of infidelity. A suggestion or two, however, is all that can be here submitted: the intelligent reader will find it worth his while to pursue the inquiry into all its details.

2. There are but two conceivable motives that could induce the writers of the New Testament supposing them to have been impostors to make the attempt of imposing their books upon the world. Either they must have done so to promote their personal gain, pecuniary or otherwise; or they must have done it from a sincere and disinterested desire to benefit their fellow-creatures. But neither of these suppositions will hold good. 3. The authors of the New Testament could not have proposed in their undertaking either power, pleasure, or any other species of gain; because they could not but know that the religion which they were labouring to establish was, in its very principles, equally opposed to Judaism and Paganism, and must, of necessity, bring down upon its advocates the vengeance of these two great classes of society. That both Christ and his apostles were fully aware of the consequences which would result to them from their exertions and labours, is evident from every part of the writings under consideration;* and that the event answered to the anticipation, is known to every reader of these and other early Christian writings. Now, is it reasonable to suppose that any persons of common sense would voluntarily have engaged in an imposture from which they could not hope to derive any thing but the most dreadful sufferings, and even death itself? If these men were mere cheats, they were such without any motive or advantage, and even contrary to every motive and idea of advantage by which men are usually influenced. With regard to pecuniary gain, or money-getting, every thing concurs to show that this was no part of the design proposed by the persons whose conduct we are referring to. They had no fixed places of abode themselves, and they never interfered in the pecuniary concerns of their converts, except so far as to induce them to minister to the necessities of those who were unable to support themselves. For some short time they took upon themselves, for very obvious reasons, the distribution of the provision thus made for the poor; but as soon as it became any thing considerable, they committed it to other hands, and devoted themselves exclusively to their apostolic and ministerial labours.t

* See Matt. xxiv. 9; Mark iv. 17; x. 30; Luke xi. 49; xxi. 12-16; John xv. 20; xvi. 4, 33; Rom. v. 3,4; viii. 35, 27; 2 Cor. iv. 8, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17; 2 Thess. i. 4, 5; Heb. x. 32-36; 1 Pet. iv. 12-19; James v. 10, 11. † Paley remarks, that the most tempting opportunity which occurred to the apostles, of making a gain of their converts, was

4. They could not have engaged in the imposture from a desire to benefit their fellow-creatures. This must presuppose their belief, at least, in the doctrines which they taught, and their conviction that they were adapted to promote the well-being and happiness of men. These, however, cannot be separated from the facts of the evangelical histories, which the objection assumes to be false; and therefore no such belief or conviction could have been cherished by the persons in question. But to this must be added, that the doctrines taught by these persons condemn, most unequivocally, the conduct which they are supposed to have pursued, and denounce it under the penalty of eternal misery. Are we to suppose, then, that they were ardently attached to a religion which forbids every kind and degree of fraud and falsehood, while their whole lives were one continued scene of perjury; and that, whilst guilty of the basest and most useless knavery themselves, they were taking infinite pains, and enduring unexampled suffering, in order to teach mankind the value of truth and honesty? The idea is monstrously absurd.

III. Is there any thing contained in the books of the New Testament which is contradicted by other and independent writers, possessing an actual knowledge of the facts and circumstances narrated in them?

1. The only discrepancy between the sacred and profane history, of which we have any recollection, is found in Luke ii. 1, 2, which presents a chronological difficulty. The passage is as follows:-" And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Cæsar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)"

It being

2. As to the extent of this census. now agreed, on all hands, that the Greek words here translated "all the world" are to be taken in a restricted sense, it is unnecessary to notice the tom-fooleries of which some sagacious deistical writers have been guilty, in their remarks upon

by the custody and management of the public funds, when some of the richer members of the church, intending to contribute their fortunes to the common support of their society, sold their possessions, and laid down the price at the apostles' feet, Acts iv. 34-37. Yet so insensible or undesirous were they of the advantage which that confidence afforded, that we find they very soon disposed of the trust, by putting it into the hands, not of nominees of their own, but of stewards formally elected, for the purpose, by the society at large, Acts vi. 1-6. He adds, that this excess of generosity, which cast private property into the public stock, was so far from being required by the apostles, or imposed as a law of Christianity, that Peter reminds Ananias that he had been guilty, in his behaviour, of an officious and voluntary prevarication, Acts v. 4.

