Chapter 5

Chapter 5.

Of the Testimony of the Spirit. Traditions. Miracles.

Section 1. Before I proceed to the consideration of those other Testimonies, which are as Arguments drawn from those innate Excellencies, and Properties of the Word which I have insisted on, some other things whose right understanding is of great importance in the cause under debate, must be laid down and stated. Some of these refer to that Testimony of the Spirit, that is usually and truly pleaded, as the great ascertaining Principle, or that, on the account whereof, we receive the Scriptures to be the Word of God. That it may be seen, in what sense, that is usually delivered by our Divines, and how far there is a coincidence between that Assertion, and what we have delivered, I shall lay down what that Testimony is, wherein it consists, and what is the weight or stress that we lay upon it.

Section 2. That the Scripture be received as the Word of God, there is required a twofold Efficacy of the spirit. The first respects the subject or the mind of man that assents unto the Authority of the Scripture; now concerning this Act, or work of the Spirit, whereby we are enabled to believe the Scripture, on the account whereof we may say that we receive the Scripture to be the word of God, or upon the Testimony of the Spirit, I shall a little enquire, what it is, and wherein it doth consist.

Section 3. First. Then, It is not an outward or inward vocal Testimony concerning the Word, as the Papists would impose upon us to believe and assent. We do not affirm that the spirit immediately, by himself, saith unto every individual Believer, this Book is, or contains the Word of God; We say not that the Spirit ever spake to us of the Word, but by the Word. Such an Enthusiasm as they fancy is rarely pretended, and where it is so, it is for the most part quickly discovered to be a delusion. We plead not for the usefulness, much less the necessity of any such Testimony. Yea the Principles we have laid down, resolving all faith into the Public Testimony of the Scriptures themselves, do render all such private Testimonies altogether needless.

Section 4. Secondly. This Testimony of the spirit consists not in a persuasion that a man takes up, he knows not well how, or why; only this he knows, he will not Depose it though it cost him his life. This would be like that, which by Morinus is ascribed to the Church of Rome, which though it knew no Reason why it should prefer the vulgar Latin Translation before the Original, yet by the guidance of the Spirit would do so, that is unreasonably. But if a man should say, that he is persuaded that the Scripture is the Word of God, and that he will die a one thousand times to give Testimony thereunto; and not knowing any real ground of this persuasion, that should bear him out in such a Testimony, shall ascribe it to the Spirit of God, our concernment lies not in that Persuasion. This may befall men by the Advantage of Traditions, whereof men are usually Zealous; and obstinate in their defence. Education in some constitutions will give pertinacy in most vain and false persuasions. It is not then a Resolution and Persuasion induced into our minds we know not how, built we know not upon what foundations, that we intend in the Assignation of our receiving the Scripture, to be the Word of God, to the effectual work and witness of the Holy Ghost.

Section 5. Two things then we intend by this Work of the spirit upon the mind of man. 1. His communication of spiritual Light; by an act of his Power, enabling the mind to discern the saving Truth, Majesty, and Authority of the Word, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. There is a blindness, a darkness upon the minds of men, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], that not only disables them from discerning the things of God, in their certainty, Evidence, Necessity, and beauty; (for [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉];) but also causes them to judge amiss of them; as things weak and foolish, dark, unintelligible, not answering to any Principle of Wisdom whereby they are guided: 1 Corinthians 2. Whilst this [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] abides on the minds of men, it is impossible that they should on any right abiding foundation assent to the Word of God. They may have a prejudicate opinion, they have no faith concerning it. This darkness then must be removed by the Communication of Light by the Holy Ghost, which work of his Illumination is commonly by others spoken unto; and by me also in another place.

Section 6. 2. The Holy Ghost together with, and by his work of Illumination, taking off the perverse disposition of mind that is in us by nature, with our Enmity to, and Aversion from the things of God, effectually also persuades the mind, to a receiving and admitting of the Truth, Wisdom, and Authority of the word; Now because this perverse disposition of mind, possessing the [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] of the soul, influences the Will also into an Aversion and dislike of that Goodness, which is in the Truth proposed to it; it is removed by a double act of the Holy Ghost.

Section 7. 1. He gives us Wisdom, Understanding, a spiritual Judgment, whereby we may be able to compare spiritual things with spiritual, in a spiritual manner, and to come thereby to a clear and full Light of the heavenly Excellency and Majesty of the Word; and so enables us to know of the doctrine, whether it be of God. Under the benefit of this Assistance, all the parts of the Scripture in their Harmony and Correspondency, all the Truths of it in their power and necessity, come in together to give Evidence one to another, and all of them to the whole; I mean as the mind is enabled to make a spiritual Judgment of them.

Section 8. 2. He gives [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], a spiritual sense, a Taste of the things themselves upon the mind, Heart, and Conscience; when we have [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]senses exercised to discern such things. These things deserve a more full handling, and to be particularly exemplified from Scripture, if the nature of our present design would admit thereof.

Section 9. As in our natural Estate in respect of these things of God, the mind is full of vanity, darkness, blindness, yea is darkness itself, so that there is no correspondency between the faculty and the Object; and the Will lies in an utter unacquaintedness, yea impossibility of any acquaintance with the life, power, savour, sweetness, relish, and Goodness, that is in the things proposed to be known and discerned, under the dark shades of a blind mind; so for a removal of both these, the Holy Ghost communicates Light to the Understanding, whence it is able to see and judge of the truth, as it is in Jesus, and the Will being thereby delivered from the dungeon wherein it was, and quickened a new, performs its office, in embracing what is proper and suited unto it in the object proposed. The Spirit indeed discovereth to every one [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; according to the counsel of his will; but yet in that way, in the General whereby the Sun gives out his light and heat, the former making way for the latter: But these things must not now be insisted on.

Section 10. Now by these works of the Spirit, He doth, I say, persuade the Mind concerning the Truth and Authority of the Scripture; and therein leave an Impression of an effectual Testimony within us: And this Testimony of his, as it is Authoritative, and infallible in itself, so of inconceivably more Efficacy, Power and Certainty unto them that do receive it, than any Voice, or internal Word, boasted of by some, can be. But yet this is not the work of the spirit at present enquired after.

