God's Word and Prophets

When there is mention of the Word of God, or of Man, it doth not signifie a part of Speech, such as Grammarians call a Nown, or a Verb, or any simple voice, without a contexture with other words to make it significative; but a perfect Speech or Discourse, whereby the speaker Affirmeth, Denieth, Commandeth, Promiseth, Threateneth, Wisheth, or Interrogateth. In which sense it is not Vocabulum, that signifies a Word; but Sermo, (in Greek Logos) that is some Speech, Discourse, or Saying.

When we speak of the Word of God or of Man, we do not mean a part of speech. We do not mean what grammarians call a noun or a verb. Nor do we mean a single utterance, unconnected to other words that give it meaning. Instead, we mean a complete statement or discourse. Through such speech, the speaker affirms, denies, commands, promises, threatens, wishes, or asks a question. In this sense, the term for a Word is not Vocabulum but Sermo (Logos in Greek). Sermo means a speech, discourse, or saying.

Again, if we say the Word of God, or of Man, it may bee understood sometimes of the Speaker, (as the words that God hath spoken, or that a Man hath spoken): In which sense, when we say, the Gospel of St. Matthew, we understand St. Matthew to be the Writer of it: and sometimes of the Subject: In which sense, when we read in the Bible, “The words of the days of the Kings of Israel, or Judah,” ’tis meant, that the acts that were done in those days, were the Subject of those Words; And in the Greek, which (in the Scripture) retaineth many Hebraismes, by the Word of God is oftentimes meant, not that which is spoken by God, but concerning God, and his government; that is to say, the Doctrine of Religion: Insomuch, as it is all one, to say Logos Theou, and Theologia; which is, that Doctrine which wee usually call Divinity, as is manifest by the places following (Acts 13.46.) “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you, but seeing you put it from you, and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life, loe, we turn to the Gentiles.” That which is here called the Word of god, was the Doctrine of Christian Religion; as it appears evidently by that which goes before. And (Acts 5.20.) where it is said to the Apostles by an Angel, “Go stand and speak in the Temple, all the Words of this life;” by the Words of this life, is meant, the Doctrine of the Gospel; as is evident by what they did in the Temple, and is expressed in the last verse of the same Chap. “Daily in the Temple, and in every house they ceased not to teach and preach Christ Jesus:” In which place it is manifest, that Jesus Christ was the subject of this Word of Life; or (which is all one) the subject of the Words of this Life Eternall, that our saviour offered them. So (Acts 15.7.) the Word of God, is called the Word of the Gospel, because it containeth the Doctrine of the Kingdome of Christ; and the same Word (Rom. 10.8,9.) is called the Word of Faith; that is, as is there expressed, the Doctrine of Christ come, and raised from the dead. Also (Mat. 13. 19.) “When any one heareth the Word of the Kingdome;” that is, the Doctrine of the Kingdome taught by Christ. Again, the same Word, is said (Acts 12. 24.) “to grow and to be multiplied;” which to understand of the Evangelicall Doctrine is easie, but of the Voice, or Speech of God, hard and strange. In the same sense the Doctrine of Devils, signifieth not the Words of any Devill, but the Doctrine of Heathen men concerning Daemons, and those Phantasms which they worshipped as Gods. (1 Tim. 4.1.)

Again, “the Word of God” or “the Word of Man” may sometimes refer to the speaker. It may mean words spoken by God or by a man. In this sense, when we say “the Gospel of St. Matthew,” we mean that St. Matthew wrote it. Sometimes, however, the phrase refers to the subject. In this sense, the Bible speaks of “the words of the days of the Kings of Israel, or Judah.” This means that the events of those days were the subject of those words. The Greek used in Scripture retains many Hebrew expressions. In this Greek, “the Word of God” often means not words spoken by God, but teaching about God and his government. In other words, it means religious doctrine. Thus, Logos Theou and Theologia mean the same thing: the body of teaching we usually call Divinity. The following passages make this clear. In Acts 13:46, “Then Paul and Barnabas spoke boldly and said, It was necessary to speak the Word of God to you first. But since you reject it and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, look, we turn to the Gentiles.” Here, “the Word of God” means the teaching of the Christian religion, as the preceding passage clearly shows. In Acts 5:20, an angel tells the Apostles, “Go, stand in the Temple and speak all the Words of this life.” Here, “the Words of this life” means the teaching of the Gospel. What the Apostles did in the Temple makes this clear. The last verse of the same chapter describes their actions: “Every day, in the Temple and in every house, they continued teaching and preaching Christ Jesus.” This passage clearly makes Jesus Christ the subject of this Word of Life. That is, he was the subject of the Words of this Eternal Life, which our Saviour offered them. Likewise, in Acts 15:7, the Word of God is called the Word of the Gospel. This is because it contains the teaching about Christ’s Kingdom. The same Word is called the Word of Faith in Romans 10:8–9. As that passage explains, it means the teaching that Christ has come and has risen from the dead. Also, Matthew 13:19 says, “When anyone hears the Word of the Kingdom.” This means the teaching about the Kingdom that Christ taught. Again, Acts 12:24 says that the same Word “grew and multiplied.” This is easy to understand as referring to the teaching of the Gospel. But understanding it as God’s voice or speech is difficult and strange. In the same sense, “the Doctrine of Devils” does not mean words spoken by any Devil. It means the teaching of pagan people about Daemons and those phantoms they worshipped as Gods (1 Timothy 4:1).

Considering these two significations of the WORD OF GOD, as it is taken in Scripture, it is manifest in this later sense (where it is taken for the Doctrine of the Christian Religion,) that the whole scripture is the Word of God: but in the former sense not so. For example, though these words, “I am the Lord thy God, &c.” to the end of the Ten Commandements, were spoken by God to Moses; yet the Preface, “God spake these words and said,” is to be understood for the Words of him that wrote the holy History. The Word of God, as it is taken for that which he hath spoken, is understood sometimes Properly, sometimes Metaphorically. Properly, as the words, he hath spoken to his Prophets; Metaphorically, for his Wisdome, Power, and eternall Decree, in making the world; in which sense, those Fiats, “Let there be light,” “Let there be a firmament,” “Let us make man,” &c. (Gen. 1.) are the Word of God. And in the same sense it is said (John 1.3.) “All things were made by it, and without it was nothing made that was made; And (Heb. 1.3.) “He upholdeth all things by the word of his Power;” that is, by the Power of his Word; that is, by his Power; and (Heb. 11.3.) “The worlds were framed by the Word of God;” and many other places to the same sense: As also amongst the Latines, the name of Fate, which signifieth properly The Word Spoken, is taken in the same sense.

