I HAVE neither leisure nor abilities to undertake a regular definition of the Law of Nature, with all the doctrines usually ranked under that head: and indeed, if I had both leisure and abili­ties, I should want inclination; because such a work would unavoidably become voluminous, on account of the variety of authors necessary to be mentioned, who have treated the subject with dif­ferent views: and as all science is vain, which is not reduced to practice, so the more voluminous any subject is ren­dered, [Page 2] the less it can be useful, on ac­count of the increased difficulty of com­municating it to the generality of read­ers. I have therefore confined my tract to such general remarks on the subject, as are most necessary for the observation of my countrymen at large, with respect (more particularly) to one point, viz. the Illegality of reducing or subjecting man­kind to involuntary servitude, either under political or private dominion: as all pre­tensions to an unlimited authority of any man or men over others, are con­trary to Natural Equity and the Laws of God, as well as baneful to mankind in general; which effect is unhappily de­monstrated by the numberless instances of unnatural oppression now prevailing to the destruction of mankind, in almost every part of the world. I have already shewn in my answer ⁽¹⁾ to the Reverend [Page 3] Mr. Thompson (an advocate for the African slave trade) that the Jewish con­stitutions were not strictly consistent with the Law of Nature in all points; and, consequently, that they are not to be considered as the rule by which law­yers and casuists may safely determine "what is, or what is not, according to Nature."

The Law of Nature has been variously represented; but all the best writers, both ancient and modern, agree in adopt­ing that maxim of the Civil Insti­tutes ⁽²⁾, which declares involuntary ser­vitude, [Page 4] or slavery, to be "contrary to the Law of Nature:" this rule is commonly understood as applicable only to domestic slavery; but it is equally true when ap­plied to political oppression, or the exer­cise of an unlimited dominion over a whole nation. Some few authors indeed have been so unreasonable, as to assert that "there is no such thing as natural Law;" but they are properly censured by the learned Baron Puffendorf, in his "Law of Nature and Nations." Book 2. Chap. 3.

[Page 5]He particularly mentions the argu­ment of Carniades as contracted by Lac­tantius to the following effect.

"That men first instituted Laws to secure and promote their own advantage, &c. but that there was no such thing as Natural Law in the world," &c. p. 104.

Such doctrine is certainly very con­venient for Tyrants and Slaveholders of every degree, who must otherwise re­main without excuse, whenever "the Law of Nature," and "the Common Rights of Humanity," are urged against them: it is therefore necessary for them, either to misrepresent the Law of Nature (as the Reverend Mr. Thompson has done), or else (like Carniades) utterly to deny its existence. This latter method has been also adopted by some modern advocates for Slavery, who, in private discourse on this subject, have declared, that they esteem "the Law of Nature" [Page 6] to be no other than their natural pro­pensity to pursue their own heart's desire of profit or pleasure: and this they call "natural Liberty;" though it certainly is the most unnatural Tyranny: for when the immutable necessity of reciprocal con­sideration is forgot, or set aside, there can be no safety among men, and con­sequently no natural Liberty: we must, therefore, submit ourselves to be the ser­vants of law, in order to be truly free; according to the excellent observation of Cicero. "Legum denique idcirco om­nes Servi sumus, ut liberi esse possumus." Tom. 2. p. 208. ⁽³⁾. We may learn from the histories of all nations, that Lust, Ava­rice, Pride, Revenge, Love of Power, Jea­lousy, &c. are Principles of Action, which unavoidably produce oppression and wrongs, to the destruction of the human species, in all places where will and pleasure (whether in political or private domi­nion) [Page 7] are supreme; or whenever Self-love and Private Interest become entirely predominant among men. That Self-love is predominant with the generality of mankind is but too apparent; yet we are not, therefore, obliged to admit that "Self-love" is "the universal principle of action;" though an eminent and learn­ed law-writer has (with very good in­tentions, as his argument proves) thought proper to give it that title.

"Honesty (indeed) is the best policy," even for a selfish man to pursue; and, it is certain, that the solid attainments of virtue and justice afford a real and sub­stantial satisfaction, which in the end, most amply fulfils the purposes of Self-love.

But though Virtue and Honesty are thus favourable to Self-love in their natural effects, yet this, by no means, proves that [Page 8] Self-love is the motive of all virtuous and honest men; or that it is the "universal principle of action:" for, if that were really the case, many of the most amiable virtues must be esteemed mere empty names. There could be no true Gene­rosity or Benevolence; no Disinterested Goodness of heart; no sincere Natural Affection between parents and their chil­dren, husbands and their wives, brethren, friends, &c. whereas history affords many undoubted instances of Self-love being lost in the superior affections, natural to generous minds, in all these different de­grees of connection; but it is needless to recite them, since, even in the brute creation there are natural ⁽³⁾ affections superior to Self-love.

[Page 9]The common hen is so inflamed with Natural Affection, and anxious care for her tender brood, that she seems to have as little sense of Self-love in time of danger, as of her own weakness; for she will boldly fly in the face of every invader (except man) however superior in size or strength to herself.

The timorous cow, it is said, will attack the fiercest tyger, when her calf is by her side. Many instances of very extraordinary Affection in dogs to their masters have been well attested. Those faithful animals have sometimes been known to lose all sense of danger to themselves in the necessary defence of their owners. And the very swine dis­cover such a Natural Affection and real sympathy for their brethren of the sty, [Page 10] whenever they hear their cries of distress, that their example ought to shame the depraved part of mankind (imperial ty­rants and royal robbers, who extend their dominion by breach of faith, un­lawful invasion, murder and rapine, as also those petty tyrants and destroyers of mankind the African traders, and Ame­rican slaveholders) lest the affectionate brute, notwithstanding his sensuality, should seem, on comparison, a more ge­nerous, and therefore a more noble animal than that Man, who stifles all Natural Affection, Fellow-feeling, and Charity to his kind, merely for the sake of acquiring power, or worldly profit to himself; and surely a time will come, when all such offenders against the Law of Nature (who prefer the wages of unrighteous­ness to the natural dictates of Humanity and Conscience) will have reason to esteem the lot of the most contemptible brute infinitely more eligible than their own!

[Page 11]Now, as it appears that "Self-love" is not the "universal Principle of Action" even in brutes, much less ought it to be esteemed so in mankind, because the human soul (besides the Natural Affection which men ought to have in common with other creatures) is endowed with a much more noble principle, or motive to good actions, I mean Reason, or that "Knowledge of good and evil," which we inherit from our first parents, and which they unlawfully took upon themselves, at the instigation of their spiritual enemy, that they might thereby be rendered accountable for all their actions, and, through Knowledge ⁽⁴⁾, become guilty before God!

The history of that fatal transaction demands our most careful consideration, since all mankind are particularly affected [Page 12] by it! And surely the principles of our own Nature are subjects of enquiry infi­nitely more important to us, than all the other branches of natural Philosophy; and yet perhaps they are less examined by men of science, and consequently are less understood, than any other! but in vain is the most accurate knowledge of plants, drugs, fossils, and minerals; or of the exact revolutions of the heavenly bodies, and of the nature and properties of all the elements, &c. if the philoso­pher is unacquainted with himself ⁽⁵⁾, and the properties and state of his own soul, which is too often the case! Knowledge, in all the former particulars, is indeed honourable and praise-worthy, but, in the latter, it is indispensable; for when men, through ignorance of the compouna Nature of man, slight the common means, [Page 13] which God has revealed, to guard their minds against intellectual deceptions, they are sure to be perverted in their princi­ples, to the imminent danger both of body and soul! Such an one, probably, thinks himself too judicious a critic to admit the Mosaic account of the subject now before us, viz. the Fall of Man; at least in the literal sense of the text: so that the doctrines, which I propose to collect from it, will have very little weight, I fear, with men of that stamp. Never­theless, as there are many doctrines in other parts of Scripture, which corro­borate the literal meaning of that rela­tion, and as there are also several cir­cumstances discoverable in the Nature of Man, which cannot otherwise be rea­sonably accounted for, I must beg my readers to excuse me, even if they think me too prolix in my examination of that part of the sacred history, which I con­ceive to be absolutely necessary for the [Page 14] obtaining a true practical idea of the Law of Nature, and the Principles of Action in Man.

God delivered a clear and express Law to Man before the fall;— ‘but of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, thou shalt not eat of it:’ and then fol­lows the denunciation of punishment;— ‘for in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely DIE. Gen. ii. 17.’

This was the first and only penal Law; A FORFEITURE OF LIFE! And though we find afterwards, that the declared punishment was not immediately exe­cuted according to the letter (that is, the penalty of death was not inflicted on the day of the transgression, as it seemed to be at first ordained) yet this affords no just exception against the truth and pro­priety of the relation.

[Page 15]The same ALMIGHTY BEING, who had a right (as all things are his own) to prohibit the action above-mentioned, and to assign a punishment for disobe­dience, had certainly a right also to re­spite, or postpone, or even to remit (if he had been pleased to do so) the exe­cution of the Law which he himself had ordained. But for the present it is sufficient to remark, that the nature of the penalty had been clearly revealed to our first parents, and was as clearly un­derstood by them, so that they were sufficiently sensible of their obligation to observe the said Law, previous to their breach of it: which plainly appears by the speech of the woman to the tempter, viz. ‘But of the fruit of the tree in the midst of the garden, GOD hath said, ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.’

[Page 16]After so clear an acknowledgment of the divine precept, the act of taking the fruit (which otherwise in itself would, probably, have been no crime) was cer­tainly a wilful sin of a very heinous na­ture, being a gross contempt of God's word, for which our first parents very justly incurred the penalty of death, which, they were previously told, must be the consequence of disobedience.

They had received this caution even from God himself, whom they knew to be their Maker and Supreme Lord; and yet the unwary woman unhappily listened to an assertion, that was absolutely contra­dictory to her Creator's word, and there­by drew upon herself, and all her de­scendants, the irrevocable doom to la­bour!—pain!—and mortality!

Perhaps the haughty philosopher will now be ready to arraign the justice of [Page 17] the divine decree, which involved the innocent progeny (that is, innocent with respect to this particular crime) in the punishment of their guilty parents; but if he will patiently follow me through this examination of Human Na­ture, he will, perhaps, be able to form a better idea of the Nature of original Sin, and of the cause of its being in­tailed (or rather the effects of its being intailed) on all the descendants of Adam. For the immediate effect of that original Sin of our first parents, was the acqui­sition of an additional faculty (even of a divine attribute) to the Nature of Man, which of course descends from these original stocks by natural inheritance to all their progeny, and thereby inevitably involves them all in the same condem­nation; the manner of which shall be more particularly explained hereafter. This very ancient example of punish­ment for a contempt of God's word (the [Page 18] direful effects of which, labour, pain, and mortality, are ever before us) should teach mankind the extreme danger of paying attention to any doctrines and interpretations of Law or Religion, that have the least tendency to oppose or con­tradict the literal or most obvious mean­ing of God's word; for the efforts of our spiritual Enemy are never more bane­ful, than when he is pleased to assume the office of a commentator on the Laws of God; in which character he is fre­quently discoverable; for though he does not now present himself outwardly or ap­parently, as at first, in the assumed shape of a serpent, yet the venom of his doctrines is too often sufficiently distinguishable, both in the writings and discourses of men! And it is remarkable, that his first attempt against mankind should be in the capacity of a critick on the Divine Law! The influence of spiritual enemies is indeed a distinct Principle of Action in [Page 19] Man, which shall be more particularly mentioned in the course of this Tract.

But to return to the first fatal in­stance, before-mentioned, of Satan's suc­cess, in misleading mankind, which oc­casioned another distinct Principle of Action in Man.

It appears that the Tempter was well well acquainted with the true nature and effects of the forbidden fruit, which he declared, indeed, but not without utter­ing, at the same time, a notorious false­hood. ‘Ye shall not surely die (said he) for God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof’ (viz. of the fruit taken from the tree of knowledge) ‘then your eyes shall be opened: and ye shall be as gods, knowing Good and Evil. Gen. iii. 4, 5.’

[Page 20]Now this acquisition of Knowledge, which the Tempter promised, was really such as he represented it, viz. a Divine Attribute ("Ye shall become as gods, knowing Good and Evil;" so that, in this one respect, indeed, his intelligence was true: for the inspired historian has re­corded also the words of God himself to the same effect:— ‘And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become AS ONE OF US, to know Good and Evil. (Chap. iii. 22.)’ But truth is much more deceitful and dangerous, even than falsehood itself, when, for the purpose of misleading, it is maliciously blended with the latter; for notwithstanding the Deceiver's flattering assurance to our first parents, that they should "not die;" yet in the very day (as it seems) of their transgression, they heard the tremendous sentence of misery and death pronounced against them! and though it was not then finally executed, as they had reason [Page 21] to expect it would, according to the tenor of the Law before declared, on which the judgment was founded, (for God never judges men without Law, like the arbitrary princes of this world) yet the said Law, by which their lives were expressly forfeited, was sufficiently ful­filled by the condemnation of the trans­gressors (on the very day of their offence) to mortality; whereby their once immor­tal bodies were rendered continually liable to diseases, injuries, misery, and death, as the bodies of all their descen­dants have ever since been! and they were no longer entitled even to the food necessary for the support of their poor mortal bodies, without severe labour, care, and assiduity! — ‘Cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow ⁽⁶⁾ [Page 22] shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee: and thou shalt eat the herb of the field.—In the sweat of thy face’ (said God to his guilty creature man) ‘shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground: for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return. (Gen. iii. 17, to 19.)’

These have ever since been the condi­tions of human life; and though some men, who have store of worldly goods, endeavour to cast away care, and seem to [Page 23] live in a state of opposition to this gene­ral rule, yet they only deceive them­selves; for no descendant of Adam, be he ever so rich, has any right to eat the bread of idleness; nor can he do so with­out offence against his own soul, as well as against this universal ordinance of God.—If Providence has afforded him wealth and leisure, he is accountable for both; being only a steward for life; after which, the performance of his duty to God, to his country, to his neighbours, nay, to mankind in general, his brethren of the universe, will be strictly scruti­nized, and punished in proportion to the degree of his wilful neglect and disobe­dience; since nothing is more clearly revealed, than that all mankind lie under an indispensable obligation to improve their talents for all these duties, as well as to use them whenever there is an op­portunity; so that the man who neg­lects to employ, in these services, a due [Page 24] portion of that leisure, which his rank, or situation in life affords him, may justly be said to mispend his Master's time, for it is not his own: and such an one must inevitably suffer with the "unprofitable servant," described in the Gospel, who neglected to improve his talent;— ‘Cast ye the unprofitable ser­vant into outer darkness!—There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Matt. xxv. 30.’ See the whole parable from the 14th verse, whereby it plainly appears, that mankind are laid under an indispensable necessity to im­prove their respective natural talents, to the best of their power, for their Lord's service.

The affluence, and unemployed leisure, therefore, of many persons, whom we daily see amongst us, afford no just ex­ception to God's general ordinance con­cerning the hard conditions of human [Page 25] life. It is almost too obvious to be mentioned, that riches and hereditary honours procure no exemption from the most material part of that sentence, viz. "to dust thou shalt return!" And that the time and manner of that returning to the dust, or to the ground, is equally unknown to the rich and to the poor, though to both equally certain: so that no man, not the greatest or most inde­pendent, can claim even a single day before-hand as his own: ‘I will say to my soul’ (saith the rich man in the pa­rable) ‘Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years: take thine ease, eat, drink and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, THIS NIGHT THY SOUL SHALL BE REQUIRED OF THEE; then whose shall those things be which thou hast provided? Luke xii. 19, 20.’ Wherefore, with respect also to the other part of the punishment for the original sin (viz. the doom to labour) let those [Page 26] men, who think themselves exempted, by their rank and fortunes, from the necessity of employment; who think they have a right to spend their time, as well as their money, just as they please, for their own amusement and mere self-sa­tisfaction; and seem to enjoy leisure and ease, as if God's general ordinance to all mankind had been partial, or of none effect! Let such men, I say, be reminded of the alarming dreadful sentence pro­nounced by "the Lord of the vineyard" in the parable. ‘Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig-tree, and find none: cut it down, why cumbereth it the ground ⁽⁷⁾?’ How ab­surd therefore is the pride of those men, who value themselves on account of ter­ritorial authority (whether publick or private) and yet live as if the importance, which they assume in right of landed pos­sessions, or hereditary rank in life, might of [Page 27] itself be esteemed a sufficient merit with­out the cultivation of any other! But let them remember, that there is a ‘Lord of the vineyard ⁽⁸⁾,’ to whom all things belong ⁽⁹⁾, and to whom a strict account must be rendered of every trust ⁽¹⁰⁾, and of every possession, whether of lands, or of governments: so that the dominions and estates of all temporal lords and land­owners (be their right of tenure ever so unexceptionable among men) are yet so far from being their own, that even they themselves, whenever they acquire a habit of mispending their time and wealth, [Page 28] are justly esteemed as INCUMBRANCES upon that very ground, in which all their imaginary consequence is planted! Now, shall we envy the rich man's enjoyment of unemployed leisure, if this be the con­sequence? Far better had it been for such a person to have endured, with the meanest labourer, the common lot of man, and in the sweat of his face to have eat his bread ⁽¹¹⁾, than thus to have lived an unworthy exception to the gene­ral decree, thereby rendering himself in the sight of God, as one that ‘cumbereth the ground!’ It would be well for mankind, if the consideration of this sen­tence might be esteemed also a general Principle of Action; but, alas! we are all too apt to mispend our time in some degree; yet it is a failing to which the rich are more particularly liable. They are not compelled by necessity, like other men, to think for themselves; and [Page 29] from thence a fatal, inconsiderate notion is too apt to prevail among them, viz. that their time is their own; and there­fore, as they presume upon a supposed right to spend their leisure, according to their own Will and Pleasure, they neces­sarily mispend their substance also, for which they are equally accountable; and as riches are also the ordinary means of procuring the sweets and enjoyments of life, they are, consequently, a continual source of temptation, as well to acquire them unjustly, as to expend them impro­perly. From hence, probably, arises the extreme danger of riches to the spiritual welfare of mankind! ‘Verily I say unto you (said our Lord) that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, then for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of GOD, Matth. xix. 23, 24.’ ‘Go [Page 30] to now, ye rich men,—weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you! James v. 1.’— ‘Son, remem­ber that thou in thy life-time re­ceivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. Luke xvi. 25.’ It is, nevertheless, through the additional faculty before-mentioned, which human nature acquired by the transgression of our first parents (viz. the Knowledge of Good and Evil) that Sin is imputed to us, whether we be rich or poor.

Our spiritual Enemy envied the hap­piness of mankind in their original state; and, therefore, artfully led them to the criminal usurpation of forbidden Know­ledge, that they might, thereby, be ren­dered accountable to THE ETERNAL JUDGE for all their thoughts, words, and actions; and, through Knowledge, be­come [Page 31] guilty before GOD, and continually subject to Sin and Death! For this divine Knowledge obliges us (howsoever we act) to approve, at least, of virtuous actions, and to condemn vice; so that, when men transgress, it is, for the most part, knowingly, or wilfully: and as ‘the strength of Sin is the Law ⁽¹²⁾,’ so the guilt of every criminal action is with justice imputed to us, because we have wilfully offended against this natural Light, or LAW in our hearts, by which we ought to have known how ‘to re­fuse the evil, and chuse the good. Isa. vii. 15.’

The Gentiles, without the knowledge of Scripture, nevertheless acknowledged this principle. "Law" (according to Cicero) ‘is a supreme Reason planted in [Page 32] nature, which commands what ought to be done, and prohibits the contrary;" and he affirms, that "the same Reason, when it is established and perfected in the mind of man, is Law.’

"Lex" (says he, in his first Book de Legibus) ‘est Ratio summa, insita in Na­turâ, quae jubet ea quae facienda sunt, prohibetque contraria. Eadem Ratio, cum est in hominis mente confirmata et confecta, Lex est. See Tom. 4. of his Works, p. 219.’ ⁽¹³⁾.

Here the enlightened Heathen writer plainly acknowledges the Principle as natural to Mankind (— ‘Ratio summa, insita in Naturâ’) and yet esteemed it, at the same time, a divine Attribute, by some means imparted from GOD (— ‘recta, et a numine Deorum tracta Ratio’) though he might probably be [Page 33] unacquainted with the occasion of its being engraffed in Human Nature. He mentions this Attribute again, in his second Book de Natura Deorum, where he speaks of Prudence, or the choice of Good, and rejection of Evil, ‘as a univer­sal Law common to God and Man.’

‘Sequitur ut eadem sit in his, quae in genere humano, ratio, eadem veritas utrobique sit, eademque Lex; quae est recti praeceptio, pravique depulsio. Ex quo intelligitur, prudentiam quoque, et mentem á Diis ad homines pervenisse, &c. (Tom. 4. p. 157.)’ And in his first Book de Officiis, he more particularly defines the Law of Nature in Man, by describing the double bias of soul, viz. Appetite and Reason, and instead of laying down Ap­petite, or the Pursuit of Happiness, as the Rule of Obedience (which some very emi­nent and learned lawyers have done) he wisely reverses that rule, and thence [Page 34] forms an unexceptionable Rule of Action, viz. that Reason must rule, but Appetite obey. See his own words: ‘Duplex est enim vis animorum, atque naturae: una pars in appetitu posita est, quae est [...] Graecè, quae hominem huc, et illuc rapit: altera in ratione quae docet, et explanat, quid faciendum, fugiendumque sit. Ita fit, ut Ratio praesit, Appetitus vero obtemperet. Tom. 4. p. 248.’

He also clearly describes this natural instinct, ‘the Knowledge of Good and Evil,’ under the title of Common Sense, "Communis Intelligentia," and lays it down as the Law, or Rule of Nature ("Naturae Norma") for distinguishing good Laws ⁽¹⁴⁾ from bad, right from wrong, and honourable from base, which [Page 35] certainly is a much safer Principle to rely on than "Self-love."

‘Atqui nos Legem bonam à mala, nulla alia nisi Naturae Norma dividere possumus. Nec solùm jus et injuria à natura dijudicatur, sed omnino omnia honesta, ac turpia. Nam et COM­MUNIS INTELLIGENTIA nobis notas res efficit, easque in animis nostris in­choavit, ut honesta in virtute ponantur, in vitiis turpia. Haec autem in Opi­nione existimare, non in Natura posita, dementis est. De Legibus, Lib. 1. Tom. 4. p. 222.’ ⁽¹⁵⁾. And the Apostle Paul has also given a strong testimony concerning the power and influence of this instinct, or first Principle planted in human Nature.

He informs us, that some men, who had not the written Law of God, were, [Page 36] nevertheless, capable of doing by Nature (or Instinct) the things contained in the Law— ‘For when the Gentiles, which have not the Law, do by Nature the things contained in the Law, these, having not the Law, are a Law unto themselves ⁽¹⁶⁾; which shew the work [Page 37] of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness’ (or the conscience witnessing with them) ‘and their thoughts the mean while’ (or between themselves) ‘accusing, or else excusing one another; &c. Ro­mans ii. 14, 15.’

This necessarily implies a natural Knowledge of GOOD and EVIL, so that this divine faculty, or instinct in the Na­ture of Man, seems plainly to be the grand Principle, whereby men, who have ‘not the Law, are a Law unto them­selves. (Rom. ii. 14.)’ And this I ap­prehend to be, properly, ‘THE LAW OF NATURE’ in MAN, the Law written on our hearts, or the Conscience, which bears witness with us, as the Apostle declares [Page 38] in the following verse:—Our ‘thoughts the mean while accusing, or else ex­cusing us;’—for there are few men so bad, as not to have been, at some time or other, sensible of remorse, through the accusation above-mentioned of their their thoughts, or Conscience. For what are these thoughts which accuse and excuse, but Conscience itself; that is, the very same Principle, only differently expressed by the Apostle, for the sake of explana­tion? And again, this Conscience, which bears witness, is not a different, or distinct Principle from ‘the Knowledge of Good and Evil,’ but only another name or mode of expressing the same Principle; or if it be so defined by some writers, as to appear in any degree different or distinct from the latter, it cannot, at most, be otherwise esteemed than as a different effect of that same Divine Knowledge: and the like may be said of Sinderesis ( [...]) as well as of ‘the Law of [Page 39] Reason;’ both of which some authors have treated as distinct Principles from Conscience, notwithstanding that all these separate heads, Sinderesis, Reason, and Conscience, are necessarily resolved into one single principle or foundation, viz. "the Knowledge of Good and Evil," to which the enquirer is naturally led, in attempting to define them; for indeed this same identical Principle or Power is equally attributed to them all. ‘ Sin­deresis’ (says the author of Doct. et Student) ‘is a natural Power of the soul, set in the highest part thereof, moving and stirring it to Good, and ab­horring Evil’ ⁽¹⁷⁾. What is Sinderesis therefore, when thus explained, but the [Page 40] natural Knowledge in Man to reject the Evil, and chuse the Good? REASON is also explained by this celebrated author to the same effect:— ‘After (or accord­ing to) the Doctors— Reason (says he) is the power of the Soul that discerneth between GOOD and EVIL, and be­tween GOOD and BETTER, com­paring the one with the other: the which also sheweth virtues, loveth GOOD, and flieth VICES ⁽¹⁸⁾.’

[Page 41]In the beginning of the Chapter, he expresses himself, as if he supposed that Man was indued with this divine faculty of Reason before the fall, even at the time "when he was created ⁽¹⁹⁾;" a doctrine which, certainly, is erroneous. [Page 42] That our first parents received from God, when they were first created, a due proportion of Reason suited to their original condition, is not to be doubted; but there is no authority whatever to warrant the supposition of their being at first indued with that Perfection of Reason, that Attribute of a Divine and Spiritual Nature, which afterwards became natural to Man; though the worthy author apparently means this supreme degree of Reason, when he tells us, that Man, by the gift of Reason, is ‘ made like to the dignity of angels ⁽²⁰⁾, discerning truth from falsehood, and Evil from Good;’ whereas it appears [Page 43] very plainly from the Scriptures, that this Perfection of Reason was afterwards acquired by unlawfully eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge; for it is plain, that the desire of acquiring Knowledge was part of the temptation to trangress: ("a tree to be desired to make one wise," said the deluded Woman) and it was not until they had both of them eaten the forbidden fruit, that God said, ‘Be­hold, the Man is become AS ONE OF US, to know Good and Evil; (Gen. iii. 22.)’ thereby plainly alluding to the Knowledge then newly acquired by the for­bidden fruit; and they were driven out of the garden, we are expressly told, to prevent a further acquisition to the Na­ture of Man, viz. ‘lest he put forth his hand, and take ( [...]) ALSO of the tree of Life, and eat and live for ever;’ and therefore it is certain, that Man was not enlightened by the Divine Law of Reason within himself, when he was first [Page 44] created; or at least not with so great a share of it, as has since been justly attributed to Human Nature.

The third article which I have before mentioned, as a principle necessarily in­cluded in that divine Knowledge of Good and Evil, which our first parents unlaw­fully took upon themselves, is CON­SCIENCE; and the ingenious author of Doctor and Student, before quoted, in describing the meaning of the word Conscience, has accordingly explained it exactly as if he had been defining the true purpose of the former Principle, the Divine Knowledge of Good and Evil. ‘So God’ (says he) ‘has placed Con­science in the midst of the rational soul, as a light by which it should discern what it ought to do, or ought not to do ⁽²¹⁾.’ This is exactly the [Page 45] purpose of "the Knowledge of Good and Evil," viz. that we should use it ‘as a light to discern what we ought to do, or ought not to do;’ or, in Scripture words, that we ‘may know to refuse the Evil, and choose the Good. Isa. vii. 15.’ and again in the 16th verse.

