SHORT but SUFFICIENT CONFUTATION

Of Bp. Warburton’s
projected defence (as he calls it) of Christianity, in his divine legation of Moses, in a letter to the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London.

My LORD,

THE reason of my presuming to write to your lordship on the following subject is, because it is a matter on which your lordship has employed your excellent pen, greatly to the benefit of the world.

And the reason of my writing at all, is owing to a book newly published¹
in defence of bishop Warburton, in which your lordship, is charged with a multitude of contradictions, and inconsistencies relating to this point.

¹ Free and candid examination of the bishop of London’s sermons, &c.

It is not my design to enter here as an assistant to your lordship. For this is quite needless.

My intention is, as mentioned in the title page. And because bishop Warburton has owned
this writer, as a most able defender of his scheme. I have taken occasion to shew, that it is a scheme so contrary to scripture, and the truth of things, as no art of words, or stretch of genius, however powerful in paradox, can ever be able to support.

The author of this book, as bishop Warburton assures us,¹ is too modest to make his name known to the world; a quality, which from the reading of his book, one would not suspect to be so predominate in him. — But though modesty has forced him to conceal his name, yet he has given us some information of his character. He begins; “I, who am a bare looker-on, and absolutely disengaged from all that biass of affection, which is so wont to warp the followers of an old system, or the inventers of a new, have done my best to examine this question with all impartiality.”²

¹ Preface to critical enquiry, &c.

² Examination p. 2.

Had one of the antient writers of Greece said this of himself, how positive, might a modern critic have been, from the decisive words, a bare looker-on, that he had never wrote upon the same subject before? And that therefore, any book of that kind ascribed to him, must infallibly be false and spurious. And yet, to the confusion of criticism, this author, who unasked, and of his own free motion, declares, that he begins this work as a bare looker-on, has for more than ten years before he made this declaration, been sweating in the thickest dust, and heat of Doctor Warburton’s most ardent contention for novelties.¹

¹ Critical enquiry, &c. published 1746.

I have the Doctor’s own words for this, both for the novelties, and this gentleman’s wonderful zeal, and skill shewn in the defence of them, so many years ago.

“Notwithstanding, says the Doctor, all that can be said, much clamour will ever attend novelties, though never so strongly proved. — But truth seldom thrives the worse, for unreasonable opposition; and it would seem (N. B.) not to be far from its establishment, when such writers, as the following, appear in its defence — He hath established what he undertook to defend, with such extent of learning, and force of good argument, that I dare become responsible for all he says; and am willing, that those of my opinions here debated, may stand, or fall, by the strength, or the invalidity of this defence.”¹

¹ Preface to the critical enquiry, p. 10.

This compliment, so very hearty, as well as elegant, puts me in mind of another, which the learned Doctor made some time since, to the whole clergy of this nation; “a body of men, says he, the most learned, virtuous, and truly Christian, that ever adorned a church, or state.”¹

¹ D. L. Vol. 2. Preface, p. 6.

These two compliments are of so very high a strain, that were it not for the gravity of the Doctor’s character, and the seriousness of the subject, the reader might have thought himself obliged to understand them both ironically. But if the Doctor meant no more by this, than to buy a peace with the clergy, it must however be said, that he gave more for the purchase of it, than a man of a scrupulous conscience would have given.

However the compliment paid to this modest gentleman (who to be sure will, now never be able to let the world know his name) seems to have been comfortably received in secret, by the ample return he has made the Doctor for it, in his new book. Where, speaking of a part of the Doctor’s performance, he says, “For this answer, I must refer the reader to the D. L. where he will find the subject handled with that force, solidity, and precision of argument, which so eminently distinguish the author from all his cotemporaries.”

I shall now only just observe, that the compliment made by the bishop to the clergy, has here very much abatement made to it, by his great ally. For as matters now stand, if this very clergy, good, learned, and Christian, beyond any thing ever heard of in the world before, should one and all unite in opposing the bishop, all that they could possibly get by their pains, would be only to shew, how eminently he stands distinguished by force, solidity, and precision of argument from all his cotemporaries.

But no more of this. Bishop Warburton grounds his scheme, upon the doctrine of the Old and the New Testament. But seeing he affirms that to be of the greatest weight, which is taken from the New Testament, and this author also begins there, I shall do so likewise.

First, I shall clearly evince, that there is not in all the New Testament, one single text, which either in the letter, or the spirit proves, or has the least tendency, or design to prove, that the immortality of the soul, or its perpetual duration after the death of the body, was not an universal, commonly received opinion in, and thro’ every age of the world from Adam to Christ. Secondly, That this doctrine or belief of a future state, was not designedly secreted, or industriously hidden from the eyes of the people of God by Moses, neither by the types and figures of the law, nor by any other part of his writings. From whence I shall occasionally shew, that the true ground and method of Christian redemption to eternal life, preached by the apostles, began with Adam, was the religion of Adam, and all his descendants. And also, that the writings of Moses, and the patriarchal faith, give the very same full proof of the immortality of the soul, or a future state, as the gospel doth.

Need I not observe, that the whole merits of the debate, betwixt Bishop Warburton on the one side, and the whole Christian church of all ages, on the other side, lie wholly in these particulars, which, if they can be made good, the whole costly fabric of the Doctor’s projected defence of Christianity, (as he calls it) built at the expence of such immense treasures of learning, fetched from all quarters of the antient and modern world, must have the fate which always happens to castles built in the air.

This learned writer, to shew, that the immortality of the soul, or its perpetual duration in a future state, was entirely unknown in all the former dispensations of God, until the coming of Christ, begins with this passage of St. Paul. “God hath saved us according to his own purpose, and his grace which was given us in Christ Jesus, before the world began. But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light, thro’ the gospel.”

On which words he thus proceeds: ♦“We are told, that God, before the world began, had decreed to restore mankind to that lost inheritance of eternal life, which they should forfeit by the disobedience of our first parents. It is added, that this secret purpose, was now at last made manifest by the appearing of Christ, who hath abolished death, and brought life, and immortality to light by the gospel. The apostle mentions two periods, one, when it was originally formed in the secret counsels of God, the other, when it was published and revealed. The opposition between these two states, seems necessarily to imply, that during the interval, it remained a secret. If the apostle may be allowed to be his own interpreter, it will be easy to establish this exposition by a parallel passage in the epistle to Titus. In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began, but hath in due time manifested his word through preaching. Agreeably to this, the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, assures us, that the great salvation of the gospel, that is, the promise of eternal life, first began to be spoken by the Lord. But how could he be the first who taught this doctrine, if Moses and the prophets had taught it long before? Or how did he begin to speak of that, which so many others had been commissioned to teach before? Sometimes we are told, that life and immortality are brought to light, sometimes that it was made manifest, sometimes that it first began to be spoken by Jesus Christ. The bringing to light, and making manifest, are equivalent to the beginning first to teach. And if so, the publication ascribed to Jesus Christ, must have been the first and original publication, and not merely the illustrating or giving new splendor to a doctrine, by the addition of one, or more circumstances unknown before. However, an eminent writer (meaning your Lordship) assures us, that Jesus Christ did not give the first notice of this doctrine. All that I need remark upon it, is, that this assurance seems directly to contradict the word of inspiration.

Your Lordship has also said, that the antient revelations afforded a good proof of a future state. This writer makes great shew of triumph over this most true assertion, and is continually bringing it forth as a proof of your inconsistency, both with yourself and the apostles.

But to follow him farther: “St. Paul, saith he, observes that Jesus Christ was sent to shew light to the people, that is, to the Jews and to the Gentiles. It is plain from hence, that he was a light to the first, in the same sense, in which he was a light to the last; and therefore as he was a light to the Gentiles, by revealing the mystery of redemption, in a restoration to life and immortality, to them absolutely unknown, it seems to follow, that he also enlightened the Jews, by the manifestation of a truth equally unknown. Agreeably to this account of things, Zacharias, in his prophecy upon the birth of John Baptist, says, The day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. A description, which will by no means permit us to suppose, that they were enlightened with a good proof of a future state. If they had been enlightened with such a proof, they would have been in the region of life and immortality, and not in the verge and shadow of death. They would not have been sitting in darkness, but walking in the light, if they actually saw the grand object in question: how consistent it is, to assign a good view of an object, to a people sitting in darkness, must be left to the judgment of others. However, this seems to be the necessary consequence of affirming, that the Jews had a good proof of a future life.”

This is the glaring contradiction, which he is continually charging upon your Lordship throughout his whole book. Again, he attacks your Lordship thus, from your own words: “St. Peter, says his Lordship, tells all Christians, that they are called out of darkness into a marvellous light. Ask the evangelists, they will tell you, The day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death. Ask any, or all the apostles, and they will tell you, their commission is, to open the eyes of the people, and turn them from darkness unto light. But how could the Jewish people have a good view and prospect of life, and immortality, if their eyes were not opened? How could they be called out of darkness, if their situation presented them with a good view of an object, which they were now first invited to behold? And how could they sit in the shadow of death, if they had been favoured with a good proof of a future state?

“It would be ridiculous to say, that they sat in darkness, or that they had not their eyes, merely, because they did not see the object in its full proportion, or extent, or had not an exact view of every minute part, and the opportunity of surveying it quite round. The sitting in darkness and the shadow of death, evidently implies a total want of light, by which the people thus circumstanced, were to be enlightened; it being impossible to express the most entire ignorance in more emphatic terms.”¹

¹ Pages 4, 5, 6, &c.

I have made these large quotations from this author, containing all his chief texts of scripture, and his comments upon them, in his own words, that there might be no complaint of my robbing his arguments of any of their force, for all that he farther says on this subject, is but mere repetition.

I shall now shew, that all his reasoning upon these texts is false in itself, and nothing at all to the purpose, as not touching the one great point in question, which is the doctrine or belief of a future state, or the immortality of the soul in a life after this. — And this I shall do, by making it plain, that not one of these texts, nor any other in all the New Testament, proves, or has the least tendency to prove, that the doctrine or belief of the soul’s immortality, and a future state, was not known in and thro’ every age of the world, before the coming of Christ in the flesh.

This will be sufficiently done, by shewing, that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, or its future existence in some kind of happiness or misery in another life, is a matter about which these texts say not a syllable, but leave it as untouched as the doctrine of the pre-existence of souls.

