E V
c^uWb , Th<pwia% , ft Co ^v A > ,J~
Tra<M<b £*y> ^a
DISCOURSE
O N
MIRACLES,
Confidered as EVIDENCES to prove the Divine Original of a REVELATION.
Wherein is fhewn,
What Kind and Degree of EVIDENCE arifes from them, and in which the various Reafonings on thofc Queftions that relate to the Subjeft are fairly re- prefented.
To which is added, an
APPENDIX,
CONTAINING
An ENQUIRY into this Queftion, viz. Whether the Doftrines of a future State of Exiftence to Men, and a future Retri bution, were plainly and clearly taught by Mofes and the Prophets? Humbly offered to the Confideration of the Rev. Dr. WARBERTON, and all others that particularly in- tereft themfelves in this Queftion.
By THOMAS CHUBB.
5-Uf^' LONDON: ^b\
Printed for T, Cox, at the Lanl under the Royal-Exchange, MDCCXLI.
I. ... . • :-.; I
THE
PREFACE.
CONTROVERSIES in matters of religion^ when managed with that fairnefs and good humour as they ought, have this ad vantage arifing from them, that they give occafion for mens reafoning fa culties to be exercifed with much more care and attention than other- wife they would be* And this tends to check and reftrain the growth of A 2 bigotry
iv The P R E E A C E.
bigotry and fuperftition, which, thro* rnens inattention^ are apt to prevail in the world. The points contro verted, are, likewife, very often fet in a much clearer light by this means, and the way to truth is rendered more eajy> by a removal of thofe difficulties and objections which are bars to mens receiving it. And this has given occafion to fome men, (viz. thofe who purfue truth in the love of it) to wifh that all reftraints upon mens enquiries were removed, and that all men were &full liberty to offer their thoughts, and their ob- jedions freely^ upon every queftion with which religion is concerned ; this being moft fair and equitable in itfelf, and, likewife, the moft fure and certain way for a religion which is well grounded to be generally re ceived^ and, thereby, to be more throughly eftablijhed. Indeed, this is an improper way for the general re ception,
The PREFACE. v
ception, and, thereby, the eftablifh- ment of a religion that is not well grounded, becaufe fuch a method tends to its fubverfion. And,
This has encouraged me to offer, to publick confideration, the follow ing Dlicourfe on Miracles, confi- dered as evidences^ to prove the di vine original of a revelation, where in I have taken a view of the fubjeft confidered {imply in itfelf, without any view or regard to any particular revelation, or to any par ticular miracle, wrought, or fup- pofed to be wrought in favour of the divinity of any revelation; and, in which, I have introduced the various reafonings upon the feveral queftions with which the fubjedt is concerned, not intending, hereby, to raife difficulties^ and make ob- je£lionsy thefe being raifed and made already, but only to give a fair representation of what may be faid
upon
vi The P R E F A C E.
upon both fides of thofe queftions* without making myfelf a party^ or being interejled in what is offered on either fide, that fo, if any dif ficulty fliould arife, from fuch a view of the cafe, it might give oo cafion, and opportunity to fome perfon or other of fuperior abilities to remove it. I am fenfible it is a cafe but too common, when men exercife any freedom in reafoning about matters of religion, or when they lay open the difficulties which any fcheme of religion is incum- bered with, and the like, then they are reprefented to the world as Deiftsy as enemies to revealed reli gion, &c. tho', by the way, Chrif- tians are but a fed of Deifts 01 Theifts, as thofe are juftly oppofed to Atheifts, and Polytheifts, Yea, fome Chriftians feem fcarcely to have come up to the character of Deifts, or Theifts; becaufe Poly the- 3 ifm,
The PREFACE. vii
y or a plurality of deities, feem to be a part of the compofition in their fcheme of religion. How ever, this is what I am not foli- citous about; for as I am very fen- fible that I arn anfwerable to God for my actions, fo to his judgment^ as to the moft fair and equitable Being, I chufe to refer myfelf. The prefent cry is, that Deifm and Infidelity prevails ; and if thefe com plaints are jufty then the queftion is, what (hould be done to flop the growth of it? And the anfwer, I think, is evident (fo far as rea- fon and argument is concerned in the cafe) viz. that fair and proper anjwers fhould be returned to thofe difficulties and objections which are made the grounds of it. But how can fuch anfwers be returned, ex cept thofe difficulties and objections are fairly and fully represented ? Arid this is what I have endea voured
viii The PREFACE.
voured to do in the following Di£- courfe, fo far as the fubjeft I treat of in a general way is concerned.
DISCOURSE
O N
MIRACLES,
When coniidered as Evidences to prove the Divine Original of a Revelation.
SECTION I.
1 SHALL not here enter into thofe quef- tions, whether God has ever given a di vine revelation to the world j or whe ther ever any miracles have been wrought in favour of the divinity of a revelation ; but admitting the fuppofition that a divine revela tion has been, or may be given to mankind $ and that miracles have been, or may be wrought in favour of the divinity of a reve- B lation ;
lation ; then my enquiry is, what kind, and degree of evidence ariies from them. And in order to treat of this fubject clearly, I {hall Jirft enquire what is meant by a miracle, as it ftands related to the prefent queftion -, fe- condfa what by Revelation •> thirdly, what by the divinity of a revelation \ fourthly, what by evidence ; and^/r/i/y, what by proof. And, Firft, Of a miracle. This term, I think, is ufed to exprefe a Jenfible effeft^ which is a- bove the natural ability or inherent power of map to caufe or produce ; which is likewite above or bejides the ordinaiy courfe of nature, or of thofe laws by which the natural world is .governed, in the courfe of God's general providence; and which alfo is produced by the agency, or cooperation of an invifible Be ing. By the natural ability of man, is meant that ability which arifes from our whole com- pofitioh with all its improvements, acting iny or upon matter, confidered as under the direc tion of thofe laws which the God of nature hath fubjccled it to. As thus, foppofing it to be above the natural ability of man, (when thoroughly acquainted with all the fecrets and powers in nature, and mafter of all the art which human natiire is capable of attaining,) to raife bimfelf i.tp, and move through the (iv\ to the height, and with the fwiftnefs of an £agle ; and that this effect muft be the pro duce, hot of the ordinary courfe of nature, or of thofe laws by which the natural world fe governed, but of the immediate mterpofi-
tion
[ 3 ]
tion and power of fome in^lfibk agent ;: and fuppofing it to be above the natural ability of this man to dijcover that he mould be thus raifed up., and moved by the power of ano ther ; admitting this to be the cafe ; then if a man mould be thus raifed up, and moved through the air, as aforefaid, and if this ope ration fo far depended upon the man's will, as that he would, or would not be thus move4 through the air^ according as he willed either; or if he only foretold that this effect would take place 5 this would be, with refpeft to that man, miraculous, or a miracle ; and he upon whofe will the operation depended, or who foreknew, and foretold it, that man might be laid to work this miracle. Again, fuppofe a man mould will that a particular mountain mould be removed from its place and be car ried into the midji. of the fea ; or, fuppofe he ihould only foreknow, and foretel that fuch an effeft would take place, admitting it to be .above his ability to caufe or produce fuch an effect, or to foreknow that it would be e-f- fefted, and that it was not the produce of thole laws by which the natural world is go verned, and fuppofe the mountain mould be removed accordingly, this would be, with refped: to that man, a miracle; and he upon whofe will the operation depended, or who foreknew and foretold it, that man would be the worker of the miracle. For tho' this operation was performed, not by the power of the man, but by the power of fome invi- B 2 fible
[4]
fible agent ; yet as the power which was ex- ercifed, in this cafe, was jubjett to the man's will, as to the exercife of it; or elfe, as it was revealed to, and foretold hy him, that fuch ;an effect fhould take place ; fo his rela tion to the action, as aforefaid, would render it his, in an improper fenfe, and he would be the worker of the miracle. And this is fup- pofed to,. be the cafe in all thofe miracles with which the preient queftion is concerned. For, .as miracles are here confidered as evi dences of the divinity of a revelation; and as divine revelations are delivered to the world by the mouth, or -pen of fome man ; fo no miracle can be an evidence of the divinity of a man's meffage, except the power exercifed in working the miracle bcjitlyefl to the man's will, as to the exercife of it ; or, at leaft, ex cept it be revealed to, and foretold by that man, that fuch an effect: will take place ; for, otherwife, it would not appear that the mi racle was related to one man, or to his mef fage, more than to another; and, confequent- ly, not to any man ; and, therefore, it could not be an evidence in the prefent cafe.
There are tivo other definitions of a mira cle, which do not anfwer throughout to the definition here given ; tho' when the cafes are examined, they will appear in the iffue to be refolved into it. As jirft, fome men define a miracle to be a fen fible effect, which is won derful and fur prizing to the fpectators. But then it is to be remembered, that thofe effects
being
[ 5 ]
being wonderful and furprizing, are the ground or reafon to fuch perfons to judge them to be produced, not by the agency of man, but by the agency, or cooperation of an invifible Being, and as fuch they are confidered as miraculous. So that this definition, in its loft refult, is the fame with that given above. Secondly , fome men define a miracle to be a fenfible effed:, which is above the natural a- bility of man to caufe or produce; and which is produced by the agency, or cooperation of God. But then thofe men take it for granted, that there is no other invifible agent but God, which can, or which doe^ at leaft, perform any operation upon this globe. So that this definition is the lame with that before laid down, excepting that it afcribes, and con fines all fuch e&fts as are above the natural ability of man to caufe or produce, to the agency or operation of God only. Again,
Secondly, Of a revelation. This term ex^- preffes the conveying of ideas from one in~ telligent being to another, whether it be by ipeech, writing, or otherways; and whether the fubjedt of fuch ideas be matter of Jpecu- lation, or prattice •> and whether it relates to fads pafty prefent, or to come. But left the terms I here make ufe of to explain the term revelation mould need themfelves to be ex^ plained, therefore, to cut fhort this work, I obferve, that the point I have now in hand is a Jpecimen, and carries in it the idea of what I intend by the term under confidera- 2 tion.
tion. That is, I do put this difcourfe into writing^ thereby to convey to my reader the idea of what I intend by the term revelation ; and if that idea is convey'd hereby, then this is, in reality, revelation itfelf \ becaufe it not only contains in it, but likewife conveys to my reader, the idea which I annex to that term. Again,
Thirdly, Of the divinity of a revelation. When the term divine is annexed to a revela tion, it exprefies, that the ideas which it con tain were originally and immediately convey'd from God to his creature, or creatures ; tho' fecmdarily and mediately they are conveyed from him, by .one creature to another. But then by divine rcvelation, in the prefent cafe, 5s not intended any particular, private reve lation, the fubjeifi of which relates to parti cular perfons, or to a particular occaiion ; but only fiich publick revelations as are given, and intended to inform the judgments, and to direct the affe&ions and behaviour of man kind, and, as fuch, to be a ftanding rule of action to them. Again, by publick revelati ons, are not meant a divine application to the mind of each individual of our fpecies, by which are revealed to each individual the truths intended to be made known. For tho* this may be called a publick revelation, as it is given univerfally to all, yet, ftri&ly fpeak- ing, it would be a particular, private revela.- tion, becaufe it is given particularly to each individual. And fuch a revelation, whether
it
[7]
it be confidered as publick or private, is fo reign to the prefent enquiry -y becaufe the cafe of miracles, in our prefent view of them, would not come into the queftion. For, in that cafe, as every one would have the reve lation 'd&firft hand, and no one would receive it from another, fo no credit would be re quired, by one, from another, with refpeft to it ; and, confequently, no miracle would be wanted to back or fupport any one's credit on that account. Befides, the prefent enquiry is not, what fort of evidence is proper to work a rational conviction in the mind of each individual of our fpecies, of the divinity of thofe impreffions which have been made upon them, and by which a divine revelation is fuppofed to be conveyed to each of them j but only upon a fuppofition that a revelation of which it is faid that it is divine (hould at any time be given or publifhed by the mouth, or pen of one man, to others, and for their life, and real miracles (hould be wrought by the reporter^ and flhould be appealed to by him as evidences of the divinity of his mif- fion ; then, and in that cafe, the enquiry is, what kindy or degree of evidence arifes, (not to the revealer, but to others J from thofe miracles, in favour of the divinity of that re* velation. Again,
Fourthly, Of evidence. This term expreffes that which is the ground of our afjent to, or diffent from a propofition ; and it is of two kinds, namely, teft.imony, and deduction.
By
By tejlimony is meant, when ah intelligent being, by fpeech, writing, or otherwife, vouches for, or denies the propofition in de bate. And by deduction is meant, when that which is brought as evidence requires our comparing of ideas, and from thence we col- left or deduce the truth, or falfenefs of the point in queftion. And as evidence is of two kinds, fo it is the latter of thefe with which we are at prefent concerned. For as miracles are fenfible effe&s, fo they become evidences, not by bearing teftimony, as aforefaid, but by being reflected upon with regard to their phy- lical caufes, and the grounds and reafons upon which the agent adts, and the like; from whence is collected or deduced the truth) or falfenejs of the propofition in quef tion 5 and that becomes the ground of our af- jent) or diffent* Miracles are direft evidences, and give zfenfible proof, not of the veracity, but only of the power which attends the ac tor; and, therefore, any other kind of evi dence which may be fuppoied to arife from them, can be only by deduction^ as it is the refult of juft reafoning upon the cafe. Again, Fifthly, Of proof. This term exprefles ei ther the correfpondency of the evidence to, and with the truth of ' things j or elfe the preva- lency of the evidence upon the judgment. By the correfpondency of the evidence to, and with the truth of things, is meant, when the evidence fets forth or witnefleth to the truth. And this is proof in the moft
proper
[9]
-proper fenfe ; tho' it muft be granted, it will not be efteemed fo but where conviction fol lows. The perfon who is not convinced by the evidence propofed, will judge that the propofition is not proved by it ; becaufe, he thinks, the truth does, or may lay on the other fide of the queftion. By the preva- lency of the evidence upon the judgment, is meant, that it Jo far prevails, as that the judgment is convinced of the truth, or falfe- nefs of the propofition upon that evidence. And this is called proof in a fecondary and lefs proper fenfe ; even tho' the judgment de termines wrong upon fuch evidence. And in that cafe, it is fo only in a fecondary and lefs proper fenfe; becaufe, ftri&ly fpeaking, a falfe propofition cannot be proved true, tho' the underftanding may be fo far mifled as to judge it to be fo. Proof, likewife, is of two kinds, namely, probable and certain. By probable is meant, when the evidence {hews that it is more likely for the truth to be on one fide of the queftion than on the other, but does not fhew it abjolutely to be fo ; that is, it does not fhew that it implies a contradic tion, or an impoffibility in the nature of things to fuppofe the contrary. Again, by probable is meant, when the evidence pre vails fo far upon the judgment as to gain af- Jent, but not fo far as to exclude a poffibility of the contrary. By certain proof is meant, when the evidence (hews the truth to be on one fide of the queftion abfolutely9 and that
C it
[ 10]
it cannot be otherwife ; or when the evidence fo far prevails upon the judgment, as that it determines abfolutely, and is convinced that it implies a contradiction, or an impoffibility in the nature of things to fuppofe the contrary, tho' it may, poffibly, be otherwife. And this latter cafe is called certain proof ~ not be- caufe it is fo in itfelf, but becaufe it is fo e- fteemed by the perfon who is convinced by it.
SECTION II.
HAVING explained the terms which immediately relate to the fubjedl under confideration, I mould now proceed to the general enquiry, were it not that there are Jive things which feem abfolutely necelfary to be enquired into, as previous to it. And thefe points feem proper to be taken notice of, not only for the better , and wore perfect underftanding of the cafe before us, but alfo, in order to keep, as clear as poffible, from every difficulty that is liable to perplex it; which enquiries are as follow. Firft, How far the natural ability of man extends. Se condly, Whether there are any other invifible agents but God, which can, or which do (at leal!) adt upon this globe. Thirdly, Suppof- ing there are, then what kind or degree of
power
C » ]
power they are capable of exercifing. Fourth ly, Whether God will fuffer them to exert fuch power as they have, when it is to be employed for the delufion of his creatures. And Fifthly, Whether a man who may be faid to work a miracle, (as before explained,) is at liberty to ufe fuch miracle-working power, well or ill, and to employ it in ferv- ing what purpofes he pleafe. And,
Firft, I am to enquire how far the natural ability of man extends. But this feems to be a difficulty too great for human underftand- ing to furmount. We plainly fee the great difference there is with regard to the capacities of men, and the improvement of thofe ca pacities, in the knowledge of thofe laws, to which matter is fubjedled betwixt one man and another ; a difference^ great, that, to ap pearance, one man is as much fuperior to an other in thefe refpedts, as the latter is fuperior to fome brutes. And as our own abilities come Jhort, in one refpedt or other, to the abilities of other men, fo this fhews the diffi culty > or rather the impoffibility of fixing the point, and {hewing the utmoft extent of the natural ability of mankind. But then, tho* this is a point which cannot poffibly \*s fixed by us, yet there are cafes in which there is jufl ground for prejuming that the effects pro duced exceed the bounds of human power; becaufe in thofe cafes there is a high degree of probability on the one fide, and but a bare poffibility on the other. Thus, as in the two C 2 inftances
[ 12]
inftances mentioned above, viz. if a man fhould rife up, and move thro' the air, to the height, and with the fwiftnefs of an eagle; or, if he fhould command a mountain to re move out of its place, and to ftand in the midft of the fea, and it (hould be removed accordingly, then there would be juft ground for prefuming that thofe effe&s exceeded the bounds of human power ; becaufe, as this is greatly fuperior to any power which has yet appeared to be in man, fo from hence arifes a high degree of probability, that it is above the natural ability of mankind ; and there is no probability, but only a bare poffibility, if that, of the contrary. And, therefore, ad mitting that infucb cafes we have no certain proof, that the efteds produced exceed the bounds of human power; yet the probabi lity, and the prefumption arifing from it a- gainft fuch power in man, are fb exceeding ftrong, as become almoft equal to fuch proof.
SECTION III.
QECONDLY, I am to enquire, Whether ^J there are any other invifible agents but God, which can, or which do, at leaft, aft upon this globe. And this, likewife, is a talk exceeding difficult, feeing we have no footfleps to trace, nor any thing to guide us
[ '3]
in our fearch after truth, with refped to the queftion before us. As to any light or infor mation which may be fuppofed to be derived from divine revelation, with refpeft to the prefent queftion, that is naturally and necefja- rily excluded out of the cafe. For as the di vinity of a revelation is the principal and ultimate end of the general enquiry, and the great and main point fought after; fo that point muft not be juppo/edy nor taken for granted, nor muft any argument, light, or information be borrowed from it, in any queC- tion previous to it. This then, viz. Whether there are any other invifible agents but God, which can, or which doy at kaft, aft upon this globe, is a point that muft remain unde termined; and confequently, neither the ne gative, nor the affirmative fide of this quef tion is to be taken for granted, in order to prove any other point ; becauie nothing can certainly be concluded from either, Teeing that would be to draw certain conclufions from uncertain principles.
SECTION IV.
'"""F^HIRDLY, fuppofing there are fuch
invifible agents as aforefaid, then I am
to enquire what kind, or degree of power
they are capable of exercifing. And here
alfo
['4]
alfo we are in the dark^ and muft leave this point under the fame uncertainty that we find it. For as invijible agents are beings which we are perfed: grangers to, fo the kinds, or degrees of power which may arife from their natural constitutions, are what we have no poffible way to difcover. All, I think, which can be faid upon the point, is this, namely, that as there are various kinds of beings which God has produced, and which come within our knowledge, fo there are various kinds, and degrees of power which he hath communicated to thofe beings. And as power is capable of being communicated, fo it is equally as eajy for God to communicate one kind, or degree of power as another -, at leaft, it is equally as eafy for any thing we know, or canfoew to the contrary. But then,
It may be urged, allowing that there are fuch invifible agents as aforefaid, and, like- wife, that we cannot difcover what kind, or degree of power may arife from their natural conflitutions ; yet when jeveral fuch effedls take place, as may juftly be prefumed to ex ceed the bounds of human power, and when they are produced by Jeveral inftruments in. cppofition to each other, then the prevailing power proves itfelf to be divine.
To this it may be anfwered, that the pre~ valency of power is not a proof that it is di vine. Two created beings may contend for the mailery, and he that has the greater power will prevail, if he exerts it with dijcretion.
And
[ is]
And this will be the cafe, whether the con tending agents are vifible^ or invijible beings ; fo that the truth, or goodnefs of a caufe, can not be determined from the fuccefs of the contenders, becaufe, fometimes, it is not he that has the beft caufe, but he that has the greateft power which gains the vidtory. It is true, if God interpofes in any cafe, then it is to be prefumed that he will give truth the viftory; but the queftion will ftill remain, whether he does interpofe, or not, feeing the prevalency of power is not, neither can it be a proof that it is divine. Again,
It may be farther urged, that the ralfing a dead perfbn to life, is a work above the natu ral ability or inherent power of any created being; and, therefore, it muft be performed by the immediate operation or agency of God.
To which it may be anfwered, that here is a point prefumed without Jufficient ground, and a confequence drawn from that prefiimp- tion, which in argument is not to be allowed. The animal life (as the cafe appears to us) has a connexion with, and a dependence upon a body fitly organized, and ftored with juices, and thofe juices in a proper motion, &c. fo that if fome of the principal parts of the machine are thrown into any great diforder, or if the juices are let out, or ftagnate, or the like> then a ce/ation of life, which we commonly call death, will enfue, except fome jpeedy remedy be applied to correSt the difor der in the machine, or to Jlop the difcharge
of
of the fluids, or to thin, or re/lore them td their proper motion, &c. or in other words, to remove that, whatever it be, which would have been, if not removed, the ground and cauje of the ceffation of life. And as life is thus expofed, fo it has fometimes been pre- ferved when in the greateft danger. A fkilful furgeon or phyfician, by a timely interpofi- tion, has fometimes prevented death, by re moving a diforder which, otherwife, would fpeedily, and unavoidably have ended it. Yea, fometimes, by a timely, and proper applica tion from a fkilful person, life has been re- jlored after a fhort ceflation ; that is, after all the marks and fymptoms of life have difap- peared ; I fay, in f'ome fuch inftances, life has Jeemed, at leaft, to have been reftored. Thus far it is evident that the natural ability of man extends. But that this is the utmoft ex tent of human power, ought not be laid, becaufe, we cannot tell what farther know ledge and experience may render men capable of doing. But fuppofing it may, poiTibly, be above the natural ability of man to reftore life after one, or two, or three days ceflation, or fome other given time ; yet it will not fol low that it is above the natural ability of every other created being, feeing the extent of man's power cannot be a rule to us, by which we may judge of the abilities of other agents whom we are not acquainted with.
In the hijlory of the deliverance of the children of Jjrael from Egyptian bondage,
wo
[ '7
We have an account, that the magicians, by their enchantments, that is, (as it is commonly underftood,) by a power derived from evil fpirits, turned their dead, rods into ferpents, that is, into living, aSlive beings, which ier- pents are known, and allowed to be. And from hence it may be argued, that if an in* vifible created agent could, by his own natu ral ability, fo change and dijpoje the particles of matter which conftituted a dead rod, as that, they became an organized body, ftored with juices, in a proper motion, and could do whatever was farther neceflary to render that dead rod a living, affiive being, (as in the inftance above x;) then there is a ftrong probability, that it is within the inherent power of fome created beings, to reffiify the diforders of an organized body, rejlore to it a proper quantity of fluids, put them in mo tion, and do what is farther neceffary to render it again a living, affive being, after one, or two, or three days death, feeing the latter, (as far as we can judge,) is as eafy to be performed as t\iz former. So that the pro per queflion arifing from hence will be, whe ther there are any created beings who can, by their own natural ability or inherent power, rectify the diforders of an organized body, rejlore to it a proper quantity of fluids, put them in motion, and do what is farther ne ceffary to render it again a living creature, after one, .or two, or three days death, or fome other given time. But this is what, at
D prefent,
prefent, we have no way to difcover, and, therefore, neither fide of the queftion is to be taken for granted, in order to prove any other point. Tho' if we admit, as true, what is recorded, as done, by the magicians of Egypty in turning dead rods into ferpents, then the probability will be on the affirmative fide of the queftion, as has been fhewn a- bove.
SECTION V.
FOURTHLY, Suppofing there are fuch invifible agents as aforefaid ; then I am to enquire, Whether God will fuffer them to exert fuch power as they haver when it is to be exercifed for the delufan of his creatures. And here, if we argue by analogy, that is, if we infer from his conduct in one cafe, how he will acl: in another -, then it is plain, that God 'will fuffer invifible agents to exert their power in ferving what purpofes they pleafe. Men, we fee, are at liberty, and do actually delude one another, in every kind of delu- fipn, tho' it be in points of the utmojl im portance, and for each other's hurt, and fometimes, when they have no other advan tage from it, but the bare pleafure of delud ing ; and thus they deal with the creatures below them ; and thus, in like manner, thofe
creatures
[ '9 ]
creatures deal with one another. From whence arifes a Jtrong probability, that all invifible agents (if there are any fuch) are at liberty to exert their power in ferving what purpofes they pleafe. But then,
It may be urged, that it is inconfiftent with God's moral character, as a juft and good being, to fuffer invifible agents to exert their power for the delujion of mankind.
To this it may be anfwered, that as this rejlralnt arifes from the purpofe which fuch power is made fubfervient to, namely, the delufion of mankind ; fo when any kind, or degree of power is to be exercifed to anfwer the fame end, either by a vifible, or an invi fible agent, it muft be eqttally z&fit in the na ture of the thing, for God to reftrain it, feeing delufion is the fame in itfelf, and as bad in its confequences, to the per/on deluded, whether the power which is the ground of that delufion be natural, or fupcr natural ; and feeing it would be equally as kind, and good in God, to exercife his reftraining power in tins former, as in the latter cafe. But that God dcei not exercife his retraining power in the former cafe, is evident from experience* Again,
It may be farther urged, that invifible a- gents, with refpedl to their underftandings • and power, are what men are not an equal match for ; and that, if God fliould permit fuch agents to exert their power for the de~ lujion of mankind, this would be to exfoft D 2 the
the generality of men to fuch evils- and tnifi chiefs as they are not qualified to guard a- gainft; and, that, therefore, it becomes the •wifdom and goodnefs of God, to interpofe and prevent thofe evils, by re ft raining invifible agents from ufing their power as aforefaid.
To this it may be replied, that as it is a popular argument drawn from the moral per- fedtions of God, ib it may, in a multitude of inftances, be turned againft them. Al- moft every tribe of animals may take up their complaint, and fay, that they are ex- pofed to' a multitude of evils and inconve- niencies, through the faperior capacities of men, which they are not an equal match for, and, therefore, are not qualified to guard a- gainft the evils men bring upon them ; and that if God were a wife and good being, he would kindly interpofe, and prevent their falling into thofe evils, or deliver them out of them : But he does not interpofe, as aforefaid, and, therefore, he is neither wife nor good. The fly, when it is taken in the net the fpi- der has fpread for it, may take up its com plaint, and fay, O wretched, helplels creature that I am ! I am now fallen into the faare which the crafty Ipider laid for me, whole fuperior capacity I am not an equal match for., and whofe mifcbievms defigns J am not qualified to guard againft. Surely, if the great governor of the univerfe were wife and good, he would have mercifully interpofed, and prevented my falling into fo great an
evil,
[ 21 j
evil, which, by my condition in nature, I was not qualified to fecure myfelf from, or he would now interpofe and deliver me out of it ; but he has not, nor does interpofe, ^s aforefaid, therefore, he is not wife nor good, at leaft, he muft be defective in one, or other of thefe. And,
As this is the cafe with refped: to the ani mals below us, fo it is the fame with refpeft to our own Ipecies. Bftchjftm who is forced to bear, or fuffer many evils and mi/eries from the fuperior power which a tyrannical governor is pofleffed of, may take up his complaint, and fay, that if God were wife and goody he would interpofe and reftrain tJie tyrant from exercifing his power, as afore faid, feeing not only himfelf, but many more are forced to fuffer the like evils, it not being in their power to prevent them, or to deliver themfelves from them. It is equally the fame to a man, whether his misfortunes are brought upon him by ihcjupenor power^ or craft of another ; and it would be equally as kind and good fa God to interpofe and prevent, or re move them, whether they be introduced by the fuperior power, or craft of a vifibky or an invijible agent. And,
As men .are not a match for each other in a variety of cafes, fo, particularly, with re gard to delufion and impofition ; and that too in matters of religion. And here it may be proper to fuppofe that Mahomet was an im- pojtor, tho'5 indeed, this may minifter jufl
ground
.
ground of complaint to the Mahometans; becaufe they may infift, that their prophet ought to be proved an importer, and that we ought not to take it for granted that he was fo. But this is a queftion which the prefent argument is not concerned with, and it is only fuppofed for argument fake, to illuftrate the point now in hand. Suppofing then that Mahomet was an impojtor, and that no invifi- ble agent was concerned, either in contriving, or propagating the impotition ; yet feeing it did (itcceed, and that not only over a great part of the world, but alfo through a courfe of many ages, and is like to fucceed through many more ; therefore, the queftion arifing from hence will be, whether it would not have been equally as kind and good, for God to have interpofed and prevented the Maho metan -delufion, as the cafe nowftands, as it would have been, fuppofing it had been in troduced by the power, or craft of an invifi- ble agent. And the anfwer to this queftion may, poffibly, appear to fome, very evident, namely, that goodnefs is as much concerned, and would be equally fhewn in one cafe, as in the other; and from hence they may argue, that feeing God has not interpofed to prevent delufion in one cafe, therefore, no good argu ment can pofiibly be drawn from his wij&m and goodnefs,, to (hew that he would have in terpofed in the other. Again,
It may be further urged, that man is en dowed with a faculty of nnderjlanding, by
the
the right ufe and exercife of which, he is qualified to guard againft the Mahometan^ or any other delujion, provided it be not backed with the power of an invifibk agent, in work ing miracles for its confirmation.
To which it may be farther anfwered, that if men would rightly ufe, and follow their underftandings, they would thereby be guarded and fecured from every delufion, (or, at leaft, from all that are hurtful,) tho* backed with the power of an invifible agent, as a- forefaid; becaufe then every man would be aflurcd, from the nature and reafon of the thing, that no power, how great foever, could poffibly be of God, which directly and immediately -tended to the hurt and damage of mankind. And, confequently, if this were the cafe, then there would be no place for the exercife of divine wifdom and goodnefs, in pre venting the delufion of mankind. But this is not the cafe, feeing the generality of men are fo far from ufing, and following their underftandings in this particular, that, on the contrary, they are too apt to follow every one who takes upon him to guide them, and are 'very eafily mifled and deluded ; fo that the honeft, plain, fimple part of mankind, are not an equal match for the more fubtile and crafty. And it is in this view that man is to be confidered. The proper queflion, there fore, is this, viz. confidering the bulk of mankind in their prejent circumftances, fa liable to be deluded and irnpofed upon, whe ther
ther it would not be equally kind and for God to interpofe and prevent their delu- fion, as well when an invifible agent is not concerned in promoting and forwarding it, as when he is. And if the divine wifdom and goodnefs is equally concerned, and would be equally (hewn in both cafes, (which fome men think muft be allowed,) then, fay they, feeing God does not interpofe to prevent delu- fion in one cafe, therefore, no good argument can be drawn from his wifdom and goodnefs, to prove that he would interpofe in the other* But farther, it may be anfwered, , As it is moft evident that delufion does take place, fo it is alike evident that God nnijl permit and fuffer it, whiUl there are fuch things as free creatures in being. Men will be at liberty, whilft they are agents, to exercife their natural abilities in ferving what purpojes they pleafe. Take away that liberty, and their agency ceafes, or is deftroyed. And this muft be the cafe of all intelligent, free beings, whether vifible, or invifible, and whe ther their natural r power, (that is, the power arifing from their natural conftittitions) be greater, or left. So that to fay, it is morally unfit for God to fuffer his creatures to delude or injure one another, is the fame as to fay, that it is morally unfit for God to call free creatures into being. But then,
It may be yet farther urged, that tho'
God will fuffer invifible agents (fuppofing
there are fuch) to exercife their power in
i ferving
05]
ierving what purpofe they pleafe, yet feeing they do not frequently exercife their power upon this globe, it becomes a queftion, whe ther they do at any time exercife it amongft: mankind. JFor if invifible agents can, and fometimes do exercife their power as afore- faid, then there is juft ground to prefume that they frequently do fo, becauie they have frequent occafions and opportunities for it; bat whereas it is evident they feldom (if ever) do ; therefore it is highly probable that they do not exerciie their power here at all. And though we cannot diicover what may be the motives to invifible agents to interefl: them- felves in human affairs, yet feeing the tranfac- tions which take place amongft mankind are generally a round of the fame things ; fo from hence arifes a probability that the motives to action (if there are any fuch) to invifible a- <&Kte frequently take place upon this globe, and thereby become frequently the grounds and reafons of aclions to them. So that if invifible agents do interefl: themfelves at all in the affairs "of this world, then it is to be pre- itimed, that they frequently do fo (as was ob- ferved above) becauie there are frequently occa- Jiom for, and excitements to it. But feeing they feldom if ever do, therefore it is highly probable, that they do not exercife their pow er here at all; efpecially if it be confid'ered, that in many inftances, in which it has been pretended, that fuch power hath been ex'er-
E crfe'tf,
[26]
died, it has been (hewn to be no other than juggle , or impojlure.
To which it may be replied, that if this argument proves any thing, it proves too much, becaufe it concludes as Jirongly againft God's exercifing his power in enabling men to work miracles at any time, feeing it is feldom (if ever) that he does ; the occafions and ex citements returning as frequently, and there by as frequently becoming the grounds and reafons of action to him, as to any^ other in- vifible being. For if miracles are at any time ufed to convince men of the divine original of a revelation ; then, when men grow fceptical and incredulous, as to the truth of thofe facts, and confequently are doubtful with regard to the divinity of that revelation ; when this is the cafe, then new miracles become as ufeful, and ferve fat fame purpofes as thofe before, <uiz. to work the conviction of mankind. And it would be equally as kind and good in God to give them in the latter, as in the former cafe. But whereas he does not do it in the latter, this affords an argument againjl his having done it in the former. Again,
It may farther be urged, that God is not in jujlice obliged to repeat miracles for the conviction of mankind, when he has once given them for that end.
To which it may be replied, that it is not
juftice, but goodnefs, which is the Jpring of
action to God in all fuch cafes; and that the
kindnefs is as great to man, and that it would
3 be
[27]
be equally as good in God, to exercife his power in one cafe, as in the other^ as was ob- lerved above.
It may like wife be yet farther urged, that the frequency of miracles would render them ufelefs.
To which it may be yet farther replied, that the argument from miracles is juji the famey whether they take place//?Afc/ff, or of ten ; whether in every age, or only in twenty, or an ' hundred zgzs. And from the whole of what has been here offered, it may be thought juft to infer, that if the Jeldomnejl of invilible agents acting upon this globe, affords an ar gument againft their acting here at all, then as God feldom, if ever, interpofes to enable men to work miracles, from hence arifes a probability, that he never does. Again,
It may be urged, fuppoiing there are other invifible agents bejides God, which act upon this globe ; then miracles prove nothing with refpedt to the divinity of a revelation. For as it will always be uncertain, whether God be the agent in producing thofe effects which we call miracles, or whether they are pro duced by the power of fome other invilible being $ fo that uncertainty will render every conclufion (in argument) weak and uncertain, which is drawn from them. From which it will follow, either, firjl, that there are no other invifible agents but God, which can, or which do (at leaft) act upori this globe ; or if there are, or may be fuch, then it will E 2 follow,
t
28 ]
follow, fecondl)\ that miracles prove nothing in the prefent cafe 3 becaufe it will be uncer tain, with refpedl to every miracle, whether God be the agent in producing it, or not.
To this it may be anfwered, that as to the Jtrjl of thofe inferences, it is a conclufion drawn from doubtful and uncertain premiies. That is, there is no principle in nature, or reafon, from whence the foremen tioned point can be certainly inferred ; and therefore that infe rence foiz. that there is no other invilible agent but God, which can, or which does act upon this globe) muft pafs for a Cypher in argument. And as to the fecond inference, viz. admitting that there are, or may be o- ther invifible agents befides God, w^ich cany or which do (at leaft) act upon this globe, then miracles prove nothing with refpect to the divinity of a • revelation j this conclufion may be thought too Jlrong for the premifes. For though with reiped: to any miracle, we cannot be certain that God is the agent in producing it, yet if the circumftances which attend the cafe render it probable that he did, then it will follow, that tho' miracles cannot afford certain, yet they may afford probable proof in favour of the divinity of a revelation. What thofe circumftances are, which may be judged to be a juft founda tion for fuch a probability, will be confidered in their due place.
S E C T I O N VI.
IFTHLY and laftly, I am to enquire, Whether a man who may be faid to work a miracle (as the cafe is explained above) is at liberty to ufe fuch miracle-working power well, or ill, and employ it in ferving what purpofes he pleafes. This enquiry is in forne meafure anfwered in the precedent fee- tion, in which it is obferved, that men will be at liberty, whilft they are agents, to exer- cife their natural ability in ferving what pur pofes they pleafej for take away that liber ty, and their agency ceafes, or is deftroyed. And, as this is the cafe with refpeft to the natural abilities of men, fo it muft be the fame with regard to all fuper natural power which may be fuperadded, whether it be that of working miracles, or otherwife. For, as the exercife of fuch power depends upon a mans will, or at leaft he is afore apprized of the exercife of it ; fo, in the very nature of the thing, it muft be at his option to diredt it this way, or that way, to make it attend the truth, or a lie. Indeed, God may, if he pleafe, give to, or with-hold fuch miracle- working power from a man, or he may with draw it when given j but then he cannot give it, and reftrain a man in the ufe of it at the
fame
C 30 ]
fame time, that being a contradiction, and an impoffibility in nature.
If jt (hould be urged as above, admitting this, then miracles prove nothing with refpe£t to the divinity of a revelation. For, if he who works a miracle is at liberty to annex it to truth^ or falfoood, of which a by-ftander cannot poffibly be a judge, whether it be an nexed to one, or the other of thefe ; then it will follow, that miracles prove nothing in the prefent cafe,
To this it may be anfwered as above, viz. that this conclufion may be thought too ftrong for the premifes. For, though with refpedl to any miracle, we cannot be certain that it is annexed to truth, yet if the circum- ftances which attend the cafe render it proba ble that it is, then it will follow, that though miracles cannot afford certain, yet they may afford grobable proof in favour of the divini ty of a revelation.
SECTION VII.
HAVING thus prepared the way, by {hewing, fir/I 9 that we cannot poffibly know the utmoft extent, nor fix the bounds of human power 5 fecondly, that we cannot
know
know whether any other invifible agent but God can, or does (at leaft) aft upon this globe ; thirdly, fuppofing there are other in- viiible agents befides God, which do aft as aforefaid, yet we do not know what kind, or degree of power they are capable of 'exer- cifing y fourthly, if there are other invifible a- gents befides God, who act upon this globe, then- God will permit and fuffer them to ufe their power in ferving what purpofes they pleafe, at leaft he will permit them to act thus, for any thing we know, or for any grounds we have from which we may fairly and juftly conclude the contrary ; and fifthly, a man, who may be faid to work a miracle, (as explained above) is at liberty to ufe fuch miracle-working power well, or ill, by an nexing it either to the truth, or to a lie ; thefe points being laid down as principles, from hence two conclufions will clearly and unavoidably follow, namely,
Firft, That thofe effects which are won derful and furprizing, but of which we have no juft grounds for prefuming that they ex ceed the bounds of human power, and con- fequently cannot fairly prefume that they are produced by the power of an invifible being ; if fuch are offered as evidences to prove the divine original of a revelation, the proof (if any there be) arifing from them, can be but a low degree of probability. For, as it is uncertain, whether the operations referred to
be
[ 32 }
be annexed to truth, or falfhood, and as it is uncertain whether thofe operations are fuper- natural ; fo, if they are fupernatural, yet it is alike uncertain whether they are divine ope rations, feeing they may not be performed by God, but by the agency of fome other invifi- ble being. And therefore, though all other proper circumflances concurred in favour of iuch evidence, yet feeing the three forernen- tioned points of uncertainty attend the cale, this renders the probability arifing from that evidence fo much the weaker, and confe- quently, the proof arifing from it can be but a low degree of probability. Again,
Secondly, It will follow from the principles before laid down, that with refpeft to all thofe effects of which it may juftly be prefumed, that they exceed the bouftds of human pow er, and corifequently, that they are produced by the power and interpolation of fome in- viiible agent ; if thefe are offered as evidences to prove the divine original of a revelation, the proof arifing from them at moft can be but probable , becaufe we cann'ot poffibly come to any certainty, whether the miracles re ferred to be annexed to truth, or falfhood; nor whether God is the agent in thofe opera tions, or whether they be performed by the power or agency of fome other invifible be ing. So that fuppofing all other proper cir cumftances concurred in favour of fuch evi dence, yet as the two forementioned points
of
[33]
of uncertainty attend the cafe, therefore, the proof arifing from that evidence, at moft, cannot be certain, but only probable, feeing it does not imply a contradiction, nor an im- poffibility in nature to iuppofe the contrary. And, from hence two questions will arife, namely, what are thole circurnftances that may attend a miracle, which may make it probable that it is annexed to truth, rather than to a lie? And what are thofe circurn ftances which may make it probable that God is the agent in fuch an operation, rather than any other inviiible being ? But, as the anfwer to thejirft of thefe queftions will be contained in, and may eaiily be collected from the anfwer to the fecond, therefore, I (hall drop the former, and give an anfwer to the latter of thofe queftions only.
But before this queftion can be fairly con- fidered and anfwered, it is to be obferved, that there are two or three things to be fup- pofed or admitted as proper foundations for argument with refpect to it, viz. Fir ft, That there is a natural and eflential difference in things, and that one thing or action is really better or preferable to another in nature. Se condly ^ That there is a rule of action refult-* ing from that difference, which every moral agent ought in reafon to 'govern his actions by. Thirdly y That God, as the governor of the intelligent and moral world, makes the reafon of things the rule and meafure of his F actions,
[34]
a&ions, in all his dealings with his creatures, and this renders him absolutely and perfectly wi/e and good. Thefe points muft be pre- fumed or taken for granted, for, otherwife, there is not any principle we can reafon from, nor any thing which will be a proper founda tion for argument in the preient cafe. But if it be admitted that God is abfolutely and perfectly wife and good, as aforefaid, then it will follow, that all divine revelations are given for the good of mankind, and that in all God's dealings with his creatures, he will a<ft a part which is worthy of, m&fuitable to fuch a character ; and this will be a proper foundation for argument with refpedl to the queftion before us.
SECTION VIII.
IT being fuppofed in the precedent fe&ion, thatfucb circumftances may attend a mi racle, as render it more likely and probable that God is the agent in producing that ef- fedl, rather than any other invifible being; and it likewife being premifed that God al ways adts fuitable to his character, as a wife and good being, the prefent queftion is, thofe circumftances are, upon which
the
[ 35 1
the aforefaid likelihood and probability can be fairly grounded ? And the anfwer to this queftion is, that thofe circumftances muft re gard either the faff it/elf, or elfe the revela tion itfelf, which the faff is brought to vouch for. And,
Firjty As to the faff itfelf, the circum ftances which attend it, and which can be of any confequence in the prefent cafe, muft either regard the kind, or degree of power which is exercifed in that fa£t, or elfe the goody or evil which that power (coniidered abftraftedly from the revelation) is introduc- tive to, or is the caufe of. As to the firjty viz. the kind, or degree of power which is exercifed in a miracle; nothing can btjairfy concluded from hence, either for, or again/I its being wrought by God, rather than by fome other invifible agent, becaufe, (as was obferved above,) it is equally as eafy for God to communicate one kind, or degree of power, as another-, at leaft, it is fo for any thing we know, or can Jhew to the contrary. So that there is not any kind, or degree of power which may be exercifed upon this globe, (that of raifing the dead not excepted,) but may be inherent to, and be the natural refult of the conftitution of fome creature, feeing God can, and for any thing we know, may have communicated fiicb kind, or degree of power ; I fay, that this may be the cafe, for any thing we know, or can prove to the con- F 2 trary,
[36]
frary, and, therefore, nothing can certainly be concluded on either fide; becaufe, that would be to draw certain conclusions from uncertain principles, which is abfurd. And to fay, that God cannot communicate this, or that kind, or degree, of power, is, plainly, to limit and let bounds to the boundlefs power of God, and is prejuming a point, without the leaft ground for it. Again,
Secondly, As the power which is exercifed in a miracle may be (when confidered ab- ftradtedly from the revelation) introduftive to, or be the caufe of good, or it may be intro- dudlive to, or be the caufe of evil^ fo it may be judged, that one of thefe puts the probability on one fide ', and the other puts the probability on the other fide of that queftion. That is, if the power which is exercifed in a miracle is the immediate caufe of, or is intro- dudive to the good of mankind, this makes It probable that it was wrought by a divine hand, (except fome other circumftance at tends the cafe, which weakens or deftroys that probability ;) becaufe it is more likely that God fhould thus kindly interpofe for the common good of his creatures, than that one creature ihould thus interpofe in favour of the reft. But if the power which is exercifed in a miracle is introdu&ive to, and is the caufe of evil to mankind, this makes it probable that fuch a miracle was not wrought by God, but by the power of fome other inyifible a-
gent 5
[ 37 ]
gent ; becaufe, if we fuppofe fuch power to be divine, there would be a prepojteroujhefs in the divine conduct, that is, in God's giv ing a revelation to mankind, intending it for their good, and then proving to them that it is divine, b^ working a miracle which di- redly and immediately was the caufe of, or was introdu&ive to their hurt; fuch a con duit in God would be prepofterous, and, therefore, the Juppofition is not to be ad mitted.
SECTION IX.
AGAIN, fecondly, The other circum- ftances which come into the prefent queftion, are fuch as relate to the revelation itjelf, out of which the forementioned likeli hood and probability muft arife, that the mi racles wrought in favour of the divinity of that revelation, are wrought by God, rather than by any other invifible being. And thofe circumftances muft be fuch, in which God's moral character is concerned 5 that is, God's wijdo?n and goodnejl muft be {hewn in, and by the revelation, in its being fubfervient to virtue and goodnefs, and, confequently, to the happinejs of mankind, both here, and
hereafter,
[38]
hereafter, there being no other circumftances but theje that can attend a revelation, out of which the foremen tioned likelihood or proba- bility can arife ; and when this is the cafe, then it may be urged, that there is a likeli hood, or a probability y that thofe effects which are above the natural ability of man to caufe or produce, were produced by a divine hand. For as God is the common parent of his crea tures, and the natural guardian of their hap- pinefs, and, as Juch, it may fairly be pre- fumed, that he has a much greater concern and regard for their well being, than any other agent, fo it is more likely that he mould interpofe for their common fafety, than that one creature mould thus interpofe in favour of the reft, as has been already obferved. So that when the fubjeft matter of a revela tion is fubfervient to virtue and goodnefs, and, confequently, to the prejent and. future hap- pinefs of mankind $ and when the miracles wrought in favour of the divinity of that revelation, confift offuch facts as are the imme diate caufe of, or are introduftive to their good*, thofe circumftances may be judged to render it likely and probable that God is the agent in producing /#<:/& effects, rather than any other invifible being, except fome other tircumftances attend the cafe, which weaken, or dejiroy that probability.
SEC-
[39]
SECTION X.
AVING {hewn, in the two precedent fedtions, what thole circumftances are, which do, or which may be judged to render it likely and probable that God is the agent, (rather than any other invifible being,) in pro ducing thofe effefts which we call miracles, and which are wrought in favour of the di vinity of a revelation ; I now proceed to en quire what thofe other circumftances are, which do, or which may be judged either to ftrengthen, or elfe to weaken, or deftroy that probability. Firji, If the wifdom and good- nefs which is (hewn in and by a revelation runs thro' all its parts ; and, fecondly, if that revelation be communicated to all who alike ftand in need of it 5 if thefe circumftances attend a revelation, then they very much heighten the probability that thofe miracles wrought in its favour were wrought by a divine hand; but if thofe circumftances, or either of them are wanting, then it very much weakens that probability. And,
Firft, If a revelation, backed with mira cles, (hould naturally and apparently tend to the good of mankind throughout '; and if wif dom and goodnejs fhew themfelves thro* all its parts, then this heightens the forementi- 3 oned
[40]
oned probability, as a revelation thus confti- tuted is fo much more worthy of the beft of beings, and more fuitable to our natural no tions of the deity. But if a revelation, backed with miracles, mould naturally and appa rently tend to the good of mankind in one branch of it, and as naturally and apparently tend to their hurt in another^ then this would, at lead, very much weaken the fore- mentioned probability : Yea, it may be ur ged, that it makes it probable, that the mira cles wrought in favour of fuch a revelation, 'were not wrought by God, but by the agency ofjome other invifible being; becaufe the na tural and apparent evil which fprings from Jome parts of that revelation, is an indication of a defeat of goodnefs in the being it pro ceeded from, which cannot be the cafe with refpe<3 to God. But then,
It may be urged, that thofe branches of a revelation which naturally and apparently tend to the hurt of mankind, may, in their fecret and remote confequences, turn to their greater good-, of which God is the only judge, who fees things as well in their Jecret and remote, as in their natural and apparent con fequences. And, therefore, no good argu ment can be drawn from the natural and apparent evil of a revelation againfl its divi nity, or again/1 the divinity of thofe mira cles which are wrought in its favour.
To
uo
To which it may be anfwered, that if this proves any thing, it proves too much. For if we are not to form a judgment of good and evil in this cafe from what is natural and ap parent, but from what is fecret and remote ; then the moft barbarous and cruel, and the moft biirdenfome inftitutions may be of God$ becaufe thefe, for ought we know, may in their Jecret and remote confequences, fome way or other, turn to the good and benefit of fome or other of mankind. So that no good argument can be drawn for, or againji the divinity of a revelation ; nor for, or again/1 the divinity of thofe miracles which are wrought in its favour, from the good, or evil, which fprings from it : feeing it is not the good, or evil, which is naturally and appa rently the refult of any revelation (and which alone man is qualified to difcern) but it is
.z J '
fuch good and evil as fecretly and remotely fprings from it (and which man is -not qualifi ed to difcern and reafoh from) that muft de termine the cafe.
Befides, if the fecret and remote confe- quences of things are to be taken into the cafe, and made a foundation for -argument, then there is fcarce any revelation which has hitherto come forth under an heavenly charac ter, but this kind of reafoning may be turn-- ed againji it. For though it cannot be dif- cerned at the time of delivery, what will be the Jecret and remote confequ^nces of any re-;
G velattoa;
[42]
velation ; yet after-times may (hew, or at leaft may furnifh men with materials to guejs what thofe coniequences are, which men in former times could not difcover. And a Jcep- tick, or an unbeliever^ may from hence raife an argument again/I the divinity of thofe re velations which have hitherto been confidered as divine, by obferving how many evils and mijchiefs they have been the parents of, or are judged to be fo, when confidered in their unnatural and latejl confequences ; fo that it will be exceeding difficult to make it appear, that there has been as much good, as evil pro duced by them; and coniequently, if this kind of reafoning be ju/ly it will furnifh out an argument againft^ rather than in favour of the divinity of thofe revelations, which have come forth under an heavenly character > and againfti rather than for the divinity of thofe miracles, whkh may have been wrought in their favour; though in truth, nothing can \& fairly concluded in the prefent cafe, be- caufe a revelation cannot in reafon be jujtly chargeable with any confequences, but what <uifibly, naturally > and apparently fpring from It. Again,
Secondly, If a revelation which wholly tends to the good of mankind is backed with mira cles as aforefaid, and is given to all who alike ftand in need of it; then it may be urged, that this circumftance very much heightens the probability that thofe miracles wrought in its
favour
[43]
favour are divine, as fuch a condud is worthy of the common parent of mankind, who pi ties equally every pitiable objedt, and whofe tender mercies are over all his works. But if fuch a revelation fhould be given to one nation or people only, when the reft of mankind ftand alike in need of it, then it may be ur ged, that fuch a partial condudl makes it pro bable, that it was not God, but Jbme other invifible agent, who wrought thofe miracles in favour of that revelation. For as true goodnefs difpofes the being in which it refides to minifter relief alike to all in diftrefs, if they are alike objedts of pity, and if there is equal power to relieve all as fome > fo when relief is miniftred partially as aforefaid, then the queftion is, whether this be not an indi cation of IK ant of goodnefs in the adminiftra- tor, which furely cannot be the cafe with re- fped to God,
SECTION XL
AS it is fuppofed In the precedent fec- tion, that the giving a revelation par tially to fome, and not univerfally to all, de- ftroysy or at lea ft very much weakens the pro bability that thofe miracles wrought in favour G 2 of
[ 44 ]
©f the divinity of that revelation are wrought by a divine hand, fuppofing all other circum- ftances concurred in its favour; fo it feems proper here to take notice of the various rea- fonings which may be offered on either fide of that queftion. As thus,
It may be urged, though our great and kind Creator intended, that all his creatures ihould be happy y and therefore, made a fuita-r ble and proper provijion that they might at tain it 3 yet he did not intend, and therefore 4id not provide that all fhould attain the fame degree of happinefs, much lefs that they {hould all attain to the higheft degree of it. This is abundantly evident from the various fpecies of creatures which God hath called into being, who are very differently qualified to obtain happinels, and whole happinefs, when attained, admits of degrees, fome great er, fome lefs. All are not made angels, all are not made men ; but there are a great varie ty of fpecies of beings who are intended for happinefs, and yet they are not defigned, and therefore are not qualified to attain to fo high a degree of it, as men and angels are capable of attaining. Again,
As God did not intend, that every fpecies of creatures {hould attain to equal degrees of happinefs ; fo he -did not intend, and there fore has not provided that all and every indi vidual of any fpecies ihould attain to the Jams degree of it. This is abundantly evi dent
C 45 ]
dent from the great difference there is with refpect to the capacities, and the circum- ftances of men, by which they are very dif ferently qualified to obtain happinefs, and which probably will occafion a very great difference in the happinefs they {hall attain. And as the difference of capacities and cir- cumflances amongft mankind, by which they are qualified for Attaining different degrees of happinefs, is what God could not but forefee^ as it refults from the original frame and con- ftitution of things, and yet has not provided againft ; fo he could not but intend, that fuch different capacities and circumftan- ces fhould take place amongft mankind, and confequently, that different degrees of hap pinefs fhould be obtained by them. And,
As divine revelation is only intended to ren der thofe who enjoy it capable of attaining to a greater degree of happinefs, which other- wife they would be in danger of not attain ing ; and as all thofe who are deflitute of di vine revelation are capable of attaining to bappinefs, though of a much lower degree, and this is all which juftice and equity re quire that God ihould do for them : fo if God gives a revelation only to part of man kind, and thereby renders them only capable of attaining to fuch greater degrees of happi nefs, as that revelation becomes fubfervient to, and leaves the reft of our fpecies under a dif- ability to attain to fuch greater degrees of 3 happU
[46]
happinefs, but ftill with ability to obtain a leJJ'er degree of it, then he is not more partial, nor lejs benevolent in this, than in the two for mer cafes ; that is, if God's not giving a re velation to alI9 but only to a ^r/ of man kind, when all flood alike in need of it, be an inftance of his afting partially with his creatures, and renders him defe5li<ve in point of benevolence, toward thofe who have not the advantage of that revelation ; then he is alike partial, and alfo defective in point of benevolence ', in not making all his creatures capable of attaining to equal degrees of hap pinefs, and likewife in his not giving equal ca pacities to all men, and not putting them un der the fame advantageous circumftances, as might render them capable of attaining to the bigheji happinefs which human nature is ca pable of attaining. But God cannot fairly be charged with partiality, nor with a defect in point of benevolence in the two latter cafes; and therefore, he cannot fairly be charged with thefe in the former.
To which it may be anfwered, firjt, that as to angels, we know nothing about them, either as to their capacities, or to the degree of their happinefs; and therefore, they ought not to be brought into the queftion. And as to the various fpecies of beings, which take place upon this globe, and which are quali fied for different degrees of happinefs, thefe \vere not called into being for the fake of va riety,
[ 47 ]
riety, but that a much greater good might be~ carried on thereby. Suppofe all the various fpecies of beings below us had been made men, thdn this globe could not have afforded provijion, nor would it have been a proper habitation for them. And fuppofe God had made none but men, and had left all the other fpecies of beings in non-exift'nce, then all the good which is exercifed upon, and which is now fhewn to the Jeveral fpecies of beings below us, would have been funk and loft. And as to our own fpecies, our condition in life, without the other creatures, would have been much worje than it is now with them. And as it was not for the fake of variety, that God made fo many different fpecies of be ings, but that a much greater good might bo carried on thereby ; fo if a more general good would be carried on, by a revelation's being given partially to feme, than it would be by its being given generally to ail, if this were the cafe, then the cafes under confideration would \)t parallel ; but this does not appear to be the cafe , and therefore, thoje cajes ia point of argument admit of no comparifon ; that is, there is the appearance at leaft of great partiality, and a defeat of benevolence in one cafe; whereas, there is no Jiich appearance with refped: to the other. Again,
It may be anfwered, fecvndly, that the pre- fent conftitution of things is the bejt which nature would admit of, to anfwer the great
defign
[ 48 ]
defign intended to be carried on thereby, viz. a publick or general good. For if things could have been better conftituted for the an-^ fwering that end, then we have jujl ground to prefume, that they would have been fo, as God will mo ft certainly purfue fuch a va luable end, by the beft , and moft effectual means for its attainment. And as the dif ference betwixt the capacities, and circum- ftances of men, which differently qualifies them to attain happinefs, refults from the original frame and constitution of things, and is perfectly accidental with refpect to each individual ; fo this is an evil which could not be provided againft, without the introduction of fome other equal, or greater evil; and therefore, if a more general good would be carried on by a revelation's being given par tially to fome, than would be by its being given generally to all; and if the giving of it generally to all would be introduclive of fome equal, or greater evil than what refults from its being given partially to fome, if this ap peared to be the cafe, then the cafes under confideration muft be allowed to be parallel; but this does not appear to be the cafe, and therefore, they admit of no comparifon ; that is, there is the appearance at leaft of great partiality, and a defeSI of benevolence in one cafe; whereas, there is no fuch appearance with refpect to the other. Again,
It
[ 49 ]
It may be anfwered, thirdly, that to con- fider divine revelation as only intended to qua lify men for attaining greater degrees of happinefs, than otherwife they are in great •danger of not attaining, is a very defective and partial reprefentation of the purpofes which it may juftly be expeded fuch a reve lation would be intended to ferve. Man is an accountable creature, who is anfvverable to God for his actions, and who will be reward ed or punifhed in another world, according as he behaves himfelf in this \ and the gene rality of mankind (fpread up and down up on the face of the earth) when con fide red without a divine revelation, are fuppofed to be attended with fuch great difficulties and impediments, which ftand in the way of their future fafety, as that they are in great danger, not only of not attaining to the bigheft degree of happinefs which human nature is capable of, but aljb of not attaining unto any degree of happinefs at all ; yea they are in great danger of falling into a ftate of great and la ft ing mifery. This either is, or is judged to be the deplorable ftate of the gene rality of mankind without a revelation. So that it may juftly be expefted, that the pur~ poje which a divine revelation would be in tended to ferve, would be, not barely to qua lify men for obtaining a higher degree of happinefs than otherwise they are in danger of not obtaining; but alfo to engage them
H to
[So]
to attain happinefs itfelf in oppofition to its contrary, and to prevent their being greatly aftd laftingly miferable, which miiery they are in great danger of bringing upon them- ielves. Now the proper queftion anting from hence is, not what God in ftridt juflice is obliged to do for a fpecies of creatures fallen into fuch deplorable circumftances, bat what pity and kindnefs would difpofe him to do to wards their relief. And, if God out of a tender regard for the well-being of his crea tures, kindly interpofed for the relief of fome, then the queftion is, whether that regard for his creatures well-being would not equally dif pofe him to interpofe for the relief of all in thoje circumftances.
To which it may be added, that if a reve lation's being given partially to fome, and not univerfally to all, be for the fake of that beauty which arifes from variety^ and that it might give occajion to God to communicate different degrees of happinefs to his creatures ; then that end will as effectually be obtained by God's giving no revelation at all, or by his making that revelation universal, as it will by his giving it partially, as a fore fa id : for in each cafe, there will be different abilities, op portunities, improvements > and attainments among mankind, which will introduce that beauty that arifes from variety y and there will be occajion given to God to communicate dif ferent degrees of happinefs to his creatures, as
well
well in either of the two former cafes, as in the latter. However, if the giving of a re velation partially, as aforefaid, does not de- flroy the probability arifing from fuch evi dences as are offered in favour of its divinity ; yet it may be urged, that it very much weak ens that probability, except the difficulty before {hewn to arife from fuch partiality can be re moved. But then,
It may be aflcedj what motive could induce any other inviiible agent befides God (fup- pofing there are fuch) to back with miracles. 4 revelation thus configured for the good of mankind, though partially given, as afore-. iaid ?
To which it may be anfwered, that tho' juch a procedure could not be accounted for, yet the queftion would ft ill remain, whether fuch a partial conduft be divine ? As to thofe free beings which come within our knowledge^ we fee their aBiom, but are very little ac quainted with the motives they fpring from. And if we are Jo little acquainted with the jprmgs of adlion in our own fpecies, how then can it be expected, that we fliould account for the condud: of thofe invifible beings, the extent of whofe power, and the motives to whofe aftions we are perfect ftrangers to ? However, in this cafe it may be urged, that it is more likely that a creature, who may have different motives to adt from, fliould fliew kindnefs to one, and not to another, H 2 when
when he can ferve them both, and both are alike the objects of his regard (fuppofing that to be the cafe) than that Qod mould do Jo, feeing he always does good for goadnefi fake, and therefore, it is moil likely, that he will difpenfe his favours alike to all, who are alike the objects of his goodnefs. Again,
It may. be urged, that when a revelation which wholly tends to the good of mankind, and which lays claim to a heavenly character, is backed with miracles, that revelation muft be divine, though partially delivered as afore- faid 'y becaufe as an evil or 'vicious invifible a- gent 'would not be the author of fo much good to others, as the recommending fuch a reve lation might be fubfervient to; fo a good or virtuous invifible agent could not recommend fuch a revelation as divine, and preferve his chara&er, if it were not fo ; and therefore, }ie 'would not do it. For as this would be bearing ivitnefs to a falfliood, and would be an impojition upon mankind ; fo that will be a reajon againft a good being's recommend ing a revelation under fuch a character, tho' ever fo kindly intended ; becauie it would be doing evil, that good may come of it, which furely a good being would not chufe to do. And if neither a virtuous, nor a vicious in vifible agent., would exercife their power in recommending as divine, a revelation circum- ftanced, as aforefard, if it were not fo ; then Jt will follow, that a revelation thut circum- 3 ftanced.
[53]
itanced, and thus attefted to by miracles, as above, miijl be of God.
As to vicious invifible beings, it may be anfwered, that no being is necefjarily vicious, that being abjurd. And therefore, though the generality of a being?s aftions are vicious, and that may entitle him to the character of a vicious being ; yet it does not follow, that he will not+ in any inftance, ad: otherwife; becaufe, for ought we know, fuch motives may intervene, as may become a ground or reafbn to him to do good in feme inftances, and thereby aft contrary to his general cha- rader. This is manifeftly the cafe amongft our own fpecies, there being inftances of per- fons who fometimes aft contrary to their gene ral characters ; that is, there are bad men, who in Jome inftances perform good aftions ; and there are good men, who in Jome in ftances perform bad ones ; and this may be the cafe of invijible agents, for any thing we know to the contrary. And admitting there are, or may be vicious invifible beings (that is, beings who are led on to action from •evil or vitiated affeftions) and who in com pliance with fuch temptations as are prefent to them do aft repugnant to reafon ; yet it is unreafonable to fuppofe, that any particular invifible agent, or Jociety of fuch agents, fhould enter into a refolution never to do any thing which might be for the good of man kind, though they fhould have both power
and
[ 54 ]
and opportunity fo to do. This, I fay, is an unreasonable fuppoiition ; becaufe it does not appear^ that our fpecies have given any occa- iion to any vicious invilible agent, or fociety of fuch agents, to take up jhch a refentment againft us, as never to do any thing for the good of any of us, though ability and op portunity ihould invite them to it. So that ,we have no affurance, that a vicious invifible agent will not exercife his power in recom mending revelation as aforefaid. And,
As to virtuous invifible agents, it may be anfwered, that though in the general we ought to have a ftric~l regard to truth in our intercourfe with each other, becaufe the com mon good is manifeftly interefted in it, and depends upon it ; yet there may be fome ex traordinary cafes, in which it may be right and jit for us to do otherwife. Suppofe a man to have fuch an antipathy againft ycfuits bark, as that he would not be prevailed upon to take it, though his life was in the greatefi danger, and though the taking that medicine was the onlv means which was likely to pre- ferve it : The queftion in this cafe is, whe ther it would be wrong and unfit for a phyfi- cian to recommend this medicine to fuch a patient under another name ; and if he had any jealoufy about it, to endeavour to con vince him, that it was another thing ? And the anfwer is evident, that it would not. For though the man in this cafe is deceived, yet it
is
[55]
is not to his hurt, but for his good; and therefore, that deceit cannot properly come under the denomination of evil, but good; and this is not doing evil, that good may come of it -, becaufe, ftrictly fpeaking, there is no evil in the cafe ; that is, there is none in the end, nor yet in the means by which that end is obtained. In like manner, fup- pofe an imrijible agent mould kindly interpofe and give a revelation to fome part of man kind, which highly tended to their good; and fuppofe he fhould be fatisfied, that this re velation 'would not be accepted, unlefs it came recommended as divine -, and therefore, that it might obtain acceptance, and might do that good which he propofed by it, he endeavours to convince thofe to whom it was delivered that it came from God, by enabling the pro- mulger to work a miracle^ or miracles, for that purpofe : In this cafe the queilion is, whether fuch an action be evil, and whether* fuch a conduct be inconjijlent with a virtuous character? To which it may be anftveredy that it would not; becaufe, ftrictly fpeaking,. there is nothing evil or vicious in it. But- then,
It may be {aid, that fuch an action would be highly provoking to Almighty God ; becaufe: it would be fathering that upon him, which would not belong to him.
To which it may be anfwered, that as the great director of the univerfe is not governed
by
[56]
by capricious humour^ but by the reafon of things fo, in the prefent cafe, there could not be any juft ground of difpleafure to him, becaufe, in reality, there would no difhonour be done^ nor intended to be done to him, and his name would only be ufed to promote an end which he could not but approve ofj viz. the good of his creatures. Again,
It may be faid, that truth has an intrinfick goodnefs in it, as it ftands oppofed to deceit and falfaood -, and, therefore, tho' God can not but like the behaviour of his creatures when they are promoting each other's good, provided the means be laudable and commen dable by which that end is obtained, yet he cannot but dijlike it, when it is obtained by deceit and falfoood, becaufe fucb a conduct is evil and vicious.
To this it may be anfwered, that truth and good are as dijlinff^ and different in na ture, as colour and found \ fo that truth, is not good, neither is good, truth, thefe being terms which are ufed to exprefs ideas that are diflinSt and different from each other. And, as truth, is not good, fo it does not ftand op pofed to evil, but to falmood ; falfhood being the oppofae to truth, as evil is the oppojite to good : And, therefore, to fay that truth is good, or that falmood is evil, when thefe are confidered abftratfedly from that good, or evil which either of them may be /ubjerevient to, is, plainly, to confound the ufe of words. So
that
[57 3
that truth and falfljood, when confiuered Jlrattedly, properly fpeaking, are neither good, nor evil, but become Jo by that good, or evil they are productive of. And here, ftirely, it will be allowed, that if a man mould report the faults and weakneffes of his neighbour, not to anfwer a good, but an evil pur poje, fuch an action would be evil and vicious, tho' he reported nothing but the truth. And yet, if truth has an intrinjick goodnefs in it, when confidered abftraffedly from the end it is made to ferve, then the forementioned attion would not be evil, but good. And if telling the truth to anfwer a bad purpofe, be evil and vicious ', which is an allowed cafej then by parity of reafon, faying a thing that is not true, to anfwer a good purpoje, may, in jbme extraordinary cafes, be -good and virtuous* Again,
It may be faid, that tho* truth is not good, ftridly and properly fpeaking, yet it is ana logous to it, as it has a mitural and intrinfick valuablenefs in it, which re: :ders it preferable to its contrary, and by which the under- {landing is as naturally led to purfue it, as the will is to cbuje and purfue what is good.
To this it may be anfwered, that -truth, comes under a twofold confideration^ viz.jirft, the truth of things, and, fecondly, a, true re lation of our opinions concerning them. In the former cafe truth (lands oppofed to error, and in the latter tofalfbood. And tho' with I refpedt
[58]
refpecft to the former, truth has an intrinfick valuablenefs in it, as it is in nature preferable to its contrary, and by which the under- flanding is naturally led to purfue it; yet it it otherwife when it is confidered in the latter cafe, for then truth commences an action or faff, and as fuch is the object ^ not of the un- derftanding, but of the will. A man does not neceffarily fpeak truth, or falfhood, (as he necejjarily perceives the truth, or falfenefs of a proportion,) but either of thefe are the produce of his eleftion, refulting from fome motive that intervenes, and which is to him the ground or reafon of his choice. And when truth thus commences an action or faCt, it then becomes good, or evil, only by the good, or evil purpofes it is made to ferve. As thus, the whole is equal to all its parts; this is a propofition, the truth of which our underftandings qualify us to difcover, and when it is difcovered, we approve and value it as truth, (not as good,) in oppoiition to every error which may be oppofed to it. But if a man is to relate his opinion con cerning the truth, or falfenefs of that propo fition, that relation is plainly a matter of faff, and the good, or evil of that fad: muft, in the nature of the thing, be deduced from the good, or ev'ApurpoJes which it is made to ferve, and not from the truth, or falfenejs of what is related by it. Suppofe he relates the truth, but does it with an evil intention -, the
3 truth
[59]
truth of the relation cannot alter the adion, and make that/tf^? good, which in the na ture of the thing is evil. Again,
It may be farther faid, that this opens a door to deceit and falfhood, and tends to de- ftroy all truji and confidence amongft man kind. For if there are cafes in which de ceiving is jujiifiable, men will from thence take encouragement to deceive in any cafey and juftify themfelves in it, and, confequent- ly, all ground of confidence is taken away.
