themselves, and fall upon others, if the Holy Scriptures were but laid before the eyes of Christians in its due connection and consistency, it would not then be so easy to snatch out a few words, as if they were separate from the rest, to serve a purpose to which they did not at all belong, and with which they have nothing to do. But as the matter now stands, he that has a mind to it, may, at a cheap rate, be a notable champion for truth, that is, for the doctrines of the sect that chance or interest has cast him into. He need but be furnished with verses of Sacred Scripture, containing words and expressions that are but flexible (as all general, obscure, and doubtful ones are), and his system that has appropriated them to the orthodoxy of his church, makes them immediately strong and irrefragable arguments for his opinion. This is the benefit of loose sentences, and Scripture crumbled into verses, which quickly turn into independent aphorisms. But if the quotation in the verse produced, were considered as a part of a continued coherent discourse, and so its sense were limited by the tenor of the context, most of these forward and warm disputants would be quite stripped of those, which they doubt not now to call spiritual weapons, and they would have often nothing to say that would not show their weakness, and manifestly fly in their faces. Perhaps if it were well examined, it would be no very extraordinary paradox to say, that there are fewer that bring their opinions to the Sacred Scripture to be tried by that infallible rule, than bring the Sacred Scripture to their opinions, to bend it to them, to make it as they can a cover and guard to them."*

3d, The general tenor of Scripture ought to be made the rule of our faith and practice.-A little attention, with the aid of common sense, will enable us to discern the principal doctrines and duties of Revelation. From the general tenor of Scripture, we deduce the unity, the supremacy, the providence, and benevolence of God, the responsibility of man, the dependance of his future happiness or misery on his use or abuse of the talents entrusted to his care. Any doctrine opposed to these grand, these fundamental principles, cannot be a doctrine of Revelation. Thus, the doctrine of the Trinity is irreconcilable

*Locke's Essay for understanding St. Paul's Epistles, by consulting St. Paul himself. We strongly recommend the whole of this preface to his Paraphrase, to the serious study of our readers.

with the Unity of God, and cannot be a doctrine of Revelation. The doctrine of eternal torments, is opposed to the benevolence of God, and cannot be a doctrine of Scripture. The passages that seem to inculcate these notions, and others opposed to the attributes of the Deity, as derived from the general tenor of Scripture, are either misinterpreted, or are spurious, or contain some false reading. Misinterpretation may arise from giving a literal sense to a figurative passage, from ignorance of the idiom and structure of the language, from an ellipsis not being supplied, and various other causes.

4th, Great attention must be paid to the signification of words in controverted passages.-Parallel passages should be carefully examined. We should endeavour to ascertain the different senses in which any important word is used in Scripture, and especially the usual acceptation of it by the author whose work we are reading. The word God is used by us only to signify the Deity, but in Scripture, it has a very extensive signification. One of the names of the Supreme Being is often used to denote strength, quality, excellence, &c. Gen. xxiii. 6, NW, neshia aleim, literally, a prince of God, i.e. a mighty prince. Hosea xiii. 15, 1, ruch yeve, a wind of Jehovah, i. e. a strong wind. 2 Sam. ix. 3, 707, hesed aleim, the kindness of God, i. e. great kindness. A great fire is called a fire of God, Job i. 16. Great mountains are called mountains of God, Psalm xxxvi. 6; and lofty cedars, cedars of Jehovah. The same idiom occurs in the New Testament. Acts vii. 20, Moses was arrãos TW Oɛw, asteios to Theo, beautiful to God, i. e. very beautiful. 2 Cor. orλα duvaяa Cew, hopla dunata Theo, weapons powerful to God, i. e. very powerful. Rom. i. 16, The power of God, i. e. very powerful. 1 Thess. iv. 16, The trumpet of God, a trumpet of a loud blast. Persons speaking the word of God, fulfilling his purposes, or executing important trusts, are called gods. Ex. xxii. 28, Thou shalt not revile the judges: in the original, the gods. Judges and magistrates are also called, aleim, gods, in the following passages:-Ex. xxi. 6, Then shall his master bring him to the judges, literally, to God; Ex. xxii. 8; 1 Sam. ii. 25; Psalm lxxxii. 1. 6. Ex. vii. 1, And Jehovah said unto Moses, See, I have made thee, aleim, god to Pharaoh. See also John x. 34, 35; 1 Cor. viii. 5. Son of

God is a common mode of expression to intimate a state of favour and privilege, of excellence and acceptance. Can we wonder that Jesus Christ, who was without sin, who spake the words of God, and was in the place of God to us, whilst he revealed his will, should be called God, or a God, by the Apostle John i. 1? Yet this is the only passage in which Christ is so named. We shall hereafter show, that the following passages do not speak of Christ as God:-Acts xx. 28; Rom. ix. 5; 1 Tim. iii. 16; Hebrews i. 8; 1 John v. 20.

