Pharifees, with many other facts of a common nature, are impoffible to be accounted for, unless we allow that he did really work miracles. And the fame obfervations hold in general of the other parts of the fcripture hiftory.

Sixthly, There is even a particular argument in favour of the miraculous part of the fcripture hiftory, to be drawn from the reluctance of mankind to receive miraculous facts. It is true, that this reluctance is greater in fome ages and nations than in others; and probable reafons may be affigned why this reluctance was, in general, lefs in ancient times than in the prefent (which, however, are prefumptions that fome real miracles were then wrought): but it must always be confiderable from the very frame of the human mind, and would be particularly fo amongst the Jews at the time of Chrift's appearance, as they had then been without miracles for four hundred years, or more. Now this reluctance muft make both the writers and readers very much upon their guard; and if it be now one of the chief prejudices against revealed religion, as unbelievers unanimously affert, it is but reasonable to allow alfo, that it would be a ftrong check upon the publications of a miraculous hiftory at or near the time when the miracles were faid to be performed; i. e. it will be a ftrong confirmation of fuch an hiftory, if its genuinenefs be granted previously.

And, upon the whole, we may certainly conclude, that the principal facts, both common and miraculous, mentioned in the fcriptures, must be true, if their genuineness be allowed. The objection against all miraculous facts will be confidered below, after the other arguments for the truth of the fcripture miracles have been alledged.

The converfe of this propofition is also true; i. e. If the principal facts mentioned in the fcriptures be true, they must be genuine writings. And though this converfe propofition may, at first fight, appear to be of little importance for the establishment of Chriftianity, inafmuch as the genuineness of the fcriptures is only made use of as a medium whereby to prove the truth of the facts mentioned in them, yet it will be found otherwife upon farther examination. For there are many evidences for the truth of particular facts mentioned in the fcriptures; fuch, for inftance, as thofe taken from natural history, and the contemporary profane hiftory, which no-ways prefuppofe, but, on the contrary, prove the genuinenefs of the fcriptures; and this genuineness, thus proved, may, by the arguments alledged under this propofition, be extended to infer the truth of the rest of the facts: which is not to argue in a circle, and to prove the truth of the fcripture-history from its truth; but to prove the truth of thofe facts which are not attefted by natural or civil hiftory, from thofe which are, by the medium of the genuinenefs of the fcriptures.

PROP. II.

THE GENUINENESS OE THE SCRIPTURES PROVES THEIR DIVINE

AUTHORITY.

THE truth of this propofition, as it refpects the book of Daniel, feems to have been acknowledged by Porphyry, inafmuch as he could

no-ways

no-ways invalidate the divine authority of this book, implied by the accomplishment of the prophecies therein delivered, but by afferting that they were written after the event, i. e. were forgeries. But the fame thing holds of many of the other books of the Old and New Teftaments, many of them having unquestionable evidences of the divine foreknowledge, if they be allowed genuine. I referve the prophetical evidences to be difcuffed hereafter, and therefore fhall only fuggeft the following inftances here, in order to illuftrate the propofition; viz. Mofes's prophecy concerning the captivity of the Ifraelites, of a ftate not yet erected; Ifaiah's concerning Cyrus; Jeremiah's concerning the duration of the Babylonif. captivity; Chrift's concerning the deftruction of Jerufalem, and the captivity that was to follow; St. John's concerning the great corruption of the Chriftian church; and Daniel's concerning the fourth empire in its declenfion; which laft was extant in Porphyry's time at least, before the event which it fo fitly reprefents.

The fame thing follows from the fublimity and excellence of the doctrines contained in the fcriptures. These no-ways fuit the fuppofed authors, i. e. the ages when they lived, their educations or occupations; and therefore, if they were the real authors, there is a neceffity of admitting the divine afsistance.

The converfe of this propofition, viz. that the divine authority of the fcriptures infers their genuineness, will, I fuppofe, be readily acknowledged by all. And it may be used for the fame purposes as the converfe of the laft. For there are feveral evidences for the divine authority of the fcriptures, which are direct and immediate, and prior to the confideration both of their genuineness, and of the truth of the facts contained in them. Of this kind is the character of Chrift, as it may be collected from his difcourfes and actions related in the gofpels. The great and manifeft fuperiority of this to all other characters, real and fictitious, proves, at once, his divine miffion, exclufively of all other confiderations. Suppofe now the genuineness of St. Luke's Gofpel to be deduced in this way, the genuineness of the Acts of the Apoftles may be deduced from it, and of St. Paul's Epiftles from the Acts, by the usual critical methods. And when the genuineness of the Acts of the Apostles, and of St. Paul's Epiftles, is thus deduced, the truth of the facts mentioned in them will follow from it by the laft proposition; and their divine authority by this.

PROP. III.

THE TRUTH OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTS CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTURES PROVES THEIR DIVINE AUTHORITY.

THIS propofition may be proved two ways; firft, exclufively of the evidences of natural religion, fuch as thofe delivered in the last chapter; and, Secondly, from the previous establishment of the great truths of natural religion. And, first,

It is evident, that the great power, knowledge, and benevolence, which appeared in Chrift, the prophets, and apoftles, according to the fcripture accounts, do, as it were, command affent and fubmiffion from all those who receive these accounts as historical truths; and that, though they

B 3

they are not able to deduce, or have not in fact deduced, the evidences of natural religion; nay, though they fhould have many doubts about them; the frame of the human mind is fuch, that the feripture 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 higheft wifdem and goodness.

Secondly, If natural religion be previoufly eftablifhed, the truth of the principal facts of the feriptures 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 apoftles, 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 should permit these perfons to make fuch a claim falfely, and then endue them, or suffer them to be endued, with fuch credentials as muft fupport such 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 scriptures 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 those of the two last.

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 established 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 firft, or even the fecond, and yet are ranked under the title of unbelievers. It is neceffary to fhew to fuch perfons, that the first 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 itself, 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 firft and loweft 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, must be confidered as divinely infpired, and as having immediate divine authority; elfe we cannot allow even common authority to thefe 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 apoitles, had natural talents for writing hiftory, applying the fcriptures, reafoning, 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 reafonings thereupon, inconclufive and unfatisfactory; that the writers themselves nowhere lay claim to infallibility, when speaking from themselves; and that Hermas, Clemens Tomanus, and Barnabas, who were apoftolical perfons, feem evidently to have reasoned 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 rest of the fcriptures, the reafonings, the application of the prophecies, and even the doctrines of inferior note, must be infpired: elfe what can be meant by the gifts of the fpirit, 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 reasonings of the fcriptures have the marks of being written in the fame manner as other books, i. e. may feem not to be infpired, yet a secret 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 distinguished from thofe which a Being that has a sufficient power over our intellectual frame might excite in us.

The third and laft hypothefis is, That the whole fcriptures are infpired, even the most minute historical paffages, the falutations, incidental mention of common 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 distinguifhed by Providence from all other writings, even of good Jews and Chriftians, and to admit of a vindication in refpect of fmall difficulties, and small 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 prefume to determine which of thefe three fuppofitions approaches neareft the truth. The following propofitions will, I hope, eftablish the firft 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 ferious, inquifitive men can fcarce 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 ufes 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 facred 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 fhall 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.

PROP. IV.

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 refembles 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 efteemed by thefe nations to be tranfmitted to them by their forefathers in a continued fucceffion, from the times when the refpective 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