Scripture uses the WORD OF GOD in these two senses. In the second sense, meaning the teaching of the Christian religion, all Scripture is clearly the Word of God. But in the first sense, not all Scripture is the Word of God. For example, God spoke the words “I am the Lord your God, etc.” to Moses, continuing through the Ten Commandments. But the introduction, “God spoke these words and said,” comes from the writer of the sacred history. When the Word of God means what God has spoken, the phrase is sometimes literal and sometimes metaphorical. Literally, the phrase means the words God spoke to his Prophets. Metaphorically, the phrase means his wisdom, power, and eternal decree in creating the world. In this sense, the commands “Let there be light,” “Let there be a firmament,” and “Let us make man,” etc. (Gen. 1) are the Word of God. The same meaning appears in John 1:3: “All things were made by it, and without it nothing was made that was made.” Hebrews 1:3 also says, “He upholds all things by the word of his power.” This means by the power of his Word, or simply by his power. Hebrews 11:3 says, “The worlds were formed by the Word of God.” Many other passages use the phrase in the same sense. Likewise, the Latin term Fate, which literally means “the spoken word,” is used in this same sense.

Secondly, for the effect of his Word; that is to say, for the thing it self, which by his Word is Affirmed, Commanded, Threatned, or Promised; as (Psalm 105.19.) where Joseph is said to have been kept in prison, “till his Word was come;” that is, till that was come to passe which he had (Gen. 40.13.) foretold to Pharaohs Butler, concerning his being restored to his office: for there by His Word Was Come, is meant, the thing it self was come to passe. So also (1 King. 18.36.) Elijah saith to God, “I have done all these thy Words,” in stead of “I have done all these things at thy Word,” or commandement: and (Jer. 17.15.) “Where is the Word of the Lord,” is put for, “Where is the Evill he threatened:” And (Ezek. 12.28.) “There shall none of my Words be prolonged any more:” by “Words” are understood those Things, which God promised to his people. And in the New Testament (Mat. 24.35.) “heaven and earth shal pass away, but my Words shall not pass away;” that is, there is nothing that I have promised or foretold, that shall not come to passe. And in this sense it is, that St. John the Evangelist, and, I think, St. John onely calleth our Saviour himself as in the flesh “the Word of God (as Joh. 1.14.) the Word was made Flesh;” that is to say, the Word, or Promise that Christ should come into the world, “who in the beginning was with God;” that is to say, it was in the purpose of God the Father, to send God the Son into the world, to enlighten men in the way of Eternall life, but it was not till then put in execution, and actually incarnate; So that our Saviour is there called “the Word,” not because he was the promise, but the thing promised. They that taking occasion from this place, doe commonly call him the Verbe of God, do but render the text more obscure. They might as well term him the Nown of God: for as by Nown, so also by Verbe, men understand nothing but a part of speech, a voice, a sound, that neither affirms, nor denies, nor commands, nor promiseth, nor is any substance corporeall, or spirituall; and therefore it cannot be said to bee either God, or Man; whereas our Saviour is both. And this Word which St. John in his Gospel saith was with God, is (in his 1 Epistle, verse 1.) called “the Word of Life;” and (verse 2.) “The eternall life, which was with the Father:” so that he can be in no other sense called the Word, then in that, wherein he is called Eternall life; that is, “he that hath procured us Eternall life,” by his comming in the flesh. So also (Apocalypse 19.13.) the Apostle speaking of Christ, clothed in a garment dipt in bloud, saith; his name is “the Word of God;” which is to be understood, as if he had said his name had been, “He that was come according to the purpose of God from the beginning, and according to his Word and promises delivered by the Prophets.” So that there is nothing here of the Incarnation of a Word, but of the Incarnation of God the Son, therefore called the Word, because his Incarnation was the Performance of the Promise; In like manner as the Holy Ghost is called The Promise. (Acts 1.4. Luke 24.49.)

Secondly, “his Word” can mean its effect: the thing itself that his word affirms, commands, threatens, or promises. For example, Psalm 105:19 says Joseph was kept in prison “until his word came.” This means until the event Joseph had foretold to Pharaoh’s Butler came to pass (Genesis 40:13). Joseph had foretold that the Butler would be restored to his office. So “his word came” means that the event itself came to pass. Similarly, Elijah says to God, “I have done all these words of yours” (1 Kings 18:36). This means “I have done all these things at your word,” or command. And in Jeremiah 17:15, “Where is the word of the Lord?” means “Where is the disaster he threatened?” Ezekiel 12:28 says, “None of my words will be delayed any longer.” Here, “words” means the things God promised his people. In the New Testament, Matthew 24:35 says, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.” This means that everything I have promised or foretold will come to pass. In this sense, St. John the Evangelist calls our Saviour himself, in the flesh, “the Word of God.” And I think St. John alone uses this name. As John 1:14 says, “the Word became flesh.” This means the word, or promise, that Christ would come into the world, “who in the beginning was with God.” In other words, God the Father intended to send God the Son into the world. His purpose was to guide people toward eternal life. But only then was this purpose carried out, and God the Son actually became flesh. So our Saviour is called “the Word” here, not because he was the promise, but because he was the thing promised. Those who use this passage as grounds for commonly calling him the Verb of God only make the text more obscure. They might just as well call him the Noun of God. For a verb, like a noun, means nothing more than a part of speech, a voice, or a sound. By itself, it neither affirms nor denies, neither commands nor promises. Nor is it any bodily or spiritual substance. Therefore, it cannot be called either God or man, whereas our Saviour is both. In his Gospel, St. John says that this Word was with God. In his First Epistle, verse 1, he calls the Word “the Word of Life.” In verse 2, he calls him “the eternal life, which was with the Father.” So Christ can be called the Word only in the same sense that he is called Eternal Life. That is, he is “the one who has secured eternal life for us” by coming in the flesh. Similarly, in Revelation 19:13, the Apostle speaks of Christ wearing a garment dipped in blood. He says that Christ’s name is “the Word of God.” We should understand this as if he had said that Christ’s name was “The one who has come according to God’s purpose from the beginning, and according to his word and promises delivered through the Prophets.” So nothing here concerns a word becoming flesh. Rather, it concerns God the Son becoming flesh. He is therefore called the Word because his becoming flesh fulfilled the promise. In the same way, the Holy Ghost is called the Promise (Acts 1:4, Luke 24:49).

There are also places of the Scripture, where, by the Word of God, is signified such Words as are consonant to reason, and equity, though spoken sometimes neither by prophet, nor by a holy man. For Pharaoh Necho was an Idolator; yet his Words to the good King Josiah, in which he advised him by Messengers, not to oppose him in his march against Carchemish, are said to have proceeded from the mouth of God; and that Josiah not hearkning to them, was slain in the battle; as is to be read 2 Chron. 35. vers. 21,22,23. It is true, that as the same History is related in the first book of Esdras, not Pharaoh, but Jeremiah spake these words to Josiah, from the mouth of the Lord. But wee are to give credit to the Canonicall Scripture, whatsoever be written in the Apocrypha.

There are also passages in Scripture where the Word of God means words consistent with reason and fairness. Sometimes these words are spoken by someone who is neither a prophet nor a holy man. For Pharaoh Necho was an idolater. Yet his words to the good King Josiah are said to have come from the mouth of God. Through messengers, Pharaoh Necho advised Josiah not to oppose him as he marched against Carchemish. Josiah did not listen to these words and was killed in battle, as recorded in 2 Chronicles 35:21,22,23. It is true that the first book of Esdras tells the same story differently. In that account, Jeremiah, not Pharaoh, spoke these words to Josiah from the mouth of the Lord. But we must believe the canonical Scripture, whatever is written in the Apocrypha.

