world, should agree in the belief of a thing, which never existed. For though doubts have arisen concerning this general belief, yet it is now pretty well ascertained, from the accounts of travellers, that no nation hath yet been discovered, among whom some traces of religious worship have not been found.

Be it so, says the objector; yet still we find single persons, even in civilized countries, and some of them men of enlarged capacities, who have not only had their doubts on this subject, but have proclaimed aloud their disbelief of a Divine Being.

We answer, that it is more than probable, no man's infidelity on this head was ever thoroughly settled. Bad men rather endeavour to convince themselves, than are really convinced. But even on a supposition, that a few such persons could be found, what is their testimony against so great a majority, as the rest of mankind? The light of the sun is universally acknowledged, though it happens, that now and then, a man may be born blind.

But since, it seems, there are difficulties in supposing adivine Creator,and Preserver of the world, what system of things does the Atheist suppose attended with fewer? He sees the world produced before him. He sees it hath been created; and is preserved. Some account of this matter must be given. If ours displease him, let us have his.

The experiment hath been tried. We have had many atheistical creeds; none of which hath stood the test of being handed down with any degree of credit

into future times.

It was an

The Atheist's great argument indeed against a Deity, is levelled at the apparent injustice of his government. objection of ancient date; and might have had its weight in heathen times; but it is one of the blessings, which attends Christianity, that it satisfies all our doubts on this head; and gives us a rational and easy solution of this poignant objection. What if we observe an inaccurate distribution of the things of this world! What if virtue be depressed, and vice triumphant! It is nothing, says the voice of religion, to him who believes this life to be an inconsiderable part of his being: a point only in the expanse of eternity: who believes he is sent into this world, merely to prepare himself for a better. This world, he knows, is intended neither for reward nor punishment. Happiness anquestionably attends virtue even here,

and misery, vice: but it is not the happiness of a splendid station, but of a peaceful mind; nor is it the misery of low circumstances, but of a guilty conscience. The things of this world are not, in their own nature, connected either with happiness or misery. Attended sometimes by one, and sometimes by the other, they are merely the means of trial. One man is tempted with riches, and another with poverty; but God intends neither an elevated, nor a depressed situation as the ultimate completion of his will.

Besides, if worldly prosperity even was the indication of God's favour, yet good men may have failings and imprudences enough about them to deserve misfortune; and bad men virtues, which may deserve success. Why should imprudence, though joined with virtue, partake of its reward? Or the generous purpose share in the punishment, though connected with vice?

Thus then we see the being of a God is the universal creed of nature. But though nature could investigate the simple truth, she could not preserve it from error. Nature merely takes her notions from what she sees, and what she hears, and hath ever moulded her gods in the likeness of things in heaven, and things on earth. Hence every part of the creation, animate and inanimate, hath, by turns, been an object of worship. And even the most refined nations, we know, had gross conceptions on this head. The wisest of them, indeed, by observing the wonders of crea tion, could clothe the Deity with wisdom and power: but they could go no farther. The virtues of their heroes afforded them the highest ideas of perfection: and with these they arrayed their gods; mixing also with their virtues, such vices as are found in the characters of the best of

men.

For just notions of the Deity, we must have recourse then to revelation alone. Revelation removes all these absurdities. It dispels the clouds of ignorance; and unveils the divine majesty, as far as it can be the object of human contemplation. The lax notions of libertinism, on one hand, which make the Deity an inobservant governor; and the gloomy ideas of superstition, on the other, which suppose him to be a dark malignant being, are equally exposed. Here we are informed of the omniscience and omnipresence of God. Here we learn, that his wisdom and power are equalled by his goodness; and

that his mercy is over all his works. In short, we learn from revelation, that we are in the hands of a being, whose knowledge we cannot evade, and whose power we cannot resist; who is merciful and good to all his creatures; and will be ever ready to assist and reward those, who endeavour to conform themselves to his will: but whose justice, at the same time, accompanying his mercy, will punish the bold and careless sinner in proportion to his guilt. Gilpin.

§ 101. On the Creed, continued-the Belief of Jesus Christ.

After professing our belief in God, the creed proceeds with a profession of our belief in Jesus Christ, his Son, our Lord." A person celebrated as Jesus Christ was, we may suppose, would naturally find a place in the profane history of his times. It may not be amiss, therefore, to introduce the evidence we are about to collect, with the testimony of some of the more eminent of the heathen writers, who have mentioned him. They will at least inform us, that such a person lived at the time we assert; and that he was the author of a new religion.--I shall quote only Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny.

