YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

A VIEW
OF THE PRINCIPAL

DEISTICAL WRITERS,
THAT HAVE APPEARED IN ENGLAND IN THE LAST AND PRESENT CENTURY.
WITH OBSERVATIONS UPON THEM:

SOME ACCOUNT OF THE ANSWERS THAT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED
AGAINST THEM.
En sebeval Hitters to a tfrivnls.
By JOHN LELAND, D.D.
in 1754.

WITH AN APPENDIX
By W. L. BROWN, D.D.,
PRINCIPAL OF MARESCIIAL COLLEGE, ABERDEEN, ETC. ETC.
<•

AN INTRODUCTION;
COMPRISING A SUCCINCT VIEW OF1 THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE
CONTROVERSY,
By CYRUS R. EDMONDS,
AUTHOR OF " THE LIFE AND TIMES OF GENERAL WASHINGTON."

LONDON:
PRINTED FOR T. TEGG AND SON, CHEAPSIDE ;
R. GRIFFIN AND CO., GLASGOW ; T, T. AND H. TEGG, DURLIN ;
ALSO
J. AND S. A. TEGG, SYDNEY AND HOBART TOWN.

M.DCCC.XXXVII.

I.IDDOM, CAST.LJ! BTR-EF.T, UNS.BtiSV*

PREFACE TO THE FIFTH EDITION.

No man that is not utterly unacquainted with the state of things
among us can be ignorant, that in the last, and especially in the
present age, there have been many books published, the manifest
design of which was to set aside revealed religion. Never in any
country where Christianity is professed, were there such repeated
attempts to subvert its divine authority, carried on sometimes under
various disguises, and at other times without a disguise at all. The
most noted writers on that side have been at liberty to produce
their strongest objections ; these objections have been retailed by
others ; and many seem to take it for granted, that Christianity
hath received very sensible wounds by the several attacks that have
been made upon it, and that they have greatly hurt its credit, and
weakened its authority.
But whosoever will be at the pains impartially to examine those
of the deistical writers that have hitherto appeared among us, and
to compare them with the answers which have been made to them,
will find, that upon a nearer view they are far from being so formi
dable as some have been apt to apprehend. And since there are
few that have leisure or patience for a particular inquiry into the
several writings which have appeared in this controversy, some
judicious persons, who wish well to the interest of our common
Christianity, have been of opinion, that it might be of real service
to give a summary view of the most noted books that have been
•published against revealed religion for above a century past, together
with proper observations upon them. From such a view, the reader
might be enabled to form some notion of the several turns this con
troversy hath taken, how often the enemies of revealed religion have
thought pro*per to change their methods of attack, the different dis
guises and appearances they have put on, and the several schemes
they have formed, all directed to one main end, viz. to set aside reve
lation, and to substitute mere natural religion, or, which seems to
have been the intention of some of them, no religion at all, in its room.
Upon such a comparison between those that have attacked Chris
tianity, and those that have been written in defence of it, it would
appear, that if it be really true, that deism and infidelity have made
a great progress among us, it must have been owing to something
else than the force of reason and argument ; that the Christian
religion is in no danger from a free and impartial inquiry; and that
a 2

IV PREFACE.
the most plausible objections which have been brought against it,
though advanced with great confidence, and frequently repeated,
have been fairly and solidly confuted. Such a view would make it
manifest, that the enemies of Christianity have not generally be
haved as became fair adversaries, but have rather acted as if they
judged any arts lawful by which they thought they might gain their
cause. And yet, notwithstanding their utmost efforts for above a
century past, they have really been able to say but little against the
Christian religion, considered in its original purity, as delivered by
Christ and his apostles, or to invalidate the solid evidences by
which it is attested and confirmed.
'* For these reasons it hath been judged, that a short and compre
hensive view of the deistical writers of the last and present age
might be of great use. And as the course of my studies hath led
me to be conversant in several of those writings which have been
published on both sides in this important controversy, it was urged
upon me, by some persons for whom I have a great regard, to under
take this work. There was one great objection, which hindered me
for some time from attempting it, and which still appeareth to me to
be of no small weight, and that is, that as, according to the plan
thatswas formed, it would be necessary to give an account of the
answers published to the books 1 should have occasion to mention,
this would oblige me to take notice of some of my own. I am sen
sible how difficult it is for an author to speak of his own perform
ances, in such a manner as not to intrench upon the rules of
decency. If he give a favourable character of them, this will be
interpreted as a proof of his vanity, any appearance of which is
usually turned to his disadvantage. And on the other hand, if he
should make no mention of his own books at all, where the rfature
of the design in which he is engaged makes it proper for him to
mention them, this might perhaps be censured as a false and affected
modesty. It is no easy matter to keep clear of these extremes ;
and, for this reason, it would have been a particular pleasure to me
to have seen this work undertaken by another hand ; but as this
hath not been done, I have chosen rather to attempt it myself, than
that a work, which I cannot but think might be of real service,
should be neglected. It cannot be expected, that a distinct notice
should be taken of all the writers that have appeared among us
against revealed religion for this century past. This, if it could be
executed, would take too large a compass, and be of no great use.
A view of the principal of them, or, at least, of those who have
made the greatest noise, may be sufficient. And the design is not
to give an historical account of the authors, or of their personal

PREFACE.

characters, but to give some idea of their writings, which alone we
have properly to do with.
The method proposed, and for the most part pursued, is this :
The several writers are mentioned in the order of time in which they
appeared. Some account is given of their writings, and of the
several schemes they have advanced, as far as the cause of revelation
is concerned. And great care has been taken to make a fair repre
sentation of them, according to the best judgment I could form of
their design. Some observations are added, which may help to lead
the reader into a just notion of those writings, and to defect and
obviate the ill tendency of them. There is also an account sub
joined of the answers that were published ; not all of them, but
some of the most remarkable, or such as have come under the
author's special notice. And very probably some have been omitted,
which might well deserve to be particularly mentioned.
This may suffice to give a general idea of the following work ; at
the end of which there are some reflections subjoined, which seem
naturally to arise upon such a view as is here given. Observations
are made on the conduct of the deists in the management of the
argument. And the whole concludes with a brief representation of
the evidences for the Christian religion, and its excellent nature
and tendency.
What has been now laid before the reader, is taken from the Pre
face to the first edition : and it gives a just account of the original
nature and design of this work, which was at first intended only to
make up one volume. But not long after the publication
of it, I was put in mind of a considerable omission I had been guilty
of in making no mention of Mr. Hume, who was looked upon to be
one of the most subtle writers that had of late appeared against
Christianity. About the same time was published, a pompous
edition of the works of the late Lord Viscount Bolingbroke, in five
volumes quarto, the last three of which seemed to be principally
intended against revealed, and even against some important prin
ciples of what is usually called natural, religion. Some persons, for
whose judgment and friendship I have a great regard, were of
opinion, that, to complete the design which was proposed in publish
ing the View qf the Deistical Writers, it was necessary to take a
distinct notice of the writings of Mr. Hume and Lord Bolingbroke :
and that in that case it might be of use to make more large and
particular observations upon them, than could properly be done
where a number of writers came under consideration. This produced
a second volume, which, though it had the same title with the
former, viz. A View of the Deistical Writers, yet differed from it in

PREFACE.

this, that it did not contain strictures and observations upon a variety
of authors, but a large and particular consideration of the only two
there examined, viz. Mr. Hume and the late Lord Bolingbroke,
especially the latter. And this was judged necessary, considering
his Lordship's high reputation as a writer, and that there are scarcely
any of the objections against Christianity which he hath not repeated
and urged in one part or other of his works, and that with a peculiar
confidence, and with all the strength of reason and vivacity of
imagination he was master of. And as I then thought I had
finished the design, that volume ended with an Address to Deists
andprofessed Christians, which appeared to me to be a proper con
clusion of the whole.
But after the second volume was published, some letters were
sent me, relating both to that and the former volume, which put me
upon reconsidering some things in them, and making farther
additions and illustrations, which I thought might be of advantage
to the main design. These were thrown into a Supplement, which
made up a third volume, and was published separately for the use
of those who had purchased the two former.
It gives me some concern, that this work is become so much
larger than "was at first intended, which I am afraid will prove a
disadvantage to it, and disgust or discourage some readers. But I
hope favourable allowances will be made, considering the extent of
the design, and the variety of matters here treated of. I believe it
will appear, that there are few objections which have been advanced
in this controversy, but what are taken notice of in the following
work, and either sufficiently obviated, or references are made to
books where fuller answers are to be found.
May God in his holy providence follow what is now published
with his blessing, that it may prove of real service to the important
interests of religion among us, to promote which, as far as my ability
reaches, I shall ever account the greatest happiness of my life. And
it should be the matter of our earnest prayers to God, that all those
who value themselves upon the honourable name and privileges of
Christians, may join in united efforts to support so glorious a cause,
in which the preservation and advancement of true religion and
virtue, the peace and good order of society, and the present and
eternal happiness of individuals, are so nearly concerned.
I have nothing farther to add, but that in this as well as the former
editions the whole is conducted in a series of letters, which were
written to my most worthy and much esteemed friend, the reverend
Dr. Thomas Wilson, rector of Walbrook, and prebendary of West
minster, in the form in which thev now appear.

INTRODUCTION.

The comparative inefficiency of controversy, for the establish
ment and propagation of truth, has long been a point of general
agreement. The almost impossibility of supplanting the notion of
an opponent by this means, has passed into a proverb; and the
lists of polemical contest, in particular, resemble not so much a
field of battle for the dispute of territory, as an arena for fencing, in
which the antagonists practise the use of weapons for the mainte
nance of scanty frontiers, which are often the grounds of an endless
litigation, neither admitting of decision nor appeal.
It is further observable, in theological controversy, that the acri
mony which it has displayed, has generally been in inverse propor
tion to the importance ofthe points at issue; so that, what may be
called the civil dissensions of divines, have ever been the most ran
corous; and where the proximity ofthe parties has enabled them to
grapple each other closely, the strife has been marked by the dead
liest bitterness.
Neither of these features, however, have characterized the great
preliminary discussion, on the decision of which depends the very
existence of all the minor points of variance among divines. The
deistical controversy may be regarded as the most momentous that
ever attracted the notice, and employed the energies of the human
mind. In it are involved no less than the claims of the word of God
on the attention of men, the truth or imposture of the entire system
of Christianity, and, by inference, of every other form of religious
belief; so that the eternity of man's existence, the dignity or insig
nificance of his nature, the whole compass of his interests, the ex
treme possibilities of good and ill — all hang suspended on the issue
of this mighty contest.
With these considerations, the earlier disputants, on both sides,
seem to have been deeply impressed. The purer and more pro
found school of Freethinkers, though they had no personal joys
and consolations dependent on the result of their labours, and nothing
to hope from success but the insignia of victory, yet seemed consci-

INTRODUCTION.

entiously convinced of the truth of their opinions, and not altogether
insensible to the magnitude of the question. Accordingly, they
wrote for the most part with seriousness and dignity ; they ever
maintained at least the semblance of reasoning ; and even, when be
trayed into sophism, they rarely seemed to lose sight of the intrinsic
greatness of the subject they were discussing. It seems natural to
expect, that the advocates of Christianity, whose dearest interests
were embarked in the system they maintained, should conduct their
part of the dispute with the most intense energy, and at the same
time with a trembling cautiousness, lest a cause of such universal
interest should suffer even a temporary disadvantage through any
oversight of theirs. Accordingly, the writings of the earlier de
fenders of revelation supply some of the most invaluable models of
fair and philosophical investigation of which our literature can boast.
Massive learning, relieved of its cumbrousness by masterly arrange
ment — close and compact argument, which disdained in its progress
any declamatory flourishes which could indicate a premature triumph
— unassuming boldness and steadiness of purpose — the candour
that scorned an unfair advantage, and the generosity that
spared the fallen and the misguided — such were the attributes
which distinguished, throughout the contest, these illustrious de
fenders of the faith. The more recent aspect of the controversy •
has been somewhat different. In the battle waged by philosophers,
victory had plainly declared on the side of Christianity. The
wretched and desperate adherents of the conquered party, have sub
sequently seemed to fight, not for conquest, but existence. In their
desperation they have lost their discipline ; and their opponents,
consequently, in the security of success, have in some instances
deemed it sufficient to chastise their insolence with the appropriate
scourge of ridicule.
The earlier annals of the deistical controversy have been recorded,
with equal ability and fairness, by Dr. Leland, in that invaluable work
of which a new edition is now offered to the public. It should not,
however, be regarded as merely historical. It constitutes of itself a
most masterly defence of the Christian religion, lt abounds with
unanswerable arguments against every species of infidelity, and con
fers upon its author the rank of an eminent defender of the authen
ticity and authority of the Bible. It will be the design of the
writer, in the following introductory pages, to present a cursory,
but, as far as he is able, a comprehensive view of the deistical wri
tings which have appeared since the publication of Dr. Leland's
treatise ; and of those productions, on the evidences of the Christian
religion, to which they have given rise. In one respect the execu-

INTRODUCTION.

tion of this task must of necessity be defective. On the one hand,
the infidel writers of modern times have, for an obvious reason, be
taken themselves to arguments which are undeserving of a parti
cular mention here, as they have long ago been exposed and refuted.
While, on the other hand, the extended promulgation of sceptical
opinions in modern times, has called forth a series of works in
defence of Christianity, not so substantially different as to require a
separate analysis— a process inconsistent with the limits allotted to
this Introduction.
The most recent impugner of divine revelation, whose writings
underwent the scrutiny of Dr. Leland, was David Hume. His
philosophical writings, in general, were subjected to a searching
analysis, and, had no other reply appeared, they would have been
regarded as fully and fairly refuted. Since that time, however, the
most strictly argumentative, and therefore the most formidable of
his writings, (the Essay on Miracles), has been answered by Dr.
George Campbell, in a work, which for perspicuity and force of
reasoning, and for the candid and catholic spirit which it displays
throughout, will ever be regarded as one of the highest models of
theological controversy, and one of the grandest bulwarks of the
Christian faith. Although the learned author of the following work
has bestowed much of his labour and ingenuity upon that part of it
which he has devoted to Mr. Hume's celebrated essay, yet, as Dr.
Campbell's refutation has ever been regarded as the most complete
and triumphant, it may be proper to present, in this place, a brief
view of the line of argument he has adopted.
It was the design of Mr. Hume to prove, that miracles wrought
in support of a system of religion, could be rationally received only
by those who witnessed them. He declares, that " a miracle sup
ported by any human testimony, is more . properly a subject of
derision than of argument;" and, again, that "no testimony for any
kind of miracle can ever possibly amount to a probability, much
less to a proof." His argument"' in "support of this position, has
been thus compendiously stated by Dr. Campbell.
" Experience is our only guide in reasoning concerning matters
of fact. Experience is in some things variable, in some things
uniform. A variable experience gives rise only to probability ; an
uniform experience amounts to a proof. Probability always sup
poses an opposition of experiments and observations, where the one
side is found to overbalance the other, and to produce a degree of
evidence proportioned to the superiority. In such cases we must
balance the opposite experiments, and deduct the lesser number
from the greater, in order to^know the exact force of the- superior

INTRODUCTION.

evidence. Our belief or assurance of any fact, from the leport of
eye-witnesses, is derived from "no other principle than experience;
that is, our observation of the veracity of human testimony, and of
the usual conformity of facts to the reports of witnesses. Now if
the fact attested partakes of the marvellous, if it is such as has sel
dom fallen under our observation, here is a contest of two opposite
experiences, of which the one destroys the other, as far as its force
goes, and the superior can only operate on the mind by the force
which remains. The very same principle of experience, which gives
a certain degree of assurance in the testimony of witnesses, gives
us also, in this case, another degree of assurance against the fact
which they endeavour to establish ; from which contradiction there
necessarily arises a counterpoise, and mutual destruction of belief
and authority. Further, if the fact affirmed by the witnesses, in
stead of being only marvellous, is really miraculous ; if, besides, the
testimony considered apart and in itself amounts to an entire proof;
in that case there is proof against proof, of which the strongest
must prevail, but still with a diminution of its force, in proportion
to that of its antagonist. A miracle is a violation of the laws of
nature ; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established
these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the
fact, is as entire, as any argument from experience can possibly be
imagined. And if so, it is an undeniable consequence, that it can
not be surmounted by any proof whatever from testimony. A
miracle therefore, however attested, can never be rendered credible,
even in the lowest degree."
The fallacies into which such writers as Mr. Hume are betrayed,
will be generally found to reside in those elementary premises, in
which error lies so contiguous to truth, that its divergence is the
least perceptible. Accordingly, we find in his definition of a
miracle, an inaccuracy which his opponent has not fully exposed.
He describes it as a transgression of the laws of nature, or, as he
elsewhere less figuratively expresses it, a " violation of the usual
course of nature." It might seem captious, to infer from this latter
expression, that every unusual event must be regarded as miraculous.
A far more vital objection, however, may be urged against it. Let
it be remembered, that by the very nature of his argument, the evi
dence of testimony is excluded, and therefore, that our judgment
respecting the ordinary course of nature must be formed solely upon
personal observation. But with how few, comparatively, of the
operations of nature are we personally acquainted ; in how much
fewer cases can we trace them to their efficient causes ; and in how
very few instances do we understand the mode or principle by which

INTRODUCTION.

those hidden causes effect the results which we observe ! In short,
after all our dogmatizing respecting the usual course of nature, the
only universal principle that we can lay down is, that every effect must
have had an adequate cause ; and with this relation of cause and
effect, the arguments in favour of miracles never interfere. It is, on
the contrary, contended, that a peculiar cause was in these instances
put into operation, and one fully adequate to the production of the
effect. The evidences of which extraordinary interposition are to be
found, not only in the miracles themselves, but in collateral direc
tions, — as in the circumstantial fulfilment of prophecy, where the
occurrence of the event, and the antecedent delivery of the predic
tion, rest on the same kind of evidence with the most undoubted
historical facts ; the execution of Charles I, or the existence of
General Washington.
These observations derive their importance, from the constant and
mischievous use which the essayist makes of his definition. Dr.
Campbell, however, chiefly confines his reply to that part of the
argument which respects the evidence of testimony ; and, on this
ground, has produced a refutation which must satisfy every candid
and intelligent mind. In the execution of his design, he first de
monstrates the fallacy of Mr. Hume's position, that the evidence of
testimony is derived solely from experience, by showing, that prior
to experience, the declarations of others have a natural and inde
pendent influence on our belief. This he illustrates by noticing,
that the fullest assent to testimony, however supported, is given by
children, and inexperienced persons; and that increased experience
inspires a diffidence rather than confidence in the statements of
others. He establishes, that the presumption prior to personal
knowledge, is in unison with the testimony, not against it; and
removes the objection, that experience often corrects the misrepre
sentations of others, by showing, that the same fact is equally true
of the reports of our own memory; though it would be highly absurd
to infer from hence, that the evidence of memory is derived from
experience. He then adverts to the next principal position taken
by the essayist, which he proves to be equally untenable. " When
the fact attested," says Mr. Hume, "is such as has seldom fallen
under our observation, there is a contest of two opposite experi
ences, of which the one destroys the other, as far as its force goes,
and the superior can only operate upon the mind by the force
which remains." After exposing, with great felicity, the show of
arithmetical precision exhibited in the above argument, he proposes
a case in confutation, the statement of which may be thus abridged.
I have lived for some years near a ferry ; I know that the passage-

INTRODUCTION.

boat has crossed the river a thousand times, and as often returned
safe ; but I have just met an unknown man, who assures me that
it has foundered, with all its passengers, before his eyes. Here are,
what Mr. Hume would call, opposite experiences. How am I to
balance them 1 Must I set the two thousand instances on the one
side, to the single instance alleged on the other ? In this case, I
have nineteen hundred and ninety-nine chances to one that my in
formation is false. Or must I, before I believe it, have two thou
sand times as much evidence for the single instance, as that which
I have for any of the opposite ones ? This is impossible, since for
many of them, I have the evidence of my own senses. Or, once
more, must the evidence I have of the veracity of the witness, be a
full equivalent to the two thousand instances which oppose his
statement ? This, again, is out of the question, as the witness is,
by the supposition, a perfect stranger. Yet these appear to be the
only modes by which the contrary experiences can be balanced.
But, suppose it be said, ' What then, is such weak evidence of tes
timony incapable of being refuted?' I reply, by no means;
although the contrary experiences, of which Mr. Hume talks so
much, are utterly unable to set it aside. For, first, it may be in
validated by contradictory testimony. The next stranger whom I
meet declares, that the whole tale is a fiction, for that he saw the
boat and all the passengers come to land in safety. Here is a
weight, thrown at once into the opposite scale, of more account
than all the two thousand opposite instances put together. My
former experience vanishes from, my recollection ; my mind hangs
in suspense between the two contrary declarations, until it is set at
ease by corroborations of the second report, by the next three or four
persons whom I meet. Again, though I may not meet with any
one who can contradict the original report, the testimony of my in
formant may be invalidated by individuals who may successively
assure me, that he is a notorious liar, and that he is continually
forging such reports for the mere purpose of alarming strangers.
This, though not so direct a refutation as the former, is a further
means of discrediting a testimony. In» short, though the direct
counter statements, supposed above, may be balanced against each
other, as being of a homogeneous kind, yet the two thousand instances
and the single instance, cannot be so compared, since they refer to
different facts, and though of a contrary nature, are not contradic
tory, and may therefore both be consistently believed. Lastly,
Dr. Campbell argues, that the conclusion from experience is always
general ; and runs thus — 'This is the ordinary course of nature ¦
such an event may be reasonably expected, where all the circum-

INTRODUCTION. Xiii
stances are entirely similar.' But this conclusion must, in parti
cular cases, be exceedingly insecure, since, though all the known
circumstances may be similar, many of the actual circumstances
may be unknown and dissimilar. On the contrary, the evidence
from testimony is always particular ; and runs thus — 'This was
the fact in such an individual instance.' The evidence, therefore,
resulting from experience, is necessarily so weak, compared with
that which results from testimony, that the strongest conviction,
built merely ou the former, may be overturned by the slightest proof
exhibited by the latter. Such is an abstract of that beautiful line
of argument, by which the boasted metaphysical theory, constructed
by Mr. Hume against the miracles of Christianity, was fairly and
finally exploded.* At its first enunciation, it occasioned much
perplexity and alarm, to many sincere and even intelligent believers;
while it inspired a transitory triumph throughout the ranks of infi
delity. Very soon, however, the baseless structure was smitten with
that memorable blow under which it fell, and it is now only remem-.
bered as one of many instances, in* which the proudest champions of
scepticism have, after long and loud defiance, done involuntary
homage to the majesty of truth, by an ignominious fall, and an
irretrievable ruin.
" Thus I have shown," says Dr. Campbell, " as I proposed, that
the author's reasoning proceeds on a false hypothesis. — lt supposes
testimony to derive its evidence solely from experience, which is
false. — It supposes by consequence, that contrary observations have
a weight in opposing testimony, which the first and most acknow
ledged principles of human reason, or, if you like the term better,
common sense, evidently shows that they have not. — It assigns a
rule for discovering the superiority of contrary evidences, which, in
* A curious exemplification of that logical acuteness, in which Dr. Campbell so
far surpassed his opponent, occurs in the following note, introduced in his first
section. " I shall here take the liberty, though the matter be not essential to the design of
this tract, to correct an oversight in the Essayist, who always supposes, that, where
contrary evidences must be balanced, the probability lies in the remainder or sur
plus, when the less number is subtracted from the greater. The probability does not
consist in the surplus, but in the ratio, or geometrical proportion, which the numbers
on the opposite sides bear to each other. I explain myself thus. In favour of one
supposed event there are 100 similar instances, against it 50. In another case under
consideration, the favourable instances are 60, and only 10 unfavourable. Though
the difference, or arithmetical proportion, which is 50, be the same in both cases, the
probability is by no means equal, as the author's way of reasoning implies. The pro
bability of the first event is as 100 to 50, or 2 to 1. The probability of the second is
as 60 to 10, or 6 to one. Consequently, on comparing the different examples, though
both be probable, the second is thrice as probable as the first."

INTRODUCTION. h

the latitude there given it, tends to mislead the judgment, and which
it is impossible, by any explication, to render of real use."
Having disposed ofthe sophistical position, on which Mr. Hume
founded the abstract and most formidable portion of his reasoning
against miracles, as an evidence of Christianity, Dr. Campbell
animadverts upon his opponent's method of conducting his argu
ment ; and convicts him, in several instances, of a degree of logical
incapacity, if not of intentional guile, as flagrant as any that can be
found in the entire compass of the deistical writings.
For example, he has two distinct, and even opposite uses, for the
term experience, on which so much of his argument turns; and,
hence, he is enabled dexterously to shift its application from one
thing to another, until his reader is either convinced or totally be
wildered. " It is a miracle," says Mr. Hume, " that a dead man
should come to life, because that has never been observed in any
age or country. There must, therefore, be a uniform experience
against every miraculous event, otherwise that event would not
merit that appellation." Here he plainly intimates, that there can
only be a uniform experience against such events as have never been
observed in any age or country. He is not, therefore, referring in
this place to personal experience (which is the only rendering that
can give force or meaning to some other branches of his argument),
since personal experience does not extend to " every age and coun
try." The greater part of this "experience," therefore, is solely the
result of testimony ; and his argument, therefore, resolves itself into
the following ludicrous paradox — " Testimony is not entitled to the
least degree of faith, but as far as it is supported by such an exten
sive experience as, if we had not had a previous and independent
faith in testimony, we could never have acquired." Again — " A
miracle," says he, " is a violation of the laws of nature, and, as a firm
and unalterable experience hath established these laws, the proof
against a miracle is as entire as any argument from experience can
possibly be imagined." The conciseness and consecutiveness of
such passages as these — the logical form into which Mr. Hume
casts his grossest blunders — is at first sight somewhat startling;
but, let it be remembered, that this " experience," which he terms
" firm and unalterable," and, in another place, " uniform,*' has been
already shown to depend almost entirely upon testimony : but this
same testimony is our warrant for the truth of those very miracles
against which he is contending. So that Mr. Hume appears, with
all this show of demonstration, to have simply fallen into that
blunder, or rather crept into that fallacy, so well known to young
beginners in logic, under the name of "begging the question !"

INTRODUCTION.

The Dr. next alludes to a distinction, artfully suggested by Miv
Hume, between events that are "contrary to our experience," and
suchasare " not conformable to it ;" the latter of which, he admits,
are capable of proof by testimony. A number of passages are then
cited, from the essay itself, in which the author manifestly uses the
terms as mutually interchangeable, and even demonstrates that
they are entirely synonymous. He further puts side by side — " I
own there may possibly be miracles, or violations of the ordinary
course of nature, of such a kind as may admit a proof from human
testimony;" and, in another place, " No testimony can ever possi
bly amount to a probability, much less to a proof." Again, by
a comparison of two or three other passages, he deduces a still
more ridiculous contradiction. " Suppose," says the essayist, " all
authors, in all languages, agree that, from the first of January,
IfiOO, there was a total darkness over the whole earth for eight
days ; suppose that the tradition of this extraordinary event is still
strong and lively among the people — that all travellers, who return
from foreign countries, bring us account of the same tradition, with
out the least variation or contradiction; it is evident that our
present philosophers, instead of doubting of that fact, ought to
receive it for certain, and ought to search for the causes whence it
may be derived." Now, before the author could believe such a
miracle as this, he must at least be satisfied that the proof of it from
testimony, is stronger than the proof against it from experience ;
but, we have already seen, that " from the very nature of the fact,
there is as direct and full a proof against the existence of any mira
cle as can possibly be imagined." Whence, then, does testimony
derive the evidence which can overturn such a proof as this ? The
reply is, in Mr. Hume's own words, " Testimony hath no evidence,
Ibut what it derives from experience ; these differ from each other,
only as the species from the genus." Let us then substitute for
*' Testimony " its admitted equivalent, " Experience," and Mr.
Hume's argument for his eight days of darkness, assumes the fol
lowing beautiful and irrefragable form : "There is- a proof of
IT FROM EXPERIENCE, WHICH IS SUPERIOR TO AS ENTIRE A
PROOF FROM EXPERIENCE AS CAN POSSIBLY BE IMAGINED!"
Having thus triumphantly defeated the most celebrated of Mr.
Hume's deistical arguments, namely that against all miracles what
soever, Dr. Campbell proceeds, in the following sections, to notice
severally those which respect the miracles recorded in the Bible.
In the fourth section of the first part of his book, he shows there is
no peculiar presumption against those which are said to have been
wrought in support of religion. This he substantiates, by refuting

XVI INTRODUCTION.
Mr. Hume's opinion, that all such relations are to be accounted for by
two powerful passions of the human mind, the passion for the mar
vellous, and the religious affection. With respect to the first of these,
he shows that the presumption arising from it, against historical ac
counts of miracles is no greater than that against any other extraor
dinary phenomena — of electricity, chemistry, or magnetism, before
such phenomena has been verified by experience; yet the application
of Mr. Hume's principle, in these cases, would be obviously absurd,
and would arrest the progress of every department of science, by inter
posing the barrier of universal scepticism. With respect, again, to
the religious affection, he proves, that this principle tends as much
to obstruct as to promote our belief in any given religious miracle,
since no two things in nature are more diametrically opposite, than
some systems of religious belief. Before, then, any force can be
allowed to this latter argument, he must prove, that the religious
tenets of those who testify to the Christian miracles, were in unison
with the doctrines they were wrought to attest ; in other words,
that their religious zeal and prejudice would have biassed them in
favour of the preternatural power of those who performed them.
But, unfortunately, the very contrary of this is the case. These
very miracles produced a conviction, in their minds, contrary to any
which they had previously entertained ; and, consequently, effected
this result, not in consequence, but in spite of that " religious affec
tion," to whose mighty influence Mr. Hume attributes their credu
lity. In his fifth, he further shows, that there is a peculiar pre
sumption in favour of the Christian miracles, on account of the
vast — the infinite interests involved in that system, which they
attest ; a principle of reasoning, which not only approves itself to a
Christian advocate, but which is founded on an independent and
obvious fitness, insomuch that it is recognised by a heathen poet
and critic*
The remainder ofthe first part of the Dr.'s performance is devoted
to an examination of the general principle, adopted by Mr. Hume,
in cases in which an overwhelming weight of evidence, seems to
establish something of an extraordinary and miraculous kind. In
such cases, the essayist lays down as a canon, " That the proba
bility of the fact, is in the inverse ratio of the quantity of miracle
there is in it." " I weigh," says he, " the one miracle against the
other, and, according to the superiority which I observe, I pronounce
my decision, and always leject the greater miracle." In reply, the
doctor exposes the absurdity which this principle involves, namely,
* Nee Deus intersit nisi dignus vindice nodus
Incident.

INTRODUCTION. Xvii
that it is more probable that God should interpose his power, in the
slightest possible degrees, and for the most frivolous purposes, than
that he should exert it, with the majesty becoming a God, to sub
serve the highest and eternal interests of his servants, and his
sons. The first part closes, by resolving, with the most perfect fairness,
the principle which Mr. Hume lays down, at the close of the first
part of his essay, as its grand sum and corollary, into the following
position: " That no testimony is sufficient to esteiblish a miracle;
unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be
more improbable than the fact which it endeavours to establish!"
We frequently find Mr. Hume arguing in a circle, in the minor
portions of his celebrated treatise ; we learn, however, from the
above conclusion, that this spinning motion is natural and necessary
to his mental operations — that, in fact, the instances referred to are
but diurnal rotations in a vast circular orbit. After accomplishing
a vast circuit in quest of singularities and paradoxes, he returns,
it seems, to the precise point from which he set out — to one of the
most elemental and intuitive truths which the early dawn of reason
discloses to the perception of infancy.
The second part of Dr. Campbell's masterly dissertation, as it
dwells more upon detail than upon great and disputed principles,
requires only a cursory notice. Its substance will be found in the
following synopsis. There is no presumption arising from human
nature, against the miracles said to have been wrought in proof of
Christianity; for, if it be objected, that the belief ofthe early pro
selytes may be attributed to credulity and enthusiasm, inspired by
the eloquence, fervour, or sanctity of the founders of a new religion,
it may be replied, that even if this were true of a few early converts,
it could not account for the accession of multitudes, continuing
through successive generations, including men of the soundest and
most searching order of mind, and embracing many of all ranks,
conditions, and characters. That further, we have no counter tes
timony, from the numerous and inveterate enemies of these early-
proselytes, notwithstanding the direct appeals made to them on this
subject by the apostles ; on the contrary, they admitted that notable
miracles had been wrought among them. Further, although we
find enthusiasts mistaken as to the origin of certain impulses of
which they are conscious, yet we never find a multitude of men.how-
everenthusiastic, alike mistaken as to the testimonyof their owasenses.
How then can they have been mistaken as to the resurrection and
ascension of Christ? In short, as absurdity is ever the last
b

INTRODUCTION.

refuge of scepticism, the most unbelieving appear to be those, who
believe that the persons who were deceived, as to these great events,
were the very men* who stole and concealed the body of their Master.
Nor is it less absurd to imagine that the apostles, though undeceived
themselves, were confederated to deceive the rest of the world;
since, apart from the high improbability, that the infamous secret
should have been kept inviolate among a multitude of knaves, every
motive, which can actuate to so audacious an enterprise, was want
ing; and nothing but penury, disgrace, and destruction awaited
those who embraced and propagated the Gospel. Nor is there any
presumption, arising from the history of mankind, against the
genuineness ofthe Christian miracles. So far from men in all ages
having been imposed upon, as Mr. Hume boldly asserts, by ridicu
lous stories of miracles, ascribed to new systems of religion, the
religion of the Bible is the only religion extant which claims to
have been recommended, at its first publication, by the evidence of
miracles. Few enthusiasts, of any age or country, have dared to
advance such a plea; and wherever they have had the boldness to
recur to it, it has proved the bane, and not the support, of their
cause. Moreover, the miracles alleged to have been wrought
among pagan nations, by no means detract from the evidence
afforded to the truth of Christianity, by the miracles of Scripture ;
and this for several reasons. Many of them, for example, may be
explained on natural principles, by the subsequent discoveries of
science. None of them were wrought in corroboration of claims to
inspiration, or in proof of the authenticity of a revelation. On the
contrary, they were performed, whenever they had any reference to
religion, in confirmation of a system already established, and gene
rally received, and not in attestation of a new and, therefore, aggres
sive religion. Above all, there is a character of meanness, jugglery,
and concealment attaching to all other miracles, and a paucity and
partiality of evidence attesting them, which strikingly contrasts
with the undisguised openness of the Christian miracles, the uni
versal assent of enemies to their genuineness, and the transparent
simplicity and good faith of the writers by whom they are recorded.
This convincing contrast, Dr. Campbell has developed in an ex
tended and searching examination of the popish and pagan mira
cles adduced by Mr. Hume ; and justly concludes, from the whole
examination, that the lustre of the Gospel miracles is vastly en
hanced, by comparison with the paltry counterfeits of them, exhibited
both in ancient and modern times.
The next point demonstrated is, that, apart from the evidence for
particular facts, we have the clearest proof of the occurrence of some

INTRODUCTION. ^ifc
events, which, as being unconformable and opposite to the present
course of nature, and the experience of mankind, must, even on Mi\
Hume's definitions, be deemed miraculous. The instance chiefly
dwelt upon, is the creation of the human species, and, by inference,
ofthe universe itself. The only opposing hypothesis, is that of an
eternal succession of generations of mankind; a supposition, by
which the eternity of existence ascribed by theists to one infinite
Being, is transferred to an unbeginning series of finite creatures.
This notion the Dr. opposes, by pointing to the early barbarism of
all nations; thelate invention of letters, sciences, and arts; the known
origin of many states and kingdoms; and the first peopling of many
countries. The comparative recentness and rapidity of the progress
which mankind have made, from a state of total barbarism and
ignorance, to the heights of civilization and science which they now
occupy, he justly infers to be inconsistent with the bare and fantastic
hypothesis, of the existence of the species from eternity.
While noticing this part of the deistical controversy, it may not
be unseasonable to digress for a moment, in order to introduce an
argument on the subject, which occurs in a sermon on Modern In
fidelity, by the late Rev. Robert Hall. The entire treatise, is con
fessedly one of the most masterly exhibitions of the ennobling and
blessed tendency of the Christian religion, and of the debasing and
destructive influence of scepticism, and, at the same time, one of
the sublimest efforts of genius which our literature can boast.,
"When we examine a watch," says he, " or any other piece of ma
chinery, we instantly perceive marks of design. The arrangement of
its several parts, and the adaptation of its movements to one result, show
it to be a contrivance; nor do we ever imagine the faculty of contriving
to be in the watch itself, but in a separate agent. If we turn from
art to nature, we behold a vast magazine of contrivances ; we see
innumerable objects replete with the most exquisite design. The
human eye, for example, is formed with admirable skill for the pur
pose of sight, the ear, for the function of hearing. As in the pro
ductions of art we never think of ascribing the power of contrivance
to the machine itself, so we are certain the skill displayed in the
human structure is not a property of man, since he is very imper
fectly acquainted with his own formation. If there be an insepa
rable relation betwixt the ideas of a contrivance and a contriver 5
and it be evident, in regard to the human structure, the designing
agent is not man himself, there must undeniably be some separate
invisible being, who is his former. This great Being we mean to
indicate by the appellation of Deity.
" This reasoning admits b ut of one reply. Why, it will be said,
62

XX INTRODUCTION.
may we not suppose the world has always continued as it is ; that
is, that there has been a constant succession of finite beings, appear
ing and disappearing on the earth from all eternity ? I answer,
whatever is supposed to have occasioned this constant succession,
exclusive of an intelligent cause, will never account for the undeni
able marks of design visible in all finite beings. Nor is the absurdity
of supposing a contrivance without a contriver diminished by this
imaginary succession ; but rather increased, by being repeated at
every step of the series.*
" Besides, an eternal succession of finite beings involves in it a
contradiction, and is therefore plainly impossible. As the supposi
tion is made to get quit of the idea of any one having existed from
eternity, each of the beings in the succession must have begun in
time : but the succession itself is eternal. We have then the suc
cession of beings infinitely earlier than any being in the succession ;
or, in other words, a series of beings running on, ad infiyiitum, before
it reached any particular being, which is absurd.
" From these considerations it is manifest there must be some
eternal Being, or nothing could ever have existed : and since the
beings which we behold bear in their whole structure evident marks
of wisdom and design, it is equally certain that he who formed
them is a wise and intelligent agent.
" To prove the unity of this great Being, in opposition to a plura
lity of Gods, it is not necessary to have recourse to metaphysical
abstractions. It is sufficient to observe, that the notion of more
than one author of nature is inconsistent with that harmony of
design which pervades her works ; that it explains no appearances,
* This paragraph has been introduced, in order to present an entire view of Mr.
Hall's reasoning. It is by no means necessary to the support of the writer's position,
which was completely established in the preceding paragraph ; besides which, it
appears to me utterly unsatisfactory and fallacious. I conceive that the source of
the error lies in the term " each," as predicated in the first branch of the argument of
an infinite succession. A moment's reflection will show, that this term necessarily
implies known limits, and is therefore plainly inapplicable, even in hypothesis, to an
infinite series. From this results the erroneous distinction between eternity and
time — the latter of which is as conventional a division of the former, as an hour is of
a year. The subsequent fallacies in this line of reasoning, the reader will easily
trace to those which have been pointed out ; and the ludicrous conclusion to which
the author is led, derives its poignancy, less from any inherent absurdity in the specu
lation which he opposes, than to the vital error involved in his first position. It is
impossible to attribute the slightest degree of intentional unfairness to a writer who,
like Mr. Hall, united the candour of philosophy with the majesty of o-enius. We
should rather regard this as one of many instances which have come under our
notice, in this introduction, of the inadequacy of mere metaphysical reasoning to
establish those truths, on which [the only rays of infallible light are shed from a
simple, a scanty, and a dogmatic revelation. — C. R. E.

INTRODUCTION. XXI
is supported by no evidence, and serves no purpose, but to embarrass
and perplex our conceptions.
" Such are the proofs of the existence of that great and glorious
Being whom we denominate God ; and it is not presumption to say,
it is impossible to find another truth in the whole compass of morals,
which, according to the justest laws of reasoning, admits of such
strict and rigorous demonstration."
Dr. Campbell closes the dissertation which has thus passed
under review, and which may be regarded as an almost perfect
specimen of candid, perspicuous, and triumphant controversy, with
some observations on Mr. Hume's examination of the Pentateuch.
Here he first adduces Mr. Hume's own remark, that polytheism and
idolatry are invariably found among rude and ancient nations ; and
thus infers the genuineness of the divine revelation, given in the
Pentateuch, to the early inhabitants of the world, from the purity
of their religious belief. He next exposes the falsehood of one of
the Essayist's remarks, that the book was probably written long after
the events it relates ; and the curious absurdity of another, " that
it was supported by no concurring testimony," a circumstance ob
viously precluded, as most children are aware, by its long priority
to any other written document. He adduces, as collateral evidence
of its truth, the prevalence, among many remote nations, ofthe divi
sion of time into weeks, and of various traditions, which are evidently
corruptions of the relations given by Moses ; and finally offers a
variety of analogical arguments in favour of the antecedent proba
bility of the miracles recorded, and of the general credibility of
the document. In closing, the Dr. animadverts upon a sort of
final position of the Essayist, which indicates a degree of fatuity and
incapacity of reasoning, scarcely exceeded in any part even of the
Essay on Miracles. It is as follows, " Upon the whole, we may
conclude, that the Christian religion not only was at first attended
with miracles, but, even at this day, cannot be believed by any rea
sonable person without one. Mere reason is insufficient to convince
us of its veracity ; and whoever is moved by faith to assent to it ;"
that is, whoever by his belief is induced to believe it, " is conscious
of a continued miracle in his own person, which subverts all the
principles of his understanding, and gives him a determination to
believe what is most contrary to custom and experience." "If any
meaning," says Dr. Campbell, " can be gathered from that strange
assemblage of words just now quoted, it seems to be one or other of
these which follow : either, That there are not any in the world who
believe the gospel ; or, That there is no want of miracles in our
own time. How either of these remarks, if just, can contribute to

XXH INTRODUCTION.

the author's purpose, it will not, I suspect, be easy to discover. If
the second remark be true, if there be no want of miracles at present,
surely experience cannot be pleaded against the belief of miracles
said to have been performed in time past. Again, if the first remark
be true, if there be not any in the world who believe the gospel, be
cause, as Mr. Hume supposes, a miracle cannot be believed without
a new miracle, why all this ado to refute opinions which nobody
entertains ?"
Mr. Hume's treatise, respecting the authenticity and genuineness
of the Pentateuch, received a far more searching and severe exami
nation, in a little book entitled Letters on Infidelity, published at
first anonymously, and in a subsequent edition with the name of its
author, Dr. George Home, Bishop of Norwich. It commences
with a letter to Dr. Adam Smith, the apologist for the life and writ
ings of Mr. Hume, written in a style of the happiest satire ; it
dwells more upon the details, than upon the general principles of
Mr. Hume's sceptical writings ; but it convicts him, throughout, of
the grossest fallacies in reasoning, of the most infamous licentious
ness in his system of morals, and of the utmost ignorance and inca
pacity in his criticisms on the sacred writings. It exhibits, in every
page, some learning, and the most pointed and effective ridicule ;
and is, perhaps, on the whole, as well calculated as any work on
the subject, to remove those sceptical tendencies which Mr, Hume
communicated to weak and wavering minds, by the beauties of his
style, and the dogmatical impudence of his assertions.
It may, perhaps, be thought, that a somewhat disproportionate
degree of attention has been bestowed, in this introduction, to the
deistical writings of Mr, Hume, and the apologies for Christianity
to which they gave occasion. The reason for this is, that he has
employed, in opposition to Christianity, a more formidable degree of
ingenuity, research, and literary influence, than any writer who falls
within that period of the controversy now under review. Before
dismissing him, the writer deems it important to notice a single
passage in one of his private letters, which shows, that with all his
industry, virulence, and buffoonery, he was himself heartily ashamed
of the opinions he propagated. In a letter addressed to Dr. Hugh
Blair, when alluding, with every symptom of conscious defeat, to
Dr. Campbell's dissertation, he says, " I could wish your friend had
not denominated me an infidel writer, on account of ten or twelve
pages which seem tohim to have that tendency, while I have wrote so
many volumes on history, literature, politics, trade, morals, which,
in that particular at least, are entirely inoffensive. Is a man to be
called a drunkard because he has been seen fuddled once in his life

INTRODUCTION.

time ?" In what a melancholy, in what an ineffably despicable posi
tion, does this sentence exhibit the boasted champion of modern
infidelity ! What ! we exclaim, does he shrink from the denomi
nation of an infidel writer, who has employed all his talents and
learning in perverting the Old Testament, and invalidating the New ?
— who has despised Moses and the prophets, and calumniated
Christ and his apostles — who has habitually ridiculed the miracles,
discredited the histories, maligned the tendency, and blasphemed
the author of the Bible ? What, then, means the application of
such language as this to Christianity — "the modern European
superstition," '' the virulent poison," " the cruel enemy," " the in
human tyrant," that '' chiefly contributes to render life miserable ? "
Whence, then, Mr. Hume's elaborate defence of suicide, adultery, and
every crime which can deface the species, till, instead of the image
of God, they retain only the image of man ? And why, too, that
heart-sickening effort to deaden the pangs of a death-bed without
hope, by his Lucian, and his whist, and those saddest of jokes
about Charon and his boat ? This is the man who slinks away
from the charge of infidelity ; and, having never exhibited either
the modesty or the integrity of the philosopher, abandons his last
claim to that character, by disowning all interest in the grandest
principles he has adopted and maintained.
It might have been supposed, that the complete refutation with
which Mr. Hume's Essay on Miracles had been met, by Campbell
and others, would have finally destroyed that line of attack ; sub
sequently, however, such varied arguments have been employed in
defence of the Christian revelation, that modern sceptics have been
compelled to bestir themselves to corresponding exertions; and, as
new arguments have become somewhat scarce, they have betaken
themselves to such as had been already exploded, with some slight
changes in their mode of presenting and illustrating them. Accor
dingly, the doctrine of Hume, that miracles cannot be proved by any
testimony, was revived by La Place, the celebrated French astro
nomer, in his work Sur les Probabilities, and supported in an
elaborate criticism in the Edinburgh Review, No. 46, universally
attributed to Professor Leslie. This critique, and the reasoning of
La Place, which occasioned it, were answered with great ability
and entire success, by the Rev. James Somerville, in a treatise
which demands a moment's attention in this place. The language
of La Place has been translated as follows. " Events may be so
extraordinary, that they can hardly be established by any testimony.
We would not give credit to a man who, affirmed that he had seen
an hundred dice thrown into the air, and all fall on the same faces.

INTRODUCTION.

If we ourselves had been spectators of such an event, we would not
believe our own eyes, till we had scrupulously examined all the cir
cumstances, and assured ourselves that there was no trick nor decep
tion. After such examination, we would not hesitate to admit it,
notwithstanding its great improbability; and no one would have
recourse to an inversion of the laws of vision, in order to account
for it. This shows, that the probability of the continuance of the
laws of nature is superior, in our estimation, to every other evidence,
and to that of historical facts the best established. One may, there
fore, judge of the weight of testimony necessary to prove a suspen
sion of the laws of nature, and how fallacious it is, in such cases, to
apply the common rules of evidence."
After noticing the looseness of the author's expressions, as to
" hardly believing" and " not believing," Mr. Somerville addresses
himself to the first proposition, namely, that we would not believe a
man who said that he had seen an hundred dice fall on the same
faces. This fundamental position he shows to be a petitio principii,
a very favourite mode of reasoning, as we have seen, with modern
sceptics, since the credibility of testimony to extraordinary events
is precisely the point in dispute. In showing this, however, he
corrects one previous error, which, so long as it remained, rendered
the above position totally irrelevant to the question, one way or the
other. " We would not believe a man,"' says La Place. This is ad
mitted on all hands. The question is not, whether any one man's
testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, or an extraordinary
event, but whether any conceivable concurrence and weight of testi
mony is sufficient for that purpose. Having made this alteration,
in order to give the slightest force and relevancy to the remark, it
exchanges the character of a truism for that of a falsehood : for by
we the writer evidently intends mankind in general ; but it is an
undeniable fact, that mankind have, in all ages, believed the most
extraordinary occurrences on what they regarded as valid testimony.
The second position, namely, that we would believe our own eyes
in the matter of the dice, may be suffered to pass as innocent ; but
the reason assigned by the astronomer, for our confidence in the
evidence of our eye-sight (which may be regarded as the next step
in the argument) is also shown to be false, viz. our confidence in the
immutability of the laws of vision. We are confident of no such
thing. On the contrary, we know that a variety of physical derange
ments do disturb the ordinary laws of vision. The ground of our
confidence, as must appear from a moment's reflection, is that, in
this particular instance, they have not been interrupted ; a fact
easily, and even involuntarily, verified by observation of all other

INTRODUCTION. XXV

objects around. So that the conclusion falls to the ground ; and
only leaves us surprised, that the great philosopher should so mis
take his vocation, as to apply his theory of chances to subjects
which it could not possibly elucidate.
The reasoning of Professor Leslie admits of an equally easy
refutation. Having fallen still more flagrantly into the erroneous
assumption of Mr. Hume, that all our knowledge of the ordinary
phenomena of nature is experience (a term which can only be used
with propriety in reference to our own personal observation, all
other knowledge being manifestly derived from testimony) ; and
having next assumed, with about equal truth, that experience in
these matters is perfectly uniform ; he concludes that no testimony
can prevail against it. " A most unquestionable truth, without
doubt," replies Mr. Somerville, " if his premises are granted, and
far from requiring the metaphysical talents of Hume, or the mathe
matical powers of La Place, or his reviewer, to establish. For if
experience be uniform, that experience must consist of the personal
experience of every individual of the human race, in every age.
Nothing less can constitute uniform experience ; and if there be
uniform experience on any point whatever, it is plain that no testi
mony can prevail against it ; for this obvious reason, that no person
could possibly be found giving such testimony. The uniformity of
experience, which is assumed as the very basis of the argument,
precludes the possibility of any opposite testimony. The proposi
tion, therefore, which assumes that no testimony can prevail against
uniformity of experience, is a mere childish truism."
The reason for the confusion of experience and testimony, on the
part of modern sceptics, is clearly pointed out by this ingenious
writer. Real experience furnished too narrow ground for such an
extensive conclusion as they wished to draw. Had they justly
restricted the application of the term experience, and designated as
testimony every thing prior and collateral, they would have been
deprived of the plausible ground of opposing testimony to uniform
experience; and, instead of saying, that no testimony is to be
credited against uniform experience, they would have only been able
to argue, that no testimony is to be credited against uniform testis
mony, a proposition too harmless to require any attention. Had they
apportioned to testimony its rightful province, it would have fol
lowed, that the statement respecting miracles, and those concerning
the laws of nature, as standing on the same ground, namely that of
testimony, must all be tried by the same laws, the laws by which
testimony is tried.
" It would scarcely be worth while to bestow even a moment's

INTRODUCTION.

attention on the effusions of so inapt a reasoner on moral subjects
as the learned Reviewer, but for the sake of noticing, and claiming
for Christianity, the most singular of the arguments of La Place,
which bears on the subjects of miracles — an argument which over
throws Mr. Hume's deistical school from the very foundation, bury
ing together in the rubbish Professor Leslie, La Place, and an
undistinguished mob of little disciples, "quos fama obscura recondit."
It will be recollected, that Mr. Hume's statement is, that no testi
mony, for any kind of miracle, can ever possibly amount to a pro
bability, much les's to a proof;'' — a position which, together with
the whole theory with which it stands connected, is warmly eulogized
by the Edinburgh Reviewer, and attributed to the historian as its
sole and original author. It should further be borne in mind, that
no less absolute or modified form of presenting this dogma will in
any degree serve the purpose for which it is designed ; since, if any
kind or degree of evidence, short of that of personal observation,
could establish the possibility of a violation of the laws of nature, it
would become necessary for the impugners of the Scripture miracles
to examine, in detail, the evidence of all kinds by which they are
supported, and to demonstrate its inadequacy. To such a process
the sceptical school in question are remarkably disinclined ; and
they therefore confine their opposition to the most abstract and
metaphysical forms of argument. Bearing these considerations in
mind, let the reader listen for a moment to the mathematicians.
" Supposing, with M. La Place, that the greatest antiquity to
which history goes back is 5000 years, or 1826213 days, the pro
bability that the sun will rise again to-morrow is, according to
this rule, as yfjgf; or there is 1826214 to 1 to wager in favour of
that event."
This obviously implies, that if a person should wager more, as,
for instance, a hundred millions to one, he would act against the
laws of probability. Here it is clearly shown, that there is not only
" a possibility," but some probability, of the sun not rising to
morrow ; it is indeed small, but it is appreciable and definable.
And how will the sceptic attempt to prove, that an event which is
not only possible, but, to a certain measurable degree, probable to
occur to-morrow, cannot, by any evidence, be established to have
happened in any past period ? " If he say," argues Mr. Somerville, '
" that it is in itself impossible, we deny it upon his own showing ;
for he has proved that it is possible, and even to a certain decree
probable. If he say that uniform experience is against it, we deny
it, and say, that only the experience of the present generation is
against it. If he say that uniform testimony is against it this we

INTRODUCTION. XXvil
deny also ; for it is testified, by the author of the book of Joshua,
that in his time the sun stood still for a whole day ; and there is no
testimony at all on the other side, as applicable to that particular
day. The same observations may be applied to all the miracles
recorded in Scripture. Experience is not applicable to them, for it
is limited to the objects under our notice ; and testimony is so far
from being against them, that there is testimony for them, and none
against them. Many persons testify that they saw them happen,
and none testify that they were upon the spot, and examined all the
circumstances, and saw that they did not happen. As to the testi
mony of those who were not there, however uniform it might be, it
does not bear at all on the subject. The principles of calculation,
therefore, are more in support of miracles than against them." Truly
this is smiting off the head ofthe giant with his own sword!
The next and only writer, after the days of Hume, who brought
to the cause of infidelity a high and deserved reputation for philo
sophy and letters, was Mr. Gibbon, the celebrated historian of the de
cline and fall of the Roman Empire. His opposition to the cause of
Christianity, was marked by less both of zeal and subtlety than the
writings of Mr. Hume evinced. The latter wrote in the character
of a philosopher, and regarded those as his best and most characte
ristic works which related to morals and religion. Mr. Gibbon, on
the contrary, offered to revealed religion only the hostility of the
historian and the scholar. Accordingly, he is only known, in the
ranks of deistical writers, by two chapters in his historical work, in
which he details the rise and progress of Christianity, and the
causes which, in his opinion, contributed to its prevalence. Nothing
could be more artfully and courteously disguised, than was the thread
of infidelity in this portion of his history ; and while he habitually
indicates a deep veneration for that vast but silent agency, which
achieved a domination over mankind, far more powerful than
did the arts of senators, and the swords of the Caesars — while he
recognizes the superior sublimity of that intellectual and spiritual
empire, over mere physical and territorial supremacy, he repeatedly
ascribes it, by sly implication, to causes the most ordinary and in
adequate, and thus depreciates the dignity of its nature, and veils
the divinity of its origin. The immediate effect of these chapters,
was only to inspire a suspicion of the orthodoxy of the writer ; but
it was not long before the Christian world settled into a deep and
serious conviction of the injury which they threatened to the cause
of religion. The effect of this general impression was much en
hanced, by the alarming prevalence of infidel opinions. Scepticism,
upon the most sacred of subjects, had of late ceased to be the ex-

XXVlll INTRODUCTION.

elusive distinction of philosophers. Availing themselves of the
spread of education, and favoured by external and political events,
its votaries had succeeded in extending its influence, and in impreg
nating with its poison every rank of society. The Christian church
was naturally, or rather providentially, alarmed, by the new species
of opposition which she had to encounter. Her champions and her
hosts were aroused ; and to their energies she owes those recent but
impregnable defences with which she is now encompassed. Accord
ingly, a number of writers in defence of Christianity, too great for
any but a merely nominal mention, appeared to answer the asper
sions of Mr. Gibbon, against the truths of revealed religion. In
presenting a brief analysis of the controversy, as conducted by them,
it may not be improper to quote the arrogant terms in which the
historian himself, in his memoirs of his life and writings, conde
scended to notice them. "Had I believed," he says, "that the
majority of English readers were so fondly attached even
to the name and shadow of Christianity — had I foreseen that the
pious, the timid, and the prudent would feel, or affect to feel, with
such exquisite sensibility, I might perhaps have softened the two
invidious chapters, which would create many enemies, and concili
ate few friends. But the shaft was shot, the alarm was sounded,
and I could only rejoice, that, if the voice of our priests was clamo
rous and bitter, their hands were disarmed from the powers of per
secution. I adhered to the wise resolution of trusting myself and
my writings to the candour of the public, till Mr. Davis, of Oxford,
presumed to attack,- not the faith, but the fidelity of the historian.
My vindication, expressive of less anger than contempt, amused for
a moment the busy and idle metropolis ; and" the most rational part
of the laity, and even of the clergy, appear to have been satisfied of
my innocence and accuracy I would not print this vindication in
quarto, lest it should be bound and preserved with the history itself.
At the distance of twelve years, I calmly affirm my judgment of
Davis, Chelsum, &c. A victory over such antagonists was a suffi
cient humiliation. They, however, were rewarded in this world.
Poor Chelsum was indeed neglected; and I dare not boast the
making Dr. Watson a Bishop ; he is a prelate of large mind and
liberal spirit: but1 I enjoyed the privilege of giving a royal pension
to Mr. Davis, and of collating Dr. Apthorpe to an archiepiscopal
living. Their success encouraged the zeal of Taylor the Arian, and
Miluer the Methodist, with many others whom it would be difficult
to remember, and tedious to rehearse. The list of my adversaries
was graced, however, by the more respectable names of Dr. Priestley,

INTRODUCTION, XXIX
Sir David Dalrymple,* and Dr. White ; and every polemic, of either
university, discharged his sermon or pamphlet against the impene
trable silence of the Roman Historian." After some more particu
lar notice of the publications of the last-mentioned persons
— characterized by the same superciliousness and vanity — Mr. Gib
bon concludes as follows : " Let me frankly own that I was startled
at the first discharge of Ecclesiastical ordnance; but, as soon as I
found that this empty noise was mischievous only in the intention*
my fear was converted into indignation, and every feeling of indig
nation or curiosity has since subsided in pure and placid indiffe
rence." The passages in Mr. Gibbon's Historical Work, which gave rise
to so much controversy, are to be found in the fifteenth and sixteenth
chapters, which are devoted to the early progress of the Christian
religion. " Our curiosity is naturally prompted," says he, " to
inquire by what means the Christian faith obtained so remarkable
a victory over the established religions of the earth. To this inquiry*
an obvious but satisfactory answer may be returned ; that it was
owing to the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and the
ruling providence of its great Author." Perhaps it was this single
passage which more than any other necessitated the active opposi
tion of the world to the succeeding remarks. Nothing could be
more disingenuous, or more dangerous, than this curious observa
tion. It seems to indicate the justest views and the most stable and
enlightened faith ; of both of which, the sequel of his examination
proves him to be utterly destitute. Having laid down this primary
principle, he proceeds to detail what he terms the secondary causes
which favoured the growth of the Christian church. These he con
jectures to have been the following :
1. The inflexible and, if we may use the expression, the intolerant
zeal of the Christians, derived, it is true, from the Jewish religion,
but purified from the narrow and unsocial spirit, which, instead of
inviting, had deterred the Gentiles from embracing the laws of
Moses. 2. The doctrine of a future life improved by every additional
circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to that important
truth. „
3- The miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive church.
4. The pure and austere morals of the Christians.
5. The union and discipline of the Christian republic, which
* Afterwards Lord Hailes.

INTRODUCTION.

gradually formed an independent and increasing state in the heart
of the Roman empire.
These reasons are, indeed, prescribed by Mr. Gibbon as secon
dary; but, throughout his treatise he so systematically passes over
that primary agency which, in the commencement he refers to, as
giving all their efficiency to the subsidiary causes, and further, so
continually throws out sly, unfair, and intangible insinuations
against the truths of revelation generally, as to make it evident that
he deemed the " five causes" as primary and self-sufficient, and was
only studious to adopt the most effectual, but least alarming mode
of disseminating his scepticism.
It was to these allegations, therefore, that Dr. Watson chiefly
confined his opposition, in his celebrated "Apology for Christianity"
— a work which impressed the historian with a higher opinion of its
author, than he entertained of any other of his opponents ;
although it is unquestionable, that Mr. Davis gave him by far the
most uneasiness, by attacking his historical " fidelity," while the
other only impugned what he amusingly denominates his faith.
Iri replying to the first cause to which Mr. Gibbon traces
the spread of Christianity, Dr. Watson does not notice the
obvious singularity of attributing intolerance to the unprotected
feebleness of the early church — a figure of speech analogous to that
by which we should ascribe sparing mercy to a couple of new
born lambs, surrounded by a troop, of snarling and misbehaving
wolves. Nor does he remark on the absurdity of supposing, that
" the ruling providence of the great author" would have approved
and employed such an agency — a lapse of memory on the part of
Mr. Gibbon, apparent in one or two other of the " five causes."
He chiefly confines himself to the source from which the historian
derives the zeal of the early church, convicts him of ignorance and
error in identifying it with the zealous exclusiveness of the Jewish
system, to which the whole design and spirit ofthe Christian religion
was essentially hostile, exposes his insensibility to, or wilful contempt
of, the influence of that doctrine, to whose evidence he, in a moment
of incautious orthodoxy, had attributed the triumphs of the cross,
and points to the principles and promises of the gospel, as the
only means by which that "inflexible zeal" could have been
kindled and sustained.
In concluding his first letter he animadverts upon a seemingly
incidental statement of Mr. Gibbon, that " the contemporaries of
Moses and Joshua had beheld with careless indifference, the most
amazing miracles ; and that, in contradiction to every known prin-

INTRODUCTION. XXXI
ciple of the human mind, the Jews seem to have yielded a more
ready assent to the traditions of their remote ancestors, than to the
evidence of their own senses." In reply, the Doctor confutes both
of the allegations, by several facts and arguments, and exposes,
though not so fully and pointedly as he might have done, the
latent bearing which it has against the veracity of the Old Tes
tament Scriptures.
The second cause alleged by Mr. Gibbon as having contributed
to the early advancement of Christianity, is the doctrine of the
immortality of the soul, "improved," as he expresses it, " by every
additional circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to
that important truth." Unfortunately, however, Dr. Watson
clearly shows, that the additions " to this important doctrine," as
received by the pagans, were by no means calculated to give
"weight and efficacy" to it ; but, on the contrary, were adapted to
repel them from its adoption. The bare notion of a future state,
was not an innovation upon the heathen mythology. The novelty
consisted in the doctrine of probation and responsibility, and the
resurrection of the dead ; and this, as connected with eternal
punishment as the consequence of their habitually cherished vices,
was very unlikely to attract them to the ranks of Christianity. He
next opposes the historian's suggestion, that the Gentiles were con
verted by their fears of Christ's second coming, of the final judg
ment, and the general conflagration — showing, first, that the mere
declarations of a few despised and ignorant men, were utterly inade
quate to inspire those fears ; and further that, notwithstanding the
frequent use of such terms as, " We who are alive and remain," the
apostles themselves did not expect the second advent of their Mas
ter, but, on the contrary, speak of their own approaching decease,
in language which clearly indicates the opposite opinion. The
various prophecies contained in the epistles, which point to future
and remote corruptions of Christianity, and which are universally
believed to have had their fulfilment in the prevalence of the
popish religion, more fully establish this point. In noticing the
third cause adduced by Mr. Gibbon, to account for the early
spread of the Christian religion, namely, the miraculous powers
ascribed to the primitive church, it is impossible not to notice the
characteristic slyness with which the author has concealed a satire
and a fallacy in the terms. What can Mr. Gibbon mean in the
use of the word ascribed ? If he means that these miraculous
powers were falsely claimed and conceded, what becomes of his
preliminary acknowledgment of the "evidence of the doctrine
itself, and the ruling providence of its Author ?" If, on the other

XXXII INTRODUCTION.

hand, he grants that these powers were really possessed, where is
the fairness, nay, the common honesty, of employing a term which
he knew would leave -upon the mind of the majority of his readers
a false and pernicious impression ? But, apart from this, a fallacy
lies in this part of Mr. Gibbon's reasoning, which it is still more
important to expose. The kind of miraculous power, a claim to
which is charged by Mr. Gibbon upon the primitive church, is such
that any pretensions to it would rather have impeded than promoted
the cause of Christianity. "They consisted," he says, "of divine in
spirations, conveyed, sometimes in the form of a waking, sometimes
a sleeping vision, and were liberally bestowed on all ranks of the
faithful — on women as on elders, on boys as well as on bishops."
The obvious reply to these representations may be given in the
words of Bishop Watson :
"Cast your eye, Sir," says he, " upon the church of Rome, and
ask yourself (I put the question to your heart, and beg you will
consult that for an answer ; ask yourself) whether her absurd pre
tensions to that very kind of miraculous powers you have here
displayed as operating to the increase of Christianity, have not
converted half her members to Protestantism, and the other half to
infidelity ? Neither the sword of the civil magistrate, nor the pos
session of the keys of heaven, nor the terrors of her spiritual thun
der, have been able to keep within her pale even those who have
been bred up in her faith ; how, then, should you think, that the
very cause which hath almost extinguished Christianity among
Christians, should have established it among pagans ? I beg I may
not be misunderstood ; I do not take upon me to say, that all the
miracles recorded in the history of the primitive church after the
apostolical age, were forgeries ; it is foreign to the present purpose
to deliver any opinion upon that subject : but I do beg leave to in
sist upon this, that such of them as were forgeries, must in that,
learned age, by their easy detection, have rather impeded than
accelerated the progress of Christianity ; and it appears very proba
ble to me, that nothing but the recent prevailing evidence of real,
unquestioned, apostolical miracles, could have secured the infant
church from being destroyed by those which were falsely ascribed
to it."
The next cause to which Mr. Gibbon ascribes the growth of the
new religion, is " the pure and austere morals of the Christians."
This would, at first- sight, appear an unexceptionable position ; as
the purifying tendency of Christian truth, is not only one of its
noblest distinctions, but one of its most legitimate and effectual
recommendations. Such apparently fair admissions, however as

INTRODUCTION. XXXiii
this, should always have the effect of putting the reader of Mr.
Gibbon's writings on his guard, against some particularly covert
and formidable invasions of Christianity, which they generally
introduce. Thu.s, in the close of the very paragraph in which the
above statements occur, we find him accounting for this superior
sanctity. "As it is my intention," says he, "to remark only on
such human causes as were permitted to second the influence of
revelation, I shall slightly mention two motives, which might natu
rally render the lives of the primitive Christians much purer and
more austere than those of their pagan contemporaries, or their de
generate successors ; repentance for their past sins, and the laudable
desire of supporting the reputation of the society in which they
were engaged." That even these motives should secure a higher
degree of moral excellence, than was found among contemporary
pagans, will be readily understood ; though the principle on which
this consideration accounts for the superiority of the primitive Chris
tians over their "degenerate successors," seem somewhat obscure ;
since if they were successors, in other words true Christians, the
same repentance, and care for the reputation of their fraternity,
would be possessed alike by both. But further than this, to account
for the purity of Christian morals by any such considerations, is at
once to betray a strange wa t of acquaintance with human nature,
and either the most contemptible ignorance or the most contemp
tuous disregard of those grand truths, to the reception of which
alone the Christian ascribes whatever measure of holiness he may
possess. Besides, the admission, erroneous as it is in Mr. Gibbon's
application of it, has very obviously the further attribute of insin
cerity ; and was probably designed to disarm the reader of his sus
picion, and thus to prepare him for the heedless reception of the
sentiments and sophisms of infidelity. Accordingly, in the course
of the same chapter, we find him distributing the motives to virtue
and general excellence, under two cardinal principles ; the love of
pleasure, and the love of action. " The character," says he, " in
which both the one and the other should be united and harmonised,
would seem-to constitute the most perfect idea of human nature.
The insensible and inactive disposition, which should be supposed
alike destitute of both, would be rejected, by the common consent
of mankind, as utterly incapable of procuring any happiness to
the individual, or any public benefit to the world." " But," he
immediately continues, " it was not in this world that the primitive
Christians were desirous of making themselves either agreeable or
useful." What construction can sophistry itself affix to this last
sentence, except that the Christians were destitute of every motive

INTRODUCTION.

to excellence, usefulness, or happiness ? and how does this repre
sentation agree with his former one, that such was the excellency
of their character, as to subdue the inveterate hostility of Jews and
Romans, and to win them to the faith of the gospel ? A similar
insinuation occurs in the very next page. After descanting on the
simplicity and undue self-denial of the early disciples of Jesus, he
adds, " It is always easy, as well as agreeable, for the inferior ranks
of mankind to claim a merit, from the contempt of that pomp and
pleasure which fortune has placed beyond their reach. The virtue
of the primitive Christians, like that of the first Romans''. J was very
frequently guarded by poverty and ignorance." What are we to
think of a writer, who alternately with such assassin-like attacks as
these, has the mingled meanness and audacity (for milder terms
would be inappropriate) to offer to the majesty of the Christian
religion his courtly but insulting obeisance !
In noticing the fourth and last of Mr. Gibbon's reasons, it will
only be necessary to point attention to the terms he adopts, from
which the general tone of his disquisition upon it may be easily in
ferred. This he alleges to have been '' The union and discipline of
the Christian Republic, which gradually formed an independent and
increasing state in the heart of the Roman Empire." Would anyone
suppose that this language referred to the primitive Christian church,
and was adduced to account for the early prevalence of that spiritual
kingdom which, as its founder declared, was " not of this world " !
The attention of the reader is ingeniously diverted from apostles
and converts to popes and cardinals, and he learns insensibly to
class the best and purest times of Christianity among the ages of
its foulest corruptions. The object of the historian in this, the
closing part of his argument, is consistent with that which he has
at once conceded and promoted, throughout the portion of his history
under review. It is to unspiritualize religion ; to confound that
extraordinary association which is based on a community of belief,
experience, affections, and hopes, with those which are merely civil
and political ; to keep out of sight the special relation which the
Divine Being sustains to the former; and to represent it as a system
ingeniously devised, for obtaining a vast but imperceptible influence
over mankind, by imposing on their credulity those notions which,
while they would not bear the scrutiny of the philosopher, had a
salutary effect on the morals of the great mass of society. Hence
the use of such terms, as the " Christian Republic," " a large and
increasing state," with a variety of others, calculated to insinuate
into the mind the most vital errors, with that imperceptible gentle
ness which should neither disturb its prejudices, nor awaken its fears.

INTRODUCTION.

It need not excite surprise, still less need it intrude .uiy doubts
respecting the evidence of revealed religion, that so covert a mode
of attack should in many instances have met with success; and
even where this has not been the result, the dangers through which
the reader has securely passed, have remained undetected. A strik
ing instance of this is afforded by a late distinguished philosopher,
Sir James Mackintosh. In allusion to the five causes to which, as
we have seen, Mr. Gibbon ascribes the triumphs of Christianity,
Sir James writes : " Perhaps those which he enumerates, are among
the most obvious. They might all be safely adopted by a Christian
writer, with some change in the language and manner." That this
extraordinary man should not have perceived a hostility to religion,
in these chapters, far more mischievous than any that can belong
to mere manner, is doubtless to be attributed, not to any defect of
acuteness, still less to a leaning to sceptical opinions, but solely to
that generous candour, which is the invariable distinction of a phi
losophic mind, but which, when unchastened with experience and
caution, is too apt to concede sincerity to all who are ingenious
enough to conceal their duplicity.
The latter part of Bishop Watson's reply to Gibbon, is occupied
in animadversions upon the closing portion of his fifteenth chapter ;
in which he manifestly impugns the authenticity of the New Tes
tament histories: though still with that degree of adroitness, and
simulation of respect, which he ever maintained ; and which, while
it rendered "his work more dangerous, gave to it a character of un
utterable meanness. Having delicately insinuated doubts and
reflections upon the statements of divine revelation, throughout
those chapters of his history which he devotes to its consideration,
he attempts, in the last paragraph of the fifteenth, to leave a per
manent impression on the mind of the reader, against that invalu
able kind of evidence for the truth of Christianity, derived from
miracles. The tone of reproach which he affects, in noticing the
unbelief of the ancient heathen, is peculiarly characteristic; and
the whole paragraph, by its mingled malignity, cowardice, and
duplicity, stigmatizes its author in the ranks of infidelity, as " the
least exalted spirit that fell,"
" But how shall we excuse," says he, " the supine inattention of
the pagan and philosophic world, to those evidences which were
presented by the hand of Omnipotence, not to their reason, but to
their senses ? During the age of Christ, of his apostles, and of
their first disciples, the doctrine which they preached was confirmed
by innumerable prodigies. The lame walked, the blind saw, the
sick were healed, the dead were raised, demons were expelled, and

XXXVI INTRODUCTION.
the laws of nature were frequently suspended for the benefit of the
church. But the sages of Greece and Rome turned aside from the
awful spectacle, and pursuing the ordinary occupations of life and
study, appeared unconscious of any alterations in the moral or
physical government of the world. Under the reign of Tiberius,
the whole earth, or at least a celebrated province of the Roman
empire, was involved in a preternatural darkness of three hours.
Even this miraculous event, which ought to have excited the won
der, the curiosity, and the devotion of mankind, passed without
notice in an age of science and history. It happened during the
lifetime of Seneca and the elder Pliny, who must have experienced
the immediate effects, or received the earliest intelligence of the
prodigy. Each of these philosophers, in a laborious work, has re
corded all the great phenomena of nature, earthquakes, meteors,
comets, and eclipses, which his indefatigable curiosity could collect.
Both the one and the other have omitted to mention the greatest
phenomenon to which the mortal eye has been witness since the
creation of the globe. A distinct chapter of Pliny is designed for
eclipses of an extraordinary nature and unusual duration : but he
contents himself with describing the singular defect of light which
followed the murder of Csesar, when, during the greatest part of the
year, the orb of the sun appeared pale and without splendour.
This season of obscurity, which cannot surely be compared with the
preternatural darkness of the Passion, had been already celebrated
by most of the poets and historians of that memorable age."
Respecting the first allegation of the historian, viz., that the
Christian miracles were unnoticed by learned and observant
heathens, Dr. Watson remarks, first, the comparative infrequency
of these miracles, and the consequent probability that no contem
porary historian ever witnessed them, for otherwise they would un
doubtedly have, noticed them, since they do not hesitate to record
the silly juggles of Vespasian; secondly, that so far from being in
attentive to those wonders, by which the Divine Being attested the
inspiration of his early servants, multitudes of pagans saw and be
lieved, and forsaking all hopes of worldly honour, riches, or security,
devoted themselves to the profession of Christianity; and lastly,
that the miracles of the Christians were attributed by many to
magic, and were, therefore, deemed unworthy of notice by contem
porary annalists. With regard to the preternatural darkness at
the crucifixion, the Dr. shows that it was probably partial,
and therefore the less obvious to universal notice, by these
considerations. First, from the fact of Jesus having seen from the
cross his mother and John, though there is reason to believe that

INTRODUCTION. XXXVH
they were at some short distance; secondly, because the same
word used by the same historian, is elsewhere employed to
denote a darkness which must necessarily have been very slight ;
and thirdly, because the term translated "all the earth," may with
great propriety be translated " all the region," by which version the
silence of contemporary but foreign historians is easily explained.
Such are the principal features of the controversy, as carried on
by the Bishop of Llandaff against the Roman historian. As far as
regards its influence upon the public mind, Dr. Watson's Apology,
by dwelling chiefly upon the cardinal topics involved in Mr.
Gibbon's five reasons for the spread of Christianity, has been by
far the most successful of the replies. Those of Mr. Davies, and
of Sir David Dalrymple, were devoted to a closer examination of
those inaccuracies, and ingenious and almost imperceptible fallacies
which render the historian's treatise so dangerous, by gradually
impressing sentiments which in the commencement he had the
hypocrisy to disavow, and which, to the last, he never had the
courage to defend. But notwithstanding their evil design
and pernicious tendency, the effect of Mr. Gibbon's writings
was exceedingly circumscribed. Their learning and their magni
tude alike limited their influence, while the more concise and
popular replies of his opponents still further promoted this result.
Neither of these circumstances affected the individual who next
claims our notice. Thomas Pai ne was eminently qualified to influ
ence the minds ofthe vulgar. His style of writing was perspicuous
and pointed, abounding with wit, and rendered still more influential
by the circumstances into which he was introduced by the American
war and the French Revolution. His aversion to the Christian
religion was undisguised and unbounded; and perhaps there are
few men who have met with such melancholy success in their
attempts to seduce mankind from the enjoyments and prospects of
religion, to the chill and dreary shades of infidelity. This effect
was greatly enhanced by his political writings, which lent to his
name a degree of splendour highly favourable to the reception of
his religious tenets. In these there was scarcely any thing that was
new; most of his objections to Christianity had been triumphantly
refuted many times before ; and if all had not shared the' same fate,
it was because, in his incredible ignorance of the Christian religion
and Scriptures, he had fallen into some errors, of which his more
cautious predecessors had never dreamed.
When it is remembered, that in his principal work, entitled "The
Age of Reason," Mr. Paine attempts to invalidate the genuineness
and authenticity of the entire Scripture histories, prophecies, gospels,

INTRODUCTION.

and epistles ; and to pick out innumerable inconsistencies, without
the remotest pretensions either to scholarship, theological knowledge,
or common sincerity, it will readily be supposed that this is not the
place in which his innumerable representations can be exposed.
They have already been most ably refuted by a number of eminent
divines ; among whom we may mention, as the principal, Bishop
Watson, in his Apology for the Bible, Thomas Scott, in his Vindi
cation of the Divine Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, and
Andrew Fuller, in his " Gospel its own Witness." Of all his objec
tions against revealed religion, there is but one that has the slightest
pretensions to originality ; and as this one argument has been com
pletely answered by Mr. Fuller, and subsequently, by a similar
process of reasoning, but with greater prolixity, and gorgeousness
of illustration, by Dr. Chalmers, it will suffice to confine our notice
of Mr. Paine's writings to a brief detail of this branch of the con
troversy. His argument is founded upon the recent discoveries of
Astronomy, which render probable the existence of a plurality of
worlds. It may be stated in the following manner. It is highly
probable that this world is but an insignificant point in the creation,
surrounded on all sides by myriads of globes, inhabited by intelli
gent beings ; but if so, how incredible is it that it should have
engrossed so vast a portion of the Divine regard ; that in this little
inhabited speck God himself should become incarnate, and thus
accomplish results so mighty as to be without a parallel in the history
of his eternal administration so far as it is known to us. Of this ap
parent disproportion he makes the most, in his opposition to the Chris
tian revelation. " Though it is not," he says, " a direct article of the
Christian system, that this world which we inhabit is the whole of the
habitable creation, yet it is so worked up therewith, from whatis called
the Mosaic account of the creation, the story of Eve and the apple,
and the counterpart of that story, the death ofthe Son of God, that
to believe otherwise, that is, to believe that God created a plurality
of worlds, at least as numerous as what we call stars, renders the
Christian system of faith at once little and ridiculous, and scatters,
it in the mind like feathers in the air. The two beliefs cannot be
held together in the same mind; and he who thinks he believes
both, has thought but little of either." With these views he
attempts to show, that the Scriptures recognise this as the only
world ; and to exhibit the absurdity of supposing, either that in
this world only this manifestation of Divine condescension was
made, or that every other world had been similarly visited. Against
these statements Mr. Fuller offers the following arguments.

INTRODUCTION.

1. That so far from "the two beliefs" being inconsistent with
each other, they have been held together by some of the greatest of
men. 2. That so far from "the Christian system of faith forming itself
upon the idea of only one world," it distinctly reveals in addition
a world of happiness, and a world of misery; and nowhere implies
that these three states comprehend the whole inhabited creation.
3. That if the notion of a plurality of worlds interfere in any
degree with the doctrines of revelation, it should obviously be aban
doned, since at best it is matter, not of belief, but merely of opinion
aud conjecture, while the system of opinion with which it is alleged
to interfere, comes supported by an irrefragable body of evidence.
The author next proposed to show, that admitting the intelligent
creation to be as extensive as modern philosophy supposes, the cre
dibility of redemption is not thereby weakened, but on the contrary
in many respects is strengthened and aggrandized. After premi
sing the incalculable importance with which the condition of immor
tality invests the nature of man, and the consequent fitness of a
vast expenditure of means to secure his happiness, he argues the
consistency of the Scripture doctrine of redemption, with the sup
posed magnitude of creation, from the following considerations.
1. Whatever be its extent, we have no proof that it contains any
beings who have apostatized from God, except men and angels.
2. Whatever be its extent, there is no inconsistency in supposing
that a particular part of it may be chosen from the rest, as a theatre
on which the great Author of all things would perform his most
glorious works.
3. For such a display, that spot would probably be chosen
wherein the greatest efforts had been made to dishonour God.
4. The events which have thus transpired, in this little insigni-
cant world, are competent to fill God's whole dominions with great
and everlasting joy.
He further argues, that the credibility of the Gospel scheme is
enhanced by the supposed magnitude ofthe creation, on the follow
ing grounds.
1. The Scripture teaches us first, that God's regard to man is an
astonishing manifestation of his condescension, and that on account
of the disparity between him and the celestial creation.
2. That before creation, this world was marked out by eternal
wisdom, as the theatre of this great manifestation.
3. That the mediation of Christ is represented as bearing a refe
rence to the whole creation, by bringing them into union with the
church of God.

xl INTRODUCTION.
4. That thus, through the mediation of Christ, not only is the
whole creation represented as augmenting the blessedness of the
church, but the church as augmenting the blessedness of the
whole creation.
5. The Scriptures teach us, that the earth itself, with all its re
deemed inhabitants, shall, at a future period, be purified, and
reunited to the holy empire of God : and
Lastly. That even the punishment of the finally impenitent, is
represented as appointed for an impressive example to the whole
creation. By this admirable train of reasoning Mr. Fuller meets one of the
most recent of the aggressions of philosophy and rationalism
against the truths of revelation: and so long as that reasoning
shall remain on record, it is not presumptuous to predict that
the ingenious speculation of Paine will be consigned, together
with the dishonest sophistry of Hume, and the respectful treachery
of Gibbon, to unbroken and lasting forgetfulness.
On the whole, we cannot dismiss the deistical writings of Paine,
with any more respect than is claimed by the modern infidels whose
works have previously come under review. In point of learning, repu
tation, and influence, he stood far below the great historians; while
his ignorance of his principal subject, theology, and of the Bible in
particular, was the most gross and contemptible that it is possible
to imagine. His virulence and bitterness of spirit against every
thing related to religion, clearly showed that his opposition was not
that of philosophy, but "of prejudice ; while the cowardice of his
nature, and the impurity of his morals, to which the absolute filthi-
ness of his person was a tolerably faithful index, proved that his in
fidelity grew out of his fears, and that, like the miserable Rochester,
he knew, in fact, no objection to the Bible, but a bad life. Degraded,
however, as he was in a social point of view, below the ordinary
level of human nature, he was a man of great acuteness, of much
original wit, and one of the most masterly political writers of his
day ; all which gave to his theological works a vogue and influ
ence, which, from their intrinsic worth lessness, they could not other
wise have obtained. Accordingly, they were productive for a time
of an accession to the ranks of infidelity, both in France and in this
country, augmenting at once the numbers, the confidence, and the
virulence of the deistical school. The replies, however, to which
reference has already been made, together with the many and in
valuable works on the evidences of Christianity, to which the writ
ings of Paine indirectly gave rise, have established the authenticity

INTRODUCTION. xii
of revelation on new and impregnable grounds ; and have proved
by their result, that detected sophisms are quite as incapable of
revival as exploded superstitions.
Subsequently to the publication of the " Age of Reason,'' the
deistical controversy has been carried on in this country, by the
offensive party, with such a total destitution of originality, argu
mentative power, and ingenuity, as scarcely to repay the tedious
task of perusing it. Philosophical freedom of thought has long
ceased to be the distinction of the sceptic ; and nothing but levity,
insolence, obscenity, and a daring contempt of every sacred and
social obligation, remain to distinguish him from the believer in the
Gospel. To draw from their obscurity those writers whose opposi
tion to Christianity is confined to offensive sneers and indecent
ribaldry, to which it is alike impossible and improper to reply,
would be gratuitously to circulate the poison without the antidote.
As little is it necessary to extend the notoriety which has been ob
tained by some modern deists, solely by the refutations which their
productions have received at the hands of the learned and the good
— to publish'the infamy of a Carlile because Mr. Carson* conde
scended to rebuke him, or the blasphemy of a Taylor because the
enormity and pestilence of his wickedness enlisted against him the
learning and piety of Dr. Smith.t It only remains to notice two
modern infidel schools, whose opposition to religion is analogous to
that which has been already noticed, and which was founded on
modern astronomical discovery. Like that exploded argument,
those of the schools in question, unable to stand alone, claim sup
port from the partial and short-sighted deductions of philosophy,
" falsely so called." The one founds its hostility to revealed religion,
on the recent discoveries of Geology ; and the other, with Robert
Owen at its head, connects that hostility with the wildest dogmas
and most empirical nostrums of political economy.
The investigations of geologists have led to the discovery of cer
tain organic remains, both animal and vegetable, to which they are
compelled to assign a date long prior to any embraced in the
Mosaic chronology. These phenomena have been seized upon, as
invalidating the authenticity of the Mosaic record ; and while infi-
* The Truth ofthe Gospel demonstrated from the character of God manifested in the
Atonement. A Letter to Mr. Richard Carlile, by Alexander Carson. — Edinburgh,
1820. t An Answer to a Paper, entitled " Manifesto of the Christian Evidence Society," by
John Pye Smith, T>. D. The above manifesto may be regarded, as marking the ulti
mate boundary to which the gross ignoiance and incompetency of modern deists has
attained ; and as constituting the last effort of that party, of sufficient importance to
deserve a mention in these pages.

xiii INTRODUCTION.
dels, on the one hand, have rejoiced in an unexpected triumph over
the pretensions of revelation generally, not a few Christian writers,
with more zeal than judgment, have preferred a most unfounded
charge of deism against the science and the students of geology.
Amongst the earliest defenders of the Christian religion, from this
new species of invasion, was Dr. Chalmers. Subsequently, how
ever, the argument has been so luminously stated by Dr. Buckland
in his Bridgewater Treatise on Geology, that he may with propriety
be regarded as setting the question at rest. His argument may be
thus stated. First, That it is as unreasonable to expect a history
of geological phenomena in the Mosaic history, as to look for a
specific mention of the satellites of Jupiter, or the rings of Saturn.
That the object ofthe historian was simply to reveal the history of
the human race, and only records the origin of the earth itself, and
the heavenly bodies, in order to teach that they were not eternal
and self-existent, but the offspring of divine wisdom and power :
and Secondly, That the first verse of Genesis, which is the principal
object of attack, may be fairly appealed to by the Christian geolo
gist, as expressing, by the word beginning, an undefined period of
time — as containing a brief statement of the creation of the material
elements, at a time distinctly preceding the operations of the first
day. That it is not affirmed, that God created the heavens and the
earth in the first day, but in the beginning ; and that this begin
ning may have been an epoch at an unmeasured distance, followed
by periods of undefined duration, during which the physical opera
tions disclosed by geology'were going on.
The system of opinion which bears the name of Mr. Owen is far
more comprehensive. It is levelled alike against the fundamental
principles of morals, every pretension of the Scriptures, and every
principle and feeling of a religious nature, that ever has been enter
tained by the human race, in any age or country. With what may
be called the ethical part of Mr. Owen's creed we have nothing to
do. It may be briefly stated in his own words. " It does not be
long," says he, " to the constitution of man, or the original nature
of his constitution, that there can be merit or demerit in the opinions
or feelings of a single human being." So much for morals.
With respect to religion, he advocates, somewhat whimsically,
the existence of a First Cause; whom, in innocent acquiescence
with the prejudices of "the old world," he agrees to call "God;"
but denies that man has ever had the means of acquainting himself,
in the slightest degree, with his attributes, character, or conduct;
as if we were any more able to ascertain the existence of God, irre
spectively of his attributes, than we are to demonstrate the existence

INTRODUCTION. xliH
of matter irrespectively ofthe only properties of it which meet our
senses, — extension, impenetrability, and the rest !
But we have said that his religious opinions rest upon a certain
system of political economy. This connexion may be thus ex
plained. He advocates the perfection of human nature; and attri
butes the misery and wickedness which prevail in the world, to
the law makers, and not the law breakers. In concurrence with
this opinion, he pleads for the community of property, the dissolu
tion of the present regime of marriage, and the universal license of
the innocent propensities of human nature. Hence he discards
the Christian religion, as a system of superstition and priestcraft,
calculated to repress the indulgence of the natural appetites,
and to limit the happiness of mankind. " The basis," he
says, " of the religion of truth, is the knowledge that the laws of
nature have given the power to adult man, so to control the mental
faculties, and physical powers of his infant, as to force it to receive
error, however absurd or inconsistent, or to imbibe truth, only known
to be truth by its undeviating consistency with the ascertained laws
of nature." He thus presupposes, as existing in the mind of man,
a perfect knowledge of all the laws which control the physical and
the intellectual world ; and by a just deduction, repudiates revela
tion, as an impertinent interference with this inscrutable wisdom.
The relation then betwixt his views of religion and political economy
is obvious. Assuming that nothing is necessary to the perfection
of human nature, but a rational and educational social system, he
deems religion unnecessary and perplexing; and contends that
praise and blame have ever hitherto been. perversely awarded; and
that the obedience to the ascertained laws of nature, or, in other
words, to the dictates of inclination, will expel selfishness, sin, and
religion, with all their dependent miseries, from the world, and leave
mankind a race of immaculate ephemera ! To reply to such mere
assumptions, it might suffice us to point Mr. Owen to that vast
body of evidence, by which the authenticity of revelation, as
a whole, and the truth of its doctrines respectively, are proved by
every species of argument, historical, abstract, and experimental,
and of which Mr. Owen indicates, in every sentence, the densest
ignorance. But, on an attentive perusal of his writings, we feel
even this to be unnecessary. Apart from the habitual assumption
of every principle which has been refuted in every age of the world,
and by the universal experience of mankind — apart from his assum
ing, as a perfectly easy task, to expel from the human mind, by a
process of education, selfishness, envy, malice, and all uncharitable
ness, we find such a hopeless haziness of intellect, as threatens

Xliv INTRODUCTION.
almost to paralyze the energy, and exclude the light, of divine truth
itself. Hence he exhibits an insensibility to evidence, and a reck
less audacity of assertion, which is perfectly astounding. He states,
for example, that all the religions of the world are founded on the
same suppositions, and that they are the following.
1. That there is an absolute necessity to believe all that the
priests declare.
2. That the blackest of crimes is to disbelieve what they pro
mulgate as divine truths.
3. That there is the same criminality in loving or hating, what
the priests all over the world say should be loved or hated.
4. That for believing and loving what the priests say should
be disbelieved or hated, men shall be eternally rewarded or
punished. " You thus perceive," he continues, " that when religion is
stripped of the mysteries with which the priests of all times and
countries have invested it, all its divinity vanishes ; and it stands
before the astonished world, in all its naked deformity of vice,
hypocrisy, and imbecility; In consequence of this discovery, all
testimony handed down to us from our remote and ignorant ances
tors, when opposed to facts, or the unchanging laws of nature, will
not hereafter be received into any intelligent or superior mind.
Such will be aware, that, of necessity, the universe must be one great
truth, (!) composed of all the facts which it contains," &.c. &c.
To reply to such rabid stuff as this, would be to waste the time of
the writer, and the patience of the reader.
It does not fall within the scope of this introduction, to notice the
progress of Deism in other nations. It might be sufficient to re
joice, that the mantle of the ancient Freethinkers is now only em
ployed, to veil from the public view the demoralizing and disgusting
filthiness of their successors. The opinions of Mr. Owen,
however, will lead the recollection of the reader to the School of
Rationalists, who usurp the name of Christians in Germany.
These, like the raving Apostle of the " New Moral World,"
appoint human philosophy as the supreme arbiter of religious
truth; and while they ridicule the inspiration of the Bible,
regarding prophets as patriotic bards, and Jesus and his apostles as
promulgating important truths by justifiable frauds, yet allow the
system to continue, as "a muzzle for the brute," until the transform
ing efficacy of philosophical morality shall have rendered its influ
ence unnecessary.
We have already seen, in the course of this brief review, the
fallacies and iniquities of successive schools of infidelity, falling

INTRODUCTION. xiv
before the power of the truth of the Gospel. It is gratifying to
know, that this ostentatious usurpation of the dignities of religion,
is fast falling into contempt. We have already followed many of
the devices of a corrupt ingenuity to the long home of forgetfulness ;
and we delight to fortify, by experience, the confident hope, that in
every succeeding attempt to overcloud the lustre of the gospel, the
thin and empty mists of human folly will roll away beneath a dis
tant horizon, before the ever brightening beams of the Sun of Righ
teousness.

CONTENTS.

/

Page.

Letter I. — Some account of those that first took upon themselves the name of deists
— Observations on Lord Herbert of Cherbury's Scheme  1
Letter II. — Farther Observations on Lord Herbert's Scheme . . . .12
Postscript^-An account of a remarkable Incident relating to Lord Herbert of Cher-
bury — Reflections upon it .......... 19
Letter HI.— Observations on Mr. Hobbes's Writings  26
Letter IV. — Reflections on Mr. Charles Blount's and Mr. Toland's Writings . 31
Letter V. — The Earl of Shaftesbury's Writings examined  39
Letter VI. — The Account given of the Earl of Shaftesbury's Writings in the fore
going Letter, vindicated ........... 53
Letter VII. — An Account of Mr. CoUins's Discourse of Free-thinking, and of his
Book intitled The Grounds of the Christian Religion ..... 63
Letter VIII. — Mr. Woolston's Discourses on the Miracles of our Saviour considered 81
Letter IX. — An Account of Dr. Tindal's Christianity as old as the Creation . . 90
Letter X. — Dr. Morgan's Book, called The Moral Philosopher examined . . 108
Letter XL —The Pamphlet intitled Christianity not founded on Argument examined 123
Letter XII. — A Pamphlet intitled The Resurrection of Jesus considered, exam
ined, and confuted ............ 136
Le( ter XIII. — An Account of Mr. Chubb's posthumous Works . . . .157
Letter XIV. — Some further Remarks on Mr. Chubb's posthumous Works . . 171
Letter XV. — Observations on a Pamplet intitled Deism fairly stated, and fully
vindicated — A brief Account of Lord Bolingbroke's Attempt against the Scrip
tures, in his Letters on the Study and Use of History ..... 195
Letter XVI. — Some general Observations upon Mr. Hume's Scheme in his Philo
sophical Essays .... ......... 209
Letter XVII. — Observations on Mr. Hume's Essay concerning a particular Provi
dence and a future state  220
Letter XVIII. — An Examination of the first part of Mr. Hume's Essay on Miracles
which is designed to show, that Miracles are incapable of being proved by any
Evidence whatsoever .  229
Letter XIX. — Reflections on the second Part of Mr. Hume's Essay on Miracles,
ivhich is designed to show, that in fact there never was a miraculous Event,
established upon such Evidence as can reasonably be depended upon — A par
ticular Examination of what he has offered concerning the Miracles attributed to
the Abbe de Paris . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
Letter XX. — Additional Observations relating to Mr. Hume, with Remarks on an
ingenious Paper, containing an Examination of Mr. Hume's Arguments in his
Essay on Miracles ............ 270
Letter XXL — Farther Reflections relating to the Abbe de Paris, and the great
Sanctity ascribed to him — Observations on some Passages in Mr. Hume's
Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, relating to Self-denial, Mortifica
tion, and Humility  . . . . 285
Postscript. — An Account of Mr. Douglas's Book, intitled The Criterion, or Mira
cles examined, &c. ............ 29J
Letter XXII. — General Remarks on Lord Bolingbroke's posthumous Works . 298

xlviii CONTENTS. Page.
•Letter XXIII.— An Inquiry into Lord Bolingbroke's Proofs of the Being and ^
Attributes of God, and his Sentiments concerning the divine Perfections . . 309
Letter XXIV.— Lord Bolingbroke's Account ofthe Doctrines of divine Providence
considered ; and the Objections against a particular Providence examined . 328
Letter XXV. — Lord Bolingbroke's Sentiments concerning the Immortality of the
Soul and a future State, examined ......... 344
Letter XXVI.— Observations on Lord Bolingbroke's Accouutof the Law of Nature 362
Letter XXVII.— An Examination of what Lord Bolingbroke has offered concern
ing Revelation in general  376
Letter XXVIII. — Lord Bolingbroke's strange Representation ofthe Jewish Reve
lation examined ... ......... 397
Letter XXIX.— Lord Bolingbroke's Objections against the divine Original and
Authority ofthe Scriptures of the Old Testament considered . . . .427
Letter XXX. — Farther Objections of Lord Bolingbroke against the Mosaic
Writings, and the Scriptures of the Old Testament, considered . . . 440
Letter XXXI. — Reflections upon the favourable Representations made by Lord
Bolingbroke, ofthe excellent Nature and Design ofthe original Christian Reve
lation. Those Passages which seemed designed to expose the Doctrines, and
invalidate the Proofs and Evidences of Christianity, considered . . . 468
Letter XXXII. — Lord Bolingbroke's Objections against the Laws and Doctrines
of Christianity  496
Letter XXXIII. — The Christian Doctrine of future Retributions vindicated. Con
clusion of the Observations on Lord Bolingbroke's posthumous Works . . 514
Letter XXXIV. — Designed to introduce the Reflections on the late Lord Boling
broke's Letters on the Study and Use of History, which are subjoined at large . 531
Letter XXXV. — The Account of the Deistical Writers closed, with general
Reflections on those Writers . . . . . . . . . .613
Letter XXXVI. — A Summary of the Evidences of Christianity .... 626
The Conclusion. — In an Address to Deists and professed Christians . . . 651
Appendix. — Reflections on the present State of Things in these Nations . . 608
N.B. For a fuller account of the Contents, see the Head preceding each Letter.
And for the subject matter of the Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the
Study and Use of History, see the Contents prefixed to that Piece, p. 535, &c.

A VIEW
OF THE
DEISTICAL WRITERS, &c.
IN SEVERAL LETTERS TO A FRIEND.

LETTER I.

Some Account of those that first took upon them the Name of Deists. — Lord Herbert
of Cherbury, one of the most eminent deistical Writers that appeared in England in
the last Age. — His attempt to form Deism into a System. — Observations upon his
Scheme, and Upon the five Principles in which he makes all Religion to consist. — It
is shown that the Knowledge of them was very imperfect and defective in the
heathen World ; and that a Revelation from God for clearing and confirming those
important Principles might be of great advantage.
Dear Sir,
I now enter upon the task you have enjoined me, the giving
some account of the principal deistical writers that have appeared
among us for above a century past. The reasons given by you and
other judicious friends, have convinced me that such a work might
be of use, if properly executed ; we only differed as to the fitness of
the person that was to execute it. My objections have been over
ruled ; I must therefore set about it as well as I can : and if I were
sure that others would look upon this attempt with the same favour
able eye that your candour and friendship for me will incline you to
do, I should be in no great pain about the success of it*
The name of Deists, as applied to those who are no friends to
revealed religion, is said to have been first assumed about the
middle .of the sixteenth cenutry, by some gentlemen in France and
Italy, who were willing to cover their opposition to the Christian
revelation by a more honourable name than that of atheists. One
of the first authors, as far as I can find, that makes express mention
of them, is Viret, a divine of great eminence among the first
reformers, who in the epistle dedicatory prefixed to the second tome
of his Instruction Chretienne, which was published in 1563, speaks
of some persons in that time who called themselves by a new name,
that of deists. These, he tells us, professed to believe a God, but
K

2 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. I-
showed no regard to Jesus Christ, and considered the doctrine of
the apostles and evangelists as fables and dreams. He adds that
they laughed at all religion, notwithstanding they conformed them
selves, with regard to the outward appearance, to the religion of
those with whom they were obliged to live, or whom they were
desirous of pleasing, or whom they feared. Some of them, as he
observes, professed to believe the immortality of the soul ; others
were of the Epicurean opinion in this point, as well as about the
providence of God with respect to mankind, as if he did not concern
himself in the government of human affairs. He adds, that many
among them set up for learning and philosophy, and were looked
upon to be persons of an acute and subtle genius ; and that, not
content to perish alone in their error, they took pains to spread the
poison, and to infect and corrupt others, by their impious discourses
and bad -examples.*
I leave it to you to judge, how far the account this learned author
gives of the persons that in his time called themselves deists, is
applicable to those among us who take upon them the same title,
and which they seem to prefer to that of Christians, by which the
disciples of Jesus have hitherto thought it their glory to be distin
guished. That which properly characterizes these deists is, that
they reject all revealed religion, and discard all pretences to it, as
owing to imposture or enthusiasm. In this they all agree, and in
professing a regard for natural religion, though they are far from
being agreed in their notions of it. They are classed by some of
their own writers into two sorts, mortal and immortal deists.f The
latter acknowledge a future state : the former deny it, or at least
represent it as a very uncertain thing : and though these are, by
some among themselves, represented under a very disadvantageous
character, and as little better than atheists, they are, it is to be
feared, the more numerous of the two. Indeed some of their most
eminent modern writers seem to be very easy about these differences.
With them all are true deists who oppose revelation, whether they
own future rewards and punishments or not ; and they speak with
great regard of those disinterested deists who profess to pursue
virtue for its own«ake, without regard to future retributions. J
In giving an account of the deistical writers that have appeared
in these nations (for I shall not meddle with those of a foreign
growth), I shall go back to the former part of the last century ; and
the first I shall mention, and who deserves a particular notice, is
that learned nobleman, Lord Edward Herbert, Baron of Cherburv.
He may be justly regarded as the most eminent of the deistical
writers, and in several respects superior to those that succeeded him.
He may be also considered as the first remarkable deist in order of
time, that appeared among us as a writer in the last century; for the
first edition of his book de Veritate was in 1624, when it was first
*¦ Bayle's Dictionary, article Viret. + Oracles of Reason p. 99
} Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 33*}, 333. cd. 8vo.

Let. I. LORD HERBERT OP CIIERBURY. 3
published at Paris. It was afterwards published at London, as was
also his book de Causis Error um, to which is subjoined his treatise
de Religione Laid. Some years after this, and when the author
was dead, his celebrated work de Religione Gentilium was published
at Amsterdam, in 1663, in quarto ; and it was afterwards re-printed
there in 1700, in octavo, whioh is the edition I make use of; and an
English translation of it was published at London in 1705.
His Lordship seems to have been one of the first that formed
Deism into a system, and asserted the sufficiency, universality, and
absolute perfection, of natural religion, with a view to discard all
extraordinary revelation as useless and needless. He seems to
assume to himself the glory of having accomplished it with great
labour, and a diligent inspection into all religions, and applauds
himself for it, as happier than any Archimedes.* This universal
religion he reduceth to five articles, which he frequently mentioneth
in all his works. 1. That there is one supreme God. 2. That he
is chiefly to be worshipped. 3. That piety and virtue are the prin
cipal part of his worship. 4. That we must repent of our sins ;
andjf we do so, God will pardon them. 5. That there are rewards
for good men, and punishments for bad men, in a future state ; or,
as he sometimes expresseth it, both here and hereafter. These he
represents as common notices inscribed by God on the minds of all
men, and undertakes to show that they were universally acknow
ledged in all nations, ages, and religions. This is particularly the
design of his book de Religione Gentilium ; though it is but com
paratively a small part of that work which tendeth directly to prove
that these articles universally obtained : the far greater part of it is
taken up with an account of the heathen religion and ceremonies,
which he bath performed with an abundance of learning, and hath
intermixed many softening apologies for the pagan superstition and
idolatry. As he represents these five articles as absolutely necessary, tbe
five pillars, as he calls them, on which all religion is built ; so h&
endeavours to show that they alone are sufficient, and that nothing-
can be added to them which can tend to render any man more
virtuous, or a better man. But then he subjoins this limitation,
" provided these articles be well explained in their full latitu'de."f
This universal religion which all men agree in, his Lordship repre
sents to be the only religion of which there can be any certainty,
and he endeavours to show the great advantages that would arise
from men's embracing this religion, and this only. One of the
reasons he offers to recommend it is this, that this catholic or
universal religion answers the ultimate design of the holy Scriptures.
" Sacrarum literarumfini ultimo intentionique quadrat." He adds,
that " all the doctrines there taught aim at the establishment of
these five catholic articles, as we have often hinted ; there is no
sacrament, rite, or ceremony there enjoined, but what aims, or seems
* De Relig. Gentil. <.-. 15. init. -f Appendix to Relig. Laici, qu. 3d.
b 2

4 A VIEW OP THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. I.
to aim, at the establishment of these five articles." See his reasons
at the end of his Religio Laid.
One would be apt to think by what this noble writer here offers,
that he must have a very favourable opinion of Christianity as con
tained in the holy Scriptures ; since he represents it as the great
design of all its doctrines, and even of the rites and sacraments there
enjotned, to establish those great principles in which he makes reli
gion properly to consist. Accordingly he expressly declares in the
above-mentioned treatise, that it was far from his intention to do
harm to the best religion, as he there calls Christianity, or the true
faith, but rather to establish both.*
But I am sorry that I am obliged to say, that, notwithstanding
these fair professions, his Lordship on all occasions insinuateth pre
judices against all revealed religion, as absolutely uncertain, and of
little or no use. He inveigheth promiscuously, as many others have
done since, against all pretences to revelation, without making a
distinction between the false and the true. He often speaks to the
disadvantage of particular religion, which is a name he bestoweth on
the Christian religion, and any revelation that is not actually known
and promulgated to the whole world : and he representeth it as
containing doctrines, which disgust some men against all religion,
and therefore is for recommending what he calls the universal reli
gion, as the best way to prevent men's having no religion at all.
And particularly he insinuates, that the Christian religion granteth
pardon on too easy terms, and derogateth from the obligations to
virtue ;t a reflection which is manifestly owing to a misapprehension
or misrepresentation of the doctrine of Christianity on this head.
So he elsewhere supposeth, that the faith there required is no more
than a bare assent to the doctrines there taught ; though nothing is
capable of a clearer proof, than that the faith on which so great a
stress is laid in the gospel covenant is to be understood of a vital
operative principle, which purifieth the heart, and is productive of
good works ; and that the necessity of true holiness and virtue is
there strongly inculcated. The charge he advanceth against Chris
tianity might be more justly retorted upon himself, who, though he
mentions it to the praise of his universal religion, that it giveth no
license to sin, but bindeth men strictly to the severity of virtue, yet
to show what reason sinners have to hope for pardon, offereth
several pleas and excuses that tend to extenuate the guilt of sin.
Particularly he urgeth, that men's sins are not for the most part
committed out of enmity against God, or to cast dishonour upon
him, but with a view to their own particular advantage or pleasure,
and are chosen by them under the appearance of some good4 And
in his book de Veritate he declares, that those are not lightly to be
condemned, who are carried to sin by their particular bodily con
stitution ; and he instances particularly in the rage of lust and
* Relig. Laici, p. 28. t The Appendix to his Relig. Laici, qu. 6.
t Dc Relig. Gentil. p. 268. Dr. Tindal talks in the same strain. Christianity as
old as the Creation, p. 32. ed. 8vo.

Let. I. LORD HERBERT OF CHERBURY. 5
anger ; no more than a dropsical person is to be blamed for his
immoderate thirst, or a lethargic person for his laziness and inac
tivity. He adds, indeed, that he does not set up as an apologist for
wicked men, but yet that we ought to pass a mild censure upon
those who are carried to sin by a corporeal and almost necessary
propensity to vice. Neque tamen me hie conscelerali cujusvis patro-
num sisto ; sed in id solummodo contendo, ut mitiori sententia de Us
statuamus, qui corporea, brutali, et tantum non necessaria propensione
in peccata prolabuntur. This apology may be carried very far, so
as to open a wide door to licentiousness, and would soon introduce
a very loose morality.
But not to insist upon this, I would observe that the principal
design of his treatise de Religione Laid seems to be to show, that
the people can never attain to any satisfaction as to the truth and
certainty of any particular revelation, and therefore must rest in the
five articles agreed to by all religions. This particularly is the
intention of his fourth and fifth queries in the appendix to that
treatise. In his fourth query he supposes, that the things which
are added to those common principles from the doctrines of faith
are uncertain in their original ; and that though God is true, the
Laics can never be certain that what is pretended to be a revelation
from God is indeed a true revelation from God. In his fifth query
he urgeth, that supposing the originals to be true, yet they are
uncertain in their explications. To this purpose he takes notice of
the multiplicity of sects among Christians ; and that the Laics can
never be sufficiently sure of the meaning of the revelation, concerning
which there are so many controversies ; that in order to arrive at
any certainty in these matters, it would be necessary either to learn
all languages, to read all the celebrated writers, and to consult all
those learned men that have not written, a method which is
manifestly absurd and impracticable ; or else to have recourse to a
supreme judge- of controversies appointed by common consent.
It is an observation that will undoubtedly occur to you on this
occasion, that his Lordship here maketh use precisely of the same
way of talking, to show that the Laics can have no certainty about
any revelation at all, which the writers of the Romish Church have
frequently urged to show the necessity the people are under to rely
entirely upon the authority of the Church or Pope, because of the
difficulties or the impossibility of their coming to any certainty in
the way of examination or private judgment. But if the Laity
cannot be certain of revealed religion, because of the controversies
that have been raised about the articles of it, for the same reason it
may be said, that they can arrive at no certainty with respect to
his Lordship's catholic universal religion : for though he repre
sented! men as universally agreed in the five articles in which he
makes that religion to consist, it is undeniable that there have been
great controversies about them; and that the modern deists, as
well as ancient philosophers, are divided in their sentiments in rela
tion to them, especially when explained, as he requireth they should

6 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. I.
be, in their full latitude. He ought not therefore to make a thing's
being controverted to be a proof, of its uncertainty, and that men
can come to no satisfaction about it ; a principle which he and other
deists often insist upon, but which manifestly leads to universal
scepticism. But this is not the only instance, in which arguments
have been brought against Christianity, that in their consequences
tend to subvert all religion, and all evidence and certainty of
reason. From this general view of Lord Herbert's scheme, it sufficiently
appears that his design was to overturn all revealed, or, as he calls
it, particular religion, and to establish that natural and universal
religion, the clearness and perfection of which he so much extols,
in its room, as that which alone ought to be acknowledged and em
braced as true and divine.
I shall now freely lay before you some observations that have
occurred to me in considering the scheme of this noble author.
One is this, that he hath carried his account of natural religion
much farther than some others of the deists have done. It were to
be wished, that all that glory in this character would agree with
this noble Lord in a hearty reception of those articles which he
representeth as so essentially necessary, and of such vast importance.
These he would have to be explained in their full extent, and that
except they be properly explained they are not sufficient. Thus
explained, they include the belief not only of the existence, but the
attributes of God ; of some of which, in his book de Veritate, he
gives a good account, and of his providence and moral government.
He asserts, that God is to be worshipped, and that this worship in-
cludeth our offering up to him our prayers and thanksgivings ;*'
that piety and virtue are absolutely necessary to our acceptance
with God ; and he particularly urget'h the necessity of observing
the ten commandments ; that we are obliged to repent of our sins
in order to our obtaining forgiveness, and that this repentance in-
cludeth both a sorrow for our sins, and a turning from them to the
right way. He also insisteth upon the belief of the immortality of
the soul, and a future state of rewards and punishments, in which
God will recompense men according to their actions, and even accord
ing lo their thoughts.^ These things he supposeth to be common
notices, so clear that he can scarce be accounted a reasonable crea
ture who denieth them. And yet I am afraid, if all these things
are to be looked upon as necessary, many that call themselves deists
will be as loath to admit his Lordship's natural and catholic religion,
as Christianity itself. There is reason to apprehend, that some of
their strongest prejudices against Christianity arise from its setting
those principles in too clear a light, and enforcing them in too strong
a manner. It is true, that when they are for putting a fair gloss
upon deism, and asserting the sufficiency and perfection of natural
religion abstracted from all revelation, they are willing to have it
* De Veritate, p. 271, 272. t De Relig. Gentil. p. 283.

Let. I. LORD HERBERT OF CHERBURY. 7
thought that their religion includeth the belief of those important
articles. They are then obliged to have recourse to his Lordship's
system, and the arms he hath furnished them with ; but at other
times they make it plainly appear that they are far from being fixed
in these principles. His Lordship declares, that it is necessary these
articles should be well explained : but indeed they are expressed in
very general and indefinite terms, and there is no great likelihood of
their agreeing in the explications of them. It is a thing well known,
that many who have made no small figure among our modern deists
have denied some of his Lordship's five articles, at least taken in
the extent in which he seems willing to understand them. God's
moral government and particular providence ; his worship, especially
as it includes prayer and praise ; man's free agency, the immortality
of the soul, and a future state of retributions, have made no part of
their creed. Some of them have been far from pleading for that
strictness of virtue which his Lordship tells us natural religion
obliges men to ; and, instead of urging the necessity of repentance,
have, after Spinosa, represented it as a mean, an unreasonable, and
wretched thing.* And the rewards and punishments of a future
state have been exploded under the notion of bribes and terrors, a
regard'to which argueth a sordid and mercenary temper of soul, in
consistent with a true and generous virtue.
Another reflection that it is proper to make on Lord Herbert's
scheme is this : that these five principles, in which he makes his
universal religion to consist, were not so very clear and well known
to all mankind, as to make an external revelation needless or use
less. His Lordship indeed supposeth them to be common notices,
inscribed by a divine hand in the minds of men ; and accordingly
he sets himself to prove, with a great show of learning, in his book
de Religione Gentilium, that these principles were universally be
lieved and acknowledged by the people in all ages, countries, and
religions. But any man that carefully examines his book will find,
that all that he really proves is no more than this ; that there were
some imperfect vestiges of these important truths preserved among
the Gentiles, and that the knowledge of them was never absolutely
and totally extinguished, which will be easily allowed. But he has
not proved, that the people, or even all those that passed for wise
and learned, had a distinct knowledge and assurance of those prin
ciples, especially if taken in their just extent. The testimonies he
hath produced, by no means prove such an universal agreement :
what he seemeth principally to rely upon is the reasonableness and
evidence of the principles themselves, which he supposeth to be so
plain, that no rational man can be ignorant of them. Thus he de
clares, that he would sooner doubt whether the beams of the sun
shone upon those regions,, than suppose that the knowledge of God,
the evidences of whose existence and perfections are so obvious from
* Poenitentia virtus non est, sive ex ratione non oritur -. quem facti pcenitet bis
miser seu impotens est. Spin. Eth. Pt. 4. Prop. 54.

