The necessary connection of these two, that if he rose from the dead, he was the Messiah; and if he rose not from the dead, he was not the Messiah; the chief priest and pharisees, that had prosecuted him to death, under stood very well: who therefore " came together unto " Pilate, saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver " said, whilst he was yet alive, After three days I will " rise again. Command, therefore, that the sepulchre " be made sure unto the third day, lest his disciples " come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the " people, " He is risen from the dead:" " so the last Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 341 " errour shall be worse than the first." The errour they here speak of, it is plain, was the opinion, that he was the Messiah. To stop that belief, which his miracles had procured him amongst the people, they had got him put to death; but if, after that, it should be believed, that he rose again from the dead, this demon stration, that he was the Messiah, would but establish what they had laboured to destroy by his death; since no one, who believed his resurrection, could doubt of his being the Messiah.
It is not at all therefore to be wondered, that his re surrection, his ascension, his rule and dominion, and his coming to judge the quick and the dead, which are characteristical marks of the Messiah, and belong pe culiarly to him, should sometimes in scripture be put alone, as sufficient descriptions of the Messiah; and the believing them of him put for believing him to be the Messiah. Thus, Acts x. our Saviour, in Peter's dis course to Cornelius, when he brought him the gospel, is described to be the Messiah, by his miracles, death, resurrection, dominion, and coming to judge the quick and the dead.
These, (which in my " Reasonableness of christiani- " ty," I have upon this ground taken the liberty to call concomitant articles,) where they are set alone for the faith to which salvation is promised, plainly signify the believing Jesus to be the Messiah, that fundamental article, which has the promise of life; and so give no foundation at all for what the unmasker says, in these words: " Here one article of faith, viz. the belief of " Christ's resurrection (because it is of so great import- " ance in Christianity) is only mentioned; but all the " rest must be supposed, because they are mentioned " in other places."
Answ. If all the rest be of absolute and indispensable necessity to be believed to make a man a Christian, all the rest are, every one of them, of equal importance. For things of equal necessity, to any end, are of equal importance to that end. But here the truth forced its way unawares from the unmasker: Our Saviour's resur rection, for the reason I have given, is truly of great 342 A Second Vindication of the importance in Christianity; so great, that his being, or not being the Messiah, stands or falls with it: so that these two important articles are inseparable, and in effect make but one. For, since that time> believe one, and you believe both; deny one of them, and you can believe neither. If the unmasker can show me any one of the articles in his list, which is not of this great im portance, mentioned alone, with a promise of salvation for believing it, I will grant him to have some colour for what he says here. But where is to be found in the scripture any such expression as this: if thou shalt be lieve with thy heart " the corruption and degeneracy " of human nature," thou shalt be saved? or the like. This place, therefore, out of the Romans, makes not for, but against his list of necessary articles. One of them, alone, he cannot show me any-where set down, with a supposition of the rest, as having salvation pro mised to it: though it be true, that that one, which alone is absolutely necessary to be superadded to the belief of one God, is, in divers places, differently ex pressed.
That which he subjoins, as a consequence of what he had said, is a farther proof of this: u And consequently, " says he, 'if we would give an impartial account of our " belief, we must consult those places: and they are " not altogether, but dispersed here and there. Where- " fore we must look them out, and acquaint ourselves " writh the several particulars, which make up our be- " lief, and render it intire and consummate."
