non, an Epistle or Two excepted, were admitted as Scriptural at That Time, we have all the reason to believe, that the nature of the thing requires; since we find them appealed to by the earliest Writers as universally acknowledged, without putting themselves to the trouble of citing any particular authority in their support. And he, -who shall refuse to believe the Books of the New Testament to be of Apoftolical Authority, when he is authentically informed by the early Writers, that those who were able to know the truth admitted them as such; merely because they have not told us at what precife time, and by means of what particular perfons, Each Book in its turn became first more universally known, possessed, and received; is only laying before us an incontestable proof of his own irrational, and sceptical disposition, to pass for an argument against the Authority of the Canon. But, besides the vanity of this objection itself, what can be faid for a Writer, who first asserts for his fundamental principle, that the moral parts of the Books of the New Testament were written by the Apostles, and that only the other parts were not; nay, and that perhaps the Apostles wrote the whole, though without the Authority of JESUS; and then, in order to prove this, attempts to shew, that the Entire Books, including all the Moral Parts, as well as the rest, were not written by the Apostles to whom they are ascribed? The inconfiftencies, and contradictions of these Writers are really somewhat curious, and fuch as are not often to be met with. The Prefacer says *, "That no fooner had CHRIST in some degree " succeeded in his benevolent design, than his "followers corrupted his Religion, and restored *P. 30. " again "again the kingdom of darkness." He must therefore hold, that the New Testament was a corruption of CHRIST'S Religion from the first. But the Author, though he does sometimes put this supposition, insists almost wholly upon its having been corrupted fince. - The Prefacer says t, "Many of the Pagans objected, that the im" pieties, absurdities, inexplicable doctrines, and "Incomprehensible Mysteries, contained in the "Books of the Old and New Testament, rendered "Christianity so incredible, that they thought it " ridiculous to embrace it." - "That the Doc"trine of a dying God was rejected by their Phi 66 losophers with difdain and contempt. And that "this, and many other of the Mysteries of Chrif"tianity, gave to the Pagans in general, as well " as the Philosophers, an utter aversion to it." The Author says §, on the contrary, - "So fuc" cessful and efficacious were the endeavours of ८८ CHRIST, that the power and influence of the "Heathen Priests began foon to decline, and " their temples were no longer crowded. This " was the event in almost every country where "CHRIST and his Apostles made their appear"ance. The Philofophers and wife men em"braced Chriftianity as their own; and the igno"rant foon found the practice of it productive " of happiness." - Both the Prefacer, and the Author ||, affert from Mr. Claude; though Neither of them quotes the place where he says it; "that " had it not been for the fevere edicts of Constan"tine and his Son, against Paganism, or the old "Gentile Religion, three parts in four of all Eu rope would have been at this day Pagans." Yet the Author, in the very fame page, where he thus attributes the overthrow of Paganism to the perfe †P. 27. § P. 26, ‡ P. 28. 2 || P. 26. in the Note, cution cution of Paganism itself; imputes the spreading of Chriftianity to the perfecution not of the Pa gans, but of the Christians themselves. "The 66 persecutions which they, the Chriftians, met " with tended to the spreading of the Religion "which they taught, and their deaths established " their Pious System." That is, the Pagans became Christians to avoid being perfecuted for Paganism, and had it not been for this perfecution of Paganism almost all Europe would have been Pagans to this day; and yet the Pagans became Chriftians, when they saw they should be persecuted for embracing Chriftianity. So admirably do our Two new Teachers agree with truth, with each other, and with themselves. As to what the Prefacer has prefumed to affert, that the mysteries of the Scriptures in general, and the notion of a dying God in particular, made the Pagans, including the Philofophers, reject the Gospel with ridicule, disdain, and contempt, the fact is, that these same Philosophers worshipped numbers of Gods who had died upon earth, and had numbers of mysteries, and never more of either, than when Chriftianity was spreading; and That had spread itself over the Roman Empire, and even far beyond it, before the Edicts of Constantine. And let these Writers inform us, whether the New Testament was interpolated before Christianity was thus spread, and had done all this good; or whether it could be corrupted afterwards, and neither Christians, Jews, nor Heathens, be able to discover any thing of the fraud, till these two great Luminaries arose, to give light to those who have remained so long in darkness. SECT. 3 SECT. XIV. The Author's Misrepresentations of the Old Teftament, and the Law of Moses, confidered. H AD the Author confined himself to the fundamental point which he professedly sets himself to prove; as both his principles themselves, and his arguments in their support, have now been confidered, nothing more would have remained to be done. But fince he has chosen to throw out fome reflexions; though unconnected with the grand, immediate point in dispute; tending to prejudice his readers against the Scriptures in general, by misrepresenting the accounts they give of the Divine Dispensations; it would be improper to leave unnoticed what he has thus industriously advanced. Whoever is a disclaimer of the Gospel of CHRIST, as a Revelation properly so called, is no less so, we may be fure, of the Law published by Mofes, confidered in the same light; accordingly we find the Author afsserting, as follows. "Whatever notions Mofes, the Jewish Law"giver, might himself have of the Supreme Being, "it is evident that the ideas which the generality "of the Jews had of him," (that is, as he would infinuate, the ideas which the Law of Moses taught them to have of him;) " were low, gro veling, partial, and imperfect. Instead of be"lieving God to be the Maker and Governor, the • Father, Friend, and Benefactor, of the Univerfe, they vainly thought him to be the God of Abraham, Ifaac, and facob, the God of the Jews "only: A local, partial, finite, comprehensible, "visible, capricious, and revengeful Being, like " themselves; 2 "themselves; that he loved only them, and hat" ed all the world befides; - And from this prin ciple they were led to hate and despise all man"kind, except themselves ‡." 66 "That Charity and Universal Benevolente, thofe grand and essential parts of the Religion of Nature and of CHRIST, do not appear to have " been inculcated among the Jews, or to be a part " of Mofes's Plan; and that it does not appear, " that he impressed on their minds any ideas of a " future state. - That their Religion consisted principally in Ceremonies, in which there could be no real virtue; in which the purity of the " heart could have but little share, and therefore that it is not so apparently stamped with the " Divine Seal. That the virtues of Justice, Chari 66 ty, and Benevolence, were nowife influenced, or "the practice of them promoted by this Religion. "That God was to be appeased, and rendered " kind to them, by Sacrifices and Ceremonies, " not by virtuous actions *. That Power seems to be almost the only attribute of the Deity known " to the Jews themselves, and Fear seems to be "the fole motive of their worship †." Again the Author says, - "Priefts have cloath"ed God with almost all the frailties of Human Nature, as may be seen in the Old Testament; "where he is spoken of as being a jealous God, visiting the fins of the fathers on the children, to "the third and fourth generation: as being impla"cable, and that he would not be reconciled to "his creatures, nor accept the most virtuous 66 conduct, unless he was rendered propitious by " Sacrifices: - With such notions as these, and "with others which were equally injurious to the " character of the infinitely perfect God; and Introd. p. 14, 15. And fee p. 394. P. 396. " which |