OF THE

TRUT H

OF THE

CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

T

O believe the Chriftian religion, is to believe that Mofes and the prophets, Chrift and his apostles, 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 those who regulate their faith and practice by the fcriptures are Christians; fo all thofe who difclaim that name, and pafs under the general title of unbelievers, do alfo difavow 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 those whofe names they bear, but fuppofe them to abound with fictions, not only in the miraculous, but also 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 still call in question 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 himfelf or others in the truth of the Chriftian religion, as oppofed by these feveral claffes of unbelievers, muft inquire into thefe three things:

First, The genuineness of the books of the Old and New Testa

ments.

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 premifed three preparatory propofitions, of lemmas, whereby the evidence for any one of them may be transferred upon the other two.

PROP. I.

THE GENUINENESS OF THE SCRIPTURES PROVE THE TRUTH OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTS CONTAINED IN THEM.

FOR, first, It is very rare to meet with any genuine writings of the hiftorical kind, in which the principal facts are not true; unless where

VOL. V.

B

་

where both the motives which engaged the author to falfify, and the * circumftances which gave fome plaufibility to the fiction, are apparent; neither of which can be alleged in the prefent cafe with any colour of reafon. Where the writer of a hiftory appears to the world as fuch, not only his moral fenfe, but his regard to his character and his intereft, are ftrong motives not to falfify in notorious matters; he muft therefore have stronger motives from the oppofite quarter, and alfo a favourable conjuncture of circunftances, before he can attempt this.

Secondly, As this is rare in general, fo it is much more rare where the writer treats of things that happened in his own time, and under his own cognizance or direction, and communicates his hiftory to perfons under the fame circumstances. All which may be faid of the writers of the fcripture hiftory.

That this, and the following arguments, may be applied with more eafe and clearnefs, I will here, in one view, refer the books of the Old and New Teftaments to their proper authors. I fuppofe then, that the Pentateuch confifts of the writings of Mofes, put together by Samuel, with a very few additions; that the books of Joshua and Judges were in like manner collected by him; and the book of Ruth, with the first part of the book of Samuel, written by him; that the latter part of the first book of Samuel, and the fecond book, were written by the prophets who fucceeded Samuel, fuppofe Nathan and Gad; that the books of Kings and Chronicles are extracts from the records of the fucceeding prophets concerning their own times, and from the public genealogical Tables, made by Ezra; that the books of Ezra and Nehemiah are collections of like records, fome written by Ezra and Nehemiah, and fome by their predeceffors; that the book of Efther was written by fome eminent Jew, in or near the times of the tranfaction there recorded, perhaps Mordecai; the book of Job by a Jew of an uncertain time; the Pfalms by David, and other pious perfons; the books of Proverbs and Canticles by Solomon; the book of Ecclefiaftes by Solomon, or perhaps by a Jew of latter times, fpeaking in his perfon, but not with an intention to make him pafs for the Author; the prophecies by the prophets whofe names they bear; and the books of the New Teftament by the perfons to whom they are ufually afcribed, There are many interval evidences, and in the cafe of the New Teftament many external evidences alfo, by which thefe books may be fhewn to belong to the authors here named. Or, if there be any doubts, they are merely of a critical nature, and do not at all affect the genuineness of the books, nor alter the application of these arguments, or not materially. Thus, if the epittle to the Hebrews be fuppofed written, not by St. Paul, but by Clement or Barnabas, or any other of their contemporaries, the evidence therein given to the miracles performed by Chrift and his followers will not be at all invalidated thereby." Thirdly, The great importance of the facts mentioned in the fcriptures makes it ftill more improbable, that the feveral authors fhould either have attempted to falfify, or have fucceeded in fuch an attempt. This is an argument for the truth of the facts, which proves the ge

nuineness

huineness of the books at the fame time, as I fhall fhew below in a diftin&t propofition. However, the truth of the facts is inferred'. more directly from their importance, if the genuineness of the fcriptures be previously allowed. The fame thing may be obferved of the great number of particular circumftances of time, place, perfons, &c. 17 mentioned in the feriptures, and of the harmony of the books with themfelves, and with each other. Thefe are arguments both for the genuineness of the books, and truth of the facts diftinctly confidered, and alfo arguments for deducing the truth from the genuinenefs. And indeed the arguments for the general truth of the hiftory of any age or nation, where regular records have been kept, are fo interwoven together, and fupport each other in fuch a variety of ways, that it is extremely difficult to keep the ideas of them diftinct, not to anticipate, and not to prove more than the exactnefs of method requires one to prove. Or, in other words, the inconfiftency of the contrary fuppofitions is fo great, that they can scarce ftand long enough to be confuted. Let any one try this in the hiftory of France or Eng land, Greece or Rome.