The Word of God, is then also to be taken for the Dictates of reason, and equity, when the same is said in the Scriptures to bee written in mans heart; as Psalm 36.31. Jerem. 31.33. Deut.30.11, 14. and many other like places.

The Word of God, then, also means the principles of reason and fairness when Scripture describes them as written in the human heart. Examples appear in Psalm 36.31, Jerem. 31.33, Deut. 30.11, 14, and many similar passages.

The name of PROPHET, signifieth in Scripture sometimes Prolocutor; that is, he that speaketh from God to Man, or from man to God: And sometimes Praedictor, or a foreteller of things to come; And sometimes one that speaketh incoherently, as men that are distracted. It is most frequently used in the sense of speaking from God to the People. So Moses, Samuel, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and others were Prophets. And in this sense the High Priest was a Prophet, for he only went into the Sanctum Sanctorum, to enquire of God; and was to declare his answer to the people. And therefore when Caiphas said, it was expedient that one man should die for the people, St. John saith (chap. 11.51.) that “He spake not this of himselfe, but being High Priest that year, he prophesied that one man should dye for the nation.” Also they that in Christian Congregations taught the people, (1 Cor. 14.3.) are said to Prophecy. In the like sense it is, that God saith to Moses (Exod. 4.16.) concerning Aaron, “He shall be thy Spokes-man to the People; and he shall be to thee a mouth, and thou shalt be to him in stead of God;” that which here is Spokesman, is (chap.7.1.) interpreted Prophet; “See (saith God) I have made thee a God to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy Brother shall be thy Prophet.” In the sense of speaking from man to God, Abraham is called a Prophet (Genes. 20.7.) where God in a Dream speaketh to Abimelech in this manner, “Now therefore restore the man his wife, for he is a Prophet, and shall pray for thee;” whereby may be also gathered, that the name of Prophet may be given, not unproperly to them that in Christian Churches, have a Calling to say publique prayers for the Congregation. In the same sense, the Prophets that came down from the High place (or Hill of God) with a Psaltery, and a Tabret, and a Pipe, and a Harp (1 Sam. 10.5,6.) and (vers. 10.) Saul amongst them, are said to Prophecy, in that they praised God, in that manner publiquely. In the like sense, is Miriam (Exod. 15.20.) called a Prophetesse. So is it also to be taken (1 Cor. 11.4,5.) where St. Paul saith, “Every man that prayeth or prophecyeth with his head covered, &c. and every woman that prayeth or prophecyeth with her head uncovered: For Prophecy in that place, signifieth no more, but praising God in Psalmes, and Holy Songs; which women might doe in the Church, though it were not lawfull for them to speak to the Congregation. And in this signification it is, that the Poets of the Heathen, that composed Hymnes and other sorts of Poems in the honor of their Gods, were called Vates (Prophets) as is well enough known by all that are versed in the Books of the Gentiles, and as is evident (Tit. 1.12.) where St. Paul saith of the Cretians, that a Prophet of their owne said, they were Liars; not that St. Paul held their Poets for Prophets, but acknowledgeth that the word Prophet was commonly used to signifie them that celebrated the honour of God in Verse

In Scripture, the word PROPHET sometimes means a spokesperson who speaks from God to people, or from people to God. Sometimes it means someone who predicts future events. Sometimes it means someone who speaks incoherently, as people do when out of their minds. Most often, the word means someone who speaks from God to the people. Moses, Samuel, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and others were Prophets in this sense. The High Priest was also a Prophet in this sense. Only he entered the Sanctum Sanctorum, or Holy of Holies, to ask God questions. He then had to report God’s answer to the people. Thus, when Caiphas said that one man should die for the people, St. John says (11:51): “He did not say this on his own. Rather, as High Priest that year, he prophesied that one man would die for the nation.” Those who taught the people in Christian congregations are also said to prophesy (1 Corinthians 14:3). God uses the word in a similar sense when speaking to Moses about Aaron (Exodus 4:16): “He shall be your spokesman to the people. He shall be your mouth, and you shall stand in God’s place for him.” The word translated here as spokesman is rendered as Prophet in Exodus 7:1. God says, “See, I have made you a God to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother shall be your Prophet.” Abraham is called a Prophet in the sense of speaking from people to God (Genesis 20:7). There, God speaks to Abimelech in a dream: “Now return the man’s wife, for he is a Prophet and will pray for you.” From this passage, we may also conclude that Prophet is an appropriate name for certain people in Christian churches. These are the people called to offer public prayers for the congregation. The Prophets who came down from the high place, or Hill of God, prophesied in the same sense. They carried a psaltery, a tambourine, a pipe, and a harp (1 Samuel 10:5–6). Saul, among them, is also said to prophesy (verse 10). They prophesied by publicly praising God in this way. Miriam is likewise called a Prophetess (Exodus 15:20). The word should also be understood this way in 1 Corinthians 11:4–5, where St. Paul says: “Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered, etc., and every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered.” Here, prophecy means no more than praising God in psalms and holy songs. Women could do this in church, although they were not allowed to address the congregation. In this same sense, pagan poets were called Vates (Prophets). These poets composed hymns and other kinds of poems in honor of their Gods. Everyone familiar with the books of the Gentiles knows this well enough. The usage is also clear in Titus 1:12. There, St. Paul says that a Prophet of the Cretians themselves called them liars. St. Paul did not regard their poets as Prophets. Rather, he recognized that the word Prophet commonly referred to those who celebrated God’s honor in verse.

When by Prophecy is meant Praediction, or foretelling of future Contingents; not only they were Prophets, who were Gods Spokesmen, and foretold those things to others, which God had foretold to them; but also all those Imposters, that pretend by the helpe of familiar spirits, or by superstitious divination of events past, from false causes, to foretell the like events in time to come: of which (as I have declared already in the 12. chapter of this Discourse) there be many kinds, who gain in the opinion of the common sort of men, a greater reputation of Prophecy, by one casuall event that may bee but wrested to their purpose, than can be lost again by never so many failings. Prophecy is not an art, nor (when it is taken for Praediction) a constant Vocation; but an extraordinary, and temporary Employment from God, most often of Good men, but sometimes also of the Wicked. The woman of Endor, who is said to have had a familiar spirit, and thereby to have raised a Phantasme of Samuel, and foretold Saul his death, was not therefore a Prophetesse; for neither had she any science, whereby she could raise such a Phantasme; nor does it appear that God commanded the raising of it; but onely guided that Imposture to be a means of Sauls terror and discouragement; and by consequent, of the discomfiture, by which he fell. And for Incoherent Speech, it was amongst the Gentiles taken for one sort of Prophecy, because the Prophets of their Oracles, intoxicated with a spirit, or vapour from the cave of the Pythian Oracle at Delphi, were for the time really mad, and spake like mad-men; of whose loose words a sense might be made to fit any event, in such sort, as all bodies are said to be made of Materia prima. In the Scripture I find it also so taken (1 Sam. 18. 10.) in these words, “And the Evill spirit came upon Saul, and he Prophecyed in the midst of the house.”

