Mr. B — d begins his Animadversions with this re mark, that our creed-maker had said, That " I give it " over and over again in these formal words, viz. That " nothing is required to be believed by any Christian " man but this, That Jesus is the Messiah.5' To which Mr. B — d replies, p. 4, in these words: " Though I " have read over the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. " with some attention, I have not observed those 400 A Second Vindication of the " formal words in any part of that book, nor any " words that are capable of that construction; provided " they be considered with the relation they have to, and " the manifest dependence they have on, what goes be- " fore, or what follows after them/' BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.
Whether it was because he would not, or because he could not, let the reader judge. But this is down upon his score already, and it is expected he should answer to it, or else confess that he cannot. And that there may be a fair decision of this dispute, I expect the same usage from him, that he should set down any proposition of his I have not answered to, and call on me for an an swer, if I can; and if I cannot, I promise him to own it in print.
The creed-maker had said, " That it is most evident to " any thinking and considerate person, that I purposely " omit the epistolary writings of the apostles because " they are fraught with other fundamental doctrines, " besides that which I mention."
To this Mr. B— d answers, p. 5, That if by " funda- " mental articles, Mr. Edwards means here, all the " propositions delivered in the epistles, concerning just " those particular heads, he [Mr. Edwards] had here " mentioned; it lies upon him to prove, that Jesus " Christ hath made it necessary, that every person must " have an explicit knowledge and belief of all those " before he can be a Christian."
BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.
And yet, without an answer to it, all his talk about fundamentals, and those which he pretended to set down in that place, under the name of fundamentals, will signify nothing in the present case; wherein, by fundamentals, were meant such propositions which every person must necessarily have an explicit knowledge and belief of, before he can be a Christian.
Mr. B — d, in the same place, p. 6, 7, very truly and pertinently adds, " That it did not pertain to [my] " undertaking to inquire what doctrines, either in the " Epistles, or the Evangelists and the Acts, were of ** greatest moment to be understood by them who are Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 401 " Christians; but what was necessary to be known and " believed to a person's being- a Christian. For there " are many important doctrines, both in the Gospels, " and in the Acts, besides this, * Thai Jesus is the " ' Messiah/ But how many soever the doctrines be, " which are taught in the epistles, if there be no doc- " trine besides this, * That Jesus is the Messiah,' " taught there as necessary to be believed to make a " man a Christian; all the doctrines taught there will (: not make any thing against what this author has as- " serted, nor against the method he hath observed; " especially, considering we have an account, in the " Acts of the apostles, of what those persons, by whom " the epistles were writ, did teach, as necessary to be " believed to people's being Christians."
This, and what Mr. B — d subjoins, " That it was not " my design to give an abstract of any of the inspired " books," is so true, and has so clear reason in it, that any, but this writer, would have thought himself con cerned to have answered something to it.
BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.
It not being, it seems, a creed- maker's business to convince men's understanding by reason; but to im pose on their belief by authority; or, where that is wanting, by falsehood and bawling. And to such Mr. Bold observes well, p. 8, " That if I had given the like " account of the epistles, that would have been as little " satisfactory as what I have done already, to those who " are resolved not to distinguish * betwixt what is ne- " ' cessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, and " ' those articles which are to be believed by those who " ' are Christians,' as they can attain to know that Christ " hath taught them."
This distinction the creed-maker, no-where that I remember, takes any notice of: unless it be p. 255, where he has something relating hereunto, which we shall consider, when we come to that place. I shall now go on to show what Mr. Bold has said, to which he answers not.
Mr. BOLD farther tells him, p. 10, that if he will prove any thing in opposition to the Reasonableness of 402 A Second Vindication of the Christianity, &c. it must be this: " That Jesus Christ " and his apostles have taught, that the belief of some " one article, or certain number of articles distinct from " this, ' That Jesus is the Messiah/ either as exclusive " of, or in conjunction with, the belief of this article, " doth constitute and make a person a Christian: but " that the belief of this, that Jesus is the Messiah alone, " doth not make a man a Christian."
BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards IRREFRAGABLY AN SWERS NOTHING.