Suetonius* tells us, that "the emperor Claudius drove all the Jews from Rome, who, at the instigation of one Christ, were continually making disturbances."

Tacitust, speaking of the persecution of Christians, tells us, "that the author of that name was Christ, who was put to death by Pontius Pilate, in the reign of Tiberius."

Pliny's testimony is more large. It is contained in a letter, written to the emperor Trajan, desiring his instructions with regard to Christians. He blames their obstinacy in refusing to sacrifice to the Roman deities-but from their own confession can draw nothing, but that they assemble, on a certain day, before sun-rise -that they pay divine honours to Christ as a God-that they bind themselves by a sacrament not to steal, nor to commit adultery, nor to deceive-and that, after the performance of these rites, they join in one common meal. Nay, he examined, he says, two of them by torture: yet still he finds nothing obnoxious in their behaviour, except their absurd superstitions. He thinks, however, the matter should be in

* In vita Claud, Cæs.

quired into: for Christianity had brought religion into great disuse. The markets were crowded with victims; and scarce a purchaser came near them.

These writers afford us sufficient testimony, that Jesus Christ lived at the time we assert; and that he was the author of a new religion. They had opportunities of being well informed; could have no interest in falsifying; were no converts to the new sect; but talk of Christ, only as they would of any singular person, whom they had occasion to mention. Their testimony therefore is beyond cavil.

Let us now proceed a step farther, and examine the scripture evidence of Christ, which proves not only his existence; but that he is our Lord, or the Messiah-and not only that he was the author of a new religion; but that this religion is true.

Upon examining the grand scripture evidence on this head, we find the greatest stress laid upon miracles and prophecies: both of which are direct appeals to God, by a claim to supernatural power. And though both these modes of evidence are calculated, as well for us who live in remoter times, as for those who lived in the earliest; yet the evidence from miracles seems more particularly addressed to them; as that from prophecy is to us. They were the eye-witnesses of the miracles of the gospel, of which we have only the evidence at second hand. Whereas prophecy is a mode of evidence, which increases through every age. The early Christians had it in part; but to us this amazing web is still more unfolded; and more of its wonderful texture displayed. Let us examine each in its order.

Among the eye-witnesses of the gospel miracles, were many learned men, as well as unlearned. The former had opportunity and abilities to examine the works before them: to trace out fraud, if any such were latent; and did unquestionably receive them with all that circumspection which was due to such wonderful exhibitions, before they embraced the Christian faith; while the most ignorant spectator was a competent judge of matter of fact; and many of our Saviour's miracles were such as could not possibly, from the nature of the facts themselves, be coloured with fraud.

It had a strange sound to the prejudices of mankind, that a crucified malefactor + Lib. 15. +Lib. 20.

was the Saviour of the world; and we cannot suppose, that any man, much less that a multitude of men, would embrace such a belief without clear conviction, especially as no worldly advantage lay on the side of this belief; and the convert even renounced the world, and embraced a life of persecution.-Let us consider the single miracle of Christ's resurrection. Jesus had frequently mentioned it before his death; and the thing was so far in general credited, that the sepulchre was sealed, and an armed guard appointed to watch it, We may well suppose, therefore, that his favourers would naturally, upon this occasion, reason thus: "Jesus hath now put his pretensions upon a fair issue. He hath told us, he will arise from the dead on the third day:-here then let us suspend our judgment, and wait the result. Three days will determine whether he be an impostor, or the real Messiah." -It is very natural to suppose, that the favourers of Jesus would reason, after his death, in a manner like this: and it is beyond credibility, that any of them would have continued his disciples, had they found him falsifying in this point. But we know they did continue his disciples after this. We know also, that many proselytes, convinced by this very event, embraced the Christian religion. We have all the reason in the world therefore to believe, that they were fully satisfied. His miracles were to them a sufficient proof of his pretensions, All candid men wonld have acquiesced, as they did; and in their belief we have a very strong foundation for

our own.

Again, with regard to prophecy, we observe, that the writers of the Old Testament seem, in various parts, to characterize some extraordinary person, who was in process of time to make his appearance in the world. The marks are peculiar, and can neither be mistaken nor misapplied. "He was to be born of a virgin-he was to turn the hearts of the disobedient to the wisdom of the just-though dignified with the characters of a prince, he was to be a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief-though described to be without sin, he was to be numbered with transgressors -his hands and his feet were to be pierced -he was to be made an offering for sin —and was never to see corruption."These prophecies were published many

hundred years before the birth of Christ; and had been all along in the hands, not only of the Jews, but of all men of letters. The Old Testament had been early translated into the Greek language; and received into the politest libraries of those times.