To which it may be anfwered, that this kind of reafoning proves juft as much, as if it fhould be faid, that becaufe it is allowed to be juftifiable in feme extraordinary cafes for a man to take away the life of another, (viz. when it is in the defence of his own,) men will from hence take encouragement to murder each other upon all occafionsy and to juftify themfelves in it, and, confequently, all peace and fafety would be banifted from fociety. T'his may be urged with equal ftrength as the former, the reafoning being the jame in both cafes. But furely, no man will think fuch reafbnings, or the conclufiom drawn from them to be jufl. A good man will know how to diftinguifh juftly in both cafes, and as to bad men, no principle will rejlrain them. However, this is befide the point, becaufe the proper queftion is, whe ther what has been advanced is the truth, and not what ufe bad men are liable to make 'I 2 of
[.6o]
of it, who are difpofed to make a had ufe of the bejt things. Befides, what is it which renders fpeaking truth in general, and mutual confidence fo valuable? Is it not, becaufe the good of fociety arijh from, and depends upon them ? And if fo, then their valuablenefs refults from the good they are fubfervient to, which is the point contended for. From what has been laid, it may be inferred, that we can have no afjurance that a virtuous, in- vifible agent will not exercile his power in. recommending a revelation as divine, which, in reality, is not Jo, when that revelation is circumjlanced as aforefaid. Again,
It may be farther urged, that tho' God does give a revelation to one nation, and not to another, yet feeing thofe who have it nof^ have their reajbn and under/landing to guide them, and feeing God will deal with them according to the light they have, and not according to what they have not; therefore, he cannot fairly be charged with want of kindnefs, nor with partiality in the cafe.
To which it may be anfwered, that what is faid of the latter, is equally the cafe of both, fuppofing no revelation had been given at all : And, therefore, if a revelation is ufe- ful, or neceffary, or a kindnefs to one nation, it muft be alike ufeful, or neceflary, or a kindnefs to all, or, at leaft, to all in like circumflances ; and, confequently, the quef- tion 18^ whether the giving it to one, and npvt
to
[6r]
to all, has not in it the appearance, at lea ft, of great partiality ? If one man fhould over take two men upon the road, carrying each of them a heavy burden, who were equally wearied with their journey, were both at the fame diftance from their home, and who were, in all refpects, equally the objects of his pity, and if he fhould ajjifl one, and leave the other to wreftle with his difficulty, when it was equally in his power, and as eafy for him to afiift them both, this would be an inftance of great partiality, and an indication that it was not true goodnejs, but fome other motive which excited to the action. The application is eafy. Again,
It may be farther urged, that God is at liberty to difpenfe his favours to whom, and in what manner he pleafes, and that it is not fit for his creatures to fay, why? Or, what doeft thou ?
To which it may be anfwered, it is granted that God is at liberty to difpenfe his favours arbitrarily, or, as he pleafes, with regard to any pbyfaal neceffity he is under to the contrary ; and he is likewife at liberty to aft thus, as he is above controul. But if he be a wife and good being, which moft certainly he is, then he will always direft his actions by the rules of wifdom and goodnefs; and, confequently, it may be urged, that he will not difpenfe his favours arbitrarily and par tially, as the objection fuppofes. Again,
It
[62.]
It may yet be farther urged, that God may give a revelation thus conftituted for the common good, to one nation or people only* and lay it upon them, as their duty, to pub- lijh it to the reft ; and fo it may be given, not only intentionally, but eventually to all; in which cafe, as his kindnefs will be univer- Jaly fo it clears him from all appearance of partiality.
To which it may be anfwered, that if God was a perfeSl fir anger to mankind, then it might more eafily be admitted, that he might intend a general good by fuch a revela tion, and might leave it in the hands of a few men to make it fo. But when we con- fider what long experience hath {hewn man kind to be, how apt they are to betray the truft repofed in them, and, thereby, tofruf trate the kind intentions of their Maker; how liable to corrupt whatever is put into their hands, to turn it to their private advan tage, and to make it fubfervient to quite con trary purpofes than what it was intended; and that no threatnings nor promifes tttfuffi- cient to keep fome men to their duty ; and that all this is perfectly well known to God ; when this is taken into the cafe, then the queftion is, whether it is not unlikely that God ihould intend a revelation for the good of ally and yet fhould leave it in the hands of a few men to make it fo, feeing it is equally as eafy for him to give it univerfally
to
to all, as to give it to one nation or 'people only ? Add to this, the oppojition that a reve lation, which is given in this way, is liable to, and that it is likely to meet with, fo that it may be a courfe of many ages before it makes its way thro' the world, if it does at all, and, consequently, the greateft part of mankind may loje the benefit of it. So that the queftion is, whether this does not heighten the improbability, that God would give a re^ velation defigned, and conftituted for a ge neral good, in the way above mentioned ? This, however, muft be allowed, that when a revelation is given by God to men, it will be done in a way which is confident with hu man liberty, and then it will be the fubject of every man's free choice, whether he will receive the benefits intended by it, or not. But then this does not affect the cafe; the prefent queftion, not being whether man is to be over-ruled, but whether it is likely that fuch a wife and good being as God is, fhould give a revelation, and intend it for a general good to mankind, and yet fhould give it in fuch a way, as that it will be in the porter, and at the pleafure of one, or & jew men, to prevent thoujands and millions of others from flaring in the benefits of it? But then,
To what has been returned, by way of anfwer, as above, it may be replied, that if a revelation's being given partially to fome, and not itnfaerfally to all, be a good argument
again/I
[64]
againft its being given by God, becaufe that benevolence which difpofed God to give it to fome, would equally difpofe him to give it uni- verfally to all in like circumstances ; then this argument concludes z&Jirongly againft its be ing given by any other invifible being. Foi^ as benevolence is fuppofed to be thejpring of adtion in both cafes, ib that benevolence would difpofe the benevolent agent to make his kind- nefs univerfal, as well in one cafe as in the other y that is, whether the benevolent agent be God, or whether he \&fome other invifible being. And, if we may fuppofe fome fecrei reafon to take place, (which, if difcovered, our underftandings could not but approve,) which reafon may be a proper motive to fome other invifible agent to communicate his good- nefs to fome, tho' not to all, in like circum- ftances, then that fuppofition may, with e± qual reafon, be admitted with refped: to God. To this it may be anfwered, that if all invifible agents are perfectly free from all temptations, mifguided affedtions, and from every thing that may miflead them in their conduft, which is the cafe with refpedl to God\ then, indeed, what is urged above would be of 'weight", but we have no princi ple upon whichy^ a prefumption or fuppo fition can \& fairly grounded, and, therefore, the precedent argument does not conclude as Jirongly in one cafe, as in the other. Befides, the ability of a virtuous invifible agent, in
this
[65 J
this cafe, may be limited and bounded, and, confequently, tho' it may be in the power of fuch an agent to ferve part of mankind, yet it will not follow, that it is equally in his power to ferve all, were he difpofed Ib to do. Again,
With refped: to the grand objection againft the divinity of a revelation, mentioned above, viz. its being given partially to fome, and not univerfally to all, it may be farther ob- ferved, fuppoiing the body of mankind to be in fuch a corrupt and degenerate ftate, both as to their opinions, their affections and adions, as renders a revelation (which is fitly conftituted to reform thoie abufes) highly uje- fal, and, therefore, extremely deferable to mankind; and fuppofing a revelation which claims a heavenly character fliould be given, which is excellently fuited to anfwer thefe pur- pofes ; and fuppofing fuch effects take place, and are offered in favour of the divinity of this revelation, of which it may fairly and jujlly be prefumed that they exceed t;he bounds of human power, and, confeqtusntly, that they are produced by the agency of fome in- vifible being, and that the power exercifed, was fubfervient to the prefent good of man kind ; and fuppoiing this revelation be given only to fome, and not to all, in like circum- flances, the queflion would be, whether this Jingle circumftance againft the divinity of Juch a revelation, be of le/s, 6r equal., QV fuperior
K weight,
si c 66
weight, than all thofe other citcumliances which are offered in favour of the divinity of that revelation ? fo that the force of all that has been offered on either fide of the prelent queftion terminates in this, namely, whether this one circumftance again/I the divinity of a revelation (viz. its being given partially as aforefaid) or whether all the other circum- ftances which are fuppofed to concur in fa vour of the divinity of that revelation, I fay, the queftion is, which of thefe ought in rea- fon to determine our judgments either for, or againft the divinity of that revelation ? Again,
It may be farther obferved, by way of an- fwer to the forementioned objection, that by God's giving a revelation univerfally to all, muft be meant either, fir ft, his giving it to all, by applying immediately to the mind of every individual of our fpecies, and thereby revealing to every individual the truths in tended to be made known ; or elfe, fecondly, by applying immediately to the mind of fome one, or more of our fpecies, and revealing to him, or them, the truths intended to be made known, as aforefaid, and then apply ing mediately by him, or them to others, by requiring him, or them, to reveal or publifh thofe- truths to others, and them to others, and fo on till that revelation is communicated to all; thefe being, I think, the only ways by which a revelation can be given univerfal
ly to all, as aforefaid. As to the jirft, it muft be granted, that fuch a particular divine application to the mind of each individual, as aforefaid, would be giving of a revelation u- niverfally to all ; but then fuch a revelation would be foreign to our preient enquiry, be- caufe the cafe of miracles, in our prefent view of them, would not come into the quef- tion. For as in that cafe, as every one would have the revelation at Jirft hand, and no one would receive it from another ; fo no credit would be required to be given to one from another, with refpect to it; and confequent- ly, no miracle would be wanted to back, or fupport any one's credit on that account. So that if a revelation was given univerfally to all, by a divine application to the mind of every individual of our fpecies, then the cafe of miracles., in our prefent view of them, would not come into the queftion. As to the fecond way of giving a revelation to all, viz. by God's applying immediately to the mind of fome one, or more of our fpecies, and reveal ing to him, or them, the truths intended to be made known ; and then, applying me diately by him, or them, to others, by re quiring him, or them, to reveal or publifo thofe truths to others, and them to others, and fo on till it be given univerfally to all ; if this were the cafe, then, in the nature of the thing, the revelation muft lie under all the difficulties and difadvantages before taken no- K 2 tice
[68]
tice of, viz. it muft be then in the power of one man to prevent or hinder many others from fearing in the benefits intended by that revelation, and the like. For as man is a free being, fo whatever truft is repofed in him, he is liable to abufe ; and whatever offer is made to him, he is liable to rejeft, and to aft in oppofition to it ; and this is the cafe of all our fpecies. And therefore, if a divine revelation were given, as aforefaid, then it would be abfurd to afk, why it is not given univerfally to all ? feeing its being communi cated to all, depends upon the virtue and ho- nefty of all our fpecies, and fuppofes, that all and every one appointed to publife this revelation would be faithful and true in exe cuting that truft, and that all to whom it is published, would be fo hone/I and jujl, as not to oppofe it. But this is not to be fuppofcd, becaufe if this were the cafe (which finely in faft it is not) then the world would not ftand in need of juch a revelation, as we have now under consideration. So that the point at laft turns upon this queftion, viz. which of thofe two ways of giving a revelation to the world would *befl and mojl effectually anfwer the purpofes of fuch a revelation? whether by a divine application immediately to the mind of every individual of our fpecies ? or whether by a divine application immediately to fome one or more of our fpecies, and me diately by him> or them> to others, and by
them
[69]
them to others, and fo on ? What difficulties and difadvantagcs are liable to attend the lat ter of thefe ways, and what impofttions and frauds may be committed under the pretext of it, are eafy to be difcerned, becaufe they have taken place in fofit. But then, what difficulties and inconveniences may attend the former of thefe ways, are not fo eajy to be guejjed at, except we form our judgments in the prefent cafe, upon what has attended fome pretenfions of this kind. Thus, the enthu- fiafm and madnefs, if I may fo call it, which took place in the laft age^ and which in troduced great diforder, was founded on a perfuafton, or at leaft a pretence of an imme diate divine application to the mind of each individual. Every one thought y or pretended, that he was immediately taught of God. So that fuppofing mankind at any time to be in Juch circumftances, as very much to need a divine revelation ; and fuppoljng God were difpofed to give them one; then the queftion. is, which of the two ways beforementioned would be liable to the leaft difficulties and in conveniences, and which of them would beft anfwer the purpofe of a publick or general good ? I fay, this is the prefent queftion ; be caufe we may be allured God will always make ufe of Juch ways and means, as will beft anfwer the end propofed to be obtained. But as this queftion cannot well be anfwered, becaufe we are not very good judges in the
prefent
prefcnt cafej ib it may be urged, that this takes off\ or at leaft very much weakens that objection againft the divinity of a revelation, which arifes from its not being given univer- fally to all.
SECTION XII.
THUS I have reprefented, or taken a view of the cafe of miracles, and have introduced the various reafonings upon thofe queftions with which the fubject is concerned, ^nd hereby have (hewn what kind and degree of evidence arifes from them, under the vari ous circumftances which may attend them ; and how far, and in what refpecl they are capable of proving a revelation to be divine. And in the courfe of this argument, I think, It plainly appears, that miracles under the mojt advantageous circumftances cannot, in the nature of the thing, afford certain^ but only probable proof, that a revelation is di vine.
The fum of the argument is this, viz. When the circumftances that attend the cafe afford a juft foundation for prefuming, that the facets in queftion exceed the bounds of hu man power j and confequently, there is juft
ground
ground to prefume, that they were produced by the power of fome invifible being; and likewife, when there are other circumftances which make it likely, that the miracles wrought were annexed to the truth > and not to a lie ; and alfo, when there are fuch other circumftances attending the cafe as make it more likely and probable^ that God is the agent in producing thofe effedts, rather than any ether inviiible being ; then miracles in thofe circumftances feem to afford probable proof, that the revelation they are brought to vouch for is divine. What thofe circumftances are which are judged to be a juft foundation for fuch likelihood and probability, is (hewn above; and likewife, what thofe circnmftances are which feem to perplex the cafe,
SECTION XIII,
AND as I have conlidered the cafe of miracles upon a fuppofition of the truth and certainty of the fadrs themfelves ; fo furely it cannot be thought improper, if I re mind my reader, that he ought carefully to examine the grounds upon which his ajjeht to the truth of thofe fadls is founded ; becaufe other wife he is in danger of being mi/led.
For
[72]
For though there may be cafes In which we may come to a certainty of the truth of thofe fads, and in many others to a high degree of probability ; yet there may be cafes Jo cir- cumflanced) as may render thofe facts very doubtful and uncertain > and therefore, the grounds of our aflent ought carefully to be examined^ left our credulity fhould miflead us.
Man is a creature not only capable of be ing impofed upon by others, but likewife of impoiing upon himfelf. He can imagine, that he Jees and hears what in reality he does not , and fo of his other fenfes. And though our fenfes are the only proper judges of fenfible ef- fefts, yet this is not always an abfolute fecuri- ty againft delufion; becaufe fometimes the imagination leads the underftanding, when we think it is led by thejtn/es) and then we conclude, that fbme fenjible effe&s have taken place, when in reality they have not. And this is the cafe not only when we are ajleep^ or in the height of a fever, or in the depth of melancholy -y but fometimes when neither of thefe take place. When fomething that is wonderful and Jurprizing ftrikes the imagina tion ftrongly, and when the mind is not ap prized of its own weaknefs, and the danger it is in of being deluded in this way, and when nothing interpojes which inftantly {hews, that it cannot be fad:, but merely the produft of imagination 5 then the imagination fome- 3 times
t 73 ]
times Ib far prevails as to mi/lead the judg-* ment; and men become as certain (with re gard to the perfuafion of their oitin minds) of what is merely Ji&itious, as they are of thofe fads which are real and certain in themfelves. And as men are thus capable of being mi/led \ fo they are the more Jirongly difpofed to it, when religion is any way interefted in the cafe. Religion awakens the paffions, and en gages them in its favour; and then we are more eajily led to believe thofe fads to be true, which we ivi/b to be fo, than otherwife we mould do. When religion is to be propagated, and men confider themfelves as heavenly meC- fengers, and as thofe who are engaged in the caufe of God, this too often intoxicates their minds, and then they are difpofed to, and (without great watchfulnefs upon themfelves) are in danger of going groundlefsly into the belief of thofe fads, which tend to advance% or Jtrengthen the intereft they are engaged in. This may ibmetimes be the cafe; and therefore, though honefty and integrity may fecure us from impofing upon others, yet thefe are not always zjecurity againft our impofing upon ourjehes. And,
As men are thus capable of mifleading themfelves, fofometimt?, and under fome cir<- cum/lances, the delufion is catching. It is but to report to others, what we imagine we fee and hear; and they in ft ant ly imagine, that they fee and hear the fame things. And thus
L jt
[741
it is when a nation is threatned with a fo reign invafion, or when the peoples fears are any other ways alarmed with the expectation of war, if one man imagines that he fees ar mies fighting in the clouds, and if he re ports it to others, then they are apt to ima gine that they fee the fame ; whereas if each of thofe who heard the report had been Jepa- rated from that company, and thofe fears, they would not have imagined, that they had feen any fuch things ; this, I fay, may jbmetimes be the cafe. And though a variety of fuch fads, or fupernatural effects may take place, the truth of which we may be afjured of upon good grounds, and confequently, that we are not deceived by others, nor ourjehes ; yet there may be many others of which our fenfes may be fuppofed to be witneffes, which 'when they are throughly confidered will ap pear to be very uncertain -, and if they are brought as evidences to prove the divinity of a revelation, the proof arifing from them mufl therefore be doubtful and uncertain alfo.
Thus ftands the cafe with regard to fame of thofe fatfs of which we ourfelves are fuppofed to be witneffes. But if we are to take thefe, and fome other facts, which may be confidered as miraculous, upon the report of others, and if the ftory of them have paffed through federal hands, this muft ren der thofe facts more uncertain. For tho' we may be affured of our own honefty and integrity
with
[75]
with regard to the point in hand, yet we cannot be alike aflured of the honefty and in tegrity of other men. And,
Tho' it be a proper enquiry in fuch a cafe, whether, and how far the reporter's prejent intereft is concerned, hecaufe if it is, then the credit of the report would be thereby weakened, as a man's prefent intereft may be come a temptation to him to mljlead others for its fake; yet fuppofing the reporter has no prefent intereft in view, this will not, in ail cajes, be a jit ft foundation for relying abfo- lutely on feme mens integrity, becaufe, not- withftanding this, they may deceive us. The getting and prejervmg worldly wealth, and the Jecurmg life, with its enjoyments, are not the only fprings from which diffimulation and impofition may arife, feeing men have other pajfions which excite to action as ftrongly^ and, perhaps, to perfons of Jo me tempers and conftitutions, more ftrongly than thefe. The imaginary glory which arifes from the confi- deration of being heavenly meflengers, -$nd the concern men are under to promote the caufe of God, in which they think themjehes engaged, are reafons fufficient to difpofeyi;;;^ men to turn themfelves into every Jhape, and to advance any thing that appears necejjary to fupport that caufe, even tho' it be injurious to their worldly intereft. And,
Tho' it would, likewife, be a proper en quiry, whether, and how far the reporters L 2 have
C/6]
have fhewn their integrity in other in/lances ; for if it appears that they have mi/led people in other cafes, then they are left to be relied upon in this-, and if they have {hewn their integrity in many other inftances, then the grounds of confidence, in them, become fa much the Jlronger in the prejcnt cafe -, yet if integrity fhould appear to run thro* the gene ral courfe of fome perfons actions, even that would not be ajujl ground for relying abfo** lutely upon their integrity in all matters of religion, becaufe, to fome perfons, religion JanZiifies every action, and makes thofe facts appear good, which, in any other cafe, would appear to the fame perfons exceedingly evil. So that, tho' zjleady integrity fhould appear to run thro* the general courfe of a man's actions, and tho' this would be a proper ground of confidence in a man in the affairs of life, yet it would not be a like ground of confidence in fome fuch men, in the caje be^ fore us. For when fome men confider them- felyes as engaged in the caufe of God and re ligion, this may lead them to ufe their endea vours to promote that caufe, in every <way in which they are likely to fucceed, and then they are liable, and dijpojed to affirm and maintain whatever feems proper to Jupport and carry on the caufe in which they are re- ligioufly engaged, without regarding whether 4t be ftriStly true, or not, of which, furely, the world has furnifhed us with inftances.
And
,[77]
And, therefore, this ought to be a check upon our confidence in the prefent cafe, and fhould prevent our running haflily into the belief of every faft, the report 0'f which comes from perfons whofe integrity has appeared to run thro* the general courfe of their actions. And,
Tho' diflimulation and impofition may ftand condemned in the judgment, and by the religious principles of fuch men, yet that is not always & fufficient ground of confidence, in the cafe before us. For when diffimula- tion, and impofition are made fubfervient to the purpofes of religion, then fome men are apt to fee them in another light, call them by another name, and fome way or other render the practice of them not only eafy, but com mendable to themfelves. And as miracles are made fubfervient to the purpofes aforefaid, (b this is a jujl ground for us to aft with caution when we admit them, and go into the belief of them, efpecially, if the ftory of them have paffed thro* Jeveral hands, becaufe diffe rent perfons may have different motives to aft from, and to difpoje them to miflead man kind, of which, in the nature of the thing, we cannot be very good judges.
Befides, there are various circumftances, fome of which Jlrengthen, and others weaken the credit of fuch reports. As thus, the faft itfelf may be fuch as renders it more ea/y, or more difficult to detedt a fraud, if there be
[73]
any. The former of thefe very much cnsy and the latter very much iveakem the credit of the report. For if it be a cafe in which a fraud is ea/ily detedted, then it be comes more likely that it would be deteded, were there any fuch. thing. But if it be a cafe in which it would be difficult to detect a frau$, then the grounds of dijlruft become fo much the ftrongery and, confequently, the grounds of credit become fo much the weaker. Again, the fact may be performed in an age, and country where, and when miracles are in reputation, and people go ea/ily into the belief of them ; or, they may be performed at a time, and in a place when, and where mira cles are in difreputt, and the belief of them is not eafily admitted. The former of thefe weakens, and the latter flrengthem the credit of fuch reports. For when miracles are in repute, and people go eafily into the belief of them, then there is not a like difpofition in the people to examine the cafe with that care, and jlrittnefs, as when the belief of miracles is not fo eafily and readily admitted, and, confequently, the former of thefe weak ens, and the latter Jlrengthem the credit of fuch reports. Again, the fact may be per formed in the open day-light, and in the face of fociety, or it may be done in the night, or in a corner, or before two or three witnefles only. The former of thefe Jlrengthens, and the latter weakens the credit of the report.
For
[ 79 ]
For when a fad is done before a multitude, and at fuch a time and place as gives a fair opportunity of examining it ftriffly, then it may be prefumed that fome perfon or other would be dijpofed to do it, and thisjtrengtb* em the credit of the report of fuch a fact. But if it be done at a time> or in a ^>/<2£<? which would render it difficult to examine the cafe throughly^ or if it be performed be fore a very fmall number of witnefies, who, therefore, may be more eafily milled, or cor rupted than a multitude can be fuppofed to be, this very much weakens the credit of the report. Again> the fact may be performed before perlbns who are well qualified and dij- pojed to examine it Jtriffly -, or before weak and ignorant people who are more eafily mif- led and impofed upon ; or before perfonfe who, from other confiderations, are dijpofed to countenance the report of it. The former of theie Jirengthens, and the latter weakens the credit of fuch report. For if a fact be performed before perfons who are 'well qua- lifted and dijpofed to examine it throughly, then there is a probability that a fraud would be detected, if there were any. But if it be performed before weak and ignorant people, or before perfons who, from other coniidera- tions, are dijpojed to countenance the report, then there is not the fame likelihood that a fraud would be detected, and, confequently, the credit of the report, under Juch circum- 3 ftances,
[8o]
itances, would be fo much the weaker. A- gain,
If thofe fads are entered upon record, and if thofe records are to be evidences of the truth of thofe fads, in future times, and to pojlerity, then the credit of fuch records may be either jlronger, or weaker , according to the various and different circumftances which rnay attend them. As thus, the fads may be entered upon record at the time of performance, and thofe records may be made fo publick at the time and place of adion, as may not only diffofe, but render it very eafy for inquifitive perfons who live upon the fpot, to examine the cafe throughly, by ex* amining both the record, and the evidences of the fads which are to fupport the credit of that record ; or the fads may be entered upon record, ten, or twenty, or thirty years after performance, and may be made publick in places far diftant from the place of adion, or be kept as a facred treafure in the hands of believers. The former of thefe very much Jlrengthens, and the latter very much weakens the credit of fuch records. For with refped to the former circumftances, there is a fair occajion, and an opportunity offered by them, to every perfon who lives near the place of adion, and who may, therefore, (without much trouble or inconvenience to themfelves) examine the cafe with the utmojl jlrittnefs; and this renders it more likely that a fraud
would
[8!]
would be detected, if there were any, and, coniequently, thoje circumftances very much jtrengthen the credit of fuch records. But if the facets are entered upon record ten, or twen ty, or thirty years after the performance, and are made publick at places far diflant from the place of action, or if they are kept as a fecret- treafure in the hands of believers, as this would render a ftrict and proper fcrutiny into the cafe exceeding difficult, if not impojji- ble -, fo it would not only difcourage, but ef fectually hinder all attempts of this kind ; and confequently, a fraud under Juch circumftan ces would not ea/ily be deteSled; and this muft render the credit of fuch records fo much the weaker. Conftant experience {hews how hard and difficult a thing it is to come at the truth of facts performed but yejlerday, and in the next parijh-, and this difficulty of courfe muft increafe in proportion to the diftance of time and place the facts may be performed in, or of their being entered upon record, or the making thofe records publick; and other circumftances may intervene, which may in creafe that difficulty. Befides, who is there that would take the fains of examining into the truth of a fact performed ten, or twenty years, before, and an hundred or two hundred miles diftant from him ? The troublefomenejs of the work, and the little likelihood of ob taining a rational fatisfaction, are furely fuffi- cient bars to fuch an undertaking, Thefe are 'M circi&n-
circiftnftances (and poffibly there may be many others) which either Jlrengthen or weaken the credit of fuch reports and records as we have now under consideration.
Miracles^ at a dijlance, more efpecially when they ftand related to the prefent quef- tion, are things of which, in fome inftances at leaft, it is difficult to attain to a high de gree of probability, much more to any cer tainty, with regard to them; that is, with refpeft to the truth of the fa&s themfelves. For, tho' fbmetimes mens faith runs high in this particular, yet that does not always arife from, nor bear a proportion to t\\Q Jirengtb and clearnefs of the evidence upon which fuch faith is founded -, the prejudices that arife from education, preconceived opinions, and the like, having fb prevailing an influence upon the understandings of men, as that they generally govern their judgments in this particular ; and men are believers, or infidels, juft as their prejudices lead them to be one, or the other of thefe. And, tho* the circum- jlances that attend miracles ought in fome meafure to be our guide, yet, alas ! experience fhews, that the very fame circumftances, at leaft they are the fame, for any thing that appears to the contrary, at different times, and to different perfons, do not become a like foundation for credit, or the contrary, with refpedt to them. And here, I think, it may not be amifs to acquaint my readers with
a
a miracle, or fad, which is faid to have taken place in our own times, viz. in the month of Auguft, 1703 -, which fad: was declared, and attefted by John Cavalier of Sauve, on Ja nuary 31, 1706, at London-, and which declaration was printed and publifhed the fame year, or the year following, as it is contained in Mr. Lacy's book, entitled, A Cry from the Defert : Or, T^eflimoniah of the miraculous things lately come to pafs in the Seven nes, verified upon Oath, and by other Proofs. Take the relation in Mr. Cavaliers own words, pages 49, 50, 51, 52. of the forementioned book. " Our leader, Mr. Ca- " waiter my couiin, called an aflembly at the- " T^ile-kilns of Cannes, near Sengnau, in the <c month of Auguft, 1703. Our troop was " between five and fix hundred men, and <c there were doubtlefs as many more of both cc fexes, who came from the towns and vil- " lages adjoining, to affift in religious exer- cc dies, that Lord's day. After divers exhpr- cc tations, ledlures, and pfalms fung, brother, <c Clary, who had received admirable gifts <c (and whofe frequent revelations, with thofe " of Mr. Cavalier, were the ordinary direc- " tions of our troop) was feized with extafy " in the midft of the aflembly, his bodily c agitations being fo great, as to affed: the " audience very much. The beginning of " his fermon he faid feveral things relating " to the dangers to which the aflemblies of " the faithful were ordinarily expofed, but Ma <( that
cc that God watched over them, and Was c their guard. His agitations augmenting, " the ipirit made him fay theie words, or to cc this effedl ; I acquaint thee, my child, there cc are two 'men in this affembly, who are come <c only to betray you, they are jent by the enemy " t°-$y ^at pajjcs among you, and to give cc an account thereof to thofe who jent them ; <c but I Jay unto thee, I will have them dijco- *c vered, and thou thyjelf foalt lay hands upon <c them. We were all attentive to what he *< had faid, and immediately Clary, the agi- c* tations of his head and bread continuing, <c walked towards one of the traitors (I call <( them fo, becaufe they profefled our reli- ** gion,) and laid hand upon the man's arm, <c Mr. Cavalier feeing this, commanded the " foldiery to their arms, and to furround the aflembly fo, that no one might efcape. The other fpy, who flood at a diftance, made his way through the croud immediately, and came, with his comrade, to fling him- felf at the feet of Mr. Cavalier, confeffing c< the fault, and begging pardon of God, " and of the aifembly. Both of them al- cc ledged, that extream poverty had brought <c them to yield to the temptation, but faid, *c they repented it bitterly, and both of them • promifed, by the grace of God, to be c faithful for the future, if their lives were f fpared, Mr. Cavalier, however, ordered c them to be bounda and put in ward.
" After
((
<c
<c
" After this, the infpiration of Clary con- " tinuing, with violent agitations, he cried ££ out aloud, that many of the audience u murmurred within themfelves, at what was " done, as if the readinefs and freedom " wherewith the accufed perfons had con- " feffed, was a fign of an underftanding be- *£ twixt Clary and them, in order to counter- t£ feit a miracle. In that inftant, faid the fpirit by Clary, 0 people of little faith, do ye fiill doubt of my power , among you, when cc 7 have made you fee Jo many wonders of it? I command a fire immediately to be made, and I fay to thee, my child, I will that thou put thyjelf into the midjl of the flames, and they jhall have no power to hurt thee, &c. <£ At thefe words, there was a fhriek among <c the people, of thofe efpecially who had <£ murmurred, and who having not ferved in <c arms had not fo much faith as we; all " thefe cried out together, confeffing their diltruft, and craving pardon, faying, Lord, of thy mercy withdraw this te/iimony of fir el we find that thou art he which knows the hearts; but Clary with redoubling agita tions infifted, it (hould be done. Mr. Ca valier ordered wood to be got immediately *c for a pile; and as there was at hand tile- " kilns, they found in a moment a deal of '• brufh-wood, and dry, combuflible ftuff; <£ this fmall wood, mixed with large flicks, " was heaped up in the midft of the congre-
" gation,
*e
[86]
gation, on a finking ground, fo that the people round were above it. " Clary, who had upon him a white ftreight frock, being a bricklayer by trade, put himfelf upon the top of that pile of wood, ftreight upright, with his hands joined and lifted above his head ; he was " ftill in his extafy, or agitations, and conti- €t nued to fpeak in the flames. I have been cc told by feveral what his difcourfe then <c was, for my part, I could not underftand f< him. I have heard that Clary put fire to " it himfelf, and that the fire mounted in an <e inftant; but I did not obferve that partial - ce lar, though I was very near. The troop <c under arms encompailed quite the aflem- " bly, which was almoft all upon the knee *c in prayer and tears, making a circle round <c the fire. The wife of Clary flood by, *c with her father and two fifters, and fe- " veral of his own kindred, I cannot be po- <c fitive to name them. Every one in the " affembly might fee him ftand furrounded " with flames, that rofe much above his " head. Thofe that had gathered the wood ce pufhed back the flicks as they happened to <c ftart from the fire, that all might be con- <c fumed. He did not come out of the fire cc till the wood was quite fpent, and there cc was no more flame. The fpirit was ftill <c upon him, and though he continued at
" leaft
[87]
cc leaft a quarter of an hour (as far as I am <c able to compute) in the flames; yet he " came forth with hiccoughs and heavings of " the breaft upon him.
" Mr. Cavalier concluded the affembly " with a prayer aloud, offering up praifes " unto God, for that great miracle, which " he had vouchfafed to perform, for the " ftrengthning the faith of his fervants. I " was one of the firft who embraced our " precious brother Clary, I took notice of " his clothes and hair, which the flames fo " much refpefted alfo, that no mark could " be difcerned of fire upon them. His wife tc and kindred were in tranfports of joy, and " the congregation difperfed, becaufe the *c night drew on, every one in a triumph of " praifing and blefling God. I faw and c< heard all thefe things. Mr. Cavalier then " called for the two men, that were convid:- " ed and put in hold ; he was of opinion " with thofe about him, to (hew them mer cy, becaufe they feemed fincerely penitent, and had really executed nothing j fo that the two fellows being exhorted to future fidelity, were fet at liberty." Here we have a relation of a fact which is very uncommon, and of an extraordinary nature, <uiz. a man who flood upon a pile of wood, when fet on fre, and remaining upon it till it was confumed, without receiving any harm thereby. This was done fo lately, as
to
[88]
to be within the compafs of the laft forty years; and likewife fo near us, as in the neighbouring kingdom of France. This fad: is of fuch a nature, as feems to be above, and therefore, not the produce of juggle or Jleight of hand. This fad, or miracle, was performed before a great number of witneffes, by computation not lefs than one thoiifand. Thefe witneffes were perfons who fuffered perfecution for the fake of their religion ; per- Ibns who Were eminent for their great piety, or at leaft for their being frequent in thoie exercifes which are made the outward figns and tokens of it ; perfons of reputed honejly and integrity, and who could not poffibly have any worldly advantages in view to dif- pofe them to engage in, or to countenance a fraud, as the government they lived under was very much againft them, and greatly op- pofed that new dijpenfation they were believers in, and that new minijiry they attended upon. And, as this fad or miracle took place, or at leaft is fa id to have taken place in our own time, and in our neighbourhood (France being put in competition with more diftant coun tries) and before a great number of witneffes^ who were well qualified to difcern and judge of its reality; and, for any thing that appears to the contrary, were dtjpofed to teftify the truth of what they knew ; ib it was declared, and attejied, and entered upon record, and tjiat record was publifked within four years
after
89
after the faft, which publication muft have been much more extenfive and general than any ancient publication of fadls could be be fore the ufe of printing took place, the book in which the hiftory of this fa6t is contained, having come to a fecond edition in the year 1707.
Now, though all thofe circumftances con cur in favour of the miracle abovementioned, by which it may feem that a fraud could have been more eafily detetted in this cafe, if there was any, than in many other cafes of like kind ; yet who is there that thinks he has proper and fufficlent ground to juftify his giving credit to this fad:, fuppofing it has, or fhould come within his notice ? or that can (hew JufficwHt reafon why he flhould not? and^ I think, it may be anfwered, perhaps, not one in teny amidft the multitude of believers that are now in the world. The miracle referred to was wrought, or fuppofed to be wrought^ in favour of a new dijpenfation, and a new minijlry introduced to propagate it* and fuppofing it to have been ever fo well attefted, yet it would have been under a dif- advantage, as the generality of believers were fo ftrongly prejudiced in favour of old miracles^ as not to admit of any new ; and this will be the cafe of all new difpenfations, till they get the better of thofe prejudices. If the new difpenfation referred to, and the new miniftry introduced to propagate it, viz. the modern
N prophets,
[90]
prophets, as they are called, had gained the afcendant over thole prejudices which lay againft them, and had iucceeded by gene rally prevailing in the world 3 then, no doubt, the forementioned fail would have been ad mitted as unqueftionably true, by all who be lieved in this new difpenfation ; and every cir- cumftance relating to this miracle would have been introduced, and imbellifhed, in order to fupport its credit ; but whereas the difpenfa tion and miniftry referred to, have not ge nerally prevailed, but feem rather to fink and die away ; fo the very knowledge of the fore- mentioned miracle feems likewife to die away with them.
Perhaps, it may be faid, that though ac cording to the above relation the fad before- mentioned was feen by a multitude of fpec- tators; yet that circumftance, viz. its being feen by many, refls wholly upon the authority of Mr. Cavalier's tejlimony, which may feem at leaft to weaken its credit. For, as the great number of witnefles referred to, have not given any te/limony concerning this fad:, at leaft no fuch thing has come to our knowledge; fo this renders the cafe the fame to us as if thofe perfons had not been witnefles; witneffes without a teftimony be ing fo many mutes, and are altogether the fame with regard to this, or any other fadt, as if they had not been witnefles at all. And though Mr. Cavalier has declared, that 2 this
[9']
this fact was feen by a multitude of perjbns ;
yet as this is grounded upon his fmgle tejiimo-
#y, fo the credit of the whole refts upon his
Jingle tejlimony alfo, and is the fame to us as
~if he only had been witnefs to this fad:.
To which it may be replied, that this is the cafe of many other miracle^ which, not- withftanding, are deemed unqueftionably true; that is, there are other facts, or miracles, whofe truth are not generally doubted of, faid to be done before many witnej/es ; which cir- cumftance, viz. their having been perform ed before many witneffes, we have no other authority for, than the bare tejlimony of the hiftorian, who, perhaps, may not have been a witnefs to thofe facts himfclf ; and there fore, if this circumftance, viz. its having been feen by many, is of little or no weight in the prefent cafe ; then, by parity of rea- fon, it muft be of little or no weight in other cafes under the fame circumftance. Befides, the forementioned fact has been attefted, not only by Mr. Cavalier, but Mr. Page has alfo declared the fame, as being an eye-witnefs to it. And Mr. Marion feems likewife to re fer to this fact, whofe words are as followeth. I am fatisfied, that as God fuppreffed, when he pleaied, the power of flames, and did other like miracles among us ; fo he damped the force of mulket-balls, that they fometimes dropped harmlefs, and as rebounding from them, whom God would N 2 "be
<c
« be a fhield to." See A Cry from theDefart, page 94.
When men become greatly prejudiced in favour of, or againft any faft, or miracle, they become difpofed thereby to fee in a fa vourable light, or the contrary, every thing that Hands related to it -y and when fuch pre judice becomes general, then what is offered in favour of, or againft fuch fad, or miracle, meets with general acceptance, or general dif- like, confonant to fuch prejudice, whether the argument be of weight, or not. An inftance of this kind, I think, we have in a book, in titled, The Trial of the Witneffes of the Refurreflion of Chrift-> which book met with a general acceptance 5 whereas, were this trial to be fairly tried, it might, perhaps, appear not to be altogether worthy of it:. I mean, not as it ftands related to Mr. Woolfton, and his fictitious correfpondent the Je<wijh Rabbi, but a§ it ftands related to its title-page, viz. The Trial oftheWitr- neffes of the Refurreffiion of Chrift -, in which view of the cafe, I beg leave to obferve, tha^t To try the witneffes to any facf}:, or mira cle, fo as that the proper purpofe of fuch a trial may be effeftually anfwered by it, is, I think, to make fuch a fair arid thorough examination of the cafe, as may enable the reader to form a true judgment whether the (evidences given in afford a proper foundation for credit with refpedt to the faft thofe wit neffes are brought to vouch for. And in
fuch
[ 93 ]
fuch a trial, I think, there arc three things which are chiefly to be enquired into j name ly j firft, the teftimonies of thofe witnefles ; Jecondly, their ability to know the truth of what they teftified -y and, thirdly -, whether there be fufficient ground for prefuming that they would, or did teftify the truth of what they knew. I fuppofe it will not be hard nor difficult for my readers to underftand what I mean by the two laft of thefe enqui ries, and therefore, I (hall not take upon me to explain them, but {hall pafs them by, and (hall only explain myfelf upon the firft, and (hew what I mean by trying the tefti monies of thofe vyitnefles.
This article of enquiry, I think, implies two things, iriz. jfifffi the producing the teC- timonies of thofe witnefles in the words of the witneffes them/elves, and not in the words of an artful commentator. As thus ; if Si- inon, and Andrew, and Philip, are to be con- fidered as ivitnejffes of the refurredlion of Chrift, and if thefe witnefles are to be tried, then, upon fuch trial, the teftimony of Si mon muft be produced in the words of Si mon hjmfelf, and the teftimony of Andrew in the words of Andrew himfelf , and the teftimony of Philip in the words of Philip himfelf, and not in the words of another. This, I fay, muft be done, becaufe the cafe requires that it {hould. It is quite ridiculous to pretend to try a witnefs, without producing
the
[ 94 ]
the teftimony of that witnefs ; feeing a wit- nefs without a teflimony, is like a body with out a foul, that is, it is dead and ufelefs. And to produce the teflimony of any witneis, not in the words of the witnefs himfelf, but in the words of another, who takes upon him to fpeak the witneffes fenfe in his own (viz. the fpeaker's) words, this, I think, is foul praffiifing, and it is the fame as if no tefti- mony had been produced at all. The feveral teftimonies of the witneffes being thus pro duced in the words of the witnefles them- felves, the other branch of this firft article of enquiry is, whether thofe witneffes agree in their teftimonies ; and alfo, whether they are .plain, and clear, and exprefs, and full, with refped: to the queftion in debate ; or whether they have exprefled themfelves weakly, or darkly, or doubtfully upon the point.
And, if any material failure appears, with refped: to the Jtrjl grand article of enquiry, then the other fwo articles become of lefs im portance. As thus; it will not be of much ufc to enquire, whether Simon, and Andrew ; and Philip were 'well qualified to know the particular fad: of Chrift's refurreclion -, or whether we have juft ground for prefuming . that they would tej&fy the truth of what they knew concerning it ; when, either, they • have not given any teftimonies concerning that fad, or when fuch teftimonies are not pro* duc.ed, or when the teftimonies produced are
not
[ 95 ]
not in the words of the witnejjes themfehes> or when thofe teftimonies difagree in circum- ftances that are material, or when thofe wit neffes have exprefled themfelves weakly^ or darkly, or doubtfully upon the queftion, in thefe cafes all farther enquiry feems to be but of little ufe.
The three forementioned articles of en quiry, I think, muft of neceffity take place, in trying the witneffes to any fact, if the proper purpofe of fuch a trial is to be effectu ally anfwered thereby. For, though I do not pretend to underftand forms of law, nor methods of proceeding in courts of judicature, yet this, I think, I may venture to fay, that if the witneffes to a fad: are to be tried> in order that a true judgment may be formed, whether the evidences they have given afford a proper foundation for credit, with refpeft to the fadl they are brought to vouch for; then the three forementioned articles of en quiry ought to be plainly, fairly, and fully difcuffed, in order to anfwer that purpofe; becaufe a material defed: in either of thefe^ will difappoint that end. Indeed, if other purpofes are to be anfwered, then other mea- fures are to be taken. The ufe I would make of this, is, to lead my readers to care and attention in what they read, and not to fol low the common cry, left they fhould be milled thereby.
Poffibly
[96]
Poffibly it may be urged, that miracles ftand upon as good a foot of credibility as any other fads of which our publick hifto- ries are compofed.
To which it may be anfwered, that this may be the cafe in Jome injlances, that is, where the circumftances are alike; but in other injlances, where the circumftances are not alike, it may be quite otherwife. -The credi bility of fads may be greater, or left, from the different circumftances that attend them, as I have already obferved ; and different fads may have different foundations for credit, tho' related in the fame hiftory. That there was fuch a perfon as Conjtantine the Great, is con- fidered as a matter of fad: ; and that he, and his Jbldiers, faw the figure of a crojl in the heavens, is likewife confidered as a matter of fad; but then the latter of thofe fads does not ftand upon a like foot of credibility with the former, fuppoling them both to be related in the fame hiftory, there being a variety of cir cumftances which afford a proper foundation for credit with refped to the former, whereas thofe circumftances are wanting with regard to the latter; and therefore, there is not a like foundation for credit with refped: to it, even tho' Conjlantine and all his army had be come vouchers in the cafe. Chriftianity was then ftruggling with, and lifting up its head above Paganifm in the Roman empire ; and Conftantine> and his foldiers, confidered them-
felves
[ 97 ]
Selves as engaged in the caufe of God, and fighting under the banner of their heavenly captain \ and as their fuccefs naturally intoxi cated their minds, by giving too great a brifk- nefs to their fpirits, fo this prepared and dif- pofed them to imagine that they faw and heard any thing prodigious that was ftarted, if it appeared to favour their caufe. Again,
It may be urged, that if the proof arifing from miracles, in any inftance or cafe, is at good as the nature of the thing will admit ; then it is very unreajbnable^ in any fuch in ftance or cafe, to require better proof than the nature of the thing will allow, and that in a cafe of difficulty ^ a wife man would not run any hazard, but would always choofe thefafer fide.
To this it may be anfwered, it is true that fuch a demand would be very unreafonable^ but then it is alike unreajonable, in any cafe, to require affent where there is no proof, or to require zjlronger aflent than properly arifes from the evidence ; fo that if it be unreafon- able on one fide to demand certain proof, in a cafe where, in the nature of the thing, it cannot be given, then it muft be alike unrea- fonable, on the other Jide, to demand an abjb- lute aflent where that proof is wanting. And, as this, and every other queflion, ought to be examined with the utmoft fairnefs, fo, fure- ly, every man ought, in reafon, tofubmit to evidence, and to allow the force of every ar-
O gument,
[98]
gutnent, whether the proof arifing from it be certain, or only probable ; and whether that probability be greater^ or lefs -, and whe ther it be fory or again/I the queftion in de bate, But then, if a man adts honejily and uprightly, in this cafe, he cannot, in reafon, be fuppofed to run any hazard, as to the fa vour of God, and \mjafety in another world ; becaufe, to admit Juch a fuppofition, would be to paint out God in the <worft of colours, and to reprefent him as acting a moft un~ righteous part by his creatures. For if it is right and .Jit to give our affent, where proper evidence appears, then it muft, in the nature of the thing, be equally as Jit to <witb-hold our .affent, where that evidence is wanting. And on the other fide, if it is unfit to witb-hold our .affent when proper evidence takes place, then it muft, in the nature of the thing, be equally as unfit to give our affent, where there is no Juch evidence, or to give zftronger affent than naturally arifes from the evidence. So that we cannot fuppofe any hazard to be run in this cafe, with relpect to the favour of God, and our future fafety, without fup- pofing God to act a part which is moft un~ reajbnable and difingenuous.
In a tract which I formerly publi(hed, en titled, T'he Caje of Abraham^ with regard to his offering up liaac in Jacrifice, re-examined, I expreffed myfelf in the following words. ^ I have but juft touched upon the cafe of
" miracles,
[99]
" miracles, becaufe, poffibly, forne time or " other I may treat of that fubjedt more at " large." This hint raifed an expectation in my readers, that I would take an opportunity for the offering my thoughts to the world on thatfubje&y and it likewife has given occafion for my being feveral times called upon with reipedl to it; which expectation, I hope, I have now fully fatisfied, by my publication of this difcourfe. Neverthelefs, it is not un likely but that our preient defenders of Chri£- tianity, viz. the Stebbings * and the Horlers of the age, may find out ibmething or other in this difcourfe, (like as in my book, in titled, The true Go/pel of Jefus Chrift a/erted,) to ground the imputations of Heathenijm and Atheifm upon. Tho' I readily acknowledge, it was not at all ftrange to me to find that my neighbour, the reverend Mr. Horkr, fhould, out of the abundance of his ivitticifmi, pre ient the world with the following narrative, viz. that I have pafled from Arianifm to So- cinianifmy and from Socinianifm to Deifm, and having left Deifm, I have removed myfelf into a very remote part of the univerfe, and have taken up my head quarters at the infa mous town of Atheifm. This, according to Mr. Horler, has been the courfe of my tra vels, if I may be allowed to ufe the fimili- O 2 tude ;
* See Dr. Stebbing's vifitation charge to the clergy of the archdeaconry of Wilts \ and Mr, Horlcr's ierinon preached before the Wlltjblre fociety at Brijhl.
tude ; and, were I to make another, and a farther remove, then, furely, the Lord him- felf would not know where I mould flop. However, the forementioned relation muft be allowed to be a moft curious piece of hiftory, which is worthy to be tranfmitted to pofteri- ty, and which, no doubt, will merit, for the wanton hiftorian, a garnifhed flail in one or other of the cathedrals. And, as to the re verend Dr. Stebbing, I have this to obferve, that if he had thought I had offered any thing to the world which would not bear be ing reajoned upon, he was welcome to exa mine it, and to have confuted it, had it been in his power; but for him to come Jlily be hind me, with his back-flroke, with his impu tation of Heathemjm, this, I think, was act- ing out of character, as a man of under- ftanding. Heathens, in the eftimation of the multitude, are the moft abjeffi of our fpecies \ fee a man funk the loweft in his underftanding and behaviour, and he is prefently characte rized by the term Heathen., yea, he is a mere "Heathen.
The reafon why I mention this here, is, becaufe a 'very great man has been pleafed to fay of me, that I am come to perjbnal re flexions, with relpeft to Dr. St ebbing, and this, I apprehend, was given as a reafon why Dr. Stebbing would have no more to fay upon the fubjecT:, And here I beg leave to obferve, that I have gone no farther into perfonal re flexions,
flexions, than I was naturally, and almoft unavoidably led by the fubject before me. Thus, for example. Tho' Dr. Stebbing had complained to the publick of Mr. Fojler's ill ufage, in making him a mere Turk, yet he made no fcruple of ufing me in the fame way, by making me a mere Heathen. And, as the doing as one would be done by, is a heathenijh, as well as a chriftian maxim, fo from hence I was naturally led to obferve, that its being fuch, (viz. a rule of "adtio'n to Heathens) might, perhaps, fet it below Dr. Stebbing 's notice, feeing Heathenifm is very low in his eftimation. Again, if felling all, and giving it to the poor, be, according to Dr. Stebbing, neceflary to conftitute a dijciple of Chrifl, then, furely, it was very natural for me to obferve, that, in this particular, Dr. Stebbing's conduct, as Cbrift's dijciple, is very prepojierous, as the many church prefer ments he has got in his poffeffion, and con tinues to hold, do plainly demonstrate. A- gain, I obferved, that the characters of Infi del, Deift, Heathen, &c. may, with as much jujlnefs and propriety, be fixed upon other perfons as upon me, whom yet, Dr. Stebbing would not chufe to treat in this way ; and this, I acknowledge, was charging the Dr. with partiality, but then, this charge I was naturally led into, from the fubject I was treating of. For, as I then had in view, and juft after refered to tfermon of the bifiop of
Salifbury's
-Salisbury's, (who is Dr. Stebbing's great friend and benefactor) in which * fermon the bilhop has afferted, that Chriflianity is as old as the creation^ and that the go/pel is a republication of the law of nature, which, according to Dr. Stebbing, is rank Heathenifm, and is the very title of Tindafs book, even that book which has made fo great 3 noife in the world, and has flirred up the wrath and indignation of our fons of thunder, and has led them to perfecute its author with hard names, and terms of reproach, both living and dead ; I fay, as the bimop of Salijbury had thus plainly and publickly exprefled himfelf, fo for Dr. Stebbing to pafs over, in filence, fuch an old offender, if it may be called an offence, and to fingle out me to fix the odium of Heathenifm, &c. upon, this was partiality with a witnefs ; and this reflexion I was thus naturally led into from the iubjecl: I had then in hand. However, Dr. Stebbing has made good an old proverb, viz. that one man may with more fafety fteal a horfe, than another may look over a hedge. The bimop of Sa lijbury may take the liberty to fay that white. is white without incurring any cenfure ; and were his lord (hip to fay that white is black, (tho' this fuppofition is not to be admitted,) no doubt but it would be overlooked ; where as,
* See a fermon preached by Dr. Sberlocke, now lord bifhop of Salisbury^ at Bow-Church, London^ on the lytfe of #£,1715.
103
as, if I take the liberty to fay that white is 'white, I muft be ftigmatized with the cha- rafters of Infidel, Heathen, &c. Thus much for that great man's remark I now refer to, namely, that I am come to perfonal reflexions, which, I prefume, are thofe I have mention ed, elfe I do not know what fuch a charge can be grounded upon.
To conclude, I obferve, that as I have, in the precedent difcourfe, treated the fubjedt under confideration with plainnefs, fairnefs, and freedom, fo I have done it with this view, viz. that the cauje of truth might be ferved thereby, whether it (hall be on this, or that fide of any queftion there treated of. Ne- verthelefs, what I have offered, muft be fub- mitted to the judgment of my readers.
A N
A N
APPENDIX,
CONTAINING
An Enquiry intd this Queftion, viz.
Whether the Do&rines of the fu-
•ture Exiftence of Men, and a
future Retribution, were plainly
taught by Mofes and the Prophets.
I Do not here take upon me to fupport either the affirmative, or the negative fide of this queftion ; but only to fhew, that our Lord Jefus Chrift has declared for the former.
It is obferved, by the writer of the Atis of the Apoftlesy that the Sadducees jald there is no refurreftioriy nor angel, nor fpirit; but the fharijees confefs both, as in Afts xxiii. 8. Thefe Sadducees thought they had put a very
P puzzling
io6
puzzling cafe to our Lord, by obferving, that there was a woman who had jeven hujbands, and by querying whofe wife (lie fhould be at the refurredtion, feeing they all
had her, as in Mark xii. 18 23. And Je-
Jus anjweringy faid nnto them. Do ye not there fore err, becauje ye know not the Jcriptures, nor the power of God? as at ver. 24. In this anfwer our Lord plainly fuppofes, that the dodtrine of the refurredtion, or at lead of mens future exiftence, was taught in the Jcriptures, and that the Sadducees ignorance of the icriptures was, in part, the ground of their error in this particular. He likewife re ferred them to a paflage in the writings of Mojes, in which the dodlrine was taught which thefe Sadducees denied (as at verjes 26, 27.) And as touching the dead that they rife, have ye not read in the book of Mojes, how in the bujh God Jpake unto him., faying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of IJaac, and the God of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; ye therefore do greatly err. Here, I think, it is moft apparent, that in the opinion^ and according to the tefi timony of Jejus Chrift, the yews were taught the doftrine of the refurre£liony or at leaft of mens future exiftence (which, perhaps, with them was the fame thing) in the writ ings of Mojes Yea, according to St. Luke (as in Luke xx. 37, 38.) our Lord faith, that this doftrine was taught by Mojes hitnfelf.
Now
io7
Now that the dead are raifed, even Mofes Jhewed at the bufh, when he called the Lord, the God of Abraham, and the God of Ifaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all live unto him.
But farther, in Luke xvi. 18, to the end of the chapter, our Lord gives the following relation, or parable. T'here was a certain rich man, which was cloathed in purple and fine linen, and fared Jumptuoujly every day. And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate full of fores, and de/ired to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich marts table : moreover, the dogs came and licked his fores. And it came to paft that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham s bojbm : the rich man aljb died, and was buried. And in hell be lift up his eyes, being in torment, and feet h Abra ham afar off', and Lazarus in his bofom : and he cried, and faid, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and fend Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this fame. But Abraham faid, Son, remember tliat thou in thy life time receivedjl thy good things, and likewije Lazarus evil things, but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And be- fides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, Jo that they which would pa/i from hence to you, cannot, neither can they pafs
P 2 ><>
[io8]
to us, that would come from thence. T:hen he faid, I therefore pray thee, father ', that thou wilt fend him to my father s houfe : for I haw jive brethren, that he may tejlify unto them, left they a IJo come into this place of torment. Abraham faith unto him, 'They have Mofes and the prophets, let them hear them. And he faid, Nay, father Abraham : but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent *. And he faid unto them, If they hear not Mofes and the prophets, neither will they be perfuaded tho* one rofe from the dead.
In this parable there are feveral things which our Lord took an occafion to acquaint his followers with, fuch as that there will be another life after this, in which good men will be happy, and bad men miierable. For tho' the rich man is not faid to be a bad man, nor is Lazarus faid to be a good man ; yet this is plainly fuppofed, taking all the other
parts
* It is a doclrine ufually taught by Chriftians, that the damned in hell are fo intirely given up to Tin and wickednefs, that nothing but malice againft God, and their fellow-creatures, and other vile affe&ions take place in them ; whereas, ?n this parable, the rich man in hell is reprefented as having great pity and tendernefs for his brethren upon earth, and that he ufcd his utmoft endea vour to prevent their falling into the fame condemnation with himfelf; which, furely, dcmonftrate great good- »efs to take place in him. And admitting this to be but i parable ; yet, I think, what is related in it, with re gard to tnis matter, is of much more weight than the oppofite popular opinion, which has nothing in nature or zeafon to fupport it.
I09 3
parts of the parable into the cafe. For when the rieh man renewed his requeft, with re gard to his five brethren, or rather reafoned with Abraham upon his denying it, he urged this reafon for it, viz. that if one went unto them from the dead, they would repent; which fiippofes that thofe who fuffer mifery in ano ther world are bad men, and that repentance in this life, is the way to efcape that mifery ; both of which, I think, imply that they are good men, who will be happy in another world.
Again, our Lord not only acquainted his hearers by this parable, that there would be a future ftate of exiftence to men, and a future retribution ; but alfo, that thofe dodtrines were plainly and clearly taught by Mo/es and the prophets. This, J think, is moft ap parent from the reafon which is given, why Lazarus fliould not be fent from the dead, to give warning to the rich man's five bre thren, left they alfo fall under the fame condemnation with him. The kind office, which the rich man defired that Lazarus would perform to his brethren, was plainly this, viz. to acquaint them, that there was moft certainly a life to come, in which good men will be happy, and bad men miferable, that fo thofe men might be prevailed upon by it to repent, and amend their ways, and thereby efcape that mifery. But this requeft was denied, for this reafon, viz, bccaufe thofe
very
[no]
very things were taught them by Mofes and the prophets -, they have Mofes and the pro- phets> let them hear them. The queftion here is, what thole men were to hear and learn from Mofes and the prophets ; and the anfwer is obvious, if the reafon afligned why Lazarus (hould not be fent from the dead be pertinent, and to the purpofe, viz. they were to hear and learn thofe very things which Laza rus was to inform them of, and which, if attended to, would be fufficient for their con- vision. This, I fay, muft be the cafe, if the reafon beforementioned be pertinent, and to the purpofe. Mofes and the prophets muft have taught plainly and clearly what this mejjenger from the dead was to have ac quainted the rich man's friends of, otherwife the reafon urged againft the fending fuch a meflenger would have been idle and trifling. This is ftill more evident from Abrahams farther reafoning upon the cafe. For, when the rich man urged, that if one went from die dead they would repent, Abraham repli ed, that if they would not hear, would not attend to what was faid to them by Mojes and the prophets, neither would they be perjuaded ihough one rofe from the dead, which plainly fuppofes, that what Mofes and the prophets had taught, was as plain and evident ', and as proper a foundation for conviffiion, as any thing that could be faid by a mejfenger from the dead. They have Mofes and $he prophet s>
3 ^
[Ill]
let them bear them ; for if they hear not Mo«> Jes and the prophets, neither 'will they be fer- fuaded though one rofe from the dead,
From what I have obferved, I think, it fully appears, that our Lord has declared him/elf to be on the affirmative fide of the foremen tioned queftion. For to fuppofe that he would put Juch a reafon into the mouth of
fendi
againft his fending Lazarus from the dead, which reafon he knew to be falfe in fafty I think, is by no means to be ad mitted. And from hence, I think, one, or other of thefe three conclufions will una voidably follow, namely, either,
Firft, That thofe doctrines, viz. that there will be a future ftate of exiftence to men, and a future retribution, were plainly and clearly taught by Mofes and the prophets, as our Lord hath maintained. Or elfe,
Secondly, That our Lord Jefus Chrift did not rightly and truly underftand Mofes and the prophets touching thefe matters. Or elfe,
Thirdly, That there is, or was another Mojes and the prophets, which our Lord referred to, who had taught, thofe doarines. plainly and ckarly • which other Mofes and the prophets we are not acquainted with.
I fay, I think, that one or other of thefe conclufions muft of neceffity follow from the premifes, or principles before laid down ; and therefore, I beg leave humbly to offer it to
the
[112]
the confidcration of the reverend Dr. War-* berton, and all others that particularly in- tereft themfelves in the forementioned quef- tion; prefuming, that one or other of them will clear up this point.
FINIS.
A N
ENQUIRY
CONCERNING
REDEMPTION.
Wherein tha
%,
CHRISTIAN REDEMPTION
Is particularly confidered. To which is prefixed,
A PREFACE;
Wherein is (hewn,
That if Chriftianity be not founded on Argu ment, but on thofe Divine Impreflions that are made on Mens Minds concerning it, (as a late ingenious Au thor has attempted to prove ; ) then it is moft uncer tain and precarious, and cannot be reduced to any Standard. And in which is alfo fliewn, that Chrift's Kingdom has been fo far from being fupported, and eftablimed by the Interpofition of Civil Power ; that on the contrary it has rather been annihilated thereby.
By T H O. CHUBB.
LONDON:
Printed for T. Cox, at the Lamb under the Royal Exchange. M,DCC,XLTII. Price is. 66
£?• B. A Colle£Uon of Trafls in one Volume in Quarto formerly publiflTd, and feveral Trails printed fince, which now make two Volumes in Oftavo contaj- the Whole of Mr. Cbubb's Writings j cf the latter may be had the Whole, or any particular Tra£l, if apply'd for in Time.
THE
AUTHOR
T O H I S
READERS,
SIRS,
AS I intend tp publifh a Jecond Volume of Collection of TraCts, containing all thofe TraCts which have been publifhed fince the publication of my jirft Collection ; fo I did intend to add to, and conclude that Collection with a difcourfe, entitled, The Authors Farewell to his Readers ; in which, I propofed to take my leave of the world as a writer ; but this lajl part of my defign, fome of my readers have diffuaded me from, becaufe they are unwilling I {hould bar myfelf from offering my thoughts to their con- fideration at any time to come, whilft my life (hall be continued 5 and therefore in compli ance with their defire, that part of my de- fign I have dropped: and now I intend to conclude the aforefaid Collection with the fol- A 2 lowing
lowing Enquiry y in which, /W ^0/#fr of more principal note are infilled on, viz. firft. That penitence is the 0w/y ground of God's mercy to finners ; and/mW/y, That f£/j doSlrme is true Chriftianity.
The ' j#>y? of thefe points is what mankind at large are concerned with, fo tliat Chriftians are not more particularly interefted in it, but only in common with the reft of the world; at leaft it is what all vicious per/ons are imme diately interefted in, of what denomination or profeffion foever, fuppofing man to be an ac countable creature, who will anfwer for his preient behaviour in futurity. That many of our fpecies have greatly departed from that rule of affedion and aftion which man, as an in telligent, aftive, free being, ought to diredt and govern his affections and behaviour by, and thereby have rendered themfelves jujtly dijpleafmg to God, and the proper objetfs of his refentment, is a truth fo obvious, as not to admit of a difpute. This being the cafe, it muft be a matter of the greateft concern to mankind, at leaft to all thofe of our fpecies, who have acquired fuch a depravity of nature, as to render themfelves the proper objects of di vine revenge, to know whether there be any poflible way by which fuch creatures may ren der themfelves the proper objects of God's mer cy ; and if there be fuch a way, then the next important queftion will be, what that way is. And in order to obtain proper fetis- fa£tion in the preient cafe, it is to be obferved,
that
[5] "
that the forementioned queftions arc of moral coniideration, in which, the character and conduct of the Deity are concerned ; and therefore thefe queftions muft be brought to their proper teft, and be tried , by the jlandard of moral truth., viz. by that eternal and in variable rule of right and wrong, which refuits from the natural and the efiential difference in things, in order to obtain fuch fatisfa&ion. All queftions in every fcience muft be tried by the principles of that particular fcience to which the queftion {lands related, and not by the prin ciples upon which any other fcience is ground ed. Thus all queftions in geometry muft be tried or proved by or from thofe principles upon which that fcience is founded, and the like muft be done in queftions relating to gravita tion or weight; it being very prepofterous to pretend to try a propofition relating to meafure, by the principles of gravitation, or to pretend to try a propofition relating to weight, by the principles of menjuration. In like man ner, all queftions of moral consideration, in which the character and conduci of the Deity are concerned, of which thofe before-mention ed are fuch, thefe muft be brought to their proper tejl, it being equally abfurd as in the forementioned cafes to pretend to try queftions in morals by any other rule than what is the ground and foundation of moral truth, viz. the eternal and invariable rule of right and wrong.
If it fliould be faid, that the queftions under coniideration are related to, and are to be con-
fidered
[6]
fidered as parts of Chriftianity ; and therefore the appeal ought to be made to the Cbriftian revelation with refpeft to them; becaufe the Chriftian revelation is the ground and founda tion of the Chriftian religion, and confequently is the Jlandard or rule of truth by which all queftions are to be tried that relate thereto : Anfwer, All queftions of moral confideration muft of neceffity be brought to the teft and be tried by the Jlandard of moral truth, be caufe that is all the rule they are fubjedt to, or can be tried by, in order to obtain proper fa- tisfaftion ; and this is equally the cafe, whe ther thefe queftions (land related to any tradi tionary religion, or not. Morality is founded in nature independent of any revelation or tra ditionary religion, and is what mankind at large are interefted in, and therefore Chriftians ftand upon a foot with the reft of the world with regard to all queftions relating thereto, and which is the cafe of the queftions under confideration. For, as thofe queftions are of univerfal concern antecedent to, and indepen dent of all revelation or traditionary religion; ib the nature of the thing requires that they (hould be tried by a rule which mankind are capable judges of, antecedent to, and indepen dent of any revelation or traditionary religion, a rule which is both obvious and certain, and which is equally fo, whether any revelation or traditionary religion had ever taken place in the world, or not ; and fuch is the rule refered to. Befides, as the natural and eflential difference
ia
; [7]
in things exhibits a rule of affedtion and a&ion which is, in order of nature, prior to all re velations and traditionary religions; fo all re velations and traditionary religions muft them- fefoes be brought to this tejt, and be tried by this rule, in order for us to form a proper and true judgment whether fuch revelations, fuch traditionary religions are, or may be of God, or not. For, as eternal realbn and truth are God's willy or rather the rule and meafure of the divine condudl ; fo all queftions relating thereto muft be brought to this teft, and be tried by this rule, in order for us to form a proper Judgment concerning them. And if upon fuch trial, any thing, any dodlrine or proportion fhall appear to be contrary^ or not conjbnant to the eternal reafon and truth of things 5 then fuch contrariety is a proof that any fuch thing, doftrine, or propofition is not of God. So that fhould thole queftions arife> viz. whether the Mofaick^ the Chriftian^ or the Mahometan revelations^ and confequently whether the refpedive traditionary religions grounded on thofe revelations are of God, or not, thofe queftions muft be brought to the forementioned teft, and be tried by that rule ; and if either of them will not abide fuch trial, but is found wanting^ then it ought to be dif carded as an unhallowed thing, whether it be one, or another, or all of theie. And if all revelations and traditionary religions muft ihemfehes be brought to the aforefaid teft, and be tried, and approved by, or from that rule\
then,
then, furely, it muft be greatly improper to fet up revelation as a rule to judge of propoji- tionSi which are in order of nature before the rule itfelf, and which judgment concerning them, as grounded on revelation, derives all its 'weight from its conformity to the forementioned rule of right and wrong, without which confor mity fuch judgment would be of no weight at all.
Thus much I thought proper to premife, in order to atjift my readers in forming a true judgment with regard to the important quef- tions refercd to; queftions of fuch importance that a mijlakc with refpect to them may wound religion in its vitals, and thereby prove fatal to mankind. For, tho' the doctrines of auri cular confeffion, purgatory, praying to Saints, bowing before an Image, tranfubftantiation, and the like may be of very little coniequence with regard to mens future fafety ; becaufe a ,man may be a good man, or a true penitent^ whether he be on one fide of any of theie queftions, or on the other ; yet if he (hould be mifled with regard to what is the true ground of God's mercy to finners, then, if he be a •vicious man, he may by fuch error be ivith- beldy or prevented from rendering himielf the proper objecl of mercy, and thereby fall fiort of that mercy ; and thus his error may prove fatal to him.
And, as I have in the following difcourfe laid down this propofition, viz. That penitence is the only ground of God's mercy to finners ; fo I have alfo undertaken to maintain, that this
dodtrine
... . .
doctrine is true Chriftianity. By its being true Chriftianity, I mean that it is a part of that revelation of God's will which was made to mankind by the mini fir y of Jefus Chrift, who was the founder of Chriftianity. So tfrat the queftion with me, is not whether the fore- mentioned do&rine be Peterifmy or Paulifm.» but only whether it be Chriftijm, or Chriftia- nity -, that is, the queftion with me, is not whether, the doctrine refered to was taught by St. Peter, or St. Paul, but only whether it was taught by Jefus Chrift. If a queftion fhould a rife, what is the difpenfation of Mofes ? or what is the difpenfation of Mahomet ? that 'is, what are the doctrines which Mofes or Maho met has difpenfed to the world ? then, I think, recourfe muft be had to what Mofes himfelf^ or to what Mahomet himfelf has fet forth, in order to obtain proper latisfaclion -, and not to what has, been fet forth and declared by their imme- .diate difciples and followers. And the reafon. of this is obvious, viz. becaufe Mofes and Ma homet were principals with refpect to each of their difpenfations ; whereas the difciples and followers of thefe were at moft but fubjlitiite^ who might poffibly go beyond, or fall foort of the defign and intention of their mafter. And if this is a proper, way of proceeding, ihould a queftion arife, what is the difpenfation of Mo- Jes? or what is the difpenfation of Mahomet? (as I prefume it will be allowed to be 5) then fliould the queftion be, what is the difyenfatkn of Cbn/l? or what is CbrijVurmtyl recourfe,^ I
B think,
.... C .
tliink, ought likewife to be had to what Cbrift kimfelf hath fet forth, and difpenfed to the world, in order to obtain proper fatisfaftion, and not to what has been dilpenfed to the world by his immediate difciples and followers ; I fay, this ought to be the cafe, for the reafon beforementioned. And, as the queftion under conlideration is what Chriftians are more parti cularly interefted in, and, as fuch, it may perhaps be of more confequence to them than to any other people in the world, as an error \vith refpecl: to it may prove more fatal to them than to others ; fo for that reafon, I think, it ought to be fairly and fully difcuffed, that if poffible it may be brought to an iflue. Befides, the words 'injidel, unbeliever, infidelity, &c. which are ufed as terms of, reproach, are ban died about, and men throw them at each o- ther at random without any rule or reafon, and (hereby unchriflianife each other before the
* point is fettled, what ra?/'and true Chriftianity is • whereas till this point be fettled upon its
^proper foundation, at leaft till it is plainly and ju'ftly fettled in a man's mind, which I am "afraid is feldom the cafe, he is Icarce a judge -for 'himfelf, much lefs for other men, whether he is with regard to true Chriftianity a believer, or ah unbeliever, and fo is in danger of erring in that refpecl:; becaufe if he errs with regard to the premijh, then he is likely to err with re gard to the conclufion drawn from them ; that
- is, if he mould judge true Chriftianity to be what it really is not, then he may likewife
judge
judge himfelf to be a believer with refpedt tq Chriftianity, when in reality that is not the cafe.
