PRL os eS AS Ge a = eg OF THE ra SULOGIGAL SEMNUARY, PRINCETON, New: DON A TION OF SAMUEL AGNEW, OF PHILADELPHIA, PA. Sa cn i Phanek 35 th185%)\ Lotter a ‘ Ext: ai se a ie DE 5 CDOS S88 ¢ Be i Hees ~ Je | A 2 ar ) BT 21 21 OS Lov \ hed el age = ~ on © 13 ite 1763-1834. +a Inglis; John, 1/0971Oo". a c fi Le i -7179F 7 T } 1Stlail ( A vindication of UNris 42 FS © £ it a aL a o EDINBURGH ; PRINTED BY BALLANTYNE AND CO., PAUL'S WORK, CANONGATE, A VINDICATION OF CHRISTIAN FAITH; ADDRESSED TO THOSE WHO, BELIEVING IN GOD, YET REFUSE OR HESITATE TO BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST. WHOM HE HATH SENT. BY JOHN INGLIS, D.D. ONE OF THE MINISTERS OF OLD GRAYFRIARS’ CHURCH, EDINBURGH, AND ONE OF HIS MAJESTY’S CHAPLAINS IN ORDINARY IN SCOTLAND. ** yk BELIEVE IN GOD, BELIEVE ALSO IN ME.” JOHN, CHAP. XIV. VER. I. WILLIAM BLACKWOOD, EDINBURGH ; AND T, CADELL, STRAND, LONDON. MDCCOXXX. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2022 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/vindicationofchrOOing| PREFACE. Tnovcn much has been published on the evidences of the Christian Religion, it is hoped that the following observations may account for the appearance of another Tract on that interesting subject. I. It seems to me that many of the advo- cates of Christianity have paid too little attention to the prejudices which are enter- tained against what is peculiar in its doc- trine, as a rule of both faith and practice. They have been too confident, I think, of accomplishing their object at once, by an overpowering statement of the direct evi- dence, by which the Divine mission of vi PREFACE. Christ is supported. If we had not to contend against prejudices, or preconceived opinions, perhaps a secondary place might be conveniently assigned to the argument arising from the eacellence of the Christian doctrine. But the influence of prejudice renders the human mind very nearly inac- | cessible to both evidence and argument ; and certain it is, that deep-rooted prejudice has, from the beginning, operated, and in the minds of many continues to operate, against a cordial reception of the Gospel of Christ. | The corrupt heart of man is naturally averse to the Gospel as a doctrine of right- eousness; and the human understanding, under the influence of a corrupt heart, en- tertains many speculative objections to it, which have the effect to encourage and fortify men in unbelief. Till such objec- tions be removed, they are not only an in- superable obstacle to all exercise of candour in the examination of evidence, but effec- tually disincline a considerable part of man- kind to any consideration of the subject. PREFACE. Vil The objections are of such a nature as ad- mits of their occurring to almost every mind; they come home to the ordinary feelings and habits of men in their connexion with this world ; they have an appearance of ac- cording with the maxims and principles on which men are accustomed to reason about secular affairs; no intellectual exertion is necessary to their having full power and effect ;—to the understanding of a man under the influence of a corrupt heart, they present themselves spontaneously in all their force, as often as he is called to be- think himself either of his personal interest in the doctrine of the Gospel, or of its claims to Divine origin. To what other cause than this, can we ascribe the undeniable fact—That much of the Gospel doctrine, as preached even to professing Christians, is heard by many of them with seeming indifference? The sub- ject, it may be said, has become trite and familiar to their minds, and therefore does not excite the degree of interest which they Viil PREFACE. naturally feel in what is new. But the want of novelty does not afford a sufficient account of the matter; for though many things, which concern their lives and for- tunes in the world, have become at least as familiar to them as the Gospel doctrine, the interest which they take in these things is not, on that account, abated. ‘To what, then, shall we impute the difference be- tween the two cases? Does it arise from objections to the direct evidences of Chris- tianity ? I am convinced that, in the minds of such men, no question on this point is either much or often entertained. From the little which they have either read or heard about the evidences of Christ’s Di- vine mission, they do not see how it can, with reason, be rejected ; and, consequently, so far as his doctrine accords with their own preconceived opinions, they listen to it with reverence, But, when the way of salvation through Christ is illustrated, as comprising some views of the Divine character and counsel which the human mind cannot fully comprehend,—though they do not absolute- PREFACE. 1X lydeny what isthus revealed—they conceive that they may be excused for having no decided. opinion respecting it ; and, in refe- rence to such doctrine, they hear the Gos- pel as if they heard it not——LEven in the department of moral duty, there are some things to which they give a similar recep- tion. There are Christian precepts which require more than they are disposed to regard as obligatory ;—perhaps, what is re- quired appears to them very nearly, if not altogether, unreasonable -_and they cannot, therefore, believe that conformity to such precepts is indispensable. To what does this case amount ?— Though such men do not object to the di- rect evidences of Christianity, they do not truly make a surrender of their understand- ings to Christ as a Divine teacher. For they receive and acknowledge his doctrine, only so far as it is reconcileable with their ‘own prejudices. They select for themselves, out of the Christian system, a rule of both faith and practice, but a rule which is far from comprehending all that. Christ hath x PREFACE. taught and enjoined. In short, their ob- jections to much of the Christian doctrine effectually prevent them from embracing it, on such evidence as would otherwise have satisfied their minds. Now, if such be the effect of the objec- : tions in question upon some _ professing Christians, What shall we suppose in refe- rence to avowed unbelievers ? They have not been influenced by any reverence for the Author of the Christian faith that could prevent such objections from taking deep root in their minds; they feel, on the contrary, that they are judging and acting consistently when they object to the instructions of one in whose Divine mis- sion they do not believe ;—and, according- - ly, much of their reasoning,—though per- haps more of their wit and ridicule,—has been directed against the doctrine of the Gospel. Is it to be supposed that a better and more powerful statement of the direct evi- dences of Christ’s Divine mission will of it- PREFACE. XI self satisfy the minds of such unbelievers ?— Even in dealing with those men who are so inconsistent as, in their hearts, to object to the Christian doctrine, while they make an outward profession of faith in its Author, it is in a great measure vain to argue that the evidence of his Divine mission ought to supersede their objections. ‘This argument does not satisfy them; and far less can we _ expect it to prevail in the case of avowed unbelievers. For they stand, as I have al- ready hinted, on more consistent ground, by maintaining that their objections to the doctrine of Christ are, of themselves, a suf- ficient reason for denying his Divine mis- sion. By a triumphant statement of the ex- ternal evidences of Christianity, we may perhaps put our adversaries to silence. They may find it impossible to bring for- ward even a specious objection to the his- torical evidence ;—and I am far from ma- king light of this advantage. It is no small advantage that we protect others against the hazard of having their minds distracted Xi PREFACE. by a renewal of false and seductive argu- ment. But are the men to whom I have last alluded,—or even professing Christians under the influence of similar prejudice,— brought nearer to a cordial reception of the whole truth as it is in Jesus—that “ engraft- ed word,” which, if received in the spirit of — meekness, “is able to save their souls 2?” Or is there no hope that they may be reclaimed, by our fairly meeting them on the ground | which their prejudices seem to mark out for us ? 3 It is true that the corrupt dispositions of the human heart, in which all objections to the Christian doctrine originate, are not to be otherwise corrected or subdued than by the Spirit ofall Grace. But those objections, which a corrupt heart prompts some men either to devise or entertain, do not the less admit of being examined and refuted in a way calculated to be instrumental in the hand of God, towards bringing them to a saving faith in the Gospel doctrine ;—and it seems to me, that in this field of argument PREFACE. Xiil the advocates of the Christian cause have encouragement to hope for success. Perhaps unbelievers might even be justi- fied in refusing to give any attention what- ever to the direct evidence of Christ’s Di- vine mission, till their objections to his doc- trine were, in the first instance, considered and weighed. Tor if the doctrine were found unworthy of God, or in its nature such as could not be supposed to proceed - from a perfect Being, it would be morally impossible that we should have evidence of its truth. I do not, indeed, presume to say, that our knowledge of God, independently of Reve- lation, can entitle us to conclude, in all cases of doctrine, what is, or is not, com- patible with the perfection of his nature; _ but it will not be denied, that there might be things taught and inculcated which we could not fail to regard as inconsistent with any just idea of the Divine character and counsels ; and, consequently, they who be- lieve in God (though not hitherto in the Xiv PREFACE. Gospel of Christ) may have a right to be satisfied, in the first instance, that such things are not contained in the doctrine which we represent as proceeding from the Divine Being. Yet it is not upon this ground chiefly,— it is chiefly upon that ground of expediency — to which I have before adverted, that I feel it to be my duty to examine, in the first place, those objections which are urged against what is peculiar in the doctrine of the Gospel. Though the objections of the unbeliever, even according to his own esti- mate of them, should not be of the import- ance to which I have last referred,—though he should not be so bold as to maintain that they are of such a nature as precludes the possibility of his supposing that the reli- gion of Christ has proceeded from a perfect Being,—though he should, therefore, find it impossible to justify himself for refusing to give attention,—even before his objec- tions be answered—to the direct evidences of the Christian faith,—Is there no good to be done—no advantage to be gained—by re- PREFACE. XV moving his objections in the first place, if I shall find it in my power to remove them ? Will it be a small advantage, if I can bring him to enter on an examination of the evi- dences with a more unprejudiced mind ? Or ought I to be deterred from making the endeavour, because he is not entitled to such accommodation ? Whatever concession to his prejudices may be involved in such a preparatory discussion,—if the prejudices in question be thereby removed or abated, I shall hold that both my concession and my labour are richly rewarded. It may be argued, indeed, on the other hand, that if the nature of the doctrine were left entirely out of view, many readers might listen with more impartiality to a statement. of the evidence by which its truth is supported. But it is impossible that this advantage should be realized ; for every man, before reading any such Tract as the present, has got some information, and has formed some opinions, whether right or wrong, respecting the doctrine of XVI PREFACE. Christ, which he cannot altogether banish from his mind, while he inquires into the evidence of its Divine origin. And equal- ly impossible is it that the opposite course, which I propose to follow, should give un- due advantage to the Christian argument ; for, though a just view of the doctrine | should not only tend to remove objections, but also induce men to lend a favourable ear to the more direct evidence of its truth, an advantage thus arising from its intrinsic merits, cannot with reason be regarded as unfair. I would therefore say to unbelievers— We have in our hands a book, or rather a collection of books, which lays claim to be a Revelation from Heaven. Before we in- quire whether the claim be, in any other way, established, let us consider whether what 1s contained in this collection of books can be regarded as unworthy of God to reveal, or does not, on the contrary, afford strong indications of a Divine origin. The answer to this question will go far, I PREFACE. XVil trust, to prepare the minds of some men for a satisfactory examination of that direct evidence by which the Divine mission of Christ is supported. II. I am farther of opinion, that some of the ablest advocates of Christianity have not applied its historical evidence in the way best calculated to establish the truth or reality of Christ’s Miracles. So far as concerns the Miracles, I appre- hend that the first and most direct purpose to be served by historical evidence, is to place men of the present day in a situation corresponding, as nearly as may be, to that of the original witnesses of the transactions in question ; and that it is by availing our- selves, in the first instance, of this advantage, that we may proceed, both most regularly and most safely, to inquire, whether these transactions were or were not miraculous. We are assured, by historical evidence, b XVill PREFACE. that, while some of the witnesses doubted or disbelieved, others, who professed to be- lieve, bore testimony to their sincerity in that profession, by submitting to die rather than abandon it. But it is not to be for- gotten, that the Gospel history, which in- forms us of their faith, and the evidence which they gave of its sincerity, does also acquaint us with the outward and visible circumstances, on which their belief of an invisible miraculous Agency was establish- ed. It thereby enables us to judge—not only of the sincerity—but also of the srounds, of their belief. By placing us, as far as possible, in their situation at the time when they beheld the transactions record- ed, it calls us to say, whether, in such cir- cumstances, we could ourselves have refused to acknowledge them as miracles ;—1It vir- tually calls us to sit as judges between those who denied, and those who acknow- ledged, the presence of Divine Miraculous Agency. | ‘This appears to me an essential advan- tage to any mind that is honestly desirous PREFACE. X1X of ascertaining the truth. Without avail- ing ourselves of it, I conceive it to be im- possible to do full justice to the evidences _ of Christian faith. In all ordinary cases of evidence, the means of knowledge, which a witness pos- sesses, are the first point to which we direct our attention; and I cannot imagine to myself a reason why the same course should not be followed in reference to the miracles which are said to have been wrought in proof of Christ’s Divine Mission. Yet, so far as I know, this branch of the evidence has not recently met with the at- tention which it deserves——An author, to whom the Christian cause is otherwise much indebted, (Dr Paley,) has, in his “ View of the Evidences,” placed it in the back- ground ;—and my excellent friend and co- presbyter, Dr Chalmers, (whose Illustra- tions of the Historical Evidence I do, in many respects, most sincerely admire,) has declined to acknowledge what I now advert to, as any part of the argument, by which the reality of Christ’s miracles requires to “xX PREFACE. be supported. I have, therefore, a strong desire to be helpful, if I can, towards pre- senting this part of the evidence in that prominent view to which I think it entitled, —as the foundation of all the importance which can be, afterwards, attached to the testimony of the original witnesses of the miracles, even when proved to be sincere. If I could agree with Dr Chalmers, in regarding what the original witnesses at- tested as, in each case, nothing more than a fact cognizable by their bodily senses, I should think it quite sufficient to have evi- dence of their sincerity. But it seems to me undeniable, that what they attested respect- ing the miracles, resolves itself into a com- bination of fact and opinion,—and an opinion founded on circumstances of which we are both qualified, and called upon, to judge — Let us derive illustration of what I now state from some one of the miracles of Christ ;—let us take, for that purpose, the miracle which was wrought on a man born blind.* * John, chap. ix. PREFACE. XX1 All the facts of the case, Which could be manifest to the bodily senses of the wit. nesses, are these—That Jesus met with a man who was understood to have been blind from his birth; that he made clay and an- ointed the man’s eyes with it, and said unto him—* Go, wash in the pool of Si- loam ;” that the man went away, and that one, who appeared to be the same person, “came back seeing.” But the author of the narrative (one of the original witnesses), does more than attest these facts; he ob- viously communicates to us an opinion re- specting them ; for his manifest design is to convince his readers that a miracle was wrought, or that the man’s eyes were open- ed by preternatural agency. Consequent- ly, in order to our judging whether his opi- nion was well founded, it is essential that we examine the facts on which it was esta- blished. It is essential that we duly con- sider, in the first place, what was immedi- ately presented to his bodily senses ; and, in the second place, a variety of accompany- ing or subsequent circumstances,—the pre- Xxil PREFACE. vious notoriety of the man having been blind from his birth, or the possibility, on the other hand, that he only pretended to be blind, the evidence on this point afforded by his parents, the testimony which they also bore to the fact, that he who now ap- peared possessed of sight, was the same in- dividual who had been born blind, and the sufficiency or insufficiency of any thing em- ployed, like natural means of cure—It seems impossible to deny that the circum- stances of that severe scrutiny which led to all these facts being ascertained—were detailed by the Evangelist, as grounds on which he reported the case as miraculous, and for enabling others to judge of the suf- ficiency of thesegroun ds. TI am aware, indeed, that there is one class of miracles which does not admit of such examination. There is reference made © in the Lpistles of the New Testament to miracle which were wrought by the first teachers of Christianity, in the various coul- tries which they visited. ‘These miracles PREFACE, XX are referred to without any detail of the circumstances connected with them,—even without such a specification as can enable us to consider one of them as distinguished from another. Consequently all the evi- dence for the reality of such miracles, rests upon uncontradicted testimony,—testimony uncontradicted by those to whom the Epis- tles were addressed, and by whom we may presume that its truth or falsehood was known But, we cannot be, for that reason, absolved from the obligation to examine those circumstances connected with other miracles, which are obviously detailed for enabling us to judge whether the eye-wit- nesses had good cause to acknowledge the presence of miraculous agency. ‘The op- portunity, which we have, of so doing, im- parts to these miracles a superior degree of importance for the establishment of Chris- tian faith. Yet, in order to this part of the argu- ment being effectually supplied, it seems to me essential to adopt an arrangement, which XXIV PREFACE. (so far as I know), has not hitherto recom- mended itself to the advocates of the Chris- tian cause—an arrangement under which we may decline any consideration of the mira- cles, till we shall have considered and weigh- ed all the evidence, which it is proposed to urge, for the truth of the Gospel history, as a narrative of facts not miraculous. If the testimony of eye-witnesses, uncon- nected with the ground of their belief or opinion, were all the evidence for the reali- ty of miracles that ought to be desired or sought after, the martyrdom of the first teachers of Christianity would be almost the only fact essential to be established, be- fore we should pronounce a judgment on any miracle which they have attested. But convinced, as I am, that the reality. of Christ’s miracles cannot be incontroverti- bly proved, without our sitting in judg- ment on those circumstances, not in them- selves miraculous, on which the eye-wit- nesses founded their own belief,i—I regard it as indispensable to ascertain the truth of the Gospel history, as comprising all the 13 PREFACE. XXV. circumstances to which I refer, before I in- vite the reader even to entertain a question respecting the miracles. . I am not aware that, in reference to other points, the conduct of the argument in the following pages requires any previous ex- planation or apology. Whatever may be new in the illustrations, will be respected or not, according to its merits. So far, on © the other hand, as I am indebted to others, I desire to acknowledge my obligation. Dr Macknight’s “ Truth of the Gospel His- tory” has directed my attention to points which might otherwise have escaped my notice, and has assisted me in useful refer- ences. My recollection also enables me to say that some of the sermons of Archbishop Secker, Dr Ogden, and Mr Symmons, had made an Impression on my mind, from which I have derived advantage.—I need scarcely add that, inevery such treatise, there must be a considerable proportion of common-place XXV1 PREFACE. argument ; for, though it be familiar to the minds of many readers, it is neither he less important in itself, nor the less essential to such a complete and connected view as may be expected to produce the desired effect. It only remains for me, in concluding these Prefatory Remarks, to request the reader’s attention to the following Table of ConTENTS, as comprising a series of Propo- sitions, which I hope may be recognised as sufficient, in the event of their being duly established, to answer every reasonable de- mand for evidence. CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION. ’ PAGE. MANKIND were in want of a Divine Revelation, and had ground to hope for it, : , : . CHAPTER I. The Christian Revelation is not, in any respect, un- worthy of God, but, on the contrary, affords presumptive evidence of its own Divine Origin, . ; seit) ¢ Srorron L—The Christian Revelation confirms and esta- blishes, in a way worthy of God, those fundamental truths of Religion which unassisted Reason had sought to ascer- tain, Section I].—There is nothing in the peculiar Doctrine of Christ, relative to the present condition of cur nature, and the way of Salvation through him, which does not appear to be worthy of God, Section IIf.—In the department of moral duty, the Gospel requires more than unassisted Reason had regarded as obli- gatory, but nothing which well-directed Reason can re- fuse to acknowledge as worthy of God, and conducive to the perfection of our nature, 13 b4 XXVIil CONTENTS. PAGE. Section IV.—From all the preceding views of the Gospel, there arises strong presumptive evidence of its Divine origin, e CHAPTER I. The Gospel History is supported by Evidence which well entitles us to confide in it as a Narrative of F acts, so far as they are not miraculous, . . : : Section IL—The Gospel History affords much internal evidence of its own Truth, ; ‘ r j Section Il.—The Gospel History was published at a time when the Jewish Rulers were in full possession of the means of detecting and exposing any Falsehood which it might have contained ;—yet no confutation of it appeared, Section I1—The Gospel History was subsequently and incidentally corroborated, in many important points, by some Authors adverse to the Religion of Christ ;—and, not- withstanding the rapid progress of his Religion, there was still no attempt made, in any quarter, to disprove any part of what is contained in the Evangelical Record, Section IV.—The Gospel History has been transmitted to men of the present day in a way which leaves us no cause to apprehend that it has been surreptitiously altered or cor- rupted, : : ? ER Sa CHAPTER III. | Considering the Gospel History as an authentic Re- cord of Facts not miraculous, we have sufficient proof of the reality of the Christian Miracles, and consequently proof of Christ’s Divine Mission, yar : 49 57 73 105 122 127 CONTENTS. XX1X PACH. Ssction I.—The Miracles of Christ, if proved to be real, may be reasonably sustained as Evidence of his Divine Mission, 5 : : , : : : F : ee Section H.—The reality of Miracles may be satisfactorily proved by Human Testimony, : : ‘ 5 : 132 Section I{L—The nature and number of Christ’s Mira-_ cles, and the circumstances in which they were wrought, afforded security to the World against deception, and, more particularly, rendered it impossible that the Men, who have attested their reality, could themselves be deceived, .- 143 Section IV.—The Apostles of Christ, who have borne witness to his Miracles (while they could not themselves be deceived,) gave such evidence of their own truth and integrity, as renders it impossible to suppose that they in- tended to deceive others, ; : : ‘ : ‘ 195 SucTion V.—Besides the Miracles wrought by Christ him- self, there appear to have been many Miracles wrought by the Apostles and other early Teachers of Christianity, for the reality of which we have evidence arising from tacit ad- mission, that may prove, to some minds, even more satisfac- tory than direct and positive proof, : ; : >» 204 CHAPTER IV. The Divine origin of the Christian Faith is also sup- ported by Evidence arising from the fulfilment of Pro- phecy, : : . ‘ ‘ : : : 213 Section I.—Prophecy, in connexion with its fulfilment, is well calculated to afford evidence of a Divine interposi- tion, and evidence which we ought not to consider as weak- ened by a certain measure of obscurity in the Prophetic Record, : ib. XxX CONTENTS. PAGE. Section I].—There is no good ground for objecting to the Old Testament as a Record of Prophecies, Section IIJ.—Intimations were very early given, in the Old Testament, of a Divine purpose to employ some extraor- dinary and effectual means for the deliverance of Men from the consequences of their Transgression and Fall, and for the prevalence of true Religion among all the Nations of the Earth,’ . ‘ Srcrion I[V.—Prophetic Notices were given of the Cha- racter and Condition of the Person by whom the Promised Blessing should be imparted to the World,—of his peculiar work as a Saviour,—and even of the time when he should be Manifested, Section V.—There are many Prophecies respecting the subsequent Fortunes, both of the Christian Church, and of the Jewish Nation, which have been so. far fulfilled as to afford a strong pledge of their ultimate and perfect Aécom- plishment, . A : CHAPTER V. The Propagation of the Gospel in early Ages, when considered in all its cireumstances, should contribute, still farther, to satisfy every candid mind that it has truly proceeded from God, : : 5 : : CHAPTER VI. The effect which the Gospel has produced on the hearts and the lives of Men, concurs with every other view of the case in vindicating its claim to a Divine Origin, 4 : ; : ; : ° 220 224 234 247 269 290 CONTENTS. Xxx1 PAG E, CHAPTER VII. There is no ground to suppose that the Religion of Christ could have been more effectually established by any other Evidence than what has been.afforded; nor could more overpowering Evidence have been given, consistently with the condition of Men in this World, as a state of trial and discipline, : : - ya, Ge CHAPTER VIII. Summary of the whole preceding Argument, with a brief view of the effect which may be reasonably ex- pected from continued and patient endeavours to urge it on the Minds of Men, : ; : : : 323 ‘sail abe 7 x ee kek BEY ccd Petar ah ras [Pe Nay \ ef ae oa My bales: Seree Ave INTRODUCTION. MANKIND WERE IN WANT OF A DIVINE REVELATION; AND HAD GROUND TO HOPE FOR IT. IN an argument addressed to men who believe in God, it should not be necessary to employ many words for the establishment of this proposition. Without a Divine Revelation, both the origin and the destination of the Human Race were in- volved in obscurity. Even their existing condi- tion was not to be accounted for, without a view to dispensations in a future state that should vin- dicate, in some respects, the present disposals of Providence. Yet the evidences of a future state were imperfect and unsatisfactory; and a con- sciousness of ill desert made it the more difficult for men to look forward to it with hope and con- fidence. Was it, in these circumstances, unnatural to expect that the Being who created men should, in some way, impart to them the knowledge which was requisite to the satisfaction and establishment of their minds ?—-Supposing this world to be— A »® 2 INTRODUCTION. what some circumstances seemed to indicate— only a place of trial and discipline, in which men might be prepared for a future state, Was it not important, for the accomplishment of this divine purpose, that they should have such an assurance of the gracious design as might engage their hearts to comply with it? Supposing, at the same time, that the Divine Being, in his infinite mercy and love, was willing to extend forgiveness to penitent sinners in some way consistent with the honour of his government, Was it not important that this blessed purpose should be somehow revealed, as a mean of engaging men so to love and serve God upon earth, as to be prepared for enjoying him in heaven ? The principle of reason, with which mankind were endowed by their Creator, qualified them, in some measure, to search for a knowledge of these things. But their reason—from whatever cause ——whether original or superinduced imbecility— was found practically inadequate to arrive at any certain conclusion. Was it, in these circumstan- ces, unnatural that He, who gave them the faculty of reason, should also supply its defects, by com- municating, in another way, the knowledge of which they were so much in want ? Whatever may have been the origin and cause of either the ignorance or the wickedness which INTRODUCTION. 3 have prevailed among men,—if it be only admit- ted that ignorance and wickedness are susceptible of increase or diminution,—Can it be accounted unnatural that, in such a case, the Divine Being should interpose in behalf of his rational offspring ? —It was scarcely possible to think of God as a Being of infinite perfection, without some hope that his unbounded goodness, combining with his delight in whatever is holy, and just, and true, would incline him to employ effectual measures against the dominion of sin, and for advancing the cause of truth and righteousness in the world which he had made. Presuming, therefore, upon these grounds, that a Divine Revelation will not be antecedently ac- counted either unnecessary, or a blessing which was not to be hoped for, I would invite those whom I address to consider deliberately whether the Gospel of Christ ought not to be regarded and accepted as proceeding from God. CHAPTER I. THE CHRISTIAN REVELATION IS NOT, IN ANY RESPECT, UNWORTHY OF GOD, BUT, ON THE CONTRARY, AfF-= FORDS PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE OF ITS OWN DIVINE ORIGIN. Tue doctrine of Christ has been sometimes called a republication of the religion of Nature ; and it accordingly imparts the authority of direct revelation to some fundamental truths which un- assisted reason had sought to ascertain. But it also discloses many interesting views of our pre- sent condition, and the way of salvation, which the reason of man had not anticipated ;—and, even in respect of moral duty, it prescribes and requires more than either the understandings or the con- sciences of men had previously recognised as essen- tial to moral perfection. Let us endeavour candidly to estimate its me- rits and claims in these three different depart- ments. | SECTION I, THE CHRISTIAN REVELATION CONFIRMS AND ESTABLISHES, IN A WAY WORTHY OF GOD, THOSE FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS OF RELIGION, WHICH UNASSISTED REASON HAD SOUGHT TO ASCERTAIN, THE reason of man, aided (it may be) by ori- ginal and traditionary revelation, had, in some measure, recognised the existence of an Infinite Being, from whom all things proceed, whose Pro- vidence superintends and governs all things, and who will reward or punish men in a future state, according to what they have done, or left undone, in the present life. But the evidence and cer- tainty of a Providence, which superintends and governs all things, depend on the evidence which we previously have of the infinite perfection of the Divine Nature; and our evidence of the per- fection of the Divine Nature can never be com- plete without a certainty of a future state of re- wards and punishments, in which the justice of God may be more fully vindicated than it is in the present world. ‘The whole scheme, therefore, of Natural Religion mainly depended on the evidence which unassisted reason could afford of a future state of retribution. Additional light on this sub- DOCTRINES OF NATURAL RELIGION CONFIRMED. 7 ject was to cast light on every other; and it will be found that there is no argument for a future state, suggested by the reason of man, which the Christian doctrine, and the circumstances attend-~ ing its promulgation, do not materially strengthen. 1. Unassisted reason had been willing to infer, from the faculties of the human soul, that it is a principle distinct and separate from whatever is material or bodily ; and, consequently, that Im- mortality is the law of its nature. But the Chris- tian revelation imparts to this argument much ad- ditional strength. It removes any doubt which had been previously entertained respecting the separate existence of spirits ; and, by what it com- municates respecting the ministry of angels in par- ticular, as beings purely spiritual, whose faculties, at the same time, bear an intimate resemblance to those of the human soul, it powerfully encourages us to infer that the soul will be found allied to angelic beings, in its essence as much as in its fa- culties; or, in the words of Christ himself, that we shall be “ as the angels of God in Heaven.” 2. Unassisted reason had strenuously maintain- ed that the inequality, which is manifest, in the distribution of rewards and punishments in this world, could not be permitted under the govern 8 DOCTRINES OF NATURAL RELIGION, ment of a Being infinitely just, if there were not a future state of more equal and perfect retribution. But, without the aid of a Divine revelation, men had no other evidence or exemplification of Divine justice, than what the moral government of this world afforded. It is only the way of salvation through Christ that affords such decisive evidence of the inflexible justice of God, as can assure us of its being ultimately vindicated in the view of his rational offspring. That atonement for sin, which he required, leaves no doubt in the mind of the Christian that the justice of God will at length be manifest in all his doings—that it is only in re- ference to our condition as immortal beings, that we are here placed in such a state of probation as supersedes immediate reward or punishment, and that a future state there must be, in which God will render to every man according to his deeds. 3. There are some things to which the Author of our Being has borne indirect witness or testimony from the beginning, by endowing us with a disposi- tion, and in some measure a capacity, to recognise them. In this way he appears to have communi- cated. to mena sense or anticipation of theirown im- mortality. But, in addition to those anticipations of immortality, which may be regarded as the witness of our Creator within us, the Christian revelation CONFIRMED BY CHRISTIAN REVELATION. 9 bears such direct and unequivocal testimony to a future state, as forbids those who believe in Christ to entertain any doubt of its reality. Immortality, and our interests in it, are the subject on which the whole doctrine of the gospel bears, as on one common point or centre. All the promises of Christ ultimately resolve themselves into one 5 and “ this is the promise,” saith an apostle, “ which he hath promised us, even eternal life.” 4. Notwithstanding the visible prevalence of the power of death, there had been, from the be- ginning, some accompanying and visible indica- tions that its reign and dominion might be at length superseded. That mingled dispensation of good and evil, under which the sons of men lived upon earth, strongly indicated that they were here in a state of trial and discipline, and might ulti- mately find refuge from the power of death in that mercy, through which alone they, in the mean- while, lived and moved. But the Christian reve- lation goes farther ;—it enlarges and establishes this ground of hope. It teaches us that it was only by sin that death was brought into the world, and, consequently, that the Saviour of men, by putting an end to sin, will effectually put an end to death as the creature of sin. Within a short time, indeed, after the reign of 10 DOCTRINES OF NATURAL RELIGION, death had commenced, there was even an exame ple and earnest of our ultimate superiority to its power. noch, the seventh from Adam, was trans~ lated to heaven without seeing death; and it is by no means impossible that this encouraging fact might be known, by tradition, to many who were, © in other respects, very nearly left to the guidance of unassisted reason. But, in this respect as well as others, the Gospel of Christ has brought life and immortality far more clearly to light. It teaches us, that, as an emblem of our ultimate victory over death, Christ was pleased to restore to life, and to all the visible functions of life, more than one of the children of men, over whom death had exercised its full dominion 3 and that, after He had himself voluntarily submitted to this king of terrors, for the purpose of working out our deli- verance, he afforded such evidence, as imagination could not have readily anticipated, of the power which he had acquired over death, by rising from the grave at the time which he had appointed, as the first fruits of them that sleep. While all the arguments for a future state, sug- gested by human reason, were inconclusive, even to the philosophic mind, they were little calculated to make any impression on the great body of man- kind. So far as they entertained any prospects CONFIRMED BY CHRISTIAN REVELATION. ll beyond the grave, they believed as they were taught, without being able to give a reason of the faith which was in them, But that disclosure of immortality, which the Gospel of Christ affords, is calculated, in the views now presented, to make such an impression on every mind, as renders the Christian’s hope of immortal bliss an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast. Let it not, however, be supposed, that in refer- ring, at present, either to the import of the Gospel doctrine, or to facts in the Gospel history, I am claiming any man’s assent to their truth. My sin- gle object, at present, is to shew, that, if they be true, they cast a strong light on the doctrine of a future state, and a light of which the world was much in need. If this be granted, it ought, at least, to satisfy the candid mind, that so far the Christian revelation is not unworthy of God, and ought not, therefore, to be rejected, without a fair and unprejudiced examination of its evidences. Perhaps it is not too much to expect that a re- velation which, in this respect, so beautifully ac- cords with what had been the anticipations of un- assisted reason, should, on that account, even gain a favourable attention to whatever proofs it can offer of its divine origin. For we have seen that ‘the question, which respects the doctrine of immor- 12 NATURAL RELIGION CONFIRMED. tality, was the problem which the reason of man had been most solicitous to resolve, and a problem which, if resolved in the affirmative, goes far to settle, in a way the most satisfactory, every other question which affects the great principles of Na- tural Religion—either the infinite perfection of the Divine Being, or the certainty of a Divine Providence extending, in this world, to the affairs of men. , But I observed, that the Christian doctrine also discloses many interesting views of our condition by nature, and the Way or means of salvation, which the reason of man had not anticipated. To some of these, human wisdom has objected ; and the validity of the objections falls next to be con- sidered. (Aakoey SECTION II. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE PECULIAR DOCTRINE OF CHRIST, RELA- TIVE TO THE PRESENT CONDITION OF OUR NATURE, AND THE WAY OF SALVATION THROUGH HIM, WHICH DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WORTHY OF GOD. SOME men, who profess to believe in God, have alleged that what the Christian doctrine propounds respecting the present condition of our nature is altogether incredible. The Scripture account, that the parents of our race, originally created holy and happy; did, by sinning against God, fall from that blessed state—that their posterity have been in- volved in the consequences of their fall—and that this catastrophe is the primary cause of all the wickedness and misery which prevail in the world —seems to them very unreasonable ; nay, that we should suffer in consequence of the fault of others, seems to them even unjust. But, is it really un- reasonable to suppose that the rational offspring of God were originally created, in some measure like to himself in holiness and happiness—-stran- gers to both natural and moral evil ? This suppo- sition seems, on the contrary, to accord with every 14 SCRIPTURE ACCOUNT OF TRANSGRESSION just conception of a perfect Being. Is it, then, un- reasonable to think that our first parents were, at the same time, invested with a freedom of will, or of choice, so as to have it in their power to choose what was evil? Without a freedom of will, or of choice, it is difficult to conceive how there should be any thing virtuous or praiseworthy in a moral agent. We, accordingly, experience that we have, ourselves, a freedom of choice, and have therefore no right to pronounce the same thing impossible in the case of the parents of our race. Is it, in the next place, either incredible or wonderful that sin, once introduced into the world, should be productive of misery? We have too much expe- rience, alas! that sin is in all cases productive of misery, Are the objectors, then, to stand upon the single ground, that it cannot be consistent with Divine Justice to leave us to suffer in consequence of the fault of others ? Even this objection cannot e maintained, consistently with our experience of the ways of God; for it is not more certain that God governs the world, than that suffering in con- sequence of the fault of others, is, under his go. vernment, very commonly exemplified. Is not the prodigality of a parent very often the occa sion of poverty and hardship, if not of disease also, to his offspring ? Does not this visibly take place uncer the providence of that very Being, whose a AND FALL VINDICATED. 15 justice, it is contended, cannot admit of our suf- fering in consequence of the sin of our first pa- rents ?—The whole case seems to resolve itself into the following alternative. Either men must have been created, at first, holy and happy, and must have made themselves sinful and miserable, as the Scriptures teach us; or the world must have been created by God in its present state,—full, as it is, of both sin and misery,—and, consequently, God himself must be the immediate author of all the natural and moral evil which exist in it. But, in reasoning, as I now do, with men who profess to believe in God as a Being infinitely holy and good, it should not, I think, be a question which of these propositions is least liable to objection. If we sincerely believe in God, as the moral go- vernor of the universe, what the Christian doc- trine teaches us concerning the original state, and subsequent fall, of the parents of our race, and concerning our own consequent sin and misery, will account to us in a far more satisfactory manner for what we experience to be the condition of our nature, than all the theories on this subject which the imagination of man can devise. The Scripture account of our fallen state has even the peculiar advantage, that it leaves us ground of hope. Had not men been originally made for better things, a view of our existing con- 16 MYSTERIES CONNECTED WITH dition could not have given us any ground to ex- pect them. But, if we have indeed fallen from a high estate, a hope of restoration to it seems less unnatural. It is amidst the ruins of our original estate that we find the first encouragement to that precious hope, which the doctrine of the Gospel imparts to us. But objections have also been urged against what the Gospel reveals concerning a way of sal- vation to men from the sin and misery which, con- fessedly, do prevail in the world. 1. What the Scriptures teach us respecting the character of the agents employed in the work of our salvation, seems to prove a stumbling-block to many. The New Testament explicitly directs us to regard the Saviour as a divine and uncreated being, and reveals to us, at the same time, another divine and uncreated agent, in the person of the Holy Spirit, proceeding from the Father and from the Son, thereby calling us to recognise what has been denominated a 7inity in the Godhead ; to all which, the objection is—that it is mysterious and encomprehensible. It would be vain to deny that the doctrine in question is mysterious in a high degree; to the THE WAY OF SALVATION VINDICATED. 