the like Passages in my Book my meaning is so evident that no body but an Unmasker would have said that when I spoke of believing as a bare Speculative assent to any Proposition as true I affirm'd that was all that was required of a Christian for Justification Though that in the strict sense of the word is all that is done in believing And therefore I say as far as meer believing could make them Members of Christ's Body plainly signifying as much as words can that the Faith for which they were justified included something more than a bare assent This appears not only from these words of mine p. 196. St. Paul often in his Epistles puts Faith for the whole Duty of a Christian but from my so often and almost every-where interpreting believing him to be the Messiah by taking him to be our King whereby is meant not a bare idle Speculation a bare notional perswasion of any truth whatsoever floating in our Brains but an active Principle of Life a Faith working by Love and Obedience To take him to be our King carries with it a right disposition of the will to honour and obey him joyn'd to that assent wherewith Believers imbrace this Fundamental Truth that Jesus was the Person who was by God sent to be their King he that was promis'd to be their Prince and Saviour But for all this the Unmasker p. 56. Confidently tells his Reader that I say no such thing His words are But besides this Historical Faith as it is generally call'd by Divines which is giving Credit to Evangelical Truths as barely reveal'd there must be something else added to make up the true Substantial Faith of a Christian. With the assent of the Understanding must be joyn'd the consent or approbation of the Will. All those Divine Truths which the Intellect assents to must be allow'd of by this Elective Power of the Soul True Evangelical Faith is a hearty acception of the Messias as he is offer'd in the Gospel It is a sincere and impartial submission to all things requir'd by the Evangelical Law which is contain'd in the Epistles as well as the other Writings And to this practical assent and choice there must be added likewise a firm Trust and reliance in the blessed Author of our Salvation But this late Undertaker who attempted to give us a more perfect account than ever was before of Christianity as it is deliver'd in the Scriptures brings us no tidings of any such Faith belonging to Christianity or discover'd to us in the Scriptures Which gives us to understand that he verily believes there is no such Christian Faith for in some of his numerous Pages especially 191. and 192 c. where he speaks so much of Belief and Faith he might have taken occasion to insert one word about this compleat Faith of the Gospel Though the places above quoted out of my Reasonableness of Christianity and the whole tenor of the latter part of it shew the falshood of what the Unmasker here says Yet I will set down one Passage more out of it and then ask our Unmasker when he hath read them whether he hath the brow to say again that I bring no tidings of any such Faith My words are Reasonableness of Christianity p. 244. Faith in the Promises of God relying and acquiescing in his Word and Faithfulness the Almighty takes well at our hands as a great mark of Homage paid by us poor frail Creatures to his Goodness and Truth as well as to his Power and Wisdom and accepts it as an Acknowledgment of his peculiar Providence and Benignity to us And therefore our Saviour tells us Iohn XII 44. He that believes on me believes not on me but on him that sent me The Works of Nature shew his Wisdom and Power But 't is his peculiar care of Mankind most eminently discover'd in his Promises to them that shews his Bounty and Goodness And consequently engages their Hearts in Love and Affection to him This oblation of an heart fixed with dependance and affection on him is the most acceptable Tribute we can pay him the Foundation of true Devotion and Life of all Religion What a Value he puts on this depending on his Word and resting satisfied on his Promises we have an example in Abraham whose Faith was counted to him for Righteousness As we have before remarked out of Rom. IV. and his relying firmly on the Promise of God without any doubt of its Performance gave him the Name of the Father of the Faithful And gained him so much favour with the Almighty that he was called the Friend of God The Highest and most Glorious Title can be bestowed on a Creature The great out-cry he makes against me in his two next Sections p. 57. â—60 as if I intended to introduce Ignorance and Popery is to be entertain'd rather as the noise of a petulant Scold saying the worst things she could think of than as the arguing of a Man of sense or sincerity All this mighty Accusation is grounded upon these Falshoods That I make it my great business to beat Men off from Divine Truths That I cry down all Articles of the Christian Faith but one That I will not suffer Men to look into Christianity That I blast the Epistolary Wriâ—ings I shall add no more to what I have already said about the Epistles but those few words out of my Reasonableness of Christianity p. 295. The Epistles resolving Doubts and reforming Mistakes are of great Advantage to our Knowledge and Practise And p. 229. An explicit belief of what God requires of those who will enter into and receive the benefits of the New Covenant is absolutely required The other parts of Divine Revelation are Objects of Faith and are so to be received They are Truths whereof none that is once known to be such i. e. of Divine Revelation may or ought to be disbelieved And as for that other Saying of his That I will not suffer Men to look into Christianity I desire to know where that Christianity is locked up which I will not suffer Men to look into My Christianity I confess is contain'd in the written Word of God And that I am so far from hindring any one to look into that I every where appeal to it and have quoted so much of it that the Unmasker complains of being overlaid with it and tells me 't is tedious All Divine Revelation I say p. 300. requires the Obedience of Faith And that every one is to receive all the parts of it with a docility and disposition prepar'd to imbrace and assent to all Truths coming from God and submit his Mind to whatever shall appear to him to bear that Character I speak in the next Page of Mens endeavouring to understand it and of their interpreting one place by another This and the whole Design of my Book shews That I think it every Christian's Duty to read search and study the Holy Scriptures and make this their
