Scripture: Number, Age, Purpose, Authority, and Interpreters

By the Books of Holy SCRIPTURE, are understood those, which ought to be the Canon, that is to say, the Rules of Christian life. And because all Rules of life, which men are in conscience bound to observe, are Laws; the question of the Scripture, is the question of what is Law throughout all Christendome, both Naturall, and Civill. For though it be not determined in Scripture, what Laws every Christian King shall constitute in his own Dominions; yet it is determined what laws he shall not constitute. Seeing therefore I have already proved, that Soveraigns in their own Dominions are the sole Legislators; those Books only are Canonicall, that is, Law, in every nation, which are established for such by the Soveraign Authority. It is true, that God is the Soveraign of all Soveraigns; and therefore, when he speaks to any Subject, he ought to be obeyed, whatsoever any earthly Potentate command to the contrary. But the question is not of obedience to God, but of When, and What God hath said; which to Subjects that have no supernaturall revelation, cannot be known, but by that naturall reason, which guided them, for the obtaining of Peace and Justice, to obey the authority of their severall Common-wealths; that is to say, of their lawfull Soveraigns. According to this obligation, I can acknowledge no other Books of the Old Testament, to be Holy Scripture, but those which have been commanded to be acknowledged for such, by the Authority of the Church of England. What Books these are, is sufficiently known, without a Catalogue of them here; and they are the same that are acknowledged by St. Jerome, who holdeth the rest, namely, the Wisdome of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobias, the first and second of Maccabees, (though he had seen the first in Hebrew) and the third and fourth of Esdras, for Apocrypha. Of the Canonicall, Josephus a learned Jew, that wrote in the time of the Emperor Domitian, reckoneth Twenty Two, making the number agree with the Hebrew Alphabet. St. Jerome does the same, though they reckon them in different manner. For Josephus numbers Five Books of Moses, Thirteen of Prophets, that writ the History of their own times (which how it agrees with the Prophets writings contained in the Bible wee shall see hereafter), and Four of Hymnes and Morall Precepts. But St. Jerome reckons Five Books of Moses, Eight of Prophets, and Nine of other Holy writ, which he calls of Hagiographa. The Septuagint, who were 70. learned men of the Jews, sent for by Ptolemy King of Egypt, to translate the Jewish Law, out of the Hebrew into the Greek, have left us no other for holy Scripture in the Greek tongue, but the same that are received in the Church of England.

The Books of Holy Scripture are the books that should form the canon, meaning the rules of Christian life. All rules of life that people are bound in conscience to follow are laws. So the question of Scripture is the question of what counts as law throughout Christendom, both natural and civil. Scripture does not determine what laws each Christian king must establish in his own territories. Yet Scripture does determine what laws he must not establish. I have already proved that sovereigns are the only lawmakers in their own territories. Therefore, only books established as canonical by the sovereign authority are canonical, or law, in each nation. It is true that God is the sovereign of all sovereigns. Therefore, when God speaks to any subject, that subject must obey him, whatever any earthly ruler commands to the contrary. But the question is not whether to obey God. The question is when God has spoken and what he has said. Subjects without supernatural revelation can know this only through natural reason. That same reason guided them to obey the authority of their own commonwealths to secure peace and justice. In other words, reason guided them to obey their lawful sovereigns. Because of this obligation, I can recognize only certain books of the Old Testament as Holy Scripture. These are the books that the authority of the Church of England has commanded us to recognize as such. The books are well enough known that I need not list them here. They are the same books recognized by St. Jerome, who considers the rest Apocrypha. These other books are the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobias, and the first and second books of Maccabees. He includes the third and fourth books of Esdras as well. He considers the first book of Maccabees Apocrypha even though he had seen it in Hebrew. Josephus, a learned Jew who wrote during the reign of the Emperor Domitian, counts twenty-two canonical books. He makes their number match the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. St. Jerome does the same, although the two group the books differently. Josephus counts five Books of Moses and thirteen books by prophets who wrote the history of their own times. We shall see later how this grouping fits the prophetic writings contained in the Bible. Josephus also counts four books of hymns and moral teachings. But St. Jerome counts five Books of Moses, eight books of prophets, and nine other sacred writings, called Hagiographa. The Septuagint were seventy learned Jewish men summoned by Ptolemy, King of Egypt. They were to translate the Jewish Law from Hebrew into Greek. They left us no books as Holy Scripture in Greek except those accepted by the Church of England.

As for the Books of the New Testament, they are equally acknowledged for Canon by all Christian Churches, and by all sects of Christians, that admit any Books at all for Canonicall.

The books of the New Testament are equally accepted as canonical by all Christian Churches and sects that accept any books as canonical.

