VOL I.
Levites, sacrifices, offerings, feasts of tabernacles, and the like, lay directly, in the letter, against that cessation of Mosaical rites, which the Jews op- osed.: Now who was fit, who was able to determine upon these different and various institutions of God, but God himself? To declare positively, that all obligation from his former commands was now ceased, that his institutions were no more to be observed, that the time allotted unto the church’s obedience unto him in their observance was expired, this: was no otherwise to be effected but by an immediate revelation from himself. And this is done in this Epistle, and that in this only as to the Jews; whereby it became the main instrument and means of pulling up their old church state, and translating it anew into the appointments of our Lord Jesus Christ. Neither is this done by a bare declaration of God’s authoritative interposition, but in a way of excellent and singular wisdom and condescension. God’s love and care of his church, are manifested in the institutions that were now to be removed; and his wisdom appears in their gradual instruetion as they were able to bear; and the whole nature and design of these institutions is evidenced to be such, as that having received their full end and accomplishment, they did of themselves naturally expire and disappear. And hereby, in that great alteration which God then wrought in the outward worship of his church, there is discovered an oneness and unchangeableness in his love and care; and a suitableness, harmony, and consonancy, in the effects of his will. Infinite Wisdom is also seen, so arranging these alterations in a subserviency one to another, that they should no where in any thing cross or interfere, and all of them be to his own glory in the promotion and furtherance of the light, faith, and obedience of his church, as sufficiently manifests the original and fountain whence it doth proceed. For my part, I can traly say, that I know not any portion of holy writ, that will more effectually raise up the heart of an understanding reader, to an holy admiration of the goodness, love, and wisdom of God, than this Epistle doth. Such, I say, is the subject-matter of this Epistle, so divine, so excellent, so singular. And in the handling hereof, we have not the least occasional mixture, of any matter, words, sentences, stories, arguments or doctrines so unsuited to the whole, as to argue the interposure of a fallible spirit.
Thus we know it hath fallen out in all the writings of the Christians of the first ages, after the sealing of the canon of the Scriptures. Many things in them appear to proceed from an holy and heavenly Spirit breathing in their authors; and most of what they contain to be consonant unto the mind of God: yet have they all of them evident footsteps that the authors were subject unto errors and mistakes, even in and about the things written by them. And the continuance of these failings in their writings, capable of an easy conviction, is no small fruit of the holy wise providence of God, and his care over his church, that it might not in after ages be imposed upon with the great and weighty pretence of antiquity, to admit them into a competition with those, which himself gave out to be its infallible, and therefore only rule. That nothing of this nature, nothing wmanitus, merely after the manner of men, befel the writer of this Epistle in his work, we hope through the assistance of its principal Author, to manifest in our Exposition of the several parts of it. And this subject-matter of this Epistle, thus handled, further secures us of its original.
made a characterism of writings given by divine inspiration, are consonant unto the general argument, and peculiar subject-matter of it. That the whole Scripture hath an especial end, which is peculiar unto it, and wherein no other writing hath any share, but only so far as it is taken from thence, and composed in obedience thereunto, is evident unto all that do seriously consider it.
This end supremely and absolutely, is the glory of that God who is the Author of it. This is the centre where all the lines of it do meet, the scope and mark towards which all things in it are directed. It is the revelation of himself that is intended, of his mind and will, that he may be glorified; wherein also, because he is the principal fountain, and last end of all, consists the order and perfection of all other things. Particularly the demonstration of this glory of God, in and by Jesus Christ is aimed at. The works of God’s power and providence do all of them declare his glory; the glory of his eternal perfections and excellencies, absolutely and in themselves. But the end of the Scripture, is the glory of God im Christ, as he hath revealed himself, and gathered all things to an head in him, unto the manifestation of his glory. ‘For this is life eternal, that we know him the only true God, and whom he hath sent, Jesus Christ.” The means whereby God is thus glorified in Christ, is by the salvation of them that do believe, which is therefore also an immediate end of the Scripture: “ These things are written, that we may believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that believing, we may have life through his name,” John xx. 31; 1 Tim. iv. 16. Moreover, whereas this eternal life unto the glory of God, cannot be obtained without faith and obedience according to his will, the Scripture is given for this purpose also, that it may instruct us in the mind of God, and make us wise unto salvations 2 Tim. iii. 15, 16; Rom. i. 16; 2 Peter i. 3. These, in their mutual subserviency and dependence, complete the characteristical end of the Scripture. I confess Plato, in his Timeus, makes it the end of philosophy, that we may thereby be made like unto God. But that philosophy of his, haying its rise and spring in inbred notions of nature, and the contemplation of the works of God’s providence, could have no other end but conformity unto him, as his perfections were revealed absolutely; whereunto the Scripture adds this revelation in Christ Jesus, John i. 18, which gives them as I said, their special and peculiar end. It makes God known as all in all, and man to be nothing as to goodness or blessedness, but what God is pleased to.do for him, and communicate unto him; and Jesus Christ to be the great and only way and means whereby he will communicate of himself, and bring us unto himself. The more clearly any portion of Scripture discovers and makes conspicuous this end, the more parts of the series and order of things, whereby the last and utmost end of the glory of God is produced, in their mutual connexion, dependence and subserviency, it manifesteth, the more fully doth it express this general end of the whole, and thereby evince its own interest