1% human mind it is certainly incomprehensible. If any man attempt to explain it, he only exposes his own folly and presumption. But are we, on that account, entitled to reject or deny it, in the event of its appearing that the Scriptures, in which it is contained, are supported by such evidence as would, otherwise, satisfy us that they proceed from God ? It does not seem reasonable that men who so well know, from experience, the limited nature of their own capacities, and at the same time acknow- ledge an Infinite Being, should at all question the possibility that, in reference to the Divine N ature, things may be or exist, which, to their minds, are incomprehensible. They cannot do so without palpable inconsistency. For men who believe in God already recognise and admit many things re- lative to his nature and agency, which they are altogether unable to comprehend. What sort of conception do they form of the work of God, in creating all things out of nothing, and of what is called the immensity of the Divine Being, or the omnipresence of one who is indivisible ? Were they so determined against acknowledging the mysteries of the Gospel of Christ, as to be will- ing, for the sake of consistency, to deny whatever is most universally acknowledged concerning both B 18 MYSTERIES CONNECTED WITH the attributes and the works of God,—all this would avail them nothing. For there are innu- merable appearances on the face of nature—things Visible to the corporeal eye, the existence of which, therefore, must be acknowledged—that are altoge- ther incomprehensible to us. I need not refer either to the visible heavens, or to the human frame,-— I may safely content myself with the most fami- liar, even hackneyed, allusion to the ordinary pro- cess of nature, in the very earth on which we tread. Where is the man who comprehends, and will un- dertake to explain, how the small seed, which is thrown into the bosom of the earth, gradually pro- duces a stately plant, similar in its properties to that which produced the seed itself,—why it must undergo corruption before it rise to vegetable life, or by what means, after it hath sprung, it de- rives ftom the earth that vegetable food which nourishes it unto perfection ? So far from our having a right to deny the pos- sibility of any thing which is revealed concerning God, merely on account of its rising above our comprehension, things more or less incomprehen- sible to us were naturally to be expected in any revelation, which we might receive, of the nature and ways of an Infinite Being. Men had even ex- perience to lead them to this conclusion—experi- ence arising from the way in which the Divinity THE WAY OF SALVATION VINDICATED: 19 had previously manifested himself to the world. He had made himself known by the works of na- ture, and by the principle of reason in the human frame. But, while many of the things most fami- liar to us in the book of nature rise entirely above our comprehension, it seems to be a distinguishing characteristic of our reason, to enquire into things which it cannot comprehend,—to start questions which it is incapable of answering, doubts which it is incapable of solving,—and to leave us in the end perplexed with mystery. Perhaps some of those whom I address may be inclined to ask, whether things which could not be rendered intelligible to man—supposing them to be as they are revealed—might not, with more propriety, have remained hidden from him in the depths of the Divine counsel? The question may seem to be important; but it only leads to an an- swer illustrative of both the wisdom and the grace of God. For nothing that is incomprehensible to the human mind, is revealed to us without neces- sity, or without a view to important advantages which result to us from that knowledge of it which is actually communicated. If a knowledge of the divine character of the Saviour had not been ne- cessary for the comfort and edification of those whom he came to save, or if a knowledge of the 20 - MYSTERIES CONNECTED WITH separate work of the Holy Spirit in our salvation had not been, for like reasons, precious to the be- lieving soul, it might never have been known on earth that the unity of the Godhead admits of those separate or distinct modes of subsistence, which the Christian doctrine calls us to recognise. But, in fact, those truths which are objected to as incomprehensible, are the great foundation of all the hope which we entertain as Christians. Is it possible that, in these circumstances, we should not be contented with devoutly adoring what in this world we cannot comprehend, or that we would really prefer to have remained ignorant of such things, and consequently ignorant of the only true way of salvation ? In reference to many worldly cases, we prac- tically acknowledge, as facts, things which we do not comprehend, because our doing so is conducive to our worldly interest. We also communicate to our children, as facts, many things which we do not pretend to. explain to them, till their reason more nearly arrive at maturity... As earthly pa- rents, we account this our duty to our children ; we see it to be, in many respects, necessary. Why, then, may not our Heavenly Father deal with us in a similar manner, during the infancy of our na- ture ?—for at present our nature is but in a state of infancy. Shall we, in this case, be so foolish THE WAY OF SALVATION VINDICATED. 21 and froward as to refuse believing, or to deny the possibility of the things which He communi- cates, merely because our intellectual capacity is not hitherto so far advanced or matured, as to en- able us to comprehend them ? It has been objected, more particularly, that such an union of the human to the divine nature, as the Christian revelation directs us to recognise in the person of the Saviour, is altogether incon- eruous, unworthy. of God, and therefore incre- dible. In the first place, it is said to be so incongruous, as to be, on that account, incredible. But this ar- gument cannot be reasonably maintained by men who duly attend to the union of the human soul and the human body. For, however exalted be the nature of God above that of man,—if we consider merely the discrepance or contrariety which would preclude the possibility of union,—there does not appear a greater contrariety between the Divine mind and a mind in some measure created after its image, than there certainly is between soul and body. ven the union of the Divine Spirit with human flesh, cannot, with reason, be regarded as incredible, by men who recognise, in their own frame, the union of a spiritual with a material 22 MYSTERIES CONNECTED WITH substance, and an union so complete, that the two, in the meanwhile, constitute one person, In the next place, it is said that the union in question is unworthy of God—that no reasonable mind can allow itself to imagine that the Divinity should condescend to connect himself, in any such manner, with a human frame. But they, who maintain this argument, seem to forget that the ways of God are not as our ways, nor his thoughts as our thoughts. The great of this world may apprehend a loss of dignity from condescension, because they mistake wherein dignity consists. It is true, that condescension, proceeding from mean and ignoble motives, may justly expose men to the loss of dignity. It is also true, that dignity, which depends on outward rank or condition, unsupport- ed by corresponding endowments of the mind, may be exposed to hazard from condescension, because, in the hour of condescension, the false glare of outward condition is eclipsed. But the true dig- nity of the mind only appears the more illustrious, in proportion as condescension enables us to exa- mine it the more closely, or in a greater variety of bearings. To a justly discerning eye, even the dignity and glory of the King of kings were ne- ver more effectually displayed, than by his conde- scension in behalf of his guilty creatures. For in THE WAY OF SALVATION VINDICATED. 23 what does the glory of the Divine Being chiefly consist, if not in the goodness so manifest in all his doings? or in what department is his goodness most illustriously displayed, if not in his unparal- leled condescension for working out our eternal salvation ? If condescension be at all an act or ex- pression of goodness, it is obvious that the higher be the station from which the person descends, and the lower the condition to which he humbles him- self, for a truly benevolent purpose, the more illus- trious must his goodness appear to every discrimi- nating mind. 2. An objection has also been urged against what the Gospel reveals concerning the suffering of the Saviour—against the doctrine that he suffered, the just for the unjust, to make atonement for the sins of men. It has been said that this doctrine is in- compatible with the wisdom and goodness of God. Perhaps this objection, like the former, calls us to pronounce upon some things, of which we are not well qualified to judge; but it will be found that there is, in this case, as much within the reach of our comprehension as may go far to sa- tisfy the inquiring mind. The law of God is violated by men—the threat- 24 THE DOCTRINE OF enings of his law are despised, and the honour of his government insulted. How, then, are the transgressors to escape the deserved punishment ? If we believe in God as the righteous governor of the universe, we cannot suppose that this pur- pose is to be accomplished in any way which shall not provide for the authority of his law being henceforth maintained in the view of his rational _ offspring ; for who would otherwise be afraid to trample under foot his commandment ? Shail it then be held that the zepentance of the sinner may be accepted as the requisite satisfac- tion to Divine justice ? The Divine administration, so far as we are practically acquainted with it, does not justify the hope that, through repentance alone, we may ob- tain the pardon of sin. ‘The general laws of na- ture are laws of God, established by the wisdom of God. Yet according to these, according to the constitution of things under which we live, as con- nected with our interest in the present world, re- pentance for what we have done amiss is far from being sufficient, in most cases, to save us from those evil consequences which are the natural and proper punishment ;—we are, in most cases, left to suffer for our folly. What ground have we, then, for supposing that what we experience to be at present the rule of the Divine government will not ATONEMENT VINDICATED. 25 prove to be arule of everlasting application? We have some cause to think that such arule may be, in all cases, necessary to the ends of government. The repentance of a criminal does not procure his pardon or acquittal before any earthly tribunal. It is not found consistent with the purposes of human government that his repentance should have this effect; nor have we any separate and sufficient grounds for concluding that it would prove more consistent with the ends and purposes of the Divine government. If, for these reasons, it seem that an atonement for sin was necessary for maintaining the honour of the Divine government, in extending mercy even to the penitent, upon what principle shall we object to that way of atonement which the Gos- pel reveals ? If it was essential that the authority of the Di- vine law should be maintained, while mercy was to be extended to those who had transgressed it, does not this purpose appear to be effectually ac- complished? What intelligent being may not hence- forth dread to break that law, if nothing but the blood of the Son of God could expiate such an of- fence ?—Or in what other respect does the atone- ment in question appear unworthy, either of Di- 26 THE DOCTRINE OF vine wisdom to devise, or of Divine justice te accept ? . While it was at least congruous and suitable, that what was to be endured for the sins of men should be endured in the nature of man,—while it was the human nature of Christ that also render- ed him capable of suffering, the Divine Nature, to which it was united, gave that value to his suffer- ing which the case required, and which nothing else could have imparted.—It does not seem that any thing in the power of a created being, either to do or to suffer, could have been accepted as a sa- tisfaction to Divine Justice. For. on the one hand, no created being could have a right to present him- self as a surety for others, without authority de- rived from a Divine appointment. And, on the other hand, any thing undertaken and executed by him in obedience to the appointment or command of God, could not have amounted to more than his own immediate duty, consequently could not have made atonement in any sense for our offences. But, regarding the Saviour as uncreated and in- dependent, what he did and suffered appears to meet the very exigency of the case. Though his humiliation in these respects was by the appoint- ment of his Heavenly Father, the appointment did not make it duty. He gave what he did not owe; ATONEMENT VINDICATED. 27 and what he gave could therefore be sustained as an atonement for the sins of men. It has indeed been urged that, if justice, which calls for the punishment of offenders, be an attri- bute of the Divinity, such justice must have re- quired the punishment of the sinner himself—that its demands could not be satisfied by the blood of the innocent. But they who make this objection seem to have, in one respect, an erroneous idea of the justice of God ; and it is essential that we rea- son with a correct understanding of what is im- plied in this Divine attribute. It is well known that justice, as required in a governor or public magistrate on earth, is a very different thing from justice as required of an indi- vidual in his private capacity. While the justice which calls for punishment is essential to the one, it is forbidden to the other. Consequently, if the justice which God prescribes to man be an image of what is inherent in himself, that justice which demands the punishment of an offender can belong to the Divine Being only in the character of a go- vernor, and cannot be exercised otherwise than with a view to the ends of government. When such a satisfaction, therefore, is made for the sins of men, as maintains the honour and authority of 28 THE DOCTRINE OF the Divine government, the justice of God makes no farther claim; mercy is then allowed to tri- umph ;—the Divine Being, as Lord of the moral world, so far from still requiring the punishment of the delinquent himself, rejoices in his escape. It is true, that a human governor or earthly ma- gistrate cannot, in any case, accept a substitution of the innocent for the guilty; but the reasons why he can exercise no such power are altogether in- applicable to the case before us. The man who may offer tu die for his friend, has no right to dis- pose of his own. life, and consequently the go- vernor or Magistrate, to whom the offer is made, can have no right to accept it. But, in the case before us, the person who offers to die for the sins of men is an independent Being, who has “ power to lay down his life, and power to take it up again.” That supreme Governor, also, who accepts the offer, is exempt from any law that could forbid such acceptance; for the immutable law of his own nature is nothing else than a desire of promoting the greatest good; and, by means of the substitu- tion proposed, the great ends of both justice and mercy are at once attained. Perhaps by some men the argument which I have thus followed out may be regarded as unne- cessary, and as having too much the appearance ATONEMENT VINDICATED. 29 of subjecting the ways of God to the principles and rules which are applicable to the affairs of men. To any such objection my answer is, that I believe there are minds to whose satisfaction such reasoning may be conducive, and that it cannot possibly be derogatory from the honour of the Di- vine Being to shew that his own ways are not in- consistent with those which he has prescribed to | his rational offspring. But if the question in the mind of any man still be—How he is to believe it possible that one, who was “ in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God,” should, as a man, become obedient unto death, for the sake of creatures so inferior and insignificant as we are,—the only answer which I have to offer, beyond what has been previously suggested, must, in a great measure, resolve itself into the insufh- ciency of a finite mind to determine what is or is not possible in the ways of an Infinite Being. However inferior and insignificant men be, com- pared to Him who created them, it would ill be- come any creature to determine, that either the race of men, or any conceivable existence that re- sembles God, may not be an object for him to save. If, in the view of that Being who inhabits eternity, a thousand years be as one day, an atom may be as a world; and in what degree the suffering of the only begotten Son may serve to advance or 30 AGENCY OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD manifest the glory of God in the view of many of his intelligent offspring, more capable than we are to perceive and admire it ; or whether it may not tend to preserve in a state of innocence and just subjection the inhabitants of millions of worlds to which we are strangers, are matters which we may better know and understand—only in that future state, in which we shall see the Saviour face to face. 3. An objection has been urged against what the Gospel reveals respecting the agency of the Spirit of God in renewing and sanctifying the spi- rit of man. It has been said that such an opera- tion on the heart of man, unperceived by himself, is altogether incomprehensible, and for that reason it seems to be accounted impossible. But, in replying to this objection, it cannot be necessary to take much ground of argument that has not been already illustrated. For, however in- comprehensible the work of the Spirit of God may be, they who would for this reason deny its reality, do not, I presume, pretend to more understanding or comprehension of the work of God, in creating men at first out of nothing, and endowing them with those very powers and faculties which, in the new creation, he renovates and improves. To ac- IN RENEWING THE SPIRIT OF MAN. 31 knowledge God as the father of our spirits as well as the former of our bodies, and yet to deny the possibility of his renewing the spirit that is in us, is too glaring an inconsistency. Even that the Divine operation is unperceived by us, cannot be sustained as an objection; for we are so constituted, that we cannot have a per- ception of what proceeds from another without an intervention of our bodily senses. I may, in- deed, have a perception or consciousness of both the influence exerted and the effect produced ot my mind by a vemembrance and consideration of things which are not, at the moment, present to my organs of sense. The knowledge which, by their intervention, has been once communicated to me, I can store up and recall to view without their renewed agency. The impressions which I so re- tain may have the effect of exciting in me the passions of love or hatred, hope or fear; and the exercise in which I am so engaged, is as exclusively a spiritual function, as any of which human na- ture is capable. But still I am indebted for it to a communication originally received through the medium of my bodily senses, and to a renewal or reconsideration of the impression which I in this way received. If, on the contrary, my inward man is to be immediately and directly the recep- 82 AGENCY OF THE SPIRIT CF GOD tacle of what is purely spiritual, it is quite obvi- ous that my bodily senses cannot be the medium through which such things are to he communica- ted; and, unless we can be referred to some other primary and original medium of communication accommodated to such a case, it is impossible for us to comprehend how the direct and immediate agency of a Spiritual Being on our spiritual frame | should be at all discerned or perceived by us. In short, the objection to what is revealed on this subject seems to have originated in an abuse of the Divine condescension. The Divine Being condescends, for our greater good, to make our own understanding, as well as our own will and affections, partly instrumental in the blessed work of renewing and sanctifying our nature. With that view, He presents to us arguments and mo- tives to what is good, by the intervention, in the first instance, of our bodily senses. He addresses himself to our senses as a medium through which his counsel and will shall be outwardly communi- cated to us; and because, thus far, we are enabled to comprehend the manner of his dealing with us, the rising presumption of some minds would lead them to conclude that more than what we thus comprehend is impossible with God. I am somewhat ashamed of having employed, IN RENEWING THE SPIRIT OF MAN. 33 in this case, such abstract reasoning as I have been enabled, in others, to avoid. My apology is, that for the satisfaction of some men, I have thought it necessary. But I trust that there are few of my readers who may not be satisfied with the single and unencumbered consideration, that the Being who created the soul of man—who alone created all things—to whom all things, which do not involve a contradiction, are alike possible and easy—can undoubtedly find access to our hearts, in any way which approves itself to him, in order to his moulding and framing them according to his pleasure. 3 aa tdwe 4 SECTION III. IN THE DEPARTMENT OF MORAL DUTY, THE GOSPEL REQUIRES MORE THAN UNASSISTED REASON HAD REGARDED AS OBLIGATORY, BUT NOTHING WHICH WELL-DIRECTED REASON CAN REFUSE TO AC- KNOWLEDGE AS WORTHY OF GOD, AND CONDUCIVE TO THE PER= FECTION OF OUR NATURE. Ir would not be an easy task to mark or define with precision, all that distinguishes the morality of the Gospel from what had been dictated by un- assisted reason in its best estate. But there cer- tainly are some precepts of Christianity, in a great measure peculiar to it; and there are other cases of moral obligation, in which men, without the aid of Divine revelation, had not generally recog- nised such a standard of duty as that to which the religion of Christ requires us to conform. It is therefore essential to the vindication of Christian faith, that the scheme of morality, which it un- folds, shall not appear in any respect unworthy of God. What the Gospel requires has been, in some instances, matter of offence, on account of the idio- matic language in which it is expressed,—not on PRECEPTS EXPRESSED IN IDIOMATIC LANGUAGE. 35 account of its real import. But, in such cases, it is only necessary to interpret the language in a way consistent with what the Author of the Gos- pel has elsewhere enjoined in words which do not admit of being misunderstood. Jesus says, upon one occasion, that a man cannot be his disciple, if he “ hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters.”* But the mutual love which ought to subsist among parents and children, husbands and wives, brethren and sis- ters, and all the duties resulting from that natural affection, are, on other occasions, inculcated by the Gospel of Christ, in such a variety of plain and consistent language, as makes it obvious that no- thing more could be intended, in the case before us, than to represent the obligation which we are under to maintain every other affection in a state of just subordination to the love of our God and Saviour. ! Trusting, therefore, that such an example may satisfy the reader respecting other cases, in which an objection might arise from the enigmatical na- ture of the language employed, I would proceed to a consideration of what is peculiar or distin- guishing in the real import of the morality of the Gospel. * Luke, chap, xiv. ver, 26, 36 CHRISTIAN HUMILITY The Divine Teacher, in whom I invite men to believe, gave early and explicit intimation that the laws of his religion were to take cognizance, not of the outward conduct only, but also of the heart and its affections; and to this principle no objec- tion seems to be avowed. Whatever deviations from it had taken place under the sanction of other teachers, and whatever secret aversion to it there still be in the corrupt heart, its essential rec- titude has been found too obvious to admit of its being openly questioned. But there are some particular precepts which call for more consider- ation. 1. The Author of Christianity gave early no- tice that the virtue of umzlity was to constitute the foundation of what should be required in the character of his disciples,—by annexing to this virtue in particular the broad and comprehensive promise of an interest in his spiritual kingdom. “‘ Blessed,” said he, “ are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”* The proud heart of man has also observed, in connexion with humility as a moral precept, the humiliating tend- ency of that way of salvation which the Gospel reveals, and has objected to the whole Christian * Matth. chap. v. ver. 3. VINDICATED. 37 system, regarded in this view, as derogatory from the dignity of human nature. It was but too natural that the same spirit, which (as the Scriptures teach us) first led man to rebel against his Maker, should also object to the means now employed for its own cure. But, if a regard to the real dignity of human nature has, in this case, an influence on the minds of any, their apprehensions must surely originate in a misconception of what is implied in Christian humility. Humility, as a Christian virtue, does not con- sist in thinking worse of ourselves than truth would dictate. It has, like all other virtues, its foundation in truth. Nor does the pride, which is opposed to it, consist in entertaining a just sense of what belongs to us—of our real merit, our just claims, or our proper dignity. The essence of pride consists in pretending to be what we are not, or in claiming what is not our due; and the es- sence of humility, in “ not thinking of ourselves more highly than we ought to think, but thinking soberly.” If to be humble must be regarded as an expression of comparison, denoting that our opi- nion of ourselves is low, it does not denote low as compared with the truth, but low as compared 38 CHRISTIAN HUMILITY VINDICATED. with what the hearts of men too commonly dic- tate. Upon what possible ground, then, can this vir- tue fail to approve itself to the unprejudiced rea- gon or understanding of men? So far from being incompatible with the dignity of human nature, it imparts to us both the dignity and the independ- ence which seem to be most desirable, even in a worldly view. It is only the man who does not overrate his own consequence, that can have any security against the mortification of seeing his claims denied ; he alone stands upon a footing of real independence, as pretending to nothing which others can justly refuse. He is, in consequence, enabled to pass through the world with an open countenance and an open mind; he has no secrets connected with his dignity, which he dreads that others may detect,—no alarm, therefore, for the most penetrating eye—no0 mysterious veil to pre- serve. What is more important,—it is only he that seems to be qualified for communicating with the Father of his spirit ;—for, as it is only he that has a just sense of his own weakness and his own wants, it is his prayer alone that can be directed aright—directed for the supply of what- he truly needs; and, while God, therefore, “ resisteth the proud, he giveth grace to the humble.” CHRISTIAN SELF-DENIAL VINDICATED. 39 2. Closely allied, in some respects, to humility is the precept of self-denial. “ If any man,” saith Christ, “ will come after me, let him deny him« self.”* The language is unquestionably of a mor- tifying kind, and is regarded by many as a hard saying. Nor do I at all disavow, that what it re- quires must be more or less felt as a hardship; with no reason could it otherwise receive such a name as self-denial. Yet, if we attend to the case, we shall find that there is nothing implied in it which our reason or understanding can refuse to sanction. The precept certainly requires, that we deny or refuse to ourselves any enjoyment of this life, and any means of preserving life itself, that would prove inconsistent with the honour of Christ, and the salvation of our immortal souls. But how is it possible that less should be required ? Without refusing what is sinful in this life, we should be incapable of enjoying the life which is to come; —and shall it, indeed, be accounted unreasonable to require of us what is indispensable to both the perfection and happiness of our nature ? They who object to the Christian precept of self- denial, as either unreasonable or degrading, ought * Matth, chap. xvi. ver. 24. ° 40 CHRISTIAN SELF-DENIAL VINDICATED. at least to consider whether they do not, at the same time, approve and sanction something very like it indeed, as a principle of worldly wisdom. What is the education which the wisdom of the world prescribes to the young and untutored mind, but a regular system of self-denial? Not a day passes in early life, without our being required to deny or refuse to ourselves some present enjoyment, with a view to future and distant advantage of a worldly kind. So long as we remain in this world, we find it necessary to act, more or less, on a simi- lar principle -—and, though any worldly reward, which we can reap as the fruit of such self-denial, is not worthy of being compared to what awaits the disciples of Christ hereafter,—there are not wanting instances, in which the self-denial pre- scribed by the world is more grievous than what | the religion of Christ does, in ordinary circum- stances, exact. 3. Another precept, or rather a whole depart- ment of precepts, allied in their spirit to both hu- mility and self-denial, has given still greater of- fence.— Love your enemies,” said Christ, “ bless them that curse you, do good to them that. hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you.” * . * Matth. chap.v. ver. 44. LOVE OF ENEMIES VINDICATED. 4] These precepts have been regarded as unnatu- ral, and what they require, as impracticable. But, as objections to Christian duty are apt to origi- nate in a misconception of what is required, it may be useful to consider what is implied in loving our enemies. In the language of common life, the term dove is usually employed to denote a peculiar and dis- tinguishing regard ; but it is not in this sense that we are required to love our enemies. We are com- manded to love our enemies only because it is our duty to love all men, and because our corrupt hearts are too apt to make the case of our enemies an exception from the general rule. Our love to all men (of course including our enemies) is re- quired to be such as would lead us to do good to every individual, if we had opportunity ; but it must, from the nature of the case, consist in a ge- neral good will, rather than in a peculiar and dis- tinguishing affection. Did Christian love to our enemies denote more than I nowrepresent, it would be unnatural indeed, for it would be love to them on account of their being our enemies. But the great difficulty may seem to remain. We cannot love our enemies without forgiving them; and it is asked, Whether the forgiveness 42 FORGIVENESS AND LOVE of injuries be not, in some cases, incompatible with the condition of man, inconsistent with his dignity, with his interest, even with his personal safety. One would think that men who are duly con- scious of their own offences against God, and yet hope to be forgiven by him, should not be very | confident or much at ease in maintaining such an argument ; but I do not the less desire to meet the question as it has now been stated. Let us therefore settle, in the first place, what is to be understood by forgiveness on the part of oné man towards another. For this term has, in some cases, a broad, and in others a limited signi- fication ; and the extent of what it denotes is to be ascertained by the circumstances in which it is em- ployed. Though in many casés we may exercise a forgiveness so complete, as to feel towards the per- son who injured us as if the injury had never been committed, there can be no doubt that it is neces- sary, in other cases, so far to remember the injury as to guard more effectually against a similar at- tack. There are cases in which it is necessary even to manifest our sense of injury, and, it may be, to renounce all intercourse with one whose perseve- ring animosity would render our intercourse with him dangerous in the time to come. Yet all this can be no reason against our so forgiving him, and OF ENEMIES VINDICATED. 43 so loving him, as to be willing to do him good, if circumstances should admit ; and in such a case as I have now supposed, more is not required. In such a case,Christian forgiveness is opposed only to that revenge which would prompt us either to render evil for evil, or to withhold from our enemy those good offices which may still be performed consist~ ently with our own honour and safety. Let it not be thought that I am, in this instance, so unfaithful to the doctrine of Christ, or using such freedom with the word of God, as to make it bend to the opinions of men. Most happily, for the satisfaction of ever'y mind, our Divine Teacher has condescended to explain, both to limit and illus- trate, the duty in question, with more care and precision than we find him employing on almost any other subject. “ If thy brother,” saith he, “ shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone : If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: But if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.”* * Matth. chap. xvii. ver. 13—17. 4,4, FORGIVENESS AND LOVE That absolute forgiveness, which leads to a re- newal of wonted confidence, is thus required, only in the event of our brother, who had offended, being prevailed on to hear us—to hear and ac- knowledge the justice of our complaint against him. For the accomplishment, therefore, of this desirable purpose, we are instructed that no likely means should be left untried. But if our offend- ing brother cannot be, in any way, reclaimed toa just sense of the wrong which he has done to us, we are directed to regard him as a man with whom it is not honourable or safe to have future inter- course. Though it is still our duty so to forgive him, and love him, as to be willing to do him good, if circumstances shall admit, he is to be to us what an heathen man and a publican were to the Jews—persons with whom they avoided to mingle in the ordinary intercourse of life. Shall it, notwithstanding, be thought that the Christian precept: of forgiving and loving our ene- mies, is unnatural in itself, or incapable of being reduced to practice? Is it necessary that I hate another merely on account of his hatred to me ? Shall the most worthless individual of those around me have such a power over my heart, as to render it at his pleasure the victim of a hateful and cor- roding spirit ? I shall only assert the proper dig- OF ENEMIES VINDICATED. 45 nity of my nature, by preserving my own spirit meek and unruffled by his; and if I can still, by any good deeds, promote his interest, I shall place myself, with respect to him, upon vantage-ground indeed! If his heart be not impenetrable to all generous affection, it is possible that, in this way, he may still be reclaimed. 4. Perhaps some vindication may be expected of a precept more broad and comprehensive than any to which I have adverted,—the exhortation to be “ perfect, even as our Father which is in Heaven is perfect.” * I do not believe that the real object and de- sign of this precept are very generally mistaken. - But when it can serve a purpose adverse to the Christian cause, what the precept requires is re- presented as impracticable, and on that account unreasonable. It would be altogether preposterous to suppose that the precept in question has any reference to those attributes of the Divinity, which are the ex- clusive characteristics of an Infinite Being. Even power and wisdom, though they be faculties in * Matth. chap. v. ver. 48, AG VINDICATION OF PRECEPT TO BE PERFECT respect of which the creatures of God are not al- together precluded from a resemblance of Him who created them, do not fall within the sphere of this precept. As the great object of religion is our advancement in moral perfection, the single object of the precept before us is a likeness to God in those affections of the heart, on which moral perfection depends ; and the exhortation is © accordingly connected with a train of reasoning, which refers exclusively to morality in the heart and life. It has, notwithstanding, been urged, that what Christ in this case requires is unreasonable, be- cause the absolute perfection which belongs to the Divine Being is not, in any of its departments, attainable by man. But is it not possible to at- tain both a real and progressive likeness to God in his moral attributes, without attaining that ab- solute or infinite perfection, which is His preroga- tive? Or is there any reason why Divine perfec- tion, though in its degree unattainable by any finite being, may not be an example to us in re- spect of its constituent qualities ? May it not be held, on the contrary, that the absolute or entire perfection of the Divine character, renders it a more fit object even of our imperfect imitation ? Absolute perfection is aimed at in every rule of AS OUR HEAVENLY FATHER IS PERFECT. 47 conduct which a teacher of morality prescribes. There is no precept, founded in essential recti- tude, of which absolute perfection is not the ob- ject, within that sphere to which the precept ex- tends. ‘The same objection, therefore, which is urged against proposing the Divine character as an example to men, might, with equal reason, be urged against the whole, or any part, of the Law, which God hath given us. But, though perfect conformity to the law of God is, in our present state, unattainable, does it follow that perfect con- formity to it should not be required by God, and, aimed at by men? We are unable to keep our- selves altogether from iniquity. But does it fol- low that a certain measure of iniquity should be, for that reason, allowed by God, or that we should not be commanded by Him to abstain from al/ that is evil? When Christ exhorts us to be perfect, as our Father in heaven is perfect, he certainly re- quires us both to propose to ourselves a perfect standard, and to aim at the nearest. possible re- semblance to it; but it does by no means follow, that we have not profited by his exhortation, be- cause we have failed of absolute or complete suc- cess. Our duty consists in a vigorous imitation of Divine perfection, productive of such a progres- sive, though imperfect, likeness to our Heavenly Father, as we know to be attainable by his chil- dren on earth. 48. VINDICATION OF PRECEPT TO BE PERFECT, &e. We have in this way an advantage beyond what can be otherwise realized to us, in our endeavours after moral improvement. ‘The import of moral precepts may be mistaken, owing to the uncertain and fluctuating import of the language in which they are expressed. But the man who has formed just conceptions of the Divine character, finds in it a standard of perfection by which he can never be deceived, by which every maxim or rule of duty may be safely tried and appreciated, and which only requires to be steadily kept in view, in order to its guiding and directing the willing mind to the highest attainments which our nature is destined to reach. The example of our Heavenly Father, regarded as a rule of duty, has even the advantage of sug- gesting such a motive to the imitation of it as can- not be without effect. - Our hearts must be alto- gether alienated from God if we do not feel it de- lightful to imitate him whom we have so much cause to love. SECTION IV. FROM ALL THE PRECEDING VIEWS OF THE GOSPEL, THERE ARISES STRONG PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE OF ITS DIVINE ORIGIN, WHILE the views which we have taken of the Christian doctrine were calculated to remove some objections to it, which originate with a perverted understanding, I trust that they have been effec- tual for convincing the reader of its perfect adapt- ation to all our spiritual wants and necessities, As creatures ignorant of much that relates to the present condition of our nature, and even un- certain of our ultimate destination, it seems im- possible that we should not hail with delight the glorious light which the Gospel casts on things which so materially concern us. As sinful crea- tures, liable to punishment from the hand of a Being of infinite justice, and also conscious of the reigning power and dominion of sin within us, it seems impossible that we should not rejoice in the assurance which the Gospel imparts, both of for- giving mercy to the penitent sinner, and of Divine grace to every man who sincerely desires and seeks D 50 PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE OF THE after it, for his deliverance from the power of ini- quity, and his consequent preparation for everlast- ing felicity in the presence of his Heavenly Father. What is there farther that can be desired by a man duly conscious of his spiritual disease, and of his wants as a spiritual being? Is it possible that they who are interested in such blessings should not regard the communication of them, through the Gospel of Christ, as altogether worthy of a Being of infinite goodness ? It does not seem too much to suppose, that every man, who has a just sense of his condition by nature, should cling to the revelation of these things as a precious gift of Heaven,—as the anchor of his soul during his abode in the present world. Yet let it not be supposed that it is in this re- spect alone that the views which we have taken of the Christian doctrine afford presumptive evidence of its Divine origin. The evidence is much strength- ened by what we know respecting the condition of its Author, considered in connexion with what he taught and enjoined. « We speak wisdom,” said an Apostle, “ among them that are perfect, yet not the wisdom of this world.” It has never been pretended that the Au- thor of Christianity frequented: those schools in which the wisdom of the world was taught. Yet DIVINE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPEL. 51 we have seen that his doctrine affords a more con- sistent and satisfying view of many things pertain- ing to God, as well as to the condition and inte. rests of men, than the wisdom of the world had attained. We have seen that the morality of his religion, in particular, far transcends, in point of purity and perfection, any rule of life which had been previously recognised. On what principle do we account for these things ? Is there no ground to presume that the perfection which we thus trace, and which does not seem to have been of men, may be found to be of God ? It may, at least, be hoped that they who attend to the religion of Christ in this view, and observe how it approves itself to well-directed reason, will not regard it as the dream of a deluded mind. What account of it, then, can be given, consist- ently with a denial of its divine origin ? If it has neither proceeded from God, nor from any weak mind which was itself deluded, it must, of neces- sity, have been devised by an impostor, for the purpose of deluding others. This, accordingly, is the ground on which unbelievers have attacked it from the beginning. They have represented it as a deep-laid scheme for imposing on the world. Yet how are we to reconcile this account of the matter with what we have seen to be the fact,— That the Christian doctrine, and its morality in 52 PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE OF THE particular, are, in many respects, directly opposed to the prejudices and inclinations of men, and, consequently, could afford no natural promise to their Author of advancing his credit or interest among meni. In those systems of religious doctrine and wor- ship, which have been imposed on the world by the cunning and artifice of individuals, we observe what was naturally to be expected—an artful accommodation both to the prejudices of a misin- formed or perverted mind, and to the wishes of a corrupt heart. But in what department of the Christian doctrine do we trace any similar accom- modation? In one view, the religion of Christ 1s well accommodated to the world; it is well ac- commodated to the wants and necessities of the world. But the wants and the wishes of men are often very opposite; some of the wants, to which the Christian doctrine is accommodated, are of a kind which the corrupt heart was unwilling to recognise—wants which it did not wish to be sup- plied. | Though we have seen that the precepts of the Gospel, in particular, are such as well-directed rea- son must approve, some of them are so obnoxious to the corrupt heart, that they were, from the be- ginning, pronounced by many to be hard sayings, which no man could bear. So far from their Au- DIVINE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPEL. 53 thor making any attempt, even to cover or dis- guise, in the first instance, what might appear pe- culiarly grievous, we have seen that the words which he employed, were, to say the least, as rigid as the duty which they were intended to denote. What an exemplification was it of plain dealing, to require of those who would come after him, (or, in other words, would become his disciples,) “to deny themselves, and take up their cross?” Was this the language of one who meant to cheat others into a profession of his religion ? Was this the manner in which one regardless of truth, and only eager to promote his own aggrandisement, would have endeavoured to prevail on men to be- come his followers ? We might suppose a deluded and superstitious mind to have been willing to impose superstitious penances on others. But we have seen that the general character of the Gospel doctrine abund- antly protects its Author against any charge of having been himself deluded; and what we now observe concerning some of his precepts, makes it equally impossible to suppose that he had any si- nister scheme or design of alluring men to become his disciples, by deceitful views of what should be required of them. Nor is it in this negative view alone that the peculiar precepts of the Gospel afford evidence of 54 PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE OF THE their Author’s sincerity; they strongly indicate his own confidence in their divine origin.