Section 11. 2 There is a Testimony of the spirit, that respects the object, or the Word itself; and this is a public Testimony, which, as it satisfies our souls in particular, so it is, and may be pleaded, in reference unto the satisfaction of all others, to whom the Word of God shall come. The Holy Ghost speaking in and by the Word, imparting to it Virtue, Power, Efficacy, Majesty and Authority, affords us the Witness, that our faith is resolved unto. And thus whereas there are but two heads, whereunto all Grounds of Assent do belong, namely Authority of Testimony, and the self Evidence of Truth, they do here both concur in one. In the same Word we have both the Authority of the Testimony of the spirit, and the self Evidence of the Truth spoken by him; yea so, that both these are materially one and the same, though distinguished in their formal conceptions. I have been much affected with those verses of DANTES the Italian Poet, which some body hath thus word for word turned into Latin.

—larga pluvia Spiritus sancti quae est diffusa Super veteres, et super novas membranas, Est syllogismus qui eam mihi conclusit Acute adeo ut prae illa Omnis demonstratio mihi videatur obtusa.

The spirits communication of his own Light, and Authority to the Scripture, as Evidences of its original, is the Testimony pleaded for.

Section 12. When then we resolve our faith into the Testimony of the Holy Ghost, it is not any Private whisper, Word, or voice given to individual Persons; It is not the secret and effectual persuasion of the Truth of the Scriptures, that falls upon the minds of some men, from various involved considerations of Education, Tradition, and the like, whereof they can give no particular account: It is not the effectual work of the Holy Ghost upon the minds and wills of men, enabling them savingly to believe, that is intended; The Papists for the most part pleading about these things, do but show their ignorance and malice. But it is the Public Testimony of the Holy Ghost given unto all, of the Word, by and in the word, and its own divine light, Efficacy, and Power.

Section 13. Thus far then have we proceeded. The Scripture, the Written Word hath its infallible Truth in itself; [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]John 17. from whence it hath its Verity, thence it hath its Authority; for its whole Authority is founded in its Truth. Its Authority in itself, is its Authority in respect of us; nor hath it any whit more in itself, than de jure it hath towards and over all them to whom it comes; That de facto some do not submit themselves unto it, is their sin and rebellion. This Truth and consequently this Authority, is evidenced and made known to us, by the public Testimony which is given unto it by the Holy Ghost speaking in it, with divine Light and Power, to the minds, souls, and consciences of men: being therein by itself proposed unto us, We being enlightened by the Holy Ghost, (which in the Condition wherein we are, is necessary for the Apprehension of any spiritual thing or truth in a spiritual manner) we receive it, and religiously subject our souls unto it, as the Word and Will of the everliving, sovereign God, and judge of all. And if this be not a bottom and foundation of faith, I here publicly Profess, that for ought I know, I have no faith at all.

Section 14. Having laid this stable foundation; I shall with all possible brevity consider some pretences, and Allegations, for the confirmation of the Authority of the Scripture, invented and made use of by some, to divert us from that foundation, the closing wherewith, will in this matter alone bring peace unto our souls; and so this Chapter shall as it were, lay in the balance, and compare together, the Testimony of the Spirit before mentioned and explained, and the other pretences and pleas, that shall now be examined.

Section 15. 1. Some say, when on other accounts they are concerned so to say, that we have received the Scripture from the Church of Rome, who received it by Tradition, and this gives a credibility unto it. Of Tradition in general, without this limitation which destroys it, of the Church of Rome, I shall speak afterwards. Credibility, either keeps within the bounds of probability, as that may be heightened to a manifest uncontrollableness, whilst yet its principles exceed not that sphere; in which sense it belongs not at all to our present discourse; or it includes a firm, suitable foundation, for faith supernatural and divine. Have we in this sense received the Scripture from that Church, as it is called? Is that Church able to give such a credibility to anything? Or does the Scripture stand in need of such a credibility to be given to it from that Church? Are not the first most false, and is not the last blasphemous? To receive a thing from a Church, as a Church, is to receive it upon the Authority of that Church. If we receive anything from the Authority of a Church, we do it not because the thing itself is worthy of Acceptation, but because of the Authority alleged. If then we thus receive the Scriptures from the Church of Rome, why (in particular) do we not receive the Apocryphal Books also, which she receives? How did the Church of Rome receive the Scriptures? Shall we say that she is authorized to give out what seems Good to her, as the Word of God? Not: but she has received them by Tradition; so she pleads, that she has received the Apocryphal books also; we then receive the Scriptures from Rome; Rome by Tradition; We make ourselves Judges of that Tradition. And yet Rome says, this is one thing, that she has by the same Tradition, namely, that she alone is judge of what she has by Tradition. But the common fate of liars is befallen that Harlot: she has so long, so constantly, so desperately lied in many, the most things that she professes, pretending Tradition for them, that indeed she deserves not to be believed, when she tells the Truth. Besides, She pleads that she received the Scriptures from the Beginning, when it is granted that the copies of the Hebrew of the old, and Greek of the new Testament were only authentic: These she pleads now under her keeping to be woefully corrupted, and yet is angry that we believe not her Tradition.

Section 16. Some add that we receive the Scripture to be the Word of God upon the account of the miracles that were wrought at the giving of the Law, and of the new Testament; which miracles we have received by universal Tradition. But first I desire to know whence it comes to pass, that seeing our Savior Jesus Christ wrought many other miracles besides those that are written, John 20. 30. chapter 21. 25. and the Apostles likewise, they cannot by all their Traditions help us to so much as an obscure report of any one, that is not written; (I speak not of Legends) which yet at their performance were no less known than those that are; nor were less useful for the end of miracles than they. Of Tradition in General afterwards. But is it not evident that the miracles whereof they speak, are preserved in the Scripture and no otherwise? And if so; can these miracles operate upon the understanding or judgment of any man, unless they first grant the Scripture to be the Word of God, I mean to the begetting of a divine faith of them, even that there were ever any such miracles? Suppose these miracles alleged, as the Ground of our believing of the word, had not been written, but like the Sibyl's leaves had been driven up and down, by the Worst and fiercest wind that blows in this world, the breath of man; Those who should keep them by tradition, that is men, are by nature so vain, foolish, malicious, such liars, adders, detractors, have spirits and minds so unsuited to spiritual things, so liable to alteration in themselves, and to contradiction one to another, are so given to impostures, and are so apt to be imposed upon, have been so shuffled and driven up and down the world in every Generation, have for the most part so utterly lost the Remembrance of what themselves are, whence they come, or whether they are to go, that I can give very little credit to what I have nothing but their Authority to rely upon for, without any Evidence from the nature of the thing itself.