From what has been said, it must ap­pear, that Conscience, Reason, and Sinde­resis, though sometimes treated as distinct Principles, are nevertheless essentially founded on one Great Principle, viz. the Divine Knowledge of GOOD and EVIL; and when our first parents, contrary to the commands of God, took that Know­ledge upon themselves, the immediate effects of it were the most pungent work­ings of Conscience! They were conscious of their disobedience to God! Conscious of their shame and nakedness! Conscious that the Divine Justice must pursue them, so that they would have even hid [Page 46] themselves, had it been possible, from the presence of their Almighty Crea­tor! But how vain was the attempt to fly from God's universal presence ⁽²²⁾, when they could not even separate them­selves from the anxious warnings and forebodings even of their own Consci­ences! For Conscience maintained its new habitation in their throbbing breasts, attending them in their most secret re­tirement with a stinging remembrance of their disobedience and ingratitude! And as the wilful taking of Conscience upon themselves was the cause of all [Page 47] their misery; so the effect of that one fault was the entailing Sin and Death on all their descendants (who by the Laws of Nature must, necessarily, partake of that Nature which their parents so un­happily assumed) for thus— ‘by one Man Sin entered into the world’ (as we are informed by the great Apostle of the Gentiles) ‘and Death by Sin; and so Death passed upon all Men’ ( [...]) in or through whom ‘all have sinned. For until the Law’ (that is, even before the written Law of Moses) ‘Sin was in the world: Also ⁽²³⁾ Sin is not imputed when there is no Law. But ⁽²⁴⁾ Death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them who had not sinned after the similitude of [Page 48] Adam's transgression, &c. (Rom. v. 12. to 14.)’ Apparently meaning, that as ‘ Death’ (which was the effect and punishment of imputed Sin) ‘ reigned from Adam to Moses,’ (that is, "until the Law," [...]) so we ought to conclude, that some sort of Law, previous to that of Moses, preceded Sin, as Sin preceded Death, viz. ( ‘as Sin hath reigned unto Death,’ see ver. 21.) for otherwise Death could not have reigned before the written Law; and conse­quently the Law, to be understood, by which "Sin entered into the world," and by which "Death passed upon all," and "reigned from Adam to Moses," was the Law of internal Knowledge, or Consci­ence, by which all Men, from the time of our first parents (Christ alone ex­cepted) are convicted Sinners! For as the Ways of Man are not equal to his assumed Knowledge, he is thereby ren­dered guilty, and obnoxious to the eternal [Page 49] Justice of GOD, ‘in whose sight shall no man living be justified! (Psal. cxliii. 2.)’

Hence a temporal DEATH, or depar­ture from this world, is not the only fruit of Sin, but there is also a ‘certain fearful looking for of judgment, and fiery in­dignation, &c. (Hebrews x. 27.)’, the sense of which is so deeply im­printed on the human Conscience, that even the most hardened offender is, at some time or other, affected with it; otherwise Sin could not be esteemed "the Sting of Death"—For if the na­tural light of Human Reason would per­mit men to indulge themselves with a positive assurance, that Death is really the last period, or final dissolution of their existence, the Consciousness of Sin would not encrease the Fear of Death, and could not, therefore, with propriety be esteemed "the Sting of Death." Death [Page 50] is, indeed, the King of Terrors; and Na­ture shrinks at its approach! But the anguish of the guilty and unbelieving soul springs from a deeper source than Death! viz. the dread of what must follow it! This is a further effect of Reason and Human Knowledge: for though a man refuses to be bound by the eternal Laws of Reason, yet Reason will inform him of his guilt, and its deserts, and vindicate her injured Laws by dreadful expectation! for the very Devils believe and tremble! (James ii. 19.)

Horrible gloom! when Reason sees no ground for hope!—Thus Conscience, though not obeyed, is Conscience still; and a time, we know, will surely come, when men shall ‘begin to say to the mountains,’ fall on us; and to the hills, cover us ⁽²⁵⁾! (Luke xxiii. 30.)

[Page 51] Death, therefore, it is manifest, is not the only object of the sinner's fear, or men would never seek a hiding-place in what must be their graves, by wishing to be buried under the very mountains and hills, with the vain hope of secreting themselves from the wrath to come! —And who is free from sin?—In the sight of God ‘shall no man living be justified. (Psa. cxliii. 2.)’ And ‘with­out shedding of BLOOD is no remission. (Heb. ix. 22.)’ Wherefore it is mani­fest, that the BLOOD of every man is for­feited before God!—But the Almighty was graciously pleased to accept the BLOOD of animals (probably as an acknow­ledgment of that forfeiture, and as a [Page 52] type of a future and more effectual re­demption) to atone for human guilt— ‘For the life of the flesh’ (said God to Moses) ‘is in the BLOOD: and I have given it to you upon the altar, TO MAKE AN ATONEMENT for your souls:’ for ‘it is the BLOOD that maketh an ATONE­MENT for the SOUL. (Lev. xvii. 11.)’

But as the Necessity of Redemption is thus obvious, so the means of obtaining it has been as clearly revealed: and therefore the same innate Knowledge of Good and Evil, which has rendered us obnoxious to GOD'S Eternal Justice through disobedience, will lead us (if we use it as we ought) to repentance and amendment; and consequently to reconciliation and eternal happiness, through that more effectual propitiation and redemption, to which all mankind are invited by the Redeemer himself, who is ‘ the WAY, and the Truth, and the Life:’ as ‘ no man cometh unto [Page 53] the Father, but by him. (John xiv. 6.)’ ‘For if through the offence of ONE’ (our first parent Adam) ‘MANY be dead; much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, (which is) by ONE Man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto MANY. And not as (it was) by one that sinned (so is) the gift; for the judgment (was) by one to condemna­tion, but the free gift (is) of many offences unto justification,’ &c. (See the contrast as carried on by the Apostle Paul, in the 5th chapter of his Epistle to the Romans.)

Men seldom fall indeed into any very gross offence against the Eternal Law, till they are initiated, as it were, by lesser crimes; and have gradually stifled the natural restraint of the innate Knowledge or Conscience before described; and then they are no longer worthy to be called Men, being more properly Brutes; be­cause [Page 54] Conscience, or the Knowledge of Good and Evil, which should distinguish the Nature of Men from Brutes, doth no longer influence their actions.

The state, indeed, of such unhappy men is worse than that of brutes; be­cause there is still another capital dis­tinction in their nature, which wicked men cannot cast off, as they do Consci­ence! they have a living Soul, which must, inevitably, be accountable for all their actions, as I have before remarked; and, therefore, when they prefer the temporal gratification of their passions (whether of Pride, Love of unlimited Power, Avarice, Lust, Hatred, or Selfish­ness) to the eternal welfare of their souls, they may be said to sell themselves for nought; because all unlawful passions are increased, instead of being satisfied, by indulgence; so that there is no Bondage [Page 55] so wretched as that of Sin ⁽²⁶⁾; no Slave so truly miserable, as the man who is a Slave to his Passions ⁽²⁷⁾. And, there­fore, when we are endeavouring to trace out ‘the Law of Nature, and Principles of Action in Men,’ it would be unrea­sonable to search for it among Slaves (I mean those that are Slaves to their passions) because such MEN are not their own masters, and consequently are not worthy the name of MEN. It would be neither just nor charitable to draw [Page 56] our conclusions concerning the Nature of Man from that depraved state of Hu­man Nature, wherein the proper and natural distinction of Manhood (the KNOW­LEDGE of GOOD and EVIL, which we naturally inherit from our first parents) has lost its influence!

No MAN, indeed, is perfect; neither are ALL MEN depraved; and though the depraved state of man may, perhaps, be most general, it, certainly, is not uni­versal; and therefore ‘the universal Principle of Action in Man’ is not to be drawn from thence. But it will be still much more profitable for us to re­member (when any Rule of Obedience is proposed as an universal Principle of Action) that it is not so much our business or interest to trace out what REALLY IS "the universal Principle of Action," as what it OUGHT TO BE. I have already produced the testimony of the most [Page 57] learned and able lawyer among the Hea­thens, that ‘the Knowledge of Good and Evil’ is an universal Principle, natural to mankind; and he so far esteems it as "a Rule of Obedience," that he lays it down as the foundation of Law. ‘For Law (says he again in another place) is nothing else but right and divinely inspired Reason, commanding what is ho­nest, and forbidding the contrary’ ⁽²⁷⁾. But a modern, though very learned and respectable, law commentator, has re­ferred us to a different Principle, as a "Rule of Obedience," which is very liable to be misunderstood: he informs us in page 41, vol. 1. that the Creator ‘has graciously reduced the Rule of Obe­dience to this one paternal Precept,— That Man should pursue his own Hap­piness.’ "This," (says he) ‘is the [Page 58] foundation of what we call Ethics, or natural Law.’ Yet, in justice to the worthy author, it must be allowed, that the Happiness, which he speaks of, is not selfish, partial, or sensual Happiness (for that would be a very improper sub­ject for a "paternal Precept") but ‘real Happiness,’ and ‘substantial Happi­ness,’ as he further expresses himself in the same page; and no Happiness can be "real," or "substantial," which is not lasting; so that it is plain this emi­nent writer means that lasting and ‘sub­stantial Happiness’ alone, which arises from Obedience to the will of God: for the Knowledge of which he refers us, at the same time, to the Holy Scriptures. See the following page 42.

Yet even such "substantial Happiness" can only be called an effect, of which a conscientious Obedience to the will of God is one of the causes; but the primary [Page 59] cause, or motive to that Obedience in good Men, is still different from both; and yet none of them can be the proper foun­dation of Ethics, or natural Law.

The learned author has himself as­signed a more probable foundation in the preceding page, to which perhaps he might mean to refer by the prono­minal adjective "This," in the sentence which immediately follows his ‘one paternal Precept,’ (viz. ‘ This is the foundation of what we call Ethics, or natural Law’) for he observes in p. 40. that, ‘CONSIDERING the Creator only as a Being of infinite Power, he was able unquestionably to have pre­scribed whatever Laws he pleased to his creature Man, however unjust or severe. But as he is also a Being of infinite Wisdom, he has laid down only such Laws as were founded in those relations of Justice that existed in the nature of things, antecedent to [Page 60] any positive Precept.—THOSE RE­LATIONS of JUSTICE,’ then, on which the other Laws are founded, are properly THE FOUNDATION. And "these" (the learned writer himself tells us in the following sentence) ‘ are the eternal, immutable LAWS of GOOD and EVIL, to which the Creator him­self, in all his dispensations, conforms; and which he has enabled Human Reason to discover, so far as they are necessary for the conduct of human actions.’ Thus THE FOUNDATION is clearly laid down, and there is no oc­casion to assign any other Motive of Obe­dience to the several Laws on this Foun­dation, than what is mentioned in the same sentence, viz. Human Reason, by which men are enabled to discover ‘these eternal and immutable Laws of Good and Evil.’ For the Knowledge of what is Good, or what is Evil, is surely a sufficient Motive for chusing the one, and rejecting the other; because [Page 61] Good, when known, is as truly amiable in itself, as Evil is detestable and fright­ful; so that the former most naturally engages our preference, without any other Motive than this natural Knowledge of their respective qualities.

Sinister Motives do, nevertheless, too frequently prevail, through the extreme frailty of Human Nature, which engages the greater part of mankind in the pur­suit of temporal Interest, or partial and sensual Happiness!

So that, if the learned commentator had mentioned Self-love, as the general, instead of the ‘universal Principle of Action,’ I should not have thought myself obliged to have taken particular notice of that part of his work.

Several reasons may be assigned why it cannot be admitted as the ‘universal Principle of Action.’

[Page 62]And, first, Because the most worthy actions, as I have already observed, are frequently occasioned by a more generous motive than Self-love.

Secondly, Because bad men are some­times prompted to good actions, through the influence of their own natural Know­ledge of Good and Evil, when the occa­sion happens not to interfere with their particular views of private Interest, or their predominant Passions ⁽²⁸⁾: for, if this was not the case, it is obvious [Page 63] (considering the great multitude of selfish men in comparison of the Just) that society could not exist.

And, thirdly, Because bad actions, which most abound, manifestly tend, even in the opinion of the offenders themselves, to defeat the most essential purposes of Self-love; for the most hard­ened [Page 64] sinners are conscious, through their innate Knowledge of Good and Evil, that their unlawful temporary gratifications tend to deprive them of their "real" and "substantial happiness," viz. Eternal Salvation; for if they had not this Con­sciousness of Evil, there could be no such thing as presumptuous sin.

Self-love, however, under proper re­strictions, is certainly a main branch of the Law of Nature; and, though it can­not be admitted as the ‘universal Prin­ciple of Action,’ is nevertheless an uni­versal Principle; but it cannot be ad­mitted as a "Rule of Obedience," because there are many occasions when it ought to be superseded by more noble Motives to Action.

The Knowledge of Good and Evil is also an universal Principle in Man; though it is still much farther from being ‘the [Page 65] universal Principle of Action’ than "Self-love;" and indeed my present at­tempt is not to prove what is the ‘uni­versal Principle of Action,’ but only what it ought to be, as I before remarked; being convinced, that ‘the one paternal Precept’ laid down by the learned Law Commentator (though certainly with good intentions, and probably with good authority from other Law Writers) as the "Rule of Obedience," (viz. ‘ that we should pursue our own Happiness’) is very defective; because the very Rule itself requires a multitude of other Rules to restrain it within due bounds, and curb the Self-love of individuals for the benefit of society.

Nothing is so liable to be misunder­stood as "our own Happiness;" for when Self alone is the object, Self-love can imply nothing but Partiality and Self-preference; so that such ‘a Rule of Obe­dience’ [Page 66] is liable to afford a handle of excuse for actions of mere Self-gratifica­tion, to which the learned and worthy author (or, perhaps, rather the adopter) of the hypothesis would be entirely averse: a Slaveholder, for instance, might al­ledge, that he ‘pursues his own Hap­piness,’ by extorting the unwilling service of other men, because he is thereby enabled to maintain himself and family, not only comfortably, but ele­gantly; and that the maintenance and support of the sugar islands, and conse­quently the happiness of his wealthy neighbours, depends upon the employ­ing of slaves; so that social benefits do also arise from it: and he will likewise alledge, that he is obliged by ‘Self-love’ to persist in the measure, be­cause he cannot maintain the same Hap­piness and comfort by any other means; so that he does not act contrary to ‘the Law of Nature, or the "Rule of [Page 67] Obedience,"’ as laid down by the most eminent writers on the subject!

Thus the "paternal Precept" (as it is called) of pursuing our own Happiness, may lead men to form a false estimate of necessity (or what they may think them­selves obliged to undertake, from their particular situation in life) and will afford them the like excuse for any other vice, on which a man's temporal sub­sistence depends.

It is therefore an oblique Rule, which insensibly declines into mere Self-grati­fication, or private Interest, which is the bane of Equity and Justice; so that Self-love can no otherwise be admitted as a Rule, than for the purpose of measuring the due proportion of that Love which we owe to the rest of Mankind, agreeable to a real "paternal Precept" that will [Page 68] never deceive us; ‘Thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thyself. Lev. xix. 18.’

This excellent maxim of the Old Law is strongly enforced and recommended in the New Testament, which shall hereafter be shewn: nay, the very Hea­thens, it seems, were not entirely igno­rant of this Divine Precept; for the favourite maxim of the Emperor Alex­ander Severus was much to the same effect, according to the report of Lam­pridius, quoted by the learned Joseph Mede, Book 3. p. 550. viz. ‘ Quod tibi fieri nonvis, alteri ne feceris." "Do not to another, what you would not have done to yourself.’ Neither has the doctrine been overlooked by the writers on the Law of Nature. Hobbes very judiciously refers us to this Rule of Obedience, ‘for the easy knowledge of what the Law of Nature [Page 69] dictates.’ ‘ When a Man doubts’ (says he) ‘ whether what he is going to do to another be agreeable to the LAW OF NATURE, let him suppose himself in the others room.’ ‘For by this means’ (continues he) ‘when Self-love and the other passions, which weighed down one scale, are taken thence, and put into the contrary scale, it is easy to guess which, way the balance will turn’ And Baron Puffendorf ⁽³⁰⁾ remarks thereupon, that — ‘this is no other than the great rule prescribed by our Saviour himself, of doing to Men as we would be done by.’

The learned Baron, nevertheless, re­marks in the following paragraph— ‘that this Precept cannot be esteemed a fundamental Axiom of the Law of Nature; since it is only a corollary of [Page 70] that Law, which obliges us to hold all Men equal with ourselves; and therefore may be demonstrated à pri­ori.’ But howsoever it may be capable of being demonstrated, yet this is no just objection to Hobbes's excellent rule for knowing,— ‘what the Law of Na­ture dictates;’ especially as the learn­ed objector seems, afterwards, to have sought in vain for a more ‘fundamental Axiom of the Law of Nature:’ for I cannot find, that any thing, he has afterwards proposed, is at all worthy to be compared with it, either as ‘a Foundation, or a "Rule of Obedience."’

Nevertheless, in justice to the learned Baron, I must observe, that he has well defended this general Rule against the objection of Dr. Sharrock.

‘Dr. Sharrock is of opinion’ (says he) ‘that this rule is not universal, [Page 71] because, if so, a judge must needs absolve the criminals left to his sen­tence; inasmuch as he would certainly spare his own life, were he in their place: I must needs give a poor peti­tioner what sum soever he desires; because I should wish to be thus dealt with, if I was in his condition: or I must clean my servants shoes; be­cause I require him to clean mine.’

‘But the rule’ (says the learned Baron) ‘will still remain unshaken, if we observe, that not ONE Scale only, but BOTH are to be considered; or that I am not only to weigh and examine what is agreeable to me, but likewise what obligation or necessity lies on the other person, and what I can de­mand of him, without injuring either of our duties. Book 2. Chap. 3. p. 109.’

[Page 72]Neither does the Baron's own objec­tion, which immediately follows, in the least affect the propriety of Hobbes's rule ‘for the easy Knowledge of what the Law of Nature dictates:’ for though the nature of a Rule, or Principle of Doctrine (differing from active Princi­ples) be such as to induce the necessity of supposing a prior Principle, or Instinct in man, whereby he may be enabled to suggest, adopt, approve, or obey this or any other Rule (which seems to be the reason of the Baron's refusing to acknow­ledge this excellent rule, as ‘a funda­mental Axiom of the Law of Na­ture’) yet the learned Baron himself has multiplied the difficulty, by assign­ing still another Rule, or mere Principle of Doctrine (viz. the holding all Men equal with ourselves) as the foundation of this Rule, instead of a real first Cause, such as the immediate Inspiration of God; the Revelation of his Will in the Scriptures; [Page 73] or the natural and divine Instinct of KNOWING GOOD and EVIL. For whe­ther the Precept is inculcated and made known to Man by Divine Revelation, immediate, or scriptural, or merely by the natural Instinct in Man, of knowing Good and Evil, it may nevertheless be justly esteemed ‘a fundamental Axiom of the Law of Nature.’

The Jews and Christians, indeed, are taught the value and importance of this Precept by the Holy Scriptures, yet this is not the only means of its being known and received among men as ‘a Rule of Obedience;’—for, besides the example which I have already given concerning the Emperor Alexander Se­verus, it appears that the Gentiles, in every part of the world, have demon­strated a sense of this Precept, without the assistance of Scripture: not only the ancient Greeks and Romans, but the [Page 74] remote inhabitants of China and Ame­rica: of which a few examples are here subjoined from the additional notes of the translator of Puffendorf, p. 109. viz. ‘Aristotle’ (in Diogenes Laertius, Lib. 5. Segm. 21.) ‘being asked how we ought to behave ourselves towards our friends, answered, as we wish they would behave themselves towards us. Lib. 2. tom. 2.’ ‘Quod quis juris in alterum, &c. Seneca de Ira, Lib. 3. c. 12.’ ‘Let us suppose ourselves in the same circumstances as the person with whom we are angry: That which now puts us in a passion is only the wrong opinion and estimate of ourselves: We are unwilling to SUFFER what we are willing to DO.’ ‘'Tis a saying of Con­fucius’ (in Marcinus's Hist. Sin. Lib. 4. c. 25.) ‘ Never do to another what you are unwilling to suffer from him. The same Precept was made use of by Ynca Manco Capac, the founder of [Page 75] the Peruvian empire; in order to the reducing his subjects to a life of civility. De la Vega, L. 1. c. 21.’

Thus it appears, that not only the Heathen nations of Europe, but also the distant uninformed inhabitants of China and America, were endued, by their innate Knowledge of Good and Evil, with general ideas of that most excellent Precept which CHRIST himself has de­clared to be the true Christian RULE OF ACTION: and which, therefore, may justly be esteemed ‘ a fundamental Axiom of the Law of Nature,’ viz. — ‘All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the Law and the Prophets,’ Matt. vii. 12. See also Luke vi. 31. The meaning and appa­rent intention of this GOLDEN RULE is exactly the same, in effect, as the other great commandment of the Law, ‘Thou [Page 76] shalt love thy neighbour as thyself;’ so that all persons, who carefully examine these and other parallel texts, must neces­sarily be convinced, that the command to love our neighbour as ourselves is the ‘ONE PATERNAL PRECEPT,’ or rather, I should say, the ONLY ‘ PATERNAL PRECEPT to which the Creator has graciously reduced the Rule of Obedience,’ since by the highest authority we are assured, that the equitable rule of ‘ doing to others, as we would that men should do unto us;’ or, in short, to love our neighbour as ourselves, ‘IS THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS;’ which im­plies as much as if our Lord had said, This is the Spirit, or FIRST PRIN­CIPLE OF LAW, and contains the Sum and Essence of all other Laws! The testi­mony of the Apostle Paul is nearly to the same effect— ‘ For ALL THE LAW’ (says he) ‘ is fulfilled in ONE WORD, even in this, THOU SHALT LOVE THY [Page 77] NEIGHBOUR AS THYSELF. (Gal. v. 14.)’ Which might well be paraphrased as follows: ‘ALL THE LAW IS FUL­FILLED IN ONE WORD;’—for ‘the Creator’— ‘has graciously reduced the Rule of Obedience to this one paternal Precept’ (not,— ‘ that Man should pursue his own Happiness;’—but)— ‘EVEN IN THIS, THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOUR AS THYSELF;’ so that no other "paternal Precept" can possibly be received as a general Rule of Obedience for all occasions except this alone; which must, therefore, be acknow­ledged as the fundamental Rule, both of Natural and Revealed Law. Concerning this Golden Rule of Action, I have wrote a separate Tract under the title of the Law of Liberty, or Royal Law, to which I must beg leave to refer my readers for further remarks on that head.

[Page 78]Having now proved, I hope, that this ‘FUNDAMENTAL AXIOM OF THE LAW OF NATURE’ ought to be ‘THE UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE OF ACTION IN MAN,’ I can more safely resume my discourse concerning ‘Principles of Action’ in general. It has already been shewn, that ‘the Knowledge of Good and Evil’ is ‘ an universal Principle’ in Man, as well as Self-love. But I must now remark, that the former has the following essential difference from Self-love as an universal Principle, viz. that it is never superseded, like the latter, by any just Motive of DUTY (though it is often violated in breach of DUTY through human Frailty); for all just Motives of DUTY are perfectly con­sistent with it, and influence the heart under its direction and guidance, and even the most noble Motive to Action (independent of Inspiration, or immediate Revelation) is so far from superseding [Page 79] the natural "Knowledge of Good and Evil," that it may, more properly, be esteemed an exertion of it: for instance, by a due exertion of ‘the Knowledge of Good and Evil,’ we promote the very first Principle of all Duty, as it is the first great commandment, viz. The Love of God; for if we have ‘Know­ledge to chuse the Good, and reject the Evil,’ the same Knowledge must in­cline us to prefer the Author of all Good (when revealed to us) and his Com­mandments before every other conside­ration; for so Abraham's Obedience in attempting to sacrifice his son, was ren­dered acceptable to God: he knew his Maker and supreme Lord by unquestion­able Revelation; and, therefore, justly concluded, through his natural ‘Know­ledge of Good and Evil,’ that the Command of God ought to supersede all natural Affection, and Self-love; so that this was an Effect of Reason, which [Page 80] seemed to counteract even the Principles of Reason itself, by dissolving all the ties of Nature! But the Patriarch thereby gave an ample proof of a sincere Faith, and of an unfeigned Love to his Creator.

By what Principle of Action also was Moses induced (though the meekest of Men) to remonstrate to his Creator, when the Divine Indignation was declared against the Ingratitude and Wickedness of the children of Israel, in worshipping the molten calf during the time that Moses continued in the mount to receive the Law? God said to Moses— ‘I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff­necked people: now therefore LET ME ALONE, ( [...] LET ME REST,’ that is, from your intercessions) ‘that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may CONSUME THEM: and I will make of THEE a great nation. Exod. xxxii. 9, 10.’ Now, if "Self-love" had been [Page 81] "the universal Principle of Action," Moses would not have declined the acceptance of such a distinguished honour, when tendered to him even by the ALMIGHTY LORD OF THE UNIVERSE, whose right of disposal could not justly be called in question! But the faithful minister of the Israelitish commonwealth did not seem to entertain the least sense of that imaginary "paternal Precept" mentioned above, ‘that Man should pursue his own Happiness:’ for his answer on that occasion proves, that he was actuated by a Principle infinitely superior to Self-love; I mean a true and unfeigned Zeal for the Glory of God, arising from a right use of his natural discretion, or ‘Know­ledge of Good and Evil,’ which di­rected his choice, and enabled him to set aside all consideration of SELF, or private worldly Interest, when he thought the circumstances of the pro­position seemed likely to affect the ho­nour [Page 82] of GOD in the misinformed opi­nion of the Egyptians and other Hea­then. For he ‘besought the Lord his God,’ (though God had previously forbid him, saying, "LET ME ALONE") ‘and said, Lord, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of EGYPT, with great power, and with a mighty hand? Wherefore should the EGYPTIANS speak and say, For mis­chief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath’ (said Moses to the ALMIGHTY) ‘and repent of this evil against thy people.’ And he also claimed the promise by which GOD had absolutely bound himself to the Patri­archs— ‘To whom (said Moses) thou swarest by thine OWN SELF, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed,’ &c. And the text immediately, informs [Page 83] us, that ‘the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people. (Exod. xxxii. 7. to 14.)’ Thus God was pleased to manifest his regard and consideration even for Human Judg­ment!—even for the opinion of a mere Man, when founded on Reason, and other just Principles, such as mankind are capable of exerting! And shall earthly monarchs, then, presume to despise any reasonable remonstrance of their fellow men—of their equals in every other respect, except that of a de­legated office, when it is apparent that even the SUPREME LORD, and MAKER OF ALL THINGS, has condescended to hear and graciously receive a remon­strance from his Creature Man! Nay, and that repeatedly on various occasions! The like remonstrance was also made by Moses, when God declared his anger against Israel, for murmuring at the re­port given of the promised land; and [Page 84] for proposing to return into Egypt; and also for attempting to stone Joshua and Caleb, who had endeavoured to appease, and convince them of their error. See the 14th Chapter of Numb. ver. 7. ‘And the LORD said unto Moses, how long will this people provoke me? and how long will it be ere they believe me, for all the signs which I have shewed among them? I will smite them with the pestilence, and disinherit them, and will MAKE OF THEE’ ( said GOD to Moses) ‘a great­er nation, and mightier than they.’

