Chapter 1

CHAPTER 1.

The Divine Original of the Scripture, the sole foundation of its Authority. The Original of the old Testament, Hebrews 1:11. Several ways of immediate Revelation. The peculiar manner of the Revelation of the word. Considerations thereon. Various expressions of that way, 2 Peter 1:20, 21. The written word, as written, preserved by the Providence of God. Capellus's opinion about various lections considered. The Scripture not [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. The true meaning of that Expression. How the word came of old, and how it was received. Entirely from God to the least Tittle. Of the Scriptures of the New Testament and their peculiar prerogative.

Section 1. THAT the whole Authority of the Scripture in itself, depends solely on its Divine Original, is confessed by all who acknowledge its Authority. The evincing and declaration of that Authority, being the thing at present aimed at; The discovery of its divine Spring and Rise, is in the first place, necessarily to be premised thereunto. That foundation being once laid, we shall be able to educe our following Reasonings and Arguments, wherein we aim more at weight than number, from their own proper Principles.

Section 2. As to the Original of the Scripture of the Old Testament, it is said God SPAKE [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], Hebrews 1:1; of old, or formerly in the Prophets. From the days of Moses the Lawgiver, and downwards, unto the consignation and bounding of the Canon delivered to the Judaical Church, in the days of Ezra and his companions [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] the men of the great Congregation, so God spake. This being done only among the Jews, they as his Church, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], Romans 3:2, 9, 4, were intrusted with the Oracles of God. God spake, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] for [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (Chrysostom, Theophylact) in for by: [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], by the Prophets, as Luke 1:70. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], by the mouth of the Holy Prophets; But there seems to be somewhat farther intended in this Expression.

Section 3. In the Exposition, or giving out the eternal Counsel of the Mind and Will of God unto men, there is considerable his speaking unto the Prophets, and his speaking by them, unto us. In this expression, it seems to be, that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] or filia vocis, that voice from heaven that came to the Prophets which is understood. So God spake in the Prophets, and in reference thereunto there is Propriety in that Expression, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], in the Prophets. Thus the Psalms are many of them said to be, To this, or that man. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] A Golden psalm to David; that is, from the Lord; and from thence their tongue was as the Pen of a writer, Psalm 45:1. So God spake in them, before he spake by them.

Section 4. The various ways of special Revelation, by Dreams, Visions, Audible voices, Inspirations, with that peculiar one of the Lawgiver under the Old Testament, called [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] face to face, Exodus 33:11. Deuteronomy 34:10: and [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Numbers 11:8; with that which is compared with it, and exalted above it, (Hebrews 1:1, 2, 3) in the New, by the Son, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], from the bosom of the father, John 1:17, 18, are not of my present consideration, all of them belonging to the manner of the thing enquired after, not the thing itself.

Section 5. By the Assertion then laid down of God speaking in the Prophets of old, from the beginning to the End of that long tract of time, consisting of 1000 years, wherein he gave out the writings of the old Testament; Two things are ascertained unto us, which are the foundation of our present discourse.

Section 6. 1. That the Laws they made known, the Doctrines they delivered, the Instructions they gave, the Stories they recorded, the Promises of Christ, the Prophecies of Gospel times they gave out, and revealed, were not their own, not conceived in their minds, not formed by their Reasonings, not retained in their memories from what they had heard not by any means beforehand comprehended by them, (1 Peter 1:10, 11) but were all of them immediately from God; there being only a passive concurrence of their rational faculties in their Reception, without any such active obedience, as by any Law they might be obliged unto. Hence,

Section 7. Secondly, God was so with them, and by the Holy Ghost so spake in them, as to their receiving of the word from him, and their delivering of it unto others by speaking or writing, as that they were not themselves enabled by any habitual light, knowledge or Conviction of Truth, to declare his Mind and Will, but only acted, as they were immediately moved by him. Their Tongue in what they said, or their hand in what they wrote, was [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] no more at their own disposal, than the Pen is, in the hand of an expert Writer.

Section 8. Hence, as far as their own Personal concernments, as Saints, and Believers did lie in them, they are said [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], to make a diligent inquiry into and investigation of the things, which [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], the Spirit of Christ, that spake in themselves did signify, 1 Peter 1:10, 11. Without this, though their Visions were express, so that in them their eyes were said to be open, Numbers 24:3, 4; yet they understood them not. Therefore also, they studied the writings and Prophecies of one another, Daniel 9:2. Thus they attained a saving useful habitual knowledge of the Truths delivered by themselves and others, by the Illumination of the Holy Ghost, through the study of the Word, even as we, Psalm 119:104. But as to the receiving of the Word from God, as God spake in them, they obtained nothing by study or Meditation by enquiry or Reading, Amos 7:15. Whether we consider the matter, or manner of what they received, and delivered, or their receiving and delivering of it, they were but as an instrument of Music, giving a sound according to the hand, intention, and skill of him that strikes it.

