Arg. IX. Thei/ that believe not the Scripture to be the word of God, when propounded to them as such, thqugh they have not the testimony of the church to confirm, them, in it, yet sin in their not believing it; and are therefore bound to believe it antecedently to the church's testimony (for if they were not bound to believe it, they should not sin in disbelieving it) : and consequently the Scripture hath its authority in itself, and before the testimony of the church, and therefore not from it. That men sin in not believing the Scripture even without the church's testimony, is proved from Acts xiii. 46, 5], where Paul shakes off the dust of his feet ao-ainst the unbelievinof Jews, and tells them they " judge themselves unworthy of eternal life." See Acts xxviii. 24, etc., where he declares their actual unbelief to be the effect of their hard-heartedness ; which, though it might be judicial, they being left of God to theinselves and their own lusts, 5'et withal it was sinful too, and contracted by themselves. And will any man say that these Jews, in refusing the gospel, did not sin? I sup-
520 AUTHOKITY OF THE SCllIPTUEE.
pose the Papists themselves scarcely will. If they say, as formerly, that Paul's testimony was the testimony of the cliurch; I answer, those Jews owned no such thing as a gospel church, nor any autlio- rity it had to bind them to the belief of the gospel ; and consequently could not own Paul as an officer of that church, his apostleship being merely a gospel office ; which a man could not submit to who did not first receive the gospel by which he was constituted an apostle. If they say, they might know him to be an apostle by the miracles he wrought ; I answer again, that when he preached at Antioch in Pisi- dia, we have no mention of any miracle he there wrought ; yet some, both Jews and Gentiles, believed, Acts xiii. 42, 43: and therefore they neither received himself nor his preaching upon the account of his miracles; nor could miracles make it the duty of the unbeliev- ing Jews to submit to Paul as an officer of the gospel church, when no miracle was wrought by him. If it be said that he was known by the fame of his miracles elsewhere wrought, which gave credit to him ; then it will follow that Paul was to be believed for his miracles' sake, as well as the gospel for his sake ; and thence, again, that the gospel was not to be believed merely for Paul's own authority, but principally for his miracles, it being for their sake that he himself was owned as having any authority. And if so, either Paul's authority was not the authority of the church, or the authority of Paul as the cliurch was not supreme; for that of his miracles was above it, — that which procured credit to him was of greater authority than himself. Upon the whole, it seems, by this reply of the Papists, that miracles were the great thing which procured credit to Paul's preaching ; and if they did, the authority of the church did not,- — unless, as before they made Paul and the church the same, so here they will make mu-acles and the church the same.
Arg. X. It cannot be certainly known, hy the testimony of the church, that the Scripture is the word of God; and therefore it hath not, as to us, its authority from the church. If it may be certainly known that the Scripture is the word of God by the testimony of the church, then either it must be by the testimony of the universality of believers, or of the pastors. Not the former: for (beside that the Papists themselves exclude them, and say that the Scripture is to have authority with them, but not/?'07?i them,^) either Ave speak of the multitude of believers separately and disjunctively ; and so they cannot give credit to the Scrijiture, when they are all of them fallible and liable to error : or else all together and in conjunction ; but so likewise they cannot certify us of the divineness of the Scripture, be- cause they never did, never will, meet together to do it. And we may stay long enough ere we believe the divinity of the Scripture, if ' Vide SjntJigma Tliesium in Acad. Salmurieu.
I
AUTHORITY OF THE SCEIPTURE. 521
we tarry till all the believers in the world meet together to give in their verdict concerning it. If we speak of the church merely in the popish sense, for the pastors of it, there will be as much uncertainty as in the other ; for either Ave must consider them separately too, or in conjunction. If separately, they are all liable to error; and, ac- cording to the Papists themselves, they do all believe the Scripture on the authority of the church ; and therefore caimot give authority to it. If we consider them all together, when did, or when will, the pastors of all the churches in the world meet together, to give their joint testimony to the Scripture? And if they should, why are we bound to believe them? They were not infallible singly, nor can they be any more so conjunctly. If all the several parts of the integral — the chiurch — be liable to error or corruption, why is not the whole? But suppose the pastors meet by then delegates in a general council, will that mend the matter? Not at all, that I see; for it is not yet determined by the Papists themselves, where the supreme authority, which should give testimony to the Scripture, doth reside, — whether in pope, council, or both. And so we are left at uncertainties, and know not to whom to go, — Avhose word to take ; but must suspend our belief of the divineness of the Scripture, till it beagreed uponamong our adversaries whose authority is indeed supreme, and to be relied upon. Yet put [the] case, [that] a general council be the chief which gives testimony to the Scripture : how shall we know that this council hath not erred, in determining the Scripture to be the word of God ? Shall we know it by the Scripture? It is supposed we doubt con- cerning that; and so its testimony is not valid. Or by the testimony of the church? Why, this council is the church itself, which deter- mines in its own case; and so we must believe this council hath not en-ed, because it says it hath not erred. If the pope be the church virtual, and we must receive the Scripture on his credit, the same objection will be against him; for how shall we know he doth not err? By the Scripture? But it is yet in question. Or by the testi- mony of the church? The pope himself is this chmxh; and then we must beheve he hath not erred, only because he saith he hath not erred. Lastly, let pope and council both together be this church : how shall we know they both together do not en-? Not by the Scrip- ture, for that is not yet owned ; nor by the testimony of the church, for pope and council together, are this church, and their testimony concerning themselves is not to be received. And, to conclude, how shall we know that pope and council are the church? Not because they themselves say so, nor because the Scripture doth ; for that is not yet believed. Not by the testimony of the Spirit ; for why shall that bear witness any more to the church, that it is the church, than to the Scripture, that it is the word of God? Nor yet by notes or