A sermon in confutation of R. H. the author of The guide in controversies Shewing that his most plausible arguments produced against Protestants, do more effectually conclude for Judaism against Christianity. By Daniel Whitby, D.D. chantor of the church of Sarum.

A SERMON ON John vii. 47, 48, 49.

Are ye also deceived? have any of the Rulers, or of the Pharisees belie∣ved on him? But this people who knoweth not the law is accursed.

[§. I]

THE Miracles of our Blessed Saviour, by which his Doctrine was confir∣med, were so exceeding many, and exceeding great, that they prevailed on those plain hearted people who beheld them to believe that he who wrought them was indeed the Christ. For many of the people believed on him, saying, when Christ cometh will he do more miracles than these? Verse 31. These apprehensions of the Vulgar did so Alarum the Chief-Priests, and Pharisees, who saw their Interest, Authority, and Credit with the people must decline, as fast as that of Christs prevailed, that they forth∣with dispatcht their Officers to take him, and bring him to them, Verse 32. These Officers when they had heard the gracious words which

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

issued from the mouth of Christ, were them∣selves taken by him, they who were sent to bring Christ to the Priests and Pharisees, were themselves brought to Christ, and so these Con∣verts neglect to do the Office of the High-Priests Serjeants. And being asked the reason why they had not brought Christ, they boldly answer, that they had heard such gracious and heavenly words proceeding from him as never man before him spake, and therefore could not think it fit to appre∣hend so excellent a person, as he was. The Pharisees, hearing this answer, do presently con∣clude their Officers must be deceived in these kind thoughts of Christ, and offer this, as they sup∣posed, convincing Argument, to prove it, viz. that though the giddy multitude, who had no know∣ledg of the Law, and therefore no capacity to understand the mind of God contained in it, might be enclined to think that Jesus was indeed the Christ, yet since the Rulers of the Church, the Sanhedrim, seeing the Doctors, and Expounders of the Law, the Scribes and Pharisees believed not on him, but did unanimously reject him as a vile Impostor, they must be certainly deceived, who apprehended otherwise concerning him, because they followed the verdict of the ignorant, and giddy multitude, in opposition to the better judgments, and the mature deliberations of their Church Guides, and learned Clerks.

Now amongst all the Arguments by which the Emissaries of the Church of Rome endeavour to beguile unstable souls, and beget in them a suspi∣tion that they have been seduced from the Church, none is more plausible than this which by the Pharisees is here laid down. I therefore shall endeavour,

1. To propound the Argument which is here urged by the Pharisees to prove our Jesus could not be the true Messiah, in its full strength and vigor. And

2. To shew that what the Papists do produce to prove that Protestants must be deceived, is exactly parallel to what the Pharisees did, or might produce against our Saviour, and the same arguments might with equal reason have been urged by the unbelieving Jews against our Lords Disciples, and those who laid the first foundations of, and became early converts to the Christian Faith; As they are urged by the Papists against our departure from the Church of Rome.

[§. II]

Now the Argument contained in the Text is this, viz. You must be certainly deceived if you believe that Jesus is the Christ; Because you do, by entertaining this perswasion, contradict the judgment of your Church Guides which God hath set over you. For they have frequently assem∣bled for the determination of this grand debate, Whether this Jesus was the Messiah promised to the Jews or not, and they have constantly determined that he was not the Christ. And have unani∣mously concluded that he deserved to be punish∣ed as a vile Impostor, and that all who did confess that he was the Christ, should be excommunicated. In an assembly consisting of Chief Priests, and Pharisees, they positively declare that Christ could be no Prophet because he was a Galilean. This all, say they, who search the Scriptures may plainly see. Moreover they determine in my Text, that all who so esteemed him were them∣selves deceived, and that they lay exposed to this delusion for want of knowledge in the Law. In the ninth Chapter of St. John, the Pharisees again

declare that this man could not be of God, because he did not keep the Sabbath. Moreover these Pha∣risees, and other Rulers of the Church, determi∣ned and agreed together, that whosoever did confess that Jesus was the Christ, should suffer excommuni∣cation. They therefore thought themselves infal∣libly certain, (if excommunication be as R. H. informs us, an evidence of a claim to be infallible) that Christ was not the true Messiah. Elsewhere the Scribes and Pharisees do positively conclude that Christ did only Cast out Devils through Beel∣zebub. After some days they again call a Coun∣cil and there determine that it was fit that Christ should die. This the High-Priest declares, and all the Pharisees, and the Chief-Priests agree to execute. A full Assembly consisting of the High-Priests, and all the Chief-Priests, Presbyters, and Scribes, Christ being brought before their Council, do with one voice declare that he was worthy to die as a Blasphemer, and also that by their Law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. After his death the Chief-Priests, and the Pharisees, with one consent pronounce him a deceiver. When the Disciples began to witness that he was risen from the dead, the High-Priests, Rulers, Elders, Scribes, and all the kindred of the High-Priest assemble at Jerusalem, and strictly do command them not to speak at all, or teach in the name of Jesus. Soon after the High-Priest, the Sanhedrim, and all the Elders of Israel, being met in Council, repeat the same command, and chastise the Apo∣stles for their disobedience to it. If therefore the decrees of many Councils, consisting of the Guides of the whole Jewish Church, may be esteemed suf∣ficient to decide a Controversie, it must be cer∣tain that Jesus Christ was not the true Messiah pro∣mised

to the Jews, but a Deceiver and Blasphemer. Now as a Romanist, having produced five Provin∣cial, and two General Councils, falsly so called, for that portentous Doctrine of Transubstantia∣tion, saith, If the Decrees of so many Synods, so often weighing the Adversaries reasons and evidences, was not sufficient for setling such a point, at least as to the obedience of future silence, and noncontradi∣ction, and as to suffering the Church to enjoy her peace, what can hereafter be sufficient? Or can we ever hope that any Controversie shall be finally determined, or ended by any future Council, if this, (of the Messiah) is not by these forepast? Can there be any ground here to question the integrity, or lawful proceedings of so many Councils, all concurring in the same judgment (for a Corporal presence, saith the Romanist, that Christ was a Deceiver, saith the Jew?) Or could there be any new light in this point attainable in those times, by the private person, or Christian Convert which those (Guides of the Jewish Church, who con∣demned your Jesus) were not capable, or had no no∣tice of.