the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this Book So far his History is by his own Confession concise But these says he are written that ye might believe that Iesus is the Messiah the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his Name As concise as it was there was yet if the Apostle's word may be taken for it against the Unmâ—sker's enough contain'd in his Gospel for the procuring of eternal life to those who believed it And whether it was that one Article that he there sets down viz. That Iesus was the Messiah or that Set of Articles which the Unmâ—sker gives us I shall leave to this Modern Divine to resolve And if he thinks still that all the Articles he has set down in his Roll are necessary to be believed to make a Man a Christian I must desire him to shew them to me in St. Iohn's Gospel or else to convince the World that St. Iohn was mistaken when he said that he had written his Gospel that Men might believe that Iesus is the Messiah the Son of God and that believing they might have life thorugh his Name So that granting the History of the Scripture to be so concise as the Unmasker would have it viz. That in some places the infallible Writers recording the Discourses of our Saviour and his Apostles omitted all the other Fundamental Articles propos'd by them to be believed to make Men Christians but this one that Iesus was the Messiah Yet this will not remove the Objection that lies against his other Fundamentals which are not to be found in the Histories of the Four Evangelists nay which are not to be found in every one of them If every one of them contains the Gospel of Jesus Christ and consequently all things necessary to Salvation Whether this will not be a new ground of Accusation against me and give the Unmasker a right to charge me with laying by three of the Gospels with contempt as well as he did before charge me with a contempt of the Epistles must be left to his soveraign Authority to determine Having shew'd that allowing all he says here to be as he would have it yet it clears not the Objection that lies against his Fundamentals I shall now examine what truth there is in what he here pretends viz. that though the one Article that Jesus is the Messiah be mention'd alone in some places yet we have reason to be perswaded from the conciseness of the Scripture History that there were at the same time join'd with it other necessary Articles of Faith in the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles It is to be observed that the Unmasker builds upon this false Supposition that in some places other necessary Articles of Faith join'd with that of Iesus the Messiah are by the Evangelists mention'd to be propos'd by our Saviour and his Apostles as necessary to be believed to make those they Preach'd to Christians For his saying that in some places that one necessary Article is mention'd alone implies that in other places it is not mention'd alone but join'd with other necessary Articles And then it will remain upon him to shew XXXVI In what place either of the Gospels or of the Acts other Articles of Faith are join'd with this and propos'd as necessary to be believed to make Men Christians The Unmasker 't is probable will tell us that the Article of Christ's Resurrection is sometimes join'd with this of the Messiah as particularly in that first Sermon of St. Peter Acts II. by which there were Three Thousand added to the Church at one time Answ. This Sermon well consider'd will explain to us both the Preaching of the Apostles what it was that they propos'd to their unbelieving Auditors to make them Christians and also the manner of St. Luke's recording their Sermons 'T is true that here are deliver'd by St. Peter many other Matters of Faith besides that of Iesus being the Messiah For all that he said being of Divine Authority is Matter of Faith and may not be disbelieved The first Part of his Discourse is to prove to the Iews that what they had observed of Extraordinary at that time amongst the Disciples who spake variety of Tongues did not proceed from Wine but from the Holy Ghost And that this was the pouring out of the Spirit prophesied of by the Prophet Ioel. This is all Matter of Faith and is written that it might be believed But yet I think that neither the Unmasker nor any body else will say that this is such a necessary Article of Faith that no Man could without an explicit belief of it be a Christian Though being a Declaration of the Holy Ghost by St. Peter it is so much a Matter of Faith that no body to whom it is now propos'd can deny it and be a Christian. And thus all the Scripture of the New Testament given by Divine Inspiration is Matter of Faith and necessary to be believed by all Christians to whom it is propos'd But yet I do not think any one so unreasonable as to say that every Proposition in the New Testament is a Fundamental Article of Faith which is required explicitly to be believed to make a Man a Christian Here now is a matter of Faith join'd in the same Sermon with this Fundamental Article that Iesus is the Messiah And reported by the Sacred Historian so at large that it takes up a Third part of St. Peter's Sermon recorded by St. Luke And yet it is such a matter of Faith as is not contain'd in the Unmasker's Catalogue of necessary Articles I must ask him then whether St. Luke were so concise an Historian that he would so at large set down a matter of Faith propos'd by St. Peter that was not necessary to be believed to make a Man a Christian and wholly leave out the very mention of all the Unmasker's additional necessary Articles if indeed they were necessary to be believed to make Men Christians I know not how any one could charge the Historian with greater unfaithfulness or greater folly But this the Unmasker sticks not at to preserve to himself the Power of appointing what shall and what shall not be necessary Articles and of making his System the Christianity necessary and only necessary to be received The next thing that St. Peter proceeds to in this his Sermon is to declare to the Unbelieving Iews that Iesus of Nazareth who had done Miracles amongst them whom they had Crucified and put to Death and whom God had raised again from the Dead was the Messiah Here indeed our Saviour's Crucifixion Death and Resurrection are mentioned And if they were no where else recorded are matters of Faith which with all the rest of the New Testament ought to be believed by every Christian to whom it is thus propos'd as a part of Divine Revelation But that these were not here propos'd to the Unbelieving Iews as the Fundamental Articles which
