righteousness of Chrift?" He tells you himself, Rom, iv. 6. To him that believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, faith is imputed for righteoufnefs. "Why is Chrift ftiled Jehovah our Righteousness? Because we are both justified and fanctified through him.

P. 140. "My death, the cause of their forgiveness; my righteousness, the ground of their acceptance." How does this agree with p. 68. "To afcribe pardon to Christ's paffive, eternal life to his active righteousness, is fanciful rather than judicious?"

P. 244. "He commends fuch kinds of beneficence only, as were exercised to a disciple as fuch." Is not this a flip of the pen? Will not our Lord then commend, and reward eternally, all kinds of beneficence, provided they flowed from a principle of loving faith? Yea, that which was exercised to a Samaritan, a Jew, a Turk, or an Heathen? Even thefe I would not term " tranfient bubbles," though they do not procure our juftification.

P. 246. "How muft our righteoufnefs exceed that of the Scribes and Pharifees? Not only in being fincère, but in poffeffing a complete righteousness, even that of Chrift." Did our Lord mean this? Nothing lefs. He specifies, in the following parts of his Sermon, the very inftances wherein the righteousness of a Chriftian exceeds that of the Scribes and Pharifees.

P. 248. "He brings this fpecious hypocrite to the teft." How does it appear that he was an hypocrite? Our Lord gives not the least intimation of it. Surely he loved him, not for his hypocrify, but his fincerity!

Yet he loved the world, and therefore, could not keep any of the commandments in their spiritual meaning. And the keeping of these is undoubtedly the way to, though not the cause of, eternal life.

P. 250. "By works his faith was made perfect : appeared to be true." No: the natural fenfe of the

word is, By the grace fuperadded while he wrought thofe works, his faith was literally made perfect.

P. 250. "He that doth righteousness is righteousmanifefts the truth of his conversation." Nay; the plain meaning is, he alone is truly righteous, whose faith worketh by love.

Ibid. "St. James fpeaks of the juftification of our faith." Not unless you mean, by that odd expreffion, our faith being made perfect for fo the apoftle explains his own meaning. Perhaps the word juftified is once ufed by St. Paul for manifefted.But that does not prove, it is to be fo understood here.

P. 253. "Whofo doth these things fhall never fall into total apoftafy." How pleafing is this to flesh and blood! But David fays no fuch thing. His meaning is, Whofo doth these things to the end, shall never fall into hell.

The feventh dialogue is full of important truths. Yet fome expreffions in it I can't commend.

P. 269. "One thing thou lackest, the imputed righteousness of Chrift." You cannot think, this is the meaning of the text. Certainly the one thing our LORD meant was, the love of GOD. This was the thing he lacked.

P. 276. Is the obedience of Chrift infufficient to accomplish our juftification?" Rather I would afk, Is the death of Chrift infufficient to purchase it?

P. 281. The faints in glory aferibe the whole of their falvation to the blood of the Lamb." So do I: and yet I believe he obtained for all a poffibility of falvation."

Ibid. "The terms of acceptance for fallen man were a full fatisfaction to the divine justice, and a complete conformity to the divine law." This you take for granted; but I cannot allow.

The terms of acceptance for fallen man are repentance and faith. Repent ye, and believe the gospel.

P. 282. "There are but two methods whereby

any can be justified, either by a perfect obedience to the law, or because Chrift hath kept the law in our ftead." You fhould fay, or by faith in Chrift." I then answer, This is true. And fallen man is jufti. fied, not by perfect obedience, but by faith. What Chrift has done is the foundation of our juftification, not the terms or condition of it.

In the eighth dialogue likewife there are many great truths, and yet fome things liable to excep

tion.

P. 312. "David GOD himself dignifies with the most exalted of all characters." Far, very far from it. We have more exalted characters than David's, both in the Old Teftament and the New. Such are thofe of Samuel, Daniel, yea, and Job, in the former; of St. Paul and St. John in the latter.

