path of duty, and in the purfuit of happiness. If a revelation is found to be neceffary to this great and important end, then this will be, at leaft, a prefumptive argument that God has given fuch a revelation to man. I shall enter no farther into a particular confideration of the words than to confider them as containing a propofition which it fhall be the business of this discourse to illustrate by plain matters of fact. The propofition to be illustrated is this:

That human wisdom, unaided by revelation, is utterly infufficient to instruct mankind in the knowledge of God, and to direct him in the path of duty. The world by wifdom knew not God.

It has long been a common place topic with infidels, when attempting to decry revelation, to extol the light of mature, as being not only a fufficient, but the only guide to instruct mankind in his duty, and direct him in the purfuit of happiness. Many fine and plaufible things have been faid on this fubject by men of learning and ingenuity, who wished to throw away the Bible, and too much countenance has been given to fentiments of this kind by others who were the profeffed friends of revealed religion, by attributing too much to the religion of nature and too little to revelation. Even fome of the most effential principles of Chriftianity have been reprefented as clearly taught by this all powerful inftructor. But there is an effential dif ference between the discovery of a principle by mere un- . affifted reafon, and our viewing the fame principle as rational when presented to the mind in the pages of revelation. In the illustration of this fubject there is but little place for reafoning. Our appeal must be made to matters of fact. Had it not been for aid derived from revelation, iş it probable that all thefe fine things would have been faid about the light of nature? Certainly not; elfe why would they not be found in the works of heathen writers of antiquity, as well as in thofe of modern theorists? The queftion is not what men of learning and ingenuity may fuppofe that the light of nature can do? But what has it done? What has it done in times paft, in the ages before revelation became generally known? What has it done, or is at this day doing, among the present heathen nations?

To thefe queftions all the abfurdities of ancient and modern Paganilm furnish an answer. Here let us not confine the enquiry to what the light of nature has done among unlettered barbarians, ancient or modern? But what has it done among the ancient Greeks and Romans, the enlightened and polished nations and fages of antiquity? However great the progrefs which they made in arts and fciences, a progrefs in which they have been feldom outftripped, and in fome branches of knowledge, fcarcely equalled by the moderns, yet in religious knowledge, in juit ideas of the natural and moral perfections of the Supreme Being, in purity of worship, or in a complete and confiftent fyftem of morality, they have made few or no advances beyond the most ignorant and unlettered barbarians. The queftion may still recur, what has this boasted reafon done among the modern champions of infidelity, only to add farther confirmation to the truth contained in our text? So far have they been from making progrefs, that the farther they have wandered from revelation, and the greater refinements they have made upon their own fyftems, the more they have heaped abfurdity upon abfurdity. Lord Herbert was the first Apoftle of deifm in Great Britain, if not in Europe. He adopted feveral im portant truths, which he engrafted into his fyftem, fuch as the unity of the Godhead, the neceffury of virtue, the immortality of the foul, and a future ftate of rewards and punifhments. Thefe truths, which were undoubtedly borrowed from revelation, he received under the name of natural notions, or notices of truth and duty, imprinted on the minds of men by the light of nature. The greater part of thefe principles have been rejected by others who have pretended to follow nature's light more closely. While both have united in rejecting a divine guide and conductor, what has been to one a clear and univerfal principle, imprinted on the minds of all by nature, has, by another, been ridiculed as the height of abfurdity. moral writers have endeavoured to reduce almost every thing in religion to what they are pleased to call a natural notion. But, had not fuch theorifts borrowed from revelation, many parts of their theories had never exifted, and

Some

the theorists themselves, instead of amuling the world with their fine fpun notions, might have been, at this day, bowing down, before stocks and stones, like the Pagans of antiquity.*

But in order to prove that the light of nature is fufficient to difcover many important principles of religion, we are referred to the hiftory of Socrates, Plato, Seneca, Epictetus and others, who, although it does not appear that they ever either renounced or discountenanced the prevailing idolatry and Polytheifm of the age and country in which they lived, had, it must be confeffed, fome ideas of the Supreme Being which were more rational, and more

* The ancient heathens seem, almoft univerfally, to have entertained an opinion, either derived from the light of nature, or received by tradition, that there was a neceffity for fuch a revelation. To this purpose are the words of Cicero de divinatione. "Deliberation," fays Socrates, " is proper for us. But concerning things that are ob"fcure and uncertain, we ought to confult Apollo, whom "the Athenians confult publicly concerning things of

