Page images

no Promise os Salvation by Faith under the Latv, because there was no Promise of Salvation by Faith in Christ, the only Son of God, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost &c. or because the Christian System &c. was unknown before the Coming of the Saviour, i. e. was not revealed before the Revelation of it; I fay, unless this will follow, the Hypothesis we are defending is immoveable, and this great Champion of St. Paul will be found to handle his Weapons in a manner which is the Reverse to that of his Master, and to be jighting as one that beateth the Ær.


But lastly, the common Hypothesis is inconsistent likewise, the Examiner tells us, with the Bishop of London's Sermons and Discourses on Prophecy.—His Lordship, says our Author, "ranks "the Principle of the Resurrection among the Doc"trines of the patriarchal Religion," which were to be dispensed and administered by the Law. "And yet the avowed Purpose of his sixth Sermon "is to prove that the Doctrine of the Resurrection "was reserved for the preaching of jfejus." (p. 254.) Now I am not to answer for any Inconveniencies that may attend his Lordship's Hypothesis, either by his ante-dating the Book of Job, or denying the Jews the Doctrine of the Resurrection. What were the precise Tenets of the antient fenos with regard to a future State, or to the Principle of the

Resurrection, ResurreBion, it may not be easy to determine; but I see not how the common System is affected therer by; because let such Tenets have been as strong, and full, as you please, they imply nothing, as we have observed, in the least derogatory to the Office of Jesus Christ, or independent on God's Covenant " by him, and him alone conveyed to "us." A bare Persuasion, a doctrinal Tenet, or the Hope and Expectation of a Blessing, or Deliverance, implies neither Merit, nor Claim, nor adequate Knowledge of the Deliverer; and consequently we may suppose that the Doctrine even of the Resurrection was a popular one among the antient Jews, without impairing the Dignity, or encroaching upon the Province of the Gospel.

Farther, says the Examiner, "as his Lordship *' contends that the Promise of Redemption was "revealed in the patriarchal Ages; his Hypothesis "supposes that this Doctrine was to be taught "and dispensed by the Law;"which we will allow to be sound Reasoning as soon as it shall be proved that a Promise and a Doctrine are one and the fame Thing. But if they are not, "the learned "Prelate does by no means fay, that the Law was "given to propagate a DoBrine, which was to *' remain a Mystery, Sec. but that it preserved a Hope, or conveyed a Promise which virtually contained one. (p. 255.) Well then might his Lord

{hip assert, "that the Publication of the Gospel "has made an Alteration in the Scheme of Reli"gion, by revealing to us the Son of God:" and that " the Knowledge of the Son of God, of his "Power and Dominion, &c. became necessary, as "the Foundation of the Faith required to be "placed in him as our dear Redeemer, &c. and "that therefore the New Testament Doctrines, "relating to the Dignity and Office of Jesus Christ, "are relative to his Office of Redeemer; and that "therefore there was no explicit Declaration of "them either before or under the Law of Moses." The Examiner, in short, by confounding Promises with Doctrines, Expectations with Certainties, national Sanclions with spiritual Hopes, and "Judaism with Chrijtianity, has perplexed and embarrassed a System perfectly clear and consistent in itself, (p. 256. &c. &c.) To conclude, "his "Lordsliip, we are informed, is but little content "with the Opinion of those Writers, who are "content with what the Law represents of itself; "namely, that it was given to preserve the Know'• ledge of the one true God amongst the Israelites, "whilst it was lost every where else. He rejects "this, as too low and narrow a Design; and main"tains, that it was intended for higher Purposes, "and given to administer the like Hopes with the "Chrijtian Covenant." Now what Method tke great Prelate has taken to rejeft a Design hy

enlarging enlarging it, the Examiner should have been kind' enough to acquaint us; in the mean time, be that as it will, if the Law was not given " to administer "the Hopes of the Christian Covenant, i.e. to preserve the Promise of Redemption, or Restoration to Life and Immortality; or, in other Words, if the Jews, among whom the Knowledge and Worship of the one true God was undeniably maintained, had not the least glimmering Notion, the least Conception of afuture State, I believe it to be demonstrable, that this Knowledge was not so utterly and universally lost, but that a System of Theology may be extracted from the Sentiments of Pagan Philosophy, upon the whole, more rational, consistent, and comfortable, than that of Moses himself.—But I may have Occasion to resume this Argument, and shall only observe at present, that if this should appear to be the Case, the Examiner was over hasty when he insolently challenged the learned Dr. Leland to " clap his "Book into the Number, in his next View Of "Deistical Writings." (p. 262. 263.)



WE are arrived at length at the Examiners Inquiry, how far the Doctrine advanced in my Lord Bijhofs Jixth Sermon, affects the Argument es the Divine Legation; how far it tends to establijj h the Credit of Moses and the Prophets; and how far it is confftent with the bther Parts of bis Lord/hip's theological System. The Doctrine, it seems, advanced by his Lordship, is, " That all "the former Revelations had left the Principle of M a future State involved in Doubts and Obscurities, ** or embarrassed with Difficulties and XJncertain'* ties, which were to be illustrated and made plain "by Jefus Christ" Now the Examiner argues, that as " the Want of the Knowledge of the Reu fkrreStion was, according to the Bishop's own "Hypothesis, the Ground of all these Doubts and "Uncertainties, &c. fb it is impossible to assign any "System of Religion prior to the Christian, any "clear and evident Revelation of a future State" And as "Revelation, agreeably likewise to his "Lordship's Doctrine, was given to assure us of "the Certainty and Reality of Things Future, "without which Assurance they could have no "Effect or Influence on our Affections," so the Patriarchal and Jewijh Religion did consequently, by someMeans or other, subsist without " any per

« PreviousContinue »