righteousness are to our consciences; and in that case the one would be as easily determined as the other. Crisp. But is there not a difference between the importance of believing the truth of God, and that of complying with his commands ? Gai. You would not think more favourably of a child who should discredit your testimony, than of one who should disobey your authority; and the same Being, who declares that without holiness no man shall see the Lord, hath declared that he who believeth not the record that God hath given of his Son, hath made him a liar that, he who believeth not shall be damned! Crisp. But should every error or mistake to which fallible mortals are liable, be considered as unbelief, and as subjecting us to damnation? : Gai. By no means. There is a specific difference between error and unbelief. The one is a misappre hension of what the divine testimony contains, the other supposes that we understand it, but yet discredit it. It is the latter, and not the former, that is threatened with damnation. Crisp. Do you then suppose error to be innocent? Gai. The answer to this question must depend upon the cause from which it springs. If it arise from the want of natural power, or opportunity of obtaining evidence, it is mere mistake, and contains in it nothing of moral evil. But if it arise from prejudice, neglect, or an evil bias of heart, it is otherwise, and may endanger our eternal salvation. Crisp. Will you be so good as to illustrate this dis tinction? Gai. Had David been engaged in the most wicked conspiracy when he fled to Ahimelech; and had Ahimelech in this circumstance, given him bread and t a sword; yet, if he knew nothing of it, less or more, nor possessed any means of knowing it, his error would have been innocent, and he ought to have been acquitted. But had he possessed the means of knowledge, and from a secret disloyal bias neglected to use them, giving easy credit to those things which his heart approved, he would have deserved to die. Crisp. Amongst human errors, can we distinguish betwixt those which arise from the want of powers or opportunities, and such as spring from the evil bias of the heart? Gai. In many cases we certainly cannot, any more than we can fix the boundaries between light and shade; yet there are some things, and things of the greatest importance, that are so plainly revealed, and of so holy a tendency, that we are taught by the Scriptures themselves to impute an error concerning them not to the understanding only, but to the heart. The fool hath said IN HIS HEART, there is no God. Why do ye not understand my speech ? Because YE CANNOT HEAR MY WORDS. They stumbled at the stumbling, stone, being disobedient. Crisp. Have not all men their prejudices, the good as well as the wicked ? Gai. As all men are the subjects of sin, undoubtedly they have. But as it does not follow, that because a good man is the subject of sin he may live in the practice of all manner of abominations, neither does it follow, that, because he is the subject of criminal error, he may err in the great concerns of eternal salvation. Good men have not only their gold, silver, and precious stones; but also their wood, hay, and stubble, which will be consumed, while they themselves are saved; nevertheless they are all represented as building upon a right foundation. He that errs with respect to the foundation laid in Zion, will, if God give him not repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, err to his eternal overthrow. Crisp. Does not this last species of error seem nearly related to unbelief? Gai. I conceive it to be so nearly related, as to be its immediate effect. The heart leans to a system of falsehood, wishing it to be true; and what it wishes to be true, it is easily persuaded to think so. The first step in this progress describes the spirit of unbelief, the last that of error. The one grows out of the other. Such a progress was exemplified in those persons described in the epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians: They received not the love of the truthbelieved not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness-therefore God gave them up to a reprobate mind, that they might believe a lie, and be damned! Crisp. Surely it is a serious thing in what manner we hear and receive the word of God. Gai. True, and I may add, in what manner we preach it too. Wo unto us if we teach mankind any other way of escape than that which the Gospel reveals! Wo unto us if we preach not the Gospel! If an angel from heaven preach any other Gospel, let him be accursed! : DIALOGUE THE THIRD. On the connexion between Doctrinal, Experimental, and Practical Religion. CRISPUS. RISPUS. In our last interview we discoursed on the influence of truth as it respected our eternal salvation; we will now inquire, if you please, into its influence on the holiness and happiness of Christians in the present state; or, in other words, into the connexion between doctrinal, experimental, and practical religion. Gai. Such an inquiry may convince us of the importance of each, and prevent our extolling one branch of religion at the expense of another. • Crisp. What do you mean by experimental religion? Gai. Experimental religion may be considered generally and particularly; in general we mean by it, the exercise of spiritual or holy affections, such as hope, fear, joy, sorrow, and the like. Crisp. And what relation do these things bear to divine truth? Gai. Under the agency of the Holy Spirit, they are its immediate effect. To render this matter evident, we need only inquire what have been the best seasons of our life, and our own remembrance will convince us that divine truth has been at the bottom of all those enjoyments which were truly solid and valuable. Crisp. Some of the best times in my life have been those in which I have mourned over my sin with godly sorrow. Gai. Very well; this holy mourning arose from a sense of your own depravity, a truth plentifully taught in the Bible. Crisp. I can remember also many joyful seasons when I have been in the lively exercise of faith and hope. Gai. Very good; but faith has truth for its object, and hope lays hold of a blessed immortality. Take away the doctrine of the Cross, and the promise of eternal life, and your faith, and hope, and jox, would be annihilated. • Crisp. I have heard some persons exclaim against doctrinal preaching, as being dry and uninteresting; give me, say they, something spiritual and experimental. Gai. Doctrines, it is allowed, may be so represented as to become dry and uninteresting; but Scripture truth is not so in its own nature. The doctrines of the Gospel are expressly called " spiritual things," which are spiritually discerned. Crisp. Does not the term experience convey the idea of proof or trial? Gai. It does; and this is what I had in mind when I said the subject might be considered particularly. Though we use the term to express the exercise of spiritual affections in general, yet it is more accurate to apply it to that proof or trial which we make of divine things, while passing through the vicissitudes of life. Crisp. Experimental knowledge, we commonly say in other things, is knowledge obtained by trial. Gai. Very well; it is the same in religion. There are many truths taught us in the divine word, and which we may be said to know by reading; but we do not know them experimentally till we have proved them true by having made the trial. Crisp. Mention a few examples. Gai. We read in the Scriptures of the doctrine of human impotency, and we think we understand it; but we never know this truth properly till we have had proof of it in our own experience. Further, we read of the corruption of the human heart, and think in our early years that we believe it; but it is not till we have passed through a variety of changes, and had expérience of its deceitful operations, that we perceive this truth as we ought. Again, we read much of the C |