Lecture 6 is on the test of truth in matters of religion. "Is this test REASON?- -or is it Revelation ?"

"On the supposition of our having a revelation from God, there can be but one answer, surely, to this question, amongst all who think soberly. The test must, without controversy, be, not Reason, but Revelation. To affirm the contrary, would be to exalt reason, in the certainty of its decisions, above Divine authority, and the claims of Natural Religion above those of the Word of God."- -p. 117.

The proper province of reason, it is stated, is to determine whether the scriptures be a revelation from God; and what is the true meaning of the various parts of "It is a question of great importance," Mr. W. justly remarks,

this revelation.

"Is this volume, which we call the Holy Scriptures, given by inspira

tion of God? Is it a Divine revelation? There is an obvious and important difference between this question, and the question, Whether these Scriptures contain such a reve lation?-I have all along hitherto proceeded on the assumption, that hot only the latter, but the former also of these questions, is rightly answered in the affirmative ;—that is, on the assumption of what is usually termed the plenary inspiration of the sacred volume. I have taken it for granted, not only that they contain truth, but that all which they contain is truth."-p. 117.

The genuineness, authenticity, and inspiration of the scriptures, our author takes for granted, observing that this is indispensably

necessary,

"To the Scriptures being a pro

per test either of doctrines or of actions. A test, or standard, must, it is very obvious, be something that VOL. II. No. 2.

is itself fixed ;—and to which we can make our appeal, in all cases, with confidence and security. That by which we are to prove all things, must surely be something which is itself already proved.”—p. 118.

Our readers have already seen, that the plenary inspiration of the scriptures is not admitted by Socinian writers; not at least by those who have made the greatest progress among them. They contain, indeed, it is admitted the word of God, but they are not themselves entitled to that appellation. According to this view of the scriptures, Mr. W. remarks ♪ with great justice, every one must perceive,

In

They cannot be a test by which all things are to be proved; for instead of possessing any fixed character and decisive authority, there is nothing certain in them. bringing all things to them as a test, we may be rejecting important truth, and storing our minds with mistakes as to facts, and with hasty and illgrounded opinions, the result of ig norance and prejudice. They are themselves, it seems, to be proved by a standard of superior authority. For what is there, in the preceding quotation, respecting the Holy Scriptures, which might not be said, in the same terms, and with the same truth, with regard to the writings either of the author himself by whom their authority is thus unsettled, or of any other human author whatever?"-p. 119.

We are aware that it would not have been practicable for Mr. W. to enter upon a defence of the plenary inspiration of the scriptures; and that there are in existence, several valuable treatises, (particularly that by Mr. Dick, of Glasgow), upon this subject already: still we cannot but wish that the important bearing of this doctrine upon the Socinian controversy, were more fully pointed out than it has yet been; since in this warfare, matters are ra

pidly approaching a crisis.The hosts of the enemy must speedily concentrate themselves behind the alleged far-fetched analogies and inconclusive reasonings of the original and accredited teachers of the christian doctrine: Taking the bible as a whole to be a revelation from God, it is impossible they can stand their ground, even after all their attempts to spike the guns of their evangelical antagonists. They are, therefore, gradually retreating to this fortress, and thither it becomes all the friends of truth to follow them; or rather, to preoccupy the ground before the great body arrive there, that they may find norest for the soles of their feet,until they have reached the natural termination of their retrograde course; and thus give a roournful and monitory admonition to the whole christian world, that there is no consistent medum between what is usually called the evangelical system and downright infidelity, We have been led into these remarks, be cause we know no man better able to supply this desideratum than Mr. W. we respectfully invite him to turn his attention to it. The following most importat remarks may be considered as the sum of this lecture:

1stly, The Holy Scriptures, of the Old and New Testaments, are the TEST by which all things are to be proved.

2lly, The Scriptures must be received as an inspired whole.

3dly, In making our appeal to the Seriptures, we should beware, en all occasions, of secretly indulging a wish to discover any part of them, however small, to be spurious.

"4thly, When we examine any word, or text, or passage, our sole desire should be, to discover, not the sense which it may bear, or which we may imagine it ought to bear;

but the sense in which it was origi nally used by the writer himself.

5thly, To the dictates of the inspired volume, our minds should be prepared humbly and implicitly to bow-whatever it plainly declares, we must receive, without gainsaying.

6thly, My last observation is, that we ought to beware of forming our judgment from detached and insulated passages of the word of God :---that we should take the

Scriptures in their harmony, comparing one part with another, and using them, as much as possible, asself-expositors."

Lecture 7, on the doctrine of Atonement, is founded on Rom. iii. 25, 26. From these versesMr. W. illustrates, and proves, the five following observations ::

"I. It is in consideration of the Sacrifice of Christ, that God is propitious to sinners:

II. In pardoning the guilty on this ground, God displays his righ

teousness:

marks:

"The great question, then, on this momentous subject, comes to be: IN WHAT MANNER may for giveness be extended to the guilty, so as to satisfy the claims of infinite justice, and thus to maintain in their full dignity, free from every charge of

imperfection or of mutability, the character of the Governor, the rectitude of his administration, and the sanction of his law?'

"The rendering of the Divine Being propitious, in this view, refers, it is obvious, (and the distinction is one of great importance on this subject) not to the production of love in his character, or in the particular state of his mind towards fallen men, but simply to the mode of its expression. The inquiry is, How may the blessed God express his love, so as effectually to express, at the same time, his infinite and immutable abhorrence of sin; and thus, in making known the riches of his mercy,' to display, in connecgion with it, the inflexibility of his Justice, and the unsullied perfection

of his holiness?

