Nor is that the only answer insisted on for the removal of IMr B.'s sophistry, which he mentions, p. 7, and pursues it for three or four leaves onward of his preface, namely, " That the scriptures which he urgcth do in the letter hold out such things as he allegcth them to prove, but yet they must be figuratively interpreted." For JSIr B.'s " mystical sense," I know not what he intends by it, or by whom it is urged. This is applicable solely to the places he produceth for the description of (iod and liis attri- butes, concerning whom that some expressions of Scripture are to be so interpreted himself confesseth, p. 13; and we desire to take leave to inquire whether some others, beside what Mr B. allows, may not be of the
Gi THE PREFACE OF MR BTDDLE
same consideration. In other things, for the most part, we have nothing at all to do with so much as the interpretation of the places he mentions, but only to remove the grossly sophistical insinuations of his queries. For instance, when Mr B. asks, "Whether Christ Jesus was a man or no?" and allegeth express Scripture affirming that he was, we say not that the Scripture must have a figurative interpretation, but that Mr B. is grossly sophistical, concluding from the assertion of Christ's human nature to the denial of his divine, and desperately injurious to the persons with whom he pretends he hath to do, who as yet " understand not the truth of our religion," in undertaking to declare to them the special " chief things of belief and practice," and hiding from them the things of the greatest moment to their salvation, and which the Scripture speaks most plentifully unto, by not stating any question or making any such inquiry as their affirmation might be suited unto. The like instance may be given in all the particulars wherein Mr B. is departed from " the faith once delivered to the saints." His whole following discourse, then, to the end of p. 13, wherein he decries the answer to his way of procedure, which himself had framed, he might have spared. It is true, we do affirm that there are figurative expressions in the Scripture (and Mr B, dares not say the con- trary), and that they are accordingly to be interpreted ; not that they are to have a mystical sense put upon them, but that the literal sense is to be received, according to the direction of the figure which is in the words. That these words of our Saviour, "This is my body," are figurative, I sup- pose Mr B. will not deny. Interpret them according to the figurative import of tliem, and tliat interpretation gives you the literal, and not a mystical sense, if such figures belong to speech and not to sense. That sense, I confess, may be spiritually understood (then it is saving) or other- wise ; but this doth not constitute different senses in the words, but only denote a difterence in the understandings of men. But all this, in hypothesi, Mr B. fully grants, p. 9; so that there is no danger, by asserting it, to cast the least thought of uncertainty on the word of Grod. But, p. 10, he gives you an instance wherein this kind of interpretation must by no means be allowed, namely, in the Scripture attributions of a shape and similitude (that is, of eyes, ears, hands, feet) unto God, with passions and affections like unto us ; which that they are not proper, but figuratively to be interpreted, he tells you, p. 10-12, " those affirm Avho are perverted by false philosophy, and make a nose of wax of the Scripture, which plainly affirms such things of God." In what sense the expressions of Scripture intimated concerning God are necessarily to be received and understood, the ensuing considera- tions will inform the reader. For the present, I shall only say that I do not know scarce a more unhappy instance in his whole book that he could have produced tlian this, wherein he hath been blasphemously in- jurious unto God and his holy word. And herein we shall deal with him from Scripture itself, right reason,' and the common consent of mankind. How remote our interpretations of the places by him quoted for his pur- pose are from wresting the Scriptures, or turning them aside from their purpose, scope, and intendment, will also in due time be made manifest.
We say, indeed, as Mr B. observes, that in those kinds of expressions God " condescendeth to accommodate his ways and proceedings " (not his essence and being) "to our apprehensions;" wherein we are very far from saying that "he speaks one thing and intends the clean contrary," but only
"O yaf vast ooKii, touto I'lvxi (pay.iv. 'O Ss ivxifi^v raurtiv rhu ^rifriv oh •ra.vv iriffroripav 'ixii- — Arist. Nicom. iii.
TO HIS CATECHISM EXAMINED. 65
tliat the tilings that he ascribes to himself, for our understanding and the accommodation of his proceedings to the manner of men, are to be under- stood in him and of them in that which they denote of perfection, and not in respect of that which is imperfect and weak.^ For instance, when God says, " his eyes run to and fro, to behold the sons of men," Ave do not say that he speaks one thing and understands another ; but only be- cause we have our knowledge and acquaintance with things by our eyes looking up and down, therefore doth he who hath not eyes of flesh as we have, nor hath any need to look irp and down to acquaint himself with them, all whose ways are in his own hand, nor can without blasjjhemy be supposed to look from one thing to another, choose to express his know- ledge of and intimate acquaintance with all things here below, in and by his own infinite understanding, in the way so suited to our apprehension. Neither are these kinds of expressions in the least an occasion of idolatry, or do give advantage to any of creating any shape of God in their ima- ginations, God having plainly and clearly, in the same word of his wherein these expressions are used, discovered that of himself, his nature, being, and properties, which will necessarily determine in what sense these ex- pressions are to be understood; as, in the consideration of the several particulars in the ensuing discourse, the reader will find evinced. And we are yet of the mind, that to conceive of God as a great man, with mouth, eyes, hands, legs, etc., in a proper sense, sitting in heaven, shut up there, troubled, vexed, moved up and down with sundry passions, perplexed about the things that are to come to pass, which he knows not, — which is the notion of God that Mr B. labours to deliver the world from their darkness withal, — is gross idolatry, whereunto the scriptural attributions unto God mentioned give not the least countenance; as will in the pro- gress of our discourse more fully appear. And if it be true, which Mr B. intimates, that "things implying imperfection" (speaking of sleep and being weary) "are not properly attributed to God," I doubt not but I shall easily evince that the same line of refusal is to pass over the visible shape and turbulent affections which are by him ascribed to him. But of these more particularly in their respective places.