Fourthly, If the books of the Old and New Teftaments were written by the perfons to whom they were afcribed above,”.'e, if they be genuine, the moral characters of thefe writers afford the ftrongeft affurance, that the facts afferted by them are true.Falfhoods and frauds of a common nature fhock the moral fenfe of contmon men, and are rarely met with, except in perfons of abandoned characters how inconfiftent then muft thofe of the moft glaring and impious nature be with the higheft moral characters! That fuch characters are due to the facred writers appears from the writings themfelves by an internal evidence; but there is alfo ftrong external evidence in many cafes; and indeed this point is allowed in general by unbelievers. The fufferings which feveral of the writers underwent both in life and death, in atteftation of the facts delivered by them, is a particular argument in favour of thefe..

Fifthly, The arguments here alleged for proving the truth of the fcripture hiftory from the genuinenets of the book's, are as conclufive in refpect of the miraculous facts, as of the common ones. But be fides this we may obferve, that if we allow the genuineness of the books to be a fufficient evidence of the common facts mentioned in them, the miraculous facts must be allowed alfo, from their clofe connexion with the common ones. It is neceffary to admit beth or neither. It is not to be conceived, that Mofes fhould have delivered the Ifraelites from their flavery in Egypt, or conducted them through the wildernels for forty years, at all, in fuch manner as the common history reprefents, unless we fuppofe the miraculous facts, intermixed with it to be true alfo. In like manner, the fame of Chrift's miracles, the multitudes which followed him, the adherence of his difciples, the jealoufy and hatred of the chief priests, fcribes and pharifees, with many other facts of a common nature, are inpoffible to be accounted for, unless we allow that he did really work miracles. And the fame oblervations hold in general of the other parts of the fcripture history.

B 2

Sixthly,

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 aligned why this reluctance was, in general, lefs in antient times than in the prefent (which, however, are prefumptions that fome real Miracles were then wrought): but it inuft always be confiderable from the very frame of the human mind, and would be particular fo amongst the Jewe at the time of Christ's appearance, as they had then been without miracles for four hundred years, or more. Now this reluctance must make both the writers and readers very much upon their guard, and if it be now one of the chief prejudices again revealed religion, as unbelievers unanimously affert, it is but reafonable 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 strong confirmation of fuch an hiftory, if its genuineness 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 genuinenefs be allowed. The objection againft all miraculous facts will be confidered below, after the other, arguments for the truth of the fcripturę miracles have been alleged.

The converle of this propofition is alfo true; i. e. If the princi-, pal 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 feriptures is only made ufe 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 hiftory, and the contemporary profane Hiftory, which no-ways prefuppofe but, on the contrary, prove the genuinenets of the fcriptures, and this genuineness, thus proved, may, by the arguments alleged 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 hiftory 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 OF THE SCRIPTURES PROVES THEIR DIVINE AUTHORITY.

THE truth of this propofition, as it refpects the book of Daniel, feems to have been acknowleged by Prophyry, inasmuch as he could no-ways invalidate the divine authority of this book, implied by the accomplishment of the prophecies therein delivered, but by allerting 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 Tef

tament.

taments, many of them having unquestionable evidences of the di vine foreknowledge, if they be allowed genuine. I referve the pro phetical 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; Ifaiali's concerning Cyrus; Jeremiah's concerning the duration of the Babylonith captivity; Chrift's concerning the destruction 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, i. e. before the event which it fo fitly reprefents.

The fame thing follows from the fablimity and excellence of the doctrines contained in the fcriptures. Thefe no-ways fuit the fup-pofed 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 admiting the divine atfistance.

The converfe of this propofition, viz. that the divine authority of the feriptures infers their genuinenefs, will, I fuppofe, he readily acknow leged by all. And it may be used for the fame purposes as the converfe of the last. 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 Gospel to be deduced in this way, the genuineness of the Acts of the Apofties may be deduced from it, and of St. Paul's Epiftles from the Acts, by the ufual critical methods. And when the genuineness of the Acts of the Apoftles, and of St Paul's Epifles, is thus deduced, the truth of the facts mentioned in them will follow from it by the laft propofition; and their divine authority by this.

PROP. III.

THE TRUTH OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTS CONTAINED IN THE SCRIP TURES 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, fecondly, from the previous cftablishment of the great truths of natural religion. And, first,

It is evident, that the great power, knowlege, and benevolence, which appeared in Chrift, the prophets, and apoftles, according to the fcripture accounts, do, as it were, command aflent and fabmiffion from all those who receive thefe accounts as hiftorical truths; and that, though 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 fcripture hiftory, allowed to be true, muft convince us, that Chrift, the

B 3

prophets