as we meet with in his letters on Theron and Afpafio. However, this we may be certain of, that all his attempts to obfcure, difguife and pervert the gofpel of Chrift, will, as the like have ever done, iffue in the farther clearing up of the truth, the disappointment and confufion of its oppofers, the honour of God, and the joy and confirmation of all who know and love the truth. As the fun never fhines more brightly than after he has been for fome time under a cloud; fo however truth may, for a time, be eclipfed and enveloped in a cloud of erroneous and heretical fancies, it will, at laft, work itself clear of them all, and shine with a more striking and refulgent fplendor than it did before. It may, and will be oppofed as long as the great adverfary thereof has any emiffaries and influence in this lower world, but it will at laft be victorious over error and all opposition. Great is the truth and will prevail. The following remarks I fubmit to the judgment of the impartial and judicious, defiring that no regard may be paid to what I have advanced farther than, after the ftricteft examination, it is found agreeable to the Sacred Oracles, and the analogy of faith. I hope the candid reader will make allowance for defects of ftyle and other inaccuracies of a like nature. If what is offered fhould be of use for undeceiving any who may have have been impofed upon by the deceitful artifices whereby the author of the letters has endeavoured to darken, perplex, and overthrow the true doctrine of the grace of God; for keeping others from being feduced by his fallacious and fophiftical reafonings; or for vindicating thofe important truths of the gospel which he has attempted to pervert and prostitute, and establishing any in the faith of the truth, in which they have been inftructed; it will be a fufficient recompence for what trouble I have undergone in following this extraordinary writer through fome of those tiresome and gloomy paths of myfticifm, ambiguity and error in which he endeavours to intangle his unwary and ignorant readers. There are many combinations formed against the cause and kingdom of Chrift in our day; but those who have the interests of Zion at heart, and prefer Jerufalem to their chief joy, may comfort themselves with this confideration; that the multitude of all the nations that fight against Mount Zion, including, among others, all hereticks and fubtil underminers of the truth, fhall be as the dream of a night vision. The Lord Jefus must reign till be bath put all his enemies under his feet; and in the mean time, upon all the glory, up on all the truths, ordinances and inftitutions of Chrift, and upon all his faithful fervants and followers, there is, and fhall be a defence. CONE PAlamon's ftrange notion concerning the Divine Being-His extraordinary criticism on John iv. 24. examined. His notions of the Supreme Being fimilar to that of the old Anthropomorphites, and J. Biddle, an English Socinian, in the last century, p. 23.-The fentiments of fome heathen philofophers more orthodox than thofe of the letter-writer on this fubject, p. 25.Strange paraphrafe on the words of our Lord, John iv. 24. p. 27.The fame text preverted by Soci-His corrupt glofs upon it, though far from being fo abfurd and nonfenfical as that of our author, rejected, and the commonly received interpretation thereof admitted by fome of his most learned disciples, p. 30.-Falfe gloffes put upon the Scriptures why fo readily admitted by many, p. 32. nus. ARTICLE II. REMARK S. Palamon's ftrange affertion concerning the object of worship, smells rank of the Socinian error concerning the the perfon of Chrift:not eafily reconciled with what the Scripture teaches concerning the divinity of Chrift, and the hypoftatical union between the divine and human natures in his perfon; and lays a founda tion for Idolatry, p. 34- -The letter-writer juftly fufpected of adopting fome Socinian notions concerning the perfon of Chrift.His GLORIFIED MAN ex- ercifing and difplaying every divine perfection, appears to be much the fame with the DEIFIED MAN of the So- The commonly received distinction between the co- venant of works, and the covenant of grace, which Pale- mon rejects as a fcholaftic or fyftematic dream, vindica- ted;-fhewed to be fcriptural, and every way agree- able to the apoftolic gofpel. The reality and propri- ety of fuch a distinction fuppofed in the apostle Paul's reafonings, in his epiftles to the Romans and Galatians, with regard to the law and the promise, works and grace, the old and new covenant, P: 54-- -The denying that there was a covenant of works made with Adam, as the head and reprefentative of mankind, the fource of many pernicious errors and capital mistakes concerning reli- gion, p. 71. Palamon's new edition of the covenant of works confidered, p, 74-- -His doctrine contrafted with what the Apostle Paul teaches in relation to this point, p. 75- -The falvation of believers not of grace, according to Palemon's hypothefis, but a debt Palamon's account of the manner in which the know- ledge and faith of the truth, which he affirms to be the fole |