But the noble Principles (far superior to Self-love) by which that Great Mi­nister of State generally regulated his conduct, once more prevented his, ac­ceptance of the glorious promise, even though tendered by his Maker! His sincere regard for the Glory of God, agreeable to the first great Commandment, made him jealous that the Heathen nations should [Page 85] falsely conceive, that the LORD JEHO­VAH was not able to bring his people (the Israelites) into the land which he "sware unto them;" so that his Zeal for the Glory of God was, manifestly, the principal Motive of his answer on that occasion ⁽³¹⁾. And though a natural Affection (or brotherly Love) for his [Page 86] countrymen might, probably, be also in­cluded as an additional Motive to his in­tercession (worthy our imitation) yet his "own Self-love" was, manifestly, quite out of the question; since he might have attained for himself the highest pitch of worldly glory, without for­feiting his real or eternal Happiness by such an acquisition; for as the offer was made by ‘the God of the Spirits of all Flesh,’ the acceptance of it could not have been imputed to him as sinful; though the contrary behaviour was ap­parently more agreeable to the will of the Almighty, who was pleased to sig­nify his approbation of Moses's remon­strance and intercession, by declaring to him— ‘I have pardoned according to thy word.’ Numb. xiv. 11. to 20.

[Page 87]Also upon the rebellion of Korah, re­lated in the 16th chapter of Numbers, when God spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying,— ‘ Separate yourselves from among this congregation, THAT I MAY CON­SUME THEM IN A MOMENT.’ Yet these two great leaders of Israel were so little actuated by that imaginary ‘uni­versal Principle of Action’ SELF-LOVE, that they were entirely regardless of their own danger, notwithstanding the divine warning, and seemed to have no other care, but that of endeavouring to save their brethren from GOD'S wrath; for it does not appear, that they retreated, or separated themselves ‘from among the congregation,’ as they were expressly directed, but only "fell upon their faces," and exerted the powers of Human Reason in the following short remonstrance to their Maker— ‘ O GOD, THE GOD of the Spirits of all Flesh, shall ONE MAN SIN, and wilt thou be wroth with ALL [Page 88] THE CONGREGATION?’ Numb. xvi. 20—22.

The like Remonstrance, founded in sound Reason and natural Equity, had once before been made even to the Al­mighty himself, by his faithful Servant ABRAHAM, when God condescended to reveal to him the awful decree of Divine Vengeance against the populous cities of the plains of Sodom.

— ‘Wilt thou also destroy the Righteous with the Wicked?’ ( said Abraham ⁽³²⁾ ‘—shall not the LORD of all the earth DO RIGHT?’

[Page 89]Thus a due exertion of right Reason demonstrated the Dignity of Human Na­ture, and the examples, just mention­ed, sufficiently prove, that THE AL­MIGHTY requires his Creature Man to judge of Right and Wrong, and to form and declare a sound Judgment upon the eternal Principles of Justice and Right­eousness, agreeable to that Divine Know­ledge with which the Human Mind is most certainly endowed.

Though Abraham and his descendants, Moses and Aaron, knew that they could not exist, even a single moment, without the immediate protection of Divine Pro­vidence, yet they thought it their duty to remonstrate even to their CREATOR on the eternal Principles of ‘Justice and Judgment!’

THE ALMIGHTY SEARCHER OF HEARTS knew beforehand what they [Page 90] would say, and the propriety of their future answers; and, therefore, undoubt­edly afforded them these extraordinary opportunities of proving to all mankind their Knowledge of Good and Evil, as well as their Faith and entire dependence on the eternal "Justice and Judgment" of the Divine BEING, that these clear ex­amples of the Knowledge and Dignity of Human Nature, as also of the regard and consideration which even the great Au­thor of that Nature was graciously pleased to manifest, on those occasions, towards the mental Faculties of his Creature Man, might be recorded to the end of time!

Concerning the Spirit of ‘Justice and Judgment’ with which Abraham was endowed, God previously declared — ‘I know him, that he will command his children, and his houshold after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord [Page 91] to do JUSTICE and JUDGMENT, &c. (Gen. xviii. 19.)’ So that Abraham's Remonstrance, wherein he appealed to " the JUSTICE and JUDGMENT" of GOD, was apparently agreeable to the foreknowledge and expectation of the Almighty, as well as the other Remon­strance of Abraham's descendants, Moses and Aaron. For these extraordinary ex­ertions of Human Reason, in appealing to the Divine Justice, were so far from being offensive even to THE SUPREME AND ETERNAL SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE, that, on the contrary, he clearly manifested his approbation by the gracious manner in which he accepted and answered these human petitions! He condescended to satisfy the righteous and just Spirit of ABRAHAM, by an assu­rance, that even "if ten righteous per­sons" only could be found amongst the wicked nations in the plains of Sodom— ‘I will not destroy it’ (said he) ‘for [Page 92] the tens sake’ ⁽³³⁾. And to the Re­monstrance of Moses and Aaron (the de­scendants of the just ABRAHAM) the like favourable attention was paid by ‘the God of the Spirits of all Flesh:’—for as their petition was offered up in behalf of the whole Congregation (viz. that they might not suffer for the fault of one or a few persons) God condescended to spare the Congregation, though they had justly incurred the forfeiture of life by joining ⁽³⁴⁾ the haughty and factious princes of Israel in open rebellion to the Divine Ordinances, contrary to the [Page 93] clearest evidence of all their senses! For Moses, on offering up this short petition, was immediately directed to separate the Congregation from the more notorious offenders— ‘Speak unto the Congregation, saying,—Get ye up from about the taber­nacle of KORAH, DATHAN, and ABI­RAM.—And MOSES rose up, and went unto DATHAN and ABIRAM; and the Elders of Israel followed him. And he spake unto the Congregation, saying, Depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men, and touch nothing of theirs, lest ye be consumed in all their sins.’—And accordingly all persons, that had grace sufficient to repent of their connections with these wicked men, — ‘Gat up from the tabernacle of Ko­rah, Dathan, and Abiram, on every side:’ And immediately afterwards God was pleased to justify Moses, and to demonstrate the truth of his Divine Mis­sion, by a tremendous and unusual exam­ple [Page 94] of Vengeance ⁽³⁵⁾ upon the hardened offenders and their families! (Numb. xvi. 1. to 40.) And this being done in the presence of the whole Congregation, (then a populous nation) the evidence of it (which is handed down to us by their descendants, the Jews, and has also been confirmed, from time to time, by other instances of Divine Vengeance upon the same nation) was thereby rendered incontestable!

Nevertheless, the very next day, ‘all the Congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses, and against Aaron, saying, Ye have killed the people of the Lord.’—This further rebellion having once more provoked the Divine Justice, the cloud covered the tabernacle, and the glory of the Lord appeared! And Moses and Aaron were once more [Page 95] commanded to separate themselves from the Congregation, that a National Ven­geance might take place!— ‘ Get you up from this Congregation’ (said the Al­mighty) ‘ that I may CONSUME THEM AS IN A MOMENT.’ Nevertheless, these two worthy Ministers of God dis­covered no sense of fear for themselves, whilst the national danger demanded their endeavours in behalf of their brethren; and therefore, instead of separating them­selves, as they had been once more com­manded, they, once more, ‘FELL UPON THEIR FACES,’ to implore the Di­vine mercy and forgiveness of the na­tional iniquity; so that Self-love was manifestly superseded by Patriotism and brotherly Affection! And as the plague was already begun among the people, the mediation of these two men was so far favoured by the God of Israel, that Moses was inspired with wisdom and presence of mind to instruct his Brother Aaron how to ‘make an atonement for the [Page 96] people’ by the burning of incense— And accordingly Aaron ‘stood between the dead and the living; and the plague was staid.’ Numb. xvi. 41—48.

These are unquestionable examples to demonstrate, that "Self-love" is not "the universal Principle of Action."

Upon a former intercession also of Moses in behalf of his ungrateful coun­trymen, he permitted his natural Affec­tion for them, to carry him (seemingly) far beyond the bounds of Reason and Moderation, in his expressions to the Almighty ⁽³⁶⁾; even so far as to wish, that he himself might be blotted out of [Page 97] God's Book ⁽³⁶⁾, if the sin of the people was not forgiven! So that Self-love is by no means ‘the universal Principle of Action.’

The affectionate Apostle Paul seemed also equally anxious for the eternal wel­fare and prosperity of the same great Na­tion; and he expressed the like unbound­ed Love towards them, by one of the strongest hyperbolical expressions (as Mr. Burkitt calls it) that he could possibly have chosen for that purpose.— ‘I could wish’ (says he) ‘that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren my kinsmen according to the flesh. (Rom. ix. 3.)’ And though the Apo­stle, by the words— [...], might perhaps mean to refer only to [Page 98] that anathema of temporal misery and de­struction denounced by Christ himself, against Jerusalem, and the unbelieving Jewish nation, for their open rejection of the Gospel ⁽³⁷⁾; yet it is manifest, [Page 99] that the affectionate and truly patriotic Apostle would have been ready to suffer every kind of temporal misery, and even to lay down his Life for the refractory Nation, if he could thereby have averted the approaching vengeance from his countrymen, and restored them to Grace and the promised Privileges of the Gospel, to which they had been the first invited of all other nations! And therefore we cannot surely conceive, that ‘the Prin­ciple of Action,’ or Motive to such a declaration, was Self-love.

[Page 100]The disinterested Principles of this Apostle are evident also from some other expressions, and especially from that in his Epistle to the Romans, (v. 7.) viz. ‘—peradventure for a good Man’ (says he) ‘some would even dare to die;’ which idea totally excludes the Principle of Self-love. But though the Apostle's Expressions sufficiently prove that Self-love was not his Principle of Action, yet the same was more effectually demonstrated by his Life and Practice!

And again, When we read of JONA­THAN'S inviolable Friendship towards DAVID, can we conceive, that he was actuated, by Self-love? We cannot men­tion that Principle without injustice to the generous character of that truly noble Prince, unless we speak of it comparatively, to shew, that his Friend­ship and brotherly Love was equal to it; for the Scripture repeatedly informs us, that he loved DAVID "as his own Soul."

[Page 101]It was not an unreasonable Friendship; he was well convinced of the Merit and Virtue of DAVID; for on these he found­ed his Love; and he had too much Vir­tue himself to violate a reasonable Friend­ship, even though his own private Inte­rest and very Inheritance was at stake!

These points were most earnestly pressed upon him with all the authority that an anxious worldly-minded father could possibly assume, and yet without effect— ‘As long as the Son of Jesse liveth upon the ground’ (said Saul to Jona­than) ‘thou shalt not be established, nor thy kingdom; wherefore now send and fetch him unto me, for he shall surely die.’ Now, if Self-love had been the Principle of Action with JONATHAN, he could not have greater temptation! But he knew how ‘ to refuse THE EVIL, and CHUSE THE GOOD,’ and would not, therefore, submit (like modern statesmen) to the wretched policy of [Page 102] doing "Evil that Good might come!"— Honour and Justice were his ‘Principles of Action;’ and he was willing to risque, not only his worldly dignity and state, but his life also, rather than injure and forsake an innocent man! ‘Where­fore shall he be slain?’ (said he) ‘What harm hath he done?’—And when he found that his father persisted in his base resolution, he was filled with honest in­dignation; and, as the text informs, ‘ rose from the table IN FIERCE ANGER’ —not on account of his father's inju­rious behaviour to himself, in attempt­ing to kill him with a javelin, but be­cause ‘ he was grieved FOR DAVID’ (says the text) and that ‘his father had done him shame. See 1 Sam. xx. 31. to 34.’

And again—Was David, King of Is­rael, actuated by Self-love, when he ten­dered his own Life, to save the Lives of his Subjects, praying God to ‘Let his [Page 103] hand be against him, and against his father's house,’ instead of the nation in general?

Surely his Principles of Action were very different from Self-love, or from that imaginary PATERNAL PRECEPT of "seeking his own Happiness!"

His Conscience probably informed him, that he was guilty before God in having numbered the Israelites, to satisfy some vain or presumptuous curiosity concern­ing the Strength of the Nation, at a time when his whole confidence and hope of success against his enemies ought to have been placed in GOD alone; and he would perhaps then recollect, that the same sinful Presumption within himself, which had occasioned the undertaking, had also occasioned ⁽³⁸⁾ the neglect of that tribute [Page 104] or offering to God, which, in the Law, is expressly enjoined to be given as a ransom for the Soul of every individual of that nation, whenever they should be num­bered, viz. half a shekel for every one: ‘When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel, after their number’ (said GOD to Moses) ‘then shall they give EVERY MAN A RANSOM FOR HIS SOUL UNTO THE LORD, when thou numberest them: that THERE BE NO PLAGUE among them when thou num­berest them,’ &c. See Exod. xxx. 12. to 16.

[Page 105]REASON and CONSCIENCE therefore taught him, that he himself was the principal aggressor; and these just Prin­ciples, joined to a patriotic Regard for the Preservation of his Countrymen, cer­tainly induced him to present himself to God as the proper victim of divine Vengeance!—For ‘ DAVID spake unto the LORD, when he saw the angel that smote the people, and said—Lo, I have sinned, and I have done wickedly: but these sheep, what have they done? Let thine hand, I pray thee, BE AGAINST ME, AND AGAINST MY FATHER'S HOUSE, &c. 2 Sam. xxiv. 17.’

It would, surely, be highly absurd to attribute so pathetic and penitent a de­claration to the Principle of Self-love ⁽³⁹⁾. [Page 106] The Monarch of Israel was actuated by a much less reasonable ‘Principle of [Page 107] Action,’ (and still very opposite to Self-love) when he uttered that bitter [Page 108] lamentation for the death of his wicked, rebellious, and incestuous Son Absalom — ‘Would to GOD’ (said he) ‘I had died for thee my Son!’

NATURAL PATERNAL AFFECTION was more powerful in this case than REASON; and every other Principle of Action, even Self-love (which is also a natural Affection, and generally very po­tent) was entirely superseded by it: for the King most earnestly wished, that he himself had died, instead of that unna­tural wretch, who (he was well aware) ceased not, whilst he lived, to plot his father's ruin, being an enemy (he well knew) that was implacable, that was restless, and impatient to deprive him, [Page 109] not only of his kingdom, but of his life; and had already violated his bed, in the most publick and shameless manner, with the detestable crime of incest!— There was no room to hope for the reformation of a wretch that had so entirely lost all distinction between GOOD and EVIL!—No gleam of happiness for his injured father, but in his death!— And yet paternal Affection compelled the latter to esteem even his own death pre­ferable, if he could thereby have pro­longed the wretch's life!— ‘O my Son Absalom, my Son, my Son Absalom!— Would to God’ (said he) ‘I had DIED FOR THEE, O Absalom, my Son, my Son! 2 Sam. xviii. 33.’

Thus it appears that SELF-LOVE is by no means ‘the universal Principle of Action,’ since there are other Affec­tions, which sometimes supersede it, and become the leading Principles of Action.

[Page 110]A certain noble Author of the last century, in a work, intituled ‘A View of the Soul,’ has several chapters con­cerning the Power and Influence of the Affections over all the other natural fa­culties, Reason itself not being excepted: and in one chapter he attempts to prove, ‘that some Affection is the substantial Part of the Soul’ ⁽³⁹⁾. But though [Page 111] the Affections are certainly to be esteemed "Principles of Action," yet they cannot [Page 112] at any rate be admitted as ‘Rules of Obedience’ (as I have before observed concerning the Affection of Self-love) be­cause the generality of Mankind are more liable to be influenced by evil, misplaced Affections, than by those which might tend to their real Happiness.

The Affections of the avaricious Man, for instance, are all subordinate to his Affection for amassing temporal wealth: —he may love his wife and children, perhaps, when the natural Affections of [Page 113] the husband and parent do not interfere with his predominant passion for riches; but, whenever they do, the wretch loses all feeling for his own flesh and blood, and will eagerly sacrifice to MAMMON the peace of his family, and the hap­piness of his beloved children, even in the most material circumstance of their lives! And though such a wretch is sometimes influenced, indeed, by the more general Principle of Self-love (that is, whenever the consideration of Self happens to fall in competition with his duty to other men) yet even Self-love itself must yield to the Love of Hoarding, since it is the well-known characteristic of the Miser to withhold all the com­forts of life, even from HIMSELF, in order that he may indulge his unreason­able Affection for amassing wealth; which Depravity, if not assiduously and care­fully checked in time, will most surely increase with age, till it becomes inve­terate [Page 114] and irresistable, and entirely en­slave its wretched Votary!

It would be well for such men, if they deprived themselves only of tem­poral comforts; but, alas, AVARICE defeats SELF-LOVE, even in its most im­portant concern, Eternal Welfare. ‘Go to now ye Rich Men, weep and howl of your miseries that shall come upon you.’ James v. 1. Compare this with what has already been mentioned in pages 23—30.

The depraved Appetites and Affections of Drunkards and Gluttons are also PRINCI­PLES OF ACTION, which are frequently too powerful both for Reason and Consci­ence, and even for Self-love! for they too often lead Men with their eyes open to certain destruction, even though they are warned by the clearest Conviction and Foreknowledge concerning the inevitable consequences of their respective vices! Diseases, misery, and death may stare [Page 115] them in the face, and mark them, by their gradual approaches, as the unfor­tunate victims of these criminal indul­gencies;—but how seldom do they deter! Nay, the certain expectation even of eternal damnation is not sufficient to re­form them; and the learned Dr. Hales has produced an example ⁽⁴⁰⁾ concern­ing Drunkards, to prove that they would go on, even though they should see Hell-Fire before their eyes!

The depraved Affections for every other vice, as Lust, Gaming, &c. are equally capable of supplanting the universal [Page 116] Principles of Self-love and Common Sense; and do frequently carry Men headlong to destruction, when it is impossible but that they must have foreseen the necessary consequences of their inordinate pur­suits!

How carefully therefore ought Man­kind to guard themselves against every unlawful Affection; and strenuously to resist them, whenever they occur, lest any undue Affection should become the reigning Principle of Action, and lead the poor enslaved mortal to eternal destruction! ‘From whence (come) wars and fightings among you? (Come they) not hence, (EVEN) OF YOUR LUSTS, THAT WAR IN YOUR MEMBERS? Ye LUST, and have not: ye KILL, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ASK NOT. Ye ASK, and receive not, because ye ASK AMISS, that ye may consume it upon [Page 117] your LUSTS. Ye ADULTERERS and ADULTERESSES, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God?’ James iv. 1—4.

But many actions which may seem ap­parently to have been occasioned merely by corrupt Affections, are nevertheless promoted by a more latent cause: I mean the Inspiration or Influence of the spiritual Enemies ⁽⁴¹⁾ and Deceivers of Mankind, [Page 118] which must also be reckoned amongst the various Principles or Motives to [Page 119] Action; because nothing can be more certain, than that these incorporeal MA­LIGNANT BEINGS take a most dan­gerous advantage (though unperceived) of all immoral carnal Affections in un­guarded worldly Men; and do thereby lead the unwary and careless Liver into the most detestable Slavery ⁽⁴²⁾, that [Page 120] they may dishonour the work of God, and prepare the deluded Mortal for eter­nal shame and punishment!

[Page 121]The amazing power and force of the unlawful Affections, which I have already described, cannot reasonably be account­ed for, on any other Principles. We have no right, however, to murmur at God's permission of spiritual Temptations (whereby the Divine Knowledge of Good and Evil, presumptuously assumed by Man, is proved and tried) especially as the Almighty has mercifully been pleased [Page 122] to give us the most ample warning throughout the Scriptures of our con­tinual danger; insomuch that the Chri­stian Church hath generally made the necessary resistance to Evil Spirits an ex­press Article of the Baptismal Vow, viz. To ‘renounce the Devil and all his Works.’ Nevertheless, the unreason­able Heresy of the Sadduces (who were the Deists of ancient times) not only subsists to this day, but seems even to prevail in a most dangerous degree; for there are many people amongst us, who profess to believe the Scriptures, and yet affect to disbelieve the existence of those malignant spiritual Beings, commonly mentioned and signified under the name of "the Devil," though the Scriptures afford the clearest testimony concerning them: but our modern Sadduces endea­vour to explain all texts, wherein Devils or Evil Spirits are mentioned, as mere customary figures of speech expressive of [Page 123] some Evil Affections, and sometimes of mere bodily Disorders ⁽⁴³⁾. Howsoever plausible this kind of sophistry may ap­pear, [Page 124] where applied to some few parti­cular passages, yet there are others so [Page 125] clear in the literal expression, and so well guarded by the scope or intention [Page 126] of the subject delivered in the context, that it is impossible to wrest them from [Page 127] the obvious literal meaning, without perverting all the rules of grammar and common sense.

[Page 128]We are most carefully warned by the great Apostle to the Gentiles, to be upon our guard against these powers of darkness.

‘Put on the whole Armour of God,’ (says he) ‘that ye may be able to stand AGAINST THE WILES OF THE DE­VIL. For we wrestle not with FLESH and BLOOD, but against PRINCIPA­LITIES, against POWERS, against THE RULERS OF THE DARKNESS OF THIS WORLD, against spiritual Wick­edness in high places.’ Eph. vi. 11, 12.

In the same Epistle (iv. 27.) the Apostle still further warns the Ephesians against the SPIRITUAL ENEMY. ‘Nei­ther’ (says he) ‘give place, to the DEVIL.’ And, in his 2d Epistle to [Page 129] the Corinthians (ii. 10, 11.) he signifies his forgiveness to some offending person (probably meaning that fornicator whom he ordered in the 1st Epistle (Chap. 5.) to be excommunicated. He says, ‘for your sakes (forgave I it) in the person (or in the sight or presence) of Christ; lest SATAN should get an advantage over us: for we are not ignorant of his De­vices.’ The Apostle James also warns us upon the same points: ‘Resist the Devil’ (says he) ‘and he will flee from you.’ (iv. 7.) And the Apostle Peter is still more particular in his ad­vice on this head— ‘Be sober, be vigi­lant;’ (says he) ‘because your Ad­versary THE DEVIL, as a roaring Lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour. Whom RESIST steadfast in the faith,’&c. 1 Pet. v. 8.

The same Apostle also tells us, that ‘ GOD spared not THE ANGELS that [Page 130] sinned, but cast them DOWN TO HELL, and delivered them into CHAINS OF DARKNESS, to be reserved unto Judg­ment. (2 Pet. ii. 4.)’ The Word which is here translated " down to HELL," viz. [...] ( ‘down to Tar­tarus,’ or ‘ in Tartarus;)’ is derived from the Greek verb [...], Terreo, to dread, or be in Terror; so that even if Tartarus, or Hell, does not signify a real Place ⁽⁴⁴⁾, it signifies, at least, an actual [Page 131] State or Condition of extreme Terror and horrible Darkness, in which even SPI­RITS [Page 132] may be involved, or (as it were) bound; for the Apostle, by the idea of Darkness here expressed, may perhaps [Page 133] allude to a total Exclusion from the Light, Comfort, and Influence of the Divine Grace, or an entire Withdrawing of the glorious CREATOR'S Light and Spirit, by which Exclusion or Withdrawing, the wilful Reprobacy of these rebellious An­gels might, probably, have been fixed upon them, as an indelible stain of in­famy, to mark them for future punishment, and to exclude them from all hope of escaping the Divine Justice! So that those Spiritual Beings, which once were glorious in their Nature (being created "Angels of Light") have rendered them­selves most inglorious and detestable, by misusing that Liberty, in which the benevolent Creator had placed them; for they ‘kept not their first Estate ⁽⁴⁵⁾, but’ wickedly withdrew themselves from "their own Habitation," and have [Page 134] thereby been the wilful Authors of their own disgraceful and depraved Na­ture (the Diabolical Disposition); which is founded only in their own voluntary wickedness; ‘ for GOD IS NOT (the Author) OF CONFUSION ⁽⁴⁶⁾, BUT OF [Page 135] PEACE. (1 Cor. xiv. 33.)’ ‘God cannot be tempted with Evil, neither [Page 136] tempteth he any Man,’ or rather, he tempteth NONE, ( [...]) no Beings what­soever, [Page 137] (James i. 13.) and— ‘Out of the Mouth of the Most High proceedeth not EVIL and GOOD?’ (Lam. iii. 38.) so that as Iniquity can have no Fellowship ⁽⁴⁷⁾ [Page 138] with GOD, these Apostate Spirits have, of course, been totally excluded from every Ray of the Divine LIGHT; whereby, in­stead of continuing Angels of Light, as at first created, they are become totally dark, and opposite in every Principle to the LIGHT, Goodness, and Mercy of THE AL­MIGHTY; so that they may now be called, with propriety, ANGELS of DARK­NESS; for tho' they sometimes deceit­fully assume the opposite character ⁽⁴⁸⁾, in order to deceive the unwary, yet their Power is only of Darkness ⁽⁴⁹⁾, being [Page 139] bound (as it were) in the dark Chains ⁽⁵⁰⁾ of their own Iniquity or Reprobacy—in the "everlasting Chains" of horrible Darkness ⁽⁵¹⁾, whereby they are effectu­ally "reserved for Judgment," without being deprived of that activity, in exer­cising the malignity of their fixed re­probate Principles, and proneness to do Evil, which the Scriptures in many other passages attribute to them. For without some such supposition, how shall we [Page 140] reconcile the above-mentioned text of the Apostle Peter, as also that which is parallel to it in the Epistle of Jude, (wherein the fallen Angels are repre­sented as bound ‘in everlasting Chains under Darkness unto the Judgment of the Great Day)’ ⁽⁵²⁾ with those other texts before quoted from the Apostles Paul, James, and Peter, concerning the Activity and Vigilance of Diabolical Spi­rits.

The Apostle Paul, as I before re­marked, warns us of ‘the Wiles of the DEVIL,’ (by which word, in the singular number, is commonly under­stood the Prince ⁽⁵³⁾, or Chief of the [Page 141] fallen Angels), and tells, that ‘we wrestle not against FLESH AND BLOOD, but against PRINCIPALITIES, against POWERS, against the Rulers of the DARKNESS of this World, &c.’ Eph. vi. 11, 12.) being a clear declaration of the Agency and Activity of these invisible Spiritual Beings.

Again, the Apostle James tells us, to ‘resist the DEVIL, and he will FLEE from us;’ which excludes every idea of his being actually bound in chains of confinement. And the Apostle Peter represents him as ‘a roaring Lion, that WALKETH ABOUT, seeking whom he may devour;’ which absolutely for­bids the belief of a local confinement in any one place: so that the Chains of Darkness in Tartarus may very well ex­press [Page 142] such a total Darkness of Apostacy and absolute Reprobation, as I have sup­posed, wherein the disobedient Angels are bound and reserved for the day of Vengeance; for ‘THE EVERLASTING FIRE ⁽⁵⁴⁾ prepared for the DEVIL and HIS ANGELS; (Matt. xxv. 41.)’ [Page 143] being marked and distinguished from other Spirits by their confirmed propen­sity [Page 144] to Evil, and their continual oppo­sition to every good Principle; which [Page 145] renders their final condemnation to that "everlasting Fire" inevitable; for "the DEVILS also believe and tremble:" (James ii. 19.) by which, it seems, they fore­know their own certain condemnation, like those abandoned. Human Sinners, who ‘sin WILFULLY after (they) have received THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH;’ to whom ‘there remain­eth no more Sacrifice for Sins, but a cer­tain fearful LOOKING FOR of Judg­ment and fiery Indignation, which shall devour the Adversaries. Heb. x. 26, 27.’

[Page 146]This clear description of Human Re­probacy opens to us a very probable idea of the Angelic Reprobacy, or the mode whereby the Nature of Devils was first occasioned; and at the same time proves, that Men are equally liable to fall into the same lamentable Degeneracy and horrible Apostacy from God, and there­by may become a sort of Devils ⁽⁵⁵⁾, but indeed, of a very base and inferior [Page 147] order: for though they may be EQUAL, perhaps, IN WICKEDNESS (when the restraining Power of Conscience, or the Divine Knowledge of Good and Evil, is entirely effaced, or withdrawn from them) yet they must remain as much INFERIOR IN POWER and ABILITIES, as Human Nature is inferior to the cre­ated Part of Devils, I mean the Angelic Nature; for the Scriptures inform us, that ANGELS ‘are GREATER in Power and Might; (2 Pet. ii. 11.)’ and con­sequently must retain a GREATER pro­portion of both, (i. e. Power and Might) even in their fallen State, than reprobate Men.