Who were the originall writers of the severall Books of Holy Scripture, has not been made evident by any sufficient testimony of other History, (which is the only proof of matter of fact); nor can be by any arguments of naturall Reason; for Reason serves only to convince the truth (not of fact, but) of consequence. The light therefore that must guide us in this question, must be that which is held out unto us from the Bookes themselves: And this light, though it show us not the writer of every book, yet it is not unusefull to give us knowledge of the time, wherein they were written.

No sufficient evidence from other historical sources has established who originally wrote the various Books of Holy Scripture. Such historical evidence is the only proof of matters of fact. Nor can natural reason establish who wrote these books. For reason establishes only the truth of conclusions drawn from premises, not the truth of facts. We must therefore look to the books themselves for guidance on this question. Although the books do not reveal every book’s author, they can still help us understand when they were written.

And first, for the Pentateuch, it is not argument enough that they were written by Moses, because they are called the five Books of Moses; no more than these titles, The Book of Joshua, the Book of Judges, The Book of Ruth, and the Books of the Kings, are arguments sufficient to prove, that they were written by Joshua, by the Judges, by Ruth, and by the Kings. For in titles of Books, the subject is marked, as often as the writer. The History Of Livy, denotes the Writer; but the History Of Scanderbeg, is denominated from the subject. We read in the last Chapter of Deuteronomie, Ver. 6. concerning the sepulcher of Moses, “that no man knoweth of his sepulcher to this day,” that is, to the day wherein those words were written. It is therefore manifest, that those words were written after his interrement. For it were a strange interpretation, to say Moses spake of his own sepulcher (though by Prophecy), that it was not found to that day, wherein he was yet living. But it may perhaps be alledged, that the last Chapter only, not the whole Pentateuch, was written by some other man, but the rest not: Let us therefore consider that which we find in the Book of Genesis, Chap. 12. Ver. 6 “And Abraham passed through the land to the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh, and the Canaanite was then in the land;” which must needs bee the words of one that wrote when the Canaanite was not in the land; and consequently, not of Moses, who dyed before he came into it. Likewise Numbers 21. Ver. 14. the Writer citeth another more ancient Book, Entituled, The Book of the Warres of the Lord, wherein were registred the Acts of Moses, at the Red-sea, and at the brook of Arnon. It is therefore sufficiently evident, that the five Books of Moses were written after his time, though how long after it be not so manifest.

First, consider the Pentateuch. The title “the five Books of Moses” is not enough to prove that Moses wrote them. The titles The Book of Joshua, the Book of Judges, The Book of Ruth, and the Books of the Kings prove no more. They do not establish that Joshua, the Judges, Ruth, and the Kings wrote those books. Book titles identify the subject as often as the author. The History Of Livy names the author, but the History Of Scanderbeg takes its name from its subject. In the last chapter of Deuteronomy, verse 6, we read concerning Moses’ tomb, “that no one knows its location to this day.” This means the day when those words were written. Clearly, then, those words were written after Moses’ burial. It would be a strange interpretation to say Moses spoke about his own tomb, even as a prophecy. He would have been saying that his tomb remained undiscovered up to a day when he was still alive. But perhaps someone may argue that another person wrote only the last chapter, not the rest of the Pentateuch. So let us consider what we find in Genesis, chapter 12, verse 6: “And Abraham passed through the land to the place of Sichem, to the plain of Moreh, and the Canaanite was then in the land.” These must be the words of someone writing when the Canaanite was no longer in the land. Consequently, the words cannot be Moses’ words, since he died before entering the land. Likewise, in Numbers 21, verse 14, the writer cites an older book titled The Book of the Wars of the Lord. That book recorded Moses’ deeds at the Red Sea and at the brook of Arnon. It is therefore sufficiently clear that the five Books of Moses were written after his lifetime. How long afterward, however, is less clear.

But though Moses did not compile those Books entirely, and in the form we have them; yet he wrote all that which hee is there said to have written: as for example, the Volume of the Law, which is contained, as it seemeth in the 11 of Deuteronomie, and the following Chapters to the 27. which was also commanded to be written on stones, in their entry into the land of Canaan. (Deut. 31. 9) And this did Moses himself write, and deliver to the Priests and Elders of Israel, to be read every seventh year to all Israel, at their assembling in the feast of Tabernacles. And this is that Law which God commanded, that their Kings (when they should have established that form of Government) should take a copy of from the Priests and Levites to lay in the side of the Arke; (Deut. 31. 26) and the same which having been lost, was long time after found again by Hilkiah, and sent to King Josias, who causing it to be read to the People, renewed the Covenant between God and them. (2 King. 22. 8 & 23. 1,2,3)

