صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

have showed, in another place, what that proves ; to which I refer you.

In answer to the creed-maker's question, about his other fundamentals found in the epistles : “ Why did the apostles write these doctrines ? Was it not, that those they writ to might give their assent to them ?" Mr. Bold, p. 22, replies : “ But then it may be asked again, Were not those persons Christians to whom the apostles preached these doctrines, and whom they required to assent to them ? Yes, verily. And if so, What was it that made them Christians before their assent to these doctrines was required ? If it were any thing besides their believing Jesus to be the Messiah, it ought to be instanced in, and made out.

But to this Mr. Edwards answers not. The next thing in controversy between Mr. Bold and the creed-maker, (for I follow Mr. B-d's order) is about a matter of fact, viz. Whether the creed-maker has proved, “ that Jesus Christ and his apostles have taught, that no man can be a Christian, or shall be saved, unless he has an explicit knowledge of all those things wbich have an immediate respect to the occasion, author, way, means, and issue of our salvation, and which are necessary for the knowing the true nature and design of it?" This, Mr. Bold, p. 24, tells him, “he has not done." To this the creedmaker replies, p. 258,

“ And yet the reader may satisfy himself, that this
is the very thing that I had been proving just before,
and, indeed, all along in the foregoing chapter.” Answ.
There have been those who have been seven years
proving a thing, which at last they could not do; and
I give you seven years to prove this proposition, which
you should there have proved ; and I must add to your
score here, viz.
LII. That Jesus Christ, or his apostles, have taught,

that no man can be a Christian, or can be saved,
unless he hath an explicit knowledge of all these
things which have an immediate respect to the oc-
casion, author, way, means, and issue of our salva-

1

[ocr errors]

1

a

tion, and which are necessary for our knowing the

true nature and design of it. Nor must the poor excuse of saying, It was not necessary “ to add any farther medium, and proceed to another syllogism, because you had secured that proposition before,” go for payment. If you had secured it, as you say, it had been quite as easy, and much for your credit, to have produced the proof whereby you had secured it, than to say you had done it; and there

: upon to reproach Mr. Bold with heedlessness; and to tell the world, that “he cares not what he saith.” The rule of fair dispute is, indispensably to prove, where any thing is denied.

To evade this, is shuffling: and, he that, instead of it, answers with ill language, in my country, is called a foul-mouthed wrangler.

To the creed-maker's exception to my demand, about the actual belief of all his fundamentals in his new creed, Mr. Bold asks, p. 24, “ Whether a man can believe particular propositions, and not actually believe them

But to this Mr, Edwards answers not. Mr. Bold, p. 25, farther acknowledges the creedmaker's fundamental propositions to " be in the Bible; and that they are for this purpose there, that they might be believed :” and so, he saith, “ is every other

” proposition which is taught in our Bibles.” But asks, How will it thence follow, that no man can be a Christian until he particularly know, and actually assent to, every proposition in our Bibles ?”

But to this Mr. Edwards answers not. From p. 26 to 30 Mr. Bold shows, that the creedmaker's reply concerning my not gathering of fundamentals out of the epistles is nothing to the purpose ; and this he demonstratively proves.

And to this Mr. Edwards answers not. The creed-maker had falsely said, That “ I bring no tidings of an evangelical faith :” and thence very readily and charitably infers : “ Which gives us to understand, that he verily believes there is no such Chri

[ocr errors]

stian faith.” To this Mr. Bold thus softly replies, p. 31 : “I think Mr. Edwards is much mistaken, both in his assertion and inference :and to show that he could not so infer, adds : “ If the author of the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. had not brought any tidings of such a faith, I think it could not be thence justly inferred that he verily believes there is no such Christian faith : because his inquiry and search was not concerning Christian faith, considered subjectively, but objectively; what the articles be, which must be beJieved to make a man a Christian ; and not with what sort of faith these articles are to be believed.”

