in a manner something different from Dr. Burnet, which I will here consider as Dr. Middleton represents it.

Dr. Middleton suggests, that it is not possible for any mortal, "to give a historical narration, to describe the particular manner, order, and time, in which, or the materials out of which, this world, and its principal inhabitant, man, were formed: that were any writer to pretend to it, we. should apply to him what was said by God to Job, where wast thou, when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. And we should think the same of him, which Job confesseth of himself; that he had uttered what he understood not; things too wonderful for him, which he knew not. We should conclude, at once, that the whole, which the wisest of men could write upon the subject, must be the mere effect of fancy and imagination." From the nature of the story itself, we should readily conclude, that no writer.

A Job xxxviii. 4.

whatsoever could be so sufficiently informed; as to be able to give a historical narration of it; or could have authority enough to make it pass for such with any judicious reader." Dr. Middleton introduces the suggestion, not pretending directly to say, that Moses could not possibly, supposing him an inspired writer, give an authentic account of the facts related by him; but desiring to have the reader weigh and consider, what he would reasonably think of such facts so related, if the relator was thought not to have a warrant of a real revelation from God, of the matters declared by him. What argument can be drawn from what he thus offers, seems to me to be very obscure. The apostle tells us, that through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God; where he

See Middleton's Examinat. p. 128. Burnet's Archæol. p. 284.

Let us take a review of the story, as if it had been told us by Sanchoniatho. Middleton's Examinat. p. 128.

d Heb. xi. 3.

evidently refers to the Mosaic history. That the worlds were not eternal, but were made by the power of God, may be demonstrated from the reason and nature of things; but that God spake the word, and they were made; commanded, and they were created;" that they were not made, without the word spoken by him; not made by the immediate purpose of his will; but that he said, let them be, and they were so; as also that things did not instantly, all at once, take their being, as he might design them, but, in six days, were in their several orders framed and fashioned, day by day; such in every day, as he was pleased to appoint, when, before, there were none of them; this we may have no reason to believe, but upon the autho

* Psal. cxlviii. 5. See xxxiii. 6, 9. Gen. i. 3, 6, 11, 14, 20, 24, &c.

Nothing would give us so clear a view of the apos-` tle's reasoning in the eleventh chapter to the Hebrews, as the carefully observing his distinction and definition of the word faith: faith, he tells us, ver. 1. is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. The word we translate substance, is úwórası;;

rity of Moses' history. But shall we now ask the question? what if we set aside all consideration of the authority of Moses, and

:

how we came here to render it substance, is not easy to say as derived from iò and ", it may signify what the logicians define substance, res subsistens et substans accidentibus; but faith, an act of the mind, is no such substance. There is a passage in the New Testament, which may lead us to render this place more pertinently. St. Paul tells us, 2 Cor. ix. 4. of the Sósao, of his boasting-where we render the word, the confidence. The apostle assuredly believed that his boasting was not groundless; and this assured pelief he called visas. In this we have a clear meaning; faith is this assurance, an undoubting persuasion of the things hoped for. The apostle adds, that it is the evidenge, yx, what proves to us things not seen. We are apt to be very indistinct in our notions of faith, In common speech we often take faith and knowledge the one for the other; the believing a thing upon good testimony, and the knowing it, are, in a general acceptation, reputed one and the same thing. But the scriptures shew us a real difference between faith and knowledge; which are not the same attainments; for we are exhorted to add the one to the other: add, says St. Peter, to your faith, knowledge; 2 Pet. i. 5. Faith is the believing things not seen, not known to ourselves, but declared to us, and believed upon testimony, that

suppose what is written by him, as if written by Sanchoniatho, or any other ancient sage, who wrote uninspired, what he apprehended to be true, agreeably to his own sentiments of things? I answer: it will unques-. tionably follow, such sage not being infallible, if there be many as possible ways, in

they are true. We are capable of information, without the testimony of others, two ways; by our senses, and by our understanding. Things external strike our senses, and we immediately know what impressions we receive of them; and we have an ability of mind to see and compare our thoughts of things, and to form a judgment what to conclude of them. In this sense, divers things, which, literally speaking, are invisible, may, in the language of St. Paul, be said to be clearly seen, being understood: Rom. i. 20. We have a knowledge, an intuition of them in our mind, from our clear reasonings upon them, without information from another: but faith is not of this sort; faith cometh by hearing, Rom. x. 17 it is the belief of what we do not know, of ourselves, but are assured is known by some other, and declared to us. Now if we would accurately distinguish between belief in general, and that faith which is our religious concern; in the one we believe things, which are testified to be known by men to be true; in the other we believe things, that are well testified to have been declared from God.