the phrase. The words are restricted, by common consent, to the sense in which they are employed by some of the best Greek writers, to signify the extent of the Roman dominions. But as there is no general census mentioned in any historian as having taken place at this time, the meaning of izovμŋ must be farther restrained to the land of Judea. This signification it certainly has in this same evangelist, chap. xxi. 26: "Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth," oixouμevn, this land. The whole discourse relates to the calamities that were coming, not upon the whole world, nor the whole of the Roman empire, but on the land of Judea; see ver. 21: "Then let them that are in Judea flee to the mountains." Out of Judea, therefore, there would be safety; and only those who should be with child, or giving suck, in those days, are considered as peculiarly unhappy, because they could not flee away from that land on which the scourge was to fall: for the wrath, or punishment, shall be, says our Lord, ON THIS VERY PEOPLE, namely, the Jews, ver. 23. It appears that Luke used this word in conformity to the Septuagint, who have applied it in precisely the same way, Isa. xiii. 11; xix. 26; xxiv. 1. And from this we may learn, that the word ozon had been long used as a term by which the land of Judea was commonly expressed. See Luke iv. 25; Josh. ii. 3. It is probable that the reason why this enrolment, or census, is said to have been throughout the whole Jewish nation, was to distinguish it from that partial one made ten years after, mentioned Acts v. 37, which does not appear to have extended beyond the estates of Archelaus, and which gave birth to the insurrection excited by Judas of Galilee.*

3. As to the act itself. It has been thought that the testimony of Josephus, that no tax or tribute was levied from Judea till many years after this, is at variance with the evangelist. Such, however, is not the fact, for the word doygacerda properly signifies registering-taking an account of the population; probably with a view to the levying of a tax.

4. As to the governorship of Syria. It is granted on all hands that Cyrenius was not governor of Syria, till ten or twelve years after the birth of our Lord. The question, therefore, is, how is the evangelist to be reconciled with the historical fact?

(1) Dr. Hales conceives that Cyrenius, whom Tacitus calls "an active soldier and a rigid commissioner," and who was therefore well qualified for an employment so odious to Herod and his

pur

[PART III. subjects as the making of this enrolment must have been, was probably sent into Syria to execute the decree of Augustus with an armed force. At this juncture, however, the census proceeded no farther than the first act of the enrolment of persons in the Roman registers; Herod having succeeded in effecting a reconciliation with the emperor. But upon the deposal and banishment of Archelaus it was carried into effect, for the pose of which Cyrenius was sent again, as president of Syria, with an armed force. Now it is of this establishment of the assessment or taxing, which was necessary to complete the Roman census, that Dr. Hales understands the evangelist to speak in the parenthetical remark, which he renders thus-" The taxing itself was first made while Cyrenius was president of Syria ;" and he subjoins some cogent reasons in justification of its correctness.

(2) Dr. Lardner, whose solution has been adopted by many subsequent critics, conceives that Cyrenius, having been employed in the way Dr. Hales supposes, during the presidency of Quintilius Varus, or Saturninus, whichever of them was then president, made a second census when he himself came into the office of president, ten or twelve years afterwards. Now to both these acts he supposes the evangelist to allude, when he says, "This was the first assessment of Cyrenius, governor of Syria." The translated does not say that this assessment was passage thus made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria, which would not have been true; but that this was the first assessment which Cyrenius, who was (that is, afterwards) governor of Syria, made; for after he became governor he made a second.