Section 17. Abstracting then from the Testimony given in the Scriptures to the miracles wrought by the prime Revealers of the mind and will of God in the Word; and no tolerable assurance as to the business in hand, where a foundation for faith is enquired after, can be given that ever any such miracles were wrought. If numbers of men may be allowed to speak, we may have a Traditional Testimony given to the blasphemous figments of the Quran, under the name of True miracles. But the constant Tradition of more than a 1000 years, carried on by innumerable multitudes of men, great, wise, and sober, from one Generation to another, does but set open the gates of hell for the Mohammedans; Yet setting aside the Authority of God in his Word, and what is resolved thereinto, I know not why they may not vie Traditions with the rest of the world. The world indeed is full of Traditions flowing from the Word; that is, a knowledge of the Doctrines of the word in the minds of men; but a Tradition of the Word, not resolved into the Word, a tradition referred to a fountain of sense in seeing, and hearing, preserved as an oral law, in a distinct channel, and stream by itself, when it is evidenced, either by instance in some particular preserved therein, or in a probability of securing it through the Generations passed, by a comparison of some such effect in things of the like kind, I shall be ready to receive it.

Section 18. Give me then, as I said before, but the least obscure report, of any one of those many miracles that were wrought by our Savior and the Apostles, which are not recorded in the scriptures, and I shall put more valuation on the pretended Traditions, than I can as yet persuade myself unto. Besides! many Writers of the Scripture wrought no miracles, and by this Rule their writings are left to shift for themselves. Miracles indeed were necessary to take off all prejudices from the Persons, that brought any new doctrine from God; but the doctrine still evidenced itself: The Apostles converted many, where they wrought no miracles. Acts 16. 17, 18; and where they did so work, yet they for their doctrine, and not the doctrine on their account was received. And the Scripture now has no less Evidence and demonstration in itself of its Divinity, than it had, when by them it was preached.

Section 19. But because this Tradition is pretended with great confidence as a sure bottom and foundation for receiving of the Scriptures, I shall a little farther inquire into it. That which in this case is intended, by this Tradition, is a Report of men, which those who are present have received from them that are gone before them. Now this may be either of All the men of the World, or only of some of them; if of All; either their suffrages must be taken in some Convention, or gathered up from the individuals as we are able, and have opportunity. If the first way of receiving them were possible, which is the utmost improvement that Imagination can give the Authority enquired after, yet every individual of men being a Liar, the whole convention must be of the same complexion, and so not be able to yield a sufficient basis to build a faith upon, cui non potest subesse falsum, that is infallible, and cannot possibly be deceived: much less is there any foundation for it, in such a Report as is the Emergency of the Assertion of Individuals.

Section 21. But now if this Tradition be alleged as preserved only by some in the World, not the half of rational Creatures, I desire to know, what reason I have to believe those who have that Tradition, or plead that they have it, before and against them who profess they have no such Report delivered to them from their forefathers; Is the Reason hereof because I live among these who have this Tradition, and they are my neighbors whom I know? By the same Rule those who live among the other Parts of men, are bound to receive what they deliver them upon Tradition; and so men may be obliged to believe the Quran to be the Word of God.

Section 22. It is more probable it will be answered, that their Testimony is to be received because they are the Church of God; but it does not yet appear, that I can any other way have any Knowledge of them so to be, or of any Authority that any number of men, more, or less, can have in this case, under that Name or Notion, unless by the Scripture itself. And if so, it will quickly appear what place is to be allotted to their Testimony, who cannot be admitted as Witnesses, unless the Scripture itself be owned and received; because they have neither plea nor claim to be so admitted, but only from the Scripture: If they shall aver, that they take this honor to themselves, and that without Relation to the Scripture they claim a right of Authoritative witness bearing in this case, I say again, upon the general grounds of natural Reason, and Equity, I have no more inducements to give credit to their Assertions, than to an alike number of men holding out a Tradition utterly to the contrary of what they assert.

Section 23. But yet suppose, that this also were granted, and that men might be allowed to speak in their own name and Authority, giving Testimony to themselves, which upon the hypothesis under consideration, God himself is not allowed to do; I shall desire to know whether, when the Church declares the Scriptures to be the Word of God unto us, it does apprehend anything in the Scripture as the Ground of that Judgment and declaration or no? If it says no; but that it is proposed upon its sole Authority; then surely if we think Good to acquiesce in this decision of this doubt and inquiry, it is full time for us, to lay aside all our studies and inquiries after the Mind of God, and seek only what that man, or those men say, who are entrusted with this Authority, as they say, and as they would have us believe them, though we know not at all how or by what means they came by it; seeing they dare not pretend anything from the Scripture, lest thereby they direct us to that, in the first place.

Section 24. If it be said, that they do upon other accounts judge and believe the Scripture to be true, and to be the Word of God; I suppose it will not be thought unreasonable if we inquire after those Grounds and accounts, seeing they are of so great concernment unto us. All Truths in Relations consisting, in their consonancy and Agreement, to the nature of the things they deliver, I desire to know how they came to judge of the consonancy, between the nature of the things delivered in the Scripture, and the delivery of them therein? The things whereof we speak being heavenly, spiritual, mysterious, and supernatural, there cannot be any knowledge obtained of them but by the Word itself. How then can they make any Judgment of the Truth of that Scripture in the Relation of these things, which are nowhere to be known (I speak of many of them) in the least, but by that Scripture itself.

Section 25. If they shall say, that they found their judgment and declaration upon some discovery, that the Scripture makes of itself unto them; they affirm the same that we plead for: only they would very desirously appropriate to themselves the Privilege of being able to discern that discovery so made in the Scripture. To make good this claim, they must either plead somewhat from themselves, or from the Scriptures: if from themselves, it can be nothing, but that they see, like the men of China, and all others are blind, or have but one eye at the best, being wiser than any others, and more able to discern than they. Now though I shall easily grant them to be very subtle and cunning, yet that they are so much wiser than all the world besides, that they are meet to impose upon their belief things that they neither do, nor can discern or know, I would not be thought to admit, until I can believe myself and all others not of their society or combination, to be beasts of the field, and they as the serpent amongst us.

