this fountain of delight, and turned its waters into gall and bitterness.

The words of the text, rightly understood, will not only afford us an occafion for this inquiry, but will alfo direct us in it; and, by fhewing us the principles of true religion, will help us to discover the errors and mifconceits which are introductive of irreligion and fuperftition.

The fear of the Lord, fays the wife King, is the beginning of wisdom; and the knowledge of the Holy is understanding. This is not the only place where he expreffes himself in this manner: the fame thing, with some small variety in the expreffion, is more than once repeated again in the book of Proverbs : it is to be met with alfo in the Pfalmift, in the very fame words almoft; and the thought occurs frequently in the infpired writers: fo that this feems to be a common maxim, or principle of religion, that runs through all the facred records, and by which all good and wife men have guided themfelves in the great and momentous concern of religion.

In fpeaking to these words, I propose to myself these two things:

First, To fhew, that the text, and other the like paffages of holy Scripture, will be found, upon examining the sense and reason of them, to contain this general propofition, That a juft conception of God, of his excellencies and perfections, is the true foundation of religion.

Secondly, That this juft conception of God is the right rule to form our judgments by, in all par

ticular matters of religion, and the only thing that can fecure us from either atheism or fuperftition,

First, I will endeavour to fhew you, that the text, and other the like paffages of Scripture, will be found, upon examining the fenfe and reafon of them, to contain this general propofition, That a just conception of God, of his excellencies and perfections, is the true foundation of religion: The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

To this purpose it might be thought fufficient perhaps by fome to obferve, that fear, whatever limited or enlarged notion you understand it in, is not a voluntary paffion: we cannot be afraid or not afraid of things juft as we please; but fear neceffarily relates to, and arifes from, the notion or conception we have of the thing feared: we fear any Being in proportion to the power and will which we conceive that Being to have either to hurt or to protect us. The different kinds of fear likewise are no otherwise distinguishable from one another, than by confidering the different conceptions or ideas of the things feared for fear, being the neceffary effect of fuch conceptions, muft differ according to the difference of the conceptions. If we join to great power, great malice and a fettled refolution to do mischief, fuch an object ftrikes with terror and confufion, and breeds in our minds a base and flavish fear if we add to great power, great goodness and benevolence, fuch an object creates an awe and reverence, and fills our hearts with filial fear and veneration. When therefore we fay, the fear of this, or fear of that, does fo or fo, we can have no sense of the propofition, without having a notion of the

thing feared. The fear of a tyrant, and the fear of a father, are very different paffions; but he that knows not the difference between a tyrant and a father will never be able to distinguish these paffions. When therefore we read that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, we can have no understanding of the words without having a just conception of God, by which alone we can judge of the nature of godly fear, and of its operations. Allowing therefore that the wife King, by the fear of the Lord, means a right and due fear, it neceffarily fuppofes a right and due conception of the Lord, from which only that right and due fear can flow, which is the mother of wisdom and understanding for if men misconceive concerning God, either as to his holinefs and purity, to his mercy or justice, their fear of him will not produce wifdom; which is evident from the infinite follies of the heathen world, which grew out of their falfe fear and reverence of their gods. This propofition therefore, The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, is equivalent to this, A just notion and conception of God is the beginning of wisdom.

Having deduced this expofition from the order and nature of things in themselves, let us try the other method, which is more familiar, and fee whether we can come to any expofition of these words, which will not lead to the fame thing.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: we are to confider what is meant by the fear of the Lord. The reafon of the inquiry is evidently this, that we experience in ourfelves different kinds and degrees of fear, which have very different effects

and operations: fome ftupify the fenfes, and rob us of all wisdom and understanding: others render us active and induftrious, and give an edge to our invention how to fhun and avoid the thing we fear. Of what fort then is the fear of the Lord? Is it an abject flavish fear? No, certainly all expofitors agree to warn you against this fenfe and interpretation of fear. But were you to afk the reason why the fear of God is not a flavish fear, there is only this reafon to be given you, Because God is no tyrant and I fuppofe every man of fenfe will admit this for a good reason: and what else is this but adjusting the fenfe of fear from the true notion and conception of God? The properties of religious fear, which are mentioned in Scripture, are various: The fear of the Lord is clean, fays the Pfalmift: The fear of the Lord is to hate evil, fays Solomon; and again, It is a fountain of life; and again, In the fear of the Lord is ftrong confidence. Try all these in the fame way, and you will find they are deducible only from the notion and conception of God, and are not to be understood without it. The fear of God therefore is not to be expounded from the nature of fear, confidered as a diftinct paffion of the mind; but by confidering the natural effect that a juft fenfe and notion of God has upon the mind of a rational creature: for the fear of God fignifies that frame and affection of foul, which is the confequence of a just notion and conception of the Deity. It is called the fear of God, because, as majefty and power are the principal parts of the idea of God, fo fear and reverence are the main ingredients in the affection that arifes from it: not but that love and honour

and admiration are included in the notion. And in this latitude the wife King moft certainly understood it, when he said, In the fear of the Lord is ftrong confidence: for confidence is no effect of fear, properly fo called; but it is a natural effect of a just sense of the Almighty's power and goodness.

There is but one thing that occurs to me that feems to look like a difficulty in this way of arguing, which is this: If the fear of God denotes that sense and affection of mind which is the natural effect of a true notion and conception of God, it should seem that none should be void of the fear of God, but those only who want right notions of God; and yet we know there are finners against knowledge, who discover no fear of God, though they can discourse as rationally as others upon his attributes and perfections. There are two ways by which men may discover that they have a sense of the fear of God: one indeed is by acting agreeably to it: but there is another, which is by confcience: felf-condemnation, for acting contrary to the fear of God, is an evident token of the fense of that fear. But if there are any inftances where neither of thefe figns are discoverable, there is a farther account to be given; for it is not merely the fpeculative notions of God which produce this fenfe, but there must be a perfuafion alfo, that there is a real Being to whom these ideas actually belong: without this the notion is idle and fruitlefs: we may raise in our fancies very terrible objects; but they produce little or no effect, as long as we contemplate them as the mere creatures of our imagination. In like manner the notion of a God may caufe little change in the fool's