v. 4. But to wave this Whereas Mr. Lock so often saith that by examining what the Apostles preach'd all through their History he had found that the Word preach'd by them was nothing but this that Jesus was the Messiah I have just now shew'd that it is easie for any one to find the contrary by examining only that part of the History of the Apostles which we have Acts 10. from v. 34. to v. 44. and Acts 13. from v. 23. to v. 42. where by Mr. Lock 's own Confession they treated of the Miracles Death Resurrection and Dominion of our Saviour and of his coming to judge the World as also of Remission of Sins by him See him in Reasonab of Christian p. 41. and Second Vindication p. 307. In his Reasonab of Christian. p. 194. Mr. Lock says Above threescore Years after our Saviour's Passion St. John knew nothing else required to be believ'd for the attaining of Life but that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God But will he hold to this that St. John knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd and admit of no Limitation or Exception Did he not know that it was necessary to believe One Only True God St. John 17. 3. Did he not know that it was necessary to believe that God rais'd the Lord Jesus from the dead But what shall we say to the Words of St. John 20. 31. which Mr. Lock alledges Ibid. p. 193. and from which he inferrs this These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God and that believing ye may have Life in his Name I answer That it may be said 1. That here it is as much required that we believe Jesus to be the Son of God as 't is to believe him to be the Messiah 2. That these that Jesus is the Messiah and that he is the Son of God are two principal Articles and therefore mention'd by St. John but he does not say These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and only this neither does he say And that believing this alone ye may have Life But And that believing in general i. e. believing all that the Holy Ghost makes necessary to be believ'd If thou believe in thine Heart that God rais'd the Lord Jesus from the dead thou shalt be saved Rom. 10. 9. Because in these Words our Lord's Resurrection is solely insisted on Mr. Lock will not conclude that St. Paul knew nothing else requir'd to be believed for attaining Life but that And then why should he conclude concerning St. John that he knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd but these two Articles that Jesus is the Messiah and that he is the Son of God because St. John 20. 31. he mentions only these I know that Mr. Lock does not allow us to call them two Articles but I am so little moved with his saying and not proving that Messiah and the Son of God are two Expressions signifying one and the same thing that I make bold to do it without his License Mr. Lock perhaps will think that I neglect him if I do not take notice of his Chronology He says That above threescore Years after our Saviour's Passion St. John knew nothing else required to be believ'd His Reason is Because St. John's Gospel was written so long after as says he both Epiphanius and St. Jerom assure us I shall grant that St. John's Gospel might perhaps be writ so long after our Lord's Crucifixion for St. Hierom in Catalogo and in Lib. 1. con Jovinian says That Ecclesiastical History makes St. John to have liv'd threescore and eight Years after the Lord's Passion But I cannot but take notice of Mr. Lock 's Caution some may call it his Prudence in not referring us to the Places where Epiphanius and St. Hierom assure us that it was writ so late As to Epiphanius it is true that in Haeres 51. he says that St. John writ his Gospel after the ninetieth Year of his Age and if he had also told us how old St. John was at the time when our Saviour was crucified we might have known whether according to Epiphanius St. John writ his Gospel above threescore Years after our Lord's Passion but I do not remember that Epiphanius hath any where told us St. John's Age at the time of our Saviour's Suffering And as to St. Hierom I have not found that he doth acquaint us either in what Year of his own Age or how long after his Lord's Passion it was that St. John writ his Gospel CHAP. XXIII Of Saving Faith and Vnbelief THey that believe Jesus to be the Messiah their King but will not obey his Laws and will not have him to rule over them they are but greater Rebels and God will not justifie them for a Faith which doth but increase their Guilt and oppose diametrically the Kingdom and Design of the Messiah who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all Iniquity and purifie to himself a peculiar People zealous of good Works Tit. 2. 14. And therefore St. Paul tells the Galatians That that which availeth is Faith but Faith working by Love and that Faith without Works i. e. the Works of sincere Obedience to the Law and Will of Christ is not sufficient for our Justification St. James shews at large Chap. 2. Only those who believe Jesus to be the Messiah and take him to be their King with a sincere Endeavour after Righteousness in obeying his Law shall have their past Sins not imputed to them and shall have that Faith taken instead of Obedience Mr. Lock 's Reasonab of Christian. p. 213 214 215. None are sentenced or punish'd for Unbelief but only for their Misdeeds They are Workers of Iniquity on whom the Sentence is pronounced Every where the Sentence follows doing or not doing without any mention of believing or not believing Not that any to whom the Gospel hath been preach'd shall be sav'd without believing Jesus to be the Messiah for all being Sinners and Transgressors of the Law and so unjust are all liable to Condemnation unless they believe and so through Grace are justified by God for this Faith which shall be accounted to them for Righteousness But the rest wanting this Cover this Allowance for their Transgressions must answer for all their Actions and being found Transgressors of the Law shall by the Letter and Sanction of the Law be condemned for not having paid a full Obedience to that Law and not for want of Faith That is not the Guilt on which the Punishment is laid tho' it be the want of Faith which lays open their Guilt uncover'd and exposes them to the Sentence of the Law against all that are unrighteous Ibid. p. 243 245 246. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Of the Expression Justified for Faith whereas the Scripture-Language is Justified by Faith I took notice before Chap. 19. and 21. Here I cannot but observe how apt Men are
to run into Extremes There are some that say that Unbelief is the only Sin for which Men shall be condemn'd they shall be condemn'd not for their other Sins but solely for this Mr. Lock on the other hand would persuade us that Men shall not be condemned at all for Unbelief The Sentence says he follows not doing without any mention of not believing He alledges for this St. John 5. 28 29. St. Matth. 7. 22 23. 13. 14 49. 16. 24. 25. 24 c. St. Luke 13. 26. But 1. In many of these Places as St. John 5. 28 29. St. Matth. 13. 41. not 14 as it is in Mr. Lock and 49. St. Matth. 16. 27. not 24. as Mr. Lock there is not the least mention of any Sentence therefore it is manifest that they do not tell us for what Men shall be sentenced 2. Those who are mention'd St. Matth. 7. 22 23. and St. Luke 13. 26 27. were Believers and so could not be sentenc'd for Unbelief I do not say that they believ'd to the saving of their Souls or with a saving Faith a Faith working by Love and bringing forth the Fruits of good Works for the contrary is most manifest they were Workers of Iniquity or Unrighteousness But I say that they were Believers they should say unto Christ Lord Lord yea they were such Believers as not only own'd him for their Lord but also prophesied cast out Devils and did many mighty Works in his Name and therefore if they were not sentenced for Unbelief but only for their Misdeeds it cannot be thought strange 3. Let it be suppos'd that they were Unbelievers all that these Texts say is that Workers of Iniquity shall hear that Sentence I tell you I know you not depart from me And if it may be hence inferr'd that they are to be condemn'd only for working Iniquity then from St. Mark 16. 16. where it is said He that believes not shall be damn'd it may be concluded that he shall be condemn'd only for Unbelief that the Sentence shall follow not believing without any mention of not doing But this Inference Mr. Lock will not allow They are Workers of Iniquity on whom the Sentence is pronounced says Mr. Lock out of St. Matth. 7. 23. They are Unbelievers who shall be condemned say I out of St. Mark 16. 16. And if from St. Mark 16. Mr. Lock will not conclude that Men shall be condemn'd only for Unbelief and not for working Iniquity why does he conclude from St. Matth. 7. that they shall be condemn'd only for working Iniquity and not for Unbelief 4. As to St. Matth. 25. 24 c. which may seem to be more to Mr. Lock 's Purpose than the former for this tells us expresly for what Men shall be sentenced to Punishment which the other do not the Judge shall say to those on his Left Hand Depart from me ye cursed for I was hungry and ye gave me not to eat c. it is enough to say That if because the Sentence of extreme Malediction shall be pronounced upon Men because they did not feed the hungry give drink to the thirsty take in the Strangers cloath the naked visit the sick and imprison'd he can inferr that Men shall be condemn'd only for their not having done these things and not for their Unbelief then certainly because St. John 3. 18. it is said He that believeth not is now condemned because he hath not believ'd in the Name of the only begotten Son of God we may inferr that Men are and shall be condemn'd only for their not believing and not for their not doing If Men shall be condemn'd only for the Sins mention'd St. Matth. 25. then they must be condemn'd only for Sins of Uncharitableness Impenitence is not expresly mention'd in these Places of Scripture produced by Mr. Lock any more than Unbelief Will he say that Men shall not be condemn'd for their Impenitence The Truth is that he may with as much Reason say That as say that the Sentence shall not be pronounced on them for their Infidelity Why should Mr. Lock think it strange that Men should be condemn'd for not paying Obedience to the Command of Christ who hath commanded all Men every where to believe and repent Unbelief is a Sin which is the Cause of all our other Sins which would be prevented if we did unfeignedly and with a lively Faith believe the Gospel It is also that which as it were binds and fastens the Guilt of our other Sins upon us they will not be forgiven unless we believe and repent And yet according to Mr. Lock Men shall be condemn'd for their other Sins and not for this I have perhaps dwelt too long upon this yet I think it not amiss to give a brief Account why I render St. John 3. 18. He that believeth not is now condemn'd whereas in our Translation it is He that believeth not is condemn'd already The Words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is now condemned or is now judged as most worthy of Condemnation Now that God hath express'd such wonderful Love to the World by sending his only begotten Son into it not to condemn it but that by him the World might be saved see v. 16 17. and now that he is come into the World and hath wrought such Miracles he that believes not must be most justly worthy of Condemnation because he believes not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God being given that every one that believes in him should not perish but have everlasting Life Now that Light is come into the World if Men will not believe in the Light every one will judge that they are justly worthy of Condemnation as our Saviour says in the very next Words v. 19. This is the Condemnation i. e. that which chiefly deserves Condemnation that Light hath come into the World and Men have loved Darkness more than the Light If this Rendring and Exposition of the Words be receiv'd Commentators will not need to trouble themselves so much as they have done with enquiring in what Sense the Unbeliever is said to be already condemn'd since this which I offer is a plain and easie Interpretation He that believes not is now condemn'd now after the Son of God's being actually come into the World after Miracles wrought and the Gospel preach'd by him because he believes not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God This Text then plainly shews the Danger and Desert of not believing and therefore it concerns us to beware lest as the Israelites of whom the Apostle speaks Heb. 4. did not enter into the promised Land by reason of Unbelief v. 6. so we be excluded the Heavenly Canaan for our Unbelief v. 11 CHAP. XXIV Of Repentance Baptism and Remission of Sins REpentance is as absolute a Condition of the Covenant of Grace as Faith and as necessary to be perform'd as that This was not only the Beginning of our Saviour's preaching but the Summ of all