8 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. I.
his works, did not enlighten their minds.* And he cannot be per
suaded, that any of them worshipped the sun as the chief deity,
because of the incredible absurdity of such a practice, which he well
exposes.t But when we are inquiring what men do in fact believe
and practise, we are not to judge of it from what we apprehend it is
reasonable for them to believe and practise.
If this were a proper place to take a distinct view of the proofs
he hath offered in relation to his famous five articles, it would be
no hard matter to show, that, according to his own representation
of the case, they were not so universally acknowledged and clearly
known among the Gentiles, as to make a farther revelation and en
forcement of them to be of no use or advantage. This might be
particularly shown with regard to the first and second of these
articles, viz., That there is one supreme God, and that this God is
to be worshipped ; which are principles of the greatest importance,
and which lie at the foundation of all the rest. Notwithstanding
the pains he hath taken to excuse and palliate the pagan supersti
tion and idolatry, and to prove that they worshipped the one true
God, the same that we adore, under various names, and by various
attributes ; yet he owns, that what were at first only different names
came, in process of time, as superstition increased, to be regarded
and worshipped as different gods. It is plain, from express and
formal passages, produced by him from ancient writers, that some
nations worshipped no other deities but the sun, moon, and stars.
When in the third chapter of his book de Relig. Gentil. he mentions
the names of the Deity which were in use among the Hebrews, and
shows that those names and titles were also used among the Gen
tiles ; he owneth that the Hebrews appropriated these names and
titles to the one supreme God, superior to the sun, but that the
Gentiles understood by them no other than the sun itself. He
thinks it indeed probable that the worship they rendered to the sun
was symbolical, and that they intended to worship God by the sun,
as his most glorious sensible image ; and sometimes he is very
positive that they did so, and that they rendered no proper worship
to any but the supreme God ; but at other times he speaks very
doubtfully about it, and pretends not positively to assert it, but
leaves the reader to his own judgment in this matter."!' And else
where he acknowledges, that the people perhaps did not sufficiently
understand this symbolical worship. Symbolicum ilium culium hand
satis forsan intellexit ? § It is indeed a little strange, that if the
notion and belief of one only supreme God universally obtained
among the Gentiles, none but the Hebrews should have made the
acknowledgment of the one supreme God, the Maker and Lord of
the universe, the fundamental article of their religion ; and that in
the laws of other states, particularly among the learned and polite
naticms of Greece and Rome, polytheism was established, and the
» De Relig. Gentil. p. 225. + Ibid. p. 27, 247.
\ Ibid. p. 25, 310. § Ibid. 293.

Let. I. LORD HERBERT OP CHERBURY. 9
public worship was directed to be offered to a multiplicity of deities.
Many of the heathens, by his own acknowledgment, thought that
the God they were to worship should be visible, and looked upon
it to be incongruous, that he who demanded worship from all should
hide himself from his worshippers.* And though it was a notion
which generally obtained among them, that some kind of external
worship was necessary to be rendered to their deities, yet as to the
manner of their worship he doth not deny that some of the heathen
rites were ridiculous, others absurd, and even impious. To which it
may be added, that some of their wisest men acknowledged, that
they were ignorant of the proper manner in which God is to be
worshipped, except he himself, or some person sent by him, should
please to reveal it. There is a remarkable passage in Plato's second
Alcibiad, which hath been often quoted. Socrates meeting Alcibi
ades, who was going to the temple to pray, proves to him that he
knew not how to perform that duty aright, and that therefore it was
not safe for him to do it ; but that he should wait for a divine in
structor to teach him how to behave both towards the gods and
men ; and that it was necessary that God should scatter the dark
ness which covered his soul, that he might#be put in a condition to
discern good and evil. To the same purpose, Iamblichus, in Vita
Pythag. c. 28. speaking of the principles of divine worship, saith,
" It is manifest that those things are to be done which are pleasing
" to God ; but what they are it is not easy to know, except a man
" were taught them by God himself, or by some person that had
" received them from God, or obtained the knowledge of them by
" some divine means."
The third article mentioned by his Lordship as universally agreed
on is, that piety and virtue are the principal part of God's worship.
But not to argue that the proof he brings of an universal agreement
in this principle seems to be very defective, this article would be of
no great use, except men were also generally agreed as to the nature
and extent of true piety and virtue. And it can scarce be reason
ably denied, that a revelation from God, pointing out our way to us,
and containing a clear signification of the divine will, with regard to
the particulars of the duty required of us, would be of great use.
Lord Herbert himself, after having mentioned some virtues which
were honoured among the Pagans, acknowledgeth, that besides these
there were many other things looked upon to be necessary to true
piety, especially those things which showed a devout or grateful
temper towards the gods, and the observance of the public rites and
ceremonies of religion ; which is in other words to say, that the
joining in superstitious and idolatrous worship (for such the esta
blished public worship was) made up a necessary part of the heathen
piety and virtue, and was counted a principal ingredient in a good
man's character.
As to the fourth article, that men must repent of their sins, and
* De Relig. Gentil. p. 26. t Ioid- 250'

10 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. I.
that if they do so God will pardon them, it might easily be shown
that the Gentiles were far from being agreed what are to be accounted
sins ; since some sins and vices of a very enormous kind were not
only practised and pleaded for by some of their philosophers, but
permitted and countenanced by the public laws, nor were they agreed
what is included in a true repentance. His Lordship himself ac-
knowledgeth, that the ancients seldom used the word repentance in
the sense in which we take it ;* and that they did not look upon
it to be an atonement from all crimes, but for those of a less heinous
nature ; and that they generally looked upon other things to be also
necessary, and laid the principal stress upon lustrations, and the
rites of their religion, for purifying and absolving them from guilt.
And any one who duly considers that the dispensing of pardon is an
act of the divine prerogative, the exercise of which depends upon
what seemeth most fit to his supreme governing wisdom, cannot but
be sensible that it must needs be a great advantage to be assured,
by an express revelation from God, upon what terms the pardon of
sin is to be obtained, and how far it is to extend.
With regard to the fifth article, about future rewards and punish
ments, which he representeth to be, as it really is, of vast importance,
though he sometimes expresses himself as if the heathens were
generally agreed, that good men would be rewarded with eternal life ;
at other times he intimates that they only agreed in this, that there
would be rewards and punishments in a future state; and sometimes
that they held this only, that there would be rewards for good men,
and punishments for bad men, either in this life or after it. And he
himself frequently owns in his book de Veritate, that what kind of
rewards shall be conferred, or punishments inflicted, cannot be
certainly known from the light of natural reason. -|-
': But we need not insist farther on these things. His Lordship
himself fairly granteth, that the knowledge the Gentiles had of the
the One Supreme God was lame and imperfect ; which he attributes
to the sloth or cunning of the priests, who neglected to instruct the
people, or instructed them wrong ; and that from thence it came to
pass, that the rays of the divine light being intercepted, a wonderful
darkness overspread the minds of the vulgar. " Unde etiam factum,
" ut radiis divini luminis interceptis, mira caligo vulgi animis obducta
" esset." % And he observes, that by what was added by the priests,
poets, and philosophers, the whole fabric of truth was in danger of
falling to the ground. Tota inclinata in casumque prona nutavit
veritatis fabrica.§ And at the close of this book de Relig. Gentil.
he owns, that at length the purer parts of divine worship being-
neglected, the whole of religion sunk by degrees into superstition :
and that those five articles were almost overwhelmed with a heavy
load of errors, so as to be perceived only by the wiser sort of men,
a perspicacioribus viris, i. e. by those who had a penetration above
the vulgar. ||
» De Relig. Gentil. p. 268. f De Veritate, p. 57, et alibi.
t De Relig. Gentil. p. 225. § Ibid. p. 283. || ]bid. p. 310.

Let, I. LORD HERBERT OF CHERBURY. 11
Now, this being a true representation of the case as it stood in
fact, whatever it was owing to, it can scarce be reasonably denied,
that if God should, in compassion to the corrupt and ignorant state
of mankind, grant an express revelation of his will; to clear and
restore those great principles which had been so much obscured and
perverted, to recover men to the right knowledge and worship of
God, and to explain and enforce the main important parts of their
duty, this would be of signal benefit to the world, and a remarkable
proof and effect of his great goodness. His Lordship, indeed, in
several parts of his works, throws out hints and suspicions as if either
such a revelation from God could not be given, or at least that there
can be no way of knowing, or being assured, that such a revelation
has been really given; but he no where offers any proof of it. The
general invectives he so frequently makes against priests, oracles,
impostures, prove nothing ; except it be allowed to be a reasonable
principle, that because there have been false pretenders to revelation,
therefore there never was nor can be a true one ; a way of talking
and reasoning this, that might pass among the inferior tribe of deis
tical writers, but which is absolutely unworthy of his Lordship's sense
and learning. Whereas, it may rather be gathered from it, that man
kind in all ages have been generally persuaded, that it was both
possible for God to grant an extraordinary revelation of his will, and
that, if he did it would be of great advantage. Impostors have
built upon this principle ; but this doth not show the principle itself
to be false, which hath as good a title to pass for a common notion,
as some of the five articles which he representeth to be so clear and
universally acknowledged. The only reasonable conclusion that can
be drawn from the many impostures and false revelations which
have been put upon mankind is, not that all pretences to revelation
are false and vain, but that we ought to be very careful to distin
guish the false from the true, and impartially to consider and examine
the proofs that are brought, and not to receive any revelation without
sufficient credentials of its divine authority. But it would be a most
unreasonable limitation of the divine power and wisdom to affirm,
either that God cannot make extraordinary discoveries of his will to
particular persons, in such a manner that the persons to whom they
are immediately communicated may be certain that they came from
God ; or that he cannot commission and enable such persons to
communicate to others what they have received from him, or cannot
furnish them with such credentials of their divine mission, as may
be sufficient to convince the world that they were sent of God, and
to make it reasonable for others to receive the doctrines and laws
which such persons deliver in his name. And it hath been proved,
with great strength and evidence, that this hath actually been the
case with regard to the Christian revelation.
There are other reflections that might be made on Lord Herbert's
system. But I am willing to give you and myself a little respite,
and shall therefore reserve them to be the subject of another letter.

12 A VIEW OP THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Lct' ll-

LETTER II.

Farther Observations on Lord Herbert's Scheme.— The Philosophers not qualified to
recover Mankind from the Darkness and Corruption into which they were fallen —
The Usefulness of the Christian Revelation to that Purpose.— Its not having been
universally promulgated in all Nations and Ages, no just prejudice against it.— Other
Objections of Lord Herbert considered.— Writers that have appeared against him.
Sir,
In my former letter an account was given of Lord Herbert's
scheme ; and it was shown that, taking the state of mankind and of
the Gentile world as it really was, according to his own representa
tion of the case, an express revelation from God, confirmed by his
divine authority, for clearing and enforcing those articles which his
Lordship supposeth to be necessary, would be of great use. I now
add, that in fact the Christian revelation hath been of signal advan
tage to the world, for. giving men a clearer knowledge and fuller
certainty of those important truths than they had before. Our
noble author indeed speaks with admiration of the ancient philoso
phers, as capable of instructing men in a proper manner, if they
would have attended to their instructions: but then he owns, that the
people had little regard to the purer doctrine of the philosophers.*
And, indeed, I do not see how it could be expected that they should
place any dependence upon their dictates, which were for the most
part regarded only as the tenets of their several schools, in which
the people had little concern. They were not the ministers of
religion, nor could pretend to any authority that should make them
be regarded as the guides and instructors of mankind, or cause their
opinions to pass for laws. The most eminent among them were con
tradicted by others of great name : many of them laboured to make
all things appear doubtful and uncertain ; and those of them that
had the noblest notions frequently affected to conceal them, or were
afraid to divulge them. What Alcinous hath observed concerning
Plato, with respect to the inquiry concerning the chief good, might
be applied to some other matters of great importance. " That which
'' is worthy of all honour, such is the supreme Good, he conceived
"not easy to be found, and, if found, not safe to be declared." f
His Lordship assureth us, that the philosophers were always dis-.
pleased with the superstitious worship of the people. But, if this
was the case, they seem to have been very improper persons to reclaim
them from it, since it was an universal maxim among them, and par
ticularly recommended by one of the best of them, Epictetus, that
* De Relig. Gentil. p. 310.
f Sec Alcinoiib's Doctrine of Plato, C. 27, in Stanley's Lives of the riiilobophei*.

Let. II. LORD HERBERT OP CIIERBURY. 13
every man ought to worship according to the laws or customs of his
country : * and it is well known that their established worship was
polytheism and idolatry. Varro, in a passage quoted by his Lord
ship, divides the heathen theology into three kinds ; the fabulous,
which belonged to the poets ; the -physical, which was that of the
philosophers ; and the civil. He speaks with disregard of the two
former, and represents the last as that in which the people were con
cerned, and which alone could be of real use to them : and this he
explaineth to be that which was established by the laws, and admin
istered by the priests, and which showed what gods they were
publicly to worship, what rites they were to observe, and what sacri
fices it was proper for any man to offer.-f-
If a reformation of the world by the philosophers was not to be
expected, for the reasons now given, his Loi'dship will own it was not
to be hoped for from the priests, against whom he bitterly inveighs,
as the author of all superstition, and of the great corruption of
religion in the heathen world. And as little was it to be expected
from the lawgivers and great men of the state, who generally patron
ized the established superstition, of which they themselves had been
in a great measure the authors or promoters, and were ready to punish
any that opposed it. And if there were any of them who were for
reforming and correcting some abuses in the public superstitions,
and exploding some of the grosser fables that were received among
the people, as his Lordship observes Mutius Scaevola the chief Pontiff',
and Varro, were for doing, he owns that the attempts were vain and
ineffectual, because the errors and superstitions were become invete
rate. % This being the true state of the case, it is hard to see what
other method could be taken, that would prove so effectual to
recover mankind from their superstition and idolatry, as the giving
an extraordinary revelation, attended with sufficient credentials, to
instruct men in the name of God, concerning the nature of true
religion, to assure them of the certainty of its great principles, and
to enforce the practice of its important duties by the strongest and
most prevailing motives.
And, accordingly, when Christianity appeared with the most illus
trious attestations of a divine mission and revelation from heaven, it
effected what no precepts or doctrines of the philosophers had been
able to do. The pagan polytheism and superstition fell before it :
and it hath actually produced this great advantage, that the princi
ples upon which our author layeth so much stress have been better
known and understood, and more universally acknowledged, than
they were before. It is incontestable, that Christians are more gene
rally agreed in those great principles, than ever men were in the
pagan world. They are set in a clearer light, and men come to a
o-reater certainty about them. That they are so far preserved among
the Mahometans, was also originally owing to the light of the Jewish
and Christian revelations. And it is very probable that his Lordship
* Epict. Ei.c'niiid. c. 38. f De Relig. Gentil. p. 306, 307. \ Ibid. p. 311.

14 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IL
himself is very much obliged to Christianity, though he doth not
acknowledge it, for the full persuasion he every where expressed! as
to these important articles ; several of which were denied by some,
and doubted by others of the ancient philosophers.
Though, therefore, it is not to be wondered at, that those among
the deists who have an aversion to these principles, when taken in
their just extent, should be against Christianity, yet Lord Herbert,
who asserteth them to be of such vast consequence, ought, one should
think, to have been very thankful to God for having enforced them
by an express and well attested revelation, and given them a divine
sanction. And if he were sincere in the acknowledgment he some
times makes, that the explaining and enforcing those great principles
is the ultimate design of the holy Scripture, to which all its doctrines,
and even its rights and sacraments tend, he ought certainly to have
entertained very favourable thoughts of Christianity, of its doctrines
as well as precepts, and even of its rites and positive institutions.
But that which seemeth principally to have prejudiced his Lord
ship against Christianity is, that it is what he calleth a particular
religion ; whereas the true religion must be universal, and promul
gated to all mankind. He frequently urgeth that nothing less than
such an universal religion as he pleadeth for can support the honour
of God's universal providence, and the care he exerciseth towards
the whole human race ; which no particular religion can do ; and
that otherwise the Gentiles must be supposed to be universally lost
and damned, which it were cruel and injurious to God to imagine.
This is what hath been often urged and repeated by the deists
since. To this it may be justly answered, that those who maintain the
Christian revelation may think as honourably as any others consis
tently can, of the universal care and providence of God towards
mankind. No where is this more clearly asserted than in the sacred
writings, which declare God's universal goodness and benignity
towards the human race in strong terms ; and that he hath been
continually doing them good, and hath never left himself without
witness among them. We must not indeed carry this so far as to
assert that all men have an actual knowledge of the great principles
of religion, and of their duty, because we may imagine that the
universal care of providence towards mankind requireth that it should
be so ; which seems to be the course of his Lordship's reasoning ;
for this is contrary to evident and undeniable fact and experience.
But we acknowledge that God hath given to all men the principle
of reason, together with a natural sense of right and wrong, which
would be of great use to assist them in the knowledge of religion,
and to direct them in the practice of their duty, if duly cultivated
and improved to the utmost that it is naturally capable of. But
besides this, Christians generally maintain, and the holy Scriptures
lead us to think, that God hath from time to time made extraor
dinary discoveries of his will to mankind ; that some such discoveries
were made to the first ancestors of the human race, who were bound

Let. II. LORD HERBERT OF CHERBURY. 15
by all obligations to transmit them to their posterity ; that therefore
there was an original universal religion, embraced by the first parents
of mankind, and transmitted from them to their descendants; that
accordingly some of the most eminent ancient philosophers ascribed
the knowledge and belief of some of the great principles insisted upon
by this noble author, to a tradition derived from the most early ages,
though his Lordship never maketh the least mention of tradition, as
one source of that knowledge and belief of these things, which
obtaineth among the nations; that this religion, which was both
originally derived from revelation, and agreeable to nature and
reason, was gradually obscured, and became greatly corrupted, though
still some remarkable traces and vestiges of it remained among the
Gentiles ; that God was pleased, in his wise and good providence, to
interpose by various methods, and by raising up excellent persons
from time to time to keep those remains of the ancient religion from
being totally extinguished ; that at last he was graciously pleased
to send his Son into the world, a person of divine dignity and glory,
to recover men to his true knowledge and pure worship, to direct
and assist them in the practice of their duty, to show them the true
means of their reconciliation and acceptance with God, and to bring
life and immortality into the most clear and open light; that this
revelation was attended with the most illustrious attestations, and
made a wonderful progress through a considerable part of the known
world, and would have spread still farther, if it had met with such
a reception as the excellency and importance of it well deserved ;
and finally, that as to those to whom it was actually communicated,
God will deal with them in a just, a wise, and equitable way, and
will make all proper allowances for any want of the advantages which
others enjoy. The asserters of the Christian revelation are under
no obligations to limit God's universal benevolence. They leave
those that are destitute of this revelation to God's infinite mercy ;
- and can think more favourably of their case, than those consistently
can do, who will not allow that they were under any great darkness,
and suppose them to have acted in manifest opposition to the most
clear universal light.
The objection arising against the Christian revelation, for want of
its being universally known and promulgated, hath been often con
sidered and obviated, nor is this a proper place to enter upon a large
particular discussion of it. At present it may be sufficient to observe
that the objection proceeds upon a wrong foundation, viz., that the
universal goodness and benignity of the common Parent of the uni
verse require that he should communicate his benefits to all his
creatures alike, and in equal degrees. It is evident, in fact, that in
the distribution of his benefits God acteth as a free and sovereign
benefactor, dispensing them in very various degrees, always un
doubtedly for wise reasons, but those reasons often not known to us.
It cannot reasonably rbe denied, that he hath made some whole
classes of being superior to others in valuable gifts and endowments,
and capacities for happiness ; and some individuals of the same class

16 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IL
of beings are favoured with much greater advantages than others.
And, if we look particularly into God's dealings with the human lace,
we may observe a very remarkable variety. Some are from the
beginning endued with much greater natural abilities and more
excellent dispositions, and are placed in a more favourable situation
and happier circumstances. Some whole nations are eminently dis
tinguished from others, not only with respect to many other advan
tages of human life, but with respect to the means of moral improve
ment, and are furnished with more excellent helps for making
a progress in wisdom and virtue, and consequently in true happiness.
All these differences between persons and nations are under the
direction of divine providence, as all must own that acknowledgeth
a providence, as his Lordship professeth to do. And those that are
distinguished from others by superior advantages, ought to be thank
ful to God for those advantages, and to ascribe them to his goodness,
and not deny that God hath given them those advantages, because
there are others that have them not, or not in an equal degree.
Since therefore the distinguishing some persons and nations with
valuable advantages above others is not inconsistent with the uni
versal benignity of the great Parent of mankind (for if it were, he
would not do it), it can never be proved, that he may not grant a
revelation to any part of mankind, except at the same time it be
granted equally to the whole world. Indeed, if all men every where
were required actually to believe that revelation, and were to be con
demned for not believing it, it would be necessary to have it univer
sally promulgated : but since the actual belief of it is required of
those only to whom it is actually published, and they to whom it
is not made known are not put into a worse condition than if there
had been no such revelation granted at all, no argument can be
brought to show that it is inconsistent with the divine wisdom or
goodness, to grant such a revelation to some part of mankind, though
it be not actually promulgated to the whole human race ; especially
if, in its own nature and original intention, it was fitted and designed
to be of universal extent; which is the case ofthe Christian revela
tion. Those therefore who are so circumstanced as to have an op
portunity of knowing it, ought to be very thankful to God on that
account, and not refuse or reject their own advantages and privileges,
because all others are not partakers of them as well as they. This
would be a most absurd and irrational conduct.
I shall only further observe, that this author seems frequently to
make it a great objection against what he calls particular religion,
that it insisteth upon other things as necessary, besides the religion
of nature, as contained in these five articles. Religion, according to
him, is notitiarum communium symbolutn,* a creed containing com
mon notions of truths ; and these common notices he reduceth to
the five above-mentioned. But will any man undertake to prove,
that God cannot reveal any truths to mankind, but precisely these
» De Ycrit. p. 55. 221.

Let. II. LORD HERBERT OP CHERBURY. 1/
five articles, or that all useful religious knowledge is wholly absorpt
in them? May there not be truths which, though not precisely the
same with those articles, may be of great use for clearing and con
firming them, for instructing men in the fuller knowledge of Godi
and of his will, and of the methods of his grace towards us, or for
directing' us in our duty, and animating us to the practice of it?
And must all these be discarded at once, as of no use in religion,
because they are distinct from the articles so often referred to? Or
must a well-attested revelation be rejected, because it containeth
some things of this kind ? Our noble author himself, though he
supposes these articles to be absolutely necessary, seems not to be
quite sure that they are sufficient : for he observes, that God's
judgments and proceedings are not fully known to any man : and
therefore he will not take upon him positively to pronounce, that
these articles are sufficient. Quam ob eausam neque eos sufficere
protinus dixerim* But if they should be supposed to comprehend
all that is required from the heathens, who never had the light of
the Christian revelation, it doth not follow that they are also alone
sufficient for those to whom this revelation is made known : for
supposing God to give an extraordinary revelation of his will fof
restoring religion when greatly corrupted, and clearly directing men
in the way of salvation, and helping forward their improvement iri
divine knowledge, and in a holy and virtuous practice, as it would
be a signal advantage to those to whom such a revelation is given^
so it must necessarily lay them under additional obligations. Some
things would, in consequence of it, be necessary to be believed and
done, by those to whom this "revelation is made known, which they
were not so expressly obliged to believe and practise before : and it
would be a strange thing to complain against that revelation on this
account, or accuse it of falsehood, and to choose rather to be without
the signal advantage of such a revelation, and its glorious benefits,
privileges, and hopes, than to be obliged to receive the discoveries
it brings, and to practise the duties which result from them.
One of the first English writers that published animadversions on
Lord Herbert's scheme (for I shall not take notice of what some
learned foreigners have done this way) was Mr. Richard Baxter, in
a book published in 1671, which he calls More Reasons for the
Christian Religion, and no Reason against it : and which he designed
as an appendix to his excellent treatise of the reasons of the Chris
tian religion. One part of this book contains, " Animadversions on
a Tractate de Veritate, written by the noble and learned Lord
Edward Herbert, Baron of Cherbury." This writer makes judicious
reflections on several passages in that book, but takes no notice of
his Tract de Religione Laici, nor of that learned work de Religione
Gentilium, which probably he had not seen. The celebrated Mr.
Locke, in his Essay on Human Understanding, hath some observa
tions on Lord Herbert's five articles, to show, that, however reason;-
5 De Relig. Gentil. p. 293.
C

18 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. II.
able they may appear to be, they cannot be justly accounted
common notices in the sense in which that Lord represents them ;
viz. as clearly inscribed by the hand of God in the minds of all
men.* And in his Reasonableness qf Christianity as delivered in the
Scriptures, he hath, without formally mentioning Lord Herbert,
furnished a proper antidote against his scheme, by showing, with
great clearness and force, the usefulness of divine revelation, for
setting the great principles of the law of nature, and the important
duties of religion and morality in a strong and convincing light, and
enforcing them with the most powerful motives ; and that the mere
natural unassisted light of reason was, as things were circumstanced,
insufficient and ineffectual for that purpose.t This matter is also
fully and distinctly treated in Dr. Whitby's learned work, intituled,
The Necessity and Usefulness of the Christian Revelation, by Reason
ofthe Corruptions of the Principles of natural Religion among Jews
and Heathens. London, 8vo. 1705.
The only author among us, that I know, who hath formally con
sidered the whole of Lord Herbert's scheme, and undertaken a
direct answer to his writings, is the reverend Mr. Halyburton, pro
fessor of divinity in the University of St. Andrews, in a book which
was published after the author's death, at Edinburgh, in 1714, 4to.
intituled, Natural Religion insufficient, and Revealed necessary to
Man's Happiness  " in which, particularly, the writings of the
learned Lord Herbert, the great patron of Deism ; to wit, his books
de Veritate, de Religione Gentilium, and his Religio Laici, in so far
as they assert nature's light able to conduct us to future blessedness,
are considered, and fully answered." In this elaborate performance
he sets himself largely and distinctly to show that the light of
nature is greatly defective, even with respect to the discoveries of a
Deity, and the worship that is to- be rendered to him ; with respect
to the inquiry concerning man's true happiness ; with respect to the
rule of duty, and the motives for enforcing obedience : that it is
unable certainly to discover the means of obtaining pardon of sin,
or to eradicate inclinations to sin, and subdue its power. And,
lastly, he argues its insufficiency, from a general view of the experi
ence of the world. He afterwards proceeds distinctly to consider
the five articles to which the Lord Herbert reduces his catholic reli
gion. He answers the proofs his Lordship has brought to show
that these articles did universally obtain ; and, on the contrary,
offers several proofs to show that they did not so obtain. And he
endeavours distinctly to answer the principal arguments and pleas
urged by Lord Herbert, and, after him, by Mr. Blount, for the
sufficiency of natural religion. Whosoever carefully examines what
this learned and pious author has offered on these several heads will
find many excellent things ; though the narrowness of his notions
in some points hath prejudiced some persons against his work, and
* Essay on Human Understanding, book i. c. 3, $. 15, 16, 17, 18 19.
f See his works, vol. ii. p. 574, & seq. 4th edit.

Let. II. LORD HERBERT OP CHERBURY. 19
hindered them from regarding and considering it so much as it
deserves. I shall here conclude my account of Lord Herbert, in which I
have been the more particular, because as he was one of the first, so
he was confessedly one of the greatest writers that have appeared
among us in the deistical cause.

POSTSCRIPT.
A remarkable Incident relating to Lord Herbert considered.
Sir,
After I had finished the two foregoing letters, I saw a large
anonymous letter, which was sent to you, and by you communicated
to me, relating to Lord Herbert of Cherbury. This letter deserves
particular notice ; and what I have to observe upon it may be pro
perly inserted here, immediately after the observations which have
been made upon that noble writer in the preceding letters. I
readily agree with this gentleman in acknowledging, what, as he
observes, Mr. Baxter owns in his animadversions on Lord Herbert's
tract de Veritate, that there are excellent things in that book, and
that many of the rules there proposed may be of great use. But I
had no occasion to take particular notice of them, as I proposed
only to make some general observations on his Lordship's scheme,
as far as the cause of Christianity is concerned. I hope the writer
of that letter, who appears to be a man of sense, and a friend to
Christianity, as well as a great admirer of Lord Herbert, will find,
on perusing the foregoing reflections, that I have done his Lordship
justice, and not pushed the charge against him farther than there is
just ground for it. What I have there said is perfectly agreeable to
what this ingenious gentleman has observed in this letter ; where,
after having said that Lord Llerbert is commonly reputed to have
been the first starter of Deism in the last century, he adds, " Sup
posing the charge to be true, as I greatly suspect it is, yet I am
convinced upon several good reasons, that he was nevertheless a
deist of more honour, and of greater candour and decency, as he was
of far greater parts and learning, than many that have appeared
under that denomination since.'' He subjoins, " Had he lived in
these days, wherein the subject, then new, has been thoroughly
canvassed, and no stone left unturned to find out the truth, and
bring it into fair light, I own I have charity enough to suppose, and
almost to believe, that Lord Herbert would either have been an
advocate for revelation, or at least have forborne opposing it.
This gentleman takes notice of a manuscript which he had lately
seen, containing the life ofthe Lord Llerbert of Cherbury, drawn up
from memorials penned by himself, and which is now in the pos
session of a gentleman of distinction whom he does not name. He
c 2

20 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. II.
mentions that Lord's good conduct when he was ambassador at
Paris, and some other things that do not come within the compass
of my design, which is not to give an account of the lives and
characters of the authors I mention, but only to consider their
writings, and these no farther than they relate to the controversy
between the Christians and the deists. But there is one thing in
that manuscript life of Lord Herbert, which the writer of the anony
mous letter calls a surprising incident, and which is indeed of such a
nature, that I cannot pass it by without a particular notice.
After having observed that Lord Herbert's tract de Veritate was
his favourite work, he produceth a large extract relating to it, in
that Lord's own words, signifying, that though it had been approved
by some very learned men to whom he had shown it, among whom
he mentions Grotius, yet as the frame of his whole book was so
different from what had been written heretofore[on this subject, and
he apprehended he should meet with much opposition, he did con
sider, whether it were not better for him for a while to suppress it.
And then his Lordship proceeds thus :
" Being thus doubtful, in my chamber, one fair day in the sum
mer, my casement being open towards the south, the sun shining
clear, and no wind stirring, I took my book de Veritate in my
hands, and, kneeling on my knees, devoutly said these words. 0
thou eternal God, author qf this light which now shines upon me, and
giver of all inward illuminations ; Ido beseech thee, of thine infinite
goodness, to pardon a greater request than a sinner ought to make : I
am not satisfied enough, whether I shall publish this book : if it be for
thy glory, I beseech thee give me some sign from heaven; if not I
shall suppress it. I had no sooner spoken these words, but a loud,
though yet gentle noise, came forth from the heavens (for it was
like nothing on earth) ; which did so cheer and comfort me, that 1
took my petition as granted, and that I had the sign I demanded ;
whereupon also I resolved to print my book. This, how strange
soever it may seem, I protest before the eternal God, is true : neither
am I any way superstitiously deceived herein : since I did not only
clearly hear the noise, but in the serenest sky that ever I saw, being
without all cloud, did, to my thinking, see the place from whence
it came." The ingenious writer of the letter says, he will make no remarks
on this incident, but sends it as he finds it; but he makes no doubt,
that some observations upon this and other things in that life would
be acceptable to the friends of religion.
I shall mention some reflections that have occurred to me upon
this occasion.
I have no doubt of his Lordship's sincerity in this account. The
seriousair with which he relates it, and the solemn protestation he
makes, as in the presence of the eternal God, will not suffer us to
question the truth of what he relates ; viz. that he both made that
address to God which he mentions, and that, in consequence of this,
he was persuaded that he heard the noise he takes notice of, and

Let. II. LORD HERBERT OF CHERBURY. 21
which he took to come from heaven, and regarded as a mark of
God's approbation of the request he had made ; and accordingly
this great man was determined by it to publish this book. He
seems to have considered it as a kind of imprimatur given to it
from heaven, and as signifying the divine approbation of the book
itself, and of what was contained in it.
I cannot help thinking, that if any writer, zealous for Christianity,
had given such an account of himself, as praying for and expecting
a sign from heaven to determine his doubt, whether he should pub
lish a book he had composed in favour of the Christian cause ; and
upon hearing a noise, which he took to be from heaven, had looked
upon it as a mark of the divine approbation, and as a call to publish
that book ; it would have passed for a high fit of enthusiasm, and
would no doubt have subjected the author to much ridicule among
the gentlemen that oppose revealed religion. What judgment they
will pass upon it in Lord Herbert's case I do not know : but con
sidering the great partiality they have often shown in their own
favour and against Christianity, it is not improbable, that some of
them may be apt to interpret this incident as giving a divine sanc
tion to a book, which contains indeed several important truths, but
withal hath some principles which are unfavourable to the Christian
religion; or at least, they may be willing to have it believed that
this is as much to be depended upon as the signs and attestations
said to be given from heaven to the first preachers and publishers of
the gospel revelation.
There are some things observable in Lord Herbert's solemn
address to God which, I think, are highly commendable, and would
incline one to think very favourably of his Lordship's intentions.
He discovereth in it a great veneration for the Deity, and a deep
sense of his dependence upon him as the author of light, and the
giver of all inward illuminations. This is agreeable to the senti
ments of the best and wisest men in all ages ; but yet I think it
may be justly doubted, whether an address of such a particular
kind as that made by his Lordship was proper or regular. It does
not seem to me, that we are well founded to apply for or to expect
an extraordinary sign from heaven, for determining doubts concern
ing the expediency of publishing a book. Methinks, if a man hath
used his best endeavours to find out truth, and (which certainly
ought not to be neglected) hath humbly applied to God to assist
and direct him in his inquiries ; if he hath the testimony of his own
conscience to the uprightness of his own intentions, and that he is
not actuated by pride and vain glory, by an affectation of singularity
or any worldly sinister ends and views ; and if he is satisfied, upon
the most diligent and impartial examination, that what he hath
advanced is both true and of great importance to mankind, and is
only afraid of the opposition it may meet with ; 1 think, in such a
case, especially if he hath also the advice of good and judicious
friends concerning it, he hath sufficient grounds to proceed upon,
and doth not need a particular sign from heaven to determine him.

22 A VIEW OP THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. II.
This seems to be a putting it on a wrong foot, since God hath not
in his word given us any ground to expect that he will answer such
a request ; nor is their any reason to expect it from the nature of
the thing. His Lordship himself seems to have suspected that
such an address and expectation wasnot regular, when he begs of
God to pardon it, as being a greater request than a sinner ought to
make. I believe it will be acknowledged, that sudden impressions,
or supposed signs from heaven, like that upon which Lord Herbert
seemeth to lay so great a stress, are very equivocal, and not much
to be depended upon for information in truth, or direction in duty:
They may lay persons open to mistake and delusion. It cannot be
denied, that, in such cases, men are in danger of being imposed
upon by the warmth of their own imaginations, especially if they be
wrought up to a strong desire and expectation of an extraordinary
sign from heaven, in favour of a design which they heartily wish
should succeed.
I think it is evident, from his own account of it, that this was
Lord Herbert's case. His mind was full of his book, highly pre
possessed in favour of its truth and usefulness. He seems not to
have been diffident of the truth and goodness of the book itself, but
only to have been in doubt about the expediency of its publication ;
and he took a very extraordinary way to obtain direction concerning
it. Nothing less would satisfy him than a sign from heaven ; and
it is plain that he was big with expectation. His imagination was
warmed with the hope of a sign that should be a mark of the divine
approbation. It is not to be wondered at, that a mind thus pre
pared should be disposed to interpret any incident that should
happen, in favour of its own prepossessions, and as countenancing
the purpose he had entertained in his own breast. Taking it in
this view, nothing happened, but what may reasonably enough be
accounted for, without supposing anything supernatural in the case.
He doth not mention any articulate voice, or words spoken to him
as from heaven, directing him what to do, or signifying an appro
bation of his design ; he only maketh mention of a noise that
seemed to him to come from heaven. He giveth no particular ac
count what kind of noise it was, but only that it was loud arid yet
gentle, and that it came from heaven, ferr it was like nothing on
earth ; that it was in a serene sky, and that to his thinking, lie saw
the place from whence it came. In this situation of his mind, any
noise that happened at that precise juncture, and which had some
thing unusual in it (and it is easy to suppose several things of this
kind), might be apt to make an impression on his imagination. I
shall only put one supposition, and it is this, that at that time it
might happen to thunder at a distance, which might well be in sum
mer-time, though in that part of the sky which was within his view
there was no cloud to be seen, and all seemed perfectly serene; and
the " noise of thunder heard remote " (to use Milton's phrase) com
ing at that instant when the soul was filled with expectation of
something extraordinary, would undoubtedly greatly affect him, and

Let. II. LORD HERBERT OP CHERBURY'. 23
might be regarded as a sign of approbation from heaven, which was
what he sought for; and then no wonder that it comforted and
cheered him, as his Lordship observes it did.
It is, I must confess, a great satisfaction to me to reflect, that the
evidence of the Christian religion doth not depend upon such equi
vocal signs as this. The attestations given to the first preachers
and publishers of the gospel were of such a kind, that, supposing
them to have really happened, they could not reasonably, or with
the least appearance of probability, be ascribed to anything but a
divine interposition ; and therefore might justly be regarded as
marks of the divine approbation of the Christian scheme.
Upon this occasion, I cannot help drawing some kind of parallel
in my own mind, between this incident that happened to this noble
Lord, and that extraordinary appearance from heaven which St.
Paul gives an account of; and which, with what followed upon it,
had such an effect upon him, as to conquer his obstinate prejudices,
and to engage him to profess and preach that faith in Christ which
he himself had zealously persecuted before. I believe the warmest
advocates for Christianity would be ready to own, that if that great
apostle had had no better account to give of the reasons and motives
of his conversion than such a sign from heaven as Lord Herbert
mentions, this would have been a very slender foundation either for
himself or others to go upon, in receiving the Christian doctrine as
of divine original. But the slightest comparison of the cases may
let us see that there is a wide and amazing difference between them.
Lord Herbert's mind was prepossessed with the expectation of a
sign from heaven ; he sought it, he applied to God for it, he had an
hope that something of this kind would happen : and when the
thing came which he took for a sign, it was in favour of what he no
doubt strongly wished and desired before : yet, prepossessed as his
imagination was, he heard no voice of words, nor articulate language,
signifying to him the divine will. But St. Paul was the farthest in
the world from desiring or expecting a sign from heaven in favour
ofthe religion of Jesus : on the contrary, his mind was at that very
instant wholly possessed with the strongest prejudices against it.
He was then going to Damascus, with a commission from the high-
priest to seize the disciples of Jesus, and bring them to Jerusalem
to be punished ; and he was persuaded in his own conscience that
he was right in doing so. He breathed out threatnings and slaughter
against them, as the sacred writer expresseth it : and he himself
tells us, that he verily thought with himself, that he ought to do many
things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. In this circum
stance of things, if we should suppose him seized with a sudden
pang of enthusiasm, though this is by no means likely to have hap
pened to him, as he was travelling along the road at noon-day, with
several others in his company ; but if we should suppose that some
thing of this kind happened to him, and 'that he saw an extraor
dinary light from heaven, which he took to be a sign that heaven
approved the work in which he was then engaged ; or if he had

24 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. II.
thought he also heard a voice from above speaking to him, and ani
mating him to go on, and courageously to execute the commission
he had received from the high-priest, and promising him success in
it, there might possibly be some pretence for ascribing it to the
working of an over-heated imagination, filled with the design he
was upon, which engaged all his thoughts and resolutions. But it
is plain that, in the temper he was then in, he could not have the
least expectation of Jesus of Nazareth's appearing to him with a
celestial splendour and glory, calling to him with a majestic voice
from heaven, and in words which he distinctly heard, reproving him
for his enmity to him, and persecuting rage against his disciples,
appointing him his minister and apostle, and commissioning him to
preach the gospel to the Gentiles, and to invite them to a participa
tion of the" benefits and privileges of his kingdom ; which were
things the most remote from his apprehension that could possihly
be conceived.
I need not here particularly repeat all the circumstances of a story
so well known as that of the divine appearance which occasioned
St. Paul's conversion ; but taking in the whole as he himself re-
lateth it, it is absolutely impossible that it should have been the
effect of his own enthusiastic imagination, considering how his mind
was at that time disposed, to which may be added the consequent
effects which showed the reality of it. Struck blind with the glory
of the appearance, he was obliged to be led to Damascus ; and it
was only by the laying on of Ananias' hands in the name of Jesus,
that he had his sight restored. There was immediately a wonderful
change in his dispositions, notions, and inclinations. He became
enlightened at once, without human instruction, in a perfect know
ledge of the religion of Jesus, than which nothing could be more
contrary in many points to the pharisaical principles and prejudices
he had so deeply imbibed. He was endued with the most extra
ordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, and had a power of communica
ting those gifts to others, by the laying on of his hands in the name
of a crucified and risen Jesus and in the same sacred name was
enabled to perform the most illustrious miracles. These were mat
ters of fact in which he could not be deceived himself, and of which
there were numbers of witnesses : and accordingly he went through
the nations preaching Jesus Christ, and him crucified, as the
Saviour and Lord ; which he did with such evidence, and had such
extraordinary attestations from heaven accompanying him, that vast
numbers were brought over by his ministry to embrace a religion
which was absolutely contrary to their most rooted prejudices, incli
nations, and interests.
There might possibly be some suspicions with regard to the rela
tion of a fact so circumstanced as was that of Lord Herbert. It
might be thought possible, that an author might feign an approba
tion from heaven in favour of some peculiar notions he had enter
tained, and of a book of which he was very fond, and upon which
he seems to have valued himself ; not that I think there is any

Let. II. LORD HERBERT OF CHERBURY. 25
reasonable ground of suspicion, that this noble writer feigned what
he relates concerning this incident ; but yet some may suppose, that
an author might possibly be under some temptation to deviate from
the rules of truth in such a case. But no such suspicion can be
entertained in St. Paul's case, that he should have feigned a
heavenly appearance in favour of areligion which he was well known
to have hated, persecuted, and despised, and which was absolutely
contrary to the prejudices to which he had been so obstinately
addicted, and to all his worldly expectations, connections, and
interests : to which it may be added, that he gave the highest pos
sible proof of his own sincere belief of the fact as he has related it,
by his inviolable adherence to that religion to which he was by this
extraordinary means converted ; that he exposed himself by it to
the different persecutions, and to the greatest and most various
labours and sufferings that any one man ever endured ; and which
he bore with an invincible constancy, and even with a divine exulta
tion and joy, supported by the testimony of a good conscience, and
the hope of a glorious reward in the heavenly world.
Upon the whole, let us put the supposition, that Lord Herbert, in
the account he hath given of what happened to him, has had the
strictest regard to truth (which, for my part, I have no doubt of),
and that the account St. Paul hath given of the extraordinary
appearance to him from heaven is also true, there is this vast dif
ference between the cases : that, granting all that happened to Lord
Herbert to have been as he relates it, there is nothing in it but what
may be accounted for in some such manner as that mentioned
above, without supposing any thing supernatural in the case ; but,
granting the truth ofthe relation which St. Paul gives ofthe divine
appearance to him, with the effects that followed upon it, there is
no possibility of accounting for it in a natural way, or indeed in
any other manner than by owning an extraordinary and supernatural
interposition. Though therefore the former, granting it to be true,
can by no means be depended upon as a certain mark of the appro
bation of heaven given to Lord Herbert's book ; yet the latter, sup
posing it in like manner true, affordeth a convincing proof of an
extraordinary attestation given from heaven to the divine mission
and glory of a crucified Jesus, and to the truth and divine original
of the Christian revelation.
I may perhaps be thought to have expatiated too much in my
reflections on this occasion ; but I hope I shall be excused when it
is considered, that the incident is of so uncommon a nature ; that it
relateth to a person of Lord Herbert's character and eminence ; and
that the account of it is extracted from memorials written by him
self. I shall make no farther remarks on the anonymous letter, than to
observe, that the writer of it makes mention of the answers to Lord
Herbert, published by Mr. Baxter and Mr. Halyburton. He also
takes notice of the Weekly Miscellany, as having lately appeared
against him. The two former I have taken notice of above ; the

26 A VIEW OP THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. III.
latter I have not seen, and therefore know not how far some of the
observations there made may have coincided with mine.

LETTER III.

Observations on Mr. Hobbes's Writings.— He sometimes professeth a Regard to the
Scripture as the Word and Law of God ; at other times ridicules Inspiration or
Revelation. — He attempts to invalidate the sacred Canon, and makes Religion and
the Authority of Scripture to depend entirely on the Authority of the Magistrate. —
His strange Maxims in Morality and Politics.— His Scheme tends to subvert
Natural Religion as well as Revealed. — Confuted by several learned Authors.
Sir,
In my two former letters some observations were made on the
writings of that eminent deist, Lord Herbert of Cherbury. The
next writer I shall mention was in several respects of a different
character from that noble Lord, though also very famous in his
time, the noted Mr. Thomas Hobbes of Malmsbury. There have
been few persons whose writings have had a more pernicious influ
ence in spreading irreligion and infidelity than his ; yet as none of
his treatises are directly levelled against revealed religion, I shall
content myself with some brief general reflections upon them. He
sometimes affects to speak with veneration of the sacred writings.
He expressly declareth, that though the laws of nature are not laws
as they proceed from nature, yet, " as they are given by God in
holy Scripture, they are properly called laws ; for the holy Scripture
is the voice of God, ruling all things by the greatest right."* But
though he seems here to make the laws of Scripture to be the laws
of God, and to derive their force from his supreme authority, yet in
many other passages, some of which I shall have occasion to
mention, he supposeth them to have no authority but what they
derive from the prince or civil power. He sometimes seems to
acknowledge inspiration to be a supernatural gift, and the immediate
hand of God ; at other times he treats the pretence to it as a sign
of madness; and, by a jingle upon the words, represents God's
speaking to the ancient prophets in a dream or vision, to be no
more than their dreaming that he spoke to them, or dreaming
between sleeping and waking.f To weaken the authority of the
sacred Canon, he endeavours to show, that the books of Moses, and
the historical writings of the Old Testament, were not written by
* De Cive, carr. iii. sect. 33. t Lcviath. p. 196.

Let. III. MR. HOBBES'S WRITINGS. 27
those whose names they bear, and that they are derived to us from
no other authority but that of Esdras, who restored them when they
were lost :* a supposition in which he hath been since followed by
others on the same side, and very lately by a noble Lord ; though
the absurdity of it is manifest, and hath been fully exposed.-)- As
to the writings of the New Testament, he acknowledgeth, that they
are as ancient as the times of the apostles, and that they were
written by persons who lived in those times, some of whom saw
the things which they relate ; which is what many of our modern
deists seem unwilling to own. And though he insinuates that the
copies of the Scriptures were but few, and only in the hands of the
ecclesiastics, yet he adds, that he sees no reason to doubt, but that
the books of the New Testament, as we have them, are the true
registers of those things which were done and said by the prophets
and apostles.*): But then he most absurdly pretends, that they were
not received as of divine authority in the Christian church, till they
were declared to be so by the council of Laodicea, in the year after
Christ 364 : though nothing is capable of a clearer proof, than that
their authority was acknowledged among Chrisntians from the
apostolic times.
He expressly asserts, that we have no assurance of the certainty
of Scripture, but the authority of the church, and this he resolveth
into the authority qf the commonwealth ; and declares, that till the
sovereign ruler had prescribed them, " the precepts of Scripture
were not obligatory laws,-but only counsel and advice, which he that
was counselled might without injustice refuse to observe, and being
contrary to the laws could not without injustice observe ;" that the
word of the interpreter of Scripture is the word of God, and the
sovereign magistrate is the interpreter of Scripture, and of all doc
trines, to whose authority we must stand .§ Yea, he carrieth it so
far as to pronounce, that Christians are bound in conscience to
obey the laws of , an infidel king in matters of religion ; that
" thought is free ; but when it comes to confession of faith, the
private reason must submit to the public, that is to say, to God's
lieutenant." And accordingly, he alloweth the subject, being com
manded by the sovereign, to deny Christ in words, holding firmly in
his heart the faith of Christ : and that in that case, " it is not he
that denieth Christ before men, but his governor and the laws of
his country. || And he expressly declareth, that idolatry to which a
man is compelled by the terror of death is not idolatry. And this
being the case, it is not to be wondered at, that he speaks with
contempt of the ancient martyrs. In this the succeeding deists
have not failed to imitate him. They have reproached those excel
lent persons as having died as a fool dieth;% as if it were a ridiculous
* Leviath. p. 200, 201, 203.
t Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters, p. 51, &c. t Leviath. p. 204.
i Quest, concerning Liberty, p. 136. De Give, c. 17. Leviath. p. 169, 283, 284.
|| Ibid. p. 238, 271.
U See Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 32, 33.

28 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. HI
and senseless thing to endure hardships and sufferings, for the sake
of truth and conscience : and yet those have been always justly
admired, who have exposed themselves to the greatest dangers in a
noble cause, and who would not do a base thing to save their lives.
Mr. Hobbes acknowledgeth the existence of God, and that we
must of necessity arise from the effects which we behold, to the
eternal Power of all powers, and Cause of all causes; and he blames
those as absurd who call the world, or the soul of the world, God :
but he denies that we know any more of him than that he exists,
and seems plainly to make him corporeal ; for he affirms, that that
which is not body is nothing at all :* and though he sometimes
seems to acknowledge religion and its obligations, and that there is
an honour and worship due to God, prayer, thanksgiving, oblations,
&c, yet he advanceth principles which evidently tend to subvert all
religion. The account he gives of it is this, " that from the fear of
power invisible, feigned by the mind, or imagined from tales publicly
allowed, ariseth religion, not allowed superstition." And he else
where resolveth religion into things which he himself derides; viz.
" opinions of ghosts, ignorance of second causes, devotion to what
men fear, and taking of things casual for prognostics."! He takes
pains in many of his works to prove man to be a necessary agent,
and expressly asserts the materiality and mortality of the human
soul ; and he represents the doctrine concerning the distinction
between soul and body in man to be an error contracted by the
contagion of the demonology of the Greeks. We may observe by
the way the great difference there is in this respect between Mr.
Hobbes and Lord Herbert. This noble writer has reckoned the
notion and belief of a future state among the common notices
naturally obvious to the minds of all men : but the account Mr.
Hobbes is pleased to give of it is this, that the belief of a future
state after death " is a belief grounded upon other men's saying,
that they knew it supernaturally, or that they knew those, that
knew them, that knew others, that knew it supernaturally."'!'
That we may have the better notion of this extraordinary writer,
it may not be amiss to mention some other of his maxims. He
asserts, that by the law of nature every man hath a right to all
things, and over all persons, and that the natural condition of man
is a state of war, a war of all men against all men : that there is no
way so reasonable for any man as to anticipate, that is, by force and
wiles to master all the persons of others that he can, so long till he
sees no other power great enough to endanger him : that the civil
laws are the only rules of good and evil, just and unjust, honest and
dishonest ; and that antecedently to such laws every action is in its
own nature indifferent : that there is nothing good or evil in itself,
nor any common laws constituting what is naturally just and unjust;
that all things are measured by what every man judgeth fit, where
there is no civil government, and by the laws of society where there
* Leviath. p. 214, 371. t Ibid. p. 53. } Ibid. p. 74.

Let. III. MR. IIOBBES'S WRITINGS. 29
is one :* that rhe power of the sovereign is absolute, and that he
is not bound by any compacts with his subjects : that nothing the
sovereign can do to the subject can properly be called injurious or
wrong; and that the kings word is sufficient to take anything from
any subject, if there be need, and the king is the judge of that
need.f In Mr. Hobbes we have a remarkable instance what strange
extravagances men of wit and genius may fall into, who, whilst they
value themselves upon their superior penetration, and laugh at
popular errors and superstition, often give in to notions so wild and
ridiculous, as none of the people that govern themselves by plain
common sense could be guilty of. It will hardly be thought too
severe a censure to say, that Mr. Hobbes's scheme strikes at the
foundation of all religion, both natural and revealed : that it tendeth
not only to subvert the authority of the Scripture, but to destroy
God's moral administration : that it confoundeth the natural dif
ferences of good and evil, virtue and vice, and taketh away the dis
tinction between soul and body, and the liberty of human actions :
that it destroyeth the best principles of the human nature, and,
instead of that innate benevolence and social disposition which
should unite men together, supposeth all men to be naturally in a
state of war with one another : that it erecteth an absolute tyranny
in the state and church, which it confounds, and maketh the will of
the prince or governing power, the sole standard of right and wrong;
and that it destroyeth all the rights of private conscience, and,
indeed, leaveth no room for conscience at all.
But notwithstanding the ill tendency of many of Mr. Hobbes's
principles, yet the agreeableness of his style, of which he was a great
master, joined to his dogmatical way of pronouncing with a very
decisive air, and the very oddness and apparent novelty of his
notions, gave them a great run for a time, and did no small
mischief. He himself boasted of the good reception his Leviathan
met with among many of our gentry: but the manifold absurdities
and inconsistencies of his scheme, and the pernicious consequences
of it to religion, morality, and the civil government, have been so
well exposed, and set in so clear a light, that there are not many of
our modern deists that would be thought openly to espouse his
system in its full extent : though indeed it cannot be denied, that
there are not a few things in their writings borrowed from his, and
that some of them have chosen rather to follow him than Lord
Herbert in several of his principles, and particularly in asserting
the materiality and mortality of the human soul, and denying man's
free agency.
Mr. Hobbes met with many learned adversaries, among whom we
may particularly reckon Dr. Seth Ward, afterwards bishop of
Salisbury, and archbishop Bramhal. The latter argued with great
* De Cive, c vi. s. 18. c. x. s. 1. c. 12. s. i. Leviath. p. 21, 25, 60, 61, 62, 63, 72,
t Leviath. p. 90, 106.

30 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. Ill,
acuteness against that part of the scheme which relates to liberty
and necessity, and afterwards attacked the whole of his system, in
a piece called the Catching ofthe Leviathan, published at London
in 1658; in which he undertakes to demonstrate, out of Mr.
Hobbes's own works, that no man who is thoroughly an Hobbist
can be "a good Christian, or a good commonwealth's man, or
reconcile himself to himself." The reverend Mr. Tenison, after
wards archbishop of Canterbury, gave a summary view of Mr.
Mr. Hobbes's principles, with a judicious confutation of them, in a
book called The Creed of Mr. Hobbes examined, published in 1670.
To these may be added, the famous Earl of Clarendon, who wrote
A brief View and Survey qf the dangerous and pernicious Errors to
the Church and State in Mi: Hobbes's Book entitled " Leviathan."
This was published in 1676. Bishop Parker, Mr. Tyrrel, but,
above all, Bishop Cumberland, in his justly celebrated work de
Ijegibus Naturce, did also distinguish themselves in th is controversy.
It is to be observed, that the learned writers who opposed Mr.
Hobbes did not so much apply themselves to vindicate revealed
religion, or the Christian system, as to establish the great principles
of all religion and morality, which his scheme tended to subvert :
and to show, that they had a real foundation in reason and nature.
In this they certainly did good service to religion : yet some of the
enemies of revelation endeavoured to take advantage of it, as if this
showed that there is no other religion but the law of nature, and
that any extraordinary revelation is needless and useless. Thus, on
every supposition, these gentlemen seem resolved to carry their
cause against Christianity. If there he no law of nature, no real
difference, in the nature of things, between moral good and evil,
virtue and vice, there is no such thing as religion at all, and con
sequently no Christian religion. On the other hand, if it be proved
that there is such a thing as the religion and law of nature, which
is founded in the very nature and relations of things, and agreeable
to right reason, then it is concluded, that this alone is sufficient,
and that it is clear and obvious to all mankind, and therefore they
need no revelation to instruct them in it, or assure them of it. A
very wrong conclusion this ! since it is manifest that a well attested
revelation from God would be of very great use, both farther to
clear and confirm some of the important principles of natural reli
gion, which, though in themselves reasonable, were in fact greatly
obscured and perverted in the corrupt state of mankind ; and also
to instruct men in things which, however highly useful to be known,
they could not have clearly discovered or been fully assured of, by
the mere unassisted light of nature, without a divine revelation.
This might lead one into a train of reflections on the connection
there is between natural and revealed religion : but I must content
myself with giving short hints of things : to enlarge farther upon
them would not suit my present design. You will probably hear
from me again soon : and in the mean time, I am, 8cc.

Let. IV. mr. blount's writings. 31

LETTER IV.
Mr. Charles Blount's Notes on the Life of ApoUonius Tyana8us, designed to expose
Christianity.- — His Religio Laici copied, for the most part, from Lord Herbert. —
He had a chief hand in the Oracles of Reason. — He attacks the Doctrine of a
Mediator, as unworthy of God. — His remarkable Concession, that it is not safe to
trust to Deism alone, without Christianity joined with it. — Mr. Toland, another
deistical Writer; very fond of asserting Paradoxes. — The Design of his Amyntor to
render the Canon of the New Testament uncertain. — He gives a large Catalogue of
spurious Gospels, and attempts to show that they were equally received and acknow
ledged in the primitive Times, with the Gospels which are now looked upon as
authentic  The contrary fully proved in the Answers that were made to him.
Sir,
Among those who openly avowed the cause of Deism, and seemed
zealous to promote it,may be reckoned Charles Blount, Esq. In 1680
he published a translation of the two first books of Philostratus's Life
of ApoUonius Tyanaus, with large notes, which are manifestly intended
to strike at revealed religion. ApoUonius, you know, was a Pytha
gorean philosopher that lived in the first century, whose character
and miracles were opposed by the pagans to those of our Lord Jesus
Christ. Hierocles wrote a book to this purpose, which was answered
by Eusebius, who hath plainly proved, that Philostratus was a vain
and fabulous writer, and that his accounts are full of romantic
stories and ridiculous fables : and whoever impartially considers
Philostratus's book, which is still extant, must be convinced that
Eusebius's censure upon it is just. Nothing can be supposed more
different than Philostratus's manner of writing, stuffed with rhetorical
flourishes and vain ostentations of learning, is from the plain, sober,
artless narration of the evangelists, which hath all the characters of
genuine unaffected simplicity, and a sincere regard to truth : to
which it may be added, that Apollonius's philosophy, and the
wonders he is said to have wrought, all tended to uphold the reign
ing established superstition and idolatry, which at the same time
had all worldly advantages on its side, and yet was not able to oppose
the progress of Christianity, which triumphed over it,, though des
titute of all those advantages, and though it had all the powers of
the world against it :— a manifest proof this, how vastly superior
the evidence of our Saviour's divine character and miracles was to
any thing that could be produced in opposition to it ! And yet
many of our modern deists have been fond of running the parallel
between ApoUonius and Jesus Christ. Mr. Blount, in his notes,
has thrown out several insinuations against- the miracles of our
Saviour, in which he has been followed and even exceeded by some
succeeding writers, of whom I may afterwards give some account.

32 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IV.
This gentleman has on several occasions discovered a strong pre
judice against the Scriptures, and shown how willing he is to lay
hold on whatsoever he thinks may expose them : it could be only
owing to this, that he finds fault with that manner of expression,
he opened his mouth, and said :* a censure which may be thought to
proceed from an extraordinary nicety, rather than a true justness
of taste. But though this, and other oriental idioms and forms of
speech, may differ from what is usual among us, the language of
Scripture has been always admired by the best judges.
In 1683 the same gentleman published a small book intitled
Religio Laici, which is little more than a translation of Lord Her
bert's treatise of the same name. The additions and improvements
he has made are so few, and of such small moment, as not to
deserve a distinct consideration, and therefore I shall refer to the
reflections already made on Lord Herbert's scheme.
Some years after, in 1693, there was another book published, in
which Mr. Blount had a principal concern, and which was plainly
inteuded to propagate infidelity. It had a pompous title, The
Oracles of Reason, and was published after Mr. Blount's unhappy
end, by his friend Mr. Charles Gildon, who ushered it into the
world by a preface in defence of self-murder, which that gentleman
had been guilty of, to get rid of the uneasiness of a passion which
proved too violent for him. The title of the book seemed to promise
demonstration, as if it were intended to serve as an infallible guide in
matters of religion : but there is little order or method in it, or
regularity of design. It is a collection of different pieces, consisting
for the most part of letters between Mr. Blount and his friends,
intermixed with fragments and translations from some Greek and
Latin authors, done with no great exactness.
That part of the book which relates to natural religion and its
sufficiency, proceeds chiefly upon Lord Herbert's plan. There are
two of the tracts particularly remarkable this way : the one is
A Summary Account of the Deist's Religion, by Mr. Blount : the
other is a letter from A. W. to Mr. Blount, concerning natural
religion, as opposed to divine revelation. In the former of these,
Mr. Blount, having set himself to show that God is not to be
worshipped by an image or by sacrifices, next endeavoureth to prove
that he is not to be worshipped by a mediator. He pretends that
the worship of God by a mediator derogateth from his infinite
mercy, equally as an image doth from his spirituality and infinity.
But his argument is founded upon a misapprehension or misre
presentation of the gospel scheme. Far from derogating from the
mercy or goodness of God, the appointment of such a mediator as
the gospel proposeth is one of the most signal instances of his grace
and goodness towards mankind : it is a wise and gracious provision
for exercising his mercy towards guilty creatures, in such a way as
is most becoming his own glorious government and perfections, and
"" Blount's Notes on Philostratus, p. 69.

Let. IV. MR. BLOUNT'S WRITINGS. 33
most conducive to their peace and comfort, and most proper to
remove their guilty jealousies and fears.
But he farther urgeth, that if God appointed the mediator, this
shows that he was really reconciled to the world before, and conse
quently that there was no need of a mediator. It showeth, indeed,
that God had kind thoughts of mercy, and gracious intentions
towards the human race ; but this doth not prove that therefore the
appointment of a mediator was needless. On the contrary, his
wisdom determined him to take this method as the properest way
of exercising his mercy, and dispensing the effects of his goodness;
of which he is certainly the fittest judge : and whosoever duly con
siders the sublime idea given us in the gospel of the mediator,
the work upon which he was sent, and the offices he was invested
with, may observe such characters of the divine wisdom and good
ness in it, such a regard to the honour of God, and to the comfort,
and benefit, and happiness of mankind, as ought greatly to recom
mend the gospel scheme. But the distinct consideration of these
things would take up more room than the present design will allow.
To this tract is prefixed a letter from Mr. Blount to Dr. Syden
ham, in which there is this remarkable passage : that " undoubtedly,
" in our travels to the other world, the common road is the safest ;
" and though Deism is a good manuring of a man's conscience, yet
" certainly, if sowed with Christianity, it will produce the most
''plentiful crop." Here he seems plainly to own, that it is not safe
to trust to Deism alone, if Christianity be not joined with it*.
As to the other tract I mentioned, the letter written by A. W. to
Mr. Blount, concerning natural religion as opposed to divine revela
tion, the chief heads of natural religion are there reduced to seven
articles. 1. That there is an infinite and eternal God, creator of all
things. 2. That he governs the world by his providence. 3. That
it is our duty to worship and obey him as our creator and governor.
4. That our worship consists in prayer to him, and praise of him.
5. That our obedience consists in the rules of right reason, the
practice of which is moral virtue. 6. That we are to expect rewards
and punishments hereafter according to our actions in this life, which
includes the soul's immortality, and is proved by our admitting pro
vidence. 7. That when we err from the rules of our duty, we ought
to repent, and trust in God's mercy for pardonf. Here Lord Her
bert's five articles, which were all that he accounted necessary, are
enlarged to seven, which indeed may be regarded as farther explica
tions of the former : and with other explications they might be en
larged to a still greater number. What was observed concerning
Lord Herbert's articles may be applied to these. It will be ac
knowledged, that they are agreeable to right reason ; but this is no
proof that therefore an express divine revelation would not be need
ful, in the present state of mankind, to set them in a stronger light,
and give them additional force. Several of the deists would be far
Oracles of Reason, p 87. 91. t Ibid. p. 197.
v

34 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let IV'
from agreeing with this writer in some of the articles he mentions.
The first article runs thus, that there is one eternal self-existent God,
creator of all things ; where it is plainly supposed, that the world
was created ; and yet, in another part of that book, Mr. Blount has
taken the pains to translate a large fragment of Ocellus Lucanus,
which is designed to prove the eternity of the world :* and it appears
that he himself does not disapprove it. In another part of these
pretended Oracles, in a letter from Mr. Gildon to Mr. Blount, the
opinion of the origin of good and evil, from two different eternal
principles, the one good, the other evil, is represented as not unrea
sonable.-)- In another of the above-mentioned seven articles it is
declared, that the worship we owe to God consists in prayer to Him,
and praise qf Him : and yet it is well known, that this has been
contested and denied by some of the ancient philosophers and
modern deists ; and Mr. Blount himself, in his notes upon the life
of ApoUonius Tyanseus, having observed that some of the heathens
used no prayers at all, insinuates, in their names, objections against
that duty."j" With regard to the fifth article, that our obedience
consists in the rules qf right i-eason, the practice whereof is moral
virtue, this is easily said in general ; but there is no great likelihood,
that, if they were to come to a particular explication, they would
agree what is to be looked upon as included in the rules of right
reason, and in the practice of moral virtue. Some of them would
probably think it reasonable to indulge the appetites and passions
in instances which others would not think reasonable or proper :
even in a point of such consequence as self-murder, some of the
ancient philosophers and modern deists have pleaded for it, whilst
others have condemned it; and it is openly justified (as was before
observed) in the preface to these Oracles of Reason. One should
therefore think no reasonable man could deny, that express precepts,
determining by a divine authority the particulars of moral duty,
would be of great advantage. As to the article of future rewards
and punishments, and the soul's immortality, this is represented by
Mr. Blount, in a letter to the right honourable the most ingenious
Strephon, and by A. W. in his letter to Mr. Blount, as a necessary
part of natural religion; and yet he observes, that the ancient
heathens disagreed about it.§ In another part of these Oracles, it
is declared to be probable, that the soul of man is not of an entirely
distinct nature from the body, but only a purer material composition. ||
Now the soul's materiality is not very consistent with the doctrine
of its immortality : and from this we may judge of A. W.'s argument
against Christianity, that " if the reasons of the Christian religion
" were evident, there would be no longer any contention or difference
" about it : and if all do not agree in it, those marks of truth in
" it are not visible, which are necessary to draw our assent."! This
argument, if it were good for any thing, would prove that there are
* Oracles of Reason, p. 212—228. f IM. p. 194. i Notes on Philostratus, p. 38.
§ Oracles of Reason, p. 201. || Ibid. p. 154, 187. f Ibid. p. 201, 206.

Let. IV, mr. blount's writinos. 35
no visible marks of truth in natural religion, no more than in re
vealed ; since it cannot be denied that men differ about the one as
well as the other : but the truth is, the argument doth not conclude
in either case.
There are several things in the Oracles of Reason which are par
ticularly designed against the holy Scriptures, and which have been
repeated by others since : but the sacred writings have been fully
vindicated against those exceptions. Mr. Blount has particularly
attacked the writings of Moses, and the' most considerable part of
what he has offered to this purpose is borrowed either from the
learned author of the Arclxzologia-Philosophicce, who, though he
differed in some things from what is generally looked upon as the
true interpretation of Moses's sense, was far from intending to sub
vert the authority of the Mosaic writings; or from the author of the
hypothesis of the Pre- Adamites, who afterwards retracted his own
book. From this writer Mr. Blount hath given us a literal trans
lation for several pages together, in different parts of this book,
without making the least acknowledgment of it, or taking any
notice of the answers that had been returned. In like manner he
hath thought proper to repeat the objections which have been fre
quently urged against the Mosaic writings, from the irreconcilable-
ness of the accounts there given with the antiquities pretended to
by the most learned heathen nations, particularly the Chaldeans and
Egyptians. Our great Stillingfleet had, in the first book of his
Origines Sacrtz, very amply considered that matter, and clearly
shown the vanity of those pretences ; yet they are here again ad
vanced with as much confidence as if they had never been refuted.
The same observation may be made with regard to the arguments
of Ocellus Lucanus about the eternity of the world, which are trans
lated and produced with great pomp by Mr. Blount, though they
had been unanswerably exposed in the last-mentioned learned
treatise*. The Oracles qf Reason were animadverted upon by Mr. John
Bradley, in a book published at London in 1699, in rimo. intitled.
An Impartial View qf the Truth of Christianity, with the His
tory of the Life and Miracles qf ApoUonius Tyanaus : to ivhich
are added, some Reflections on a Book called " Oracles qf Reason."
This book I have not seen. Dr. Nichols's Conference with a Theist
was also particularly designed by the learned and ingenious author
in opposition to the Oraclts of Reason ; and he hath not left any
material part of that book unanswered. The first part of this Con
ference was published at London in 12mo. in 1696, and the other
three parts in the following years. But what deserveth our special
notice, Mr. Gildon, the publisher of the Oracles, qf Reason, and who
had recommended them to the world with a pompous eulogium, was
afterwards, upon mature consideration, convinced of his error ; of
which he gave a remarkable proof, in a good book which he pub-
* Origines Sacrse, book iii. c. 2. f. -1-, 5, 6, 7.
n 2

:J6 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IV-
lished some years after, in 1705, intitled The Deist's Manual. It is
observable, that the greatest part of this book is taken up in vindi
cating the doctrines of the existence and attributes of God, his pro
vidence and government of the world, the immortality of the soul,
and a future state : and his reason for it was, as he himself intimates,
because many of the deists, with whom he was well acquainted, did
really deny those great principles which lie at the foundation of all
religion, or at least represented them as doubtful and uncertain ;
and their not admitting natural religion in its just extent formed
some of their principal prejudices against the Christian revelation.
The next writer of whom I shall give some account is Mr. Toland,
who, though he called himself a Christian, made it very much the
business of his life to serve the cause of infidelity, and to unsettle
men's minds with regard to religion. There are many things in his
writings which show, that he was very fond of asserting things that
had an appearance of novelty, however destitute of reason or proba
bility; a remarkable instance of which he has given in his strange
attempt to prove that motion is essential to matter. See his letters
to Serena, 'Letter IIL* In another book, which he calls Pantheis
ticon, published in 1720, he has shown himself a favourer and ad
mirer of the Pantheistic philosophy, i. e. that of Spinosa, which
acknowledgeth no other God but the universe. The first thing
that made Mr. Toland taken notice of, was his Christianity not
mysterious ; ot; a Discourse showing, that there is Nothing in the
Gospel contrary to Reason, nor above it, and that no Christian
Doctrine can be properly called a mystery. This was published
in 1696, and was animadverted upon by several writers of learning
and reputation, as Mr. Becconsal, Mr. Beverly, Mr. John Norris,
Dr. Payne, Mr. Synge, afterwards archbishop of Tuam, and Mr.
Brown, afterwards bishop of Cork. In 1709 he published at the
Hague two Latin dissertations. The first is intitled, Adeisidamon,
sive Titus Livius a superstitione vindica tus. In qua dissertatione
probatur Livium historicum in sacris, prodigiis, et ostentis enar-
randis, haudquaquam fuisse credulwm aut superstitiosum : ipsamque
superstitionem non minus Reipublicee (si non magis) exitiosam esse,
quam purum putum atheismum. The second dissertation bears the
title of Origines Judaicee, sive Strabonis de Mose et religione Ju-
daica historia breviter illustrata. In this dissertation he seems to
prefer the account of this pagan author concerning Moses and the
Jewish religion, before that which was given by the Jews themselves.
These two dissertations were answered by Mr. la Faye, minister at
Utrecht, in a book printed in 1709, and intitled, Defensio religionis,
nee non Mosis et gentis Judaica, contra duas dissertationes Joannis
Tolandi; and by Mr. Benoit, minister at Delft, in his Melange de
remarques critiques, historiques, philosophiques, theologiques, sur les
deux dissertations de Mr. Toland, intituli.es, I'un V Homme sans super
stition, et V autre les origines Juddiques, printed at Delft in 1712.
* This is confuted in Dr. Clarke's Demonstration, <**:c. p. 24. Edit, 7th.

Let. IV. MR. toland's writings. 37
But what I shall here particularly take notice of, and by which
he hath chiefly distinguished himself, is the pains he hath taken to
invalidate the authority of the sacred Canon of the New Testament,
and to render it uncertain and precarious. This seems to have been
the design of the book he calls Amyntor, which he published in
1698, and in which he hath given a catalogue of books, attributed
in the primitive times to Jesus Christ, his apostles, and other emi
nent persons, " together with remarks and observations relating to
the Canon of Scripture." He hath there raked together whatever
he could find relating to the spurious gospels and pretended sacred
books, which appeared in the early ages of the Christian church.
These he hath produced with great pomp, to the number of eighty
and upwards'; and though they were most of them evidently false
and ridiculous, and carried the plainest marks of forgery and impos
ture, of which, no doubt, he was very sensible, yet he has done
what he could to represent them as of equal authority with the four
gospels and other sacred books of the New Testament, now received
among Christians. To this end he has taken advantage of the un
wary and ill-grounded hypotheses of some learned men, and has
endeavoured to prove, that the books of the present Canon lay con
cealed in the coffers of private persons till the latter times of Trajan
or Adrian, and were not known to the clergy or churches of those
times, nor distinguished from the spurious works of heretics ; and
that the Scriptures which we now receive as canonical, and others
which we now reject, were indifferently and promiscuously cited
and appealed to by the most ancient Christian writers. His design
in all this manifestly is to show, that the gospels, and other sacred
writings of the New Testament, now acknowledged as canonical,
really deserve no greater credit, and are no more to be depended
upon, than those books which are rejected and exploded as forgeries ;
and yet he had the confidence to pretend, in a book he afterwards
published, that his intention in his Amyntor was not to invalidate,
but to illustrate and confirm, the Canon of the New Testament.*
This may serve as one instance, among the many that might be
produced, of the writer's sincerity.
Several good answers were returned to Toland's Amyntor. Mr.
(afterwards) Dr. Samuel Clarke published a small tract in 1699, in-
titled, Some Reflections on that part ofthe Book called " Amyntor,"
which relates to the Writings of the primitive Fathers, and the
Canon of the New Testament. In this he gave an early specimen
of those talents which he afterwards employed to so great advan
tage in the defence of Christianity. The same book was afterwards
answered by the ingenious Mr, Stephen Nye, in his Historical Ac
count and Defence of the Canon of the New Testament, in Answer
* See Toland's preface to his Nazarenus, p. 9. This very odd book was well
answered by Mr. (afterwards) Dr. Mangey, in his Remarks upon Nazarenus ,- on which
Mr. Toland made some reflections, in a Tract he called Mangoneutes. Mr. Paterson
also published his Anti- Nazarenus, in answer to Mr. Toland's book. And Dr. Tho
mas Brett took some notice of it in the Preface to his Tradition necessary to explain
and interpret the Holy Scriptures.

38 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IV.
to "Amyntor" ; and by Mr. Richardson, in his Canon qf the Neiu
Testament Vindicated, whose work hath been justly and generally
esteemed, as executed with great learning and judgment. To these
may be added, Mr. Jones, who hath considered this matter dis
tinctly, and at large, in his New and Full Method of settling the
Canonical Authority of the New Testament, which was published
at London in 1726, in two volumes 8vo. ; to which a third small
one was afterwards added, published in 1727, but left unfinished
by reason of the author's death.
These learned writers have plainly shown Mr. Toland's great un
fairness and disingenuity in his whole management ofthe argument :
That he has frequently imposed upon his readers by false quotations,
or by grossly misrepresenting the authors he cites : That he has
been guilty of great blunders and ridiculous mistakes : That several
of the writings he produces, as having been written in the apostolic
age, were forged so late as the third or fourth century : That by far
the greatest part of those writings, of which he hath given so pom
pous a catalogue, and which he would put upon the world as most
ancient and apostolical, are expressly rejected by the authors whom
he himself refers to, as spurious and apocryphal, or even as absurd
and impious forgeries : That as to those few of them which are not
expressly rejected and condemned by the writers who have men
tioned them, it doth not appear by any one testimony, that they
were ever generally received and acknowledged in the Christian
church, or equalled with the books of the sacred Canon : and that
even those authors who have been thought to quote some of them
with approbation, yet expressly declare, that none but the four
gospels were received in the Christian church, as of divine authority :
That though some of the false gospels, that they might the better
pass upon the people, were compiled out of the genuine gospels,
with such additions, omissions, and interpolations, as might best
answer the design of the compilers, this did not hinder their being
generally rejected; whereas the four gospels, the same which we
now receive, were generally acknowledged from the beginning :
That these and other sacred books of the New Testament were, even
in the earliest ages, spread into distant countries, and were in the
possession of great numbers of persons, and read in the churches as
divine : And finally, that several of the genuine writers of the three
first centuries have left us catalogues of the sacred books of the New
Testament, but in none of these catalogues do any of the apocryphal
books appear.
To set this whole matter in a clearer light, Mr. Jones has given
us a complete enumeration of all the apocryphal books of the New
Testament, and made a critical inquiry into each of these books,
Avith an English version of those of them which are now extant, and
a particular proof that none of them were ever admitted into the
Canon ; and he hath distinctly produced and considered every testi
mony relating to them that is to be found in any Christian writer or
writers of the first four centuries after Christ.

Let. V. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 39
Upon all that hath been written on this subject, it is a just and
natural reflection, that as the number of spurious gospels which
were rejected by the primitive Christians shows, how scrupulous
they were not to admit any books as canonical, but those of whose
truth and authenticity they had sufficient proofs ; so their admitting
and receiving with so general a consent, the four gospels which are
now in our hands, affordeth a strong argument, that they had un
doubted evidence of the genuine truth and certainty of the evange
lical records, which fully satisfied them who lived nearest those
times, and who had the best opportunities of knowing ; and that to
this it was owing, that these, and no others, were generally received
and acknowledged as of divine authority.
On this occasion it is proper to mention Dr. Lardner's excellent
work of the Credibility of the Gospel History ; in the second part
of which, consisting of several volumes, he hath made a full and
accurate collection, of the passages which are to be found in the
writers, of the first ages ofthe Christian church, relating to the four
gospels, and other sacred books of the New Testament. This he
hath executed with so much fidelity and diligence, and with such
exactness of judgment, that the English reader, who hath not op
portunity to consult the originals, will be able to judge for himself,
upon considering the passages of the original authors, which are
very faithfully translated. This affordeth so clear and continued a
proof of their having been generally received in the earliest ages of
the Christian church, that one would hope it should put an end to
this part of the controversy.

LETTER V.

The Eajl of Shaftesbury, a fine and much admired Writer  Not very consistent in
the Account he gives of Christianity. — He casteth Reflections on the Doctrine of
future Rewards and Punishments, as if it were of Disservice to the Interests of
Virtue. — The contrary shown from his own Acknowledgments. — His Lordship
resolves the credit of holy Writ wholly into the Authority and Appointment ofthe
State. — He frequently takes Occasion to expose the Scriptures, and represents them
as uncertain, and not to be depended upon. — What he saith concerning Ridicule,
as the Test and Criterion of Truth, examined. — It is shown, that a turn to Ridicule
is not the properest Disposition for finding out Truth ; and that there is great
danger of its being misapplied. — His Lordship's own Writings furnish Instances of
such a wrong Application. — Authors mentioned that have written against him.
Sir,
It gives me a real concern, that, among the writers who have
appeared against revealed religion, I am obliged to take notice of
the noble author of the Characteristics. Some indeed are not will
ing to allow that he is to be reckoned in this number. Passages

40 A VIEW OP THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. V.
are produced out of some of his writings, in which he expresseth
very favourable sentiments of Christianity. This he doth particu
larly in a preface, which, and I believe justly, is ascribed to his
Lordship as the author, prefixed to a volume of select sermons of
Dr. Benjamin Whichcot, published in 1698. In that preface he
finds fault with those in this profane age that represent not only the
institution of preaching, but even the gospel itself, and our holy
religion, to be a fraud. He expresseth his hope, that from some
things in these sermons, even they that are prejudiced against Chris
tianity may be induced to like it the better; and that the vein of
goodness which appears throughout these discourses will make such
as are already Christians prize Christianity the more ; and the fair-
nessf ingenuity, and impartiality, which they learn from hence, will
be a security to them against the contrary temper of those other
irreconcilable enemies to our holy faith. In 1716 some of his letters
were published at London, under the title of Several Letters written
by a noble Lord to a Young Man in the University, 8vo. In
these letters, which were written a few years before the Earl of
Shaftesbury's death, in the years 1707, 1708, 1709, there are excel
lent sentiments and advices, and some which seem to discover a real
regard for the Christian religion.
It were greatly to be wished, on many accounts, that his Lord
ship had always expressed himself in an uniform manner on this
subject. No impartial man will deny him the praise of a fine
genius. The quality of the writer, his lively and beautiful imagina
tion, the delicacy of taste he hath shown in many instances, and the
graces and embellishments of his style, though perhaps sometimes
too affected, have procured him many admirers. To which may be
added, his refined sentiments on the beauty and excellence of virtue,
and that he hath often spoken honourably of a wise and good pro
vidence, which ministers and governs the whole in the best manner;
and hath strongly asserted, in opposition to Mr. Hobbes, the natural
differences between good and evil ; and that man was originally
formed for society, and the exercise of mutual kindness and bene
volence; and not only so, but for religion and piety too.* These
things have very much prejudiced many persons in his favour, and
prepared them for receiving, almost implicitly, whatever he hath
advanced. And yet it cannot be denied, that there are many things
in his books, which seem to be evidently calculated to cast contempt
upon Christianity and the holy Scriptures.
It is in the Characteristics that we are properly to look for an ac
count of his Lordship's sentiments. They were first published in
three vols. 8vo. in 1711; and the last part of his life was employed
in revising them, and preparing for a new and most correct edition
of them, which accordingly was published immediately after his
death. In them he completed the whole of his works which he in
tended should be made public ; and these books are so generally
* Characteristics, vol. iii. p. 224.

Let. V. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 41
read, and by many so much admired, that it is necessary to take
notice of those things in them which seem to have a bad aspect on
religion, and to be of a dangerous influence and tendency.
Of this kind are the frequent reflections he hath cast on the
doctrine of future rewards and punishments. This, as I observed
in a former letter, is represented by Lord Herbert as a fundamental
article of natural religion ; and though he carries it too far, in mak
ing it an innate principle, in which all mankind are, and have been
always agreed ; yet it cannot be denied, that there were some notices
and traces of it generally spread among the nations, though mixed
with much obscurity, and which probably had a great effect in pre
serving the remains of religion and virtue among the people, though
contradicted by several sects of their philosophers. It is the great
advantage and glory of Christianity, that it hath cleared and con
firmed this important principle, and hath brought life and immor
tality into an open light. But the author of the Characteristics
frequently expresseth himself in a manner, which tendeth to raise a
prejudice against this great principle of natural and revealed
religion, as if it were of little use in morals, yea, and in many cases
of a bad tendency. Thus, after having made an elegant representa
tion of the happy state of things in the heathen world, and the
liberty and harmony which then prevailed, he proceeds to show the
different state of things among Christians, which he seems chiefly
to attribute to the notion and belief of a future state. " A new sort
of policy (saith he) which extends itself to another world, and con
siders the future lives and happiness of men rather than the present,
has made us leap beyond the bounds of natural humanity; and, out
of a supernatural charity, has taught us the way of plaguing one
another most heartily. It has raised an antipathy which no tem
poral interest could ever do, and intailed upon us a mutual hatred
to all eternity. The saving of souls is now the heroic passion of
exalted spirits."* This is not the only place where his Lordship
speaks with ridicule of the saving of souls, and of those who act
for their souls' sakes, and make a careful provision for hereafter.^
And he elsewhere tells us, speaking of the expectation of God's
dispensing rewards and punishments in a future life, that " an ex
pectation and dependency so miraculous and extraordinary as this
is, must naturally take off from other inferior dependencies and en
couragements. Where infinite rewards are thus enforced, and the
imagination strongly turned towards them, the other common and
natural motives to goodness are apt to be neglected, and lose much
by disuse. Other interests are hardly so much as computed, whilst
the mind is thus transported in the pursuit of a high advantage, and
self-interest, so narrowly confined within ourselves. On this ac
count, all other affections to our friends, relations, or mankind, are
often slightly regarded, as being worldly, and of little moment in
respect of the interest of our souls.*};" To the same purpose he
* Characteristics, vol. 1. p. 18, 19. edit. Sth. f Ibid. vol. iii. p. 302.
\ Ibid. vol. ii. p. 68

42 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. V.
represents it, as if the Christian were so urged to have his conver
sation in heaven, as not to be obliged to enter into any engagements
with this lower world, or to concern himself either with the busi
nesses of life, or with the offices of private friendship, or the service of
the public: and that these are to be regarded as embarrassments to
him in. working out his own salvation.* It seems to be a natural
inference from all this, that, according to his representation of the
matter, it were better for mankind not to believe, or have any regard
to a future state at all ; for if the belief be weak, he tells us it will
be of the worst consequence. "There can (says he) in some respects
be nothing more fatal to virtue than the weak and uncertain belief
of future rewards and punishments : for the stress being wholly
laid on this foundation, if this foundation seem to fail, there is no
farther prop or security to men's virtue, f" And, on the other hand,
if the belief be strong, and deeply impressed on the mind, it will
cause men to neglect the interests and duties of this present life,
the duties they owe to their friends, their neighbours, and their
country. This is the account his Lordship gives of it ; but it is grossly
misrepresented : for since that virtue and goodness which is to be
rewarded hereafter includes, according to the scripture account of
it, the doing good here on earth as far as we have an opportunity,
and even a diligence in the business of our several callings, and the
exercise of social duties, it is evidently wrong to say, that a regard
to the recompenses of a future state must carry us off from those
duties, when, on the contrary, it bindeth us more strongly to the
performance of them. Our having our conversation in heaven is
not designed to cause us to neglect the duties incumbent upon us
here on earth ; for these are most expressly enjoined in the gospel-
law, as being comprehended in that righteousness which intitleth
us to that future glory ; but that we should not take up with the
inferior things of this present world as our proper ultimate portion
and happiness, but raise our views to a nobler state, where we hope
to arrive to the true felicity and perfection of our natures. And' this
certainly is an admirable lesson, highly to the honour of Christianity;
since it is a too great affection and esteem for worldly enjoyments
that puts men upon wrong .pursuits, and is the principal source of
the greatest disorders of human life.
Several other passages might be produced, in which his Lordship
seems to represent the belief and expectation of a future state as of
pernicious influence. Thus he observes, " that the principle of self-
love, which is naturally so prevailing in us, is improved and made
stronger every day by the exercise of the passions on a subject of
more extended interest;" (by which he refers to the expectation
of eternal happiness in a future state) '-and that there may be
reason to apprehend, that a temper of this kind will extend itself
through all the parts of life. And this has a tendency to create a
stricter attention to self-good and private interest, and must insen-
* Characteristics, vol. 1. p. 99, 100. t Ibid, vol. ii. p. 69.

Let. V. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 43
sibly diminish the affection towards public good, or the interest of
society, and introduce a certain narrowness of spirit, which is
observable in devout persons of almost all religions and persua
sions."* Here he lays a heavy charge on the hope of future happi
ness ; as if it had a bad tendency, to spread an inordinate criminal
selfishness through the whole of human life, to diminish the public
good affections, and introduce a narrowness of spirit. A most
unjust charge this ! Since it might easily be shown, that the belief
and hope of such an happiness as the gospel sets before us, and
which is there represented as a state of perfect goodness and the
most extended benevolence, and for which that charity which seeketh
not her own is one of the best preparatives, has a tendency, if rightly
understood, to enlarge the heart, to purify and ennoble the soul, and
raise it above the little narrow interests of the fleshly self, and to
fill it with the highest idea of God, and his immense goodness.
But his Lordship urges, that " those who talk of the rewards of
virtue make it so very mercenary a thing, and have talked so much
of its rewards, that one can hardly tell what there is in it after all
that is worth rewarding.-)- He observes that the most heroic virtue,
private friendship, and zeal for the public,% have little notice taken
* Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 58. + Ibid. vol. i. p. 97.
$ It has been noted by the deistical writers, that zeal for the public, or love to a
man's country, which was so much inculcated by some of the ancient philosophers and
moralists, is passed over in the gospel ; and this is mentioned as a defect in the Chris
tian morality. But if the matter be rightly considered, there is no just foundation for
this objection. To have recommended as by a divine authority, what the Romans
generally understood by love to their country, a strong passion for the glory of it, and
which often carried them to do great injustice to those of other nations, would not have
been suited to the nature of a revelation, which was designed for the general good of
mankind, and to promote universal benevolence. And if our Saviour had exhorted the
Jews in the name of God to a zeal for their country and its liberties, this, in the dis
position they were then in, cciuld have been looked upon in no other light, than as stir
ring them up to tumults and insurrections. But of love to our country, as it signifies
a true and affectionate concern for the public good, he gave an admirable example ; and
his example hath the force of a precept, according to the Christian system. This will
be evident to any one that impartially considers the affection he showed to the Jewish
nation, from whom he sprung according to the flesh ; the amiable concern he expressed
for the miseries he foresaw were coming upon them, and the endeavours he used to pre
vent those evils, by checking the tumultuous spirit which was then working among
them, and engaging them to a peaceable subjection to the Roman government. The
same observation may be made with regard to the apostles and first publishers of
Christianity after our Saviour's resurrection. If they had in the name of God urged it
upon the Jews and Gentiles, among whom they preached the gospel, to be zealous for
their country, and bad promised divine rewards to so heroic a virtue, this would
undoubtedly have been regarded as an attempt to raise disturbances in the state. It
could not, as things were circumstanced, have produced any good effects, and might
probably have had very bad ones. But if by zeal for the public be meant a hearty
desire and endeavour to promote thepublic good, and the real welfare of the community,
nothing can be better fitted to answer that end than the Christian law. It hath a
manifest tendency, wherever it is sincerely believed and embraced, to make good
magistrates, and faithful and peaceable subjects, and to render men truly useful to the
public, by engaging them to a diligent discharge of the duties of their several stations
and relations, and to the practice of universal righteousness. Christianity, which
requires us to exert so noble a spirit of disinterested benevolence, as to be ready to lay
down our lives for the brethren, 1 John iii. 16, would certainly engage and animate us,
if properly called to it, even to lay down our lives for the good of the community. A
virtuous regard to the public happiness, and a contributing as far as in us lies to pro-

44 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. V.
of them in our holy religion, nor have any reward promised them :
though if they be comprehended in the things that are lovely, and
virtuous, and praiseworthy, they are both commanded there, and
shall according to the gospel scheme be rewarded ; but his Lordship
who supposes the contrary, mentions it as an advantage, that no
premium or penalty being enforced in these cases, it leaves more
room for disinterestedness, the virtue is a. free choice, and the magna
nimity is left entire.* And does not this insinuate, that if no reward
had been promised at all, to any part of our duty, it would have
been the better for us, and our virtues would have been the more
excellent ? In like manner he represents that resignation to God,
which depends upon the hope of infinite retributions or rewards, to
be a false resignation, which discovers no worth nor virtue; since it is
only a man's resigning his present life and pleasure conditionally, for
that which he himself owns to be beyond an equivalent.'!'
And yet this right honourable author himself acknowledgeth,
that if by the hope of reward be understood the hope and desire of
virtuous enjoyments, or of the very practice and exercise of virtue
in another life, it is far from being derogatory to virtue, but is rather
an evidence of our loving it."f And nothing is more evident to any
one that is acquainted with the holy Scriptures, than that though
the future happiness is there sometimes metaphorically described
under splendid sensible images, which his Lordship is pleased to
reflect upon as trifling and childish, § yet the idea there given us of
it is the noblest, the sublimest, that can be conceived. It is repre
sented as a state of consummate holiness, goodness, and purity,
where we shall arrive fo the true perfection of our natures ; a state
into which nothing shall enter that defileth ; where the spirits of the
just shall be made perfect, and even their bodies shall be refined to
a wonderful degree ; where they shall be associated to the glorious
general assembly of holy and happy souls, and to the most excellent
part of God's creation, with whom they shall cultivate an eternal
friendship and harmony ; and, which is chiefly to be considered,
where they shall be admitted to the immediate vision of the Deity,
and shall be transformed, as far as they are capable of it, into the
divine likeness. Such is the happiness the gospel setteth before us,
and which certainly furnisheth a motive fitted to work upon the
worthiest minds. And the being animated by the hope of such a
reward hath nothing mean or mercenary in it, but rather is an argu
ment of a great and noble soul,
And even as to the fear of punishment, this also may be of signal
use to restrain the exorbitancies of the passions, to check the career
of. vice, and to awaken men to serious thoughts, and thereby put
them in the way of better impressions. His Lordship himself
mote it in our several stations, make a part of that excellent and praise-worthy conduct,
which it is the great design of the Christian religion to promote, and which, according
to the divine promises there given us, shall be crowned with a glorious reward.
* Characteristics, p. 98, 99, 100, 101. t Ibid. vol. ii. p. 59.
J Ibid. vol. ii. p. 55, 56. § Ibid. vol. i. p. 282.

Let. V. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 45
asserteth the usefulness of punishments, as well as rewards, in all
well-regulated governments. And with respect to future punish
ments he acknowledgeth, that " this service of fear be allowed ever
so low and base, yet religion being still a discipline and progress of
the soul towards perfection, the motive of reward and punishment is
primary, and of the highest moment with us, till being capable of
more sublime instructions, we are led from this servile state to the
generous service of affection and love."* And he elsewhere expressly
declareth, that " the hope of future rewards, and fear of future
punishments, how mercenary or servile soever it may be accounted,
is yet in many instances a great advantage, security, and support to
virtue;" and he offereth several considerations to prove that it is
so.f I cannot therefore help thinking that this admired writer has
done very wrong in throwing out so many insinuations against the
doctrine of future retributions, and against the holy Scriptures and
Christian divines for insisting so much upon it, as though it were
of ill influence to morals. I am persuaded, that any one who duly
considers the state of mankind, and what a mighty influence our
hopes and fears have upon us by the very frame of our nature, must
be sensible, that if the Scripture had only contained fine and elegant
discourses on the beauty of virtue, and the deformity of vice, instead
of proposing the sanctions of eternal rewards and punishments, it
would neither have been so becoming the majesty and dignity of
the supreme legislator, nor so well fitted to answer the end of a
revelation designed for common use. The Scripture, indeed, doth
every where suppose, and frequently representeth the excellence of
holiness and virtue, and the turpitude and deformity of vice and sin,
and the good effects of the one, and bad effects of the other, even
in this present state. But it is the great advantage of the Christian
revelation, that it carrieth our views beyond this narrow transitory
scene to a future eternal state, and deriveth its most important
motives from thence,_ which he himself acknowledgeth to be of
infinitely greater force ; and, which is very odd, he seemeth to make
the very force of those motives an objection against insisting upon
them, as if they would render all other motives and considerations
useless. The prejudices his Lordship hath conceived against Christianity
sufficiently appear from several of those passages that have been
mentioned ; to which many others might be added. He is pleased,
indeed, more than once to declare himself a very orthodox believer.
He hath assured us, in his ironical way, of his steady orthodoxy,
and entire submission to the truly Christian and Catholic doctrines of
our holy church, as by law established : and that he faithfully
embraces the holy mysteries of our religion even in the minutest par
ticulars, notwithstanding their amazing depth.% For which he gives
this reason, that "when the supreme powers have given their sanc
tion to a religious record or pious writ, it becomes immoral and
* Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 63, 273. t Ibid. vol. ii. p. GO, & seq.
% Ibid. vol. iii. p. 315, 316.

46 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. V.
profane in any one to deny or dispute the divine authority of the
least line or syllable contained in it."* To the same purpose he
elsewhere declares, that the mysteries of religion are to be determined
by those to whom the state has assigned the guardianship and pro
mulgation ofthe divine oracles ; and that the authority and direction
ofthe law is the only security against heterodoxy and error, and the
only warrant for the authority of our sacred symbols.^ So that
according to him, Christianity has no other foundation than what
will serve a false religion as well as the true. And elsewhere, in
the person of the sceptic, he talks of our visible sovereign's answering
for us in matters of religion.% In tnis llis Lordship exactly agrees
with Mr. Hobbes: he is, indeed, far from asserting with that
writer, that there is nothing good or evil in its own nature, and that
virtue and vice depend wholly on human authority and laws ; this
he on all occasions strenuously argueth against.' But he comes into
another part of his scheme, the making the magistrate or supreme
civil power, the sole judge of religious truth aud orthodoxy, and
resolving all doctrines and opinions in religion, and the authority
of what shall be accounted holy writ, into the appointment of the
state, a scheme which absolutely destroyeth the rights of private
judgment and conscience, and which evidently condemneth the
conduct and judgment of Christ and his apostles, and the primitive
Christians at the first plantation of Christianity, and of those excel
lent men that stood up for the reformation of it since.
But notwithstanding our noble author's pretended veneration and
submission to the holy writ by public authority established, he hath
taken occasion to expose the Scripture, as far as in him lay, to
ridicule and contempt, of which many instances might, be produced.
Not to mention the insinuations he has thrown out relating to par
ticular passages both in the Old Testament and the New, he hath
endeavoured to expose the spirit of prophecy, and made a ludicrous
representation of it, and compared it with the extravagancies ofthe
maddest enthusiasts. § Miracles he will not allow to be any proofs,
though ever so certain ;|| or that there is any ground to believe their
having been done, but the authority of our governors, and of those
whom the state hath appointed the guardians of holy writ.% He
speaks with ridicule, as other deistical writers have often done, of
what he calls the specious pretence of moral certainty, and matter of
fact,** and insinuates, that the facts recorded in the gospels are
absolutely uncertain, and that he that relies upon those accounts
must be a sceptical Christian.-\-f He represents St. Paul as speaking
sceptically, and as no way certain or positive as to the revelation
made to him, though the contrary is manifest from the apostle's own
most express declarations.^ The very encomiums he sometimes
pretends to bestow upon the Scriptures are of such a kind, as tend
* Characteristics, p. 231. t Ibid. p. 71. vol. i. p. 360. * Ibid. vol. ii. p. 353.
§ Ibid. vol. i. p. 45. vol. iii. p. 67. |] Ibid. vol. ii. p. 3.31, 332.
f Ibid. vol. iii. p. 71, 73. *• Ibid. vol. i. p. 44. ft Ibid. vol. iii. n 72.
}j Ibid. p. 74. 75. '

Let. V. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 47
rather to give a low and mean idea of them. Thus he commends
the poetical parts of Scripture, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, and other
entire volumes of the sacred collection, as full of humorous dis
courses, and jocular wit; and saith, that the sacred writers "had
recourse to humour and diversion, as a proper means to promote
religion, and strengthen the established faith." In like manner he
tells us, thatourSaviour's discourses were sharp, witty, and humorous;
and that his miracles were done with a certain air of festivity ; and
so that it is impossible not to be moved in a pleasant manner at their
recital; i. e. it is impossible not to laugh at them.* But though he
seemeth here to commend his good humour, as he calls it, and else
where represents Christianity as, in the main, a witty good-natured
religion, he insinuateth that this may be all an artful pretence to
cover deep designs and schemes laid for worldly ambition and
power. Having observed, that the affection and love which pro
cures a true adherence to the new religious foundation, must depend
either on a real or counterfeit goodness in the religious founder, whom
he had called before the divinely -authorized istructer find spiritual
chief; he adds, that " whatever ambitious spirit may inspire him,
whatever savage zeal or persecuting principle may be in reserve,
ready to disclose itself, when authority and power is once obtained,
the first scene of doctrine however fails not to present us with the
agreeable views of joy, love, meekness, gentleness, and modera
tion. "f I believe few that consider how this is introduced, will
doubt its being designed as an insinuation against the character of
the holy Jesus ; an insinuation for which there is not the least
foundation in his whole conduct, or in the scheme of religion he hath
taught, and which therefore is as malicious as it is groundless.
Agreeably to this he elsewhere intimates, that the gospel was
only a scheme of the clergy for aggrandizing their own power. He
represents it as a natural suspicion of those who are called sceptical :
" that the holy records themselves were no other than the pure
invention and artificial compliment of an interested party, in behalf
of the richest corporation, and most profitable monopoly, which
could, be erected in the world. "X But any one that impartially
considers the idea of religion set before us in the New Testament,
in its primitive simplicity, will be apt to look upon that which his
Lordship representeth as a natural supposition to be the most unrea
sonable supposition in the world. If an ambitious and self-
interested clergy, and particularly the favourers of the papal
hierarchy, had been to forge a gospel or sacred records to counte
nance their own claims, or if they had had it in their power to have
corrupted and new-modelled them in their favour, the Christian
religion and worship would in many instances have been very dif
ferent from what it now appeareth to be in the sacred writings of
the New Testament. Mr. Hobbes himself was so sensible of this,
even where he inveighs against the clergy, as endeavouring to put
* Characteristics, vol. iii. p. 118, 122, 123. t Ibid. p. 1 14, 115. J Ibid. p. 336.

48 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. V.
their own laws upon the Christian people for the laws of God, and
pretends that the books of the New Testament were in the first ages
in the hands only of the ecclesiastics, that he adds, " he is persuaded
they did not falsify the Scripture ; because, if they had had an
intention so to do, they would surely have made them more favour
able to their power over Christian princes, and civil sovereignty,
than they are."*
His Lordship on many occasions insinuates, that the original
records of Christianity are not at all to be depended upon. He
frequently repeats the charge of corruptions and interpolations ; and
particularly concludes the last Miscellany of his third volume with
a heap of objections against the Scriptures, drawn fram the great
number of copies, various readings, different glosses and interpreta
tions, apocryphal and canonical books, frauds of those through
whose hands they have been transmitted to us, 8tc.f These objec
tions are put into the mouth of a gentleman, whom he makes go off
the stage with an air of triumph, as they were unanswerable ; and
yet they are no other than what have been frequently considered
and obviated by the learned defenders of the Christian cause. Dr.
Tindal hath since urged all these objections, and more of the same
kind, more largely and with greater force than his Lordship hath
done ; and a full answer hath been returned to them, sufficient to
satisfy an impartial inquirer."};
I have already dwelt longer on this right honourable author than
I at first intended ; but you will undoubtedly expect that, before I
leave him, I should take some notice of that part of his scheme,
where he seems to set up ridicule as "the best and surest criterion of
truth : this deserves the rather to be considered, because there is
not perhaps any part of his writings of which a worse use hath
been made. I am sensible that some ingenious writers have been
of opinion, that in this his Lordship has been greatly misunder
stood or misrepresented ; that his opinion, if fairly examined,
amounts only to this, that ridicule may be of excellent use, either
against ridicule itself, when false and misapplied, or against grave,
specious, and delusive impostures ; that he distinguishes between
true and false ridicule, and between genteel wit, and scurrilous
buffoonery, which, without decency or distinction, raises a laugh
from every thing. This he condemneth, as justly offensive, and
unworthy of a gentleman and a man of sense. He would have
religion treated with good manners, and is for subjectino- ridicule to
the judgment of reason ; and he declares, that as he isln earnest in
defending raillery, so he can be sober in the use of it. Several
passages are produced to this purpose. § But whatever apology
may be made for this noble writer, I think it cannot be denied, that
he has frequently expressed himself very incautiously on this head,
and in a manner that may lead persons into a very wrong method
* Hobbes's Leviath. p. 203, 204. t Characteristics, vol. iii. p. 317  34.4.
\ See particularly Answer to Christianity as old as the Creation, vol. ii. chap 5 7 8
§ Characteristics, vol. i. p. 11, 63, 83, 85, 128 ' ' ' '

Let. V. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 49
of inquiring and judging concerning truth. He not only expressly
calls ridicule a test, and a criterion of truth, but declares for apply
ing it to every thing, and in all cases. He would have us carry
the rule of ridicule constantly with us, i. e. that we must be always
in a disposition to apply ridicule to whatever offers, to see whether
it will bear.* He observes, that " truth may bear all lights ; and
one of those principal lights or natural mediums, by which things
are to be viewed in order to a thorough recognition, is ridicule
itself, or that manner of proof (for so he calls it) by which we dis
cern whatever is liable to just raillery on any subject :"+ and
though he doth not approve the seeking to raise a laugh for every
thing, yet he thinks it right to seek in every thing what justly may
be laughed at.% He declares, that " he hardly cares so much as to
think on the subject of religion, much less to write on it, without
endeavouring to put himself in as good a humour as possible ;"§ i. e.
treating it, as he himself expresseth it, in a way of wit and raillery,
pleasantry and mirth. And, indeed, what kind of ridicule his
Lordship is for, and how he is for applying it in matters of religion,
plainly appears from many specimens he has given us of it in
several parts of his works; especially in his third volume, which is
designed as a kind of review and defence of all his other treatises.
The best and wisest men in all ages have always recommended a
calm attention and sobriety of mind, a cool and impartial examina
tion and inquiry, as the properest disposition for finding out truth,
and judging concerning it. But according to his Lordship's repre
sentation of the case, those that apply themselves to the searching
out truth, or judging what is really true, serious, and excellent,
must endeavour to put themselves in a merry humour, to raise up a
gaiety of spirit, and seek whether in the object they are examining
they cannot find out something that may be justly laughed at. And
it is great odds, that a man who is thus disposed will find out
something fit, as he imagines, to excite his mirth, in the most
serious and important subject in the world. Such a temper is so
far from being an help to a fair and unprejudiced inquiry, that it is
one of the greatest hindrances to it. A strong turn to ridicule hath
a tendency to disqualify a man for cool and sedate reflection, and
to render him impatient ofthe pains that are necessary to a rational
and deliberate search. A calm dispassionate love of truth, with a
disposition to examine carefully and judge impartially, and a pre
vailing inclination to jest and raillery, seldom meet together in the
same mind. This discovereth rather an odd turn and vivacity of
imagination, than strong reason and sound judgment; and it would
be a strange attempt to set up wit and imagination, instead of
reason and judgment, for a judge and umpire in matters of the
greatest consequence.
Our noble author indeed frequently observes, that truth cannot
** Characteristics, p.- 11, 12-. f Ibid. vol. i. p. 61.
X Ibid. p. 128. § Ibid. p. 128.

50 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. V .
be hurt by ridicule, since, when the ridicule is wrong placed, it will
not hold. " Nothing is ridiculous, but what is deformed, nor is any
thing proof against raillery, but what is handsome and just ; this
weapon therefore can never bear an edge against virtue and honesty,
and bears against every thing contrary to it."* It will be readily
allowed, that truth and honesty cannot be the subject of just ridi
cule ; but then this supposeth, that ridicule itself must be brought
to the test of cool reason ; and accordingly his Lordship acknow
ledges, that it is in reality a serious study to temper and regulate that
humour.f And thus, after all, we are to return to gravity and
serious reason as the ultimate test and criterion of ridicule and of
every thing else. But though the most excellent things cannot be
justly ridiculed; and ridicule, when thus applied, will, in the judg
ment of wise and thinking men, render him that useth it ridiculous;
yet there are many persons on whom it will have a very different
effect. .The ridicule will be apt to create prejudices in their minds,
and to inspire them with a contempt, or at least a disregard of
things, which, when represented in a proper light, appear to be of
the greatest worth and importance. The face qf truth indeed, as his
Lordship observes, is not less fair and beautiful for all the counter
feit vizards that have been put upon it ; yet these vizards may so
conceal and disguise its beauty, as to make it look a quite different
thing from what it really is. It cannot be denied, that truth, piety,
and virtue, have often been the subjects of ridicule ; and bad, but
witty men have met with too much success in exposing them to the
derision and contempt, instead of recommending them to the
esteem and veneration of mankind. It is our author's own obser
vation, that false earnest is ridiculed, but the false jest passes secure.
And though he says, he cannot conceive how any man should be
laughed out qf his wits, as some have been frightened out of them,
yet there have been and are too many instances of persons that have
been laughed out of their religion, honesty, and virtue. Weak ahd
unstable minds have been driven into atheism, profaneness, and
vice, by the force of ridicule, and have been made ashamed of that
which they ought to esteem their glory.
His Lordship is pleased to represent ridicule as the fittest way of
dealing with enthusiasts and venders of miracles and prophecy ; and
having mentioned the reveries of the French prophets, and 'recom
mended Bartlemy-Fair drollery, as proper to be used on such
occasions, he gives a broad hint, that if this method had been taken
against the Reformation, or against Christianity at its first rise, it
would have been effectual to destroy it, without having recourse to
persecution. % He has here plainly let us know in what light he
regardeth our holy religion. On other occasions, he declares only
for genteel raillery : but here it seems what he calls the Bartlemy-
Fair method, which I believe will hardly pass for very genteel rail-
* Characteristics, vol, 1. p. 11, 128, 129. t ibid p 128
t Ibid. vol. i. p. 28, 29.

Let. V. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 51
lery, is supposed to be sufficient, not only against that set of
enthusiasts who were called the French prophets, but against Chris
tianity itself. But he seems not to have considered, that the great
author and first publishers of the Christian religion were scoffed and
derided, as well as exposed to grievous sufferings and torments, and
that they had trial qf cruel mockings, as well as of bonds and impri
sonments. It appears from what remains of the works of Celsus, as
well as from what Ceecilius saith in Minucius Felix, that no sarcasm
or ridicule was spared among the heathens, by which they thought
they could expose Christianity; though when they found this
ineffectual to suppress it, they from time to time had recourse to
more violent and sanguinary methods : and indeed those that have
been most prone to scoff at religion and truth have often been most
prone to persecute it too. A scornful and contemptuous spirit,
which is an usual attendant on ridicule, is apt to proceed to farther
extremes ; nor am I sure, that they, who on all occasions throw out
the bitterest sarcasms against religion and its ministers, would not,
if it were in their power, give more substantial proofs of their aver
sion. His Loidship indeed honoureth that raillery and ridicule
which he recommends, with the name of good humour ; and by
shuffling one of these for the other, and playing upon the words,
maketh himself merry with his reader. But good humour taken in
the best sense, for what he calls the sweetest, kindest disposition, is a
different thing from that sneering faculty, which disposes men to
cast contempt upon persons and things, and which is often managed
in a manner little consistent with a true benevolence.
The proper use of ridicule is to expose such follies and absur
dities as scarce deserve or admit a very serious consideration ; but to
recommend raillery and ridicule as fit to be employed on all occa
sions, and upon the most weighty and important subjects, and as the
properest means for discerning truth, appears to be an inverting the
just order of things. It is, even when innocently used,, for the most
part a trifling employment ; and a man of great genius cannot
addict himself much to it, without descending beneath his character.
Indeed there needs no more to give one a disgust at this pretended
test of truth, than to consider the use his Lordship has made of it.
When he is in any degree serious, he shows how capable he is to
inform and please his reader ; but when he gives a loose to gaiety
and ridicule, he often writes in a manner unworthy of himself. And
I am apt to think, that if nothing of his had been published, but
the two first treatises of his first volume, and the third volume, in
which he chiefly indulges himself in those liberties, he would have
generally passed in the world for a sprightly and ingenious, but
very trifling writer. He often throws out his sneers and flirts
against every thing that comes in his way ; and with a mixture of
low and solemn phrase, and grave ridicule, he sometimes manages
it so, that it is not very easy to discern his true sentiments, and
what it is that he really aims at. This is not very consistent with
the rule he himself has laid down more than once; viz. That '' it is
« k2

52 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. V-
a mean, impotent, and dull sort of wit, which leaves sensible per
sons in a doubt, and at a loss to understand what one's real mind
is." And, again, he censures " such a feigned gravity, as immoral
and illiberal, foreign to the character of a good writer, a gentleman,
and a man of sense."* There seems to be no other way of screening
him from his own censure, but by supposing that he imagined his
true intention with regard to Christianity and the holy Scriptures
might be perceived, by any sensible person, through his concealed
ridicule. And it must be acknowledged that, for the most part, it
is so ; though, in some particular places, it is hard to know whether
he be in jest or earnest. By this covered way of ridicule he some
times steals upon the reader before he is aware, and, under the
guise of a friend, gives a more dangerous blow, than if he had acted
the part of an open and avowed enemy.
Upon the whole it may be justly said, that in this noble and
ingenious author we have a remarkable instance of the wrong
application of that talent of ridicule, of which he was so great a
master. And if it has succeeded ill in his hands, how much more
may it be expected to do so in those who, for want of his genius,
are not able to rise above low buffoonery, nor capable of distinguish
ing gross and scurrilous raillery and scandal from wit and delicate
ridicule ! His Lordship hath since had many awkward imitators,
and probably will have more, who will be apt to apply his test of
ridicule, not only, as he himself hath given them an example,
against revealed religion, but against all religion, even that which is
called natura], and against that virtue, of which, in his serious
moods, he hath professed himself so great an admirer.
I shall conclude my account of this celebrated author with
observing, that the Characteristics have been attacked, or at least
some particular passages in them have been occasionally animad
verted upon by several learned writers, by Bishop Berkley, Dr.
Wotton, Dr. Warburton, and others. That part of his Lordship's
scheme which represents a regard to future rewards, as derogating
from the dignity and excellence of virtue, hath been particularly
considered by Mr. Balguy, in a short but judicious tract, written,
like his other tracts, in a very polite and masterly manner. It is
intitled, A Letter to a Deist, concerning the Beauty and Excellency
of Moral Virtue, and the Support and Improvement which it receives
from the Christian Revelation, 8vo. 1729. But I know of none that
has undertaken to answer the whole, but Mr. (now) Dr. John
Brown, in a treatise intitled, Essays on the Characteristics, published
in 1750. This work is divided into three essays 5 the first is on
ridicule, considered as a test of truth ; the second is on the obliga
tions of men to virtue, and the necessity of religious principles ; the
third is on the revealed religion and Christianity. Under these
several heads, he hath considered whatever appeared to be most
obnoxious in the writings of our noble author.
Characteristics, vol. i. p. 63, vol. iii. p. 2-^5.

