ferve to the end for which they were written? Which was to publish to the world the doctrine of Jefus Chrift, that men might be brought into his religion. Now I challenge the unmasker to fhow me, not out of any one place, but out of all the preachings of our Saviour and his apoftles, recorded in the four Gofpels, and in the Acts, all thofe propofitions which he has reckoned up as fundamental articles of faith. If they are not to be found there, it is plain, that either they are not articles of faith, neceffary to be believed to make a man a christian; or else, that those inspired writers have given us an account of the gospel, or chriftian religion, wherein the greatest part of the doctrines, neceffary to be believed to make a man a christian, are wholly omitted. Which in fhort is to say, that the christianity, which is recorded in the Gospels and the Acts, is not that christianity which is fufficient to make a man a christian. This (as abfurd and impious as it is) is what our unmasker charges upon the conciseness (as he is pleased to call it) of the evangelical hiftory. And this we must take upon his word, though these inspired writers tell us the direct contrary: for St. Luke, in his preface to his gofpel, tells Theophilus, that having a perfect knowledge of all things, the defign of his writing was to fet them in order, that he might know the certainty of thofe things that were believed amongst christians. And his hiftory of the Acts begins thus: "The former treatise [i. e. his gofpel] have I made, "O Theophilus, of all that Jefus began to do and to "teach." So that, how concife foever the unmasker will have his history to be, he profeffes it to contain all that Jefus taught. Which all muft, in the narrowest fenfe that can be given it, contain at least all things neceffary to make a man a chriftian. It would elfe be a very lame and imperfect history of all that Jefus taught, if the faith contained in it were not fufficient to make a man a christian. This indeed, as the unmasker hath been pleafed to term it, would be a very lank faith, a very lank gospel.

St. John alfo fays thus, of his hiftory of the gospel,, chap. xx. 30, 31, Many other figns truly did Jefus,

"in the presence of his difciples, which are not written "in this book:" fo far his hiftory is, by his own confeffion, concife. "But thefe," fays he, "are written

that ye might believe that Jefus is the Meffiah, the "Son of God; and that, believing, ye might have life through his name.". As concife as it was, there was yet (if the apoftle's word may be taken for it against the unmasker's) enough contained in his gospel, for the procuring of eternal life, to those who believed it. And, whether it was that one article that he there fets down, viz. That Jefus was the Meffiah, or that fet of articles which the unmasker gives us, I fhall leave to this modern divine to refolve. And, if he thinks ftill, that all the articles he has fet down in his roll, are neceffary to be believed to make a man a christian, I muft defire him to show them to me in St. John's gospel, or else to convince the world, that St. John was mistaken, when he said, that he had written his gospel, that men might believe that " Jefus was the Meffiah, the Son of "God; and that, believing, they might have life "through his name."

、

So that, granting the history of the fcripture to be fo concise, as the unmasker would have it, viz. that in fome places the infallible writers, recording the dif courfes of our Saviour and his apoftles, omitted all the other fundamental articles proposed by them to be believed to make men chriftians, but this one, that Jefus was the Meffiah; yet this will not remove the objection that lies against his other fundamentals, which are not to be found in the hiftories of the four evangelists; nay, not to be found in any one of them. If every one of them contains the gospel of Jefus Christ, and confequently all things neceffary to falvation, whether this will not be a new ground of accufation against me, and give the unmasker a right to charge me with laying by three of the gofpels with contempt, as well as he did before charge me with a contempt of the epiftles; must be left to his fovereign authority to determine.

Having showed that, allowing all he fays here to be as he would have it, yet it clears not, the objection that lies against his fundamentals; I fhall now examine

what

what truth there is in what he here pretends, viz. that though the one article, That Jefus is the Meffiah, be mentioned" alone in fome places, yet we have reafon: "to be perfuaded, from the concifeness of the" fcripture hiftory, that there were, at the fame time, joined with it other neceffary articles of faith, in the preaching: of our Saviour and his apostles.

It is to be observed, that the unmafker builds upon this falfe fuppofition, that in fome places, other neceffary articles of faith, joined with that of Jefus the Meffiah, are by the evangelifts mentioned to be propofed by our Saviour and his apoftles, as neceffary to be believed to make those they preached chriftians. For his faying, that in fome places, that "one necef

fary article is mentioned alone," implies, that in other places it is not mentioned alone, but joined with other neceffary articles. But then it will remain upon him to show,

XXXVI. "In what place, either of the Gofpels or " of the Acts, other articles of faith are joined "with this, and propofed as neceffary to be be"lieved to make men chriftians."