St. Peter principally aimed at and endeavoured to convince them of is evident from hence That they are made use of as Arguments to perswade them of this Fundamental Truth viz. That Iesus was the Messiah whom they ought to take for their Lord and Ruler For whatsoever is brought as an Argument to prove another Truth cannot be thought to be the principal thing aimed at in that argumentation though it may have so strong and immediate a connexion with the Conclusion that you cannot deny it without denying even what is inferr'd from it and is therefore the fitter to be an Argument to prove it But that our Saviour's Crucifixion Death and Resurrection were used here as Arguments to perswade them into a belief of this Fundamental Article that Iesus was the Messiah and not as Propositions of a new Faith they were to receive is evident from hence that they Preach'd here to those who knew the Death and Crucifixion of Iesus as well as Peter And therefore these could not be propos'd to them as new Articles of Faith to be believed But those Matters of Fact being what the Iews knew already were a good Argument joyn'd with his Resurrection to convince them of that truth which he endeavoured to give them a Belief of And therefore he rightly inferred from these Facts joined together this Conclusion the believing whereof would make them Christians Therefore let all the House of Israel know assuredly that God hath made that same Iesus whom ye have crucified Lord and Christ. To the making good this sole Proposition his whole Discourse tended This was the sole Truth he laboured to convince them of This the Faith he endeavoured to bring them into which as soon as they had received with Repentance they were by Baptism admitted into the Church and three Thousand at once made Christians Here St. Luke's own Confession without that of intelligent and observing men which the Unmasker has recourse to might have satisfied him again that in relating matters of Fact many passages are omitted by the sacred Pen-men For says St. Luke here v. 40. And with many other words which are not set down One would at first sight wonder why the Unmasker neglects these demonstrative Authorities of the Holy Pen-men themselves where they own their Omissions to tell us that it is confessed by all intelligent and observing men that in relating matters of Fact many Passages are omitted by the sacred Pen-men St. Iohn in what he says of his Gospel directly professes large Omissions and so does St. Luke here But these Omissions would not serve the Unmasker's turn For they are directly against him and what he would have And therefore he had reason to pass them by For St. Iohn in that passage above-cited Ch. XX. 30 31. tells us that how much soever he had left out of his History he had incerted that which was enough to be believed to eternal Life But these are written that ye might believe and believing ye might have life But this is not all he assures us of viz. That he had recorded all that was necessary to be believed to eternal Life But he in express words tells us what is that ALL that is necessary to be believed to eternal Life and for the Proof of which Proposition alone he writ all the rest of his Gospel viz. That we might believe What Even this That Iesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing this we might have life through his Name This may serve for a Key to us in reading the History of the New Testament And shew us why this Article that Iesus was the Messiah is no where omitted though a great part of the Arguments used to convince Men of it nay very often thâ— whole Discourse made to lead Men into the Belief of it be entirely omitted The Spirit of God directed them every where to set down the Article which was absolutely necessary to be believed to make Men Christians So that That could no ways be doubted of nor mistaken But the Arguments and Evidences which were to lead Men into this Faith would be sufficient if they were once found any where though scattered here and there in those Writings whereof that infallible Spirit was the Author This preserved the Decorum used in all Histories and avoided those continual large and unnecessary Repetitions which our critical Unmasker might have call'd tedious with juster Reason than he does the Repetition of this short Proposition that Iesus is the Messiah which I set down no oftner in my Book than the Holy Ghost thought fit to insert in the History of the New Testament as concise as it is But this it seems to our Nice Unmasker is tedious tedious and offensive And if a Christian and a Successor of the Apostles cannot bear the being so often told what it was that our Saviour and his Apostles every where preach'd to the Believers of one God though it be contain'd in one short Proposition What cause of Exception and disgust would it have been to Heathen Readers some whereof might perhaps have been as Critical as the Unmasker if this sacred History had in every Page been filled with the repeated Discourses of the Apostles all of them every where to the same purpose viz. to perswade Men to believe that Iesuâ— was the Messiah It was necessary even by the Laws of History as often as their preaching any where was mention'd to tell to what purpose they spoke which being always to convince Men of this one Fundamental Truth 't is no wonder we find it so often repeated But the Arguments and Reasonings with which this one Point is urged are as they ought to be in most places left out A constant Repetition of them had been superfluous and consequently might justly have been blam'd as tedious But there is enough recorded aboundantly to convince any rational Man any one not willfully blind that he is that promised Saviour And in this we have a reason of the Omissions in the History of the New Testament which were no other than such as became prudent as well as faithful Writers Much less did that Conciseness with which the Vnmasker would cover his bold Censure of the Gospels and the Acts and as it seems lay them by with Contempt make the holy Writers omit any thing in the preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles absolutely necessary to be known and believed to make Men Christians Conformable hereunto we shall find St. Luke writes his History of the Acts of the Apostles In the beginning of it he sets down at large some of the Discourses made to the unbelieving Iews But in most other Places unless it be where there was something particular in the Circumstances of the Matter he contents himself to tell to what purpose they spoke Which was every where only this That Iesus was the Messiah Nay St. Luke in the first Speech of St. Peter Act. 11. which he thought fit to give us a great part
