tion, invented for the purpose of complying with popular errors, the whole ftory being only a narra"tion of certain internal emotions and incitements

to fin, which the Holy Jesus felt arifing in his "fpotlefs mind." We might well afk here, How emotions and incitements to fin fhould arise in a Spotless mind? They could hardly arife from the mind itself, and, if they did not, then muft they have been introduced into it by fome malignant agency from without, call that agency by whatever name you chufe. However, we will not dwell upon this, as no reader need be told, that a fpotless mind can cause no emotions or incitements to fin. Let us attend to the other fuggeftion, that the existence of fuch a malignant being as we conceive the Devil to be, is inconfiftent with the perfections and wisdom of the Deity, and the free and moral agency of man. The best answer to this will be, an appeal to what is, and what is experienced to be a fact among human beings. Most notorious is the existence of malignant agents among human beings, who are daily exercifing the very fame malignity as, it is here faid, is inconfiftent with the wifdom and perfections of GOD to fuffer; and, if fuch malignity exifts among human beings, how can there be any inconfiftency in believing what the Scriptures affure us, that there is fuch malignity in the Devil and his angels. Can we be strangers to the fact, that there are proftituted women who make it their bufinefs to enfnare artless innocence to its ruin? Can we be ignorant,

that

that there have been in France men throwing off all religion, and exercifing their malignity even against GOD himself? And, will you charge God with inconfiftency in his wisdom and perfections, because he fuffers the existence of fuch human beings? if not, where is the inconfiftency if he fuffers the existence of malignant beings who are not human ? and, if he suffers them to incite men to evil, when he fuffers men to incite one another to evil? The truth is, and it is a primary truth, that there can be no inconfiftency in whatever it pleases GoD to fuffer to be. That he does fuffer human beings to exift who exercise a malignity of the fame nature with that which is afcribed to the agency of the Evil Spirit is moft certain; and, therefore, that the existence of fuch an evil fpirit cannot be inconfiftent with the wisdom and perfections of GOD; and, confequently, that no objection can lie against the Sacred Writers, for afferting the existence of such an evil spirit; and, moreover, that their having afferted it was not in compliance with the vulgar and erróneous opinions of the Jews.

May we not be allowed, exclufive of every other confideration, to form a very ftrong prefumption, that there is fuch an evil fpirit, from the very objection which is made to his exiftence? Full of wiles and fubtlety he is represented to be; and what can be more fubtle, what more likely to enfure fuccefs to himself in his exertions against us, than the introduction

7

1

troduction into our minds of a perfuafion of his own non-existence? Little able will the General be

to make resistance, who is attacked by the Enemy, while he imagines he has no enemy to be apprehenfive of. This ought well and seriously to be confidered, left, with all our fuperlative wisdom, we fhould, in the end, find ruin in our fecurity.

And as the existence of an Evil Spirit is not inconfiftent with the wisdom and perfections of God, fo neither is it with the free and moral agency of man. Man is free as a moral agent, because he cannot irrefiftibly be impelled into evil. He may refift, and, if he refifts, he conquers; and therefore the Scripture fays, "refift the Devil, and he will flee "before you." And this the Scripture faith, not in acquiefcence with I know not what erroneous opinions of the Jews, but froín a certainty of its truth. If, then, the Sacred Writers affert the existence of the Evil Spirit, they affert, nevertheless, the freedom of man, whofe will is at liberty either to resist or to submit to his influence, as it shall think proper, but cannot be compelled to a fubmiffion to it without its own voluntary confent. There is, therefore, nothing in the existence of the Evil Spirit, which is contrary to the free and moral agency of

man.

As then the Sacred Writers have afferted the exiftence of an evil Spirit, as there is nothing in the affertion

fertion which is contrary to the wisdom and perfections of God, or the free and moral agency of man; there can be no occafion for grounding the affertion on any opinions that might have been current among the Jews. It is the affertion of men inspired by the GOD of Truth, that fuch an Evil Spirit exifts, it therefore is true; and, moreover, it therefore hath not its origin in any Jewish opinions or traditions. There may not perhaps be any harm in fuppofing. that the Sacred Writers fometimes in their expreffions conform themselves to popular language; but, this is very different from a fuppofition that in their affertions and doctrines they do the fame. This would be to reduce the whole of Christianity to a mere fable; for, by the fame rule that one affertion or doctrine was charged to the account of an idle tradition, another might be; and thus the whole would become fabulous. For this reafon, therefore, as hath been already fuggefted, the Sacred Writings are never to be interpreted as if what was afferted or taught in them was so afferted and taught in com pliance with popular opinions.

1

In our interpretation of the New Teftament, wa are rigidly to adhere to the words written, which we are to conftrue by the fame rules of conftruction as govern us in the conftruction of any other Greek Writer. When we have thus obtained from the words themselves the fenfe of the affertion or the doctrine; we are then invariably to bear in our minds

the authority whence the affertion, or doctrine, proceeds, and that the Writer is a perfon infpired by the Gop of Truth, and that therefore what pro-, ceeds from him must be true likewife. I do not fay that every word and fyllable, every yap and de is written under the force of infpiration, for it may be perhaps not at all neceffary to adopt fuch a fuppofition; but this I fay, that every pofitive affertion,every doctrine which the words communicate to us is under that force; and therefore is, and must be true. I fear it too frequently happens, that when the doctrine which the words communicate, does; not please or fuit with our prejudices, we pervert: them from their true and genuine meaning to fomething elfe. Thus was it in the inftances which have been produced from the great Mr. Locke; and thus, likewife has it happened in many inferior inftances. But it is to be remembered, that no fenfe or interpretation is admiffible, which the words themselves. will not justify; that if Oos suλoyntos does not fignify "Gon be bleffed," nothing will justify us in interpreting it to fignify fo; that if os does not fignify fimply refemblance or fimilitude, we fhall be altogether unjustifiable in giving it that fenfe. Be the true genuine sense of the words what it may, by that we must abide; for otherwife, inftead of interpreting the Gospel, we make a new Gospel of our own.

S

I here add no more but this only, that, if in our conftruction of the words of the New Teftament we

adhere