When prophecy means prediction, or foretelling future events that may or may not happen, prophets include more than God’s spokesmen. Those spokesmen foretold to others what God had foretold to them. But prophets also include all those impostors who claim to predict the future with the help of familiar spirits. Others claim to predict similar future events through superstitious divination, falsely identifying the causes of past events. As I have already explained in chapter 12 of this work, there are many kinds of these impostors. Among ordinary people, one chance event, perhaps merely twisted to fit their claims, earns them a greater reputation for prophecy. No number of failures can undo that gain. Prophecy is not a skill, nor, when understood as prediction, is it a permanent calling. Instead, it is an exceptional and temporary assignment from God, most often given to good people, but sometimes to the wicked. The woman of Endor was said to have a familiar spirit. Through that spirit, she was said to have raised an apparition of Samuel and foretold Saul’s death. But that did not make her a prophetess. She had no knowledge by which she could raise such an apparition. Nor does it appear that God commanded the apparition to be raised. God only directed that deception to terrify and discourage Saul, and consequently to bring about the defeat in which he fell. Among the Gentiles, incoherent speech was considered a kind of prophecy. Their oracles’ prophets were intoxicated by a spirit, or by vapor from the cave of the Pythian Oracle at Delphi. For a time, they were genuinely mad and spoke like madmen. Their disconnected words could be given a meaning to fit any event, just as all bodies supposedly consist of Materia prima. I also find prophecy used in this sense in Scripture (1 Sam. 18. 10.), in these words: “And the evil spirit came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the midst of the house.”

And although there be so many significations in Scripture of the word Prophet; yet is that the most frequent, in which it is taken for him, to whom God speaketh immediately, that which the Prophet is to say from him, to some other man, or to the people. And hereupon a question may be asked, in what manner God speaketh to such a Prophet. Can it (may some say) be properly said, that God hath voice and language, when it cannot be properly said, he hath a tongue, or other organs, as a man? The Prophet David argueth thus, “Shall he that made the eye, not see? or he that made the ear, not hear?” But this may be spoken, not (as usually) to signifie Gods nature, but to signifie our intention to honor him. For to See, and Hear, are Honorable Attributes, and may be given to God, to declare (as far as our capacity can conceive) his Almighty power. But if it were to be taken in the strict, and proper sense, one might argue from his making of all parts of mans body, that he had also the same use of them which we have; which would be many of them so uncomely, as it would be the greatest contumely in the world to ascribe them to him. Therefore we are to interpret Gods speaking to men immediately, for that way (whatsoever it be), by which God makes them understand his will: And the wayes whereby he doth this, are many; and to be sought onely in the Holy Scripture: where though many times it be said, that God spake to this, and that person, without declaring in what manner; yet there be again many places, that deliver also the signes by which they were to acknowledge his presence, and commandement; and by these may be understood, how he spake to many of the rest.

Although Scripture uses the word Prophet in many ways, one meaning is the most common. A Prophet is someone God speaks to directly, giving him a message for another person or for the people. This raises a question: how does God speak to such a Prophet? Some may ask whether we can properly say that God has a voice and language. After all, we cannot properly say that he has a tongue or other organs like a human being. The Prophet David argues this way: “Should he who made the eye not see? Or should he who made the ear not hear?” But these words may express our intention to honor God, rather than describe his nature, as people usually suppose. Seeing and hearing are honorable qualities. We may attribute them to God to express his almighty power, as far as our understanding allows. But suppose we took David’s argument strictly and literally. Because God made every part of the human body, we might argue that he uses those parts as we do. Many of those uses would be so indecent that attributing them to God would be the greatest possible insult. Therefore, God’s speaking directly to people must mean whatever means God uses to make them understand his will. God does this in many ways, and we must look for those ways only in Holy Scripture. Scripture often says that God spoke to a particular person without explaining how. Yet many other passages also describe the signs by which people were to recognize his presence and command. These signs can help us understand how he spoke to many of the others.

In what manner God spake to Adam, and Eve, and Cain, and Noah, is not expressed; nor how he spake to Abraham, till such time as he came out of his own countrey to Sichem in the land of Canaan; and then (Gen. 12.7.) God is said to have Appeared to him. So there is one way, whereby God made his presence manifest; that is, by an Apparition, or Vision. And again, (Gen. 15.1.) The Word of the Lord came to Abraham in a Vision; that is to say, somewhat, as a sign of Gods presence, appeared as Gods Messenger, to speak to him. Again, the Lord appeared to Abraham (Gen. 18. 1.) by an apparition of three Angels; and to Abimelech (Gen. 20. 3.) in a dream: To Lot (Gen. 19. 1.) by an apparition of Two Angels: And to Hagar (Gen. 21. 17.) by the apparition of one Angel: And to Abraham again (Gen. 22. 11.) by the apparition of a voice from heaven: And (Gen. 26. 24.) to Isaac in the night; (that is, in his sleep, or by dream): And to Jacob (Gen. 18. 12.) in a dream; that is to say (as are the words of the text) “Jacob dreamed that he saw a ladder, &c.” And (Gen. 32. 1.) in a Vision of Angels: And to Moses (Exod. 3.2.) in the apparition of a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: And after the time of Moses, (where the manner how God spake immediately to man in the Old Testament, is expressed) hee spake alwaies by a Vision, or by a Dream; as to Gideon, Samuel, Eliah, Elisha, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and the rest of the Prophets; and often in the New Testament, as to Joseph, to St. Peter, to St. Paul, and to St. John the Evangelist in the Apocalypse.

The text does not explain how God spoke to Adam, Eve, Cain, and Noah. Nor does it explain how he spoke to Abraham before Abraham left his own country for Sichem in Canaan. Then God is said to have appeared to Abraham (Gen. 12.7.). So one way God made his presence known was through an apparition, or vision. Again, “The Word of the Lord came to Abraham in a Vision” (Gen. 15.1.). In other words, something appeared as God’s messenger to speak to Abraham, as a sign of God’s presence. Again, the Lord appeared to Abraham through an apparition of three Angels (Gen. 18.1.). He appeared to Abimelech in a dream (Gen. 20.3.). He appeared to Lot through an apparition of two Angels (Gen. 19.1.). He appeared to Hagar through an apparition of one Angel (Gen. 21.17.). He appeared to Abraham again through a voice from heaven (Gen. 22.11.). He appeared to Isaac at night, meaning in Isaac’s sleep, or in a dream (Gen. 26.24.). He appeared to Jacob in a dream (Gen. 18.12.). As the text puts it, “Jacob dreamed that he saw a ladder, &c.” God also appeared to Jacob in a vision of Angels (Gen. 32.1.). He appeared to Moses as a flame of fire coming from the middle of a bush (Exod. 3.2.). After Moses’s time, whenever the Old Testament explains how God spoke directly to people, he always spoke through visions or dreams. This was how he spoke to Gideon, Samuel, Eliah, Elisha, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and the other Prophets. He also often spoke this way in the New Testament. Examples include Joseph, St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. John the Evangelist in the Apocalypse.

