which the interpretations advanced by Unitarians have been far-fetched and groundless; but merely state the cause why they are in general regarded in that light by persons who widely differ from us in their religious opinions.

No one who has attentively observed the processes of the human mind can be ignorant, that, in order to produce the ready reception of any truth, it must accord with our habitual modes of thinking and pre-formed opinions; and that unless there is such accordance, even strong and decisive evidence is insufficient to produce at once a lively conviction of the understanding, though it may produce a speculative assent to the position in question. If not only the position itself, but the modes of reasoning by which it is proved to be true, do not accord with the opinions and mental habits of the individual, a truth which to some may appear self-evident, will, in such a case, be rejected as obviously false. These are things which are open to common observation; and those who are sincerely desirous of arriving at Gospel-truth, must endeavour to check the long-established biasses of the mind; they must allow themselves to examine important positions, which at first sight they might be tempted at once to reject, with a disposition to yield to the evidence which may be adduced for them; and they must suspend their decisions till the first impulses of surprise and of dissatisfaction have lost their influence on the mind. Every Searcher after the truth as it is in Jesus must

have experienced, with how much dissatisfaction an interpretation, new in his own mind, is sometimes viewed, (even though sanctioned by great appearance of evidence,) till he has become somewhat familiar with it; till he has observed it in its various bearings and tendencies, and considered its connexion with other established truths: and few who really yield up their minds to the honest search after truth can be ignorant, that opinions which they now regard as important and certainly true, they once were ready to reject, at first sight, as injurious and unfounded in revelation; and that interpretations which they now regard as obvious and natural, once appeared to them forced, far-fetched, and in every respect unsatisfactory. As these things are facts which necessarily arise from the structure of the mind, it becomes every lover of Christian truth to be slow in rejecting important positions which may not accord with his own preformed opinions; and to be honest in the examination of the evidence produced for them.

Still however there must be some satisfactory principles, by which our examination into Christian truth should ever be directed, and which will then serve to obviate, and even to prevent, the ill effects of custom and authority in checking or misguiding our inquiries. The following appear to me to be indisputable ; and I feel a lively conviction, that when Christians in general faithfully abide by such rules and their necessary consequences, in studying the truths of their

religion, Christians in general will agree in the essential purport of those truths.

1. Revealed truth' can be found ONLY in the records of Revelation contained in the Scriptures.*

2. Revealed truths can never be inconsistent with the general tenor of the Scriptures, with each other, or with any truths which can be proved from the light of reason.

3. In interpreting the Scriptures, that meaning which would be plain and obvious to those for whom the particular parts were written, or to whom they were addressed, is to be preferred, unless it can be shown that this was not the meaning of the writer or speaker.†

4. To gain a right understanding of any author, "we must carefully observe the end or design with which he wrote, and the means which he has employed for the accomplishment of his end."+

5. The opinions of the writer or speaker, are to be determined, not by any detached expressions, which (owing to the imperfection of language) are, in themselves considered, ambiguous,

* What is required for any doctrine to be received as Christian doctrine, or part of the system of truths revealed by Jesus Christ, is stated in p. 2.

"In interpreting very many phrases and histories of the N.T., it is not so much worth what we think of them from notions of our own, feigned upon I know not what grounds; as in what sense these things were understood by the hearers and lookers on, according to the usual custom and vulgar dialect of the nation." Lightfoot's Works, vol. ii. p. 158.

See Mr. Veysie's Second Letter, p. 41.

-but by the general tenor of his writings or dis

courses.

6. Expressions which, in their particular connexion, at least, are obscure, or which are capable of different interpretations, must be explained by corresponding expressions (of the same individual, or of others using a similar style,) which are plain and unambiguous.

7. No meaning of any word or phrase can be the just one, which does not suit the connexion, or which is inconsistent with the general tenor of the individual's own writings or discourses.

8. That meaning of a word in which it is commonly used by the individual, or by others using a similar style, is to be preferred, wherever the connexion, or the general tenor of his writings and discourses, will allow of it.

9. Where a passage in the New Testament admits of different interpretations, and there is nothing in the individual's own discourses or writings to decide which is the true one, that should be preferred which best accords with the general tenor and spirit of the New Testament at large.

In these principles, considered in the abstract, I should suppose that most reasoners will readily agree. I cannot expect a similar agreement as to my deductions from them; but it is one grand point gained, when we can fix upon any common principles of reasoning; and I am fully content, whatever be the result, that every

explanation of Scripture in these sheets, should be tried by those which I have advanced.

I consider myself as being authorized, by the foregoing examination of the books of the New Testament, separately and as a whole, to affirm, that the doctrines of the proper unity of God, and the proper humanity of Jesus, are accordant with the general tenor and spirit of the New Testament; and that no opposing doctrines are. If, in addition to this, it appear that those few passages which seem to teach doctrines which oppose Unitarianism, (as well as those which are supposed to imply such doctrines without directly teaching them,*) do admit of a fair interpretation, suitable to the connexion, and to the style and manner of the writer or speaker, and at the same time consistent with the generat tenor and spirit of the New Testament, then it necessarily follows that Unitarianism is the doctrine of the Gospel.-My own opinion is, that Unitarianism alone accords with the general tenor of the New Testament, and that there is nothing in the New Testament inconsistent with it;-that it is founded upon the great bulk of scriptural evidence, and affords an adequate explanation of whatever does not directly teach it.

I shall divide the evidence produced in favour

It is a principle by far too little observed by the opponents of Unitarianism, that there is a wide difference between proving and according with a doctrine. We do not deny that several passages in the N.T. sufficiently well accord with their opinions; but we cannot admit that these can in any way prove them, unless they require an explanation, which, in the given circumstances, is inconsistent with our own. See also p. 2.