Section 9. This is variously expressed. Generally it is said [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] The word was to this, or that Prophet, which we have rendered, the word came unto them. Ezekiel 1:3. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] it came expressly; essendo fuit; It had a subsistence given unto it, or an effectual in-being, by the Spirits entering into him, verse 14. Now this coming of the Word unto them, had oftentimes such a Greatness, and Expression of the Majesty of God upon it, as it filled them with dread and Reverence of him, Hebrews 3:16, and also greatly affected even their outward man, Daniel 8:27. But this dread and terror (which Satan strove to imitate, in his filthy Tripodes, and [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉],) was peculiar to the Old Testament, and belonged to the pedagogy thereof; Hebrews 12:18, 19, 20, 21. The Spirit in the declaration of the New Testament, gave out his mind and will in a way of more Liberty and Glory. 2 Corinthians 3. The expressness and immediacy of Revelation was the same; but the manner of it related more to that glorious liberty in fellowship and Communion with the Father, whereunto Believers had then an access provided them by Jesus Christ. Hebrews 9:8. Chapter 10:19, 20. Chapter 12:23, 24. So our Saviour tells his Apostles. Matthew 10:20. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; you are not the Speakers of what you deliver, as other men are, the figment and imagination of whose hearts are the fountain of all that they speak; And he adds this reason, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; The Spirit of the Father (is) he that speaketh in you. Thus the Word that came unto them, was a Book which they took in, and gave out without any alteration of one tittle or syllable. Ezekiel 2:8, 9, 10, 11. Chapter 3:3. Revelation 10:9, 10, 11.

Section 10. Moreover, when the Word was thus come to the Prophets, and God had spoken in them, it was not in their power to conceal it, the hand of the Lord being strong upon them. They were not now only on a general account to utter the Truth they were made acquainted withal, and to speak the things they had heard and seen, which was their common Preaching work according to the analogy of what they had received. Acts 4:20; but also the very individual Words that they had received were to be declared. When the word was come to them, it was as a fire within them, that must be delivered, or it would consume them. Psalm 39:3. Jeremiah 20:9. Amos 3:8. Chapter 7:15, 16. So Jonah found his attempt to hide the Word that he had received, to be altogether vain.

Section 11. Now because these things are of great importance and the foundation of all that doth ensue; namely the discovery that the Word is come forth unto us from God, without the least mixture or intervenience of any medium obnoxious to fallibility, (as is the wisdom, Truth, Integrity, knowledge, and memory, of the best, of all men,) I shall further consider it from one full and eminent declaration thereof, given unto us, 2 Peter 1:20, 21. The words of the Holy Ghost are; [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation; for the Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but Holy men of God spake, as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Section 12. That which he speaks of is, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; The Prophecy of Scripture, or written Prophecy.

There were then traditions among the Jews, to whom Peter wrote exalting themselves into competition with the written Word, which not long after got the Title of an oral Law, pretending to have its Original from God. These the Apostle tacitly condemns; and also shows under what formality he considered that, which verse 19 he termed [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], the word of Prophecy; namely as WRITTEN. The written word, as such, is that whereof he speaks. Above 50 times is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], or [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], in the New Testament put absolutely for the Word of God. And [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is so used in the Old, for the Word of Prophecy; 2 Chronicles 21:12. It is the [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], that is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] 2 Timothy 3:16; The Writing, or Word written, is by inspiration from God. Not only the Doctrine in it, but the [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] itself, or the Doctrine as written, is so from him.

Section 13. Hence the Providence of God hath manifested itself no less concerned in the preservation of the writings than the doctrine contained in them. The writing itself being the Product of his own eternal counsel for the preservation of the Doctrine, after a sufficient discovery of the insufficiency of all other means for that End and purpose. And hence the malice of Satan hath raged no less against the Book, than the Truth contained in it. The dealings of Antiochus under the old Testament, and of sundry persecuting Emperors under the new, evince no less. And it was no less crime of old to be Traditor libri, than to be Abnegator fidei. The reproach of Chartacea scripta, and membranae (Coster: Enchiridion: Chapter 1) reflects on its Author. It is true we have not the [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] of Moses and the Prophets, of the Apostles and Evangelists; but the [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] which we have, or copies contain every iota that was in them.

Section 14. It is no doubt but that in the Copies we now enjoy of the old Testament there are some diverse readings, or various lections. The [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉][〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] the [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (for the [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] are of another nature) the various lections of Ben-Asher or Rabbi Aaron the Son of Rabbi Moses of the tribe of Asher, and Ben Nepthali, or Rabbi Moses the Son of David of the Tribe of Naphtali; of the East and Western Jews, which we have collected at the End of the great Bible with the Masora, evince it. But yet we affirm that the whole Word of God, in every Letter and Tittle, as given from him by Inspiration, is preserved without Corruption. Where there is any variety it is always in things of less, indeed of no importance. God by his Providence preserving the whole entire, suffered this lesser variety to fall out, in or among the copies we have, for the quickening and exercising of our diligence in our search into his Word.