Onely to Moses hee spake in a more extraordinary manner in Mount Sinai, and in the Tabernacle; and to the High Priest in the Tabernacle, and in the Sanctum Sanctorum of the Temple. But Moses, and after him the High Priests were Prophets of a more eminent place, and degree in Gods favour; And God himself in express words declareth, that to other Prophets hee spake in Dreams and Visions, but to his servant Moses, in such manner as a man speaketh to his friend. The words are these (Numb. 12. 6,7,8.) “If there be a Prophet among you, I the Lord will make my self known to him in a Vision, and will speak unto him in a Dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithfull in all my house; with him I will speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold.” And (Exod. 33. 11.) “The Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend.” And yet this speaking of God to Moses, was by mediation of an Angel, or Angels, as appears expressely, Acts 7. ver. 35. and 53. and Gal. 3. 19. and was therefore a Vision, though a more cleer Vision than was given to other Prophets. And conformable hereunto, where God saith (Deut. 13. 1.) “If there arise amongst you a Prophet, or Dreamer of Dreams,” the later word is but the interpretation of the former. And (Joel 2. 28.) “Your sons and your daughters shall Prophecy; your old men shall dream Dreams, and your young men shall see Visions:” where again, the word Prophecy is expounded by Dream, and Vision. And in the same manner it was, that God spake to Solomon, promising him Wisdome, Riches, and Honor; for the text saith, (1 Kings 3. 15.) “And Solomon awoak, and behold it was a Dream:” So that generally the Prophets extraordinary in the old Testament took notice of the Word of God no otherwise, than from their Dreams, or Visions, that is to say, from the imaginations which they had in their sleep, or in an Extasie; which imaginations in every true Prophet were supernaturall; but in false Prophets were either naturall, or feigned.

God spoke in a more extraordinary way only to Moses on Mount Sinai and in the Tabernacle. He also spoke this way to the High Priest in the Tabernacle and the Temple’s Sanctum Sanctorum, or Holy of Holies. But Moses, and the High Priests after him, were Prophets of higher rank and stood higher in God’s favor. God himself explicitly declares that he spoke to other Prophets in dreams and visions. But he spoke to his servant Moses as a man speaks to his friend. These are the words (Numbers 12:6,7,8): “If there is a Prophet among you, I, the Lord, will make myself known to him in a vision. I will speak to him in a dream. My servant Moses is different. He is faithful in all my house. With him I will speak directly and clearly, not in riddles. And he shall see the likeness of the Lord.” And in Exodus 33:11: “The Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend.” Yet God spoke to Moses through an Angel or Angels. Acts 7:35 and 53, and Galatians 3:19, state this explicitly. God’s communication with Moses was therefore a vision, though clearer than the visions given to other Prophets. In keeping with this, God says in Deuteronomy 13:1: “If a Prophet, or dreamer of dreams, arises among you.” Here, “dreamer of dreams” simply explains “Prophet.” And in Joel 2:28: “Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy. Your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions.” Here again, dreams and visions explain what prophecy means. God spoke to Solomon in the same way, promising him wisdom, riches, and honor. For the text says (1 Kings 3:15): “And Solomon awoke, and saw that it was a dream.” So, in general, the extraordinary Prophets of the Old Testament received the Word of God only through dreams or visions. That is, they received it through images in their minds while asleep or in a trance. In every true Prophet, these images were supernatural. But in false Prophets, the images were either natural or made up.

The same Prophets were neverthelesse said to speak by the Spirit; as (Zach. 7. 12.) where the Prophet speaking of the Jewes, saith, “They made their hearths hard as Adamant, lest they should hear the law, and the words which the Lord of Hosts hath sent in his Spirit by the former Prophets.” By which it is manifest, that speaking by the Spirit, or Inspiration, was not a particular manner of Gods speaking, different from Vision, when they that were said to speak by the Spirit, were extraordinary Prophets, such as for every new message, were to have a particular Commission, or (which is all one) a new Dream, or Vision.

Nevertheless, the same Prophets were said to speak by the Spirit. For example, in (Zach. 7. 12.), the Prophet says of the Jews, “They made their hearts as hard as Adamant, so they would not hear the law. Nor would they hear the words the Lord of Hosts had sent through his Spirit by the earlier Prophets.” This makes clear that speaking by the Spirit, or Inspiration, was not a way God spoke distinct from Vision. This was so when those said to speak by the Spirit were extraordinary Prophets. Such Prophets needed a specific commission for every new message, or, equivalently, a new Dream or Vision.

To Prophets Of Perpetuall Calling, And Supreme, God Spake In The Old Testament From The Mercy Seat, In A Manner Not Expressed In The Scripture. Of Prophets, that were so by a perpetuall Calling in the Old Testament, some were Supreme, and some Subordinate: Supreme were first Moses; and after him the High Priest, every one for his time, as long as the Priesthood was Royall; and after the people of the Jews, had rejected God, that he should no more reign over them, those Kings which submitted themselves to Gods government, were also his chief Prophets; and the High Priests office became Ministeriall. And when God was to be consulted, they put on the holy vestments, and enquired of the Lord, as the King commanded them, and were deprived of their office, when the King thought fit. For King Saul (1 Sam. 13. 9.) commanded the burnt offering to be brought, and (1 Sam. 14. 18.) he commands the Priest to bring the Ark neer him; and (ver. 19.) again to let it alone, because he saw an advantage upon his enemies. And in the same chapter Saul asketh counsell of God. In like manner King David, after his being anointed, though before he had possession of the Kingdome, is said to “enquire of the Lord” (1 Sam. 23. 2.) whether he should fight against the Philistines at Keilah; and (verse 10.) David commandeth the Priest to bring him the Ephod, to enquire whether he should stay in Keilah, or not. And King Solomon (1 Kings 2. 27.) took the Priesthood from Abiathar, and gave it (verse 35.) to Zadoc. Therefore Moses, and the High Priests, and the pious Kings, who enquired of God on all extraordinary occasions, how they were to carry themselves, or what event they were to have, were all Soveraign Prophets. But in what manner God spake unto them, is not manifest. To say that when Moses went up to God in Mount Sinai, it was a Dream, or Vision, such as other Prophets had, is contrary to that distinction which God made between Moses, and other Prophets, Numb. 12. 6,7,8. To say God spake or appeared as he is in his own nature, is to deny his Infinitenesse, Invisibility, Incomprehensibility. To say he spake by Inspiration, or Infusion of the Holy Spirit, as the Holy Spirit signifieth the Deity, is to make Moses equall with Christ, in whom onely the Godhead (as St. Paul speaketh Col. 2.9.) dwelleth bodily. And lastly, to say he spake by the Holy Spirit, as it signifieth the graces, or gifts of the Holy Spirit, is to attribute nothing to him supernaturall. For God disposeth men to Piety, Justice, Mercy, Truth, Faith, and all manner of Vertue, both Morall, and Intellectuall, by doctrine, example, and by severall occasions, naturall, and ordinary.