Let. VI. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 53
The length of this letter may seem to need an apology. But you,
I know, will agree with me, that as it was proper, in pursuance of
the design in which I am engaged, to take notice of this admired
writer, so it was necessary to make such observations as might help
to obviate the prejudices so many are apt to entertain in his favour,
to the disadvantage even of Christianity itself.

LETTER VI.

The Account given of the Earl of Shaftesbury's Writings in the foregoing Letter,
vindicated against the Exceptions that had been made against it  The being influ
enced by the Hope of tbe Reward promised in the Gospel hath nothing in it disin
genuous and slavish. — It is not inconsistent with loving Virtue for its own sake, but
tends rather to heighten our Esteem for its Worth and Amiableness. — The Earl of
Shaftesbury seems, in his Inquiry concerning Virtue, to erect such a Scheme of
Virtue as is independent of Religion, and may subsist without it  The Apology he
makes for doing so. — The close Connection there is between Religion and Virtue
shown from his own Principles and Acknowledgments. — Virtue not wholly confined
to good Actions towards Mankind, but takes in proper Affections towards the
Deity as an essential Part of it. — He acknowledges that Man is born to Religion.
 A remarkable Passage of Lord Bolingbroke's to the same Purpose.
Sir,
When I first published the View of the Deistical Writers, the
foregoing letter contained the whole of what I then intended with
regard to the observations on the Earl of Shaftesbury. But not
long after the publication of it, some persons, who profess to be real
friends to Christianity, and I doubt not are so, let me know that
they wished I had not put his Lordship into the list of deistical
writers; and they thought the charge against him had in some
instances been carried too far. This put me upon revising what I
had written relating to that matter with great care; and if I had
found just cause to think, that in this instance I had been mistaken
in the judgment I had formed, I should have thought myself obliged
publicly to acknowledge it. For when I formed the design of tak
ing a view of the deistical writers, I fixed it as a rule to myself, to
make a fair representation, as far as I was able, of the sentiments
of those writers, and not to push the charge against them farther
than there appeared to me to be just ground for. And it would
have given me a real pleasure to have reason to rank so fine a writer
as the Earl of Shaftesbury among the friends of the Christian cause.
But upon the most impartial inquiry I was able to make, I
have not seen reason to retract any thing I had offered with regard
to that nohle Lord. I thought it necessary, therefore, in the Sup
plement to the View of the Deistical Writers, to publish a letter
on that subject, which I shall here subjoin to the preceding one,

54 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VI.
that the reader may have all before him which relates to that noble
writer in one view.
It can scarce, I think, be denied by any impartial person who
hath read the Characteristics without prejudice, which are the only
works he avowed, and which had his last hand, that there are
several passages in them, which seem plainly intended to expose
Christianity and the holy Scriptures. And there is great reason to
apprehend, that not a few have heen unwarily led to entertain un
happy prejudices against revealed religion, and the authority of the
Scriptures, through too great an admiration of his Lordship's writ
ings. Some instances of this kind have come under my own par
ticular observation; and therefore it appeareth to me, upon the most
mature consideration, that I could not, in consistency with the de
sign I had in view, omit the making some observations upon that
admired author, as far as the cause of Christianity is concerned.
That part of my observations on Lord Shaftesbury's works which
I find hath been particularly excepted against, is the account
given of his sentiments with regard to future rewards and punish
ments. It hath been urged, that his design in what, he has written
on this subject was, not to insinuate that we ought not to be influ
enced by a regard to future rewards and punishments, the useful
ness of which he plainly acknowledgeth ; but only to show, that it
is wrong to be actuated merely by a view to the reward, or by a fear
ofthe punishment, without any real inward love to virtue, or any
real hatred and abhorrence of vice. To this purpose his Lordship
observes, that " to be bribed only, or terrified into an honest practice,
bespeaks little of real honesty or worth ; and that if virtue be not
really estimable in itself, he can see nothing estimable in following it
for the sake of a bargain."* He asks, " how shall we deny that to
serve God by compulsion, or for interest merely, is servile and mer
cenary ?f And he puts the case of a person's being incited by the
hope of reward to do the good he hates, and restrained by the fear
of punishment from doing'the ill to which he is not otherwise in the
least degree averse ;" and observes, that " there is in this case no
virtue whatsoever."*): If his Lordship had said no more than this,
he would have said no more than every real friend to Christianity
will allow ; though in this case there would still be great reason to
complain of his Lordship's having made a very unfair representa
tion of the sense of those divines who think it necessary to urge
the motives drawn from future rewards and punishments. It is
true, that if the belief of future retributions should have no other
effect than the putting some restraint upon men's outward evil
actions, and regulating their external behaviour, even this would be
of great advantage to the community ; but this is far from being
the only or principal thing intended. Those certainly must know
little of the nature and tendency of the Christian religion who
should endeavour to persuade themselves or others, that though a
* Characteristics, vol. 1. p. 97. t Ibid, vol. ii. p. 272. *j Ibid. p. 55.

Let. VI. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 55
man had a real love of vice in his heart, and only abstained from
some outward vicious practices for fear of punishment, and though
he had an inward aversion to true goodness and virtue, and only
performed some outward acts that had a fair appearance ; this alone
would denominate him a good man, and intitle him to the future
reward ; for this were to suppose, that though he were really a
vicious and bad man, without that purity and sincerity of heart on
which the Scriptures lay so great a stress, yet the practising some
external acts of obedience, destitute of all true goodness and of
virtuous affections, would intitle him to the favour of God, and to
that eternal happiness which is promised in the gospel. If any
persons should teach this, I would readily join with his Lordship in
condemning them. But he hath not contented himself with strik
ing at the supposed wrong sentiments of divines, whom he loves on
all occasions to expose. There are several passages in his Lord
ship's writings which appear to be directly intended to represent
the insisting, so much as is done in the gospel, upon the eternal
rewards and punishments of a future state, as having a bad influ
ence on the moral temper, and particularly as tending to strengthen
an inordinate selfishness, and to diminish the affections towards
public good, and to make men neglect what they owe to their
friends, and to their country. He plainly intimates the disadvan
tages accruing to virtue from the having irrfinite rewards in view, and
that in that case the common and natural motives to goodness are apt
to be neglected, and lose much by disuse* He represents the being
influenced by a regard to future rewards and punishments as at the
best disingenuous, servile, and qf the slavish kind; and to this he
opposes a liberal service, and the principle of love, and the loving
God and virtue for God and virtue's sake ;-f- and accordingly he deter
mines, that those duties, to which men are carried without any view
to such rewards, are for that reason more noble and excellent, and
argue a higher degree of virtue. If the case really were as his
Lordship is pleased to represent it, it must certainly give a very dis
advantageous idea of Christianity ; as if the insisting upon those
most important motives, drawn from a future eternal world, which
our Saviour came to set in the strongest light, tended to introduce
and cherish a wrong temper of mind, narrow and selfish, disingenu
ous and servile, to weaken our benevolent affections both public
and private, and to take us off from the duties and offices ofthe civil
and social life. At that rate it could not be said that the gospel
is a friend to society and to mankind ; and instead of promoting the
practice of true virtue, it would rather derogate from it, and degrade
it from its proper dignity and excellence. It was therefore neces
sary to show, as I endeavoured to do in my observations on Lord
Shaftesbury's writings, that this is far from being a just representa
tion of the nature and tendency of the Christian doctrine of future
* Several passages to this purpose were produced out of tbe Characteristics in the
preceding Letter, which I need not here repeat.
f See Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 271, 272, 273.

A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS.

Let. VI.

rewards and punishments. The most noble and extensive benevo
lence, exerting itself in all proper effects and instances, in opposition
to a narrow selfish disposition, is what Christianity every where
recommendeth and enforceth in the most engaging manner ; and it
is its peculiar advantage, that it carrieth our views to a better state,
where the benevolence which is now begun shall be completed, and
shall be exercised in a more enlarged sphere, and extend to a nobler
society. And can the hope of this possibly tend to diminish our
benevolence, or must it not rather heighten and improve it? When
a man hath a firm and steady persuasion, that the Supreme Being
will reward his persevering constancy in a virtuous course with
everlasting felicity, this, instead of weakening his inward affection
to virtue, and his moral sense of its worth and excellency, must in
the nature of things greatly confirm and establish it. There is there
fore an entire consistency between the loving virtue for its own sake,
i. e. as his Lordship explains it, because it is amiable in itself* and
the being animated to the pursuit and practice of it by such rewards
as the gospel proposeth ; for it never appears more excellent and
lovely, than when it is considered as recommending us to the favour
and approbation of Him, who is the supreme original Goodness and
Excellence, and as preparing us for a complete happiness in a future
state, where it shall be raised to the highest degree of beauty and
perfection. In like manner it must mightily strengthen our abhor
rence of vice, and our sense of its turpitude and malignity, to con
sider it as not only at present injurious and disgraceful to our nature,
but as an opposition to the will and law of the most wise and righ
teous governor of the world, who will in a future state of retribution
inflict awful punishments upon those who now obstinately persist
in a presumptuous course of vice and wickedness.
Our noble author himself, when he proposeth to show what obli
gation there is to virtue, or what reason to embrace it, which is the
subject of the second book of his Inquiry, resolveth it into this,
that moral rectitude or virtue must be the advantage, and vice the
misery and disadvantage qf every creature; and that it is the crea
ture's interest to be holy, good, and virtuous.f To prove this
seems to be the entire design of that book, which he concludes with
observing, that virtue is the good, and vice the ill qf every one.
He seems indeed, in displaying the advantages of the one and dis
advantages of the other, to confine himself wholly to this present
life, and to abstract from all consideration of a future state. But if
the representing virtue be to our interest here on earth, and condu
cive to our present happiness, be a just ground of obligation to virtue,
and a proper reason to embrace it, which his second book is designed
to show, then surely, if it can be proved, that it tendeth not only
to our happiness here, but to procure us a perfect happiness in a
future state of existence, this must mightily heighten the obligation
to virtue, and strengthen the reason for embracing it. If havino-
* Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 67, f Ibid. p. 81, 98.

Let. VI. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 57
regard to the present advantages of virtue be consistent in his
scheme with loving virtue for its own sake, and as amiable in itself,
and doth not render the embracing it a mercenary or slavish service,
why should it be inconsistent with a liberal service to be assured
that it shall make us happy for ever ? Or why should they be ac
counted greater friends or admirers of virtue, who consider its excel
lency only with regard to the narrow limits of this transitory life,
than they who regard it as extending its beneficial influence to a
nobler state of existence, and who believe that it shall flourish in
unfading beauty and glory to eternity ? That an affection in itself
worthy and excellent should grow less so, by considering it as so
pleasing to the Supreme Being, that he will reward it with ever
lasting happiness, and raise it to the highest perfection it is capable
of in a future state, would be a strange way of reasoning.
It was observed in the account given of the Earl of Shaftesbury's
writings, in the preceding letter, that there are several passages in
which he acknowledgeth, that the hope of future rewards, and fear
of future punishments, is a great advantage, security, and support
to virtue. If these passages had been concealed or disguised, there
might have been just ground of complaint. But they were fairly
laid before the reader, as well as those that seemed to be of a con
trary import, that he might be able to form a judgment of his Lord
ship's sentiments, how far he is consistent with himself, and whether
the censures be well founded, which he passeth upon those who
insist upon the rewards promised in the gospel as powerful motives
to virtue. He chargeth them as " reducing religion to such a phi
losophy, as to leave no room for the principle of love — and as build
ing a future state on the ruins of virtue, and thereby betraying reli
gion and the cause of God."* He representeth them as if they were
against a liberal service, flowing from an esteem and love of God, or a
sense of duty and gratitude, and a love of the dutiful and grateful
part, as good and amiable in. itself, t And he expressly declareth, that
''the hope of future reward, and fear of future punishment, cannot
consist in reality with virtue or goodness if it either stands as essen
tial to any moral performance, or as a considerable motive to any act,
of which some better affection ought alone to be a sufficient cause."*);
Here he seems not willing to allow, that the regard to future retri
butions ought to be so much as a considerable motive to well-doing ;
and asserteth, that to be influenced by it as such a motive cannot
consist in reality with virtue or goodness. This is in effect to say,
that we ought not to be influenced by a regard to future rewards
and punishments at all ; for if they be believed and regarded at all,
they must be a considerable motive : since, as he himself observes,
where infinite rewards are firmly believed, they must needs have a
mighty influence, and will over-balance other motives.? If there
fore it be inconsistent with true virtue or goodness, to be influenced
* Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 272, 279. f Ibid. vol. ii. p. 270.
t Ibid. p. 58. § Ibid. p. 68.

58 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VI
by them as a considerable motive, it is wrong to propose them to
mankind ; for why should they be proposed, or to what purpose
believed, if it be inconsistent with true goodness to be influenced by
them in proportion to their worth or importance ? His Lordship
elsewhere observes, " that, by making rewards and punishments "
(i. e. the rewards and punishments proposed in the gospel ; for to
these he evidently refers) " the principal motives to duty, the Chris
tian religion in particular is overthrown, and the greatest principle,
that of fove, rejected."* When he here brings so heavy a charge
against those who make the rewards of the gospel their principal
motives, his meaning seems to be this : That they make the hope
of future eternal happiness a more powerful motive than the present
satisfaction and advantages virtue hath a tendency to produce,
which are the motives he so largely insists upon, and which he calls
the common and natural motives to goodness. And is the being more
animated by the consideration of that eternal happiness which is the
promised reward of virtue, than by any of the advantages it yields
in this present state (though these also are allowed to have their
proper weight and influence) so great a fault, as to deserve to be
represented as a subverting of all religion, and particularly the
Christian? If the eternal life promised in the gospel be rightly
understood, the hope of it includeth a due regard to the glory of
God, to our own highest happiness, and to the excellence of virtue
and true holiness ; all which are here united, and are the worthiest
motives that can be proposed to the human mjnd. There is a perfect
harmony between this hope, and what his Lordship so much extols,
the principle of divine love, such as separates from every thing
worldly, sensual, and meanly interested ; nor can it be justly said,
concerning this hope of the gospel reward, what he saith of a violent
affection towards private good, that the more there is of it, the less
room there is for an affection towards goodness itself, or any good
and deserving object, worthy of love and admiration for its own sake,
such as God is universally acknowledged to be.i The very reward
itself includeth the perfection of love and goodness ; and the happi
ness promised principally consisteth in a conformity to God, and in
the fruition of him ; and therefore the being powerfully animated
with the hope of it is perfectly consistent with the highest love and
admiration qf the Deity, on account of his own infinite excellency.
It appeareth to me, upon considering and comparing what hath
been produced out of Lord Shaftesbury's writings, that though his
Lordship's good sense would not allow him absolutely to deny the
usefulness of believing future retributions, yet he hath in effect en
deavoured on several occasions to cast a slur upon Christianity, for
proposing and insisting upon what he calls infinite rewards ; and
thus he hath attempted to turn that to its disadvantage which is its
greatest glory, viz. its setting the important retributions of a future
state in the clearest and strongest light, and teaching us to raise our
* Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 279. t Ibid. p. 58, 59.

Let. VI. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 59
affections and views to things invisible and eternal. His Lordship
hath, upon the most careful and diligent revisal of his works, suf
fered those obnoxious passages still to continue there. Nor will any
man wonder at this, who considereth the design and tendency of
many other passages in his writings : That he hath taken occasion
to ridicule the spirit of prophecy, and to burlesque several passages
of holy writ : That he hath represented the Scriptures as absolutely
uncertain, and the important facts by which Christianity is attested,
as not to be depended upon : That he hath insinuated injurious re
flections upon the character and intentions of the blessed Founder
of our holy religion: That he hath represented our faith in the
gospel as having no other foundation than the authority of the state;
and hath hinted, that it could hardly have stood the test of ridicule,
and even of Bartholomew-fair drollery, had it been applied to it at
its first appearance.*
As I have been engaged so far in an examination of Lord Shaftes
bury's writings, 1 shall take this occasion to make some farther ob
servations on his celebrated Inquiry concerning Virtue.
He sets out with observing, that " religion and virtue appear to
be so nearly related, that they are generally presumed inseparable
companions ; but that the practice of the world does not seem in
this respect to be answerable to our speculations ;" That " many
who have had the appearance of great zeal in religion, have yet
wanted the common affections of humanity. \ Others again, who
have been considered as mere atheists, have yet been observed to
practise the rules of morality, and act in many cases with such
good meaning and affection towards mankind, as might seem to
force an acknowledgment of their being virtuous."! His Lordship
therefore proposeth to inquire, " What honesty or virtue is, consi
dered by itself, and in what manner it is influenced by religion ; how
far religion necessarily implies virtue ; and whether it be a true say
ing, that it is impossible for an atheist to be virtuous, or share any
real degree of honesty and merit. "\
In that part of the Inquiry, in which he proposeth to show what
virtue is, he seems to make it properly consist in good affections
towards mankind, or in a man's having " his disposition of mind
and temper suitable and agreeing to the good of his kind, or of the
system in which he is included, and of which he constituteth a
part."|| And he had before declared, that some who have been
considered as mere atheists have acted with such good affection
towards mankind, as might seem to force an acknowledgment that
they are virtuous. * See all this clearly shown, p. 63, and seq.
f It will readily be acknowledged, that the appearance of religion is often separated
from true virtue ; but real practical religion necessarily comprehendeth virtue ; and as
far as we are deficient in the practice of virtue, we are deficient in what religion indis
pensably requireth of us.
t Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 5, 6. § . Ibid. p. 7.
|| Ibid. p. 31. 77, 78. 86, 87, and passim.

GO A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VI.
And as this is. the notion his Lordship gives of the nature of
virtue, so when he treats of the obligation to virtue, and the reason
there is to embrace it, which is the subject of the second book of
the Inquiry, he seems to place it in its tendency to promote our
happiness in this present life, without taking any notice of a future
state. Accordingly, many have looked upon the Inquiry as designed to
set up such a notion of virtue and its obligations, as is independent
on religion, and may subsist without it. And in the progress of
that Inquiry, his Lordship takes occasion to compare atheism with
superstition or false religion, and plainly gives the former the pre
ference ; and seems sometimes to speak tenderly of it. Having ob
served, that nothing can possibly, in a rational creature, exclude a
principle of virtue, or render it ineffectual, except what either, "1.
Takes away the natural and just sense of right and wrong ; 2. Or
creates a wrong sense of it; 3. Or causes the right sense of it to be
opposed by contrary affections."* As to the first case, the taking
away the natural sense of right and wrong, he will not allow that
atheism, or any speculative opinion, persuasion, or belief, is capable
immediately or directly to exclude or destroy it ; and that it can do
it no other way than indirectly by the intervention of opposite affec
tions, casually excited by such belief .f As to the second case, the -
wrong sense, or false imagination of right and wrong, he says, that,
" however atheism may be indirectly an occasion of men's losing a
good and sufficient sense of right and wrong, it will not, as atheism
merely, be the occasion of setting up a false species of it ; which
only false religion, or fantastical opinion, derived immediately from
superstition and credulity, is able to effect."! As to the third
case, which renders a principle of virtue ineffectual, viz. its being
opposed by contrary affections, he says, that " atheism, though it
be plainly deficient, and without remedy, in the case of ill judgment
on the happiness of virtue, yet it is not indeed of necessity the cause
of such ill judgment ; for without an absolute assent to any hypo
thesis of theism, the advantages of virtue may possibly be seen and
owned, and a high opinion of it established in the mind."§
Our noble author was sensible of the offence he had given, by
seeming to speak favourably of atheists, and by erecting a system
of virtue independent of religion, or the belief of a Deity ; and in a
treatise he published some years after the Inquiry, intitled, The
Moralists, a Philosophical Rhapsody , makes an apology for it : That
"he has endeavoured to keep the fairest measures he could with
men of this sort," (viz. atheistical persons, and men of no religion)
" alluring them all he was able, and arguing with a perfect indif-
ferency even on the subject of a Deity ; having this one chief aim
and intention, how in the first place to reconcile those persons to
the principles of virtue, that by this means a way might be laid
* Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 40. t Ibid. p. 44. 15. J Ibid. p. 46 51 52
§ Ibid. p. 69.

Let. VI. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. Gl
open to religion, by removing those greatest, if not only obstacles to
it, which arise from the vices and passions of men. That it is
upon this account chiefly he endeavours to establish virtue upon
principles by which he is able to argue with those who are not yet
inclined to own a God or future state. — He owns he has made
virtue his chief subject, and in some measure independent on reli
gion ; yet he fancies he may possibly appear at last as high a divine
as he is a moralist;" — And says, " He will venture to affirm, that
whosoever sincerely defends virtue, and is a realist in morality, must
of necessity in a manner, by the same scheme of reasoning, prove as
very a realist in divinity."* And elsewhere he says, that " we may
justly as well as charitably conclude, that it was his design, in ap
plying himself to the men of looser principles, to lead them into
such an apprehension of the constitution of mankind, and of human
affairs, as might form in them a notion of order in things, and draw
hence an acknowledgment of the wisdom, goodness, and beauty,
which is Supreme ; that being thus far become proselytes, they
might be prepared for that divine love which our religion would
teach them, when once they should embrace it, and form them
selves to its sacred character. "f
This must be owned to be a handsome apology ; so that if we
take his Lordship's own account of his intention in his Inquiry, it
was not to favour atheism, but rather to reclaim men from it ; to
reconcile atheists to the principles of virtue, and thereby bring them
to a good opinion of religion. It may no doubt be of real service to
the interests of virtue, to endeavour to make men sensible of its
great excellence in itself, and its present natural advantages, which
his Lordship sets forth at large, and in a very elegant manner ; and
this is no more than hath been often represented by those divines,
who yet think it necessary to insist on the rewards and punishments
of a future state. There are indeed many that have said, what no
man who knows the world and the history of mankind can deny,
that in the present situation of human affairs, a steady adherence to
virtue often subjects a man to severe trials and sufferings ; and that
it frequently happeneth, that bad and vicious men are in very pros
perous outward circumstances ; but I scarce know any that have
maintained what his Lordship calls that unfortunate opinion, viz.
that " virtue is naturally an enemy to happiness in life ;" or who
suppose, that " virtue is the natural ill, and vice the natural good
of any creature."*}* Nor would any friend to Christianity have
found fault with his Lordship's endeavouring to show, that by the
very frame of the human constitution, virtue has a friendly influence
to promote our satisfaction and happiness, even in this present life ;
and that vice has naturally a contrary tendency. But certainly it
was no way necessary to his design, supposing it to have been, as
he professes, to serve the cause of virtue in the world, to throw out
so many insinuations as he has done against the being influenced by
» Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 266, 268. f Ibid. p. 279. i Ibid. p. 71, 72.

62 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VI.
a regard to future rewards and punishments; as if it aTgued a
higher degree of virtue to have no regard to them at all. And
though in several passages he shows the advantage which arises to
virtue from religion and the belief of a deity, yet whilst he seems to
allow that virtue may subsist, and even be carried to a considerable
degree without it, I am afraid it will give encouragement to those he
calls the men of looser principles ; .and that instead of reclaiming
them from atheism, it will tend to make them easy in it, by leading
them to think they may be good and virtuous men without any reli
gion at all.
His Lordship seems, from a desire of keeping the fairest measures,
as he expresses it, with men of this sort, to have carried his com
plaisance too far, when he asserts, that atheism has no direct ten
dency either to take away and destroy the natural arid just sense of
right and wrong, or to the setting up a false species of it. This is
not a proper place to enter into a distinct consideration of this sub
ject. I shall content myself with producing some passages from the
most applauded doctor of modern atheism, Spinosa, and who hath
taken the most pains to form it into a system. He proposeth, in the
fifteenth chapter of his Tractatus Theologico-politicus, to treat of the
natural and civil right qf every man. De jure uniuscuj usque uaturali
<Sf civili. And the sum of his doctrine is this ; that every man has a
natural right to do whatever he has power to do, and his inclination
prompts him to ; and that the right extends as far as the force. By
natural right, or law, jus et institutum natura., " he understands
nothing else but the rules of the nature of each individual ; according
to which it is determined to exist and act after a certain manner*."
* Per jus & institutum naturee nihil aliud intelligo, quam regulas naturae uniuscujus-
que individui, secundum quas unumquodque naturaliter determinatum concipimus ad
certo modo existendum & operandum. Ex. gr. pisces a natura determinati sunt ad na-
tandum, magni ad minores comedendum, adeoque pisces summo naturali jure aqua
potiuntur, & magni minores comedunt — " Sequitur unumquodque individuum jus
summum habere acfomnia quae potest. — Nee hie ullam agnoscimus differentiam inter
homines & reliqua nature individua, neque inter homines ratione praiditos, & inter
alios qui veram rationem ignorant, ne<jue inter fatuos, delirantes. Jit sanos." Quare
inter homines quamdiu sub imperio solius naturae vivere considerantur, tarn ille qui ra
tionem nondum novit, vel qui virtutis habitum nondum habet, ex solis legibus appetitus
summo jure vivit, quam ille qui ex legibus ration's vitam suam dirigit. Hoc est sicuti
sapiens jus summum habet ad omnia quae ratio dictitat, sive ex legibus rationis vi'vendi ¦
sic etiam ignarus et animi impotens summum jus habet ad omnia quae appetitus suadet)
sive ex legibus appetitus vivendi. Jus itaque naturale uniuscujusque hominis, non sand
ratione, sed cupiditate etpotentia dererminatur — Quicquid itaque unusquisque qui sub
solo natura imperio consideratur, sibi utile vel ductu sana? rationis, vel ex afiectuum
impetu judicat, id summo naturae jure appetere, et quacunque ratione, sive vi, sive dolo,
sive precibus, sive quocunque demum modo facilius poterit, ipse capere licet, et conse-
quenter pro hoste habere eum, qui impedire vult, quo minus animum expleat suum.
Ex quibus sequitur jus et institutum naturae sub quo omnes nascuntur, et maxima ex
parte vivunt, nihil nisi quod nemo cupit, et nemo potest, prohibere ; non contentiones
non odia, non iram, non dolos, nee absolute aliquid quod appetitus suadet, aversari'
Nee minim, nam natura non legibus humane rationis, qua? non nisi verum utile et con-
versationem intendunt, sod infinitis aliis, qua? totius naturee, cujus homo particula est
selenium ordinem respiciunt; ex cujus sola necessitate, omnia individua certo modo de-
terminantur ad existendum et operandum.— Ostendimus jus naturale sola potentia cu-
jusque determinari.— Nemo, nisi promisso aliud accedat, de tide alterius potest esse
certus, quandoquidem unusquisque naturae jure dolongere potest; nee pactis stare tene-
tur, nisi spc msjoris boni, vel metu majoiis mali.— Tract. Theolog. Polit cap xvi

Let. VI. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 63
And after having observed, that " the large fishes are determined
by nature to devour the smaller, and that therefore they have a
natural right to do so," and that " every individual has the highest
right to do all things which it has power to do ;" he declares, that
" in this case he acknowledges no difference between men and other
individuals of nature, nor between men that make a right use of their
reason and those that do not so ; nor between wise men and fools ;
that he who does not yet know reason, or has not attained to a
habit of virtue, hath as much the highest natural right to live ac
cording to the sole laws of appetite, and to do what that inclines
him to, as he that directs his life by the rules of reason hath to live
according to reason." Accordingly, he directly asserts, " that the
natural right of every man is determined not by sound reason, but
by inclinations or appetite and power ; that therefore whatever any
man, considered as under the sole government of nature, judges to
be useful for himself, whether led by sound reason, or prompted by
his passions, he has the highest natural right to endeavour to pro
cure it for himself any way he can, whether by force or fraud ; and
consequently to hold him for an enemy, who would hinder him from
gratifying his inclination ; and that from hence it follows, that the
right and law of nature, under which all are born, and for the most
part live, only prohibits that which a man does not desire, or which
is out of his power; nor is it averse to contentions, hatred, wrath,
deceit, or to any thing that the appetite puts him upon. And no
wonder ; for nature is not confined within the laws of human reason,
which only intend the true benefit of mankind, but depends upon
infinite other things which respect the eternal order of universal
nature, of which man is only a minute part ; from the necessity of
which alone all individuals are determined to exist and operate after
a certain manner." He often repeats it in that chapter, that " natural
right is only determined by the power of every individual." And he
expressly asserts, that '' no man can be sure of another man's fidelity,
except he think it his interest to keep his promise ; since every man
has a natural right to act by fraud or deceit, nor is obliged to stand
to his engagements, but from the hope of greater good, or fear of
greater ill.''
I think it must be owned, that these principles have not merely
an indirect and casual, but a plain and direct tendency, to take
away or pervert the natural sense of right and wrong, or to introduce
a false species of it, if the substituting power and inclination instead
of reason and justice can be accounted so. This is to argue conse
quentially from atheism, when all things are resolved into nature and
eternal necessity, by which are understood the necessary effects of
matter and motion. Spinosa indeed owns, that it is more profitable
to live according to the dictates of reason, or the prescriptions of the
civil laws, than merely according to appetite or natural right. But
whilst men think they have the highest natural right to do whatever
they have power to do, and inclination prompts them to, civil laws
will be but feeble ties, and bind a man no farther than when he has

04 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VI.
not power, or thinks it not for his interest to break them. Virtiie
and vice, fidelity and fraud, are on a level; the one equally founded
in natural right as the other ; and how any man can be truly virtu
ous upon this scheme I cannot see.
It appears to me therefore, that, instead of endeavouring to show
that virtue may subsist without religion, or the belief of a God and
a future state, one of the most important services that can be done
to mankind is to show the close connection there is between religion
and virtue or good order, and that the latter cannot be maintained
without the former. And this indeed plainly follows from some of
the principles laid down by our noble author in his Inquiry.
Although he seems to have intended to show, that an atheist may
be really virtuous ; and observes, in a passage cited above, that
without the belief of a Deity, " the advantages of virtue may possibly
be seen and owned, and a high opinion of it established in the mind,"
he there adds, " however it must be confessed, that the natural
tendency of atheism is very different*;" where he seems plainly to
allow, that atheism is naturally an enemy to virtue, and that the
direct tendency of it is to hinder the mind from entertaining a right
opinion of virtue, or from having a due sense of its advantages. And
elsewhere, speaking of the atheistical belief, he observes, that it
" tends to the weaning the affections from every thing amiable and
self-worthy ; for how little disposed must a person be to love or ad
mire any thing as orderly in the universe, who thinks the universe
itself a pattern of disorder !"+ To this may be added another re
markable passage, in which his Lordship declares, that " he who
only doubts of a God may possibly lament his own unhappiness,
and wish to be convinced ; but that he who denies a Deity is daringly
presumptuous, and sets up an opinion against the sentiments of
mankind and being of society;" where he seems plainly to pro
nounce, that atheism is subversive of all virtue, which in his scheme
hath an essential relation to society and the good of the public.
And accordingly he adds, " that it is easily seen, that one of these"
(viz. he that only doubts) " may bear a due respect to the magis
trates and laws, but not the other (viz. he that denies a Deity),
" who being obnoxious to them is justly punishable");."
Several passages might be produced, in which his Lordship re
presents the tendency religion hath to promote virtue, He observes,
that " nothing can more highly contribute to the fixing of tight ap
prehensions, and a sound judgment or sense of right and wrong, than
to believe a God, who is represented such, as to be a true model or
example of the most exact justice, and highest goodness and
worth ! " § And again, that " this belief must undoubtedly serve
to raise and increase the affection towards virtue, and help to submit
and subdue all other affections to this alone. — And that, when this
theistical belief is entire and perfect, there must be a steady opinion
ofthe superintendency of a Supreme Being, a witness and spectator
* Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 69. f Ibid. p. 70. % Ibid. p. 260. § bid. p. 51.

Let. VI. EARL OF SHAFTl'.HBUHY. 65
of human life, and conscious of whatsoever is felt or acted in tha
universe; so that in the perfectest recess, or deepest solitude, there
must be one still presumed remaining with us, whose presence singly
must be of more moment than that of the most august assembly
upon earth; and that in such a presence, as the shame of guilty ac
tions must be the greatest of any, so must the honour be of well
doing, even under the unjust censures of a world. And in this case
it is very apparent, how conducing a perfect theism must be to
virtue, and how great a deficiency there is in atheism *." He shows,
that " where by the violence of rage, lust, or any other counter
working passions, the good affection may frequently be controled
and overcome — if religion interposing creates a belief, that the ill
passions of this kind, no less than their consequent actions, are the
objects of a Deity's animadversion ; it is certain , that such a belief
must prove a seasonable remedy against vies, and be in a particular
manner advantageous to virtue f. And he concludes the first book
of the Inquiry concerning Virtue with observing, that " we may
hence determine justly the relation which virtue has to piety; the
first not being complete but in the latter. And thus," saith he, '* the
perfection and height of virtue must be owing to the belief of a
God*. From these passages it sufficiently appears, that those who would
separate virtue from religion cannot properly plead Lord Shaftes
bury's authority for it. And indeed not only is religion a friend to
virtue, and of the highest advantage to it, but as it signifies proper
affections and dispositions towards the Supreme Being, is itself the
noblest virtue. It is true, that his Lordship seems frequently to
place virtue wholly in good affections towards mankind. But this
appears to be too narrow a notion of it. He himself makes virtue
and moral rectitude to be equivalent terms ;§ and moral rectitude
seems as evidently and necessarily to include right affections toward^
God, as towards those of our own species. He that is deficient in
this, must certainly be deficient in an essential branch of good af
fections, or moral rectitude. If a human creature could not be said
to be rightly disposed, that was destitute of affections towards its
natural parents, can he be said to be rightly disposed, who hath not
a due affection towards the Common Parent, as Lord Shaftesbury
calls him, of all intellectual beings ? This noble writer describes
virtue to be that which is beautiful, fair, and amiable in disposition
and action. And he asks, " Whether there is on earth a fairer
matter of speculation, a goodlier view or contemplation, than that of
a beautiful, proportioned, and becoming action?" || And is there any
thing more beautiful, more justly proportioned, and more becoming,
than the acting suitably to the relation we bear to the Supreme
Being, and the serving, adoring, and honouring him, as far as we
are capable of doing sq ? Is there such a beauty and harmony in
good affections towards those of our own species, and must there
» Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 57. t Ibid. p. 60, 61. \ Ibid. p. 76. § Ibid. p. 77. 81
|| Ibid. vol. ii. p. 105.
F

66 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VI.
not be still more beauty and excellency in having our minds formed
to proper affections and dispositions towards our Maker, Preserver,
and Benefactor, the source and principle, to use our author's ex
pressions, ef all being and perfection, the supreme and sovereign
beauty, the original of all which is good and amiable? His Lordship
speaks in the highest terms of the pleasing consciousness which is
the effect of love or kind affections towards mankind. But certainly
there is nothing that can yield more of a divine satisfaction, than
that which ariseth from a consciousness of a man's having approved
himself to the best of beings, and endeavoured to promote his glory
in the world, and to fulfil the work he hath given us to do- And it
will be readily acknowledged, that a necessary part of this work is
the doing good to our fellow-creatures.
The very notion He so frequently gives of virtue, as having an
essential relation to a system, seems, if understood in its proper ex
tent, to include religion, and cannot subsist without it. His Lord
ship indeed frequently explains this as relating to the system of the
human species, to which we are particularly related, and of which
we constitute a part. But he also represents the human system as
only a part ofthe universal one, and observes, that " as man must
be considered as having a relation abroad to the system of his kind,
so even the system of his kind to the animal system ; this to the
world (our earth), and this again to the bigger world, the universe.'' *
And that " having recognised this uniform consistent fabric, and
owned the universal system, we must of consequence acknowledge
an universal mind."-|- He asserts, that " good affection, in order to
its being of the right kind, must be entire;" and that " a partial
affection, or social love in part, without regard to a complete society
or whole, is in itself an inconsistency, and implies an absolute con
tradiction.""); But how can that affection to the system be said to
be entire, or of the right kind, which hath no regard to the author
of it, on whom the whole system, the order, and even the very
being of it, absolutely depends; and without whom indeed there
could be properly no system at all, nothing but disorder and confu
sion? On this occasion it will be proper to produce a remarkable
passage in his third volume ; where he observes, that " if what he
had advanced in his Inquiry, and in his following Philosophic Dia
logue, be read, it will follow, that since man is so constituted by
means of his rational part, as to be conscious of this his more im
mediate relation to the universal system and principle of order and
intelligence', he is not only by nature sociable within the limits of his
own species or kind, but in a yet more generous and extensive
manner. He is not only born to virtue, friendship, honesty, and
faith, but to piety, adoration, and a generous surrender of his mind
to whatever happens from the Supreme Cause or order of things,
which he acknowledges entirely just and perfect. "§
I have insisted the more largely upon this, because many there
* Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 286. t Ibid. p. 290. { Ibid. p. 110, 113, 114.
£ Ibid. vol. iii. p. 221.

Let. VI. EARL OF SHAFTESBURY. 07
are among us that talk highly of virtue, who yet seem to look upon
religion to be a thing in which they have little or no concern. They
allow that men are formed and designed to be useful to one another ;
but as to what is usually called piety towards God, or those acts of
religion of which God is the immediate object, this does not enter
at all into their notion of virtue or morality. They slight it as a
matter of no consequence, and think they may be good and virtuous
without it. But not to urge, that religion or a true regard to the
deity is the best security for the right performance of every other
part of our duty, and furnisheth the strongest motives and engage
ments to it (which certainly ought greatly to recommend it to every
lover of virtue) , there is nothing which seems to be capable of a
clearer demonstration, from the frame of the human nature, and the
powers and faculties with which man is endued, than that he alone,
of all the species of beings in this lower world, is formed with a
capacity for religion ; and that consequently this was one principal
design of his creation, and without which he cannot properly answer
the end of his being. To what hath been produced from the Earl
of Shaftesbury, I shall add the testimony of another writer, whom
no man will suspect of being prejudiced in favour of religion, the
late Lord Viscount Bolingbroke ; who, though he sometimes seems
to make man only a higher kind of brute, and blames those who
suppose that the soul of man was made to contemplate God, yet at
other times finds himself obliged to acknowledge, that man was
principally designed and formed for religion. Thus, in the specimen
he gives of a meditation or soliloquy of a devout theist, he talks of
feeling the superiority of his species ; aud adds, " I should rouse in
myself a grateful sense of these advantages above all others, that I
am a creature capable of knowing, of adoring, and worshipping my
Creator, capable of discovering his will in the law of my nature, and
capable of promoting my happiness by obeying it*." And in ano
ther passage, after inveighing, as is usual with him, against the
pride and vanity of philosophers and divines, in exalting man and
flattering the pride of the human heart, he thinks fit to acknow
ledge, that " man is a religious as well as social creature, made to
know and adore his Creator, to discover and to obey his will ; that
greater powers of reason, and means of improvement, have been
measured out to us than to other animals, that we might be able to
fulfil the superior purposes of our destination, whereof religion is un
doubtedly the chief; and that in these the elevation and pre-eminence
of our species over the inferior animals consist-)-.'' I think it plainly
followeth, from what Lord Bolingbroke hath here observed, and
which seems to be perfectly just and reasonable, that they who live
in an habitual neglect of religion, are chargeable with neglecting the
chief purpose of their being, and that in which the true glory and
pre-eminence of the human nature doth principally consist; and
* Lord Bolingbroke's Works, vol. v. p. 390, 391. See also to th; same purpose,
ibid. p. 340. t Ibid- P- 47°-
F2

68 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VII.
that consequently they are guilty of a very criminal conduct, and
which they can by no means approve to the great author of their
existence, who gave them their noble powers, and to whom, as the
wise and righteous governor of the world, they must be accountable
for their conduct.
I have been carried farther in my observations on this subject
than I intended ; but if this may be looked upon as a digression, I
hope it will not be thought unsuitable to the main design I have
in view. I am, Sir, &c.

LETTER VII.

Mr. CoUins's Discourse qf Free-thinking  He gives a long Catalogue of Divisions
among the Clergy, with a view to show the Uncertainty of the Christian Religion 
His Attempt to prove that there was a general Corruption of the Gospels in the
sixth Century. — The Absurdity of this manifested. — His Pretence that Friendship
is not required in the Gospel, though strongly recommended by Epicurus, .shown to
be vain and groundless  An Account of his Book, entitled, The Grounds and
Seasons of the Christian Religion.— The pernicious Design and Tendency of that
Book shown. — He allows Christianity no Foundation but the allegorical, i. e. as he
understands it, the false sense of the Old Testament Prophecies. — His Method
unfair and disingenuous  Some Account ofthe principal Answers published against
the Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered, which was designed to be a defence of it.
Sir,
In the year 1713 came out a remarkable treatise, which it will be
necessary to take some notice of, entitled, A Discourse of Free-
thinking, occasioned by the Rise and Growth qf a Sect called Free
thinkers. It was written by Anthony Collins, Esq., though pub
lished, as his other writings are, without his name. The same
gentleman had in 1707 published an Essay concerning the Use of
Reason in Propositions, the Evidence whereof depends upon human
Testimony; in which there are some good observations, mixed with
others of a suspicious nature and tendency. In' this essay there are
animadversions upon some passages in a tract written by Dr. Francis
Gastrel, afterwards Lord Bishop of Chester, entitled, Some consi
derations concerning the Trinity, and the Way of managing that
Controversy, published in 1702. To the third edition of which,
published in 1707, that learned and judicious divine subjoined a vin
dication of it, in answer to Mr. CoUins's essay. This gentleman
also distinguished himself by writing against the immateriality and
immortality of the human soul, as he afterwards did against human
liberty and free agency ; and, with regard to both these, was an
swered by Dr. Samuel Clarke, with that clearness and strength for
which that author was so remarkable. The Discourse of Free-

Let. VII. MR. COLLINS. 69
thinking is professedly intended to demonstrate the necessity and
usefulness of free-thinking, from reason, and from the examples of
the best and wisest men in all ages. But there is great reason to
complain of a very unfair and disingenuous procedure throughout
the whole book. He all along insinuates, that those who stand up
for revealed religion, are enemies to a just liberty of thought, and to
a free examination and inquiry. His design is certainly levelled
against Christianity, and yet he sometimes affects to speak of it
with respect. He no where argues directly against it, but takes
every occasion to throw out sneers and insinuations, which
tend to raise prejudices in the minds of his readers. No small
part of this book is taken up in invectives against the clergy,
and in giving an account of the divisions that have been among
them about the articles of the Christian faith. If there hath been
any thing unwarily advanced by any of them, if they have vented
any odd or absurd opinions, or have in the heat of dispute cast rash
and angry censures upon one another, these things are here turned
to the disadvantage of Christianity itself; as if this excellent reli
gion were to be answerable for all the passions, follies, and exorbi
tances of those that make profession of it ; or, as if the differences
which have been among Christians were a proof, that there is
nothing in the Christian religion that can be safely depended upon.
This indeed has been a standing topic for declamation in all the
deistical writings, though it is founded upon a principle which is
manifestly false, viz. that whatever has been at any time contro
verted is doubtful and uncertain ; a principle which, as I had oc
casion to observe before, would set aside the most important truths
of natural religion as well as revealed. But these gentlemen too
often act, as if they were not very solicitous about the former, pro
vided they could destroy the latter with it.
A great noise is raised in this Discourse of Free-thinking, about
the pious frauds of ancient fathers and modern clergy, and their
forging, corrupting, and mangling of authors ; and it is insinuated,
that they have altered and corrupted the Scriptures, as best served
their own purposes and interests. Lord Shaftesbury had insinuated
the same thing before ; and these clamours are continually renewed
and repeated, though it hath been often shown with the utmost
evidence, that a general alteration and corruption of the holy Scrip
tures was, as the case was circumstanced, an impossible thing.
And we have the plainest proof in fact, that even in the darkest
and most corrupt ages of the Christian church, the Scriptures were
not altered in favour of the corruptions and abuses which were then
introduced, since no traces of those corruptions are to be found
there; on the contrary, they furnish the most convincing arguments
for detecting and exposing those corruptions.
But what he seems to lay the greatest stress upon, is a passage
from Victor of Tmuis, in which it is said, that at the command of
the emperor Anastasius, the holy gospels were corrected and
amended. This our author calls an account of a general alteration

70 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VII.
of the four gospels in the sixth century ; and he says, it was disco
vered by Dr. Mills, and was very little known before.* But then
he should have taken notice of what Dr. Mills has added, viz. that
it is certain as any thing can be, that no such altered gospels were
ever published; and that if the fact had been thus, it would have
been mentioned with detestation by all the historians, and not be
found only in one blind passage of a puny chronicle. Indeed there
cannot be a plainer instance of the power of that prejudice and
bigotry against Christianity, which has possessed the minds of the
gentlemen that glory in the name of Free-thinkers, than their laying
hold on such a story as this to prove a general corruption of
the gospels, contrary to all reason and common sense. Let us sup
pose the emperor Anastasius to have had an intention to alter the
copies of the gospels (which yet it is highly improbable he should
attempt), he could only have got some of the copies into his hands ;
there would still have been vast numbers of copies spread through
different parts of the empire, which he could not lay hold of, espe
cially considering how much he was hated and opposed ; or if we
should make the absurd and impossible supposition of his being
able to get all the copies throughout the east into his hands; yet as
there were still innumerable copies in the west, where he had little
or no power, they would have immediately detected the alteration
and corruption, if there had been any. Loud complaints would
have been made of the attempt, but no such complaints were ever
made ; and in fact it is evident, that there have been no greater dif
ferences since that time between the eastern and western copies
than there were before. And it is undeniably manifest, from great
numbers of authors, who lived in the preceding ages, and whose
works are come down to us, that the Scriptures, a great part of
which is transcribed into their writings, were the same before that
pretended alteration, that they have been since.
With a view of showing the uncertainty ofthe sacred text ofthe
New Testament, this author takes notice of the various readings
collected by Dr. Mills, which he says amount to thirty thousand.
This objection has been so fully exposed, and this whole matter set
in so clear a light by the famous Dr. Bentley, under the character
of Phileleutherus Lipsiensis, that one should think it would have
been for ever silenced. And yet it has been frequently repeated
since by the writers on that side, and particularly by Dr. Tindal, in
his Christianity as old as the Creation, without taking the least
notice of the clear and satisfactory answer that had been returned
to it.
The ancient prophets have been the constant objects of the sneers
and reproaches of these gentlemen, and accordingly this writer has
told us, that, to obtain the prophetic spirit, Ihey played upon music,
and drank wine.-]- That they might very lawfully and properly
drink wine, in a country where there was great plenty of it, may
well be allowed, without any diminution of their character; and
* Discourse of Free-thinking, p. 89, 90. f Ibid p. 153,

Let. VII. MR. COLLINS. 71
that they employed music, particularly in singing praises to God,
may be concluded from several passages in the sacred writings.
But certainly, if they had the prophetic spirit at all, neither wine
nor music gave it them, or could enable them to foretell things to
come. Bnt then he does them the honour to say, they were great
free-thinkers, and that " they writ with as great liberty against the
established religion of the Jews (which the people looked on as the
institution of God himself), as if they looked upon it all to be im
posture." That the prophets freely declared against the Jewish
corruptions, against their idolatries and immoralities, and against
their laying the chief stress on ritual observances, whilst they neg
lected the weightier matters of the law, is very true. And this is
here, by an unpardonable disingenuity, represented as an inveighing
against the Mosaic dispensation, as if they did not believe it to have
been originally of divine institution ; whereas it is to the last degree
evident, that they all along suppose the law of Moses to have been
instituted by God himself, and reprove the people and priests, not
for their adherence to that law, but for their deviations from it, and
neglect of the most important duties there enjoined.
This gentleman has given us a long list oi free-thinkers, but there
is none of them all of whom he seems to speak with greater com
placency than Epicurus, though he owns that his system was a
System of Atheism* And after having observed, that Epicurus
was eminent for that most divine of all virtues, friendship, he says,
that we Christians ought to have a high, veneration of him on this
account, because even our holy religion itself does not, any where par
ticularly require of us this virtue. The noble author of the Charac
teristics had made the same observation before him, and both the
one and the other cite a passage from bishop Taylor, to show that
there is no word properly signifying friendship in the New Testa
ment. Thus they have happily hit upon an instance in which the
morality of the gospel is defective, and exceeded by that of Epicurus.
But it ought to be considered, that friendship, when understood of
a particular affection between two or more persons, is not always a
virtue. It may in some cases encroach upon a nobler and more ex
tensive benevolence, and may cause persons, and hath often done
s», to sacrifice the most important duties to private affections. Or,
w'nere this is not the case, yet where friendship ariseth from a par
ticular conformity of natural tempers and inclinations between some
mQj and others, or, as Lord Shaftesbury expresses it, that peculiar
relation which is formed by a consent and harmony of minds, it does
notoroperly come under the prescription of a law, nor can be the
mat^r of a general precept. But if it be understood of that bene
volence which uniteth virtuous minds in the sacred bands of a
special cordial affection, never was this more strongly recommended
and erforced than in the gospel of Jesus. It requireth us to love and
do good to all mankind, in which sense bishop Taylor rightly observes,
T Discourse of Free-thinking, p. 90, 129.

72 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VII
in the very passage referred to, that Christian charity is friendship to
all the world. And the last-mentioned noble writer asketh, Can
any friendship be so heroical as love to mankind?* And, besides
this general affection towards all men, the gospel requireth us to
cultivate a still nearer, stronger, and more intimate affection towards
good men, whom it representeth as obliged to love one another with
a pure heart fervently. Lord Shaftesbury is pleased to mention St.
Paul's saying, that, perhaps for a good man one would even dare to
die, and observes, that the apostle is so far fretm founding any pre-*
cept upon it, that he ushers it in with a very dubious per advent ure.f
But it is to be supposed, his Lordship had not considered that noble
passage of St. John, Hereby perceive we the love of God,- because he,
our Lord Jesus Christ, laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay
down our lives for the brethren, 1 John iii. 16. Can friendship be
carried to a nobler height, or be enforced by more engaging motives,
or a more powerful example? Can it be pretended, that the most
divine qf all virtues, friendship, is not required of us in our holy
religion, when we are there required, if properly called to it, to give
so glorious a proof of our friendship to our Christian brethren,
whom we are taught to regard as united to us by the most sacred
ties? We shall dismiss this Discourse of Free-thinking with observing,
that as the author of it hath put Solomon into his list of free-thinkers,
for asserting, as he pretends he did, the mortality of the soul, and
denying a future state, though the contrary is manifest from what
Solomon himself saith, Eccles. xii. 7, 14, so he takes that occasion
to inform his reader, that the immortality of the soul wasjirst taught
by the Egyptians, and was an invention of theirs.% Mr. Toland
had said the same thing before in his letters to Serena ;§ and this
may help us to judge how far some of our boasted free-thinkers are
from being friends to natural religion taken in its just extent.
Soon after this Discourse of Free-thinking appeared, the reverend
Mr. Hoadley, now lord bishop of Winchester, published some very
sensible Queries addressed to the Authors of a late " Discourse of
Free-thinking ; in which the dishonest insinuations, false reasonings,
and pernicious tendency of that treatise are laid open in a short and
concise, but clear and convincing manner. There were several other
ingenious pamphlets published to the same purpose ; but none of
them was so generally admired and applauded as the Remarks on a
late "Discourse of Free-thinking," by Phileleutherus Lipsiensis, i e.
Dr. Bentley. This learned writer hath so fully and effectually de
tected and exposed the great and inexcusable mistakes committed by
the author of that discourse, his blunders and absurdities, his fre
quent wrong translations and misunderstanding of the authors he
quotes, or wilful perversions and misrepresentations of their sense,
" Characteristics, vol. ii. p. 229. t Ibid. vol. i. p. 10!,
) Discourse of Free-lliiiikiiig, p. 152. <s Letter 2d.

Let. VII. MR. COLLINS. 73
that it might, one should think, have discouraged him from appear
ing any more as a writer in this cause.*
But such was this gentleman's zeal against Christianity, that,
some years after, he thought fit to attack it in another way, which
was more subtle and more dangerous. He published a Discourse
on the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion, London,
1724, 8vo. as if his design had been to do real service to Christianity,
by establishing it upon a sure and solid foundation. The scheme
he lays down is this, that our Saviour and his apostles put the
whole proof of Christianity solely and entirely upon the prophecies
ofthe Old Testament; that if these proofs are valid, Christianity is
established upon its true foundation ; but if they are invalid, and
the arguments brought from thence be not conclusive, and the pro
phecies cited from thence be not fulfilled, Christianity has no just
foundation, and is therefore false. Accordingly he sets himself to
show, that the prophecies cited in the New Testament from the Old,
in proof of Christianity, four or five of which he particularly con
siders, are only typical and allegorical proofs ; and that allegorical
proofs are no proofs, according to scholastic rules, i. e. as he plainly
intends it, according to the rules of sound reason and common sense.
He asserts, that the expectation of the Messiah did not obtain
among the Jews, till a little before the time of our Saviour's appear
ing, when they were under the oppression of the Romans; and that
the apostles put a new interpretation on the Jewish books, which was
not agreeable to the obvious and literal meaning of those books,
and was contrary to the sense of the Jewish nation : That Chris-
• There was a French translation of the " Discourse of Free-thinking," carried on
under Mr. CoUins's own eye, and printed at the Hague in 1714., though it bears Lon
don on the title page. In this translation several material alterations are made, and a
different turn is given to several passages from what was in Mr. CoUins's original
English. This is plainly done with a view to evade the charges which had been
brought against him by Dr. Bentley, under the character of ' ' Phileleutherus Lipsiensis,"
some of which charges that bore very properly against Mr. Collins's book, as it was
first published, will appear impertinent to those that judge only by this translation.
But care is taken not to give the least notice of these alterations to the reader, upon
whom it is made to pass for a faithful version of the original. All this is clearly shown
by the author of the French translation of " Dr. Bentley's Remarks on the Discourse
of Free-thinking," which was printed at Amsterdam in 1738, under the title of " Fri-
ponerie Laique des pretendus Esprits sorts d'Angleterre : The Lay-craft of the pre
tended Free-thinkers of England." This gentleman, Mr. de la Chapelle, has made it
appeal-, that Mr. Collins, and his translator, who acted under his direction, have been
guilty of palpable falsifications and frauds, which ill became one who had in that very
book raised a loud outcry against the clergy for " corrupting and mangling of authors,
and for pious frauds in the translation or publishing of books." And I cannot but
observe on this occasion, what must have occurred to every one that has been much
conversant in the deistical writers, that it would be hard to produce any persons what
soever who are chargeable with more unfair and fraudulent management in their quota
tions, in curtailing, adding to, or altering, the passages they cite, or taking them out of
their connection, and making them speak directly contrary to the sentiments of the
authors. It is well known that they affect frequently to quote Christian divines ; but
they seldom do it fairly, and often wilfully misrepresent and pervert their meaning.
Many glaring instances of this sort might be produced out of the writings of the most
eminent deistical authors, if any man should think it worth his while to make a collec
tion to this purpose.

74 A VlfilW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VII.
tianity deriveth all its authority from the Old Testament, and is
wholly revealed there, not literally, but mystically and allegorically;
and that therefore Christianity is the allegorical sense of the Old
Testament, and is not improperly called Mystical Judaism; and that
consequently the Old Testament is, properly speaking, the sole true
Canon of Christians ; That the allegorical reasoning is set up by
St. Paul, and the other apostles, as the true and only reasoning
proper to bring all men to the faith of Christ ; and all other methods
of reasoning are wholly discarded. Thus it appeareth, that the
evident design of this author's book is to show, that the only foun
dation on which Christianity is built is false; that the first pub
lishers of the gospel laid the whole support and credit of Christ's
divine mission, and of the religion he taught, upon pretended Jewish
prophecies, applied in a sense which had no foundation in the pro
phecies themselves, and contrary to the plain original meaning and
intention of those prophecies, which the Jews had never understood
nor applied in that sense, and which had nothing to support it but
allegory ; i. e. the mere fancy of him that so applies it. If we
needed any farther proof of our author's intentions towards Chris
tianity, it might be observed, that he represents Jesus and his apos
tles as having founded their religion on prophecy, in like manner as
the several sects among the heathens did theirs on divination. And
these prophets, he tells us, manifested their divine inspiration by
the discovery of lost goods, and telling of fortunes.* So that he
makes Jesus and his apostles found their religion on the predictions
of fortune-tellers and diviners, and those misapplied too; which
plainly shows what a despicable idea this writer intended to convey
of the Christian religion, and the blessed author of it.
Few books have made a greater noise than this did at its first pub
lication. The turn given to the controversy had something in it
that seemed new, and was managed with great art ; and yet, when
closely examined, it appears to be weak and trifling. The very fun
damental principle of the author's whole system, viz. That the pro
phecies of the Old Testament are the sole foundation of Christianity,
and the only proofs and evidences insisted upon by our Saviour and
his apostles in confirmation of it, is absolutely false, as any one
may know that can read the New Testament : for it is undeniable,
that our blessed Lord often appealeth to his wonderful works, as
manifest proofs that the Father had sent him; and the apostles in
like manner frequently appealed to his miracles and resurrection,
and to the miracles wrought, and the extraordinary gifts of the
Holy Ghost poured forth in his name, as uncontested proofs of the
divine authority of that scheme of religion which they published to
the world. With regard to the prophecies, the course of his reason
ing really amounts to this ; that because there are difficulties and
obscurities attending some very few passages cited out of the Old
Testament in the New, as having a reference to the times of the
* Discourse on the Grounds, &c. of the Christian Religion, chap. vi.

Let. VII. MR. COLLINS. 75
gospel, and we cannot well, at this distance, see the propriety of
the application, therefore the whole of the N.ew Testament is false ;
and the accounts given of our Saviour, his excellent discourses, the
miracles he performed, and the illustrious attestations given to him
from heaven, are of no force at all ; and all the arguments drawn
from thence are ineffectual and vain. It is in the same strain of
reasoning that he concludes, that because four or five prophecies
(for he produces no more) cited in the New Testament from the Old,
seem not to relate to the gospel times in a literal, but in a secondary
and typical, i. e. as he explains it, an allegorical sense, therefore
none of the Old Testament prophecies can be applied directly and
literally at all, or have any relation to our Saviour and the gospel
dispensation. And because the modern Jews contest the applica
tion of some prophecies to the Messiah, which are applied to our
Saviour in the New Testament, therefore the ancient Jews allowed
none of those prophecies to be applied to the Messiah, which in the
New Testament are applied to him ; and yet the contrary is invin
cibly evident from their writings still extant, by which it appeareth,
that most ofthe prophecies applied to our Saviour in the New Tes
tament, and many others not there mentioned, were understood of
the Messiah by the ancient Jews, as many of them still are by the
most celebrated of the modern Jews themselves. And it was cer
tainly a strange attempt in this author to endeavour to prove, that
the Jews had no notion or expectation of the Messiah, till a little
before the times of our Saviour, when all their writers, with one
consent, ancient and modern, who are the proper judges in such a
case, agree, that there had been all along among them an hope
and expectation of the Messiah, founded, as they universally be
lieved, on the sacred writings. It may further let us see this writer's
ingenuity, that because St. Paul makes use of an allegory in his
epistle to the Galatians, though he there manifestly introduces it by
way of illustration, and expressly declares to those to whom he
writes, that these things are allegorized, therefore he layeth the
whole stress of his argument upon allegory as the principal and only
proof; and that he and the other apostles absolutely reject all other
reasoning but the allegorical, which is no reasoning at all. And
yet any one that ever read St. Paul's epistles must know, that he
often makes use of reasoning and argument, and very close reasoning
too. The last instance I shall produce of this author's extraordinary
way of arguing is, that because the apostles and sacred writers of
the New Testament acknowledge the authority of the Old, and
draw proofs from thence, therefore the New Testament is of no
authority at all, and the Old Testament is the sole Canon of Chris
tians, i. e. because there is an harmony between the Old Testament
and New, and because the former had foretold a glorious person who
was to introduce a new and more perfect dispensation ; therefore
that new and more perfect dispensation is no new dispensation at
all, but is absolutely and in all respects the same with that old and
more imperfect one in which it was prefigured and foretold, and
which was designed to prepare the way for it.

7b" A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VII.
Having made these general observations, it will be proper to take
notice of some of the answers that were made to this book ; and here
that which was written by Dr. Chandler, the lord bishop of Coven
try and Lichfield, deserves special notice. It was published in
1725, and is entitled A Defence of Christianity, from the Prophe
cies of the Old Testament. This is a very learned and elaborate
performance, and executed with great judgment. In it the bishop
first sets himself to show, that there was a general expectation of the
Messiah at the time when our Saviour appeared ; and he traces this
expectation from that time to the very age of the prophets them
selves. He then proceeds to show, that to support this expectation
there were express literal prophecies that truly concern the Messiah,
of which he produces twelve, which he particularly considers ; and
he proves with great evidence, that they were applied by the ancient
Jews to the Messiah, and that it appeareth from the prophecies
themselves, that they could not be applied to any other. He then
goes on to show, that, besides these, there were typical prophecies
to the same effect, and which were intended to be applied to the
Messiah. The author of the Grounds, fyc. had every where repre
sented typical prophecies as signifying no more than that they were
afterwards applied in an allegorical sense, and had asserted that
there appear not the least traces of a typical intention in the writers
of the Old Testament, or any other Jews of those times. In oppo
sition to which, the bishop plainly proves, from the writings of the
prophets themselves, that they were wont to prophesy by types, and
to speak of themselves or others as types of other persons and people,
on purpose to foretell what should be done by or to single persons or
notions hereafter ; of which he gives several instances : That there
fore typical actions and typical discourses made part of the prophetic
language, and were understood by the people to carry a reference to
something future. And consequently, if the prophets speak of the
Messiah in their own persons, or of other persons as types of him,
there is nothing in this but what is agreeable to the known prophetic
language. He makes it appear, that the prophets themselves under
stood some of those prophecies as typical of the Messiah, and, at
the time of delivering those prophecies, gave intimations that they
were thus to be referred : That accordingly the Jews acknowledge,
that there were types in the Old Testament, and particularly that
there were types of the Messiah ; and that both the ancient and
modern Jews understand many texts of the Messiah as the Chris
tians do, which are plainly typical; and he shows, that there were
good reasons for covering some ofthe events relating to the Messiah
under the veil of types, which were not to be fully explained till the
age in which they were fulfilled.
He next proceeds to give a distinct account of the texts pretended
by the author of the Grounds to be misapplied. He justly observes,
that if the principal characters of the Messiah be evidently found in
the Jewish Scriptures, to the same intent for which they are cited by
Christ and his apostles, it is unreasonable to quit a certain truth,

Let. VII. MR. COLLINS. 77
because every individual circumstance is not equally clear ; and it
doth not plainly appear at this time how two or three authorities are
to be applied to 1 he Messiah. And that the expression, that it might
be fulfilled, on which the author layeth so great a stress, was
sometimes designed by the Jews to mean no more than that some
thing answered alike in both cases, or that there was a suitableness
in the cause or circumstance of one event to the other ; and he shows,
that the same way of speaking continueth among the Jews to this
day. With regard to the allegorical way, he observes, that it was
chiefly in condescension to the Jewish Christians that St. Paul at
all used it ; but that nothing can be more false and disingenuous,
than to pretend that he never used any other way of reasoning than
this. Finally, he thinks it may be allowed, that, considering the
illustrious attestations given to our Saviour, which plainly showed
that he was a teacher sent from God, his interpretation of the pro
phecies ought to be acquiesced in ; since he wrought his miracles by
the same spirit by which those prophecies were delivered ; and he
instances in several prophecies, the interpretation of which given by
our Lord, though different from that of the Jews, was actually ful
filled and verified by the event.
There was another learned author of the same name with the
bishop, Mr. (now Dr.) Samuel Chandler, who also distinguished
himself on this occasion, in a book entitled, A Vindication of the
Christian Religion, published in 1725, 8vo. In the former part of
that work, he hath a discourse on the nature and use of miracles ;
in which, after having stated the true notion of a miracle, and given
the characters that distinguish true miracles from false, he clearly
vindicates the miracles of our Saviour, and shows, that as they were
circumstanced, they were convincing proofs of his divine mission.
The second part of the same book is particularly designed as an
answer to the author of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian
Religion. After having shown, that the prophecies of the Old Tes
tament are not the only proofs of Christianity, and that it is very
absurd to pretend, as that author had done, that the Old Testament
is the sole canon of Christians, he clearly evinceth, that many of
those prophecies had a farther reference than to the times when they
were first delivered ; and particularly that they contain a description
of a great and good person to proceed from David, who, notwith
standing his sufferings, should be highly exalted, and under whom
true religion and righteousness should be more extensive than before ;
that these prophecies relate principally to a spiritual salvation and
deliverance ; and that the Jews in our Saviour's time, as appeareth
from their most ancient writings, applied many of those prophecies
to the Messiah. He next treats of" the double sense of prophecies,
which the author of the Grounds had ridiculed, and shows that
there is no absurdity in supposing, that as some prophecies relate
wholly to the Messiah, so others may relate partly to his time and
partly to the times when they were first discovered ; and that this

78 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VII.
double sense of the prophecies was originally intended, and was so
understood by the Jews. He accounts for the particular places ex
cepted against by the author of the Grounds, and observes, as the
bishop had done, that the apostles sometimes quote passages from
the Old Testament, not in a way of direct proof, but to illustrate the
argument they are upon; and sometimes by way of accommodation,
to signify a correspondence of events, and to describe things that
happened in their own times, by expressions derived from the ancient
prophetic writings. That as arguments ad hominem have been al
ways allowed, so if there were some particular passages in the
ancient prophets, which were applied by the Jews to the Messiah,
the reference of which was not so natural and clear, the apostles
were fully justifiable in applying them to Jesus Christ, in their rea
sonings with the Jews, as far as they did agree with his person and
character : but that there are few instances of this kind ; nor did
the apostles make use of this way of argument, except to the Jews
or Jewish proselytes ; and even to them they did not put the chief
stress on these, but laid before them other solid and substantial
proofs of Christianity. Finally, if the difficulties which attend the
quotations out of the Old Testament were much greater than they
really are, yet this would not affect the credit or truth of the Chris
tian religion, which hath so many evidences to support it.
There were several other good answers published to the Grounds,
&c. and which were so well executed, as to deserve that a particular
account should be given of them, if my prescribed limits would allow.
Among others, Dr. Bullock's sermons were very justly and highly
esteemed, in which " the reasoning of Christ and his apostles in their
defence of Christianity is considered. To which is prefixed, a pre
face, taking notice of the false representations of Christianity, and
of the apostles' reasoning in defence of it, in a book entitled A Dis
course of the Grounds and Reasons qf the Christian Religion,"
London, 8vo. 1725. Dr. Sykes also published an " Essay upon
the Truth of the Christian Religion, wherein its real Foundation in
the Old Testament is shown, occasioned by the ' Discourse of the
Grounds,' " London, 8vo. 1725. In this book it is both clearly
proved, that there are some direct prophecies relating to the Messiah
in the Old Testament, especially in the book of Daniel ; and there
are many good observations to show, that the New Testament
writers often quote passages by way of accommodation and allusion
only ; and that most of the texts produced as prophecies by the
author of the Grounds are of this kind. To these may be added,
an ingenious treatise entitled, " The true Grounds and Reasons of
the Christian Religion, in Opposition to the false ones set forth in a
late Book, entitled 'The Grounds, 8cc.'" London, 8vo, 1725;
" Letters to the Author of the ' Discourse of the Grounds,' show
ing, that Christianity is supported by Facts well attested ; that the
words of Isaiah, Chap. vii. 14, in their literal Sense are a Prophecy
of the Birth and Conception of the Messias; and that the Gospel-
Application of several other Passages in the Old Testament is just,''

Let. VII. MR. COLLINS. 79
by John Greene, 8vo, London, 1726. Mr. Whiston also published,
" The literal Accomplishment of Scripture-Prophecies, being a full
Answer to a late * Discourse of the Grounds, &. a' " London, 8vo,
1724 : and he afterwards published " A Supplement to the literal
Accomplishment of the Scripture-Prophecies," London, 8vo. 1725.
It may be proper also to mention a book, which was occasioned by
the Grounds, &c. though not directly in answer to it, entitled, '' The
Use and Intent of Prophecy in the several Ages of the Church," by
Dr. Thomas Sherlock, bishop of London. This is an excellent per
formance, in which a regular series of prophecy is deduced through
the several ages from the beginning, and its great usefulness shown.
The various degrees of light are distinctly marked out, which were
successively communicated in such a manner as to answer the great
ends of religion, and the designs of Providence, till those great
events to which they were intended to be subservient should receive
their accomplishment. There was another valuable book, which,
though not published till some years after, may be considered as
peculiarly designed against the Grounds, &c. viz. '' The Argument
from Prophecy, in Proof that Jesus is the Messiah, vindicated, in
some Considerations on the Prophecies of the Old Testament, as
the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion," by Moses
Lowman, London, 8vo. 1733. The last book I shall here take
notice of, as published on this occasion, was "A Review of the
Controversy between the Author of the ' Discourse of the Grounds
and Reasons ofthe Christian Religion' and his Adversaries, in a
Letter to the Author," 8vo. 1726, by Mr. Thomas Jeffrey. This is
drawn up in a clear and judicious manner, and was deservedly well
esteemed. The author of the Grounds, 8cc. thought fit, in 1727, to publish
a second book, which was to pass for a defence of his first, in answer
to his several adversaries, and particularly to the bishop of Lich
field. It was entitled, The Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered.
In this book he very slightly passeth over the chief things he ought
to have proved, and on which in \vs former book he had laid the
greatest stress. Instead of confirming what he had so positively
asserted before, that the prophecies of the Old Testament were the
only proof on which Christianity is founded, he only shows that
they are part of the proof insisted on by our Saviour and his apostles,
and most disingenuously supposes, that his adversaries would not
allow them to be any proofs at all. He had affirmed with great con
fidence, that none ofthe ancient Jews ever understood any of those
prophecies of the Messiah, which are applied to Christ in the New
Testament ; but the utmost that he now attempts to show is, that
some of those prophecies were not understood by the ancient Jews
ofthe Messiah ; and even for this he can give no other reason than
that some of the modern Jews do not so apply them. He has no
thing now to prove, that the Old Testament is the only canon of
Christians, or that tbe allegorical sense is the only sense of pro
phecies intended by our Saviour and his apostles. And whereas his

I'O A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VII.
answerers had urged, that though most of the prophecies applied in
the New Testament to our Lord Jesus Christ were literally fulfilled
in him, yet some particular passages might be used only in a way of
illustration and accommodation, and not as direct proofs ; he sets
himself, as his manner is, with a mighty pomp of quotations, to
show the absurdity of supposing, that the apostles' method of citing
prophecies was nothing but a mere accommodation of phrases, as if
his adversaries had held, that all the passages cited in the New
Testament from the Old were applied only by way of accommodation,
which not one of them ever asserted. He puts on an appearance of
answering what the bishop had alleged concerning the general and
constant tradition, which had obtained among the Jews with regard
to the Messiah ; and he considers the twelve prophecies that learned
writer had produced, as literally fulfilled in the Messiah. But any
one that will take the pains to compare what he hath here offered
with the book he pretends to answer, will find how little he has
been able to say that is really to the purpose, and how far he has
been from invalidating the proofs which had been brought. He
often slips over the most material things that had been urged, and
as the bishop afterwards complained, takes no more notice of them
than if he had not read them. If he can but find a single passage
in any Jewish or Christian writer, though but a modern one, and
contrary to the general consent of interpreters, this is laid hold on
to set aside the bishop's interpretation, and to show that the Jews
did not generally understand a prophecy of the Messiah, or apply it
to him, though clear evidence had been produced that they so ap
plied it.
But there is no part ofthe Literal Scheme, &,c. which the author
has so much laboured, as that where he hath collected together all
he could meet with against the antiquity and authority of the book
of Daniel, and the prophecies contained there. This occasioned a
second answer from the learned bishop, entitled, " A Vindication of
the Defence of Christianity from the Prophecies of the Old Testa
ment," published in 1728, in which he hath largely and very
solidly vindicated the antiquity and authority of the book of Daniel,
and the application of the prophecies there contained to the Messiah,
against the author's objections; and hath also fully obviated what
soever he had farther advanced against the antiquity and univer
sality of the tradition and expectation among the Jews concerning
the Messiah. The learned Dr. Rogers had before this published his
very valuable sermons on the Necessity of divine Revelation, and
the Truth of the Christian Religion. "' To which is prefixed a
preface, with some remarks on a late book, entitled, The Scheme of
Literal Prophecy considered," London, 1727, 8vo. Soon after
which, there came out an ingenious pamphlet, entitled, " The true
Grounds of the Expectation of the Messiah," in two letters by
Philalethes, London, 1727, said to be written by Dr. Sykes. Dr.
Bullock also appeared again to great advantage in this controversy,
in a treatise entitled, " The Reasoning of Christ and his Apostles

Let. VIII. MR. COLLINS. JU
vindicated, in two parts. 1. A Defence of the Argument from
Miracles, proving the Argument from Prophecy not necessary to a
rational Defence of our Religion. 2. A Defence of the Argument
from Prophecy, proving the Christian Scheme to have a rational
Foundation upon the Prophecies of the Old Testament," in answer
to a book intitled, "The Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered,"
London, 1728, 8vo. In this book, Dr. Bullock finds great fault
with our author's way of managing the argument; he observes, that
he has not only " raked together the unguarded expressions of in
genious men, but by altering, adding to, and curtailing passages
referred to, and by other disingenuous methods unbecoming a man
of honour and sincerity, wresteth them to purposes apparently con
trary to their true import," And yet no man had raised a louder
outcry against the clergy, for abusing, corrupting, and mangling of
authors to serve their own purposes, than this gentleman had done
in his Discourse of Freethinking. The bishop, in his Vindication,
makes the same complaint against him ; so does Dr. Samuel
Chandler, who published, on this occasion, a judicious " Vindica
tion of the Antiquity and Authority of Daniel's Prophecies, and
their Application to Jesus Christ;" in answer to the objections of
the author of the Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered, London,
1728, 8vo. About the same time was published, " Christianity the
Perfection of all Religion, natural and revealed ; wherein some of
the principal Prophecies relating to the Messiah in the Old Testa
ment are shown to belong to him in the literal Sense, in Opposition
to the Attempts of the Literal Scheme," 8cc. by Thomas Jeffreys,
London, 1728. I shall conclude this letter with observing, that this
attack against Christianity, though carried on with great art as well
as malice, produced this advantage, that it gave occasion to a full
and accurate examination into the nature, design, and extent of
many of the Old Testament prophecies, and to the placing some
difficult passages in a clearer light.

LETTER VIII,

Mr. Woolston's Discourses on the Miracles of our Saviour.— Under pretence of standing
up for the allegorical Sense of Scripture, he endeavours absolutely to destroy the
Truth of the Facts recorded in the Gospels. — His disingenuous Representation of the
Sense of the Fathers on this Head, and his false Quotations. — He charges the
Accounts given of Christ's Miracles as absurd, false, and incredible. — His gross
and profane Buffoonry, and base Reflections on the Character of our Saviour $ and
yet he pretends a Zeal for his Honour and Messiahship — A Specimen of his way
of Reasoning with regard to several of Christ's Miracles, and his Resurrection —
Many good Answers published against him.
Sir,
I have already taken notice of several attempts, which were
manifestly intended to subveit the truth and divine authority of our

82 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let VIII.
holy religion. The last that was mentioned was, that of the author
of the Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Re
ligion, who, under pretence of setting Christianity on a sure and
solid foundation, had endeavoured to show that it hath no founda
tion at all ; that it is founded wholly on the Old Testament pro
phecies, taken not in a literal, but merely in an allegorical, i. e. as
he plainly designed it, in a false sense, contrary to the original in
tention of the prophecies themselves. In opposition to him it was
clearly shown, that many of the Old Testament prophecies are
justly applied to our Saviour in their proper and literal sense. Be
sides which it was urged, that there were other solid proofs of
Christianity, particularly that of our Saviour's miracles, and his
resurrection from the dead; and the illustrious attestations given to
him from heaven, were evident proofs of his divine mission. And
now, under pretence of acting the part of a-moderator in this con
troversy, a new antagonist arose, Mr. Woolston, who endeavoured
to allegorize away the miracles of our Saviour, as Mr. Collins had
done the prophecies. This he first attempted in a pamphlet, in-
titled, A Moderator between an Infidel and an Apostate ; and in two
Supplements to it; and afterwards more largely in six Discourses on
the miracles of our Saviour, which were successively published at
different times, in the years 1727, 1728, and 1729 ; the design of all
which is to show, that the accounts of the great facts recorded in
the gospels are to be understood wholly in a mystical and allegorical
sense; and that, taken in the literal and historical sense, they are
false, absurd, and fictitious. This attempt he hath carried on with
greater rudeness and insolence than any of those that appeared be
fore him. The Earl of Shaftesbury, even where he unhappily sets
up ridicule as the test and criterion of truth, expresseth his disap
probation of scurrilous buffoonry, gross raillery, and an illiberal kind
of wit. And if there ever was any performance to which these cha
racters might be justly applied, it is this of Mr. Woolston. The
same noble writer observes, that to manage a debate so as to offend
the public ear, is to be wanting in that respect that is due to the
society ;  and that what is contrary to good breeding is, in this re
spect, as contrary to liberty. If we are to judge of Mr. Woolston's
writings by this rule, they are as inconsistent with a just liberty, as
they certainly are with good breeding and decency.
There are two ways by which he endeavours to answer the de
sign he hath in view. The one is, by showing that the literal sense
of our Saviour's miracles is denied by the most ancient and vener
able writers of the Christian church ; the other is, by showing the
absurdity of the accounts given in the gospels, taken in the literal
sense. With regard to the first of these, he hath with great pomp
produced many testimonies of the fathers, for whom he professeth
the profoundest veneration ; and, by a strange disingenuity, endea -
voureth to represent them as absolutely denying the facts themselves
related in the gospel; because, according to a custom which then
obtained, they added to the literal, a spiritual and allegorical sense,

Let. VIII. MR. woolston. h;*
and took occasion from thence to make pious allusions. He pre-
tendeth, that if we will adhere to the fathers, the gospel is in no sort
a literal story; and that the history qf Jesus' s life is only an emble
matical representation of his spiritual life in the souls of men. But it
is certain, and was evidently proved by his learned answerers, that in
giving the allegorical and mystical sense, the fathers first supposed
the literal sense, and the historical truth of the facts, and upon them
built their allegorical interpretations. It is acknowledged, that in
these they often exceeded just bounds, and too-much indulged the
vagaries of a pious fancy; but to pretend, that they intended to
deny that the facts recorded by the evangelists were really done, is
one of the most confident impositions that were ever put upon man
kind ; and it is not to be doubted, but the author himself was sen
sible of this. Many glaring instances of unfairness and disingenuity
in his quotations from the fathers were plainly proved upon him. It
was shown, that he hath quoted books generally allowed to be spu
rious, as the genuine works ofthe fathers; and hath, by false trans
lations and injurious interpolations, and foisting' in of words, done
all that was in his power to pervert the true sense of the authors he
quotes; and that sometimes he interprets them in a manner directly
contrary to their own declared sense, in the very passages he appeals
to, as would have appeared, if he had fairly produced the whole
passage. It is not to be wondered at, that an author who was capable of
such a conduct should stick at no methods to expose and misrepre
sent the accounts given by tbe evangelists of our Saviour's miracles,
Under pretence of shewing the absurdity of the literal and historical
sense of the facts recorded in the gospels, he hath given himself an
unrestrained license in invective and abuse. The books of the
evangelists, and the facts there related, he hath treated in a strain
of low and coarse buffoonery, and with an insolence and scurrility
that is hardly to be paralleled. He asserts, that they are full of
improbabilities, incredibilities, and gross absurdities : that they are
like " Gulliverian tales of persons and things, that out of the ro
mance never had a being : that neither the fathers, nor the apostles,
nor Jesus himself, meant that his miracles should be taken in the
literal, but in the mystical and parabolical sense." And he expressly
declares, that " if Jesus's miracles, literally taken, will not abide the
test of sense and reason, they must be rejected, and Jesus's autho
rity along with them."* He casteth several reflections on our
blessed Lord, so base and scurrilous, that they cannot but be ex
tremely offensive to a Christian ear ; and which even sober heathens,
many of whom regarded him as a person of great wisdom and virtue,
would have been ashamed of; and yet this author charges the
bishop of London with ignorance or malice, in representing him as
a writer in favour of infidelity. He declares, that he is the " far
thest of any man from being engaged in the cause of infidels or
* Discourse IV. p. 16,
G 2

84 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VIII.
deists ;" and that he "writes not for the service of infidelity, which
has no place in his heart, but for the honour of the holy Jesus, and
in defence of Christianity." The like declarations he frequently
repeateth. He ends his fourth discourse on our Saviour's miracles
with avowing, that his design in these his discourses is " the ad
vancement of the truth and ofthe Messiahship of the holy Jesus, to
whom be glory forever, Amen." He concludes his sixth discourse
in the same manner, and expresses himself in his first and second
Defence to the like purpose. Any one that compares these decla
rations with the whole strain of his discourses, will be apt to enter
tain the worst opinion imaginable of the writer's sincerity ; and the
most extensive charity will scarce be able to acquit him from the
most gross and shocking prevarication.
But not to insist farther on this, one would have expected, that,
after all the clamours he hath raised against the evangelical accounts
of our Saviour's miracles, he should have had some formidable ob
jections to produce; and yet, when stripped of the ridiculous turn
he hath given them, they are, except some few difficulties, which
are far from being new, and have been solidly answered, contemp
tibly vain and trifling. It is an objection he frequently repeats
against what we are told concerning our Saviour's curing the
diseased, the blind, the lame, &c. that the evangelists have not
given us an exact account of the nature and symptoms of their dis
tempers, as physicians and surgeons would have done, that we might
know whether the cure was supernatural. And if they had done
this, it would, no doubt, have been improved as a strong presump
tion of art and contrivance in the relaters, and as no way consistent
with that honest, artless simplicity of narration, for which the evan
gelists are so remarkable. With regard to the cure of the man that
was iDorn blind, he finds fault that our Saviour did not cure him
with a word speaking, which he says would have been a great and
real miracle; and if he had done so, as he did in several other cases,
this writer would have been as far from believing it as before. He
will have it, that, under pretence of anointing the blind man's eyes
with clay and spittle, Jesus made use of a sovereign balsam which
wrought the cure-; and supposes, in direct contradiction to the
-whole story, that his blindness was only a slight disorder of the
eyes, which was wearing away with age, and that therefore the re
storing him to his sight was no miracle at all, though the man him
self, his parents, and friends that had known him all along, and the
chief priests and pharisees, who made a strict enquiry into the case,
could not help acknowledging that it was a very great one. Our
Saviour's discovering to the Samaritan woman the secrets of her
past life, which convinced her of his being a prophet, and from
whence he took occasion to give her the most excellent instructions
concerning tbe nature of true religion, passes with this writer for the
triesk of a. fortune-teller. And whereas it appeareth from the ac
count given by the evangelist, that the Samaritans looked for the Mes-
jsiah under the idea of a divine teacher, and the Saviour of the

Let. VIII. mr. woolston. 85
world, he represents it as if they expected the Messiah, not as a
prince or a prophet, but a conjuror only. Several other instances
might be produced, in which he addeth or varieth circumstances,
and altereth the story as recorded by the evangelists, that he may
take occasion to place it in a ridiculous light.
It is a remarkable concession which is made by him in the begin
ning of his fifth Discourse, that " it will be granted on all hands,
that the restoring a person indisputably dead to life is a stupendous
miracle ; and that two or three such miracles, well-attested and cre
dibly reported, are enough to conciliate the belief, that the author
of them was a divine agent, and vested with the power of God."*
Three miracles of this kind are recorded in the gospel to have been
wrought by Jesus : viz. his raising Jairus's daughter, the widow's
son at Nairn, and Lazarus. And what has our author to object
against these accounts ? He objects in general against them all,
that the persons raised ought to have been magistrates or persons,
of eminence. But the raising such persons would not have been so
agreeable to the rest of our Saviour's conduct and character, who
shunned what might have the appearance of ostentation, or be
looked upon as an attempt to make an interest with the great. He
farther objects, that the persons that were raised should have told
what they had seen and done in the separate state. And if the
evangelists had been romantic writers that wanted to amuse their
readers with strange stories, they might probably have inserted
some things of this kind into their accounts; but they confined
themselves to the plain facts, as far as they knew them, which they
have related with the greatest simplicity. He objects particularly
against the story of raising Jairus's daughter, because she was but a,
girl qf twelve years old ; as if the raising one of that age was not as
great a miraote as if she had been twenty. He next pretends that
she was only in a fit; though all the persons about her, and her
nearest relations, were satisfied that she was dead, and were making
the usual preparations for her funeral. It is enough with him to
discredit the story of raising the widow's son at Nairn from the
dead, that he was not a person of importance, but a youth, and the
son of a poor woman ; and he has with great sagacity discovered,
that Jesus's accidental meeting the corpse, and touching the bier,
is a plain proof that it was all a contrivance between him and the
young man. To mention such objections is to confute them. But
perhaps he hath stronger ones to produce against the story of the
resurrection of Lazarus, which he pronounceth to be such a contex
ture qf folly and fraud, as is not to be equalled in all- romantic his
tory ; and yet the principal objection he hath to offer is no more
than this, that three of the evangelists have not mentioned it. But
no argument can be drawn against the truth of the fact from their
silence, since it is evident that they never designed or pretended to
record all the remarkable miracles which our Saviour wrought; and
*. Discourse V. p. 3t

86 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VIII.
St. John, who was an eye-witness, and who chiefly taketh notice of
the things which the others had omitted, hath given us a very dis
tinct and particular account of it. Among the circumstances which
Mr. Woolston looks upon to be sufficient to set aside that story, one
is, that we are told, Jesus wept. This was a sign of his great
humanity, and the goodness of his temper ; but our author thinks
a stoical apathy would have become him better. Another is, that
Jesus called to Lazarus with a loud voice to come forth ; which was
certainly very proper, that all who were present, might attend and
observe. And what is very odd, he makes Lazarus's being bound
in grave clothes, and having his head bound about with a napkin, to
be a very suspicious sign that he had not been really dead ; and
very wisely has found out, that Lazarus by a concert with Jesus,
who was at a considerable distance when it happened, contrived to
be buried, and lie in the grave four days, that Jesus might have
the honour of seeming to raise him up from the dead. And because
the Jews took counsel to kill Jesus, and he withdrew for a, while
from their rage, this is produced as a proof, that the Jews knew he
was guilty of a fraud, and that he himself was conscious of it;
whereas it appears from the whole account, that their taking counsel
to put him to death was owing to their being sensible of the great
ness of the miracle, and that it was too evident to be denied, and
was likely to draw the people after him.
The objections which he makes in the person of a Jewish rabbi,
against the evangelical story of our Lord's resurrection, which he
declareth to be a complication of absurdities, incoherences, and con
tradictions, are equally frivolous. He insinuates, that the guards
set by the Roman governor, at the desire of the chief priests, to
Watch the body of Jesus, suffered themselves to be bribed or intoxi
cated by the disciples ; in which he is more quick-sighted than the
chief priests and pharisees, whom it more nearly concerned, who,
it is plain, suspected no such thing; in which case, instead of ex
cusing, they would have endeavoured to get them severely punished.
But what he seems to lay the principal stress upon isj a supposed
covenant between the chief priests and Jesus's disciples, that the
seal with which the stone of the door of the sepulchre was sealed
should not be broken, till the three days were entirely passed ; and
that therefore the rolling away the stone from the sepulchre, and
breaking the seal before the three days were ended, was a breach of
that covenant, and a proof of an imposture. A most extraordinary
conceit this ! as if the rulers of the Jews would have troubled them
selves to enter into a concert with Jesus's disciples, whom they
hated and despised, and who at that time had hid themselves for
fear of them, and were fled ; or as if such a covenant could bind
our Lord from rising when he judged fittest. As to that part of
the objection which supposes, that he ought to have lain in the
grave, according to his own prediction, three whole days and nights,
it proceeds from a real or affected ignorance of the Jewish phrase
ology. This is a modern objection. The ancient enemies of Chris-

Let. VIII. MR. WOOLSTON.

(17

tianity did not pretend that Jesus rose before the time prefixed; for
they very well knew that, according to a way of speaking usual
among the Jews and other nations, his rising again on any part of
the third day was sufficient to answer the prediction. This matter
was set in a clear light in The Trial ofthe Witnesses, yet the objec
tion was again repeated by the author of the Resurrection of Jesus
considered, and was so fully exposed by the learned answerers, that
one would hope we shall hear no more of it.*
Mr. Woolston makes it also a great objection against the truth of
Jesus's resurrection, that he did not shew himself after his death to
the chief-priests and rulers of the Jews. And indeed there is no
objection with which the deistical writers have made a greater noise
than this. It is urged particularly by the author of the Resurrection
of Jesus considered ; but, above all, Mr. Chubb has insisted upon it
at large, and with great confidence, in his posthumous works, vol. i.
p. 337, and seq. And yet good reasons may be assigned, why it
was not proper that it should be so, Considering the cruel and in
veterate malice they had shewn against Jesus, and the power of
their prejudices, there is no likelihood of their submitting to the
evidence. They had attributed his miracles to the power of the
devil ; and his raising Lazarus from the dead, of which they had
full information, only put them upon attempting to destroy him.
Instead of being wrought upon by the testimony of the soldiers,
they endeavoured to stifle it. And if Jesus had shewn himself to
them after his passion, and they had pretended it was a spectre or
a delusion, and had still refused to acknowledge him after this, it
would have been insisted upon as a strong presumption against the
reality of his resurrection. But let us suppose that Jesus had not
only appeared to them after his resurrection, but that they them
selves had acknowledged the truth of his resurrection and ascen
sion, and had owned him for their Messiah, and brought the body
of the Jewish nation into it ; can it be imagined that they who now
make that objection would have been satisfied ? It may rather be
supposed, that those great men's coming into it would have been
represented as a proof that all was artifice and imposture ; and that
the design was to spirit up the people against the Roman govern
ment, and carry on some political scheme, under pretence of restor
ing the kingdom to Israel. The whole would have been treated as
a national Jewish affair, a thing concerted between the chief priests
and the disciples ; and there would have been a greater clamour
raised against it than there is now. I am persuaded that the evi
dence which was actually given of Christ's resurrection by the
apostles and disciples of Christ, in opposition to their own preju
dices, and to the authority and power of the Jewish chief priests
and rulers, and notwithstanding the persecutions to which their
testimony to it exposed them, was much more convincing and less
» See the Evidence of the Resurrection cleared, p. 64, &c. and Mr. Chandler's Wit
nesses of the Resurrection re-examined, p. 14 — 19.

8B A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. VIII.
exceptionable than it would have been, if they had had the favour
and countenance ofthe chiefs ofthe Jewish nation, or of those per
sons who were of the greatest interest and authority among them.
What has been mentioned may serve for a specimen of this
writer's objections against the accounts of our Saviour's miracles
recorded in the evangelists; and he might by the same way of
management, by arbitrary suppositions, and adding or altering cir
cumstances as he judged proper, have proved the most authentic
accounts in the Greek or Roman history to be false and incredible.
Lie might at the same rate of arguing have undertaken to prove,
that there was no such person as Jesus Christ, or his apostles, or
that they were only allegorical persons, and that Christianity was
never planted or propagated in the world at all.
This extraordinary writer thought fit to begin his second Dis
course on our Saviour's miracles, with boasting, that none of the
clergy had published their exceptions against what he had offered
in his first; and that this shewed that his cause was just, and his
arguments and authorities unanswerable. But he did not continue
long unanswered ; many learned adversaries soon appeared against
him, but they were far from imitating him in his low and scurrilous
way of treating the subject. They shewed themselves as much
superior in the temper, calmness, and solid and serious manner of
treating the argument, as in the goodness of their cause. They
considered even his most trifling objections, and whatever things he
had urged, that had any real or seeming difficulty in them (and
some such things must be expected in ancient writings, which ref
late to times and customs different from ours, and especially with
regard to facts of an extraordinary nature), were coolly examined,
and fully obviated.
The late worthy bishop of London, Dr. Gibson, published on this
occasion an excellent pastoral letter, written, as all his are, with
great clearness and strength. The learned and ingenious Dr.
Zachary Pearce, now Lord Bishop of Rochester, published The
Miracles qf Jesus Vindicated, in four parts, which came out at dif
ferent times in the year 1729, and were deservedly much esteemed.
But the largest answer was that by Dr. Smallbrook, Lord Bishop
of St. David's, in two volumes, 8vo. This learned work is intitled,
" A Vindication of our Saviour's Miracles, in which Mr. Woolston's
Discourses on them are particularly examined ; his pretended Au
thority ofthe Fathers against the Truth of the literal Sense are set
in a just Light, and his Objections, in point of Reason, answered"
— London, 1729. There were other good answers published, which
also took in the whole of Mr. Woolston's Discourses ; such were
Mr. Ray's " Vindication of our Saviour's Miracles," in two parts,
the first published in 1727, the second in 1729 ; and Mr. Steven
son's "Conference on the Miracles of our Saviour," published in
1730, an ingenious and solid performance. Besides which'there
were several excellent pamphlets, that were designed to vindicate
some particular miracles against Mr. Woolston's exceptions. Such

Let. VIII. MR. WOOLSTON. 89
were Mr. Atkinson's "Vindication of the literal Sense of three
Miracles of Christ — his turning Water into Wine — his whipping
the Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple — and his exorcising the
Devils out of two Men — against Mr. Woolston's Objections, in his
first and second Discourses on the Miracles of our Saviour ; in three
Letters to a Friend," London, 8vo., 1729. Dr. Harris's two ser
mons on the " Reasonableness of believing in Christ, and the Un
reasonableness of Infidelity; with an Appendix, containing brief
remarks upon the case of Lazarus ; relating to Mr. Woolston's fifth
Discourse of Miracles," London, 8vo., 1729. That discourse of
Mr. Woolston was also animadverted upon by Mr. Simon Brown,
in a treatise written with great smartness and spirit, intitled, " A
fit Rebuke to a ludicrous Infidel, in some Remarks on Mr. Wool
ston's fifth Discourse on the Miracles of our Saviour ; with a Pre
face concerning the Prosecution of such Writers by the Civil
Power," London, 8vo., 1732. The following tracts also deserve
special notice, as being written with great clearness and judgment.
" A Vindication of three of our blessed Saviour's Miracles, in
Answer to the Objections of Mr. Woolston's fifth Discourse on the
Miracles of our Saviour," by Nathaniel Lardner, now Dr. Lardner,
London, 1729. " A Defence of the Scripture History, as far as it
concerns the resurrection of Jairus's Daughter, the Widow's Son
at Nairn, and Lazarus ; in answer to Mr. Woolston's fifth Dis
course," London, 1729. This is said to have been written by Dr.
Henry, who afterwards published " A Discourse on our Saviour's
miraculous Power of Healing; in which the six Cases excepted
against by Mr. Woolston are considered ; being a Continuation of
the Defence of Scripture History," London, 1730. And as Mr.
Woolston had bent his efforts with a particular virulence against
the resurrection of our blessed Lord, this was fully and distinctly
considered, especially in a pamphlet written by Dr. Sherlock, Lord
Bishop of London, entitled, " The Trial of the Witnesses of the
Resurrection of Jesus," London, 1729, which has been very justly
admired for the polite and uncommon turn, as well as the judicious
way of treating the subject. There were also published on the same
occasion, " An Answer to the Jewish Rabbi's two Letters against
Christ's Resurrection, and his raising Lazarus from the dead ; with
some observations on Mr. Woolston's own Reflections on our
Saviour's conduct," London, 1729. " An impartial Examination
and full Confutation ofthe Arguments brought by Mr. Woolston's
pretended Rabbi against the Truth of our Saviour's Resurrection,"
London, 8vo., 1730. And two Discourses by Dr. Wade; the first,
" An Appeal to the Miracles of Jesus Christ for his Messiahship;"
the second, "A Demonstration of the Truth and Certainty of his
Resurrection from the dead," London, 8vo., 1729. Among the
writers that appeared against Mr. Woolston, Mr. Joseph Hallet
ought not to be forgotten, on the account of his judicious " Dis
course of the Reality, Kinds, and Numbers of our Saviour's Mira
cles, occasioned by Mr. Woolston's six Discourses;" this was

90 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IX.
published in the second volume of his notes and discourses, 8vo.,
1732. The last I shall mention is Mr. Stackhouse, who published
"A fair State of the Controversy between Mr. Woolston and his
Adversaries," London, 8vo., 1730 ; in which he hath given a very
clear account of Mr. Woolston's objections, and the answers that
were returned by those who had written against him.
Mr. Woolston published what he called, " A Defence of his Dis
courses on the Miracles of our Saviour, against the Bishop of Lon
don and St. David's, and his other Adversaries," in two pamphlets ;
the first was published, London, 1729 ; the second in 1730. These
are very trifling performances, in which there is a continued strain
of low drollery, but little that has a show of reason and argument,
in answer to what had been strongly urged against him. He has
scarce attempted to take notice of the instances which had been
brought to show his great dishonesty in his quotations, and his
gross falsifications of the fathers and ancient writers. This seems
to have given him very little disturbance, though if he had any
regard to his own reputation, it highly concerned him to clear him
self, if he had been able to do it, from so heavy a charge.
But I believe you will be of opinion, that I have dwelt long
enough upon such an author, though he himself boasts of cutting
out such apiece of work for our Boylean lectures, as shall hold them
tug (as he politely expresses it), so long as the ministry of the letter
and a hireling priesthood last*

LETTER IX.
The present Age a happy Time of Liberty; but that Liberty greatly abused  An
Account of Dr. Tindal's Christianity as old as the Creation. — He pretends a great
Regard for the Christian Religion, yet uses his utmost Efforts to discard all Revela
tion, in general, as entirely useless and needless ; and particularly sets himself to ex
pose the Revelation contained in the holy Scriptures ofthe Old and New Testament.
— The high Encomiums he bestows on the Religion of a Deist, and on his own Per
formance. — Observations upon his Scheme. — It is shown to be absurd and inconsis
tent.— What he offers concerning the absolute universal Clearness of the Law of
Nature to all Mankind, contrary to plain undeniable Fact and Experience  His
Scheme really less favourable to the Heathens than that of the Christian Divines.
— An Account of the Answers published against him.
I believe, Sir, you will agree with me, that never had any nation
a fuller enjoyment of liberty than we have had since the Revolution.
What Tacitus celebrates as the felicity of the times of Trajan,
" that men might think as they pleased, and speak as they thought," ¦
may be more justly applied to our own. Rara temporum felicitate,
ubi sentire quae velis, et quez sentias dicere licet.f The noble author
* See his fifth Discourse on Miracles, p. 65,66. f Tacit. Hist. 1. i. in proem.

Let. IX. DU. TINDAL. J)l
of the Characteristics is pleased to mention it to the honour of
the heathen world in ancient Greece and Rome, that " visionaries
and enthusiasts were tolerated ; and on the other side, philosophy
had as free a course, and was permitted as a balance against super
stition. Thus matters were happily balanced ; reason had fair play ;
learning and science flourished."* It would be no hard matter to
show that this representation is not altogether just ; for, not to
mention the case of Socrates and others, it is capable of a clear
proof, that though they might bear with the disputes among the
several sects of philosophers in their schools, yet they would not
suffer the established religion of the state to be called in question,
and were ready to punish those that opposed it, of which they gave
the most sanguinary proofs when Christianity appeared. But what
his Lordship has said of those heathen times, the felicity of which
he so much extols, is undoubtedly true of ours. Visionaries and
enthusiasts are not persecuted, but tolerated ; philosophy has a free
course; reason has fair play; learning and science have greatly
flourished. Nor can any age or country be mentioned, in which
men have had a greater freedom of openly declaring their sentiments,
either with regard to civil or religious matters. This is our privi
lege and our glory ; but the greatest advantages are capable of
being perverted through the corruption of mankind. Liberty,
which, rightly improved, is the best friend to truth and to pure and
undefiled religion, is often abused to a boundless licentiousness. Of
this we have had many instances ; but in nothing has it more re
markably appeared, than in the open repeated attempts that have
been made against all revealed religion. It cannot be pretended,
that the adversaries of Christianity have not been at liberty to pro
duce their strongest objections against it. They have not only
offered whatsoever they were able in a way of reason and argument,
but they have in many instances given a loose to the most offensive
ridicule and reproach ; and if they have frequently thought fit to
cover their attempts with a pretended regard for Christianity, we
may safely affirm, that it has not been so much out of fear of punish
ment, as that under that disguise they might the better answer the
end they had in view, and give religion a more deadly wound as
pretended friends, than they could as avowed adversaries. This
advantage however hath arisen from it, that it hath given occasion to
many noble defences of Christianity, and to the clearing various
difficulties, and placing the excellence and evidences of our holy
religion in the strongest and most convincing light.
The attacks against Christianity, of which I have taken notice in
my former letters, seemed for some time to have been carried on
almost without intermission. Animated with a strange kind of zeal,
the enemies of revelation were unwearied in their endeavours to
subvert it. When repelled in one attempt, they were not discou
raged, but renewed it in another form. Of this we now are going
* Characteristics, vol. i. p. 18.

02 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IX.
to have a fresh instance. Woolston's attempt was so conducted as
to raise a kind of horror and just indignation in all that had not
utterly extinguished all remaining regard to the religion in which
they were baptized. Such outrageous abuse, such undisguised
reproach cast upon our blessed Saviour and' his holy gospel, such
coarse ridicule and contempt, though it did a great deal of mischief
among men of empty and vicious minds, with whom scurrilous jest
and gross buffoonery, especially when levelled against things sacred,
passeth for wit and argument ; yet was apt rather to create disgust
in persons of any degree of taste or refinement. It was therefore
judged necessary, that Christianity should be attacked in a more
plausible way, which had a greater appearance of reasoning, and
might be better fitted to take with persons of a more rational and
philosophic turn. This seems to have been the design of Dr. Tin
dal's laboured performance, intitled, " Christianity as old as the
Creation ; or, the Gospel a Republication of the Law of Nature;"
which was first published in 4to, London, 1730, and afterwards in
8vo. One would have been apt to expect from the title of this book,
that he should have set himself to prove, that the gospel is perfectly
agreeable to the law of nature; that it hath set the great principles
of natural religion in the clearest light; and that it was designed to
publish and confirm it anew, after it had been very much obscured
and defaced through the corruption of mankind. And if so, this
author, who every-where professeth such a high esteem for the
genuine law and religion of nature, ought to have done all in his
power to recommend the gospel- revelation to the esteem and vene
ration of mankind, and to have represented it as a great advantage
to those that enjoy it, and a signal instance of the divine goodness:
And what would induce one farther to think that this was his view,
he expressly declareth, that Christianity is the external, as natural
religion is the internal revelation of the same unchangeable will of
God, and that they differ only in the manner of their being com
municated ; and he proposeth greatly to advance the honour qf ex
ternal revelation, by showing the perfect agreement there is between
that and internal revelation. He professeth to agree with bishop
Chandler, that " Christianity itself, stripped of the additions that
policy, mistake, and the circumstances of time have made to it, is a
most holy religion ; and that all its doctrines plainly speak them
selves to be the will of an infinitely wise and God."* Accordingly
he honoureth himself and his friends with the title of Christian
Deists. But whosoever closely and impartially examineth his book will
find, that all this plausible appearance and pretended regard to
Christianity is only intended as a cover to his real design, which was
to set aside all revealed religion, and entirely to destroy the authority
of the Scriptures. Others have attacked particular parts of the
Christian scheme, or of its proofs. But this writer has endeavoured
* Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 382. edit. 8vo.

Let. IX, DR. TINDAL. 93
to subvert the very foundation of it, by showing, that there neither
is nor can be any external revelation at all, distinct from what he
calls the internal revelation of the law of nature in the hearts of all
mankind: that such external revelation is absolutely needless and
useless ; that the original law and religion of nature is so perfect,
that nothing can possibly be added to it by any subsequent external
revelation whatsoever; nor can God himself lay any new commands
upon us, or institute any positive precepts, additional to the immu
table eternal law of nature, without the imputation of erecting an
unreasonable tyranny over his creatures. And as the religion and
law of nature is absolutely perfect, so it always was and is clear and
obvious to all mankind, even to those of the meanest capacity ; so
clear that it is impossible to be rendered more plain to any man by
any external revelation, than it is to all men without it ; that there
fore all pretences to such revelation are only owing to enthusiasm or
imposture; that reason and external revelation are inconsistent;
and to be governed by the authority of such revelation is really to
renounce our reason, and to give up our understandings to implicit
faith; that this hath been the source of all the superstitions and
corruptions which have prevailed among mankind ; and that there
fore the best thing that can be done for them is to engage them to
throw off all regard to revelation, and to adhere to the pure simple
dictates of the light of nature.
And as he thus encleavoureth to set aside all external supernatural
revelation as needless and useless, and all pretences to it as vain
and groundless ; so he particularly setteth himself to expose the re
velation contained in the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testa
ment. He attempteth to invalidate the original proofs on which
the authority of that revelation is founded, and particularly that
which is drawn from the miracles that attested it ; and he also
taketh pains to prove, that we cannot possibly have any assurance,
that this revelation is transmitted to us in a manner which may bj
safely depended upon. He examineth the revelation itself, and en-
deavoureth to show, that it is uncertain and obscure ; that its pre
cepts are delivered in a loose, general, undetermined manner, so as
to be incapable of giving clear directions to the bulk of mankind ;
that the keys of solution necessary for understanding the Scrip
tures, are what the people are wholly unacquainted with ; that, far
from being of use as a rule to direct men in faith and practice, the
•iptures are only fit to perplex and misinform them; that they
^ give them very wrong and unworthy apprehensions of the
1 the duty they owe him ; and that there are many things
•nded or approved there, which are apt to lead men
nation to the duties they owe to one another. He farther
eiR^vOureth to show, that there is a contrast and opposition be
tween the parts of this revelation, particularly between the Old Tes
tament and the New. And it may be said upon the whole, that he
hath spared no pains to rake together whatsoever he thought might
be capable of exposing the Scriptures, or the Christian religion.

94 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IX.
He concludes his book with arguing against the Christian revelation,
from its having not been universal in all times and places, and from
the corruptions of Christians.
Whilst he thus useth his utmost endeavours to expose Christi
anity as a falsely-pretended revelation, and as not only needless and
useless, but of pernicious influence to mankind ; he hath taken care
to make the most advantageous representation of that scheme of
natural religion he would recommend, and to show the great advan
tage the religion of the deists hath above that of the Christians.
He sometimes speaks as if he thought the deists were infallibly
guided, in making use of the reason God hath given them, to dis
tinguish religion from superstition, so that they are sure not to run
into any errors ef moment* On the other hand, he honours all
those that are for positive precepts in religion with the character of
Demonists; and he represents divines in all ages, as, for the most
part, mortal enemies to the exercise qf reason, and even below brutes.
He ends his book as he had begun it, with a high panegyric upon
his own performance; that by this attempt of his, " as nothing but
rubbish is removed, so every thing is advanced which tends to pro
mote the honour of God, and the happiness of human societies ;
that there is none who wish well to mankind, but must also wish his
hypothesis to be true : and that there cannot be a greater proof of
its truth, than that it is in all its parts so exactly calculated for the
good of mankind, that either to add to it, or take from it, will be
to their manifest prejudice; that it is a religion, as he hopes he has
fully proved, founded upon such demonstrable principles, as are
obvious to the meanest capacity, and most effectually prevents the
growth both of scepticism and enthusiasm."
This may suffice to give a general idea of this boasted perform
ance; but, if carefully examined, it will appear, that it is far from
deserving the magnificent encomiums which he himself, and others
who are favourers of the same cause, have so liberally bestowed
upon it.
The scheme which this writer hath advanced, in order to show
that there is no place or need for extraordinary revelation, dependeth
chiefly upon two principles. The orie is, that the law or religion
of nature, obligatory upon all mankind, was from the beginning
absolutely perfect and immutable, so that nothing could ever be
added to it by any subsequent revelation. The other is, that this
original law or religion of nature, comprehending all that men were
from the beginning obliged to know, believe, profess, and practise,
always was and still is so absolutely clear to all mankind, that it
cannot be made clearer to any man by any external revelation, than
it is to all men without it.
As to the first, he argues, that because God is unchangeable and
absolutely perfect, therefore the religion he gave to man from the
beginning must have been unchangeable and absolutely perfect;
since nothing can proceed from a God of infinite perfection but what
* Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 336. edit. 8vo.

Let. IX. DR. TINDAL. Q~,
is perfect; and that to suppose any subsequent addition to it, or
alteration in it, is to suppose a change in God. But this will not
answer the author's end, except he can prove that man is un
changeable too; and that the state of mankind must necessarily in
all ages and seasons continue precisely the same that it was at the
beginning ofthe world ; for if there should be a change in the state
and circumstances of mankind, e.g. from pure religion to supersti
tion, and from a righteous and innocent to a guilty and corrupt
state, God may see fit for excellent ends to lay new injunctions upon
men, or make some farther discoveries of his will, suited to that
alteration of circumstances. Nor would this show that he was
changeable, but that he was most wise and good; and it would be
a strange thing to affirm, that there could not possibly be any farther
significations or discoveries of the divine will ever made -by God
himself, or any other thing required by him of men, or any addi
tional help or advantages ever offered to them, in any supposable
state or circumstances of mankind, but what were afforded and made
from the beginning of the creation. This is a most absurd scheme ;
and if such a one had been advanced by the advocates for revelation,
plentiful ridicule would have been bestqwed upon it.
And it is equally absurd to pretend, as this writer doth, that God
cannot at any time, or in any circumstance of things, enjoin posi
tive precepts. If there be any external worship to be rendered to
God at all (and this gentleman hath not thought fit openly to deny
this), it would be the most unreasonable thing in the world to pre
tend, that he cannot institute or appoint what are the properest out
ward rites, or manner of performing that worship; especially since
our author allows, that men themselves may appoint them ; and to
deny God the power which he alloweth to human magistrates in such
a case, is abhorrent to the common sense of mankind; especially,
considering that there is nothing in which men have more grossly
erred, or as to which they stood in greater need of being properly
directed, than in what relateth to religious worship. I would only
farther observe, that this writer, in the whole dispute about positive
precepts, always supposes positive and arbitrary precepts to be
terms of the same signification ; and by arbitrary he means things
for which there is no reason at all. But this is a very unfair state
ofthe case; for when we say God hath instituted positive precepts,
though the matter of them be antecedently of an indifferent nature,
it is still supposed there were wise reasons for enjoining them, and
that, when enjoined, they are designed to be subservient to things
of a moral nature, and to help forward the great ends of all religion.
And that the positive precepts required in the Christian religion are
such, and of an excellent tendency, hath been often clearly shown.
The other main principle of the author's scheme is, that that law
or religion of nature, which he supposes to be absolutely perfect,
always was and is so clear and obvious to all men, that there is not
the least need or use of external revelation. This is what he hath
greatly laboured; and if strong and confident assertions, frequently

96 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IX.
repeated, may pass for proofs, he hath fully proved it. This part of
his scheme coincides with that of Lord Herbert of Cherbury, who
had represented the five great principles, in which he makes religion
to consist, to be common notices, inscribed by a divine hand in the
minds of all men, and universally acknowledged in all ages and
nations, In like manner the author of Christianity as old as the
Creation asserteth, that that religion, the perfection of which he so
much extols, is apparent to the whole world, to those of the meanest
as well as highest capacity, and who are unable to read their mother,
tongue. He expressly declareth, that God could not . more fully
make known his will to all intelligent creatures than he hath done
this way; no, not if he should miraculously convey the same ideas to
all men.* He frequently speaks, as if the principles and obligations
of natural religion were so clear, that men could not possibly mis
take them; that all men see them at first view ; and that the actual
knowledge of the law of nature is naturally necessary, and insepar
able from rational nature ; so that it is as impossible for any reason
able creature to be ignorant of it, as it is for animals to live without
the pulse of the heart and arteries.
This scheme, though it has been mightily applauded, is contrary
to evident fact and experience; it supposeth the law or religion of
nature, in itsimportantprinciples and obligations, to be necessarily
known to all mankind, and to be so clear that they cannot mistake
it; when nothing is more certain and undeniable, than that they
have mistaken it in very important instances, and that some of
its main principles have been very much perverted and obscured. I
shall not here repeat what was offered to this purpose in a former
letter in my remarks on Lord Herbert's scheme, in which it is
plainly proved, that men have fallen into a gross darkness with re
spect to some of those great principles in which that noble writer
makes the true religion to consist; and that after all his efforts to
the contrary, he hath found himself under a necessity of acknow
ledging it. The like acknowledgments the author of Christianity as
old as the Creation hath been obliged to make. He himself in seve
ral parts of his book, though in plain contradiction to his own
scheme, representeth almost all mankind in all ages, excepting the
Freethinking few,\ as having had very unworthy apprehensions of
God, and wrong notions of the religion and law of nature. And no
small part of his book is employed in inveighing against that super
stition which he supposeth to have generally prevailed among man
kind at all times, and which in his opinion is worse than Atheism ;
and consequently it must be acknowledged, even according to his
own representation of the case, that men had fallen from the right
knowledge of the religion of nature into great darkness and corrup
tion. Cicero was so sensible of this, that, speaking of some smalt
sparks of virtue implanted in us, he complaineth, that they are soon
extinguished by corrupt customs and opinions, so that the light of
* Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 22. edit. 8vo. t Ibid. p. 149.