The Devils, or Satanical Spirits, are constantly represented in the Scriptures to be as diametrically opposite in their Nature to the infinite Goodness of GOD, as Darkness is to Light ⁽⁵⁶⁾; as False­hood [Page 148] ‘Ye are of your Father the DEVIL, &c. When he speaketh a LYE, he speaketh of HIS OWN: for he is a LYAR, and the Father of it. John viii. 44.’ is to Truth ⁽⁵⁸⁾; as implacable and unprovoked Malice ⁽⁵⁹⁾ is to ever­lasting Mercy and Love ⁽⁶⁰⁾! And, there­fore, as they were really "Angels" in "their first Estate," so entire a change in their very nature may fairly be ac­counted as " Chains of Darkness"—of horrible Darkness! wherewith they are bound, as it were, and reserved for eter­nal Judgment, without hindrance or impediment to their natural activity in promoting Evil, as far as God is pleased to permit, in order to prove the Faith [Page 149] of Mankind; as in the severe trials of Job's patience, and also in the tempta­tion even of our Lord himself, which cannot be otherwise understood than in a literal sense; for CHRIST in his Hu­man Nature, not only overcame those extraordinary exertions of the Devil's power, related by the Apostle Matthew (Chap. 4.) and the Evangelists Mark (Chap. 1.) and Luke (Chap. 4.) but was also ‘in all points tempted like as we are (yet) without Sin.’ Heb. iv. 15.

And our Lord also declared the earnest wish and activity of the Spiritual Enemy to overcome the Faith of the Apostle Peter— ‘Simon, Simon’ (said our Lord) ‘Behold, SATAN HATH DESIRED (to have) YOU, that HE MAY SIFT (you) AS WHEAT: but I have prayed for thee, that thy Faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy bre­thren. Luke xxii. 31, 32.’ This is [Page 150] a clear Revelation that Human Nature is really liable to the impulse and temp­tations of wicked Spirits ⁽⁶¹⁾, which will certainly prevail over us, and become [Page 151] the Principles of Action, if we are not careful and vigilant to resist them as we ought: for Christ did not forbid the Tempter from using his endeavours against Peter, but only prayed, that THE FAITH of the Apostle should not fail; whereby he has taught us, that a sound and stedfast FAITH (for which WE ALSO are bound to pray) will sufficiently enable us to resist the POWERS OF DARKNESS.

But when Men disbelieve the very existence of those active Spiritual Ad­versaries, how should they be upon their guard to resist their influence? For Un­belief in the existence of Spiritual Beings will certainly be promoted, even by the DEVILS themselves, in all places where­ever they can gain advantage by it, and especially wherever Scepticism, Deism, [Page 152] and the groundless notions of the Sad­ducees, are openly set up in opposition to the clear testimonies of revealed Re­ligion, and the true Faith: for in all such places, it is obvious, that the in­terest of Satan's empire will be promoted by a disbelief of his existence; and con­sequently, that the Angels of Darkness will, in such places, most carefully abstain from every outward and visible demon­stration of their agency and power among Men. Whereas at other times, and in other places, where ignorance of a con­trary nature has prevailed, and Men have been subjected to superstitious ter­rors, by neglecting the only proper ob­ject of their confidence, in such places, I say, the Agency and Interference of DEMONS with Mankind have ever been notorious and manifest; of which the histories of all Heathen nations bear ample testimony.

[Page 153]The uniformity of Demon Worship, in all parts of the world, before the preach­ing of the Gospel, affords also a clear proof of the worldly Empire of Satan; for though Devils were worshipped under various names, and various figures, yet there was a constant uniformity in all such particular points as tended most to the Destruction of Mankind, or to lead Men to the most direct opposition to the revealed Laws of God, whereby the universal Author or Promoter of such baneful devices was clearly discoverable; the same being for the most part con­trary to the Nature of Man, and such, therefore, as could not naturally pro­ceed from Man alone.

Hence we may plainly account for the universal adoption of Human Sacri­fices amongst all Heathen Nations! Some of these deluded people withheld not even their own offspring from their Spiri­tual [Page 154] Deceiver; the spilling of Human Blood being most grateful to that Being, who " was a MURDERER from the be­ginning " ⁽⁶²⁾. Hence we may also account for the Cuttings in the Flesh for the dead, and the marking or tattooing of the skin, which still prevails amongst the African and American nations, and the present uninformed Islanders of the South Seas, as much as it formerly did amongst the Picts, and other more ancient Hea­thens; for their marks in the flesh were certainly intended by the Spiritual De­ceiver, as a sort of Dedication to him­self ⁽⁶³⁾, and as an affront to the Divine [Page 155] Creator, who formed Man without any such unnatural distinctions, and expressly [Page 156] commanded in his revealed Law.— ‘Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead,’ (or rather FOR THE SOUL) ‘nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord’ (that is, JEHOVAH, the only eternal BEING.) Levit. xix. 28.

And as the "forbidding to marry" is declared in Scripture to be ‘a Doctrine of Devils’ ⁽⁶⁴⁾; so we accordingly [Page 157] find, that amongst the ancient Heathens there was an order of Nuns or Priestesses (called Vestal Virgins) that were bound, contrary to Nature, in vows of CELI­BACY; and amongst the Heathen Tar­tars, Chinese, and other idolaters, even to this day ⁽⁶⁵⁾, there are distinct orders [Page 158] of Men, it seems, as well as Women, laid under the same unnatural restraint [Page 159] through the instigation of their spiritual Adversary ⁽⁶⁶⁾; and yet the same De­ceiver [Page 160] promoted, almost universally a­mongst the Heathen, as a sacred Rite, [Page 161] the promiscuous use of Woman, in order to draw Men by their natural Lusts to [Page 162] join the superstitious Congregations of his Worshippers.

Of this kind were the Rites of Venus among the Greeks, Romans, and (more particularly among) the inhabitants of Cyprus ⁽⁶⁷⁾; the shameful Rites of As­tarte [Page 163] (whom the Heathens called Queen of Heaven) in her temple at Byblus ⁽⁶⁸⁾: Those of Thammuz ⁽⁶⁹⁾ (or Adonis) [Page 164] among the Phoenicians, Syrians, and Apostate Jews: Those of Tanais, or Anaitis, among the Armenians ⁽⁷⁰⁾: And those of MYLITTA, the Aphrodite, or Venus of the ancient Babylonians, and more Eastern nations, at whose shrines women of all ranks, even of the first quality, were required once in their lives to prostitute themselves ⁽⁷¹⁾. The [Page 165] impious Rites of BAAL-PEOR (whereby many of the Israelites were ensnared by "the Council of Balaam" ⁽⁷²⁾ seem to have been of the same kind ⁽⁷³⁾; and to increase the temptation to Demon worship, it appears that the women of the first quality, among the daughters of Moab and Midian, were not exempted from that most disgraceful and pernicious pollution, baneful both to body and soul: for the Midianitish woman, that [Page 166] prostituted herself to Zimri the Sime­onite (and was killed, together with her captivated Israelitish paramour, by Phi­neas) is expressly declared to have been the daughter of Zur ⁽⁷⁴⁾, who was ‘HEAD OVER A PEOPLE, and of a CHIEF HOUSE in Midian.’ (Numb. xxv. 15.) And he is mentioned after­wards as one of THE KINGS of Midian. (Numb. xxxi. 8.)

Thus "the Council of Balaam" pro­moted the service and worship of Devils; and this should warn us of the extreme danger of yielding to the crime of For­nication, which, in all ages and nations, has been used as a snare to vilify man­kind, and enslave them to Spiritual Ad­versaries: for as THE FORBIDDING TO MARRY is unquestionably THE DOC­TRINE [Page 167] OF DEVILS (see p. 156 preceding) whereby those, who devote themselves to such unnatural commands, fall under more severe Temptation to FORNICA­TION ⁽⁷⁵⁾, so, on the other hand, [Page 168] FORNICATION is reciprocal in its effects, by being one of the most baneful ob­stacles to lawful and virtuous MARRI­AGE, and, consequently, to the increase and multiplication of mankind: but this, bad as it is, is not the worst con­sequence of habitual FORNICATION; for men, being thereby drawn away from the service and worship of their Creator, [Page 169] are gradually led to greater crimes, whereby their minds are more and more darkened, like those of the fallen Angels, until they are totally deprived of the Light and Image of their Creator, and lose both temporal and eternal Happi­ness!

When Men are IN BONDAGE to their own Lusts, there is no doubt but that Satan has already "got an Advantage" over them; and, by their Lusts, and unrestrained Affections, does hold them IN BONDAGE also to himself! So that a Man cannot free himself from Spiritual Bondage, without forsaking and repent­ing of his favourite sins; for we can have no direct idea of resisting the Devil (as the Scriptures command us) but that of resisting Evil, wherever we perceive it, whether in thoughts, words, or actions. But when Men entirely neglect this ne­cessary resistance to Evil, they are sure [Page 170] to be led on from one vice to another, till the two before-mentioned natural and universal Principles in Mankind, in­tended for their Preservation, viz. Com­mon Sense (or Reason) and Self-love, have lost their influence: for the Actions of of a great part of Mankind cannot be accounted for upon any other Principle than that of a lamentable BONDAGE to the SPIRITUAL ADVERSARY, who leads them to actions that are clearly contrary to Self-love and Common Sense, and con­trary even to any probable gratification that might afford a Temptation to Hu­man Beings!—to actions that apparently tend to their own everlasting destruction!

How common is it for Men to lift their hands against their own life, and deliberately to exclude themselves from all possibility of repentance? It must be allowed indeed, that real Madness, or Lunacy, and other natural distempers [Page 171] and frenzies, are frequently the Princi­ples of Action which occasion Suicide; but we have too many instances of de­liberate Self-murder, wherein no such natural causes can with justice be al­ledged, though generally assigned by the coroner's juries, through a false notion of mercy, which inclines them to adopt the erroneous maxim, that ‘all Men are mad who kill themselves.’ But nothing is more false!

If the Brute Creation were equally liable to voluntary deaths, Suicide might with more probability be attributed to natural causes only, as they are almost equally liable to distempers; but herein appears a capital distinction between Human Nature and that of Brutes. None of the BRUTE CREATION ever violate the universal Principle of SELF-LOVE, which the Divine Author of Na­ture has given them for their preserva­tion! [Page 172] And though MAN is also endowed with the same Principle, as I have already shewn, yet the very BRUTES make so much better use of it than MAN, that in them we distinguish the same Principle, even by another name, and call it IN­STINCT— an INSTINCT of Self-preser­vation—an Instinct, because it is never violated. How are we to account for this seeming Superiority in the BRUTES? Why should HUMAN NATURE be more subject to Depravity than they are? MAN, who, in addition to that natural Light with which he was endowed at the time of his Creation, has since ac­quired an additional power of discern­ment and prudence for his preservation, even a Divine Knowledge of GOOD and EVIL, that he ‘may know how to refuse the EVIL, and chuse the GOOD;’ and yet is in general infinitely more depraved than the very BRUTES! Let any rea­sonable Man consider how impossible it [Page 173] is, by natural Causes, to account for so extraordinary a circumstance! That MAN, endowed with such a Superiority of Knowledge for SELF-PRESERVATION, and also endowed with Self-love in com­mon with the rest of the Creation, should yet be subject to such monstrous Depravity, as to lose all sense of both, while the BRUTES are never known to violate that universal Principle, Self-love! except it be for a reasonable Cause, that they risk their own Lives in defence of their young, to preserve their species, or through gratitude, as Dogs will de­fend their masters, which surely is no Depravity! To what extraordinary cause then shall we attribute this very singular superiority of BRUTES in a circumstance so necessary to happiness. The cause is obvious, BRUTES have never been sub­ject to spiritual Delusions, or to be actuated by infernal Spirits, since the time that the Serpent deceived our first parents!

[Page 174]There is no instance, I believe, since that time, of BRUTES being really actu­ated by evil Spirits, except one; and that was (be pleased to observe) by express Permission of our LORD himself, viz. when the Devils entered into the swine by the lake of Gennesareth. For it appears, that the Demons had no power to enter into the animals, till our Lord had ex­pressly granted it: for— ‘the Devils BESOUGHT HIM, saying, If thou cast us out, SUFFER US to go away into the herd of swine, and he said unto them, Go.’ THE PERMISSION being thus gained, the animals immediately ac­quired a new "Principle of Action," too similar to that which actuates poor aban­doned sinners among MEN (as when the Devil entered Judas, and led him, not only to betray his Lord, but to punish the horrid treason with his own hands, contrary to every conceivable Natural Principle of Action) so the unhappy Brutes [Page 175] by Gennesareth were no sooner subjected, like Mankind, to the Bondage of infernal Spirits, than they immediately lost that Principle of Self-love, which in them (because never violated but at this par­ticular time) is called Instinct; and by the immediate consequence of that loss, they have afforded us a notable example of the baneful effects of Diabolical In­spiration ⁽⁷⁶⁾, to which at all other times [Page 176] Mankind alone are subjected;—for ‘be­hold’ (says the text) ‘the whole herd [Page 177] of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters. Matth. viii. 28—32.’

[Page 178]Thus the Influence of EVIL SPIRITS became, manifestly, a Principle of Action [Page 179] in the poor Brutes, which overpowered their ‘Natural Instinct of Self-preser­vation,’ [Page 180] and hurried them headlong to destruction; and the cause being [Page 181] known, it is very natural to conclude, when we see similar Effects in Human [Page 182] Beings, that the same "Principle of Action" may perhaps have produced [Page 183] them; especially if there be no previous circumstances of Distemper or Distraction, [Page 184] which may leave room to hope, that another Cause might reasonably be assign­ed. [Page 185] And as the example also shews us, that Devils have no power to enter Brutes [Page 186] without express Permission of the Creator, let us, by a comparative consideration of [Page 187] our own bodies, learn to be continually upon our guard against the devices and [Page 188] instigations of our spiritual Enemies, always remembering, that they need no [Page 189] such express Permission from God to enter the Human Body; or rather, that God [Page 190] has already lodged the Power of permit­ting or resisting them, entirely in the [Page 191] Human Breast; since we are by Nature continually liable to receive the Inspira­tion of the Devil and his Angels as a "Principle of Action," if we neglect the necessary Resistance commanded in the Scriptures; and consequently, that they already have Permission from God to enter all Human Beings, I mean all those as [Page 192] are capable of discerning between Good and Evil, and do not reject the Evil as they ought, according to that Divine Knowledge which we inherit from our first Parents!

This Peculiarity in our Nature is there­fore apparently the reason why Spiritual Adversaries are permitted by the Al­mighty to approach Mankind, though they have no such general Permission with respect to the rest of the animal Creation. But Man took the Knowledge of Good and Evil upon himself, contrary to the ex­press commands of God, as I have be­fore remarked; and therefore we have no right to murmur at the Permission which God has granted to ‘the Devil and his Angels,’ to take possession of all unguarded Souls, which unhappily yield to their suggestions and tempta­tions, without resistance or repentance; and more especially we have no right to mur­mur [Page 193] (I say) at this Permission, if we con­sider that God has given us fair warning of our continual danger and warfare with the Principalities and Powers of Darkness; as the Holy Scriptures plainly inform us, that we are continually liable to Satanical influence; and that the DEVIL will get an advantage over us, if we do not resist him as we ought!—In this necessary Resistance, and the objects of it, consist the principal exercise of that assumed Knowledge of Good and Evil, for which we are accountable; viz. we know Evil from Good, and consequently know when we ought to resist; but if we do not resist, then we have chosen the EVIL, and (in whatsoever mode the EVIL is manifest) have given Advantage to the Devil, and submit ourselves to his Bondage. The Choice therefore, which is set before us, amounts to this—Whether we will chuse ‘the Kingdom of God, and his Righteousness, (Mat. vi. 33.)’ [Page 194] and cheerfully assent (as the dignity of Human Nature requires) to that ‘per­fect Law of Liberty,’ which Christ has tendered to us for the regulation of our conduct towards all Mankind, as well as for Self-preservation? or—Whether we rather prefer the Empire of SATAN, the spiritual Enemy, for the sake of those temporal gratifications and vile indul­gences, by which he holds Men in Bon­dage, through their carnal affections, till they become personal Enemies, even to themselves!

The assumed Principle of ‘knowing Good and Evil,’ will undoubtedly in­duce all Mankind most readily to CHUSE ‘the Kingdom of God, and his Righteous­ness; (Mat. vi. 33.)’ but this is not a CHOICE to be made merely once in our lives, but to be continually maintained, or the prudent CHOICE will avail nothing! Are not Men in general bound by a so­lemn oath in the outward rite of Water-Baptism, [Page 195] thus to maintain that prudent CHOICE which they publickly profess? And yet how little do their practices in general correspond with such a resolu­tion! Surely, ‘the Mammon of Unright­eousness, (Luke xvi. 9.)’ ‘the PRINCE of this World,’ that had been ‘cast out, (John xii. 31.)’ ‘the Principalities, Powers, and Rulers of the Darkness of this World, (not FLESH AND BLOOD)’ with whom we have to WRESTLE, do apparently prevail over a great multitude in every rank of life! For, ‘this is the Condemnation, that Light is come into the World, and Men loved DARKNESS rather than LIGHT,’ (a lamentable Choice! a shameful prostitution of the Knowledge of Good and Evil! but the Apostle assigns the reason) ‘because,’ (says he) ‘their Deeds were EVIL. For every one that doeth EVIL, hateth the LIGHT, neither cometh to the LIGHT, lest his Deeds should be reproved. But [Page 196] he that doeth the Truth, cometh to the LIGHT, that his Deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought IN GOD. John iii. 19. to 21.)’ Let us therefore be upon our guard, and ‘put on the whole Armour of God, that (we) may be able to stand against the WILES OF THE DEVIL. (Ephes. vi. 11.)’

But though Human Nature is thus liable to the Influence of ‘the Devil and his Angels,’ let us remember at the same time for our comfort, that it is equally capable of being actuated by DIVINE INSPIRATION; and that Man­kind (in the glorious FREEDOM of the Gospel) are equally left to their CHOICE for the admission of that supreme Good, "THE GIFT OF THE HOLY GHOST," to regulate their Principles of Action in all cases, as they are for the admission of the contrary Spirit, ‘the Prince of Darkness!’ For the Promises of CHRIST relating to that heavenly Gift are clear [Page 197] and absolute, and are tendered to all Mankind without exception, that they may exercise their natural Knowledge of GOOD and EVIL, in CHUSING, ACCEPT­ING, and continually CLAIMING them, if they really prefer "the Kingdom of God" to "the Kingdom of this World!" Here is true Freedom! a Charter of inestimable Privileges! ‘ ASK, and it shall be GIVEN YOU; SEEK, and ye shall FIND; knock, and it shall be OPENED unto you, &c. (Mat. vii. 7.)’ And again, "All things whatsoever ye shall ASK IN PRAYER, be­lieving, ye shall receive." (Mat. xxi. 22. and Mark xi. 24.) And after these ge­neral promises, our Lord appealed to the common Sense of his hearers concerning the efficacy of a son's request to a natural Father, to obtain things that are neces­sary for him; and concludes thereupon — ‘If ye then being EVIL, know how to give GOOD GIFTS to your Children: HOW MUCH MORE shall your heavenly Father GIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT to [Page 198] them that ASK HIM? (Luke xi. 9. to 13.)’ So that every Man, who de­voutly, and with due Faith, claims that glorious GIFT according to the Promise, and with such a disposition of mind as the Scriptures require, will undoubtedly receive it, "for he is faithful that pro­mised." Heb. x. 23.

I am well aware how uncommon it is to introduce these religious topicks into Tracts of Law, but as the Divine Influ­ence of THE HOLY SPIRIT upon Man­kind may certainly be esteemed the su­preme "Principle of Action in Man," I am obliged, by the nature of my sub­ject, to cite some testimonies concerning the general effect of that heavenly Gift, to which all Mankind are entitled; for such is the compound Nature of Man, that Enquiries concerning ‘Human Nature,’ and ‘the Principles of Hu­man Actions,’ cannot be fairly and [Page 199] carefully defined, without a careful exa­mination of this Human Claim to DIVINE INSPIRATION; nor indeed without a careful warning also against that very opposite and foreign Spiritual Influence, which is equally liable to alter Human Nature, and become ‘the Principle of Action;’ which I hope I have already sufficiently proved from Scripture. And therefore with respect to the former, viz. the inestimable Claim to Divine Inspiration which we hold in CHRIST, it is proper to be remarked, that the peculiar and necessary Effect of that glorious and hea­venly Gift, is a total change in the Nature of Man (from his fallen State, before described, to ‘A NEW CREA­TURE’) by a Regeneration or New Birth through THE SPIRIT; to which God has also been pleased to annex (as necessary on our first publick Admission to the Claims and Privileges of the Gospel) an outward visible Sign also, or [Page 200] typical Washing with Water ⁽⁷⁷⁾; by which we bear a publick or outward testimony of that true Faith, which alone can qualify our claim to the pro­mise.

Thus Man, through the privileges of the Gospel, becomes "A NEW CREA­TURE," (2 Cor. v. 17.) and partakes even of THE DIVINE NATURE, if his [Page 201] own earnest and sincere endeavours are not wanting; for the Apostle PETER has expressly declared, that this is one of the effects of our Lord's most gra­cious promises. ‘Grace and Peace be multiplied unto you (said the Apostle) through the Knowledge of GOD, and of JESUS OUR LORD, according as his DIVINE POWER hath given unto us all things that (pertain) unto Life and Godliness, through the Knowledge of him that hath called us TO GLORY and VIRTUE: whereby are given unto us EXCEEDING GREAT AND PRECIOUS PROMISES; that by these ye might be PARTAKERS of the DIVINE NATURE (ΚΟΝΩΝΟΙ) having escaped the Corruption that is in the World through Lust. (2 Pet. i. 2. to 4.)’

Hence the Dignity and Superiority of MAN over the rest of the visible [Page 202] Creation is manifest! We not only pos­sess, by natural Inheritance from our first Parents, a DIVINE ATTRIBUTE (as I have already shewn in the former part of this Tract) viz. the Knowledge of Good and Evil; but also, by a right use of that Knowledge, in CHUSING and pre­ferring the Good, and in REJECTING and resisting the Evil, we are capable also ( through CHRIST) of PARTAKING " even of the DIVINE NATURE;" so that if we consider this most extraordi­nary Privilege, which is tendered to us on the one hand, and that deplorable Condition on the other hand, which we shall probably fall into, if we neglect it (viz. the partaking of the Diabolical Na­ture by the inspiration of the Devil and his Angels; to which, as I have already shewn, we are continually liable, if we do not watch, and resist); it must be be evident that MAN is either the most [Page 203] glorious, or the most miserable and base of all other Creatures!

Surely the consideration of these things ought to humble the pride of those in­considerate persons, who, on account of mere temporal honours, and worldly possessions, are so lifted up above their brethren, as to forget that they have no natural Precedency; but expect that the multitude of inferiors in fortune should implicitly submit to the will of the worldly superior, in all things; and who also seem to lose all sympathetick concern, all sense of fellow-feeling for the wants and sufferings of their poor dependants, as if they sprung from a different Stock, and were not of EQUAL DIGNITY in the SIGHT OF GOD!

But, alas, PRIDE is a Principle of Action, which occasioned the Fall even [Page 204] of SATAN himself ⁽⁷⁸⁾, and of his An­gels, and is equally pernicious to Hu­man Nature; for it renders MANKIND more liable to forfeit that glorious Liberty, those inestimable Privileges, which I have before described, than any other vice! And the reason is plain; for THE PROUD MAN, of all others, is most liable to neglect that "ROYAL LAW," which I have already mentioned—that GOLDEN RULE, by which their notions of poli­tical government, and their behaviour to all Mankind, ought to be regulated; for if he was not guilty of this neglect, he [Page 205] would necessarily cease to be PROUD, he would cease to be uncharitable; he would cease to be an Advocate for arbitrary Power, either in political Despotism, or in domestick Slavery, both of which now unhappily prevail almost throughout the whole world! for even the enlightened English Nation is no longer qualified to censure the unnatural Oppression of the Peasantry and lower orders of people in Russia, Poland, France, some Part of Germany, and in many other States, which are commonly called Christian; since the English Government have pub­lickly favoured, and do continue to en­courage the most abominable Oppres­sions that ever disgraced Mankind; I mean the AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE carried on from England, and THE TOLERATION OF SLAVERY IN THE BRITISH COLONIES! Let the Advo­cates for these Oppressions seriously and carefully consider the DIGNITY and [Page 206] EQUALITY of HUMAN NATURE, which I have described, as well as their own STATE OF PROBATION in this life, and the Forfeiture of inestimable Privileges to which they are continually liable, and I trust they will become sen­sible of their danger!

But, alas, there are many other causes of failure, which tend to deprive Man­kind of that glorious and eternal Dignity, for which ALL MEN should be candi­dates: for besides the ordinary tempta­tions of worldly Pleasures ⁽⁷⁹⁾, which draw the bulk of Mankind from con­sidering the true means of obtaining the glorious promises of the Gospel, how often are the minds of Men puffed up with Self-sufficiency, and the PRIDE OF HUMAN LEARNING, and too often [Page 207] even with SPIRITUAL PRIDE, whereby they suffer themselves to be perverted through the deceitfulness even of their own sophistry!

How can such Men avail themselves of the glorious Promise of DIVINE IN­SPIRATION, as "a Principle of Action," if they form to themselves a Mode of believing, which is totally different from "the Faith once delivered to the Saints?"

Perhaps they will say— ‘We do ask the assistance of God's Holy Spirit, and have as good a Right as others to sup­pose that God's Promise is fulfilled in us;’ nevertheless they must allow, that FAITH is necessary for those who ASK; and how can Men be said to have the NECESSARY FAITH, who form to themselves notions of God's HOLY SPI­RIT, which are totally inconsistent with the DIVINE NATURE?

[Page 208]How can we conceive that ‘ the SPI­RIT OF GLORY and OF GOD (1 Pet. iv. 14.)’ ‘ resteth upon’ those who wick­edly esteem that glorious and ‘Eternal Spirit (Heb. ix. 14.)’ no otherwise than as a created Being, and a mere mi­nistering Spirit; and who refuse to join in that excellent Form of Prayer, the Litany of the Church of England, merely because THE HOLY GHOST is, therein, addressed AS GOD? Is not this to do " despite unto THE SPIRIT of Grace? (Heb. x. 29.)