If it be asked then, What is the great discovery, new light and knowledge, declared in these texts, as newly made known to the world by the gospel? It is answered, that the one thing meant both by the letter and spirit of all these, and every other the like passages of scripture, speaking of that mystery, new light, or knowledge made known by the gospel, and unknown before, is absolutely nothing else, points at nothing else, and has nothing else implied in it, but the one whole process of Christ in his personality, his birth, his life, his sufferings, his death, his resurrection and ascension into heaven. This, and this alone, namely, The whole process of Christ, in all these important particulars, is the great salvation, the great mystery, the hidden wisdom of God, kept secret from the foundation of the world, and not manifested, nor possible to be manifested, but by Christ himself entering into, and going thro’ all the parts of this process. — Of this process alone it is, that the apostles speak, when they declare the mystery opened in the gospel, to have been a mystery kept secret since the world began: and the reason why it was so is plain, because it must be a secret, and continue such, till what was contained in it came into actual existence, and thereby manifested itself.

Of this process alone, and its wonderful effects, it is that the apostles speak, when they glory of the abolishment of death, and of life and immortality brought to light through the gospel: because it is the gospel alone, that manifests the actual existence of this process of Christ in all its parts. Nor do they ever speak of any light, life, or knowledge, as formerly the hidden wisdom of God, and now made manifest to the world, but solely that light, that life, and knowledge, which arises from some one or other, or all the parts of our Saviour’s process, as the one only possible and actual Redeemer of the world.

That this is, the plain full truth of the matter, that the only thing, discovered to the world by the light of the gospel, is the one whole process of Christ, must be acknowledged by every considerate man, even from the nature of the thing. — For what can the mystery of the gospel be, but the mystery of Christ, as a Saviour, made known to the world? And what can the mystery of Christ, as a Saviour made known be, but the manifestation of what he is in himself, in the power of his personality, in the efficacy of his birth, in the blessed consequences of his life, his sufferings, his death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven, as our second Adam, or father of a new, divine nature, derived into us by his wonderful process in all its parts.

Now as all these particulars make up the whole manifestation of the mystery opened in the gospel, so there is not in any of these, the most distant hint given, that the doctrine of a future state, was not as soon, as universally, and constantly known as the fall of man was. Nor do they any more imply, such ignorance, than they imply, the fall of man not known till Christ came in the flesh. — Now that which is not taught in, and by the process of Christ, cannot be taught by the manifestation of the gospel mystery. But in all our Saviour’s process, there is no possibility of making any part of it prove, that the immortality of the soul, or its destination to a future life, was not the common belief, of every age from Adam to Christ.

For this wonderful process of Christ, which is the whole mystery opened in the gospel, is about quite another kind of life in the soul, than that which consists in its bare immortality. For immortality, considered in itself, may as well be a curse as a blessing. But this is not the life and immortality that the gospel boasts of. It leaves such natural immortality, which belongs as well to devils as men, as wholly untouched, as it does the original of the alphabet. And for this reason, because the one knowledge which the former world wanted, and the Christian world got, is by all the evangelists and apostles confined to that, which Christ, as God and man, was, did, suffered, purchased, and obtained, in and through the efficacy and merits of his process, till as a second Adam, he was placed at the right hand of God.

It is the living knowledge, the real participation of all these parts of our Saviour’s process, as a God incarnate, that contains all that life and immortality, all the glad tidings of salvation, and light out of darkness, made known to the world by Christ and his apostles. Nor do they ever call the attention of mankind to any other new light or knowledge, but that of seeing and knowing, how every part of Christ’s process had its particular and joint efficacy, to destroy the works of the devil, and the power of hell in fallen man.

This was the good news of life and immortality brought to light by a glorious gospel, which shewed the whole counsel of God towards fallen men; how they were before the foundation of the world seen in Christ, predestinated to be made conformable to his image, who by all that he was, did and suffered, from his first coming down, to his ascension into heaven, was the one, only possible means of their partaking again of the divine nature.

Every step of our Saviour’s process from first to last, was only so many necessary steps of our progress out of the eternal death of sin and misery, into a participation of an heavenly life in Christ Jesus. And in this process is contained all that
Christian theology, which makes up the whole doctrine of Christ and his apostles.

No power of reasoning, no art of criticism, can force one single text of the New Testament to speak, or so much as hint at any other life or immortality but this, as first made known to the world by the gospel. — The natural immortality of the soul, is no part of its redemption, but belongs to it as it belongs to all angels, whether in heaven or in hell, and is an immortality no more purchased by the incarnation of the Son of God, than the immortality which belongs to Lucifer and his angels. — Therefore this cannot be that immortality, which is the gift of God through Jesus Christ. And therefore nothing that is said of that immortality, which comes to fallen man only by Jesus Christ, can be the least proof, that the belief of the soul’s perpetual existence in a future state came first, or only by him, and was not always held by every age, from the beginning of the world.

Natural immortality has its full nature in the fallen angels; but the one immortality that comes by Jesus Christ, is the glory of the Holy Trinity, dwelling and manifesting itself in the immortal nature of the soul.

For this is a certain truth, that all that is divine and God-like in any creature, dwells as a supernatural gift or operation of God in it; which may be lost, as it was in angels, and Adam; and can be kept by no other power but that of faith; nor regained, when lost, but by the return of that same faith, and full resignation to God. So that the natural immortality of angels or men, is only their capacity to receive the never-ending, but always increasing manifestation of divine glory in, and thro’ all the natural powers. And this is the one immortality made known, and purchased for us through the blessed Jesus, being and doing what he was and did, in our poor immortal nature, that had lost its God.

But to consider now the texts of the New Testament, on which this author has endeavoured to establish Bishop Warburton’s opinion. The first and chief of these is that of St. Paul; “God hath saved us, according to his own purpose, and his grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus, before the world began: but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.”

Now every word in this passage excludes all regard to the natural immortality of the soul, and necessarily leads and confines us to that one life and immortality, to a life and immortality of the heavenly nature brought forth in our souls. — For the life and immortality here granted to us, is expressly affirmed to be effected by Christ’s abolishment of death. Therefore as is the death here abolished, such must be the life that is brought forth in the stead of it.

The death here abolished is not the natural mortality of body or soul, but that death, whose destruction is declared in these words of the apostle, Christ was manifested to destroy the works of the devil: and from that destruction comes forth the one true life and immortality, which is an eternal union of righteousness in and with Christ, as a principle of a divine life eternally dwelling in us.

To be carnally minded, saith the apostle, is death, this is the one death that Christ is here said to abolish; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace; and this is the one life and immortality that Christ sets up in the stead of death, by making us spiritually minded, or as St. Peter words it, “partakers of the divine nature, by which we are made children of God, and if children, then heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ.”

Farther, St. John saith, This is the record, that God hath given unto us eternal life; surely this is the one immortality brought to light by the gospel. But to shew us what, and wherein this immortal, or eternal life consists, the apostle adds, “and this life is in his Son: he that hath the Son, hath life, and he that hath not the Son; hath not life.”

* Therefore this immortality, or eternal life given unto us of God, not only has nothing in it concerning the natural immortality of souls, but is necessarily to be understood of quite another matter.

* For they only can have this eternal life given to them of God, who have the Son: therefore it has no relation to the natural immortality of souls, and they can only have the Son, of whom it can be truly said, “that Christ is of God become wisdom and righteousness, and sanctification to them.”

* As another full proof of all that has been said, it may be added, that the life and immortality brought to light by the gospel, is purely conditional and only offered to mankind, as a gift of God, upon certain terms. And therefore does not, cannot mean the immortality of the soul, or its perpetual natural duration in a future state.

Thus, “God gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believed on him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. Ye will not come to me, that ye may have life.” Therefore the immortality of life revealed by the gospel, is purely conditional, and adventitious to the soul, such as may be received, or not received, and consequently cannot possibly be, or mean a natural immortality, for such immortality, it has no power of freely receiving, or not receiving upon terms.

That blessing of a heavenly immortality, freely given by God, is nothing else but a celestial holiness, purity and perfection brought forth in the soul, by its having the eternal WORD and SPIRIT of God again restored to, and united with it: called immortality, not because of its eternal duration, but because eternally free from all that, which is death, or the deadly evil of sin in the soul; called also so, in opposition to that natural immortality of devils, and damned souls, which tho’ never ceasing, is only an eternal death. So that no argument, from what is said of the life and immortality made known by the gospel, can be drawn into a proof, that the belief of a future state, was not the general belief of the world before. Because the immortality preached by the gospel, is a thing quite different from the natural, perpetual duration of the soul, and means neither more, nor less, than the glory and perfection of a divine life, to which Adam died the very day that he did eat of the forbidden tree, and which is quickened again, in and by the whole process of Christ in our nature.

I come now, to my second proposition, namely, to shew, that the doctrine of a future state, or the immortality of the soul, was not designedly secreted, or industriously hidden from the eyes of the people of God by the types and figures of the Mosaic dispensation. — My reasons for it are as follow. First, because it is highly unworthy of God, to suppose, that it was, the end of those types and figures, designedly to secrete, or hide from the people of God, the knowledge of any truth, much less the knowledge of a truth, absolutely necessary, to the very possibility of any spiritual relation, or religious communication between God and man, as that of the immortality of the soul, must be. — For though the Mosaic state, may be justly called a region of darkness, when compared to that light which has arisen from the process of Christ; yet so far as it went, and with regard to the people under it, it was a degree of light, and a degree of life: it was some progress in victory over death, it was some opening of divine light, an help to such kind of knowledge, as could be had in such a state, as was only formed to support, and keep up a faith, and hope, and expectation of such a redemption to come, as had been promised from the beginning of the world, but could have no open manifestation, till its own existence manifested itself. — It is therefore a gross mistaking the whole nature of the law, to consider its types and figures as designedly hiding any thing from man. — Their design was quite the contrary, namely, to convey new light and farther information. And though they may be said to be a shadowy, and imperfect representation, yet its whole intent is, to give some knowledge of the substance; and by its signs to make the things to come more expected, than they would have been without such types and figures.

Bishop Warburton, speaking of typical representation, saith, it necessarily implies the throwing a thing into shade, or secreting it from vulgar knowledge.

Typical representation, in the law, is not, cannot be the throwing a thing into shade, or secreting it from vulgar knowledge. For this supposes the thing typified to have been already in existence, or it could not be thrown into shade. But this hath no place in the Mosaic types and figures; they are not the putting any thing already existent, under a cover, but are a degree of light cast upon such a matter, as had never shewn itself, and which could therefore only be typically pointed at, till it came into actual existence.