by him become the Father of a great People which should possess the Land of Canaan The thing promis'd to him was no more but a Son by his Wife Sarah and a numerous Posterity by him which should possess the Land of Canaan These were but temporal Blessings and except the Birth of a Son very remote suchas he should never live to see But because he question'd not the performance of it but rested fully satisfied in the Goodness Truth and Faithfulness of God who had promis'd it was counted to him for Righteousness The Faith whereby those Believers of old i. e. before our Saviour's time pleased God was nothing but a stedfast reliance on the Goodness and Faithfulness of God for those good things which either the light of Nature or particular Promises had given them grounds to hope for This was all that was requir'd of them to be persuaded of and embrace the Promises which they had They could be persuaded of no more than was propos'd to them embrace no more than was reveal'd They had a Belief of the Messiah to come they believ'd that God would according to his Promise in due time send the Messiah to be a King and Deliverer All that was requir'd before the Messiah's appearing in the World was to believe what God had reveal'd and to rely with a full Assurance on God for the performance of his Promise and to believe that in due time he would send them the Messiah this anointed King this promised Saviour and Deliverer according to his Word Thus Mr. Lock p. 23 24 247 249 252 253 254. of his Reasonab of Christianity OBSERVATIONS Here in Reasonab of Christian. p. 23. Mr. Lock says This Faith for which God justified Abraham as p. 24. he says Ahraham was justified for his Faith and in like manner p. 22. God justifies a Man for believing Now as it was observ'd above Chap. 19. this is not the Scripture-Language he constantly reads in his Bible Justified by Faith not for it It may therefore be justly wonder'd that Mr. Lock who is so much for keeping close to the Expressions of his Bible and thinks it our Duty to do it see his Third Letter p. 123. and 210. should affect to say so often that God justifies for Faith But perhaps he will correct it in his next Edition It is also just matter of Wonder that he should say that no more than temporal Blessings were promis'd to Abraham and that the Faith which God counted to him for Righteousness was nothing but his believing those Promises and resting fully satisfied of their Performance See Reasonab of Christian p. 24. and 249. especially when speaking of those Believers of old mention'd Heb. 11. of whom Abraham is one he says expresly that they had a Belief of the Messiah to come and that they believ'd that God would according to his Promise in due time send the Messiah see Ibid. p. 253 254. And he that consults the New Testament will find that as to the Promise of the Messiah and the Belief of it there is more said of Abraham than of the rest Abraham saw Christ's day and rejoyc'd S. John 8. 56. In thy Seed shall all the Kindreds of the earth be blessed Act. 3. 25. To Abraham were the Promises made and to his Seed which is Christ Gal. 3. 16. CHAP. XXII Of our Faith under the Gospel THE Belief of one invisible eternal omnipotent God Maker of Heaven and Earth c. was requir'd before the Revelation of the Gospel as well as now The Gospel was writ to induce Men into a belief of this Proposition that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah which if they believ'd they should have Life After his Death his Resurrection was also commonly requir'd to be believ'd as a necessary Article and sometimes solely insisted on Salvation or Perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one Proposition That Jesus was the Messiah I mean this is all is requir'd to be believ'd by those who acknowledge but one eternal and invisible God the Maker of Heaven and Earth For that there is something more requir'd to Salvation besides believing we shall see hereafter All that was to be believ'd for Justification was no more but this single Proposition that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ or the Messiah This that Jesus was the Messiah was all the Doctrine the Apostles propos'd to be believ'd Above three score years after our Saviour's Passion S. John knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd for the attaining of life but that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God Whoever would believe him to be the Saviour promised and take him now rais'd from the dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of all Men to be their King and Ruler should be saved Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 25 29 31 43 47 93 194 304. That this that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah is the sole Doctrine pressed and required to be believ'd in the whole Tenour of our Saviour's and his Apostles preaching we have shew'd through the whole History of the Evangelists and the Acts. And I challenge them to shew that there was any other Doctrine upon their Assent to which or Disbelief of it Men were pronounced Believers or Unbelievers and accordingly receiv'd into the Church of Christ or else kept out of it Ibid. p. 195. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock challenges others to shew any other Doctrine when he shews it himself He says that our Lord's Resurrection was also commonly requir'd to be believ'd as a necessary Article Reasonab of Christian p. 31. What can be more plain So The Belief of one invisible eternal omnipotent God Maker of Heaven and Earth c. is requir'd Ibid. p. 25. We must believe him to have been raised from the dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of all Men and to be our King and Ruler for if we do not believe these how can we take him now rais'd from the dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of all Men to be our King and Ruler which he expresly requires Ibid. p. 304. He says Ibid. p. 30. that we may gather what was to be believ'd by all Nations from what was preached to them by the Apostles Now he expresly tells us that the Apostle S. Paul preached that Jesus being risen from the dead now reigneth and shall more publickly manifest his Kingdom in judging the world at the last day Ibid. p. 191. In like manner p. 190. We see what it was our Saviour preached to the Apostles and what it was that was to be preached to all Nations viz. That he was the Messiah that had suffer'd and rose from the dead the third day and fulfill'd all things that was written in the Old Testament concerning the Messiah and that those who believ'd this and repented should receive Remission of their Sins through this Faith in him Here Mr. Lock plainly testifies that beside this one Article That Jesus is the Messiah the Apostles preach'd
that he did preach viz. That Men should repent and believe the good Tidings which he brought them Believing Jesus to be the Messiah and repenting were so necessary and fundamental Parts of the Covenant of Grace that one of them alone is often put for both Repentance is not only a Sorrow for Sins past but what is a natural Consequence of that Sorrow if it be real a turning from them into a new and contrary Life It is an hearty Sorrow for our past Misdeeds and a sincere Resolution and Endeavour to the utmost of our Power to conform all our Actions to the Law of God It does not consist in one single Act of Sorrow tho' that being the first and leading Act gives Denomination to the whole but in doing Works meet for Repentance in a sincere Obedience to the Law of Christ the remainder of our Lives It is in other Words well express'd by newness of Life And sometimes turning about is put alone to signifie Repentance Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 197 198 200 201. To be baptized into his Name is to enroll our selves into the Kingdom of Jesus the Messiah and profess our selves his Subjects By Baptism we are made Denizons and solemnly incorporated into that Kingdom Ibid. p. 212 213. Baptism was made use of by our Saviour to be that solemn visible Act whereby those who believ'd him to be the Messiah receiv'd him as their King and profess'd Obedience to him were admitted as Subjects into his Kingdom So Peter began Acts 2. 38. Repent and be baptiz'd these two things were required for the Remission of Sins Ibid. p. 199 200. God propos'd to the Children of Men that as many of them as would believe Jesus his Son to be the Messiah the promised Deliverer and would receive him for their King and Ruler should have all their past Sins Disobedience and Rebellion forgiven them and if for the future they liv'd in a sincere Obedience to his Law to the utmost of their Power the Sins of Humane Frailty for the time to come as well as all those of their past Lives should for his Son's sake because they gave themselves up to him to be his Subjects be forgiven them Tho' in consideration of Mens becoming Christ's Subjects by Faith in him whereby they believe and take him to be the Messiah their former Sins shall be forgiven yet he will own none to be his nor receive them as true Denizons of the New Jerusalem into the Inheritance of Eternal Life but leave them to the Condemnation of the Unrighteous who renounce not their former Miscarriages and live in a sincere Obedience to his Commands Ibid. p. 211 212 241. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Believing Jesus to be the Messiah and Repenting are so necessary and fundamental Parts of the Covenant of Grace that one of them alone is often put for both so Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 198. But I would know why they are the more necessary and fundamental Parts of the Convenant of Grace on this account that one of them alone is oft put for both or how this that one of them alone is oft put for both doth prove that they are necessary and fundamental Parts of it Withal how appears it that one of them alone is oft put for both All the Proof that he tenders for it is in the Words immediately following For says he St. Mark chap. 6. 