It would be a reflection on our author's integrity to fuppofe, that he has advanced any thing concerning religion in his letters, that he does not firmly believe himself; and fince all his religious principles are only to many inferences from the refurrection of Chrift; or, which I take to be the fame thing, an explication of the genuine import of the fact, the knowledge and belief of which is as neceffary to juftification, as the knowledge of the fact itself, it is evident, that all his peculiar notions concerning grace, converfion, regeneration, holiness, charity, church, kingdom of heaven, &c. muft belong to that gospel the belief of which is neceffary to juftification. Hence it is manifeft, that what he calls the bare truth, to be believed in order to juftification, is not fuch a fimple, and uncompounded thing, as he would make us believe it is. Yea, upon inquiry, it will be found to contain as great, and a far more grofs mixture, than the popular doctrine' does*: for in reality, according to what has been juft now observed, it must include in it all the erroneous and abfurd notions which this author, or the noted patron of his party, may think fit to recommend to their adherents as the true apoftolic gofpel. Thus to be a true believer will turn out the fame thing with being a ftanch Glaffite. And, indeed, the whole of Palamon's reafoning in his letters, is only a ftrong attempt to prove this: how well he has executed it, let the impartial reader judge. We have already obferved, that the letter-writer fometimes would have us believe, that the fimple truth relating to the refurrection of Jefus, and other facts connected with it, is all that is propofed in the New Teftament as an immediate ground of faithto guilty finners; or that the fimple belief of the fame is all that is to be underftood by juftifying According to his own account of the matter. faith: faith and that fometimes he makes the knowledge of the import of thefe facts-equally neceffary to juftification. But, as it would ftill be very difficultto fhew how the bare fact of Chrift's refurrection, let it be ever fo firmly believed, or any character of God thence arifing, can be faid to import any ground of comfort or encouragement to a guilty finner, abftracting from all confideration of the great end and design of it; or of the peculiar afpect it bears toward finners of mankind; at other times he infinuates, that both the fact and its import must be understood, and believed, in the fenfe of the apoftles which is in effect to overthrow all his own. affertions and reafonings concerning the fimple. truth, or the fact and its import; as perhaps we may have occafion to fhew more fully afterwards. Mean time, let us hear what our author himself fays in relation to this point. Thus he writes, "I am "fully fatisfied, then, in agreement with the wit"neffes, to hold the meaning they have given of "the refurrection of Jefus, for the gospel, the word, and the teftimony of God; and to call it, by way "of eminence, THE TRUTH, in oppofition to "every false glofs on the Scriptures, and every false reasoning about the light or law of nature, or "about any of the works or ways of God *." In another place Palamon speaks in the following. manner: "Every one who believes the fame truth "which the apoftles believed, has equally precious "faith with them. He has unfeigned faith, and "fhall affuredly be faved. If any man's faith be "found infufficient to fave him, it is owing to this, "that what he believed for truth, was not the very "fame thing that the apoftles believed, but fome lie connected with, or dreffed up in the form of truth. So this faith can do him no good; be * Letters, P. 73. "cause, caufe, however feriously and fincerely he believes, "yet that which he believes is false, and therefore "it cannot fave him. There is but one genuine "truth that can fave men*.” I confess it is not easy to understand the force or intent of this reafoning. It is very like talking one knows not what. There is a number of words thrown together that, fo far as I can fee, have no determinate meaning at all. After one has made fhift to embarafs and perplex a fubject in this manner, he may affirm or deny any thing relating to it, and handle it just as he pleafes. Such loofe, myftical and unmeaning jargon merits no regard. Is it not a truth, that Jefus died and rofe again? Is it not a truth fo well attefted in the New Teftament, that if men will but exercise their own reason in confidering and examining the evidence by which it is fupported, they cannot refufe yielding a firm affent to it? Have not many really believed it whom the letter-writer will not allow to have been poffeffed of juftifying faith? Does not he himself