—Before Christ appeared in the world, the baneful effects, which had resulted from a spirit of hatred and revenge, were well known. But the deep root which this hateful spirit had gained in the hu- man heart, and the seeming impossibility of con- vincing men that they ought so to love their enemies as to do them good, were enough to pre- vent heathen sages from inculcating strictly, if at all, the obligation of a truly forgiving spirit. An attempt to do so, would have been accounted by them more than enough to blast and defeat the best scheme of morality with which it might be connected. Nothing, therefore, but a conscious- ness of divine power accompanying his doctrine, could have induced the Author of the Christian faith to require such a spirit as indispensable in his disciples. Those attainments in charity, which he hath commanded us to aim at, could never have been contemplated by one who did not also antici- pate that divine and all-powerful energy, by which a change so blessed was to be wrought out on the human heart. Is it possible, in these circumstances, to account for what is new and peculiar in the Gospel-doc- trine, as a rule of both faith and practice, upon DIVINE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPEL. 55 any other supposition than that of its having pro- ceeded from God? Was its Author uneducated in “ the wisdom of this world?” Did he, notwith- standing, undertake to instruct and satisfy our minds respecting both the present condition of our nature, and our ultimate destination ? Do we find that his doctrine on this subject, though at first it seem liable to objections, only requires to be deli- -berately considered and examined, in order to its approving itself to our reason? Do we find that his precepts also, as a rule of life, are more con- ducive to the perfection of our nature, than all that the wisest and best of men had previously devised? Does this view of the Gospel prevent the possibility of our rejecting it as the dream of an ignorant enthusiast? Has its Author, at the same time, placed the honesty of his design out of question, by rigidly inculcating precepts which were so obnoxious to the corrupt heart as to give no natural promise of advancing his reputation and interest in the world,—even so obnoxious as to forbid any hope of their being accepted by men, otherwise than through the blessed influence of the Spirit of all Grace, whom he, at the same time, re- vealed as co-operating with himself in the work of our salvation ?—If, to these questions, the answer of the reader be what my mind directs me to an- ticipate, there seems to be no way of accounting 56 PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE, &c. for what we have traced as peculiar in the Gospel of Christ, without presuming that it comes from God. Trusting that the views of the Gospel, which I have thus presented, may induce the reader to give a candid, if not a favourable, attention to its more direct evidences, I proceed to submit these evidences to his consideration; and shall, in the first place, endeavour to shew, that the Gospel his- tory is entitled to our confidence as a record of facts not miraculous, in order to our afterwards appealing to these facts as affording evidence of the reality of the Christian miracles. CHAPTER IL. THE GOSPEL HISTORY IS SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE WHICH WELL ENTITLES US TO CONFIDE IN IT AS A NARRATIVE OF FACTS, SO FAR AS THEY ARE NOT MIRACULOUS. THE establishment of this proposition is the foundation of all the direct proof by which the reality of Christ’s miracles can be fairly and ef- fectually maintained. Yet, so far as regards his- torical evidence for the truth of the Gospel nar- rative, I have the satisfaction of thinking that my labour may be safely abridged; for, though the historical evidence has not been applied by some authors in the way which appears to me most logi- cal and conclusive, there has been such a mass of it brought forward by the advocates of the Chris- tian cause, as must be more than sufficient to an- swer every reasonable demand. But there are also internal marks or indications of either truth or falsehood, which every narrative more or less possesses. False documents, taking 58 EVIDENCE OF GOSPEL HISTORY. to themselves the name of history, may contain such internal evidence of falsehood, as makes it preposterous to think of establishing their truth. There may be others of an equivocal character ; and there certainly are some in which all the in- ternal and essential indications of truth are so strong, as to give greater and more perfect effect to the direct testimony by which they are support- ed. Ifthe Gospel history be of this last descrip- tion, its character in that respect ought to be illus- trated, in the first place, as tending still farther to modify the task of establishing its truth by direct and positive evidence. I shall, therefore, begin with inquiring what indications of either truth or falsehood present themselves on the face of the evangelical record. li le SECTION I. THE GOSPEL HISTORY AFFORDS MUCH INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF ITS OWN TRUTH. 4 WITH a view to illustrate this proposition, let us attend to the more prominent indications of truth or falsehood which any historical document may be supposed to present. 1. The consistency of a narrative is essential to the confidence which we repose in it. A narrative may be chargeable with such incon- sistencies as render it impossible for us to believe one part of it without disbelieving another. On the other hand, consistency may amount, in some cases, to more than a hegative recommendation. By a strict examination of a narrative, we may perceive consistency in such trying circumstances, as not only preclude the possibility of its being the effect of study or precaution, but afford strong pre- sumptive evidence of its being the simple result of a natural and habitual adherence to truth. What I have now supposed may: be realized in 60 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE TRUTH the course of comparing one part with another of the same narrative; but, if different authors have furnished us with separate narratives, bearing on the same subject, and if their mutual consistency be essential to our acknowledging the truth of all or either of them, it is manifest that a field is thereby opened for such a severe trial, as renders it highly probable that we may either detect the falsehood of the whole, or acquire some moral evi- dence of an undeviating regard to truth, in those from whom the narratives in question proceed. This hypothetical case is practically exemplified in the Gospel history —Four individuals (each professing to have a perfect knowledge of the cir- cumstances) have given us four separate accounts of the life of Christ. They are so different from one another, that the last, in particular, (that of the Evangelist John,) contains but little of what had been recorded by those who preceded him, Yet, instead of any real inconsistencies having been detected by the most scrutinizing eye, it is found that those circumstances, in the different narratives, which at first sight bear an appearance of inconsistency, only furnish us with presumptive evidence of both the simplicity and integrity of the men by whom they were respectively written. If the four narratives of the life of Christ had borne such a resemblance to each other, in respect OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY. 61 of both the circumstances recorded, and the lan- guage employed, as to make it impossible for any man to bring forward a plausible allegation of in- consistency, it would have amounted, in the view of a discerning mind, to something like evidence of mutual consultation on the part of those con- cerned—of such artful design (though it might be for a good purpose) as must have impaired the confidence which we may otherwise repose in them. When, on the contrary, we observe any seeming discrepance in respect of either language or circumstances, and yet find it effectually remo- ved by a very natural explanation—when we find that, notwithstanding such appearances of discre- pance, the most acute and determined adversaries of the Christian faith have not been able, in any one instance, to establish a charge of real incon- sistency, it may well have the effect of satisfying our minds that each of the Evangelists must have written with a single desire of recording the truth, —with less concert and worldly wisdom than what may in some cases be useful,—but with such per- fect confidence in his own integrity, as resulted from the testimony of a good conscience. 2. A narrative may present to its readers more particular evidence that its author could not be 62 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE TRUTH actuated by any sinister design, or any other pur- pose than what is avowed. — Deliberate falsehood has its origin most fre- quently in a design to promote some worldly in- terest of those by whom it is propagated. If a narrative contain nothing that can tend to the worldly advantage of its author, it has so far a claim to attention ;—if it has plainly an opposite tendency, a tendency in any sense disadvantage- ous to the person from whom it proceeds, and of which he must himself have been conscious, we have some presumptive evidence of its truth. What is, in this respect, the character of the Gospel history? Does it contain any thing by which its authors could reasonably hope to pro- mote their worldly interest ? Two of them were Apostles of Christ ; and they do not deny that, in attaching themselves to his cause, they were originally actuated by worldly views; they confess that, in this respect, they were much disappointed. But does such a con- fession savour of any renewed scheme of worldly ambition ?—(most assuredly it could not aid such a scheme)—Or is there any thing in the account which they give of their Master’s life and doctrine, OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY. 63 by which they might hope to gain the co-opera- tion of worldly men in measures for their own advancement in the world? It is manifest that the whole tenor of what they wrote, could only expose them to the contempt of men who were ac- tuated by worldly views, if it did not subject them to the hatred and enmity of some whose interests were likely to be affected. If worldly reputation, more particularly, was their object, what means did they employ for acqui- ring it ? Two of them (as I have already said) were of the number of Christ’s more immediate associ- ates ;—what do we find in ¢hezr writings calculated to advance the credit or reputation of that body of men—the apostolic family—to which they belong- ed? Was this object to be accomplished by an avowal of their own original misapprehensions of their Master’s doctrine,—of the doubts which they had entertained of his power,—the contentions which prevailed among themselves,—the baseness of one of their number who had betrayed him,— the weakness of another who had denied him,— the meanness and. cowardice which they had all manifested by forsaking him in the hour of trial ? The prejudices or preconceived opinions of an historian, may influence him to frame his narrative in a way calculated to establish and maintain these G4 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE TRUTH opinions. But all the prejudices or preconceived opinions of the authors of the Gospel history were directly opposed to the doctrine of Christ. As Jews, they had, in common with their countrymen, ex- pected the Messiah toestablish a temporal kingdom. Their Master, on the contrary, instructed them that his kingdom was not to be of this world; and the whole doctrine which he taught was ac- commodated to a spiritual design. So far from their having any prejudices in favour of his doc- trine, which could induce them to misrepresent the truth, it is manifest that they had strong pre- judices against it, which it was necessary for them to surmount, before they could, in their hearts, so receive what he taught, as to be prepared to do it justice in any communication to others. Shall it be supposed that, after having become attached to their Master and his cause, they may have perverted the truth for the purpose of ad- vancing his honour? I shall not deny the possi- bility, that a man who rises superior to all undue regard to his own worldly interest and reputation, __who even rises superior to all undue confidence in his own preconceived opinions,—may still be tempted to pervert the truth for advancing the honour of another. Far less would I deny that the honour of Christ was eminently dear to those OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY. 65 who have furnished us with the history of his life. But is there any thing on the face of the Gospel record, to warrant a suspicion that its authors were disposed to employ any means for promoting his honour, beyond a simple and faithful narra- tive of what they had seen and heard? If they are to be suspected of having employed other and undue means for this purpose, how comes it that they appear to have been altogether neglectful of what they might have fairly and honourably done for its accomplishment,—neglectful of what they might have done, without any violation of truth, and what other men, in the same outward circum- stances, certainly would have done? How comes it that, in recording the transactions of their Mas- ter’s life, not a word ever escapes from them, ex- pressive of their admiration of either the power, or the wisdom, or the goodness, which he mani- fested ? Or how comes it that, in narrating those facts and circumstances, on which the enemies of their Master were most likely to found an accu- sation against him, we do not once find them ac- companying their statement with such an apology for the part which he had acted, or such an ex. planation of it, as their intimate acquaintance with all the circumstances might have enabled them to suggest ? It is morally impossible to account for 1D) 66 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE TRUTH these things upon any principle short of admit- ting, that it was their single object to bear a faith- ful testimony, leaving it to a higher power to con- trol the purposes which were to be served by it. We cannot, indeed, attend to the Gospel his- tory in the views already presented, without per- ceiving that one of its peculiar features is s7m- plicity ; nor will it be found an easy matter, in — any case, to reconcile this characteristic with a sinister design. But in adverting to the simpli- city of the Gospel narrative, I am well entitled to take high ground. For not only is simplicity one of its distinguishing features, there Is no history extant that may, in this respect, be at all compa- red with it. Its simplicity is not only exempli- fied in certain remarkable instances, but so per- vades the whole, that there is not a single case in which an opposite feature can be traced. Much of the simplicity of a narrative consists in the author’s attention being confined to the facts which he narrates, exclusive of whatever is either personal to himself, or intended to recom- mend what he writes to the approbation of others. Now, two of the authors of the Gospel history, being of the number of Christ’s immediate asso- ciates, were themselves deeply concerned in the facts which they narrated ; yet it would be diffi- OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY, 67 cult to discover from the tenor of their narrative, that they had any personal interest in the matter, —either in the honour which it reflected on those concerned, or in the responsibility which it im- posed on them. All the Evangelists must have been aware that, so far as circumstances should admit, their veracity would be called in question by the enemies of their Master ; yet we do not find them making any protestations of their own truth and integrity, or any appeal to the im- possibility of their having been actuated by world- ly views. It was natural that they should re- fer to the Old Testament prophecies concerning the Messiah, as fulfilled in the person of Jesus ; and had they been actuated by worldly wisdom, they would have been likely to bring forward some laboured argument on this subject, instead of ad- hering to the single duty of recording what they had seen and heard. But how do we find them proceeding ? In narrating particular events, they do occasionally refer to particular _ prophecies which, in these events, received their fulfilment. But with what simplicity is the reference made! There is no argument employed to convince their countrymen either that the prophecies in question did not admit of a different interpretation, or that the general appearance and character of their 68 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE TRUTH Master were conformable to what the Law and the Prophets had given them cause to expect. How are we to account for such unexampled silence,—for such abstinence from the use of all the means which others would have employed for vindicating and maintaining either their own ho- nour, or that of the cause in which they were en- gaged ? One answer may be given, which meets the question in its full extent. They felt it to be their duty, as I have already hinted, to record those things of which they had been eye and ear- witnesses, but were convinced that, in doing so, they did all that was incumbent on them, and all that they were warranted to undertake. When their conduct, viewed in all its bearings, shall be accounted for on a different principle, we may then, but not till then, lose the benefit of a strong presumptive argument in favour of their truth and integrity. 3. A narrative may present much internal evi- dence of its own truth, arising from the facility which it affords for the detection of any falsehood which it may be supposed to contain. By a very general statement of facts, real or pretended,—by a statement which makes no dis- tinct reference to accompanying circumstances,—— OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY. 69 an author may, in a great measure, put it out of the power of others to form a judgment of the truth or falsehood of what he writes. The more numerous and specific, on the other hand, that such references are, the more does he lay open the whole case to the examination and judg- ment of the world,—the more does he facilitate and invite such inquiry as may enable all men to ascertain what credit is due to him. It is not, therefore, easy to suppose that the specifications in question should be very liberally given, by an author who is not conscious of the truth of what he is recording. Proceeding upon this ground, what may we na- turally presume or anticipate respecting the vera- city of the authors of the Gospel history ? Do they appear to have written like men confident of the truth of what they narrated, and consequently not afraid of any trial to which it might be ex- posed ? I doubt whether there be any other history in which all the circumstances of time and place, to- gether with the names and designations of eye- witnesses and others concerned, are detailed with a minuteness so strongly indicating a single and earnest desire that all men should have it in their power to ascertain the truth. I also doubt whe- 470 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE TRUTH ther it be possible to account for this distinguish- ing characteristic of the Gospel narrative, in any way consistent with a supposition of its falsehood. If the date of an event be not duly recorded, it becomes impracticable to make any inquiry into the truth of what the author of the narrative as- serts. It may, or may not, have happened; for we are left in a state of irremediable ignorance respect- ing all that could enable us to make trial of the authenticity of his statements. But to give the reader of the Gospel history the utmost advantage in this respect, he is referred to circumstances which distinctly mark and ascertain the dates of those great events with which others in their or- der are immediately connected. He is not even left in perplexity arising from the different ways in which time has been calculated, and its periods denominated, in different countries ; he is referred to circumstances which serve, in the view of all men, to fix the date of the events in question,— such as the name of the existing Emperor of Rome, and the year of his reign,—the names of the Ro- man Governors of Judea and Galilee,—and the name of the person who was, for the time, High Priest of Jerusalem. An author who does not specify distinctly the OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY. sod | place which was the scene of what he records, puts it out of the power of his reader (even sup- posing him nearly contemporary with the event) to satisfy himself, by an examination of either living witnesses, or traditionary evidence. But, in almost every instance, the Evangelists have described the place to which the event in question is referred, with a degree of minuteness obviously and wisely intended to facilitate the strictest in- quiry into the evidence of what they narrate. In most instances, the particular district or neigh- bourhood, the particular town or village,the mount or the garden—in some cases the particular house —is recorded with such precision as plainly tend- ed to invite inquiry. A want of the names and designations of the persons, to whom reference is made, might still have gonefar to obstruct the requisite investigation. But no such want could be felt by those who, at the time of the first publication of the life of Christ, endeavoured to ascertain its truth or falsehood. The names and occupations of his family and con- nexions—of his more immediate and constant as- sociates—of others with whom he had occasional intercourse, some of them personally interested in the most remarkable transactions of his life, and some of them in the higher ranks of society,—even 72 INTERNAL EVIDENCE, &c. the names and designations of the more distin- guished of his enemies and persecutors—are all given in a way which must have tended to facili- tate inquiry, and which plainly indicates the ab- sence of either reserve or disguise—the absence of whatever is inconsistent with truth. If the Gospel history had not been written till | the alleged witnesses of what is recorded had been laid in the grave,—till even the memory of cir- cumstances which might have contradicted it, had been nearly lost; or, though written by contem- poraries of Christ, had it been carefully locked up from the view of the world till the late period to which I now refer, I admit that the facilities which it affords for the detection of falsehood must have proved in a great measure illusory. But, with all its unreserved specification of the most minute cir- cumstances of time and place, together with the names and designations of witnesses and others concerned, we shall find, in the next Section, that it was published to the world while many of the eye and ear-witnesses of what is recorded—both friends and enemies of Christ—were still alive, and consequently while his enemies had it fully in. their power both to inquire into and expose any falsehood which his friends might have attempted. to impose on the world. SECTION II. THE GOSPEL HISTORY WAS PUBLISHED AT A TIME WHEN THE JEWISH RULERS WERE IN FULL POSSESSION OF THE MEANS OF DETECTING AND EXPOSING ANY FALSEHOOD WHICH IT MIGHT HAVE CONTAIN= ED ;—YET NO CONFUTATION OF IT APPEARED. THE existence of many ancient manuscripts of those books, which constitute the Gospel history, does of itself refer us to a period of remote anti- quity, as the date of their publication. The exist- ence, also, of versions or translations of these books into languages which, for many ages, have ceased to be spoken in the world, authorises us to look back to a more definite time, at which the origi- nals must have existed. Nor is this all the evi- dence of the same kind. A recent author, in allu- ding to the circumstances now mentioned, has ju- diciously added, that the peculiar idiom of the Greek tongue, in which the New Testament is written, affords decisive evidence of its coming from men of Hebrew origin. These circumstan- ces certainly go far to countenance the supposi- tion that the different books of the Gospel history were written and published by the men to whom As GOSPEL HISTORY WRITTEN they have been always ascribed, and consequently before the close of the Apostolic age. But how comes it that any doubt is entertained (if entertained it actually be) about the books in question having been the genuine production of their supposed authors ? The names of the authors have been handed down to us in connexion with the writings respectively ascribed to them. ‘There is nothing contained in the books themselves which we may not naturally suppose to have been writ- ten by the men to whom they are ascribed; nor has any conflicting claim to the authorship been urged. Two of these books, at the same time, give us information respecting their authors. In the be- ginning of the Gospel ascribed to Luke, the au- thor informs us that “ he had perfect understand- ing of all things” (about which he was to write) “ from the very first.” * It can scarcely be doubt- ed that he refers, in these words, to such personal knowledge as indicates that he was a contempo- rary of Christ and his Apostles. We accordingly find the same author, in his History of the Acts of the Apostles, employing such language as evident- ly denotes that he was himself concerned in some * Luke, chap. i. ver. 3. BY ITS ALLEGED AUTHORS. 19 of the events which he narrates. We also find, that in the Gospel ascribed to John, the author represents himself as having been a personal wit- ness of the crucifixion. “ He that saw it,” says he, “ bare record, and his record is true; and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might be- lieve?’ * These will be found important circum- stances ; but, in reference to the last case, we have something more explicit. In the conclusion of the Gospel by John, the author announces himself as plainly as if he had recorded his name. Alluding to a designation by which he had been known, and under which he had immediately before spoken cf himself, he says,—‘ This is the disciple which tes- tifieth of these things, and wrote these things.” + Now, what is the precise value of this testi- mony? Supposing that we shall find other evi- dence to satisfy us that the books of the Gospel history are, in the ordinary sense of the term, ge- nuine documents, we shall have the advantage, in regard to two of these books, that the requisite information respecting their authors forms a part of the record itself ; and, consequently, every ar- gument by which we prove the authenticity of the record, will be equally conclusive in regard to its authors. * John, chap. xix. ver. 39. + Ibid. chap. xxi. ver. 24. 76 REFERENCE BY LUKE TO GOSPEL HISTORY Yet let it not be supposed that the light which may be desired respecting the authors of the books in question, is by any means indispensable ; for, when we shall have proved that the Gospel history, by whomsoever it was written, was published du- ring the Apostolic age, the establishment of this proposition alone will enable us to bring forward, in all its force, the great ultimate question, Why that history was not confuted at the time by the enemies of Christ, to whom the falsehood, if it had existed, must have been known ? _ By what means, then, shall we more fully as- certain that the Gospel history was published du- ring the Apostolic age ? In the Gospel which is ascribed to Luke, the author begins with an explicit reference to histo- rical treatises on the same subject, which had been previously written by others. “ Forasmuch,” says he, “ as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, even as they delivered them unto us, who, from the beginning, were eye- witnesses and ministers of the Word, it seemed good to me also,” &c.* * Luke, chap. i. ver. 1—3. AS PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED et In this passage the expression many forbids us to understand Luke as referring eaclusively to any books denominated Gospels, which are now con- tained in the volume of the New Testament ; for, altogether, they are not many. But there can be no doubt that he had in his eye some well-known publications, containing an account of the life and doctrine, as well as the death and resurrection, of Christ ; for less cannot be understood as denoted by “ the things most surely believed.” If the testimony of Luke, then, is to be respect- ed, much of the substance of the Gospel history, whether written by inspired men, or by fallible authors, had been published before he wrote his Treatise on the same subject; and it cannot be supposed that, upon this point, he declared what he did not know to be true; for it was morally impossible that, in reference to this point, he could succeed in imposing a falsehood on others. All men into whose hands his own book came, must have known whether the multifarious writings on the same subject, to which he referred, had or had not an existence. If it be contended that the Gospel of Luke itself may not have been published at the time when it professes to have been written, Can they who main- tain this position assign the publication of his Gospel to any other period, at which the non-ex- 78 REFERENCE BY LUKE TO GOSPEL HISTORY istence of the writings to which he refers would not still have proved fatal to his own credit as an author ? One would think that a book, containing such explicit reference to many publications which had never existed, could not be given to the world at any time with much safety. But if it shall, notwithstanding, be alleged, that in some dark age, a man, eager to accomplish a deception, may have taken his hazard of such a publication, I desire to ask, why he should have taken any such hazard of what was not necessary to the accomplishment of his deceitful purpose ? For it is not easy, on the one hand, to perceive what deceitful advantage he was to gain by such a false reference; nor is it possi- ble, on the other hand, to account for his making an unnecessary reference, ina way so marked and unequivocal, to many publications which had ne- ver existed, and about which inquiry might still be made. Yet if we suppose that the narratives to which Luke refers had been published at the time when his Gospel is understood to have been written, it is manifest that these narratives alone (for they were narratives of the “ things most surely be- lieved” among Christians) made it indispensable for the enemies of Christ to refute what they con- tained, if it was at all in their power to refute them. AS PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED. 19 Were there any lack of evidence for our present purpose, perhaps much might be made of this ar- gument ; but we have evidence for the early pub- lication of the Gospel history, in its nature so di- rect and conclusive, as to supersede the necessity of such reasoning. What sort of evidence is it that will, in this case, satisfy a discriminating and candid mind? This question is both natural and important ; for, in the case before us, we are not allowed to derive the requisite conclusion from what has proved sa- tisfactory respecting other publications. The dates of other publications have been held as unques- tionable, perhaps upon little other evidence than that of their title-pages; or, with more reason, upon reference to the age or the era of their alle- ged authors, taken in connexion with such allu- sions in the books themselves, as served to mark the age in which they had been written. But, in regard to the Gospel history, more evidence is call- ed for; and, from the nature of the case, it seems impossible that the additional evidence should be any other than that of personal testimony—testi- mony direct or indirect—to the eaistence of the Gospel history, at the period of its alleged publi- cation. 80 DEMAND FOR MORE EVIDENCE In answering, however, the demand for such evidence as that in question, it may be useful to keep in mind the particular reason why it seems to be desired. No man denies that the Gospel history has been for a long time in the hands of those who have called themselves Christians ; but it is supposed possible that, instead of having been published during the age of its professed authors, it may have been brought out at a subsequent era, and artfully imposed on the world as an early publication, which had been somehow neglected or forgotten. I am not answerable for any ab- surdity there may be in this supposition ; I desire to meet the supposition, because it is the only one upon which it can be maintained that the Gospel history was not published at the early period to which I am concerned to assign it. Now, it so happens that, during the times which immediately succeeded the age of the Apostles, and downward to the present day, there is such a su- perabundance of the testimony desired as precludes the possibility of supposing that the Gospel his- tory had not been published within much less than a hundred years after the death of Christ. I might, therefore, circumscribe and reduce to a very short period the time within which an imposition like that in question could be attempted. But it is not necessary to leave any chasm whatever in the evi- CONSIDERED. 8] dence ; for we shall find references to the existence of the evangelical record in writings which were published even before the close of the Apostolic age. Considering the Gospel history as comprehend- ing separate treatises on the same subject, proceed- ing from different individuals,and bearing evidence that, in the first instance, they were separately published, the different authors may be fairly re- gardedas giving credible testimony to one another ; and when we consider, farther, how many of the facts recorded by the Evangelists are also advert- ed to in the Apostolic Epistles, which, though now comprised in the volume of the New Testament, bear evidence of having been originally trans- mitted, at different periods, to different Christian churches throughout the civilized world, it seems impossible to disregard the testimony which so - many separate authors must be understood as bearing—each to the writings of another. Nor is it possible to deny that this testimony extends to the date of the publications in question, as indicated by much of their own language and import ; for no book which is not an imposture can be sup- posed to assign to itself a false date. The next testimony which may be expected is _ ¥ 82 NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE that of contemporaries of the Apostles and Evan- gelists. But it is scarcely to be supposed that we should have testimony on this subject from men of that day, who were adversaries of Christ and his cause; for, unless such men had found it in their power to deny and confute the Gospel history, it was obviously their wisdom to be silent respecting it. Consequently the laws of evidence require us to be satisfied with the only testimony which, from the nature of the case, could be expected. What sort of testimony, then, to the existence of the Gospel history are we to receive from friends of the Christian cause, who lived at the time of its alleged publication? It is not, surely, to be ex- pected that we are to find them bearing witness in any formal way to the existence of that history, as if its existence had been, at the time, a ques- tionable matter. Were such testimony produced, we should have good cause to reject it, as present- ing internal evidence of its own falsehood. Sup- posing the history of the life of Christ to have been published by various authors at the time alleged, no man, either friend or foe, would anticipate such a case as that its publication, or the date of it, should be afterwards denied. We cannot, there- fore, look for a direct and formal testimony to any such fact. But if we have in our possession the writings of contemporary authors, who took a TO BE EXPECTED. 83 friendly interest in the Christian cause, we may naturally search them for some allusions, more or less direct, to the Gospel history, as previously published, either in whole or in part ; and if such allusions shall be found, the less formal and inten- tional that they appear, the more satisfying evi- dence shall we have that there has been no fraudu- lent design. Keeping these considerations in view, I would now refer the reader to the writings of some in- dividuals who are ordinarily denominated A posto- lical Fathers, because they lived during the age of the Apostles. 1. Clement, who is mentioned by Paul as his fellow-labourer,* and is well known to have been Bishop of the Christian Church at Rome, wrote an Epistle to the Church at Corinth, of which we are in possession ; and there can be no reasonable doubt of its being genuine, for there is mention made of it by many of the fathers of the second century, and particularly by Dionysius, who was himself Bishop of Corinth, within less than a hundred years after the epistle in question had been received by the church over which he presi- Phil, chap. iv. ver, 3. 84 ALLUSIONS TO GOSPEL HISTORY ded.—Among a variety of allusions in that epistle to the Gospel history, as already published, we find some quotations of the sayings of Christ, as recorded by Matthew and Luke. “ Especially re- membering,” says Clement, “ the words of the Lord Jesus which he spake, touching long suffer- ing and gentleness ; for thus he said, Be ye merci- ful, that ye may obtain mercy ; forgive, that w may be forgiven unto you ; as ye do, so shall it be done unto you ; as ye give, so shallit be given un- to you; as ye judge, so shall ye be judged ; as ye show kindness, so shall kindness be showed unto you; with what measure ye mete, with the same shall it be measured unto you.” * If, upon com- paring this passage with the corresponding pas- sages in the Gospel of Matthew and that of Luke,t we were still to entertain a doubt of Clement ha- ving referred to the language of these Evangelists, we should at least feel ourselves under a necessity of admitting that the sayings of Christ, to which he does refer, had been, in one way or other, re- corded; for he does not impart them to the Co- rinthians as any thing new, he only desires them to remember the words, on the supposition that they were already acquainted with them.—Still * Clement Ep. chap. xin. + Matth. chap. v. ver. 7; chap, vil. ver. 1, 2. Luke, chap. yi. ver. 37, 38. IN AN EPISTLE OF CLEMENT. 85 more precise and definite, however, is the reference which Clement makes, in the same Epistle, to the language of Paul. Many important facts of the Gospel history had been recorded by Paul in his Epistles, and not a few in his first Epistle address- ed to the Corinthians, the very men to whom Cle- ment was writing. It was impossible that Cle- ment could deceive the Corinthians about either the existence or the contents of an epistle, which, if it did exist, must have been in their own pos- Session. Yet we not only find him referring to the First Epistle to the Corinthians, but explicitly mentioning its author by name. “ Take into your hands,” says he, “ the Epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle. What did he at first write unto you, in the beginning of the Gospel? Verily, he did, by the Spirit, admonish you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos, because that even then you. did form parties.” * 2. Polycarp was appointed by the Apostles Bishop of the Christian Church at Smyrna; and ef his writings, there is still extant a Letter to the Church at Philippi, which has been so much refer- red to by succeeding authors, as to place its au- thenticity out of question. Dr Lardner calculates * Chap. xlvii. 1 Cor. chap. i. ver. 12. 86 ALLUSIONS TO GOSPEL HISTORY that, in that Letter, there are more than twenty allusions to passages of the New Testament; and not a few of them, I may add, are quotations from the Gospel history. The language of the Gospels, in particular, seems to be quoted, in order to his impressing it on the memory of his readers; for he introduces his quotations in the same way which — we have observed in the case of Clement ;—‘ Re- membering,” says he, “ what the Lord said, teach- ing, Judge not, that ye be not judged ; forgive, and ye shall be forgiven ; be ye merciful, that ye may obtain mercy ; with what measure ye mete, a shall be measured to you again.** The author, indeed, seems to speak of the writings of inspired men as already collected into one sacred volume, which, in one passage, he denominates “ the ora- cles of the Lord,” and in another, “ the Holy Scriptures. Whosoever,” says he, « perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, he is the first-born of Satan ;”} and again, “ I trust that ye are well exercised in the Holy Scriptures.” 3. Perhaps the references which I have thus made to two out of the number of the Apostolical Fathers might suffice for our present purpose ; but I am unwilling to omit altogether the testimony of * Letter, chap. ii. Luke, chap. vi. ver. 38. + Chap. vi. { Chap. xii. BY POLYCARP AND PAPIAS. 87 Papias. Some doubt, indeed, has been expressed, whether he had been personally conversant with any of the Apostles. But, as it is certain that he was a companion of Polycarp, I cannot be far wrong when I assign his testimony to the close of the Apostolic age. He makes the most explicit reference to Matthew and Mark, as authors of the Gospel history. Of the latter, in particular, he says —“ Mark, being the interpreter of Peter, writ exactly whatever he remembered ; but not in the order in which things were spoken or done by Christ ;” and again, “ This one thing he made his care—to omit nothing which he had heard, and to say nothing false in what he related.” * I think every candid mind will admit that those testimonies to the early publication of the Gospel history, which I have thus selected, are as strong as could have been looked for, from the writings of men in the Apostolic age, or even at its imme- diate close. It was not, during this period, that we were likely to find very numerous and detailed references to the Christian Scriptures. A multi- tude of such references is the natural result of controversy, respecting either the doctrine or the authority of the books in question. But, respect- * Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. lib. tii. chap. 39. 88 ALLUSIONS TO GOSPEL HISTORY ing the doctrine of the Gospel, there could not be - much controversial discussion during the age of the Apostles; for their interpretation of it must have been sustained by the great body of true Christians as infallible; and so reserved were the adversaries of Christianity during the same period, that there was no controversy about the authority of what its friends had published. The close of the Apostolic age produced, in these respects, a great change. While many learned. men, in succession, now earnestly endeavoured, by the number and variety of their writings, to com- pensate the world for the removal, by death, of those who could speak of Christ as one whom they had seen and heard,—not a few of the most emi- nent. devoted their labour, more particularly, to such controversial vindication of either the truth or the purity of the Christian faith, as kept the Gospel history continually in their view. Yet I do not, on this account, feel myself under obligation to bring forward many such witnesses. While I refer men, who have leisure for the investigation, to the indefatigable Lardner, for the testimony of more than a hundred authors subsequent to the Apostolic age, I am confident that, to ordinary minds, the early publication of the Gospel history —which is the only point at present in question— BY SUBSEQUENT AUTHORS. $9 may be placed out of doubt, by a selection of three out of anumber so overwhelming. I am the more confident, because, owing te the authors whom I shall quote having been engaged in controversy, we shall have, in two cases out of the three, the singular advantage of their own testimony being confirmed by that of their controversial opponents, as adversaries to the Christian cause. 