SECTION IV.

BUT many who admit the abstract character of God, feel notwithstanding a disposition to reject the gospel history; although its whole tenor is in perfect conformity with the general idea to which they have professed their consent. This is natural, though unreasonable. It is probable that the old king's son was very much astonished when he learned the final determination as to the mode of executing the law in his case; yet, if he had been asked before, what his opinion of his father's character was, it is likely that he would have answered with confidence, that he knew him to be a just prince and an affectionate father. Why, then, was he astonished? Did not the fact agree with his previous judgment? The only explanation is, that he did not comprehend the full meaning of his own expressions; and when he saw the general idea which he had formed of his father's character em

bodied in an action, he did not recognize it to be in fact the same thing. Many of those who reason on the character of God fall into a similar mistake: They admit his absolute moral perfections; but when the abstract idea which they have formed of Him takes life before their eyes, and assumes the body of an action, they start from it as if it were an utter stranger. And why? The only reason which can be given is, that the abstract idea which they talk about is so vague and indeterminate as to make no distinct impression on their minds.

If a man really admitted, in truth and in intelligence, that abstract idea of God which he admits in words, he would find his reason compelled to believe a fact which is only an exemplification of that idea, nay the existence of which seems in some degree indispensible to the consistency of that idea. The admission of this abstract idea, and the rejection of the corresponding fact, are as inconsistent as to be convinced of the thorough liberality of a friend's character, and at the same time to reject as absurd and fanciful the history of a liberal action

said to have been performed by him when the occasion seemed actually to require it.

There is another quality belonging to abstract ideas, arising from the vagueness of the impressions made by them, which recommends them to many minds; and that is, their inoffensiveness. A corrupt politician, for instance, can speculate on and applaud the abstract idea of integrity; but when this abstract idea takes the form of a man and a course of action, it ceases to be that harmless and welcome visitor it used to be, and draws on itself the decided enmity of its former apparent friend. The fact is, that the man never really loved the abstract idea of integrity, else he must have loved every exemplification of it. We have thus an unequivocal test of a man's principles. Bring the eloquent eulogist of magnanimity into a situation where he may be tried, bring him in difficult circumstances into contact with a person of real magnanimity, and we shall see whether it was the thing or the name which he loved.

In the same way, many men will admit the abstract idea of a God of infinite holiness and goodness; and will even take de

light in exercising their reason of their
taste in speculating on the subject of his
being and attributes; yet these same per-
sons will shrink with dislike and alarm from
the living energy which this abstract idea
assumes in the Bible. It is there no longer
a harmless generality: It is a living Being,
asserting one spiritual character and one
class of principles in harmony with his own,
disapproving and condemning every other,
and casting the weight of omnipotence into
his scale, to prove the vanity of all resist-
ance. Those who feel oppressed by the vi-
gilance and strictness of this ever-present
witness, without being convinced of the
importance of his friendship, are glad to
retreat and to shroud themselves under the
vagueness of an abstract idea. But in truth
they do not believe nor love this abstract
idea of God, else they would also believe
and love the living character which cor-
responds to it. The real conviction of the
truth of the abstract idea would necessarily
contain in it the conviction of the corre-
sponding fact.

A

X

These remarks may serve to illustrate the grounds on which a charge of moral

guilt is brought by the Scriptures against unbelief. If a man cannot refuse his assent and approbation to an abstract principle in morals, why does he reject it when it loses its abstractness, and comes in a form of power and efficiency? The principle continues the same; it has only assumed a more active attitude. In truth, he now rejects it because it is active, and because it strenuously opposes many of his favourite inclinations. He does not wish to be guided by what he knows to be right, but by what he feels to be agreeable." He does not wish to retain God in his knowledge." He does not wish, at any risk or with any sacrifice, to do the will of God; and therefore "he doth not know of the doctrine whether it be of God." Such an ignorance as this is criminal; because it arises from a wilful stifling of conviction, and an aversion to admitted truths.

It thus appears, that, by the help of abstract ideas and general terms, a man may appear to have made great progress in morals, whilst in fact he has learned nothing. Things operate on our minds exactly aecording to our apprehension of them, and