Mr. BOLD also, p. 10, charges him with his falsely accusing me in these words: " He pretends to contend " for one single article, with the exclusion of all the rest, " for this reason; because all men ought to understand " their religion." And again, where he says,, I am at this, viz. " That we must not have any point of doctrine " in our religion, that the mob doth not, at the very " first naming of it, perfectly understand and agree " to: " Mr. Bold has quoted my express words to the contrary.
BUT TO THIS this unanswerable gentleman AN SWERS NOTHING.
But if he be such a mighty disputant, that nothing can stand in his way; I shall expect his direct answer to it among those other propositions which I have set down to his score, and I require him to prove, if he can.
The creed-maker spends above four pages of his Re flections, in a great stir who is the author of those ani madversions he is reflecting on. To which I tell him, it matters not to a lover of truth, or a confuter of errours, who was the author; but what they contain. He who makes such a deal to do about that which is nothing to the question, shows he has but little mind to the argu ment; that his hopes are more in the recommendation of names, and prejudice of parties, than in the strength of his reasons, and the goodness of his cause. A lover of truth follows that, whoever be for or against it; and can suffer himself to pass by no argument of his adver sary, without taking notice of it, either in allowing its force, or giving it a fair answer. Were the creed- maker capable of giving such an evidence as this of his Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 403 love of truth, he would not have passed over the twenty first pages of Mr. Bold's Animadversions in silence. The falsehoods that are therein charged upon him, would have required an answer of him, if he could have given any; and I tell him, he must give an answer, or con fess the falsehoods.
In his 255th page, he comes to take notice of these words of Mr. Bold, in the 21st page of his Animadver sions, viz. " That a convert to Christianity, or a chris- * tian, must necessarily believe as many articles as he " shall attain to know, that Christ Jesus hath taught." " Which, says the creed-maker, wholly invalidates what " he had said before, in these words," viz. " That Jesus " Christ and his apostles did not teach any thing as ' necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, ' but only this one proposition, That Jesus of Nazareth " was the Messiah." The reason he gives to show that the former of these propositions (in Mr. Bold) invali dates the latter, and that the animadverter contradicts himself, stands thus: " For, says he, if a Christian must " give assent to all the articles taught by our Saviour " in the gospel, and that necessarily; then all those " propositions reckoned up in my late discourse, being " taught by Christ, or his apostles, are necessary to be " believed." Ans. And what, I beseech you, becomes of the rest of the propositions taught by Christ, or his apostles, which you have not reckoned up in your late discourse? Are not they necessary to be believed, " if " a Christian must give an assent to ALL the articles " taught by our Saviour and his apostles? " Sir, if you will argue right from that antecedent, it must stand thus: " If a Christian must give an assent to " ALL the articles taught by our Saviour and his apo- " sties, and that necessarily; " then all the propositions in the New Testament, taught by Christ, or his apostles^ are necessary to be believed. This consequence I grant to be true, and necessarily to follow from that antece dent, and pray make your best of it: but withal re member, that it puts an utter end to your select number of fundamentals, and makes all the truths delivered in 404 A Second Vindication of the the New Testament necessary to be explicitly believed by every Christian.
But, sir, I must take notice to you, that if it be un certain, whether he that writ the Animadversions, be the same person that preached the sermon, yet it is very visible, that it is the very same person that reflects on both; because he here again uses the same trick, in an swering in the Animadversions the same thing that had been said in the sermon, viz. by pretending to argue from words as Mr. Bold's, when Mr. Bold has said no such thing. The proposition you argue from here is this: (( If a Christian must give his assent to all the articles " taught by our Saviour, and that necessarily." But Mr. Bold says no such thing. His words, as set down by yourself, are: " A Christian must necessarily believe " as many articles as he shall attain to know that Christ " Jesus hath taught." And is there no difference be tween " ALL that Christ Jesus hath taught," and " AS " MANY as any one shall attain to know that Christ " Jesus hath taught? " There is so great a difference between these two, that one can scarce think even such a creed-maker could mistake it. For one of them ad mits all those to be Christians, who, taking Jesus for the Messiah, their Lord and King, sincerely apply themselves to understand and obey his doctrine and law, and to believe all that they understand to be taught by him: the other shuts out, if not all mankind, yet nine hundred ninety- nine of a thousand, of those who profess themselves Christians, from being really so. For he speaks within compass, who says there is not one of a thousand, if there be any one man at all, who explicitly knows and believes all that our Saviour and his apostles taught, i. e. all that is delivered in the New Testament, in the true sense that it is there intended. For if giving assent to it, in any sense, will serve the turn, our creed-maker can have no exception against socinians, papists, lutherans, or any other, who, acknowledging the scripture to be the word of God, do yet oppose his system.