To this the creed-maker answers indeed; but it is something as much worse than nothing, as falsehood is worse than silence. His words are, p. 258, “ It may be questioned, from what he [the animadverter] bath the confidence to say, p.31, viz. There is no inquiry in the Reasonableness of Christianity, concerning faith subjectively considered, but only objectively,” &c. And thus having set down Mr. B-d's words otherwise than they are; for Mr. Bold does not say, there is no inquiry, i. e. no mention, (for so the creed-maker explains inquiries here. For to convince Mr. Bold that there is an inquiry, i. e. mention, of subjective faith, he alleges, that subjective faith is spoken of in the 296th and 297th pages of my book.) But Mr. Bold says not, that faith, considered subjectively, is not spoken of any where in the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. but““ that the author's inquiry and search (i. e. the author's search, or design of his search) was not concerning Christian faith considered subjectively.” And thus the creedmaker, imposing on his reader, by perverting Mr. Bold's sense, from what was the intention of my inquiry and search, to what I had said in it, he goes on, after his scurrilous fashion, to insult, in these words which follow :“I say, it may be guessed from this what a liberty this writer takes to assert what he pleases.” Answ.“To assert what one pleases,” without truth and without certainty, is the worst character can be given a writer ; and with falsehood to charge it on another, is no mean slander and injury to a man's neighbour. And yet to these shameful arts must he be driven, who finding his strength of managing a cause to lie only in fiction and falsehood, has no other but the dull Billingsgate way of covering it, by endeavouring to divert the reader's observation and censure from himself by a confident repeated imputation of that to his adversary, which he himself is so frequent in the commission of. And of this the instances I have given are a sufficient proof; in which I have been at the pains to set down the words on both sides, and the pages where they are to be found, for the reader's full satisfaction. • The cause in debate between us is of great weight, and concerns every Christian. That any evidence in the proposal, or defence of it, can be sufficient to conquer all men's prejudices, is vanity to imagine. But this, I think, I may justly demand of every reader, that since there are great and visible falsehoods on one side or the other (for the accusations of this kind are positive and frequent) he would examine on which side they are: and upon that I will venture the cause in any reader's

I judgment, who will but be at the pains of turning to the pages marked out to him; and as for him that will not do that, I care not much what he

says. The creed-maker's following

words, p. 258, have the natural mark of their author. They are these: “How can this animadverter come off with peremptorily declaring, that subjective faith is not inquired into in the treatise of the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. when in another place, p. 35 and 36, he avers, That Christian faith and Christianity, considered subjectively, are the same?" Answ. In which words there are two manifest untruths: the one is, “ That Mr. Bold peremptorily declares, that subjective faith is not inquired into,

spoken of, in the Reasonableness of Christianity," &c. Whereas Mr. Bold says in that place, p. 31, “If he [i. e. the author] had not said one word concerning faith subjectively considered.” The creed-maker's other untruth is his saying, “That the animadverter avers, p. 35, 36, that Christian faith and Christianity, considered subjectively, are the same.” Whereas it is evident, that Mr. Bold, arguing against these words of the creed-maker (“The belief of Jesus being the Messiah was one of the first and leading acts of Christian faith”), speaks in that place of an act of faith, as these words of his demonstrate: “Now, I apprehend that Christian faith and Christianity, considered subjectively, (and an act of Christian faith, I think, cannot be understood in any other sense) are the very same." I must therefore desire him to set down the words wherein the animadverter peremptorily declares, LIII. That subjective faith is not inquired into, or

spoken of, in the treatise of the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c.

And next, to produce the words wherein the animad

verter avers,

LIV. That Christian faith and Christianity, considered subjectively, are the same.

To the creed-maker's saying,

" That the author of the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. brings us no tidings of evangelical faith belonging to Christianity," Mr. Bold replies: That I have done it in all those pages where I speak of taking and accepting Jesus to be our King and Ruler; and particularly he sets down my words out of pages 119, &c.

But to this Mr. Edwards answers not. The creed-maker says, p. 59 of his Socinianism unmasked, that the author of the Reasonableness of Christianity“ tells men again and again, that a Christian man, or member of Christ, needs not know or believe any more than that one individual point.” To which Mr. Bold thus replies, p. 33: “If any man will show me those words in any part of the Reasonableness, &c. I shall suspect I was not awake all the time I was reading that book : and I am as certain as one awake can be that there are several passages in that book directly contrary to these words. And there are some expressions in the Vindication of the Reasonableness, &c. one

« السابقةمتابعة »