lefs than that both words and fentiments should be dictated to them; it is fully as credible, that they would be affifted, in the fame manner, when they wrote, especially as the record was to last through all ages, and to be a rule of faith to all the nations of the earth. Paul affirms, that he, and the other apostles, fpoke, "not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghoft taught *;" and this general affertion may be applied to their writings, as well as to their fermons. Befides, every perfon, who hath reflected upon the fubject, is aware of the importance of a proper selection of words in expreffing our fentiments; and knows how easy it is. for a heedlefs or unfkilful perfon, not only to injure the beauty, and weaken the efficacy of a dif course, by the impropriety of his language, but by fubftitutig one word for another, to which it feems to be equivalent, to alter the meaning, and perhaps render it totally different. If then, the facred writers had not been directed in the choice of words, how could we have been affured, that thofe, which they have chofen, were the most .proper? Is it not poffible, nay, is it not certain, * x Cor. ii. 13. that that they would have fometimes expreffed themfelves inaccurately, as many of them were illiterate; and by confequence, would have obfcured and mifrepresented the truth? In this cafe, how could our faith have fecurely rested on their teftimony? Would not the fufpicion of error in their writings have rendered it neceffary, before we received them, to try them by the ftandard of reafon; and would not the authority and the defign of revelation have thus been overthrown? We must conclude, therefore, that the words of Scripture are from God, as well as the matter;' or we shall charge him with a want of wisdom, in tranfmitting his truths through a channel, by which they might have been, and most probably have been polluted. To the infpiration of the words, the difference in the style of the sacred writers feems to be an objection; becaufe, if the Holy Ghoft were the author of the words, the ftyle might be expected to be uniformly the fame. But, in answer to this objection, it may be obferved, that the Divine Spirit, whofe operations are various, might act differently on different perfons, according to the natural turn of their minds. He might enable enable one man, for instance, to write more sublimely than another, because he was naturally of a more exalted genius than the other, and the fubject affigned to him demanded more elevated language; or he might produce a difference in the ftyle of the fame man, by raising, at one time, his faculties above their ordinary ftate, and by leaving them, at another, to act according to their native energy, under his inspection and controul. We fhould not fuppofe, that infpiration, even in its higher degrees, deprived thofe, who were the fubjects of it, of the ufe of their faculties. They were, indeed, the organs of the Spirit; but they were conscious, intelligent organs. They were dependent, but diftinct agents; and the operation of their mental powers, though elevated and directed by fuperior influence, was analogous to their ordinary mode of procedure. It is eafy, therefore, to conceive, that the style of the writers of the Scriptures fhould differ, just as it would have differed, if they had not been infpired. A perfect uniformity of style could not have taken place, unless they had all been inspired in the fame degree, and by inspiration their faculties had been completely fufpended; fo that |