2. They who so often, and so unanimously condemned your Saviour, and his Doctrine (saith the Jew) were the Church-Guides by God ap∣pointed to teach the Children of Israel all the Sta∣tutes which the Lord had spoken to them by the hand of Moses, to teach Jacob his judgments, and Israel his Law, and by whose lips the knowledg of it was to be preserved. They were the men who are in Scri∣pture styled the Messengers, or the Ambassadors of the Lord of Hosts; that is, the men appointed by him to declare his message to the people. They were the men Ordained to Minister before the Lord in every Controversial matter, men who were set for the judgment of the Lord and for Controversies, In Con∣troversie

they shall stand in judgment, saith the Lord, and by their word shall every Controversie be tried.

Wherefore to act in opposition to the judgment of these Guides, must be to act presumptuously, as God himself declares, to despise the verdict of Gods Messengers, and in a Controversial matter of the highest moment, to reject the sentence of those men, who are by God Ordained to define it, and by whose words, according to his Ordi∣nance, it must be tried.

3. As for the common people, who in this matter did oppose their private judgments to the Decrees of their Church Guides, not acquiescing in their Conciliar determinations, that your Je∣sus was not the true Messiah, they, saith the Jew, must act against that Rule which both the Law of Moses, and the Prophets have prescribed, for by that Law they are commanded under pain of death when any Controversie should arise among them to go to the Priests and Levites, and to the Judg then living, to enquire the sentence of judgment from his mouth, and to do according to the sentence which they shall shew them, and according to all that they inform them, not declining from it to the right hand, or the left. They by the Prophets are instructed to ask the Priests concerning the Law, and to seek the knowledg of it from their mouths. They therefore stood obliged to assent to the determinations of the Sanhedrim, and the Conciliar Decrees of Priests and Levites, Scribes and Pharisees confirmed by the High-Priest, and so they were obliged to believe that according to the true intent and meaning of the Law, your Jesus could not be the true Messiah. And conse∣quently they must err who quitting the Decisions of the Pharisees, and other Rulers of the Church, embrace that Tenet of the ignorant and giddy multitude.

[§. III]

Thus the Jew pleads from Scripture, against our Blessed Lord. And if you do compare these pleas, and others of like nature, which might be offered from the Scriptures by the Jew, with what the Romanists do offer for the infallibility of any of their Councils, you will soon find that all their pleas for this infallibility from the New Testament, are paralleled, or rather over-ballanced with pla∣ces of like nature in the Old, which do more strongly plead for the infallibility of the High-Priest, and Rulers of the Jewish Church. For,

1. Doth the Romanist plead Christs promise to be for ever with his Church?

Answ. The Jews had equal reason to expect Gods presence among them, because he promised to dwell among the children of Israel, to meet them at the Tabernacle of the Congregation, and there speak with them, to Reign over them in Zion from hence∣forth and for ever. He chose Zion for his habitation, and said of it, this is my rest for ever, here will I dwell, and of Jerusalem, that he would put his name for ever in that place, and that his eyes, and his heart should be there for ever.

2. Do they add that Christ hath promised that where two or three are gathered together in his name, he will be in the midst of them?

Answ. God also promised to the Jews that he would bless them out of Zion, and that whereso∣ever he did record his name, there would he come and bless his people,

3. Do they alledg these sayings of our Lord to his Disciples, viz. He that heareth you heareth me. He who neglects to hear the Church shall be ac∣counted as a Heathen and a Publican.

Answ. God also said that he who will not hearken to the Priest that stands to minister before the

Lord, even that man shall die for his presumption.

4. Do they say that Christs Apostles command∣ed Christians to obey those that had the rule over them, and to follow their faith?

Answ. Our Jesus did command his hearers to do all that the Scribes and Pharisees did say unto them, and that because of their Authority derived from Moses, and God himself commanded all his people to do according to all that they should be in∣formed of by the Priests. And

5. Do they plead Christs promise made to his Apostles that he would send the Spirit of Truth to guide them into all Truth?

Answ. Whereas this promise doth personally belong to the Apostles, and not to their Successors (for it is a promise to bring to their remembrance by his Spirit, what he before had said to them and to shew them things to come, to which Spirit of Prophesie the Roman Doctors do not now pre∣tend.) I say whereas this promise did belong to the Apostles only, God stood obliged by Cove∣nant to cause his holy Spirit to remain among the Rulers of the Jewish Church. For thus he speaks, according to the word that I covenanted with you, when ye came out of Aegypt, so my Spirit re∣mains among you. Moreover God promised to the Sanhedrim that he would put the spirit of Moses upon them, and in compliance with that promise he came down in a Cloud, and took the spirit which was upon Moses, and gave it to the seventy Elders, so that they Prophesied and did not cease. Or,

6. Do they argue for their infallibility, because the Church is stiled by St. Paul, the pillar, and the ground of truth, by reason of that truth which is preserved by her Governours?

Answ. God also hath declared touching his Priests, that the law of truth was in their mouth, and of Jerusalem that she should be called the City of truth. And if the Church of Judah hath since failed, so also hath the Church of Ephesus, of which alone St. Paul affirmeth that it was the pillar, and the ground of truth.

7. Do they conclude that the Church-Guides must be infallible, because God hath placed in the Church some Apostles, some Prophets, some Pastors and some Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the Ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, that we henceforth be no more chil∣dren tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of Doctrine?

Answ. Were not the Jewish Priests placed also for this end, for the work of their Ministry, the perfecting of their Saints, the edifying of their Flocks? Were not their lips to preserve that know∣ledg which should restrain the people from their errors? Were not they appointed to heal that which was sick and bring again that which was strayed? Or,

Lastly, Do they triumph in that promise of our Lord, that the Gates of Hell should not prevail against the Church?

Answ. God also promised that his Covenant made with his Levites, Priests and Ministers, should be as certain and perpetual, as that of day and night. So that I need not add, that by this Phrase, Christ only promiseth that pious Christians shall not for ever be detained under the power of the grave, which I have elsewhere shewed, to be the natural, and only import of these words, the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church.

Moreover the plain meaning of the foregoing words, viz. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church, is, as a Tertullian well informs us, only this: Thou who hast first of all my Di∣sciples acknowledged me to be the Christ, thou shalt first preach this Doctrine to the World, and, by so doing, lay the first foundations of a Christian Church. Which he accordingly performed, first laying the foundation of a b Church among the Jews by the conversion of three thousand souls. And after laying the foundation of a Church a∣mongst the Gentiles, by the conversion of Corneli∣us, and his friends, Christ having, to fulfil his pro∣mise, c made choice of him among the rest of the Apo∣stles, that the Gentiles by his mouth should hear the word of the Gospel, and believe. Now to pretend to be St. Peters Successor in this matter, is in effect to say, that the foundations of a Christian Church are not yet laid.

