very best of the external cannot support itself without it: for when, for instance, the supernatural facts done by the founders of our holy faith, are unquestionably verified by human testimony, the evidence of their divinity will not follow till the nature of that doctrine be examined, for whose establishment they were performed. Indeed, in the instance here given, they must be enforced in conjunction before any conclusion can be drawn for the truth of the revelation in question. But were there no other benefit arising from the cultivation of the internal evidence than the gaining, by it, a more perfect knowledge of God's word; this, sure, would be enough to engage us in a vigorous prosecution of it. That this is one of its fruits I need not tell such as are acquainted with its nature. And it is not without occasion I take notice of this advantage; for who, in this long controversy between us and the deists, hath not applied to certain advocates of revelation, what was formerly said of Arnobius and Lactantius, "that they undertook the defence of Christianity before they understood it?" A misfortune which probably the more careful study of the internal evidence would have prevented; because no one, well versed in that, could have continued ignorant of so important a principle, as that THE Doctrine of REDEMPTION is of the VERY ESSENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. Notwithstanding these superior advantages, it hath so happened, that the internal evidence hath been hitherto used as an introduction only to the external: and while by the latter, men have proved our religion actually divine, they have gone no further with the former, than to show it worthy indeed of such original.

What may have occasioned this neglect, is not so easy to say. Perhaps it was because writers have, in general, imagined that the difficulties of prosecuting the internal method to effect, are not so easily surmounted as those which attend the other: as supposing that the writer on the external evidence hath only need of the usual provision of church history, common diligence, and judgment, to become master of his subject; while the reasoner on the internal proof must, besides these, have a thorough knowledge of human nature, civil policy, the universal history of mankind, an exact idea of the Mosaic and Christian dispensations cleared from the froth and grounds of school subtilties, and church

66

of the nature of true religion to suffer by time, so it is of the nature of the false to gain by it. "L'Antiquité convient à la religion," says the learned president de Montesquieu, parceque souvent nous croyons plus les choses à mesure qu'elles sont plus reculées; car nous n'avons pas dans la tête des idées accessoires tirées de ces temps-la, qui puissent les contradire." L'Esprit des Loix, lib. xxvi. c. 2. For whatever religion, thus circumstanced, the writer had then in his thoughts, he must needs suppose it to be a false one; it being nonsense to suppose the true should ever be amended with any external evidence which argued it of falsehood.

systems; and, above all, should be blessed with a certain sagacity, to investigate the relations of human actions, through all the combinations of natural, civil, and moral complexities. What may suggest this conclusion is, their reflecting, that, in the external evidence, each circumstance, that makes for the truth of revealed religion, is seen to do so, as soon as known: so that the chief labour, here, is to search and pick out such, and to place them in their proper light and situation; but that, in prosecuting the internal evidence, the case is widely different: a circumstance in the frame and composition of this religion, which perhaps, some time or other, may be discovered to be a demonstration of its divinity, shall be so far from being generally thought assistant in its proof, that it shall be esteemed, by most, a prejudice against it: of which, I suppose, the subject of the following discourse will afford a remarkable example. And no wonder, that a religion of divine original, constituted to serve many admirable ends of providence, should be full of such complicated mysteries, as filled the learned Apostle with astonishment. On the other hand, this religion being for the use of man, we need not despair, when we have attained a proper knowledge of man's nature, and the dependencies thereon, of making still growing discoveries, on the internal evidence, of the divinity of its original.

Now, though all this may be true; and that, consequently, it would appear a childish arrogance in an ordinary writer, after having seen the difficulties attending this method, to hope to overcome them, by the qualities here said to be required; yet no modest searcher after truth need be discouraged. For there are in revealed religion, besides those interior marks of truth, above described, which require the delicate operation of a great genius and master-workman to bring out and polish, others also, no less illustrious, but more univocal marks of truth, which God hath been pleased to impress upon his dispensations; which require no great qualities, but humility, and love of truth, in him who would from thence attempt

"To vindicate the ways of God to man."

The subject of this discourse is one of those illustrious marks: from which, the discoverer claims no merit from any long, learned, or laborious search. It is honour enough for him that he is the first who brings it out to observation; if he be indeed the first. For the demonstration is so strong and beautiful, and at the same time appears to be so easy and simple, that one cannot tell whether the pleasure of the discovery, or the wonder that it is now to make, be the greater.

The medium, I employ, is the omission of the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments, in the laws and religion Moses

delivered to the Jewish people. By this, I pretend to carry the internal evidence much further than usual; even to the height of which it is capable, moral demonstration.

Why I choose to begin with the defence of Moses, is from observing a notion to have spread very much of late, even amongst many who would be thought Christians, that the truth of Christianity is independent of the Jewish dispensation: a notion which was, till now, peculiar to the Socinians; who go so far as to maintain, "that the knowledge of the Old Testament is not absolutely necessary for Christians:" * and, those who profess to think more soberly, are generally gone into an opinion that the truth of the Jewish religion is impossible to be proved but upon the truth of the Christian. As to the first sort of people, if they really imagine Christianity hath no dependence on Judaism, they deserve our compassion, as being plainly ignorant of the very elements of the religion they profess; however suitable the opinion may be to a modern fashionable notion, not borrowed from, but the same with, the Socinian, that "Christianity is only the republication of the religion of nature." As for the more sober, it is reasonable to think, that they fell into the mistake from a view of difficulties, in the Jewish dispensation, which they judged too stubborn to be removed. I may pretend then to their thanks, if I succeed, by coming so seasonably to their relief; and freeing their reasonings from a vicious circle, which would first prove the Christian by the Jewish; and then the Jewish, by the Christian religion.

