that any one would dare to usurp the place of Christ, or carry his impiety and arrogance so far, as to claim the titles of Lord and God, and the attributes of holiness and infallibility? Who would have supposed, that Christians, in the days of the apostles so enlightened and so jealous of their spiritual liberty, would ever become so stupid and indifferent, as to allow such a power to raise itself on the ruins of their religion and their reaNothing could have been more remote from the apprehensions of men. Yet these most improbable predictions have been punctually fulfilled in all their circumstances, as protestant writers have unanswerably proved." (Dick, 89, 90.)

son.

These prophecies are part of St. Paul's epistles. Now if part was given by inspiration, it is the more credible that the whole was thus given.

While inquiring concerning the inspiration of St. Paul's writings, we ought by no means to forget the testimony given on this subject by St. Peter. That the latter wrote under a divine influence, was, it is hoped, sufficiently proved in the last lecture. But in his estimation, the writings of St. Paul were to be considered as having the same authority with those of the Old Testament: Even as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, hath written to you; as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to be understood, which they who are unlearned or unstable, wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. From these words it is evident, that St. Peter considered the writings of his illustrious fellow-laborer as Scripture; a term exclusively applied by other writers of the New Testament to these sacred books, such as those of Moses and the prophets, which were believed infallibly to communicate the will of God. If, therefore, omitting all other testimony on the subject, we should confine ourselves wholly to that of St. Peter, I see not but that it might with propriety be said, that the writings of St. Paul had, by an inspired apostle, been pronounced true and sacred.

In the preceding lecture, we defined inspiration in the following words, "Such an influence on the mind of a person, as either communicates to him something previously unknown, or brings so clearly to his recollection what was once known, as prevents him from conveying to others anything inconsistent with truth." This divine influence was, I suppose, enjoyed by the authors of the New Testament, when writing on the subject of religion. We are not under the necessity of supposing, that when other subjects are incidentally introduced, the same influence is exerted on the mind of the writer. When Paul gives Timothy advice concerning his health, and when he directs the latter to bring certain articles of apparel, which were left behind, or mentions the names of many, whom he wished to receive from him Christian salutations, the occasion was not such as to require any special influence of the divine Spirit. Nor are we authorized to believe, that in every opinion or purpose, which the sacred writers express on subjects, with which religious truth is not immediately connected, they were under any infallible influence. St. Paul sometimes formed purposes the accomplishment of which was providentially prevented; (1 Cor. 15: 5. 2 Cor. 1: 15) neither in forming nor expressing which purposes, can we suppose him to have been under a divine impulse. On common subjects the apostles speak with the same uncertainty, which usually attends human affairs: Besides the household of Stephanus, saith he, I know not whether I baptized any other. (1 Cor. 1: 16.) It may be, saith he to the Corinthians, that I will abide, yea and winter with you. St. Peter says: By Sylvanus, a faithful brother, as I suppose, I have written to you. Similar uncertainty is perceived in the following expressions: I hope to see you in my journey. I will come unto you quickly, if the Lord will. I hope to stay some time with you. if the Lord permit. These things I write hoping to come unto you quickly; but if I should tarry, that thou mayest know how to behave thyself in the church of God, etc.

The doubtfulness, expressed in these quotations, does, in no

degree, extend to the doctrines of religion. These are exhibited with the confidence of men, who knew the source whence their knowledge and their commission were derived.

It is of no small importance to ascertain in what light these writings were viewed in the first ages of their existence. That they were greatly respected, read in Christian assemblies, and appealed to both by friends and enemies, as containing the religion of Christ, was shown on a former occasion. It will now be shown, by passages from the Fathers, selected and arranged by Dr. Whitby, that the christian Scriptures were believed to be given by inspiration.