But although Moses did not compile those Books entirely or in their present form, he wrote everything they say he wrote. For example, he wrote the Volume of the Law, apparently contained in Deuteronomie, chapters 11 through 27. This law was also to be written on stones when the Israelites entered the land of Canaan. (Deut. 31. 9) Moses himself wrote this law and gave it to the Priests and Elders of Israel. It was to be read to all Israel every seventh year, when they gathered for the feast of Tabernacles. This is also the law that God commanded their Kings to copy from the Priests and Levites. That command would apply when the Israelites had established that form of Government. The copy was to be placed beside the Ark. (Deut. 31. 26) And this same law, after being lost, was found again much later by Hilkiah and sent to King Josias. Josias had it read to the People and renewed the Covenant between God and them. (2 King. 22. 8 & 23. 1,2,3)

That the Book of Joshua was also written long after the time of Joshua, may be gathered out of many places of the Book it self. Joshua had set up twelve stones in the middest of Jordan, for a monument of their passage; (Josh 4. 9) of which the Writer saith thus, “They are there unto this day;” (Josh 5. 9) for “unto this day”, is a phrase that signifieth a time past, beyond the memory of man. In like manner, upon the saying of the Lord, that he had rolled off from the people the Reproach of Egypt, the Writer saith, “The place is called Gilgal unto this day;” which to have said in the time of Joshua had been improper. So also the name of the Valley of Achor, from the trouble that Achan raised in the Camp, (Josh. 7. 26) the Writer saith, “remaineth unto this day;” which must needs bee therefore long after the time of Joshua. Arguments of this kind there be many other; as Josh. 8. 29. 13. 13. 14. 14. 15. 63.

Many passages in the Book of Joshua suggest that it too was written long after Joshua’s lifetime. Joshua had set up twelve stones in the middle of Jordan as a memorial of the people’s crossing (Josh. 4:9). The writer says of these stones, “They are there to this day.” For “to this day” indicates a time beyond living memory. Similarly, the Lord said that he had removed the shame of Egypt from the people (Josh. 5:9). The writer then says, “The place is called Gilgal to this day.” Such a statement would have been inappropriate in Joshua’s time. Likewise, the Valley of Achor was named after the trouble Achan caused in the camp (Josh. 7:26). The writer says the name “remains to this day.” This statement must therefore have been written long after Joshua’s time. There are many other arguments of this kind, such as Joshua 8:29, 13:13, 14:14, and 15:63.

The same is manifest by like arguments of the Book of Judges, chap. 1. 21,26 6.24 10.4 15.19 17.6 and Ruth 1. 1. but especially Judg. 18. 30. where it is said, that Jonathan “and his sonnes were Priests to the Tribe of Dan, untill the day of the captivity of the land.”

Similar arguments make the same point clear in the Book of Judges, 1:21, 26, 6:24, 10:4, 15:19, 17:6, and Ruth 1:1. But Judges 18:30 is especially clear. It says that Jonathan “and his sons were priests to the Tribe of Dan, until the land was taken captive.”

That the Books of Samuel were also written after his own time, there are the like arguments, 1 Sam. 5.5. 7.13,15. 27.6. & 30.25. where, after David had adjudged equall part of the spoiles, to them that guarded the Ammunition, with them that fought, the Writer saith, “He made it a Statute and an Ordinance to Israel to this day.” (2. Sam. 6.4.) Again, when David (displeased, that the Lord had slain Uzzah, for putting out his hand to sustain the Ark,) called the place Perez-Uzzah, the Writer saith, it is called so “to this day”: the time therefore of the writing of that Book, must be long after the time of the fact; that is, long after the time of David.

Similar arguments show that the Books of Samuel were also written after Samuel’s own time. These appear in 1 Sam. 5.5, 7.13,15, 27.6, and 30.25. David ruled that those guarding the supplies should receive an equal share of the spoils with those who fought. The writer then says, “He made it a law and a rule for Israel to this day.” (2. Sam. 6.4.) Again, David was displeased that the Lord had killed Uzzah for reaching out his hand to steady the Ark. David called the place Perez-Uzzah, and the writer says the place is called that “to this day”. Therefore, the book must have been written long after the event, meaning long after David’s time.

As for the two Books of the Kings, and the two books of the Chronicles, besides the places which mention such monuments, as the Writer saith, remained till his own days; such as are 1 Kings 9.13. 9.21. 10. 12. 12.19. 2 Kings 2.22. 8.22. 10.27. 14.7. 16.6. 17.23. 17.34. 17.41. 1 Chron. 4.41. 5.26. It is argument sufficient they were written after the captivity in Babylon, that the History of them is continued till that time. For the Facts Registred are alwaies more ancient than such Books as make mention of, and quote the Register; as these Books doe in divers places, referring the Reader to the Chronicles of the Kings of Juda, to the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, to the Books of the Prophet Samuel, or the Prophet Nathan, of the Prophet Ahijah; to the Vision of Jehdo, to the Books of the Prophet Serveiah, and of the Prophet Addo.

