B-d's Defence of the Reasonableness of Christianity, whether a layman, or a churchman, a Socinian, or one of the church of England, answered the creedmaker as well as he? Yet this is urged as a matter of great weight; but yet, in reality, it amounts to no more but this, that a man of any denomination, who wishes well to the peace of Christianity, and has observed the horrible effects the Christian religion has felt from the impositions of men, in matters of faith, may have reason to defend a book, wherein the simplicity of the Gospel, and the doctrine proposed by our Saviour and his apostles, for the conversion of unbelievers, is made out, though there be not one word of the distinguishing tenets of his sect in it. But that all those, who, under any name, are for imposing their own orthodoxy, as necessary to be believed, and persecuting those who dissent from them, should be all against it, is not perhaps very strange.

One thing more I must observe of the creed-maker on this occasion: in his Socinian Creed, chap. vi. the author of the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. and his book, must be judged of, by the characters and writings of those who entertain or commend his notions. "A professed Unitarian has defended it ;" therefore he is a Socinian. The author of A Letter to the Deists speaks well of it; therefore he is a Deist. Another, as an abettor of the Reasonableness of Christianity, he mentions, p. 125, whose letters I have never seen; and his opinions too are, I suppose, set down there as belonging to me. Whatever is bad in the tenets or writings of these men infects me. But the mischief is, Mr. Bold's orthodoxy will do me no good: but, because he has defended my book against Mr. Edwards, all my faults are become his, and he has a mighty load of accusations laid upon him. Thus contrary causes serve so good a natured, so charitable, and candid a writer as the creed-maker, to the same purpose of censure and railing. But I shall desire him to figure to himself the loveliness of that creature, which turns every thing into venom. What others are, or hold, who have expressed favourable thoughts of my

book, I think myself not concerned in. What opinions others have published, make those in my book neither true nor false; and he that, for the sake of truth, would confute the errors in it, should show their falsehood and weakness, as they are: but they who write for other ends than truth, are always busy with other matters; and where they can do nothing by reason and argument, hope to prevail with some by borrowed prejudices and party.

Taking therefore the Animadversions, as well as the sermon, to be his, whose name they bear, I shall leave to Mr. B-d himself to take what notice he thinks fit of the little sense, as well as great impudence, of putting his name in print to what is not his, or taking it away from what he hath set it to, whether it belongs to his bookseller or answerer. Only I cannot pass by the palpable falsifying of Mr. B-d's words, in the beginning of his epistle to the reader, without mention. Mr. B-d's words are: "whereby I came to be furnished with a truer and more just notion of the main design of that treatise." And the good creed-maker sets them down thus: "The main design of my own treatise or sermon:" a sure way for such a champion for truth to secure to himself the laurel or the whetstone!

This irresistible disputant, (who silences all that come in his way, so that those that would cannot answer him) to make good the mighty encomiums he has given himself, ought (one would think) to clear all as he goes, and leave nothing by the way unanswered, for fear he should fall into the number of those poor baffled wretches, whom he with so much scorn reproaches, that they would answer, if they could.

Mr. B-d begins his Animadversions with this remark, that our creed-maker had said, That "I give it over and over again in these formal words, viz. That nothing is required to be believed by any Christian man but this, 'That Jesus is the Messiah."" To which Mr. B-d replies, p. 4, in these words: "Though I have read over the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. with some attention, I have not observed those

formal words in any part of that book, nor any words that are capable of that construction; provided they be considered with the relation they have to, and the manifest dependence they have on, what goes before, or what follows after them.'

But to this Mr. Edwards answers not.

Whether it was because he would not, or because he could not, let the reader judge. But this is down upon his score already, and it is expected he should answer to it, or else confess that he cannot. And that there may be a fair decision of this dispute, I expect the same usage from him, that he should set down any proposition of his I have not answered to, and call on me for an answer, if I can; and if I cannot, I promise him to own it in print.

The creed-maker had said, "That it is most evident to any thinking and considerate person, that I purposely omit the epistolary writings of the apostles because they are fraught with other fundamental doctrines, besides that which I mention."