These Men may pray for the HOLY SPIRIT, indeed; but, with such erroneous conceptions of that GLORIOUS GIFT, it is impossible that they should RECEIVE that eternal "SPIRIT OF TRUTH," till they have sincerely repented of their horrid blasphemies, and humbled their own haughty Spirits to receive the plain information of the Scriptures; for if our [Page 209] Belief in the HOLY TRINITY were set aside, the greatest part of those sacred Writings would become utterly unin­telligible to us; because they must, in that case, seem to contain the grossest contradictions, as there are passages, which, without that necessary doctrine, would surely appear inconsistent with grammar and common sense! The doc­trine of the HOLY TRINITY is ex­pressed in the Articles and Liturgy of the Church of England in such guarded terms, as cannot easily be misconstrued and perverted: and though a certain set of men may pretend to found their ob­jections to the Church of England on some other Articles of less moment, yet I am thoroughly persuaded, that the said guarded Terms, concerning that ONE ne­cessary Doctrine, are the principal causes of offence to many of those mistaken Clergymen, who lately petitioned Parlia­ment that they might be exempted from [Page 210] Subscription ⁽⁸⁰⁾ to the Articles of the Church of England. But as a right Faith [Page 211] must seal and authenticate our claims to the inestimable privileges and immuni­ties of the Gospel, and as the true Dignity of Human Nature cannot be attained without the Divine Assistance, and the Inspiration of God's Holy Spirit, where­by Men are made partakers (as I have already shewn) of the Divine Nature, some knowledge of the latter (so far as the Almighty hath been pleased to reveal himself to us) is absolutely necessary for [Page 212] those Persons who desire to be acquaint­ed with the Law of Nature, and ‘the Principles of Action in Man:’ and therefore some observations relating to the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, are by no means foreign to the subject and in­tention of this Tract. But it is an awful mystery, that must be received more by Faith in what God has been pleased to reveal to us, than by Human Comprehen­sion. The finite understanding of the NA­TURAL MAN ⁽⁸¹⁾ cannot, in this life, conceive an adequate idea of that glo­rious and eternal BEING, which in every attribute is infinite perfection! Nay, even if we had a perfect Knowledge of that which is now so far above us, yet no language could supply words, no rheto­rical figures of comparison could be found to express that Knowledge! and it would, therefore, remain unuttered, in these lower [Page 213] Regions, like those "unspeakable Words" which were heard by the Apostle Paul when he was "caught up into Paradise!" 2 Cor. xii. 4. For— ‘To whom will ye liken God? (said Isai. xl. 18.)’ ‘or what Like­ness will ye compare unto him?’

But a time will come, when we shall know, even as we are known ⁽⁸²⁾. This expression to KNOW, even as we are KNOWN, implies a perfect Knowledge of that eternal Being, which is infinite in Knowledge, in Power, in Majesty, in Glory, &c.—And therefore a more ex­alted State of Happiness cannot be con­ceived, than that which a perfect Know­ledge of GOD must afford!—A Happiness to be expected only in Heaven, when Human Nature shall have put on In­corruption and Immortality ⁽⁸³⁾. But [Page 214] though we can neither attain, in this life, a perfect Knowledge of God, nor that perfect Happiness which results from it, yet it is our duty to improve and cultivate our limited Knowledge concern­ing the Divine Nature, as far as God has been pleased to reveal himself to us in the Scriptures; for so FAR the Know­ledge is undoubtedly necessary to MAN, even in this life, or otherwise, we may be assured, the Revelation would not have been made, in the Scriptures, ‘by Inspiration of God’ ⁽⁸⁴⁾, who cannot act in vain! Let us therefore earnestly desire to partake of that necessary Know­ledge, and let us look into the evidences of it with the most awful reverence, [Page 215] and the most humble submission of our FAITH to the Word of GOD; lest through any improper conception of the Divine Nature, we should unhappily fall under a similar condemnation to that of Eli­phaz, and his two friends, who visited Job— ‘My Wrath’ (said JEHOVAH) ‘is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me’ (the thing that is) ‘right, &c. (Job xlii. 7.)’

When Moses desired to see the Glory of JEHOVAH (saying, ‘I beseech thee shew me THY GLORY’) he was answered by the Almighty, ‘Thou canst not see my Face: for there shall no Man see me and live. (Exod. xxxiii. 18.20.)’ We must therefore limit our ideas of those appearances under which God re­vealed himself to the Patriarchs, and to Moses;—for the Gospel expressly in­forms us, that ‘no Man hath seen God at any time’ (but the Evangelist im­mediately [Page 216] adds with respect to the Mes­siah) ‘the only begotten Son, which IS IN THE BOSOM OF THE FATHER, he hath declared.’ ( [...]) That is, hath clearly declared or shewn the Father, or, as Mr. Leigh has remarked upon the Word in his Critica Sacra—id est (says he) Nobis ad ejus veram cognitio­nem eruendam Dux et Auctor fuit, &c.

This is further explained by the de­claration of our Lord himself— ‘He that hath SEEN me (said our Lord) hath SEEN the Father; &c. (1 John xiv. 9.)’ ‘Believe me, that I am in the Fa­ther, and the Father in me ⁽⁸⁵⁾. (ib. ver. 11.)’ Not that any Man hath SEEN the eternal Being (or JEHOVAH) I mean the Divine Nature ⁽⁸⁶⁾, in which the [Page 217] Son of Man (even while ON EARTH) was and is in the Bosom of the Father, (and in which now that he is ascended into Heaven) he is always with his Church ON EARTH, though he ‘sat down’ ( [...], which plainly implies a personal Residence) ‘on the Right Hand of the Majesty on High; (Heb. i. 3.)’—for "GOD is a Spirit," and cannot be seen by Human Eyes ⁽⁸⁶⁾, ‘though he be not far from every one of us. For in him we live, and move, and have our being. (Acts xvii. 27, 28.)’ But Christ being ‘the Image of the IN­VISIBLE [Page 218] GOD ⁽⁸⁷⁾, in whom all Ful­ness dwelleth, (Coloss. i. 15—19.)’ ‘for in him dwelleth all the Fulness of [Page 219] the GODHEAD BODILY, [...], or personally! (Coloss. ii. 9.)’ ‘Who being the Brightness of his Glory, and express Image of his’ ( that is, God's ⁽⁸⁸⁾ Person ( [...]) ‘and upholding all Things by the Word of his Power, (Hebr. i. 3.)’ in him [Page 220] alone, therefore, ‘who is the Image of God, (2 Cor. iv. 4.)’ can GOD be seen! and in him alone could be fulfilled that ancient Promise to the Jewish Na­tion, that they should SEE THEIR GOD: — ‘O Zion, that bringest good Tidings, get thee up into the high Mountain: O Jerusalem, that bringest good Tidings, lift up thy Voice with Strength: lift (it) up, be not afraid; SAY UNTO THE CITIES OF JUDAH, BEHOLD YOUR GOD! Isaiah xl. 9.’ Com­pare this with the Context in the same Chapter. The Divine Person, whom "THE CITIES OF JUDAH" are here called upon to BEHOLD, was afterwards (agreeable to this prophecy) particularly pointed out by John the Baptist, to " the Cities of Judah ⁽⁸⁹⁾, and the Office of that faithful Harbinger, or [Page 221] Forerunner, in proclaiming the Advent as well as the Dignity of the Divine Person, that was ‘to be seen, or made manifest to Israel,’ is as distinctly fore­told in the 3d and 5th Verses of the same Chapter. ‘The Voice of him that crieth in THE WILDERNESS’ (for the Wilderness was the appointed Place of John's Ministry) ‘Prepare ye the Way of the LORD’ ( [...] "the Way of JEHOVAH") ‘make straight in THE DESERT’ (once more alluding to the Place wherein the Messiah was first pro­claimed [Page 222] by his inspired Harbinger) ‘a Highway for OUR GOD!’ And again, ‘the Glory of THE LORD’ ( i. e. "the Glory of JEHOVAH," [...]) ‘shall be revealed, and ALL FLESH SHALL SEE (it) TOGETHER,’ &c. This latter Sentence was fulfilled only in part, when "the Voice in the Wilderness" pro­claimed the Messiah, saying, ‘Behold the Lamb of God,’ &c.—for though Jerusalem, "and the Cities of Judah," then beheld their GOD in the Person of the Son of God ⁽⁹⁰⁾, and saw the Glory ⁽⁹¹⁾ of Jehovah, that was promised to be revealed, without perceiving it, agree­able [Page 223]to another Prophecy of Isaiah ( ‘in SEEING ye shall SEE, and shall not PERCEIVE ⁽⁹²⁾, chap. vi. 9.) yet all Flesh did not then SEE him together!’ Suc­ceeding Generations, indeed, may be said to see, and also to perceive the Glory of Je­hovah, that is, with the Eye of Faith in the scriptures: but the prophecy will most certainly be literally and universally fulfilled AT THE DAY OF JUDGMENT, when ‘ALL THE TRIBES OF THE EARTH shall SEE THE SON OF MAN coming in the Clouds of Heaven, with Power and GREAT GLORY. (Matt. xxiv. 30.)’ For then "THE GLORY OF JEHOVAH" [Page 224] will be so revealed, that ‘ALL FLESH SHALL SEE (it) TOGETHER,’ even those Men shall see, that now presume to deny the Divine Nature of our Redeemer, and refuse to worship him; for ‘ BEHOLD, he cometh with the Clouds; and EVERY EYE SHALL SEE HIM, and they (also) which pierced him. Rev. i. 7.’ ‘This is he’ (said the learned Bishop Chan­dler, speaking of the Divine WORD ⁽⁹³⁾, which was in the Beginning with God, and was God, and made all Things) ‘who in time’ (says he) ‘was made Flesh, and is called JESUS ⁽⁹⁴⁾, and [Page 225] CHRIST, as he is indeed the Foun­tain of Life and Light to every Being [Page 226] that partakes of either, &c. (Serm. before the King in 1718. p. 21.)’ ‘Some­times he is indeed treated’ (says the same learned Writer, p. 15.) ‘as an Angel, or Messenger; but even then is so distinguished from all other Angels, in respect of Majesty, Autority, and Power, or dignify'd with the incom­municable Title of JEHOVA, that they had not the least Thought of his being a meer Angel,’ &c.

The Eternal WORD, though he was in the Beginning with GOD, and was GOD, yet under the Dispensation of the Gospel (that he might restore the lost [Page 227] Dignity of fallen Man) became the Angel, or MESSENGER of GOD; that is, of Jehovah Tsabaouth, the Lord of Hosts. For He was— ‘the Messenger of the Covenant,’ foretold by the Prophet Malachi, and being also Lord of Hosts him­self, he sent another Messenger before his Face to prepare his Way—"BEHOLD, I" (that is, I JEHOVAH TSABAOUTH, or Lord of Hosts, see the End of the Verse) " will send MY MESSENGER" (that is, John the Baptist ⁽⁹⁴⁾) ‘and he shall prepare the Way before me’ (that is, before the Divine WORD, which, being included in the Unity of JEHOVAH, then spoke to the Jews under the Title of LORD OF HOSTS) " and THE LORD" ( [...] THE ADOUN ⁽⁹⁵⁾, or supreme [Page 228] Lord) "whom ye seek" (whom the Jews were taught by their Prophets to expect) ‘ shall suddenly come to HIS ⁽⁹⁶⁾ Temple, even THE MESSENGER’ (or Angel, [...] Malach, from whence the Prophet Ma­lachi himself was also named) ‘ OF THE COVENANT, whom ye delight in: Behold, he shall come, saith the LORD OF HOSTS. Malachi iii. 1.’

Thus it appears, that the Messenger (whom our Lord himself declared to be John the Baptist) was to be sent to prepare the Way before JEHOVAH OF [Page 229] HOSTS, the same Divine Being who SPOKE by the Prophet, ‘Behold, I will send MY Messenger, and he shall prepare the Way before ME.’ But our Lord himself, in referring to this Passage, varies a little from the Original, by making a Distinction of Persons between the Lord (or Jehovah of Hosts) who spoke, and the Divine Person before whom the Messenger was to prepare the Way— ‘Behold, I send MY Messenger before THY Face, which shall prepare THY Way before THEE. Matt. xi. 10.’ This Variation from the first to the se­cond Person, from my to thy, and from me to thee, proves that Christ (for it cannot be applied to any other but Christ and Jehovah) was indeed the Person before whom the Messenger, John, was to prepare the Way; and the original Text (which undoubtedly is also a true Reading in this Place, as it perfectly corresponds with all the ancient Ver­sions) [Page 230] proves at the same time, that the Way was to be prepared for Jehovah, who said, Behold, I will send MY Mes­senger, and he shall prepare the Way before ME; and consequently it appears, by comparing both Texts, that CHRIST is included in the Eternal Being JE­HOVAH. The Socinians endeavour to evade this Testimony of the Scripture concerning the Divine Nature of the Messiah, by supposing that he is called Jehovah only in a relative Sense, as being the Prophet, or Ambassador of JEHOVAH, the Representative being named for the Prin­cipal. In like manner, for Instance (say they) as he that despiseth Christ's Messen­gers, is said to despise Christ himself; and he that despiseth him, despiseth also him that sent him. Luke x. 16. And he that lied to the Apostles, lied to God. Acts v. 4.

In these and such like Passages, in­deed, the relative Sense is manifest; and [Page 231] it may also, in a certain degree, be ad­mitted in the Construction of the Text in question, but yet not so as to favour the Socinian Argument in the least re­spect whatsoever.

The Prophecy, for instance, concern­ing the Messenger therein mentioned (of whom JEHOVAH said,—" he shall pre­pare the Way before ME) was fulfilled in the Person of John the Baptist, as our Lord himself declared (see Note in p. 227.); and therefore, according to the Socinian Method of Argument, it might indeed be said of those worldly Men, who despised that extraordinary Mes­senger of Jehovah, and neglected the Doctrine of Repentance, which he en­forced; that they, in so doing, despised the Lord Jehovah, by whom this Mes­senger was sent; and, on the other hand, those Jews, who readily received John's Doctrine of Repentance, and attended [Page 232] diligently to his Instructions, may, in the like relative Sense, be said to honour Jehovah, by paying due Respect to his Messenger. But a mere relative Honour, such as might lawfully be given to the Messenger of Jehovah, will bear no Com­parison with the Honour that is due to Jehovah himself:—the latter must be supream Honour and Worship, whereas the former amounts only to Respect, At­tention, and good Offices, for whatever is more than these must lead to Idolatry; so that the Comparison can be carried no farther.

A Messenger of Jehovah cannot, there­fore, merely as such, be allowed the Name of JEHOVAH, because this would entitle him also to the Honour that is due to JEHOVAH alone; so that when Jeho­vah said, ‘MY Messenger’— ‘ he shall prepare the Way BEFORE ME,’ he must mean (if Language has any Use) [Page 233] that the Messenger was to prepare the Way for the Advent of Jehovah himself, who could not be said to come in the Person of any Messenger, or Ambassador whatsoever, except in one of the Divine Persons that are manifestly included in the same Eternal BEING, and conse­quently are entitled to the Honour and Worship, as well as to the Name, of JE­HOVAH! This glorious Title JEHOVAH is no where in Scripture attributed to any Person whatever, that is not thus included in the Unity of the Godhead, neither can it be without Blasphemy (so that the Socinian Argument must fall to the Ground) because it is the distin­guishing Title of the supreme Divine Nature!— ‘ Thou, whose Name alone (is) JEHOVA (art) the most High over all the Earth. Psal. lxxxiii. 18.’ or it should rather be rendered, as we find it in the old English Versions— Thou whose [Page 234] Name is JEHOVAH, art ONLY (or alone) the most High, &c.

This Division of the Sentence is agree­able to all the ancient Versions, except the Syriac; but, in either way of tran­slating, the Name of JEHOVAH is ma­nifestly given as the distinguishing Title of the supreme GOD; and cannot therefore be attributed to any Person whatever, that is not truly God, because the said Distinction would be destroyed, if the Name was ever used merely in that rela­tive Sense for which the Socinians con­tend: Proper Names, indeed, were fre­quently formed or compounded with that Holy Name, by having it prefixed, or postfixed, to some other Word, ap­parently with an Intention to distinguish the Servants of JEHOVAH ⁽⁹⁷⁾; but the [Page 235] peculiar and incommunicable Name itself has never been mentioned by any of the Sacred Writers in such a manner, as to refer us either in direct Terms, or by necessary Implication, to any other Persons whatsoever, besides those of the Holy Trinity; and, on the other hand, with respect to Christ, it is not only the Name of JEHOVAH that is re­ferred to him by the necessary Inter­pretation of several incontestable Pas­sages of Scripture; but also the Power ⁽⁹⁸⁾, the Honour ⁽⁹⁹⁾, and the Glory [Page 236] of Jehovah ⁽¹⁰⁰⁾: so that the Socinian Evasion before-mentioned is as vain as it is wicked, whenever it is applied to those Passages of Scripture wherein the Name of Jehovah is attributed to that Divine Person, ‘in whom dwelleth all the Fullness of the Godhead, bodily! Coloss. ii. 9.’

[...] JEHOVAH is the proper and es­sential Name of ALMIGHTY GOD, be­cause it, in some degree, expresses his Eternal Being or Existence, being a com­pound Word, including different Tenses or Times of the Hebrew Verb [...] TO BE, or rather (as it is the Preterperfect Tense, signifying HE WAS; from whence is formed [...], the Participle as well as [Page 237] Present Tense, signifying, according to Buxtorf's Concordance (though, in his Lexicon, he renders it also FUIT) ‘ens, es, est;’ being, thou art, he is; to which the prefixed [...], the true characteristic Let­ter of the Future Tense ( shall or will be), is also added to form the Word [...] JE­HOVAH; so that this mysterious and awful Name seems to express ALL TIME, or ETERNITY; as if, for in­stance, a Word was to be compounded of three different Tenses of the Latin Word esse, to be, viz. est, fuit, erit (he is,—he was,—he shall be) yet so as to include the Sense of all three, and con­sequently to denominate in one single Word an Eternal BEING, that ever did, and ever will, EXIST.—And such seems to be the Interpretation of the glorious Name JEHOVAH, according to the Opi­nion of the most learned in the Hebrew Tongue, viz. "ENS, EXISTENS AB ETERNO ET IN ETERNUM," A BEING [Page 238] existing from all Eternity and for ever. This is the Sense which the learned Buxtorf has quoted in his Hebrew Lexi­con from the famous Jewish Rabbin Aben Ezra, and he cites also the Au­thority of several others of the most eminent Jews much to the same Pur­pose ⁽¹⁰¹⁾. But, as the Words of Holy Scripture are best interpreted by Holy [Page 239] Scripture, he refers us at the same time to a Text in the Revelations, wherein the Apostle John addresses the Seven Churches of Asia in the NAME OF GOD, which is there clearly expressed in the same Sense that the Jews (as I have before remarked) have attributed to the Hebrew Name JEHOVAH, and seems therefore to be the true Interpretation of it.—" Grace be unto you, and peace from him, which IS, and which WAS, and which IS TO COME, [...]. Rev. i. 4. In like manner the four Beasts, or rather living Animals [...] (which in the Revelations represent the Hosts or Armies of Israel, by the Figures of those Animals which were borne on the Standards of the four principal Tribes in their En­campments round the Tabernacle) ‘rest not Day and Night, saying, "Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty; which WAS, and IS, and IS TO COME, [...]. Rev. iv. 8. So also [Page 240] the four and twenty Elders, which sat before God on their Seats, fell upon their Faces and worshipped God, saying, We give Thanks to thee, O LORD GOD AL­MIGHTY, which ART, and WAST, and (WILT BE, or) ART TO COME,’ &c. [...]. Rev. xi. 16, 17.

This Eternal BEING, which has been pleased to reveal himself to us in such clear and comprehensive terms, is the same Almighty JEHOVAH that is men­tioned in Genesis (xiv. 22.) in the highest terms of Power and Glory— ‘the Lord’ (in the original JEHOVAH) ‘the most high God, the Possessor of Hea­ven and Earth.’ The same Eternal BEING, or JEHOVAH, is also called "JEHOVAH, GOD OF ISRAEL," [...] in Exod. xxxii. 27. Joshua vii. 19. xiii. 33. xxii. 24. Judges xi. 23, &c. He is also called ‘JEHOVAH, the GOD OF GODS,’ ( [...]) [Page 241] in Joshua xxii. 22. where we find this glorious title twice expressed in the same sentence: ‘The LORD (or JEHOVAH) God of Gods; THE LORD God of Gods, he knoweth,’ &c. And therefore, as the LORD, or JEHOVAH, mentioned in these several texts, is undoubtedly THE SU­PREME GOD, we are naturally led to attribute the same Divine Excellence, and supreme Dignity, to the glorious name JEHOVAH, wherever it occurs in other parts of Scripture, because there is but ONE JEHOVAH! " Hear, O Israel!— [...] — "The Lord," (or Jehovah) " our God (is) ONE LORD" (viz. ONE JEHOVAH— [...] ‘and thou shalt love JEHOVAH with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might, &c. (Deut. vi. 4, 5.)’ Thus the Unity of God is proved to be an indispensable article of our Faith! And yet we are equally bound to acknow­ledge, that Three Divine Persons are [Page 242] comprehended in that One, Almighty and Eternal BEING, or JEHOVAH!— because this glorious name is clearly applied, in the Holy Scriptures (even in those of the Old Testament) to as many distinct Persons; who are, therefore, to be esteemed equal, or ONE, with the supreme God, as ‘ Jehovah our God (is) ONE JEHOVAH! Deut. vi. 4.’

For though we are bound to acknow­ledge a manifest subordination with re­spect to the merciful and gracious OF­FICES of Redemption and Sanctification, whereby Two of the Divine Persons are particularly distinguished in Scripture, yet we are obliged, at the same time, to believe, that the several Divine Persons are of One and the same Eternal and Almighty EXISTENCE with respect to that incomprehensible BEING, or Divine Nature, wherein their Unity consists; because the contrary Doctrines of those [Page 243] Men, who deny that OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, and THE HOLY GHOST, par­take of the same Divine Nature with THE FATHER, do manifestly and ne­cessarily include the supposition of a superior and inferior order of DIVINE EX­ISTENCE (for that all the Three Persons have Divine Existence and Divine Attri­butes cannot be denied, without setting aside the whole tenour of the Holy Scriptures) which EXISTENCE could not, without absurdity, be called one and the same, but must necessarily be esteemed several, or separate and different, if the least degree of Inequality with respect to the Divine Nature be ad­mitted; and therefore such Doctrines are totally inconsistent with our indispensable Belief in the Unity of God, whatsoever those mistaken people, who call them­selves Unitarians, may think!

But a due regard to these two necessary distinctions, viz. the Equality and Unity [Page 244] (as there is but ONE GOD) of the THREE Persons with respect to their Divine Nature, and the revealed subordi­nation of TWO of them with respect to the merciful and gracious OFFICES of Redemption and Sanctification, whereby they are personally distinguished and made known to us in Scripture;—a due regard to these two necessary distinctions (I say) and to the proper application of the several texts by which both are respec­tively proved, will clearly demonstrate (at least to all Men who sincerely ask and seek the knowledge of Truth, as Christ has commanded) that the Doctrine of the Trinity, as received by THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND, is strictly con­sistent with the indispensable doctrine of Scripture before-mentioned concern­ing the Unity of God.

That there are Three distinct Persons in that One ETERNAL BEING, or JE­HOVAH, is clearly revealed in Scripture; [Page 245] for each Person is occasionally mentioned under that distinguishing and peculiar Name of the Supreme God.

And first, with respect to the first Divine Person in the Holy Trinity.— In the 42d chapter of Isaiah, the Divine Person, whom the Prophet represents in the 6th verse, as speaking in the name of Jehovah, is clearly distinguished from the MESSIAH and HOLY SPIRIT; and though it may seem a needless work to produce any proofs that the Almighty Father, ‘THE GOD and FATHER of our Lord JESUS CHRIST ⁽¹⁰²⁾,’ is truly JEHOVAH (which no Man will deny) yet I propose to recite some parts of this chapter, in order to prove the [Page 246] clear distinction of Persons and their Offices, as revealed even in the Old Testament.— ‘Thus saith GOD JEHO­VAH, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and Spirit to them that walk therein: I JEHOVAH have called THEE’ (apparently meaning the MES­SIAH) ‘in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, and for a light of the Gentiles; to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, (and) them that sit in darkness out of the prison-house. I AM JEHOVAH; that (is) MY NAME: and MY GLORY WILL I NOT GIVE TO ANOTHER, &c. Isai. xlii. 5—8.’ These words of JEHOVAH are manifestly addressed to the MESSIAH, as a distinct Person, in his mediatorial Office of Redeemer; and [Page 247] the Divine Person, who thus addresses the Messiah, is manifestly the same that speaks in the first verse of the same chapter, and mentions both THE MES­SIAH and the HOLY SPIRIT in that one sentence as distinct PERSONS FROM HIM­SELF, and under different and distinct characters or offices of the Christian Dis­pensation, suitable to the nature of that extraordinary prophecy concerning the future Redemption of Mankind! ‘Be­hold, MY SERVANT,’ (apparently meaning the MESSIAH in his state of humiliation as SON OF MAN) ‘whom I uphold; mine Elect (in whom) my Soul delighteth; I have put MY SPIRIT upon HIM:’ (Here the Three Persons are distinctly expressed) ‘He shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles! He shall not cry, not lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, &c. Isai. xlii. 1—3.’ Thus we find the Office of THE [Page 248] MESSIAH particularly described in this chapter, as well as the descent of THE HOLY SPIRIT upon HIM: and this is expressly foretold by the Lord JEHOVAH, who speaks of himself distinctly from the other two; so that the distinction of Per­sons is hereby clearly manifested.

Secondly, The glorious Name of the supreme God JEHOVAH, is plainly attri­buted, in the 40th chapter of Isaiah, to the Second Person, the Divine Messiah, in his Pastoral Office, as ‘Shepherd of Israel.’

The peculiar Harbinger or Forerunner of the Messiah is described and foretold in the third verse, as the Forerunner also of JEHOVAH— ‘The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the WAY of the LORD’ ( [...] THE WAY OF JEHOVAH) ‘make straight in the desert a HIGHWAY for OUR GOD. (3d verse).’

[Page 249]And John the Baptist, in whom alone that prophecy could be fulfilled (as I have shewn more particularly in my Tract on Prophecy ⁽¹⁰³⁾) declared the identity of the Divine Person whom he preceded in the world, and whose WAY he was SENT TO PREPARE, saying,— ‘He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the HOLY GHOST, and with Fire. Matt. iii. 11.’ — And afterwards, when the Priests and Levites (those that were sent from Jerusalem to ask him, ‘Who art thou’) questioned him, saying, ‘Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that CHRIST, nor ELIAS, neither that PROPHET? John answered them, say­ing, I baptize with water: BUT THERE STANDETH ONE AMONG YOU, whom ye know not; HE IT IS, WHO, COMING AFTER ME, is preferred before me, [Page 250] whose shoes latchet I am not worthy to unloose. &c. John i. 19—27.’ And "the next day" he bore full and express testimony to the identity of the Divine Person that came after him, whose WAY HE PREPARED— ‘John seeth JESUS coming unto him, and saith— BEHOLD THE LAMB OF GOD, which taketh away the sin of the world. THIS is HE of whom I said, AFTER ME COMETH a MAN, which is preferred before me; FOR HE WAS BEFORE ME. And I knew him not: but that he should be MADE MANIFEST to ISRAEL, therefore I am come baptizing with water. And John bare record, saying, I saw THE SPIRIT DESCENDING FROM HEAVEN like a dove, and IT abode upon HIM. And I knew him not: but HE that sent me to baptize with water, THE SAME said unto me’ (now mark again the clear declaration of Two Divine Persons, separate and distinct from the Divine Being now represented [Page 251] as speaking) ‘ UPON WHOM thou (John) shalt see THE SPIRIT descending and remaining on HIM, the same is HE which baptizeth with THE HOLY GHOST. And I saw’ (said John) ‘and bare record that THIS is the SON OF GOD. Again, the next day after, John stood, and two of his disciples; and’ (bore the like testimony to the Divine Person, WHOSE WAY he was sent TO PREPARE; for) ‘looking upon JESUS as he walked, he saith— BEHOLD THE LAMB OF GOD! John i. 29—36.’ Thus John declared himself to be the peculiar, Har­binger (as I have said) of the SON OF GOD; so that the name of JEHOVAH (whose WAY, in the prophecy, he is ex­pressly said to prepare) must necessarily be attributed to the Messiah, to whom after­wards this long expected preceding Messen­ger did personally apply the prophecy.