The two Books of the Kings and the two books of the Chronicles mention monuments that still existed in the writer’s day. These passages include 1 Kings 9:13, 9:21, 10:12, 12:19, and 2 Kings 2:22, 8:22, 10:27, 14:7, 16:6, 17:23, 17:34, 17:41. They also include 1 Chron. 4:41 and 5:26. Besides these passages, there is sufficient evidence that these books were written after the captivity in Babylon. The history they tell continues up to that time. For recorded events always predate the books that mention those events and cite the records. These books cite such records in several places. They refer readers to the Chronicles of the Kings of Juda and the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel. They also refer readers to the Books of the Prophet Samuel, the Prophet Nathan, and the Prophet Ahijah. Further references point to the Vision of Jehdo and the Books of the Prophet Serveiah and the Prophet Addo.

The Books of Esdras and Nehemiah were written certainly after their return from captivity; because their return, the re-edification of the walls and houses of Jerusalem, the renovation of the Covenant, and ordination of their policy are therein contained.

The Books of Esdras and Nehemiah were certainly written after the return from captivity. This is because these books describe the return and the rebuilding of Jerusalem's walls and houses. They also describe the renewal of the Covenant and the establishment of a system of government.

The History of Queen Esther is of the time of the Captivity; and therefore the Writer must have been of the same time, or after it.

The story of Queen Esther takes place during the Captivity. So the writer must have lived during the Captivity or afterward.

The Book of Job hath no mark in it of the time wherein it was written: and though it appear sufficiently (Exekiel 14.14, and James 5.11.) that he was no fained person; yet the Book it self seemeth not to be a History, but a Treatise concerning a question in ancient time much disputed, “why wicked men have often prospered in this world, and good men have been afflicted;” and it is the most probably, because from the beginning, to the third verse of the third chapter, where the complaint of Job beginneth, the Hebrew is (as St. Jerome testifies) in prose; and from thence to the sixt verse of the last chapter in Hexameter Verses; and the rest of that chapter again in prose. So that the dispute is all in verse; and the prose is added, but as a Preface in the beginning, and an Epilogue in the end. But Verse is no usuall stile of such, as either are themselves in great pain, as Job; or of such as come to comfort them, as his friends; but in Philosophy, especially morall Philosophy, in ancient time frequent.

The Book of Job gives no indication of when it was written. Although Ezekiel 14:14 and James 5:11 give sufficient evidence that Job was not an invented person, the book seems different. It seems to be not a history, but a discussion of a question much debated in ancient times: “why wicked people have often prospered in this world, and good people have suffered.” This interpretation is all the more likely because of the book’s form. From the beginning to the third verse of the third chapter, where Job’s complaint begins, the Hebrew is in prose. St. Jerome confirms this. From there to the sixth verse of the last chapter, the text is in hexameter verse. The rest of that chapter returns to prose. So the entire debate is in verse. The prose is added only as a preface at the beginning and an epilogue at the end. But verse is not the usual way people speak when they are in great pain, as Job was. Nor is verse usual for people who come to comfort sufferers, as Job’s friends did. But in ancient times, verse was common in philosophy, especially moral philosophy.

The Psalmes were written the most part by David, for the use of the Quire. To these are added some songs of Moses, and other holy men; and some of them after the return from the Captivity; as the 137. and the 126. whereby it is manifest that the Psalter was compiled, and put into the form it now hath, after the return of the Jews from Babylon.

Most of the Psalms were written by David for the choir to use. Songs by Moses and other holy men were added to these. Some were written after the return from the Captivity, such as Psalms 137 and 126. This makes it clear that the Psalter was compiled and given its present form after the Jews returned from Babylon.

The Proverbs, being a Collection of wise and godly Sayings, partly of Solomon, partly of Agur the son of Jakeh; and partly of the Mother of King Lemuel, cannot probably be thought to have been collected by Solomon, rather then by Agur, or the Mother of Lemues; and that, though the sentences be theirs, yet the collection or compiling them into this one Book, was the work of some other godly man, that lived after them all.

Proverbs is a collection of wise and godly sayings. Some are from Solomon, some from Agur the son of Jakeh, and some from the Mother of King Lemuel. There is probably no reason to think Solomon collected them rather than Agur or the Mother of Lemuel. Although the sayings are theirs, gathering them into one book was the work of some other godly man. That man lived after all of them.

The Books of Ecclesiastes and the Canticles have nothing that was not Solomons, except it be the Titles, or Inscriptions. For “The Words of the Preacher, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem;” and, “the Song of Songs, which is Solomon’s,” seem to have been made for distinctions sake, then, when the Books of Scripture were gathered into one body of the Law; to the end, that not the Doctrine only, but the Authors also might be extant.