Answ. Never was a man constanter to a loose way of talking. The question is only about articles necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian: and here he talks of the " several particulars which make up our " belief, and render it intire and consummate; " con founding, as he did before, essential and integral parts, which, it seems, he cannot distinguish. Our FaTfh is true and saving, when it is such as God, by the new covenant, requires it to be: but it is not intire and con summate, until we explicitly believe all the truths con tained in the word of God. For the whole revelation of truth in the scripture being the proper and intire Reasonableness of Christianity, <fyc.
object of faith, our faith cannot be intire and consum mate, until it be adequate to its proper object, which is the whole divine revelation contained in the scripture: and so, to make our faith intire and consummate, we must not look out those places, which, he says, are not altogether. To talk of looking out, and culling of places, is nonsense, where the whole scripture alone can " make up our belief, and render it intire and consum- " mate:" which no one, I think, can hope for, in this frail state of ignorance and errour. * To make the un- masker speak sense and to the purpose here, we must understand him thus: " That if we will give an impar- " tiai account " of the articles, that are necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, " we must con- " suit those places where they are; for they are not all " together, but dispersed here and there; wherefore we " must look them out," and acquaint ourselves with the several particulars, which make up the fundamental articles of our belief, and will render a catalogue of them intire and consummate. If his supposition be true, I grant his method to be reasonable, and upon that I join issue with him. Let him thus " give an " impartial account of our belief; let him acquaint us " with the several particulars which make up a " Christian's belief, and render it intire and consum- " mate." Until he has done this, let him not talk thus in the air of a method, that will not do: let him not reproach me, as he does, for not taking a course, by which he himself cannot do, what he reviles me for failing in. " But our hasty author," says he, " took " another course, and thereby deceived himself, and " unhappily deceived others." If it be so, I desire the unmasker to take the course he proposes, and thereby undeceive me and others; and " acquaint us with the " several particulars which make up a Christian's be- " lief, and render it intire and consummate; " for I am willing to be undeceived: but until he has done that, and shown us by the success of it, that his course is better, he cannot blame us for following that course we have done.
I come now to his fourth and last particular, p. 78, 344 A Second Vindication of the which, he says, is the main answer to the objection; and therefore I shall set it down in his own words, in- tire, as it stands together. " This," says he, " must " be born in our minds, that Christianity was erected " by degrees, according* to that prediction and promise " of our Saviour, that " the Spirit should teach them " all things." John xiv. 26. and that " he should " guide them into all truth." John xvi. 13. viz. " after his departure and ascension, when the Holy " Ghost was to be sent in a special manner, to en- " lighten men's minds, and to discover to them the " great mysteries of Christianity. This is to be noted by t us, as that which gives great light in the present case. " The discovery of the doctrines of the gospel was '' gradual. It was by certain steps that Christianity " climbed to its height. We are riot to think then, " that all the necessary doctrines of the Christian re- " ligion were clearly published to the world in our " Saviour's time. Not but that all that were necessary " for that time were published, but some which were " necessary for the succeeding one, were not then dis- " covered, or, at least, not fully. They had ordinarily " no belief, before Christ's death and resurrection, of '• those substantial articles, i. e. that he should die and " rise again: but we read in the Acts, and in the " epistles, that these were formal articles of faith after- " wards, and are ever since necessary to complete the " Christian belief. So as to other great verities, the " gospel increased by degrees, and was not perfect at " once. Which furnishes us with a reason why most " of the choicest and sublimest truths of Christianity are " to be met with in the epistles of the apostles, they " being such doctrines as were not clearly discovered " and opened in the Gospels and the Acts." Thus far the unmasker.
I thought hitherto, that the covenant of grace in Christ Jesus had been but one, immutably the same: but our unmasker here makes two, or I know not how many. For I cannot tell how to conceive, that the conditions of any covenant should be changed, and the covenant remain the same; every change of conditions, Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 345 in my apprehension, makes a new and another covenant. We are not to think, says the unmasker, " That all the " necessary doctrines of the Christian religion were " clearly published to the world in our Saviour's time; " not but that all that were necessary for that time were " published: but some, which were necessary for the <c succeeding one, were not then discovered, or, at least, " not fully." Answ. The unmasker, constant to him self, speaks here doubtfully, and cannot tell whether he should say, that the articles necessary to succeeding times, were discovered in our Saviour's time, or no; and therefore, that he may provide himself a retreat, in the doubt he is in, he says, " They were not clearly " published; they were not then discovered, or, at " least, not fully." But we must desire him to pull off his mask, and to that purpose, 1. I ask him how he can tell, that all the necessary doctrines were obscuredly published, or in part disco vered? For an obscure publishing, a discovery in part, is opposed to, and intimated in, " not clearly published, " not fully discovered." And, if a clear and full disco very be all that he denies to them, I ask, XXXVIT. Which those fundamental articles are, " which were obscurely published," but not fully discovered in our Saviour's time?