1. Not more than thirty or forty years subse- quent to the Apostolic age, we have Justin Mar- tyr. ‘This great man had passed through various schools of philosophy before he became a Christian. He was, therefore, the better qualified, after his conversion, to render eminent service to the cause of Christ. Amidst a variety of useful works which are adverted to by succeeding authors, he wrote two Apologies for the Christian Faith, addressed to successive Emperors of Rome. In these the quotations from the Gospel history are numerous. In one passage,* he says,—“ The Apostles, in the Memoirs composed by them, which are called Gos- pels, have thus delivered it—That Jesus com- manded them to take bread and give thanks.” In another place, he adds,—* In the Commentaries, which, as I have said, were composed by the * Apol. I. p. 98. SO ALLUSIONS TO GOSPEL HISTORY Apostles and their followers, it is writ, That his sweat fell like drops of blood, as he prayed, say- ing, Lf it be possible, let this cup pass from me.” * And again, addressing himself to the Emperor on the subject of Christian worship, he says,—* The Memoirs of the Apostles, or the writings of the Prophets, are read, according as the time allows ; and when the reader has ended, the president makes a discourse, exhorting to the imitation of so excellent things.” + The expression, “ Memoirs which are cailed Gospels,” will not fail to be observed by the dis- cerning reader as a most appropriate description of the writings of the four Evangelists. But there is another of Justin’s works, from which we may derive evidence still more to our purpose ; for (as I have previously hinted) it is evidence from an adversary combined with his own. Among his works which are extant, there iS an account, or narrative, in two parts, of a dia- logue, or controversial debate, which he maintain- ed with Trypho, a Jew, respecting the truth of Christianity ;—And in that dialogue, Trypho says to Justin,—* The precepts in your Gospel, as it is called, are so great and wonderful, that I think it * Lardner, Cred. edit. 1748, Part ii. vol. i. p. 268. + Ibid. p. 269. . BY JUSTIN MARTYR AND IRENAUS. 91 impossible for any man to keep them ; for I have been at the pains to read them.” * Unless it shall be maintained that the writings ascribed to Justin are throughout a forgery, it is impossible to doubt the authenticity of what he quotes as the words of Trypho; for they amount to an observation which Justin could not at the time have any motive to record, but that of being faithful in what he narrated. Yet Trypho, an un- believing Jew, here presents himself as a witness, —beyond question disinterested,—to the early publication of the Gospel history. 2. Ireneus, though he had not seen the Apos- tles, was in his youth acquainted with some who had been intimately conversant with them. He may, therefore, be fairly classed with Justin Mar- tyr, as one whose testimony, in respect of its date, stands very near to the period at which the Gos- pel history is alleged to have been published ; and he is referred to by subsequent authors in a way which imparts to his writings all the sanction for their authenticity that can be desired. There are not, indeed, extant any writings of Irenzeus in opposition to the avowed adversaries of the Christian faith ; but there are preserved, of * Lardner, Cred. Part ii. vol. i. p. 269. 92 ALLUSIONS TO GOSPEL HISTORY his composition, five books, in which he combats heretical teachers ; and, in one of these, we find a passage, in which he bears testimony to the pub- lication of the Gospel history by its respective au- thors, in language which is fortuitously so deci- sive, that I should think it unwise to add even a word of comment to the following quotation.*— “ We have not received,” says he, “ the knowledge of the way of our salvation, by any others than those by whom the Gospel has been brought to us. Which Gospel they first preached, and after- wards by the will of God committed to writing, that it might be, for time to come, the pular and foundation of our faith. For, after our Lord arose from the dead, and they (the apostles) were en- dowed from above with the power of the Holy Ghost coming down upon them, they received a perfect knowledge of all things. They then went forth to all the ends of the earth, declaring to men the blessing of heavenly peace, having all of them, and every one alike, the Gospel of God. Matthew then, among the Jews, wrote a Gospel in their own language, while Peter and Paul were preaching the Gospel at Rome, and founding a church there. And after their exit, Mark also, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, delivered to us in writing the * Book iii. chap. i. BY IRENZUS AND ORIGEN. 93 things that had been preached by Peter. And Luke, the companion of Paul, put down in a book the Gospel that had been preached by him. Af- terwards John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned upon his breast, he likewise published a Gospel, while he dwelt at Ephesus in Asia.” 3. A short interval of time brings us to the last author whose testimony in this case I propose to quote ; and, when I mention the name of Origen, no learned reader will think lightly of our con- cluding witness. The very number of his writings would of itself throw ridicule on the idea of their being a forgery : It has been somewhere observed, with justice, that as well might all the writings ascribed to Cicero be pronounced a forgery. Origen’s quotations of Scripture are so nume- rous, that they would, of themselves, prove the early publication, not of the Gospels alone, but of very nearly all the books which compose the vo- lume of the New Testament. He refers to the four Gospels, in particular, as “ received without dispute by the whole Church of God under Hea- ven.”*—Yet more valuable still for our present purpose is one peculiar remark of this author, for which we are indebted to the circumstance of his * Euseb. Eccl. Hist. lib. vi. chap. 29, 9 4 ALLUSIONS TO GOSPEL HISTORY having been engaged in controversy with Celsus, an Epicurean philosopher. It might perhaps have been pretended (had there been no opposing testi- mony) that the Gospel history, however early pub- lished, was so little known or read, as to account in some measure for its not being denied or con- futed. But, instead of there being ground for such a pretence, we find Origen introducing a pas- sage from the New Testament with the very sin- gular and pointed remark, that “ it is written, not in any private books, or such as are read by a few only, and those studious persons, but in books read by every body.”* Nor is it a small advantage which we derive from Origen’s antagonist in the controversy. The language of Celsus, as a bitter enemy of the Chris- tian faith, is sufficient, of itself, to prove the early publication of the Gospel history. He makes ex- plicit mention of things “ which were written by the disciples of Jesus,” and alleges, that.“ some of the believers, through a kind of inebriation, think it is allowable for them to alter the Gospel.”+ There is here, no doubt, a heavy charge brought against some false or heretical teachers of the in- fant church ; but, supposing the charge against * Origen, Cont. Cels. lib. vii. p. 720. + Celsus, Book II. p. 77, as quoted by Origen. ? BY ORIGEN AND CELSUS. 95 them to be well founded, it does not, in the least degree, weaken the testimony of Celsus to the only point now in question—his testimony to the im- portant fact, that the publication of the Gospel history had taken place at the time to which Christians assign it. In the face of such testimonies, it is impossible for any mind to deny the early publication of the Gospel history, without proceeding on the suppo- sition that the writings to which I have referred are forgeries. But, if such a supposition be admit- ted in the present case, how is a supposition of forgery to be obviated or prevented in any histo- rical case whatever ? If, after having proved the authenticity of certain books, so far as regards their publication at a given era, by references to contemporary and subsequent writings, we be next required to prove the authenticity of the writings to which we have, for this purpose, re- ferred,— where is the demand for such proof to end? All that can be reasonably desired is, that the writings referred to be such as would not, on any other account, be called in question. Yet we have more to rely upon in the case before us ;— we are enabled to meet the most extravagant de- mand. for not only are the writings, to which I have referred in the preceding pages, referred to 96 HOW EARLY PUBLICATION OF GOSPEL HISTORY in their turn by succeeding authors, there is such a continued and uninterrupted succession of simi- lar reference, down to the present day, as must put an end to the supposition of forgery in every mind that does not repudiate altogether the evi- dence arising from human testimony. It is true, that I have not traced and exhibited in detail this unbroken series of reference ;—the labour of the task could be surpassed only by its inutility ; for, supposing that the requisite volumes were writ- ten, who would be found to read them ? But, if it be understood that there is a chasm in the regu- lar succession of such reference—any such chasm as would admit of a supposition that the earlier writings might be forgeries—only let the adver- saries of the Christian cause point out the period in question, that it may be in the power of its friends to correct their mistake. In the meanwhile,—assuming, as a position not to be denied, that the Gospel history was written and published during the Apostolic age,—let us consider how this circumstance tends to establish its truth ? The great body of the Jewish nation, by whom the divine mission of Christ had been rejected, and the rulers of the Jews, in ‘particular, had a SERVES TO ESTABLISH ITS TRUTH. 97 deep interest in exposing any falsehood in the Gospel narrative which could be detected. No people were ever more distinguished, than the Jews, by national feelings ; their national expec- tations, in particular, were unbounded. But, with- out founding on this peculiarity of their charac- ter, was it possible that the rulers of any country, placed in their circumstances, should have allow- ed such a narrative as that of the Gospel to remain uncontradicted, if they had known it to be false, and had been able to disprove it ? One who represented himself as a messenger of God, had condemned in the strongest terms both the principles and conduct of the Jewish rulers. In opposition to their fondest hopes of national aggrandizement, he had declared that the Mes- siah’s kingdom was not to be of this world. His whole doctrine was calculated to subvert their in- fluence and authority over the consciences of a people who had blindly submitted to them. The rulers, in consequence, seek to put him to death ; and he charges them with that design. They at length accomplish their purpose against him, but not till he has foretold the punishment which awaited them, in the utter destruction of their people and nation, and has also pledged himself to prove the truth of his whole testimony, by rising @ 98 NO ATTEMPT BY JEWISH RULERS from the state of the dead. Means are employed to prevent any false report of a resurrection ; yet his disciples bear witness to his having risen, as he said, and having afterwards ascended to heaven. All these things, and many more of a similar kind, whether true or false, were set forth in the Gospel narrative; that narrative was publish- ed by four of the followers of Christ, and was read by men of every rank and condition. If it were false, the Jewish rulers had it in their power to detect and expose its falsehood ; for the great- er part of the transactions recorded had been open to public observation, and were of such recent date as admitted of their being proved or dispro- ved by eye and ear-witnesses. Yet no attempt seems to have been made by men so deeply concerned, to confute the Gospel history. I admit that their rejection of Christ as a Sa- viour, may be held to be a denial of his miracles, as the effect of divine and preternatural agency. But I am not, at present, contending for the reality of the miracles. I only desire at present to establish the truth of those facts and circum- stances, not miraculous, which may afterwards enable us to judge of the miracles. The Jewish rulers must have been aware that, if the ordinary TO CONFUTE THE GOSPEL HISTORY. 99 facts of the Gospel history could be disproved, those which were preternatural would lose their title to credit—would lose the very foundation on which alone their truth could be maintained. Could it have been proved that Jesus was in Galilee at the time when he is said to have wrought a miracle in Judea, or that the alleged witnesses of any miracle in question could not be present, because known to be elsewhere employed,—could it have been proved that any one of the persons, said to have been miraculously cured, had never laboured un- der the disease or infirmity alleged, or that he was afterwards known to be afflicted in the same Way as he had been before the pretended miracle,—in any one of these cases there would certainly have been a detection of imposture. Could it even have been proved that the most trivial facts of the Gospel history were misrepresented, it would have brought the historian into discredit ; his testimony to other facts would not have been respected. The ene- mies of Christ had, therefore, the strongest mo- tive to institute a strict investigation of all such facts and circumstances as those to which I have referred. Yet we do not find that the Jewish rulers pre-. tended to disprove or even to deny any thing of a kind not preternatural, which has been record- ed by one or other of the four Evangelists. Had 100 NO ATTEMPT BY JEWISH RULERS there been a confutation of the Gospel history, it is impossible to suppose that it would not have been made public; for, otherwise, it must have been useless. It is natural to suppose that it would have been circulated wherever the apostles of Christ were endeavouring to convince the world of his divine mission.—One of the avowed objects of his religion was to supersede every other which had prevailed among men. Its design in this re- spect was soon perceived, and had the effect of uniting the rulers of every nation in a virtual league against it. Is it possible to suppose that, in these circumstances, a confutation of the nar- rative, on which the truth of this religion was founded, and a confutation proceeding from the country which was the scene of the transactions in question, would not have been greedily recei- ved, and even sought after ? Or is it possible that such a confutation (if it had existed) should, after all, have been utterly lost, so as to be unknown to succeeding ages, while contemporary writings of every other kind have been handed down to the present generation ? Perhaps it may be argued that, when the great body of men in the civilized world were converted to the Christian faith, special care would be taken by a tyrannical priesthood to destroy any such confutation of the Gospel history. But it must TO CONFUTE THE GOSPEL HISTORY. 101 not be forgotten that, before the world could be thus Christianized, the truth of the Gospel narra- tive must have been well established. Either no attempt must have been made to confute it, or the attempt must have proved ineffectual. Yet that there had been no attempt to confute it—of a kind entitled to notice—is manifest from another circumstance. For, though many arguments and invectives against the Christian faith (which are still extant) were early published by heathen phi- losophers ; and, though many edicts also, for the persecution of Christians, were issued by the Ro- man emperors, we find no allusion in such wri- tings to an understood or alleged falsehood in the Gospel history, or to any confutation of its truth on the part of the Jewish rulers. The conclusion to be derived from this view of the case, seems to me irresistible; as a narrative of facts not preternatural, the Gospel history must be true. The evidence on which the conclusion rests is no doubt of a negative kind; but it so little admits of deception, that I think it should afford more perfect satisfaction to the human mind, than is ordinarily derived from the most direct and positive testimony. It has been observed with truth; that even can- 102 NO ATTEMPT BY JEWISH RULERS did minds demand more evidence for the Gospel history than for any other record of facts. How is this demand to be accounted for? of Christ’s burial had been, in common with other things, wisely ordered in Providence, for affording complete and equal advantage to both his enemies and his friends, for ascertaining either the impos- ture or the reality of his promised resurrection. Fad his body been carelessly thrown into the pro- miscuous heap of those who had been put to death as malefactors, it might have been nearly impossi-— ble, either for the Jewish rulers to guard against the body being stolen, or for the disciples to vin- dicate themselves against the charge of having stolen it ;—perhaps, after three days, there might even have been a question about the identity of the body. But the manner in which Christ was buried, afforded every advantage for ascertaining the truth. With the leave of the Roman gover- nor, Joseph of Arimathea took the body, and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in a rock,—to which, of course, there could be no other access than by the door ;—and not only was Joseph himself careful to shut the door, by rolling to it a great stone,—the Jewish rulers made it sure—as sure as human means could accomplish—by sealing the stone and setting a watch. What, then, are we to expect as the result of such precatttion ?—-If the Jewish rulers are ulti- PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE OF A RESURRECTION. 187 mately to deny the Resurrection, it may certainly be expected, that after the determined period of three days, they shall either produce the body of Christ, or give some satisfactory account of the means of violence by which it had been taken out of their power. Yet in both these points they completely fail. The tomb is confessedly empty 5 and that any violent means had been employed for carrying off the body cannot even be pretend- ed; for not one of the guard (it would seem) has even a wound or a seratch to shew as a proof of his having been engaged in any struggle. It is, therefore, alleged, that the body was siolen,—that the soldiers on guard had been all asleep, and that the disciples had, in the mean time, broken into the sepulchre and carried off the body of their Master, without one of the soldiers being, all the while, awakened. If this account of the matter is not to be rejected as in itself incredible, the natural question must be,—Who beheld the al- leged procedure, so as to be qualified to report it to others? The only persons who report it, are men who, by their own account, could not behold it—those very soldiers who pretend to have been, during the whole transaction, in such a profound sleep, that even the means employed for breaking open the door had not the effect of awakening them.—We have the best right ‘to say, that this 188 NON-PRODUCTION OF DEAD BODY account of the matter, however absurd, is the only one which the Jewish rulers ever gave; for we have seen, that the Gospel history, which contains this, as their first account of it, and asserts it to be still their common saying, was published to the world, while it was completely in their power to contradict and disprove any misrepresentation of the case: Yet, in no writing or argument against Christianity, do we find any contradiction of what is thus said to have been the apology or pretence of the Jewish rulers. I am far from saying that the presumptive evi- dence of Christ’s resurrection, arising from this view of the case, however strong it must be re- garded, should supersede a demand for direct and positive proof. But I desire to ask, in the mean time, whether the whole circumstances which I have partly referred to, and partly detailed, did not originally afford to the world strong security against deception ? Perhaps that faithful record of these circum- stances, which we have now in our hands, affords to us even a greater advantage. They who lived at the time of Christ’s death and resurrection, could not all participate equally of the advantage which I have illustrated. Though some of them were personally conversant with the circumstances PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE OF A RESURRECTION. 189 which I have brought under review, many more must have derived their information from the re- port of others, before that report had stood the test of the severe scrutiny, to which it could not fail to be either directly or indirectly subjected by the Jewish rulers. But, in our day, every man is equally enabled to build his faith on the found-. ation of such written and recorded evidence as originally challenged and defied objection, and has been transmitted to us in a way which cannot fail- to satisfy any candid mind. Those men, indeed, who have borne witness to Christ’s resurrection, could not be much in want on their own account, of such security against de- ception as resulted from the circumstances which we have been considering. But, from such a re- trospective view of the case, even their minds must have derived much satisfaction; and it remains to be considered, whether they had not at the same time, such direct and unquestionable means of knowledge respecting what they have attested, as forbid all supposition of their having been de- ceived. If this point can be established, it may perhaps be less necessary to say much about the number of the witnesses ; for ten, twenty, or thirty men, 190 THE DIRECT TESTIMONY TO against whose credibility there is no ground of suspicion, will afford to a candid mind, very near- ly as much satisfaction respecting the truth of what they attest, as could be derived from the corresponding testimony of ten, twenty, or thirty thousand. But the number. of persons who saw Christ, and conversed with him after his resurrec- tion, is a matter of more importance, in respect of its having afforded to each individual increa- sed security against deception, by enabling him to compare the result of his own observation,— his own remembrance of what he had seen and heard—with the corresponding observation and testimony of others. It is, therefore, satisfying to know, that not only the Apostles, and some others to whom Christ had been most intimately known, but five hundred brethren, who had seen him at once, bore witness either directly or indirectly to the same truth. Their continued profession, in- deed, of the Christian faith, was itself a continued testimony to their belief in the resurrection. But it is more important to consider that the Apostles of Christ, in particular, as persons select- ed to bear witness of his having risen, had the ad- vantage of seeing him and conversing with him,— not once only, or in circumstances favourable to any thing like deceit or illusion,—but on various CHRIST’S RESURRECTION, 19] occasions, and in all the variety of circumstances which could tend to satisfy the most jealous mind. They conversed with him both in public and in private,—in the fields, during the light of day, when all that passed was open to the observation of others,—and also in chambers to which they had retired, where there was no object to withdraw their attention from either his personal appearance or what dropped from his lips. Their interviews appear to have been deliberate, and attended with all the circumstances to which they had been previously accustomed ;—they sat at meat with him, and received from him, at the same time, spi- ritual instruction—direction and consolation re- specting their duty as his Apostles, and respecting all that awaited them in the world. As a farther proof of his identity,-—if more could be required, —they saw him perform a miracle, very similar in its circumstances to one which he had wrought in their presence before his crucifixion and death, It has been objected, indeed, that, on two oc- casions, to which I have referred, Christ is repre- sented as having come to his disciples in the cham- ber where they were assembled, notwithstanding that “ the doors were shut (fastened it would seem) for fear of the Jews.” It has been argued, from this circumstance, that it could be only the 192 APOSTLES COULD NOT BE DECEIVED, disembodied spirit of Christ that appeared to his disciples. But on what ground can it be either denied, or thought at all improbable, that the mi- raculous power, which Christ exerted for other ' purposes, was employed in this case for the pur- pose of drawing the bolts or fasteningsof the doors ? We are informed, in the book of the Acts of the Apostles, that an angel of the Lord, on one occa- sion, opened the doors of a common prison for the deliverance of the Apostles of Christ ; and, though it is not there said that the angel again fastened the doors, we are left to conclude that he had done so; for, in the morning, the officers of the Jewish council reported, that “ the prison-doors they found shut with all safety, but found no man within.” Equally satisfying is the proof (though no men- tion be made of the fact) that, in the case before us, the bolts or fastenings, if not otherwise drawn, must have been removed by the miraculous power of Christ ; for we shall find that, after he came in- to the chamber in which the Apostles were assem- bled, he gave them undeniable evidence that he was not a disembodied spirit, but had flesh and bones like themselves. It had been wisely ordered, in providence, that the Apostles should be slow to believe in the re- surrection of their Master. After they had wit- RESPECTING CHRISI’S RESURRECTION. 193 nessed his death, they were so far from bethinking themselves of what he had said about rising again, that they appear to have given up all hope of the cause in which they had been engaged. We are accordingly informed, that when they saw him, for the first time, after his resurrection, “ they were terrified, and supposed that they had seen a spirit,”—partly, it may be, because they knew that the doors of the chamber had been fastened. But this faithless imagination was soon dispelled; and, in the meantime, it served the purpose for which it was intended in the providence of God,—that of procuring, not only for them, but for all who should “ believe in Christ through their word,” stronger and more perfect evidence of the reality of his resurrection. “ Behold my hands and my feet (said he) that it is I myself; handle me and see ; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have.”—“ Have ye here (added he) any meat ? and they gave him a piece of broiled fish, and of an honey-comb, and he took it, and did eat before them.” * For the better accomplishment of the gracious purpose of Heaven, the course of events was so ordered that, on the occasion to which I have now referred, the Apostle Thomas was not present with * Luke, chap. xxiv. ver. 39-~43, N ; 194 APOSTLES COULD NOT BE DECEIVED, &c. his brethren, and that he was not to be convinced by their report. “ Except I shall see in his hands (said Thomas) the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my | hand into his side, I will not believe.”* The in- credulity of Thomas was, no doubt, highly blame- able ; but, considered in connexion with its result, it enables us, at the present day, to repose addi- tional confidence in his testimony ;—for at the very next meeting with the Apostles, Christ con- descendingly said to him—“ Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands ; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side ; and be not faith- less, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him—My Lord and my God !” + * John, chap. xx. ver. 29. + John, chap. xx. ver. 27, 28. SECTION IV. THE APOSTLES OF CHRIST, WHO HAVE BORNE WITNESS TO HIS MIRA-_ CLES, (WHILE THEY COULD NOT THEMSELVES BE DECEIVED, ) GAVE SUCH EVIDENCE OF THEIR OWN TRUTH AND INTEGRITY, AS REN- DERS IT IMPOSSIBLE TO SUPPOSE THAT THEY INTENDED TO DE~ CEIVE OTHERS. THE great body of the people who beheld the miracles of Christ, though they had strong secu- rity against deception, have not transmitted to succeeding generations, any report and testimony of what they had seen. All the advantage, there- fore, which we derive from the means and oppor- tunities of satisfaction which were afforded to them—to both the friends and the enemies of Christ—is an assurance that, in the case of his miracles, the procedure was open and fair, and that, if imposture could have been detected, a com- munication of it would have been made to the Jewish rulers. Perhaps this may not be regard- ed as an unimportant circumstance, by minds which are accustomed to consider and weigh cir- cumstantial evidence. But it is well known that a competent number of men were selected by 196 APOSTLES ACQUITTED OF INTENTION Christ for bearing witness of his miracles to the world, and, more particularly, for giving testi- mony to the reality of his resurrection. We have seen, in the course of the preceding section, that, from the nature of the case, these men could not be deceived ; and, if we can with equal safety ac- quit them of any intention to deceive others, their testimony ought to be sustained. The general character of the Apostles gives us no particular cause for doubting the truth of their testimony ; for, with the exception of a per- severing endeavour to propagate their Master's doctrine, it does not appear that any particular blame was ever imputed to them. But, supposing that they were in their hearts dishonest, and will- ing to deceive others, with a view to some personal advantage, we cannot suppose that they made an attempt to do so, without some hope of success ; for, without more or less hope of success, no scheme of deception was ever followed out.—If they knew assuredly that their Master, after work- ing many miracles, had risen from the dead, they might certainly feel it to be their duty, without any consideration of the consequences, to declare the truth as they were commanded by him, and leave the event to that Being whose power they knew to be equal to all things; but it is morally TO DECEIVE THE WORLD. 197 impossible that they should have undertaken a work of deception, without looking forward to some chance of succeeding, by the means in their own power. What, then, were the means and en- deavours by which they could, in this case, expect to deceive the world ? They must have been aware that they had not such education and learning as could eminently qualify them for deceiving men of enlightened minds ; nor was it possible that they could expect to accomplish much by their power and influence, By nature they were not even endowed with that courage, which could either qualify them for, or ex- cite them to,a very dangerous undertaking ;—in an hour of danger, they had all very recently deserted their Master. They had, besides, too much cause to distrust one another; for one of their number, in whose fidelity they had implicitly confided, had, but very lately, betrayed their common Lord, With such personal disqualifications, of which they must have been conscious, could they derive more encouragement from the nature of their sup- posed undertaking—from any facilities for decep- tion, which the undertaking itself could afford ? The self-denying doctrine, which they were to 198 APOSTLES HAD NOTHING TO GAIN preach, was not likely to prepossess the world in their favour. They knew that it had already in- censed, not the rulers only, but the great body of the Jewish nation, against Christ himself and his cause; and they had seen, from their Master’s death, with what vigour and determination the power and authority of their adversaries were like- ly to be employed against them. Nor was it in their own country alone that they had cause to expect such determined resistance ;—they were to preach, to many nations, a doctrine which denoun- ced every other system of faith and worship, as not only vain but impious,—a doctrine, therefore, which could not be otherwise accepted by any people, than at the expense of abolishing the esta- blished religion of their country. Shall it, indeed, be supposed that, by such men, and in such circumstances, a scheme would be de- vised for imposing upon others such pretended miracles as were to overthrow the religious faith and religious establishments of the civilized world? I put this question, even upon the supposition al- ready stated—that the men themselves were to be gainers by the deception; for, even upon this supposition, I hold it to have been morally impos- sible that, conscious of the fraud, and consequent- ly without any other reliance than upon their own BY BEARING A FALSE TESTIMONY. 199 resources, they should have devoted themselves to such an undertaking,—an undertaking utterly without hope. But in what respect were the Apostles to be gainers by bearing a false testimony to the mira- cles of Christ? Much of the argument by which I have endeavoured to show, in a preceding chap- ter, that the authors of the Gospel history could have no motive to impose on the world a false or fictitious narrative, is equally applicable to the tes- timony which the Apostles bore to their Master’s miracles. The belief of pretended miracles was to establish, for his doctrine, a false claim to faith and acceptance. But how, or in what way, was that doctrine to profit the men who preached it ? It was to worldly profit alone that they could look as the reward of falsehood ;—In what way, then, was the preaching of their Master’s doctrine to serve to them any worldly purpose? The self- denial, which they undertook to inculcate upon others, and consequently were bound to exemplify in their own conduct, seemed to place worldly ad- vantages out of question. Nor was it possible that they should not have foreseen, from the begin- ning, that something very opposite to the gain of this world would infallibly be the fruit of their Jabour. All the circumstances to. which I have 200 APOSTLES GAVE DECISIVE EVIDENCE adverted, as precluding a rational hope of success, must have led them to anticipate—not resistance merely—but hardship and suffering, at the hand of men who were deeply interested to counteract their efforts. Their Master, indeed, had warned them that they should be hated and persecuted for his sake; and their own experience must have gradually confirmed every apprehension of suffer- ing, which, from the beginning, they had cause to entertain. We are assured that, in the course of their apostolic labour, they all endured great per- secution; and that the greater part, at least, of their number, even suffered a violent death, as martyrs to the truth of what they had attested. If this fact be admitted, it must lead to an im- portant conclusion ; yet upon what ground can the fact be called in question ? That the early Christians were persecuted on account of their religion, and that many of them, who refused to renounce the Christian faith, were on that account put to death, seems to be altoge- ther undeniable. In addition to what the authors of the New Testament communicate to us on this subject, we are furnished with a minute detail of corresponding facts, by a variety of Heathen wri- ters, whose veracity has never been impeached. I have already quoted, (though for another pur- OF THEIR TRUTH AND INTEGRITY. 201 pose) such an account of the sufferings of the early Christians, from the writings of ‘Tacitus and Sue- tonius, as may well supersede the necessity of pro- ducing farther testimony. Shall it then be sup- posed that the Apostles of Christ, through whose word others believed, were themselves exempted from the persecution to which their converts were ~ exposed ? Were this a supposable case, it could not be difficult to prove the reverse of the propo- sition. The early sufferings of some of the Apos- tles—including the martyrdom of James the E]l- der—as detailed in the book entitled The Acts of the Apostles, proved to be no more than a speci- men of what their brethren were destined to en- dure, as represented in the writings of many of the fathers of the Christian Church, whose testi- mony on the subject has come down to us uncon- tradicted. But, in reference to a point, which so little admits of question, I cannot think it neces- sary to enter into detail; and I decline to do so with more freedom, because I can safely refer any reader, who may be desirous of more particular in- formation, to a satisfactory disquisition on the sub- ject, in the first volume of Dr Paley’s View of the Evidences of Christianity. What conclusion are we to derive from such premises ?—The Apostles of Christ bore testimony 202 APOSTLES GAVE DECISIVE EVIDENCE to the reality of his miracles, and more particu- larly to the fact that he had risen from the state of the dead. They preached “ Jesus of Nazareth as a man approved of God by miracles, and won- ders, and signs ;” they preached his doctrine as the word of God,—because proceeding from one who had, by miracles, attested his divine mission. Their means of knowledge respecting these alle- ged miracles, were such as precluded the possibility of their being deceived ;—and, for the purpose of convincing the world of their sincerity, they were willing to submit to any trial of it, that suspicion and malice could suggest. After enduring much in their Master’s cause, they were individually, and in succession, threatened with death, as the punishment of their adherence to it. They knew this to be no vain threat; for they had seen it executed upon other Christians who were less deep- ly implicated in the alleged offence. They, at the same time, knew, that the means of escape were in their power. They had only to retract their confession of Christ and his doctrine, in order to ensure their deliverance at the latest hour. Yet they, one after another, preferred to lay down their lives as martyrs to the truth of what they had attested. In what possible way could men afford more eS ee ee ee OF THEIR TRUTH AND INTEGRITY. 203 evidence of their truth and integrity ? To part with life itself for the purpose of confirming his testimony, is the utmost that we can demand of anyman. It is, therefore, a test of sincerity which the world has not been, in other cases, disposed to reject. But, in no other case, has there been such strong ground for sustaining it; for, while the Apostles of Christ were willing to submit to death rather than relinquish their Master’s cause, their conduct, from the beginning, in maintaining that cause, is altogether incapable of being ac- counted for, upon any principle, by which we can suppose a dishonest and worldly mind to be actua- ted. The fair conclusion, therefore, is, that either their testimony ought to be sustained, or there ought to be an end to belief founded upon testi- mony. SECTION V. BESIDES THE MIRACLES WROUGHT BY CHRIST HIMSELF, THERE APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN MANY MIRACLES WROUGHT BY THE APOSTLES AND OTHER EARLY TEACHERS OF CHRISTIANITY, FOR THE REALITY OF WHICH WE HAVE EVIDENCE ARISING FROM TACIT ADMISSION, THAT MAY PROVE, TO SOME MINDS, EVEN MORE SATISFACTORY THAN DIRECT AND POSITIVE PROOF. I THOUGHT it necessary to prove the truth of the Gospel history, so far as the facts which it contains are not miraculous, before I reasoned from these facts in support of the truth of Christ’s mi- racles. But what we know of the miracles, to which I now refer, is derived, not from the Gospel history, but chiefly from the Epistles of Paul. The reader may therefore ask, as a preliminary ques- tion, what evidence we have for the authenticity of these Epistles. In replying, however, to this question, it will not, I think, be necessary to subject any reader to the labour which would attend a renewed exa- mination of the fathers of the Christian church, for the purpose of extracting from them what re. AUTHENTICITY OF PAUL’S EPISTLES, 205 fers to the writings of Paul. For, in the first place, the Gospel history, which we have already seen to be authentic, affords presumptive evidence of the authenticity of all the Apostolic Epistles. What they contain is in strict accordance with it ; —many of the facts, to which Paul alludes in his Hpistles, are recorded in the Gospel history ;—~ and the whole doctrine, which we find inculcated, as well as the whole object proposed, in the epis- tolary writings of the New Testament, are exact- ly the same with those of the Gospels.—In the second place, it will not be found necessary to my present purpose to prove any thing farther respecting the Epistles in question, than that they were actually transmitted to those Christian churches, for whose use they profess to have been written.—And, in the third place, this point ap- pears to be sufficiently established by what I have already had occasion to quote from the writings of the fathers of the church, when proving the truth of the Gospel history. Much of the evi- dence which I extracted from their writings is applicable, not to the Gospels alone, but equally to the Epistles, and leaves us in no doubt about the existence and publication of both at a very early period. We have seen that Polycarp speaks: of the writings of inspired men as, even in his time, collected in one sacred volume, which, in 206 PAUL REFERS TO MIRACLES WROUGHT BY one passage, he denominates “ the Oracles of the Lord ;” and, in another, “the Holy Scriptures ;” we have also seen that Origen makes quotations from nearly all the books which compose the volume of the New Testament,—and that Clement, a much earlier writer, not only makes reference to one of the Epistles of Paul, but explicitly men- tions its author by name. Now, in that very Epistle, to which Clement refers, (the first to the Corinthians,) Paul gave an account of the various gifts of the Spirit, by which he and other early teachers of Christianity had been qualified for their office, and had gained converts to the Christian faith, in Corinth as well as other cities. Among these, he enumerated the gifts of healing and working miracles ; and he accordingly reminded the Corinthians, in his second Epistle, “ that the signs of an Apostle had been wrought among them, in signs and wonders, and mighty deeds.”* He again referred, in his Epistle to the Galatians, to the miracles which had been wrought by those who ministered to them in the spirit ;—and, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, we find distinct mention made of “signs and wonders, and divers miracles,” by which God had borne wit- 2d Cor. chap. xii. ver. 12. HIMSELF AND OTHER TEACHERS OF CHRISTIANITY. 207 ness to the Apostles, for confirming the faith of those to whom they preached. I admit that we have no such record of the miracles to which I now refer, as can even enable us to distinguish one of them from another. We cannot, therefore, have the advantage of exami- . ning their circumstances, for the purpose of ascer- taining the credit which is due to them. We have not even the benefit of any direct testimony to their reality, proceeding from men who beheld them. Yet the single and unencumbered fact—that the Apostle Paul, in his letters to different churches, referred to such miracles, as having been actually wrought among themselves, affords a proof of these miracles, which, morally speaking, I would pronounce irresistible. Paul must certainly have known whether he had himself wrought such miracles. But, not only was it impossible that he should himself be de- ceived, it seems to have been out of his power, in this case, to deceive those to whom he wrote ; for they also must have had some knowledge whether miracles had or had not been wrought among them. It was, therefore, impossible that any man of common sense could deliberately refer to such miracles, in the language used by the Apostle, without a certainty in his own mind that they 208 EVIDENCE ARISING FROM THE MIRACLES were a matter of notoriety among those whom he addressed. If, among the Corinthians and others, no such miracles had been known, the solemn ap- peal which Paul made to them, in support of his doctrine, must have been regarded as an insult, and his doctrine must, in consequence, have been rejected as an imposture. But the men to whom he wrote, did, on the contrary, receive and ac- knowledge his Epistles as containing nothing else than the words of Divine truth, and thereby set their own seal to the truth of the Apostle’s asser- tion respecting the miracles to which I now refer. The importance of this part of the argument is so well illustrated by Dr Chalmers, that I am confident the reader will thank me for the follow- ing quotation :— “« There are infidels who have affirmed that the glory of establishing a new religion, induced the first Christians to assert, and to persist in assert- ing, what they knew to be a falsehood. But they forget that we have the concurrence of two parties to the truth of Christianity, and that it is the con- duct only of one of the parties, which can be ac- counted for by the supposition in question. The two parties are the teachers and the taught. The former may aspire to the glory of founding a new faith ; but what glory did the latter propose to TO WHICH PAUL REFERS. 