were fallible, and have actually committed mistakes in their narrations, and their reafonings. We must not anticipate the arguments, which refute this opinion, whether advanced by a heretic or an infidel; and I fhall, therefore, only observe, that this man and his followers find it their intereft to weaken, and fet afide the authority of the Scriptures, as they have adopted a system of religion, from which all the distinguishing doc-trines of revelation are excluded. Others confi-der the Scriptures as infpired in thofe places,, where they profess to deliver the word of God; but in other places, especially in the historical parts, they afcribe to them only the fame authority which is due to the writings of well-informed and upright men But as this diftinction is perfectly arbitrary, having no foundation in any thing faid by the facred writers themselves, fo it is liable to very material objections. It reprefents our Lord and his apoftles, when they spoke of the Old Testament, as having attested, without any exception, or limitation, a number of books as divinely inspired, while fome of them were partly, and fome were almost entirely human compofitions. It fuppofes the writers of both Teftaments

B3

Teftaments to have profanely mixed their own productions with the dictates of the Spirit; and to have paffed the unhallowed compound on the world as genuine. In fact, by denying that they were conftantly under infallible guidance, it leaves us utterly at a lofs to know when we fhould, or fhould not believe them. If they could blend their own ftories with the revelations made to them, how can I be certain, that they have not, on fome occafions, published, in the name of God, fentiments of their own, to which they were defircus to gain credit and authority? Who will affure me of their perfect fidelity in drawing a line of diftinction, between the divine and the human parts of their writings? The denial of the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures tends to nafettle the foundations of our faith; involves us in doubt and perplexity; and leaves us no other method of afcertaining how much we fhould believe, but an appeal to reason. But when reafon is invefted with the authority of a judge, not only is revelation dishonoured, and its Author infulted, but the end for which it was given, is completely defeated.

A queftion of very great importance demands

our

our attention, while we are endeavouring to fettle, with precifion, the notion of the infpiration

of the Scriptures. It relates to the words, in which the facred writers have expreffed their ideas. Some think, that, in the choice of words, they were left to their own difcretion, and that the language is human, though the matter be divine; while others believe, that in their expreffions, as well as in their fentiments, they were under the infallible direction of the Spirit. It is the laft opinion which appears to be most conformable to truth; and it may be fupported by the following reafoning.

Every man, who hath attended to the operations of his own mind, knows, that we think in words; or that when we form a train or combination of ideas, we clothe them with words; and that the ideas which are not thus clothed, are indiftinct and confufed. Let a man try to think upon any subject, moral or religious, without the aid of language, and he will either experience a total ceffation of thought; or, as this feems impoffible, at leaft while we are awake, he will feel himself constrained, notwithstanding his utmost endeavours, to have recourfe to words as the in

ftrument

The

ftrument of his mental operations. As a great part of the Scriptures was fuggefted or revealed to the writers; as the thoughts or fentiments, which were perfectly new to them, were conveyed into their minds by the Spirit, it is plain that they must have been accompanied with words proper to exprefs them; and, confequently, that the words were dictated by the fame influence on the mind, which communicated the ideas. ideas could not have come without the words, because without them they could not have been conceived. A notion of the form and qualities of a material object, may be produced by fubjecting it to our fenfes; but there is no conceivable method of making us acquainted with new abstract truths, or with things which do not lie within the fphere of fenfation, but by conveying to the mind, in some way or other, the words fignificant of them. In all thofe paffages of Scripture, therefore, which were written by revelation, it is manifeft, that the words were inspired; and this is fill more evident, with respect to those paffages which the writers themselves did not understand. No man could write an intelligible difcourfe on a fubject, which he does not understand, unless

he

he were furnished with the words, as well as the fentiments; and that the penmen of the Scriptures did not always understand what they wrote, might be fafely inferred from the comparative darkness of the difpenfation under which fome of them lived; and is intimated by Peter when he says, that the prophets "enquired and fearched diligently what, and what manner of time the Spirit of Chrift which was in them did fignify, when it testified beforehand the fufferings of Chrift, and the glory that should follow *."

In other paffages of Scripture, those not excepted in which the writers relate fuch things as had fallen within the compafs of their own knowledge, we will be difpofed to believe, that the words are inspired, if we calmly and feriously weigh the following confiderations. If Chrift promised to his disciples, that when they were brought before kings and governors for his fake, "it should be given them in that fame hour what they should speak, and that the Spirit of their Father fhould fpeak in them t;" a promise, which cannot be reasonably understood to fignify

lefs

* Pet. i. 10, II.

Matth. x. 19, 20. Luke xii. 11, 12.