Thomas Hobbes · Complete work
Part III, Chapter XXXIII, 2
Part III, Chapter XXXIII, 2 of 101. Read it here for reference, or continue through the entire work without leaving the reader.
Open the complete readerOriginal 17th-century English
Of the Prophets, the most ancient, are Sophoniah, Jonas, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Michaiah, who lived in the time of Amaziah, and Azariah, otherwise Ozias, Kings of Judah. But the Book of Jonas is not properly a Register of his Prophecy, (for that is contained in these few words, “Fourty dayes and Ninivy shall be destroyed,”) but a History or Narration of his frowardenesse and disputing Gods commandements; so that there is small probability he should be the Author, seeing he is the subject of it. But the Book of Amos is his Prophecy.
Jeremiah, Abdias, Nahum, and Habakkuk prophecyed in the time of Josiah.
Ezekiel, Daniel, Aggeus, and Zacharias, in the Captivity.
When Joel and Malachi prophecyed, is not evident by their Writings. But considering the Inscriptions, or Titles of their Books, it is manifest enough, that the whole Scripture of the Old Testament, was set forth in the form we have it, after the return of the Jews from their Captivity in Babylon, and before the time of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, that caused it to bee translated into Greek by seventy men, which were sent him out of Judea for that purpose. And if the Books of Apocrypha (which are recommended to us by the Church, though not for Canonicall, yet for profitable Books for our instruction) may in this point be credited, the Scripture was set forth in the form wee have it in, by Esdras; as may appear by that which he himself saith, in the second book, chapt. 14. verse 21, 22, &c. where speaking to God, he saith thus, “Thy law is burnt; therefore no man knoweth the things which thou has done, or the works that are to begin. But if I have found Grace before thee, send down the holy Spirit into me, and I shall write all that hath been done in the world, since the beginning, which were written in thy Law, that men may find thy path, and that they which will live in the later days, may live.” And verse 45. “And it came to passe when the forty dayes were fulfilled, that the Highest spake, saying, ‘The first that thou hast written, publish openly, that the worthy and unworthy may read it; but keep the seventy last, that thou mayst deliver them onely to such as be wise among the people.’” And thus much concerning the time of the writing of the Bookes of the Old Testament.
The Writers of the New Testament lived all in lesse then an age after Christs Ascension, and had all of them seen our Saviour, or been his Disciples, except St. Paul, and St. Luke; and consequently whatsoever was written by them, is as ancient as the time of the Apostles. But the time wherein the Books of the New Testament were received, and acknowledged by the Church to be of their writing, is not altogether so ancient. For, as the Bookes of the Old Testament are derived to us, from no higher time then that of Esdras, who by the direction of Gods Spirit retrived them, when they were lost: Those of the New Testament, of which the copies were not many, nor could easily be all in any one private mans hand, cannot bee derived from a higher time, that that wherein the Governours of the Church collected, approved, and recommended them to us, as the writings of those Apostles and Disciples; under whose names they go. The first enumeration of all the Bookes, both of the Old, and New Testament, is in the Canons of the Apostles, supposed to be collected by Clement the first (after St. Peter) Bishop of Rome. But because that is but supposed, and by many questioned, the Councell of Laodicea is the first we know, that recommended the Bible to the then Christian Churches, for the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles: and this Councell was held in the 364. yeer after Christ. At which time, though ambition had so far prevailed on the great Doctors of the Church, as no more to esteem Emperours, though Christian, for the Shepherds of the people, but for Sheep; and Emperours not Christian, for Wolves; and endeavoured to passe their Doctrine, not for Counsell, and Information, as Preachers; but for Laws, as absolute Governours; and thought such frauds as tended to make the people the more obedient to Christian Doctrine, to be pious; yet I am perswaded they did not therefore falsifie the Scriptures, though the copies of the Books of the New Testament, were in the hands only of the Ecclesiasticks; because if they had had an intention so to doe, they would surely have made them more favorable to their power over Christian Princes, and Civill Soveraignty, than they are. I see not therefore any reason to doubt, but that the Old, and New Testament, as we have them now, are the true Registers of those things, which were done and said by the Prophets, and Apostles. And so perhaps are some of those Books which are called Apocrypha, if left out of the Canon, not for inconformity of Doctrine with the rest, but only because they are not found in the Hebrew. For after the conquest of Asia by Alexander the Great, there were few learned Jews, that were not perfect in the Greek tongue. For the seventy Interpreters that converted the Bible into Greek, were all of them Hebrews; and we have extant the works of Philo and Josephus both Jews, written by them eloquently in Greek. But it is not the Writer, but the authority of the Church, that maketh a Book Canonicall.
