in unintelligible phraseology,-unintelligible, I mean, to them, If these writers and speakers have, in fact, used such language, it was certainly done by design,-unhappily not the design of men, but of the Spirit of inspiration. "For," says St. Paul, speaking of himself and his inspired brethren, "we speak not "in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the 66 Holy Ghost teacheth." The use of such language is only to perplex and mislead, or at the best to communicate nothing to those who hear. Can any sober man attribute this conduct, or the design from which it must have sprung, to the Spirit of God? But, if the language of the Scriptures was intended to be intelligible to those to whom it was addressed, it was certainly uttered in the customary manner, and with its obvious meaning. The reason is plain and decisive. These men could not possibly find out any other meaning, or understand it in any other manner. If, therefore, it was intended, that any other sense than the obvious one should be annexed to the words, whatever was addressed to them was addressed to them in vain, Either they could not understand it at all, or they must understand it falsely, unless prevented by mere accident. II. A great part of the Bible was written by men who knew no other than plain language, and no other meaning but that which was customary and familiar. David, Amos, Matthew, Mark, John, Peter, James, and Jude, were all uneducated men, and the same thing is proba bly true of several other writers in the sacred canon. It is, however, sufficient for the present purpose, that these were of this character. All the doctrines contained in the Scriptures are, I think it may be safely asserted, found in the writers mentioned under the former head. All these doctrines, therefore, were originally addressed to plain men. So many of these doctrines are delivered by the writers mentioned under this head, that he who cordially embraces what they have written, will find little difficulty in believing whatever is found in the Bible. But these men knew no language beside the plain, familiar language of mankind. The knowledge of uncustomary, technical, or what may be called philosophical phraseology, is an attainment of mere learning, and cannot be possessed by an unlearned man. Hence a great part of the doctrines of the Gospel, so many as evidently to involve the whole, were certainly delivered in the plain language of men, because they were delivered by those who knew no other. Should it be said that although these men knew no other. language of themselves, yet they may have received the knowledge of philosophical language by inspiration, since Christ promised them that they should receive a mouth and speech, which all their adversaries should not be able to gainsay or resist, I answer, that St. Paul, in the passage just now quoted from 1 Cor. ii. 13, expressly declares, that he and his fellowapostles did not use this language. "Which things also we "speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth." The things here mentioned are, in the preceding verse, styled the things that are freely given to us of God; and in the tenth verse, the things which God hath revealed unto us by his Spirit, i. e. the things which were revealed to Paul and his fellow-apostles by the Spirit of inspiration. These things, the Apostle declares, they did not speak in words taught by man's wisdom, or human philosophy. As this is true of the New Testament, so it is, beyond all controversy, equally true of the Old. III. The Scriptures were written chiefly for plain men. The first is, that these constitute altogether the great body of mankind, and are immensely disproportioned in their numbers to all the rest. The souls of all these are, severally, of as much value as those of the great and learned. From their numbers, therefore, it is reasonably concluded, that God, in revealing his will and publishing the way of salvation, had a primary reference to those who were immeasurably more important to his eye than all others. Secondly, The Scriptures directly exhibit this truth to us. St. James, censuring the particular respect paid to the rich and great by the Christians to whom he wrote, says, "Hearken, my "beloved brethren; hath not God chosen the poor of this world, "rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom?" Christ declared to the people of Nazareth, by a quotation from the Prophet Isaiah, his own character and mission in these remarkable words :"The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; for he hath anointed "me to preach the Gospel to the poor." When the disciples of John came, to inquire whether Jesus was the Messiah or not, he gave it, as one decisive proof of his character, that the poor had the Gospel preached to them. Almost all his labours were employed on plain, humble people. Such persons were his companions; such were his Apostles. Thirdly, Persons of this class have, much more extensively than any other, believed and obeyed the Scriptures. The common people, we are told, heard Christ gladly; and of them almost all his converts were made. Often they were his only defence against the malicious designs of their superiors. Several times, it is said, they would have laid hands on him, but did not, for fear of the people. The Apostles found the same defence; and almost all their converts were of the same class. What was true of those periods has been true of all which have succeeded. From the remains of the early