5. That it is inconsistent with the divine perfections, to suppose, that God can by an external revelation give any religious knowledge, at _any time_, to _any people_, which was not equally given at _all_ times, and to _all_ people. This is the state of the controversy. As to the railing accusations, which this author pours out, at all adventures, upon the clergy, I shall wholly pass them over; my intention being only to appeal to the reason of the reader, and to add nothing to it, but the safe, unerring light of divine revelation. CHAPTER I. _Enquiring, whether there be any thing in the |nature| and |condition| of man, to |oblige| him to think, that he is not to admit of any doctrines or institutions, as revealed from God, but such as his own reason can prove to be necessary from the nature of things._ I BEGIN with enquiring what there is to _oblige_ a man to hold this opinion, because if there is not some strong and plain proof arising from the _nature_ and _condition_ of man, to _oblige_ him thus to abide by the sole light of his own reason; it may be so far from being a duty, which he owes to God, that it may be reckoned amongst his most criminal presumptions. And the pleading for this authority of his own reason; may have the guilt of pleading for his greatest vanity. And if, as this writer observes, _spiritual pride be the worst sort of pride_,¹ a confident reliance upon our own reason, as having a right to determine all matters between God and man, if it should prove to be a _groundless pretension_, bids fair to be reckoned the highest instance of the _worst_ kind of the worst of sins. ¹ Page 150. Every other instance of vanity, every degree of personal pride, and self-esteem, may be a pardonable weakness in comparison of this. For how small is that pride which only makes us prefer our own personal beauty or merit to that of our fellow-creatures, when compared with a self-confiding reason, which is too haughty to adore any thing in the divine counsels, which it cannot fully comprehend; or to submit to any directions from God, but such as its own wisdom could prescribe? Thus much is certain, that there can be no _medium_ in this matter. The claiming this authority to our own reason, must either be a very great duty, or among the greatest of sins. If it be a _sin_ to admit of any _secrets_ in divine providence, if it be a _crime_ to ascribe wisdom and goodness to God in things we cannot comprehend: if it be a _baseness_ and _meanness_ of spirit to believe that God can teach us _better_ or _more_ than we can teach ourselves: if it be a _shameful apostacy_ from the dignity of our nature, to submit to any _mysterious providence_ over us, to comply with any other methods of _homage_ and _adoration_, than such as we could of ourselves contrive and justify; then it is certainly a great duty to assert and maintain this authority of our own reason.