the accounts which they give of his conducting the Ifraelites from Egypt to Canaan are such as might be expected. The authors lived so long after Mofes, and had so little opportunity or inclination to know the exact truth, or to be particular, that their accounts cannot invalidate the Scripture history, though they do a little confirm it. The expulfion of the Canaanites by Joshua seems to have laid the foundation of the kingdom of the Shepherds in the Lower Egypt mentioned by Manetho, and of the expulfion of the natives into the Upper Egypt; who, after some centuries, drove the shepherds back again into Canaan about the time of Saul. The Canaanites mentioned by St. Austin and others, upon the coast of Afric, may be of the same original. See Newton's Chronology, page 198. We may conclude from the book of Judges, that there were many petty fovereignties in the neighbourhood of Canaan; and it appears from Pagan hiftory, as Sir Ifaac Newton has rectified it, that the first great empire, that of Egypt, was not yet risen. When David subdued the Philistines or Phænicians, Cadmus and others seem to have fled into Greece, and to have carried letters with them, which the Philistines had probably learnt, about a generation before, from the copy of the law found in the ark taken from the Ifraelites. After Solomon's temple was built, the temple of Vulcan in Egypt, and others in other places, began to be built in imitation of it; just as the oracles of the Heathens were imitations of God's communications to the Ifraelites, and particularly of that by Urim and Thummim. Shishak, who came out of Egypt in the fifth year of Rehoboam, is the Sesoftris of Herodotus; and this point, being fettled, becomes a capital pin, upon which all the Pagan chronology depends. Hence Herodotus's lift of the Egyptian kings is made probable and consistent. As we advance farther to the Affyrian monarchy, the Scripture accounts agree with the profane ones rectified; and when we come still farther to the æra of Nabonaffar, and to the kings of Babylon and Perfia, which are pofterior to this æra and recorded in Ptolemy's canon, we find the agreement of facred and profane history much more exact, there being certain criterions in the profane hiftory for fixing the facts related in it. And it is remarkable, that not only the direct relations of the historical books, but the indirect, incidental mention of things in the prophecies, tallies with true chronology; which furely is such an evidence for their genuineness and truth, as cannot be called in question. And, upon the whole, it may be observed, that the facred history is distinct, methodical, and consistent throughout; the profane, utterly deficient in the first ages, obfcure and full of fictions in the succeeding ones; and that it is but just clear and precife in the principal facts about the time that the sacred history ends. So that this corrects and regulates that, and renders it intelligible in many instances, which must otherwise be given up as utterly inexplicable. How then can we suppose the facred history not to be genuine and true, or a wicked imposture to rise up, and continue not only undiscovered, but even to increase to a most audacious height, in a nation which of all others kept the most exact accounts of time? I will add one remark more : This fame nation, who may not have lost fo much as one year from the creation of the world to the Babylonish captivity, as foon as they were deprived of the assistance of prophets, became most inaccurate in their methods of keeping time, there being nothing more erroneous than the accounts of Jofephus, and the modern Jews, from the time of Cyrus, to that of Alexander the Great; notwithstanding that all the requifite assistances might easily have been borrowed from the neighbouring nations, who now kept regular annals. Hence it appears, that the exactness of the sacred history was owing to the divine afsistance.

It is an evidence in favour of the Scriptures, allied to those which I am here confidering, that the manners of the perfons mentioned in the Scriptures have that fimplicity and plainness which is also ascribed to the first ages of the world by Pagan writers; and both of them concur, by this, to intimate the novelty of the then present race, i. e. the deluge.

Besides these attestations from profane history, we may confider the Jews themselves as bearing testimony to this day, in all countries of the world, to the truth of their ancient history, i. e. to that of the Old and New Testaments. Allow this, and it will be easy to fee how they should still perfift in their attachment to that religion, those laws, and those prophecies, which so manifestly condemn them, both in paft times, and in the present. Suppose any confiderable alteration made in their ancient history, i. e. any such as may answer the purposes of infidelity, and their present state will be inexplicable.

The books of the New Testament are verified by history, in a manner ftill more illuftrious; these books being written, and the facts mentioned therein transacted, during the times of Augustus, Tiberius, and the succeeding Cæfars. Here we may obferve,

!