Section 26. If it be from the Scripture that they seek to make Good this claim; then as we cause them there to make a stand, which is all we aim at, so their plea must be from the promise of some special Assistance granted to them for that purpose; if their assistance be that of the spirit, it is either of the spirit that is promised to believers, to work in them as before described and related, or it is some private Testimony that they pretend is afforded to them; If the former be affirmed, we are in a condition, wherein the necessity of devolving all on the scripture itself, to decide and judge who are believers, lies in everyone's view; if the latter, who shall give me Assurance, that when they pretend that witness and Testimony, they do not lie and deceive; we must here certainly go either to the Scripture, or to some cunning man to be resolved. Isaiah 8:19, 20.

Section 27. I confess the Argument which hath not long since been singled out, and dexterously managed by an able and learned pen, namely; of proving the Truth of the doctrine of the Scripture, from the Truth of the story, and the Truth of the story from the certainty there is that the Writers of the Books of the Bible, were those Persons whose names and inscriptions they bear; so pursuing the Evidence, that what they wrote was true and known to them so to be, from all requisita that may possibly be sought after for the strengthening of such Evidence, is of great force and efficacy. It is I say of great force and efficacy as to the end for which it is insisted on; that is to satisfy men's rational Enquiries; but as to a ground of faith, it hath the same insufficiency with all other Arguments of the like kind; Though I should grant that the Apostles and penmen of the Scripture were persons of the greatest industry, honesty, integrity, faithfulness, holiness that ever lived in the world, as they were; and that they wrote nothing, but what themselves had as Good Assurance of as what men by their senses of seeing and hearing are able to attain; yet such a Knowledge and Assurance is not a sufficient foundation for the faith of the Church of God; if they received not every Word by inspiration, and that evidencing itself unto us, otherwise than by the Authority of their Integrity, it can be no foundation for us to build our faith upon.

Section 28. Before the committing of the Scriptures to writing, God had given the World an Experiment what keepers men were of this Revelation by tradition; Within some hundreds of years after the flood, all knowledge of him, through the craft of Satan, and the vanity of the minds of men which is unspeakable, was so lost, that nothing, but as it were the creation of a new World, or the Erection of a new Church state by new Revelations, could relieve it. After that great trial what can be farther pretended, on the behalf of Tradition I know not.

Section 29. The sum of all is; The merciful Good Providence of God, having by divers and various means; using therein amongst other things, the ministry of men and Churches, preserved the Writings of the Old and New Testament in the World; and by the same gracious disposal afforded them unto us, they are received and submitted unto by us, upon the Grounds and evidences of their divine Original before insisted on.

Section 30. Upon the whole matter then, I would know, whether if the Scriptures should be brought to any man, when, or where, he could not possibly have it attested to be the Word of God, by any public or private Authority of man, or Church, Tradition, or otherwise, he were bound to believe it or no? Whether he should obey God in believing, or sin in the rejecting of it? Suppose he do but take it into consideration, do but give it the reading or hearing, seeing in every place it avers itself to be the Word of God, he must of necessity either give credit unto it, or disbelieve it; To hang in suspense, which ariseth from the imperfect actings of the faculties of the soul, is in itself a weakness, and in this case being reckoned on the worst side, is interpretatively a Rejection. If you say it were the duty of such an one to believe it, you acknowledge in the scripture itself a sufficient Evidence of its own original Authority; without which it can be no man's duty to believe it. If you say, it would not be his sin to reject and refuse it, to disbelieve all that it speaks in the name of God; then this is that you say; God may truly and really speak unto a man, (as he doth by the Scripture) and yet that man not be bound to believe him. We deal not thus with one another.

Section 31. To wind up then the plea insisted on in the foregoing Chapter, concerning the self-evidencing Light and Power of the Scripture, from which we have diverted, and to make way for some other considerations, that tend to the confirmation of their divine Original, I shall close this discourse with the two general considerations following.

Section 32. 1. Then laying aside these failing pleas, there seems to be a moral impossibility that the Word of God, should not manifest its own Original, and its Authority from thence. Quaelibet herba deum. There is no Work of God, as was showed, but reveals its Author. A curious Artificer imparts that of form, shape, proportion, and comeliness to the fruit of his Invention, and work of his hands, that every one that looks upon it, must conclude, that it comes from skill and Ability. A man in the delivery of his mind in the writing of a Book, will give it such an impression of Reason, that though you cannot conclude that this, or that man wrote it, yet you must, that it was the product of a man, or Rational creature: yea some individual men of Excellency in some skill, are instantly known by them, that are able to judge in that Art or skill, by the Effects of their skill. This is the Piece, this is the hand, the Work of such an one. How easy is it for those who are conversant about ancient Authors to discover an Author by the spirit and style of his writings. Now certainly this is strange beyond all belief, that almost every Agent should give an impress to its work, whereby it may be appropriated unto him, and only the Word, wherein it was the design of the Great and Holy God to give us a portraiture as it were of his Wisdom, Holiness and Goodness, so far as we are capable of an Acquaintance with him in this Life, is not able to declare and evince its Original. That God who is prima Veritas, the first and sovereign Truth, infinitely separated and distinguished from all creatures on all accounts whatever, should Write a Book, or at least immediately indite it, commanding us to receive it as his, under the penalty of his Eternal displeasure, and yet that Book not make a sufficient discovery of itself to be his, to be from him, is past all belief. Let men that live on things received by Tradition from their Fathers, who perhaps never had sense of any real Transaction between God and their souls, who scarce ever perused the Word seriously in their lives, nor brought their Consciences to it; please themselves in their own imaginations! The sure Anchor of a soul that would draw nigh to God in and by his Word, lies in the things laid down.