Indeed, if Chriftianity be not founded on argument, but on thofe impreffions that are made on mens minds concerning it, (as a very ingenious Author has undertaken to maintain ;) then it may be both various and contrary, ac cording to the images that are pictured on mens minds, by a divine impreffion, concern ing it. And as the impreffion itfelf is the only evidence of its divinity, fo Chriftianity, in this view of the cafe, muft be moft uncertain and precarious, and cannot be reduced to any ftandard. For if God's ways are not as mans ways, nor his thoughts as mans thoughts ; and if the wifdom of men be fooliJJmefs with God, and the righteoufnefs of men, (or what by the exercife of their difcerning faculties appears to them to be fo,) be unrighteoujhefs with him, (which are the principles this author reafons from,) fo that a man is not at all a judge of divine matters -, then the divine impreffioris made on mens minds may be both various and contrary to different perfons, and to the fame perfon at different times-, and confequently that muft be Chriftianity for the time being to every man, which is confonant to the divine impret fions laji made upon his own mind, whether they agree with the impreffions made on other mens minds concerning it, or not; and whe ther they agree with the impreffions made on his own mind at any time preceding, or not ; B 2 I
o
J fay, this may be the cafe. For tho' men may fuppofe and expedt that unity, unifor mity^ arid invar iablenefs will take place with refpeCl to Chriftianity, as being confonant to mans wifdom ; yet that may not be the cafe here, becaufe what is agreeable to, and is dic tated by man's wifdorn may be foolifonefs with God, as well in this cafe as in any other, of which man is not a judge. So that variety and contrariety may take place with regard to Chriftianity, as being the produce of 'divine impreffion, for any thing we know, or can {hew to the contrary; feeing reajbn, and argu ment, and the very exercife of our difcerning faculties are not only excluded out of the cafe, but cannot anfwer any manner of purpofe in it. Tho' it mud be acknowledged, that this fully accounts not only for the variety and con trariety of ftapes Chriftianity has appeared in; but alfo for the various and contrary religions that have taken place in the world diftindt from Chriftianity, all which may have been the pro duce of divine impreffion. For tho' it may be agreeable to mans ivijdom that there is, or can be but one true religion, and one acceptable way of worfhip, and one way for finners to be reconciled to God ; yet this may be all foolijh- nejs with Gcd. And tho* it may be agreeable to man's wifdom that men (hould aft fairly and uprightly with each other, and that God fhould a<fb thus by his creatures ; yet this alfo may be yboli/hnejs with kirn, and the contrary to this may be confonant to divine wifdom : I fay, this
may
may be the cafe, for any thing we know ; fee ing tfztffl is not a ^/Wg£ of thefe things. If it fhould be faid, that God has made known his will touching thefe matters, by a divine impref- iion on mens minds ; in and by which he has declared himfelf unchangeable : Anfwer, As God may will one thing to dayy and another thing to morrow ; may declare himfelf changeable to day> and unchangeable to morrow ; I fay, as this may be the cafe, of which, upon the prefent fup- pofition, we have no grounds from which we may fairly conclude the contrary -, fo nothing can certainly be concluded from any divine im- preffion on mens minds in any cafe whatever. Befides, if Chriftianity be grounded on thefe imprejfions, that are made on mens minds con cerning it, then its divinity feems to reft upon a precarious and uncertain foundation. For as the impreffions on mens minds may be the re- fult of the human conftitution under the cir- cumftances in which each individual is placed ; or they may be produced by the fpirit of truth, or the fpirit of error ; and as man has no cer tain rule to judge by, whether any impreflion on his mind be from one or another of thefe, nor indeed does the nature of the thing, in our prefent view of it, admit of any fuch rule; fo of courfe every man muft be altogether un certain whether any impreffion on his mind be divine, or not; and confequently whether what he receives as Chriftianity from fuch im preffion be in reality Chriftianity, or not. In fine, if God's ways are not as man's ways, nor
God's
, [ '
Gofs thoughts as mans thoughts^ and if the wifdom of men be fooli/hnejs with God, and the righteoufnefs of men be tmrighteoufnejs with him ; then man is in a very w/7 ftj/f, whether with, or without divine impreffions, as not ha- ving'whereon to reft the fole of his foot with Jafety, but is with regard to religion in the ut- moft difficulty and dijlrefs. Upon the whole I obferve, that if the author I refer to has proved his point ; then, I think, the moft abfolute fcep- ticijm in matters of religion will follow upon it, at leaft fo far as Chriftianity is concerned. However, hear what Jefus Chrift faith, Matt. xii. 57. Tea, and why even of yourfehes judge ye not what is right? Thefe words feem at leaft to imply that what Chrift offered to the people was level to their capacities, and was what they were capable judges of, independent of any fo reign aid-, and therefore he addrefled himfelf to their under/landings, and put the queftipn to them, Yea, and why even of yourfehes judge ye not what is right? Whereas, if Chriftianity is not founded on argument, but on thofe di vine impreffions that are made on mens minds concerning it -, then, I think, it would have been more natural and pertinent for Chrift to have addrefled his audience by way of caution and advice, in thefe or the like words : Take heed that ye lean not to your own under ft andings, nor do you of yourfehes form any judgment about ^ what I Jhall fay to you, becauje then you will certainly be mijled; but do you carefully attend to thofe divine imprejjions that are made upo.n
your
your minds, and do you rely on 'them mly for your tnftruBion and information. And indeed preach ing, and all other addreffes that are made to the human underftanding, feem to be introduced only for form Jake-, becaufe it is not that out" ward teaching that is addreffed to, and that is received by the human underftanding, but only "that inward teaching by a divine impreflion that does the work ; which inward teaching the human underftanding is not at all a judge of; and which furely would be as powerful and efficacious, whether any outward teaching took place, or not. And, as neither this au thor nor his readers can know, or judge any thing about Chrijlianity, neither what it is, nor what it is not, but by, or from a divine im- prejjion on each of their minds, feeing, accord ing to this author and St. Paul, no man knows or underftands the things of God, but by the Spirit of God fpeaking in him ; fo all addrefs to ' the human underftanding, whether by preaching or writing, whether by St. Paul or by this author, feems at lea ft to ksvain and ' ttfelefs. Neverthelefs, I think, it muft be al lowed that the author has treated the fubjecft with opennefs and freedom, and with a majlerly hand-, .and. has produced much more reafon and argument for excluding reafon and argu ment from Chriflianity, than the generality of men are mafters of; and therefore, I think, the performance is by no means defpifable, but is worthy the attention of our firft-rate divines. Moreover, it is covertly a proper and decent
call
" t 16
call to our clergy, not any longer to play faji and kofe in an affair of fuch moment ; but ei ther with this author wholly to difcharge reafon and argument from Chriftianity, or elfe to be 'wholly guided by thefe in every thing relating thereto. And indeed there has been too much occafion given for fuch a call as this, as the .conduct of ibme of our elergy has been moft prepofterous in this particular ; for when reafon and argument have been neceffary to fupport the particular Jcheme of religion they have ad hered to, or the particular interejl they have been engaged in, then reafon and argument have conflantly been appealed to -, but when reafon and argument have anfwer'd the con trary purpofes, then they have been as con- ftantly exploded. As to myfelf, I obferve, that if Chriftianity be not founded on argument !, nor will bear to be tried by it, then, in my opinion, it cannot poflibly be of God. For, as eternal reafon and truth are God's will, . qr . the rule and meafure of the divine conduct j fo confequently whatever comes from him will admit of the Jlrifleft fcrutiny by way of rea- faning and argumentation^ feeing every thing, that is of divine original has reafon and truth for its bafis.
But to return. As Chriftianity is allowed to be a matter of great importance to mankind, at leaft it is allowed to be fo by Chrijiians -, fo it muft be a matter of moment to them to be rightly informed what real and true Chriflianity is: at leaft to fix the flandard to which teft
all
all queftions, all propofitions muft be brought, in order for us to form a proper judgment, whether they are true Chriftianity, or not. This, I think, is what the cafe requires. I have, in my book, entitled, The true Go/pel of Jejus Chriji afferted, {hewed what I apprehend to be true Chriftianity ^ as it is to be collected from Chrift's mini/try, but then, this has been, reprefented to be deijm, * heatbemfm, &c. I therefore intreat thofe who think, or at leaft who have reprefented me as not having done jujlice to the fubject, that they would kindly interpofe for the fettling this point, by (hewing what the Jlandard is by which all things are to be tried, in order for us to judge whether they are Chriftianity, or not 5 and alfo by {hewing what true Chriftianity is, as built upon that foundation. Only I beg leave to obferve, that it will be paying a very low compliment to Chriftianity, to reprefent it as confiding of tkSrinn which will not tally with truth > and which were not taught by its founder. Tho\ I think, this is not more prepofterous than for the difciples of Chrift to heffor and bully in their mailer's caufe, whiift they pay no regard to the laws and precepts he has left them to go vern their affections and actions by. For, tho' the Rechabites paid a ftrict regard to the com mandments of yonadab the Son of Recbab, their father, and neither drank wine, nor built
C houfes,
* See the reverend Dr. Steblin's vifitation Charge, to the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Wits*
. .
houfes, nor planted vineyards, nor fowed feed, but dwelt in tents all their days ; (Jer. xxxv. 6.) yet in this Chrift's difciples beg leave to be excujed. The Chriftian fcholar can, out of the abundance of his zeal, deify the perfon of his mafler, and bow down his head like a bulruih at the very mention of his name ; can hav« faith or confidence in him out of meafure, and pray to him without ceafing ; can cut and flay hereticks and infidels under the pretext of his authority, and can fay, and do any thing, and every thing for his lake, fave governing his affections and attions by his majlers /aws ; fuch obedience being, in his opinion, no other than dry morality, which is too low and mean, and fitter for a mere heathen, who has nothing but his virtue to truft to, than for an angelick foul, who is to be carried to heaven on the wings of his own faith, or perhaps in the fiery chariot of his own zeal, having laid fajl hold of the mantle or merits of his majkr, which will pro cure an entrance for him. And, that this is the truth of the matter, a little obfervation will (hew, by comparing the precepts of Chrifl with the lives of thofe who call themfelves his followers; in which comparifon great contra riety will appear, and that not in a few inftan- ces only, but in a multitude of cafes. So that whatever advantage Chriftianity may have been to mankind informer times, it does not appear to turn to any great account to them now, feeing, taking mankind in general, Chriftians are not much better than other men. And
indeed
[ '9]
indeed things Teem to be quite reverfed. For inftead of the kingdoms of this world be coming the kingdom of God, and of his Chrift; the kingdom of Chrift is become the kingdoms of this world. The kingdom of Chrift at prefent, at leaft that kingdom which is called after his name, is founded in civil policy, is fupported by civil or world ly power, and is made fubfervient chiefly, if not wholly, to worldly purpojes. Whereas the real and true kingdom of Jefus Chrift is quite of another nature, it is a kingdom which is not of] nor from tins world ; it is a king dom fet up in the hearts of men, by which their affections and actions are voluntarily Jub- jefled to ChriiVs laws, independent of all ex ternal compulfion, and all other authority.
To conftitute a true difciple of Jefus Chrift, or a true fubjcct of his kingdom, two things are ablblutely neceffary, viz. firjl> to believe, or at leaft to admit that Jefus Chrift was ap pointed of God to make known his will to mankind touching the true way to God's fa vour and eternal life; and feccndly, in confe- quence of fuch faith or admiffion to conform his affeffiiom and actions to Chrift's laws, the latter of thefe being altogether as necefiary to fuch a character as the former. Te are my friends, (faith Chrift, John xv. 14.) if ye do whatsoever 1 command you \ by which is plainly implied, that he who does not do what Chrift has commanded is no friend, no difciple of Chrift, nor no fubject of his kingdom. So
C 2 that
c 20].
that it is doing what Chrift commands, be- caufe Chrift has commanded it $ and not be^- caufe it is commanded by fome other au thority, which conftitutes a true fubjecl of Chrift's kingdom. Matt, xxiii. 8, 9, 10. Be not ye called Rabbi, for one is your Ma/ier, even Chrift -, and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth, for one is your Father which is in heaven. Nei ther be ye called mafters, for one is your Majler^ even Chrift. Whatever authority is affumed among Chriftians with regard to God's favour and eternal life, in order to diredt and in fluence the underftandings and confciences, the affections and actions of Chriftians, whe ther it be called civil or ecclefiajlical, tempo^ ral or fpiritual, all fuch coercive power is not the kingdom of Chrift :, but the fubverfion, or rather the annihilation of it ; becaufe fo far as men are directed and influenced by fuch authority, fo far the kingdom of Chrift is funk and loft in them. St. Paul puts a quef- tion, Rom. vi. 16. Know ye not that to whom ye yield yourfelves fervants to obey, his fervants ye are to whom ye obey? Now, tho' St. Paul differently applied the propofition here laid down ; yet that alters not the cafe, becaufe the apoftle laid it down as an univerfal pro- pofition, which holds good in all cafes; and he appealed to the common fenfe and reafon of the believers at Rome for the truth of it. Know ye not ? which is the fame as to fay, that this is a thing fo obvious that you all
mujl*
_ ^
muft, and dfc £wz0 it, that to whom ye yield yourfelves fervants to obey, his fervants ye are to whom ye obey. So that Chrift's kingdom is fo far from being fupported and eftabliflied by the Interpofition of civil power, that on the contrary it is in a great meafure annihi lated thereby. Whatever authority is the ground of our fubmiffion, that is our mafter -y and therefore to whomfoever a man> a Chriftian yields obedience, bk fervant, his fubjetf he is to whom he yields that obedience; whether it be to ye/us Chrift, or Ce/ar. Indeed, the blending together, or the unnatural coalition of church and Jiate^ has anfwered very great purpofes to men in this world ; fuch as that thofe who piifh hardy and get foremofl in this pretended church and kingdom of Chrift, have their hundreds and their thoufands per year for now and then attending at the altar, as they affect to call it ; live in palaces like kings, cloath themfelves * in fine linen and coftly apparel, and fare furnptuoufly every day ; fit in the uppermoft rooms at feafts, receive greetings in the markets, and are called, Rab bi, Rabbi ; and, no doubt, thofe who flare in fuch good things think them worth con tending for, and fay in their hearts, with the
three
* Matt. x. 24, 25. 'The difciple is not^ (ought not to be) above his majler^ nor the fervant above kts Lord; it is enough for (or it ought to fuffice) the dlfclple that ke be as his majler^ ?nd the fervant as his Lord', and if fo, then this enquiry is very natural, viz. what refemblance is there betwixt gilded mitres, lawn fleeves, embroidered copes, or fcarlet hoods, and the plain, fcamlefs coat of Jefu$ Chriit ?
[.22
three difciples at ChrhTs transfiguration, Lord, it is good for us to be here ; for tho' heaven is allowed to be a very good place, or ftate, which may be fit to be retired to, when this world's good things can be enjoyed no longer ; yet, according to the proverb, A bird in the hand is worth two in the bufo, and therefore to make fure play, they chule to pofiefs them- fclves with as much of this word's good things as is poffible to be obtained by them, and then to take their chance for the riches of another. But then, tho' in Jbme ages and countries the jlritt alliance offin/ive and defenjive which church and ftate have entered into againjl foor mankind, has been productive of fuch great and good things as thofe above men tioned ; yet thereby Chrift' s kingdom has been, as it were, joftled out of the 'world \ feeing fo far as civil power has interpofed, and has been to Chriftians a ground and reafon of action, fo far Chrift's authority, and Chrift's kingdom have been deprejjcd. And tho' the ordinances and miniftry founded in, and fupported by civil power, may in a loofe and very improper fenfe be called Chriftian, as thofe who exercifc fuch power are called after Chrift's name ; yet ftridl- jy fpeaking thefe are not the inftitutions and miniftry of Chrift, but only of that power by which they are founded and fupported. And fuppofing fuch ordinances and miniftry be like unto^ and are of the fame kind with what was inftituted by Jefus Chrift ; yet that alters not the cafe, becaufe fuch likenefs and fimilitude 2 makes
.
makes 7/0 alteration with refped: to the autho* rity upon which it is grounded ; for as that authority is merely civil, fo confequently every thing muft be merely civil that is grounded upon it, and ftipported by it. And indeed, it is but too common for men profeffing Chriflia- nity, to be juft as good Chriftians as the civil power requires and obliges them to be ; or per haps as comports with, or is fubfervient to their worldly intereft ; beyond which, too often Chrift's precepts Hand for cyphers. For, tho' the flat ate s of Omri are kept^ and all the works or laws of the houfe of Ahab, and men walk in their counjels, Mic. vi. 1 6 ; yet the precepts of Chrift lie quite unregarded. Hear the charge which Chrift gives to his difciples, Lay not up for your/elves treafures upon the earthy where moth and rufl corrupt ', and where thieves break through and fteal-, but lay up for your/elves trea fures in heaven, where neither moth nor rujl cor rupt •, and where thieves do not break through and JleaL Again, When thou makejl a dinner or a flipper, call not thy friends, nor thy bre thren, nor thy kinfmen, nor thy rich neighbours, * lejl they bid thee again, and a recompence be fnade thee. But when thou makejl a feajl, call
the
* As in the eaftern countries, a loftinefs of fpeecb was fometimes ufed, in which more was ejfprejfcd than was in tended to be underjlood ', fo I am willing to fuppofe, that in this text Chrift did not intend to bar his difciples totally from that friendly fociety in eating and drinking (with their neighbours, friends and relations, whether of high or low degree) thofe good things which God hath pre pared
, , _
the poor, the maimed, the larie, the blind, 'and thou foalt be bleffed ; for they cannot recommence thee, but thou jkak be recompenced at the refur- reffiion of the juft. Thefe, with many others, are the precepts of Jefus Chrift, which he hath given in charge that his difciples and followers mould walk by, which precepts are read in our fynagogues every fabbath-day ; and yet not the leaji regard is paid to them by many of our moft zealous and orthodox Chriftiam, even whilft they are anathematizing hereticks and Jchifma- ticks, deijls and infidels : and the reafon of this is obvious, viz. becaufe thofe precepts tend to retard, rather than to promote their greatly a- bounding in worldly pofleffions and enjoyments, which with too many of them is the main
pared to be received with thankfgiving, and which friend ly ajjociation is one of the great comforts of life \ I lay, I ant willing to fuppofe Chrift did not intend this; becaufe, I think, Juch a precept would be wrong', tho* I am fenfible the text is very plain and exprefs, both as to the prohibi tion, and the injunction, and as to the rcafons urged to fup- port both. But then, furely, nothing lefs than this can be intended, viz. that when a Chriftian has made proper pro- vifion for bimfelf and his Immediate dependents, he is not to beftow the furplus of his fortune upon the rich and wealthy? becaufe they are not the objects of his care, nor he of theirs, and therefore nothing mould be expected from them one to another ; but upon the poor and needy $ who have it not in their power fufficiently to provide for them- felves ; and yet the text in this rejtralntd and limited fcnfe feems to be but little regarded by the rich and wealthy ^ either Ihing or dying, who ufually beftow much the greateft part of what they are poflefled of, not to thofe who ivant* but to thofe who abound in worldly good things, As to the propriety of this precept in this limited fenfe, I rmift fubmit it to the judgment of my readers.
.
print, notwithftanding all their harangues abolit futurity, as their lives do plainly demonftrate. Neverthelefs, it muft furely be allowed to be greatly prepofterous for men who call them- felves Chrijlians, and who would think them- felves injured to be deemed otherwife, more efpecially for the minifters of Ghrift, to lay up riches heap upon heap, as if, like the Babyloni ans of old, they intended therewith to build a tower that mould reach to heaven^ when fuch felfiJhnefS) fuch worldly -mindednejl was what Chrift mewed himfelf chiefly concerned to re form mankind from. Now, if the ambafla- dors of Chrift, (as they affect to be called) who have, or at leaft who pretend to have received the Holy Ghojl by the impofition of hands, and to have been fent upon a fpecial mejfage from heaven, viz. to warn their brethren that they go not to the place of torment :, if thefe men pay little or no regard to the commandments of Chrift, but live as if they had no fuch maf- ter, which is too much the cafe ; then furely it muft be allowed, that the cafe of the mul titude profeffing Chriftianity is not much better; for if thefe things be done in the green tree, then what (hall be done in the dry? and confe- quently Chrijfs kingdom muft be come to a very low ebb. From what I have obferved my readers may fee> that Chriftendom, or Chrift's kingdom, is not of that great extent which it may be thought to be, as containing #//, or al- mojl all Europe ', and part of AJia, Africa, and America^ which makes a great found -, whereas
D if
;f 2
if none are the fubjects of Chrift's kingdom, but thofe who govern their affe&ions and ac tions by Chrift's laws, which is the truth of the cafe, then Cbriftendom will be reduced into a much narrower compafs,
I will add but one observation more, which I hope my readers will patiently attend to. As it is become fafhionable to abuje, vilify, and mifreprefent thofe perfons, whom crafty and evil-minded men are pleafed by way of re proach to characterize by the terms freethink ers, deifts, infidels, &c. fo to render thofe per fons the more contemptible, they are frequently charged with refufing to affent to what they cannot comprehend in matters of religion; whilft at the fame time (faith their accufer) thofe very perfons do affent to what they can not comprehend in things natural. This is the charge. And to illuftrate fuch prepofterouf- nefs of conduct in the freethinkers, feveral in- itances are produced, in which they are faid to aflent to what they do not comprehend. Tho', by the way, it is not in any man's power, whether he thinks freely or otherwife, to carry his affent farther than what he comprehends,, in any cafe whatever. By the term compre hend, I think, the fame is meant as by the term under ft and. If I have a juft and true idea of all the terms which conftitute this pro- pofition, viz. That the three angles of a right- lined triangle are equal to two rectangles, then I underftand the propofition, and then I com prehend it. What I comprehend I underftand, 2 and
, ,
and what I under/land I comprehend; and what I do not comprehend, that I do not un derftand, and what I do not underftand, that I do not comprehend ; the terms being, I think, fynonymous. This being premifed, I proceed to a cafe which is ufually urged, in which it is pretended that the freethinker gives his affent to what he does not underftand in things natural; and at the fame time he re- fufes to give the like aflent to what he does not underftand in matters of religion. The cafe is this, ^fhat mind afts upon matter] is the propofition laid down ; this propolition, fays the accufer, the freethinker aflents to, and yet he does no more underftand how mind a£ts upon matter, than he under/lands the greatefl myftery in religion -, and thus the freethinker, to ap pearance at leaft, ftands convicted of the charge laid againft him, viz. That in things natural he gives his aflent to what he does not under ftand, tho* he refufes the like aflent in matters of religion. This fort of legerdemain, if it may be fo called, I have often known pradtifed in the pulpit. The firft propofition introduced is \_that mind afts upon matter,J with refpedt to which the preacher fets forth, that this pro pofition the freethinker aflents to. Now ad mitting this to be the cafe -y yet notwithftand- ing the freethinker is quite clear of the charge laid againft him ; becaufe with refpeft to this propofition his aflent does not go a tittle far~ ther than what he underftands. He under- ftands this propofition clearly and perfectly D 3 well,
f
Well, viz. [that mind a5ts upon matter ;] and as he throughly underftands it, fo he can af- fent to it, fuppofing he is convinced of its truth. But then, as the juggler at the ftage, when he has (hewn one bag to the fpectators, and has turned it infide outward, and has done whatever elfe is neceflary to convince them that there is nothing in it, he then'/w/.* It by, and introduces another bag like the former, out of which he takes a hen, and chickens, and what ever elfe it was ftored with ; and this change of bags is done fo artfully and quick, as not to be perceived by the fpeclators : fo that (to ap pearance) the fame bag which appeared to be empty, in an inflant of time as plainly appeared to be full, tho' it did not appear that any thing had been put into it : in like manner, when the preacher has {hewn off with the Jirft pro- pofition, viz. \that mind ^dls upon matter,] and has obferved that it is what the free thinker afTents to ; he then artfully drops it, and introduces another propofition in its ftead, viz. [bow mind acts upon matter;] which fe- cond propofition, tho' it varies from the Jirft but in one word, yet they are as diftincl and different as the two bags that were by turns in the hand of the juggler, the one empty, and the other full. The preacher having thus in troduced \i\sfecond propofition, viz. [bow mind acts upon matter,] he then difplays his talent, in mewing that this is what the freethinker does not, nor cannot underftand, which is alfo ; but then, this is what the freethinker
does
Joes not, nor cannot affent to, tho* the preacher by his art leads the people to think that he does. For, tho' the freethinker aflents to this propofition, viz. [that mind adls upon mat ter,] becaufe he underftands it, and is con vinced of its truth 5 yet he does not give his afient to this propofition, viz. [how mind acts upon matter,] becaufe he does not undcrftand it. And thus the preacher, by & Jiidden and artful change of the proportions, (which if not attended to, may appear to be the fame) leads the inattentive audience to think, that the free thinker does really give his aflent to what he does not underftand, and therein lies the preacher's dexterity. The cafes are parallel. For as in the former cafe, the trickfter, by a fudden and artful change of the bags, mifleads and impofes upon the Jenfes of the fpectators ; fo in the latter, the preacher, by a like fudden and artful change of the propofitions, mifleads and impofes upon the under/landings of his au dience. I will repeat the cafe, that fo if poffible my readers may not fail of feeing through it. [fhai\ mind a&$ upon matter, this, fays the preacher, the freethinker aflents to \ and yet [bow] mind atfs upon matter, he no more un- derftands, than he does the greatejl myjlery in religion. Here, by the fudden and artful change of the word [that] for the word [how], by which a change is made in the propofitions, the audience, (at leaft thofe of them that do not fee through the difguife,) are mijled, and freethinkers are abujed. The true
flate
_
ftate of the Cafe is this, namely, that as the Jirft propofition, viz. [that mind afts upon matter] may be underftood by all thinkers, whether free or fettered-, fo it may be aflented to by them all, provided they are fatisfied of its truth. Again, as the Jecond propofition > viz. [how mind afts upon matter] is not un derftood by any thinker, whether bound or free; fo it cannot poffibly be aflented to by any of them. Who is there among the multitudes of mankind that believes how, or in what manner mind atfs upon matter ? furely there is no fuch perfon. And the reafon is obvious, viz. be- caufe how, or in what manner mind affis upon matter is not underftood by any man, and there fore cannot poffibly be believed or aflented to by them. And this is the cafe in all other in- ftances, with refpeft to which no man can carry his faith or aflent a tittle farther than he underftands ; and if any man pretends that he can, he either puts a fallacy on himfelf, or elfe impofes on others. Thus I have (hewn, how through craft and bafenefs freethinkers are ab- ufed. To think freely is to take an impartial view of any queftion, and of every thing that ftands related to that queftion, whether it makes for it, or again/1 it ; and to form a judgment agreeably to the evidence that ap pears, exclulive of every bias that may miflead the mind in forming that judgment ; this is freethinking, and thole who adt thus are free- thinkers, and are in reality an ornament to hu man nature, and to civil fociety; and as fuch,,
viz*
folz. as freethinkers, furely, are not plagues nor pefts to either, however they may be rna- licioufly reprefented -y feeing freethinking does not difpofe nor lead them thereto. Neverthe- lefs, I am fenfible that in this age freethinking is fet forth to be moft fcandalous and reproach- ful\ and perhaps my thinking fo freely on the fubjects treated of in the following Enquiry, may draw on me that character, which I at- fure my readers, I am not afhamed of; be- caufe to think freely is, in my opinion, a re putable thing. Indeed a Chriftian prieft, viz. the reverend Mr. Warburton, in his high ftrain of fcandal and defamation^ (tho', I hope, in. this refpecl: priefts of all religions are not the fame) has been before-hand with me in this particular ; in his preface to his Critical and Philofophical Commentary on Mr. Popes EC- fay on Man, in which he has expreffed him- felf in the following words.
" As for the tribe of Freethinkers, ^foland^ " Tindal, Collins, Coward, Blount, Strut, Chubb^ <c Dudgeon, Morgan, T'illard, and their fel- " lows, the mortal foes both of reafon and " religion, injured wit as well as virtue, by " the mouth of one of their happieft advo- " cates, long ago called for vengeance on <c them.
« The licence of a following reign
" Did all the dregs of bold Socinlan drain ; <c Then unbelieving priefts reforrn'd the nation, " And taught more pleafant methods of fal- vation ^
<c Where
[3*
*c Where heaven's free fubjefts might their
rights difpute,
" Left God himfelf fhould feem too abfolute. " Encourag'd thus, wit's Titans brav'd the fkies, <c And the prefs groan'd with licens'd blafphe-
mies.
cc Thefe mongers, criticks, with your darts engage, " Here point your thunder $ and exhaujl your
rager
Here my readers will fee, that Mr. Warbuf- ton charges me with being a mortal foe both of reafon and religion, injured wit and virtue; with refpeft to which charge I obferve, that as on the one fide, I have not, and I truft I fhali not, join in any religious party orfatfion what ever againft truth ; fo on the other fide, the caufe of reafon, religion and virtue I have fin- cerely and uprightly endeavoured to promote-, and if in any of my enquiries I have erredt from which I do not pretend to be exempt, as fuch error is what I have endeavoured to guard againft, by examining carefully and impar tially thofe queftions that have come before me ; fo I am quite eafy in that refpedt, even whilft under the expectation of futurity. And as to injured wit, if I have done nothing for it, I have done nothing againft it 5 confequent- ly, if I have not been its friend, I have not been its foe : with what face then could this man, this reverend prejbyter of our church, lay the above imputation upon me ? or what prin ciple is there, upon whish he can ju/iify his
conduft
re: . [33] ;
conduct in fo doing ? this I am at a lofs to dif- cover. As the above charge is moft heavy-, fo it requires the clear ejl w\&ftrongejl proof to fupport it ; and yet, I know, Mr. Warburton has not, nor can he have wherewith juftly to grouhd this his prefumptive charge upon ; and therefore when he bringeth his gift to the al- tar^ when he approacheth with reverence the holy table^ to make a publick and folemn pro- feflion of his difciplefiip to Cbrift, and, as it were, to Jwear fealty to him as his Lord-, and alfo to join with the body of the faithful in offering up an eucharijlical facrifice to God ; I hope he will then and there remember, that I have * ought againjl him^ Matt.v. 23, 24. But then, whether this great divine does, or will think himfelf concerned to pay fuch a re gard to that rule of aftion given by Jefus Cbrift, which is here refered to, by acting as a Chriflian, confonant to this precept given to Chrift's difciples confidered as Jews, the event only can (hew. If f Mr. Warburton, by the
pub-
' Tho' I have heard, that the church of Rome teach- eth, that faith is not to be kept with hereticks ; yet I have not heard, that the church of England teacheth, that juf- tice is not due, nor need be paid to freethinkers ; and therefore, I hope, Mr. Warburton will not plead a right of indulgence^ nor claim an exemption from doing juftice even to me^ fuppofing he (hould difown my ftanding in any bro therly relation to him.
t In an Appendix to my Difcourfe on Miracles I ftiled the reverend Mr. Warburton Dr. Warburton^ apprehending that he had obtained a title to the appellation of Doctor,
E whereas
[ 34 ]
publication of the above-cited paragraph, in tended to give the world a fpecimen of the effeft that his faith in Chrift and in the doc trine of futurity, has upon his mind and life; then, I think, every honeft man will have rea- fon to join with me in this petition, viz. From fuch believers, good Lord, deliver us.
whereas in this I was miftaken ; but then as it was thro' ignorance I did it, fo I truft Mr. Warlurton will forgive me this wrong : tho', (if I have been rightly informed) that feather has fince been denied this great man, by one of our univerfities, after much follicitation for it.
A N
A N
ENQUIRY
CONCERNING
REDEMPTION,
BEFORE I enter upon this Enquiry, two or three things are neceffary to be premifed as previous to it. As Jirft, That there is a natural, * and an effential difference in things ; and that that difference is the ground and foundation of mo ral truth : So that with refpedt to all queftions of moral confideration, our arguments and rea- fonings muft be grounded on this principle, in order to render fuch arguments and reafonings pertinent, and of any weight. For, were it
E 2 to
* See this point more largely confidered in my difcourfe, intitled, The Sufficiency of Re^fgn in Matters of Religion farther confidered »
1 — ..
to be admitted that there is a univerfal fame* nefs, or indifference in things, and that one thing is not diftinft from, or is not preferable to another in nature; then the confequence is clear, that the diftinctions of right and wrong, of good and evil, of truth and falfhood, of juft and unjuft, and the like, are idle and vain, becaufe nature does not admit them ; or, at leaft, if they are admitted, it is to no manner of purpofe, becaufe right and wrong, good and evil, juft and unjuft, truth and falfhood, &c. are all upon an equality as being in them- felves perfectly indifferent, one not being pre ferable to another. So that upon a fuppolition there is a univerfal famenefs, or a univerfal in difference in nature, all morality is funk and loft; and all queftions of moral confideration become abortive ; and all arguments and rea- fonings with regard to moral truth amount to juft nothing at all. It will anfwer no manner of purpofe to enquire after, or attempt to prove that a thing is right, or wrong ; good, or evil ; true, or falfe ; if right and wrong, good and evil, truth and falfhood are the very fame thing ; or if one of thefe is not preferable to another in nature. If the communication of good or happinefs be the very lame thing with the communication of evil or mifery, or if thefe are fo perfectly indifferent, as that one is not preferable to the other ; then all ar gumentation with refpect to them muft be vain and ufelejs. From what I have obferved, I think, it plainly appears that as the natural
and
[37]
and effcntial difference in things is the ground and foundation of moral truth •> fo of neceflity this principle muft be admitted as the founda tion of argument in all queftions relating there to. Again,
Admitting there is a natural and eflential difference in things, and that one thing is real ly diftindt from, and is preferable to another in nature ; then it is God's being conftantly, uniformly, and univerfally affedted, and adt- ing agreeably to fuch difference which confti- tutes the divine rectitude or the moral perfec tions of the Deity; that is, it denominates God to be perfectly wife, juft, good, &c. So that in all queftions relating to the character and conduct of the Deity, our arguments and reafonings muft be grounded on this principle, (viz. that God's affections and actions are al ways perfectly conformable to the effential dif ference in things) in order to render fuch ar guments and reafonings pertinent, and of any 'weight. For, admitting that the divine affec tions and the divine will and power are in fluenced by, and are under the direction of capricious humour and arbitrary will, which is the fame as to fay, that they are under no direction or guidance at all, but that God is affedted, and adts at random without any rule or reafon ; I fay, were this to be admitted, then the confequence is clear, that the divine redtitude or the moral perfections of God are fictitious things. Then it will be very impro per, or rather abfurd to attribute wifdom,
goodnefs,
£ 38]
goodnefs, &c. tti the Deity ; becaufe, if that were the cafe, then God would be affected, and would act from mere humour, which is the fame as from no principle at all ; and con- fequently the forementioned appellations of wife, good, juft, &c. could not, with any propriety, be applicable to him. So that upori a fuppofition the Deity is affected, and acts, not confonant to that rule of affection and ac tion which refults from the natural and effen- tial difference in things, but from arbitrary will, as aforefaid ; then divine rectitude or the moral perfections of God are funk and loft ; and then all arguments and reafonings with re- fpect to thefe, will be idle and vain. It will be to no manner of purpofe to enquire whe ther any difpenfation, and fcheme of religion be of God, or not ; becaufe, upon the prefent fuppofition (-viz. that God is affected and acts from fovereign pleafure) we have no principle to reafon from, no foundation for argument from which any thing may juftly be concluded in fuch a cafe. It would be very abfurd to ar gue for, or againfl any difpenfation or fcheme of religion being of God from its being a- greeable with, or contrary to wifdom, good nefs, juftice, &c -, becaufe wifdom and folly, good and evil, juft and unjuft, one of thele is as eligible, as confilient 'with, and as likely to be chojen, or recommended by fovereign pleafure and arbitrary will, as another. And, on the other fide, if it be admitted that the divine affections, the divine will and power are, at
3 all
[39]
all times, and in all inftances and cafes, influ enced by, and are directed by that law or rule of affection and action which refults from the natural and effential differences in things ; then here is a proper ground and foundation for ar gument, from which juft and rational conclu- Sons may be drawn with regard to the con duct of the Deity in all his difpenfations or dealings with his creatures. If this principle be admitted, then here is a proper tejl for all difpenfations, all fchemes of religion, to be brought to, and be tried by, in order for us to form a judgment whether they are divine^ or not \ and by which we may be guarded from delufion and impofition, at leaft from all that is injurious and hurtful to mankind ; becauie whatever difpenfation or fcheme of religion is plainly repugnant to divine rectitude, fuch dif penfation, iuch fcheme of religion cannot pof- fibly be of God.
And, that the Deity is conftantly, uniform ly, and univerfajly affected, and acts (when ever he does act) agreeably to that rule of af fection and action which refults from the natur ral and eflential differences in things, is moil apparent. For, as God is the mo/i perfect in telligence ; fo he muft of neceffity moji clearly. difcern the right, or wrong ; good, or evil -y truth, or falfhood ; &c. and alfo the preferable- nefs, or non-preferablenefs of each of thefe to its contrary, which takes place in all inftances and cafes through the whole univerfal nature ±
fay, this mult be the cafe with refpect to
God,
[40]
God, who is the moft perfed intelligence. And, as the Deity does moft clearly perceive as aforefaid ; fo the divine affedions, and the divine will and power are conjtantly guided and directed by that difcernment. That is, when God ads, he always chufes to aft right, and to do good, but never the contrary ; he always loves what is lovely, and hates what is hateful, but not their contraries ; he always pities the proper objeds of pity, and (hews mercy to the proper objeds of mercy, but not to their con- traries ; and fo in all other cafes. I fay, this will always be the cafe with refped to God ; not from any fatality , not from any natural necejjity he is under to be affeded, and to aft thus, but becaufe there is a reajbn refulting from the natural difference in things why he fhould be affected, and ad: thus, and a reafon againjl his being afFeded, and ading contra- rily ; nor does nature afford a motive, a temp tation, an excitement to the Deity to be af- feded, or to ad otherwife, and therefore we may well be afjureci that that never will be the cafe.
Having thus prepared the way, by {hewing what muft be admitted as a ground or founda tion for argument with refped to all queftions of moral confideration, and all queftions with which the character and conduct of the Deity is concerned ; I now proceed to the Enquiry, viz. concerning Redemption. The words re deem and redemption are fometimes applied to things, and fometimes to ferjbns. When one
. .
man puts his goods into the pofieflion of ano ther, as a pledge, pawn, w Jecurity for a fum of money he has borrowed of that other per- fon, till fuch time as he (hall pay the money again ; then when that money is thus payed^ the goods pledged or pawned as aforefaid are redeemed thereby. Again, when a man is be come a vaffal or flave to another, and his li berty is pur -chafed, then he is redeemed: and, as what was paid for the man's liberty is the price of that redemption, fo he who pays that price is the JZave's redeemer.
This is the common, obvious, and ftrift literal fenfe of the words redeem and redemp tion, when applied to things or perfons: fo that in a literal redemption, with refpedt to perfom, (if I may be allowed to exprefs myfelf thus, which perhaps may be very improper) there muft be a literal flaw, or a perfon in a ftate of literal Jlavery to &literalmajler^ and alfo a literal price, or valuable coniideration paid by a literal redeemer to that liter almafter, in order to purchafe a literal redemption to that literal captive ; I fay, all this muft take place when the words redeem and redemption are taken in a ftriffi literal fenfe y and are applied to perjbm. So that when a perfon has by his mif- behaviour rendered himfelf the proper objett of refentmenty and in confequence thereof is re- ferved or bound over to punifhment, the being any way injlrumental in facing that man from punifhment, cannot in a ftridt and proper fenfe be called redemption ; nor can he who is
F injlru-
mjlrumental in facing the offender from pu- nifhment, be flrictly and properly called a re-* deemer, becaufe the perfon thus difcharged was not a vaffal or flave, but a criminal. Mifbe- haviour or difobedience to any law does not conflitute a captive, but a criminal-, and con- fequently the being infirumental in faving a perfon from that punifliment his difobedience has expofed him to, cannot properly be called redemption; nor can be who is inftrumental in faving fuch a perfon, be properly called a re deemer; but thofe terms, when thus applied, muft be ufed in a loofe* remote, improper^ or fi gurative fenfe. And,
As the terms redeem and redemption ar© improperly and figuratively applied, when ap plied to the difcharging a perfon from the pu- nifhment his mifbehaviour has expofed him to; fo, I think, it will be proper to enquire what that mi/behaviour is, which juftly expofes the offender to punifhment. Mifbehaviour or fin may be thus briefly defined, viz. It is the doing that which in reafon ought not to be done, or the omitting to do what in reafon ought to be done. Now, tho' fin, according to this defini tion, is in every inftance the proper objedl of diflike and difapprobation ; yet, I think, it dees not in every inftance render the agent the pro per object of refentment and puniflment. Ven geance, revenge, refentment and punifhment, as they are terms of like import ; fo they all fuppofe fome injury or wrong done either to the pevfon, character, or fortune of another, or
the
. _. 43 _
the omitting to do what ought to have been done for the Jiipport, and in the defence of ei ther of thefe. So that revenge or punimment is the retaliation of injury and wrong, or the rendering evil for evil ; and therefore in thofe inftances of mi{behaviour or fin, where no in jury or wrong is done, nor intended to be done to another, nor any defect of benevolence to others takes place, there can be no reajbnable ground for vengeance or punifhment ; becaufe there is no ra'/,' either negative or pofitive, done to another, to be revenged ; that is, there is no evil done to be the ground of revenge or pu- nifhment. Suppofe a man inattentively did a thing which terminated in his own hurt, when he intended it for his own good, and no kind of good was done thereby either to himfelf or others; and fuppofing he might eafily have dif- covered what would be the confequence of his action, if he had duly confidered the cafe; in this inftance his behaviour would be juftly dif- approveablc, becaufe no man ought in reafon to contribute needlefely to his own hurt, and becaufe every man ought in reafon to look for ward, and confider what will be the natural confequences of his actions. But then, as in this cafe the man's action terminated in his GWH hurt only, and no kind of injury was done, nor intended to be done to any other, nor in deed did he intend to do hurt to himfelf; therefore, I think, he cannot be the proper ob- jefit of vengeance or punimment to any other intelligent being ; his weakncfs, folly, or fin, Fa in
[ 44 ]
in this cafe would render him the objedl of pity rather than of punijhment. Such fin or mifbehaviour as denominates the finner, not bafe, but foolijh only, may render the agent worthy to be defpifed, worthy of contempt, but not of punifliment. In fine, a foolifo finner ', and a bafe> villainous finner^ are two different characters, and are worthy of different treat ment. For, as fin, in thefe different cafes, fprings from different caujes, and produces dif ferent effedts ; fo the former merits contempt only, and the latter both contempt and punjjh* went. And, if we confider God as the great governor of the intelligent and moral world, who will certainly aft fuitable to fuch a cha- radler $ then, moft certainly, he will execute vengeance upon none but fuch to whom ven geance and punifhment is truly and properly due. Again,
Man is fo conftituted, and in fuch circum- ftances, as that it is great odds but he will be unreafbnably injurious to others in fome inftances, even againft the general bent of his mind, and the tenor of his actions. For, as the appetites and paffions that take place in man, and are a part of the human conftitu- tion, are, in many cafes, the fprings of adtion j fo thofe appetites and pafiions are, fometimes, fo fuddenly andjirongly raifed, as that men are hurried on by them to do what is juftly blame- able and injurious to others, before their atten tion is called in to enable them to confider what they are doing ; this, I fay, is fometimes 3 the
[ 45 ]
the cafe. And, tho' men ought to confider irjty and a£l afterwards ; yet, as I faid before, it is great odds but in Ibme inftances the cafe will be otherwife with all men, nor can it well be expected that it will not. So that when a man through the weaknefs and frailty of na ture becomes in fome leffer inftances unreafon- ably injurious and hurtful to others, againft the general bent and difpofition of his mind, and the tenor of his actions, and as foon as he is come to himfelf is fenfible of, and forry for his mifbehaviour, and repairs the injury fo far as it is in his power, and makes his mifcarriage a reafon to himfelf to be more watchful of his behaviour in time to come, I fay, I think, fuch a finner cannot be the proper obj_e5l of divine revenge. For, tho' a man's fault, in fuch a cafe, when coniidered abjlrattedly from the circumftances which are fuppofed to attend it, that is, fuppofing thofe circumftances did not attend it, may render him the proper objedt of divine revenge ; yet when thofe circumftances do attend the cafe, then, I think, fuch a man would rather be the objeft of compaffion and mercy. And, were we to fuppofe that God would execute vengeance upon fuch offenders whofe faults are circumftanced as aforefaid, it would be the fame as to fuppofe that God does pot a<S according to re£litude> or the reafbn of things ; becaufe the reafbn of things does require that all circumjlances fhould be taken into the cafe, and that' the agent fhould be treated ac cordingly. I am fenfible it is a much higher
and
. .
and nobler character, and that it muft appear fo to the Deity, and therefore it may be diffe rently treated by him, for a man to pafs thro* the feveral ftages of life without offending at #//, than to offend under the foremen tioned cir- cumftances. But then, admitting this to be fojfible -, yet perhaps it has never been the cafe, nor can it well be expedted that it (hould, as I have already obferved. And, were fin, un der the forementioned circurnftances, made the ground of divine revenge j then mankind would be placed in a mod hazardous ftate, and it would have been much better for them never to have exifled, becaufe non-exijlence is certainly preferable to a ftate in which it would be ten thoufand to one againft a man, that is, it would be ten thoufand to one for his being doomed to a ftate of mifery, and he would fcarce have a chance for the contrary. This, iurely, would be a very great hardjhip upon mankind ; and fuch a conftitution of things, and fuch a conduct grounded upon it as is here fuppofed, would be the produce of great un- kindnefS) and would, moft certainly, be contrary to redtitude. ,
But then, if neither the foolijh Jinner^ that is, he whofe fin denominates him to be, not vicious, but weak and foolifli only, nor the in jurious Jinner, when his mifcarriages are cir- cumftanced as aforefaid, are the proper objedts of divine vengeance, the queftion ftill remains, who are ? And, the anfwer to this queftion, (to me;) is moft apparent ; viz. Thofe who
from
[47]
from an unreafonable felfiflmefs and bafenefi of mind, not only with-hold their hands from doing that good to others that they ought, but alfo vicioufly and cruelly contribute to their hurt; who from a vile difpofition affliSt and grieve their neighbours, by injuring them in their perfons, their characters, or their for tunes, without any juft ground; and who in troduce that evil and mifery into the world, which they ought, in reafon, according as they have power or opportunity, to prevent, or re move. Thefe men oppoje and frujlrate the gracious purpofe of our kind Creator in calling this world into being, by their becoming com mon enemies to the common good; thefe men are defignedly and deliberately injurious and hurt ful to the intelligent and moral world, and thereby render themfelves the proper objects of refentment to every intelligent being, and con- fequently to the Deity as fuch •> thefe are the men upon whom, in reafon and equity, evil ought to be retaliated, and to whom vengeance or punijlment is due. And tho' God cannot poflibly be a fufferer by the evil that is done to his creatures, and therefore none can be the objects of punifliment to him on that account ; yet, as the happinefs of his creatures was the great end of their creation, and in that refpect God is greatly interefted in their weal, or woe ; fo whoever defignedly oppofes and endeavours to frujlrate this grand defign, fuch men render themfelves the proper objefrls of divine revenge. And tho', in the execution of civil juftice, and
con-
..,..
confequently in the diftribution of civil re~ venge, the forementioned diftinffion may not always be made; becaufe civil governors, to whom the diftribution of civil revenge is com mitted, cannot in every cafe be able to difco- ver, whether the injury 'done refulted wholly from the infirmities and frailty of nature, and was circumftanced as aforefaid, or whether it was the refult of a baje and vicious mind j yet as God, who is the moft perfect intelligence, has a clear and perfect knowledge of every one's caie, fo he will certainly take every thing into the account, and deal with his creatures ac cordingly. And,
Here I beg leave to take notice of a vulgar error, (at leaft it appears fo to me) which has
Erevailed among Chriftians, viz. That man- ind became liable or fubjeft to death and mor tality thro* the^/&2 of our -fa ft parents ; whereas according to all the appearances of nature this was the cafe antecedent to, and independent of fuch fin. The whole vegetable and animal creation are in their own natures mortal, by, or from the original conftitution of things. Each fpecies of vegetables, whether produced from feed or other wife, receive nutriment, grow up and increafe, till they come to the higheft perfection their natures will admit, un der the circumftances in which each individual is placed ; and then they gradually decay, and come to a diffblution, either fooner or later, ac cording as that decay may be haftened by the circumftances which attend them. And, as it
is
[49] ^ V
is with the vegetable, fo it is with the animal creation $ each fpecies, whether produced from feed or otherwife, receive nutriment, grow up and increafe till they come to the higheft per fection their natures will admit, under the va rious circumftances in which each individual is placed ; and then they gradually decay, and come to a dijjolution, either fooner or later ac cording as that decay may be haftened by the circumftances which attend them. This is ap parently the cafe with refpect to the various fpecies of animals that inhabit this globe, of which the fpecies of mankind are a part, and from which, in this refpeffi, they do not ap pear to differ at all\ at leaft, this appears to be the cafe of all thofe fpecies of animals which come within the reach of human ob- fervation. So that had food been with-held from our firft parents for a long time, or had thofe fluids upon which the animal life de pends been totally ftagnated, or totally dif- charged from their bodies, even whilft in a ftate of innocence ; then death would unavoida bly have enfued, according to thofe fettled laws by which the animal creation has been go verned. Befides, as man was, by the original conftitution of things, defigned and qualified to increafe and multiply, fo mortality feems ne- ceffary to fuch a conftitution, that one genera tion might pafs away, in order to give place to another. For, had our firft parents and their pofterity been perpetuated in their original vi gorous ftate ; then the .increafe of mankind
G would
[50]
would have been fo great as that this glole could not long have been a proper habitation, nor afforded a fuitable provifion for them ; whereas if man is by, and from his original constitution a mortal creature, then the fore- mentioned inconvenience is fufficiently guarded againft. I am fenfible it is pretended that in a proper time each individual of our fpecies would have been tranjlated to fome other place in the univerfe, in order to make way for others to fucceed them here ; but then this is introducing one fuppofition that has no fort of evidence to fupport it, in order to make good another fuppofition which is equally infuppor- table.
I am alfo fenfible it may be urged that St. Paul taught this doctrine, viz. that all mankind became mortal through Adams tranfgreflion, as in i Cor. xv. 21, 22. For Jince by man came death, by man alfo came the refurreffiion from the dead. For as in Adam all die, even fo in Chrijl Jhall all be made alive. To which it may be anfwered, admitting St. Paul did teach this doctrine in the words refered to, and alfo that he taught this doctrine, viz. that man kind became or were made Jinners by Adams dijobedience, and were, upon that account, bound over to condemnation, as in Rom. xv. 18, 19. 'Therefore, as by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation -, even Jo, by the righteoufnefs of one, the free gift came upon all men unto jujtification of life. For as by one mans difohedience many were made fmners-, Jo
by
&v the obedience of one, fJjall many be made righ teous. I fay, admitting that bt. Paul taught thofe dodfrines in the words refered to, (which feems to he the cafe, at leaft the latter feems to be as plainly taught as the former) then the queftion will be, Whether St. Paul's authority is fufficient to build thofe doctrines upon, fee ing the latter is plainly repugnant to truth and reafon, and the former is contrary to all the obvious appearances of nature. What St. Paul grounded his fentiments upon, in the cafes re fered to, cannot certainly be determined. To fay that St. Paul received thofe doctrines by a fpecial revelation from God, or that he wrote his epiftles by divine infpiration, is faying what thofe who urge it have no authority for, have no evidence to fupport ; and if St. Paul did teach thofe doctrines, then this is a plain proof of the contrary ; becaufe it may fairly be pre- fumed that God has not, neither will he be the parent of any doctrines that are erroneous, and therefore not of thofe above-mentioned, which plainly appear to be fuch : I fay, which plainly appear to be fuch, that is, erroneous. For, as the former of thofe doctrines is con trary to all the obvious appearances of nature, and therefore is erroneous j fo the latter is con trary to truth and reafon, and is therefore er roneous. It is contrary to truth that Adams pofterity became or were made finners by Adams fin, becaufe fin is wholly perfonal, and cannot be transferred from one to another : and it is repugnant to rettitude to condemn one for G 2 the
[52]
the offence of another, and therefore it is what God will not do. Now if thofe dodtrines are erroneous, as they plainly appear to be, then we may well be affured that God has no way been concerned in the propagation of them.
And here, before I proceed, I think it pro per to ftate the notion of innocence^ in order to prevent its being over-valued. Innocence is, (if I may fo fpeak) a mean betwixt doing evil and doing goody or betwixt vice and virtue ; fimple innocence being neither. The former of theie, viz. doing evil juftly expofes to pu- nifoment) except the evil done be circumflanced as before-mentioned ; and the latter, viz. doing good merits reward ; whereas fimple innocence intitles to neither. If I, from a bafe and evil mind, take away the life of a man, which life ought to have been preferved ; by fuch an adtion I become injurious to the intelligent world, and juftly expofe myfelf to vengeance or puniflment. Again, if I fhould be an in- ftrument in Javing the life of a perfon, who had behaved properly in fociety, and therefore ought to live, which life I was not particularly interefted in, by this I fhould become a bene- fattor to the intelligent world, and the intelli gent world would become in reafon obliged gratefully to return the kindnefs when power and opportunity ferve, which return of kind nefs is properly called reward. But if I do neither of theie, it not having been in my power to have done the latter, then I am inno* cent with refped to the former, that is, I am
not
... _
I ; [S3] ' _
not guilty of murder ; which innocence, as it hath nothing of evil in it which would juftly expofe me to vengeance or punifliment, fo it hath nothing of good in it which would render xne worthy of recompence or reward. And tho' (as I have already obferved) God cannot receive either good or 'evil from his creatures, and therefore they cannot be to him the proper cbjeffs of reward or punifhment on that ac count ; yet, as God called this world into be ing on purpofe that his intelligent creatures might tafte pleafure of various kinds, and be made happy thereby, and in that refpect he is interefted in their weal or woe ; fo whoever kindly promotes^ or bafely difappoints that end, does thereby render himfelf the proper objeff of divine reward, or divine punimment : whereas in all thofe parts of a man's conduct, in which he is innocent only, or in which he has done neither good, nor evil to others, * he cannot poffibly be the proper object of either. Upon the whole I obferve, that as the doing good, or the doing evil to others, are the only proper grounds for rewards and punimments, whether thefe be confidered as private, or publick, as human, or divine; fo furely fimple innocence, in which neither of thefe take place, cannot be a proper foundation for either. But to re turn,
Having
* When a man does good or evil to himfelf, as he only is interefted in that good or evil ; fo the action itfelf car ries with it its own reward or its own punifhment, and that I think is all which, in reafoa and equity, the cafe require?.
[54] i
Having before (hewed what it is which ren ders a creature the proper objeff of divine ven geance, I now proceed to enquire whether there is any thing in nature that can render fuch a creature the proper cbjett of mercy. And firft, let it be admitted for argument's lake, that there is nothing in nature which can •render fuch a creature the proper object of .mercy, in order to fee how the cafe will ftand upon that fuppofition. And if this be admit ted, viz. that when a creature has rendered himfelf the proper object of divine revenge, there is nothing in nature which can render that creature the proper object of mercy ; then the confequence is clear, viz. that God will not {hew mercy to fuch a creature ; he will not remit neither in whole nor in part that pitnifo- ment his fins have juilly expofed him to, but will execute vengeance to the full according as his crimes deferve. I fay this will be the cafe, becaufe this is following nature, and acting properly \ whereas were God to act otherwife, that is, were he to fliew mercy to a creature which is not the proper object of mercy, but of vengeance and punifliment, it would be altogether as prepojlerou^ and as contrary to rectitude, as it would be for him to love a creature who is the proper object of his hatred. Again, let it be admitted on the other fide, that when a creature has rendered himfelf the proper object of divine revenge, there is fome- thing in nature which will render that creature the proper object of mercy ; I fay$ let this be
admitted
[ 55]
admitted in order to fee how the cafe will ftand upon this fuppofition. And if this be admit ted, then when fuch a creature has rendered himfelf the proper object of mercy, God will moft certainly {hew mercy to that creature ; I fay, this will certainly be the cafe ; becaufe this would be following nature, and acYmg properly, whereas were God to act otherwife, that is, were God to with-hold his mercy from a creature who had rendered himfelf the pro per object of mercy, this would be as pre- pofterous, and as contrary to rectitude, as it would be for God to hate the creature who had rendered himfelf the proper object of his love. This, I think, is as plain and evident in morals, as any proportion in mathematicks can be. By mercy, in this cafe, I mean the remitting that punifhment in whole or in part which the offender had juftly expofed himfelf to. Not to (hew mercy to a creature who has rendered himfelf the proper object of mercy, is to be unmerciful ; which is contrary to recti tude, and is juftly blameable. To be unmer ciful is to with- hold mercy when, and 'where mercy ought to be {hewn, which is the pre- ient cafe.
But then, if it be admitted that there is fomething in nature which will render fuch an. offender, as is here refered to, the proper ob ject of mercy, the queftion will be what that fomething is ? Whether it be fomething inhe rent in him, or whether it be fomething external to him : And, in order to find Jathfaclory an-
fwers
[56]
Avers to thefe queftions, it will be neceflary to enquire what it is, which is the true ground of divine revenge ? Whether it be fomething in herent in the creature, or fomething external to him ? I fay, this is abfolutely neceffary to be enquired into, becaufe it is the removing or taking away the grounds of divine revenge, which muft make way for, and which can only render fuch a creature the proper objeffi of mercy ; for ofherwife that creature will con- tinue to be the proper object of revenge, un til vengeance has been fully fatisfied. But this I have enquired into already, and have {hewn what it is which renders a creature the proper object of divine revenge ; namely, it is oppofing the great end of creation, by becoming a com mon enemy to the common good, from an habitual bafenefs or vilenefs of mind ; I fay, from an habitual bafenefs or vilenefs of mind, becaufe the evil actions refered to muft not be conlidered abftractedly from the bad dijpofition. they fpring from, feeing that difpoiition deno minates and conftitutes them to be what they are, viz. evil affiiom in a moral fenfe, and fee ing it is the evil difpofition of mind thofe ac tions fpring from, which renders the agent the proper objeff of divine revenge. And as the true and only ground of divine vengeance is internal and perfonal-, fo of neceffity the true and only ground of the divine mercy muft be internal and perjbnal alib; becaufe it is the taking away of the former, which is the ground or reafon of the latter^ as I have al- 2 * ready
C. [57]
ready obferved. And as the doing good and the doing evil, which are thb only proper grounds of reward and punifliment, are both perjonal, and cannot be iransfered to another ; fo it is apparently contrary to rectitude to affliff me for the offerees of another, or to (hew mer cy to one for the virtues of another, this being to act greatly improper in either cafe. He that does evil from an evil difpofition, does thereby juftly expofe himfelf, and himfelf only, to pu- nijhment ; arid were evil to be inflicted on an other upon that account, fuch evil would be in- Sided from an improper motive, and without znyjujl ground, and therefore would be wrong. In like mariner, he that does good from a Vir tuous or good difpofition of mind, does thereby render himfelf, and himfelf only, worthy of re- 'compence or reward; and were mercy fhewri to one on the account of, and by way of re turn for the good done by another, this Would be (hewing mercy to that perfdn from ari im proper motive, and without any juft ground, and therefore would be wrong alfo. And, as the ground of divine mercy mud of neceffity be internal and perfonal ; fo the queftion be fore us is, what it is in nature which can be the ground of that mercy ? But this branch o£ the fubject I have already largely confidered, in my Enquiry concerning the ground and foundation of religion, (to which I refer my feader) and therefore I (hall here only ttan* fcribe what I have there offered as the furrt o£ argument
it M
cc cc
.
I have already obferved, that punifhment is relative to guilt, the latter of thefe being " the ground and foundation of the former. I " have likewiie obferved, that actions derive <c their guilt, not from their effeds and con- <e fequences, but from their caufes ; that is, <c from thofe evil or vicious difpofitions of " mind, which are the ground and caufe of cc them. I have further obferved, that when " once guilt is contracted, it can never be " taken away j that is, when once an evil ac- " tion has been committed, that adlion can- " not be undone, nor can it ever be otherwife " but an evil a ft ion, and confequently, the *c perfpn who committed it muft continue to ic have fcen guilty of that evil adion to all " eternity, at leaft, fo long as he {hall con- " tinue to exift. And this is the cafe upon " all Jchemes> whether the criminal fuiFers the " punifhment his crime deferves, or whether " we admit the abfurd fuppofition of another's *c fuffering in his ftead, or whether his punifli- " ment be remitted, in whole, or in part. " But then, thoJ an evil adlion cannot be un- " donc^ but muft continue to have been com- <c mitted to all eternity ; yet that evil difpofi- " tion of mind out of which it fprang, (and " which denominates and conftitutes it to be e an evil adlion in a moral ienfe) may be put c away, and when that is the cafe, then he c that before was the proper objett of puniih- <c ment, by this, ceafes to be'fuch, and be- cc comes thereby the proper objett of mercy.
" For
.[59] , . ,
<e For as in things natural, take away the cc caufe, and the effedl •will ceafe j fo in things <c moral, take away the caufe, and the effed: <c ought to ceafe. A man in a ftate of fo- " verty is the proper objeft of relief, and " therefore ought to be relieved : but then, " take away the caufe, and the effedt ought to <c ceafe ; that is, change his circumftances, by «c putting him into a ftate of plenty, and then <c he f4$J to be the proper objed of relief, <c and therefore ought not to be relieved. In <c like manner, a man who, from a wicked <c difpofition of mind, has been guilty of a <c wicked adion, becomes thereby the proper <c objeft of punifhment : but then, take away <c the caufe, and the effeft ought to ceafe ; that <c is, change his circumftances by removing <c that wicked difpofition of mind which took cc place in him, and which was the c'auje of " his miitbehaviour, and then he ceajes to be <c the proper objecft of punifhmeht, and be- <c comes thereby the proper objeft of mercy. " For when the grounds of refentment and <c punifhment ceafe, which is the cafe here, " then, in reafon and equity, refentment and " puni(hment ought to ceafe alfo. And it would " be the fame abfurd conduft, to punt/b a man after he is become a penitent, for his having before been guilty of an evil adion, as it would be to relieve a man in a ftate of plen ty, for his having before been in a ftate of poverty. This change of circumftances in an offender, changes his cbaraffcr and relations. H 2 " For,
<c <c <c
[6o]
*< For, whilft he was under the power of f< clous affeftions, and was difpofed to gratify, e< and did gratify them to the publick hurt, <c he was then an evil and vicious creature^ " and an enemy to the intelligent and moral cc world, and, as fuch, was the proper cbje^l of refentment and puniminent. But when he became changed as aforcfaid, he then ceafed to be that evil or vicious creature, and is become virtuous and good, (or at leaft he is prepared and difpofed to be fo) he is <c no longer an enemy > but is (or is difpofed to : be) a friend and a benefactor to the intelli- " gent world as far as it is in his power, and, c as fuchj he is no longer the proper object of cc refentment and puniflment, but is become by " the forementioned change, the proper objefit " of companion and mercy. So that if the cc Deity will follow nature, and be guided by " it, (which he moft certainly will) then he cc muft deal with fuch a creature according to " what he is, and not according to what he " has been -, he muft deal with hirn not as an " offender confidered Jimply as fuch, which E would render him the proper objedl of pu- ?c niftment, this not being his whole character *, *' but he mqft and will treat him as a penitent " offender, that being his whole character, and fc the present ftate of his cafe, and, as fuch, •* he is the proper objett of God's mercy. To " fay, in this cafe, that the penitent offender 'c Jlill continues to have been guilty of the 4£ crimes he has committed, and therefore, he
cc ought
** ought to be punijhed, this is weakly urged ; «e becaufe, (as I have already obferved) that is ce the cafe upon all fchemes, and therefore it cc ought not to be urged here ; and is the fame " kind of reafoning as to fay, that the man " who has been in a ftate of poverty, tho' his " circumftances are changed, and he is now " in a ftate of plenty 5 yet he Jtill continues to <c be the man who has been in a ftate of po- <c verty, and therefore Jl'ill ought to be relie- fc ved ; the weaknefs of which, I think, ap- <c pears at firft fight. From what I have ob- cc ferved, I think, my readers cannot avoid feeing what it is which renders men, who have, by their greatly departing from that rule of action they ought to be governed by, rendered themfelves juflly difpleafing to their Maker ; I fay, I think, my readers cannot avoid feeing what it is which will render fucb offenders the proper objects of God's mer cy ; and confequently will be the ground of " the divine mercy to them. Namely, it is " paffing through fucb a change^ which, (to " fpeak in the figurative language of the New " Teftament) is called a being born again \ be- " coming a new creature , being created anew " in, or according to Chrift Jefus; and the <c like. Whatever offender paffes through this " change, he thereby ceafes to be the proper ob- ' jett of punifliment, and becomes the proper objefl of mercy 5 and therefore, we may be aflured, he will moft certainly obtain it at
cc cc
" God's hand."
I
.
I am fenfible, that what I have before laid down is not admitted by a to? ingenious writer on this fubject, who, tho' he allows that peni tence renders the offender the proper object of mercy ; yet were God to {hew mercy to him, it would be to aft contrary to rectitude, and therefore that cannot be the cafe. This, I pre- fume, it will be expected I {hould take notice of, in order to do jiiftice to the fubjeffi before me. The author has obferved, that were God to fhew mercy to the penitent offender, this would be treating penitence and innocence alike; which as they are different characters, that re quire different treatment, • fo to treat them alike muft be contrary to reffitude. To this I beg leave to add, that were God to punifh the pe- 'nitent offender, this would be treating penitence and impenitence alike ; which as they are diffe rent characters, (much more different than pe nitence and innocence) that require different treatment, fo to treat them alike muft be con trary to rectitude alfo. The latter of thefe ob- fervations, I think, is as jujl as informer, and both of them together feem to bring the Deity under this dilemma, viz. that he muft aft con trary to reftitude, let him act which way he will. For, if God (hews mercy to the peni tent, then he acts contrary to rectitude, by treating penitence and innocence alike ; or if \\tpunijljes the penitent, then he alfo acts con trary to rectitude, by treating penitence and impenitence alike, and this makes the cafe look ahnoft defperate. , However, I am not altoge ther
63
ther without hope of clearing the divine con- dud: of this difficulty.
And, in order thereto, I obferve, that to ad mit the fuppofition, that it is contrary to rec titude for God to ihew mercy to the proper objeds of mercy, is greatly abfurd. To love the proper objeds of love, and to bate the pro per objeds of hatred, is not only agreeable with reditude, but is really reffitude itfelf. In like manner, to {hew mercy to the proper ob jedls of mercy, is fo far from being contrary to reditude, that it is perfectly agreeable with it ; yea, it is rectitude itfelf. And tho', in this cafe, penitence and innocence are treated alike ^ yet it will not follow, that penitence is treated otherwife than it ought to be. By being treated alike, in the prefent cafe, muft be meant being put upon the fame foot with regard to God's favour; becaufe otherwife they are not treated alike, feeing penitence is forgiven, whereas in nocence is not, nor does it Jland in need vi for- givenefs. I have already obferved, that inno cence is a mean betwixt doing evil and doing good) or betwixt virtue and vice ; that as it does not expofe a man to any punijbment, fo neither does it entitle a man to any reward-, fimple innocence therefore in point of morality is a mere negative; it does neither evil nor good, and rifes no higher than bare exigence. I farther obferve, that penitence, tho' it entitles the penitent perfon to a difcharge from punijh* ment, that is, it renders him worthy of fiich a difcharge ; yet it does not entitle him to, or
render
. ..
render him worthy of any reward. For, if any reward comes into the cafe, that reward arifes wholly from the virtue that was previous to penitence, or confequent upon it. By reward here is meant fome pojitive goody and not for- givenefs or a difcharge from punifhment, which penitence is here fuppofed to render the peni tent offender worthy of. And, as by penitence a creature is born again into a ftate of inno cence, that is, innocence for the time prefent^ tho' not for the time paft ; fo their affinity in this refpeft renders it proper, that they fliould be treated alike* Penitence changes a bad man into a good man, at leaft it puts him into a ftate in which he is as much dijpofed to good- nefs, as if he were in a ftate of innocence^ that is, as if he had never tranfgreffed. Yea^ perhaps more, becaufe, (according to the pro verb, A burnt child dreads the fire,} the peni tent is more likely to be upon his guardy than if he were in a ftate of innocence, feeing he has experienced the fad effefts of the contrary. And this obfervation ieems to be juftified by the conduct of our^yfry? parents when in a ftate of innocence, than which, furely, none were ever more eajily betrayed into folly than they, when in their innocent ftate. However, I think, it may juftly be faid, that penitence does as much difpofe a man to virtue and good- nefs as innocence, and as fuch they are alike the objects of God's favour, and as they are to make their fortunes as their future virtue (hall deferve, fo furely the putting them upon 'fuch
afoot cannot be contrary to redlitude. tho' the penitent perfon has contracted guilt, which the innocent perfon has not ; and tho' penitence does not, nor cannot undo what has been done, it cannot annihilate guilt wheu once contracted ; yet it can and does remove from the guilty perfon, thofe evil or vicious difpojitions which were the ground and caufe of guilt ; it can and does render the offender the proper object of mercy ; it can and does rejlore the guilty perfon to aftate, which to all intents and purpofes is the fame as innocence, or at leaft is equal in' value to it. And,
Here I beg leave to obferve, that in com mon language we often fpeak of the qualities, or properties of action, as if they were real fubftances ; and of what is paft, as if it were prefent. Thus, we fay that guilt cannot be annihilated^ whereas guilt being only the non conformity of adtion to reffitude, or to that rule which adtion ought to be conformed to, refult- ing from a bafe and evil mind as its ground and caufe, it is not the fubjedl of annihilation. And thus, we fpeak of guilt zsprefent, whereas when the guilty adtion ceajes, the guilt or non- conformity of that adlion to its rule ceafes with it. It would be equally as abfurd to fuppofe, that when an action ceajes, the guilt (which is only a property) of that adlion continues, as it would be to fuppofe, that when a fpherical body ceafes, the Jphericalnejs (which is only a mode or property) of that body remains : whereas the truth is, that as when a fpherical
I body
[66]
body is annihilated, faznfphericalnefs, and eve ry other property of that body ceafes with it ; fo when an action cea/es, then guilt, and every other property of that adtion ceafes alfo. And therefore, when a man has once been guilty of murder, tho' it will be for ever true that he has, or did once contract the guilt of murder, that he has been, or was guilty of murder, and that he has been, or was a murderer ; yet it will not be for ever after true, that he is contraff- ing the guilt of murder, or that he is a mur derer ; becaufe when the murderous attion cea- fed, then the murder, or the non- conformity of that adlion to redtitude ceafed alfo. But then, tho* guilt is as inftantaneous as the aEtlon it ftands related to ; yet the propriety and fitnefs of puniflring the agent who has contracted it, remains, until he bas Juffered the puniftitnent his crime deierves, or has by his repentance difcharged himfelf from thofe vicious difpofi- tions, which were the ground and caufe of his guilt ; and when either of thefe take place, he then ceafes to be the proper objedt of punifh- ment ; becaufe by the former a juft refentmerit is fully fatisfied, and by the latter the grounds of that refentment are removed, fo that in ei ther cafe the propriety and fitnefs of punifhing ceafes.