The Books of Ecclesiastes and the Canticles contain nothing not written by Solomon, except perhaps their titles or headings. For the headings “The Words of the Preacher, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem,” and “the Song of Songs, which is Solomon’s,” seem to have been added to distinguish the books. This seems to have happened when the Books of Scripture were gathered into one body of the Law. The purpose was to preserve not only their teachings but also the names of their authors.

Of the Prophets, the most ancient, are Sophoniah, Jonas, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Michaiah, who lived in the time of Amaziah, and Azariah, otherwise Ozias, Kings of Judah. But the Book of Jonas is not properly a Register of his Prophecy, (for that is contained in these few words, “Fourty dayes and Ninivy shall be destroyed,”) but a History or Narration of his frowardenesse and disputing Gods commandements; so that there is small probability he should be the Author, seeing he is the subject of it. But the Book of Amos is his Prophecy.

The earliest Prophets are Sophoniah, Jonas, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Michaiah. They lived during the reigns of Amaziah and Azariah, also called Ozias, Kings of Judah. But the Book of Jonas is not really a record of his prophecy. His prophecy consists of these few words: “Forty days and Ninivy shall be destroyed.” Instead, the book tells the story of his stubborn disobedience and his arguments against God’s commands. So Jonas is unlikely to have written the book, since he is its subject. But the Book of Amos contains his prophecy.

Jeremiah, Abdias, Nahum, and Habakkuk prophecyed in the time of Josiah.

Jeremiah, Abdias, Nahum, and Habakkuk prophesied during Josiah's reign.

Ezekiel, Daniel, Aggeus, and Zacharias, in the Captivity.

Ezekiel, Daniel, Aggeus, and Zacharias, during the captivity.

When Joel and Malachi prophecyed, is not evident by their Writings. But considering the Inscriptions, or Titles of their Books, it is manifest enough, that the whole Scripture of the Old Testament, was set forth in the form we have it, after the return of the Jews from their Captivity in Babylon, and before the time of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, that caused it to bee translated into Greek by seventy men, which were sent him out of Judea for that purpose. And if the Books of Apocrypha (which are recommended to us by the Church, though not for Canonicall, yet for profitable Books for our instruction) may in this point be credited, the Scripture was set forth in the form wee have it in, by Esdras; as may appear by that which he himself saith, in the second book, chapt. 14. verse 21, 22, &c. where speaking to God, he saith thus, “Thy law is burnt; therefore no man knoweth the things which thou has done, or the works that are to begin. But if I have found Grace before thee, send down the holy Spirit into me, and I shall write all that hath been done in the world, since the beginning, which were written in thy Law, that men may find thy path, and that they which will live in the later days, may live.” And verse 45. “And it came to passe when the forty dayes were fulfilled, that the Highest spake, saying, ‘The first that thou hast written, publish openly, that the worthy and unworthy may read it; but keep the seventy last, that thou mayst deliver them onely to such as be wise among the people.’” And thus much concerning the time of the writing of the Bookes of the Old Testament.

The writings of Joel and Malachi do not make clear when they prophesied. But the headings or titles of their books make the following clear enough. The whole Old Testament was published in its present form after the Jews returned from captivity in Babylon. This was before the time of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, who had it translated into Greek by seventy men. These men were sent to him from Judea for that purpose. The Church recommends the books of the Apocrypha, though not as canonical books, but as useful books for our instruction. And if these books can be trusted on this point, Esdras published Scripture in its present form. This may be seen from his own words in the second book, chapter 14, verses 21, 22, and following. Speaking to God, he says: “Your law has been burned. Therefore no one knows the things you have done, or the works yet to begin. But if I have found favor with you, send the holy Spirit down into me. Then I will write everything that has happened in the world since the beginning, as recorded in your Law. Then people may find your path, and those who will live in later days may live.” And in verse 45: “And when the forty days were over, the Highest spoke, saying, ‘Publish openly the first things you have written, so that the worthy and unworthy may read them. But keep the last seventy, so that you may give them only to the wise among the people.’” That is all concerning when the books of the Old Testament were written.

