REMARKS ON MR. T. PAINE'S PREFACE. MR. PAINE'S work by no means accords to its title. The Age of Reason' is far more replete with wit, and rhetorical flourishes, than with solid argument, or sober discussion. It is in fact an attempt to reduce to practice Lord Shaftsbury's famous maxim, that ridicule is the test of truth; except that scurrility and acrimony generally predominate. It is easy to answer Mr. P.'s reasonings, in which there is very little that is new: but his confident assertions, vehement declamations, and smart repartees, are very imposing. Every reader of such a book ought therefore to pause, from time to time, and seriously to ask himself, What argument does this contain? When Mr. P. thought himself near death, he rejoiced that he had published the first part of The Age of Reason.' This indeed proved the sincerity of his enmity to the Bible; but not that his opinion of the Bible was well grounded. Should a Christian adduce such a circumstance, as a proof that his principles were true, he would be counted an enthusiast. He elsewhere swears, that he thinks the Christian religion is not true; and concludes his Deistical creed, by saying So help me God.' This is an advance above all preceding infidels, and may B evince that he was sincere in his opposition to the gospel; and so was Saul of Tarsus. (Acts xxvi, 9.) But was he right in his opinion on the subject? Mr. P. professes to draw all his arguments against the Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves. This is specious, and politick, but very delusive. In case any of your readers should think you had not 'put forth your whole strength, by not referring for proof of your opinion to ancient authors; lest they should " suspect that all ancient authors are in your favour, I will ⚫ venture to affirm, that had you made a learned appeal to all the ancient books in the world, sacred or profane, Christian, Jewish, or Pagan; instead of lessening, they would have established the authority of the 'Bible as the word of God.' Bp. Watson. Though priests be not allowed to pay the same regard to their credit, interest, or even subsistence, as all other men do without censure; yet they are bound in conscience, and office to defend the Bible: and why should they not be as competent to write on religion, or in defence of it, as other men are concerning their several professions? BOOK THE FIRST. CHAP. I. . The Books of Moses. By way of introducing our subject, I would observe, that the credit given to the Bible is often ascribed to the prejudices of education. But I am impelled to declare, that for some years I was not much more disposed to believe the scriptures than Mr. P. was: and having shaken off the shackles of education, I was much gratified by my emancipation, and flattered myself greatly on my superior discernment, with proportionable contempt of seniors and superiors, who adhered to the faith. Yet, at length after much about forty years, diligently employed in examining the evidences and contents of the Bible; I am more and more fully convinced, that it is "THE "WORD OF GOD." Mr. Paine undertakes to demonstrate, that Moses did not write those books, which are ascribed to him, and consequently that they are destitute of authority. This, however, would not follow: for they might be authentick records, even if written by another author. Let us then consider a few of the most obvious proofs, that Moses did write the main substance of these books which bear his name; and that he wrote them "inspiration of God: by and then a little notice may properly be taken of Mr. P.'s boasted demonstration of the contrary. 1. The books themselves give plain intimations to that effect. "Moses wrote all the words of the Lord.-And "he took the book of the covenant, and read it in "the audience of the people." Exod. xxiv, 4, 7. "When "Moses had made an end of writing the words of this "law in a book, until they were finished;---He commanded "the Levites, saying, Take this book of the law, and put "it in the sides of the ark." Deut. xxxi, 24--26. Reference to the law written by Moses is continually made in most of the subsequent books of the scripture. The testimony of all antiquity, Jews and Pagans; with that of the whole Christian church, and of the modern 'Jews, the avowed enemies of Christianity; concur in ascribing these books to Moses. Now how could such a unanimous opinion have prevailed in the world, if there had been no foundation for it? If it did not originate at the time assigned for the first publication of these books, at what time could it have been introduced? Is it possible that the whole nation of Israel should have been persuaded, that the recent writings of an anonymous impostor, were books always known and reverenced by them? Or that they had always been governed by laws, and observed weekly, monthly, and annual institutions, and been conversant with histories, which they had never seen before? If priests and princes had attempted such an imposition, and forcibly endeavoured to silence opponents; would not two parties have been formed? Would there have been no trace of it in any history? It is indeed too late to attempt disproving the claim of books, which have certainly borne the name of Moses, by the general consent of mankind much above 2000 years. 2. The history contained in these books is confirmed by the most ancient records of the pagan world, and even by the fables of the poets; and has every mark of authenticity. It indeed throws more light on the original of nations, and many other coincident subjects, than all the records of antiquity taken together. 3. The views given in the books of Moses of the moral perfections, works, and government of God, and of his self-existence, eternity, and all other attributes, is in every respect, most rational, sublime, and satisfactory; and as much excels all that the pagans_wrote on these subjects, as the sun outshines a taper. The creation of the world by the one living and true God, is peculiar to these books, and the other parts of the Bible, and to writings taken from them; while obscurity and uncertainty, in this most |