12. mentions nothing but their preaching Repentance as St. Luke in the parallel Place chap. 9. 6. mentions nothing but their evangelizing or preaching the good News of the Kingdom of the Messiah Thus Mr. Lock But how will he hence make good this Inference Therefore of these two Believing and Repenting one alone is oft put for both There is no mention of believing in either Place St. Luke says that the Apostles preach'd the Gospel St. Mark says that they preach'd that Men should repent of believing here is not a Word But from both Texts we may gather that this That Jesus is the Messiah was not the only Article which the Apostles preach'd For in St. Mark 6. 12. they preach'd that Men should repent or that they should have their Sins remitted upon their Repentance as St. Peter afterward preach'd Repent and be baptiz'd for the Remission of Sins Acts 2. 38. and as our Saviour says St. Luke 24. 47. that Repentance and Remission of Sins should be preach'd so that it is clear that the Apostles preach'd this Article of Remission of Sins upon our repenting And then in St. Luke 9. 6. they preach'd the Gospel which comprehends more than that one Article That Jesus is the Messiah as the good News that a Saviour was born into the World c. Mr. Lock in Reasonab of Christianity p. 201. having said that sometimes turning about is put alone to signifie Repentance cites St. Matth. 13. 15. and St. Luke 22. 32. where the Word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and why that should be rendred to turn about rather than to convert or turn I am to be taught Ibid. p. 212. he says That to be baptiz'd into the Name of Christ is to enroll our selves in the Kingdom of Jesus the Messiah But as we are said to be baptiz'd in or into the Name of the Lord Jesus so we are also said to be baptiz'd in or into the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost St. Matth. 28. 19. Now to be baptiz'd in the Name of the Holy Ghost cannot signifie the enrolling our selves in the Kingdom of the Holy Ghost for we do not read in Holy Writ of the Kingdom of the Holy Ghost as we do of the Kingdom of the dear Son of God And why then should we make In or into the Name to signifie one thing when it is spoken of the Son and another when it is spoken of the Holy Ghost or of the whole blessed and glorious Trinity As then to baptize in or into the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is to baptize 1. by Authority and Commission from them 2. into the Worship and faithful Service of them all the Days of our Life So I conceive we are to interpret the being baptiz'd in or into the Name of the Lord Jesus Ibid. p. 241. Mr. Lock says In consideration of Mens becoming Christ's Subjects by Faith in him whereby they believe and take him to be the Messiah their former Sins shall be forgiven But other where he makes Men become the Subjects of Christ by Baptism as well as by Faith and both Repentance and Baptism to be required for the Remission of Sins alledging Acts 2. 38. and not Faith only And therefore he might have express'd the Gospel-Terms or the Conditions of Forgiveness more fully by saying that if Men repent and believe the Gospel and be baptized they shall through the Merits and Death of their blessed Saviour have their former Sins forgiven CHAP. XXV Of the Immortality of the Soul and
jure aliis Discipulis tribui nequeant Prius concedi posse putamus posterius vero negamus id enim sufficit plusquam satis ad Primatum Petri quae ei si quis fuisset ridicule admodum stolide superstruitur Pontificis Romani Praerogativa evertendum Thus Episcopius And there are Protestant Divines of great Esteem for their Learning and Judgment and who have engaged as zealously as any other against the Papal Interest who have gone farther have not only made the Person of St. Peter to be meant by the Rock but also somewhat peculiar to be granted him and yet shew that this affords not the least Advantage to the Pope's Pretensions that he is Universal Pastor To omit some of our English Divines they that please may consult Cameron either in his Praelections in St. Matth. 16. 18. or in the great Criticks Episcopius says that this That the Church should be built on him as on a Rock was granted to Peter in common with the other Apostles And to the same purpose speaks Origen Tractat. 1. in Matth. If thou thinkest that the whole Church was built upon Peter alone what wilt thou say of John the Son of Thunder and every one of the Apostles Shall we dare to say that the Gates of Hell could not prevail against St. Peter only but could prevail against the rest And a little after If that saying To thee I will give the Keys was common to the other Apostles why was not the rest which was then said as to Peter common to them too So that this may be a fourth Exposition that by the Rock is meant St. Peter not alone but together with the other Apostles As he made that Confession Thou art Christ the Son of the living God not for himself only but also in the Name of the other Apostles so according to this Sense he receiv'd this Grant for the rest of the Apostles as well as for himself I have alledged the foresaid Testimonies to satisfie Mr. Lock That Persons of approved Piety as well as Learning have judged our Saviour's Words On this Rock I will build my Church capable of other Interpretations than that which is mention'd by him viz. That the Faith which was confessed by St. Peter 〈◊〉 those Articles That Jesus is the Christ and That he is the Son of the living God are the Rock on which the Church is built This is the only Interpretation that can do Mr. Lock any Service and therefore he takes no notice of the rest But he should not be himself guilty of that which he condemns so much in others i. e. the imposing his Interpretations of Scripture upon us And therefore he must not be displeas'd if we do not grant that which Mr. Lock here affirms without any Proof that this Proposition That Jesus is the Messiah the Son of the living God was that Rock on which our Lord said that he would build his Church Mr. Lock says that the Evidence that we deceive not our selves in ascribing a Revelation to God can never be so great as the Evidence of our own intuitive Knowledge where if his Meaning be that we can never be so certain that any Revelation suppose the Scripture is from God as we are of the Object of our intuitive Knowledge I must deny it for I firmly believe that there have been and may now be those who are as certain that the Scriptures are the Word of God as they can be of that which they clearly see and distinctly perceive by any other of their Senses And I am confirm'd in this Belief by the Words of Mr. Chillingworth c. 1. § 9. To those says he that believe and live according to their Faith God gives by degrees the Spirit of Obsignation and Confirmation and to be as fully and resolutely assur'd of the Gospel of Christ as those which heard it from Christ himself with their Ears which saw it with their Eyes which look'd upon it and whose Hands handled the Word of Life CHAP. XXIX Of Fundamentals and the Apostles Creed GOD alone can appoint what shall be necessarily believ'd by every one whom he will justifie and what he has so appointed and declared is alone necessary No body can add to these Fundamental Articles of Faith nor make any other necessary but what God himself hath made and declared to be so And what these are which God requires of those who will enter into and receive the Benefits of the New Covenant has already been shewn An explicit Belief of these is absolutely requir'd of all those to whom the Gospel of Jesus Christ is preached Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 301. The Primitive Church admitted converted Heathens to Baptism upon the Faith contain'd in the Apostles Creed A bare Profession of that Faith and no more was required of them to be receiv'd into the Church and made Members of Christ's Body How little different the Faith of the ancient Church was from the Faith I have mention'd may be seen in these Words of Tertullian Regula fidei una omnium est sola immobilis irreformabilis credendi scilicet in unicum Deum omnipotentem mundi conditorem Filium ejus Jesum Christum natum ex Virgine Maria crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis receptum in coelis sedentem nunc ad dextram Patris venturum judicare vivos mortuos per carnis etiam resurrectionem Hac lege Fidei manente caetera jam disciplinae conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis Tert. de Virg. Velan in princip This was the Faith that in Tertullian's time sufficed to make a Christian. And the Church of England only proposes the Articles of the Apostles Creed to the Convert to be baptiz'd and upon his professing a Belief of them asks whether he will be baptiz'd in this Faith and upon the Profession of this Faith and no other the Church baptizes him into it The Apostles Creed is the Faith I was baptiz'd into no one tittle whereof I have renounced that I know And I heretofore thought that gave me title to be a Christian. Second Vindicat. p. 177 178 182. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock tells us in Reasonab of Christian. p. 301. that it had been already shewn what the Fundamental Articles of Faith are But I ask How had it been shewn He had sometimes affirm'd positively that this that Jesus of Nazareth is the only Gospel-Article of Faith that was requir'd Reasonab of Christian p. 195. that Salvation or Perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one Proposition that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 43. that this was all the Doctrine the Apostles propos'd to be believ'd Ibid. p. 93. At other times he had said that it was also requir'd for the attaining of Life that they should believe that Jesus is the Son of God Ibid. p. 194. He had also spoken of concomitant Articles viz. Christ's Resurrection Rule and coming again to judge the World saying that these
