point, which, if it be an error, tends to confirm all other errors. When a man reafons himself into a mistake, he may reafon himself out of it again. But when a man difcards reason, and fubftitutes in its room a divine inftructor, every enthusiastic notion becomes then immediately ftamped with the character of divine truth.. The ftrange effects of fuch wildnefs we have. often seen.

As far, indeed, as a holy life is concerned, we are affured every where in fcripture, that unless the endeavours of man are affifted by the Holy Spirit of God, which dwells within him, and to whofe divine admonitions he ought ever to liften, he can do nothing. Here the divine aid is neceffary. Man, as a moral agent, with all the mifchiefs of the fall about him, ftands certainly in need of fupport.

But the investigation of truth is a different affair. It was not fo much his understanding, that was disturbed; as his will and affections.· Wretched man! he knew what was right; but could not practife it. To rectify his knowledge, enough had been done: infpired truth was on record; and he had a rule given him to underftand it. Farther aid would have rendered that

rule unneceffary; and the expectation of any fuch aid, enthusiastic.

It is true, indeed, the pious Christian will read his Bible with the best effect and in this fenfe,

no doubt, the Holy Spirit may be faid to affift him in understanding the truth of scripture: for he who does the will of God, will know of the doctrine, whether it be of God. But this is still only the application of scripture to the rectifying of his affections. To understand it as a fyftem of truth, the rule given us to compare fpiritual things with spiritual, seems abundantly sufficient. The New Testament is to us precifely in the state, in which the Old Teftament was to the apoftles. It is inspiration recorded. If farther infpiration be neceffary, a written record is more than is neceffary. It seems therefore fully fufficient for the understanding of fcripture, to take it into our hands; and, in the spirit of fincerity, and piety, to compare one part with another; or with a general view of the whole. This feems, in the apostle's idea, the only key to the fcriptures.

But now, it must be confeffed, that a variety of caufes have introduced difficulties into these facred records; and, of course, into the mode of investigation. Ancient customs not well understood

derstood-ancient modes of fpeaking, not conformable to our own-ancient errors, generated in times of ignorance-modern prejudices, and opinions, grafted on texts of fcripture mifapplied-have united with other caufes in disfiguring the plain, and fimple truths of the gospel.

Why God fuffered this blot, as fome may call it, in the facred record of truth, we know not. Yet humbly tracing the reason of it in the analogy of his other works, we may refer it to the general law of a state of trial. Every thing here bears the marks of the fall. In our moral purfuits we are exercised with various difficulties: why not in the pursuit of religious truth? In both we may be affifted, if we apply the proper means. In one, the Spirit of God will direct our endeavours: in the other, the great fcriptural rule of comparing Spiritual things with spiritual.

The honest application of this rule, without doubt, would remove at least all the material difficulties of fcripture. But instead of solving them in this way, we too often endeavour to adjust them by the words of man's wisdom. Hence arife all the difputes, that have divided the church.

The

The opinions which have occasioned them, however varied, run commonly in two great channels-that of enthusiasm, and that of libertinifm. The enthufiaft reads his Bible too literally the libertine (I use the word in its lefs offenfive fenfe,) too laxly. The one utterly dif cards reafon the other thinks nothing but reafon worth attending to. The enthusiast loves a mystery, because he does not understand it: the libertine allows nothing to be a mystery; what he does not understand, he rejects.——Let us, in an inftance or two, apply our great fcriptural rule to them both.

:

With regard to the jarring doctrine of faith, and works, it can never furely be fettled by the literal application of a few scattered paffages of St. Paul: but one should imagine it might easily be fettled by comparing such passages with other parts of fcripture; and still more by an appeal to the whole fcheme of Christianity. The very first book of the Bible fhews us, that the gospel was meant to restore us to that purity of life, which we had originally loft. This indeed feems to be the leading point of Christianity; the word of God every where exhorting us to cleanse our hearts

-to

to purify our affections-and to transform ourselves into new creatures.

Now it is certain, that all this must be done by faith. Whoever cometh to God through Chrift, must believe that he is, and that he is the rewarder of them who diligently feck him. So that in this sense we may be said to be juftified by faith; because without faith, and its accompanying virtues, no man can attain that righteousness, which the' gofpel requires as a proper qualification for our receiving the merits of Chrift's death. All Chriftians therefore lay a ftrefs on faith. The great difference is, the partial view makes it in itself an end-the comparative view makes it the means only of a purified heart, and a good life.

With regard again to an awful doctrine, which we have lately heard difputed with so much freedom; one fhould think, that a comparison of Spiritual things with fpiritual, might lead us here also to one point. The whole Bible, Old Testament and New, prophecies, and completion, feem fo full both of the humanity and divinity of Christ, that one fhould wonder, how any one, who believes the fcriptures, could feparate the two ideas. If only human, how inconfiftent! Here is a human being, who engages in the

arduous