With these ideas, let us open the New Testament, and it is obvious that no picture can be more like its original, than these prophecies of Christ in one Testament, are to his history in the other, Here we see that extraordinary virginbirth unravelled.-Here we see a life spent in turning the hearts of the disobedient to the wisdom of the just.-Here we find the prince of his people, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.Here we see the Lord of righteousness numbered with transgressors-we see his hands and his feet pierced—we see him made an offering for sin-and we see realized that extraordinary idea of death without corruption.

It were an easy matter to carry this comparison through a more minute detail of circumstances; but I mean only to trace the outlines of this great resemblance. To complete the picture would be a copious work.

Besides these predictions, which related immediately to the life and death of Christ; there were many others, which deserve notice. Among these, the two great leading prophecies were those of the calling of the Gentiles, and of the dispersion of the Jews.

The calling of the Gentiles was one of the earliest prophecies of the Old Testament. The Jews were distinguished in appearance, as the favourite people of God; and they were sufficiently elated upon that distinction, But if they had attended closely to their prophets, they might have discovered, that all the prophecies which described the happy state of the church, had evidently a more distant prospect, than to them. Those early promises, in particular, which were repeated to the patriarchs, were not merely confined to their posterity; but included "all the nations of the earth."-And when the later prophets, as the great event approached, spoke a plainer, and a more intelligible language, the whole nation might have understood, as Simeon, and some of the wisest and most intelligent of them did

this head, that nothing is said in Scripture of paying divine honours to the Virgin Mary. Those rites are totally of popish origin.

We farther believe, that Christ "suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; and that he descended into hell,"—that is, we declare our belief of the Scripture account of the circumstances and the reality of Christ's death.

To make an action clear, it is necessary, first, to establish its date. This is usually done by ranging it under the magistrate who then presided, the time of whose government is always registered in some public record. Thus we believe that Christ's death happened when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea. We believe also, with regard to the manner of his death, that he was crucified; that he died as really as any mortal ever died; and that he was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arima

thea*.

The "descent into hell" is undoubtedly a more obscure expression than might be wished in a creed, and was not indeed added till many ages after the creed was first composedt. But as creeds are human compositions, we believe this, and every other difficulty, only as consistent with Scripture. Now the sense which seems most agreeable to Scripture, is, that his soul remained till his resurrection in that place (whatever that place is) where the spirits of the blessed rest: and the expres. sion seems to have been added, only that we may the more strongly express our belief of the reality of his death.

This we do, when we express our belief of the separation of his soul and body. "He was buried," and "descended into hell." The first expression relates to his body, which was laid in the grave; the second to his soul, which passed into the place of departed spirits.

We farther believe, that "on the third day he rose again from the dead." The resurrection of Christ from the dead is a point of the utmost importance to Christians. On the certainty of Christ's resurrection depend all hopes of our own. On this article, therefore, we shall be more large.

And, in the first place, what is there in

it that need shock our reason? It was a wonderful event: but is not nature full of wonderful events? When we seriously weigh the matter, is it less strange, that a grain of corn thrown into the ground should die, and rise again with new vegetation, than that a human body, in the same circumstances, should assume new life? The commonness of the former makes it familiar to us, but not in any degree less unaccountable. Are we at all more acquainted with the manner in which grain germinates, than with the manner in which a body is raised from the dead? And is it not obviously striking, that the same power which can effect the one, may effect the other also?-But analogy, though it tend to convince, is no proof. Let us proceed then to matter of fact.

That the body was dead, and safely lodged in the tomb, and afterwards conveyed out of it, was agreed on, both by those who opposed, and by those who

favoured the resurrection. In the circumstances of the latter fact, they differ widely.

The disciples tell their story-a very plain and simple one-that scarce expecting the event, notwithstanding their master had himself foretold it, they were surprised with an account that the body was gone that they found afterwards, to their great astonishment, that their master was again alive-that they had been several times with him; and appealed for the truth of what they said to great numbers, who, as well as themselves, had seen him after his resurrection.

The chief priests, on the other side, declared the whole to be a forgery; asserting that the plain matter of fact was, the disciples came by night, and stole the body away, while the soldiers slept.

Such a tale, unsupported by evidence, would be listened to in no court of justice. It has not even the air of probability. Can it be supposed, that the disciples, who had fled with terror when they might have rescued their master's life, would venture, in the face of an armed guard, to carry off his dead body?-Or is it more probable, that they found the whole guard asleep; when we know, that the vigilance of centinels is secured by the strictest discipline? Besides, what advantage could arise

+ See Bingham's Antiquities, vol. iii. c. 3.