But then it may be urged, that I have ufed the term innocence in a fenfe different from what it is ufed by the author I refer to, who intends by it pcrfeft virtue, as is evident when we take into the account all that he has faid
upon
upon the fubject. To which it may be an- fwered, firji, That perfect virtue, perhaps, is 2ijiate that none of our fpecies have attained to, and if fo, then perfect virtue does not come into the cafe. Man is fo conftituted, as that perfect virtue cannot reafonably be expected from him, feeing it is more than ten thoujand to one that he will do amifs, in fome inftan- ces, through the infirmities and frailties of na ture. Neverthelefs, when a man retains ///<:£ a rectitude of mind, as not to contract any vi cious difpofitions, and behaves properly through the general courfe of his life, and in thofe in- ftances in which he does amifs through inat tention and the weaknefs of nature, as foon as becomes to himfelf he is fenfiblp of, and forry for his mifconduct, and makes' his mifcarriage a reafon to himfelf to be more watchful of his behaviour in time to come ; I fay, not- withflanding fuch a man affs wrong, in fome inftance ; yet he behaves as well as the prefent constitution of things will admit, and as may reafonably be expected that he fhould ; and therefore he will moft certainly be approved of God. And, tho' fuch a man does not attain to perfeff virtue ; yet he does not need that repentance which vicious men do, becaufe all the repentance he is capable of, and which his cafe requires, attends upon, and tallies with his guilt. And, if perfect virtue is not attainable by mankind, then, I think, it is out of the queftion. But farther, if it be admitted that fome one or more of our fpecies have attained I 2 to
[68] ;. |
to perfect virtue, or admitting it might be the Caie, or fuppofing it were, then it may be an- fwered, fecondly, That the (hewing mercy to pe nitent offenders, is not treating penitence and perfed: virtue alike, becaufe penitence only en titles to au exemption from punijhment, whereas perfect virtue entitles to a reward fuitable to the meafiire of that virtue which is to be re warded ; and this, furely, is very far from treating penitence and perfedt virtue alike.
I am fenfible it has been urged, that this is considering the penitent abftrattedly from his crimes; whereas he is to be confidered in his complex ch'arader, viz. not barely as a peni tent, but as a penitent offender ; and that rec titude requires he mould be treated according to that complex character, which is the truth of his cafe. To which it may be anfwered, That this is groundlefily urged, becaufe the ideas of penitence and guilt are injeparable in the prefent cafe. The idea of guilt is evidently contained in the idea of penitence, as repen tance neceffarily fuppofes an offence committed, which is repented of ; fo that where there is repentance, there muft have been guilt, and where there has not been guilt, there can be no repentance ; that is, there can be no place for it, becaufe there is nothing to be repented of. Again, the idea of guilt is alfo contained in the idea of mercy or forgivenejs, as forgivenefs ne ceffarily fu-ppofes an offence committed, which is< forgiven ; fo that where there is mercy or for givenefs. there muft have been guilt, and
where
[69] :
where there has been no guilt, there can be no forgivenefs ; that is, there can be no place for it, becaufe there is nothing to be forgiven. And, indeed, the thing itfelf requires that pe nitence and guilt fhould be confidered as con- netted \ becaufe it is this complex character only which is the objett of mercy. For, could peni tence be confidered abftradtedly from guilt, (which nature does not admit) then forgivenefs would be excluded, becaufe there is nothing in penitence to be forgiven : fo that it is not pe nitence confidered abftra&edly, but penitence connected with guilt, which renders a creature the objedr. of mercy. In fine, the cafe in mo rals, I think, ftands thus; Jimple innocence is a mere negative, it neither expofes to punifh- rnent, nor entitles to a reward ; guilt confi dered abjlrattedly renders a perfon the objedt of punifoment ; guilt connected with penitence ren ders a perfon the objeft of mercy -, virtue ren ders a perfon the objed of, or worthy of re- ward; and to a<5l agreeably, in the diftribution of thefe, is to aft right, or according to the truth of each one's cafe ; or, in other words, according to moral reftitude. Thus, I think, I have fully cleared the character and conduct of the Deity from that great diftrefs and diffi culty it feemed to labour under.
And, as I have removed, or at leaft have at tempted to remove the forementioned difficul ty -y fo I (hall take the liberty to confider what the 'worthy and ingenious author I refer to, has
offered for that purpofe. And, in order to make way for what the author has urged in the prefent cafe, he introduces another cafe as jimilar to it. In the former God is confidered as difpenfing to his creatures natural evils ; and in the latter as difcharging them from fuch evils. The former regards thofe evils which be- fel, or at leaft which are fuppofed to have befallen mankind, upon the mifbehaviour of our firil parents in eating the forbidden fruit, namely, mortality, and a depravation of human nature upon the whole fpecies. The latter not only regards a difcharge from thole evils infli&ed as above, but alib a difcharge from that condem nation mens fins have expofed them to.
With regard to the former, the author al lows, that as Adams fin was perjbnal, fo his pofterity, who were then not born, could not poffibly be involved in the guilt of it ; and confequently could not be worthy of correction on that account. So that had Almighty God difpenfed thofe evils to mankind on account of Adams tranfgreflion, this would be contrary to rectitude ; becaufe it would be afflicting a mul titude for the offence of one, which offence they were no way guilty of, nor acceffary to. And therefore, to keep clear of this difficulty, the author confiders the great evils which befel mankind upon Adams fin to be natural grie vance^ that came upon Adams pofterity, not by way of punijhment for his fin, but only as natural confequences thereof. Upon which I oblerve, that the evils beforementioned arejit/l i the
I,. .. [71]
the fame, whether they be confidered as pu- nifhments for Adam's fin, or only as natural confequences thereof, they are equally the fame in them/elves, and equally the fame to thofe who bear them, and, I imagine, that the cha racter and conduct of the Deity are equally af fected thereby. The firft man, when he came out of his Maker's hand, is fuppofed by our author to be naturally Immortal ; and that he had no inclination or propenfity to fin. But then, Adams body, and alfo the fruit which grew upon the tree of knowledge, were^S con- Jlituted, as that the latter, when it had paffed into the former^ naturally introduced fo great a change in the human conftitution, as that from an immortal, Adam became a mortal crea ture, and likewife all his numberleis po/ierity. And not only fo, but the effect of this fruit was fuch, when it had pafled into Adams body, as that it naturally introduced a depravation of the human nature ; through which depravation all our fpecies became difpofed, and were under a jlrong propenfity to fin. By this bias in the conftitution, tho* man's agency was not de- ftroyed; yet the cafe of every individual of our fpecies became exceeding hazardous, in as much as it was great odds that every one, in fome inftances, would be betrayed into Jiny and confequently into future mijery thereby. So that in, and by the difpenfation of the fore- mentioned natural grievances, (as our author' calls them) mankind were, not only cut off from the perpetual enjoyment of the blefiings
of
[72]
of this world, but alfo were fo expofed to thd miferies of another, as that there was fcarce a poffibility of efcaping them. But then, were this the truth of the cafe, (which furely it is not) fuch a conftitution of things muft be greatly defective, and greatly contrary to the divine reditude. For, as man is by, and from his make and conftitution an accountable crea ture; fo reftitude requires that he fhould be equally dealt with, and that he ftiould havey^/r flay for his life ; but if men are called into be ing under the forementioned difficulties and di fad van i:ages, having fuch a bias in their con- ftitutions as naturally and almofl unavoidably leads them to fin, and in confequence thereof to future mifery, of which it may juftly be queftioned, whether one of our fpecies has efcaped, feeing, as St. James faith, that in many things <we offend all ; I lay, if this be the cafe, which according to our author it is ; then fuch a conftitution of things muft be greatly contrary to rettitude \ and then, as mankind are very unfairly and unequally dealt with, fo the difadvantages they are born un der are equally injurious to them, and equally dishonourable to God, whether they be confi- dered as penal upon, or only as confequence s of Adams tranfgreffion. And fuppofing thofe e- vils to be more than balanced by the benefits that accrue to mankind in and through a re deemer; yet what is this more, or otherwife than breaking the head, and then giving a plai- Jler to heal it ; or the being greatly cruel, in
order
i . ' [ 73 ] :
order to make way for the exercife of mercy* But then, that mankind became mortal, and that human nature became depraved, confe- quent upon Adams fin, thefe doctrines are con tradicted by all the obvious appearances of na ture > and confequently the divine condudt in the produ&ion of the prefent conflitution of things, ftands clear of what has been thus un- juftly charged upon it.
Having thus confidered what our author has offered as introductory to what he had to urge^ in order to remove the forementioned difficul ty, I now come to confider what he has urged^ for that purpofe. The difficulty refered to a- rifes from hence^ viz. our author has obferved, that were God to fliew mercy to penitent offend ers, whom he allows to be the objects of mercy , this would be treating penitence and innocence alike y which as they are different characters j that call for different treatment, fo to treat them alike muft be contrary to re&itude. To which I have added, that were God to punifh penitent offenders, this would be treating peni- ( tence and impenitence alike \ which as they are different characters, (much more different than penitence and innocence) that call for dif ferent treatment, fo to treat them alike muft be contrary to rectitude alfo. Here we fee, that in the prefent cafe, the Deity feems to be fur- rounded with difficulty on every fide ; the kind afliftance which our author has offered to help him out, I come now to confider. The ex pedient which our author has found out for K removing
[74]
removing the aforefaid difficulty, is by intro ducing a redeemer into the cafe; tho', by the way, the term redeemer muft be ufed in a very remote, improper, or figurative fenfe ; be- caufe when that term is ufed properly, it is not applicable to the cafe before us, feeing the cafe in hand no way tallies with a literal redemp tion. But admitting the term, which in the prefent cafe is merely nominal, the queftion will be, how is the forementioned difficulty re moved by a redeemer ? And the anfwer, in a few words, (without meddling with the flou- rifies and decorations of our author's argument) I think, is this, namely, that the redeemer has done and fuffered fuch things, as have merited greatly at the hands of God, which merit God has rewarded the redeemer for, in a way that terminates in the good both of the redeemed and the redeemer ; in the good of the redeemed by their Jins being pardoned -, and in the good of the redeemer by the pleajure and fatisfa&ion that arifes to him from a fenfe of penitent of fenders being forgiven, and of his having ob tained that forgivenefs for them. This is the way in which God pardons penitent offenders, according to our author, which he thinks is agreeable with rectitude ; and thus he thinks the forementioned difficulty is removed-, tho', I think, a little attention to the fubject will plainly ihew the contrary, upon our author's principles.
. Our author lays it down as a fundamental Principle in morals, that every creature muft
be
I .-..; .'. [75]
be dealt with acccording to his true character \ whether that character be Jimple or compound ed-, and to aft otherwife is contrary to re£li- tude. And feeing penitent offenders fuftain a double or complex character compounded of guilt and penitence ', and innocence is a Jimple uncompounded character, this difference of courie calls for different treatment 3 and therefore to treat penitence, (that is, penitence connected with guilt,) and innocence alike, muft be con trary to re%itudey according to the fundamen tal principle before laid down. Upon which I obferve, that if rectitude requires that every creature mould be treated according to his true character, and if the having been guilty is a part of the character of a penitent offender, as moft certainly it is, and if pardoning the penitent is contrary to re&itude as our author maintains, becaufe it is treating penitence and innocence alike -, then from hence it will una voidably follow, that it will be for ever con trary to reQitude for God to pardon a guilty perfon, whether penitent, or impenitent ; be caufe the having been guilty will for ever be a part of his character. For let whatever cir- cumftances take place; yet as thofe circum- ftances cannot poffibly alter the guilty perfon's character, but leave him]u& as they found him in that refped, viz. a guilty perfon ; fo they cannot poflibly alter the divine conduct with refpedt to him, fuppofing God to aft agreeably with rettitude. It will be for ever true^ that a perfon has been guilty of thofe faults which
K 2 he
.
he has been guilty of, and this wilier ever be bis true character, or at leaft a part of it j and therefore it will always be unfit, (let what will take place) for God to pardon him, becauie that will be treating guilt (whether connected with penitence, or impenitence) and innocence alike, which is contrary to reffitude, upon the principles before laid down ; fo that the intro ducing a redeemer makes no alteration in the- cafe. And therefore, admitting that the me rits of a redeemer were a thoujand fold greater than they are, fuppofing fuch a thing could be ; as thofe merits have no conneftion with, nor relation to the guilt of any foreign agent, nor is the character of any guilty perfon in the leaft altered thereby ; fo he cannot poffibly re ceive any benefit from them, becaufe redtitude requires that he fhould be dealt with, not ac cording to the merits and true character of another, but according to the truth and reality of his own cafe.
Befides, the merits of a redeemer cailnot poflibly alter the nature of things, they cannot turn wrong into right, where the fubjedt con tinues the fame, which is the prefent cafe. And therefore, to fuppofe that God would pardon penitent offenders by way of reward for the merits of a redeemer, is the fame as to fuppoie that God would do evil that good tnight come of it \ that God would do what is morally evil, that natural good may accrue thereby, both to the redeemer, and the re- teemed. To pardon penitent offenders is de clared
. . .
dared to be contrary to retfitude, that is, it is morally evil-, and if fo, then we may be af- fured this is what God w7/ not do, to anfwer tf#y, even the bejl of purpofes. For, tho' God will moft certainly reward the merits of a re deemer ', and of every other per/on ; yet, furely, he will do it in a way that is perfectly agreea ble with reftitude, and not in a way that is contrary thereto, which the pardoning penitent offenders is profeffed and declared to be. And, tho' a redeemer cannot but approve of, and be pleafed 'with the repentance and forgivenefs of finners, this being the cafe of every gracious mind, there being joy in heaven, joy in the pre- fence of the angels of God over one Jinner that repenteth, and much more over multitudes that do fo ; yet, furely, fuch pleafure cannot, with any propriety, be called a reward, becaufe in faft it is not fo. The pleafure and fatisfadtion that arifes to every good mind from a fenfe of penitent offenders being forgiven, is moft ap parently the effeft and confequence of fuch for givenefs, and not the ground and reafon of it ; and, the introducing the term redeemer, which is merely nominal, makes no alteration in the cafe. Nor is the redeemer's merits rewarded by God's pardoning penitent offenders ; for if that were the cafe, then the merits of one, would be rewarded in the perfons of others, which our author does not admit, becaufe it is contrary to redtitude. However, to fave appearances, the pardoning penitent offenders muft be called rewarding the merits of a re deemer.
[78]
cleemer, tho' ever fo improper, and then all looks fair and well: like as in the foremen- tioned cafe, the great evils that are fuppofed to befal mankind upon the tranfgreffion of our firft parents, if thofe evils are confidered as afflictions laid upon our fpecies on account of Adams Jin, this is not to be admitted, becaufe it is contrary to reftitude ; but then, conjure thofe evils into a confequence of Adams tranf- grejjion and all is right. From what I have obferved, I think, it appears, that our author, inflead of removing the forementioned diffi culty, has rather perplexed and dijlreffed the fubjedl.
As to our author's Jimilitude, of an earthly monarch pardoning his rebellious penitent fub- jefts, at the requejt, and on account of the merits of the prince his fon ; this is a covering too narrow to hide the nakednefs of his argu ment. For, either thofe penitent rebels were the proper objeffis of the king's mercy and for- givenefs independent of the interceffion and me rits of the prince, or they were not. If they were, then, the cafe is clear, that it was jit and proper for the king to forgive them exclu- Jive of all otherconfiderations ; becaufe other- wife he would not a<ft properly by them, nor as their cafe required. If they were not the proper objedts of the king's mercy and forgive- nefs independent of the interceffion and merits of the prince, then the cafe is as clear, that it 'would be unfit for the king to (hew mercy to them, even tho' he was importuned to do it
by
• :, [79] i
by a Jon who had merited greatly at his hands ; becaufe to forgive them would be to ad: impro perly by them, and otherwife than their cafe required. And were the king to ad: improper- ly, by fhewing mercy to thofe who were not the proper objeds of mercy from fuch motives, this would be an inftance of great iveaknefs ; but then, to attribute fuch weaknejs to God is moft intolerable, (I am forry to fay it, for the worthy author's fake.) To tack about here, and fay, that thofe rebels were the proper ob- jeffs of the king's mercy, is to exclude the in- terceffion and merits of the prince out of the cafe ; becaufe then it would be right and Jit for the king to pardon thofe penitent rebels, be caufe they are penitent rebels, exclujive of all other confiderations. I will only add, that to play at cups and balls in morals, is of dangerous confequence ; as it tends to baffle and mijlead, not the external fenfes, but the intellectual and reafoning faculties of mankind. But to re turn.
I have before (hewn what it is which ren ders a creature the proper objeff of divine ven geance ; and alfo \vhat it is which renders Juch a creature the proper objeft of God's mercy ; to which, I here add, that the being the pro per objed of mercy is, and muft be the only ground or reafon to the Deity for {hewing mer cy in any inftance, becaufe were God to (hew mercy upon any other account, or from any other ground than the creatures being the pro per object of mercy, he would then ad: impro perly,
8o
iyj or contrary to redtitude, which cannot, or rather which will not be the cafe. All therefore that remains is to enquire how, or in what fenfe the terms redeemer, and redemption are applicable to the cafe before us -, and parti cularly what is to be underftood by them when applied to the Chriftian redemption. I have al ready obferved, that in a literal redemption with refpecfl to perfons, (if I may be allowed to exprefs myfelf thus) there muft be a lite ral flaw or a perfon in a ftate of literal fla- very to a literal mafter, and alfo a literal price or valuable confideration paid by a literal re deemer, to that literal mafter, in order to pur- chafe a literal redemption to that literal cap tive. So that when thofe terms redemption, and redeemer are applied to the cafe before us, they cannot be taken in a literal fenfe, but muft of neceffity be ufed in a loofe, improper, or figurative fenfe. The cafe, I think, ftands thus. As in a literal redemption, the perfon who is redeemed, is delivered from a great evil, viz. a ftate of fiavery, which deliverance is properly called redemption ; fo in the prefent cafe, the offender is alfo delivered from a great evil, viz. from that condemnation which by the juft judgment of God he was bound over to, which deliverance may alfo by a figure of fpeech be called redemption. And as in a lite ral redemption, he who pays the price, which is the ground of the captive's deliverance, is properly called the fiave's redeemer \ fo in the prefent cafe, he who is inflrumental, in bring ing
., 8l
ing a flnner to that repentance and reformation of his evil afFe<5tions and actions, which is the ground of God's mercy to him, may alfo by a like figure ofjpeecb be called the Tinner's redeem er. This^ I thinly is the utmoft that can be ex- prefled by thofe terms redeemer, and redemp tion, when applied to the cafe in hand. And,
As Jefus Chrift was fent into the world on purpofe to feek and to Jaw that which was loft} by calling upon, or otherwife engaging finners to repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance, and thereby to render them- felves the proper objefts of God's mercy-, fo wholbever are prevailed upon by his means to repent and turn to God as aforefaid, and there-* by efcape the wrath to come, all fuch perfons may, by a figure of fpeecb, be faid to be re deemed ; and Jeliis Chrift may, by a like figure of fpeecb, be faid to be their redeemer. This is all the redemption that the nature of the thing will admit; and this, in a few words^ is the fum and fubjlance of the Chriftian re demption. And, that this is the truth of the cafe, is moft apparent from the hiftory of ChriiVs life and miniftry, in which, the end of Chrift's coming, and the grounds of God's favour to men, and of his mercy to finners are moft expreffly and fully declared. It is the Jetting forth and exemplifying of tbefe to which Chrift's difcourfes and parables are chief ly directed, and in which they generally ter minate. For as Chrift declared of, and from himfelf that he was come to feek and to fave
L that
C 82 ]
that which was loft ; fo he declared that re pentance and reformation was the ground and foundation of God's mercy to wicked men, and that except they did repent, they would all perifo. So that he came to feek and to fame men in this way, and by this means ^ viz. in prevailing upon them to repent and tarn to God, and thereby to render themfelves the pro per objects of God's mercy. This, I fay, was the way in which Chrift propofed to be a Sa viour to mankind ; and indeed this was the only pqffible way in which he could do it. For, as men had by their evil deeds rendered them felves perfonally difpkajing to God, and the proper objedts of his refentment ; fo of ne- ceffity Chrift muft, if he would be a Saviour to them, remove from them thofe evil difpofi- tions which had been the caufe of their mif- carriages, and the ground of God's difpleafure towards them; and he muft^produce in them fuch good dijpofitions as would render them per fonally pleafing to God, and the proper objedte of his mercy. I fay, Chrift muft render men perfonally pleafing to God, of which there was no other poffible way but by bringing them to repentance and amendment of life : for, as to what Chrift either did, or fuffered, which might render him perfonally valuable, and per fonally pleafing to God, that could not pofll- bly make any alteration in the finner's cafe. Chrift likewife declared, that the practice of virtue or well-doing was the ground of God's favour, and that the pra&ice of vice or evil-
* doing
[83]
doing was the ground of God's difpleafure, and this, I think I may fay, he was conftant and uniform in. For, tho' Chrift infifted on mens believing in him, and reprefented fuch faith to be of the utmojt importance to them 5 yet, it is plain, he did not intend by this to teach men, that Jimple believing was the ground of God's favour and mercy, but only that without fuch faith, the purpojes of his miniflry would not be anfwered upon them ; they would not do what he taught them, if they did not believe in him. This very point Chrift hath fully explained at the conclufion of his moft excellent fermon on the mount, in which he allures us, that it is not he who cries, Lord, Lord, who believes in Chrift, and profefles dijciplefoip to him, that (hall enter into the kingdom of heaven j but only he that does the will of God who is in hea ven. That he who hears, who believes Chrift's fay ings and doth them, builds his houfe upon a rock, acts with fafety, whereas he who hears, who believes Chrift's fayings and doth them not, fuch a hearer, fuch a believer builds his houfe upon the/m/, expofes himfelf to the utmoft dan ger. So that it is not believing, but doing which is the ground of God's favour and mercy; and it is doing in a man's own perjbn, and not in the per/on of another. The ground or reafon why the father received, embraced, and rejoiced over his prodigal ion, who had wafted his fubftance in riotous living, (Chrift informs us) was not be- caufe he had been importuned to do it, not be- caufe fome other perfon had behaved well and merited greatly at Jiis hand \ but becaufe he, the L 2 prodi-
; c
prodigal, was perfonally changed, and become a good man ; this was the reafon why the father received him, &c. It is meet, it is fit and pro per, faid the father to the elder brother, that we fhould make merry and be glad, for, or becaufe, this thy brother was dead, and loft in 'Dice and wickednefs ; but is alive and found a- gain by repentance and reformation. This is what thrift's difcourfes and parables chiefly point at, and in which they generally termi nate, as I have already obferved ; and this I call Chriftianity, or the Chriflian religion, be caufe this is what Chrift taught, who was the founder of that religion.
I have carefully read thole books called the Four'-GoJpeh, in which books we have an ac count both of what Chrift did, and taught in the exercife of his miniftry ; and through the whole, thefe plainly appear to me to have been the great and main points which he in culcated upon his hearers, which he had prin cipally in view, and which he induftrioufly purfued ; namely, to prevail upon men to ren der themfelves perfonally valuable, and thereby perfonally pleajing to God ; by putting on that internal and unaffeded piety, that plainnefs and Simplicity, that uprightnefs and integrity, that humility, meeknefs and patience, that modefty, temperance and fobriety, that peace and quiet, that kindnefs, friendlinefs, love and benevolence which are the ornament and per- feffiion, and alfo the happlnefs of our natures, whether man be confidered in his fingle, or in his focial capacity j and this Chrift reprefents
as
as the only ground of God's favour, and of that great recompence of reward which is laid up in heaven for thofe that are worthy of it : and alfo to prevail upon vicious men to be regene rated and born again, to become new crea tures ; by putting away from them all vile affedions, and every evil word and work, and by bringing forth the fruits of righteoufnefs ; and this he reprefents as the only ground of God's mercy to finners, and as the only way by which they may efcape the wrath to come. This, I fay, is what Chrift principally aimed at thro' the whole courfe of his miniftry, as the hiftories of his life do plainly Chew ; there be ing but onefentence, or rather but one Jingle word throughout thofe hiftories which feem to look any other way, and from which any other con- clufion may be drawn. Matt. xx. 28. Mark x. 45. Even as the fon of man came not to be mi- mjlred unto, but to minifter, and to give his life a ranfom for many. Here from the word ran- fom (which, I think, is all that can be found through the whole hiftory of Chrift's life and miniftry) a contrary conclufion may be drawn, viz. that the ground of God's mercy to fin ners is not their rendering themielves the pro per objects of mercy, but rather what Chrift has done and Juffered for their fakes ; he came to give his life a ranfom for many. But then, to put fuch a fenfe upon this word, which is contrary to all that Chrift has faid upon the fubjecl, and which cannot poffibly be true^ this, I think, is greatly unreajonable, and not
doing
' " [ 86 ]
doing juftice to our common Matter : efpecial- ly, if it be confidered that this term is often ufed in a figurative fenfe in the books of the Old Teftament. For example, As God by his judgments upon the Egyptians prevailed upon Pharaoh to let the people of IJrael go j fo by a figure of fpeech he is faid to have re deemed or ranfomed them *. In like manner, $s Chrift fpent his time, his ftrength, his life, his all, (if I may fo fpeak) not chiefly to ferve hitnfelf, but to prevail upon men to be virtuous and good, and upon finners to repent and turn to God, and thereby render themfelves the pro per objecfts of God's favour and mercy ; fo he may, by a like figure of fpeech, and with equal propriety, be faid to give his life a ran- jom for them ; and this, I think, is the utmofl that can, with any propriety or truth, be in- fered from this word. And,
As this is true Chriftianity, and the true gof- of Jefus Chrift, at leaft as far as Chriftianity and the gofpel of Chrift are concerned with the grounds of mens acceptance with God, and of finners obtaining the divine mercy ; fo it is in this, that the Chriftian religion excels all other traditionary religions ; viz. in that it feparates true religion from every thing that has been annexed to it, or blended with it. Chriftianity lays the ax to the root of the tree, it cuts off every excrejcence> every luxuriant
branch^
* Exod. vi. 6. xv. 13. Deut. vii. 8. ix. 26. xiii. 5. XV. 15. xxi. 8% xxiv. 18. 2 Sam. vii. 23. I Chron. xvii. 21. Nehem. i. x. Mic. vi. 4.
f • [87]
branch, every thing that \sfupernumerary, and reduces religion to its native purity and Jimpli- city. Chriftianity makes perfonal valuablenefs, and that only, the ground of raens acceptance with God 5 and a ferfonal renovation of heart and life, the only ground of vicious mens ob taining the divine mercy. But then, by Chri ftianity, I mean only what Chrift himjelf has fet forth and declared in thefe refpe&s, and not what his difciples and followers may have faid touching thefe matters. If a difpute fhould arife concerning what is true Chriftianity, what is the true gofpel of Jefns Chrift, then, I think, as the hiftory of Chrift's miniftry has been tranfmitted down to us ; fo the appeal muft be made to that hiftory, in order to obtain proper fatisfadtion ; and not to the writings of his dif- ciples and followers, who were liable to fall fiort, or to go beyond the defign and intention of their Mafter, as I have already obferved. The immediate difciples and followers of Chrift, even after the effufion of the Holy Ghoft on the day of pentecoft, thought, or were of opinion, that the gofpel of Chrift was to be preached to the Jews only ; and that led them, to confine their miniftry to thofe Jews: but in this they erred in defeat, viz. in limiting and confining the kindnefs and goodnefs of God (held forth by the gofpel) to the Jews, which was defigned to be extended to all mankind. Again, the immediate difciples and followers of Chrift, or fome of them at leaft, thought that circumcifion and the obfervatipa of the cere monial
[88]
menial law of Mofes ought to have been fed upon, and to have been fubmited to, by the Gentile converts to Chriftianity : but then, in this they erred in excefs ; namely, in making, or rather in thinking Judaifm to be a part of Chriftianity, when it is not fo; at leaft it was not judged to be fo by St. Paul, and a great party of Chriftians with him. Now if the apoftles, if the immediate dijciples and followers of Chrift were liable to fuch miftakes as thole before-mention'd, even after they had received the promije of the Father, as it is evident they were, if the hi/lory of their afls is to be relied upon ; then, furely, this ought to be a reafon to us to weigh and confider well what we receive from them ; efpecially if it appears to be contrary to what we have re ceived from their Majter, which is the prefent cafe. Befides, fuch caution, care and infpec* tion is what the apoftles themfelves have re commended to us. Thus, i tfbeff. v. 21. Prove a! I things, all queftions, all doctrines, let them come from what quarter focver -y and then, upon fuch trial, hold faft that which ap pears to be true and good, i John iv. i. Be lieve not every fpirit> every prophet, every teacher; but try them all whether they be of God, or not -, becaufe many falfe prophets or teachers are gone out, or fhew forth in the world. By this advice we not only learn, that all teachers and their dot! rims are to be tried, but alfo, that there is a certain rule by which we may judge whether fuch doctrines are true,
or
or falfe ; and confequently whether they or may be of God, or not ; becaufe, without inch a rule, all trial comes to nought. So that, according to the above advice, we are not blindly to fubmit to any thing^ much lefs to every thing that may be impofed upon us. And, as Chrift has made a renovation of mind and life, and that only, the ground of God's mercy to vicious men, and has not made his own fufferings and death a party in the cafe, (if I may fo fpeak) nor indeed does the nature of the thing admit that he mould ; fo, furely, the authority of the apoftles cannot be zfuffici- ent warrant to us, to fet afide a doctrine which is moft apparently true in itfelf, and which has been delivered to us by their Mafter.
The pardoning penitent offenders is a matter of great importance^ in which the penitent is
• greatly interefted-, and therefore it cannot be a matter of indifference whether God pardons penitent offenders, or not. Now, if it can not be a matter of indifference, then the cafe
\ will be brought to this fhort iffue, viz. it is in the nature of the thing either right and^fe that God fhould pardon penitent offenders, or elfe it is wrong and unfit that he fhould do it ; I fay, it muft be one or the other of thefe, fee ing indifference (which is the mean) is exclud ed out of the cafe. If it be the former •, that is, if it be in the nature of the thing right and
jit that God fhonld pardon penitent offenders, then he will moft certainly do it; and he will do it for this reafori, viz. becaufe it is right
M and
[ 90 ]
and ft that he {hould > this motive being fuffi- cient to determine the divine will and power to do what is right, exclufive of all other motives or coniiderations whatever. If it be the latter, that is, if it be in the nature of the thing wrong and unfit that God {hould pardon peni tent offenders, then it is moft certain that God will not pardon them, and he will not do it for this reafon, viz. becaufe it is wrong and unfit that he (hould ; nor will any confideration prevail upon him to ad: thus, it being morally impoiTible that the merits of ten thoufand redeem ers, or that any interceffion or application to him (liould prevail upon him to do what is in itfelf wrong. So that the foremen tioned doc trine, viz. That God is made placable or mer ciful to penitent finners through the merits that have arifen from the life, the fufferings, and death of Jcfus Chrift, is moft notorioufly falfe. And
Here, I think, it may not be amifs to en quire into the dodtrine of merit, as applied to Jcfus Chrift, which is generally made the main ground of Chriftians faith and hope; tho' by the way Chrift has not made faith in his blood, nor reliance on his merits, but only hearing his fay ings and doing them, the great, and the only ground of fafety to his followers. As Chrift was appointed and fent of God to teach and inftrud: mankind in the true way to eternal life ; fo he entered upon his miniftry when about thirty years of age, before which time it; does not appear, that he did any thing mate rial
f ' [9']
rial in which mankind are interefted. And when Chrift entered upon his miniftry, it is faid that he fafted forty days, after which he was led by the fpirit into the wildernels, and was tempted of the devil; but then, as Chrift v/as not hungry all that time till the forty days were at an end, and therefore did not exercife any great felf- denial in the time of hisfafting; ib his virtue could not rife very high on that account. And, as Chrift's ftanding out, and not being overcome by the devil's temptations, rifes no higher than Jimple innocence ; fo virtue or merit feems at leaft to be excluded out of the cafe. And when Chrift entered upon that work he was appointed to, he went up and down Judea, or at leaft he travelled over thole parts of that country where the poor and ig norant people lived, teaching them, and doing good to them by the many miracles he wrought; by which means probably he went thro' much painfulnejs and wearinefs^ and fometimes drew on himfelf the reproaches, and at other times the acclamations of the people : but then, in all this, (according to his own account) he was with refpect to God an unprofitable fer- vant, he did no more than was his duty, in the office he was appointed to. Indeed, by what Chrift did, mankind became greatly obli ged to him, as he profecuted their good there by. And, as Chrift went up and down the country of Judea, doing good as beforemen- tioned ; fo when about three years and an half were expired, hey at Jerufalem> fell into the M a hands
[92]
hands of wicked and blbod-tbirjty men, who treated him with fcorn and contempt, buffeted him, put a crown of thorns upon his head, and at laft put him to death in a way the moft fKnriefkd and painful. And, as Chrift went through all this duty and fuffering readily, willingly and chearfully, and with a view to promote both the preient and future well being, of mankind; fo of neceffity he muft thereby render himfelf highly approveable, and greatly rcivardable t6 the common Father of us all ; from whom, no doubt, Chrift has, and will, in due time, receive a full and -ample reward. But thep, as to mankind it is out of their power, (at prefent at leaft) to return the kind nefs. I fay, there can be no room for doubt ing, but that God has, and will amply reward ttye virtue or merits of Jeias Chrift; but then, there cannot be the like reafon for concluding tpat God will heap favours upon, or Jhew mercy to others on account of Chrfjfs merits -, becaufe that would be acting contrary to the eternal rules of right and wrong, which require, that where virtue takes place, there, in thejame per- jon, reward fhould take place alfo, and not in the perfon of another. God may, if he pleafe, fhew kind nefs to his creatures independent of Jail merit ; but then, it would be the goodnefs of God, and not the merits of another, which would be the fole ground of that kindnefs : whereas were God to (hew kindnefs to one, by way of return for the virtue or merits of ano ther ; fuch return would be very improper, as
the
[93]
the reward would be placed on a wrong object $ in which cafe, (the truth is) the absence of vir- tue would be favoured, (if I may fo fpeak) whilft virtue itfelf would go unrewarded. This being the true ftate of the cafe, the grand queftion arifing from hence will be, whether the cruelty exercifed on Jefus Chrift in his fuf- ferings and death be a juft ground for mercy ^ or for refentment in the Deity. In all other cafes, I dare fay, it will be allowed, that fuch a fcene of action would be a juft foundation for refentment ; and if fb, then the queftion will be> how comes nature to be reverled in this ? how comes that to be a juft foundation for mercy here, which would be a juft founda tion for refentment in all other cafes? To add the circumftance of Chrift's being the fon of God, is fo far from helping, that on the con trary it makes the cafe ftill worfe, as that cir-» cumftance makes the grounds of refentment fo much the Jlronger. However, if the opinion of Jefus Chrift be of any weight, he has de clared himfelf plainly and fully upon this quek tion, Mark xii. i — 9, And he began to fpeak unto them by parables. A certain man planted a vineyard, — and let it out to hujbandmen, and went into afar country. And at the feafon he Jent to the hujbandmen a Jerv ant, that he might receive from the hujbandmen of the fruit of the vineyard. And they caught him, and beat him,
and Jent him away empty. Again, he Jent
another, and him they killed, and many others, beating jbme, and killing Jbme* Having yet
there-
[94]
therefore one fony his well-beloved, he fent him alfo lajl unto them, faying, they will reverence my fon. But thofe hujbandmen faid among them- jelves, this is the heir, come, let us kill him, and the inheritance fiall be ours. And they took him, find killed him, and cajl him cut of the vine yard. What flail therefore the Lord of the vineyard do ? he 'will come and dejlroy tlw huf- $andmen ; and will give the vineyard unto others. This parable, I think, is only applicable to Je- fus Cbrift, and to thofe men who had been be fore fent to the Jews to remind them of their duty, and to call them to repentance for the breach of God's laws, and who had met with ill ufage from thofe Jews on that account ; and likewife to the Jewifh nation. In the ap plication of this parable, Chrift is fo far from ieprefenting his fufferings to be the ground of mercy to the Deity in any refpeft, that he does not give the lead hint of it ; but on the con trary, he reprefents his fufferings and death as a juji ground of divine revenge. What Jhall therefore the Lord of the vineyard do ? he will come and dejlroy the hujbandmen^ and will give the vineyard unto others. I am fenfible this is only applicable to thofe who were fome way or other concerned in, or acceffary to Chrift's fuf ferings and death ; but then, thefe are all that can poflibly be inter ejled in the cafe. As to. the reft of mankind, the fufferings and death of Chrift cannot poflibly be a ground of divine mercy, nor revenge to them ; becaufe they are not rendered the proper objects of either there-
bv.
[95 ]
by. To fuppofe therefore, that the vilenefs and ivickcdnefs which the yews and Romans were guilty of, in laying fo heavy a burden of af fliction on Jefus Chrift, as he underwent by his fufferings and death ; or that the virtue exer- cifed by Jefus Chrift, in fubmitting to, and pa tiently bearing that burden ; I fay, to fuppofe that either of thefe were a ground or reafon to the Deity to (hew mercy to mankind, is moft wild and extravagant, and repugnant to the common fenfe and reafon of mankind. As to the wickednefs exercifed in that fcene of ac tion, that, moft certainly, was a juft founda tion for divine revenge. And, as to tht'Vtrtue exercifed by Jefus Chrift, tho' this might ren der him highly worthy of recompence or re ward ; yet it could not poffibly be a proper ground for God to {hew favour or mercy to mankind, becaufe they were not rendered more or lefs the proper objects of either thereby. The doctrine of transfering virtue or merit from one to another, or of God's (hewing kindnefs to one on account of the virtue or fufferings of another, as it has been of long (landing in the Chriftian church, (who probably took it from the yews ;) fo, I preftime, it laid the founda tion for this doctrine, viz. That works of fa- pererogation take place in fome Chriftians ; which doctrine has prevailed in the church of Rome, and has greatly promoted the trade thereof. This doctrine of works of fupereroga- tion taking place in fome Chriftians, has indeed becnjuftjy exploded kyProteftants -, tho' at the fame time they have maintained that there was an in finite ^
' [96]
finite redundancy of good works in Jefus Chrift; whereas, if we fuppofe an infinite redundancy of virtue or merit in Chrift which was tranfer-* able, then where lies the abfurdity or impro priety of a redundancy of merit in fome of his followers, that is equally transferable, tho' much lefs in quantity, in proportion to the mea- fure of virtue they have attained to ? If it be faid, that Chrift's followers have done no more than was their duty, and therefore they have not had a redundancy of good works ; then the fame may be faid of Jefus Chrift ; it behoved himy or it was his duty to do, and fuffer as he did, in order to anfwcr the purpofes of his mi ni dry, and the end of his coming, or of his being fent into the world.
If it ihould be faid, fuppofing the doftrine of transfer ing merit were excluded out of the cafe ; yet, neverthelefs, it was abfolutely ne ceffary Chrift Qnou\djuffer and die^ that thereby God might vindicate and fapport the honour of his laws, and likewife fhew his great dijlike of
Jin; becaufe otherwife the pardoning penitent offenders would expofe God's laws to contempt, by countenancing men in the breach of them : Anfwer, That it was neceffary Chrift ihould fuffcr and die, in order to anfvver the purpofes of his mini/try, may perhaps be true ; but that it was neceffary he (liould fuffer and die, to an- fwer the purpofes aforefaid, that could not be
. the cafe ; becaufe thofe purpofes could not pof-
fibly be anjwered thereby. The honour of God's
laws could not be fupported and vindicated by
I the
.
the 0jV;z and moft notorious breach of which was the cafe in the crucifixion of Chrifh Nor could God's diflike of fin poffibly be fhewn, by his permitting men to be guilty of the greateft wickednefs, in imbruing their hands in the blood of a perfon the moft inno cent and virtuous : I fay, God's diflike of fin could not poffibly be (hewn, by his permitting or fuffering fuch cruelty and barbarity to take place, which was all the part the Deity bore in that fcene of adtion ; namely, he permitted or Jufered it. Nor indeed does the pardon ing penitent offenders in the leaft countenance the breach of God's laws. For, tho' God par dons penitent offenders ; yet he pardons none but penitent^ and that {hews God's dijlike of fin^ and the breach of his laws, to be fiich^ that no merit, no application "or inferceffion made to him by another, is fufficient to atone for the breach of them ; that nothing but a thorough renovation of mind and life in the Jinner him± felf\ will difcharge him from that punijhment which his fmy through the juft judgment of God, has bound him over to.
But then, it may be urged, that the dpoftles of Chrift taught this dodtrine, viz. That God was made placable or merciful to penitent fin- ners by tiiz fufferings and death of Jcjus Chrift ± as their writings do plainly (hew. Thus Ro mans v. 9, 10. Much more then being now jufti- jied by his blood, we flail be fayed from wrath through him. For, if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his fon±
N
[98] .
&c. Eph. i. 7. Col. i. 14. In whom we have re demption through his blood, even the forgivenefs of fins. Eph. iv. 32. Forgiving one another, even as God for Chrift s fake hath forgiven you. Heb. ix. i2. By his own blood he entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. i Pet. ii. 24. Who his own felf bare our Jim in his own body_ on the tree, &c. Chap, iii, 18. For Chrift alfo hath once Buffered for Jim, the jujl for the unjuft, that he might bring us to God. i John i. 7. But if we walk in the light > even as he is in the light , we have fellowjhip one with another ; and the blood of Jefus Chrift his Jon cleanfeth us from all fin. Rev. i. 5. Unto him that loved us, and wafoed us from our Jim in his own bloody &c. Chap. v. 9. For thou wajljlain, and haft redeemed us. to God by thy blood, &c. To which I anfwer, that thefe and all other texts of like import, muft of neceffity t>e taken in a figurative fenie, in order to ren der them confiftent with truth, ajid with Chrif- tianity.
If it fliould be farther infifted on, that the apoftles ^did teach the aforefaid dodrine, in the texts refered to ; for tho' their writings do a- bound with figures; yet the fentences before- mentioned, or fome of them at leaft, do not admit of any fuch figurative fenfe as is here iuppofed. As thus, forgiving one another, even as God for Chrift' s fake hath forgiven you. Here the doctrine taught by rhe apoflle is plainly and evidently this, viz. That it is upon Chrift s and for his fake, that God forgives pe nitent
.
nitent offenders ; of which no figure can be found which will deftroy this fenje, and at the fame time leave the apoftle's words confiftent with common fenfe. To this I anfwer, That if the apoftles did teach this dodtrme, of which I do not take upon me, nor indeed am. I able to fliew the contrary; then it) this, as they greatly departed from the truth, fo they went greatly beyond the defign and intention of their Mafter, by making that the ground of God's mercy to penitent offenders, which Chrift hath not made fo ; and therefore this dodtrine is no part of Chriftianity,
If it fhould be farther urged, that the apo- ftles have not only taught the forementioned dodtrine, (viz. That God was made placable or merciful to penitent finners by or through the fufferings and death of Jefus Chrift ;) but they have alfo given it the fandtion of miracles, as they wrought miracles in confirmation of their miniftry at large, of which this dofirine is a part ; fo that were this dodtrine erroneous, fuch error would be rendered invincible, by the miraculous power which attended it : To this I anfwer, Whether the apoftles taught the aforelaid dodtrine, or not ; or whether this doc trine has had the fanftion of miracles, or not ; is not very material in the prefent cafe 5 becaufe the authority of the apoftles, and the fanftion of miracles united, cannot pofllbly alter the nature of things, cannot make a falfe propo- fition true, cannot make the dodtrine under confideration to be either true in itfelf, or a JST 2 fart
t
100
part of Chriftianity, when in reality it is nei ther. And, as to miracles, that matter may perhaps be thought to be cleared upy and all dif ficulties removed by a late learned and inge nuous writer on the fubjedl of miracles, who has obferved, that when miracles are unconnect ed with doctrine, then they only prove them- felves ; that is, they only prove that fuch mi racles were wrought; and this, I think, muft be true, except it be that they may alfo be marks of kindnefs or refentment, according to the good or evil which may be produced by them. Neither veracity nor infallibility have any neceilary connection with, nor dependence upon power, nor power upon them ; and therefore the power of working miracles can not, of itfelf, be a proper teft of truth in any cafe whatever. And, as it would be very in- coriclufive to argue, that becaufe a man fpeaks truth, therefore he has the power of working miracles: fo it will be equally inconcluiive to argue, that becaufe a man has the power of wording miracles, therefore he fpeaks truth ; the latter conclufion being equally as unnatural #s the former. Whether a man fpeaks truth in any in (lance, or whether he has the power of working miracles, muft be proved by fuch principles from which thefe conclusions do na turally and unavoidably follow, and not from one another, feeing they have no connection with, nor dependence upon each other. The author I refer to has alfo farther obferved, that miracles, are connected with dodtrines*
then
[ ,01 ]
then they are either miracles of truth, or mi racles of a lie, according to the truth or falfe- neis of the dodtrines or propofitions they {land connected with. So that if the dodtrine under confideration, together with the other parts of the apoftles miniftry, were connedted with the miracles that the apoftles wrought ; then, as thofe miracles ftand connedted with fome prot- pofitions or dodtrines that are true, fo in thefe inftances they are miracles of truth ; and as thefe very fame miracles ftand connedted with the dodtrine under confideration, which is er roneous ; fo in this inftance they are miracles of error, (or, according to our author, they are miracles of a lie 3) which diftindtion and difference does not arife from the miraculous power exercifed, but from the different doffrines which fuch power ftands connedted with. And indeed our author feems to be much in the right, in the prefent cafe, becaufe the nature of the thing feems to require that all dodtrines which are to be tried ought to be brought to their proper teft, (at leaft all dodtrines of moral confideration, in which mankind are interefted, thefe ought to be tried by the jlandard of mo ral truth) and not be tried by any power they may arbitrarily be connetted with ; I fay arbi trarily connedted, becaufe nature does not con- ftitute any fuch cormedtion.
Befides, as, (according to the author I refer to) miracles, when unconnedted with dodtrines, prove nothing but themfelves ; fo the miracles wrought by the apoftles, which ftand upon re cord
[ 102 ]
cord in their Acts, do not appear to be con- neded with any dodrines, and confequently thofe miracles Snly prove themjefoes ; and in this view of the cafe they are out of the quef- tion. That the miracles wrought by the apof- tles were not connected with any dodrine, by this I mean, that they were not particularly de clared to be fo by thofe who wrought them, they not having declared what particular doc trines they intended to conned: thofe miracles with, or whether they intended any fuch con nection at all ; and therefore, the queftion will be, What is it which conftitutes a connection betwixt miracles and doctrines ? feeing nature has not made any fuch connedion. This in deed is a matter of great importance in the prefent cafe ; becaufe, till this point be fairly fettled, we may perhaps only ramble, and not reafon conclujively upon the fubjed. But then, this is what the author I refer to has not done, nor attempted to do ; tho' in his view of the cafe it feems to have been greatly wanted, and the fubjed feemed to require it at his hand. And as to me, it is a taflc which I find myfelf unequal to ; for when I look round the fubjed:, difficulties croud in on every fide. However, I here obferve, that the connedion betwixt miracles and dodrines may be made or confti- tuted, or at leaft may be fuppofed to be con- ftituted feveral ways. Asjirj}, by a particular and fpccial declaration of him who works the miracle, in which declaration is fpecified the particular dodrines or propofitions each mira-
i cle
I03
cle is, or is to be connected with. Qsjkond, by fome general declaration made by him who works the miracle, exprefled in thefe, or the like words, [The works that I do, bear wit- nefs of me.J Or laftly, fuch connection may be fuppofed to be conftituted by the working of a miracle, and the promulgation ,of a doc trine by one and the fame per/on, without any general or particular declaration made concern ing it -, in which cafe, the miracle wrought be comes, of it/elf, conneded with every doftrine promulged by the operator, at leaft, with all that are promulged after the operation. If the^V/? of thefe ways be the cafe, that is, if miracles and do6trines become connected by a particular declaration of him who works the miracle, then the miracles wrought by the apoftles are out of the prefent queftion, they only prove themfelves, feeing they are deftitute of any fiich connection with doCtrines as is here refered to, and at mod were only miracles of kindnefs or of refentment. And then, as the miracles wrought by Mofes in Egypt were only conneCt- ed with this propofition, viz. that Mo/es ivas fent of God to Pharaoh to demand the people of IfraelV freedom, and were not connected with that body of judicial and ceremonial laws, commonly called the difpenfation of Mofes ; fo that difpenfation does not appear to have been any more connected with, and fupported by miracles, than was the di/penfation of Maho met. And the miracles wrought in the wilder- nefs do not appear to be any more, or any
other
104
other than inftances of God's extraordinary pre- fence with the children of Jjrael, until he had brought them to the promifed land j and at moft were miracles only of kindnefs or of re- fentment. Again, if miracles become con nected with doctrines by fome general decla ration made by him who works the miracle, exprefled in thefe, or the like words, [The works that I do, bear witnefs of me;] then the miracles wrought by the apoftles are like- wife, in this view of the cafe, out of the pre- fent queftion, as being dejtitute of any iiich connection. The apoftles wrought miracles upon different occafions, as the objects of pity were preiented to their view, and the like ; but then, it does not appear, that they con nected thofe miracles with the doctrines they taught, by any general or particular declara tion concerning it. Or laftly^ if miracles and doctrines, of them/elves, become connected by their being wrought and promulged by one and the fame perfon, without any general or parti cular declaration concerning fuch connection ; then, indeed, the miracles wrought by the apoftles muft have been connected with their doctrines. But then, as the doctrine under confideration, viz. that God was made placa ble or merciful to penitent iinners through the furTerings and death of Jefus Chrift, is fuppofed to have been taught by the apoftles, which doc trine I have before ihewn to be erroneous and contrary to Chriftianity ; fo all the miracles wrought by the apoftles, which became con nected
, . ..,.
hefted' with this dodtrine, were, in this in flame, miracles of error. And this muft have been the cafe whenever the apoftles taught any thing that was erroneous, of which the doc trine before-mentioned, I think, was ncit the only inftance. I fay, in all fuch inftances, the miracles the apoftles wrought muft have been mkacles of error \ thoj in many other in/lances thofe very miracles were miracles of truth.
If it mould be faid, admitting the fuppo- fition, that the fame miracle may be both a miracle of truth and a miracle of a lie, (which indeed, I think, it may be, if miracles and doctrines become connected as aforefaid, except the inverting a man with the power of work ing miracles makes that man both infallible and impeccable, and thereby fecures him foi* ever after from thinking, fpeaking, and acting <wrong^ which furely is not the cafe, nor, I think, is it pretended to be;) I fay, if it fhould be faid, that the admitting the above fuppofition greatly embarraffes the fubjeffi, and involves it mjuch confufion from which nothing can certainly be concluded : I anfwer, we muft of neceffity take things as they are, whether they prove more, or lefs $ and not pretend to extract that, or more from them than is con tained in them ; feeing, according to the pro- , verb, We can have no more of a fox than his Jkin. Miracles are inftances or evidences of Jiiperior power, and have a natural tendency to draw people about the operator, and to engage their attention to what he fays ; they may
O likewife
likewife be marks of kindnefs or of refentmenf, according to the purpofes they are made to ferve ; all this, I think, is plain and indifputa- ble. But when the matter is carried farther, and miracles are confidered as connected with doctrines, and thereby are made vouchers for thofe do&rines, then difficulty and dijlrefs ap pears. For when once a man has wrought a miracle, after that it will be in his power, and at his choice to make it a miracle of truth, or a miracle of a lie, or a miracle of both ; as it will be in his power ', and at his choice to pro- mulge truth) or error, or both after the work ing of fuch miracle. And in this view of the cafe, miraculous power may perhaps be thought fcarce fit to be trufted in human hands, as being of dangerous confequence ^ feeing error, even hurtful errory when vouched for by miracles, would become almoft invincible to thofe people whofe attention and difcernment feldom goes farther than their fenfes, of which people there are not a few. For, as he who works a mi racle is not only liable to err himfelf, after the operation, but is alfo liable to make the miraculous power he has exercifed, fubfervient to good or bad purpofes as he pleafes ; fo were God to defign and conftitute fuch miraculous power to be a fanftion to every doffirine which the operator (hould promulge after the exercifb of it, the divine conduct, in fuch a cafe, would be moil hazardous -, and it would be running fuch a rijk with regard to the fafety and well- being of mankind, as a man of common pru-
dence
f . . . E I07 ] ^ / ,. ,. .;.
dence would not chufe to do in an affair of much lefs concern, except the neceffity of the cafe required it. And if we form a judgment of men in former times , when miraculous power was exercifed, from what appears to take place now, it renders the cafe ftill more difficult ; becaufe now, it plainly appears, that many of the greateft pretenders to, and moft zealous advocates for religion, faith, and or thodoxy, are fcarce trujl worthy, where the abufe of truft will turn to their worldly advan tage, as experience and fa<ft every day (hew. To fay that God will effectually fecure all thofe with whom he entrufts miraculous power, for ever after from thinking, fpeaking, and a£t- ing wrong, would be to affert againft plain fadl, if the hiftorical account of things in the New Teftament is to be relied upon ; but this, I think, is not pretended, as I have already ob- ferved. That the apoftles and firjl converts to Chriftianity erred in judgment, even in matters of importance, after they were endowed with power from on high, and after they had wrought miracles by virtue of fuch power, is left upon record 5 and that the apoftles were liable to fuch error, is, I think, farther evident from their writings, or at leaft this appears to me to have been the cafe of St, Paul, who is reprefented to have wrought miracles in abun dance: and, that the apoftles were liable to err in practice or aft wrong is as evident, if St. Paul's authority is of weight, who de clared, that he withftood Peter to the face, O 2 becaufe
. I08
becaufe he (viz. Peter) was to be blamed^ as having adted wrong, Gal. ii. 1 1. And St. Paul fuppojed of himfelf that he was liable to ad: wrong, even to his own deftrudtion, j Cor. ix. 27. If therefore the inverting a man, even an apoftle, with the power of working miracles, did not fecure that man from erring in his judgment, nor from promulging fuch er ror ; and if it did notjecure him from erring in his pradtice, from impofing upon others, as is evident it did not ; and if miracles and doc trines become, of themfefoes> connected as afore- fa id 3 fo that one becomes a voucher to the .other ; then the fubjedt appears to me to be in a perplexed ft ate -, which perplexity feems to tender Jcepticijin, with refpedt to miracles, more eligible than otherwife it would be ; as it natu rally leads to this queftion, viz. Whether the Difficulties which attend doubting that any mira cles were ever wrought, are lefs, or equal, or greater than thofe difficulties which attend the belief of them. With regard to the former, the fceptick has one main difficulty to encounter \vith, viz. the hiftorical evidence upon which the truth of thofe miraculous facts depends, that the believer gives his affent to, and by which, thofe fadts are fuppofed to be well attejled -, but then the weight of this kind of evidence, in feme cafes, feems to depend upon ti\Q favoura ble difpojition of the believer, who is convicted Vipon fuch evidence: fo that equal evidence does not, in all cafes, produce the fame degree of affent where the favourable difpofitipn is want ing,
io9
ing, as where it obtains. This feems to be the cafe with refpedt to 'witches and appari tions ; the fafts that relate to thefe, having been looked upon for many ages paft to be well at- tefted, like that of miracles, the hiftorical evi dence for the proof of the former not coming greatly behind, for number, clearnefs, and cre dit, the hiftorical evidence for the proof of the latter ; and yet now, feepticifm with regard to witches and apparitions, is become much lefi dif- reputable, and is more eafily admitted than here tofore ; and this has led our wife legiflators to cancel afevere editt with regard to one of thefe, viz. that of witches. Whether the weight of that hiftorical evidence which attends miracles is liable to fuck fluctuation as in the cafes above- mentioned, I do not take upon me to deter mine ; all that I have to obferve is this, viz. that the believer, upon the foregoing fuppofi- tion, (viz. that miracles are connected with, and are made vouchers for every doctrine the operator fhall promulge after the operation by a divine appointment,) has alfo difficulties to encounter with ; which difficulties, as they are Jlubborn, and feemingly inflexible, fo one fol lows upon another, as the clouds follow after the rain. Thus, in \ht Jirft ages of Chriftia- nity, when the gift of miracles was vouch- fafed to the church ; then parties and difputes about religion abundantly prevailed ; and that not only in the fecond and third centuries, but alfo in the/>y?, as the writings of the apoftles do plainly (hew. Upon which I obferve, that in
thofe
..
thofe times the power of working miracles muft have been prefent with, and have been exercifed by all parties, and thereby miracles muft have been connected with, and have been promifcuoufly vouchers for truth and error a- like ; or elfe that power muft have been exer cifed only in favour of truth, and confequently only by thofe parties that maintained it. If the former of thefe was the cafe, then great confu- Jion muft have followed ; for as the power ex ercifed, fuch as giving fight to the blind, health to the fick, life to the dead, and the like, could not, of itfelf, fhew whether it was conneffed with truth or error ; fb the party exercifing fuch power muft have left the fub- jedt under the fame diftrefs ; feeing it was exer cifed by all parties, and on each fide of every controverted queftion alike. If the latter was the cafe, that is, if miraculous power was ex ercifed only in favour of truth, and confe quently only by tbofe parties that maintained it, then, the confequence is clear, viz. that par ties and controverfies muft have ceafed, and could not long have fubfifted among them ; for as miracles would have been connected with truth only, fo confequently they would have determined every queftion in favour of ortho doxy, by which means all parties and contro verfies muft have come to an end ; this furely would have been the cafe. There are many parties and controverfies fubfifting among Chrif- tians at this time, of which, I think, the pedo- baptifts and antipedobaptifts are not to be con-
fidered
t III ]
fidered the leaft ; feeing much learning and reafoning have been fhewn, and many volumes have been written by each party in that contro- verfy. Now, fuppofing the gift of miracles was at this time reftored to the church, and that the power of exercifing it was prefent with one of thefe parties and not with the other, and confequently that miracles were connected with, and thereby became vouchers for one fide of this controverfy only, the quef- tion would be, what will follow from hence ? And the anfwer to this queftion is mod obvi ous, viz. that the controverfy itjelf, and like- wife the parties founded upon it would ceafe and come to an end ; becaufe on which fide foever miraculous power appeared, it would determine the queftion in its favour ; and the other party would be forced to give out, as not having wherewith to oppofe. And if this would be the cafe now, which I think muft be allow ed ; then, furely, it would have been the fame in the firft ages of the church, when miracu lous power was prefent with it. And therefore, feeing parties and controverfies prevailed among Chriftians, whilft the power of working mira cles is fuppofed to have been exercifed by them, from hence it may feem to follow ei ther, jirft, that the power of working miracles muft have been exercifed by all parties, and thereby miracles muft have been connected with, and have been promifcuoufly vouchers for truth and error alike, which introduces great confufion, as I have already obferved ;
or
.
or elfe it may feem to follow, fecondly, that nd fuch miraculous power was exercifed at all± feeing otherwife parties and controverfies would have ceafed, which yet it is plain they did not $ the latter of which may perhaps, in this view of the cafe, feem at leaft, to have the appear ance of probability.
Neverthelefs, I think, it muft be allowed, at leaft it is readily allowed by me, that tho' there is no fuch connection betwixt power and truth, as that one is a neceffary attendant on the other; and tho* miracles cannot alter the nature of things, cannot make a falfe propo- fition true: yet, I think, when jt plainly ap pears that miraculous power is, or has been ex erted, the exertion of fuch power calls for our moft ferious attention and regard ; and if any doctrine has been promulged by the operator that mankind are interejled in, which doctrine is in itfelf probable, as being perfectly agreeable to our natural notions of things, then fuch mi raculous power at leaft greatly Jlrenghtem or heightens that probability, as it minifters juft ground for presuming that the Jpring of fuch fuperior power is the Jpring of fuperior know ledge alfo, when both, to appearance at leaft, are kindly held forth to anfwer the purpofes of benevolence. But then, I think, we are not blindly to follow every thing that may be re commended by miraculous power; but on the contrary, I think, it is our duty^ becaufe our intereft is embarked in the cafe, to try eve- ry fpirit, every doffrine^ every prophet, every
teacher ;
C ".3
teacher; to prove all things, and to hold f aft tbat^ which upon fuch trial appears to be 'worthy of the common parent of mankind. This is the fum of the matter, as the cafe ap pears to me -, tho' it may perhaps have a very different appearance to others,
Thus I have gone through what I propofed, and have, I think, treated this fubjedr., viz. redemption, with plainnefs, fairnefs and free dom. And tho' I have gone out of the common road; yet if I fliould here have dealed forth more truth to my readers than they are ufu- ally entertained with, on fubjefts of this na ture, I prefume it will eafily be excufed.
F i N i s.
BOOKS
BOOKS written by Mr. THO. CHUBB, and printed for THO. Cox, fince the Publication of his Collection of Drafts in Quarto^ viz.
I. A DISCOURSE concerning reafon, with regard to religion J\ and divine revelation. Wherein is fhewn, That reafon cither is, or that /'/ ought to he, a fufficient guide in matters of religion. Occaiioned by the Lord Bifhop of London's, fecund palloral Letter. To which are added, Some reflexions upon the comparative excellency and ufefulnefs of moral and pojitive du ties. Occafioned by the controverfy that has arifen (with re- fpec~l to this fubjeft) upon the publication of Dr. Clarke's expofi- tion of the Church Catechifm. The fecond edition. Price i s.
II. An enquiry concerning the grounds and reafons, or what thofe principles are, upon which, two of our anniverfary folem- nities are founded, viz. that on the 3oth of January, being the day of the martyrdom of king Charles I. appointed to be kept as a day of fajling ; and that on the 5th of November, being the day of our deliverance from popery and flavery, by the happy arrival of his late majefty king William III. appointed to be kept as a dsy of thankfgiving. To which is added, The fuf- ficiency of reafon in matters of religion, farther conjidered. Wherein is fhewn, that reafon, when carefully ufed and fol lowed, is to every man, who is anfwerable to God for his ac* tions, under any or all the moft difadvantageous circumftances he can poifibly fall into, whether he refides in China, or at the Cape of Good Hope, a fufficient guide in matters of religion ; that Is, it is fufficient to guide him to God's favour, and the hap- pinefs of another world. Price is.
III. Four Tradls, viz. Firfl, An enquiry concerning the books of the New Tefldment, whether they were written by divine infpiration, Sec. Second, Renurks on Britannicus** letter, publifhcd in the London Journah of the 4th and IIth of dpril, 1724; and re-publiflied in tiitjournah of the 5th and 12th of April, 1729; containing an argument drawn from the finglc
faff of C'hrijFs refurretfion, to prove the divinity of his mijfion. Wherein is {hewn, that Britannicus's argument does not anfwer the purpofe for which it was intended. And in which is like- vife fhewn, what was the great and main end that the refur- redion of Cbrif was intended to be fubfervient to, viz. not to prove the divinity of his mifTton, but to gather together his difciples, to commiffion, and qualify, and lend them forth to preach his gofpel to all nations. Third, The cafe of Abraham, with refpe^t to his being commanded by God to offer his fon Haat in facrifice, farther confidered : in anfwer to Mr. Stone's xemarks. In a letter to the Rev. Mr. Stone. Fourth, The equity
and
BOOKS printed for T. Cox.
and reafonablenefs of a future judgment and retribution exempli fy d', or, a difcoarfe on the parable of the unmeiciful fervant ; as it is related in Matt, xviii. from verfe 23, to the end of the chapter. Price 2s.
IV. Some obfervations offered to publick confideration. Oo cafioned by the oppofition made to Dr. Rundle1* election to the fee of Ghucefter. In which the credit of the hiftory of the OldTeftament is particularly coniidered. To which are added, three tracts, viz. I. An anfwer to Mr, Stone's fecond remarks on the cafe of Abraham, with regard to Jhis being commanded by God to offer up his fon Ifaac in facrifice. In a fecond let ter to the Rev. Mr. Stone, M. A. and fellow of the learned fo-» ciety of Wadham-Collegt in Oxford. II. A difcourfe on fince^ dry. Wherein is (hewn, That fmcerity affords juft ground for peace and fatisfaction in a man's own mind, and renders his conduct juftly approvable to every other intelligent being. Oc- cafioned by what Dr. Waterland has lately written on the fub- ject. In a letter to a gentleman. III. A fupplement to the tract, intitled, The equity and reafonablenefs of a future judgment and retribution exemplified. In which, the doctrine of the eter nal and endlefs duration of punifhment to the wicked, is more particularly and fully confidered. Price is 6d.
V. The equity and reafonablenefs of the divine conduct, in pardoning finners upon their repentance, exemplified : or a dif courfe on the parable of the prodigal fon. In which thofe doc trines, viz. that men are rendered acceptable to God, and that finners are recommended to his mercy, either by the perfect obedience, or the meritorious fufferings, or the prevailing in- terceffion of Chrift, or by one, or other, or all of thefe, are particularly confidered, and refuted. Occafioned by Dr. But ler* s late book, intitled, The analogy of religion natural and re vealed, to the conflltution and courfe of nature. Offered to the confideration of the clergy, among all denominations of Chrif- tians. To which are added two differtations, viz. I. Concern ing the fenfe and meaning of St. Paul's words, Titus iii. 10, 1 1. A man that is an heretic ky after the firft and fecond admonition, re-
jett : Knowing that be that i* fuch, ii fubverted, and Jtnneth, being condemned of himfelf. II. Concerning the time for keeping a fabbath. Offered to the confideration of the Sabbatarians. In a letter to Mr. EhxalL To which is likewife added, The cafe of pecuniary mulcts, with regard to Diffenters, particularly confidered. In a fecond letter to the Rev. Dr. Stebbing. Price is. 6d.
VI. An enquiry into the ground and foundation of religion.
Wherein is fhewn, that religion is founded in nature ; that is,
2 that
ROOKS printed for T. Cox.
that there is a right and wrong, a true and falfe religion in na ture : and that nature or reaion affords plain, obvious, certain principles, by which a man may diftinguiih thefe, and form a proper judgment in the cafe j and which an honeft, .upright man may fafcly and fecurely fhy his mind upon, amidft the various and contrary opinions that prevail in the world, with regard to this fubjecl:. To which are added, I. A poftfcript, occafioned by the publication of Dr. Stebbing's vifitation charge, that had been delivered to the clergy of the archdeaconry of Wilts. II. A fliort differtation on Matt. xix. 21. If thou wilt be perfetf, go and fell that thou haft, and give to the poor, and thou Jhalt have treafure in heaven : and come and folh-vu me. Occa- iioned by Dr. Stebbing's unjuft and groundlefs reflexion on the author, with' regard to- this text, in the aforefaid charge. III. An anfwer to a private letter, from -a ftranger to the author, on the fubjed of God's foreknowledge. Price 2/.
VII. The True Gofpel of Jefus Chrift afcrted. Wherein is {hewn what is, and what is not that gofpel ; what was the great and good end it was intended to ferve ; how it is excel lently fuited to anfwer that purpofe ; and how, or by what means, that end has in a great meafure been fruftrated. Hum bly offered to publick confederation, and in particular to all thofe who efteem themfelves, or are efteemed by others, to be minifters of Jefus Chriit, and preachers of the gofpel ; and more efpecially to all thofe who have obtained the reputation of be ing the great defenders of Chriftianity. ABs xvii. 6. They drew Jafon, and certain brethren, unto the rulers of the city, crying,, 'Ihefe that have turned the world upjide down, are come hither alfo. To which is added, A Ihort differtation on Providence. The fecond Edition. Price 2/. the Price before 4^.
VIII. The True Gofpel of Jefus Chrift vindicated. And alfo a vindication of the author's fhort differtation on Provi dence. Price i/.
IX. A difcourfe on Miracles, confidered as evidences to prove the divine original of a revelation. Wherein is fhewn, what kind and degree of evidence arifes from them, and in which the various reafonings on thofe queftions that relate to the fubjecl are fairly reprefented. To which is added, an ap pendix, containing an enquiry into this queftion, viz. whether the doctrines of a future fbte of exiftence to men, and a future retribution, were plainly and clearly taught by Mofes and the Prophets ? Humbly offered to the confederation of the Rev. Dr. Warburton, and all others that particularly intereft themfelves in this queiliori. Price u. 6 d.
THE
GROUND and FOUNDATION
O F
MORALITY
CONSIDERED.
Wherein is fhewn,
That difinterefted Benevolence is a proper and a worthy Principle of Adtion to in telligent Beings.
And in which is alfo fhewn,
What fome of thofe abfurd and bad Confe- quences are, which naturally and obvioufly follow the Do&rine of abfolute Selfifhnefs ; or, that Self- good is the fole and univerfal Principle of Action in Nature: Occafion'd by the Rev. Mr. RUT HER* FORD'S EfTay on MORALITY.
