because there may be a false revelation, there cannot be a truè one: application of what has been said to the Christian revelation its pretensions are worthy of the deepest consideration: reasons given why such pretensions are not to be turned off with general and loose observations: neglect of this consideration shown to be inexcusable: want of sincerity in religious professions, and desire of salvation, give a wrong turn to controversies about religion different conduct is pursued with respect to those worldly objects which we highly value: concluding exhortation.

PART III.

There cannot be a fairer trial of any religion than a consideration of its efficacy in leading us to eternal life, which is the end of all religion: the difficulty is, how to apply this rule so as to direct our choice, since all religions pretend to have the words of eternal life: our object therefore must be to enable ourselves to determine, which are, and which are not, words of eternal life. Some principles in all religions are allowed, which may help our determination: such are these—that life eternal can be had only from God; and that from him the only way to obtain it is to live agreeably to his holy will; whence it follows, that since to do God's will is the only way to obtain eternal life, the words which instruct us in the knowlege of his will must be the words of eternal life: when therefore we inquire from what principle we ought to derive our religion, we do in truth inquire from what we may best derive our knowlege of God's will, since this is the true measure of our religious obedience. Two ways only by which we can arrive at this knowlege: one, by following the dictates of reason and nature; the other, by learning it either from God's own declaration, or from persons sufficiently authorised by him, which is what we call revelation. Between these two general principles, it is no hard matter to judge which is the safest: as nature is a better

guide than any pretended revelation, so every true revelation, as far as it goes, is better than nature: absurd to compare natural religion and revelation together, as considered in themselves since, if the revelation be false, no arguments are necessary to make it yield to nature; if true, none can be sufficient. On the same principle other general objections against the gospel of Jesus Christ examined: its methods of salvation, which human sagacity cannot fathom, are matters of complaint with unbelievers: they think it unreasonable that God should propose such as objects of faith, and from this presupposed unreasonableness conclude they were not of God's contrivance, but the tricks of impostors: this objection, however, is opposed to all revelation in general, considered as a principle of religion, which adds any thing to what reason teaches us: the question then will be can it be reasonable for God to propose any articles of faith or conditions of salvation, the reason and propriety of which do not appear to man? This the case of the gospel. In the sense of the gospel, what is a mystery and what is not: it must be remembered that not human reason, but God's will is the rule and measure of religious obedience; and therefore the terms of it must be tried by their agreement with God's will rather than the narrow compass of man's reason. If reason can by any means discover that the conditions of salvation proposed to us are the will of God, its work is over, and we are bound to use the means prescribed in order to obtain the desired end and how little soever reason may be able to penetrate into mysteries, yet if it can discover them indeed to be the mysteries of God, and proposed by him as terms of salvation, it discovers to us that these mysteries are the words of eternal life; and what more does a man look for in his religion? This, it may be said, is true, on the supposition that God re quires the belief of mysteries; but how does this prove it reasonable for him so to do? Certain allowances being made on each side, the question is reduced to this-whether it can ever

be necessary to reveal mysteries, in order to perfect the salvation of mankind? whenever it is necessary, it must be reasonable, unless it be unreasonable for God to save the world. Nature of a mystery stated: no real or positive thing in nature, but merely negative with respect to ourselves: what the complaint against mysteries amounts to shown. Return to the question, whether it can be ever necessary for God to use such means for the salvation of the world, the agreeableness of which to the end proposed human reason cannot discover: this shown to be necessary by various arguments, particularly by the difficulty of reconciling it with the wisdom and justice of God so freely to pardon sin as not to leave the marks of his displeasure on it, and vindicate in the face of creation the honor of his laws and government no religion but that which is able to adjust these difficulties can have the words of eternal life: mysteries are so far from being an objection to the gospel, that without a mystery it is impossible for us to be saved: a religion without them might serve for this life, since they are not necessary parts of religion considered only as a rule of action; but they are most necessary when considered as means of obtaining pardon and eternal glory.

PART IV.

Religion acting on the soul, compared with a regimen necessary for the body-one sort proper for a sound constitution, and another for repairing a broken one: an innocent man has nothing to do but to preserve his innocency, which is his title to God's favor; his religion therefore is only a rule of life, and there is no room in it for mystery; but on the supposition of mankind becoming sinful and liable to God's wrath, religion itself becomes a new thing. Unbelievers may think that too much is required to believe that all are sinners and are fallen short of the glory of God: but this is the principle on which

the gospel uniformly proceeds, and on this it must be judged. Three things, necessary to be done for a sinner in order to restore him to eternal life, considered: 1st, that God be reconciled to him: 2dly, that he be purged from the impurity of sin: 3dly, that for the future he be enabled to obey God's holy laws: necessity of these conditions briefly shown. Allowing them to be necessary, and likewise that religion must contain the words or means of eternal life, it follows that the sinner's religion must contain the means of fulfilling these conditions: our notion therefore of such a religion is very imperfect, when we consider it only as a rule of action: as far as a rule of action is necessary, the gospel is shown to have it in the strictest sense of the words, and in the purest form but a rule of life is not the only notion of religion: according to the other ideas which belong to it, it is not necessarily absurd if supposed mysterious: examined in this point of view with reference to the first of the three conditions above-mentioned, or as containing the means by which God is reconciled to sinners. Though we cannot practise a law without understanding it, yet God may be reconciled to us without our comprehending every thing done for that purpose, as a malefactor may receive and profit by a pardon, without knowing what induced his prince to grant it: if a sinner could not receive mercy unless he comprehended all the reasons of it, then only would it be necessary for religion to exclude all mysteries: since the knowlege of the essence of things, and that of the existence of things, are quite distinct, our ignorance of the latter can be no argument against our belief in the former: this explained more fully. The argument carried still further; it being shown that this part of religion must necessarily be mysterious, and the means of reconcilement such as reason and nature cannot comprehend. Reason challenged to discover any means of reconcilement, if these certain and allowed principles be laid down—viz. that it is just for God to punish sinners, and that God can do nothing

but what is just difficulty must ever remain as long as we attempt to scan the divine justice by our narrow conceptions of it and this it is which occasions many things in the gospel to be mysterious. To redeem the world is the work of God only: he alone could find the means, and apply them: religion founded on redemption must consist of two parts-viz., an account of the redemption wrought by God, and instructions to men on what terms they may reap its benefits: as far as our own part in the gospel goes there is nothing mysterious; we know how to act: as to the other parts of it, we are not required to comprehend and account for the means of salvation, but only to accept them: mysteries of God in redemption compared with his wonderful and mysterious works of creation, in which his ways are past finding out: strange that salvation should be the only instance in which men refuse mercy because they cannot understand the methods of obtaining it. The other two points, viz., the cleansing sinners from their iniquity, and the enabling them to live virtuously for the future, are omitted, because the same arguments will apply to them, mutatis mutandis. Conclusion-the only fair way of appreciating the gospel, is to consider the true state of mankind in the world.