(3) The late editor of Calmet, Mr. Charles Taylor, has offered a new conjecture, which was suggested to him by the inscription on a medal of Antioch; namely, that Cyrenius was associated with Saturninus in the government of Syria. The following is the substance of his observations in support of this opinion:-On this medal appear the letters OroAO, which are presumed to be the first letters of Oтодоvo, Volumnius, the colleague of Saturninus; and indeed Josephus (Ant. lib. xvi., cap. 9, 10), speaking of these persons, styles them presidents or governors, in the plural; though Saturninus was properly president, and Volumnius procurator, that is, chief of the emperor's revenue, in this province. There are, then, two things extremely remarkable in this medal: First, that only on medals of Antioch are any names inscribed of those consular Romans who were sent by the early emperors to govern the province of Syria: Secondly, that the name of Volumnius, an inferior officer, should appear

(4) That these solutions of the difficulty will be perfectly satisfactory to every reader, would be rather too much to affirm; but to every candid inquirer they cannot fail to suggest that the discrepancy may result from the paucity or imperfection of our own historical knowledge. And is it too much to say that a passage of this kind

on the same coin with that of Saturninus, the | vindicated Josephus, who describes Saturninus principal governor. There must have been some and Volumnius as governors [plural] of Syria; reason for this; and this is conceived to be the we have justified both St. Luke and Tertullian, following:-Antioch, the capital of Syria, where, though in a seeming contradiction; one affirming no doubt, Saturninus kept his court, was the Cyrenius, the other affirming Saturninus, to have metropolis of a very extensive province; but was executed the enrolment; and we have justified ill-situated for being the seat of government, being the words of the evangelist, which may be thus very far north. It may be presumed, too, that understood: "This enrolment was the first effected Damascus, a city of no slight pretensions, was by Cyrenius; meaning, while he was the first sometimes in this province; and thus it might be time governor of Syria, of the same rank as Voproper, that although one was the primary president, lumnius; of which province he was afterwards yet that, for the purposes of government, there governor, of the same rank as Saturninus; in should be treo presidents of Syria, both appointed which capacity he enforced another enrolment, by the emperor. The reader perceives that we sup- from which this should be carefully distinguished." pose Saturninus to have been stationary at Antioch, Or, "This was the enrolment of Cyrenius, he while his associate was engaged in other districts being then governor of Syria associated with of the province, as circumstances required; and Saturninus; and should be distinguished from what we suppose of Volumnius we also suppose that made by him eleven years afterwards, when of Cyrenius, who after him held the same office. he was the chief, the precedential governor of the Nor is it impossible that this second governor same province."+ might reside at some other city in the province. However that might be, we have instances that the province of Syria could, on occasion, spare one of its rulers for a time to an adjacent district, as it might still have one remaining: nevertheless, any transaction said to be done under one (he who was in activity), might be said, not improperly, to be done under the other also; especially if he were the superior in dignity, although he staid at home at the seat of government. It remains now, that we examine the date on our medal, E A, 35, which, we presume, is from the Julian era of Rome 705, and marks the year 740 for the time when the coin was struck. If Herod died in the year 750, or 751, and Quintilius Varus had succeeded Saturninus only about a year at that time, then Saturninus must have held this station eight or nine years, supposing this medal to have been struck immediately on his appointment to the government. We are, however, more interested respecting Volumnius, who possibly might die, or might quit his appointment in or before the year 746 or 747, and be succeeded by Cyrenius. This nobleman was consul of Rome, 742; was sent against the Homonadenses, perhaps about 745, being then either the ordinary proconsul of Cilicia the adjoining province to Syria, or an extra officer in that province. Having terminated this commission, he was appointed to Syria, suppose on the death of Volumnius, and in this character he superintended the execution of that enrolment which was appointed by the decree of Augustus Casar.* Thus, by means of our medal, we have

* This statement allows for the opinion of those who think that Christ was born in 747, and that Herod died about the Passover, 750.

occurring in a work which is, in every other respect, not only perfectly accordant with contemporary history in its direct statements and more prominent features, but which also exhibits so many incidental and undesigned coincidences in the most minute and trifling matters-should not be too closely pressed, or too harshly interpreted; much less should it be thought to make against its general accuracy. Let it receive the same treatment in this respect, as if it were found in the pages of Xenophon, or of Livy.

IV. Do the books of the New Testament contain any thing incredible in itself, or contradictory to the nature of things?

1. This question may be safely answered in the negative. The entire history of the introduction of Christianity into the world is miraculous, but it is not absurd; the extraordinary works performed by our Saviour and his apostles were above the laws of nature, and beyond human agency; but there was nothing in them repugnant to the nature of things, or to the power and moral excellence of the Supreme Being.