209 themselves from being the dupes of an imposition so ruinous to every earthly interest, and held in such low and disgraceful estimation by the world at large ? Abandon the teachers of Christianity to every imputation which infidelity, on the rack for conjectures to give plausibility to its system, can desire, how shall we explain the concurrence of its disciples ? There may be a glory in leading, but we see no glory in being led. - - - - Paul, in his Epistles to the Corinthians, tells them that some of them had the gift of healing, and the power of working miracles ; and that the signs of an apos- tle had been wrought among them in wonders and mighty deeds. A man aspiring to the glory of an accredited teacher would never have committed himself on a subject, where his falsehood could have been so readily exposed. And in the vene- ration with which we know his Epistles to have been preserved by the Church of Corinth, we have not merely the testimony of their writer to the truth of the Christian miracles, but the testimony of a whole people, who had no interest in being deceived. - - - - How comes it, if it be all a fabri- cation, that it was never exposed ? We know that some of the disciples were driven, by the terrors of persecuting violence, to resign their profession. How should it happen that none of them ever at- O 210 EVIDENCE ARISING FROM THE MIRACLES tempted to vindicate their apostasy, by laying open the artifice and insincerity of their Christian teachers ? We may be sure that such a testimony would have been highly acceptable to the existing authorities of that period. The Jews would have made the most of it; and the vigilant and dis- cerning officers of the Roman government would not have failed to turn it to account.”* Upon my own mind, this particular argument makes the more impression, because I hold it to be not only unlikely, but almost incredible, that the circumstances in which it is founded should have been devised by the wisdom of man for the accomplishment of the purpose which is actually served by it.—It seems to me almost impossible that Paul, when he reminded the Corinthians and others of the miracles which had been wrought among them, could have any farther object than that of strengthening and establishing the faith of the individuals to whom he wrote ;—It seems al- most impossible that he could, at the time, be ac- tuated by any view to that ultimate evidence for the reality of these miracles, which would result from the confidence with which he had appealed to them, in writing to men to whom the truth of * The Evidence, &c. edit. 1816. pp: 98—100. \ TO WHICH PAUL REFERS. 211 the case must have been known. It seems rather, that in this case,—as we may well suppose in many others,—the thoughts and purposes of the Apostle must have been overruled by God, for the accomplishment of an object, which he had not himself contemplated,—and that in this way a foundation has been laid for such an accession to the evidence of Christian miracles, and conse- quently to the evidences of the Christian revela- tion, as will not, I think, be made light of by any candid and intelligent mind. I am not forgetting, that in the case of the mi- racles to which I have now referred, we are alto- gether without those advantages which enabled us to ascertain that they who beheld the miracles of Christ could not themselves be deceived. The utmost evidence we have for the miracles now in question is, that the men among whom they were wrought, conscientiously believed in their reality. But, considering what appears to have been the number and variety of these miracles,—consider- ing also the number of churches or societies of Christians among which they were wrought, and by none of which their reality was disavowed,— considering, at the same time, that a detection of imposture, even in one case out of a hundred, must have brought ultimate discredit on the 212 EVIDENCE ARISING FROM THE MIRACLES, &c. whole,—the argument founded on them cannot fail, I think, to afford a delightful and satisfying corroboration of the evidence previously stated, as resulting from the miracles which were wrought by Christ himself during his own abode upon earth. P2iae J CHAPTER IV. THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPEL IS ALSO SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE ARISING FROM THE FULFILMENT OF PROPHECY. IF all the other evidences of Christianity were annihilated, or kept out of view, we have such evi- dence resulting from a long continued and progres- sive fulfilment of prophecy as might of itself con- vince and satisfy any candid mind. But, in order to our deriving more full satisfaction from an ex- amination of those prophecies, in detail, which re- late to Christ and his religion, there are some ge- neral observations which I desire very shortly to premise. SECTION I. PROPHECY, IN CONNEXION WITH ITS FULFILMENT, IS WELL CALCU- LATED TO AFFORD EVIDENCE OF A DIVINE INTERPOSITION, AND EVIDENCE WHICH. WE OUGHT NOT TO CONSIDER AS WEAKENED BY A CERTAIN MEASURE OF OBSCURITY IN THE PROPHETIC RECORD, IT will not be denied that future events may be 214 IMPORTANCE OF THE EVIDENCE so distant, and dependent on so many circum- stances, as to render it impossible for human sa- gacity to foresee their accomplishment ;—In the view of human wisdom, they may be so improba- ble as even to forbid any conjecture of their fulfil- ment. Consequently, to foretell such events is just as much a miracle of knowledge as any mighty work can be a miracle of power. Prophecy, considered in connexion with its ful- filment, has even some advantages over miracles of power. The man, to whom the evidence of prophecy is presented, can examine and contemplate, both long and deliberately, all the circumstances with which any particular case is connected ;—to the time al- lowed him for this examination there is no other limit set than his continuance in the present state of trial and discipline. ‘There is no room left for the pretence—sometimes urged in the case of what we more commonly denominate miracles—that even an eye-witness may be deceived by false and momentary appearances. Nor does it seem that, in regard to any particular prophecy, a later age can be much in want of any advantage for the re- quisite examination, that was enjoyed by the men in whose time it was fulfilled, The infidel who oe eS ee Ou Tee Te Oe a ee a ARISING FROM PROPHECY. 215 pleads, in justification of his unbelief, that he would have believed in Christ if he had seen the miracles which are ascribed to him, can offer no corresponding vindication of himself for resisting that evidence which results from the fulfilment of prophecy, in the appearance and work of Christ upon earth. For, even at the present day, we have very nearly, if not altogether, the same advan- tage that was enjoyed by any who have gone be- fore us, for deliberately judging and ascertaining whether those events, which the prophets foretold, could be foreseen or anticipated by human sagaci- ty, and whether the things foretold have been in their time and order fulfilled. When a variety of prophecies have one common object, the evidence arising from their fulfilment may also be found progressive in its influence. If, in reference to salvation through Christ, and the fortunes of his Church in the world, there has been a long succession of prophecies gradually receiving their fulfilment,—throughout many ages and down to the present day,—there can be no doubt that the mere accumulation of cases must render the evidence of his Divine mission stronger to ws than it was to men of an earlier age. But it is more important to remark, that a combination of cases, in regular succession, may also reflect such light 216 IMPORTANCE OF THE EVIDENCE on one another as to strengthen materially the evidence resulting from each. Miracles of power do not derive the same advantage from being view- ed in connexion. Though their number may Strengthen our general security against deception, by affording us renewed opportunity of detecting imposture, each must be separately considered, and its reality separately ascertained. But the lan- guage of one prophecy may go far to illustrate that of another, with reference to the same common ob- ject ; and, when we examine the circumstances of their fulfilment, any difficulty which we find in the case of one may be, in a great measure, removed by corresponding circumstances of another. Sup- posing that the figurative language of a particular prophecy would of itself leave us in doubt whe- ther it refer to a temporal or a spiritual concern, —if it be obvious, from the distinguishing circum- stances of another prophecy, that the same words can be there interpreted only in a spiritual sense, the latter case may certainly aid us towards a just interpretation of the former. In short, every step which we take, with sufficient caution, in our ex- amination and judgment of prophecies in detail, so far as they have reference to the same general object, goes far, both to facilitate our progress, and to secure us, as we proceed, against the hazard of deception. An accumulation of cases serves, in ARISING FROM PROPHECY. 217 this way, to strengthen the evidence which results to us from each ;—and, to the man who is unwea- ried in his search after truth, an historical review of all those prophecies which bear on the advent and work of the Messiah, and the fortunes of his Church in the world, may probably be found the most effectual mean, which he can employ, for the establishment of his mind in the faith of the Gospel. There has been much complaint about the ob- scurity of prophecy. But the absurdity of the complaint has been so often exposed, and is so pal- pable to the reflecting mind, that it cannot be ne- cessary to say much respecting it. The language of prophecy might be so clear and unambiguous as altogether to defeat its own object. Were it as explicit as seems to be demanded, any individual, placed in favourable circumstances for the purpose, would have it in his power so to conform his own pretensions, as well as his own appearance and manner of life, to what had been foretold, as to im- pose himself on the world for the person actually designed in the language of the prophet ;— Or, if no such deceitful attempt were made, still the per- | son designed would, in a great measure, lose the advantage which the fulfilment of prophecy was intended to afford him; for it would be urged, 218 NO GROUND FOR OBJECTING with too much seeming reason, that the prophetic language had put it in his own power to bring about its fulfilment in the way best calculated to accomplish his object. It was therefore wisely ordered that the prophecies concerning the Mes- siah should be involved in as much obscurity as to leave no ground for this objection. Yet we shall find, on the other hand, that the circumstances © connected with their fulfilment reflect such light on the prophetic language, as may now satisfy every candid mind respecting its original import. It is, besides, to beconsidered that, if the language of the prophets respecting the advent and the cha- racter of the Messiah had been so explicit as to make it impossible for any one to misconstrue or misap- ply it, we can scarcely suppose that the Jews would ) have put him to death, without their minds being so overruled of God as to deprive them of their free agency. ‘The operation and effect, therefore, of such prophecies might, for aught we know, be incompatible with the condition of men as account- able creatures. .It is only from such a degree of obscurity in the prophetic language as its fulfil- ment effectually removes, that we have assurance of its being a fit instrument in the hands of an All- wise Being for the accomplishment of his gracious © purposes. | The force of this reasoning will be more mani- TO THE OBSCURITY OF PROPHECY. 219 fest when we attend to some of the prophecies in detail. But, in this case as in others, it is essen- tial to be assured, in the first place, that we de- rive our information from an authentic record. Eero SECTION II. THERE IS NO GOOD GROUND FOR OBJECTING TO THE OLD TESTA- MENT AS A RECORD OF PROPHECIES. PERHAPS I ought not even to anticipate any such objection ; for it will not be found that my argument rests on an admission of the Divine in- spiration of the Old Testament. The prophecies in question are contained in a certain book, or collec- tion of books, which assign to themselves a very early date, or a variety of very early dates. If it shall be found that these alleged prophecies have been manifestly fulfilled in later ages, their fulfil- ment may, no doubt, tend to prove the Divine inspi- ration of the books in which they are contained ; but a previous. assumption or admission of such inspiration, cannot be necessary to my present purpose. In order to our reasoning, with the de- sired effect, from the alleged fulfilment of such prophecies, all that can be requisite is, that we be duly assured of the early existence of the record in which they are contained. Were it to be held OLD TESTAMENT AN UNEXCEPTIONABLE RECORD. 221 that the record in question, so far from having existed at a very early period, may be reasonably supposed to be a fabrication by the friends of the Christian cause, subsequently to the events of which it professes to afford a prophetic intima- tion, this would, indeed, be fatal to our argument. But the antiquity of the Hebrew scriptures ap- pears to be so generally admitted, and I am so little aware of any ground on which it can be questioned, that what I think it necessary to ad- vance on this preliminary point, may be comprised within very narrow bounds. 1. It is impossible to suppose that any of those Jews who, since the coming of Christ, have ad- hered to the institutions of Moses, should have combined with Christians for imposing on the world, as an ancient record, any books of mo- dern invention, which tend to establish the Chris- tian faith ;—yet, without their co-operation, it is obvious that such a fraud could not be practised. 2. We have evidence of the early existence of the Hebrew scriptures, arising from a translation of them into the Greek language ;—for, though there may be some fiction in the accounts which are given of the way in which that translation was executed, there seems to be no doubt that 222 THE OLD TESTAMENT AN UNEXCEPTIONABLE the first part of it, at least, was completed more than 150 years before the birth of Christ. Nor would it be easy to account for the labour bestow- ed in the execution of that work, without ad- mitting that the Hebrew scriptures must have been, at the time, regarded as a record valuable on account of its antiquity. 3. The evidence which we have already sus- tained, for the truth of the Gospel history, makes it impossible for us to doubt that the Old Testa- ment Scriptures were in the hands of the Jews, long before Christ appeared in the world; for we find that the Evangelists make frequent reference to these Scriptures, as the well-known and long- established foundation of the religion of their coun- try. They make frequent reference to Moses, in particular, and the law of God as contained in his writings,—by which they must certainly be un- derstood as bearing testimony—if not to the truth of all that is contained in the books of Moses—at least to their having been handed down, as a re- cord believed to be genuine, from the early period at which it professes to have been written. 4. The antiquity of the Jewish race, and of the Scriptures which attest it, casts light on much that is peculiar in the existing character and RECORD OF PROPHECIES. 223 habits of that people ; and the existence of such a people, bears testimony to that historical record, which alone enables us to account for what we observe in their condition. What, then, are the prophecies which have been most remarkably fulfilled, either in the appearance and the work of Christ upon earth, or in the sub- sequent fortunes, both of his Church, and of the Jewish nation ?—An answer to this question will be the business of the three following Sections. ‘Banca ws) SECTION III. INTIMATIONS WERE VERY EARLY GIVEN IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, OF A DIVINE PURPOSE TO EMPLOY SOME EXTRAORDINARY AND EF= FECTUAL MEANS FOR THE DELIVERANCE OF MEN FROM THE CON- SEQUENCES OF THEIR TRANSGRESSION AND FALL, AND FOR THE PREVALENCE OF TRUE RELIGION AMONG ALL THE NATIONS OF THE EARTH, THE original intimation, that the seed of the woman should bruise the head of the serpent,* though in some respects very enigmatical, was obviously of precious import ; and the promise of a blessed deliverance was renewed to Abraham, as the father of the faithful, in language more explicit. When Abraham was called to leave his coun- try and his kindred, and to go forth in quest of another land, God was pleased to-enter into a co- venant with him, saying—“ I will make of thee * Gen. chap. ili. ver. 15. PROMISES OF GOD TO ABRAHAM. 225 a great nation, - - - And in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.”* To this cove- nant the Lord is also represented as referring, when he was about to destroy the city of Sodom ; “ Shall I hide,” said He, “ from Abraham that thing which I do; seeing that Abraham shall surely be- come a great nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him ?”+—And to give greater solemnity to this covenant, the promise or engagement on the part of God was explicitly re- newed, when Abraham had approved himself faith- ful to his promise of obedience, by consenting to the sacrifice of his son Isaac ;—“ By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son; That in blessing, I will bless thee, and in multiplying, I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, - - - And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” + The first part of this promise was strictly ac- complished. Not to speak of other descendants of Abraham, the progeny of his grandson Jacob became, of themselves, a great nation. Shall it, in these circumstances, be supposed that the other part of the promise has failed, or that there is no * Gen. chap. xii, ver. 2, 3. + Gen. chap. xviii. ver. 17, 18. t Gen. chap. xxii, ver. 16.18, ; } 226 FULFILMENT OF THE PROMISES sense in which all the families or nations of the earth either have been, or ever shall be, blessed in the seed of Abraham ?—One of his descendants, the Apostle Peter, maintained to his brethren the ‘Jews, that the advent of the Messiah and the preaching of his Gospel, were a fulfilment of this promise—of “ the covenant,” said he, “ which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham—TIn thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be plessed.”* And Paul, in addressing himself to ‘Gentile Christians, represents even them as, in a spiritual sense, the children of Abraham, because “ the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying—In thee shall all nations be blessed.” + Is there any good reason for rejecting this in- terpretation of the Divine promise ?—Regarding Christ, as in his human nature one of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh, and regarding the religion which he taught as both designed for the benefit of all nations, and comprehending a pledge or promise of its being ultimately received by every nation under Heaven,—Upon what ground can it be denied, either that the Christian dispensation is a fulfilment of the Divine promise * Acts, chap. ili. ver. 20. + Gal. chap. iii. ver. 8. GIVEN TO ABRAHAM. Peat to Abraham, or that the promise so early given, when considered in connexion with its fulfilment, affords corroborative evidence that the Christian religion is of God ? Shall it be regarded as an objection to this ar- gument, that I interpret the divine promise as re- ferring to a spiritual blessing ? The words, in which the promise is expressed, do not enable us to determine whether the bless- ing to all nations was to be temporal or spiritual. Consequently, all that is necessary to the vindica- tion and fulfilment of the promise is, that the blessing, as realized, appear to be of adequate im- portance ; and it will not be denied, that such spiritual blessings as the Gospel of Christ offers to all men, (if they have indeed a substance and reality,) are more important than all that this world can give. But, in looking forward to other promises of the Old Testament, obviously connected with that which was given to Abraham, we shall find decj- sive evidence, both that the blessing in question was altogether spiritual, and that these promises have been literally accomplished in Christ as a spiritual Saviour. The ¢ypical prophecies are, from the nature of 228 TYPICAL PREDICTIONS OF CHRIST the case, more ambiguous than others ; yet I feel that I should not do justice to my argument by keeping them altogether out of view ; for the lan- guage employed is, in some cases, incapable of being accounted for, on any other supposition than that of its referring to the Messiah and his spiri- tual kingdom. It is well known that, under the Old Testament dispensation, not only was instruction conveyed by figurative or symbolical actions, but some person already existing in the world was occasionally pointed. out as an emblem and representative of one who should afterwards appear. To the per- son so pointed out, regarded as a type, the Old Testament writers. even applied all the distin- euishing characteristics of the antitype, or the person figuratively predicted, so as to speak, in all respects, of him who should at length appear, under the name and designation of his existing representative. . _ David, King of Israel, was accordingly a type of Christ. We find that, in the book of Psalms, he frequently speaks of himself in that character, and in such language as it is impossible to apply to himself literally. “ I will declare the decree,” saith he; “The Lord hath said unto me, Thou AND HIS SPIRITUAL KINGDOM. 229 art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the Heathen for thine inheritance ; and the uttermost parts of the earth for a possession.” *—That. the person, here refer- red to, is represented as the Son of God in a pe- culiar and exalted sense, is evident, not only from the language in which that relation is expressed, but also from the inheritance assigned to him. It will not be said that David himself received any such inheritance; nor is there any other person than the Messiah to whom the typical represen- tation can be held as applicable. But Christ is elsewhere revealed as the only begotten of the Father ; and of the glorious inheritance here pro- mised, considered in a spiritual view, we know that he has, in a great measure, received “ posses- sion”—possession of it in such a degree as consti- tutes a satisfying earnest of its being in its full extent realized to him. In a prayer for his son Solomon, David speaks of fim also as a type of the Messiah. After much that may be regarded as partly applicable to the temporal kingdom over which Solomon was to reign, and, tn all respects, applicable to the spirit- ual kingdom of Christ, the Psalmist breaks out in loftier strains respecting the person of whom he * Psalm ii. ver, 7, 8, 230 MORE EXPLICIT PROPHECIES chiefly spoke. “ All kings,” says he, “ shall fall down before him; all nations shall serve him; ._.- His name shall endure for ever; his name shall be continued as long as the sun; and men shall be blessed in him 3 all nations shall call him blessed.”*—-David could not be ignorant that what he thus foretold was not to be accomplished in the person of Solomon himself as an earthly prince $ —his eye was evidently directed to the promise which had been made to Abraham and his seed, as at length to be fulfilled in one who should be descended of Solomon. - But, in the writings of the Prophet Isaiah, there are numerous representations of the Messiah’s kingdom divested of all the ambiguity of typical prophecy ; and we shall find that, though partly veiled under figures and images of a temporal kind, they have obviously a spiritual reference: The nations are spoken of as involved in dark- ness ; and God is represented as saying to the pro- mised deliverer—* It is a light thing,” (a small matter,) “ that thou shouldst be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the pre- served of Israel; I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayst be my salvation * Psalm Ixxii. ver. 11, 17. OF CHRIST’S SPIRITUAL KINGDOM. 231 unto the ends of the earth.”* And again, address- ing himself to the Jewish nation, the Lord is re« presented as saying“ Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee ; for, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people ; but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee; and the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.”+ It will scarcely be denied that the prophet here refers to a spiritual blessing; for it is of such blessings that “ght is ordinarily employed as an emblem. Nor can any thing appear more natural than the application which the aged Simeon made of this prophecy, when he took the child Jesus “in his arms, and blessed God, and said—Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, ac- cording to thy word; for mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.’ t The prophet, indeed, had intimated more par- ticularly that the light which was to shine upon the Gentiles should have the blessed effect of turn- ing them from idolatry. “ They shall be turned * Isaiah, chap. xlix. ver.6. + Ibid. chap, lx. ver. 1~3, { Luke, chap. ii. ver. 28—-32. ph ve 332 MORE EXPLICIT PROPHECIES back,” said he, “ they shall be greatly ashamed that trust in graven images, that say to the molt- en images—Ye are our Gods.”* And we accord- ingly know, that wherever the light of the Gospel has penetrated, its immediate effect has been to put an end to all acknowledged worship of idols. By another prophet it was distinctly intimated, that the great purpose, for which the promised Deliverer should be revealed, was “ to make an end of sin, to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness.” + And the Gospel accordingly instructs us that, while Christ hath made atonement for iniquity, the grace of God has been revealed by him, for the purpose of teaching all men to “ deny ungodliness and world- ly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, and god- ly in this present world.” + It is manifest,even from these quotations, but still more from the general tenour of the Old Testament Scriptures, that, long before the advent of Christ, intimations had been given of a gracious purpose, on the part of God, at length to employ some ex- traordinary and powerful means for the preva- >» * Isaiah, chap. xlii. ver. 17. + Daniel, chap. 1x. yer. 24. t Tit. chap. ii. ver. 12, io = =z 7 7 3 : Ry : j OF CHRIS?’S SPIRITUAL KINGDOM. 233 lence of true religion among all nations. At the time when these intimations had been given and recorded, there was nothin g in the condition of the Heathen world, or in the outward course of events connected with it, that could justify any correspond- ing expectation. Yet the Gospel of Christ, and the means employed for its establishment and pro- pagation, may well be regarded as a fulfilment of what had been thus foretold, and as a strong pledge of the ultimate and complete fulfilment of the pro- mise originally made to Abraham—That, in his’ seed, all the nations of the earth should be blessed. It is not, however, to the general import only of the promised blessing, that the prophecies of the Old Testament refer ;—they direct our atten- tion, more particularly, to the character and work of the promised Deliverer, and even to the time which had been fixed and determined for his ap- pearance. [: 284.09 SECTION IV. PROPHETIC NOTICES WERE GIVEN OF THE CHARACTER AND CONDI-« TION OF THE PERSON BY WHOM THE PROMISED BLESSING SHOULD - BE IMPARTED TO THE WORLD,;—OF HIS PECULIAR WORK AS A SAVIOUR,—AND EVEN OF THE TIME WHEN HE SHOULD BE MANI- FESTED. RESPECTING the Divine character of the pro- iiised Messiah, we find David employing very ex- plicit language. “ Thou art fairer,” says he, “ than the children of men. - ~ - Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre; thou lovest righteousness and hatest wickedness; therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.”* It is obvious, that the name or title of God is, in this passage, given to more than one person. It is first given to the person immedi- ately addressed, and then to another, who is dis- tinguished as his God, or the Being who has anointed him with the oil of gladness. Consider- ed in this view, the language denotes both the d- vine character of the promised Deliverer, and that * Psalm xlv. ver. 2, 6, 7. THE CHARACTER OF PROMISED DELIVERER. 235 subordination to his heavenly Father which Chris- tians recognise in the Saviour as a man, or one of the seed of Abraham. But, if there seem to be in this case any obscu- rity, only let one passage of Scripture (in words of the same author) illustrate the import of an- other. “ The Lord,” says David, in another Psalm,— The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”* Any ambiguity which we might otherwise find in the import of these words, is removed byan unanswerable argument with which we are furnished by Christ himself. “ What think ye of Christ ?” said he to the Pharisees, “ Whose son is he? They say unto him, the son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying—The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word.”{ The question admitted of no answer without recognising—what Chris- tians know and believe concerning the person of the Saviour—that while, as a man, he is of the seed of Abraham, and the son of David, he is also the eternal and only begotten son of God, and in that * Psalm cx. ver. 1. + Matth, chap. xxii, ver. 42—46, 236 THE CHARACTER OF PROMISED DELIVERER respect, the Lord of David.—It is accordingly this consideration and no other—a consideration of his character as both the son of God and the son of man, which also enables us to account for the words addressed to him,— Sit thou at my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy foot- stool.” It is in his character as man and Media- tor that he is thus exalted, and that his enemies are brought under subjection to him. Yet it is in virtue of the union of the Divine to the human nature in his person, that he is gualified to be the head of his spiritual kingdom on earth, and to direct and govern all things for the good of his church. The prophet Isaiah, also, while he speaks of the Messiah as a child who should be born in the world, does yet denominate him “ the mighty God ;”* and, for the purpose of denoting his pecu- liar and distinguishing character in a way which could neither be. misinterpreted, nor fail to com- mand attention, the prophet explicitly refers to his miraculous conception ;—“ Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”+—While, in these words, the human nature of the Messiah is unequivocally * Isaiah, chap. ix. ver. 6. + Isaiah, chap. vii, ver, 14, AS BOTIL GOD AND MAN, 237 denoted—while he is represented as descending from an earthly parent, the designation or condi- tion of his mother so distinguishes his case from that of other men, as to constitute a striking em- blem of his character as a man without sin. Nor does the prophet fail to keep his divine nature at the same time in view. His name was to be Immanuel, which, in the Hebrew language, signi- fies—Gr'od with us—God manifested in the flesh, and, for a time, dwelling with men upon earth. These are, to say the least, very striking pre- dictions, and incapable of being applied to any other individual than that Saviour, in whose character, as the New Testament reveals it, they have received exact and perfect fulfilment. But not only did the language of prophecy direct at- tention, as we have seen, to the peculiar character of the promised Messiah as both God and man,— the prophet, whose words I have last quoted, gave an account, also, of his outward condition in the world, and of the means by which he should ac- complish his work upon earth,—an account which it seems so impossible to misinterpret or misapply, that, though all other evidence from prophecy were out of view, it might of itself be sufficient to satisfy the candid mind. The prophet represents him as one who does 238 THE CHARACTER AND THE WORK “ no violence, neither is deceit in his mouth— yet despised and rejected of men, a man of sor- rows and acquainted. with griefs.”. This unme- rited affliction he bears without murmur or com- plaint; for, “as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.—Yet it pleases the Lord to bruise him, and put him to grief,”— not, indeed, on hisown account, but he is * wound- ed for our transgressions, and bruised for our ini- quities ; the chastisement of our peace is upon him, and with his stripes we are healed. - - - The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all,” - - - and, as a “righteous servant, he shall justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities.* To whom, or what sort of person, shall this language be found applicable ? Is there any thing farther in the prophet’s account that can help us to interpret it as applicable to any ordinary man ? It will rather be admitted that what remains of the description is more extraordinary. For, while the person in question is “ numbered with trans- eressors, and pours out his soul unto death,” there- by making himself “ an offering for sin,” we are assured that “ he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hands.” + The prophet obviously refers to one who, after * Isaiah, chap. lili, + Ver. 10, OF THE PROMISED DELIVERER, 239 submitting to death, should rise superior to its power ; and the whole description of his character, —of his suffering,—of the reason and purpose of his suffering—not on his own account, but for others,—and of his glory also as the reward of his suffering,—The whole is so strictly conformable to what has been realized in the person and the work of Christ, that—were there not incontrovert- ible evidence of the authenticity of the prediction —it would most probably be represented as an attempt to pass under the name, and to clothe with the character, of prophecy, what had been written after the events in question were accom- plished, It is, therefore, most satisfactory to know, that our evidence of the authenticity of this prophecy, and particularly of the time when it was written and recorded, is the most perfectthat can be desired, Thedate which the Old TestamentScriptures assign to it is more than seven hundred years before the Son of God was manifested in the flesh ; and J have already referred to satisfying evidence of the ex- istence of the Old Testament record, as the well- ‘known and established foundation of the Jewish faith, long before the Gospel of Christ was preach- ed to the world. But, with reference to a prophecy of such high importance as that now in ques- tion, I may be excused, I hope, for also reminding 240 PROPHECIES RELATIVE TO my reader of the impossibility that, from the birth of Christ to the present time, there can have been any interpolation of the language, which I have quoted. Let it only be remembered that, du- ring all that time, the canon of Old Testament Scripture has been in the keeping of a people, who abhor the Christian name, and who, notwithstand- ing, read at the present day, as the words of Isaiah, what I have now transcribed from his writings. The unbelief of the Jews appears, in this view, to have been overruled by God for the establishment of the very faith which they have disdained and rejected. The Divine Being often accomplishes his pur- poses by means which our imagination could never have anticipated; but while, in the present in- stance, we trace the design of Heaven to place the authenticity of such predictions out of question, it will not fail, I trust, to have the effect of dispo- sing every candid mind more duly to yield to the force of evidence. Nor will it be found that there is any lack of such additional evidence from pro- - phecy as can be, with reason, either expected or desired. Besides developing, as we have seen, both the character and the work of the promised Messiah, the Old Testament Scriptures referred, from the THE TIME OF THE SAVIOUR’S APPEARANCE. 241 beginning, to the ¢#me when he should appear in the world. When Jacob, on his death-bed, foretold to each of his sons what should be his own fortune and that of his posterity, he adverted more particular- ly to the fortune of Judah. After representing his pre-eminence over his brethren, and compa- ring his strength or power to that of a lion,—the Patriarch added these remarkable words :—“ ‘The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a law- giver from between his feet, until Shiloh come ; and unto him shall the gathering of the people begs’ Without troubling my reader with the more critical and learned argument for proving that the name Shiloh is, in its import, exclusively appro- priate to the promised Messiah,—it may be suf- ficient to advert to the language of Jacob in this passage, as connected with the promise which had been made to Abraham. The promise bore, in the first place, that the seed of Abraham should be- come a great nation ; and, in the second place, that, in his seed, or in one descended of him, all the nations of the earth should be blessed. Accord- * Gen. chap. xlix. ver. 10, Q ¥ 242 PROPHECIES RELATIVE TQ ingly, Jacob here refers to both parts of the origi- nal promise, and intimates that both should receive their accomplishment in the tribe of Judah. The dominion which Judah should exercise is intima- ted by the sceptre which he should wield, and by his denomination and character as a dawgiver. The long continuance also of this dominion is adverted to, and yet limits are set to its duration son tie, in some sense, to cease when Shiloh comes. Yet, in another sense, it is then to become more exten- sive ; for, unto Shiloh the people or nations of the earth are to be gathered—and gathered, I may fairly add, for the ultimate fulfilment of the second part of the original promise,—that, in one descend- ed of Abraham, all nations should be blessed. Considered in this connexion, the language of Jacob plainly intimates, that the coming of the Messiah was to precede the destruction of Jeru- salem ; yet it implies, at the same time, that the two were to be nearly contemporary events ;—and it will not be denied, that in both these respects, the prophecy corresponds to what we historically know concerning the birth of Christ, and the sub- sequent overthrow of the Jewish polity and com- monwealth, | But the time which had been fixed, in the coun- sels of Heaven, for the advent of the Messiah, was THE TIME OF THE SAVIOUR’S APPEARANCE, 243 revealed at a later period, in a way more definite and unequivocal. About 500 years before the birth of Christ, the Prophet Daniel disclosed the import of a very precise communication on this subject, which had been made to him by the An- gel Gabriel. One circumstance only in that com- munication will be found at all enigmatical ; and I | have the satisfaction of premising, that the question which it involves will prove to be one of easy so- lution. The law of Moses prescribed to the Jews a pe- culiar way of computing time, with reference to what was denominated the Jubilee. “The seventh year,” said the law, “ shall be a Sabbath of rest unto the land.”* But, for the purpose of deter- mining what was to be understood by the seventh year, it was added—“ Thou shalt number seven Sabbaths of years unto thee, (or seven weeks of years,) seven times seven years ; and the space of the seven Sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years; --~- And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land.”+ This mode of computation tended to clothe the sayings of the prophets with that de- gree of obscurity which we have seen to be essen- tial to their purpose ; and it was accordingly adopt- * Ley, chap. xxv. ver. 4. > Ver. 8, 10. 244 PROPHECIES RELATIVE TQ ed in the Book of Daniel, with reference to the duration ‘of the Jewish commonwealth after the return of the people from the Babylonish capti- vity, and also with reference to the corresponding time which had been fixed for the advent of the Messiah. The Angel Gabriel is represented as saying to Daniel—“ Seventy weeks are determi- ned upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, to finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy. - - - After three score and two weeks, shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince that shall come shall de- stroy the city and the sanctuary ; and the end thereof shall be with a flood ; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.” * It is not necessary for my present purpose, to bring into view any other part of this very remark- able prophecy; nor should there be any difficulty in the interpretation of those parts of it which I have quoted. Understanding that Daniel’s weeks de- note weeks of years, or, in other words, that the seven days of each week denote seven years, we arrive at two conclusions.—In the first place, the * Dan. chap, ix. ver. 24, 26. THE TIME OF THE SAVIOUR’S APPEARANCE. 243 seventy weeks in the prophecy amount to 490 years, which appear to be the time that actually elapsed from the going forth of the command- ment for rebuilding Jerusalem to the year in which it was ultimately destroyed ;—And, in the second place, reckoning three score and two weeks from the same date, for fixing the time when “ Messiah was to be cut off, but not for himself,” our cal- culation brings us down to that period in the life of Christ, when he may be supposed to have be- come fully susceptible, as a man, of those afflic- tions which terminated in his death. What possible objection can there be to this in- terpretation, or what doubt entertained about the application and fulfilment of the prophecy ? We have seen that the law given to the Jews directed them to the mode of computing time which is here adopted,—consequently that Daniel had, besides the sanction of custom, direct authority for such a computation. Our interpretation of his language is, therefore, both natural and authorized ;—And, considering the prophecy in all its concomitant circumstances, a more literal interpretation of it would even be absurd. We have, thus, a body of Old Testament pro phecy concerning the character, the condition, and the work, of the promised Messiah, terminating 246 IMPORTANCE OF THE PROPHECIES REFERRED TO. with a distinct intimation of the time of his ap- pearance on earth,—given at least 500 years be- fore the time which was so fixed and determined ; And we have found that all the prophecies now in question, received such an exact fulfilment in Christ, as should render it difficult for any man to deny, that he was the person, from the begin- ning, promised and designed as the great deliverer of the human race. But, besides the prophecies which have been fulfilled in the appearance and work of the Savi- our on earth, there are others relative to the sub- sequent fortunes both of the Christian Church and of the Jewish nation, which call for attention in our present argument, and shall therefore be the subject of the next Section. [ 24% J] SECTION V. THERE ARE MANY PROPHECIES RESPECTING THE SUBSEQUENT FORe TUNES BOTH OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND OF THE JEWISH NATION, WHICH HAVE BEEN SO FAR FULFILLED AS TO AFFORD A STRONG PLEDGE OF THEIR ULTIMATE AND PERFECT ACCOMPLISH- MENT. IN a variety of Old Testament prophecies, to which I have already referred, as bearing on the advent of the Messiah and the purpose of his mission, there was also intimation given of the blessed effect of his coming, and the extensive pre- valence of his religion. We have seen it plainly foretold, that the light which was to shine on the world should have the effect of turning men from idolatry to the worship of the true God, and that all nations should partake of this blessing. Nor is it in the Old Testament alone that we find such prophetic intimations. We learn from the Evan- gelists, that Christ himself, during his abode upon earth, foretold, in very remarkable words, the en- largement of his spiritual kingdom ;—He compa- red it to “a grain of mustard seed, which a man 248 PROPHECIES RELATIVE TO THE FORTUNES took and sowed in his field ; which, indeed,” says he, “is the least of all seeds; but when it is. grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and be- cometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.”* The circum- stances in which this’ prophecy was fulfilled, and the means by which it was accomplished, soon. after Christ had left the world, will furnish a Separate argument for the Divine origin of the Christian faith, which, in this place, I have no desire to anticipate. But, in the mean time, there cannot be a doubt of its having received both a speedy and ample fulfilment by the conversion of an innumerable multitude of the heathen to the faith of the Gospel ;—nor can we, with reason, ascribe to human sagacity the foresight of an event so little akin to any thing which had been before exemplified in the world. I might, indeed, avail myself, in this place,— and with no small advantage,—of those prophecies also which relate to the more adverse fortunes of Christianity,—to those corruptions of its doctrine and worship which were foretold,—in the first place, by the Prophet Daniel,—afterwards by Paul, in two of his Epistles,—and latterly by John, * Matth. chap. xii, ver. 31, 32, OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 2495 in the Book of Revelation. But I am contented to forego, in a great measure, this advantage, ra- ther than occupy my pages with such a contro- versy about the fulfilment of these prophecies in the corruptions of the Church of Rome, as would prove incompatible with both the simplicity and the brevity of discussion, which I think it essen- tial to maintain.—It will at least be admitted, that great corruptions were predicted ; and even with- out our ascertaining in what particular events the prophecies in question have had their fulfilment, it will scarcely be denied, either that much evil, corresponding to what was foretold, has prevailed among one class or other of men who had received the gospel,—or that the early and avowed antici- pation of such abuses was peculiarly indicative of candour and integrity in those friends of the Chris- tian cause by whom the prophetic warning was given.