Now herein doth this Epistle come behind no other portion of Scripture whatever. For as the exaltation of the glory of God, as he is the first cause and last end of all things, is expressly proposed in it, so the relation of the glory of God, and of our obedience and blessedness, whereby and wherein it is declared unto the person, offices, and mediation of Jesus Christ, is in an eminent manner insisted on and unfolded in it. And whereas some parts of Scripture do exhibit unto us most clearly some one part of this general end of the whole, and other portions or ere of it some other parts, this expresseth the whole, and all the parts of it distinctly, from the very foundation of calling men to the knowledge of God and obedience, unto the utmost end of his glorifying himself in their salvation by Jesus Christ. Neither is there herewith the least alloy or mixture of any bye, particular, or personal end of the writer; nothing of his honour, reputation, advantage, self-pleasing in any thing; but all runs evenly and smoothly to the general end before proposed. And this also hath deservedly a place among the τεκμήρια of writings by divine in- ‘spiration. 5
§ 26. The style also of the sacred Scripture, or φράσεως yapaxryp, as it is termed by Eusebius in this argument, is of deserved consideration. By the style of any writing, we understand both the propriety of the words, with their grammatical construction, and that composition of the whole which renders it fit, decorous, elegant, and every way meet to be used in the matter about which it is used, and for the effecting of the end which is proposed in it. I know some bold atheistical spirits have despised the style of the Holy writers as simple and barbarous. Among these, Angelus Politianus is generally and deservedly censured by all learned men, who was imitated in his profane contempt of it by Domitius Calderinus. And of the like temper was Petrus Bembus, who would scarce touch the Scripture; though his own epistles are not one of them free from solecisms in grammar. Austin also confesseth that, whilst he was yet a Manichee, he had the same thoughts of it: ‘Visa est mihi indigna quam Tullianz dignitati comparem.* The Scripture seemed to be unworthy to be compared with the excellency of Cicero. But it must be acknowledged that these spake of the common translations of it, though they used that pretence to reject the study of the books themselves. ‘
I do confess that, though some translations may, and do render the words of the original more properly, and better represent and insinuate the native genius, beauty, life, and power of the sacred style than some others do; yet none of them can, or do express the whole excellency, elegancy, and marvellous efficacy of it for the conveyance of its senses to the understandings and minds of men. Neither is this any reflection upon the translators, or on their abilities, diligence, or faithfulness, but that which the nature of the - thing itself produceth. There is in the sacred Scripture, in the words wherein, by the Holy Ghost, it was given out, a proper peculiar virtue, and secret efficacy, inflaming the minds of the readers and hearers, which no diligence or wisdom of man can fully and absolutely transfer into, and impress upon any other language. And those who have designed to do it, by substituting the wordy elegancies of another tongue, to express their quickening and affecting idiotisms, (which was the design of Castalio,) have of all others most failed in their intentions.
Neither doth this defect in translations arise from hence, that the original tongues may be more copious and emphatical than those of the translations, which possibly may be the condition of the Greek and Latin, as Hierome often complains. But it is from the causes before named, and therefore is most evident in the translations of the Old Testament, when yet no man can imagine the Hebrew to be more copious, (though it be more comprehensive,) than the languages whereinto it hath been translated. But it is of the originals themselves, and the style of the sacred penmen therein, concerning which we discourse. And herein the boldness of Hierome cannot be excusea, thougu he be followed by some others of great name in latter ages, who more than once chargeth St. Paul with solecisms and barbarisms in expression, and often urgeth (upon a mistake as we shall see) that he was imperitus sermone, ‘unskilful in speech.’ But as neither he, nor any else, are able to give any cogent instance to make good their charge, so it is certain that there is nothing expressed in the whole Scripture, but in the manner and way, and by the words wherewith it ought to be expressed, unto the ends for which it is used and designed. This might easily be manifested, both from the intent of the Holy Ghost himself in suggesting those words unto his penmen, and in the care of God over the very iotas and tittles of the words themselves. And wherever there appears unto us an irregularity from the arbitrary directions or usages of other men in those languages, it doth much more become us to suspect our own apprehensions and judgment; yea, or to refuse to those directions and usages the sovereignty of an absolute rule; than to impute the least failure or mistake to them who wrote nothing but by divine inspiration. The censure of Hensius in this matter is severe, but true. Prolegom. Aristarch Sac. ‘Vellicare aliquid in illis, aut desiderare, non est eruditi sed blasphemi hominis, ac male feriati, qui nunquam intelligit que humana sit conditio, aut quanta debeatur reverentia ac cultus cuncta dispensanti Deo, qui non Judicem, sed supplicem deposcit.’