First, that the incidental mention of the Roman emperors, governors of Judæa, and the neighbouring provinces, the Jewish highpriests, sects of the Jews, and their customs, of places, and of tranfactions, is found to be perfectly agreeable to the histories of those times. And as the whole number of these particulars is very great, they may be reckoned a full proof of the genuineness of the books of the New Testament, it being impossible for a person who had forged them, i. e. who was not an eye and ear witness, and otherwife concerned with the transactions as the books require, but who had invented many histories and circumstances, &c. not to have been deficient, fuperfluous, and erroneous. No man's memory or knowledge is fufficient for such an adaptation of feigned circumstances, and especially where the mention is incidental. Let any one confider how often the best poets fail in this, who yet endeavour not to vary from the manners and customs of the age of which they write; at the fame time that poetry neither requires nor admits so great a minuteness in the particular circumstances of time, place, and perfons, as the writers of the New Testament have descended to naturally and incidentally.

Secondly, Secondly, that Christ preached in Judæa and Galilee, made many disciples, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, at the instigation of the chief men among the Jews; also that his disciples preached after his death, not only in Judæa, but all over the Roman empire; that they converted multitudes, were perfecuted, and at laft suffered death, for their firm adherence to their master; and that both Chrift and his disciples pretended to work many miracles; are facts attested by civil hiftory in the amplest manner, and which cannot be called in question. Now these facts are so connected with the other facts mentioned in the New Testament, that they must stand or fall together. There is no probable account to be given of these facts, but by allowing the reft. For the proof of this, I appeal to every reader who will make the trial. It may also be concluded from the remarkable unwillingnefs of the present unbelievers to allow even the plainest facts in express terms; for it shews them to be apprehenfive, that the connexion between the several principal facts mentioned in the New Testament is inseparable, and that the attestation given to some by civil history may easily be extended to all.

To

It has been objected, that more mention ought to have been made of the common facts by the profane writers of those times, also some acknowledgment of the miraculous ones, had they been true. this we may answer, first, that Judæa was but a small and diftant province of the Roman empire; and the Jews themselves, with whom the Christians were for a long time confounded, much despised by the Romans. Secondly, that hiftorians, politicians, generals, &c. have their imaginations so much preoccupied by affairs of state, that matters purely religious are little regarded by them. Gallio cared for none of these things. Thirdly, that a person who attended in any great degree to the Chriftian affairs, if a good man, could fcarce avoid becoming a Chriftian; after which his teftimony ceases to be Pagan, and becomes Christian; of which I shall speak under the next head. Fourthly, that both those who were favourers of the Chriftians, and those averse to them in a moderate degree, one of which must be the cafe with great numbers, would have motives to be filent: the halfchristians would be filent for fear of being perfecuted; and the others would affect to take no notice of what they disliked, but could not disprove; which is a fact that occurs to daily observation. Laftly, when these things are laid together, the attestations of the profane writers to the common facts appear to be fuch as one might expect, and their filence as to the miraculous ones is accounted for.

Thirdly, all the Christian writers, from the time of the apostles and downwards, bear testimony to the genuineness of the books of the New Testament, and the truth of the facts, in a great variety of ways direct and indirect, and in such manner as might be expected. Their quotations from them are numberless, and agree fufficiently with the present copies. They go every where upon the fuppofition of the facts, as the foundation of all their difcouries, writings, hopes, fears; &c. They discover every where the highest regard, and even veneration, both for the books and the authors. In short, one can

:

not fee how this testimony in favour of the Books of the New Testament can be invalidated, unless by supposing all the ecclesiastical writings of the first centuries to be forged also; or all the writers to have concurred to write as if they believed the genuineness and truth of these books, though they did not; or to have had no ability or inclination to diftinguish genuineness and truth from forgery and falfehood; or by fome other fuch supposition as will scarce bear to be named.

Here three questions may be asked, that bear some relation to this subject; and the answers to which will, I think, illustrate and confirm what has been advanced in the last paragraph.