Again, that typical representation does not necessarily imply, the throwing a thing into shade, and secreting it from vulgar knowledge, is plain from hence. — Baptism, and bread and wine in the sacrament, are merely corporeal types and figures of spiritual things; but if it was necessarily essential to typical representation, to throw things into shade, and secrete them from vulgar knowledge, it would follow, that these two sacraments could have no other end, but to cast the spiritual things of the gospel into shade, and secrete them from vulgar knowledge. Type, figure, and human language, with regard to spiritual things, have the same kind of imperfection, though not in the same degree; but yet teaching and informing, is the design of both of them.

Of the Mosaic types therefore it may justly be affirmed, that they were so far from designedly hiding, or covering any truths from man, that their whole intent was, to uncover, and make less hidden such things as at that time, could not be seen, or known as they were in themselves. — Nothing could possibly manifest the nature, power, and efficacy of Christ’s process (the one thing typified) but its own real nature, come into actual existence in all its parts. — Therefore through every age of the world, from the first promise made to Adam, of a seed of the woman to bruise the head of the serpent, to that time, all the religious goodness of mankind consisted in their walking before God in an implicit faith of a full redemption, made known to them under representation of a seed of the woman, overcoming the mischief that the serpent had done to them. And through this faith alone it was, that all the holy men of old had their righteousness, and peace, and union with God. And God was not ashamed to be called their God, inasmuch as having received the promises, and seen them afar off, and embraced them, they confessed they were strangers and pilgrims on earth, desired a heavenly country, and through faith, looked for a city whose builder and maker is God.

Hence are the following great truths undeniably evident, (1.) That faith in Christ, has always been, and always must be, the only ground of salvation possible to man, in any age of the world. (2.) That this faith itself, and all its power and efficacy, has always, as fully proceeded from Christ alone, as the faith of those who believed in him, when come in the flesh. For as then Christ truly said of himself, without me ye can do nothing, so it was equally true of the first promised seed of the woman, that without it, nothing good could have been done by fallen man.

Therefore, (3) the covenant of God with all mankind through Christ, is a living, operative covenant of life and immortality, not first begun, or first made known, when Christ was on earth, and died for us, but a covenant as antient as our first parents, as universal as their offspring. And what the apostle saith, that God was in Christ Jesus reconciling the world unto himself, tells us a truth and goodness of God, that extends itself to every nation, people, and language, that ever hath been, or ever shall be upon the face of the earth.

* And as an implicit faith in a promised redemption was all the religion of the old world; all that could be done by the infinite wisdom of God, was according to the fitness of times, seasons and occasions (only known to himself) to give forth such typical and prophetic intimations of this redemption, as should more and more confirm their faith, and prepare them to see, that the whole process of Christ, when finished, was that very redemption first promised to all the world, in the promise made to the common Father of mankind, through succeeding ages kept constantly in view, by a train of types and prophecies.

* And as the history and ritual of Moses, could not possibly design to take away the knowledge of any divine truths from the people of God, so least of all could they designedly hide from them a belief of the natural immortality of the soul: a truth absolutely necessary and essential to any spiritual relation, or religious communion between God and man.

* And indeed, Moses, is as free from any such design, as the apostles themselves.

* For to say, that the types of the law have designedly hid, from the people of God, all sense of the immortality of the soul, is as false, as bold and extravagant, as to say the same thing of the gospel.

For in the New Testament, not a word is to be found, that expressly affirms the soul to be naturally immortal; in this respect the law and the gospel are equally silent; and yet neither of them secrete, or hide it from the people of God, but both fully prove, and with the same kind of proof, the absolute necessity of believing it.

For as in the gospel it is never expressly asserted, and yet is fully proved, because unavoidably supposed, and necessarily implied in and by the open, and plain doctrines of the gospel: so it is with the books of Moses; they never expressly affirm the natural immortality of the soul, and yet give one, and the same full proof of it, as the gospel doth. Because the express doctrines of every dispensation of God, from Adam to Christ, openly teach doctrines, which not by inference, but in the plain nature of the thing, unavoidably require, and necessarily imply, the immortality of the soul, and the common belief of it in all ages of the church before the coming of Christ.

The obtaining an union with Christ, is the one life and immortality brought to light by the gospel; but this immortality unavoidably requires, and necessarily implies the perpetual duration of the soul’s natural life. For nothing but an ever-enduring creature, is capable of enjoying an everlasting gift.

Therefore the gospel, tho’ never once expressly asserting, yet continually demonstrates the natural immortality of the soul.

And this is the whole truth, with regard to the Mosaic history and types; they hide it, in the same manner as the gospel hides it, that is, not at all; and they fully prove it in the same manner as the gospel proves it, by doctrines which necessarily require, and absolutely imply it, in the first conception of them.

For the history of the creation and the fall of man, contains an express covenant of a redemption, promised to Adam and his fallen posterity, in which a seed of the woman should do away the evil which the serpent had brought into the human nature, that is, should restore the first, lost, heavenly life to mankind.

But this covenant, and the immediate benefit of it, could neither be wanted nor received, but by immortal creatures, that believed themselves to have an immortality, which had lost that glory and perfection which belonged to it at the first. Nor could such immortal creatures have any power of entering into this covenant any other way, than by an implicit faith in God. For it was a covenant of redemption, or return of their first glory, without the least intimation of the time, or age, when, or the means, or manner how it was to be brought to pass. Therefore such a covenant, and such a faith, in the very first conception of them, without the least reasoning or deduction, absolutely imply, and necessarily require a full belief of a future state.

And how could God better keep up a full sense of it, or more fix it in the hearts of men, than by placing and fixing all their faith and comfort, in a redemption certainly to come upon all the world, which yet might not come, till half the world was dead?

Or how could mankind possibly give into this faith, had they had the least doubt of the certainty of a life to come? For their faith in such an expected redemption, could not be either more or less, than their faith in a future state.

Therefore God’s requiring this faith of them, was in the highest degree his requiring them to
believe the ever-enduring life of their souls. Consequently, in the first revelation of God to man, life and immortality, as it means an ever-enduring state of the soul, was as fully, and in the same degree brought to light, as in the revelation of the gospel.

In the gospel it is proved, because an immortality of a heavenly life is made known, purchased and given by Christ, which necessarily implies an immortal nature in man, or he could not partake of it.

In the first revelation, it is equally proved, because a redemption to come, that was to be obtained by an implicit faith, without any knowledge of the time when it was to appear, whether before or after many generations of men were dead and gone, necessarily implies a full belief of a state belonging to man, that is beyond time, and the death of the body.

This proof of the natural immortality of the soul, thus inseparable from the first revelation of God, is so strong, that nothing need, or hardly can be added to it. For how could God more fully assert the immortality of our nature, than by requiring our faith in such a redemption? Or how could man more strongly declare his full belief of, such immortality, than by his faith in a redemption that had nothing to do with time, or the life, or death of the body in this present world?

Again, The murder, or martyrdom of Abel, and the translation of Enoch into heaven, both recorded for the instruction of the people in this very point, are two examples, and first fruits of the redemption promised to Adam, and all mankind; two invincible proofs, that this first covenant was a covenant of life and immortality, confirmed to mankind by facts strong and convincing, like those of Christ’s resurrection and ascension.

For immediately after a covenant of redemption was made, the first good man after it, in the very beginning of the world, and the beginning of his own life, after his first act of divine worship, and as soon as God had declared his good pleasure in it, was slaughtered like a beast.

Now can there be a fuller demonstration, that the covenant of redemption was for life and immortality in a future state? Otherwise the first good man in the world lost all the benefit of God’s covenant, merely because he was good; merely thro’ the devotion that he shewed towards God, and the favour which God shewed towards him.

Therefore either Abel’s blood cries aloud the absolute certainty of a future state, or Abel must be said to have been undone, ruined, and deprived of all good, purely because of a friendship discovered between God and him.

This fact therefore, recorded by the Spirit of God assures all the Mosaic generations, that another life belonged to Abel and to them, besides that which Abel lost by his death. Does it not as directly, declare this, as when Christ said, his kingdom was not of this world? Does it not say the same thing, as when Christ said to his disciples, fear not them that can only kill the body? The same thing, as the voice from heaven, which cried, blessed are the dead which die in the Lord?

Again, Another proof of the same force, is the translation of Enoch. God saith by Moses, Enoch walked with God, and was not, for God took him. Now, could any the most expressive form of words, have told the ancient world with more certainty than this fact does, that God’s covenant with man, was for a kingdom of heaven?

Our blessed Lord, when departing out of this world, saith to his disciples, I go to prepare a place for you, that where I am, there ye may be also. And does not Enoch’s translation say as much, as if he had been sent again by God to say, God has taken me from this world into heaven, to make it manifest to you, that where I am gone, there are ye to come also.

Behold here the adorable goodness of God to the first and succeeding ages of the world! These two great articles of faith, which are now the comfort of the Christian world, namely, victory
over death, and ascension into heaven, had even then the utmost and most convincing proof given to them by God.

The old world, from the first man, were all in a covenant of redemption. — Life and immortality was both by doctrine and example, made known to them, and nothing remained as a mystery or wisdom hidden in God, to be revealed in the last times, but that one thing which could not be manifested, till by its own actual existence it manifested itself, namely, the wonderful process of Christ in our fallen nature. By which process alone it was that all the faith, as well before as after Christ, had all its efficacy.

Hence it is, that the faith and religion of the first world was in substance, the very Christian faith and Christian religion, one and the same way, and power of salvation; which oneness consists in this, that Christ, the same yesterday, to-day and for ever, was the same mediator between God and man from the beginning of the world, one and the same power of life and salvation to murdered Abel, as to martyred Stephen.

This faith from this original, was their peace with God thro’ Jesus Christ, the very same faith of which Christ saith, He that believeth in me shall never die. The same faith of which he again saith, If any man thirst, let him come unto me and
drink; he that believeth in me, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

That this was the catholic, saving faith, common to all the ♦patriarchal
ages, we are assured by the Spirit of God in the epistles to the Corinthians and Hebrews, telling in express words, “They did all eat the same spiritual meat, did all drink the same spiritual drink, for they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ.”

Are we not told, that very same thing of the patriarchal generations, which Christ said to those that believed in him, that by eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, they have eternal life?

In the eleventh chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews, the same spirit, speaking of the patriarchal ages, saith, “All these died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were perswaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed they were strangers and pilgrims on earth, — who desired a better country, that is, an heavenly.”

