they are not able to deduce, or have not in fact deduced, the evidences of natural religion; nay, though they should have many doubts about them; the frame of the human mind is fuch, that the fcripture history, allowed to be true, muft convince us, that Chrift, the prophets and apoftles, were endued with a power greater than human, and acted by the authority of a Being of the highest wifdom and goodness.

Secondly, If natural religion be previously established, the truth of the principal facts of the fcriptures proves their divine authority in an eafier and more convincing manner.

For, firft, the power fhewn in the miracles wrought by Chrift, the prophets and apofties, the knowledge in their prophecies, and their good moral characters, fhew them to be, in an eminent manner, the children, fervants, and meffengers, of him who is now previously acknowledged to be infinite in power, knowledge, and goodness.

Secondly, Chrift, the prophets and apostles, make an exprefs claim to a divine miffion. Now, it cannot be reconciled to God's moral attributes of juftice, veracity, mercy, &c. that he fhould permit these perfons to make fuch a claim falfely, and then endue them, or fuffer them to be endued, with fuch credentials as muft fupport fuch a false claim. Their claim is not, therefore, a falfe one, if we admit their credentials; or, in other words, the truth of the principal facts mentioned in the fcriptures proves the divine miffion of Chrift, the prophets, and apoftles, i. e. the divine authority of the fcriptures.

The fame obfervations may be made upon the converfe of this propofition, as upon thofe of the two laft.

And thus the genuineness of the fcriptures, the truth of the principal facts contained in them, and their divine authority, appear to be fo connected with each other, that, any one being eftablifhed upon independent principles, the other two may be inferred from it. The first and fecond of thefe points are, indeed, more evidently fubfervient to the laft, than the laft is to them; for, if the laft be allowed, it is at once all that the believer contends for; whereas fome perfons appear to admit, or not to reject, the first, or even the second, and yet are ranked under the title of unbelievers. It is neceffary to fhew to fuch perfons, that the firft and fecond infer each other mutually, and both of them the laft; and it may be of fome ufe to fhew, that the laft infers the two firft in fuch a way, as to caft fome light upon itfelf, without arguing in a circle; the divine authority of one book being made to infer the genuineness of another, or the facts contained in it, i. e. its divine authority alfo.

Here it may not be amifs to fay fomething concerning the divine infpiration of the fcriptures. Now there are three different fuppofitions, which may be made concerning this point.

The firit and lowest is, that all the paffages delivered by Mofes and the prophets, as coming from God, and by the evangelifts, as the words of Chrift, alfo the revelation given to St. John in a divine vifion, with all parallel portions of fcripture, muft be confidered as divinely infpired, and as having immediate divine authority; elfe we cannot allow even common authority to these books: but that the common hiftory, the reafonings of the apoftles from the Old Teftament, and perhaps fome of their opinions, may be confidered as coming merely

from

from themselves, and therefore, though highly to be regarded, are not of unquestionable authority. The arguments for this hypothefis may be, that, fince the fcriptures have fuffered by tranfcribers, like other books, a perfect exactnefs in the original, as to minute particulars (in which alone it has fuffered, or could fuffer, from tranfcribers), is needlefs; that Mofes and the prophets, the evangelifts and apoftles, had natural talents for writing hiftory, applying the feriptures, reasoning, and delivering their opinions; and that God works by natural means, where there are fuch; that the apoftles were ignorant of the true extent of Chrift's kingdom for a confiderable time after his refurrection, and perhaps mistaken about his fecond coming; that God might intend, that nothing in this would fhould be perfect, our bleffed Lord excepted; that fome hiftorical facts feem difficult to be reconciled to one another, and fome applications of paffages from the Old Teftament by the writers of the New, with their reasonings thereupon, inconclufive and unfatisfactory; that the writers themfelves nowhere lay claim to infallibility, when fpeaking from themfelves; and that Hermas, Clemens Tomanus, and Barnabas, who were apoftolical perfons, feem evidently to have reafoned in an inconclufive manner.

