whereas God in the law seems to limit it to the moral CHAP. law, and chiefly insists on the three first precepts of V. the Decalogue; and therefore condemns such a one as spake in the name of the Lord, when he had not commanded them, Deut. xviii. 20. and such as endeavoured to bring in idolatry, Deut. xiii. 1, 2, 3. where, though the false. prophet should offer to do signs and wonders before them, yet, if his intention were to draw them to worship false Gods, they were not to hearken unto him. And Maimon. therefore Maimonides, where he largely disputes about de Fund. Leg. c. 8. the truth of prophecies, lays this down as a certain rule: S. 7. Si propheta surrexerit, atque magna miracula aut prodigia fecerit, et adlaboraverit falsitatis convincere prophetiam Mosis M. n. istum non audimus, quia certo novimus prodigium præstigiis aut incantationibus productum esse, as Vorstius renders him. If a prophet do never so great miracles, and seeks to convince Moses of falsehood, we are not to hearken to him: for we know that they are not done by the power of God, but by the illusion of the devil. And else- Idem de where he tells us, that if any one pretends to prophesy Idololat. "y in the name of idols, they must not so much as dispute with him, nor answer him, nor desire any signs or miracles from him; and if of himself he shews any, we are not to regard or mind them; for, saith he, whoever doth but doubt in his mind concerning them, he breaks that command, And thou shalt not hearken to the words of Deut. xiii. that prophet. So that the doctrine once established ought 3. to be our most certain rule, according to which we must judge of all pretenders to miracles; if their design be to draw men off from God's word, we are not to hearken to what they either say or do.

4. The doctrine of those prophets who seek not to introduce idolatry, must not be measured by a strict conformity to the words of Moses's law, but to the main reason and intention of it. The great reason of this is, because God did not intend the Jews should always rest in the Pædagogy of the ceremonial law, but sent them prophets to train them up by degrees, and to fit them for a state of greater perfection; and therefore it would be very unreasonable to judge whether they were true prophets or no, exactly by that which they came gradually to wean them from; which were all one as to try one whether he were grown a man or no by the swaddling-clouts he wore when he was a child. God tempered the ceremonial law much according to the condition and capacity of the persons it was prescribed to, and therefore the sanctions of it did

Leg. c. 5.

S. 9.

VIII.

BOOK immediately respect their temporary concerns: but we II. are not to think the end of that dispensation was to be merely a covenant for the Land of Promise; but as the cherubims in the Temple did always look towards the Mercy-seat, so did this whole economy look towards the coming of the Messias. But it was with the generality of the Jews as it is with ignorant people, who looking up to the heavens cannot fancy the stars to be any bigger than they seem to them; but astronomers, by the help of their optic-tubes and telescopes, do easily discern the just magnitude of them. So the Jews ordinarily thought there was no more in those types and shadows than was visibly represented to them; but such as had the help of the Divine Spirit (the best telescope to discern the day-star from on high with) could easily look through those prospectives into the most glorious mysteries of the Gospel of Jesus Christ; these types being like triangular prisms, that must be set in a due light and posture, before they can represent that great variety of spiritual mysteries which was contained in them. Now the great office of the prophet was to administer this light to the people, and to direct them in those excellent pieces of perspec tive, wherein, by the help of a prophetic glass, they might see the Son of God fully represented to their view. Besides this, the prophetical office was a kind of Chancery to the Mosaic law; wherein the prophets did interpret the pandects of the law ex æquo et bono, and frequently shewed in what cases God did dispense with the outward letter of it, to exalt the more the inward sense and reason of it. Hence the prophets seem many times to speak contemptibly of the outward prescribed ceremonies, when their intent is not to condemn the observation of them, but to tell the people there were greater things which God looked at, than the outward observation of some ceremonial precepts; and that God would never accept of that by way of commutation for real and internal Psalm 1. 8. goodness. Hence the prophets by their own practice did frequently shew that the law of Moses did not so in13. lxvi. 3. dispensably oblige men, but that God would accept of those actions which were performed without the regularity required by the law of Moses; and thus he did of sacrificing upon high places, not only before the building of the Temple, but sometimes after; as he accepted of the sacrifice of Elijah on Mount Carmel, even when Vid. Jarchi high places were forbidden: which the Jews are become so sensible of, that they grant that a true prophet may

li. 16.

Isa. i. 11,

Jer. vii. 21,

22, 23.

I Kings

xviii. 38.

in Deut.

xviii. 21.

