To realize this high destiny requires truth in the inward parts, which can only be attained by coming in honest simplicity to the Father of Light, who will in no wise cast out whoever will thus seek Him.

God is the God of all flesh: there must be therefore some common ground from which all mankind, even the lowest of our species, unless accident or excess has impaired his faculties, may start in search of Him. This ground is the belief in the existence of God, and that He is a being of infinite goodness. On this foundation all true religion must rest: on this foundation, which is broad and ample as the universe, demonstration will accompany every step; for he who diligently acts on this belief, whatever may be his present principles, will daily and hourly draw nearer to God; and, if the foundation be true, if He be a being of infinite goodness, must needs ultimately attain unto Him.

But if Christianity be true, the road of those to whom it is addressed must inevitably lead through the Gospel; for, claiming to be a revelation from God, no one, with the slightest shew of reason, can pretend that he wishes to attain to the knowledge of God, who refuses to be taught in His own appointed way; no one, therefore, who rejects Christianity, can justify himself as a believer in the existence and goodness of God, except so far as Christianity shall be, in his opinion, inconsistent with that belief; because, professing to be a revelation from God, if it is worthy of Him, those who reject it, reject the very object of their search—the knowledge of God, the essence of all true religion, and the highest attainment any creature is capable of.

Now if Christianity be true, the God of Nature

and of Christianity must be the same. It cannot be true, therefore, if inconsistent with the Divine attributes, especially with that which is fundamental to all religion-the Divine goodness. Christianity will pass triumphantly through this test in all points but one; in all other respects it assumes and verifies the Divine attributes, and is the only scheme whereon they can be fully justified; for although God has not left himself without witness, giving corn, and wine, and oil, in their seasons, yet it is the bread that came down from Heaven, it is the meat that perisheth not, that clearly vindicates Him as a righteous Governor, as a God of intellectual beings.

I have stated that Christianity, as commonly interpreted, is contrary to the Divine attributes on one point; that point is the Doctrine of Eternal Misery in Hell. This I shall endeavour to prove with respect to the goodness and justice of the Deity, employing the presumption which thence arises as a basis to an inquiry into the reality of the doctrine as included in Christianity and contained in Scripture; I shall therefore claim as a postulate, that the presumption against this doctrine is strong in proportion to its apparent inconsistency with the Divine attributes.

I shall then proceed to consider it as supposed to pervade the Christian system, or as standing on the authority of insulated texts; and, in order to attain a fair judgment, I shall pass in review all our Saviour's parables, and all such of His incidental expressions as appear to have any relation to the point in question. I shall also produce from the Epistles every text that appears to me to bear upon the subject. From this investigation I shall deduce

as my inference, that the doctrine is inconsistent with the otherwise uniform tenor of our Saviour's own words, with the object for which he came into the world, and with the sense in which the Apostles understood Him when enlightened by the Holy Spirit; and that it therefore does not pervade the system, but must be maintained, if at all, on the authority of detached texts.

In the course of this part of the inquiry I think I shall be able to prove that many texts, particularly Rom. v. 12th to 21st verses-2 Cor. ii. 14, v. 5— Gal. iv. 27-Eph. i. 10, are not true, on the supposition of eternal misery; and that these and others which are unintelligible or obscure, start, on its removal, into perfect harmony with the whole scheme of Christianity.

My next step shall be to consider this doctrine as practically applied in human life; and I think it will appear to be either useless, as being disregarded, or noxious, as bringing an opprobrium on Christianity and preventing its diffusion; for, as no services are accepted by God but those done in love, and none such can this produce; so, to prevent crimes, the withdrawing of existence, which is ever in the Divine power, would be much more effectual.

I shall then endeavour to prove that the doctrine can only be defended by assuming the natural immortality of man; a point which no one text of Scripture either declares or assumes, whilst hundreds declare or assume the contrary.

I shall then shew, by disposing, on St. Paul's authority, of one other text, on which the doctrine is thought to rest, that the only words that imply it, are "Where their worm dieth not;" and that these very

words are omitted by one of two of the Evangelists, who record the other words used by our Saviour on the same occasion; which I hold to be no less than a demonstration that the Holy Spirit, who it was promised should guide them into all truth, meant not by these words to reveal a decree whereby the punishment of man's sins was increased infinitely.

The probability that these words are wrongly interpreted is strengthened by this consideration, that they are attended by a grammatical inaccuracy, unparalleled, I believe, in holy writ, and that not arising from inadvertency, because thrice repeated.

Having pointed out the difficulties that attend the doctrine, and investigated the authority on which it rests, it remains, in order wholly to remove this obstacle to the reception of Christianity as the work of the God of nature and of love, that by some legitimate criticism I should exhibit the words in question in a sense that harmonizes with reason and revelation. Having done this, I shall then attempt to shew that Christianity alone can solve the difficulties which attend the history and consequences of creation; and if I can make apparent the image of God impressed upon these, no one who possesses the first principles of all religion-the belief in the being and goodness of God-can, without selfcondemnation, withhold his belief from conclusions by which divine truth is harmonized, and refusing to walk in the path which God himself has pointed out, can yet hope to attain to glory, honour, and immortality.

God is great, and worthy to be praised; but acceptable praise cometh not out of feigned lips: it

is only by ascribing to God his own that we can do him honour, and we know that in honouring Him, and in that alone, shall man prosper.

Truth alone, therefore, is pure good; Error as absolutely evil; and as one or other of these prevail in our opinions, happiness or misery inevitably accompany it.

The importance to us of the knowledge of truth depends exactly on our relation to the subject it concerns; and if it be material to us to know the relation in which we stand to our fellow creatures, out of which arises our duties with respect to them, it is transcendently so to know God, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent, because to the highest object is united the most intimate and extensive relation. It is the noblest attainment human creatures are capable of, the most excellent gift that even Infinite Goodness can bestow. All error, therefore, in this respect, all misapprehension of God's promises and threats, must taint and injure our whole state, and be to us matter of infinite concernment; and as all that is estimable and lovely in human life is so, as, by being beneficial to mankind, it conduces to the honour of God, so will he be blessed in the very act who shall remove a misconception as to God's dealings with his creatures, which extensively prevailing, dulls in our apprehensions the lustre of His glory, and intercepts the beams that issue from Him to cheer, to animate, and to bless.

The importance of the subject treated of in the following pages will justify the freedom with which it is discussed. If that freedom, however, were to transgress the bounds of honest candour, the writer

have no excuse to plead, having recorded his