FIFTHLY, Should any one fay that, being divinely illuminated, he was thereby enabled to know, from fome obfcure paffage of scripture-That one intelligent being may wantonly torment and perfecute another, and, in fo doing, act confiftently with the most perfect rectitude-This would be a dreadful mistake indeed. And now,

what determines this to be a miftake? Doubtless it is reafon, with whose plain principles the doctrine of this enlightened perfon clafhes, and will not correfpond.

FROM

FROM these observations it appears, that (altho' much more knowledge may be gained from the scripture by divine affistance. than without it) the meaning of scripture must be determined by reafon in the last resort.

THE gospel is generally received in England as a divine revelation of truth and duty. But a native of this country, who fhould receive it for fuch without any better reason (a remark which has often been repeated) would act an exceeding weak, and a very criminal part. Therefore, although a native of this country,

country, I am bound to enquire after better reafons whereon to

build my faith. And I apprehend (waving all others) the two best proofs that the gofpel is a divine revelation, are drawn from its internal character, with regard to truth and moral tendency, and from its effects in a moral view upon those who have moft fincerely received it These two articles being connected with its pretenfions. Without these proofs all others are vain. These are obvious; others remote.

BUT

BUT now, how am I to judge concerning the internal character of the gospel, unless I bring it to the test of my reason? Dr. Doddridge fays one of the best proofs is drawn from hence; yet this, he affirms, must not be brought to the test of reason. If fo, I am utterly ignorant whether it be excellent or otherwise : and I am equally ignorant, whether the gospel has had a good or a bad effect on those who have cordially received it. If the report of reason merit no regard, I am unable to tell you which book is most valuable, the Bible or the Koran: I know no dif

ference

ference between Jefus and Mahomet; between a Chriftian and a Turk*; between a perfon whom I judge to be religious and good, and another whom I think to be impious, wicked, abandoned.

BUT, whatever refpect may be due to great names (and there are few names I venerate more than Dr. Doddridge's) as a reaJonable being, I am conscious of

* I would be far from intimating that a Turk, because a Turk, is therefore a bad man but I believe there has been, and there is, much greater, much more exalted virtue among Chriftians.

a law