of old, they had a holy anointing oil, with which they anointed, and by which they sanctified their tabernacle, altar, priests, &c. Exod. xl. This was the type; the antitype of which the apostle thus expresses, in the forecited text, as that which is common to all true saints, who are spiritual priests, consecrated to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 1 John ii. 20. Ye have an unction from the HOLY ONE, and ye know all things. Ver. 27. The anointing teacheth you of all things. And perhaps the same thing is referred to in Rev. iii. 18. Anoint thine eyes with eye-salve, that thou mayest see. It is an unction from the Holy One, an holy anointing, an holy calling. In the same degree that God appears lovely to the soul, in the same degree is he actually loved. The exercise of love is always in proportion to the degree of our sense of the divine beauty. For, beholding the glory of the Lord, we are changed into the same image. The affections excited, are answerable to the views. A sense of the divine loveliness, if we may so speak, is love in embryo : esteem of, delight, and complaisance in the moral character of the Deity, is love in internal exercise; a life devoted to his service, to advance his honour and interest in the world, is love operating in good works. And then are ye my friends, if you do whatsoever I command you. But each of these are plainly of the same nature, holy and divine. And each are equally enjoined as matter of duty in that first and great command, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart. Therefore we are by God himself thus called upon, Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away the foreskins of your

z And by the way, this may show the difference between a rational conviction that God is lovely, and a sense of his loveliness. A man may from rational arguments be convinced in his conscience, that God is lovely; and yet have no sense of his loveliness in his heart, nor any love to him. Satan knew in his conscience, that the holy character which God gave of Job, there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, was an amiable character; but this character was so far from exciting love, that it excited envy and hatred in his heart. He wished to be able to prove Job an hypocrite, i. e. that all his love to God arose merely from self-love. Doth Job fear God for naught. So a wicked man may be convinced in his conscience, that God is an amiable Being; and yet be so wicked, as that he cannot bear to think that any saint on earth loves God for his own loveliness. And the reason may be learnt from 1 John iii, 12

heart. Jer. iv. 9. And again; Make you a new heart, and a new spirit. Ezek. xviii. 31.

For it is the duty of all to whom the Gospel comes, to look upon it as a glorious Gospel, and to have their hearts charmed with its beauty. To be blind to its glory is criminal, as was before shown; and to see its glory is for the same reason, a duty. And therefore, all who are blind to the glo

ry of the Gospel, and so disbelieve and reject it, are expressly threatened with eternal damnation. But such an infinite punishment supposes the crime to be infinitely great. The infinite greatness of the crime supposes we are under infinite obligations to the contrary. That is, under infinite obligations to look upon the Gospel as glorious, and cordially to believe and embrace it. And indeed its own intrinsic infinite beauty, lays us under infinite obligations; and not to esteem what is so infinitely worthy of our esteem, must be infinitely criminal.

To say, that it is not our duty to look upon the Gospel of Christ as a glorious Gospel; that is, to look upon the divine prefections therein so clearly manifested, as glorious; is to say, that we are not obliged to look upon God himself, as a glorious Being, when set in the clearest light before our minds. Which is, in effect, to say, that it is not our duty to love God. Which is to give up natural and revealed religion both at once and to pronounce the deepest depravity, perfectly innocent.

Had mankind, to whom the Gospel comes, a genuine relish for holy beauty, a taste for the beauty of God's true character, they would naturally discern the glory of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the image of God. If they knew God the Father, they could not fail to know his Son. Had mankind as high a relish for divine glory, as they have for the glory of this world, the glory of the Gospel would strike the mind as naturally as the glory of an earthly kingdom now does.

Had the Jews, for instance, had as high a taste for a spiritual Messiah, as they had for a temporal one, Christ crucified would as naturally have appeared glorious, as their expected Messiah, a temporal prince, was wont to do, in their

VOL. II.

64

ture.

fond imaginations. We have no inability to know and love God and Jesus Christ, but what is altogether of a criminal naAnd therefore our Saviour's conduct may be vindicated, in pronouncing such a heavy wo on the inhabitants of Corazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum, because they repented not. For if the fault is wholly in us, it is no doubt increased, as our external advantages are increased.But,

