For unfeigned trust,

pledges, bewray themselves. though not founded upon inward evidence, is productive of it. Though not the child, it is the fruitful mother.

6thly. We grant that none but the quickened sinner can truly believe that he shall be saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Believing being a spiritual act, necessarily presupposes spiritual life; as an animal or intellectual act implies a similar life. The dead sinner cannot believe. He is under a moral incapacity for such an act: just as he cannot love God till his enmity be taken away. Meanwhile his inability to believe, does not at all affect his warrant to believe. Great is the difference betwixt what I may do, in point of right, and what I can do in point of fact. Though none but the quickened sinner can take Christ, it will not follow that none but he may, or ought to take him. At that rate we must bid none believe, but such as have got the spirit of faith. Nor will it follow that it is unjust in God to command those to believe who cannot; or mockery, to offer Christ to such as cannot take him. Sinners cannot take Christ, because their enmity will not allow them: just as Joseph's brethren, could not speak peaceably to him, because they hated him, Gen. xxxvii. 4. Neither will it follow that because none but such as have spiritual life can believe in Christ, therefore none should attempt to believe till they know that they have that life. This inference is unjust, because we cannot know our spiritual life, before its operation, but only by it. We cannot discern our spiritual life in itself, but only by its acts, operations, and defects. If we will not attempt spiritual actions, till first we know that we have spiritual life, we never will: that life being discernible by its actions only. When Christ bade the man with the withered hand stretch it out, Mark iii. 5. it would have been arrogance in him to have answered, I know not if I can. This he could not know before, but in, attempting to stretch it forth.

These things premised, we assert that sinners have a warrant to believe that they shall be saved by Christ, before they see the evidences of grace in themselves. And this assertion we support with the following arguments.

1st. The first argument we take from our text itself. In it we see two apostles preaching to one sinner, the jailor, who so lately had fastened their feet in the stocks, and a few minutes ago designed to plunge his sword in his own bowels. Such an atrocious sinner they immediately bid believe in Christ for salvation. And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." Here the jailor is warranted to believe prior to his seeing any evidences of grace in himself. Guilt, great guilt he saw in himself, but wo grace. I grant he was a convinced sinner, and hence desirous to hear of the way of salvation. But that he was any thing more than convin. ced, that he had got spiritual life, does not appear. It cannot be said that the apostles exhorted him to believe, because they saw he had the spirit of faith, and therefore would believe. They had not always the discernment of spirits, as they could not always work miracles. And they preached Christ to many who instead of believing the doctrine, blasphemed the Sa viour, and persecuted the preachers.

2dly. Sinners have a warrant to believe the gospel history prior to, and independent of, the inward evidences of grace; and if so, then also to believe the gospel promise. That every man, without exception, is bound to believe the gospel history, will be readily believed by all Christians. But that the obligation to believe the promise is as extensive, is denied by some. For our part we are satisfied that in both cases the obligation is the same. And by this we must a bide, till it be proved that there is one warrant authorizing all men to believe the gospel history, and another authorizing some men only to believe the gospel promise. It cannot be denied that history and promise come to us in one and the selfsame sacred

scripture, that both are the word of the living and true God, that the one gives evidence of things that are not seen, and the other promiseth things hoped for. Hence they constitute not two different objects, of two different kinds of faith, but both together are one object of one and the selfsame faith. It will be said, perhaps, that many believe the truth of the gospel history, who yet do not believe its promise, or that they shall be saved. We grant that many do in a certain sense believe the one, who do not trust in the other. They believe that there was such a person as Jesus of Nazareth, that he died, that he rose again, and ascended up into heaven. But how do they believe these things? No otherwise than that there were such men as Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Pompey, and others. They give a human faith to the divine testimony. They credit the gospel history, just as they do any other, bearing strong marks of credibility. They be lieve it, not because God has said it: if they did, they would also trust to the promise, expecting eternal life through Christ Jesus. Whosoever believes one word because God has said it, must for that very reason believe all. He who can pick and choose; taking some and leaving others, has not the faith of God's elect. Though the history be of things past, and the promise concerning things to come; that makes no difference to faith, inasmuch as both are the words of the one God. Hence we fear not to say, that he who believes that Christ is the Son of God, because God has told him so, will certainly trust in Christ for salvation. If, on the authority of the divine testimony, I believe that Christ is the Son of God, I cannot but believe that he will be a Saviour to me, as appears in the case of the Ethiopian eunuch asking to be baptized. Philip answered him, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.' "" To which he answered, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God," Acts viii. 37. Hence it fairly follows, that his believing that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, implied that he believed on him with all his heart. If it did

