the Scriptures, in anfwer to Christianity not founded on argument, I. 262, 263. His Reflectionsbon Deifm fairly stated, ib. 403. III. 66.

BENTLEY Dr. Richard His Remarks on Collins's Difcourfe of Free-Thinking, I. 121, 126.

BERROW Mr. Capel- His Anfwer to Deifm fairly Stated, III. 66.

BLOUNT Mr. Charles-His notes on Philoftratus's account of the life of Apollonius Tyaneus, I. 67, 68. His Religio Laici copied, for the most part, from Lord Herbert, ib. 69. He was one of the chief authors of the Oracles of Reafon, ibid. His argument against the worship of God through a Mediator confidered, ib. 70, 71. He acknowlegeth Deifm not to be fafe without Christianity, ib. 72. BOLINGBROKE Lord Viscount His Letters on the Study and Ufe of History, I. 406, 407. His. Poftbumous Works, II. 136, &c. He raifeth himfelf above all other writers antient or modern, ib. 149. His invectives against the holy Scriptures, ib. 144, 145. Against the antient philofophers, ib. 146, &c. And efpecially against antient and modern Chriftian writers, ib. 149, &c. Charges thofe that differ from him with madnefs, ib. 153, 154. The main principles of his fcheme reprefented, ib. 155, 156, 157. He treats thofe as profane who talk of imitating God in his moral attributes, ib. 170, 171. Offers feveral objections against afcribing moral attributes to the Deity, ib. 181, &c. Yet in effect acknowlegeth those attributes, ib. 194, &c. He denies that God's end in making man was to communicate happiness to him, ib. 191. Profeffes to own a general Providence with regard to collective bodies; but denies a Providence, as extending to individuals, i. 206. The

con

inconfiftency of his fcheme fhewn, and its ill con-
fequences to mankind, ib. 215, &c. He acknow-
leges the great antiquity and fefulness of the
doctrine concerning the immortality of the foul,
and a future ftate, ib. 241. Pretends neither to
affirm nor deny it, ib. 242. Yet treats it as a fic-
tion, ib. 244, 246. Will not allow that the foul
is an immaterial fubftance diftinct from the body,
ib. 245, 246. Attempts to deftroy the moral
argument for a future ftate from the prefent une-
qual diftributions of Divine Providence, ib. 262,
&c. Sets up as an advocate for Providence-His
great inconfiftency in this fhewn, ib. 265, 266.
› He speaks with contempt of those that have writ-
ten of the law of nature before him, ib., 280. Af-
ferts the univerfal clearness of that law to all man-
kind, and that no man can mistake it, ib. 283. Yet
owns that is often mistaken, and affords a dubious
light, ib. 291. Makes polygamy to be a precept of
the law of nature, ib. 298. His loose way of
talking about marriage, ib. 300. Supposes modesty
and chastity to have no foundation in nature; but
to be owing to human vanity, ib. 301. The per-
nicious tendency of his fcheme, with refpect to
morals, ib. 306, &r. He denies that mankind
have any need of extraordinary fupernatural reve-
lation; and endeavours to answer Dr. Clarke's ar-
guments for it, ib. 313, &c. Yet his own scheme,
contrary to his intention, tendeth to fhew the use-
fulness and neceffity of revelation, ib. 354. His
attempts to difprove the truth and authenticity of
the Mofaic hiftory, ib. 363, &c. His charge
against the Scriptures, particularly the Mofaic
writings, for degrading the Deity to mean and
unworthy offices and employments, ib. 421, &c.
And for afcribing to God human parts and paffions,
Bb 3

ib.

ib. 436. And for commanding things contrary to the law of nature, ib. 447. His objections against the Mofaic account of the creation, ib. 466, &c. And of the fall, ib. 474, &c. The acknowlegements he makes in favour of Chriftianity. ib. 50%, &c. He feems to give up feveral of the Deistical objections, ib. 514. His great inconsistency on this head, ib. 17, 518. He pretends that Chriftianity is a republication of the doctrine of Plato, but more unintelligible than it, ib. 522, 523. And that the New Teftament confifteth of two different Gofpels, contrary to one another; that of Christ, and of St. Paul, ib. 524. His invectives against this apoftie, ib. 526, &c. Seems to acknowlege the Gospels to be credible and authentic records of Chrift's difcourfes and actions, ib. 538, 539. Yet does all he can to deftroy their credit, ib. 540. The way he takes to account for the propagation of Chriftianity fhewn to be infufficient, ib. 550, &c. Pretends that Christianity has been of no advantage to the reformation of mankind, ib. 555. His objections against the doctrine of a Mediator, and of redemption by the blood of Christ, ib. 572, &c. He endeavours to expose the Chriftian doctrine of future rewards and punishments, as abfurd, and contrary to the divine attributes, ib.604, 605. Seems to deny the exercife of divine juftice, either here or hereafter, ib. 610, 611. Finds fault with the Gospel doctrine of a future judgment, for teaching that men fhall then be called to an account for the thoughts and difpofitions of their hearts, ib. 612. Pretends that, according to the reprefentations made in the New Testament, men fhall be faved or damned in the lump, without any regard to the different degrees of virtue or vice, ib. 620, &c. Objects against the eternity of future punish;