acknowledge, that this is a truth which even the devils believe, though they hate and tremble at it +? Does not he often infinuate, that the knowledge and belief of this truth, of the fimple fact of Chrift's refurrection, or of it confidered merely as a fact, include all that is meant by justifying faith? Yet, if we may take his word for it, none of these last mentioned believe the fame truth which the apoftles believed; to affert which is in effect to affirm, that they believe it, and yet do not believe it; and this, I think, looks very like a plain contradiction. But the letter-writer endeavours to cloke this abfurdity, by perplexing the matter more and more, and throwing fuch a mist of ambiguity upon it, that * Letters, P. 302. + Letters, p. 405. the the reader must doubtlefs lofe fight of him and it both. He feems to grant, as indeed it cannot be denied, that many believe the fimple truth, concerning the refurrection of Chrift, who yet are never juftified. But he tells us, they believe it in a different fenfe from the apoftles.." Every one," fays he," who believes that Jefus is the Chrift in a different *He fhould have faid who believes, that Jefus died and rofe again; but he feems to have been aware, that the expreffion he has made ufe of, which may be underftood in very different fenfes, would afford more scope for his loofe and fophiftical reafonings on this fubject. If the account which he elfewhere gives of juftifying faith may be allowed to be genuine, the truth believed, being only the bare fact of Chrift's refurrection, is, by far, too fimple to admit of different fenfes. The fame fact may doubtlefs be viewed in divers lights, and may differently affect those to whom it is related, according to what concern they have in it, or the different afpects it may bear towards them. Hence it may be the occafion of joy to fome, and of grief to others; while a third fort may hear the report of it with a cold indifference, and without any emotion; when yet all agree in believing the exilence of it, or that it did actually take place at fuch a determinate time. But the bare truth of the fact is fuch a fimple and invariable thing, that it must be very odd, yea, extremely abfurd, to talk of believing it in different fenfes. Since Palemon affirms, we muft believe the fimple truth relating to the refurrection of Jefus in the sense of the apostles, and that otherwise it cannot fave us, he fhould have told us what that fenfe of the apofties is in which it is neceffary to believe it. But as he has not thought fit to do this, in fuch a manner as any body can understand him, I think I may venture to do it for him, by informing the reader, That to believe the refurrection of Chrift, with the other facts and doctrines neceffarily connected with it, in the fense of the apostles, L 3 ac "different fenfe from the apoftles, or who main"tains any thing in connection with thefe words "fubverfive of their real meaning, believes a falfehood; fo his faith cannot fave him." We might allow the popular preachers thus to diftinguilh the fimple belief of the truth from fuch a faith of it as the apoftles had; because their doctrine lays a foundation for fuch a diftinction, yea, makes it neceffary: but for Palamon, who maintains that the fimple knowledge or belief of the bare truth is all that is neceffary to juftification, or that by believing the fimple truth, That Jefus died and rofe again, a man becomes poffeffed of juftifying faith, to make use of this diftinction, is intolerable. What regard can juftly be paid to a writer who in this manner fays and unfays, and is fo fhamefully inconfiftent with himfelf? If the fimple truth may be believed, and yet the perfon who believes it remain unjuftified, becaufe he does not believe it in the fenfe of the apoftles; or, which the letterwriter muft intend, if his words have any meaning, because he has not a juft view, and does not make according to him, is juft to believe them as R. S. and Mr. J. G. believe them, or, in other words, to become a ftanch Glaffite. These Gentlemen do not, like their opponents, call us impartially to fearch the Scriptures, whether those things which they affirm are fo;-but with over-bearing confidence they impofe their own fenfe of what is taught in the Scripture upon us, as the only meafure or touchftone by which all doctrines and opinions concerning religion, yea the Scriptures themselves, must be explored. But it will be prudent to try them before we truft them, or give implicit faith to their dictates, though delivered with the most confident and affuming airs; left it fhould be found upon examination, that they are nearly allied to that clafs of men who fay, they are apoftles, and are not-Rev. ii. 2. a fuit |