"When we say that God is displeased with any of his creatures, we speak of them not as creatures, but as sinners. He hath sworn by himself, that he hath no pleasure in the death of the wicked.'' But he

hates sin-as contrary to his holy nature, hiding his glory from the eyes of his intelligent creatures, and, in proportion to the extent of its prevalence, tending to the destruction of the order and happiness of the universe. When we speak of haired as existing in the infinite mind, we ought, it is true, to beware of associating with it any idea of passion or turbulent emotion.But to make it a question whether God be displeased with sin, and with sinners, is to confound good and evil together; to divest the human mind of all its salutary fears of judgment to come; and to dispute the propriety of God's own language on this momentous subject. In the scriptures we find it aflirmed, that God is angry with the wicked every day; that he hateth all the workers of iniquity,' that he hath revealed from heaven his wrath against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men;-and the children of disobedience' are denominated children of wrath. When God, on the other hand, forgives iniquity, he is, in perfect consistensy with such expressions, represent

6

ed as turning from the fierceness of his anger, and taking away all his wrath' as not retaining his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy-as pacified' towards the objects of his forgiveness, notwithstanding all that they have done:' and they who before were 'children of wrath,' are described as then saying, with holy and humble joy, O Lord, I will praise thee; for though thou wast angry with me, thine anger is turned away. This is PROPITIATION: and it is in Christ Jesus, as we have already seen, that God is thus propitious.to sinners." p. 147.

We cannot refrain from presenting our readers with the following extract, which describes what may be called the nature of the atonement.

We most cordi

ally recommend it to the atten tion of our readers, as calculated to counteract a very pernicious error upon this important subject

the all-sufficiency of the sacrifice an error which virtually denies of Christ, and renders his divine character totally useless in the scheme of redemption.

While it appears a most important scriptural truth, that something equivalent, in the eye of Divine Justice, to the punishment of the sinner, was, in the view and for the reasons which have been stated, absolutely necessary in order to his escape, I do not think there is any thing in the word of God, that warrants the representation which has been given, by some of the friends of this doctrine, as if the sufferings of Christ formed what they call an exact equivalent-neither dess nor more-for the sins of all who shall be saved by his atonement. This sentiment seems derogatory to the infinite dignity of the Sufferer, and the consequent infinite value of his sacrifice. The sufferings of the Son of God ought not to be brought into comparison, as a display of the Divine.righteousness, with even the eternal sufferings of millions of his creatures. The idea of exact equivalent proceeds on the supposition,

of the Almighty,' the 'poison whereof drank up his spirit !'—p. 175. The PERSONALITY and DEITY of the Holy Spirit, constitute the subject of the 9th lecture. "What then," says Mr. W.

"Do we mean by a person ? and what is the proper evidence of personality?-By a person we mean that which possesses personal properties and the only legitimate, I might say the only possible proof of personality, in the present case, or, indeed, in any case, is the proof of the possession of such properties and, in the particular instance before us, the only ground on which this can at all be ascertained, is the ascription of such properties to the Holy Spirit, in the Scriptures of truth."—p. 199.

The personality of the Holy Spirit is proved by a reference to some of those passages of scripture, in which personal properties and personal acts are ascribed to him, and from his being represented as the object of the dispositions and acts of others. The proof of the personality of the Spirit necessarily involves that of his Deity; for, as Mr. W. justly observes, the acts and operations ascribed, in many passages of scripture to the Spirit of God, possess the clear and decided characters of Divinity. Additional, and, as they appear to us, completely conclusive arguments, are adduced in support of this important doctrine, for which we must, however, refer to the work itself.

Lectures the 10th and 11th are devoted to a consideration of the influences of the Holy Spirit. In the first of these lectures Mr. W. asserts the necessity of divine influence in regeneration, and vindicates the doctrine from some leading objections. The appropriate work of the Spirit in the scheme of redemption, Mr. W.

4

observes, is to give effect in the souls of men to the work of salvation, by leading them to believe the gospel; and the first operation of the Spirit is stated to be the spiritual illumination of the understanding, in order to the conversion of the heart. Mr. W. illustrates this subject by the words of the apostle in 1 Cor. ii. 14.-" But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; neither can be know them, because they are spiritually discerned." By the natural man the apostle is stated to have meant,

"All those, who remained under the influence of such principles only as exist in the animal and rational nature of man, independently of the renewing operation of the grace or Spirit of God.

By the things of the Spirit of God,' says Mr. W. we must understand the truths of the gospel; those doctrines which were revealed to the holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. Respecting these it is here affirmed, that the natural man receiveth them not;—that they are foolishness to him; that he cannot know them!

"To the right understanding of the passage, and of the true nature which it affirms the necessity,—it is of that operation of the Spirit of of great consequence to ascertain the proper meaning of the last of these expressions' neither can he KNOW them.' What is the nature of this knowledge? Now to this question the passage itself furnishes. an immediate and satisfactory answer. To know them,' is, obvi ously, to know them in such a way that they no longer appear fuo ishness:

and this implies nothing less, than discerning them to be, what they really are, the wisdom of God;

nothing less than a perception of their truth, excellence, and glory. While they appeared foolishness,. they were not received:—whenever they are thus known, thus discern