tles, though in a far inferior degree. For with what effusion of the Spirit at Pentecost, they had the gifts of tongues, the gifts of miracles, of discerning of spirits, yea, the gifts of wisdom and knowledge (the pastor's and teacher's gifts), mentioned 1 Cor. 12, and also 1 Cor. 14. But will any man say that believers now have any such gifts of the Spirit, or any promise thereof? Mr. Dell, in his answer to Mr. Simpson, p. 34, tells us of many promises of the Spirit to believers: 1 Cor. 12, 13, Gal. 4, 6, 7, whence he gathers, that the whole Church of believers, and every true member thereof, do receive the Spirit of God. And who will deny that they do receive it, to cry Abba father, to change, sanctify, and comfort their hearts? But there is more than these required to make an able minister. God's ministers must rightly divide the word of truth: 2 Tim. 2, 15, Must be apt to teach; 1 Tim. 3, 2, Must be able by sound doctrine, both to exhort, to convince the gainsayers. They must have the tongue of the learned, that they may not be as those unlearned ones that wrest the Scriptures to their own and others perdition: 2 Pet. 3, 16. Now let any prudent man be judge in this case, whether he think that every Christian that hath received the sanctifying Spirit of God is gifted thereby and qualified, for the confutation of gainsayers and the whole work of the ministry.

Mr. Dell, in his answer to Mr. Simpson:

Objection: "Human learning is rather an hindrance than an help to the ministry of the Gospel, and doth rather unfit than fit men for it; and the grace and teaching of God only prepares and enables men to this divine work. Learning is so far from fitting men for this Gospel and the ministry thereof, that indeed there is nothing in greater enmity to Christ crucified, nor more contrary to the Word of the Cross than that. Yea, nothing in all the world hath been such an introducer, favorer, supporter, and enlarger of anti-Christ's kingdom, as human learning and philosophy. This hath brought in all the hypocrisy, superstition, false worship,sects, and schisms, etc. Answer. It is to be feared that Mr. D. hath been tainted with human learning, as in some other of his opinions, so in writing of these things. Let the reader remember what approbation he gave to human learning before, that he would have it taught, not only in universities, but in all cities and villages; and yet he hath now so forgot himself, that though for humane and civil ends, he did allow it, yet now he saith, that it is enmity to Christ crucified, and contrary to the word of the cross, etc.; wherein let the indifferent reader observe with me a few particulars.

1. If Mr. Dell had allowed the use of Logick in Divinity, how should he have dared to have allowed any of these humane arts, or languages for any end whatsoever? Paul abhors that charge: Rom., 3, 8. Let us do evil that good may come of it, and their damnation is just that so reason. But Mr. D. saith that for humane ends (as for the Commonwealth's sake) Schools, Universities, Colledges, Grammar, Logick, Physick, Law, Rhetorick, Arithmetick, Geometry, should be set up in every town and city in the whole nation; which yet are no better than enmity to Christ crucified and contrary to the word of the cross, the greatest introducers, favourers, supporters, and inlargers of Anti-christs kingdom, which have brought in all the hyprocrisie, superstition, false doctrine, false worship, sects, and schisms.

Is not this to do evil, that good (some outward good to civil society)

may come of it? It is no matter how it fares in the meantime with Christ or Antichrist, Christian or antichristian religion. It is no matter how much hypocrisy, or false doctrine, false worship, etc., be set up thereby, in every city or village in the whole nation, so that their human ends be provided for. Is not this man, think you, a good friend to Christ and Antichrist, to the Church and commonwealth? Doth this doctrine come from the Spirit of God, or another spirit?

2. Anti-Christ himself and his adherents, take in all the rabble of locusts crawling out of the smoke of the bottomless pit, take in all the popish tyrants, and all the devils in hell (for these are all such as are in the world); yet, according to Mr. Dell's divinity, were never such introducers, or favorers, etc., of Antichrist's kingdom, were never such enemies to Christ crucified, or the word of His cross, never brought in so much hypocrisy, superstitution, false doctrine, false worship, etc., as human learning, and yet how can he in any sense allow of any human learning, or desire more universities or colleges. Would he have more Antichrist's, more devils, etc.? Hath not that man laid aside natural logic, and common sense, and honesty, and put off his forehead that writes thus?