V.

sometimes command something to be done in violation of CHAP. the law of Moses, so he doth not draw people to idolatry, nor destroy the obligation of Moses's law. But this they Et Vorst. ad restrain to yw something done in case of necessity, Maim. de and that it should not pass into a precedent or a perpetual Fund. c. 9. law; and therefore their rule is bɔ̃a 1 uyaw ny, The s. 5, 6, 7. prophet was to be hearkened to in every thing he commanded in a case of necessity. By this it is clear that the prophets were not to be tried by the letter of the law of Moses, but by the end and the reason of it. Thus much I suppose will make it clear what rules the people had to try the prophets' doctrine by, without miracles.

BOOK

II.

I.

CHAP. VI.

The Trial of Prophetical Predictions and Miracles.

I. The great Difficulty of trying the Truth of prophetical Predictions from Jer. xviii. 7, 8, &c. Some general Hypotheses promised for the clearing of it. II. The first concerns the Grounds why Predictions are accounted an Evidence of Divine Revelation. Three Consectaries drawn thence. III. The second, the Manner of God's Revelation of his Will to the Minds of the Prophets. Of the several Degrees of Prophecy. IV. The third is, that God did not always reveal the internal Purposes of his Will unto the true Prophets. V. The grand Question propounded, How it may be known when Predictions express God's Decrees, and when only the Series of Causes? For the first, several Rules laid down. 1. When the Prediction is confirmed by a present Miracle. 2. When the Things foretold exceed the Probability of second Causes. VI. 3. When confirmed by God's Oath. VII. 4. When the Blessings foretold are purely spiritual. VIII. Three Rules for interpreting the Prophecies which respect the State of Things under the Gospel. IX. When all Circumstances are foretold. 6. When many Prophets in several Ages agree in the same Predictions. X. Predictions do not express God's unalterable Purposes, when they only contain Comminations of Judgments, or are Predictions of temporal Blessings. XI. The Case of the Ninevites, Hezekiah, and others, opened. XII, XIII. Of Repentance in God, what it implies. XIV. The Jewish Objections about Predictions of temporal Blessings answered. XV. In what Cases Miracles were expected from the Prophets : when they were to confirm the Truth of their Religion. Instanced in the Prophet at Bethel, Elijah, Elisha, and Moses himself; XVI. whose Divine Authority that it was proved by Miracles, is demonstrated against the modern Jews, and their Pretences answered.

THE next thing which the rules of trial concerned, was the predictions of the prophets. Concerning which God himself hath laid down this general rule, Deut. xviii. 22. When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; thou shalt not be afraid of him. Grotius understands this place of the prophet's telling the people he would do some miracles to confirm his doctrine; but if those miracles were not done as he said, it was an evi

VI.

dent demonstration of a false prophet. It is certain it CHAP. was so; for then his own mouth told him he was a lying prophet: but these words seem to refer rather to something future than present, and are therefore generally understood concerning the truth of predictions; which was a matter of very difficult trial, in regard of the goodness or the justice of God so frequently interposing between the prediction and the event. That place which makes it so difficult to discern the truth of a prediction by the event, is Jer. xviii. 7, 8, 9, 10. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; if that nation against whom I have pronounced turn from evil, I will repent of the evil I had thought to do unto them: and at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; if it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then will I repent of the good wherewith I said I would benefit them. By which place it seems clear, that even after the predictions of prophets God reserved a liberty to himself either to repent of the evil or the good that was foretold concerning any people: how then can the fidelity of a prophet be discovered by the event, when God may alter the event, and yet the prophet be a true prophet? This being a case very intricate and obscure, will call for the more diligence in the unfolding of it: in order to which, we shall first premise some general hypotheses, and then come to the particular resolution of it. The general hypotheses will be concerning the way and method of God's revealing future contingencies to the prophets; without which it will be impossible to resolve the particular emergent cases concerning predictions.

II.

The prediction of future events is no further an argument of a prophetic spirit, than as the foreknowledge of those Hypoth. things is supposed to be out of the reach of any created understanding; and therefore God challengeth this to himself in Scripture, as a peculiar prerogative of his own, to declare the things that are to come, and thereby manifest the idols of the Gentiles to be no Gods, because they could not shew to their worshippers the things to come, Isa. xliv. 6, 7. From this hypothesis these three consectaries follow:

1. That the events which are foretold must be such as do exceed the reach of any created intellect; for otherwise it could be no evidence of a spirit of true prophecy; so that the foretelling of such events as depend upon

VOL. I.

M