sumed a bolder attitude. Their elder brethren, who lived near the Christian æra, had as perfect a hatred of the gospel: some of them were high in rank and office; and the civil authority with which they were vested, enabled them the better to discover the truth; but, after all, they were obliged to acknowledge the reality of the miracles of the New Testament. Of late, their successors deny them, with a high tone of assurance. Some have professed to demonstrate that miracles are impossible; others have attempted to expose the futility or falsehood of particular passages; multitudes have searched for contradictions, objections, and difficulties in the Scriptures; and they have plentifully bestrewed their compositions with ridicule and sarcasm. Some of these adversaries are men of talents and learning; while others possess neither, and have nothing to recommend them but a hatred of the gospel. But what have all these men been able to say against it? The Christian who has read extensively on the subject, will be gratified to find how easily and satisfactorily their objections have been answered; how wide of the mark their bitter arrows have flown; how little they have been able to invalidate the grand evidences for Christianity; and how entire and firm the building remains, after all their efforts to overthrow it. Nor indeed are the objections so numerous, as one ignorant of the controversy might suppose; for although the writings of deists be greatly multiplied, we find often little else but the objections made by former authors, again presented to view. Persons who would attack the works of creation and providence, would be able to say more against them, and in a more forcible way, than has been said against divine revelation.

SECTION IV.

From a Spirit of Opposition to the Gospel, and in order to destroy its Credibility, Deists run into the grossest Absurdities.

WHEN men, in order to oppose successfully a system which they dislike, run into the grossest absurdities, and believe any thing, however improbable, which has a tendency to discredit it, there is some reason to conclude that the system is true; at any rate, there is the strongest reason to believe that they are wrong. How prominent is this feature in deists, where Christianity is concerned! Many of them are men of much erudi

tion, of good sense, and of sound judgment; but there is a certain fatuity quoad hoc, which every reader of the controversy must have observed. The religion of the ancient heathens of Greece and Rome was a heterogeneous mass of idolatry, superstition, impurity, and barbarity. But how highly do infidels extol it! Gibbon, who ranks among the Pontifices Maximi of infidelity, always speaks of it with approbation, and dignifies it with the title of "the elegant mythology of the Greeks." The Koran contains a profusion of ridiculous ceremonies and unmeaning observances, and various precepts contrary to reason and goodness; but the prophet of Mecca has won the good graces of unbelievers; and the most civil things are said of Mohammed and his religion. But why? He was an enemy to the gospel of Christ. Modern paganism likewise finds many panegyrists among them. The religion of Hindostan is well known to be a chaos of idolatry, lewdness, and cruelty; and the Hindoos, by the testimony of the most competent judges, are among the most dishonest, lewd, false, and deceitful people on the face of the earth. But how highly have they been extolled by deistical writers! If you give credit to the Abbé Raynal and his coadjutors, you would suppose their religion the essence of wisdom and purity, and its votaries the patterns of every virtue. But on what account do they thus misrepresent the truth? Christianity will suffer by the comparison; and the religion of Brahma appear superior to the religion of Jesus. The chronology of the Scriptures agrees with the most authentic ancient histories, with appearances in nature, with the invention of arts and sciences; and it is confirmed by an accurate investigation of the records of nations. But from a spirit of pride, the Egyptians, the Chinese, and the Hindoos, invented a chronology_reaching back hundreds of thousands, nay millions of years. The reign of some of the monarchs lasted for many thousands of years. Deists drink down the enchanted cup with avidity, and are intoxicated with delight. But how is it that sensible men can for a moment give credit to such palpable absurdities? Because the credibility of the gospel will be hereby ruined. When a Christian performs eminents acts of goodness, infidels insinuate that there is just cause to suspect him of hypocrisy. If a man of another creed do the same things, though in an inferior degree, he and his religion are exalted to the skies; and to hint a suspicion that he may be a hypocrite, is an unpardonable crime. Because Christianity has teachers of religion, all her ministers are bitterly inveighed against as ignorant or

artful priests, destitute of every good principle. Let bad men who assume the office be covered with as heavy a load of infamy as you please. But why this enmity against the good, who not only teach but practice virtue-and who, along with Christianity, illustrate all the principles, and enforce all the precepts, of natural religion, as extensively, and earnestly, and constantly as ever a deist did? They are ministers of the gospel, and that is crime enough; every thing connected with it, is an object of dislike.

The deist is entreated to consider the conduct of his fathers and brethren, with an unbiassed mind. It is painful to be compelled to bring such heavy charges against a body of men; but can he contradict them? Does it not appear as if all means were thought lawful against the Christian religion, and that it must be condemned per fas et nefas? But does it not likewise show, that little reliance is to be placed on men who will employ such methods to obtain their end; and that they seem to feel a consciousness, that their cause is not so good as they would wish the world to believe?