3. Whereas he saith that human learning is rather a hindrance than an help to the ministry of the Gospel and to all Christianity. Let us consider a little what truth there is in this assertion, to let pass what I said before:

1. I will premise what Mr. Crandon" and M. Horn, do grant that were no friends to human learning. Mr. H. grants some lesser usefulness some sciences may afford (to Divinity), as the mathematics to find out the bigness of the ark, the measures of the temple, etc.; Astronomy, to tell us what Arcturus and Orion and Pleiades are; history and chronology may seem to help to understand the passages of the monarchies and visions in Daniel, etc. Thus Horn; but I should have thought that so strict a divine would rather have scrupled the very name of Arcturus and Orion, which, to find out, he must find worse human learning; that is heathenish fables, which will tell of a bear and a bear's tail in heaven, where Arcturus stands, and the constellation of Orion brings in Jupiter, Neptune, and Mercury; how they did ex urina illum procreare, and that Diana, for his valor in hunting, carried him up to heaven. To have these and such things brought into the translation of the Scripture would stumble a godly heart that knows the meaning thereof, as the rawest piece of human learning put in for Scripture which Mr. H. swallows. Now let me add what Mr. Crandon's judgment is; he speaks thus in his writings against Mr. Baxter. "That logical, philosophical, and metaphysical argumentations (mark he puts in metaphysics, too, which many will not own for a distinct science) in natural, moral, and economical questions (and these do spread far in divinity, as hath been said before,) may be useful. Yea, logic, in its sober and moderate use, applied as an instrument to assist in the contexture and retexture of Scriptures, to find out the sense and meaning thereof, and farther, as by joining of Gospel positions together, it helpeth elicit sure and sound conclusions,-may be profitably used in evangelical questions." Thus Mr. Crandon, which crosseth Mr. Dell's judgment. Let me add farther:

1. How shall a minister, without the knowledge of the original tongues, either translate the Scriptures or, when they are translated, maintain them

against the popish, vulgar, or other diverse false translations, to be the infallible truth of God? How shall he comfort a poor soul that saith he is a reprobate, and proves it out of 2 Cor. 13, 5, because he knows not that Jesus Christ is in him, if he knows not what adokimos means? I might make innumerable such instances, but I spare.

2. For logic let them tell me what a parologism is: Sam. 1, 22, without some knowledge in logic; what logicon gala means: 1 Pet. 2, 2. For logician is nowhere used as it is translated (of the word), but Rom. 12, 1, It is translated reasonable, and if there be logical and reasonable milk in the Scripture take away logic and reason, and the milk will be turned, neither will it be adolon without deceit. Yea, how shall a man know when a Scripture is wrested, or falsely applied, or a false use is made of it, or a false consequence is drawn out of it, or a true, without some principles of logic, especially, to hold forth these things to others, he must needs be a shameful workman, and many times ridiculous, neither rightly apprehending, nor dividing the word of truth, that hath no knowledge how to interpret the Scripture.

3. For rhetoric I would fain have the unlearned minister, or him that understands not rhetoric, to give any tolerable sense of these places of Scripture, and many the like (farther than they have been opened to them by the learned): John 15, 1, 'I am the true vine, etc.'; John 1, 29, 'Behold the Lamb of God'; 1 Cor. 10, 4, The rock was Christ; John 6, 41, 'I am the bread that came down from heaven'; John 10, 7, 'I am the door of the sheep, etc.'; add these places: John 3, 13, 'No man ascends into heaven but he that came down from heaven, etc.'; 1 John 3, 16, 'Hereby perceive we the love of God, because He laid down His life for us': John 21, last, 'There be many things that Jesus did the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.' And that Mat. 12, 20, as Jonas was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.' I should be endless if I should enumerate what might be gathered in this case. But I shall here have done

with Mr. Dell's arguments.

There is somewhat more in Horn and Crandon, which I shall be brief in, because as they state the question I should not contend with them.

Mr. Horn, thus: "That the study of philosophy (though lawful to be known and, in some points, useful yet,) is not necessary to the preachers or preaching of the Gospel, nor the key of knowledge, without which men cannot understand, or profitably hold forth the truths of Christ to others." It is not denied but what is necessary to salvation may be both understood and preached without the help of philosophy; it is enough if it be lawful and useful (ad bene ormelius esse), which is granted by him.

Now Mr. Cr., in his preface against Baxter, states the question thus: "That human learning is of no force to decide, judge, and conclude anything in questions merely evangelical, such as justification and all other Gospelgraces and privileges." I suppose that Mr. Crandon shall neither have Mr. Baxter nor any Protestant writer his adversary in that assertion. He that shall say otherwise shall make a pope of human learning, and an idol, or set up man above God. But for all this these revered men bring arguments that

go as far in overthrowing all human learning as Mr. Dell hath done. Let me briefly see the strength of them:

Horn. "If philosophy, physics, etc., had been needful for furnishing of men to the Gospel, this Christ, our Saviour, who came to teach us the mind of God and to set on foot the preaching of the Gospel, would have delivered those sciences unto us; at least a more perfect form of them than the philosophers did or could. But He did not so, etc., therefore they are not needful, etc."