And although these Books were written by divers men, yet it is manifest the Writers were all indued with one and the same Spirit, in that they conspire to one and the same end, which is the setting forth of the Rights of the Kingdome of God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. For the Book of Genesis, deriveth the Genealogy of Gods people, from the creation of the World, to the going into Egypt: the other four Books of Moses, contain the Election of God for their King, and the Laws which hee prescribed for their Government: The Books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Samuel, to the time of Saul, describe the acts of Gods people, till the time they cast off Gods yoke, and called for a King, after the manner of their neighbour nations; The rest of the History of the Old Testament, derives the succession of the line of David, to the Captivity, out of which line was to spring the restorer of the Kingdome of God, even our blessed Saviour God the Son, whose coming was foretold in the Bookes of the Prophets, after whom the Evangelists writt his life, and actions, and his claim to the Kingdome, whilst he lived one earth: and lastly, the Acts, and Epistles of the Apostles, declare the coming of God, the Holy Ghost, and the Authority he left with them, and their successors, for the direction of the Jews, and for the invitation of the Gentiles. In summe, the Histories and the Prophecies of the old Testament, and the Gospels, and Epistles of the New Testament, have had one and the same scope, to convert men to the obedience of God; 1. in Moses, and the Priests; 2. in the man Christ; and 3. in the Apostles and the successors to Apostolicall power. For these three at several times did represent the person of God: Moses, and his successors the High Priests, and Kings of Judah, in the Old Testament: Christ himself, in the time he lived on earth: and the Apostles, and their successors, from the day of Pentecost (when the Holy Ghost descended on them) to this day.
It is a question much disputed between the divers sects of Christian Religion, From Whence The Scriptures Derive Their Authority; which question is also propounded sometimes in other terms, as, How Wee Know Them To Be The Word Of God, or, Why We Beleeve Them To Be So: and the difficulty of resolving it, ariseth chiefly from the impropernesse of the words wherein the question it self is couched. For it is beleeved on all hands, that the first and originall Author of them is God; and consequently the question disputed, is not that. Again, it is manifest, that none can know they are Gods Word, (though all true Christians beleeve it,) but those to whom God himself hath revealed it supernaturally; and therefore the question is not rightly moved, of our Knowledge of it. Lastly, when the question is propounded of our Beleefe; because some are moved to beleeve for one, and others for other reasons, there can be rendred no one generall answer for them all. The question truly stated is, By What Authority They Are Made Law.
As far as they differ not from the Laws of Nature, there is no doubt, but they are the Law of God, and carry their Authority with them, legible to all men that have the use of naturall reason: but this is no other Authority, then that of all other Morall Doctrine consonant to Reason; the Dictates whereof are Laws, not Made, but Eternall.
If they be made Law by God himselfe, they are of the nature of written Law, which are Laws to them only to whom God hath so sufficiently published them, as no man can excuse himself, by saying, he know not they were his.
He therefore, to whom God hath not supernaturally revealed, that they are his, nor that those that published them, were sent by him, is not obliged to obey them, by any Authority, but his, whose Commands have already the force of Laws; that is to say, by any other Authority, then that of the Common-wealth, residing in the Soveraign, who only has the Legislative power. Again, if it be not the Legislative Authority of the Common-wealth, that giveth them the force of Laws, it must bee some other Authority derived from God, either private, or publique: if private, it obliges onely him, to whom in particular God hath been pleased to reveale it. For if every man should be obliged, to take for Gods Law, what particular men, on pretence of private Inspiration, or Revelation, should obtrude upon him, (in such a number of men, that out of pride, and ignorance, take their own Dreams, and extravagant Fancies, and Madnesse, for testimonies of Gods Spirit; or out of ambition, pretend to such Divine testimonies, falsely, and contrary to their own consciences,) it were impossible that any Divine Law should be acknowledged. If publique, it is the Authority of the Common-wealth, or of the Church. But the Church, if it be one person, is the same thing with a Common-wealth of Christians; called a Common-wealth, because it consisteth of men united in one person, their Soveraign; and a Church, because it consisteth in Christian men, united in one Christian Soveraign. But if the Church be not one person, then it hath no authority at all; it can neither command, nor doe any action at all; nor is capable of having any power, or right to any thing; nor has any Will, Reason, nor Voice; for all these qualities are personall. Now if the whole number of Christians be not contained in one Common-wealth, they are not one person; nor is there an Universall Church that hath any authority over them; and therefore the Scriptures are not made Laws, by the Universall Church: or if it bee one Common-wealth, then all Christian Monarchs, and States are private persons, and subject to bee judged, deposed, and punished by an Universall Soveraigne of all Christendome. So that the question of the Authority of the Scriptures is reduced to this, “Whether Christian Kings, and the Soveraigne Assemblies in Christian Common-wealths, be absolute in their own Territories, immediately under God; or subject to one Vicar of Christ, constituted over the Universall Church; to bee judged, condemned, deposed, and put to death, as hee shall think expedient, or necessary for the common good.”