"The apostles," says Clement of Rome, "being filled with the Spirit, and having the word of God committed to them, went out preaching the kingdom of God." He adds, that "St. Paul wrote to them by the Spirit." "In Justin Martyr's time, they were read in christian assemblies, as the holy prophets, as being written by men full of the divine Spirit." Irenaeus asserts, that "the apostles knew of the truth by revelation, as well as St. Paul; for, as St. Paul was an apostle not of men, neither by men, but by Jesus Christ, so were they." Theophilus, who lived in the second century, speaks of the ancient prophets, and the writers of the Gospels, as corresponding, because they both spake by the same Spirit. "The prophets and apostles," says Clement of Alexandria, "were both actuated by one and the same Spirit." Origen, it appears, speaks on the subject with great decision and particularity, asserting of the evangelical and apostolical Scriptures, that "they are divinely inspired." Nearly in the words of Theophilus and Clement of Alexandria, he adds, that "both the prophets of the Old, and the writers of the New Testament, spake by one and the same Spirit."

The investigation, you perceive, has related exclusively to the New Testament. Though it is not my intention to institute. an inquiry concerning the Jewish Scriptures, it may not be useless to exhibit, in very few words, the general grounds, on which their claims to inspiration are supported.

1. The inspiration of Moses results unavoidably from the

truth of his religion. Our Saviour spake, but wrote nothing. Moses not only spake, but wrote. His religion is contained in his own writings. All which any one can desire to have proved in regard to him, is, that he was divinely commissioned. But the truth of the Mosaic religion certainly results from the truth of Christianity. That Moses had received a divine commission, is every where acknowledged by Christ and his apostles. Therefore, by proving Christianity, we did, in fact, prove the inspiration of Moses. But the application of the remark may be more extensive. The books which were received as sacred by the Jews, were precisely the same as those which now constitute the Old Testament. This is evident from the testimony of Josephus. These Jewish Scriptures were in general, acknowledged by our Saviour as of divine authority. As such he appealed to them in opposition to his adversaries. St. Paul, also, whose inspiration we have endeavored to show, asserted in reference to these writings, that all Scripture was given by inspiration of God. As to the prophets in particular, the accomplishment of their predictions indicates the source whence they were derived; and it should not be forgotten, that hence arises additional and decisive proof, that Moses was inspired, as he delivered that prophecy, which so minutely delineates the present condition and fortunes of the Jewish people.

We close the lecture with a few remarks.

1. If the Scriptures are the word of God, their value is inexpressibly great. Religion, as it involves the eternal state of human beings, has undeniably pre-eminent claims to our attention. On such a subject, to be left to mere conjecture, or to the discordant theories of fallible and benighted men, would be infinitely to be deplored. To such a condition we are not abandoned. When we contemplate human conduct, or that event, which mortals most dread, but which none can escape, we are not under the necessity of examining what Plato and Cicero have written on the immortality of the soul, or on the offices of life; we have instruction, in which there can be no error. The Son of God hath abolished death, and brought life and immortality

to light. Men, who had been conversant with him, and were afterwards guided by that Spirit whom he sent to teach them all things, and bring all things to their remembrance, have recorded his words and miracles, and have developed his doctrines. We know, therefore, not only that we shall be judged hereafter, but also the standard by which all decisions as to human character will be made.

2. I would subjoin a few remarks as to the manner in which the Scriptures are to be studied, and the extent, to which reason is of use in forming our theological sentiments. First, reason is of the greatest importance, in examining the evidences of revealed religion, that we may ascertain whether that which professes to be from God, is so in reality. When any person, having examined the Scriptures, perceives that their high claims are well supported, his reason is required in comparing the different parts, one with another, to see what is the meaning of each, and what are the doctrines, which they inculcate. In order to this it may be necessary to consider what is the author's design, and whether his language is literal or figurative. In this point of view, there may also be much importance attached to ancient events, customs, and modes of thinking. That this importance may neither be overlooked nor exaggerated, the exercise of sound judgment is required. But, when the meaning of God's word is ascertained, (and in most cases this may be no difficult matter,) there is an end to all hesitancy, deliberation, and debate. What God has taught cannot be false. The commands which he has given, must be obeyed; and this, whether, in themselves considered, we are able to understand the reasonableness of the command, or to perceive the consistency of the doctrine. The reason is obvious. It is very possible for beings of our limited capacities to err. Many things, which now appear irrational, might appear otherwise, were our knowledge increased, or our powers enlarged. But it is not possible for a God of infinite wisdom to err; nor for a God of infinite truth and justice, to utter a falsehood, or to act unrighteously.