designed to make known to the People by it Can we imagine these unclean Spirits were Promoters of the Gospel and had a Mind to acknowledge and publish to the People the Deity of our Saviour which the Vnmasker would have to be the Signification of the Son of God Who can entertain such a thought No they were no Friends to our Saviour And therefore desir'd to spread a Belief of him that he was the Messiah that so he might by the envy of the Scribes and Pharisees be disturb'd in his Ministry and be cut off before he had compleated it And therefore we see our Saviour in both places forbids them to make him known As he did his Disciples themselves for the same Reason For when St. Peter Mat. XVI 16. had own'd Iesus to be the Messiah in these words Thou art the Messiah the Son of the living God It follows v. 20. Then charged he his Disciples that they should tell no man that he was Iesus the Messiah Just as he had forbid the Devils to make him known i. e. to be the Messiah Besides these words here of St. Peter can be taken in no other sence but barely to signifie that Iesus was the Messiah to make them a proper Answer to our Saviour's Question His first Question here to his Disciples v. 13. is Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am The Question is not of what Original do you think the Messiah when he comes will be For then this Question would have been as it is Mat. XXII 42. What think you of the Messiah whose Son is he If he had enquir'd about the common opinion concerning the Nature and Descent of the Messiah But his Question is concerning himself Whom of all the extraordinary Persons known to the Iews or mentioned in their Sacred Writings the People thought him to be That this was the meaning of his Question is evident from the Answer the Apostles gave to it And his further demand v. 14 15. They said some say thou art Iohn the Baptist some Elias and others Ieremias or one of the Prophets He saith unto them But WHOM say ye that I am The People take me some for one of the Prophets or Extraordinary Messengers from God and some for another But which of them do you take me to be Simon Peter answer'd and said Thou art the Messiah the Son of the living God In all which Discourse 't is evident there was not the least Enquiry made by our Saviour concerning the Person Nature or Qualifications of the Messiah but whether the People or his Apostles thought him i. e. Iesus of Nazareth to be the Messiah To which St. Peter gave him a direct and plain Answer in the foregoing words declaring their Belief of him to be the Messiah Which is all that with any manner of Congruity could be made the sence of St. Peter's Answer This alone of it self were enough to justifie my interpretation of St. Peter's words without the Authority of St. Mark and St. Luke both whose words confirm it For St. Mark Chap. VIII 29. renders it Thou art the Messiah and St. Luke Chap. IX 18. The Messiah of God To the like Question Who art thou Iohn the Baptist gives a like Answer Ioh. I. 19. 20. I am not the Christ. By which Answer as well as by the following Verses it is plain nothing was understood to be meant by that Question but which of the extraordinary Persons promised to or expected by the Iews art thou Ioh. XI 27. The Phrase of the Son of God is made use of by Saint Martha And that it was used by her to signiâ—ie the Messiah and nothing else is evident out of the Context Martha tells our Saviour that if he had been there before her Brother died he by that Divine Power which he had manifested in so many Miracles which he had done could have saved his Life and that now if our Saviour would ask it of God he might obtain the Restoration of his Life Iesus tells her he shall rise again Which words Martha taking to mean at the general Resurrection at the last Day Iesus thereupon takes occasion to intimate to her that he was the Messiah by telling her that he was the Resurrection and the Life i. e. That the Life which Mankind should receive at the general Resurrection was by and through him This was a description of the Messiah It being a received Opinion amongst the Iews that when the Messiah came the Just should rise and live with him for ever And having made this Declaration of himself to be the Messiah he asks Martha Believest thou this What! Not whose Son the Messiah should be But whether he himself was the Messiah by whom Believers should have Eternal Life at the last Day And to this she gives this direct and apposite Answer Yea Lord I believe that thou art the Christ the Son of God which should come into the World The Question was only whether she was perswaded that those who believe in him should be raised to eternal Life That was in effect whether he was the Messiah And to this she answers yea Lord I believe this of thee And then she explains what was contain'd in that Faith of hers even this that he was the Messiah that was promis'd to come by whom alone Men were to receive eternal Life What the Iews also understood by the Son of God is also clear from that passage at the latter end of XXII of Luke They having taken our Saviour and being very desirous to get a Confession from his own Mouth that he was the Messiah that they might from thence be able to raise a formal and prevalent Accusation against him before Pilate the only thing the Council asked him was whether he was the Messiah v. 67. To which he answers so in the following Words that he lets them see he understood that the design of their Question was to entrap him and not to believe in him whatever he should declare of himself But yet he tells them Hereafter shall the Son of Man sit on the right hand of the power of God Words that to the Iews plainly enough owned him to be the Messiah But yet such as could not have any force against him with Pilate He having confessed so much they hope to draw yet a clearer Confession from him Then said they all art thou then the Son of God And he said unto them ye say that I am And they said what need we any further witness For we our selves have heard of his own Mouth Can any one think that the Doctrine of his Deity which is that which the Unmasker accuses me for waveing was that which the Iews designed to accuse our Saviour of before Pilate or that they needed Witnesses for Common sense as well as the current of the whole History shews the conâ—â—ary No it was to accuse him that 〈◊〉 owned himself to be the Messiah and â—hereby claim'd a Title to be King