‘ THE VOICE OF HIM that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye THE WAY OF JEHOVAH, make straight in the de­sart [Page 252] a highway for OUR GOD, (Isai. xl. 3.)’ And the Divine Person, for whom THE WAY was to be thus pre­pared, is so distinctly described by his Advent, and Pastoral Office, in the 9th, 10th, and 11th verses of this chapter, that the proper application of the glo­rious titles therein mentioned, cannot be mistaken, at least by those who sin­cerely seek after truth! ‘O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain: O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength: lift (it) up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah,— BEHOLD YOUR GOD!’ To the fulfill­ing of which in Christ the Apostle Paul (as I have already shewn) bears ample testimony, saying, ‘ GOD is as manifest in the flesh,’ &c. ⁽¹⁰⁴⁾. And again, ‘For [Page 253] in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Coloss. ii. 9.’ So the [Page 254] Apostle John, " The WORD was GOD," &c. "All things were made by him," &c. [Page 255] ‘And the WORD was made FLESH, and dwelt among us, and we BEHELD HIS [Page 256] GLORY, the GLORY, as of the only be­gotten of the Father, full of grace and [Page 257] truth. John i. 1—14.’ See notes in p. 222—224. But to return to the Prophet.

‘Behold’ (said he) ‘the LORD GOD’ (that is, ADONI JEHOVAH, or the Lord Jehovah) ‘ WILL COME with strong (hand), and his arm shall rule for him: behold, HIS REWARD (is) with him, and HIS WORK before him. HE shall feed his flock LIKE A SHEPHERD’ (the peculiar Office of the Messiah, who himself declared, ‘I am the GOOD SHEPHERD. The GOOD SHEPHERD giveth his life for his sheep,’ &c. John x. 11.) "HE" (said the Prophet) ‘shall ga­ther the Lambs with his arm, and carry (them) in his bosom, (and) shall gently lead those that are with young. (Isai. xl. 3—11.)’ It is surely the REWARD and WORK of the MESSIAH in his Pas­toral Office, that are here so distinctly foretold; and therefore the Adjective HIS, and the Personal Pronoun HIM (both expressed by [...] in the Original, [Page 258] and so often repeated in these verses) as also the Personal Pronouns HIM and HE must necessarily be referred, by the plainest rules of grammar, to the Per­sonal Nouns (THE LORD GOD, or ADO­NI JEHOVAH) which immediately pre­cede them, and by which the Holy Spirit has marked the supreme or equal Divi­nity of the Messiah with the Father, and that he is really JEHOVAH and GOD beyond all possibility of contradiction!

Before the Incarnation of the Divine Logos, or WORD OF GOD (that is, be­fore he ‘was MADE FLESH, and dwelt among us John i. 14.’) God re­vealed himself to the children of Israel, not only by the name of [...] (JEHOVAH, signifying Eternal Existence, by including the characteristical letters of the Present, Preterite, and Future Tenses, as I have already shewn) but also by the name of [...] A-hi-ah, which is the same verb of Being or Existence, with the sign only [Page 259] of the Future Tense, signifying, I WILL BE ⁽¹⁰⁵⁾: and when the Son of God was personally present on earth, in our HUMAN NATURE, as a Descendant of Abraham, he asserted his pre-existent state, by giving himself a similar title of Eternal Existence, though in a diffe­rent Tense; for he used the Present Tense alone, without any characteristical Letter of the Future, [...], I AM, instead of, I WILL BE (as the promises respecting his own Person were accomplished by [Page 260] his PRESENCE, which, as he himself also promised, will continue to the end of the world ⁽¹⁰⁶⁾ ‘ Before Abraham was,’ (said our Lord) ‘I AM.’— (John viii. 58.) This expression (if the occasion of its being made be duly con­considered) cannot be made to accord properly with its context in any other sense than as a reference to Christ's Eternal Existence; and, as such, it ma­nifestly corresponds with the meaning of the glorious Name JEHOVAH.

[Page 261]The purpose of our Lord's argument was, certainly, to declare his pre-existent State of Glory, in answer to the Jews, who said— ‘Art thou greater than our Father Abraham, which is dead? &c. (John viii. 53.)’— ‘Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?’ So that his immediate answer— ‘ Before Abraham WAS, I AM,’ must neces­sarily be understood in the sense which I have mentioned.

He had, a little time before, told the Jews, who disputed with him, ‘I pro­ceeded forth’ (said he) ‘and came from God. (v. 42.)’ The expression in the original Greek has a much deeper meaning; it is not merely "from God," as in the common English translation; but out of God, EK [...] — "OUT of GOD, I PROCEEDED FORTH," &c. which is much more expressive of that procession, which is commonly called the Eternal Generation of the SON, —of that Divine Person, who ‘is in [Page 262] the Bosom of the Father (John i. 18.)’ and ‘whose GOINGS FORTH (have been) from of old, from everlasting. Micah v. 2.’ Had not these Jewish unbelievers been blinded by their own wickedness, and worldly desires, they would have understood by the Prophets, that their Messiah, though he was to be a Descen­dant of Abraham, according to the pro­mises, was yet to be one who had ETERNAL EXISTENCE, and conse­quently must be entitled to the in­communicable name of Eternal Existence, JEHOVAH; for he, ‘whose goings forth (have been) from of old, from ever­lasting,’ was the same of whom the Prophet Micah saith, that he should come out of BETHLEHEM EPHRATAH, "to be Ruler in Israel," viz. that Ruler, of whom the same Prophet foretold, ‘that they should smite the JUDGE OF ISRAEL with a rod upon the cheek.’ Compare the first and second verses of this chapter. And in the fourth verse [Page 263] the name of Jehovah is manifestly attri­buted to the same Divine Person.— ‘And he shall stand and feed’ (that is, "as a Shepherd," compare with Isaiah xl. ii.) ‘in the strength of JEHOVAH, in the Majesty of the NAMEof JEHOVAH his God.’ Compare this also with the Prophecy of Jeremiah concerning THE BRANCH from, the stock of JESSE— ‘And this (is) HIS NAME, whereby he shall be called, JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. Jer. xxiii. 6.’

His Eternal Existence, and Almighty Power, as GOD, were plainly declared by the Psalmist— ‘Thy throne, O GOD, is for ever and ever. (Psa. xlv. 6.)’ This, as the Apostle Paul testifies, was said of the SON— ‘But unto the SON’ (he saith) ‘Thy throne, O GOD (is) FOR EVER AND EVER: a Scepter of Righteousness (is) the Scepter of thy Kingdom. Thou hast loved RIGHTE­OUSNESS’ (which accords with the Name of the Divine Branch, JEHOVAH [Page 264] OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS) ‘and hated ini­quity; therefore God, (even) thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. (Heb. i. 8, 9.)’

In the latter part of this sentence, in­deed, the Prophet manifestly alludes to the inferior Nature (THE NATURE OF MAN) which this Divine Person was to assume, for the Angels were not HIS FELLOWS; but Men:—it was Human Nature alone that was to be exalted and restored by that peculiar union with the Divine Nature in Christ, whereby all Mankind are ren­dered FELLOWS and BRETHREN to him ‘that is ready to judge the quick and the dead, (1 Pet.iv. 5.)’ and may thereby become (if their own negligence and wilful abuse of God's gifts do not pre­vent them) even FELLOW HEIRS (Eph. iii. 6.) ‘Heirs of God, and JOINT HEIRS with Christ: (Rom. viii. 17.)’ who is ‘the Heir of all things, Heb. i. 2.’— ‘For verily he took not on’ (him the nature) ‘ [Page 265]of ANGELS; but he took on (him) of the SEED of Abraham. Heb. ii. 16.’ And accordingly the same Apostle calls him ‘the first-born among many BRE­THREN, Rom. viii. 29.’ and informs us also, that ‘it behoved him to be made like unto (his) BRETHEN, that he might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things (pertaining) to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. Heb. ii. 17.’ But the Apostle, never­theless, amply proclaims the Eternal Existence and Divine Nature of that Person, mentioned in his quotation from the 45th Psalm, who was to be anointed above HIS FELLOWS; for he immedi­ately afterwards quotes another Psalm (viz. cii. 25—27.) to assert the ETER­NAL DIGNITY AND POWER of the same Person— ‘And thou, LORD ⁽¹⁰⁵⁾, in the beginning has laid the foundation [Page 266] of the earth: and the heavens are the works of thine hands: they shall perish; [Page 267] but thou remainest: and they all shall wax old as doth a garment: and as a [Page 268] vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail. Heb. i. 10, 11, 12.’—So that our Lord [Page 269] was really in his Being, or Existence, what the same Apostle seems to apply to his Doctrine, ‘ JESUS CHRIST the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever. (Heb. xiii. 8.)’ For it was He, who said, ‘Fear not; I AM THE FIRST AND THE LAST: (I am) He that liveth, and was dead; and be­hold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and death. (Rev. i. 17, 18.)’—Thus it appears, that our Redeemer was not only JEHOVAH in Name, but in Effect or Reality also, if the true meaning of that title be con­sidered, as his being THE FIRST and THE LAST, demonstrates his Eternal Existence and Power as much as the Name of JEHOVAH.—Compare the last-mentioned text with the exhortation of GOD by Isaiah (xli. 10.) to his people Israel— ‘ FEAR THOU NOT; for I (am) with thee: be not dismayed; FOR I (am) THY GOD: I will strengthen [Page 270] thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my RIGHTEOUSNESS.’ And again, in the 13th and 14th verses, ‘For I the LORD (or JEHOVAH) thy GOD, will hold thy right hand, saying unto thee, FEAR NOT, I will help thee. FEAR NOT, thou worm Jacob, (and) ye men of Israel: I will help thee, saith THE LORD’ (i. e. JEHOVAH) ‘and thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel.’ And this LORD, or JEHOVAH, who here declares himself to be THE GOD of Israel, proclaims his own ETERNAL EXISTENCE near the beginning of the same chapter (viz. 4th verse) in the very same terms that were used in the Reve­lations by him ‘THAT LIVETH, AND WAS DEAD’— ‘Who hath wrought and done (it)’ (said JEHOVAH by Isaiah) ‘calling the generations from the beginning? I the Lord (JEHO­VAH) THE FIRST, and WITH THE [Page 271] LAST, I (am) HE.’ And also in the 44th chapter, ver. 6. ‘ Thus saith the LORD (JEHOVAH) the King of Israel, and his Redeemer the LORD OF HOSTS (JEHOVAH TSABAOUTH) I (am) THE FIRST, and I (am) THE LAST; and beside me (there is) no God.’ See also Isai. xlviii. 12. where­in we find that ‘the God of Israel, the Lord of Hosts’ (mentioned in the 2d verse) declares his Eternal Existence in the very same terms used by Christ in the Revelation, viz. ‘I (am) THE FIRST: I ALSO (am) THE LAST’— and as it has already been shewn, that the true meaning of the title JEHOVAH is nearly to the same purpose, it is ma­nifest that Christ is JEHOVAH in effect, as well as in name!

He is JEHOVAH also in power and glory— ‘Who have declared this from the ancient time?’ (said Isaiah) ‘ (Who) [Page 272] hath told it from that time? (Have) not I JEHOVAH? and (there is) NO GOD ELSE BESIDE ME; A JUST GOD, and A SAVIOUR: (there is) none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved all the ends of the earth: for I (am) GOD [...] and (there is) none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth (in) righteous­ness, and shall not return, THAT UNTO ME EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW, EVERY TONGUE SHALL SWEAR. Isai. xlv. 21—23.’

Now let us see to whom this is ap­plied by the Apostle Paul— ‘For none of us’ (that is, no true Christian) ‘liveth to himself’ (says the Apostle) ‘and no man dieth to himself. For whe­ther we live, we live unto THE LORD; and whether we die, we die unto THE LORD: whether we live therefore, or die, WE ARE THE LORD'S. For to [Page 273] this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might BE LORD both of the dead and living. But why dost thou JUDGE thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST. For it is writ­ten ⁽¹⁰⁶⁾, as I live, saith THE LORD ⁽¹⁰⁷⁾, EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW TO ME, AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL CONFESS TO GOD. So then every one of us shall give account of himself TO GOD. Let us not therefore [Page 274] JUDGE one another any more, &c. Rom. xiv. 7—13.’ The reason here as­signed by the Apostle for the illegality of JUDGING our Brother, is, that ‘we shall all stand at the JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST,’ to whom he attributes the dignity of JEHOVAH, by maintain­ing in the preceding context, that he is THE LORD, to whom we live and die, &c. and by applying to him Isaiah's prediction of universal homage to JE­HOVAH, as if Christ himself, in his pre-existent state, had said, [...] I JEHOVAH, &c.— ‘Unto me every knee shall bow,’ &c.—And from this ap­plication of the Prophecy to the Person of Christ, the Apostle immediately draws a conclusion with a manifest re­ference to what he had before said of our standing at the Judgment Seat of Christ.— ‘So then every one of us shall give account of himself to GOD. Let us not therefore JUDGE one another any more,’ &c.

[Page 275]From this whole quotation it ap­pears, that when the Apostle asserts the dignity of Christ, as being THE LORD of us all— [...] (that we live and die "UNTO THE LORD," [...], &c.) he in effect applies to him the dignity of JEHOVAH, as that title is usually ex­pressed in Greek by [...], THE LORD. In the Septuagint tranflation we read, [...], (Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord) for [...] that is, ‘Hear, O Israel, JEHOVAH our God, is ONE JEHOVAH. Deut. vi. 4.’—And the same text is expressed exactly in the same words by the Evan­gelist Mark (xii. 29.) where he recites our Lord's answer to the question of the Scribe about the first (or chief) Commandment; for the Evangelist un­questionably substitutes the word [...] (Lord) in his Greek text for [...] (Je­hovah) in the original Hebrew, of which there are many more instances in [Page 276] the New Testament; so that from thence we are taught the true import and meaning of the title [...], ‘the Lord,’ as applied to Christ in the New Testament.

LORDS there are, indeed, many; and the word [...] is of as general use and application in the Greek Tongue, per­haps, as SIR in the English Tongue; but yet, whenever it is preceded by the article [...] (as, [...]) and has no express reference to any particular place, title, office, or temporal dignity, it must ne­cessarily, in that case, be understood as a title of Supreme Dignity, because it is then applicable to no other Being, but that alone, which is most eminently the Lord ( [...]) as being " Lord of all ^*;" so that the title [...], THE LORD (and [Page 277] many times [...] even without the ar­ticle) is with propriety substituted in the Greek Scriptures ⁽¹⁰⁸⁾ for the title JEHOVAH, in translations and quota­tions [Page 278] from the Hebrew original, wherein that Holy Name occurs!

It would take up too much of my reader's time (as well as of my own) [Page 279] were I to cite all the examples that may be found in the Greek Scriptures, of quo­tations from the Hebrew text, wherein the word [...], or Lord, is substituted [Page 280] for the Hebrew title [...] Jehovah: however, I have inserted in the pre­ceding note a sufficient number (I hope) of examples from the Evangelists to demonstrate, beyond contradiction, the true meaning and importance of the Greek title, [...] (LORD) when it is applied to GOD, or to CHRIST; for in that case, if there is any truth in the Evangelists, as faithful translators, it implies and expresses nothing less than the dignity of JEHOVAH! Exactly in this sense, therefore, we must necessarily understand the Apostle Paul, when he tells us, in his first Epistle to the Co­rinthians (xv. 47.) ‘that the first Man [Page 281] (is) of the earth, earthy: the second Man (is) [...]— THE LORD, (or JEHOVAH) from heaven.’—The effect of this translation of mine will appear sufficiently justifiable, if it is compared with a parallel expression of John the Baptist recorded by John the Evangelist (iii. 31.)— ‘He that cometh from above, IS ABOVE ALL’ ( [...]) ‘he that is of the earth, is earth­ly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven’ (the Apostle re­peats his assertion) ‘ IS ABOVE ALL!’ ⁽¹¹⁰⁾ &c.

[Page 282]Now it must be allowed that none, except ‘the God of Israel, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, (Psa. lxxxiii. 18.)’ can justly be said to be ABOVE ALL! —So that if THE MESSIAH was not truly GOD, and included with the Al­mighty Father and the Holy Ghost in the Eternal BEING, JEHOVAH, this expres­sion (that he "IS ABOVE ALL") could not, with the least propriety, be so pe­remptorily [Page 283] and repeatedly applied to him! But as John the Baptist (who was sent to prepare the way of JEHOVAH, as I have already remarked) has positively asserted concerning him that ‘cometh from heaven,’ that he "is above all," we must necessarily conclude, that ‘the LORD FROM HEAVEN’ (the title applied to Christ by the Apostle Paul in the parallel text recited above) is a title of supreme Dignity, and implies as much as if the Apostle had expressly intituled the Messiah—"JEHOVAH from heaven;" for had this latter been literally ex­pressed by some Prophet in the Hebrew tongue, the Apostle's words, [...], would have been the regular Greek version of such an expression, which I have already proved by a variety of examples. (See pages 275—281.)

But Christ is not only [...], THE LORD (or JEHOVAH) from heaven, [Page 284] but he is also "the Lord of Glory" ⁽¹¹¹⁾, one of the highest titles that can be conceived! So that if he were not really of one and the same Divine Nature with the Almighty Father, this title of Su­preme Excellence, ‘THE LORD OF GLORY,’ could not be used with the least degree of propriety, especially as God (i. e. the LORD Jehovah) has declared to the Jews, that he will not give his Glory to another—viz. ‘I am THE LORD (i. e. JEHOVAH); that is MY NAME: and MY GLORY will I not give to another, &c. (Isai. xlii. 8.)’—If Christ, therefore, is the ‘LORD OF GLORY,’ he must necessarily be esteemed ONE with the Father, in the Eternal BEING JEHOVAH!—Our Lord himself also declared, ‘I and the Father are ONE.’— [...]. [Page 285] (John x. 30.) and yet this very sentence, which asserts THE UNITY of the Father and the Son, expresses at the same time a manifest Distinction of Persons; which is also clearly demonstrable in almost every other page of Scripture; though the doctrine of the Unity of God is not less clearly laid down and inculcated throughout the Scriptures!

Our Lord has delivered this doctrine of his Unity with the Father, in various modes of expression; as— ‘He that hath seen me (said he) hath seen the Father,’ &c. and ‘I am in the Father, and the Father in me, &c. (John xiv. 9, 10.)’ and yet the true nature and manner of that UNITY must still remain a Mystery, because a perfect knowledge of that Eternal BEING, which in every way is infinite, cannot possibly fall within the comprehension of our finite understand­ings ⁽¹¹²⁾!

[Page 286]This doctrine is, nevertheless, a ne­cessary part of our Faith; because the Scriptures contain such a proportion of evidence, really within the measure of Human judgment, as is sufficient to authenticate the whole, and demonstrate the Divine Mission of those Holy Per­sons, by whom they were, from time to time, delivered for our instruction: and therefore, as we are answerable to God for the use or abuse of that Know­ledge of Good and Evil, which we inherit from our first parents (as I have already shewn in the beginning of this Tract) we cannot reject any part of the Scrip­ture Evidence, without being guilty of such a manifest perversion and abuse of that hereditary Knowledge, as must ren­der us highly culpable before God, and endanger our eternal welfare! We are bound, therefore, to receive even some things that we do not understand, for the sake of those things which we do [Page 287] understand; just as our Lord himself instructed Philip to believe this very doctrine of his UNITY WITH THE FATHER, for the sake of the mighty Works ⁽¹¹³⁾ which he had shewn him: for these, indeed, were evident to his senses, and could not be denied; and therefore, as the Divine Mission was so strongly authenticated, Philip was bound to receive the whole Doctrine of the [Page 288] Gospel, as delivered by Divine Autho­rity, even though he did not compre­hend it! And, in like manner, is every man indeed obliged to submit his judg­ment in receiving and acknowledging these revealed mysteries of our religion, for the sake of that substantial evidence which the Scriptures afford us of other Truth and Facts, which fall more im­mediately within the measure of Hu­man Comprehension— ‘ Believe me, that I am in the Father (said our Lord) and the Father in me, or else BELIEVE ME FOR THE VERY WORKS SAKE!’

But our Lord, nevertheless, conde­scended to illustrate this doctrine, in some degree, by a most interesting com­parison, which relates, very materially, to the principal subject of this Tract, (THE NATURE OF MAN) because it informs us, at the same time, concern­ing that intimate Connexion with THE [Page 289] DIVINE NATURE, which HUMAN NATURE is rendered capable of ac­quiring, through the Divine Mediator between GOD and Man!

‘ Sanctify them,’ (said that DIVINE MEDIATOR, when he prayed to his "HOLY FATHER" for his Disciples) ‘through thy Truth: THY WORD IS TRUTH, [...].’ (And who is this Logos, this Word, this Truth of the "HOLY FATHER," both under the Old and New Covenant, but our Divine Mediator himself? who imme­diately added) ‘As thou hast sent’ ME (said he) ‘into the world, even so have I also sent them’ (viz. the Disciples, as he had formerly sent the Prophets) ‘into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the Truth. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their Word; that THEY ALL MAY BE [Page 290] ONE’ (which is the interesting com­parison before-mentioned) ‘ AS THOU FATHER (art) IN ME, AND I IN THEE, THAT THEY ALSO MAY BE ONE IN US: that the world may be­lieve that thou hast sent me. And THE GLORY which THOU gavest ME I have given THEM; that THEY MAY BE ONE, EVEN AS WE ARE ONE: I IN THEM, AND THOU IN ME, that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that thou hast sent ME, and hast loved THEM, as thou hast loved ME. FATHER, I WILL ( [...]) that they also, whom thou has given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold MY GLORY which THOU hast given ME: for thou lovedst me BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD. O RIGHTEOUS FATHER, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. [Page 291] And I have declared unto them thy Name, and will declare (it): that THE LOVE, wherewith thou hast LOVED ME may be IN THEM, and I in them. John xvii. 17—26.’ Here is a glorious declaration of the Dignity, to which God has been pleased to call MANKIND! And as the Unity of the Disciples, or true Believers, is thus clearly compared to the Unity of THE FATHER and THE SON, it is manifest that the doctrine of the last-mentioned UNITY (as far as the Scriptures have revealed it to us) is a topic necessarily included in the subject of this Tract— "The Nature of Man." But this Unity of THE FATHER and THE SON is not in all respects the same Unity, as that wherein the Church (or Congregation of Disciples and true Be­lievers) is included with the Father and the Son ^*; though the Faithful undoubt­edly partake of the Divine Nature by the [Page 292] HOLY SPIRIT, agreeable to the promises (see p. 200—202), and both CHRIST and THE FATHER are "IN THEM," as our LORD said— ‘I IN THEM, and THOU in me,’ agreeable to what our Lord had once before declared— ‘If a man love me, he will keep my words: and MY FATHER will love him, and WE will COME UNTO HIM, and make OUR ABODE with him! (John xiv. 23.)’ Thus HUMAN NATURE is capable of being exalted and dignified, even in this life, notwithstanding the uncertainties and sufferings attending our worldly con­dition!

The Faithful, indeed, are ONE in the Father, and the Son, as our Lord prayed for them to his Heavenly Father, ‘that they all may be ONE ( [...]) AS thou FATHER (art) in me, and I in thee, that they also may be ONE IN US,’ &c. and again, that ‘they may be ONE, [...], EVEN AS [Page 293] WE ARE ONE: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in ONE,’ &c. but we must be careful to maintain the due distinction between the Unity of THE FATHER and THE SON, and the Unity of the Faithful in the Father and the Son! The latter is, indeed (in some respect or other) like the former, alike probably in that very circumstance alone of being in Unity— in Unity of WILL, of LOVE, and UNI­VERSAL Benevolence, &c. for ‘GOD IS LOVE, and he that dwelleth IN LOVE, dwelleth IN GOD, AND GOD IN HIM, &c. (1 John iv. 16.)’ but it is not altogether the same Unity, wherein the Scriptures declare the Almighty Fa­ther and his Son to be ONE (as some Socinians have conceived) or it could not with propriety be compared with it! Like is compared with Like; but ‘Like is not the same,’ even to a proverb! In what respect the latter Unity may be like the former, I have already shewn by authority [Page 294] of Scripture: but THE HEAVENLY FATHER and HIS SON are ONE in many other respects, which cannot with the least degree of propriety be attri­buted to the Unity of the Church in Christ! The Son of God is ONE with his Almighty Father in Eternal Existence, in that BEING of Eternity, JEHOVAH! (See p. 258—275, &c.) They are ONE also in Power and Divine Attributes! The Son being expressly intitled ‘LORD OF ALL. (See page 276.)’ ‘THE LORD FROM HEAVEN, (page 283.)’ ‘THE LORD OF GLORY, (p. 284.)’ and is also declared to be ‘ABOVE ALL, (p. 281.)’ and ‘OVER ALL, GOD ^* BLESSED FOR EVER ^†.’ These [Page 295] are undoubtedly Attributes of the Hea­venly Father (and many more shall hereafter be mentioned in the course of the argument) so that THE FATHER and THE SON are manifestly ONE in these several respects, and in many more, as there is but ONE GOD, or ONE JEHOVAH! But the Unity of the Congregation of true Believers, (that they are ONE in Christ, &c.) must be considered in a more confined sense: the true Believers are ONE glo­rious Universal Church, ONE Building, of which our Lord JESUS CHRIST is ‘ the Foundation, (1 Cor. iii. 11.)’ ‘ the chief Corner Stone, (Eph. ii. 20.)’ "they are a Spiritual House," (1 Pet. ii. 5.) a Bride ^*, (John iii. 29.) a Being of [Page 296] many in one ^*, as the symbol of the Che­rubim, four living Creatures in one, which moved with one Spirit, and repre­sented the Hosts of Israel (see p. [...] ): and of course all those that are engrafted on that stock (the Olive-tree of Israel) through Christ ^†, are in like manner esteemed ONE; because all distinctions [Page 297] of Nation, Rank, and Dignity, and even of Sex, are set aside in the true Church— ‘There [Page 298] is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor [Page 299] female: for ye are all ONE in CHRIST JESUS. And if ye (be) CHRIST'S, then [Page 300] are ye ABRAHAM'S SEED, and Heirs according to the promise. (Gal. iii. [Page 301] 28, 29)’. Thus the Faithful are one in [Page 302] Christ, but surely not with Christ;—I [Page 303] mean, not with him, in the UNITY [Page 304] of Power, Glory, and Eternal Existence, [Page 305] wherein he and the Holy Ghost are (and ever were) included with the Almighty Father! The Unity of the Church is, indeed, in some respects (as I have shewn) LIKE the Unity of THE FATHER and THE SON, but it is not the same Unity, as the Socinians would insinuate ^*. In the Communion Service of the Church of England, indeed, mention is made of our Unity WITH Christ— ‘We are ONE WITH Christ, and Christ WITH us,’ (see Exhortation at the time of the Celebration, &c.) but this has not the least reference to the Unity of Christ WITH the Father, but only to the de­clared Unity of the Faithful, who form that one Building, whereof Christ is the [Page 306] ‘chief Corner (Stone). In whom all THE BUILDING fitly framed together groweth unto AN HOLY TEMPLE in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of GOD through the Spirit. (Eph. ii. 20—22.)’ So that all faithful disciples are, undoubtedly, ONE in Christ (that is, ONE " Holy Temple ^*," or ONE Catholick Church) even as the Father and the Son are ONE: but it must appear from the several texts already quoted (if they are duly compared and weighed together) that the Unity of the Church in Christ, is not mentioned as the same Unity, wherein the Father and the Son are ONE (viz. One in Power, Glory, and Eternal Existence, or One GOD) but only as a resemblance or illustration, in some respects, of that DIVINE UNITY!— In [Page 307] some respects (I say) as being united in Will, or in Divine Love (as I have already shewn) or by the inspiration of the HOLY SPIRIT in each individual, through which the whole Congregation of the Faithful that are "builded together" in Christ, become " an Habitation of GOD," (see the text last quoted from Eph. ii. 20— 22.) but not in all respects, because there are many circumstances (some of which I have already mentioned) wherein the Unity or Fellowship of Christ with the Heavenly Father is infinitely transcen­dent, and such as cannot, without Blas­phemy, be attributed to the redeemed Brethren, or those that are merely Mem­bers of the Church; so that the Socinian objection to the doctrine, which neces­sarily arises from the several texts, where­in the Father and the Son are declared to be ONE, is apparently unjust and false! May any other Man, but ‘the Man Christ Jesus, (1 Tim. ii. 5.)’ say as he did— ‘ALL THINGS THAT THE [Page 308] FATHER HATH ARE MINE? (John xvi. 14.)’ And again— "As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father?" (John x. 15.) or, as Christ expressed himself to his Heavenly Father in Prayer — ‘And now, O Father, GLORIFY THOU ME WITH THINE OWN SELF, WITH THE GLORY which I had with thee before the world was? (John xvii. 5.)’ Thus Christ declares his right to be glorified with the Heavenly Father himself, which must mean, to be glorified with SUPREME GLORY, as it is the Glory of the Al­mighty Father, "the Glory which" the Son had with his Almighty Father "before the world was!" This glorious Person assumed the NATURE OF MAN, and for a time dwelt among men, that he might "fulfill all righteousness" (Mat. iii. 15.) even in his Human Nature, and thereby restore the lost dignity and pri­vileges of that Nature;— ‘the first Man (being) of the Earth, earthy;’ but ‘ the Second MAN THE LORD FROM HEAVEN! (1 Cor. xv. 47.)’ Human [Page 309] Nature, therefore, is indeed exalted to eternal Glory, but that is only in, by, and through him, who alone is truly and essentially the "SON OF GOD," as well as the "SON OF MAN!" For he is ‘the Way, and the Truth, and the Life: No man cometh unto the Father’ (said our Lord) ‘but by me. (John xiv. 6.)’

