On the other hand; if the profoundest humility towards God, be the highest instance of piety: if every thing within us and without us, if every thing we know of God, every thing we know of ourselves preaches up humility to us, as the foundation of every virtue, as the life and soul of all holiness: if _sin_ had its beginning from _pride_, and _hell_ be the effect of it, if _devils_ are what they are through spiritual pride and self-conceit, then we have great reason to believe, that the claiming this authority to our reason, in opposition to the revealed wisdom of God, is not a frailty of _flesh_ and _blood_, but that same spiritual pride which turned _angels_ into _apostate_ spirits. Since therefore this appealing to our own reason, as the absolutely _perfect rule_ of all that ought to pass between God and man, has an _appearance_ of a pride of the _worst_ kind, and such as unites us both in temper and conduct with the fallen spirits of darkness, it highly concerns every pleader on that side, to consider what grounds he proceeds upon, and to ask himself, what there is in the _state_ and _condition_ of human nature, to oblige him to think, that nothing can be _divine_ or _holy_, or _necessary_, in religion, but what _human_ reason dictates? I hope the reader will think this a fair state of the case, and that all the light we can have in this matter, must arise from a thorough consideration of the _state_ and _condition_ of man in this world. If without revelation he is free from mysteries as a _moral_ and _religious_ agent, then he has some plea from his state and condition to reject _revealed_ mysteries. But if in a state of natural religion, he can’t acknowledge a divine providence or worship God, without _as much_ implicit faith, and submission of his reason, as any revealed mysteries require; then his _state_ and _condition_ in the world, condemns his refusal of any revelation sufficiently attested to come from God. This enquiry therefore into the state and condition of man, being so plainly the true point of the controversy, I hope to obtain the reader’s impartial attention to it. Had mankind continued in a state of _perfect innocence_, without ever failing in their duty either to God or man, yet even in such a state, they could never have known what God would or would not reveal to them, but by some express revelation from him. And as God might intend to raise them to some higher, and unknown state of perfection; so he might raise them to it by the revelation of such things as their own reason, though uncorrupt, yet could not have discovered.