and ever fince, hath been convinced of its truth. When the mind is not candid, or the truth not fairly examined, infidelity fprings from two fources -the perverfion of our paffions; and the perverfion of our reafon. In other words, as the text expreffes it, the God of this world, that is, fome worldly motive, hath blinded the eyes of them that believe not.

The man of pleasure has an interest to serve, wholly oppofite to the nature of the Gospel. The rules of the Gospel oppofe every action of his life. It is natural for him, therefore, and the only thing indeed he can do, while he continues to be a man of pleasure, to endeavour to overturn the Gospels If he cannot overthrow the Gospel, the Gospel will certainly overthrow him.-But the man of pleasure is by no means a formidable enemy. He cannot reason, and therefore he cannot injure the Gospel by argument. For the same reason, he is also unaffailable. In defperate cafes men often fight with fuch weapons às come first at hand. With fuch, the man of pleasure commonly attacks Chriftianity. They They are ordinary weapons indeed, but they are the best he can get. arguments are made up of scraps of wit-obfolete objections, which have been answered over and

His

Over

over-and of misconceived and mifinterpreted paffages of Scripture, which have no force when explained, or when compared either with the context, or with the general fcheme of Christianity.-Poor however, as his objections are, they fuffice him, because he neither chufes to examine fuch anfwers as would overturn them, nor to come in the way of fuch evidence as would bear them down.. In fhort, it is his ftudious endeavour, that the God of this world may blind his eyes. He is an infidel through choice.

The man of reafon opposes Christianity on other ground. Though he too, now and then, condefcends to liften to the calls of appetite, his grand attack is founded on the all-fufficiency of reafon. Reafon is given him to be the touchftone of right and wrong-of truth and falfehood. To this he brings all religious truth. And as objections may be made to every thing, his objections, if he be an acute man, may be fubtle: though fometimes they are trifling enough, as he never vouchfafes to look into those writers, who have examined and refolved his objections, probably long before he made them. But, what is moft perverse in his attack on Chriftianity, he has different modes of judging between religious and scientific truth. In

many

many parts of science, he is obliged to confefs his ignorance. But he has not that candour, when he meets with a difficulty in religion. This we call unfair. He fhould certainly acknowledge his own confined understanding in religion, as well as in other parts of knowledge-unless he think he can more eafily grafp the difficulties of a divine revelation, than of a human science.

The man of reason is under another bias, which leads him into infidelity. He often forms a fyftem of his own, which the pride of his heart will not fuffer him to abandon. Or, perhaps, he is under the influence of fome infidel fociety, and has all their scorn to encounter, if he draw back. When he once, therefore, becomes an infidel, he generally continues one*.

* The Abbé Barruel has written a history of Jacobinism, from which it appears, that Voltaire, and all the French philofophers were of this clafs. Their horrid watch-word was, Ecrafez l'infame,(crush the wretch,) meaning Chrift. And in their blafphemous fyftem, as far as we know, they all died.

Dd

XXXVI.

2 CHRON. XXXII 31.

HOWBEIT IN THE BUSINESS OF THE AMBASSA

DORS OF THE PRINCES OF BABYLON, WHO
SENT UNTO HIM TO ENQUIRE OF THE WON-
DER THAT WAS DONE IN THE LAND, GOD
LEFT HIM TO TRY HIM.

W

E are to fuppofe the writer of this book to be infpired, and the doctrine contained in the text to be fcriptural; though I do not remember any where a parallel paffage.

God had bleffed the good king Hezekiah with more riches than any prince of his time; infomuch, that he was the wonder of all thofe nations which bordered on his dominions. Among others, the king of Babylon fent meffengers to congratulate him on his recovery from a dangerous illness; but, in fact, to examine into the truth of what he had heard

heard of his great opulence*. Hezekiah feems to have indulged the pride of his heart too much on this occafion; and God, to humble him, no doubt, left him to himself.

Now this probably may be one method of God's dealing with mankind, in a state of trial. In fome circumstances, he may leave even good men to themfelves, to try and exercise their humility, by fhewing them how faint their own endeavours are without his affiftance. And although this doctrine is not found any where, that I recollect, except in this paffage of Scripture, yet it seems very agreeable to the nature of a state of trial.—Many expreffions there are in Scripture, which speak of the dereliction of God's holy spirit ; that is, when bad men are hardened against it, and perfist in rejecting its gentle admonitions-but this does not amount to the doctrine of the text.-Both doctrines, however, are excellent leffons in a state of trial. The former should be an awful warning to lead the bad man to repentance: the latter fhould be a ftanding caution to the good man, to keep his mind in that humble ftate; which alone can make him acceptable to God.

*This appears from laying together the three feparate paffages in which this tranfaction is mentioned; 2 Chron. xxxii. 31.-Ifa. xxxix. 1.-2 Kings, xx. 12.

Dd2