The miserable state of fallen MAN is already described in the former part of this Tract. The means of retrieving our lost dignity remains still to be shewn. God has mercifully revealed to us these necessary means, and tendered them in the Scriptures to our Choice, that by a prudent use of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, we may constantly prefer, and chuse the Good, earnestly claiming the pro­mises of Divine Assistance; whereby we shall also be enabled to reject the Evil on all occasions, and effectually to resist the Spiritual Enemy, and maintain our inte­grity in the severest trials of our Faith; for ‘in all these things we are more than [Page 310] Conquerors through him that loved us. (Rom. viii. 37.)’

Thus the device of SATAN, in pro­moting MAN'S assumption of forbidden Knowledge, is compleatly turned against himself; for that very KNOWLEDGE, which (through his deceit and tempta­tion) subjected all Mankind to SIN and Death, is now (through the mercy of God) become a proper Principle of Action (if we use it as we ought) to incline us to RIGHTEOUSNESS, and lead us to " the Tree of Life ⁽¹¹⁴⁾! But we [Page 311] must remember, at the same time, that this Knowledge in Man is far from being of [Page 312] itself sufficient for these purposes! The dignity and privileges of Human Nature [Page 313] cannot be known, nor the manner of communicating them properly under­stood without a right Faith in the Dig­nity and Divine Nature of Christ, be­cause, [Page 314] in his Promises alone, our title to those extraordinary Privileges is founded! ‘ Whatsoever ye shall ask IN MY NAME’ (said our Lord JESUS) ‘ that WILL I DO’ (a clear proof of his Divine Nature) ‘ that the Father’ (said he) ‘ may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in MY NAME’ (said our Lord again) ‘I WILL DO IT, &c. John xiv. 13, 14.’

A right Faith, therefore, concerning the true Dignity of that Divine Person, in whose Name we hope to obtain the heavenly Gift of the Holy Ghost, is undoubtedly necessary; and we must "give him the honour due unto his Name," or the very mention of that Name, in­stead of intitling us to favour, would be an offence to God, who ‘hath highly [Page 315] exalted’ his only begotten Son, ‘and given him A NAME, which is above EVERY NAME: that at the NAME of JESUS every knee should bow, of (things) in heaven, and (things) in earth; and (things) under the earth: and that every tongue should confess, THAT JESUS CHRIST IS LORD, to THE GLORY OF GOD the Father. (Philip. ii. 9—11.)’

‘Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE OTHER NAME UNDER HEAVEN given among Men, whereby we must be saved. Acts iv. 12.’ ‘For as the Father raised up the dead, and quickeneth them: even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. John v. 21.’

In a preceding verse (viz. 17th) our Lord, in like manner, compared (with a seeming insinuation of equality) his own works with the works of his Father— ‘My Father worketh hitherto’ (said he) ‘and I work.’

[Page 316]The Father which worketh hitherto, was clearly understood by the Jews to signify the Almighty Father, the Worker or Maker of all things, and therefore they could neither brook the mention he made in the same sentence of his own working, nor the particular claim which our Lord expressed in that sen­tence to the Almighty Father as his peculiar Father, calling him My Father, instead of Our Father, as the common Parent or Creator of Mankind.

All this is plainly implied in the fol­lowing verse; and ‘therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath,’ (viz. by his miraculous Works in healing the Sick, and doing good) ‘but said also, that GOD WAS HIS FATHER,’ [...], (said that God was his proper or peculiar Father) ‘making himself EQUAL with God.’ For to call God [Page 317] his peculiar Father was justly esteemed by the Jews the same thing as making himself "equal with God," though they were unjustly incensed at it, through a want of due attention to the mighty Works (similar to those of the Almighty Father) to which Christ appealed, as a proof that he was really the Son of God!

That SUPREME HONOUR is therefore due unto THE NAME AND PERSON OF THE SON, our Blessed Redeemer, who, for OUR SAKE, took THE NATURE OF MAN upon himself, is manifest, because we are expressly commanded to honour the Son, even as we honour the Father; so that we cannot exceed— ‘FOR THE FATHER JUDGETH NO MAN; but hath committed ALL JUDGMENT UN­TO THE SON: that all (Men) should honour THE SON, even as they honour THE FATHER, ( [...]’). And again, [Page 318] ‘He that honoureth not the Son, ho­noureth not the Father which hath sent him. John v. 22, 23.’

To "honour the Son" ( [...], from [...] and [...], according as, or) even as they "honour the Father," would be ido­latry, if the Son was not a Divine Per­son, really and truly God from all Eter­nity! Because the God of Israel, the Eternal and Everlasting [...] Jehovah, and Creator of all things ⁽¹¹⁵⁾, at the very time that he promised this Glori­ous Redeemer ‘for a Covenant of the people, for a Light of the Gentiles; to open the blind eyes, to bring out the PRISONERS from the PRISON’ (that [Page 319] is, from the bondage and slavery of Satan) ‘and them that sit in darkness out of the PRISON-HOUSE,’ he im­mediately added in the very next sen­tence, ‘I am the LORD’ (or Jehovah) ‘ THAT IS MY NAME: and my GLO­RY will I not give to ANOTHER, &c. Isai. xlii. 5—8.’

It is impossible therefore, that the Supreme God, JEHOVAH, should ‘give his Glory,’ or require Men to honour the Son, even as they honour the Father, if the Son was another, or not in Unity or One with the Father in the Eternal Being of the One God; I mean, if he was not included in the One Eternal Divine Being [...] which is but ONE ( [...] One Jehovah) that is, UNITY ITSELF, and therefore incapable of dif­ferent Degrees, or Inequality. ‘Hear, O Israel (said Moses) the Lord (or Jehovah) our God, is One Lord,’ or ‘ [Page 320]ONE Jehovah. ( [...]) Deut. vi. 4.’ And yet we find, that this glorious Name of the One Eternal God of Israel; viz. Jehovah [...], is manifestly attri­buted, both in the Old and New Testa­ments (as I have already shewn), to the Messiah as a distinct Person from the Father; and therefore, when we read our Lord's expression in John xiv. 28. "My Father is greater than I," we must necessarily understand, that no comparative reference can possibly have been intended thereby, nor is to be made, concerning the Divine Nature, or Godhead, which certainly is but One, viz. "ONE JEHOVAH," as the text expressly declares, and consequently we must acknowledge with the Author of the Creed, commonly attributed to Athanasius, that ‘the Son is equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead,’ (viz. the One Eternal Being, or Jehovah) ‘though inferior to the Father as touch­ing [Page 321] his Manhood,’ or his Mediatorial Office; for in some such qualified sense we must of course understand our Lord's expression in John ( ‘The Father is greater than I’) before-mentioned; for those Men, who venture to assert, that the Inferiority of the Son consists in his Divine Nature, must evidently suppose a Superior and Inferior Divine Nature, and consequently, that there are Two Divine Natures, which Idea the Scriptures expressly forbid— ‘(JEHO­VAH, OUR GOD, is ONE JEHOVAH, (Deut. vi. 4.)’—And therefore, as the Son is also JEHOVAH, we are bound by the Scriptures to believe, that he is of the same Divine Nature with the Father in that One Eternal Being, agreeable to what he himself has declared— ‘I and the Father are One. ( [...]) John x. 30.’ And as the Plurality of Persons is clearly expressed in the latter text by the Plural Verb [...], we [Page 322] are; so the word [...], One, evidently de­monstrates the UNITY and EQUALITY of their Divine Nature; for it is no less evident from the context, that the said word [...], ONE, refers to the Being of God, or Jehovah, and was intended to express the Unity of their Divine Nature ^*. The Jews, it is plain, understood the expression in that sense, and immediately charged our Lord with Blasphemy— saying,— ‘Because that thou, being a Man, makest thyself God.’ And though our Lord condescended to cite a passage from the Psalms, wherein the title of Gods is applied to mere Men, viz. ‘I said ye are Gods,’ in order to shew, that the Scriptures would not be broken by the consequence which they had drawn from his expression; yet he im­mediately after maintains the evident meaning of his first expression, as it was [Page 323] at first understood by the Jews, and, by a fair comparison, shewed his infinite superiority over them that were called Gods, in the Law, ‘If he,’ (said our Lord, meaning the Prophet David) ‘called them GODS, unto whom the Word of GOD came, and the Scripture can­not be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, thou blasphemest; because I said, I am THE SON OF GOD?’ And our Lord immediately added an incontestable proof of his being GOD [not merely in a confined, qualified Sense, like those Men called GODS in Scripture ⁽¹¹⁶⁾, but GOD also] in Effect and Power!— ‘If [Page 324] I do not THE WORKS OF MY FA­THER’ (continued our Lord) ‘be­lieve me not. BUT IF I DO, though [Page 325] you believe not me, BELIEVE THE WORKS: that ye may know and BE­LIEVE that the FATHER is IN ME, and I IN HIM. (John x. 31—38.)’

[Page 326]This reference to the Works of the Father, was a manifest appeal of Christ to the understanding of his hearers, concerning the peculiar manner in which [Page 327] he was really God, and of the same Divine Nature with THE FATHER, agreeable to the obvious sense of his [Page 328] first proposition— ‘I and the Father are One, (ver. 30.)’—and the unbe­lieving Jews (notwithstanding their men­tal [Page 329] blindness, and hardness of heart, fore­told by their own Prophets) as plainly understood, that the necessary effect of this argument was exactly the same upon the whole, that they at first ap­prehended; viz. that he ‘MADE HIM­SELF,’ (i. e. declared himself to be really) ‘GOD,’ and therefore they im­mediately renewed their wicked perse­cution as at first; for ‘they sought again to take him,’ (says the text) ‘but he escaped out of their hand, (ver. 39.)’

My readers may perhaps think, that I prolong my work too much, and ren­der it tedious, by inserting so many proofs concerning the Divine Nature of THE SON OF GOD; but alas! I find, that my labour on this point is become necessary! Many learned men, and some, [Page 330] even of my own particular friends, have unhappily overlooked that indispensable doctrine, and do not perceive, that the glorious Name JEHOVAH (the peculiar Name of THE ONE SUPREME GOD) is clearly in the Scriptures attributed also to the Son of God! And we cannot rightly understand the Nature and Dig­nity of MAN (which is my leading sub­ject in this Tract) nor the true value of THE PRICE which was given for MAN'S REDEMPTION (as we ‘are bought with A PRICE, 1 Cor. vi. 20.’) unless we are truly sensible of the Nature and Dignity (as far as God has revealed it to us in the Scriptures) of that Di­vine Person, who took Human Nature upon himself, in order to restore the lost Dignity and Privileges of fallen MAN!

One of my learned friends (though a sensible and worthy man) amongst other arguments and quotations against my doctrine, remarks as follows.

[Page 331] ‘ The Apostle Paul’ (says he) ‘saith, in Ephes. i. 17—20. that’ ‘THE GOD OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, THE FATHER OF GLORY’— ‘SET HIM AT HIS OWN RIGHT HAND.’ ‘Hence’ (says my learned friend) ‘it necessarily follows that Christ is not Jehovah, but the Son of Jehovah.—God, who made the worlds by his Son, is the Father of Christ. (Heb. i. 2.)’ See likewise (says he) Isaiah xi. 2.— ‘The Spirit of JEHOVAH shall rest upon him.’— ‘ Also Isai. lxi. 1, 2.’ ‘The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because JEHOVAH hath anointed me to preach,’ &c. ‘com­pared with Luke iv. 18.’

Now that Christ is the Son of God, or (as my friend stiles him) ‘the Son of Jehovah ^*,’ every true Christian must [Page 332] readily allow to be a true and indispen­sable doctrine; but it by no means fol­lows from thence (though my friend says it necessarily follows) ‘that Christ is not Jehovah!’ To the direct con­trary of my friend's assertion, I am obliged to remark, that as Christ is the Son of Jehovah, and the Son of God in a peculiar and essential manner ^*, it ne­cessarily follows from thence, that he is also really and truly GOD and JEHOVAH in an essential manner; for as a SON must necessarily partake of the Nature [Page 333] or Essence of his natural FATHER, so "THE SON OF JEHOVAH" must neces­sarily be of the same Nature, Being, or Essence with his ALMIGHTY FATHER, JEHOVAH; and as there is but ONE JEHOVAH, must necessarily in some way or other (though incomprehensible to us at present) be included in that ONE Eternal BEING! The very circum­stance which my friend assigns as a proof that " the Son is NOT JEHOVAH," was esteemed by the unbelieving Jews (when our Lord was on earth) as a proof that he made himself equal with God! ‘ Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath’ (that is, as they falsely alledged, because he had healed the Sick, and done good on the Sabbath Day, which was certainly lawful) ‘ but said also, that GOD WAS HIS FA­THER’ ( [...], his own proper or peculiar Father, that is, his Father [Page 334] in a real or essential manner; and this, it seems, is the very reason which my friend has assigned as a proof that Christ is not Jehovah, but which, on the contrary, the Jews rightly esteemed to be the same thing as) ‘ making him­self EQUAL WITH GOD! [...]. John v. 18.’

Our Lord was so far from denying the truth of the consequential Doctrine, which the Jews had drawn from his having said, that "God was his Father," [...]—"his own proper Father," that he immediately, in the very next verse, appealed to his works for the truth of it! ‘ Then answered Jesus, and said unto them, Verily, Verily, I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do:’ (shewing thereby, that the Father is in­deed the Fountain of Power; but im­mediately afterwards he shews likewise, [Page 335] that he himself, as being Son of the Al­mighty Father, was therefore equal in Power with THE FATHER) ‘ for what things soever he’ (that is, the Father) ‘ doeth’ (said our Lord) ‘THESE ALSO DOETH THE SON LIKEWISE!’ (or in like manner [...], which is surely such an ample declaration of his own Almighty Power, as could not be true, were he not really JEHOVAH) ‘ For the Father’ (continued our Lord) ‘ loveth the Son, and sheweth him ALL THINGS THAT HIMSELF DOETH: and he will shew him greater WORKS THAN THESE’ (alluding to the mighty WORKS, by which he proved himself to be "THE SON OF JEHOVAH") ‘ that ye may marvel’ (said he). ‘ For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth (them); EVEN SO THE SON QUICKENETH WHOM HE WILL.’ [Another incontestable declaration of AL­MIGHTY POWER, such as cannot be at­tributed [Page 336] to any that is not TRULY GOD, though it is certainly an especial Attri­bute of him that is called [...] —"THE PRINCE (or Author) OF LIFE ⁽¹¹⁷⁾]! ‘For the Father’ (continues our Lord) ‘judgeth no man; but hath committed ALL JUDGMENT unto the Son, that all (men) should honour ⁽¹¹⁸⁾ the Son, even as they honour the Fa­ther.’ (And as supreme Honour is certainly due to THE FATHER, we [Page 337] must of course honour THE SON with supreme Honour, EVEN AS ( [...]) ‘we honour the Father.’ This is so ne­cessary a part of the Christian Duty, that men cannot pay the proper honour to THE HEAVENLY FATHER, unless they thus honour THE SON, also, with supreme Honour; for) ‘HE THAT HONOURETH NOT THE SON’ (that is, ‘ He that honoureth not the Son, even [Page 338] as he honoureth the Father’—for this is necessarily implied from the preceding Context) "HONOURETH NOT THE FA­THER " ⁽¹¹⁹⁾, WHICH HATH SENT HIM. John v. 17—23.

The Scriptures attribute Eternal Ho­nour and Glory to THE SON, and that jointly with THE HEAVENLY FA­THER [Page 339] — ‘Blessing, and HONOUR, and GLORY, and POWER, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, AND UNTO THE LAMB, for ever and ever. And the four beasts’ (or animals ⁽¹²⁰⁾ representing the Redeemed Hosts of Israel) ‘ said, AMEN. (Rev. v. 13, 14. See also the 12th verse.)’

[Page 340]Thus we find, that ‘HONOUR, and GLORY, and POWER,’ belong ‘UN­TO THE LAMB FOR EVER!’ He had indeed, for a time, laid aside this SU­PREME GLORY (this Glory which is attributed to him jointly with him that sitteth upon the Heavenly Throne) that he might become "the Son of Man," and ‘by Obedience ⁽¹²¹⁾ in fulfilling the Law ⁽¹²²⁾,’ and ‘ all Righteous­ness [Page 341] ⁽¹²³⁾,’ even as A MAN, might re­trieve the dignity and lost privileges of HUMAN NATURE: but the Divine Glory was again to be restored to him, though he now partook of the Nature of his Creature Man; nay, the Son himself, even when a Man, claims the Glory of his Heavenly Father!— ‘ And now, O Father’ (said he) ‘GLORI­FY THOU ME WITH THINE OWN­SELF, WITH THE GLORY which I had WITH THEE before the world was. John xvii. 5. See also p. 308.’

It was not only in his Divine Nature, that THE SON was to be thus glorified, but expressly as "MAN;" so that the Nature of MAN is indeed exalted in Christ to the highest pitch of glory!— ‘Behold THE MAN, whose Name is [Page 342] THE BRANCH’ (says the Prophet Zechariah) ‘he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall BUILD THE TEM­PLE of the Lord ⁽¹²⁴⁾: even he shall BUILD THE TEMPLE of the Lord; and he shall BEAR THE GLORY,’ (that is, even he,—THE MAN that is called the Branch, shall BEAR THE GLORY) ‘ and shall SIT and RULE UPON HIS THRONE; and he shall be A PRIEST UPON HIS THRONE,’ [that is, a ROYAL PRIEST, after the order of that Righteous King, ⁽¹²⁵⁾, who was KING of SALEM, or King of PEACE ⁽¹²⁶⁾] ‘and the Counsel of PEACE shall [Page 343] be between them both. (Zechariah vi. 12, 13.)’ The throne or kingdom here promised, was also to be an everlasting Kingdom, though given to Christ, ex­pressly as "Son of Man;" for it is cer­tainly the same Kingdom foretold by the Prophet Daniel,— ‘I saw in the night visions,’ (says Daniel) ‘and behold (one) like THE SON OF MAN came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him DOMINION, and GLORY, and A KINGDOM, that all People, Nations, and Languages, should serve him: HIS DOMINION IS AN EVER­LASTING DOMINION, WHICH SHALL NOT PASS AWAY, and HIS KINGDOM (that) WHICH SHALL NOT BE DE­STROYED.’ [Page 344] Dan. vii. 13, 14. Com­pare this with chap. ii. 44. wherein the same Prophet informs us, that— ‘in the days of these Kings’ (meaning the Kings, or rather Kingdoms, which suc­ceeded the fourth great Kingdom or Roman Empire) ‘shall the God of Hea­ven set up a Kingdom, which shall NEVER BE DESTROYED: and the King­dom shall not be left to other People, (but) it shall break in pieces, and con­sume all these Kingdoms, and IT SHALL STAND FOR EVER.’ The Psalmist had also previously declared— ‘ Thy Throne, O GOD, is FOR EVER AND EVER. Psal. xlv. 6.’ Which the Apostle Paul has applied expressly to the Son. Heb. i. 8. These Prophecies of an Eternal Kingdom, proclaimed by the Prophets under the Old Testament, were confirmed by the Angel GABRIEL, when he declared the Eternity of CHRIST'S Government:— ‘And behold’ (said he [Page 345] to the Blessed Virgin) ‘thou shalt con­ceive in thy womb, and bring forth a Son, and shalt call his Name JESUS’ (which signifies A SAVIOUR. See note in p. 225.) ‘He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and THE LORD GOD shall give unto him THE THRONE of his Father David. And he shall REIGN over the House of Jacob FOR EVER (— [...]): and of HIS KINGDOM THERE SHALL BE NO END ( [...].’) Luke i. 31—33. The Apostle Paul, nevertheless, informs us of a time, ‘when he (Christ) shall have DELIVERED UP THE KINGDOM TO GOD, EVEN THE FATHER; when he shall have put down all Rule, and all Authority and Power.’ (meaning ALL POWER that in any degree is opposite or inimical in its Nature to his KINGDOM OF RIGHT­EOUSNESS) ‘For he must REIGN till he hath put all Enemies under his Feet.’ [Page 346] 1 Cor. xv. 24, 25. And again, in the 28th verse— ‘ And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall THE SON ALSO HIMSELF BE SUBJECT UNTO HIM THAT PUT ALL THINGS UNDER HIM, THAT GOD MAY BE ALL IN ALL.’ The two last mentioned texts, when collated with the preceding declara­tions concerning the Eternity of Christ's Kingdom, would contain an irreconcileable difficulty, were it not clearly demon­strable, that "the Son of God" is really included with THE ALMIGHTY FA­THER in the Eternal BEING JEHOVAH, and consequently is truly GOD! For the fact is, that he is called JEHOVAH and GOD in many unquestionable passages of Scripture, in some expressly, in others by necessary implication, (several examples of which are already cited in this Tract) and no inference to the contrary can be justly drawn from any of the texts which my learned friend (before mentioned) [Page 347] has laid before me as proofs of an op­posite sentiment!

Most of these indeed are such as re­late to the Son, merely in his mediatorial Office as MESSIAH, or the Anointed of JEHOVAH;—as Psal. ii. 2. ⁽¹²⁷⁾ com­pared with Acts iv. 24, 25, 26. also Heb. i. 8, 9.—Psal. cx. 1. 1 Cor. xv. 25. [Page 348] (which is the particular text now under consideration) Eph. i. 17.20. and Heb. i. 2. And others relate particularly to Christ's ministry, whilst he dwelt personally as a Man upon earth;—as Isai. xi. 2. ⁽¹²⁸⁾ lxi. 1, 2. compared with Luke iv. 18.—These prove indeed that [Page 349] he is ‘inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood,’ and all of them demon­strate his subordination to the Almighty Father in the ministry and gracious offices which he had undertaken for the restoration of mankind; but none of them afford the least shadow of contra­diction to the texts wherein his Divine Nature is declared! One particular text, however, remains to be mentioned, which at first sight, seems to militate against my general argument—viz. Psal. lxxxiii. 18.— ‘ That (men) may know that thou’ (i. e. GOD mentioned in the 1st and 13th verses) ‘WHOSE NAME ALONE IS JE­HOVAH, (art) the most High over all the earth.’—Now, it is strictly true, indeed, (though I do not think it the proper translation of this text, see pages 233—236.) that God ALONE is JE­HOVAH, because Jehovah alone is God ^*; and the Scriptures assure us, that there is but ONE JEHOVAH, (Deut. [Page 350] vi. 4.) or One "ONLY WISE GOD." (Rom. xvi. 27. 1 Tim. i. 17.) And therefore, when the Son of God is called JEHOVAH, or GOD, he is not so named, as being distinct or separate with respect to that ONE Eternal Being, JEHOVAH, or GOD, but as being included in that Divine Nature, or GOD, ‘whose Name alone is JEHOVAH,’ and as being ONE with the ALMIGHTY FATHER! which was declared by the Son himself; — ‘I and the Father ( [...]) WE ARE ONE. (John x. 30.)’ ‘I am in the Father, and the Father in me. (John xiv. 11. xvii. 21. and x. 38.)’ And therefore, though the Son ‘shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Fa­ther,’—and shall ‘also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all,’ (as declared in the texts cited above from 1 Cor. xv. 24—28.) yet, as the Son is in the Father, and the Father in him, and [Page 351] as "all things that the Father hath are" the Son's (John xvi. 15.) and as he must of course be glorified with the Glory which he had with the Father himself before the world was, (John xvii. 5.) it is manifest that he will still reign in and with the ALMIGHTY FATHER in that Eternal Being of GOD, which will then "be all in all!"

In the above mentioned text of St. Paul, it is said, that ‘He’ (Christ) ‘must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet,’ and that ‘the last enemy (that) shall be destroyed is DEATH. (1 Cor. xv. 25, 26.)’ This opens to us the time that Christ will deliver up the kingdom. DEATH, that last enemy, will be effectually destroyed, when all men, that are redeemed by Christ, are risen from DEATH! The world itself (where alone Death reigned) and all that is desirable in it, will then [Page 352] not only be "burned up," (2 Pet. iii. 10.) but will be made the seat of eter­nal Horror and "everlasting Fire," (see Notes in pages 130 and 142.) and the irrevocable decrees of the Son of MAN, in his final Judgment upon MEN and ANGELS, will by that time have taken place! Here, then, is an end of the whole Christian Dispensation! What need can there be of a Redeemer, a Me­diator, or of a Judge, after the Fate of all Mankind is determined!—It is no lessening, therefore, of the Son's Dig­nity, that he then delivers up the several charges which he had undertaken in obedience to his Father's will, when the same shall have been compleatly executed and fulfilled!—The generality of Commentators agree, that it is Christ's Mediatorial Kingdom which will then be delivered up; but they should also have mentioned that Sovereignty, which is still of higher degree, that glorious [Page 353] Sovereign Authority, which is of un­speakable Dignity; I mean that of sit­ting as SUPREME JUDGE OF THE UNI­VERSE! An Authority of which even the Almighty Father hath divested him­self— ‘For the Father judgeth no Man, but hath committed all Judgment unto the Son’ (and the supreme Dignity of the Trust is fully declared by the reason of its being given); ‘that all (Men) should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. (John v. 22, 23.)’ Nay, not only Men, but Angels must honour him; for the word ALL ( [...]) includes Angels as well as Men; and we read expressly, that Angels are required to WORSHIP HIM ⁽¹²⁹⁾, which would be gross idolatry, if Christ was not truly GOD, and One with the Father in the [Page 354] Eternal Being JEHOVAH! And when the important Trust shall have been fulfilled, and compleatly executed, that Divine Authority and Jurisdiction, as supreme Judge (which had been com­mitted only to One of the Divine Per­sons) shall be delivered up, together with all other offices of distinct or separate Au­thority, that ‘GOD MAY BE ALL IN ALL.’ And in GOD, undoubtedly, the Son of God ‘shall reign over the House of Jacob for ever: and of his Kingdom there shall be no end!’—Agreeable to the Angels Prophecy. Luke i. 33.

