66 CXI. And upon this confideration it is, that our SAVI- SERM. OUR doth fo aggravate the impenitency and unbelief of the Jews, because it was in oppofition to all the advantages of knowledge, which can be imagined to be afforded to mankind, John xv. 22, 23, 24. "If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had fin;" that is, in comparison their fin had been much more excufable; "but now they "have no cloke for their fin." "He that hateth me, "hateth my FATHER alfo: If I had not done 66 among them the works which none other man "did, they had not had fin; but now have they "both feen, and hated both me, and my FATHER." How is that? Our SAVIOUR means, that they had now finned against all the advantages of knowing the will of God, that mankind could poffibly have: at once oppofing natural light, which was the dif penfation of the FATHER; and the cleareft revelation of God's will; in the difpenfation of the gofpel by his Son; "now have they both feen and "hated both me and my FATHER." The two remaining obfervations I fhall referve to another opportunity. SERMON The danger of all known fin, both from the light of nature and revelation. SERM. The fe cond fer mon on this text. ROM. i. 18, 19. For the wrath of GOD is revealed from heaven, against all ungodliness and unrighteoufnefs of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of GOD is manifeft in them, for God hath fhewed it unto them. I Have handled four of the obfervations which I raised from thefe words; and fhall now proceed to the other two that remain. The fifth obfervation was, that the natural knowledge which men have of GoD, if they live contrary to it, is a fufficient evidence of " their holding the "truth of God in unrighteousness." For the reafon why the apoftle chargeth them with this, is, "be"cause that which may be known of GoD is mani"feft, in that God hath fhewed it unto them." There is a natural knowledge of God, and of the duty we owe to him, which the apoftle calls to yousór TO," that of GoD which is obvious to be "known" by the light of nature, and is as much as is abfolutely neceffary for us to know: There is fomething of GOD that is incomprehensible, and beyond the reach of our understandings; but his being and effential perfections may be known, which he calls his "eternal power and godhead; these he tells CXII. tells us "are clearly feen, being understood by the S ERM. things which are made;" that is, the creation of the world is a plain demonstration to men, of the TO being and power of GOD; and if fo, then "GOD "is naturally known to men;" the contrary whereof Socinus pofitively maintains, tho' therein he be forfaken by moft of his followers; an opinion, in my judgment, very unworthy of one, who, not without reafon, was esteemed fo great a master of reafon; and (tho' I believe he did not fee it) undermining the strongest and fureft foundation of all religion, which, when the natural notions of God are once taken away, will certainly want its beft fupport., Befides that by denying any natural knowledge of God, and his effential perfections, he freely gives away one of the most plaufible grounds of opposing the doctrine of the Trinity. But because this is a matter of great confequence, and he was a great man, and is not to be confuted by contempt, but by better reafon, if it can be found; I will confider his reafons for this opinion, and return a particular anfwer to them. First, he says that if the knowledge of GOD were natural, it would not be of faith; but the apoftle fays, that " we must believe that he is." The force of which argument, if it have any, lies in this, that the object of faith is divine revelation, and therefore we cannot be faid to believe what we naturally know. The schoolmen indeed fay fo; but the fcripture ufeth the word faith more largely, for a real perfuafion of any thing, whether grounded upon sense, or reafon, or divine revelation. And our SAVIOUR'S speech to Thomas," because thou haft feen, thou haft believed," does fufficiently inti, 8 mate, SERM. mate, that a man may believe what he fees; and CXII. if fo, what fhould hinder, but that a man may be faid to believe what he naturally knows; that is, be really perfuaded that there is a GOD from natural light? Secondly, his next argument is, because the fame apostle concludes Enoch to have believed GOD, because he pleafed GoD," and without faith it is "impoffible to please him." From whence he fays it is certain that men may be without this belief, which if it be natural they cannot. Indeed if the apoftle had faid, that whoever believes a GoD, muft of neceffity obey and please him, then the inference had been good, that all men do not naturally believe a GOD, because it is certain they do not please him; but it is not good the other way, no more than if a man should argue thus, that because whoever acts reasonably, must be endowed with reafon, therefore men are not naturally endowed with reafon. For as men may naturally be endowed with reafon, and yet not always make ufe of it; fo men may naturally know and believe a Gon, and yet not be careful to please him. His third argument is, that the fcripture fays that there are fome that do not believe a God, for which he cites that of David, "the fool hath faid in his "heart there is no God;" which certainly proves, that bad men live fo, as if they believed there were no God; nay, it may further import, that they endeavour as much as they can, to ftifle and extinguifh the belief of a GoD in their minds, and would gladly perfuade themselves there is no God, becaufe it is convenient for them there fhould be none; and whether David meant fo or not, it is very pro bable CXII. bable that fome may arrive to that height of im- SER M. piety, as for a time at least, and in fome moods, to disbelieve a GoD, and to be very confident of the arguments on that fide. But what then? is the knowledge and belief of a Gop therefore not natural to mankind? nature itself, as conftant and uniform as it is, admits of fome irregularities and exceptions, in effects that are merely natural, much more in those which have fomething in them that is voluntary, and depends upon the good or bad ufe of our reafon and understanding; and there is no arguing from what is monftrous, against what is natural. It is natural for men to have five fingers upon a hand, and yet fome are born otherwife: but in voluntary agents, that which is natural may be perverted, and in a great measure extinguished in fome particular inftances; fo that there is no force at all in this objection. His fourth and last argument is, that there have not only been particular perfons, but whole nations who have had no fenfe, nor fo much as fufpicion of a deity. This I confefs were of great force, if it were true; and for the proof of this, he produceth the inftance of Brafil in America. But I utterly deny the matter of fact and history, and challenge any man to bring good teftimony, not only of any nation, but of any city in the world, that ever were profeffed atheists. I know this was affirmed of fome part of Brafil, by fome of the first discoverers, who yet at the fame time owned, that these very people did moft exprefly believe the immortality of the foul, and the rewards and punishments of another life; opinions which no man can well reconcile with the denial I and |