Evangelists and Author of the Acts were very strange Historians The first were to instruct the World in a new Religion consisting of a great number of Articles says the Unmasker necessary to be believed to make a Man a Christian i. e. a great number of Propositions making a large System every one whereof is so necessary for a Man to understand and believe that if any one be omitted he cannot be of that Religion What now did our Saviour and his Apostles do Why if the Unmasker may be believed they went up and down with danger of their Lives and Preach'd to the World What did they Preach Even this single Proposition to make way for the rest viz. This is the Eminent Man sent from God to teach you other things which amounts to no more but this That Iesus was the Person which was to teach them the true Religion but that true Religion it self is not to be found in all their Preaching nay scarce a word of it Can there be any thing more ridiculous than this And yet this was all they Preach'd if it be true that this was all which they meant by the Preaching every where Iesus to be the Messiah And if it were only an Introduction and a making way for the Doctrines of the Gospel But it is plain it was called the Gospel it self Let the Unmasker as a true Successor of the Apostles go and Preach the Gospel as the Apostles did to some part of the Heathen World where the Name of Christ is not known Would not he himself and every body think he was very foolishly imploy'd if he should tell them nothing but this that Iesus was the Person promised and sent from God to reveal the true Religion But should teach them nothing of that true Religion but this Preliminary Article Such the Unmasker makes all the Preaching recorded in the New Testament for the Conversion of the Unbelieving World He makes the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles to be no more but this that the great Prophet promised to the World was come and that Iesus was he But what his Doctrine was that they were silent in and taught not one Article of it But the Unmasker mis-represents it For as to his accusing the Historians the Evangelists and Writers of the Acts of the Apostles for their shameful omission of the whole Doctrine of the Christian Religion to save his Hypothesis as he does under his next Head in these words That though this one Proposition be mention'd alone in some places yet there is reason to think and be perswaded that at the same time other Matters of Faith were proposed I shall shew how bold he makes with those inspired Historians when I come to consider that particular How ridiculous how senseless this bold Unmasker and Reformer of the History of the New Testament makes the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles as it stands recorded of them by infallible Writers is visible But taking it as in truth it is there we shall have a quite other view of it Our Saviour Preach'd every where the Kingdom of God and by his Miracles declar'd himself to be the King of that Kingdom The Apostles Preached the same and after his Ascension openly avowed him to be the Prince and Saviour promis'd But Preach'd not this as a bare Speculative Article of simple belief But that Men might receive him for their King and become his Subjects When they told the World that he was the Christ it was not as the Unmasker will have it Believe this Man to be a Prophet and then he will teach you his new Religion which when you have received and imbraced all and every Article thereof which are a great number you will then be Christians if you be not ignorant or incredulous of any of them But it was Believe this Man to be your King sent from God Take him for such with a resolution to observe the Laws he has given you and you are his Subjects you are Christians For those that truly did so made themselves his Subjects And to continue so there was no more required than a sincere endeavour to know his Will in all things and to obey it Such a Preaching as this of Iesus to be the Messiah the King and Deliverer that God Almighty had promised to Mankind and now had effectually sent to be their Prince and Ruler was not a simple preparation to the Gospel But when received with the Obedience of Faith was the very receiving of the Gospel and had all that was requisite to make Men Christians And without it be so understood no body can clear the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles from that incredible Impersection or their Historians from that unpardonable negligence and not doing either what they ought or what they undertook which our Unmasker hath so impiously charged upon them as will appear yet plainer in what I have to say to the Vnmasker's next Particular For as to the remainder of this Paragraph it contains nothing but his censure and contempt of me for not being of his Mind for not seeing as he sees i. e. in effect not laying that blame which he does either on the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles or on the inspired Writings of their Historians to make them comply with his System and the Christianity he would make The Unmasker 's Second Particular p. 76. tells us That though this One Proposition or Article be mention'd alone in some places yet there is reason to think and be perswaded that at the same time other Matters of Faith were proposed For it is confess'd by all intelligent and observing Men that the History of the Scripture is concise and that in relating of Matter of Fact many Passages are omitted by the Sacred Penmen Wherefore though but this one Article of belief because it is a Leading one and makes way for the rest be expresly mention'd in some of the