Bishop Warburton is so out of humour with this whole chapter, thus full of patriarchal light and glory, that he gives it the heathenish name of the Palladium of the cause, which he had undertaken to demolish. And he accordingly attacks it with a number of critical inventions, that may as truly be called heathenish; for they are in direct opposition to all Christian theology.

He will have it, that the faith set forth in this whole chapter, is concerning a faith in the abstract, and not a specific faith in the Messiah. An invention as little grounded in the gospel, as goodness in the abstract, in opposition to specific goodness. Goodness in the abstract, if it hath any meaning, is all goodness, and therefore must have every species of goodness in it; so faith in the abstract, if it hath any meaning, is all faith, and therefore must have every species of faith in it.

His first reason, why this whole chapter is concerning a faith in the abstract, and not a faith in the Messiah, is taken from that definition of faith; “The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”

And yet this very definition, if it had been intended to give the most distinct idea of the nature of faith in the Messiah, could not have been better expressed, for there is every thing in it that can fully set forth that very faith. For if faith in a Messiah to come, must be a faith in things hoped for, and a reliance upon the certainty of things not seen; if this, and nothing but this, can be a true faith in a Messiah to come, how could it be more directly pointed at, than by making it to be the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen?

For in this definition, not only the true object, but the true efficacy of faith in the Messiah is set forth, in that it is made to be such a real
foretaste, and participation of things hoped for, and not seen, as is justly called, the very substance and evidence of them.

Again, the Doctor appeals to the following words, as proof, that the faith described in this chapter, is not a faith in the Messiah, “He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of all those that diligently seek him.” Which words contain neither more nor less, than if it had been said, “He that cometh to God, must believe that he is a fulfiller of his promises to all those that truly believe in him, and them: for God cannot be considered as a rewarder of mankind, in any other sense, than as he is a fulfiller of his promises made to mankind in the covenant of a Messiah.” For God could not give, nor man receive any rewards or blessings, but in and through the one Mediator. Therefore to believe in God, as a rewarder, and blesser, is the very truth, and reality of a right faith in the Messiah.

The Doctor has another proof, which he says, puts the matter out of all doubt. In this chapter it is said, By faith Rahab the harlot escaped, by faith the Israelites passed through the red sea, by faith the walls of Jericho fell down. “But was any of this, a faith in Jesus the Messiah?”

Now not to rob this argumentation of any of its strength, it must be allowed to proceed thus.

Joshua’s faith could not be in the Messiah, or the promises of God made to his forefathers.
But why so? Because by his faith the walls of Jericho fell down.

Just as theologically argued, as if it had been said, Abel’s faith could not be a faith in the seed of the woman, promised to his parents; because by his faith “he offered unto God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain.”

Enoch’s faith could not be in a Messiah to come, because by his faith he was taken up to God.

Abraham’s faith could not be in the Messiah, because by his faith, “He sojourned in a strange country, chose to dwell in tents, and looked for a city that hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” His faith could not be in a Messiah to come, because by his faith he offered up Isaac, his only begotten son.

Having set the Doctor’s argument in its best light, no more need be said about the worth of it.

At last comes his invincible argument, which if it was as strong, as he gives out, all that went before might have been spared.

“To evince it impossible, says the Doctor, that faith in the Messiah, should be meant by the faith in this chapter, the apostle expressly saith, that all those, to whom he assigns this faith, had not received the promises; therefore they could not have faith in that, which was never proposed to their faith. For how should they believe on him, of whom they had not heard?”

Now if this argument has any good logic in it, it must follow, that no one, whether patriarch or prophet, before, or after the law, ever had, or could have faith in the Messiah, for all who died before the birth of Christ, must have died without receiving the promises, which were then first received, when good old Simeon could sing, “Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation.”

But St. Paul, speaking to the Jews, saith, “Behold, we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise, which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same to us their children.”

Here, by the Spirit of God himself, is made known to us, the true difference between receiving, and not receiving the promises. The fathers, who could only see them afar off, are those who died without receiving the promises, that is, without receiving the things promised. And their children who lived to see the promises fulfilled, are they that received the promises, that is, the things promised.

Farther, the Spirit of God saith, “all these died in the faith, not having received the promises.”

But how could they die in this faith? It was for this only reason, because they had not received the promises, that is, the things promised. For
if they had, they could not have died in faith, but in the enjoyment of things promised.

The Doctor therefore has unluckily pitched upon that, as an argument against the possibility of their faith in the Messiah, which is the very reason, why they did die in the faith of him. For the holy Spirit saith, they all died in the faith; and then the reason is added, why they did, namely, because not having received the promises; therefore their not having received the promises, is the reason why they died in the faith of them. And their faith had this foundation, because they had seen the things promised, as afar off, that is, long after their own deaths, and therefore to be fulfilled, or made good in a future life. Consequently, their faith was in a redemption to come in a life after this; which surely may be affirmed to be a true faith in the promised Messiah, or in all that, which had been promised, from the first joyful notice, which God gave of him, in a seed of the woman to bruise the head of the serpent. Which in gospel language is called, destroying the works of the devil, and bringing all that to life again, which died in Adam’s transgression.

It is added of these holy men dying in the faith of promises seen afar off, that they were perswaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth; now they that say such things, plainly declare, that they seek a better country, that is, an heavenly.

What an extravagance is it therefore in the learned Doctor, to say, How should they believe in him of whom they have not heard; as in the least degree applicable to those saints of the old world? For their faith was in promises made to them, but not fulfilled before their deaths, which they beholding as afar off, died in the fullest faith and expectation of a blessed life and heavenly country in virtue of them. Therefore they believed in that, of which they had heard, they knew what it was that they believed, namely, a redemption from all the evil of their pilgrimage on earth, to a life in heaven.

Our blessed Lord said to the Jews, Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it, and was glad. Surely then Abraham had faith in the Messiah, and yet he is numbered by the apostle amongst those, who died not having received the promises.

But now, though Abraham’s rejoicing at the sight of that day, was a sufficient proof, that his faith was in the Messiah, yet the implicit faith of the more antient, patriarchal world in that, which they had not seen, as Abraham had, was as right a faith in the Messiah, as Abraham’s was. This point is determined, in the following words of Christ. Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they, which have not seen, and yet have believed.

This, and this alone, is the only real difference between the religion of the faithful before, and
after Christ. Before Christ, the living faith, was in a Messiah to come in some wonderful, but unknown way. By this faith, they stood under the blessed power of the seed of the woman, and from generation to generation were kept in the one true covenant of life, and union with God.

After Christ, the same living faith, rejoiced in a Messiah made known by a miraculous birth, in the fallen human nature, redeeming it out of every evil of life, of death, of sin and hell, till it was placed, as God and man in one person, at the right hand of God in heaven.

Now when in process of time, the covenant of life between God and man, had lost much of its effect, and the people of God had greatly fallen away from the faith and piety of the first patriarchs, (perhaps not more remarkably than the Christian world is fallen from the truth and faith of the apostolic ages) it pleased God by Moses, to introduce the descendents of the patriarchs into a new covenant of care, and protection over them.

Which covenant was not a new progressive state of that first one true religion, that alone unites God and fallen man, nor given for its own sake, or because of any intrinsic goodness in its washings and purifications, but granted to the hardness of their hearts, as a temporal means of keeping a fallen people from falling farther under the blindness and vanity of their earthly minds.

The first covenant was so perfect that nothing could be added to it, but the manifestations of that which was promised in it. It was a promise of life and redemption to mankind, to be fulfilled in and by the seed of the woman. Now the promise, and the fulfilling of it, are not (as in human matters) two distant, separate things, that begin at different times, nor can the one ever be without the other. They both began together, and must exist together. The end, that is, the fulfilling, grows out of the beginning, goes along with it, and has all its efficacy from it; and the beginning, that is, the promise, is only so much of the end.

That which Christ did, suffered, and obtained in our flesh, calling all to turn to God, to deny themselves, to enter into the strictest union with him, giving all divine graces, and yet only according to their faith in him; that very same, the seed of the woman from the beginning was always doing, yet solely according to their faith in it.

* The loss of this faith in the first ages of mankind, gave birth to that which is called the heathen, or rational world; for they both began together, and brought forth a race of people, full of blindness, wickedness, and idolatry. For so far as they departed from faith, so far they fell from God, under the dominion and government of their reason, passions, and appetites. And thence began the kingdom of this world, and the wisdom of this world, which ever must have full power over every man, as soon as he ceases to live by faith.

* Reasoning instead of faith, brought about the first dreadful change in human nature, no less than a real death to God. And nothing but faith instead of reasoning, can give any one fallen man power to become again a son of God. Now to the end of the world, this will be the unalterable difference between faith in God, and reasoning about the things of God: they can never change their place, or effects; that which they did to the first man, that they will do to the last.

* It matters not, how much the revelations and precepts of God are increased, since the first single command given to Adam; for no more is offered to our reasoning faculty by the whole bible, than by that single precept. And the benefit of the whole bible is lost to us, as soon as we reason about the nature and necessity of its commands, just as the benefit of that first precept was lost in the same way.

Hath God indeed said, ye shall not eat of every tree in the garden? This was the first essay, or beginning of reasoning with God. What it was, and did then, that it will always be, and do. Its nature, and fruits will never be any other, to the end of the world. And though in these last ages, it hath passed through all schools of quibbling, and is arrived at its utmost height of art, and precision of argument, yet as to divine matters, it stands just where it stood, when it first learnt that logic from the serpent, which improved the understanding of Eve. And at this day, it can see no deeper into the things of God; give no better judgment about them, than that conclusion it at first made, that death could not be in the tree which was so good for food, so pleasant to behold, and to be desired for knowledge.

In short, these two, faith and reasoning, have, and always will divide all mankind, from the beginning to the end of the world, into two sorts of men.

The faithful, thro’ every age, are of the seed of the woman, the children of God, and heirs of redemption.

The reasoners are of the seed of the serpent, they are the Heathens thro’ every age, and heirs of that confusion, which happened to the first builders of the tower of Babel.

* To live by faith, is to be in covenant with God; to live by reasoning, is to be in compact with ourselves, with our own vanity, and blindness.

* To live by faith, is to live with God in the spirit and power of prayer, in self-denial, in contempt of the world, in divine love, in foretastes of the world to come, in humility, in patience, long-suffering, obedience, resignation, absolute dependence upon God, with all that is temporal and earthly under our feet.