—I therefore hasten to the consideration of other prophecies, about the fulfilment of which there seems to be less room for controversy. We have seen that, connected with the pre- phecy of Daniel respecting the time of the Sa- viour’s advent, there was an explicit intimation of the utter overthrow of the Jewish polity and commonwealth, as an event to be. speedily accom- plished after Messiah should “ be cut off, but not 290 PROPHECIES RELATIVE To for himself.” To leave us in no doubt that the prophet meant to represent, not merely the de- struction of Jerusalem, but the termination of the Jewish economy, he expressly foretold that, during the last of the seventy weeks, the sacrifice and oblation should cease. Accordingly, Christ him- self, towards the close of his ministry on earth, explicitly intimated that these events should be ac- complished during the lifetime of some of those whom he addressed. With a view to their inte- rest and safety, he not only gave them signs of the time “ when these things should come to pass,” but directed them to-the way in which they might escape from the accompanying danger. “ When ye shall see Jerusalem,” says he, “ encompassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh ; then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains.”* And, as a proof that the sacri- fice and oblation should permanently cease ; or, in other words, that there should be an end of the Mosaic ritual, he foretold more particularly the utter demolition of the Temple, which had been appropriated to that ritual service. “ There shall not,” said he, “ be left one stone of it upon an- other that shall not be thrown down.”+ It is not denied, I believe, that the historical * Luke, chap. xxi, yer. 20, 21. f Ibid, chap. xxi. ver. 6: THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM. 251 account of the destruction of Jerusalem, about thirty-six years after the death of Christ, is strict- ly conformable, not only to his prophetic lan- guage, which I have now quoted, but to all the circumstances of the case, as represented by him in a long discourse recorded by three of the Evan- gelists. The only resort, therefore, of the unbe- liever, is to suppose that what the New Testa- ment contains on this subject, must have been written, not before, but after the event,—a suppo- sition which, to say the least, must be regarded as a very violent one. For we have already seen satisfactory evidence of such an early publication of those books of the New Testament called Gos- pels, as renders it very nearly impossible that they can have been written after the destruction of Je- rusalem. But if any reader, whose impression of this evidence is in want of being renewed, shall be averse to look back to it, as stated in a former ~ chapter, he may perhaps be excused from taking that trouble; for we shall find that other prophe- cies respecting the future condition of the Jews, have received their fulfilment in ages so very dis- tant from that in which they were published, as to preclude all objection of a similar kind. After Moses, the founder and lawgiver of the Israelitish nation, had given them the most en- 252 PROPHECIES RELATIVE TO THE SUBSEQUENT couraging promises of national prosperity, as the reward of fidelity and obedience to their Divine Benefactor, and had also warned them that, if they should forsake the service of God, they should be scatteréd among the heathen, and that their * Jand should be desolate, and their cities waste,” —he, in the name of God, subjoined these gra- cious words ;—* Yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break my covenant with them ; for I am the Lord their God.”* And the Prophet Jeremiah, adverting to the same case, represents the Divine Being as making a similar promise, in terms of still more remarkable import ;—“ Fear thou not, O Jacob, my servant ; for I will make a full end of all the nations, whither I have driven thee; but I will not make a full end of thee.” + This prophecy is not to be understood as appli- cable to the great body of the ten tribes, who re- volted from their allegiance to the house of David ; for they appear to have been ultimately lost, as a separate people, in the land of their captivity. But the divine origin of the prophecy is abund- antly manifest in the fortunes of that remainder of the seed of Jacob which constituted the Jewish * Ley. chap. xxvi, ver. 44. + Jer. chap. xlvi. ver. 28. FORTUNES OF THE JEWISH NATION. 953 nation. Before the advent of the Messiah, this prophecy had been, in their case, so far fulfilled, | by their being preserved as a separate people, du- ring their captivity in Babylon, and by their being afterwards re-established in their own land,— while “ a full end” had been made of the nation which had held them captive. But, in the course of providence, the same prediction was to receive amore remarkable fulfilment ; and with this view it was, in the meanwhile, repeated and illustrated by a New Testament prophet. The Apostle Paul, referring to the rejection of the Jews, and comparing the Church of God upon earth to an olive tree, represents them as branches broken off, on account of their unbelief, but adds, that “ God is able to graff them in again.” Then, dismissing the metaphor, he reveals explicitly the gracious design of Heaven in their behalf ;—“ For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits ; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.” * In connexion with what was so fixed * Rom, chap. xi, ver, 25, 26, 27. 254 PROPHECIES RELATIVE TO THE SUBSEQUENT and determined, the Apostle also refers to the wise and gracious purpose of Divine Providence, both in the rejection of the Jews, and in their ultimate re- storation. “ Have they stumbled,” says he, “* that they should fall? God forbid: But rather that, through their fall, salvation is come unto the Gen- tiles, for to provoke them (the Jews) to jealousy. Now, if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gen- tiles, how much more their fulness ? - - - If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead ?”* The prophetic language of Paul, considered in this connexion, denotes not only that the rejection of the Jews was to prove subservient to the con- version of the Gentiles, but that their restoration would have an effect, still more powerful, to pro- mote the ingathering of the remainder of the Gen- tile world,within the pale of the Christian Church; —and, in the latter view more particularly, I shall have occasion to consider this prophecy. But the primary question is—In what degree, if any, the prophecies now in question have been hitherto fulfilled. Most certainly, the great body of the Jews have * Rom. chap. xi, yer, 11, 12, 15. FORTUNES OF THE JEWISH NATION, 235 not hitherto been brought to the faith of Christ. But has there been nothing in their condition, from the dissolution of their polity and common- wealth to the present day, which may be regarded as a partial fulfilment of the prophecies which I have quoted, and as affording a strong pledge of their ultimate and complete fulfilment ? In order to the Jews being ultimately restored as a nation, it was obviously necessary that they should be, in the meanwhile, preserved as a sepa- rate people. Had they so mingled, by intermar- riage and otherwise, with the people among whom they lived, during their absence from their own land, as to be no longer distinguishable from them, —had the descendants of those Jews, who were dispersed, after the destruction of Jerusalem, be- come in this way, as others have become, merely an integral part of the community with which their fathers had mingled,—it would have been folly to speak of their being afterwards restored as anation. But the existence of the Jews, at this day, as a people distinct from all the nations among which they have sojourned, is too obvious to be questioned. Up to the present time, the original prophecy of Jeremiah respecting them is obviously fulfilled. For while God appears to have made “ a full end” of other nations, we 256 HOW THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE JEWS know that, during more than seventeen hundred years subsequent to the dispersion of the Jews, he has not made “ a full end” of them. Their condition at this day, in respect of both number and distinguishing character, still admits of our supposing that they may be restored as a nation. Even the predictions of Paul respecting them are so far verified; for, that they should be preser- ved as a separate people, during the period of their dispersion, must be held as implied in the pro- phecy of their ultimate restoration. In these circumstances, two questions arise— first, In what degree the existing condition of the Jews, regarded as a fulfilment of prophecy, serves to prove the Divine inspiration of the Old and N ew Testaments ; and, secondly, In what degree, if at all, it should strengthen our faith in the ultimate and complete fulfilment of what has been predict- ed respecting that peculiar people. But, in order to our arriving at such a conclu- sion, in reference to these points, as all the circum- stances of the case are calculated to warrant, it is essential to consider whether any natural account can be given of the existing condition of the Jews, or whether, in the absence of such natural causes as might serve to account for it, we must not IS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR. 204 ascribe it to such a peculiar interposition of pro- vidence as renders it in some sense miraculous. Certain it is, that their existence as a separate people, after they have been so long dispersed among the other nations of the earth,—without any land or dwelling-place which they could call their own, as a bond of mutual connexion,—- forms a very extraordinary case in the history of the human race ;—a very short period, compara- tively, seems to have completely incorporated other nations with the people among whom they were dispersed. — | | | It is not very difficult, indeed, to account for the Jews having continued a distinct race during the Babylonish captivity; for, as that captivity did not endure longer than about seventy years, it is natu- ral to suppose that the generation, which had been carried away from Judea, had not become altoge- ther extinct, till about the time of their posterity returning to the land of their fathers ; and, for so short a period as seventy years, it could not be very difficult to trace the history of every separate family, including all its connexions and descend- ants. But very different is the case which now presents itself. Considering the length of time which has elapsed, since the Jews were last remo- ved from their own land,—any registers which they R 258 WOW THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE JEWS may have endeavoured to keep must have been exposed to such innumerable hazards, and they must have had such inducements to put an end to all remembrance of their separate origin, by inter- marriage with other nations,—the various coun- tries, so distant from each other, over which they have been scattered, must have rendered their mu- tual communication so difficult and imperfect,— their condition, in all respects, must have involved such obstacles to their continuing as a separate people,—that any mind, which could have looked forward to these obstacles, must have pronounced them insurmountable, In what way, then, are we to account for the undeniable fact—that, dispersed as they have been over all the nations of the civilized world, they still remain as much one distinct people as when they inhabited the land of Judea,—and a people, we have cause to believe, not less numerous than they were in their most prosperous state as a nation ? Are there any circumstances, peculiar to them as a people, which will naturally account for these things ? They were originally distinguished from other nations by a ceremonial law, and a corresponding ritual service, to which they still religiously ad- IS TO BE ACCOUNTED For. 259 here. Can it be that their attachment to these has been so strong as to prove a bond of union which nothing could dissolve ?— While they were in their own land, the institutions to which I now refer were regarded by them as a grievous burden. —Even after the Babylonish captivity,—though they appear to have been less prone, than former- ly, to idolatrous worship, and consequently stead- fast in their observance of the Mosaic ritual,—it was still spoken of as a yoke which neither they nor their fathers could bear. So far, therefore, as the memory of their origin, and their designation as a separate people, could impose on them, after their dispersion, an obligation to the ceremonial law, one would suppose that they might have been induced rather to bury in oblivion, than sedulous- ly to keep in mind, all that tended to distinguish and separate them from the other nations of the earth. | Perhaps more influence may be fairly ascribed to the hope which they have entertained of being restored in a national capacity to the land of their fathers. Hope is a powerful principle, and may have operated strongly as a bond of union. But we must not allow ourselves to suppose that their ground of hope in this case has been equal to that confidence in their ultimate restoration which Christians are warranted to entertain, As Chris- 260 THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE JEWS tians, we can account for their long-continued suf- fering, in a way which opens a natural prospect of their restoration, by enabling us to anticipate an event which may very naturally lead to it. Con- sidering that it is in this world only that men can be either rewarded or punished in their national capacity, we have good cause to ascribe the un- precedented suffering of the Jews, as a people or nation, to an act of unprecedented, and hitherto unrepented, national iniquity,—viz. that, as a na- tion, they had, “ with wicked hands, crucified and slain the only begotten Son of God.” We have, therefore, ground to suppose, that when, as a na- tion, they shall have repented of this unexampled atrocity, and shall, in consequence, embrace Christ as a Saviour, they may yet be restored to that favour with God, which was long their distin- guishing portion. But, in their present state of impenitence and consequent infidelity, it is altoge- ther impossible for themselves to take the same encouraging view of what awaits them as a people. They are themselves unable to account for the national punishment which they have so long en- dured.in’ any way which can open a reasonable ‘prospect of its termination. In their present state of mind, any reason which they can assign for their having been so long rejected of God, must leave them ground to fear that He whom they have HAS A MIRACULOUS ASPECT. 261 offended has cast them off for ever ;—and, in such circumstances, they must find it proportionally difficult to build their hope even on those promises of Old Testament Scripture, which, as Christians, we are strongly encouraged to interpret in a way favourable to their ultimate restoration. - I do not mean to say that, even in these circum- stances, they have not entertained a hope of being’ restored to the land of their fathers. But, if such a hope has contributed to their preservation, in the meanwhile, as a separate people, To what are we to ascribe the strength and the prevalence of this hope? Considering that, for the reasons which I have stated, their natural ground of hope was weak, and accompanied with much cause for de- spondency, To what is it possible for us to attri- bute its strength and prevalence within them, but to such a Divine and preternatural influence as imparts to the whole case a miraculous aspect ? Now, if upon these grounds, we be entitled to ascribe the continued existence of the Jews as a separate people to such a Divine interposition as appear's In some sense miraculous, it may well be considered as, in itself, very powerful evidence of the truth of Divine revelation ;—so far as a stand- ing miracle is compatible with the nature of things, what we have now traced may be regarded as pro= 262 THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE JEWS longing to the world the benefit of that evidence which results from miracles. But, as it is only in aid of the argument from prophecy that the case of the Jews is now before us, the immediate ques- tion is—Whether the miraculous aspect of their condition does not strengthen the evidence arising from those predictions of it which have been brought under our review. I do not say that either the Apostle Paul or the Prophets of the Old Testament foresaw such a long-continued dispersion of the Jews, as now renders it impossible to account for their having continued a separate people, without a peculiar interposition of Providence ;—I do not say, that the Prophets foresaw and foretold it, as an event which they knew was to be accomplished by mi- raculous agency. But is it to be held as nothing, in the scale of evidence, that the event, which they were enabled to foretell, involves in it a mi- raculous result ?. Does not this circumstance make it more obviously impossible that the precise event in question should have been foreseen by any hu- man sagacity ? Does it not even afford some indi- cation that they who foretold it, spoke or wrote under the influence of a more plenary inspiration than has been in other cases exemplified ? Does it not, in these views, impart additional strength A PLEDGE OF THEIR ULTIMATE RESTORATION. 263 to that evidence which results from the fulfilment of prophecy ? Leaving these questions to the judgment of the reader, I would now beseech him to consider more particularly—whether the existing condition of the Jews, as the result of a special interposition of Providence, ought not to establish our confi- dence in what has been farther predicted respect- ing them. For what other purpose than their re-establish- ment, at length, as a nation, can it be supposed that Providence has so interposed for preserving them in the meanwhile as a separate people ? It is not the way of God to do any thing in vain,— far less to control and supersede the ordinary course of human affairs, so remarkably as we have traced in the case before us, without a view to the accomplishment of some important purpose. The ultimate conversion of the Jews, as a peculiar people to whom the promises of the Messiah had been originally given,—their ultimate conversion, as a distinct race, to the faith and obedience of the Gospel, and their consequent re-establishment in their own land, as a distinguished portion of the visible church of God upon earth,—a triumph, so signal, of the once crucified but now glorified Redeemer of men, presents to the contemplative 264 CONSEQUENCES TO BE EXPECTED FROM THE mind an object of such paramount importance, as at once accounts fur any extraordinary interposi- tion which may have been necessary to prevent that people from being incorporated in the mean- while with other nations. But, without a view to this glorious event, no final cause whatever can be assigned for such an anomaly in the course of. Providence as their remaining, till now, a separate people. ‘The fact, as it presents itself to our bodily eyes, would, in this case, constitute an ex- ception from a rule which has been, hitherto, found applicable to all the ways of God. So far, at least, as-we can judge, it would be a miracle very different from any that has ever been known, or that ever will be exemplified,—for it would be a miracle without a purpose or object, and conse- quently inconsistent with an inviolable principle of the moral government of the Divine Being. It is not surely too much to say, that we have, in these circumstances, more than ordinary ground for confidence in the fulfilment of those prophecies which relate to the conversion and ultimate re- storation of the Jews as a people and nation ;—we have such a pledge for their fulfilment as never was given in any other case ;—we have a pledge which, in its nature, amounts to an anticipation of ultimate fulfilment, and in the meantime realizes that event to every believing mind. CONVERSION AND RESTORATION OF THE JEWS. 265 Yet greater and more glorious than the event itself, are the consequences to be reasonably ex- pected from it. It is well known that, in both the Old and New Testaments, there are prophecies of an ultimate and universal prevalence of the Christian faith. To these prophecies it is objected, that, whatever prospect there may have been in the early ages of Christianity, the slow progress—if progress there be-—which the Gospel now makes, forbids all hope of their fulfilment. But such reasoning may well be regarded as presumptuous. It obviously sets limits to what may hereafter be accomplished by Divine agency; and it proceeds, more particularly, on a supposition that the course of outward events is, at no period, to prove more favourable than it now is to a more extended propagation of the Gospel. Yet it should not be difficult to perceive, that the conversion and restoration of the Jews as a people and nation—an event for the fulfilment of which we have found that we have such a vist= ble pledge as no wiprejudiced mind can disregard, —may be fairly and reasonably expected to have a boundless effect in opening the eyes of men, even in “ the uttermost parts of the earth,” to per- ceive and acknowledge the truth of the Gospel. The visible accomplishment of a promise so early _given,—the preservation of the Jews as a separate 266 IMPORTANCE OF THE GREAT SCHEME OF PROPHECY people, so obviously with a view to the accom- plishment of that promise, and the illustrious na- ture of the long-expected event itself, regarded as the consequence of a Divine interposition,—the illustration which will be thereby afforded of the ways of God from the beginning,—of his truth and unchangeableness, and of the consequent con- sistency of all the dispensations of his providence, —may well be expected to have the effect of bringing all his rational offspring on earth to give glory to their Father in Heaven, and to his only begotten Son, as the more immediate Redeemer of our guilty race. IN the meantime, I trust that such views as have been presented of the great scheme of pro- phecy, relative to the salvation of men, and of its unequivocal fulfilment, so far as the progress of time has admitted, cannot fail to make an impres- sion on every unprejudiced mind.—Prophecy has not been much resorted to for evidence in support of any false religion. It has been declined by impostors, not only as a severe ordeal of their pretensions, but as too circuitous a mode of ac- complishing their purpose. However confident they may have been in their own Sagacity and FOR THE ULTIMATE PREVALENCE OF THE GOSPEL. 267 foresight, respecting any future and distant event, the very distance of the time at which they could have a chance of being found right in their con- jecture, has left them no hope of deriving from it that worldly advantage at which alone they aimed. But, for a reason in some sense corresponding to this, yet directly opposite, the wisdom of God has rested the evidence of the Christian revelation, in a great measure, on the fulfilment of prophecy. The benefit of men of all ages,—from the begin- ning to the end of time,—being equally the pur- pose and object of the Divine Being, the requisite postponement of an advantage has not been a rea- son, with him, against employing the best means of its being ultimately realized. A compensation was, in the meanwhile, to be made to those to whom he was pleased to reveal himself, by his affording to them, in various ways, more direct communications of his immediate presence. These communications were, in the course of Providence, to be discontinued, only in proportion to the de- gree in which the evidences of a standing revela- tion should be rendered more perfect. This object was to be accomplished, not only by means of a permanent and unchangeable record of the Divine counsel and will,—but, in connexion with that record, by the gradual fulfilment of prophecy. To us, accordingly, in these latter times, the evi- 268 IMPORTANCE OF THE GREAT SCHEME OF PROPHECY. dence arising from prophecy has acquired much increased importance ; and, when it shall have at- tained all the plenitude of its destined power, it will, I doubt not, be the great outward mean of putting an end to infidelity among men. r 269 7 CHART ile. Vv. THE PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL IN EARLY AGES, WHEN CONSIDERED IN ALL ITS CIRCUMSTANCES, SHOULD CONTRIBUTE STILL FARTHER TO SATISFY EVERY CANDID MIND THAT IT HAS TRULY PRO- CEEDED FROM GOD. I FORMERLY adverted to the propagation of the Gospel as a fulfilment of prophecy ; but we shall find that it also affords separate and more direct evidence of the Divine origin of the Christian faith. | To enable the reader, therefore, to estimate this evidence,—let us attend to the progress which Christianity made during its earliest ages,—to the peculiar circumstances in which it so prevail- ed,—to the outward means employed for that purpose,—-and to the inferences which we may fairly derive from these views of the case, either separately or combined. From the book of the Acts of the Apostles, and 270 RAPID AND EXTENSIVE from some passages in the Epistles of Paul, we learn that, within a very few years after the death of Christ, not only had many been converted to the Christian faith in Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria,—the Gospel had been preached, and embraced by multitudes, in the most considerable cities and provinces of both Asia and Europe,— in Antioch, Ephesus, and Galatia,—in Athens, Corinth, and Macedonia,—even in Rome, the capi- tal of the civilized world. But, if the testimonies, to which I now refer, be received with hesitation, as proceeding from friends of the Christian cause, it is fortunate that we have attestations of a similar and stronger im- port, proceeding from its avowed enemies. In proving the truth of the Gospel history, I had occasion to make quotations from the writings of Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny, in which they have borne undesigned testimony to the prevalence of the Gospel, (certainly undesigned so far as concerns any view to promote it,) both in the city of Rome, and in one, at least, of the provinces of the Roman Empire. We have seen that, in the history of the reign of Claudius, who became Em- peror of Rome only about seven years after the death of Christ, Suetonius represented the Chris- tians as a body so numerous as to have excited PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL. 271 the jealousy of the imperial government. We have also seen that, about 30 years after Christ’s death, Tacitus spoke of them as “ a vast multi- tude,” and that, about 50 years later, the young- er Pliny, in his celebrated letter to the Emperor Trajan, represented the prevalence of Christianity. to have been so great, in the province of which he was governor, that, for some time, the temples of heathen worship had been desolate, and its sacred rites neglected. While we have such a corroboration, from hea- then authors, of the scriptural testimony on this point, with reference to the apostolic age,—we find that subsequent, though uninspired, Christian writers, during the second century,—such as Jus- tin Martyr and Tertullian,—appealed, in language which publicly defied contradiction, to the preva- lence of Christianity in every country or nation, which was either subject to the Roman govern- ment, or had, through its means, become access- ible to those who preached the glad tidings of salvation. There has, indeed, been so general an admission of the rapid and extensive propagation of Chris- tianity in the ages to which I refer, that I should not think myself justified in detaining the reader by a more particular review of the testimonies by which it is verified. It is more necessary to con- 272 GOSPEL PROPAGATED UNDER THE EYE OF MEN. sider the cercumstances.in which the Gospel of Christ appears to have so remarkably prevailed. It will not be denied, that the age in which Christ appeared, was distinguished, as I formerly observed, by high attainments in human learning. Nor will it be pretended that, for a considerable time subsequent to his death, the world had so far lost this advantage, as not to be well qualified to form an estimate both of the doctrine which was preached in his name, and of the evidence by which its truth was established. Perhaps the advantage in question was more confined, than it now is, to the higher ranks of society. But this considera- tion cannot weaken our argument; for it is im- possible to suppose that, when the Gospel appear- ed to prevail, men of rank and influence could re- main inattentive to either its import or its claims. It is well known that, in fact, it commanded the attention of such men as had it in their power, in respect of both learning and influence, either to vindicate and uphold its truth, or to detect and expose its fallacy. We know that, by some men of this description, and not an inconsiderable num- ber, it was acknowledged and received as the doc- trine of God ;—and surely their profession of the Christian faith should have led others to refute, if it had been in their power, its pretensions to a WELL QUALIFIED TO DETECT IMPOSTURE. 273 Divine origin. It is impossible that the reader can, in this view, lightly regard the mention of such men, among the Jews, as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, both members of the Sanhedrim, with * a great company of the priests,” who, soon after the ascension of Christ, “ became obedient to the faith ;’—or, among other converts, the names of Sergius Paulus, a Roman proconsul ; Dionysius, a senator of Athens; PVavius, who suffered mar- tyrdom at Rome during his consulship; and Jas- tin Martyr, who, both before and after his conver- sion, approved himself one of the most learned of his age. With a knowledge that men like these avowed themselves believers in the doctrine ot Christ, and that others had an equal opportunity both of examining its claims, and of justifying their unbelief, we cannot possibly refuse to his religion the full credit of having been originally taught and propagated under the eye and obser- vation of many who were well qualified to detect imposture. Nor can the reader fail to perceive that, while the Christian doctrine, if founded in truth, had in this respect, a mighty advantage, it must be difficult indeed,—on the supposition of its being false,—to account for its being favour- ably received in such circumstances. _ While the learning of the age was calculated to S 274: THE GOSPEL MADE NO SACRIFICE discourage the attempts of an impostor, there was no countervailing advantage for the introduction. of any new and false religion. Among the differ- ent nations of the heathen world, the great mass of the people were attached to one or other of the systems of superstition which had long prevailed. Many of their superstitious rites, and the temples devoted to them, had the advantage of an outward splendour, which was calculated to dazzle and gra- tify an ignorant multitude. And, though there may have been learned and enlightened indivi- duals convinced in their own minds, of the vanity of the popular faith, and its accompanying wor- ship, it is not to be supposed that they would be inclined to exchange one superstition for another, or to renounce the religion of their fathers for any thing else, under the name of religion, which they did not believe to come from Heaven. Certain it is, that the Gospel held out to men no worldly advantage that could induce them to make such a change. Yet it is equally certain, that it openly and explicitly laid claim to, and de- manded, the exclusive faith and acceptance of men of all nations and languages. It offered no com- promise with any thing that was called religion among the heathen. It proclaimed, on the con- trary, a spiritual warfare against every system of TO CONCILIATE ANY WORLDLY MIND. 275 superstition which prevailed in the habitable world. Such pretensions and claims were obviously cal- culated to arm against it men of all nations who should not be convinced of its Divine origin. They were calculated to engage, in a simultaneous re- sistance,—in one extensive conspiracy for its sup- pression,—-the votaries of idolatrous worship in every country under heaven. , The preaching of the Gospel, accordingly, had this effect. The nations of the world had been, hitherto, forbearing to each other in matters con- nected with religion ; because nothing which, un- der the name of religion, prevailed in one nation, had laid claim to acceptance in another. But, from the time when Christ left the world, till his reli- gion became the predominant faith of the Roman empire and of those who reigned over it, the rulers of an idolatrous people continued to take counsel against the Lord and his Anointed, and did not fail to employ, for the accomplishment of their purpose, all the means which a persecuting spirit could suggest. From the New Testament we learn, that the persecution of the Christians had its beginning in Judea; and, though it seems to have originated in a popular impulse, it was systematically followed out at the instance of the rulers of the Jews. Saul, who was afterwards known under another 276 THE GOSPEL PROPAGATED IN THE FACE OF name as an Apostle of Christ, appears to have had authority for this purpose from the High Priest ; and we are told, that “ he made havock of the church, entering every house, and haling men and ‘women, committed them to prison.” In his own person also, he afterwards endured what he had beenso forward to inflict upon others; and, through- out his Epistles to different Churches, he makes frequent reference to the severe persecution with which they had been visited, and to the faith and patience with which they had sustained it. But the most particular account that we have of what the early Christians suffered on account of their religion, is furnished by heathen writers, who, as enemies of the Christian faith, cannot be suspected of a design to uphold its credit by any exaggerated statement. The same passages in the writings of Sueto- nius and Tacitus, by which we have proved the truth of the Gospel history, and the rapid propa- gation of the Christian faith, afford sufficient evi- dence of the persecution which Christians endured. Suetonius, indeed, only states generally, that, un- der the reign of Nero, “ the Christians were pu- nished with death,” as “a people addicted to a new and dangerous superstition.” But Tacitus acquaints us, in a passage already quoted, that Nero “ punished them with the most exquisite UNEXAMPLED PERSECUTION. ey. sufferings,’—that “ a vast multitude were made a sport of in their death, being covered with the skins of wild beasts, that they might be torn to pieces of dogs, or covered with inflammable mat- ter, and, when the daylight failed, hve were burnt to give light.”* Let it only be remembered, that it was in the face of such persecution that Christianity made the rapid progress of which we have found simi- lar evidence. So far from the torture inflicted having induced the great body of professing Christians to renounce their profession, the pa- tience and fortitude, with which they endured the most exquisite and protracted suffering, seem to have had the effect of gaining new converts to the Christian faith. It was in such circumstances that “ the word of God mightily grew and. pre- vailed.” Is it too much to conclude, from this view of the case, that the early Christians were sincere in their profession ? I am aware of its having been contended, that the pride and obstinacy of the human mind may induce a man to submit to death itself, rather than renounce a falsehood which he has long maintain- * Annal. xv. 278 THE SUFFERINGS OF THE EARLY CHRISTIANS ed. But does not this argument proceed on a supposition, that the man has been from the be- ginning conscious of falsehood, and has maintain- ed it for some sinister end or purpose, which it would disgrace him to acknowledge ? If this be the principle or ground of the argument,—In what possible way can it be applied to the case of the early Christians? By what sinister motive could they be influenced, at first, in avowing them- selves disciples of Christ ? It was impossible that they could have any worldly interest to serve by it; they could not, therefore, have any motive, originally, but a regard to truth, or to their spirit- ual and everlasting interest. In these circumstan- ces, if they had at length found themselves to have been deceived, there could not have been much disgrace in confessing it; nor is it very credible that any man would submit to death ra- ther than acknowledge a mere mistake, or misap- prehension, of which he had been at length con- vinced. Yet this is not the most decisive view which we may fairly take of the martyrdom of the early Christians. We may presume that many of them originally embraced Christianity with a distinct understanding that the profession of it was likely to subject them to severe persecution, if not to a premature and violent death. The close succes- A DECISIVE PROOF OF THEIR SINCERITY. 279 sion of persecuting measures, at the instance of the Roman emperors, during the first three cen- turies of the Christian era, fully justifies this pre- sumption. It seems impossible, indeed, to doubt, that during the second and third centuries, the greater number of converts must have made their first avowal of Christianity with a deliberate view to the hazards of persecution. ‘This considera- tion seems to be fatal to the argument in question as urged by the unbeliever ; for it is certainly gra- tuitous and unjustifiable to suppose, that the pride or obstinacy of the human mind was the cause of the early Christians patiently submitting to that suffering which they had contemplated from the beginning, as a price which they might, at any time, be called to pay for their adherence to the cause of Christ. - But, supposing that a few individuals might be suspected of maintaining, at the expense of their lives, what they knew to be a falsehood, and of doing so in circumstances which seem to render such conduct unaccountable,—Are we to make the same supposition in reference to all the innumer- able host of martyrs to the faith of the Gospel ? Before the persecution of Christianity was termi- nated, we have cause to believe that more than one half of the civilized world had become Chris- 280 NO GROUND TO SUPPOSE THAT tian ;—The number of individuals, who had, in the meanwhile, suffered in the cause of Christ, seems to have been incalculable; and even they _ who remained alive had not maintained their pro- fession without anticipating persecution. Is it really to be supposed that they all acted a part which is not to be accounted for upon any of the ordinary and recognised principles of human con- duct ? The supposition would involve an absur- dity. It will not, therefore, be easy for any man to controvert the conclusion, that the early Chris- tians were sincere in their profession. Yet it is not less certain that the sincerity of the earliest converts is very nearly sufficient evidence of the truth of what they believed,—inasmuch as it seems to have been very nearly impossible that they could themselves be deceived respecting it. We have seen that Paul, in several of his Epis- tles, makes reference to a great variety of miracles, which had been wrought by himself and others, among those to whom he wrote. The Christians, therefore, in his time, were not in the condition of men believing merely on the report of others, con- cerning the miracles which Christ himself had ori- ginally performed. They had the testimony of their own bodily senses respecting miracles which THE EARLY CHRISTIANS WERE DECEIVED. 281] continued to be wrought, for the purpose of proving his Divine mission, as well as the Divine mission of those who taught in his name. And it was al- most impossible that they could be deceived about the miracles in question ; for their number was not so limited as to admit of all the requisite means of deception being in every case employed. Nor was it in one city or country alone, or among one so- ciety of Christians to the exclusion of others, that such miracles appear to have been wrought. The Christians of one province had the advantage of comparing all that they had themselves seen with what their brethren, elsewhere, attested. The means of detecting imposture were in this way so multiplied as to afford nearly all the security against it, which the condition of human things seems to admit ; and if, in any one case, a cheat or imposition had been discovered, in no other could credit have been given to the authors of it. Still more unreasonable would it be to suppose that the earliest Christians were deceived, or their minds overpowered, by the reasoning or argu- ment employed for gaining them over to the faith of Christ. ‘The Apostles, with the exception of one, appear to have been comparatively illiterate 5 — Their assistants also in the ministry were, gene- rally speaking, of the same description. Their op- ponents, on the other hand,—the men who concei- 282 CONCLUSION TO BE DERIVED FROM ved that they had an interest in upholding the su- perstitions of the heathen world,—comprehended in their number all who were distinguished for learn- ing and eloquence, in an age which was itself dis- tinguished by unexampled attainments in -both. To this advantage they added all that influence over the minds of others which is the natural re- sult of high station, with its ordinary accompa- niments of wealth and power. Is it possible, in these circumstances, to ascribe the wonderful sue- cess of the new religion to any natural superiority which its teachers possessed ? Or, does not the propagation of the Christian faith, considered in this view, render it more obviously hopeless to attempt accounting for it on the supposition of its votaries having been deceived ? Yet, if we cannot account for the conduct of the early Christians, upon a supposition of their having been deceived, and have, at the same time, found it impossible to reject the evidence which they afforded of their sincerity, at what conclu- sion shall we arrive ? There seems to be no alter- native, but to admit that their teachers actually wrought miracles, and communicated to them the truths of God. There is, indeed, other and analogous ground FAITH AND PATIENCE OF EARLY CHRISTIANS. 283 on which the same conclusion seems to be una- voidable. For the inferiority of the Christian teachers, in respect of natural endowments, while it must have rendered hopeless any attempt at de- ception, also calls us to consider—whether it was possible for such men, without preternatural aid, even to have maintained the cause of ¢ruth, in opposition to the learning and eloquence, as well as worldly influence, with which they had to con- tend. To say the least, there is no example in the history of the world of any great object, how- ever just and laudable, having been accomplished by means so unlikely. In these circumstances, an admission of the re- ality of the miracles removes much difficulty. It enables us to perceive, that the teachers of Chris- tianity were furnished with a practical argument, addressed to the bodily senses of men, which it was impossible for any fair and candid mind to resist, and that, under the influence of the convic- tion thereby produced, the early Christians had the strongest motives to adhere to their profes- sion in the face of persecution. It even accounts, in a considerable degree, for the overwhelming disproportion between the success of the first teach- ers of Christianity, and that of the ministers of Christ in any subsequent age. _ 284, CONCLUSION TO BE DERIVED FROM Yet I should not be faithful to the cause of Christ, if I ascribed the rapid propagation of the gospel, and its permanent establishment in the world, to nothing else than the miracles in ques- tion. The miracles may account for its success, till persecution arose. But are they quite suffi- cient to account for its continued and rapid pro- pagation in defiance of persecution, and for the patience and fortitude with which its adherents chose to submit to death rather than to renounce the Christian faith ? The miracles might well con- vince those who beheld them of the truth of the Christian doctrine, and thereby impart to them the high advantage of sincerity in their profession. But was sincerity alone a sufficient pledge for their maintaining the profession of their faith, in defiance of such persecution as they appear to have endured? Or is it possible to account for such an in- numerable body of men and women—of all ages,— in all the various conditions of life,—and of mental endowments equally varied—having submitted to themost exquisite and lingering torture, from which they might have escaped by abjuring the Christian name,—without supposing that their resolution was immediately upheld by preternatural divine influence ? Had their conviction of duty only em- boldened them to meet a violent death in any of FAITH AND PATIENCE OF EARLY CHRISTIANS. 