The Scriptures indeed are every where filled with clear Testimonies concerning the Divinity of our BLESSED REDEEM­ER, so that the command to honour him, "even as we honour the Father," is per­fectly consistent with all the rest. And therefore, unless we HONOUR the Son with SUPREME HONOUR, ‘even as we honour the Father,’ we fall short [Page 355] of the command; and, for want of due Faith, cannot expect to obtain of the Father that glorious and heavenly Gift for the necessary improvement of Human Nature, which our REDEEMER has pro­mised ‘to them that ask in his Name, even the Spirit of Truth, (John xv. 26.)’ which ‘will guide us into all Truth. (John xvi. 13.)’

The supreme, or equal Divine Nature of THE HOLY SPIRIT, is not less clearly declared, in several parts of Scripture, than the Divine Nature of THE SON OF GOD, notwithstanding that some other parts of Scripture express a manifest Subordination of Office; as that ‘he shall NOT SPEAK OF HIMSELF; but what­soever he " SHALL HEAR, (that) shall he speak ⁽¹³⁰⁾;"’ and that he is sent [Page 356] or given by the Father ⁽¹³¹⁾; and also [Page 357] by the Son ⁽¹³²⁾; and again, that he is declared to be "the Spirit of Christ" ⁽¹³³⁾, as well as "the Spirit of God!" [Page 358] —yet (I say, notwithstanding these ex­pressions of Subordination) the supreme or equal Divine Nature of THE HOLY SPIRIT is clearly revealed in several parts of Scripture. The Prophet Isaiah, for instance, has declared the Divine Omnipotence of the Spirit in the strong­est terms;—in terms which prove, that "the Spirit of God" is a free and inde­pendent Spirit, and is truly God of the [Page 359] same supreme Divine Nature, or Eternal Being, with the other Two Divine Per­sons; for this Prophet expressly applies to "the Spirit of God" the same supreme Attributes of Creation and Almighty Power, which in other parts of Scrip­ture are occasionally attributed to the other Two Divine Persons!

But hear the words of the Prophet himself, dictated by that same Spirit.— ‘ Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand? and meted out hea­ven with the span, and comprehended the dust in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a ba­lance? Who hath directed THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD,’ (or rather the SPI­RIT OF JEHOVAH [...], for thus exactly is the Spirit of the Lord com­monly expressed in the Old Testament, when mention is made of his inspiration or coming down upon the Prophets) ‘ or who (being) his Counsellor, hath taught him? With whom took he counsel; [Page 360] and (who) instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him the way of understanding?’ (Thus the Prophet clearly insists on the indepen­dency of the free ^* Spirit of the Lord) ‘—Behold, the nations (are) as as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, he taketh up the isles as a very little thing. And Libanon (is) not sufficient to burn, nor the beasts thereof sufficient for a burnt-offering! All nations before him (are) as nothing: and they are counted to him less than nothing, and vanity. (Isaiah xl. 12—17.)’ The Prophet af­terwards proceeds to speak of GOD ( [...]) without further distinction of Persons, having already, in the preceding part of the chapter, clearly distinguished the Person of the Son of God under the title [Page 361] of "Jehovah," and "our God," whose Advent was to be proclaimed by the voice in the wilderness, and of whom Sion and Jerusalem were directed to say unto the cities of Judah, ‘Behold your God, (see p. 248—258)’ and having also expressly distinguished ‘the Spirit of Jehovah,’ and proclaimed his Di­vine Attributes and supreme Dignity, (see ver. 12—17. last cited) he now proceeds to speak of GOD (in the 18th verse) without further distinction of Persons. ‘To whom then’ (continues he) ‘will ye liken GOD? or what likeness will ye compare unto him? (ver. 18, &c.)’

The Spiritual Nature of GOD is surely so far above our finite comprehension, that it cannot be explained or expressed by any likeness or comparison whatso­ever!—But yet, as we may clearly per­ceive and understand, by what is revealed to us, that the supreme Attributes of Creation and Almighty Power are applied [Page 362] expressly to the Holy Spirit (as in the above cited text of Isaiah) which in other parts of Scripture are equally attri­buted to THE FATHER AND THE SON, we may reasonably conclude, that the supreme Dignity of the HOLY SPIRIT must necessarily consist in his entire Union and Equality with the Father and with the Son in the Divine Nature, or GODHEAD ^*—that ONE eternal and glo­rious Being, JEHOVAH, ‘which is, and which was, and which is to come, THE ALMIGHTY! (Rev. i. 8. see also p. 239.)’

This entire Union of THE HOLY SPI­RIT with the Almighty Father and the Son, in the One Eternal Being of GOD, is a necessary doctrine, without which THE ALMIGHTY POWER, attributed in the Scriptures to the Holy Spirit, cannot be reconciled to that other indispensable Article of our Faith, the Unity of God!

[Page 363]In the Book of Job (ch. xxxiii. 4.) the Spirit is declared to be the Creator! ‘THE SPIRIT OF GOD ⁽¹³⁴⁾ hath MADE me, and THE BREATH’ (a term synonymous to SPIRIT) ‘ of the Almighty hath given me Life.’ In the account also which Moses has given us of the Creation, we read, that ‘the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (Gen. i. 2.)’ And the Psalmist attributes the Creation to THE SPIRIT jointly with the Divine WORD; — ‘By the WORD of JEHOVAH were the heavens made: and all the host of [Page 364] them, by the BREATH (or SPIRIT ⁽¹³⁵⁾ of his mouth. (Psal. xxxiii. 6.)’ And afterwards, when the Divine WORD was made flesh and dwelt among us, he himself expressly attributed to ‘the Spirit of God’ ⁽¹³⁶⁾ those mighty WORKS, to which he appealed for the truth of his doctrine concerning his Unity with the Almighty Father (see p. 287.) and which, at another time, he expressly calls the Works of his Father! ⁽¹³⁷⁾ So that without the doctrine of the Unity of the Divine Nature, this ap­plication of the same Attributes to dif­ferent Persons could not be understood!

[Page 365]St, Paul also attributed to ‘THE POWER OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD’ ⁽¹³⁸⁾ the miracles, which he wrought "through Jesus Christ," in preaching his Gospel to the Gentiles. Nay, even the miraculous Conception of the Blessed Virgin (from whence the Holy Child Jesus was called "the Son of God") is expressly attributed to the Holy Ghost by St. Matthew— ‘She was found with Child of the Holy Ghost (i. 18.)’ ‘for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost. (i. 20.)’ Compare this with Luke i. 35.— ‘The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,’ &c.

[Page 366]The glorious Title [...]— ‘the Power of the Highest,’ which imme­diately follows these words concerning the Holy Ghost in the last mentioned text, is by several learned Commentators at­tributed also to him, viz. the Holy Spirit ⁽¹³⁹⁾; and a Title nearly similar is certainly attributed to the same Spirit, even by our Lord himself, when he fore­told the fulfilling of God's promise in the Gift of the Holy Ghost. — ‘And behold (said he) I send the promise of my Father ⁽¹⁴⁰⁾ upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with POWER FROM ON HIGH. (Luke xxiv. 49.)’

[Page 367]Similar Titles are also given to the Son of God; for even in his ministerial Cha­racter as Messiah, or Christ, after he had taken Human Nature upon him, he is called ‘THE POWER OF GOD, AND THE WISDOM OF GOD. (1 Cor. i. 24.)’ Surely these are Attributes of the Divine Nature, and Titles of supreme Dignity!

The Power of Justification must cer­tainly be also accounted a Divine Attri­bute, and as such can belong to none but GOD; ‘for it is GOD that JUSTI­FIETH (Rom. viii. 33.)’ but yet both Justification, and Sanctification also, (another Divine Attribute) are expressly attributed to the HOLY SPIRIT, jointly with CHRIST!— ‘But ye are washed, but ye are SANCTIFIED, but ye are JUSTIFIED, in the Name of the LORD JESUS, and by ( or in) THE SPIRIT of our God. (1 Cor. vi. 11.)’

[Page 368]To give Life, also, is not less apparently an Attribute of THE DIVINE NATURE than Creation, whether we speak of mere Animal Life, or the Spiritual or Eternal Life, but more especially the latter, and yet this ALMIGHTY POWER is attributed both to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit! For though it is ‘GOD who quickeneth the dead, (Rom. iv. 17.)’ and ‘ who quickeneth all things; (1 Tim. vi. 13.)’ yet the Son also is called ‘ a quick­ening Spirit, 1 Cor. xv. 45.’ ‘and quickeneth whom he will, ( [...], John v. 21.)’ and by the same authority we know likewise, that ‘it is THE SPIRIT that QUICKENETH! (John vi. 63.)’ In consequence of this Al­mighty Power the Son is called ‘THE PRINCE (or Author) OF LIFE ⁽¹⁴¹⁾, [Page 369] and the Spirit is expressly intituled— the Spirit of LIFE ⁽¹⁴²⁾.’

Add to this, that the Spirit is expressly intituled ‘the Spirit of Wisdom and Understanding, the Spirit of Counsel and Might ⁽¹⁴³⁾, the Spirit of Holi­liness’ ⁽¹⁴⁴⁾, and ‘THE SPIRIT OF GLORY’ ⁽¹⁴⁵⁾! These expressions of [Page 370] Dignity and Power are unlimited, and do certainly include the highest or supreme degree of the several recited Attributes, even the infinite Wisdom, Understanding, Counsel, &c. of GOD, because they are attributed to that glorious Spirit, which ‘searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God! (1 Cor. ii. 10.)’ and they are attributed to him, also, as essential Properties, which are so eminently his, that he is even named from them— ‘the Spirit of Wisdom’— ‘the Spirit of Might’— ‘the Spirit of Glory;’ as Christ is also intituled— ‘the Power of God, and the Wisdom of God, (see p. 367.)’ and "the Lord of Glory," see pages 283, 284.

These Titles and Attributes cannot (in that eminent and essential degree in which they are attributed both to the Son and Holy Spirit) belong to any Being that is not truly God, and Jehovah: and it is clearly revealed to us, that there is [Page 371] but One Jehovah ⁽¹⁴⁶⁾ (as I have before remarked in pages 241—244) who is the only true God; the God of Israel ⁽¹⁴⁷⁾; and yet we learn by the Scriptures, not only that CHRIST is truly GOD, and JEHOVAH (of which I have already produced many authentic proofs from Scripture in pages 216—354) but that THE HOLY GHOST is also JEHOVAH, and consequently is included likewise in the Unity [...], ⁽¹⁴⁸⁾ of the Deity or Godhead!

[Page 372]The Holy Ghost is Jehovah, because it is he who "limiteth a certain day," ‘ saying in David, To-day, after so long a time’ (see St. Paul's Commentary on the 95th Psalm) ‘ as it is said, To­day if ye will hear HIS VOICE’ (the Holy Ghost refers them to THE VOICE of another Person, who appears by the Apostle's argument to be the Messiah) ‘ harden not your hearts. Heb. iv. 7.’ In the preceding chapter the Apostle [Page 373] tells us expressly, that it was the Holy Ghost who said these words— ‘ Where­fore’ (says he) ‘ as the HOLY GHOST SAITH’— ‘To-day if ye will hear HIS VOICE, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness: when your Fathers tempted ME’ (saith the Holy Ghost) ‘proved ME, and saw MY WORKS forty years.’ [But in the several accounts which Moses has given us of these glo­rious Works and Transactions, we find them mentioned as the Works of Jeho­vah, and by St. Paul they seem to be attributed to Christ ⁽¹⁴⁹⁾; and therefore if the Holy Ghost was a mere ministering Spirit, employed only as an agent in Jehovah's Works with Jehovah's Power, and was not also truly Jehovah himself, he (the Spirit of Truth) could not have [Page 374] called them his Works.] ‘Wherefore I was grieved’ (continues the Holy Ghost, still speaking in David) ‘with that generation, and said, They do alway err in (their) heart; and they have not known MY ways. So I sware in MY wrath, they shall not enter into MY rest. Heb. iii. 7—11.’ Surely these are expressions of supreme Authority, which could not be used by any Spirit that was not truly Jehovah!

Again, in the 10th chapter of the same Epistle (15th verse) we read— [...], &c.— ‘ THE HOLY GHOST also is a witness to us: for after that HE had said before,’ ‘This is the covenant that I WILL MAKE with them,’ &c. The text to which the Apostle apparently refers us is in Jeremiah, xxxi. 33. where [Page 375] we find, that it was Jehovah, who said these words by the Prophet!

See also the two verses preceding— ‘Be­hold the days come, SAITH JEHOVAH, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, &c. (Jer. xxxi. 31.)’ And afterwards in the 33d verse (the text quoted by St. Paul as words said by THE HOLY GHOST) the Pro­phet adds in the Name of JEHOVAH— ‘But this (shall be) the covenant that I WILL MAKE with the House of Israel; after those days, SAITH JEHOVAH, I will put MY Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be THEIR GOD, and they shall be my people.’ This text is expressly attributed to the Holy Ghost by the Apostle, and the next verse is joined by the Copulative [...] (and) as the words of the same Divine Speaker— ‘ AND they shall teach no more every man his neigh­bour, [Page 376] and every man his brother, saying, KNOW JEHOVAH: for they shall all KNOW ME’ [saith THE HOLY GHOST, this being a regular continuance (as I before remarked) of the words attributed to him by the Apostle] ‘from the least of them unto the greatest of them, SAITH JEHOVAH: for I will forgive their iniquity’ (and none but God can for­give sins ^*!) ‘and I will remember their sin no more. (Jer. xxxi. 33, 34.)’

This Promise is apparently to the same effect, as that which JEHOVAH had be­fore proclaimed by his Prophet Isaiah, viz.— ‘ And all thy children (shall be) TAUGHT OF JEHOVAH. Isai. liv. 13.’ To these texts, therefore, our Lord probably referred, when he said to the Jews— 'It is written in the Prophets,' ‘And they shall be ALL TAUGHT OF GOD.’ ‘Every man therefore that hath [Page 377] HEARD, and hath LEARNED OF THE FATHER, cometh unto me. John vi. 45.’ Thus, the being taught of God, is manifestly esteemed by our Lord to be the same thing as hearing and learning of the Father, for he mentions these cir­cumstances apparently to illustrate what he had before said (in the preceding verse) concerning the Father's drawing the true Believers— ‘No man’ (said our Lord) ‘can come unto me, unless THE FATHER, which hath sent me, DRAW him, (John vi. 44.)’ so that Christ's reference to what was ‘written in the Prophets’ on this subject (especially as he applies these Prophecies to the Drawing and Teaching of the Father) seems, at first sight, to make against my argument, which was to shew, that the Prophecies here cited were the Words of THE HOLY GHOST, speaking in the Prophets under the Title of Jehovah! But this is so far from being a real ob­jection, [Page 378] that it is truly a confirmation of the former argument concerning the speaking of THE HOLY GHOST, when we consider, that the Drawing of the Father, and the Teaching of God, is effected only by the Spirit of God! For the same Apostle (John), who recorded our Lord's reference to the Prophets last cited, tells us in his First General Epistle (ii. 20.) how this Teaching of God is communicated. [...].— ‘And ye have AN UNCTION from the Holy One ⁽¹⁵⁰⁾, and ye KNOW all things.’ [Page 379] (1 John ii. 20.) This Unction, or Anoint­ing, is generally understood by Com­mentators to signify the Influence of the Holy Spirit ⁽¹⁵¹⁾, and the Effect of that Influence is further explained in the 27th verse of the same chapter— ‘But THE ANOINTING, which ye have re­ceived [Page 380] of him, abideth in you, and ye need not that any man TEACH you: but as the same ANOINTING TEACHETH you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie: and even as it hath TAUGHT you ye shall abide in him. (1 John ii. 27.)’ And it is manifest, that this "Anointing, which teacheth all things," is to be understood of THE HOLY SPI­RIT; for the Apostle Paul informs us, that the Communication of this Know­ledge or Teaching from God is by the Holy Spirit— ‘Eye’ (says he) ‘hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which GOD hath prepared for them that love him. But GOD HATH REVEALED (them) UNTO US BY HIS SPIRIT: for THE SPIRIT searcheth ALL THINGS, yea, THE DEEP THINGS OF GOD. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so THE THINGS [Page 381] OF GOD knoweth no man, but THE SPIRIT OF GOD. Now we have re­ceived, not the spirit of the world, but THE SPIRIT WHICH IS OF GOD’ [or rather THE SPIRIT OUT OF GOD, [...], that is, which pro­ceedeth forth ( [...], see John xv. 26.) "out of God," see note 132 in p. 357]; ‘that we might KNOW the things that are freely given to us of GOD’ (where­by it is manifest, that we obtain this Knowledge of the things of God by the Holy Spirit). ‘Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which THE HOLY GHOST TEACHETH ⁽¹⁵²⁾; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.’ But ‘THE NA­TURAL [Page 382] ( [...], or Animal) MAN re­ceiveth not the things of THE SPIRIT OF GOD,’ [How urgent and importunate ought we therefore to be in claiming, on all occasions, the gracious Promises of Spiritual Assistance (see p. 200—202) as the Nature of Man is declared to be thus miserably deficient without that Hea­venly Gift, the neglect of which is the first foundation of Infidelity and Scep­ticism] ‘for they are foolishness unto him;’ [even the things of infinite Wis­dom (for such must be ‘the things of the Spirit of God’) are foolishness to the mere Natural Man!] ‘neither can he know (them) because they are SPI­RITUALLY discerned. But he that is SPIRITUAL, judgeth all things, &c. (1 Cor. ii. 9—15.)’

The glorious Effect of Christ's Pro­mises upon those who duly claim them, is principally (as I have before remark­ed, [Page 383] see p. 196—202) that we shall "partake of the Divine Nature!" But how can that Effect take place, if the Spirit of God, and of Christ ⁽¹⁵³⁾, (see page 357), the Spirit of the Father, and [Page 384] of the Son, by which alone we can have communication with either ⁽¹⁵⁴⁾, is not really Divine? We are taught by a mul­titude of texts throughout the New Testament, that MAN by Nature is ca­pable of receiving THE HOLY SPIRIT within him; so that the Human Body is expressly called in Scripture ‘the Tem­ple of the Holy Ghost ⁽¹⁵⁵⁾;’ and therefore, if THE HOLY GHOST were not really and truly GOD, of the same [Page 385] Divine Nature with THE FATHER (for there can be but ONE Divine Nature, as there is but ONE GOD, which I hope is already clearly demonstrated, see pages 241—244) how improper would be the idea of comparing Man to a Temple? For Christians are not only called ‘ the Temple of God ⁽¹⁵⁶⁾, but expressly (as I have already remarked) the Tem­ple [Page 386] of the Holy Ghost,’ as if the terms were synonymous!

Too many Temples, indeed, through the Depravity of Mankind, and the In­fluence of Devils, have been dedicated to those, " which by Nature are NO GODS!" But that was only amongst men — "who knew not God." (Gal. iv. 8.) But shall we conceive of the inspired Writers of the New Testament, that they would also DEDICATE Temples to a Being, "which by Nature is no God!" For if we could suppose it true, that THE HOLY SPIRIT ‘by Nature is no GOD,’ the TEMPLE OF THE HOLY GHOST would be no better, in that one [Page 387] respect, than Heathen Temples! And therefore, if we really believe the Holy Scriptures to be the Word of God, we must necessarily believe that THE HOLY GHOST is really and truly GOD; for otherwise we should not have been re­quired by the Holy Scriptures to esteem our Bodies as the ‘Temple of the Holy Ghost!’ And as it thus appears to be a necessary conclusion, that THE HOLY GHOST is truly GOD, it is equally a necessary doctrine, that he is also JE­HOVAH— " For who is GOD" (i. e. truly God) " except JEHOVAH?" ^† Psa. xviii. 31. And therefore, though THE HOLY GHOST is clearly revealed to us in Scrip­ture as a distinct Person from THE FA­THER [Page 388] and THE SON, he must neverthe­less be included in that One Divine and Eternal Being, JEHOVAH; and according­ly, in that supreme character, he revealed the Divine Will to the Prophets! Of this I have already produced some remarkable, and (I trust) incontrovertible proofs, and therefore shall only request my reader's attention to one more example of it. ‘Well spake THE HOLY GHOST’ (said the Apostle Paul to the unbelieving Jews at Rome) ‘by Isaias the Prophet unto our Fathers, saying; Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive. For the heart of this people is waxed gross, &c. Acts xxviii. 25.’ But when we turn to that part of Isaiah's Prophecy to which the Apostle refers us, as the SAYING of THE HOLY GHOST, we find it was JEHOVAH which spoke to the Prophet!— ‘I heard’ (says the Prophet) ‘the VOICE of the LORD [Page 389] (Adonai) saying, Whom shall I SEND? and who will go for US?’ (speaking expressly in a Plurality of Persons). ‘Then said I, here (am) I; send me. And HE said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, (or in hearing) but under­stand not; and see ye indeed (or in see­ing) but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed ⁽¹⁵⁷⁾. Then said I, LORD, (or Adoni) how long? And HE answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, &c. Isai. vi. 8—11.’

Now the Lord, or Adoni, who then spake to Isaiah, was represented to the [Page 390] Prophet (see the beginning of the chap­ter) as ‘sitting upon a throne high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple,’ &c. ‘and one cried unto another,’ (that is, the Seraphims mentioned in the pre­ceding verse) ‘ HOLY, HOLY, HOLY (IS) JEHOVAH OF HOSTS, the whole earth is full of his glory, &c. (ibid. 1—3.)’

Now, notwithstanding that the Lord JEHOVAH is represented in this Divine Revelation as speaking in the Plural Number ("who will go for us"), and that the threefold repetition of the Epi­thet Holy, in the proclamation of God's glorious Title, Jehovah of Hosts, seems to correspond with the above-mentioned Idea of a Plurality of Persons being comprehended in that One Eternal Being JEHOVAH, which then revealed himself to Isaiah, yet the Apostle Paul expressly attributed the Revelation to the Holy [Page 391] Ghost, as being the Divine Person which then spake! ‘Well SPAKE THE HOLY GHOST’ (says he) ‘by Isaias the Prophet, SAYING, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear,’ &c. Who then shall presume to say that THE HOLY GHOST is not really and truly GOD; when it is apparent by the cita­tions already made, that the glorious Name JEHOVAH, which includes THE DIVINE NATURE OF THE FATHER, and OF THE SON, is expressly attributed also to THE HOLY GHOST?

Without a due sense of this supreme Dignity of the Holy Spirit, we should form but a very unworthy idea of the real Dignity of HUMAN NATURE, which (as I have already shewn) is not only capable of receiving the Gift, or internal Communication, of that glorious and eternal FREE SPIRIT ¹⁵⁸ OF GOD, [Page 392] as a Principle of Action, but is absolutely entitled even to claim that wonderful par­ticipation of the Divine Nature! to claim it, I say, by a written Charter of Privileges, which can never be taken from us (as God's Word cannot fail), he having bound him­self to us on certain reciprocal condi­tions by an irrevocable covenant (as sure as his Word) that MAN might be FREE indeed! We are FREE (I say) having now a free Choice, through Christ, to partake, if we will ⁽¹⁵⁹⁾, of the Tree of Life (see note in p. 310) from which our [Page 393] first Parents were unhappily excluded in this world!

[Page 394]But these glorious Privileges being granted to Human Nature only through the Merits of that "Son of Man," who voluntarily took our Nature upon him, we must always remember, that our [Page 395] Title to the Benefits of the free Cove­nant, before-mentioned, is valid only when claimed in his Name, and for his Sake, as we ourselves are otherwise to­tally unworthy of them; for he alone is "the Way, and the Truth, and the Life;" and ‘no Man cometh unto the Father, but by him. John xiv. 6.’

He hath, therefore, particularly in­structed us how to claim the Privileges of Human Nature, assuring us by re-iter­ated ¹⁶⁰ Promises, tendered in the most urgent and affectionate manner, [Page 396] that Prayers in his Name shall certainly be effectual; that is, provided there be no wilful Defect on our part; which [Page 397] conditional Clause is always to be un­derstood, wherever Promises of Blessings are delivered in Holy Scripture.

Let us therefore be mindful, ‘that the sufferings of this present time, are not worthy (to be compared) with the [Page 398] glory which shall be revealed to us, (Rom. viii. 18.)’ [...], that is, towards us, or respecting ourselves; referring, probably, to that ‘Eternal Weight of Glory’ with which Human Nature is capable of being invested ‘after the sufferings of this present time,’ as sig­nified by the same Apostle in a parallel passage of another Epistle— ‘For our light affliction’ (said the Apostle) ‘which is but for a moment’ (i. e. com­paratively speaking) ‘worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal Weight of GLORY! 2 Cor. iv. 17,’ This further Revelation of God's Will [va­riously expressed in the New Testa­ment ⁽¹⁶¹⁾ concerning the sure and most certain expectation, that we may [Page 399] entertain, of being invested with ETER­NAL GLORY in the world to come, (if we [Page 400] persevere in the true Faith and Practice of Christianity in this world); completes [Page 401] our Charter of Privileges and Immunities, or, "the perfect Law of Liberty," which [Page 402] THE ALMIGHTY has been pleased to tender to his Creature Man!

[Page 403]— ‘Who’ (then) ‘shall separate us from the love of Christ? (shall) tribu­lation, [Page 404] or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? [Page 405] (As it is written, for thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted [Page 406] as sheep for the slaughter). Nay, in all these things, we are more than con­querors, [Page 407] through him that loved us. For I am persuaded’ (said the Apostle to the Romans) ‘that neither death, nor life, nor angels,’ (that is, the angels of Satan) ‘nor principalities, nor pow­ers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor heighth, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Rom. viii. 35—39.’

Here is a noble declaration of that "perfect Liberty," to which Christ has [Page 408] restored mankind! that glorious Dignity of "Human Nature," which even the poorest and meanest persons amongst us (the distressed, the hungry, and the naked) are capable of attaining by Perseverance in Faith, and Resolution in observing and keeping, on their Part, THE CON­DITIONS ⁽¹⁶²⁾ of our reciprocal Cove­nant with God!

[Page 409]Let us therefore (like the Apostle) approach unto the Throne of Grace, in full Assurance of FAITH, always remem­bering, that a SOUND FAITH must be the principal Foundation of our Pre­tensions to the promised Dignity and Privileges of HUMAN NATURE, and that by Perseverance in the true Faith, and a continual Renewal of those in­estimable Claims, from time to time, while we remain in this world, we may be as confident as the Apostle, that ‘neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor heighth nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from THE LOVE [Page 410] OF GOD, which is in CHRIST JESUS our Lord;’ because, through him, God has put it absolutely in our own Power (whatever our temporary Afflictions and Sufferings may be in this Life) to attain an "ETERNAL WEIGHT OF GLORY:" 2 Cor. iv. 17.— ‘For which cause we faint not’ ( ‘though our outward man perish’) being fully persuaded that he, who PROMISED, is ‘able also to PERFORM.’

The Defects of this Tract, wherever the Reader discovers any, are certainly to be attributed to the fallible Author, whose Name is prefixed; but whatever may seem praise-worthy, and instructive therein, to GOD ALONE!

"SOLI DEO, GLORIA ET GRATIA."