SECTION V.

The System of the Deists does not supply the Place of the Gospel, nor make suitable and sufficient Provision for the Happines of Man.

The na

THE gospel clearly conveys to us the knowledge of every thing that is necessary to our duty and happiness. ture of God, the manner of worshipping him, the way of acceptance with him, the various parts of duty, the consolations of his promises, and a future state of reward and punishment, are fully and plainly revealed; and all the satisfaction which it is reasonable for us to expect, is given. These the deist rejects. It is natural then to conclude that he has something better to put in their place; and that if he robs us of these by withdrawing our hearts from the gospel, he can furnish more satisfactory discoveries of divine truth, and more ample consolations. But what is that system of religion which is to stand in the gospel's room?

It may be justly remarked, that the deist's only care has too often been to eradicate the belief of the gospel from the heart; and when that object has been attained, no pains were taken to instil other principles; but as if every thing had then

been done, the person was left without any fixed principles to direct him. This conduct certainly merits the severest reprehension; and it may justly be said, that what influences such a zealot, is not the love of truth or human happiness, but a hatred of Christianity. But let us suppose a deist disposed to teach the whole of his system, what is there in it that can supply the place of the gospel? What assurance can you give, O deist, that God will hold friendly intercourse with man? When I wish to engage in worship, I seek "access through Christ by one Spirit unto the Father." But how do you say I am to worship God? What particular directions can you give me; and what assurance that my worship shall be favourably received? The New Testament informs me that I may hope for reconciliation with God, whom I have offended, through the mediation of Jesus Christ: but this doctrine you reject. How shall I then obtain the pardon of my sins, and be admitted into the friendship of God? Tell me, deist, for the subject is of the last importance to my peace of mind. "Repent and reform your life; and God will forgive you, and be your friend." What dependence may I place on your assertions? Besides, how often, and how long, and for what sins, will repentance suffice? I am conscious that every duty which I perform is attended with imperfections; what assurance can you give me that it will be acceptable? I feel much consolation from the prospects and hopes of that state of blessedness, which the gospel has encouraged the disciples of Jesus to look for after death. You say that the gospel is an imposture; and you wish to cut off all my expectations. But what do you put in its place? You speak also of a future state; but who ever saw it? No one, according to your system, ever came down from heaven to reveal it; all rests on the reasoning of man. But can man by reasoning inform me what the happiness is, how long it will endure, and whether it may not be lost? The gospel affords me resignation and comfort amidst the sufferings of this present life, from the consideration "that all things work together for good to them that love God; and that our light afflictions work out for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory." All these I must reject, if I attend to you. But where are the consolations you can furnish in their place? There are no declarations of God; I must rest in the assertions and reasonings of man: but will these suffice?

In all these things, deist, you offer me nothing beyond conjecture or a low degree of probability. It may be; but it may

not be. You can present nothing like certainty and assurance. And is this an adequate support? Is this sufficient to animate hope, and direct the life? Is it for this, that the Christian is to forsake the gospel, which is a "lamp to his feet, and a light to his paths?" Shall he bid adieu to what he justly accounts certainty, for a system which even the deist cannot say rises higher than peradventure? Brief hints must suffice, where a more extended consideration is almost necessary to throw the full blaze of light on the subject; a subject which every one who rejects Christianity is loudly called on, for his own satisfaction, to examine with the most serious attention.

SECTION VI.

There is good reason to conclude that the System of Natural Religion which the Deists profess to hold, is derived from the New Testament.

66

reason

"A DIVINE revelation is needless," says the deist, will teach men all necessary truths;" and in proof he refers to the system of natural religion which he has drawn up. But is there no ground to deny your assertion, and to charge you with having stolen your system from the Scriptures? What it contains may in general be called the principles of natural religion; but the question is, "Where did the deist learn them? Was it from reason, or from Christ?" That it was not from reason, the history of mankind affords evidence which it will not be easy to refute.

The ancient philosophers of Greece and Rome were men of the first talents; they spent their days in study; they frequently directed their attention to the most important subjects; and they wrote many books. But show me their system of natural religion? Here and there a fine sentiment is to be found, but surrounded by pages of gross error; each diamond is hid under mountains of rubbish; or shall we rather say it sparkles from a dunghill. One of the first modern deists in England attempted to compile a system out of all these just ideas. But had he placed by their side the heaps of rubbish from which they were extracted, had he brought forward the superstition, the absurdity, and the idolatry with which they stood connected, in the original authors, it would have appeared that, however beautiful a whole they might make in his hands, the detached sentiments were of no use in theirs. The general system of