Page images
PDF
EPUB

made, is a proof of nothing but that the means were adequate to the
end, the cause to the effect. A falfe religion may be fpeedily and
widely fpread by force or by fraud; or it may, by degrees, gain an
extenfive establishment in the world, from its being propitious to
the follies, the vices, and paffions of mankind; or from its being
first introduced in an unenlightened and credulous age; or in a
country fitted by peculiar circumftances to fofter and fupport it; or
from a concurrence of many other human means. This may be
readily granted; but that the Chriftian religion fhould have been
quickly propagated from Judea through the Roman Empire, during
the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, &c. by the human abili-
ties of the Apoftles, appears to me to be an incredible fact. Thofe
who think otherwife would do well, in addition to the fact itself,
to confider the prophecies which were fulfilled when it took place.
"What motive, fays Julin Martyr in his Apology (Reeve's
Tranf.), could ever poffibly have perfuaded us to believe a crucified man
to be the firft begotten of the unbegotten God, and that he would come
to judge the world, had we not met with thofe prophetic teftimo-
nies of him proclaimed fo long before his incarnation? Were we
not eye-witneffes to the fulfilling of them? Did we not fee the de-
folation of Judea, and men out of all nations profelyted to the faith
of his Apoftles, and renouncing the ancient errors they were brought
up in? Did we not find the prophecies made good in ourfelves, and fee
Chriftians in greater numbers, and in greater fincerity, from among
the Gentiles, than from the Jews and Samaritans ?"-This argu-
ment has been infifted upon by Henry More in the firft vol. of his
works, where there is a chapter intituled, Veritas Evangelii demon-
firata ex Succeffu; by J. Denne in a difcourfe printed 1725, intituled,
The miraculous Succefs of the Gofpel, a Proof of its divine Origin;
by Lesley in his Short Method with the Deifts; by Millar in his Hif-
tory of the Propagation of Christianity, and Overthrow of Paganifin :
by Tillotson in the 12th vol. of his Sermons; by Leng in his Ser-
mons at Boyle's Lecture; by Fortin in his Truth of the Chriftian
Religion; by Leland in the 6th chapter of the 2d part of his Defence
of Chriftianity by Bp. Atterbury in his two Sermons on the Mira-
culous Propagation of the Gofpel; by Boffuet in his Difcourfe on
Univerfal Hiftory; by Lardner in his Collection of Jewish Tefti-
monies; by Powell in his 10th Difcourfe; by Benfon in his Reafon-
ableness of Chriftianity; and by Young in the 2d vol. of his Differ-
tations on Idolatrous Corruptions; where, alfo, there is a com-
pendious view, fupported by proper authorities, of the countries
through which the Apostles travelled in propagating the Gospel.

An Efay on the Man of Sin, from Benfon's Paraphrafe
and Notes on St. Paul's Epifles. p. 268.

That the Popish religion is the Chriftian religion, is a falfe po-
fition; and therefore Chriftianity may be true, though the religion

of

t

of the Church of Rome be, in many of its parts, an impofture. This obfervation fhould be always kept in mind by fuch of our young men of fashion, as are fent to finish their education by tra velling in Catholic countries. It may seem paradoxical to affert, that the corruptions of any religion can be proofs of its truth; yet the corruptions of the Chriftian religion, as practifed by the Church of Rome, are certain proofs of the truth of the Chriftian religion; inafmuch as they are exact completions of the prophecies which were delivered by Daniel, St. Paul, and St. John, concerning that apoftafy from the faith, which was to take place in the latter times. I have known the infidelity of more than one young man happily removed, by fhewing him the characters of Popery delineated by St. Paul in his prophecy concerning the Man of Sin (2 Thef. ii. 1.), and in that concerning the apoftafy of the latter times (1 Tim. iv. 1). Bp. Hurd, in his 7th fermon at Warburton's Lecture, has given a concife hiftory of the charge of Antichriftianifm, which has, at different times, been brought againft the Church of Rome, Dr. Whitaker, Regius Profeffor of Divinity at Cambridge, in his exercife for his degree at the Cominencement in 1582, fupported this Thefis-Pontifex Romanus eft ille Antichriftus quem futurum Scriptura prædixit. He had, before that time, refuted the forty arguments by which Nicholas Sander boafted that he had demonftrated-that the Pope was not Antichrift. Whitaker's works are very well worth being looked into by thofe who would know what can be faid for and against the other principal points in controverfy between Proteftants and Papifts, as well as against this primary pillar of the reformed faith-That the Hierarchy of the Church of Rome is the Little Horn of Daniel, the Man of Sin of St. Paul, and the Antichrift of St. John. The evidence arifing from the completion of the prophecies relative to the Rife, Character, and Fall of the Man of Sin, is an increafing evidence it ftrikes us with more force than it ftruck our ancestors before the Reformation; and it will ftrike our pofterity, who fhall obferve the different gradations of his decline, and his final cataftrophe, with more force than it now ftrikes us.

Obfervations on the Hiftory and Evidence of the Refurrection of Jefus Chrift. By GILBERT WEST, Efq. Lond. 1767. 6th. Ed. p. 289.