If therefore Roman Catholicks conclude from these ambiguous and obscure places for the infalli∣bility of Councils, or of the major part of the Church guides concurring with the Pope in any Sentence or Decree, although these places do not speak one syllable of any Pope, or major part of the Church-Guides, and much less of the Romish Prelats, and less of their infallible assistance, what Ovations and Triumphs would they have made, had it been said expresly of their Cardinals and Councils, as it is said of Jewish Priests, that they were set for judg∣ment and for Controversie: had God fixed his glo∣rious presence at Rome, as he did at Jerusalem?

and setled there a seat of Judgment, and a conti∣nual Court of highest judicature, as was that San∣hedrim which in Jerusalem was setled? had he dwelt in St. Peters as he dwelt in the Temple? had he left with them, as he did with the Jewish Priests, a standing Oracle, a Ʋrim and a Thummim to consult with on all occasions? so that this plea being much stronger for the infallibility of the Superiors of the Jewish Church, than for the infal∣libility of the whole Western Church, or any of its Councils, the Roman Doctors must acknow∣ledg either that they fallaciously urge it a∣gainst Protestants, or must confess that it stands also good against the Christian, and is a confirma∣tion of all those traditions which were condem∣ned by our Saviour, and a sufficient plea for all those errors and corruptions, which, as the Pro∣phets do complain, were generally taught and practised by the Church-Guides, in the declining Ages of the Jewish Church. For if these Argu∣ments be good now, they were so then, and if they were good then, for ought that I can see, the High Priest, and the major part of the Church Ru∣lers of the Jews were always in the right, and Christ and his Apostles, with the Holy Prophets, must be in the wrong.

[§. IV]

Moreover had we no evidence from Scripture, may the Jew say in prosecution of this Argument, reason seems very strongly to conclude for this submission of the common people, and some few Priests to the concurring judgments of their Church-Guides, and of the major part of Jews, who joyned with then in condemnation of your Jesus, as a Blasphemer and false Prophet, and of his followers as Hereticks and Schismaticks, or men who worshipped God after that way which by

the Jews was called Heresie, and were Ring-leaders of a Sect. For still to argue after the manner of the Romish Doctors.

1. Is it not reasonable to conceive that they who were Gods Ministers appointed for this very thing to judg in controversial matters, and to make tryal of such as did pretend to Prophesie, as was the Jewish Sanhedrim: I say, is it not rea∣sonable to conceive that the assistance of the Ho∣ly Spirit should be vouchsafed to these Rulers of the Church, and Doctors of the Law, rather than to those common people who bore no such relati∣on to God, had no commission from him to di∣rect others in the meaning of his word, but had so many, and such express injunctions to seek it at the mouth of their Church-Guides? Can we imagin that these Pharisees and Rulers should be the men ordained by God for Controversies, and by whose words they must be tried; and yet should be such blind and stupid Guides, as by your Jesus they were said to be, that he who was led by them must fall into the ditch?

Moreover were no assistance from above to be expected in this case, is it not reasonable to think that these great Doctors of the Law, those numerous Priests who made it their whole business to study, and search out the meaning of the Law of Moses, those Members of the Sanhedrim, who were still chosen out of the most Learned Persons, and the most eminent for wisdom, I say, may we not reasonably conceive such Persons to be fitter and more able Judges of the sense and meaning of that Law, or of the truth of any miracles pre∣tended to be wrought by Christ, or his Apostles, than was that rude and giddy Multitude which had no knowledg of the Law? They therefore

considering their Superiors study and Learning in such things Divine, and also their own ignorance; they con∣sidering both the special ordination, and commission of their Superiors from God to teach them in necessary truths, and his charge laid upon them to obey their Ecclesiastical Superiors, ought to depend upon, and adhere to their directions so much the more in any point of faith, by how much it is esteemed more necessary, as wherein there is a much greater hazard if they should err.

3. All that your Gospel doth suggest, or reason may pretend for the exemption of the first Jewish Converts from obedience to these decrees of their Superiors in the Jewish Church, may, saith the Jew, be fully answered from the plain Principles, and almost in the words of Roman Catholicks. For to proceed in the expressions of R. H. the Guide in Controversies, with very little variation of them.

[§. V]

1. Will you affirm that all the Priests and Ru∣lers, Scribes and Pharisees, and the whole Sanhe∣drim acted against their faith and conscience, in these determinations by which your Jesus was condemned as an Impostor?

Answ. R. H. will tell you there is a moral cer∣tainty that so many such persons cannot conspire in such a matter, viz. a necessary to Salvation, to falsifie the truth against their own belief and conscience, to their Subjects and Posterity, with an Anathema to all dis∣senters, or an excommunication of all who preach∣ed, and believed that Christ was the Messiah promi∣sed to the Jews, and was already risen from the dead, when their own consciences could tell them that these things were true. If any can be so un∣charitable as to credit of them so great a wickedness, that the Supream Councils of the (Jewish) Church

should with design decree an error contrary to their faith, (or knowledg) in this necessary matter, and then enjoyn all their Subjects to believe it un∣der Anathema, he must believe that they most cer∣tainly do devote themselves to eternal perdition. And therefore, if not out of Charity, or reverence to such sacred persons, yet from the irrationality of such a defence, it is much better to pass over this objection.

2. Will you say that these Superiors were only to be appealed to in doubtful matters, and that this thing, whether the Scriptures declared your Je∣sus to be the true Messiah, was not doubtful?

Answ. R. H. informs you that a right judg∣ment cannot but account all those places doubtful, in the sense whereof either the Antient or present major part of Christianity are of a contrary judgment from himself. That must be therefore doubtful, accor∣ding to the ground and reason of this Rule, which you presume not to be doubtful, since it was that in which the major part of the then pre∣sent Jewish Church was of a contrary judgment from the Christian Convert.

3. Will you plead in favour of the vulgar, that they were bound to hearken to these Jewish Guides no longer than they followed the Rule of Scripture?