The Writers of the New Testament lived all in lesse then an age after Christs Ascension, and had all of them seen our Saviour, or been his Disciples, except St. Paul, and St. Luke; and consequently whatsoever was written by them, is as ancient as the time of the Apostles. But the time wherein the Books of the New Testament were received, and acknowledged by the Church to be of their writing, is not altogether so ancient. For, as the Bookes of the Old Testament are derived to us, from no higher time then that of Esdras, who by the direction of Gods Spirit retrived them, when they were lost: Those of the New Testament, of which the copies were not many, nor could easily be all in any one private mans hand, cannot bee derived from a higher time, that that wherein the Governours of the Church collected, approved, and recommended them to us, as the writings of those Apostles and Disciples; under whose names they go. The first enumeration of all the Bookes, both of the Old, and New Testament, is in the Canons of the Apostles, supposed to be collected by Clement the first (after St. Peter) Bishop of Rome. But because that is but supposed, and by many questioned, the Councell of Laodicea is the first we know, that recommended the Bible to the then Christian Churches, for the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles: and this Councell was held in the 364. yeer after Christ. At which time, though ambition had so far prevailed on the great Doctors of the Church, as no more to esteem Emperours, though Christian, for the Shepherds of the people, but for Sheep; and Emperours not Christian, for Wolves; and endeavoured to passe their Doctrine, not for Counsell, and Information, as Preachers; but for Laws, as absolute Governours; and thought such frauds as tended to make the people the more obedient to Christian Doctrine, to be pious; yet I am perswaded they did not therefore falsifie the Scriptures, though the copies of the Books of the New Testament, were in the hands only of the Ecclesiasticks; because if they had had an intention so to doe, they would surely have made them more favorable to their power over Christian Princes, and Civill Soveraignty, than they are. I see not therefore any reason to doubt, but that the Old, and New Testament, as we have them now, are the true Registers of those things, which were done and said by the Prophets, and Apostles. And so perhaps are some of those Books which are called Apocrypha, if left out of the Canon, not for inconformity of Doctrine with the rest, but only because they are not found in the Hebrew. For after the conquest of Asia by Alexander the Great, there were few learned Jews, that were not perfect in the Greek tongue. For the seventy Interpreters that converted the Bible into Greek, were all of them Hebrews; and we have extant the works of Philo and Josephus both Jews, written by them eloquently in Greek. But it is not the Writer, but the authority of the Church, that maketh a Book Canonicall.

All the New Testament writers lived within a century after Christ’s Ascension. All had seen our Saviour or been his disciples, except St. Paul and St. Luke. Consequently, whatever they wrote dates from the time of the Apostles. But the Church’s acceptance of these books, and recognition of their authorship, does not date quite so far back. We can trace the Old Testament books back no further than Esdras. Guided by God’s Spirit, Esdras recovered those books after they had been lost. Similarly, we can trace the New Testament books back only to their collection and approval by the Church’s leaders. Copies were few, and no private individual could easily have possessed them all. The Church’s leaders recommended these books as the writings of the Apostles and disciples whose names they bear. The first list of all the Old and New Testament books appears in the Canons of the Apostles. These Canons are supposedly collected by Clement, the first Bishop of Rome after St. Peter. But this attribution is only supposed, and many question it. So the Council of Laodicea is the first council known to have recommended the Bible to the Christian Churches of its time. The Council recommended these books as the writings of the Prophets and Apostles. This Council was held in the year 364 after Christ. By then, ambition had gained such power over the Church’s great teachers that they no longer regarded Emperors as shepherds of the people. Instead, they regarded even Christian Emperors as sheep, and non-Christian Emperors as wolves. These teachers tried to present their doctrine not as advice and instruction from preachers, but as laws from absolute rulers. They also considered frauds pious if those frauds helped make people more obedient to Christian doctrine. Yet I am convinced that these teachers did not therefore falsify the Scriptures. This is so even though only churchmen held copies of the New Testament books. For if they had intended to falsify these books, they would surely have made them more favorable to their power. The books would have supported their power over Christian Princes and civil sovereignty more than they do. I therefore see no reason to doubt that our present Old and New Testaments are true records. They record what the Prophets and Apostles did and said. And perhaps some books called Apocrypha are also true records. This holds if those books were excluded from the Canon only because they were not found in Hebrew. It does not hold if they were excluded because their doctrine conflicted with the other books. For after Alexander the Great conquered Asia, few learned Jews lacked a thorough knowledge of Greek. The seventy translators who translated the Bible into Greek were all Hebrews. And we still have the works of Philo and Josephus, both Jews, who wrote eloquently in Greek. But a book becomes canonical through the Church’s authority, not through its author.