Neither hath their success been much better, wha have exercised their critical ability in judging of the style of the particular writers of the Scripture, preferring one before, and above another; whereas the style of every one of them is best suited to the subject-matter whereof he treats, and the end aimed at, and the persons with whom he had todo. And herein Hierome® hath led the way to others, and drawn many into a com-" mon mistake. The style of Isaiah, he says, is proper, urbane, high, and excellent; but that of Hosea, and especially of Amos, low, plain, improper, savouring of the country, and his profession, who was a shepherd. But those that understand their style and languaze, will not easily give consent unto him, though the report has been admitted by the most. It is true there appeareth in Isaiah an excellent πάθος in his exhortations, expostulations, and comminations; attended with efficacious apostrophes, prosopopeeias, metaphors, and allusions; a compacted fulness in his prophecies and predictions, a sweet evangelical spiritualness in his expression of promises, with frequent paronomasias, and ellipses, which have a special elegancy in that language, whence he is usually instanced by learned men‘ as an example of the eloquence of the divine writings, and his δεινωτὴς preferred unto that of AEschines, Demosthenes, or Cicero. But the reader must take heed that he look not for the peculiar excellencies of that prophet, absolutely in the words used by him, but rather in the things that it pleased the Holy Ghost, to use him as his instrument in the revelation of. But the other part of Hierome’s censure is utterly devoid of any good foundation. The style of Amos, considering the subject-matter that he treateth of, and the persons with whom he had to do, in suiting of words and speech, wherein all true solid eloquence consisteth, is every way as proper, as elegant as that of Isaiah, Neither will the knowing reader find him wanting in any of the celebrated styles of writing, where occasion unto them is administered. Thus some affirm that St. Paul used sundry expressions, (and they instance in 1 Cor. iv. 3; Col. 11. 18,) that were proper to the Cilicians his countrymen, and not so proper as to the purity of that language wherein he wrote; but as the first of the expressions they instance in, is an Hebraism, and the latter purely Greek; so, indeed, they will discover a Tarsian defect in St. Paul, together with the Patavinity in Livy that Pollio noted in him.
§ 28. Eloquence and propriety of speech for the proper ends of them, are the gift of God, Exod. iv. 10, 11. And therefore unless pregnant instances may be given to the contrary, it may well be thought and expected that they should not be wanting in books written by his own inspiration. Nor indeed are they; only we are not able to give a right measure of what doth truly and absolutely belong unto them. He that shall look for a flourish of painted words, artificial meretricious ornaments of speech, discourse suited to entice, inveigle, and work upon weak and carnal affections; or sophistical captious ways of reasoning to deceive; or that suada, or πιθανολογια, that smooth and harmonious structure of periods wherein the great Roman orator gloried, the lenocinia verborum, the ὕψος, and grandiloquentia of some of the heathens, in the Scripture, will be mistaken in his aim. Such things become not the authority, majesty, greatness, and holiness of Him who speaks therein. An earthly monarch that should make use of them in his edicts, laws, or proclamations, would but prostitute his authority to contempt, and invite his subjects to disobedience by so doing. How much less would they become the declaration of his mind and will, given unto poor worms, who is the great Possessor of heaven and earth.
Besides, these things belong not indeed unto real eloquence and propriety of speech, but are arbitrarily invented crutches, for the relief of our lameness and infirmity. Men despairing to affect the minds of others, with the things themselves which they had to propose unto them; and acquainted with the baits that are meet to take hold of their brutish affections; with the ways of prepossessing their minds with prejudice, or casting a mist before their understandings, that they may not discern the nature, worth, and excellency of truth; have invented such dispositions of words, as might compass the ends they aimed at. And great effects by this means were produced; as by him whom men admired,
pleni moderantem frcena Theatri.’
pected that it was not truth itself that conquered men, but that they had been circumvented and deceived by appearing or fallacious consequences, and the splendour or elegancy of speech.’
First, It becometh the majesty, authority, and holiness of Him, in whose name it speaketh. And hence it is, that by its simplicity without corruption, gravity without affectation, plainness without alluring ornaments, it doth not so much entice, move, or persuade, as constrain, press, and pierce into the mind and affections, transforming them into a likeness of the things which it delivers unto us.” And, therefore, though St. Paul says that he dealt not with the Corinthians, καθ ὑπεροχὴν Aoyou ἡ σοφιας, in ‘an excellency or sublimity of speech, or wisdom, like that of the orators before described; yet he did ev αποδειξει rvevparocg καὶ δυναμεως, in such an evidence of spiritual power, as was far more effectual and prevalent. The whole of the sacred style is Seorperec, if truth, gravity, authority, and majesty can render it so; nor can any instance be given to the contrary.
contemplation of. Bodies that have a native beauty and harmony in the composition of their parts, are advantaged more by being clothed with fit garments, than by the ornaments of gay attire. And the spiritual native beauty of heavenly truths, is better conveyed unto the minds of men, by words and expressions fitted unto it, plainly and simply, than by any ornaments of enticing speech whatever; and therefore we say with Austin, that there is not any thing delivered in the Scripture, but just as it ought to be, and as the matter requires.
Thirdly, the style of the holy penmen is, in gracious condescension, suited unto them, and to their capacity, who constitute the greatest part of them with whom they had to do. This Origen at large insists upon in the beginning of his Fifth Book against Celsus. The philosophy and oratory of the heathen, was suited principally, if not solely, to the capacity of the learned; this the authors and professors of it aimed at; namely, that they might approve their skill and ability unto those who were able to judge of them. The Scripture was written for the good of mankind in general,Y and without the least design of any accommodation of itself, to the learning and wisdom of men. And this συγκαταβασις, or condescension unto the common reason, sense, usage, and experience of mankind in general, is very admirable in the holy penmen, and absolutely peculiar to them. In this universal suitableness unto all the concernments of it, consists that excellent simplicity of the Scripture style, whereby it plainly and openly, without fraudulent ornaments, in common and usual speech, declares things divine, spiritual and heavenly, with an holy accommodation of them to the understanding and capacities of men, in such occasional variety as yet never diverts from those properties and characters wherein the uniformity of the whole doth consist.
de Doctri. Christiana, lib. 4. cap. 6, is very well worthy consideration; whither I refer the reader, that I may not too far divert from my present particular design.
