be deduced from them, as they stand recorded; but we must judge of those facts, or discourses, by the doctrinal and preceptive parts of the Scriptures: nor does it at all invalidate the complete inspiration of the sacred writers, to allow that they expressed themselves in common language, and wrote of things as men generally spoke of them; rather than according to philosophical exactness, or in the style that was used in the schools of the learned, during the ages in which they lived. Supposed or unimportant errors, or inaccuracies of expressions, in such things, are not in the least inconsistent with that entire divine inspiration of which we speak; for the Scriptures were not written to render us exact philosophers, or to instruct us in ancient history and geography, but to make us wise unto salvation. Nor do the few immaterial mistakes, which in a long course of years have crept in, through the errors of transcribers, create any difficulty or uncertainty to the humble and teachable inquiFer: though they frequently give occasion to the self-sufficient to cavil and object; for the "Lord taketh the wise in their own craftiness."

It is futile and absurd, for any man to dispute against particular doctrines as unreasonable, to disallow facts as incredible, or to quarrel with the divine dispensation as unrighteous; when he finds himself unable to answer the plain arguments, which are adduced to prove the whole to be the word of God. Where the premises are undeniable, and the deductions unavoidable, obstinacy and self-conceit alone will persist in incredulity; and ridicule, reviling, subtle insinuations, or witty sarcasms, are, in such a case, certain indications of a proud and bitter enmity to the truth itself. If then the arguments that shall be adduced, be sufficient to establish the divine authority of the Scripture; I trust the reader will recollect, that, as a reasonable and accountable creature, he is bound to study, believe, and obey it; and to make it the rule and standard of all his principles, affections, and conduct. These things. premised, I observe—

I. That vast numbers of wise and good men, through many generations and in distant countries, have agreed in receiving the Bible as a divine revelation. Many of them have been noted for seriousness, erudition, penetration, and impartiality in judging of men and things. With much labour and patient investigation, they de tected the impostures by which their cotemporaries were duped yet the same assiduous examination confirmed them in believing the Bible to be the Word of God; and induced them to recommend it, living and dying, to all others, as the source of wisdom, hope, and consolation. In this view, even the tradition of the church has much weight: for, whatever abuse has been made of the term, by such as generally were no part of the true church; yet the whole company of those, who have worshipped the living God in spirit and truth, (including them who ventured and laid down their lives for con→ science sake, and who were the most pious, holy, and useful men in every age,) having unanimously concurred in handing down to us the Scriptures as a divine revelation, and having very little differed about the books which form a part of that sacred deposit, must be allowed to be a consideration of great importance. And I cannot but suppose, that if a Being of entire impartiality, of sound mind, and holy disposition, should be shown the two companies, of those who have received, and of those who have rejected the Scriptures; and should compare the seriousness, learning, patient investigation of truth, solid judgment, holy lives, and composure in a dying hour, (without unmanly terror or indecent levity,) of the one company, with the character and the conduct of the other; he would be induced to take up the Bible with profound ve neration, and the strongest prepossession in its favour.

II. The agreement of the sacred penmen among themselves is another cogent argument of their divine inspiration. Should an equal number of cotemporaries of the same country, education, habits, profession, natural disposition, and rank in life, concur in writing a book on religious sub

jects as large as the Bible, each furnishing his proportion without comparing notes together; the attentive reader, whose mind had been long inured to such studies, would be able to discover some diversity of opinion among them. But the penmen of the Scripture succeeded each other, during the term of fifteen hundred years: some of them were princes or priests, others shepherds and fishermen ; their natural abilities, education, habits, and employments, were exceedingly dissimilar; they wrote laws, history, prophecy, odes, devotional exercises, proverbs, parables, doctrines, and controversy; and each man had his distinct department; yet they all exactly coincide in the exhibition they give us of the perfections, works, truths, and will of God; of the nature, situation, and obligations of man; of sin and salvation; of this world and the next; and in short of all things connected with our duty, safety, interest, and comfort; and in the whole of the religion inculcated by them. They all were evidently of the same judgment, aimed to establish the same principles, and applied them to the same practical purposes. Apparent inconsistencies will indeed perplex the superficial reader; but they will vanish after a more accurate investigation: nor could ever any charge of disagreement, among the penmen of the Bible, be substantiated: for it can only be said, that they related the same facts with different circumstances which are perfectly reconcileable; and that they gave instructions suited to the persons whom they addressed, without systematically showing the harmony of them with other parts of divine truth. They wrote not by concert, and bestowed no pains to avoid the appearance of inconsistency: yet the exact coincidence that is perceived among them by the diligent student, is most astonishing, and cannot be accounted for on any rational principles, without admitting that they wrote "as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

