of one eternal God, the Creator and Governor of all things, we are prefented with a multitude of fuppofed Deities which have been propagated by natural generation. We are, in imagination, carried back to a period in which they did not exift, and are amufed with the hiftory of their progenitors. Inftead of the Lord who changeth not, who is of one mind and none can turn him, we find Deities fhifting and changing according to the whims of the moment. It is not to be doubted but that these fuppofed immoralities of their Deities were one great fource of the immorality prevalent in the heathen world. Having no ideas of a perfect character, and having the knowledge of no ftandard agreeable to which they cou'd draw fuch a character, they cloathed their divinities with fuch imagin ́ary characters, good or bad, as they faw among mortal men. Having once cloathed their Deities with their own vices, it cannot be thought wonderful if they should practice those immoralities, which they faw, or believed to be prevalent among the objects of their veneration, and that their worship should be equally impure with the divinities they adored. We accordingly find one Deity worshipped by rioting and drunkennefs, another by debauchery and the most licentious proftitution, another by cruelty, treachery and bloodshed. All these things, which it is not my prefent purpofe to detail at large, furnish fo many proofs. that, however great were the attainments of fome in the heathen world, in the feveral other branches of knowledge, they were yet awfully ignorant of the character of the true God; and that the world by wifdom knew not God.

3. Equally deficient is human wifdom, or the wisdom of this world, for the purpofe of inftructing mankind in the nature of that worship and homage which is due to God from his creatures. If there is a God and but one God, it naturally follows that he, and he only, is to be worshipped. If he is to be worshipped, it is not to be expected that either the fubftance or form of his worship fhould be left to the uncertain conjectures of men. knowledge of the nature, as well as of the object of worfhip, is of the utmost importance to mankind. But in order to difcover either the fubftance or form of worship,

A

we will explore the researches of human wisdom as much in vain as we will if we attempt to afcertain the unity, and learn the nature of its object. The utmost stretch of human reafon unaffifted by revelation, could never give a fatisfactory aafwer to that important quellion.-Wherewith fball I come before God or bow myself before the most high? Hence the endiefs maze of uncertainty in which they are involved, and the almost infinite variety of conflicting opinions, which prevail among thofe who have forfaken the fountain of living waters; I mean our modern advocates for the fufficiency of reafon, and for discarding revelation. Although in general, they retain fo much of what they have learnt from revelation as to profess their belief in the being of a God, yet they fcarcely agree in any thing elfe. Some profefs to believe that this God is to be worshipped, others difcard all ideas of worshipping him. Some fuppofe a prayer to be a neceffary, or at least, a proper part of worship, while others deride it and treat it as the most abfurd and ridiculous fuperftition. Some profefs their belief in a Providence which directs and controuls the affairs of men, while others fuppofe that God concerns not himself with the trifling affairs of mortals. And it is not to be expected, that, so long as all is left to vague conjecture, there should be any agreement on this fubject, or that there fhould be any thing else than endless difputes. Indeed there appears to be but one way in which it seems practicable to get rid of fuch difputes, and that way feems to be pretty generally adopted by the advocates for the fufficiency of nature's light, i. e. to discard the worship of God altogether. And truly a fociety of worshipping Deifts would be a novel fpectacle in the world. All this confirms the observation in our text, that the world by wifdom knew not God.

4. Neither the light of nature, nor all the researches of human wisdom could ever discover a way in which an of fended Deity could be appeased, or even whether, when once justly offended, he was reconcilable in any way whatfoever. Nothing can be of greater importance to mankind than fuch a difcovery as this. Many heathens either difcovered by the light of nature or received from