* To live by reasoning, is to be a prey of the old serpent, eating dust with him, groveling in the mire of all earthly passions, devoured with pride, imbittered with envy, tools and dupes to ourselves, tossed up with false hopes, cast down with vain fears, slaves to all the good and evil things of this world, to-day elated with learned praise, to-morrow dejected at the loss of it; yet jogging on year after year, defining words and ideas, dissecting doctrines and opinions, setting all arguments and all objections upon their best legs, sifting and refining all notions, conjectures, and criticisms, till death puts the same full end to all the wonders of the ideal fabric, that the cleansing broom does to the wonders of the spider’s web, so artfully spun at the expence of its own vitals.

* This is the unalterable difference between a life of faith, and a life of reasoning in the things of God; the former is from God, works with God, and therefore all things are possible to it; the latter is from the serpent, and therefore vain opinions, false judgments, errors and delusions are inseparable from it.

Every scholar, every disputer of this world, nay every man, has been where Eve was, and has done what she did, when she sought for wisdom that did not come from God. All libraries are a full proof of the remaining power of the first sinful thirst after it: they are full of a knowledge that comes not from God, but from the first foundation of subtlety that opened her eyes. For as there cannot be any goodness in man, but so far as the divine goodness works in him, so there cannot be any divine truth, or knowledge in man, but so far as God’s truth and knowledge works in him?

Indeed nothing but the one Spirit of Christ, living and working in man, from the beginning to the end of the world, can possibly be the source of any goodness, holiness, or redemption of man.

The scriptures abound with proof of this. What can be more decisive than the following words? If any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. If Christ be not in you, ye are reprobates. And must not this be equally true of every man in the world? As true of all men in the patriarchal as in the gospel ages? If any man, says the apostle; therefore no regard is had to time or place, but where there is any man, there this truth is affirmed of him by the apostle, that unless he hath the Spirit of Christ he is none of his, but is a reprobate. But if none can be Christ’s, but because they have his Spirit living in them, and none can be God’s, but because they are Christ’s, it follows that if Christ was not the Spirit and power of that first, universal covenant made by God with fallen Adam, if he was not that which was meant by the seed of the woman, if his Spirit was not from that time the real bruiser of the serpent’s head, both Adam, and all his posterity, for much more than three thousand years lived and died mere reprobates, and that, by an unavoidable necessity, because they had not the Spirit of Christ living in them.

And now, my Lord, I think I have sufficiently proved not only my two propositions, but also that the first covenant with Adam, by the seed of the woman, was the one Christian means of salvation, so wonderfully manifested by the whole process of Christ revealed in the gospel. Therefore it is a truth of the utmost certainty, that from the beginning of the world to the end of it, there never was, nor ever will be any more, or any other, but one and the same true religion of the gospel, which began with Adam and Eve thro’ Jesus Christ, the one mediator and reconciler of God to man, who was as certainly the life, strength, and salvation of the faithful in the old world, as he was in after-times, when the Son of the Virgin Mary, the way, the truth, and the life, to all that have faith in him.

And indeed a plurality of religions, or means of salvation, is as gross an imagination as a plurality of gods, and can subsist upon no other foundation.

A better religion necessarily supposes a better God, and a change in religion a change in that God that makes it. A partial God, with-holding
the one true power of salvation, till the last ages of the world, is as atheistical as Epicurus’s god.

In sundry times, and in divers manners, it may please the wisdom of God, to vary that which is only an outward help to the truth of religion; but the inward spirit and truth of salvation, is as unvariable as God himself.

The law therefore of Moses, as consisting of carnal ordinances, not only makes nothing perfect, but brings nothing new into the one covenant of redemption, but was only a temporary, provisional help, added because of transgressions, till the promised seed should come; that is, till the whole process of Christ, should in its last and highest degree of evidence manifest itself in all its parts.

* This law then no more belonged to the true religion of the Old Testament, than of the New, neither did it ever stand between these two dispensations, as in their stead. No: it was merely on the outside of both, had only a temporary relation to the true religion, either before or after Christ, but was no more a part, or instead of them for a time, than the hand that stands by the road, directing the traveller, is itself a part of the road, or instead of it.

Now, tho’ the reason of man ought not to pretend to fathom all the depths of divine wisdom, in the whole of this additional covenant, yet two ends of it are apparent.

First, To bring this corrupted people of Israel into a new state of such observances, as might preserve them from the gross superstitions and idolatries to which they were too much inclined. And this, by a ritual of such condescensions to their carnal minds, as might nevertheless be a school of restraints and discipline, full of such purifications, types, and figures, as gave much spiritual light and instruction, both backwards and forwards. Backwards, as truly significative of their fallen state, daily memorials of their lost purity and perfection: forwards, as variously pointing at that promised victory over the serpent, which had been the constant faith and hope of their forefathers.

Secondly, That by a theocracy added to this ritual, which shewed itself in a covenant of continual care and protection, openly blessing their obedience, and punishing their rebellion, and working all kinds of miracles in the overthrow of their enemies, not only they themselves, but all the rest of the world, might be forced to see and know, that there was no God, that had all power in heaven and on earth, but the one God of Israel.

As to the Israelites themselves, this temporal covenant was a great instance of God’s goodness towards them. For they were thus called out of idolatry, separated from the rest of the world, built into an holy church of God, put under a most amazing theocracy, indulged for a time
with a ritual of carnal institutions, because of the hardness of their hearts, which ritual was full of every instruction by doctrines, types, figures and miracles, all shewing in the strongest manner, that they were to be heirs of the heavenly promises made to their forefathers.

And as to the rest of the world, no particular message or messenger, tho’ new risen from the dead, proclaims to them in so powerful a manner, the vanity of their idols, the knowledge of the one true God of all the world, as this remarkable body of people set up in the midst of the world did. So that the law, tho’ nothing but a temporal covenant of outward care and protection, was not only most divinely contrived to preserve the faith of the first holy patriarchs, and guide them to the time and manner of receiving the promises made to their fathers, but it was all mercy to the rest of the world, being no less than one continual, daily, miraculous call to them to receive blessing and protection, life and salvation in the knowledge and worship of the one true God of heaven and earth.

Now when the children of the patriarchs, were to be entered into this new covenant, the utmost care was taken by the Spirit of God, that to eyes that could see and ears that could hear, enough should be shewn and said, to prevent all carnal atheism to temporal and outward things, and bring forth a spiritual Israel, full of that faith and piety, in which their holy ancestors, as pilgrims on earth, had lived and died devoted to God, in hope of everlasting redemption.

To this end Moses, tho’ bringing them under a ritual of bodily washings and purifications, yet that they might use them only as outward confessions and memorials of an inward spiritual pollution, and as types and figures of their being to be delivered from it; is led by the inspiration of God, not only to insert in the books of the law, the most sublime doctrines and heavenly precepts of patriarchal holiness, but to lay before them, for their daily instruction, a history of the most deep and affecting truths: truths that had every thing in them fitted to awaken and keep up that strong hope of an eternal redemption, under the power of which, the holy patriarchs had overlooked every thing in time for the sake of eternity.

I mean, the most wonderful history of the creation and curse of this world, of the high origin of man and his dreadful fall from it, his redemption and covenant of life restored in a seed of the woman, the lives and deaths of the holy patriarchs, their patience under all sufferings, their contempt of worldly advantages, their heavenly visions, revelations and speeches from the invisible God, keeping them thereby in an holy intercourse with the invisible world, full of faith and hope of the good things of eternity.

To mention one or two of those great doctrines
of Moses, which set forth the original perfection and heavenly nature of man.

God said, Let us make man in our own image and likeness. Is not this as high a doctrine of immortality, does it not give the same instruction, raise the same hope, and call for all the same elevation of the heart to God, as when St. John
saith, Beloved, it does not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that when he shall appear, we shall be LIKE him? Just the same truth, and fitted to have the same effects, as when Moses said, God made man in his own LIKENESS.

St. Paul says, God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself. A comfortable doctrine indeed, and full of hope of immortality; yet only the same comfort and hope of immortality which had been openly preached by Moses.

When Moses bringeth in the Deity, as saying, The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent; he preaches that very same gospel, and in the same manner which the apostle did. For his words plainly teach, that God was in the seed of the woman reconciling the world unto himself; as when St. Paul says, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; the difference is nothing else, but in two different names given to our Redeemer.

* Now tho’ Moses was the first recorder of the gospel salvation in a written book, yet was he not the first preacher of it. For it was proclaimed in Adam’s day, from heaven, as the birth of Christ in the flesh, in the days of Herod. For when God said, The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent, the same good tidings of salvation was proclaimed from heaven by God himself, as when the angel said to the shepherds, Unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

* But how can we know this? Only by God’s own teaching. For nothing can be truly known of God by the creature, but that which God makes known of himself. — So far as God operates in the creature, and manifests himself in it, so far it truly knows, and is taught of God. — Any other knowledge of God, however learned, high, or deep it may pretend to be, is as vain and spurious as that goodness which proceeds from something else, than God’s good Spirit living in us.

* Genius, parts and literature, however set forth with wit and rhetoric, have no affinity with divine knowledge; they can no more give it, than the lust of the eyes and the pride of life can generate humility and purity of heart. These accomplishments live and act in a sphere of their own, and have no more power of taking to themselves any living knowledge of God, than the art of painting to the life, can give the power of creating life.

* The blindness, and follies which have over-run both the antient and modern world in matters of religion, are a full proof of the capital doctrine of divine revelation, namely, that man
(now the defaced image of God) is so miserably changed and fallen from his first created state, that nothing less than a new birth, can bring him again into the region of divine truth.

And hence it is, that tho’ religion has its deepest ground in the nature of man, tho’ God be essentially, present in the souls of all men, yet from the fall of Adam to the end of the world, it will be an immutable truth, that strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto divine knowledge; and none but the simple of heart, the poor in spirit, or the real followers of Christ can find it.

* But it is time to have done. I shall only trouble your Lordship with the few following remarks. — Dr. Warburton says, “He has proved that the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments is not to be found in, nor did make a part of the Mosaic dispensation.”¹ The Mosaic dispensation means nothing else, but a temporary ritual, and a temporary theocracy of worldly blessings and curses to support it. These are its fixed bounds within which it is confined. — Therefore, to prove that a state beyond this world, was not to be found in, nor did make a part of a state, that is confined to this world, is as easily and as vainly done, as to prove that the garden of Eden is not to be found in, nor makes a part of a map that is confined to England. And to infer that the Israelites therefore had no notion of an immortality, because it was not a part of their ritual, is no better than to infer, that the people of England can have no notion of the garden of Eden, because nothing of it is to be seen in the map of this island. — But tho’ not in the ritual, yet Moses in other parts of his books written for the instruction of those to whom he gave the ritual, has given them the fullest notice and highest proof of that godlike and immortal nature they received at their creation, shewing them to be the children of the patriarchal covenant, heirs of all the promises of eternal redemption made to their fathers from the beginning of the world. Nay, the most heavenly doctrines and precepts given by the apostles to the redeemed of Christ, as heirs of immortality, are to be found in the books of Moses.