The fecond hypothefis is, That hiftorical incidents of fmall moment, with matters of a nature foreign to religion, may indeed not have divine authority; but that all the reft of the fcriptures, the reafonings, the application of the prophecies, and even the doctrines of inferior note, must be inspired : else what can be meant by the gifts of the spirit, particularly that of prophecy, i. e. of inftructing others? How can Chrift's promife of the Comforter, who fhould lead his difciples into all truth, be fulfilled? Will not the very effentials of religion, the divine miffion of Chrift, providence, and a future ftate, be weakened, by thus fuppofing the facred writers to be mistaken in religious points? And though the hiftory and the reafonings of the fcriptures have the marks of being written in the fame manner as other books, i. e. may seem not to be infpired, yet a fecret influence might conduct the writers in every thing of moment, even when they did not perceive it, or reflect upon it themselves; it being evident from obvious reafonings, as well as from the foregoing theory, that the natural workings of the mind are not to be diftinguished from thofe which a Being that has a fufficientpower over our intellectual frame might excite in us.

The third and laft hypothefis is, That the whole fcriptures are infpired, even the moft minute hiftorical paffages, the falutations, incidental mention of comínon affairs, &c. The argument in favour of this hypothefis are, That many parts of fcriptures appear to have double, or perhaps manifold fenfes; That not one jot or tittle of the law (i.e. of the whole fcriptures of both the Old and New Teftaments, in an enlarged way of interpretation, which, however, feems juftifiable by parallel inftances) fhall perish; That the Bible, i. e. the book of books, as we now have it, appears to have been remarkably diftinguifhed by Providence from all other writings, even of good Jews and Chriftians, and to admit of a vindication in refpect of small difficulties, and fmall feeming inconfiftencies, as well as of great ones, every day more and more as we advance in knowledge; and that effects of the fame kind

B 4

with

with divine infpiration, viz. the working of miracles, and the gift of prophecy, fubfifting during the times of the authors of the books of the Old and New Teftaments, and even in all, or nearly all, of these writers; alfo, that they extended, in fome cafes, to very minute things.

I will not presume to determine which of these three fuppofitions approaches nearest the truth. The following propofitions will, I hope, eftablifh the first of them at leaft, and prove the genuineness of the fcriptures, the truth of the facts contained in them, and their divine authority, to fuch a degree, as that we need not fear to make them the rule of our lives, and the ground of our future expectations; which is all that is abfolutely neceffary for the proof of the Chriftian religion, and the fatisfaction and comfort of religious perfons. I even believe, that the following evidences favour the fecond hypothefis ftrongly, and exclude all errors and imperfections of note; nay, I am inclined to believe, that serious, inquifitive men can scarce reft there, but will be led by the fucceffive clearing of difficulties, and unfolding of the most wonderful truths, to believe the whole fcriptures to be infpired, and to abound with numberlefs uses and applications, of which we yet know nothing. Let future ages determine. The evidently miraculous nature of one part, viz. the prophetical, difpofes the mind to believe the whole to be far above human invention, or even penetration, till fuch time as our understandings fhall be farther opened by the events which are to precede the fecond coming of Chrift. In the mean while, let critics and learned men of all kinds have full liberty to examine the sacred books; and let us be fparing in our cenfures of each other. "Let us

..

judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come; and then shall every man have praife of God." Sobriety of mind, humility, and piety, are requifite in the purfuit of knowledge of every kind, and much more in that of facred. I have here endeavoured to be impartial to each hypothefis, and juft to hint what I apprehend each party would or might fay in defence of their own. However, they are all brethren, and ought not to fall out by the way.

THE MANNER IN WHICH THE BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS HAVE BEEN HANDED DOWN FROM AGE TO AGE, PROVES BOTH THEIR GENUINENESS, AND THE TRUTH OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTS CONTAINED IN THEM.

FOR, firft, It resembles the manner in which all other genuine books and true hiftories have been conveyed down to pofterity. As the writings of the Greek and Roman poets, orators, philofophers, and hiftorians, were esteemed by these nations to be tranfmitted to them by their forefathers in a continued fucceffion, from the times when the respective authors lived; fo have the books of the Old Teftament by the Jewish nation, and thofe of the New by the Chriftians; and it is an additional evidence in the laft cafe, that the primitive Chriftians were not a diftinct nation, but a great multitude of

people

people difperfed through all the nations of the Roman empire, and even extending itself beyond the bounds of that empire. As the Greeks and Romans always believed the principal facts of their historical books, fo the Jews and Chriftians did more, and never seem to have doubted of the truth of any part of theirs. In fhort, whatever can be faid of the traditional authority due to the Greek and Roman writers, fomething analogous to this, and for the most part of greater weight, may be urged for the Jewish and Chriftian. Now, I fuppofe that all fober-minded men admit the books ufually afcribed to the Greek and Roman hiftorians, philofophers, &c. to be genuine, and the principal facts related or alluded to in them to be true; and that one chief evidence to this, is the general traditionary one here recited. They ought therefore to pay the fame regard to the books of the Old and New Teftaments, fince there are the fame or greater reafons for it.