IV. Why is this kind of knowledge, of which we are speaking, constantly represented in Scripture, as peculiar to the saved, (1 Cor. i. 18.) to the called, (ver. 24.) to the spiritual, (Chap. ii. 14.) to the changed, (2 Cor. iii. 18.) to those who believe, (Chap. iv. 4.) to those who love God and keep his commands, (1 John ii. 4.) and who have eternal life? (John xvii. 3.) and why is it affirmed, that whosoever sinneth, hath not seen him, nor known him? (1 John iii. 6.) and that, he that doth evil hath not seen God? (3 John 2.) and of every natural man, without exception, neither can he know them? (1 Cor. ii. 14.) It is, in a word, because it implies a contradiction that it should be otherwise. For this kind of knowledge, and its effects, are necessarily connected. And this kind of knowledge cannot exist in an unregenerate mind. For, to use the language of Scripture, that which is born of the flesh is flesh; and the carnal mind is enmity against God. And what fellowship hath light with darkness? Or what concord is there between sin and holiness? Or what agreement between a carnal heart, and that character which it is at enmity against? Our Saviour judged it implied the greatest absurdity, that satan should cast out satan; that is, that satan should be against himself. But it is plainly an absurdity equally great, to suppose, that two intelligent Beings, of characters as diametrically opposite as sin and holiness, should relish each other's characters, and appear amiable in each other's eyes. Once granting that FALLEN MAN is totally dead in sin, destitute of the least spark of spiritual life, of the least remainder of divine relish, or in the words of the apostle, that the carnal mind is enmity against God; (and by the carnal mind, he declares himself to mean every man who is destitute of the spirit of Christ; Rom. viii. 7, 8, 9.) I say, once granting this, and it is certain, and is even capable of strict demon

stration, from the nature of things, that a sense of the amiableness of God's true and real character, must of necessity be peculiar to the regenerate. False notions of God may ravish an unregenerate heart, but his true character every such heart is in fact at enmity against. Hence the Gospel will be hid from all natural men, be they Jews or Greeks, however wise, however prudent, however penetrating, and however well instructed; and that even while sitting under the ministry of Christ himself, who spake as never man spake; and notwithstanding all the preaching of his inspired apostles. Thus the Scriptures affirm that, in fact, it proved. And thus, the reason of the thing, shows it must for ever prove.

It implies a contradiction, to suppose the human heart should be charmed with a character just opposite to its own. And nothing can be plainer, than that the character of the HOLY ONE of Israel is diametrically opposite to the temper of one who is quite dead in sin. The divine character, therefore, must be altered in our imagination, or we, in fact, be born again, or God can never appear to us an amiable Being. If we suppose God's character altered and accommodated to our taste, we may be charmed with the fiction, dead in sin as we are. But the clearer view a carnal man hath of the truth, the more certain will he be that the love of God is not in him. Rom. vii. 8, 9.

It is true, many a carnal man is ravished to think that God loves him, and will save him; but in this case, it is not the true character of God which charms the heart: it is not God that is loved. Strictly speaking, he only loves himself. And self-love is the source of all his affections. Or, if we call it love to God, it is of no other kind than sinners feel to one another. For sinners love those that love them. The carnal Israelites, who gave the fullest proof of their disaffection to the divine character, as exhibited by God himself before their eyes, yet were once full of this kind of love at the side of the Red sea. Our being ravished ever so much in a belief that God loves us, is no sign that God's true character would suit our taste, had we right notions of it. The hypocritical Galatians loved Paul while they considered him as the instrument of their conversion, and means of their salvation; but on

further acquaintance with the man, they turned his enemies ; for his character, rightly understood, did not suit their taste.

If God is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity; if he cannot look upon sin but with infinite detestation; if all those views, affections, thoughts, words, and actions, which are sweet to the taste of a carnal heart, are so infinitely odious in the eyes of God, as to appear to him worthy of the eter nal pains of hell, as is in fact the case, (Gal. iii. 10.) it is as impossible that a carnal heart should see a beauty in the divine character, as that it should view its own character as being infinitely odious. For one implies the other. If it is beautiful in God to be affected toward my character, as in fact he is, my character must be infinitely odious: nor can I at any time, from the heart, look upon God as a lovely Being, without looking upon myself as infinitely hateful. For that being whose nature it is, to look upon me as infinitely odious, is not lovely, unless I am in fact infinitely odious.— When our Saviour, speaking to the Pharisees, said, ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? These words determined his character in their eyes. And it implies a contradiction, to suppose, that Christ's cha racter might have appeared lovely to them, without their own appearing odious, answerable to the import of his words.But there was nothing in a Pharisee's heart to lead him to look upon his own character in such an odious light. And, therefore, all our Saviour's declarations, and all his miracles, did but exasperate them. The more they knew of Christ, the more they hated him. As it was natural to them to approve of their own character, so it was natural to condemn his. For, if the fault was not in them, it was in him. To say it was not in him, was to own that they were serpents, and a generation of vipers, worthy of eternal destruction. To look upon him as altogether lovely, was to look upon themselves as infinitely odious. But this was diametrically opposite to every bias in their hearts. Their old heart, therefore, must be taken away, and a new heart be given them, or they could never view things in this light. And thus our Saviour understood the matter. And, therefore, on a time, speaking