rity, how many become plain from study and vigorous application of mind? If God give men an understanding, certainly its energies should be employed here; and there is nothing unsuitable to the divine nature, that a revelation should be given, some parts of which require the utmost exertion of intellect in order to perceive the truth. If, after all, certain passages remain obscure, the reason has been already assigned; or they may be classed under the following part of the objection.

"Some things in the New Testament are mysterious." What right has man to require that all should be clear, and all level to his comprehension? Are there not mysteries in the works of creation, concerning which the wisest philosopher must confess his ignorance? Is not this the case in natural religion? Who can comprehend God's necessary existencea Being without a cause producing it? Why, then, should it be considered as an objection against the New Testament that there are some things in it which we cannot fully comprehend? If, after we have seen on numberless occasions faith uniting with reason, the writers should in some instances soar above reason, but never stand in opposition to its dictates, what just cause has man to complain?

It merits peculiar notice, and is of very great weight on this subject, that God in his moral government has not, in any one instance, acted as man would have done; so different is his reason from man's, and his judgment as to what is wisest and best. When a person surveys the annals of the nations, what disorder, what wickedness, what confusion, what misery! But let him consider that this is the history of what takes place under the moral government of God, whose plans are infinitely wise, and righteous, and good; and who, while he consults his own honour, is promoting the happiness of those who love him, and in the highest degree. How mysterious does every thing appear! He who believes the perfections and providence of God must acknowledge the fact; but he is utterly at a loss to explain how it can possibly be. The thing itself is certain, but the manner is a perfect mystery; the machinery is infinitely too complicated for man to survey and comprehend.

Some Greenland boys, when the missionaries were attempting to teach them the alphabet, disgusted with the task, exclaimed," Is it not far better to be in a kajak catching seals, as our fathers do, than to be crying A, B, C; or, like you, scrawling all day long with a feather?" The good to be derived from education was a mystery. Some of the parts of divine instruction, and their connexion with the end they are

designed, are equally mysterious to us. When we were children, there were things in the conduct of our parents the reason of which we could not comprehend. And shall the little child, man, imagine that he can understand every dispensation of the great Father of all? We have since seen the wisdom of our parents in that which we condemned; and should not man form the same judgment in respect to the government of God?

If the subject be duly considered, so far from its appearing suspicious that there should be mysteries in the Christian religion, it will rather be regarded as a proof of its divine origin. If nothing more was contained in the New Testament than we knew before, or nothing more than we could easily comprehend, we might justly doubt if it came from God, and whether it was not rather a work of man's device. Were there mysteries in the duties of Christianity, an objection might justly be raised; but not so with respect to the doctrines. That there will be some things respecting the nature and government of God which are not fully revealed some things which are merely hinted at on account of their connexion with other parts of divine truth-and some things which are just mentioned but not explained, because they exceed the grasp of the human understanding-it is natural for us to expect; and what just ground is there of complaint? In a word, if, in the phenomena of nature, and in the moral government of the Deity, there are many things confessedly mysterious, is it not more than probable that this will be the case in a revelation of his will, where the subject is equally vast, and in some respects far more comprehensive? Without mysteries, the gospel would not be like the works of God.

SECTION XIII.

Objection. "When we survey the form and mode of Composition of the books of the New Testament, we cannot conceive that they were written by divine Inspiration."

THE New Testament is undoubtedly a very remarkable book. Men who never studied language or composition, wrote it in a foreign tongue. Illiterate Jews drew it up in Greek, which was the most common medium of intercourse in the civilized world at that time; the idiom of consequence is oriental, the words are from Greece; it may be said that they thought in Hebrew, and wrote in Greek. Its contents have been already

considered; and the world is challenged to produce a book on subjects equally important, and at the same time so instructive and satisfactory. The method is more loose than suits a modern taste; but it is just what we should look for from such men, and in such an age. As to the style, it is what it might be expected that men in their circumstances and with their views would employ. Excepting part of the Old Testament, it is the simplest book that ever was written.-None make so ridiculous a figure as illiterate men when they wish to write fine language. The evangelists and apostles make no such attempt; they are above it; they are never at pains to stop for a word, but take just such as occur; every one must see that they are minding things and not words. According to the taste of their nation and age, there is a great deal of figurative language, and much allegory, and frequent allusions to the sacred books of the Jews. But notwithstanding these peculiarities, their manner of representation is so luminous as to be altogether unequalled. In proof of this, it is absolutely certain that a person unaccustomed to mental exertions, whether from his youth, or want of practice, or weakness of capacity, will understand more of the history of the New Testament than of any other book, and have clearer ideas of the facts which are narrated; he will likewise have more distinct conceptions, both of its religious principles and moral precepts, than he could derive from the writings of the most celebrated philosophers, were even the same truths contained in them.

