lect to have thought, when reading the account, that, on some points, the difference between us was more in expression than in sentiment. My only reason for mentioning this circumstance here, is to prevent the misconstruction of my silence in regard to him, and other writers on the same subject, whose sentiments may either coincide with mine, or stand in opposition to them. My silence in such cases proceeds neither from contempt nor from policy. They will come nearer the truth, and do me more justice, who shall ascribe it to ignorance. I shall only add, with respect to the gentleman who did me the honour to translate my Dissertation into French, that though, upon the whole, he has acquitted himself admirably of the task he had undertaken, and has, in many things, improved up. on his original, there are a few places in which he seems not perfectly to have apprehended my meaning. The cause of his mistake I find to have sometimes been an ambiguity or obscurity in the English expression I had employed. In such cases I have endeavoured to correct the fault in this edition, and give to the diction all the perspicuity possible. There is no quality in style more important, whatever be the subject; but in argumentative writings it is indispensable. INTRODUCTION. 66 CHRISTIANITY," it has been said, " is not founded in argument." If it were only meant by. these words, that the religion of Jesus could not, by the single aid of reasoning, produce its full effect upon the heart; every true Christian would chearfully subscribe to them. No arguments, unaccompanied by the influences of the Holy Spirit, can convert the soul from sin to God; though even, to such conversion, arguments are, by the agency of the Spirit, rendered subservient. Again, if we were to understand, by this aphorism, that the principles of our religion could never have been discovered by the natural and unassisted faculties of man; this position, I presume, would be as little disputed as the former. But if, on the contrary, under the colour of an ambiguous expression, it is intended to insinuate, that those principles, from their very nature, can admit no rational evidence of their truth, (and this, by the way, is the only mean ing which can avail our antagonists), the gospel, as well as common sense, loudly reclaims against it. The Lord JESUS CHRIST, the author of our religion, often argued, both with his disciples and with his adversaries, as with reasonable men, on the principles of reason. Without this faculty, he well knew, they could not be susceptible either of religion or of law. He argued from prophecy, and the conformity of the event to the prediction *. He argued from the testimony of John the Baptist, who was generally acknowledged to be a prophet. He argued from the miracles which he himself performed ‡, as uncontrovertible evidences, that God Almighty operated by him, and had sent him. He expostulates with his enemies, for not using their reason on this subject. Why, says he, even of yourselves, judge ye not what is right? § In like manner we are called upon by the apostles of our Lord, to act the part of wise men, and judge impartially of what they say | Those who do so, are highly commended for the candour and prudence they discover in an affair of so great consequence **. We are even commanded, to be always ready to give an answer to every man that asketh us a reason of our hope t†; in meekness to instruct them that oppose themselves ‡‡; and ear * Luke xxiv. 25. &c. John v. 39. & 46. John v. 36. x. 25. || 1 Cor. x. 15. ‡‡ 2 Tim. ii. 25. 37, 38. xiv. 10. 11. † John v. 32. & 33. § Luke xii. 57. ++ 1 Peter iii. 15. nestly to contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints *. God has neither, in natural nor in revealed religion, left himself without witness; but has in both given moral and external evidence, sufficient to convince the impartial, to silence the gainsayer, and to render inexcusable the atheist and the unbeliever. This evidence it is our duty to attend to, and candidly to examine. We must prove all things, as we are expressly enjoined in holy writ, if we would ever hope to hold fast that which is good t. THUS much I thought proper to premise, not to serve as an apology for the design of this tract, (the design surely needs no apology, whatever the world may judge of the execution), but to expose the shallowness of that pretext, under which the advocates for infidelity, in this age, commonly take shelter. Whilst therefore we enforce an argument, which, in support of our religion, was so frequently insisted on by its divine founder, we will not dread the reproachful titles of dangerous friends, or disguised enemies of revelation. Such are the titles, which the writer, whose sentiments I propose in these papers to canvass, has bestowed on his antagonists ; not, I believe, through malice against them, but as a sort of excuse for himself, or at least a handle for introducing a very strange and unmeaning compli * Jude 3. + 1 Thess. v. 21. + Page 204. |