Thus, first, it may be asked, why we have not more accounts of the life of Chrift tranfmitted to us. To this I answer, that it is probable from St. Luke's preface, that there were many short and imperfect accounts handed about very early; the authors of which, though they had not taken care to inform themselves accurately, did not, however, endeavour to impofe on others designedly; and that all these grew into disuse, of course, after the four Gospels, or perhaps the three first, were published, or at least after the canon of the New Teftament was formed; also that after this the Christians were so perfectly fatisfied, and had the four Gofpels in such esteem, that no one prefumed to add any other accounts, and especially as all the apostles were then dead.

The second question is, How come we to have so little account, in the primitive writers, of the lives, labours, and sufferings of the apostles? I answer, that the apostles seem to have refided in Judæa, till Nero's army invaded it, and afterwards to have travelled into diftant parts; and that neither their converts in Judæa, nor those in the distant barbarous countries into which they travelled, could have any probable motive for writing their lives: also, that, as to other Chriftians, they had neither opportunities nor motives. The Chriftians looked up to Chrift as their master, not to the apostles. Their great business was, to promote Christianity, not to gratify their own or others fruitless curiosity. They were not learned men, who had spent their lives in the study of annalists and biographers. They did not fufpect, that an account of the lives of the apostles would ever be wanted, or that any one could call their integrity, inspiration, miracles, &c. in question. St. Luke seems to have defigned by his Acts, chicfly to shew how the Gospel first got firm footing amongst Jews, profelytes of the gate, and idolatrous Gentiles; in order to encourage the new converts to copy the examples of the apostles and first preachers, and to publish the Gospel in all nations. Lastly, the primitive Christians had early disputes with Jews, Heathens, Heretics, and even with one another, which took up much of their attention and concern.

Thirdly, it may be asked, who were the persons that forged the fpurious acts and revelations of several of the apostles, &c. I answer, that, amongst the number of those who joined themselves to the Chriftians, there must be many whose hearts were not truly purified, and and who, upon apoftatizing, would become more self-interested, vain-glorious, and impure, than before. These were Antichrifts, as St. John calls them, who left the church because they were not of it. Some of these forged books, to support themselves, and establish their own tenets; others might write partly like enthusiasts, partly like impostors; and, lastly, there were some both weak and wicked men, though not fo abandoned as the ancient Heretics, who, in the latter I end of the second century, and afterwards, endeavoured to make converts by forgeries, and fuch other wicked arts. However, all those who are usually called Fathers, in the first ages, stand remarkably clear of such charges.

Fourthly, the propagation of Christianity, with the manner in which it was opposed by both Jews and Gentiles, bears witness to the truth and genuineness of the books of the New Testament. But I forbear entering upon this argument, as it will come more properly in another place. Let me only observe here, that there are many passages in the Talmudical writings, which afford both light and confirmation to the New Testament, notwithstanding that one principal defign of the authors was to difcredit it.

PROP. X.

THE AGREEMENT OF THE BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS WITH THEMSELVES AND WITH EACH OTHER, IS AN ARGUMENT BOTH OF THEIR GENUINENESS AND TRUTH.

THE truth of this propofition will be evident, if a fufficient number of these mutual agreements can be made out. It is never found, that any fingle perfon, who deviates much from the truth, can be so perfectly upon his guard, as to be always confiftent with himself. Much less therefore can this happen in the cafe of a number, living also in different ages. Nothing can make them confiftent, but | their copying faithfully after real facts. The instances will make this

clearer.

The laws of the Ifraelites are contained in the Pentateuch, and referred to in a great variety of ways, direct and indirect, in the Hiftorical Books, in the Pfalms, and in th Prophecies. The historical facts alfo in the preceding books are often referred to in those that fucceed, and in the Plalms and Prophecies. In like manner the Gofpels have the greatest harmony with each other, and the Epistles of St. Paul with the Acts of the Apostles. And indeed one may say, that there is scarce any book of either Old or New Teftament, which may not be snewn to refer to many of the rest in fome way or other. For it is to be observed, that the Bible has been studied and commented upon far more than any other book what/oever; and that it has been the business of believes in all ages to find out the mutual relations of its parts, and of unbelievers to search for inconfiftencies; alfo that the first meet every day with more and more evidences in favour of the Scriptures from the utual agreements and coincidences here confidered; and that unbeli, vers have never be n able to alledge any inconfiftencics that could in the leait invalidate

the