UNITARIANISM affords such numerous and splendid examples of conversion from theological mysteries, and palpable contradictions, to her plain and heavenly tenets, that it is probably this simple fact, which prompts the champions of orthodoxy to be so lavish of slander and vituperation; thus endeavouring, by the most dishonourable means, to neutralize the dreaded effects which might result from free inquiry; and, by every species of misrepresentation, to prevent the people from reading, thinking, and concluding for themselves. Judging from its consequences, therefore, the fact is highly important; it affords a strong antecedent probability, that Unitarianism is Gospel truth; and this will be more evident by investigating its origin.

Unitarianism can boast of many advocates and defenders who rejected the corruptions of Christianity, and embraced what they conscientiously believed, after laborious and - patient investigation, to be the truth as it is in Jesus. To what motive can we impute a line of conduct so diametrically opposed to all the influences usually ascribed to habit, education, or popular opinions? The cause must be allowed to be powerfully influential. Were these converts acquired by means of some fictitious plausibility with which it was invested; of immunities it had the means of granting, or penalties it possessed the power of inflicting? Have any been led to embrace Unitarianism, because of the incessant importunity, the never-ceasing attacks of its professors; who zealously disseminated their opinions by every method possible-clothed it with familiar prepossessing graces and concealed its hideous deformity beneath an insidious cloak of candour and lib

erality, until the unsuspecting heart imbibed the fatal poison, and the hapless victim fell a powerless sacrifice? This cannot be; because, the charge has been gravely advanced, that Unitarians are torpid and inert, inhabitants of a frigid and cheerless region; without zeal; not deeming it necessary to make the least effort to propagate their peculiar views. This charge, too, especially when compared with the heaven-and-earth-moving proselytism of some sects, is in some respects correct, with reference to time past-nay, is partially true of time present. That it is not universally true now, may be gathered from the alarm so apparent in the tents of orthodoxy, at the unseemly activity which is so unaccountably manifested. Verily, it was unwise to charge upon the system, the indifference of its professors; to denounce Unitarianism as necessarily productive of disgraceful supineness and inactivity; to taunt it as a sect almost extinct, and "nearly dwindled away from public observation!" Thus, Unitarians have been forced to the field; they have buckled on, their armour; they have appealed from the authority of Fathers, and the tenets of Reformers, and the Catechisms of Assemblies, to the Bible, as the only law binding upon Christians; they have proclaimed the inalienable right of man to think for himself, in religious things: that no man has power to interfere between man and his Creator, but that " conscience is not controlable by human laws, nor amenable to human tribunals." And the sons of orthodoxy may quail before the spirit they have so unguardedly contributed to raise, whilst from Indus to the Pole, the holy truth is published, that there is ONE GOD, and one Mediator between God and men, the MAN CHRIST JESUS.

But to return. As Unitarians have been so inactive in the dissemination of their opinions, we cannot ascribe to their agency, that vast accession of numbers, that acquisition of talent and zeal, which has been gained from the ranks of orthodoxy. Is the cause to be found in the ecclesiastical dignities which Unitarianism can bestow? Does she lavish honours on hypocrites who profess her dogmas, and reward her advocates with enormous wealth; and entice conscience with golden salvos; and hoodwink inpendence by splendid endowments? Or, as an established faith, does she wield secular authority, and create objects and stations, which may be worthy the exertion of ambition, or lure the attention of avarice? Or, if the influence

of patronage and wealth be nugatory, can she shackle free inquiry by ex animo assents and consents to creeds, articles, and confessions, or command uniformity by the agency of intolerant tests, or disqualifying laws? No! she is herself proscribed and debased; she possesses no immunities; wealth she has not to bestow, nor honours to confer, for she has not sacrificed to the prince of this world. Nor does she possess influence, by assuming the infallibility of an Assembly's Catechism, and erecting herself thereon as an immoveable basis; and alluring frail humanity with captivating views of seats at synods and presbyteries, and, in the distance a Moderator's chair, from whence to rule, as with a rod of iron, the faith and opinions of fellow men-arrogate the powers of God's vicegerent, the head and master of the Christian church, and promulgate what shall, or shall not, be believed-what is, or is not essential to salvation. Unitarianism receives, as a fundamental truth, the Christian equality of all the disciples of their Master. She recognises not lords in God's heritage. Who art thou that judgest another's servant, to his own Master he standeth or falleth?

Is it vanity or self-conceit, which has contributed to swell the ranks of this rapidly increasing sect? Was the profession of Unitarianism synonymous with profound erudition, and brilliant talents; did it combine in the eyes of the world, literary celebrity with distinguished excellence; was it connected with acknowledged worth, superior attainments, and splendid accomplishments? And were the opinions of her advocates received with respectful deference; and the character held in such estimation, as to empower its possessor to become an indisputable arbiter in all things pertaining to philosophy or literature? On the contrary, the sect was despised as insignificant; its tenets scouted as heterodox; its teachers vilified as ignorant declaimers: while from the paucity of its numbers, each theologically orthodox stripling could pour upon it the language of contempt, for it was the sect every where spoken against!

Still Unitarianism was on the increase; her cause was strengthened by the accession of many, whose first introduction to Christianity took place under very different auspices from hers. To her, as the pure Gospel light, flocked fearless and independent minds, who, in the pursuit of truth, were led to reject Platonic reveries, and