as leads the penitent personally to confide in the atonement Christ has made for sin, and the righteousness that He has obtained for sinners; and thus to look to, and rely upon, Him as his Saviour. Let none, however, suppose that any but they who possess that true repentance already mentioned, can exercise such a faith and trust as this in the atonement of Jesus Christ. There must be this thorough change of mind before faith can be really exercised; for it is the language of faith and repentance conjointly," Lord save me, or I perish." And all who truly repent, and become thus changed in mind, may draw nigh unto God through our Lord Jesus Christ, in faith, nothing doubting but that they shall "obtain mercy," and "receive the end of their faith, even the salvation of their souls;" for unto them will God fulfil His gracious promise-" come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." It is requested that the answers, throughout the Examination, may be strictly confined to the terms of the questions, and that they may be as short as is consistent with a distinct statement of the particulars required. EVIDENCE. I. Enumerate simply, and without entering into any argument, the general Heads under which the evidences of Christianity, external and internal, may be classed. The EXTERNAL EVIDENCES of Christianity may be classed under Historical Testimony, the Fulfilment of Prophecy,-Performance of Miracles,—and its extensive propagation, while opposed to human prejudices, and destitute of all local and civil sanction: and the INTERNAL EVIDENCES may be classed under the Purity of its Morals, and its suitableness to promote the happiness of mankind. II. Shew, as Paley has done, that, if a Future State be probable, it is also probable, and in precisely the same degree,-1st. That a Revelation should have been given to Man.-2dly. That Miracles, such as are recorded in Scripture, should have been worked. Suppose the Creator to have formed part of His creation capable of paying a moral obedience to His will, and that He intended for these a future state of existence, and that their condition in this future state, should depend on their conduct in the present; and, moreover, that a knowledge of this would be conducive to their happiness: is it not probable that such knowledge should be revealed to them? But a revelation could not be given without the performance of a miracle: therefore, in exactly the same degree in which it is probable that a revelation should be made, in that degree it is also probable that miracles, such as would prove this revelation to be divine, should be worked.* * Paley's Evidences.-Preparatory considerations. III. Shew that, if we establish the truth of either the Old or the New Testament, we gain the strongest testimony to the truth of the other. By establishing the truth of the Old Testament, we gain the strongest testimony to the truth of the New, because the New Testament records events, things, and circumstances which are the antitypes and fulfilments of certain types and prophecies contained in the Old; and the reality of which events and circumstances are corroborated by profane historians of the apostolic age: so that we are obliged either to believe the New Testament to be true, or the whole class of profane histories of those times, and the numerous statements in the Old Testament, the truth of which we have previously allowed, to be false. And again, in establishing the truth of the New Testament, we necessarily establish that of the Old, for the New testifies of the Old:-" Search the Scriptures," said Christ to the Jews, "for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and these are they which testify of me ;" and again, "Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me ;" and to His disciples Christ said, "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me." If, therefore, we allow the truth of the New Testament, we must allow that of the Old likewise; or else a consequence, similar to the above, inevitably follows,-that we at the same time believe and disbelieve the truth of the same book,-the New Testament. IV. In investigating the truth of the History of the Jews in the time of Moses, and of the History contained in the New Testament, shew that it is highly important to prove that these Histories were written at the times, in which we believe them to have been written. If it could not be proved that these histories were written at the times in which we believe them to have been written, they would be liable, however unreasonably, to the charge of having been published for the purpose of imposing upon mankind: the prophecies they contain might be said to be historical narratives founded upon past occurrences, and propagated after the events to which they profess to refer;—the miracles also which are recorded might be questioned, if it could not be shewn that these histories were written about the times in which they are said to have been written. In proving, therefore, that these histories were written about the times to which they are generally referred, we gain strong negative testimony to their truth; for if they contained anything contrary to truth, they were capable of being disproved, and consequently rendered unworthy of credit, by the very persons who were contemporary with the times in which they were written; the entire absence of which refutation reasonably establishes their claim to credibility.* * Horne's Introduction to the Holy Scriptures, Vol. I. pp. 36, 37. V. Prove that this must have been the case with respect to the Mosaic History, from the following considerations: 1. The nature of the events related, and the manner of relating them. 2. The commemorative character of the Jewish Institutions. 