Answ. Be it so, But saith R. H. Who is ap∣pointed judg of these supreme Judges, when they transgress against this Rule? their Subjects? who are from them to learn the sense of the Rule where dif∣ficult, and disputed, and who are bidden to follow their faith? The right exercise of Judgment will not judge so. For if the vulgar may pass this judg∣ment of the Decrees of many Councils, and the concurring judgment of their Superiors and Church Guides, I hope the matter must be evident even to

the vulgar sort that notwithstanding the contrary judgment of Chief Priests and Rulers, Scribes, Pharisees and Elders, and almost all the Jewish Nation, that sense of Scripture must be false, which their Ecclesiastical Guides alledged, to prove that Jesus was not the true Messiah, and that ac∣cording to their Law he was to die, and that sense of the Scripture must be true which by the Apo∣stles, and their few Converts, was alledged to prove that Jesus was the Messiah promised to the Jew. Now how vainly, saith R. H. doth any one pretend, or promise himself a certainty of any thing wherein so many Councils, and a much major part of the Church, having all the same means of certainty as he, judgeth contrary? where it seems the Scripture may be so doubtful that the sense of the (then) Ca∣tholick Church, or its greatest Councils, they say, can be to them no certain or infallible interpreter of it, where the judgment or common Reason of these Coun∣cils thinks it self so certain of the contrary, as to Ana∣thematise dissenters, or cast them out of the Church. On what grounds here these private Persons, or new erected Churches could assure themselves of their own sense of Scripture to be true, they having left that of the Churches Councils, and of a major part of (Jews) who also judged their sense false, I understand not. Surely they will not say, they have this certainty from the Scripture, because the true sense thereof is the thing so mainly questioned, and the certainty or infal∣libility of the traditive sense of the (Jewish) Church they renounced, and then, which only is left, their own judgment, or their own common reason, when that of their greatest Councils, or major part of their Church-Guides, differs from it, one would think should be a more fallible ground to them, than the judgment or common reason of the Church.

For a man to presume himself certain in a matter of faith, or in his own sense of Scripture, (though the literal expression he never so clear,) where so many Learned and his Superiours, (comparing other Texts, &c.) are of a contrary judgment, this, saith R. H. is the same as if in a matter of sence, a dim sighted Person should profess himself certain that an object is white, when a multitude of others, the most clear sighted that can be found, having all the same means of a right sensation as he hath, pronounce it black, or of another colour. Moreover if these Scri∣ptures, or reasons be so clear even to the ignorant and unlearned Jew, must they not be as clear to their Church-Guides, and may not then their judgments more securely be rely'd upon, at least for any thing which is presumed to be clear? For if Scriptures be maintained so clear in necessaries, that every one using a right endeavour cannot mistake in them, then shall the Church Governours much ra∣ther, by reason of this clearness, obvious to every Ru∣stick, not err in them; and so shall the people, the more the Rule of faith is proved to be clear, the more securely rely on, and be referred in them to their di∣rection.

4. If you pretend a more sincere endeavour in those few converts to find out the sense of Scrip∣ture, or search out the truth in these matters, which, in the case of the Beraeans, your Scripture seemeth to assert.

Answ. I Answer still with the same Author, that since all parties do pretend sincere endeavour in the right understanding of the Scriptures, and after it do differ so much in their sense of it, it follows that such sincere endeavours being indifferently allowed to all par∣ties, the sense of Scripture, (and the verdict of true reason) ought to be pronounced clear, if on any,

on that side as the major part doth apprehend it; (which certainly was not the Primitive Converts, but the unbelieving Jews, and their Ecclesiastical Superiors.) For surely we have reason to presume that the Chief Guides of the Church, in their consults concerning a point necessary to Salvation delivered in Scripture, (as that of the Messiah was) use at least so much endeavour as a plain Rustick doth to under∣stand the meaning of it. And whatsoever other thing is supposed necessary besides sincere endeavour, or is understood to be included in it, (as freedom from pas∣sion, and secular Interest, or also a freely professing the truths which their sincere endeavour discovers to them,) none can rationally imagin but that these su∣pream Church Governours should be as much, or more disengaged herein, than private men. And that pas∣sion and interest blind private men, or our selves, sooner than General Councils, or a major part of the Church.

See therefore here the wisdom of the unbelie∣ving Jews, who to preserve themselves from erring, in this matter, made use of the securest way that reason could imagine, saith R. H. or that Christians are prescribed, whilst for the sense of the Scriptures that were controverted in this point of the Messiah, they chose not to rely on their own judgments, but on that of the Supremest Guides of the Church, and Judges of Divine Truth that were afforded them on earth, and so if they erred, yet took the wisest course to have missed erring that Religion, or Reason could dictate. To which Guides also the subjects of this former Communion all believed submission of their private judgments to be due, and to be commanded, from whence also it follows that till they are convinced of error in this point, viz. that no submission was due, to the Decrees of all these Councils, and the

concurring judgment of those Spiritual Guides by whom your Jesus was condemned, they are not capable of being convinced in any other matter,

If lastly, you affirm that the common people had conviction, and demonstration from the Miracles of Christ of the falshood of the Decrees, and the Interpretations of their Church Guides in this mat∣ter, and of the truth of that Christianity which they embraced in opposition to those said Decrees.

Answ. This I confess is a great truth, but then the Roman Doctors cannot plead it, without reje∣cting most of their professed Tenets, and their strongest pleas for absolute submission to the Ma∣jor part of their Church Guides. For,

1. Admit our Saviour, and his Apostles wrought true Miracles, how did the vulgar perceive them so to be but by their senses? and how did they in∣fer from them the truth of Christianity, but by their private Reasons? Now the evidence of sense and reason must be both neglected, saith the Roma∣nist, when a Divine Revelation declares any thing contrary to them, This, and this only, being their defence of Transubstantiation against the common sense and reason of mankind. Now of the cer∣tainty of a Divine Revelation, or the true sense of Scripture, they make the judgment of the Ma∣jor part of their Church Guides to be sufficient evi∣dences, and so there was sufficient evidence, ac∣cording to this Rule, that all the Miracles which Christ, and his Apostles seemed to work, were done in opposition to Divine Revelation, or the true sense of Scripture.