Let. IX. DR. TINDAL. 97
nature no-where appears* From whence he infers the great neces
sity and usefulness of philosophy to direct and assist us ; and cer
tainly this will conclude much more strongly for the necessity and
usefulness of a divine revelation, which would be much more ad
vantageous, and more to be depended on.
The argument therefore which Dr. Tindal urgeth from the sup
posed universal clearness ofthe law of nature, to show that there is
no need or use for external revelation, falls to the ground. And
indeed his way of arguing, if it proves any thing, equally proves,
that all the writings of philosophers and moralists ; all the instruc-
• tions that have been ever given to mankind in matters of religion and
morality, have been perfectly needless and of no use ; and that
consequently, all books which have been written on these subjects,
the noblest in the world, and the best worth writing upon, must be
discarded, as well as the scriptures; since all mankind have such a
perfect knowledge of their duty, that they stand in no need of in
struction or information. Yea, he sometimes represents it, as if in
structing them by words tended only to mislead them from the know
ledge of things. Thus, according to this goodly scheme, all men
are to be left to what he calls the simple dictates of the light of
nature, without any instruction at all; the certain consequence of
which would be universal ignorance and barbarism. He often ex
presseth himself, as if he thought that all men have an equal know
ledge of the law of nature ; and indeed I do not see but that upon
his scheme it must be so ; yet at other times he supposeth the know
ledge men have of it to be more or less clear according to the cir
cumstances they are in; for he says, it is not necessary that all men
should have equal knowledge of it, but that all should have sufficient
for the circumstances they are in;\ and talks of a man's doing his
best, according as his circumstances permit, to discover the will qf
God; and of men's being accepted, if they live up to their different
degrees of light. But though others may charitably make use of
this way of speaking, it is hard to see how this writer can do it in
consistency with his scheme; or how he can suppose any allowances
to be made for involuntary errors : since according to his representa
tion of the case, all errors in matters of religion or morals must be
voluntary, in opposition to the clearest universal light. Though
therefore he sets up for a mighty advocate for the heathen world,
and blames the Christian divines for passing too severe a censure
upon them, he himself must, if he be consistent, judge much more
harshly of them than they : since his hypothesis quite destroys the
plea with regard to the heathens, drawn from the great darkness and
difficulties they laboured under ; for he positively asserteth, that the
law of nature is so clear, that no well-meaning Gentile could be igno
rant ofit.% He must therefore suppose all of them, who were in
volved in the general superstition and idolatry, which he himself ac
knowledged to be contrary to the law of nature, to have been
Tuseul. Quaist. lib. iii. in proaem. f Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 4. edit. 8vo.
\ Ibid, p 3J.
-Il

98 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IX.
destitute of that sincerity, which he maketh to be the only title to
happiness, and to the favour of God.
It may not be improper to observe farther, that though he often
speaks oif the law of nature, as if it were a system of principles and
rules fixed and unalterable, to which nothing could ever be added,
and in which nothing could ever be altered (which rules and princi
ples he supposes to be necessarily known to all mankind), yet at
other times he expresses himself, as if he thought there were no fixed
unchangeable principles and rules of morality at all. The goodness
of actions is, according to him, to be wholly measured by their
tendency; and this is to be judged by the circumstances a man is
under, which circumstances he represents as continually changing.*
It appears from several passages, that, after all his magnificent talk
ofthe perfection and immutability of the law of nature, all that he
would have to be understood by it is only this, that it is the will of
God that every man should act, according as the circumstances he
is under point out his duty. This is the sole universal rule or stand
ing law given to all mankind for their conduct, and by which they
may know their duty in all cases whatsoever; as if it were sufficient
to tell men, even the most illiterate, that they must act as the cir
cumstances they are placed in do require, without any other or
farther direction. But surely any one that knows the world and
mankind must be sensible, that, if every man were to be left to
himself, to find out what is good and fit for him to do, merely by
what he apprehendeth to be most for his own benefit in the circum
stances he is under, and to gratify his appetites and passions, as far
as he himself thinketh to be most for his own advantage and happi
ness, without any other direction or law to restrain or govern him,
it would soon introduce a very loose morality. I cannot help look
ing upon it to be a strange way of thinking, to imagine that it
would be better for every man to be left thus to form a scheme of
religion and morals for himself, than to have his duty urged and en
forced upon him, by plain and express precepts, in a revelation
confirmed by the authority of God himself.
As this book made a great noise, many good answers were re
turned to it. A second pastoral Letter was published on this occa
sion by the late bishop of London, which, like his former, com
prised a great deal in a small compass, and was very well fitted to
answer the end it was intended for, to be an antidote against the
spreading infection of infidelity. Several other valuable treatises
might be mentioned, such as, The Argument set forth in a late
Book intitled, " Christianity as old as the Creation," reviewed and
confuted in several Conferences, by Dr. Thomas Burnet. Dr. Water-
land's Scripture Vindicated; which was particularly designed to vin
dicate the holy Scriptures, which this author had takengreat pains
to vilify and expose: a good account is here given of a great num
ber of passages in the sacred writings, and his objections against
* Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 16. 317, 318.

Let. IX. DR. TINDAL. <)<)
them are fully obviated. Mr. Law's Case of Reason, or Natural
Religion, fairly and fully stated, in answer to a Book, entitled,
" Christianity as old as the Creation." Mr. Jackson's Remarks on a
Book, intitled, " Christianity as old as the Creation-'' Dr. Stebbing's
Discourse, concerTiing the Use and Advantage qf the Gospel-Revela
tion, in which are obviated the principal Objections contained in a
Book, intitled, " Christianity as old as the Creation," London, 8vo.
1731. The same learned and judicious writer published another
excellent tract against Dr. Tindal, intitled, A Defence of Dr.
Clarke's Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion, in Answer to
the fourteenth Chapter of a Book, intitled, " Christianity as old as
the Creation," London, 8vo. 1731. Mr. Balguy, the worthy author
of a Letter to a Deist, of which some notice was taken before in the
account of the Earl of Shaftesbury's writings, published on this
occasion A second Letter to a Deist, concerning a late Book, intitled,
" Christianity as old as the Creation;" more particularly that
Chapter which relates to Dr. Clarke, London, 8vo. 1731. And,
several'years after, he published a very valuable tract, which was
particularly intended to defend the mediatorial scheme, against the
objections which Dr. Tindal had advanced, intitled, An Essay ou
Redemption, being the second Part qf Divine Rectitude, London,
8vo. 1741. To these ought to be added, a piece which has been
deservedly much esteemed, written by the ingenious Mr. Anthony
Atkey, though without his name, intitled, The main Argument ef
a late Book, intitled, " Christianity as old as the Creation," fairly
stated and examined; or, a short View of the whole Controversy,
London, 8vo, 1733. Besides these and other tracts that were -pub
lished on this occasion, there were some large answers made to this
book, of which I shall give a more particular account.
The first of them that I shall mention in entitled, "The Useful
ness, Truth, and Excellency of the Christian Revelation, defended
against the Objections contained in a late Book, entitled, ' Christi
anity as old as the Creation,' " by James Foster, afterwards Dr.
Foster, London, 8vo. 1731. This is generally and justly acknow
ledged to be an ingenious performance, and written with great
clearness of thought and expression. It is divided into five chapters.
The first is designed to show the advantages of revelation in general,
and particularly of the Christian; it is plainly proved, that what
ever the power of reason may be supposed to be, if duly exercised
and improved to the utmost, yet when the light of nature is dar
kened, and ignorance, idolatry, and superstition have overspread the
world, which was undoubtedly the case when our Saviour appeared,
an extraordinary revelation would be highly useful, and of great
benefit to mankind. He then proceeds to consider what is the
proper evidence of the truth and divinity of any particular revelation ;
and how those to whom it is given may be satisfied that it really
came from God ; and here it is shown, that miracles, when con
sidered in conjunction with the good tendency and excellence ofthe
doctrines, furnish a proper and sufficient evidence. In the second
h2

100 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IX.
chapter, he vindicates the conduct of God's providence in not mak
ing the Christian religion universally known to all nations, and in
all times and ages : and proves, that this is analogous to the gene
ra] course of providence both in the natural and moral world, and
that it is consistent with the divine perfections, and consequently
with the notion of its being a divine revelation. In the third
chapter, which is the largest in the whole book, it is shown, that
we have a sufficient probability, even at this distance, of the authen
ticity, credibility, and purity of the books of the New Testament;
and that the common people are able to judge of the truth and un-
corruptedness of a traditional religion ; and a good answer is re
turned to the arguments drawn from the changes of language, the
different use of words, and the style and phrase of Scripture, to
prove it an obscure, perplexed, and uncertain rule. The fourth
chapter contains a general defence of positive commands, which
Dr. Tindal had urged as alone " sufficient to make all things else,
that can be said in support of any revelation, totally ineffectual."
It is proved, that they are not repugnant to reason, nor subversive
of moral obligation, nor inconsistent with the wisdom, justice, and
goodness of God ; and that instituted religion is not superstition,
and, if rightly understood, has no more a tendency to superstition,
than natural religion itself. And the fifth contains a particular
vindication of the peculiar positive institutions of Christianity; in
which it is shown, that they are of excellent use for begetting and
strengthening good moral habits, and for exciting and engaging
men to a more diligent practice of moral duties.
Another answer, which particularly engaged the attention of the
public, was that published by Dr. John Conybeare, rector of Exeter
College, Oxford, late lord bishop of Bristol, viz. "A Defence of
Revealed Religion, against the Exceptions of a late Writer, in his
Book entitled ' Christianity as old as the Creation,' London, 1732."
This book is divided into nine chapters. The first is designed by
the acute and learned author to show, what we are to understand
by the law or religion of nature, from what the obligation of it arises,
and how far it extends. He shows, that the religion or law of
nature does not take in every thing that is founded in the nature or
reason of things, which seems to be the sense the author of Chris
tianity as old as the Creation takes it in throughout his whole book,
but only such a collection of doctrines and precepts, as is discern
ible to us in the use of our natural faculties ; and this, though
founded in nature, becomes then only properly a law to us, when it
is regarded as the will of God, the supreme legislator ; and our obli
gation to it, strictly speaking, is founded on the divine sanction of
rewards and punishments. In the second chapter it is shown, that
the law or religion of nature, in the sense already explained, is not
absolutely perfect. Since the law of nature is only what men are
capable of discerning, in the use of their natural faculties, it can be
no more perfect than human reason. If the law of nature were ab
solutely perfect, it must have such a clearness as to the meaning

Let. IX. DE. TINDAL. ]01
and authority of it, as can admit of nothing more in any possible
circumstance ; it must have such a strength of enforcement, that it
cannot be heightened in any way whatsoever ; and such an extent
of matter, as to comprehend every thing that may be fit and proper
to be known or done, and not to admit of any possible article to be
added to it. And he plainly proves, that the law or religion of
nature is not absolutely perfect in any of these respects. Chapter
third is intended to show, that the law of nature is not immutable,
in such a sense especially as to be incapable of admitting any ad
ditional precepts. And here the question concerning positive pre
cepts is accurately stated, and it is proved that God may appoint
them ; and an answer is returned to the author's objections to the
contrary. In chapter fourth he enquires, whether natural and re
vealed religion be necessarily the same ; and if not, wherein the
proper distinction between them both doth consist. In the former
chapter he had shown, that positive precepts might be given ; here
he carries it farther, and proves that some positive institutions might
reasonably be expected, if ever God should reveal his will at all ;
both as tokens of his authority and our submission, and for the
better order and decency of his worship, and the outward part of
religion, and for the increase and advancement of inward piety. The
same thing is urged from the concurrent sense of mankind in all
ages, and under all religions. It is further shown, there are other
things of higher importance in which natural and revealed religion
differ, though they are not properly opposed to each other, e. g. with
regard to principles and doctrines not discoverable by nature's light,
or as to precepts which, though founded in the nature of things, yet
are not certainly knowable in the use of our own reason. They also
differ in point of clearness, and in efficacy. He instances particu
larly in the assurance given us of the pardon of sin, divine assis
tances, and the eternal retributions of a future state. Chapter fifth
is designed to show, that a proper rule of life is not perfectly and
easily discoverable by every man, even by those of the meanest
capacity ; and here it is evinced, that the author's own scheme of
natural religion, which he pretends is so obvious to all mankind, is
perplexed, obscure, and defective. In chapter sixth he inquires,
whether a proper rule of life be more easily and perfectly discover
able by us in the use of our own reason, than the proof or meaning
of a revelation can be. He shows the possibility of immediate reve
lation or inspiration, and that this gives the highest evidence ; and
that as to traditional revelation, though the evidence be not strictly
demonstrative, it may be such as is sufficient to determine the
assent of a sober thinking man ; and he answers what the author
had brought to prove, that the sense and meaning of such a reve
lation cannot be fixed and ascertained. Chapter seventh is de
signed to show, that a revelation is expedient, in order to a more
easy, more perfect, and more general knowledge of the rule of life.
This is distinctly evinced, both with regard to the wiser and better
part of men, particularly the philosophers, and with respect to

102 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IX.
persons of a lower rank and meaner abilities ; and a good answer is
made to what the author had urged, concerning the supposed in
consistency between our being governed by reason and revelation.
In chapter eighth it is shown, that a revelation is expedient in
order to enforce the general practice of the rule of life ; that the
mere pleasure of doing well, or a moral taste or sense, is not alone
a sufficient balance for all the inconveniences of doing otherwise,
amidst all the embarrassments of passion and temptation ; nor if to
this be added the civil sanctions of human authority, are these alone
sufficient ; for these are designed not so much to reward virtue,
several of which do not come under the cognizance of human courts,
as to punish crimes, and those only such as tend to the hurt
of the society. Virtue can only be sufficiently enforced by sanc
tions established by God himself; and a revelation is expedi
ent for that purpose. He concludes this chapter with giving a clear
answer to two objections urged by the author ; the one is, that if a
revelation be expedient to be made to any, it must be equally ex
pedient to be made to all, and at all times ; the other is, that the
revelation hath not in fact answered that purpose for which we
r.ffirm it to be expedient. The ninth, and last, chapter is intended
to evince, that there is sufficient evidence of the reality of a revela
tion, especially of the Christian. He observes, that what is usually
called the internal evidence of a revelation is not strictly and pro
perly an evidence, but only a necessary condition or qualification of
a true revelation ; that external proof is the only direct evidence of
a divine revelation; and this consisteth in miracles, as including
prophecies, which may be considered as one sort of miracles. He
shows what reason we have to believe, that the miracles recorded to
have been done in favour of the Christian religion were really
wrought ; and that, supposing them to have been wrought, they
were real and satisfactory proofs of a divine original..
There was another answer to Dr. Tindal's book, which I should
not have chosen to take notice of, if the method I am in did not
make it proper for me to do so, as I am sensible how hard it is for
an author to speak of his own work, without offending his own mo
desty, or the delicacy of the reader. It was published at Dublin in
two volumes, 8vo. in 1733, under the title of An Answer to a late
Book, intitled, " Christianity as old as the Creation ;" and was after
wards reprinted at London in 1740. It is much larger, and takes a
wider compass than the other answers ; and therefore the account
here given of it will be also larger. It is divided into two parts :
In the first part, which takes up the first volume, the author's ac
count of the law of nature is considered, and his scheme is shown to
be inconsistent with reason, and with itself, and of ill consequence
to the interests of virtue, and to the good of mankind. This volume
consisteth of eleven chapters, besides a large introduction, contain
ing observations upon the author's spirit and design, and the way
of reasoning made use of by him, and others of our modern deists.
In the first chapter there is a general account of that writer's scheme,

Let. IX. DR. TINDAL. 103
which lies scattered in. his book with little order or method, but is
here brought together in one view, and the various and inconsistent
senses, in which he takes the law of nature, examined. The second
chapter relates to the vast extent he gives to the law of nature, as
taking in whatsoever is founded in the nature of things. This is
shown to be a strange hypothesis, when he is speaking of that law
which he supposes to be known to all men, as if the whole reason
and nature of things were open to every man ; whereas, taken in
this comprehensive view, it is only perfectly known to God himself.
In the third and fourth chapters, what he hath offered to prove,
that the religion or law of nature given to mankind at the beginning
was so absolutely perfect that nothing could ever be afterwards
added to it, and particularly that God could never institute any
positive precepts, is distinctly considered ; and it is proved, that God
may both give men new laws suited to new circumstances of things,
and may, if he seeth fit, institute positive precepts ; and that these
may answer very valuable ends; and particularly, that there were
wise reasons for the positive institutions both of the Jewish and
Christian religion. The fifth and sixth chapters relate to what our
author had advanced concerning the universal clearness of the law
of nature. It is shown at large, that it is not so obvious to all man
kind, as to render an extraordinary revelation needless ; that even
as to those principles and duties which, absolutely speaking, are
discoverable by human reason, revelation may be of great use to give
a clearer and more certain knowledge of them, than the bulk of
mankind, or even the wisest, could have without it. Besides which,
there are several things of great importance to us to know, of which
we could nof have a certain assurance by the mere light of natural
reason without revelation, and with regard to which, therefore, an
express revelation from God would be of signal advantage, and
ought to be received with great thankfulness; as particularly, with
relation to the methods of our reconciliation with God when we
have offended him, the terms and extent of forgiveness, and the
nature, greatness, and duration of that reward, which it shall please
God to confer on imperfect obedience. In the 7th and 8th chapters
it is evinced, that this writer's scheme of natural religion is very de
fective; and that he giveth a wrong account of some of the main
principles and duties of the law of nature ; that he in effect depriveth
it of its strongest sanctions ; and that his scheme tendeth to take
away the fear of God, and to make men easy in their sins. The
ninth is designed to show, that his scheme is not fitted to answer
the end he proposes by it, the delivering mankind from superstition
and priestcraft; and that a strict adherence to the Christian reve
lation in its original purity would have a happier influence this way.
The tenth chapter relates to those passages, in which he pretends to
describe the religion of deists, and to draw a parallel between that
and Christianity ; and it is shown, that the advantages he would ap
propriate to deism do much more properly belong to the Christian
religion, as laid down in the holy Scriptures. In the eleventh

104 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. IX.
chapter, his pretence of introducing a new and glorious state of
things is examined ; and the whole concludes with a brief represen
tation of the pernicious tendency and manifold inconsistences of
the author's schsme.
In the second part, the authority and usefulness of the revelation
contained in the sacred writings of the Old and New Testament, is
asserted and vindicated against the objections and misrepresenta
tions of this writer. This part is divided into sixteen chapters.
The first contains some considerations concerning divine revelation
in general, and what are the proper characters and evidences by
which it may be known that such a revelation is really given ; and
that our being governed by the authority of such a revelation is not
inconsistent with our being governed by reason, as this author has
attempted to prove. The second chapter examines his objections
against the characters of the first publishers and witnesses of the
Jewish and Christian revelation ; and it is shown, that we have all
the assurance that we can reasonably desire, that they were neither
imposed upon themselves, nor had a design to impose upon others ;
nor indeed, as things were circumstanced, had it in their power to
do so, if they had designed it. In the third chapter his objections
against the proof from miracles are considered. It is shown, that
they are neither needless nor uncertain proofs ; that there are certain
marks and characters by which true divine miracles may be distin
guished from those pretended to be wrought by imposture, or the
agency of evil spirits ; and that these characters are to be found in
the miracles wrought in favour of the Jewish and Christian revela
tion. The design of the fourth chapter is to prove, that we have
all the evidence that can be reasonably desired ; that the revelation
contained in the holy Scriptures, with an account of the facts and
attestations by which that revelation was originally confirmed and
established, is transmitted to us with such a degree of purity and
certainty, as may be safely depended upon ; and this is particularly
shown with regard to the writings ofthe Old Testament, especially
the law of Moses. In the fifth chapter, the authority and integrity
of the sacred records of the New Testament are asserted and vin
dicated against the author's exceptions ; and that we have both
sufficient external proofs of their being safely transmitted to us,
and that they carry in them the greatest internal evidences of
genuine truth and uncorruptedness, that can be found in any writ
ings whatsoever. The sixth chapter shows, that the wonderful
success the gospel met with, and its speedy and general propaga
tion, furnish a strong proof, as the case was circumstanced, of the
truth of the facts on which it is founded. The following chapters
are designed to consider his objections against Scripture, drawn
from the nature and manner ofthe revelation there contained. And
first, his attempt to prove, that it is uncertain and obscure, is ob
viated. What he urgeth to this purpose, concerning the ambiguity
and uncertainty of words, concerning the scriptures being written in
dead languages, and that the translations are not to be depended

Let. IX. DR. TINDAL. 105
on, is in the seventh chapter distinctly examined. The eighth re
lates to the keys of solution necessary for understanding the Scrip
ture, which he pretends the people are wholly unacquainted with ;
and what he offers concerning the figurative language of Scripture,
and the parables and proverbial expressions made use of by our
Saviour, is considered. The ninth chapter makes it appear, that
many of those passages, which this writer censures as obscure and
apt to mislead the people, are so noble and of such excellent use,
that a candid critic would have judged them worthy of admiration.
In the tenth, an answer is given to his objections against the gospel
precepts, drawn from their being delivered in a loose, general, and
undetermined manner ; and his argument for the obscurity of Scrip
ture, from the divisions among Christians about the sense of it, and
his pretence that this would infer the necessity of an infallible guide,
is shown to be vain and inconclusive. The eleventh and twelfth
chapters contain a distinct and particular examination of all those
passages, whereby he pretends to prove, that the Scriptures tend to
lead the people into wrong apprehensions of God, and into a wrong
practice with relation to the duties they owe to one another.
Chapter thirteenth considers what he has offered to show, that there
is a contrast between the spirit of the Old and New Testament.
In the fourteenth and fifteenth chapters, the Mosiac account of
man's original dignity and the fall, and the Christian doctrine of a
Mediator, are vindicated against this writer's exceptions. The last
chapter contains an answer to two objections against Christianity,
which have been often urged, and with which the author concludes
his book : the one drawn from its not having been given and made
known to all mankind in all ages and places from the beginning, the
other drawn from the corruptions of Christians. And it is shown,
that no argument will justly hold from either of these against the
usefulness and divine authority of the Christian revelation.
There was also a solid and excellent answer to Christianity as old
as the Creation, drawn up by the reverend Mr. Simon Brown, and
which well deserves a particular notice. But I fear I may be
thought to have been too tedious and particular already in the ac
count that has been given of the answers to this book, though the
opinion many have entertained of it, as if it were a very formidable
attack upon Christianity, will I hope in some degree plead my
excuse.

106 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. X.

LETTER X.
Another Attempt against Christianity in Dr. Morgan's Book, called, The Moral
Philosopher. — He seems to acknowledge the great Usefulness of Revelation, but
leaves no Way of knowing when a Revelation is really given  He discards all Au
thority, even a divine one, in Matters of Religion, and all Proof from Miracles and
Prophecy. — His Invectives against the Law of Moses and the Prophets. — Though
he professeth himself a Christian on the Foot ofthe New Testament, he insinuates
several Reflections on the Character of our Saviour, and endeavours to invalidate
the Attestation given to'Christianity by the extraordinary Gifts and Powers ofthe
Holy Ghost. — He pretends that the Apostles preached different Gospels, and that
the New Testament is a Jumble of Inconsistent Religions. — His Book fully con
futed in the Answers that were published against him. — Some Account of those
Answers, as also of the second and third volumes of the Moral Philosopher.
Sir,
As you still insist upon my continuing the correspondence on the
subject of my former letters, I shall now take notice of a fresh at
tempt against Christianity, in a book that appeared with a pompous
title, The Moral Philosopher, in a Dialogue between Philalethes, a
Christian Deist, and Theophanes, a Christian Jew — " In which the
grounds and reasons of religion in general, and particularly of Chris
tianity as distinguished from the religion of nature, the different
methods of conveying and proposing moral truth to the mind, and
the necessary marks or criteria on which they must all equally de
pend, the nature of positive laws, Sec. with many other matters of
the utmost consequence to religion, are fairly considered and debated,
and the arguments on both sides impartially represented," London,
8vo. 1737. The author of this book, Dr. Morgan, seems at first
view to go much farther in his concession, than other his fellow-
labourers in the same cause. If we were to judge by some parts of
his book, we should be ready to look upon him as having very
friendly dispositions towards the Christian religion, since he seems
expressly to acknowledge the great usefulness of divine revelation
in general, and of the Christian revelation in particular. He speaks
of man's natural weakness and inability, and represents those as
conceited of themselves, who in the present state of mankind talk
of the strength qf human reason in matters of religion. He observes,
that at the time of Christ's appearing, "mankind in general were
in a state of gross ignorance and darkness, with respect to the true
knowledge of God, and of themselves, and of all those moral rela
tions and obligations we stand in to the Supreme Being, and to one
another : That they were under great uncertainty concerning a
future state, and the concern of divine providence in the government
of the world, and at the same time were filled with a proud and
vain conceit of their own natural abilities and self-sufficiency : That
our Saviour's doctrines on these heads, though they appeared to be
the true and genuine principles of nature and reason, when he had

Let. X. DR. MORGAN. 107
set them in a proper light, yet were such as the people had never
heard or thought of before, and never would have known, without
such an instructor, such means and opportunities of knowledge :
That they who would judge uprightly of the strength of human
reason in matters of morality and religion, under the present cor
rupt and degenerate state of mankind, ought to take their estimate
from those parts of the world which never had the benefit of reve
lation ; and this perhaps might make them less conceited of them
selves, and more thankful to God for the light of the gospel." He
asks, "if the religion of nature, under the present pravity and cor
ruption of mankind, were written with sufficient strength and clear
ness upon every man's heart, why might not a Chinese, or an Indian,
draw up as good a system of natural religion as a Christian, and
why have we never met with any such ?" He adds, that " let us
take Confucius, Zoroaster, Plato, Socrates, or the greatest moralist
that ever lived without the light of revelation, and it will appear,
that their best systems of morality were intermixed and blended
with so much superstition, and so many gross absurdities, as quite
eluded and defeated the main design of them."* This author could
scarce have declared more expressly than he hath here done against
Tindal's darling scheme, concerning such an absolute universal
clearness and sufficiency of the light of nature in the present state
of mankind, as renders revelation entirely needless and useless. To
which it may be added, that he speaks in many passages very ho
nourably of Jesus Christ, and the religion he hath introduced, as
having brought clearer discoveries of our duty, and enforced it by
stronger motives, and provided more effectual aids, than ever was
done before. And accordingly he expressly declareth himself to be
a Christian on the foot ofthe New Testament.
If we were to form our judgment of him merely from such pas
sages as these, it might be thought to be doing wrong to our moral
philosopher, to rank him in the list of the deistical writers ; but by
a prevarication and a disingenuity which is not easily paralleled, ex
cept among some of those that have appeared on the same side,
under all these fair pretences and disguises, he hath covered as de
termined a malice against the honour and authority of the Christian
revelation, as any of those that have written before him.
It is not easy to form a distinct notion of what he understandeth
by that revelation, the usefulness of which he would be thought to
acknowledge. He granteth, " that God may, if he thinks fit, com
municate his will by immediate inspiration, or supernatural illumina
tion ; yea, and that what he thus communicates may come with
evidence equal to a mathematical demonstration. "f Yet he plainly
intimates, that it can never be proved, that God had ever thus
communicated his will, and treats such inspiration as the invention
of our spiritual scholastics or systematical divines. By several pas
sages of his book, especially if compared with what he saith in his
• Moral Philosopher, vol. i. p. 144, 145. t Ibid. p. 83, 84.

108 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. X.
second volume, which he published in defence of it, it appeareth,
that by revelation he understandeth any discovery of truth, in what
way soever a man comes by it, even though it be by the strength and
superiority qf his own natural faculties.* So that all that have
discovered rational or moral truth by their own study and applica
tion, in the use of their natural faculties, may be said, according to
this account of it, to have had the light of revelation ; and if so, it
is not easy to see how he could consistently represent whole nations,
among whom he reckoneth the Indians and Chinese, as having never
had the benefit qf revelation ; or how he could say, that the most
eminent philosophers and moralists, such as Confucius, Zoroaster,
Plato, Socrates, lived without the light qf revelation. For will he
say, that none of them had any discovery or manifestation of ra
tional moral truth made to them in any way whatsoever, no, not so
much as in the exercise of their own natural faculties ?
The great principle he hath laid down, and which runs through
his whole book, is, that there is but one certain and infallible mark
or criterion of divine truth, or of any doctrine or law as coming
from God, and that is, the moral truth, reason or fitness of the thing
itself, when it comes to be. fairly proposed to, and considered by
the mind or understanding. He frequently declareth, that we are
not to receive any thing as true in religion upon any authority
whatsoever,-!* or upon any other foundation than its own intrinsic
evidence, or moral fitness ; and this he explaineth to be its con-
ducibleness to our happiness, as appearing to our reason, indepen
dently of all authority. So that after all his fair pretences about
the benefit of revelation, we are not to receive any thing upon the
authority of revelation at all. Supposing any persons to have been
extraordinarily sent of God, to make a discovery of his will concern
ing truth or duty, whatever credentials they produce to prove their
divine mission, we are not to receive any thing upon that authority,
no more than if they were not thus extraordinarily sent of God.
The doctrines and laws they deliver as from God, in what way
soever they are attested and confirmed, are really and entirely on
the same footing with the opinion of philosophers or moralists, who
do not pretend to be extraordinarily sent of God at all ; i. e. we are
to believe the doctrines they teach, if upon examining them we find
them to be true, by reasons drawn from the nature of things ; and
we are to submit to their precepts and directions, if upon consider
ing them we are satisfied that they tend to our own advantage and
happiness ; but their authority, abstractly from the reason of the
thing, must have no weight to determine us. Thus the proper use
and advantage of revelation, which is to assure us by a divine testi
mony of the truth of things, which either we could not have known
at all, or not so certainly or clearly, by our own unassisted reason ;
and with regard to our practice, to direct us to our duty, and bind
* Moral Philosopher, vol. i. p. 343. vol. ii. p. 12, 13, 25, 26. 44
t Ibid. vol. ii. p. 6, 21, &c. '

Let. X. DR. MORGAN. 109
it upon us by express precepts, confirmed by a divine authority, is
entirely set aside by this author. Accordingly he will not allow
either miracles or prophecy to be any proof of divine revelation, or
any reason at all for our believing any doctrines, or submitting to
any laws, which have this attestation given to them. This being
the true state of the case, according to him — that nothing is to be
received upon the authority of revelation — it is to no great purpose
to inquire how this revelation is communicated to us. Yet he
makes a, great noise about the uncertainty of the manner of convey
ing a revelation to us. He frequently seems to make a mighty dif
ference between immediate and traditional revelation ; and sometimes
puts on an appearance of granting, that inspiration or extraordinary
revelation from God is a sufficient ground of assurance to the person
or persons- to whom this revelation is originally and immediately
communicated. But upon a close examination, and by comparing
several passages in his book, it will be found, that he does not, and
indeed cannot in consistency with his scheme, allow, that those
persons to whom this revelation is immediately made, have any way
of being sure of the truth of what is thus communicated, but by the
reason of the thing, by its own intrinsic evidence, or apparent ten
dency to our benefit. And those to whom this revelation is tradi
tionally communicated, may have the same kind of assurance; i. e.
they may believe it, if upon examining they find it to be true, by
arguments drawn from the nature and reason of the thing. So that,
upon his scheme, immediate revelation makes no difference, though
he often talks as if there were a very great one.
It appeareth upon this view, that though he sometimes seems
absolutely to contradict and subvert the scheme of the author of
Christianity as old as the Creation; yet at the bottom, his own
scheme cometh pretty much to the same thing. He, as well as that
author, is for discarding all authority, even a divine one, in matters of
religion ; and represents the receiving anything purely upon such au
thority, as a renouncing our reason. According to him, the only way
any man, even of the meanest capacity, can have to be fully assured of
the truth of any doctrine in religion, is by the reason ofthe thing,
or its own intrinsic evidence, independent of all authority or testi
mony ; and in like manner, with regard to practice, the only way
any man hath of knowing any thing to be his duty, is its conduci-
bleness to his own happiness in the circumstances he is in ; of
which every man is to be the judge for himself. To put all duty
and obedience upon this foot, would go a great way to dissolve all
bands of government, human and divine; since upon this scheme,
it is in effect left to men themselves, whether and how far they shall
obey ; i. e. so far only as they apprehend the thing required to tend
to their own happiness. And certainly it cannot be denied, that
considering the present darkness and corruption of mankind, and
how much they are influenced by their appetites and passions, they
would be in great danger, if left to themselves, of forming wrong
judgments concerning their own happiness, and what is conducible

110 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. X.
to it, or connected with it. Such a scheme might be consistently
advanced by Dr. Tindal, who supposed, though contrary to evident
fact and experience, that the whole law "bf nature and fitness of
things is obvious to all mankind, even to those that cannot read
their mother tongue. But it seems not so easily, reconcileable to
the concessions made by the Moral Philosopher , who acknowledgeth
the present weakness and inability of reason, and that the law of
nature is not written with sufficient strength and clearness in every
man's heart, in the present corrupt and degenerate state of mankind.
We have seen the regard this writer hath to revelation in general.
As to the revelation contained in the holy Scriptures, he expressly
and avowedly rejecteth the Old Testament, and openly declareth
that he will have nothing to do with it in his religion. He repre-
senteth the law of Moses, as " having neither truth nor goodness in
it, and as a wretched scheme of superstition, blindness, and slavery,
contrary to all reason and common sense, set up under the specious
popular pretence of a divine instruction and revelation from God."
And he endeavours to prove, that this was the sentiment of St.
Paul. Among other heavy charges which he hath advanced against
that law, one is, that it encouraged human sacrifices, as the highest
act of religion and devotion, when offered not to idols, but to God;
and he takes occasion to consider the case of Abraham's being com
manded to offer up Isaac, which he represents as absolutely un
hinging and dissolving the whole law of nature. He then goes on
to consider the spirit of prophecy. He representeth the Urim and
Thummim as a priestly cheat, and afterwards proceedeth to make a
very odious, though inconsistent, representation of the character
and conduct of the ancient prophets ; against whom he exclaimeth
as the great disturbers of their country, the authors of all the civil
wars and revolutions in the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and the
cause of the final ruin of both ; though the contrary is evident from
the very historical accounts to which he pretendeth to appeal. And
he praiseth Ahab and Jezebel, and other idolatrous princes, for hav
ing endeavoured to destroy them.
As to the New Testament, though he frequently affecteth to speak
with great veneration of Jesus Christ, yet he insinuateth very base
and unworthy reflections upon his person and character : that he
pretended to be the Messiah foretold by the prophets, though he
very well knew that those prophets had only spoken of a temporal
Jewish prince, who was to arise and reign in Judea ; and that ac
cordingly he suffered himself to be carried about by the mob as their
Messiah for a twelvemonth together; and did not renounce that
character till his death, when he absolutely disclaimed his being
the Messiah foretold in the prophetical writings, and died upon that
renunciation. As to the apostles, the first authorized teachers and
publishers of the religion of Jesus, he affirms, that they themselves
never so much as pretended to be under the unerring guidance and
inspiration of the Holy Ghost ; that they differed among themselves
about the most concerning parts of revelation ; and preached dif-

Let. X. DR. MORGAN. Ill
ferent, and even contrary, gospels ; and that all the apostles, except
St. Paul, preached what he calls the Jewish gospel, viz. salvation
by Jesus Christ as the Jewish Messiah, i. e. the national prince and
deliverer of the Jews. This, which he all along explodes as false
and absurd, he represents as the only proper essential article of the
Christian faith. As to the attestations given to our Saviour's divine
mission, and to the doctrines taught by the apostles, by miracles,
prophecy, and the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, he abso
lutely denieth them to be any proofs at all. Finally, though he
professeth himself to be a Christian on the foot of the New Testa
ment, yet he representeth it as leaning strongly towards Judaism,
which is, in his opinion, a system of superstition and tyranny. He
pretends, that Christ's own disciples represented things according
to their Jewish prejudices, and therefore are not to be depended upon
for a just account either of doctrines or facts ; and that the New
Testament was corrected, revised, and published by the Jews, who
altered it according to their own prejudices and false opinions ; so
that, as it now stands, it is a system of Judaism, a jumble qf incon
sistent religions.
You will allow me here to observe, that a writer must have asi
uncommon degree of confidence, to represent the New Testament
as corrupted and altered by the Jews according to their own preju
dices and false opinions, when not one of their peculiar and most
darling notions and prejudices is to be found in this book, but much
to the contrary ; whereas, if they corrupted it at all, it must be sup
posed that they would have corrupted it in favour of those notions
and prejudices. No where is the observance of the Mosaic law
prescribed to Christians, or insisted upon as necessary to the favour
of God under the gospel. The Messiah there spoken of is the
author of a spiritual salvation, and the Saviour of the world, not
the national deliverer of the Jews only. And the Gentiles are re
presented as incorporated into his church and kingdom, and as
sharers in his benefits, equally with the converted Jews. The New
Testament is so far from being a jumble of inconsistent religions,
that it is evidently one and the same scheme of religion that is car
ried on in the writings of the Evangelists, the Acts of the Apostles,
and the Apostolical Epistles. The same doctrines are every where
tauo-ht, relating to God, to our Lord Jesus Christ, the great and
only mediator between God and man, and the methods of our re
demption and salvation through him ; relating to the terms of our
acceptance with God, to the resurrection of the dead, the general
judgment, and the eternal retributions of a future state. The same
excellent laws and precepts are eveiy where inculcated, the same
duties enjoined towards God and man, the same purity of heart
and life indispensably required, the same noble motives are every
where proposed to animate our obedience, the same discoveries and
displays of the divine grace and mercy, the same encouragements
given to the truly penitent, the same gracious assistances promised
and provided for the upright and sincere, the same awful threatenings

112 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. X.
denounced against those that go on in a course of presumptuous
sin and disobedience. Thus one beautiful and harmonious scheme
of religion appears throughout, uniform and consistent in all its
parts, which shews that those sacred writings have not undergone
any material corruption. Some have found fault, that some of
those writings seem to have been written occasionally, and that the
Christian religion is not delivered there in a systematical way, but
it has been much more wisely ordered. If it had been delivered
once for all in a formal system, it might have been more easily
altered and corrupted, or at least there would have been greater
ground of suspicion that it was so ; whereas, as the case now stands,
the doctrines and laws of it, and the most important facts relating
to it, are repeated and inculcated in so many places, and on so
many different occasions, that without a total alteration and cor
ruption of those original writings, which could not be effected, the
religion must still be maintained and preserved.
But to return to our Moral Philosopher, he honoureth himself,
and those of his sentiments, with the title of Christian Deists, as
the author of Christianity as old as the Creation had done before
him, as if they only were the true Christians ; and brandeth all
others, i. e. those that acknowledge the divine authority of the
Christian religion, as taught in the New Testament, with the cha
racter of Christian Jews. He frequently inveighs against all his
torical faith, and books qf historical religion, as he calls the holy
Scriptures, as of no use or importance at all ; as if the belief of the
important facts recorded in the gospel, relating to our Lord Jesus
Christ, had nothing to do with the faith of a Christian. All the
religion he is pleased to allow to those whom he characterizeth as
Christian Jews, is only an historical, political, clerical, mechanical
faith and religion ; whilst he appropriateth real religion, and moral
truth and righteousness, to himself, and those of his own faction.
One of the first tracts which appeared against the Moral Philoso
pher was an ingenious piece, written by Mr. Joseph Hallett, viz.
The Immorality of the Moral Philosopher, being an Answer to a
Book lately published, intitled, " The Moral Philosopher," 8vo. 1737.
He afterwards published A Vindication of it in. a Letter to the Moral
Philosopher, who had answered it. Some time after, there were
two large answers published to that book, of both which I shall give
a distinct account. The first I shall mention is entitled, Eusebius,
or the true Christian's Defence, against a late Book, intitled, " The
Moral Philosopher," Cambridge, 8vo. 1739, by John Chapman,
M.A. now Dr. Chapman. In this learned and accurate work, the
author doth not examine the whole of the Moral Philosopher's book,
nor concern himself with the particular objections he had brought
against the Jewish and Christian revelation, but applies himself to
consider the main principles of his scheme, and on which the whole
structure depends.
He begins with his fundamental principle, viz. "that moral truth,
reason, and the fitness of things, are the sole certain mark or crite-

Let. X. DR. MORGAN. 113
rion of any doctrine as coming from God." He shews the ambiguity
of the praise, and the various senses it is capable of, and that in no
sense can it be understood to be a proper mark or criterion of any
doctrine or law, as having come from God in a way of extraordinary
revelation, concerning which alone the question lieth. That there
fore we must have some other mark or criterion, which may evi
dence an extraordinary interposition of God, and his testimony to
the truth of what is delivered in his name. And particularly he
setteth himself to prove, that miracles and prophecy are evidences
of an extraordinary divine interposition and testimony. He treats
the question about miracles largely and distinctly, and, after having
stated the true notion of a miracle, shews, that miracles may be of
such a nature, and so circumstanced, as in some cases to prove the
divine mission of the persons by whom they are wrought, and the
truth and divine authority of the doctrines which are attested by
them, independently of all consideration of the doctrines themselves;
but that when they are all consideied in conjunction with the good
tendency ofthe doctrines and laws that are thus attested, they in-
centestably demonstrate the divine original of those doctrines and
laws. He hath good observations on the great use of miracles, as
the plainest and most popular, the most short and compendious way
of proving a divine revelation, and judiciously obviates the objec
tions made against the proof from miracles, both by the Moral Phi
losopher and by others that have written on the same argument
before him. He also vindicates the argument from prophecy against
this writer's exceptions.
Having shown what are the true proofs of original revelation, he
proceeds to consider traditional revelation, concerning which the
Moral Philosopher, after many others, had raised a great clamour,
under pretence that there can be no such thing as divine faith upon
fallible human testimony. This, Dr. Chapman hath examined very
fully, and hath clearly shown, that the original revelation itself, to
gether with the accounts of the proofs or extraordinary facts where
by it was at first attested, may be transmitted to after-ages, with
such a degree of evidence, as may make it reasonable for those to
whom it is thus transmitted to receive it as divine, or as having
originally come from God, and consequently may lay a just founda
tion for their receiving it with a divine faith. He afterwards ap-
plieth what he had said concerning the original proofs of revelation,
and concerning that revelation's being safely transmitted to after-
ages, to the revelation which was published by our Lord Jesus
Christ, and his apostles. He showeth at large, that the miracles
which were wrought were of such a kind, as were sufficient alone to
prove to eye-witnesses his and their divine mission, and, when far
ther considered in conjunction with the doctrines taught by him
and them, amounted to a full demonstration of it. He then pro
ceeds to show, that these miracles, together with particular accounts
of our Lord's doctrines, and those of his apostles, were faithfully re
corded, and committed to writing by those who were witnesses to
1

114 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITER?. Let. X.
them ; and that these writings have been transmitted with unques
tionable evidence of their being genuine and uncorrupted in all
material points ; and that therefore we cannot refuse to receive them,
but upon principles which would absolutely destroy the credit of all
past facts whatsoever.
He next proceeds to consider and explain the nature of the Chris
tian religion as distinguished from deism, which the Moral Philo
sopher and others would confound. He answers the objections
those writers had urged from the pretended ambiguity and obscu
rity of Scripture, and the differences among Christians about the
interpretation ofthe Christian doctrines; and concludes with a vin
dication of that great article ofthe Christian faith, which this writer
had endeavoured to pervert and expose, concerning our Lord Jesus
Christ, as the true Messiah foretold by the prophets. The prophe
cies relating to the Messiah are considered ; and from thence it is
evinced, that he was not to be merely a national Prince, and de
liverer ofthe Jews, but the Saviour of the world ; and was not merely
to erect a temporal dominion, but a spiritual kingdom of truth and
righteousness. There was another answer published about the same time, viz.
The divine Authority of the Old and New Testament asserted, i\c.
against the unjust Aspersions and false Reasonings qf a Book, in-
titled " The Moral Philosopher," London, 8vo. 1739. After what
was said on a like occasion in my last letter, I shall make no apo
logy for giving some account of this answer; which is the rather
necessary, becnuse the Moral Philosopher, in the second volume he
published, and of which some notice must be t.iken afterwards, bent
his force principally against it. The design of this answer was to
take a distinct view of what Dr. Morgan had offered both against
revelation in general, and against the holy Scriptures in particular ;
and it cost some pains to range the objections of that writer in some
order, which are scattered with a strange confusion through his book.
This answer begins with stating the question concerning revelation
in general, the usefulness of which the Moral Philosopher makes a
show of acknowledging, and yet in effect leaveth no way of knowing
when such a revelation is really given. His pretended sole criterion
of moral truth and fitness is examined; and it is shown, that mira
cles may be so circumstanced for number, nature, and continuance,
as to yield a sufficient attestation to the divine mission of the per
sons by whom, and to the divine authority of the doctrines and
laws in confirmation of which they are wrought ; and that the ac
count of these extraordinary miraculous facts, as well as the laws
and doctrines attested and confirmed by them, may be transmitted
to us in such a manner, that it would be perfectly unreasonable to
deny or doubt of them.
From the question concerning revelation in general, the author of
this answer proceeds to what is the principal design ofhis book, viz.
to vindicate the revelation contained in the holy Scriptures of the
Old and New Testament. And first, the law of Moses is vindicated

Let. X. DR. MORGAN. 1]"*
at large against the objections of the Moral Philosopher ; and the
excellent design, nature, and tendency of it is distinctly shown.
Particularly, that law is cleared from the charge of countenancing
and encouraging human sacrifices ; and as the case of Abraham's
offering up Isaac has been often insisted upon, and particularly is
represented by this writer, as absolutely subversive of the whole law
of nature, and a command which it was impossible for God to give,
or for us to have any proof that it was given, care is taken to set
this whole matter in a proper light, and to answer the objections
that have been made against it. The same is done with regard to
the war against the Benjamites in the affair of Gibeah, of which our
author had made a most odious representation, with a view to cast
a reflection on the oracle of Urim and Thummim. The prophet
Samuel and David are cleared from the unjust aspersions he had
cast upon them ; and the scandalous representation he had made
of the latter's dancing naked before the ark ; as also what Lord
Shaftesbury had offered on the same subject, and concerning the
naked saltant spirit qf prophecy are considered, and the injustice
and absurdity of it shown. The characters ofthe ancient prophets
are vindicated ; and the author's gross falsifications, and strange
perversions of the Scripture-history exposed. With regard to the
objections brought by the Moral Philosopher against the New Tes
tament, particular notice is taken of his base insinuations against
the character of our blessed Saviour, and especially of his pretence
that Jesus at his death renounced his being the Messiah foretold by
the prophets. It is shown, that he claimed to be the Messiah, and
that he was really so in the true sense of their prophetical writings.
As to the apostles, it is proved, in opposition to what he had confi
dently asserted to the contrary, both that they themselves professed
to be under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and that they gave
sufficient proofs to convince the world of their divine mission. The
attestation given to them by the extraordinary gifts of the Holy
Ghost is particularly considered ; and the author's pretence, that the
false teachers, as well as the true, had those extraordinary gifts and
powers, and made use of them in confirmation of their false doctrines,
is examined, and shown to be vain and groundless. The account
he giveth of the Jewish Gospel, which he pretends was preached by
all the apostles but St. Paul, is shown to be entirely his own fiction ;
aud the harmony between St. Paul and the other apostles, and the
wisdom and consistency of their conduct, are manifested. The at
tempt he maketh against the whole canon of the New Testament,
as if it were corrupted and interpolated by the Jews, is considered.
And whereas, under pretence of rectifying the errors of Christianity
with regard to some particular doctrines of Christianity, he had
severely inveighed against the doctrine of Christ's satisfaction ; this
is vindicated against his exceptions. Finally, the argument he
would draw from the differences among Christians, to prove that
none of the doctrines of revealed religion are of any certainty or use
fo mankind, is shown to be vain and inconclusive.
I 2

116 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. X.
The author of the Moral Philosopher, who was a writer of great
vivacity, did not continue long silent. He published a defence of
his former book, in what he called The second volume of the Moral
Philosopher ; or, a farther Vindication of Moral Truth and Reason.
This was chiefly designed against the author of the answer last
mentioned, except a long letter addressed to Eusebius, i. e. Dr.
Chapman. In this book, he talks with the same confusion that he
did before, concerning moral truth and reason, as being the sole cri
terion of divine truth, or truth as coming from God ; without adding
any new proof, or distinctly explaining what he means by it. He
represents his adversaries, and all the advocates for revelation, as
renouncing all evidence from nature and reason in matters qf religion;
and that, in their scheme, natural and revealed religion are two
essentially different, and opposite religions. This is a very unfair re
presentation ; since he could not but know, that they maintain, that
there is a harmony and connection between reason and revelation ;
and that revelation leaves all the proofs of religion drawn from reason
in their full force, and adds to them the attestation of a divine au
thority or testimony. And this must certainly be of great weight.
It gives a farther degree of certainty and evidence, even with regard
to those things, of which we might have some discovery by our
reason before, as well as furnisheth a sufficient ground of assent with
regard to things, which we could not have known by mere unassisted
reason. As to the proofs of revelation, he still insisteth upon it, that mira
cles are no proofs ; but he takes very little notice of what his
answerers, and particularly Dr. Chapman, who had treated this
question largely and distinctly, had offered to prove that they are so.
He lays down several observations tending to show the great diffi
culty their is in knowing which are true miracles. To this purpose
he observes, that men may easily be mistaken, and think those
things to be miracles which are not so; or they may be imposed
upon by artifice,- or the strength of their own imaginations, so as to
take those things to have been done, which really were not done :
That persons are much more liable to be deceived, and often have
been so, in judging of things supposed to be supernatural, than in
things that come in the common course ; and that even those before
whom they are supposed to have been originally wrought may be
thus deceived, much more those to whom they come only by report.
All that follows from these, and other observations to the same pur
pose, amounts really to no more than this, that great and particular
care and caution is necessary to guard against deception in things
of so extraordinary a nature. But it is far from proving, either
that it is impossible that any true miracles should ever be done, or
that we should have any satisfactory evidence or certainty concern
ing them. Notwithstanding all that this writer hath offered, it is
still true, that miracles may be so circumstanced with regard to
their number, nature, and continuance, that persons may be as cer
tain of their having been really done, as they can be of any facts

Let. X. DR. MORGAN. 117
whatsoever for which they have the testimony of all their senses ;
and may be also certain, that they are things absolutely exceeding
all human power. They may also be of such a nature and ten
dency, and so manifestly designed to promote the cause of righte
ousness and virtue, that we may be sure they were not done by any
evil being superior to man ; and must therefore have been done
either by the immediate power of God himself, or by superior good
beings acting under his direction. It hath been often shown, that
such were the miracles wrought at the first establishment of the
Jewish and Christian dispensation. They were done in so open a
manner, and produced such effects, that those before whom they
were wrought had as full an assurance of the reality of them, as they
could have of any facts whatsoever; and at the same time could
be but sensible that they exceeded all the power of man. And they
were also of such a nature, that they could not without the highest
absurdity be supposed to have been wrought by any evil being or
beings ; and therefore ought to be regarded as the testimony of God
to the divine mission of the persons by whom, and to the truth and
divine original and authority of the doctrines and laws in confirma
tion of which they were wrought.
Our author indeed hath in this book made an extraordinary at
tempt, with regard to the miracles of Moses, to prove, that though
that vast assembly of people were made to believe that those things
were done before their eyes, and that they themselves saw them
done, yet they were never really done at all ; and in order to account
for this, he makes some of the wildest suppositions that ever entered
into the head of any man that was not absolutely out of his senses.
But lest this should not take, his next attempt is to prove, that those
miracles, if wrought at all, were done by an evil power ; as if any
evil being, even supposing, what is absurd to imagine, that he were
capable of exerting such amazing acts of divine power as were ex
hibited at the establishment of the Mosaic dispensation, would do
it, to confirm a system of laws, which prescribed the adoration of
the one living and true God, in opposition to the then spreading idola
try, and strongly obliged men to the practice of virtue and righteous
ness. The chief proof he bringeth for so strange an assertion is,
the command relating to the destruction of the Canaanites, on ac
count not only of their impure and cruel idolatries, but of the most
abominable crimes and vices, which then universally prevailed amono;
them; as if it were impossible for God, in any circumstances of
things, ever to give such a command. This, which hath been fre
quently urged by the writers on that side, particularly Dr. Tindal,
was considered in the Answer to Christianity as old as the Creation,
vol. ii. p. 352 — 358, 2nd edit. And upon its being here repeated
by the Moral Philosopher, was again examined, and obviated in the
2nd volume of The Divine Authority ofthe Old and New Testament
asserted, p. 97, &c. It is also set in a proper light by Mr. Lowman,
lu his Dissertation on the Civil Government of tke Hebrews, p.
320, &c.

118 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. X.
As to our Saviour's miracles, this writer pretendeth, contrary to
Christ's own most express declarations, that he did not appeal to
them as proofs of his divine mission. He also repeateth the stale
objection, which hath been often answered and exposed, that the
miraculous cures which Jesus wrought were owing to the strength
of fancy and imagination in the patient, and not to power in the
agent. But, whatever we suppose the force of imagination in some
cases to be, there are many of our Lord's miracles of such a kind,
that there cannot possibly be the least room or pretence for such a
supposition. With regard to the conveyance of divine revelation, it had been
shown, that doctrines and laws which were originally received by
revelation from God, together with an account of the extraordinary
facts or proofs whereby that revelation was attested, may be trans
mitted to after-ages in a manner that may be safely depended upon ;
and that the doctrines and facts of the Christian revelation have
been so transmitted. He hath little to oppose to the clear and dis
tinct proofs that were brought for this, but some general clamours,
which he repeateth on all occasions, about the uncertainty of tradi
tion and fallibility of human testimony ; though it be incontestably
evident, that laws and facts may be, and often have been, trans
mitted in this way, with such a degree of evidence and certainty,
that it would be perfectly unreasonable, and contrary to common
sense, to deny or doubt of' them ; and yet all along throughout his
whole book, he argues as if it were sufficient to destroy the authority
of the Scripture-revelation, that its doctrines and laws, and the ac
count of its important facts, have been transmitted through the
hands of weak and fallible men. This he representeth as a placing
the most important divine truth on the foot of fallible human testi
mony. But however specious this may appear, and fitted to im
pose upon superficial inquiries, there is nothing in it of real weight;
for if a revelation or law had any original divine authority, and, that
it might be of use to succeeding ages, was committed to writing,
which is the surest method of conveyance ; and if we have sufficient
evidence to give us reasonable assurance, that this written revelation
has been safely transmitted to us, without any material corruption
or alteration, as hath been often plainly shown with regard to the
Christian revelation ; then it is as really of divine authority now as
it was at first, and we are obliged to receive and submit to it as such.
For it doth not lose its authority by being committed to writing ;
nor doth its authority depend on the intermediate conveyers, any
more than the authority of a law formerly enacted by the legislature
can be said to depend upon the persons by whom it has been trans
cribed or printed, but upon its having been originally enacted by the
legislature.* As to the objections this writer had urged in his former book
against the revelation contained in the Holy Scriptures of the Old and
* See concerning this, •' Divine Authority of the Old and New Testament asserted,"
vol. ii. p. 24, 25.

Let. X. DR. MORGAN. ]19
New Testament, and which had been particularly considered, he re
peats them again in this book with greater confidence than before,
and often without taking the least notice of what was offered to the
contrary ; or if he makes a show of answering, very lightly passeth
over what was of principal importance in the argument. He gives
himself little trouble about the gross misrepresentations and falsifi
cations of the sacred history which had been plainly proved upon
him, but still persisteth in the charges he had advanced, and addeth
farther invectives ; at the same time assuring his reader, that his
answerer had not said one ivord to the purpose, and that what he had
offered was one continued rant. And sometimes, as in the case of
the Messiah's being, according to the prophetical writings, a mere
temporal prince of the Jews only, our author, instead of answering
the proofs which had been brought to the contrary, declares it to be
a point so evident, that he scorns to dispute with any man that will
deny it, i. e. he scorns to dispute with any man that will not give
him up the very point in question.
These are arts of controversy which none would envy him the
honour of. And he frequently expresseth himself in a manner that
shows little regard to common decency ; as when he saith of David,
Away with him to the devil from ivhence he came! And speaking of
the Jews, he avers, that this miraculously stupid people was always
inspired and possessed with the spirit of the devil. And the Chris
tians come in for their share ofthe compliment; for he adds, that
they, i. e. the Jews, have transfused their spirit and faith into Chris
tians. It would not be worth while to mention these things, if it were
not to give some idea of the temper and genius of this writer. He
has gone so far as boldly to pronounce, that the God of Israel, to
whom the priesthood was instituted, and sacrifices were offered, was
a cheat and an idol, as much so as any of the Pagan deities, and
that he was only considered as a local tutelar deity ; though one
would think it scarce possible for any man seriously to read the Old
Testament, and not be sensible that the God there every-where re
commended to our adoration and obedience, and whom the people
of Israel were obliged by their law to worship, exclusively of all idol
deities, is represented as the maker of heaven and earth, the sovereign
Lord of the universe. In his former book he had sometimes spoken
with great seeming respect of Christianity ; but here he throws off
all disguise, and does what he can to expose it to the derision and
contempt of mankind. Nothing can be more scandalous than the
representation he makes of the effusion of the Holy Ghost on the
day of Pentecost. He avers, that those who had the gift of tongues
could not speak those languages with any sense, coherence, or con
sistency ; that they only uttered a strange kind of gibberish, which
neither they themselves nor any body else could understand. And
yet it appears from the account that is given us, that the people of
many different countries, which were come from all parts to Jem-

120 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. X.
salem at the feast of Pentecost, understood the apostles, as speaking
to them in their several languages the great things of God, and were
filled with such admiration on this account as produced the conver
sion of great numbers of them to the Christian faith. He pronounces,
that they who seemed to have these gifts were out of their wits for
the time, and expressly calls them frantic jits; and what is very ex
traordinary, pretends to prove all this from the authority of St. Paul
himself, who, according to his representation, must have been one
ofthe maddest enthusiasts that ever lived ; though at other times he
thinks fit to extol him as the bold and brave defender of religion and
liberty. He concludes his book with a fresh invective against the law of
Moses, as if it were designed to indulge men in personal intemper
ance, and were wholly calculated for the interest of his own family ;
though no lawgiver ever gave greater proofs of his disinterestedness
than Moses did ; as he made no provision for raising his own chil
dren to honours and dignities in the state, but left them to continue
in the rank of common Levites. The last thing he mentions is the
law about the trial of jealousy, of which he gives a strange account.
But this, as was clearly proved against him.dependeth wholly upon
his own false and arbitrary suppositions, which betray either great
ignorance or wilful misrepresentation.*
It could not be a very agreeable employment to carry on a con
troversy with such a writer. There is however a second volume pub
lished of the Divine Authority ofthe Old and New Testament asserted,
by the author of the first, which was designed as an answer to the
second volume of the Moral Philosopher, London, 8vo, 1740. In
this reply, every thing in his book is considered that had any ap
pearance of reason and argument; and his unfair representations,
his unjust aspersions, and confident attempts to impose falsehoods
upon his reader, are detected and exposed. And whereas there is
no part of his book that seems to have been more laboured, than
where he undertakes to prove, that the tribe of Levi had above
twenty shillings in the pound upon all the lands of Israel, the ex
travagance of his computations is plainly shown. - But no man hath
set this matter in a clearer light, than Mr. Lowman, in his learned
and judicious Dissertation on the Civil Government of the Hebrews;
in which the Justice, Wisdom, and Goodness of the Mosaical Consti
tution are vindicated; in particular from some late unfair and false
Representations of them in the " Moral Philosopher," London, 8vo,
1740. But this author was not to be convinced or silenced. He soon
after published what he called the Third Volume of the Moral Phi
losopher; or, Superstition and Tyranny inconsistent with Theocracy,
London, 8vo, 1740. In the body of this book, which is particu
larly designed as an answer to the second volume ofthe Divine Au-
* See " Divine Authority of the Old and New Testament asserted," vol. ii. p. 362,
& seq.

Let. X. DR. MORGAN. 121
thority of the Old and New Testament asserted, there is scarce any
thing new attempted. The same things are repeated over again, in
a strain of confidence peculiar to this writer; and at this rate it is
easy to write books and carry on controversies without end. But
there scarce needs any other confutation of what he hath here offer
ed, than to desire the reader carefully to compare it with the book
to which it is pretended to be an answer. The only farther obser
vation I would make upon it is, that our author, contrary to his
usual custom, has in one instance condescended to acknowledge a
mistake he had been guilty of in his former volume. It is in his
computation of the Levitical revenues, in which he had made an
overcharge in one single article of no less than one million two hun
dred thousand pounds a year. Yet so fond is he of what he had
advanced concerning the Levites having, by the Mosaical constitu
tion, the whole wealth and power of the nation in their hands, that
he still endeavours to support it by some very extraordinary calcula
tions ; the falsity and absurdity of which was soon after clearly and
fully exposed by Mr. Lowman, in an appendix to his Dissertation
on the Civil Government qf the Hebrews, London, 1741. But the
most remarkable thing in the third volume of the Moral Philosopher,
and that part of it which may be most properly called new, is a lone
introduction, of above an hundred pages, in which he pretends to
give an account of the ancient patriarchal religion, and an historical
relation ofthe descent of the Hebrew shepherds into Egypt; the rise
and foundation of the Mosaic theocracy; the inconsistencies and
self-contradictions ofthe Hebrew historians, &c. In this part of his
work he hath, if possible, exceeded himself in misrepresentation and
abuse ; but I shall take no farther notice of it than to observe, that
there were solid and ingenious remarks made upon it, by a gentle
man that stiles himself " Theophanes Cantabrigiensis," in a pam
phlet intitled, The ancieut History ofthe Hebrews vindicated, Cam
bridge, 8vo, 1741. And afterwards by Dr. Samuel Chandler, in his
Vindication of the History of the Old Testament, in answer to the
Misrepresentations and Calumnies qf Thomas Morgan, M. D.
and Moral Philosopher; the first part of which was published,
London, 1741, and a second part came out in 1743, and after Dr.
Morgan's death. It is here plainly proved, that this writer hath
been guilty of manifest falsehoods, and of the most gross perver
sions of the Scripture-history, even in those very instances in which
he assureth his reader, he hath kept close to the accounts given by
the Hebrew historians. The author of the Resurrection of Jesus
considered, who wrote soon after, thought fit to make a very con
temptuous representation of Dr. Chandler's performance. He is
pleased to represent him, as having levelled all his artillery of wit,
learning, and spleen against the Moral Philosopher, Dr. Morgan,
instead of answering ; and as having fired off twenty sheets to shoot
one of his, and missed the mark.* This no doubt must pass for a
* Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 71, 72. edit. 3d,

122 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. X.
full confutation of Dr. Chandler's work. But all that can be gather
ed from it is, that, with these gentlemen, the proving of any of
them guilty of the most gross falsifications of Scripture, which had
been fully proved upon Dr. Morgan, is to pass for a thing of no con
sequence; as if falsehood and misrepresentation were to be looked
upon as very allowable, when put in practice for so good an end as
the exposing Christianity and the Holy Scripture. It is proper here
to observe, that the ingenious Mr. Hallet, who, as was mentioned
before, had early appeared against the first volume of the Moral
Philosopher, published also A Rebuke to the Moral Philosopher for
the Errors and Immoralities contained in his third Volume, 8vo,
1740. I shall conclude this account of the Moral Philosopher with ob
serving, that soon after his third volume appeared, Dr. Chapman
published a second volume of his Eusebius, or the true Christian's
farther Defence against the Principles and Reasonings qf the Moral
Philosopher, London, 8vo, 1741. In this he considers at large all
that this writer had offered concerning what he calls the Jewish gos
pel, which he confidently affirms was preached by all the apostles
but St. Paul, and of which he pretends the temporal kingdom of
Christ in the Jewish sense was the principal article. He shows, with
the clearest evidence, that this was not preached by any of the
apostles, and that there was a perfect harmony between them and
St. Paul, as to what concerned the authority and obligation of the
Jewish law under the gospel. He also judiciously explains and
vindicates the Scripture-doctrine of redemption, and the satisfaction
of Christ, against that author's objections and gross misrepresen
tations. The following this extraordinary writer through his several books,
and the answers that were made to him, has engaged me in a detail
which I am afraid has not proved very agreeable to you, any more
than it has been so to myself. But it may be of some use to show,
that, notwithstanding his boasted pretences, there have been few
writers who have been more effectually confuted and exposed, than
he that was pleased to honour himself with the title of the Moral
Philosopher.

Let. XI. ' CHRISTIANITY NOT FOUNDED ON ARGUMENT." ]23

LETTER XI.
Observations upon the pernicious Tendency of the Pamphlet intitled Christianity not
founded on Argument  The Design of it is to show, that the Christian Faith has
nothing to support it but a senseless Enthusiasm. — The Author's great Disingenuity
and Misrepresentations of Scripture detected. — He strikes at natural Religion, as
well as revealed, destroys all Certainty of Reason, and declares against Education,
and the instructing Children in any Principles at all. — The principal Arguments he
hath offered in Support of his Scheme considered. — Christianity no Enemy to Ex
amination and Inquiry. — Men's being commanded to believe, no Presumption that
Faith is not a reasonable Assent. — The Faith required in the Gospel is properly a
Virtue, and the Unbelief there condemned is really a Vice  His Pretence, that
the People are not capable of discerning the Force of the Proofs brought for Chris
tianity, and therefore cannot be obliged to believe it, examined. — Account of the
Answers published against him.
Sir,
The controversy with the Moral Philosopher was scarce at an
end, when a new and very remarkable pamphlet appeared, intitled,
Christianity not founded on Argument, London, 1742. The author
of this carried on his design against the Christian religion, in a way
somewhat different from what others had done before him. Under
specious appearances of zeal for religion, and under the cover of de
vout expressions, he hath endeavoured to show, that the Christian
faith hath no foundation in reason, nor hath any thing to support
it but a wild and senseless enthusiasm, destitute of all proof and
evidence. And if this could be made out, it would no doubt answer
the intention he too plainly appears to have had in view, the expos
ing the Christian religion to the derision and contempt of mankind.
With great gravity and seeming seriousness he sets himself to show,
that a rational faith, i. e. as he explains it, " an assent to revealed
truth founded upon the conviction of the understanding, is a false
and unwarrantable notion."* That " that person best enjoys faith
who never asked himself one single question about it, and never
dealt at all in the evidence of reason. "f That God never intended
that we should make use of -our reason, or intellectual faculty at all
in believing, or that our faith should be founded upon any evidence
which might convince the judgment, or make it reasonable for us
to believe. This he undertakes formally to prove, first by several
arguments drawn from tbe nature of reason and religion ; and after
wards he endeavoureth to prove the same thing from the account
given us in Scripture.
Having thus, as he pretends, removed the false grounds of faith
and religion, and shown that it hath nothing to do with reason or
argument, he next proceeds to declare what is the true principle of
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 7. t Ibid. p. 29.

124 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XI.
faith ; aud this he resolves wholly into a constant particular revela
tion, imparted separately and supernaturally to every individual:*
That " the Holy Ghost irradiates the souls of believers at once with
an irresistible light from heaven, that flashes conviction in a mo
ment; so that this faith is completed in an instant, and the most
perfect and finished creed produced at once, without any tedious
progress in deductions of our own."-f He represents this great dic
tator and infallible guide, as having promised " to abide with us to
the end ofthe world, that we might not be left liable one moment to
a possibility of error and imposture ; % and as speaking the same
thing to all, and bringing them to think all alike.§ Nothing can
be more absurd in itself, nothing more contrary to plain undeniable
fact, than this immediate infallible inspiration of every particular
person, which causes men to think all alike, and does not leave them
liable one moment to a possibility of error and imposture; and yet
this he makes to be the sole foundation of the Christian faith. He
represents it to be of such a nature as to render all outward instruc
tion, and even the Scriptures themselves, entirely needless ; and
that those who are thus instructed by the Spirit, " need not concern
themselves about the credit of ancient miracles, or the genuineness
of distant records :" as if the Christian faith had nothing to do with
the facts recorded in the gospels. This he calls the revealed and
scriptural account ofthe matter;^ and pretends, that " this account
depends not upon the strength of any single quotation whatever, but
on the joint tendency and tenor of the whole." f
This pamphlet was received by the enemies of Christianity with
great applause; and yet, upon a close examination, there are such
apparent marks of great disingenuity in it, as should tend, with fair
and candid minds, to give very disadvantageous impressions both
of the author, and of a cause that needs such base arts to sup
port it.
The whole turn of the pamphlet is in a religious strain; he for
mally pretends to offer up his most ardent prayers in behalf of his
friend at the throne of grace, " that God would he pleased himself
to illuminate and irradiate his mind with a perfect and thorough
conviction of the truth of his holy gospel ; that the same Holy
Spirit that first dictated the divine law would powerfully set on his
seal, and attest its authority in his heart."** Such a strain of ridi
cule as this, for whosoever impartially considers this treatise can
regard it in no other view, is one of the most solemn mockeries that
were ever offered to the Supreme Being. In many other passages,
under pretence of exalting the influence of the Holy Spirit, the
Scriptures are depreciated, as of no use; they are called, by way of
contempt, manuscript authorities, and paper revelations ; as if the
being committed to writing could destroy the authority of a divine
law ; when the man would be thought out of his senses that should,
under the same pretence, attempt to invalidate the authority of hu-
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 122. t Ibid. p. 89. t Ibid o fit)
§ Ibid. p. 89. || Ibid. p. 68. f, Ibid. 105. »* Ibid, pi 12.

Let. XI. " CHRISTIANITY NOT FOUNDED ON ARGUMENT.'' 125
man laws. It is observable, that the most highflown enthusiasts
have always spoken with disregard of the Holy Scripture, and repre
sented it as a dead letter; which by the way is no great sign of its
being of an enthusiastic nature and tendency ; and this writer hath
endeavoured to take advantage of their madness for exposing the au
thority of the sacred writings. Thus the deists can upon occasion
run into the wilds of enthusiasm, and join with the men they most
heartily despise, in order to answer their design of exposing Chris
tianity. Such hath been the fate of holy writ, to be undervalued
by those that had no religion at all, and by those that have carried
religion up to madness and phrenzy.
But what greatly strengthens the charge of disingenuity against
this writer is, that he is guilty ofthe most gross misrepresentations
of scripture, and the matters of fact therein contained ; some of
which are of such a kind as to be scarce reconcileable to any degree
of honesty and candour. He pretends to prove, from the plain nar
rative part of the New Testament history, that Christ and his
apostles, in planting the gospel, never proposed arguments or evi
dences of any kind to engage men to believe : whereas it is manifest,
from the accounts given in the gospels, the acts, and the epistles,
that the method of Christ and his apostles took to make converts
was, by assiduous instruction, by teaching and preaching, and by
laying before them evidences of the most convincing kind, and
which made it reasonable for them to believe.
There can scarce be a more glaring instance ~of disingenuity than
to assert, as this writer does, contrary to Christ's own most ex
press declarations (concerning which, see John v. 36. x. 25. 38.
xiv. 11. Matth. xi. 3, 4, 5, 6.), that he himself never designed,
that his miracles should be regarded as proofs and evidences of his
divine mission ; that he was ahoays remarkably upon the reserve
when he happened among unbelieving company : and that he took
particular care that his miracles should not come to public notice,
and See thou tell no man was generally the charge ; though it is
manifest from the whole gospel, that he generally wrought his
miracles in the most public wav, before great numbers of people,
and in the presence even of his most malicious adversaries; and
there were only a very few instances in which he seemed to be upon
the reserve, for which no doubt there were good reasons, some of
which may be gathered from the circumstances of the cases men
tioned. But such is the manner of this writer; if he can find a
particular instance or two that seems favourable to his intention, he
lays hold of this, contrary to the whole tenor of the gospel-history,
and would put it upon his reader, as if what was done for special
reasons in a very few instances, were constantly and always the
case in every instance. Thus he positively asserts, that our Saviour
" constantly stipulated before-hand, for a certain degree, and no
ordinary one, of confidence and persuasion in the persons on whom
he wrought his miracles." * This he seems to lay a particular stress
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 49.

126 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XI.
upon; and yet it is so far from being true that this was constantly
the case, that there are comparatively but a very few instances in
which he previously required persons to profess their belief in him.
In one ofthe answers to this pamphlet, there are near fifty instances
produced of miracles wrought by our Saviour where no such thing
was required.* And in the few instances where it was insisted upon,
it was not a commanding those to believe in an instant who did not
believe before : it was only a requiring them to profess the faith they
already had, and a declaring his approbation of their faith, and was
designed as a means to strengthen it more and more. And the pro
priety of his taking this method in some instances is manifest, as it
tended to direct men's views to that which was the principal use and
end of his miracles, and which our author hath thought fit to deny,
viz. to confirm their faith in his divine mission.
With the same unfairness he confidently avers, that, according to
the Scripture accounts, the apostles always expected to make their
converts by a word's speaking ; that they never allowed any time
for deliberation, but denounced damnation against -those that hesi
tated in the least ; and that they discouraged all examination and
inquiry ; when on the contrary it appeareth, that they often staid a
considerable time together in a place, reasoning in the synagogues,
repeating their excellent instructions, and performing the most illus
trious miracles, as proofs of their divine mission. That St. Paul
abode for a long time at Iconium, for a year and six months at
Corinth, and for above two years at Ephesus. It is also evident
that they encouraged men to examination and inquiry, and com
mended them when they did so ; a remarkable instance of which we
have in the encomium bestowed upon the Bereans, who examined
the apostles' doctrine, and searched the Scriptures daily , whether these
things were so, as they had taught them ; and the consequence of
this their diligent examination was, that many of them believed,
Acts xvii. 10, 11, 12.
The representation this author makes of the influence of the Holy
Spirit imparted to all believers is also highly disingenuous, though
in it he pretends to keep close to the Scripture accounts. He re
presents it as absolutely excluding all outward teaching, and all use
of our own endeavours : and yet nothing can be more evident than
it is from the whole gospel, that we are required to be diligent in the
use of our own endeavours ; and the great usefulness of outward
teaching is constantly supposed, and provision is made for its con
tinuance in the Christian church. With the like candour he pre-
tendeth, that, according to the Scripture account, faith is perfected
in an instant, and admitteth of no degrees; and that the Spirit
causeth all believers to think alike, and raiseth them above all pos
sibility of error; whereas it is evident, that faith is there represented
as not ordinarily completed at once, but capable of continual growth
and improvement, and as admitting of various degrees. And it is
* Benson's Reasonableness ofthe Christ. Relig. &c. p. 181- 188.

Let. XI. " CHRISTIANITY NOT FOUNDED ON ARGUMENT.'* 127
every where supposed, that believers may in many things be of dif
ferent sentiments, and are to bear with one another in their
differences. These and other things of the like kind, are so palpably misrepre
sented, that it can hardly be supposed that this writer himself, who
is quick-sighted enough when he pleases, should not have been sen
sible that they were so.
Another thing that, may give us no very advantageous notion of
the author's design is, that he hath advanced several things which
seem to have a bad aspect on natural religion as well as revealed,
and representeth the former as not founded on reason and argument
any more than the latter. He pretends, that all attempts to prove
the principles of natural religion by reason hath done more harm
than good; and that "even upon the plainest question in nature,
the existence of a Deity, the laboured productions of Dr. Clarke
himself have rather contributed to make for the other side of the
question, and raised a thousand new doubts in the reader's mind."*
Accordingly he takes a great deal of pains to destroy all certainty of
reason. He represents it as perpetually fluctuating, and never capa
ble of coming to a certainty about any thing ; and as if truth and
falsehood may be equally proved by it. The bulk of mankind are,
according to him, under a natural incapacity of acting at all ; and as
to the ablest and best of men, " they are equally disqualified for fair
reasoning by their natural prejudices; which, being ever earlier
than the first efforts of reason, is as absolute a disqualification for
such a trial, as the greatest natural incapacity. "+
But surely all who have any regard to religion, or who think that
reason is an advantage or privilege, and that men are to be regarded
as rational thinking beings, moral agents, must look upon this way
of representing things as absolutely subversive of all religion and
morality. It tendeth to debase and vilify human nature, and to cast
dishonour upon God's government and providence ; as if he had
taken no care of mankind at all, but gave them up entirely to their
passions, without any principle of reason to guide or govern them ;
or at least had 'placed them in such circumstances, that, as this
writer declares, reason always comes too late with its assistance, and
not till we are lost in the power of evil habits beyond recovery.
To all this it may be added, that there are several passages in his
book, in which he absolutely declares against instructing children
in religious or moral principles, as a wicked attempt to prepossess
their tender minds, and as barring all farther improvement. No care
is to be taken to cultivate the minds of young persons, under pre
tence that this would only tend to fill them with prejudices. Thus
there is no advantage at all in being born in an enlightened or civi
lized age or nation; and a child in Great Britain must be left as
much without instruction, as if he were born in the wilds of America.
To make this scheme of a piece, and perfectly consistent, it should
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 81. t Ibid. p. 17, 18, 23, 26.

128 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XI.
be so contrived, that children should not be trained up to any lan
guage at all, and that they should be kept from all converse with
others, for fear of their being prepossessed ; and that they should
be left wholly to nature, without instruction of any kind. And what
a hopeful state of things this would introduce, is easy to see. Thus,
to avoid Christianity, these gentlemen seem willing to sink us into
the lowest degree of barbarism and brutality.
Having made these general observations on the spirit and design
of this applauded performance, and the pernicious tendency of it to
subvert all certainty of reason, and natural religion as well as re
vealed, I shall now take some notice of the principal things he hath
offered in support of his scheme, and to show that Christianity hath
no foundation in reason.
One of his arguments bears a near affinity to what has been just
mentioned concerning education ; for he produceth it as a proof,
that the Christian religion is not a rational one, because we are
baptized into it, and obliged to train up children in the knowledge
and belief of it. A strange argument this ! since common sense tells
us, that the more rational and excellent any religion is, the more
requisite it would be to instruct children in the principles of it, and
to set its doctrines and evidences in a proper light before them, as
far as they are capable of receiving them ; for this would be the best
preservative against the pernicious influence of corrupt principles,
and the power of wrong affections and evil habits, which otherwise,
by the author's own acknowledgment, would be apt to get the start
of them, and give a wrong bias to the mind.
He seems to lay a great stress on the sudden conversions we
sometimes read of in the New Testament; but they are far from
being proofs of what he brings them to prove, that those persons
were converted without reason and experience. All that can be
fairly concluded from those instances is, that the evidence that was
offered was so strong, and came with such light and force, as did
more to produce conviction in a short time, than a long course of
abstracted reasonings would have done. If there were some thou
sands, as he observes, converted at one lecture,* these instances only
relate to the conversions that were wrought at Jerusalem soon after
our Lord's resurrection and ascension, of which the people had such
convincing evidences by the extraordinary effusion of the Holy
Ghost on the day of Pentecost, and the signal and undeniable
miracles wrought by the disciples in the name of a risen Jesus, as,
joined with what they had known before our Saviour's admirable
discourses and illustrious miracles, as well as the extraordinary events
that had happened at his crucifixion, to which they themselves had
been witnesses, rendered the evidence so strong and striking, that it
was perfectly rational to submit to it, and receive it.
The passage of the apostle, 2 Cor. x. 4, 5. The weapons of our
warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 39

Let. XI. "CHRISTIANITY NOT FOUNDED ON ARGUMENT." I2t>
of strong holds, casting down imaginations, or reasonings, and every
high thing that exalteth itself against tke knowledge of God, and
bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience qf Christ, is
produced by this writer to show that the gospel is not only without
all evidence, but contrary to reason. And yet the manifest design
of it is to show, not that the gospel had no evidence to support it,
but that the evidences accompanying it were so strong and convin
cing, as were vastly superior to any arguments or reasonings that
could be brought against it. But there is no injunction there laid
upon Christians, as the author pretends, " to lay reason under the
most absolute restraint and prohibition, and not to permit it the
least opportunity or freedom to exert itself, or interpose upon any
occasion whatsoever."*
Another argument with which he makes a mighty parade is to
this purpose, that no religion can be rational that is not founded on
a free and impartial examination.-]- And sueh examination sup
poses a perfect neutrality to the principles which are examined, and
even a temporal disbelief of them, which is what the gospel con-
demneth. But this proceeds upon a wrong account of the nature
of free examination and inquiry. It is not necessary to a just in
quiry into doctrines or facts, that a man should be absolutely indif
ferent to them before he begins that inquiry, much less that he
should actually disbelieve them ; as if he must necessarily commence
atheist, before he can fairly examine into the proofs of the existence
of God. It is sufficient to a candid examination, that a man ap-
plieth himself to it with a mind open to conviction, and a disposition
to embrace truth on which side soever it shall appear, and to receive
the evidence that shall arise in the course of the trial. And if the
inquiry relateth to principles in which we have been instructed, then,
supposing those principles to be in themselves rational and well
founded, it may well happen, that, in inquiring into the grounds of
them, a fair examination may be carried on without seeing cause to
disbelieve, or doubt of them through the whole course of the enquiry ;
which in that case will end in a fuller conviction of them than before.
But there is no argument on which he seems to place a greater
stress, to show that Christianity is not founded on reason and evi
dence, than this, that we are there authoritatively commanded to
believe, and penalties are denounced against us if we do not believe ;
whereas it is plain, that " no proposition can be tendered to our
reason with penalties annexed, or under the restraint of threats and
authority ;"*(; since assent or dissent is an independent event, under
no influence of ours." Men are constantly determined to believe
according to the evidence that appeareth to them, and the will hath
nothing to do with it ; and therefore there can be no virtue in be
lieving truth, or fault in rejecting it. And he expressly affirms,
"that a determination either right or wrong in matters which are
not self-evident, and in which there is anything of induction or in-
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 84. f Ibid. p. 5. f Ibid. p. 8.
K

130 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XI.
ference, is equally meritorious."* This is a very convenient plea
for infidelity, and so it is for atheism itself; since it proceeds upon
this foundation, that men can never be obliged to believe any prin
ciples at all in which there is any thing of induction or inference,
nor consequently those relating to the existence of God and a pro
vidence. And if there be no fault in disbelieving those principles,
there can be no fault in refusing to obey, or worship him. which
necessarily dependeth upon the belief of his existence. But the
foundation this goes upon is manifestly false ; as if men were always,
and in all cases, determined by mere evidence, and that assent and
dissent were therefore necessary acts, and absolutely out of their
power. Nothing is more undeniable from common observation and
experience, than that the will and affections have a great influence
on the judgment; and that we have a great deal of freedom in the
right or wrong use of our reasoning faculties, and consequently are
liable to praise or blame on that account. Let the proofs that are
offered be ever so plain, we may choose whether we will attend to
them ; or we may turn our eyes from the evidence ; or, if we profess
to examine, may, through prepossession and wrong dispositions of
mind, institute a slight, a partial, and defective examination. Men
may be, and often are, so biassed by the influence of affections and
interests, as to cause things to appear to them in a quite different
light than otherwise they would do. All the world owns, that a
candour and simplicity of heart, the love of truth, and a readiness
to embrace it when fairly proposed, is a very commendable disposi
tion of mind ; and that refusing to receive it through the influence of
corrupt affections and passions is really culpable. But this espe
cially holdeth in truths of a religious and moral nature. Our be
lieving or disbelieving them is very much influenced by the good or
bad dispositions of our minds, and must have a great effect upon the
practice ; and therefore in these cases to receive and embrace these
truths may be an important duty, and to disbelieve or reject them
may be highly criminal ; and God may very justly interpose his
authority to require the one, and warn men against the other.
The author all along supposeth, that the faith required in the
gospel is no more than a bare assent of the understanding, and the
unbelief there condemned is a mere speculative dissent. But this is
a wrong representation ; nothing is more evident than that the faith
required in the gospel of those to whom it is made known, that faith
to which the promises are made, is a complex thing : it includeth a
love of truth, and a disposition to embrace and profess it, which, in
the circumstances in which Christianity first appeared, argued a
great deal both of candour and fortitude ; and it is always repre
sented to be of a vital operative nature, a principle of holy obedience,
and which purifieth the heart, and leadeth men to do the will of
God, and obey his commands. And such a faith is certainly a
virtue, and very properly the subject of a divine command ; and the
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 17, 18.

Let. XI. "CHRISTIANITY NOT FOUNDED ON ARGUMENT." 131
unbelief there condemned is supposed to proceed from men's being
under the influence of corrupt affections and prejudices, and from
their unwillingness to receive the truth, because their deeds are evil.
It is expressed by their shutting their eyes, and hardening their
hearts, lest they should see with their eyes, and understand with
their hearts, and be converted and healed. And this certainly
argueth a bad and vicious disposition of soul, and leadeth to dis
obedience ; and is therefore very properly forbidden in the divine
law. With regard to human laws, when they are once sufficiently pro
mulgated, it would scarce be accepted as a plea for men's neglecting
or breaking those laws, that they are not satisfied that they are the
king's laws ; and that no man can be justly obliged, under the re
straint of authority and penalties, to assent to this proposition, that
these are the king's laws ; since assent is not in our own power. It
is very probable, that a way would soon be found to overrule this plea,
and convince them that authority could interpose in this manner. In
like manner, it seems to be obvious to the common sense and reason
of mankind, that if God hath given a revelation or discovery of his
will, concerning doctrines and laws of importance to our duty and
happiness, and hath caused them to be promulgated with such evi
dence as he knoweth to be sufficient to convince reasonable and well-
disposed minds, that will carefully attend to it, he hath an un
doubted right to require those to whom this revelation is published
to receive and to obey it. And if, through the influence of corrupt
affections and lusts, those to whom this revelation is made known
refuse to receive it, he can justly punish them for their culpable neg
lect, obstinacy, and disobedience. Our author himself, speaking
of the Spirit's working faith in all men, saith, though in evident
contradiction to his own scheme, that " the tender of this convic
tion, however potent in its influence, may yet depend greatly upon
the proper dispositions of our minds to give it a reception for its
efficacy; and so far will give place, and afford ample matter of trial
and probation, and become indeed a test of our obedience. And
that in this case disbelief and guilt have a meaning when put to
gether ; since the compliance required is, not a compliance out of
our power, nor any longer that of the understanding, but of the will,
in its nature free, and therefore accountable ; and though we are
not by any means chargeable for the effects of our apprehension, yet
there is no reason but that we may be with all justice called to
the strictest account for our obstinacy, impiety, and perverseness."*
I shall only take notice of one thing more, and which is indeed
the most plausible thing in his whole book, and that is, that the
generality of mankind, even of those among whom Christianity is
published, cannot be obliged to believe it, because they have not a
capacity to discern and judge of the proofs and arguments which
are brought for it. But though it should be allowed, that they
* Christianity not founded on Argument," p. C4.
K 2

132 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XI.
could not of themselves trace those proofs and evidences, yet there
are few but may be made sensible of the force of those proofs and
evidences, when set before them by others. And this is sufficient.
It is evident to any one that knows mankind, that we are so con
stituted, as to stand in need of mutual assistance and information,
in matters of great consequence to our duty and happiness. Most
of the principles of science of every kind are things that must be
taught ; and there are few that reason out those principles for
themselves, but proceed upon them as demonstrated by others, and
apply themselves to practice the rules that are founded on those
principles. In like manner religion must be taught, or the most of
mankind will know but little of it. And if it requireth care and
application to understand its doctrines and precepts, and the evi
dences whereby it is confirmed, this is no argument at all, either
against its reasonableness or excellence ; for nothing that is truly
excellent in knowledge or practice is to be attained to without care
and diligence. It is every man's duty in this case to take in what
helps and informations he can get ; and if we can come to perceive
the evidence by the assistance of others, this will answer the pur
poses of religion as well as if we could do it merely by the force of
our own reason without any assistance at all.
It would undoubtedly be a thing above the capacity of the gene
rality of mankind, and what the most learned would not be well
fitted for, to trace out all the parts of religion and morality by a
regular deduction from the first principles in a way of abstracted
reasoning ; and therefore it is a great advantage, that God hath
given a clear revelation of his will, containing, in plain and express
propositions, the principles and doctrines which are of greatest im
portance to be known, and the duties which are most necessary to
be practised. Such a revelation is set before us in the gospel; and
the evident marks of disinterestedness that appear in it, without the
least traces of a worldly spirit or design, the purity and excellence
of its doctrines and precepts, and the uniform tendency of the whole
for promoting the glory of God, and the good of mankind, and the
cause of virtue and righteousness in the world, furnish arguments
obvious to common capacities, that this religion owed not its rise to
human policy, to the arts of impostors, or to evil beings, but was of
a godlike and heavenly original. And as to historical evidence,
persons of common sound understanding may be made sensible, by
the help of the learned, that we have all the evidence ofthe truth
of the extraordinary facts, whereby the divine authority of the Chris
tian religion was attested, which can be reasonably desired. That
most of those facts were of a public nature, which might have been
easily detected and exposed if they had been false ; in which case
that religion, which had nothing else to support it, and was desti
tute of all worldly advantages, must have fallen at once. But that
this was so far from being the case, that the greatest enemies of
Christianity are not able to deny, that, upon the credit of those
facts, this religion, though directly opposite to the prejudices which

Let. XL "CHRISTIANITY NOT FOUNDED ON ARGUMENT." 133
then universally obtained, and though it had the most unsurmount-
able difficulties to encounter with, and had all the powers of the
world engaged against it, soon made a wonderful progress both
among Jews and Gentiles ; which, as things were circumstanced,
cannot otherwise be accounted for, than by admitting the truth of
those extraordinary facts. That the original revelation itself, to
gether with an account of those facts, was committed to writing in
the very age in which that revelation was first given, and those facts
were done ; which is a sure method of conveyance, though oral tra
dition is a very uncertain one : And that these accounts, which were
written by persons who were perfectly acquainted with the things
they relate, and which have all the characters of purity, artless un
disguised simplicity, and an impartial regard to truth, that any
writings can possibly have, were in that very age received with
great veneration, as of sacred authority. The copies of them were
soon spread abroad into many different countries : they were read
in the public assemblies, translated into various languages, and they
have been ever since so constantly cited and appealed to in every
age by persons of different sects and parties, many of whom have
transcribed large portions of them into their writings, that it may
be justly said, they have been transmitted with a continued evi
dence, far greater than can be produced for any other books in the
world ; and that a general corruption of them, if any had attempted
it, would have been an impossible thing. There is nothing in all
this, but what persons of common sound sense, who are desirous of
information, may be sufficiently assured of by the assistance of the
learned : and when, besides this, they feel the power and influence
of the doctrines and motives proposed in those sacred writings upon
their own hearts, comforting them in all the vicissitudes of mortal
life, and animating them to all virtue and goodness, this completeth
their satisfaction and assurance ; especially when it is farther consi
dered, that we are taught in Scripture to hope, that God's gracious
assistances will not be wanting to those that with honest hearts and
upright intentions endeavour to know and do the will of God. For
if any man will do his will, saith our Saviour, he shall know of the
doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself, John
vii. 17.
Our author, in order to shew that the generality of mankind are
incapable of judging of the evidence for Christianity, hath taken
upon him to pronounce, that there are few that are capable of rea
soning at all, if there is the least of induction or inference in the
case.* And this, if it proveth that they are under no obligation to
believe Christianity, equally proveth, that they are under no obli
gation to believe natural religion, not even the existence of a God,
or a providence ; since here there is certainly room for induction
and inference. But the truth is, this is a very false and base repre
sentation of human nature : it would follow from it, that the gene-
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 17, 18.

134 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let XI.
rality of men are incapable of moral agency, of virtue and vice, or of
being governed by laws ; for this supposeth them capable of under
standing what those laws are, and what is the duty required of
them, and of making inferences and deductions. And with regard
to religion, and its proofs and evidences, it can scarce be doubted,
that if men applied themselves to it with the same care and diligence
that they generally do in matters of much less consequence, they
would attain to such a sense of religion and its evidences, as would
both make it reasonable for them to believe it, and to govern their
practice by it.
There were several good answers published to Christianity not
founded on Argument. One of the first that appeared was that
written by Dr. Doddridge, which I remember to have read with
pleasure, but as I have not had an opportunity of seeing it for some
years, cannot give a particular account of it. I shall confine myself
to those answers which I have now by me.
The first I shall mention is entitled, The Reasonableness of the
Christian Religion, as delivered in the Scriptures, being an answer to
a late Treatise, entitled, " Christianity not founded on Argument,"
by George Benson, afterwards Dr. Benson, London, 8vo. 1743.
This may be regarded not merely as an answer to that pamphlet,
but as a good defence of Christianity in general, and so the learned
author designed it. It consisteth of three parts. In the first part,
after having settled the meaning of the -wore\ faith, and shown what
that faith is, which the gospel requireth of those to whom it is made
known, and to which rewards are there annexed, and that it is really
a virtue ; and what that unbelief is which is there forbidden and
condemned, and that it is really a vice ; he goes on to produce some
of the principal arguments which prove the truth of the Christian
religion. He first considers what are usually called the internal
evidences of Christianity, the reasonableness of its doctrines, of its
moral precepts, of its positive institutions, and of the sanctions by
which it is enforced ; and then considers the external evidence aris
ing from prophecy and miracles, particularly from the resurrection
of Christ, and the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost poured
forth upon the apostles and first Christians. These things are here
set in a fair and agreeable light ; and it is also shown, that the ac
counts given of these things in the New Testament may he de
pended on, and that we have sufficient evidence of the truth and
authenticity of the gospel records. In the second part a solid
answer is given to the several objections and difficulties proposed
by the author, with a view to show that religion cannot be a rational
thing. The third part contains a distinct explication.of those texts
of Scripture which he had perverted and misapplied. And there is
scarce any one text cited or referred to in his whole book which is
not here particularly considered.
Not long after this, there was another valuable answer published,
entitled, The Christian's Faith a rational Assent, in Answer to a
Pamphlet, entitled, " Christianity not founded on Argument," by

Let. XI. "CHRISTIANITY NOT FOUNDED ON ARGUMENT." 135
Thomas Randolph, D.D., London, 1744. It was published in two
parts, and divided into six chapters. In the first, the question in
dispute is clearly stated, which is reduced to this : whether the
Christian faith be founded on argument, and is ordinarily attainable
in a rational way, or is to be acquired only by a particular revela
tion imparted supernaturally to every individual? And he under
takes, in opposition to the author of that pamphlet, to shew, that
the Christian's faith ought to be founded upon the conviction of the
understanding, and that it is a rational assent, by whieh he means,
that just and satisfactory reasons may be given for the hope and
faith we profess. He considers the nature of assent, and shows,
that we are not wholly passive in believing or disbelieving, but have
a great compass of liberty in the use of those faculties on which
assent depends ; and that therefore faith may be a virtue, and argue
a good disposition of mind, and unbelief be vicious and criminal.
In his second chapter, he fairly examines and clearly confutes the
author's arguments drawn from the nature of reason and religion :
and in the third, the arguments from Scripture, by which he pretends
to prove, that we are not to use our understandings in matters of
religion. In his fourth chapter, he inquires into the author's own
scheme, and the principle of gospel evidence which he has thought
fit to assign, which he wholly resolveth into an immediate, infallible,
supernatural revelation, darted with an irresistible light into the
mind of every particular person : the absurdity of this Dr. Randolph
exposes, and answers the pretended proofs brought from Scripture
in support of it. The fifth chapter contains a good account of the
proofs of the Christian religion, with a particular consideration of
the objections of this writer against miracles and traditional testi
mony. Lastly, he takes notice of the reflections thrown out by
the author of that pamphlet against the Church of England in par
ticular. You will probably expect, that I should take some notice of ano
ther answer, which appeared about the same time, and which also
met with a favourable reception from the public, viz. Remarks on a
late Pamphlet, entitled, " Christianity not founded on Argument.''
These remarks, which were drawn up by me at your own desire, were
contained in two letters that were published separately, London,
1744. The design of this answer, which was much shorter than
either of the former, was not to enter upon a distinct and particular
account of the evidences which are usually produced in proof of the
Christian religion, which the author of these letters had considered
largely on some former occasions, but to represent in a clear and
concise manner the absurdity and ill tendency, as well as manifold
inconsistencies, of this writer's scheme ; to give a plain confutation
of the principal arguments from Scripture and reason, by which he
has pretended to support it, and to detect and expose his fallacies
and misrepresentations.
But it is time to take leave of this writer, whom I have taken the
more particular notice of, because some of his objections are managed
with great art, and have a specious appearance.

136 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITER?. Let. XII.

LETTER XII.
The Resurrection of Christ an Article that lies at the Foundation of the Christian
Faith. — Attacked with great Confidence in a Pamphlet, entitled, The Resurrection of
Jesus considered. — What this Writer offers to prove, that Christ did not foretel his
own Resurrection, and- that the Story of the Chief Priests setting a Watch at the
Sepulchre is a Forgery and Fiction, examined and confuted  Observations on the
extraordinary Way he takes to fix Contradictions on the Evangelists. — The Rules by
which he would judge of their Accounts would not be endured, if applied to any
other Writings. — He insists on farther Evidence of Christ's Resurrection ; and yet
plainly intimates, that no Evidence that could be given would satisfy him. — Extra
vagant Demands of the Deistical Writers on this Head considered. — The Evidence
that was actually given, the properest that could be given. — The seeming Variations
among the Evangelists, if rightly considered, furnish a Proof of the Truth and
Genuineness of the Gospel Records. — An Account ofthe Answers published to this
Author, especially of Mr. West's Observations on the History and Resurrection of
Jesus Christ. — Sir George Littleton's Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship
ef St. Paul commended.
Sir,
The resurrection of Christ is an article of vast importance, which
lieth at the foundation of Christianity : if this faileth, the Christian
religion cannot be maintained, or may be proved to be false. If
Christ be not risen (saith St. Paul), then is our preaching vain, your
faith is also vain, 1 Cor. xv. 14. On the other hand, if this holdeth
good, the divine mission and authority of the blessed Founder of
our holy religion is established. This is what he himself appealed
to, as the great and ultimate proof, which was to convince mankind
that he was what he professed himself to be, the Son of God, the
Saviour of the world. If he had been an artful impostor, it can
scarce be supposed that he would have appealed to such a proof as
this, which would have been the most effectual way he could have
taken to detect and expose the vanity of his own pretences, and
overturn the whole scheme of his religion : or, if he had been an
enthusiast, and was imposed upon by the warmth of his own imagi
nation, to believe that God would indeed raise him from the dead,
the event would have effectually shown the folly and madness of his
expectations. And, therefore, since he put the proof of his divine
mission upon a thing of so extraordinary a nature, which manifestly
exceeded all human power, and was actually enabled to accomplish
it, this shows, both that he certainly knew that he was sent of God,
and that he really was so. And indeed it cannot be conceived how
a more illustrious attestation could possibly have been given to him
from heaven, than his resurrection from the jdead, in accomplish
ment of his own prediction, and what followed' upon it, his ascension
into heaven, and the extraordinary effusion ofthe Holy Ghost upon his
disciples, as he himself had promised. This the enemies of our holy
religion are sensible of; and therefore, though they have sometimes
affected to argue, that, supposing Christ to have really risen from

Let. XII. " THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED." 137
the dead, this would not be a valid proof of the truth ofthe Chris
tian revelation,* they have in all ages bent their utmost efforts
against it. Celsus employed all his wit and malice to ridicule it ;
so have others done since : of late Mr. Woolston had distinguished
himself this way ; and no part of his discourse on the miracles of
our Saviour was so much laboured, as that wherein he endeavoured
to show, that the account given by the evangelists of Christ's
resurrection is a false and incredible story. But the weakness of his
objections was clearly shown in the answers that were made to him;
among which The Trial of the Witnesses, 8tc. was especially remark
able, both for the strength of the reasoning, and the ingenious and
polite manner of treating the argument. Mr. Woolston himself
never attempted to vindicate that part of his Discourse against the
answers that had been given to it. But after several years had
passed, a bold adventurer appears in a pamphlet, intitled, The
Resurrection of Jesus considered, in Answer to the Trial of the
Witnesses, by a Moral Philosopher, London, 1744; so this gentle
man thinks proper to style himself, as Dr. Morgan had done before
him. Like that writer, he appears to be of great vivacity, and no
small degree of confidence, and to have a high opinion of his own
abilities and performances ; and, like him, seems resolved to put all
the arts of controversy in practice, by which he thinks he might
carry his point, without being very solicitous whether they are pro
perly reconcileable to truth or candour. He has with great diligence
raked together all that a lively imagination, animated with the most
determined malice, could invent or suggest, for misrepresenting and
exposing the gospel-history ; nor does he, as some others had done,
any where pretend a regard to the religion of Jesus, but all along
openly declares against it ; in which he is so far to be commended,
if he had but acted the part of a fair, as he doth of a professed
adversary. The principal things observable in this treatise, with relation to
the declared design of it, the overthrowing the accounts that are
given us of the resurrection of Jesus, may be reduced to these three
heads : 1. He undertakes to prove, that Christ did not foretel his
death and resurrection at all, neither to the Jewish priests and Pha
risees, por to his own disciples; and that all that the evangelists say
on this head is mere fiction and forgery. 2. That the whole story of
the Jewish priests and rulers setting a watch at the sepulchre, and
sealirjg the stone, is false, and a most absurd and incredible fiction.
3. That the accounts given by the evangelists of Christ's resurrec
tion are in every part inconsistent and self-contradictory, and carry
plain marks of fraud and imposture. I shall make some observations
on each of these ; and that I may not return to this subject again,
shall take notice, as I go along, of some things advanced by Mr.
Chubb, in his posthumous works, to enforce the objections of this
writer. * See a Letter, said to be written by Mr. Collins, to the author of the " Discourse
on the Grounds, &c." in answer to Mr. Green's Letters, published in 1726.

138 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
It is of great importance to our author's cause to prove, if he was
able to do it, that Jesus did not foretel his own death and resurrec
tion : for if he did foretel it, and it was known that he did so, this
makes the precautions taken by the chief priests to prevent an im
position in this matter absolutely necessary ; and the whole story is
perfectly consistent. Besides that, as hath been already hinted, his
foretelling a thing of such a nature, which, if he had been an impos
tor, he must have known it would be absolutely out of his power to
accomplish, and which yet was actually fulfilled, affords the most
convincing proof, that he was really that extraordinary and divine
person he professed himself to be. Our author saw this, and there
fore has made an attempt to show, that Jesus did not foretel his
death and resurrection, neither to the Jewish priests and Pharisees,
nor to his own disciples. With regard to the former, it appeareth
from the testimony of the evangelists, St. Matthew and St. Luke,
that when the Scribes and Pharisees desired Jesus to show them a
sign from heaven, he told them, that no sign should be given, but the
sign qf the prophet Jonas. And St. M atthew farther informs us,
that he then openly declared to them, that as Jonas was three days
and three nights in the whale's belly, so should the Son of man be
three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, Matth. xii. 38,
39, 40. Which plainly supposed, that, in that space of time, he
should, after lying in the earth or grave, rise out of it, as Jonas came
alive out of the belly of the fish. From this prediction therefore,
which was uttered more than once in the hearing ofthe Scribes and
Pharisees, they might gather that he intended to signify that he
should rise again from the dead. What this writer hath offered
against this is very trifling. Because St. Luke, in mentioning what
our Saviour said concerning the sign of the prophet Jonas, doth not
expressly take notice of his declaring, that the Son of man should lie
three days and nights in the heart of the earth, he pretends that this
is a proof that St. Matthew forged it, Whereas all that it proves is,
that St. Matthew hath given a fuller relation of what our Saviour
said on that occasion, than St. Luke hath done ; though what the
latter relateth concerning Christ's mentioning the sign of the pro
phet Jonas, plainly implieth it. He also repeats what Mr. Woolston
had urged, that Christ did not lie three days and nights in the grave ;
of which I took some notice before in my remarks on Mr. Woolston's
discourses. He farther hints at what Mr. Chubb, who wrote after
our author, and endeavours to reinforce his objections, has enlarged
upon for several pages together,* that Jesus could not have made
such a declaration as this, that no sign should be given to that wicked
and adulterous generation, but the sign ofthe prophet Jonas ; both be
cause their being a wicked generation was rather a reason for giving
them a sign, since in that case they needed it most, and the design
of his coming was to call sinners to repentance ; and because in fact
Christ did work signs and wonders among them after this. But to
* Chubb's posthumous works, vol. i. p. 342 — 347.

Let. XII. " THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED." ]39
take off the force of this, it is sufficient to observe, that by com
paring Matth. xvi. 1. Luke xi. 16. Mark viii. 11. it appeareth, that
the sign they demanded was a sign from heaven, by which they
probably meant some glorious appearance in the heavens. They had
a little before attributed his miracles to Beelzebub : and now they
insisted that he should give them a particular kind of sign ; and it
was perfectly consistent with his character to refuse to humour them
in this demand, which he well knew proceeded from a cavilling
temper, and not from minds honestly willing to submit to evidence.
But though he refused to give them at that time precisely such a
sign as they demanded, he yet both continued to work miracles
among them, and referred them to his resurrection, which, taking
in the circumstances that attended it, and followed upon it, was,
in the fullest and properest sense, a sign from heaven, and was suf
ficient to convince them, if they were disposed to receive conviction.
To this it may be added, what St. John informs us of, that in a
discourse addressed to a great number of the Jews, among whom
were several of his malicious enemies, he plainly spoke of his laying
down his life, and taking it again, and declared that this command
ment he had received of his Father, John x. 17, 18, 19, 20.
As to his own disciples, under which character others besides the
twelve apostles are often comprehended, the author himself ac-
knowledgeth, that the evangelists represent him as having declared
to them in plain and express terms, on five different occasions, that
he should suffer and die, and rise again on the third day. But be
cause they tell us, that the disciples did not understand this saying,
and that it was hid from them, and that they questioned among them
selves, what this rising from the dead should mean, he would have the
whole pass for forgery and fiction. He thinks it incredible, that
twelve men could hear such plain expressions, so clearly foretelling
his dying and rising again, and yet not be able to understand them.
But this is easily accounted for, considering that the disciples were
at that time under the power of those prejudices, which then gene
rally prevailed among the Jews, relating to the Messiah. They
could not conceive how the Messiah, who, according to their notions
of things, was to abide for ever, and not die at all,* could be sub
ject to sufferings and death ; nor consequently how he should rise
again from the dead. When therefore they heard Jesus, whom they
looked upon to be the Messiah, talk of his dying and rising again
on the third day, they thought it must be understood in some mys
tical or figurative sense, and that some meaning which they did not
at present comprehend lay hid under those expressions, however
plain they might appear; so that this only shows the dulness of
their apprehensions, and the force of their prejudices, and at the
same time the impartiality of the evangelical historians who have
recorded it. But though the disciples could not conceive how Christ
should die and rise again on the third day, yet as he so often
* See John xii. 34.