Gospels yet we must not conclude thence that no other Matter of Faith was requir'd to be admitted of For things are briefly set down in the Evangelical Records and we must suppose many things which are not in direct terms related Answ. The Vnmasker here keeps to his usual custom of speaking in doubtful terms He says that where this one Article that Iesus is the Messiah is alone recorded in the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles We have reason to be perswaded that at the same time other Matters of Faith were propos'd If this be to his purpose by Matters of Faith must be meant Fundamental Articles of Faith absolutely necessary to be believed by every Man to make him a Christian. That such Matters of Faith are omitted in the History of the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles by the Sacred Historians this he says we have reason to be perswaded of Answ. They need be good Reasons to perswade a rational Man that the Evangelists in their History of our Saviour and his
of yet owns the Omission of several things that the Apostle said For having expressed this Fundamental Doctrine That Iesus was the Messiah and recorded several of the Arguments wherewith St. Peter urged it for the Conversion of the unbelieving Iews his Auditors he adds v. 40. And with many other words did he testifie and exhort saying Save your selves from this untoward Generation Here he confesses that he omitted a great deal which St. Peter had said to perswade them To what To that which in other words he had just said before v. 38. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Iesus Christ i. e. Believe Iesus to be the Messiah take him as such for your Lord and King and reform your Lives by a sincere Resolution of Obedience to his Laws Thus we have an account of the Omissions in the Records of Matters of Fact in the New Testament But will the Unmasker say that the preaching of those Articles that he has given us as necessary to be believ'd to make a Man a Christian was part of those Matters of Fact which have been omitted in the History of the New Testament Can any one think that the Corruption and Degeneracy of humane Nature with the true Original of it the Defection of our first Parents the Propagation of Sin and Mortality our Restoration and Reconciliation by Christ's blood the Eminency and Excellency of his Priesthood the Efficacy of his Death the full Satisfaction thereby made to divine Iustice and his being made an all-sufficient Sacrifice for Sin our Iustification by Christ's Righteousness Election Adoption c. were all proposed and that too in the Sense of our Authors System by our Saviour and his Apostles as Fundamental Articles of Faith necessary to be explicitely believed by every Man to make him a Christian in all their Discourses to Unbelievers And yet that the inspired Pen-men of those Histories every where left the mention of these Fundamental Articles wholly out This would have been to have writ not a concise but an imperfect History of all that Iesus and his Apostles taught What an account would it have been of the Gospel as it was first preached and propagated if the greatest part of the necessary Doctrines of it were wholly left out and a Man could not find from one end to the other of this whole History that Religion which is necessary to be believed to make a Man a Christian And yet this is that which under the Notion of their being concise the Vnmasker would perswade us to have been done by St. Luke and the other Evangelists in their Histories And 't is no less than what he plainly says in his Thoughts concerning the Causes of Atheism p. 109. Where to aggravate my Fault in passing by the Epistles and to shew the Necessity of searchin them for Fundamentals he in words blames me But in effect condemns the Sacred History contain'd in the Gospels and the Acts. It is most evident says he to any thinking Man that the Author of the Reasonableness of Christianity purposely omits the Epistolary Writings of the Apostles because they are fraught with other Fundamental Doctrines besides that one which he mentions There we are instructed concerning these grand heads of Christian Divinity Here i. e. in the Epistles says he There are Discoveries concerning Satisfaction c. and in the close of his List of his Grand Heads as he calls them some whereof I have above set down out of him he adds These are the Matters of Faith contained in the Epistles By all which Expressions he plainly signifies that these which he calls Fundamental Doctrines are none of those we are instructed in in the Gospels and the Acts that they are not discover'd nor contain'd in the historical Writings of the Evangelists Whereby he confesses that either our Saviour and his Apostles did not propose them in their Preachings to their unbelieving Hearers or else that the several faithful Writers of their History willfully i. e. unfaithfully every where omitted them in the account they have left us of those Preachings Which could scarce possibly be done by them all and every where without an actual Combination amongst them to smother the greatest and most material parts of our Saviour's and his Apostles Discourses For what else did they if all that the Unmasker has set down in his List be Fundamental Doctrines every one of them absolutely necessary to be believed to make a Man a Christian which our Saviour and his Apostles every where preached to make Men Christians but yet St. Luke and the other Evangelists by a very guilty and unpardonable Conciseness every where omitted them and throughout their whole History never once tell us they were so much as proposed much less that they were those Articles which the Apostles laboured to establish and convince Men of every where before they admitted them to Baptism Nay the far greatest part of them the History they writ does not any where so much as once mention How after such an Imputation as this the Unmasker will clear himself from laying by the four Gospels and the Acts with contempt let him look if my not collecting Fundamentals out of the Epistles had that Guilt in it For I never denied all the Fundamental Doctrines to be there but only said that there they were not easie to be found out and distinguished from Doctrines not Fundamental Whereas our good Vnmasker charges the historical Books of the New Testament with a total Omission of the far greatest part of those