The unmasker, it is probable, will tell us, that the article of Chrift's refurrection is fometimes joined with this of the Meffiah, as particularly in that firft fermon of St. Peter, Acts ii. by which there were three thoufand added to the church at one time. Anfw. This fermon, well confidered, will explain to us both the preaching of the apoftles; what it was that they propofed to their unbelieving auditors, to make them chriftians; and alfo the manner of St. Luke's recording their fermons. It is true, that here are delivered by St. Peter many other matters of faith, befides that of Jefus being the Meffiah: for all that he faid, being of divine authority, is matter of faith, and may not be difbelieved. The first part of his difcourfe is to prove to. the Jews, that what they had obferved of extraordinary at that time, amongst the difciples, who fpake variety of tongues, did not proceed from wine, but from the Holy

Ghoft;

Ghoft; and that this was the pouring out of the Spirit, prophefied of by the prophet Joel. This is all matter of faith, and is written, that it might be believed: but yet I think, that neither the unmasker, nor any body elfe will fay, that this is fuch a neceffary article of faith, that no man could, without an explicit belief of it, be a christian; though, being a declaration of the Holy Ghoft by St. Peter, it is so much a matter of faith, that no-body to whom it is now propofed, can deny it, and be a chriftian. And thus all the fcripture of the New Teftament, given by divine infpiration, is matter of faith, and neceffary to be believed by all chriftians, to whom it is propofed. But yet I do not think any one fo unreasonable as to fay, that every propofition in the New Teftament is a fundamental article of faith, which is required explicitly to be believed to make a man a chriftian.

Here now is a matter of faith joined, in the fame fermon, with this fundamental article, that " Jefus is "the Meffiah;" and reported by the facred hiftorian fo at large, that it takes up a third part of St. Peter's fermon, recorded by St. Luke: and yet it is fuch a matter of faith, as is not contained in the unmasker's catalogue of neceffary articles. I muft afk him then, whether St. Luke were so concise an historián, that he would fo at large fet down a matter of faith, propofed by St. Peter, that was not neceffary to be believed to make a man a chriftian, and wholly leave out the very mention of all the unmafker's additional neceffary articles, if indeed they were neceffary to be believed to make men chriftians? I know not how any one could charge the hiftorian with greater unfaithfulnefs, or greater folly. But this the unmasker fticks not at, to preferve to himself the power of appointing what fhall, and what fhall not, be neceffary articles; and of making his fyftem the chriftianity neceffary, and only neceffary to be received.

The next thing that St. Peter proceeds to, in this his fermon, is, to declare to the unbelieving Jews that Jefus of Nazareth, who had done miracles amongst them, VOL. VI.

Y

whom

whom they had crucified, and put to death, and whom God had raised again from the dead, was the Meffiah.

Here indeed our Saviour's crucifixion, death, and refurrection, are mentioned: and if they were no-where elfe recorded, are matters of faith; which, with all the reft of the New Teftament, ought to be believed by every chriftian, to whom it is thus propofed, as a part of divine revelation. But that these were not here propofed to the unbelieving Jews, as the fundamental articles, which St. Peter principally aimed at, and endeavoured to convince them of, is evident from hence, that they are made ufe of, as arguments to perfuade them of this fundamental truth, viz. that Jefus was the Messiah, whom they ought to take for their Lord and Ruler. For whatfoever is brought as an argument, to prove another truth, cannot be thought to be the principal thing aimed at, in that argumentation; though it may have fo ftrong and immediate a connexion with the conclufion, that you cannot deny it, without denying even what is inferred from it, and is therefore the fitter to be an argument to prove it. But that our Saviour's crucifixion, death, and refurrection, were used here as arguments to perfuade them into a belief of this fundamental article, that Jefus was the Meffiah, and not as propofitions of a new faith they were to receive, is evident from hence, that St. Peter preached here to thofe who knew the death and crucifixion of Jefus as well as he: and therefore thefe could not be propofed to them, as new articles of faith to be believed; but thofe matters of fact being what the Jews knew already, were a good argument, joined with his refurrection, to convince them of that truth, which he endeavoured to give them a belief of. And therefore he rightly inferred, from thefe facts joined together, this conclufion, the believing whereof would make them chriftians: "Therefore let

all the houfe of Ifrael know affuredly, that God hath "made that fame Jefus, whom ye have crucified, "Lord and Chrift." To the making good this fole propofition, his whole difcourfe tended: this was the fole truth he laboured to convince them of; this the faith he endeavoured to bring them into; which as foon

as