Secondly, if we re-confider the circumftances recited in the last paragraph, it will appear, that these traditionary evidences are fufficient ones; and we shall have a real argument, as well as one ad hominem, for receiving books fo handed down to us. For it is not to be conceived, that whole nations fhould either be impofed upon themfelves, or concur to deceive others, by forgeries of books or facts. These books and facts must therefore, in general, be genuine and true; and it is a strong additional evidence of this, that all nations must be jealous of forgeries for the fame reasons that we are.

Here it may be objected, that as we reject the prodigies related by the Greek and Roman writers, though we admit the common hiftory, so we ought also to reject the scripture miracles. To this I anfwer,

First, That the fcripture hiftory is fupported by far ftronger evidences than the Greek or Roman, as will appear in the following Propofitions.

Secondly, That many of the fcripture miracles are related by eyewitneffes, and were of a public nature, of long duration, attended by great and lafting effects, infeparably connected with the common hiftory, and evidently fuitable to our notions of a wife and good Providence, which cannot be faid of those related by the Pagan writers.

Thirdly, That the fcripture miracles not attended by thefe cogent circumstances, are fupported by their connexion with fuch as are; and that, after we have admitted thefe, there remains no longer any presumption against those from their miraculous nature.

Fourthly, If there be any fmall number found amongst the Pagan miracles, attefted by fuch-like evidences as the principal ones for the fcripture miracles, I do not fee how they can be rejected; but it will not follow, that the fcripture miracles are falfe, because fome of the Pagan ones are true,

PROP.

PROP. V.

THE GREAT IMPORTANCE OF THE HISTORIES, PRECEPTS, PROMISES, THREATENINGS, AND PROPHECIES, CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTURES, ARE EVIDENCES BOTH OF THEIR GENUINENESS, AND OF THE TRUTH OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTS MENTIONED IN THEM.

THIS is one of the inftances in which the evidences for the fcriptures are fuperior, beyond comparison, to thofe for any other ancient books. Let us take a fhort review of this importance in its feveral paticulars.

The hiftory of the creation, fall, deluge, longevity of the patriarchs, difperfion of mankind, calling of Abraham, defcent of Jacob with his family into Egypt, and the precepts of abftaining from blood, and of circumcition, were of fo much concern, either to mankind in general, or to the Ifraelites in particular, and fome of them of so extraordinary a nature, as that it could not be an indifferent matter to the people, anongit whom the account given of them in Genefis was firft pubhified, whether they received them or not. Suppofe this account to be fit publifhed among the Ifraclites by Mofes, and alfo to be then confirmed by clear, univerfal, uninterrupted tradition (which is poffible and probable, according to the hiftory itfelf); and it will be easy to conceive, upon this true fuppofition, how this account fhould be handed down from age to age amongst the Jews, and received by them as indubitable. Suppofe this account to be falfe, i e. fuppofe that there were no fuch evidences and veftiges of thefe hiftories and precepts, and it will be difficult to conceive how this could have happened, let the time of publication be as it will. If early, the people would reject the account at once for want of a clear tradition, which the account itle of would give them reafon to expect. If late, it would be natural to inquire how the author came to be informed of things never known before to others.

If it be faid, that he delivered them as communicated to him by revelation (which yet cannot well be faid, on account of the many references in Genefis to the remaining veftiges of the things related), these furprifing, interefting particulars would at least be an embarraffment upon his fictitious credentials, and engage his contemporaries to look narrowly into them.

If it be faid, that there were many cofmogonies and theogonies current amongst the Pagans, which yet are evidently fictions; I answer, that thefe were in general regarded only as amazing fictions; however, that they had fome truth in them, either expreffed in plain words, or concealed in figures, and that their agreement with the book of Genefis, as far as they are confiftent with one another, or have any appearances of truth, is a remarkable evidence in favour of this book. It is endlefs to make all the poffible fuppofitions and objections of this kind; but it appears to me, that the more are made, the more will the truth and genuineness of the fcriptures be established thereby.

It ought to be added, in relation to the precepts of abstaining from blood, and circumcifion, before mentioned, that if the first was common to mankind, or was known to have been fo, the laft peculiar

to