were fenfible of their own ignorance and felt the neceffity of a divine inftructor. They were not backward to con fefs their need of inftruction and their great blindness in moral and divine things, and that truth was hid from them in an unfathomable depth. This might eafily be made to appear by quotations from the writings of their wifest and best men, fuch as Socrates, Plato, Cicero and others. They were not like our modern champions of reafon, who faftidiously throw revelation behind their backs. Divine Levelation is, by way of eminence, a light fhining in a dark place. In a moral and religious point of view, what a dark wildernefs would this world be, had we not the lively oracles of God for a light unto our feet and a lamp un to our path? Probably it would be fome degrees darker than ancient Paganifm itself, for that had, undoubtedly, Some rays of light derived from revelation. Whether

therefore are they to be looked upon as the friends or as the enemies of mankind, who ftudiously endeavour to undermine the evidences of revelation, and lead us back to an unknown, and unknowable something called the light of nature? Thefe champions of reafon frequently reason themselves into the groffeft abfurdities, and endeavour to impose the most palpable inconfiftencies upon the world as the perfection of reafon and philofophy, while they forfake the fountain of living waters, and hew out to themfelves cifterns, broken cifterns, that can hold no water. Did not modern infidels borrow from that revelation which they not only vilify and defpife, but endeavour, with all their might, to undermine and deftroy, they might, and probably would, with all their boasted reafon and fuperior mental endowments, have been, at this day, worfhipping the hoft of heaven, or fome of the moft abfurd idols of the prefent eattern pagan nations.

3. Is human reafon fo utterly infufficient to lead man. kind to the knowledge of God and his duty, and is a revelation of fuch neceffity and importance, then this affords, at leaft prefumptive evidence, that God has actually given Luch a revelation to mankind It is true, we cannot fay that God was under any particular obligations to give fuch a revelation; for he can be under no obligation to any of

his creatures, any farther than as fuch obligations either grow out of the perfections of his own nature, or are flipulated by promise. But when we confider the divine goodness in other refpects; especially when we confider it as difplayed in the formation of man with fuch powers. and faculties as render him capable of worshipping, ferving, and adoring; of knowing, loving, and enjoying himself, it is at leaft probable that he would give him fuch a revelation as would be fufficient to direct him in the path in which this enjoyment was to be obtained. Whether fuch a revelation has been actually given, and, if given, where. it is to be found, will be the more immediate bufinefs of fome future difcourfes. At prefent I fhall only obfervethat another thing which farther ftrengthens the prefumptive evidence in favour of revelation, is the defire and expectation which has been common to almost all nations. If God never had given to man a revelation, nor given him any ground to expect that he would give one, how can we account for that defire and expectation which was not confined to the Jews, but was, in a great measure common to all nations? Many of the heathens were fully fenfible of their blindness and ignorance, and longed for a divine inftructor, and were not without the expectation that God would at fome time, and in fome way, though at prefent unknown, difpel that darkness in which they were enveloped. This defire and expectation, no doubt laid the foundation for practifing a variety of impofitions by endeavouring to palm pretended revelation on the world.. Not only Jews and Chriftians, but alfo Pagans and Mahom-etans have had perfons among them who profeffed to re-ceive communication from the deity. Some of these pre-tenfions mult, of course, be faife; but, if God never gave a revelation, nor any grounds to expect one, whence the idea. of counterfeiting the very existence of a counterfeit neceflarily fuppofes that there is fomething genuine which an attempt is made to imitate. This affords ftrong prefumptive proof, at least, in favour of revelation.

4. Is human reafon an infufficient guide in matters of religion, then the evidences of revelation call for a fair and candid examination. As we are, on the one hand not to

believe without evidence, fo, on the other, we ought carefully to weigh, and impartially to examine the proofs on which we are required to believe that the fcriptures contain a revelation from God. Thefe evidences have stood, and it is believed, will still stand the test of the most rigid fcrutiny. Let us therefore, while refolved on the one hand not to believe without evidence, give to the proofs their proper force, not requiring a fpecies of evidence which is, in the nature of things, impoffible, and which is required for the eftablishment of no other fact, and, if not fwayed by preju-dice and prepoffeffion, we will be eonvinced that the Gofpel is no cunningly devised fable. This examination will be more particularly attempted in the following difcourfes.

DISCOURSE II.

PSALMS, Xix. 7, 8, 9.

The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the foal: The teftimony of the Lord is fure, making wife the fimple The flatutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: The commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever: The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.

IN a former discourse I endeavoured to offer fome confiderations tending to illuftrate the neceffity of revelation, grounded on this argument, that human wifdom is an infufficient guide to direct us in matters of religion. We have feen that this infufficiency was felt, and the neceffity of revelation acknowledged by many of the wifer heathens. Instead of imitating modern unbelievers, by rejecting that fure word of prophecy which providence had put in their hands, because it was not, in every punctilio, fuited to their preconceived notions and prejudices; or to the ftandard which they had fet up in relation to what a revelation ought to be, they longed for that divine direction and instruction which they had not. We have alfo feen that, together with the defire, there was an expectation prevalent in the heathen world, that God would, at some time, and in fome way, communicate the knowledge of his will to mankind. No doubt many impoftors took the advantage of this defire and expectation, and abused the credulity of mankind by fictitious pretenfions that they had received communications from heaven. Not only Jews and Chriftians, but Pagans and Mahometans have pretended to receive communica

tions from the deity. Many of these pretenders have, without doubt, been impoftors, yet this is far from amounting to a proof that none of their pretenfions were well founded. Counterfeits are ufually imitations of fomething real. Where there is nothing of the kind which is true and genuine, there is nothing to counterfeit. Bafe counterfeit coin never would exilt, were there no genuine money. If God had never given any revelation of his will to mankind befides the light of nature, or fuch common notices as are inscribed on the minds of all by the creator, nor ever given man any grounds to expect a revelation, what could poffibly have fuggefted to any individual of the human race, the idea of counterfeiting fuch a revelation on the one hand, and of expecting it on the other? How can we account for that defire and expectation which was fo generally prevalent in the world, as well as for the many pretences to actual communications with the deity, if God never gave a revelation of his will, nor gave mankind any grounds to expect one? The bufinefs of the prefent difcourfe will be to fhow that the facred books of the old and new Teftament contain internal characteristics of a revelation every way worthy of God to give to man; and that it is impoffible that fuch writings could ever have exifted, unless they had been divinely inspired. By the law, teftimony, ftatutes, judgments, commandments, &c. mentioned in the text, we are to understand the word of God in general, whether revealed by Mofes or other prophets and holy men after him. The Pfalmift cannot be laid to refer in this paffage, immediately to the new Testament fcriptures, because that part of the facred canon was not penned until many ages after his day. the characters here given of the faw, teftimony, &c. are as strictly applicable to the new Teftament fcriptures, as to the writings of Mofes and the prophets, viz. that they are the means of converting the foul, rejoicing the heart, enlightening the eyes, and making wife the fimple. I fhall not attempt to explain what is diftinctly to be underftood by the different phrafes, law, teftimony, ftatutes, &c. Perhaps they are only amplifications of the fame meaning, tending to exprefs more fully, the high and exalted opin

But