3. punishments, ib. 626. Remarkable acknowlegement of his on this head, ib. 627. Pretends that future punishmehts cannot be reconciled to the belief of an all-perfect Being, ib. 631.

BRADLEY Mr. John-His reflections on the Oracles of Reason, I. 77.

BRAMHALL Archbishop-His writings against Hobbes, I. 64.

BROWN Mr. John, now Dr.-His Effays on the Earl of Shaftesbury's Characteristics, I. 115. BROWN Mr. Simon-His Rebuke to a ludicrous Infidel, in answer to Mr. Woolfton, I. 161. His An

fwer to Dr. Tindal's Christianity as old as the Creation, ib. 198. BULLOCK Dr. Richard His answer to Collins's dif courfe of the Grounds and Reafons of the Chriftian Religion, I. 137. And to his Scheme of literal Prophecy confidered, ib. 143.

BURNET Dr. Thomas-His Conferences, in answer to Tindal's Christianity as old as the Creation, I. 183.

C.

CANAANITES-The command for exterminating them not inconfiftent with the law of nature, I. 225. II. 447, &c.

CAUSE-According to Mr. Hume there is no connection between Caufe and Effect; nor is there any way of knowing it, either by reason, or by experience, II. 5, 6. The manner in which the Caufe produces the Effect is inexplicable; but this no argument against it, ib. 9, 10. 23.

CHANDLER Dr. Bishop of Coventry and Litchfield An account of his Defence of Christianity, from the prophecies of the Old Teftament-in anfwer to Mr. Collins's Difcourfe on the Grounds, &c. I. 132, 133. His Vindication of it, in anfwer to the Scheme of literal Prophecy confidered, ib. 142.

Bb 4

CHANDLER

CHANDLER Dr. Samuel-An account of his Vindica-
tion of the Chriftian Religion, in answer to Mr.
Collins's Difcourfe on the Grounds, &c. I. 135.
His Vindication of the Antiquity and Authority of
Daniel's Prophecies, against the objections of the
Scheme of literal Prophecy confidered, ib. 143.
"His Vindication of the Hiftory of the Old Tefta-
ment-against the third volume of the Moral Phi-
lofopher, ib. 233. His Witnesses of the Refurrec-
tion re-examined, and proved confiftent-in answer to
the Refurrection of Jefus confidered, ib. 303, 304.
CHAPMAN Dr. John An account of his anfwer to
the Moral Philofopher, intitled Eufebius, I. 214,

215. 235.

CHINESE Their antient fages expreffed themselves ob-
fcurely concerning the Deity, III. 132. Great differ-
ence between them and Moses in this respect, ibid.
CHRIST-Taught religion with great fimplicity, II.
508. 513. Lord Bolingbroke pretends that he art-
fully engaged the Jews to put him to death, ib.
595. The doctrine of his being appointed to
judge the world, pretended by the Deifts to be
of no ufe to mankind, III. 61. The usefulness
and importance of it fhewn, ibid.

CHRISTIAN REVELATION-Has fet the principles of
natural religion in the cleareft light, I. 25. 27.
Want of univerfality no juft objection against it,
ib. 31, et feq. II. 559, 560. A fummary of the
evidences for Chriftianity, I. 438, et feq. Its
great usefulness and excellency acknowleged by
Lord Bolingbroke, II. 512, &c. It has contri-
buted to destroy polytheism and idolatry, and has
reformed many laws and cuftoms, contrary to the
law of nature, 556, 557. It does not teach light and
trivial expiations for fin, ib.583. It is not true,that the
whole fyftem of Chriftianity inspires and flatters the