¹ D. L. Vol. II. page 474.

Dr. Warburton takes much pains to get rid of the only true sense of the following texts of Moses. Thus, Let us make man in our own image and likeness. From these words, he says, it is inferred, that the soul is immaterial. But he thinks Moses intimated quite another matter. And so do I; for to intimate the immateriality of the soul, by saying, that man was made in the image and likeness of God, is quite short of the sense of the words: to say, that the soul is immaterial, is saying no more, than that it is not a circle or a piece of clay, it is saying nothing at all of it but only of something that it is not. Therefore Moses cannot be supposed to intimate such a nothing as this, by the image and likeness of God. But he asserts a much higher matter, namely, that being created in the image of God, he was made a partaker of the divine nature, and therefore had not only immortality, but the riches and perfections of the Deity grounded and growing up. And this is the true ground of our eternal happiness, that is, of that eternal increase of union, perfection and glory, which the redeemed soul will find in God; it is because the image of God, being as a seed sown into it at its creation, it will to all eternity, after his admission into heaven, open more and more its divine nature, and spring forth in new and farther fruits of glory, beatitude and union with God.

Every thing that is endless, numberless in the depth of eternity, is endless and numberless in the silence of the soul; what seeing is, what hearing, feeling, &c. are in their boundless variety, and ever increasing newness of delights in eternity, these, with all their wonders, are the innate birthright and sure inheritance of every immortal godly soul. And on the other hand, the same boundless, numberless depth and growth of every tormenting, painful, frightful sensation, will open itself in every soul, that has lost its God, and is left to its own immortal life within itself.

Vain therefore, is that principle published to the world, by a celebrated philosopher of the last century, that the soul in its first created state,
is a mere rasa tabula, or blank paper. A fiction, that is contradicted by all that we know of every created thing in nature.

For every creature of this world, animate or inanimate, is in its degree, a microcosm of all the powers, that are in the great world, of which it is a part. And nothing through all this universe, has in its essence, only the nature of a rasa tabula, or blank paper, but is in its kind, full of the riches, and powers of all outward nature.

In like manner must it be with the eternal world; every thing which comes from it, must be in its degree, a microcosm of all the powers and glories of eternity.

Let it be said, that the matter of this world, was in its first created state, free from all extension, solidity and parts, and this would be as grave a saying, and as much founded in nature, as the rasa tabula of the soul: say again, that by degrees it got a materiality of length, breadth and parts, from without, and this would be no greater a wonder, than that a soul, created inwardly destitute of any principle of knowledge, should from outward causes grow up into a profound philosopher. Again, say that the soul was at first, but a blank paper, till the organs of the body began to act upon it; and may not the enemies of religion, as justly say, that it must be the same blank paper again at the last, when the body shall be broken off from it?

If therefore the Essay upon human understanding (which the Doctor calls the most original book that ever was published) has produced a metaphysicks, in many points dangerous to religion, and greatly serviceable to false, and superficial reasoning, it is not to be wondered at, since so eminent an error, is the fundamental principle on which it proceeds.

But to return to the Doctor: he says, “The divine image and likeness must consist in something that is peculiar to man, — that the two things peculiar to man, are his shape, and his reason; that it cannot be in his shape, therefore it must be in his reason.”¹

¹ Page 554.

The divine image and likeness cannot consist in something that is peculiar to man. It might as well consist in his shape, as in his faculty of making syllogisms; but on the contrary, it must consist in that, and only that, which is, peculiar to God. Nor could man possibly be created in the image and likeness of God, unless something peculiar to God, had been the divine glory and perfection of his creaturely life. For the creaturely life, and all that is peculiar to it, is at the utmost distance from God, and can only have a likeness to that, which is to be found in creatures. — God dwelling in a supernatural way in the creature, is the only possible image of God that can be in it. The fallen angels have every thing that was creaturely left in them, but they are horrible devils, because they have lost their supernatural image of God, which dwelt in them at their creation. They have still reason, craft and subtlety; but because they have nothing, but what is peculiar to the creature, they are all rage, torment and misery.

The Doctor therefore, instead of appealing to two things in man, his shape and his reason, as his true distinction from beasts, should have said, by the authority of Moses, that only one thing was peculiar to man, as his glorious distinction both from fallen angels, and terrestrial animals, and that one thing is, his being created in the image and likeness of God. As to his outward shape, considered only as different from other animals, there is but little distinction in it; because they are as different in shape from one another, as man is from them all. And if man at his creation had had no higher a guest within him, than his reason, his shape would have been little better, than that of a fox, or a serpent. For reason, when not under the government of a higher principle, is that same craft, and cunning, that is visible in variety of beasts; and is for the most part, as earthly an instrument of mischievous passions, and lusts in man, as it is in beasts. And what is more, it must be so, till it comes under the government of that, which was the image and likeness of God, in the first creation of man.

* What is the difference between reason in St. Paul,
a Spinosa, a Hobbes, or a Bolingbroke?
None at all, or no other than in their outward shape. Therefore if reason be the divine image and likeness of God in man, a Hobbes and a Bolingbroke, had as much of it as St. Paul.
And a man that is all his life long reasoning himself into atheism, and the wisdom of living according to his own lusts, must be allowed to give daily proof of his having the image and likeness of God, very powerfully manifested in him.

The Doctor’s great proof, that reason is the image and likeness of God, is because Moses immediately adds, Let them rule over the fish of the sea, and over the fowls of heaven, and over the beasts of the earth. “For what, says he, could invest man with this dominion de facto, as well as de jure, but his reason?”¹

¹ D. L. page 554.

Our blessed Lord, at leaving the world, saith, “These signs shall follow them that believe; in my name, they shall cast out devils, they shall speak with new tongues, they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them.” Now let it be asked, what could invest the believers in Christ with this dominion de facto, as well as de jure, but their reason? Both this question, and the solution of it, is just as sound, and theological as the Doctor’s.

For it was not any thing of their own, but solely the name, that is, power of Christ dwelling, and operating in them, that invested them with the dominion over devils, serpents, diseases,
and all outward deadly, or hurtful things. Now that which gave this power, to the believers in Christ, was that very same, which gave to the first perfect man, a power of ruling over all the creatures of this world, and of living in full superiority and dominion over all that was, or could be hurtful, and deadly, in fire, or water, heat or cold, or any elementary things. So that Adam whilst standing in his first state of glory, and power, had the same reason to say of all that he was, and did, that which St. Paul
said, yet not I, but Christ that liveth in me.

And how the Doctor came to think of any other power, as the ability of man to rule over the creatures, is very strange, since the gospel has so plainly told him, that they only are the children of God, who are led by the Spirit of God. If therefore the first man, created in the image and likeness of God, may be supposed by his creation, to have been a child of God, then sure is it, that he had the Spirit of God, living and working in him. And that surely may be allowed to have been his true and his only qualification, to have and exercise a dominion over the rest of the creation.

The Doctor, in order to find out that image, and likeness of God in man, of which Moses writes, looks into the constitution of that two-legged animal, who is the disputer of the world. As likely to succeed, as if in order to find out that paradise,
of which Moses writes, he should search for it in the hundreds of Essex, or in the wilds of Kent.

For Moses, to prevent the folly of looking for the divine image in any thing, that is natural to the present state of man, has given us assurance, that this first man, created in the image of God, died the very day that he did eat of the forbidden tree. And that nothing of this divine man remained but terrors within, and such a figure of himself, as filled him with shame and confusion.

And a greater than Moses has told us, that man, in his present natural state, is so dead to that first divine glory, that he has no possibility of entering into the kingdom of God till he is born again from above. This sufficiently shews that he who will find out in what the image of God in man consisted, must as the apostle saith, walk by faith and not by sight.

The next text of Moses, which the Doctor miserably injures, is thus quoted by him, “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into him the breath of life, and man became a living soul; that is, say the objectors, had an immortal soul.”

Who the objectors are, I know not; but the truth of the text requires us to say, that therefore man had a divine and godlike soul, a true offspring of the divine nature. Because the breath or Spirit of the holy triune God, was that breath by which he was made a living soul. — And therefore the riches of this first life in man, were the riches of the divine nature manifesting itself in the soul.

But the Doctor will have it, that only an unlearned English reader, can collect any thing to be divine in the soul, from the words of Moses, as not knowing that what is translated a living soul, signifies, in the original, only a living animal. But this, every English reader may know to be a vain criticism; for no stress is laid upon the expression, a living soul, no more than if it had been said, a living animal. But the full proof of the divine greatness of the human soul, lies solely in this, that the breath or spirit of the holy Trinity was breathed into it, and was that which made it to be a living soul, and therefore the life that arose in it, was the life of God in the soul.

The Doctor thus comments upon the words of the text. “God, the great plastic artist, is here represented, as making and shaping out a figure of earth and clay, which he afterwards animates or inspires with life. He breathed into this statue the breath of life, and the lump of clay became a living creature.”

Had this elegant and most graphical description been only found in some minor poet, or school declamation, it might have been overlooked; but in a prose treatise of divinity, it ought not to pass uncensured. I know of nothing that can equal it, unless it be supposed that some ingenious anthropomorphite, reading these words, and the Lord God did unto Adam and Eve make coats of skins, and cloathed them; should thus describe the matter, “Here, God, the great artist, is represented, as having the skins of beasts before him, and with his divine hands, cutting, shaping and joining them together in forms of garments, fitted to the size and distinction of the first man and his wife.”

I may defy any one to shew, that this comment does not pay as great a regard to the letter, and do as much honour to the sense of this scripture, as the Doctor’s doth to the other text.

The sacred text, God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into him the breath of life, is a short and full declaration of a most important truth, namely, that man was brought into being, in a twofold nature, having the nature of this outward world, and the nature of heaven; the former signified by his being formed of the dust of the ground, the latter, by the breath of God breathed into him. To be formed out of the dust of the ground, is the same thing, as if it had been said, that he was formed out of all the riches, powers, and virtues that are in this whole visible world. For every property of nature is hidden in the earth. And man, so far as he was designed to be a creature of this outward world, is therefore said to be formed out of the earth, because the earth is not only the treasure-house of all that is in outward nature, but is the mother of all the three other elements. And as all things of this world, whether animate or inanimate, are from the earth as their mother, so in the earth is there every power and blessing of life, to sustain every thing that has its body from it; as appears by that fruitful power, which is continually giving forth itself in all kinds of vegetable food, fitted to the wants of every living creature.