285 its more accustomed forms, perhaps human and unaided resolution might have been sufficient to account for it. But the representations, which are given us, of their suffering, considered in con- nexion with the incalculable number of victims, whose resolution and fortitude triumphed over all that the art of man could inflict, seem to forbid us to ascribe their conduct to any thing that is in the mind of man, unsupported by that Divine power, which can strengthen and enable him for all things. The world, in respect of its being present and visible,—the terrors with which it assails us, and the corresponding punishments which it is capable of immediately inflicting—have a mighty advan- tage, in point of influence, over all that is future and unseen. Notwithstanding the paramount im- portance of what awaits us hereafter, it is well known that the fear of death, or rather of the torture which may be inflicted before death can relieve us, has overcome the resolution and forti- tude of some men, who were not merely sincere in their Christian profession, but eminently distin- guished by strength of mind, as well as fortified by long experience of the power of religion. How, then, shall we account for an opposite result in circumstances far less favourable ?—How shall we account for the triumph of men who had no such advantages ? I say—men who had no such ad- 286 CONCLUSION TO BE DERIVED FROM vantages,—for, out of the multitude of martyrs to the faith of Christ, there must have been many who were not remarkable for either native ener- gy of mind, or any previous attainments which could fortify them in the hour of trial. Is it un- reasonable—is it not, on the contrary, most natu- ral—to regard their triumph as the effect of a Di- vine interposition, and consequently as affording i separate and undeniable evidence, that the cause in which they suffered was the cause of God— upheld by the power of God ? I am aware of its being almost a proverbial ob- servation, that persecution commonly defeats its own purpose. But there is nothing implied in this observation that weakens our present argu- ment. It is true, that persecution did, in some sense, defeat its own purpose in the very case to which I refer. But, strictly speaking, the purpose was defeated, not by the means of persecution em-_ ployed, but by the glorious and triumphant resist- ance of the men who were persecuted. It was the conduct which they maintained under persecution —the unshrinking determination of mind with which they adhered to their Christian profession in circumstances of such extraordinary trial—that called other men to consider more duly the claims of that faith by which they were actuated. The question before us, therefore, falls to be determined FAITH AND PATIENCE OF EARLY CHRISTIANS. 287 upon the ground of its separate and exclusive merits. Persecution may have often defeated its own purpose, when the natural powers of the hu- man mind were adequate to all the necessary re- sistance. Even in such cases, a sincere regard to truth may have been manifested, and may have had an effect to recommend the cause of its vota- ries ;—or, at least, the operation of a persecuting spirit may have excited the indignation of others, against those who dared to employ such means of accomplishing their object. But no discomfiture of a persecuting purpose, in the natural course of things, can affect the conclusion which we. may fairly derive from such a resistance to persecution as transcends any thing that can be ascribed to the unaided powers of man. The last is the case to which our attention is directed in the conduct of an incalculable number of early Christians ; and it does not seem to admit of any other solution than that their minds were upheld by the invisible, and, it may be, unrecognised, influence of Divine power. The man who duly considers—what it seems impossible to deny—that the Gospel of Christ, within the time to which I have referred, was ac- cepted and embraced by the great body of man- kind in all the nations of the civilized world,—that it was promulgated in an enlightened age, and gra- 288 CONCLUSION TO BE DERIVED FROM dually recommended itself to the learned as well as the unlearned of every class and condition,— that the men employed in its propagation were, generally speaking, illiterate, but boldly appealed, for the truth of what they taught, to the evidence of miracles, wrought by them in the most public manner, and under the eye of those to whom they preached,—that, so far from there being any thing in its doctrine that could recommend it toa world- ly mind, it inculcated many hard sayings, of which it was early complained that no man could bear them,—that it, notwithstanding, laid claim, from the beginning, to universal acceptance, and virtu- ally declared war against every other system of faith and worship which had prevailed among men,—that it thereby provoked the powers of the world to measures of the most determined hosti- lity,—that the early Christians were, in conse- quence, exposed to such persecution as had never before been exemplified, and yet maintained their Christian profession with such resolution and for- titude as we cannot reasonably ascribe to the hu- man mind, otherwise than as strengthened and upheld by Divine influence,—that their triumph over the world, in the hour of their departure from it, not only defeated the purpose of their perse- cutors, but engaged others to embrace a religion which so clearly manifested itself to be of God,— 18 THE ORIGINAL PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL. 289 that, in this way, the doctrine of a crucified Sa- viour continued to gain ground, till even the rulers of the earth, who had so violently opposed it, were prevailed on, by the force of truth, to become its friends and abettors,—The man who can delj- berately consider these things, without perceiving and acknowledging that the religion of Christ was an object of Divine protection, that it was main- tained and upheld by an interposition of Divine power,—or, without believing, in consequence, that its author was sent of God,—would not, I appre- hend, have believed though he had been an eye-~ witness of the resurrection of Christ from the state of the dead, uj i fF 290 J CHAPTER VI. THE EFFECT WHICH THE GOSPEL HAS PRODUCED ON THE HEARTS AND THE LIVES OF MEN CONCURS WITH EVERY OTHER VIEW OF THE CASE IN VINDICATING [T'S CLAIM TO A DIVINE ORIGIN. BEFoRE the manifestation of the Son of God, the wisest of men had combined their efforts to furnish the human mind with powerful and effec- tual motives to virtue; and, when the wisdom of man had been found unequal to this arduous task, the wisdom and the grace of God were reveal- ed in the Gospel of Christ for teaching us “ to live soberly, righteously, and godly.”—Does thie Gospel serve this invaluable purpose ? No question can be either more fair or more interesting. They, who at the beginning asserted the value and importance of the Christian faith, could only appeal to the powerful influence which it was calculated to have on human conduct. But, now that its efficacy has been in some measure tried, experience is the fairest test ;—The tree, saith Christ himself, is to be known by its fruit. PRACTICAL DESIGN OF THE GOSPEL. 291 Let us, therefore, inquire and consider in what degree the Gospel of Christ appears to serve its declared purpose, and whether the effect which. it appears to produce be such as justifies its claim to be regarded. as the “ power of God, and the wis- dom of God,” In respect of practical influence, the utmost that the Gospel promised, from the beginning, was a partial and progressive reformation in this world, to be perfected in a future state ; and the question —whether it appears to fulfil its promise—is of course to be determined by a comparative view of the morals of men, in two different situations,— on the one hand, that of wanting—and on the other, that of having—the advantage of the wis- dom and grace of God as revealed in the Gospel. But, in this inquiry, it is a matter of some diffi- culty to distinguish and ascertain the facts and circumstances, connected with either side of the comparison, on which our conclusion may be fair- ly established. It must not be supposed that the religion of Christ is strictly answerable for the character and conduct of all who call themselves by his name. If there be any considerable number of profess- ing Christians thereby induced to live “ soberly, 299 MEANS OF ASCERTAINING THE EFFECT righteously, and godly,” we are ina great measure called to ascribe the opposite conduct of others to a want of that belief or acceptance, which in the first instance constitutes a Christian, and which the Gospel so naturally demands, in order to its operating its effect on the human heart. But, while I lay claim to this ground of defence against those who might found an objection to my argument on the lives of some men who unwar- rantably call themselves by the name of Christ,— I should not do justice to his cause in the world, if I were to confine myself to such narrow ground. For, not only does the Gospel manifest its power in the life and character of all sincere Christians,— it extends its influence indirectly to a reformation of the world at large. When men even outward- ly profess a religion of such purity and excellence, they are in some measure deterred from an open violation of its precepts by a regard to consistency of conduct ; and that engaging example of virtue, which true Christians afford, has, at the same time, a powerful influence on others. If some respect- able members of society, actuated by Christian principles, be distinguished, for instance, by their deeds of charity, the humanity of others is there- by called forth and encouraged ; schemes of bene- ficence are more universally adopted; and, even on the side of virtue, the power of custom or fa- PRODUCED BY THE GOSPEL. 293 shion is found to be considerable. Yet the Gospel of Christ is, on this account, apt to lose, instead of gaining, credit with unthinking men ; for, in consequence of the general standard of moral con- duct being, by its means, advanced and improved, the difference is less conspicuous between the man- ners of the true Christian and those of the world around him. dee: It is also important to consider that we should do injustice to the Christian faith, if, in appre- ciating its practical influence, we were to proceed upon a comparison between the general character of professing Christians and that of other people, in our own times, who do not profess the Gospel. For the Mahometan faith, which in this case would come into question, was devised by one who had the advantage of au acquaintance with the Chris- tian Revelation; and any degree of power which it may possess, as a principle of virtuous action, may be justly ascribed to what it has borrowed from the Gospel doctrine. The fairest and most effectual way of ascertain- ing the measure of credit which is due to the Gos- pel of Christ, in respect of its reforming the morals of men, is by a faithful comparison of the general state of moral character in the Christian world, with the state of moral character, in circumstances 294. STATE OF MORAL CHARACTER otherwise similar, before the Christian doctrine was revealed. There are, at the same time, bounds which may be set to any such inquiry, so far as concerns the heathen world; for there is a limited sphere, be- yond which it is obvious that we should inquire im vain. Their religious rites do not appear to have been devised with much view to moral improvement ; some of them, it is well known, were subservient to licentiousness and debauchery. The schools of philosophy, on the other hand, were frequented only by afew. The writings of the learned, had they been more adapted to the capacity of the multitude, were little, if at all, within their reach. There were no stated and public means of moral instruction, similar to what the preaching of the Gospel affords, extending their advantages, as it does, to men of every condition. ‘There was no universally acknowledged standard of moral duty, similar to what the Scriptures contain, open to the examination of all men. However honourable may have been the labours of the heathen sage, to the great body of mankind they were certainly unprofitable. It is, therefore, altogether unna- tural to suppose that we should find the moral character of the lowest ranks of society in the IN THE HEATHEN WORLD. 295 heathen world, superior to that of the few who alone had advantages for its improvement. It is to the well-educated classes alone that we may rea- sonably look for any favourable view of heathen morals. Yet, in reference to the wisest and most learn- ed of the heathen, it may also abridge our re- search to keep in mind the extent of the morality which was inculcated in their writings, as direct- ing us to a point beyond which we should look in vain. | | It is well known that many of those virtues, which chiefly adorn the Christian character, were scarcely, if at all, recognised in their systems of moralduty,—far less inculcated with the confidence and decision which are so necessary in the case of lessons that are to influence human’ conduct. In vain do we search their writings for any just les- sons of repentance and purity of heart, or of that humble, and meek, and forgiving spirit, which, in the character of man, as in the sight of God, is an ornament of so great price. On the other hand, we find evidence of the most perverted moral sentiment in the base characters under which the great body of the people were encouraged to contemplate some of the gods whom they worshipped. It is natural to imitate those 296 STATE OF MORAL CHARACTER whom we admire and adore; yet certain it is that, if the character of men in the heathen world was formed on that of their imaginary deities, the standard of human as well as divine perfection, must have been low indeed. Even the melancholy representation, so shocking to the feelings of a Christian, which the Apostle Paul has given, of the manners of the heathen,* need not, in this view, surprise us; nor can it be matter of wonder that the Apostle himself has traced their gross abominations to the very cause at which I now point,—that of their having “ changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man.” | The Apostle’s language on this subject was ad- dressed to men who had been practically conversant with the case to which he referred. Had his re- presentation been unfounded, it is impossible to suppose that they should have acquiesced in it, and have given him credit for a regard to truth in what he otherwise taught and inculcated. Nor do we any where find such an opposite represent- ation of the character of the heathen, as can give us ground for calling in question the Apostle’s statement. The descriptions, indeed, which heathen writers * Nom. chap. i. IN THE HEATHEN WORLD. 297 have given of the virtue of men like themselves, are In some instances deceitful. A little attention enables us to perceive, that what they exhibit as virtue is rather vice in disguise,—that what is pre- sented to us as proof of a noble mind, has, in fact, proceeded from ferocious passions, which refused to be controlled—Yet more painful is it to reflect on the degree of wickedness, by which many pro- minent individuals of the heathen world were un- questionably characterised. Upon this point, the historical evidence of which we are possessed,— while it is unequivocal,—is at the same time so generally known, that it would be an abuse of both the time and the patience of the reader to euter into any detail of it. What, then, has Christianity done for us ?—It was certainly to be expected that the sublime and elevating views which it presents, should produce some salutary effect; —And, though Christians have ereat cause to take shame to themselves, indivi- dually, for not having szfficiently profited by their advantages, God hath not revealed himself in vain, but hath, in fact, as well as in promise, taught men to live more “ soberly, righteously, and godly.” If the Gospel of Christ has recommended such purity, and humility, and meekness, and charity, 298 SALUTARY INFLUENCE OF THE GOSPEL as were not duly recognised by unassisted reason, it has not been without effect. However lament- able be, the wickedness which has still prevailed, the Christian world has never been without men, who have been enabled, through Divine grace, to adorn, by these peculiar virtues, the doctrine of their God and Saviour; nor has their example ever been without its influence on the mind and temper of others. If impurity and hatred and re- venge still lurk in the heart,—at least they dare not, as in former times, stalk abroad in the face of day, and justify themselves to the world. Ac- knowledging, as it were, that their deeds are evil, they come not to the light, lest they be reproved. It is impossible, indeed, to question the efficacy of the Gospel, in respect of some of its distinguish- ing virtues; for the law of Christ, in regard to them, has so far recommended itself, as to be em- braced and sanctioned by human institutions, which confessedly regulate the conduct of men. The polygamy and the arbitrary divorce, which prevailed in the heathen world, having been for- bidden by Christ, the laws of Christian nations have, in that department, adopted the principle, and enforced the practice, of the Christian system ; —and, by its interposition in this single case, the Gospel has done more than the wisdom of the iN SOME DEPARTMENTS UNQUESTIONABLE. 299 learned, and the authority of the powerful, had before accomplished for improving and perfecting the condition of social life. It has both secured and augmented the domestic virtue, and conse- quently the domestic happiness, which constitute so large a portion of the virtue and happiness which are chiefly within the sphere of all men. | The Christian law of Charity, also, as opposed to hatred and revenge, has manifested its power in a way equally unequivocal; for, throughout the Christian world, it is, in like manner, virtual- ly recognised by the law and the practice of na- tions. The destructive principle, which renders evil for evil, with no better view than to gratify hatred and revenge, had prevailed among nations as well as individuals. Not only does it appear to have prevailed in the ancient world; even in our times, nations which have not received the Gospel, still appear to act upon it in the prosecu- tion of national hostilities. It is impossible to ac- count otherwise for that inhumanity towards cap- tives in war, which they both practise and avow. But, among Christian nations, not only is an op- posite principle avowed,—their practice in a great measure corresponds to it. That Christian for- bearance, which so generally deters its votaries from whatever would aggravate the. sufferings of the individual foe,—that Christian brotherly kindness which, in the midst of all that would exasperate 300 OBJECTION TO THE SLOW PROGRESS OF the heart, often seeks to alleviate individual suffer. ing,—and that broad principle of Christian chari- ty, which effectually teaches the conqueror to treat the captive with the respect which misfortune claims,—have already, in the view of the obser- ving mind, erected a monument to the honour of the Christian faith,—the magnitude and glory of which will continue to increase, till the art of war shall be no longer taught among men. Shall J, notwithstanding, be allowed no credit for asserting, that the same virtues do also, in a considerable degree, bind the consciences of Chris- tians in the more private intercourse of life? The unbeliever may, if he will,refuse this admission — But, if he lives in the Christian world, and mingles in its society, his own experience should convict him of injustice to the Christian name ;—it may well convict him of ingratitude for the blessings Which he actually derives from the influence of these virtues on the society in which he mingles, It may perhaps be objected to the conclusion at which I would arrive,—that, in the great work of reforming the world, the progress of the Gospel is slow,—that the spiritual disease, which it is intended to cure, has still a deep root in the con- stitution of men,—and that a remedy, of more powerful effect, would have more clearly indicated THE GOSPEL IN REFORMING THE WORLD. 301 the skill and capacity of a Divine physician. But would it not be unreasonable that the Gospel of Christ should be held answerable for the accom- plishment of more than it promises? Its ut- most promise (as I already observed) does not ex- tend to more than a partial and progressive re- formation in this world, to be perfected in a future state ; and, when a blessing so great is bestowed, it does not become men, who are the objects of it, either to reject or despise it on account of its not being greater. This consideration appears to me to afford a sufficient answer to the objection in question. But Tam not the less willing to give all the additional satisfaction in my power to any sincere inquirer after truth. It was, no doubt, in the power of that Infinite Being, to whom all things are equally easy of ac- complishment, to restore the human race, at once, and without any co-operation of natural means, to the original perfection and happiness of their nature. But, if we only keep in mind that, in reference to this world, God is ordinarily pleased to employ natural means for the accomplishment of his purposes,—and consider, at the same time, the extent of that benevolent design which the Gospel is intended to promote,—if we duly keep 302 GRADUAL MANNER IN WHICH GOSPEL OPERATES in mind—what the Scriptures plainly intimate— that the condition of the saints in a future state is to be permanent and unchangeable, and that the design of the Gospel is to prepare men for that unchangeable state,—we shall, perhaps, find reason to conclude that the gradual manner in which it operates, so far from weakening its claim. to a Divine origin, affords a separate and striking illustration of the wisdom and the grace of its Divine Author. I am aware that, in bringing forward this view of the subject, I am treading on delicate ground ; for that curiosity, which would induce men to pry with eagerness into the motives of the Divine conduct, and to hazard conjectures. respecting them, when no good purpose is to be thereby ser- ved, may well be regarded as presumptuous. But, if our inquiry proceed from a sincere desire to attain greater satisfaction and assurance of mind respecting the way of salvation which God hath revealed, and be, at the same time, conducted with modesty, it cannot, I trust, be with reason condemned. | Under these conditions, therefore, let us, for a moment, inquire—whether the preparation of our nature for a state of unchangeable bliss was likely to be best effected by a sudden restoration to its ACCOUNTED FOR. 803 original purity, or by the slow and progressive operation of the Gospel. If we may judge from the information com- municated to us respecting the intelligent offspring of God, it appears that, of all the wayward. pas- sions, it is pride that can gain the easiest and ear- liest admission to intellectual and moral agents in a pure and happy state, and that this is also the passion most directly incompatible with that Divine intercourse, on which their perfection and happiness depend. A proud desire of independ- ence on Him who had created them, appears to have been the essence of that sin by which angels fell. For this reason, the Apostle Paul represents a man’ “lifted up with pride as falling into the condemnation of the devil ;”*—And, accordingly, the devil still appears to assert his equality with God, by soliciting or tempting others to worship him rather than God. It is also to pride, in par- ticular, that we are directed to trace that disease of the human soul, which the Gospel of Christ is intended to remedy. It was, by infusing into the heart of one of the parents of our race, a proud desire to be as God, that the devil appears to have seduced them into their first transgression. Is it, in these circumstances, unnatural to sup- * Ist Tim, chap. iil, ver. 6. 304 GRADUAL MANNER IN WHICH GOSPEL OPERATES pose, that the remedy, which the Gospel prescribes, should have a special reference to pride as the origin of evil? If such a spirit of humility must now be cultivated in men as shall preclude, for ever, all tendency to a passion which would again deface the image of God in our nature, may it not be necessary that some peculiar means be employed ——accommodated to that particular purpose? In connexion with other means so accommodated, with which the Gospel of Christ seems to abound, may it not be essential that the recovery of the human soul, from the ravages which pride had committed, should be, in this world, gradual and slow ? A sudden restoration to the perfection and bliss, which we had lost, might have an effect similar to what is produced by the indulgence of a fond but injudicious earthly parent towards a child who is ever offending and ever forgiven, without being rendered duly humble for his past folly and presumption. But the discipline, through which Christians have to pass in this world,— the various troubles which here accrue to us from the present disordered state of our moral frame, and the imperfect success of our best endeavours to recover the perfection and happiness of our na- ture,—are well calculated to correct every tend- ency to that proud and froward spirit, with which Wwe are so unhappily infected, and even to clothe ACCOUNTED FOR, 305 us with humility—with that permanent character: of humility, which appears so essential to a future state of permanent perfection and bliss. Let me only present the case in another, me strictly analogous, view. | It is well known, in regard to the concerns of this world, that any possessions or advantages, of which we have never felt the want, are apt to be undervalued. Even those which have once been lost through our own folly, if they be quickly and easily recovered, are still, perhaps, regarded less than their importance demands ; and our anxiety to maintain and preserve them is proportionally less eager. But, when we have leng suffered un- der the want of any worldly comfort, and have laboured hard for its recovery,—if we be again blessed with the possession, it loses no part of its value in our estimation ;—the contrast between our present aud our former condition, opens our eyes to much of its excellence which would other- wise have escaped our notice; and our attention to preserve it is proportionally watchful, constant, and durable. Similar to what I thus represent have been, and are likely to be, the feelings and conduct of men in regard to their spiritual possessions. Origin- ally holy and happy, and having never felt the U 806 GRADUAL MANNER IN WHICH GOSPEL OPERATES want of that delight which resulted from a con- formity to the will of God,—the parents of our race allowed the pleasures of sin to come in com- petition with it; and the preference which they gave too clearly manifested that they were not duly sensible of the value of their first possession. — How, then, or in what way, were they, and we also, as their sinful offspring, to be restored to. our forfeited perfection and happiness ? Though the Divine Being still looked upon us with the pity and the distinguishing love of a father,—such an immediate restoration as it was, no doubt, in his power to accomplish, might have been incon- sistent with the natural means of impressing us with such a sense of its value as to qualify us for a permanent and unchangeable state. If we must now be taught more highly to value, and more duly to maintain, that conformity to the Divine Image to which we shall yet be restored, any re- covery of our disordered frame, produced without labour and difficulty on our part, could but little operate as a natural mean of advancing this de- sign of Heaven. But, left for a time to feel and lament the prevalence of indwelling sin,—Stimu- lated by the strongest motives to contend against its power,—deriving from Heaven such measures of Divine aid, as serve to cherish our hopes and invigorate our endeavours, but never in this world ACCOUNTED FOR. 807 completely to fulfil our wishes,—struggling, there- fore, with the weakness of our nature, and slowly advancing in our arduous work,—yet at length attaining, by the grace of God, the whole object of our unwearied desire in the blessed mansions above,—we shall never account ourselves able to value, sufficiently, that perfection and_ bliss ‘to ‘ which we are restored,—we shall never forfeit or lose our renewed possession. How far a more direct and immediate Divine influence may be necessary, even in a future world, for maintaining and increasing, in the saints, the constituents of that glory and happiness in which they shall be reinstated, is a matter which rises far above the sphere of our inquiry. But, instead of our objecting to the Divine origin of the Gos- pel of Christ, on account of its influence being slow and progressive, it may well delight us to trace, in this very circumstance, such a co-opera- tion of natural means, as may be fairly accounted an earnest of whatever else shall be found neces- sary for maintaining us hereafter in a state of un- changeable bliss. It must be delightful to know that our nature is now receiving, from the hand of its original Creator, such gradual but certain improvement as may prevent any tendency again to degenerate,—and that He who thus operates 308 GOSPEL THE REMEDY OF AN ALL-WISE PHYSICIAN. on the human frame, is not less able than willing to accomplish and perfect his mighty work. -In all the views which have now been present- ed, the Gospel of Christ appears to be such a re- medy for our spiritual disease as might be expect- ed to proceed from an All-wise Physician. Lven_ to our minds, when aided in their research by those views which divine revelation suggests, the very circumstances connected with its practical effect, which might otherwise have led us to ques- tion its Divine origin, approve themselves to be the power of God, and the wisdom of God, for the everlasting salvation of immortal souls. cf 309 4 CHAPTER, VII. THERE IS NO GROUND TO SUPPOSE THAT THE RELIGION OF CHRIST COULD HAVE BEEN MORE EFFECTUALLY ESTABLISHED BY ANY OTHER EVIDENCE THAN WHAT JIAS BEEN AFFORDED} NOR COULD MORE OVERPOWER-= ING EVIDENCE HAVE BEEN GIVEN, CONSISTENTLY WITH THE CONDITION OF MEN IN THIS WORLD, AS A STATE OF TRIAL AND DISCIPLINE, THis part of my argument may be regarded as partly gratuitous. If avowed unbelievers can shew no cause for denying the sufficiency of the evidence by which the Divine mission of Christ is supported,—-so far as concerns them, there might be an end of the question before us; for to de- mand, in any case, more evidence than what ap- pears to be sufficient, is obviously unreasonable. But it is not less certain that the demand is made —secretly if not avowedly—even by men who would not be understood as altogether rejecting the doctrine of the Gospel. As a justification of themselves for remaining in a state of doubt re- 310 DEMAND FOR STRONGER EVIDENCE specting its divine origin, they, in their own minds, argue that, were it really the doctrine of God, its truth might have been made more manifest, and that a gracious Being would not have withheld the strongest and most perfect evidence. The hesitation, with which this argument may, at first, be employed, affords no security against their re- curring to it, just as often as their consciences would convict them of any thing that is eminent- ly inconsistent with the profession and obligations of a Christian. ‘There is even cause to fear that, after a long life of such hesitation, many have left the world in the same state of mind. Yet it may, in the first instance, be fairly ques- tioned, whether stronger evidence could have been given. At the least, I think it very improbable that any man could have previously imagined to himself a combination of evidence, either so un- exceptionable in its different parts, or so perfect and conclusive in an aggregate view, as that to which our attention has been directed. We have found that the external evidence com- prehends miracles, not only of power, but also of knowledge ; and it 1s not easy to imagine any other way in which direct and external evidence could have been afforded. I doubt, at the same time, whether miracles of knowledge may not be, to the reflecting mind, the more convincing of the CONSIDERED. 311 two. But I admit that a miracle of power may, at the moment of its being wrought, have the greater effect ; and I am inclined to think, that when the unbelieving or the hesitating mind calls for more evidence, it secretly points at some over- whelming manifestation of Divine power. In what way, then, was this demand to be com- plied with ? Was there any way in which divine agency could be more unequivocally manifested, than by recalling to life, and all the functions of life, men who had passed under the power of death ? Or was there any way in which the re- ality of such a miracle could be made more certain and obvious than it was in the case of Lazarus, and in that of Christ himself? I am aware that the Resurrection of Christ is the very case in which the plea for stronger evi- dence has been most plausibly urged; and I am not unwilling to examine what has been advanced upon this point, as a specimen of what the unbe- lieving mind may suggest. Nor do I feel that it could have been previously adverted to, with so good effect, as under this division of the general argument ; for the greater part of my reply will be found applicable,—not to the case of the resurrec- tion alone, but to the demand for evidence in any 12 QUESTION WHETHER ANY OTHER EVIDENCE Se) department, stronger than that which has been afforded. At has been argued, that upon the supposition of Jesus having risen from the state of the dead, it was most naturally to be expected that he would appear to all the people, and particularly to the Jewish rulers, whom it was peculiarly important to convince, because their testimony in his favour, regarded as the testimony of enemies, would have been the most convincing to the world. On the other hand, it is distinctly admitted, that Christ, after he had risen, did not appear “ to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead ;” *__and, in consequence of this ad- mission, the objection in question presents itself the more readily to those who are conversant with the Christian Scriptures. But such a voluntary and candid statement of the fact certainly calls for a proportionally candid attention to the solution of any difficulty which the case may involve ; aud I trust that such attention will not be given in vain. It is presumed, in the first place, by the objec- * Acts, chap. x. ver. 41, WAS LIKELY TO BE MORE EFFECTUAL. 315 tors, that the appearance of Christ “ to all the people” would have strengthened the evidence of the resurrection. But this argument obviously proceeds on a supposition that the evidence and certainty of an event must be proportioned to the number of those who bear testimony to it. The first question, therefore, is, Whether this supposition of the objectors be fully warranted ? May I not rather be justified m abiding by what J formerly said,—that the testimony of a limited number of witnesses (perhaps, as in the case of the resurrection, not less than five hundred) afiords as perfect evidence as could be afforded by any inultitude whatever ? If there be a doubt respecting the answer to this question, another as naturally presents itself ; _—Would the appearance of Christ to all the people, after he had actually risen, have brought out, in support of the fact, any unanimous and decisive testimony from the multitude, to whom he might have so appeared? Of such a multitude there must have been some who had never seen him be- fore his death, and could, therefore, bear no testi- mony. Even of those who had seen him, there must have been many who had but a very imper- fect recollection of his appearance. Is it not high- ly probable that, in the minds of individuals of this latter class, there might have been doubt and 314 QUESTION WHETHER ANY OTHER EVIDENCE hesitation, if not directly opposite opinions, re- specting the great question— Whether the person said to be risen from the dead was the same whom they had formerly beheld 2? And if so—Would not their contradictory testimony have weakened, instead of strengthening, the evidence which was actually afforded ? | It may be said, indeed, as I have already hinted, that the testimony of the Jewish rulers, consider- ed as enemies of Christ, would have been more satisfying than that of his friends ;—and I have no indisposition to admit that all the five hundred, who are said to have seen him at once, may have been his friends, or believers in him before his death. But is it certain that his appearance to the Jewish rulers would have prevailed on them to bear testimony to his resurrection ? Or is there not cause to apprehend that their prejudices against him and his doctrine, and a regard to their worldly interest, as likely to be affected by the establishment of his religion, would have harden- ed their minds against an acknowledgment of the truth ? I am far from supposing that all the rulers of the Jews were alike unprincipled and dishonest. Some of them, we know, received Christ as a Sa- viour, upon the evidence which was afforded. But is there ground to suppose that they, who resisted WAS LIKELY TO BE MORE EFFECTUAL. 315 such evidence, would have acknowledged him, im consequence of his appearing to them from the state of the dead? It must be remembered that, in the case of the resurrection of Lazarus, these men had rejected the same evidence, or very near- ly the same, which the objectors presume would have afterwards proved effectual; for Lazarus, after his resurrection, seems to have returned to | all his ordinary intercourse with the world, and was, in consequence, visible to all who had any desire of seeing him. It is obvious, in these cir- cumstances, that so far as the resurrection of La- zarus had been without effect, it was not because the evidence of it had been imperfect, but because there was nothing in the case calculated to abate that hostility to Christ, which, in the minds of the Jewish rulers, arose from a hatred of his doc- trine, and a well-founded opinion that 1t was op- posed to their worldly interest. ‘The natural con- clusion, therefore, is, that the resurrection of Christ himself, in whatever way it had been evi- denced, would have produced as little effect, with- out their minds being prepared to make some sa- crifice both of their prejudices and their worldly interest to the cause of truth. Such a prepara- tion of mind was manifested on the part of those who actually received Christ as a Saviour. They did not receive him without sufficient evidence ; 316 QUESTION WHETHER ANY OTHER EVIDENCE but, witile evidence was afforded, they had also the indispensable advantage of being willing to admit aud acknowledge the truth, at the expense of all the sacrifice which was required. On the other hand, they who rejected the Saviour assigned a reason for their conduct which would have been just as valid, though, to each of them individually, he had appeared from the state of the dead,—and a reason which, under the influence of corrupt hearts, may have had the effect of partly deceiving themselves, so as to lull their consciences asleep. They do not appear to have denied the reality of Christ’s miracles ; but they ascribed them to the agency of the devil, with whom they maintained that he was in league for defeating the cause. of God in the world; and it is manifest that the same argument would have remained to them, in all its supposed strength, though they had actual- ly seen and handled a risen Saviour. Dismissing, however, from our view, all that is peculiar to the case of the resurrection of Christ, —and supposing it a possible thing that such evi- dence of his Divine mmission, as would have brought all the Jewish rulers to believe in him, might have been, in one way or other, afforded to them in particular,—-Let us consider what would have been the consequence. | WAS LIKELY TO BE MORE EFFECTUAL, 317 It is not impossible that, through their influ- ence, the great body of the Jewish nation might have outwardly acknowledged Christ as a messen- ger from Heaven; and I shall not inquire too strictly whether he would, in this way, have gained a greater number of ¢we disciples, than he obtained without any such aid. But, had he been at once and cordially acknowledged through- out all the land of Judea, what effect would it have had on the evidence of his Divine mission, as presented to other nations, and other gene- rations of men? This is the great question ;— for in regard to the Jews in particular, whether rulers or people, it will scarcely be maintained that they had, on their own account, a right to be favoured with greater evidence than what was to be allowed to the world at large. There could be no good reason for granting such a distinguish- ing favour to them, unless their reception of the Christian doctrinewas tohave the effect of strength- ening the evidences of Christianity to others. Yet we shall find, on the contrary, that more over- powering evidence of Christ’s Divine mission,—in whatever way it might have been at first afford- ed,—that any such overpowering evidence as could have prevailed on the great body of the Jewish nation at once to receive and acknowledge him,— would have been extremely unfavourable to both 318 QUESTION WHETHER OVERPOWERING EVIDENCE the more extended propagation, and the ultimate maintenance, of his religion. Hated, as the Jewish nation had been, by all around them, and chiefly on account of a religious distinction,—their unanimous acceptance of Christ, so far from recommending his cause to others, would have excited a strong and universal suspi- cion of a concerted design among the Jews to de- ceive the nations, with a view to promote their own national aggrandizement. ‘The opposition which the rulers had, for a time, given to him and his doctrine, would have been regarded as nothing else than a cunning device to cover their ultimate design, and thereby to procure greater credit to the testimony which they were at length to give in his favour. Not only would his doctrine and its evidences have been represented as delusive, it would have been more difficult, in this case, to provethe contrary; for nothing serves more strong- ly to establish the truth of his Divine mission, than the zeal with which his enemies persevered in their attempts to detect imposture, even in the procedure of his Apostles after his own ascension to Heaven, and the complete failure of these at- tempts in circumstances which afforded every op- portunity for detection. Even upon the unlikely supposition, that una- WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ULTIMATELY INJURIOUS. 