In the Old Testament, God Spoke from the Mercy Seat to Supreme Prophets with a Permanent Calling. Scripture Does Not Explain How. Among Old Testament prophets with a permanent calling, some were supreme and others subordinate. Moses was the first supreme prophet. After him came the High Priests, each during his own term, as long as the priesthood held royal authority. Later, the Jewish people rejected God as their king. After that, kings who submitted to God’s government were also his chief prophets. The High Priest’s office then became subordinate. When God was to be consulted, the priests put on holy vestments and consulted the Lord at the king’s command. They were removed from office whenever the king thought fit. For King Saul (1 Sam. 13. 9.) commanded that the burnt offering be brought. He also commanded the priest to bring the Ark near him (1 Sam. 14. 18.). Then he told the priest to leave it alone (verse 19.), because he saw an advantage against his enemies. In the same chapter, Saul asks God for counsel. Similarly, after David was anointed, but before he possessed the kingdom, he is said to “enquire of the Lord” (1 Sam. 23. 2.). He asked whether he should fight the Philistines at Keilah. David also commanded the priest to bring him the Ephod (verse 10.). He wanted to ask whether he should remain in Keilah. And King Solomon (1 Kings 2. 27.) removed Abiathar from the priesthood and gave the office to Zadoc (verse 35.). Therefore, Moses, the High Priests, and the godly kings were all sovereign prophets. On all extraordinary occasions, they asked God how they should act or what outcome they should expect. But how God spoke to them is not clear. Saying that Moses experienced a dream or vision on Mount Sinai, like other prophets, contradicts God’s distinction between them. God made that distinction in Numbers 12. 6, 7, 8. Saying that God spoke or appeared in his own nature denies that he is infinite, invisible, and beyond understanding. Saying that God spoke through inspiration, or an infusion of the Holy Spirit understood as God himself, makes Moses equal to Christ. Yet only in Christ does the fullness of God dwell bodily, as St. Paul says (Col. 2. 9.). Finally, suppose God spoke through the Holy Spirit, meaning the graces or gifts of the Holy Spirit. Saying this attributes nothing supernatural to Moses. For God leads people toward godliness, justice, mercy, truth, faith, and every kind of moral and intellectual virtue. He does so through teaching, example, and various natural and ordinary circumstances.

And as these ways cannot be applyed to God, in his speaking to Moses, at Mount Sinai; so also, they cannot be applyed to him, in his speaking to the High Priests, from the Mercy-Seat. Therefore in what manner God spake to those Soveraign Prophets of the Old Testament, whose office it was to enquire of him, is not intelligible. In the time of the New Testament, there was no Soveraign Prophet, but our Saviour; who was both God that spake, and the Prophet to whom he spake.

These ways cannot explain how God spoke to Moses at Mount Sinai. Nor can they explain how he spoke to the High Priests from the Mercy-Seat. So we cannot understand how God spoke to those Sovereign Prophets of the Old Testament whose duty was to consult him. In the time of the New Testament, there was no Sovereign Prophet except our Saviour. He was both God who spoke and the Prophet to whom God spoke.

To Prophets Of Perpetuall Calling, But Subordinate, God Spake By The Spirit. To subordinate Prophets of perpetuall Calling, I find not any place that proveth God spake to them supernaturally; but onely in such manner, as naturally he inclineth men to Piety, to Beleef, to Righteousnesse, and to other vertues all other Christian Men. Which way, though it consist in Constitution, Instruction, Education, and the occasions and invitements men have to Christian vertues; yet it is truly attributed to the operation of the Spirit of God, or Holy Spirit (which we in our language call the Holy Ghost): For there is no good inclination, that is not of the operation of God. But these operations are not alwaies supernaturall. When therefore a Prophet is said to speak in the Spirit, or by the Spirit of God, we are to understand no more, but that he speaks according to Gods will, declared by the supreme Prophet. For the most common acceptation of the word Spirit, is in the signification of a mans intention, mind, or disposition.

God Spoke Through the Spirit to Prophets with a Permanent but Subordinate Calling. I find no passage proving that God spoke supernaturally to subordinate prophets with a permanent calling. Rather, he spoke as he naturally guides all other Christians toward piety, belief, righteousness, and other virtues. This guidance works through temperament, instruction, education, and the opportunities and encouragement people receive to practice Christian virtues. Yet this guidance is rightly attributed to the work of the Spirit of God, or Holy Spirit. In our language, we call the Holy Spirit the Holy Ghost. For every good inclination comes from God's work. But God's work is not always supernatural. Therefore, when a prophet is said to speak in the Spirit, or by the Spirit of God, we should understand only this: the prophet speaks according to God's will, as declared by the supreme Prophet. For the most common meaning of the word Spirit is a person's intention, mind, or disposition.

In the time of Moses, there were seventy men besides himself, that Prophecyed in the Campe of the Israelites. In what manner God spake to them, is declared in the 11 of Numbers, verse 25. “The Lord came down in a cloud, and spake unto Moses, and took of the Spirit that was upon him, and gave it to the seventy Elders. And it came to passe, when the Spirit rested upon them, they Prophecyed, and did not cease,” By which it is manifest, first, that their Prophecying to the people, was subservient, and subordinate to the Prophecying of Moses; for that God took of the Spirit of Moses, to put upon them; so that they Prophecyed as Moses would have them: otherwise they had not been suffered to Prophecy at all. For there was (verse 27.) a complaint made against them to Moses; and Joshua would have Moses to have forbidden them; which he did not, but said to Joshua, Bee not jealous in my behalf. Secondly, that the Spirit of God in that place, signifieth nothing but the Mind and Disposition to obey, and assist Moses in the administration of the Government. For if it were meant they had the substantial Spirit of God; that is, the Divine nature, inspired into them, then they had it in no lesse manner than Christ himself, in whom onely the Spirit of God dwelt bodily. It is meant therefore of the Gift and Grace of God, that guided them to co-operate with Moses; from whom their Spirit was derived. And it appeareth (verse 16.) that, they were such as Moses himself should appoint for Elders and Officers of the People: For the words are, “Gather unto me seventy men, whom thou knowest to be Elders and Officers of the people:” where, “thou knowest,” is the same with “thou appointest,” or “hast appointed to be such.” For we are told before (Exod. 18.) that Moses following the counsell of Jethro his Father-in-law, did appoint Judges, and Officers over the people, such as feared God; and of these, were those Seventy, whom God by putting upon them Moses spirit, inclined to aid Moses in the Administration of the Kingdome: and in this sense the Spirit of God is said (1 Sam. 16. 13, 14.) presently upon the anointing of David, to have come upon David, and left Saul; God giving his graces to him he chose to govern his people, and taking them away from him, he rejected. So that by the Spirit is meant Inclination to Gods service; and not any supernaturall Revelation.