fathers in the church, particularly of Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp, it is unanswerably evident, that they and the Christians generally of their time; Christians distinguished for simplicity and godly sincerity; who had their conversation in the world, not by fleshly wisdom but by the grace of God; adopted no other mode of construing the Scriptures. These men were generally the plain inhabitants of the several countries in which they lived; and by their piety and benevolence in life, and their meekness, patience, and fortitude in death, proved to every succeeding age that they were precious sons of Zion, comparable to fine gold. Of the same character were the great body of Christians in the second and third centuries; the numerous converts of Augustine; those of Bernard; the Waldenses; the Hussites; and the great body of converts made at and after the Reformation. Generally, these have been almost all the Christians in every age of the church. But it is reasonably be lieved that the Scriptures were especially written for those who, it was foreseen, would embrace and obey them. IV. The doctrines formed by the obvious meaning of the Scriptures, are the only doctrines which have spread vital religion in the world. Those who heard the Apostles preach, and their successors through the two first centuries and the earlier parts of the third, were almost universally incapable of annexing any other meaning than the obvious one, to the declarations of the Scriptures. This is the only character given them, both by their friends and their enemies, and is therefore unquestionably their true character. It is hardly necessary to mention, because so well known and so universally acknowledged, either the vast multitude of these Christians or the prominent excellence of their character. In the numerous instances in which religion prevailed in the succeeding ages of the church, it prevailed solely by the preaching of the very same doctrines. This was true, particularly with regard to the prevalence of religion in Egypt, under Dionysius and Athanasius; in Africa, under Cyprian, Augustine, and Fulgentius; in Italy, under Ambrose, under the Gregorys; in the Lesser Asia, under St. Bernard; also in France, the numerous followers of Peter Waldo and of John Huss; those of Wickliffe also, and the very numerous Christians among the reformed in the various Protestant countries. To these may be added the numerous Christians found in this country, from its early settlement, and the vast multitude which, in many Protestant countries, between the years 1730 and 1760, became public professors of religion. Let every man employ himself in reading diligently ecclesiastical history, particularly that branch of it which records the prevalence of practical piety, and he will see irresistibly that, when these doctrines have been preached and believed, vital religion has flourished; when they have not, it has regularly decayed. Such has always been the fact heretofore; such is the fact at the present time. If I am asked on what ground I assert, that the persons of whom I have spoken were vitally religious, and that others were not, I answer, on that which the Scriptures have made the evidence of vital religion, the conduct of the respective classes of men. "By their fruits," says our Saviour, speaking of those who are not Christians, "shall ye know them." Those who have embraced these doctrines have, in a manner honourable to human nature, adorned the doctrine of God their Saviour, by bringing forth those fruits which, he declares, spring from evangelical repentance, faith, and holiness. Of this fact, as it respects the early ages of Christianity, there can be no debate, nor, it would seem, as it respects the reformers and their followers. There is as little reason to doubt it concerning the great body of Christians who have followed them, even their enemies themselves being judges. Even by those multitudes who have held the doctrines in question, they are daily declared to be truly religious, and placed among the best of mankind. On this subject, however, I cannot expatiate, but will conclude my observations concerning it by a quotation or two from distinguished adversaries of these doctrines. One of these, Robert Forsyth, Esq., a learned civilian, and who appears to have no great reverence for Revelation, says, "There is one remark which we think ourselves bound in "justice to make, although it appears to us to be some"what singular. It is this, that from the earliest ages, down "to our own days, if we consider the character of the an"cient Stoics, the Jewish Essenes, the modern Calvinists ❝and Jansenists, when compared with that of their antagonists, "the Epicureans, the Sadducees, the Arminians, and the Je"suits, we shall find that they have excelled, in no small degree, "in the practice of the most rigid and respectable virtues, and "have been the highest honour of their own ages, and the best "models for imitation to every age succeeding." Dr. Priestley also acknowledges, that "those who hold these "doctrines have less apparent conformity to the world, and "seem to have more of a real principle of religion, than his ❝own followers; and that those who, from a principle of religion, "ascribe more to God and less to man than other persons," (the distinguishing characteristic of these men,)" are men of the greatest elevation of piety." But if these doctrines have, and others have not, produced this mighty effect in the succes |