§ 31. Whatever hath been thus spoken concerning the style of the sacred Scripture in general, it is as applicable unto this Epistle unto the Hebrews, as to any one portion of holy writ whatever. That simplicity, gravity, unaffectedness, suitableness to its author, matter, and end, which commends the whole unto us, are eminent in this part of it; that authority, efficacy, and energy, which are implanted on the whole, by him who supplied both sense and words unto the penmen of it, exert themselves in this Kpistle also.
No defect in any of these can be charged on it, that should argue it of any other extract than the whole. Nothing is to be found in the whole Kpistle so far singular, as to be inconsistent with that harmony as to style and manner, which in all their variety still prevails among the books of the holy Scripture. If any where, as in the begmning of the first chapter, the style seems to swell in its current above the ordinary banks of the writings of the New Testament, it is from the greatness and sublimity of the matter treated on, which was not capable of any other kind of expression. Doth the penman of it, any where use words or phrases, not commonly, or
-rarely, or perhaps nowhere else used in the sense and way wherein they are by him applied? it is because his matter is peculiar, and not elsewhere handled; at least not on the same principles, nor to the same purpose as by him. Doth he oftentimes speak in an Old Testament dialect, pressing words. and expressions to the service and sense they were employed in under the tabernacle and temple after they had been manumitted as it were, and made free from their typical importance in the service and spiritual sense of the gospel; it is from the consideration of the condition of those, with whom in an especial manner he had to do; and this in perfect harmony with the wisdom of the Holy Ghost in other portions of Scripture. So that on this account also its station in the holy canon is secured.
§ 32. Moreover, besides the peculiar excellency which is found in the style of the holy Scripture, either evidencing its divine original, or at least manifesting that there is nothing in it unworthy of such an extract, the authority of its principal author exerts itself in the whole of it, upon the consciences of men. And, herein, is this epistle an especial sharer also. Now this authority as it respects the minds of men, arises in part from the holy matter contained ‘in it, and the heavenly manner wherein it is declared. They have in their. conjunction, a peculiar character, distinguishing these writings from all writings of a human original, and manifesting them to be of God. Neither can it otherwise be, but that things of divine revelation, expressed in words of divine suggestion and determination, will appear to be of a divine original. And partly it arises from an ineffable emanation of divine excellency, communicating unto God’s own word a distinguishing property because of its relation unto him. We speak not now of the work of the Holy Ghost in our hearts by his grace, enabling us to believe; but of his work in the word, rendering it credible and meet to be believed. Not of the seal and testimony that he gives unto the hearts of individual persons of the truth of the Scripture, or rather of the things contained in it; but of the seal and testimony, which in the Scripture he gives unto it, showing it to be his own work and word. Such a character have the works of other agents, whereby they are known and discerned to be theirs. By such properties are the works of men discerned, and oftentimes of individuals amongst them. They bear the likeness of their authors, and are thereby known to be theirs. Neither is it possible that there should be any work of God, proceeding so immediately from him, as do writings by divine inspiration, but there will be such a communication of his Spirit and likeness unto it, such an impression of his greatness, holiness, goodness, truth, and majesty upon it, as will manifest it to be from him. The false prophets of old pretended that their dreams, visions, predictions, and revelations were from him. They prefixed 0X3, he saith, unto all the declarations of them, Jer. xxui. 31, and therefore, doubtless, framed them to as great a likeness unto those that were by inspiration from him as they were able. And yet the Lord declares that all their imaginations were as discernible from his word, as chaff from wheat; and this by that authority and power wherewith his word is accompanied, whereof they were utterly destitute, ver. 28, 29. And this authority do all they who have their senses exercised in it, find and acknowledge in this Epistle, and in it their minds and consciences do acquiesce. They hear and understand the voice of God in it, and by that Spit which is promised unto them, discern it from the voice of a stranger. And when their minds are prepared and fortified against objections, by the former considerations, into this they ultimately resolve their persuasion of its divine authority. For, |
§ 33. From this authority, they find a divine efficacy proceeding; a powerful operation upon their souls and consciences, unto all the ends of the Scripture. A reverence and awe of God, from his authority shining forth and exerting itself in it, bemg wrought in them, they find their minds effectually brought into captivity unto the obedience taught
This efficacy and power is in the whole word of God. ‘Is not my word as a fire, saith the Lord, and like a hammer that breaketh the rocks in pieces, Jer. xxiii, 29, that is, living and powerful, and ‘sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart,’ Heb. iv. 12. As it hath an εξουσια, or authority over men, Matt. vii. 29, so it hath a δυναμις, or powerful efficacy in and towards them, Acts xx. 32; James i. 21. Yea, it is the power of God himself, for its proper end, Rom. i. 16, and therefore said to be accompanied with the demonstration of the Spirit and power, 1 Cor. 11. 4, a demonstration ὑπερ Tag λογικας μεθοδους THY ψυχὴν εἰς συγκαταβασιν ελκουσα, as Basil,’ drawing the soul to consent beyond the efficacy of rational or logical arguments, or geometrical demonstrations,.as he adds in the same place. And this divine power and efficacy of the word, as to all the ends of it, proceeding from the authority of God in it, with his designation of it unto those ends, (which is that which giveth energy unto all things, enabling them to produce their proper effects, and setting limits and bounds to their operation,) is testified unto in innumerable places of the Scripture itself. And it doth sufficiently manifest and evidence itself, both in the fruits and effects of it on the souls of particular persons, and in that work which it hath wrought, and doth yet carry on invisibly in the world, in defiance of all the opposition that is made unto it by the power of hell, in conjunction with the unbelief, darkness, and lusts of the minds of men, as may elsewhere be more at large declared.