140 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
repeated it on different occasions, without ever giving the least
injunction to them to conceal it, it may justly be supposed that the
saying got abroad, and was known to many. And this coming to
the ears of the Jewish chief priests and Pharisees, who also knew
what he had said to some of the Pharisees and Scribes concerning
the sign of the prophet Jonas, was a sufficient foundation to them
to say to Pilate, We remember that that deceiver said (not that he said
to us, as this gentleman thinks fit to quote it, but that he said), while
he was yet alive, after three days I will rise again. There needed no
more to put them upon all proper precautions to prevent an impos
ture in this matter.
This leads me to take some notice of the second main thing this
writer insisteth upon, which is, that the story St. Matthew tells of
the chief priests setting a watch at the sepulchre, and sealing the
stone, is a false and absurd fiction. Mr. Woolston had allowed the
truth of the story, and built one of his principal arguments against
the resurrection of Jesus upon the circumstance of sealing the stone.
And this argument was mightily cried up for a while. But our
author had the sagacity to discern, that if this was admitted, it
would afford a strong presumption of the truth and reality of Christ's
resurrection ; and therefore thinks it more for the interest of his
cause to deny it. The chief thing he urgeth against the story pro
ceeds upon the supposition, that Jesus did not foretel his resurrec
tion at all, nor had the Jewish priests and Pharisees heard that he
had foretold it ; and therefore it is absurd to think they would give
themselves concern about it. But the falsehood of this supposition
hath been already shown; nor is there any thing in the whole story,
as related by St. Matthew, that is not perfectly consistent, and
highly probable. It is very natural to suppose, considering their
characters and dispositions, and the circumstances of the
case, that they would take the fittest precautions that the
disciples of Jesus might not have it in their power to pretend he
was risen from the dead, as it was reported he had foretold ; and
there could not be a more probable method fixed upon for this pur
pose, than the setting a watch to guard the sepulchre, and sealing
the stone that was rolled to the mouth of it. And though we should
allow them to have known, as this writer affirms they did, that
Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea had wound up the body in
linen and spices, which showed they did not expect his resurrection,
yet they knew he had other disciples : and besides might suspect,
that all this preparation for embalming the body, was only the better
to cover their design of carrying it away. What he farther urgeth
concerning their believing him to have been, what they called him
to Pilate, a deceiver, instead of being an argument, as he would
have it to be, against their using this precaution, would furnish a
strong reason for it ; since in that case they might be apt to suspect
that his disciples would act the part of deceivers too, and endeavour
to carry on the imposture, which therefore they were resolved to
prevent. And they might think this one of the most effectual
methods they could take to convince the people, many of whom

Let. XII. "THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED." 141
they knew had a high veneration for Jesus, that he was a false pro
phet, by showing the falsehood of his prediction, concerning his
rising again the third day, which would justify their own conduct
in putting him to death.
This author thinks it incredible, that the Jews should bribe the
soldiers to be silent, when they themselves must upon their report
have been convinced of the truth of the fact. But their conduct on
this occasion was no other than might be expected from persons of
their character. Whosoever considers their determined malice and
envy against Jesus, who had unmasked their hypocrisy, and opposed
their traditions ; how deeply their reputation was engaged, and their
authority with the people, as well as that of the Sanhedrim, who
claimed to themselves a power of trying prophets, and had con
demned him as a false prophet and blasphemer, must be sensible
how unwilling they would be to have it thought, that they had
wrongfully procured a most excellent person to be crucified, and that
they would take all possible methods, by stifling the evidence, to
throw off the odium from themselves. To which may be added the
power of their prejudices, which would not suffer them to imagine,
that a person who had been crucified could possibly be their Messiah,
which was absolutely subversive of all their maxims. They who,
when they could not deny his miracles, ascribed them to a diabolical
power, showed what they were capable of. And indeed the force of
obstinate prejudice, hatred, envy, pride, and a desire of maintaining
their own authority, all which concurred in this case, is amazing,
and hath often caused persons to stand out against the clearest
evidence. The last thing he hath to offer is, that St. Matthew is the only
evangelist who relateth the story of sealing the stone, and placing
the watch ; but this is of small moment : St. Matthew's relation of
it is sufficient. He wrote his gospel, by tbe consent of all antiquity,
the first of the evangelists, in a few years after our Lord's ascension,
and designed it especially for the use of the Jewish converts ; and
his relating this story in a gospel published among the Jews, and so
early in that very age when the story must have been fresh in
remembrance, and when, if false, it might have been easily con
tradicted, shows that it was a thing well known, and that he was
fully assured of the truth of it, and in no fear of being detected in a
falsehood. And what farther confirmeth this, is his referring to a
report as current among the Jews at the time when he wrote,
concerning the disciples having stolen the body, whilst the soldiers
that were set to watch the sepulchre slept. The story indeed was not
very consistent ; but yet, as the case is circumstanced, it was the
best thing they had to say. The body was gone out of the sepulchre;
either therefore it must be acknowledged that he rose again from the
dead, or that his disciples had taken it away ; and this, if done at
all, must have been done either with the connivance of the guards
that were set to watch it, or when they were asleep ; the guards, if
charged with having connived at it, and with having been bribed by

142 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
the disciples, would have been obliged to justify themselves against
that charge, and would have told the fact as it really happened ;
there was nothing therefore left but to pretend that it was done
whilst they were asleep. And yet the rulers never pretended to
convict the disciples of having stolen the body, nor instituted any
process against them on that account ; but contented themselves
with threatening to punish them if they preached the resurrection of
Jesus, which yet they boldly avowed to their faces. As to the
author's insinuation, how came St. Matthew to know of the angel's
appearing to the soldiers with such circumstances of terror, if they
were hired to conceal it, this is easily accounted for ; it is only said
that some ofthe watch went and told the chief priests, Matt, xxviii.
11. It may therefore be reasonably supposed, that others of them
might, immediately after the thing happened, tell it to some other
persons ; yea, it might probably happen, that some of those who were
then hired and bribed might discover it afterwards, when all was
over ; or that some of the priests, many of whom were afterwards
converted to the Christian faith, as we learn from Acts vi. 7, might
have known and divulged it.
Thus it appeareth, that this writer's principal objections against
this story, and which he insisteth upon as manifest proofs of the
absolute falsehood and forgery of the gospel history, are of no force.
And yet he taketh upon him to pronounce, that it is in all views
absurd to suppose, that the priests and Pharisees should guard against
a resurrection, fraudulent or real.
He next proceeds to inquire how the witnesses agree in their
evidence, and endeavoureth to prove, that the accounts the evan
gelists give of the resurrection of Jesus are in every part incon
sistent and self-contradictory, and carry plain marks of fraud and
imposture. And here I shall not enter into a distinct examination
ofthe several more minute particulars he insisteth upon, which are
all considered and discussed in the answers that were made to him,
but shall content myself with some general observations upon his
management of the subject ; and first I would observe, that he has
thought fit to consider the accounts of the three evangelists, Mat
thew, Mark, and Luke, separately from St. John ; whereas they
ought all to be taken together, since they all relate to the same fact
of Christ's resurrection ; he positively asserteth, that the three evan
gelists mention in general but three appearances of Jesus ; whereas
there are plainly seven appearances of Jesus after his resurrection
referred to by them, besides two others peculiarly mentioned by St.
John : 1. His appearing to Mary Magdalen alone, Mark xvi. 9.
John xx. 14, 15, 16, 17. 2. His appearing to the women, Matthew
xxviii. 9. 3. His appearing to the two disciples going to Emmaus,
Mark xvi. 12. Luke xxiv. 13 — 32. 4. His appearing to Simon
Peter, Luke xxiv. 34. 1 Cor. xv. 5. 5. His appearing to the eleven
as they sat at meat on the evening of the day on which he rose,
Luke xxiv. 36—43. John xx. 19 — 23. 6. His appearing to his
disciples on a mountain in Galilee, Matt, xxviii. 16, 17. 7. His

Let. XII. " THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED." 143
appearing to his disciples on the day of his ascension, Mark xvi. 19,
20. Luke xxiv. 50, 51, 52. Acts i. 6—11. Besides these, there are
two other appearances of Jesus recorded by St. John, which are not
taken notice of by the other evangelists; one is, that to the eleven,
when St. Thomas was with them, eight days after the first, John
xx. 26 — 29. The other is, that at the sea of Tiberias, to seven of
the disciples, John xxi. 1—14. Here are nine distinct appearances
pointed out by the evangelists, which were at different times, and
are plainly marked out by distinct characters. But this author, in
order to have a pretence for charging these writers with contradic
tions, thinks fit to confound these different appearances ; and the
different circumstances and variations, which show that they belong
to different appearances, are represented by him as so many incon
sistencies in the relation of the same appearance. But by this way
of management, instead of proving contradictions upon the evan
gelists, he only proves his own unfairness and absurdity. Thus e. g.
St. Luke relates an appearance of Jesus to his disciples at Jerusalem,
on the very evening of the resurrection day ; St. Matthew tells of an
appearance of his to his disciples at a mountain in Galilee, which
must have been some time after. The time and place of these
appearances are manifestly different ; which should lead every person
of candour to regard them as different appearances ; but our author
is pleased to suppose them to relate to the same appearance, and
then chargeth these different circumstances as to time and place, as
so many contradictions and inconsistencies. This must be owned to
be a very extraordinary way of proceeding ; and at this rate it
will be easy to expose the most authentic history that ever was
written. There is another rule frequently made use of by this writer, and
upon which his charge of contradictions against the evangelists prin
cipally dependeth, and that is, that if any one of them takes notice of
any circumstance or event not mentioned by the rest, this is to pass
for a proof of fiction and forgery. According to this new rule of
criticism, where several historians give an account of the same facts,
if some of them relate those facts with more, and some with fewer
circumstances, this shall be sufficient absolutely to destroy the
credit of the whole ; and they that omit a circumstance, or say
nothingatall about it,mustbe looked upon as contradicting those that
mention it. Upon this principle, St. Mark and St. Luke are made
to contradict one another ; because the latter mentions Bethany or
Mount Olivet as the place from whence Jesus ascended, and the
former, in mentioning Christ's ascension, takes no notice of the
place from whence he ascended. In like manner it is pretended,
that St. Matthew and St. John, in contradiction to the two other
evangelists, say, that Jesus never ascended at all, because they give
no distinct account of his ascension, though they evidently suppose
it ; and there are more references to it in St. John's gospel, than in
any one of the evangelists : see John vi. 62. vii. 39. xiv. 2, 28. xvi. 7,
16, 28. xvii. 5, 11. xx. 17. So because the last mentioned evan-

144 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
gelist is the only one of them that mentions the piercing the side of
Jesus with a spear, of which he himself was an eye-witness, and
gives an account of some appearances of Jesus to his disciples not
mentioned by the other evangelist, this shows, according to our
author, that he forged those accounts, and that his evidence destroys
theirs, or they his ; though one design of his writing his gospel was
to take notice of things which they had omitted ; nor do any of them
give the least hint that they proposed distinctly to recount all
Christ's appearances.
In order to fix the charge of contradictions and inconsistencies
upon the evangelists, he pretendeth, that, according to St. Luke, our
Lord ascended the very evening of the day of his resurrection. The
only proof he bringeth for so strange an assertion is, that St. Luke,
immediately after having given an account of our Lord's appearing
to the eleven disciples, and others with them, Luke xxiv. 36, and
which, by comparing ver. 29 and 33, was pretty late in the evening
of the day on which he rose, tells us, that he led them out as far as
Bethany, where he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven,
ver. 50, 51. And this he might justly say, rthough there was an
interval of several days between the one and the other; and it is
manifest from other accounts there was, and particularly from what
St. Luke himself saith in the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles.
It is plain that he intends here only to give a summary narration ;
and, therefore, after having taken notice of his first appearance to
the eleven, the account of which ends at ver. 43, he passeth over the
other appearances without a distinct mention; only giving the sub
stance of what Jesus said on some of those occasions, and which he
introduces thus, ehfe Se civto"iq, which may be thus understood, he
said besides, or moreover, unto them ; and then he proceeds to give a
short account of Christ's ascension, and of what followed upon it,
which he more distinctly relateth in the book of the Acts.
St. Luke observes, that the women, when they went to the sepul
chre, found not the body of Jesus, Luke xxiv. 3. This our candid
author represents as if he had said, that they never saw Jesus at all
after his resurrection, dead or alive ; and then would have this,
which is a manifest perversion of St. Luke's meaning, pass for a
contradiction to the other evangelists, who tell that Jesus was seen
of the women after he rose again from the dead. To prove that the
other evangelists contradict St. John, he represents St. Matthew,
Mark, and Luke, as expressly declaring, that Jesus appeared to the
eleven disciples but once after his resurrection; and yet certain it is, that
not one of them says any such thing. Nor do the evangelists any
where say, as he affirms they do, that Jesus appeared but to a very
few after he rose from the dead, which he thinks contradicts the
story of the hundred and twenty, and five hundred, mentioned by
the author of the Acts and St. Paul. He might as well have pre
tended, as Mr. Chubb did afterwards, though without offering the
least proof to support it, that the word hundred in that passage,
Acts i. 15, is an interpolation, and that instead of an hundred and

Let. XII. "THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED." 145
twenty, it should be read twenty.* Such wretched shifts only
discover a fixed resolution not to believe any accounts that should
be given.
Our author endeavours to take great advantage, in which he is
followed by the last-mentioned writer, of what is told us concerning
Christ's appearing to the two disciples going to Emmaus. Because
they did not for some time know Jesus, it is argued, that he had not
a true body, and that they could not be afterwards sure that it was
he ; since, if their senses were deceived at first, they might be so
afterwards too ; and the like may be supposed, as to all Christ's
other appearances to his disciples. That the two disciples did not
at first know Jesus, is plain from the story ; and this may be
accounted for in a natural way, if we suppose, that besides some
change which there might be in his countenance, occasioned by his
sufferings and death, he might on purpose alter the tone of his voice,
or have something in his garb, his air and manner, different from
what had been usual with him before, or in some other way disguise
himself: which seems to be signified, when St. Mark, referring to
this, saith, he appeared in another form, Mark xvi. 12. And this
might hinder them from knowing him, considering how little at that
time they expected to see him. Or, if we should suppose, that he
employed a miraculous power to prevent their at first knowing him,
which was done for a valuable end, that he might have the better
opportunity of instructing them in a familiar way in the true mean
ing of the Scriptures relating to the Messiah, his sufferings and
glory, and thereby the better prepare them for the discovery he
intended afterwards to make of himself; it by no means follows,
that, because they were withheld from knowing him for a while,
therefore when he fully discovered himself to them, they could not
be certain that it was he. It is plain, that they had afterwards such
convincing proofs that it was Jesus, as left no room for doubt in their
minds. And that very evening he showed himself again to them,
and to the eleven apostles, and others with them ; and the more
effectually to convince them, showed them his hands and feet, and
ate and drank before them ; and by the proofs which were given
them, both on that and on other occasions, they had as full evidence
of the reality of his risen body, as they could have of any thing that
came to them confirmed by the testimony of their senses. And to
suppose an extraordinary miraculous power employed all along to
deceive them, and overrule all their senses, would be to suppose as
great a power employed to make them believe a falsehood, i. e. to
make them believe that Jesus was risen when he was not so, as
would have sufficed for the truth of the resurrection ; since it would
have been as easy for the divine power to have raised his body
really from the dead, as to give all those proofs and evidences that
were given of a true body without the reality. As to his appearing
among them when the doors were shut, which is also urged against
the truth of his risen body, all that can be fairly concluded from it
* Chubb's Posthumous Works, vol i. p. 378.
L

146 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
is, that when the doors were shut, which the evangelist tells us was
for fear of the Jews, Jesus came suddenly among them, opening the
doors at once by his miraculous power ; not that his body passed
through the doors by a penetration of dimensions, which is the con
struction the author puts upon it ; for this would have entirely des
troyed our Lord's own argument, which he used at that very
time to convince them that he had a real body. " Behold (saith
he), my hands and feet, that it is I myself. Handle me, and see,
for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as you see me have." See
Luke xxiv. 36, 39, compared with John xx. 19, 20.
It is observable that this writer, in his great eagerness to expose
the evangelical accounts, seems not to consider that some of the
arguments he hath produced may be turned against him, and prove
the contrary to what he produced them for. - He frequently lays a
mighty stress on those passages which relate to the disciples not
having understood our Saviour, when he foretold his resurrection
before his death, and to their doubting of his resurrection after it.
And yet it is this very thing that gives the greatest force to their tes
timony. If they had been prepossessed beforehand with a strong
belief that he would rise again, or if they had immediately believed
that he* was risen from the dead upon the first message that was
brought to them, it would undoubtedly have been ascribed to the
warmth of their imagination, and to a too forward credulity ; but as
the case is circumstanced, there is no room for this pretence. It is
plain, that nothing but the irresistible evidence of their senses
brought them to believe at all ; and their believing it so firmly at
last, so as to be ready to seal their testimony to it with their blood,
shows that they were constrained to believe by an evidence which
they could not withstand, and which absolutely removed . their
doubts, and overcame all their prejudices.
The account given by the evangelists of Christ's resurrection is
farther confirmed by the testimony of St. Paul, who mentions his
having been seen by Peter, by James, and by the twelve apostles ;
concerning which he had many opportunities of informing himself
from the persons themselves. He also maketh mention of his
having been seen of above five hundred brethren at once, and
expressly affirms, as a thing he was well assured of, that the greater
part of them were alive at the time when he wrote this ; and it is
not to be doubted, that he had seen and known many of them, to
whose living testimonies he could then appeal. These things he
refers the Corinthians to in his epistle, as things known to be cer
tainly true, and which could not be contested, and concerning which
he himself had spoken to them more at large when he was with
them, 1 Cor. xv. 1, 2, 3, &c. And in a dispute which he there
maintaineth against some who denied the future resurrection of the
dead, he principally argueth from the resurrection of Christ, as a
fact so fully proved, that they could not deny it. Yet our author
is pleased to reject all this at once, because St Paul writes by hear
say, i. e. because he was not himself present at those appearances,
though he had the account from those who were so : and so fond is

Let. XII. " THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERD. 147
he of this thought, that he repeats it, as his manner is, in three or
four different parts of his book. According to this rule, an historian
is not to be credited in any fact of which he himself was not an eye
witness, though he might have undoubted assurance of it; a maxim
which would destroy the credit of the best historians now in the
world. But one should think this writer would at least allow, that
St. Paul ought to be credited, when, after mentioning Christ's
having appeared to others, he affirms, that he himself had seen
Jesus, 1 Cor. xv. 8. ix. 1. But it seems this also is to be rejected,
under pretence that he only saw him in a vision ; though it was at
noon-day, as he was travelling with several others in his company,
and which was attended with such remarkable circumstances, and
produced such real effects, that if he could not be sure of this, no
man can be certain of any thing that he hears or sees. Mr. Chubb
indeed, who faithfully treads in our author's steps, takes upon him
to affirm, that St. Paul's testimony weakens, instead of strengthen
ing, the evidence of Christ's resurrection ; for which he gives this
reason, that though St. Paul had known Jesus before his resurrec
tion, which it doth not appear he did, yet as that glorified body
must have been different from what if had appeared to be whilst he
was on earth, he could not be a proper judge ofthe identity of that
body with that body which had been crucified.* But it is to be
considered, that what St. Paul was to be convinced of, and of which
he himself was afterwards to be a witness, was, that Jesus was raised
again, and invested with a divine dominion and glory. And of this
the appearing of Jesus to him in the manner he did, as he was goino-
to Damascus, and assuring him by a voice from heaven, that it was
Jesus whom he had persecuted who then spoke to him, attended
with such amazing displays of a divine glory and splendour, together
with the remarkable consequences which then followed upon it,
especially the extraordinary miraculous gifts and powers with which
he himself was endued, and which he was enabled to confer upon
others in the name of a risen Jesus, exhibited the most illustrious
and convincing proof and evidence that could possibly be desired,
and which absolutely overcame all the strong and obstinate pre
judices with which his mind was at that very time possessed. So
that all things considered, there never was a testimony which
deserved greater regard than that of St. Paul, and accordingly it
has justly had the greatest weight in all ages.
I pass by other instances that might be mentioned of our author's
great unfairness and disingenuity, particularly his gross perversions
of several passages of Scripture, and putting a meaning upon them
contrary to the plain intention of the writers, with many other
things which are fully detected and exposed by his learned answer
ers. But what is wanting in reasoning, is made up in confidence.
He boldly pronounceth, that " the witnesses do not all agree in one
circumstance, but palpably contradict one another in every par
ticular; and that such inconsistencies, improbabilities, absurdities,
* Chubb's Posthumous Works, vol. I.
1,2

148 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
and contradictions, would destroy the credit of other histories ;" but
he sneeringly adds, " that the faith of this is founded on a rock."*
And I believe it will hardly be thought too severe a censure to say,
that any man who would treat any other historians as this writer
hath treated the evangelists, and who would advance such rules of
judging concerning any other books whatsoever, as he seems to
think fair with regard to theirs, would, instead of passing for a can
did and judicious critic, be generally exploded as a malicious and
impertinent caviller, that had betrayed a great defect of sense,
manners, or honesty.
In my remarks on Mr. Woolston's discourses in tbe seventh letter,
notice was taken of that grand objection, that our Lord ought to
have appeared publicly to the chief priests and rulers of the Jews
after his resurrection. I shall not repeat what is there offered in
answer to it ; but shall only observe, that our author has endeavoured
to strengthen. that objection by pretending, that Jesus had actually
engaged to do so ; and that " not to appear to the Jews when he
had promised it, and put the truth of his mission upon it, was a
denying the truth of his mission, and a falsifying his word."*
Thus he represents it, as if the evangelists had said, that
Christ promised to appear publicly to the Jews, and particularly
to their chief priests and rulers after his resurrection. But
this is entirely his own fiction ; our Lord made no such promise.
He declared indeed, that a sign, like that of the prophet Jonas,
should be given to that evil and adulterous generation, i. e. that suf
ficient evidence should be given to convince them of the truth of his
resurrection. And such evidence there was given, if their minds
had been open to conviction ; and vast numbers of the Jews were
actually convinced by it. But this writer carrieth it still farther ;
he thinks Jesus should have shown himself to the Jews as
their deliverer from the Roman yoke, and as their temporal king,
that he might prove that he was the Messiah, and fulfil the pro
phecies. A reflection occurs to me on this occasion, which you will allow
me to mention : It relates to the several demands that have been
made by these gentlemen with regard to the evidence, which they
pretend ought to have been given to the Jews of our Saviour's re
surrection. The author of Christianity not founded on Argument
thinks, that Jesus ought to have taken one turn in the market-place
in the presence of all the people, and that " this might have spared
both the painful labours and lives of so many holy vouchers. "% Mr.
Chubb insists upon it, that when Christ was risen, " he should have
repaired to the house of some friend, and made it the place of his
residence the time he staid upon earth, that so the rest of his friends,
and all others, might know where to see him, and have access to
him."§ And if he had done so, and been publicly visited, and the
people had gathered together in crowds, as might in that case have
* Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 56, 57, 58. ¦'¦"•• Ibid. p. 59, 61.
t Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 68. § Posthumous Works, vol. I.

Let. XII. " THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED." 149
been expected, this might have awakened the jealousy both of the
Jewish chief priests and rulers, and of the Roman government, and
might, in the temper the Jews were then in, have probably produced
tumults and insurrections, which would have brought a great slur
upon Christianity at its first appearance. And so undoubtedly these
gentlemen would have had it; for, according to our author, if Jesus
had appeared publicly to the Jews after his resurrection, this would
not have been sufficient, if he did not also head their armies. And
then to be sure this would have been insisted upon as a manifest
proof, that the whole scheme of his religion was false, and a mere
piece of carnal policy.
I cannot help thinking upon the whole, that after all the clamour
that hath been raised against it, the evidence which was actually
given of our Lord's resurrection was the properest thatcould begiven.
His making a public personal appearance to the people of the Jews
would have been on many accounts improper, and might probably
have had bad consequences. But besides the evidence arising from
the testimony ofthe soldiers, who had been set to watch the sepul
chre, which was well known to the chief priests, and, notwithstand
ing all their precautions, had come to the knowledge of others too ;
besides this, his appearing, in the manner he did, to a considerable
number of persons, who had been immediately acquainted with him,
to whom he frequently showed himself alive after his passion by
many infallible proofs during the course of forty days ; his ascend
ing afterwards into heaven in their sight, and the effusion of the
Holy Ghost in his extraordinary miraculous gifts and powers, as he
himself had promised, upon his disciples, the authorized witnesses
of his resurrection, which was done in the most public manner pos
sible, before many thousands of persons of all nations, which were
then assembled at Jerusalem ; all this, with the following divine at
testations that were given them, to confirm their testimony where-
ever they went, preaching the gospel for many years together, to
which testimony they unalterably adhered, in opposition to the
greatest sufferings and persecutions to which it exposed them ; all
this taken together furnished the most proper and convincing evi
dence, not only of Christ's resurrection, but of his exaltation to glory.
And accordingly we find in fact, that his resurrectiop was accom
panied with such proof and evidence, as convinced many myriads
(for so it should be rendered) of the Jewish nation, and among
them great numbers of the priests, Acts vi. 7. xxi. 20. and brought
them over, contrary to all their prejudices, to acknowledge one that
had been crucified by the heads of their own nation for their Mes
siah, their Saviour, and their Lord ; and afterwards convinced vast
numbers of the Gentiles, and gained them over to a religion the
most opposite that could be imagined, not only to their prejudices
and superstitions, but to their vices, and which exposed its profes
sors to the most grievous reproaches, persecutions, and sufferings.
But to return to our author : —Whosoever carefully considers and
compares what he hath offered may easily perceive, that, whatever
pretences he may make of demanding other and farther evidence of

150 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
Christ's resurrection than was given, no evidence that could have
been given of it would have satisfied him. If Jesus had shown him
self alive, not only to the Jewish rulers, but to every single person
of the Jewish nation, he would have been as far from believing it as
he is now ; for he intimates, that it would be necessary that Christ
should appear again in every age, and every country, and to every
particular person ; and that all the miracles should be wrought over
again :* And even this, upon his principles, would not be sufficient ;
for he lets us know more than once, that in these cases we are not
to trust our own eyesight. He roundly asserteth, that " every mira
cle is an absurdity to common sense and understanding, and con
trary to all the attributes of God."f And that "pretended facts,
which are contrary to nature, can have no natural evidence ; and
that these facts cannot be admitted on any evidence, because they
in their own nature exclude all evidence, and allow of no possible
proof."*); This point he hath laboured for several pages together,
where he strongly asserteth (for I do not find that he bringeth any
thing that can be properly called a proof,) that miracles are impos
sible. And he had better have stuck entirely to this, since if" he
could but have proved it, he might have saved himself the trouble
of writing the rest of his book.
There is another extraordinary passage in this writer, which de
serves to have a particular notice taken of it. After having treated
the account given by St. John ofthe piercing of Christ's side with a
spear, and of which he himself was any eye-witness, as a fiction, for
no other reason but because the other evangelists do not mention it:
he insinuates, that if his side.was not thus pierced, he might not be
really dead when he was put into the sepulchre ; and then no wonder
that he rose again.§ Thus it comes out, that he doubteth even of
the death of Jesus, which neither Jews nor heathens ever doubted
of. Was there ever a more obstinate or unreasonable incredulity ?
He might as well doubt, whether there ever was such a person as
Jesus, or his apostles, or whether ever the Christian religion was pro
pagated in the world at all. And indeed if, as he affirms, the resur
rection of Christ was the most incredible story that could be told, and
the evidence that was given for it was the worst evidence that could
be given, \\ he might have argued more plausibly than he hath done
in most other cases, that it was impossible, as the case was circum
stanced, that such a silly story should ever make its way into the
world, either among Jews or Gentiles, considering the religion that
was founded upon it was absolutely contrary to their most prevailing
prejudices, and had no worldly advantages on its side, but all the
powers of the world engaged against it ; that therefore it is absurd
to suppose that Christianity made any progress at all in the first
ages, though there is no fact of which we have fuller evidence. And
then he would only have one step to advance farther, and which is
indeed the natural consequence of this, and that is, to doubt whether
* Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 62. f Ibid. p. 51, 52. t Ibid p 73 74
§ Ibid. p. 50. || Ibid. p. 67. '

Let. XII. "THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED.'' 15 1
there is any such thing as the religion of Jesus, or any persons in
the world that now profess it.
I shall conclude my remarks upon this writer with observing, that
the very variations among the evangelists, which he produceth as
so many contradictions, do really confirm the truth of the main
facts. What he seemeth to insist upon is, that every one of them
should tell all the same facts, in the same order and manner, and
with the same circumstances, neither more nor less ; and that no
one of them should mention any thing which is not related by all
the rest. And if they had done so, then no doubt this would have
been improved as a plain argument, that the whole was a concerted
fiction ; and that to derive a credit to it, it was pretended to have
been written and published by four different persons at different
times, whereas these four pretended historians were really but one
historian, or, if they were different, they only transcribed one ano
ther. But as the case now stands with the evangelists, there is a
harmony in the main facts, and in the substance of Christ's dis
courses ; and yet at the same time there is a considerable variety
in the order and manner -of their narration; such a variety as plainly
sheweth these accounts to have been written by different historians,
not copied from one another ; and that they did not write by con
cert, in which case they would have been more careful to shun all
appearance of contradiction. They write with an unaffected sim
plicity, and with a confidence of truth, as becometh those that were
fully assured of what they relate ; each writeth what he knew best,
or what he thought properest to take notice of; and yet notwith
standing the seeming variations in the order of their narration, and
that some facts, or circumstances of facts, are taken notice of by
some of them which are not mentioned by others, it will be found,
if narrowly examined, that there is no contradiction between them,
and that their accounts may be fairly reconciled. And it is to be
hoped, that this author's attempt to expose their authority, however
ill intended, will only tend to strengthen it ; since though his malice
and prejudice are very apparent, and though it is plain that he
came to examine their accounts, not with a calm, impartial, and
dispassionate temper of mind, but with a resolution, if possible, to
find out absurdities and contradictions in them ; yet he has not been
able to make good the charge. It turns out, that they are perfectly
consistent, and that their seeming contradictions admit of a just
reconciliation . - jji |
I have been carried farther than I at first intended in making
observations upon this pamphlet, which gives a true sample of the
deistical spirit, and may be regarded as one of the boldest and
openest attacks that was ever made upon that grand article of the
Christian faith, the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. And I
have been the larger and more particular in my remarks upon it,
both because of the importance of the subject, which concerneth
the very foundation of our holy religion, and because I thought it
might be of use to take this occasion to obviate some of the most
plausible objections that have been urged against it. And what

152 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
hath been here offered may equally serve to take off the force of
that part of Mr. Chubb's posthumous works which relates to the
same point, and which he hath very much laboured.
But though this letter may seem already to have exceeded its
due bounds, it will be necessary, according to the method I have
hitherto pursued, to take notice of the answers that were made to
this book. Dr. Samuel Chandler, who had on some former occa
sions appeared to great advantage in the defence of Christianity,
published on this occasion a valuable treatise, entitled, " The Wit
nesses of the Resurrection of Jesus re-examined, and their Testimony
proved entirely consistent," London, 1744. It is divided into eight
chapters. In the first, it is shewn, that the sufferings and glory of
Christ were foretold by the ancient prophets. In the second, that
Christ plainly foretold his own sufferings and death, and resurrec
tion to his own disciples. In the third, that he declared his death
and resurrection publicly to the Jews. In the fourth, it is proved,
that the Jewish rulers and Pharisees procured a guard to be set on
the sepulchre of Jesus; and a solid answer is returned to the
author's objections against it. The fifth chapter relateth to the
appearance of the angels to the soldiers ; the propriety of which is
vindicated against his exceptions. The sixth chapter is concerning
the appearances of the angels to the women after the resurrection.
The seventh treats of the several appearances of Christ to the
women and to his disciples ; and this author's charge of inconsis
tencies in the evangelic accounts is distinctly considered. In the
eighth chapter, Dr. Chandler concludes with summing up the evi
dence for the resurrection of Jesus, which he hath done with great
clearness and judgment.
About the same time there was another answer published by a
learned and ingenious but anonymous author, which is entitled,
" The Evidence of the Resurrection cleared, in Answer to ' The Re
surrection of Jesus considered.' " He follows the author of that
pamphlet closely, and shews, that he grossly misrepresents the ar
guments in the "Trial of the Witnesses," which he undertakes to
answer, and that he uses the evangelists still worse. The things
which we have mentioned, as taken notice of by Dr. Chandler, are
also considered by this writer; particularly it is clearly proved, that
Christ foretold his death and resurrection, both to his own disciples
and to the Jews ; and the author's reasoning and exceptions against
the story of setting the guard, and sealing the stone, are shown to
be vain and groundless. The accounts given by the evangelists of
the appearances of the angels to the women, and of Christ to them
and to the disciples, are distinctly considered; and the seeming
variations, which the author pretends to be so many contradictions,
are accounted for, though in a way somewhat different from Dr.
Chandler. The solutions of these difficulties proposed by each of
these learned writers, are very ingenious, and may suffice to obviate
the charge of contradictions the author hath brought against the
evangelists ; but some of them are judged not to be quite so clear and
natural, as those afterwards given by Mr. West. This anonymous

Let. XII. "THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED." 153
writer concludes with a distinct examination of what the author of
" The Resurrection of Jesus considered" had offered against miracles
in general. He hath clearly and judiciously exposed the weakness
and fallacy of those reasonings, whereby that author pretendeth to
prove, that miracles are impossible both in a physical and moral
sense ; that they are contrary to God's immutability ; that they are
perfectly needless, and answer no valuable end at all ; and that if they
were once necessary, they would be always necessary. Besides the
two answers above-mentioned, there was another then published,
which I have not seen, and of which therefore I cannot give a parti
cular account, though from the character I have heard of it, as well
as from the known abilities ofthe author, I make no doubt of its
being well executed ; it is entitled, " An Address to Deists, being
a Proof of Revealed Religion from Miracles and Prophecies, in
Answer to a Book entitled, ' The Resurrection of Jesus considered/
by John Jackson, Rector of Rossington, London, 8vo., 1774."
Some time after, there was another book published, which was
also occasioned by "The Resurrection of Jesus considered," and
which particularly engaged the attention of the public, both by its
own excellence, and because the author of it was a layman ; it
is entitled, " Observations on the History and Resurrection of Jesus
Christ," by Gilbert West, Esquire, London, 1747. He very justly
commends the two learned and ingenious answers above-mentioned,
as containing a solid confutation of many objections against Chris
tianity advanced by the author of "The Resurrection of Jesus con-
sided ;" but declares himself not to have been so fully satisfied with
the manner of their clearing the sacred writers from the contradic
tions charged upon them. This put him upon examining the Scrip
tures themselves, and comparing the several accounts of the evan
gelists with each other, which he hath done with great exactness ;
and the result of his enquiries was, that by carefully distinguishing
the different appearances and events recorded by the evangelists,
several of which had been hitherto confounded, he hath happily re
moved the difficulties and inconsistencies charged upon them, and
hath taken away the very foundation of the principal objections
that have been so often repeated almost from the beginning of
Christianity to this day. I shall not enter upon the particulars of
his scheme, which may be seen with great advantage in his book.
I shall only observe, that he hath not made use of strained and ar
bitrary suppositions, but such as seem clearly to arise from the ac
counts of the evangelists, carefully considered and compared.
By comparing the several parts of the history together, he hath
made it to appear, that the women came at different times to the
.sepulchre, and in different companies, and not all at once, as many
have supposed; that there were several distinct appearances of
angels, of which he reckons three, besides that to the Roman sol
diers, viz. to the other Mary and Salome, to Mary Magdalene, to
Joanna and others with her ; that these several facts were reported
to the apostles at different times, and by different persons ; that
there were two distinct appearances of Christ to the women ; one

154 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
of which was to Mary Magdalene alone, the other to the other Mary
and Salome ; that St. Peter was twice at the sepulchre, once with
St. John, after the first report by Mary Magdalene, concerning the
body's not being found in the sepulchre ; the second time after the
report made by Joanna, and the women with her, of the appearing
of the angels to them. He observes, that Christian writers, dazzled
by some few points of resemblance, have confounded these different
facts, and thereby given great advantage to the infidel; whereas,
the facts being rightly distinguished, all the objections against this
part of the gospel history, as contradictory and inconsistent, en
tirely vanish; and it appeareth, that the evangelists, instead of
clashing and disagreeing, mutually confirm, illustrate, and support
each other's evidence.
This learned gentleman hath made excellent and judicious re
flections upon the several incidents in the history of the resurrec
tion, and upon the older in which they happened, and in which
the several proofs of the resurrection were laid before the apostles,
He shows, that the discovery of it which was made to them was
wisely ordered to be gradual ; and that as they were to be the
chosen witnesses of the resurrection of Jesus, there was a great
propriety in the several steps that were taken to give them the
highest conviction of it. There is a train of witnesses, a succession
of miraculous events, mutually strengthening and illustrating
each other, equally and jointly concurring to prove one and the
same fact. And whereas their doubting and unbelief, spoken of by
the. evangelists, seem principally to have consisted in this, that
though they might believe that Christ had appeared to those who
declared they had seen him, yet they did not believe that he had
appeared to them with a real body, therefore, in condescension to
their infirmity, he gave them the fullest evidence of the reality of
his bodily appearance.
The proofs of Christ's resurrection laid before the apostles are
digested by Mr. West under four heads. 1. The testimony of those
that had seen him after he was risen. 2. The evidence of their own
senses. 3. The accomplishment of the words he had spoken to
them, while he was yet with them. 4. The fulfilling of the things
which were written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in
the Psalms, concerning him ; of which Mr. West hath given a
judicious summary.
Upon recapitulating the several particulars which constitute the
evidence of the resurrection, he concludes, that never was there any
fact more fully proved than the resurrection of Jesus Christ ; and
that those who were appointed to be the witnesses of it had every
kind of proof, that in the like circumstances the most scrupulous
could demand, or the most incredulous imagine.
Having considered the proofs of the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
as they were laid before the apostles, he proceeds to consider
some of the arguments that may induce us, at this distance of
time, to believe that Christ rose from the dead ; and these he re-
duceth to two principal heads : The testimony of the chosen wit-

Let. XII. " THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CONSIDERED." 155
nesses of the resurrection recorded in the Scriptures ; and the exis
tence of the Christian religion.
With regard to the former, he showeth, that the apostles and
evangelists had the two qualities necessary to establish the credit of
a witness, a perfect knowledge of the facts he gives testimony to,
and a fair unblemished character ; and that their testimony is trans
mitted down in writings either penned by themselves, or authorized
by their inspection and approbation. He offereth several conside
rations to show the genuineness of those writings, and takes notice
both of the internal marks of the veracity of the sacred writers,
observable in the Scriptures, and of the external proofs of their
veracity and inspiration ; especially the exact accomplishment of
the prophecies recorded in those writings. He instances, in those
relating to the different states of Jews and Gentiles, different not
only from each other, but from that in which both were at the
time when those prophecies were written. He observes, that there
are several particulars relating to the condition of the Jewish
nation, which were most expressly foretold ; as the destruction of
the city and temple of Jerusalem, and the signs preceding that
destruction; the miseries of the Jews before, at, and after the
famous siege of that city ; the general dispersion of that people,
the duration of their calamity, and their wonderful preservation
under it ; and finally, their restoration. And since the other parts
of these predictions have been exactly accomplished, there is great
reason to think, the last will be so too in the proper season.
He concludes the whole with the argument drawn from the pre
sent existence ofthe Christian religion; and showeth, that, without
supposing the truth of Christ's resurrection, there is no accounting
for the propagation and present existence of Christianity in so
many regions of the world. To set this in a proper light, he repre-
senteth, in an elegant and striking manner, the great difficulties
this religion had to struggle with at its first appearance, and the
inabilities of its first preachers, humanly speaking, to oppose and
overcome those obstacles. They had the superstition and prejudices
of the Jews to encounter with ; and at the same time, religion, cus
tom, law, policy, pride, interest, vice, and even philosophy, united
the heathen world against Christianity. Its opposers were possessed
of all the wisdom, power, and authority of the world ; the preachers
of it were weak and contemptible ; yet it triumphed over all oppo
sition. And this, as the case was circumstanced, afforded a mani
fest proof of a divine interposition, and of the truth of the extra
ordinary facts by which it was supported ; the principal of which
is the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Thus have I endeavoured to give some idea of this excellent per
formance, and have been the more particular in my account of it,
because a work of this kind, done by a lay-man, is apt to be more
taken notice of and received with less prejudice ; and for the same
reason, though it does not come so directly within my present
design, I hope you will indulge me in giving some account of a
short, but justly admired treatise, which appeared soon after, and

156 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XII.
was also written by a learned lay-man, Sir George Littleton. It is
entitled, " Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of St.
Paul, in a Letter to Gilbert West, Esquire, London, 1747." The
great advantage of this performance is, that the evidence for
Christianity is here drawn to one point of view, for the use of those
who will not attend to a long series of argument. The design is to
show, that the conversion and apostleship of St. Paul, alone con
sidered, is of itself a demonstration sufficient to prove Christianity
to be a divine revelation. This design is very happily executed.
He first considereth the account St. Paul himself hath given of the
miraculous manner of his conversion; and thence argueth, that it
must of necessity be, that the person attesting these things of him
self either was an impostor, who said what he knew to be false,
with an intent to deceive ; or he was an enthusiast, who by the
force of an over-heated imagination imposed upon himself; or he
was deceived by the fraud of others; or lastly, what he declared to
be the cause of his conversion, and to have happened in conse
quence of it, did all really happen ; and therefore the Christian
religion is a divine revelation. That he was not an impostor, he
proves, by showing, with admirable clearness and strength, that he
could have no rational motive to undertake such an imposture ; nor
could possibly have carried it on with any success by the means we
know he employed. With equal evidence he showeth that St. Paul
was not an enthusiast; that he had not those dispositions which are
essential ingredients in that character ; and that he could not possi
bly have imposed on himself by any power of enthusiasm, either
with regard to the miracle that caused his conversion, or to the con
sequential effects of it, or to some other circumstances which he
bears testimony to in his Epistles ; especially the miracles wrought
by him, and the extraordinary gifts conferred upon him, and upon
the Christian converts to whom he wrote. To suppose all this to
have been only owing to the strength of his own imagination, when
there was in reality no such thing at all, is to suppose him to have
been all this time quite out of his senses ; and then it is absolutely
impossible to account, how such a distempered enthusiast and mad
man could make such a progress, as we know he did, in converting
the Gentile world. He next proceeds to show, that St. Paul was
not deceived by the fraud of* others ; if the disciples of Christ
could have conceived so strange a thought as that of turning his
persecutor into his apostle, they could not possibly have effected it
in the manner in which it was effected, with the extraordinary con
sequences that followed upon it. It is evident, then, that what he
said of himself could not be imputed to the deceit of others, no
more than to wilful imposture, or enthusiasm; and then it followeth,
that what he relateth to have been the cause of his conversion, and
to have happened in consequence of it, did all really happen, and
therefore the Christian religion is a divine revelation. He concludeth
with some good observations to show, that the mysteries of the
Christian religion do not furnish any just reason for rejecting the
strong and convincing evidence with which it is attended ; that

Let. XIII. mr chubb's posthumous works. 157
there are several incomprehensible difficulties in deism itself ; such
as those relating to the origin of moral evil, the reconciling the pre
science of God with the free-will of man, which Mr. Locke owns
he could not do, though he acknowledged both, the creation of the
world in time, or the eternal production of it. And yet no wise
man, because of these difficulties, would deny the being, the attri
butes, or the providence of God.
But it is time to conclude this long epistle ; and here I intended,
as you know, to have closed my accounts of the deistical wri
ters. But as you insist upon it, that, in order to complete this
design, it will be necessary to take a more particular notice than I
have done of Mr. Chubb's Posthumous Works, this will engage
me to continue my correspondence on this head for some time
longer.

LETTER XIII.

An Account of Mr. Chubb's Posthumous Works ; his specious Professions, and the
advantageous Character he gives of his own Writings — He doth not allow a particu
lar Providence, or that Prayer to God is a Duty— His Uncertainty and Inconsis
tency with Respect to a future State of Existence, and a future Judgment — He
absolutely rejects the Jewish Revelation — His Objections against it briefly obviated
— He expresses a good Opinion of Mahometanism, and will not allow that it was
propagated by the Sword — He seems to acknowledge Christ's divine Mission, and
sometimes gives a favourable Account of Christianity ; but it is shown, that he hath
done all he can to weaken and expose it, and to subvert its Credit and divine Autho
rity. Sir,
Among the deistical writers of this present age, Mr. Chubb
made no inconsiderable figure. He was, though not a man of
learning, regarded by many as a person of strong natural parts and
acuteness, and who had a clear manner of expression. He was the
author of a great number of tracts, in some of which he put on the
appearance of a friend to Christianity; though it was no difficult
matter to discern that his true intention was to betray it. One of
the most remarkable of these tracts was his " True Gospel of Jesus
Christ asserted ;" in which, under pretence of asserting the gospel
of Christ in its genuine simplicity, he really endeavoured to subvert
and expose it. This was answered by Mr. Joseph Hallet, in a
valuable tract, entitled, " The consistent Christian ; being a Confu
tation of the errors advanced in Mr. Chubb's Book, entitled, ' The
true Gospel of Jesus Christ asserted, relating to the Necessity of
Faith, the Nature of the Gospel, the Inspiration of the Apostles,
&c.' with Remarks on his Dissertation on Providence, 8vo. 1738."
Another noted tract of Mr. Chubb's was, his " Discourse on Mira
cles, in which he proposed to give a representation of the various

158 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIII.
reasonings that relate to the subject of miracles. But it is manifest,
that his intention was not to clear, but to perplex the subject ; and
to show, that the proof from miracles is not at all to be depended
upon. To this there was a solid and full answer returned by Mr. Abra
ham Le Moine, which was published at London, 8vo, 1747. Several
of Mr. Chubb's tracts were also answered by Mr. Caleb Fleming;
but his answers I have not seen. What I propose to consider are
those that are called his " Posthumous Works," some of which were
printed in his own life-time, and the rest carefully corrected and
prepared by himself for the press, and published after his death, in
two volumes, 8vo, London, 1748. The first volume begins with a
short tract, entitled, " Remarks on the Scriptures." But the far
greater part of this volume, and the entire second volume, is taken
up with what is called " The Author's Farewell to his Readers,
comprehending a variety of Tracts on the most important subjects
of religion." It is divided into eleven large sections; and the prin
cipal design he appears to have had in view is, to destroy, as far as
in him lay, the credit and authority of the Christian revelation. I
know of no answer that has been published to this book, and there
fore shall be more particular in my remarks upon it, to obviate in
some measure the mischief it is fitted to produce.
It is plain, from several hints which he hath given us, that he
looked upon himself to be a writer of no small importance. He
declares, that he hath treated the several subjects he has " discussed
with plainness and freedom, and of course must have ministered to
the pleasure of the intelligent part of mankind, whether they
approved his sentiments or not."* He begins the first section of
what he calls his Farewell lo his Readers, with expressing his hope,
that his " correspondence with them by writing for many years past,
has been not altogether useless nor unacceptable to them."f And
in the last section of his Farewell, which he calls his Conclusion, he
expresseth himself as one that in these his last writings, was leaving
a very valuable legacy to the world. I know few authors, who have
taken leave of their readers with a greater air of solemnity than he
has done. He calls God to witness to the goodness of his inten
tions ; and declares, that in what he has offered to the world, he
has " appealed to the understanding, and not to the passions of
men :"% That with sincerity and truth he can say, he has had a real
concern and regard to the present well-being of his fellow-creatures,
as well as to their future happiness :" And that as he was " in the
decline of life, and perhaps not far from the conclusion of it, and
being in the full exercise of his intellectual faculties, which are not
in the least clouded or impaired, he chose to take his leave of the
world as a writer, hoping, that what he has offered to public consi
deration has had, and may have, some good effect upon the minds
and lives of his readers."§ And he concludes the whole with again
assuring his readers, that he has laid before them, in the plainest
* Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 64, 65. t Ibid. p. 97. i Ibid. vol. ii. p. 354, 355.
§ Ibid. vol. ii. p. 357, 359, 361.

Let. XIII. mr. chubb's tosthumous works. 159
manner he was able, both in this discourse, and in what he had
before published to the world, those truths which he thought to be
of the highest importance. And so, saith he, " I bid you farewell,
hoping to be a sharer with you of the divine favour, in that peaceful
and happy state, which God hath prepared for the virtuous and
faithful, in some other future world."
Who that considers these solemn expressions, would be apt to
suspect, that this very author, in these his farewell discourses, has
not only used his utmost efforts to expose Christianity and the holy
Scriptures, but has endeavoured to weaken some of the most impor
tant principles of natural religion ?
He had, in one of his tracts formerly published, shown himself
to be no friend to the doctrine of a particular providence ; and there
are several passages in his " Posthumous Works," which look that
way. He plainly intimates, that he looks upon God as having-
nothing now to do with the good or evil that is done among man
kind ;* and that men's natural abilities or endowments of body or
mind, their fortunes, situation in the world, and other circumstances
or advantages by which one man is distinguished from another, are
things that entirely depend upon second causes, and in which pro
vidence does not interpose at all.-f- And when he endeavours to
show, that no proof can be brought for a future state from the pre
sent unequal distribution of things, his argument amounteth in
effect to this, that providence hath nothing to do with these present
inequalities, nor concerneth itself with some men's being in a pros
perous condition or circumstances, and others in a calamitous or
suffering state.*): He evidently supposes all along, that God doth
not interpose in any thing where second causes are concerned :§ So
that all agency of divine providence in disposing, governing, and
overruling second causes, in which so much of the wisdom of God's
providential administrations doth consist, is, upon his scheme, abso
lutely excluded.
Agreeably to this, he discardeth all hope or expectation of divine
assistance in the practice of that which is good ; though he owns, that
something of this kind hath been generally believed in all religion?.
This is the design of a considerable part of the first section of his
" Farewell to his Readers ;"|| which would deserve to be particularly
examined, if this were a proper place for it. I shall only observe,
that what he seems to lay a principal stress upon, to set aside the
notion of divine influences or assistances, is, that we have no way of
certainly distinguishing them from the operations of our own minds ;
whereas, supposing this to be the case, all that it would prove is, not
that there are no gracious assistances or influences communicated at
all, but that they are ordinarily communicated in a way perfectly
agreeable to the just order of our faculties, and without putting any
unnatural constraint upon them.
* Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 127. f Ibid. p. 225. * Ibid. vol. i. p. 394, 395.
$ See concerning a particular providence, Woolaston's Religion of Nature deline
ated, p. 98, and seq. I| Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 114, and seq.

160 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIII
And as he allows no particular interposition of divine providence
in human affairs, it is not to be wondered at, that he has done what
he can to show, that prayer to God is no part of natural religion.*
He supposes it as a thing certain, that God doth not fulfil our
requests by granting what we pray for, since things will go on in
their natural course, whether we pray to God or not. He owns in
deed, that prayer, considered as a positive institution, may be of use,
by introducing proper refections, and thereby proper affections and
actions; and provided it be made use of only for this purpose, with
out expecting to obtain any thing from God in consequence of it,
he thinks it cannot be said to be a mocking of God ; but yet he ap
prehends that even in this case, there is still an impropriety in it,
and puts the question, whether such an impropriety should be a
bar to prayer, or whether it be displeasing to God; and he plainly
intimates, that in his opinion it is so.f I need not take particular
notice of the objections he hath urged against the duty of prayer,
which have been often sufficiently obviated ;£• but I think it is evi
dent, that there is little room left, upon this author's scheme, for
what hath been hitherto looked upon by the wisest and best of men
to be a principal part of true piety, or of the duty we owe to God,
viz. a constant religious dependence upon his wise and good provi
dence, a thankful sense of his goodness, and gratitude to him for the
benefits we receive, a patient submission and resignation to his will
under afflictions, an ingenuous trust and affiance in him, and a look
ing up to him for his gracious assistances to help our sincere en
deavours. The doctrines concerning the immortality of the soul, and a future
state of retributions, are justly regarded as important parts of
natural religion, and have been acknowledged to be so by some of
the deists themselves. Mr. Blount, in a letter to the right honour
able and most ingenious Strephon, in the Oracles of Reason, says,
"There are many arguments from reason and philosophy to prove
the immortality of the soul, together with its rewards and punish
ments ; but that there is no argument of greater weight with him,
than the absolute necessity and convenience that it should be so, as
well to complete the justice of God, as to perfect the happiness of
man, not only in this world, but in that which is to come.'' Another
deistical writer observes,^ that " to say, man's soul dies with the
body is a desperate conclusion, which saps the foundation of human
happiness. "§ And one would think, by some passages in Mr.
Chubb's book, that he was of the same opinion. He begins the first
section of his Farewell with assuring his readers, that what he hath
principally aimed at in all his writings, has been both to evince, and
to impress deeply upon their minds, a just sense of those truths, which
are of the highest concern to them ; and one of those truths which
he there expressly mentions is this, " that God will reward or punish
* Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 287, {fee. f Ibid. p. 283, 284.
\ Religion of Nature delineated, p. 125, 126. and Benson's tract On the End and
Design of Prayer. § Letter to the Deists, p 25, cited by Halyburton.

L3t. XIII. MR. CHUBB'S POSTHUMOUS WORKS. 1()1
men in another world, according as they have by their good or bad
behaviour, rendered themselves the proper objects of cither in this."*
He repeats this again in very strong expressions at the end of his
tenth section, where he proposes to set before the reader, the sum
total, as he expresseth it, of his principles ;f and again, in what he
calls his conclusion, he speaks of God's calling our species to an ac
count for their practice and behaviour, "at which tribunal," saith
he, "he will most certainly deal with me, and the rest of mankind,
injustice and equity, according to the truth and reality of our re
spective cases." And in the very last words of his " Farewell to his
Readers," which I cited before, he declares his hope " to be a sharer
with them of the divine favour in that peaceful and happy state,
which God hath prepared for the virtuous and faithful, in some
other future world.":]:
And yet, notwithstanding these express and repeated declarations
concerning a future state of existence, and a future judgment and
retribution, he hath taken pains to unsettle the minds of men in
these important points.
In his fourth section, in which he professedly enquireth concern
ing a future state of existence to men, he representeth it as abso"
lutely doubtful, whether the soul be material or immaterial ; whether
it be distinct from the body; and, if it be, whether it is equally
perishable as the body, and shall die with it, or shall subsist after the
dissolution of the body. These are points which, he says, he can
not possibly determine, because he has nothing to ground such de
termination upon ; and at the same time he declareth, that " if tho
soul be perishable with the body, there can surely be no place for
argument with regard to a future state of existence to men, or a
future retribution, because when the human frame is once dissolved
by death, then man ceases to be, and is no more."§ In'what follows,
he declares himself quite unsatisfied with the arguments which are
brought to prove, that the soul is not material, or that matter is not
capable of intelligence ; and though he doth not take upon him ex
pressly to determine that point, it is easy to see that he inclineth
most to the materialists ;|| and after having declared, that the philo
sophical arguments and reasonings on this head are too abstract and
subtle for him to understand, and that therefore he cannot form any
judgment about them, nor draw any conclusion from them, he adds,
that divine revelation does not afford a proper ground of certainty
with respect to man's future existence, because we cannot come to
any certainty with regard to the divine original of any external reve
lation.^] He finds fault with St. Paul for saying, that life ami im
mortality are brought to light by the gospel, and will not allow that
the resurrection of Christ, supposing it true, though he takes a great
deal of pains to show that it is not so, proves either the possibility
or certainty of a resurrection and a future state.*"* Thus it appears,
that, in this section, where he professedly treateth of a future state
* Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 97, 99. t Ibid. vol. ii. p. 3-18, 349.
t Ibid. p. 355. § Ibid. vol. i. p. 312, 313. || Ibid, p 317, 318, 124, 326.
U Ibid. p. 327, 328. " * Ibid. p. 333, and seq.
M

162 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIII.
of existence to men, he does all he can to render it absolutely un
certain, and to show that no proof can be given of it, either from
reason or revelation ; and yet, that he may make a show of saying
something, he concludes this section with observing, that from man's
being an accountable creature, there arises a probability, that there
will be a future state of existence to men ; the farther consideration
of which he reserves for the following section, which is concerning a
future judgment and retribution.
In this therefore, which is his fifth section, the reader might per
haps expect some determination of this point ; and yet, though this
is a pretty long section, the proper subject of which is the future
judgment, it is managed in such a manner, as to leave the reader at
an uncertainty about it, and as much at a loss as before. He begins
indeed with observing, that " man, by his faculties and endowments,
is an accountable creature, accountable for his behaviour to all whom
it may concern, namely, to the intelligent world, and also to the
Deity, who is the most perfect intelligence."* But he absolutely
discards the proof that is drawn from the present unequal distribu
tions of divine providence. This argument he states very unfairly,
and endeavours to place it in a ridiculous light. He compares
men's different conditions here on earth to that of horses, some of
whom meet with bad masters, and others happen to have good ones ;
and pretends, the argument would equally conclude for a future
retribution with regard to all other animals, as it does for the species
of mankind ;f but, admitting there will be a future retribution, he
thinks it may be doubted, whether it shall be universally extended
to all our species. He plainly intimates, that, in his opinion, those
who die in their youth will not be called into judgment, nor those
who act a very low part in life ; and he seems to think, that those
only shall be called to an account whose lives have been of much
greater consequence to the world, and who have been greatly sub
servient to the public good, or hurt of mankind :% So that, accord
ing to his representation of the case, supposing there were to be a
future judgment and retribution, it is what the generality of mankind
would have little concern in. And as, upon his scheme, there are
but few who shall be called to an account, so it is but for some par
ticular actions that they shall be accountable. He observes, that no
man ever intended to do dishonour to God, or to be injurious to him,
however foolishly they may have used the names or terms by which
the Deity is characterized; and that therefore there will be no en
quiry at the last judgment about such offences as these; i. e. about
blasphemies against God. The only offence man can be guilty
of against God is, he thinks, the want of a just sense of his kindness
and beneficence, and the not making a public profession of gratitude
to him; but whether this will make a part of the grand inquest, he
declares himself certainly unable to judge ; and he plainly insinuates,
that in his opinion it will not ; since " among men it has been looked
upon to be a mark of greatness of soul, rather to despise and over-
» Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 387. t Ibid. p. 395. { Ibid. p. 400.

Let. XIII. MR. chubb's TOSTHUMOUS WORKS. 163
look such ingratitude, than to show any resentment of it."* The
only thing, therefore, for which he supposes men shall be ac
countable, is for the injuries or benefits they do to one another;
and even as to these, he seems not to allow, that the good or evil
particular persons do to one another, will come into judgment, but
only " the good or bad part men act, by voluntarily contributing to
the good or hurt of the commonweal."f He afterwards setteth him
self to show, that things would be as well ordered in the world with
out the supposition and expectation of a future judgment, as with
it; that men's duties and obligations would still be the same, and so
would the motives to adhere to virtue, and to avoid vice ; nor is the
belief of it of any great advantage to society :J To all which it may
be added, that here again, in treating concerning a future judgment,
he takes care to repeat what he had said in the foregoing section,
viz. that if the soul be perishable, and is dissolved with the body,
then this world seems to be man's all, and that on such a supposi
tion, a resurrection or restoration, and a future retribution, seem to
be excluded ; and at the same time he declareth, that whether the
soul perisheth with the body or not, is a thing which admitteth of
no proof.§ So that, upon the whole, he really leaveth it as a matter
quite uncertain, whether there shall be a future judgment or not ;
and yet, when he has a mind to make a boast of the good tendency
of his principles, he is for making a merit of it, that it is one of
those important truths, which he has taken pains to inculcate on the
minds of men.
I have insisted the longer upon these things, that I may unmask
the fair pretences of this author, who sets up for an uncommon
degree of openness and candour. His admirers may hence see how
consistent he is, and how far his professions are to be depended on.
I shall now consider what he hath offered in this his solemn
Farewell to his Readers, with regard to revealed religion.
As to revelation in general, he seems to make a very fair conces
sion. "When men (saith he) are sunk into gross ignorance and
error, and are greatly vitiated in their affections and actions, then
God may, for any reason I can see to the contrary, kindly interpose,
by a special application of his-power and providence, and reveal to
men such useful truths as otherwise they might be ignorant of, or
might not attend to; and also lay before them such rules of life as
they ought to walk by ; and likewise press their obedience with
proper motives, and thereby lead them to repentance and reforma-
tion."|| But, as he was afraid that in this he had made too large a
concession, he adds, " but then that it is so, and when it is so, will
in the nature of the thing be matter of doubt and disputation."
And in his sixth section, where he treateth expressly of revelation,
he asserteth, that, in what way soever God communicateth know
ledge to men, "it must be a matter of uncertainty, whether the
revelation be divine or not, because we have no rule to judge, or from
* Posthumous Works, vol. i. p 391, 392. t Ibid. p. 395, 397.
i Ibid. p. 401, 410. § Ibid. p. .399. || ibid. p. 292, 293.
*U 2

164 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIII
which we can with certainty distinguish divine revelation from delu
sion ;" and that if this be the case with those who receive the reve
lation at first hand, then surely it must be uncertain to those who
receive it from them.* Thus, though he seems to grant that God
may on some occasions kindly interpose by a special application qf
his power and providence, to reveal to men useful truths, and to direct
and excite them to their duty ; yet he will not allow that he can
communicate the knowledge of his will in such a way, as to give
them a sufficient satisfying assurance that it is a divine revelation,
and came from him. This is a most presumptuous and unreasonable
limitation ofthe divine power and wisdom, and is in effect the same
thing as to say, that he cannot communicate any revelation of his
will to mankind at all; even though his goodness should dispose
him to do so, and their circumstances should require it. Dr. Tindal
had in effect said the same thing with our author ; and what he
offered to this purpose was fully considered and obviated in the
answers that were made to him.f
From the question concerning revelation in general, Mr. Chubb
proceeds, in his sixth section, to make some observations on the Jew
ish, Mahometan, and Christian revelation in particular.
The first of these he absolutely rejecteth. He pretends, that
God's moral character is sullied by it ; that St. Peter and St. Paul
condemn it as unworthy ofthe Deity ; that it had a vast multipli
city of rites and ceremonies, which he supposes to be perfectly ar
bitrary, and instituted without any reason at all ; that it represents
God as acting partially, in choosing the Jewish nation to be a pecu
liar people ; and that, in that constitution, a twelfth part of the
people lived idly on the labour of the rest ; that the appearances of
God to the patriarchs, to Moses, &c. could only belong to a local
circumscribed deity; and that the God of Israel was not the
Supreme Being, but only some tutelar subordinate god, consonant
to the pagan idolatry; and that his conduct in ordering the Israelites
to extirpate the Canaanites was inconsistent with the moral cha
racter ofthe Deity. This is tbe sum of what he urges, for several
pages together in his sixth section, with regard to the Jewish reve
lation. J And he had insisted upon the same things before at greater
length in his second section,§ where he also condemns the punish
ing idolatry with death under the Jewish constitution as unjust,
and as tending to justify persecution for conscience' sake. These,
and other objections to the same purpose, had been urged with
great vivacity by Dr. Morgan, in his " Moral Philosopher," and
were fully considered and obviated in the first and second volumes
of "The divine Authority ofthe Old and. New Testament asserted."
Mr. Chubb has thought fit to repeat the objections,, without giving
any new strength to them that I can find, or taking off the force of
the answers which had been returned.
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 5.
t Conybeare's Defence of Revealed Religion, chap. vii. Answer to Christianity ns
old as the Creation, vol. ii. chap. 1.
t Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 19—29. § Ibid. vol. i. p. 189—231.

Let. XIII. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 165
Referring therefore to what I have more largely insisted upon in
the books now mentioned, I shall at present only observe in brief,
that the idea given of God in the Jewish Scriptures, of his greatness
and majesty, of his power and wisdom, of his justice, goodness, and
purity, and of his universal presence and dominion, is the noblest
that can be conceived by the human mind, and the most fitted to
produce holy affections and dispositions towards him : That nothing
can be more evident, than that the God proposed to the Jews, as
the proper object of their worship, is the one living and true God,
the sovereign Lord of the universe, who created all things by his
power, who preserveth and governeth all things by his providence :
That as to the divine appearances mentioned in the Old Testament,
no argument can be brought to prove, that the sovereign Lord of
the universe may not see fit on some occasions to exhibit himself
by a visible external glory and splendour, in order to strike men
with a more strong and lively sense of his immediate presence ; or
that he may not in that case make use of a glorious subordinate
being or beings of an order superior to man ; and some such beings
have been acknowledged by the best and wisest men in all ages, in
delivering messages' in his name : That it is no way inconsistent
with God's universal care and providence towards mankind, to
make extraordinary discoveries of his will to particular persons, or
to a people, or to give them wise and excellent laws, and establish
a constitution among them, the fundamental principle of which is
the acknowledgment and adoration of the one living and true God,
in opposition to all idolatry. Nor is there the least shadow of reason
to prove, that he could not in such a case make the observance of
this the principal condition on which the national privileges and
benefits he thought fit to confer upon that people should be sus
pended ; in which case, whosoever was guilty of idolatry under that
peculiar constitution, was justly obnoxious to the penalties inflicted
upon the enemies and subverters of the community. That as to
God's choosing the people of Israel, they not only proceeded from
ancestors, eminent for piety and virtue, and pure adorers of the
Deity, but may be justly supposed, at the time of God's erecting
that sacred polity among them, to have been, notwithstanding ail
their faults, freer from idolatry and other vices than any of the
neighbouring nations. They seem to have been much better than
the people of Egypt, from whence they were delivered ; or than the
Canaanites, whose land was given them, and who appear to have
been a most wicked and abandoned race of men, universally guilty,
not only ofthe grossest idolatries, but of the most monstrous vices
and abominations of all kinds. And if God saw fit on that occasion
to order them to be extirpated, as a monument to all ages of his just
detestation of such crimes and vices, this cannot be proved to be
inconsistent with the character of the wise and righteous governor
ofthe world ; though our author represents this as a millstone that
hangs at the neck of the Mosaic dispensation. With respect to the
laws that were given to the people of Israel, those of a moral nature,
of which there is a comprehensive summary in the Ten Command-

106 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIII.
ments, are unquestionably holy and excellent ; the judicial laws are
wise and equitable ; and the positive precepts, though many and
various, wisely suited to the state and circumstances of that time
and people. The reasons of several of them may be asssigned even
at this distance ; and that there were very proper reasons for the
rest may be justly supposed. And St. Peter and St. Paul, even
when they represent them as burdensome, plainly show, that they
look upon them to have been originally instituted for" wise ends,
though no longer to be observed, when a more perfect dispensation
was introduced, to which they were designed to be subservient.
The appointing the Priests and Levites, and distributing them
among the other tribes, is so far from being a just objection against
that constitution, that it may be justly regarded as a wise and ex
cellent institution, well fitted for preserving and spreading the
knowledge of religion, and the law among the people, and instruct
ing them' in their duty ; and the provision made for them was justly
due, both as a reward for their service, and as an equivalent for
their not having had a distinct portion and share of the land as
signed them with the other tribes. Finally, the Mosaic constitution
was attended at its first establishment with the most glorious and
amazing demonstrations of a divine power and majesty, and which
plainly shewed an extraordinary divine interposition ; and these
facts were done not in secret, but in the most open public manner,
of which the whole nation were witnesses ; and the memory of them
constantly preserved, both by solemn public memorials, and in au
thentic records, which have all the characters of genuine antiquity,
simplicity, and a sincere regard to truth, and have been always re
garded by the whole nation with the profoundest veneration. Nor
is there any just foundation for the author's pretence, that the sa
cred history was entirely in the hands of the priests, or that from
Solomon's time to the Babylonish captivity none had access to it
but the high-priest, and that in that captivity their law was entirely
destroyed and lost ;* a supposition that has been frequently re
peated by the deistical writers, though the absurdity of it has been
fully exposed.
Though Mr. Chubb hath absolutely rejected the Jewish revela
tion, he speaks very favourably of that of Mahomet, t Among
other instances of his regard to it, he takes upon him to pronounce,
that " it cannot surely be true, that the great prevalence of Maho-
metanism was owing to its being propagated by the sword ; because
it must have prevailed to a very great degree before the sword could
have been drawn in its favour." And yet it is a thing capable of
the clearest proof, that Mahometanism from its first appearance was
propagated by the sword. This was what Mahomet himself most
expressly required and recommended, and he accordingly spread his
religion considerably by force of arms in his life-time; and imme
diately after his death, the chief apostles of Mahometanism were
captains and mighty generals, who spread their conquests far and
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 26, 27. t Ibid. p. 30, &c.

Let. XIII. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 167
wide. Our author concludes his account of Mahometanism with
saying, "whether the Mahometan revelation be of a divine original,
or not, there seems to be a plausible pretence, arising from the cir
cumstances of things, for stamping a divine character upon it."*"
As to the Christian revelation, it is evident he has done all in his
power to expose it ; and yet he seems plainly to acknowledge
Christ's divine mission. "That there was such a person as Jesus
Christ, and that he, in the main, did and taught as is recorded of
him, appears (saith he) to be probable, because it is improbable
that Christianity should take place in the way and to the degree it
did, or at least that we are told it did, supposing the history of
Christ's life and ministry to be a fiction." He adds, that " if such
power attended Jesus Christ in the exercise of his ministry, as the
history sets forth, then seeing his ministry and the power that at
tended it seems, at least in general, to have terminated in the public
good, it is more likely that God was the primary agent in the exer
cise of that power, than any other invisible being. And then it is
probable, that Jesus Christ, upon whose will the immediate exercise
of that power depended, would not use that power to impose upon
and mislead mankind to their hurt, seeing that power appears to
have been well directed and applied in other respects, and seeing he
was accountable to his principal for the abuse of it." He adds —
*' from these premises, or from this general view of the case, I think
this conclusion follows, viz. it is probable Christ's mission was
divine; at least it appears so to me from the light or information I
have received concerning it."f And as he seems here to acknow
ledge Christ's mission to be divine, so he undertakes to give an
account what was the subject of his mission, or what it was that he
was sent to publish to the world. This he reduceth to three main
principles, for which he referreth to a tract he had formerly pub
lished, entitled, "The true Gospel of Christ," viz. 1. That nothing
but a conformity of mind and life to the eternal rule of righteousness
will render men acceptable to God. 2. That when men have de
viated from that rule, nothing but a thorough repentance and re
formation will render them the proper objects of God's mercy.
And lastly, that God will judge the world in righteousness, and will
render to every man according as his works shall be. He adds, that
these propositions seem to him to contain the sum and substance of
Christ's ministry ; and as they are altogether worthy of the Deity,
so, he thinks, they may with propriety and truth be called, the
Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is what he declares in his second
volume, p. 82,. 83 ; and he had said the same thing before, vol. i.
p. 98, 99, where he observes, that " these things contain the sub
stance of what Christ was in a special manner sent of God to ac
quaint the world with." And again he declares, that by Chris
tianity he means, " that revelation of God's will which Christ was
in a special and particular manner sent to acquaint the world with ;
and as far as the writings of the apostles are consonant with it, they
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 40. t Ibid. p. 41— 43, compared with p. 394—396.

168 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIII.
come under the denomination of Christianity :"* where he seems
fairly to own, that Christ was sent in a particular and special man
ner to acquaint the world with a revelation of God's will. He also
acknowledges, that " the writings of the apostles contain excellent
cautions, advices, and instructions, which serve for the right con
ducting our affections and actions : That the Christian revelation,
one would hope, was kindly intended to guide men's understandings
into the knowledge of those truths, in which their highest interest
is concerned, and to engage them to be justly affected therewith,
and act accordingly ; and that it naturally tends to reform the vices,
and rightly to direct the affections and behaviour of men." And
finally, " that it may perhaps be a piece of justice due to Chris
tianity (could it be certainly determined what it is, and could it be
separated from every thing that hath been blended with it), to ac
knowledge that it yields a much clearer light, and is a more safe
guide to mankind, than any other traditionary religion, as being
better adapted to improve and perfect human nature."-]-
These things would naturally lead us to think, that he had a
friendly design towards Christianity and the holy Scriptures. But,
notwithstanding all these specious professions, whosoever reads
what he calls his "Farewell to his Readers," with ever so little
attention, must be convinced, that the principal design of it was
to subvert the credit and divine authority of the Christian reve
lation. Though he declares, that he looks upon it to be probable that
Christ's mission was divine, yet he has taken great pains to show,
that the proofs which are brought for it are not at all to be depended
upon. Having observed, that the two principal arguments or evi
dences usually insisted on to prove the divine original of the Chris
tian revelation are prophecy and miracles, he uses his utmost efforts
to invalidate both these : two long sections of his " Farewell to his
Readers" are employed this way, viz. the seventh and eighth: and
as to the resurrection of Christ, he labours for nearly fifty pages
together to represent it as an absurd and incredible thing."];
In his ninth section, in which he proposes to treat ofthe personal
character of Jesus Christ, he does all he can to expose the account
given of his being born of a virgin, as a fiction. § And whereas Christ
is represented as having been perfect, and without sin, he will have
it to be understood, not that he was absolutely sinless, but that no
public or gross miscarriages could be charged upon him.|| The
highest character he seems willing to allow him is, that he was the
" founder ofthe Christian sect,"^] or, as he elsewhere expresseth it,
that he " collected a body of disciples, and laid a foundation for a
new sect among the Jews;** for he supposes, that, according to
Jesus's original intention, Christianity was only designed to be a
supplement to Judaism, and that the Mosaical constitution was to
continue always in full force, and that his gospel was to be preached
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 316. t Ibid. p. 297, 344,347,370.
j Ibid. vol. i. p. 333, &c. § Ibid. vol. ii. p.2C8— 285. || Ibid. vol. ii. p. 269.
j_ II Ibid. vol. i. p. 50. ** Ibid. vol. ii. p. 395.

Let. XIII. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 100
only to the Jews in all nations, and not to the Gentiles at all,
though the apostles afterwards deviated from his plan.* He owns
indeed, that he advanced some proper precepts of his own, in which
he seemed to correct the constitutions of Moses; but he endeavours
to show, that in these he made alterations for the worse, and that
those precepts by which he is thought to have been most distin
guished, instead of being more excellent than those of other teachers
and law-givers, are really less excellent, and less perfect; and, if
taken in their proper and natural sense, are contrary to the reason
of things, and inconsistent with the welfare and happiness of man
kind. This is the principal design he appears to have had in view,
in what he calls. " Remarks on the Scriptures ;" which is the first
tract in his " Posthumous Works."
In some of the passages above cited, he seems to give a favour
able account of Christianity, and proceeds so far as to specify what
the true gospel of Christ is, and what that message is, which he
allows Christ was sent of God to deliver to the world ; yet in plain
contradiction to himself, he asserts in several parts of his book, that
it is utterly uncertain what message Christ was sent to publish to
the world, or wherein true Christianity doth consist. This is what
he particularly endeavoureth to show in his sixth section.-]- And in
that very passage before cited, where he pretends that it is a piece
of justice due to Christianity, to acknowledge, that it yields a much
clearer light, and is a more' safe guide than any other traditionary
religion, he at the same time insinuates, that it cannot be defined or
determined what Christianity is.% He asserts, that " it has been so
loosely and indeterminately delivered to the world, that nothing but
contention and confusion has attended it from its first promulgation
to this time ; and that the books of the New Testament have been
so far from being a remedy to this evil, that they have contributed
to it."§ Accordingly, he expressly calls the New Testament, that
fountain of confusion and contradiction.^ And whereas Mr. Chilling
worth had said, that the Bible is the religion of Protestants, Mr.
Chubb thinks, that " unless it be so interpreted as to be made con
formable to the great rule of right and wrong, which, he says, in
some instances cannot be done without force and violence, it must
be an unsafe guide to mankind ;"^[ and that to appeal to Scripture
" would be a certain way to perplexity and dissatisfaction, but not
to find out the truth." ** And before this he had said, that " the
Bible has been the grand source of heresies and schisms ; and that
it exhibits doctrines seemingly the most opposite, some of which are
greatly dishonourable to God, others the most injurious to men."-]-]-
I think it is not easy to give a worse idea of the Scriptures than this
author has done. If his account of them be a just one, it must be
very dangerous to read them ; and it would be a kindness to keep
th 3m out ofthe hands of the people ; for he seems directly to charge
all this upon the Scriptures themselves, and not upon the fault of
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 85, 86. 168. t Ibid. p. 72—122. t Ibid. p. 370.
$ Ibid. p. 57. 31.3. || Ibid. p. 246, 247. If Ibid. p. 326. ** Ibid. p. 335.
tf Ibid. vol. i. p. 0. 57.

170 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIII.
those that pervert and abuse them. And yet this very consistent
writer declares against locking up the Bible from the people, and that
" this is most unsafe, as it has put the people so far under the
power of the clergy, as to involve tnem in the most gross ignorance
and superstition, and the most absolute slavery both in civil and
religious matters."* Is not this plainly to acknowledge, that the
being well acquainted with the holy Scriptures is one of the best
preservatives against ignorance, priestcraft, and superstition, and a
great advantage and security to truth and liberty? And what then
must we think of the attempt made by him and other deistical
writers to expose and. vilify the holy Scriptures, and destroy all vene
ration for them in the minds of men, which, if believed, must in
duce an absolute neglect, and even contempt, of those sacred writ
ings? Ought not this, by his own acknowledgment, to be regarded
as an attempt to bring us back into the most gross ignorance, super
stition, and slavery ?
As a farther proof of the author's good-will towards Christianity,
it maybe observed, that he represents it as savouring of enthusiasm;
and he explains enthusiasm to be " a groundless persuasion, that the
Deity dictates and impresses upon the mind of the promulger the
subject-matter of his ministry, and therefore such ministry is sup
posed to be not of or from men, but of and from God."f And as he
here supposes Christianity to be the product of enthusiasm so he
elsewhere charges the apostles and first publishers of Christianity
with imposture. He represents them as capable of giving a false
testimony to serve the Christian cause, and that they acted upon
this principle, " that truth in some cases may and ought to be dis
pensed with, and made to give way to falsehood and dissimulation;"
and upon this he asks, " How then will the miracles wrought by
Jesus Christ and his apostles be proved to be other than impostures?
supposing them to-be much better attested than at present they
appear to be."~|:
These and other things that might be mentioned may let us into
the true spirit and design of this writer, and may help us to judge
of the protestations he has made with great solemnity in the con
clusion of his " Farewell to his Readers." " If any say, that what
I have written is out of disrespect to the person and ministry of
Jesus Christ, the accusation is false." And he adds, " as upon
the Christian scheme, Jesus Christ will be the judge of quick and
dead, so I assure my readers, that in this view and upon this con
sideration, I have no disagreeable apprehension on account of any
thing that I have published to the world."§
Having given this general idea of our author's work, I shall in my
next letter offer some remarks upon those parts of his book which
may seem to require a more particular consideration.
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 327. 345. t Ibid. p. 49. 53.
| Ibid. p. 92, 93. 130, 131. 230, 231. § Ibid. p. 533.

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 171

LETTER XIV.
Some farther Remarks on Mr. Chubb's Posthumous Works — The unfair Representa
tion he makes of our Saviour's Precepts in his Sermon on the Mount. — His gross
Perversions of Scripture. — His Charge against it, as uncertain, and as having been
greatly depraved and corrupted by the Church of Rome, considered. — Observations
upon the Attempt he makes to invalidate the Proof from Prophecy and Miracles —
The Parallel he draws between the Propagation of Christianity and the Progress of
Methodism examined. — The Falsehood of his Pretence, that the Apostles quite
changed the original Plan of Christianity, and that they laid a Scheme for worldly
Wealth and Power. — His Invectives against St. Paul malicious and unjust. — He re
presents all Religions to be alike with regard to the Favour of God, and pretends to
direct Men to an infallible Guide.
Sir,
In my last, I gave a general account of Mr. Chubb's posthumous
treatises. I shall now add some farther observations relating to some
parts of those tracts which may seem to deserve to be more particu
larly considered.
Of this kind is the attempt he hath made to expose our Saviour's
precepts in his admirable sermon on the mount, which is designed to
teach the most pure and excellent morality. In several of these pre
cepts, our Lord evidently maketh use of a proverbial way of speak
ing, short and comprehensive aphorisms, delivered in phrases, some
of which may perhaps appear not so usual among us, but which were
familiar to those to whom they were at first delivered. Every one
knows, that, in such cases, every expression is not to be taken in
the utmost strictness, but the general intention is to be regarded,
which is plain enough to an honest and attentive mind. But this
writer seems resolved to take them in the most absurd sense he can
possibly put upon them. Thus, he interprets the precept against re
sisting evil, which is manifestly intended to check and suppress
private revenge, and to teach us that wise lesson, " that it is better
in many cases, patiently to bear injuries, especially in smaller in
stances, than to give way to a keen and forward resentment and
retaliation of them," as if it were designed absolutely, and in all
cases, to forbid us to shun our guard against the evils and injuries
offered to us, and required us rather to expose ourselves to those
evils. But this certainly could not be the intention of that excellent
teacher, who exhorteth his disciples to be wise as serpents in avoid
ing evil, as well as innocent as doves; and directeth them, instead of
needlessly exposing themselves, when persecuted in one city, to flee
unto another. The precept about loving our enemies is designed to
restrain and heal that bitter and malevolent spirit which men are so
apt to indulge, and to carry benevolence to the noblest height. It
teacheth us, that no private enmities or disgusts should cause us to
forget the common ties of humanity : that with regard to our ene
mies themselves, we should be earnestly desirous of their amendment
and true happiness, and should be ready, when a proper opportunity

172 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
offers, to do them good offices, and to overcome their enmity with
kindness, which is the noblest victory. But our candid author would
have it to be understood to signify, that we should put no difference
in our affection and esteem between good and bad men, but should
have an equal complacency in persons of the vilest characters as in
those of the best.* And because our Saviour speaks of God's doing
good, in the methods of his common providence, even to the un
thankful and the evil, he pretends, that, according to his represent
ation, the perfection of the Supreme Being consisteth in his being
affected towards all intelligent beings alike, and showing equal love
and favour to the righteous and to the wicked ; than which nothing
can be more contrary to Christ's manifest intention, and to the
whole tenor of his teaching and ministry. Our Lord's excellent dis
course against anxious cares, and a distracting or distrustful thought-
fulness for to-morrow, he interprets as designed to recommend
thoughtlessness and indolence, and absolutely to forbid that thought-
fulness and industry, which man's present indigent condition, and the
present constitution of things make necessary. ,f And the precept by
which we are directed not to lay up for ourselves treasures on earth,
but to lay up for ourselves treasures in heaven, which is plainly in
tended to check a too eager pursuit of worldly riches, and a placing
our chief happiness in these things, he represents as if it were de
signed absolutely to condemn all worldly acquisitions, however law
fully obtained, and well used and employed. In like manner, he
interprets what our Saviour says in a parabolical way, Luke xvi.
12, 13. concerning inviting the poor, the blind, and the lame ; and
which, as may be gathered from the context by comparing ver. 7,
&c. was designed to rebuke the vanity of expensive and ostentatious
entertainments, whilst the poor and indigent were neglected ; as if
it were his intention, that all Christians should deny themselves the
pleasure of ever entertaining, or being entertained by friends, rela
tions, and those of their own rank, and were to confine themselves
wholly to the company, conversation, and friendship ofthe poor, the
maimed, the lame, and the blind .-"j; though it is very evident from his
own practice, that our Lord Jesus was far from discouraging an
agreeable intercourse and conversation among friends, and the offices
and entertainments of the social life ; and I dare say, not one either
of the Jews, or of his own disciples, ever understood him in this
sense. But Mr. Chubb takes upon him to pronounce, that these and the
like precepts are all to be understood in the most strict literal sense,
and do not admit of any limitation, or any palliating interpretation
to be put upon them ; and he represents them as the proper precepts
of Christianity, peculiar, as he expresseth it, to the Christian sect,
and in which their founder's honour is peculiarly concerned; and pre
tends, that the observance of these alone, in the absurd sense he puts
upon them, is what constitutes a true Christian. And as these are
the precepts that are acknowledged to be peculiarly Christian, he
* Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 18, 19. f Ibid. p. 22, 23. t Ibid. p. 25, 26.

Let. XIV. MR. chubb's posthumous works. 173
thinks that from thence a judgment may be formed, whether there
be any just ground for boasting, that Christian morals are much
more excellent and perfect, than any other system of morals that
hath been exhibited to men.*
Nothing can possibly be more unfair and disingenuous, than this
conduct of our author. No man of candour, who considers the deep
wisdom and good sense which appeareth in our Saviour's discourses,
can reasonably suppose, that it was his intention to recommend such
absurd instructions and advices as they must have been, according
to this writer's representation of them. Our Lord's design, in his
excellent sermon on the mount, was not, as he himself declares, to
destroy the law and the prophets ; it was to vindicate them from the
narrow and corrupt glosses of the Jewish doctors. And what could
be more worthy of a teacher sent from God, the great Saviour and
lover of mankind, than to forbid the being angry without a cause,
all injurious and reproachful expressions, all adultery and impurity,
even in heart and thought; and to recommend purity, charity,
meekness, benevolence, the forgiveness of injuries, and even a ren
dering good for evil, and overcoming evil with good ? to warn men
against an excessive love of worldly riches, which hath in all ages
been the source of numberless evils and disorders among mankind,
and engage them to raise their affections and views to things of a far
higher and nobler nature, things celestial and eternal ? to direct men
to a calm contentment and dependance on divine providence, in
every condition, as the best preservative against those anxious dis
tracting cares and solicitudes, which, when they prevail, destroy the
relish of life? What our Saviour hath delivered on these, and on
other heads of great importance to the happiness of mankind, is
comprehended in short maxims, strongly and closely expressed,
which makes them more apt to strike, and more easily remembered ;
but without descending to particular exceptions and limitations,
which, for the most part, common sense, and the nature ofthe thing,
easily direct to. He, who was perfectly acquainted with human
nature, very well knew, that there was no great danger of men's
taking them in too strict a sense, and that they would be forward
enough to find out limitations for themselves. And any one that
impartially considers the variety of matters treated of, in that
excellent sermon on the mount, such a vast extent of pure and noble
morals comprised in so small a compass, and delivered with the
most comprehensive brevity, will be apt to admire the wisdom of this
heavenly teacher, and to have a just dislike of a writer that could
turn those admirable lessons to the disadvantage of the holy Jesus
and the Christian religion. And I am persuaded, that any man who
should treat the maxims and wise sayings of the philosophers or great
men of antiquity, as this author has done those of our Saviour, would
be regarded by all rational and thinking men among the Deists
themselves, as a rude and impertinent caviller. What renders Mr.
Chubb more inexcusable is, that he himself seems to have been very
» Posthumous Works, vol. i. p 27, 28. 31. 39, 40.

174 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
sensible, that those precepts were not intended in the sense he has
thought fit to put upon them ; for though, in what he calls
" Remarks on the Scriptures," he contends, as hath been shown,
that no other interpretation ought to be admitted, yet in another
part of his " Posthumous Works," viz. in the ninth section of his
" Farewell," where he professes to treat concerning the personal
character of Jesus Christ, he produces these very precepts as in
stances of Christ's figurative way of speaking, and plainly owns, that
they ought not to be taken, nor were originally intended, in the
strict literal sense he had put upon them. To this purpose he par
ticularly mentions the precepts of not resisting evil, of loving our
enemies, and giving to every one that asketh ;* and from thence
concludes, that we must use our reason in judging of the sense of
Scripture, and of our Saviour's precepts; which will be readily
allowed. The Scripture undoubtedly supposeth us to be reasonable
creatures, and our Saviour addresseth himself to us as such ; but it
by no means follows, as he insinuates, that because we are to use
our understandings in judging of the sense of Scripture, and all laws,
that therefore our own reason could guide us as well without them,
and that these precepts are of no use, and that it is of no advantage
to have them enforced by a divine authority.
It may not be improper on this occasion to take notice of some
other of his gross perversions of Scripture." A signal instance of
this kind we have in the same tract, in which he makes so strange
a representation of several of our Saviour's precepts. Speaking of
that noted passage, 1 John ii. 1,2, " My little children, these things
write I unto you, that ye sin not ; and if any man sin, we have an
advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous ; and he is the
propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins
ofthe whole world." He observes, that " this passage may be sup
posed to bespeak comfort and safety to a wicked Christian, i. e. to a
wicked man who is a believer in Jesus Christ, and professes disciple-
ship to him ; and that it is but for a man to apply these words of
John to himself, and " the practice of vice is made easy to him."f
That this could not possibly be St. John's meaning in this passage,
is evident from the whole tenour of his epistle, and particularly from
the words immediately following, in which he declares, " hereby we
do know that we know him," i. e. Jesus Christ, "if we keep his
commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his
commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him," ver. 3, 4.
Our author himself is sensible, that the interpretation he hath given
of this passage is not consistent with what St. John hath said in
other parts of his epistle. But that gives him no concern ; it will
only show that St. John contradicts himself; which is what he
would have him thought to do; and therefore with an unparalleled
assurance he insisteth upon it, that the account he hath given of
St. John's meaning, is the true one, " whatever St. John, or any
other writer of the New Testament, in opposition to this, may have
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 289, 293, 294, &c. t Ibid. vol. i. p. 37, 38.

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 175
elsewhere said to the contrary." His manner of expressing himself
plainly shows, that he is resolved this shall be St. John's sense, con
trary to his own most express declarations, and to the entire strain
of the New Testament ; because he thinks it tends to expose Chris
tianity, though in reality by such a procedure he has only exposed
himself. But he urgeth, that " if Christ be the propitiation for all
sins, then the most wicked Christian must needs be in a safe and
comfortable state ; and even wicked pagans and infidels, as well as
Christians, penitent and impenitent, because God would not be so
unreasonable and unjust, as to take double satisfaction for the same
offences." And in some other parts of his book, he inveighs against
the doctrine of Christ's being the propitiation for sins, as contrary to
truth, and the eternal reason of things.* But in all that he has said
on this head, he either discovers a gross ignorance of the Scripture-
doctrine of Christ's being the propitiation for our sins, or makes a
wilful misrepresentation of it ; since nothing can be more evident
than it is from the whole New Testament, that Christ's dying for
our sins was not designed to free men from an obligation to holiness
and obedience, but rather to lay them under stronger engagements
to it ; and that according to the gospel covenant, none can expect an
interest in the benefits arising from Christ's sufferings and sacrifice,
or from his mediation and intercession, but those that turn from
their sins by a sincere repentance, and who submit to be governed
by his holy and most excellent laws. The doctrine of Christ's satis
faction, rightly understood, is so far from giving the least encourage
ment to sin, that it tendeth to impress men's hearts with the deepest
sense of the heinous evils and malignity of sin, and of God's just
displeasure against it. Not only do those who teach that doctrine
as delivered in the Scriptures, insist as strongly as any others upon
the necessity of repentance and personal holiness, in order to their
acceptance with God, but they maintain, that at the same time that
God promiseth pardon to the truly penitent, he taketh care to dis
pense the pardon in such a way, as to make an awful declaration of
his hatred against sin, and to vindicate the authority of his govern
ment and laws. What can have a greater tendency to prevent our
abusing his pardoning mercy, and to excite in us a holy fear of
offending him, than to consider that he would not receive even
penitent sinners to his grace and favour, without a sacrifice of infi
nite virtue offered up on their behalf, consisting in the perfect
obedience and sufferings of the great Mediator? And that it was
upon the merit of his obedience and sufferings, that that covenant
was founded and established, in which God hath graciously engaged
to accept of our repentance, and to reward our sincere though
imperfect obedience with eternal life ?
Many other instances might be mentioned of Mr. Chubb's strange
glosses upon Scripture. He seems particularly to take pleasure in
misrepresenting and exposing the writings of St. Paul. Thus, be
cause that great apostle, in arguing against the false Jewish teachers,
* Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 250, and vol. ii. p. 112, 113, 304.

176 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
who insisted upon the observance of the Mosaic law and ceremonies,
as absolutely necessary to salvation under the gospel, urgeth, that,
if they were justified by the law, they were fallen from grace, i.M e.
from the grace ofthe gospel, and the way of justification there pro
posed, Gal. v. 4. he charges him with maintaining in the height of
his zeal, that " obedience to the law of Moses was incompatible with
salvation ;" and that let men otherwise be ever so good and excel
lent persons, this error concerning the obligation of the Mosaic law
would exclude them from the favour of God, and from eternal salva
tion. And in this, saith he, the Apostle must surely have greatly
erred.* But it ought to be considered, that those Jewish teachers,
whom St. Paul there opposes, are represented as men of corrupt
minds, who acted from worldly and sinister ends and views, and who
were not strict in keeping the law themselves, though they were for
binding it upon others, Gal. vi. 12, 13. And the apostle there ex
pressly declareth, that in Christ Jesus, or under the gospel dispen
sation, " neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision,"
i. e. neither the observance nor non-observance of these outward
rites, but faith which worketh by love, or, as he elsewhere expresseth
it, the new creature, i. e. a real sanctifying change of heart and life.
See Gal. v. 6. vi. 15. 1 Cor. vii. 19. Again, he pretends, that St.
Paul represents the calling of the Gentiles as not originally designed
by God, or as an effect of his goodness towards the Gentiles, but as
springing only from his having taken up a pique or resentment
against the Jews, which, he says, " is a spring of action much too
low, and altogether unworthy of the supreme Deity."f But nothing
is more evident than that this apostle frequently ascribes the calling
of the Gentiles to the free grace and gratuitous favour of God, and
speaks of it in noble terms, as having been designed in the councils
of the divine wisdom and love before the foundation of the world,
Eph. i. 3, 4, 5, 6. iii. 8, 9. Farther to expose that excellent apostle,
he represents it, as if in saying, that "if in this life only we have
hope in Christ, we are of all men the most miserable," 1 Cor. xv. 19.
he intended to signify, that the practice of piety and virtue is not
in its own nature so eligible, or so conducive to the real satisfaction
of this present life, as that of vice and sin. Nor will he allow that
St. Paul in this part of the argument has any reference to the case
of persecution ; and yet certain it is, that he most expressly refers
to it, ver. 29, 30, 31, 32; and his evident design is to signify the
unhappy condition Christians would be reduced to, under the grie
vous persecutions to which they were then exposed, if it were not
for their future hopes. But he especially finds great fault with St.
Paul for his doctrine concerning subjection to the hio-her powers,
Rom. xiii. 1. 6. as if it were calculated for promoting tyranny and
slavery. This he insists upon for several pages together, in two
different parts of his Posthumous Works ; and yet the apostle's doc
trine, rightly considered, is admirable. He shows, that obedience to
the civil powers is a duty which Christianity enjoins ; that it was not
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 96, 97. |- Ibid. p. 88.

Let. XIV. MR. chubb's posthumous works 177
designed to exempt men from subjection to their lawful governors,
though heathens, or to relax the bands of civil duty and allegiance.
He doth not meddle with the questions concerning the rights of
Senates, or particular forms of polity, but speaks of the duty of
private persons, and therefore presses their obedience and subjection,
without restrictions and limitations ; and to have mentioned such
restrictions would certainly have been of bad consequence; especi
ally considering the seditious dispositions of the Jews, and how they
were then affected. But our author is not willing to allow, that
religion has any thing to do with obedience to our civil governors ;
and, in express opposition to St. Paul, declares, that government
cannot be said to be the ordinance, or by the appointment of God.
He maintains, that the proper argument for obliging men to subjec
tion and obedience is, not government's being the ordinance of God,
but its being necessary to the well-being of mankind. And does not
the apostle manifestly urge this ? He both raiseth our views to the
original of government in tbe authority and appointment of God
himself, and pointeth out to us the proper ends of government, and
its great usefulness to mankind, and excellently argueth from both
these. So that he is far from what this writer here thinks fit to
charge him with, a fallacious and injurious way of reasoning.
He takes particular notice of the allegory* St. Paul makes use of,
Gal. iv. 21, &c. and uses his utmost endeavours to place it in a
most ridiculous light. Nothing can be more unfair and disingen
uous than the account he is pleased to give of it, in which he en
tirely misrepresents the design and strain of t.he apostle's discourse.
But a particular examination of what he offers, with regard to this
and several other passages of Scripture, would carry me too far. It
is sufficient to observe, that a careful and unprejudiced consideration
of the context, and a comparing one part of Scripture with another,
might easily have set him right as to the sense of most of the pas
sages he mentions ; or he might have found his difficulties cleared
by able and judicious commentators, if he had been as willing to
have his objections satisfied, as he was to raise them, or as a sincere
inquirer after truth ought to be. Candid critics, if they meet with
a passage in Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Tully, or any other celebrated
profane author of antiquity, which at first view has something in it
that they cannot well explain or account for, arc very unwilling to
charge the original author with nonsense and absurdity, and think
themselves obliged to use their utmost endeavours to find out a con
venient or favourable sense of the passage in question. But with
this writer, and many others of the same class, it seems to be a rule
to interpret every passage of Scripture in the most absurd sense that
can possibly be put upon it.
Several passages were produced in my former letter, to which
many others might be added, in which Mr. Chubb exclaims against
* Mr. Collins had endeavoured to expose that allegory ; and the design and consis
tency of it was fully cleared in the answers that were made to that writer. Nor has
Mr. Chubb offered any thing upon it that can be called new.
N

178 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
the Scripture as the source of endless contentions and divisions, as
if it were to be charged with all the absurd and contradictory opin
ions, that have at any time been grafted upon it. This he represents,
as owing to its being " expressed in a loose indeterminate way,
which would be a defect in a human composition, but is scarce sup-
posable in the case of divine revelation."* But it is no argument,
that a thing is loosely and indeterminately expressed, because men
differ or contend about the sense of it. This is owing to other
causes. Supposing a divine revelation given to mankind, ever so
clear and determinate, it could scarcely be avoided, without a constant
miraculous interposition, irresistibly impressing and overruling the
minds of all men, but that there would be a difference of sentiments
and opinions among mankind, about many things in it; and yet
this would not hinder but that such a revelation would be of signal
use for instructing men in things of great importance. The fallacy
of such a way of arguing, as if men's differing about any thing were
a proof of its uncertainty, has been often exposed, as what would
banish all religion, truth, reason, and evidence, out of the world ;
yet this is a common-place with the deistical writers, to which they
have recourse on all occasions. Many made use of it before our
author ; and since the publishing of his works, a late right honour
able writer hath been pleased to renew the charge. I shall not here
repeat what I have elsewhere offered in answer to his Lordship, and
which will equally serve to obviate all that Mr. Chubb hath advanced
on this head.-J-
The same observation may be made with regard to his attempts
against the sacred canon. He pretends, as others have done before
him, that there is no proof that the books of the New Testament
were written in the first age of the Christian church ; that there were
many spurious gospels in the primitive times, and that the Chris
tians had no way of distinguishing the genuine from the false.
These, and other things to the same purpose, he very frequently
repeats in several parts of his " Farewell to his Readers," as if he
thought the frequent repetition of them would persuade his readers
of their truth. But I shall not need to take any particular notice of
them here, but refer to what was said on this subject in the fourth
letter, where some account is given of the answers that were made
to Toland's Amyntor ; to which may be added, what hath been
lately offered in answer to the same objections, when urged by the
noble writer last-mentioned.*]:
Mr. Chubb hath also raised a great clamour about the corruption
of Scripture. He layeth it down as a principle, that if God gave
a revelation for the use of mankind, he would take care that it
should be transmitted safe and uncorrupted to all succeeding gene
rations; and would, by a particular and constant application of his
power and providence, have defended it from all injury, wherever it
was promulged, and whatever language it was rendered into. He
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 246, 247.
f Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters, p. 125, &c. \ Ibid. p. 98, &c.

Let. XIV. MR. chubb's posthumous works. 17!)
intimates, that God ought to have punished with a sudden death, as
in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, every man that had committed
any error, either in transcribing or translating it. And if this had
been the case, the consequence would have been, that no man would
have ventured to transcribe or translate it at all ; and this, no doubt,
is what these gentlemen would wish. But there is no necessity for
having recourse to such extraordinary methods ; we have sufficient
evidence to satisfy any reasonable person, that this revelation is
transmitted to us, without any such corruptions or alterations as can
destroy the usefulness of that revelation, or defeat the important
ends for which it was originally given. This hath been often clearly
shown. Our author indeed pronounces with great confidence, that
'' it is a thing abundantly evident, that the Christian revelation hath
been greatly depraved and corrupted ; that its pretended guardians
have extracted the mystery of iniquity from it ; and that we
have received the books referred to from that grand fountain of cor
ruption the church of Rome, who must have been naturally, and
almost unavoidably led to corrupt them in those times of ignorance,
to justify herself in all other corruptions and abuses." This he fre
quently repeats, as his manner is, in several parts of his book, and it
hath been often urged by the deistical writers ;* and it must be ac
knowledged, that if a general corruption of the Scriptures could have
been possibly effected, none had so good an opportunity, or a stronger
temptation to attempt it, than the church of Rome ; and yet it is
evident in fact, that they have not corrupted the Scriptures in those
instances in which it was most their interest, and we might imagine
also most in their inclination, to have corrupted them. There might
be some pretence for such a charge, if there had been any express
and formal passages inserted in the New Testament, in favour of the
papal supremacy, of St. Peter's having been Bishop of Rome, the
worship of images, the invocation of saints and angels, purgatory,
the communion in one kind, against priests' marriage, and in favour
of the monastic vows, &c. ; but our author hath not attempted to
produce any passages of this kind; and he himself has observed,
that " the New Testament was not sufficient to support the weight
of the constitution of the church of Rome, and therefore its builders
prudently annexed tradition to it."i" He also finds fault with their
locking up the Bible from the laity, as what hath put them so far
under the power of the clergy, as to involve them in gross ignorance,
superstition, and slavery. Thus, this very consistent writer, with a
view to expose the New Testament, would persuade us, that popery is
taught and founded there, and yet would have the Bible kept in
the hands of the people as a proper preservative against it.
The arguments in favour of the Jewish and Christian revelation
from prophecy and miracles have always been looked upon as of
great weight ; and Mr. Chubb hath taken great pains to invalidate
both these. With regard to prophecy, which is the entire subject
of the seventh section of his " Farewell to his Readers,"*|; he pre-
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 65, 66, 118, 121, \2l. t Ibid. p. 58.
± Ibid. vol. ii. p. 139—174.
N 2

180 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
tends not to deny, that there may be true prophecy ; that God may
certainly foreknow future events, and may enable persons to foretel
them; but he denies, that the prediction of future events can be ad
mitted as an evidence of divine revelation, because a prophecy can
never be known to be a true prophecy till it be fulfilled ; and there
fore can never be a proof or evidence at the time of its delivery, be
cause it must appear as yet uncertain. His argument here proceeds
upon a wrong supposition, as if the advocates for revelation main
tained, that the mere prediction of a future event, even before the
completion of it, were alone a sufficient proof to those who heard
the prediction, ofthe divine mission ofthe persons who delivered it.
This was far from being the only proof that was given either of the
Mosaic or Christian revelation. They were both of them at their
first promulgation attested and established by an amazing succes
sion of the most wonderful works, and which plainly argued an ex
traordinary divine interposition ; besides which, both Moses and
the prophets under the Old Testament, and our Lord Jesus Christ
and his apostles under the New, were enabled to give many express
predictions of future events ; some of which related to things which
were to happen in their own time, and received a speedy accomplish
ment ; others related to events that were not to happen till some
ages after the prediction, and these also received their accomplish
ment in the proper season. And this, added to the other evidences,
exhibited a farther illustrious proof of a divine interposition in
favour of the Jewish and Christian revelation, and shows, that the
first publishers of it were extraordinarily inspired by God, who, by
the author's own acknowledgment, can alone foresee and foretell
future contingent events. It was wisely ordered, that miracles and
prophecy should go together ; whereby not only the most striking
evidence was given to the truth and divinity of the revelation, at the
time when it was first promulgated, but provision was made that
there should be a growing evidence, which might acquire new force
and strength, by the successive accomplishment of the prophecies
in the several different periods to which they refer. Indeed, if it
were only a single prediction or two, the fulfilling of them might be
looked upon to be accidental, and to amount to no more than a
lucky conjecture ; but a series of prophecies, such as is set before us
in the sacred writings, many of them relating to things of a most
contingent nature, removed at the distance of several ages, and
which depended upon things that no human sagacity could foresee,
must be ascribed to an extraordinary divine assistance ; and it can
not reasonably be supposed, that God would impart his prescience
to give credit to impostors, who falsely pretended to be inspired by
him to deliver doctrines and laws to mankind.
As to that part of the evidence of Christ's divine mission, which
resulteth from the prophecies of the Old Testament, this had been
fully considered in the controversy between Mr. Collins and his ad
versaries, of which some account was given in the sixth letter.
What Mr. Chubb has offered on this head is very inconsiderable ;
but he has one reflection that may deserve some notice ; it is this:

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 181
That, " supposing those prophecies to have been fulfilled in Jesus
Christ, they are not so much to be regarded as an evidence of the
divine authority of the Christian revelation, as of the divine charac
ter of its primary promulger, who, being a free being, must have
been at liberty whether he would have faithfully delivered those
truths to the world, that had been delivered to him by his principal.
And this," saith he, " must of necessity be the case of all divine
revelation."* But, supposing there was a series of prophecy, relat
ing to a wonderful person, who was to appear, at a time prefixed,
as a divine teacher and Lord, and who was to erect a dispensation
of truth and righteousness, and that his coming, person, offices,
miracles, sufferings, and the glories that should follow, were de
scribed and pointed out by many remarkable predictions, delivered
at sundry times and in divers manners, all which were fulfilled in
Jesus Christ, and in him only ; this certainly must be looked upon
as an illustrious attestation, not only to the divinity of his mission,
but to the truth of the revelation he brought in the name of God ;
for it were most absurd to suppose, that God would have inspired
so many persons, in different ages, to foretell his coming and cha
racter as a divine teacher of truth and righteousness, if he had not
perfectly foreknown that he would certainly fulfil that character, and
fulfil the great trust reposed in him. And the preparing mankind
for his coming by such a succession of prophecies, and pointing him
out by the most glorious and peculiar characters, so many ages
before his actual appearing, tended to give him an attestation of a
peculiar kind, and which was never equalled in any other case.
With regard to the prophecies of Daniel, this author thinks it is
impossible " that God should deliver a prophecy so darkly, as that
one man only, and he a prodigy, amidst the millions of men that
have taken place since that prophecy was delivered, should be able
to discover the true sense and meaning of it ;"f where he goes upon
a supposition which is manifestly false, viz. that no man before Sir
Isaac Newton was ever able to discover the meaning and intent of
Daniel's prophecies. Many there have been who have laboured
happily this way, both formerly and of late ; and though there are
several things in those prophecies that are attended with great diffi
culty, there are others of the predictions contained in that book,
which are so clear, that the application of them is comparatively
easy. And they have been wonderfully verified, in a manner which
shews they could only have proceeded from that all-seeing mind
which presides over contingencies, and clearly sees through the suc
cession of ages. And the predictions there given relating to the
Messiah, the design and end of his coming, and the desolation of
the Jewish city and temple that should be connected with it, are of
such a nature, as to give a most remarkable attestation to our Lord
Jesus Christ, as the true promised Messiah. And it may be ob
served by the way, that this shews the vanity and falsehood of
another of our author's suppositions, who pretends, that the Jewish
" Posthumous Works, p. 152, 153. t Ibid. p. 147, 148.

lfcS2 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
expectation of th.e Messiah was solely owing to the notion they had
of their being God's peculiar people, from whence it was natural for
them to believe, that God would raise them up a glorious deliverer,
who should exalt their nation to the highest degree of prosperity
and grandeur ; and that the prophets humoured them in this their
notion and expectation : For if this had been the case, the prophets
would not have spoken of a suffering Messiah ; nor would they have
foretold, as they have done, his being rejected by the Jews, and the
judgments which should be then executed upon that nation, and
that the Gentiles should be partakers of the benefits of his
kingdom. This writer, who seems to value himself upon thinking out of the
common way, can see nothing extraordinary in the predictions re
lating to the calamities and dispersions of the Jews, and their won
derful preservation, under all their dispersions aud calamities, for a
long succession of ages ; and yet certain it is, that their being so
generally dispersed among all nations over the whole earth, and
being still preserved as a distinct people, notwithstanding the un
exampled discouragements, reproaches, and sufferings, to which
they have been exposed, is one of the most wonderful things, taken
in all its circumstances, that is to be found in the whole history of
mankind ; and as it hath no parallel, its being so plainly foretold
above three thousand years ago (for so long it is since the time of
Moses, who first prophecied of it) is a most signal instance of a true
prophetic spirit; and could only be owing to the inspiration of that
omniscient Being, who " declareth the end from the beginning, and
from ancient times the things which are not yet done."
I shall only take notice of one observation more, which our author
hath made with regard to the proof from prophecy, viz. that it ap
pears from St. Paul's account, that the gift of prophecy was a dis
tinct gift from that of knowledge, 1 Cor. xii. 8, 9, 10, and " that
they had no connection or dependence upon one another ;" and he
thinks therefore, " that a person's foretelling things to come, does
not prove a superiority of knowledge, and that the prophet's know
ledge exends faith et" than the prophecies he delivers." But if we
examine that passage of St. Paul which he refers to, we shall find
it is far from answering the end he proposes by it, viz. to invalidate
the proof from prophecy in favour of the Christian revelation. The
apostle is there speaking of the several gifts of the Holy Ghost,
which were poured forth on many ofthe Christian converts in that first
age, in various proportions and degrees according to his will. One
of these was, that of prophecy. It is not certain, that by prophecy,
in that particular passage, is to be understood the foretelling things
to come ; for the word prophecy is sometimes taken in that epistle
in another sense ; but allowing it to be so, since it appears from
other passages that such a gift there was in the first age of the
Christian church (and it was what our Saviour had promised, John
xvi. 13), in that case it must be said, that such a gift, if really con
ferred, could only proceed from God, or his Holy Spirit ; and as
those extraordinary gifts, of which this was one, were communi-

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 183
cated by the laying on of the hands of the apostles in the name of
a crucified and risen Jesus, the conferring these gifts on any of
the Christian converts may be justly regarded as a most illus
trious proof of a divine interposition in favour of Christianity, and
of the divine mission of the apostles, the first authorized publishers
of it.
Having considered the principal things this writer has urged on
the head of prophecy, I shall take some notice of what he hath
offered concerning the proof from miracles ; this is the subject of
his eighth section.* He will not allow, that miracles can be any proof
of the divine mission of persons or truth of doctrines. What he
chiefly insisteth upon to this purpose is, that the power of working
miracles may be equally annexed to falsehood and truth ; and
whereas it might be objected, that God will not suffer miraculous
power to be misapplied, because, were that the case, mankind would
be greatly exposed to imposition, he answers, " that when a miracle
is once wrought, it must and will be in the option of the operator to
apply that power as he pleases, either well or ill, nor could God
prevent it, otherwise than by destroying his being or his agency."
But supposing, which is the present supposition, a real power of
working miracles communicated from God, with a view to give
attestation to the divine mission of persons sent to instruct the
world in important truths, it is absurd to suppose, that he would
continue that power to them, if they applied it to the confirming of
falsehood ; or that he would have given them that power for attest
ing truth, if he foresaw they would use it in favour of falsehood:
and in that case he must have foreseen it. With regard to the
power of working miracles in the first age of the Christian church,
it was not at the option of the persons who had that power to use it
when or to what purpose they pleased. They could only work those
miracles, when and upon what occasion it seemed fit to the Holy
Ghost that they should do them ; in which case they had an extra
ordinary impulse, which is usually called the faith of miracles, which
was a kind of direction to them, when to work those miracles, and
whereby they knew and were persuaded that God would enable
them to do them. The proper use and design of those miracles was,
to confirm the testimony given by the apostles to our Saviour and
his resurrection, and the truth of the doctrines they taught as
received from him; nor can any one proof be brought, though he
takes it for granted, that any false teachers in that age did, by
virtue of any extraordinary gift or powers of the Holy Ghost com
municated to them, work miracles to confirm the false doctrines they
preached. On the contrary, St. Paul appeals to the Galatians
themselves, as in a matter of fact which could not be contested, that
miracles were only wrought, and the extraordinary gifts of the
Spirit communicated, in attestation to that true doctrine of the
gospel which he had preached, and not to that other gospel, as he
calleth it, which the false teachers would have imposed upon them»
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 177—249.

184 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
Gal. iii. 2, 5. But I have elsewhere considered this matter at large,
and shall not here repeat what was there offered.*
But what our author chiefly bends himself to prove is, that the
accounts given us of the miracles recorded in the New Testament
are false or uncertain, and not at all to be depended on. To this
purpose he mentions several of our Saviour's miracles, and repeats
the same objections against them that had been urged by Mr.
Woolston before, and to which solid answers had been returned.
Every thing in the evangelical accounts that appears to him strange
or extraordinary, he rejects at once. I cannot here enter into a
distinct consideration of the several particulars he allegeth. I shall
only mention one, on which he seems to lay a greater stress than
any of the rest, and which he insists upon more than once, as alone
sufficient to destroy the credit of the evangelical historians. It
relates to the account given of our Saviour's temptations in the
wilderness. It will be readily owned, that the fact referred to is of
a very extraordinary nature. But a thing may be very strange and
wonderful, and yet very true, and is to be received as such, if it
comes to us vouched by a sufficient authority; and in this case the
authority is sufficient ; for I think it cannot reasonably be doubted,
that the account came originally from our Lord himself, since no
other could be supposed to know it, and that it was well known to
the apostles and disciples to have come from him. It is distinctly
related by two of the evangelists, St. Matthew and St. Luke, and
referred to by a third, St. Mark. St. John, according to the
method he pursues, of insisting chiefly upon things not mentioned
by the rest, had no occasion to take notice of it. There is not the
least reason to suppose, that the evangelists would have inserted
such an account as this, if they had not been assured that the infor
mation came from Christ himself; and his authority is a sufficient
warrant for believing it ; nor is our author able to prove, that there
is any thing here ascribed to Satan, which he might not be able, or
might not be permitted to perform. In what manner he pretended
to show to our Saviour, " all the kingdoms of the world, and all the
glory of them," we are not told ; nor is there any necessity here of
taking the word all in the strictest sense. But in what way soever
this was done, concerning which we cannot pretend certainly to
judge, this writer doth not know enough of the case to pronounce
it impossible. Supposing there are evil spirits, can any man take
upon him positively to determine how far their power and ability
may extend ? And that there are both good and evil spirits supe
rior to man, hath been the general belief of mankind in all nations
and ages, and even of the best and wisest of men ; nor can a sha
dow of reason be brought to prove the existence of such spirits to be
either impossible or improbable, though our author, in his great
wisdom, has all along rejected all accounts where there is any
mention made of angels or devils, with as much confidence, as if
he could clearly demonstrate that there cannot possibly be any such
thing. * Divine Authority of the Old and New Test, asserted, vol. i. p. 380  387.

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 185
He frequently speaks of the weakness and credulity of the sacred
historians, and represents the accounts given in the gospels, and in
the Acts of the Apostles, as mere fictions, more like Jewish fables, or
popish legends, than real facts* He expressly declares, " that some
of the popish miracles, though generally rejected by Protestants as
fraud and imposture, are better attested than any of the miracles
which were wrought, or supposed to be wrought, in the first century ;
and that had the like strict scrutiny been made in former times that
is at present, those ancient miracles would have been rejected. "-J-
But every thinking person will easily see a mighty difference in the
case between miracles wrought before persons highly prejudiced in
their favour, and in proof of the reigning religion, where power and
interest is on their side, and where there is not a full liberty allowed
to make a strict inquiry in the view of enemies themselves, and
where the publie prejudices lie on the other side, and power, interest,
and authority are engaged against them. There will always be
ground of suspicion in the former case, not equally so in the latter.
The miracles said to be wrought by the Romish church, are done in
countries where Popery is the established religion, and have power,
and the prejudices of the people, and an evident worldly interest, on
their side ; and they are not performed openly in the view of Pro
testants and for their conviction, in places where there is a full
liberty of examining into all the circumstances relating to them ;
whereas the miracles whereby Christianity was established, were
done openly, and in the view of enemies, able and willing to have
detected the imposture, if there had been any ; they were done to
establish a scheme of religion, the most opposite that could be
imagined to the prevailing prejudices both of Jews and Gentiles, and
even to the prejudices that had possessed the minds of the very per
sons by whom these miracles were wrought ; and when all the power
and authority of the world, as well as the influence and artifices of
the priesthood, and every worldly advantage, lay wholly on the other
side ; and yet vast numbers were brought over to receive a crucified
Jesus as their Saviour and their Lord, in that very age, by the
evidence of those miracles and extraordinary facts, concerning which
they had the best opportunity of being informed, in opposition to all
their worldly interests, and their most inveterate prejudices. In vain
then it is to inveigh, as this writer does, against the historians, and
to pretend, that " they were weak enough to give credit to any
relations they might pick up, and had courage enough to put upon
the world whatever might be put upon them ;"% for the things
related by them are of such a public nature, that if they had been
false, it would have been the easiest thing in the world for their
enemies, of whom there were many, to have detected them ; which
would have crushed this religion in its infancy. Our author himself
is sensible how difficult it would have been to impose facts of so
extraordinary and so public a nature, as those recorded in the gos
pels, and in the Acts of the Apostles, in the very age in which the
* Ubi supra, p. 192, 193. t Ibid. p. 226, 227. t Posthumous Works, p. 194.

186 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
facts were said to be done ; and therefore, without so much as
attempting to offer the least proof, takes upon him to affirm, that
the accounts of these facts were not published till a long time after,
when there was nobody alive that could contradict them ; and he
declares as positively as if he could prove it to be so, that they were
not made public till the second century, which he represents as an
age of fiction and forgery. This is what he particularly affirms con
cerning the accounts given in the Acts of the Apostles ; though it is
evident from the book itself, that it was written in the apostolical
age, and before the second imprisonment or the death of St. Paul.
In the second century, Christianity had already made a wonderful
progress through the nations, of which there are unquestionable
proofs ; and by a strange absurdity he supposes, that the extraor
dinary facts whereby the Christian religion was attested and con
firmed, were not published till that time, i. e. that they were not
heard of or made public, till long after the founding of the Christian
church, though it was wholly upon the credit of those facts that the
Christian church was founded. He pretends farther, that the
accounts of these things " were kept as a treasure in the hands of
believers, not known to unbelievers, who therefore had it not in their
power to confute them, or detect the fraud ;"* and yet certain it is,
that the apostles went every where preaching the religion of Jesus to
an unbelieving world. All those to whom the first publishers of
Christianity preached the gospel, and published the accounts of the
important facts on which it was founded, were at first unbelievers ;
and it was upon the convincing assurance they had of the truth of
these facts, that they were brought over to embrace it, and of unbe
lieving Jews or heathens became Christians, or believers in Jesus
Christ. And whereas he adds, that " those facts were not published
at or near the place of the performance, but in Greece, Italy, &c,
where the people could not contradict them ;" he seems not to have
considered, that all these things were first published in Judea, where
the first Christian churches were founded ; and that great numbers
of Jews were converted in the places where all the facts were done.
It was not till after they had been published some years in Judea,
that they were made known to the Gentiles. And in all those
countries where the gospel was preached, there were vast numbers of
Jews, who had a continual correspondence with those in Judea, and
went frequently to Jerusalem to the public feasts, and could there
fore easily procure information whether those facts were as they had
been represented.
I shall not need to make any observations upon what Mr. Chubb
hafli offered against the accounts given by the evangelists of our
Lord's resurrection ; for, as he has only enlarged on some of the
same objections which had been advanced by the author of " The
Resurrection of Jesus considered," it may be sufficient to refer to
what has been said on this subject in the twelfth letter.
Having considered the attempts made by Mr. Chubb to invalidate
* Posthumous Works, vol ii. p. 203—205.

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 187
the argument in behalf of divine revelation from prophecy and mira
cles, it will not be improper to take some notice of what hath been
offered to take off the force of the argument, which he. hath fre
quently urged, from the wonderful propagation of Christianity, in
behalf of its divine original. He acknowledgeth, that " it is impro
bable that Christianity should take place, and prevail in the woild,
and to the degree it did, or at least that we are told it did, supposing
the history of Christ's life and ministry to be a fiction ;"* but then,
as if he had granted too much, he observes, that " the present run
of Methodism, without any miraculous power attending it, or any
external evidence to back it, takes off from the weight and force of
the argument."-]- He often returns to this, and in several parts of
his book seems willing to run a parallel between the progress of
Christianity and that of Methodism. But this only shows the
strong prejudices of those who glory in the character of free-thinkers,
and how forward they are to catch at the slightest pretences for set
ting aside the evidences brought in favour of Christianity ; for in
reality there can be no reasonable parallel drawn between the one
and the other. There is no great wonder in it, that professed Chris
tians, pretending to a high degree of purity and piety, and to teach
true scriptural Christianity, should make some progress (not in pagan
and Mahometan, or even in Popish countries ; for I do not find our
Methodists take upon them to make many conversions there, but)
in a country where scriptural Christianity is professed, and a full
toleration allowed. There is nothing in this but what may be easily
accounted for, without supposing any thing supernatural in the case.
They do not pretend to new extraordinary revelations, nor appeal to
any miraculous facts, as the French prophets did ; in which case the
failure of those facts might easily subject them to a detection ; but they
build upon the religion already received among us, and only pretend
to explain and enforce the doctrines there taught. But the case
was entirely different with regard to the apostles and first publishers
of Christianity. The religion they preached, and . especially the
great fundamental article of it, the receiving a crucified Jesus for
their Saviour and Lord, was contrary to the most rooted prejudices
both of Jews and Gentiles ; it tended entirely to subvert the whole
system of the pagan superstition and idolatry, and also the pleasing
hopes the Jews had entertained concerning a temporal Messiah,
who should raise their nation to the height of secular dominion and
grandeur ; it was holy and self-denying in its nature and tendency,
and was designed not to flatter, but to subdue and mortify, the
corrupt lusts and passions of men ; it appealed to facts of the most
extraordinary and public nature, and which could not fail being
detected, if they had been false ; the first publishers of it were not
only destitute of every worldly advantage, but had the most insur
mountable difficulties to encounter with; they were exposed, to the
most grievous persecutions, reproaches, and sufferings, and had all
the powers of the world engaged against them ; that therefore they
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 40, 41. t Ibid, marginal note.