* What therefore can it be called, but a most deplorable blindness in learned reason, to consider man as making his first entrance into paradise in no better a state than that of dust and clay, formed into a dead lumpish figure of a man, for this reason, because he was said to be formed out of the dust of the ground? Blindness indeed! when it is so evident, that even now, after the curse is in the earth, yet every thing, even the poorest weed that comes out of the dust of the ground, is in a much higher state, and enters into this world with a degree of life from its mother the earth. — Had the Doctor never seen, or heard of any other things formed out of the earth, but such as our potters, and dealers in clay can make out of it, there might have been some sort of excuse for his Adam of dead clay formed out of the earth. But when every day of his life has shewn him that almost infinite variety, powers, virtues and wonders in the kingdom of vegetables, all coming out of the earth, and nourished by it; when the scripture has told him that the beasts and cattle of all kinds were formed out of the earth, and their flesh and blood from it, and their daily sustenance from its fruitful womb: it is strange to a degree of astonishment, that he should hold, that out of this rich earth, when in its paradisical state, when man, the glory of the creation, was formed out of it, and God the former, nothing would come forth, but a dead lump of clay in the figure of a man.

Again, What a total disregard has the Doctor here shewn to the very letter of scripture? The text saith, God formed man out of the dust of the ground, nothing else is ascribed to God, as his work in this matter; but the Doctor adds quite another matter as the work of God, namely, shaping and forming lumpish clay into a dead figure of a man.

And then follows another fiction equally against the letter of scripture. For he says, that AFTERWARDS, God, breathed life into it. But in the scripture account, there is not a syllable of any first, or afterwards. — Two things are spoken of the birth of man, and as they cannot be spoken both at once, so one must come after the other in the relation of them. The scripture mentions them as two distinct things; and the reason of mentioning them thus distinctly, is not to teach us, they were done at two different times, the one first, and the other afterwards, but to give us the assurance, that man came into the world in a twofold nature, the one from the heavenly breath of God, and the other from this visible world.

But the union of these two natures in the formation of man, was owing to one, and the same operation of God. — There is no sooner, or later, in the beginning of the soul, and of the body: the beginning of one, is the beginning of the other.

To suppose that man was made a dead image, and afterwards had life breathed into it, is no better philosophy, than to suppose, that God first created the vegetable creature, and afterwards added a vegetable life to it; that he first created the globe of the sun, and afterwards added heat and light to it.

God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature. What a folly to suppose, that the creature, and its life, are two separate things, that the one came first, and the other afterwards? No better, than supposing, that a circle and its roundness, are two separate things, that first comes forth the figure, and afterwards its roundness.

But the general design of the D. L. is to establish this most horrible doctrine, that Moses designedly and industriously secreted from God’s chosen people, all thought of any eternal relation that they had with God; which is the same as saying, that he designedly suppressed the one only possible foundation of true religion. For the immortality of the human nature, is the only ground of homage and regard to an invisible and eternal God. And unless man was by nature essentially related to God, and the eternal world, it would have been as unreasonable for the God of the eternal world to call man to an heavenly adoration of him, as to bid earthly flesh and blood be, and do that which angels are, and do in heaven. Therefore the first notice from an eternal God, given to man of a religious homage due to him, and the bare capacity of man to embrace such notice, is the greatest proofs that man has something of the eternal God in him. For as nothing can hunger, but that which by nature both wants and has a capacity to eat; so nothing can receive a religion relating to the eternal God, but that which has within itself, both a want and capacity to partake of the eternal world. And had not man an eternal spirit in him, as an offspring of the eternal God, he could no more want to have any intercourse with the eternal world, than a fish can want to be out of the water. Nor could any taught adoration of the one eternal God enter any further into his heart, or be of more use to him, than so much religion taught to a parrot. For man being, or believing himself to be, as merely a creature of this world, as the parrot is, could no more regard any thing, but what his earthly nature has a fondness for, than the parrot doth. Let us eat and drink for to-morrow we die, would be the highest and truest philosophy, if there is no more of a divine life, or heavenly nature in man, than in the chattering sparrow. In this case, worldly craft, whether in a fox or a man, is the highest use of its natural powers. For if the earthly life is equally the all of both, earthly wisdom must be equally the perfection of them both. For it can no more be the duty of an earthly creature to be heavenly minded, than of a celestial creature to be carnally minded.

If therefore the Israelites under Moses, were by him directed to consider themselves merely as creatures of this world, having nothing to enjoy, or hope for, but the good things of this life, it must be said he did all that well could be done, to make them an earthly, covetous, rapacious, stiff-necked and brutal people. And all the complaints which the prophets have brought against them, on that account, ought to have been made only against Moses himself, and the religion that was set up by him. For a religion only offering, and wholly confining people to earthly enjoyments, may surely be said, not only to make, but even require them to be wholly sensual and earthly minded. And every hearty believer of such a religion, is by his very faith called upon, to make the most that he can, of the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.

* Moses saith, “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord; and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength.” Now these Israelites looking backwards to God’s covenant of redemption, made with their forefathers, of which they were the undoubted heirs; and forwards to this new covenant of a new theocracy, added, as God’s peculiar mercy to them in this life, to keep them to himself, to support them under their afflictions, and to arm them with patience in waiting for that eternal redemption, in the faith of which, their ancestors had died so full of joy and comfort: in this double view of their state under God, which Moses had so fully set before them, and with the strongest injunctions to be daily teaching them to their children, they had the highest reason to rejoice in God, and to love him with all their heart and soul and strength.

But to suppose that Moses, designedly secreting from them, the knowledge of that eternal relation they had to God, on which the hopes of their forefathers were founded, and on which he himself was made able to chuse the afflictions of Christ, has something very shocking in it. For if Moses was so good a man, because he had faith in the eternal redemption promised from the beginning, can there be more cruelty, than in supposing him, designing by his religious system, wholly to obliterate all thought and remembrance of God’s unchangeable covenant of life, and extinguish all sense and hope of a redemption to come? To what purpose is it to say to such a people, shut up in earthly hopes, “Thou shalt love the one God of heaven with all thy heart?” For if he had succeeded in his design, fixed them in the belief, that they had no treasure but in this world, we have Christ’s word for it, that the affections of their hearts could go no where else, saying, as an eternal truth, that where our treasure is, there must be the heart also. So that in this case, no love of God, and therefore no other divine virtue, could have any place in those who conformed to the design of Moses.

The Doctor, with some indignation, tries to evade this unavoidable consequence. “The true foundation of morality is the will of God. But is not the distinction between right and wrong, perpetually enforced by the law of Moses on this principle? This then is the spring of all virtue, and to give it the greatest efficacy, the love and fear of God is there incessantly inculcated. But how does a long or short existence, a life here, or elsewhere, affect at all the practice of virtue so founded?”¹

¹ D. L. page 587.

All this is quite beside the point, and leaves the Jews under the same incapacity of every divine virtue, as has been above asserted. For a short or long existence, is here never thought of, as a reason, why we should, or should not be morally good. For duration, considered in itself, whether short or long, is only a natural consequence of that kind of life, which the creature hath. For, such as is its internal nature, such is the good, and evil that belongs to it, without any regard to its longer or shorter duration.

Now it is the internal nature of man, not considered as short, but as wholly earthly, and created for only earthly goods, that is the reason, why such a kind of life is incapable of any divine virtue, and cannot possibly have any other love, affections or tempers, but such as are confined to this world: and also, why every kind of envy, greediness, craft, and contrivance how to get the most of every earthly thing, must govern every man, that has only the earthly nature in him, as unavoidably, as they govern birds, and beasts. And to tell such a people of a goodness, to which their earthly nature does not lead them, as it leads every other animal to that which it likes, is as vain, as to preach to the sparks, not to fly upwards. Nor can a nature, wholly earthly, any more sin by coveting only earthly things, than the lion sins, by having all his heart set upon his prey.

But the Doctor has a maxim, by which he proves, that the Jews, though wholly confined to earthly hopes, and enjoyments, yet might and ought to have been heavenly minded, namely, because the true foundation of morality, is the will of God. And yet this very maxim is itself a sufficient proof, than an earthly people, created only for earthly goods, are by the very will of God, directed to be earthly minded. For the will of God, in every creature, is manifested by that kind of nature, which it hath only from God. Therefore earthly creatures, by being earthly minded, pay as full obedience to the will of God, as pure heavenly spirits by their being heavenly minded. Therefore if man is only an animal of this world, by the will of God, distinguished only from other creatures, by superior skill, subtlety, and contrivances, (as they are from one another) he neither is, nor can be, under any other law, relating to his good and evil, but that which is the law of all other animals, that have all their good and evil from this world. And as it is as good in the wolf, to be ravening, as in the lamb to be harmless, because they both follow their created nature; so if man is as merely a creature of this world, as they are, when he, by his superior subtlety, in order to make the most of his worldly life, either feigns the innocence of the lamb, or puts on the ravening wolf, he follows his nature, as they do theirs, and is just as good and as bad as they are. And to tell such a man of the beauty of holiness, or call him to the denial of his own will, for this reason, because the true foundation of virtue, is the will of God, would be to as much purpose, as if you was only to require him never to sleep any more, because holy angels never sleep in heaven. For what can a creature that can have no good, all its life, but that which is like the good of milk and honey, have to do with any divine virtue? — If therefore Moses designedly, fixed the Israelites in a belief, that they had no good to hope for, but that which flesh and blood could find in earthly things, they were by him taken out of the sphere of every virtue, that can be called godly or divine, and could have no fear of God, but like that, which they might have towards him, or the giants, nor any love of God, but that which they had to their bellies.

Farther, that the Doctor has not entered into any right conception of the subject, he is upon, is plain from his asking, “But how does a short or long existence, a life here, or elsewhere, at all affect the practice of virtue so founded?” — It just so much affects it, as place, or space affects the existence of bodies. They are not brought forth by place or space, but they could have no existence but in place or space. And thus it is, that duration affects the practice of all divine virtue, it could have no possibility of existence, but in a nature incapable of dying. — Corruptibility, and divine goodness, are as impossible to be united, as life and death. — Death may as well exert the functions of life, as a mortal creature breathe heavenly tempers and affections. For though the duration of the creature is not the ground, or reason of any divine virtue, yet no creature can be capable of it, but that, which by the divinity of its birth, is born immortal.