Fundamental Doctrines of Christianity which he says are absolutely necessary to be believed to make a Man a Christian. To convince the Reader what was absolutely required to be believed to make a Man a Christian and thereby clear the holy Writers from the Unmasker's Slander any one need but look a little further into the History of the Acts and observe St. Luke's Method in the Writing of it In the beginning as we observed before and in some few other places he sets down at large the Discourses made by the Preachers of Christianity to their unbelieving Auditors But in the Process of his History he generally contents himself to relate what it was their Discourses drive at what was the Doctrine they endeavour'd to convince their unbelieving Hearers of to make them Believers This we may observe is never omitted This is every where set down Thus Acts V. 42. he tells us that daily in the Temple and in every house the Apostles ceased not to teach and to preach IESUS THE MESSIAH The particulars of their Discourses he omits and the Arguments they used to induce Men to believe he omits But never fails to inform us carefully what it was the Apostles taught and preach'd and would have Men believe The account he gives us of St. Paul's Preaching at Thessalonica is this That three Sabbath Days he REASON'D with the Iews out of the Scriptures OPENING and ALLEDGING that the Messiah must needs
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 afterwards and are ever since necessary to compleat 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 discover'd and open'd in the Gospels and the Acts. Thus far the Vnmasker I thought hitherto that the Covenant of Grace in Christ Jesus had been but one immutably the same But our Vnmasker 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 in my apprehension makes a new and another Covenant We are not to think says the Vnmasker That all the necessary Doctrines of the Christian Religion were clearly publish'd to the World in our Saviour's time not but that all that were necessary for that time were publish'd But some which were necessary for the Succeeding one were not then discover'd or at least not fully Answ. The Unmasker constant to himself speaks here doubtfully and cannot tell whether he should say that the Articles necessary to Succeeding times were discover'd 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 publish'd they were not then discover'd or at least not fully But we must desire him to pull off his Mask and to that purpose 1 o. I ask him how he can tell that all the necessary Doctrines were obscurely published or in part discover'd for an obscure publishing a Discovery in part is opposed to and intimated in not clearly published not fully discover'd And if a clear and full Discovery be all that he denies to them I ask XXXVII Which those Fundamental Articles are which were obscurely publish'd 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 discover'd at all in our Saviour's time and which they are If he cannot shew these distinctly it is plain he talks at random about them But he has no clear and distinct conception of those that were publish'd or not publish'd clearly or obscurely discover'd in our Saviour's time It was necessary for him to say something for those his pretended necessary Articles which are not to be â—ound any where propos'd in the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles to their yet Unbelieving Auditors 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 necessary 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 requir'd some Reason to make them think that something more was requir'd to make a Man a Christian after than in our Saviour's time For as I take it it is not a very probable much less a self-evident Proposition to be received without Proof That there was something necessary for that time to make a Man a Christian and something more that was necessary to make a Man 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 till he vouchsafes to give us some Reason to think that there was more requir'd 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 propos'd 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 shew me any of those other Articles mentioned 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 propos'd by the Apostles after our Saviour's time to their Unbelieving Hearers to make them Christians This one Doctrine that Iesus was the Messiah was that which was propos'd in our Saviour's time to be believed as necessary to make a Man a Christian The same Doctrine was likewise what was propos'd afterwards in the Preaching of the Apostles to Unbelievers to make them Christians I grant this was more clearly propos'd after than in our Saviour's time But in both of them it was all that was propos'd to the Believers of one God to make them Christians Let him shew that there were any other propos'd in or after our Saviour's time to be believed to make Unbelievers Christians If he means by necessary Articles published to the World the other Doctrines contain'd 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 propos'd to those they were writ to as necessary to make them Christians for this demonstrative Reason Because they were Christians already For Example many Doctrines proving and explaining and giving a farther Light into the Gospel are publish'd in the Epistles to the Corinthians and Thessalonians These are all of Divine Authority and none of them may be disbelieved by any one who is a Christian But yet what was propos'd or publish'd to both the Corinthians and Thessalonians to make them Christians was only this Doctrine that Iesus was the Messiah As may be seen Act. XVII and XVIII This then was the Doctrine necessary to make men Christians in our Saviour's time And this the only Doctrine necessary to make Unbelievers Christians after our Saviour's time The only difference was that it was more clearly propos'd after than before his Ascension The Reason whereof has been sufficiently explain'd But any other Doctrine but this propos'd clearly or obscurely in or after our Saviour's time as necessary to be believed to make Unbelievers Christians That remains yet to be shewn 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 discover'd in our Saviour's time and how far they were then discover'd And therefore he says some of them were