Which question cannot bee resolved, without a more particular consideration of the Kingdome of God; from whence also, wee are to judge of the Authority of Interpreting the Scripture. For, whosoever hath a lawfull power over any Writing, to make it Law, hath the power also to approve, or disapprove the interpretation of the same.
CHAPTER XXXIV. OF THE SIGNIFICATION OF SPIRIT, ANGEL, AND INSPIRATION IN THE BOOKS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE
Musean translation
Mouseia’s complete machine-assisted Musean translation, made directly from the complete 1651 English text (introduction, forty-seven chapters, review and conclusion) for fidelity, the author’s force and cadence, and modern clarity. Hobbes’s marginal summaries are omitted.
Of the Prophets, the earliest are Sophoniah, Jonas, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Michaiah, who lived in the time of Amaziah and Azariah, otherwise Ozias, Kings of Judah. But the Book of Jonas is not properly a record of his prophecy (which consists of these few words: “Forty days and Ninivy shall be destroyed”), but a history or account of his stubbornness and his disputes with God's commandments. It is therefore unlikely that he was its author, since he is its subject. The Book of Amos, however, is his prophecy.
Jeremiah, Abdias, Nahum, and Habakkuk prophesied in the time of Josiah.
Ezekiel, Daniel, Aggeus, and Zacharias prophesied during the Captivity.
When Joel and Malachi prophesied is not evident from their writings. But considering the inscriptions, or titles, of their books, it is clear enough that the whole Scripture of the Old Testament was set forth in the form we have it after the Jews returned from their Captivity in Babylon and before the time of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, who had it translated into Greek by seventy men sent to him from Judea for that purpose. And if the Books of Apocrypha (which the Church recommends to us, though not as canonical, yet as books useful for our instruction) can be trusted on this point, Scripture was set forth in the form we have it by Esdras. This may be seen from what he himself says in the second book, chapt. 14. verse 21, 22, &c. Speaking to God, he says: “Your law is burned; therefore no one knows the things you have done, or the works that are to begin. But if I have found grace before you, send down the holy Spirit into me, and I shall write all that has been done in the world since the beginning, which was written in your Law, so that men may find your path, and those who will live in later days may live.” And verse 45: “And it came to pass, when the forty days were fulfilled, that the Highest spoke, saying, ‘The first that you have written, publish openly, so that the worthy and unworthy may read it; but keep the last seventy, so that you may deliver them only to such as are wise among the people.’” So much for the time when the books of the Old Testament were written.
The writers of the New Testament all lived less than an age after Christ's Ascension, and all had seen our Savior or been his disciples, except St. Paul and St. Luke. Consequently, whatever they wrote is as old as the time of the Apostles. But the time when the books of the New Testament were received and acknowledged by the Church as their writings is not quite so ancient. For just as the books of the Old Testament come down to us from no earlier time than that of Esdras, who, guided by God's Spirit, recovered them after they were lost, so the books of the New Testament, of which there were not many copies, and which could not easily all be in any private person's hands, cannot be traced further back than the time when the governors of the Church collected, approved, and recommended them to us as the writings of the Apostles and Disciples whose names they bear. The first enumeration of all the books of both the Old and New Testament is in the Canons of the Apostles, supposed to have been collected by Clement the first (after St. Peter) Bishop of Rome. But since that is merely supposed, and disputed by many, the Council of Laodicea is the first we know of to have recommended the Bible to the Christian Churches of that time as the writings of the Prophets and Apostles; this Council was held in the 364. year after Christ. By then ambition had so prevailed among the great Doctors of the Church that they no longer regarded Emperors, even Christian ones, as shepherds of the people, but as sheep, and non-Christian Emperors as wolves. They sought to present their doctrine not as counsel and information, in their capacity as preachers, but as laws, in the capacity of absolute governors; and they considered frauds that made the people more obedient to Christian doctrine to be pious. Yet I am persuaded that they did not therefore falsify the Scriptures, even though copies of the New Testament books were only in the hands of ecclesiastics. Had they intended to do so, they would surely have made those books more favorable than they are to their power over Christian Princes and civil sovereignty. I therefore see no reason to doubt that the Old and New Testament as we have them now are true records of what the Prophets and Apostles did and said. And perhaps the same is true of some books called Apocrypha, if they were left out of the canon not for any conflict of doctrine with the others, but merely because they are not found in Hebrew. For after Alexander the Great conquered Asia, few learned Jews were not proficient in Greek. The seventy interpreters who translated the Bible into Greek were all Hebrews; and we still have the works of Philo and Josephus, both Jews, eloquently written in Greek. But it is not the writer, but the authority of the Church, that makes a book canonical.