What an inconsistency, to say of a creature of a short existence, or whose life is vanishing away, that its true father is in heaven, and that it ought therefore “to be perfect as its heavenly Father is perfect?” Can that which is daily tending to non-existence, be daily growing up in the perfection of God, or that which is always approaching towards death, be a child of the ever-living God? As well might it be said of the mushroom, that it has the angels in heaven for its brethren, as of man, beginning to exist to-day, and ending his existence to-morrow, that he is a child of his everlasting Father in heaven.

There are some other egregious errors which I intended to have remarked, but I am already got beyond the proper bounds of a letter. — But holy David’s case, I cannot but mention, as sufficient to have deterred the Doctor from an hypothesis, which has obliged him to place this sweet finger of Israel amongst those, who had not the least thought of any eternal relation to God. This holy David, the type of Christ, “who knew that God had sworn with an oath, that out of the fruit of his loins, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne:” this great prophet, who foretold the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither did his flesh see corruption; this David, thus deep in the counsels of God, and acquainted with the great article of the resurrection, this spiritual, typical, prophesying David, is, for the sake of the Doctor’s project, crowded amongst those, who were not allowed to have any other relation to God, or any thing else to hope from him, or thank him for, but the blessings of a temporal life, till death had put the same end, to all of David, as it did to those few sheep, that he once kept. And what is still worse, the same David is made the most zealous preacher of the folly of fearing, or hoping for any thing after death: and is appealed to by the Doctor, and his assistant, as giving the most full evidence against all happiness, but that of this life, and represented in his divine transports, as setting forth the wisdom of believing that the life of man ends like that of rotten sheep, in a death that brings him into the dark land of forgetfulness; singing gloriously, “the dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence. In death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave, who shall give thee thanks?”

Thus it is, that David, by these gentlemen is made a preacher against a future state; not considering that such infidelity would have been worse in David than it possibly can be in any modern infidel. But the truth is, the holy prophet in all passages of this kind, is only calling upon God for the continuance and full manifestation of the blessings of that temporal theocracy, which could only be given by God, or received by man whilst he was on this side death. And the darkness, silence, or insensibility affirmed of death, has no relation to a total end of life and sensibility, but solely to an end of all enjoyment, of the blessings promised by the divine theocracy. David, as son of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, had their faith and piety, and such his psalms are full of heavenly devotion, and flaming with divine love. But David, as a son of the covenant made with Moses, was also an heir of the temporal blessings of the theocracy; and in this capacity, had a right to say, Why do the wicked prosper? Wilt thou shew thy wonders in the grave? That is, canst thou give thy promised temporal blessings, when death has taken away all possibility of receiving them?

But if it could be supposed, that David by the foregoing expressions, meant to give up the promises of eternal redemption made to all his forefathers, and called the world to look for no more but what they could get in this vale of misery; what excuse can be made for the Christian church, which from first to last, has made such heathenish songs a part of the gospel service? For in this case, these psalms may be justly esteemed prophane, as having a more direct tendency to beget and fix infidelity in the hearts of men, than the hymns of the Heathen poets.

I must yet add a word, upon the Doctor’s most theological account of man’s first ability to speak articulate words.

“In judging, says he, only from the nature of things, one should be apt to embrace the opinion of Diodorus Siculus, that first the men lived for some time in woods and caves, after the manner of beasts, uttering only confused sounds.”¹ And yet it is hardly possible for a man to make a judgment more contrary to the nature of things. For does not the nature of almost all animals, beasts and birds shew us, that they have a natural untaught language, not consisting of confused sounds, but distinct by an articulate difference and intelligible to every one of the same species? If therefore the nature of things will allow us to suppose, that man was created as perfect in his kind as the animals were in theirs, then it will oblige us to affirm, that the first of mankind had from nature, an untaught language, as suitable to the ends of their creation, as distinct and intelligible to themselves, as that of birds or beasts is to them in their several kinds. Now it must not be said that the Doctor has adopted the whole opinion of Diodorus, tho’ so highly (as he thinks) conformable to the nature of things; for he has given up that of man’s living in woods and caves, and has only chosen to stand by that which is much the worst part of it, namely, his natural inability to utter any thing but confused sounds. — However, to make amends for all this poverty of speech, in which man was brought forth by God; the Doctor has a conjecture, how it soon came to be better with him. In scripture, says he, “we find that God taught the first man religion, and can we think he would not at the same time teach him language? Again, when God created man he made woman for his companion, but the only means of enjoying that benefit was the use of speech. Can we believe that he would leave them to get out of the forlorn condition of brutality as they could?”² — Shocking and even blasphemous words! For little short can it be of that, to say, that man, created in the image and likeness of God, was created in a forlorn condition of brutality? Can any infidel more despise and ridicule all that is said both in the Old and New Testament, concerning man’s creation, his high birth and destination, his fall and redemption, than is here done?

¹ D. L. Vol. II. page 81.

² D. L. ibid.

In the scripture we are told, that man in the first, perfect state of his creation, came forth a living image and likeness of the all-perfect God; that he came forth in this exalted state of perfection, above all other animals of this world, in order to be a lord and ruler over them. Can there be a more open ridicule made of all this, than to hold, that this first glorious image of God came forth in a forlorn brutal condition, unable to utter any thing, but confused sounds? Or what can be more unbecoming a Christian Doctor, than to espouse such a paltry notion from the authority of a pagan Greek, in full contradiction to all that Moses, Christ and his apostles have said of the first heavenly nature, divine birth and glorious prerogative of man? What a mockery is here made of the whole Christian system, which supposes man to have fallen from such a high degree of heavenly union with God, that nothing less than the birth of the Son of God in fallen man, could restore him to that perfection which he had at first? What a folly to talk of the fall of man, if he came out of the hands of God in a forlorn condition of brutality?

But the Doctor comes now to his full proof, that man had at first no articulate speech, and that he was actually taught it afterwards by God; “God brought every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air unto Adam, to see what he would call them.”

And yet, so unlucky is the Doctor, that no words can give a higher proof, that Adam had not only an articulate speech, but in such a degree of perfection, as none of his natural sons, not the whole tribe of linguists, critics, and grammarians, ever had, or can possibly have. For if it could be supposed, that any man was a hundred times more knowing than the Doctor is, in what he calls his enigmatic, curiologic, hierogliphic, emblematic, symbolic profundities, yet if all the beasts of the field, and all the fowls of the air, were to be brought before him to be distinguished from one another, by articulate sounds of his voice, even such a man would be as unequal to the task, as a Tom Thumb. And of all the absurdities, that ever were heard of, surely none can equal that, of supposing, that Adam had not articulate speech, but had it to learn at a time, when he was called to the exercise of the highest perfection of language, namely, to distinguish such an infinite number of creatures, by different articulate sounds of his voice. It is like supposing, that a man whose eyes had no natural power of distinguishing one thing from another, should on that account, have all the creatures in the world, brought before him, that he might describe every difference in form, and figure, that belonged to them.

The Doctor has by strength of genius, and great industry, amassed together no small heap of learned decisions of points, doctrines, as well Heathenish, as Christian, much the greatest part of which, the Christian reader will find himself obliged to drive out of his thoughts, as soon as he can in good earnest say, What must I do to be saved? — This collection of decisions, he calls his projected defence of Christianity, which if it was such, Christianity must have been but poorly provided for its support by the four gospels. I shall make no doubt of his intending, what he says by them. But a project in defence of Christianity, is not more promising, than a trap to catch humility. The nature of things allows no more of the one, than of the other. To be a defender of Christianity, is to be a defender of Christ, but none can defend him in any other degree, than so far as he is his follower. To be with Christ, is to walk as he walked, and he that is not so with him, is against him.

There are two ways of embracing Christianity, the one is as a sinner, the other as a scholar; the former is the way taught by Christ and his apostles, the latter is the invention of men, fallen from the Christian life under the power of natural reason, and verbal learning. — Now these two ways are not to be considered, as only the one better than the other, but in such a difference, as right and wrong, true and false, bear to one another. For there is no possibility of taking one step in Christianity, but as a sinner, for it has no errand but to the sinner, has no relief but for sin, and nothing can receive it, but the heart wounded, and wearied with the burden of its own sin. All the gospel is but a foreign tale, a dead letter to the most logically learned man in the world, who does not feel in the depth of his soul, that all the reasonableness, and excellency of gospel truth, lies in that fund of sin, impurity, and corrupt tempers, which are inseparable from him, till he is born again. And if the Doctor, in his application to the Deists, had pressed home this affecting truth, which stands at the door of every man’s heart, and is the only ground of Christian redemption, he had shewn a better care and concern for their souls, and had done more to awaken them out of their infidelity, than by all that wit and satyr in his dedication of his book to them. For like begets like; love and seriousness in the speaker, beget love and seriousness in the hearer; and he that has no earnestness towards unbelievers, but that of perswading them not to lose their share of the love and mercy of God in Christ Jesus, towards helpless fallen men, can only do it, in the spirit and language of that love and goodness, in whose arms, he longs to see them embraced.

But as no man ever came to Christ, but because he was weary, and heavy laden with the burden of his own natural disorder, and wanted rest to his soul, so nothing can help men to find the necessity of coming to Christ, but that which helps him to find and feel a misery of sin and corruption, which in some, the care and pleasures of this life, and in others the happiness of finding themselves wits, and polite scholars, never suffered them to feel before.

Our Lord’s parable of the prodigal son, contains the whole matter between God and fallen man. It relates nothing particular to this, or that person, but sets forth the strict truth of every man’s state, with regard to his heavenly Father. For every son of Adam has every thing in him, that is said of that prodigal; he has lost his first state, is wandered as far from his heavenly Father and country, has abused and wasted his Father’s blessings, and is that very poor swineherd, craving husks in a land of famine, instead of living in the glory of his Father’s family; and of every reader of that parable, it may be justly said, Thou art the man. And no son of Adam, do what he will, can possibly come out of the poverty, shame, and misery of his fallen state, ♦till he finds and feels, and confesses from the bottom of his heart, all that which the penitent prodigal found, felt and confessed.

I should have had much uneasiness, my Lord, in exposing so many gross errors both in the matter, and manner of the Doctor’s books, did not my heart bear me witness, that no want of good-will, or due respect towards him, but solely a regard to that which ought only to be regarded, has directed my pen.

The End of the Sixth Volume.