of faith and life," they add, article 8, "The old testament in Hebrew, (which was the native language of the people of God of old,) and the new testament in Greek, (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations,) being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic, so as in all controversies of religion the church is finally to appeal to them." Thus far the Assembly. From hence it follows, that when Stephen Scandret and these his masters tell us, that the scriptures are the chief and highest rule, the only infallible rule to heaven and glory, or the rule of faith and life, and to decide controversies," we are to understand it is as they are in Hebrew and Greek, and as in the first copies written by Divine inspiration. Thus these men still lead people in the dark, and in doubtfulness, at a distance from life and glory, and ignorant of the rule, and way; implying this difficulty, that they must first learn Hebrew and Greek, and be ascertained of the truth of the copies, as concurring with the first. And this must be from their own knowledge, not from the priests' interpretations and various meanings. And yet the Assembly and S. S. still fall short of clearing the matter of the Greek, not resolving which is the true infallible copy, there being divers Greek lections, or copies of the new testament. But further, if they cannot produce or evince the first copy, or that which most agrees with it, while they prefer the writing as the chief or only rule of faith and life, they leave people in darkness and death, in not referring them to the inward Divine light or inspiration of the Almighty, as the chief and only rule, which gave forth the holy scriptures, and without which they cannot be truly understood in any language.

Moreover, concerning the Hebrew, W. Tindal, (of whose translation we have one ancient English bible without verses,) in his prologue prefixed, in some bibles, saith thus, viz:

"W. Tindal unto the christian reader.

"If aught seem changed, or not altogether agreeing with the Greek, let the finder of the fault consider the Hebrew phrase, or manner of speech, left in the Greek words, whose preterperfect tense and present tense is often both one. And the future tense is the optative mood also; and the future tense is often the imperative mood in the active voice, and in the passive ever. Likewise person for persons, number for numbers, an interrogation for a conditional, and such like, is with the Hebrews in common usage." And he further adds, "If I shall perceive, either by myself, or by the information of others, that aught bas escaped me, or might be more plainly translated, I will shortly after

cause it to be amended. Howbeit, in many places, I think it better to put a declaration in the margent than to run too far from the text."

Now, considering the difficulty of truly translating the scriptures from the Hebrew, both as to time, manner, voice, person, number, and condition, &c. how easily herein may the sense be greatly changed. This ingenuous translator himself doth not place infallibility upon his work, or translation from the Hebrew, but ingenuously profers amendment of it, if either by his own or another's information he shall perceive a deficiency in what he hath done. Considering also what irreconcilable controversies have been among many counted learned, about the translations in divers places of scripture, and how many amendments have from time to time been made in them, and even how many various English translations we have, what dubiousness and uncertainty are both priests and people in, as to the rule and foundation of their religion, who neither know nor own the principle of true knowledge, and divine understanding, (which is God's gift,) while they have no regard to divine illumination, as the rule of faith, before the scriptures. They one while cry and set up a mere translation or reading, which to them may be dubious, as their only highest infallible rule of faith; another while they set up their own uncertain meanings, private conceptions, and fallible interpretations, upon the scriptures, as the rule and judge over them. And while still their work tends to divert people's minds from depending upon the Spirit of truth, and its enlightening, as the chief and only infallible guide and rule, where will they centre! And what a Babylonish structure do they erect upon their uncertain conjectures and dubious interpretations, from their fallible spirits and judgments. As to placing infallibility in the letter, or writing, or English translation, W. Tindal, a translator himself, did not attribute this to his translation, nor do others in their putting many marginal notes in some English bibles, as from the Hebrew and Greek. And even their learned D. Gell set forth a large book in folio, entitled, "An Essay to the Amendment of the last English Translation of the Bible," in which he finds fault with, and corrects several noted places. And what less is signified in their ample annotations, and manifold notes upon some bibles? And moreover, when some of the clergy have made Job ii. 9, their text, viz. that Job's wife said to him" curse God and die," they have told people that the Hebrew text signifieth, "bless God and die;" and some take it so, as humbly desiring God that he might die, which, arguing impatiency in her, was reprovable others, that it was "curse God and die," which was much more reprovable, not only as foolishness but wickedness, And concerning Saul and the witch of Endor, (1 Sam. xxvii. 11.)

his bidding her bring him up Samuel, it is said, "and when the woman saw Samuel," ver. 12, "and Saul knew that it was Samuel," ver. 14, " And Samuel said unto Saul, why hast thou disquieted me," &c. ver. 15. " Then said Samuel," ver. 16. So the matter runs in Samuel's name. Whereas the clergy have told us it was satan, and that Saul spake according to his gross ignorance, not considering the state of the saints after this life, and how satan hath no power over them, it was satan who to blind Saul's eyes took upon him the form of Samuel, &c. Now, seeing this interpretation is so plainly contrary to the words themselves, (for which I blame them not in this, though in many others I do,) I query, how then does this agree with their placing infallibility upon the scriptures, not only on the doctrinal, but on the historical part, when they are inclined to oppose the sufficiency of the light of Christ within? Many more instances might be brought, to show their vast variations from the letter of the scriptures in their interpretations. By the tenour of all which discourse, before, of this import, it is evident that their confession, at least of many of them, is, that all the scriptures are not infallible; but some corrupted in the various translations; others, not to be taken merely as the words import.

