and character, witnessed to his being a true believer; and made it known, that he indeed "feared God, seeing he withheld not his son, his only son, from him." In this view of the case, the argument is clear and pertinent, and the evidence full and convincing; but considered according to the other construction of the words, it affords no conclusion to the purpose. It is no consequence, that because Abraham's faith was operative, therefore his good works made him righteous, or had any hand in the justification of his person before God; or, that because his good works were an evidence that his faith was perfect and upright, therefore his good works were a condition of his justification in the sight of God, with respect to his person and state.

The same thing likewise appears from the 23rd verse, "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness; and he was called the friend of God." There can be nothing more pertinent, natural, and easy, than the application of these words to the purpose which I have proposed. That eminent instance of Abraham's obedience did most convincingly evidence the truth and sincerity of his faith; and abundantly verify the report in the scripture, that Abraham did believe God; and that he had indeed such a faith, as was the means of rendering him righteous and accepted with God. Thus the scripture was fulfilled, and clearly manifested to be true. But then, on the other hand, if justification be considered in the sense which you plead for, this argument would be so far from concluding in favour of the point to be proved, that it would be directly opposite and contradictory to it. For how could Abraham's being justified by works fulfil the scripture, which

saith, he was justified by faith, if justification be in both places taken in the same sense for absolute justification of the person before God? How could his works being imputed for righteousness fulfil that scripture which assures us that his faith was imputed for righteousness; unless faith and works are the same thing, and there be no difference at all between believing and obeying? Certain it is, that the apostle Paul understood the argument to conclude the quite contrary way, when he undertook to prove, from this very text, that righteousness is imputed to him that worketh not; and that it is imputed without works: and therefore the apostle James must be understood in such sense as will make both his argument conclusive, and his doctrine consistent with the other inspired writings. —I shall only add, as to that clause, " And he was called the friend of God," this does not mean that Abraham's works made him the friend of God; but they declared him so. His obedience did not put him in the state of a friend; but being upon trial found faithful, he obtained this testimony, that he was the friend of God, a justified believer. Now Abraham being the father of all them that believe, an eminent example of faith, and pattern of justification, the apostle subjoins," Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only," ver. 24. In a like sense, even as Christ is said to be justified in (or by) the Spirit, so a christian man is justified by the fruit of the Spirit, in a holy life, that is, declared approved of God. By works, a man that says he has faith, is thus justified, and not by faith only; not by a faith that hath not works attending it; not by a faith which is alone, or by itself, destitute of its proper fruits and evidences.

A fourth argument is taken from the instance of

Rahab, "Likewise also was not Raliab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?" ver. 25. Upon which the same remarks may be made, as on the instance of Abraham. Rahab feared the God of Israel, and was a true believer, and therefore personally justified in the sight of God, before her sending out the spies another way. For she had received the spies by faith, Heb. xi. 31. And consequently she certainly had faith, before she received them; a noble confession whereof we find her making to these spies, before she dismissed them. See Josh. ii. 10, 11. What justification, therefore, could she possibly obtain by these works, but the justification of her faith, since she was really in a justified state before?

And now I am come to the conclusion of this whole dissertation, which is " For as the body without” (or severed from) "the spirit is dead, so faith without" (or severed from) "works is dead also," ver. 26. This, as I observed before, clearly shows what was the apostle's design in his whole discourse. For every conclusion of an argument justly prosecuted, must be naturally deduced from the premises, and consist of the principal subject matter to be proved, as we see is the case before us. But if justification were here taken in the sense which you espouse, the arguments would all of them be inconclusive, and that conclusion would be quite foreign to the purpose. This consequence, therefore, of my foregoing discourse necessarily forces itself upon you, that the apostle was not here treating of the justification of our persons before God, in regard to their state; but of our faith in point of sincerity; and therefore there can no argument be brought from this context, for our justification by works, in the sense you plead for.

Thus, sir, you have seen, that the apostles Paul and James were treating of very different subjects, and their conclusions were adapted to the doctrines which they undertook to explain. And thence it is a just inference made by an eminent divine upon this subject, that "the principal designs of the two apostles 'being so distant, there is no repugnancy in their assertions, though their words make an appearance thereof. For they do not speak ad idem, nor of things eodem respectu. James doth not once inquire, how a guilty, convinced sinner, cast and condemned by the law, should be justified before God? And Paul speaks to nothing else. Wherefore apply the expressions of each of them to their proper design and scope, (as we must do, or we depart from all sober rules of interpretation, and make it impossible to understand either of them aright,) and there is no disagreement, or appearance of it between them."

And it may be yet further remarked, that these apostles had very different persons to deal with, in their respective epistles; and their addresses were accordingly suited to the state of the parties to whom they wrote. The apostle Paul's business either lay with such, who, being newly converted from heathenism, were biassed by the principles taught by the light of nature, (and which were always received by them,) to indulge the vain thought, that they must render themselves acceptable to God, and be justified in his sight, by their own personal righteousness and obedience to the law—an opinion greatly strengthened by the numerous false teachers, who were desirous to be teachers of the law, though they understood neither what they said nor whereof they affirmed; or else his business lay with judaizing christians, who being zealous of the levitical dispensation and constitution, expected justification by

their conformity to it. Of these sorts of professors the apostle observes, that "being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, they had not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God," Rom. x. 3. His concern was therefore to discover their dangerous and destructive mistake; and to represent to them the way, the true and only way, in which they might hope for justification in the sight of God. That it is not by works of righteousness which they had done, but of God's mercy, they must be saved; that they must be justified freely by God's grace, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; and that in the justification of a sinner, righteousness is imputed without works, and received by faith only.

On the contrary, James, being concerned with carnal professors of christianity, who perverted the doctrines of grace to encourage themselves in a careless, licentious life, does at large convince them of the necessity of holiness, as the fruit and evidence of a true and saving faith, and the means to qualify them for the kingdom of heaven. He therefore puts them upon examining into the truth of their faith, and foundation of their hope, and shows them, by the arguments already considered, what alone will justify their profession of faith, and give them good grounds to conclude the safety of their state.

They, therefore, who over-magnify works, and depend upon them as the condition of their justification before God, are admonished by the apostle Paul to consider, that they are building upon the sand, and that they must renounce their false confidence, or perish. "For by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified: and if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain," Gal. ii. 16. 21. This