And although these Books were written by divers men, yet it is manifest the Writers were all indued with one and the same Spirit, in that they conspire to one and the same end, which is the setting forth of the Rights of the Kingdome of God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. For the Book of Genesis, deriveth the Genealogy of Gods people, from the creation of the World, to the going into Egypt: the other four Books of Moses, contain the Election of God for their King, and the Laws which hee prescribed for their Government: The Books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Samuel, to the time of Saul, describe the acts of Gods people, till the time they cast off Gods yoke, and called for a King, after the manner of their neighbour nations; The rest of the History of the Old Testament, derives the succession of the line of David, to the Captivity, out of which line was to spring the restorer of the Kingdome of God, even our blessed Saviour God the Son, whose coming was foretold in the Bookes of the Prophets, after whom the Evangelists writt his life, and actions, and his claim to the Kingdome, whilst he lived one earth: and lastly, the Acts, and Epistles of the Apostles, declare the coming of God, the Holy Ghost, and the Authority he left with them, and their successors, for the direction of the Jews, and for the invitation of the Gentiles. In summe, the Histories and the Prophecies of the old Testament, and the Gospels, and Epistles of the New Testament, have had one and the same scope, to convert men to the obedience of God; 1. in Moses, and the Priests; 2. in the man Christ; and 3. in the Apostles and the successors to Apostolicall power. For these three at several times did represent the person of God: Moses, and his successors the High Priests, and Kings of Judah, in the Old Testament: Christ himself, in the time he lived on earth: and the Apostles, and their successors, from the day of Pentecost (when the Holy Ghost descended on them) to this day.

Although these books were written by different men, all the writers were clearly inspired by one and the same Spirit. All the books serve the same purpose: to explain the rights of the Kingdom of God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Genesis traces the ancestry of God’s people from the creation of the world to their arrival in Egypt. The other four Books of Moses describe the people’s choice of God as their King. These books also contain the laws God gave them for their government. Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Samuel, up to the time of Saul, describe the deeds of God’s people. These accounts continue until the people rejected God’s rule and demanded a king, like the kings of their neighboring nations. The remaining historical books of the Old Testament trace the succession of David’s line down to the Captivity. From David’s line would come the restorer of the Kingdom of God, our blessed Saviour, God the Son. The Books of the Prophets foretold his coming. After the Prophets, the Evangelists recorded his life, his actions, and his claim to the Kingdom while on earth. Finally, the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles describe the coming of God the Holy Ghost. They also describe the authority he left to the Apostles and their successors. This authority was for guiding the Jews and inviting the Gentiles. In short, the Old Testament histories and prophecies and the New Testament Gospels and Epistles all had the same purpose. They sought to bring people into obedience to God: 1. through Moses and the Priests, 2. through the man Christ, and 3. through the Apostles and the successors to Apostolic power. For these three represented God’s person at different times. In the Old Testament, Moses and his successors, the High Priests and Kings of Judah, represented God. Christ himself represented God during his life on earth. The Apostles and their successors have represented God from the day of Pentecost to this day. Pentecost was the day when the Holy Ghost descended on the Apostles.

It is a question much disputed between the divers sects of Christian Religion, From Whence The Scriptures Derive Their Authority; which question is also propounded sometimes in other terms, as, How Wee Know Them To Be The Word Of God, or, Why We Beleeve Them To Be So: and the difficulty of resolving it, ariseth chiefly from the impropernesse of the words wherein the question it self is couched. For it is beleeved on all hands, that the first and originall Author of them is God; and consequently the question disputed, is not that. Again, it is manifest, that none can know they are Gods Word, (though all true Christians beleeve it,) but those to whom God himself hath revealed it supernaturally; and therefore the question is not rightly moved, of our Knowledge of it. Lastly, when the question is propounded of our Beleefe; because some are moved to beleeve for one, and others for other reasons, there can be rendred no one generall answer for them all. The question truly stated is, By What Authority They Are Made Law.

The different branches of the Christian religion have long disputed this question: Where do the Scriptures get their authority? Sometimes the question takes other forms: How do we know the Scriptures are the Word of God? Or why do we believe they are? The difficulty in answering comes mainly from the poor wording of the question itself. Everyone agrees that God is the first and original author of the Scriptures. So their authorship is not what is disputed. Again, only those to whom God has supernaturally revealed the Scriptures’ divine origin can know they are God’s Word. All true Christians believe they are, but belief is not knowledge. So asking how we know the Scriptures are God’s Word does not properly state the question. Finally, suppose the question concerns our belief. Because some people believe for one reason and others for different reasons, no single general answer can cover everyone. Properly stated, the question is: By what authority are the Scriptures made law?

As far as they differ not from the Laws of Nature, there is no doubt, but they are the Law of God, and carry their Authority with them, legible to all men that have the use of naturall reason: but this is no other Authority, then that of all other Morall Doctrine consonant to Reason; the Dictates whereof are Laws, not Made, but Eternall.

To the extent that they agree with the Laws of Nature, they are undoubtedly the Law of God. They carry their own authority, clear to everyone who can use natural reason. But this authority is no different from that of all other moral teaching consistent with reason. Reason’s commands are laws that were not made, but are eternal.

If they be made Law by God himselfe, they are of the nature of written Law, which are Laws to them only to whom God hath so sufficiently published them, as no man can excuse himself, by saying, he know not they were his.