Section 33. I suppose it will not be denied but that it was the Mind and Will of God, that those to whom his Word should come, should own it and receive it as his; if not, it were no sin in them to reject it, unto whom it doth so come; if it were, then either he hath given those Characters unto it, and left upon it that impression of his majesty whereby it might be known to be his, or he hath not done so; and that either because he would not, or because he could not; To say the latter, is to make him more infirm than a man, or other worms of the earth, than any naturally effectual cause. He that saith the former, must know, that it is incumbent on him, to yield a satisfactory account, why God would not do so, or else he will be thought blasphemously to impute a want of that Goodness and Love of mankind unto him, which he hath in infinite Grace manifested to be in himself. That no man is able to assign any such Reason, I shall firmly believe, until I find some attempting so to do; which as yet none have arrived at that height of Impudence and wickedness as to own.

Section 34. Secondly. How horrible is it to the thoughts of any Saint of God, that the scripture should not have its Authority from itself. Tertullian objects this to the Gentiles; Apology Chapter 5. Facit et hoc ad causam nostram, quod apud vos de humano arbitratu divinitas pensitatur; nisi homini Deus placuerit, Deus non erit; homo jam Deo propitius esse debebit. Would it be otherwise in this case if the Scripture must stand to the mercy of man for the Reputation of its Divinity? Nay of its verity; for whence it hath its Authority, thence it hath its verity also, as was observed before; and many more words of this nature might be added.

Chapter 5.

On the testimony of the Spirit. Traditions. Miracles.

Section 1. Before I move on to consider the other testimonies that serve as arguments drawn from the built-in excellencies and properties of the Word that I have discussed, some other matters -- whose correct understanding is very important to the issue at hand -- must be laid down and clarified. Some of these relate to the testimony of the Spirit, which is commonly and rightly cited as the great assuring principle -- the reason why we accept the Scriptures as the Word of God. To show in what sense this is usually taught by our theologians, and how far it aligns with what we have argued, I will explain what that testimony is, what it consists of, and how much weight we place on it.

Section 2. For Scripture to be received as God's Word, a twofold work of the Spirit is required. The first concerns the subject -- the mind of the person who assents to Scripture's authority. Regarding this act or work of the Spirit by which we are enabled to believe Scripture, on account of which we may say we receive it as God's Word or upon the testimony of the Spirit, I will briefly examine what it is and what it consists of.

Section 3. First, it is not an outward or inward audible testimony about the Word, as the Roman Catholics would have us believe. We do not claim that the Spirit directly, by Himself, says to every individual believer, 'This book is or contains the Word of God.' We do not say that the Spirit ever spoke to us about the Word, but rather through the Word. The kind of ecstatic revelation they imagine we mean is rarely claimed, and where it is, it is usually quickly exposed as a delusion. We do not argue for the usefulness, much less the necessity, of any such testimony. In fact, the principles we have laid down -- resolving all faith into the public testimony of the Scriptures themselves -- render all such private testimonies entirely unnecessary.

Section 4. Second, This testimony of the Spirit does not consist in a conviction that a person holds without clearly knowing how or why -- knowing only that he will not abandon it even if it costs him his life. That would be like what Morinus attributes to the Church of Rome, which, though it knew no reason to prefer the Vulgar Latin translation over the original, nonetheless by the guidance of the Spirit chose to do so -- that is, unreasonably. But if a person says he is convinced that Scripture is God's Word and that he would die a thousand times to testify to that belief, yet cannot identify any real basis for his conviction to support such a testimony and attributes it to the Spirit of God, his conviction is not what concerns us here. This kind of thing can happen to people simply through the influence of traditions, which people are usually zealous about and stubborn in defending. Education in certain settings can produce stubbornness in the most empty and false convictions. So the resolution and conviction we have in mind -- when we attribute our reception of Scripture as God's Word to the effective work and witness of the Holy Ghost -- is not one introduced into our minds without our knowing how, built on foundations we cannot identify.

Section 5. Two things, then, we mean by this work of the Spirit on the mind of a person. 1. His communication of spiritual light -- an act of His power enabling the mind to discern the saving truth, majesty, and authority of the Word. There is a blindness, a darkness on people's minds that not only prevents them from recognizing the things of God in their certainty, evidence, necessity, and beauty, but also causes them to misjudge those things as weak and foolish, obscure, unintelligible, and not answering to any principle of wisdom by which they are guided (1 Corinthians 2). As long as this blindness remains on people's minds, it is impossible for them to agree to the Word of God on any true, lasting foundation. They may have a biased opinion about it, but they have no faith concerning it. This darkness must therefore be removed through the communication of light by the Holy Ghost -- a work of illumination that is commonly discussed by others and by me elsewhere.

Section 6. 2. The Holy Ghost, along with and through His work of illumination, also removes the twisted attitude of mind that we have by nature -- our hostility toward and aversion from the things of God -- and effectively persuades the mind to receive and accept the truth, wisdom, and authority of the Word. Because this twisted attitude, taking hold of the mind, also influences the will into an aversion and dislike of the goodness found in the truth presented to it, the Holy Ghost removes it through a double action.

Section 7. 1. He gives us wisdom, understanding, and a spiritual judgment by which we can compare spiritual things with spiritual in a spiritual manner, and so come to a clear and full awareness of the heavenly excellence and majesty of the Word. He enables us to recognize whether the teaching is from God. With the benefit of this help, all the parts of Scripture in their harmony and correspondence, and all its truths in their power and necessity, come together to give evidence to one another and collectively to the whole -- I mean as the mind is enabled to make a spiritual judgment of them.

Section 8. 2. He gives a spiritual awareness, a taste of the things themselves upon the mind, heart, and conscience -- when we have our senses trained to discern such things. These matters deserve fuller treatment and specific illustration from Scripture, if the scope of our present work allowed for it.

Section 9. In our natural condition regarding the things of God, the mind is full of emptiness, darkness, and blindness -- indeed it is darkness itself -- so that there is no correspondence between the faculty and the object. And the will lies in utter unfamiliarity with -- and indeed an impossibility of knowing -- the life, power, richness, sweetness, appeal, and goodness in the things presented for understanding, hidden under the dark shadows of a blind mind. To remedy both of these, the Holy Ghost communicates light to the understanding, enabling it to see and judge the truth as it is in Jesus. And the will, being delivered from the prison it was in and brought to new life, performs its proper function in embracing what is fitting and suited to it in the object presented. The Spirit indeed reveals to each person according to the counsel of His will, yet He does so in the same general way that the sun gives out its light and heat -- the former making way for the latter. But these matters must not be pursued further now.