And although these books were written by different men, it is plain that their writers were all endowed with one and the same Spirit, since they converge on one and the same end: to set forth the rights of the Kingdom of God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The Book of Genesis traces the genealogy of God's people from the creation of the world to their going into Egypt. The other four Books of Moses contain their election of God as their King and the laws he prescribed for their government. The Books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Samuel, down to the time of Saul, describe the deeds of God's people until they cast off God's yoke and demanded a King after the fashion of neighboring nations. The remainder of the history of the Old Testament traces the succession of David's line to the Captivity; from that line was to spring the restorer of the Kingdom of God, our blessed Savior God the Son, whose coming was foretold in the Books of the Prophets. After him the Evangelists wrote of his life and actions and his claim to the Kingdom while he lived on earth. Finally, the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles declare the coming of God the Holy Ghost, and the authority he left with them and their successors to guide the Jews and invite the Gentiles. In sum, the histories and prophecies of the Old Testament, and the Gospels and Epistles of the New Testament, have had one and the same aim: to bring men to obedience to God: 1. in Moses and the Priests; 2. in the man Christ; and 3. in the Apostles and the successors to apostolic power. For these three represented the person of God at different times: Moses, and his successors the High Priests and Kings of Judah, in the Old Testament; Christ himself while he lived on earth; and the Apostles and their successors, from the day of Pentecost (when the Holy Ghost descended upon them) to this day.
A question much disputed among the various sects of the Christian religion is: From where do the Scriptures derive their authority? The question is sometimes put in other terms, such as: How do we know them to be the Word of God? or: Why do we believe them to be so? The difficulty of answering it arises chiefly from the imprecision of the words in which the question itself is framed. For all sides believe that God is their first and original author, so that is not the matter in dispute. Again, plainly no one can know that they are God's Word (though all true Christians believe it) except those to whom God himself has revealed it supernaturally; the question is therefore not rightly asked in terms of our knowledge. Finally, when the question is put in terms of our belief, since some are moved to believe for one reason and others for another, no single general answer can be given for all. The question properly stated is: By what authority are they made law?
Insofar as they do not differ from the Laws of Nature, there is no doubt that they are the Law of God and carry their authority within them, legible to all men who have the use of natural reason. But this authority is no different from that of any other moral teaching consistent with reason, whose dictates are laws not made, but eternal.
If God himself makes them law, they have the character of written laws, which are laws only for those to whom God has published them so adequately that no one can excuse himself by saying he did not know they were God's.
Therefore, a man to whom God has not supernaturally revealed that they are his, or that their publishers were sent by him, is not obliged to obey them by any authority but that of someone whose commands already have the force of law: that is, by no authority other than that of the Common-wealth, residing in the Sovereign, who alone has legislative power. Again, if it is not the legislative authority of the Common-wealth that gives them the force of laws, it must be some other authority derived from God, either private or public. If private, it obliges only the person to whom God has chosen to reveal it in particular. For if every man were obliged to accept as God's law whatever particular men, claiming private inspiration or revelation, sought to impose upon him—amid such numbers of men who, from pride and ignorance, take their dreams, extravagant fancies, and madness for testimonies of God's Spirit, or from ambition falsely claim such divine testimonies against their own consciences—it would be impossible for any divine law to be acknowledged. If public, it is the authority of the Common-wealth or of the Church. But the Church, if it is one person, is the same as a Common-wealth of Christians: called a Common-wealth because it consists of men united in one person, their Sovereign; and a Church because it consists of Christian men united under one Christian Sovereign. If, however, the Church is not one person, it has no authority at all: it can neither command nor perform any act; it can possess no power or right to anything; nor does it have any will, reason, or voice, for all these qualities belong to a person. Now if all Christians are not contained within one Common-wealth, they are not one person, nor is there a Universal Church that has authority over them; thus the Scriptures are not made laws by the Universal Church. Or if it is one Common-wealth, then all Christian Monarchs and States are private persons, subject to judgment, deposition, and punishment by a Universal Sovereign of all Christendom. Thus the question of the authority of the Scriptures comes down to this: “Whether Christian Kings and the Sovereign Assemblies in Christian Common-wealths are absolute within their own territories, immediately under God; or subject to one Vicar of Christ, appointed over the Universal Church, who may judge, condemn, depose, and put them to death as he thinks expedient or necessary for the common good.”