that traditional revelation, of which numerous traces appear in their writings, fome impreffions that human nature was corrupted, that they themselves were fubjected to the impulfe of tumultuous paffions and vicious inclinations, and that the Gods were offended. But, in what way their offences could be expiated, or whether any expiation could take place, were points concerning which they had: no other guide than uncertain conjecture. It is true, an opinion feems to have been pretty generally prevalent inthe heathen world, that the anger of the Gods was to be appeafed by facrifices either of one kind or another. On this head they pushed their enquiries to the very utmost. Having imbibed the opinion by tradition, that a facrifice was neceffary to expiate guilt; they confulted the light of their own reafon in vain, in order to afcertain the nature of that facrifice which would be acceptable. No fa-crifice was fo coftly, no object was fo dear to them, but they would offer it in order to calm the tumult of guilt and procure the favour of the Gods. Their enquiries might even proceed as far as thofe ftated by the Prophet ; Wherewith fhall I come before the Lord and bow myself before the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt of ferings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be pleafed with thousands of rams or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first born for my tranfgreffion, the fruit of my body for the fin of my foul? With whatever anxiety thefe queftions might be afked, the light of nature could never anfwer them. Without a revelation for that pur-pose, the confcience of the guilty could never be fatisfied that God would accept the facrifice, and pardon the of fender. How could he discover that the blood of bulls or of goats, or even of whole hecatombs of offerings could take away fin? Without fome knowledge of a more efficient atonement, a knowledge to be derived from revelation alone, and not from the inveftigation of human wif dom, the mind could never be fatisfied of their efficacy. And, with respect to the immolation of human victims, a practice formerly prevalent among many nations, particu larly during times of general calamity, and which fome of the more ignorant and barbarous practice ftill, nothing

hows more forcibly the infufficiency of nature's light, and the imperfection of human wisdom, as a guide in matters of religion, than that the remotest idea fhould be entertained, that the kind and beneficent parent of the universe fhould be delighted with fuch acts of cruelty and barbarity. So that, although the heathen nations, in general, appear to have entertained an opinion which they derived either from the light of nature, or as is most probable, from tradition founded originally upon a divine revelation, that facrifices were to be offered as a part of the worship and homage due to the Gods, they were utterly at a lofs to whom they were to be offered, and had no light sufficient to fatisfy their minds that they would be accepted.

Some, however, prefume to tell us that a connexion between repentance and pardon, or that if men repent of their fins they fhall be forgiven, is a dictate of natural religion, a discovery conformable to, and clearly founded upon the light of nature. But although it is readily admitted that repentance is neceffary to pardon, and that the connexion between repentance and forgivenefs is infeparable, or that God will, in all cafes, pardon fuch as are truly penitent, i e. fuch as hate fin and turn from it with a fincere heart, yet it does not follow, either that repentance alone, without any other fatisfaction, is fufficient to expiate the offence and avert the penalty juftiy incurred by tranfgreffion, or that the connexion between repentance and forgivenefs was, either actually difcovered, or is dif coverable by the light of nature. Revelation plainly intimates the contrary. Let the wicked forfake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord and he will have mercy upon him, and to our Gǝd for be will abundantly pardon, is the language of revelation. But, as if this certain connexion between repentance and pardon was fomething effentially different from what ufually takes place among men, it is added, For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, faith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, fo are my ways higher thin your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Surely the idea that repentance and forgivenefs are infeparably connected, is not founded on any

thing analogous thereto among mankind. Mere repentance can make no fatisfaction to juftice for injuries and offences past. The moft that it can do is to put the man in the way of his duty for time to come. What confu

fion and disorder would it introduce into fociety, if such was the construction of human laws, that every man who repented of his offence, or who appeared to be penitent, (for man can judge only from the appearance,) fhould be abfolved from the penalty juftiy due to his crime? The number of penitents would equal that of delinquents, and punishments would ceafe. The confequence would be the deftruction of all confidence in the protection of the laws, if not the utter ruin of fociety. Human laws, therefore, know nothing about either the penitence or impenitence of the offender. Certainly then reafon could never discover that that which does, in no inftance, fatisfy a hu man law, fhould, by a divine conftitution, have the invariable effect, fo far to fatisfy the law of God as, in all cafes, to abfolve the tranfgreffor from the penalty. If there is, therefore, a connexion established between true repentance and forgiveness, that connexion cannot be difcovered by the light of nature. Our knowledge of it must be deriv

ed from revelation.

Should we admit therefore that man could, without any other aid than nature's light and the exercife of his own reafon, difcover the disease of fin, and the juft difpleasure of the Almighty against him as a finner, he mult, nevertheless, be left in abfolute despair of a pardon, until a way was difcovered by revelation.

5. The immortality of the foul, and a future state of rewards and punishments in an unfeen world, are, admitting them to be realities, points, the knowledge of which is of the greatest importance to mankind. For fatisfactory information upon them we fhall, however, fearch in vain throughout all the discoveries of human wifdom. Many very plaufible arguments may be adduced from reafon in favour of the immortality of the foul and a future life, drawn from a confideration of the various powers and faculties with which man is endued, and which appears adapted to nobler purposes than any which are attainable in this life; from the ardent thirft after immortality which