To which is added,
The FIRST SECTION of the AUTHOR'S Farewel to his READERS;
NAMELY,
The INTRODUCTION.
Wherein thofe POINTS, viz.
Of Divine Impreflions on Mens Minds ; of fpecial Grace ; of the Virtue and Merit of Faith ; and of St. THOMAS'S Unbelief, are particularly confidered.
By 7 H O MA S CHUBB.
LONDON:
Printed for T. Cox at the Lamb under the Royal-Exchange. MDCCXLV.
THE
GROUND and FOUNDATION
O F
MORALITY
CONSIDERED,
IT may perhaps feemjlrange, that an en quiry of this nature fhould take place at this time, after fo many ages are paft, and fo much reafoning and argumen tation has been exercifed, and fo many thou- fands, perhaps millions, of treatifes have been written by men offuperior abilities on moral fubjeffs-, I fay, it may feem ftrange, that now it fhould become a queftion what mora lity \& founded upon, or, perhaps, whether it has any foundation in nature at all. This may, poffibly, be thought to favour of uhi- verjal jcepticifm, or that there is no fifch thing as certainty in nature. However, fo it is, that the ground of morality is become dijputable. By morality I apprehend is meant that rettitude, fitnefi, or propriety of affion, which is fuppofed to take place, or ought to take place among intelligent beings, as fuch propriety of action approves, or recom- mends itfelf to their intelligent nature, and A 2 is
is the law of it; and its contrary, viz. «»- propriety of affiony is fuppofed unworthy to be chofen by them, as it is in its own nature dif approve able. The ground of this difparity is fuppofed to be previous in nature, as re- fulting from the natural and effential diffe rence in things ; which difference is fuppofed to exhibit a lawy or rule of aftion to intelli gent beings, or a reafon why fuch beings (hould chufe to aft, or not to aft, and why they ought to adl one way rather than an other ; a conformity^ or nonconformity of ac tion to which rule being that which denomi nates a&ions, and pcrfons, as relative to thofe aftions, to be good, or bad, virtuous, or vi cious. This rule, or reafon of action, is fometimes called the law of nature^ the ;#0- nz/law, and the law otreajbn, as it is fup pofed to be the offspring of nature, and, as fuch, to be written on the tables of every man's heart, and as it is fuppofed to be a reasonable ', or proper rule of action to all in telligent beings, who are capable of difcern- ing fuch propriety and impropriety of adion, as aforefaid.
That there is fuch a rule, or reafon of ac tion, as above mentioned, and what it is grounded upon, is \Satejktfift of our prefent enquiry. But before I proceed, I think, it will be proper to premife, that the term ac tion is not here ufed to exprefs the bare, fim- ple idea of motion, but motion under a cer tain dire^lion^ or as a means to feme end ;
this
[ 5 ]
this is the complex idea of the term action, when confidered as good, or bad. Again, the terms, viz. good, (when ufed to exprefs natural good,) pleafure, happinefs, &c. are ufed fynonymoufly; by which is meant, what is pleafing and agreeable: and the terms, viz. evil, (when ufed to exprefs na tural evil,) pain, mifery, &c. are alfo ufed fynonyrnoufly ; by which is meant, what is afflictive and difagreeabk. Again, I here ad mit, or take for granted, two points, without attempting to prove either ; viz. Jirft, that there is not an univerfal famenefs; and, fe- 'condly, that there is not an univerfal indtfc* rence in nature. By there not being an uni verfal famenefs in nature, I mean, that plea fure is not the fame thing as pain, that a cube is not the fame thing, or kind of thing, as a fphere, &c. the ideas annexed to theie terms being as really diftinSt and different in nature, as the terms or founds are, which they are expreffed by. And that this is the truth of the cafe is evident to me, becaufe I perceive it to be fo; that is, the bare,jimple perception of a fphere and a cube prove to me, that a Jpbere is not the fame thing, or kind of thing, as a cube ; and it is evident to me from fuch fimple perception only, nor does it admit of any other kind of proof; and therefore, it cannot otherwife be proved to an other. If I fhould be called upon to prove, that a cube is not the fame thing as a fphere, I muft decline it) for as I can only prove it
to
[6]
to myfelf, by myjight o.n& feeling; fb I eafi only recommend to others the ufe of their fenjeSy as the only means to obtain conviction by. By there not being an univerfal indiffe rence in nature, I mean, that pleafure and pain are not equally eligible, equally deiirable j but, on the contrary, pleafure is in nature better, and more defirable than pain. Pleafure is a natural good, which is the proper objeft of defire, and worthy of enjoyment ; where as pain is a natural evil, which is the proper object of averfion, and^/ to be avoided. But then, this is not proved by argumentation, but by fimple perception only, as in the other cafe. If any perfon ihould doubt of the truth of thefe points, (fuppofing that can be,) then fuch perfons are not concerned with, and therefore, are not applied to, in the prefent enquiry. Thefe things being premifed, I obferve, That happinefs is the end of being to' intelligent beings. Barely to be is no benejit ; and therefore, is not better than non-exif- tence. To be miferable is a real difadvan- tage ; afid therefore, is ivorje than not to be. To be happy is a real benefit; and therefore, is better than not to be ; and much better than to be miferable. From thefe premifes, I think, this conclufion follows, viz. that to be happy is the only defirable ftate> or that kappinsjs is the only end of being to intelli gent beings. And if happinefs be the end of being to intelligent beings ; then happinefs, or the vknv and profped of it, muft be a
pro-
' [ 7 ]
proper ground of attion to them, fuch aft ion being confidered as a means to that end, Thus far, I prefume, #//, who may be con fidered as concerned m the prefent queftion, are agreed; and beyond this, perhaps, they may in fart greatly differ ; and therefore, after this, what is the truth of the cafe, muft not be prefumed, but enquired into. And for the better fettling of this point, I \v \\ljirjl {hew, what I apprehend the truth of the cafe to be, and the grounds upon, which my judgment is formed with regard to it; and then I will confider it, when put in the oppofite light.
Happinefs is a natural good, the enjoy ment of which is a real benefit; and that affords a proper ground of action to an intel ligent being, to obtain and fecure it. Mi- fery is a natural evil, the fuffering of which affords a proper ground of action to an intel ligent being, to remove or prevent it. And as happinefs and mifery admit of degrees, fo a greater degree of happinefs is rather to be chofen and purfued, than a lejs ; and a lefs degree of mifery is rather to be borne or fubmitted to, than a greater. And as hap pinefs is in nature better than no happinefs, and much better than mifery ; fo it is tor that reafon rather to be chofen and purfued for one's felf, than not ; and much rather than mifery. I fay, this muft be the cafe, be- caufe happinefs is better for one's Je If \.\\zn no happinefs, and much better than mifery. A-
gain,
[8]
as happincfs is in nature better than non-happinefs, and much better than mi- fery, fo it is for that reafon rather to be communicated to another or others than not, and much rather than mifery; and for the fame reafon a greater degree of happinefs is rather to be communicated than a lefs : I fay, this mujl be the cafe ; becaufe thereby there is fo much more good, more happinefs, introduced into the creation, (which is in it- felf greatly defirable, and therefore, worthy to be introduced) than otherwije there would be. And as happinefs is better, and prefe rable, as aforefaid, fo the pleafure or happi nefs of each individual jelf is better to itfelf in an equal degree, than the happinefs of any other individual ; and therefore, it is ra ther to be chofen, and purfued by, and for itfelf, than for any other*, when fuch equal pleafure to both is incompatible. And this is the cafe, when fuch happinefs of an indi vidual comes in competition with the hap pinefs of a multitude-, becaufe a multitude is no other than a collection of many indi viduals, whofe happinefs is only the happi nefs ' of each individual felf\ of which that multitude is compofed. The cafe is the fame, as to the prevention, or removal of mifery^ the abfence of which may be called negative happinefs. Pain or mifery is a natural evil, which is afflifiive and grievous to be borne, according to its meafure and degree; and that renders it proper or reasonable, that it
fhould
[9]
fhould be prevented or removed, as well for others as for ourfefoes, tho' our care and concern for ourfelves is, in order of nature, prior to our concern for others, as we are nearer and dearer to ourfelves, than we can poffibly be to others ; and therefore, our firji care ought to be for ourfelves. And as happinefs is better ^ and preferable^ as afore- faid, fo that exhibits a proper ground or rea- fon to an intelligent being, to forego fome low degree of pleafure to himfelf, when he can greatly heighten the pleafure of another, and more efpecially of a multitude thereby ; and likewife to bear fome fmall degree of pain himfelf) when thereby he can relieve an other, or others, from an affliflion or bur then moft heavy and grievous to be borne, and which, were he in bis, or their cafe, he would greatly and very reafonably defire to - be delivered from. I fay, it would- be a proper reafon to an intelligent being to ad: thus, as hereby he would introducers much the more happinefs into the creation, (which is greatly defirable,) than tiherwije there would be. And tho', in fuch cafes, the kind, the benevolent agent would be, in fome low degree, a Jiifferer ; yet the much greater good^ which would be done to othert thereby, would be a reafon more than fuf- ficient to a rightly well-difpofed mind, a mind that is fenfible what pleafure and pain are, to deny itfelf willingly and chearfally for their fakes, Befides, a good, a kind, a B bene-
. c I0
benevolent mind, a mind that is difpofed to do good for goodnejs Jake, from a fenfe of the ufefulnefs and wortbinefs of fuch a con duct, a mind, which is not Junk into, which is not degenerated into, abfolutefelfijhnejs, fuch a mind will naturally ta/?^ fo much pleafure, and feel fo much fatisfafiion from a fenfe of his having done good, as aforefaid, as will more than compenjate for #// that he has fuffered, all that he has denied himfelf of, in fo doing. Indeed, an abfolutely felfifli mind can tafte no fuch pleafurey nor feel any fuch JatisfaEKon : for were every intelligent nature in the univerle to be made com- pleatly happy by his means, it could be no otherwife, nor no farther, a ground of plea- fure and fatisfaftion-to him, than as his own felf-good was promoted thereby. If it be equally indifferent to each, and every indivi dual intelligent being, whether any, or all intelligent beings be either happy or mijera- ble, but himfelf, (which is fuppofed to be the cafe,) then the happinefs or mijery of any, or all other intelligent beings cannot make him more, or lefs happy, or miferable, than otherwife he would be ; becaufe there is no thing in the cafe, which can poflibly be, in any degree, a ground of pleafure to him, or the contrary. I here confider the cafe, as it is in nature, abftracledly from merit and de merit ^ and independent of felf-good ; and therefore, it muft, and will be the fame, whether Jeff has any concern in the cafe, j or
I C " ]
,er not. To communicate happinefs is in it- felf good, commendable, and praife- worthy, whomever that happinefs is communicated to, or by -, and it is fo, when confidered ab- Jlraffedly from felf ; and therefore, it ' mufi be fo, whether this, or that particular felf be interefted in it, or not. To be made happy is better than not, arid much better than to be made miferable; and therefore, to make happy is better than not, and much better than to make miferable, whomever that happinefs be relative to. And from what I have obferved, I hope it appears, that diftnterefted benevolence is a proper prin ciple of adtion to an intelligent being.
And if the cafe be, as I have reprefented it, namely, that pleafure is a natural good, and pain is a natural evil, and therefore, pleafure is preferable, and ought rather to be chofen for one's felf y and to be communicated to others, than not, and much rather than pain, (fo that there is an obvious reafon, arifing from the nature of things, for the partaking^ and for the communicating of pleafure ; and an obvious reafon againft the partaking, and again it the communicating of pain ;) then morality, or that propriety and redlitude of aftion, mentioned above, commonly called the moral law, and the law of nature (as diftinguifhed from all laws, that are grounded on mere will,} this rule or law is founded upon a rock, which is immoveable, viz. upon invariable and eternal truth : then morality B 2 is
C
is what it is, independent of revelation, of the doflrine of futurity, and of the confide- ration of a Deity ; becaufe it muft, and 'will be the fame, whether thefe, or either of thefe, be taken into the account, or not: then there is a proper ground for, and an obvious diftindtion betwixt virtue and vice. When virtue is confidered in a larger and more general fenie, then all adions, that are confonani to the aforefaid propriety of action or moral law, come under the denomination of virtuous actions ; and all actions, that are repugnant to that law of nature, are vicious. And if virtue be confidered in a more parti- cular and retrained fenie, then whoever be- netfolently *, that is, voluntarily communi cates happinefs to another, (when no circum- flance intervenes to bar the propriety of that communication,) without any view, hope, or expedition of ferving hi mje/f thereby, any otherwife than that he may reasonably hope and expert, that others will {hew him the like kindneli, when there is thejame ground for it ; fuch communication is properly called virtue -, and the communicator is fofar, and inthat inftance, a virtuous man; he is a. friend and a benefactor to the intelligent world, and
* If the /firing of a6lion in doing good to another, be the good the other is to reap by that a&ion, and not the good of the a ft or ; then this is properly a benevolent aclion, or bene volence is the/pn»g of that adtion. But if one intelligent be ing does good to another, for the fake of lerving hitnfelf there by ; then it is not benevolence properly fpeaking, but felfjb- ntfs, which is the ground of that atiion.
13
is highly worthy of recompence or reward upon account thereof. And he who volun tarily and caufelefsly, that is, without any proper, or rea finable ground, communicates mifery to another ', fuch communication is pro perly called vice, and the communicator isfo far, and in that inftance, a vicious man ; he is an enemy and injurious to the intelligent world, and thereby renders himfelf the pro per object of a juft refentment, that is, of correction and punifhment. In this view of the cafe, that kindnefs, that friendlinefs, that diiinterefted bounty, which we fee take place in the world, can ea/ily &&& fairly\& accounted for, viz. becaufe benevolence, from whence they all flow, is a proper principle of adlion to man, as he is an intelligent being. Upon the prefent fuppofition there is & proper ground for gratitude, for juftice in discharging all obligations, and for every other facial virtue among men. In this view of the cafe, that fympathy, that mourning with them that mourn, and rejoycing with them that rejoice, which we fee take place among men, this can fairly be accounted far, viz. becaufe bene- volence, which is a proper principle of action to intelligent beings, naturally leads men to have a mutual concern for each other's well doing, and to be mutually ' affetted with each other's cafe. And, in this view of the cafe, the conftitution of nature can fairly be accounted for 3 all that wijdom and goodne/s, that has been fo amply displayed in information, and
production
' c
production of the various fpecies of animals, which inhabit this earth, and all the provi- Jion, that is made for their fubfiflence, and to defend them from the evils and dangers, they are expofed to; I fay, all this can fairly be accounted for, upon a fuppofition that be nevolence is a proper principle of adtion to in telligent beings : becaufe then it mufl have been benevolence, difmterefled benevolence, which dijpofed the Deity to become that boun tiful and kind parent to his creatures, which the conftitution of the natural world plainly (hews him to be. And, upon the prefent fuppofition, the wifdom and goodnefs, which is particularly exemplified in the human con ftitution, the affections that diipofe men to fociety, to be compaffionate to, and tender of each others welfare, and the like, this is all eafily accounted 'for ', as all thefe powers and affections naturally lead men to that benevo lence^ which \szproper principle of aftion to intelligent beings. And, upon the prefent fuppofition, there is a proper ground for calling men to an account for their behaviour, and for rewarding or punching them both in this world, and in the world to come, accord ing as they have vittuoujly purfued the great end of being to each one's felf, and to all other intelligent beings, and have afted agreeably to the law of their natures ; or as they have ixciwfly a£led contrary to both. Thus I have mevvn, what I apprehend the truth of the cafe to be j and if it mould be
other-
•;•'. [ '5 ]
otherwife, than what I have reprefented ifj yet it is greatly to be wijhed fasti, it were fo; becaufe the good, the much greater good of the intelligent world does moft apparently depend upon it ; and that may be confidered as a prefumptive argument of its truth.
Having thus confidered, what appears to me to be the truth of the cafe, I now pro ceed to confider it, when put in the oppofite light ; and which, I think, will be fully ex- prefled in a few words; viz. \hatfelfijhnefs is the only, or ihefole and univerfal principle of a&ion to intelligent beings, and, as fuch, it is the law of their natures. And, in con- fequence of this principle, it is right, proper, or reafonable, that each individual (hould purfue his own intereft, or greater felf-good, in all ways and by all means, by which it can moft effectually be obtained ; and he is to do this at all hazard, even tho' it be at the ex- pence of the happinefs of all other intelligent beings ; and that no intelligent being is any way obliged, nor indeed will be concerned to purfue the good, the happinefs of any other individual, any otherwife or any farther, than as his own felf-good is, or may be pro- moted thereby, or, at leaft, as it appears to him to be fo. And as I apprehend this to be a fair and a true reprefentation of the (late of the cafe, which now comes under confideration j fo it feems to me to be found ed on mere dogmatijm, as having no jblid principle in nature or reafon for its fupport, * or
; / C 16
or for it to be grounded upon. For tho' it i§ highly proper or reafonable, that every intel ligent being fhould purfue his own greater Jeff-good and endeavour to obtain the higheji happinefs, that his own nature and the con- ftitution of things will admit ; yet it does by no means follow, that he ought not, or will not difintereftedly ufe his endeavour to pro mote the good of others, and even deny him- Jelf fome low degree of pleafure for their fakes ; I fay, this will not follow from the above premifes; nor, furely, can any good reafon be given, why a man ought not or will not be a good man, by difintereftedly endea vouring to make his fellow creatures happy. However, the above doctrine of abfolute felfifhnefs is abetted-, and therefore, for the prefent, let it be admitted, that we may fee how the cafe will ftand upon that fuppo- fition.
And here I obferve, that if nature exhi bits but only one common principle of action to intelligent beings, viz. Jelf-good; then there \sjcarce any place for the above-men tioned diftinctions of moral, immoral, &c. For fuppofing the wav and means to felf- good be conjidered, and called morality, or propriety of action, (which, in the other view of the cafe is proper and true, fo far as fell- ifhnefs is kept within due bounds, and is not indulged to excefs;) then as all actions fpring from that principle of Jelf-good only, and are all directed only to that end, they
muft
1 17] .."•
muft all be morally good in the intention > whatever they may be in the event; and, furely, actions ought to take their denomi nation from the intention, rather than from an event) which was not intended. And as> in this view of the cafe, all affions will be morally good, (that is, felfiQi ;) fo there will be no place for its oppolite, viz. benevolence, which in the prefent cafe is immorality, or moral evil-, becaufe nature does not afford a motive or temptation 'to it. The cafe is the fame with refpect to the diftindion of virtue and vice. For if felfijhnefs be confidered to be virtue, as being proper, and what nature leads to, and benevolence, (which is its con trary) be deemed vice, as being unnatural, or contrary to the law of nature; then, tho' virtue may take place among men, yet vice will not, becaufe there is nothing in nature to lead to it. And then, tho* virtue may admit of degrees, (as he, who takes the foorter and quicker way to felf-good by rob bery and theft, provided he does it with fafety to himfelf, may be confidered to be much more virtuous, than he, who gets his bread in the Jweat of his face j) yet this is what benevolence, or vice does not admit; becaufe there is not, nor will be any fuch thing, as there is nothing in nature to lead men to it. And as there is np place for benevolence, fo the cafe is the fame, as to gratitude and juflice -, becaufe a man cannot poffibly come under any obligation to any C other,
[
other, but himfelf, feeing others do not ferve him upon his account, or for his fake, but only for their own. Nor can any fuch juftice take place, as coniifts in rewarding virtue, and punijhing vice, as to this world. For tho' virtue or felfifhnefs does take place ; yet, furely, it has no claim to reward. He that robs, or cheats his neighbour of ever fo great a fum, and makes himfelf ever fo happy thereby, tho' this may entitle him to the character of a very virtuous man, yet it can give him no claim to a reward ; becaufe, as all his virtue centers in himfelf only, fo he can have no demand upon others, on account thereof. And if there were of this kind of vice, viz. benevolence, which upon the prefent fuppofition there will not ; yet if no one is a fufferer by it, but the benevolent perfon, fuppofing him to be a fufferer, it cannot be a proper ground of vengeance and punim- ment. And, upon the prefent fuppofition, the doctrine of the corruption of nature muft needs be groundlefs. For tho' thztje/jijh dij- pojition, which naturally takes place in all men, and is the only ground and reafon of action to them, may poffibly be weakened in fome individuals, through the weaknejs and alteration, that may take place in their re- fpective conftitutions, by which their inte- reft may be purfued with lejs vigor, than before -y yet that difpofition can be neither corrupted^ nor fupplanted, becaufe there is no oppofite, no other principle in nature, to
corrupt
I . • [19]
corrupt it with, or fupplant it by ; an4 therefore, to talk of the corruption of na ture, muft needs be abjurd. And, upon the prefent fuppoiition, there can be no ground of gratitude, and thankfulnefs to the Deity ; for what we are, and have-, becaufe, as the Deity is an intelligent being, fo what he has done for us, could not be on our account , and for our fakes , but only for his own. Nor will gratitude and thankfulnefs to the Deity turn to any account to us; and therefore, there can be no ground, or reafon for them. And,
This leads me to obferve further, viz. that if felfimnefs be the only,, thejole principle of action to intelligent beings ; then the whole vegetable and animal creation, yea the whole conftitution of nature cannot be accounted for. An abfolutely Independent and Jelf-fuf- jicient being could not call into being fuch "a conftitution of things, to anfwer any pur- pofe to himfelf-, becaufe he cannot poffibly reap any advantage from it : and an abfolutely Jelfift Deity would not do it, to anfwer any purpofe to others; becaufe there is no prin ciple in nature to excite him to it ; and there fore, it would not have taken place at all. But the conftitution of nature does take place-, and therefore, the principle under confide- ration muft needs be ifalje principle. I have here fpoken of the conftitution of the natu ral world in general-, for were I to defcend to particulars, it would be endlefs. If the Deity has no principle to adt from, but fel- C 2 fiilinefst
[ -ao]
fifhnefs, (which muft be the cafe, upon the prefect fuppolition :) then he could not pof- fibly be the parent of the natural world, be- caufe there is no principle in nature, which could poffibly excite, or dijpoje him to pro duce fuch a conftitution of things. And if God be not the founder of the natural world $ then the queftion will be, Who is? fo that I fear, if the principle under confederation fhould be purfued much farther \ it would not fall greatly fhort of atbeifm. For, if the conftitution of the natural world was not the produce of an intelligent being, as, I think, upon the prefent fuppofition it 'was not, becaufe the marks of a difinterejled be nevolence moft obvioufly appear in it; then the argument for a Deity ^ arifing from the works of creation and providence, is funk and loft. And then it will be proper for thofe overfelfijh gentlemen to confider, -w\&t foun dation theifm has to reft upon. As to the arr gument a priori for the exijlence of a Deity, that, I imagine, \stooabftruje for the gene-* rality of mankind to receive conviction from, And as the divine conducft cannot be ac counted for upon the prefent fuppofition, viz. \hztJetjiJJmejs is the only principle of adioa to intelligent beings ; fo neither can the con- du6t of mankind. From whence comes all that kindnefs, that friendfhip, that difmter- efted bounty, that obvioufly takes place in the world, (bad as it is,) if there be no fuch |hing as difinterejled benevolence, in nature ? To
few
..,,. -
fay, that men do good to each other upon account, and for the fake of that pleafure, that will accrue to them/elves thereby, is moft abfurd-, becaufe, as it muft be perfe&fy in different to an abfolutely felfifli being, whe ther any, or all other beings be happy, or miferable, but himfelf: fo the happinefs of any, or all other beings, tho' procured by his means, cannot pofiibly minijier the leaft degree of pleafure ; becaufe there 'will not, nor cannot be any thing in the cafe, which can be a ground of pleafure to him. If it be equally indifferent to me whether any, or all other beings be happy or miferable, then the happinefs or mifery of any, or all other beings in the univerfe cannot poffibly be to me a ground of pleafure, or the contrary. And, if the doing good to another, be, in any inflance, an occafion of pleafure to an abfolutely felfifli being ; then fuch pleafure does not ariie from zjenfe of the good done to, and of the happinefs of another, but only from the benefit, the happinefs, that accrues to the affor thereby. Or, if it ihould be faid, that publick and private good are fo connected, and have fuch a depen dence upon each other, that a man cannot do good to another, without being infers/led in, and doing good to himfelf thereby ; and that a fenfe of this is the ground of aftion to men, when they do good to each other, as aforefaid : to this it may be anfwered, tho' publick and private good and evil are in fome
jnea-
meafure connefted, and become fubfervient to each other, yet they are notfo connected, as that the good or evil, which one member of fociety partakes of, becomes a good or evil to every other member thereof. So far from it, that the reverfe to this is fometimes the cafe ; as when one man is enriched by the impoveri/hing of many. Private good and evil, in abundance of inftances, are purely perjbnal, and extend no farther than the re ceiver ; much leis do they recoil back good or evil to the doer. If a man feeds his hun gry neighbour, his own good is no farther con nefted with it, than thepleajure and fatisf ac tion, which arifes from his having performed fo kind an aftion. Indeed, when private evil becomes fo general, as to diffolve the bonds of fociety, and men in general become beafts of prey to each other, as being under no publick check or reftraint, which isftldom the cafe; then, as private good fuffers, fo publick good fuffers with it, and then it will be the inter eft of the moft felfifh, to join with others in reftoring a publick intereft, for their mutual fecurity. But whilit the bonds of fociety are maintained, as it will be the intereft -, fo, (upon the prefent fnppo- fition,) it muft be the duty of every man to rob, and fteal, and cozen, and cheat his neighbours, if he can ferve himjelf thereby. I fay, it will be his duty, or aft ing confonant to the law of his nature, to att thus, provid ed he can do it withfafety to bimjelf; and
even
even to cut his neighbour's throat, if he can promote his own Jelf-good thereby. So that all that kindnefs, friendship, and difinte- refted bounty, which every day take place in the world, remain to be accounted for. Were I to enumerate all the abfurd and bad confequences, which naturally and obvioufly follow this dodrine of abfolute felfiflmefe, by the (hewing of which it would be expofed to contempt^ it would be endlefs.
And that this felfifh dodrine fhould be
advanced by chriftians, by men who value
themielves upon being the difciples and fol
lowers of Jefus Chrift, yea, and who affume
to themfelves the charader of being teach-
ers, and guides to their brethren in Cbriji's
name, and by virtue of his authority, is
fomething extraordinary ; becaufe the <wor-
thinefs and valuablenefs of Chrift's doffrine,
of his character, and conduft, is grounded on
the contrary fuppoiition, viz. that benevolence
is a becoming, a noble, and a proper principle
of adion to intelligent beings. Jefus Chrift
is reprefented as coming into the world to
Jeek, and to fave mankind, and that what he
did, zn& Jiiffered, was ultimately directed to
this end : whereas, upon the prefent fuppo-
fition, he was a moft mercenary being, who
came into the world only^ and wholly to ferve
himjelf\ and to promote his own greater felf-
good thereby. And if fo, then wherein lies
his merit ? or what is there in his cafe to be
boa/led of? However, Jefus Chrift affumed
2 the
the character of a benevolent perfen, and alfb made benevolence the charadleriftick of J//a- plefoip to him. Hereby ft all all men knowf that ye are my difciples, if ye have love, [not to yourfelves, but] one to another : fo that to fay the leaft, Jefus Chrift muft needs have been, according to thefe men, znarch-heretick, as to this doctrine of abfolute felfi(hnefs. St. John ftands likewife juftly chargeable in this refpect, i John iv« 7. Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God : which muft needs be heretical ; for if St. John had been truly orthodox, he would have exprefled himfelf thus, — Beloved, let us love our/elves, forfelf- love is of God. St. Peter, St. Paul, and the reft of the apoftles, whofe writings are with us, muft all of them likewife have greatly erred, as thole writings do plainly (hew. And indeed, all the books of the New Tefta- ment muft be heretical, becaufe therein bene volence is highly recommended, which tends . greatly to corrupt and mijlead mankind, were that practicable ; which, indeed, is not, be caufe men acl: from feljijhnefs only, there be ing no oppofite, no other principle in nature, to divert them from it.
And that this Jel/ijb doftrine fhould be trumped up in aid of divine revelation, is likewife very Jirange. For as all men are by nature led to be felfifti, and there is no oppofite, no other principle in nature to di vert them from it, or difpofe them to be otherwife ; fo experience {hews, they are by
this
this means felfifn enough of all conscience -y and therefore, do not need a divine revela tion to make them more Jo ; and confequent- ly, fuch a revelation rmift needs be ufe/e/s. Befides, there will be different degrees of virtue or felfiflinefs, as well without a reve lation, as with it. Some men will purfue their in te reft more vigoroujly %\\& fuccefsfully^ than others, by which they will get the ft art ^ and have the advantage of the more indolent and flothful. I fay, this will be the cafe both with, and without a revela tion : and therefore, what need is there of a revelation ? or what purpoje can it ferve ? And fuppofing there will be a future retribu tion in another world, it alters not the cafe; becaufe then there will be different degrees of felfifhnefs for the Deity to reward in it, (if fuch an abfurd fuppofition may be ad mitted,) whether a divine revelation be given, or not. There will be Jonathan Wilds * and other heroes in virtue, who will wigo- roujly and undauntedly purfue their relpective interefts, or what appears to them to be their greater felf-good, in fpite of the gaol, the whipping-poft, the pillory, the gallows, and all the laws and means, that may be ufed to r eftrain them from it. And if there are dif ferent manfions in heaven, then there will
D be
* Jonathan Wild, commonly called the thief-catcher, who had his refidence in London, and was the head or principal of a large gang of robbers, thieves, and pickpockets, who were undei his direction, was executed at Tyburn, May 24, 1725.
be thofe heroes in felfifhnefs, to take the up per places in them ; and therefore, a revela tion ma ft needs be ufeleft, becaufe the purpo- fes of virtue or feliiihnefs, both as to this world, and that to come, can as well, and perhaps be belter anfwered without it.
If it mould be laid, that felfiihnefs works fo Jlrongly in man, as there is no principle in nature to check it, or counter -balance it; that it will unavoidably lead men to be beafts of prey to each other, they will be continu ally robbing, fpoiling, and deftroying one an other; by which means a publick or gene ral good will befrujlrated and dif appointed y except mankind are lay 'd under ibme proper and Jiijicient reftraint : to prevent which bad ftate of things, the Deity has provided ^future flate of exiftence to men, in which jlate mens intereft will be infinitely greater, than it is in this prefent world; and, in order to make that future ftate fubjervient to a publick good in this world, the Deity has put upon men a kind of forced benevolence, or benevolence improperly fo called, by re quiring men, and making it their duty, to deny themfeives, and to put a bar to their prefent intereft, by doing good toothers, and abound- ing in good works in this world, in order to It curt to themfeives, and to heighten, their greater ielf-good in another; and that all this is difcovered, and rendered certain to men by revelation, and this is the purpofe divine re velation is intended to ferve. Upon this I
obferve.
obferve, that if, when men are left to follow nature^ they will become beafts of prey to each other, &c. then, as this is their natural ftate, fo it may well be fuppofed to be the beft ft ate they were intended for ; and to fup- pofe, that the purpojes of the Founder of this world can better be anfwered, by putting upon men fomething that is forced and tin- natural^ than can be done by the produce of nature itfelf, feems next to a paradox. A- gain, if a forced benevolence, or benevo lence improperly fo called, be necejfary to anfwer the purpofe of a publick good, (as is here fuppofed, elfe the Deity would not force it upon men, to anfwer that purpofe,) from hence it will follow, that, if true be nevolence be not the offspring of nature, then it would be much better^ and there fore, it is greatly to be wified for, that it was $ becaufe the putting a force upon na ture is a kind of dejperate attempt, according to the proverb, Patience by force is a medicine for a mad dog. Again, I obferve, that fup- pofing mens following nature will effectually fruftrate a general good, (which, indeed, upon the prefent fuppolition, is very natu rally fuppofed, becauie abfolute felfifhnefs is in a manner oppojite to publick good, as the prevailing of one, is the deprej/ion of the o- ther;) I lay, if this be the cafe, then the queftion is, how comes the Deity to be con cerned to prevent it ? For if nature exhibits only me common motive to a&ion to intelli- D 2 gent
gent beings, viz. felf-good ; then the Deity cannot have any other motive to act from ; and from hence the queftion arifes, viz. how can an abjolutcly jelfifo Deity be concern ed for a publick good, or, indeed, for any good at all, excepting felf-good, when all foreign good is in nature quite diftindt from, and altogether irrelative to his cafe ; and therefore, he can have no excitement to it ? So that it is almoft as hard to conceive, how an abiblutely felfifh Deity can be concerned ,fpr a publick good ; as it is to conceive, how :t;wo parallel lines can meet in a point.
If it ihould be faid, that felfifhnefs is the Jpring of action to the Deity, in his pro moting publick good\ becaufe he does not promote it for the fake of his creatures, but only on account of that pkafure that arifes to lim/elf, from their happineis : to this it may be anfweredJv/sr/?, that if the happinefs oi the creature is a ground of pleaiure to the Deity ; then pleafure to the Deity is the effect., and not the caufe of the creature's happinefs. Again, if the happineis of one intelligent be ing be not the natural and proper object of deiire to another intelligent being, and there fore, is not worthy and proper to be commit- nifqtfd by him; then the queftion is, how can the happineis of one be a natural and proper ground of pleafure to the other ? Surely it cannpt. If it be equally eligible and jndif- ferent to one intelligent being, whether any, or all other intelligent beings be either happy
or
3
or miferable, (which is the prefent cafe ;) then the happinefs of one cannot poflibly minifter pleafure to another ; becaufe there is nothing in the cafe to excite it. On the other fide, if the happinefs of one intelligent being is the natural and proper objeffi of defire to others, and therefore, fuch happinefs is worthy and proper to be communicated by them, and even to deny themfelves a lejs degree of pleafure for its fake ; then the happinefs of another will become a natural excitement, and a proper ground^ pleafure to them. And this muft be the cafe with refped to the Deity, fo far as it is applicable to him. The Deity, upon the prefent fuppofition, is influenced by no other principle butfel/iftne/s, and it is equally indif ferent to him, whether any, or all other be ings be happy, or miferable *, and therefore, as there is nothing in nature to excite him to communicate happinefs to others, fo, were he to do it without any motive to excite him to it, then their being made happy by his means, could not be a ground of pleafure to him, becaufe there would be nothing in the cafe for him to be pleafed with, (as his own felf-good would be out of the queftion ,) nor to be an excitement of pleafure to him. And this I take to be & jiifficient an/wer to what is ufu- ally urged, viz. that men do good to others, not for the fake of thofe they do good to , but for the fake of themjehes, and on account of that pleafure, which will accrue to themjehes by fb doing 5 whereas, if there were not an
[ 3° ]
antecedent propriety and worthinefs in doing good, then the doing it could not poflibly re coil back pleafure to the doer, becaufe there would be no ground for, nor any excitement to pleafure in the cafe ; aad therefore, the making doing good to others a ' ground of pleafure to the doer, is, in my opinion, giving up the point, and proves what it is brought to con fute.
Among thofe, who have been the abettors of the doctrine of abfolute felfijlmefs, none, I think, has been more open, and thereby more fair, nor has carried the matter farther, than the author of the tract, entitled, Self-love and virtue only reconciled by religion , &c. In which trad: the author has averred, (if I remember rightly,) that, fuppofing this world were our all ; then it would be reajonable for every man to purfue his own pleafure at all hazard^ even tho' it were at the expence of the hap[>inefi and lives of the reft of our fpecies ; fo that the abettors of the aforefaid doctrine ftand difpofed, upon their own principles, (fuppofing futurity out of the cafe,) to make an hundred thoufand millions of millions of men extremely mijerabk) through the whole period of their exiftence, provided they can add to their own fiort-lived pleafure in ib doing ; and fuch a conduct as this would be reafonable, upon theie mens principles. It would be reajonable for a man to rip up women with child, to take their little ones and dafo them in pieces again ft the {tones, and to commit all kinds of violence,
barba-
barbarity and cruelty, provided his own interejl could be ferved thereby. But can it be reafon- able for a man to imbrue his hands in the blood of his aged and tender parent ls, of his loving 'wife, and innocent children, without any provocation given, without any thing to excite his refentment? The anfwer is, that this% and what is a thoujand-fold more favage and cruel, if fuch a thing could be, would be rea- fonable upon theje mem principles ; that is, fup- poCmgfuturity out of the cafe, and fuppofing a man's interejl in this world could be ferved by it. Surely, the vilejl of men have not been fo corrupted, fb degenerated in judg ment and affection, as this; and therefore, the author, I have before referred to, one would think, muft have been fomething out of the ordinary courje of nature, or elfe that he had difcharged himfelf of reajbn and all humane affection, before he undertook to vindicate fuch principles as thefe, by pub- lilliing his pamphlet, (which may be con- fidered as a libel upon reafon, upon human nature, and upon the author of it) to the world.
And as the author, I have referred to, has undertaken to reconcile, (as he calls it,) felf-love and virtue, I therefore obferve far ther, that there is, in my view of the cafe, both a virtuous and a vicious felfifhnefs. Self-love, when exercifed properly, and kept within due bounds, as it is right in itjelf, fo it is morally good, or virtue; and, when this is
the
[3*1
the cafe, then it is not reconciled to virtue^ becaufe it is virtue itfelf. And when felf- love is exercifed improperly, and is carried to an extreme -9 then it is wrong, and then it degenerates into moral evil, or vice : and as fuch felfifhnefs ftands in diredl oppofition to virtue ; fo it can neither be changed into it, nor made to pafs for it ; and therefore, it cannot in any fenfe be reconciled to it. And as there is both a virtuous and a vici ous felfiflmefs ; fo there is alfo both a vir tuous and a vicious benevolence. When be nevolence is exercifed properly, and is kept within due bounds-, then it is according to redlitude, and then it is morally good, or virtue : but when it is exercifed improperly, and is carried to an extreme, (which may be the cafe ;) then it is wrong, and then it degenerates into moral evil, or vice.
Before I leave the fubieft, I beg leave to obferve further, viz. if felf-good be thejole, the universal principle of adtion in nature, and if nature prompts every intelligent being to purfue its greater felf-good, tho' fome will be better qualified than others to difcern wherein their greater intereft lies, and fome will purfue their intereft more vigoroujly and fuccefsfully than others, as experience plainly '{hews, and which, I think, is what is con tended for, when the principle \s fairly Jl ate d and fully explained; then, as the Deity will not be concerned to promote the good of any of his creatures in any conftitution of
things,
[ 33 ]
things, whether now or hereafter, as he cannot poffibly ferve himfelf thereby ; fo he will not make ufe of any means to this end, feeing there is nothing in na ture to lead him to it. To pretend there fore, that God kindly and providentially watches over his creatures for their good ; that he has given to mankind a revela tion, a Saviour and Redeemer, in order to procure, and fecure a greater felf-good to them; that he has fet up a pr i eft hood , whether chriftian or other wife, to inftrufft and minifter to men for their good ; that he has appointed facraments, and prayers, and other inftituted means of grace for their good ; and the like : all fuch pretences muft needs be groundkfs, becaufe there is nothing in nature, which could poffibly excite the Deity to intereft himfelf in, or be any way concerned for the good of his creatures ; and therefore, there is no principle in nature to ground thefe preten ces upon. And were the Deity to act as above, without any thing to excite him thereto, it would anfwer no purpofe to his creature; becaufe nature prompts each in dividual to purfue its greater fclf-good, ac cording to its judgment and capacity, and as tins, frame of its conftitution directs and excites; and therefore, there can be no need of any farther means to this end. There can be no need of parjons and ' E . prayers
[ 34]
prayers * to make men felfifo, becaufe they will be fufficiently fe, whether par- fons and prayers have any concern in the cafe, or not. There can be no need to /'«-. i)oke the Deity, to make men more felfifoi becaufe felfifbnefs is the very conjlitution of nature; and there is no oppofite, no other principle in nature to check, or counter-ba lance it. To fay, that, the abovementioned means are neceflary to engage, and enable men to purfue their greater felf-good in an other world, is begging the queftion ; becaufe there is nothing to ground the prefumption upon, -that there will be to men a greater leif-good in another world ; and if there will, yet the Deity will not be concerned to promote or fecure it; and therefore, will not make uie of any means, to anlwer that purpofe. Or to fay, that God may appoint thole means, to engage men to do good to each other in this world, in order for each one to promote and fecure his own prefenf ielf-good thereby, this muft needs be weak ly urged ; becaufe the Deity can be no more concerned to promote mens prejent, than their fofitre well doing; and therefore, has not appointed means to this end; and be caufe men will be politically good to others, where their interefts appear to be injeparabk, and where they are fure to ferve themjehes
thereby,
* Parfons nnd prayers are here ufed to exprefs all infti tut(d means of grace.
4
[ 35 ]
thereby, whether any pofitive inftitutions take place, or not.
But farther, upon the prefent fuppofition, no good argument can be drawn from the goodne/s of God in favour of any caufe ; be- caufe there is no pretence for fueh kind of reafoning, nor any foundation to ground fuch argument upon. And as to the hopes and expectations men may indulge themfelves in, with regard to futurity, thefe muft needs be childifo and vain -y becaufe an abfolutely felfifo Deify, and an abjolutely felfijh conftitu- tion of things can neither be a proper ground of fafety in our prefent ftate, nor of hope and expectation in any conftitution of things to come. The principle, I have been con- fidering, fubjedts the Deity to that low prin ciple of Jelfijhncfs, which were it the truth of the cafe, then all created beings would perpetually have remained in a ftate of non- exijlcnce, becaufe there would not, there could not have been any thing, any principle in nature, to have excited or difpofed the Deity to have given being to them. The bare ex- ercife of power •, and of knowledge, or judg ment to direct that power, could not have been a ground of action to the Deity in the production of the univerfe, except pro fit to the Deity followed upon it. And what -profit God could make to himfelf, by giving being to his creatures^ is hard to conceive.
£2 The
The cafe is the fame with refped: to any pleafure, the Deity may be fuppoied to have from the exercife of his power, and his judg ment to ufe it ; becaufe it is profit, which is the only ground of pleafure to an abfolutely felfifh being ; and therefore, were there no profit, there could be no pleafure to the Deity, in any of his productions, So that if dif- interejied benevolence, or doing good to others without any view, hope, or expectation of profit to the doer, be not a natural, a pro per, a reafonable, a worthy, and commend able principle of aftion to an intelligent be ing ; then, I imagine, the patrons of the doctrines of abjblute Jelfijhnefs have a difficult tafk upon their hands, as it feems to lie upon them to jhew plainty^ how we all came into being, or how the Deity could pofli- bly be dijpofed to give being to us. Thus I have gone thro', what I propofed, with regard to the ground and foundation of mo rality, and have {hewn, what I apprehend the truth of the cafe to be; which if it be not, then I readily acknowledge, that all my rea/oning and argumentation upon moral Jubjeffs ftand for nought; and which if it (hould be made appear, I am ready publickly to retract. But if what I have before laid down is the truth ; then, I think, what I have offered, muji, and will ftand its ground, whatever oppofition has been, or may be made to it. However,
this
this is a point of high concern to mankind, and is next, if not of equal importance, to the confideration of a Deity. I have alfo confidered the cafe, when put in the op- pofete light y but then, which of thefe is the truth, muft be fubmitted to the judgment of my readers.
THE
THE
Au THO R'S FAREWEL
T O H I S
R E A D E R S.
SECTION I.
The INTRODUCTION.
Wherein thofe points, viz. Of di vine impreffions on mens minds ; of fpecial grace ; of the virtue and merit of faith ; and of St. THOMAS'S unbelief, are parti cularly confidered.
SIRS,
AFTER having had a correfpon- dence with you by writing, for many years paft, which, I truft, has not been altogether ufelefs, nor unacceptable to you ; I now propofe, at the conclufiori of this trad, to take my leave of
you.
[39 ]
you. What I have principally aimed at, in all my writings, has been both to evince, and to imprefs deeply upon your minds, ajuftfenfe of thoje truths, which are of the highejl concern to you. For, tho' I do not think that error, confidered limply as fuch, that is, confidered as a wrong apprehenfion of things, efpecially when all proper meafures have been taken to have the underftanding rightly informed, is either blameable in itfelf, or difpleajing to God, feeing it is what all men are liable, and great ly in danger of falling into, be they ever fo careful \\\ guarding againft it: yet, forafmuch as our opinions have, in fome inftances, a great influence upon our wills, and confe- quently, upon our behaviour; when that is the cafe, then, error, in the event, may be greatly injurious both to ourfelves and others; and therefore, it muft be a matter of moment to have our underftandings rightly directed in all fuch cafes, in order to the rightly di- reding our affections and attions. Some of the points, that I have laboured to imprefs upon the minds of my readers, are thefe that follow, Fir ft, That there is a natural and an effential difference in things, and a law or rule of affe&ion and adtion refulting from that difference, which every moral agent ought to diredt his affections and behaviour by ; and, that nothing but a conformity of mind and life to this rule, or, at leaft, an honejt intention of adting rightly, and a fuitable practice -, will render men pkafmg and accepta ble
C 4° ]
ble to the Deity. Secondly, If men have greatly departed horn the rule abovementioned, and have, by their vicious affections and a£ti- ons, rendered themfelves the proper objeffs of divine refentment; then, as nothing but their repentance and reformation can render them the proper objects of mercy and forgivenefs, fo that, and nothing but that, will be the ground and reafon of God's mercy to them. 'Thirdly, That God will judge the world, and that he will do it, not by capricious humour, and according to arbitrary will; but by, or according to, the eternal rules of right and wrong, that is, by the aforefaid law ; and, in confequence thereof, will reward or punifo men in another world, according as they have, by their good or bad behaviour, render ed themfelves the proper objects of either in this. And, fourthly, That the three foregoing propofitions are the Jam znAjubftance of the gofpel of Chrift, or of what Chrift was, in •3i fpecial manner, fent of God to acquaint the world with. Thefe, furely, are points in which mankind at large are greatly interefted ; and threfore, their being Jet right in thefe matters muft be of the higheft concern to them.
The three firfl of thefe come under the denomination of n atural religion ; that is, ths belief of thefe, and a practice conformable to fuch belief conftitute the pure and uncorrupt- ed religion of reafon and nature -, as they are grounded upon the unalterable nature, and the
eternal
eternal reafon of things, and, as fuch, they are, and muft, and will be the fame, whether there be any divine revelation, or any promul- ged law, or not. Mens relation to, and de pendence upon God, and their relation to, and dependence upon each other, and all obligations that flow from fuch relations and dependen cies, are what they are, antecedent to, and in dependent of any revelation or promulged law; and therefore, are, and muft be the fame, both before, and after fuch promulgation ; and all juft and reafonable expectations^ grounded upon thefe, and upon mens beha viour with refpecl to them, muft be thzfame alfo. So that the grounds of mens acceptance with God, and of their obtaining the divine mercy, and tins jujlnefs and propriety of a fu ture retribution, muft of neceffity be the fame, whether God has made a revelation of his will to mankind, or not. And, as to the fourth and loft point mentioned above, (viz.) that the three foregoing proportions are the fum and fubjlance of the gofpel of Chrift, this, I am fenfible, is fo far from having been generally admitted, that, on the contra ry, great oppofition has been made to it j and men feem difpofed to have no gofpel at all, rather than fuch a gofpel as this. This is a gofpel too plain and intelligible for artful men to make their advantages of, and to build a projitable trade upon ; they muft have a gof pel which isjublime and myfterious, which is out of the reach of the human understanding, and therefore, cannot be judged of by it,
. . .[42]
othdrwife it will not anfwer their purpofes. This is a gofpel too clofely attached to vir^ tue andgoodne/s, for vicious and evil-minded men to be pleafed with ; they muft have a gofpel which will permit them to be eajy under, and which gives them a little indul gence in their vices; and therefore, it is no wonder that the reprefentation I have given of Chrift's gofpel mould be oppofed by many \ tho', by the way> if that reprefen- tation be not the truth of the cafe, then, it would have been better for us that no gofpel had been given at all ; bccaufe any other gof pel but this would have been a great impofi- tion upon mankind. And this leads me to obferve, that the point under confideration is fupported by the abfardity of the contrary fuppofition, fuppofing Chrift's gofpel to be divine. For, had Chrift taught that any thing befides a right difpofition of mind, and a right behaviour, would render men accept able to the Deity ; or that any thing befides repentance and reformation would be the ground of God's mercy to finners; or that any thing oppofite to the eternal rule of right and wrong, would be the rule by which God would judge the world ; fuch doftrines would be plainly repugnant to the nature^ and to the truth of things, and coniequent- ly, muft of neceffity be falfe. So that it is grofly abfurd to fuppofe that any fuch doc trines were taught by Chrift > whilft we ad mit his million to be divine j becaufe, if the
former
[43]
former were the cafe, then, the latter could not be fo ; that is, if Chrift did teach doc trines that are oppojite to what I call his gof- pel, then, his miffion, at leaft, as far as it relates to thefe, could not be divine, nor could any external evidence, how great fo- cver, poffibly prove it to be fuch: This, I think, is the true ftate of the cafe ; and my opponents are at liberty to take which fide of the queftion they pleafe. It is not fufficient to fay, that God is at liberty to make what be will the ground of his favours to men, and of his mercy to finners, and that he may judge the world by what rule he pleafe 3 ; be- caufe, tho' fuch a conduft may comport with the character of an arbitrary and abfolute governor amongft men ; yet, it will not com port with the jiift and proper character of him who is the moft perfect intelligence, and the wife and good governor of the univerfe. There is a rule of affection and aftion for all thofe cafes, that ariies from the natural and the effential differences in things; which rule, we may be certain, God will always abide by, and make it the meafure of his conduct ; and therefore, it is equally as abfurd to fuppofe that God w\\\ add to9 as that he will take from this rule. Thefe are Jbme of the points that I have endea voured to evince, and to imprejs upon the minds of my readers ; not barely as matters jof fpeculation, but ultimately that they may b.e a foundation for the rightly directing F2 and
; . [44] ;
and governing our affedions and aftions. Alas! what will it avail us to believe that nothing but a right difpofition of mind, and a right behaviour, will render us accept able to the Deity; except we are prevailed upon by it to render ourfelves the proper ob- jeffs of God's favour? Or what will it avail a wicked man to believe, that nothing but repentance and reformation will be the ground of God's mercy to fi oners -, except he is led by it to put away from him the evil of his doings, to ceafe to do evil and learn to do well, and thereby to render him- felf the proper objec-t of God's mercy ? Or to what purpofe will it be to believe a judgment to come ; except we are prevailed upon by it to live as tboje who muft give an account of themfelves to God ? This, I fay, is what I have principally aimed at in all my writings, notwithftanding it has been faid that I have written for bread, which I have not been under a neceffity of doing. And tho' I have, for fome time paft, been rendered ca pable of living independent of labour, by being enabled without it to procure thole necejfaries of life, which are fuitable to that rank in the world that God in the courfe of his general providence has placed me in ; yet, this is owing principally to the bounty of my friends, whole kindnejl to me I take this op portunity publickly and thankfully to ac knowledge. And, indeed, (according to the proverb,) Let every one praife the bridge he
goes
[ 45 3
goes over ; the world, bad as it is> or as it may be reprejented to be^ has been a kind world to me ; for could an ex ad: eitimate be made of all the good and evil I have re ceived from others, I dare fay, it would ap pear, that the former has exceeded the latter ten-fold. I mention this to do juftice to the world before I leave it ; and to take off, or, at leaft, to leffen the popular prejudice that has been taken up again ft it in this refpecl:. And, as I have offered my thoughts freely to the world on the points before mentioned, as well as on many other fubjedts ; fo this has introduced an idle and an impertinent en quiry concerning me, namely, what I am 5 whether a believer , or an unbeliever. This enquiry I call idle arid impertinent, becaufe It can anfwer no good end \ and becauie my arguments and reafonings are^y// the fame, that is, they are equally ftrong and con- clufive, or the contrary, whether I am one, or the other of thefe. However, I think, it will be proper to ftate the notion of believer and unbeliever, or infidel, that fo this matter may appear in the clearer light. Whoever affents to a propofition as true, fuch an one is faid, (according to the common way of fpeaking,) to be a believer with refpedl to that propofition, whatever be the ground of that aflent ; whoever doubts of the truth of a propofition, fo as to withold bis affent, and- yet does not believe the contrary, fuch an one is faid to be z/ceptick with refpecl: to it; 1(1 and
46
and whoever, not only •witholds his ajjent to a propoiition, but alib believes the contrary, fuch an one is faid to be an unbeliever •, or in*- jideL As thus, Mahomet was ajpecial mef-r fenger fent from God; with refpecT: to this proportion, whoever qffents to it as true, fuch an one is a believer; whoever doubts of the truth of it, fo as to withold his afient, and yet, does not believe the contrary, that is, does not believe it to be zfalfe propofition, fuch an one is zfceptick, and whoever not only doubts of the truth of that propofition, but alfo believes the contrary, that is, be lieves that Mahomet was not a fpecial mef- fenger fent from God, fuch an one is an un believer ^ or infidel. So that a man may be a believer with refped: to one propoiition -3 a fceptick with regard to another ; and an un^ believer •, or infidel, with refpect to another: and thus all men, of thought and rejleElion^ are believers and fcepticks, and unbelievers or infidels, in fome refpeft or other. And there fore, when thole terms, viz. believer and unbeliever, or infidel, are applied tome, I fup- pofe the enquiry is, whether I do believe that "Jefus Chrijl was a meflenger fent from God, to "make known his will, touching the true way to God's favour and eternal life ? or whe« ther I do- not only withold my affent to this propoiition, but alfo believe the contrary? I fay, I apprehend, this muft be meant, becaufe ptherwife thofe appellations, with re gard to mey are moft faofe and
[47]
nate, and may be applied to any fubje£t So that until the fubjed: is fixed to which thofe terms, viz. believer and unbeliever, are applied, I am not a judge for myfelf, whe ther I am one, or another of thefe. And tho' it would probably be a vain attempt to try to fatisfy fuch inquifitors, feeing, inftead of fatisfying, I fhould, perhaps, rather offend them ; yet, I will fhew my readers, becaufe poffibly it may be of ufe to them, what my fentiments are with refpect to the points before mentioned, as allb on many other fubjefts; together with the reafons, upon which thofe fentiments are grounded. And, in the doing of this, I (hall (as I think I ought,) ftri&ly purfue truth, without re- fpett to per Jons or things, and without pay ing a partial regard to any fyftem of reli gion, whether it be confidered as chrijlian, or otherwife; and accordingly, (hall treat every queftion with plainnefs and freedom, it being, in my opinion, a piece of jujlice which is due to all fubjcfts, that if we make an inquiry about them, we ftiould do it with . plainnefs, fairnejs, and impartiality; and introduce every thing that makes *a- gainft, as well as for the queftion in debate, whether that queftion has been generally ad mitted, or not; this being the moft likely way to come at truth, and therefore, it is not likely that truth will be a fufferer by it. And, indeed, there is the more reafon for a JlriB and impartial examination of fuch
points
]
points as have met with a general accep tance; becaufe that very thing, viz. their having been generally admitted, is too too apt to prejudice us in their favour. Nor {hall I, (I truft,) pay a partial regard to any opinion I myjelf may have been of, at any time part, with regard to any queftion I may have given my judgment upon ; but (hall confi- der it with the fame freedom and imparti ality, as if I had not given any fuch judg ment. For, as I then gave my opinion ac cording to the evidence that appeared, and as it was then prefent to my mind ; fo I fhall do the fame now, how widely foever I may differ from myfelf thereby.
But then, I do not pretend to any extra ordinary illuminations, or divine imprejfions, as having been made upon my mind, be caufe I do not apprehend I have ever expe rienced any fuch thing; and therefore, I have ho other way in which I can purfue truth but that of reafoning and argumen tation only. And tho' there have been, as well in this, as in former ages, many who have pretended to have been favoured with divine impreffions, and thereby with extra ordinary illuminations; yet, I think, they are very unfafe guides ; not only becaufe I cannot difcover any principle, any premises, from which we may conclude, with cer tainty, that their pretences are well grounded-, but alfo becaufe thefe pretenders have, with regard to their dodtrines, greatly differed a-
mong
4
[49]
mong themfelves, infomuch that what fome have held forth and taught as divine truth^ others have exploded as pernicious error. Befides, as there is in man a difcerning power y which renders him capable of diftinguifhing betwixt good and evil, truth and error, (tho', through inattention, and a partial know ledge of the cafe, he is liable to err in the ufe of it;) fo this power is of God\ and that it is fo, is as evident, and as certain, as that we are, becaufe It plainly appears to be a part of our frame and constitution. And that this faculty was, by the Author of our beings, deji.gned and intended to anfwer the purpofe aforefaid, is as obvious, as that our eyes were given us to fee withal ; whereas, I think, we cannot have equal certainty, that any impreffions, made upon our minds, are divine ; and therefore, the former muft, from the nature of the thing, be a much fafer guide than the latter. And, as our difcerning faculty is of God, and is planted in us, by him, to anfwer the aforefaid purpofe; fo, I doubt not, but that in an hone/I and care ful ufe of it we mail render ourfelves approve- able to our Maker; whereas, with regard to the impreffions * that may be made upon our minds, it feems to me altogether uncer- G
* Some of thofe, who pretend to experience the fpecial operations of the Deity upon their minds, do not call thofe operations di<vine im£rcjjionst but divine ivf.ucncc, which terra. is rather more unintelligible, as its fenfe is undeterminate in. the prdent cafe ; but then, whether the term injlusncs is rnads life of for that reafon, I am not a judge.
tain, not oifly whether any of them are di vine, and confequently, whether we ought to be direded by them, but alfo whether we fhali render ourfelves approve able to God by following fo uncertain a guide. However, that I may fet this matter in as clear a light as I can, I will fuppofe, thatjome ideas have been imprefled upon my mind> of which I have indulged the pleafing thought \ that the impreffion w<\$ divine ; this being fuppofed, the queftion is, what is there in the cafe for me fairly and rationally to ground the pre- fumptlon upon, that the imprerlion was divine? And, in order to give a fatisfadory anfwer to this queftion, two things feem neceflary to be enquired into, viz. Firft, What different cir- cumjlances may be fuppofed to attend impref- Jions, by which difference of circumflances one imprefiion may be dijlinguiflieditQrci ano ther? Secondly, What are thofe circumftances, that are peculiar to divine imprejjiom, by which they may be diftinguifhed and cer tainly known, from all other impreffions, that may be made upon the mind? And,^r/?, the enquiry is, what different circumftances may attend impreffions, by which they may be diftinguifhed one from another. And here, I (hail not take notice of all the trifling cir cumftances, that may be fuppoied to attend the cafe; becaufe, 1 think, that is needlefs, and would look more like banter than argu ment j but only of fuch as are mojl material^ wjome of them, at leaft, in order to explain
the
[ 5' ]
the thing ; and accordingly, I obferve, that imprefllons may be ftronger, or weaker, or they may minifter more, or lefs immediate pleafure to the mind; the fubjetl matter im- preffed, when confidered abftradtedly from the impreffion, may alfo be confidered as certain, or probable, m neither •> and it may be of greater or lejs importance, or of no im portance at all ; it may be of concern to fome one, or more, of our fpecies, or of general concern to the whole; it m?.y relate to things Jpi ritual, or temporal-, to things paft, prefent, or to come-y thefe are fome of the mod mate rial circumftances, which may be fuppofed to attend the cafe, and in which one impreffion may be diftinguijbed from another. But then, as to the fecond enquiry, viz. what circum- ftances are peculiar to divine impre/Jions, by which they may be diftinguifhed raid cer tainly known from all other impreffions, which may be made upon the mind, this I am utterly at a lofs to difcover. Whether divine impre (lions zitjlronger, or weaker, than other impreflions ; or whether they give more^ or lefs i immediate pleafure to the mind ; and fo on : this I cannot poffibly come at the knowledge of, as I have no rule to judge by, nor can I have any light or information from the cafe itfelf ; fo that after all my care I may be under a falufiori, if I admit the fuppojition, that the imprefllon was divine ; becaufe I have no way by which I can diftinguiJJ}, with Certainty, divine impreiiions from all other G 2 irn-
Ps*]
impreflions, which may be made upon my mind. And, if this is of neceffity the cafe with me, then, I think, it muft be the fame with all other men. And, if I am dijquali- fied for diftinguiming divine impreffions from any other impreffions, which may be made upon my own mind-, then, furely, I muft be rather more Jo with refped: to the impreflions that are made upon the minds of other men. And this, I hope, will be admitted as zfuf- fcient excufe for my not blindly fubmitting to what may be dictated to me as a divine crack, by thole who may confider themfelves to have been favoured with divine imprefli ons, and extraordinary divine illuminations. To fay, that divine impreffions can no other ways be diftinguifhed, and certainly known, than by an experimental feeling of the thing itfelf, which feeling cannot be defcribed, or exprejfed, and therefore, cannot be explained to others ; this, I think, is taking fandtuary in darknefe, and feems to favour ftrongly of dclujlon, or impofition. If, when ideas are imprelied upon the mind, there is fomething felt, which cannot be exprejjed-, then, the queition is, How do we certainly know that what is thus felt is of God? And, if we have no rule to judge by, in the prefent cafe, but are guided by mere imagination', we think it is divine, therefore it is fo; then, this inexpreffible feeling leaves the cafe in the fame perplexity and uncertainty as before -, there is fomething Jelf, which cannot be de-
Jcribed,
[ S3 ]
i and what is thus felt is prefumed to be by, or from the immediate operation of God, without any thing to ground the pre- ibmption upon; this, I think, is thejum of the evidence, which arifes from thole inex- preffible feelings abovementioned. Whether God does immediately interpofe, and imprefs ideas upon the minds of men, or not, is what I cannot certainly determine with re- fpect to either fide of the queflion, becaufe I have not wherewith to ground fuch a de termination upon ; and therefore, I (hall only obferve, that if God does interpofe, as afore- faid, then, whether this be confidered as a part of the original fcheme of God's gene ral providence, by which he propofed to govern the world, by conflantly imprefiing on mens minds fuch images as each one's re- fpedtive cafe might render ufeful to him ; or whether it be confidered as an acT: of God's fpecial providence, for the removing fuch er rors and evils, as, thro' the weaknefs or vilenefe of men, may have been introduced, and be come greatly injurious to mankind ; I fay, whether a divine interpolation, as aforefaid, be confidered as one, or the other, of thefe, it feems to be jldtable to, and altogether 'worthy of the divine wifdom and good- nefs for the Deity to interpofe, in jitch a way, as that every man may diftinguifh, with certainty., divine impreflions from all other impreflions, that may be made upon his mind 5 becaufe, without this, mankind are
in
[54]
in a moft unguarded and unfafe ftate, as without it they lie greatly expofed to delujwn and impofition, and confequently, to thofe very errors and evils, which divine impreffions are fuppofed to relieve them from ; but then, as this does not appear to have been done,- therefore, it becomes the more doubtful, whe ther there be any fuch thing as divine im- prefllons on mens minds. If it fhould be iaid, that the nature of the thing does not admit of any rule or way, by which divine knpreflions may be diftinguijhed, with cer tainty, from all other impreffions that may be made upon the mind ; and as this is out of the reach of divine wildom arid power to effect, fo it is what we are not tojeek after norexpetf-, if this be the cafe, it will fol low, not only that it muft always be a mat ter of uncertainty, whether there be any fuch thing as divine imprejjiom on mens • minds, but alfo there will be a ftrong prefumption of the contrary ; becaufe divine impreffions, without a certain rule, whereby to diftinguifh them from all other impreffions, cannot in- Jlruft and guide, but only perplex and dif- trefs mankind ; which, furely, the fupreme Deity is not dtfpojed to do/Suppofe it fhould be ftrongly impreiTed upon a man's mind, that it is his duty, and what God requires and expeffs from him, at the clofe of every day, to plunge his 'whole body under water, as a token of his penitence for the fins he had been guilty of the day part, and of G&/'s mercy
[55 ] / ;•
in the forgivenefs of them ; or fuppofe it (hould be impreffed upon his mind,- that it is his duty to cut and wound his body, in fome particular part, at fome certain times, as a token of his abhorrence of himfelf for his tranfgreffions, and of what he might juftly expedl, were God fevere in punifhing him equal to his crimes; or fappofe any other images to be ftrongly impreffed upon a man's mind, in which his duty and behaviour is concerned 5 in this cafe, if he has no rule, by which he can diftingui{h, with certainty, divine impreffions from all other imprefllons, that may be made upon his mind, then, the ideas that had been impreffed upon his mind, as aforefaid, whether of a divine original, or otherwife, could not poffibly injlruft and guide him, with regard to his duty and be haviour, but on the contrary, (if he adted with that care and caution as the importance of the cafe requires that he fhould, and which, furely, it is every man's duty to doj they would greatly perplex and diftrejs him ; becaufe he would be altogether uncertain^ whether thofe impreffions are divine, or not, and confequently, whether it was his duty to attend to them, and be guided by them, or not. I am fenfible, that the dodrine of di vine impreffions has been adhered to, and maintained by mofty if not all, religious par ties in the world ; but then, they all feem in clined to confine the favour to their own par ty, or, at leaft, to think it is chiefly, and
more
more certainly with them; and therefore, they are apt to draw back, and are unwilling to fubmit to what is didtated to them as a di vine oracle, when it comes from any other quarter; and thus, a chrifiian would fcarce think himfelf concerned, much lefs obliged to attend to what may be delivered to him as the produce of divine impreffion by a Mahome tan; and the like of a Mahometan, by a chrif- tian. Neverthelefs, if it fliould be thought, that I have not done jit ft ice to the Jubjeff, then, I hope, fome friend to truth and to mankind will kindly interpofe and fet this matter in a clearer and a truer light; and this may well be expeded from thofe, who not only maintain the dodrine of divine im- preflions, but who alfo confider themfelves to have experienced the power of fuch im preffions on their minds; becaufe fuch ex perienced men may well be fuppofed to be ca pable of fhewing plainly, what it is, which diftinguifhes divine impreffions from all other impreffions, that may be made upon the mind, fuppofing it can be done; which if it cannot be done, then, of neceffity, the cafe muft be moft perplexed and hazardous, as I have before (hewn. To fay, that God does immediately imprefs ideas upon the minds of men, tho' we cannot certainly know, at the time, that we are under the influence of fuch impreffions, nor can we diftinguijh fuch divine impreffions from any other imprei- fions, that may be made upon the mind ; 2 this,
[57]
this, I think, in any other cafe would be deemed mere prefumption, and would be far from being fatisfadory. And,
As I have been lately led to confider, or rather to reconfider the dodtrine of grace, or Jpecial grace, as it is fometimes called ; fo, I prefume, my readers will take it in good part, if I lay before them the produce of thofe reflections. By grace is here meant that power, which God is fuppofed fecretly, imperceptibly ', and fuper naturally to commu nicate to men ; which power is called fpecial grace, in diftindtion from, and in oppofition to, that power, and thofe favours vouchfafed to men, by the Deity, in and through the common and ordinary courfe of nature, there by to enable men to perform their refpedtive duties, .and render themfelves acceptable to their Maker, which otherwise, or without fuch fpecial aid, they are not able, by their natural powers or inherent ability, to do and perform. This dodtrine of grace feems to be founded on the following fuppofition, viz. that it may be, and is a mans duty to perform that which he has not power fufficient for the performance of; but then, this fup pofition feems to be moft abfurd, groundlefs, and falfe. All due or duty is conne5led with, relative to, and dependent upon that power y which any agent has for its performance ; fo that the line of a mans duty cannot poffibly be extended a point farther than the line of his ability for the performance of it; becaufe, H where,
[58]
where, and ib far as power for performance fails, w falls Jhort ; there, and fo far duty fails, w falls Jhort in proportion. It, furely, cannot be a man's duty to^, who has n& eyes ; nor to relieve the needy, who has no thing within the compafs of his power or procurement to relieve them with. The cafe muft be the fame in all other inftances and cafes, where duty may be fuppofed to be concerned ; whatever a man has nQtJufficient power for the performance of, the perfor mance of that thing cannot poflibly be his duty-, and therefore, as a man's duty may be increafed, by the increafe of his ability , fo his duty will be decreafed, by the decreafe of his ability alfo ; and were a man changed into a brute, which is faid to have been the cafe of Nebuchadnezzar, then, all the duty that lay npon him, as a man, would ceafe or be annihilated, if I may fo fpeak. Whe ther a man's ability be decreafed, or deftroy- cd by accident, or defign; whether by him- felf, or by any other agent, it alters not the cafe; becaufe the decreafing, or deftroying a man's power for performance, naturally and neceffarily decreafes, or deftroys all the duty that was connected with it, and depen dent upon it. Suppofe a man {hould de- frgnedly have put out his own eyes, then, tho* he may by fo doing have been greatly cri minal and blame-worthy -, yet, when his vi- five -power was deflroyed, and his capacity of feeiog ceafed, then/ all the duty that was * con-
[ 59 ]
connected withy and dependent * upoji that capacity, of ccurfe ceafed with it; and it would be altogether as abfurd to fuppofe it a man's duty, who has put out his eyes, to do that, when he is blind, the performance of which depends wholy uponjigbt; as it would be to fuppofe it a man's duty, who has killed himjelf, to perform that, after he is dead, which is only performable when, or if alive. And, if duty is thus naturally and necej/arily connected with, and depen dent upon, fuitable and fufficient power for the performance of it, fo that the former cannot be without the latter, which evidently Appears to be the cafe ; then, to fuppofe that it may be, and is a mans duty to do what he has not * fufficient power for the per formance of, this muft needs be an abfurd, groundlefs, and falfe fuppofition. And, if &efitppofitioti, upon which the forernention- ed doctrine of grace feems, at leaft, to be founded, is groundlefs and falfe ; then, the dodrine itfelf feems to want a proper foun dation-, becaufe it feerns quite Jhperjluous, and thereby it becomes very unlikely, that H 2 God
* Here a queftion or two does very naturally arife, a;/*. Suppofe a man ihould contrail a jujl debt, and afterwards ihould fall into fuch circumftances as to be unable to make fatisf.ftion, does his inability cancel his obligation? or does he not continue as much obliged as before ? and is it not his duty to makefatisfafiien, notwithftanding his inability ? An- fwer ; tho' a man's inability does notfatisjty any debt he has contracted, but he ftill continues to be a debtor , and is ftill obliged \.q make fatisfaction when he is able\ yet his inability fo l&sfufpends that obligation, as to make it of no force, un til lie is in vetted m\h fowtr fajfdent to make fatisfadtion.
