clear, full, and glorious display of his infinite perfections, worship they know not what. But, by his method of reasoning on this subject, it would appear his meaning is, that till Jesus was glorified, and the true character of God, as he is pleased to speak, fully manifested in him, none could have such a discovery of him, as to be capable of worshipping him in an acceptable manner; and that till then, all who pretended to worship God, must have worshipped an unknown God, or worshipped they knew not what. If it is really fo, what shall we think of the faints under the Old Testament, or of the apostles and disciples of Christ before he arose from the dead, and entered into his glory; at least of fuch of them as were not favoured with that remarkable vision of his glory which Peter, James and John had on the Holy Mount? Must it be faid that all those worshipped they knew not what? If it should be alledged, that the saints under the Old Testament, and the disciples before the resurrection of Chrift, faw his glory, and the glory of God in him, through the glass of the word and promise of God; I grant they did; but then they had other conceptions of him than these of a glorified man, or of a man that was to be glorified; for they saw his divine glory, beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father. - But any conceptions of this kind, according to our author's notion, must be accounted imaginary; because, if we may believe him, there cannot be a higher or more grand idea of the object of worship than that of a glorified Thus it will be difficult to free the apostles from the charge of ignorance, and presumption in extending or elevating their conceptions of the object of worship beyond what God has been pleased to reveal, or make known, to angels or man. men men concerning the fame. On comparing this with the foregoing article of Palemon's Creed, in which, upon the matter, he ascribes a body to the Deity, one would be tempted to suspect, that he intended to infinuate, that the Scripture does not warrant us to form any other idea of the fupreme Being than that of a GLORIOUS MAN; which, however agreeable to the notion of the old Anthropomorphites, and fome Socinians in later times, is not only unscriptural, but impious and blafphemous. After all, our author's afssertions and reasonings on this head of the object of worship, are so mystical and unintelligible, that it is hard to know what to make of them; and indeed, when strictly examined, I cannot find that they contain any thing but a jumble, or confused heap of words, without ideas or any determinate sense; and so I leave them, till the shall be pleased more fully to explain himself, and declare his sentiments concerning this matter in such language as may be intelligible to perfons of an ordinary capacity; or till he shall think fit to emerge out of his favourite depths*. * It may be observed that Palemon has his depths as well as the popular preachers. The depths they speak of are, τὰ βάθη τῷ Θεῷ, which by the Apostle are called ανεξιχνίασοι ἀἱ ὁδοὶ ἀυτỡ, the deep things of God, and his ways that are untraceable or past finding out, incomprehenfible by any finite understanding; but Palæmon's depths are depths of error, mysticism, ambiguity and absurdity, intended to intangle and overwhelm the simple and ignorant, so as to make them lofe all just views of the salutary truths and doctrines of the gofpel; and therefore may properly enough be called τὰ βάθη τῷ Σατανᾶ, or the depths of Satan. A RARTICLE III. WHAT has been commonly taught, and believed among Christians concerning a covenant of works made with man in a state of innocency, to which Systematic writers, and mony other Christian teachers, are wont to oppose the covenant of grace, is not only unprofitable, but hurtful; and the distinction usually made betwixt the covenant of works and the covenant of grace is so far from illuftrating, or helping us to form any clearer or more distinct conceptions of revealed truth concerning our state before God, or the method of acceptance with him, that it has a quite contrary effect, and ferves to set aside, obscure, and confound the capital distinction fet before us in the apoftolic writings betwixt the old and new covenant, or betwixt the covenant ratified by the blood of bulls and goats, and the new covenant in Christ's blood. T REMARKS. HE author of the letters does not, indeed, in express terms deny, that there was any fuch transaction between God and Adam, as is ordinarily called the covenant of works; yet I think it is evident from what he says, p. 354. of his letters, that he rejects what has hitherto been taught and believed among Christians concerning it, as unnecessary and useless, and is willing to have it exploded as a systematic or scholastic dream. Here again he chimes in with his old friends the Socinians, and their faithful allies the Remonftrants, with others of the fame kidney; who, for the fake of fome favourite hypothesis on which they have thought proper to form their different schemes of Christianity, have been bold to affirm, that there was no fæderal transaction betwixt God and Adam in a state of innocency; or at least that, in the covenant made with him, he did not sustain the character of a federal head to his posterity. But as this truth concerning the covenant of works made with Adam, and his fæderal headship in respect of his pofterity in that covenant, and others nearly connected with it, have been clearly proved from Scripture; and the cavils of those gentlemen against the same sufficiently answered by many Protestant writers; it might have been expected, that the letter-writer would have considered, and made some reply to their arguments, before he presumed so confidently to reject their sentiments, concerning a matter which must be acknowledged to be of very great importance, and nearly to affect the foundations of all religion. He is pleased indeed to say, that what they teach on this head serves to set aside, obscure, and confound the capital distinction set before us in the apoftolic writings, betwixt the old and new covenant; but as he hath not told us what that old covenant was to which the new is opposed in the writings of the apostles; whether we are to understand by it the moral law, or the law of the ten commandments, with its penal sanction, published to the children of Ifrael from Mount Sinai; or the whole of that typical dispensation which the church was under before the coming of the Mefsiah; neither has he offered the least proof in fupport of his extraordinary afsertion concerning the dittinction commonly made betwixt the covenant of works and the covenant of grace. To affert or deny, it seems, is enough with this gentleman, for for he seldom puts himself to the trouble either of proving what he affirms, or confuting what he impugns. And therefore, one would think, it is very ungenerous in him to be so much offended with others for discovering a sense of their own importance; a piece of vanity which, he thinks, he has reason to charge the popular preachers with, and severely condemns in them; especially as it must be evident to every intelligent and unprejudiced reader, that there are many paragraphs, yea whole pages in his book from which there is scarce any thing to be learned, but that the author certainly had a very high conceit of his own understanding and abilities. But though a simple denial might be a sufficient reply to his confident assertions, which he does not fo much as attempt to prove, by any fair method of argumentation; it may not be improper to inquire a little more narrowly into what he delivers as his opinion concerning the two covenants of works and grace, and the distinction ordinarily made betwixt them, which he treats with so much contempt. I presume it will not be denied, that God made man upright; that, as a creature capable of moral government, he was neceffarily subject to the law of his Creator, and bound to yield perfect obedience thereto, in whatever way it might be revealed or made known to him; and that he was originally endued with such a perfect knowledge of his Maker's will, as was sufficient to inform him concerning the whole extent of his duty towards him, in the circumstances he was then placed in; as alfo with full power and ability to yield all that obedience that was required of him. Now it is equally certain, that no obedience he performed, or could perform to the law of his Creator, could of itself merit, or intitle him to any reward or fur |