And next I shall desire him to tell me, XXXVIII. Whether there are any articles necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, that were not discovered at all in our Saviour's time: and which they are?
If he cannot show these distinctly, it is plain he talks at random about them; but has no clear and distinct conception of those that were published, or not publish ed, clearly or obscurely discovered in our Saviour's time. It was necessary for him to say something for those his pretended necessary articles, which are not 346 A Second Vindication of the to be found any-where proposed in the preaching of our Saviour and his apostles, to their yet unbelieving audi tors; and therefore, he says, " We are not to think all " the necessary doctrines of the Christian religion were " clearly published to the world in our Saviour's time.'* But he barely says it, without giving any reason, why " we are not to think so." It is enough that it is ne cessary to his hypothesis. He says, " we are not to think so," and we are presently bound not to think so. Else, from another man, that did not usurp an authority over our thoughts, it would have required some reason to make them think, that something more was re quired to make a man a Christian after, than in our Saviour's time. For, as I take it, it is not a very pro bable, much less a self-evident proposition, to be re ceived without proof, that there was something neces sary for that time to make a man a Christian, and something more, that was necessary to make a Christian in the succeeding time.
However, since this great master says, " we ought * to think so," let us in obedience think so as well as we can; until he vouchsafes to give us some reason to think, that there was more required to be believed to make a man a Christian, in the succeeding time, than in our Saviour's. This,, instead of removing, does but increase the difficulty: for if more were necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian after our Saviour's time, than was during his life; how comes it, that no more was proposed by the apostles, in their preaching to unbelievers, for the making them Christians, after our Saviour's death, than there was before; even this one article, " that he was the Messiah? " For I desire the unmasker to show me any of those articles men tioned in his list, (except the resurrection and ascension of our Saviour, which were intervening matters of fact, evidencing him to be the Messiah,) that were proposed by the apostles, after our Saviour's time, to their unbe lieving hearers, to make them Christians. This one doctrine, " That Jesus was the Messiah/' was that which was proposed in our Saviour's time to be believ ed, as necessary to make a man a Christian: the same Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 347 doctrine was, likewise, what was proposed afterwards, in the preaching of the apostles to unbelievers, to make them Christians.
I grant this was more clearly proposed after, than in our Saviour's time: but in both of them it was all that was proposed to the believers of one God, to make them Christians. Let him show, that there were any other proposed in, or after our Saviour's time, to be be lieved to make unbelievers Christians. If he means, by " necessary articles published to the world," the other doctrines contained in the epistles; I grant, they are all of them necessary articles, to be believed by every Christian, as far as he understands them. But I deny, that they were proposed to those they were writ to, as necessary to make them Christians, for this demon strative reason; because they were Christians already. For example, Many doctrines proving, and explain- ing, and giving a farther light into the gospel, are published in the epistles to the Corinthians and Thes- salonians. These are all of divine authority, and none of them may be disbelieved by any one who is a Christian; but yet what was proposed or published to both the Corinthians and Thessalonians, to make them Christians was only this doctrine, " That Jesus was the " Messiah: " as may be seen, Acts xvii. xviii. This, then, was the doctrine necessary to make men Christians, in our Saviour's time; and this the only doctrine neces sary to make unbelievers Christians, after our Saviour's time. The only difference was, that it was more clearly proposed after, than before his ascension: the reason whereof has been sufficiently explained. But any other doctrine but this, proposed clearly or obscurely, in or after our Saviour's time, as necessary to be believed to make unbelievers Christians, that remains yet to be shown.