But the creed-maker goes on, p. 255, and endeavours to prove that what is necessary to be believed by every Reasonableness of Christianity 9 <$c. 405 Christian, is necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, in these words: " But he will say, the belief " of those propositions makes not a man a Christian. " Then, I say, they are not necessary and indispensable; " for what is absolutely necessary in Christianity, is " absolutely requisite to make a man a Christian."
Ignorance, or something worse, makes our creed- maker always speak doubtfully or obscurely, whenever he pretends to argue; for here " absolutely necessary " in Christianity," either signifies nothing, but absolutely necessary to make a man a Christian; and then it is proving the same proposition, by the same proposition: or else has a very obscure and doubtful signification. For, if I ask him, Whether it be absolutely necessary in Christianity, to obey every one of our Saviour's com mands, What will he answer me? If he answers, No; I ask him, Which of our Saviour's commands is it not, in Christianity, absolutely necessary to obey? If he an swers, YES; then I tell him, by this rule, there are no Christians: because there is no one that does in all things obey all our Saviour's commands, and therein fails to perform what is absolutely necessary in Christianity; and so, by his rule, is no Christian. If he answers, Sincere endeavour to obey, is all that is absolutely necessary; I reply, And so sincere endeavour to understand, is all that is absolutely necessary: neither perfect obedience, nor perfect understanding, is absolutely necessary in Christianity.
But his proposition, being put in terms clear, and not loose and fallacious, should stand thus, viz. " What is " absolutely necessary to every Christian, is absolutely " requisite to make a man a Christian." But then I deny, that he can infer from Mr. Bold's words, that those propositions (i. e. which he has set down as funda mental, or necessary to be believed) are absolutely ne cessary to be believed by every Christian. For that in dispensable necessity Mr. Bold speaks of, is not abso lute, but conditional. His words are, " A Christian " must believe as many articles, as he shall attain to " know that Jesus Christ hath taught." So that he places the indispensable necessity of believing, upon the 406 A Second Vindication of the condition of attaining to know that Christ taught so. An endeavour to know what Jesus Christ taught, Mr. B — d says truly, is absolutely necessary to every one who is a Christian: and to believe what he has attained to know that Jesus Christ taught, that also, he says, is absolutely necessary to every Christian. But all this granted, (as true it is,) it still remains (and eternally will remain) to be proved from this, (which is all that Mr. Bold says,) that something else is absolutely required to make a man a Christian, besides the unfeigned taking Jesus to be the Messiah, his King and Lord; and accordingly, a sincere resolution to obey and believe all that he commanded and taught.
The gaoler. Acts xvi. 30, in answer to his question, " What he should do to be saved? " was answered, " That he should believe in the Lord Jesus Christ." And the text says, that the gaoler " took them the " same hour of the night and washed their stripes, and " was baptized, he and all his, straightway." Now, I will ask our creed-maker, whether St. Paul, in speaking to him the word of the Lord, proposed and explained to him all those propositions, and fundamental heads of doctrine, which our creed-maker has set down as neces sary to be believed to make a man a Christian? Let it be considered the gaoler was a heathen, and one that seems to have no more sense of religion or humanity, than those of that calling use to have: for he had let them alone under the pain of their stripes, without any remedy j or so much as the ease of washing them, from the day before, until after his conversion; which was not until after midnight. And can any one think, that between his asking what he should do to be saved, and his being baptized, which, the text says, was the same hour, and straightway; there was time enough for St. Paul and Silas, to explain to him all the creed-maker's articles, and make such a man as that, and all his house, understand the creed-maker's whole system; especially, since we hear nothing of it in the conversion of these, or any others, who were brought into the faith, in the whole history of the preaching of our Saviour and the apostles? Now let me ask the creed-maker, whether Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 407 the gaoler was not a Christian, when he was baptized; and whether, if he had then immediately died, he had not been saved, without the belief of any one article more, than what Paul and Silas had then taught him? Whence it follows, that what was then proposed to him to be believed, (which appears to be nothing, but that Jesus was the Messiah,) was all that was absolutely ne cessary to be believed to make him a Christian: though this hinders not, but that afterwards it might be ne cessary for him, indispensably necessary, to believe other articles, when he attained to the knowledge that Christ had taught them. And the reason of it is plain: because the knowing that Christ hath taught any thing, and the not receiving it for true (which is believing it,) is inconsistent with the believing him to be the Messiah, sent from God to enlighten and save the world. Every word of divine revelation is absolutely and indispensably necessary to be believed by every Christian, as soon as he comes to know it to be taught by our Saviour, or his apostles, or to be of divine revelation. But yet this is far enough from making it absolutely necessary to every Christian, to know every text in the scripture, much less to under stand every text in the scripture; and least of all, to understand it as the creed-maker is pleased to put his sense upon it.