to another sense In his Second Vindication p. 360 c. he alledges S. Joh. 1. 34. and 3. 35 36. also S. Joh. 1. 50. S. Luk. 4. 41. S. Mar. 3. 11. S. Matt. 16. 16. S. Joh. 11. 27. S. Luk. 22. 70. S. Matt. 27. 54. not Luke 27. 54. as by the Fault of the Press it is in Mr. Lock and of all these Texts he says p. 369 that we must give up this Argument viz. from Christ's being call'd the Son of God and allow that this Phrase in these places do's not necessarily import the Deity of our Saviour and the Doctrine of the Eternal Generation unless we think that the Eternal Generation of Jesus the Son of God was a Doctrine that had entred into the Thoughts of John the Baptist Nathaniel S. Peter S. Martha the Sanhedrim yea even of the Roman Centurion and the Soldiers that were with him watching Jesus and he supposes that few think this It do's not necessarily import says Mr. Lock just as Crellius says Necesse non est And particularly of S. Luk. 22. 70. he says that if the Son of God be to be taken for a Declaration of his Deity common and coherent Sense will hardly be made of it As to S. Luk. 4. 41. and S. Mar. 3. 11. he asks Who can entertain such a Thought as that the unclean Spirits had a mind to acknowledge and publish to the People the Deity of our Saviour And as to S. Matth. 16. 16. he says that S. Peter can be taken in no other sense but barely to signifie that Jesus was the Messiah as he also saith that the Phrase of the Son of God is us'd by S. Martha Joh. 11. 27. to signifie the Messiah and nothing else Farther the Socinians make these Expressions the Messiah and the Son of God to have the same Signification Saepissime in Scripturis Filius Dei Christus idem denotant so Crellius in 1 Pet. 1. 3. Ut adeo nomen Christus seu Messias nomen Filius Dei ex usu Judaeorum pro eodem sumeretur Wolzogenius in S. Matth. 16 16. comparing this place with Mar. 8. 29. and Luk. 9. 20. and also alledging Joh. 1. 49. and Luk. 22. 67 68 69. Idem est Messiam seu Christum Filium Dei esse Enjedinus in S. Mat. 28. 19. So Slichtingius in S. Joh. 1. 50. Ex Nathanaelis confessione videmus Filii illius Dei Regis illius Israel i. e. Christi titulum idem significare Usitatum enim erat apud Hebraeos Messiam vocare Filium Dei Again in Comment in S. Joh. 20. 31. Christi Filii Dei titulus pro synonymis usurpantur Thus also Socinus himself cont Wickum cap. 5. in Resp. ad Argum 1. Perspicuum est idem reipsa esse Christum illum Dei Filium Idem est esse illum Regem Israelis quod esse Christum Caiaphas alii Judaei aliud nihil Filii Dei nomine intellexerunt quam Christum so he alledging Matth. 26. 63. Mar. 14. 61. S. Joh. 20. 31. together with the places above-cited by Wolzogenius I shall only add Volkelius de Vera Religione l. 5. c. 12. where having compar'd Matt. 16. 16. with Mar. 8. 29. and Luke 9. 20. he concludes thus Ut facile appareat in locis istis Filium Dei Christum esse eandem habere significationem and he also adds that the same is manifest viz. that they are Expressions of the very same thing or that have the same signification from Luke 22. 67 70. Joh. 1. 50. and sundry places in S. Joh. being compar'd And thus Mr. Lock The Son of God and the Messiah are one in signification Second Vindicat. p. 353. Messiah and the Son of God were synonymous Terms at that time among the Jews Reasonab of Christian. p. 50. Confessing Jesus to be the Son of God is the same with confessing him to be the Messiah those two Expressions being understood among the Jews to signifie the same thing Ibid. p. 96. And therefore almost everywhere in his Reasonab of Christian. when he alledges any place where Christ is said or confess'd to be the Son of God he interprets it of his being the Messiah Finally he proves that these Titles have the same Signification by comparing S. Matt. 16. 16. with S. Mar. 8. 29. and S. Luke 9. 20. and by those other Texts which are made use of by Socinus Wolzogenius and Volkelius to that purpose See Reasonab of Christian. p. 102. and otherwhere Please to see also what I have said above Chap. II. Enjedinus in Matth. 28. 19. saith That no other Faith was requir'd of the Gentiles when they were Baptiz'd than to believe that Jesus is the Messiah or Son of God Nulla alia fides fuit requisita a gentibus cum baptizabantur quam ut crederent Jesum esse Messiam seu Christum vel Filium Dei He also tells us that this is that which all the Writers of the New Testament urge yea that it was the Scope and Design of writing the History of the Gospel alledging S. Job 20. 31. and that this is the Faith by which the Gentiles were made the People and Children of God Thus Enjedinus Now the Reader needs not be admonish'd of how near Affinity hereto that is which Mr. Lock so earnestly and frequently inculcates viz. that all that was to be believ'd for Justification was no more but this single Proposition that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah Reasonab of Christian. p. 47. that S. John knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd for the attaining of life but that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God Ibid. p. 194. that this is the sole Doctrine pressed and requir'd to be believ'd in the whole Tenor of our Saviour's and his Apostles preaching Ibid. p. 195. and that the Gospel was writ to induce Men to believe this Proposition that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah for Proof of it alledging S. Job 20. 31. as Enjedinus doth Some of the Socinians as Crellius Comment in 1 Corinth 15. 14. and Welzegenius in Acts 8. 37. make this Proposition Jesus Christ is the Son of God to be a brief Summary of the Christian Faith or Profession comprising many things in few words And if they who say that this is all the Faith that is requir'd had plainly declar'd that they took it in this comprehensive sense as a brief Summary of all that we are requir'd to believe concerning Christ as that he is the only Son of God our Lord was conceived by the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary c. as in the Creed it would not have given so much Offence Therefore it would not be amiss if they would make such a plain Declaration of their Meaning now Socinus in his Praelectiones Theologicae cap. 2. says that there is not any Opinion or Notion of a Deity naturally implanted in the Mind of Man Receptior hodie sententia est homini naturaliter ejusque animo insitam esse
a sober Life and expressing his Admiration how it came that they call'd them Atheists See him in Admonit ad Gentes p. 11. 2. He brings Testimonies to prove that Navigation hath discover'd whole Nations amongst whom there was to be found no Notion of a God so far were they from consenting to the existing of a Deity He alledges the Relations of several Writers but he should have been so kind as to have transcrib'd their Words for us for I find that they are not to be met with every where whereas he hath only given us the Words of two of them or three at the most The Words which he sets down out of Nicolaus de Techo's Relatio triplex de rebus Indicis Caaiguarum are these Reperi eam gentem nullum nomen habere quod Deum hominis animam significet nulla Sacra habet nulla Idola See the Essay l. 1. c. 4. § 8. Out of Mr. Ovington's Relation of his Voyage to Surat he gives us these Words They are sunk even below Idolatry are destitute of both Priest and Temple and saving a little shew of rejoycing which is made at the Full and New Moon have lost all kind of Religious Devotion Nature hath so richly provided for their Convenience in this Life that they have drown'd all Sense of the God of it and are grown quite careless of the next He adds That Coore an Inhabitant of the Country who could speak English assur'd Mr. Terry that they of Soldania had no God See the Third Letter p. 450. Now as to these Testimonies 1. It must be remembred that Mr. Lock would prove from them that there are whole Nations amongst whom there is found no Notion of a God whereas it is not said in any of these Testimonies that the Nations spoken of had no Notion of a God Nicolaus de Techo tells of a People that have no Idols or Images no Sacred Offices or Services no Name for God but he doth not say that they had no Notion of him He says likewise That they had not a Name for Man's Soul but it doth not follow thence that they had no Notion of something within them that did Think Understand Will Reason c. Coore says That they of Soldania had no God i. e. They had no particular God as other Heathens might have which their whole Nation worshipp'd but it cannot be inferr'd hence that they had no Notion of a God Mr. Ovington says That they are sunk even below Idolatry but he doth not say That they are sunk so low as that they have not so much as any Notion of a Deity 2. Yea Mr. Ovington's Testimony is clearly against Mr. Lock for when he says Saving a little shew of Rejoycing which is made at the Full and New Moon they have lost all kind of Religious Devotion it is manifest that according to him they express'd some Religious Devotion every Full and New Moon And when he says that they have drown'd all Sense of the God of it doth not this necessarily imply that they had a Sense of him before they drown'd it Not to add That too many among us seem to have drown'd all Sense of a God and are grown quite careless of a future Life though they profess the Belief of a God and of the Life of the World to come Besides these three Mr. Lock names Sir Tho. Rhoe apud Thevenot p. 2. and Jo. de Lery c. 16. Sir Tho. Rhoe apud Thevenot I have not met with Of Joannes Lerius his Historia Navigationis in Brasiliam c. 16. I can give some account It is true that he says of his Tououpinambaultii that they are ignorant of the true God and also that they acknowledge no false Gods whether Celestial or Terrestrial But afterwards he proposes the Question Whether these Americans liv'd without any Religion Where though he first answers that they want but a very little of it yet he adds that they believe the Immortality of the Soul and that the Souls of the Vertuous shall live in perpetual Pleasure and Delights but the Souls of the rest in everlasting Torments after this Life He tells also that they had their Priests and their Assemblies once in three Years in which they believ'd that a Spirit talk'd with them He takes notice also of their Trembling at the hearing of Thunder which says he argues a dread of some Power And finally he makes frequent mention of a Cacodaemon which they said was seen by them sometime in one shape sometime in another and did most miserably vex them From all this he concludes that Religion was not quite extinguish'd but some sparks of it remain'd among them Thus I have examin'd all Mr. Lock 's Testimonies except Sir Tho. Rhoe's which I could not meet with and now the Reader may judge how firmly he hath prov'd That amongst some whole Nations there is found no Notion of a God And if it appear that he hath not firmly prov'd it then not only the Argument for the Existence of a God drawn from the universal Consent of Mankind is left in full force and that holds true which Tully saith de Legibus l. 1. Nulla gens est neque tam immansueta neque tam fera quae non etiamsi ignoret qualem habere Deum debeat tamen habendum sciat but also Mr. Lock 's principal Argument to prove his darling Notion that we have no innate Ideas of a God falls to the ground His principal Argument that he urgeth for proof of that Notion is this which I have insisted upon that whole Nations are found to have no Notion of a God And we see how far he is from evincing this As to the Argument which follows in the same place viz. Essay l. 1. c. 4. § 8. whereby he would prove that beloved Notion that we have no innate Ideas of a God drawn from the Atheism which is among us which says he some profligate Wretches do barefacedly own and others would if the fear of the Magistrate's Sword or their Neighbour's Censure did not tie up Peoples Tongues it signifies nothing unless Mr. Lock could assure us which he cannot that their Atheistical Discourse is the Language of their Hearts as it is too plainly the Language of their Lips and Lives For any thing that he knows their Hearts may give their Tongues the Lye and there may be inward Fears and Whispers that there is a God at the same time that they most stoutly deny it or if not at the same time yet afterward Sickness or the Approach of Death may awake the Sense of a Deity which they hop'd they had laid asleep never to awake and make the Notions and Characters which they had labour'd to obliterate as legible as ever Before I leave this I cannot but observe that though in his Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 7. Mr. Lock would not examine how far the Idea of a most Perfect Being does or does not prove the Existence of a God yet