When the unmasker speaks of the doctrines that were necessary for the succeeding time after our Saviour^ he is in doubt, whether he should say they were, or were not discovered, in our Saviour's time; and how far they were then discovered: and therefore he says, " Some of them were not then discovered, or at least, 348 A Second Vindication of the " not fully." We must here excuse the doubtfulness of his talking, concerning the discovery of his other ne cessary articles. For how could he say, they were dis covered, or not discovered, clearly or obscurely, fully or not fully; when he does not yet know them all, nor can tell us, what those necessary articles are? If he does know them, let him give us a list of them, and then we shall see easily, whether they were at all published or discovered in our Saviour's time. If there are some of them that were not at all discovered in our Saviour's time, let him speak it out, and leave shifting: and if some of those that were " not necessary for our Sa- " viour's time, but for the succeeding one only," were yet discovered in our Saviour's time, why were they not necessary to be believed in that time? But the truth is, he knows not what these doctrines, necessary for suc ceeding times, are: and therefore can say nothing po sitively about their discovery. And for those that he has set down, as soon as he shall name any one of them to be of the number of those, " not necessary for our Sa- " viour's time, but necessary for the succeeding one," it will presently appear, either that it was discovered in our Saviour's time; and then it was as necessary for his time as the succeeding; or else, that it was not disco vered in his time, nor to several converts after his time, before they were made Christians; and therefore it was no more necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian in the succeeding, than it was in our Saviour's time. However, general positions and distinctions without a foundation serve for show, and to beguile un wary and inattentive readers.
2. Having thus minded him, that the question is about articles of faith, necessary to be explicitly and distinctly believed to make a man a Christian; I then, in the next place, demand of him to tell me, XXXIX. Whether or no all the articles, necessary now to be distinctly and explicitly believed, to make any man a Christian, were distinctly and ex plicitly published or discovered in our Saviour's time?
Reasonableness of Christianity, $$c. 349 And then I shall desire to know of him, XL. A reason why they were not.
Those that he instances in, of Christ's death and re surrection, will not help him one jot; for they are not new doctrines revealed, new mysteries discovered; but matters of fact, which happen to our Saviour in their due time, to complete in him the character and predic tions of the Messiah, and demonstrate him to be the Deliverer promised. These are recorded of him by the Spirit of God in holy writ, but are no more necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, than any other part of divine revelation, but as far as they have an im mediate connexion with his being the Messiah, and cannot be denied without denying him to be the Mes siah; and therefore this article of his resurrection, (which supposes his death,) and such other propositions as are convertible with his being the Messiah, are, as they very well may be, put for his being the Messiah; and, as I have showed, proposed to be believed in the place of it.
All that is revealed in scripture has a consequential necessity of being believed by all those, to whom it is proposed; because it is of divine authority, one part as much as another. And, in this sense, all the divine truths in the inspired writings are fundamental, and ne cessary to be believed. But then this will destroy our unmasker's select number of fundamental articles; and " the choicest and sublimest truths of Christianity," which, he tells us, " are to be met with in the Epistles," will not be more necessary to be believed than any, which he may think the commonest or meanest truths in any of the Epistles or the Gospels. Whatsoever part of divine revelation, whether revealed before, or in, or after our Saviour's time; whether it contains (according to the distinction of our unmasker's nice palate) choice or common, sublime or not sublime truths, is necessary to be believed by every one to whom it is proposed, as far as he understands what is proposed. But God, by Jesus Christ, has entered into a covenant of grace with man- 350 A Second Vindication of the kind; a covenant of faith; instead of that of works, wherein some truths are absolutely necessary to be ex plicitly believed by them to make men Christians; and therefore those truths are necessary to be known and consequently necessary to be proposed to them to make men Christians. This is peculiar to them to make men Christians. For all men, as men, are under a ne cessary obligation to believe what God proposes to them to be believed; but there being- certain distinguishing truths, which belong to the covenant of the gospel, which if men know not, they cannot be Christians; and they being, some of them, such as cannot be known without being proposed; those, and those only, are the necessary doctrines of Christianity I speak of; without a knowledge of, and assent to which, no man can be a Christian.
