PREFACE fio " THE STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS OF HUMAN REASON." IN free and familiar conferences it is never required that such a just accu- racy of sentiment or language shouldbe observed, or that men shouldbe con+ fined to such exactness of method, as in a' set or studied treatise onany appointed theme., . Occasional incidents frequently arise, and turn the conversation aside into an unexpected channel : Or sometimes, perhaps, we renalthe same subject, and the same sense may be repeated again. And in the warmth of discoorse.some freedoms of thought and expression may break out, which stand in need of the candour of those that hear them, and it is 'ever allowed in suchcases.. Let it be noted'also, that when persons of differ- ent characters are introduced in a free discourse, the narrator is not bound to defend all that one or any of the parties present happen to utter : He will not pretend to snpport every thing that Pithander urges in vindication of the insufficiencyof human reason in matters of religion ; nor dares he venture to snake all the concessions on the side of its sufficiency, nor advance all the suppositions that Sophronius the moderator bath done in this dispute. But, upon the whole, if there be any thing suggested in these conferences which may occasion Logisto and his companions, who are under temptations to infidelity, to bethink themselves a little ; if it may awaken any of them so far as to raise some doubts about the sufficiency of their boasted reason, and lead them to see and confess the necessity of divine revelation, inorder to reform the world, and, to restore mankind to true religion and the favour of God, the writer bath attained his chief design, and shall rejoice in the Success.: There is no objection which the author has found in any public writing raised against this book, but such as are already expressly and in plain Ian- gsiage both proposed by Logisto, and answered by Pithander or Sophronius. And heintreats such opponents to read the book over before they write against it, before they treat it with insult, and pronounce victory and triumph on their own side. 'Ise chief, objection which the author lias heard of, that bath been raised in conversation against these conferences, is, thatthe deist does not argue so strenuously as he might have done, nor pursue his cause with, sufficient vigor and constancy ; but that he seems to be too soon and ton easily convinced by the reasoning of his antagonist or the moderator, in several of the subjects of controversy between them ; whereasour modern infidels would have scorned to have dropt the argument, or yielded up the cause without more contest. To this the author asks leave to reply, that if he, had cited the books whence he drew Logisto's argument, the objectors, perhaps, would; think better of them ; for they are not borrowed from the meanest writers. Nor has- ,he:eves; represented Logisto falling under cún- viction, but where he thinks the argumentsof Pithander or Sophronius carry sutácient weight and convincing power . with them : He confesses, indeed, that if he had drawn the teazing saw of controversy further, and prolonged a wrangling dialogue beyondthis point, perhaps it would set the writers on that side in a jester view, agreeable to their own practice; but still it would have been mere cavilling instead of disputing, it would have rendend the
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=