This question cannot be answered without a more particular examination of the Kingdom of God, from which we must also judge who has the authority to interpret Scripture. For whoever has the lawful power to make any writing law also has the power to approve or reject its interpretation.
CHAPTER XXXIV. ON THE MEANING OF SPIRIT, ANGEL, AND INSPIRATION IN THE BOOKS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE
Plain English translation
Mouseia’s complete Plain English edition, made independently and directly from the complete 1651 English text (introduction, forty-seven chapters, review and conclusion). Hobbes’s marginal summaries are omitted.
The earliest prophets are Sophoniah, Jonas, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, and Michaiah. They lived in the time of Amaziah and Azariah, also called Ozias, kings of Judah. But the Book of Jonas is not really a record of his prophecy. That prophecy consists of just these words: “Forty days and Ninivy will be destroyed.” Instead, the book tells the story of his stubbornness and his arguments against God's commands. Since he is the subject of the story, he is unlikely to have written it. The Book of Amos, however, contains Amos's prophecy.
Jeremiah, Abdias, Nahum, and Habakkuk prophesied in the time of Josiah.
Ezekiel, Daniel, Aggeus, and Zacharias prophesied during the Captivity.
Their writings do not show when Joel and Malachi prophesied. But the headings of their books make something else clear enough: the whole Old Testament was put into its present form after the Jews returned from captivity in Babylon, and before Ptolemaeus Philadelphus had it translated into Greek by seventy men sent to him from Judea for that purpose. If the books called Apocrypha can be trusted on this point—the Church recommends them as useful for instruction, though not as canonical—Esdras put Scripture into its present form. This appears from his own words in the second book, chapter 14, verses 21, 22, and following. Speaking to God, he says: “Your law has been burned. So no one knows what you have done or what works are to begin. But if I have found favor with you, send the Holy Spirit into me. I will write everything that has happened in the world since the beginning, as it was written in your law, so people may find your path and those who want to live in later days may live.” And in verse 45: “When the forty days were over, the Most High spoke, saying, ‘Publish openly the first books you have written, so both worthy and unworthy people may read them. But keep the last seventy, to give only to wise people among the people.’” That is enough about when the books of the Old Testament were written.
All the New Testament writers lived within less than a century after Christ's Ascension. Except for St. Paul and St. Luke, they had all seen our Savior or been his disciples. So anything they wrote dates back to the time of the apostles. But the Church did not accept and recognize the books as their writings quite so early. The Old Testament books come down to us from no earlier than Esdras, who, guided by God's Spirit, recovered them after they had been lost. Likewise, the New Testament books cannot be traced, as a collection, to any earlier time than when Church governors gathered them, approved them, and recommended them as the writings of the apostles and disciples whose names they bear. There were not many copies, and no private person could easily have had them all. The first list of all the books of both Testaments appears in the Canons of the Apostles, supposedly collected by Clement, the first bishop of Rome after St. Peter. But that claim is only a supposition and many dispute it. The Council of Laodicea is the first council we know of that recommended the Bible to the Christian churches of its day as the writings of the prophets and apostles. It met in the year 364 after Christ. By then, ambition had so overtaken leading Church teachers that they no longer treated emperors, even Christian emperors, as shepherds of the people. They treated Christian emperors as sheep and non-Christian emperors as wolves. They tried to present their teachings not as the advice and information of preachers, but as the laws of absolute governors. They even considered frauds pious if the frauds made people more obedient to Christian doctrine. Nevertheless, I am convinced that they did not falsify Scripture, even though only churchmen had copies of the New Testament books. If they had meant to do that, they would surely have made the books more favorable to their power over Christian princes and civil sovereignty than they are. So I see no reason to doubt that the Old and New Testaments, as we now have them, are true records of what the prophets and apostles did and said. Perhaps some books called Apocrypha are true records too, if they were excluded from the canon only because they were not found in Hebrew, and not because their teachings disagreed with the other books. After Alexander the Great conquered Asia, few educated Jews lacked a thorough knowledge of Greek. The seventy translators who turned the Bible into Greek were all Hebrews. We also still have works by Philo and Josephus, both Jews, written eloquently in Greek. But it is the Church's authority, not the writer's identity, that makes a book canonical.