2. Certain it is that the Rulers of the Jews, and the prevailing part of the whole Nation, differed from the converted Christians in their apprehensi∣ons of these Miracles, and judged them all Dia∣bolical

Impostures, or trials of their Faith, &c. Now this seems necessary to be granted, saith R. H. that in what kind of knowledg soever it be, (whe∣ther of our sense or reason, in what ever Art or Sci∣ence) one can never rightly assure himself concerning his own knowledg, that he is certain of any thing for a truth, which all, or most others of the same, or better abilities for their cognoscitive faculties, in all the same external means, or grounds of the know∣ledg thereof, do pronounce an error. So that where all, or most differ from me, it seems a strange pride not to imagine this defect in my self, rather than them, especially when as all the grounds of my science are communicated to them, and when as for my own mistakes, I cannot know exactly the extent of super∣natural delusions. According therefore to this Rule, it was strange pride in the first Converts to Christianity among the Jews, to judg the Miracles of Christ, or his Apostles true, when most of their own Nation, as well as Heathens, differed from them in that apprehension, and spake so freely every where against the Sect of Christians.

3. The truth of the pretences of our Lord, and his Apostles, depended on two things, viz. the ful∣filling of Prophesies, and the truth of his Mira∣cles. Now according to the Roman Principles no man could be certain of the truth of either of these without the Authority of the then present Church. For the fulfilling of Prophesies depended on the sense of many obscure places of Scripture, of which, say they, the Major part of the Church-Guides must judg. And for Miracles, they tell us that there is no certain way of judging true, from false, but by the Authority of the Church. Now if these things be so, what ground could the first Jewish Converts have to believe Christ was the true Messiah,

or a worker of true Miracles, when in believing both these things, they must oppose the Authority of the then present Church.

4. All that hath been discoursed in answer to the former pleas, serves also against this. For who shall be judg whether these Miracles were true, and were sufficient to confirm the Christian Faith? those Persons whose Office it was to judg both of true Prophets, and true Miracles, or those who had no power or commission so to do? Was not the Jewish Sanhedrim and other Rulers of that Church more able Judges of the Truth, and the validity of any Miracles pretended to be wrought by Christ and his Apostles, than was that Multitude which, as experience teacheth, may be imposed upon with ease? Were not those Guides who were appointed to be Judges in all other matters, the proper Judges of this Contro∣versie? Have we not reason to believe their judg∣ment was as free from interest and passion, and their endeavors to search out the truth of these relations as sincere, as was the judgment or en∣deavours of the Laity? When therefore these Church-Guides did notwithstanding those preten∣ded Miracles of Christ and his Apostles, conclude unanimously that Christ was a Deceiver, was it not absurd to say that what they so universally determined, might be discerned by any private judgment to be the clearest falshood? that vulgar persons had demonstration in this matter against the judgment of the whole body of their Guides, and that their common reason was able to discern that to be manifestly true, which the same com∣mon reason of their Superiors, judged to be mani∣festly false?

[§. VI]

Thus have we seen that Scripture and Reason do more countenance the Jew pleading against our Lord, and the first Christian Converts, than they do countenance the Papist pleading against Protestants. In the last place the Jew may argue from Tradition thus, viz.

These Spiritual Guides in making this determi∣nation and passing of this judgment concerning Jesus were guided by that Rule, which by the greatest part of Christians, I mean the Roman Ca∣tholicks, is highly magnified, and equaled with the Holy Scriptures, viz. Tradition, acknowledged by the present Church for such. And so your Jesus must also upon this account be deemed an Impostor, or the pretences and pleadings of the Romanist against the Protestant, from the Tradition of the Church, must be acknowledged to be vain. For,

1. It is most certain that the Jews had a Tra∣dition generally received amongst them that their Messiah at his coming should restore the Kingdom to Israel. That he should subdue the Nations under them, and should erect a Temporal Dominion in the Jewish Nation over all their Enemies. Even the Disciples of our Lord did constantly believe this Article, till by the Holy Ghosts descent upon them, they were better informed. Witness their contests who should be greatest in that Kingdom, and the desire of the Sons of Zebedee to sit one at his right hand, another at his left hand in it. This was our Faith, saith Cleopas, we trusted that this Jesus should have Redeemed our Israel. And when they were assembled, after the Resurrecti∣on, their first enquiry is this, Lord wilt thou now restore the Kingdom to Israel. It is therefore cer∣tain that this was the received Tradition of the whole Jewish Church, grounded as they supposed,

upon the Scriptures which did necessitate them to expect a glorious Messiah, not such a one, saith Try∣pho, as your mean and despised Jesus was.

2. It was also a Tradition which generally ob∣tained amongst the Jews, that their Elias, who was called the This bite, was to appear again in person before the advent of the true Messiah, so was that place of Malachi Translated by the Se∣venty three hundred and eighty years before our Saviours coming. Behold I send unto you Elias 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 before the great and glorious day of the Lord come. All we expect, saith Trypho, that Christ should be anointed by Elias, who is for to come, and because this Elias is not come we think your Jesus cannot be the Christ. Accordingly the Scribes, or the Expounders of the Law, did with one voice declare it necessary that Elias should first come.

3. It was the general Tradition of the Jews that the Law of Moses should be perpetually obliging to them; and that it was to be observed even in the days of the Messiah. On this presum∣ption certainly it was that Christs Disciples, after his Resurrection, were strict observers of the Law of Moses for a considerable time; and so were al∣so many thousands of the Jewish Converts. St. Pe∣ter was so nice in observation of the Jewish cu∣stoms that till he was informed better by a vision, he thought such meat was utterly unlawful as was forbidden by the Law, so that when in that vision he was bid to slay and eat, he presently cries out, as a man tempted to an unlawful act, Not so Lord, for I have never eaten any thing that is unclean. St. James gives an account to Paul of the great Zeal that all the Jewish Converts had to the Law of Moses in these words, Thou seest Brother how many thousand of Jews there are which believe, and

they are all zealous of the Law. He farther tells him how highly they were all offended with him, because they were informed he had taught that they were not obliged to yield obedience to the Constitutions and Customs of the Jewish Law; and lastly doth exhort him to do what might be proper to cause these Zealots to believe that he al∣so walked orderly, and kept the Law. a St. Jerom, and b Sulpicius inform us that fourteen immediate succeeding Bishops, with their flocks, were all ob∣servers of the Law of Moses. And by the unbe∣lieving Jews nothing was more abhorred than the thoughts of changing their Mosaick Customs. For upon this account St. Stephen was accused of Blasphemy against Moses, and the Law, because he said that the Messiah should change the customs which Moses had delivered to them. This accusa∣tion before the Scribes, the Elders and High-Priest, was deemed sufficient to prove him guilty of that capital offence of Blasphemy. On this account they bring St. Paul before the judgment seat of Gallio, because, say they, he did persuade men to worship God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , against, or otherwise than was commanded by the Law of Mo∣ses. And this opinion they grounded chiefly up∣on those places which seem to speak of the perpe∣tual duration of those Statutes, and say they shall be ordinances to them for ever, and consequently seem to infer a Declaration from the mouth of God, that they should not be altered.