Section 10. Through these works of the Spirit, He does, I say, convince the mind of the truth and authority of Scripture, and in doing so leaves an impression of an effective testimony within us. This testimony of His, as it is authoritative and infallible in itself, is also incomparably more effective, powerful, and certain for those who receive it than any voice or internal word that some boast of could ever be. But this is not the work of the Spirit we are currently asking about.

Section 11. Second, there is a testimony of the Spirit that concerns the object -- the Word itself. This is a public testimony which, while it satisfies our own souls individually, is also something that can be cited for the satisfaction of all others to whom God's Word comes. The Holy Ghost, speaking in and through the Word and giving it virtue, power, effectiveness, majesty, and authority, provides us the witness that our faith is ultimately based on. Since there are only two categories to which all grounds of agreement belong -- namely, the authority of testimony and the self-evidence of truth -- they both converge here as one. In the same Word we have both the authority of the Spirit's testimony and the self-evidence of the truth He speaks. Indeed these two are materially one and the same, though distinguished in their formal conceptions. I have been deeply moved by these verses of DANTES the Italian poet, which someone has translated word for word into Latin.

-- larga pluvia Spiritus sancti quae est diffusa Super veteres, et super novas membranas, Est syllogismus qui eam mihi conclusit Acute adeo ut prae illa Omnis demonstratio mihi videatur obtusa.

The Spirit's communication of His own light and authority to the Scripture, as evidence of its origin, is the testimony we are arguing for.

Section 12. When we trace our faith back to the testimony of the Holy Ghost, it is not some private whisper, word, or voice given to individual persons. It is not the secret and effective persuasion of Scripture's truth that settles on some people's minds from various intertwined influences of upbringing, tradition, and the like, which they cannot give any clear account of. It is not the effective work of the Holy Ghost on people's minds and wills that enables them to believe savingly. The Roman Catholics, who argue mostly about these things, only display their ignorance and hostility. Rather, it is the public testimony of the Holy Ghost given to all, about the Word, through and in the Word and its own divine light, effectiveness, and power.

Section 13. This, then, is how far we have come. The Scripture, the written Word, has its infallible truth in itself (John 17:17). From the same source as its truth comes its authority, for its entire authority is founded on its truth. Its authority in itself is its authority in relation to us. It has no more authority in itself than it has, by right, toward and over all those to whom it comes. That some people in practice do not submit to it is their sin and rebellion. This truth and consequently this authority is demonstrated and made known to us by the public testimony given to it by the Holy Ghost speaking in it, with divine light and power, to the minds, souls, and consciences of people. When it is presented to us by itself, and we are enlightened by the Holy Ghost (which in our present condition is necessary for grasping any spiritual thing or truth in a spiritual way), we receive it and devoutly submit our souls to it as the Word and will of the ever-living, sovereign God and judge of all. And if this is not a foundation for faith, I publicly declare that, as far as I know, I have no faith at all.

Section 14. Having laid this firm foundation, I will now consider as briefly as possible some claims and arguments for confirming Scripture's authority that have been devised and used by some to divert us from the foundation that alone can bring peace to our souls in this matter. This chapter will, as it were, lay in the balance and compare the testimony of the Spirit described and explained above with the other claims and arguments that will now be examined.

Section 15. 1. Some say -- when other considerations compel them to say it -- that we have received the Scripture from the Church of Rome, which received it by tradition, and this gives it credibility. I will discuss tradition in general later, without this limiting reference to the Church of Rome that actually undermines the argument. Credibility either stays within the bounds of probability (which may be elevated to an overwhelming level while still not going beyond that sphere) -- in which sense it is entirely irrelevant to our present discussion -- or it includes a firm, adequate foundation for supernatural and divine faith. Have we in this latter sense received Scripture from that Church, as it is called? Is that Church able to give such credibility to anything? Does Scripture need such credibility to be given to it by that Church? Are not the first two claims clearly false, and the last one blasphemous? To receive a thing from a Church as a Church is to receive it on the authority of that Church. If we receive anything on the authority of a Church, we do so not because the thing itself is worthy of acceptance but because of the authority cited. If, then, we receive the Scriptures from the Church of Rome in this way, why do we not also receive the Apocryphal books, which she accepts? How did the Church of Rome receive the Scriptures? Shall we say she is authorized to declare whatever seems good to her to be the Word of God? No -- she claims to have received them by tradition. She also claims to have received the Apocryphal books in the same way. So we receive the Scriptures from Rome; Rome received them by tradition; and we make ourselves judges of that tradition. Yet Rome says this is one thing she has by the same tradition -- namely, that she alone is the judge of what she has by tradition. But the common fate of liars has overtaken that institution: she has so long, so constantly, so desperately lied about many -- indeed most -- of the things she professes, claiming tradition for them, that she truly does not deserve to be believed even when she tells the truth. Besides, she claims she received the Scriptures from the beginning, when it was agreed that the copies of the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament were the only authentic texts. These she now claims have become badly corrupted under her care, and yet she is offended that we do not believe her tradition.

Section 16. Some add that we receive Scripture as God's Word on the basis of the miracles performed at the giving of the law and the New Testament, which miracles we have received through universal tradition. But first I want to know: since our Savior Jesus Christ performed many other miracles besides those that are recorded (John 20:30; 21:25), and the apostles did the same, why is it that with all their traditions they cannot help us to so much as a faint report of even one miracle that is not written down? (I am not speaking of legends.) Yet these unrecorded miracles were no less well known at the time they occurred than the recorded ones, and were no less useful for the purpose of miracles than those that were. More on tradition in general later. But is it not obvious that the miracles they speak of are preserved in Scripture and nowhere else? If so, can these miracles have any effect on anyone's understanding or judgment unless they first accept Scripture as the Word of God? I mean for the producing of a divine faith in them -- faith that any such miracles ever occurred. Suppose these miracles, offered as the basis for believing the Word, had not been written down but like the Sibyl's pages had been blown around by the worst and fiercest wind in this world -- the breath of human beings. Those who would preserve them by tradition -- that is, people -- are by nature so vain, foolish, malicious, such liars, embellishers, and detractors. They have spirits and minds so ill-suited to spiritual things, so prone to change in themselves and to contradicting one another, so given to deception and so easily deceived, so scattered and driven around the world in every generation, and have for the most part so completely lost track of what they are, where they came from, and where they are going, that I can put very little confidence in anything for which I have nothing but their word to rely on, with no evidence from the nature of the thing itself.