Particularly Will Mr. Lock say that he was not cloath'd with it after his Resurrection If so I ask whether he will not plainly contradict our Blessed Saviour who told his Disciples after his being risen from the Dead that he had Flesh and Bones S. Luke 24. 39. It may then concern him to explain himself as to this also Mr. Lock 's Meaning also is not very plain when he says that the chief End of Christ's coming was to be a King and to be receiv'd as such It is most true that the Prophets foretold that he should be a King and it may be said that he came to fulfil the Prophecies that had been of him as it is also true that he was a King But I do not remember that it is said that the chief End of his coming was to be a King It is written that he came into the World to save Sinners to seek and to save that which was lost that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting Life that he was manifested to take away our Sins and to dissolve the works of the Devil 1 Joh. 3. 5 8. that he appear'd to put away Sin by the sacrifice of himself Heb. 9. 26. And when Pilate ask'd him whether he was a King he did not answer For this cause came I into the World that I might be a King but For this cause I came into the World that I should bear witness to the Truth S. John 18. 37. Among these several Ends I do not find the being a King expresly mention'd for one as every one of these is much less is it call'd the chief End Finally Mr. Lock himself Reasonab of Christian. p. 241. mentions something else as the great End His words are Pardon and Forgiveness of Sins and Salvation by him was the great End of his coming CHAP. VII Of our Advantages by Christ. IT will possibly he ask'd What Advantage have we by Jesus Christ Answ. 1. He found the World in a state of Darkness and Error in reference to the true God but the clear Revelation he brought with him dissipated the Darkness made the one invisible true God known to the World 2. A clear knowledge of their Duty was before wanting to Mankind but now there needs no more but to read the inspired Books all the Duties of Morality lie there clear and plain and easie to be understood There is not I think any of the Duties of Morality which he has not somewhere or other by himself and his Apostles inculcated over and over again to his Followers in express terms 3. The outward Forms of worshipping the Deity wanted a Reformation to this also our Saviour brought a Remedy in a plain spiritual and suitable Worship 4. Another great Advantage receiv'd by him is the great Encouragement he brought to a vertuous and pious Life great enough to surmount the Difficulties and Obstacles that lie in the way to it viz. by bringing Life and Immortality to light and by putting into the Scale on the side of Vertue an exceeding and immortal weight of Glory 5. One Advantage more we have by Jesus Christ is the promise of Assistance If we do what we can he will give us his Spirit to help us to do what and how we should Thus Mr. Lock Reason of Christian. p. 257 263 267 284 285 286 287 290 291 292. See also p. 234. OBSERVATIONS Here where Mr. Lock is treating purposely and largely of the Advantages that we have by Christ it is justly thought strange that he should not once make mention of his being a propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3. 25. A propitiation for our Sins yea also for the sins of the whole World 1 Joh. 2. 2. Our having Redemption through his Blood the forgiveness of Sins Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. Such an unconceivable Advantage as this that we have by him should not have been forgotten If Mr. Lock say that otherwhere in his Reasonableness of Christianity he doth mention our Redemption by Christ I grant it but 1. I do not at present remember that he any where in it mentions Redemption through his blood 2. If he do speak of it otherwhere how easie had it been for him to have nam'd it here among other Advantages and to have referr'd his Reader to the places where he had spoken of it If Mr. Lock say again that he set down as much as his Argument requir'd I answer That he did not Having moved the Question What Advantages we have by Christ and making it his business to answer it his Argument requir'd that such a transcendent Advantage as this should not have been omitted The truth is innumerable are the Advantages that we have by Christ so that it would not have been expected that he should give an account of them all To instance in some Beside the Benefits mention'd above we have by him Vocation Repentance Justification Peace with God Adoption Sanctification Audience of our Prayers Acceptance of our Persons Victory over Persecutions Afflictions and Death it self Salvation or Glorification c. And therefore that Mr. Lock though he intimates that our Advantages by Christ are great and many should insist only upon four or five and overlook all the rest especially that he should take no notice of that which is the foundation of many of the other viz. Christ's redeeming us by his Blood and being the Propitiation for our Sins is thought strange by others whatsoever he himself may think of it CHAP. VIII Of the Death and Satisfaction of Christ. HE that hath incurred Death by his own Transgression cannot lay down his Life for another as our Saviour professeth he did Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 208. He declares Joh. 10. 1. 21. the laying down his life for both Jews and Gentiles Ibid. p. 118. He freely gave up himself to Death for us Second Vindicat. of Reason of Christian. p. 400. The Design of his coming was to be offer'd up a Lamb blameless and void of offence Ibid. p. 75. Satisfaction may plainly be collected out of several places in my Reasonab of Christian. Some whereof which I took out of the Gospels I mention'd in my Vindication p. 5. and others of them which I took out of the Epistles which I shall point out to you now As I say the design of our Saviour's coming was to be offer'd up and again I speak of the work of our Redemption words which in the Epistles are taken to imply Satisfaction Second Vindicat. of the Reasonab of Christian. p. 157. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS It had been taken notice of that Mr. Lock mentioning the Advantages of Christ's coming into the World hath not one Syllable of his Satisfying for us Mr. Lock in Vindication of himself among other things says that Satisfaction may be plainly collected out of his Reasonableness of Christianity where he alledges some Passages out of the Gospels and some out of the Epistles and he adds that those in the
that diligently seek him CHAP. XIV Of the Preaching of Christ as also the Commission he gave to his Apostles and the LXX Disciples and their Preaching THE Religion our Saviour and his Apostles proposed consisted in that short plain easie and intelligible Summary which I set down in my Reasonab of Christian. in these words Believing Jesus to be the Saviour promised and taking him now raised from the Dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of Men to be their King and Ruler Mr. Lock Vindicat. of the Reasonab of Christian. p. 28. As to our Saviour and his Apostles the whole aim of all their Preaching every where was to convince the unbelieving World of these two great Truths First That there was one eternal invisible God Maker of Heaven and Earth and next That Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah the promised King and Saviour Second Vindicat. of the Reason of Christian. p. 237. Our Saviour preach'd every where the Kingdom of God and by his Miracles declar'd himself to be the King of that Kingdom The Apostles preach'd the same and after his Ascension openly avow'd him to be the Prince and Saviour promised Ibid. p. 252. By these and the like places we may be satisfied what it was that the Apostles taught and preach'd even this one Proposition That Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 282. This one Doctrine That Jesus was the Messiah was that which was propos'd in our Saviour's time to be believ'd as necessary to make a Man a Christian The same Doctrine was likewise what was propos'd afterward in the preaching of the Apostles to Unbelievers to make them Christians Ibid. p. 318. There is yet one Consideration remaining which were sufficient of it self to convince us that it was the sole Article of Faith which was preach'd and that is the Commissions of those that were sent to preach the Gospel Our Saviour's Commission or End of his being sent and the Execution of it both terminated in this That he declar'd the good News that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and gave them to understand by the Miracles he did that he himself was he So the Commission that he gave the Apostles was that they should acquaint their Hearers that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and let them know by the Miracles they did in his Name that he was that King and Deliverer they expected And his Commission to the Seventy whom he sent to preach was so exactly conformable to that which he had before given to the Twelve Apostles that there needs but this one thing more to be observed to convince any one that they were sent to convert their Hearers to this sole Belief that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 289 290 296 299. Accordingly the preaching of the Apostles every where in the Acts tended to this one Point to prove that Jesus was the Messiah Reasonab of Christian. p. 31. What that Word was through which others should believe on Christ S. Joh. 17. 20. we have seen in the preaching of the Apostles all through the History of the Acts viz. this one great Point that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 186. OBSERVATIONS It is strange that Mr. Lock should say in so many places without any Restriction or Limitation that this that Jesus is the Messiah is the sole Doctrine that one Point or Article which was preach'd when he himself otherwhere puts so many Restrictions and Limitations upon it As 1. When in his Reasonab of Christian. p. 195. he says This was the only Gospel-Article of Faith which was preach'd to them He doth not say The only Article of Faith but the only Gospel-Article He grants that the Apostles preach'd the Article of one true eternal and invisible God Maker of Heaven and Earth see Reasonab of Christian p. 43 44. but he doth not call this a Gospel-Article 2. When he says that it was the only Article necessary to be believ'd to make a Man a Christian the sole Doctrine upon their assent to which or Disbelief of it Men were pronounced Believers or Unbelievers and accordingly receiv'd into the Church of Christ. Ibid. p. 195. 3. He limits to the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles to those who were yet Strangers and ignorant of the Faith to bring them in and convert them to it Ibid. p. 298. See also p. 295. and 297. It is strange also that he should contend so much that this was the only Article of Faith that was preach'd when he acknowledges that several other Articles were preach'd Indeed now after his Death his Resurrection was also commonly required to be believ'd as a necessary Article So Mr. Lock Ibid. p. 31. Their great business was to be Witnesses to Jesus of his Life Death Resurrection and Ascension which put together were undeniable Proofs of his being the Messiah So the same Mr. Lock Ibid. p. 188. speaking of the Apostles who certainly did not fail to execute their great Business which was to preach or bear witness to the Articles of Christ's Life Death Resurrection and Ascension and not only that of his being the Messiah In the next Page viz. 190. he hath these words We see what it was that was to be preach'd to all Nations viz. That he was the Messiah that had suffer'd and rose from the Dead the third day and fulfill'd all things that was written in the Old Testament concerning the Messiah and that those that believ'd this and repented should have remission of Sins through this Faith in him And p. 191. he tells us that S. Paul preached that Jesus was the Messiah the King who being risen from the Dead now reigneth and shall more publickly manifest his Kingdom in judging the World at the last day Surely nothing can be more plain than that by Mr. Lock 's own Acknowledgment the Apostles preach'd the Articles of our dear Lord's Suffering Rising the third Day fulfilling all the Prophecies of the Old Testament concerning him now reigning and future coming to judge the World and that those who truly believe and repent shall receive remission of Sins through Faith in him and not one Article only And therefore he very fitly calls them concomitant Articles since the Apostles in their preaching often join'd them with that Article that Jesus is the Messiah The belief of Jesus of Nazareth reth to be the Messiah together with those concomitant Articles of his Resurrection Rule and coming again to judge the World c. Thus Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 293 294. To reconcile these Acknowledgments with his Doctrine of one Article he tryeth many ways but all in vain 1. As to the Article of the Resurrection he would persuade us that the Article of Jesus's being the Messiah and it are but one These two important Articles are inseparable and in effect make but one For believe one and you believe both deny one of them and you can believe neither So Mr. Lock in his
