inferred both from his own words, and from the nature of those authentic writings which they have their additions to the gofpel of Chrift, under the notion of infpired writings, and all theologers from that age to this, who have paid any regard to the apoftolic writings, are either fools or knaves! This is the natural conclufion from his lordship's reafoning; and these premifes, thus fixed, makes way for his lordship to deal his blows plentifully upon the whole tribe of gofpel-makers and theologers. Now though it were perhaps a much easier task to cut up the roots of his lordship's fophiftry, than it was for him to cut up those of theology, yet a marginal note affords too narrow limits for the task, which however has been fufficiently done already by much abler hands. Nevertheless, as I have prefumed to bring his lordship's name in queftion, and to ftart an opinion of his, which, if juft, would invalidate the authority of the greater part of our new teftament, it seems neceffary that I should say something in fupport of what I have ventured to advance, namely, that his reafonings on this head, are fophiftical and inconclufive. And, ift. His lordship has brought many heavy charges against Paul without condefcending to make one of them good. zdly. By his lordship's manner of reasoning, we are led to infer, that Paul and the other apoftles have greatly adulterated the gofpel of Chrift, by adding new terms and conditions to the covenant of grace which he established, and loading it with a number of new doctrines and duties, and thereby, horrendum dictu, have changed the covenant. This is indeed a dreadful charge, yet his lordfhip has thought proper to leave it, upon the credit of his own veracity, without the least shadow of support from the epiftolary writings of the apostles. 8 1 BUT have left us, and which are juftly included in the Chriftian canon. A few days before our Saviour's BUT is this in fact the cafe? Have any of the apostles prefumed to alter the original covenant of their Lord, or to annex to it new terms and conditions of falvation which he has not annexed? I believe that none, who are competently acquainted with the new teftament scriptures, will dare to affirm it. Upon what conditions did Chrift promise eternal life to his difciples? Was it not on condition they should believe in him, repent of their fins, and lead a holy life? And is not this the current doctrine of all the epiftles? The apostle ought to be named who hath required any other conditions of falvation than these. They have indeed frequently explained and enforced thefe conditions of the covenant in all their epiftles to the churches, and this, I apprehend, is perfectly agreeable to their office as preachers of their mafter's gofpel: But the question is, did they make new ones, or change the old? If not, they stand perfectly clear of his lordship's charge. As there is a wide difference between explaining, illuftrating, and enforcing the conditions of a covenant already made, and adding new ones to it, by which the covenant is indeed altered; fo, I apprehend, that both new truths and duties may be added for the illuftration and perfection of a prior religion, without making any material alterations in GoD's covenant with mankind. THE great condition of falvation of obtaining the divine favour under every difpenfation of religion, I take to be, faith in the promises and declarations of GoD, and obedience to his revealed will, however these revelations are made, provided they are well attefted. This conftitutes the fum total of all true religion. Now, if we fix on this bottom, it will appear of little confequence how many, or how Q3 few, Saviour's paffion, he tells his apoftles that he had many things to fay unto them, which they were not few, the truths or duties are which God hath revealed, in any of his difpenfations. Suppofe him to have revealed five truths to Adam, as the objects of his faith, and five duties as the rule of his practiceAdam in believing thefe five truths, and obferving thefe five duties, performed all that God required of him; he kept the covenant of his GOD. But now let us fuppofe that this number of truths and duties were doubled to Noah, does not Noah become inftantly obliged to enlarge his faith and obedience, according as their objects are multiplied by the divine authority? Let us fuppofe that the credenda and facienda of religion are ftill farther multiplied to Mofes and the Ifraelites, and encreafed yet to a greater number in the gospel of Chrift, and what impeachment can all this be to the juftice and goodnefs of GOD, feeing he requires from mankind, under each of thefe difpenfations, only according to the doctrines revealed to them, and the duties enjoined upon them? And feeing the conditions of GOD'S favour and eternal happiness are fill the fame for substance under each of them, namely, faith in the promifes and declarations of GOD, and obedience to his revealed will ? Let us apply this reafoning to the prefent cafe. Suppofe St. Paul and the other apoftles, in the name and authority of their mafter, and under the fanction of thofe miracles which he enabled them to work, had in their miniftry declared fome truths, and enjoined fome duties which Chrift had not expressly revealed or enjoined in his perfonal miniftry, would there be any inconfiftency or abfurdity in all this? Did Chrift any where fay that the canon of fcripture was compleated by him, and that no heed was to be given to declarations of his apoftles after his death? Nay, not yet able to bear, by reafon of remaining prejudices, but that he would in due time fend his fpirit Nay, does he not intimate quite the contrary, as we fhall fee anon? But now although this conceffion might be easily made to us, by the enemies of Chrif tianity, yet we do not need it: For, excepting a few prophefies which have nothing to do with the covenant of grace, the friends of his deceafed lordfhip may be challenged to fhew one new doctrine or duty, which is effential to that covenant added, by the apoftles, to that revelation made by their divine mafter, unless they will make fuch out of their explanations, illuftrations and enforcements of his original gofpel. Chrift preaches the duties of faith, love, hope, repentance, prayer, humility, patience, meekness, &c. &c. St. Paul and the other apostles explain and recommend thefe duties, by their proper motives, in their epiftles. Chrift fortels the rejection of the Jews and the converfion of the Gentiles; St. Paul explains thofe events at large, adding the future restoration of the Jews from the old teftament prophefies ||; Chrift fpeaks of the refurrection of the body; St. Paul largely explains this doctrine and fhews its modus . Indeed he tells us that he fhews us a mystery concerning the quômodô of this refurrection ; but what is this mystery or new doctrine to the covenant of grace? However welcome or profitable fuch discoveries as this may be, yet no one will fay they are effential to the covenant of graces or neceffary to our falvation! Being revealed, we are indeed bound to believe them, and we have a great reafon to blefs GOD for the fuperabundant exuberance of light and knowledge which he hath given us; but fuppofing such matters as x. 16. Matth. xxi. 41. Luke xx. 16. Matth. xxiii. 37. John I Cor. xv. I Theff, iv. 13, &c. I Cor. xv. 51, 52. thefe spirit which would remove these prejudices, and guide them into all truth, and fhew them things these had been still kept fecret from us, till the event had made them appear, who would dare to fay that the covenant of God's grace would have been therefore defective? Or who can be confident to affirm, that the revelation of fuch myfteries make any change in the original covenant as published by Christ? 3dly, His lordfhip has made fuch conceffions himfelf, as neceffarily overthrow the whole fabric of his own reasoning. He fpeaks of Chrift and his gofpel, as contained in the four evangelifts, in the igheft terms of refpect; he terms Chrift the Meffiah, he fon of GOD, who was fent by the father to make a new covenant with mankind, he tells us, that he proved his divine miffion by miracles, and inforced his doctrines, by promifing rewards and threatening punishments, and he every where speaks of his gofpel, the writings of the four evangelifts, in terms of the greateft veneration, as a complete fyftem of true religion? Now' efe conceffions being made, all that he has faid both against the old teftament fcriptures, and epiftolary writings of the new, falls to the ground. For is it to be imagined, that the fon of GoD would have every where referred to the old teftament fcriptures as infpired and authentic writings, and quoted Mofes, the prophets, and the Pfalms as prophefying of himself, and as the ground work of true religion, if they are indeed fuch as his lordship reprefents them? And if it be true indeed, that this fon of GoD promised a large effufion of the fpirit to his apostles after his afcenfion, and commanded them to tarry in Jerufalem in expectation of this event; if he promised that this fpirit fhould lead them into all neceffary truth,, and teach them things which they were not able to bear in his life time, but fhould |