188 A VIEW OF the deistical writers. Let. XIV.
should be able in such circumstances to bring over vast numbers
both of Jews and Gentiles to the faith of the crucified Jesus, and
that the religion they taught should in spite of all opposition prevail,
and at length overturn the whole established superstition, which
had every worldly advantage to support it ; this cannot be reason
ably accounted for, without supposing' the interposition of a divine
power, and the truth of the extraordinary facts on which it was
founded. Mr. Chubb seems to lay a particular stress on the great change
which, he pretends, took place in Christianity, whilst in its most pri
mitive state. He affirms, that " the apostles set out upon two prin
ciples, which may be considered as the foundation or corner-stone
of the Christian building. 1. That Christianity is a supplement to
Judaism, and therefore was to be grafted upon it; and that the law
of Moses was not to be abolished, but still continued. 2. That the
Gospel was a favour to be vouchsafed to the Jews only, and that to
them only it was to be preached." And he pretends, that " the
apostles were unavoidably led into these principles by their Master
himself:" but that " in a little time they quite changed the original
scheme or plan of Christianity, and dug up and destroyed the foun
dations they themselves had laid :" and then he asks, " How do we
know in what instances they may be depended upon ? and if they
acted wrong in this, how does it appear that they ever acted right?"*
This he returns to on several occasions. But this whole matter is
entirely misrepresented : it is plain from several hints given by our
Lord himself during his personal ministry, that it was really his in
tention, and the design upon which he was sent, to erect a new and
more perfect dispensation than the Mosaical was, though it was not
as yet a proper season to make a public declaration of it; that his
gospel was to be preached not to the Jews only, but also to the Gen
tiles ; and that the latter were to be taken into his church, and to
be made partakers of his benefits, and of the great salvation he came
to procure. Any one will be convinced of this, who impartially con
siders the following passages, Matth. viii. 10, 11, 12. xv. 10, 11.
xxi. 43. John iv. 21, 23. x. 16. The utmost that our author's pre
tence can be made to amount to, is really no more than this : that
the apostles, for some time after our Lord's ascension, were not en
tirely freed from their Jewish prejudices. And supposing, which was
really the case, that the Jewish dispensation was originally from
God, and was designed to give way to the more perfect dispensation
of the gospel, for which it was preparatory, there was a great pro
priety in it that the change should not be brought about all at once,
which might have been too great a shock even to honest and well-
disposed minds. The gradual method of unfolding the Christian
scheme, and dispelling the apostles' prejudices, instead of being a
just objection, shows that the whole was conducted with a divine
wisdom and goodness : and their having continued for some time
under these prejudices, giveth a mighty force to their testimony,
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 84, & seq.

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 189
and furnisheth a manifest proof that the Christian dispensation was
not of their own invention, nor was owing to a sudden pang of en
thusiasm ; since it was with such difficulty that they themselves
were brought to discern and embrace it, considered in its proper
harmony. And it was only owing to the strength ofthe overpower
ing light and evidence, that all their prejudices were at length over
come and dispelled.
Besides the two principles mentioned above, Mr. Chubb has
thought fit to take notice of a third, which he also pretends was a
fundamental principle of Christianity, as laid down by the apostles,
viz. " That the disciples of Christ were to have one common stock
or property, of which the clergy were constituted the trustees and
directors :" and he thinks, that " from this it appears, how ground
less that pretence must be, that the apostles and ministers of Jesus
Christ could have no worldly advantage in view, when they went
forth to preach the gospel ; whereas nothing can be more evident,
than that they had a fair prospect of, and a very plausible pretence
for, gathering great riches into their hands, as keepers and managers
of the church's property or treasure." This he is so fond of, that he
insisteth upon it for several pages together.* And the author of the
Resurrection of Jesus considered had hinted at the same thing before
him, to show, that the apostles were interested witnesses, and that
therefore their testimony to Christ's resurrection is not to be de
pended on.t But all this is built on a false foundation ; for there
was no divine or apostolical constitution obliging Christians to put
their whole worldly substance into the common stock, and to com
mit it to the apostles as the directors. It appeareth plainly from
St. Peter's words to Ananias, that it was a matter which depended
entirely on the free choice of the Christian converts, and was the
effect of their voluntary zeal and charity; and it was an illustrious
proof ofthe strong conviction and persuasion they had of the truth of
the gospel, and of those great and extraordinary facts by which
Christianity was supported. This was the more remarkable, as it
was at Jerusalem that this was done, soon after our Lord's resurrec
tion and ascension, and the extraordinary' effusion of the Holy
Ghost on the day of Pentecost, and where they had the best oppor
tunity of knowing the evidences of those facts. But whatever was
done this way, in the extraordinary circumstances in which the first
Christians were placed, it is manifest from some passages in the
New Testament, and particularly from St. Paul's directions to the
Corinthians, that this was not designed to be generally obligatory
upon all Christians. See 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 2. 2 Cor. viii. 9. And indeed
it seems to have been peculiar to those at Jerusalem ; for which un
doubtedly there were particular reasons ; and even there, so far were
the apostles from claiming to themselves the direction of the pub
lic stock, that they expressly refused to have any thing to do with
the management of it, that they might apply themselves to their
proper work, the ministry of the word ; and it was given into the
* Posthumous Works, p. 102—110. -j- Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 68.

190 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
hands of persons of unexceptionable characters, chosen by the Chris
tian society for that purpose, that they might impartially distribute
out of the common stock to those that needed it, Acts vi. 1, 2. 3.
If the apostles had been actuated by worldly views, they would cer
tainly have chosen a scheme of religion, more cunningly accommo
dated to the prevailing humours and prejudices of mankind; for
what prospect could they have of persuading people to give up their
treasures and worldly substance into their hands, by preaching up
to the Jews a person that had been condemned and crucified by the
chief priests and rulers of their own nation for their Messiah, and
preaching up to the Gentiles a crucified Jew for their Lord and
Saviour? Our author himself is sensible of this, and therefore at
the same time that he talks of the fair worldly prospect they had,
he owns that these prospects must have depended upon their expect
ing success in their ministry, and upon their being persuaded that
they had God and his promises on their side, and that Christ would
be with them, as he had foretold, to the end of the world: * so that,
according to his own way of stating the case, and indeed according
to the reason of the thing, their prospect of success was founded in
the firm belief they had of the truth and divinity of Christ's mission,
and of his resurrection and exaltation to glory. So inconsistent is
this writer's hypothesis, that, in order to make good his charge of
worldly interested views against the apostles, he is forced to go upon
a supposition of the truth of the illustrious attestations that were
given to the Christian religion, and which he elsewhere endeavours
to invalidate. And yet, supposing the apostles to have believed
what fhetvc Lord had told them, they could have no worldly ad
vantage to expect ; since he had assured them, that they should be
exposed to all manner of reproaches, persecutions, and sufferings,
both from Jews and Gentiles, and should be hated qf all men for
his name's sake. And this was actually the case : what the apostles
got by preaching up the religion of Jesus is in a very affecting man
ner represented by St. Paul, who was one of them : from whence it
is manifest, that never were there any persons exposed to a greater
variety of hardships and sufferings, 1 Cor. iv. 9. 11, 12, 13. xv. 19.
32. 2 Cor. iv. 8, 9, 10, 11. xi. 23—28.
It is particularly evident, that this last mentioned great apostle
could have no worldly advantage in view in embracing Christianity.
His interests, reputation, and prejudices, lay wholly the other way,
and tended strongly to bias him against it. Nothing but conviction,
and the power of evidence, could overcome his obstinacy; after
which he became the most eminently instrumental to propagate the
Christian religion in the world, of which he had been a most zealous
persecutor before. And this seems to be the cause of that peculiar
rancour and prejudice, which this writer every-where discovers
against him. The best judges have admired the strength and close
ness of St. Paul's reasoning ; this particularly was the judgment of
one of the best reasoners of the age, Mr. Locke, who studied his
* Posthumous Woiks, v..I. ii. p. 108, 109.

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 191
writings with great application. But our author has thought fit to
represent him as a loose unguarded writer; who did not attend to his
own argument, or to the subject. He frequently charges him with
drawing wrong conclusions from his premises ; and that his epistles
were crude, indigested performances, which were probably sent as
they were first wrote, without being revised by him ; and that this
sometimes involved him in confusion. He endeavours to give the
most absurd and ridiculous turn possible to several passages in his
writings; some instances of which were taken notice of above, to
which many others might be added. Not content with this, he
represents this excellent person, who was no less remarkable for his
humility than for his many other virtues, as a vain-glorious boaster,
and treats the account which, with a remarkable modesty, and as
it were by constraint, he gives of his labours and sufferings, as
a bravado, and past all belief. * He accuses him and St. James as
guilty of the most gross and notorious dissimulation and hypocrisy,
and represents him as the great author of pious frauds in religion :
and that he acted upon this principle, " that truth in some cases
may and ought to be dispensed with ;" and that therefore he and
the other apostles were capable of giving a false testimony to serve
the Christian cause.f But this certainly was not St. Paul's prin
ciple ; he has condemned in the strongest terms those who main
tained, that it is lawful to lie for the glory of God, and to do evil
that good may come qf it ,- which is the great principle upon which
pious frauds are built, Rom. iii. 5, 6. All that Mr. Chubb has ad
vanced, to prove the heavy charge he has brought against this great
apostle, is reducible to two facts. The one is, his saying before the
council, that of the hope and resurrection of the dead he was called in
question, Acts xxiii. 6. ; upon which our author observes, that in
this " he acted a deceitful part, and coined a lie to save himself,
since he was not called in question about the resurrection, nor was
this any part of the charge against him."*]; But that the preaching
through Jesus Christ the resurrection of the dead, was one reason of
the persecution which was raised against Christ's disciples ; and that
this was what particularly excited the rage of the Sadducees against
them, of which party the high priest, or at least many of those about
him, and who were men of power and interest, appear to have been,
is plain from the account given in the Acts of the Apostles, chap. iv.
1, 2, 3. v. 17. And it was very allowable for the apostle to take
advantage of this, for creating a division among his adversaries, who
were not themselves agreed what charge to bring against him. This
is a proof of his prudence and address, and that he did not run
upon his sufferings with a blind enthusiastic heat; but it is no proof
of his dishonesty. The other instance upon which the charge of hy
pocrisy and lying against St. Paul is founded, is taken from what
he did at Jerusalem, by St. James's advice, in purifying himself in
the temple, Acts xxi. 20— 26.§ But if this had been fairly repre-
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 364, 365. t Ibid. p. 92, ise. 235, &c.
t Ibid. vol. i. p. 330, 331. vol. ii. p. 238. § Ibid. vol. i. p. 92, 93. 98.

192 A VI.'W OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
sented, it would have appeared, that there was nothing in his con
duct on this occasion inconsistent with honesty and integrity. What
the Jewish Christians had been informed of concerning St. Paul was,
that he had taught the Jews which were among the Gentiles to for
sake Moses, saying, that they ought not to circumcise their children,
neither to walk after the customs, ver 21. They represented him as
having taught, that it was absolutely unlawful for the Jews to cir
cumcise their children, or to observe the Jewish rites. This accu
sation was false : St. Paul had not taught this; he only had argued
against the necessity of observing that law, and had urged Jews and
Gentiles to a mutual forbearance with one another in this matter.
And what he did pursuant to the advice of St. James, showed that
he did not look upon it to be then unlawful to observe the Jewish
rites ; and that he judged it both lawful and expedient in some cases
to observe them, for avoiding scandal ; and upon this principle he
proceeded in circumcising Timothy. This whole matter had been
set in a clear light, and the wisdom and consistency of the conduct
of St. Paul and the other apostles fully justified, in the answers that
were made to the Moral Philosopher. But Mr. Chubb repeats the
charge, without troubling himself to take off the force of what had
been offered for clearing it.
After what hath been observed, it will be no surprize to find, that
this writer represents the being converted to Christianity as of no
importance at all, and that he frequently lets us know, that he looks
upon all religions to be alike, with regard to the favour of God.
" The turning from Mahometanism to Christianity," says he, " or
from Christianity to Mahometanism, is only a laying aside one ex
ternal form of religion, and making use of another, which is of no
more real benefit, than a man's changing the colour of his clothes,
by putting off a red coat, and putting on a blue one in its stead."*
He elsewhere represents it as an indifferent matter, " whether aman
aman adopts Judaism, or Paganism, or Mahometanism, or Chris
tianity ;" and what is more extraordinary, he would put this upon
us, as St. Peter's sentiment as well as his own ; and endeavours,
after his manner, to prove it from that noted passage, Acts x, 34, 35.
Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons ; but in
every nation, he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is ac
cepted with him. He pretends, that St. Peter here teacheth, " that
faith in any religious leader, or his ministry, is altogether super
numerary, and that he hath excluded both faith and infidelity out
of the case :"f as if the apostle there designed to tell Cornelius, that
it was of no manner of importance whether he believed in Jesus
Christ or not; which is to make him speak in direct contradiction
to the very design of his being sent to Cornelius, and of all his sub
sequent discourse to him. St. Peter signifieth indeed, in the words
cited by this author, that whosoever in any nation, like Cornelius,
truly feared and worshipped God, and practised righteousness,
should be accepted of him, though not belonging to the Jewish
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 33, 34. f lb'0*- vol. i. p. 295  302.

Let. XIV. mr. chubb's posthumous works. 193
nation, or initiated into the Mosaic polity ; but he certainly never
intended to signify, that the embracing Christianity was a matter
of mere indifference. Cornelius's piety and good dispositions would
have rendered him acceptable to God, though he had not heard of
Christ; but when he had an opportunity of being informed, that
very piety and fear of God led him to receive those significations
of the divine will, and to believe in Jesus Christ whom he had
sent. The great importance and advantage of faith in Christ, in
such a case, is evidently supposed in St. Peter's whole discourse,
who was extraordinarily sent on purpose to instruct him in it.
This writer thinks proper to find fault with the author of the Acts
of the Apostles, for laying so great a stress on the conversion of
Jews or heathens to Christianity, which, in his opinion, is "of little
consequence as to the favour of God, or their future safety, because,
if they were virtuous and good men, they were secure without such
conversion, and if they were bad vicious men, they were not se
cured by it."* But if they were good men before, and were thereby
put in the way of greater improvements in goodness, more fully
instructed in religion, raised to more glorious hopes, and furnished^
with more excellent helps, and more powerful animating encou
ragements to all virtue and universal righteousness ; or if they
were bad men, involved in gross ignorance and idolatry, super
stition and vice, which was the general character of the heathens
when the gospel appeared, and by turning to Christianity were
brought to the knowledge and pure adoration of the only
true God, and engaged to forsake their evil ways, and to
live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world ;
and no other were accounted true Christian converts ; this,
by the author's own acknowledgment, must have been a signal
advantage. He himself had said a little before, " if the revela
tion referred to could furnish me with useful knowledge, or
with a better rule of life, or with more powerful excitements to
the practice of virtue and true religion, than at present I am in
possession of, and thereby I should be made a wiser and a better
man, then I acknowledge, that such conviction would be bene
ficial to me in proportion to such improvement."+ This is evi
dently the case of the Christian revelation, wherever it is sincerely
believed and embraced, and men give themselves up to its divine
conduct ; and therefore those to whom this revelation is offered,
and who yet despise and reject it, are justly chargeable with great
guilt ; for it cannot be a slight guilt to reject the valuable means
and helps which God hath, in his infinite wisdom and goodness,
provided, for promoting our spiritual improvement, and engaging
and enabling us to work out our own salvation : nor can any thing
be more unreasonable than to pretend, as the enemies of revelation
have often done, that because virtue and righteousness are what
God approves, therefore faith is unnecessary, and of no consequence
at all. The very contrary follows from it : for, if moral improve-
» Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 33. t Ibid. p. 32.
o

194 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIV.
ment and true holiness be of such vast importance, then certainly
the best and properest means for attaining to it are very needful,
and to be highly valued ; and such are the means and helps which
the religion of Jesus affordeth, as laid down in the Holy Scrip
tures : and to reject those means and assistances, under pretence
of obtaining the end without them, is a most absurd and criminal
conduct, justly displeasing in the sight of God, and a most un
worthy return to his infinite goodness.
I shall conclude my remarks on Mr. Chubb's Posthumous Works,
with taking notice of a remarkable passage at the end of the eighth
section of his Farewell to his Readers. After having done all he
could to expose the Scriptures, and shew that it is not safe to appeal
to them, he draws this conclusion from the whole: that "this shews
"the great propriety of our returning back to that prior rule of action,
" which is the ground and foundation of moral truth, and conse-
" quently of moral certainty ; viz. that eternal and invariable rule of
" right and wrong, as to an infallible guide, and as the solid ground
" of our peace and safety, which rule we are too easily diverted
" from.*" He seems to speak here, as if Christians, and those that
were for adhering to Scripture as their rule, had no regard to the
rule of right and wrong, or to the nature and reason of things, which
is a gross misrepresentation ; and as if the deists were under the
conduct of an infallible guide. Particularly it is to be supposed,
that he would have it to be understood that he himself hath taken
care to follow the infallible guide he recommends : but if we are to
judge by the effect it has had upon himself, we have no great
encouragement to entertain a very favourable opinion of thead van tage
we shall obtain by forsaking the Scripture, under pretence of follow
ing such a guide. For what is it, that his infallible guide has
directed him to? It has inclined him to deny a particular providence,
or that God now interposeth in ordering or governing the affairs of
men, and the events relating to them, whether with regard to nations
or particular persons, and consequently has directed him not to make
a dependence on providence, a trust in God, or resignation to his
will, any part of his religion : it hath taught him not to expect any
gracious assistances from God, or to apply to him for them : it
leaveth him at a loss whether it be proper to pray to God at all,
and inclineth him to think that it is the safest way to let it alone :
nor doth this guide inform him, whether men's souls are material or
immaterial, or whether they shall subsist after death, or shall die
and perish with the body, or whether there shall be a future state
in which God will call men to an account for their actions : or, if
there shall be a future judgment, his guide leadeth him to apprehend
that it shall extend but to a small part of the human race, and but
to a few of the actions they perform ; that they shall not be called
to an account for the blasphemies they may have uttered against
God, or for any neglect of duties that more immediately relate to
the Deity, or for private injuries they do to one another, or for any
* Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 219.

Let. XV. " 11EIS.1I FAIRLY STATED,'' &C 19,<)
actions at all but those which concern tlie public; and how far
these are to extend, he hath not thought fit to inform us. I cannot
see therefore but that it is much better to follow the light the
Scripture affordeth us, which giveth us clear instructions in these
and other things of great importance, concerning which our author's
infallible guide, according to his account of the matter, hath given
him no directions at all, or hath given him wrong ones.
I have now finished my observations on Mr. Chubb's Posthumous
Works, which I have perhaps enlarged upon more than they really
deserve. But I have chosen to do it, both because they seem to be
of a dangerous tendency, and well fitted to do mischief, and have by
some persons been very much extolled, and because there has been no
answer, that I know of, given to those books. I do not love to
make reflections that seem to bear hard upon any man's integrity :
but I think it cannot be denied, that, notwithstanding his great
pretences to plainness and candour, and an impartial love of truth
and liberty, there are very apparent marks of great disingenuity in
his writings. The nature of this work would not admit of my
entering into a more minute examination ; but there are few
things of consequence in his two volumes which are, not here taken
notice of.

LETTER XV.

Observations uponn Pamphlet, intitled, Deism fairly Stated, and fully Vindicated. — The
Author's pompous Account of Deism, and his way of stating the Question between
Christians and Deists, considered. — Concerning the differences among Christians about
the Way of knowing the Scriptures to be the Word of God. — The Charge he brings
against the Christian Religion, as consisting only of unintelligible Doctrines and useless
Institutions, and his Pretence, that the Moral Precepts do not belong to Christianity
at all, but are the Property of Deists, shewn to be vain and groundless. — The Cor
ruption? of Christians no just Argument against true Christianity. — A brief Account
of Lord Bolingbroke's Attempt against the Scriptures in his Letters on the Study and
Use of History.
Sir,
Having considered pretty largely Mr. Chubb's Posthumous
Works, I shall now send you some observations upon a pamphlet,
which, though originally written by another hand, is said to have
been revised by Mr. Chubb, and to have undergone considerable
alterations and amendments : it is intitled Deism fairly Stated,
and fully Vindicated, and was published in 1746. And as it hath
been much boasted of, I shall distinctly consider both the account
the author of it gives of deism, and the attempt he hath made to
expose the Christian revelation.
In his account of deism he treads in the steps of Dr. Tindal, and
o 2

196 a View of the deistical writers. Let. XV.
it might be sufficient to refer to the remarks that have been made

¦"to"

upon that writer's scheme, of which some account was given in the
tenth Letter. But let us examine our author's pretensions more
distinctly. He tells us that "deism is no other than the religion essential to
man, the true original religion of nature and reason.*" And because
Christian divines have asserted, that the gospel contains the true
religion of reason and nature, he represents them, and particularly
the present bishop of London, and Mr. (now Dr.) Samuel Chandler,
as acknowledging, that "deism is the alone excellence and true glory
" of Christianity," and pretends that what he has cited from them
proves, that "deism is all in the Christian institution that can pos-
"sibly approve itself to the true genuine reason of man.f" And
accordingly he declares, that "every thing that is enjoined in the
" gospel to be believed as a rational doctrine, or practised as a
"natural duty, relating to God, our neighbours, and ourselves, is an
"established part of deism."]:" And through his whole book he
supposes deism to comprehend every doctrine and precept which is
founded in reason and nature, or, as he sometimes expresseth it, in
truth and reason, i. e. it comprehendeth every doctrine and precept
that is true and just and reasonable.
That we may judge of the fairness of this writer in stating the
point, it is proper to observe, that the thing he would be thought to
vindicate is the religion of those that call themselves deists, and who
reject revelation, and oppose Christianity. This is the only deism
in question, and which it concerneth him to state and vindicate.
But he has thought fit all along to represent deism and natural
religion as terms of the same signification ; whereas deism, as we
are now considering it, is to be understood, not precisely of natural
religion, as comprehending those truths which have a real foundation
in reason and nature, and which is so far from being opposite to
Christianity, that it is one great design of the gospel to clear and
enforce it; but of that religion which every man is to find out for
himself by the mere force of natural reason, independent of all
revelation, and exclusive of it. It is concerning this that the
inquiry properly proceeds. Dr. Tindal was sensible of it; and
therefore is for sending every man to the oracle in his own breast
as the only guide to duty and happiness, which alone he is to consult,
without having any regard to revelation : and accordingly he
frequently represents the religion of nature as so clearly known to
all men, even to those that cannot read in their mother tongue, as to
render any farther revelation perfectly needless and useless. But
if the question be concerning natural religion in this sense, it is far
from deserving all the fine encomiums which this writer, after Dr.
Tindal, so liberally bestows upon : he represents it as so perfect, that
nothing can be added to it : and therefore will not allow, that Chris
tianity can be said to be "grounded on natural religion, or to be an
* Deism fairly Stated, &c. p. 5.
t Ibid. p. G. } Ibid. p. 7.

Let. XV. " deism fairly stated," &c. 197
"improvement of it:" for he declares, that he "cannot possibly
" conceive how an entire and perfect structure (which is the case of
" natural religion) can be only a foundation of a perfect structure,
" or how a perfect religion can be improved.*" Here he securely
assumes the very thing in question, viz. that the religion which
every man knoweth of himself by his own unassisted reason is so
perfect, as to be incapable of receiving any addition or improvement,
even from divine revelation: which is in other words to say, that
every man by his own reason, exclusively of all revelation, takes in
the whole of religious truth and duty, which is founded in the
nature of things, and knows as much of it already as God can teach
him : and that a divine revelation can give him no farther light or
stronger assurance, relating to any thing that it is proper for him to
believe or practise in religion, than what his bare reason informs
him of without it.
Among the encomiums which our author bestows upon deism,
one is, that it is " no other than the religion essential to manj-f- " a
phrase that he and others of the deistical writers seem fond of.
But will these sagacious gentlemen undertake to inform the world
what kind or degree of religion is essential to the human nature ?
Or, if they could oblige the world with that discovery, is nothing
valuable in religion but what is essential to man ? If revelation
discovereth to us some things of importance which we could not
attain to the knowledge of by bare unassisted reason; or giveth us
farther assurances concerning some things, as to which we were
doubtful before, and setteth them in a clearer light ; or exhibiteth
a more complete system of duty ; or furnisheth more powerful mo
tives to animate us to the practice of it ; must all these dis
coveries be rejected, under pretence that what we thus receive by
revelation is not essential to man? Might not all improvements
of every kind be discarded for the same reason? And so man must
be left in his pure essentials. And then what a fine figure would
the human nature make !
Besides this general account of deism, our author takes upon him
to exhibit some fundamental credenda of a deist ; and he might
easily find a plausible scheme of natural religion formed ready to
his hand by Christian writers, and then put it upon the. world for
pure genuine deism. Among these fundamental articles of the reli
gion of a deist, he reckons the belief of a future state of rewards and
punishments. But is this a point in which the deists are agreed '!
Lord Bolingbroke every-where sets up for a deist of the first rank,
and glories in that character, and yet he does all he can to weaken
or subvert that which is here put upon us as a fundamental article
of the deistical creed : and Mr. Chubb, who no doubt would pass
with our author for a true deist, though sometimes, like this writer,
he makes a great shew of believing not only the truth but the im
portance of that doctrine, yet in several passages of his Fareivell to
his Readers, and especially in his fourth and fifth sections, where" he
* Deism fairly Stated, <5cc. p. 13. t Ibid. p. 513.

198 a view of the deistical writers. Let. XV
treats professedly of this subject, setteth himself to shew that it is
altogether uncertain, and incapable of being proved, and that the
probability lies against it.* Thus it is that these gentlemen are
sometimes willing to make a fair appearance with their principles,
till persons are drawn in, and fully initiated in the mysteries
of deism.
This author gives us twelve propositions with great pomp, most of
which have nothing to do with the debate between Christians and
deists, and others of them are very ambiguous, f In his seventh
proposition he layeth it down as a principle, that "to govern our
"conduct by our reason is our duty, and all that God requireth of us."
If the meaning be, that God requireth nothing from us but what we
know by our bare unassisted reason to be our duty, and that jf any
thing farther be revealed to be our duty, we are not obliged to per
form it, because we did not know it to be so by our own natural
reason independently of that revelation, it is false and absurd : for
when God requireth us to be governed by our reason, it must be
supposed to be his intention, that we should take in all proper helps
and assistances. And if he is pleased in his great goodness to give
us additional discoveries of his will and our duty for enlightening
and assisting our reason, then certainly we are obliged, and it is
what reason itself and the religion of nature requireth of us, to pay
a regard to those discoveries ; so as to believe the truths which he
has been pleased to reveal, and to practise those duties which he
has seen fit to enjoin: and not to do so would be highly criminal.
The four last of his twelve propositions are designed to shew,
that reason and nature sufficiently instruct us without revelation, as
to the methods of reconciliation with the Deity, when we have offen
ded him by our sins, and give us a certain assurance that God will
reinstate us in his favour upon our repentance and reformation. I
have elsewhere considered this subject at large in answer to Tindal,
who had particularly insisted upon it."); At present I shall only ob
serve, that though nature and reason seem to^direct us to repentance
and reformation in case of our being conscious of having offended
God and transgressed his holy laws, yet reason and nature could not
give us certain information, how far repentance shall be available to
avert the punishment we had incurred, or what shall be the extent of
the divine forgiveness, or how far an obedience like ours, mixed with
many failures and defects, and which faileth short in many instances
of what the divine law requires, shall be rewarded. We do not
know enough of God, of the reasons and ends ofthe divine govern
ment, and of what may be necessary for vindicating the authority
of his laws, to be able to pronounce with certainty, by the meue
light of our own unassisted reason, what measures his governing
wisdom and righteousness may think fit to take with regard to guilty
creatures that have sinned against him. Will any reasonable man
pretend, that God himself cannot discover any thing to us, which it

* S-e before, p. 2«0, & seq. t Deism fairly Slated, kc. p. 37—40.
} The Answer to Christianity as old as the Creation, vol. i. c. 6.

Let. XV. " DEISM FAIRLY STATED," cVc. 199
may be proper for us to know, relating to the methods of his dealings
towards us, the terms of our acceptance with him, or the retributions
of a future state, but what we ourselves knew as well before f Or,
if he should condescend to make discoveries to us of this sort, and
give us assurances relating to matters of such great importance, ought
we not to be thankful for such discoveries? especially since it is
certain in fact, that men in all ages and nations have been under
great anxieties" and uncertainties about the proper means of pro
pitiating an offended Deity.
Our author mentions it to the praise of deism, that " it is that
religion of nature and reason, which was believed and practised
by Socrates, and those of old," whom he represents as having been
ornaments to human nature.* Thus he seems to think it a greater
honour to be a disciple of Socrates than of Jesus Christ. But why
are we to be turned back to the religion of Socrates, who have a
light so vastly superior to that which he enjoyed ? However he
may be justly commended for having attained so far, considering
the circumstances he was under (though in many things he fell in
with the established superstition of his age and country), is this
a reason why we should be sent to that philosopher to learn a
right scheme of religion, when we have a far more excellent one in
our hands, and recommended by a much higher authority? He
was himself sensible of his need of farther assistances, and a divine
instructor ; and shall we who have that inestimable advantage, de
spise the light given us from heaven, and be desirous to return to
that state of darkness and uncertainty of which he complained, and
from which he wanted to be delivered ?
The remarks that have been made will help us to judge of those
passages in which he pretendeth to give the true state of the ques
tion between deists and Christians. " The single question," saith
he, " between Christians and deists is, whether the belief of rational
doctrines, and the practice of natural duties, are all that are strictly
necessary with regard to the divine approbation, and consequently
human happiness ?"-f- And again, when he professes to come to
the point, he says, "The grand foundation of the difference be
tween the deists and the religious of all other persuasions is, whe
ther any doctrine or precept that has not its foundation apparently
in reason or nature, can be of the essence of religion, and with
propriety be said to be a religious doctrine or precept."*); Here
he supposes, and it runs through his whole book, that nothing can
be properly said to belong to religion, but what plainly appeareth
to the understanding of every man, without any assistance from
divine revelation, to be founded in nature and reason. The ques
tion then, though not clearly stated by this writer, is this: whether
God can make any additional discoveries in relation to doctrines to
be believed, or duties to be practised, concerning which we had no
certain information by the bare light of unassisted nature and rea-
* Deism fairlv Stated, p. 5. t Ibid. p. 7. See also p. 8—10.
X Ibid. p. 14.

200 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XV.
son ? And if God hath made such discoveries, whether it would
not in that case be necessary, that those to whom these discoveries
are made should believe those doctrines, and practise those duties ?
Whether, because our own natural reason did not inform us of them
without revelation, therefore when they are revealed to us, we may
safely and innocently reject them as useless and unnecessary, and
as not belonging to religion at all ? Or whether reason and nature
do not require it of us as an indispenable duty, to pay a just sub
mission and regard to the significations and discoveries of the di
vine will concerning truth or duty, in whatever way they are made
known to us ? These are questions, which one should think would
admit of an easy decision : since nothing could be more absurd,
than to lay it down as a principle, that God can make no farther
discoveries of truth and duty to be believed and practised by us,
but what all men know of themselves by their own unassisted rea
son ; or that, if he should, we are not obliged to receive or regard
these discoveries.
It is very usual with the deistical writers, and this author among
the rest,' to put the question, whether reason or revelation be the
best guide, as if there were an opposition or inconsistency between
them : but the proper question is, whether reason left merely to
itself, and with the many frailties, corruptions, and defects to which
it is now subject, or reason with the assistance of divine revelation,
be the best guide to duty and happiness ? Revelation indeed
would be of little use, if we were to take his account of it. He tells
us, that by " pure revelation must be meant, that which is of such
a nature as to be quite out of reason's province to form any judg
ment about it: That matters supernatural are incapable of an exa
mination by natural reason, or of being approved as reasonable :
And that surely no man can be rationally convinced of what lies
quite out of the reach of his reasoning faculties to form any judg
ment at all about."* This he frequently repeats, and seems to
value himself upon this way of putting the case. But it is grossly
misrepresented. None of the friends of revelation understand by
it, that about which we are not capable of forming any judgment at
all : on the contrary, they generally agree that we must make use
of our reason, both in judging of the evidences of divine revelation,
whereby it is proved to be from God, and of the sense and meaning
of its doctrines and precepts. But our author thinks fit to play
upon the word supernatural, as if by it were meant that which is
absolutely unintelligible and absurd ; whereas a thing may be so
far supernatural, that we could not have discovered it merely by our
own reason without a divine revelation, and yet, when discovered
to us, we may be able to form a judgment concerning it, and may
see it to be worthy of God, and of an excellent tendency, and as
such our reason may approve it.
Having considered that part of the pamphlet in which the author
pretends to give a fair state and vindication of deism as opposed to
* Deism fairly Stated, p. 2, 24.

Let. XV. " DEISM FAIRLY STATED," «&:C, 201
revelation, I shall now take some notice of what he hath advanced
with regard to the Christian revelation in particular.
He says, "the material question between rational Christians
and deists depends upon the proof that is made by Christians, that
the Scriptures are a divine revelation, and the very word of God ;
for if this point be proved, the controversy is at an end." But here
he complains of the want of unanimity among Christians, in a point
of such importance. "The Roman Catholics say, We know the
Scriptures to be the word of God, only by the testimony of the
church ; and among Protestants, some say, They are known to be
the word of God by themselves, to those only whose eyes the Spirit
of God is pleased to open, to perceive the characters of divine truth
impressed on them : others maintain, that they will manifestly ap
pear to be the word of God by themselves, upon an honest inves
tigation of mere natural reason, to any man who shall impartially
exercise it about them.'-* But if the matter be rightly considered,
there is not so great a difference among Christian writers about
the way of knowing the Scriptures to be the word of God, as is
pretended. Christians in general are agreed, that the extraordi
nary facts recorded in the gospel are true, and that those facts
prove the divine mission of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the truth
and divinity of that scheme of religion which was published to
the world in his name. They agree, that the Scriptures contain
a faithful and authentic account of the doctrines and laws deliv
ered by Christ and his apostles, and of the illustrious attestations
whereby they were confirmed : That they were committed to writ
ing by the apostles themselves, who were eye and ear witnesses
of what they relate, or by their most intimate companions, and
were published in the first age of the Christian church, the age
in which those doctrines and laws were delivered, and the facts
were done : That these writings have remarkable internal cha
racters of truth and divinity in the goodness and excellence of
the doctrines, the purity of the precepts, the force and power of
the motives, that unaffected simplicity and impartial regard to
truth which everywhere appears, and in the admirable tendency
of the whole to promote the glory of God,' and the good of man
kind, without any traces or views of "worldly policy, ambition,
avarice, or sensuality. And though some talk of these characters
as discernible by the aid of the Holy Spirit, and others by the
investigation of human reason, yet neither do the former intend to
exclude human reason from having any concern in that inquiry,
nor do the latter design to exclude the assistance of the Holy
Spirit ; since it is generally acknowledged among Christians, and
is highly agreeable to reason itself, that it is proper to apply to
God, the author of light, and giver of all inward illumination, as
Lord Herbert calls him, to assist us in our inquiries, and by pu
rifying our souls from vicious affections, and corrupt prejudices,
to prepare our minds for a due reception of religious and moral
* Deism fairly Stated, p. 16—24.

202 . A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XV.
truth. I add, that though some have talked of corruptions in the
sacred writings, yet Christians are generally agreed, that the
Scriptures are transmitted to us without any such general corrup
tion as to make any alteration in the doctrines and facts, and that
they are delivered down to us by a credible uninterrupted tradition,
greater than can be produced for any other books in the world ;
by the testimony not merely ofthe church in one age, but in every
age, from the time in which they were written ; and not merely by
any one party of Christians, but by those of different sects and
parties, by friends and enemies. Any one that considereth the
several things now mentioned, and which have been often urged
by Christians of all denominations, by the best of the Popish, as
well as Protestant writers, who have appeared in defence of Chris
tianity, will see that there is a more general agreement among
them, in what concerneth the proofs of the divine original and au
thority of the sacred writings, than our author seems willing to
allow. With regard to prophecy and miracles, which are insisted on by
all Christian writers as proofs of the divinity of the Christian reli
gion, he will not allow them to be any proofs of it all ; because
they do not prove, that "the collection of tracts commonly called
the Bible were written by the persons respectively whose names
they bear; that the Deity immediately dictated to each writer the
subject matter contained therein ; and that these books have been
faithfully transmitted down to us without any corruption, altera
tion, addition, or diminution."* Mr. Chubb has the same thought,
and seems very fond of it, for he has it over and over again in his
Farewell to his Readers. But if prophecies and miracles exhibited
sufficient credentials to the divine mission of our Lord Jesus Christ
and of his apostles, who published to the world the doctrines and
laws ofthe Christian religion ; and if the Scriptures contain a just
and faithful account of those prophecies and miracles, and of the
doctrines and laws so attested and confirmed, and delivered by
those divinely authorized teachers: dotb not this lay a just foun
dation for receiving those doctrines and laws as of divine authority?
As to their being written by the persons whose names they bear,
and their being safely transmitted to us, without any material cor
ruption or alteration, this needeth no miracles to prove it ; it must
be proved by other mediums, such as by the acknowledgment of
all mankind are sufficient to prove things of that kind. If these
writings can be traced up, as they certainly may, from our own
times, by unquestionable evidence, to the very age in which they
were written ; and if they have been all along acknowledged to
have been written by those to whom they are ascribed, and even
the enemies who lived nearest those times never contested it; and
if it can be demonstrated, that, as the case was circumstanced, a
general corruption of those writings in the doctrines and facts, if
any had attempted it, would have been an impossible thing ; this
* Deism fairly Stated, p. 22, 26.

Let. XV. "deism fairly stated,'' Sec. 203
ought to satisfy an impartial inquirer ; and this is capable of as
clear a proof as the nature of the thing can admit, and which, as
hath been already hinted, is superior to what can be produced for
any other book in the world. And the man that would doubt of
such evidence in any other case, would be looked upon as ridicu
lously scrupulous, and be thought to carry his scepticism to an un
reasonable height.
As to the subject matter of the Christian revelation, this writer
is for stripping it of every doctrine that is founded in nature and
reason; though there are several important doctrines of that kind,
e. g. those relating to the attributes and providence of God and
a state of future retributions, which Christianity was manifestly
intended to confirm and establish, and set in a clearer light. If
we are to take his account of it, it consisteth wholly of specula
tive, metaphysical, unintelligible doctrines, which lie out of the
reach of reason to determine whether they be true or false, or to
pass any judgment at all about them; and of positive institutions
which he pretends by the confession of Christian divines are no
constituent parts of religion.* By saying they are no constituent
parts of religion, he evidently intends, that they have nothing to
do with religion, and are of no use or significancy at all ; whereas
the divines he refers to agree, that the positive institutions of
Christianity do belong to religion as valuable instrumental duties
which have a tendency to subserve and promote the great ends
of all religion, and are, when rightly improved, of signal use and
benefit. After having observed, that many parts of Scripture are mys
terious and unintelligible, he saith, that to suppose that God gives
forth unintelligible instructions and propositions to his creatures is
to prove him, in fact, a mere trifer.f And he urges, that " as
certain as a being of perfect rectitude has given a revelation so
certain it is, that not any thing in that revelation can be found
on a strict inquiry unrevealed, i. e. not understood by men of
learning, penetration, diligence, and industry.";}" The design of
this is to insinuate, that if there be any one thing in the Bible
even in the prophetical parts of it, which is not understood by
men of learning and diligence, the whole is false; or if there be
any circumstance in the revelation obscure, it cannot be a 'true
divine revelation. But may it not reasonably be supposed, that
in a revelation designed not merely for any one particular age, but
for the use of mankind in every succeeding age, as there are
many things, and those of the greatest importance, sufficiently
clear and intelligible at all times, so there may be some things
not well understood at one time, which afterwards are cleared up
by farther inquiry, or a more diligent search, or by comparing
predictions with events? Or, may not things which are revealed
to us as far as it is necessary they should be so, yet have some
things attending them, the manner of which we are not able
* Deism fairly Stated, p. 2, 6, 16, 21, 58. t Ibid. p. 26, 34. ' Ibid. p. 83.

204 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XV.
clearly to explain jand understand ? Is not this the case of many
important points of what is called natural religion, relating to
the providence and attributes of God, the divine eternity, immen
sity, omniscience, the creation of the world, &c. ? And must we
reject what we do understand, and the great usefulness of which
we clearly apprehend, because there is something relating to it
which we cannot distinctly conceive !
As to the objections he makes against some particular doctrines of
Christianity, as unintelligible and absurd, or at least as absolutely
useless, this entirely depends upon the strange and unfair represent
ation he has been pleased to make of them. Thus he supposes
Christians to maintain it as a doctrine of Scripture, that "an original,
" uncompounded, immaterial, and pure spirit, should, like one ofthe
"derived, compounded, material, human species, have a Son."* As
if Christians understood God's having a Son, in the same gross,
literal, and carnal sense in which one man begets another.
He pronounces, that "the supposed satisfaction for sin by Christ's
"death is a doctrine entirely repugnant to reason, and as such ought to
" be rejected with scorn. "f Mr. Chubb has passed the same censure
upon it, which is owing to the absurd light in which he has thought
fit to represent it, concerning which see before. But the doc
trine of our redemption and reconciliation through the obedience
and sufferings of our Lord Jesus Christ, considered as taught in the
holy Scriptures, hath nothing in it but what is worthy of God, and
of an excellent tendency.
He mentions another doctrine, which he owns to be intelligible
enough, but represents it as good for nothing, and as of no more
consequence to the world in general, than there being a burning
mountain in the kingdom of Naples, is an advantage to the people of
of England. And he thinks " it is greatly improbable, that God
"should especially interpose to acquaintthe world with what mankind
"would do altogether as well without.";}' The doctrine he here refers
to is that of God's judging the world by Jesus Christ. But this,
rightly considered, is a noble part of the gospel scheme, and capable
of being improved to the most excellent purposes. It renders the
whole harmonious and consistent, in that the same glorious and divine
Person by whom God made the world, and by whom as the great in
strument he carried on his gracious designs for recovering mankind
from their ruinous and lost estate, is appointed to be the judge of all
men, and dispenser of future retributions. And what farther shews
the propriety of appointing Christ to be the judge is, that this is the
last perfective act of the kingdom and dominion committed to him as
Mediator, and that it is to be regarded as a reward of his amazing hu
miliation and self-abasement, and of his unparalleled obedience and
sufferings in our nature, in compliance with his heavenly father's will.
To which it may be added, that nothing can be fuller of comfort to
good men, than that the benevolent Saviour of mankind will judge the
* Deism fairly Stated, p. 66. t Ibid. p. 41.
t Deism fairly Stated, p. 35.

Let. XV. " DEISM FAIRLY STATED," &C. 205
world in the father's name ; since it yields a satisfactory proof, that
it is the will of God, that the judgment should be conducted, not
with the utmost rigour of unallayed justice, but with great equity,
so as to make all proper allowances for human weakness and infirmity,
as far as is consistent with unbiassed truth and righteousness. And
at the same time it hath a manifest tendency to strike an awe into
the impenitent rejecters of the divine grace and goodness, to consider
that they must be accountable to that Lord and Saviour whom they
rejected and despised. What a mighty enforcement must it give to
his authority and laws, that he himself shall call us to an account
as to our obedience or disobedience to those laws, and will have it in
his power to fulfil his own glorious promises to them that believe and
obey him, and to execute his awful threatenings against the finally
impenitent and disobedient.
There are several other things he repeats which are urged by almost
every deistical writer, and which I have had occasion frequently to
mention, such as the contradictory interpretations put on several
passages of Scripture, different translations, errors of transcribers, 8cc.
But that which he seems to lay a particular stress upon is the cor
ruption of Christians. He speaks of the abominable wickedness that
has rode triumphant in the Christian world : and that " the Americans
" have too much reason to consider the coming of Christians and
" Christianity among them as the greatest evil and curse that ever
" befel them.*" But if professed Christians have made religion a
cover for their ambition, avarice, and cruelty, Christianity is not ac
countable for this. And whosoever considers the best accounts of
the Americans before Christianity came among them ; their gross
ignorance and barbarity, their human sacrifices, and the abominable
vices and customs which prevailed among them,-j- must be sensible,
that if the pure religion of Jesus, as taught in the gospel by Christ
and his apostles, had been published and received among them in its
genuine purity and simplicity, it would have been the happiest thing
that could have befallen them; and the greatest fault is, that little
care has been taken to instruct them and the other heathen nations,
in the true Christian religion as delivered in the holy Scriptures.
Notwithstanding the corruptions so complained of in the Christian
world, it is undeniable, that what there is of knowledge and true
religion among men, is principally where Christianity is professed.
But if all were true that is pretended concerning the depravity
of those that call themselves Christians, it would only prove,
that they are very much fallen from the religion they profess, but
not that Christianity itself is false, or was not originally from God.
Whilst it can be shewn, as it may be with the utmost evidence,
that considered in itself, and as contained in the Scriptures, it is of
the most excellent tendency, and that the uniform design of its
doctrines, precepts, promises, and threatenings, is to promote the
cause of virtue and righteousness in the world, and to reclaim men
from vice and wickedness ; it is certainly very unreasonable and
* Deism fairly Stated, p. 47, 48. t Bayle's Dictionary, article Leon [Peter Cuccade].

205 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XV,
unfair to make Christianity answerable for the abuses and corrup
tions it condemneth. If every thing must be rejected which hath
been abused, government and civil polity, knowledge and literature,
religion, liberty, and reason itself, must be discarded.
One of the most remarkable things in the tract we are now con
sidering is, that the author will not allow that the moral precepts of
Christianity properly belong to it all, or make any part of the Chris
tian religion. He pretends, that Christian divines, in order to render
Christianity amiable, have decked her with the graceful ornaments of
moral precepts; whereas in Christianity the moral precepts are but
borrowed ware, the property of the deists, and as much distinguished
from Christianity, as Christianity is from Mahometanism. Thus
he hath found out an admirable expedient to strip Christianity of
what hath been hitherto esteemed one of its principal glories. The
holy and excellent precepts which the great Author of our religion
taught and enjoined in the name of God, and to enforce which by
the most weighty and important motives was one great design of his
and his apostles' ministry, do not, it seems, belong to Christianity at
all. Moral precepts, according to this writer, make no part of divine
revelation, and of the scheme of religion delivered in the Gospel ;
though to clear and shew them in their just extent, and enforce them
by a divine authority, and by the most prevailing motives, seems to
be one of the noblest ends for which a divine revelation could be
given to mankind. Supposing, which was really the case, that the
world was sunk into an amazing darkness and corruption, there was
nothing that was more wanted than to have a pure system of morals,
containing the whole of our duty with respect to God, our neighbours,
and ourselves, delivered, not as the opinions of wise men and philo
sophers, but as the laws of God himself, and enforced by all the
sanctions of a divine authority, and by ail the charms of a divine
grace and goodness. This is what hath been done by the Christian (
revelation ; and its great usefulness to this purpose, and the need the
world stood in of it, is excellently represented by Mr. Locke, in his
Reasonableness of Christianity, * quoted at large by Dr. Benson in
his remarks on this pamphlet, who very j ustly observes, that this
great man had fully obviated before-hand all that the author of Deism
fairly Slated hath advanced on this subject.
The last argument he urgeth against the Christian revelation is
drawn from its not having been universally spread in all ages and na
tions. I shall not say any thing here to this objection, which hath
been often repeated and answered. It had been particularly insisted
upon by Dr. Tindal, and was fully considered in the answers that
were made to him. Some notice was taken of it in the observations
on Lord Herbert's scheme. And it may be observed, as Mr. Chubb
himself seems to think, that no great stress should be laid upon it;
and he will not take upon him to affirm, that the non-universality of
a revelation is a just objection against its divinity.-f-
Soon after Deism fairly Stated, &c. appeared, Dr. Benson pub-
* Locke's Works, vol. ii. p. 575 — 579. 4th edit.
t Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 218, 219.

Let. XV. bolingbroke's letters. 207
lished animadversions upon it, in the second edition of the Reason
ableness of Christianity as delivered in the Scriptures, London, 1746:
To which there is added an appendix, in which he solidly vindicates
the arguments he had offered in his Reasonableness of Christianity,
&c. against the exceptions of this writer, and charges him not only
with false reasonings, but with gross misrepresentations. The same
charge is urged against him in a tract published by the Reverend
Mr. Capel Berrow, though without his name, intitled, Deism not con
sistent with the Religion of Nature and Reason ; — " wherein are ob
viated the most popular objections brought against Christianity,
" those especially which are urged by a moral philosopher, in a late
"extraordinary pamphlet, styled Deism fairly Stated, and fully Viri-
"dicated, in a letter to a friend — London, 1751." There were other
answers to Deism fairly Stated, which I have not seen. I shall con
clude my reflections upon it with observing, that this pamphlet fur
nishes remarkable instances to verify the observation I had occasion
to make before* concerning the unfair conduct of the deistical writers,
and the strange liberties they take in misrepresenting the sense of the
Christian writers whom they quote.
It may not be improper here to take some notice of the attempt
made against the authority of the sacred writings in the late Lord
Bolingbroke's Letters ou the Study and Use of History. In some
of these letters he hath used his utmost efforts to subvert the credit
of the scripture history ; but the method he has made use of to this
purpose seems not to be well chosen, nor consistent with itself. A
principal reason which his Lordship produces to invalidate the credit
and authority of the old Testament history is, that the Greeks were
not acquainted with it ; and that their accounts, particularly with
regard to the Assyrian empire, do not agree with the accounts given
of it in Scripture. And yet he himself has taken great pains to shew
that the ancient Greeks were fabulous writers, and that their accounts,
of ancient times, either with regard to other nations, or their own,
are not to be depended on : and accordingly he hath let us know,
that if they had perfectly agreed with the accounts given in the Jew
ish Scriptures, he would have had very little regard to them, and
would not have looked upon this to be any argument of their truth.
Many learned writers have produced testimonies from heathen authors,
tending to strengthen some remarkable passages in the scripture his
tory. This his Lordship finds great fault with, and chargeth it as a
most partial and absurd conduct to admit the testimony of the heathen
writers, if they happen at any time to agree with the scripture ac
counts, and to reject their testimony when against them. But if the
matter be fairly weighed, there is nothing in this but what is very
reasonable: for, considering the strong prejudices of the heathens
against the Jews, whose whole religion and policy were so opposite
to theirs, it is evident that no great stress can be laid upon what
they say against them, and their history ; and yet if any thing be
found in their writings, which tendeth to confirm the facts recorded
• * See above, let. vii.

208 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XV.
in the Jewish sacred books, it is just to take advantage of this;
since it is plain this could not be owing to a favourable preposses
sion towards the Jews, or their histories, but to the force of truth,
or to some traditions which they looked upon as authentic. For
though the testimonies are not much to be regarded, when they
are to the prejudice of those for whom they have a declared
aversion, yet the testimony of enemies in favour of those to whom
they are known to be enemies, has been always looked upon to be
of great weight.
In order to invalidate the Scripture history, his Lordship has
thought fit to repeat what had been often mentioned by the writers
on that side : That the Jewish sacred books were lost in the Baby
lonish captivity ; that there have been such corruptions and alter
ations in the copies, that there can be no dependence upon them ;
that there is no proof of the Gospels having been written in the
apostolic age ; that they were not distinguished from the spurious
gospels ; that there had been formerly evidence against Christi
anity, but that it was destroyed ; that the Christian clergy, through
whose hands the Scriptures have been transmitted to us, were
guilty of numberless frauds and corruptions : and that the many
differences among Christians about the sense of Scripture show,
that it is absolutely uncertain ; and that there is now no certain
standard of Christianity at all. These and other objections, which
his Lordship hath displayed with no small ostentation, I shall not
here take any particular notice of, having considered and obviated
them in the Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study
and Use qf History, especially as far as they relate to Christianity
and the Holy Scriptures, published at London, 8vo. 1753. About
the same time, the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of Clogher
published A Vindication of the Histories of the Old and New Tes
tament, in Answer to the Objections of the late Lord Bolingbroke :
in which he hath both detected and exposed several mistakes his
Lordship had fallen into with respect to other ancient authors
whom he cites, and hath vindicated the sacred writings against the
attempts made in those Letters to invalidate their credit and divine
authority. — These, with Mr. Harvey's Remarks on Lord Boling
broke's Letters, as far as they relate to the History of the Old Tes
tament, are the only answers I have seen to his Lordship's Letters
on the Study and Use of History. But we shall soon have occa
sion to return to this noble Lord, who afterwards, in his posthu
mous works, appeared still more openly against the Christian cause,
and even against what have been hitherto accounted some of the
most important principles of natural religion.

Let. XVI. mr. iiume. 209

LETTER XVI.

Mr. Hume, a subtle and ingenious Writer, but extremely sceptical and fond of Novelty.
— He proposes to free Bletaphysics from that Jargon and Obscurity which has served
only as a Shelter to Superstition and Error. — His Doctrine concerning the Relation
of Cause and Effect examined. — He declares, that the Knowledge of this Relation is
of the highest Importance, and that all our Reasons concerning- Matter of Fact and
Experience, and concerning the Existence of any Being, are founded upon it. — Yet
he sets himself to show, that there is no real Connexion between Cause and Effect,
and that there can he no certain, nor even probable, reasoning from the one to the
other. — Reflections upon the great Absurdity and pernicious Consequences of thi3
Scheme — The Inconsistencies this Writer hath fallen into.
Sir,
I now send you some observations upon Mr. Hume, an ingeni
ous writer, who hath lately appeared against the Christian cause,
and that in a manner which seems to have something new in it,
and different from what others had written before him, especially
in what he calls his Philosophical Essays concerning Human Un
derstanding. The second edition of this book, with additions and
corrections, which is what I have now before me, was published in
London, 1750. This gentleman must be acknowledged to be a
subtle writer, of a very metaphysical genius, and has a neat and
agreeable manner of expression. But it is obvious to every judi
cious reader, that he hath, in many instances, carried scepticism to
an unreasonable height; and seemeth everywhere to affect an air
of making new observations and discoveries. His writings seem,
for the most part, to be calculated rather to amuse, or even con
found, than to instruct and enlighten the understanding ; and
there are not a few things in them, which strike at the foundation
of natural, as well as the proofs and evidences of revealed, religion.
This appeareth to me to be, in a particular manner, the character
of his Philosophical Essays : and you will, perhaps, be of the same
opinion, when you have considered the remarks I now send you.
If we were to form a judgment of these Essays, from the account
he himself is pleased to give of them, and of his intention in writ
ing them, our notion of them would be highly to their advantage.
Having taken notice of the abstractedness of metaphysical specula
tions, he says, that he has, " in the following Essays, " endeavoured
to throw some light upon subjects, from which uncertainty has
hitherto deterred the wise, and obscurity the ignorant." He pro
poses " to unite the boundaries of the different species of philo
sophy, by reconciling profound inquiry with clearness, and truth
with novelty ;" and thinks "it will be happy, if, reasoning in this
easy manner, he can undermine the foundations of an abstruse
philosophy, which seems to have served hitherto only as a shelter
p

210 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVI.
to superstition, and a cover to absurdity and error."* He under
takes to " banish all that jargon, which has so long taken posses
sion of metaphysical reasonings, and drawn such disgrace upon
them."f And after having represented all the received systems of
philosophy, and all common theories, as extremely defective, he pro
mises to " avoid all jargon and confusion, in treating of such subtle
and profound subjects."*);
That part of these Essays, which I shall first take notice of, and
which is indeed of a very uncommon strain, and seems to lie at
the foundation of many of those extraordinary things which he
afterwards advances, is what he proposes to consider, p. 47, $• seq.;
where he observes, that "it is a subject worthy curiosity, to in
quire, what is the nature of that evidence, which assures us of any
real existence and matter of fact, beyond the present testimony of
our senses, or the records of our memory." He observes, that
" this part of philosophy has been little cultivated either by the
ancients or moderns :" but though it is difficult, it may be " useful,
by destroying that implicit faith and credulity, which is the bane
of all reasoning and free inquiry."^ After such a pompous profes
sion, one would be apt to expect something extremely deserving
of our attention. Let us therefore examine into his scheme, that
we may know what it really is ; and then our way will be clear
to make the necessary remarks upon it.
He observes, that " the relation of cause and effect is necessary
to the subsistence of our species, and the regulation of our con
duct in every circumstance and occurrence of human life. With
out this, we should never have been able to adjust means to ends,
nor employ our rational powers either to the producing of good,
or avoiding of evil."|| And, accordingly, he expressly declares,
that " if there be any relation, any object, which it imports us to
know perfectly, it is that of cause and effect : on this we found
all our reasonings, concerning matter of fact and experience; and
by this alone we retain any assurance concerning objects, that are
removed from the present testimony of our memory and senses :"
and that " the existence of any Being can only be known by argu
ments from its cause, or its effect."** It appeareth then, that by
his own acknowledgment, it is of the highest importance to know
the relation of cause and effect. Let us now see what instruction
he gives us with regard to that relation.
He absolutely denies, that this relation can possibly be known
a priori, and asserts, that it entirely arises from experience :ff that
it is this only " that teaches us the nature and bounds of cause
and effect, and enables us to infer the existence of one object from
that of another.""];"); But he takes a great deal of pains to show
that experience cannot furnish a reasonable foundation for such an
inference. He had laid it down as a principle, that all arguments
* Philosophical Essays, p. [8, 19. t Ibid. p. 27,28.
X Ibid. p. 97, 106, 107. § Ibid. p. 47, 48, 49.
|| Ibid., p. 89. 90. ** Ibid. p. 123, 258.
tt Ibid. p. 50, ;">2, 53. XX Ibid. p. 258.

Let. XVI. MR, HUME. 211
from experience can at best only be probable ; but he will not
allow even this in the present case: he sets himself to prove, that
" not so much as any probable arguments can be drawn from cause
to effect, or from effect to cause:"* that " the conjunction of the
effect with the cause is entirely arbitrary, not only in its first con
ception, a priori, but after it is suggested by experience :"f that,
"indeed, in fact, we infer the one from the other; but that this
is not by a chain of reasoning; nor is there any medium which
may enable the mind to draw such an inference."); The only
ground of such an inference is, the supposed resemblance between
the past and future : but that it is impossible any argument from
experience should prove that resemblance : and yet if there be not
such a resemblance, all experience becomes useless, and can give
rise to no inference or conclusion. "§ He positively asserts, that "we
know only by experience the frequent conjunction of objects, without
being ever able to comprehend anything like connexion between
them. "|| And he frequently observes, that the connexion is only
in our own thoughts or conceptions, not in the things themselves ;
and resolves the conjunction between cause and effect, and the
inference drawn from the one to the other, wholly into custom ;
that it is a " customary connexion in the thought or imagination be
twixt one object, and its usual attendant;''** that custom, he
always calls a habit ;ff and represents it as owing to a repetition
of acts ; at other times, he ascribes it to an instinct, or mechanical
tendency, and represents it as a necessary act of the mind, and
infallible in its operations :");*); yet afterwards, speaking of the same
custom or instinct, he says, that, like other instincts, it may be
fallacious and deceitful.^
The great argument he produces, and upon which he lays the
greatest stress, to show that we can have no certainty in our con
clusions concerning the relation of cause and effect, nor reason
from one to the other, is, that we have no idea of that connexion
which unites the effect to the cause, "or of the force, power, or
energy, in the cause, which produces the effect; nor consequently,
any medium whereby we can infer the one from the other. He
sets himself particularly to show, that neither external objects give
us the idea of power, nor reflections on the operations of our own
minds.|||| If what our author offers on this head had been only to display
the subtlety of his metaphysical genius, and show how little we are
able distinctly to explain the manner even of those things of which
we have the greatest certainty, we should have allowed him to
amuse himself, and his readers, with a little philosophical play.
But what he here advances, concerning cause and effect, power
and connexion, he makes the foundation of conclusions relating
to matters of great importance, —
* Philosophical Essays, p. 62, 63. t Ibid. p. 53, 54. J Ibid. p. 60, 61.
§ Ibid. p. 65,66. || Ibid. p. 114. ** Ibid. p. 123.
tt Ibid. p. 73, 74,91, 120. }J Ibid. 73,91. §$ Ibid. p. 251.
UU Ibid. p. 105, 106.
p 2

212 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVI.
 Hez nugee seria ducunt
In mala 
By endeavouring to destroy all reasoning from causes to effects,
or from effects to causes, and not allowing that we can so much
as probably infer the one from the other, by arguing either a priori,
or from experience, he subverts, as far as in him lies, the very
foundation of those reasonings, that are drawn from the effects
which we behold in the frame of the universe, to the existence of
one supreme, intelligent, all-powerful cause; and accordingly we
shall find that he himself afterwards applies this principle to this
very purpose. Another use that he makes *of this doctrine con
cerning cause and effect i«, what we would not have expected from
it, to confound all difference between physical and moral causes ;
and to show that the latter have the same kind of causality with
the former. This is the purport of his eighth essay, which is con
cerning liberty and necessity :* though if he argued consistently,
he must deny that there is any such thing in nature as necessity,
or necessary connexion ; or that there is either physical or moral
cause at all.
You will scarce expect, that I should enter upon a laborious
confutation of so whimsical a scheme, though proposed to the
world with great pomp, and represented by the author himself as
of vast importance. I shall content myself with making some ge
neral observations upon it.
And first, whereas this writer frequently, throughout these essays,
lays a mighty stress upon experience, as the great guide of human
life, and the only foundation of all other knowledge, especially
with respect to matter of fact, and the existence of objects, he here
plainly endeavours to show, that there can be no argument from
experience at all ; nor can any reasonable conclusion be drawn from
it : for he will not allow, that argument can be drawn or inference
made from experience, but what is founded on the supposed rela
tion or connexion betwixt cause and effect. If therefore there be
no relation or connexion between cause and effect at all, in the
nature of things, which it is the whole design of his reasoning on
this subject to shew, then all certainty of experience' all proof
from it, entirely fail ; all experience, as he himself expresses it,
becomes useless, and can give rise to no inference or conclusion.^
Secondly, Another remark I would make upon Mr. Hume's way
of arguing is, that it proceeds upon a wrong foundation, and which
is contrary to truth and reason, viz. that we cannot have any reason
able certainty of the truth of a thing, [or that it really is, when we
cannot distinctly explain the manner of it, or how it is. The sum
of his argumentation, as I have already hinted with relation to cause
and effect, is, that we cannot be certain of any such thing as power
or energy, because we cannot conceive or explain precisely wherein
it consists, or how it operates. But this is a very fallacious way of
reasoning. Though we cannot metaphysically explain the manner
* Philosophical Essays, p. 129, and seq. t Ibid. p. 66.

Let. XVI. mr. hume. 213
in which the cause operateth upon the effect, yet we may, in many
cases, be sure that there is a connexion between them ; and that
where there are certain effects produced, there are powers correspon
dent or adequate to the production of those effects. The mind, in
such cases, when it sees an effect produced, is led, by a quick and
undoubted process of reasoning, to acknowledge that there must be
a cause which hath the power of producing it; or else we must say,
that it is produced without any cause at all, or that nothing in nature
hath any power of producing it ; which is the greatest of all absurdi
ties. He urgeth, that " it must be allowed, that when we know a
power, we know that very circumstance in the cause, by which it
is enabled to produce the effect." And then he asks, "Do we
pretend to be acquainted with the nature of the human soul and
the nature of an idea, or the aptitude of the one to produce the
other ?"* But certainly we may know, that there is something in
the cause which produceth the effect, though we cannot distinctly
explain what that circumstance in the cause is, by which it is
enabled to produce it. We must not deny, that there is in the
mind a power of raising up ideas, and recalling them, and fixing
the attention upon them, because we cannot explain how this is
done. The argument Mr. Hume offers to prove, that we can have
no assurance of the reality of force or power, viz. because we can
not distinctly conceive or explain how it operateth, would equally
prove, that we cannot be sure that we have any ideas at all, because
we cannot well explain the nature of an ideas, or how it is formed
in the mind. He himself, on another occasion, observes against
Malebranche, and the modern Cartesians, who deny all power and
activity in second causes, and ascribe ali to God ; that " we are
indeed ignorant of the manner in which bodies operate upon one
another ; and so we are of the manner or force by which the mind,
even the supreme mind, operates, either on itself or on bodv.
Were our ignorance therefore a sufficient reason for rejecting any
thing, we should be led into that principle of refusing all energy
to the Supreme Being, as much as to the grossest matter."f He
here seems to censure it as a wrong way of arguing, to deny that
a thing is, because we cannot distinctly conceive the manner how
it is; or to make" our ignorance of any thing a sufficient reason
for rejecting it ; and yet it is manifest, that his own reasoning
against power or causality, force or energy, depends upon this prin
ciple ; and indeed, by comparing the several parts of his scheme,
there is too much reason to apprehend, that he had it in view to
deny all force and energy, and all power whatsoever, in the Su
preme as well as in secondary causes ; or at least to represent it as
very uncertain. I think this gentleman would have done better
to have said, as a late ingenious author of his own country, " We
have no adequate idea of power ; we see evidently that there must
be such a thing in nature ; but we cannot conceive how it acts, nor
what connects the producing cause with the produced effect." Che-
* Philosophical Essays, p. 110, 111. t Ibid. p. 117, 118.

214 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVI.
valier Ramsay's principles of natural and revealed religion, vol. i.
p. 109.
Thirdly, A third remark is, that many of our author's arguings
on this subject are contrary to the most evident dictates of common
sense. Such is that, where he asserts, that not so much as a pro
bable argument can be drawn, in any case, from experience, con
cerning the connexion betwixt cause and effect ; or from whence
we may conclude, that from a similar cause we may expect similar
effects.* Thus, e. g. according to his way of reasoning, it cannot
so much as probably be concluded from experience, that if a quan
tity of dry gunpowder be laid in any place, and fire be applied to
it, it will cause an explosion ; or that if it hath such an effect to
day, a like quantity of powder, the same way circumstanced, will
produce the same effect to-morrow. No probable reason can be
brought to show, that that which has had the effect in thousands
of instances in time past, will, though all circumstances appear
perfectly similar, have the same effect in time future. He grants,
indeed, that, in such cases, the mind is determined to draw the
inference ; yet he asserts, that the understanding has no part in
the operation. But surely, when, from observation and experience,
we come to know and judge of the ordinary course of nature, the
understanding may justly draw a probable argument or conclusion,
that from such and such causes, so circumstanced, such effects will
follow. This inference is perfectly rational. And it is a strange
way of talking, that, even from a number of uniform experiments,
we cannot so much as probably infer a connexion between the
cause and the effect, the sensible qualities and the secret powers.
The reason he gives, is, that " if there be any suspicion, that the
course of nature may change, and that the past may be no rule for
the future, experience can give rise to no inference or conclusion."f
But is the probability of a thing destroyed, according to any way
of reasoning allowed hitherto, because it is barely possible it may
happen otherwise, though there are ten thousand to one against it?
Mr. Hume elsewhere, when arguing against miracles, lays it down
as a principle, that there is a constant uniformity in the course of
nature, never to be violated ; but here, in order to show, that no
probable reason can be brought from experience, concerning the
connexion of cause and effect, he supposes, that there may be a
suspicion that the course of nature may change. Thus this gen
tleman knows how to assume and alter principles, as best suits his
own present convenience. Reason leadeth us to conclude, that
the course of nature is the appointment and constitution of that
most wise and powerful Being, who made the world, and settled
that law and order which he judged fittest and properest ; and
then reason leadeth us also to conclude, that, except in very ex
traordinary cases, the same order will continue ; and extraordinary
cases do not hinder the probability of the ordinary course. So
that reason affords a proper medium for a probable conclusion con-
* Philosophical Essays, p. 61—63. t Ibid. p. 65, 66.

Let. XVI. mr. hume. 215
ceming what effects are to be expected. He affirms, indeed, that
all inferences of this kind are only the effects of custom or habit,
not of reasoning.* But why is custom or habit here mentioned
in opposition to reason, or as exclusive of it? May they not both
concur? It is evident that they often go together, and mutually
strengthen one another. Custom alone, without reason, is often
not to be depended on ; but in this case reason gives its suffrage ;
and, in all arguings in experimental philosophy, reason argues from
similar causes to similar effects. It is by reason we draw those
inferences, and the inferences are rational. It must not be said,
that in this case there is no reasoning at all ; but that the reason
ing is often so obvious, that it carries conviction by the very con
stitution of the human mind, which naturally acquiesceth in it as
satisfactory. It seems evident, that the great Author of our being-
hath formed our minds, so as to reason in this manner; and he
would not have done this, if it had not been both of great use in hu
man life to make such inferences, and if there were not a real
foundation for it in the nature of things. This writer himself
owns, that " none but a fool or a madman will ever pretend to
dispute the authority of experience, or to reject that great guide
of human life: but he thinks it may be allowed a philosopher to
have so much curiosity as to examine the principle of human na
ture, which gives this weighty authority to experience."!-" But I
cannot help thinking, that if we were to judge of philosophy by
the specimen this gentleman hath given of it in this instance,
many would be apt to conclude, that there is a great difference, and
even opposition, between philosophy and common sense ; that what
is so obvious and apparent to the common sense and reason of man
kind, that he is a fool and a madman who doubts of it, yet in phi
losophy is not so much as probable.
Another instance, in which our author's scheme is not very
reconcilable to the common sentiments of mankind, is, that he says,
that " though we learn, by experience, the frequent conjunction oi
objects, yet we are unable to comprehend any thing like connexion
between them ; and that there appears not in all nature any thing-
like connexion, conceivable by us ; all events are entirely loose and
separate ; one event follows another ; but we never observe any tie
betwixt them ; they seem conjoined, but never connected.""); But
it is evident, that in many cases we have a distinct idea of con
junction or contiguity, as in a heap of sand ; and of connexion,
as betwixt cause and effect ; and the connexion in this case is not
merely in our thoughts, as this gentleman is pleased to represent
it ; but this very connexion in our thoughts is founded on a con
nexion which we perceive in the things themselves. They are not
connected as cause and effect, because we think them so ; but we
perceive them to be connected, because we find they are so : nor
is this owing merely to a custom or habit in our minds, but there
is in nature a real foundation for it.
* Philosophical Essays, p. 73, 7-1, & passim. t Ibid. 63, 66.
X Ibid. p. 120.

216 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVI
Fourthly, Another remark which occurs to me upon consider
ing Mr. Hume's scheme, is, that he hath fallen into several incon
sistencies and contradictions ; and, indeed, it is not to be wondered
at, that a man who argueth against common sense, however subtle
and ingenious he may otherwise be, should also be inconsistent with
himself. I have already taken notice of the passages in which he
representeth experience as uncertain, and that not so much as a
probable argument can be drawn from it ; and yet in his sixth essay;
which is concerning probability, he shews that experience may not
only furnish probable conclusions, but what he calls proofs ; which
he explains to be such arguments from experience, as leave no room
for doubt or opposition*. And he frequently speaks of experience
in very high terms, as a certain guide. Again, in several passages
above referred to, he expressly declares, that in making experimental
conclusions, there is no place for reasoning ; that the inference in
this case is entirely owing to custom, and the understanding has no
part in it ; and yet he elsewhere owns, that there is great scope of
reasoning in inferences of this kind from observation and experience ;
and that not only men greatly surpass the inferior animals in this
way of reasoning, but that one man very much excels another.4/-
And he declares, that " all our reasonings are founded on a species
of analogy ; where the causes are entirely similar, the analogy is
perfect ; and the inference drawn from it is regarded as certain and
conclusive;""); though he had said, that " it is impossible that any
arguments from experience can prove such a resemblance." § An
other inconsistency, which may be observed in Mr. Hume's reason
ing on this subject, is, that though he represents the connexion
betwixt cause and effect to be only a connexion in our thoughts, not
in the things themselves,|| yet he asserts, that " there is a kind of
pre-established harmony between the course of nature, and the suc
cession of our ideas ; and though the powers and forces, by which
the former is governed, be wholly unknown to us, yet our thoughts
and conceptions have still, we find, gone on in the same train with
other works of nature ;"** where he seems to suppose, that there is
a real connexion in the nature of things, to which the connexion in
our minds correspondeth. The general strain of his arguing in
several of his essays, seems to be designed to prove, if it proves any
thing, that we cannot be sure that there is any such thing as cause
or causal connexion in the universe ; yet he says, " it is universally
allowed that nothing exists without a cause of its existence; and
that chance is a negative word, and means not any real power which
has any where a being in nature."ff Here-he falls into the com
mon way of speaking, that every thing which existeth must have a
cause of its existence ; otherwise we must acknowledge the opera
tion of chanoe. And he observes, that " there is no such thino- as
chance in the world." J*): Causes therefore must be acknowledged,
* Philosophical Essays, p. 93. t Ibid., p. 170, 171. 1 Ibid p 165.
$ Ibid., p. 66. || Ibid., p. 123, 126. ** Ibid., p. 90. tt Ibid.,' p! 151.
XX Ibid., p. 93.

Let. XVL mr. iiume. 217
though we cannot explain the manner of their causality. And he
himself, in reckoning up the principles of the connexion of our ideas,
distinctly mentions resemblance, contiguity, and causation ; and this
last he makes to be the most common and useful of all ; * and
yet, in the course of his reasoning, he really leaves no place for
causation, distinct from similarity or resemblance, and contiguity. It
may be mentioned, as another instance of his inconsistency, that he
frequently makes power and necessary connexion the same thing ;
and argues, that if there be any connexion between cause and effect
at all, it must be a necessary one ; for that cannot be called a cause,
that is not necessarily connected with the effect ;-f and yet, in his
Essay on liberty and necessity, when speaking of the influence of
motives upon the mind, he saith, that, " as this influence is usually
conjoined with the action, it must be esteemed a cause, and be
looked upon as an instance of the necessity which we would esta
blish ;'' J where he plainly supposeth, that it is not essential to the
notion of a cause, that it is infallibly and always connected with the
effect; but that it is sufficient, if it be usually joined with it. And
to the same purpose, he saith, that " all causes are not conjoined to
their usual effects, with like constancy and uniformity." § Indeed,
his whole Essay on Liberty and Necessity, though seemingly built
upon the scheme he had advanced in his foregoing Essays, with
relation to cause and effect, is really not reconcileable to it. In all
his reasonings in these Essays, concerning cause and effect, he had
argued, that there is no such thing as necessary connexion, or in
deed any connexion at all, betwixt cause and effect; and upon this
scheme, it is idle to talk of a necessity either in physical or moral
causes. And yet in his Essay on Liberty and Necessity, he plainly
argues upon the supposition of a real connexion ; though he wi 11
only call it a conjunction betwixt cause and effect. And he all
along supposeth the influence of causes, and the power of motives ;
and that a necessity must be acknowledged in moral as well as
physical causes. He would have us to begin the question concern
ing Liberty and Necessity, not " by examining the faculties of the
soul, but by examining the operations of body, and of brute unin
telligent matter." || And with regard to this, he observes, that "it
is universally allowed, that matter, in all its operations, is actuated
by a necessary force ; and that every effect is so precisely deter
mined by the nature and energy of its cause, that no other effect, in
such particular circumstances, could possibly have resulted from the
operation of its cause ;"** and he expressly asserteth, that " the con
junction betwixt motives and voluntary actions, is as regular and
uniform as that betwixt the cause and effect, in any part of nature. "ff
Thus we see, that he can acknowledge cause and effect, and the
connexion betwixt them, when he has a mind to take advantage of
this, for overthrowing the liberty of human actions. And he con-
* Philosophical Essays, p. 32, 84. t Ibid., p. 93, 103, 151. X Ibid., p. 154.
J Ibid., p. 138. || Ibid., p. 147. ¦** Ibid., p. 131, 132.
tt Ibid., p. 141.

218 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVI.
eludes the Essay, with taking notice of the objection which might
be raised against what he had advanced, viz., that " if voluntary
actions be subjected to the same laws of necessity with the opera
tions of matter, there is a continued chain of necessary causes, pre
ordained and pre-determined, reaching from the original cause of
all, to every single volition of every human creature. While we act,
we are at the same time acted upon. There is no contingency any
where in the universe, no indifferency, no liberty." This objection
he putteth very strongly;* and yet I cannot see, that, according to
the hypothesis he had advanced in the foregoing Essays, there can
be any just foundation for it; for if there be only a mere conjunc
tion of events, but no causal influence, it cannot be said, that,
whilst we act, we are acted upon. On the contrary,, nothing is
acted upon, nor is there any power, force, or energy in nature. All
events are loose, separate, and unconnected, and only follow one an
other without connexion ; and therefore there can be no continued
chain of necessary causes at all. This would be the proper answer,
according to the principles he had laid down, if he had thought
those principles would bear. But he hath not thought fit to make
use of it ; but, in contradiction to his own scheme, seems here to
admit a chain of necessary causes, physical and moral, in order to
load Providence ; and plainly represents the objection as unanswer-
able.f Thus I have considered, pretty largely, our author's extraordinary
scheme ; and the observations that have been made may help us to
j udge of this gentleman's character as a writer, whether it deserveth
all the admiration and applause, which he himself, as well as others,
have been willing to bestow upon it. We may see, by what hath
been observed, how far he hath answered what he had prepared the
reader to expect, clearness and precision, in his way of treating
these curious and sublime subjects. He had particularly proposed,
with regard to power, force, and energy, " to fix, if possible, the
precise meaning of these terms ; and thereby remove part of that
obscurity which is so much complained of in this species of philo
sophy." %
What Mr. Hume hath offered, concerning cause and effect, puts
me in mind of a remarkable passage in lord Bolingbroke's posthu
mous works, which I shall mention on this occasion. " Whatever
knowledge," saith his lordship, " we acquire of apparent causes, we
can acquire none of real causality, or that power, that virtue, what
ever it be, by which one being acts on another, and becomes a
cause. We may call this by different names, according to the
different effects of it; but to know it in its first principles, to know
the nature of it, would be to know as God himself knows ; and
therefore this will be always unknown to us, in causes that seem to
be most under our inspection, as well as in others that are the most
remote from it." And he represents those "philosophers as ridicu
lous, who, when they have discovered a real actual cause, in its
* Philosophical Essays, p. 157, 158. t Ibid., p. 162. } Ibid., p. 101, 102.

Let. XVI. mr. Hume. 219
effects, by the phasnomena, reject it, because they cannot conceive
its causality, nor assign a sufficient reason why and how it is."*
This may seem to bear hard upon Mr. Hume ; but what is more to
be wondered at, he hath in effect passed a censure upon himself.
He indeed gives a high encomium on sceptical philosophy, in the
beginning of his sixth Essay ; that "every passion is mortified by
it, but the love of truth ; and that passion never is, nor can be
carried to too high a degree. It is surprising therefore, that this
philosophy, which, in almost every instance, must be harmless and
innocent, should be the subject of so much groundless reproach and
obloquy."4- But afterwards, in his twelfth Essay, which is of the
academical or sceptical philosophy, he gives no advantageous notion
of scepticism. He says, that " the grand scope of all the inquiries
and disputes of the sceptics is, to destroy reason by ratiocination
and argument.""); And, speaking ofthe sceptical objections against
the relation of cause and effect, he saith, that " while the sceptic
insists upon these topics, he seems, for the time at least, to destroy
all assurance and conviction ;" and then he adds, that " these argu
ments might be displayed at a greater length, if any durable good
or benefit to society could ever be expected to result from them.
For," saith he, " here is the chief, and most confounding objection
to excessive scepticism, that no durable good can ever be expected
from it, while it remains in its full force and vigour."§ And he had
said, that "nature will always maintain her rights, and prevail in
the end, over any abstract reasoning whatsoever ; " || and if so, I
think we may justly conclude, that any abstract reasoning which is
contrary to the plain voice of nature ought to be rejected as false
and trifling, and of no real use or service to mankind.
But it were well, if the worst thing that could be said of our
author's excessive scepticism were, that it is trifling and useless. It
will soon appear, that, as he hath managed it, it is of a pernicious
tendency ; but you will probably be of opinion, that enough hath
been said of this gentleman, and his oddities, for the present.
I am, &c.
* Lord Bolingbroke's Works, vol. iii. p. 541. t Philosophical Essays, p. 70.
X Philosophical Essays, p. 245. § Ibid., p. 251. J| Ibid., p. 71.

220 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVII.

LETTER XVII.

Observations on Mr. Hume's Essay concerning a particular Providence and a future
State — His Attempt to shew, that we cannot justly argue from the Course of Nature
to a particular intelligent Cause, because the subject lies entirely beyond the Reach
of human Experience, and because God is a singular Cause, and the Universe a sin
gular Effect ; and therefore we cannot argue by a Comparison with any other Cause,
or any other Effect — His Argument examined, whereby he pretends to prove, that,
since we know God only by the Effects in the Works of Nature, we can judge of his
Proceedings no farther than we can now see of them, and therefore cannot infer aDy
Rewards or Punishments beyond what are already known by Experience or Observa
tion — The Usefulness of believing future Retributions acknowledged by Mr. Hume,
and that the contrary Doctrine is inconsistent with good Policy.
Sir,
It appears from what was observed in my former letter, that few
writers have carried scepticism in philosophy to a greater height
than Mr. Hume. I now proceed to consider those things in his
writings that seem to be more directly and immediately designed
against religion. Some part of what he calls his Philosophical
Essays concerning Human Understanding, manifestly tends to sub
vert the very foundations of natural religion, or its most important
principles. Another part of them is particularly levelled against
the proofs and evidences of the Christian revelation.
The former is what I shall first consider, and shall therefore exa
mine the eleventh of those essays, the title of which is concerning a
particular Providence and a future state. Mr. Hume introduces
what he offers in this essay as sceptical paradoxes advanced by a
friend, and pretends by no means to approve of them. He proposes
some objections as from himself, to his friend's way of arguing, but
takes care to do it in such a manner as to give his friend a superi
ority in the argument ; and some of the worst parts of his essay
are directly prfeposed in his own person. The essay may be con
sidered as consisting of two parts. The one seems to be designed
against the existence of God, or of one supreme intelligent cause of
the universe ; the other, which appears to be the main intention of
the essay, is particularly levelled against the doctrine of a future
state of rewards and punishments.
I shall begin with the former, because it comes first in order to
be considered, though it is not particularly mentioned till towards
the conclusion of the essay. He observes, in the person of his Epi
curean friend, that " while we argue from the course of nature, and
infer a particular intelligent cause, which at first bestowed and still
preserves order in the universe, we embrace a principle which is
both uncertain and useless." The reason he gives why it is uncer
tain is, " because the subject lies entirely beyond the reach of human

Let. XVII. mr. hume. 221
experience."* This is a specimen of the use our author would make
of the principles he had laid down in the preceding essays. He
had represented experience as the only foundation of our knowledge
with respect to matter of fact, and the existence of objects : that it
is by experience alone that we know the relation of cause and effect:
and he had also asserted, that not so much as a probable argument
can be drawn from experience to lay a foundation for our reasoning
from cause to effect, or from effect to cause. I shall not add any
thing here to what was offered in my former letter to show the ab
surdity, the confusion, and inconsistency of these principles. I shall
only observe, that this very writer, who had represented all argu
ments drawn from experience, with relation to cause and effect, as
absolutely uncertain, yet makes -it an objection against the argument
from the course of nature to an intelligent cause, that the subject
lies entirely beyond the reach of human experience. What the
meaning of this is, it is not easy to apprehend. It will be readily
allowed, that we do not know by experience the whole course of
nature ; yet enough of it falls within the reach even of human ob
servation and experience, to lay a reasonable foundation for inferring
from it a supreme intelligent cause. In that part of the universe
which cometh under our notice and observation, we may behold
such illustrious characters of wisdom, power, and goodness, as de
termine us, by the most natural way of reasoning in the world, to
acknowledge a most wise, and powerful, and benign Author and
Cause of the Universe. The inference is not beyond the reach of
our faculties, but is one of the most obvious that offereth to the
human mind. But perhaps what the author intends by observing,
that this subject lies entirely beyond the reach of human experience,
is this : that notwithstanding the admirable marks of wisdom and
design which we behold in the course of nature and order of things,
we cannot argue from thence to prove a wise and intelligent Cause
of the universe, or that, there was any wisdom employed in the
formation of it, because neither we, nor any of the human race,
were present at the making of it, or saw how it was made. This
must be owned to be a very extraordinary way of reasoning, and I
believe you will easily excuse me if I do not attempt a confutation
of it.
Mr. Hume, after having argued thus in.the person of his Epicu
rean friend, comes in the conclusion of this essay to propose another
argument as for himself. " I much doubt," saith he, " whether it
be possible for a cause to be known only by its effect, or to be of
so singular and particular a nature as to have no parallel, and no
similarity with any other cause or object that has ever fallen under
our observation. It is only when two species of objects are found
to be constantly conjoined, that we can infer the one from the other :
and were an effect presented which was entirely singular, and could
not be comprehended under any known species, I do not see that
we could form any conjecture or inference at all concerning its
* Philosophical Essays, p. 224.

222 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVII.
cause. If experience, and observation, and analogy, be indeed the
only guides we can reasonably follow in inferences of this nature,
both the effect and cause must bear a similarity and resemblance to
other effects and causes which we know, and which we have found
in many instances to be conjoined with each other."* Mr. Hume
leaves it to his friend's reflections to prosecute the consequences of this
principle, which, he had hinted before, might lead into reasonings of
too nice and delicate a nature to be insisted on. . The argument, as
he hath managed it, is indeed sufficiently obscure and perplexed ;
but the general intention of it seems to be this ; that all our ar-
guings from cause to effect, or from effect to cause, proceed upon
analogy, or the comparing similar causes with similar effects. Where
therefore there is supposed to be a singular cause, to which there is
no parallel (though he much doubts whether there can be a cause of
so singular a nature), and a singular effect, there can be no arguing
from the one to the other ; because in that case we cannot argue by
a comparison with any other cause, or any other effect. Except,
therefore, we can find another world to compare this with, and an
intelligent cause of that world, we cannot argue from the effects in
this present world to an intelligent cause : i. e. we cannot be sure
there is one God, except we can prove there is one other God at
least ; or that this world was formed and produced by a wise intelli
gent cause, unless we know of another world like this, which was
also formed by a wise intelligent cause, and perhaps not then neither:
for he seems to insist upon it that there should be many instances of
such causes and effects being conjoined with each other, in order to
lay a proper foundation for observation, experience, and analogy, the
only guides we can reasonably follow in inferences of this nature. He
immediately after observes, that " according to the antagonists of
Epicurus, the universe, an effect quite singular and unparalleled, is
always supposed to be the proof of a deity, a cause no less singular
and unparalleled." If, by calling the universe a singular and unpa
ralleled effect, he intends to signify that no other universe has come
under our observation, it is very true ; but it by no means follows
that we cannot argue from the evident marks of wisdom and design
which we may observe in this universe that we do know, because
we do not know any thing of any other universe. This grand uni
versal system, and even that small part of it that we are more par
ticularly acquainted with, comprehendeth such an amazing variety
of phsenomena, all which exhibit the most incontestable proofs of
admirable wisdom, power, and diffusive goodness, that one would
think it scarce possible for a reasonable mind to resist the evidence.
But such is this subtle metaphysical gentleman's way of arguing in
a matter of the highest consequence, the absurdity of which is ob
vious to any man of plain understanding. It is of a piece with
what he had advanced before, that there is no such thing as cause
or effect at all, nor can any probable inference be drawn from the
one to the other ; than which, as hath been already shown, nothing
* Philosophical Essays, p. 232, 233.

Let. XVII. MB. hume. 223
can be more inconsistent with common sense, and the reason of all
mankind. The other thing observable in this essay, and which seems to be
the principal intention of it, relateth to the proof of a providence
and a future state. He introduces his friend as putting himself in
the place of Epicurus, and making an harangue to the people of
Athens, to prove that the principles of his philosophy were as inno
cent and salutary as those of any other philosophers. The course
of his reasoning or declamation is this : that " the chief or sole ar
gument brought by philosophers for a Divine existence is derived
from the order of nature ; where there appear such marks of intelli
gence and design, that they think it extravagant to assign for its
cause, either chance, or the blind unguided force of matter : that
this is an argument drawn from effects to causes ; and that when we
infer any particular cause from an effect, we must proportion the
one to the other, and can never be allowed to ascribe to the cause
any qualities, but what are exactly sufficient to produce the effect ;
and if we ascribe to it farther qualities, or affirm it capable of pro
ducing any other effect, we only indulge the license of conjecture,
without reason or authority."* That therefore " allowing God to
be the author of the existence or order of the universe, it follows,
that he possesses that precise degree of power, intelligence, and be
nevolence, which appears in his workmanship, but nothing farther
can ever be proved.4/ Those therefore are vain reasoners, and re
verse the order of nature, who instead of regarding this present life,
and the present scene of things, as the sole object of their contem
plation, render it a passage to something farther. The Divinity may
indeed possibly possess attributes which we have never seen ex
erted, and may be governed by principles of action, which we cannot
discover to be satisfied : but we can never have reason to infer any
attributes, or any principles of action in him, but so far as we know
them to be exerted or satisfied." He asks, " Are there any marks
of distributive justice in the world?" And if it be said, that "the
justice of God exerts itself in part, but not in its full extent," he
answers, " that we, have no reason to give it any particular extent,
but only so far as we see it at present exert itself."4: That " indeed
when we find that any work has proceeded from the skill and in
dustry of man, who is a being whom we know by experience, and
whose nature we are acquainted with, we can draw a hundred in
ferences concerning what may be expected from him, and these in
ferences will all be founded on experience and observation. But
since the Deity is known to us only by his productions, and as a
single being in the universe, not comprehended under any species or
genus, from whose experienced attributes or qualities we can by
analogy infer any attribute or quality in him, we can only infer such
. attributes or perfections, and such a degree of those attributes, as
is precisely adapted to the effect we examine ; but farther attributes
or farther degrees of those attributes, we can never be authorized to
* Philosophical Essays, p. 215. t Ibid. p. 220. X Ibid. p. 203.

224 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVII.
infer or suppose by any rules of just reasoning." He adds, that
" the great source of our mistakes on this subject is this : we tacitly
consider ourselves as in the place of the Supreme Being, and con
clude that he will on every occasion observe tbe same conduct,
which we ourselves in his situation would have embraced as reason
able and eligible ; whereas it must evidently appear contrary to all
rules of analogy to reason from the intentions and projects of men
to those of a Being so different, and so much superior — so remote
and incomprehensible, who bears less analogy to any other being
in the universe than the sun to a waxen taper." He concludes,
therefore, " that no new fact can ever be inferred from the religious
hypothesis : no reward or punishment expected or dreaded beyond
what is already known by practice and observation."* This is a
faithful extract of the argument in this essay, drawn together as
closely as I could, without the repetitions with which it aboundeth.
I shall now make a few remarks upon it.
The whole of his reasoning depends upon this maxim, that when
once we have traced an effect up to its cause, we can never ascribe
any thing to the cause but what is precisely proportioned to the
effect, and what we ourselves discern to be so ; nor can we infer any
thing farther concerning the cause, than what the effect, or the pre
sent appearance of it, necessarily leads to. He had to the same
purpose observed, in a former essay, that " it is allowed by all phi
losophers, that the effect is the measure of the power."4- But this
is far from being universally true; for we, in many instances, clearly
perceive that a cause can produce an effect which it doth not actually
produce, or a greater effect than it hath actually produced. This
gentleman's whole reasoning proceeds upon confounding necessary
and free causes ; and indeed he seems not willing to allow any dis
tinction between them, or that there are any other but necessary
and material causes.*); A necessary cause acts up to the utmost of
its power, and therefore the effect must be exactly proportioned to
it. But the case is manifestly different as to free and voluntary
causes. They may have a power of producing effects which they
do not actually produce ; and, as they act from discernment and
choice, we may, in many cases, reasonably ascribe to them farther
views than what we discern or discover in their present course of
action. This author himself owns, that this may be reasonably
done with respect to man, whom we know by experience, and whose
nature and conduct we are acquainted with ; but denies that the
same way of arguing will hold with respect to the Deity. But
surely, when once we come from the consideration of his works to
the knowledge of a self-existent and absolutely perfect Being, we
may, from the nature of that self-existent and absolutely perfect
cause, reasonably conclude, that he is able to produce certain effects
beyond what actually come under our present notice and observation,
and indeed that he can do whatsoever doth not imply a contradic
tion. This universe is a vast, a glorious, and amazing system, com
prehending an infinite variety of parts ; and it is but a small part
* Philosophical Essays, p. 230. t Ibid. p. 125. f Ibid. p. 131, 132, 141, 151.

Let. XVII. mr. hume. 225
of it that comes under our more immediate notice. But we know
enough to be convinced, that it demonstrateth a wisdom as well as
power beyond all imagination great and wonderful: and we may
justly conclude the same concerning those parts of the universe that
we are not acquainted with. And for any man to say, that we
cannot reasonably ascribe any degree of wisdom or power to God,
but what is exactly proportioned to that part of the universal frame
which comes under our own particular observation, is a very strange
way of arguing ! The proofs of the wisdom and the power of God,
as appearing in our part of the system, are so striking, that it is
hard to conceive how any man, that is not under the influence of
the most obstinate prejudice, can refuse to submit to their force :
and yet there are many phenomena, the reasons and ends of which
we are not at present able to assign. The proper conduct in
such a case is, to believe there are most wise reasons for these
things, though we do not now discern those reasons, and to
argue from the uncontested characters of wisdom in things that we
do know, that this most wise and powerful agent, the author of
nature, hath also acted with admirable wisdom in those things, the
designs and ends of which we do not know. It would be wrong
therefore to confine the measures of his wisdom precisely to what
appeareth to our narrow apprehensions, in that part of his works
which faileth under our immediate inspection. This was the great
fault of the Epicureans, and other atheistical philosophers, who,
judging by their own narrow views, urged several things as proofs
of the want of wisdom and contrivance, which, upon a fuller know
ledge of the works of nature, furnish farther convincing proofs of
the wisdom of the great Former of all things.
In like manner, with respect to his goodness, there are number
less things in this present constitution, which lead us to regard him
as a most benign and benevolent Being. And therefore it is highly
reasonable that, when we meet with any phenomena which we can
not reconcile with our ideas of the divine goodness, we should con
clude that it is only for want of having the whole of things before
us, and considering them in their connexion and harmony, that they
appear to us with, a disorderly aspect. And it is very just in such
a case to make use of any reasonable hypothesis, which tendeth to
set the goodness of God in a fair and consistent light.
The same way of reasoning holds with regard to the justice and
righteousness of God as the great Governor ofthe world. We may
reasonably conclude, from the intimate sense we have of the excel
lency of such a character, and the great evil and deformity of in
justice and unrighteousness, which sense is implanted in us by the
author of our being, and from the natural rewards of virtue, and
Sunishment of vice, even in the present constitution of things, that
e is a lover of righteousness and virtue, and an enemy to vice and
wickedness. Our author himself makes his Epicurean friend ac
knowledge that, in the present order of things, virtue is attended with
more peace of mind and with many other advantages above vice ;*
* Philosophical Essays, p. 221.
Q

226 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVII.
and yet it cannot be denied that there are many instances ob
vious to common observation, in which vice seemeth to flourish
and prosper, and virtue to be exposed to great evils and calamities.
What is to be concluded from this ? Is it that because the justice
of God here showeth itself only in part, and not in its full extent
(to use our author's expression), therefore righteousness in God is
imperfect in its degree, and that he doth not possess it in the
full extent of that perfection, nor will ever exert it any farther than
we see him exert it in this present state ? This were an unreason
able conclusion, concerning a being of such admirable perfection,
whose righteousness as well as wisdom must be supposed to be in
finitely superior to ours. It is natural, therefore, to think that this
present life is only a part of the divine scheme, which shall be com
pleted in a future state.
But he urgeth, that the great source of our mistakes on this
subject is, that " we tacitly consider ourselves as in the place of
the Supreme Being, and conclude that he will on every occasion
observe the same conduct which we ourselves in his situation would
have embraced as reasonable and eligible. Whereas it must evi
dently appear contrary to all rules of analogy, to reason from the
intentions and purposes of men to those of a Being so different and
so much superior, so remote and incomprehensible."* But though
it were the highest absurdity to pretend to tie down the infinite in
comprehensible Being to our scanty model and measures of acting,
and to assume he will on every occasion (for so our author is
pleased to put the case) observe the same conduct, that we should
judge eligible; since there maybe innumerable things concerning
which we are unable to form any proper judgment, for want of
having the same comprehensive view of things that he hath; yet
on the other hand, there are some cases so manifest, that we may
safely pronounce concerning them, as worthy or unworthy of the
divine perfections. And as our own natures are the work of God,
we may reasonably argue from the traces of excellencies in our
selves to the infinitely superior perfections in the great Author of
the universe, still taking care to remove all those limitations and
defects with which those qualities are attended in us. This is what
Mr. Hume himself elsewhere allows in his Essay on the Origin of
our Ideas. " The idea of God," saith he, " as meaning an in
finitely intelligent, wise, and good being, arises from reflecting on
the operations of our own minds, and augmenting those qualities
of goodness and wisdom without bound or limit." See his Phi
losophical Essays, p. 24, 25. Since therefore we cannot possibly
help regarding goodness and benevolence, justice and righteousness,
as necessary ingredients in a worthy and excellent character, and
as among the noblest excellencies of an intellectual being, we are
unavoidably led to conclude that they are to be found in the highest
possible degree of eminency in the absolutely perfect Being, the
Author and Governor of the world. These are not mere arbitrary
* Philosophical Essays, p. 230.

Let. XVII. MR. HUME. 227
suppositions, but are evidently founded in nature and reason ; and
though in many particular instances we, through the narrowness of
our views, cannot be proper judges of the grounds and reasons of
the divine administration, yet in general we have reason to conclude,
that if there be such a thing as goodness and righteousness in God,
or any perfection in him correspondent to what is called goodness
and righteousness in us, he will order it so that in the final issue of
things a remarkable difference shall be made between the righteous
and the wicked ; that at one time or other, jind taking in the whole
of existence, virtue, though now for a time it may be greatly afflicted
and oppressed, shall meet with its due reward ; and vice and
wickedness, though now it may seem to prosper and triumph, shall
receive its proper punishment. Since therefore, by the observation
of all ages, it hath often happened, that in the present course of
human affairs, good and excellent persons have been unhappy, and
exposed to many evils and sufferings, and bad and vicious men have
been in very prosperous circumstances, and have had a large
affluence of all worldly enjoyments, even to the ends of their
lives, and that, as this gentleman himself elsewhere expresseth it,
" such is the confusion and disorder of human affairs, that no per
fect economy or regular distribution of happiness or misery is in
this life ever to be expected ;"* it seems reasonable to conclude,
that there shall be a future state of existence, in which these
apparent irregularities shall be set right, and there shall be a more
perfect distribution of rewards and punishments to men according
to their moral conduct. There is nothing in this way of arguing
but what is conformable to the soundest principles of reason, and
to the natural feelings of the human heart. But though a future
state of retributions in general be probable, yet as many doubts
might still be apt to rise in our minds concerning it, an express re
velation from God, assuring us of it in his name, and more distinctly
pointing out the nature and certainty of those retributions, would
be of the most signal advantage.
I shall have occasion to resume this subject, when I come to
consider what Lord Bolingbroke hath more largely offered in re
lation to it. At present it is proper to observe that though Mr.
Hume seems to allow his epicurean friend's reasoning to be just,
yet he owns, that " in fact men do not reason after that manner ;"
and that " they draw many consequences from the belief of a
divine existence, and suppose that the deity will inflict punish
ments on vice, and bestow rewards on virtue, beyond what appears
in the ordinary course of nature. Whether this reasoning of
theirs, "adds he, " be just or not, is no matter; its influence on
their life and conduct must still be the same. And those who
attempt to disabuse them of such prejudices, may, for aught I
know, be good reasoners, but I cannot allow them to be good
citizens and politicians; since they free men from one restraint
upon their passions, and make tbe infringement of the laws of
* Moral and Political Essays, p. 224, 225.
Q 2

228 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVII.
equity and society in one respect more easy and secure."* I think
it follows from this by his own account, that he did not act a wise
or good part, the part of a friend to the public or to mankind, in
publishing this Essay, the manifest design of which is to persuade
men, that there is no just foundation in reason for expecting a future
state of rewards and punishments at all. Nor is the concession he
here makes very favourable to what he addeth in the next page,
concerning the universal liberty to be allowed by the state to all
kinds of philosophy. According to his own way of representing
it, Epicurus must have been cast, if he had pleaded his cause
before the people ; and the principal design of this Essay, which
seems to be to show not only the reasonableness, but harmlessness,
of that philosophy, is lost ; for if the spreading of those principles
and reasonings is contrary to the rules of good policy, and the cha
racter of good citizens ; if they have a tendency to free men from
a strong restraint upon their passions, and to make the infringement
ofthe laws of equity and society more easy and secure; then such
principles and reasonings, according to his way of representing the
matter, ought in good policy to be restrained, as having a bad in
fluence on the community.
There is one passage more in this Essay which may deserve some
notice. It is in page 230, where he observes, that " God discovers
himself by some faint traces or outlines, beyond Which we have no
authority to ascribe to him any attribute or perfection. What we
imagine to be a superior perfection may really be a defect. Or,
were it ever so much a perfection, the ascribing it to the Supreme
Being, where it appears not to have been really exerted to the full
in his works, savours more of flattery and panegyric, than of just
reasoning and sound philosophy." The course of his arguing seems
to be this : That it would savour oi flattery, not of sound reasoning,
to ascribe any attribue or perfection to God, which appears not to
have been exerted to the full in his works. And he had observed
before, that" it is impossible for us to know anything ofthe cause,
but what we have antecedently, not inferred, but discovered to the
full in the effect."4/ It is plain therefore, that according to him we
ought not to ascribe any perfection to God, but what is not merely
inferred, but discovered to the full in his works. It is also manifest,
that according to him there is no attribute or perfection of the
Deity exerted or discovered to the full in his works ; for he had said
just before, that he discovers himself only by some faint traces or
outlines. The natural conclusion from these premises taken together
is plainly this : that it would be flattery and presumption in us to
ascribe any attribute or perfection to God at all. And now I leave
it to you to judge of the obligations the world is under to this
writer. In one part of his Essay he makes an attempt to subvert
the proof of the existence of a God, or a supreme intelligent cause
of the universe ; and here he insinuates that it would be wrong to
ascribe any perfection or attribute to him at all. And the main
* Philosophical Essays, p. 231. f Ibid., p. 222. '

Let. XVIII. mr. hume. 229
design of the whole Essay is to show, than no argument can be
drawn from any of his perfections, to make it probable that there
shall be rewards and punishments in a future state, though he
acknowledgeth that it is of great advantage to makind to believe
.them. You will not wonder after this, that this gentleman, who has
endeavoured to shake the foundations of natural religion, should
use his utmost efforts to subvert the evidences of the Christian reve
lation. What he hath offered this way will be the subject of some
future letters.

LETTER XVIII.

An Examination of Mr. Hume's Essay on Miracles — A Summary of the first Part of that
Essay, which is designed to show, that Miracles are incapable of being proved by
any Testimony or Evidence whatsoever — His main Principle examined, that Ex
perience is our only Guide in reasoning concerning Matters of Fact ; and that Miracles
being contrary to the established Laws of Nature, there is an uniform Experience
a*gainst the Existence of any Miracle — It is shown that no Argument can be drawn
from Experience, to- prove that Miracles are impossible, or that they have not been
actually wrought — Miracles not above the Power of God, nor unworthy of his
Wisdom — Valuable Ends may be assigned for Miracles — They are capable of being
proved by proper Testimony — This applied to the Resurrection of Christ. — And it is
shown, that the evidence set before us in Scripture is every way sufficient to satisfy
us of the truth of it, supposing that Evidence to have been really given as there
represented. Sir,
I now proceed to consider Mr. Hume's celebrated Essay on
Miracles, which is the tenth of his Philosophical Essays, and has
been mightily admired and extolled, as a masterly and unanswerable
piece. I think no impartial man will say so, that has read the
ingenious and judicious answer made to it by the Rev. Mr. Adams,
now rector of Shrewsbury. It is entitled, An Essay in answer to
Mr. Hume's Essay on Miracles, by William Adams, M. A. That
which I have by me is the second edition, with additions, London,
1754. Besides this, I have seen a short but excellent discourse,
by the Rev. Dr. Rutherforth, entitled, The Credibility of Miracles
defended against the Author of the Philosophical Essays, " in a
discourse delivered at the primary visitation of the Right Rev.
Thomas Lord Bishop of Ely. — Cambridge, 1751." These in my
opinion are sufficient. But since you desire that I would also take
a particular notice of Mr. Hume's Essay, I shall obey your com
mands, and enter on a distinct consideration of this boasted per
formance. Mr. Hume introduceth his Essay on Miracles in a very pompous
manner, as might be expected from one who sets up in his Philo-

230 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVIII.
sophical Essays, for teaching men better methods of reasoning than
any philosopher had done before him. He had taken care at every
turn to let his readers know how much they are obliged to him, for
throwing new light on the most curious and sublime effects, with
regard to which the most celebrated philosophers had been extremely
defective in their researches. And now he begins his Essay on
Miracles with declaring, that " he flatters himself that he has dis
covered an argument, which, if just, will, with the wise and learned,
be an everlasting check to all kinds of superstitious delusion; and,
consequently, will be useful as long as the world endures ; for so
long," he presumes, " will the account of miracles and prodigies be
found in all profane history." *
This Essay consisteth of two parts. The first, which reacheth
from p. 173 to p. 186, is designed to show, that no evidence which
can be given, however seemingly full and strong, can be a sufficient
ground for believing the truth and existence of miracles; or, in
other words, that miracles are, in the nature of things, incapable of
being proved by any evidence or testimony whatsoever. The second
part is intended to show, that supposing a miracle capable of being
proved by full and sufficient evidence or testimony, yet, in fact,
there never was a miraculous event in any history established upon
such evidence. The first is what he seems principally to rely upon;
and, indeed, if this can be proved, it will make any particular
inquiry into the testimony produced for miracles needless.
The method he makes use of in the first part of his Essay, to
show that no evidence or testimony that can be given is a sufficient
ground for a reasonable assent to the truth and existence of
miracles, is this : He lays it down as an undoubted principle, that
experience is our only guide in reasoning concerning matters of
fact ; and at the same time insinuates, that this guide is far from
being infallible, and is apt to lead us into errors and mistakes. He
observes, that the validity and credibility of human testimony is
wholly founded upon experience r That in judging how far a testi
mony is to be depended upon, we balance the opposite circum
stances, which may create any doubt or uncertainty : That the
evidence arising from testimony may be destroyed, either by the
contrariety and opposition of the testimony, or by the consideration
of the nature of the facts themselves : That when the facts partake of
the marvellous and extraordinary, there are two opposite experiences
with regard to them ; and that which is the most credible is to be
preferred, though still with a diminution of its credibility, in pro
portion to the force of the other which is opposed to it : That this
holdeth still more strongly in the case of miracles, which are sup
posed to be contrary to the laws of nature ; for experience being
our only guide, and an uniform experience having established those , ,
laws, there must be an uniform experience against the existence of
any miracle ; and an uniform experience amounts to a full and entire
proof. To suppose, therefore, any testimony to be a proof of a
* Philosophical Essays, p. 174.

Let. XVIII. mr. hume. 231
miracle, is to suppose one full proof for a miracle, opposed to
another full proof in the nature of .the thing against it, in which
case those proofs destroy one another. Finally, that we are not to
believe any testimony concerning a miracle, except the falsehood of
that testimony should be more miraculous than the miracle itself
which it is designed to establish. He also gives a hint, that as it is
impossible for us to know the attributes or actions of God, otherwise
than from the experience which we have of his productions, we
cannot be sure that he can effect miracles, which are contrary to all
our experience, and the established course of nature ; and therefore
miracles are impossible to be proved by any evidence.
Having given this general idea of this first part of Mr. Hume's
Essay on Miracles, I shall now proceed to a more particular exami
nation of it.
It is manifest that the main principle, which lieth at the founda
tion of his whole scheme, is this : that experience is our only
" guide in reasoning concerning matters of fact." * You will have
observed, from what hath been remarked in my former letters, that
this author brings up the word experience upon all occasions. It is,
as he hath managed it, a kind of cant term, proposed in a loose,
indeterminate way, so that it is not easy to form a clear idea of it,
or of what this writer precisely intends by it. He had declared,
that it is only by experience that we come to know the existence of
objects ; that it is only by experience that we know the relation
between cause and effect ; and at the same time had endeavoured
to show, that experience cannot furnish so much as even a probable
argument concerning any connexion betwixt cause and effect, or by
which we can draw any conclusion from the one to the other. He
had afterwards applied the same term, experience, to show that no
argument can be brought to prove the existence of one supreme
intelligent Cause of the universe, because this is a subject that lies
entirely beyond the reach of human experience ; and that we can
have no proof of a future state of retributions, because we know
no more concerning providence than what we learn from experience
in this present state. And now he comes to try the force of this
formidable word against the existence of miracles, and to raise an
argument against them from experience.
But that we may not lose ourselves in the ambiguity of the term
as he employs it, let us distinctly examine what sense it bears, as
applied to the present question. In judging of the truth of the
maxim he hath laid down, viz., that experience is our only guide in
reasoning concerning matters of fact, it is to be considered, that the
question we are now upon properly relates, not to future events, as
the author seems sometimes to put it,f but to past matter of fact.
What are we, therefore, to understand by that experience, which he
makes to be our only guide in reasoning concerning them ? Is it
our own particular personal experience, or is it the experience of
others, as well as our own ? And if of others, is it the experience
* Philosophical Essays, p. 174. t Ibid. p. 175.

232 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVIII.
of some others only, or of all mankind ? If it be understood thus,
that every man's own personal observation and experience is to be
his only guide in reasoning concerning mat'.ers of fact, so that no
man is to believe anything with relation to any facts whatsoever,
but what is agreeable to what he hath himself observed or known
in the course of his own particular experience ; this would be very
absurd, and would reduce each man's knowledge of facts into a
very narrow compass; it would destroy the use and credit of
history, and of a great part^of experimental philosophy, and bring
us into a state of general ignorance and barbarism. Or is the word
experience to be taken in a larger and more extensive sense, as com
prehending, not merely any particular man's experience, but that of
others too? In this case we have no way of knowing experience,
but by testimony. And here the question recurs, Is it to be under
stood of the experience of all mankind, or of some persons only ?
If the experience referred to be the experience or observation of
some persons only, or of a part of mankind, how can this be de
pended on as a certain guide ? For why should their experience be
the guide, exclusively of that of others ? and how do we know, but
that many facts may be agreeable to the experience of others, which
are not to theirs ? But if the experience referred to be the experi
ence of all mankind in general, that must take in the experience
both of all men of the present age, and of those in past times and
ages, it must be acknowledged that this rule and criterion is not
easily applicable ; for will any man say, that we are to believe no
facts but what are agreeable to the experience of mankind in all
ages ? Are we, in order to this, to take in whatsoever any man or
men, in any age or country, have had experience of? and to judge
by this how far it is reasonable to believe any past fact or facts, of
which we ourselves have not had sensible evidence ? Even on this
view of the case, it might probably take in many facts of a very
extraordinary nature, and which have happened out of the common
course of things ; of which there have been instances in the expe
rience and observation of different nations and ages. And at this
rate experience will not be inconsistent with the belief even of
miracles themselves, of which there have been several instances
recorded in the history of mankind.
But farther, in reasoning from experience, either our own or that
of others, concerning matters of fact, it is to be considered, what it
is that we propose to judge or determine by experience in relation
to them. Is it whether these facts are possible, or whether they
are probable, or whether they have been actually done ? As to the
possibility of facts, experience, indeed, or the observation of similar
events known to ourselves or others, may assure us that facts or
events are possible, but not that the contrary is impossible. Con
cerning this, experience cannot decide anything at all. We cannot
conclude any event to be impossible, merely because we have had
no experience of the like, or because it is contrary to our own
observation and experience, or to the experience of others; for> as
this gentleman observes in another part of his Essays, " the contrary

Let. XVIII. mr. uume. 233
of every matter of fact is still possible, because it can never imply
a contradiction."* And again he says, speaking of matters of fact,
" there are no demonstrative arguments in the case ; since it implies
no contradiction, that the course of nature may change."f No
argument, therefore, can be brought to demonstrate anything or
fact to be impossible, merely because it is contrary to the course of
our own observation and experience, and that of mankind, provided
it doth not imply a contradiction, or provided there be a power
capable of effecting it. Another thing to be considered, with regard
to facts, is, whether they are probable : And here experience, or the
observation of similar events, made by ourselves or others, may be
of great use, to assist us in forming a judgment concerning the
probability of past facts, or in forming conjectures concerning future
ones. But if the question be, Whether an event has actually hap
pened, or a fact has been done ; concerning this, experience, taken
from an observation of similar events, or the ordinary course of
causes and effects, cannot give us any assurance or certainty to
proceed upon. We cannot certainly conclude, that any fact or
event has been done, merely because we or others have had expe
rience or observation of a fact or event of a like nature ; nor, on
the other hand, can we conclude that such a certain event hath not
happened, or that such a fact hath not been actually done, because
we have not had experience of a like action or event being done, or
have had experience of the contrary being done. The rule, there
fore, which he lays down, of judging which side is supported by
the greater number of experiments, and of balancing the opposite
experiments, and deducting the lesser number from the greater, in
order to know the exact force of the superior evidence,"); is very
uncertain and fallacious, if employed in judging whether matters of
fact have been really done ; for the fact referred to, and the evidence
attending it, may be so circumstanced, that, though it be a fact of
a singular nature, and to which many instances of a different kind
may be opposed, we may yet have such an assurance of its having
been actually done, as may reasonably produce a sufficient con
viction in the mind. The proper way of judging whether a fact or
event, of which we ourselves have not had sensible evidence, hath
been actually done, is by competent testimony. And this, in
common language, is distinguished from experience, though this
writer artfully confounds them.
This, therefore, is what we are next to consider, viz., the force of
human testimony, and how far it is to be depended upon.
And with regard to the validity of the evidence arising from
human testimony, he observes, that " there is no species of reason
ing more common, more useful, and even necessary to human life,
than that derived from the testimony of men, and the reports of
eye-witnesses and spectators." The whole certainty or assurance
arising from testimony he resolveth into what he calls past expe
rience. That " it is .derived from no other principle than our obser-
* Philosophical Essays, p. 48. t Ibid. p. 62. X Ibid. p. 176.

