up our daily employment? especially if we are deeply concerned about them. How common is it for our dreams to vary according to the temper or tone of our minds? If in a happy frame of mind when awake, the dreams in succeeding sleep will generally be pleasant. If the previous tone be sorrowful, the succeeding dreams will be unpleasant. If exposed to danger on the previous day, we shall be subject to alarms in the dreams of the night.No wonder, then, that after we have been in deep distress for fear of damnation, and our minds exerted to their utmost tension in seeking salvation, no wonder that we have some strange dreams in relation to spiritual things. And God can renew our hearts, and awaken in us all the holy affections of the new man, while we are asleep. Yea, I for one, am constrained to believe, that he sometimes actually does so. And whether the new heart be given in sleep or immediately preceding it, no wonder that in our dreams, our thoughts and feelings should be of altogether a different nature from what we ever had before. Pleasant dreams, then, may be the result of regeneration. But they may also result from other things. The self-deceived, who think they are born again, while they are not, may have equal joy when awake; and this may lead to dreams equally strange and delightful with those which are had by the really regenerate. Nay, such dreams may be had by such as have no previous hope that they have been born again. Great distress of mind may lead them to dream of great distress, such as exposure on a dangerous precipice, and falling from it; or confinement in a dark or

fiery prison. And nothing would be more natural after dreaming of these things, than to dream also of deliverance from them. Indeed, I believe that most generally when we dream of exposure, we dream also of deliverance. How rash and dangerous would it be, then, to take a dream of deliverance for sufficient evidence of deliverance from the wrath to come? Dreams then are no evidence either for or against the security of our salvation.

6. Zeal in the cause of religion is no evidence. Every one must have some zeal of God,' or he cannot be a Christian. But all zeal in good things is not Christian zeal. The Jews had a "zeal of God," but it was "not according to knowledge." Rom. x. 2. We e may think we "contend earnestly for the faith," while we are only contending about the faith, contending only for mastery. We may think ourselves "zealous of good works," when we are only zealous for a party. We may contend ever so earnestly for orthodoxy, and yet have no right motives in doing so. And zeal is not characterized by the subject on which it is employed, but by the motives by which it is prompted.We may be actuated by the sheerest selfishness in our most earnest endeavours to build up the interests of religion. Neither is zeal characterized by its intensity, or degree. We may have all the zeal of a Jehu, and yet be as destitute of piety as he.-Yea, we may have such zeal as would lead us to give our body to be burned," and yet be destitute of that "charity" or love, without which our zeal will 'profit us nothing.' 1 Cor. xiii. 3.

66

7. Great exactness in the external duties of religion, is, in itself, no evidence. We may have all "the form of godliness," and not have "the power" of it. How exact were the Scribes aud Pharisees yet Christ said, "Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." Matt. v. 20. Many modern formalists are very strict in the outward duties of religion, who, nevertheless, are living very profligate lives. And if the strictness of Scribes, Pharisees, and formalists, in their outward duties, is no evi-t dence of their having saving grace, then our strictness in the same things is no evidence that we have saving grace. We may be led to such exactness by education and habit, by example, and by a desire to conform to those around us. We may be led to it because we think such attention to externals will procure us salvation, and therefore we dare not neglect them. Or like the Scribes and Pharisees, we may do it for the sake of being distinguished among our fellow men for our superior piety. Among all these, there may be no holy motives. And as motives give actions their moral character, in, that strictness to which these motives prompt, there is no real piety. Ever so great strictness in the externals of religion is no proof then of internal piety.

8. Great exactness in the discharge of moral duties, is no evidence. It is true that where religion does exist, it will promote morality. But persons may be outwardly and strictly moral without religion. There are various selfish and sinful motives which may, nay, which often do influence men to

moral duties. They may therefore attend to these duties without any saving grace in their hearts.— Many are very strict in their outward observance of the second table of the law, who neglect the first table altogether. Nay, the Deist who makes a mock of Christianity, is often very strict in moral duties and is the more so, because morality is all the religion which he believes in; and therefore he wishes to display it as much as he can, that he may gain adherents and applause.

But this point is settled by divine inspiration.We are informed (Mark x.)that the young man who came to Christ, inquiring what good thing he must do to have eternal life, had observed the several duties of morality. Yet Christ told him, "one thing thou lackest." That one thing' was saving grace. Outward morality is then no evidence of salvation.

9. The fact that we know the exact time when our supposed conversion took place, is no evidence. We often hear people speak of the precise moment when God pardoned their sins and renewed their hearts. And they evidently speak of knowing the exact time as if it were a matter of great importance; nay, as if it were the highest evidence of the reality of their conversion. We know the exact

time when we experienced certain new and strange sensations! What does this prove? It proves this, and this only-that we know the exact time when we were either converted or deceived: it proves that we had some new religious feelings, either genuine or spurious. But which of the alternatives it does not decide. This is self-evident, and needs no further argument.

As the before mentioned things are not evidences that we are Christians; so on the other hand, the want of them is no evidence that we are not Christians.

The fact that we have not had very distressing conviction of sin, is no evidence that we are not born again. In the antecedents of conversion, "there are diversities of operations, but the same Spirit." There is every variety both in the mode and degree of convictions. There is no calculating how deep a sense of sin, or how great a fear of wrath, we must have in order to be born again.— Many of the most faithful saints have had but comparatively slight distress for fear of final wrath. It is no uncommon thing for the new-born soul for a long time to reject a hope of salvation, because he has not yet been sufficiently convicted.' It is important, therefore, to consider, that while on the one hand we may have ever so distressing conviction, and yet go back into stupidity: on the other hand, though we have ever so little fear of punishment, we may repent and believe; and if we do repent and believe, we are subjects of a saving change of heart.

That we have never had very great and sudden joy, and very wonderful manifestations in divine things, is no evidence against us. As there are various operations of the Spirit before conversion, so there are equally various ones after it. No two can be found who had exercises in conversion alike, either in degree or circumstances. If we consult the experience of real Christians, we shall find that but a small portion of them had very sud