Though different men wrote these books, their writers plainly had one and the same Spirit. They all work toward the same end: setting out the rights of the Kingdom of God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Genesis traces the ancestry of God's people from the creation of the world to their arrival in Egypt. The other four books of Moses tell how they chose God as their king and give the laws he set for their government. Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Samuel, up to Saul's time, describe what God's people did until they threw off God's rule and asked for a king like their neighboring nations had. The rest of the Old Testament history traces the line of David down to the Captivity. From that line would come the one who restored the Kingdom of God: our blessed Savior, God the Son. The books of the prophets foretold his coming. Then the Evangelists wrote about his life, his deeds, and his claim to the Kingdom while he lived on earth. Finally, Acts and the apostles' letters declare the coming of God the Holy Spirit and the authority he left with the apostles and their successors to direct the Jews and invite the Gentiles. In short, the Old Testament histories and prophecies and the New Testament Gospels and letters all have the same aim: to bring people to obey God, first as represented by Moses and the priests, second as represented by the man Christ, and third as represented by the apostles and the successors to their authority. These represented God's person at different times: Moses and his successors, the high priests and kings of Judah, in the Old Testament; Christ himself while he lived on earth; and the apostles and their successors from the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit came down upon them, to today.
The different branches of Christianity argue a great deal about where Scripture gets its authority. Sometimes they put the question another way: “How do we know it is God's word?” or “Why do we believe it is God's word?” The difficulty of answering comes largely from the unclear wording of the question. Everyone agrees that God is its first and original author. So that is not what they dispute. Also, nobody can know that Scripture is God's word unless God has revealed it to that person supernaturally, though all true Christians believe it. So the question is not properly one about our knowledge. Finally, if it is a question about our belief, different people believe for different reasons. No single general answer covers them all. The real question is: By whose authority does Scripture become law?
Where Scripture agrees with the Laws of Nature, it is unquestionably God's law. It carries its own authority, which anyone able to use natural reason can read. But this authority is no different from that of any other moral teaching that agrees with reason. The rules of reason are eternal laws, not laws that have been made.
If God himself makes Scripture law, it is like a written law. Such a law binds only people to whom God has made it known clearly enough that none of them can excuse themselves by saying they did not know it was his.
If God has not supernaturally revealed to a person that these writings are his, or that the people who published them were sent by him, that person is bound to obey them only by the authority of someone whose commands already have the force of law. That is the authority of the Commonwealth, held by the Sovereign, who alone has legislative power. If that legislative authority does not give Scripture the force of law, some other authority from God must do so, either private or public. A private revelation binds only the person to whom God has specifically revealed it. Suppose everyone had to accept as God's law whatever individuals tried to impose on them by claiming private inspiration or revelation. Many people, through pride or ignorance, mistake their own dreams, wild fantasies, and madness for signs of God's Spirit. Others, from ambition, falsely claim such signs against their own consciences. Under those conditions, no divine law could be recognized. If the authority is public, it belongs either to the Commonwealth or to the Church. If the Church is one person, it is the same as a Commonwealth of Christians. It is called a Commonwealth because its people are united in one person, their Sovereign. It is called a Church because those people are Christians united under one Christian Sovereign. But if the Church is not one person, it has no authority. It cannot command or act, possess any power or right, or have a will, reason, or voice. All these belong to persons. If all Christians do not belong to one Commonwealth, they are not one person. There is then no universal Church with authority over them, so the universal Church does not make Scripture law. Alternatively, if they do form one Commonwealth, all Christian monarchs and states are private persons. A universal Sovereign of all Christendom could judge, depose, and punish them. So the question about Scripture's authority comes down to this: “Are Christian kings and sovereign assemblies in Christian Commonwealths supreme in their own territories, answerable directly to God? Or are they subject to one vicar of Christ, set over the universal Church, who may judge, condemn, depose, and put them to death whenever he thinks it useful or necessary for the common good?”
We cannot answer that question without looking more closely at the Kingdom of God. That inquiry will also let us judge who has authority to interpret Scripture. Whoever has lawful power to make a writing into law also has power to approve or reject its interpretation.
Chapter XXXIV. What Spirit, Angel, and Inspiration Mean in the Books of Holy Scripture