Section 15. It was an unhappy Attempt (which must afterwards be spoken unto) that a learned man has of late put himself upon, namely, to prove variations in all the present [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] of the Old Testament in the Hebrew Tongue from the Copies used of old, merely upon uncertain conjectures, and the credit of corrupt Translations. Whether that Plea of his be more unreasonable in itself and devoid of any real ground of Truth, or injurious to the Love and care of God over his Word and Church, I know not sure I am, it is both in an high degree. The Translation especially insisted on by him, is that of the 70. That this Translation either from the mistakes of its first Authors (if it be theirs, whose name and number it bears) or the carelessness or ignorance, or worse of its Transcribers, is corrupted and gone off from the original in a 1000 places twice told, is acknowledged by all who know ought of these things. Strange that so corrupt a stream should be judged a fit means to cleanse the fountain. That such a Lesbian Rule should be thought a fit measure to correct the original by; and yet on the account hereof, with some others not one whit better, or scarce so Good, we have 1826 various lections exhibited unto us, with frequent insinuations of an infinite number more yet to be collected. It were desirable that men would be content to show their learning, Reading and diligence, about things where there is less danger in Adventures.

Nor is the relief He provides against the charge of bringing things to an uncertainty in the Scripture, which he found himself obnoxious unto less pernicious than the opinion he seeks to palliate thereby; although it be since taken up and approved by others. The Saving Doctrine of the Scripture, He tells us, as to the matter and substance of it, in all things of moment it is preserved in the Copies of the original, and Translations that do remain.

Section 17. It is indeed a great Relief, against the inconvenience of corrupt Translations, to consider that although some of them be bad enough, yet if all the Errors and mistakes that are to be found in all the rest, should be added to the worst of all, yet every necessary saving fundamental truth, would be found sufficiently testified unto therein. But to depress the sacred Truth of the originals, into such a condition, as wherein it should stand in need of this Apology, and that without any color or pretence from discrepancies in the Copies themselves that are extant, or any tolerable evidence that there ever were any other, in the least differing from these extant in the world, will at length be found a work unbecoming a Christian Protestant Divine. Besides the injury done hereby to the Providence of God towards his Church, and care of his Word, It will not be found so easy a matter, upon a supposition of such corruption in the Originals as is pleaded for, to evince unquestionably that the whole saving doctrine itself, at first given out from God, continues entire and incorrupt. The nature of this doctrine is such, that there is no other Principle or means of its discovery, no other Rule or measure of judging and determining anything about or concerning it, but only the writing from whence it is taken: it being wholly of divine Revelation, and that Revelation being expressed only in that writing. Upon any corruption then supposed therein, there is no means of rectifying it. It were an easy thing to correct a mistake or corruption in the transcription of any Problem or Demonstration of Euclid, or any other ancient Mathematician, from the consideration of the things themselves about which they treat, being always the same, and in their own nature equally exposed to the knowledge and understanding of men, in all Ages. In things of pure Revelation, whose knowledge depends solely on their Revelation, it is not so. Nor is it enough to satisfy us, that the doctrines mentioned are preserved entire; every Tittle and [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] in the Word of God, must come under our care and consideration, as being as such from God; But of these things we shall Treat afterwards at large; return we now to the Apostle.

Section 17. This [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], this written Prophecy, this [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; is not of any private Interpretation. Some think that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is put for [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] or [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], which according to Hesychius denotes Afflation, inspiration, conception within; so Calvin; In this sense the importance of the words, is the same with what I have already mentioned; namely that the Prophets had not their private conceptions, or self-fancied Enthusiasms of the things they spoke. To this Interpretation assents Grotius. And [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], for [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], is reckoned amongst the various Lections that are gathered out of him, in the Appendix to the Biblia Polyglotta. Thus [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], is the other side of that usual expression, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], or [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. Camero contends for the retaining of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; and justly. We begin a little too late to see, whether men's bold Conjectures in correcting the Original Text of the Scriptures are like to proceed. Here's no color for a various Lection; one Copy it seems by Stephen read [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; without ground, by an evident error; and such mistakes are not to be allowed the name or place of various Readings. But yet says Camero, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is such a Resolution and Interpretation as is made by Revelation. He adds that in that sense [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is used by the 70, in the business of Joseph's Interpretation of Pharaoh's Dream, Genesis 40; which was by Revelation. But indeed the word is not used in that Chapter. However he falls in with this sense, (as do Calvin and Grotius) that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], is not to be referred to our Interpretation of the Prophets, but to the Way and manner of their receiving the Counsel and Will of God.

