The Scriptures genuine interpreter asserted, or, A discourse concerning the right interpretation of Scripture wherein a late exercitation, intituled, Philosophia S. scripturæ interpres, is examin'd, and the Protestant doctrine in that point vindicated : with some reflections on another discourse of L.W. written in answer to the said exercitation : to which is added, An appendix concerning internal illumination, and other operations of the Holy Spirit upon the soul of man, justifying the doctrine of Protestants, and the practice of serious Christians, against the charge of ethusiasm, and other unjust criminations / by John Wilson ...

CHAP. XVII.

1. That Sound Philosophy asserts nothing contrary to Scripture granted. 2. Two Principles instanced in, and Wolzo∣gen's Tergiversation taxed. 3. The two great Articles of the Creation of all things out of nothing, and the Re∣surrection of the same numerical Bo∣dy proved against the Exercitator, to be asserted in Scripture.

THE Exercitators next Work is to answer the great Argument, * 1.1 which, he says, some urge against his * 1.2 opinion, viz. Philosophy, and conse∣quently Humane Reason, asserts many things that are repugnant to Divinity and the Scriptures, and therefore they cannot be allow'd for the Rule of In∣terpreting Scripture. He denies the Antecedent; and so do I. What Au∣thors they be in the Reformed Churches that thus argue, I know not. But this I know, that it is no uncommon thing for pugnacious Wits, to draw the Sword

upon the shadow of a Dream, and make Hector-like declamations against Utopi∣an Adversaries. Set aside those Authors, who are engaged by some Atheologi∣cal Hypothesis, which they have espou∣sed (as the Papists and the Lutherans in the Doctrine of the E••charist) I know not any Man of Learning and Understanding, who hath such a thought, that there is any thing in Scri∣pture derogatory or contradictory to true Philosophy or Sound Reason; or that believes any thing true in Philo∣sophy to be false in Divinity. What∣soever is true any where, is true every where. Here therefore our Author may put up his Dagger.

But there is one thing which I can∣not * 1.3 well pass over, That the Exercita∣tor pretending to confute those who assert a contrariety between the Prin∣ciples of Philosophy and Divinity, and instancing in these two, Ex nihilo nihil fit, and Idem non potest, numericè re∣produci, Instead of solving the knot, he cuts it, and plainly affirms both these

Principles to be true, absolutely, and without limitation both in Philosophy and Divinity, confidently asserting that the Scripture doth no where teach us, That the World was made of nothing, or that the same numerical Body shall rise at the last day. And here Wolzogen un∣worthily deserts the Christian Cause, not vouchsafing to write one word in vindication of these grand Truths a∣gainst this bold Adversary; but tells us he is content the Man should enjoy his own opinion, though, he says, he could easily have refuted him: Which makes his silence the more inexcusable, and brings him under greater suspition of Heterodoxy, notwithstanding all his Rhetorical Flourishes. But it is time I should return to our Author, who, if he had not been too much in love with Novelty, might without the least prejudice to his Cause (unless it have some other Monster in the Belly of it that is not yet come to the birth) have answered, that these Axioms are true in a limited Sense both in Philoso∣phy and Divinity; viz. That by a fi∣nite

created Power, nothing can be made of nothing; and that by the like limited power, the same numerical Bo∣dy that perisheth, cannot be reprodu∣ced. But that nevertheless to an infi∣nite Power all things that imply not contradiction are possible.

But it seems by this Authors words, * 1.4 that he disowns the received Doctrine of the worlds Creation out of Nothing; and the Reproduction of the same in∣dividual Body.

1. By denying the former, he must necessarily maintain the Eternity of Preexistent Matter: whereas if God be the Maker of all Beings besides him∣self (as the Scripture sufficiently assures us) then nothing besides himself could be Eternal; but he must in making the World make the Matter whereof the World consists, which Matter there∣fore must be made of nothing. The first Article in the most ancient Creeds (as the Reverend Bishop of Chester hath * 1.5 observed) had instead of these words Maker of Heaven and Earth, or toge∣ther

with them, this Clause, The Ma∣ker of all things visible and invisible, agree∣ably to that of the Apostle, Coloss. 1. 16. which distribution is so comprehensive, that it will not admit of any Excepti∣on, all things whatsoever being either visible or invisible: and whatsoever can be supposed necessary to the making of the World, it must of necessity come under one of these two Members of the distribution, and consequenly be of Gods making. And indeed if it were otherwise, then something else besides God, must have a necessary, uncreated, independent Being: which carries with it so broad a Contradiction, as Mans Reason left fair to it self cannot al∣low. Again,

