reafon. The fplendid exception of St. Paul muft fubvert all fpeculations, which are founded upon the hypothefis, that the Almighty provided incompetent phyfical means in order to distinguish his own agency, as if His wif dom and power required the contraft of the wisdom and power of those, to whom He himself had not difpenfed the ordinary meafure of intellectual ability. In conformity with this unworthy theory we might have expected to see an illiterate Galilean miraculously enabled to reafon, without premeditation, and even instantaneously, before the philosophic tribunal of Stoics and Epicureans, affembled at the Areopagus. But inftead of fuch a fudden communication of knowledge, or inspiration of qualifications for the particular occafion, an eloquent and learned Jew of Tarfus was selected to be the Apoftle of the eloquent and learned Gentiles. It is obferved by the philofophical Greek a geographer of antiquity, that every kind of knowledge was cultivated with fo much ardour at Tarfus, that it furpaffed Athens and Alexandria, and every other

a Strab. Geog. lib. xiv. p. 673. This paffage has been often referred to; but if I had been fatisfied with the particulars ufually cited, I should not have found the most curious part of the account.

feat of fcience that could be named, and that it differed from them all in this respect, that its learned men were all citizens, with a small intermixture of ftrangers; so that St. Paul might aver with propriety and truth, that he was "a citizen of no mean city." When the inhabitants of Lyftra applied to him the title of Mercury," because he was "the chief speaker," are we to understand that this appellation was descriptive of his eloquence, or fimply intended to distinguish his speaking from the comparative filence of his affociate? To the Jews he relates with juftifiable fatisfaction the advantages of the Jewish part of his education under Gamaliel, and in his orations at Athens and Cæfarea he does not hesitate to display the erudition of the schools of Tarfus.

This argument, drawn from the supposed defective capacities of the Apostles, has been ftill further extended, in contradiction to facts with an innocent and fanciful credulity, which may extenuate the imprudence of the author, but exposes Chriftianity to new objections. It has been faid b, that if we compare "the "excellence and fublimity of the doctrine and

b See Maclaine's Answer to Soame Jenyns.

precepts of the Gospel with the rank and "capacities of its teachers, we then are " brought into the sphere of miracles." But the rank and capacity of St. Paul were much too great to present such a contraft. Excellence characterizes all the writings of this Apostle, and fublimity is not the casual ornament of a few paffages only; but in the proportion that his natural abilities exceeded those of the Galilean teachers, in the fame degree do they fhew the insufficiency of this ftandard of revelation. It would follow from this reasoning, that the more we degrade the intellectual abilities of the first teachers of the Gospel, the further we recede from the probability of forgery and impofture; and that, upon the intimation of such fufpicions from an adversary, we may confidently direct him. to compare the excellence and fublimity of the precepts and doctrines of the Gospel with the capacities of its original teachers. great as we may be willing to fuppofe this disparity to have been, what do we really know of the abilities of the first teachers of Christianity? They purfued indeed humble occupations; they were vilified in the popular adage, that "no good thing could come out "of Galilee;" and of two of the chief apo

.

But

ftles, Peter and John, it is said, that they were "unlearned and ignorant." If the paffages in the epiftle to the Corinthians relate to the preachers of Chriftianity, we must further defcribe them as 66 things bafe," "weak," "foolish," and " defpifed." But according to this interpretation St. Paul would include himself among thofe, who were not merely in the estimation of men weak and foolish, but abfolutely fuch in refpect to natural capacity. We might with equal propriety affirm, that among the first converts were the poor only, and the illiterate, when the Apoftle declares, that "the wife after the flesh," "the noble," and "the mighty," who were called, were " not many," as affert, that the Apostles were not ignorant only, but incapable of intellectual improvement. It seems not to have been attended to, that the want of that worldly intereft and confequence, which is derived from wealth or power, were more likely to deprefs them lower in the opinion of mankind, and to expose them to greater neglect and contempt, than mere mental inferiority.

We may examine this argument in another light. Whatever may have been the other fubjects on which Inspiration may have operated, we cannot conceive, that the weak in

understanding have in any cafe been purposely felected to fhew its nature and effects. In the inftance of a written fyftem of inftruction mental deficiency in the author would be no security against imposture, but would certainly perplex and involve the subject in additional intricacies. It would tend to prove, that a writer of more ability might be able to make the distinction between infpiration and ordinary human endowments lefs perceptible. If this confequence is not to be admitted, why are we to appreciate the excellence and fublimity of the doctrines and precepts of the Gospel by an oppofition of the incapacity of its teachers? If, on the other hand, no comparison can be made, and none certainly can be made, between the extent of the wifdom of man and the fuggeftions of inspiration, it will not depend upon the degree of his intellect, be it more or be it lefs, whether we are or are not brought "into the sphere of miracles.”

But in the statement of the fact, that the firft teachers were either Galileans, or perfons of defective abilities, an exception occurs, which has been neglected in the zeal to augment the neceffity of miraculous interpofition. A portion of the world was inftructed neither by Galileans, nor by perfons of “ natural in