will exempt no child of Adam from this miserable. weakness: nothing but the grace of God can possibly remove it. Where that is suffered to enter, and the heart, instead of persisting in its own will, is surrendered to the will of God, the whole gospel is sufficiently clear, because no text of it is any longer offensive. Of this happy change we have the best example in the apostles of our blessed Saviour; who, when they first entered the school of Christianity, had a veil upon their hearts like the rest of their countrymen, and were strongly possessed by a spirit of the world, promising itself the full enjoyment of temporal honors and preferments. But the sufferings and death of their master having shewed the vanity of such expectations, and served in a great measure to beat down this earthly principle, they were ready for conviction; and then their understanding was opened, that they might understand the scriptures. The evidence that before was dark and inconclusive, became on a sudden clear and irresistible; and they, who had lately fled from disgrace and death as from the greatest of evils, could now rejoice that they were found worthy to suffer. Their opinion was altered, because their affections were cleansed from this world: that mire and clay was washed off from their eyes in the true waters of Siloam, and now they could see all things clearly.

What has been here said upon the conduct of our Saviour's disciples and the unbelieving Jews, may be applied to all those who dispute any article of the

'q Luke xxiv. 45.

Christian faith; and particularly the doctrine of the ever-blessed trinity, as revealed to us in the holy scriptures. For we shall certainly find, that some false principle is assumed, which flatters the pride of human nature. It abhors restraint and subjection; and is ever aspiring, right or wrong, to be distinguished from the common herd, and to exalt itself against the knowledge of God. What this principle is, we shall very soon discover: it is publicly owned and gloried in by every considerable writer that of late years has meddled with this subject. I shall instance in the learned Dr. Clarke; because he is deservedly placed at the head of the Arian disputants in this kingdom.

He affirms in his first proposition, that the ONE GOD, spoken of in Matt. xix. 17. and elsewhere, is only one PERSON; and then adds, "this is the first principle of natural religion.”*

So then here are two different religions; by one of which it is proved, that the one God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: that he is therefore three persons. But it is the first principle of the other religion, that he is but one person: though how can that be reconciled with the practice of the whole heathen world, who are so far from discovering this one person, that they held Gods many, and Lords many, is not very easy to determine. And whence comes this religion? It is confessed to be drawn from nature! It is the gospel of the natural man, unsanctified by divine r 2 Cor. x. 5. s 1 Cor. viii. 5. *See Script. Doct. p. ii. 1.

S

grace, and uninstructed by any light from above; and owes its birth to that fountain of darkness and selfconceit, from whence has sprung all the confusion and imagination that ever was introduced into the religion of God. And what wonder, if nature should operate as strongly in an Arian or a Socinian against the mystery of the trinity, as it did in the Jews against the law and the prophets, and in the unconverted disciples against the doctrine of the cross? If it be laid down as a first principle, that God is but one person; then it will be utterly impossible, so long as this principle keeps possession, that any person, of common sense enough to know the meaning of words, should quietly receive and embrace a revelation in those parts of it, where it teaches us that God is three persons: these two principles being so diametrically opposite, that while he holds to the one, a voice from the dead will not persuade him of the other. Therefore, I say again, we ought not to wonder, if that man should remain for ever invincible, who BRINGS to the scripture that knowledge of God, which he is bound, as a Christian, to RECEIVE from it.

What then will be the consequence in this case? The practice of the Deist, who carries on this argument to its proper issue, is to deny the scripture revelation, because his natural religion is contrary to it; and they cannot both be true. But the partial unbeliever, who allows the scripture to be supported by such external evidence as he cannot answer, while his reason objects to the matter contained in it; must follow the example of the Jews, and reconcile the scripture where he cannot believe it. Thus they treated

the law of Moses. We know, said they, that God spake unto Mosest therefore, they readily granted his law to have a divine authority: but as it would not serve their turn in its own proper words, they put a false gloss of tradition upon the face of it, to hide its true complexion; and then complained that the scripture was not clear enough: and if you used it as a testimony to Jesus Christ they would stone you for a blasphemer.

What shall we say then? that the Jews were of a different opinion from the Christians? and that this was their way of understanding the scripture? No: God forbid. For if we will believe the scripture itself, it was their way of denying it. Had ye BELIEVED Moses, says our Lord, ye would have believed me: and he gives us upon this occasion, the true grounds and reasons of their unbelief; because they received honor one of another, and had not the love of God in them." Every hypothesis of human growth, which was pretty sure to agree with their complexion, and reflected some honor upon themselves by exalting the nature of man, that can make a religion for itself, and comes in its own name; that they would gladly receive. But if any thing was offered to them in the name of God, to be received for the love of him, and the spiritual comfort of a pure conscience, and the hope of a better world: it was rejected, as an encroachment upon their natural rights, and an invective against the innocent pleasures of a carnal Jerusalem. And so it is with us at this time: for if an author does but hang out the sign of nature and reason in his title-page, there are readers in plenu See John v. 39,-ad fin.

t John ix. 29.

ty, who will buy up and swallow his dregs by wholesale: but if God, of his infinite mercy and condescension, shews to them the way of salvation, his words are to be abstracted from the evidence upon which he requires us to believe them, then put into this alembic of reason, and demonstrated to be no poison, before they can be brought to taste them. And if they should happen to be a little disagreeable to flesh and blood, and the operation should miscarry, the fault is charged upon God, and not upon themselves, who ought to have gone another way to work: as they will certainly find.

We conclude, therefore, because Christ has affirmed it, that every degree of doubt and disputation against the words of God, is just so much unbelief; proceeding not from the head or understanding, but from the heart" and affections. And the world is filled with the vain jangling of uncertainty, for this short reason- -all men have not faith.x