2. By disclaiming the latter, this Au∣thor evidently denies the Resurrection; for that imports the rising again of the same Body that fell, according to that known Speech of Damascen so oft ci∣ted by our Divines, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And if the same nu∣merical Body rise not, but another is made de novo for the Soul to animate,

this is not a Resurrection but a new Creation; and then the first Creation of the World may as aptly be called a Resurrection as that which is so stiled by the Holy Ghost in Scripture. But I think the Scripture speaks plain enough in this Case, (though this Au∣thor will not own it) when it says, that at the last day, This corruptible must * 1.6 put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. And that * 1.7 our Lord Jesus Christ shall then change our vile Body, that it may be made like unto his glorious Body. And that, If the * 1.8 Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in us, he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken our mortal bodies by his spirit that dwel∣leth in us. Add to this that Argument from the description of the place whence the Resurrection shall begin; which I cannot better represent to the Reader than in the words of the learned Bishop * 1.9 of Chester, They which sleep in the dust of the Earth (Dan. 12. 2.) and they which are in the Graves, (Joh. 5. 28.) shall hear the Voice and Rise. And, Rev.

20. 13. The Sea shall give up the dead which are in it, and Death and the Grave deliver up the dead which are in them. But if the same Bodies did not Rise, they which are in the dust, should not revive; If God should give us any other Bodies than our own, neither the Sea nor the Grave should give up their dead. That shall Rise again which the Grave gives up; the Grave hath nothing to give up, but that Body which was laid into it: therefore the same Body which is Buried, shall at the last day be revived. And whereas the Socinians (who are our Adversaries in this, as well as in many other Articles of our Faith) to evade this Argument, will have the Graves spoken of in Joh 5. 28. to be the Graves of ignorance and impiety there meant; and the Rising to be Mens coming to the knowledge of Christ, &c. the afore∣said learned Person answers them, That Christ expresly, speaks of bringing Men to * 1.10 Judgement, vers. 27. and divides those that are to come out of their Graves into two Ranks, vers. 29. neither of which can be so understood: The first are those

which have done good before they come out of their Graves; these therefore could not be the Graves of Ignorance and Impiety, from which no good can come: The se∣cond are such who have done evil, and so remain as evil Doers, and therefore cannot be said to come forth of the Graves of Ignorance and Impiety, or to Rise by the Preaching of the Gospel to newness of life, because they are expresly said to come forth to the Resurrection of Damnati∣on.

But if the Exercitators Principles will allow him to write after the rate he here doth, I think none that hath any veneration for the Scriptures, will be over-fond of such a corrupt and fallaci∣ous Interpreter. But when Men are hammering out a new Divinity, they must either find out a new Scripture, or a new way of Expounding the Old, to countenance their own Dreams, that when, by this Artifice, they have turn∣ed out the true Christianity, they may bring us in a Pagan Religion finely set out in the stately dress of Eternal Rea∣son.

No wonder they cry out of Systems * 1.11 as Chains and Fetters to their desulto∣rious and volatile Wits. They had ra∣ther (as one says of wanton Heads) ••e the Purchasers of Error than the Heirs of Truth. Of whom the Lord Veru∣lam * 1.12 gives us a very fit Character. Certè sunt, qui cogitationum Vertigine delectantur, ac pro servitute habent fide fixa & Axiomatis constantibus restringi, Liberi Arbitrii usum in Cogitando non mi∣xùs quam in Agendo affectantes. Verily, says he, there are some who are delight∣ed in a giddiness of opinions, and take it for a bondage to be restrained by a fixed Faith and setled Principles, no less affecting the use of their Free Will in thinking than in acting. And so I have dispatcht the first Part of my Work, and proceed to the second.

Notes

• * 1.1

  § 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.2

  Ph. Scr. Int. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 1
• * 1.3

  § 2. Ph. Scr. Int. c. 8. par. 2.
• * 1.4

  §. 3.
• * 1.5

  Dr. Pear∣son Expos. of the Creed, Art. 1.
• * 1.6

  1 Cor. 15. 53.
• * 1.7

  Phil. 3. 20, 21.
• * 1.8

  Rom. 8. 11,
• * 1.9

  Expos. of the Creed. p. 382.
• * 1.10

  Ibid. in Marg.
• * 1.11

  Lu. Viers in Aug. de C. D. l. 18. c. 41. Novi ••ominem non tam ••octum quam arro∣gantem ••actabun∣dumque, qui se & scriptu∣rum multa profiteba∣tur: Et non secus vitaturum quae quis antea dix∣isset, quam aspides vel basi∣liscos: longe enim malle se scientem pruden∣temque falsum pro vero affirmare, quam alienae opinioni acquiescere.
• * 1.12

  Sermon. fidel. cap. de Veritate,