But would not this extraordinary intervention have been a perpetual miracle? And would a perpetual miracle have been any miracle at all? Would such an intervention have been consistent with the order of eternal Wisdom?* If natural means have sufficed to preserve, in its primitive integrity, the substance of this necessary evidence, would it be very philosophical in me to require a perpetual miracle to prevent the substitution, transposition, or omission of a few words? I might as well require a perpetual miracle to prevent the errors of every individual in matters of faith,† &c. I blush at my objection, and acknowledge the unreasonableness of my desires. The only thing which makes them appear pardonable in my own eyes is, that they were formed in the sincerity of an honest heart, earnestly inquisitive after truth, but not discovering it at first view.‡ i * Vide ch. xi. a note of this book. + See what I have said on the nature and end of miracles, ch vi. book i. and ch. ix. book ii. I might have easily entered into more minute particulars on the authenticity of the sacred books, the alterations of various kinds to which these books have been subject, the various readings, the suppositious pieces, and many other points of history and criticism, which I have hardly touched upon. I have frequently reverted to this remark, and I could not too frequently recur to it, that the nature and design of my work might not be misunderstood. So much has been written by men of learning, within the two last centuries, that much erudition may be displayed at a very small expence, by consulting and making abstracts from their works. But, as I had no wish to make a shew of borrowed erudition, and as I never approved of mere compilations; as my intention was not to write a com pleat historical and critical treatise on the proofs of Christianity; as I wished only to seize, and impress on others, the philosophical and moral parts of these proofs, it was my business. to apply myself chiefly to that which constituted this philosophical and moral part. I endeavoured to cling to the body and main branches of the tree, and to give up the boughs and leaves to the philologist by profession, who is better able than I am to manage the thorns of criticism. The readers, also, whom I had peculiarly in view, would give me little credit for these scientific details. It is, moreover, well known, that in treating a subject extremely copious, one may easily become diffuse, but that much art is required to be concise. Lastly, The proportions of a well-made book ought to be like those of the human frame; their extremities must bear a relation to the head and body. If, therefore, I am censured by any critic for not having enlarged further on any particular article, I intreat him to consider, that it is my work, not his, that I am composing. A philosopher would never engage in the proefs of Christianity, if these proofs rested on the almost infiuite multiplicity of minute details, which form the labyrinth of modern criticism. The stately temple of truth is not placed in this labyrinth-SUPREME WISDOM has made its access easier to mankind-The roads leading to it are neither intricate nor dark-Good sense and reason stand at the entrance, and are Commissioned to introduce the sincere friends of truth and virtue. CHAP. IV. THE TRUTH OF THE WRITTEN EVIDENCE.. I' F I have sufficiently satisfied myself of the authenticity of this evidence, which is the great object of my inquiries; If I am morally certain that it has been neither forged nor essentially altered; is it posssible for me, with any reason, to entertain the least doubt of its truth? I have already observed, that the truth of an historical work, is its conformity with fact. If I have sufficiently proved to myself, that the miraculous facts contained in the written evidence of Christianity, are of such a nature, as renders them incapable of being forged, or of being admitted. as true, if false in themselves; if it has been established, also on the most solid grounds, that the witnesses who publickly and unanimously attested them, could neither deceive nor be deceived concerning them-can I possibly reject their evidence, without doing violence not only to all the rules of sound logic, but even to the most common principles of human conduct.* A striking reflection here occurs to me : -were it even possible that I could entertain any reasonable doubts concerning the authenticity of the historical writings of the witnesses; if my doubts arose from the circumstance of these writingst not having been delivered to any particular society, with a direct charge of preserving them; still, however, I should not be able to form the smallest doubt, respecting the epistles addressed by the witnesses themselves, to those particular and numerous societies which they had founded and governed, especially if I consider how greatly these societies were concerned in the preservation of these invaluable letters of their own founders. I therefore read these letters with all the attention they deserve, and I * Vide ch. i. ii. iv. v. viii. book ii. The four gospels. |