3. The testimony of the Sacred Historians of subsequent periods. 4. The belief of the Jews themselves. 1. The events related, the passage of 600,000 men, besides women and children, through the Red Sea on dry land, the presence of a cloud by day, and of a pillar of fire by night to guide them through the wilderness, the awful circumstances attending the giving of the law upon mount Sinai, and the sustaining of so many thousands with bread from heaven for a period of about forty years, are so extraordinary and public in their nature and character,* and are related with such particularity+ of place, time, and circumstances, as to render it utterly improbable that this history should have been written at any period but that in which these things actually occurred; unless, indeed, it were compiled from preceding histories received as authentic among the Jews. But of the existence of such preceding histories we have no knowledge, and therefore conclude there were none. So that Moses could have no corroborating testimony but the facts themselves, and could appeal to no witnesses but the individuals who had seen the events; and therefore this history must have been written about the time in which the events related took place. 2. The character of the Jewish Institutes also proves this point; for this history contains an account of the events and circumstances which these Institutes respectively commemorate,‡ and had it not been written about the time such events and circumstances happened, these Institutes could never have been established, especially since there was no prior or more original account. And, 3. the allusion made to the books of Moses, by several Sacred Historians of subsequent periods,§ shews this history to have existed prior to their own times; and as some of them lived very near the time of Moses himself, this allusion to the Mosaic records proves them to have been written within, at least, a very few years of the period to which they are generally referred. And, moreover, 4. the constant belief of the Jews|| themselves from the present day, back to the most remote period of their history, still further shews, that the books of Moses could not have been written at any time but that in which we believe them to have been written. Horne's Introduction to the Holy Scriptures, Vol. I. p. 121. † p. 44. p. 48. VI. State the nature of the evidence which we possess for proving this point with respect to the Gospel History. The particularity with which the various events and circumstances are related, the style of the language, the concurrent testimony of co-temporary profane authors, ENEMIES, and indifferent persons, as well as friends.* * Horne's Introduction, Vol. I. pp. 62-99. VII. What argument for the Divinity of Christ may be drawn from the fact, that His enemies made it a constant ground of accusation against Him, that He pretended to be the Son of God? It is evident that when the Jews charged Christ with pretending to be the "Son of God," they understood by this term nothing less than EQUALITY with the Supreme Being; for on a certain occasion, when His enemies attempted to take away His life, He inquired, “For what good work do ye stone me?” and they answered, "For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."* Again, after Pilate had declared that he found nothing in Christ worthy of death, the Jews answered him, “We have a law, and by our law he ought to DIE, because he made himself the Son of God:"+ here using the very words "Son of God," and alleging that for this He had legally forfeited His life. Now Christ had many opportunities of correcting this opinion, had it been erroneous, yet in no single instance did He endeavour to do so, but rather encouraged it by frequently appealing to His Works. From the fact, therefore, that the enemies of Christ made it a constant ground of accusation against Him that He pretended to be the "Son of God," we draw so forcible an argument for His divinity, that to deny its conclusiveness is, in effect, to charge either the Jews (and of course Christ also being Himself a Jew), with ignorance of their own language in using a phrase to express that which it did not express; or, Christ with the awful crime of blasphemy, in unjustly allowing Himself to be considered equal to the one true and living God. Before we admit the force of any Prophecy as Evidence, we may reasonably require that it should be shewn : 1st. That the Prophecy was in existence at a period earlier than the event to which it refers. 2dly. That it has not been since altered so as to suit the event. 3dly. That it is not, like the Heathen oracles, expressed in such vague and ambiguous terms as to admit of being applied to a variety of events; and that the circumstances predicted are not such as might have been foreseen or conjectured by human wisdom. 4thly. That it has been exactly fulfilled. It would materially strengthen the argument, if the events predicted were numerous, of an extraordinary character, and seemingly inconsistent with each other. Apply all these tests to the 53d chapter of Isaiah.—How do the Jews interpret this Prophecy? 1. This prophecy is universally allowed to have been written about 700 years before Christ, to whom it refers; and is found in the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament, which was written about 270 years B. C. 2. No Version has been discovered to have been written since these events took place, but what agrees, in every essential point, with the original Hebrew and Greek MSS. copies. 3. This prophecy is so clear and particular, that had it been a record of past circumstances it could scarcely have been more minute in its description; and |