Section 18. And indeed, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; taking [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], for an Interpretation of the Word of prophecy given out by writing, as our Translation bears it, is an Expression that can scarcely have any tolerable sense affixed unto it; [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], or [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] relates here, to [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]: and denotes the first giving out of its Word, not our after consideration of its sense and meaning. And without this sense it stands in no coherence with, nor opposition to, the following sentence, which by its causal connection to this, manifests that it renders a Reason of what is herein affirmed, in the first place; and in the latter, turning with the adversative [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], an opposition unto it: [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; for Prophecy came not at any time by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. What Reason is in the first part of this verse, why the Scripture is not of our private interpretation? or what opposition in the latter to that Assertion? Nay on that supposal, there is no tolerable, correspondence of discourse in the whole [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. But take the Word to express the coming of the Prophecy to the Prophets themselves, and the sense is full and Clear.

Section 19. This then is the intention of the Apostle; the Prophecy which we have written, the Scripture, was not an issue of men's fancied Enthusiasms; not a product of their own minds and Conceptions, not an Interpretation of the Will of God by the understanding of man, that is of the Prophets themselves; neither their rational apprehensions, Enquiries, conceptions of fancy, or Imaginations of their hearts, had any place in this business; no self Afflation, no rational meditation managed at liberty by the understandings and Wills of men, had place herein.

Section 20. Of this, says the Apostle, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; knowing, judging, and determining this in the first place. This is a Principle to be owned and acknowledged by every one that will believe any thing else. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is not only to know, to perceive to understand; but also to judge, own, and acknowledge. This then in our Religion is to be owned, acknowledged, submitted unto, as a Principle, without further dispute. To discover the Grounds of this submission and Acknowledgment, is the business of the ensuing discourse.

Section 21. That this is so indeed, as before asserted, and to give a Reason why this is to be received as a Principle, he adds, verse 21. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. That word of Prophecy which we have written, is not [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], of private conception, for it came not at any time by the will of man. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] which is the passive Conjugation of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] from [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], denotes at least to be brought in; more than merely it came; It was brought into them by the Will of God. The Affirmative, as to the Will of God, is included in the negative, as to the will of man. Or it came as the voice from heaven to our Savior on the mount: verse 18; where the same word is used. So Ezekiel 1. 3. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] essendo fuit verbum; it was brought into him, as was showed before. Thus God brought the word to them, and spoke in them, in order of nature, before he spoke by them. As [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. it was brought to them, it was [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] the voice of the Lord, Genesis 3. 8. or [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] as the Jews call it; as spoken by them or written, it was properly [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] verbum Dei, the word of God; which by his immediate voice he signified to the Prophets. Thus some of them in visions, first eat a written book, and then prophesied, as was instanced before. And this is the first spring of the Scripture; the beginning of its emanation from the Counsel and Will of God. By the Power of the Holy Ghost, it was brought into the organs or instruments, that he was pleased to use, for the Revelation, and declaration of it unto others.

Section 22. That which remains for the completing of this dispensation of the Word of God unto us, is added by the Apostle; [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; When the Word was thus brought to them, it was not left to their understandings, Wisdoms, Minds, Memories, to order, dispose and give it out; but they were borne, acted, carried out by the Holy Ghost, to speak, deliver and Write, all that, and nothing but that, to every tittle, that was so brought to them. They invented not Words themselves, suited to the things they had learned; but only expressed the Words, that they received. Though their mind and understanding were used in the choice of Words, whence arises all the difference, that is in the manner of expression, (for they did use [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Words of Will, or choice,) yet they were so guided, that their words were not their own, but immediately supplied unto them; and so they gave out [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] the writing of uprightness, and [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Words of truth, itself. Ecclesiastes 12. 10. Not only the Doctrine they taught, was the Word of truth, Truth itself, John 17. 17; but the Words whereby they taught it, were Words of truth from God himself. Thus allowing the contribution of passive instruments for the Reception and Representation of words, which answers the mind and tongue of the Prophets, in the coming of the voice of God to them, every Apex of the written word is equally divine, and as immediately from God as the voice wherewith, or whereby he spoke to, or in the Prophets; and is therefore accompanied with the same Authority, in itself, and unto us.

Section 23. What has been thus spoken of the Scripture of the Old Testament, must be also affirmed of the New; with this addition of advantage and preeminence, that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Hebrews 2. 3. it received its beginning of being spoken by the Lord himself, God spoke in these last days [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] in the Son. Hebrews 1. 1.