much Certainty as our Knowledge in self because otherwhere Mr. Lock denies all Certainty of Faith CHAP. XVIII Of Mysteries or Things above Reason I Wish I could say there were no Mysteries in the Holy Scripture I acknowledge there are to me and I fear always will be Mr. Lock in his First Letter p. 226 227. Things are distinguish'd into those that are according to above and contrary to Reason 1. According to Reason are such Propositions whose Truth we can discover by examining and tracing those Ideas we have from Sensation and Reflexion and by natural Deduction find to be true or probable 2. Above Reason are such Propositions whose Truth or Probability we cannot by Reason derive from those Principles 3. Contrary to Reason are such Propositions as are inconsistent with or irreconcilable to our clear and distinct Ideas Thus the Existence of one God is according to Reason the Existence of more than one God contrary to Reason the Resurrection of the Body after Death above Reason Above Reason also may be taken in a double Sense viz. above Probability and above Certainty and in that large Sense also contrary to Reason is I suppose sometimes taken Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 23. There being many things wherein we have very imperfect Notions or none at all and other things of whose past present or future Existence by the natural Use of our Faculties we can have no Knowledge at all these are beyond the Discovery of our natural Faculties and above Reason and Reason hath directly nothing to do with them Thus that part of the Angels rebelled against God and therefore lost their first happy Estate and that the Bodies of Men shall rise and live again these and the like are beyond the Discoveries of Reason Ibid. c. 18. § 7. OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock in his Second Letter complains that he is join'd with Unitarians and the Author of Christianity not mysterious p. 7. and that therefore the World would be apt to think that he is the Person who argues against the Trinity and denies Mysteries p. 24. Wherefore that he might clear himself from this latter Imputation of denying Mysteries he says That there are Mysteries in Holy Scripture to him and he fears that there always will be But if hereby he only means that there are some things in Scripture hard to be understood and which he fears he shall never understand I know not but that the Author of Christianity not mysterious may say the same However he distinguisheth very well of things according to above and contrary to Reason but when in his Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 7. he had reckon'd this that the Bodies of Men shall rise and live again among things above Reason in his Third Letter p. 210. he tells us that in the next Edition of his Essay he shall change these words The Bodies of Men shall rise into these The dead shall rise But I shall take farther notice of this when I reflect upon his Doctrine of the Resurrection CHAP. XIX Of the Law of Works and the Law of Faith also of Justification THE Law of Works is that Law which requires perfect Obedience without any Remission or Abatement so that by that Law a Man cannot be just or justified without an exact performance of every tittle The Language of this Law is Do this and live Transgress and die no Dispensation no Atonement Under the Law of Works is comprehended also the Law of Nature as well as the Law given by Moses Nay whatever God requires any where to be done without making any allowance for Faith that is a part of the Law of Works So the forbidding Adam to eat of the Tree of Knowledge was part of the Law of Works The Civil and Ritual part of the Law delivered by Moses was to the Jews a part of the Law of Works but the moral part of Moses's Law or the Moral Law obliges all Men every where and is to all Men the standing Law of Works But Christian Believers have the Privilege to be under the Law of Faith too which is that Law whereby God justifies a Man for believing though by his Works he be not just and righteous i. e. though he come short of perfect Obedience to the Law of Works God alone does or can justifie or make just those who by their Works are not so which he doth by counting their Faith for Righteousness i. e. for a complete Performance of the Law The Difference between the Law of Works and the Law of Faith is only this that the Law of Works makes no allowance for failing on any occasion Those that obey are righteous those that in any part disobey are unrighteous and must not expect Life the reward of Righteousness But by the Law of Faith Faith is allowed to supply the defect of full Obedience and so the Believers are admitted to Life and Immortality as if they were righteous Were there no Law of Works there could be no Law of Faith For there could be no need of Faith which should be counted to Men for Righteousness if there were no Law to be the Rule and Measure of Righteousness which Men fail'd in their obedience to Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 16 18 19 20 21 22. The Rule therefore of the Covenant of Works was never abolished tho' the rigour were abated The Duties enjoyn'd in it were Duties still Their Obligations never ceased Ibid. p. 225. The Law of Faith is for every one to believe what God requires him to believe as a Condition of the Covenant he makes with him and not to doubt of the Performance of his Promise Ibid. p. 24 25. Righteousness or an exact Obedience to the Law seems by the Scripture to have a Claim of Right to Eternal Life Ibid. p. 11. OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock who thinks it our Duty as far as we deliver any thing for Revelation to keep close to the Words of the Scripture see his third Letter p. 210. doth not observe his own Rule when he says that God justifies a Man for believing this not being the Scripture-Language as far as I remember We are often said to be justified by Faith and if he will also just by Faith as Faith is oft said to be impated to Men for Righteousness and God is stil'd the justifier of him that believes but I do not find that the Scripture useth these Words that he is the justifier of any Man for believing Having said that exact Obedience to the Law seems to have a Claim of Right to eternal Life Mr. Lock alledges for it Rom. 4. 4. and Revel 22. 14. see his Reasonab of Christian. p. 11. In Rom. 4. 4. 't is said To him that worketh the reward is not reckon'd of grace but of debt In Rev. 22. 14. the Words in our Translation are Blessed are they that do his Commandments that they may have right to the tree of Life Mr. Lock adds in the same Character Which is in the Paradise of
certain as that of Sense and Science He and other worthy Men of our Church who writ in his time were not wont to argue so loosly and withal he gives it as a Reason of something else see him cap. 6. § 2. There every one may also see that when he says Faith is not Knowledge he takes the word Knowledge in a different Sense from that in which he takes it § 3. where he speaks of the Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith When he speaks of Knowledge of the Articles of Faith he by Knowledge understands only an Apprehension or Belief but when he says Faith is not Knowledge he takes the Word properly and exactly in the Sense in which he uses the Word Science By this time Mr. Lock may see what the Task is that he hath set himself viz. He is to prove this Consequence Faith is not Knowledge therefore there is not requir'd of us under pain of Damnation an Apprehension or Belief of the Articles of Faith as certain as that of Sense or Science But since Mr. Lock mentions Mr. Hooker together with Mr. Chillingworth as if they countenanced his Notion of Faith and Certainty I have consider'd that which they say of this Matter and find that he hath no countenance at all from those excellent Persons He makes Knowledge and Certainty to be the same thing and Faith to be only Probability let him shew where either Mr. Hooker or Mr. Chillingworth doth either of these He distinguishes between Assurance and Certainty yea he makes full Assurance of Faith to come short of Certainty I would know where those excellent Persons do this He ridicules the Certainty of Faith but Mr. Hooker and Mr. Chillingworth ascribe a Certainty to Faith They both of them speak of a Certainty of Evidence and a Certainty of Adherence and when Mr. Hooker in his Sermon upon Heb. 1. 