shown to be necessary to the Apostle's argument, plainly enforced by the context, and to stand clear of all difficulties. The more sure word of prophecy here mentioned is shown to refer not only to the prophecies of the Old, but also to those of the New Testament. The above interpretation of the passage furnishes an answer to one objection, stated by the learned Grotius, against the authority of the epistle.

DISCOURSE I.

II PETER, CHAP. I.-VERSE 19.

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts.

THERE being evidently a comparison in the text between the 'word of prophecy,' and something before mentioned or intended, it is necessary to look back to see how the relation stands, and what the thing is to which the word of prophecy' is compared and preferred. At the 16th verse the Apostle says, We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' And after thus disclaiming all art and deceit in setting forth the promises and expectations of the gospel, he proceeds to declare on what evidence and authority he had raised such expectations in them: But (we) were eye-witnesses of his majesty, for he received from God the Father honor and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.' Immediately follow the words of the text, 'We have also a more sure word of prophecy.'

You see on what foundation their inference stands, who assert that the evidence which Christians have from prophecy for the certainty of their hopes and expectations, compared with the evidence they have from the preaching of the Apostles, who were eye-witnesses and ear-witnesses of what they report concerning the majesty of Christ, is the greater and surer evi

*

dence; or, in the words of a late author, that "prophecy is a stronger argument than a miracle, which depends on external evidence and testimony." This author has taken great pains to show that the argument from prophecy for the truths of Christianity, as managed and applied by the writers of the New Testament, is absurd and ridiculous; and that we may not flatter ourselves with hopes of assistance from other arguments, he gives us this text of St. Peter, to show, by the authority of our own Scriptures, that prophecy, as bad an argument as it is, is nevertheless the very best that our cause affords: but his views be to himself; what truth there is in his exposition and application of this part of Scripture we shall soon see.

Interpreters differ very much in expounding this passage; but all, as far as I see, agree in rejecting this sense, which gives a superiority to the evidence of prophecy above all other evidence by which the truth of the gospel is confirmed; and indeed the text expounded to this meaning contradicts not only the general sense of mankind on this subject, but will be found likewise inconsistent with itself and many other places of Scripture. For, first, let any man consider, and say on what proof and evidence the authority of prophecy itself depends: can any prophet give greater proof of his divine mission than the power of working miracles? And if this be the last and the greatest proof he can give of his being sent by God, can the evidence of prophecy ever rise higher than the evidence of miracles, on which it ultimately depends for all its authority? When Gideon was called to the deliverance of Israel, the angel of the Lord came and said unto him, 'The Lord is with thee, thou mighty man of valor ;—go in this thy might, and thou shalt save Israel from the hand of the Midianites; have not I sent thee?' Here now was a prophecy delivered by the angel of the Lord to encourage his undertaking. What says Gideon to this? He desires a sign: 'If now I have found favor in thy sight, then show me a sign that thou talkest with me.' A sign is given him, a miraculous sign; he is satisfied, and undertakes the work appointed; to which he is again encouraged by two miracles

'A Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion' 1724. p. 27.

wrought at his request: Judges vii. What think you now? The prophecy delivered by the angel was as much a prophecy before as it was after miracles wrought in confirmation of it; but was the word of prophecy more sure before the miracles than after? If so, why was a sign desired? and, when desired, why was it granted? Does God work miracles to humor men in their folly? or is it to confirm their faith? If it be to confirm their faith, then our faith in the prophets depends on the authority of miracles; and since the stream can never rise above the spring-head, the evidence of prophecy cannot be greater than the evidence of miracles. But let us take a higher instance : Moses was the first and the greatest prophet of the law, to whom God spoke face to face :' he was called by God to deliver the children of Israel out of Egypt, and commissioned to assure them of God's immediate protection. This, I suppose, was sufficient to make him a prophet to Israel: but what says Moses? Behold they will not believe me, nor hearken to my voice; or they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.' Was this a foolish complaint in Moses? If it was, how came God to listen to it, and to furnish him with an answer above all exception, by giving him immediately a power to work miracles in confirmation of his prophecy? Does not this method of God's proceeding plainly show that miracles are the prophet's greatest authority and confirmation? What is that superior evidence of prophecy then, which is said so much to exceed the evidence of miracles? But to go on the comparison in the text, with respect to St. Peter himself, is between the word of prophecy' and the immediate word of God; and according to this exposition of the text, St. Peter, who declares that he heard the voice of God himself in the mount, is made in his own person to say, (for the words are, 'WE have a more sure word of prophecy,') that the dark prophecies of the Old Testament were a surer and more certain evidence than this immediate voice of God which he heard with his own ears. Now what is prophecy, that it should be more surely and certainly to be depended on than the immediate voice of God? Is it possible to think that St. Peter, or any man in his wits, could make such a comparison?

But farther, let us consider what account St. Peter himself

gives of this 'word of prophecy;' which we are told is beyond comparison the best and the surest evidence we have for our faith. He compares it to a light shining in a dark place,' and distinguishes it from day-light, and that brightness which is ushered in by the day-star. This word of prophecy,' then, is here compared by St. Peter to the glimmering light of a candle seen at a distance in a dark night; which, though it gives some direction, yet is nothing compared to clear day-light. Is not this now a choice account of the evidence of the gospel? nay, of the very best evidence which we have of the gospel? Are we still surrounded on all sides with darkness, assisted by one only distant glimmering light? Was it thus that Christ came to be a light to lighten the Gentiles, and to be the glory of Israel?' St. Peter, in his first epistle, tells all Christians that they are called out of darkness into God's marvellous light ;' how comes he then in this second epistle to tell them that they are still in darkness, and have nothing but a light glimmering in the darkness to direct them? Can the same writer possibly be supposed to give such different accounts of our gospel-state? Ask St. Paul what state Christians are in: he will tell you 'that the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, has shone unto them:' 2 Cor. iv. 4. Ask the Evangelists; they will tell you, the day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death.' Ask any, or all of the Apostles ; they will tell you their commission is to open the eyes of the people, and to turn them from darkness to light:' Acts xxvi. 16. agreeable to what our Lord told his disciples, 'Ye are the light of the world:' Matth. v. 14. How different is this account from that which St. Peter is supposed to give of the 'best light' we have under the gospel, in contradiction to himself, and almost every writer of the New Testament!

6

But let us go one step farther, and we shall find that St. Peter in the text is so far from speaking of the word of prophecy' as of the best light or evidence to be had for the point in question, whatever it was, that he manifestly speaks of it as not the best, but as a light to be attended to only until a better comes. Hear his words: We have also a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as