A third Letter for Toleration.

5°3

examined it, lays it down as an unquestionable principle of his religion, thatthe Scripture is the word of God; what will you answer to him? And yetit would ffiake a great many Christians in their religion, if they ffiould layby that prejudice, and suspend their judgment of it, until they had made itout to themselves with evidence sufficient to convince one who is not preju-diced in favour of it; and it would require more time, books, languages,learning and skill, than falls to most men’s ffiare to establish them thereinif you will not allow them, in this so distinguishing and fundamental a point,to rely on the learning, knowledge, and judgment of some persons whom theyhave in reverence or admiration. This though you blame it as an ill way, P. 4-.yet you can allow in one of your own religion, even to that degree, that hemay be ignorant of the grounds of his religion. And why then may you notallow it to a Turk, not as a good way, or as having led him to the truth ;but as a way as sit for him, as for one of your church to acquiesce in ; andas fit to exempt him from your force, as to exempt any one of your church-from it ?

To prevent your commenting on this, in which you have shewn so muchdexterity, give me leave to tell you, that for all this I do not think all reli-gions equally true or equally certain. But this, I fay, is impossible for you,,or me, or any man, to know, whether another has done his duty in exa-mining the evidence on both sides, when he embraces that side of the ques-tion, which we, perhaps upon other views, judge false: and therefore wecan have no right to punish or persecute him for it. Irrthis, whether and howfar any one is faulty, must be left to the Searcher of hearts, the great andrighteous Judge of all men, who knows all . their circumstances, all thepowers and workings of their minds ; where it is they sincerely follow, and:by what default they at any time mil's truth : and he, we are sure, will judgeuprightly.

But when one man shall think himself a competent judge, that the truereligion is proposed with evidence sufficient for another;, and thence shalltake upon him to punish him as an offender, because he embraces not, up-on evidence that he the proposer judges sufficient, the religion that he judgestrue; he had need be able to look into the thoughts of men, and know theirseveral abilities ; unless he will make his own understanding and faculties to.be the measure of those of all mankind; which if they be no higher elevated,,no larger in their comprehension, no more discerning, than those of some-men, he will not only be unfit to be a judge in that, but in almost any casewhatsoever.

But since, 1. You make it a condition to the making a man an offender in,not being of the true religion, that it has been tendered him with sufficientevidence. 2. Since you think it so easy for men to determine when the truereligion has been tendered to any one with sufficient evidence. And 3. Sinceyou pronounce “ it impiety to say that God hath not furnished mankind with A -P- If£i -“ competent means for the promoting his own honour in the world, and the" good of fouls.” Give me leave to ask you a question or two. 1. Can any onebe laved without embracing the one only true religion? 2. Were any of the

Americans;