Answer. 1. Take the force of this reason, pari; thus, if the knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages had been needful for furnishing men the Gospel in all ages, then Christ would have taught those languages, and made grammars for the learning of them, at least in a more perfect form than any grammarians did or could. He hath not done so, therefore, etc., would any wise man think this to be a good consequence? Yet the case is much alike, for both original tongues and the arts and sciences are like preparatives fitting persons to the preaching of the Gospel (for that is meant by furnishing men to the Gospel). But God is pleased to give to the sons of men to be exercised with labor and study in this and other kinds: Eccles. 1,13. 2. Christ hath delivered to us those sciences (as far as is needful) in a nore perfect form than any philosopher of old hath done. There was never such a method of physics or natural philosophy as is set down in the order of the works of creation, nor ever such a form of ethics, politics, or economics as He hath delivered in the Decalogue, and His own interpretation thereof, etc.

Horn. "The arts and sciences are of a diverse nature from the Gospel, that being a revelation of redemption and way to salvation for fallen man; philosophy but a purblind speculation about the nature of the creatures, and of God as He stands in relation of a creator and governor of them, etc."

Answer. 1. Not only arts and sciences, but the law, both ceremonial, and moral, and judicial, are of diverse nature from the Gospel, as it is the revelation of redemption, etc. Is all, therefore, superfluous, etc.?

2. Whatsoever is contained in Holy Scripture tends some way or other to the way of salvation for sinful man, and to make the man of God perfect; 2 Tim. 3, 16, 17, So doth the knowledge of God's works which are sought out of all them that have pleasure therein; Psal. 111, 2, Yea, they all make for the glory of God; Psal. 45, 10, And the knowledge of God's works is laid down in Holy Writ, not in a purblind speculation about the creatures, but in a way infallible.

3. Though the Gospel in a strict sense signifies the glad tidings of redemption by Jesus Christ, yet it hath a larger signification sometimes, as Rom. 2, 16, wherein the apostle tells us of the day of judgment, in which God shall judge the secrets of men according to the Gospel. There the rule of the last judgment shall be not only the Gospel in a strict sense, but as the law may be also comprehended under it; and whatsoever is contained in the Scriptures of the works of God, and as far as it concerns a minister to preach all profitable and Scripture truths, the knowledge of arts and sciences is useful and expedient to him to hold them forth to his hearers. Horn. "The law or doctrine of the Lord is perfect for conversion and edification, Psal. 19, 7."

Answer. But this perfect doctrine comprehends the doctrine of God's works, which is called philosophy.

Besides, that perfection doth not exclude, but presuppose that same to gnoston tou theou; Rom. 1, 19, Some common notions concerning God and His works are left in every man still, that must not be extinguished.

1

Horn. "If the said heathenish sciences are necessary to salvation, then we are not complete in Christ, but the contrary is affirmed, Col. 2, 2, 3, 10." Answer. Heathenish sciences are not necessary to salvation, nor simply to make an able minister. A Christian may be complete in Christ, and a minister an-able minister, without them, as the apostles and many others have been. We grant that all the treasures of soul-saving knowledge are in Christ, yet this doth not exclude the expedience of the knowledge of the law, ceremonial or moral (which are mentioned in the same place: Col. 2, 14), though we may be complete in Christ without seeking our salvation by them. Horn. "If we are to beware of philosophy lest we be spoiled by it, then it is not necessary to teach and preserve us. But the former is true, Col. 2, 8, and by philosophy the apostle means not only sophistry, but that which the wisest philosophers accounted philosophy."

Answer. 1. No Christian (that I know of) will say that heathenish philosophy is necessary to teach or preserve him or others. 2. What philosophy means he explains, and addeth to philosophy vain deceit, and that is no better than sophistry.

3. There are many false principles of heathenish philosophy, as the eternity of the world, the freedom of the will to goodness, the placing of the chiefest good in contemplation, or in moral virtues-such notions as these will spoil us, and must be shunned. But there are many true principles even amongst the heathens (which the apostle calleth that which is known of God, as His eternal power and Godhead), these will not spoil us.

4. There is nothing so good, no, not the Scriptures themselves, but they may be abused, and it is good counsel to warn men to take heed that they be not spoiled by the Scripture abused; much more may we be warned that we be not spoiled by the philosophy of the heathens.

5. The word (spoiled) by an allegory hath respect to what he spoke before about the treasures of Christ or the word; verse 2, That which robbeth us of these treasures, leaves us but poor creatures, but all philosophical tenets do not this.

6. I deny not but that (as Ames saith, and it is alleged by Mr. Crandon) the schoolmen and popish writers have made a very hodge-podge and mingle-mangle of heathenish philosophy and divinity together, and so brought in many pernicious errors into divinity; and it is likely that the apostle in this place forewarns the faithful to beware of such philosophy, which is called, Rev. 2, The depths of Satan. But what is this to the forbidding of sober and Christian philosophy?

What is added more than this by Mr. Horn hath been answered before. Mr. Crandon hath objected another place against secular learning, that is: "Acts 19, 19, What is spoken of the converts of Ephesus, while the apostle was yet resident among them, and consequently consenting with them, that they burnt their books of curious arts; which though some would have to be understood of conjuring books, yet I cannot assent to them, because