66

great importance." And in another place, Cicero fays thus; "There is an ancient opinion, drawn even from the "Heroical times, that there is among men a certain di"vination, which the Greeks call prophecy or infpira“tion, i. e. prefenfion and knowledge of future things.' Again Cicero fays, "I fee no nation either fo polished " and learned, or fo unpolished and ignorant, as not to "think that things future may be pointed out, and may be "understood and foretold by fome men." The infufficiency of the light of nature cannot be better described than in the words of Cicero. "If we had come into the "world," (faith he,)" in fuch circumstances, as that we "could clearly and distinctly have discovered nature her“self, and have been able, in the course of our lives, to "have followed her true and uncorrupted directions, this " alone would have been fufficient, and there would have "been but little need of teaching and inftruction. But " now nature has given us only fome small sparks of right

b

worthy of God, than was common to the bulk of heathen worshippers. Although we, by no means grant, that the religious difcoveries of thefe fages of antiquity, were as clear as many would wish to have us believe, yet, admitting for the fake of argument, every thing contended for, it will not follow that the light of nature, or human wif dom unaffi.ted by revelation, is fufficient to difcover the true knowledge of God and our duty.

ift. The ideas, even of these much boafted examples of the fufficiency of nature's light, were very much confined, and mixed with much error and abfurdity, and their fyltem of morals wretchedly defective; vice, in many intan

"reafon, which we fo quickly extinguish with corrupt o66 pinions and evil practices, that the true light of nature 66 no where appears. As foon as we are brought into "the world, immediately we dwell in the midst of all "wickedness, and are furrounded with a number of most "perverfe and foolish opinions, and evil practices; fo that 66 we seem to fuck in error with our nurfe's milk. After"wards when we return to our parents, we are committed to tutors, then we are farther stocked with fuch a variety of errors, that truth becomes perfectly overwhelmed "with falfehood, and the most natural fentiments of our "minds are entirely ftifled with confirmed follies. But "when, after all this, we enter upon the bufinefs of the "world, and make the world, confpiring every where in "wickedness, our great guide and example, then our very "nature itself is wholly transformed, as it were into cor"rupt opinions. A livelier defcription of the prefent cor66 rupt ftate of human nature is not easily to be met with." Clark's Evidences of Nat. and Revl. Religion. Page 225.

The following quotations are from the fame work. "Ye may even give over all hopes of amending men's "manners for the future, (fays Socrates,) unless God "be pleafed to fend you fome other perfon to inftruct you." "And Plato. Whatever, (faith he,) is fit, right, and as it fhould be in the prefent evil ftate of the world,

66

And

ces paffing for virtue and virtue denominated vice. with refpect to fome of the most important principles of religion, viz. the natural and moral perfections of the Deity, the way to enfure his favour and efcape his dif pleasure, the immortality of the foul and a future life. as well as divers others, all was doubt and uncertainty, as I fhall fhew more fully in another place.

2d. Had the moral and religious systems of fome particular Philofophers even embraced all the effential priaciples of religion, and included the whole fyftem of moral duty which we owe to God and our neighbours, it

66

can be fo only by the particular interpretation of God." "Another paffage is as follows: "It seems best to me, "(fays Socrates, to one of his difciples,) that we expect "quietly, nay it is abfolutely neceffary, that we wait with patience till fuch time as we can learn certainly how we " ought to behave ourfelves, both towards God, and to"wards men. When will that time come, replies the difciple, and who is it that will teach us this? It is one, "anfwers Socrates, who has now a concern for you, with more to the fame purpose. From a general notion that prevailed in the first ages, that religion was to be taught by a revelation from the Gods, all fuch as gave inftitu "tions and rules for religion, pretended to have received "them from the Gods, by divine revelation, as Romulus, "Lycurgus, Numa, Minos, in Crete, and Syphis, in Egypt. If reafon only had been the firft guide in mat"ters of religion, rulers neither would have thought of, nor have wanted the pretence of revelation, to give "credit to their inftitutions. Whereas, on the other "hand, revelation being generally esteemed in all nations, "to be the only true foundation of religion; kings and "rulers when they thought fit to add inventions of their own to the religion of their ancestors, were obliged to "make use of that difpofition which they knew their people to have, to receive what came recommended to them under the name of revelation."

66

Ibid. Page 136, to 159.