fact, a full admission of the soundness of his reasoning on the then only existent data, that is, on all which had yet been known of the mental philosophy. Insomuch, that to stem his infidelity in both its branches, they had to discover what was before unknown; or rather, we think, to invent or imagine what was before unthought of. We hold both the cause of Natural Theology, and the cause of Christianity, to be independent of any such device-and that without complicating and mystifying the science of human nature, or having recourse to questionable novelties, there might, on the ground of experimental evidence alone, be raised a defence against each of his two sophistries, more effective than any which has been hitherto attempted, and certainly far more luminous. 12. One main advantage of such a refutation as we have attempted, is, that if effective, it goes conclusively to establish the experimental character of the evidence for the truth of Christianity-the only appropriate evidence for a religion of facts. We feel anxious for the removal of all from the christian side of the controversy which might obliterate that character-and we did feel an obliteration, so long as no other argument could be devised, by which to meet the sophistry of Hume, but such as recognised our faith in testimony to be distinct from our faith in experience. I hold it a most important demonstration, if it have really been made out, that the historical argument for the truth of Christianity has a purely inductive basis to rest upon; and that all the strength and glory which modern science has taken to herself, because of her firm standing on the groundwork of observation, belongs, without mixture and without attenuation, to the faith which we profess. The characteristic thing which gives such vigorous and enduring staple to the philosophy of our age, is, that she now builds up all her doctrine on the findings of experience and, no longer as before, on the fancies of a creative imagination. What we hold then a most desirable thing in argumenting the cause of Christianity, is to preserve this strictly experimental character to the reasonings on which her authority is founded—and we ever felt this subtlety of Hume, not as argued by him, but as redargued by his opponents, to be an obstacle in the way. It seemed a giving up of the authority of experience, to affirm of testimony, a character sui generis, and which owned no fellowship with the other— and we do feel, as if restored to comfort and to confidence, when, on the premises of our antagonist, that testimony is reducible to experience, we can nevertheless make good an overwhelming superiority of proof, for the miracles of Christ and his immediate followers. We now, in reference to our gospel and our faith, hold ourselves to be as firmly posted, as the disciples of modern science, on the evidence, the purely observational evidence of ascertained facts. It only remains, to follow the investigation consistently out, from the evidence of Christianity to the substance of Christianity-and to take our lessons from the volume of revelation, just as every sound experimental philosopher takes his from the volume of nature. They hold the authority of one natural observation to be of more weight than the goodliest theory however plausible. And we, with our well accredited record, should hold one scriptural observation taken from its pages, to be of surpassing authority and value over all gratuitous imaginations of our own. The question of sound philosophy is, what findest thou? The question of sound theology is, what readest thou? There have been repeated attempts to put these two at variance-and to oppose the lessons taken from the works, to the lessons taken from the word of God. But there is the same reigning spirit that actuates the true disciple in each of these departments, and a harmony of principle in both. BOOK II. ON THE MIRACULOUS EVIDENCE FOR THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY. CHAPTER I. On the Principles of Historical Evidence, and their Application to the Question of the Truth of Christianity. 1. WERE a verbal communication to come to us from a person at a distance, there are two ways in which we might try to satisfy ourselves, that this was a true communication, and that there was no imposition in the affair. We might either sit in examination upon the substance of the message, and then, from what we knew of the person from whom it professed to come, judge whether it was probable that such a message would be sent by him; or we may sit in examination upon the credibility of the messengers. ( 2. It is evident, that in carrying on the first examination, we might be subject to very great uncertainty. ~ The professed author of the communication in question may live at such a distance from us, that we may never have it in our power to verify his message by any personal conversation with him. We may be so far ignorant of his character and designs, as to be unqualified to judge of the kind of communication that should proceed from him. To estimate aright the probable genuineness of the message from what we know of its author, would require an acquaintance with his plans, and views, and circumstances, of which we may not be in possession. We may bring the greatest degree of sagacity to this investigation; but then the highest sagacity is of no avail, when there is an insufficiency of data. Our ingenuity may be unbounded; but then we may want the materials. The principle which we assume may be untrue in itself, and, therefore, may be fallacious in its application. 3. Thus, we may derive very little light from our first argument. But there is still a second in reserve the credibility of the messengers. We may be no judges of the kind of communication which is natural, or likely to proceed from a person with whom we are but imperfectly acquainted; but we may be very competent judges of the degree of faith that is to be reposed in the bearers of that communication. We may know and appreciate the natural signs of veracity. There is a tone and a manner characteristic of honesty, which may be both intelligible and convincing. There may be a concurrence of several messengers. There may be their substantial agreement. There may be the total want of any thing like concert or collusion among them. There may be their determined and unanimous perseverance, in spite of all the incredulity and all the opposition which |