4. says that this Certainty of Adherence is greater in us than the other he plainly implies that both the one and the other Certainty is in us but not both in the same degree And as to Mr. Chillingworth when he says of this Hypothesis that all the Articles of our Faith were revealed by God we cannot ordinarily have any rational or acquired Certainty more than moral see him c. 1. § 8. he grants that we may have a moral Certainty of that Hypothesis But § 9. he adds Yet this I say not as if I doubted that the Spirit of God being implor'd by devout and humble Prayer and sincere Obedience may and will by degrees advance his Servants higher and give them a Certainty of Adherence beyond their Certainty of Evidence But what God gives as a reward to Believers is one thing and what he requires of all Men as their duty is another and what he will accept of out of Grace and Favour is yet another To those that believe and live according to their Faith he gives by degrees the Spirit of Obsignation and Confirmation which makes them know though how they know not what they did but believe and to be as fully and resolutely assur'd of the Gospel of Christ as those which heard it from Christ himself with their ears which saw it with their eyes which look'd upon it and whose hands handled the Word of Life If Mr. Lock will say thus much with Mr. Chillingworth more will not be requir'd of him I said that Mr. Lock makes Faith to be only Probability and I have in this Chapter transcrib'd sundry Passages from him which make this out Herein lies the Difference between Probability and Certainty Faith and Knowledge says he in Essay l. 4. c. 15. § 3. where as Knowledge is in his Sense Certainty so Faith is Probability So again He says he that says he barely believes acknowledges that he assents to a Proposition as true upon bare Probability And again To say that Believing and Knowing stand upon the same grounds is I think to sâ—y that Probability and Demonstration are the same thing See his Third Letter p. 159 223. Mr. Lock in his Third Letter p. 124. haâ—h these Words That this Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind I have so plainly declar'd Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 16. that no body I think can question it If you ask in what words he declares it he tells us that speaking of some Propositions wherein Knowledge i. e. in his sense Certainty fails us he says that their Probability is so clear and strong that Assent as necessarily follows it as Knowledge does Demonstration Thus Mr. Lock But how does he so plainly declare that the Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind when neither in the Words which he cites nor in that whole Section out of which he cites them there is any mention either of the Assurance of Faith or of Faith it self He speaks indeed of probable Mediums the probability of some of which may be so clear and strong that Assent necessarily follows it and perhaps he would have us to apply this to the probable Grounds of Faith for he will not allow the Grounds of Faith to be more than probable But as he saith of probable Mediums that they cannot bring us to the lowest degree of Knowledge so probable Grounds of Faith cannot bring us to the lowest degree of Certainty and so according to him our Faith cannot advance it self above Probability as was observ'd before When Mr. Lock says in his Third Letter p. 133. I think it is possible to be certain upon the Testimony of God where I know that it is the Testimony of God should he not rather have said It is impossible for him who knows that God is true yea Truth it self not to be certain upon the Testimony of God provided he know that it is the Testimony of God And after all what is this to us who live now since according to Mr. Lock it is impossible for us unless we had an immediate Revelation from God himself to know that it is the Testimony of God and so by this Proviso he makes it impossible for us without such an immediate Revelation to be certain upon the Testimony of God though we should be suppos'd to have a certain knowledge of his Veracity CHAP. XXI Of Abraham's Faith and the Faith of those that liv'd before our Saviour's time THE Faith for which God justified Abraham what was it It was the believing God when he engaged his Promise in the Covenant he made with him The Faith which God counted to Abraham for Righteousness was nothing but a firm Belief of what God declar'd to him and a stedfast relying on him for the accomplishment of what he had promised Abraham believ'd that tho' he and Sarah were old and past the time and hopes of Children yet he should have a Son by her and
that he suffer'd rose again fulfill'd all things that were written in the Old Testament concerning him that he now reigneth shall judge the World at the last day and that those that repent and believe the Gospel shall receive Remission of Sins Is it not then matter of greatest Admiration that the same Person should tell us that Salvation or Perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one Proposition that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 43. that all that was to be believ'd for Justification was no more but this single Proposition p. 47. that this was all the Doctrine the Apostles propos'd to be believ'd p. 93. that for three score years after our Saviour's Passion S. John knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd for the attaining of Life but this p. 194. and that this is the sole Doctrine requir'd to be believ'd p. 195. especially when in his Vindication of his Reasonab of Christian. p. 29. he seems to complain of those that blam'd him for contending for one Article Having says he thus plainly mention'd more than one Article I might have taken it amiss c. And so in his Second Vindication p. 26. he hath these words That there is one God and Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord who rose again from the dead ascended into Heaven and sitteth at the right hand of God shall come to judge the quick and dead are more than one Article and may very properly be call'd These Articles Now in the foregoing Page he refers us to places in his Reasonab of Christian. where he makes the Belief of all these necessary which says he is evidence enough that I contended not for one single Article and no more All that I can say is that it is not easie to reconcile Mr. Lock to himself or to make out that sundry Passages in his Reasonab of Christianity do not clash with each other He says in Reasonab of Christian. p. 31. that Christ's Resurrection was sometimes solely insisted on and yet he will confess that we cannot thence conclude that to be the sole Article that is necessary to be believ'd Why then doth he urge so much that this that Jesus is the Christ is the sole Doctrine the only Article that one Proposition that is requir'd to be believ'd because perhaps it is sometimes solely insisted on Mr. Lock Ibid. p. 43. having said that S. Paul tells the Jews at Antioch Act. 13. 46. It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you but seeing you put it off from you we turn to the Gentiles adds Here 't is plain that S. Paul's charging their Blood upon their own heads is for opposing this single Truth that Jesus was the Messiah that Salvation or Perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one Proposition Thus Mr. Lock But I would know how all this is plain from the Words which he alledges from Acts 13. 46. for 't is certain that it is not said in express terms either that the charging their Blood on their own Heads is for opposing this single Truth that Jesus is the Messiah or that Salvation or Perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one Proposition It is true when the Apostle says Ye put it from you he intimates that it was wholly their own fault that they did not receive Benefit by the Words being spoken to them and that may look something toward the charging their Blood upon their own Heads but as to all the rest there is not the least ground or footstep of it Act. 13. 46. Perhaps Mr. Lock will say that by the Word of God there is meant no more than this one Proposition That Jesus is the Messiah But who will not rather believe that when St. Paul said It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you he thereby meant that Word of God which he had preach'd to them of Antioch in Pisidia as is recorded in that Chapter and which the Jews contradicted He had preached That God had of the Seed of David according to Promise raised up to Israel a Saviour Jesus v. 23. That the Jews at Jerusalem had condemn'd him and desir'd Pilate to put him to Death and in so doing fulfill'd the Voices of the Prophets and the things that were written concerning him v. 27 28 29. that he was also buried and that God rais'd him from the dead no more to see Corruption according to the Prophecies of him and that he was seen for many Days after his Resurrection v. 29 30 31. usque ad 38. and that every one that believes should receive Remission of Sins by him and be justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses v. 38 39 All these are more than one single Truth or one Proposition and are all comprehended under the Word of God mention'd v. 46. And it may be observ'd that in all that Sermon from the beginning of v. 16. to v. 42. there is not express mention as much as once made of Jesus's being the Messiah or King tho' there is of his being a Justifier and Saviour In his Reasonab of Christian. p. 47. Mr. Lock hath these Words So that all that was to be believ'd for Justification was no more but this single Proposition That Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah The Words So that import that he deduceth this from one or more of the Texts of Scripture which he there alleadges and if I mistake not from the last of them viz. Act. 10. 43. where 't is said To him i. e. Jesus of Nazareth give all the Prophets witness that through his Name whosoever believeth in him shall receive Remission of Sins Here indeed is mention of Remission of Sins or Justification but that all that was to be believ'd for Justification was that single Proposition which he so often mentions will never be prov'd from that Text. Yea Mr. Lock speaking of St. Peter's Sermon to Cornelius Act. 10. of which that Text is a part doth not say that there is in it any express mention of our Saviour's being the Messiah but says he he is described to be so by his Miracles Death Resurrection Dominion and coming to judge the quick and the dead See him in his Second Vindication p. 307. In his Reasonab of Christian. p. 93. he alledges the Words of Act. 8. 4. They that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the Word Which Word was nothing says he but this that Jesus was the Messiah But if you ask how he proves this he only says As we have found by examining what they preach'd all through their History Where by their History he means undoubtedly the History of the Apostles and when he says they preach'd that they must be the Apostles whereas they that are said to have preach'd the Word Acts 8. 4. were not the Apostles for we are told v. 1. that the Apostles were not scatter'd abroad as those were that are mention'd
