For how can God be thought to punish our blessed Saviour out of _dislike_, if his sufferings are represented of such infinite merit with him? Or how can he shew thereby his _approbation_ of the guilty, whose repentance is not _acceptable_ to him, till recommended by the infinite merits of Jesus Christ? As to the fitness of our Lord’s sufferings, as God and man; and the _nature_ and _degree_ of their worth; reason can no more enter into this matter, or _prove_ or _disprove_ any thing about it, than it can enter into the state of the whole creation, and shew, how it could, or could not, be in the whole, better than it is. For you may as well ask any of your _senses_, as ask your _reason_ this principal question, _Whether any supernatural means be necessary for the atonement of the sins of mankind?_ Or, supposing it necessary, whether the _mediation_, _death_, and _intercession_ of Jesus Christ, as God and man, be that true supernatural means? For as the fitness or unfitness of any _supernatural_ means, for the atonement of sin, must result from the _incomprehensible relation_ God bears to sinners, as it must have such _necessity_, and _dignity_, as this relation _requires_, it necessarily follows, that if God acts according to _this relation_, the _fitness_ of his actions cannot be according to our comprehension. Again: Supposing some _supernatural means_ to be necessary, for destroying the guilt and power of sin; or that the _sufferings_, and _intercession_, of the Son of God incarnate, is that true supernatural means, it necessarily follows, that a revelation of such, or any other _supernatural_ means, cannot possibly be made obvious to our reason and senses, as the things of human life, or the transactions amongst men are; but can only be so revealed, as to become just occasions of our _faith_, _humility_, and _pious resignation_, to the divine wisdom and goodness. For, to say that such a thing is _supernatural_, is only saying, that it is something, which, by the _necessary state_ of our own nature, we are as incapable of knowing, as we are incapable of seeing _spirits_. If therefore supernatural things are by the letter of scripture ever revealed to us, they cannot be revealed to us as they are in their _own nature_: for if they could, such things would not be _supernatural_. If an _angel_ could appear to us, as it is in its own nature, then we should be _naturally_ capable of seeing angels; but, because our nature is not _capable_ of such a sight; therefore, when _angels_ appear to men, they must appear, not as they are in themselves, but in some _human_ or _corporeal_ form. It is just thus, when any _divine_ matter is revealed by God; it can no more possibly be revealed to us, as it is in its _own nature_, than an _angel_ can appear to us, as it is in its own nature; but such supernatural matter can only be revealed to us, by being represented to us, by its likeness to something, that we already _naturally_ know.