This the good creed-maker either will not, or cannot understand; but gives us a list of articles culled out of the scripture by his own authority, and tells us, those are absolutely necessary to be believed by every one, to make him a Christian. For what is of absolute neces sity in Christianity, as those, he says, are, he tells us, is absolutely requisite to make a man a Christian. But when he is asked, Whether these are all the articles of absolute necessity to be believed to make a man a Chris tian? this worthy divine, that takes upon himself to be a successor of the apostles, cannot tell. And yet, having taken upon himself also to be a creed-maker, he must suffer himself to be called upon for it again and again, until he tells us what is of absolute necessity to be believed to make a man a Christian, or confess that he cannot.
408 A Second Vindication of the In the mean time, I take the liberty to say, that every proposition delivered in the New Testament by our Sa viour, or his apostles, and so received by any Christian as of divine revelation, is of as absolute necessity to be as sented to by him, in the sense he understands it to be taught by them, as any one of those propositions enume rated by the creed-maker: and if he thinks otherwise I shall desire him to prove it. The reason whereof is this, that in divine revelation, the ground of faith being the only authority of the proposer: where that is the same, there is no difference in the obligation or measure of be lieving. Whatever the Messiah, that came from God, taught, is equally to be believed by every one who re ceives him as the Messiah, as soon as he understands what it was he taught. There is no such thing as garbling his doctrine, and making one part of it more necessary to be believed than another, when it is understood. His saying is, and must be, of unquestionable authority to all that receive him as their heavenly King; and carries with it an equal obligation of assent to all that he says as true. But since nobody can explicitly assent to any proposition of our Saviour's as true, but in the sense he understands our Saviour to have spoken it in; the same authority of the Messiah, his King, obliges every one absolutely and in dispensably to believe every part of the New Testament in that sense he understands it: for else he rejects the authority of the deliverer, if he refuses his assent to it in that sense which he is persuaded it was delivered in. But the taking him for the Messiah, his King and Lord, lay ing upon every one who is his subject, an obligation to endeavour to know his will in all things; every true Christian is under an absolute and indispensable neces sity, by being his subject, to study the scriptures with an unprejudiced mind, according to that measure of time, opportunity, and helps, which he has; that in these sa cred writings, he may find what his Lord and Master hath by himself, or by the mouths of his apostles, re quired of him, either to be believed or done.
The creed-maker, in the following page, 256, hath these words: " It is worth the reader's observing, that ** notwithstanding I had in twelve pages together (viz.
Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 409 " from the eighth to the twentieth) proved, that several " propositions are necessary to be believed by us, in " order to our being Christians; yet this sham-animad- " verter attends not to any one of the particulars which " I had mentioned, nor offers any thing against them; " but only, in a lumping way, dooms them all in those " magisterial words: " I do not see any proof he pro- " duces," p. 21. This is his wonderful way of con- " futing me, by pretending that he cannot see any " proof in what I allege: and all the world must be led " by his eyes."