[ocr errors]

The Refurrection of Chrift is the very corner-ftone on which the hope of a Chriftian is built; for, if Chrift be not rifen, Chriftianity is an impofture; and if Chrift be rifen, Chriftianity is true, and Deifm is a delufion. Whether Chrift be, or be not rifen from the dead, is a queftion of fact, and must be decided (not by metaphyfical dif quifitions concerning the power of God to work a miracle, nor by nice fubtilties concerning the fufficiency of human teftimony to eltablish the credibility of miracles, but) by fairly eftimating the weight of evidence for and against the fact. The main arguments

[ocr errors]

which are brought to invalidate the fact of the Refurrection are đëz duced from the real, or feeming, differences in the accounts which the Evangelifts have given of the circumftances which attended it ; and much labour has been employed in harmonizing the feveral accounts. But what if it fhould be admitted (I do not fay that the conceffion is neceffary), that the accounts cannot in every little point be made to agree? Will you for that reafon difbelieve the fact itself? As well might you have difbelieved the report of those who fhould have faid, that they had feen the body of Cæfar dead, because you would have found them disagreeing, probably, in fome minute points, relative to the number or fituation of his wounds, to the time or manner of his being ftabbed in the Capitol. A flight difagreement between the writers of the New Teftament, in their relations of matters of fact, is entirely analogous to what may be ob ferved every day in courts of justice; no one, on account of a trifling difference in the teftimonies of the witneffes, ever thinks of queftioning the existence of the fact in which they all agree, or of im peaching either their integrity, or competency to eftablish the fact. If the Evangelifts do really differ from each other in their accounts of the Refurrection of Jefus, it is a proof that they did not write in concert, were not combined to impofe a fable on the world; and it is a proof, alío, that what they wrote was not infpired in the man ner which fome, with more piety than judgment, have fuppofed it to have been. Let the Deifts make the moft they can of the variations which they think may be found in the Evangelifts; yet will they never be able to prove, that the facts mentioned by these wri ters refpecting the Birth, Life, Death, Refurrection, and Afcenfion of Jefus Chrift, are not true: let them faften upon the writers of the New Teftament as much human infirmity as they can; yet will they never be able to prove that they were not divinely inspired in what they delivered concerning the doctrines neceffary to be believed, and the duties neceffary to be performed, by all true difciples of Jefus Chrift.-The book which is here printed has been much efteemed; it has been tranflated both into German and French, and may be of great ufe to those whofe religious principles are unfettled. Macknight, in his Harmony, has endeavoured to reconcile the feeming inconfiftencies in the Evangelifts relative to the refurrection. Lardner púb lifhed fome judicious obfervations on Macknight's plan. Benfon has given his fentiments on the fubject of the Refurrection in his Life of Chrift, and has anfwered the objections ufually made to it. Bp. Newcome, in his Harmony, may be confulted on the fubject with great advantage. A pamphlet, publifhed many years ago, intituled, The Trial of the Witnelles of the Refurrection of Jefus, has been well received in the world; but the moft folid reafoning on the fubject may be met with in a difcourfe concerning the Refurrection of Jefus Chrift, by Humphrey Ditton, 5th ed. 1749. Fabricius, in the 44th chap. of his Delectus Argumentorum, mentions 28 different authors on the Refurrection, and in the 9th chap. of his Lux Evangelica he adds above 20 more; nor would it be a difficult talk greatly to enlarge his catalogue.

OF

OF THE

TRUTH

OF THE

CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

To believe the Chriftian religion, is to believe that Mofes and the

prophets, Chrift and his apoftles, were endued with divine authority, that they had a commiffion from God to act and teach as they did, and that he will verify their declarations concerning future things, and especially thofe concerning a future life, by the event: or, in other words, it is to receive the fcriptures as our rule of life, and the foundation of all our hopes and fears. And as all thofe who regulate their faith and practice by the fcriptures are Chriftians; fo all thofe who difclaim that name, and pafs under the general title of unbelievers, do also disavow this regard to the fcriptures. But there are various claffes of unbelievers. Some appear to treat the fcriptures as mere forgeries; others allow them to be the genuine writings of thofe whose names they bear, but suppose them to abound with fictions, not only in the miraculous, but alfo in the common part of the hiftory; others again allow this part, but reject that; and, laftly, there are others who feem to allow the truth of the principal facts, both common and miraculous, contained in the fcriptures, and yet ftill call in queftion its divine authority, as a rule of life, and an evidence of a happy futurity under Chrift our faviour and king. He, therefore, that would fatisfy himself or others in the truth of the Chriftian religion, as oppofed by these feveral claffes of unbelievers, muft inquire into these three things:

Firft, The genuineness of the books of the Old and New Tefta

ment.

Secondly, The truth of the principal facts contained in them, both common and miraculous. And,

Thirdly, Their divine authority.

I will endeavour, therefore, to ftate fome of the chief evidences for each of these important points, having firft premised three preparatory propofitions, or lemmas, whereby the evidence for any one of them may be transferred upon the other two.

VOL. V.

B

PROP.

which are brought to inv duced from the real, or the Evangelifts have giv and much labour has be counts. But what if it conceffion is neceffary), be made to agree? Will As well might you hav have faid, that they h would have found th points, relative to the time or manner of hi greement between the lations of matters of ferved every day in c difference in the to tioning the existence peaching either thei If the Evangelifts d of the Refurrection concert, were not c

[ocr errors]

is a proof, allo, thi ner which fome, to have been. tions which they they never be ters refpecting t of Jefus Christ, New Teftament never be able: they delivered the duties nec Chrift.-The has been tra: great ufe to t in his Har

encies in tl.

lifhed for

given his

Chrift, :

N

1

« PreviousContinue »