A learned man δ᾽ said well; ‘Non monent, non persuadent Sacre literee, sed cogunt, agitant, vim invenunt; Legis rudia verba et agrestia, sed viva, sed animata, flammea, aculeata, ad imum, spiritum penetrantia, hominem totum potestate mirabili transformantia: expressing the sum of what we maintain. From hence is all that supernatural light and knowledge, that conviction and restraint, that conversion, faith, consolation and obedience, that are found amongst any of the sons of men. aca γραφὴ, saith Basil,» ϑεοπνεύυστος Kat ὠφέλιμος, δια TovTo συγγραφεισα Tapa Tov πνευματος iv’ worep ἐν κοινῳ των ψυχων ιατρειῳ, παντες AYSpwToL TO Lapa τοῦ OLKELOY παϑους EKacTOC ἐκλεγωμεϑα.----ἰ The whole Scripture is divinely inspired and. profitable; being written by the Holy Ghost for this purpose, that in it, as a common healing office for souls, all men may choose the medicine suited to cure their own distempers. Such is the nature, power, and efficacy of this Kpistle towards them that do believe. It searches their hearts, discovers their thoughts, fixes principles in their consciences, judges their acts inward and outward, supports their spirits, comforts their souls, enlightens their minds, guides them in their hope, confidence, and love to God, directs them in all their communion with him, and obedience unto him, and leads them to an enjoyment of him. And this work of the Holy Ghost in it, and by it, seals its divine authority unto them, so that they find rest, spiritual satisfaction, and great assurance therein. When once they have obtained this experience of its divine power, it is in vain for men or devils to oppose its canonical authority with their frivolous cavils and objections. Neither is this experience merely satisfactory to themselves alone, as it is by some pretended. It is a thing pleadable, and that not only in their own defence to strengthen their faith against temptations, but to others also; though not to atheistical scoffers, yet to humble inquirers; and humility ought to be the frame of all men in the investigation of sacred truths.
§ 34. Unto what hath been spoken, we may add, that the canonical authority of this Epistle is confirmed unto us by catholic tradition. By this tradition I intend not the testimony only of the present church that is in the world, nor fancy a trust of a power to declare what is so in any church whatever; but a general uninterrupted fame conveyed and confirmed by particular instances, records, and testimonies, in all ages. In any other sense, traditions are of very little value, as we may learn from the instance of him who first began to magnify them. This was Papias, a contemporary of Polycarp, in the very next age after the apostles. Tradition of what was done, or said by Christ, or the apostles, and what expositions they gave, he professed to set a very high value upon, equal to, if not above the Scripture. And two things are considerable in his search after these traditions.:
First,© That he did not think that there was any church appointed to be the preserver and declarer of apostolical traditions, but made his inquiry of all the individual ancient men that he could meet with, who had conversed with any of the apostles.
Secondly, That by all his pains, he gathered together a rhapsody of incredible stories, fables, errors, and useless curiosities. Such issue will the endeayours of men have, who forsake the stable word of prophecy, to follow rumours and reports, under the specious name of traditions. But this catholic fame whereof we speak, confirmed by particular records in all ages, testifying unto a matter of fact, is of great importance. And how clearly this may be pleaded in our present case, shall be manifested in our investigation of the penman of this Epistle.
And thus I hope, we have made it evident, that this Epistle is not destitute of any one of those τεκμήρια, or infallible proofs and arguments, whereby any particular book of the Scripture evinceth itself unto the consciences of men to be written by inspiration from God. It remaineth now to show, that it is not liable unto any of those exceptions, or arguments, whereby any book, or writing pretending a claim to a divine original, and to canonical authority thereupon, may be convicted, and manifested to be of another extract; whereby its just privilege will be on both sides secured.