319 nimity among the Jews in their acceptance of Christ had produced a corresponding unanimity, _at the time, among other nations, succeeding ge- nerations of men, and we, more particularly, in these latter times, would have been only left the more at a loss how to form any decided opinion concerning the pretensions and the doctrine of one, whose cause the powers of the world had, at the beginning, so combined to support, as to prevent either his character or his mission from undergo- ing that severe scrutiny by which truth is most effectually ascertained. ‘Those men who have no good will to a doctrine so pure and holy as that of Christ, would have had too plausible a pretence for alleging—what they have alleged without any such ground—that the Christian faith had been, in its origin, nothing else than a fraudulent inven- tion of designing statesmen, who had combined to impose it on the nations of the earth, for the purpose of keeping the multitude in awe. It is only that opposition which Christianity so long experienced from the powers of the world, that now effectually defends it against such a charge; and it is chiefly to the backwardness of men—of the Jews in particular—at first to ac- knowledge its truth,—it is to that scrupulous exa- mination which its evidences, in consequence, un- derwent, that.we are indebted for the comfortable * & 320 OVERPOWERING EVIDENCE NOT CONSISTENT assurance that they who, at the beginning, recei- ved it, were not likely either to be themselves de- ceived, or to transmit an imposture to others. In these circumstances, it is manifest that more overpowering evidence of Christ’s Divine mission must have been unfavourable to the permanent maintenance of his religion, so far as it was to de- yend on either the means or the way and manner of its original establishment,—in short, that such overpowering evidence must have proved ulti- mately injurious to the cause of Christ, unless re- newed communications of similar evidence had been repeatedly and frequently made to every ge- neration of men, and to every people or nation under heaven, who had once received the faith of the Gospel. Whether it was possible that overpowering evi- dence should have been so continued, by miracu- lous agency, may at least admit of a question ; for if miracles had been so common as the case would lave required,they would the less have distinguish- ed themselves, to the eye of the outward obser- ver, from what must have happened in the ordi- nary course of nature ; and certain it is, that any such application and use of overpowering evidence whether compatible or not with the nature of things—would have been incompatible with the WIPH THE MORAL GOVERNMENT OF Gop, 321 moral government of God, and the condition of -men in this world as a state of probation. Were that evidence of invisible things which is presented to the human mind, as complete and perfect as the evidence, which our eyes or our ears afford, for the existence and the nature of the material objects around us, We could no more avoid believing, than we can avoid seeing or hearing ;— our believing would be no proof of our fairness and candour in accepting and sustaining evidence, nor any proof of our not hating the truth which is revealed to us. Our faith, becoming a matter of necessity or compulsion, would not be entitled to those praises which are bestowed upon it; for it would not be, in itself, a principle of any moral excellence. But, under the influence of such evi- dence, as we actually have, for the truth of divine things,—evidence calculated to convince and satis- fy, but not to overpower and compel the mind,— our belief or unbelief is a fair criterion of our in- tegrity. In consequence of there being room left for objections of some sort, it is in the power of men, who hate the light on account of their deeds being evil, to sustain captious and groundless ob- jections, so as to manifest their perversion of mind, and their attachment to their evil] deeds ; and not less is it in the power of others to shew their can- = 322 OVERPOWERING EVIDENCE NOT CONSISTENT &c. dour and honesty, by disregarding those objec- tions which they find to be frivolous or unreason- able, and to evince their love of the truth, by be- lieving in it, and abiding by it, in defiance of arguments by which others are seduced. The unbelief of the one class becomes, in this view, a just ground of condemnation ; and the faith of the other is, through the grace of God, recognised as a proper subject of what the Scriptures denomi- nate a reward—that reward which Christ hath purchased for those who believe in and obey him. Such a method of dealing with his intelligent offspring, appears to be worthy of God. In re- gard to the evidence of Divine things, it seems to be the only method of dealing with men, that is compatible with the great design of providence respecting them in the present world. Fee > ae CHAPTER VIII. SUMMARY OF THE WHOLE PRECEDING ARGUMENT, WITH A BRIEF VIEW OF THE EFFECT WHICH MAY BE-REA« SONABLY EXPECTED FROM CONTINUED AND PATIENT ENDEAVOURS TO URGE IT ON THE MINDS OF MEN, THE number and variety of topics, to which the reader’s attention has been called, make it the more important to reconsider them in an abbrevia- ted or condensed view, in order that their com- bined force may be duly perceived. Without a Divine Revelation, men were inca- pable of attaining satisfaction and establishment of mind, respecting their own existing condition, and their ultimate destination. Yet a just understand- ing of things, which so nearly concerned them, was essential to their duly improving by the present dispensations of Providence ; and there was there- fore ground to hope that the Being, who at first created them—a Being of infinite goodness—would not withhold the requisite communication of his own counsel and purposes respecting them. s 324 RECAPILTULATION The Gospel of Christ professes to be that re- velation from heaven, of which men were in want, and for which they had ground to hope. Does its import justify this pretension It presents to us consistent and satisfying views of those fundamental truths of religion, which the reason of man had but imperfectly recognised. The evidence which human reason had attained, for the reality of these things, was unsatisfactory, because the infinite perfection of the Divine Being —the point on which the whole depended—did not seem to be fully justified by the present dis- posals of Providence, under which there is SO near- ly one outward event to the righteous and the wicked. A certainty of ‘a future state was indis- pensable for the removal of this difficulty. ihe researches of human reason fell short of this ob- ject. But the Gospel of Christ has supplied the defect, in the way of all others most satisfactory, —not only by direct assurances,—but by throw- ing additional light on the principles and grounds of every argument for a future state, which un- assisted reason had itself devised. — The Gospel of Christ also directs us to many interesting views of our condition, and of the counsels of Heaven respecting it, which the reason of man had not anticipated. OF THE ARGUMENT’. $25 It directs us to recognise the trausgression and fall of the parents of our race, as having entailed on us both sin and misery.—It is said that this doctrine is unreasonable. But, if it be not ad- initted that the human race were at first created holy and happy, and that they made themselves sinful and miserable,—the only other conclusion seems to be, that the world of mankind must have been created by God in its present state,—full as it is of both natural and moral evil,—a conclusion which it is presumed will not recommend itself to any who believe in a Being of infinite goodness. The Gospel also teaches us that God, of his ins finite mercy, has provided for our salvation from the punishment and the power of sin, end for our consequent restoration to both perfection and happiness. To the scheme of salvation thus revealed, hu- man reason has objected that there are many things in it mysterious and incomprehensible. But there is nothing connected with it more mys- terious than what we otherwise recognise con- cerning the character and works of an Infinite Being.—It has been said that the doctrine of vicarious suffering, on the part of the Saviour, cannot be reconciled with the wisdom and good- ness of God. But we have seen, on the one hand, 326 RECAPILTULATION that, without such an atonement for sin, men had not ground to hope for pardoning mercy, and, on the other hand, that the suffering of the Son of God, in the nature of man, secures the honour of the Divine government in the extension of mercy to every penitent sinner.—The agency of the spirit of God, in renewing the spirit of man, has been objected to as an impossible thing, because unper- éeived by men. But would it not be presumptuous to maintain that the Being who created the human soul—to whom all things which do not involve a contradiction are alike possible and easy—may not find access to the spirits which he hath made, even without a consciousness of it on their part ? In the department of moral duty, human reason has objected against much that is peculiar to the Gospel of Christ, as mortifying and degrading. But we have seen that the precepts in question, —when their object and import are duly ascertain- ed and considered,—cannot be regarded as either unnatural or degrading, but that a conformity to them is, on the contrary, conducive to both our perfection and happiness. The Gospel of Christ, considered in these views, affords presumptive evidence of its own Divine origin. It cannot be regarded as “ the wisdom OF THE ARGUMENT. 327 of this world,” but—when considered in connex- ion with the condition and circumstances of its Author—may well be regarded as “ the wisdom of God.” The Divine mission of Christ is also supported by much direct and positive evidence. But, in. order to our judging of the reality of Christ's iniracles, we have first inquired into the truth of the Gospel history, as comprising facts not mira- culous, on the ground of which the truth of the miracles might be afterwards established. We have found that the Gospel history affords much internal evidence of its own truth. It possesses, in a remarkable degree, that con- sistency which is essential to our confidence in any narrative. For, while there are such appearances of discrepance, in the accounts presented by its different authors, as seem to forbid our supposing that they had any mutual consultation, the most acute and determined adversaries of the Christian cause have not been able, in any one instance, to establish a charge of real inconsistency. There is also internal evidence that its authors could not be actuated by any sinister design. For we have seen that they had no worldly interest which they could hope to promote by what they 328 RECAPITULATION - have written, and that the great purpose to be served by their narrative was in direct opposition to their own prejudices. We do not even find them vindicating their Master’s honour in those cases respecting which it was most likely to be called in question. They seem to have felt that their single duty consisted in recording those — things of which they had been witnesses, leaving the event to God. Their narratives also afforded every possible facility for the detection of any falsehood which they might have contained,—by such a minute statement of the circumstances of time and place, together with the names and designations of wit- nesses, as was calculated to lay open the whole case for the examination and judgment of the world. In addition to such presumptive evidence for the truth of the Gospel history, we have more absolute and conclusive proof. ; We have seen that, in the writings of early Christians, (some of them men who lived in the Apostolic age,) there are not only unequivocal allusions to the Gospel history, but direct mention made of the different treatises which it comprises, together with the names of their respective au- thors. It, therefore, seems undeniable that the Gospel history was published at a time when the OF THE ARGUMENT. 329 Jewish rulers had it in their power not only to contradict any falsehood which it might have con- tained, but also to produce, in support of their contradiction, eye-witnesses of those facts which might have been misrepresented. Yet equally certain is it, that no attempt was made,—while it could thus have been done with effect,—to invali- date the truth of the Gospel record, or to disprove, more particularly, those facts and circumstaiices not miraculous, on the authority of which the evidence of Christ’s miracles was to depend. In what way are we to account for these things ? Is it possible to suppose that the Jewish rulers, -——deeply interested as they were, or imagined themselves to be, in resisting the progress of the Gospel,—would not have published, if they had found it in their power, a confutation of the Gospel history, which would have been as widely circu- lated as the writings of the Evangelists? Or, is it not manifest, from their making no such at- tempt, that a confutation was impracticable ? We have farther seen, that the truth of the Gospel record was subsequently and incidentally corroborated, in many important points, by au- thors adverse to the religion of Christ. A variety of respectable heathen authors,— either in their historical detail of what concerned 330 RECAPITULATION the Roman Empire, or with more immediate re- ference to its existing condition,—have adverted to many of the most important points of the Gospel history, as facts which were not to be questioned. The exact conformity, therefore, of their testimony to that of the Evangelists—so far as the same points are concerned—gives the latter an additional claim to our confidence, even for the truth of other circumstances which fill up their narrative. From the same sources of information we learn that, within about thirty years after the death of Christ, the publication of the Gospel history, and the corresponding labour of the Apostles, had well nigh subverted the religion—not of Judea alone, but of the Roman Empire. Yet, if the Roman government could have detected and ex- posed any falsehood in that record on which Christian faith was established, the prevalence of Christianity would have been short-lived. In these circumstances the incontrovertible fact—that, up- on this subject, the imperial government was just as silent as the Jewish rulers had been, affords such evidence of the truth of the Gospel history, as cannot be adduced in support of any other his- torical record on earth. We have also the strongest ground to believe OF THE ARGUMENT. 331 that the Gospel history, as originally published, has been faithfully transmitted to men of the pre- sent day.—The preservation of early manuscripts of the New ‘Testament, and the translations of it into various languages,—the quotations from it by innumerable authors from the beginning to the present times, and the controversial discussion of — which both its import and its language have never ceased to be the subject—afford not only more perfect evidence of faithful transmission than has been exemplified in any other case, but such evi- dence, in respect, of both strength and variety, as no mind could have anticipated. With the aid, then, of the Gospel history, as a record of facts not miraculous—Have we, or have we not, decisive proof of the reality of Christ’s miracles, and consequently of his Divine mission ? ‘ No man,” said Nicodemus to Christ himself, * can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.” Nicodemus perceived that such a suspension of the laws of nature, as was manifested in the works to which he referred, could not be otherwise effected than by Divine and preternatural agency. Evil spirits, indeed, are said ‘to have wrought miracles. But evil spirits can have no power that 832 RECAPITULATION is not derived from God, and under his control. Nor is it consistent with any just idea of either the truth or the goodness of the Divine Being, to suppose that he permits evil spirits to exercise their power in a way which can ultimately deceive the well-disposed and upright in heart. If the magicians of Egypt performed miracles by the invocation and aid of evil spirits, their miracles were overruled by God in a way which tended to defeat their own object. | It has been maintained, indeed, by a celebrated philosopher (Mr Hume,) that the reality of mira- cles is a thing so incredible, that it cannot be proved by human testimony. But that author’s argument has its foundation in Atheism; and I am reasoning, on the contrary, with men who believe in God. Were there no God, the Creator of all things, on whom all things depend, we might be led to conclude, that the laws of nature are eternal; and there might also arise a presumption that they are unchangeable, since we could not recognise any power by which an alteration or change could be effected. But, if we admit that there is a Being who created all things, and who, in disposing of the works of his hand, must have established the laws of nature, it is impossible to deny that their OF THE ARGUMENT. 338 operation may be suspended by the same power which established them. Even the likelihood or improbability of such an event must depend on the importance of the end proposed. The reality of miracles may therefore be proved by human testimony, if the testimony be such as would be, in any other case, entitled to perfect credit, or, in other words, if there be no ground | to apprehend deception. Now, in the case of the miracles of Christ, Was it not some security against deception that they were wrought in an enlightened age, and among a people who, from their having been raised supe- rior to the delusions of Polytheism, must have been better qualified than others to form a judg- ment respecting the pretensions of any thing— whether word or deed—which was represented as proceeding from the true and living God? Was there not additional security against deception, arising from the circumstance—That the Author of the miracles in question had no outward means of rewarding any man for combining with him to deceive the world,—that his miracles were not wrought for upholding existing institutions which any ruling powers were, at the same time, con- cerned to maintain,—but, on the contrary, for the accomplishment of a purpose to which both the 334 RECAPITULATION people and the government of his country were disinclined ? Was there not greater security af- forded by the nwmber of Christ's miracles—the variety of cases, to human eye unforeseen, in which his miraculous power was exerted ? Was not the security against deception farther strengthened by the unequivocal nature of some of the cases in which he undertook to exemplify his miraculous agency—-cases 1n which he manifested his power over the very elements, of which the visible frame of nature is composed, and over death itself, the king of terrors ? Were the Apostles of Christ, in particular, con- sidered as witnesses of his miracles, not qualified to ascertain what they have reported to the world ? Their report consists chiefly of facts and circum- stances which were presented to their bodily senses. We have it in our own power to judge whether, upon the ground of these facts, we ought to con- cur with the witnesses in regarding the transac- tions as miraculous. But, in the first instance, were they qualified for what they appear to have undertaken ? j Two of them, who have written the Gospel history, cannot have been ignorant men. More of the number seem to have been of such a rank or condition in society, as admitted of their minds OF THE ARGUMENT. 335 being somewhat invigorated by intercourse with the world. It is, at the same time, evident from the Gospel narrative, that every advantage was afforded them for ascertaining the facts to which they have borne witness. ‘This was remarkably the case, in reference to the resurrection of their Master ;—and, as to other miracles which we have — examined, the publicity of the whole procedure afforded an immense advantage. Even supposing the Apostles to have imagined that they saw what was not visible, or heard what was not spoken, would not their mistake have been corrected by those other witnesses, whose bodily senses were not subject to the same illusion ? If it be manifest that the Apostles could not be deceived, Can we, with equal safety, acquit them of any intention to deceive others ? Supposing that they were in their hearts re- gardless of truth, it was impossible that, with the means which they possessed, they could entertain any hope of imposing on the world what they knew to be a falsehood. Nor was it more possi- ble that they could expect any advantage to them- selves from preaching the doctrine of their Master, if they had not believed it to be the doctrine of God. They must have been aware, from the be- ginning, that by doing so, they were to expose 336 RECAPITULATION themselves to much persecution. Observation and experience must soon have confirmed their appre- hension—even of a violent death. Yet they per- severed to the end in the work which their Master had assigned to them—willing to suffer death rather than abandon his cause. In such circumstances, the fair conclusion seems to be, that either the testimony of the Apostles ought to be sustained, or there ought to be an end to belief founded upon testimony, But the Apostles not enly bore witness, as we have seen, to the miracles of Christ—they did, themselves, work miracles, as a proof of their being commissioned to speak in his name. Paul, in par- ticular, though not originally of the college of Apostles, makes direct and explicit reference to such miracles, in his Epistles to the Corinthians and the Galatians. He appeals to the men whom he addressed, for the miracles which he had wrought among them. It is scarcely possible to suppose that, upon this point, he could deceive them, or that he made such an appeal, without a conscious- ness of truth. The divine origin of the Christian doctrine is ’ OF THE ARGUMENT. 3% also established by evidence arising from the ful- filment of prophecy. | Prophecy, considered in connexion with its ful- filment, is just as much a miracle of knowledge, as any mighty work can be a miracle of power; and it has even some advantages over miracles of power. We can examine and contemplate, both long and deliberately, all the circumstances with which a prophecy is connected. There is no room for the pretence—so commonly urged in the case of other miracles—that even an eye-witness may be deceived by momentary appearances. Nor does it seem that, in regard to any particular prophecy, a later age can be much in want of those advan- tages for the requisite examination, which were enjoyed by the men in whose time it was fulfilled. When a variety of prophecies have one common object, as in the case before us, the evidence ari- sing from their fulfilment is also progressive in its influence. The prophetic intimations, in regular succession, reflect such light on one another, as to strengthen the evidence resulting from each. There has been much complaint about the ob- scurity of prophecy. But, if it were as explicit as seems to be demanded, there would be too much ground for alleging that the prophetic language x 338 RECAPITULATION had put it in the power of a man to bring about its fulfilment, in a way calculated to serve a deceit- ful purpose. In referring to the Old Testament, as a record of prophecies, it is not necessary to produce evi- dence of its Divine inspiration ;—nothing more can be requisite than an assurance of its early existence, as a record in which the prophecies are contained—a fact which seems to be placed beyond question. | Now, among other prophecies of the Old Testa- ment, it contains a rich variety of intimations, in regular succession, that some extraordinary and powerful means would at length be employed, for the deliverance of mankind from the consequences of their transgression and fall, and for the preva- lence of true religion among all nations. At the time when these intimations were given and re- corded, there was nothing in the visible course of events to justify any corresponding expectation. Yet the Gospel of Christ, and the means employ- ed for its propagation, are a satisfying fulfilment of what was foretold. There are also prophecies in the Old Testament which directed the attention of men, more particu- larly, to the character and work of the promised Deliverer, and even to the time which had been bow OF THE ARGUMENT. 339 fixed and determined for his appearance. These intimations were as explicit as is at all consistent with the degree of obscurity requisite in the language of prophecy. Of those to which I have referred, the latest were given, five hundred years before the birth of Christ. Yet they received in him such exact fulfilment, as forbids us to doubt that he was the person, from the beginning pro- mised and designed as the great Deliverer of the human race. There are, likewise, prophecies, in both the Old and the New Testaments, relative to the sub- sequent fortunes both of the Christian church and of the Jewish nation. Those which relate to the propagation and establishment of the religion of Christ, received, very speedily, such a fulfilment as no human wisdom could have anticipated. Those which relate to the destruction of Jerusa- lem were both amply and exactly fulfilled. Even the more extraordinary intimation—that the Jews, though effectually dispersed among the other na- tions of the earth, should still be preserved and recognised as a separate people, in order to their being at length restored as a nation, has been hitherto fulfilled in a way which has so much of a miraculous aspect, as to afford a strong pledge of its ultimate and perfect fulfilment, by the conversion of that people to the Christian faith, 840 RECAPITULATION and their consequent re-establishment in the land of their fathers. The way in which the Gospel was propagated affords farther evidence of its truth. It is well known that, within less than fifty years after the death of Christ, his religion was embraced by multitudes in almost every nation of the civilized world. It gradually recommended itself to the learned as well as the unlearned of every class and condition. ‘The men employed in its propagation were, with the exception of one, comparatively illiterate; but they appealed, for the truth of what they taught, to the evidence of miracles, as wrought by them in the most public manner, and under the eye of those to whom they preached. The doctrine which they inculcated did not hold out to men a promise of any worldly advantage. It made no concession to any thing which was called religion among the heathen. It proclaimed, on the contrary, a spiritual warfare against every species of superstition which pre- vailed in the habitable world. It thereby pre- voked the powers of the world to adopt measures of the most determined hostility against it. The early Christians were, in consequence, subjected to unexampled persecution. Yet the patience and fortitude, with which they endured the most ex- OF THE ARGUMEN'. 341 quisite and protracted suffering, had only the ef- fect of gaining new converts to the Christian faith. Their fortitude was such as was calculated to produce this effect ; for it was such as we cannot | reasonably ascribe to the human mind, otherwise than as strengthened and upheld by Divine in- fluence. The man who, duly considering these things, can yet refuse to admit that the religion of Christ was an object of Divine protection, or deny that its Author was sent of God, would not, I appre- hend, have believed on any other evidence. It is not, however, to be forgotten, that the great purpose for which the wisdom and grace of God were revealed in the Gospel, was “ to teach men to live soberly, righteously, and Godly,” and that, according to Christ himself, the tree is to be known by its fruit. Does the effect, then, which Christianity in this respect produces, justify its claim to be regarded as the power of God and the wisdom of God ? All that the Gospel promised, from the begin- ning, was a partial and progressive reformation in the present world, to be perfected in a future state. —Does it not fulfil this promise 2. Strictly speaking, the Gospel of Christ is not 342 .RECAPITULATION answerable for the conduct of those who may falsely call themselves by his name ; and it might, therefore, be regarded as enough for our present purpose, that the Christian world has never been without men who have been enabled, through Divine grace, to adorn the doctrine of their God and Saviour, by those sublime and exalted virtues which he inculeated. But it is not less certain that their example has had an influence on the mind and temper of others, and that even the out- ward profession of a religion of such purity and excellence, has more or less deterred men from an open: violation of its precepts. It is impossible, indeed, to question the efficacy of the Gospel, in respect of some of its distinguish- ing precepts; for the law of Christ, in regard to them, has been embraced and sanctioned by hu- man institutions, which confessedly regulate the conduct of Christian nations. —— If it still be objected, that, in the great work of reforming the world, the progress of the Gospel is slow, my answer is—that all the purposes of Heaven respecting us appear to be accomplished in a slow and gradual manner, in order to our being, ourselves, the more instrumental towards their accomplishment,—and that a slow and pro- gressive restoration of owr nature to its original purity may be a mean, in the hand of God, of OF THE ARGUMENT. 343 preparing it more duly for a future state of per- manent and unchangeable bliss. In what way, then, could more perfect evidence have been afforded, for establishing men in the faith of the Gospel ? I am at a loss to imagine any species or kind of evidence from which the Divine Mission of Christ does not derive support. But, stipposing that miracles, in particular, might have been wrought in some way more overpowering to the human mind, or more irresistible at the mo- ment,—and supposing that, in consequence of an overpowering dispensation of miracles, all nations had been, at once, prevailed on. to receive Christ as a Saviour,—what would have been the ultimate effect 2 Succeeding generations of men, and we, more particularly, in these latter times, might have been at a loss how to form any decided opinion concerning the pretensions and the doc- trine of One, whose cause the powers of the world. had, at the beginning, so combined to support, as to prevent either his character or his mission from undergoing that severe scrutiny, which is so essen- tial for either detecting imposture or ascertain- ing truth. | Even supposing it to have been compatible with the nature of things that a renewal of overpower- ing miracles, from age to age, and from day to 344 IMPORTANCE OF THE ARGUMENT day, should have continued, throughout all gene- rations, to produce the same effect,—would such an application of overpowering evidence have been consistent with the great principles of the Divine ‘Government ? Most certainly, it would not have been consistent with the design of Providence re- specting this world, as a state of probation. For, under the compulsory influence of overpowering miracles, our believing would be no proof of fair- ness and candour in judging of what is proposed to us, nor any proof of our net hating the truth which is revealed. Wuar effect may be reasonably expected from the argument which I have thus recapitulated ?— Is it possible that any man who has deliberately and candidly considered it, in all its bearings, should not acknowledge that the Divine Mission of Christ is supported by convincing evidence ? Perhaps some parts of the argument may have appeared to the reader less conclusive than others ; perhaps, some things may have been feebly stated ; or, it may be, that I have been so injudicious as to rest more on some points of the evidence than their separate importance could justify. But the question is not what conclusion the reader CONSIDERED AS A WHOLE. 3145 should derive from any one article of evidence or argument which he conceives to be defective. He is called upon, in all fairness, to consider and ap- preciate the whole,—both to allow, to every sepa- rate part, the weight to which it is justly entitled, and to consider the whole in that aggregate and connected view in which it is presented to him. To my mind, the evidence which has been de- tailed, especially when considered in its just con- nexion, appears so irresistible, as to preclude the possibility of supposing that it can be rejected on speculative ground. I am inclined to think, that upon the supposition of the two cases being cou- sidered in a speculative view, apart from any practical bias, it would be less unnatural to ap- prehend that a man might refuse to believe in an infinite and invisible Being, or in any thing which does not manifest itself to his bodily senses, than that, truly believing in God, he should refuse to believe in Jesus Christ as the Saviour of men. But if there exist, in this case, any speculative enigina, arising from the deistical professions of some men, it is abundantly solved, in a practical view, by the Author of Christianity himself; for he intimated, from the beginning, that many would “ love darkness rather than light,”—igno- rance rather than the knowledge which he com- 346 IMPORTANCE OF INTERNAL AND EX'TERNAL municated,—on account of their deeds being evil, and of their hearts being devoted to what is evil. _ How, then, and in what degree, does this last consideration tend to modify the importance of those evidences of Christianity which are address- ed to the human understanding ? I am not only convinced that the heart of man must be in some measure right with God, before his understanding effectually recognise the truth of the Gospel,—I regard it as beyond question, that, when through Divine grace men are brought to a just sense of their condition as ignorant and sinful creatures, even they, who are very imper- fectly qualified to judge of the external evidences of Christianity, may be effectually induced to be- lieve in and embrace it, in consequence of their perceiving it to be in all respects accommodated to their spiritual wants. It could not otherwise be said that the poor have “ the Gospel preached to them,” or that the Gospel is designed for the poor and uneducated. If a distinct understanding of all the grounds of Christian evidence were indispensable to the exercise of faith in Christ, the great body of those who constitute his Church upon earth, must have been incapable of receiving and embracing him as EVIDENCE SEPARATELY CONSIDERED. 347 a Saviowr,—incapable from a want of that intel- lectual energy which education imparts. But the Author of Christianity assures us, that “ if a man will do the will of God, he shall know of the doc- trine whether it be of God.”—-The whole scheme of the Gospel is so well adapted to what we know and feel to be our existing condition, that the man, whose heart no longer objects to it as a doctrine of righteousness, nattirally cleaves to it as the an- chor of his soul; and, so far as an exercise of the understanding is still essential to Christian faith, why should we doubt that the Divine Being is ready to impart the aid of his spirit, for the sup- ply of our wants, even in this department ? For these reasons, I trust that the view which I have presented of the Christian doctrine, as in all respects worthy of God and accommodated to the condition of men, may not be without a salu- tary effect. But does this view of the case super- sede the importance of such an appeal as I have also made to the human understanding, on the subject of the ealernal evidences of the Gospel ? There are symptoms of a disposition, in some friends of the Christian cause, to attach less im- portance, than has been hitherto allowed, to the external evidences. But it seems to me, that, in 348 DUTY OF ENFORCING THE ARGUMENT this respect, they are not justified by either Scrip- ture or reason. The miracles of Christ appear to have been ori- ginally productive of great effect. No man can read the Gospel history without perceiving that miracles were the great instrument elployed for prevailing on men to believe in him. After his ascension, the Apostles did not preach his doc- trine without appealing in the strongest manner, both to the miracles which he had wrought, and to the fulfilment of prophecy, as evidence that he had been sent of God; nor can there be a doubt that they were, in this respect, under Divine guidance. For what reason shall we not imitate their ex- ample ? It results from the nature of the case, that the miracles of Christ must have been intended for the benefit of men in all ages ; for, so far as it can be made evident that preternatural agency was employed, the argument derived from it ought to be just as powerful at the present day as it was to the witnesses of the transactions in question. If the impression which the argument makes be not now so strong, its failure can be ascribed to nothing else than a corresponding deficiency in the assurance which we have of the reality of the miracles, FROM EXTERNAL EVIDENCES. 349 Upon what ground, then, is it possible to sup- pose—either that we should be excused from con- tinuing to urge, on the minds of men, the evidence which we have for the Christian miracles, or that we should urge it without effect? We have no right to imagine that the counsel of Heaven, re- specting the means of bringing men to believe in the Gospel, has undergone such a change, as would warrant a departure from what is sanctioned by the example of its first teachers, and by the suc- cess which attended their labour. " It is true, that the Apostles had an advantage, which we do not enjoy. They were themselves invested with a power of working miracles. But how does this affect the obligation under which we are laid? The power of working miracles does not seem to have been imparted to them, for the immediate conviction only of the eye-witnesses of such mighty works ; for we find the Apostle Paul referring to the miracles which he had wrought, in order that the same means, which had been ori- ginally effectual for convincing men of the truth, might still be conducive to the confirmation and establishment of their faith. Nay, while the Apos- tles wrought miracles, they did not the less refer men, throughout all the civilized world, to mira- cles which the great majority of them had not seen,—to the miracles which Christ himself had 350 THE BENEFIT TO BE EXPECTED FROM wrought, exclusively in the land of Judea. What they did, in this respect, we have it still in our power to do ;—and on what imaginable ground shall we doubt the importance of doing it ? Even if it were conceded that uneducated men cannot be expected to profit, in any degree, by an illustration of the external evidences of Christian- ity, this could be no reason for denying the advan- tage of it to others. But we know that, by the Apostles of Christ, the argument founded on the external evidences was urged on all classes of men ; and we have no ground to suppose that, in reference to any class, it was urged in vain. The argument, both from miracles and from the fulfil- ment of prophecy, is calculated to make some im- pression on every mind ;—It addresses itself to the common sense of mankind; and I have no doubt that its salutary influence is felt by many, who could not unfold such an argument for the conviction of others. If uneducated men be little qualified to solve many difficult questions which may occur in the discussion of the external evi- dences, they have, at least, the corresponding ad- vantage, that such questions are not very likely to occur to their own minds, Without distinguishing, therefore, between dif- THE EXTERNAL EVIDENCES. 351 ferent classes of men, let me put the case—that one, hitherto denying or hesitating to acknow- ledge the truth of the Gospel, has the external evidences of its truth fairly presented to him.— In what way shall we suppose that he avoids to believe, without incurring, in the mean time, such disapprobation of his own mind, as may, through Divine grace, prove an earnest of future convic- tion ? If he refuse to give his attention to the subject, in what way shall he justify himself? Is it pos- sible that his mind can approve him, in regarding the question at issue as one of small importance to a rational and immortal being ? If, on the contrary, he examine the case, and give attention to the whole argument,—TI shall not say that a corrupt heart may not still induce him to reject the truth as it is in Jesus. But it seems unlikely that he should be able to reject it, without a warfare between his understanding on the one side, and the corrupt principles of his na- ture on the other, or without some consciousness, also, of the bias of his heart against the Gospel as a doctrine according to godliness ;—It seems un- likely that he should be able to reject it, without some testimony of his conscience against him, which, through the grace of God strengthening it, B52 THE BENEFIT TO BE EXPECTED, &c. may at length prevail for his deliverance from the toils of iniquity. | Supposing,—what is most probable,—that the person in question neither absolutely refuses to give attention to the Christian evidences, nor ex- amines them with the requisite care-—-How does he acquit himself to his conscience ?—He has stopt short in his labour for ascertaining the truth ; and the real cause of his being unwilling to proceed farther is, that a dislike to the import and tendency of the Christian doctrine makes the inquiry respecting it disagreeable to him. But, in his own mind, his defence is—that he finds no encouragement to follow out such an investigation, —that, so far as he has gone, he is not satisfied, and that he is not willing to persevere in fruitless labour.—Now, to what does this apology amount ? He is in doubt whether he ought, or ought not, to believe in Christ,—consequently in doubt respect- ing a matter, on which he cannot deny that his own eternal salvation may depend. Is it possible that, in these circumstances, and refusing to renew the investigation, he can enjoy the approbation of his own conscience ? Is it possible that he should account it wise, or should not perceive it to be the greatest of all folly, to leave such a question un- settled, without employing the means which are CONCLUDING APPEAL. 353 still in his power for the solution of his doubts, and the consequent establishment of his mind ? Is no good to be expected from inviting such a man to renewed investigation ? Supposing that the invitation is not accepted,—if it only remind him of his own folly, his consciousness of wrong may be gradually increased and strengthened, till it lead to a blessed change. WILL any man, who has read the preceding pages of this volume, permit me, before I conclude, to suppose that he is more or less in such a state of mind as that to which I have last adverted ? Have the evidences of Christianity made such an impres- sion on him, that he cannot at once deny and re- ject it? Does he also perceive that, if it be true, it materially concerns his everlasting welfare ? Does he, at the same time, admit that there are. points of the evidence, of which he may better per- ceive the force upon reconsideration ?—If such be the state of his mind—Is it possible that he can see it wise to discontinue his investigation of the subject, till his opinion be, in one way or other, established ? Is there any other occupation that can, with reason, prevent him from devoting the requisite time to the great work of ascertaining Z 354 CONCLUDING ADVICE. what he may find indispensable to be believed and accepted for the salvation of his immortal soul ? —If he acknowledge that he feels any aversion to ‘the subject, What reason can he assign for such aversion? An unwillingness to be saved in the way of such perfect righteousness as the Gospel requires—is the only ground of aversion that can be supposed to prevail, in a case of such incalcu- lable importance.—Let him, therefore, pray to God for deliverance from the dominion of a corrupt and wicked heart ;—and, while he reviews more deli- ‘berately the external evidences of the Gospel of Christ, let him never fail to consider its admirable adaptation to the supply of all his wants as a Spi- ritual and Immortal Being. THE END. EDINBURGH : PRINTED BY BALLANTYNE AND COMPANY. PAUL’S WORK, CANONGATE. BOOKS PRINTED FOR WILLIAM BLACKWOOD EDINBURGH. 1 en a ann a ae In 8vo, 10s. 6d. HISTORY of the PROGRESS and SUPPRESSION of the REFORMATION in SPAIN, during the Sixteenth Cen- tury. By Tuomas M‘Cris, D.D. ALSO, BY THE SAME AUTHOR, I. HISTORY of the PROGRESS and SUPPRESSION of the REFORMATION in ITALY, during the Sixteenth Century. Including a Sketch of the History of the Refor- mation in the Grisons. S8vo, 10s. 6d. Il. THE LIFE of JOHN KNOX. (A new Edition pre- paring.) 2 vols. 8vo. Il. THE LIFE of ANDREW MELVILLE. The Second Edition. 2 vols. 8vo, L.1, 4s. IV. MEMOIRS of Mr WILLIAM VEITCH, Minister of Dumfries, and GEORGE BRYSSON, Merchant in Edin- burgh. Written by themselves. With other Narratives illustrative of the History of Scotland, from the Restoration to the Revolution. To which are added, Biographical Sketches and Notes. 8vo, 12s. In 8vo, 8s. AN ESSAY on the EFFECT of the REFORMATION on CIVIL SOCIETY in EUROPE. By Wituram Macray, Minister of the Gospel, Stirling.- *,* The Professor of Marischal College, Aberdeen, along with the other Trustees of the late Mrs Blackwall, prescribed in 1820 as the sub- ject of her Biennial Prize Essay, “ What has been the Effect of the Reformation on the State of Civil Society in Europe?” and an outline of the above Essay obtained the Prize. The author, from the peculiar aspect of the times, has now been induced to publish it ; and, in preparing it for the press, he has made so many additions as to render it almost a new work. In 12mo, 8s. LECTURES, EXPOSITORY and PRACTICAL, on Select Portions of Scripture. By Anprew Tuomson, D.D., Mi- nister of St George’s, Edinburgh. The Second Edition. ALSO, BY THE SAME AUTHOR, 1. SERMONS ON INFIDELITY. Second Edition. Post 8vo, 7s. 2. THE SIN AND DANGER OF BEING LOVERS OF Pleasure more than Lovers of God, stated and illustrated in Two Discourses. Third Edition. 18mo, 2s. 3. AN ADDRESS TO CHRISTIAN PARENTS on the Religious Education of their Children. Third Edition. 18mo, Is. 6d. 4. A CATECHISM FOR YOUNG PERSONS. Ninth Edition. 4d. 5. A COLLECTION OF HYMNS FOR CHILDREN. Second Edition. 18mo, 9d. . A COLLECTION IN PROSE AND VERSE, for the Use of Schools. 12mo, 3s. bound. fo) 2 BOOKS PRINTED FOR WILLIAM BLACKWOOD, EDINBURGH. In Foolscap 8vo, 6s. RELIGIOUS CHARACTERISTICS. By Tuomas AIRD. In Foolscap 8vo, 4s. 6d. An ESSAY on the EXTENT of HUMAN and DIVINE AGENCY in the PRODUCTION of SAVING FAITH. In 8vo, Seventh Edition, 8s. The EVIDENCE and AUTHORITY of the CHRIS- TIAN REVELATION. By the Rev. Tuomas Cuatmers, D.D. one of the Ministers of Glasgow. In Three vols. 12mo, with 14 Plates, L.1, 7s. bound in cloth, ANNALS OF THE PENINSULAR CAMPAIGNS, from 1808 to 1814, by the Author of “ Cyril Thornton.” In 12mo, 5s. POLITICAL FRAGMENTS. By Roserr Forsyru, Esq. Advocate. “ From many of the views put forth in that singular production, (Tue PoriticaL Fracments or Mr Forsyru,) we wholly dissent ; but the vigour and sagacity of mind displayed in it command respect. The author is unquestionably a man of extraordinary talents, of extensive observation and experience, and expresses—even where we can neither adopt his conclusions nor approve the tone of his language—opinions too largely embraced to be regarded otherwise than with serious attention.” — Quarterly Review. No. 83. In 2 vols. Foolscap 8vo, 12s. CHAPTERS ON CHURCHYARDS. By the Authoress of “ Ellen Fitzarthur,” “The Widow’s Tale,” “ Solitary Hours,” &c. Originally published in Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine. BY THE SAME AUTHOR, In Foolscap 8vo, 6s. 6d. SOLITARY HOURS. . In Foolscap 8vo, 10s. 6d. THE COURSE OF TIME. A Poem. In Ten Books. By Rosert Pottox, A.M.—Ninth Edition. In Foolscap 8vo, 6s. THE HOPE OF IMMORTALITY. A Poem. In Four Parts. In Foolscap 8vo, price 8s. 6d. the Second Edition of RECORDS OF WOMAN, — With other Poems. By Fericia Hemans. BY THE SAME AUTHOR, In Foolscap 8vo, price 8s. 6d. the Second Edition, with Additions, of THE FOREST SANCTUARY: With other Poems. ey cal 1a theds te i Pd a *% de i > » ney ee A 93 ¥ al. a arate if OF ARNE Ry iy nnege — ‘ G 14 . pepe; ae eNO RE “ad 6976