subdivisions, that truth is overlaid by the care taken to preserve her, and men's minds bewildered by endless dissection of the articles of faith. Necessarily, therefore, a difficult, though a very important duty devolves upon him, who, either for the purpose of instruction or defence, would transfer the Scriptures from the original to any modern language; that he endeavour with the greatest care to adapt the modern precise distinctions, accurately, to the more undefined expressions of the original, and beware of rivetting down general expressions to particulars, with which they have only a remote connection. From the neglect of these plain precautions, many of the difficulties in Scripture arise.

A serious deist, who really thinks the attainment of truth in things which concern eternity, an object of importance, must be desirous so far rightly to understand a book which professes so much, that he may be satisfied whether he has sufficient grounds for rejecting it. And to a Christian, the right and exact interpretation of it must be an object nearest his heart. It is the only method by which the purity of religion can be preserved, and the honour of it vindicated, against the attacks of unbelievers, or the scoffs of wicked men. The true sense of it is the only foundation upon which our church can rest her doctrine. And a mutual disposition to agree in the clear understanding of that, which is precisely revealed, and to cease from contentiously maintaining that,

which is uncertainly defined, is the temper wanted to bring Christians to one mind in their doctrine. Their present divisions furnish their enemies with weapons for assailing the Scriptures themselves. All men should imitate the noble mind of the Bereans, and receiving "the word with all readiness of mind search the Scriptures daily, whether those things are so1" which are recommended for their adoption..

14 Acts xvii. 11.

14"

DISSERTATION III.

DIFFERENT SENSES IN WHICH THE SUPREME BEING MAY BE SAID TO BE THE CAUSE OF EVIL.-VOLNEY.

Of

As a particular branch of the former inquiry, it was proposed to consider the different senses, in which the Supreme Being may be said to be the cause of evil. The inquiry must be confined to natural evil, or the inconveniences which we experience, as inhabitants of this world. moral evil, as what he either wills, acts, or approves, he can, neither by the philosophic Theist nor the Christian, be allowed directly or indirectly to be the cause in any sense. The former considers him, as a Being endued with all moral perfection himself, to have established all those relations in which his rational creatures stand to each other and to the things about them, by which moral good is made the law of their nature; and therefore as abhorrent of all participation in that, which is in the highest degree offensive to him; and therefore not acting so inconsistently as himself to subvert that law. The Christian learns from revelation another

cause,

which introduced wickedness into this lower world, the perverted will of a creature, who abused his faculties to the dishonour of his Creator and persuaded man to join with him in disobedience. Instead therefore of impeaching the credit of Scripture because it contains this account, we ought rather to esteem it an argument in its favour, that it has made known to us a fact of so much importance to us in its consequences, and which relieves us from any farther anxiety on the subject. But of natural evil he may be called the author in the two senses pointed out in the former Dissertation, both as the immediate cause and the cause by consequence.

Of those evils which arise from the imperfections of our nature and the limitation of our faculties, both of mind and body, he is the cause only by consequence1; because he hath placed us in a certain part of the scale of being with certain powers, from which limitation, that imperfection and its consequences follow. That he hath given us so much, claims our unceasing gratitude; that he hath given us no more, was a matter of his free choice. The withholding of some powers while he grants others, cannot be esteemed an actual evil, when he does not require of us more than he hath given us powers to perform. He only

'See Paley's Natural Theology, c. xxvi. p. 535-538. Edit. Lond. 1804. Archbishop King on the Origin of Evil.

demands of us a proper exercise of the powers, which he has given us, and a submission to whatever befals us from the want of more, as the proof of our obedience. Neither is he any more than the remote cause of those evils, which overtake us, when we transgress the laws of nature.

He hath constituted this world upon general laws; wherein certain effects follow certain causes. He hath given us reason by which we may perceive the connection of these with each other; and if we do not choose that line of conduct which leads to good, we ourselves are the immediate cause of the evil which befals us. He intends good for us, and the rule, which the constitution of nature points out, leads to good; but the law, which he hath laid down, must have its course, whatever the consequence be to any individual. "The generations of the world were healthful, and there is no poison of destruction in them, but ungodly men with their works and words called it to them." Farther, even if the evils which befal us, do not arise from contumacious rebellion against the moral rules of right reason, but only against the rules of common prudence, we are still the cause of our own ruin, by choosing a careless and negligent conduct, where our Creator demanded of us, a careful and due exercise of the understanding which he hath given us. As for the evil

Wisd. i. 14. 16.