SERMON VIII.

1 COR. vii. 40.

And I think also that I have the Spirit of God.

THIS chapter, I believe, always makes a part of

the conversation, when the inspiration of scripture is ⚫ the subject in debate. They who are inclined to the libertine side of the question, never forget to mention, that St. Paul himself confesses that he sometimes writes only his own private sentiments and opinion, without any direction or assistance of the Spirit of God. The consequence is easy, with regard to the rest of the sacred writers; for if St. Paul, who was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles, was not always inspired when he wrote his Epistles, there is no reason to doubt but that others were in the same case, though they had not the ingenuity to make the same confession. But this consequence, however easy, may not be just; because an exception strengthens the cases that are not excepted; and if a person who claims to write by inspiration, and proves his claim, tells you, in two or three instances, that he gives only his private opinion, or his private advice, it is a fair presumption that every where else, where no such caution is inserted, he really does write under the influence of that inspiration which he claims. If men therefore would argue fairly, and with candour, it would not affect the doc

trine of the general inspiration of scripture; though we should allow, that a particular apostle in answer to some particular questions, relating chiefly to the state of the church at that time, ventured to give his private opinion or advice, without being inspired just at that juncture by the Holy Ghost.

But the safer way, perhaps, is not to stand to their courtesy. Some people, if you grant a little, will assume a great deal; and the more they find you disposed to yield, the more unreasonable they grow in their demands. I shall therefore consider the particular passages in this chapter which are liable to the exception of being not inspired, and shew that, when rightly understood, no such conclusion follows from them. And when these appearances are removed, there is nothing to hinder us from subscribing to the apostle's own judgment in his own case, which he certainly knew better than any other man; and this he gives us in the text, I think also that I have the Spirit of God.

It is evident, from the first verse of this chapter, that it is the apostle's reply to some questions which the Corinthian converts had sent to him; for he begins, Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me; i. e. I am now going to return my answer to your inquiries. These inquiries related to marriage and divorce, and other cases of that nature; some of which our Lord himself had determined, while he was here on earth, in his own doctrine, and by his own express commandments, which oblige all Christians, in all ages of the world. But some others of less consequence he had not decided. This distinction is the key, which lets us into the meaning of some of the disputed passages in this chapter;

and the obscurity of others lies only in the manner of expression. Let us examine them in their order.

The first is, verse the sixth; where the apostle says, But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. There the outcry begins, that St. Paul was not inspired when he wrote this; since he himself confesses, that he had no commandment to write what he did, but only a bare permission. A permission from whom? or whence? From heaven? or of men? If the permission was from heaven, from God, or the Spirit of God, it shews, even in the lowest sense, that the apostle had some intercourse and communication with heaven, and received his instructions from thence. Though the Holy Spirit did not command him to write what he did, yet if he permitted him to do so, it is plain that he received counsel from him, that the Holy Ghost was his guide and director; and consequently that his decisions, even here, are not mere human decisions, but authorized in some degree by the Holy Ghost. But the truth of the matter is, this is not the meaning of the place. The permission spoken of is not the Holy Spirit's permission to St. Paul to write what he did; but St. Paul's permission to the Corinthians to judge for themselves in the affair of marrying, or not marrying, as their own case and constitution required, notwithstanding any thing he said about it. For what he said was not a commandment of religion, or general law of the gospel, but counsel, or good advice, suitable to the state of the church there, and at that time. "As to marrying in general, I wish that you were all unmarried, as I am; but this I say

66

Locke's paraphrase. "What I thus say, ver. 2—5, "I say only by way of counsel, what appears to me "to be best for men, generally speaking; but herein "I am far from laying any precept on any;" is Dr. Hammond's. Now what is this to St. Paul's inspiration? Cannot an inspired person give his advice in an article of conduct, where the Christian religion has left men free, and the divine Author of it has laid them under no command? The Christian religion neither commands nor forbids men to marry ; but leaves them in possession of the same natural liberty in which it found them. If therefore St. Paul had delivered a new commandment in this case for marrying, or a prohibition against it, so far from proving his inspiration, it would rather have proved that he was a false apostle, and ignorant of the nature and genius of the religion which he pretended to preach. But though no new commandment of this kind was to be delivered, and no new law imposed upon the Christian church; yet sure an apostle, without any impeachment of his inspiration, might give his opinion about what was most expedient to be done, in a particular church, at a particular juncture. Is there any thing absurd in his opinion? or inconsistent with the notion and belief of his being inspired? No; so far from it, that it is the very same advice which Jesus Christ himself would have given, if he had been still upon earth, and could have been consulted in person. He would have given no commandment, either to marry or to abstain from marriage; but, considering the signs of the times, and the state of the world as it then was, would have judged it most prudent not to touch a woman ; and, He that is able to receive this saying,

let him receive it, would have been the substance of his advice.

The next exception of St. Paul's inspiration rises from a view of the 10th and 12th verses, as compared together. In the former of these he says, Unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: whereas in the latter he says, But to the rest speak I, not the Lord. Here therefore some people imagine, that St. Paul distinguisheth between what he wrote by inspiration and what he wrote without it; that he was inspired, or under the influence of the Spirit, when he wrote the 10th verse; but when he wrote the 12th, was left entirely to himself, without any such guidance or direction. Now, before we consider the meaning of the texts, let us attend a moment to the nature of the thing. Is it likely, is it possible, that this could be the case? Does it carry in itself the appearance of truth? or the face of probability? What! was inspiration like a flash of lightning, here this moment, and gone the next? Could a man be inspired, and not inspired, almost in a moment of time? Or what interval passed between writing the 10th verse and writing the 12th? Had the apostle been in a deliquium? did he fall into a swoon? and, when he came to himself, the Spirit was departed from him? If it should be suggested, that there was a necessity for his being inspired when he wrote the 10th verse, but none when he wrote the 12th; I answer, that, as far as we can judge of the necessity, it was directly on the reverse. The point determined in the 10th verse, had been before determined by Jesus Christ himself in his public doctrine, and even in his sermon on the