Moreover it is certain that, as the Protestants condemn as sinful and pernitious, many Tradi∣tions and Customs of the Roman Church, so did that Jesus whom Christians honour as the true Messiah, as frequently inveigh against, and so∣lemnly condemn many Traditions which then

were generally received, and practised in the Jewish Church, as vain and sinful customs, and such as tended to make void the Scriptures, and render the whole Jewish worship vain. He there∣foce seemeth to have been as great an enemy to Ecclesiastical Traditions, though they were gene∣rally owned by the then present Church, as such as Protestants can be esteemed.

Lastly, Certain it is that the Superiours, and Church Rulers, or at the least the Major, and pre∣vailing part of the Church Rulers, did then as firmly, and unquestionably believe that those Traditions which were condemned by your Je∣sus, and which so evidently proved, if true, he was not the Messiah promised to the Jew, were both agreeable to the word of God Expounded by their Church Tradition, and were delivered to them by Moses and the Patriarchs, and Prophets, and were continually practised by their Fore∣fathers, as doth the Roman Church believe that her Traditions were taught, and practised by Christ or his Apostles, and by their Successors through∣out all Ages of the Church. Hence are they often styled by them the Traditions of the Antients, or the Traditions received by succession from their Fathers.

And in their later writers they are always held to be derived from God by Moses together with the written Law, and as an explication of it. Hence, like good Roman Catholicks, they were more exceedingly zealous for the Traditions of their Fathers, than for the Law it self. They accuse all who walked not according to these customs of their Fathers, as persons who forsook the Law of Moses. And to do any thing against these customs of their Fathers was reputed Criminal: This be∣ing so,

I ask why the tradition of the major part of the Church Catholick or Christians in any Age whatso∣ever, and their concurring judgment that what she doth at present teach, and practise, she received from Christ and his Apostles, should be esteemed sufficient to render all those persons guilty of He∣resie and Schism, who do not yield assent to what they teach, or a compliance with their practices as Roman Catholicks assert, and yet that the general tradition of the then present Jewish Church, even including the Disciples of Christ, should not con∣clude them Schismaticks and Hereticks, who being Members of that Church, would not assent unto what they so generally taught, or comply with that which they practised as delivered to them by Moses, and the Patriarchs, and Prophets.

[§. VII]

But to apply these things, if it be possible, yet more particularly unto the pleadings of the Roman Church, and to shew the weakness and the pernici∣ous results of their most specious pretences. I add,

1. That notwithstanding it was the duty of the Priests and Rulers of the Jewish Church both to preserve and teach unto the people the knowledg of the Law, yet did the major part of these Church-Guides, both oft and dangerously swerve from this their duty. For they did teach and pra∣ctise, and direct the people into those ways which were destructive to the eternal welfare of their Souls, God by his Prophets doth complain without exception of them, that they erred in vision, and stumbled in judgment, that the teachers of his people made lies their refuge, and under falshood hid them∣selves, saying, the overflowing scourge shall not come to us: that their Interpreters had transgress'd against him, that his watchmen were blind, they were all ig∣norant, all dumb dogs that could not bark, sleeping, ly∣ing

down, loving to slumber; that they were greedy dogs that could never have enough. Shepherds that could not understand, that the Priests said not, Where is the Lord? and they that handled the Law knew him not, that the Pastors also transgressed against him, and the Prophets prophesied by Baal, and walked after things that did not profit. That his Prophets prophe∣sied falsly, and the Priests bare rule by their means. That from the Prophet to the Priest every one dealt fal∣sly. That they heald also the hurt of the Daughter of his people slightly, saying, peace, peace, when there was no peace. That his wise men had rejected the word of the Lord. And that the Pastors whose business it was to feed his sheep, destroy'd, and scattered, and drove them away, and did not visit them. That both Priests and Prophets were profane. That they had violated his Law, and had profaned his holy things, putting no dif∣ference betwixt the Holy and profane, the clean and the unclean, and hid their eyes from his Sabbaths. That the Shepherds of Israel fed themselves, but did not feed the flock, the diseased did they not strengthen, neither did they heal that which was sick, nor bring again that which was driven away, nor seek that which was lost, but with force and cruelty they Ruled, so that the sheep were scattered because there was no Shepherd. That they rejected knowledg, so that Gods people were destroyed for lack of it. That her Prophets were light and treacherous persons, her Priests had polluted the Sanctuary, they had done violence to the Law. That they had forgotten the Law of their God, they departed out of the way, they caused many to stumble at the Law, they corrupted the Covenant of Levi.

Moreover of these Guides it is expresly said, That they which led his people caused them to err, and destroyed the way of their paths. That the Leaders of the people caused them to err, and they that were led

of them were destroyed, and that their Shepherds cau∣sed them to go astray. Our Lord declares, that they were fools, blind Guides, full of Hypocrisie, and of ini∣quity, that they had taken away the key of knowledg, and had shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men, not going in themselves, nor suffering them that were entring to go in. That they made many false de∣cisions in matters of so great importance as to make void the Law of God, and render his whole worship vain. That they transgressed the commandment of God by their Traditions. That notwithstanding their instructions the people were as sheep without a Shepheard, or only had such Guides as would most certainly, if they submitted to their guidance, lead them to the pit, Hence therefore I infer,

1. That even those Spiritual Guides who are by Gods appointment constituted to instruct his people, and to feed his flock (for such our Lord acknowledged the Scribes, and Pharisees, and Ru∣lers of the Jewish Church to be) may scatter, and destroy that flock. And they who are set for the judgment of the Lord, and for controversies, may violate, corrupt, pervert that Law they should in∣terpret, they may be partial in it, they may depart out of the way, they may make the Command∣ments of God of none effect, and his whole wor∣ship vain by their traditions, they may cause their sheep to err, stumble, and go astray, and that so dangerously that they who are led by them shall be destroyed with them, and find no entrance into bliss. And hence, I hope, I may assume the bold∣ness to conclude against the Infallibility of our Spiritual Governours, or the concurring judgments of the major part of them: which is sufficient to root up even the foundations of the Romish Babel.