§ 35. The first consideration of this nature is taken from the author or penman of any such writing. The books of the Old Testament were all of them written by prophets or holy men inspired of God. Hence St. Peter calls the whole of it, προφητεια prophecy, 2 Pet. 1. 21; prophecy delivered by men, acted or moved therein by the Holy Ghost. And though there be a distribution made of the several books of it from the subject-matter, into the law, prophets and Psalms, Luke xxiv. 44, and often into the law and prophets on the same account, as Acts xxiv. 14, xxvi. 22, yet their penmen being all equally prophets, the whole in general is ascribed unto them, and called prophecy, Rom. i. 2, xvi. 26; Luke xxiv. 25; 2 Pet. i. 19. So were the books of the New Testament written by apostles, or men endowed with an apostolical spirit, and in their work equally inspired by the Holy Ghost; whence the church is said to be ‘“‘ built on the foundation of the prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ being the chief @orner stone,” Eph. ii. 20. If then the author of any writing acknowledgeth himself, or may otherwise be proved to have been neither prophet nor apostle, nor endued with the same infallible spirit with them, his work, how excellent soever otherwise it may appear, must needs be esteemed a mere fruit of his own skill, diligence, and wisdom, and not any way to belong unto the canon of the Scripture. This is the condition, for instance, of the second book of Maccabees. In the close of it, the author being doubtful what acceptance his endeavours and manner of writing would find amongst his ‘readers, makes his excuse; and affirms, that he did his utmost to please them in the style and composition of his words. So he tells us before, chap. ii. 24, that he did but epitomize the history of Jason the Cyrenean, wherein he took great pains and labour. In the course of his work the author commends Judas Maccabeeus for offering sacrifices for the dead, (which indeed Judas did not, but for the living,) no where appointed in the law; and affirms that Jeremiah hid the holy fire, ark, tabernacle, and altar of incense in a cave. He affirms that Antiochus was killed at Nanea in Persia, chap. i. 16, and that the same person died in the mountains of torments in his bowels, as he was coming to Judea, chap. 9. while the first book affirms that he died of sorrow at Babylon, chap. vi. 16. He affirms, that Judas wrote letters to Aristobulus in the one hundred and eighty eighth year of the Seleucian empire, (who was slain in the hundred fifty second year of it, lib. i. chap. i. 3,) that is, thirty six years after his death; with many other such mistakes and falsehoods. This author then had no great need to inform us, that he had no special divine assistance in his writing, but leaned unto his own understanding. But yet this he doth, as we showed, and that openly; for the Holy Ghost will not be an epitomater of a profane writing, as he professeth himself to have been; nor make excuses for his weakness, nor declare his pains and and sweat in his work as he doth. And yet to that pass are things brought in the world by custom, prejudice, love of reputation, and scorn to be estemed mistaken in any thing, that many earnestly contend, that this book was written by divine inspiration, when the author of it himself openly professeth it to have been of another extract. For although this book be not only rejected out of the canon, by the council of Laodicea,4 Hierome,* and others of the ancients, but by Gregory‘ the great bishop of Rome himself; yet the church of Rome would now by force thrust it thereinto. But were the author himself alive again, I am so well persuaded of his ingenuity and honesty, from the conclusion of his story, that they would never be able to make him say, that he wrote by divine’ inspiration; and little reason then have we to believe it. Now this Epistle is free from this exception. The penman of it doth no where intimate, directly or indirectly, that he wrote in his own strength, or by his own ability; which yet if he had done, in an argument of that nature which he insisted on, it had been incumbent on him to have declared it, that he might not lead the church into a pernicious error, in embracing that, as given by inspiration from God, which was but a fruit of his diligence and fallible endeavours. But on the contrary, he speaks as in the name of God, referring unto him, all that he delivers; nor can he in any minute instance, be convicted to have wanted his assistance.
§ 36. Circumstances of the general argument of a book, may also prove it to be of human or fallible original. This they do for instance, in the book of Judith. For such a Nebuchadonosor, as should reign in Nineve, chap. 1.1, and make war with Arphaxad king of Ecbatane, ver. 13, whose captains and. officers should know nothing at all of the nation of the Jews, chap. vi. 3, that waged war against them ih the days of Joakim, or as other copies, Eliakim the high priest, chap. iv. 5, after whose defeat, the Jews should have peace for eighty years at the least, chap. xvi. 28, 30, is an imagination of that which never had subsistence in rerwm natura; but is a representation of what M711 a Jewish woman ought, as the author of it conceived, to undertake for the good of her country. Setting aside the consideration of all other discoveries of the infallibility of the whole discourse, this alone is sufficient to impeach its reputation.
Our Epistle is no way obnoxious unto any exception of this nature. Yea, the state of things in the churches of God, and among the Hebrews in particular, did at that time administer so just and full occasion unto a writing of this kind, as gives countenance unto its ascription unto the wisdom and care of the Holy Ghost. For if the eruption of the poisonous brood of heretics, questioning the deity of the Son of God in Cerinthus, gave occasion to the writing of the gospel by St. John; and if the dissensions in the church of Corinth, deserved two epistles for their composition; and if the lesser differences between believers of the Jews and Gentiles, in and about the things treated of in this Epistle had a remedy provided for them in the epistles of St. Paul junto the Gentiles; is it not at least probable, that the same Spirit who moved the penmen of those books to write, and directed them in their so doing, did also provide for the removal of the prejudices, and healing of the distempers of the Hebrews, which were so great, and of so great importance unto all the churches of God, And that there is weight in this consideration, when we come. to declare the time when this Epistle was written, will evidently appear.;
§ 37. The most manifest eviction of any writing pretending unto the privilege of divine inspiration, may be taken from the subject-matter of it, or the things taught and declared therein. God himself being the first and only essential truth, nothing can proceed from him but what is absolutely so; and truth being but one, every way uniform and consonant unto itself; there can be no discrepancy in the branches of it, nor contrariety in the streams that flow from that one fountain. God is also holy, glorious in holiness, and nothing proceeds immediately from him, but it bears a stamp of his holiness, as also of his greatness and wisdom. If then any thing in the subject-matter of any writing, be untrue, impious, light, or any way contradictory to the ascertained writings of divine inspiration, all pleas and pretences unto that privilege must cease for ever. We then need no other proof, testimony or argument to evince its original, than what itself tenders unto us. And by this means also do the books commonly called Apocryphal, unto which the Romanists ascribe canonical authority, destroy their own pretensions. They have all of them, on this account, long since been cast out of the limits of any tolerable defence. Now, that no one portion of Scripture, is less obnoxious to any exception of this kind, from the subjectmatter treated of, and doctrines delivered in it, than this Epistle, we shall by God's assistance manifest in our exposition of the whole, and each particular passage of it. Neither is it needful, that we should here prolong our discourse, by anticipating any thing that must necessarily afterwards in its proper place be insisted on. The place startled at by some, chap. vi. about the impossibility of the recovery of the apostates, was touched on before, and shall afterwards be fully cleared. Nor do 1 know any other use to be made of obServing the scruple of some of old, about the countenance given to the Novatians by that place, but only to make a discovery how partially men in all ages have been addicted unto their own apprehensions in things wherein they differed from others. For whereas if the opinion of the Novatians had been confirmed in that place, as it is not, it had been their duty to have relinquished their own hypothesis, and gone over unto them; but instead of this, some of them discovered a mind rather to have broken in upon the authority of God himself declared in his word, than so to have done. And it is greatly to be feared that the same spirit still working in others, is as effectual in them to reject the plain sense of the Scripture in sundry places, as it was ready to have been in those of old, to reject the words of it in this.
