whatever, and in the End subjects his own darling Schemes to the same Uncertainty; for if we cannot judge of the Fitness, of plain moral Truth and Duty, neither can we of any Scheme of Religion; especially such as hang together more by Art and human Contrivance, than by Reason or Revelation. Being very desirous to get all the Information I could, concerning the Matter in Debate; I have attentively read over Mr. _Cole's_ Treatise on the _Sovereignty_ of God. I know 'tis thought an unanswerable Performance; and, so far as it regards general Christianity, it is worth every Christian's serious Notice: But as to the Doctrine it was wrote to support, it leaves it (in my Judgment) no better than it found it; but is miserably weak, and defective, as to any Thing that looks like sound Reason, or true Argument; and amounts to no more than this _poor Assertion, That because God is a Sovereign, he may do what he pleases:_ And, from the Instances he brings from Scripture, 'tis plain, that Mr. _Cole_ himself pays as _little_ Regard to the intrinsick Worth and Excellence of Things, as is done by many of his Brethren. The manner in which he has been pleased to give us the Story of _Jacob_ and _Esau_, proves the Truth of this Observation, I have no great Inclination to spend Time in explaining _hard Passages_ of Scripture, (tho' if any thing of that kind can be serviceable, or deem'd excellent, 'tis Mr. _Taylor_ of _Norwich_ his Book on _Original Sin_,) or to trespass on the Reader's Patience, by throwing one Text of _hard_ and _uncertain_ Meaning against another; for by this means the Controversy hath been needlessly prolonged. Where the Scriptures are _plain_, _positive_ and _reasonable_, their Authority ought to be conscientiously adhered to: But as this is not always the Case, the _next_ Thing to knowing what is the _true Meaning_ of any particular Text of Scripture is, to know what it neither _does_ nor _can_ possibly mean; in which Case, the Divine Attributes, and the Nature and Reason, or (if you please) Fitness of Things, is the best Rule. We _cannot_, it is impossible we _should_, understand the certain determinate Meaning of any Text of Scripture _better_, if altogether _so well_, as we do _know_ certainly, that God is _just_ and _good_, and _know_ also as clearly, what _Justice_ and _Goodness_ mean, when applied to the _Deity_, as we do, when we apply them to _ourselves_. And this Rule, if duly observed, would be abundantly sufficient, to set aside many Interpretations of Scripture, too commonly admitted upon this and the like Occasions. And, besides this never failing Argument (to all who attend duly to its Force) it is worth while, just to remark, that though, as the _Bible_ now stands, there are in it (as we must acknowledge) some Passages, which (especially at first sight) seem to favour the Doctrine of _Sovereignty_, &c. yet as it is possible, nay sometimes easy, to give them _another interpretation_, and the general Scope