

CHRISTIANITY. 



II* Of 



a me-ajre 

 frotn CtKl. 



ThefirU 

 way of re- 



rifyinjf a 



Mill I 



plicablc lo 

 uch a catr. 



But the <e- 



c oud way 

 applicable 

 'o ii in all 



m 



to wreck our Onpleatant tooing-. upon the bearers of it. 

 In tliii w.v. t only harp no earthly interest 



lo d>-ceive lie strongest inducement possi- 



ble to abstain from ii ;pon that message which 



they were < : of all, at the con- 



. :! . :' r'"-ir .iisrM,-- r-.-itv, :' B ; .:": ?. -. in 

 in war 



n by none but their master ; a;\l which none but 

 hi messengers ?o:>!d evi-roVain th>- possession of. In this 

 way, unfruitful is all our efforts may have been upon the 

 first subject of examination, we may derive from the se- 

 cond the most dec! ice. that the me.isage in 

 question is a rral n enage. and was actually transmitted 

 to as by its professed author. 



5. Now. this consideration applies in all its parts to 

 a message from God. The argument for the truth of 

 this message resolves itself into thf same twn topics of 

 examination. We may sit in judgment upon the subject 

 of the message ; or we may sit in judgment upon the 

 credibility of it bearers. 



The first forms a great psrt of that argument for 

 the truth of the C'iri t:an religion, which comes under 

 the head of its int< rial evidences. The substance of the 

 message is neither nun: nor less, than that particular 

 scheme of the divine economy which is revealed to us in 

 the New Testament ; and the point of inquiry is, whe- 

 his scheme be consistent with that knowledge < f 

 God and his attributes which we arc previously in pos- 

 session of. 



7. 1 ( appears to us, that no effectual argument can 

 be founded upon this consideration. We are not 

 enough acquainted with the designs or character of 

 the bein-' from whom the message professes to have 

 come. Were the author of the message fome dis- 

 tant and unknown individual of our own species, we 

 would scarcely be entitled to found an argument up- 

 on any comparison of ours, betwixt the import of tile 

 message and the character of the individual, eten though 

 we had our general experience of human nature to help 

 us in the speculation. Now, of the invisible God, we 

 have no experience whatever. We are still further re- 

 moved from all direct and personal observation of him 

 or of his counsels. Whether we think of the eternity 

 of his government, or the mighty range of its influence 

 ever the wide departments of nature and of providence, 

 he stands at such a distance from us, as to make the ma- 

 nagement of his empire a subject inaccessible to all our 

 faculties. 



S. It is evident, however, that this does not apply to 

 the second topic of examination. The bearers of the 

 message were beings like ourselves ; and we can apply 

 our safe and certain experience of man to their conduct 

 and their testimony. We know too little of Gud, to 

 found any argument upon the coincidence which we con. 

 eeive to exiit betwixt the subject of the message and our 

 previ us conceptions of its author. But we may know 

 enough of man to pronounce upon the credibility of the 

 messengers. Had they the manner and physiognomy of 

 boat It men ? Was their t< -ti i m,y resitted, and did they 

 persevere in it ? Had they any interest in fabricating 

 the message; or did they suffer in consequence of tin, 

 perseverencc ? Did they suffer to such a degree, as to 

 constitute a satinfying pledge of their integrity ? Was 

 more than one messenger, and did they agree as to 

 the i-.ihitar r.- of that commu.'.ir ition which they made 

 .1 ? Did they exhibit any special mark of 

 tbeir office as the messengers of God ; such a mark as 

 none but God could give, and none hut his approved 

 messengers could obtain the possession of? Was this 



mark the power of working miracles ; and were these 

 miracles so obviously addressed to the senses, as to leave 

 no suspicion of : > These arc ques- 



tions which we feel our competency to talic up, and to 

 decide upon. They lie within the legitimate boundaries 

 of human observation ; and upon the solution of these 

 do wt question of the truth of the Christian 



religion. 



9. This, then, is the state of the question with those 

 to whom the message was originally addressed. Th y 

 had personal acccv; to the i.d the evidences 

 of their veracity lay before them. . c the eye 

 and ear-witnesses of those fac occurred 

 commencement of the Christian and upon which 

 its credibility rests. What met their ohservalii n ir.ir.t 

 have been enough to satisfy them; but we livi at the 

 distance of nearly 2000 years, and is t 



satisfy us ? Tho-c facts, which consti'r 



for Christianity, might have been cred 



cing to them, if they realiy saw them ; i y 



way by which they can he rrnderct' 



cvng to us, who only read of them ? W. -xpe- 



dient by which the knowledge and belief of : 



other times can be transmitted to posterity ? C 



distinguish between a c<.rru;>t and a faithfn' 



s'on ? Have we evident- 



ascertain what was the h<. . .0 to who 



sage was first communicated ? And can the belief which 



existed in their mitids be derived to ours, by our sitting 



in judgment upon the reasons which product d it ? 



10. t way in wiiich th* belief and knowledge 

 of the men of former ages can be transmitted to their 

 descendants, is through the medium of written tc 



ny ; and it is fortunate for us, that the records of the 

 Christian religion are not the only historical documents 

 which have come down to us. A great "i in- 



formation hw-conje down to us in ti. .1 great 



part of that information is as firmly believed, and as con- 

 fidently proceeded upon, as if the thing narrated had 

 happened within the limits of our ivt -bight. No man 

 doubts the invasion of Britain by .1 :r; and no 



man doubts, therefore, that a conviction of the truth of 

 past events may be fairly produced in the mind by the 

 instrumentality of a written memorial. This \j the kind 

 of evidence which is chiefly appealed to for the truth of 

 ancient history ; and it i:. counted satisfying evidence for 

 all that part of it which is received and depended upon. 



11. In 1 -ore the reader, ilien, the evidence 

 for the truth of Christianity, we do not call his mind to 

 any Miiirular or unprecedented exercise of its faculties. 

 We call him to pronounce upon ihe credibility of writ- 

 ten documents, which profess to have betn pubhkhexj at 

 a certain age, aixi by certain authors. The" inquiry in- 

 volves in it no prnct pealed to every 

 day in qu' -iticism. To sit in judg- 

 ment on thi- credibility of a \viitun document, is a fre- 

 qurnt and familiar exercise of the uiuU '(.-.landing witti li- 

 terary men. It is fortunate for the hunun mind, when 

 so interesting a question as its religious faith can be pla- 

 ced uncer the tribunal of such evidence as it is com. 



to pronounce upon. It w.it toilnn , ' K to whom 



.jainty (.1 pr fes-.nl communi 



.TSI addressed, that they could decide upon tlu 



: ae communication by such tnt 



day princ:; rks of truth or : :n the 



human "t that communication. And 



nate for us, that when, after that communication has as- 

 sumed the form of a historical document, we c.ui pro- 

 Bottncc upon the degree of credit which should 



How the 



those who 

 fim recet- 



!!!'- r I 



c;i be 



lilted 



II' ,Kl: 



By written 

 u-!timony. 



It i< imo 

 this that 

 our Idiili in 