pleased to dose it no more nor no less than what is in his System He hath put himself into the Throne of Christ and pretends to tell you which are and which are not the indispensable Laws of his Kingdom Which parts of his divine Revelation you must necessarily know understand and believe and in what sense and which you need not trouble your head about but may pass by as not necessary to be believed He will tell you that some of his necessary Articles are Mysteries and yet as he does p. 115. of his Thoughts concerning the Causes of Atheism that they are easy to be understood by any Man when explained to him In answer to that I demanded of him who was to explain them The Papists I told him would explain some of them one way and the Reformed another The Remonstrants and Anti-remonstrants give them different senses And probably the Trinitarians and Unitarians will profess that they understand not each other 's Explications But to this in his reply he has not vouchsafed to give me any answer Which yet I expect and I will tell him why Because as there are different Explainers there will be different Fundamentals And therefore unless he can shew his Authority to be the sole Explainer of Fundamentals he will in vain make such a pudder about his Fundamentals Another Explainer of as good Authority as he will set up others against them And what then shall we be the better for all this stir and noise of Fundamentals And I desire it may be consider'd how much of the Divisions in the Church and bloody Persecutions amongst Christians has been owing to Christianity thus set up against Christianity in multiplied Fundamentals and Articles made necessary by the Infallibility of opposite Systems The Unmasker's Zeal wants nothing but Power to make good his to be the only Christianity for he has found the Apostles Creed to be defective He is as infallible as the Pope and another as infallible as he and where Humane Additions are made to the Terms of the Gospel Men seldom want Zeal for what is their own To conclude What was sufficient to make a Man a Christian in our Saviour's time is sufficient still viz. the taking him for our King and Lord ordained so by God What was necessary to be believed by all Christians in our Saviour's time as an indispensable Duty which they owed to their Lord and Master was the believing all divine Revelation as far as every one could understand it And just so it is still neither more nor less This being so the Unmasker may make what use he pleases of his Notion That Christianity was erected by Degrees it will no way in that sence in which it is true turn to the advantage of his select Fundamental necessary Doctrines The next Chapter has nothing in it but his great Bug-bear whereby he hopes to fright People from Reading my Book by crying out Socinianism Socinianism Whereas I challenge him again to shew one word of Socinianism in it But however it is worth while to write a Book to prove me a Socinian Truly I did not think my self so considerable that the World need be troubled about me whether I were a follower of Socinus Arminius Calvin or any other Leader of a Sect amongst Christians A Christian I am sure I am because I believe Iesus to be the Messiah the King and Saviour promised and sent by God And as a Subject of his Kingdom I take the rule of my Faith and Life from his Will declar'd and left upon Record in the inspired Writings of the Apostles and Evangelists in the New Testament Which I endeavour to the utmost of my power as is my Duty to understand in their true sense and meaning To lead me into their true meaning I know as I have above declar'd no infallible Guide but the same Holy Spirit from whom these Writings at first came If the Unmasker knows any other infallible Interpreter of Scripture I desire him to direct me to him Till then I shall think it according to my Master's Rule not to be called nor to call any Man on Earth Master No Man I think has a right to prescribe to my Faith or Magisterially to impose his Interpretations or Opinions on me Nor is it material to any one what mine are any farther than they carry their own Evidence with them If this which I think makes me of no Sect entitles me to the Name of a Papist or a Socinian because the Unmasker thinks these the worst and most invidious he can give me and labours to fix them on me for no other reason but because I will not take him for my Master on Earth and his System for my Gospel I shall leave him to recommend himself to the World by this Skill who no doubt will have reason to thank him for the rareness and subtility of his Discovery For I think I am the first Man that ever was found out to be at the same time a Socinian and a Factor for Rome But what is too hard for such an Unmasker I must be what he thinks fit When he pleases a Papist and when he pleases a Socinian and when he pleases a Mahometan And probably when he has consider'd a little better an Atheist for I hardly scaped it when he writ last My Book he says hath a tendency to it and if he can but go on as he has done hitherto from Surmises to Certainties by that time he writes next his Discovery will be advanced and he will certainly find me an Atheist Only one thing I dare assure him of that he shall never find that I treat the things of God or Religion so as if I made only a Trade or a Jest of them But let us now see how at present he proves me a Socinian His first Argument is my not answering for my leaving out Matth. XXVIII 19. and Iohn I. 1. Pag. 82. of his Socinianism Unmask'd This he takes to be a Confession that I am a Socinian I hope he means fairly and that if it be so on my side it must be taken for a standing Rule between us that where any thing is not answer'd it must be taken for granted And upon that score I must desire him to remember some Passages of my Vindication which I have already and others which I shall mind him of hereafter which he passed over in Silence and hath had nothing to say to which therefore by his own rule I shall desire the Reader to observe that he has granted This being premised I must tell the Unmasker that I perceive he reads my Book with the same Understanding that he writes his own If he had done otherwise he might have seen that I had given him a reason for my omission of those two and other plain and obvious Passages and famous Testimonies in the Evangelists as he calls them where I say p. 11. That if I have leâ—t out none of those Passages or