It is not difficult to raise objections against the form of the New Testament; and they may at first sight appear plausible; but the more they are considered, the less weight they will be found to have. There is a great diversity of taste with respect to the composition of a book between people in the eastern and the western parts of the world: besides this, almost every nation has its distinguishing taste. When God grants a written revelation of his will, it cannot suit even so much as the national taste of all the human race. Is it not natural to suppose that he will leave the men whom he is pleased to employ to follow the method which was familiar to the age and nation in which they lived? As he selected Jews for this purpose, we may expect to find the oriental manner of writing distinguished by the peculiar taste of the Jewish people. And where is the injustice and unreasonableness of God's requiring men to receive the knowledge of his will in the dress of the land of Canaan? If an eastern prince grant to any European nation a letter of privileges conveying singular advantages in commerce, who

refuses it, and objects that the letter is drawn up in the outlandish phraseology of oriental composition? Display the same candour here, and the objection will no more be heard. Is it wise to say, "I cannot think this book, though full of blessings, is from God; and I will not receive it, because the men who wrote it had long beards, and wore loose garments, and did not appear in a dress like ours?" As to what respects style, it is beneath the author to be solicitous about ornaments; God will not address us as a rhetorician would. The speech of a king is not, or should not be, gaudy and laboured; and the laws of nations are not promulgated in flowery language.

Objection.

SECTION XIV.

How can we be certain that the books of the New Testament were written by the apostles of Christ; and if they were, that they have not been interpolated and corrupted since."

You are satisfied that the Iliad was written by Homer, the Eneid by Virgil, the works of Horace by that poet, and the orations of Cicero by the famous Roman orator of that name. If I ask why do you believe this, you say, The testimony of all antiquity confirms it. The books of the New Testament have the same authority in their favour. This additional evidence they have, that as their contents are more important, and they professed and were thought by multitudes to contain doctrines essentially necessary to salvation, people were far more interested in knowing that they were written by the apostles of Christ, as they derived thence all their value. What is there in the works of Homer or Virgil which could provoke so strict a scrutiny? Let it be seriously considered then, that whatever overthrows the New Testament, overthrows all other ancient books, and along with them all the evidence of testimony. Those men of later times who have called in question the authority of the New Testament are not aware of the absurdity of their conduct. When Hardouin the Jesuit, a very learned man, gravely asserted and maintained that Homer, and Virgil, and Horace, and Cicero, and all the other Greek and Roman classics, were written by cloistered monks in the middle ages, there was so deep a sense of the gross absurdity of the thing, that he drew upon himself the universal laugh of the literary world; and that was confutation enough. The same treatment

is justly due to those who assert that the New Testament was written by other men than the apostles of Christ; for it is a thousand times easier to forge such writings as those of Homer and Virgil, than the Gospels and Epistles.

That the writings of the New Testament have not been interpolated, nor corrupted, nor have come down to us in a different state from that in which they left the hands of the evangelists and apostles, we have the best reasons to conclude. It will be readily granted that from the haste or ignorance of transcribers there may be the mistake of a name, a date, a place, or a particular word. This is the case with all the other ancient books I have mentioned, and in a far greater degree. Yet notwithstanding these errors of the press, as they may be called, we think the purity of the classics sufficient to warrant us to say that they have not been interpolated nor corrupted, but are still the same as when they were first composed. Internal evidence has great weight. The beauty of composition in general, and the peculiar style of each writer, convince the critic that the work is genuine, and all of a piece; it has the seal of the author's mind stamped upon it. Such a peculiarity of manner have the apostles of Jesus Christ; and to imitate them is beyond the capacity of man. Some treatises were in the primitive ages of Christianity ascribed to them, of which a few fragments remain; but he who has imbibed the spirit of their writings, if he will compare with the New Testament the works which were falsely attributed to them, will find the difference in every respect as great as a classical scholar will, between the orations of Cicero and Pagninus's Latin version of the Scripture. The homogeneity of the New Testament (if the word may be permitted) furnishes the strongest proof that it was composed by men of the same spirit and of the same wisdom, and that there is no foreign mixture.

If, besides this, we consider the veneration which the primitive Christians had for the writings of the apostles, nothing can be more unlikely than they should have a desire to alter them. Their veneration was a sufficient security for their fidelity. But if any of them had entertained a wish to alter the books of the New Testament, it would have been impossible for them to succeed. Copies were speedily multiplied, they were in the hands of Christians in all the churches; they were translated early into the different languages spoken by the several nations among which the gospel was planted: pious men in their religious treatises quoted passages from them; sects and parties soon arose, and heretics erred from the truth;