XXXI.

In which are fome things hard to be underflood.2 Peter 3. xvi.

THIS expreffion is commonly thought to refer

to St. Paul's epiftles; which are here fupposed to contain things hard to be understood. The alteration of a fingle letter in the original (ois for ais) which fome manufcripts warrant, make the fense wholly different. Inftead of St. Paul's epiftles, the myfteries of the gofpel, are hard to be underflood. This makes a much better fenfe; for tho many reafons may be given, why fome things in St. Paul's epiftles may at this day be hard to be understood; yet we cannot well conceive them to have been fo at the time they were written: we cannot well fuppofe that epiftles written to particular churches, could contain any thing that was not easily understood by those churches. To let this matter however pafs, in the following difcourfe, I fhall confider first the fource

fource of fcriptural difficulties:-and fecondly, how far a difficulty is an objection.

With regard to the fources of fcriptural difficulties, they may be traced either to human or divine origin. Scriptural difficulties of human origin arife from errors in tranfcribing---from errors in tranflating-from the idioms of the Jewish language fo different from our own-from figurative, proverbial, and allegoric forms of fpeaking---and laftly from ancient rites, manners, and customs, which are now little known. To one or the other of thefe fources, I suppose most of the fcriptural difficulties under this head may be referred.

Such difficulties, as arise from a divine fource, are of a different kind. Of them no folution can be given. They confift of thofe myfterious points, which we can never understand. Such are the

myfterious doctrines of the Trinity---of the incarnation of our bleffed Lord---of his propitiation for fin---of the nature of redemption---of the mode of inspiration; and of fome other points, which are wholly beyond our capacity to explain.Let us however fee, how far thefe, or the other fpecies of fcriptural difficulty, arifing from human inadvertence, amount to matter of objection. Sceptics have turned both the one fort of difficul

ties,

tics, and the other into objection. Let us examine with what reafon.

Let us confider, firft the fcriptural difficulties of human origin. Thefe have in general been well explained by the labours of learned men. Το the fimple-minded, and well-difpofed they never were objections. But I fhould just ask those, who are in queft of difficulties in order to turn them into objections, Whether they have fully, and candidly examined all that has been faid in anfwer to thefe difficulties? If they have, and remain ftill unconvinced with regard to a few particular difficulties, they muft at least have found, in their enquiries, fuch a number of difficulties diffolved, that if they have any candour, they muft fuppofe, thofe which remain, are not indiffoluble.If the fceptic, on the other hand, which is most probably the cafe, has taken no pains to examine the difficulties, in which he feems to be fo interefted, he cannot certainly be confidered as a judge of the cafe. He has heard one fide only; and we may difmifs him without farther attention. It is plain to what fide he leans. He is a prejudiced man. He has other objections to the gofpel, befides thefe difficulties; and if these were diffolved, a new set of difficulties

would

would arife.

In all probability fuch a man muft look to his life and manners. There lies the rub. The gofpel is too pure; not too difficult.

But perhaps he is candid enough to fee the force of all this, and owns that difficulties, which are merely of human origin, cannot always be avoided in a state of human things; and therefore cannot properly be confidered as objections: but ftill perhaps he is disconcerted with the other species of difficulties-the myfteries of religion, which he cannot accomodate to his reason.

A person of this difpofition, who is feriously willing to enter into argument, may be asked, Whether he does not think it reasonable, that when God Almighty makes a revelation of his will to man, there may be fome things in it, which human reafon cannot comprehend? Does he for inftance, pretend to understand the whole plan of the redemption of mankind? Does he clearly fee God's intention and defign in every part of it? He can have no real objection, unless he clearly understand the whole fubject-matter, to which he objects. If I take up a book on algebra, and do not understand the principles of the science, the difficulties that arife, are not certainly objections. I must folve them in my own ignorance. But if VOL. I.

E e

.

I take

I take up a poem, or a history, the subject of which I clearly comprehend, a difficulty there be comes an objection.

But you reply, that as the fcriptures are given for a directory, they fhould therefore be plain in

every part.

Why fo?It is true, that as far as the scriptures are a directory, they should be plain.--And fo they are. But there are many things in the fcriptures, which are not meant as directions ---where doctrines are hinted at, and were never intended to be explained; nor indeed could be: doctrines in which you have no concern. These are difficulties, no doubt; but to make them objections would be absurd.

We reason thus in common life. In God's moral government of the world, what is meant as our directory, is plain, and eafy; but many things in it are mysterious, abftrufe, and above our comprehenfion. But tho these things are difficulties, we have the fenfe not to make them objections. How ridiculous would that man appear, who fhould object to his victuals, because he was unacquainted with the nature of vegetation, or of animal growth?

Let