]
Godthould interpofe and to men, for the performance of their duty, when they kwefufficient power to do their duty, antecedent to fuch his interpofition,, Does it not feem quite prepofterous for a rich man to defire and pray to God to give him ability to do his duty, as a rich man, when the riches he is already in the poflef- fion of is that very ability by which he is to do his duty, as a rich man? The cafe is the fame in all other inftances of duty. And if fpecial grace is fuperjluous, as it muft needs be ; then, this ieems to be a weighty cbjeSilon againft the truth of that doctrine.
The truth of the cafe feems plainly to be this; men are a fpecies of creatures, who are conftituted of various parts and powers^ by which they are rendered capable of an- fwering worthy purpofes upon this globe; and as the parts and powers of which men are conftituted are not all equal, but are diffe rent in different perfons, fo their refpedtivc duties > and the purpojes they are to ferve? vary and are different alfo. And tho' men are fubje£t to many 'wants -, yet, they cannot poffibly want ability to do their duty -, becaufc in whatfpever flate they are, their duty will be proportionate to the ability they have for the performance of it. And tho5 men are furrounded with manifold temptations,, that is, there will many things take place, which will become excitements to men to break thro' the line of their duty 5 yet., as thefe
are
D 61 ]
excitements only, and do not put a force Upon nature, fo every man muft have fuffici- ent power, either to comply with, or to re- eff thefe excitements ; and confequently, fe at liberty, whether he will break thro1 the line of his duty, or not; becaufe in every inftance, where, and fo far as nature }&forced> in fuch inftances men are not tempted, but ever-ruled, they do not aft, but are affed upon; and therefore, in thofe cafes, duty is quite out of the queftion. And, as to the term felf, if by it is meant all the parts and powers of which each individual is confti- tuted, exclufive of that principle of freedom, ,or agency, by which thofe parts and powers are to be directed ; then, and in this view of the cafe, felf is the work of God, and can not be confidered abftractedly from it; fo that whatever a man does, he does it by the ability that God gi<ueth, and God is all in all. If a man lifts up his hand, or his foot, or performeth any other action, whatever pur- pofe the action is made to ferve, he does it from a power derived from his Maker -, and the power, by which fiich action is perform ed, is as much, and as truly derived from God, as if it were fupernatural. And, as all the parts and powers, which conftitute each individual, is each individual f elf ; fo each individual \sjelf-fufficient for the per formance of every thing, which is within the compafs of that felf -power , without any pther help. Thus, a man who abounds in
riches.
riches, is felf-fufficient for the relief of the poor, as far as his riches enable him fo to do. And thus, a man who has health of body, and the ufe of his limbs, \sfelf-fiifficient for walking ; that is, he is able of himfelf to remove himfelf from one place to another, without any other help; and, indeed, with out any other, or farther power or help from God, than what refults from his frame and conftitution. How idle and ridiculous muft it therefore be, for the advocates of fpecial grace, by mere dint of affurance, to run down the doctrine of felf-fufficiency, as they are pleaied to call that fufficient ability a man has, and of neceffity muft have to do his duty ; as if the very Juppojition of fuch fufliciency was a moft monftrous thing! If by Jeff is meant the exercije of human a- gency, by which each individual felf does, of itfelf, voluntarily chufe either rightly to life, oxjlothfully to neglect, or wickedly to a- bufe the various parts and powers of which his conftitution is compounded ; then, and in that view of the cafe, felf may, without «,ny great impropriety, be confidered ab- flraftedly from the work of God, as afore- faid; and then, as felf, when it wickedly abufes the human powers, by applying them to bafe purpofes, does thereby of, and from itfelf, independent of any immediate ad: of the Deity, render itfelf a bafe and evil crea- ture, and does thereby, of itfelf, become juftly dtfpifeable and condemnable *, fo, in like
mapner,
63
manner, when felf rightly directs the hu man powers, to anfwer the worthy purpofes they were intended to ferve, then, it does of> audfrom itfelf > independent of any immedi ate adt of the Deity, render itfelf a worthy and good creature, and does thereby, of it- Jclf\ become juftly approveabk and commend able. And, in this view of the cafe, each individual felf is to be confidered good, or bady as of itfelf ] abftraftedly from, and in dependent of the work of God; becaufe God leaves each individual felf perfectly at liberty to direct his work, viz, the parts and powers of the human conftitution, to* an fwer goody or bad purpofes, as it pleaies $ of which the cafe would be equally the fame, fuppofing any fupernatural power were add ed, whilft felf is at liberty to ufe that power •welly or ///. Thus, the member of the body called the tongue^ is wholly the 'work and gift of God, together with the felf-moving power, or ability, to ufe it ; but then, each, individual is perfectly at liberty ', in the ap plication of its felf-moving power upon the tongue, to diredt it to the publication of trutby or a //<?, or the anfwering any good, or bad purpoje^ as it pleafes. And, fuppofe God fhould, by an immediate adl of his power, add to the human conftitution any new endowment of mind, or any new mem bers to the body, fuch as 2. pair of wings, by which a man would be enabled to fly 5 if he is at liberty to ufe this new power well, or
m,
?//, then, all the good or evil that is pro duced by it, ought to be placed, not to God's, but to the agent's account, who directed that power to anfwer the purpofe it was made to fervej this new power, when added to the conftitution, being as much, and as truly a man's Jelf, as thofe powers are, of which his conftitution was antecedently compounded. How extravagant muft it therefore be for men, out of an affetfation of humility and lowlinefs of mind, to place all the evil they do to their own account, and all the good they do to the account of God-, whereas, God is equally concerned in the production of evil, as in the production of good; and man is equally concerned in the production of good, as in the production of evil; and therefore, both ought to be equally afcribed to one, or the other. That is, if all the good a man does ought to be afcribed to God, then all the evil a man does ought to be afcribed to God alfo ; becaufe God is equally concerned in the production of both ; and if all the evil a man does ought to be afcribed to himfelf, then all the good he does ought to be afcribed to himfelf alfo; becaufe he '\s> equally concern ed in the production of both. This appears to me to be a fair, zjuft, and true reprefen- tation of the cafe. And,
Here, perhaps, it may not be amifs to
take notice of what is fometimes urged in
favour of the doCtrine of fpecial grace, or
rather of what is urged againfl the doCtrine
of
,,
of felf-fufficiency, which feems to ftand in competition with it ; namely, fir ft > That it muft be great pride and arrogance in man to confider himfelf as an independent, felf-Juffici- cnt creature, as one who can, of him/elf, do many gdod aftions $ whereas man, especially Jince the fall, is moft corrupt, impotent, and weak, who cannot, of himfelf, fo much as think a good thought, much lefs bring forth any thing that is good, without the fpecial aid of his Maker. This objection, if it may be called an obje^tion^ is fully obviated in what I have obferved above $ tho', indeed, what is urged is a mere inveffiive, as if it was pride and arrogance in a man to think juftly and truly of the 'work of God, of his own frame and conjiitution, &c. which is the pre- fent cafe. God msjofaf made man an in dependent, felf-fufficient creature, as to fur- nifh him with parts and abilities for a&ion, and has left him quite free to ufe the parts and powers, of which his conftitution is compounded, well, or ill\ and to call a juft and proper fenfe of this, pride and arrogance^ is moft intolerable; not but it is a cafe too common for men to fupply the want of ar gument with invetfives. Secondly, It has been urged, that the Jcriptures, and more particularly the New ^ejlament, reprefent mankind to be weak and impotent, as afore- faid ; and thofe fcriptures require men to think thus of themfehes, and to pray to God to give them ftrength and power to do their I duty,
[66 ]
duty, which, without fomQjpecial divine aid, men, of themj elves, are not able to perform. Anf wer ; All doctrines and counfels that /»/- lit ate againft truth, con not themfelves be founded in truth; and therefore, are not to be admitted, whether they come from Paul, Mofes, or any other perfon who may have aflumed a prophet ick or divine character. And, as every man muft of neceffity have power fufficient to perform every duty, and anfwer every obligation that lies upon him, becaufe otherwife he could not poffibly have been under fuch obligation ; fo confequently, if there are any doctrines or counfels held forth to us in the fcriptures, that are incom patible with this truth, then, they cannot poffibly be founded in truth, and therefore, ought to be rejected, thirdly, It has been urged, that the doctrines of mans impotency, as aforefaid, and of fpecial grace, have been univerfally maintained by men of all religions, and in all parts of the world, excepting, perhaps, a few pbilo/ophers and deijls, whole pride and vanity led them to think all our fpecies to be either fools, or knaves, but themfelves; and, as univerfal opinion is on thejide of the dp&rints referred to, fo this is a prefumptive argument of their truth-, be caufe, were men univerfally to err in points of importance, it would be of very badconfequence-, but this is not the cafe -, in points of impor tance men univerfally agree. Anfwer; If there have been any fuch men who have
thought
• [67]
thought all others to be either fools, or knaves, that have profeffed to differ in their fentiments from them; then, they muft, at leaft, have been egregious fools that thought Jo. And, if the above charge of pride and vanity, upon philofophers and deifts, be only grounded upon their diffenting from univerfal opinion ; then, the above charge is a mere inveffive. What the bad confequences are which follow univerfal error, I am not apprized of; nor am I fully fatisfied, that in all points of im portance men are univerfally agreed. As to the doctrines of man's impotency and fpecial grace, that thefe have had univerfal opini on to back them, is much to be queftioned ; becaufe in other points there are many that do not fublickly oppofe popular opinions, and yet, are far from going into the belief of them ; and that may, perhaps, have been the cafe of the doctrines under confideration. But, fuppofing the doctrines referred to have had univerfal opinion on their Jide ; yet, furely, that cannot be a proper ground to determine any man's judgment in their favour. Uni verfal opinion muft have fome reafon, that has been univerfally admitted as its proper bajis, elfe it is a mere phantom ; to take up an opi nion, without fome reafon to ground it upon, is like building without a foundation. Where- ever, therefore, univerfal opinion obtains, the queftion will be, What is that opinion ground ed upon'? which ground I am carefully to examine, in order to lee whether it is a pro-
I 2 per
: [68 ]
per foundation for fuch opinion ; if I find it to be fo, I afferit to it, not becaufe it is uni- verjally affented to, but becaufe it appears to me to be well grounded, independent of fuch univerfal aiTent. If I find it to be otherwife, the queilion will be, What muft I do? Muft I judge of the cafe according to the jlrength of the evidence, as it appears to my mind, or muft I give up my underftanding in com- plaifance to univerfal opinion? Not the latter, finely, becaufe the ground of affent does not become a whit the ftronger, by its having obtained univerfal affent ; nor is it more fo, than if it had obtained aflent from one mind only ; or even than if it had gained no affent at all. Suppofe the reafons, upon which the Ptolemaick fyftem of aftronomy was ground ed, had obtained univerfal affent \ would that fyftem nave been ivell grounded, becaufe the rea/ons upon which it was grounded had been yniverfally admitted? and ought univerfal opinion to have determined the judgment of Copernicus, again/I the ftrongeft and moft obvious reafons to the contrary ? Surely, not. If the advocates for fpecial grace fhould tack about, and fay, that by grace is not meant any new power that is given to men ; but only that the Deity does particularly, and Ipecially, interpofe and dlfpofe men to make a proper ufe of the abilities they already have, which otherwife, or without fuch a divine in- terpofition, they would not be difpofed to do: Anfwer ; This is in reality giving up the doc trine
69
trine di Jpecial grace we have had under con* fideration, and introducing another fort of fpecial grace in its place and ftead. And, as to this new fort of fpecial grace, if the Deity does by it any otherways difpofe men to do their duty, (if it may be called duty, which is greatly improper,) than by difpofing them by motives of perfuafion, to make a proper ufe of the powers they have, this would be 4eJlru$lV£ of human agency -, becaufe, fo far as force takes place, agency is difplaced, and in all fuch cafes man is a mere pajjive fubjeff ; he does not aft, but is acted upon. And, if this fort of grace confifts only in furniming men with proper motives of perfuafion, to dif pofe them to do their duty; then, in this, it enters upon the province of another fort of fpecial grace ', which by way of diftinftion I call \h& fecond fort \ viz. external divine reve- lation, commonly called the chriftian revela tion -, whofe proper province it is, or, at leaft, it is faid to be, (by general, if not univerfal opinion among chriftians,) to lay before men thofe motives of perfuajlon as are proper to difpofe them to do their duty, which motives of perfuafion, without external divine revela tion, men could not have attained to, and there fore, 'without fuch external divine revelation^ they muft have been deftitute of them. So that in this cafe, it is pulling down one fort of ' fpecial grace, to Jet up another; it is taking from the fpecial grace of external divine re velation, by fetting up a third fort of fpecial
grace
7o]
grace to fupply its place, and to anfwer its purpofes. Thus, when men have taken from the human conftitution, thoje powers and capacities, which the author of nature has furnifhed it with, and compounded it of; then, they introduce what they call fpecial grace, to repair the injury.
But farther, I beg leave to repeat an ob- fervation that I have already made, (perhaps more than once in the courfe of my wri tings,) becaufe, I think, it is what my rea ders fhould always remember, and govern their judgments by ; viz. that in the deter minations they come to concerning the truth of any propofition, or fafi, fuch determi nations ought to correfpond with, and be proportionate to the flrcngth and clearnefs of the evidence upon which they are grounded ; and, that where certainty cannot be attained, our judgments ought to be directed and go verned by probability, and, as probability may be greater, or lefs, fo where the greater degree of probability appears, it ought to determine our judgments to that fide vi the queftion, to which the greater degree of probability ftands related ; and, that our af- fent ought to bzftronger, or weaker, in pro portion to the greater, or lefs degree of pro bability, which is the ground of that aftent. This, I think, ought to be the cafe; and herein, I apprehend, lies the propriety, rec titude, or morality of 'faith, if it may be ex- preffed thus. But then, by the term faith
is
is here meant the bare a£t of ajjent to the truth of a propofition, or fad:, abftraded from any reditude of aftion that may be previous to it, or consequent upon it; whe ther that aflent be grounded on fenfible evi dence, or on demonftration, (which may, perhaps, come under the denomination of fcience or knowledge-,) or whether it be ground ed on any other kind of evidence.
I am fenfible, that in oppofition to what I have thus frequently obferved, it is pre tended, that the excellency and merit si faith arifes from, and bears a proportion, rather to the weaknefs, than to the ftrength of the evidence upon which it is grounded. And, this opinion is founded upon the words of Chrift to St. Thomas, — John xx. 29. Je- fusfaid unto him, Thomas , becaufe thou haft jeen me, thou haft believed-, bleffed [or more blefled] are they who have not Jeen , and yet have believed. Now, if the faith that is founded on the teftimony of others, is more worthy, more bleffed, than the faith that is founded on the teftimony of a man's own fenfes, as in the inftance referred to; then, the confequence is clear, viz. that the virtue and merit of faith arifes from, and bears a proportion, rather to the weaknefs, than to tiitftrengtb of the evidence upon which it is grounded. Wherefore, I obierve, that if this were the cafe, viz. that to believe upon weak evidence is more valuable, than to be lieve -the fame thing upon evidence that is
Jlronger; then, by parity of reafon, to bef* lieve without evidence muft be more meri* torious, than to believe upon weak evidence 5 and then, to believe again/I evidence muft be ftill more valuable, than to believe with out evidence ; the veryjlating of which cafe fufficiently expofes it. Upon this principle, the faith that is founded upon the lingle teftimony of one man is more valuable, than the faith that is founded upon the united teftimonies of twelve men, fuppofing them to be all perfons of equal credit; and it is more valuable for this reafon, viz. becaufe, in the former cafe, the evidence upon which faith is founded is eleven times weaker than in the latter^ as one is eleven times lefs than twelve. The value of faith may like wife be greatly heightned, by the circumftances that attend the cafe. If the teftimony of twelve men is directly contrary to the teftimony of one man, and if it appears that the twelve were better qualified to know the truth of the cafe referred to, than that fingle evidence, and like wife were known to be perfons of greater veracity, and fo were more likely to teftify the truth of what they knew concerning it; thefe circumftances greatly weaken the credit of that Jingle evidence, and confequently, they greatly heighten the value of that faith that is grounded on his teftimony. But, furely, nothing can be more prepofterous than to fuppofe, that the faith founded on the teftimony of one man is in nature more i men-
[ 73 ]
meritorious, than the faith that is founded on the tefti monies of twelve men, in oppofiti- on to that iingle evidence, which twelve wit- nefles are better qualified to know the truth of the cafe, and are more likely to relate the truth of what they know ; or to fuppofe the faith that is founded upon the teftimony of another man, who is capable of deceiving, as well as being deceived, is more valuable, than to aflent upon the evidence that arifes from what we our/elves have feen and heard. And yet, this muft be the cafe, if the valuablenefs of faith arifes from the weaknejs of the evi dence upon which it is grounded. St. Tho mas believed the refurrection of Chrift, upon the evidence that arofe from his own fenjes ; another man believed the fame fatt, upon St. Thomas s tejlimony -, now, as the ground of aflent to St. Thomas was moft certainly jlronger, than the ground of aflent to the other, as a man comes nearer to certainty by what he fees and hears himjelf, than by what is told him by another man \ fo aflent in St. Thomas, furely, was rather more proper, and therefore, rather more valuable, than aflent in the other perfon, if there be any difparity in the cafe, whatever may have been faid to the contrary ; at leaft, .it appears fo to me. If St. Thomas ivithcld his aflent to the facl beforementioned, when proper evi dence had been presented to him, ..and if his diflent fprang from any wireafonable preju dice > any great impropriety .in his conduct K and
[ 74]
and refolutions, in this he may have been greatly blame able ; but then, I think, hk faith did not become left valuable when he did be-
«/
lieve, by the evidence being Jtronger, than that evidence 'was which had been offered to him before, and which had been, perhaps, through his inattention, or other wife, injuf- faient for his conviftion. Surely, according to the principle before laid down, the excel lency of chriftianity mufl confift in the re- verjing of nature ; tho', I think, Chrift did not intend to fet forth, that faith founded upon weak evidence is more worthy^ more valuable, than faith that is founded upon evidence that is ftronger ; but only that other believers would (hare in the advantages, that are fuppoied to follow believing, as well as St. Thomas, notwithftanding their faith was not founded vvifenfible evidence, as his was. Thomas, becaufe thou hzttfeen me, thou haft believed; but then, tho' the favour of feeing my perfon, fince I arofe from the dead, as thou haft done, has been vouchfafed but to a few ; yet,- neverthelefs, others who anjwer the purpofe of believing will not fail of fha- ring in the bleflednefs that attends it, as well as thee, notwithftanding they have not been convinced, upon fuch fenfible evidence, as thou haft been. Thomas, becaufe thou hajlfeen me, thou hajl believed \ bleffed [alfo] are they who have notfeen, and yet have believed. As the above paraphrafe is conionant to truth-, fo, I think, ity^/yexpiefles the fenfe of the text. I Siacc
[ 75 ]
Since my putting together the foregoing reflections, the reverend and ingenious Mr. Fqftcr has publifhed * his fentiments, touch-, ing the morality of 'faith; and has attempted to (hew, th&tfaitb, founded on fenfible evi dence, is le/s valuable or moral, than faith founded on other evidence -, but then, he does not ground this difparity upon the jlrength and weaknefs of the evidence, but upon other circumjiances, which he fuppofes peculiar to each cafe; viz. that faith in the former, or when grounded on fenfible evidence, is in a manner forced, and involuntary, and thereby is more eafy and cheap to the believer ; where as, faith in the latter cafe requires more palm to be taken, more ingenuity ', more care and application to procure it. Upon which, I obferve, that injbme inftances the cafe may be as it is reprefented, and in other inftances it may be the reverfe. Suppofe a friend of mine, upon whofe teftimony I have juft ground to rely, was lately come from Lon don, and he voluntarily informed me, (with out any application of mine to procure the information,) that the pillar lately (landing near London- Bridge, commonly called the Monument, was fallen do\w, in this in fiance faith founded on the tejlwwny of my friend would be in a manner forced, and involun tary, and would be much more eajy and cheap to me, than faith founded on jenjibk evidence, becaufe that would require my taking the K 2 care
* Sec Mr. Fojtefs Sermons, Vol. III. Sermon ix.
. J 76 ]
care and pains of a journey to London^ to in- fpecl: the place, in order to procure it. But, Admitting the cafe were always, as is repre- fented above, then, in this view of it the worth and morality that attends it is not/ much relative to faith, 'as to that rettitude of rf#;'0»,' by which a man difcharges his mind of all partiality and prejudice, and examines carefully, and candidly, all the evidence that fells within his notice, both for, and againft the qiiL^bn in debate 5 this redtitude of aclion being plainly dijlincl from, and previous to faith, and is equally valuable, whether it be produdiye of faith, or of its contrary, viz. infidelity. Suppofe a man to have diverted hirnfelf of partiality and prejudice, and to have honeftly enquired into the truth and divinity both of the Chriftian and the Maho metan revelations, and fuppofe the produce of fuch enquiry to be fait h in the Chriftian, and infidelity with refpeQ: to the Mahometan revelation ; then, the queftion would be, >vhether 'infidelity, with regard to the Mz/60- ^;<?/^« revelation, be not equally valuable and moral, as /*///; in the Chrifiian ? And, the anfwer, I prcfume, will be, that one of thefc is as valuable as the other -, or, rather, that the morality, in each cafe, was not Jo much 'relative to faith, nor infidelity, as to that reftitude of a ft ion which was dlJlinB from, and previous to both. And, let it be admitted, tor argument fake, that the reverfe of this was the cafe ; namely, that the produce of
fuch
[77]
fuch enquiry was faith in the Mahometan, and infidelity with refpect to the Chriflian revelation-, and then, the queflion will be, whether faith and infidelity in this latter cafe, be not equally valuable and moral, as faith and infidelity in the former? And, the aniwer, I think, will be, that the latter would be equally valuable, equally moral with the for mer: I fay, I think, the aniwer will be this, (except the judgment 'bejirongly biaffcd, by fome unreafonable prejudice, which is fup- pofed to have been St. 'Thomas's cafe ;) becaufe infidelity is equally as valuable, or moral, as faith, when they are equally 'well grounded. And, as faith is plainly diftinct from that rectitude of action which is previous to it; fo, furely, what is proper and peculiar to one of thefe, ought not to be applied to the other ; and yet, I think, the blending together, or incorporating of thefe, and then, making what is proper and peculiar to a part, relative to the whole, is that upon which the firength of Mr. Fojler's reafoning, and the weight of his argument depends. And, as in the dif- quifition of all queflions of this nature, great care ought to be taken in guarding againft all hurtful errors; fo, in order thereto, I think, we muft not only diftinguifh betwixt faith, and what is previous to it, but alfo be- twixtfaith, and what may be conjequent upon it. Suppofe a man to divert hirnfelf of par tiality and prejudice, and carefully and can didly to enquire, whether there will be a fu ture
turejlate of exiftence to men, and a future retribution -, and fuppofe the produce of fuch enquiry to be faith in both theje, and that fuch faith was proper, as being proportionate to the evidence upon which it was grounded; and fuppofe likewife, that the believer, in confequence of his faith, was led to repent of the evil of his ways, to ceafe to do evil, and learn to do 'well-, then, tho* there would be a propriety ', or worthiness in his faith, and in his behaviour precedent to it ; yet, the prin cipal worthinefs, or merit of the cafe, would not be relative to thefe, but to that rettitude of mind and life which was confequent to them ; and, it would be this chiefly that would render the believer pleajing and accept able to his Maker. For, if the faith before mentioned mould have no fuch good effift upon the mind and behaviour of the be liever, but hejlill goes on in a vicious courfe, and lives as if there would be no future Jlate> no future retribution, which may be, and, perhaps, fometimes is the cafe j then, fuch a believer, notwithftanding the propriety of his faith, and of his condutt previous to it, would be unacceptable to God ; and his condudl, upon the whole, would be fo far from en titling him to a blej/ing, that, on the contrary, it would bring upon him a moft grievous curfe. But further, the propriety and wor- thinefe that may take place in faith, and in that rectitude of action which may be previ- MS to it, thcfe rile no higher than a virtuous
or
[ 79 ] -\
or proper felfifinefs -, he that enquiretb, en- quirethyir himjelf, and he that believeth, be- lieveth for him/elf, and not for another-, and the worthinefs of \hsfe fall infinitely fart ^ if I may fo fpeak, of that worthinefs which is relative to a virtuous, godlike benevolence, or what one agent generoufly does for another. What an agent does for himfelf, it carries with it its own reward-, what an agent gene- roujly does for others, renders him worthy of recommence or reward from all.
As the cafe of St. Thomas has been under confideration, I think, it may not be amils to obferve, that the branch of hijtory, where in that cafe is contained, feems to be of doubt ful authority, becaufe it feems, at leaft, to contradict, in two points, the other hiftories^ wherein the refurredtion of Chrift is record ed ; and thereby it feems to weaken the caufe it is brought tofupport, viz. the doctrine of Chrift's refurreflion. The purpofe Chrift's refurre&ion was immediately dire&ed to, was his qualifying his difciples, by giving them proper injiruffions for preaching his gofpel to the world ; and his commifliomng, or autho rizing them to execute that truft. And the •doing of this properly, feems to have requi red that he fhould fully have inftrudted them firjt, and then commiflioned them after ward-, this lajl att being ti\Q finifhing part , or that which concluded ^and put a period to his miniflry among them. And it feemed alib to require, that, when the commif-
fion
[ 8° ]
fion * was given, all jhould be prefent which' weredefigned to ad: under it; becaufe other- wife the abjent perjbns would have no commiffi- on at all ; and it feems very ftrange, that Chrift fhould have cbofe a time for giving this com miffion, when any one perfon was abjent v who was intended to act by virtue of its au thority ; thefe points are what the nature and propriety of the thing feem to call for. And as the account of the refur reft ion of Chrift is contained in five hiftories; fofour of them make Chrift's giving the aforefaid commif- fion the laft minijlerial aft he performed to his difciples, except his blejfing them when he was parted from them. And as to the other point, viz. that all the difciples were prefent when the commiffion was given, two of the hiflorians are cxprefs as to that, and fay, that the eleven were there, and confe- quently Thomas muft have been prefent, as he was one of the eleven ; and this the other two do not contradiff, but rather fuppofe it. But then, with refpect to both thefe points, St. Johns gofpel fets forth the contrary, where it is faid exprefsly, that ^Thomas was not prefent when the commiffion was given ; and that Chrift appeared twice afterward, at
one
* That Chrift fliould give a commiffion to his difciples, and thatyfctt hiftorians mould take upon them to tranfmit this commiffion to pofterity in the very words of Cbrijl \ and yet ftiould all differ from each other with refpecl to it, is ex ceeding ftrange, and (hews a defeat of memory, or fomething elfe. This commiffion was of fucb concern, that one would have thought it mould have been fo ftrongly imprefied upon the minds of thofe that heard it, as never to have been for got, in whole, or in part. .
one of which times 'Thomas was cured of his unbelief. This being the cafe, the queftion is, how muft our judgments be determined^ when two oppojite points are maintained? And the anfwer is obvious ; if we follow na ture, the lefs number ought to give place to the greater, where the evidences are of equal credit, and are equally qualified to know the truth; and confequently, that the one hij- torian, viz. St.- John, ought to give place to the four, who contradidt him. And then, as part of St. John's hiftory will he Jet ajide -, fo the ^doftrine of ChriJFs refurreSion will be thereby cleared of fuch incumbrance as that part of his gofpel has brought upon it. However, in order to bring thoie hiftorians to Jbme agreement, and fave St. John harm- lejs, it will be proper to confider John's hif tory as ending with the 23d verfe of the xxth chapter of his gofpel; and then, that hiftory will tally with all the other hiftories, Jo far as not to contradift them in either of the points before mentioned. But then, the queftion will be, what 'muft be done with the remainder of Johns gofpel ? And the an fwer like wife is obvious, viz. it muft be re- jeffled asjpurious. What faith the fcriptures ? Caft out the bond woman and her fon -, for the Jon of the bond woman fn all not be heir with the fon of the free woman. The part of Johns gofpel referred to, may have been added to that hiftory by fome other hand ; princi pally, perhaps, for the fake of that ridicu- faus Jtory of Thomas $ unbelief related"* in it,
.
that being the principal point it is concerned with. I call that branch of hiftory a ridicu lous ftory ; becaufe it feems defigned to re- prefent Thomas as adting a inoft ridiculous part in it. The hiftorian, in giving an account of Thomas's unbelief, has certainly dropped thofe circumjlances which attended the cafe, and yet are necelTary to be known in order to form a proper judgment upon it. The hiftory fets forth, that fome of the difciples came to Thomas, and told him, they had feen the Lord; upon which he is reprelented to have replied, inftantly, [Except I Jhall fee^in his hands the print of the nails, and put my Jin- gers into the print of the nails, and thrujl my hand into his fide, I will not believe ;] this to rne feems incredible. The difciples muft, furely, have told Thomas the circumjlances of the cafe, and in what manner their Mafter had appeared, and (hewed hunfelf to them, and what was the ground of their affent, •elfe there was nothing to lead him to make fuch a declaration ; if Thomas had not dljliked what was the ground of aflent to the other difciples, then, he could have had no oc- cajion given him to declare what ihould be the ground of affent to himfelf. This being the cafe, I (hall therefore jupply the hiftory with/if/? circumftances as plainly appear to be both natural and neceffary, taking mfucb help, from the general hiftory of Chrift's re- furreffion, as it affords ; and with this help the cafe will appear in a twp-foild light > as thus. The difciples, who had feen Chrift
after
r 83
after his refurrediion, came to Thomas, who had not feen him, and told him, they had feen the Lord-, upon this Thomas afked them fjow, and in what manner their Mafter had appeared, and (hewed himfelf to them? They anfwered, that when they were ga thered together (the door being (hut for fear of the Jews,} their Mafter inftantly appeared and flood in the mid ft' of them, and after he had converfed with them fome time, he then as inftantly disappeared and vanifoed out of their light ; and that, as he had appeared to them at different times, fo he had made that appearance under different forms. This account was fo far from bz\r\gfatisfa£lory to Thomas, that, on the contrary, he was na turally \z&. to fitfpeff it-, for as this account, afforded no fort of proof of the identity or famenefs of Cbrijl's perfon, that is, it did not make it appear, that the perfon whom they had feen, was the very Jame perfon who had been crucified, but rather rendered it greatly uncertain-, feeing that appearance was under different forms, and was fo inftantaneous as made it look more like an apparition, than a real refurreffiion ; fo from hence there feem- ed juft ground for Thomas to fear, that thofe difciples might have been milled. And, .as the aforefaid account was not fatisfaftory to Thomas; fo he gave his fellow difciples to underftand 'what would befatisfaffory to him ; namely, that as the crucifixion of Chrift had rendered his body particularly remarka* kle, by thejcars and marks that the fpear and
L 2 nails
nails muft have made upon it; fo thejeeing and feeling thole parts of the body {hould be the teft to him, and the ground of his qffent, or d\jent\ and, if the perfon, who had ap peared, was his real and very Mafter, he did not doubt but he would give himfucb fatis- faffion -, nor would he be difpkafed with him for defiring it; feeing it was afting with fuch care and caution, in 'an affair of great impor tance, as every honeft, prudent man, who is not difpofed to follow every dreamer, ought, and would be difpofed to do. But then, the cafe may be put in another light, which may, perhaps, not appear quite fo favourable to 'Thomas. The difciples, who had feen Chrift after his refurre&ion, came to Thomas, and told him, they hsidjeen the Lord. Upon which Thomas afked them, in what manner Chrift had appeared, and {hewed himfelf to them ? To which they anfwered, that they had not onlyjeen his perfon, but alfo had con- verjed with him 5 and that he had eat and drank in their prefence, and had expofed to their view tbofe parts of his body, which the fpear and nails had peirced-, that he had re quired them, and they h&djeen and handled thofe very parts ; by which they were fa- tujied it was their Mafter. This, however, was not fatisfafiory to Thomas, but he re quired jlronger and clearer evidence ; upon which the difciples afked him, what evidence would fatisfy him? To which he replied, [Ex cept IJhallfee in his hands the pr hit of the nails, and put my fingers into the print of the nails, and i ' thruft
i c .
thruft my band into his fide, I will not believe.'} Good God ! is fuch ridiculoufnefs as this pojflble? Could 'Thomas be fuch Kjimpleton to difallow the weight of the evidence,upon which his fellow difciples had been convinced, and then injlantly infift upon the very fame kind of evidence for himfelf? Surely, it could not be. I here prefume, that the difciples did (hew to Thomas what were the grounds of affent to them, befides barely telling him they had/^/z the Lord 5 becaufe otherwije it is pafl all belief, that Thomas (hould make the declaration he did. The fupplements I have added, are not forced, but quite natural, and are in part taken from the general hiftory of Chrift's refurredtion ; and therefore I further obferve, that the difciples who talked with Thomas, fhewed him that they grounded their belief of the refurredlion of their Matter, either on the circumftances mentioned in the firfty or elfe on the circumftances mentioned in thsjecondvitw I have taken of the cafe. If on the^yfr/?, then Thomas s declaration, was moft jufl and proper ; if on ihcjecond, then, it is not to be conceived that Thomas could make that declaration ; the ridiculoufnefs of the fuppofition over-Jets it-y not but the authority of the relation it/elf feems to be doubtful^ upon the grounds before mentioned.
Thus much I thought proper to obferve, by way of introduction.
FINIS.
BOOKS written fy Mr. THO. CHUBB, and
printed for TH o. Cox, fence the Publication of his Colleftion of Drafts in Quarto^ viz.
I. /\ DISCOURSE concerning reafen,^ with regard to
jf\. and divine revelation. Wherein is (hewn, Thatreaibn either is, or that it ought to be, ^fufficient guide in matters of religion. Occafioned by the Lord Bifhop of London 's fecond paftoral letter. To which are added, Some reflexions upon the comparative excellency and ufefulnefs of moral and pofitive du ties. Occafioned by the controverfy that has arifen (with re- fpeft to this fubje6l) upon the publication of Dr. Clarke's ex- pofaion of the Church Catechifm. The 2d edit. Price u.
II. And enquiry concerning the grounds and reafons, or what thofe principles are, upon which, two of our anniverfary folemnities are founded, 'viz. that on the 3<Dth of January ', being the day of the martyrdom of king Charles I. appointed to be kept as a day off aft ing j and that on the 5th of November, being the day of our deliverance from popery and flavery, by the happy arrival of his late majefty king William III. appoint ed to be kept as a day of thankf giving. To which is added, The fufficiency of reafon in matters of religion, farther con- fidered. Wherein is {hewn, that reafon, when carefully ufed jmd followed, is to every man, who is anfwerable to God for his a£lions, under any or all the moft difadvantageous circum- ftances he can poflibly fall into, whether he refides in China, or at the Caps of Good Hope, zfafficient guide in matters of re ligion ; that is, it is fufficient to guide him to God's favour, and the happinefs of another world. Price is.
III, Four Trafts, <viz. Firft, An enquiry concerning the books of the New Tejlament, whether' they were written by divine infpiration, &c. Second, Remarks on Britannicus\ letter, publifhed in the London Journals of the 4th and 1 1 th of April, 1724 ; and re publiihedin the Journals of the 5t!l and izth of April, 1729 ; containing an argument drawn from the fugle
fftft of Chriffs refurrefiion, to prove the divinity of his mijfion. Wherein is fliewn, that Britaitmcus'a argument does not anfwer the purpofe for which it was intended. And in which is like- wife fhewn, what was the great and main end that the refur- reclion of Chrift. was intended to be fubfervient to, viz. not to prove the divinity of his miffion, but to gather together his difciples, to commiifion, and qualify, and fend them forth to preach his gofpel to all nations. Third, The cafe of Abraham* with refpedt to his being commanded by God to offer his fen Ifaac in facrifice, farther confidered : in anfwer to Mr. S toners remarks. In a letter to the Rev. Mr. Stone. Fourth, The equity and reafottablenefs of a future judgment and retribution exempli- ffd; or, a difcourfe on the parable of the unmerciful fer-. "vant, as it is related in Maft.xviii. from verfe 23, to the end of the chapter. Price 2s.
IVv Some obfervations offered to publick cojifideration. Oc-
BOOKS printed for T. Cox.
cafioned by the oppofition made to Dr. Rundlis election to tfee fee ofGIoucefter. In which the credit of the hiftqry of the Old Tejlament is particularly confidered. To which are added, three tracts, viz. Ir An anfwer to Mr. Stone's fecond remarks on the cafe of Abraham, with regard to his being commanded by God to offer up his fon Ifaac in facrifice. In a fecond let ter to the Rev. Mr. Stone, M. A. and fellow of the learned fo- ciety of Wadham-College in Oxford. II. A difcourfe on fmce- nty. Wherein is mewn, That fmcerity affords juft ground for peace and fatisfaction in a man's own mind, and renders his conduct juftly approveable to every other intelliaent beinp. Occafioned by what Dr. Waterl<x*4\to& lately written on the fubject. In a letter to a gentleman. III. A fupplement to the tract, intitled, The equity and reajonablenefs of a future judgment and retribution exemplified. In which, the doctrine of the e- ternal and endlefs duration of punifliment to the wicked, is more particularly and fully confidered. Price is. 6d.
V. The equity and realbnablenefs of the divine conduct, in pardoning fmners upon their repentance, exemplified : Or a difcourfe on the parable of the prodigal fon. In which thofe doctrines, <uix. that men are rendered acceptable to God, and that fmners are recommended to his mercy, either by the per fect obedience, or the meritorious fufferings, or the prevailing interceffion of Chrift, or by one, or other, or all of thefe, are particularly confidered, and refuted. Occafioned by Dr. Butlers late book, intitled, The analogy of religion natural and revealed, to the conftitution and courfe of nature. Offered to the confideration of the clergy, among all denominations of Chriilians. To which are added two diflertations, <viz. I. Concerning the fenfe and meaning of St. PauTs words, Titus iii. 10, 1 1 . A man that is an heretick, after the frjl and fecond admonition, rejeft : Knowing that he that is fitch, is fubwrted, andfinneth, being condemned of himfelf. II. Concerning the time for keeping a fabbath. Offered to the confederation of the Sabbatarians. In a letter to Mr. Elwall. To which is hkewife added, The cafe of pecuniary mulas, with regard to JDiifenters, particularly confidered. . In a fecond letter to the Rev. Dr. St ebbing. Price is. 6d.
VI. An enquiry into the ground and foundation of religion Wherein is mewn, that religion is founded in nature; that is that there is a right and wrong, a true and falfe religion in na ture : and that nature or reafon affords plain, obvious, certain principles, by which a man may dittinguifh thefe, and form a proper judgment in the cafe; and which an Koneft, upright man may fafely and fecureiy fhy his mind upon, amidil the various and contrary opinions that prevail in the world, with regard to this fubject. To which are added, I. A poftfcript Occafioned by the publication of Dr. Stcbbhg's vifltation charge, that had been delivered to the clergy of the archdea conry of Wilts. II. A fliort differtation on Matt. xix. 2 1 . ]f
BOOKS printed for T. Cox .
thou •wilt be perfeff, go and fell that thou baft, and give to the •poor, and ' thou fialt have treafure in heaven : and come and fol low me. Occafioned by Dr. S telling's unjuft and groundlefs reflexion on the author, with regard to this text, in the afore - faid charge. III. An anfwer to a private letter, from a ftran- ger to the author, on the fubjeft of God's foreknowledge. Price zs.
VII. The True Gofpel of Jefus ChrifUfferted. Wherein is Jhewn what is, and what is not that gofpel ; what was the great and good end it was intended to ferve ; how it is excellently fuited to anfwer that purpofe ; and how, or by what means, that end has in a great meafure been fruftrated. Humbly of fered to publick confideration, and in particular to all thofe who efteem themfelves, or are efteemed by others, to be mi- nifters of Jefus Chrift, and preachers of the gofpel ; and more efpecially to all thofe who have obtained the reputation of be ing the great defenders of Chriilianity. A&s xvii. 6. They drew Jafon, and certain brethren, unto the rulers of the city, crying, Thefe that have turned the world upjide down, are corns hither alfo. To which is added, A mort difiertation on Pro vidence. The fecond Edit. Price zs. the Price before 4*.
VIII. The True Gofpel of Jefus Chrift vindicated. And alfo a vindication of the author's ihort difTertation on Provi dence. Price is.
IX. A difcourfe on Miracles, confidered as evidences to prove the divine original of a revelation. Wherein is fhewn, what kind and degree of evidence arifes from them, and in which the various reafonings on thofe queftions that relate to the fubjedt are fairly represented. To which is added, an appen dix, containing an enquiry into this queilion, <vi«. whether the dodrines of a future ftate of exiftence to men, and a fu ture retribution, were plainly and clearly taught by Mofes^ and the Prophets ? Humbly rftered to the confideration of the Rev. Dr. Warburtun, and all others that particularly intereft themfelves in this queilion. Price is. 6d.
X. An enquiry concerning redemption. Wherein the Chriftian redemption is particularly confidered. To which is prefixed, a Preface ; wherein is fhewn, That if Chriftianity be not founded on argument, but on thofe divine impreflions that are made on mens minds concerning it, (as a late ingeni ous author has attempted to prove';) then it is moft uncertain and precarious, and cannot be reduced to any ilandard. And in which is alfo fhewn, that Chrift's kingdom has been fo far from being fupportcd, and eitabliihed by the interpofition of civil power ; tiiat on the contrary it has rather been annihi lated thereby.
2V. J?. A Colleaion of Trails in one Volume in Quarto formerly pub- liih'd, and feveral Tra#s printed fince, which now make two Vo lumes in Oftavo ; contain the Whole of Mr. CLubb's Writings ; of the latter may be had the Whole, or any particular Trad, if apply'd 1 in Time.
FOUR
DISSERTATIONS,
viz.
I. On the HISTORY of MELCHIZEDEK. From which it appears, that Abraham did not give Tithes to Melcbixedck,
but Melcbizedek to Abraham.
II. On the Temper and Behaviour of E s A u and JACOB, the two Sons of the Patriarch Ifaac. Whereby it appears, that Efau was much the better Man.
III. On the Conduct of BALAAM. In which that Prophet's Character is cleared of thofe Reproaches and Imputations wherewith it has been flamed.
TV. On Dr. SHERLOCK, Lord Bimop of Sa/*fiuty's Aflerdon, viz. Thus far all is well-, as grounded upon, or as an Inference or Conclufion drawn from the following Premifes, namely, And the people (of Ifrael) fer<ved the Lord all the days of Jofhua, and all the days of the Elders that out -lived Jofhua, 'who had feen all the great kvorks of the Lord that he did for Ifrael ; which Premifes are the Text to his Lordihip's Sermon, lately publifhed.
Infcribed to
Mr. SAMUEL DICKER,
Of W A £ TO N in SURREY. By T H O. CHUBB.
LONDON:
Printed for T. Cox, at the Lamb under the Royal- Exchange, 1746. (Price i j. 6d.)
T O
Mr, SAMUEL DICKER
O F
Walton in Surrey*
WORTHY SIR,
YOUR leaving your place of abode in Jamaica (where, through a proper ap plication to bujinefs, accompanied with flriEl honefty and integrity, you acquired a plen tiful fortune with great reputation) to pafs the remainder of your days in this your native coun try, in the contemplation of truth, and in the communication of good to your fellow creatures, has given me the occafion, and opportunity of waiting on you by this addrefs ; for as I am hap pily fallen under the kind influence of the latter, Jo I beg leave to prefent you with the following Differtations, that thereby I may contribute my mite towards your participation of the former. And though what 1 here offer may not, perhaps, A ^ exattly
D E D I C A T I O N.
exafily accord with the fentiments of Patri archs, Apoftles, and many other men of note, as 'well in former, as later and prefent times >, yet as truth does not always lie in the path that is tnoft trodden, fo, I fatter myfelf, that will plainly appear to be the cafe with regard to tbofe fubje&s / have animadverted upon. However, truth is the point / aimed at ; and whether I have hit the mark, or not, is humbly fubmitted to your impartial and unbiafled judgment, by,
Kind SIR,
Sarutn, Feb. I, 1745-6.
Your greatly obliged,
Humble Servant,
Tho. Chubb.
A
D I S S |
A E R T A T I 0 N, |
|
0 R |
||
E N |
o u |
I R Y, |
Concerning the hiftory of Melchizedek. From which it appears, that Abra ham did not give tithes to Melcbi- y but Melchizedek to Abraham.
IN the book of Qenejis we have an account, that Chedorlaomer king of Elam was not content with being king in his own king- domy or over his own family, houfhold or tribe ; but, like ambitious princes of later times, he affumed a dominion over other kings , and their kingdoms or people that were in his neigh bourhood. And in confequence of this aflfump- tion, thofe kings and their people ferved Che dorlaomer twelve years, and in the thirteenth year fome of them rebelled ; that is, they at tempted to (hake his yoak from off their necks. This revolt raifed the *wratb and rejentment of
Cbedor-
~IZ. [6] -
Lbedorlaomer ; and in order to gratify his re vengeful paffion, and withal to Jirike terror in all the people in thofe countries, he, the fol lowing year, gathered together his own people, and alfo the kings and their people, who conti nued in their fubjedion to him, viz. Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king'of Ellafer, and 7?- dal king of nations ; thefe went out and ravaged the country all around them, committing great <wajle where-ever they came. Upon which, and in order to give a check to the ambition and tyranny of Cbedorlaomer, and to put a flop to thofe ravages, Bera king of Sodom, Birfoa king of Gomorrah, Shinah king of Admahy Shemebar king of Zebojim, and Bela king of Zoar; thefe joined their forces, and went out and engaged in battle with the kings and people before mentioned, Jive kings again ft four. ' This bat tle was fought in the vale of Siddim, in which the five kings, and their people, kwere totally routed-, and the conquerors fell upon the Jpoil, and took the goods, and vitfuah, and carried away fome of the people captive, amongft whom was Lot, Abrahams brother 's fen. But when tidings thereof came to Abraham^ he armed his trained fervanfs, that had been borri in his houfe, three hundred and eighteen men, and arofe, and made hafte after Ckcdorlaomer and his company, and purfued them unto Dany and overtook them, and fought againft them, and fmote them, and purfued them farther, even unto Hob a. And Abraham brought back all the goods, and alfo Lot his nephew, and his
goods,
[7]
goods, and the wqmen, and all the people. This victory was of the utmofl coniequence, not only to the Jive kings, and their people, who were immediately and directly inter eft ed in it; but alfo to the other kings and people of Canaan, who were like wife inter ejled in it, though more remotely, as it checked the pride, and broke the power of Chedorlaomer, which, otherwife, the more diftant parts of Canaan were likely to have felt the terrible effects of. A juft fenfe of this deliverance led Bera, king pf Sodom, to go out to meet Abraham , at his return from the flaughter of Chedorlaomer, and the kings and people that were with him, to compliment Abraham upon the viffory he had obtained, and to make his thank-offering to Jiim, for the fignal fervice he had done to their country ; and he met Abraham at the valley of Shaveb. And Melchizedek, king of Salem, he alfo went out to meet Abraham, at his return from the flaughter of the kings ; for though Melchizedek was not immediately interefted in the victory obtained, yet he was highly obliged to Abraham, as thereby a flop was put to the ambitious views, and tyrannical practices of Chedorlaomer -, the bad effects of which, other- wife, the king and people of Salem might foon have felt to their coft. This Melchizedek was a priefl, as then the bead or principal of every family was both king and prieft in his 0w# #0z//£ ; and he was the (or a) prieft of the moft high God, that is, Melchizedek was a prieft who paid his acknowledgments or thank-offerings, not
to
[8]
to the titular and fitfitious deities of the Cz- naanites, but to the fupream Deity, the God of Gods, or the moft high God pojfeffbr of heaven and earth. And as Mekhizedek went out to meet Abraham, fo he did not go empty-banded^ but took with him bread and wine, and, no doubt, fu.ch other good things as Salem afforded, in order to refrefh Abraham and the people that were with him, who muft have been greatly fatigued by their purfuing after, and fighting with Chedorlaomer, and his company, as aforefaid. And when Mekhizedek drew near, and met Abraham^ he bleffed him, that is, he put up his petition to the fupream Deity, for a blejjing upon Abraham ', and faid, Bleffed be Abraham * of the moft high Gody pofleffbr of keavcn and earth ; and bleffed be the mojl high God 'which hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand. Mekhizedek having thus prayed to God for a blefjing upon Abraham^ and having alfo gave thanks to God for giving him the vidtory,
he
* That Melcbizedttk was greater than Abraham, may, per haps, be true ; he may have been po/effed of lands and territo ries, whereas Abraham fojourned in the territories of another ; he may have been the bead of a more numerous family, or people, than Abraham was, and fo may have been greater than he, as the king of Great Britain may be faid to be greater than the king of Sardinia. But then, it does not follow, that Mekhizedek was greater, or better, than Abraham, becaufe he had blejfed, or prayed for a blejjtng upon Abraham, according to the argument of the author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews upon the cafe ; Heb. vii. 7. Without all contradiction the lefs is bit-Jed of the better (or greater.) A beggar may blefs, that is, he may put up his peti tion to God, for a blejjing upon a king ; but then, it does not follow, that the beggar is better, or greater, in any refpec\ than the king he blc/ed> or prayed for ; and, therefore, the aforefaid author's reafoning rnuft needs be inconclujive.
- [9]
he then proceeded to blefi, or pay his thanb- offering to Abraham himjelf, by preferring him \vith a tenth part of the good things he had brought from Salem (for he gave him tithes of all) and then, the other nine parts, no doubt, he dijlributed among the reft of the people, to refrefh and comfort them ; or, at leaft, as far as that would go towards it. Melchizedek hav ing thus (hewed his gratitude and thankfulness to Abraham (who might well be confidered as the fdviour of their country) by making him a prefent as aforefaid ; then Eera king of 50- dom, being thus injlructed by Melcbizedetts ex ample,, he alfo made a generous offer to Abra ham of all the fpoil, of all the goods that had been retaken from Chedorlaomer, referving only the perjbns that had been brought hack for him- felt This generous offer of Eera was by Abraham as generoufly refufed\ who would not accept of any the leaft part of it for himfelf (much lefs did he take a tenth part, therewith to make prefents of to others) fave only what the young men had eaten, and a portion for his three friends, viz. Ancr, EJ&col, and Mamre, in whofe territories he Jbjourned, and by w/&0/? fo^» he had gained this vidory. This, I think, is the natural thread, and, therefore, * jttft account of the branch of hiftory I have been eonfidering j and would, I doubt not, be nd- mittcd as fuch, were it not contradicted, in one of its articles, by the author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews ; which author confiders Abraham as having given tithes to Melchizedek, as iti
B chap.
chap. vii. 2. To whom aljb Abraham gave a tenth fart of all ; verfe 4. Now confider how great this man was, to 'whom the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the fpoils. Where as in the precedent view of the cafe, Mel- chizedek is confidered as having given tithes to Abraham^ and not Abraham to Melchizedek. For the clearing and fettling of this point, it is to be obferved,
Firft, That the forementioned author had nothing but the Jewijh hiftory, or Pentateuch, that could be of any weight, to ground his opi nion upon, touching who gave tithes in Abra ham and Melchizeaek'* cafe; there being no other hiftory, memoir, or record that appears, at leaft, that I have ever heard of, but the ori ginal Hebrew Pentateuch, in which an account has been given of this matter 5 and though our Englifo Pentateuch is but a tranjlatlon from fome Hebrew copy, yet that muft have been likewife the cafe of all other copies, except thole in the Hebrew tongue -, for as the Penta teuch was originally written in Hebrew, (b whatever language it has Jince appeared in, whether Greek, or other wife, fuch copies muft of neceffity have been either immediately^ or mediately, tranflations from the Hebrew -, nor do I apprehend, that the fever al copies of the Pentateuch do at all differ in their relation of this piece of hiftory, with refpedl to the point under confideration. For as it has been looked upon, in former times, by fome learned men, to be, at leaft, a little doubtful who gave tithes,
whether
.
whether Abraham, or Mekhizedek ; fo, furely, if there be any copy of the Pentateuch in which this point is more particularly and fully exr- preffed, it would have been dijcovered and ap pealed to long before now. As to any opinion that may have been given upon the cafe elf Melchizedek, by Jofephus; or any other learned man, whether Jew, or Ghrijliany whether ctn- tlent, or modern, if it does not appear to be fairly grounded on the hiftory, it cannot be of •weight; becaufe, at moft, it is but barely con- jeSlural^ or presumptive. When men are dif- pofed to extend their knowledge or belief beyond the means of information, then they have re- courfe to conje5lure\ and as their judgments have no proper guide, fo, confequently, they determine according to the arbitrary and wan- dring imaginations of their own minds. And this I take to be the ground of the multiplicity \ and contrariety of opinions, learned men, of many ages, have gone into concerning Me'lchi- zedek-y as well as in a multitude of other cafes. Melchizedek is indeed taken notice of in a (I fuppofe Hebrew) fragment, or, perhaps, a (hort poetical composition, in which the Poet, or Pfalmift, fpeaking of the perjon whom he made the fubjeft of his mule, faith, as in Pfalm ex. 4. 5Tfe Lord bath fivorn, and will not repent^ thoit art a pricjl for ever, after tue order of * Melchizedek. But then, the Poet is filent
B 2 as
* To be a prleft after the order of Melcbixedek, furely, can be no mont or otburwije, than to be a priclt after, or according to
tb'ut
$s to tithes ; and, therefore, the aforefaid au~ thor could not have any thing from that com- pofition whereon to ground his opinion, that Abraham gave tithes to Mekhizedek, and not Melcbizedek to Abraham. And as the author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews could have no proper foundation for his opinion, but the hiflory referred to, touching who gave tithes, in the cafe under confideration ; fo this leads me to obferve,
Secondly, That that hiftory does not yield a proper ground for fuch opinion to be builf upon, viz. that Abraham gave tithes to Mel- chizedek, but the contrary ; as, I think, will plainly appear, if the natural thread of the ftory be duly attended to. For when the hifto- rian had obferved, that Melcbizedek brought forth * bread and wine, and alfo that he was the (or a) prieft of the moft high God, he added, and he (viz. Melchlzedek) blefled him (viz. Abraham) andJaid, Bkjjed be Abraham of the mojl high Gody poffefjor of bepven and
earth -,
at order of priefthood which took place in Mehbizcdf&'s time ; and which order of prierthooJ, 1 apprehend, is agreed upon by all to be, that the bead, or -principal per/on of every family or tribe, was king and prieft in his o<wn houfe. I fay, this is all that can fairly be fuppofed ; becaufe all that the hiftorian has informed us of, touching Melcbizedek1 s priejlhood, is only that he was the (or a) prieft of the moil high God.
* If the city of Salem was in the valley of Sha<veb, and ;f Melcbizedek met Abraham at the entrance of that city ; then the reading in our Englijb Bible may be very proper, 'viz. that Mel- tbizedek brought forth bread and wine, that is, he brought forth of kh city bread and wine, when he met Abraham ; but other- wife, I think, by brought forth, muft be meant, that Melchize- dik Iroiight theft with him from Salem, when he went to me ft Abraham.
[ 13 1
tarth 5 and bleffed be the mo ft high God which hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand. Here we fee, that the affive perfon, or the perfonj^t^* jngy was Melchizedek ; and the paffive perfon, or the perfon fpoken to and of, was Abraham. The hiftorian goes on, without the leaft hint or intimation of a change of perfons, and obferves, that he, the aftive perfon, or the perfon fpeak- ing, viz. Melchizedek, gave him, the paffive perjfon, or the perfon fpoken to and of, vi&. Abraham, tithes of all. Thus we fee, that the hiftorian is very particular and expre/s, that it \vas Melchizedek which gave tithes to Abraham, and not Abraham to Melchizedek ; and this leads me to obferve,
^Thirdly, That the circumftances which at tended the cafe do not admit it to be otherwife : For, Jir/l, Melchizedek had done nothing to, or for Abraham which called for fuch a grateful return ; whereas, Abraham had laid Melchize dek, and all the people in that neighbourhood under an obligation of gratitude to him, in that he had (for the prefent, at leaft) rid the coun try of their great oppreffbr. Melchizedek had not ri/ked his life to procure fafety to Abraham; but Abraham had done this to work deliverance for fome, and to procure fafety to the country around, of which Melchizedek and the people of Salem were a part : fo that there was not the Jloadow of a rtafon for Abraham to have given tithes to Melchizedek ; whereas, there was the ftrongeft reafon for Melchizedek thus to {hew his gratitude to Abraham. To fay, that Abraham
gave
, : r
gave tithes to Melchizedek on account of his being a prieft, muft needs be weakly urged ; becaufe, though he was a prieft, yet he was not a prieft in, and to the houfe or family of Abraham^ and therefore, did not ftand in the relation of a prieft to him ; and becaufe Abra ham was alfo a prieft him/elf, as the bead of every family or tribe was both king and prieft in his own houfe ; which was Abraham's cafe, except we fuppofe him to have been lefs pious than his neighbours, which fuppofition, furely, is not to be admitted. Befides, Abraham built altar 's , offered jacrtfices, and did what was done by other priefts ; and, therefore, was as much, and as truly a prieft as Melchizedek and other priefts were; fo that there is not the leajl pretence for Abraham to have given tithes to Melchizedek on account of priejihood. Nor, Jecondly, had he ##y thing in the w//?y of Sha- veb, of to 0<z£w, to make a prefent with, or to give tithes of. When Abraham heard of the tvil that had befallen his coufin Lot, he went out in hafte, and the men that were with him, in order to purjue after, and overtake Chedorlao- mer and his company; and therefore, the thing fpeaks itfelf, that they took nothing with them but their weapons of 'war, and what was necef- fary to annoy the enemy; and did not need- lefsly incumber themfelves with goods and riches to make prefents withal. Whereas, when Mel- chizedek went out to meet Abraham, upon his return from the daughter of the kings, he was provided with bread and wine, and fuch good
things
things as Salem afforded ; and thereby he Was furnifhed with materials wherewith to make a thank-offering to Abraham. To fuppofe, as the author to the epiftle to the Hebrews does, that Abraham gave to Melchizedek a tenth part of the goods or fpoil that had been retaken from Chedorlaomer, this fuppofition appears to be al together groundlefs; becaufe the hiftorian has obferved, that when Bera king of Sodom made an offer to Abraham of all the goods or fpoil ' that had been brought back, Abraham would not accept the leaji part for himfelf, not from a thread even to a fhoe-latchet ; much lefs did he take a tenth part thereof, to make a prefent to Melchizedek. Befides, the goods or fpoil re ferred to, was, antecedent to the aforefaid quar rel, the * property of thofe unfortunate people whom Chedorlaomer and his adherents had van- quifhed'y and for Abraham , upon his return from the flaughter of the kings, to have 'with held from the diflreffed owners a tenth part of their goods, and given them to a neighbouring king, who had not been a Jujferer, is a fuppo fition that is moft unnatural and prepofterous.
What
* When Cbedorlaomer and the kings and people that followed him, went forth to engage in battle the five kings and people that came againfl them, they took with them, no doubt, their weapons of <aw, and what was ncceffary for a prefent fubfiftence ; but then, it is not to be fuppofed that they needlefsly*incumbred themfelves with goods and riches, thereby to lay a foundation of fpoil for their enemies ; nor does the hiilory give any countenance to fuch a fuppofition. The fpoil, therefore, referred to, mail needs have been the goods and wealth which had been plundered and taken from the people, of Sodom, &c. and which the hillojiap informs us Abraham had L rought back.
. .
What I would farther obferve upon the cafe is, that if the author of the epiftle to the He brews erred, in the inflame above-mentioned, as it plainly appears, to me at leaft, that he did ; then that may have been the cafe in other inftances; and then his judgment or opinion •alone, upon any point, is not a proper founda tion for our faith to be grounded upon, becaufe he may poffibly have erred ; and confequently, whatever he has offered ought to be tried, be fore it be admitted, and not implicitly fubmitted to. Thus, this Author confiders Jefus Chrift to have been a priejl after the order of Melchi- xedek, chap. v. verfe 6. The author gives a quotation, which he applies to Chrift, viz. Thou art a priejl for ever after the order of Melchizedek. Verfe 10, fpeaking likewife of Chrift, he faith, Called of God an high priejl after the order of MelchizedeL Here, indeed, the author feems to have taken his opinion of Chrift's priejlhood being after the order of Met- chizedek, from the Hebrew poet or pfalmift be fore-mentioned, who left his readers in the dark, as to the per/on whom he made ihcjitp- je5t of his pfalm or fong, and which this au thor applies to Jefus Chrift. But then, it does not appear that Jefus Chrift was a priejl after the order of Melchizedek* The order of priejl hood in Melchizedek's time, was, that the head or principal in every family or tribe was both king and priejl in his own houfe, as hath been already obferved j whereas, it does not appear,
that
>r; i '73.
that jefus Chrift was the principal 'of the fa- mi ly> or tribe, to which he belonged, but rather the contrary ; and, therefore, fuppofing him to have been a priejl, yet it does not ap pear that he was a priefl after the 'order of Melchizedek. Nor does it appear, that Jefus Chrift performed any prieftly acts, or exercifed any prieftly office in, and among his own fami ly, or tribe, nor indeed whilft he was upon earth, and, therefore, When the term prieft was applied to him, it muft have been ufed in an improper and figurative fenfe. To fay, that Chrift executed the office of a prieft, by offer ing up himfelf a facrifice upon the crofs, for the fins of the world, this feems to be weakly urged ; becaufe Chrift did not offer up, or fa crifice himfelf (if the term may be admitted) but was facrlficed by the wicked Jews and Romans -, and, therefore, Chrift was not a prieft, but a vitfim in that bloody fcene of ac tion. Or to fay, that Chrift's priefthood was fpiritual, is befide the point; becaufe that is the fame as to fay, that Chrift was only a prieft in an improper and figurative fenfe; and becaufe tin&prejent queftion is not concerning thejptrz- tuality, or temporality of Chrift's priefthood, but only concerning the way, method, or order by which he was introduced into it. Or to fay, that whatever Chrift was in the days of his flejh, yet he is now a prieft, as he executes a prieftly office in heaven ; this is towering in our imaginations above the clouds, and a<ver- ing that which we have no way (that appears)
C clearly
clearly to under/land, or make out ; and, confe- quently, it is extending our faith beyond the means of information, heaven being quite out of dijlance with refpedl to us, fo as for us to under/land what is tranj acting there. Indeed, the author of the hiftory of the Afts of the Apoftles has informed us, chap. vii. that in the enthufaftick rapture St. Stephen was in, juft be fore his death, the heavens opened, and St. Ste phen looking jleadfajlly in, or looking in with a fteady jixed eye and mind, he faw the glory of God, or God feated on a glorious throne, and Jefus /landing on the right hand of God ; but then nothing concerning Chrift's priejlhood can be inferred from hence.
And here, I beg leave to digrefs a little, by obferving to my readers, that according to the Jewifo theology, that is, according to the fenti- ments, and the accounts which fome of the Jews have given of Jehovah, the Lord of Hofts, or the national God of Ifrael, they feem, at leaft, to have confidered him as a great and glorious Being, whofe place of refi- dence is above the Jlarry region, or in the higheji heaven, where he is feated on a throne of Majefty, being attended by a multitude of lejs glorious beings, or minifterial deities, fome of which, at leaft, are called angels ; and that the place of refidence to Jehovah is parted from thefe lower regions by a veil or curtain, com monly called the firmament of heaven \ and that this veil is fometimes parted in funder, in order to give a farther view into what is above
it,
C
it. Thofe angels that attend Jehovah's prefencc are fometimesy^ to do bufinefs upon this globe, and then they appear greatly to refemble the fpecies of mankind ; but otherwife, by reafon of the aforefaid curtain, and, perhaps, by their great diftance, they are invijible to the inhabi tants of this earth, excepting upon ibme ex traordinary occafions they have been rendered vifible to ibme particular perfons, to whom they have been fent to tranfatt bujinejs with, as aforefaid. Thus, when Ahab king of Ifrael adjured the prophet Micajah to tell him no thing but the truth in the name of the Lord; (i Kings xxii. 16.) the prophet, in obedience to that jolemn charge, faid to the king, / jaw all Ifrael fcattered upon the hills, as Jheep that have no jhepherd ; and the Lord faid, thcfe have no ma/ier, let them return every man to his houfe in peace. The prophet faid alfo to Ahab, Hear tloou therefore the word of the Lord, I Jaw the Lord fitting on his throne, and all the ho/I of heaven ftanding by him, on his right-hand, and on his left. And as Jehovah had then a pur- po/e to anfwer, viz. to entice and perfuade Ahab, that he might £0 up, and fall at Ramoth-Gilead ; fo an enquiry was made, who of thofe atten dants would undertake this work. And there came forth (from among this hoft, or multi tude) a fpirit, and Jlood before the Lord, and faid, I will perfuade him. And the Lord faid unto him, Wherewith? And he Jaid, I will go forth, and I will be a lying fpirit in the month of all his prophets. And he faid, thou foalt
C 2 perfuadi
[20]
perfuade him, and jhalt prevail alfo -, go forth^ and do Jo. Now, therefore, the Lord hath put a lying jpirit in the mouth of all thefe thy pro phets. \ and the Lord hath Jpokcn evil concerning thee. Here we fee, that the Lord, and his hojl of attendants, and the throne of Majefty on which he was feated, were the objects of "oijion to Micajah \ and, therefore, fb far muft have been material. This branch of hiftory has put thinking people upon the enquiry, from whence the lying fpirit might come ? who was the principal in this deceit ? and to whofe account this diffimulation and faljhood is to be placed ? And in confequence of fuch inquifition* fome fay, it is not to be confidered as diaboli cal, as coming from the prince of darknefs; becaufe they apprehend the Hebrew hiftorians have never characterized the Devil, or Satana with the title of Jehovah, but have generally given that appellation to the -God of Abraham^ Ifaac and Jacob, or the national God of If- rael-, which Jehovah is, by the hiflorian, made to be the principal in the cafe under confidera- tion ; now therefore the Lord, or Jehovah, hath put a lying fpirit in the mouth of all thefe thy prophets, faid Micajah to Ahab. And as fome men think the Devil is not to be confidered as the principal in the cale referred to ; fo they think much lefs can it, with any propriety or truth, be applied to the fupream Deity. The one God over all, fay they, is poffeffed with the moft bqundle/s power, and the moft perfeff intelligence 5 and, therefore, is able, of himjelf,
to
v 3
to anfwer any purpofe he may have in view, without having recourfe to the contemptible means of lying and falfhood to obtain it. If Ahab had rendered himfelf unworthy to live in this world^ and the fupream Deity had been difpofed to remove him out of it, he could many ways have put a period to Ahatis life, without commiflioning one of his creatures to go forth and deceive him with a lie, with a falla cious promife of fuccefs, thereby to entice him to go upy and fall by the fword at Ramoth- Gilead. Nor, fay they, will the one God over all, who is the grand fource and fountain of light and 'truth, make ufe of the low means of artifice and collufion to anfwer any of his pur- pofes ; becaufe thereby he would aSt quite out of character, he would perform the part, act like untoy and, as it yvere, Jill up the character of the prince of darknejs, and the father of lies ; and, therefore, moft afluredly, the lying fpirit in Ahab's prophets was not of, or from the fupream Deity, nor was he any way a party in the cafe. Confonant to the account given of Jehovah by the prophet Micajah, is that given by St. Stephen, who when he faw the heavens opened, or when the firmament of heaven was divided or parted in funder in his view, he then (as he informed the people) faw aljo the glory of God; by which he mufl mean, he law Godfeated on his glorious throne, as is evident from what he faw befides, viz. Jefus, or .the Son of mzuftanding on the right band of God. Thefe inftances fhew what con ceptions
[22]
ceptions the Jews had of Jehovah, or the God of Ijrael, viz. that he is in part material, and thereby vijible \ though generally invifible to us, as he is concealed by a w/7, and as his principal lefidence is in the higheji heaven, which is far above, and out of our fight. The term faw, that is here made ufe of, does not admit of being takea figuratively in the prefent cafe ; becaufe, as St. Stephen jaw with his bodily eyes the heavens open, or the firmament of heaven part in funder ; fo the view he had from fuch an opening muft have been with his bodily eyes alfo. But then, though what was thus feen may be applicable to hmzfecondary,fubordinate deity, who is clothed with matter, and thereby is rendered vijible, or, at leaft, the objecJ of vifion ; yet, furely, it is hard to conceive it can be applicable to the , one God over all, to that Immenjity who has neither throne nor foot- Jlool, neither right hand nor left, but is equally prefent in every part of infinite fpace, in the fame manner, kind, and degree. Befides, if the railing any low, carnal, unfuitable, orfalje image of the Deity upon the human mind, or the likening God to any thing fenfible and mate rial, by any moulten or carved work, or by paintings on a 'wall, be deemed idolatrous, as I apprehend it is, at leaft, by proteftant Chrifti- ans; then, furely, the raifing fuch image by any arrangement of 'words, or fentences, muft, with equal propriety, come under the fame de nomination. / Jaw the Lord fitting on his throne, and all the hojl of heaven Jianding by i him,
him, on his right hand, and on his left, faid Mi- cajah : and St. Stephen, like wife, looking up jleadfajlly into heaven, Jaw the glory of God^ and Jejus ftanding on the right hand of God. Thefe accounts are delivered to us as hijiorical fafts, the one being grounded on the authority of a Jewifo, and the other on the authority of a Chrijtian hiftorian ; which hiftorians have fet forth, that the prophet Micajah and St. Stephen were eye witnejjes of the fads referred to. But to return.
If the author of the epiftle to the Hebrews Was liable to err, and did err, as in the in- Jtances above ; then that may have been the cafe of other Jcripture writers ; I fay, that may have been the cafe, for any thing we know, or for any grounds we have from which we may fairly zndjitjily conclude the contrary. And this holds forth a wholefome leffbn of in- ftrudtion to us; namely, that when books are put into our hands * as guides to our judgments and aftions, then it nearly concerns us all care fully and attentively to confider what it is which isr thus held forth to us. And this ought more efpecially to be done with refpedt to writings that have a divine character ftamped upon them ; becaufe long and general experience (hews, that men are too too apt to give up their under- Jlandings in complaifance to what comes forth under Jitch a character. And though it is of no confequence to us, whether Melchizedek gave
tithes
* This point will be more largely and fully confidered in the Vlth fe&ion of the Author'' 4 Fartwel to bit Readers.
