muft and would recommend and encourage, by his promises, fuch felfishness only, as has regard to this world. Neither is there any principle in nature which can difpofe God to have any regard to the publick good; much lefs to promise the happines of another world to those who (by acting contrary to nature, or to a divine determination) pursue the publick happinets here; fo that, upon the prefent Suppofition, the chriftian revelation cannot poffibly be divine.

Here I obferve, what wretched shifts men will fly to when they are preffed in argument, viz. they will reprefent benevolent virtue, (which in reality is the most valuable (if not carried to an extream) when it comes in competition with selfishness,) as a childish and a foolish thing; fo that a man would be a fool, and a blockhead, to deny himself any the least enjoyment, or to undergo any the leaft labour or pain for the fake of another, or for the fake of the publick, were he not fure to be fufficiently recompenced for it in another world. And if this principle be uniformly maintained, then, I think, he would be a fool, &c. who would not rob, and steal, and cut throats, and be guilty of every outrage which lay in the way of his Intereft, were there not the gallows in this world, and damnation in another, to reftrain him. I fay, fuch fhifts as thefe, men are forced to fly to, to fupport a defperate. caufe. Tho', indeed, fome late writers of controversy are

grown

grown fo fceptical in argument, that there is no knowing where to find them; for they will give up a principle in one page, and reafon from it in another. And they will invent a great number of idle diftinctions, which, I think, can answer no other purpose, than to perplex the case, and mislead their readers. But to return,

As there is a rule of action, founded in the nature of things, which every intelligent being ought, in reafon, to direct and govern his actions by, (the firft Cause of all things, as he is an intelligent Being, not excepted) fo this rule is called the law of nature; because it naturally and neceffarily refults from the nature, and the effential differences in things. And it is called a law, not as being the commandment of a fuperior, but as it is a rule of action to intelligent beings, and fo it answers the purposes of a law to them, And thus St. Paul confiders it, Rom. ii. 12. For as many as have finned without law, shall perifh without law. That is, as many as have finned, and thereby rendered themselves worthy of punishment, who have not had any law given them by their Creator (which was the cafe of the Gentile world) fuch men fhall be judged by, and be condemned for the breach of that law, or rule of action, which is founded in the reafon of things, Here we fee St. Paul plainly fuppofes this rule of action to be a law to mankind, or which comes to the fame, he fupposes it to G 2 anfwer

anfwer the purpoies of a law to them, viz. as it is what they cught to govern their actions by at prefent, and as it is that by which they will be judged hereafter. But the Apoftle is yet more particular, at verses 14, 15. For when the Gentiles who have not the law (viz. the law of Mofes, nor any other law given them by their Creator) do by nature (vis. from a natural fenfe of right and wrong, of good and evil, &c.) the things contained in the law (viz. the law given them by God, the law of God being founded on, and conformed to the reafon of things) thefe having not the law (viz. having not any law given them by God) are a law unto themfelves; (viz.are confcious to themfelves of a law, or rule of action, founded in the nature of things, which they cught to be governed by) which fhew the work of the law written in their hearts, (that is,as the law of God is founded on,and conformed to the reafon of things; fo this principle of felf-confcioufnefs fhews that God's law is for fum and substance written and impreffed upon every man's heart) their confcience alfo bearing them witness, and their thoughts, the mean while, either accufing, or elfe excufing one another. (That is, the Gentiles, who had no law given them by God, were yet confcious to themselves of acting agreeably with, or contrary to that rule of action founded in the nature of things, and in the mean while (that is, before the day of judgment) their own thoughts acquitted or condemned them accordingly.)

If it fhould be faid, that the law of nature is the law of God; I anfwer, that it is the law of God, as it is that rule of action, by which God always directs and governs his behaviour towards his creatures. And it is God's law, as he adopts it, and makes it his, by giving it as a rule of action to his fubjects, (he being the great Governor of the moral world) all God's laws being founded upon it, and conformed to it. But it is not God's law as founded folely on his will and commandment; becaufe, it is, and ought to be, a law or rule of action to all intelligent beings, whether God willed or commanded it, or not. And,

This law of nature is, in order of nature, above and before all other laws, it being the ground and foundation of them; all laws, and government, whether human or divine, being originally founded, not in a fuperiority of power, but in the reafon of things, as aforefaid. And as government itself is founded in the reason of things; fo all authority, and all laws, flowing from it, ought to be directed and governed by this original, and primary law of nature. It being a manifeft abfurdity to fuppofe, that any lawgiver can, in reafon have a right to command what is not fit nor reasonable to be commanded. And this is manifeftly the cafe, with refpect to all laws, and all lawgivers, whether human or divine. It being equally as unreaLonable and unfit, that God fhould make an unreasonable

unreasonable law, or a law which anfwers no good end, as that any other lawgiver should act thus, feeing the reafon of things is, and ought to be, as much a rule of action to him, as to any other intelligent being. God indeed is our Creator, and as he called us into being without our confent, fo hereby he became our common parent, and the natural guardian of our happinefs: and hereby he has, in reafon, a right to govern us, not by making what law he pleafes, but only to rule us for our good; it being very unequal and unreasonable, that he should excrcife any other authority over us, feeing his calling us into being, or his being poffeffed with fuch power, as we are not able to refift, does not alter the nature of things, by making that fit and reafonable which otherwife would not be fo. And,

As this rule of action is founded in the reafon of things; fo our obligation to obedience is founded on the fame principle. That is, we are, in reafon, obliged to yield obedience to this law, fuppofing no promulged law had ever been given to mankind. Thus the grateful acknowledgment of a favour received, and the making a grateful return for it to proper perfons, and under proper circumftances (when and where fuch returns can be made) are duties which every intelligent being is, in reafon, obliged to perform, when confidered abftractedly from, and antecedent to any promulged law of any kind.

For