Section 24. Thus God who himself began the writing of the Word with his own finger, Exodus 31:11; after he had spoken it Exodus 20; appointing or approving the writing of the rest that followed, Deuteronomy 31:12; Joshua 23:6; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 14:6; 2 Kings 17:13; 1 Chronicles 21:15; 2 Chronicles 25:4, 4; Ezekiel 2:9, 10; Habakkuk 2:2; Luke 16:29; John 5:39; John 20:31; Acts 17:11; doth lastly command the close of the immediate Revelation of his Will, to be written in a Book, Revelation 1:11; and so gives out the whole of his Mind and counsel unto us in writing; as a merciful and steadfast relief, against all that confusion, darkness, and uncertainty, which the vanity, folly, and looseness of the minds of men, drawn out and heightened by the unspeakable alterations, that fall out amongst them, would otherwise have certainly run into.

Section 25. Thus we have laid down the Original of the Scriptures, from the Scripture itself; and this Original is the basis and foundation of all its Authority. Thus is it from God; entirely from him; As to the Doctrine contained in it, and the Words wherein that Doctrine is delivered, it is wholly his; what that speaks, He speaks himself. He speaks in it and by it; and so it is vested with all the moral Authority of God over his Creatures.

CHAPTER 1.

The divine origin of Scripture as the sole foundation of its authority. The origin of the Old Testament, Hebrews 1:1. Several ways of immediate revelation. The unique manner of the revelation of the Word. Considerations on this topic. Various expressions of that manner, 2 Peter 1:20-21. The written Word, as written, preserved by the providence of God. Capellus's opinion about variant readings considered. The Scripture not of human origin. The true meaning of that expression. How the Word came in ancient times, and how it was received. Entirely from God down to the smallest detail. On the Scriptures of the New Testament and their special privilege.

Section 1. Everyone who acknowledges the authority of Scripture agrees that its entire authority depends solely on its divine origin. Since our present goal is to demonstrate and declare that authority, we must first establish its divine source and origin. Once that foundation is laid, we will be able to draw our following arguments -- where we aim more at weight than number -- from their own proper principles.

Section 2. Regarding the origin of the Old Testament Scripture, we are told that God SPOKE in old times, or formerly, through the prophets (Hebrews 1:1). From the days of Moses the lawgiver onward, until the establishment and closing of the canon given to the Jewish Church in the days of Ezra and his companions -- the men of the great Congregation -- this is how God spoke. Since this was done only among the Jews, they as His Church were entrusted with the oracles of God (Romans 3:2; 9:4). God spoke "in" -- that is, "by" -- the prophets (Chrysostom, Theophylact), as in Luke 1:70. He spoke by the mouth of the holy prophets. But there seems to be something further intended in this expression.

Section 3. In the revealing of the eternal counsel of God's mind and will to people, we must consider both His speaking to the prophets and His speaking through them to us. In this expression, it seems to be the audible voice from heaven -- the voice that came to the prophets -- that is in view. So God spoke in the prophets, and there is a specific reason for the phrase "in the prophets." In the same way, many of the Psalms are said to be given "to" this or that person. A Golden Psalm was given "to" David -- that is, from the Lord. And from that point their tongue became like the pen of a writer (Psalm 45:1). So God spoke in them before He spoke through them.

Section 4. The various ways of special revelation -- through dreams, visions, audible voices, and inspirations, including the unique form given to the lawgiver under the Old Testament called face to face (Exodus 33:11; Deuteronomy 34:10), and the manner described in Numbers 12:8, along with what is compared to it and exalted above it in the New Testament through the Son (Hebrews 1:1-3) who came from the bosom of the Father (John 1:17-18) -- are not my present concern. All of them relate to the manner of the revelation, not to the thing itself.

Section 5. By the statement that God spoke in the prophets of old -- from the beginning to the end of that long period of 1,000 years during which He gave the writings of the Old Testament -- two things are established for us, which form the foundation of our present discussion.

Section 6. 1. The laws they proclaimed, the doctrines they delivered, the instructions they gave, the stories they recorded, the promises of Christ, and the prophecies of Gospel times they revealed -- none of these were their own. They were not conceived in their minds, formed by their reasoning, retained in their memories from what they had heard, or in any way previously understood by them (1 Peter 1:10-11). Instead, all of these came immediately from God. The prophets' rational faculties played only a passive role in receiving them, without any active contribution that they might have been required to make by some law. From this it follows:

Section 7. Second, God was so with them, and the Holy Ghost so spoke in them -- both in their receiving the Word from Him and in their delivering it to others by speaking or writing -- that they were not enabled by any habitual light, knowledge, or conviction of truth to declare His mind and will. They only acted as they were immediately moved by Him. Their tongue in what they said, or their hand in what they wrote, was no more under their own control than a pen is in the hand of an expert writer.

Section 8. Because of this, insofar as their own personal concerns as saints and believers were involved, they are said to have made a diligent search and investigation into the things that the Spirit of Christ, who spoke within them, was revealing (1 Peter 1:10-11). Without this personal search, even though their visions were vivid -- so that their eyes were said to be open (Numbers 24:3-4) -- they still did not understand them. For this reason, they also studied the writings and prophecies of one another (Daniel 9:2). In this way, they gained a saving, useful, habitual knowledge of the truths delivered by themselves and others through the illumination of the Holy Ghost and the study of the Word, just as we do (Psalm 119:104). But when it came to receiving the Word from God -- as God spoke in them -- they gained nothing by study, meditation, inquiry, or reading (Amos 7:15). Whether we consider the content or the manner of what they received and delivered, or their receiving and delivering of it, they were like a musical instrument giving a sound according to the hand, intention, and skill of the one who plays it.