To come therefore to a clear decision of this contro versy, I desire the un masker to tell me, XLT. What those doctrines are, which are absolutely necessary to be proposed to every man to make him a Christian?
XLII. 1.- Whether they are all the truths of divine revelation contained in the Bible?
For I grant his argument, (which in another place he uses for some of them, and truly belongs to them all,) viz. that they were revealed and written there, on pur pose to be believed, and that it is indispensably neces sary for Christians to believe them.
XLIII. 2. Or, whether it be only that one article, of Jesus being the Messiah, which the history of our Saviour and his apostles preaching has, with such a peculiar distinction, every- where proposed?
XLIV. 3. Or, whether the doctrines necessary to be proposed to every one to make him a Christian, be any set of truths between the two?
Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 351 And if he says this latter, then I must ask him, XLV. What they are? that we may see, why those, rather than any other, contained in the New Tes tament, are necessary to be proposed to every man to make him a Christian; and, if they are not every one proposed to him, and assented to by him, he cannot be a Christian.
The unmasker makes a great noise, and hopes to give his unwary, though well-meaning readers, odd thoughts, and strong impressions against my book, by declaiming against my lank faith, and my narrowing of Christianity to one article; which, as he says, is the next way to reduce it to none. But when it is considered, it will be found, that it is he that narrows Christianity. The unmasker, as if he were arbiter and dispenser of the oracles of God, takes upon him to single out some texts of scripture; and, where the words of scripture will not serve his turn, to impose on us his interpretations and deductions, as necessary articles of faith; which is, in effect, to make them of equal authority with the unquestionable word of God. And thus, partly in the words of scripture, and partly in words of his own, he makes a set of fundamentals, with an exclusion of all the other truths delivered by the Spirit of God, in the Bible; though all the rest be of the same divine autho rity and original, and ought therefore all equally, as far as they are understood by every Christian, to be be lieved. I tell him, and I desire him to take notice of it, God has no-where given him an authority thus to garble the inspired writings of the holy scriptures.
Every part of it is his word, and ought, every part of it, to be believed by every Christian man, according as God shall enable him to understand it. It ought not to be narrowed to the cut of the un masker's peculiar system; it is a presumption of the highest nature, for him thus to pretend, according to his own fancy, to establish a set of fundamental articles. This is to diminish the authority of the word of God, to set up his own; and create a reverence to his system, from which the several 352 A Second Vindication of the parts of divine revelation are to receive their weight, dignity, and authority. Those passages of holy writ which suit with that, are fundamental, choice, sublime, and necessary: the rest of the scripture (as of no great moment) is not fundamental, is not necessary to be be lieved, may be neglected, or must be tortured, to comply with an analogy of faith of his own making. But though he pretends to a certain set of fundamentals, yet to show the vanity and impudence of that pretence, he cannot tell us what they are; and therefore in vain contends for a creed he knows not, and is yet no-where. He neither does, and which is more, I tell him, he never can, give us a collection of his fundamentals gathered upon his principles, out of the scripture, with the re jection of all the rest, as not fundamental. He does not observe the difference there is between what is ne cessary to be believed by every man to make him a Christian, and what is required to be believed by every Christian. The first of these is what, by the covenant of the gospel, is necessary to be known, and conse quently to be proposed to every man, to make him a Christian: the latter is no less than the whole revelation of God, all the divine truths contained in holy scrip ture: which every Christian man is under a necessity to believe, so far as it shall please God, upon his serious and constant endeavours, to enlighten his mind to un derstand them.