less foolish than presumptuous pretence. Accordingly, they are perhaps the only sect, which hath sprung up so lately, made so great a bustle for a while, and which is neverthelessat this day totally extinct. It deserves also to be remarked concerning this people, that though they were mad enough to imagine that. they could restore a dead man to life; nay, though they proceeded so far, as to determine and announce beforehand the day and the hour of his resurrection; yet none of them were so distracted, as to imagine, that they had seen him rise; not one of them afterwards pretended, that their prediction had been fulfilled. Thus even a frenzy, which had quite disordered their intellects, could not in this instance overpower their senses.

UPON the whole, therefore, till some contrary example is produced, I may warrantably conclude, that the religion of the BIBLE is the only religion extant, which claims to have been recommended by the evidence of miracles;-that though, in dif ferent ages and countries, numberless enthusiasts have arisen, extremely few have dared to advance this plea ;-that whereever any have had the boldness to recur to

it, it hath proved the bane, and not the support of their cause. Thus it hath been evinced, as was proposed, that there is no presumption arising from the history of the world, which can in the least invalidate the argument from miracles, in defence of Christianity.

SECT. III.

No miracles recorded by historians of other religions are subversive of the evidence arising from the miracles wrought in proof of Christianity, or can be considered as contrary testimony.

"WHY is a miracle regarded as evidence "of a religious doctrine ?" Or, "What con"nection is there between an act of power "admitted to be supernatural, and the truth "of a proposition pronounced by the per

son who exerts that power?" These are questions, which some of our infidels have exulted in as unanswerable: and they are questions, which it is proper to examine a little; not so much for their own sake, as because a satisfactory answer to them may throw light on the subject of this section.

A man, I suppose, of an unblemished cha

racter, advanceth doctrines in religion, un- known before, but not in themselves apparently impious or absurd. We interrogate him about the manner wherein he attained the knowledge of those doctrines. He affirms, that by no process of reasoning, nor in any other natural way, did he discover them; but that they were revealed to him by the Spirit of God. It must be owned, there is a very strong presumption against the truth of what he says; and it is of consequence to inquire, whence that presumption ariseth. It is not primarily from any doubt of the man's integrity. If the fact he related were of an ordinary nature, the reputation he has hitherto maintained would secure him from being suspected of an intended deceit. It is not from any absurdity or immoral tendency we perceive in the doctrine itself. It ariseth principally, if not solely, from these two circumstances, the extreme uncommonness of such a revelation, and the great facility with which people of strong fancy may, in this particular, impose upon themselves. The man, I suppose acquaints us further, that God, when he communicat ed to him the truths he publishes, communi

such as, of giving sight to the blind, and hearing to the deaf, of raising the dead, and making whole the maimed. It is evident, that we have precisely the same presumption against his being endued with such a power, as against his having obtained such a revelation. Two things are asserted: there is one presumption, and but one, against them; and it equally affects them both. Whatever proves either assertion, removes the only presumption which hinders our belief of the other. The man, I suppose, lastly, performs the miracles before us, which he said he was commissioned to perform. We can no longer doubt of a supernatural communication. We have now all the evidence which the integrity of the person could give us, as to any ordinary event attested by him, that the doctrine he delivers as from God, is from God, and therefore true.

Nay, we have more evidence than for any common fact, vouched by a person of undoubted probity. As God is both almighty and all-wise, if he hath bestowed on any so uncommon a privilege, it is highly probable, that it is bestowed for promoting some end uncommonly important. And what more important end than to reveal to men that

Their exOf the ex

which may be conducive to their present and eternal happiness? It may be said, that at most, it can only prove the interposal of some power superior to human: the being who interposeth is perhaps a bad being, and intends to deceive us. This, it may be allowed, is possible; but the other is probable. For, first, From the light of nature, we have no positive evidence of the existence of such intermediate beings, good or bad. istence is therefore only possible. istence and perfections of God, we have the highest moral assurance. Secondly, If there were such beings, that raising the dead, and giving sight to the blind, should come within the verge of their power, is also but possible; that they are within the sphere of omnipotence is certain. Thirdly, Whatever seems to imply a suspension of any of the established laws of nature, we may presume with great appearance of reason, proceeds from the Au thor of nature, either immediately, or, which amounts to the same thing, mediately; that is, by the intervention of some agent empowered by him. To all these there will also accrue presumptions, not only, as was hinted already, from the character of the preacher,