Section 9. This is expressed in various ways. Generally it is said the Word was to this or that prophet, which we translate as the Word came to them. Ezekiel 1:3 says it came expressly -- it was given a real existence, an effectual indwelling, by the Spirit entering into him (verse 14). This coming of the Word to them often carried such greatness and such an expression of God's majesty that it filled them with dread and reverence of Him (Habakkuk 3:16) and also greatly affected their physical bodies (Daniel 8:27). But this dread and terror (which Satan tried to imitate through his foul oracles and frenzied utterances) was unique to the Old Testament and belonged to its instructional purpose (Hebrews 12:18-21). The Spirit, in revealing the New Testament, communicated His mind and will in a way of greater freedom and glory. 2 Corinthians 3. The directness and immediacy of the revelation was the same, but the manner of it reflected the glorious freedom of fellowship and communion with the Father, to which believers now had access through Jesus Christ. Hebrews 9:8; 10:19-20; 12:23-24. So our Savior tells His apostles: Matthew 10:20 -- You are not the speakers of what you deliver, as other people are, whose words flow from the imaginations of their own hearts. And He adds this reason: The Spirit of the Father is the One who speaks in you. In this way, the Word that came to them was like a book that they took in and gave out without changing a single detail or syllable. Ezekiel 2:8-11; 3:3; Revelation 10:9-11.

Section 10. Furthermore, when the Word had come to the prophets and God had spoken in them, they had no power to conceal it, because the hand of the Lord was strong upon them. They were not merely called, in a general sense, to speak the truth they had learned and to tell what they had heard and seen -- which was their regular preaching work, following the pattern of what they had received. Acts 4:20. They were also required to declare the very specific words they had received. When the Word had come to them, it was like a fire inside them that had to be released or it would consume them. Psalm 39:3; Jeremiah 20:9; Amos 3:8; 7:15-16. Jonah discovered that his attempt to hide the Word he had received was completely futile.

Section 11. Because these things are so important and serve as the foundation for everything that follows -- namely, the demonstration that the Word has come to us from God without the slightest mixture or interference of any human element subject to error (such as the wisdom, truthfulness, integrity, knowledge, and memory of even the best of all people) -- I will examine this further from one full and prominent declaration of it given to us in 2 Peter 1:20-21. The words of the Holy Ghost are: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation; for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Section 12. What he speaks of here is the prophecy of Scripture, or written prophecy.

There were traditions among the Jews to whom Peter wrote that elevated themselves into competition with the written Word. These later gained the title of an oral law, claiming to have originated from God. The apostle silently condemns these traditions and also reveals the specific form in which he was considering what he called in verse 19 the word of prophecy -- namely, as WRITTEN. It is the written Word, as such, that he is discussing. Over fifty times in the New Testament, the term for "writing" or "Scripture" is used absolutely to refer to the Word of God. The same term is used in the Old Testament for the Word of prophecy (2 Chronicles 21:12). It is the writing that is inspired by God, as stated in 2 Timothy 3:16. The text itself, or the doctrine as written, comes from Him. Not only the doctrine contained in it, but the written text itself -- the doctrine as written -- is from God.

Section 13. For this reason, God's providence has shown itself no less concerned with preserving the writings than the doctrine they contain. The writing itself is the product of His own eternal counsel for preserving the doctrine, after He had sufficiently demonstrated the inadequacy of all other means for that purpose. And so Satan's hostility has raged no less against the book than against the truth it contains. The actions of Antiochus under the Old Testament and of various persecuting emperors under the New prove this clearly. In ancient times, it was no less a crime to be a betrayer of the book than to be a denier of the faith. The insult of calling Scripture mere "paper writings" and "parchment" (Coster: Enchiridion: Chapter 1) reflects back on its Author. It is true that we do not have the original manuscripts of Moses and the prophets, the apostles and evangelists, but the copies we possess contain every detail that was in them.

Section 14. There is no doubt that in the copies we now have of the Old Testament there are some different readings or variant readings. The variant readings of Ben-Asher (or Rabbi Aaron, the son of Rabbi Moses of the tribe of Asher) and Ben Naphtali (or Rabbi Moses, the son of David of the tribe of Naphtali), and of the Eastern and Western Jews -- which we have collected at the end of the great Bible with the Masora -- prove this. But we still maintain that the entire Word of God, in every letter and detail, as given by Him through inspiration, has been preserved without corruption. Wherever there is any variation, it is always in things of lesser -- indeed of no importance. God, by His providence, preserved the whole intact while allowing this minor variation to occur in or among the copies we have, in order to sharpen and exercise our diligence in searching His Word.