not, the consequence would be that the evangelist accepted of lower terms of communion than he had demanded He asked that the eunuch should believe with all his heart, but instead of that he believed this truth only, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. It must therefore be granted, that he believed this truth, not at all as devils do, but with a recumbency of heart on the Son of God. And accordingly the evangelist being satisfied that he did, baptized him,

verse 38.

3dly. If none but such as see the evidences of grace in themselves are warranted to believe that they shall be saved by Christ, then the foundation of faith is greatly changed. It has been generally granted that the foundation of faith is without us, but according to this doctrine it is rather within us. If my warrant to believe that I shall be saved, turn upon the hinge of inward evidence, it natively follows that I must first look into my own heart, before I look into the word. For in vain do I seek a warrant in the one, till I have seen evidence of grace in the other; and thus in effect my evidences are my warrant. warrant. When I have them I am warranted to trust in Christ for salvation: and when I have them not, I am not warranted. Thus the one is up and down, visible and invisible, according to the various state of the other. And becomes narrow and broad as there are few or more men who have the evidences of grace. But what a fluctuating foundation this! How unlike the unchangeable God! whose word abideth the same, whatever changes may be in us. According to this doctrine, my trust turns upon my evidence. I must not trust a bare word at first; no, I must first see, and then believe.

4thly. If the sinner must not believe in Christ for salvation till he see the evidences of grace in himself, it comes to be a question, whence do these evidences arise? Purity of heart, and love to God and all his saints, are the sum of these evidences I suppose. Now whence do they come? Ac

cording to this doctrine, they do not flow from faith, for we must not believe, till we see them. I had always thought that the evidences of grace had been the same with the evidences of faith. But here, it seems, are evidences of grace before faith, evidences not flowing from it, but upon which it is founded. According to holy scripture, faith purifieth the heart, Acts xv. 9. and worketh by love, Gal. v. 6. And therefore purity and love do not go before it. That the effects of faith can exist before itself, is as unphilosophic, as it is is unscriptural. It is much as one should say, the child is before the mother, the fruit before the root. That there can be any evidences of grace in the soul prior to its cleaving to Christ by faith, is a doctrine utterly unknown in holy scripture. What though there be life in the order of nature previous to that act, it is not discernible before, but only by it. I see no evasion that can be made here, unless it be said, that a sinner's belief that there is a Saviour provided, produceth such effects in him as warrant him to believe that he in particular shall be saved by that Saviour. But is not this saying upon the matter, either that the faith of the gospel history warrants us to believe in the promise; that one kind of faith leads to another; or that the faith of the one produces such effects in us as warrant us to believe in the other for our salvation; all which are absurd.

5thly. If we are not warranted to trust in Christ for our salvation till we see the evidences of grace in ourselves, we shall never trust in him at all. That these evidences cannot be before faith we have just now seen, and therefore if we must not trust till we see them, we must remain in unbelief. Thomas said he would not believe a Saviour's resurrection till he In mercy he was vouchsafed a sight, otherwise according to his own word, he had remained an unbeliever. But if we abide by that doctrine, that we must not believe that Christ will save us, till we see the inward evidences of grace in ourselves, how miser

saw.