Yet, for all this, many priests and professors, for their own ends, if they are about to oppose the light within, or divine illumination, and the sufficiency of the holy Spirit's teaching, deny it to be either the rule of faith or life, or sufficient to guide to heaven without the scriptures, which argues their gross and carnal diffidence, and sinful unbelief. Then, in plain contradiction, they place all the infallibility and sole sufficiency therein upon the scriptures, as the only highest rule of faith and life, the only rule and way to heaven and glory, the only rule to try both doctrines and spirits by. And here they most idolatrously, and in a most preposterous manner, prefer the scriptures before Christ, and set them up above the Spirit that gave them forth, while they slight and cry down the light of Christ within, as not any rule, &c. though it both manifests all things reprovable, and is the prover of deeds, whether they are wrought in God; for which end," he that doeth truth bringeth his deeds to the light." John iii. 19, 20, 21. But as Christ said to the unbelieving Jews, so it may now justly be said to these opposers of his light within: "ye search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me; but ye will not come to me that you might have life." John v. 39, 40. Mark, ye will not come to Christ, that ye might have life. The scriptures do not direct men to themselves for life and salvation, but to the Son of God, who is both the life, the foundation, the way, and so the only rule, guide, and teacher, and not the scriptures. But why do the Presbyters of our times so often

exalt their own diverse meanings and interpretations, as the rule, above the scriptures, contrary to the great stress, which at other times they lay upon the scriptures? So that finally, they deny both the spirit and the scriptures to be the rule, setting up their own meanings over both, being ignorant of the scriptures and of the power of God. We may believe that the truth of it is, it is more consistent with their gain and trade of preaching, that their meanings should be the rule over or above the scriptures, than that the scriptures should be the only or highest rule to heaven, as sometimes they pretend, for that bibles are to be had at a great deal cheaper rate than their preaching. But then for their own ends, on the other hand, they can, in plain self-contradiction, cry up the scriptures as the only infallible rule to heaven, when their design is to divert people's minds from depending on the divine light and immediate teaching of God within, for life and salvation. Seeing that it is evident, they can more easily avoid the scriptures' infallibility, for their own ends, that they may be masters both over the scriptures and men's faith, for their lucre and gain, than they can get any of the children of light to assist their trade, or any to maintain them in it, who are turned from darkness to the light, to wait upon the immediate teachings of God. But it is easier for them to evade or dispense with the scriptures' infallibility, than to hinder the true light from shining in men's hearts; for that is possible for them. Again: the scriptures were not the Presbyterians' sole rule of faith and practice, when they set forth their Directory, Confession of Faith, and Scotch Covenant, agreed upon by the Kirk of Scotland and the Assembly at Westminster, which was of no small charge. It is easy to see, that their sole rule, (as they have pretended the scriptures to be,) they can easily dispense with, add to, or vary from, for their own ends, at their pleasure, both in doctrine, discipline, and practice, as might be instanced, not only for their unscriptural practice of sprinkling infants, but in many other traditions and Babylonish relics.

S. Scandret's sense about the points in controversy examined.

S. Scandret."By the light in every man understand-not the light of the gospel. 2 Cor. iv. 4. Lest the light of the glorious gospel should shine," &c. p, 1, 2.

Answer. "The God of the world hath blinded the minds of those that are lost, lest the light of the glorious gospel should shine unto them." 2 Cor. iv. 4. And this man's work is of the same tendency, viz. to blind people's minds, which implies that the light of Christ Jesus, which is gospel light, is given to all; but the minds blinded by satan oppose it. The subject which

satan works upon and prevails with, is their minds, not the light.

S. S. "Mark, it is not said the light, but God hath shined." p. 7.

Answer. A frivolous exception. Can there be such divine shining without his Divine light?" God hath shined in our hearts," &c. and "God is light."

66

S. S. (upon Phil. iii. 16.) The saints were to walk according to their several attainments what they had got out of the scriptures, by the same rule," &c. p. 9.

Answer. What scriptures? They were to walk in the Spirit, which directed their minds to God, that he might reveal his mind to them. And here was the same rule, the same thing, the same principle, their several attainments being according to their spiritual growth in the light. Was the rule mentioned In 2. Cor. x. 13, and Gal. vi. 15, 16, to be got out of the bible? See this man's gross ignnorance.

S. S. "Innocency, man's perfect light must not be the whole of his rule." p. 11.

Answer. A gross error. God was then his perfect light and rule in his teachings; and is not that light which is perfect, whole?

S. S. "We need no infallible Spirit to help to discern the counsels of light and darkness in scripture, for all there comes from God." p. 27.

Answer. He is not told this by an infallible Spirit, for many counsels of darkness, of the serpent and wicked men, both against God, Christ, and his people, are recorded in scripture, And it is the Spirit of Christ, which is infallible, that truly opens and reveals the truths in scripture, to the understanding of the children of light.

S. S. "The Spirit dwelling in all believers, is sometimes a sweet mover to duty, though no indwelling Spirit." p. 38. Answer. Gross ignorance and confusion. What! no indwelling Spirit, and yet dwelling in all believers ?" Did you ever hear such doctrine before!

66

S. S. God's commands cease not to be God's commands; either because the spirit doth not within put men on to obey them," &c. p. 38.

Answer. A gross inference against the spirit; for the spirit of truth leads true believers into all truth, from which no true and necessary commands can be excluded, unless he will say, some of them are no truths.

S. S. "We are to obey them, though the spirit within puts not on otherwise, some wicked men in living contrary to the scriptures, do not sin, cannot be damned for so doing. For some have sinned away the motions and strivings of God's spirit." p. 38.