If God himself makes them laws, they have the nature of written laws. Written laws bind only those to whom God has made them sufficiently known. So none of those people can claim, as an excuse, not to have known the laws were his.

He therefore, to whom God hath not supernaturally revealed, that they are his, nor that those that published them, were sent by him, is not obliged to obey them, by any Authority, but his, whose Commands have already the force of Laws; that is to say, by any other Authority, then that of the Common-wealth, residing in the Soveraign, who only has the Legislative power. Again, if it be not the Legislative Authority of the Common-wealth, that giveth them the force of Laws, it must bee some other Authority derived from God, either private, or publique: if private, it obliges onely him, to whom in particular God hath been pleased to reveale it. For if every man should be obliged, to take for Gods Law, what particular men, on pretence of private Inspiration, or Revelation, should obtrude upon him, (in such a number of men, that out of pride, and ignorance, take their own Dreams, and extravagant Fancies, and Madnesse, for testimonies of Gods Spirit; or out of ambition, pretend to such Divine testimonies, falsely, and contrary to their own consciences,) it were impossible that any Divine Law should be acknowledged. If publique, it is the Authority of the Common-wealth, or of the Church. But the Church, if it be one person, is the same thing with a Common-wealth of Christians; called a Common-wealth, because it consisteth of men united in one person, their Soveraign; and a Church, because it consisteth in Christian men, united in one Christian Soveraign. But if the Church be not one person, then it hath no authority at all; it can neither command, nor doe any action at all; nor is capable of having any power, or right to any thing; nor has any Will, Reason, nor Voice; for all these qualities are personall. Now if the whole number of Christians be not contained in one Common-wealth, they are not one person; nor is there an Universall Church that hath any authority over them; and therefore the Scriptures are not made Laws, by the Universall Church: or if it bee one Common-wealth, then all Christian Monarchs, and States are private persons, and subject to bee judged, deposed, and punished by an Universall Soveraigne of all Christendome. So that the question of the Authority of the Scriptures is reduced to this, “Whether Christian Kings, and the Soveraigne Assemblies in Christian Common-wealths, be absolute in their own Territories, immediately under God; or subject to one Vicar of Christ, constituted over the Universall Church; to bee judged, condemned, deposed, and put to death, as hee shall think expedient, or necessary for the common good.”

Suppose God has not supernaturally revealed to someone that the Scriptures are his, or that he sent those who published them. That person is obliged to obey the Scriptures only by the authority of someone whose commands already have legal force. In other words, that authority belongs only to the Commonwealth, acting through the Sovereign, who alone has legislative power. Again, if the Commonwealth’s legislative authority does not give the Scriptures legal force, some other authority derived from God must. Such authority must be either private or public. If private, it binds only the person to whom God has chosen to reveal it. For suppose everyone were obliged to accept as God’s law whatever individuals imposed on them by claiming private inspiration or revelation. Many people, through pride and ignorance, mistake their own dreams, wild fantasies, and madness for evidence of God’s Spirit. Others, through ambition, falsely claim such divine evidence, against their own consciences. Under these conditions, it would be impossible for any divine law to be acknowledged. If the authority is public, it belongs either to the Commonwealth or to the Church. But if the Church is one person, it is the same thing as a Commonwealth of Christians. It is called a Commonwealth because its members are united in one person, their Sovereign. It is called a Church because its Christian members are united under one Christian Sovereign. But if the Church is not one person, it has no authority at all. It can neither command nor take any action. Nor can it possess any power or right to anything. It has no will, reason, or voice, because all these qualities belong to persons. Now, if all Christians do not belong to one Commonwealth, they are not one person. Nor is there a Universal Church with any authority over them. Therefore, the Universal Church does not make the Scriptures into laws. But if all Christians do form one Commonwealth, then all Christian monarchs and states are private persons. They are subject to judgment, removal from power, and punishment by a Universal Sovereign over all Christendom. So the question of the authority of the Scriptures comes down to this: “Do Christian kings and sovereign assemblies in Christian Commonwealths have supreme authority within their own territories, directly under God? Or are they subject to one Vicar of Christ, appointed over the Universal Church? May he judge, condemn, depose, and put them to death as he considers useful or necessary for the common good?”

Which question cannot bee resolved, without a more particular consideration of the Kingdome of God; from whence also, wee are to judge of the Authority of Interpreting the Scripture. For, whosoever hath a lawfull power over any Writing, to make it Law, hath the power also to approve, or disapprove the interpretation of the same.

This question cannot be answered without a closer examination of the Kingdom of God. That examination must also guide our judgment about who has authority to interpret Scripture. For whoever has the lawful power to make a written text into law also has another power. They can approve or reject interpretations of that text.