In the time of Moses, seventy men besides Moses himself prophesied in the camp of the Israelites. Numbers 11:25 explains how God spoke to them. “The Lord came down in a cloud and spoke to Moses. He took some of the Spirit that was upon Moses and gave it to the seventy Elders. And when the Spirit rested upon them, they prophesied and did not stop.” First, this clearly shows that their prophesying to the people served Moses’ prophesying and was subordinate to it. For God took some of Moses’ Spirit and put it upon them. So they prophesied as Moses wished. Otherwise, they would not have been allowed to prophesy at all. For a complaint was made against them to Moses (verse 27). Joshua wanted Moses to forbid them from prophesying. But Moses did not forbid them and instead told Joshua, “Do not be jealous on my behalf.” Second, “the Spirit of God” here means nothing more than a willingness to obey Moses and help him govern. Suppose instead that the passage meant they had received God’s actual Spirit, that is, the divine nature itself. Then they would have possessed it no less fully than Christ himself. Yet only in Christ did the Spirit of God dwell bodily. The passage therefore means God’s gift and grace guided them to work with Moses, from whom their Spirit came. Verse 16 also shows that these men were to be Elders and Officers of the people appointed by Moses himself. For the words are, “Gather before me seventy men whom you know to be Elders and Officers of the people.” Here, “you know” means the same as “you appoint” or “have appointed to these positions.” For we are told earlier (Exodus 18) that Moses followed the advice of Jethro, his father-in-law. Moses appointed Judges and Officers over the people, choosing men who feared God. The seventy were chosen from these men. By putting Moses’ spirit upon them, God made them willing to help Moses govern the kingdom. The Spirit of God is described in the same sense in 1 Samuel 16:13–14. Immediately after David was anointed, the Spirit came upon David and left Saul. God gave his gifts of grace to the man he chose to govern his people. He took those gifts away from the man he rejected. So “the Spirit” means a willingness to serve God, not any supernatural revelation.

God spake also many times by the event of Lots; which were ordered by such as he had put in Authority over his people. So wee read that God manifested by the Lots which Saul caused to be drawn (1 Sam. 14. 43.) the fault that Jonathan had committed, in eating a honey-comb, contrary to the oath taken by the people. And (Josh. 18. 10.) God divided the land of Canaan amongst the Israelite, by the “lots that Joshua did cast before the Lord in Shiloh.” In the same manner it seemeth to be, that God discovered (Joshua 7.16., &c.) the crime of Achan. And these are the wayes whereby God declared his Will in the Old Testament.

God also spoke many times through the results of casting lots. These lots were arranged by those he had placed in authority over his people. So we read that God revealed Jonathan’s offense through the lots Saul ordered to be drawn (1 Sam. 14. 43.). Jonathan had eaten a honeycomb, breaking the oath the people had taken. And God divided the land of Canaan among the Israelites (Josh. 18. 10.). He did so through the “lots that Joshua cast before the Lord in Shiloh.” God seems to have revealed Achan’s crime in the same way (Joshua 7.16., etc.). These are the ways God made his will known in the Old Testament.

All which ways he used also in the New Testament. To the Virgin Mary, by a Vision of an Angel: To Joseph in a Dream: again to Paul in the way to Damascus in a Vision of our Saviour: and to Peter in the Vision of a sheet let down from heaven, with divers sorts of flesh, of clean and unclean, beasts; and in prison, by Vision of an Angel: And to all the Apostles, and Writers of the New Testament, by the graces of his Spirit; and to the Apostles again (at the choosing of Matthias in the place of Judas Iscariot) by lot.

He also used all these methods in the New Testament. He spoke to the Virgin Mary through a vision of an angel, and to Joseph in a dream. He also spoke to Paul on the road to Damascus through a vision of our Saviour. He spoke to Peter through a vision of a sheet lowered from heaven, containing various animals, both clean and unclean. He also spoke to Peter in prison through a vision of an angel. He spoke to all the Apostles and writers of the New Testament through the gifts of his Spirit. He also spoke to the Apostles by lot when they chose Matthias to replace Judas Iscariot.

Seeing then all Prophecy supposeth Vision, or Dream, (which two, when they be naturall, are the same,) or some especiall gift of God, so rarely observed in mankind, as to be admired where observed; and seeing as well such gifts, as the most extraordinary Dreams, and Visions, may proceed from God, not onely by his supernaturall, and immediate, but also by his naturall operation, and by mediation of second causes; there is need of Reason and Judgement to discern between naturall, and supernaturall Gifts, and between naturall, and supernaturall Visions, or Dreams. And consequently men had need to be very circumspect, and wary, in obeying the voice of man, that pretending himself to be a Prophet, requires us to obey God in that way, which he in Gods name telleth us to be the way to happinesse. For he that pretends to teach men the way of so great felicity, pretends to govern them; that is to say, to rule, and reign over them; which is a thing, that all men naturally desire, and is therefore worthy to be suspected of Ambition and Imposture; and consequently, ought to be examined, and tryed by every man, before hee yeeld them obedience; unlesse he have yeelded it them already, in the institution of a Common-wealth; as when the Prophet is the Civill Soveraign, or by the Civil Soveraign Authorized. And if this examination of Prophets, and Spirits, were not allowed to every one of the people, it had been to no purpose, to set out the marks, by which every man might be able, to distinguish between those, whom they ought, and those whom they ought not to follow. Seeing therefore such marks are set out (Deut. 13. 1,&c.) to know a Prophet by; and (1 John 4.1.&C) to know a Spirit by: and seeing there is so much Prophecying in the Old Testament; and so much Preaching in the New Testament against Prophets; and so much greater a number ordinarily of false Prophets, then of true; every one is to beware of obeying their directions, at their own perill. And first, that there were many more false than true Prophets, appears by this, that when Ahab (1 Kings 12.) consulted four hundred Prophets, they were all false Imposters, but onely one Michaiah. And a little before the time of the Captivity, the Prophets were generally lyars. “The Prophets” (saith the Lord by Jerem. cha. 14. verse 14.) “prophecy Lies in my name. I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, nor spake unto them, they prophecy to you a false Vision, a thing of naught; and the deceit of their heart.” In so much as God commanded the People by the mouth of the Prophet Jeremiah (chap. 23. 16.) not to obey them. “Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, hearken not unto the words of the Prophets, that prophecy to you. They make you vain, they speak a Vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord.”

All prophecy, then, depends on a vision, a dream, or some special gift from God. Visions and dreams are the same when they occur naturally. Such special gifts are so rarely seen among people that they inspire wonder whenever they appear. Both these gifts and the most extraordinary dreams and visions may come from God through different means. God may produce them through supernatural, direct action, or through natural processes and secondary causes. So reason and judgment are needed to distinguish natural gifts from supernatural ones, and natural visions or dreams from supernatural ones. People therefore need to be very cautious about obeying anyone who claims to be a prophet. Such a person demands obedience to God in whatever way he declares, in God’s name, will lead to happiness. For anyone who claims to teach people the way to such great happiness also claims to govern them. That means ruling and reigning over them, something all people naturally desire. Such a claim therefore deserves suspicion of ambition and fraud. Consequently, everyone should examine and test these claimants before obeying them. The exception is anyone who has already granted them obedience when establishing a Commonwealth. This happens when the prophet is the Civil Sovereign or is authorized by the Civil Sovereign. If everyone were not allowed to examine prophets and spirits, providing signs for judging them would have served no purpose. These signs enable everyone to distinguish those they should follow from those they should not. Signs for recognizing a prophet are given in Deuteronomy 13:1 and the following verses. Signs for recognizing a spirit are given in 1 John 4:1 and the following verses. The Old Testament contains much prophecy against prophets, and the New Testament contains much preaching against them. False prophets also ordinarily far outnumber true ones. Everyone must therefore beware of following their directions, at their own peril. First, the great number of false prophets compared with true ones is clear from Ahab’s consultation of four hundred prophets. All were fraudulent impostors, with only one exception, Michaiah (1 Kings 12). And shortly before the Captivity, the prophets were generally liars. “The prophets,” says the Lord through Jeremiah, chapter 14, verse 14, “prophesy lies in my name. I did not send them, command them, or speak to them. They prophesy to you a false vision, a worthless thing, and the deceit of their own hearts.” So God commanded the people through the prophet Jeremiah not to obey these prophets (chapter 23, verse 16). “This is what the Lord of Hosts says: Do not listen to the prophets who prophesy to you. They fill you with empty hopes. They speak visions from their own hearts, not from the mouth of the Lord.”

