Vert. 26,27. the Epifile to the R.ománs. 4 DIALOGUfi XXI. Verles 26, 27. As it is written, there (ball come it deliverer out of Sion,, and [ball turne away ungodli- neffe from Jacob; for ¡hi, is my covenant with them, when 1pall take away their jnnes. TIMorwnus. WHat doch Paul performe in thefe `/ words ? S t L. After his owne tellimony or prophetic touching the vocation of the fulneffe of the Jewes towards the end of the world ; he now proveth it by a double teftimony of the Prophet Efay; whence arifeth a fecond argument, to confirme that fecret of the Jewes con- verfion, even by Prophetical! authority, which is a molt lure word that cannot falle nor deceive. The Prophets have foretold the Jewes converfion, before the reftoring of all things, therefore certainly it mull be fo. T I M. Here aretrro knots to be leefed, firff (hew ae how Paul eal/eth that a fecret, verfe 25. wficb here in thefe verfes he faith was written before by the Prophet ? if it were written and revealed, then it is no feeret. S L.Dotrinet of the word are fecrets to force when they are not to others which know them; alto they be fecrets in part, when in the whole they be not fecrets. So it fareth with this particular do&trine,touching the future and ful re- ftauration of the unbeleeving Jewes : though it was written in the Scripture of the Prophets, "yet it remained as to others, fo to Paul himfelf a fecret and hidden thing,till it was taught him,yea and after he had learned it, yet Rill to others which knew it not, it did abide a myftery ; yea and to himfelfe in force fort, as in what manner,at what particu- lartime, and by what means this voca- tion thould be fulfilled. Thus what is not abfolutely a fecret,may yet be called a myfiery in fotne refpe&s. T I M. lint was is not fuffeient for the credit of this myftery, that Paul had affirmed 5 it /rons theinfpirationof the holyGha9? wha t needetb he to bring Scripture to confirme it, bis own offer! ion being an Apo file was aboun- dantly enough ? S I L. lc is true, Paul his owne af- fertion might have fitfliciently autho- rised thisdo&rine,but for two or three itearont efpeciall reafons,he doth now (as often Whathe heretofore) appeale unto Scriptures , prove their: repeating his wonted words ( as it is ao@nne hr. STtiTe of written.) His reafons be chefe : Fiel, to rise ota re- manifefland make good that which in fiamcni. his defence against King togrippa he had fpoken, that he did witneffe no o- ther things then thofe which the Pro- , phets did fay fhould corne, Alts 26.22. Secondly, to prevent and put by the offence of the Jewes,thae they might not be fcandalized and grieved with the do -) Etrine of the Gofpell; wherein they fhould apparently behold a great and full agreement between it and the Gof- pell. Thirdly,to commend the nfe of the Scriptures, that it alone is a perfeft rule of faith and manners, and al- fufñcient alone to demonfirate and prove all do trines touching falvation; fo as we need not for this purpofe,authority hu- mane, or traditions of the Church, and unwritten word. T a M. What are We then to learn froth tbra confiant cuffome of Paul, ffill provoking to the authority of the old 7efiament, for proof of points and articles of religion ? S I L. Firft, the great proportion and harmony or content which is be- tween the Prophetical! and Apoftoli- call writings.Nothing in the new Tefla- ment is taught to be beleeved unto fal- vation,which is not foretold and fore- (hewed in the old; nothing promifed in the old, which hath not the acconl- plifhment in the new, fo as the boökes of Fvangelifts and Apoftles, be as it were Commentaries of the Prophets, as the Prophets be interpreters of 1l?ofes. The new Teftament is the illuftration of the old, as the old is the fhadowing of the new : both be but one word, and one Scripture, as there is but one faith, one Church; whatfoever fanaticall and fantafticall men, as Marcionites, Mani- chees, and others do dreame. Secondly, T t 2 wt
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=