1 24 1
tithes to Abraham, or Abraham to Mekhize^ dek -, yet as thefe indifferent things do not (land alone, but are mixed and blended with matters of the greatejl moment, with which our conduct and behaviour, our comfort, peace, and y^/y are concerned, and may be greatly affefted by ; fo our difcovering an £/r0r in the former, may lead us to be more watchful and careful with regard to the latter. And though whatever God faith is /r#//>, and need not be farther enquired into; becaufe, were it not truth, it would not be fa id by him ; yet 'when, and what God faith by the mouths and pern of men, may be moft uncertain and precarious; and, there fore, as he is a yi0/ who faith in his /6^r/ there is no God-, fo he is alfo & fool, though not in an equal degree, who believeth in his heart whatever may be put upon him as a divine oracle, without diligently enquiring, according to the bejl of his ability, and carefully and at* 1 entirely confidering, whether it be really fot or not.
AN
A N
ENQUIRY
Into the conduce of Efau and jacob, the two fons of the patriarch Jfaac- Whereby it appears, that Efau was much the better man.
AS the Jews have always boafted of, and valued them/elves upon their being the jpecial favourites of heaven, and that they have been Jingled out, not only from the body of mankind in general, but alfo from the reft of the offspring of the patriarch Abraham, (to whom the prom lie was made) to be the peculiar people of God ; fo, perhaps, it may not be deemed impertinent to enquire, what there may have been in reafon and nature to be the ground of that preference. And as there does not appear to be any other memoir or re cord but the Pentateuch only, from, and by which, the characters and conduct of the He brew patriarchs are difcovered and made known to us; fo it muft be that record only which can furnifla us with materials for the prefent D enquiry,
26
enquiry. The Hebrew hiftorian informs us,. that Abraham had eight fons, viz, Iftmae!, Ifaac, Zimram, Jokfoan, Medan, Midian, lfi~ bak, and Shuah -, but then, though Abraham had many fons, yet they were not all counted for thejeed, it being Jfaac only who was the fon of the promife. As to IJhmael, he was ba/e- born, being the fon of Hagar, who was hand maid to Sarah, Abraham's wife ; and as to Zimram, Jokjhan, Medan, Midian, Ijlbak, and Shuah, thefe were the fons of Keturah, Abra ham sfecond wife. Gen. xxv; though, at verfe 6, Keturah feems to be confidered as Abrahams concubine. None of thefe were counted Abra ham's feed in that particular and fpecial fenfe in which Ifaac was, he only being the fon of -the promife, and of whom God faid to Abraham, In Ifaac fhall \hyfeed be called. And as Ifaac Was the fon of the promife, or him in <whofe pofterity the promifes that had been made to 'Abraham are fuppofed to center-, fo he had two fons, viz. Efau and Jacob ;. the younger of which was preferred in his pofterity to the pofterity of £/&#, who was the *A/<?r brother, the offspring of J^^ only being counted for the feed, as the feed of Efau were excluded : but then, whether there was any thing in reafon and nature to be the ground of that preference, is the fubjecl: of our prefent enquiry. And in order to make a proper inqui'iition, I think, we muft take ajhorf view of the conduct and beha viour of thefe two men, under the feveral exi gences that attended them, fo far as they have
beer?
been exhibited to us in and by the Pentateuch ; this being the only way, that appears, for us to obtain proper fatisfaftion in the prefent cafe.
Firft, We are to enquire into the conduft and behaviour of Efau, he being the elder bro ther. And as the hiftory of Efau is very^/fonf, fo the firft thing remarked of him, with re gard to his condud:, is, he was a cunning hunter, a man of \hsfield, GeneJIs xxv. 27. by which, I fuppofe, muft be meant, that he fhewed more art and cunning in purfuing after, and catching game, than fome others did; and, therefore, he was ftiled a cunning hunter. And though, perhaps, the Jkill which Efau (hewed in catch ing game, may not be confidered as greatly to his praife ; yet neither can it, I think, be con fidered as a proper ground of difpraife to him. The hiftorian has further obferved : And Jacob fod pottage, and Efau came from the field, and he was faint. And Efau f aid to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that fame red pottage, for lam faint ; therefore his name was called Edom. And Jacob faid, Sell me this day thy birthright. And Efau f aid, Behold, I am at the point to die, and what profit flail this birthright do me? And Jacob faid, Swear to me this day:, andhefivare unto him, and he fold his birthright unto Jacob. 'Then Jacob gave Efau bread, and pottage of lentils, and he did eat, and drink, and rofe up and went his way -, thus Efau dcfpifed his birth right. In this branch of hiftory, Efaus con- duffi is, perhaps, juftly condemnable, viz. his bartering away his birthright (or his right to a
D 2 greater
ill' [28]
greater Jhare of the inheritance of his father) in the manner, and upon the terms above-men tioned. The hiftorian faith, that Efau defpifed his birthright : by which, I think, nothing more can be meant, than that he had not fet fo high a value upon it as he ought, or as the cafe required that he mould. But then Efaus offence ftems to admit offotne alleviations, as it was committed in his youth, a time of life in which rnens value for riches and worldly wealth does not ufually rile fo high, as when they are farther advanced in years ; as he was under great rejilejfnefs and uneafinefs from the great drought or fever that was then upon him, and which put him off his guard-, and as he was drawn, or betrayed into it, by the unreafonable propofal and demand of his brother. Befides, Efau conceived himfelf to be at the point of death) and that the partaking of Jacob's pot tage was the only means he had to prevent it ; and that led him to reafon and aft as he did. Behold, (faid he) / am at the point to die, and what profit Jhall this birthright do me ? If the . premife Efau reafoned from had beeny'z//?, and well grounded, then the conclujion he drawed frbm it, and his fubfequent conduft would have been juji and proper alfo. If Efau had been really at the point of death, (as he thought himfelf to be) and if the partaking of Jacob's pottage was the only means he had to prevent it; and if he could come at that pottage no other way than by parting with his birthright for it ; I fay, had this been the cafe, (which, it is plain
from
9
from the hiftory, Efau conceived it to be) then, furely, Efau adted properly in preferring a greater good to a lefs, when, without it, he muft have been deprived of both; he afted right in giving up his birthright to fave his life. So that, at the worft, EJaus mijcondutf was the effed: of weaknefs, but not of wickednefs -, it was the produce of a mi/taken judgment, but not of a vicious mind. The author of the epiftle to the Hebrews feems therefore to be too fevere in his cenfure upon Efau. Chap xii. 16, 17. Left there be any fornicator, or profane perfon as Efauy who for one morfel of meat fold his birth right ; for ye know, that when afterwards he would have inherited the blejfing, he was rejected; for he found no place of repentance^ though he fought it carefully with tears. This'CbriJtian writer, like fome writers of later times, gives a very partial account of Efaus cafe, and calls him a profane perfon for felling his birthright for one morfel of meat, without taking notice of the principal circumftances which attended the cafe. Efau did not fell his birthright for one morfel of meat, confidered^/^/y as a mor fel of meat ; but under the -sonfideration of its being a means of pre/erving his life; he did not fell his birthright to gratify his appetite, but to fave himfelf from death: Behold, faid he, I am at the point to die, (or I fhall very foon be dead) and what profit fhall this birthright do me ? Nor was Efau rejected from the blejjing on account of his having fold his birthright, as the aforefaid author hath fuggefled; but, on
the
[30]
the contrary, he was tricked out of it, by the nicked contrivance, by the lying andfalfhood of his mother and brother. The author referred to has farther obferved concerning Efau, that he found no place of repentance, though he fought it carefully with tears ; by which I fuppofe he muft mean, that E/au's repentance came too late, and was unavailable -, or elfe what he faid is fcarce Jenfe : but then, this is faid without any authority from the hijiory, which reprefents Efau, not as blaming himfelf for the lofs of the birthright, but as laying all the fault upon Ja- cob his brother. Genefis xxvii. 36. And he (viz. Efau) faid, Is he not rightly named Jacob ? for he hath fupplanted me theje two times, he took away my birthright, and behold, now he hath taken away my blejjing. And though the hiflo- rian has obferved, that when Efau found him felf difappointed of the blefling, he cried with an exceeding great and bitter cry, and that he lift up his voice and wept -, this does not appear to have arifen from a fenfe of his mifconduffi in felling his birthright, but only on account of his brother's difappointing him of the bleffing which his father intended him -, and from an earneft dejire that his father would blefs him alfo, as well as his brother. Verfe 34. And when Efau heard the words of his father, (that he had given the bleffing to Jacob which was intended for him) he cried with an exceeding great and bitter cry, and faid unto his father, Blefs me, even me alfo, O my father. Verfe 38. And Efau faid unto his father, Haft thou but one 3 bleffing,
[3' ]
blejjing, my father ? Blefs me, even me alfo, 0 my father ; and he lift up his voice and wept. From what I have obferved, I think, it appears, that the author of the epiftle to the Hebrews has not donejujiice to the character of Efau. And Efau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Eeri the Hit tit e, andBa- jhemeth the daughter of Elon the Hittite ; which were a grief of mind to Ifaac and to Rebecca, Ge- nefis xxvi. 34, 35. Whether Efau was any way blameable in the choice of thefe women, the hiftorian has not informed us, but only that they were a grief to his parents ; and therefore, nothing can be concluded from it ei ther to his praife or difpraife.
What comes next to be confidered, is Efau\ difappointment of the bleffing, and his behavi our thereupon. When Ifaac was old, he pro- pofed to give his blejjing to his elder fon Efau, he not having done any thing (that appears) to have forfeited his father's favour. And in order thereto, Ifaac fent Efau into the field to catch venifon, and to drefs it, and make fa- voury meat, fuch as his foul loved, that he might eat thereof, and blefs Efau before his death, Genefis xxvii. But Rebecca hearing what Ifaac Jaid, propofed zftratagem to Jacob, where by to deceive Ifaac, and difappoint Efau of the bleffing ; which ftratagem was put in execution, and fucceeded; Ifaac was deceived, and Jacob Hole away the blejjing from his brother. And it came to pafs, as jbon as Ifaac had made an End of blejjing Jacob, and Jacob was Jcarce gone out
from
p . [32]
from the prefence of Ifaac bis father ', that Efau his brother came in from his hunting. And he a 1/6 made favoury meat, and brought it unto his father, and f aid unto his father, Let my fa ther arife and eat of his Jons venifon, that thy foul may blefs me. And Ifaac his father faid unto him, Who art thou ? And he faid, I am thy fon, thy jirft-born. And Ifaac trembled very ex ceedingly, and faid, Who, where is he that hath taken venifon and brought it me, and I have eaten of all before thou camejl, and have bleffed him ? yea, and he foall be blejjed. And when Efau heard the words of his father, he cried with a great and exceeding bitter cry, and faid unto his father, Blefs me, even me alfo, 0 my father. And he faid, Ihy brother came with Jubtilty, and hath taken away thy blejfmg. And he faid, Is not he rightly named Jacob ? for he hath fupplanted me thefe two times, he took away my birthright, and behold now he hath taken away my blefjing : and he faid, Haft thou not referred a blejjingfor me? And Ifaac anfwered andjaid unto Efau, Behold, I have made him thy lord, and all his brethren have I given to him for ferv ants ; and with corn and wine have Ifujiained him ; and what fo all I do now unto thee, my fon ? And Efau faid unto his father, Haft thou but one bleffing, my father? Blefs me, even me alfo, O my father : and Efau lift up his voice and wept. And Ifaac his father anfwered and faid unto him, Behold, thy dwell ing fiall be the fatnefs of the earth, and of the dew of heaven from above, and by thy Jword foalt thou live, and foalt firve thy brother > and
it
"' , .."'«. . [33]
It JJjall come to pafs, 'when thou fo alt have the dominion, that thou Jhalt break his yoak from off thy neck. And EJau hated Jacob, becaufe of the blejjing therewith his father bleffed him ; and Efaufaid in his heart, The days of mourning for my father are at hand, then will I Jlay my brother Jacob.
In this branch of hiftory, there are three things remarkable as to the condu6t of Efau. Fir ft, he was deeply ajfetted with the lofs of that blefling his brother had deprived him of; and he cried with an exceeding great and bitter
cry ; and he lift up his voice and wept.
Secondly, he made Jirong applications to his fa ther, that he might be bleffed as well as his bro ther. When Efau heard the words of his fa ther, that he had given the bleffing to Jacob, he faid unto his father, Elefs me, even me alfo,
O my father. And he (viz. Efau) faid,
Haft thou not referved a blejjing for me ?
And EJau faid unto his father, Haft thou but one blejjing, my father ? Elefs me, even me alfo, O my father \ and he lift up his voice and wept. Thefe words of Efau, furely, were moft melt ing, and were enough to have pierced the heart of any man, and, therefore, muft needs have wounded the very foul of Ifaac, his aged, tender, and loving father. Laft/y, the rejent- ment Efau went into, upon the /// ufage he met with from his brother. And Efau hated Jacob, becaufe of the blejjing wherewith his father bleffed him ; and Efau faid in his heart, 'The days of mourning for my father are at hand, then wi/I
E /
C 3
_.. .
/ Jlay my brother Jacob. Here the proper queflion is, what ground was there for fitch concern, fuch application, and fuch refentment in Efau ? For the jblution of which queftion, I (hall not enquire, whether in thofe times pa rents had it in their power, and it was left to their option to determine the ftate and condition of their poflerity, either for projperity, or ad- verfity, for many generations to come ; it being fufficient for the prefent purpofe to obferve, that this was then thought, or judged to be the cafe. And Ifaac anfwered, and faid unto Efau, Behold I have' made him (viz. Jacob) thy lord, and all his brethren have I given unto him for fervants ; and with corn and wine have I fttftained him, &c. Now this being the ftate of the cafe, Ifaac s blejjing muft of neceffity appear to EJau to be a matter of the utmojl consequence to him, and to his pofterity $ and, therefore, it muft have been a proper ground for the great concern he was under in lofing the bleffing his father had intended him, and for the preffing application he made to his father, that he might be bleffed as well as his brother ; and it was alfo a proper ground of rejentment to him againft his brother, who had been fo greatly injurious to him ; it being as juft and proper, and as much founded in nature, to hate or dijlike the proper objects of hatred, as it is to love or approve the proper objects of love. Perhaps, it may be faid, with too much juftice, that Efau carried his refentment too far, in that he meditated his brother's death 5 Ejaufaid
in
[ 35 ]
in his heart, T!he days, of mourning for my fa* ther are at hand, then will I Jlay my brother Jacob. However, though this part of EJaus condudl may be juftly blameable, yet it had every alleviating circumftance attending it. For as Jacob had extorted from Efau, in the day of his diftrefs, his birthright, and now had robbed him of his father's bleffing ; thefe high provoca tions fo awakened and raifed the paffion of re- rentment in Efau> as makes it no wonder that it exceeded its proper limitation, feeing under fuch circumflances a man muft be greatly upon the watch, and have a great command of him- felf, to keep the paffion from exceeding its pro per bounds, and which is not ordinarily the cafe. And though Efau faid in his heart, he would Jlay his brother ; yet he did not hajlily put this his refolution in practice ; he did not in the height of his paffion fall foul of his bro ther, and put a period to his life ; but only in tended to do it, at fome diftance of time to come ; and as his refentment had been, ia fome meafure, juftly raifed, by the repeated in juries that had been done him, fo it was re moved, when the beat of his paffion was over ; and upon his brother's humble fubmi/Jion, it was turned into love.
Rebecca being confcious of the ill ufage that had been done to her fon Efau, to prevent any bad confequences that might follow upon it, me prevailed upon Ifaac to fend Jacob to Padan-aram, to take a wife of their own kin- dred ; and Jacob went to his uncle Laban, and E 2 took
[36]
took two of his daughters to wife, and under #/'/«• gathered together great fubftance, and then returned back to Canaan. And as Jacob could, not but be Jenfible how bafely he had aded to wards his brother; fo he propofed to appeafe his brother's anger by a prefent. Genefis xxxii. And Jacob took of that 'which came to his hand^ a prefent for Efau his brother, two hundred Jhe- goats and twenty he-goats, two hundred ews and twenty rams, thirty milch camels with their colts, forty kine, and ten bulls, twenty fie-affes and ten foals. Chap, xxxiii. And Jacob lift up his eyes, and looked, and behold, Efau . came, and with him four hundred men -, and he divided the children unto Leah, and unto Rachel, and unto the two hand-maids. And he put the hand-maids and their children foremojl, and Leah and her children after, and Rachel and Jofeph hinder- mojl. And he paffed over before them, and bowed himfelf to the ground feven times, until he canie near to his brother. And Efau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck and ki/ed him, and they wept. And he lift up his eyes, and Jaw the women and the children ; and f aid, Who are thofe with thee? Andhefaid, T'be children which God hath gracioujly given thy fervant. Then the hand-maids came near, they and their children, and they bowed themfehes. And Leah al/b with her children came near, and bowed them/ekes; and after came Jofeph near and Rachel, and they bowed themfehes. And he faid, What meaneft thou by all this drove, which I meet ? and he faid, Thefe are to find grace in o the
[ 37 ]
the Jight of my lord. And Efau faid, I have enough, my brother, keep that thou haji unto thy- felf. Here we fee, notwithftanding Jacob had fupplanted Efau twice, by depriving him both of the birthright and blej/ing , yet Efau went out to meet him at his return, and when he faw him, he received him with all the affeffiion and tendernefs of a brother. Efau, as it were, caft the remembrance of his brother's /// ufage of him behind his back, and when he faw him, he ran to meet him, he embraced him, fell upon his neck and kiffed him, and wept over him ; fuch joy did Efau fliew at the return of his brother. This, furely, is almoft a fm- gular inftance of good nature, and overlooking of injuries upon thejirjl fubmiffion; in which Efau has few equals, and, perhaps, none have excelled him. But this is not all ; for as Jacob had prepared a large prefent for his brother, in order to appeafe that anger which he knew had been juftly provoked; fo Efau moft generoujly refufed it, and faid, / have enough, my brother, keep that thou haft unto thyfelf. To fay I have enough, when an offer of much more prefents, is an inftance of felf -denial that does not ordi narily take place -, and yet this was Efaus cafe. Where is the man ! where is the Chriftian ! who fays / have enough, when an offer prefents of greatly increafing his ftore ? and yet this was the cafe of Efau. For though, perhaps, it may not be unufual for a Chriftian biihop, when in the poffkffion of two or three thoufand pounds per year, to fay I have enough, whilft
there
C 38 ]
there is no profpeff of his rifing higher, or get ting more -, yet no fooner is a 'view opened to a more profitable fee, then, where is, or where was that Chriftian bifhop, that Jelf-denying father of the church, who has not, who does not ufe #// his intereft, put forth his utmoft endeavour, and, as it were, row againfl wind and tide to get \\imk\f Jafely landed there? The inftance of contentment and Jelf -denial fhewn forth in Efau, is, furely, of ineftimable 'value, and worthy even of Chriftian imitation -, I have enough, my brother, keep that thou haft unto tby- felf. Efau alfo kindly offered Jacob fome of his people, to help Jacob's houfliold on in their way. Verfe 15. And EJau faid, Let me now leave with thee fome of the folk that are with me ; and he faid, What needeth it ? let me find grace m the fight of my lord. So Efau returned that day on his way unto Seir. Thefe are the principal occurrences of Efau* life, as they are held forth to us in the Pentateuch ; by which, I think, it appears, that though Efau was of like pajfions with other men, and y&s fufrjeSt to all the infirmities and frailties of nature ; yet his character, upon the whole, is worthy and amiable.
What comes next to be confidered, is the conduct of Jacob ; and the jfr/? thing remarka ble of him, is that of his getting the birthright from his brother 3 which (hews what was the grand fpring or principle of action in him, viz. covetoujhefs, or a vicious fe If -love. St. Paul has obferved, i-ftm, vi, IQ, That the love of mo ney
... •;. J 39] ^ .^
ney is the root of all evil; by which, furely, the apoftle muft mean, not a proper, but an exceffive or vicious love of money, or worldly goods, which is ufually termed covetoujhefs : this he confiders to be the root of #//, or mojl evil, as it leads men into many bad practices to procure it, and which was verified in Jacob's cafe. Genefis xxv. ^/^ y^0£ y<?</ pottage, and Efau came from the field, and be was faint; and Efau faid to Jacob ', Feed me, I pray theey 'with that fame red pottage^ for I am faint. If Jacob had attended to the calls, and the obliga tions of nature^ then, when he faw his brother Efau in diftrefs, and beheld the anguijh of his foul, he would readily and fpeedily have admi- niftred relief to him; and this he would have done independent of all application, and of the brotherly relation that fubfifted betwixt them, becaufe it was what EJau's pitiable cafe re quired ; and, therefore, for Jacob to fee his brother in diftrefs, and to Jhut up the /^w/y of his compaffion from him, when called upon for help, is fuch an inftance of hard-heartednefs^ as is not ordinarily to be met with. And Jacob Jaid, Sell me this day thy birthright. As Jacob had difcharged himfelf of all the previous obli gations of nature, fo his heart ran after gain, and that even in his youth, which does not alleviate, but rather aggravate the offence, it being a time of life in which that paffion is not ufually fo greatly corrupted. Jacob no fooner faw the diftrds of his brother, and beard his complaint, but he caft about him
what
t.
what advantage to make to himfelf thereby. And Jacob faid, Sell me this day thy birthright -, this, furely, was a mpft monftrous demand, and {hewed Jacob's covetoujhefs to be immeafurable even as the fand of the fea. If Jacob, in bar tering with his brother, had required penny worth for pennyworth, it would have had the face of juftice, though void of pity ; or if he had required a pounds-worth for his penny worth, that would have been a moft unreafona- ble and extravagant demand ; but for him to require his brother's birthright for his bowl of lentil broth, is fuch an exchange as admits of no comparison -, and is fuch an inftance of boundlefs avarice, as hath none to parallel And as was Jacob's covetoufne/s, fo was his confidence ; he muft have had the moft con- fummate affurance to have been capable of making fo monflrous a demand. And that Jacob might make fare work, he required his brother to bind the bargain with an oath. And Jacob faid, Swear to me this day ; and he /ware unto him, and he fold his birthright unto Jacob. Thus was EJau fupplanted of the birthright, under a colour of jujiice ; and God muft be made a party in the caufe ; EJau muft appeal to the Deity to be a witnejs to this moft accurjed contrail.
Genefis xxvii. And it came to pafs, that 'when Ifaac was old, and his eyes were dim, Jo that he could not Jee, he called Efau his eldeji fon, and faid unto him, My fon j and he faid unto him, Behold, here am L And he faid unto him, Be hold,
C
hold, now I am old, I know not the day of my death -, now therefore, take, I pray thee, thy wea pons, thy quiver and thy bow, and go out to the field, and take me fame venijon, and make favoury meat, fuch as I love-, and bring it to me, that I may eat, that my foul may blefs thee before I die. And Rebecca heard when IJ'aac fpake to Efau his fon ; and Efau went to the field to hunt for vent/on, and to bring it. And Rebecca fpake unto Jacob her fon, faying, Be hold, I heard thy father fpeak unto EJau thy brother, faying, Bring me venifon, and make me favoury meat, that I may eat, and blefs thee be fore the Lord, before my death. Now therefore, my fon, obey my voice, according to that which I command thee ; go now to the flock, and fetch ?ne from thence two kids of the goats, and I will make them favoury meat for thy father, fuch as he loveth -, and thou Jhall bring it to thy father \ that he may eat, and that he may blefs thee before his death. And Jacob faid to Rebecca his mo ther^ Behold, Efau my brother is a hairy man, and I am afmooth man ; per adventure, my father 'will feel me, and I Jhall feem to him as a de ceiver^ and I /hall bring a curfe upon me, and not a blejjing. And his mother faid, Upon me be thy.curje, my fon ; only obey my voice, and go fetch me them. And he went, and fetched, and brought them to his mother ; and his mother made favoury meat, fuch as his father loved. Here we fee, that Rebecca was the projector of the intended fraud-, {he put her fon Jacob upon playing the trickfter with his father and bro- ,
F ther :
[42]
ther : we allb fee, that "Jacob at firft declined the work ; but then his refujal was not grounded on the bajenefs of the defign, but on fas, danger of not fucceeding in it : Behold (faid Jacob) Efau my brother is a hairy man, and I am a Jmooth man ; my father, peradventure, will feel me, and I mail leem to him as a deceiver, and I mall bring a curfe upon me, and not a ble/J- ing. And Rebecca took goodly raiment of her elder Jon Efau, which were with her in the houj'e, and put them upon Jacob her younger Jon ; and fhe put the Jkins of the kids of the goats upon his hands, and upon the Jmooth of his neck, and '/Joe gave the favoury meat, and the bread which foe had prepared, into the hand of her fon Jacob -9 and he came unto his father, and faid, My fa ther ; and he faid, Here am I, who art thou, my fon? And Jacob faid unto his father, lam Efau thy firjl-born, I have done according as thou baddeft; arife, I pray thee, and Jit, and eat of
my venifon, that thy foul may blej's me. And
IJaac Jaid unto Jacob, Come near, I pray thee,
that I may feel thee, my fon, whether thou be
my very fon Efau, or not. And Jacob went
near unto Ifaac his father, and he felt him, and
faid, 'The voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands
are the hands of Efau ; and he difcerned him not,
becaufe his hands were hairy as his brother Ejau's
hands -, fo he bleffed him, and Jaid, Art thou my
very fon Efau ? and he faid, I am. And he
faid, Bring it near to me, and I will eat of my
Jons venifon, that my foul may blefs thee : and
he brought it near to him, anfl he did eat -, and
he
he brought him wine, and he drank : and his fa ther Ifaac Jaid unto him, Come near now and kifs me, my fon ; and he came near, and hi fled him ; and he fmelled the fmell of his raiment, and bleffed him; and Jaid, See, the fmell of my fon is as the fmell of a field which the Lord hath bleffed ; therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, &c. When fome men engage in an evil defign, they flick at nothing in the profecution of it ; and that feems to have been Jacob's cafe. Ja cob, through the • injligation of his mother, en gaged in a defign of robbing his brother of the blejjing his father had intended him ; and he commenced the moft thorough-paced liar, both in word and deed, to obtain it. Jacob put on his brother's apparel, he counterfeited the Jkin of his hands and his neck, he covered himfelf with diffimulation as with a cloak, and then went to his father with that boldnefs, which is only fuitable to honefty and truth. And Jacob Jaid, My father ; and Ifaac /aid, Who art thou, my fon ? and he f aid unto his father, I am Efau thy firjl-born? I have done according as thou baddeji me. And as Ifaac s jealoufy was raifed, by the voice that he heard (the voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Efau, and he difcerned him not-, that is, he difcerned him, and yet he difcerned him not) fo this led Ifaac to put the queftion more Jirongly and clofely to Jacob, viz. Art thou my very fon Efau ? and he f aid, lam. Never, furely, was diffimula tion and falfliood carried to a greater height, than in the prefent cafe. Jacob not only put F 2 himfslf
;[44] ;
hirnfelf in the place of his brother, and called himfelf by his brother's name ; but when he was ftridly examined, he flood to it to the lajl, that he was the very EJau ; and, no doubt, would have fwore it, had that been required. And Ijaac [aid unto bis Jon, How is it that thou haft found it Jo quickly ', my Jon ? and he faidy Becaufe the Lord thy God brought it to me. Good God ! for Jacob to make the Deity a party in his unrighteous caufe, and reprefent God as bearing a part in, and forwarding the fraud, muft needs be the height of impiety, as well as the grqfjeft faljhood,
As Jacob had jujliy raifed the rejentment of his brother, by robbing him of the birthright and bleffing ; fo to prevent EJau from return ing the injury, Rebecca prevailed upon Ifaac to lend Jacob to Padan-aram, to his uncle Laban. Genefis xxviii. And as Jacob went on his way, the fun being fet> he laid him down to Jleep -, and he dreamed, and behold, a ladder Jet upon the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven -, and behold, the angels of God afcending and defcending on it: What this hieroglypbick dream was de- figned to point out, the hiftorian has not in formed us ; though this feems to be hinted by it, viz. that the place of refidence to the angels is heaven, and that fometimes they defcend, and do bujinefs upon earth, and then afcend up to heaven again j but then the fwift motion by which they are fuppofed to pafs through the air, feems to be very unaptly reprefented by the JIow progreffion of afcending and defcending upon
[45 ,
a ladder. And the Lord flood above it (viz. this ladder) • and there made feveral promifes to Jacob, and to his feed, if fuch a thing could be, confidering the evil practices Jacob had been fo lately engaged in. And 'when Jacob awoke, he vowed a vow, faying, If God will be with me in this way that I go, and will give me bread -to eat, and raiment to put on, Jo that I come again to my father 's houje in peace, and plenty ; (the laft of thefe, furely, was fuppofed and intended, though notexpreffed; elfe, whereof would Jacob have had to have given a tenth to God, according to his vow) then jhall the Lord be my God-, and this/tone, which I have fet for a pillar, Jhall be God's houje ; and of all that thou Jhalt give me, I will, Jiirely, give the tenth part to thee. As Jacob was fometimes concerned in making of contracts ; fo he took care to fti- pulate good terms for himfelf, whether he traf ficked with God, or with man-, witnefs the birthright contract, as well as that juft men tioned. Not but the laft article in this con- tracl: may poffibly have been defcended from priefily parents, as priefts of all forts have en deavoured to perfuade the world, that what is given to them is offered to God, and acceptable to him ; of which they feem to look upon tithes to be a very convenient portion. And if the article ^ referred to was part of the contract, then it does not appear, that this part of the bargain was made good-, though Jacob had ac quired fo large a fubftance in Padan-aram, as at his return it conftituted two bands: fo that
Jacob's
[46]
Jacob's vow feems to have been like that of the Jailor in the ftorm. And Jacob went on his journey till he came to the country of the eaft, and there he met with Rachel, his uncle La- bans daughter ; who had him to her father's houfe, where he was kindly entertained. And Jacob Jerved his uncle Lab an fourteen years for his two daughters, Leah and Rachel, by whom he had Jeven fons, and one daughter ; and like- wife four other fons, viz. two apiece by each of their hand-maids, Bilhah and Zilpah, whilft they remained in the houfe of their father. Whether the multiplying of wives and concu bines, as in Jacob's cafe, is confonant to that rule of aftion which the fpecies-of mankind ought to be governed by, is a queftion I (hall not enter into; but only obferve, if it was fo in Jacob's cafe, then it muft be fo in all other cajes under the fame circumftances. And when Jacob had thus increafed his family, he defired Laban to let him return 'with them to the country from whence he came. Gene/is xxx. But Laban defired Jacob to continue with him, and he would reward him to his fatisfao tion. And he f aid, What foall 1 give thee? And Jacob Jaid, "Thou Jhalt not give me any thing ; if thou wilt do this thing for me, I will again feed, and keep thy flock. I will pajs through all thy flock to day, removing from thence all the Jpeckled and fpotted cattle, and all the brown cattle among the Jheep, and the fpeckled and Jpotted among the goats ; and of J'uch jhall 'ie my hire. So Jhall my righteoufnefs anfwer
for
. , [47 ]
for me in time to come, when it fhall come for my hire before thy face ; every one that is not fpeckled among the goats, and brown among the Jheep, that foall be accounted as ftolen with me. This, to appearance, was a moft fair and equitable propofal, and feemed to belpeak the propojer to be a man of flriffi honour, honefly, and integrity , whereas, in truth, it was an artful contrivance in Jacob, to gather the bejl of Laban s cattle to him/elf, and make them his own property, under the appearance of juftice and honefty, as the event {hewed. Laban not being acquainted with the craft zxi&fubtilty of Jacob, and expecting his cattle would have been left to follow nature, without being pra5iifed upon, to turn them out of that other- wife natural courfe they were in, he readily complied with the propofal, confidering himfelf, no doubt, to have been in very fafe hands ; though afterwards he found the cafe to be otherwife, to his coft. Jacob having flruck a bargain with Laban, he foon fell to pra&ifmg upon his cattle, in order to anjwer his own purpofe. And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazle, and chefnut-tree, and pilled white Jirakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods ; and he fet the rods, which he had pilled before the flocks, in the watering troughs, when the flocks came to drink^ that they Jhould conceive when they came to drink -, and the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringflraked, fpeckled and fpotted. And Jacob did feparate the lambs,
and
[48] ' ;
and fet the faces of the focks towards the ring- ftraked, and all the brown in the flock of La- ban ; and he put his own flock by tbemfelves, and put them not unto Labans cattle. And it came to pajs, whenfoever the flronger cattle did conceive, that Jacob laid the rods before the eyes of the cattle in the gutter 'S, that they might con ceive among the rods ; but when the cattle were feeble, he put them not in ; Jo the feebler were Labans, and the flronger were Jacob's. As was Jacob's covetoufnefs, fo was his craft, viz. inexhauftible ; and thereby his conduct was all of a piece. Whilft Jacob was in Canaan, in the houfe of his father Ifaac, his wits were employed in making his market upon the for- tune of his brother; and when he carne to Padan-aram, the fame kind of craft was exer- cifed in draining the blood out of the veins of his uncle Laban. Jacob's Jkill in natural phi- lofophy, or his knowing what natural effects the firiking the imaginations of the cattle at the time of conception would produce, together with the ignorance and flmplicity of Laban; thefe put it into his power to enrich himfelf, at his uncle's coft : he put the pilled flicks into the watering-troughs, and the cattle conceived, and brought forth accordingly. And as Jacob did this to the flrong cattle, but not to the weak ; fo by this means the feebler were La- bans, and the flronger were his own. Thus Jacob, taking the advantage of his uncle's ignorance and fimplicity, encreafed in wealth exceedingly, and had maid fcrvants and men 3 ferevants>
_x; [49] _
fervants, and camels and affes. This being the v cafe with Jacob at Padan-aram, as he grew rlchy his uncle grew poor : fo Laban and his fons grew very urieafy thereby; which Jacob perceiving, he thought it advifeable to march off. Gene/is xxxi. And the better "to grace the retreat, the hiftorian obferves, that the Lord faid unto Jacob, Return unto the land of thy fathers, and I will be with thee ; but then, 'who. the lord was that gave Jacob this fea- fonable advice, the Lord only knows. How ever, Jacob fent and called Rachel and Leah to the field unto his flock, and faid unto them, I fee your father s countenance thai it is not to wards me as before -, but the God of my fathers hath been with me. And ye know, that with all my power I have ferved your father, and your father hath deceived me, and changed my wages ten times -, but God fujfered him not to hurt me, If he faid thus, The Jpeckled foall be thy wages , then all the cattle bare fpeckled: and if he faid thus, The ring-Jlraked Jhall be thy hire -, then bare all the cattle ring-Jlraked : Thus hath God taken away the cattle of your father, and hath given them unto me. And that Jacob might clear up his own innocence, and throw all the blame upon his uncle, he farther informed his wives what he had feen in a dream, and what the Lord had told him. As Jacob was a perfect majler of the arts of dijjimulation and mijrepre- fcntation, fo in the ufe of thefe he took upon him to jujlify himfelf, at the expence of his uncle's reputation. It was Laban (if Jacob is
G to
[So] ;
to be credited) who was the deceiver, and who had changed his wages ten times -, whereas the truth of the cafe feems to be this : Laban find ing himfclf to be in bad bands, and that his circumftances grew worje and worfe, he made thole changes in Jacob's wages, in order to check a growing evil, which otherwife he knew not how to guard againft ; and, indeed, Jacob (hewed himfelf to be fo veryjharp, that Laban, with all his care and circumfpeffiion, could not be a match for him -, and, therefore, muft needs have been a great fufferer by him. And though it feerned right to Laban, that Jacob fhould be well rewarded for his fervice, and therefore he generoufly offered him to make his own terms ; yet it could not feem right to him, and therefore he did not intend, by that offer, to put it in Jacob's power to bring him to poverty thereby, which he plainly faw Jacob was driving at; to prevent which, he changed his wages, as aforefaid. However, Ja cob had another way of maintaining his inno cence, by charging all that had happened upon Providence : If he (viz. Laban) faid thus, The fpeckled foall be thy wages-, then all the cattle bare Jpcckled : and if he faid thus, fhe ring-ftraked Jhall be thy hire ; then all the cattle bare ring- jlraked: Thus God hath taken away the cattle of your father, and hath given them unto me. Ne ver, iu rely, was there a more partial or falfe reprefentation of a cafe than this! Jacob knew full well, that as to the bearing of the cattle it was the produdt ofrfecond caufes ; and that he
was
[5'] .
Was the only agent concerned in fetiing thofe caufes on work; it was he who pi lied the ficks, and laid them in the watering-troughs ; it was be that brought the Jlrong cattle to the troughs, in order for them to conceive, as aforefaid: and therefore, for him to make it the aft of God, to fay, that the Lord had taken away Laban s cattle, and given them to him, v/as both impi ous and falfe. It is a cafe but too common for mens evil deeds to be covered with the cloak of divine Providence, Every thing is confidered as under the direction and appointment of God, whether good or evil; all things come to pafs according to his will ; it is he that maketh <war and maketh peace \ it is God that maketh rich and maketh poor, though one man becomes rich by robbing and plundering, and another becomes poor by being robbed and plundered: and thus men projlitute the character and ^n?- /##£ the facred TZ^^ of God, by making him & party in every unrighteous caufe. j^<^ having complained to his wives, and they joining in the complaint, they agreed to go off with all that they had ; to which Rachel added her father's images, which (he had kcrefy Jlolen from him. And as Jacob took the opportunity of going away whilft Laban vtzs fleering \\\$fiejp ; fo it was told Laban on the third day, that j^/a/i was fed. Upon which, Z/^^ took his bre thren with him, and purjued after him fpv&t days journey, and they overtook him in the Mount-Gilead. And God came to Laban Syrian in a dream by nigkt, and J aid unto l\
G 2 Take
fake heed that thou fpeak not to Jacob either good or bad. Who, or what this god was that interpofed in favour of Jacob, when his cha~ ratter and conduft are taken into the account, is hard to find ; for though, perhaps, it may be much too Jevere to fay of Jacob, he had a heart to conceive, a head to contrive, and a #W to execute any villany; yet, furely, it may be vtryjuftly and truly faid of him, that his avaritious defires, and the craft he ufed in gra tifying them were greatly extenjive. When La- ban overtook Jacob, he complained of /'// u/age, in that Jacob ftole away fecretly, and did not give him the opportunity of feeing and kiffing his children, and fending them away in cbear- fulnefs ; and moreover he had Jiolen his Gods. "And Jacob anjwered, and faid unto Laban, Be hold, I was afraid, for I faid, Par adventure thou wilt take by force thy daughters from me : 'with whomfoever thoufindejl thy Gods, let him not live; before our brethren difcern thou 'what is thine with me, and take it to thee ; for Jacob knew not that Rachel had Jiolen them. Then Laban fearched all their tents and fluff; but as Rachel had put the images in a hamper, and fat upon it, and pretended, when her father came to fearch the hamper, that (he could not rife up, becaufe the cuflom of women was upon her ; fo (he, (having learned the art of lying land diflimulation as well as her hufband) by this means, prevented her father from/earching the hamper ; and thereby Laban not only loft his imagc^ but alfo brought upon himfelf the
imputation
[S3]
imputation of a falfe accufer. And "Jacob •wroth, and chode with Laban, &c. However, at laft, they made up the matter, they entered into a covenent, and parted friendly.
Jacob having parted from Laban, he went forward, and fent and acquainted Efau of his coming. Gene/is xxxii. And the mejfengers re turned to Jacob, faying, We came to thy brother Efau, and alfo he cometh to meet thee, and four hundred men with him. And Jacob was greatly afraid, and dijireffed -, and he divided the people that were with him, and the focks, and herds , and the camels, in two bands. Fear and ihame are proper attendants on guilt, tho' unnatural to innocence. Jacob could not but be confcious of the injuries he had done his brother ; and, therefore, when he heard he was coming to meet him, with four hundred men, it put him in fear. However, having prayed to God for protection, and meafuring his brother's temper and affections by his own, who was greedy of gain, he thought nothing was fo likely to ap- peafe his brother's anger as a valuable prefent •> and which he fet apart accordingly. And Ja cob was left alone, and there wreftled a man (or one who appeared like a man) with him until the breaking of the day -, and when he Jaw that he prevailed not againjt him, he touched the hol low of his thigh, and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint -, and he wrejiled with him. And he jaid, Let me go, for the day breaketh ; and he [aid, I will not let thee go, except thou blefe me. And he Jaid unto him, What is thy tiame ?
And
[54]
And he faid, Jacob. And he faid, rfhy name jhall be no more called Jacob \ but Ifrael; for as a prince haft thou had power with God, and with men, and haft prevailed. And Jacob ajked him and faid, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name ? And he faid, Wherefore is it that thou doft ajk after my name ? and he bleffed him there \ And yacob called the name of the place Peniel-, for I have feen God (or the angel of God) face to face, and my life is preferred. From this, and federal other accounts in the Pentateuch, it is plain, that the angels who appeared to, and converfed with the Hebrew patriarchs were a fpecies of beings, which, as to their outward appearance, very much rejembled the fpecies of mankind-, they eat, and drank, and walked, and talked like men : but then, whether they were diftinguijhable into fexes, viz. males and females, and fo did, or do increafe and multiply like human kind, is a point the hiftory, perhaps, may be thought not to be quite clear in ; though, I think, there are fome paffages in holy <writ which feem, at leaft, to favour the afi firmative fide of this queftion. Thus, yob i. 6. Now there was a day when the fons of God came to prefent themfehes before the Lord, and Satan came alfo among them. That thefe /0;w of God were angels, is highly probable ; not only from Satan's affociating himfelf with them, who was one of that fpecies, though an angel of dark- nefs ; but alfo angels are reprefented in the bible as attending the divine prefence, which thefe fons of God were faid to do. Thefe angels be ing
[55]
ing called Jons of God, plainly befpeaks them to be of the male kind, and fuppofes that there were, or might be others of the fame fpecies, who come under the denomination of daugh ters of God ; though, perhaps, thofe daughters of God, w female angels, if any fuch there be, may not have been fent to do bufinefs upon earthy as the Jons of God were, and, therefore, we may have heard nothing of them. In a large family, where there are parents and chil dren y m afters zn&fervants, fojourners and guejlsy and perfons of different ages and fexes, thefe are diftinguifhed by different names; and as the offspring of the heads of the family are diftin- guifhed by the general term children, in diC- tindion to thofe in the fame family, who are either their parents, or elfe fojourners, guefts, or fervants; fo thefe children, with regard to the fexesy are diftinguifhed by the terms Jons and daughters ; fons and daughters, as to the fexes, being put in oppofitiony and by way of diJitnSiion in the fame family, with regard to the offspring, as males and females are with re- fpedl to ihejpecies at large, and, therefore, the term fon does as much contain in it the idea of a maky as it does that of a child. So that if there is a fpecies of intelligent beings that are not diftinguifhable into males and females, that is, if there is nothing in the conftitution of each individual which denominates it either a male or female; then, it is plain, that the term Jon, as well as daughter, is altoge ther irrelative to that fpecies ; becaufe there
is
v, .,;.,, [56] .^
is nothing to ground the diftin£tion3 and, there fore, not the appellations, upon. From what I have obferved, I think, it appears, that if God has a fan, then there muft be, at leaft, a capa city in nature for his having a daughter ; if the Deity has a male child, who, on that account, is called a fon of God, then he may have a female child, who, on that account, may be called a daughter of God; and, confequently, if there are male angels who are called Jons of God, then there may be females of the fame ipecies who may with equal propriety be called daughters of God alfo. To this I may add, Genefis vi. And it came to pafs, when men began to multiply (or were greatly multiplied) on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the fens of God Jaw the daughters of men that they were fair, and they took them
wives of all which they chofe. 'There were
giants in the earth in thofe days, (viz. when, or after the coalition of fpecies, or the fons of God going in unto the daughters of men, as aforefaid) and alfo after that, (viz.) when the fons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them ; the fame [chil dren] became mighty men, which were of old (or in thofe antient times) men of renown. That is, the males who fprang from fuch a coalition of fpecies, from fons or angels of God and daughters of men, were not only of larger fiature than others, but they had alfo rendered themfelves remarkable by their atfions-, they became famous on account of their mighty
[57]
deeds, they were mighty men, men of That thefe Jons of God were not of the human fpecies is plain, becaufe they are put in contra- dijlinftion to them ; when men began to be, or were greatly multiplied, then the fons of God did as aforefaid. And »that thefe fons of God were angels is highly probable; becaufe we know of no other fpecies of intelligent beings but the angels who have fo near a refemblance to men, or who have had any intercourfe with them. And that thefe fons or angels of God were of the male kind is plain, not only from the appella tion of Jons, which belpeaks them to be males, but alfo from their going in unto, or lying with the daughters of men, and thofe women bearing children confequent upon it. Whether angels are of a gigantickjfe^, and fo produced giant 3, or whether this extraordinary production was ow ing to the mixture of the fpecies, as aforefaid, is not to be difcovered by the hiftory. Jacob hav ing wrejlled and converfed with the angel, as before-mentioned, he went forward until he met his brother, who received him gracioujly. Gene/is xxxiii. And when the two brothers were again parted, Jacob came to Shalem, a city of Shechem, and he bought a parcel of land of Hamor, the father of Shechem, who was lord of the country. And Dinah, the daughter of Leah, which foe bare unto Jacob, went out to fee the daughters of the land. Genefis xxxiv. And when Shechem, the Jon of Hamor, the Hi- wife, prince of the country, jaw her, he took her and lay with her, and defiled her ; and his foul
H clave
[S3]
clave unto. Dinah the daughter of Jacob. An-cl t-larnor^ the father of Shechem, propofed to the fons of Jacob a treaty of marriage betwixt his Jon and their fifter ; and offered to give what dowry they £hould require. And the Jbm of Jacob (concealing their refentment) anjwered Shechem and Hamor hi? father deceitfully, and
faid, >—We cannot do this thing, to give our
Jj/fer to One that is uncirciimcifed ; for that were a reproach unto us. But in this will we conjent unto yon, if you will be as we be, that every male of you be circumcijid -, then will we give our daughters unto you, and we will take your daugh ters unto tis> and we will become one people ; but if ye will not barken unto us to be circumcifed, then will we take our daughter, and we will be gone. And the words plea/ed Hamor and Shechem his Jon-, and tie young man deferred not to do the thing, bccaufe he had delight in Jacob's daughter. And Hamor and Shechem conferred with the reft of the people, and prevailed upon them to come into the agreement; in confequence of which they were all circumcifid. As the /3»j of Jacob inherited the corrupt effetfions, the diffimulation and falficod of their father ; fo, like him, they made every thing to yield to their inclinations, and even things Jacred muft be made fubfervient thereto. And ac cordingly conformity in the externals of religion muft.be required from the Shechemites, every male among them muft be circumcijed, a divine inflitution muft be projtitutedy the more fully to gratify a revengeful paffion, and to fatisfy
their
[59]
their avaritious defines. The Sheclemttes having fubmlttcd to the painful rite of circumcifion, which difabled them from making that defence of their lives and fortunes as otherwife they would have been capable of, they thereby put it into the power of the Jons of yacob to cut them off. And it came to pafs on the third day, whiljl they were fore, that two of the Jons of Jacob, (who, no doubt, were appointed for that purpofe by the reft) Simeon and Levi, Di nah" s brethren, took each man his Jword, and (like thirfty bloodhounds) came upon the city boldly, and Jlew all the males. And they flew Hamor, and Shechem his /on, with the edge of the Jword', and took Dinah out of Shecbems boiije^ and went out. The Jons of 'Jacob (probably the other fons, having the fignal given them) came upon the Jlain, and Jpoiled the city. — *fhey took their focep, and their oxen, and their ajjes, and that which was in the city, and that which was in the 'field, and all their wealth -, and all their little ones and their wives took they captive, and J foiled even all that was in the houfe. Here we lee was a general, and a moft terrible deftruo tion and devaftation, in which the innocent and the guilty were equally involved , and, there fore, if ever refentment was carried much too far, it feems to have been fo in the prefent cafe ; and this very naturally leads to the quef- tion, (viz.} What could have been the ground of ibjevere'a. revenge? And the anfwer is, It was Shechem $ lying with their fifter Dinah, ivhich thing ought not to have been done. That
H 2 focb
fuch a thing ought not to have been done, is true; but then, it is as true, that the offence bore no proportion to the retaliation ; efpecially if it be confidered, that he who had defloured Dinah, not only propofed, but greatly defired to make her his wife, which was, in fome mea- fure, repairing the injury ; and which offer the fons of Jacob publickly profeffed to accept, upon certain conditions that were complied with. And, therefore, for thefe fons of Jacob, thefe favourites of heaven, to break through the co venant they had entred into, and not only kill the offending party, but alfo his father, and all the males that were in the city, and then pof- fe/s themfelves of all their cattle, goods, and fub- liance, both within doors and without, and take their wives and children captive, is fuch an unheard-of barbarity and villany as is rarely to be met with ; and which makes the aft or s look more like beafts of prey than men. Nor, per haps, were all thefe fons of Jacob always clear of thofe kind of offences they (bowed fo great a refentment againit ; witnels Reubens going in to his fathers concubine, and Judah lying with T^amar^ his daughter-in-law, and who would have gratified his wrath > as well as his luft, upon her, had not flame covered his face. Not but it hath been often obferved, that thole men who take the liberty to debauch the wives and daughters of others, (hew a great rejentment when the like is pracliied upon their own ; and this (hews the excellency and ufefulnejs of that golden rule of action, viz. of doing to others as
we
6f
we would they fhould do unto us. However, Jacob was greatly offended at the vile behaviour of his fons, and told them, -They troubled him and made his name to Jlink among the inhabi tants of the land ; which feems to be \hzjujleft and moft amiable part of his conducl. And as Simeon and Levi were a kind of principals in the aforefaid cruelty ; fo Jacob reproached them with it when he came to die. Gene/is xxxv. Simeon and Levi (faid he) are brethren, injlru- ments -of cruelty are in their habitations ; 0 my foul, come not than into their fecret^ unto their af- fembly^ mine honour^ be not thou united ; for in their anger they Jlew a man, and in their felf- i&ill they digged down a wall-, curfed be their anger ^ for it was farce, and their wrath, for it was crueL I will divide them in Jacob, and fcatter them in IfraeL Gene/is xlix. This cruel difpofition feems to have prevailed in the fons of Jacob, and to have become a kind of fecond na^ ture to them ; elfe, furely, they could not have meditated their brother Jofeph's death upon fo flight grounds, viz. his father's loving him bet ter, and treating him with more tendernejs than he did them. Gene/Is xxxvii. And Jacob tra velled from Shalem to Bethel, and from thence he went towards Ephrath. Gene/is xxxv. And Rachel conceived, and bare Jacob another fony (which put a period to her life) and Jhe called his name Benoni ; but his father called his name Benjamin. And Jacob (hewed a partial regard to his two fons Jofeph and Benjamin; though this is not to be wondered at, becaufe they were
his
[62]
his youngeji children, whofe mother was dead\ and becaufe they were the fons of his moft be loved Rachel. After this, I think, there is nothing memorable in the hiftory of Jacob, with which his moral character is concerned ; fo that what I have taken notice of, are the principal occurrences of his life, from which his character is to be collected ; except we take into the account his a£ts of piety and his enthu- fiajm, all which were compatible with very bad aft ions. Jacob's character, upon the whole, feems to be this, viz. he was a covetous , crafty, defigning man ; who facrificed truth, honour , and honcjly to his avaritious views : and though he made a profeffion of great piety, and he is faid to have had frequent perjonal conferences with God, with angels, &c. yet his conduft, upon the whole, feerns jujlly condemnable, and what even a wife and good man would greatly difapprove.
Thus I have taken a view of the behaviour of Efau and Jacob, the two fom of the patri arch Jfaac, as their conduct has been exhibited to us by the Pentateuch-, from which it ap pears, upon a companion, that R/au was much the better man. As to the pofterity of EJauy we have nothing to ground an enquiry upon, their actions having been buried in oblivion ; at leaft, the cafe has that appearance with refpedl to me. And as to thc-Jeedof- Jacob, his fons are reprefented by the hiftorian. to have been •wratlful, cruel, and treacherous, whofe hands were Jtained with bkod-, and their pcjfarity are
rep re-
reprefented by their own hiftorians and pro* phets to have been, from their Jirft commence ment as a nation to their loft difperfion by the Romans, zftubborn, a rebellious, •m&'z. gainj ay- ing people. For though the ox knoweth his owner, and the afs his matter's crib ; • yet Ifrael did not know, nor would the fons of Jacob con- Jider. The fum of the argument feems to be this, viz. Efau appears to have been a plain, hone/I, undejigning, good-naturd man, whofe pofterity, as to their moral conduft, (for want of materials) we can form no judgment of: Jacob appears to have been an avaritious, crafty, designing man, who ftuck at nothing to gain his ends \ and his pofterity were an untraffable, obftinate, wicked people, who would be neither led nor drove, would be wrought upon neither by f miles nor frowns. And this carries us back to our firft enquiry, viz. if the "Jews were Jingled out from the reft of mankind in general, and from all others of the feed of Abraham in particular, to be the peculiar and favourite people of God ; then, whether there was any thing in nature or rea/bn to have been the ground of that preference ? And this quef- tion is anfwered (by, or from the precedent enquiry) in the negative, viz. there was not. But then it is to be obferved, when the queftion is put, Whether there was any ground ? it is meant, any proper ground of preference. If a man fhould chufe a Jhrew to be his wife, for or becaufe me is a forew, this would be a ground of choice,, thgugh a very improper one,
and
and he would commence a fool by fo doing* In like manner, Jiubbornefs> or perverfenefs, may be confidered as a ground, though it can not be a fidtable and -proper ground of pre ference to a being of the moft perfect intelli gence ', and boundlefs power ^ which the one God over all is allowed to be. That the fupream Deity, the one common Parent of the intelligent world, fhould fingle out a particular branch of the human fpecies to be his peculiar and favourite people, is hard to conceive, is what the human understanding cannot well digeft ; and that he fliould give the preference to the lefs worthy ^ the lefs deferring, is dill more fo. And this very naturally leads to another en quiry, viz. Whether the Je-\vs pretence of be ing the peculiar people of God could poffibly have been well grounded? The folution of which Is left to more capable judges.
Perhaps it may be laid, that the election of the Jews, to be God's peculiar people, was not. upon their own account, or for their own fakes,, that any great advantage might accrue to them thereby ; but their election was intended to an- fwer other purpofes, namely, to preferve the knowledge of, and keep up a ferife of the true God in the world ; to abolijjj the dodtrine of mintflerial and deputed gods ; to reftore and preferve the purity of God's ivorfoip, by ex cluding from it all images and external reprefen- tatiom of the Deity 5 and that from Jacobs family might fpring a perfon that mould be the Saviour of the world. "To. this it may be an-
fwered,
.
fwered, that the feed of Jacob were not elected to be God's peculiar people for their own lakes, nor to anfwer any great and valuable pnrpofe to them, is exprejly contrary to that covenant , or thofe promifes which were made to their an- cejlors, and which are the evidences of that elettwn. Thus, Genefisyti, i, 2, 3. Afow the Lord had faid unto Abraham, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father s houfe, unto a land that I 'will flew thee. And I 'will make of thee a great nation, and I will blefs thee, and make thy name great ; and thou fialt be a blejjing. And I 'will blefs them that blefs thee, and curje him that curfeth thee : and in thee Jhall all families of the earth be blcffed. Chap. xiii. 14, 15. And the Lord faid unto
Abraham, Lift up now thine eyes, and
look from the place where thou art, northward and fouthward, and eaftward and weftward. For all the land which thou feeji, to thee will I give it, and to thy feed for ever. Chap. xvii. 6, 7, 8. And I (viz. God) will make thee (viz. Abraham) exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee ; and kings Jhall come out of thee. And T will eftablifo my covenant between me and thee, and thy feed after thee, in their generations ; for an ever lofting covenant ; to be a God unto thee, and to thy feed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy feed after thee, all the land wherein thou art a Jlranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlafting pojfejjion; and I will be their God.t Upon the mak ing of thefe promifes, the rite of circum-
I cifion
[ 66 ] . . ;
cifion was appointed, to be a fign or token to the Jews of God's faitbfulnefs and truth in making good this perpetual and everlaft- Ing covenant to them. From thefe promijes made to Abraham, and which were afterwards confined to \hspofterity of Jacob, it abundantly appears, that the houfe of Ifrael were cbojen and feparated from the reft of the world to be God's peculiar people, with a principal view, and ejpecial regard to thofe ^0//<? themjefoes, that they might be a great and profperous na tion through all generations; and, therefore, what is offered above with relation thereto, muft needs be perfedtly groundlefs. As to thofe con- jeclural grounds (for, furely, they are no other) of the Jews election to be God's peculiar peo ple, which arc mentioned above, I obferve, that if by preferving the knowledge of, and keeping up a fenfe of the true God, be meant to preferve the knowledge of, and keep up a fenie of a fupream Deity ; then, according to the learned, the knowledge of, and a fenfe of a fupream Deity, was part of the Pagan theology; and, therefore, was not in danger of being junk and loft in the world. For though the Pagans worshipped, or paid their refpedt to many mediatorial and fubordinate gods; yet they acknowledged and worfhipped one, and but one fupream Deity. Nor could the election of the Jews to be God's peculiar people, aboliJJj and extinguiJJ.) the doctrine of mimfterial and fubjlituted deities ; becaufe Judaijm it/elf was grounded upon it. Galatians iii. 19. Wherefore
then
[67]
then jerveth the law? it was added, becaufe of tranfgreflion, till the feed Jhould come, to whom the promi/e was made -, and it (viz. the law) was ordained by angels [or deputed gods] in the hand of a mediator. Hebrews ii. 2, 3. For if the word (or law) fpoken (or ordained) by an gels (or minifterial deities) was Jleadfaft, and every tranfgreffion and dijobedience (again ft that law, delivered by fubftituted gods, as aforefaid) received ajuji recompence of reward-, How flail we efcape ? &c. Again, verfe 5. For unto the angels bath he not put in fubje&ion the world (or difpenfation) to come, whereof we (peak. This plainly implies, -that the world, or difpenfation that then was, or which had pafied, or was faffing away, had been put in fubjeftion to an gels, or deputed gods. And as the law was or dained, or difpenfed to the Jews, through the miniftry of angels, or deputed deities ; fo, fure- ly, the aforefaid doffirine could not, nor was it intended to be extinguijhed by the Jews election, as aforefaid. And this makes it probable, that Jehovah, who is faid to have converfed with Abraham, Mofes, and other Jewijh patriarchs, and is called the God of Ifrael, was no more than a minifterial and deputed god. And, in deed, Chrijiianity may, perhaps, feem to reft upon a like foundation, as grounded upon the miniftry of Jefus Chrift. For though feme Chriftians maintain (perhaps, on very flight grounds) that Jefus Chrift is the one nece/arily exifting Being, the one fupream Deity } yet there have been other Chriftians, who have I 2 main-
V [68]'- ; ,
maintained (perhaps, on as good grounds as the former) that Jefus Chrifi is no more than a deputed and fubordinate God. And if the yews were elected to be God's peculiar people, in or der to keep God's worfhip clear of idols, or ido latry ; then the means was greatly dif propor tionate to the end propofed to be obtained by it ; becaufe there was never a people more addicted to idolatry than they, till after their tlijperfwn (by the Babylonifo captivity) into Per- /ia, and other countries, by which the know ledge of the common people , and the Jews theo logy, feem to have been greatly improved ; the common people, before that time, being moft grojly ignorant in theological matters, having fcarcely any knowledge of their own law. And as to the Saviour of the world defcending from any particular family, or perfon, it could not poffibly be of any confequence to mankind -, be caufe, provided they have a Saviour., it muft be a matter of indifference to them, who their Saviour defcended from, whether Shem, Ham, or Japhet. And if it may be coniidered as a repu tation to Jefus Chrift, that he defcended from the patriarch Abraham -, then it muft be a dif- reputation to him to have defcended from the patriarchs Jacob^ Judah, and others ; though in truth there is no real reputation, or difre- putation ; no worthinefs, or unworthinefs, de rived from either.
Before I quit this fubjecT:, I beg leave to ob- fervc farther, viz. that in the hi/lory of Jacob? he is not only reprefented as being engaged in
fevera!
feveral bad defigns, and that he profecuted them by very unjuftifiable means, without any the leaft mark of dijlike fhewn by the Deity thereto, or any token of contempt being ftampt upon them-, but alfo, on the contrary, the hiftory feems at leaft to fet forth > that the "Lord was with Jacob in all his unrighteous un dertakings, and that God made what he did to proffer in his hands. This being the cafe, or at leaft it is fuppofed to be fo, from hence a queftion feems naturally to arife, viz. Whe ther the two following proportions are natural conclufions from the above premijes? namely, firft, that God fees not Jin in fome people^ which was fully exemplified in the cafe of Jacob. Secondly r, As Jacob was highly favoured of Gody and what he did the Lord made it to proffer ; fo if a man takes him for an example, and goes into the like practices of dijjimulation^ falfhood, &c. to anfwer his evil purpofes, as Jacob did 5 then he can have no juft ground to conclude, but that the Lord may be with- him, and that he may be highly favoured and prospered of God alfo. The former of thefe is a doftrinal) and the latter a practical conclu- fion 5 both which feem to follow from the above premifes, and feem to be the ujes that every man is to make of the branch of hiftory re ferred to, by a practical application of it to himfelf. If God fees not fin in Jbme people ; then he may not fee fin in me. If God is with, and profpers fbme men in their unrighteous un dertakings 5 then he may be with, and ad: the
fame
rrrzrri [7°]: -...-
fame part by me, fhould I engage in any bad defign ; at lea ft, I can have no proper ground to conclude he will not, fo that I have an equal chance of having God on my fide. This, I fay, feems to be the practical improvement, that an attentive mind is naturally led to make upon read ing the piece of hiftory I have been examining.
The ufe I would make of this, is to lead my readers to confider, what extraordinary care and caution every one ought to ufe, who attentively reads, and practically applies, what he reads [in the Bible] to himfelf. For though attentively to read, and practically to apply, are the moft natural and proper ufes that any books held forth to us, as proper guides to our judgments, our affections and actions, can be applied to ; yet fuch is the fubjetf matter con tained in the Bible, in many of its parts, that without the utmoft care and caution be ufed in reading^ and applying it as aforefaid, it may become the parent of manifold evils, of which the branch of hiftory I have examined is an obvious inftance. The jujlnefs and propriety of this reflection, I readily fubmit to the judgment of every Jerious and confederate man. I will only add, that if God be immutable, which moft undoubtedly he is j then he equally approves, and difapproves the proper objects of approbation and diflike in all ages and places, without refpect to perfons, or things ; feeing he is every where, and always the fame, both in this difpenfation, and in all difpenfations ; in this world, and in all worlds, both yefterday, and to day, and for ever. A
A SHORT
D I S S E RT AT I O N
On the conduit of Balaam. In which that Prophet's character is cleared of thofe reproaches and imputa tions wherewith it has been ftained.
IN the book of Numbers, we have an ac count, that when Ealak king of Moab heard of all that had been done to Sihon king of the Amorites, to Og king of Bajhan^ and to their cities and people, he was fore afraid. And he called together feme of the elders of Moab and Midiany and fent them, with a prejent in their hands, to Balaam the fon of Beor, to Pethor, to intreat Balaam to come to him to curfe IJrael; upon a prefump- tion, that he whom Balaam HefTed with his mouthy would be bleffed indeed; and that he upon whom Balaam pronounced a curfe, would be cur fed accordingly. Thefe meffengers went to Balaam •, and delivered their meflage ; but Balaam gave them to underftand, that he would give no an fiver > until he had received
inftruc-
:;:;: [72] •••:•:.::--•
inftruftion from God, and then he would an- Iwer agreeable thereto. This cautious conduct in Balaam feems to merit praife, in that he would not baftily take upon him to blefs, or to curfe, until he had conjulted his principal, and was inverted with proper authority for either. However, he hofpitably invited the meflengers to lodge with him, and he would give them their anjwer ; and they abode with him accord ingly. The hiftorian has alfo informed us, that God came to Balaam, and f aid, What men are thele with thee? And Balaam fa id unto
*/
God, Balak the Jon of Zippor, king of Moab, hath fent unto me, faying, Behold, there is a people come out of Egypt which covereth the face of the earth, Come now, curfe me them -, per adventure I Jhall be able to overcome them, and drive them out. And God faid unto Ba laam, Thou jhalt not go with them, thou fhalt not curfe the people, for they are bleffed. Upon this Balaam informed the meflengers, that the Lord had rcfufed to let him go with them ; and they returned with this meflage to the king, their matter. The meflengers hav ing returned with the forementioned anfwer to Balak, and he not being fatisfied therewith, fent a fecond time to Balaam, by meflengers more honourable than the former, not only with a prefent in their hands, but alfo with a promije from Balak, of promoting Balaam to great honour, and of doing for him what he fhould defire, and with an earneft requeft, that Balaam would come to him, and curfe Ifrael To 3 which
, , [73], . H
which meffage Balaam anjwered, and faid unto the fervants of Balak, If Balak would give me his houje full offiher and gold, I cannot (that is, I will not) go beyond the word of the Lord my God, to do lefs, or more. An anfwer, furely, the moft honefl, which contains in it a Jleady refolution to maintain his integrity, and that no worldly consideration fhould turn him from his duty ; if Balak would give me bis houfe full of fiher and gold, 1 will not go beyond the word of the Lord my God, to do left, or more. However, he kindly invited the men to tarry with him that night, and then they fhould hear in the morning what the Lord had ^farther to fay concerning them. Balaam aded with the fame caution now as before, he would not give an anfwer to the meflage, till he had been In- jlrutted of God what anfwer to make. And God came unto Balaam at night, and Jaid unto him, If the men come to call thee, rife up, and go with them ; but yet the word, which I flail fay unto thee, that foalt thou do. And Balaam rofe up In the morning, and f addled his afs, and went with the princes of Moab. Here we fee, that Balaam had God's order to go with the men, only it was given him in charge, that what God fhould fay, that fhould he do, which he had before made a refolution to do ; nor does it appear he had any inclination to do other- wife. And when Balak heard that Balaam was come, he went out to meet him. And Balak faid unto Balaam, Did I not earneflly fend unto thee to call thee ? Wherefore cameft thou not unto me ? K Am
[74]
Am I not able, indeed, to promote thee to honour? And Balaam faid unto Balak, Lo I am come unto thee, have I now any power at all to fay any thing ? the word that God putteth in my mouth, that Jhall (or will) I Jpeak. Never, furely, was there an anfwer more proper, or that {hewed a Jlricler adherence to duty, than this. Lo I am come unto thee, have I now any power at all to Jay any thing ? the word that God putteth in my mouth, that will I fpeak. And Balaam went with Balak unto Kirjath- huzoth, that he might fee the utmofl fart of the people^ and pronpunce a curie upon them all. But Ealaam regarded not the requeft and im portunity of Balak, nor his filver, nor his gold, nor his titles of honour, nor any profpeft of greatnefs to himfelf -, but like a good and faith ful fervant, he kept clofe to his duty, by {peak- ing the words, and them only, that God put in his mouth, and thereby pronounced upon If- rael a bleffing inftead of a curfe. And Balak faid unto Balaam, What hajl thou done ? I took tbee to curfe mine enemies, and behold thou hajl bleffed them altogether. And he anjwered and faid, Mujt I not take heed to fpeak that which the Lord hath put in my mouth ? Surely, it may be truly faid of Ealaam, he held 'f aft his inte grity, and would not let it go. T'hen Balak took Ealaam unto the top of Pifgah, from whence he might fee but part of the people of Tfrael, that he might curfe them, as he had not leave to curfe the whole. But Balaam, as be fore, kept to his duty, he would fay neither
lefs.
[75 ]
lefs, nor more, than the word God put in his mouth ; the iffue of which was not a curfe, but a bleffing upon Ifrael. And Ealak faid unto Balaam, Neither curfe them at all, nor blefs them at all. But Balaam an/wered, and faid unto Balak, 'fold not I thee, faying, All that the Lord fpeaketh unto me, that I mujl (or will) do ? And Ealak f aid unto Balaam, Come, I pray thee, I will bring thee to another place, per ad venture It will pleafe the Lord, that thou may eft curfe me them from thence ; and Balak brought Balaam unto the top of Peor, that looketh to wards yefoemon. And when Balaam faw, that it pleafed the Lord to blefs Ifrael, he went not forth to receive inftrudtions, as at other times, or as he had done before, but the fpirit of the Lord came upon him, and hepropbe/iedof, and pronounced a bleffing upon Ifrael And Balak' s anger was greatly kindled again/I Balaam, and he fmote his hands together. And Balak (aid unto Balaam, I called thee to curfe mine enemies » and behold thou haft altogether hie/Jed them thefe three times. Therefore now flee thou to thy place ; I thought to promote thee unto honour, but lo the Lord hath kept thee back from honour. And Balaam faid unto Balak, Spake I not alfo unto thy mejjengers which thou fentejt unto me, faying, If Balak would give me his houfe full of fifoer and gold, I cannot (I will not) go be yond the commandment of the Lord, to do either good, or evil, of my own mind -, but what the Lord faith, that will I f peak. And now behold I go unto my people -, come, therefore, and I will K 2 advertife
[76]
advertife thee what this people 'will do unto thy people in the latter days. And he took up his pa rable, &c. At the conclufwn of which con- verfati.on, the hiflorian obferves, And Balaam roje up, and 'went and returned unto his place : and Balak a/Jo went his way.
This is the reprefentation the hiftorian has given of the behaviour and conduEl of Balaam -, by which it appears, that he maintained an unjhakent refolution to adhere ftridlly to his du ty, notwithstanding the Jlrong temptations of worldly wealth and greatnefs that had been p re fen ted to him. He refolded, and made good his refolution, not to deviate from his duty, ei ther by excefs, or defe£l>, that he would do nei ther more, nor lefs, than as God fhould direct ; that the word which God (hould put in his mouth, that) and that only, he would fpeak. And, therefote, whatever opprobrious names he may have been ftigmatized by, whether that of conjuror, enchanter, or otherwife ; yet his behaviour and conduct appear to be amiable, and which has not been excelled by many of thofe whofe names have been entered upon record, either in f acred, or profane hiftory. And if we add to this what the prophet Micah has re lated concerning him (by what authority we know not) it will greatly heighten his character. Micah vi. 5, 6, 7, 8. O my people, remember now what Balak king of Moab confulted, and what Balaam the fon of Beor an/we red him from Shittim unto Gilgal, that ye may know the righ- teoufnefs of the Lord, Wherewith Jhall I come 3 before
[77]
before the Lord, and bow myfelf before the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt-offer ings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be pleajed with thousands of rams, or with ten thoufands of rivers * of oil ? Shall I give my firji-born for my tranjgrejion, the fruit of my body for the fm of my Joul? He hath Jhewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to do juftly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Never had any man more jujl and proper notions of the fupream Deity, and of the true grounds of mens acceptance with him, than, Balaam had. When Balaam had gone through all that parade of external piety, which was confonant to the cuftoms and manners of thofe times, by building altars, offering burnt-offer ings, &c. he then ferioujly expoftulated with Balak, and reprefented to him as well what is not, as what it is, which constitutes true reli gion, and renders men truly acceptable, and well-pleajing to their Maker. And this he did in a very fhort, and yet in a molt plain and inftruclive way, by expreffing it in the follow ing words. Wherewith Jhall I come before the Lord, and bow myfelf before the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be pleafed with thoufands of rams, or with ten thou fands of rivers of oil ? Shall I give my firjl-
born
* By rivers, probably, was originally meant gallons, or fome other meafure* or w/ftl -, begaufe oil does not run in rivers.
