reason be assigned, why we may not suppose that this document was, from the very first, committed to writing. It will perhaps be said, that writing was unknown at this early period. But who can prove this? Were not the nine hundred years, during which the first man lived, space sufficient for the invention of the rudest sort of writing imaginable (for even this would be infinitely superior to tradition)? Is it necessary I ask, to suppose, that none but Egyptians could have ingenuity enough to discover something like the hieroglyphical or picture-writing, which was found some years ago among the savages of Peru? In the first ages of the world, savage life was unknown, if we may believe the Scriptures; and to this, the nature of the case will afford abundant support. If men could, in those days, build cities, establish governments, make progress in all the refinements of civilised life, I am at a loss to discover, why we should suppose it impossible they could have been acquainted with any sort of writing. In the book of Job, which is manifestly as old as the Exodus, and a book of Scripture perfectly independent of any thing which originated with the Jews, we have the mention of writing a book occurring as something well known; and there is not the least reason for supposing, that Job had any intercourse whatever with the Egyptians. The probability therefore is, that writing was in use before the days of Moses; nor can any good reason be adduced, why it may not have been known as early as the days of the first man. When, moreover, we take into the account the consideration, that it was just as necessary the very first prophecy should be correctly delivered down, as it was that it should be revealed; we are compelled, I think, to come to the conclusion, that He who gave the revelation itself would have provided, that it should be thus correctly retained.

*

If we suppose, in the next place, that all the book of Genesis was given to Moses by revelation, still the fact will remain that there was a prior revelation, which the Almighty thought it expedient on this occasion to restore. In this case, we must perhaps suppose that the prior revelation had been lost; which will be sufficient to condemn the doctrine of tradition; because, it is on the supposition only of tradition

being had recourse to, that this loss could have been sustained. The revelation, therefore, which we now have, is probably, in part at least,-as old as the times of the first family; and, on every view, it is certainly the oldest book in the world. That it has been preserved with an astonishing degree of accuracy, down to our times, is beyond all doubt; and so far its claim to credibility is complete and convincing.

:

Let us now consider the nature of its authority. The authority to which the Scriptures lay claim is, as already noticed, Divine. That the truths it professes to teach could have been obtained from any other quarter is certainly impossible and, as it has been remarked, if no such grounds of authority can be shewn properly to belong to this book, it will follow, that the claims thus made ought to be treated as imposture. The only questions we now have to discuss will, therefore, be,-first, whether it is reasonable to suppose any such authority would be afforded in any case; and, secondly, whether we have good reason for believing, that such authority has been actually afforded.

With regard to the first, If it can be supposed that a knowledge of religion is at all necessary to man,—and the experience of all ages and nations may be cited to shew that it is; and, if it is a fact, that man as such has it not in his power to propose any thing which will deserve that name,then must it follow, that in order to supply mankind with the needful boon, God himself must vouchsafe to discover it. In the dealings of Providence in the world around us, we know that the most abundant provisions have been made for the happiness, but none for the misery, of the creature; and this we know could have been effected by nothing short of Almighty power. We have, then, in this respect, every reason for believing that the power of the Deity has been, and is still, exerted. Why may we not then suppose, that the same power has been, and is still, also exerted, for the purpose of bringing about ends in many respects analogous, but in all superior, and infinitely more valuable in purpose and durability. If it be necessary that the great Maker of the universe exert a power either ordinary or extraordinary, which is manifestly his own, for the purpose of "feeding the ravens, or clothing the grass of the field, which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into the oven;" can it in any way be

unreasonable that he should exert the same power, but in a direction in some respects different, yet suited to bring about the beneficent end proposed, when the interests of man, temporary and eternal, can be secured by no other means? Whatever may be said of the means themselves considered separately (and these we have shewn are both good and suitable), there can be nothing unreasonable in the supposition, that they would be afforded. On the contrary, nothing can be more probable, as formerly remarked, than that He who has provided so abundantly for the body, would also make an adequate provision for the soul; and, if it can be shewn, that the facts of the case are such as to establish this position, the authority to which our Revelation lays claim, will be complete, and binding upon all.

With regard to our second question, then, The claim made to belief is, that of an open and continued series of miracles.* It may here be remarked, that had the claim made consisted of some one miraculous operation only, performed perhaps in the presence of a few selected individuals; or, had the series (supposing one to have existed), how extended soever it might have been, remained unknown except to a party, whose interest it might have been to propagate and keep up a system of fraud; or, had the acts themselves been public, but doubtful as to their real character, or trivial as to their object and end; or, had a knowledge of these supposed events come down to us through the medium of oral tradition only, or, if committed to writing, had presented to us much that was doubtful as to their origin, or suspicious from the variety of the copies, or from the palpable mistakes. and contradictions with which they abounded; and, in addition to this, had these accounts been opposed, refuted, or disregarded, by the considerate and respectable part of society, and been held in estimation only by a few of the immoral, fanciful, or enthusiastic, who were perhaps addicted to the marvellous, and blind to the requirements of reason and sobriety; then, I say, might we with justice have refused our assent to the claims made, and properly enough resisted the authority advanced. Because, that which is palpably untrue, or probably false, must, of all things, be the

* See the second and third sermons in this volume.

least likely to advance the interests of human society; or, because, that which makes no claim whatever to our belief, or which, in doing so, betrays a bad one, can never rise higher in our estimation, than merely to leave us where it found us, unmoved, indifferent, and excusable.

Of our Revelation, however, it may be truly affirmed, that not one of these weak or doubtful circumstances attaches itself either to its origin, progress, or present state. We have, on the contrary, a series of miracles the most open and artless, the best attested, the most connected in matter and in object, and yet the most various, distinct, and widely divided, as to time, persons, interests, and events, that can possibly be imagined. We have too the testimonies of both friends and foes, commenced in the earliest antiquity, and carried down through the lapse of numerous ages, that however the text, the relations, or the doctrines, ought to be considered, the facts detailed are true and worthy of all acceptation.

It may be said in reply, perhaps, that still the truth of such miraculous events having taken place, depends after all upon the credit of a few historians; We answer: That the historians are not numerous we willingly allow; but then, they are such, supported as they are by innumerable collateral circumstances, as are worthy of all credit. They had, moreover, no earthly point to gain in giving their several testimonies; and many of them sealed these with their blood.-Again, if it once became necessary that miracles should cease (and surely they need not have been continued, when no adequate end could thus be secured); then would it also become necessary, that every succeeding age should consult the histories of past times, in order to put themselves in possession of the evidences of religion. If we have, however, in the case of our evidences, to look back, and to examine the histories of past times; we also have a combination of testimonies, given, indeed, by various and independent writers, conspiring to afford an assurance not less miraculous and convincing on the whole, than the several particulars themselves must have once been, taken singly. Those miracles, however, which consist of predictions (and with these our Scripture abounds) can never, so long as the testimony of history remains, lose their power to astonish and to convince: and

when we consider these in their character, as interwoven with one another, and with the fates of nations, as will be noticed in some cases hereafter in this work; we are forced to the conclusion, that this is the "Lord's doings, and that it is wonderful in our eyes."-It is not, however, our intention here to enter upon the proofs requisite to establish these points; this would be to trespass on the province of those who have written on the evidences of revealed religion. To these writers, therefore, the reader is now referred. *

Paley's Evidences, Chalmer's Evidences, Lardner's Credibility, &c. The ancient apologists, Justin Martyr, Josephus against Apion, Origen against Celsus, Eusebii Præparatio and Demonstratio Evangelica, Bishop Newton on the Prophecies, &c. &c.