Why I choose this medium, namely, the omission of a future state in the Jewish dispensation, to prove its divine original, is,

First, for the sake of the deists: being enabled hereby to show them, 1. That this very circumstance of omission, which they pretend to be such an imperfection, as makes the dispensation unworthy the Author to whom we ascribe it, is, in truth, a demonstration that God only could give it. 2. That those several important passages of Scripture, which they charge with obscurity, injustice, and contradiction, are, indeed, full of light, equity, and concord. 3. That their high notions of the antiquity of the religion and learning of the Egyptians, which they incessantly produce, as their palmary argument, to confront and overturn the history of Moses, do, in an invincible manner, confirm and support it.

Secondly, for the sake of the Jews; who will, at the same time, be shown that the nature of the theocracy here delivered, and the omission of the doctrine of a future state in that dispensation, evidently obliges them to look for a more perfect revelation of God's will.

*Cuper, advers. Tract. Theol. Polit. lib. i.

Thirdly, for the sake of the Socinians; who will find, that Christianity agrees neither with itself, nor with Judaism; neither with the dispensations of God, nor the declared purpose of his Son's mission, on their principle, of its being only a "republication of the religion of nature." In this demonstration, therefore, which we suppose very little short of mathematical certainty, and to which nothing but a mere physical possibility of the contrary can be opposed, we demand only this single postulatum, that hath all the clearness of self-evidence; namely,

"That a skilful lawgiver, establishing a religion, and civil policy, acts with certain views, and for certain ends; and not capriciously, or without purpose or design."

This being granted, we erect our demonstration on these three very clear and simple propositions:

1. "THAT TO INCULCATE THE DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE STATE OF REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS, IS NECESSARY TO THE WELLBEING OF CIVIL SOCIETY.

2. "THAT ALL MANKIND, ESPECIALLY THE MOST WISE AND LEARNED NATIONS OF ANTIQUITY, HAVE CONCURRED IN BELIEVING AND TEACHING, THAT THIS DOCTRINE WAS OF SUCH USE TO CIVIL SOCIETY. 3. "THAT THE DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE STATE OF REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS IS NOT TO BE FOUND IN, NOR DID MAKE PART OF, THE MOSAIC DISPENSATION."

Propositions so clear and evident, that, one would think, we might directly proceed to our conclusion,

THAT THEREFORE THE LAW OF MOSES IS OF DIVINE ORIGINAL.

Which, one or both of the two following syllogisms will evince.

I. Whatsoever religion and society have no future state for their support, must be supported by an extraordinary providence.

The Jewish religion and society had no future state for their support: Therefore, the Jewish religion and society were supported by an extraordinary providence.

And again,

II. The ancient lawgivers universally believed that such a religion could be supported only by an extraordinary providence.

Moses, an ancient lawgiver, versed in all the wisdom of Egypt, purposely instituted such a religion.

Therefore, Moses believed his religion was supported by an extraordinary providence.

But, so capricious are men's passions, now for paradox, and now for system, that these, with all their evidence, have need of a very particular defence; libertines and unbelievers denying the major propositions of both these syllogisms; and many bigots amongst believers, the minor of the first. These passions, however different with regard to the objects that excite them, and to the subjects in which they are found, have this in common, that they never rise but on the ruins of reason. The business of the religionist being to establish, if his understanding be too much narrowed, he contracts himself into system: and that of the infidel, to overturn; if his will be depraved, he, as naturally, runs out into paradoxes. Slavish, or licentious thinking, the two extremes of free inquiry, shuts them up from all instructive views, or makes them fly out beyond all reasonable limits. And as extremes fall easily into one another, we sometimes see the opposite writers change hands; the infidel, to show something like coherence in his paradoxes, represents them as the several parts of a system; and the religionist, to give a relish to his system, powders it with paradoxes; in which arts, two late Hibernians,* the heroes of their several parties, were very notably practised and distinguished.

It was not long then before I found, that the discovery of this important truth would engage me in a full dilucidation of the premises of the two syllogisms: the major of both requiring a severe search into the civil policy, religion, and philosophy of ancient times; and the minor a detailed account of the nature and genius of the Jewish dispensation. The present volumet is destined to the first part of this labour; and the following, to the second. Where, in removing the objections which lie in our way, on both sides, we shall be obliged to stretch the inquiry high and wide. But this, always, with an eye to the direction of our great master of reason,§ "to endeavour, throughout the body of this discourse, that every former part may give strength unto all that follow, and every latter bring some light unto all before."

* See the discourse called Nazarenus; an Epistolary Discourse concerning the Immortality of the Soul.-Dissertationes Cyprianicæ, &c.

† Books i. ii, iii.

Books iv. v. vi.

§ Hooker.