to juftification, or to give relief to the confcience of a finner disquieted with a sense of guilt. This he calls the fimple truth; which he sets in opposition to all promises, offers, and declarations of grace, made to finners; though these almost every where occur in the New Testament, and have hitherto been reckoned necessary to give such a view of the death and refurrection of Jefus, as can afford any encouragement to a guilty finner. It must be owned, that the author of the letters speaks very darkly and ambiguously on this head; so that it is not easy to know what are his real fentiments, or if he has any fixed principles at all concerning the matter in debate between his antagonists and him, with relation to this subject. And, indeed, it seems to be his main design through the whole of his performance, not with becoming candor to explain and illuftrate, but artfully to embarass, perplex, and throw a mist upon every subject he treats of, so as to intangle and confound the minds of ignorant and injudicious readers; that thus he may have a favourable opportunity to instil into them his erroneous and pernicious notions, and give his adversaries, or rather the truth through their fides, a blow in the dark. Were this Gentleman's peculiar tenets stript of all disguise, cleared of all ambiguity, and set forth in a plain and fimple dress, their contrariety to the Scriptures, and all true Christian experience, would instantly be obvious to the meanest capacity; and a malignant opposition to the true doctrine of the gospel, and the power of godliness, with a malicious attempt to defame the memory and character of a number of worthy men, who shewed a laudable zeal, and hearty concern for the purity of the gospel, found to be the special characteristicks of his strange performance. But he is remarkable for a peculiar dexterity 3 dexterity in expressing himself, fo as to referve a number of little fubterfuges to which he may have recourse when attacked, and avoid the dint of any argument that may be offered in confutation of his darling sentiments. If he should be beaten out of one, he has another to fly to; and to pursue him through all the dreary paths of ambiguity, myfticism and abfcurity, and the several refuges of lies in which he endeavours to secure himself from the blows of any adversary that may think fit to attack him, must be acknowledged to be no pleasant nor easy tafk. The method in which this author has been pleased to deliver his sentiments, concerning the matter expressed in the article under confideration, is a glaring instance of what has been just now observed. When speaking of the gospel, or that which is proposed in Scripture, or in the New Testament, as he loves to speak, to be believed in order to juftification, or by the faith of which a finner is justified; sometimes he appears to understand no more by it than an authentic, or well-attested account of the facts, relating to the death and refurrection of Jesus -abstracting from any particular explication or intimation of the great end and design of them given by the apostles and other inspired writers, or any confideration of that peculiar afpelt which they bear towards sinners of mankind. At other times he would feem to give a very different account of the matter, by infinuating, that in order to juftification one must know and believe, not only the facts, but their import; and understand them in the very same sense in which they were understood by the apoftles: what that sense is we hall see afterwards. Our author puts the following words in the mouth of Jonathan, his supposed convert: "This fact," namely, the refurrection of Jesus, " firm as a rock, " emboldens me to pay an equal regard to philoso" phical 2 "phical guesses, and to enthusiastical fancies. If 65 any one, then, should ask me a reason of the " hope that is in me, I have only one word to say, "The refurrection of Jesus. Take away this from 66 me, and I am miferable indeed. Let this stand true, and nothing shall ever make me despair *.» Here, one would think, he supposes a knowledge and belief of the death and refurrection of Christ, confidered merely as facts that took place in a certain period, to be all that is necessary to quiet the confcience of a finner pinched with a sense of guilt, and lay a foundation for comfort, and an affured hope of falvation; and that this is, indeed, all that in Scripture is meant by justifying faith. This we must acknowledge is a very fimple view of the plain truth; but then it is equally certain, that those facts, considered merely in this light, bear the very fame aspect toward all creatures endued with reason and understanding, and so capable of believing any truth that is accompanied with fuch evidence as necessarily commands the affent of a rational mind. And therefore whatever comfort this view of the death and refurrection of Christ may be supposed to afford to any of those, it must afford the fame to devils and damned spirits; for they are as capable of knowing and giving a firm assent to the truth of the facts as any other. If the hope of the guilty, at fast instance, depends wholly upon the truth of Christ's refurrection without confidering it as having any particular afpect towards sinners of mankind; fuch as makes it warrantable for every one of them who hear of it to take encouragement from it, and build their hope of juftification and falvation upon it; the fallen angels, yea sinners now in hell, would have as much reason as Jonathan to say, Let this stand true, and nothing shall ever make us despair. This I doubt not but every one will account a very wild and extravagant supposition; yet it is a necessary consequence of Palæmon's doctrine: and, absurd as it is, upon enquiry, it will be found to contain the substance of his reasoning against what is taught by his opponents in relation to this point. This will appear evident, if we consider, that if any thing be added to the simple perfuafion of what the letterwriter calls the bare truth, formerly described; or if any thing besides that is held necessary to justifying faith; it will oblige us, whether we will or not, to adopt the very fubstance of the popular doctrine concerning the call, promise, and offer of the gospel, as necessary to be believed, and complied with, in order to justification. But if such a perfuafion of the bare truth, as we were speaking of just now, must be acknowledged to be all that is meant in Scripture by justifying faith, we must, of necessity, also admit the shocking absurdity above-mentioned, with many others of a like nature. * Letters, p. 70. much The letter-writer seems to have been sufficiently sensible, that this notion was too gross to be allowed of by any thinking perfon; and that, if clearly proposed, stedfastly adhered to, and uniformly maintained, it would be liable to fuch objections as could not easily be answered, and might be improved for overthrowing his whole scheme; therefore to the truth of the fact, namely, the refurrection of Jesus, he has thought proper to join the import of it, as also necessary to be known, and particularly attended to, in order to give that relief to the confcience of the guilty which he supposes to accompany justifying faith. Accordingly, to the words formerly quoted, he adds the following: "This fact and its " import, or the character of God thence arifing, " mutually " mutually confirm and ascertain each other. This " character could never have been drawn to our "view, but from some divine work. No work but "this could ever evince such a character; and if " this work was done, of neceffity there must be " such a character. This fact and its import, then, " must stand or fall together *." We have a great deal more, to the same purpose, in the account which he makes Jonathan to give of his converfion and the grounds of his faith. I shall not at present stay to examine the force of this reasoning about the fact and its import, as illustrating and confirming each other. Perhaps to some, it may appear mystical enough; but, I think, thus much is certain, that he supposes the import of the fact as equally necessary to be known, in order to justification, with the truth of it. Yet it can hardly be doubted, but one may know, and be perfuaded of the truth of the fact, who does not understand the import of it. And if so, something besides a perfuafion of the fimple truth-must be allowed to be necessary to juftification. Something, did I say? yea, a great deal; even that whole stystem of extravagant and whimsical notions which Palæmon, or rather his rd father Mr. J. G. has thought fit to dignify with the honourable epithet of the ancient apoftolic gospel. All these must belong to the import of the fact, if we may believe our author himself, who, in the person of Jonathan, tells us, "That the knowledge of the fact above-mentioned " forced upon him a new set of principles, by the " most convincing and fatisfactory, as well as ir" resistible evidence; and that all his religious " principles and practices are so many inferences " from it. +" * Letters, p. 71. † Letters, 70. 77. VOL. I. L It |