p. 9. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Expositors are not agreed what Death it is which God threatned to Adam upon his eating the forbidden Fruit. Mr. Lock if I mistake him not can by Death here understand nothing but that which we call the Death of the Body or a natural or temporal Death And I believe few will deny that this Death was threatned in the words Thou shalt surely die Gen. 2. 17. The great Objection against this is that which Mr. Lock intimates viz. that it is said In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die whereas it was above nine hundred years after his eating that Adam died this Death But hereto it may be answer'd 1. That in the day that he did eat taking the words in the strict sense this Death became due to him or he became a Child of Death God might have said to him as Solomon to Abiathar 1 Kings 2. 26. Thou art worthy of death but I will not at this time put thee to death 2. In that day he became liable to Diseases which were Harbingers of this Death which did by degrees weaken the strength of Nature and at last introduce Death 3. St. Hierom and Theodoret do testifie that Symmachus instead of Thou shalt surely die translates Thou shalt be mortal and the rendring is approv'd and commended by S. Hierom in Tradit Hebr. in gen Now according to it there is no difficulty for Adam did become mortal that day 4. Some say that Adam repented and that upon his Repentance the Execution of the Threatning was respited as others say that it was respited upon the account of the Remedy which God had prepared viz. The Seed of the Woman Lastly There is no necessity that the words In the day be taken so strictly we may understand them more largely viz. At what time thou shalt eat thereof know assuredly that thou shalt die the death As Solomon says to Shimei On the day thou goest out and passest over the Brook Kidron thou shalt know for certain that thou shalt surely die 1 Kings 2. 37. It could not be Solomon's Meaning that Shimei should surely die the very same day that he passed over Kidron for he could not foresee that Shimei would return to Jerusalem the self same day or that word would be brought to him the self same day that he had passed over he only tells Shimei that if he should pass over he would forfeit his Life and be certainly put to Death whensoever he should please to give order for the execution of the Sentence Therefore notwithstanding the foremention'd Objection we may conclude that Adam was to die that Death which we call the Death of the Body or a natural Death and thus far Mr. Lock is in the right The Question is Whether he be in the right when he says that by the Death threatned Gen. 2. 17. he can understand nothing but this Death What thinks he of a Death of Afflictions outward Sufferings and Calamities May not this be comprehended under the word Death Gen. 2. Is not the Word Death taken in this Sense in other places of Scripture When S. Paul says of himself that he was in Deaths oft may we not interpret it in Sufferings oft See 2 Cor. 11. 23. In like manner when he says 1 Cor. 15. 31. I die daily may we not suppose that he had respect to the Afflictions and Sufferings that came daily upon him for the sake of Christ But most plainly the Word is thus to be understood Exod. 10. 17. where Pharaoh says to Moses and Aaron Intreat the Lord your God that he may take away from me this Death only Here by Death is understood nothing but the Plague of Locusts With respect to these Afflictions and Calamities one says Incipimus enim si forte nescis tum mori cum primum incipimus vivere mors cum vita protenditur And thus Adam begun to die i.e. to be liable to the Afflictions and Miseries of Life that very day that he sinn'd But Mr. Lock informs us more particularly what he cannot understand by Death Genesis 2. saying 1. Some will have it to be a state of Guilt wherein not only he but all his Posterity was so involv'd that every one descended of him deserv'd endless torment in Hell-fire 2. They would have it be also a state of necessary sinning and provoking God in every Action that Men do see Reasonab of Christianity p. 4 5. whereas he cannot subscribe to either of these significations of the Word Death But I must acknowledge my self so ignorant as not to know the Authors of these two Interpretations It would have been more satisfaction to his Readers if Mr. Lock had given us the Names of them together with their express Words and directed us to the places where we might have found them But he not having done this it cannot be expected that any notice should be taken of what he says concerning them There are who say that by Death Gen. 2. we are to understand not only that natural Death and that Death of external Afflictions and Sufferings of which we have spoken but also a spiritual Death so they call the loss of so much of the Image of God as consisted in perfect Righteousness and true Holiness and of that Light and Strength which Adam had before his Fall and likewise of everlasting Death They conceive that all these are comprehended under the Penalty threatned Gen. 2. And if Mr. Lock had disputed against these I should perhaps have consider'd his Arguments It may be said that he doth argue against those who make everlasting Death to be comprehended in that Threatning for that which we call eternal Death he calls eternal Life in Misery His words are these It seems a strange way of understanding a Law which requires the plainest and directest words that by Death should be meant eternal Life in Misery Could any one be suppos'd by a Law that says for Felony you shall die not that he should lose his Life but be kept alive in perpetual exquisite Torments Thus Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 5. labouring to expose those who make a double Death both of Body and Soul not only temporal but also eternal to be threaten'd to Adam but it cannot be said that he argues against them for here is nothing that looks like an Argument 1. He says It is strange that by Death should be meant eternal Life in Misery but instead of Eternal Life in Misery he should have said Eternal Death in Misery for a Life in perpetual exquisite Torments and Misery is more truly a Death than a Life The Margin of our Bibles Gen. 2. 17. instead of Thou shalt surely die hath Dying thou shalt die which Words seem very properly to express Mens dying everlastingly 2. I cannot say that he doth say but I believe that he would have said that he who says for Felony thou shalt die cannot be suppos'd to mean not that he
should lose his Life but that he should be kept alive in perpetual exquisite Torments But the cases are not parallel for they that expound the Words Thou shalt surely die of a double Death say that he should both lose or depart out of this present Life and also after his Departure suffer those perpetual exquisite Torments Besides an earthly Lawgiver who can only kill the body when he says Thou shalt die cannot be supposed to mean that the Person should suffer such Torments but it cannot be inferr'd hence that when the heavenly Lawgiver who after he hath kill'd is able to destroy both Soul and Body in Hell says Thou shall die he may not fitly be suppos'd to threaten Eternal Death as well as Temporal But that which gives greatest Offence is still behind and that is that he describes that which we call a natural or temporal Death not only by losing all actions of Lise and Sense but also by ceasing to be His words are these By Death here I can understand nothing but ceasing to be the losing of all actions of Life and Sense see Reasonab of Christian. p. 6. And so again p. 15. This being the case that whoever is guilty of any Sin should certainly die and cease to be That when Men die their Bodies lose all actions of Life and Sense we need not be told but ceasing to be is a quite different thing and according to the known sense of the words can signify nothing but the being annihilated It will therefore concern Mr. Lock to find out some other Sense of the Words which we know not of for it seems very strange that he should make Death an Annihilation When Mr. Lock says that none are truly punished but for their own deeds Reasonab of Christian. p. 9. we may gather from that which immediately follows that his Meaning is that there will be no Condemnation to any one at the great Judgment but for his own Deeds but that Persons have suffer'd otherwise for the Sins of others there are sundry Instances in Holy Writ and Mr. Lock here alledges the Words of the Apostle affirming that in Adam all die CHAP. XVI Of the Law of Nature and of Moses's Law THe Law of Nature is a Law knowable by the Light of Nature i. e. without the help of positive Revelation It is something that we may attain to the knowledge of by our natural Faculties from natural Principles Mr. Lock Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 13. The existence of God is so many ways manifest and the Obedience we owe him so congruous to the Light of Reason that a great part of Mankind give Testimony to the Law of Nature Ibid. § 6. Every Christian both as a Deist and as a Christian is obliged to study both the Law of Nature and the revealed Law that in them he may know the Will of God and of Jesus Christ whom he hath sent Second Vindication p. 77. The Civil and Ritual part of the Law delivered by Moses obliges not Christians tho' to the Jews it were a part of the Law of Works it being a part of the Law of Nature that Man ought to obey every positive Law of God whenever he shall please to make any such Addition to the Law of his Nature But the moral part of Moses's Law or the moral Law which is every where the same the eternal Rule of Right obliges Christians and all Men every where and is to all Men the standing Law of Works Reasonab of Christian. p. 21 22. No one Precept or Rule of the eternal Law of Right which is holy just and good is abrogated or repeal'd nor indeed can be whilst God is an holy just and righteous God and Man a rational Creature The duties of that Law arising from the Constitution of his very Nature are of eternal obligation and it cannot be taken away or dispens'd with without changing the nature of things and overturning the Measures of Right and Wrong Ibid. p. 214. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS It is known to be Mr. Lock 's darling Notion That there are no innate Ideas and no innate Law and consequently according to him the Law of Nature is not innate but he tells us that the knowledge of it is attain'd by the light of Nature or by our natural Faculties from natural Principles But I would ask him Whence we have these natural Principles from which by our natural Faculties we attain to the Knowledge of the Law of Nature for he denies all innate Principles Will he say then that we owe them to the Superstition of a Nurse or the Authority of an Old Woman or our Educations for these he mentions Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 22. and 26. where he is giving an account how Men commonly come by their Principles If he say this I would know why he calls those which are taught us by Old Women or our Nurses Parents and School-Masters natural Principles If Mr. Lock please to satisfie us as to these Queries I may possibly farther consider his Description of the Law of Nature Farther I believe that there have been many that have not made use of the Light of Reason and the natural Faculties which God hath given them as they should have done and withal have not had the advantage of any Revelation or of being taught who yet have had some Knowledge of the Duties and Dictates of the Law of Nature and have assented to them as just and good as soon as they were proposed to them CHAP. XVII Of Natural and Revealed Religion or of the Light of Reason and that of Revelation IT is not to be wonder'd that the Will of God when cloath'd in words should be liable to that Doubt and Uncertainty which unavoidably attends that sort of Conveyance And we ought to magnifie his Goodness that he hath spread before all the World such legible Characters of his Works and Providence and given all Mankind so sufficient a light of Reason that they to whom this written Word never came could not whenever they set themselves to search either doubt of the being of a God or of the Obedience due to him Since then the Precepts of Natural Religion are plain and very intelligible to all Mankind and seldom come to be controverted and other reveal'd Truths which are convey'd to us by Books and Languages are liable to the common and natural Obscurities incident to Words methinks it would become us to be more careful and diligent in observing the former and less magisterial positive and imperious in imposing our own Sense and Interpretations of the latter Mr. Lock Essay l. 3. c. 9. § 23. Whatsoever Truth we come to the discovery of from the Knowledge and Contemplation of our own clear Ideas will always be certainer to us than those which are convey'd to us by Traditional Revelation for the Knowledge we have that this Revelation came from God can never be so sure as the Knowledge that we have from our own clear and