which is infinitely glorious. But it is foolish to render honour to that which is odious, and dishonourable. To a regenerate heart Christ crucified is therefore the wisdom of God, but to others foolishness and a stumbling-block. 1 Cor. i. 18. 23, 24. and ii. 14. These sentiments are explained and proved at large, in my Essay on the nature and glory of the Gospel. And this is what Mr. M. misrepresents and cries out against, as new divinity. p. 40, 41, 42.

Rem. 4. Every unregenerate sinner, be his doctrinal knowledge what it will, is in the temper of his heart, an infidel. For it is incredible, that infinite honour should be done to that which appears worthy of no honour at all. But the divine law, and the divine character therein exhibited, to a carnal heart, appear worthy of no honour at all. For they appear not amiable, but odious. For, Rom. viii. 7. The carnal mind is enmity against God. Therefore, a cordial belief of the truth of the Gospel is peculiar to the regenerate. 1 John v. 1. Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God. Therefore,

Rem. 5. It is not strange, that an unregenerate man, when the true Gospel of Christ is explained and set in a clear light before his eyes, should cry out, this is new divinity to me.' For it may truly be quite new to him. A system of sentiments he never believed to be true. But it is strange that the true Gospel of Christ should appear to be new divinity to an old saint. But it is ti me to proceed:

Arg. 2. God the Father loves that character of himself, which he exhibited to Adam in his law. But the Gospel calls us to be like God; to be conformed to his image: therefore the Gospel calls us to love that character of God which is exbibited in his law. That God the Father loves that character of himself which he exhibited to Adam in his law, is evident from this, viz. That character which is exhibited in the law was God's true character; as Mr. M. grants, p. 41. "The divine character exhibited in the moral law, was that which was exhibited to Adam in his state of innocency, and it was God's true character." Indeed, it was God's true and real character, or else God gave himself a character contrary to truth in the moral law: which none will dare to say. But

if that character of God was God's true and real character, then it will follow, that God loved that character then. For all will grant that God loved his own character. But if God loved that character then, he does love it still, unless his nature is changed. But that God is immutable, the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever, needs no proof to those who believe the bible. But if God still loves that character of himself, which he exhibited in his law, since the fall, as much as he did before, then in order to our being like God and in his image, we must love it too. For if he loves it, and we hate it, then we are not like him, but are contrary to him are not of the same spirit, but of a spirit and disposition contrary to him. But the Gospel calls us to be like God; and in a true and real conversion we are changed into the same image; as all grant. And therefore the Gospel calls us to be reconciled to that character of God which is exhibited in the moral law, which he always did, and always will love, and without the love of which we are not like God, but contrary unto him; are not in his image, but are in the image of the wicked one, who doth now, and always will, hate that character of God which is exhibited in his law.

Arg. 3. God the Son, in character of Mediator, loves that character of God which is exhibited in the law, and against which the carnal mind is at enmity. But the Gospel calls us to be like Christ in the temper of our hearts: therefore the Gospel calls us to be reconciled to, and to love that character of God, which is exhibited in his law, against which all unregenerate sinners are at enmity. That God the Son, in character of Mediator, loves that character of God which is exhibited in the law, is evident, because he is the express image of his Father's person. Heb. i. S. But his Father loves that character, as has been proved; and therefore he loves it as much as his Father does. And besides, he became incarnate, lived and died to do honour to the divine law, and to the divine character therein exhibited. But the Gospel calls us to be like Christ, to be of the same spirit, to imitate him, and follow his example. But if we hate that character of God which is exhibited in the law, we are not like Christ, we are not of the same spirit, we do not imitate him, nor follow

his example; but we are of a temper contrary to him, and like the devil.

Remark 1. To hate that character of God which is exhibited in the law, is to hate Christ Jesus and his righteousness. For Christ Jesus loved that character, and lived and died to do it honour and in this his righteousness consisted; and for this his Father was well pleased in him Therefore,

Rem. 2. Those who are at enmity against God the Father, are also at enmity against God the Son. For to hate the law, is to hate the Gospel. Because the Gospel vindicates the honour of the law. Thus the Pharisees, who hated the true character of God the Father, which was exhibited in the law of Moses, likewise hated the character of Jesus Christ, exhibited in explaining and vindicating that law in his public ministry, and in detecting and condemning the false glosses which they had put upon it. They have both seen and hated both me and my Father. For if God's character, exhibited in his law, is odious, then the character of Christ, as Mediator, is odious also. Because Christ's mediatorial character consists in supreme love to that character of God which is exhibited in the law, exercised and expressed in his life, and in his death.