To this we may add, that the scriptural history accords, in a wonderful manner, with the most authentic records which remain of the events, customs, and manners of the

countries and ages to which it stands related. The rise and fall of empires, the revolutions that have taken place in the world, and the grand outlines of chronology, as mentioned or referred to in the Scriptures, are coincident with those stated by the most approved ancient writers: whilst the palpable errors in these respects, detected in the apocryphal books, constitute one of the most decisive reasons for rejecting them as spurious. The history of the Bible is of far greater antiquity than any other records extant in the world and it is remarkable, that in numerous instances it shows the real origin of those absurd fables, which disgrace and obscure all other histories of those remote times: which is no feeble proof, that it was derived from some surer source of information than human tradition.

III. The miracles, by which the penmen of the Scriptures confirmed their divine mission to their cotemporaries, afford us also a most convincing proof in this matter. The account of these miracles may be evidently shown to have been published very soon after the time, and at the places, in which they were said to have been wrought in the most conspicuous manner, and before vast multitudes, enemies as well as friends: yet this public challenge never called forth any man to deny that they were really performed; nor was an attempt of this kind made till long afterwards. Can any man of common sense, think that Moses and Aaron could possibly have persuaded the whole nation of Israel, that they had witnessed all the plagues of Egypt, passed through the Red Sea with the waters piled on each side of them, gathered the manna every morning, and seen all the wonders recorded in their history; had no such events taken place? If then that generation could not be thus imposed on; when could the belief of these extraordinary transactions be palmed upon the nation? Surely, it would have been impossible in the next age, to persuade them that their fathers had seen and experienced such wonderful things, when they had never before heard a single word about them in all their lives: and when an appeal must have been made to them, that

these were things well known among them! What credit could have been obtained to such a forgery at any subsequent period? It would have been absolutely necessary, in making this attempt, to persuade the people that such traditions had always been current among them; that the memory of them had for ages been perpetuated by days and ordinances observed by all the nation; and that their whole civil and religious establishment had thence originated and could this have possibly been effected, if they all had known, that no such memorials and traditions had ever before been heard of among them? The same might be shown concerning the other miracles recorded in Scripture, especially those of Christ and his apostles and it might be made evident that the man, who denies them to have been actually performed, must believe more wonderful things without any evidence, than those which he rejects, though established by unanswerable proof. But brevity will only allow me to insist on one miraculous event, viz. the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: for this being once proved, the substance of the whole Scripture is evinced to be a divine revelation. His doctrine and authority establish the authenticity of the Old Testament: and the witnesses of his resurrection were the penmen of the New Testament.

Almost all human affairs are conducted by testimony: the concurrence of two or three unexceptionable witnesses is sufficient to prove any fact, that is in its own nature credible and the resurrection of a dead person, by Omnipotence, and for the most important purposes, cannot reasonably be deemed incredible. The ancient prophets had predicted the resurrection of the Messiah; (Ps. xvi. 10. Isaiah liii. 10-12.) and indeed every pre-intimation of his glorious and perpetual kingdom, when compared with the prophecies of his sufferings and death, implied that he would rise again from the dead. His very enemies knew, that he had foretold his own resurrection within three days, and they took precautions accordingly: yet the body was gone, and they could give no rational account what was be