As true Religion is founded in nature; fo nature exhibits a proper rule of action to all intelligent beings, in all cafes, and under all poffible circumstances where a law or rule of action is wanting; and this denominates it a perfect law. For, were nature deficient in this respect in any cafe, or circumftance whatever, then, the law or rule of action refulting from it would not be perfect, and confequently, the law of nature would not be a perfect law, which fuppofition is greatly abfurd. So that nature exhibits a proper rule of action to intelligent beings as well after they are become offenders, as antecedent to the offence committed; that is, nature as much, and as plainly points out to men what they ought to do after they have offended, in order to render themselves the proper objects of mercy, as it points out to them what they ought to do, fo as not to ftand in need of that mercy. I fay, nature as plainly points out a proper rule of action in this, as in any other cafe. I am fenfible, this is running counter to our modern Theology, which supposes that nature is defective in this particular, and that there is no proper rule of action refulting from it with regard to criminals; and confequently, that God is at liberty to act arbitrarily in this respect, by appointing what conditions he please for his creatures to obtain his mercy, and for them to be reconciled to him ; this is grofsly abfurd as I have already observed. And,

e

but

From

From hence a question very naturally arises, viz. what difference is there between Dr Stebbing's Chriftian Religion and mine? if I may be allowed to use those terms, without being charged with great impropriety. And the anfwer is, that the difference is very great. My representation of Chriftianity is all natural, it is pure nature without any mixture or addition. Whereas, Dr Stebbing's Christian Religion is a compound, it is partly natural, and partly artificial; it is cooked up in a polite manner, and after the French fashion, with high fauces, forced meats, and made dishes, fuch as nature and reafon are perfect ftrangers to, and by which it is fuited to the vitiated appetites of mankind. But then, it ought to be remembered, that no doctrine is to be admitted, or at least ought to be admitted, as an important truth, until upon a fair trial it is proved to be fuch; and therefore, the doctrines of atonement, of propitiation, of pecuniary mulets, of transubstantiation, and the like, these muft all be tried before they be admitted; and if upon a fair trial thefe, or either of them, fhall plainly appear to have the ftamp of reafon and truth upon them, then, where that appears to be the cafe, every fuch doctrine. ought, for that reafon, to be received; but if upon fuch trial thefe doctrines, or either of them, fhall be found wanting, then, where fuch defect appears, every fuch doctrine ought, for that reafon, to be rejected.

There

There are many words and even affertions in the New Teftament that are either mere figures of Speech, or elfe are only allufions to what took place amongst men, and in particular to what took place among the Jews under the difpenfation of Mofes. And though the doctrines that are or may be grounded upon these, may afford matter for an artful harangue; yet a little attention will discover that they will not bear being reafoned upon, without being found wanting. Thus for example, it is afferted that Christ fits at the righthand of God, which affertion seems at least to imply that God is a material being, who, in fome particular place in the universe, fits on a glorious throne, and that Chrift, as his fon, fits in a chair of ftate at his right-hand; in which fenfe, probably, those words are understood by many young and tender minds, who have been taught frequently to repeat them from the time they first came to the use of speech. Now, tho' what is thus implied in the forementioned affertion, may with as much juftness be grounded upon it, as other doctrines are grounded upon other words or affertions in the New Teftament; yet it is not to be admitted, because the contrary can be proved, viz. that God is an immaterial being, who is present in the fame manner, kind, and degree, in every part of infinite fpace; and confequently, has no right-hand for Chrift to be placed at. So that these words, viz. Chrift fits at God's right-hand, tho' they are made an Q3 article

article of Chriftian Faith; yet, I think, can be no other than an allufion to the custom and ufage of an earthly prince, who, when feated on his throne, has his fon, or the heir apparent to his crown, fitting at his righthand; and as to what we are to understand by it, and learn from it, these are questions that at prefent I am not concerned with. In like manner, Chrift is faid to be the propitiation for the fins of the whole world, which words, as they ftand in our tranflation, 1 John ii. 2. are scarce fenfe; and if we understand them to mean, that Chrift by his mediation, or any other way, difpofes or inclines God to be propitious to a finful world, then, in this fenfe they cannot poffibly be true, because God is in himself, and from his own nature, difpofed and inclined to be propitious to all fuch finners as fhall render themselves the proper objects of his mercy antecedent to, and independent of, Chrift's undertaking, and therefore, cannot poffibly be made fo by it. And this truth is as evident and plain as that God is not material. It is the evil difpofition of mind that takes place in us, and is the ground and cause of all our tranfgreffions, which is the ground of God's dislike of us, and of his refentment against us; and therefore, there cannot poffibly be any thing in nature which can render God actually propitious, that is, which can actually remove God's diflike and refentment, but the actual removal of that which is the ground and caufe of thefe, viz. the

evil

evil difpofition of mind that takes place in us; and then, as the caufe is taken away, the effect ought, and confequently, moft certainly will ceafe. This is fo plain and obvious that men of common abilities with a little attention muft perceive it; and therefore, it would be offering the greatest affront to Dr Stebbing, to fuppofe that a man of his fuperior abilities and greater attention does not. It will not be fufficient to urge, that the doctrines of atonement, of propitiation, and the like, as they are ufually understood by Chriftians, are grounded upon the words of St Paul and St John, whose ministry was backed with miracles, and therefore, thofe doctrines ought to be received as important truths; I fay, it is not fufficient to urge this, because the doctrine of tranfubftantiation is grounded upon the words of the Mafter of thefe Apostles, even Christ himself, and therefore, upon this foot of argument, the doctrine of tranfubftantiation ought much more to be received as an important truth, which yet notwithstanding is justly rejected by Proteftants. All doctrines therefore as well that of tranfubftantiation which are grounded upon the words and language of the New Teftament ought to be tried, before they be admitted as important truths. And feeing, the doctrines of atonement, propitiation, and the like, as they are commonly understood by Chriftians, will not bear the trial without being found wanting; the confequence is clear, viz. that all fuch doctrines ought to

be