Section 17. Setting aside, then, the testimony given in Scripture to the miracles performed by those who originally revealed God's mind and will in the Word, no adequate assurance -- where a foundation for faith is needed -- can be given that any such miracles ever occurred. If sheer numbers of people are allowed to speak, we could have a traditional testimony supporting the blasphemous fictions of the Quran under the name of true miracles. But the consistent tradition of more than a thousand years, passed down by countless multitudes of people -- great, wise, and sensible -- from one generation to the next does nothing but open the gates of hell for the Muslims. Yet setting aside the authority of God in His Word and everything resolved into it, I do not see why they could not match traditions with the rest of the world. The world is indeed full of traditions derived from the Word -- that is, a knowledge of the doctrines of the Word in people's minds. But a tradition of the Word that is not ultimately traced back to the Word itself -- a tradition rooted in a source of sensory experience in seeing and hearing, preserved as an oral law in a separate channel and stream by itself -- when such a tradition is demonstrated either by a specific example of something preserved in it, or by a reasonable case for its transmission through the generations by comparison with similar effects in things of a like kind, I will be ready to accept it.

Section 18. Give me, then, as I said before, even the faintest report of any one of those many miracles performed by our Savior and the apostles that are not recorded in Scripture, and I will value the supposed traditions more than I can presently bring myself to do. Besides, many writers of Scripture performed no miracles, and by this reasoning their writings are left to fend for themselves. Miracles were certainly necessary to remove all prejudices against the persons who brought any new doctrine from God, but the doctrine always proved itself. The apostles converted many people where they performed no miracles. Acts 16:17-18. And where they did perform miracles, they were received on the strength of their doctrine, not the doctrine on their account. And Scripture now has no less evidence and demonstration of its divinity in itself than it had when the apostles preached it.

Section 19. But because this tradition is claimed with great confidence as a sure foundation for receiving the Scriptures, I will examine it a little further. What is meant by tradition in this case is a report from people, which those who are present have received from those who came before them. This could be a report from all people in the world, or only from some of them. If from all, their votes must be gathered either in some assembly or collected from individuals as we are able and have the opportunity. If the first method were even possible -- which represents the highest level that imagination can give to the authority in question -- yet since every individual person is a liar, the whole assembly would have the same character and therefore could not provide a sufficient basis for building a faith that cannot possibly be deceived. Much less can such a basis be found in the kind of report that emerges from the assertions of individual people.

Section 21. But if this tradition is said to be preserved by only some in the world -- not even half of rational beings -- I want to know what reason I have to believe those who have that tradition, or claim to have it, over and against those who say their ancestors passed down no such report to them. Is the reason that I live among these people who have the tradition, and they are my neighbors whom I know? By the same rule, those who live among the other groups of people would be bound to accept what they pass down by tradition. And so people could be obligated to believe the Quran is the Word of God.

Section 22. It is more likely the answer will be that their testimony should be accepted because they are the Church of God. But as far as I can see, there is no other way I can know them to be so, or know of any authority that any group of people -- large or small -- can have in this case under that name or idea, except through Scripture itself. If that is the case, it will quickly become clear what place their testimony should hold, since they cannot be admitted as witnesses unless Scripture itself is first acknowledged and accepted -- because their only claim or right to be admitted as witnesses comes from Scripture. If they declare that they claim this honor for themselves and that, apart from any reference to Scripture, they have a right to give authoritative witness in this matter, then I say again: on the general grounds of natural reason and fairness, I have no more reason to believe their claims than I would to believe an equal number of people holding a tradition completely opposite to what they assert.

Section 23. But suppose even this were granted, and people were allowed to speak on their own name and authority, giving testimony about themselves -- which, under the current theory, God Himself is not allowed to do. I would like to know whether, when the Church declares Scripture to be God's Word to us, it perceives anything in Scripture as the basis for that judgment and declaration, or not. If it says no, but that the declaration rests on its sole authority, then surely -- if we think it wise to accept this resolution of our question -- it is high time for us to set aside all our studies and inquiries into the mind of God and simply ask what that man or those men say who are entrusted with this authority (as they claim, and as they want us to believe, though we have no idea how or by what means they obtained it, since they dare not appeal to Scripture lest they point us to that first).

Section 24. If it is said that they judge and believe Scripture to be true and to be God's Word on other grounds, I assume it will not be thought unreasonable for us to investigate those grounds, seeing they are of such great concern to us. All truths in their relationships consist in their agreement and correspondence with the nature of the things they describe. I would like to know how they came to judge the agreement between the nature of the things described in Scripture and Scripture's description of them. Since the things we are talking about are heavenly, spiritual, mysterious, and supernatural, no knowledge of them can be obtained except through the Word itself. How, then, can they make any judgment about the truth of Scripture's account of these things, when many of them are known nowhere else, not even in the smallest degree, except from Scripture itself?

Section 25. If they say they base their judgment and declaration on some evidence that Scripture presents about itself to them, they are affirming the very same thing we argue for. They would just like to claim for themselves the exclusive privilege of being able to recognize that evidence as it is displayed in Scripture. To make good this claim, they must appeal either to something from themselves or from the Scriptures. If from themselves, it can only be that they see -- like the people of China -- while everyone else is blind or has only one eye at best, being wiser and more able to perceive than anyone else. Though I will readily grant them to be very clever and cunning, I would not want to be thought to admit that they are so much wiser than everyone else in the world that they are fit to impose on others' belief things that those others neither do nor can discern or know -- not until I can believe that I and all others outside their society or alliance are beasts of the field, and they are the serpent among us.

Section 26. If they base their claim on Scripture, then -- since we compel them to stop right there, which is all we aim at -- their argument must come from a promise of some special help granted to them for that purpose. If the help they claim is that of the Spirit, it is either the Spirit promised to believers, working in them as described and explained above, or it is some private testimony they claim is given to them. If the former is asserted, we are in a position where the necessity of turning everything back to Scripture itself -- to decide and judge who are believers -- is plain for everyone to see. If the latter, who will give me assurance that when they claim to have that witness and testimony, they are not lying and deceiving? We must here certainly go either to Scripture or to some fortune teller for our answer. Isaiah 8:19-20.