234 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVIII.
vation of the veracity of human testimony, and of the usual con
formity of facts to the report of witnesses." And he mentions, as
grounds of the belief of human testimony, that " men have com
monly an inclination to truth, and a sentiment of probity ; that
they are sensible to shame when detected in a falsehood ; and that
these are qualities discovered by experience to be inherent in human
nature."* But he might have put the case much more strongly,
by observing, that human testimony, by the acknowledgment of all
mankind, may be so circumstanced, as to produce an infallible
assurance, or an evidence so strong, that, as our author expresseth
it in another case, none but a fool or a madman would doubt of it.
It is a little too loose to say in general, that it is founded only on
past experience. It hath its foundation in the very nature of things,
in the constitution of the world and of mankind, and in the
appointment of the Author of our being, who, it is manifest, hath
formed and designed us to be in numberless instances determined
by this evidence, which often comes with such force, that we cannot
refuse our assent to it without the greatest absurdity, and putting a
manifest constraint upon our nature.4^ Mr. Hume himself, in his
Essay on Liberty and Necessity, hath run a parallel between moral
and physical evidence, and hath endeavoured to show that the one
is as much to be depended on as the other. He expressly saith,
that " when we consider how aptly natural and moral evidence link
together, and form only one chain of argument, we shall make no
scruple to allow, that they are of the same nature, and derived from
the same principles. "J
It will be easily granted, what our author here observes, that
" there are a number of circumstances to be taken into consideration
in all judgments of this kind ; and that we must balance the oppo
site circumstances that create any doubt or uncertainty ; and when
we discover a-superiority on any side, we incline to" it, but still with
a diminution of assurance in proportion to the force of its antago
nist.'^ Among the particulars which may diminish or destroy the
force of any argument drawn from human testimony, he mentions
the contrariety of the evidence, contradictions of witnesses, their sus
picious character, &c. : and then proceeds to take notice of " what
may be drawn from the nature of the fact attested, supposing it to
partake of the extraordinary and the marvellous." He argueth,
that " in that case the evidence resulting from the testimony receives
a diminution greater or less in proportion as the fact is more or less
unusual. When the fact attested is such a one as has seldom fallen
under our observation, here is a contest of two opposite experiences,
of which the one destroys the other as far its force goes ; and the su
perior can only operate upon the mind by the force which remains."
This is a plausible, but a very fallacious way of reasoning. A thing
may be very unusual, and yet, if confirmed by proper testimony, its
being unusual may not diminish its credit, or produce in the mind of
* Philosophical Essays, p. 176, 177. t Ditton on the Resurrection, part 2.
X Philosophical Essays, p. 144. $ Ibid. p. 177.

Let. XVIII. mr. hume. 235
a thinking person a doubt or suspicion concerning it. Indeed,
vulgar minds, who judge of every thing by their own narrow notions,
and by what they themselves have seen, are often apt to reject and
disbelieve a thing, that is not conformable to their own particular
customs or experience. But wiser men, and those of more enlarged
minds, judge otherwise; and, provided a thing comes to them suf
ficiently attested and confirmed by good evidence, make its being
unusual no objection at all to its credibility. Many uncommon facts
facts, and unusual phenomena of nature, are believed by the most
sagacious philosophers, and received as true without hesitation, upon
the testimony of persons who were worthy of credit, without follow
ing the author's rules, or making their own want of experience or
observation an objection against those accounts. And upon this
dependeth no small part of our knowledge. Mr. Adams hath very
well illustrated this by several instances, and hath justly observed,
" that the most uniform experience is sometimes outweighed by a
single testimony ; because experience in this case is only a negative
evidence, and the slightest positive testimony is for the most part
an overbalance to the strongest negative evidence that can be pro
duced." *
Our author here very improperly talks of a contest between two
opposite experiences, the one of which destroys the other. For when
1 believe a thing unusual, I do not believe a thing opposite to mine
own experience, but different from it, or a thing of which I have had
no experience ; though if it were a thing contrary to my own expe
rience, provided it were confirmed by sufficient testimony, this is not
a valid argument against its trufli, nor a sufficient reason for dis
believing it. This gentleman himself hath mentioned a remarkable
instance of this kind in the Indian prince, who refused to believe the
first relations concerning the effects of frost. This instance, though
he laboureth the point here, and in an additional note at the end of
his book, is not at all favourable to his scheme. He acknowledgeth,
that in this case of freezing, the event follows contrary to the rules
of analogy, and is such as a rational Indian would not look for.
The constant experience in those countries, according to which the
waters are always fluid, and never in a state of hardness and solidity,
is against freezing. This, according to his way of reasoning, might
be regarded as a proof drawn from constant experience, and the
uniform course of nature, as far as they knew it. Here then is an
instance, in which it is reasonable for men to believe upon good
evidence an event no way conformable to their experience, and con
trary to the rule of analogy, which he yet seems to make the only
rule by which we are to judge of the credibility and truth of
facts. From the consideration of facts that are unusual, he proceeds to
those that are miraculous, which is what he hath principally in view ;
and with regard to these, he endeavoureth to show that no testimony
at all is to be admitted. " Let us suppose," saith he, " that the fact
* Adams's Essay in answer to Hume on Miracles, p. 19, 20.

236 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVIII.
which they affirm, instead of being only marvellous, is really mira
culous ; and suppose also that the testimony, considered apart, and
in itself, amounts to an entire proof; in that case there is' proof
against proof, of which the strongest must prevail, but still with a
diminution of its force in proportion to that of its antagonist."* It
may be proper to remark here, that this writer had in a former essay
defined a proof to be such an argument drawn from experience, as
leaves no room for doubt or opposition.f Admitting this definition,
it is improper and absurd for him to talk of proof against proof ;
for since a proof, according to his own account of it, leaves no room
for doubt or opposition ; where there is a proper proof of a fact there
cannot be a proper proof at the same time against it ; for one truth
cannot contradict another truth. No doubt his intention is to sig
nify that there can be no proof given of a miracle at all, and that
the proof is only on the other side ; for he there adds, " A miracle
is a violation of the laws of nature ; and as a firm and unalterable
experience hath established those laws" [he should have said, hath
discovered to us that these are the established laws, i. e., that this is
the ordinary course of nature] " the proof against a miracle, from
the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from ex
perience can possibly be imagined." He repeats this again after
ward, and observes, that there must be an uniform experience against
every miraculous event, otherwise the event would not merit the
appellation ; and as an uniform experience amounts to a proof, there
is here a direct and full proof from the nature of the fact, against
the existence of any miracle." "f He seems to have a very high
opinion of the force of this way of reasoning, and therefore takes
care to put his reader again in mind of it in the latter part of his
Essay. " 'Tis his experience alone," saith he, " which gives authority
to human testimony; and 'tis the same experience that assures us of
the laws of nature. When therefore these two kinds of experience
are contrary, we have nothing to do but to substract the one from
the other. And this substraction with regard to all popular religions
amounts to an entire annihilation." § And it is chiefly upon this
that he foundeth the arrogant censure, which, with an unparalleled
assurance, he passeth upon all that believe the Christian religion,
that " whosoever is moved by faith to assent to it, is conscious of a
continued miracle in his own person, which subverts all the prin
ciples of his understanding, and gives him a determination to believe
whatever is most contrary to custom and experience." It is thus that
he concludes his Essay, as if he had for ever silenced all the advocates
for Christianity, and they must henceforth either renounce their
faith, or submit to pass with men of his superior understanding for
persons miraculously stupid, and utterly lost to all reason and
common sense.
Let us therefore- examine what there is in this argument that can
support such a peculiar strain of confidence ; and I believe it will
* Philosophical Essays, p. 108. t Ibid., p. 93. x Ibid., p. 181.
§ Ibid., p. 202, 203.

Let. XVIII. mr. hume. 237
appear that never was there weaker reasoning set off with so much
pomp and parade.
There is one general observation that may be sufficiently obvious
to any man, who brings with him common sense and attention, and
which is alone sufficient to show the fallacy of this boasted argu
ment ; and it is this : that the proof arising from experience, on
which he layeth so mighty a stress, amounteth to no more than this,
that we learn from it what is conformable to the ordinary course and .
order of things, but we cannot learn or pronounce from experience
that it is impossible things or events should happen in any particular
instance contrary to that course. We cannot therefore pronounce
such an event, though it be contrary to the usual course of things,
to be impossible ; in which case no testimony whatsoever could prove
it. And if it be possible, there is place for testimony. And this
testimony may be so strong and so circumstanced, as to make it
reasonable for us to believe it. And if we have sufficient evidence
to convince us that such an event hath actually happened, however
extraordinary or miraculous, no argument drawn from experience
can prove that it hath not happened. I would observe by the way,
that when this gentleman talks of an uniform experience, and a firm
and unalterable experience, against the existence of all miracles, if
he means by it such an universal experience of all mankind as hath
never been counteracted in any single instance, this is plainly sup
posing the very thing in question, and which he hath no right to sup
pose, because, by his own acknowledgment, mankind have believed
in all ages that miracles have really been wrought. By uniform
experience, therefore, in this argument must be understood, the
general or ordinary experience of mankind in the usual course of
things. And it is so far from being true, as he confidently affirms,
that such an uniform experience amounts to a full and direct
proof, from the nature of the fact, against the existence of any
miracle, that it is no proof against it at all. Let us judge of this
by his own definition of a miracle. " A miracle," saith he, " may
be accurately defined, a transgression of a law of nature by a par
ticular volition of the Deity, or by the interposal of some invisible
agent." Now our uniform experience affordeth a full and direct
proof, that such or such an event is agreeable to the established laws
of nature, or to the usual course of things ; but it yieldeth no proof
at all, that there cannot in any particular instance happen any event
contrary to that usual course of things, or to what we have hitherto
experienced ; or that such an event may not be brought about by a
particular volition of the Deity, as our author expresseth it, for
valuable ends worthy of his wisdom and goodness.
He cannot therefore make his argument properly bear, except he"
can prove that miracles are absolutely impossible. And this is what
he sometimes' seems willing to attempt. Thus, speaking of some
miracles pretended to have been fully attested, he asks, "What
have we to oppose to such a cloud of witnesses, but the absolute
impossibility, or miraculous nature of the event?"* where he seems
* Philosophical Essays, p. 195.

238 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVIII.
to make the miraculous nature of an event, and the absolute impos
sibility of it, to be the same thing. And he elsewhere makes an
attempt to prove, that we have no reason to think that God himself
can effect a miracle. He urges, that though the Being to whom the
miracle is ascribed, be in this case Almighty, it does not, upon that
account, become a whit more probable ; since it is impossible for us
to know the attributes or acts of a Being, otherwise than from the
experience we have of his productions in the usual course of nature."*
But when once we conclude, from the effects in the works of nature,
that he is Almighty, as this gentleman seems here to grant, we may,
from his being Almighty, reasonably infer that he can do many
things which we do not know that he hath actually done, and can
produce many effects which he hath not actually produced ; for an
Almighty Being can do any thing that doth not imply a contradic
tion ; and it can never be proved that a miracle, or an event contrary
to the usual course of nature, implieth a contradiction. This writer
himself expressly acknowledgeth, in a passage I cited before, that
" it implies no contradiction, that the course of nature may change;"f
and he repeats it again afterwards, that " the course of nature may
change." j And as to the extraordinariness of any fact, he saith,
that " even in the most familiar events, the energy of the cause is as
unintelligible, as in the most extraordinary and unusual." § What
we call the course of nature is the appointment of God, and the
continuance of it dependeth upon his power and will ; it is no more
difficult for him to act contrary to it in any particular instance, than
to act according to it. The one is in itself as easy to Almighty
Power as the other. The true question then is concerning the divine
will, whether it can be supposed that God, having established the
course of nature, will ever permit or order a deviation from that
regular course, which his own wisdom hath established ; and with
regard to this, it will be readily granted, that it is highly proper and
wisely appointed, that in the ordinary state of things, what are com
monly called the laws of nature should be maintained, and that
things should generally go on in a fixed stated course and order;
without which there could be no regular study or knowledge of
nature, no use or advantage of experience, either for the acquisition
of science, or the conduct of life. But though it is manifestly
proper that these laws, or this course of things, should generally
take place, it would be an inexcusable presumption to affirm that
God, having established these laws and this course of nature in the
beginning, hath bound himself never to act otherwise than accord
ing to those laws. There may be very good reasons, worthy of his
great wisdom, for his acting sometimes contrary to the usual order
of things. Nor can it in that case be justly pretended that this
would be contrary to the immutability of God, which is Spinosa's
great argument against miracles ; for those very variations which
appear so extraordinary to us, are comprehended within the general
plan of his providence, and make a part of his original design.
* Philosophical Essays, p. 95. t Ibid., p. 62. f Ibid., p. 66.
§ Ibid., p. 114.

Let. XVIII. mr. hume. 239
The same infinite wisdom which appointed or established those
natural laws, did also appoint the deviations from them, or that they
should be overruled on some particular occasions ; which occasions
were also perfectly foreseen from the beginning by his all compre
hending mind. If things were always to go on without the least
variation in the stated course, men might be apt to overlook or
question a most wise governing providence, and to ascribe things
(as some have done) to a fixed immutable fate or blind necessity,
which they call nature. It may therefore be becoming the wisdom
of God to appoint that there should be, on particular occasions,
deviations from the usual established course of things. Such ex
traordinary operations and appearances may tend to awaken in man
kind a sense of a Supreme disposer and governor of the world, who
is a most wise and free as well as powerful agent, and hath an
absolute dominion over nature ; and may also answer important
ends and purposes of moral government, for displaying God's justice
and mercy, but especially for giving attestation to the divine mission
of persons, whom he seeth fit to send on extraordary errands, for
instructing and reforming mankind, and for bringing discoveries of
the highest importance to direct men to true religion and happiness.
It appeareth then, that no argument can be brought from ex
perience to prove, either that miracles are impossible to the power
of God, or that they can never be agreeable to his will ; and there
fore it is far from yielding a direct and full proof against the exist
ence of miracles. It may illustrate this to consider some of the
instances he himself mentions. " Lead cannot of itself remain
suspended in the air. Fire consumes wood, and is extinguished by
water." Our uniform experience proves, that this is the usual and
ordinary course of things, and agreeable to the known laws of
nature; it proves, that lead cannot naturally and ordinarily, or by-
its own force, be suspended in the air ; but it affordeth no proof at
all, that it cannot be thus suspended in a particular instance by the
will of God, or by a supernatural force or power. In like manner
our experience proves, that fire consumes wood in the natural course
of things ; but it yieldeth no proof, that, in a particular instance,
the force of fire may not be suspended or overruled, and the wood
preserved from being consumed by the interposal of an invisible
agent. Another instance he mentions is, that "it is a miracle that
a dead man should come to life ; because that has never been
observed in any age or country ;"* but its never having been
observed, if that had been the case, would have furnished no proof
at all that a dead man cannot be raised to life by the power and
will of God, when a most valuable a»d important end is to be
answered by it. And if we have good evidence to convince us, that
a man had been really dead, and that that man was afterwards
really restored to life, (and this is a matter of fact of which our
senses can judge, as well as of any other fact whatsoever) no argu
ment can be drawn from experience to prove that it could not be
* Philosophical Essays, p. 181.

240 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVIII.
so. Our experience would indeed afford a proof, that no merely
natural human power could effect it ; or that it is a thing really
miraculous, and contrary to the usual course of nature; but it
would not amount to a full and direct proof, nor indeed to any proof
at all, that it could not be effected by the divine power.
And now we may judge of the propriety of the inference he draws
from the argument, as he had managed it. " The plain consequence
is," saith he, " and it is a general maxim worthy of our attention,
that no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the
testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more mira
culous than the fact which it endeavours to establish ; and even in
that case, there is a mutual destruction of arguments, and the
superiority only gives us an assurance suitable to that degree of
force which remains after deducting the inferior. When any one
tells me that he saw a dead man restored to life, I immediately con
sult with myself whether it be more probable that this person should
ever deceive or be deceived, or that the fact he relates should really
have happened ; I weigh the one miracle against the other, and,
according to the superiority which I discover, I pronounce my deci
sion, and always reject the greater miracle."*
You cannot but observe here, this writer's jingle upon the word
miracle. As he had talked of proof against proof, so he here talks
as if in the case he is supposing there were miracle against miracle ;
or as if the question were concerning two extraordinary miraculous
facts, the one of which is opposed to the other. But whereas in
that case one should think the greater miracle ought to take place
against the lesser, this gentleman, with whom miracle and absurdity
is the same thing, declares that he always rejects the greater miracle.
But to quit this poor jingle, it is allowed, that the raising a dead
man to life must, if ever it happened, have been a very signal
miracle ; i. e. as he defines it, a violation of the law of nature by a
particular volition of the Deity. The question therefore is, whether
any evidence is given which may be depended on, to assure us, that
however strange or extraordinary this event may be, yet it hath
actually happened. That the thing itself is possible to the Deity,
however it may be contrary to the usual course of nature, cannot be
reasonably contested ; because it cannot be proved to involve a con
tradiction, or any thing beyond the reach of Almighty power. For
it would be to the last degree absurd to say, that he who formed
this stupendous system, or who contrived and fabricated the wonder
ful frame of the human body, and originally gave it a principle of
life, could not raise a dead man to life. It would be a contradiction,
that the same man should be living and dead at the same time, but
not that he who was dead should afterwards be restored to life ; and
therefore if it be the will of God, and his wisdom and goodness
seeth it proper for answering any very important purposes, he is able
to effect it. But then, whether he hath actually effected it, is an
other question ; and here it will be readily owned, that in a case of
* Philosophical Essays, p. 182.

Let. XVIII. mr. hume. 24l
so extraordinary a nature, the evidence or testimony upon which we
receive it, ought to be very strong and cogent.
Mr. Hume is pleased here to put the case in a very loose and
general way. "When any one tells me," saith he, " that he saw a
dead man restored to life, I immediately consider with myself,
whether it be more probable that this person should either deceive
or be deceived, or that the fact he relates should really have
happened." He puts it as if there was nothing to depend upon but
the testimony of a single person ; without any assignable reason
for such an extraordinary event ; and when thus proposed, naked
of all circumstances, no wonder that it hath an odd appearance !
But that we may bring the question to a fair issue, let us apply to
it what our author without doubt had principally in his view, the
resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Taking the case therefore
according to the representation given of it in the Holy Scriptures,
let us examine whether, supposing all those circumstances to concur
which are there exhibited, thev do not amount to a full and satis
factory evidence, sufficient to lay a just foundation for a reasonable
assent to it. Let us then suppose, that in a series of writings pub
lished by different persons in different ages, and all of them incorr-
testably written long before the event happened, a glorious and
wonderful person was foretold and described by the most extraordi
nary characters, who should be sent from heaven to teach and in
struct mankind, to guide them in the way of salvation, and to intro
duce an excellent dispensation of truth and righteousness. That
not only the nation and family from which he was to spring, the
place of his birth, and time of his appearing, was distinctly pointed
out, but it was foretold that he should endure the most grievous
sufferings and death, and that afterwards he should be exalted to
a divine dominion and glory, and that the Gentiles should be enlight
ened by his doctrine, and receive his law. That accordingly, at the
time which had been signified in these predictions, that admirable
person appeared. That he taught a most pure and heavenly doc
trine, prescribed the most holy and excellent laws, and brought the
most perfect scheme of religion which had ever been published to
the world ; and at the same time exhibited in his own sacred life and
practice an example of the most consummate holiness and goodness.
That in proof of his divine mission he performed the most wonder
ful works, manifestly transcending the utmost efforts of all human
power or skill, and this in a vast number of instances, and in the
most open and public manner, for a course of years together. That
he most clearly and expressly foretold that he was to undergo the
most grievous sufferings, and a cruel and ignominious death, and
should afterwards rise again from the dead oa the third day. And
to this he appealed as the most convincing proof of his divine mis
sion. That accordingly he suffered the death of the cross, in the
face of a vast multitude of spectators ; and notwithstanding the
chief men of the Jewish nation, by whose instigation he was cruci
fied, took the most prudent and effectual precautions to prevent an
imposition in this matter, he rose again from the dead at the time

242 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XVIII.
appointed, with circumstances of great glory, in a manner which
struck terror into the guards who were set to watch the sepulchre.
That afterwards he showed himself alive to many of those who were
most intimately acquainted with him, and who, far from discovering
a too forward credulity, could not be brought to believe it, till they
found themselves constrained to do so by the testimony of all their
senses. That as a farther proof of his resurrection and exaltation,
they who witnessed it were themselves enabled to perform the most
wonderful miracles in his name, and by power derived from him,
and were endued with the most extraordinary gifts and powers, that
they might spread his religion through the world, amidst the great
est oppositions and discouragements. That accordingly this reli
gion, though propagated by the seemingly meanest and most un
likely instruments, and not only destitute of all worldly advantages,
but directly opposite to the prevailing superstitions, prejudices, and
vices both of Jews and Gentiles, and though it exposed its publish
ers and followers to all manner of reproaches, persecutions, and
sufferings, yet in that very age made the most surprising progress;
in consequence of which, the religion of Jesus was established in a
considerable part of the world, and so continueth unto this day.
Such is the view of the evidence of the resurrection of Jesus ;
and, taking it altogether, it forms such a concatenation of proofs,
asis every way suitable to the importance of the fact, and which was
never equalled in any other case. To suppose all this evidence to
have been given in attestation to a falsehood, involveth in it the
most palpable absurdities. It is to suppose, either that God would
employ his own prescience and power to give testimony to an im
postor, by a series of the most illustrious prophecies and numerous
uncontrolled miracles ; or that good beings, superior to man, would
extraordinarily interpose for the same purpose, to countenance and
derive credit to a person falsely pretending to be sent from God,
and feigning to act in his name ; or that evil spirits would use all
their arts and their power to attest and confirm a religion, the
manifest tendency of which was to destroy idolatr)', superstition,
and vice, wherever it was sincerely believed and embraced, and to
recover mankind to holiness and happiness ; which is a contradiction
to their very nature and character. It is to suppose that a number
of persons would combine in attesting falsehoods in favour of a
person who they knew had deceived them, and of a religion con
trary to their most inveterate and favourite prejudices, and by which
they had a prospect of gaining nothing but misery, reproach, suffer
ings, and death ; which is absolutely contrary to all the principles
and passions of the human nature. It is to suppose that persons
of the greatest simplicity and plainness would act the part of the
vilest impostors ; or that men who were so bad, so false, and impious,
as to be capable of carrying on a series of the most "solemn imposi
tions in the name of God himself, would, at the hazard of all that
is dear to men, and in manifest opposition to all their ^worldly
interests, endeavour to bring over the nations to embrace a holy and
self-denying institution; or that they were enthusiasts, who were

Let. XVIII. mr. hume. 243
carried away by the heat of their own distempered brains to imagine
that for a series of years together, the most extraordinary facts were
done before their eyes, though no such things were done at all, and
that they were themselves enabled actually to perform the most
wonderful works in the most open and public manner, though they
performed no such works. It is to suppose that such mad enthu
siasts, who were also mean and contemptible in their condition, and
for the most part ignorant and illiterate, were not only capable of
forming the noblest scheme of religion which was ever published to
mankind, but were able to overcome all the learning, wealth, power,
and eloquence of the world, all the bigotry and superstition of the
nations, all the influence and artifices of the priests, all the power
and authority of the magistrates. That they did this by only
alleging that they had a commission in the name of a person who
had been crucified, whom they affirmed, but without giving any
proof of it, to have been risen from the dead, and to be exalted as
the Saviour and Lord of mankind. All this is such a complication
of absurdities, as cannot be admitted but upon principles that are
absolutely abhorrent to the common sense and reason of men. It
were easy to enlarge farther on this subject ; but this may suffice at
present, especially considering that Mr. Adams hath urged many
things to this purpose with great clearness and force, in his answer
to Mr. Hume's Essay, p. 31 — 36. And what is there to oppose to
all this? Nothing but the single difficulty of restoring a dead man
to life, which is indeed a very extraordinary and miraculous event,
but is not above the power of God to effect, and, supposing a good
and valid reason can be assigned for it worthy ofthe divine wisdom
and goodness, involveth in it no absurdity at all. And such a reason
it certainly was, to give an illustrious attestation to the divine mission
of the holy Jesus, and to the divine original of the most excellent
dispensation of religion that was ever published among men. To
talk, as this author does, of the diminution of the evidence in pro
portion to the difficulty of the case, is trifling ; for the evidence is
here supposed to be fully proportioned to the difficulty and import
ance of the case ; since there is both a power assigned every way
able to effect it, and a valuable end, which makes it reasonable to
think it was becoming the divine wisdom and goodness to interpose
for effecting it.
You will perhaps think this may be sufficient with regard to the
first part of Mr. Hume's Essay on Miracles. In my next, I shall
endeavour to make it appear that we have the highest reason to
think that the evidence, which hath been argued to be sufficient if
given, was really and actually given ; and shall answer the several
considerations he hath offered to show, that supposing miracles
capable of being proved by evidence or testimony, yet no evidence
was ever actually given for miracles, which can be reasonably
depended upon.

r 2

244 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIX.

LETTER XIX.

Reflections on the second Part of Mr. Hume's Essay on Miracles, which is designed to
show, that in fact there never was a miraculous Event established upon such Evidence
as can be depended on — What he offers, concerning the necessary Conditions and
Qualifications of Witnesses in the Case of Miracles, considered — It is shown that
the Witnesses to the Miracles in Proof of Christianity had all the Conditions and
Qualifications that can be required to render any Testimony good and valid — Con
cerning the Proneness of Mankind in all Ages to believe wonders, especially in
Matters of Religion — This no Reason for rejecting all Miracles without further
Examination — The Miracles wrought in Proof of Christianity not done in an ignorant
and barbarous Age — His Pretence that different Miracles wrought in favour of dif
ferent Religions destroy one another, and show that none of them are true — The
Absurdity of this Way of Reasoning shown — Instances produced by him of Miracles
well attested, and which yet ought to be rejected as false and incredible — A particular
Examination of what he hath offered concerning the Miracles attributed to the Abbt;
de Paris, and which he pretends much surpass those of our Saviour in Credit and
Authority. SIR,
I now proceed to consider the second part of Mr. Hume's Essay
on Miracles. The first was designed to show that miracles are in
capable of being proved by any evidence whatsoever, and that no
evidence or testimony that could be given, let us suppose it ever so
full and strong, would be a sufficient ground for believing the truth
and existence of miracles. And now in his second part he proceeds
to show, that supposing a miracle capable of being proved by full
and sufficient evidence or testimony, yet in fact, there never was a
miraculous event in any history established upon such evidence as
can reasonably be depended upon. To this purpose he offereth
several considerations. The first is designed to prove that no wit
nesses have ever been produced for any miracle, which have all the
necessary conditions and qualifications, to render their testimony
credible. The second consideration is drawn from the proneness
there has been in mankind in all ages to believe wonders ; and the
more for their being absurd and incredible ; especially in matters of
religion ; and that therefore in this case all men of sense should
reject them without further examination. His third observation is,
that they are always found to abound most among ignorant and
barbarous nations. His fourth observation is drawn from the oppo
site miracles wrought in different religions which destroy one an
other ; so that there is no miracle wrought, but what is opposed by
an infinite number of others. He then goes on to give an account
of some miraculous facts which seem to be well attested, and yet
are to be rejected as false and incredible. This is the substance of
this part of his Essay, which he concludes with an insolent boast,

Let. XIX. mr. hume. 245
as if he thought he had so clearly demonstrated what he undertook,
that no man who had not his understanding miraculously subverted
could oppose it. But I apprehend it will appear, upon a distinct
examination of what he hath offered, that there is little ground for
such confident boasting.
The principal consideration is that which he hath mentioned in
the first place, drawn from the want of competent testimony to
ascertain the truth of miraculous facts. He affirms, " that there
is not to be found in all history any miracle attested by a sufficient
number of men, of such unquestionable good sense, education, and
learning, as to secure us against all delusion in themselves ; of such
undoubted integrity, as to place them beyond all suspicion of any
design to deceive others ; of such credit and reputation in the eyes
of mankind, as to have a great deal to lose in case of being detected
in any falsehood ; and at the same time attesting facts performed in
such a public manner, and in so celebrated a part of the world, as
to render the detection unavoidable ; all which circumstances are
requisite to give us a full assurance in the testimony of men."*
Here he supposes that where these circumstances Concur, we may
have full assurance in the testimony qf men concerning the facts
they relate, however extraordinary and unusual. Let us therefore
examine the conditions and qualifications he insists upon, as neces
sary to render a testimony good and valid, and apply them to the
testimony of the witnesses of Christianity, and the extraordinary
miraculous facts whereby it was confirmed, especially that of our
Saviour's resurrection.
The first thing he insisteth upon is, that the miracle should be
attested by a sufficient number qf men. He hath not told us what
number of witnesses he takes to be sufficient in such a case. In
some cases very few may be sufficient ; yea, a single evidence may
be so circumstanced as to produce a sufficient assurance and con
viction in the mind, even concerning a fact of an extraordinary
nature ; though where there is a concurrence of many good wit
nesses, it is undoubtedly an advantage, and tendeth to give farther
force to the evidence. And as to this, Christianity hath all the
advantages that can reasonably be desired. All the apostles were
the authorized witnesses of the principal facts by which Christianity
is attested ; so were the seventy disciples, and the hundred-and-
twenty, mentioned Acts ii. 15, 21, 22, who hadjbeen with Jesus
from the commencement of his personal ministry to his ascension
into heaven ; to which might be added many others who had seen
his illustrious miracles, as well as heard his excellent instructions.
The accounts of these things were published in that very age, and
the facts were represented as having been done, and the discourses
as having been delivered, in the presence of multitudes ; so that
in effect they appealed to thousands in Judea, Jerusalem, and
Galilee. It is true, that as to the resurrection of Christ, this was
not a fact done before all the people ; but there was a number of
witnesses to it, sufficient to attest any fact. Christ showed himself
* Philosophical Essays, p. 183.

246 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL writers. Let. XIX.
alive after his passion to several persons at different times, whose
testimony give mutual support and force to one another. He showed
himself also to all the apostles in a body, to several other disciples,
and at last to five hundred at once. To which it may be added,
that all the extraordinary facts and wonderful works wrought by the
apostles and first publishers of Christianity, many of which were of
a very public nature, and done in the view of multitudes, came in
aid of their testimony.
As to the qualifications of the witnesses, the first thing he re
quireth is that " they should be of such unquestionable good sense,
education, and learning, as to secure us against all delusion in them
selves." The reason why this gentleman here mentiorieth learning
and education as necessary qualifications in witnesses, is evident.
It is undoubtedly with a view to exclude the apostles, who, except
St. Paul, appear not to have been persons of education and learn
ing. But no court of judicature, in inquiring into facts, looks upon
it to be necessary that the person giving testimony to the truth of
those facts should be persons who had a learned education ; it is
sufficient if they appear to be persons of sound sense and honest
characters, and that the facts were such that they had an oppor
tunity of being well acquainted with. And thus it was with regard
to the first witnesses of Christianity. They were not indeed persons
eminent for their learning, knowledge, and experience in the world ;
if they had been so, this might probably have been regarded as a
suspicious circumstance, as if they themselves laid the scheme, and
it was the effect of their own art and contrivance. But they were
persons of plain sense, and sound understanding, and perfectly
acquainted with the facts they relate. This sufficiently appeareth
from their writings, and the accounts they have left us. Their
narrations are plain and consistent, delivered in a simple, unaffected
style, without any pomp of words or ostentation of eloquence or
literature on the one hand, and on the other without any of the
rants of enthusiasm. All is calm, cool, and sedate, the argument
of a composed spirit. There is nothing that betrayeth an over
heated imagination ; nor do they ever fly out into passionate excla
mations, even where the subject might seem to warrant it. The
facts they relate were of such a nature, and so circumstanced, that
they could not themselves be deceived in them, supposing they had
their senses, or be made to believe they were done before their eyes
when they were not done. This must be acknowledged as to the
facts done during Christ's personal ministry. For they were con
stantly with him in his going out and coming in, and had an oppor
tunity of observing those facts in all their circumstances for a course
of years together, and therefore could be as perfectly assured of
them as any man can be of any facts whatsoever, which he himself
hears and sees. And as to his resurrection, they were not forward
rashly to give credit to it by an enthusiastic heat ; they examined it
scrupulously, and would not receive it, till compelled by irresistible
evidence, and by the testimony of all their senses.
The next thing he insisteth upon is, that " the witnesses should

Let. XIX. MR. HUME. 247
be of such undoubted integrity, as to place them beyond all sus
picion of any design to deceive others." Apply this to the wit
nesses of the miraculous facts whereby Christianity was attested,
and it will appear that never were there persons who were more
remote from all reasonable suspicion qf fraud, or a design to impose
falsehoods upon mankind. They appeared by their whole temper
and conduct to be persons of great probity and unaffected sim
plicity, strangers to artful cunning, and the refinements of human
policy. It mightily strengthens this when it is considered, that as
the case was circumstanced, they could have no temptation to en
deavour to impose these things upon the world if they had not been
true, but had the strongest inducements to the contrary. They
could have no prospect of serving their worldly interest, or answer
ing the ends of ambition, by preaching up a religion, contrary to
all the prevailing passions and prejudices of Jews and Gentiles, a
principal article of which was salvation through a crucified Jesus.
They could scarce have had a reasonable expectation of gaining so
much as a single proselyte, to so absurd and foolish a scheme, as it
must have been, supposing they had known that all was false, and
that Jesus had never risen at all. How could it have been expected
in such a case, that they should be able to persuade the Jews to
receive for their Messiah one that had been put to an ignominious
death by the heads of their nation, as an impostor or deceiver ? or
that they should persuade the Gentiles to acknowledge and worship
a crucified Jew for their Lord, in preference to their long-adored
deities, and to abandon all their darling superstitions for a strict
and self-denying discipline ? The only thing that can be pretended
as a possible inducement to them, to endeavour to impose upon
mankind, is what this writer afterwards mentions. " What greater
temptation," saith he, " than to appear a missionary, a prophet,
and ambassador from heaven ? Who would not encounter many
dangers and difficulties to attain so sublime a character ? Or if
persuaded of it himself, would scruple a pious fraud in prospect of
so holy an end ?" * But there is no room for such a suspicion in
the case we are now considering. If they had pretended a reve
lation in favour of a Messiah, suited to the Jewish carnal notions
and prejudices, who was to erect a mighty worldly dominion,
arrayed with all the pomp of secular glory and grandeur, they
might have expected honour and applause in being looked upon as
his ministers. But what honour could they propose from being re
garded as the disciples and apostles of one that had been condemned
and put to a shameful death by public authority ? To set up as
his ambassadors, and pretend to be inspired by his spirit, and to be
commissioned by him to go through the world, preaching up Jesus
Christ, and him crucified ; this was in all appearance the readiest
way they could take to expose themselves to general scorn, derision,
and reproach ; and they must have been absolutely out of their
senses to have expected "that any veneration should be paid to them
* Philosophical Essays, p. 200.

248 A view of the deistical writers. Let. XIX.
under this character, supposing they had no other proof to bring
of their crucified master's being risen, and exalted in glory as the
universal Lord and Saviour, but their own word. Thus it appears,
that they could have no inducements or temptations, according to
all the principles or motives that usually work upon the human
mind, to attempt to impose this scheme of religion, and the facts by
which it was supported, if they had known them to be false ; and
if they had been false, they must have known them to be so. But
this is not all. They had the strongest possible inducements to the
contrary. The scheme of religion they preached, and which these
facts were designed to attest, was directly opposite to their own
most rooted prejudices. On the supposition of Christ's not having
risen, they must have been sensible that he had deceived them;
that the promises and predictions with which he amused them
were false ; and that consequently they cauld have no hopes from
him, either in this world or in the next. At the same time they
could not but foresee, that "by pretending he was risen from the
dead, and setting him up for the Messiah after he had been cru
cified, they should incur the indignation of the body of their own
nation, and the hatred and contempt of those in chief authority
among them. They could not possibly expect anything but what
they met with, persecutions, reproaches, shame, and sufferings, both
from Jews and Gentiles. Their exposing themselves to these things
may be accounted for, if they were persuaded that what they wit
nessed was really true, though even in that case it required great
virtue and constancy and divine supports. But that they should,
in manifest opposition to their own religious prejudices and worldly
interests, without the least prospect of any thing to be gained by it
here or hereafter, persist to the very death in attesting a falsehood,
known by themselves to be so ; and that they should, for the sake
of one who they knew had deceived them, expose themselves to the
.greatest evils and sufferings, to which all men have naturally the
strongest aversion, is a supposition that cannot be admitted with
the least appearance of reason, as being absolutely subversive of all
the principles and passions of human nature. Our author ought
to acknowledge the force of this reasoning, since he taketh pains
throughout his whole Essay on Liberty and Necessity, to show,
that we may in many cases argue as surely and strongly from the
power and influence of motives on the human mind, as from the
influence of physical causes ; and that there is as great a certainty
and as necessary a connexion in what are called moral causes as in
physical. This author undoubtedly in that Essay carrieth it too
far, when, in order to subvert human liberty, he would have it
thought, that in all cases the power of motives worketh with as ne
cessary a force upon the mind, as any physical cause doth upon the
effect. But that in many particular cases things may be so cir
cumstanced with regard to moral causes, as to afford a certainty
equal to what arises from physical, cannot reasonably be denied.
And such is the case here put. And he expressly declareth, that
"we cannot make use of a more convincing argument than to prove,

Let. XIX. mr. hume. 249
that the actions ascribed to any person are contrary to the course of
nature, and that no human motives in such circumstances could ever
induce them to such conduct."*
This writer farther requireth, that " the witnesses should be of
such credit and reputation in the eyes of mankind as to have a
great deal to lose in case of being detected in any falsehood." If
the meaning be, that they must be persons distinguished by their rank
and situation in the world, and of great reputation for knowledge
and for the eminency of their station and figure in life ; this in the
case here referred to would, instead of strengthening, have greatly
weakened the force of their testimony. It might have been said,
with some show of plausibility, that such persons, by their know
ledge and abilities, their reputation and interest, might have it in
their power to» countenance and propagate an imposture among the
people, and give it some credit in the world. If the facts recorded
in the gospel, the miracles and resurrection of Jesus Christ, had
been patronised and attested by the chief priests and rulers of
the Jewish nation, it would undoubtedly have been pretended that
they had political designs in view, and that, considering their au
thority and influence, they might more easily impose those things
upon the multitude. On this view of things the evidence for those
important facts would have been far less convincing than now it is.
And therefore the divine wisdom hath ordered it far better, in ap
pointing that the first witnesses of the gospel were not the worldly
wise, mighty, or noble, but persons of mean condition, and yet of
honest characters, without power, authority, or interest. And
whereas this writer urgeth, that the witnesses ought to be of such
reputation as to have a great deal to lose in case of being detected in
a falsehood, it ought to be considered that a man of true probity,
though in a low condition, may be as unwilling to be branded as a
cheat and an impostor, and as desirous to preserve his good name,
which may be almost all he has to value himself upon, as persons
of greater figure and eminence in the world, who may more easily
find means to support themselves, and to evade detection and
punishment. The apostles indeed rejoiced that they were counted
worthy to suffer shame for the name of Christ, Acts v. 41. But
this was not owing to their being insensible to shame, but to the
testimony of a good conscience, and to the full persuasion they had
of Christ's divine mission, and the divinity of the religion they
preached in his name. This particularly was the principle upon
which St. Paul acted, who was a man of reputation among the Jews,
and would never have made a sacrifice of this, and of all his
worldly interests and expectations, to join himself to a despised
persecuted party, and against whom he himself had conceived the
strongest prejudices, if he had not been brought over, by an evi
dence which he was not able to resist, to the acknowledgment of the
Christian faith, and of the extraordinary facts of which it was esta
blished. * Philosophical Essays, p. 135.

250 a view of the deistical writers. Let. XIX.
The last thing he insisteth upon is, that the facts attested by the
witnesses should be " performed in such a public manner, and iu
so celebrated a part of the world, as to render the detection un
avoidable." This may be applied with the greatest propriety to the
extraordinary and miraculous facts by which Christianity was
attested. Justly doth St. Paul appeal to King Agrippa, in the
admirable apology he made before him and the Roman governor,
Festus, and which was delivered before a numerous and august
assembly of Jews and Romans, that none of these things were hidden
from him ; for, saith he, this thing was not done in a corner, Acts
xxvi. 26. Christ's whole personal ministry, and the wonderful
works he wrought were transacted, not in a private and secret, but
in the most open and public manner possible, in places of the
greatest concourse, and before multitudes of people assembled from
all parts. The same may be said of many of the miracles wrought
by the apostles, in the name and by the power of a risen Jesus ;
and particularly never was there any event of a more public nature
than the extraordinary effusion of the Holy Ghost on the day of
Pentecost. The first publishers of Christianity preached the re
ligion of Jesus, and performed miracles in confirmation of it, not
merely in small villages, or obscure parts of the country, but in
populous cities, in those parts of the world that were most cele
brated for the liberal arts, learning, and politeness. They published
their religion, and the wonderful facts by which it was supported
throughout the Lesser Asia, Greece, Italy ; in the cities of Jeru
salem, Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, Thessalonica, Philippi, Athens,
and Rome itself. If therefore their pretences had been false, they
could scarce have possibly escaped a detection ; especially con
sidering that they were everywhere under the eye of watchful
adversaries, unbelieving Jews as well as heathens, who would not
have failed to detect and expose the imposture, if there had been
any. As to what the author afterwards allegeth, that "in the
infancy of new religions the wise and learned commonly esteem the
matter too inconsiderable to deserve their attention and regard;
and when afterwards they would willingly detect the cheat, in order
to undeceive the deluded multitude, the season is now gone, and
the records and witnesses who might clear up the matter, are
perished beyond recovery ;"* this pretence hath no place in the
case we are now considering with regard to Christianity. That
religion met with the greatest opposition even in its infancy. Per
sons of principal authority in the nation where it first arose, bent
their attention and employed their power to suppress it. And in all
places where it was afterwards propagated, there were unbelieving
Jews, who used their utmost efforts to stir up the heathens against
it, who of themselves were strongly inclined by their own preju
dices to oppose it ; and this at the very time when, if the facts had
been false, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to
have detected the falsehood, which in that case must have been
* Philosophical Essays, p. 203.

Let. XIX. mr. hume. 251
known to thousands ; since many of the facts appealed to were of
a very public nature.
Thus 1 have considered the conditions and qualifications he in
sisteth upon, as necessary to give us a full assurance fn the testi
mony qf men with regard to miracles ; and have shown that all the
conditions that can be reasonably desired, concur with the highest
degree of evidence, in the testimony given by the apostles and first
witnesses of Christianity, to the extraordinary facts whereby its
divine authority was established. Their testimony had some ad
vantages which no other testimony ever had. St. Luke observes,
that with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of
the Lord Jesus, Acts iv. 33. The testimony they gave was accom
panied with a divine power. The force of their .testimony did not
depend merely on their own veracity, but may be said to have been
confirmed by the attestation of God himself. It is with the utmost
propriety, therefore, that the sacred writer of the Epistle to the
Hebrews representeth God, as bearing them witness, both with signs
and wonders, and with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost,
according to his own will, Heb. ii. 4. And it is incontestably true in
fact, that so strong and convincing was the evidence, that great
numbers both of Jews and Gentiles were brought over in that very
age, to the faith of a crucified and risen Saviour. Nor was this
the effect of a too forward credulity, since it was in direct oppo
sition to their prejudices, passions, and worldly interests. The
principles and inducements which usually lead men to form wrong
and partial judgments, lay wholly on the other side, and, instead
of being favourable to Christianity, tended rather to determine men
to disbelieve and reject it, so that it may be justly said, that the
propagation of that scheme of religion which is held forth in the
gospel had something in it so wonderful, taking in all the circum
stances of the case, that it affordeth a manifest and most convincing
proof of the truth of the extraordinary facts upon which it was
founded. I now proceed to make some observations upon the other con
siderations this gentleman offers in the second part of his Essay,
and which indeed can at best pass for no more that presumptions,
and only show, that the testimony given to miracles is not rashly to
be admitted, and that great care and caution is necessary in judging
of them, which will be easily allowed.
The second consideration, and upon which he seems to lay a great
stress, is this : " that we may observe in human nature a principle
which, if strictly examined, will be found to diminish extremely
the assurance we might have from human testimony in any kind of
prodigy." He says, " that though for the most part we readily
reject any fact that is unusual and incredible in an ordinary degree,
yet when anything is affirmed utterly absurd and miraculous, the
mind rather more readily admits such a fact, upon account of that
very circumstance which ought to destroy all its authority. The
passion of surprise and wonder arising from miracles, being an
agreeable emotion, gives a sensible tendency towards the belief of

252 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIX.
those events from which it is derived.  But if the spirit of re
ligion join itself to the love of wonder, there is an end of common
sense ; and human testimony, in these circumstances, loses all
pretensions to authority."* And again he observes, that " should
a miracle be ascribed to any new system of religion, men in all
ages have been so much imposed on by the ridiculous stories of
this kind, that this very circumstance will be a full proof of a cheat,
and sufficient with all men of sense, not only to make them reject
the fact, but even reject it without farther examination." And he
repeats it again, that it should make us form a general resolution
never to lend any attention to it, with whatever specious pretext it
may be covered."4- He here undertaketh to answer for all men qf
sense that they will reject all miracles produced in proof of religion
without farther examination, because men in all ages have been
much imposed on by ridiculous stories of this kind. But this
certainly is the language, not of reason and good sense, which
will dispose a man fairly to examine, but of the most obstinate
prepossession and prejudice. No kinds of historical facts, whether
of an ordinary or extraordinary nature, can be mentioned, in
which men have frequently been imposed upon. But that is
no just reason for rejecting such facts at once without examination;
and the man that would do so, instead of proving his superior good
sense, would only render himself ridiculous. That there have been ¦
many false miracles will be readily acknowledged; but this doth not
prove that there never have been any true ones. It ought indeed
to make us very cautious, and to examine miracles carefully before
we receive them ; but it is no reason at all, or a very absurd one,
for rejecting them all. at once without examination and inquiry.
Thus to reject them can only be justified upon this principle, that
it is not possible that there should be a true miracle wrought in
favour of any system of religion. But by what medium will he un
dertake to prove this ? He seems expressly to admit, that in other
cases "there may possibly be miracles, or violations of the usual
course of nature, of such a kind as to admit of proof from human
testimony. "J This concession is not very consistent with what he
had laboured in the first part of his Essay to show, with regard to
all miracles in general, via., that they are incapable of being proved
by any testimony. But now, provided miracles be not produced in
proof of religion, he seems willing to allow, that they may possibly
admit of proof from human testimony. The only case therefore in
which they are never to be believed, is when they are pretended to
be wrought in favour of religion. But in this he seems to have
both the reason of the thing and the general sense of mankind
against him. It is certainly more reasonable to believe a miracle,
when a valuable end can be assigned for it, than to believe it when
we cannot discern any important end to be answered by it at all.
And one of the most valuable ends for which a miracle can be sup
posed to be wrought seems to be this, to give an attestation to the
divine mission of persons sent to instruct mankind in religious
* Philosophical Essays, p. 184, 185: t Ibid. p. 204, 205. X Ibid. p. 203.

Let. XIX. mr. nuME. 253
truths of great importance, and to lead them in the way of salva
tion. Our author seems sometimes to lay a mighty stress on the
general opinion and common sentiments of mankind.* And there
are few notions, which, by his own acknowledgment, have more
generally obtained in all nations and ages than this, that there
have been miracles actually wrought on some occasions, especially
in matters of religion, and that they are to be regarded as proofs of a
divine interposition. This is a principle which seems to be con
formable to the natural sense of the human mind.
The observation he makes concerning the agreeable emotion pro
duced by the passion of wonder and surprise, and the strong pro
pensity there is in mankind to the extraordinary and the marvellous,
proves nothing against this principle. The passion of wonder and
surprise was certainly not given us in vain, but for very wise pur
poses ; and it may be presumed that this passion, as well as others,
may be rightly exercised upon proper objects. But I cannot agree
with this gentleman, that men are naturally disposed and inclined
to believe a thing the rather for its being utterly absurd and mira
culous, especially in matters of religion. They may indeed, and
often do, believe absurdities ; but they never believe a thing merely
because it is absurd, but because, taking all considerations together,
they do not look upon it to be absurd. It may be observed, by the
way, that this writer here makes absurd and miraculous to be terms
of the same signification, whereas they are very different ideas.
A miracle, when supposed to be wrought by a power adequate to
the effect, and for excellent ends, is indeed wonderful, but has no
absurdity in it at all. It is true, there have often been very absurd
things recommended to popular belief under the notion of miracles,
and such pretended miracles have been received without much
examination, when wrought in favour of the established super
stition. But even real miracles are received with difficulty, when
they are wrought in opposition to it; and where the influence of the
priesthood, the prejudices of the vulgar, and the authority of the
magistrate, are on the one side, which was the case of Christianity
at its first appearance. Considering the nature of that religion,
how contrary it was to the prevailing notions and prejudices both
of Jews and Gentiles, the strictness of the morals it prescribed,
the scheme of salvation through a crucified Saviour which it pro
posed, the meanness of the instruments by which it was propa
gated, and the numberless difficulties it had to encounter with ; the
miracles wrought in attestation of it could not have met with a
favourable reception in the world, if there had not been the most
convincing evidence of their being really wrought. The strangeness
of the facts, instead of producing belief, would rather have turned
to its disadvantage, and could scarce have failed being detected in
such circumstances, if they had been false.
His third observation is, that it " forms a very strong presump
tion against all supernatural relations, that they are always found
* Essays Moral and Political, p. 307.

254 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIX.
chiefly to abound among ignorant and barbarous nations ; pr if a
civilized people have ever given admission to any of them, they
have received them from ignorant and barbarous ancestors."* But
no presumption can be drawn from this to the prejudice of Chris
tianity, which did not make its appearance in an ignorant and bar
barous age, but at a time when the world was greatly civilized,
and in nations where arts and learning had made a very great pro
gress. And it must be considered, that it had not only their in
veterate prejudices, their darling passions, and inclinations; but
their pretended miracles to encounter with extraordinary facts re
ceived from their ancestors, who transmitted them, as he expresseth
it, with that inviolable sanction and authority, which always attends
ancient and received opinions. How strong and cogent therefore
must the force of the evidence in behalf of the Christian religion,
and the extraordinary miraculous facts designed to support it, have
been, which, in the hands of such mean instruments, could make
so great a progress in a civilized and enlightened age, and prove
too hard for the religion of the empire ; which, besides its being
interwoven with the civil establishment, had the prescription of
many ages to plead, and was supported by pretended miracles,
prodigies, and oracles ! Mr. Hume is pleased to take notice on
this occasion of the management of that cunning impostor Alex
ander.-4- But though, the better to carry on the cheat, he had laid
the scene among the barbarous Paphlagonians, who were reckoned
among the most stupid and ignorant of the human race ; and not
only put in practice all the arts of imposture (though it doth not
appear, that he pretended to work miracles among the people, or
put the proof of his authority upon them), but had procured a pow
erful interest among the great to support him, he and his impos
tures soon sunk into oblivion, and so undoubtedly would Chris
tianity too have done, if its extraordinary facts had no better foun
dation in truth and fact than his pretensions had.
" I may add," " saith he, " as a fourth reason which diminishes
the authority of prodigies, that there is no testimony for any,
even those which have not been expressly detected, that is not
opposed by an infinite number of witnesses ; so that not only
the miracle destroys the credit of the testimony, but even the testi
mony destroys itself." He goes on to observe, that " in matters
of religion whatever is different is contrary ; that it is impossible
that all these different religions should be established on a solid
foundation; that every miracle pretended to have been wrought
in any of these religions, as it is designed to establish that parti
cular system, has the same force to overthrow every other system ;
and consequently to destroy the credit of those miracles on which
that system was established. So that all the prodigies of different
religions are to be regarded as contrary facts, and the evidences
of those prodigies as opposite to one another."4: This writer is here
* Philosophical Essays, p. 186, 187.
t Ibid. p. 188, 189.. f Ibid. p. 190, 191.

Let. XIX. mr. hume. 255
pleased to confound prodigies and miracles, which ought to be dis
tinguished. Many things that have passed under the notion of
prodigies, are very far from being miracles, in the strict and proper
sense in which we are now considering them : and if we speak of
miracles properly so called, the supposition he here goes upon, viz.
that all religions have been founded upon miracles, and have put
the proof of their authority upon them, is manifestly false. It is
well known, that Mahomet did not pretend to establish his religion
by miracles ; nor indeed can it be proved, that any systems of reli
gion had any tolerable pretension of being originally founded upon
miracles, but the Jewish and the Christian ; and these, though in
some respects different, are not contrary, but mutually support
each other ; the former being introductive and preparatory to the
latter. But if his supposition should be admitted, that all religions
in the world have been founded upon the credit of miracles, it is
hard to comprehend the force of his reasoning. By what logic doth
it follow, that because miracles have been believed by mankind in
all ages and nations to have been wrought in proof of religion,
therefore miracles were never really wrought at all in proof of reli
gion, nor are they ever to be believed in any single instance ?
With the same force it may be argued, that because there have
been and are many opposite schemes of religion in the world,
therefore their being opposite to one another proves that they are
all false, and that there is no such thing as true religion in the
world at all. But let us suppose ever so great a number of false
hoods opposed to truth, that opposition of falsehood to truth doth
not make truth to be less true, or destroy the certainty and evi
dence of it. Supposing the religions to be opposite, and that
miracles are said to be wrought in attestation of those opposite
religions, it may indeed be fairly concluded that they cannot be all
true, but not that none of them is so. Our author himself seems
to be apprehensive, that this might be looked upon as a fallacious
way of reasoning. " This argument," says he, " may appear very
subtle and refined ; but is not in reality different from the rea
soning of a judge, who supposes, that the credit of two witnesses,
maintaining a crime against any one, is destroyed by the testimony
of two others, who affirm him to have been two hundred leagues
distant at the same instant when the crime is said to have been
committed."* This gentleman has here given us a most extraor
dinary specimen, how well qualified he would be to-determine causes
if he sat in a court of judicature. If there came several witnesses
before him, and their testimony was opposite to one another, he
would without farther examination reject them all at once, and
make their opposition to one another to be alone a proof that they
were all false, and none of them to be depended upon. But it
hath been hitherto thought reasonable, when testimonies are oppo
site, to weigh and compare those testimonies, in order to form a
proper judgment concerning them. In case of alibi's, which is the
* Philosophical Essays, p. 192.

256 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIX.
case the author here puts, the testimonies do not always destroy
one another. A just and impartial judge will not immediately
reject the testimonies on both sides without examination, because
they contradict one another, which is the method our author seems
here to recommend as reasonable, but will carefully compare them,
that he may find out on which side the truth lies, and which of the
testimonies is most to be credited, and will give his judgment
accordingly. This certainly is the course which right reason pre-
scribeth in all cases, where there is an opposition of testimony, and
which it is to be presumed this gentleman himself would recom
mend in every case, but where the cause of religion is concerned.
For here, notwithstanding all his pretensions to freedom of think
ing, his prejudices are so strong, that he is for proceeding by dif
ferent weights and measures from what he and all mankind would
judge reasonable in every other instance. He hath showed him
self so little qualified to judge impartially in matters of this na
ture, that I believe men of sense, to use his own phrase, will lay
very little stress on any judgment he shall think fit to pronounce
in this cause.
The only part of Mr. Hume's Essay on Miracles which now re-
maineth to be considered, is that which relates to some particular
accounts of miraculous facts, which he would have us believe are
as well or better attested, than those recorded in the Gospels, and
yet are to be rejected as false and incredible. The first instance
he mentioneth is that of the Emperor Vespasian's curing a blind
and a lame man at Alexandria, and which he affirms is one of the
best attested miracles in all profane history. This has been urged
by almost every deistical writer who hath treated of miracles : and
how little it is to the purpose in the present controversy hath been
often shown. Not to repeat what Mr. Adams hath well urged
concerning it, it may be sufficient to observe, that it appeareth
from the accounts given us bythe historians who mention it,* that
the design of these miracles was to give weight to the autho
rity of Vespasian, newly made Emperor by the great men and the
army, and to make it be believed that his elevation to the imperial
throne was approved by the gods. I believe every reasonable man
will be of opinion, that in any case of this kind, there is ground to
suspect artifice and management. And who would be so presump
tuous as to make too narrow a scrutiny into the truth of miracles,
in which the interests of the great, and the authority of a mighty
Emperor, were so nearly concentrated ? And if, as this writer ob
serves, from Tacitus, some who were present continued to relate
these facts, even after Vespasian and his family were no longer in
possession of the empire ; it doth not appear, that the persons re
ferred to were such as had been in the secret of the management,
which probably lay in few hands ; or if they were, it is not to be
wondered at that they should afterwards be unwilling to own the
part they had in this affair ; especially since no methods were made
use of to oblige them to discover the fraud.
* Tacit. Hist. lib. 4. versus finem. Sueton. in Vespas. cap. 8.

Let.- XIX. mr. hume. 257
The next instance he produceth is the miracle pretended to have
been wrought at Saragossa, and mentioned by Cardinal De Retz,
who, by Mr. Hume's own account, did not believe it. But cer
tainly a man must have his head very oddly turned, to attempt to
draw a parallel between the miracles of our Saviour and his
apostles, and miracles pretended to have been wrought in a country
where the inquisition is established, where the influence and inte
rests of the priests, the superstitions and prejudices of the people,
and the authority of the civil magistrate, are all combined to sup
port the credit of those miracles, and where it would be extremely
dangerous to make a strict inquiry into the truth of them ; and
even the expressing the least doubt concerning them, might expose
a man to the most terrible of all evils and sufferings.
But that which Mr. Hume seems to lay the greatest stress upon,
and on which he enlarges for some pages together, is, the miracles
reported to have been wrought at the tomb of the Abbe de Paris.
Having observed, that in the Recueil des Miracles de V Abbe de
Paris, there is a parallel run between the miracles of our Saviour
and those of the Abbe, he pronounces, that " if the inspired writers
were to be considered merely as human testimony, the French au
thor is very moderate in his comparison, since he might with some
appearance of reason pretend, that the Jansenist miracles much
surpass the others in credit and authority."*
This has been of late a favourite topic with the deists. Great
triumphs have been raised upon it, as if it were alone sufficient to
destroy the credit of the miraculous facts recorded in the New
Testament. I shall therefore make some observations upon it,
though in doing so I shall be obliged to take notice of several
things which Mr. Adams hath already observed, in his judicious
reflections upon this subject, in his answer to Mr. Hume's Essay
on Miracles, from page 65 to page 78.
The account Mr. Hume pretends to give of this whole affair is
very unfair and disingenuous, and is absolutely unworthy of any
man that makes pretensions to a free and impartial inquiry. He
positively asserts, that the miraculous facts were so strongly proved,
that the Molinists or Jesuits were never able distinctly to refute
or detect them ; and that they could not deny the truth of the
facts, but ascribed them to witchcraft and the devil. Yet certain
it is, that the Jesuits or Molinists did deny many of the facts to
be true as the Jansenists related them ; that they asserted them
to be false, and plainly proved several of them to be so. Particu
larly the Archbishop of Sens distinctly insisted upon twenty-two
of those pretended miraculous facts, all which he charged as owing
to falsehood and imposture.
He farther observes, that twenty-two of the Cures or Rectors of
Paris pressed the Archbishop of Paris to examine those miracles,
and asserted them to be known to the whole world. But he knew,
or might have known, that some of those very miracles which those
* Philosophical Essays, p. 196.
s

258 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIX.
gentlemen desired might be particularly inquired into, and which
they represented as undeniably true and certain, were afterwards
examined, and the perjury of the principal witnesses plainly de
tected.* And the Archbishop, who, he tells us, wisely forbore an
inquiry, caused a public judicial inquest to be made, as Mr. Adams
observes, and in an ordinance of November 8, 1735, published
the most convincing proofs, that the miracles so strongly vouched
by the Cures, were forged and counterfeited.-f-
Mr. Hume is pleased to observe, that " the Molinist party tried
to discredit those miracles in one instance, that of Mademoiselle
le Franc, but were not able to do it :" where he speaks, as if this
were the single instance in which they tried to discredit those
miracles, which is far from being true. This indeed was taken
particular notice of because it was the first history of a miraculous
fact which the Jansenists thought fit to publish, with a pompous
dissertation prefixed. It was cried up as of such unquestionable
truth, that it could not be denied without doubting of the most
certain facts : and yet the story was proved to be false in the most
material circumstances, by forty witnesses judicially examined upon
oath. It was plainly proved, that she was considerably better of
her maladies before she went to the tomb at all : that she was
no stronger when she returned from the tomb than she was when
she went to it: and that she still stood in need of remedies after
wards. Mr. Hume indeed takes upon him to declare, that the
proceedings were the most irregular in the world, particularly in
citing but a few of the Jansenist witnesses, whom they tampered
with : and then he adds, " besides they were soon overwhelmed
with a cloud of new witnesses, an hundred and twenty in number,
who gave oath for the miracles." He doth not say, they all gave
oath for this particular miracle, but for the miracles : and indeed
most of these testimonies were very little to the purpose, and
seemed to be designed rather for parade and show than for proof;
and nothing turned more to the disadvantage of the Jansenists,
than their endeavouring still to maintain the credit of this miracle,
after the falsehood of it had been so evidently detected : the more
witnesses they endeavoured to produce for this, the more they ren
dered themselves suspected in all the rest. They alleged some
want of formality in the proceedings, but were never able to dis
prove the principal circumstances of the facts alleged on the other
side, and which were absolutely inconsistent with the truth and
reality of the miracle. "j;
Mr. Hume refers his reader to the Recueil des Miracles de VAbbt
de Paris, in three volumes : but especially to the famous book of Mr.
de Montgeron, a counsellor or judge of the parliament of Paris,
and which was dedicated to the French King. But if he had read
on both sides, or had thought fit to lay the matter fairly before his
* Des Voeux's Critique Generale, p. 242, 243. t Adam's Essay, p. 71.
X This whole matter is set in a clear light in Mr. Des Voeux's Dissertation sur les
Miracles, &c, p. 46, 49, and in bis Critique Generate, p. 204, 231, 232.

Let. XIX. mr. hume. 259
reader, he might have informed him that these books have been
solidly answered by Mr. des Voeux, a very ingenious and judicious
author, who had himself been bred up among the Jansenists, and
was at Paris part of the time that this scene was carrying on.
See his Lettres sur les Miracles, published in 1735, and his Cri
tique Generate du Livre de Mr. de Montgeron, in 1741. See also
what relates to this subject in the 19th and 20th tomes ofthe Bib
liotheque Raisonnee.
There never was perhaps a book written with a greater air of
assurance and confidence, than that of Mr. de Montgeron. He
intitles it, The Truth of the Miracles wrought by the Intercession
of M. de Paris and other Appellants, demonstrated against M. the
Archbishop qf Sens. It was natural therefore to expect, that he
would have attempted to justify all those miracles which that pre
late had attacked. But of twenty-two which are distinctly insisted
upon by the Archbishop, there are seventeen which Mr. de Mont
geron does not meddle with. He hath passed by those of them
against which the strongest charges of falsehood and imposture
lay. Five of the miracles attacked by the Archbishop, he takes
pains to justify; to which he has added four more, which that pre
late had not distinctly considered. Mr. des Voeux, who has ex
amined this work of Mr. de Montgeron with great care and j udg-
ment, hath plainly shown, that there are everywhere to be dis
covered in it marks of the strongest prepossession.* Carried
away by the power of his prejudices, and by his affection to the
Jansenist cause, to which he was greatly attached, he has in several
instances disguised and misrepresented facts in a manner which
cannot be excused or vindicated. The last-mentioned author has
charged him with faults, not merely of inadvertency, but with di
rect falsifications designed to impose upon the public. See the
sixth letter of his Critique Generate, page 208, et seq. Mr. Hume
has taken care not to give his reader the least hint of any thing of
this nature.
The remarks which have been now made may help us to judge
of Mr. Hume's conduct in his management of this subject.
I shall now proceed to make some observations upon the remark
able differences there are between the miracles recorded in the
gospels, and those ascribed to the Abbe de Paris ; by considering
which it will appear, that no argument can be justly drawn from
the latter to discredit the former, or to invalidate the proofs pro
duced for them.
I. One observation of no small weight is this : at the time when
the miracles of the Abbe de Paris first appeared, there was a
strong and numerous party in France, and which was under the
conduct of very able and learned men, who were strongly prepos
sessed in favour of that cause which those miracles seemed to be
intended to support: and it might naturally be expected, that
these would use all their interest and influence for maintaining and
* The character of Mr. de Montgeron is well represented by Mr. Adams, in his An
swer to Hume, p. 74, 75. S 2

260 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIX.
spreading the credit of them among the people. And so it actu
ally happened. The first rumours of these miracles were eagerly
laid hold on ; and they were cried up as real and certain miracles,
and as giving a clear decision of Heaven on the side of the appel
lants, even before there was any regular proof so much as pre
tended to be given for them.*- To which it may be added, that
the beginning 'of this whole affair was at a very promising con
juncture, viz. when the Cardinal de Noailles was archbishop of
Paris ; who, whatever may be said of his capacity and integrity,
which Mr. Hume highly extols, was well known to be greatly
inclined to favour the cause of the appellants. It was therefore a
situation of things very favourable to the credit of those miracles,
that they first appeared under his administration, and were tried
before his officials ; and though the succeeding archbishop was no
friend to the Jansenists, yet when once the credit of those miracles
was in some measure established, and they had got the popular
vogue on their side, the affair was more easily carried on. But at
the first appearance of Christianity, the circumstances of things
were entirely different. There were indeed parties among the
Jews, the most powerful of which were the Pharisees and Sad
ducees, besides the priests and rulers of the Jews, and the Sanhe
drim, or great council of the nation : but not one of these afforded
the ieast countenance to the first witnesses and publishers of the
Christian religion. Our Lord, far from addicting himself to any
party, freely declared against what was amiss in every one of them:
he opposed the distinguishing tenets of the Sadducees ; the tradi
tions, superstitions, and hypocrisy of the Pharisees, and the pre
judices of the vulgar. Christianity proceeded upon a principle
directly contrary to that, in which all parties among the Jews were
agreed, viz. upon the doctrine of a spiritual kingdom, and a suf
fering Messiah : and accordingly all the different sects and parties,
all the powers civil and ecclesiastical, united their interests and
endeavours to oppose and suppress it. Whatever suspicion there
fore might be entertained with regard to the miracles said to have
been wrought at the tomb of the Abbe de Paris, which had a
strong party from the beginning prepared to receive and support
them, no such suspicion can reasonably be admitted as to the truth
and reality of the extraordinary facts whereby Christianity was
attested, which, as the case was circumstanced, could scarce pos
sibly have made their way in the manner they did, or have escaped
detection, if they had not been true.
II. Another consideration, which shows a remarkable difference
between the miracles recorded to have been wrought by our Sa
viour and his apostles, and those ascribed to the Abbe de Paris, is
this : That the former carry plain characters of a divine interpo
sition, and a supernatural power ; and the latter, even taking their
own account of them, do not appear to be evidently miraculous, as
they may be accounted for without supposing any thing properly
* Critique Generate, let. vi.

Let. XIX. MR. HUME. 261
supernatural in the case. Our Lord Jesus Christ not only healed
all manner of diseases, but he raised the dead : he commanded the
winds and the seas, and they obeyed him : he searched the hearts,
and knew the thoughts of men : he gave many express and circum
stantial predictions of future contingencies, both relating to his
own sufferings and death, and to his consequent resurrection and
exaltation, and relating to the calamities that should come upon
the Jews, the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and the
wonderful propagation and establishment of his church and king
dom in the world, which it was impossible for any man, judging
by the rules of human probability, to foresee: he not only per
formed the most wonderful works himself, but he imparted the same
miraculous power to his disciples, and poured forth upon them the
extraordinary gifts ofthe Holy Ghost, as he had promised and fore
told ; gifts of the most admirable nature, which were never paral
leled before or since, and which were peculiarly fitted for spreading
and propagating the Christian religion. With regard to these, and
other things which might be mentioned, no man has ever pre
tended to draw a comparison between the miracles ascribed to the
Abbe de Paris, and those of our Saviour; and accordingly one of
the most zealous and able advocates for the former, M. Le Gros,
expressly acknowledgeth, that there is an infinite difference between
them, and declares that he will never forget that difference. The
only instance in which a parallel is pretended to be drawn, is with
regard to miraculous cures, which, alone considered, are the most
uncertain and equivocal of all miracles. Diseases have often been
surprisingly cured, without anything that can be properly called
miraculous in the case. Wonderful has been the effect of medi
cines administered in certain circumstances ; and some maladies,
after having long resisted all the art and power of remedies, have
gone off of themselves by the force of nature, or by some surprising
and unexpected turn, in a manner that, cannot be distinctly ex
plained. Yet it may be observed, that there were several circum
stances attending the miraculous cures wrought by our Saviour
and his apostles, which plainly showed them to be divine. The
cures were wrought in an instant, by a commanding word. The
blind, the lame, those that laboured under the most obstinate and
inveterate diseases, found themselves immediately restored at once
with an Almighty facility. If there had been only a few instances
of this kind, it might possibly have been attributed to some odd
accident, or hidden cause, which could not be accounted for ; but
the instances of such complete and instantaneous cures wrought by
our Saviour were very numerous. They extended to all manner of
diseases, and to all persons without exception who applied to him :
yea, he cured some that did not apply to him, who did not know
him, or who were his enemies, and had no expectation'of a cure,
in which cases it could not be pretended that imagination had any
share. In all these respects, there was a remarkable difference
between the miraculous cures wrought by our Saviour, and those
pretended to have been wrought at the tomb of the Abbe de Paris.

262 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIX.
Several of their most boasted cures, and which were pretended to
have been sudden and perfected at once, appear from their own
accounts to have been carried on by slow degrees, and therefore
might have been brought about in a natural way. Some of these
cures were days, weeks, and even months, before they were per
fected. One nine days' devotion followed another, and they were
suffered to languish, and continue praying and supplicating for a
considerable time together ; and if the cure happened, and the
distemper came to a crisis during the course of their long attend
ance, and whilst they were continuing their devotions, this passed
for a miraculous cure, though it might well be done without any
miracle at all : especially as several of those persons continued to
be taking remedies, even whilst they were attending at the tomb.
It is manifest from the relations published by themselves, that with
regard to several of those who were pretended to be miraculously
cured, their maladies had already begun to abate, and they had found
considerable ease and relief in a natural way before they came to
the tomb at all ; and some of them seem by the force of their imagi
nation to have believed themselves cured, when they were not so,
or to have taken a temporary relief for an absolute cure. Several
of the cures, the accounts of which were published with great
pomp, could not with any propriety be said to have been perfected
at all ; since the persons said to have been cured, still continued
infirm, and had returns of their former disorders. This can scaice
be supposed, if the cures had been really miraculous, and owing
to an extraordinary exertion of the power of God, who would not
have left his own work imperfect. See all these things fully proved
by many instances, in M. des Voeux's Lettres sur les Miracles;
particularly in the fifth of these letters.
To all which it may be added, that of the vast numbers who
came to the tomb to be cured, and who had recourse to the Abbe's
intercession, there were but few on whom the cures were wrought,
in comparison of those who found no benefit at all, though they
applied to him with the utmost devotion, and continued to do so
for a long time together: and indeed, considering how many there
were that applied for help and cure, and how much they were pre
possessed with the notions countenanced in the Romish church, of
the power of departed saints, of the prevalency of their intercession,
and the efficacy of their relics, and to what a height their imagina
tion was raised by their prejudices in favour of the appellants, by
the high opinion they had of the Abbe's extraordinary sanctity, by
the rumours of miracles daily spread and propagated, and by the
vast crowds which attended at the tomb, it would have been really
a wonder, if, amongst the multitudes that came for cure, there had
not been several who found themselves greatly relieved. The ad
vocates for the miracles mightily extol the extraordinary faith and
confidence the sick persons had in the intercession of the blessed
Deacon, as they call him : and the force of their imagination, when
carried to so extraordinary a pitch, might in some particular cases
produce great effects. Many wonderful instances to this purpose

Let. XIX. MR. HUME. 26a
have been observed and recorded by the ablest physicians, by which
it appears what a mighty influence imagination, accompanied with
strong passions, hath often had upon human bodies, especially in
the cure of diseases : it hath often done more in a short time this
way, than a long course of medicines have been able to accom
plish. It is not therefore to be much wondered at, that as the
case was circumstanced, amidst such a multitude of persons some
surprising cures were wrought : but it could not be expected that
the effect would be constant and uniform. If it answered in some
instances, it would fail in many more : and accordingly so it was
with regard to these pretended miraculous cures. And if this had
been the case in the extraordinary cures wrought by our Saviour,
there would have been ground of suspicion, that what some have
alleged might possibly have been true, that his miracles owed their
force, not to any supernatural energy, but to the power of imagi
nation. But taking these miracles as they are recorded in the gos
pels, it is manifest, that there can be no just ground for such a pre
tence. They exhibit evident proofs of a divine interposition, which
cannot be said of those reported to have been wrought at the
Abbe's tomb. M. de Montgeron, in his book dedicated to the
King, published an account of eight or nine cures ; and it is to be
supposed, that he fixed upon those which he thought had the ap
pearance of being most signally miraculous ; and yet the very first
of those miracles, viz. that affirmed to have been wrought upon
Don Alphonso de Palacio, appeareth plainly, by taking the whole
of the relation as M. Montgeron himself hath given it, to have had
nothing in it properly miraculous, as Mr. Adams hath clearly
shown.* And with regard both to that and the other miracles so
pompously displayed by M. de Montgeron, M. Des Voeux has very
ingeniously and judiciously, after a distinct examination of each of
them, made it appear, that they might have been wrought without
supposing any miraculous or supernatural interposition at all. See
the last letter of his Critique Generate.
III. Another consideration, which shows the great difference
there is between the miracles wrought at the first establishment of
Christianity, and those said to have been wrought at the tomb
of the Abbe de Paris, and that no argument can reasonably be
brought from the latter to the prejudice of the former, is taken from
the many suspicious circumstances attending the latter, from which
the former were entirely free. Christ's miracles were wrought, in
a grave and decent, in a great but simple manner, becoming one
sent of God, without any absurd or ridiculous ceremonies, or super
stitious observances. But the miracles of the Abbe de Paris were
attended with circumstances that had all the marks of superstition,
and which seemed designed and fitted to strike the imagination.
The earth of his tomb was often made use of, or the waters of the
well of his house. The nine days' devotion was constantly used,
and frequently repeated again and again by the same persons ; a
* Adams's Essay, in Answer to Hume, p. 76, 77.

264 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XIX.
ceremony derived originally from the Pagans, and which hath been
condemned as superstitious by some eminent divines of the Romish
church.* Another circumstance to be observed, with relation to
Christ's miracles, is, that, as hath been already hinted, they were
not only perfected at once, but the persons found themselves healed
and restored without trouble or difficulty. But in the case of the
cures affirmed to have been wrought at the Abbe's tomb, it appeareth
from their own accounts, not only that they were gradual and slow,
but that the persons on whom these cures were wrought, frequently
suffered the most grievous and excessive pains and torments, and
which they themselves represent to have been greater than ever
they had felt before, or were able to express ; and these pains often
continued for several days together in the utmost extremity.f To
which may be added, the violent agitations and convulsions, which
became so usual on these occasions, that they came at length to be
regarded as symptoms of the miraculous cures ; though they could
not be properly regarded in this view, since many of those who
had those convulsions found no relief in their maladies, and even
grew worse than before. They were frequently attended with
strange contortions, sometimes frightful, sometimes ridiculous, and
sometimes inconsistent with the rules of modesty and decency .J
And accordingly they have been condemned by some of the most
eminent Jansenist divines. In 1735 there was published at Paris
a remarkable piece, intitled, Consultation sur les Convulsions,
signed by thirty appellant doctors, men of great reputation among
the Jansenists for learning, judgment, and probity; the greater
part of whom had at first entertained favourable thoughts of those
convulsions ; and some of them had publicly declared them to be the
work of God. But now they pronounced them to be unworthy of
God, of his infinite majesty, wisdom, and goodness : They declared
that it was a folly, a fanaticism, a scandal, and intone word, a blas
phemy against God, to attribute to him these operations ; and did
not scruple to intimate, that they rendered the miraculous cures,
to which they were pretended to be annexed, suspected. These
doctors, who were called the Consultants, condemned all the con
vulsions in general. Others of the Jansenist divines, whom M. de
Montgeron has distinguished by the title of the Antisecouristes, and
whom he acknowledges to be among the most zealous appellants,
and to be persons of great merit and eminence, though they did
* Lettres sur les Miracles, p. 258, 259, 336, 337.
t Lettres sur les Miracles, p. 339, & seq.
X Some of those that were seized with these convulsions, or pretended to be so,
were guilty ofthe most extravagant follies. They pretended to prophesy, and uttered
several predictions, which the event soon proved to be false. One of them went so far
as to foretel, that the church-yard of St. Medard, which had been shut up by the King's
order, should be opened, and that M. de Paris should appear in the church, in the pre
sence of great numbers of people, on the first of May following. See this and other
remarkable things relating to these' convulsions, in M. Vernet's Traite de la Verite de
la Religion Chretienne, sect. 7, chap. xxii. xxiii. And there cannot be a greater
proof of the power of M. de Montgeron's prejudices, than that in the last edition of his
book, in three volumes 4to. he has particularly applied himself to support and justify
these convulsions.

Let. XIX. mr. hume. 265
not condemn all the convulsions, yet passed a very severe censure
upon those of them which that gentleman looks upon to be the
most extraordinary and miraculous of all. And with regard to
these convulsions in general, it may be observed, that by the ac
knowledgment of the most skilful physicians, nervous affections have
frequently produced strange symptoms; that they are often of a
catching contagious nature, and easily communicated ; and that
they may be counterfeited by art. Many of those that were
seized by M. Heraut, the Lieutenant of Police, acknowledged to
him that they had counterfeited convulsions ; in consequence of
which there was an ordinance published by the King, January 27,
1732, for searching out and apprehending those impostors. And
yet Mr. Hume has thought proper to represent it, as if M. Heraut,
though he had full power to seize and examine the witnesses, and
subjects of these miracles, could never reach any thing satisfactory
against them.
These must be owned to be circumstances, which administer
just grounds of suspicion, and which make a wide difference be
tween the miracles pretended to have been wrought at the tomb of
the Abbe de Paris, and those that were performed by our Saviour,
and by the apostles in his name.
IV. The next observation I shall make is this ; that several of
the miracles ascribed to the Abbe, and which were pretended to be
proved by many witnesses, were afterwards clearly convicted of
falsehood and imposture ; which brings a great discredit upon all
the rest ; whereas nothing of this kind can be alleged against the
miracles by which Christianity was attested. The affair of Anne
le Franc, of which some account was given above, shows, as
M. Des Voeux justly observes, how little dependence is to be
had upon informations in this cause directed by Jansenists. But
this is not the only instance of this kind. They had published
that La Dalmaix had been miraculously cured by the Abbe's inter
cession ; and this was proved by a letter pretended to have been
written by herself. And yet this pretended miraculous cure was
afterwards denied by the person herself, by her mother, and all her
sisters : and by a sentence of a court of judicature of May 17, 1737,
a person was declared to be convicted of having forged that, and
some other letters, under the name of Dalmaix. * The Sieur le
Doux openly retracted the relation of a miracle said to have been
wrought upon himself. M. Des Voeux gives several other instances
of false miracles, published by the Jansenists, and afterwards ac
knowledged to be so.-}- Jean Nivet was represented, by decisive in
formations, as cured of his deafness, and yet it is certain that he was
deaf after, as well as before. The record of the informations made
by Mr. Thomassin is full of contradictions, which discover the false
hood and perjury of the principal actress, and of the only witness
of the miracle, as the Archbishop of Sens has well proved : though
many of these proofs are passed over in silence by M. le Gros, who
undertook to answer him. % Some of the witnesses and persons con-
* Vernet ubi supra, cap. xxi.
t Lettres sur les Miracles, p. 171, et. seq. Critique Generale, p. 204, &c. 233,334,
X Ibid. p. 24,2, 243.

266 a view of the deistical writers. Let. XIX.
cerned withdrew, to escape the search that was made for them, and
to shun the examination and inquiry which the king had ordered ;
and others, who had attested that they were cured by the interces
sion ofthe Abbe de Paris, afterwards retracted it. The certificates
themselves, on which so great a stress is laid, tend in many in
stances to increase the suspicion against those facts, which they
were designed to confirm. The very number of those certificates,
many of which are nothing at all to the purpose, and serve only for
show, are plain proofs of art and design. The manner of drawing
up those certificates, and the relations of the miracles, and the style
and form of expression, show, that the persons in whose names they
are drawn had the assistance of persons, of a capacity much superior
to their own. Long pieces, in a correct style, and in perfect good
order, were published under the name of mean and illiterate persons.
M. le Gros owns, that the relation of Genevieve Colin was reformed
as to the style, by a person whom she desired to do it. Thus they
had it in their power, under pretence of reforming, to alter it, and
got the simple person to sign the whole. Five witnesses in the case
of Anne le Franc depose, that their certificates left with the notary
were altered, falsified, and embellished with divers circumstances.
Many of the relations which were at first published, and were not
thought full enough, were afterwards suppressed, and do not appear
in M. de Montgeron's collection ; and others more ample were sub
stituted in their stead, and embellished with many striking circum
stances, which were omitted in the first relation. Many ofthe wit
nesses in their depositions carry it farther than, according to their
own account, they could have any certain knowledge. Some of
them appear to have been surprized into their testimonies by false or
imperfect representations ; and artifices were employed to procure
certificates from physicians, without bringing the case fully before
them, or suffering them fairly to examine it.
To all which it may be added, that there is great reason to sus
pect, that many poor people feigned maladies, and pretended to be
cured, on purpose to procure the gifts and benefactions of others ;
which many of them did to good advantage. It is well known, and
has been often proved, that in the Romish church there have been
instances of persons, who made a trade of feigning maladies, and
pretending to be miraculously cured. Such a one was Catharine
de Pres, who was afterwards convicted by her own confession ; of
which Father Le Brun hath given a particular account, Hist. Crit,
des Prat. Superstit. liv. ii. cap. 4. who hath also detected several
other false miracles which had been believed by numbers of that
church. And may we not reasonably suspect the same of many
poor people who came to the tomb of the Abbe de Paris? See all
these things shown in M. Des Voeux's Lettres sur les Miracles,
Letters V, VI. and especially in Letters VII. and VIII. of his Cri
tique Generale, where he particularly examineth every one of the
miracles produced by M. de Montgeron. It is his observation, that
the more carefully we consider those relations, and compare them
with the pieces that are designed to justify them, the more plainly

Let. XIX. mr. hume. 267
the falsehood of them appeareth. And accordingly he hath found
out not merely a single contradiction, but numerous contradictions,
in the relations of the several miracles, compared with the certifi
cates, and the pieces produced in justification of them. And there
fore he asks with good reason, what becomes of demonstrations built
on such relations and such certificates ? He very properly observes,
that the falsity even of a small number of facts, which are pretended
to be proved by, certificates, that were collected by those who took
pains to verify the miracles, are sufficient to discredit all others
founded on such certificates.
If the same things could have been justly objected against the
miracles recorded in the New Testament, Christianity, considering the
other disadvantages it laboured under, could never have been estab
lished. But the case with regard to these miracles was very differ
ent. They were not indeed proved by certificates, which may be
procured by art and management. The first publishers of the Chris
tian religion did not go about to collect evidences and testimonies ;
nor was there any need of their doing so in facts that were publicly
known, and the reality of which their enemies themselves were not
able to deny. They acted with greater simplicity, and with an open
confidence of truth. Their narrations are plain and artless ; nor do
they take pains to prepossess or influence the reader, either by art
ful insinuations, or too violent assertions ; which our author men
tions as a suspicious circumstance. Never were any of their ene
mies able to convict them of falsehood. Far from ever denying the
facts they had witnessed, or withdrawing for fear of having those
facts inquired into, as several did in the other case, they openly
avowed those facts before the public tribunals, and before persons of
the highest authority : they never varied in their testimony, but per
sisted in it with an unfainting constancy, and sealed it with their
blood. And it gives no small weight to their testimony, that they
witnessed for facts, which were designed to confirm a scheme of
religion contrary to their own most rooted prejudices. Nor can it be
alleged, that they were themselves divided about the reality and di
vinity of the miracles wrought by Christ and his apostles, much less
that they rejected and condemned many of them as foolish, scanda
lous, and injurious to the Divine Majesty ; which was the censure
passed upon some of the extraordinary facts relating to the Abbe de
Paris, by the most eminent Jansenist divines.
Finally, the last observation I shall make is this : that the mira
cles of our Saviour and his apostles appear to have been wrought for
an end worthy of the divine wisdom and goodness. The declared
design of them was to give an attestation to the divine mission of
the most excellent person that ever appeared in the world, and to
confirm the best scheme of religion that was ever published, the
most manifestly conducive to the glory of God, and to the salvation
of mankind. Here was an end worthy of God, and for which it was
fit for him to interpose in the most extraordinary manner. Accord
ingly this religion, thus attested and confirmed, was established in
the world, and soon triumphed over all opposition. All the power

268 a view of the deistical writers. Let. XIX.
of the adversary, civil or sacerdotal, could not put a stop to its pro
gress, or to the wonderful works done in confirmation of it. The
effects which followed, considering the amazing difficulties it had to
struggle with, and the seeming weakness and meanness of the in
struments made use of to propagate it, proved the reality of those
miracles, and that the whole was carried on by a divine power. But
if we turn our views on the other hand to the miracles pretended to
have been wrought at the tomb of the Abbe de Paris, it doth not
appear that they answered any valuable end. There has indeed been
an end found out for them, viz. to give a testimony from heaven to
the cause of the appellants. But we may justly conclude from the
wisdom of God, that in that case it would have been so ordered, as
to make it evident that this was the intention of them, and that he
would have taken care that no opposition from them should prevail,
to defeat the design for which he interposed in so extraordinary a
manner. But this was far from being the case. Mr. Hume indeed
tells us, that " no Jansenist was ever at a loss to account for the
cessation ofthe miracles, when the church-yard was shut up by the
king's edict. 'Twas the touch of the tomb which operated those ex
traordinary effects, and when no one could approach the tomb, no
effect could be expected."* But supposing that the design of those
extraordinary divine interpositions was to give a testimony from
heaven to the cause of the appellants, it is absurd to imagine,
that it would have been in the power of an earthly prince, by shut
ting up the tomb, to put a stop to the course of the miraculous
operations, and to render the design of God of none effect.4- . It
strengthens this, when it is farther considered, that the whole affair
of these pretended miracles turned in the issue rather to the disad
vantage ofthe cause it was designed to confirm. It hath been already
observed, that some of the most eminent among the appellant doc
tors, and who were most zealously attached to that cause, were
greatly scandalized at several of those miracles, and especially at the
extraordinary convulsions which generally attended them. The cen
sures they passed upon them gave occasion to bitter contentions,
and mutual severe reproaches and accusations. Some of the Jansenist
writers themselves complain, that whereas before there was an entire
and perfect union and harmony among them, as if they had been all
of one heart and soul, there have been since that time cruel divisions
and animosities, so that those who were friends before became irre
concilable enemies. % And can it be imagined, that God would
execute his designs in so imperfect a manner that he would exert
his own divine power to give testimony to that cause, and yet do it
in such a way as to weaken that cause instead of supporting it, to
raise prejudices against it in the minds of enemies, instead of gain-
* Philosophical Essays, p. 208.
t M. de Montgeron indeed will not allow that the miraculous operations ceased at
the shutting up of the tomb ; but by the miraculous operations he principally under
stands the convulsions, which continued still to be carried on : but which many of tho
principal Jansenists were far from looking upon as tokens of a divine interposition,
X Crit. Gener. lettre v. p. 159. h seq.

Let. XIX. mr. hume. 269
ing them, and to divide and offend the friends of it, instead of con
firming and uniting them ? Upon the whole, with regard to the
attestations given to Christianity, all was wise, consistent, worthy
of God, and suited to the end for which it was designed. But the
other is a broken, incoherent scheme, which cannot be reconciled to
itself, nor made to consist with the wisdom and harmony of the di
vine proceedings. The former therefore is highly credible, though
the latter is not so.
The several considerations which have been mentioned do each
of them singly, much more all of them together, show such signal
differences between the miracles recorded in the gospels and those
ascribed to the Abbe de Paris, that it must argue a peculiar degree
of confidence to pretend to run a parallel between the one and the
other, much more to affirm, as Mr. Hume has done, that the latter
much surpass the former in credit and authority. This only shows
how gladly these gentlemen would lay hold on any pretence to in
validate the evidences of Christianity. Thus, Mr. Chubb, in a dis
course he published on miracles, in which he pretends impartially
to represent the reasonings on both sides, produced with great pomp
a pretended miracle wrought in the Cevennes in 1703, and repre
sented it as of equal credit with those of the gospel. M. le Moyne,
in his answer to him, hath evinced the falsehood of that story in a
manner that admits of no reply :* and yet it is not improbable, that
some future deist may see fit some time or other to revive that story,
and oppose it to the miracles recorded in the New Testament.
Mr. Hume concludes his Essay with applauding his own perfor
mance, and is the better pleased with the way of reasoning he has
made use of, as he thinks, " it may serve to confound those dange
rous friends, or disguised enemies to the Christian religion, who
have undertaken to defend it by the principles of human reason.
Our most holy religion," saith he, " is founded on faith, not on rea
son :f and it is a sure method of exposing it, to put it to such a
trial, as it is by no means fitted to endure." And he calls those,
* Le Moyne on Miracles, p. 422, &c.
+ This author, who takes care to make the principles of his philosophy subservient
to his designs against religion, in the fifth of his Philosophical Essays, where be under
takes to treat of the nature of belief, gives such an account of it as seems to exclude
reason from any share in it at all. He makes the difference between faith and fiction
to consist wholly in some sentiment of feeling, which is annexed to the former, not to
the latter : That the sentiment of belief is nothing but the conception of an object
more lively and forcible, more intense and steady than what attends the mere fiction
of the imagination ; and that this manner of conception arises from the customary
conjunction ofthe object with something present to the memory or senses. See his
Philosophical Essays, p. 80 — 84. This gentleman is here, as in many other places,
sufficiently obscure, nor is it easy to form a distinct notion of what he intends. But
his design seems to be to exclude reason or the understanding from having any thing to
do with belief, as if reason never had any influence in producing, directing, or regula
ting it ; which is to open a wide door to enthusiasm. But this is contrary to what we
may all observe, and frequently experience. We in several cases clearly perceive, that
we have reason to regard some things as fictitious, and others as true and real. And
the reasons which show the difference between a fiction and a reality show, that we
ought in reason to believe the one and not the other; and so reason may go before the
sentiment of belief, and lay a just foundation for it, and be instrumental to produce it.
And in this case the belief may be said to be strictly rational.

270 a view of the deistical writers. Let. XX.
who undertake to defend religion by reason, pretended Christians*
Such a mean and ungenerous sneer is below animadversion ; all that
can be gathered from it is, that these gentlemen are very uneasy at
the attempts which have been made to defend Christianity in a way
of reason and argument. They, it seems, are mightily concerned for
the preservation of our holy faith, and in their great friendship for
that cause would give it up as indefensible. And if the best way of
befriending the Christian religion be to endeavour to subvert the
evidences by which it is established, our author hath taken effectual
care to convince the world of his friendly intentions towards it. As
to the brief hints he hath given towards the end of his Essay against
the Mosaic history, and the miracles recorded there, I shall not here
take any notice of themr both because Mr. Adams hath clearly and
succinctly obviated them, in his answer to that Essay, p. 88 — 94,
and because I shall have occasion to resume this subject, when I
come to make observations on Lord Bolingbroke's Posthumous
Works, who hath with great virulence and bitterness used his ut
most efforts to expose the Mosaic writings.

LETTER XX.

Additional Observations relating to Mr. Hume. — A Transcript of an ingenious Paper,
containing an Examination of Mr. Hume's Arguments in his Essay on Miracles. —
Observations upon it. — The Evidence of Matters of Fact may be so circumstanced
as to produce a full Assurance. — Mr. Hume artfully confounds the Evidence of
past Facts with the Probability of the future. — We may be certain of a matter of
Fact after it hath happened, though it might before-hand seem very improbable that
it would happen  .Where full Evidence is given of a Fact, there must not always
be a Deduction made on the Account of its being unusual and extraordinary  There
is strong and positive Evidence of the Miracles wrought in Attestation of Christi
anity, and no Evidence against them — The miraculous Nature of the Facts no Proof
that the Facts were not done  A Summary of Mr. Hume's Argument against the
Evidence of Miracles — The Weakness of it shown. — Considering the vast Impor
tance of Religion to our Happiness, the bare Possibility of its being true should be
sufficient to engage our Compliance.
Sir,
The four preceding letters comprehend all the observations that
were made upon Mr. Hume in the second volume of the " View of
the Deistical Writers," 8vo. edit. But soon after that volume was
published, I received a letter from a gentleman of sense and learn
ing, which particularly relates to that part of it which was designed
in answer to Mr. Hume. He was pleased to say it gave him uncom
mon satisfaction, and at the same time sent me a paper which he
seemed to be very well pleased with, that had been drawn up by a
young gentleman, then lately dead. It was designed as a confutation
* Philosophical Essays, p. 204, 205.

Let. XX. MR. HUME. 271
of Mr. Hume upon his own principles, which he thought had not
been sufficiently attended to in the answers that had been made to
that writer ; and he allowed me, if 1 should be of opinion that any
thing in it might be serviceable to a farther confutation of Mr. Hume,
to make use of his sentiments either by way of note or appendix, as
I should judge most convenient. I returned an answer, in a letter
which I shall here insert, as it containeth some reflections that may
be of advantage in relation to the controversy with Mr. Hume; but
first it will be proper to lay before the reader the paper itself here
referred to, which is concisely drawn, and runs thus : —
AN EXAMINATION OF MR. HUME's ARGUMENTS
IN HIS
ESSAY ON MIRACLES.
The objects of human understanding may be distinguished either
into propositions asserting the relation between general ideas, or
matters of fact.
In the former kind we can arrive at certainty, by means of a
faculty in our souls, which perceives this relation either instantly or
intimately, which is called Intuition, or else by intermediate ideas,
which called Demonstration.
But we can only form a judgment of the latter by experience.
No reasoning a priori will discover to us, that water will suffocate,
or the fire consume us, or that the loadstone will attract steel; and
therefore no judgment can be made concerning the truth or falsehood
of matters of fact, but what is constantly regulated by custom and
experience, and can therefore never go higher than probability.
When we have frequently observed a particular event to happen
in certain circumstances, the mind naturally makes an induction,
that it will happen again in the same circumstances. When this
observation has been long, constant, and uninterrupted, there our
belief that it will happen again approaches infinitely near to cer
tainty. Thus no man has the least doubt of the sun's rising to
morrow, or that the tide will ebb and flow at its accustomed periods ;
but where our observations are broken upon by frequent interruptions
and exceptions to the contrary, then we expect such an event with
the least degree of assurance; and in all intermediate cases, our ex
pectations are always in proportion to the constancy and regularity
of the experience.
This method of reasoning is not connected by any medium or
change of steps, but is plainly to be observed in all animate beings,
brutes as well as men.* And it would be as absurd to ask a reason,
why we expect to happen again, that which has regularly come to
pass a great many times before, as it is to inquire, why the mind
perceives a relation between certain ideas.
* May not the long sought after distinction between brutes and men consist in this :
That whereas the human understanding comprehends both classes, the brutal sagacity
is confined only to matters of fact?

272 a view of the deistical. writers. Let. XX.
They are both distinct faculties of the soul ; and as it has been
authorized by some writers of distinction, to give the denomination
of sense to the internal as well as external perceptions, the one may
be called the speculative, and the other the probable sense.
From this last-mentioned principle Mr. Hume has deduced an
argument to show, that there is great improbability against the be
lief of any miraculous fact, how well soever attested ; and as religion
may seem to be greatly affected by this conclusion (supposing it to
be true), before we come directly to consider the argument, it may
not be amiss to inquire how far religion, as a practical institution,
may be concerned therein.
And for this purpose it is to be observed, that probable evidence
for the truth or falsehood of any matter of fact differs essentially
from demonstration, in that the former admits of degrees, in the
greatest variety, from the highest moral certainty down to the lowest
presumption ; which the latter does not.
Let it also be further observed, that probable evidence is in its
nature but an imperfect kind of information, the highest degree of
which can never reach absolute certainty, or full proof; and yet to
mankind, with regard to their practice, it is in many cases the very
guide of their lives.
Most of our actions are determined by the highest degrees of pro
bability ; as for instance, what we do in consequence of the sun's
rising to morrow; of the seasons regularly succeeding one another;
and that certain kinds of meat and drink will nourish. Others are
determined by lesser degrees. Thus rhubarb does not always purge ;
nor is opium a soporific to every person that takes it ; and yet for
all that they are of constant use for these purposes in medicine. In
all cases of moment, when to act or forbear may be attended with
considerable damage, no wise man makes the least scruple of doing
what he apprehends may be of advantage to him, even though the
thing was doubtful, and one side of the question as supportable as
the other; but in matters of the utmost consequence, a prudent man
will think himself obliged to take notice even of the lowest proba
bility, and will act accordingly. A great many instances might be
given in the common pursuits of life, where a man would be con
sidered as out of his senses, who would not act, and with great dili
gence and application too, not only upon an over-chance, but even
where the probability might be greatly against his success.
Suppose a criminal under sentence of death were promised a par
don, if he threw twelve with a pair of dice at one throw ; here the
probability is thirty-six to one against him, and yet he would be
looked upon as mad if he did not try. Nothing in such a case would
hinder a man from trying, but the absolute impossibility of the
event. Let us now apply this method of reasoning to the practice of
religion. And supposing the arguments against miracles were far
more probable than the evidence for them, yet the vast importance
of religion to our happiness in every respect would still be very suf
ficient to recommend it to the practice of every prudent man ; and

Lat. XX. MR. HUME. 273
the bare possibility that it might prove true, were there nothing else
to support it, would engage his assent and compliance ; or else he
must be supposed to act differently in this respect to what he gene
rally does in all the other concerns of his life. So that whether Mr.
Hume's reasonings be true or false, religion has still sufficient
evidence to influence the practice of every wise and considerate man.
This being premised, let us now proceed to consider Mr. Hume's
arguments. His reasoning may be briefly expressed in this manner :
We have had a long, universal, and uninterrupted experience, that
no events have happened contrary to the course of nature, from con
stant and unvaried observations ; we have therefore a full proof, that
the uniform course has not been broke in upon, nor will be, by any
particular exceptions. But the observation of truth depending upon,
and constantly following human testimony, is by no means universal
and uninterrupted, and therefore it does not amount to a full proof,
that it either has, or will follow it in any particular instance. And
therefore the proof arising from any human testimony can never
equal the proof that is deduced against a miracle from the very
nature of the fact.
This I take to be a full and fair state of this gentleman's rea
soning. But the answer is very plain ; if by human testimony he would
mean the evidence of any one single man indifferently taken, then
indeed his second proposition would be true ; but then the conclu
sion will by no means follow from it; but if by human testimony he
would understand the evidence of any collection of men, then the
second proposition is false, and consequently the conclusion must
be so too.
That twelve honest persons should combine to assert a falsehood,
at the hazard of their lives, without any view to private interest, and
with the certain prospect of losing every thing that is and ought to
be dear to mankind in this world, is, according to his own way of
reasoning, as great a miracle, to all intents and purposes, as any
interruption in the common course of nature; because no history
has ever mentioned any such thing, nor has any man in any age
ever had experience of such a fact.
But here it may be objected, that though it be allowed to be as
great a miracle for twelve honest men to attest a falsehood, contrary
to their plain interest in every respect, as that any alteration should
happen in the common course of nature, yet these evidences being
equal, they only destroy one another, and still leave the mind in
suspense. This objection draws all its force from Mr. Hume's assertion, that
an uniform and uninterrupted experience amounts to a full proof,
which when examined will not be found true ; and indeed I wonder
that a writer of his accuracy should venture on such an expression,
since it is confessed on all hands, that all our reasonings concerning
matters of fact ever fall short of certainty, or full proof.
And besides, the very same objection which he makes against the
veracity of human testimony, to weaken its authenticity, may be re-
T

274 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XX.
torted with equal force against his unvaried certainty of the course
of nature ; for doubtless the number of approved histories we have
relating to miracles, will as much lessen the probability of what he
calls a full proof on his side of the question, as all the forgeries and
falsehoods that are brought to discredit human testimony, will
weaken it on the other. But the best way to be assured of the
falsehood of this objection is to examine it by what we find in our
own minds ; for that must not be admitted as an universal principle,
which is not true in every particular instance.
According to Mr. Hume, we have a full proof of any fact
attested by twelve honest disinterested persons. But would not the
probability be increased, and our belief of such a fact be the
stronger, if the number of witnesses were doubled ? I own, my
mind immediately assents to it. But if this be true, it will then evi:
dently follow, that the proof against a miracle, arising from the na
ture of the fact, may, and has been exceeded by contrary human
testimony. Suppose, as before, that the testimony of twelve persons is just
equal to it, and we have the evidence of twenty for any particular
miracle recorded in the Gospel ; then subtracting the weaker evidence
from the stronger, we shall have the positive evidence of eight per
sons, for the truth of a common matter of fact.
Q. E. D.
The answer I returned to the letter in which this paper was en
closed, was in substance as follows :
Sir.
I am very much obliged to you for the kind manner in which you
have expressed yourself with regard to me : and it is a pleasure to
me to find, that my reply to Mr. Hume is approved by a gentleman
of so much good sense, and of such eminency in his profession, as I
am well informed you are accounted to be.
I agree with you, that Mr. Hume is an elegant and subtile writer,
and one ofthe most dangerous enemies to Christianity that has ap
peared among us. He has a very specious way of managing an
argument. But his subtilty seems to have qualified him not so
much for clearing an obscure cause, as for puzzling a clear one.
Many things in his Philosophical Essays have a very plausible
appearance, as well as an uncommon turn, which he visibly affects;
but, upon a close examination of them, I think one may venture to
pronounce, that few authors can be mentioned who have fallen into
greater absurdities and inconsistencies. And it were to be wished
there was not a sufficient ground for the severe censure you pass
upon him, when you say, that, " with all his art, he has plainly dis
covered a bad heart, by throwing out some bitter sneers against the
Christian revelation, which are absolutely inconsistent with a serious
belief, or indeed with any regard for it, though in some parts of his
writings he affects a different way of speaking."
You observe, that " we seem to be greatly deficient in the logic
of probability, a point which Mr. Hume had studied with great

Let. XX. MR. HUME. 275
accuracy." And I readily own, that there is a great appearance of
accuracy in what Mr. Hume hath advanced concerning the grounds
and degrees of probability, and the different degrees of assent
due to it. But though what he hath offered this way seems plausi
ble in general, he hath been far from being fair or exact in his appli
cation of it.
The paper you have sent enclosed to me, and which you tell me
was drawn up by the young gentleman you mention, contains a
sketch of an attempt to show how Mr. Hume might be confuted,
on his own principles, and is executed in such a manner, that
one cannot but regret, that a gentleman of so promising a genius,
and who might have proved signally useful, was snatched away by
a fever about the twentieth year of his age. You allow me to make
what use of it I judge proper, and seem to expect that I should tell
you my sentiments of it with the utmost frankness and candour.
And this obligeth me to acquaint you, that though I look upon the
confutation of Mr. Hume in the way this gentleman hath managed
it to be subtile and ingenious, yet in some things it doth not
seem to me to be quite so clear and satisfactory, as were to be
wished in a matter of so great consequence. He has, I think, from
a desire of confuting Mr. Hume upon his own principles, been led
to make too large concessions to that gentleman, and hath proceeded
upon some of his principles as true and valid, which I think may
be justly contested.
Mr. Hume frequently intimates, that there neither is nor can be
any certainty in the evidence given concerning matters of fact, or in
human testimony, which can be securely depended on ; and that at
best, it can be only probable. And the ingenious author of the
paper, having observed, after Mr. Hume, that we can form no judg
ment concerning the truth or falsehood of matter of fact, but what
is constantly regulated by custom or experience, adds, that " it can
never go higher than probability." And again he saith, that " pro
bable evidence is in its nature but an imperfect kind of information ;
the highest degree of which cannot reach absolute certainty or
full proof;" where he seems not to allow, that the evidence concern
ing matters of fact can ever arrive at such a certainty as to make up a
full proof. And he repeats it again, that " it is confessed on all
hands, that all our reasonings concerning matters of fact ever fall
short of certainty or full proof." And yet if we allow Mr. Hume's de
finition of a full proof, that it is " such an argument from experience
as leaves no room for doubt or opposition," the evidence fora matter
of fact may be so circumstanced as to amount to a full proof, and
even to a certainty ; for I can see no reason for confining certainty
to the evidence we have by intuition or by demonstration. In treat
ing of certainty as distinguished from probability, a two-fold cer
tainty may very properly be allowed. The one is the certainty by
intuition or by demonstration ; the other is, a certainty relating to
matter of fact. This is indeed of a different kind from the former;
but I think it may no less justly be called certainty, when it so
fully satisfietb the mind, as to leave not the least room for doubt
t 2

276 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XX
concerning it, and produceth a full assurance. And that this is
often the case with relation to matters of fact cannot reasonably be
denied. The words sure and certain are frequently applied in com
mon language to things of this kind, and, for aught I can see, very
properly. And in the best and exactest writers, it is often described
under the term of moral certainty, an expression which this gentle
man himself makes use of.* And it is a great mistake to imagine,
that the word moral in that case is always used as a term of diminu
tion, as if it were not to be entirely depended upon. It is only
designed to show that this certainty is of a different kind, and pro-
ceedeth upon different grounds, from that which ariseth from demon
stration ; but yet it may produce as strong an assurance in the
mind, and which may undoubtedly be depended upon. That there
was a war carried on in England in the last century between King
and Parliament, I only know by human testimony. But will any
man say that for that reason I cannot be sure of it ? Many cases
might be mentioned with regard to matters of fact which we know,
by human testimony, the evidence of which is so strong and con
vincing, that we can no more reasonably doubt of it, than of the
truth of any proposition which comes to us demonstrated by
the strictest reasoning. Mr. Hume himself seems sensible, that it
would be wrong to say, that every thing which is not matter of
demonstration comes only under the notion of probability. And
therefore, though he frequently seems to class all matters of fact
under the head of probabilities, yet, in the beginning of his Essay
on Probability, he seems to find fault with Mr. Locke for dividing
all arguments into demonstrative and probable; and observes, that to
conform our language more to common use, we should divide argu
ments into demonstrations, proofs, and probabilities ; where he seems
to place what he calls proofs, which he explains to be such argu
ments from experience as leave no room for doubt or opposition, in
a higher class than probabilities. And Mr. Locke himself, though
he seems to confine certainty to demonstration, yet allows concerning
some probabilities arising from human testimony, that " they rise
so near to certainty, that they govern our thoughts as absolutely,
and influence our actions as fully, as the most evident demonstra
tion ; and in what concerns us, we make little or no difference
between them and certain knowledge. Our belief thus grounded
rises to assurance."t And in that case I think probability is too
low a word, and not sufficiently expressive, or properly applicable to
* The ingenious gentleman seems to grant what may be sufficient, when he saith,
that probability "in some cases approaches infinitely near to certainty." If it be
allowed, that matter of fact may be so certain, that the mind may be fully assured of it,
and so as to leave no room for a reasonable doubt, this is all that is really necessary in
the present controversy. And this is what Mr. Hume himself seems sometimes to
allow. But at other times, he gives such an account of human testimony as tends to
render it in all cases uncertain. And the design of his representing it as never rising
higher than probability, seems to be to convey an idea of uncertainty and doubt as
inseparably attending all human testimony. And to guard against the wrong use that
may be made of this, is the design of what I have here observed.
t Essay on Human Understanding, book iv. chap. xv. sect 6.

Let. XX. mr. hume. 277
things of this kind. For according to Mr. Locke's account of it,
and the common usage of the word, that it is said to be probable
which is likely to be true, and of which we have no certainty, but
only some inducements, as Mr. Locke speaks, to believe and receive
them as true.
Another thing observable in Mr. Hume's reasoning on this sub
ject is, that in treating of probability or the evidence of facts, which
he foundeth wholly upon experience, he confoundeth the evidence
of past facts with that of the future ; and the young gentleman
himself seems not sufficiently to distinguish them. The instances
he produceth to show, that the judgments which the mind forms
concerning the probability of events will always be in proportion to
the constancy and regularity qf the experience, all relate to the proba
bility of future events from the experience of the past. But the
question about the probability of any future fact hath properly
nothing to do in the present controversy between Mr. Hume and
his adversaries, which relateth wholly to the evidence of past facts ;
and it is only an instance of this writer's art, that, by confounding
these different questions, he may perplex the debate, and throw
dust in the eyes of his readers. It will be granted, that with rela
tion to future facts or events, the utmost evidence we can attain to
from past observation or experience is a high degree of probability ;
but with relation to past matters of fact, we may in many cases
arrive at a certainty, or what Mr. Hume calls a full proof; yea, it
often happens, that the evidence of past facts may be so circum
stanced, that we may be certain that such an event really came to
pass,. though, if the question had been put before the event, the proba
bility from past experience would have been greatly against it.
Nothing therefore can be more weak and fallacious than Mr.
Hume's reasoning, when from this principle of forming conclusions
concerning future events from past experience, he endeavours to
deduce an argument against the belief of any miraculous fact, how
well soever attested. For though, if the question were concerning
a future miracle in any particular instance, if we should judge
merely from past experience, the probability might seem to lie
against it; yet if the question be concerning a past miraculous
fact, there may be such proof of it, as may not leave room for a
reasonable doubt that the miracle was really done, though be
fore it was done it might seem highly improbable that it would be
done. Another fallacy Mr. Hume is guilty of, is his supposing that in all
cases where the fact, in itself considered, is unusual, and out of the
way of common experience, whatever be the evidence given for it,
there must still be a deduction made, and the assent given to it is
always weakened in proportion to the unusualness of the fact. Now
this doth not always hold. A fact of an extraordinary nature may
come to us confirmed by an evidence so strong, as to produce a full
and undoubted assurance of its having been done ; and in such a
case there is no deduction to be made; nor is the assent we give to
the truth of the fact at all weakened on the account of its being

278 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITER?. Let. XX.
unusual and extraordinary. Thus e. g. that a great king should be
openly put to death by his own subjects, upon a pretended formal
trial before a court of judicature, is very unusual, and before it came
to pass would have appeared highly improbable; but after it hap
pened, there is such evidence of the fact as to produce a full assu- ,
ranee that it was really done ; and the man who should go about
seriously to make a doubt of it, and make a formal deduction from
the credit of the evidence, on the account of the strangeness of the
fact, and should pretend that we must believe it with an assent only
proportioned to the evidence which remaineth after that deduction,
would, under pretence of extraordinary accuracy, only render him
self ridiculous, lt will indeed be readily owned, that more and
greater evidence may be justly required with regard to a thing that
is unusual and out of Ihe common course, than is required for a
common fact ; but when there is evidence given sufficient to satisfy
the mind, its being unusual and extraordinary ought not to be
urged asa reason for not giving a full credit to it, or for pretending
that the testimony concerning it is not to be depended upon. For
the evidence for a fact out of the course of common observation and
experience may be so circumstanced, as to leave no room for the
least reasonable doubt ; and the assent to it may be as strong and
firm as to any the most common and ordinary event ; nor is any
thing in that case to be deducted from the credit of the evidence,
under pretence of the fact's being unusual or even miraculous.
You will allow me on this occasion to take notice of a passage
in your letter, in which, after having observed that Mr. Hume
had studied the point about probability, and treated upon it with
great accuracy, you give it as your opinion, that " the best way of
answering him would be in the way himself has chalked out, by
comparing the degrees of probability in the evidence on both sides,
and deducting the inferior." Here you seem to suppose, that there
is evidence on both sides in the case of miracles, and that, upon
balancing the evidence, that which hath the higher degrees of pro
bability ought to be preferred, at the same time making a deduc
tion from it in proportion to the weight of the contrary evidence.
But the supposition you here proceed upon appears to me to be a
wrong one, viz. that in the case in question there is evidence on
both sides, and consequently an opposition of evidence, i. e. evi
dence against the miracles wrought in proof of Christianity, as well
as evidence for them. There is indeed positive strong evidence on
one side, to show that those facts were really done ; an evidence
drawn from testimony so circumstantiated, that it hath all the qua
lifications which could be reasonably desired to render it full and
satisfactory.* But what evidence is there on the other side ? No
counter-evidence or testimony to show the falsehood of this is pre
tended by Mr. Hume to be produced; nor are there any circum
stances mentioned, attending the evidence itself, which may justly
tend to render it suspicious. Nothing is opposed to it but the
* See this fully shown in answer to Mr. Hume, p. 206, and seq.