Seeing then there was in the time of the Old Testament, such quarrells amongst the Visionary Prophets, one contesting with another, and asking When departed the Spirit from me, to go to thee? as between Michaiah, and the rest of the four hundred; and such giving of the Lye to one another, (as in Jerem. 14.14.) and such controversies in the New Testament at this day, amongst the Spirituall Prophets: Every man then was, and now is bound to make use of his Naturall Reason, to apply to all Prophecy those Rules which God hath given us, to discern the true from the false. Of which rules, in the Old Testament, one was, conformable doctrine to that which Moses the Soveraign Prophet had taught them; and the other the miraculous power of foretelling what God would bring to passe, as I have already shown out of Deut. 13. 1. &c. and in the New Testament there was but one onely mark; and that was the preaching of this Doctrine, That Jesus Is The Christ, that is, the King of the Jews, promised in the Old Testament. Whosoever denyed that Article, he was a false Prophet, whatsoever miracles he might seem to work; and he that taught it was a true Prophet. For St. John (1 Epist, 4. 2, &c) speaking expressely of the means to examine Spirits, whether they be of God, or not; after he hath told them that there would arise false Prophets, saith thus, “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God. Every Spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God;” that is, is approved and allowed as a Prophet of God: not that he is a godly man, or one of the Elect, for this, that he confesseth, professeth, or preacheth Jesus to be the Christ; but for that he is a Prophet avowed. For God sometimes speaketh by Prophets, whose persons he hath not accepted; as he did by Baalam; and as he foretold Saul of his death, by the Witch of Endor. Again in the next verse, “Every Spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh, is not of Christ. And this is the Spirit of Antichrist.” So that the rule is perfect on both sides; that he is a true Prophet, which preacheth the Messiah already come, in the person of Jesus; and he a false one that denyeth him come, and looketh for him in some future Imposter, that shall take upon him that honour falsely, whom the Apostle there properly calleth Antichrist. Every man therefore ought to consider who is the Soveraign Prophet; that is to say, who it is, that is Gods Viceregent on earth; and hath next under God, the Authority of Governing Christian men; and to observe for a Rule, that Doctrine, which in the name of God, hee commanded to bee taught; and thereby to examine and try out the truth of those Doctrines, which pretended Prophets with miracles, or without, shall at any time advance: and if they find it contrary to that Rule, to doe as they did, that came to Moses, and complained that there were some that Prophecyed in the Campe, whose Authority so to doe they doubted of; and leave to the Soveraign, as they did to Moses to uphold, or to forbid them, as hee should see cause; and if hee disavow them, then no more to obey their voice; or if he approve them, then to obey them, as men to whom God hath given a part of the Spirit of their Soveraigne. For when Christian men, take not their Christian Soveraign, for Gods Prophet; they must either take their owne Dreams, for the prophecy they mean to bee governed by, and the tumour of their own hearts for the Spirit of God; or they must suffer themselves to bee lead by some strange Prince; or by some of their fellow subjects, that can bewitch them, by slander of the government, into rebellion, without other miracle to confirm their calling, then sometimes an extraordinary successe, and Impunity; and by this means destroying all laws, both divine, and humane, reduce all Order, Government, and Society, to the first Chaos of Violence, and Civill warre.

In Old Testament times, prophets who claimed visions quarreled with one another. One challenged another, asking, When did the Spirit leave me to go to you? Such was the dispute between Michaiah and the rest of the four hundred. They also accused one another of lying, as in Jeremiah 14:14. Similar disputes continue today among those who claim to speak through the Spirit under the New Testament. Everyone therefore had, and still has, a duty to use natural reason to judge all prophecy. Everyone must apply the rules God has given us to distinguish true prophecy from false prophecy. In the Old Testament, one rule required teaching to agree with what Moses, the sovereign prophet, had taught. The other required the miraculous power to predict what God would bring about. I have already shown these rules from Deuteronomy 13:1 and the following verses. In the New Testament, there was only one identifying mark: teaching that Jesus is the Christ. That is, Jesus is the King of the Jews promised in the Old Testament. Whoever denied that article of faith was a false prophet, whatever miracles he might seem to perform. Whoever taught it was a true prophet. St. John expressly discusses how to test spirits to determine whether they come from God (1 John 4:2 and following). After warning that false prophets would arise, he says: “This is how you recognize the Spirit of God. Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.” This means the speaker is approved and accepted as a prophet of God. Acknowledging, professing, or preaching that Jesus is the Christ does not mean the speaker is godly or among the Elect. It means that he is a recognized prophet. For God sometimes speaks through prophets whom he does not personally accept. He did so through Baalam. He also foretold Saul’s death through the Witch of Endor. Again, in the next verse, John says: “Every spirit that does not acknowledge that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not from Christ. And this is the spirit of Antichrist.” So the rule is complete on both sides. A true prophet preaches that the Messiah has already come in the person of Jesus. A false prophet denies that the Messiah has come and expects him in some future impostor. That impostor will falsely claim the honor of being the Messiah. The Apostle rightly calls that impostor Antichrist. Everyone should therefore consider who the sovereign prophet is. That means identifying God’s representative on earth, who has authority under God to govern Christians. Everyone should take as a rule the teaching that this sovereign commands to be taught in God’s name. They should use that rule to test the truth of teachings put forward by supposed prophets, with or without miracles. If those teachings contradict the rule, people should follow the example of those who came to Moses. They complained that some people were prophesying in the camp, whose authority to do so they doubted. They left Moses to decide whether to support or forbid those prophets, as he saw reason to do. In the same way, people should leave that decision to their sovereign. If the sovereign rejects those prophets, people should no longer obey them. If he approves them, people should obey them as men given part of their sovereign’s Spirit by God. For when Christians do not recognize their Christian sovereign as God’s prophet, they must accept one of several alternatives. They must treat their own dreams as the prophecy that will govern them, and their swollen pride as God’s Spirit. Or they must let themselves be led by a foreign prince. Or they must follow fellow subjects who can bewitch them into rebellion by slandering the government. Such subjects offer no miracle to confirm their calling, except sometimes extraordinary success and freedom from punishment. By these means, they destroy all laws, both divine and human. They reduce all order, government, and society to the original chaos of violence and civil war.