Section 15. It was an unfortunate attempt (which must be addressed later) that a learned man has recently undertaken: to prove that all the present copies of the Old Testament in the Hebrew language differ from those used in ancient times, based purely on uncertain guesswork and the authority of corrupt translations. Whether his argument is more unreasonable in itself and lacking any real basis in truth, or more harmful to God's love and care for His Word and Church, I am not certain. But I am sure it is both to a high degree. The translation he mainly relies on is that of the Septuagint. That this translation -- whether through the mistakes of its original authors (if it truly belongs to those whose name and number it bears), or through the carelessness, ignorance, or worse failings of its copyists -- has been corrupted and departed from the original in over 2,000 places, is acknowledged by everyone who knows anything about these matters. It is astonishing that such a corrupt stream should be considered a suitable means to purify the fountain. That such a flexible standard should be thought a proper tool to correct the original by! And yet on this basis, along with some other sources no better -- or hardly as good -- we are presented with 1,826 variant readings, with frequent hints that an endless number more remain to be collected. It would be better if men were content to display their learning, research, and diligence in areas where there is less danger in taking risks.

Nor is the defense he provides against the charge of creating uncertainty in Scripture -- a charge he knew he was exposed to -- any less harmful than the opinion he tries to soften with it, even though it has since been adopted and endorsed by others. He tells us that the saving doctrine of Scripture, as to its substance, in all matters of importance, is preserved in the copies of the original and the translations that remain.

Section 17. It is indeed a great comfort, against the problem of corrupt translations, to realize that although some of them are bad enough, if all the errors and mistakes found in all the rest were added to the worst of them, every necessary saving fundamental truth would still be sufficiently testified to in them. But to drag the sacred truth of the originals down to such a level that it needs this kind of defense -- and to do so without any basis or excuse from differences in the manuscripts themselves that survive, or any reasonable evidence that any others ever existed that differed in the slightest from those we now have -- will eventually be recognized as conduct unworthy of a Christian Protestant theologian. Beyond the harm done to God's providence toward His Church and His care for His Word, it will not be easy -- once such corruption of the Originals is accepted -- to prove beyond question that the entire saving doctrine originally given by God still remains complete and uncorrupted. The nature of this doctrine is such that there is no other principle or means for discovering it, no other rule or standard for judging or deciding anything about it, except the writing from which it comes. It is entirely a matter of divine revelation, and that revelation is expressed only in that writing. If any corruption is assumed in it, there is no way to correct it. It would be simple to correct a mistake or corruption in the copying of any problem or proof by Euclid or any other ancient mathematician, because the things they deal with are always the same and are equally open to human knowledge and understanding in every age. In matters of pure revelation, whose knowledge depends entirely on their being revealed, this is not the case. Nor is it enough to assure us that the doctrines mentioned are preserved intact. Every detail and smallest mark in the Word of God must receive our care and attention as being from God. But we will discuss these things more fully later. Let us now return to the apostle.

Section 17. This written prophecy, this Scripture, is not of any private interpretation. Some think the Greek word used here is equivalent to another form that, according to Hesychius, means breathing in, inspiration, or inward conception. Calvin takes this view. In this sense, the meaning of the words is the same as what I have already described: the prophets did not speak from their own private ideas or self-generated enthusiasms. Grotius agrees with this interpretation. And the alternative reading is listed among the variant readings collected from him in the Appendix to the Biblia Polyglotta. This interpretation represents the other side of the usual expression for prophetic utterance. Camero argues for keeping the original reading -- and rightly so. We are beginning too late to see where men's bold guesses at correcting the original text of the Scriptures are going to lead. There is no basis here for a variant reading. One manuscript, it seems, according to Stephen, read differently -- without grounds, by an obvious error. Such mistakes should not be given the name or status of variant readings. But Camero says this word refers to such a resolution and interpretation as is made by revelation. He adds that in that sense the word is used by the Septuagint in the account of Joseph's interpretation of Pharaoh's dream (Genesis 40), which was by revelation. But in fact, the word is not used in that chapter. Nevertheless, he agrees with this meaning (as do Calvin and Grotius): the term is not to be applied to our interpretation of the prophets, but to the way and manner in which they received God's counsel and will.

Section 18. And indeed, if we take the word as referring to an interpretation of the written word of prophecy, as our translation renders it, the expression can scarcely be given any acceptable meaning. The key term here relates to the original giving out of the Word, not to our later consideration of its meaning and significance. Without this understanding, the verse has no coherent connection with, or contrast to, the sentence that follows. That following sentence, through its causal link to this one, clearly provides the reason for what is stated here. In the first part it gives a reason, and in the second part, turning with the contrasting word "but," it presents an opposition: for prophecy came not at any time by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. What reason does the first part of this verse give for why Scripture is not of our private interpretation? Or what contrast does the latter part present to that claim? On that assumption, there is no reasonable flow of thought in the whole passage. But take the word as expressing the coming of the prophecy to the prophets themselves, and the meaning is full and clear.