§ 38. The style and method of a writing may be such, as to lay a just prejudice against its claim to canonical authority. For although the subject-matter of a writing may be good and honest in the main of it, and generally suited unto the analogy of faith; yet there may be in the manner of its composition and writing, such an ostentation of wit, fancy, learning, or eloquence; such an affectation of words, phrases and expressions; such rhetorical paintings of things small and inconsiderable; as may sufficiently demonstrate human ambition, ignorance, pride, or desire of applause, to have been mixed in the forming and producing of it. Much of this Hierome & observes, in particular, concerning the book entitled the Wisdom of Solomon, written, as it is supposed, by Philo, an eloquent and learned man: redolet Gracam eloquentiam. This considera- tion is of deserved moment in the judgment we are to make of the spring or fountain from whence any book doth proceed. For whereas great variety of style, and manner of writing, may be observed in the penmen of canonical Scripture; yet in no one of them do the least footsteps of the failings and sinful infirmities of corrupted nature before mentioned appear. When therefore they manifest themselves, they cast out the writings wherein they are from that harmony and consent, which in general appears amongst all the books of divine inspiration. Of the style of this epistle we have spoken before. Its gravity, simplicity, majesty, and absolute suitableness unto the high, holy, and heavenly mysteries treated of in it, are, as far as I can find, not only very evident, but also by all acknowledged, who are able to judge of them.
§ 39. Want of catholic tradition in all ages of the church, from the first giving forth of any writing testifying unto its divine original, is ‘another impeachment of its pretence unto canonical authority. And this argument ariseth fatally against the apocryphal books before mentioned. Some of them are expressly excluded from the canon by many of the ancient churches, nor are any of them competently testified unto.
The suffrage of this kind given unto our Epistle, we have mentioned before. The doubts and scruples of some about it, have likewise been acknowledged. That they are of no weight to be laid in the balance against the testimony given unto it, might easily be demonstrated. But because they were levelled all of them principally against its author, and but by ‘consequence against its authority, I shall consider them in a disquisition about him, wherein we shall give a further confirmation of the divine original of the Epistle, by proving it undeniably to have been written by the apostle St. Paul, that eminent penman of the Holy Ghost.
§ 40. Thus the canonical authority of this Epistle stands clear. It is destitute of no evidence needful for the manifestation of it, nor is it obnoxious unto any just exception against its claim of that privilege. And hence it is come to pass, that whatever have been the fears, doubts, and scruples of some; the rash temerarious objections, conjectures, and censures of others; the care and providence of God over it, as a part of his most holy word, working with the prevailing evidence of its original implanted in it, and its spiritual efficacy unto all the ends of holy Scripture; hath obtained an absolute conquest over the hearts and minds of all that believe, and settled it in a full possession of canonical authority, in all the churches of Christ throughout the world.