Answ. " It is worth the reader's observing," that the creed-maker does not reply to what Mr. Bold has said to him, as we have already seen, and shall see more as we go on; and therefore he has little reason to com plain of him, for not having answered enough. Mr. Bold did well to leave that which was an insignificant lump, so as it was, together; for it is no wonderful thing not to see any proof, where there is no proof. There is indeed, in those pages the creed-maker men tions, much confidence, much assertion, a great many questions asked, and a great deal said after his fashion: but for a proof, I deny there is any one. And if what I have said in another place already, does not con vince him of it, I challenge him, with all his eyes, and those of the world to boot, to find out, in those twelve renowned pages, one proof. Let him set down the proposition, and his proof of its being absolutely and indispensably necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian; and I too will join with him in his testi monial of himself, that he is irrefragable. But I must tell him before-hand, talking a great deal loosely will not do it.
Mr. Bold and I say we cannot see any proof in those twelve pages: the way to make us see, or to convince the world that we are blind, is to single out one proof out of that wood of words there, which you seem to take for arguments, and set it down in a syllogism, which is the fair trial of a proof or no proof. You have, indeed, a syllogism in the 23d page; but that is not in those twelve pages you mention. Besides, I 410 A Second Vindication of the have showed in another place, what that proves; to which I refer you.
In answer to the creed-maker's question, about his other fundamentals found in the epistles: " Why did " the apostles write these doctrines? Was it not, that " those they writ to, might give their assent to them?" Mr. Bold. p. 22, replies: " But then it may be asked " again, Were not those persons Christians to whom the " apostles writ these doctrines, and whom they required " to assent to them? Yes, verily. And if so, What " was it that made them Christians before their assent " to these doctrines was required? If it were any thing " besides their believing Jesus to be the Messiah, it " ought to be instanced in, and made out."
BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.
The next thing in controversy between Mr. Bold and the creed-maker, (for I follow Mr. B — d's order,) is about a matter of fact, viz. Whether the creed-maker has proved, " that Jesus Christ and his apostles have " taught, that no man can be a Christian, or shall be " saved, unless he has an explicit knowledge of all " those things, which have an immediate respect to " the occasion, author, way, means, and issue of our " salvation, and which are necessary for the knowing " the true nature and design of it? " This, Mr. Bold, p. 24, tells him, " he has not done/' To this the creed- maker replies, p. 258.
" And yet the reader may satisfy himself, that this is " the very thing that I had been proving just before, " and, indeed, all along in the foregoing chapter/' Answ. There have been those who have been seven years proving a thing, which at last they could not do; and I give you seven years to prove this proposition, which you should there have proved; and I must add to your score here, viz.
LII. That Jesus Christ, or his apostles, have taught, that no man can be a Christian, or can be saved, unless he hath an explicit knowledge of all these things which have an immediate respect to the occa sion, author, way, means, and issue of our salvation, Reasonableness of Christianity, S$c. 411 and which are necessary for our knowing the true nature and design of it.
Nor must the poor excuse, of saying, it was not necessary " to add any farther medium, and proceed " to another syllogism, because you had secured that " proposition before;" go for payment. If you had secured it, as you say, it had been quite as easy, arid much for your credit, to have produced the proof whereby you had secured it, than to say you had done it; and thereupon to reproach Mr. Bold with heed- lessness; and to tell the world, that " he cares not " what he saith." The rule of fair dispute is, indis- " pensably to prove, where any thing is denied. To evade this is shuffling: and he that, instead of it, an swers with ill language, in my country, is called a foul- mouthed wrangler.
To the creed-maker's exception to my demand, about the actual belief of all his fundamentals in his new creed, Mr. Bold asks, p. 24, " Whether a man can be- " lieve particular propositions, and not actually believe " them?"
BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.
Mr. Bold, p. 25, farther acknowledges the creed- maker's fundamental propositions to " be in the bible; " and that they are for this purpose there, that they " might be believed:" and so, he saith, " is every other " proposition which is taught in our bibles." But asks, " How will it thence follow, that no man can be a " Christian, until he particularly know, and actually as- " sent to every proposition in our bibles?'* BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.
From p. 26 to 30, Mr. Bold shows, that the creed- maker's reply concerning my not gathering of funda mentals out of the epistles is nothing to the purpose: and this he demonstratively proves.
AND TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.
The creed-maker had falsely said, That " I bring no " tidings of an evangelical faith; " and thence very readily and charitably infers: " Which gives us to w understand, that he verily believes there is no such 412 A Second Vindication of the