-. , ,,,
born * for my tranfgrej/ion, the fruit of my body for the Jin of my foul ? He hath Jhewed thee (by that principle of difcernment which he hath made a part of the human conftitu- tion) O man (whomfoever thou art) what is good-, and what doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but (or only) to dojuftly, and to love mer cy, and to walk humbly with thy God? This re- prefentation fhews Balaam, the Midianite, to have been a man of great penetration, and of a found judgment; who had not contented himfelf with a bare Juperficial knowledge of things, nor been carried away with the bigotry, fuperftition, or enthufiafm of the times; but had carefully and candidly confidered as well what is not, as what it is, which conftitutes true religion. And that his conduft was agreeable to his fuperior underftanding, is evi dent from the hiftory, and is backed by that mod pathetick wijh of his, which ftands upon record, Numbers xxiii. 10. Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my lajl end be like his. This was the earneft dejire, and, no doubt, the conftant endeavour of this great and good man. I fay, if what the prophet Micah has fet forth concerning Balaam, be admitted, then it greatly heightens his charadier j but that, perhaps, may
be
If the more *oaluablenefs of the thing facrificed, renders the facrificer fo much the more acceptable ; then by parity of reafo.n it feems to follow, that he who offers up his own offering in fa- crifice to God, does thereby render himfelf fo much the more acceptable ; beraufe a man's own offspring is to him the mofl •valuable of all valuable things, excepting what may more ftri&ly and properly be called himfelf.
[79] H
be looked upon as of doubtful authority, be- caufe it is not contained in the Pentateuch, nor do we know what Micdh had to ground it upon.
And as I have taken a view of the beautiful character and condutt of Balaam, as it is fet forth in the hiftory ; fo, to do juftice to the fubjedt, I will next conlider what may be ob- jefted to it. And Jirft, the hiftorian has in formed us, that God's anger was greatly kin dled againft Balaam, becaufe he went with the men -, that God reproved his rajhnefs by the mouth of the afs, 2 Pet. ii. 16. <fbe dumb afs /peaking with mans voice, forbad the madnefs "of the prophet-, and that he alfo reproved him by the mouth of an angel. Upon which I ob- ferve, that Balaam a<fted with all the caution and prudence imaginable throughout the whole affair. For when the men came with the reward of divination in their hands, and with an offer of great honour j though the tempta tion was Jlrong, yet Balaam was not wrought upon by it, but kept clofe to his duty; he would neither go with the men, nor fend them away without him, until he had received in- ftrudtion from God which of thefe he {hould do -, and, therefore, for God to order Balaam to go with the men, and then be angry with him for going, is a fuppofition moft abfurd and unnatural To fay, that Balaam had received a full anfwer at/r/?, and, therefore, he fliould not have applied to God a fecond time, is, per haps, prefuming too far; for though Balaam
knew
knew what was God's pleafure with regard to the firjl meffengers, yet he could not be cer tain, without enquiring, with refpeft to the fecond-, and, therefore, for him not to run hand over head, but to enquire, was certainly more prudent and fafe. Balaam could not certainly know, but God might determine different, with regard to thcjecond melTage, from what he had done by the fir ft-, which was the cafe infatt, as the event Ihewed ; and, therefore, to enquire, furely, could not be blameable ; nor is it likely to have been a ground of dlfpleafure to God. That Balaams afs fpake, is recorded in the hiftory ; but that the prophet's madnefs was properly reproved thereby, does not appear. And the Lord opened the mouth of the afs, andjhefaid unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou haft fmitten me thefe three times ? Am not I thine afs, upon which thou haft ridden ever ftnce I was thine, unto this day ? was I ever wont fo do Jo unto thee ? The voice is mans voice, but the reafoning is that of an afs. What have I done unto thee, that thou haft fmitten me thefe three times ? was Impertinent. The afs knew (if me knew any thing of the matter) that {he had cruftied her maker's foot againft the wall, and that (he was fallen down under him ; and, therefore, to afk what Jhe had done, was great impertinence. Am not I thine afs, upon which thou haft ridden ever Jince I was thine, unto this day ? was I ever wont to do jo unto thee? might be juftly faid; but then, as me had always carried her mafter with fafety be fore,
8I
fore, fo that gave her matter reafonablc ground to expcff (he not perceiving any1 impediment in the way) that (lie would have carried him with fafety then, and her doing otherwife was the ground of his difplea/hre againft her; fo that what the afs offered as an excuje, muft have appeared to her mailer as an aggravation of her fault. If the afs had obferved to her mat ter, that the way was barred by the prefence of a Jhining man, 'or angel, which kept her from going m, and that was the ground of their prefent mi/carriages, and had appealed to his eye-fight for a proof thereof, {he would have an- fwered the manly character (lie affumed, by fpeaking with man's voice ; but for the afs to ufe the voice of a man, and yet to reafon no better than an afs, feems to render the miracle of none effect That the prefence of the angel in the way (hould have formed a picture upon the eyes of the afs, and yet not upon the eyes of Balaam, is a little ft range ; but that God fhould give to the afs the voice of a man, and yet (hould not put manly reajbning into her mouth, is greatly more fo. The hiftorian in forms us, that the angel Hood in the way, and he told Balaam he came there to with/land him* becaufe his way was perverfe- ; but then we are not informed wherein that perverfenefs confifted. However, Balaam confeffed his fault in beating the afs, as now it appeared he had no proper ground for it ; he excitfed his mifconduct, if it may be fo called, and offered to return back. And Balaam Jaid unto the angel of the Lord, I I. have
•have Jinned, for I knew not that thou ftoodejl in the 'way againjl me ; now, therefore^ if it dif- pleafeth thee, I will get me back again. And the angel of the Lord faid unto Balaam, Go 'with the men; but only the 'word that I Jh all Jpeak unto tbee, that foalt thou fpeak, 'which Balaam was before fully determined to do ; and if fo, then what need of all this pother ? The fum of the matter feems to be this, God gave Balaam an order to go with the men, and then . was angry with him for obeying that order, God reproved Balaam by an angel and an afs ; and then bid him do what he was reproved for doing, viz. go with the men. This branch of hiftory, fo far as the angel and the afs are con cerned in it, has the marks of incredibility upon it; which makes it feem more like a fable than a fatf. Again, it may be objected,
Secondly, That Balaam loved the wages of unrighteoufnefsy 2 Pet. ii. 15. and that he ran greedily after reward, Jude ji. Upon which I obferve, that this cenfure is not jujiified, but contradiSed by the hiftory. That Balaam was a man, and, as fuch, was liable to the infirmi ties and frailties of nature, I prefume will be granted on all hands; and that he w&s attacked by temptations of worldly wealth and grandeur, is let forth in the hiftory ; and that thofe temptations might, in fome degree^ affect his paffions, may have been the cafe, feeing he was but a man ; but then thefe temptations, Jlrong as they were, were effectually baffled and cvercome by him. If Ealak would give me his
honje
hoiife full of filver and gold \ I will not go beyond the word of the Lord, to do lefs, or more ; was, furely, a moft glorious triumph over tempta tion. And though to be flrongly tempted, as aforefaid, may be confidered as a misfortune to Balaam, by rendring his cafe more hazardous -9 yet as thofe temptations were- maftered, and overcome by him, fo certainly they terminated in his glory. If when the bait was held forth, Balaam had greedily caught at it : if when the men came to him, with the reward of divina tion in their hands, faying, Come, curfe Ifrael, his heart had been fo Jet upon the propofed re ward, as to have went inftantly after the men, without consulting his God, or his duty, and had curfed I/rael, according to their defire, then his affections and conduct would have been jujily condemnable ; but whereas the reverfe of this was the cafe, therefore, moft afluredly, it be- fpeaks his praife. Again, it may be objected,
'Thirdly ^ That Balaam wickedly endeavoured to pervert the Deity, by attempting to prevail upon God to curfe Ifrael ; and that this is re corded by the fame hiftorian, who has given us the larger and more general account of him, as aforefaid. Deuteronomy xxiii. 5. Neverthelefs, the Lord thy God would not hearken unto Ba laam, but the Lord thy God turned the curfe into a blejjing unto tbee. God's not hearkening unto Balaam plainly implies, that Balaam had be- jpught him to curfe Jfrael. This is alfo recorded by another Hebrew hiftorian, Jq/bua xxiv. 10, But I (viz. God) would not hearken unto Ba- L 2 laam>
..
&c. Upon which I obferve, that a& this is not fupportcd, but is rather ttntraditfed by the more general hiftory of Balaam; fo it carries -with it its oivn anfiver. That a man of Balaam's fuperior underftanding, who had a moft clear and jujl conception of the nature and the moral perfections of God, and of the true grounds of acceptance with him, and who. was the w after of his own paffions, as the hif tory lets forth ; that he fliould be fo weak) as to think, that God would be 'wrought upon, by his requeft, to curfe Ifrael, which otherwife he was determined to blefs, is, furely, pajl belief -r the extravagancy of the fuppofition overfets it. Again, it may be objected,
LaJUy, That though Balaam' could not pre vail upon God to curje IJrael *, yet he taught Balak the way how to debauch and corrupt them, and thereby to bring down God9 3 curfe upon them. Numbers xxxi. 16. Behold, the/e caujed the children of Ifrael, through the counjel of Balaam, to commit tre/pajs again/I the Lord? in the matter of Pcor, 6cc. Revelations ii» 1 4. Rut I have a- few things againji thee, becauje thoii' haft there them that hold the doffirine of Balaam?r <wbo taught- Balak to cajl a ftumbling- block before the children of Ifrael, to eat things facrificed to idols, and to commit fornication. Upon which I obferve, that this is not fupport- ed, but rather contradicted by the more general - hiftory of Balaam ; wherein, the true caufe of I/rael's mifcarriage, of their committing forr ^ and foiling into idolatry, is fet forth,
' [ 8$ ]
Numbers xxv. i, 2. And Ifrael abode in Shit-* tim, and the people began to commit 'whoredom 'with the daughters of Moab, and they called the people to the Jacrifice of their gods ; and the peo ple did eat, and low down to their gods. Verfes 1 6, 17, 1 8. And the Lord fpake unto Mofes, faying.? Vex the Midianites, and fmite them, for they have 'vexed you with their wiles, wherewith they have beguiled you, in the matter of Peor9 and in the matter of Cozby, the daughter of a prince of Midian, which was Jlain in the day of the plague for Peors Jake. Here we have an account how the people of Ifrael came to be corrupted, and drawn to idolatry. The people of Ijrael went among the * Moabites and Mi dianites, and that introduced a familiarity be twixt them ; and this gave the men of Ifrael an opportunity of debauching their young wo men, by gratifying their carnal defires upon them ; and then thole girls, in return, inticed them to idolatry. The hiftory faith, *fbe peo ple (that is, the men among the Ifraelites) bt-* gan to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab, and they (viz. the young women of Moab, who had been thus debauched) called the peoph (that is, thofe fornicators) to the fa- crtfice of their gods ; and the people did eat, and bow down to their gods. Thus the people of Ijrael became corrupted and defiled, became fornicators and idolaters, without either Balak,
or
* That the men of Ifrael went among the Moabites and M- Jianites, is plain j becaufe otherwife they could not have been, prefent at their idol fcafts, nor bowed down to their gods, 3>©t being performed in the camp cf
or "Balaams being concerned in the matter ; nor is the thing at all credible in itfelf. That Balaam, who was well injlructed in the princi ples of religion, and had fo ftrict a watch upon his own actions, as not to deviate from his duty, though under a powerful temptation; and, according to the prophet Micah, was fo much concerned for the well being of Balak, as to point out to him, in the plaineft manner, the true and only grounds of divine acceptance ; and was himfelf fo deeply affected with this very converjation he had with Balak, as to breathe forth his foul in that holy wifh, Let me die the death cf the righteous, and let my loft end be like his\ which he knew full well could not be, except he lived the life of the righteous ; I fay, for this- man, under thefe circumftances, at the fame time, in the Jame converfation, and, as it were, in the fame breath, to abandon his good principles, and bajely and wickedly advife and inftruct Balak how to corrupt and defile Ifrael, is a fuppofition fo monftroujly abfurd and unnatural \ as would have/hocked the faith even, of pope Pius himfelf ; and which, furely, the moil credulous cannot go into the belief of; though, indeed, it muft be acknowledged, credulity has a throat Jo wide, that almoft any thing can be Jw allowed by it.
Upon the whole, perhaps, the queflion will be, How (hall we make up this account > that has thofe different appearances in, and from the books and writings referred to? And if I may be permitted to con]e£iure> poffibly, the
cafe
cafe may be this. When the Ifraelltel made war upon the Midianites, they made no dijlinc- tion, but cut off both good men, and bad men, as they came in their way. Numbers xxxi. 8. They Jlew the kings of Mirftan, bejide tbe reft of them that were flain, namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Rebay Jive kings of Midi an ; and Balaam aljb the Jon of Beor they Jlew with the Jword. Balaam being thus in volved in the common d'eftru&ion, by falling a facrifice to the wrath of the Ifraelites, that the cruel and unnatural death of this great and good man, might not remain as a blot upon them through all pofterity, the Ifraelites then, or in after times invented, and Jtxed the above- mentioned calumnies upon him, thereby to ex- citfe and juftify their imbruing their hands in his righteous blood. Thefe calumnies, furely, could not poffibly have gained credit with the Prophet Micah ; though it is plain they did with St. jfude, and other Chriflian writers, in later times. What I have lafl offered is only a conjeSure. However, if any perfon can make up the above account better, when that is done, this will readily be given up. The ufe I would make of thefe reflections, is to obferve to my readers, that we ought not haftily to follow the multitude in judging of, or giving charac ters of men, nor indeed of writers of note, whether they have been jfewsy Chriflians, or others ; but, on the contrary, we ought care fully to examine the -faffs from which their characters are to be collected, and to take in
the
.
the whole of their refpe&ive cafes, and candidly to form a judgment from thefe, becaufe other- wife we are in danger of not doing juftice to them. Balaam has been ufually, and, per haps, generally confidered to have been a very bad man ; whereas from the view I have taken. of his cafe, I think, it appears he was the very reverfe. Befides, that the Deity fhould fre quently converfe with a bad man, as Balaam is judged to have been, and (hould difcloje the fe-r cret purpofes of his providence to him, is a fup- position that is jcarce admitable.
AN
A N
ENQUIRY
Into the juflnefs and propriety of Dr. Sherlock Lord Bifliop of'Saliflurfs aflertion, <uiz. Thus far all is well-, as grounded upon, or as an in ference or conclulion drawn from the folio w- ingpremifes; namely, And the people (of Ifrael) ferved the Lord all the days of Jojhua^ and all the days of the elders that outlived Jojhua, who hadfeen all the great works of the Lord that he did for Ifrael : which premifes are the text to his Lordfhip's fermon lately published.
JUDGES ii. 7. And the people jerved the Lord all the days of yojbua, and all the days of the elders that outlived Jofhua^ who had feen all the great works of the Lord,, that he did for Ifrael : Thus far (fays the bifhop * of Salisbury) all is well. In order to form a judgment of the bifliop's conclufion, as drawn from the above premifes, it feems proper to have a right under/landing of thofe premi- M fes;
* See a fermon preached by the Right Rev. the Lord Bifhop of Satl/lury at the cathedral church of Sarum, Qftober the 6th, 174.5, on occafion (as it may feem) of the rebellion in Scotland in favour of a popilh pretender.
— ;: C 90 ] :
Jet-, that is, to know what the hiftorian meant by ferving the Lord, or what was that duty and fervice the Ifraelites paid to God all the days of Jojhua, and of the elders that outlived him. Serving the Lord, fometimes fignifies (in holy writ) worfhipping the Lord, or fhewing outward marks of refpeZt to him, fuitable to the external piety of the times, and which in JoJJma's time confifted in building altars, offering facrifices, &c. But then this kind of fervice could not be intended by the hiftorian, becaufe in thefe fervices, according to the hiftory, the people of Ijrael had been al- moft totally deficient. After the Ifraelites had pafled over Jordan they were circumcifed and kept the pajjover, and after the taking the city of Ai, upon zfecond attack, as having been re- pulfed at the Jirft, they then built an altary and offered burnt -offer ings and peace-offerings; but after that time there is not the leajl hint in the hiftory of their performing any aft of pub- lick worfhip to the Lord, until the end of Jo/hua's campaign, and then they were in a manner draison into it by the rebuke of an an gel ; upon which, they then offered facrince to the Lord, as a thing they had not been uled to do. Serving the Lord, fometimes implies the
. 'worjkipping the Lord, and him only, in diftinc- tion from, and in oppofition to the worfhipping of idols and the gods of other nations 3 but this, the hiftorian has informed us, was not their cafe 5 and, therefore, could not be intended by him. Jo/Ilia, a little before his death, called
the
the people together, and having reminded them of the victories they had obtained, which he con fide red as the works of the Lord, and which the hiftorian called the mighty works of the Lord that he did for Ifrael, he exhorted them as followeth : Jojhua xxiv. 14. Now, there fore, fear the Lord, and ferve him in fmcerity, and in truth, and put away the jlrange gods (or idols) which your fathers ferved on the other Jide of the flood, and in Egypt ; and ferve ye the Lord. From this advice of yofoua, it is plain, that the Ifralites, in his time^ even whilft they were making war upon the Canaanites, retained and venerated the gods or idols their fathers had worfhipped on the other fide of the flood, and in Egypt-, and confequently had not worfhipped the Lord only. Jofiua adds, verfe 1 5, And if itfeem evil unto you to ferve the Lord, chufe you this day whom ye will ferve \ whether the gods which your fathers ferved on the other fide of the food, or the gods of the Amorites in whofe land ye dwell-, but as for me and my houfe, we will ferve the Lord. fofoua bringing the cafe to fuch a a iffue, plainly {hews, that ferving the Lord only, before that time, was a point far from having been fettled among them, or pradlifed by them. jfoj/jua having declared for himfelf and family, that they would ferve the Lord, that is, they would ferve him only, and the people alfo having declared the fame, Jofoua faid unto them, verles 22, 23, Te are witneffes againft your/elves, that ye have chofen the Lord, to ferve him ; and they Jhidy We are witneffes* Now, therefore,
M 2
[92]
(faid he) put away the ftrange gods which are among you ; and incline your heart to the Lord Godoflfrael From all which it is plain, that the Ifraelites retained and venerated the idols their fathers had firmed on the other fide of the flood, and in Egypt, and alfo the idols they had met with in Canaan-, for though they killed the idolaters, yet they preferred and cbefijhtd the idolatry, and for which an angel was fent to rebuke them, Judges ii. 2. Sometimes, by ferving the Lord may be meant, the paying obedience to God's commands in general, but this the hiftorian could not intend, becaufe he has nothing in his hiftory to ground fuch a de claration upon, or to fupport it by ; feeing the duty and fervice he has recorded as paid to God by the Jjraelites, throughout the time referred to, may be fummed up and expre/ed in their having 'killed and taken po/effion. And this leads me to obferve, that fometimes ferving the Lord implies, the executing vengeance on thofe whom God had appointed to deftruftion, or, at leaft, on thofe who were declared to be thus deftmed, by the men who affumed the character of be ing God's voice to the people. And in this way of ferving the Lord, it may, perhaps, be truly faid of the people of Ifrael, that they ferved or intended to ferve the Lord all the days of Jo/lwa, &c. And, indeed, this kind of fervice paid to God is reprefented in holy writ as highly •valuable, and difobedlence to commands of this fort is reprefented to be mojl deteftable. Thus when Saul was ient by Samuel utterly to 'dejlroy Ama-
lek>
[ 93 ]
kk, both man and woman, infant and fuck- ling, ox and (heep, camel and afs, and Saul had not executed that bloody commiffion to the full-, Samuel told him, that to obey in fuch cafes was better than facrificey and to hearken to commands of that kind, fo as to put them in execution to theyM, was better than to offer the fat of rams; and on the other fide, that re bellion or difobedience mfuch cafes was as the de- t eft able fin of witchcraft, zndjiubborne/s or non- compliancewithfacbcommandswzsastmyuity&nd idolatry, Samuel i. 1 5. And as the Israelites thus ferved the Lord all the days of JoJIwa, and of the elders who outlived him, by executing ven geance on thofe who had been thus doomed to dejlruftion ; fo to fet this matter in-a full and proper light, it feems neceffary to inquire how great and extenjive that dejlruttion was, which conftituted the Ifraelites fervice and obedience, as aforefaid.
And, jirft, it will be proper to fee the extent of the Ifraelites commiffion to kill and deftroy, and then we (hall the better judge how fully that commiffion was executed by them; and confequentiy, what ground the hiftorian had for averring that Ifrael ferved the Lord all the days of Joftua, and of the elders that outlived him. Jofhua i. Now after the death of Mofes, the fer- <uant of the Lord, it came to pafs, that the Lord Jpake unto Jofoua the Jon of Nun, Mofes minifter, faying, Mofes my fervant is dead, now therefore arife, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this People, unto the land which I do give to them,
even
[94]
even to the children of Jfrael Everyplace that the fole of your foot Jhall tread upon, that have 1 given unto you, as I faid unto Mofes. From the wildernefs and this Lebanon, even unto the great river, the river Euphrates ; all the land of tke Hittites, and unto the great fea towards the going down of the fun, frail be your coaft. This was the grant, or the extent of country given, or rathef- promijed to be given to the people of Ifrael; viz. from the wildernefs fouthward, to the river Euphrates northward, and from the country of the Hittites inclufive (I apprehend towards the fun fifing, eaftward,) to the great fea towards the going down of the fun, weft- ward ; a great extent of land indeed, which if full of inhabitants, as the hiftory feemeth to fet forth, it muft have been an home for fome hundreds of thoufands, perhaps, millions of peo ple. And here the queftion is, how were the Ifraetites to be put into the poffeffion of all this country ? And the anfwer is, they were to dip- foffe/s the inhabitants by putting men, women, and children to death, and thereby poflefs them- felvcs of their country, and all that they had. Deuteronomy xxxi. 3, 4. <fbe Lord thy God, he will go over (viz. Jordan) before thee, and he 'will defiroy tboje nations before thee, and thoit jhalt foffe/s them ; and Jojhua, he Jhall go over before thee, as the Lord hath faid. And the Lord fiall do unto them as he did to Sihon, and to Og, kings of the Amorites, and unto the land of them 'whom he defiroy ed. Numbers xxi. 34, 3 5. And the Lord faid unto Mofes, Fear him not,
(viz.
[95]
(viz. Og king of Bafoari) for I bave delivered him into thine hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou Jhalt do to him as thou dideji unto Sihon king of the Amorites, 'which dwelt at Hejhbon. So they fmote him and his fens, and all his people, until there was none left him alive ; and they pojjeffed his land. This was the extent of the Ifraelites commiffion, they were utterly to deftroy both men, women, and children, and leave none alive, of all the people who in habited thofe countries; from the ivildernefs fouthward, to the great river Euphrates north ward ; and from the land of the Hittites eaft- ward, to the great fea weft ward, (a moft bloody commiffion indeed ;) and to poffefs themfelves of thofe countries, and whatever they found there in, was the grant or promije that had been made to them.
Having thus feen the extent of the Ifraelites commiffion to kill and deftroy, we are next to enquire how duly it was executed. After the Ifraelites had paffed over Jordan, their firjl at tack was made \upofo Jericho \ and tho' God had engaged by promije for their fuccefs, yet they foolifhly fent men to fpy out the land ; as if any human art, or policy, or ftrength could ft and out againft God. Thefe fpies went to "Je richo, and took up their quarters with an harlot, who flickered and concealed them ; and fo added treachery to her lewdnejs. After the return of the fpies, Jofhua and the people went up againft Jericho $ and the ark was carried round the city once every day, for jix days fuccellively, and
Jeven
[96]
feven times the feventh day, one of which miift have been their fabbatb, or day of holy reft according to their law ; and /even priefts went before the ark, trumpeting (or making an hide ous noife,) upon trumpets made of rams horns. What purpoje this perambulation, and making this frightful noife for the fpace of feven days could anfwer, is hard to conceive ; except it was to Jlrike terror in the people of Jericho ', while the Ifraelites were employed in undermi- ning, and digging down the wall of their city, which probably was time fufficient for that pur pofe. When the priefts had gone round Jeri cho Jeven times on the feventh day, the people made a great Jhouty and the wall fell down; not, furely, by any miraculous power, feeing there were hands and time fufficient to have forced it down without ; miracles not being ufed where there are natural means fufficient to pro duce the fame effeffs without them. The peo ple of Jericho were fo greatly intimidated by feeing the armies of I/rael, and hearing the bloody maffacre that had been committed upon the people of Hefibon and Ba/han% on the other fide Jordan, that they made no rejiftance, n» defence -, but tamely fubmitted like Jheep to the- llanghter, and were all put to the fword, except the lewd woman and her family, who hadyM- tered the fpies as aforefaid. For when the wall of Jericho fell downy the people went up into the city, every man jlraight before him -, and they utterly deflroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman i ox and afs, with the edge of the
fivord.
t 97 ]
O Jericho ! Jericho ! hard was thy tot ; the fons of rapine and violence entered thy ftreets, and wafted their footfteps in thy blood} thy virgins were cut off as the flowers of the field, and thy young men were Jlain with the fword; in thee were heard the dying groans of multitudes, who were weltering in their gore, whilft there were none to pity, nor none left to make lamentation ; in thee the weeping , bleeding^ fainting, dying mothers, beheld with pierced hearts, their tender innocent Jucklings torn from their breafts, and trampled under foot 3 in thee the grey hairs of the #gW pleaded for mercy, with thofe favages whofe tender mercies were cruelty, and yet, moft affuredly, blejjed are the merciful, for they Jhall obtain mercy, Math. v. 7. O Jericho ! great were thy forrows, . in the day of thy calamity -, and yet Jericho $ forrows were, as it were, but the be ginning of for rows. O Jericho! Jericho! what had ft thou done, that thou fhouldeft bepurfued with fo fevere a revenge ?
The Israelites having murdered all the people of Jericho, as it were in cold blood, for the peo ple made no refinance; and having burnt their city, and all that was therein, excepting the fil- ver, and the gold, and the veflels of brafs and iron, which were put ajide for God's ufe, they went next towards At. And tho' God had en gaged by promije to give them the country, and had aflured them that thofe they went again ft Jhould not be able to ftand before them ; yet Jofoua feemed to think a little human pru- N denct
[98]
dencc might be ufeful; and therefore, fent ibme men to view Ai-, who upon their return in formed him, that the people were but few, and therefore, they advifed him not to fend all* I/rael. again ft Ai> but only two or three thou- fandy which they thought would be fufficient.. This -advice Jojhua followed; and accordingly fent againft Ai about three thoujand men. Whe ther Jofvua had any reliance on thofe promijes> that the people of Canaan (hould not be able to ft and before them, Jofouaii.g. Thato^fhould chafe an hundred, and an hundred {hould put ten thoujand to flight, Leviticus xxvi.. 8. Or whether he thought the people of Ai, like thole of Jericho, would have made no refiftance,, but would tamely have yielded to the point of their fwords ; or whether his mifcondu^ was^ owing to the wrong information given him by the fpies -, fo it was, that he did not fend ftrength jitfflcient to vanquifl) the people of Ai. When the IJraelites. went up ngainjl Ai, the men of Ai armed thernfelves v/ith courage, as well as with weapons of war, and being refolved tore- pel force with force, they engaged in battle with the people of IJrael, killed thirty-fix of them, and put the reft to fight. This defeat put Jofoua into the utmoft confufion at frft, till* he had recovered himfelf, and through his great penetration and Jagacity he had found out an expedient to revive the courage- of the IJraelites, and tojave his own reputation, as God's iwV* to the people. Achan had tato of the accurfed; and that was to be confidered as the
ground-
[99]
of God's dlfpleafurc againft Ifrael; and confequently, of their being put to flight by the men of Al. Achan had taken at yericho a Babyhnijh garment, two hundred (hekels of filver, and a wedge of gold ; which Jiher and gold, in Read of being put into God's Jlorehoufe^ as it ought to have been, (tho' the earth is the Lord's and the fulnefs thereof,) Achan put it in his own ; and that made it an accurfed thlngy and brought di/plca/ure upon Ifrael\ thirty-fix men were ,flain by the people of Al. This, furely, was a "very improper and unnatural dif- penfation of Providence, that Achan s fin, the fin of an Individual \ fhould bring difpleafurc iipon .all IJraeL The prophet Ezekiel has af- fured us, in the name of the Lord, (who wa'S, for any thing that appears, as much> and as truly God's voice to the people, as Mofes or Jojhua) that God is not a partial being ; that Jhe has no refpeffi to .perfons j that the Jbul that Imneth, (and therefore every foul that finneth) ihall dle$ that the father (hall not bear the Iniquity of the fon, nor the /J;z the Iniquity of the father; but that the righteoufnefs of the righteous fliall be upon him> and upon him only ; and the wickednefs of the wicked fhall be .#^0« A/;//, and upon him only ; thztthe/e are the ways of rlghteoufnefs and equity, and that thefe equitable ways are the ways of G^?// w^/? high, And if God be truth ', by the mouth of his fer- vant Ezekiel $ then let M?/£? and Jojhua, and every other gainfayer be a /r^r : whereas in the cafe before us, Achan only finned, and dilplea- N 2 fure
[100]
fure came upon IJrael $ through Achan s trefpafs thirty-fix men were flain, whilft Achan the trefpaffer remained alive; thefe were unequal \ unrighteous difpenfations, and therefore, accord ing to Ezekiel) were not the ways of God moft high. However, to make an atonement, Jofoua took Achan the Jon of Zerah, and the Jiher, and the garment, and the wedge of gold, and his Jons, and his daughters, and his oxen, and his Jheep, and his tent, and all that he had, and all Ijrael ftoned him (and his family) with ftones; and then burnt them with fire. — — So the Lord turned from the jlercenejs of his anger. This atonement feems to be as unequal, as unrighte ous, as the unequal rcfentment that preceded it ; for tho' Achan had treipaffed, yet his children and his family were guiltlefs ; and therefore, to involve them all in one common deftru&ion, was to *uifit the iniquity of the father upon the children ; it was to make the fons and daughters to bear the iniquity of their father ; which unequal, unrighteous difpenfation God hath moft folemnly protejled againft, by the mouth of his fervant Ezekiel, as in chap, xviii. Neverthelefs, by virtue of this atonement the breach was made up, Go4 and Ifrael were made friends again ; and by the aforefaid dijafter Joflma learned two leffons of inftrudtior^viz. jirft, not to lead men into temptation, and there fore he ordered, for the time to come, that every capture ihould be the property of the captor, without referving any part for God ; and, Je- condly, to fend more than fuffieient ftrength
againft
againft the enemy, and not to rely too much on the promije of God, who had fo fadly failed them in their la/I encounter. Jojhua, in con- fequence of this prudent precaution, tho' he had, or pretended to have God on his fide j yet, when he went up a Jecond time againft Ai, he afted as if God had nothing to do in the matter. JoJIwa fent thirty thoujand away by night, to lie in ambufo againft At \ five thoujand of which were placed on the weft fide of the city, whilft Jofoua and all the reft of the men of war were to go up againft the north fide, as if they would engage in battle ; and then to make a feint ', as if they fled from before the people of Ai, until they had drawn them out of the city, and the Hers in wait had entered it, and fet it on^r^; which when Jojhua and the people faw, they were to return to the charge; all which was done, and they fucceeded accordingly. But then, this vidlory feems to favour ftrongly of human policy ; and had not the hiftorian affured us that all this was done by the order of God, one might be tempted to think that Jofaua, in this inftance, did not truft in the Lord with all his heart, but leaned a little to his own under*- {landing. Thus by craft as well as ftrength were the people of Ai overcome; and Jojhua drew not back his hand, until he had deftroyed all the people of Ai; which tho' they were reckoned but few, yet thofe that fell were twelve thoufand.
The people of Jericho and Ai being thus all
cut off, it greatly alarm d, (as well it might,)
4 the
C I02 1
die people in all that country ; and this led the men of Gibe&n craftily to make a league with yofoua^ thereby to fave themjehes ; but then this drew upon the Gibeonites the rejentment of their neighbours^ for thus combining with the common enemy \ the confequence of which was, that jive kings and their people came and en camped before Gibeon. However, the Ifraelites came to the aid of their new ally ; and totally routed thefe kings and their people y and flew them with a great {laughter. In this battle God is reprefented by the hiftorian as appearing for the IJraelites in an extraordinary and miraculous manner : Jirft^ in throwing down great Jlone& out of heaven upon thofe they purjued> by which #20r£ were killed than were flain by the fword : fecondly^ in caufing the fun, (or rather the earth) to ft and flilly for the fpace of a whole day, at the command of Jofoua ; but as the loft men tioned miracle is paft all belief, feeing God could have deftroyed thofe men many 'ways, without throwing fa&fyftem of nature into a convuljion, as thejtcfphig the diurnal motion * of the earth, for the fpace of twelve hours, may be faid to
be;
* If God's flopping the diurnal motion of the earth, to give Jq/frua. time for deitroying the Cafoaautfes, wlien that could as cf- fefiually have been done by the other miracle upon record, viz. by throwing down great ftones out of heaven upon them a//; if this be paft belief, then what can be faid of the earth's being not only flopped in its diurnal motion, but that motion being re<verfedt and the earth moving in an inftant tea degrees the contrary way ; and then in an inftant to return again to its former motion, as in the cafe of the fhadovv going back ten degrees on the dial of Ahaz, ? 2 Kings xx. 1 1. I fay, if the former account be incredible ; then the latter muft needs be fo. Befides, the laying a lump of figs
upon
103
fee; fo that renders the former miracle more doubtful; and like wife (hews than even an He brew hiflorian is not abfolutely to be relied upon, And that day JojJiua frnote Makkedah and the king thereof, and all the fouls that were therein^ and left none remaining -, and that muft needs have been a bloody day indeed. From Makkedah Jofiua paffed on to Libnah, and there he put all to the fwvrd'i and from Libnah to Lachijh, and there he did the fame. And Horam king of Gezer went up to help Lachifo, and jfo/hita Jmote him, and his people, until he left him none remaining. Thus the I/raelites having put off humanity, and having difcharged tbemfefoes of the previous obligations of nature, under the pre text of a divine commiffion, went through the country of Canaan, cutting off its inhabitants like withering hay, without {hewing pity or mercy to any of them ; and tho' many of them fell in battle, yet the cafe would have been the fame if they had made no refi/tance, they muft all have been deftroyed, which was the cafe of the people of Jericho. And Jojhua took alfo Eglon, and Hebron, and Debir, and Kadefo- bernea, and Gaza, and G often, and put all to the (word, even all that breathed. After this^ a great many kings and their people aifejnbled to gether,
upon Hezcktatfs boil, and his recovery upon it, was fuch a de~ nonftration of a cure, as needed no miracle to prove it to be fo j nor would Hczekiafrs patience have been long tried, had he waited the event, fe.eing on the third day he was to appear in the houfe cf the Lord, according to the word of the prophet lfaiab\ Surelyy by thefe extravagant relations \b&Hebr e*vj hiilorians tried tQ what human credulity was capable, of bein
gether, to defend themfelves, and their country^ and to put a Jlop to the ravages of thefe JJrae- lites ; and they went out a great multitude ', even as the fand of the fea ; but the Ifraelites over came them, and put the numerous people of thofe countries a II to the fword, until they left none re maining. At that time Jojhua cut off the Ana- kirns from Hebron, from Debir> from Anab, and from the mountains of IJrael and Judah ; and thus a gratf />#r/ of the country, which had teen promifed the people of IJrael ^ was by thh means put into their hands. The hiftorian enu merates thirty-one kings and their people, which had been Jlain by Joflwa and the people of Jfrael; beiide the multitudes that vr&s Jlain on the 0/for fide Jordan^ with the Anakims, and ethers, which w;r #ctf brought into that account. By this time Jojhua was grown old, and unfit to bear the fatigue of war, (tho' there yet re mained multitudes of people to be cut off, and much more land to be put into their poffeffion, Jojhua xiii. i.) and therefore, he fpent the fmall remainder of his time in compelling the people, and dividing the country among them, as well what they bad not yet conquered, as what they had. And after JoJJjuas death, fas elders (that were his cotemporaries) with the people of If- rael <went on with their conquefls, in order to fubdue the re/I of the people that were not yet iubdued ; and they took Bezek, and flew in it ten thoujand men. And tho' the Israelites pufh- ed their conquefts as far as they could ^ yet the people began to be *ioo Jtrong for them, ib that
great
great numbers remained. And tho' they dro>ue the people out of the mountains, which pro bably were not fo full of inhabitants; yet they could not drive them out of the valleys, becaufe they had chariots of iron\ notwithftanding Jojhua had aj/ured them, that chariots of iron fhould be no bar to their conquefts-, Joflma xvii. 1 8. Nor, indeed, could it have been, if the power that attended them had been the power of Oodmojt high, againft which no power, nor coun- fel can (land. But then, tho' the Israelites were far from being put into the pofleffion of all that great extent of country which had been promifed them, viz. from the wildernefs fouthward, to the river Euphrates northward, and from the land of the Hittites, inclufive, eaftward, to the great fea weft ward ; and fo were far from cut ting off &\[ that had been appointed to deftruSfion ; yet, it muft be confefled, they made a very great Haughtier; in which, I think, upon a mode rate computation, they muft have Bereaved of life not lefs faznjix hundred thoufand people t including women and children j tho', perhaps, it may have been double, or treble that number. And thus the people of IJrael ferved, or are faid to have ferved the Lord all the days of Jofoua, and of the elders that outlived him, by killing and taking poflefllon j but after the death of thefe men, they did not purfue their conquefts, they ceafed to kill and deftroy as before, and To ceafed to ferve tht Lord, as aforefaid.
And that killing the Canaanites, and taking of their country was the Jervice^ and O all
[io6]
<z//the fervice the hiftorian referred to, as being performed by the people of Ifrael, at the time referred to, is moft evident from the remarks he has made of their ferving or paying obedi ence to God's commands in this rejpeft, and his recording the complaints that were made of their difobedience in other rejpefts. Thus, Jojhua x. 40. And jfo/Jjua (with the people) Jmote all
the country of the bills, all that breathed, as
the Lord commanded. Chap. xi. 9. Andjojhua (with the people) did as the Lord had bid him $ he houghed their horjes, and burnt their chariots with fire. Verfe 23. Andfojofiua (with the people) took the whole land, according to all that the Lord had f aid unto Mofes. Chap. xiv. 15. As the Lord commanded Mo/es, Jo the children of Ifrael did-, and they divided the land. This was the principal, and almoji all the fervice the If- raelites paid to God throughout Jojhuas times ; for as to building altars and offering facrifices, thefe kind of fervices do not appear to have ta ken place any more than twice, viz. once at the beginning, and once at the end of Jojhua's campaign. And though they were commanded, Deuteronomy vii. 5. But thus foall ye deal with them : ye Jhall dejlroy their altars, and break down their \ images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire ; yet in this they had been greatly deficient ; they had indeed cut off the idolaters, but then they pre- ferved the idols, and thereby cherifhed the ido latry ; and this led Jojhua, a little before his death, to give them a charge, faying, Put away
the
the ft range gods that are among you, and incline your heart unto the Lord God of Ifrael. And fuch their negleft of duty and disobedience^ was not only reproved by Jofaua, but alfo an angel was fent on purpoie to upbraid them with it. yudges ii. And an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and f aid ^ I made you $o go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I Jware unto your father -j; and I faidy I will never break my covenant with you. And ye JJoall make no league with the inhabitants of this land, and ye Jhall throw down their al tars ; but ye have not obeyed my voice -, why have ye done this ? Wherefore I alfo faidy I will not drive them out from before you ; but they Jhall be as thorns in your Jides, and their gods flail be a fnare unto you. And it came to pafs9 when the angel of the Lord fpake thefe words unto all the children of IJrael, that the people lift up their voice and wept. And they called the name of that place Bochim ; and they Jacrificed there unto the Lord. And when Jofiua had let the people go, the children of Ifrael went every man unto his in heritance^ to poffefs the land. And the people ferved the Lord all the daysofjofhua^ and all the days of the elders that outlived Jojbua, who had feen all the great works of the Lordy that he did for IfraeL And Jojhua the fen of Nun, the fervant of the Lord> diedy being an hundred and ten years old.
In this branch of hiftory we have an account
of an angel complaining to the Jfraelites of their
difobedience to the command of GW, in that they
O 2 had
- [io8]
had not extinguijhed the idolatry they met with in Canaan, but on the contrary they had che- rifhedit; and alfo here is a threatening, or a foretelling, that the idols of Canaan, which they clave to, fhould, or would be a yj&zrtf to them: here is likewife a kind of confejjion which the If- raelites made, of their being guilty of what was charged upon them, and a return to their duty-, they lift up their voice and wept, and they offer ed facrifice then and there unto the Lord. The hiftorian having given us this account of the If- raelites dijobcdience, in not cleaving to the Lord with all their hearis, but venerating the idols of Canaan-, he almoft immediately adds, And the people ferved tl Lord all the days of Jofoua, and of the elders that outlived him : by which fervice he could mean no more, nor otherwife, than their being employed in killing the people of Canaan, and fojfeffing themfelves of their country, and all that they had, according as the Lord had commanded.
Having fully {hewn what is contained in the above premifes, or what was that duty and fer vice which the Ifraelites paid to God all the days of Jojhua, and of the elders that outlived him ; I now come to enquire into \hsjujlnefs and propriety of the bifhop of Salijbury's qffertion, as grounded upon, or as a conclufion drawn from them, viz. Thus far all is, or was well. Were I to introduce a text of fcripture that may be deemed analogous to that of the bifhop's, as ferving the Lord by killing mankind is the fuh- jett of both, viz. "John xvi. 2. They Jhall put
you
. " ,' • [ 109 ] :
you out of the fynagogues ; yea, the time comtth that who/oever killeth you 'will think that he doth God fervice ; and were I to ground an affertion upon, or draw an inference or conclufion from thefe premifes, analogous to the conclufion drawn by the bifliop, viz. Thus far all will be well; this, perhaps, would only introduce a queftion, namely, which of thofe conclufions was moft natural andjitft, the bifhop's, or mine ? Or were I only to ground an affertion upon, or to draw an inference or condujion from the bifhop's pre mifes, which is directly contrary to what his lordfhip has inferred from thefe premifes, viz. Thus far all is, or was ///; without offering any thing by way of argument or evidence to fup- port fuch aflertion ; this may, perhaps, be look ed upon as balancing accounts with the biflhop, by bringing one naked affertion againft another : but then, this would not fatisfy the prefent en quiry. I therefore obferve, that life is a natu ral good, and death is* natural evil; and there fore, to fave life is doing well, and to take away life is doing ill, when confidered abftrattedly from all other confiderations. And as the peo ple of IJrael, all the days of Jojhua, and of the elders that outlived him, went from city to city, and from kingdom to kingdom, carrying blood and Daughter, death and deftruftion, wajl- ing and deflation to all people and places where- ever they came ; fo the moft natural, and obvi ous conclufion, which follows from thefe premi fes, is, Thus far all was ///; and, with the bifliop's leave, I add, it was greatly Jo. And if the con-
clujion
[ no ]
tlufion I have drawn from the above premifes be natural andjujl; then, as the bimop's conclujion from the fame prernifes is direttly the reverje, it muft of neceffity be unnatural and improper. But that the matter may appear plain and obvi* cm to every reader, I will introduce a fimilar cafe, and thereby make it our own. Suppofe the man who pretends a right to the crown of thefe realms, fhould like wife pretend that God has given him a fpecial commiffion to difpeople this ijland, by putting men, women and chil dren to death, and to place another fet of inhabi tants in their ftead ; and this man having forces attending him Jufficient to attempt fuch an en- terprize, he, and his followers, in confequence of fuch commij/ion, at leaft, the pretence of it, goes from city to city, and from county to coun ty, throughout this ifland, killing and deftroying ell before them, whether they made any refift- ance, or not; cutting 0^'both men, women and children, without regarding age, orjex, the grey hairs, or the f ticklings, but flaying all that breathed : I fay, fuppofing this were the cafe; then, when this bloody fcene of action was at an end, could any by-Jlander, any man conceive in his heart, or declare with his mouth, that thus far all was well? or would he not rather, and with much more juftice and truth, think, and fay, that thus far all was ill, and that it was greatly Jo ?
The prefent rebellion in Scotland, together with the Scotijh Highlanders defcent into Eng- land, headed by a popifli pretended heir to the
crown
[ "1 ] /•
erown of thefe realms, has given the people of this nation utafte of fucb troubles * and afflidi- ons as they have not been ufed to bear : for tho' there are few who have felt the diftrefTes occa- fioned thereby; yet thofe who have not felt them feem to have been greatly affetfed with the fears and apprehenfions of them. And as the people of England have been greatly alarmed upon this occafion -, fo I dare prefume there is fcarce a per/on among us, except thofe who wifh well to this vile, this curfed and defperatc defign, who would admit that the fupream Deity, the kind and compaffionate Parent of mankind, who alike pitieth every pitiable object,
has
' The clergy, upon this occafion, or fome of them at leaft, have been pleafed to confider, and reprefent the prefent rebellion, and the troubles and afflidions which have befallen the people of this nation thereby, to be the Lorls doings, that it is the hand of the Lord which hath done all this, that the Lord hath brought all thefe evils upon us, as a J uft corredion and punimment for our fins ; which is the fame as to fay, that God, by a fecret divine influence, h<&h Jiirred up, &nd/ent a popifh pretender, and a body of Scotch Highlanders, to be as a rod in his hand to fcourge, chaf- taie and pumih the people of this nation for their great and mani fold fins and provocations. Now, if this be in reality the truth of the cafe, then, furely, it muft be the hounden duty of the peo ple of this nation not to refill thefe evils, not to kick againft the pricks, not to oppofg the will, and power, and handy-work of God, who hath providentially brought all thefe evils upon us for our good ; but on the contrary, to humble ourfelves under his miehty hand, to bear patiently and paffively the chaftifements of the Lord, by readily and willingly (after the example of our com mon matter) yielding our hacks to the /miters and our cheeks to
•*-K,rv4^ 4>l**t4» j. 7- 7 X- . 7 7 • • i i.
, _ / / O " IAW y//***c,f j ttlAU. WUI C/y£r£7Cj 1V/
thole that pluck of the hair, without making any refinance: and then, entering into ajjbciations, making contributions, raifing of foldiers, and the like, in order to check the progrefs of thefe rebels, and to put a Jlop to the prefent rebellion, muft needs be wrong, and contrary to true piety; becaufe thefe are no other than ma~ king opposition to, and fighting againft God, and attempting to baffle and difappoint the gracious purpofes of his kind providence.
f»Oix/arrle no *•
has given a fpecial commiffion to this banditti of &:0/fl& highlanders, headed by a />0///£ pre tender, to rob and plunder, to ?##/?£ and j^>0/7, as they have done: fuppofing a dfo/W commiffion for it was pretended, and thefe fpoilers thought it to be the cafe ; and fuppofing there were men who aflumed a prophetick character to vouch for it, and even a pretence of miraculous power to &?£•£ it ; I fay, fuppofing the difturbers of the publick peace at this time put on fuch pre tences as thefe; yet,^furely, there is no man of common fenje among us, who has fo low, fo mean, fo unworthy, fo contemptible an opinion of the common Father of mankind, as to countenance, or give credit to them. God is not more the God and Father of one nation or jfeople than another, feeing we are all equally the work of his hand, and are all upheld and prejerved by his power and good nefs; and therefore, if God would not give a fpecial commiffion to a popifo pretender and his adherents, to commit the wafte and fpoil upon the people of this nation that hath been committed by them, which moft cer tainly he would not ; then much lefs would he, or did he grant to the I/raelites a commiffion to bring upon \hzCanaanites much greater evils.*, as our diftrejfes bear no proportion to the wafting and defolation that was brought upon the coun try and people of Canaan. For tho' what our countrymen have fuffered be great, and greatly to be lamented; yet, alas! all their fufferings put together, whether at Carlijle, at Penrith, at Prejlon, at Manchefter, at Derby, at Notting-
[ "3]
bam, arid all other places in England, are by n& means equal to the evils that befel the people of Jericho only.
If it fhould be faid, in this fuppofed cafe there is fomething admitted that ought not, namely, that God may grant a commiffion to kill and deftroy as well now as heretofore •> whereas finct the coming of Jefus Chrift there neither hast nor will there be any fach thing : Anfwer, what has been, may be j feeing there is no new thing under the fun, Ecclef. i. 9. If it (hould be faid, that the coming of Jefus Chrift has made a very great alteration in the prefent cafe ; be caufe//;^ Chrift 's coming the fupream Deity is the Lord merciful and gracious, long-fuffering^ and of great goodnefs, who willeth not the death of any, even the vileft of his creatures, but would much rather that they turned from their evil ways *, and this is what his patience and long- fuffering is defigned and intended to lead them to: and therefore, tho' fuch a bloody, killing com miffion was given to Jojhua heretofore ; yet no fuch commiffion will be granted now : Anfwer, if no fuch bloody commiffion will be granted now, becaufe now God is the Lord merciful, &c» then this fully proves, that no fuch commiffion was granted heretofore -, becaufe heretofore God was the Lord merciful and gracious, and equally and in all refpeEts the fame as now -, nor could the coming of Jefus Chrift pojibly make any alteration in him, feeing he is the God that cban- geth not. God is love, and he is always, and every where fo. God is not all wrath and ven geance in one age, or to one part of fehe human P fpecies.
fpecies, and all patience and long-fuffering m another *%p, or to another part of mankind; but he is always and every where the fame. So that if the difpenfation of the go/pel by Jefus Cbrift, be a difpenfation of grace and love-, and if it be of, and from the Jupream Deity : then the difpenfation of wrath and vengeance by jfyferf muft of neceffity have come from fome other quarter -, feeing, as St. James hath juftly obferved, out of the Jame fountain proceedeth not fweet water and bitter, nor fait water and frefo. If it mould be faid, the Canaanites were idolaters, that they worfhipped fubftituted, and, perhaps, fictitious deities ; that they payed their refpecT: to thofe thro' images, or external objetfs fet up to reprefent them ; and that this was the ground of God's difpleafure againft them, and of his commiffloning Jofiua and the people of Ifrael to deftroy them: whereas the inhabi tants of this ifland, whatever their mifcondutt may be in other reffe&s, yet they keep them- felves clear of idolatry ; and tho* their modes of woriliip are various, yet that worfhip is direfted to the one God over all-, and therefore no fuch bloody commiffion will be given to deftroy us, much lefs by ipopijh pretender: Anfwer, that the inhabitants of this ifland zre better, ad: more juitably to their intelligent natures, and better avjwer the purpofes of their creation, than the Canaanites did ; and thereby render themfelves much more the proper objetts of God's patience and long-fuffering, of his kindnefs and benevo lence, than thofe Canaanites : this is much more eafily taken for granted, than proved. The fla gitious
["5]
gitlous practices, and bad behaviour of the peo ple of this ifland are fitfficiently known, and therefore need not to be enumerated; and which, according to our publick and daily confeffion, our cafe cannot be very good-, becaufe we there by feem to declare, that we have offended agaihft -all God's holy laws, that we have left undone •all thofe things which we ought to have done, and have done all thofe things which we ought not, and confequently there is no health in us : whereas with regard to the behaviour and moral conduct of the Canaanites, we know nothing of them but from the Hebrews, that very party of men who were their deftroyers; who, no doubt, have given a very partial account of them, and have greatly aggravated what may have beenjuftfy blameable in them, the better to •excufe VM&Juftify their own cruelty and barbarity towards them. And if worfhipping ftibftituted gods be idolatry, then it becomes a queftion, whether the inhabitants of this ifland be alto gether clear in that refpedt ? becaufe it may, per haps, be a little doubtful, whether Jefus Chrift, who is made the object of worfhip among us, be any other than a minijlerial and fubftituted God; feeing, according to St. Peter, Ads x. 42. he was ordained oi GoJto.be the judge of quick and dead; which cannot poffibly be the cafe of ihejitpream Deity, who has nojuperior, no one above him, that he can receive any commiffion, or any kind of authority from. And fuppofing the Ca?iaanites were- idolaters, yet they were not Angularly fo ; there having been multitudes of others both then, and before., and fince that P 2 time,
time, who have been equally culpable, which yet have been treated with much greater lenity. And that God fhould fingle out the idolatrous Ca~ naanites, and treat them with foy£wn?arefent- jnent -, whilft he winked at idolatry in all other places and times, is a fuppofition that greatly de rogates from his honour, and therefore is not to be admitted. Partial providences are unequal, unrighteous providences ; and therefore, accord ing to the prophet Ezekiel, are not the ways of God moft high. Befides, the IJraelites, to whom the commiffion was granted to kill and deftroy, as aforefaid, were not only jlrongly inclined to idolatry themfelves, but they cherifoed that very idolatry, which (according to the com- miffion) they were appointed to exttJtgui/h : for tho' they killed the idolaters, yet they em braced and nourifhed the idolatry, as their own hiftorians have fet forth. And that God fhould dijpeople a country, becaufe they were idolaters, only to make way for another Jet of idolaters to fucceed them, greatly exceeds the bounds of credit. And if God may be fuppofed to have granted fuch a bloody commiffion to Jofoua heretofore, then why may he not grant fuch a commiffion to a popifo pretender now? If it ihould be faid, the giving fuch a commiffion to a popifh pretender, would be to encourage and flbet popery ; and therefore, no fuch com miffion will be granted ; Anfwer, then the giv ing fuch a commiffion to njew, was encourag ing and abetting yudaifm, which is near of kin to popery ; and therefore, no fuch com- was granted to Jo/hita. Is popery a
compo-
[ "7 ]
compofition of beggarly elements ? fo was Ju- daijm. Is popery a bloody, perfecting conftitu- tion ? fo was Judaijm. Is popery a law of car nal commandments ? fo was Judaifm. Is popery a moft grievous yoak of bondage ? fo was Ju daifm. And admitting popery to be much more gro/s than Judaifm -5 yet if God will not encou rage nor abet the greater evil, popery, now, by, and thro' a popifh pretender; then he will not, he did not encourage nor #&tf the /£/? evil, Judaifm, heretofore, by, and thro1 Jojhua, an adherer there to. If it mould be faid, that Jojhua and the Ifraelites were commiffioned to kill the Canaan- it e 3, and take pofleffion of th£ir country, tliat thereby God might make good his covenant and promije to Abraham : Anfwer, that the fupream Deity, who is the moft perfecJ intelligence, and the moft boundlefs goodnefs, mould make fuch a promife to Abraham, as from the natural courfe of things would require fuch bloody work, fuch cruelty to be exercifed to make it good, is paft belief. If it (hould be faid, that God made the aforefaid promife to Abraham, as a reward for his faith and obedience; and becaufe God knew, or foreknew, that he would command his children and his houfehold, or pofterity, after him to keep the way of the Lord, to do juftice and judgment : Anfwer, that God mould re ward Abraham according to his worthinejs, is perfectly agreeable to the rules of right and wrong •, but that he mould reward the worthi nejs of Abraham in his unworthy pofterity, is contrary to thofe rules ; it is unequal, which un equal ways are not the ways of God moft high, 2 And
C »8
And if God's foreknowing that Abraham would charge his pofterity as aforefaid, may be con- iidered as a reafon to him for making the pro- wife, and granting the commiffion referred to; then, furely, his foreknowing that Abrahams pofterity would pay no regard to the charge and commandment of their fatfar, but would act quite contrary thereto, muft have been a much jlronger reafon againft it: and, confequently, no fuch promife was made, nor commiffion given. If it fhould be faid, notwithftanding all that has been, or may be offered againft the aforefaid commiffion, as given to Jofoua', yet we are cer tain God did give him fuch a commiffion ; and as the people of Jfrael killed the Canaanites, and took pyjeffim of their country, in obedience to God's command^, fo, Thus far ail is, or was well: Anfwer, the granting fuch a commiffion was a mod partial admin iftration, which yields to us a moral certainty, that God would not, and there fore did not grant that commiffion. And as this commiffion was of an extraordinary nature^ which required the Deity, as it were, to undeify himfelf to grant it, and men to unman them- felves to put it in execution ; fo the nature of the thing rnoft obvioufly requires that it fhould have very extraordinary evidence to prove or fupport its credit: and this leads to the enquiry, what the aforefaid certainty is grounded upon ? And upon the ftricleft enquiry I am capable of making, I do not find the certainty referred to has, or can have any other ground or foundation than the bare tejlimony of the Hebrew hiftorians ; who, as they were inter ejled in, and thereby far- ties
ir9 _
ties in thecaufe ; fo their teftimony alone with out any other thing, or circumftance, to corrobo rate it, would, in any other cafe of much kfs importance, be deemed no more than a bare ground of probability, if that: much lefs would
be admitted as a proper ground of certainty in a cafe of fo extraordinary a nature as that under confideration. If it mould be faid that the credit of thofe hiftories, together with the authority tf the hiftorians, and the divinity of the aforcfaid commiffion, are all fufficiently /up- ported by that miraculous power which attended
zljraehtes; and were fuch power exercifed now m favour of a like bloody commiffion the divinity of that commiffion would be &f fiaently proved, or fupported by it : Anfwer whatever miraculous power may be fuppofed to* attend the Ifraelites, it can be no *4J5T2 cunty to us, that their hiftorians always wrote truth-, becaufe thefe are points that are altoge ther irrelathe to each other. And as we have a moral certainty, that God -would not nor did not grant any fuch commiffion, whet heretofore Know- to that yields a like certainty, that God'
tner has heretofore, nor will he now exercife any fuch miraculous power bimfelf, nor appoint fuch power to be exercifed by others, to anfwer any Jucb purpofe. Befldes what (T we, that any miraculous power was exeSfed bT or among the Ifraelites, to countenance this com- m.flion ? If lt fhould be faid, that the credit of thofe miracles is Sufficiently fupported by the hip. tones in which they are recorded : Anfwer J.MH I fear our argument muft end in a fircular
dance -t
[ 120 ]
dance ; the credit of the hiftories is fupported by the miracles, and the credit of the miracles is fupported by thofe hiftories.
To conclude : I obferve, that this prefent ftate of things is confeffedly a ftate of probation and trialy and not a ftate of retribution ; that every man is to cbufe the end he obtains, and the means he obtains it by ; and that in a ftate or conftitu- tion of things to come, he will be called to give account to the fupream Deity, (or to one fubfti- tuted by him,) of what he has done, and how he has behaved in this prefent ftate : and then he will be rewarded^ or pumfoed, accordingly as he has acted a wife and virtuous^ or a footifo and •vicious part. But if the conftitution of the natu ral world, if things animate and inanimate are moved and directed by a fecret divine influence, or certain fprings of motion and a£liony to anfwer the purpofes of God's providence ', as it is called $ if the Deity by Juch influence fo moves and directs the under/landings, the appetites, the paffiom and affections of men, as thereby to bring about all thofe events that are called the works of his providence ; if he maketh rich, and maketh /wr, by fecretly directing one man into a path that /?#*£ to riches, and thus leads another man into thofe Jleps that bring him to poverty ; if God maketh war, and maketh peace, by exciting a y^/r/V of w<z//6 and vengeance^ thro' which whole countries are involved in blood and confujion, and alike ftirs up a fpirit of /0W and benevolence, which leads to unanimity and ^&7<r£ ; if he raifes up a fpirit of pride, ambition, and luft of power in Kouli*
Kan,
C I''
Kan, thereby to introduce wafting and defola* tion in the eaft ; and if he roufes up the like tur* bulent paffions in the French king^ whereby to introduce the like calamities in this we/tern part of the world, by way of correction and puwfo- ment for fin; and if, (according to the bifhop of Salisbury, in his fermon lately publifhed,) by theie fecret fprings of motion and action, or by this hand of providence, things are fo directed, as that profperity and adverfity in this world are made to tally with, and bear fome proportion to mens virtues and vices, (fuppofing in fuch a ftare virtue and vice do fubfift:) I fay, if this be the cafe; then, as this 'world cannot with any pro priety be called a ftate of probation or trial; fo a future retribution muft of neceffity be fuper- feded. For as the end and purpofe of retribution, or rather retribution itjelj] takes place in this world; fo thereby the ground and reajonof a re tribution to come is effeftually taken away. I will only add, that the ground of the precedent enquiry, and of what I have offered upon ir, is in honour and juftice to the fupream Deity. For as I am God's creature ; fo, I think, I have a right> (without giving reafonable ground of of fence to any,) intake off thofe groundlefs impu- tations, wherewith men have ftained the beauti ful and Jpotlefs character of God moft high.
F i N i s.
BOOKS written by Mr. THO. CHUBB, and printed for THO. Cox, fmce the Publication of his Collection of Tratts In ®hiarto^ viz,.
I. A DISCOURSE concerning reafon, with regard to religion Ji\* anc^ divine revelation. Wherein is fhewn, That reafon either is, or that it ought to be a fuffident guide in matters of re ligion. Occafioned by the Lord Bifhop of London* s fecond ^2&.&- ral letter. To which are added, Some reflections upon the com parative excellency and ufefulncfs of moral 2cs\&pofitieve duties. Oc- cafioned by the controverfy that has arifen (with refpecl: to this iubjecl:) upon the publication of Dr. Clarke^ expofition of the Church Catechifm. The zd edit. Price is.
II. An enquiry concerning the grounds and reafons, or what thofe principles are, upon which two of our anniverfary folemni- ties are founded, «i;/.r. that on the 3oth of January, being the day of the martyrdom of king Cbarlcs I. appointed to be kept as a day of fafting; and that on the 5th of November , being the day of our deliverance from popery and flavery, by the happy arrival of his late majefty king William 111. appointed to be kept as a day of thankj- gi-ving. To which is added, The fufficiency of reafon in matters of religion, farther confidered. Wherein is fhewn, that reafon^ when carefully ufed and followed, is to every man, who is an- iwerable to God for his actions, under any or all the moft dif- advantageous circumltances he can poffibly fall into, whether he refides. in China, or at the Cafe of Good Hope, zfujficient guide in waiters of religion -, that is, it is fufficient to guide him to God's favour, and the happinefs of another world. Price is.
III. FourTracls, viz. Firjl, An enquiry concerning the books of the New Teft&ment, whether they were written by divine infpi- raiion, &c. Second, Remarks on Brifannicus^s letter, publimed in the London Journals of the 4lh and i Ith of April) 1724; and re- publifhed in the Journals of the 5th and 1 2th of April, 1 729 ; con taining an argument drawn from \\\z Jingle fatf of ChriJFs refur- refiion, to prove the divinity of his mijjion. Wherein is fhewn, that Bntannicus^t argument does not aniwer the purpofe for which it was intended. And in which is likewife fhewn, , what was the great and main end that the refurreclion of Chrift was intended to be lubfervient to, 'viz. not to prove the divinity of his miffion, but to gather together his difciples, to commiffion, and qualify and fend them forth to preach his gofpel to all nationt. Third, The cafe of Abraham, with refpecl to his being commanded by God to offer his fon Jfaac in facrificc, farther confidered : in anfwer to Mr. Stoniz remarks. In a letter to the Rev. Mr. Stone. Fourth, The equity and reafonahlentfi of a future judgment and retribution exemplify d-, or, a difcourfe on the parable of the unmerciful fer- vant, as it is related in Matt, xviii. from verfe 23, to the end of the chapter. Price 2j.
TV. Some obfervations offered to publick confideration. Occa- fioned by the oppofition made to Dr. RundtTs eleclion to the fee of Gloucefer. In which the credit of the hiflory of the Old Teftament is particularly confidered. To which are added, three tracts, *vi». I. An anfwer to Mr. Seonis fecond remarks on the
BOOKS printed for THO. Cox.
cafe of Abraham, with regard to his being commanded by God to offer up his, fon Ifaac in facrifice. In a fecond letter to the Rev. Mr. Stone, M. A. and fellow of the learned fociety of Wad- barn-College in Oxford. II. A difcourfe on fmcerity. Wherein is fhewn, That fmcerity affords juft ground for peace and fatis- faftion in a man's own mind, and renders his conduct juftly ap- proveable to every other intelligent being. Occafioned by what Dr. Waterland has lately written on the fubjecl. In a Letter to a gentleman. III. A fupplement to the traft, intitled, T^e equity and r>r.(bnablenefs of a future judgment and retribution exemplified. In which the do&rine of the eternal and endlefs duration of pu- nimment to the wicked, is more particularly and fully confi dered. Price u. 64.
V. The equity and reafonablenefs of the divine conduct, ia pardoning finners upon their repentance, exemplified : Or a dif courfe on the parable of the prodigal fon. In which thofe doc trines, <viz. that men are rendered acceptable to God, and that finners are recommended to his mercy, either by the perfect obe dience, or the meritorious fufferings, or the prevailing iutercef- fion of Chrift, or by one, or other, or all thefe, are particularly confidered and refuted. Occafioned by Dr. Butler's late book, intitled, The analogy of religion natural and revealed, to the con-
Jtitution and courfe of nature. Offered to the confideration of the clergy among all denominations of chriftians. To which are added two differtations. 'viz. I. Concerning the fenfe and meaning of St. Paul's words, Titus iii. 10, II. A man that is an heretick, aftsr the firft avd fecond admonition, rfjett : Knowing that he that is fetch, is fub*vertedt andjlnneth^ being conde?nned of himfelf. II. Concerning the time for keeping a fabbath. Offered to the con fideration of the Sabbatarians. In a letter to Mr. Elwall. To which is like wife added, The cafe of pecuniary mulcts, with re gard to DiiTenters, particularly confidered. In a fecond letter to the Rev. Dr. Stebbing. Price is. 6d.
VI. An enquiry into tne ground and foundation of religion. Wherein is fhewn, that religion is founded in nature; that is, that there is a right and wrong, a true and falfe religion in na ture : and that nature or reafon affords plain, obvious, certain principles, by which a man may diftinguifh thefe, and form a proper judgment in the cafe; and which an honeft, upright man may fafely and fecurely ftay his mind upon, amidft the various and contrary opinions that prevail in the world, with regard to this fubjeft. To which are added, I. A poflfcripr, occafioned by the publication of Dr. Stebbing's vifitation charge, that had been delivered to the clergy of the archdeaconry of Wilts. II. A fhort differtation on Matt. xix. 21. If thou wilt be pcrfefl, go and fell that thou*haftt and give to the poor, and thou jhalt have treafure in heaven: and come and follow me. Occafioned by Dr. Stebbing^s unjuft and groundlefs reflection on the author, wich re gard to this text, in the aforefaid charge. III. An anfwer to a private letter, from a ftranger to the author, on the fubject of God's foreknowledge. Price 2*.
VTT Tii^.
BOO KS printed for THO. Cox*
VII. The True Gofpel of Jefus Chrifl afferted. Wherein is 3iewn what is, and what is not that gofpel ; what was the great and good end it was intended to ferve; how it is excellently fuited to anfwer that purpofe ; and how, or by what means, that end ha$ in a great meafure been fruftrated. Humbly offered to publick cbnlideration, and in particular to all thofe who efteem them- felves, or are efteemed by others, to be minifters of Jefus Chrift, and preachers of the gofpel ; and more efpecially to all thofe who have obtained the reputation of being the great defenders of Chriftianity. Acts xvii. 6. They drew Jafon, and certain bre thren, unto the rulers of the city, crying, T^hefe that have turned the world upfede down^ are come hither alfo. To which is added, A fhort differtation on Providence. The fecond Edit. Price 2/. the Price before 4*.
VIII. The True Gofpel of Jefus Chrifl vindicated. And alfo a vindication of the author's fhort differtation on Providence. Pr. is.
IX. A difcourfe on Miracles, confidered as evidences to prove the divine original of a revelation. Wherein is fhewn, what kind and degree of evidence arifes from them, and in which the various reafonings on thofe queftions that relate to the fubject are fairly reprefented. To which is added, an appendix, containing an enquiry into this queftion, *viz. whether the doctrines of a future ihte of exiitence to men, and a future retribution, were plainly and clearly taught by Mofes and the Prophets ? Humbly offered to the confideration of the Rev. Dr. Warlurton, and all others that particularly intereft themfelves in this queftion. Price is. 6d.
X. An Enquiry concerning redemption. Wherein the Chrif- tian redemption is particularly confidered. To which is prefixed, a Preface ; wherein is mew'n, That if Chriftianity be not found ed on argumenr, but on thofe divine impreffions that are made cm mens minds concerning it, (as a late ingenious Author has at tempted to prove ;) then it is moft uncertain and precarious, and cannot be reduced to any ftandard. And in which is alfo fhewn, that Chrift's kingdom has been fo fer from being fupported, and eftablifhed by the interpofition of civil power, that on the con trary it has rather been annihilated thereby.
XI. The ground and foundation of morality confidered. Wherein is fhewn, that difmterefted benevolence is a proper and a worthy principle of action to intelligent beings. And in which is alfo fhewn, what fome of thofe abfurd and bad confequences are, which naturally and obvioufly follow the doctrine of abfo- lute felfifhnefs ; or, that felf-good is' the fole and univerfal prin ciple of action in nature : Occafioned by the Rev. Mr. Ruther ford's effay on morality. To which is added, the flrlt fection of the author's farewel to his readers ; namely, the introduction. Wherein thofe points, <viz. of divine impreffions on mens minds, of fpecial grace, of the virtue and merit of faith, and of St. Thomases unbelief, are particularly confidered.
Ar. £. A Collection of Trafls in one Volume in Quarto formerly publifh'd, and feveral Trafts printed fince, which now make two Volumes in Oc tavo ; contain the Whole of Mr. Cbubfrs Writings ; of the latter may b« had the Whole, or any particular Traci, if apply 'd for in Time,
map tyffir
^ittSI
U*t\ip