. not knowing how numerous they might be; and dreading alfo, if they fhould drive matters to extremity, the effects of that influence, which the apostles from time to time acquired among the common people. The moft oppreffive tyrants, even when armed with abfolute authority, are not without fears of this kind: how much more timorous must a tyrannical ariftocracy have been, that was deftitute of mutual confidence, and over-awed by the Roman power! To which I may add, fifthly, That the advice given by Gamaliel in the council, Refrain from "these men, and let them alone; (for if this counfel or this work be of men, it will come to nought; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it ;) left haply ye be found even to fight against God: I fay, this advice had great weight with them; which indeed it deserved to have, as a better could not have been given. The event has proved, that Gamaliel was a wife, as well as a pious man; and what was thus fo seasonably fpoken to the first enemies of the gospel, may with equal propriety be addressed to them who oppose it in these latter days. In ancient writings, as there is nothing to invalidate the gospel hiftory, fo there are feveral teftimonies to confirm it. That Chrift fuffered under Pontius Pilate, and was the founder of the sect of Christians, is attefted by Tacitus, and admitted, I think, by all writers on the fubject. Facts recorded in the new Teftament, concerning Herod, Pilate, Feftus, and Felix, are mentioned by Jofephus, and in the Jewish Talmud. And the new star that shone on the nativity, the earthquake and preternatural darkness that accompanied the crucifixion, and the maffacre of the innocents by Herod, are with fome reafon fuppofed to have been mentioned by pagan authors, as well as by the evangelifts. This, however, is not affirmed as certain; nor does any material part of the evidence depend upon it. It is true, that the Roman writers of that time, both hiftorians and philofophers, feem to have been very ignorant of our Saviour's history and doctrine, and to have had no curiofity to know either. Is this wonderful? It will not appear fo, to him who confiders, the distance of Judea from Rome, and the state of navigation in thofe days; the contemptuous opinion which the Romans, the masters of the world, entertained, both of the national character, and of the religion of the Jews; the proud spirit of the heathen philofophy, fo directly repugnant to that humble and docile difpofition, which is required of every difciple of Christ; the extreme diffimilitude between a practical religion, whofe fole aim is to purify the foul, and prepare it for heaven, and a philosophy framed chiefly for the purpose of dispute and rhetorical declamation; the mean condition, and unaffuming manners, of the publifhers of the gofpel, fo unlike the pomp and pedantry of the Epicureans and the Stoics; and above all, perhaps, that crucifixion, which the author of Christianity was known to have undergone, and which his followers avowed and gloried in; but which, according to the modes of thinking, that then univerfally prevailed, through all the reft of the Roman empire as well as in Judea, was a death of so much ignominy, that no perfon was thought likely to fuffer it, who had, or deferved to have, any reputation in the world. He who confiders these things, and who knows the ftate of learning at that time, the characters of those who were reputed learned, and the real nature of the Christian religion, may indeed wonder to hear that fo many were converted to the faith; but will not wonder to find, that neither Seneca nor Epictetus, the elder nor the younger Pliny, Tacitus, nor Marcus Aurelius, were among the number. See this matter illuftrated, with great precision and elegance, in the fourth chapter of Difquifitions (by Sir David Dalrymple) concerning the antiquities of the Chriftian church. SOME of the firft Chriftians, whofe writings are ftill extant, speak of the gospels as the work of thofe evangelifts whose names they bear. And they had good opportunities of information in this particular, as well as of comparing the gospel history with the most authentic traditions concerning the persons and events therein recorded: Origen, who was born in the second century, being contemporary with Ireneus, who was the disciple of Polycarp, who had been the disciple of the apostle John, and perfonally acquainted with others of the early Christians. Is it to be imagined, that those men would not be inquifitive about the truth of a religion, for which they had ground to believe, that they were likely to suffer perfecution and martyrdom? If we fuppofe ourfelves in their fituation, with the fame alarming view before us, and with the fame means of knowledge they had, we shall fee that it is not poffible for a man of common understanding to do, and to suffer, what they did and fuffered, unless he firmly believe the doctrine he maintains, and know that he has good reason to believe it. To all this we may add, that the Epiftles, which are of the fame age with the hiftorical part of the new teftament, appear evidently to have been written by men who were in earnest in what they wrote, and to be adapted to real occurrences and circumftances of the times. THE flyle, too, of the gospel bears intrinfic evidence of its truth. We find there no ap pearance of artifice or of party-fpirit; no attempts to exaggerate on the one hand, or depricate on the other; no remark, thrown in to anticipate objections; nothing of that caution, which never fails to distinguish the teftimony of those who are confcious of impofture; no endeavour to reconcile the reader's mind to what may be extraordinary in the narrative; all is fair, candid, and simple: the hiftorians make no reflections of their own, but confine themselves to matter of fact, that is, to what they heard and faw; and honeftly record their own mistakes and faults, as well as the other particulars of the story. For a more full difplay of fome of these arguments, as well as for other things that might be mentioned on this head, the reader, till he have leisure to perufe more voluminous writings, may confult Addison's fhort but elegant Treatife of the Chriftian religion. Whence it will appear, that the gospel history is at least as well vouched as any other of that time; and that, on the ground of human teftimony alone, (without confidering at prefent the divine authority of the facred writings,) we have as good reafon to believe what the New Teftament records of the birth, life, miracles death and doctrine of Chrift, as to believe |