Rem. 3. To expect acceptance with God on the account of the righteousness of Christ, which consists in love to that character of God which is exhibited in the law, while we allow ourselves to hate that character, and really believe that the Gospel does not call us to love it, implies this gross inconsistence, viz. that we acknowledge that love to that character is above all things acceptable to God, and that yet God does not desire us to love it. It was his will that Christ should love and honour it to procure the salvation of his disciples, but his disciples may lawfully hate it. Moreover, to depend on Christ's righteousness, i. e. on Christ's loving that character and doing it honour, while we allow ourselves to hate it, and affirm, that it is contrary to the character of God and to the character of man; contrary to the law and to the Gospel; contrary to nature and to grace,' for us to love it; is grossly inconsistent. For it is to depend on that as our justifying righteousness in the sight of God, which, if it were

And so our

case, is not

in us, would be a sin. For sin is a transgression of the law. But Mr. M. says, that it is contrary to the law of God for us to love that character of God which is exhibited in the moral law.' p. 41, 42. Thus men are taught to trust in the righteousness of Christ for justification in the sight of God, while they allow themselves to hate that righteousness of Christ, and to believe it would be a sinful thing in them to love what he loved, and to be holy as he was holy, and righteous as he was righteous. But, if we think it lawful to hate that character of God which is exhibited in the divine law then we think ourselves innocent in hating of it. real dependance for acceptance with God in this on Christ's righteousness, but on our own innocence. By the law given to Adam it appears, 1. That God was disposed to punish sin. 2. That in his view, it became him as a moral governor of the world, to punish sin. 3. That it was his fixed determination that sin should not go unpunished. And by the cross of Christ, it appears in a still clearer light, 1. That God is disposed to punish sin. 2. That in his view, it becomes him as moral governor of the world, to punish sin. 3. That it is his fixed determination that sin shall not go unpunished. But a determination, in all instances, to punish sin in the criminal, and never to accept a surety to die in his room, is not, and never was, any part of God's revealed character. However, if God's disposition to punish sin is not an amiable disposition, it never was and never will be an object of love, whether exhibited in the law, or in the cross of Christ. But if it is a beauty in the divine character, it always was, and always will be, an object of love, whether exhibited in the law, or in the cross of Christ. To say, that the holiness and justice of the divine nature are glorious, when the surety is the sufferer; but odious, when the criminal himself is punished, is the grossest absurdity, and the most barefaced hypocrisy.

Arg. 4. The regenerating, sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit, are necessary in order to that reconciliation to God, to which the Gospel calls us, as is evident from John iii. 3-6. But the regenerating, sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit are not necessary in order to our loving a charac

ter, which, while unregenerate, we are not at enmity against. For, 1. There is no need of the regenerating influences of the Spirit, in order to all that preparatory work, which is before regeneration; as all grant. 2. After this preparatory work is completely finished, according to Mr. M. the unregenerate sinner is capable of receiving the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ :' while unregenerate, he means; for he adds by which bis soul will be regenerated.' p. 31. Thus the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ is actually seen, according to Mr. M. by the unregenerate sinner, while unregenerate. And therefore there is, according to him, no need of the regenerating, sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit to bring the sinner thus far. Nay, in fact, the sinner comes thus far while unregenerate. And, 4. being brought thus far, the sinner now needs no new principle of grace, as he says, p. 47, 48. For indeed it is natural for all mankind to love that which appears glorious and amiable in their eyes. Nor is any assistance needed in this, according to Mr. M.; no, not so much as external means; it will have this effect without the necessity of an exhortation.' p. 52. Just as it was natural for Jacob to love Rachel, as soon as he saw her, without the need of an exhortation.' And much less did he need any supernatural assistance of the Spirit of God in the affair. Yea, according to Mr. M. the reconciliation will be perfect on the first discovery, so that an exhortation to be reconciled to God will never more be needed. Thus it is evident, that on Mr. M.'s scheme, the regenerating, sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit, are entirely needless in order to a sinner's loving that character of God, against which, Adam was no more at enmity after his fall, than he was before he fell, which Mr. M. supposes is exhibited in the Gospel. And therefore, 5. Regeneration in his sense of it, may be wrought by light,' without any sanctifying influences of the Spirit at all. For as God's supposed new character may appear glorious and amiable to one, who is at enmity against God's old character; so this new character may for the same reason be loved by one, who is at enmity against his old character. That is, by the carnal mind. For this NEW God teaches his votaries,