"But GoD stiles him a man after his own heart." This is the text which has caused many to mistake: for want of confidering, first, That this is faid of David in a particular refpect, not with regard to his whole character: Secondly, The time, at which it was spoken. When was David a man after God's own heart? When GOD found him following the ewes great with young, when he took him from the Sheepfolds, Pfal. Ixxviii. 71. It was in the 2d or 3d year of Saul's reign, that Samuel said to him, The LORD bath fought him a man after his own heart, and hath commanded him to be captain over his people, 1 Sam. xiii. 14. But was he a man after GOD's own heart all his life? or in all particulars? So far from it, that we have few more exceptionable characters, among all the men of God recorded in fcripture. P. 321 "There is not a juft man upon earth that finneth not." Solomon might truly fay fo, before Chrift came. And St. John might, after he came, fay as truly, Whosoever is born of GOD finneth not. "But in many things we offend all." That St. James does not speak this of himself, or of real Chriftians,

B

will clearly appear, to all who impartially confider the context.

The ninth dialogue proves excellently well, that we cannot be juftified by our works.

But have you thoroughly confidered the words which occur in the 331ft page?

"O children of Adam, you are no longer obliged, to love God with all your strength, nor your neighbour as yourselves. Once indeed I infifted upon abfolute purity of heart: now I can dispense with some degrees of evil defire. Since Chrift"-has fulfilled the law for you, you need not fulfil it. I will connive at, yea accommodate my demands to your weak

nefs."

I agree with you, that "this doctrine makes the holy One of GoD a minister of fin." And is it not your own? Is not this the very doctrine which you efpoufe throughout your book?

I cannot but except to feveral paffages alfo in the tenth dialogue. I ask, firft,

P. 356." Does the righteousness of GOD ever mean" (as you affirm) "the merits of Chrift ?" I believe not once in all the fcripture. It often means, and particularly in the epistle to the Romans, GOD'S method of justifying finners. When therefore you fay,

Ibid. "The righteoufness of GOD means, fuch a righteousness as may justly challenge his acceptance," I cannot allow it at all: and this capital miftake muft needs lead into many you others. But I follow you step by step.

Ibid. "In order to entitle us to a reward, there must be an imputation of righteoufnefs." There must be an intereft in Chrift. And then every man Jhall receive his own reward, according to his own labour.

P. 357. "A rebel may be forgiven, without being restored to the dignity of a fon." A rebel against an earthly king may; but not a rebel against GOD.

In the very fame moment that God forgives, we are the fons of GOD. Therefore this is an idle dispute. For pardon and acceptance, though they may be diftinguished, cannot be divided. The words of Job which you cite are wide of the question. Thofe of Solomon prove no more than this, (and who denies it?), that juftification implies both pardon and acceptance.

P. 359. "Grace reigneth through righteousness unto eternal life;"-that is, The free love of God brings us, through juftification and fanctification, to glory. P. 346. "That they may receive forgive- ness, and a lot among the fanctified" that is, that they may receive pardon, holiness, heaven.

P.360. "Is not the fatisfaction made by the death of Christ, fufficient to obtain both our full pardon and final happiness?" Unquestionably it is; and neither of the texts you cite proves the contrary.

P. 361. "If it was requifite for Chrift to be baptized, much more to fulfil the moral law."

I cannot prove that either the one or the other was requifite in order to his purchafing redemption for us. P. 362. "By Christ's fufferings alone, the law was not satisfied." Yes it was; for it required only the alternative, Obey or die. It required no man to obey and die too. If any man had perfectly obeyed, he would not have died. Ibid. "Where fcripture afcribes the whole of our falvation to the death of Christ, a part of his humiliation is put for the whole." I cannot allow this without fome proof. He was obedient unto death, is no proof at all; as it does not neceffarily imply any more, than that He died in obedience to the Father. In fome texts there is a neceffity of taking a part for the whole. But in these there is no fuch neceffity.

P. 365. "Chrift undertook to do every thing neceffary for our redemption:" namely, in a covenant made with the Father. 'Tis fure, He did every thing neceffary; but how does it appear, that He