Section 27. I admit that the argument which has recently been singled out and skillfully developed by an able and learned writer -- namely, proving the truth of Scripture's doctrine from the truth of its history, and the truth of the history from the certainty that the writers of the books of the Bible were the very persons whose names and titles they bear, thus tracing the evidence that what they wrote was true and known by them to be so, covering every requirement that could possibly be demanded to strengthen such evidence -- is of great force and effectiveness. It is, I say, of great force and effectiveness for the purpose it is intended for: satisfying people's rational inquiries. But as a foundation for faith, it has the same inadequacy as all other arguments of its kind. Though I should grant that the apostles and writers of Scripture were persons of the greatest diligence, honesty, integrity, faithfulness, and holiness who ever lived -- as they were -- and that they wrote nothing that they did not have as strong assurance of as any person could gain through their senses of sight and hearing, yet such knowledge and assurance is not a sufficient foundation for the faith of God's Church. If they did not receive every word by inspiration, and if that inspiration does not prove itself to us in some way beyond the authority of their personal integrity, it cannot be a foundation for us to build our faith upon.

Section 28. Before Scripture was committed to writing, God had given the world an experiment in how well people guard revelation through tradition. Within a few hundred years after the flood, all knowledge of God -- through the cunning of Satan and the indescribable emptiness of human minds -- was so completely lost that nothing short of what amounted to the creation of a new world or the establishment of a new Church through new revelations could restore it. After that great test, what more can be said on behalf of tradition, I do not know.

Section 29. The sum of all this is: God's merciful and good providence, having by various means -- using among other things the ministry of people and churches -- preserved the writings of the Old and New Testament in the world, and by the same gracious arrangement brought them to us, they are received and submitted to by us on the grounds and evidences of their divine origin already discussed.

Section 30. Taking everything into account, then, I would like to know: if the Scriptures were brought to someone in a time or place where they could not possibly have them attested as the Word of God by any public or private authority of any person or Church, by tradition or otherwise, would that person be bound to believe them or not? Would they obey God in believing, or sin in rejecting them? Suppose they simply consider them, give them a reading or hearing. Since everywhere Scripture declares itself to be God's Word, they must necessarily either accept it or reject it. To remain undecided -- which arises from the incomplete workings of the soul's faculties -- is in itself a weakness, and in this case, being counted on the worst side, amounts to a rejection. If you say it would be the duty of such a person to believe it, you acknowledge that Scripture has in itself sufficient evidence of its own original authority -- without which it could be no one's duty to believe it. If you say it would not be a sin for them to reject and refuse it, to disbelieve everything it speaks in God's name, then this is what you are saying: God may truly and really speak to a person (as He does through Scripture) and yet that person is not obligated to believe Him. We do not even treat each other that way.

Section 31. To wrap up the argument presented in the previous chapter about the self-evidencing light and power of Scripture, from which we have digressed, and to make way for some additional considerations that support their divine origin, I will close this discussion with the two general reflections that follow.

Section 32. 1. Setting aside these inadequate arguments, there seems to be a moral impossibility that the Word of God should fail to demonstrate its own origin and its authority derived from that origin. Quaelibet herba deum -- even every plant reveals God. There is no work of God, as was shown, that does not reveal its Author. A skilled craftsman gives such form, shape, proportion, and beauty to the product of his creativity and the work of his hands that everyone who sees it must conclude it comes from skill and ability. A person expressing their thoughts in a book will give it such an impression of reason that, even if you cannot determine that this or that specific person wrote it, you must conclude that it was the product of a rational being. Indeed, some individual people of exceptional skill in a field are instantly recognized by those who can judge that art or skill, simply from the results of their work. 'This is the piece, this is the hand, the work of that person.' How easy it is for those who are familiar with ancient authors to identify an author by the spirit and style of their writings. Now surely it is strange beyond all belief that almost every maker should leave an imprint on their work by which it can be traced to them, and yet the Word -- in which the great and Holy God designed to give us a portrait, as it were, of His wisdom, holiness, and goodness, as far as we are capable of knowing Him in this life -- is somehow unable to declare and prove its origin. That God, who is the first and sovereign truth, infinitely separated and distinguished from all creatures in every respect, should write a book (or at least directly dictate it), commanding us to receive it as His under the penalty of His eternal displeasure, and yet that book should fail to make a sufficient demonstration of itself as His, as coming from Him -- this is beyond all belief. Let those who live on things received by tradition from their fathers -- who perhaps never experienced any real encounter between God and their souls, who scarcely ever read the Word seriously in their lives or brought their consciences to it -- please themselves with their own delusions! The sure anchor for a soul that would draw near to God in and through His Word lies in the truths we have laid down.

Section 33. I assume no one will deny that it was God's mind and will that those to whom His Word should come should acknowledge it and receive it as His. If not, it would be no sin for them to reject it. But if it was His will, then either He has given it those marks and left upon it that impression of His majesty by which it might be known as His, or He has not done so. And if He has not, it is either because He would not or because He could not. To say the latter is to make Him more feeble than a human being or any other creature of the earth -- more feeble than any naturally effective cause. Whoever says the former must know that they are responsible for giving a satisfactory explanation of why God would not do this, or else they will be thought to blasphemously attribute to God a lack of the goodness and love for humanity that He has shown through infinite grace to be part of His nature. That no one is able to offer any such reason, I will firmly believe until I find someone attempting to do so -- and as yet no one has reached such a height of shamelessness and wickedness as to try.

Section 34. Second. How terrible it is to the mind of any saint of God to think that Scripture should not have its authority from itself. Tertullian raises this objection against the Gentiles in his Apology, Chapter 5: Facit et hoc ad causam nostram, quod apud vos de humano arbitratu divinitas pensitatur; nisi homini Deus placuerit, Deus non erit; homo jam Deo propitius esse debebit. Would it be any different in this case if Scripture had to depend on the good will of human beings for the reputation of its divinity? Indeed, for its very truthfulness -- since from the same source as its authority comes its truthfulness, as was noted before. And much more could be said along these lines.