Section 19. This, then, is the apostle's point: the prophecy that we have in written form -- the Scripture -- was not the product of men's imaginary enthusiasms. It was not a creation of their own minds and ideas, not a human interpretation of God's will by human understanding -- that is, by the prophets themselves. Neither their rational perceptions, inquiries, fanciful ideas, nor the imaginations of their hearts had any role in this. No self-generated inspiration, no rational thinking freely directed by human understanding and will, played any part in it.

Section 20. Of this, the apostle says: knowing, judging, and determining this in the first place. This is a principle to be acknowledged by everyone who wishes to believe anything else. The word used here means not only to know, perceive, and understand, but also to judge, own, and acknowledge. This, then, in our faith is to be acknowledged, accepted, and submitted to as a principle, without further dispute. To reveal the grounds for this submission and acknowledgment is the purpose of the discussion that follows.

Section 21. To confirm that this is indeed the case, as stated above, and to give a reason why it should be accepted as a principle, he adds in verse 21. The passage reads as follows. That word of prophecy which we have in written form is not of private origin, for it came not at any time by the will of man. The verb used here, in its passive form, means at least to be brought in -- something more than simply that it came. It was brought to them by the will of God. The affirmative statement about God's will is contained within the negative statement about human will. Or it came like the voice from heaven to our Savior on the mountain (verse 18), where the same word is used. So in Ezekiel 1:3, the Word came into being within him -- it was brought to him, as was shown earlier. God brought the Word to them and spoke in them, in the order of nature, before He spoke through them. As it was brought to them, it was the voice of the Lord (Genesis 3:8), or what the Jews call the heavenly voice. As spoken by them or written, it was properly the Word of God -- which He communicated to the prophets by His immediate voice. Some of them, in visions, first consumed a written book and then prophesied, as was mentioned before. This is the first source of Scripture -- the beginning of its flow from the counsel and will of God. By the power of the Holy Ghost, it was brought into the vessels or instruments He chose to use for revealing and declaring it to others.

Section 22. What remains to complete this process of delivering God's Word to us is added by the apostle. When the Word was brought to them, it was not left to their understandings, wisdom, minds, or memories to arrange, organize, and communicate it. Instead, they were carried, directed, and moved by the Holy Ghost to speak, deliver, and write all of it -- and nothing but it -- down to every detail that was brought to them. They did not invent words of their own suited to the things they had learned. They only expressed the words they received. Although their minds and understandings were involved in the selection of words -- which accounts for all the differences in style and expression (for they did use words of their own choosing) -- they were so guided that their words were not ultimately their own but were immediately supplied to them. And so they produced what is called the writing of uprightness and words of truth itself. Ecclesiastes 12:10. Not only was the doctrine they taught the Word of truth -- truth itself (John 17:17) -- but the words by which they taught it were words of truth from God Himself. Allowing for the contribution of passive instruments in receiving and expressing words -- which corresponds to the minds and tongues of the prophets when God's voice came to them -- every detail of the written Word is equally divine and as immediately from God as the voice by which He spoke to or in the prophets. It therefore carries the same authority, both in itself and for us.

Section 23. What has been said about the Scripture of the Old Testament must also be affirmed of the New, with this additional advantage and distinction: it received its beginning of being spoken by the Lord Himself (Hebrews 2:3). God spoke in these last days in the Son. Hebrews 1:1.

Section 24. God Himself began the writing of the Word with His own finger (Exodus 31:18), after He had spoken it (Exodus 20). He then appointed or approved the writing of the rest that followed (Deuteronomy 31:12; Joshua 23:6; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 14:6; 2 Kings 17:13; 1 Chronicles 22:15; 2 Chronicles 25:4; Ezekiel 2:9-10; Habakkuk 2:2; Luke 16:29; John 5:39; John 20:31; Acts 17:11). Finally, He commands that the close of the immediate revelation of His will be written in a book (Revelation 1:11). In this way He gives us His entire mind and counsel in writing -- as a merciful and lasting safeguard against all the confusion, darkness, and uncertainty that the foolishness, weakness, and instability of human minds, magnified by the countless changes that occur among people, would otherwise inevitably produce.

Section 25. We have now established the origin of the Scriptures from the Scripture itself, and this origin is the basis and foundation of all its authority. This is how it comes from God -- entirely from Him. Both the doctrine it contains and the words in which that doctrine is delivered are wholly His. What it speaks, He speaks Himself. He speaks in it and through it, and so it is clothed with all the moral authority of God over His creatures.