To this Mr. B-d answers, p. 5, That if by "fundamental articles, Mr. Edwards means here, all the propositions delivered in the epistles, concerning just those particular heads, he [Mr. Edwards] had here mentioned; it lies upon him to prove, that Jesus Christ hath made it necessary, that every person must have an explicit knowledge and belief of all those, before he can be a Christian."

But to this Mr. Edwards answers not.

And yet, without an answer to it, all his talk about? fundamentals, and those which he pretended to set down in that place, under the name of fundamentals, will signify nothing in the present case; wherein, by fundamentals, were meant such propositions which every person must necessarily have an explicit know ledge and belief of, before he can be a Christian, HƏ

Mr. B―d, in the same place, p. 6, 7, very truly and pertinently adds, "That it did not pertain to [my] undertaking to inquire what doctrines, either in the Epistles, or the Evangelists and the Acts, were of greatest moment to be understood by them who are

Christians; but what was necessary to be known and believed to a person's being a Christian. For there are many important doctrines both in the Gospels, and in the Acts, besides this, 'That Jesus is the Messiah.' But how many soever the doctrines be, which are taught in the epistles, if there be no doctrine besides this, "That Jesus is the Messiah,' taught there as necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian; all the doctrines taught there will not make any thing against what this author has asserted, nor against the method he hath observed: especially, considering we have an account, in the Acts of the Apostles, of what those persons, by whom the epistles were writ, did teach, as necessary to be believed to people's being Christians.'

This, and what Mr. B-d subjoins, "That it was not my design to give an abstract of any of the inspired books," is so true, and has so clear reason in it, that any, but this writer, would have thought himself concerned to have answered something to it.

But to this Mr. Edwards answers not.

It not being, it seems, a creed-maker's business to convince men's understanding by reason; but to impose on their belief by authority; or, where that is wanting, by falsehood and bawling. And to such Mr. Bold observes well, p. 8, "That if I had given the like account of the epistles, that would have been as little satisfactory as what I have done already, to those who are resolved not to distinguish betwixt what is necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, and those articles which are to be believed by those who are Christians,' as they can attain to know that Christ hath taught them.”

This distinction the creed-maker, nowhere, that I remember, takes any notice of; unless it be p. 255, where he has something relating hereunto, which we shall consider, when we come to that place. I shall now go on to show what Mr. Bold has said, to which he

answers not.

Mr. Bold farther tells him, p. 10, that if he will prove any thing in opposition to the Reasonableness of

VOL. VII.

DD

Christianity, &c. it must be this: "That Jesus Christ and his apostles have taught, that the belief of some one article, or certain number of articles distinct from this, 'That Jesus is the Messiah,' either as exclusive of, or in conjunction with, the belief of this article, doth constitute and make a person a Christian but that the belief of this, that Jesus is the Messiah alone, doth not make a man a Christian."

But to this Mr. Edwards irrefragably answers nothing. Mr. Bold also, p. 10, charges him with his falsely accusing me in these words: "he pretends to contend for one single article, with the exclusion of all the rest, for this reason; because all men ought to understand their religion." And again, where he says, I am at this, viz. "That we must not have any point of doctrine in our religion, that the mob doth not, at the very first naming of it, perfectly understand and agree to;" Mr. Bold has quoted my express words to the contrary.

But to this this unanswerable gentleman answers nothing.

But if he be such a mighty disputant, that nothing can stand in his way; I shall expect his direct answer to it among those other propositions which I have set down to his score, and I require him to prove, if he

can.

The creed-maker spends above four pages of his Reflections, in a great stir who is the author of those Animadversions he is reflecting on. To which I tell him, it matters not to a lover of truth, or a confuter of errors, who was the author; but what they contain. He who makes such a deal of do about that which is nothing to the question, shows he has but little mind to the argument; that his hopes are more in the recommendation of names, and prejudice of parties, than in the strength of his reasons, and the goodness of his cause. A lover of truth follows that, whoever be for or against it; and can suffer himself to pass by no argument of his adversary, without taking notice of it, either in allowing its force, or giving it a fair answer. Were the creedmaker capable of giving such an evidence as this of his