2. Hence I infer that notwithstanding all the formentioned Scriptures, which say it was the du∣ty of the people to ask of their Spiritual Guides the meaning of the Law, and seek the knowledg of it at their mouths, and to enquire after their judg∣ments in all those Controversies they were not a∣ble to resolve. I say, hence I infer, that notwith∣standing this, the people were not absolutely obli∣ged to rest in the decision of the major part of these Church Guides, or bound to practise all that they approved, for then an obligation must be laid up∣on them, not only to err in judgment with them to countenance false Prophets, and to speak peace to themselves when there is no peace, but also to violate the Law, and to comply with their false glosses, and corrupt interpretations of it; nay which is more unreasonable, they must be then obliged to be destroyed, to fall into the pit, and to exclude themselves from the enjoyment of Christ Kingdom. Whereas it is a contradiction to say that God obligeth any Person to transgress his Law, and it is little less than Blasphemy to say h•• doth require them to destroy themselves, to fal•• into the pit, or to deprive themselves of the enjoy∣ment of his Kingdom. Hence therefore I infe•• this Corollary:

That neither are all Christian people, Churches, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Nations absolutely bound to rest in the decisions of th•• major part of Christian Bishops, or to practise all th•••• they approve and impose. Which proposition over∣throws that absolute and blind obedience to their Church Guides, or Councils which Romanists •••• stifly plead for.

3. Hence it is also evident that private persons, or that the minor part of the whole Church may have sufficient ground, either from reason, or clea••

Scripture, for their refusal of assent, and of sub∣mission to the Authority and definitions of the major part of their Church Guides, for the Jews were bound to believe Christ to be the true Messiah, although the High Priest, and the Elders had pro∣nounced him a deceiver, and a Malefactor. They were obliged to believe his Miracles were wrought, not by Belzebub, but the Spirit of God; that Christs Kings was not of this world, that John Baptist was that Elias which was for to come, and that to eat with hands unwashed, to heal the sick, to pluck some ears of Corn upon the Sabbath day, were not unlawful actions, although the major part of their Church Guides taught, and believed the contrary. They were obliged not to void that Law of na∣ture which required Children to relieve their own distressed Parents, and therefore stood obliged not to comply with those traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees, which made the word of God of none essect, and would not suffer them to yield o∣bedience to it. And seeing they had many tradi∣tions and decrees of the like nature, which obtained amongst them, and only were rejected by the Sa∣duces, and the Disciples of our Lord; in none of these could they comply with their Church Guides without the violation of that Law of God, which sure they had sufficient ground and reason to ob∣serve. In a word, in all those cases in which they were not bound to rest in the decisions of the ma∣jor part of their Church Guides, or practise what they did approve, that is in all the cases mentioned in the former head, they must have had sufficient ground, either from Scripture, or from Reason, for their refusal of submission to them. Now these three inferences do fully justifie the Reformation of the Church of England.

[§. VIII]

4. From what hath been discoursed we may see the weakness of those pleas the Roman Doctors make in their own defence, and of the Arguments they use to shew that 'tis impossible they should be guilty of those corruptions in Doctrine, or in manners which we charge them with. For their most specious pretences are to this effect, that we confess the Church of Rome was once both true, and Orthodox, shew then, say they, how we did cease to be so, whether by Schism or Heresie? With Schism you cannot justly charge us, for that can never be of a much major, and more dignified part, in respect of a less, and inferior, subject to it; because this main body in any division is rightly taken for the whole, from which a separation is Schism, and to which every Member ought to adhere, as to the body, and head here upon earth to which it belongs; we therefore being the much major, and more digni∣fied part of the Church, cannot be Schismaticks in reference to Protestants who are, and were at their departure, a less and an inferior body to us. If He∣resie be the crime charged upon us, by what Church were we condemned? what body of men, before you, found fault with those corruptions which you, pretend to reform? for sure it was not possi∣ble for so many errors and corruptions to come in∣to the Church, and no one take notice of them? could this be so, where was the watchful eye of providence over the Church? But if we could suppose this providence was unconcerned for pre∣servation of the Church, could all the Pastors fall a∣sleep at once? or could they all conspire together to deceive their Posterity? Moreover since God will always have a visible Church, what can you mention besides that which holds Communion with the Church of Rome, as the then present vi∣sible

Church of Christ, when you began your re∣formation (except perhaps some Eastern Churches which you dislike almost as much as that of Rome?) And if that Church could teach such er∣rors as you charge her with, as matters of the Christian faith, what assurance can you have she hath not erred in defining the Canon of Scriptures, and delivering some Book, or Books for the word of God, which are not so? This is the sum of all the pleadings of the Roman party in their own be∣half. And they are only such as the Jewish Do∣ctors might have pleaded with as much plausibili∣ty against our Lords Disciples, and that first Chri∣stian Church which they planted in that Nation. For,

1. Where, may they say, will you produce the men of former Ages who taxed the Jewish Church with such errors and corruptions as your Jesus did? and bid men beware of the leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees, that is, the most holy and learned Members of our Church? Do not the Christians themselves acknowledge that we were once a right vine, and the beloved of the Lord? how, or when therefore did we cease to be so? If by Schism; produce that major part, or body of the Jewish Church from which we separated, when first your Jesus, like another Luther, appeared among us? Or if by Heresie we ceased to be so; by what Church, what Councils were we condemned? Who can believe that God would ever suffer such dangerous Doctrines to prevail in his own Church, and raise up no Church Guides, no Prophets to di∣scover things so destructive to her very being, till these new Teachers and Reformers first arose? Where then had God a true Church in the world, if not among the people of the Jews? what o∣ther

Church could Christ or his Apostles mention, besides that which he so often taxed with void∣ing the Commandments of God, and rendring his worship vain, because of some traditions which they had received from their Forefathers? If then God suffered this Church to be all over∣run with such a fatal leprosie, and gave no clear discovery thereof, where was the watchful eye of Providence? Where was that God who pro∣mised that he would put his name for ever in Je∣rusalem, and that his eyes, and heart should be per∣petually there? But suppose that Providence was unconcerned, did all our Pastors fall asleep at once? or could they all conspire to deceive posterity? Were not the Oracles of God committed to us Jews, did not you Christians receive them from us, if then our Church might teach her Children such destructive errors, as you charge her with, how can you be assured that she hath not erred even in that Canon of Scriptures which from her you have received?

