Wesley Corpus

to the Jewish or Christian Revelation? No; but) “to that revelation which he made of himself from the beginning, in the beautiful fabric of this visible world.” (Page 22.) 6. I believe your opponents will not hereafter urge you, either with that passage from St. Mark, or any other from Scripture. At least, I will not, unless I forget myself; as I observe you have done just now. For you said but now, “Before we proceed to examine testimonies for the decision of this dispute, our first care should be, to inform ourselves of the nature of those miraculous powers which are the subject of it, as they are represented to us in the history of the gospel.” (Page 10.) Very true; “this should be our first care.” I was therefore all attention to hear your account of “the nature of those powers, as they are represented to us in the gospel.” But, alas! you say not a word more about it; but slip away to those “zealous champions who have attempted” (bold men as they are) “to refute the ‘Introductory Discourse.’” (Page 11.) Perhaps you will say, “Yes, I repeat that text from St. Mark.” You do; yet not describing the nature of those powers; but only to open the way to “one of your antago mists;” (page 12;) of whom you yourself affirm, that “not one of them seems to have spent a thought in considering those powers as they are set forth in the New Testament.” (Page 11.) Consequently, the bare repeating that text does not prove you (any more than them) to have “spent one thought upon the subject.” 7. From this antagonist you ramble away to another; after a long citation from whom, you subjoin: “It being agreed then that, in the original promise, there is no intimation of any par ticular period, to which their continuance was limited.” (Pages 13, 14.) Sir, you have lost your way. We have as yet nothing to do with their continuance.