Yet your Lordship’s mind is so full of this, that after repeating the 14th and 15th verses (_as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God: for ye have not received the Spirit of bondage again to fear: but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father!_) you add, “in the former part of this verse, the apostle shews again the imperfection of the _Jewish_ law.” This also calls for proof: otherwise, it will not be allowed, that he here speaks of the _Jewish_ law at all: not, tho’ we grant that “the _Jews_ were subject to the _fear_ of death, and lived in consequence of it, in a state of _bondage_.” For are not all unbelievers, as ♦well as the _Jews_, more or less, in the same _fear_ and _bondage_? ♦ “will” replaced with “well” Your Lordship goes on, “In the latter part of the verse he shews the superiority of the _Christian_ law to that of the _Jews_.” Page 18. Where is the proof, my Lord? How does it appear, that he is speaking either of the _Christian_ or _Jewish_ law, in those words, _Ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father_? However you infer, “_Christians_ then are the adopted sons of God, in contradistinction to the _Jews_, as the former had the gifts of the Holy Ghost, which none of the latter had at that time: and _the body of the Jews_ never had.” No, nor _the body of the Christians_ neither. So that if this be a ♦proof against the _Jews_, it is the very same against the _Christians_. ♦ “poof” replaced with “proof” I must observe farther on the preceding words, 1. That your Lordship begins here, to take the word _Christians_ in a new and peculiar sense, for the whole body of the then Christian Church: 2. That it is a bad inference, “as, or because they had the gifts of the Holy Ghost, therefore they were the sons of God.” On the one hand, if they were the children of God, it was not, because they had gifts. On the other, a man may have all those gifts, and yet be a child of the devil. 9. I conceive, not only that your Lordship has _proved_ nothing hitherto, not one point that has any relation to the question: but that, strictly speaking, you have not _attempted to prove_ any thing, having _taken for granted_ whatever came in your way. In the same manner you proceed, “The apostle goes on, _The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God_. This passage, as it is connected with the preceding one, relates to the general adoption of Christians, or their becoming the sons of God instead of the _Jews_.”――“This passage relates”――How is that proved? By its connexion with the preceding? In no wise, unless it be good arguing to prove _Ignotum per ignotius_. It has not yet been proved, that the preceeding passage itself has any relation to this matter.