Now though this instance, which I have large∣ly prosecuted, may be sufficient to shew the vani∣ty of the most plausible pretences of R. H. a∣gainst the Protestants, both in his Rational account, and his Discourse. It might be farther manifested that they as strongly plead for the Heathen world, against the Jew, for the Mahumetan against the Christian, for the Priests of Baal, against Elias and those seven thousand who had not bowed the knee to Baal, for the prevailing Arian, against the Orthodox, for the Fornicator, the Simoniack, the Covetous and the Debauched person in all those Ages in which these were the Epidemical, and al∣most general diseases of the Clergy, that is from the tenth, to the sixteenth Century, and lastly for

Antichrist himself, when he, according to the predictions of the Scripture, and the confession of many Rnman Catholicks, shall drive the Church, that is the Orthodox Professors of the Faith into the Wilderness, and slay the Witnesses of Christ, and of his Doctrine. But,

To conclude, If this be truly the result of the most specious pretences of the Roman party to draw our souls into their deadly snares, if all their fairest pleas do make for Judaism, more naturally than they do for Popery. If what they urge to prove ••he Potestant Divines to be Deceivers of the people, doth more strongly prove our blessed Jesus a De∣••eiver, which is the highest Blasphemy. I hope that ••o true lover of this Jesus will be much tempted ••y such pleas to entertain a good opinion of the Romish Faith. It being certainly that Faith which cannot be established, but on the ruins of Christianity, nor embraced by any Protestant, but ••o the greatest hazard, if not the ruin of his ••oul.

Notes

• John vii. 52. Verse 41, 42.
• Verse 47, 48, 49.
• Verse 16.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. John ix. 22. xii. 42.
• Disc. chap. 4. S. 64, 65, 69.70.
• Mark iii. 22. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• Joh. xi. 47, 50, 53.
• Luke xxii. 66.
• Matth. xxvii. 63.
• Act. iv. 6, 18.
• Act. v. 40.
• Rational Ac∣count, Disc. 1. Chap. 6. S. 59. P. 58.
• Levit. x. 11. Deut. xxxiii. 10. Mal. ii. 7. Ibid.
• Deut. xvii. 8, 12.
• 2 Chron. xix. 8.
• Ezek. xliv. 24. Deut. xxi. 5.
• Deut. xvii. 12.
• Deut. xvii. 8.12.
• Hag. ii. 11. Mal. ii. 7.
• Matth. xxviii. 20.
• Exod. xxix. 42, 43, 44, 45. Mic. iv. 7. Psal. cxxxii. 13, 14. 2 Chron. vii. 16.
• Matth. xviii. 20.
• Psal. cxxxiv. 3. Exod. xx. 24.
• Luke x. 16. Matth. xviii. 17.
• Deut. xvii. 12.
• Heb. xiii. 7, 17.
• Matth. xxiii. 3.
• Deut. xvii. 10.
• John xvi. 13. Chap. xiv. 26.
• John xiv. 26. John xvi. 13.
• Hag. ii. 5.
• Numb. xi. 17.
• 1 Tim. iii. 15.
• Mal. ii. 6. Zech. viii. 3.
• Eph. iv. 11, 12.
• Ezek. xxxiv. 4.
• Matth. xvi. 18.
• Jer. xxxiii. 20, 21.
• Essay. Chap. 3.
• a

  Si quia dix∣erit Petro Do∣minus, Super hanc petram aedificabo Ec∣clesiam meam, id circo praesumis & ad te deri∣vasse solvendi & ligandi po∣testatem, qualis es evertens & commutans ma∣nifestum domini intentionem personaliter (N.B.) hoc Petro conferen∣tem, sic enim & exitus docet, in ipso Ecclesia exstructa est, id est, per ipsum.—ipse primus in Christi Baptismo reseravit aditum caelestis Regni. De Pudicitia cap. 21. p. 574. B.
• b

  Acts 2.41.
• c

  Acts 15.7.
• V. Stillingfl. Sermon upon Acts 24.14. p. 39.
• Acts 24.14. ibid. v. 5.
• Vid. Answ. in Numb. xi. 16, 17.
• R.H. discourse Chap. 13. p. 13.
• Discourse 1. Ch. 3. §. 37, 38. p. 26.
• Ibid. p. 25.
• Disc. Chap. 3. §. 44. p. 29.
• Ibid. p. 28.
• Ibid. p. 143.
• Rational ac∣count. disc. 3. Chap. 4. §. 42. p. 179.
• Ibid. disc. 2. Chap. 2. §. 15. p. 95.
• V. Rational ac∣count disc. 2. Chap. 5. §. 42. p. 141.
• Disc. Chap. 3. §. 37. p. 24.
• Disc. Chap. 1. p. 4, 5.
• Ibid. p. 24.
• Ibid. p. 145.
• Rat. Account Disc. 1. Chap. 7. §. 77. p. 74.
• Rat. Account Disc. 1. Chap. 6. §. 62. p. 63.
• Rat. Account Disc. 4. Cons. 2. p. 384.
• Stillingfl. ibid. p. 42.
• Synod. Tri••. Sess. 4.
• Matth. xviii. 1. Matth. xx. 21.
• Luke xxiv. 21
• Act. i. 6.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Dial. p. 249. B.
• Mal. iv. 5.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Dial. p. 268. A. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Mark ix. 11.
• Act. x. 14.
• Act. xxi. 20.
• Verse 21.
• Verse" 24.
• a

  Chron. 2.
• b

  Lib. 2. c. 45.
• Act. vi. 11, 14.
• Act. xviii. 13.
• Deut. xxix. 29. Levit. iii. 11. Exod. xii. 17.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Matth. xv. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Gal. i. 14.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Act. xxi. 21. Act. xxviii. 17.
• Esa. xxviii. 7. Ibid. v. 15.
• Isa. xliil. 27. Isa. lvi. 10, 11.
• Jer. ii. 8.
• Jer. v. 31. Jer. vi. 13, 14.
• Jer. viii. 9. Jer. xxiii. 1, 2.
• Ibid. v. 11. Ezek. xxii. 26.
• Ezek. xxxiv. 1, 6.
• Hos. iv. 6. Zeph. iii. 4.
• Mal. ii. 8.
• Isa. iii. 12. Chap. ix. 16. Jer. l. 6. Matt. xxiii.
• Luke xi. 52. Matt. xxiii. 13.
• Matt. xv. 6, 9.
• Matt. ix. 36. Matt. xv. 14.
• Matt. xv. 5.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Mark vii. 8.
• R. H. Rational account, disc. 3. Chap. 5. §. 63. p. 203.
• Vid. Stillingfl. Sermon 24. Acts xiv.
• Vide. Appen. Chap. 3. §. 10, 16.