2. That there are any miracles recorded in the New Testament, which are in themselves absurd or contradictory to the moral excellence which belongs to God, few, if any, persons will have

the arrogance to maintain. But it is said, they are incredible or improbable; and thus the very acts that were intended to ratify the pretensions put forth by their authors, are taken as a ground of objection to their claims. The argument of Mr. Hume, to which all subsequent objectors have betaken themselves, is well known. Personal experience he maintains to be our only guide with reference to matters of fact; "and since miracles are contrary to what we constantly observe in nature, and indeed to its laws, no testimony can be sufficient to warrant our believing them to be true or credible, even in the lowest degree." It is evidently impossible, here, to enter into a full examination of this fanciful hypothesis. It has been ably exposed by Professor Campbell, and some other writers, to whose works the reader is referred. A remark or two, however, may be offered.

Supreme Being to alter what men think the course of nature, as to preserve it. "Those effects which are produced in the world regularly and indesinently, and which are usually termed the works of nature, prove the constant providence of the Deity; those, on the contrary, which, upon any extraordinary occasion, are produced in such a manner as it is manifest could not have been either by human power, or by what is called chance, prove undeniably the immediate interposition of the Deity on that special occasion. God, it must be recollected, is the governor of the moral as well as of the physical world; and since the moral well-being of the universe is of more consequence than its physical order and regularity, it follows, obviously, that the laws conformably with which the material world seems generally to be regulated, are subservient, and may occasionally yield, to the laws by which the moral world is governed. Although, therefore, a miracle is contrary to the usual course of natureand would, indeed, lose its beneficial effect if it were not so-it cannot thence be inferred that it is a violation of the laws of nature,' allowing the term to include a regard to moral tendencies. The laws by which a wise and holy God governs the world cannot, unless he is pleased to reveal them, be learnt in any other way than from testimony; since, on this suppo

(1) It is not true that personal experience is our only guide or authority for believing matters of fact. The merest clown or peasant derives incomparably more knowledge from testimony, and the communicated experience of others, than, in the longest life, he could have amassed out of the treasure of his own memory. If that, therefore, must be the rule, the only rule, by which every testimony is ultimately to be judged, our belief in matters of fact must have very narrow bounds. No testimony, it is said, ought to have any weight with us, that does not relate to ansition, nothing but testimony can bring us acevent, similar, at least, to some one observation which we ourselves have had the opportunity of making. For instance, that there exist such people as negroes, could not, on this hypothesis, be rendered credible to a person who had never seen a negro, not even by the most numerous and the most unexceptionable attestations. The absurdities that would flow from the adoption of such a principle must be immediately obvious.

(2) To object to the credibility of miracles, on the ground that they are contrary to the laws of nature, discovers a mistaken notion of those laws. Nature has not imposed these laws upon itself; they have been imposed upon it by its divine Author. But it is dangerous to employ metaphorical language in philosophical or metaphysical disquisition; and had it been avoided by those who have urged the objection, its unreasonableness might have stood naked before them. The laws of nature are nothing more than a certain course of events which the Creator has determined that matter shall exhibit; in other words, they are the will and pleasure of God, acting continually upon matter, according to certain rules of uniformity, still bearing a relation to contingencies. This being the case, it is as easy, as Dr. Gregory remarks, for the

quainted with the whole series of his dispensations, and this kind of knowledge is absolutely necessary previously to our correctly enforcing those laws. Testimony, therefore, must be admitted as constituting the principal means of discovering the real laws by which the universe has been regulated. That testimony assures us that the apparent course of nature has often been interrupted to produce important moral effects; and we must not at random disregard such testimony, because, in estimating its credibility, we ought to look almost infinitely more at the moral than at the physical circumstances connected with any particular event." *

V. Do the writings composing the New Testament exhibit any internal evidences of the fidelity of their authors, and of the truth of those facts and circumstances which they narrate?

1. The books of the New Testament do exhibit various and powerful evidences of the fidelity of their respective authors; internal marks of sincerity and truth that are not to be found, and could not possibly exist, in any forged writings. A few particulars may be noticed.

Letters on the Evidences, vol. i., p. 177.