§ 1. Knowledge ofthe penman of any part of Scripture not necessary. Some of them utterly concealed. The word of God gives authority unto them that deliver it, not the contrary. Prophets in things wherein they are not actually inspired, subject to mistake. § 2. St. Paul the writer of this Epistle. The hesitation of Origen. Heads of evidence: § 3. Uncertainty of them who assign any other author. § 4. St. Luke not the writer of it. § 5. Nor Barnabas. The Epistle under his name counterfeit. His writing of this Epistle by sundry reasons disproved. § 6. Not Apollos, § 7. Nor Clemens, § 8. Nor Tertullian. ᾧ 9. Objections against St. Paul’s being the penman. Dissimilitude of style. Admitted by the ancients. ὁ 10. Answer of Origen, rejected.’ Of Clemens, Hierome, &e., rejected likewise. § 11. St. Paul, in what sense ἰδιωτης τῷ Acyw. § 12. His eloquence and skill, § 13. Causes of the difference in style between this and other epistles. § 14. Coincidence of expressions in it and them. §15. The Epistle ἀνεπιγραφος. § 16. Answer of Hierome, rejected. §17. Of Theodoret. § 18. Of Chrysostome. Prejudice of the Jews against St. Paul. Not the cause of the forbearance of his name. § 19. The true reason thereof. The Hebrews church-state not changed. Faith evangelical educed from Old Testament principles and testimonies, These pressed on the Hebrews, not mere apostolical authority. § 20. Hesitation of the Latin church about this Epistle, answered. Other exceptions from the Epistle itself, removed. § 21. Arguments to prove St. Paul to be the writer of it. Testimony of St. Peter, 2 Epistle ii. 15, 16. Considerations upon that testimony. The second Epistle of St. Peter written to the same persons with the first. The first written unto the Hebrews in their dispersion. Asaczoga, what. § 22. St. Paul wrote an Epistle unto the same persons to whom Peter wrote. That, this Epistle. Not that to the Galatians. Not one lost. § 23. The long-suffering of God, how declared to be salvation in this Epistle. § 24. The wisdom ascribed unto St. Paul in the writing of this Epistle wherein it appears. The dvevonta of it. Weight of this testimony. § 25. The suitableness of this Epistle unto those of the same author. Who competent judges hereof. What required thereunto. § 26. Testimony of the first churches, or Catholic tradition. § 27. Evidences from this Epistle itself. The general argument and scope. Method. Way of arguing. All the same with St. Paul’s other Epistles, Skill in Judaical learning, traditions, and customs. Proper to St. Paul. His
‘ bonds and sufferings. His companion Timothy. His sign and token subscribed.
§ 1. Tue divine authority of the Epistle being vindicated, it is of no great moment to inquire scrupulously after its penman. Writings that proceed from Divine inspiration, receive no addition of authority from the reputation or esteem of them by whom they were written. And this the Holy Ghost hath sufficiently manifested, by shutting up the names of many of them from the knowledge of the church in all ages. The close of the Pentateuch hath an uncertain penman, unless we shall suppose, with some of the Jews, that it was written by Moses after his death. Divers of the Psalms have their penmen concealed, as also have the whole books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Ruth, Esther, Job, and the Chronicles are but guessed at. Had any prejudice unto their authority ensued, this had not been. For those books whose authors are known, were not esteemed to be given by prophecy, because they were prophets; but they were known to be prophets by the words which they delivered. For if the word delivered or written by any of the prophets, was to be esteemed sacred or divine, because delivered or written by such persons as were known to be prophets, then it must be because they were some other way known so to be, and divinely inspired, as by working of miracles, or that they were in their days received, and testified unto as such by the church. But neither of these can be asserted. For as it is not known that any one penman of the Old Testament, Moses only excepted, ever wrought any miracles, so it is certain that the most and chief of them (as the prophets) were rejected and condemned by the church of the days wherein they lived. The only way, therefore, whereby they were proved to be prophets, was by the word itself which they delivered and wrote; and thereon depended the evidence and certainty of their being divinely inspired. See Amos vii. 14—17; Jer. xxiii. 25—31]. And setting aside that actual inspiration by the Holy Ghost, which they had for the declaration and writing of that word of God which came unto them in particular, even the prophets themselves were subject to mistakes. So was Samuel, when he thought Eliab should have been the Lord’s anointed, 1 Sam. xvi. 6, and Nathan when he approved the purpose of David to build the temple, 1 Chron. xvii. 2, and the great Elijah, when he supposed none left in Israel that worshipped God aright but himself, 1 Kings xix. 14,18. It was then, as we said, the word of prophecy that gave the writers of it the reputation and authority of prophets; and their being prophets gave not authority to the word they declared or wrote as a word of prophecy. Hence an anxious inquiry after the penman of any part of the Scripture is not necessary.
But whereas there want not evidences sufficient to discover who was the writer of this Epistle, whereby also the exceptions made unto its divine original may be finally obviated, they also shall be taken into consideration. A subject this is, wherein many learned men" of old, and of late, have exercised themselves, until this single argument is grown up into entire and large treatises; and I shall only take care that the truth, which hath been already strenuously asserted and vindicated, may not again, by this review, be rendered dubious and questionable.
δ 2. St. Paul it is by whom we affirm this Epistle to be written. It is acknowledged that this was so highly questioned of old, that Origen, after the examination of it, concludes, ro μὲν αληθες Θεος oda,\__* What is the ve truth in this matter, God only knows.’ However, he acknowledgeth that οἱ ἀρχαῖοι, the ancients, owned it to be written by Paul, and that he says not without good reason; whereas the ascription of it unto any other, he assigns unto a bare report. It may not then be expected, that now, after so long a season, the truth of our assertion should be so manifestly evinced, as to give absolute satisfaction unto all, which is a vain thing for any man to aim at in a subject wherein men suppose that they have a liberty of thinking what they please; yet I doubt not but that it will appear not only highly probable, but so full of evidence, in comparison of any other opinion that is, or hath been promoted in competition with it, as that some kind of blameable pertinaciousness may be made to appear in its refusal. Now the whole of what 1 shall offer in the proof of it may be reduced unto these six heads. 1. The manifest failure of all them who have endeavoured to assign it unto any other penman. 2. The insufficiency of the arguments insisted on to disprove our assertion. 3. Testimony given unto it in other Scriptures. 4. Considerations taken from the writing itself, compared with