Let. XX. mr. iiume. 279
miraculous nature of the facts, or their being contrary to the usual
course of nature ; and this cannot properly be said to be any evi
dence to prove that the facts were not done, or that the testimony
given to them was false. Nor needs there any deduction to be made
in the assent we give to such a full and sufficient testimony as is
here supposed, on that account ; because, as the case was circum
stanced, it was proper that those facts should be beyond and out of
the common course of nature and experience ; and it was agreeable
to the wisdom of God, and to the excellent ends for which those
facts were designed, that they should be so ; since otherwise they
would not have answered the intention, which was to give a divine
attestation to an important revelation ofthe highest use and benefit
to mankind.
lt is an observation of the ingenious author of the paper you sent
me, " That twelve honest persons should combine to assert a false
hood, at the hazard of their lives, without any view to private in
terest, and with the certain prospect of losing every thing that is
and ought to be dear to mankind in this world, is, according to Mr.
Hume's own way of reasoning, as great a miracle, to all intents and
purposes, as any interruption in the common course of nature."
But then he observes, that the thing these witnesses are supposed to
attest being also a miracle, contrary to the usual course of nature, it
may be objected, that these evidences being equal, they only de
stroy one another, and still leave the mind in suspense. The answer
he gives to this does not seem to me to be sufficiently clear. He
first observes, that " this objection draws all its force from Mr.
Hume's assertion, that an uniform and uninterrupted experience is
a full proof, which when examined will not be found true, because
it is confessed on all hands, that all our reasonings concerning mat
ters of fact ever fall short of certainty, or full proof." But besides
that this doth not always hold, since it has been shewn, that our
reasonings concerning matters of fact may in some cases amount to
such a certainty as may be justly called a full proof, it may still be
urged, that an uniform uninterrupted experience, though not strictly
a full proof, yet is such a proof against a miracle as is able to coun
terbalance the evidence for it; in which case the objection still
holds, and the mind is kept in suspense. And the gentleman him
self seems afterwards to grant, that a fact's being contrary to the
usual course of nature affordeth such a proof against it from the
nature of the thing, as is sufficient to counterpoise the evidence of
twelve such witnesses as are supposed, though he thinks it would
not do so, if the number of witnesses were doubled ; and that this
shews that the proof against a miracle arising from the nature of
the fact may be exceeded by contrary human testimony, which is
what Mr. Hume denies. And he argues, that if we suppose the
testimony of twelve persons for a miracle to be just equal to the
evidence arising from the nature of the thing against it, and that we
have the evidence of twenty for any particular miracle recorded in
the Gospel, then substracting the weaker evidence from the stronger,
we shall have a surplus of the positive testimony of eight persons,
without any thing to oppose it.

280 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XX,
I am persuaded, that the design of the ingenious gentleman, in
putting the case after this manner, was to signify it as his real opi
nion, that the testimony of twelve such witnesses as are here sup
posed, in proof of a miracle's having been really wrought, did not
more than countervail the argument against it arising from the
strangeness of the fact; but he had a mind to put the case as
strongly as he could in favour of Mr. Hume, and yet to show, that
there might still be an excess of proof, according to his own account,
on the side of miracles ; which destroys his main hypothesis, that
the evidence for a miracle can never exceed the evidence against it.
It appears to me however, that this is making too large a concession,
and that it is not the properest way of putting the case. It pro-
ceedeth upon the supposition, which hath been already shown to be
a wrong one, that a thing's being miraculous, or contrary to the
usual course of nature, is alone in all circumstances a proper proof
or evidence against the truth of the fact ; whereas the case may be
so circumstanced, that the miraculousness of the fact is in reality no
proof or evidence against it at all. It will indeed be acknowledged,
as was before hinted, that greater evidence is required with regard
to a fact which is miraculous, than for any fact in the common and
ordinary course. But when such evidence is given, to prove that a
miraculous fact was really done, as is suitable to the importance of
the fact, and which cannot be rejected without admitting supposi
tions which are manifestly absurd ; in such a case, a thing's being
miraculous is no just reason for not giving a full assent to the testi
mony concerning it. For its being miraculous, in the case that hath
been put, hath nothing in it absurd or incredible ; whereas that
twelve men of sound minds and honest characters should combine
to attest a falsehood, in opposition to all their worldly interests and
prejudices, and to every principle that can be supposed to influence
human nature, without any assignable cause for such a conduct
(which has been shown to be the case with regard to the witnesses
for Christianity), is absolutely absurd, nor can in any way be ac
counted for. As to the pretence, that in this case there is a miracle
on both sides, and that the one is to be opposed to the other, and
destroys its evidence ; this sophism, which has imposed upon many,
and in which the chief strength of Mr. Hume's essay lies, deriveth
its whole force from an abuse of the word miracle, and a confound
ing, as this writer hath artfully done, a miracle and an absurdity, as
if it were the same thing. That twelve men should, in the circum
stances supposed, combine to attest a falsehood, at the hazard of
their lives and of every thing dear to men, cannot properly be called
a miracle, according to any definition that can be reasonably given
of a miracle, or even according to Mr. Hume's own definition of
a miracle, that " it is a transgression of a law of nature by a par
ticular volition of the Deity, or by the interposal of some invisible
agent;" but is a manifest absurdity. But in the case of an extra
ordinary event, contrary to the usual course of natural causes, and
wrought for a very valuable purpose, and by a power adequate to
the effect, there is indeed a proper miracle, but no absurdity at all.

Let. XX. mr. hume. 281
It is true, that its being unusual and out of the ordinary course of
observation and experience, is a good reason for not believing it
without a strong and convincing evidence, a much stronger evidence
than would be necessary in common and ordinary facts. But when
there is an evidence of its having actually been done, which hath
all the requisites that can be justly demanded in such a case, and at
the same time sufficient reasons are assigned, worthy of the divine
wisdom and goodness, to show that it was proper to be done, its
being unusual and extraordinary is no proof at all that it hath not
been done, nor can in any propriety of language be called an evidence
against it ; and therefore no substraction is to be made from the
credit given to such a supposed full and sufficient evidence merely
on this account. Perhaps my meaning will be better understood,
by applying it to a particular instance ; and I choose to mention
that which is the principal miracle in proof of Christianity, our Lord's
resurrection. The fact itself was evidently miraculous, and required
a divine power to accomplish it. It was therefore necessary, in
ordeij to lay a just foundation for believing it, that there should be
such an evidence given as was proportioned to the importance and
extraordinariness of the fact. And that the evidence which was
given of it was really such an evidence, appears, I think, plainly
from what I have elsewhere observed concerning it.* But if we
should put the case thus : that not only was the fact extraordinary
in itself, and out of the common course of nature, but the evidence
given of it was insufficient, and not to be depended upon, and had
circumstances attending it which brought it under a just suspicion :
or, if contrary evidence was produced to invalidate it ; e. g. if the
soldiers that watched the sepulchre, instead of pretending that the
body of Jesus was stolen away whilst they were asleep, which was
no evidence at all, and was a plain acknowledgment that they knew
nothing at all of the matter, had declared that the disciples came
with a powerful band of armed men, and overpowered the guard,
and carried away the body ; or, if any of the Jews had averred, that
they were present and awake when the soldiers slept, and that they
saw the disciples carry away the body ; or, if any of the disciples to
whom Jesus appeared, and who professed to have seen and con
versed with him after his resurrection, had afterwards declared, that
they were among the disciples at those times when he was pre
tended to have appeared, and that they saw no such appearances,
nor heard any such conversations as were pretended. On this sup
position, it might be properly said that there was evidence given on
both sides, viz. for and against Christ's resurrection, and conse
quently that there was a real opposition of evidence ; in which case
it would be necessary carefully to examine the evidences, and com
pare them one with another, in order to judge which of them de
served the greater credit, and how far one of them weakened or im
paired the force of the other. But as the case was circumstanced,
since there was a very strong positive evidence given, that Christ
really rose from the dead, and showed himself alive after his resur-
* See above, p. 202, and seq.

282 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XX.
rection by many infallible proofs, and no contrary evidence produced
against it, nor any thing alleged to render the evidence that was
given of it justly suspected; and since there are also very good rea
sons assigned, worthy of the divine wisdom and goodness, which
rendered it highly proper that Christ should be raised from the dead ;
on this view of the case, the extraordinariness of the fact, alone
considered, cannot properly be- called an evidence against the truth
of it, nor be justly urged as a reason for not yielding a full assent
to the evidence concerning it ; for it was necessary to the ends pro
posed by the divine wisdom, that the fact should be of an extraor
dinary and miraculous nature ; and if it had not been so, it would
not have answered those ends. I think therefore it may justly be
affirmed, that, taking the case in all its circumstances, considering
the great strength and force of the evidence that is given for the fact,
and the many concurring proofs and attestations by which it was
confirmed, together with the excellent and important ends for which
it was designed, there is as just ground to believe that Christ rose
again from the dead, as that he was crucified ; though the latter be
a fact not out of the ordinary course of nature, and the former was
evidently so. And here it may not be improper to mention a remark
able observation of Mr. Locke. He had, in giving an account of the
grounds of probability, supposed one ground ofittobe the conformity
of a thing with our own knowledge, observation, and experience; and
after taking notice of several things to this purpose, he observes,
that " though common experience and the ordinary course of things
have justly a mighty influence on the minds of men, to make them
give or refuse credit to any thing proposed to their belief, yet there
is one case wherein the strangeness of the fact lessens not the assent
to a fair testimony given of it ; for where such supernatural events
are suitable to ends aimed at by him who has the power to change
the course of nature ; there under such circumstances they may be
fitter to procure belief, by how much the more they are beyond or
contrary to common observation. This is the proper case of mira
cles, which, well attested, do not only find credit themselves, but
give it also to other truths which need such a confirmation."*
Thus this great master of reason is so far from thinking with Mr.
Hume, that a thing's being miraculous, or beyond the common
course of observation and experience, absolutely destroys all evi
dence of testimony that can be given concerning the truth of the
fact, that in his opinion it doth not so much as lessen the assent
given to it upon a fair testimony; provided the supernatural facts
thus attested were suitable to the ends of the divine wisdom and
goodness, i. e. wrought in attestation to a revelation of the highest
importance, and of the most excellent tendency ; and that in that
case the more evidently miraculous the fact is, the fitter it is to
answer the end proposed by it.
The ingenious author of the paper you sent me has very properly
summed up Mr. Hume's argument against the evidence of miracles,
* Locke's Essay on Human Understanding, book iv. chap. xvi. sec. 13.

Let. XX. mr. hume. 283
thus : We have had a long, universal, and uninterrupted experience,
that no events have happened contrary to the course of nature, from
constant and unvaried observations. We have therefore a full proof,
that this uniform course has not been broken in upon, nor will be,
by any particular exceptions.
But the observation of truth depending upon, and constantly fol
lowing human testimony, is by no means universal and uninter
rupted ; and therefore it does not amount to a full proof, that it either
has or will follow in any particular instance.
And therefore the proof arising from any human testimony, can
never equal the proof that is deduced against a miracle from the very
nature of the fact.
This he takes to be a full and fair state of Mr. Hume's reasoning;
and it appears to me to be so. And he says, " The answer is plain.
If by human testimony he would mean of any one single man indif
ferently taken, then his second proposition would be true ; but then
the conclusion would by no means follow from it : but if by human
testimony he would understand the evidence of any collection of men,
then the second proposition is false, and consequently the conclusion
is so too."
This answer relateth only to the second proposition.* But it
might have been said, that neither of the propositions are to be de
pended upon, and that they are utterly insufficient to support the
conclusion he would draw from them. For as to the first proposi
tion, it assumes the very point in question ; it affirms, that no events
have ever happened contrary to the course of nature ; and that this
we know by a long, universal, and uninterrupted experience. If
this be meant universal and uninterrupted experience of all mankind
in all ages, which alone can be of any force in the present argument,
how doth it appear that we know by universal and uninterrupted
experience, that no such events have ever happened ! Are there not
several events of this kind recorded by credible testimonies to have
happened ? The whole argument then is upon a wrong foundation.
It proceedeth upon an universal and uninterrupted experience, not
broken in upon in any instance. And there is good testimony to
prove, that it hath been broken in upon in several instances. And
if it hath been broken in upon in any instances, no argument can be
brought from experience to prove that it hath not, or may not be
broken in upon ; and so the whole reasoning falls. If it be alleged,
that these testimonies, or indeed any testimonies at all, ought not to
be admitted in this case, the question returns, for what reason ought
they not to be admitted ? If the reason be, as it must be according
to Mr. Hume, because there is an universal uninterrupted experience
* Though the ingenious gentleman hath not directly and formally answered the first
proposition, yet he hath plainly shown that he doth not admit it, when he saith, that
" the very same objection Mr. Hume makes against the veracity of human testimony,
to weaken its authenticity, may be retorted with equal force against his unvaried certainty
of the course of nature. And that doubtless the many approved histories we have
relating to miracles, will as much lessen the probability of what he calls a full proof on
his side of the question, as all the forgeries and falsehoods that are brought to discredit
human testimony will weaken it on the other."

284 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XX-
against them, this is to take it for granted, that no such events have
ever happened ; for if there have been any instances of such events,
the experience is not universal and uninterrupted. So that we see
what the boasted argument against miracles from uniform experi
ence comes to. It in effect comes to this, that no such events have
ever happened, because no such events have ever happened.
As to the second proposition, though if we speak of human testi
mony in general, it will be easily allowed, that it is not to be abso
lutely and universally depended upon ; yet, as hath been already
hinted, it may in particular instances be so circumstanced, as to yield
a satisfying assurance, or what may not improperly be called a full
proof. Even the testimony of a particular person may in some
cases be so circumstanced, as to leave no room for reasonable sus
picion or doubt. But especially if we speak of what this gentleman
calls a collection qf men, this may in some cases be so strong, as to
produce a full and entire conviction, however improbable the attested
fact might otherwise appear to be. And therefore if we meet with
any testimonies relating to particular events of an extraordinary
nature, they are not immediately to be rejected, under pretence of
their being contrary to past experience; but we must carefully
examine the evidence brought for them, whether it be of such a kind
as to make it reasonable for us to believe them ; and that the
evidence brought for miraculous facts recorded in the gospel are of
this kind hath been often clearly shown.
The only farther reflection I shall make on this gentleman's paper
is, that it contains good and proper observations concerning our being
determined in matters of practice by probabilities ; that in all cases
of moment, where to act or forbear may be attended with consider
able damage, no wise man makes the least scruple of doing what he
apprehends may be of advantage to him, even though the thing were
doubtful ; but in matters of the utmost consequence, a prudent man
will think himself obliged to take notice of the lowest probability,
and will act accordingly. This he applies to the practice of religion,
and observes, that considering the vast importance of religion to our
happiness in every respect, the bare possibility that it might prove
true, were there nothing eise to support it, would engage his assent
and compliance ; or else he must be supposed to act differently in
this respect to what he generally does in all the other concerns of
his life.
This observation is not entirely new, but it is handsomely illus
trated by this gentleman, and seems very proper to show, that those
who neglect and despise religion, do in this, notwithstanding their
boasted pretences, act contrary to the plain dictates of reason and
good sense. But we need not have recourse to this supposition.
The evidence on the side of religion is vastly superior. And if this
be the case, no words can sufficiently express the folly and unreason
ableness of their conduct, who take up with slight prejudices and
presumptions in opposition to it ; and by choosing darkness rather
than light, and rejecting the great salvation offered in the gospel, run

Let. XXI. mr, hume. 285
the utmost hazard of exposing themselves to a heavy condemnation
and punishment.
Thus I have taken the liberty you allowed me of giving my
thoughts upon the paper you sent me. I cannot but look upon the
young gentleman's attempt to be a laudable and ingenious one,
though there are some things in his way of managing the argument,
which seem not to have been thoroughly considered, and which, I am
satisfied, he would have altered, if he had lived to take an accurate
review ofthe subject.
This, with a few additions since made to it, is the substance of
the answer I returned to the worthy gentleman who had written to
me, and which I have here inserted, because there are some things
in it that may tend to the farther illustration of what I had offered
in my remarks on Mr. Hume's " Essay on Miracles." My next will
contain some additional observations relating to the Abb6 de Paris,
and the miracles attributed to him ; together with reflections on
some passages in Mr. Hume's " Enquiry concerning the Principles
of Morals," which seem to be intended to expose Christianity.

LETTER XXI.

Some Reflections on the extraordinary Sanctity ascribed to the Abbe de Paris. — He
carried Superstition to a strange excess, and by his extraordinary Austerities volunta
rily hastened his own Death. — His Character and course of Life, of a different kind
from that rational and solid Piety and Virtue which is recommended in the Gospel.
— Observations on some Passages in Mr. Hume's Enquiry concerning the Principles
of Morals. — He reckons Self-denial, Mortification, and Humility among the Monkish
Virtues, and represents them as not only useless, but as having a bad Influence on
tbe Temper and Conduct. — The Nature of Self-denial explained, and its great Use
fulness and Excellence shown. — What is to be understood by the Mortification
required by the Gospel. — This also is a reasonable and necessary Part of our Duty
— Virtue, according to Mr. Hume, hath nothing to do with Sufferance. — But by the
Acknowledgment of the wisest Moralists, one important Office of it is to support and
bear us up under Adversity. — The Nature of Humility explained. — It is an excellent
and amiable Virtue.
Sir,
The miracles ofthe Abbe de Paris have made so great a noise
in the world, and so much advantage hath been taken of them by
the enemies of Christianity, and particularly by Mr. Hume, that I
thought it necessary to consider them pretty largely above in the
nineteenth Letter. Some things have occurred since, which have
some relation to that matter, and which I shall here take notice of.
In that Letter, p. 258, mention is made of the high opinion the
people had conceived of the Abbe's extraordinary sanctity, as what
tended very much to raise their expectations of miracles to be

286 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XAL
wrought at his tomb, and by his intercession. If we enquire whence
this opinion of his extraordinary sanctity arose, and upon what it
was founded, we shall find it to have been principally owing to the
excessive austerities in which he exercised himself for several years;
of which, therefore, and of some remarkable things in his life and his
character, it may not be improper to give some account. The par
ticulars I shall mention are set forth at large by the learned Mr.
Mosheim, in a dissertation on the Miracles of the Abbe de Paris,
and which I did not meet with till after the publication of the
second volume ofthe View ofthe Deistical Writers. It is intitled,
Inquisitio in veritatem miraculorum Francisci de Paris secculi -nostri
thaumaturgi.* What he there tells us concerning Mons. de Paris
is faithfully taken from those who hold him in the highest admira
tion, the Jansenistical writers. And from their accounts it suffi
ciently appears, that his whole life, and especially the latter part of
it, was one continued scene of the most absurd superstition, and
which he carried to an excess that may be thought to border upon
madness. He was the eldest son of an ancient, rich, and honourable family,
and therefore born to an opulent fortune ; though his father, when
he saw his turn of mind, very prudently left him but a part of it, and
that in the hands and under the care of his younger brother. But
though he still had an ample provision made for him, he voluntarily
deprived himself of all the conveniences, and even the necessaries,
of life. He chose one obscure hole or cottage after another to live
in, and often mixed with beggars, whom he resembled so much in
his customs, sordid and tattered garb, and whole manner of his life,
that he was sometimes taken for one, and was never better pleased,
than when this exposed him in the streets and ways to derision and
contempt. Poverty was what he so much affected, that though he
applied to his brother for what his father had left him, yet that he
might not have the appearance of being rich, he chose not to take
it as what was legally due to him, but to supplicate for it in the
humblest terms, as for an alms freely bestowed upon a miserable
object that had nothing of his own. And yet afterwards in his last
will, he disposed of it as his own to various uses as he thought fit,
especially for the benefit of those who had been sufferers for the
Jansenist cause. For several of the last years of his life, he seemed
to make it his business to contrive ways to weaken or harass, and
torment his body, and thereby hasten his own death.
Whilst he gave away his income to the poor, he himself volunta
rily endured all the evils and hardships which attended the extremity
of want and poverty. Mean aud wretched was his garb ; black
bread, water, and herbs, but without oil, salt, or vinegar, or any
thing to give them savour, was his only sustenance, and that but
once a day. He lay upon the ground, and was worn away with
continual watching. After his death were found, his hair shirt, an
* Vide Jo. Laur. Moshemii Dissertationumad Historiam Ecclesiasticam pcrtinentium
volumen secundum.

Let. XXI. mr. home. 287
iron cross, a girdle, stomacher, and bracelets of the same metal, all
bestuck with sharp points. These were the instruments of penitence,
with which he was wont to chastise himself, the 'plain marks of
which he bore on his body. By such a course he brought himself
not only into great weakness of body, but into disorders of mind ;
and this, which was the natural effect of his manner of living, he
attributed to the influence of the devil, whom God had in just judg
ment permitted to punish him for his sins. And in enquiring into
the causes of the divine displeasure, he fixed upon this, that he had
still too great a love for human learning and knowledge, and there
fore from thenceforth did all he could to divest himself of it, and
would have sold his well-furnished library, if he had not been pre
vented by some of his friends, whose interest it was to preserve it.
For two years together he refused to come to the holy supper, under
pretence that it was not lawful for him to come, God having required
him to abstain from it; and it was with great difficulty that he was
brought to it at last, by the threatenings and even reproaches of his
confessor. Finally, that no kind of misery might be wanting to
him, he chose for his companion, to dwell with him in his cottage, a
man that was looked upon to be crazy, and who treated him in the
most injurious manner. He did all he could to hide himself from
his friends, in one sorry cottage after another ; and about a month
before his death, fixed himself in a little lodge in the corner of a gar
den, exposed to the sun and wind. When by such severities he had
brought himself into an universal bad habit of body, and it was
visible to his friends, that if he continued in that course he could
not long support under it, a physician was called in, who only desired
him to remove to a more commodious habitation, to allow himself
more sleep, and a better diet, and especially to take nourishing broths
for restoring his enfeebled constitution. But all the persuasions
of his physician, confessor, and of his friends, and the tears of an
only brother, could not prevail with him to follow an advice so rea
sonable and practicable; though he was assured, that, if he used
that method, there was great hope of his recovery, and that his life
could not be preserved without it. And when at last, to satisfy their
~ importunity, he seemed so far to comply, as to be willing to take
some broth, it was only an appearance of complying, for he took
care to give such orders to the person who was to prepare it for him,
that it really yielded little or no nourishment. Thus it was manifest,
that he had determined to hasten, as much as in him lay, his own
death. And accordingly he told his confessor, that his life had
nothing in it to make it worth a Christian's care to preserve it. His
friends acknowledge, that his death was the effect "of the almost
incredible austerities that he exercised during the last four years of
his life." His great admirer the Abbe de Asfeld testifies, that he
heard him declare it as his purpose to yield himself a slow sacrifice
to divine justice.
This his extraordinary course of austerities, together with the zeal
he expressed to the very last for the Jansenist cause, which he
showed also by the dispositions he made in his will, as well as by

"288 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXI,
his appealing, as with his dying breath, to a future general council
against the constitution Unigenitus, procured him so extraordinary a
reputation, that he has passed for one of the greatest saints that ever
appeared in the Christian church. No sooner was he dead, but an
innumerable multitude of people ran to his corpse, some of whom
kissed his feet, others cut off part of his hair as a remedy against all
manner of evil ; others brought books or bits of cloth to touch his
body, as believing it filled with a divine virtue. Thus were they
prepared to believe and expect the most wonderful things.
Whosoever impartially considers the several things that have been
mentioned, and which are amply verified in the places referred to in
the margin,* will not think the learned Mosheim in the wrong,
when he pronounceth, that it cannot in consistency with reason be
supposed, that God should extraordinarily interpose by his own
divine power, to do honour to the bones and ashes of a man weak
and superstitious to a degree of folly, and who was knowingly and
wilfully accessory to his own death. In vain do his admirers, as he
himself had done, extol his thus destroying himself as an offering
up himself a voluntary sacrifice to divine justice. If a man should
under the same pretence dispatch himself at once with a pistol or
poniard, would this be thought a proper justification of his con
duct ? And yet I see not why the pretence might not as well hold
in the one case as in the other ; since it makes no great difference,
whether the death was swifter or slower, provided it was brought on
with a deliberate intention and design.
How different is this from the beautiful and noble idea of piety
and virtue which the gospel furnisheth us with, and from the per
fect pattern of moral excellence which is set us by our blessed
Saviour himself in his own holy life and practice ! That the great
apostle St. Paul was far from encouraging such austerities as tended
to hurt and destroy the bodily health, sufficiently appears from the
advice he gave to Timothy, " Drink no longer water, but use a little
wine, for thy stomach's sake, and thine often infirmities," 1 Tim. v.
23. He condemneth those that, under pretence of extraordinary
purity, were for observing the ordinances and traditions of men,
"Touch not, taste not, handle not;" and brands their practice
under the name of " will-worship, a voluntary humility, and neglect
ing," or, as the word might be rendered, " not sparing the body,"
Col. ii. 20 — 23. That which in the case of Abbe de Paris is cried
up by his admirers as a carrying religion to the highest degree of
perfection, viz. his abstaining from flesh, and confining himself to
herbs, is represented by the apostle Paul as a sign of weakness in
the faith, Rom. xiv. 2.
It hath always appeared to me to be the glory of the Christian
religion, as prescribed in the New Testament, that the piety it
teacheth us is solid and rational, remote from all superstitious
extremes, worthy of a God of infinite wisdom and goodness to
require, and becoming the true dignity of the reasonable nature. It
* Mosheim, ut supra, from p. 364 to p. 395.

Let. XXI. mr. hume. 2ii!>
comprehendeth not only immediate acts of devotion towards God,
but a diligent performance of all relative duties, and the faithful
discharge ofthe various offices incumbent upon us in the civil and
social life. It requireth us indeed to bear with a noble fortitude the
greatest evils, when we are regularly called to suffer for the cause of
God, but not rashly to expose ourselves to those evils, or to bring
them upon ourselves.
The wise and beneficent author of nature hath stored the whole
world about us with a variety of benefits ; and can it be thought to
be agreeable to his will, that instead of tasting his goodness in the
blessings he vouchsafeth us, we should make a merit of never allow
ing ourselves to enjoy them ? How much more rational is it to
receive those blessings with thankfulness, and enjoy them with tem
perance, according to that of St. Paul, " Every creature of God is
good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving;
for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer," 1 Tim. iv. 4, 5.
Can it be pleasing to our merciful heavenly Father, that we should
not merely humble and chasten ourselves on special occasions, but
make it our constant business to torment ourselves, and to impair
and destroy the bodies he hath given us, and thereby unfit ourselves
for the proper offices of life ? Is it reasonable to imagine, thatunder
the mild dispensation of the gospel, which breathes an ingenuous
cheerful spirit, and raiseth us to the noble liberty of the children of
God, the best way of recommending ourselves to his favour should
be to deny ourselves all the comforts he affordeth us, and to pass
our lives in perpetual sadness and abstinence ? Could it be said in
that case, that " godliness is profitable unto all things, having pro
mise ofthe life that now is, and of that which is to come ?" 1 Tim.
iv. 8. It is true, that mortification and self-denial are important
gospel duties, but how different from the extremes of superstitious
rigour will appear, when I come to vindicate the evangelical morality
against the objections of Mr. Hume. It was not till Christians
began to degenerate from that lovely form of rational, solid piety and
virtue, of which Christ himself exhibited the most perfect example,
that they laid so mighty a stress on those severe and rigorous aus
terities, which neither our Saviour nor his apostles had commanded.
And in this respect some of those who were anciently deemed
heretical sects carried it to a greater degree of strictness than the
orthodox themselves. And many zealots there have been in false
religions, and particularly some of the heathen devotees in the East
Indies, who in severe penances, and rigid austerities, and in volun
tary torments inflicted on their own bodies, have far exceeded the
Abb6 de Paris himself.
I think no farther observations need be made with regard to Mr.
Hume's " Essay on Miracles," which is directly levelled against
Christianity. But any one that is acquainted with his writings
must be sensible, that he often takes occasion to throw out insinua
tions against religion, which he usually represents either under the
notion of superstition or enthusiasm. Even the morals of the gos
pel have not escaped his censure, though their excellence is such
u

290 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXI
as to have forced acknowledgments from some of those who have
been strongly prejudiced against it.
There is a passage to this purpose in his " Inquiry concerning
the Principles of Morals," which deserves particular notice. In
that Inquiry, as in all his other works, he assumes the merit of
making new discoveries, and placing things in a better light than
any man had done before him ; and wonders that a theory so simple
and obvious as that which he hath advanced, could have escaped the
most elaborate scrutiny and examination.* I will not deny that there
are in that Inquiry some good and curious observations ; but I can
see little that can be properly called new in his theory of morals,
except his extending the notion of virtue (and it is concerning the
principles of morals, and therefore concerning moral virtue, that
his Inquiry proceeds) so as to comprehend under it every agreeable
quality and accomplishment, such as wit, ingenuity, eloquence, quick
ness of conception, facility of expression, delicacy qf taste in the finer
arts, politeness,f cleanliness, and even force of body. % I cannot see
what valuable end it can answer in a treatise of morals to extend
tbe notion of virtue so far. It is of high importance to mankind
rightly to distinguish things that are morally good and excellent
from those which are not so ; and therefore great care should be
taken that both our ideas of these things, and the expressions de
signed to signify them, should be kept distinct. Wit, eloquence,
and what we call natural parts, as well as acquired learning, polite
ness, cleanliness, and even strength of body, are no doubt real ad
vantages, and when under a proper direction, and rightly applied,
are both ornamental and useful, and are therefore not to be neglected,
but, as far as we are able, to be cultivated and improved. This will
be easily acknowledged ; and if this be all Mr. Hume intends, it is
far from being a new discovery. But these things make properly
no part of moral virtue ; nor can a man be said to be good and vir
tuous on the account of his being possessed of those qualities. He
may have wit, eloquence, a polite behaviour, a fine taste in the arts,
great bodily strength and resolution, and yet be really a bad man.
And when these things are separated from good dispositions of the
heart, from probity, benevolence, fidelity, integrity, gratitude, instead
* Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, p. 172.
t It has been hinted to me by a worthy friend, that some have thought I did wrong
in not allowing politeness to be ranked among the moral virtues. And therefore to
prevent mistakes, I now observe, that if by politeness be meant a kind,, obliging beha
viour, expressive of humanity and benevolence, and flowing from it, it may be justly
reckoned among the virtues ; and in this sense a plain countryman, who is good-na
tured and obliging in his deportment to the utmost of his power, may be said to be
truly a polite man. But this seems not to be the usual acceptation of the word in our
language. By politeness is commonly understood a being well versed in the forms of what
is usually called good breeding, and a genteel behaviour. And taken in that sense, how
ever agreeable and ornamental it may be, I apprehend it is not properly a moral virtue;
nor is the want of it a vice. And 1 believe it will scarce be denied, that a man may
be really a good and worthy person, and yet not be what the world calls a polite well-
bred man.
X See the 6th, 7th, and 8th sections of the Inquiry concerning the Principles of
Morals, particularly p. 127, 128, 131, 135, 137, 162, 165.

Let. XXI. MR. HUMB. 21)1
of rendering a man useful to the community, they qualify him for
doing a great deal of mischief. These qualities therefore should be
carefully distinguished from those which constitute a good moral
character, and which ought to be principally recommended to the
esteem and approbation of mankind, as having in themselves a real
invariable worth and excellence, and as deriving a merit and value
to every other quality. Nor is it proper, in a treatise of morals,
which pretends to any degree of accuracy, to confound them all to
gether under one common appellation of virtue.
And as Mr. Hume enlargeth his notion of virtue, so as to take in
several things that do not seem properly to belong to the moral dis
positions and qualities, so he excludeth from that character some
things which are recommended in the gospel as of importance to
the moral temper and conduct, particularly humility and self-denial.
He observes, that "celibacy, fasting, penance, mortification, self-
denial, humility, solitude, and the whole train of monkish virtues,
are every where rejected by men of sense, because they serve no
manner of purpose ; they neither advance a man's fortune in the
world, nor render him a more valuable member of society, neither
qualify him for the entertainment of company, nor increase his
power of self-enjoyment  On the contrary, they cross all these
desirable ends, stupify the understanding, and harden the heart,
obscure the fancy, and sour the temper."* Our author is here
pleased to class humility, mortification, and self-denial, which are
evidently required in the gospel, with penances, celibacy, and what
he calls the monkish virtues ; and pronounceth concerning all alike,
that they are rejected by all. mew of sense, and not only serve no
manner of purpose, but have a bad influence in stupifying the un
derstanding, hardening the heart, and souring the temper. This is
no doubt to cast a slur upon the gospel scheme of morality. And
on the other hand he cries up his own theory of morals, as repre
senting Virtue in all her engaging charms. That " nothing appears
but gentleness, humanity, beneficence, affability, nay even at proper
intervals, play, frolic, and gaieiy. She talks not of useless austeri
ties and rigours, sufferance and self-denial, 8cc.''t A scheme of
morals .which includeth play, frolic, and gaiety, and has nothing to
do with self-denial, mortification, and sufferance, will no doubt be
very agreeable to many in this gay and frolicsome age. But let us
examine more distinctly what ground there is for our author's cen
sures, as far as the Christian morals are concerned.
To begin with that which he seemeth to have a particular aversion
to, self-denial. This is certainly what our Saviour expressly re
quireth of those who would approve themselves his faithful disci
ples. He insisteth upon it, as an essential condition of their disciple-
ship, they should deny themselves — Mat. xvi. 24. Mark viii. 34.
And if we do not suffer ourselves to be frightened by the mere sound
of words, but consider what is really intended, this is one of the
most useful lessons of morality, and a necessary ingredient in a
* Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, p. 171. t Ibid. p. 188.

292 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXI.
truly excellent and virtuous character. One thing intended in this
self-denial is the restraining and governing our appetites and pas
sions, and keeping them within proper bounds, and in a due sub
jection to the higher powers of reason and conscience; and this is
certainly an important part of self-government and discipline, and
is undoubtedly a noble attainment, and which argueth a true great
ness of soul. And however difficult or disagreeable it may at first
be to the animal part of our natures, it is really necessary to our
happiness, and layeth the best foundation for a solid tranquillity and
satisfaction of niind. Again, if we take self-denial for a readiness
to deny our private interest and advantage for valuable and excel
lent ends, for the honour of God, or the public good, for promoting
the happiness of others, or our own eternal salvation, and for serv
ing the cause of truth and righteousness in the world ; in this view
nothing can be more noble and praiseworthy. And indeed whoever
considers that an inordinate selfishness, and addictedness to a narrow
fleshly interest, and the gratification of the carnal appetites and
passions, is the source of the chief disorders of human life, will be
apt to look upon self-denial to be of great consequence to morals.
Without some degree of self-denial, nothing truly great, noble, or
generous is to be achieved or attained. He that cannot bear to
deny himself upon proper occasions, will never be of any great use
either to himself or to others, nor can make any progress in the
most virtuous and excellent endowments, or even in agreeable qua
lities, and true politeness. This writer himself, speaking of the love
of fame, which, he tells us, rules in all generous minds, observes,
that as this prevaileth, the animal conveniences sink gradually in
their value.* And elsewhere, in the person of the Stoic philoso
pher, he saith, that "we must often make such important sacri
fices, as those of life and fortune, to virtue :" And that " the man
of virtue looks down with contempt on all the allurements of plea
sure, and all the menaces of danger — toils, dangers, and death itself
carry their charms, when we brave them for the public good."t And
even after having told us, that virtue talks not of sufferance and
self-denial, he adds, that " virtue never willingly parts with any
pleasure, but in hope of ample compensation in some other period of
their lives. The sole trouble she demands is of a just calculation,
and a steady preference of the greater happiness.""]; Here he allows,
that virtue may reasonably part with present pleasure, in hope of
an ample compensation in some other period of our lives, when upon
a just calculation it contributes to our greater happiness. But then
he seems to confine the hope of the compensation which virtue is to
look for, to some future period of this present life, which, consider
ing the shortness and uncertainty of it, is little to be depended on,
and may perhaps be thought not a sufficient foundation for a man's
denying himself present pleasures and advantages. But the gospel
* Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, p. 188..
t Moral and Political Essays, u. 213.
' Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, p. 188.

Let. XXI. mr. hume. 203
proposeth a much more noble and powerful consideration, viz. the
securing a future everlasting happiness; and supposing the cer
tainty of this, of which we have the fullest assurance given us, no
thing can be more agreeable to all the rules of reason and just cal
culation, than to part with present pleasure, or to undergo present
hardships, to obtain it.
What hath been offered with regard to the important duty of self-
denial may help us to form a just notion of mortification, which is
nearly connected with it, and which our author also findeth great
fault with. The chief thing intended by it is the subduing our
fleshly appetites, and our vicious and irregular inclinations and de
sires. To this purpose it is required of us, that we " mortify the
deeds of the body," Rom. viii. 13. that we "mortify our members
that are on the earth, fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection,
evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry," Col. iii.
5.; and that we "crucify the flesh, with the affections and lusts,"
Gal. v. 24. Mortification taken in this view is a noble act of virtue,
and absolutely necessary to maintain the dominion of the spirit over
the flesh, the superiority of reason over the inferior appetites.
Where these prevail, they tend to stupify the understanding, and
harden the heart, and hinder a man from being a valuable member of
society, which is what Mr. Hume most unjustly chargetb upon that
mortification and self-denial which is required in the gospel. Mor
tification is properly opposed to that indulging and pampering the
flesh, which tendeth to nourish and strengthen those appetites and
lusts, which it is the part of a wise and virtuous man to correct and
subdue. Even fasting upon proper seasons and occasions, however
ridiculed by Mr. Hume and others, may answer a very valuable end,
and make a useful part of self-discipline. It may tend both to the
health of the body, and to keep the mind more clean and vigorous,
as well as, when accompanied with prayer, promote a true spirit of
devotion. But in this as in every thing else, the Christian religion,
considered in its original purity as laid down in the New Testament,'
preserveth a most wise moderation, and is far from carrying things
to extremes, as superstition hath often done. It doth not any
where insist upon excessive, or what our author calls useless rigours
and austerities. And so far is that mortification which the Gospel
prescribeth, and which is nothing more than the keeping the body
under a just discipline, and in a due subjection to the law of the
mind, from being inconsistent with the true pleasure and satisfac
tion of life, that it layeth the most solid foundation for it. Mr.
Hume himself takes notice of the " supreme joy which is to be found
in the victories over vice, when men are taught to govern their pas
sions, to reform their vices, and subdue their worst enemies, which
inhabit within their own bosoms."*
Not only does this gentleman find fault with self-denial and mor
tification, but with sufferance. Virtue, according to his representa-
tion^ of it, talks not of sufferance and self-denial. And yet certain
* Mural and Political Essays, p. 213.

204 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXI.
it is, that among the best moralists of all ages it has been accounted
one of the principal offices of virtue, to support us with a steady
fortitude under all the evils that befal us in this present state, and
enable us patiently and even cheerfully to bear them. A virtue that
cannot suffer adversity, nor bear us up under it with dignity, and
in a proper manner, is of little value in a world where we are ex
posed to such a variety of troubles and sorrows. And in this the
Gospel morality is infinitely superior to that of the most admired
pagan philosophers. Mr. Hume has reckoned among virtues "an
undisturbed philosophical tranquillity, superior to pain, sorrow,
anxiety, and each assault of adverse fortune."* But what is this
philosophical tranquillity, so much boasted of, relying only upon
itself, compared with that which ariseth from the consolations set
before us in the gospel, from the assurances of divine assistances
and supports, from the love of God and sense of his favour, from
the lively animating hopes of glory, and the eternal rewards which
shall crown our patience, and persevering continuance in well
doing? The last thing 1 shall take notice of, as represented under a dis
advantageous character by Mr. Hume, though highly commended
and insisted on by our Saviour, is humility ; aud this rightly under
stood is one of the most amiable virtues, and greatest ornaments of
the human nature. Our author is pleased to talk of a certain degree
of pride and self -valuation, the want of which is a vice, and the
opposite of which is meanness. f But to call a proper generosity of
mind, which is above a mean or base thing, pride, is an abuse of
words, which ought not to be admitted, if we would speak with
exactness, in an inquiry concerning morals. It is to give the name
of an odious vice to a very worthy disposition of soul. The gospel
humility is a very different thing from meanness. It is very consis
tent with such a just self-valuation, as raiseth us above every thing
false, mean, base, and impure, and keepeth us from doing any thing
unbecoming the dignity of the reasonable nature, and the glorious
character and privileges we are invested with as Christians. True
humility doth not absolutely exclude all sense of our own good
qualities and attainments ; but it tempers the sense we have of them
with a just conviction of our absolute dependance upon God for
every good thing we are possessed of, and of our manifold sins, in
firmities, and defects. It is oppose to a vain-glorious boasting and
self-sufficiency, and to such a high conceit of our abilities and
merits, as puffeth us up with a presumptuous confidence in our
selves, and contempt of others, and which is indeed one of the
greatest hinderances to our progress in the most excellent and
worthy attainments. It roanifesteth itself towards God, by an
entire unreserved subjection and resignation to his authority and
will, by proper acknowledgments of our own unworthiness before
him, and a sense of our continual dependance upon him, and con
stant need of his gracious assistance. And it expresseth itself
« Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, p. 152. t Ibid. p. 146, 1 17.

Let. XXI. mr. hume. 295
towards men, by causing us to yield a due submission to our supe
riors, and to be affable and condescending to our inferiors, courteous
and obliging towards our equals, in honour preferring one another,
as St. Paul expresseth it, and ready to bear with each other's weak
nesses and absurdities. In a word, it diffuseth its kindly influence
through the whole of our deportment, and all the offices of life.
Nothing is so hateful as pride and arrogance. And true humility
is so amiable, so engaging, so necessary to render a person agree
able, that no man can hope to please, who hath not at least the
appearance of it. Our author himself observes, that " among
well-bred people, a mutual deference is affected, contempt of others
disguised ;"* and that " as we are naturally proud and selfish, and
apt to assume the preference above others, a polite man is taught to
behave with deference towards those he converses with, and to yield
the superiority to them in all the common occurrences of society."f
So that, according to him, a show of humility and -preferring others
to ourselves, is a necessary part of good behaviour ; and yet he is
pleased to reckon humility among those things that neither render a
man a more valuable member of society, nor qualify bim for the
entertainment of company, but on the contrary cross those desirable
purposes, and harden the heart, and sour the temper.
But enough of Mr. Hume, who, if we may judge of him by
his writings, will scarce be charged with the fault of having
carried humility to an excess. A pity it is that he hath not made
a better use of his abilities and talents, which might have laid a just
foundation for acquiring the praise he seems so fond of, as well as
rendered him really useful to the world, if he had been as industri
ous to employ them in serving and promoting the excellent cause of
religion, as he hath unhappily been in endeavouring to weaken and
expose it!

POSTCRIPT.

After great part of this work was finished, and sent to the
press, I met with a book, which I have read with great pleasure,
entitled, " The Criterion ; or, Miracles Examined, with a View to
expose the Pretensions of Pagans and Papists ; to compare the
miraculous Powers recorded in the New Testament, with those
said to subsist in latter Times ; and to show the great and material
Difference between them in point of evidence ; from whence it will
appear, that the former must be true, and the latter may be false."
The subject is evidently both curious and important, and is treated
by the author, who, I hear, is the Rev. Mr. Douglass, in a judicious
* Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, p. 161, 162. t Moral and Politi
cal Essays, p. 184, 185.

296 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXI.
and masterly way. It was published at London in 1754, and
therefore before the publication of the second volume of the " View
of the Deistical Writers." And if I had then seen it, I should cer
tainly have thought myself obliged to take particular notice of it.
The worthy author has made judicious observations upon Mr.
Hume's "Essay on Miracles," especially that part of it which
relateth to the Miracles ascribed to the Abbe de Paris, which he
has insisted on for an hundred pages together. And it is no small
satisfaction to me, that there is a perfect harmony between
what this learned author has written on this subject, and what I
have published in the preceding part of this work, though neither
of us knew of the other's work. He shows, as I have endeavoured
to do, that fraud and imposture were plainly detected in several
instances ; and that where the facts were true, natural causes suffi
cient to produce the effect may be assigned, without supposing any
thing miraculous in the case. This he has particularly shown, with
regard to each of the miracles insisted on by Mr. de Montgeron,
which he accounts for' in the same way that Mr. des Voeux
hath more largely done, though he had not seen that gentleman's
valuable writings, to which I have frequently referred for a fuller
account of those things, which I could do little more than hint at.
The reader will find in Mr. Douglass's work a full proof of the
wonderful force of the imagination, and the mighty influence that
strong impressions made upon the mind, and vehement passions
raised there, may have in producing surprising changes on the body,
and particularly in removing diseases ; of which he hath produced
several well-attested instances, no less extraordinary than those attri
buted to the Abbe de Paris, and which yet cannot reasonably be
pretended to be properly miraculous.
As I have thought myself obliged to take notice of that part of
this gentleman's book, which hath so near a connection with the
work in which I have been engaged ; so it is but just to observe, that
it is also, with regard to every other part of it, a learned and accu
rate performance.
What he proposes to show is, that the evidence for the gospel
facts is as extraordinary as the facts themselves; and that no just sus
picion of fraud or falsehood appeareth in the accounts ; while every
thing is the reverse, with regard to the evidence brought for the
pagan or popish miracles.
He observes, that the extraordinary facts ascribed to a miraculous
interposition among the Pagans of old, or the Christians of latter
times, are all reducible to these two classes. The accounts are either
such as, from the circumstances thereof, appear to be false ; or, the
the facts are such as, by the nature thereof, they do not appear to be
miraculous. As to the first, the general rules he lays down, by
which we may try the pretended miracles amongst Pagans and
Papists, and which may set forth the grounds on which we suppose
them to be false, are these three : That either they were not pub
lished to the world till long after the time when they were said to be
performed : Or, they were not published in the places where it is

Let. XXI. mr. hume. 297
pretended the facts were wrought, but were propagated only at
a great distance from the scene of action : Or, they were suffered to
pass without due examination, because they coincided with the
favourite opinions and prejudices of those to whom they were
reported ; or, because the accounts were encouraged and supported
by those who alone had the power of detecting the fraud, and could
prevent any examination, which might tend to undeceive the world.
These observations he applies to the pagan and popish miracles;
some of the most remarkable of which he distinctly mentions, and
shows, that there are none of them that do not labour under one or
other of these defects.
After considering those pretended miracles, which, from the
circumstances of the accounts given of them, appear to be false,
he next proceedeth to those works, which, though they may be
true, and ascribed by ignorance, art, or credulity, to supernatural
causes, yet are really natural, and may be accounted for, without
supposing any miraculous interposition ; and here he enters on a
large and particular discussion of the miracles attributed to the Abbe
de Paris, and of some other miracles that have been much boasted
of in the Romish church.
Having fully examined and exposed the pagan and popish mira
cles, he next proceeds to show, that the objections made against
them, and which administer just grounds of suspicion, cannot be
urged against the gospel miracles. And here he distinctly shows,
First, that the facts were such that, from the nature of them, they
must needs be miraculous, and cannot be accounted for in a natural
way, or by any power of imagination, or strong impressions made
upon the mind ; and, Secondly, that those facts are such as, from
the circumstances of them, they cannot be false. And to this pur
pose, he makes it appear, that they were published and appealed to
at the time when they were performed, and were coeval with the
preaching of Christianity, which was manifestly founded upon them.
They were also published and attested at the places where the
scene of them was laid, and on the spot on which they were
wrought ; and the circumstances, under which they were first pub
lished, give us an assurance, that they underwent a strict examina
tion, and consequently that they could not have escaped detection
had they been impostures.
Mr. Douglass thinks it not sufficient barely to prove, that the
testimony for the gospel-miracles is stronger than that which sup-
porteth any other pretended miracles ; he further shows, by a
variety of considerations, that it is the strongest that can be sup
posed, or that from the nature of the thing could be had. And then
he proceeds to observe, that, besides the unexceptionable proof from
testimony, the credibility of the gospel-miracles is confirmed to us,
by collateral evidences of the most striking nature, and which no
spurious miracles can boast of; such as the great change that was
thereby introduced into the state of religion ; the proofs that God
was with the first publishers of Christianity, in other instances
besides those of miracles, particularly in assisting them supernatu-

298 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXII.
rally in the knowledge of the scheme of religion which they taught,
and of which they were not capable of being the authors or inven
tors, and enabling them to give clear predictions of future events.
And particularly he insisteth upon that most express and circum
stantial prediction of the destruction of the city and temple of
Jerusalem, and the dispersion of the Jewish nation, as a demon
stration that Jesus acted under a supernatural influence. The last
thing he urgeth as a collateral evidence is, that the miracles
recorded in Scripture were performed by those who assumed the
character of prophets, or teachers sent from God, and their miracles
were intended as credentials to establish their claim, to add autho
rity to the messages they delivered, and the laws they taught : a
character which, he shows, both the pagan and popish miracles are
entirely destitute of.
This is a brief account of the plan of Mr. Douglass's work, which
fully answereth the title ; and it is with great pleasure I take this
opportunity to acknowledge the merit ofthe learned author, and the
service he hath done to the Christian and Protestant cause.
I am Sir, &c.

LETTER XXII.

Lord Bolingbroke's Posthumous Works an insolent Attempt upon Religion, natural
and revealed  Not written according to the Laws of Method. — His fair Professions,
and the advantageous Account he gives of his own Design. — He exalteth himself
above all that have written before him, Ancients and Moderns ; blames the Free
thinkers for taking unbecoming Liberties ; yet writes himself without any Regard to
the Rules of Decency  His outrageous Invectives against the Holy Scriptures, par
ticularly the Writings of Moses and St. Paul. — The severe Censures he passeth on
the most celebrated Heathen Philosophers. — But, above all, tbe virulent and con
temptuous Reproaches he casteth upon Christian Philosophers and Divines  A
general Account of his Scheme, and the main Principles to which it is reducible.
Sir,
Th e account you gave me of the late pompous edition of the
works of the late Lord Viscount Bolingbroke in five large volumes
4to. made me very desirous to see them. But it was some time
after the publication of them, before I had an opportunity of grati
fying my curiosity. I have now read them with some care and at
tention. The works he had published in his own life-time, and which are
republished in this edition, had created a high opinion of the genius
and abilities of the author. In them he had treated chiefly concern
ing matters of a political nature; and it were greatly to be wished
for his own reputation, and for the benefit of mankind, that he had
confined himself to subjects of that kind, in that part of his works
which he designed to be published after his decease. These his

Let. XXII, LORD BOLINGBROKE. 299
posthumous works make by far the greater part of this collection.
His " Letters on the Study and Use of History," which were pub
lished before the rest, had prepared the world not to look for any
thing from him, that was friendly to Christianity or the holy Scrip
tures. But I am apt to think, that the extreme insolence, the viru
lence and contempt with which in his other posthumous works he
hath treated those things that have been hitherto accounted most
sacred among Christians, and the open attacks he hath made upon
some important principles of natural religion itself, have exceeded
whatever was expected or imagined. There is ground to apprehend,
that the quality and reputation of the author, his high pretensions
to reason and freedom of thought, his great command of words, and
the positive and dictatorial air he every where assumes, may be apt
to impose upon many readers, and may do mischief in an age too
well prepared already for receiving such impressions. Upon these
considerations, you have been pleased to think, that a distinct ex
amination of this writer might help fo furnish a very proper supple
ment to the view which hath been taken of the deistical writers of
the last and present century. I was, I must confess, not very fond
of the employment ; for what pleasure could be proposed in raking
into such a heap of materials, which are thrown together without
much order, and among which one is sure to meet with many things
shocking to any man that has a just veneration for our holy religion,
and who hath its honour and interests really at heart ?
Before I enter on a distinct consideration of what Lord Boling
broke hath offered both against natural and revealed religion, I shall
make some general observations on his spirit and design, and his
manner of treating the subjects he has undertaken, which may help
us to form a judgment of his character as a writer, and how far he
is to be depended upon.
The manner of writing his Lordship hath generally chosen is by
way of essay. He has been far from confining himself to the laws
of method ; and perhaps thought it beneath so great a genius to
stoop to common rules. But there is certainly a medium between
being too stiff and pedantic, and too loose and negligent. He is
sensible that he has not been very methodical, and seems to please
himself in it. He declares, that " he does not observe in these
Essays, any more than he used to do in conversation, a just propor
tion in the members of his discourse ;"* and that he has thrown his.
reflections upon paper as they "occurred to his thoughts, and as the
frequent interruptions to which he was exposed would give him
leave."t He condescends to make a kind of apology for this way of
writing, when he says, "I will endeavour not to be tedious; and
this endeavour will succeed the better perhaps by declining any over-
strict observation of method.""): But I am apt to think he would
have been less tedious, and more enlightening to his reader, if he
had been more observant of the rules of method. He might then
have avoided many of those repetitions and digressions, which so
* Works, vol. iii. p. 160. t Ibid. p. 556. X Ibid. 318.

300 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXII.
frequently recur in these Essays, and which, notwithstanding all the
advantages of his style, and the vivacity of his imagination, often
prove, if I may judge of others by myself, very disagreeable and
irksome to the reader.
As to his design in these writings, if we are to take his own word
for it, very great advantage might be expected from them to man
kind. He believes " few men have consulted others, both the living
and the dead, with less precipitation, and in a greater spirit of doci
lity, than he has done: He distrusted himself, not his teachers, men
of the greatest name, ancient and modern. But he found at last,
that it was safer to trust himself than them, and to proceed by the
light of his own understanding, than to wander after those ignes
fatui of philosophy."* He is sensible that " it is the modest, not the
presumptuous inquirer, who makes a real and safe progress in the
discovery of divine truth ;"f and that " candour and knowledge are
qualifications which should always go together, and are inseparable
from the love of truth, and promote one another in the discovery of
it." J He contents himself to be " governed by the dictates of
nature, and is therefore in no danger of becoming atheistical, super
stitious, or sceptical. "§
In his introduction to his Essays, in a letter to Mr. Pope, he gives
a most pompous account of his intentions, and evidently raiseth
himself above the greatest men, ancient and modern. He " repre
sents metaphysical divines and philosophers, as having bewildered
themselves, and a great part of mankind, in such inextricable laby
rinths of hypothetical reasonings, that few can find their way back,
and none can find it forward into the road of truth."|| He declares
that, " natural theology, and natural religion, have been corrupted
to such a degree, that it is grown, and was long since, as necessary
to plead the cause of God against the divine as against the atheist;
to assert his existence against the latter, to defend his attributes
against the former, and to justify his providence against both."H
That " truth and falsehood, knowledge and ignorance, revelations of
the Creator, inventions of the creature, dictates of reason, sallies of
enthusiasm, have been blended so long together in systems of the
ology, that it may be thought dangerous to separate them."** And
he seems to think this was a task reserved for him. He proposes
" to distinguish genuine and pure theism from the prophane mix
tures of human imagination ; and to go to the root of that error
which encourages our curiosity, sustains our pride, fortifies our pre
judices, and gives pretence to delusion ; to discover the true nature
of human knowledge, how far it extends, how far it is real, and
where and how it begins to be fantastical ;tt that the gaudy visions
of error being dispelled, men may be accustomed to the simplicity
of truth." For this he expects to be " treated with scorn and con
tempt by the whole theological and metaphysical tribe, and railed
* Works, vol. iii p. 320. \ Ibid. p. 344. X Ibid, p 492
§ Ibid. vol. v. p. 492. || Ibid. vol. iii. p. 327. j Ibid. p. 327,'328.
*? Ibid. p. 331. ft Ibid. p. 328.

Let. XXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE, 30]
at as an infidel."* But " laying aside all the immense volumes of
fathers and councils, schoolmen, casuists, and controversial writers,
he is determined to seek for genuine Christianity with that simpli
city of spirit with which it is taught in the gospel by Christ him
self, "f The guides he proposes to follow are, " the works and the
word of God.""): And he declares, that " for himself he thought it
much better not to write at all, than to write under any restraint
from delivering the whole truth of things as it appeared to him."|
But though he thus professes an impartial love of truth, and to
deliver his sentiments with freedom, yet he seems resolved, where
he happens to differ from the received opinion, not to show a decent
regard to the established religion of his country. He praiseth Scsb-
vola and Varro, who, he says, " both thought that things evidently
false mightdeserve an outward respect, when they are interwoven with
a system of government. This outward respect every good subject
will show them in such a case. He will not propagate those errors,
but he will be cautious how he propagates even truth in opposition
to them."|| He blames not only that arbitrary tyrannical spirit that
puts on the mask of religious zeal, but that presumptuous factious
spirit that has appeared under the mask of liberty ; and which, if it
should prevail, would destroy at once the general influence of religion,
by shaking the foundations of it which education had laid. But he
thinks, " there is a middle way between these extremes, in which a
reasonable man and a good citizen may diiect his steps."1T It is to
be presumed therefore, that he would have it thought that this is the
way he himself hath taken. He mentions with approbation the
maxims of the Soufys, a sect of philosophers in Persia; one of
which is : " If you find no reason to doubt concerning the opinions
of your fathers, keep to them, they will be sufficient for you. If you
find any reason to doubt concerning them, seek the truth quietly,
but take care not to disturb the minds of other men." He profes
seth to proceed by these rules, and blameth some who are called
Free-thinkers for imagining, that as every man has a right to think
and judge for himself, he has therefore a right of speaking according
to the full freedom of his thoughts. The freedom belongs to him as
a rational creature : He lies under the restraint as a member of
society."** But notwithstanding these fair professions, perhaps there scarce
ever was an author who had less regard to the rules of decency in
writing than Lord Bolingbroke. The holy Scriptures are re
ceived with great veneration among Christians ; and the religion
there taught is the religion publicly professed and established
in these nations; and therefore, according to his own rule,
ought to be treated with a proper respect. And yet on many
occasions he throws out the most outrageous abuse against those
sacred writings, and the authors of them. He compares the
history of the Pentateuch to the romances Don Quixote was so fond
» Works, vol. iii. p. 330. t Ibid. p. 339. X Ibid- p. 347. § Ibid. vol. iv. p. 54.
|| Ibid. vol. iii. p. 331. 1 Ibid. p. 332. ** Ibid. p. 333, 334.

302 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXII.
of; and pronounces that they who receive them as authentic are not
much less mad than he.* That " it is no less than blasphemy to
assert the Jewish Scriptures to have been divinely inspired ;" and he
represents those that attempt to justify them as having " ill hearts
as well as heads, and as worse than atheists, though they may pass
for saints. "f He chargeth those with impiety, who would impose
on us, as the word of God, a book which contains scarce any thing
that is not repugnant to the wisdom, power, and other attributes of
a Supreme All-perfect Being. "J And he roundly pronounceth, that
" there are gross defects and palpable falsehoods in almost every
page of the Scriptures, and the whole tenor of them is such, as no
man, who acknowledges a Supreme All-perfect Being, can believe to
be his word."§ This is a brief specimen of his invectives against the
sacred writings of the Old Testament, and which he repeateth on
many occasions. He affecteth indeed to speak with seeming respect
of Christianity, yet he has not only endeavoured to invalidate the
evidences that are brought to support it, but he passeth the severest
censures upon doctrines which he himself representeth as original
and essential doctrines of the Christian religion. He makes the
most injurious representation of the doctrine of our redemption by
the blood of Christ, and chargeth it as repugnant to all our ideas of
order, of justice, of goodness, and even of theism. || And after a
most virulent invective against the Jewish notion of God, as partial,
cruel, arbitrary, and unjust, he asserts, that the character imputed to
him by the Christian doctrine of redemption, and future punishments,
is as bad or worse. H Great is the contempt and reproach he hath
poured forth upon St. Paul, who was the penman of a considerable
part of the New Testament, and whose name and writings have
been always deservedly had in great veneration in the Christian
church. He chargeth him with dissimulation and falsehood, and
even with madness.** He asserts that his gospel was different from
that of Christ, and contradictory to it;tt that he writes confusedly,
obscurely, and unintelligibly ; — and where his gospel is intelligible, '
it is often absurd, profane, and trifling.|.*j:
Some of those gentlemen who have shown little respect for the
holy Scriptures, have yet spoke with admiration of many of the
sages of antiquity ; but Lord Bolingbroke has on all occasions
treated the greatest men of all ages with the utmost contempt and
scorn. It is allowable indeed for sincere and impartial inquirers
after truth, to differ from persons of high reputation for knowledge
and learning, ancient and modern : and sometimes it is the more
necessary to point out their errors, lest the authority of great names
should lead men aside from truth. But whilst we think ourselves
obliged to detect their mistakes, there is a decent regard to be paid
them : it would be wrong to treat them in a reproachful and con
temptuous manner. Yet this is what our author hath done. If all
* Works, vol. iii. p. 280. f Ibid. p. 299, 306. 1 Ibid p 308
§ Ibid. p. 298. || Ibid. vol. iv. p. 318. vol. v. p. 291,532. t Ibid. p. 532, 533.
** Ibid. vol. iv. p. 172, 306. ft Ibid. p. 313, 327, 328. if Ibid. vol. iii. p. 330, 331.

Let. XXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 303
the passages wese laid together, in which he hath inveighed against
the wisest and most learned men of all ages, especially the philoso
phers, metaphysicians, and divines, they would fill no small volume.
And indeed these kind of declamatory invectives recur so often in these
Essays, as cannot but create great disgust to every reader of taste.
I shall mention a few passages out of a multitude that might be pro
duced, and which may serve as a sample of the rest. He saith of
the philosophers, that " they seem to acquire knowledge only as a
necessary step to error, and grow so fond of the latter, that they
esteem it no longer human, but raise it by an imaginary apotheosis
up to a divine science ; that these searchers after truth, these lovers
of wisdom, are nothing better than venders of false wares ; and the
most irrational of all proceedings pass for the utmost efforts of hu
man reason."* He represents metaphysical divines and philoso
phers as having " wandered many thousand years in imaginary
iight and darkness."t He frequently chargeth them with madness,
and sometimes with blasphemy; and that they " staggered about,
and jostled one another in their dreams."*); Speaking of Plato and
Aristotle, he says, " their works have been preserved, perhaps more
to the detriment than to the advancement of learning." § And
though he sometimes commends Socrates, he pronounces, that he
" substituted fantastical ideas instead of real knowledge, and cor
rupted science to the very source;" that "he lost himself in the
clouds — when he declared, that the two offices of philosophy are, the
contemplation of God, and the abstracting of the soul from cor
poreal sense ;" and that he and Plato were mad enough to think
themselves capable of such contemplation and such abstraction. ||
Besides many occasional passages scattered throughout these Essays,
there are several large sections which contain almost nothing else
than invectives against Plato and his philosophy. He says," that
philosopher " treated every subject, whether corporeal or intellectual,
like a bombast poet, and a mad theologian :" f that " he who reads
Plato's works like a man in his senses, will be tempted to think on
many occasions that the author was not so ;" and that " no man ever
dreamed so wildly as this author wrote." ** He chargeth him with
a " false sublime in style, and that no writer can sink lower than
he into a tedious socratical irony, into certain flimsy hypothetical
reasonings that prove nothing, and into allusions that are mere
vulgarisms, and that neither explain nor enforce any thing that wants
to be explained or enforced, "ff He represents all the commentators
and translators of Plato as dull or mad ; and calls Ficinus delirious,
and Dacier simple and a bigot, and a Platonic madman.%% The true
reason of the particular dislike he every-where expresses against that
philosopher seems to be what he calls his " rambling speculations
about the divine and spiritual nature, about immaterial substances,
* Works, vol. iii. p. 490. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 8.
X Ibid. vol. iii. p. 553, 554. vol. iv. p. 129. 150. § Ibid. vol. iii. p. 392.
|| Ibid. vol. iv. p. 113. f Ibid. p. 129. ** Ibid. p. 344. 357.
tt Ibid. p. 140, 141. 353, 354. XX Ibid. p. 107. 140. 355.

304 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXII.
about the immortality of the soul, and about the rewards and punish
ments of a future state."*
As to the Stoics, he declares, " that their theology and morality
were alike absurd:" that, in endeavouring to account how it came
that there is evil in the world, and that the best men have often the
greatest share of this evil, " they talked mere nonsense, figurative,
sublime, metaphysical, but nonsense still."-]- The ancient theists
in general he represents as having been seduced many ways into a
confederacy with the atheists, and particularly blames them for pre
tending to connect moral attributes, such as we conceive them, with
the physical attributes of God ; which, he affirms, gave great ad
vantage to the objections of the atheists."!;
But there is no sort of men against whom he inveighs with greater
license of reproach than the Christian divines and philosophers.
He frequently speaks of the ancient fathers with the utmost con
tempt : that they were superstitious, credulous, lying men; — and
that " the greatest of them were unfit to write or speak on any sub
ject that required closeness of reasoning, an evangelical candour,
and even common ingenuousness. "§ As to the more modern di
vines, he takes every occasion of insulting and abusing them. Not
onlv doth he represent them as declaimers who have little respect for
their readers, — as hired to defend the Christian system, — and as
seeking nothing more than the honour of the gown, by having the
last word in every dispute ;" || but he says, " they talk a great deal
of blasphemy on the head of internal divine characters of Scrip
ture." If He often repeats it, that atheists deny God, but the divines
defame him, which, he thinks, is the worse qf the two. He charges
them with madness, and worse than madness :** that " they have re
course to trifling distinction, and dogmatical affirmations, the last
retrenchments of obstinacy :"f+ that " of all fools, the most pre
sumptuous, and at the same time most trifling, are metaphysical
philosophers and divines."*);*]; He charges them, in an address he
makes to God, with " owning his existence only to censure his
works, and the dispensations of his providence.''§§ And frequently
represents them as in alliance with the atheists, as betraying the cause
of God to them, and as doing their best, in concert with these their
allies, to destroy both the goodness and justice ot God. ||[[ He de
clares, that " he who follows them cannot avoid presumption and
profaneness, and must be much upon his guard to avoid blas
phemy :" f f " that the preachers of natural and revealed religion have
been loudest in their clamours against Providence, and have done
nothing more than repeat what the atheists have said ; — and that
they attempt to prove that the Supreme Being is the tyrant of the
world he governs." (a) And the same charge he advanceth against
the Christian philosophers in general.
* Works, vol. iv. p. 347, 348. t Ibid. vol. ». p. 247. 317.
X Ibid. p. 316. § Ibid. vol. iii. p. 337, 338. vol. iv. p. 586.
|| Ibid. p. 290. vol. v. p. 286.314. t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 272. ** Ibid. vol. iv. p. 273,
tt Ibid. vol. v. p. 188. ft Ibid. p. 493. §§ Ibid. p. 339. |||| Ibid. p. 341. 346, 393, &C.
tt Ibid. p. 461. (a) Ibid. vol. v. p. 4.94, 485.

Let. XXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE.

303

But besides these general invectives against Christian philoso
phers and divines, he hath, particularly attacked some of the most
celebrated names in a manner little reconcileable to good manners
and the decency which ought to be observed towards persons of dis
tinguished reputation, even when we think them in the wrong.
Speaking of " many reverend persons, who," he says, " have had
their heads turned by a preternatural fermentation of the brain, or a
philosophical delirium," — be observes, " that none has been more so
than Dr. Cudworth. — He read too much to think enough." He
represents him as having " given a nonsensical paraphrase of non
sense;" — and that " the good man passed his life in the study of
an unmeaning jargon : and as he learned, so he taught."* He
charges Bishop Cumberland with " metaphysical jargon, and theo
logical, blasphemy." t Stillingfleet; is spoken of with contempt ; as
also Huet, Bochart, and the Christian antiquaries."); Nor is arch
bishop Tillotson treated with greater regard. He talks in a very
slighting way of those that have written on the law of nature, par
ticularly Grotius, Selden, and Puffendorf: that they "puzzle and
perplex the plainest thing in the world, and seem to be great writers
on this subject, by much the same right as he might be called a
great traveller, who should go from London to Paris by the Cape of
Good Hope." § There is none of the Christian philosophers of whom
he speaks with so much respect as Mr. Locke ; yet he represents
him as having " dreamed that he had a power of forming abstract
ideas ;" and mentions this as a proof, that there is such a thing as a
philosophical delirium." || And he charges it upon him as a great
inconsistency, that he should write a Commentary on St. Paul's
Epistles, and a Discourse on the Reasonableness of Christianity,
after he had written an Essay on Human Understanding.^
But there is no one person whom he treats with so much rudeness
and insolence as the late eminently learned Dr. Samuel Clarke. Hb
calls him a presumptuous dogmatist, and represents him as having
" impiously advanced, that we know the rule God governs by as
well as he, — and that, like another Eunomius, he presumes to know
God, his moral nature at least, and to teach others to know him, as
well as he knows himself."** He chargeth him with & foolish and
wicked rhodomontade, " with pretending to make infallible demon
strations, like the Pope's decrees, and sending every one to the devil
who does not believe in them ;f-f- and with a rhapsody of presump
tuous reasonings, of profane absurdities, of evasions that seem to
answer while they only perplex, and in one word, the most arbitrary
and least reasonable suppositions."*):"); He saith, that " the retrench
ments cast up by him are feeble beyond belief." That " he boasts
like a bully, who looks fierce, speaks big, and is little to be feared." §§
Not only does he call him an audacious and vain sophist, \\ || but he
* Works, vol. iii. p. ,353. vol. iv. p. 92. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 82.
X Ibid. vol. iii. p. 264. vol. iv. p. 13. § Ibid. vol. v. p. 68.
|| Ibid. vol. ii. p. 441, 442. t Ib;d- vol. iv. p. 166. 295.
** Ibid. vol. iii. p. '52. vol. v. p. 449. tt Ibid- P- 252. Xi Ibid. p. 293.
§§ Ibid. p. 280. 293. || || Ibid. p. 293.
X

306 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXII.
carries it so far as to say, that " he and WoUaston do in effect re
nounce God, as much as the rankest of the atheistical tribe.*
With regard to thelastmentionedcelebrated writer, Mr. WoUaston,
besides the severe reproach cast upon him in the passage I have
just cited, Lord Bolingbroke elsewhere treats him as ''' a licentious
maker of hypotheses — and a whining philosopher." He represents
all that he hath said about the immortality of the soul " as a string
of arbitrary suppositions ;" and that " his discourse on that subject
is such as'would lead one to think, that the philosopher who held
it was a patient of Dr. Monro's not yet perfectly restored to his
senses.f He acknowledges him indeed to have been a man of
parts and learning, but charges him with writing nonsense; that Ire,
and such as he, were learned lunatics ; and he treats his way of
arguing about a future state, as a specimen of that sort of madness
which is called a dementia quoad*lioc.% The same censure he passeth
on the late Lord President of Scotland, " that he was indeed a man
of capacity, good sense, and knowledge, but was in a delirium, and
mad, quoad hoc, when he wrote against Tindal."§
You cannot but have observed, in reading over several of the pas
sages which have been produced, that it is familiar with Lord
Bolingbroke to represent those as mad and out of their senses who
happen to differ from him, at least as mad with regard to the par
ticular point in difference. I shall only mention one passage more
to this purpose out of the many that might be produced. Having
compared the reasoners a priori to persons in Bedlam, and the several
sorts of madmen there, he adds, that " atheists are one sort of mad
men, many divines and theists another sort;'' and that these sorts
of madmen are principally to be found in colleges and schools, where
different sects have rendered this sort of madness.which is occasion
ally elsewhere, both epidemical and traditional. "|| If one were to
imitate this author's manner of talking, one might be apt to charge
him as being seized with a sort of madness, when certain subjects
come in his way — metaphysics ; artificial theology : Plato and Pla
tonic philosophy ; spiritual substance, and incorporeal essence ; hut,
above all, the Christian divines and clergy. These, when he hap
pens to meet with them, bring one of his fits upon him, and often set
him a raving for several pages together. But I confess I too much
dislike such a way of writing to make recriminations of- this kind.
And yet his lordship tells -the divines of the discretion of their adver
saries, and would have them return it with discretion. And he re
presents the orthodox bullies, as he calls them, as " affecting to tri
umph over men, who employ but part of their strength, as tiring them
with impertinent paradoxes, and provoking them with unjust reflec
tions, and often by the foulest language."!!
I am apt to think, that by this time you are weary of reading over
such a heap of abusive reflections, so unbecoming any man of learu-
* Works, p. 184, 485. t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 515, 518, vol. v. p. 398.
X Ibid. vol. v. p. 474. $ Ibid. p. 5*3.
11 Ibid. p. 3C9, 370. t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 272, 273.

Let. XXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 3Q-7
ing and education, much more one so conversant in the polite world
as Lord Bolingbroke has been. The transcribing them out of his
Essays was no very agreeable employment. But they so often occur
there, and make so remarkable a part of the works of this right
honourable author, that it was absolutely necessary to take some
notice of them. One thing may be safely collected from his writing
after this manner, viz. that he had a very high opinion of the supe
riority of his own understanding, and a sovereign contempt for all
those that were in different sentiments from him, whether philoso
phers, ancient or modern, or divines, but especially for the latter.
If we examine what foundation there is for these high preten
sions, or what new and important discoveries this writer hath made
in religion or philosophy, which may be of real use to mankind,
the principal things in his scheme may be reduced to the following
heads :
1. That there is one Supreme All-perfect Being, the eternal and
original cause of all things, of almighty power and infinite wisdom ;
but that we must not pretend to ascribe to him any moral attri
butes, distinct from his physical, especially holiness, justice, and
goodness; that he has not these attributes, according to the ideas
we conceive of them, nor any thing equivalent to those qualities as
they are in us ; and that to pretend to deduce moral obligations from
those attributes, or to talk of imitating God in his moral attributes,
is enthusiasm or blasphemy.
2. That God made the world, and established the laws of this
system at the beginning ; but that he doth not now concern himself
in the affairs of men ; or that if he doth, his providence only extend-
eth to collective bodies, but hath no regard to individuals, to their
actions, or to the events that befal them.
3. That the soul is not a distinct substance from the body ; that
the whole man is dissolved at death; and that though it may be use
ful to mankind to believe the doctrine of future rewards and punish
ments, yet it is a fiction, which hath no real foundation in nature
and reason ; and that to pretend to argue for future retributions
from the apprehended unequal distributions of this present state, is
absurd and blasphemous, and is to cast the most unworthy reflec
tions on divine Providence.
4. That the law of nature is what reason discovereth to us con
cerning our duty as founded in the human system; that it is clear
and obvious to all mankind ; but has been obscured and perverted by
ancient philosophers and modern divines ; that it has not been set
in a proper light by those who have undertaken to treat of it ; and
therefore he hath represented it in its genuine purity and simplicity ;
and that the sanction of that law relate to men not individually, but
collectively considered.
5. That from the clearness and sufficiency of the law of nature, it
may be concluded, that God hath made no other revelation of his
will to mankind ; and that there is no need or use for any extraor
dinary supernatural revelation.
6. That it is profane and blasphemous to ascribe the Jewish
x 2

308 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXII.
Scriptures to revelation or inspiration from God ; that the history
contained there is false and incredible, and the scheme of religion
taught in those writings is absolutely unworthy of God, and repug
nant to his divine perfections.
7. That the New Testament consists of two different gospels,
opposite to one another, that of Christ and that of St. Paul ; that
Christianity in its genuine simplicity, as taught by Jesus Christ, and
contained in the evangelical writings, is a benevolent institution, and
may be regarded as a republication of the law of nature, or rather of
'the theology of Plato ; that the morals it teaches are pure, but no
other than the philosophers had taught before, and that some of its
precepts are not agreeable to the natural law ; and some of its ori
ginal doctrines, particularly those relating to the redemption of
mankind by the death of Christ, and to future rewards and punish
ments, are absurd, and inconsistent with the attributes of God.
These appear to me to be the most remarkable things in the late
Lord Bolingbroke's " Posthumous Works," as far as natural and
revealed religion is concerned. And the method I propose to pursue
in my observations upon them is this :
I shall first consider the attempts he hath made to subvert the
main principles that lie at the foundation of all religion, viz., those
relating to the moral attributes of God, a particular providence
extending to the individuals of the human race, the immortality of
the soul, and a future state of retributions. I shall next examine
the account he hath given of the law of nature, and of the duties
and sanctions of that law. After which it will be proper to consider
what he hath offered concerning divine, revelation in general, with a
view to show that an extraordinary revelation of the will of God to
mankind is absolutely needless, and that therefore we may conclude
that God hath never given such a revelation at all. I shall proceed,
in the next place, to a particular and distinct examination of the
objections he hath urged against the truth and divine original of
the Mosaic revelation, and the Scriptures of the Old Testament;
and shall conclude with considering what more directly relateth to
the Christian revelation properly so called, to its proofs and evidences,
and to its laws and doctrines, all which he hath endeavoured to
expose. This I hope may be sufficient to answer the design I have in view,
which is to obviate the principal mischiefs to religion, which Lord
Bolingbroke's Works seem fitted to produce. Other things there
are in these volumes, which might furnish matter for many reflec
tions, but which I shall take little or no notice of, as they do not
come within the compass of the plan I propose. I am, &c.

Let. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. UOO

LETTER XXIII.
Lord Bolingbroke asserts the Existence of God against the Atheists, but rejects the
Argument a priori, and that drawn from the general Consent of Mankind. — He is
for reducing all the divine Attributes to Wisdom and Power, and blames the Divines
for distinguishing between the physical and moral Attributes. — He asserts, that we
cannot ascribe Goodness and Justice to God, according to our Ideas of them, nor
argue with any Certainty about them  That it is absurd to deduce moral Obliga
tions from the moral Attributes of God, or to pretend to imitate him in those
Attributes. — Observations upon his Scheme. — It is shown, that the moral Attri
butes are necessarily included in the Idea of the absolutely perfect Being. The
Author's Objections against ascribing those Attributes to God, or distinguishing
them from his physical Attributes, particularly considered. — His manifold Inconsis
tencies and Contradictions.
Sir,
In my last a general account was given of the scheme Lord
Bolingbroke seems to have had in view in his Posthumous Works,
and of the main principles to which it is reducible. I now proceed
to a more distinct examination of those principles ; and shall begin
with that which lieth at the foundation of all religion, the existence
and attributes of God. And it must be acknowledged, that his
Lordship every-where in the strongest terms asserteth the existence
of the one Supreme All-perfect Being, the Great Author of the
universe. Lie represents this as strictly demonstrable, and treats
the opinion of the atheists as infinitely absurd ; and that they can
only cavil, but cannot reason, against the existence ofthe first cause ;
of which, he thinks, we may be in reason as sure as of our own exis
tence. There are several passages in his works, in which he ex
presseth himself devoutly with regard to the Supreme Being, and
professeth seriously to adore him. And there are some instances of
his addressing him with great solemnity, and in a religious manner.*
I need not take any notice of what he hath briefly offered for de
monstrating the existence of a Deity. t He has said nothing on
this head, but what has been frequently urged to great advantage
by others before him; and particularly by Dr. Clarke, in what his
Lordship is pleased to call his pretended demonstration of the being
and attributes of God.\
Our author indeed is for confining the proof to the argument a
posteriori, and is for absolutely rejecting the argument a priori,
whereas Dr. Clarke insists upon both ; and I cannot help thinking
that both may be highly useful ; and that they are then most effec
tual, and come with the greatest force, when they come in aid of one
another. As Lord Bolingbroke rejects the argument a priori for the exis
tence and perfections of God, so he seems not willing to allow that
* See particularly vol. iii. p. 247, 356. vol. v. p. 338, &c.
t Works, vol. iii. p. 353, 354. ' Ibid. p. 52.

310 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIII.
which is drawn from the general consent of mankind. He says,
it will indeed prove, that men generally believed a God, but not that
such a Being exists ; and he represents it as trifling to insist upon it.*
And in a letter occasioned by one of Archbishop Tillotson's sermons,
vol. iii. p. 257, and seq. he finds fault with that great divine for mak
ing use of that argument, and disingenuously represents it, as if he
had rested the proof of a Deity principally upon it ;t which he is
far from doing, though it must be acknowledged to be a considera
tion of great weight. He particularly blames the Archbishop for
ascribing this consent to the nature of the human mind, on which
God has impressed an innate idea of himself; but he owns, that
afterwards he softens it by saying, that " the human mind is so dis
posed, that men may discover, in the due use of its faculties, that
there is a God." X And he speaks of some divines who explain it
thus ; that the belief of God is founded on a certain natural propor
tion there is between this great truth and the conceptions of the
human mind. But our author thinks, that " such a natural and in
timate proportion between the existence of God, and the conceptions
of the human mind, may appear chimerical, and perhaps is so;"^
and observes, that " polytheism was more conformable to the natural
conceptions of the human mind, especially in the most ancient and
ignorant ages, than the belief of One first intelligent Cause, the sole
Creator, Preserver, and Governor of all things." Yet he afterwards
declares, that " the idea of an All-wise and All-powerful Being, the
first cause of all things, is so proportionable to human reason, that it
must have been received into the minds of men, as soon as they
began to contemplate the face of nature, and to exercise their reason
in such contemplations."|| And in his reflections on M. Mauper-
tuis, who had slighted the argument from the general consent of
mankind, he observes, that " it is general enough to show the pro
portion which this truth bears to the universal reason qf mankind."^
You cannot but observe here, that he directly makes use of that
manner of expression which he had before blamed others for using.
But it will be proper more distinctly to inquire into the idea this
writer gives of God, and of the divine perfections. The only attri
butes of God which he insisteth upon as necessary to be known by
us are, his power and wisdom. " We rise," says he, " from a know
ledge of ourselves, and of the works of God, to a knowledge of his
existence, and his wisdom and power, which we call infinite."** He
blames those who presume to define the moral attributes of an All-
perfect Being ; and thinks " we ought to content ourselves lo know
that he exists by the necessity of his nature, and that his wisdom
and power are infinite."tt He declares, that a "self-existent Being,
the first Cause of all things, infinitely powerful and infinitely wise, is
the God of natural theology ; that as the whole system of the uni
verse bears witness to this truth, so the whole system of natural
* Works, vol. iii. p. 247. t Ibid. p. 258,' 267. t Ibid p 258
i Ibid. r. 259, 260. || Ibid. vol. iv. p. 195. <f Ibid. p. 256.
** Ibid. p. b'8. tt Ibid. vol. v. p. 235.

Let. XXIII. LORD R0L1NGBR0KE. 311
religion rests on it, and requires no broader foundation. These
systems are God's systems."* We see here there is no mention
made of the divine goodness, as included in the idea we form of a
deity. Natural theology, or natural religion, requires no broader
a foundation than the acknowledging the wisdom and power of God.
And so it generally is in the account our author gives of God and
his attributes; as if optimus were not to be joined with maximus in
the deist's creed, or in the idea natural religion teaches us to form of
God. And accordingly he finds fault with what he calls artificial
theology, for pretending "to connect moral attributes, such as we
conceive them, and such as they are relatively to us, with the phy
sical attributes of God." He says, " there is no sufficient foundation
for this proceeding in the phenomena of nature, and that in several
cases they are repugnant." And he expressly mentions it among
the wrong notions of the ancient theists, and which gave advantage
to the atheists with regard to the question about the original of evil,
that they maintained, that " God is just and good, and righteous, and
holy, as well as powerful and wise." He blames them for saying,
that " love was the first principle of things, and that it determined
God to bring forth his creatures into existence ;"t and that, as
Seneca says, usque ad delicias amarnur. And elsewhere quoting a
passage of Dr. Clarke, in which God is represented as having a
tender and hearty concern for the happiness of man, he says, " these
are strange words to be applied to the Supreme Being."*j: And he
argueth at great length against those who suppose, that God
made man only to be happy.
He frequently censureth the divines for distinguishing between
God's physical and moral attributes ; and " cannot see one religious
purpose, that this distinction is necessary to answer. § God's moral
attributes," he says, " can only be discerned in the works of God,
and in the conduct of his providence; and that it is evident, they
are not, cannot be so discerned in them, as to be the object of our
imitation."|| He represents it as great presumption to pretend to
deduce our moral obligations from the moral attributes of God ; and
that the absurdity of this cannot be too often exposed. IT And after
having asserted, that we cannot rise from our moral obligations to
God's supposed moral attributes, he adds, that " he calls them sup
posed, because " after all that has been supposed to prove a necessary
connection between his physical and moral attributes, we may ob
serve them in his wisdom ; — and that the effects of his wisdom give
us sometimes ideas of those moral qualities, which we acquire by
reflections on ourselves, and sometimes not."** He thinks the
divines are to be blamed, " for talking of God's infinite goodness and
justice, as of his infinite wisdom and power ;"tt and observes, that
" every thing shows the wisdom and power of God, conformably to
our ideas of wisdom and power, in the physical world and in the
moral; but every thing does not show in like manner the justice
* Works, vol. v. p. 316. t Ibid. p. 316, 317. J Ibid. p. 63.
§ Ibid. p. 62. || Ibid. p. 63. % Ibid. p. 87. *** Ibid. p. 88. tt Ibid. p. 528.

312 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIII.
and goodness of God, conformably to our ideas of those attributes in
either."* That " though the wisdom of God does not appear alike
in all the phenomena, yet, as far as we can discover, it appears in
the greatest and least to our astonishment, and none of them can be
strained into a repugnancy to it; but the same cannot be said of the
moral attributes which we ascribe to the Supreme Being, according
to our ideas of them. It cannot be disputed, and all sides agree,
that many of the phaenomena are repugnant to our ideas of goodness
and justice."*!* He declares it as his opinion, that "God's natural
attributes absorb the moral;"*!: and particularly, that "the moral
attributes of the Supreme Being are absorbed in his wisdom ; and
that we should consider them only as different modifications of his
physical attributes ; and must always talk precariously and imper
tinently, when we presume to apply our ideas of them to the appear
ances of things."§ And he chargeth the divines " as proceeding in
all their reasonings about the nature, moral attributes, and will of
God, not only without regard to the phaenomena, but often in direct
contradiction to them."||
This is not a matter that he treats merely in some occasional pas
sages. The chief design of several of his fragments and essays in
his fifth volume, particularly of the fourth, seventh, fortieth, forty-
first, and forty-ninth, is to argue against those who assert the moral
attributes of God as distinguished from his physical : or who say,
that those moral attributes, his holiness, goodness, justice, and
truth, are the same in him, that they are in the ideas we form of
those perfections; which, he says, cannot be conceived without
manifest presumption and blasphemy : upon this doctrine he chargeth
men's false conceptions and licentious reasonings about the divine
nature and providence. He adds, that " thesefalse conceptions and
licentious reasonings may proceed likewise from the analogical doc
trine; which, though it ascribes not to God human notions, yet
ascribes to him something, whatever it be, equivalent to them." If
He affirms, that " goodness and justice in God — are something
transcendent, and of which we cannot make any true judgment; and
that it is impossible we should argue with any certainty about
them."** I shall only farther observe, that he brings a charge in this
respect, not only against the Christian divines, but against the
heathen philosophers. The reason he assigns, why they were " un
able to propagate natural religion, and to reform mankind, is be
cause they proceeded in Dr. Clarke's method, to argue a priori
from the moral attributes of God, his goodness, justice, &c. which
they assumed to be the same in him that they are in our ideas."tf
By comparing these several passages together, it appears, that,
according to this writer, we are unable to form any idea of the moral
attributes of God : for if we cannot conceive of "them according to
our ideas, we cannot form any conception of them at all : that it is
wrong to distinguish them from his physical attributes, or to say
* Works, vol. v. p. 31 1. t Ibid. p. 368. J Ibid. p. 313, 314. § Ibid. p. 335, 453.
|| Ibid. p. 310. 1 Ibid. p. 541. * * Ibid. p. 311, 359, 360. tt Ibid. p. 234.

Let. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 31 3
they are connected with those attributes : that there is not only no
such thing in God as goodness or justice as we conceive of them, but
nothing in him analogous or equivalent to those qualities as they are
in us, or which is fitted to produce correspondent effects: that
therefore it ought not to be said of God, that he is just and good,
holy and true, or that he is a lover of mankind, or is concerned for
our happiness, but only that he is powerful and wise: that we can
only know God's moral attributes a posteriori from the effects, and
that many ofthe phsenomena in nature are repugnant to those attri
butes, and inconsistent with them : so that it is impossible for us to
argue with any certainty about them. This is the plain intention of
the passages which have been cited, and others might be produced
to the same purpose ; though we shall find him afterwards plainly
contradicting several things which here he has advanced.
If we consider what his reason could be for setting up an hypo
thesis so contrary to true theism, for which yet he would be thought
to have so great a zeal, there are two things which he appears to
have had in view.
1. That we are in no case to deduce our moral obligations from
the moral attributes of God, or to propose to imitate God in those
attributes. He declares, that " the laws of nature are absurdly
founded in the moral attributes of God ;"* i. e. it is absurd to talk
of his justice, goodness, righteousness and truth, as giving rise to
those laws, or appearing in the constitution of them. And as to the
pretence of imitating the Deity in his moral excellencies, this is
what he openly and avowedly condemns. This particularly is the
design of the fourth of his fragments and essays in his fifth volume.
He expressly asserts, that " God's moral attributes cannot be so
discerned by us as to be the objects of our imitation," + He pro
nounces, that " it is absurd, and worse than absurd, to assert that
man can imitate God, except in a sense so very remote, and so im
proper, that the expressions should never be used, much less such a
duty recommended." % And that " those writers or preachers who
exhort us to imitate God, must mean, not the God whom we see
in his works, and in all that his providence orders ; but the God
who appears in their representations of him, and who is often such
a God as no pious theist can acknowledge." § He declares for him
self, that he dares not use theological familiarity, and talk of imi
tating God; and treats that doctrine as extravagant, false, and pro-
phane."\\ He says, that " by assuming to imitate God, we give
the strongest proof of the imperfection of our nature, whilst we
neglect the real, and aspire to a mock honour, as pride, seduced by
adulation, is prone to do; and as religious pride, wrought up by
self-conceit into enthusiasm, does above all others." IT And he
mentions it as an instance of the impertinence of Socrates's doctrine,
that " he conjured his auditors' in the prison to make themselves
as like as possible to their great exemplar, the Supreme Being." **
* Works, vol. v. p. 90. t Ibid. p. 63. ' Ibid. p. 62. § Ibid. p. 64.
|| Ibid. p. 44. 65. f Ibid. p. 67. ** Ibid. vol. iv. p. 117, 118.

31-1 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIII.
Thus has this dogmatical and presumptuous author taken upon him
to pass a severe and insolent censure upon that which has been the
doctrine of the most excellent philosophers and moralists, and of one
far superior to them all, our blessed Saviour himself. See Mat. v.
45. 48. Luke iv. 35, 36. And he has particularly instanced in
God's causing his sun to shine on the evil and the good, and send
ing rain on the just and unjust, as a proof that we cannot and
ought not to aspire after an imitation of him ;"* though our Lord
sets this goodness of providence before us as a noble pattern, to en
gage us to an extensive benevolence, and that we should be ready
to do good even to our enemies themselves. There are indeed depths
in God's providential dispensations, with regard to which we can
not pretend to imitate him, for want of knowing the reasons upon
which he proceeds ; but this does not hinder, but that we may and
ought to endeavour to resemble him in his illustrious moral excel
lencies, as far as we can discern them in his works and in the reve
lations of his word, which in many instances we are able to do.
2. Another thing which he hath evidently in view, in denying
that we can have any idea of the moral attributes of God, so as to
make a true judgment of them, or to argue with any certainty about
them, is to destroy the argument which is drawn from the consider
ation of these moral attributes, to show the probability of a future
state of retributions. For if God be perfectly good and just, this
leads us to conclude that he will order it so, that in the final issue
of things, a remarkable distinction shall be made between the righ
teous and the wicked; and that virtue shall upon. the whole be
crowned with its due reward, and vice meet with condign punish
ment : and since this is not uniformly done in this present state, it
is reasonable to believe that there shall be a future state of rewards
and punishments. This is a way of arguing, which, by his own ac
knowledgment, has been urged by some of the best and wisest men
in all ages. To avoid this consequence, he will not allow that there
is any such thing as justice and goodness in God according to our
ideas, or any thing answering to what we call justice and goodness:
and that it is presumption in us to determine what those attributes
require that God should do. t And indeed to guard against this
seems to have been a principal point with his lordship. It is for this
that he denies, that providence extendeth its care to the individuals
of the human race : and one of his chief prejudices against the
Christian revelation appears to me to be its setting these things in
so si rong a light.
You easily perceive, that this part of our author's scheme is not
of a trifling nature. It is not a mere speculative error, but which,
pursued to its proper consequences, must have a mighty influence
on religion and morals. I shall therefore examine it distinctly, and
shall first offer some general considerations concerning God's moral
attributes, to show that they must necessarily be ascribed to the
Supreme Being : and then shall proceed to obviate the principal ob-
* Works, vol. v. p. 63. *" t Ibid. p. 153,

Lot. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 3] 5
jections he hath advanced : after which I shall point to the manifold
inconsistencies and contradictions he hath fallen into in relation to
this subject.
I shall begin with some general considerations concerning God's
moral attributes.
And 1. It is essential to the idea of God, that he is the all-perfect
Being. So our author frequently calls him, and makes it necessary
for us to regard him under that notion.* That is a remarkable de
claration which he makes Vol. III. p. 299. " I know, for I can de
monstrate by connecting the clearest and most distinct of my real
ideas, that there is a God, a first intelligent cause of all things,
whose infinite wisdom and power appear evidently in all his works,
and to whom therefore I ascribe most rationally every other perfec
tion, whether conceivable or not conceivable by me." Here he men
tions distinctly, as his manner is, God's infinite wisdom and power,
and takes no particular notice of his goodness; but surely this must
be supposed to be included, when he adds, that not only wisdom
and power, but every other perfection conceivable by us, must be
most rationally ascribed to God. For is not goodness a perfection 1
And is it not conceivable by us ? Yea, is it not the most amiable
of all perfections, and that which gives a lustre and glory to all the
rest 1 Is it possible to conceive a perfect character without it? Al
mighty power and infinite wisdom, if they could be supposed sepa
rated from goodness and righteousness, in the great Governor of the
world, would create horror and aversion instead of love and esteem.
A God destitute of justice and goodness would be such a God, as
he most wrongfully represents the God of Moses and St. Paul to be,
an unjust, a cruel, a partial, and arbitrary Being \f
He is sensible, that in our ideas of perfection, goodness and
righteousness, or his moral attributes, are necessarily included : and
that consequently according to the rule he had laid down, viz. that
it is rational for us to ascribe to God every perfection, whether con
ceivable or inconceivable by us, we ought most certainly to ascribe
to him righteousness, goodness, and truth. He endeavours there
fore to guard against this by saying, though in plain contradiction
to what he had before advanced : — " Let us not measure his perfec
tions by ours. Let us not presume so much as to ascribe our per
fections to him, even according to the highest conceptions we are
able to form of them ; though we reject every imperfection conceiv
able by us, when it is imputed to him."J He observes, that " the
first and strongest impressions that we receive of benevolence, jus
tice, and other moral virtues, come from reflections on ourselves and
others ; from what we feel in ourselves, and from what we observe
in other men. These we acknowledge to be, however limited and
imperfect, the excellencies of our own nature, and therefore con
ceiving them without any limitation or perfection, we ascribe them
to the Divine." But he says, " a very short analysis of the excel
lencies of our own nature will be sufficient to show, that they cannot
* Works, vol. iii. p. ^it'S. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 567. X Ibid. vol. iii. p. 558.

316 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL AVRITERS. Let. XXIII.
be applied from man to God without profaneness, nor from God to
man without the most shameful absurdity."* lt will be easily ac
knowledged, that we cannot ascribe any of those qualities in our
nature, which necessarily connote imperfection, to God in a literal
and proper sense ; but to say that we ought not to ascribe those,
which we cannot but look upon as the noblest excellencies and per
fections of an intelligent Being, and of which we clearly discern the
traces and resemblances in our own nature, to the infinitely perfect
Being, at the same time taking care to remove every imperfection
with which they are attended in us and our fellow-creatures, is
highly absurd, and a manifest contradiction to the common sense of
mankind. It is to say, that we are to conceive of God as the in
finitely perfect Being, and yet we are not to ascribe to him those
excellencies which we cannot possibly avoid regarding as necessarily
included in the idea of infinite perfection. Nor is this, as he is
pleased to represent it, a making man the original, and God only a
copy ;f or, as he elsewhere expresseth it, a supposing God to be no
more than an infinite man.\ This argument, if it may be called so,
is only a playing upon words. The word man carries in it the idea
of s, finite, imperfect, created being ; and therefore to call God an
infinite man has a very odd sound. But if the meaning only be, that
as man is an intelligent being, so God is infinite intelligence ; and
as man has moral dispositions, the imperfect seeds and principles of
goodness, justice, benevolence, God hath all these in the highest
possible degree of eminency, without any imperfection and defect ;
what is there in this unworthy of the supreme and absolutely per
fect Being ? It is true that, as he observes, we do not know the
manner of his being;§ but as this by his own acknowledgment is no
argument against ascribing to him wisdom and power, so neither is
it against our ascribing to him justice and goodness. He there asserts,
that " we rise from the knowledge of ourselves, and of the other
works of God, to a knowledge of his existence, and of his wisdom
and power, which we call infinite." And may it not equally be said,
that we rise from the consideration of his works, and the illustrious
displays of beneficent goodness to be found there, and from the
knowledge of the moral sentiments in our own breasts, and which
we cannot but approve, to the knowledge of his goodness, and moral
excellencies ? And since, by the very constitution of our minds,
we cannot help regarding them as perfections, we are naturally led
to ascribe them in the supreme degree to the All-perfect Being. And
to say, that when we do so, we make ourselves the orio-inal, and him
only the copy, is a strange misrepresentation : for in that case we
rise from the imperfect traces and lineaments of those excellencies in
our own souls, or which we discern in others, to the supreme goodness
and benevolence, of which all human and created goodness is but
a very faint and imperfect copy. And what can be more reasonable
than to conclude, that he must be infinitely good and just, and true,
who made us capable of discerning and feeling the amiableness and
» Works, vol. v. p. 88, 89. t Ibid. p. 87. X Ibid. p. 310. § Ibid. p. 88

Let. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 317
excellence of those moral dispositions and qualities, and who hath
spread such beauty and order, and such a profusion of blessings,
throughout this vast system !
Again, the moral attributes of God may be farther argued from
this, that they are really inseparable from infinite wisdom and
intelligence : and since wisdom could not be perfect without good
ness and justice, these moral attributes must be ascribed to the
Supreme Being as well as wisdom, which our author everywhere
ascribes to him. We may as reasonably suppose him without the
one as the other. As there are innumerable things which show his
wisdom, so there are which demonstrate his goodness and benignity.
And if there are several appearances which we find it hard to recon
cile to our ideas of goodness, so there are which seem not to be con
sistent with wisdom. And the answer is the same in both cases,
that it is owing to our ignorance, and the narrowness of our views ;
and we shall soon find our author in effect acknowledging this.
Power and wisdom without goodness and righteousness are so far
from giving us a proper idea of an All-perfect Being', that it is the
idea of a very imperfect one. This writer himself observes, that " if
God be infinitely wise, he always knows and always does that whicli
is fittest to be done : to choose the best end, and to proportion the
means to it, is the very definition of wisdom." * And accordingly
he asserts, that the wisdom of God always determineth him to do
that which is fittest upon the whole. And this necessarily supposeth
an universal rectitude of his nature. It includes both a perfect un
erring knowledge of what is fittest and best, and a disposition and
determination to act accordingly, and to do what is, all things con
sidered, best and fittest to be done. And this is really to acknow
ledge God's moral attributes : for, as our author observes, " that
which is fittest to be done is always just and good."f So that God's
wisdom is necessarily supposed to be connected with his justice and
goodness, as well as they with his wisdom ; and a regard to both is
comprehended in choosing what is fittest to be done. Wisdom
separated from justice and goodness would not be true wisdom,
which always includes the worthiest ends and properest means, but
craft, which is not a real perfection, but the contrary.
This writer shows that he is sensible of this, when he asserts,
that God's moral attributes are only " different modifications of his
wisdom; and are barely names that we give to various manifesta
tions of the infinite wisdom of one simple uncompounded Being."
And he blames the divines for supposing, "that they are in him,
what they are in us, distinct affections, dispositions, and habi
tudes.""]* He says, that "after all that has been said to prove a
necessary connection between his physical and moral attributes, we
may observe them in his wisdom. "§ And that "if they are so inti
mately connected with his power and wisdom, and so much the
same in nature, that they cannot be separated in the exercise of them,
in this case his natural attributes absorb the moral. "|| But what
* AVorks, vol. v. p. 332. t lbi(i' P' 313- t lbiA- P- 335.
§ Ibid. p. 88. || Ibid. p. 313.

313 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIII.
are we to understand by absorb ? May they not be intimately con
nected, and yet be of distinct consideration ? Are not the divine
power and wisdom intimately connected 1 Can they ever be sepa
rated in the exercise ? Is his power ever a blind power, destitute of
wisdom and intelligence ? Or, is his wisdom an impotent wisdom,
destitute of power? Yet he owns the ideas of power and wisdom
in God to be distinct, though they are neither of them really dis
tinguished from his essence. He is indeed pleased to pass a censure
on the divines, for parcelling out a divine moral nature into various
attributes like the human.* And he sometimes seems to find fault
with the distinguishing any attributes at all in God. He says, that
" since the wisdom of God is as much God as the will of God, and
the will as the wisdom, it is absurd to distinguish them; that it is
something worse to reason about the divine, as we do about the
human intellect, and to divide and parcel out the former upon the
plan of the latter. Since the will of God is not like that of man,
dark and liable to be seduced, why are we led to conclude that a
superior faculty is necessary to determine it, as the judgment of
reason does, or should, determine that of man?" Yet he immedi
ately after distinguishes between the will and knowledge of God, and
supposes it necessary to distinguish them to be (as he expresses it)
a little more intelligible ;t and elsewhere he talks of the rule which
infinite wisdom prescribes to infinite power. % And all along through
out his essays he speaks of wisdom and power as distinct attributes
of God. The one therefore does not, to use his expression, absorb
the other, though they are not separated in the exercise. This
shows that perfections may be intimately connected without being
absorbed, or, in other words, confounded one with another ; and
therefore it is no argument, that there are no such distinct attri
butes as justice, or righteousness and goodness, because they are
intimately and inseparably connected with his power and wisdom.
On the contrary, this supposes that there are such attributes. For
it would be absurd to talk of their being connected with his wisdom,
or of their being to be absorbed in his wisdom, if there were no such
qualities, or attributes; and since, as Lord Bolingbroke himself
elsewhere acknowledgeth, we must speak of God after the manner of
men,§ if we speak of these qualities at all, we must speak of them as
distinct attributes.
Let us now consider our author's objections.
1. He urges, that " the moral as well as physical attributes of
God can only be known a posteriori. They must be discerned in the
works of God, and in the conduct of Providence. And it is evident
they are not, cannot be so discerned in them, as to be the objecls
of our imitation.|| Every thing shows the power and wisdom of
God, conformably to our ideas of wisdom and power in the physical
world and in the moral ; but every thing does not show in like
manner the justice and goodness of God, conformably to our ideas
* Works, vol. v. p. 453 t Ibid. p. 5. f Ibid, vol iii p 53
<* Ibid. vol. v. p. 468. || Ibid. p. 63.

Let. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 319
of these attributes in either.* None of the phenomena can be
strained into a repugnancy to the divine wisdom; but it cannot be
disputed, that many of them are repugnant to our ideas of goodness
and justice."t Some other passages to the same purpose were men
tioned above, which I need not here repeat. In opposition to this
it may be observed, that, as was before hinted, the characters of
goodness and benignity are conspicuous in the constitution of things,
as well as of wisdom and power. And if there are several particular
phsenomena not conformable to our ideas of goodness and righteous
ness, there are also several appearances not conformable to our ideas
of wisdom, and the reasons and designs of which do not appear. It
is well known, that many are the objections which the atheists have
made against the wisdom of God, as appearing in the constitution
both of the natural and moral world. It is his own observation,
that " we must be prepared to meet with several appearances which
we cannot explain, nor therefore reconcile to the ideas we endea
vour to form of the divine perfection. If it be true, that infinite
wisdom and power created and govern the universe, it cannot but
follow, that some ofthe phsenomena may be proportionable, and that
others must be disproportionable to our and to every other finite
understanding."*!: He very properly exposes the absurdity of the
atheists in arguing against the existence; attributes, and providence
of God, from the difficulties relating to them ; and observes, that
" these difficulties do not embarrass the theist — and instead of being
surprised to find them, he would be surprised not to find them 
That there must be many phsenomena both physical and moral, for
which he can, and for which he cannot account — And that there are
secrets of the divine nature and economy which human reason can
not penetrate."§ The difficulties therefore relating to the divine
goodness are no reason for not acknowledging that goodness, any
more than the difficulties relating to the divine wisdom are a good
reason against acknowledging the wisdom of God. We may here
apply his own way of arguing. " The power of executing," says he,
" is seen in every instance ; and though we cannot discern the wis
dom of contrivance and direction in every instance, yet we see them
in so many, that it becomes the highest absurdity not to acknow
ledge them in all." And he takes notice of the folly of atheists in
objecting against it, whereby they only show their own ignorance.
He adds, that " the wisdom of God is not so often discernible by us
as the power of God, nor the goodness as the wisdom. But a mul
titude of the ph.3enomena being conformable to our ideas of goodness,
we may reason about it as we did just now about the divine wis
dom ;''|| i. e. that though we cannot discern the goodness of God
according to our ideas in every thing, yet we see it in so many, that
it would be the highest absurdity not to acknowledge it in all ; where
he seems to me plainly to give up the point, and to assert, that we
ought to acknowledge the goodness of God, even according to our
» Works, vol. v. p. 311. t Ibid. p. 368. \ Ibid. p. 365.
§ Ibid. vol. iii. p. 186, 187. || Ibid. vol. v. p. 335.

320 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIII,
ideas of goodness, as well as his wisdom, to be an attribute belong
ing to the Supreme Being; and that this may be justly argued from
his works.
But let us proceed to consider some other of his objections.
He argues against ascribing moral attributes, or the excellencies
of our nature to God, because we cannot ascribe to him fortitude
and temperance. He asketh," How can we deduce fortitude from
the attributes of God, or ascribe this virtue to him, who can endure
no pain, nor be exposed to any danger ? How temperance, when
it would be the most horrid blasphemy to suppose him subject to
any human appetites and passions, and much more to some so inor
dinate as to require a particular virtue to restrain and govern them '!
I might bring many more instances of the same kind. But he who
will not he convinced by these, how absurdly the laws of nature are
founded by some writers in the moral attributes of God, will be
convinced by none.''* He seems to have a good opinion of this way
of arguing, for he urges it more than once.t But though fortitude,
as it signifies a bearing up under evils and sufferings, and tempe
rance, as it signifies the restraining and governing the appetites and
passions, cannot be properly ascribed to God, because they neces
sarily connote the being liable to evils and imperfections, it doth not
follow, that therefore righteousness and goodness, and universal bene
volence, which imply no such imperfection, and are the noblest ex
cellencies of an intelligent nature that we can possibly conceive, may
not be applied to the supreme and absolutely-perfect Being ; and as
to fortitude and temperance, though they cannot be properly as
cribed to God, no more than piety and submission and resignation
to the divine will, which are eminent human virtues, yet they are the
objects of the divine approbation, and our obligation to them may
be justly argued and deduced from God's moral attributes, from his
holiness and the rectitude of his nature, which causeth him to de
light in moral beauty and order, and to require that his reasonable
creatures should act in a manner becoming the excellent faculties he
hath given them; and that they should maintain that temper and
conduct which tendeth to the true perfection and happiness of their
natures, which these virtues manifestly do.
He farther objects, that " our ideas of the divine attributes must
necessarily be inadequate, both on account of the infinite distance
between the divine and human nature, and on account of the num
berless and to us unknown relations, respectively to all which the
divine providence acts ; which, if we did know them, we should be
unable to compare, and in which, therefore, the harmony of the
divine perfections would not be discernible by us— That therefore we
are very incompetent judges of the moral attributes of God, and of
what they require God should do in the government of the world —
Nor can we make any true judgment, or argue with any certainty
about them," as he endeavours to prove from the authority of St.
Paul, and Dr. Barrow.t This only proves what will be easily al-
• Works, vol. v. p. 90. t ^id. p. 311. J Ibid. p. 359, i'62.

Let. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 321
lowed, that we cannot comprehend or see the whole extent of the
divine proceedings ; and that he may in many cases have reasons
for his proceedings which we are not acquainted with ; but does not
prove, that there is no such thing as goodness or righteousness in
God, according to our ideas of them, nor any thing equivalent to
them ; or that we can in no case argue from what his goodness and
righteousness require, nor judge of the equity of his proceedings.
Although the Scriptures often speak of God's ways of providence as
above human comprehension, yet they also represent him as some
times appealing to men themselves concerning the equity of his pro
ceedings. Our author indeed represents this as an absurdity, but
he does not prove it so, or show that there is any thing in it unwor
thy of the most wise and righteous and benevolent Governor of the
world. Will it follow, that because there are some difficult cases
concerning which we cannot judge, that therefore we cannot judge
in any case at all ? We may in some cases safely argue from our
ideas of the divine goodness and justice; e. g. that he will order it
so, that a remarkable difference shall be made upon the whole be
tween good and bad men ; and that virtue shall be rewarded, and
vice and wickedness punished. Will any man say, that we cannot
safely conclude from the goodness and justice of the Supreme Being,
that he will not suffer or appoint an innocent creature to be eter
nally miserable ? He observes, speaking of God's knowledge, power,
and wisdom, that " though we cannot frame full and adequate ideas
of them, it will not follow that we have, properly speaking, no know
ledge at all of his attributes, nor of the manner in which they are
exercised — That our ideas of divine intelligence and wisdom may be
neither fantastic nor false, and yet God's manner of knowing may
be very different from ours,"* In like manner it may be said, con
cerning God's moral attributes, his justice and goodness, that though
we cannot frame full and adequate ideas of them, it will not follow
that we have, properly speaking, no knowledge of them at all, and
of the manner in which they are exercised. Our ideas of them are
neither false nor fantastic, though in many instances they may be
exercised in a way different from our apprehension. To this may
be applied what lie saith against Archbishop King, that " though
we have not a direct knowledge of the nature of God by archetypal
ideas, yet we are not reduced to know nothing of him except by
analogy. It is a real knowledge, and may be said to be direct, if
we may be allowed to call any knowledge by demonstration
direct, "t
Another argument urged by this writer, to show that the divines are
in the wrong to talk of God's infinite goodness and justice as of his
wisdom and power, is this : that " the latter preserve their nature
without any conceivable bounds, and the former must cease to be
what they are, unless we conceive them bounded. Their nature im
plies necessarily a limitation in the exercise of them.":)" In answer
to this, it may be observed, that God's wisdom and power, consi-
* Works, vol. v. p. 524, 525. t 'bid. p. 539. X Ibid. p. 528.
Y

322 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIII.
dered in themselves, and as they are in God, are infinite; so also
are his goodness and justice ; biit considered relatively in the exer
cise of them as terminated in the creature, the one may be said to
be limited as well as the other ; i. e. the effects of neither of them
are properly infinite. Infinite power and wisdom, as exercised on
the creature, produce finite and limited effects; so doth infinite
goodness and justice; but still considered as qualities and attri
butes of the divine essence, they are infinite, of an eminent and
transcendent nature, and would be really in God, though there were
no creature formed. He did not begin to be good when the crea
tures began to exist, though then the exercise of goodness, under
the direction of his wisdom, respecting the creatures, began.
His other objections proceed all upon a gross misrepresentation
of the sentiments of those whom he hath thought fit to oppose. He
chargeth Dr. Clarke with asserting, that justice and goodness, and
the rest of the moral attributes, are in God just what they are in
our imperfect, unsteady, complex ideas; and that the rule according to
which God exerciseth those attributes, viz. the nature and reason of
things, is obvious to the understanding of all intelligent beings.*
This is not true, if understood of the whole nature and reason of
things in all its vast extent; nor has that learned divine any where
asserted that it is so.
Again, he represents the divines as asserting, that " the will of
God is not determined by the harmonious concurrence of all his
attributes," and that " his goodness and justice do not act in a con
currence with his wisdom."f He charges them with maintaining,
that " goodness in God is the only directing and governing principle,
and not wisdom ; and that wisdom ought to contrive, and power to
execute, under this direction." And he argues, that " if it were so,
the happiness of man ought to be proportionable to the goodness of
God, that is, infinite." And in opposition to this he asserts, that
" wisdom ought to be deemed the directing principle of divine
conduct.""}; Nor will any divine deny that wisdom is the directing
principle. They all plead for the harmonious concurrence of the
divine attributes, though they are not for confounding those attii-
butes. Goodness in God is not to be regarded as a blind
instinct, which necessarily acteth at all times, and in every
instance, to the utmost extent of its capacity, and to the highest
possible degree ; but as a most wise goodness, that is, a goodness
which is always in conjunction with, and under the direction of,
infinite wisdom. For goodness without distinction or discernment
could scarce be accounted a virtue or a perfection. Such a notion
of the divine goodness would be dishonourable to God, and of ill
consequence to the interests of religion and virtue in the world. But
his goodness is that of a most holy and understanding mind,
and is always exercised in such a way as seemeth most fit to his
infinite wisdom, which govemeth the outward effects of it, and
appointeth when, where, and how, it shall be communicated. We
are not merely to fix our views on goodness and benevolence, in
"Works, vol. v. p. 252. t Ibid. p. 313. 312. X Ibid. p. 341.

Let. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 32j
considering what God may do or may not do with regard to the hap
piness of his creatures ; but to take in every consideration, that of
his wisdom, his justice, his holiness, and righteousness, and the
majesty of his government.
He frequently accuses the divines, and even the ancient theists,
for supposing that God made man for this end, to communicate
happiness to him. But then, that he may more effectually expose
this notion, he claps in the word only, as if they maintained, that
God had no other end in view in creating man, but to make him
happy to the utmost possible degree, to give him an happiness with
out allay, as he expresseth it, and to make him not only moderately,
but immoderately happy in the world.* It is thus that he thinks
fit to represent their sense : and he says, " this is an hypothesis
which the phenomena contradict."t But though it cannot reasonably
be denied, that, according to the best conceptions we can form, one
principal motive in God's making reasonable beings was to commu
nicate happiness to them, yet I think we do not know enough of
God, nor have a sufficiently comprehensive view of things, and of
the reasons an infinite mind might have for his proceedings, to pro
nounce confidently, that he had, and could have no other reason or
motive. It may well be supposed, that in bringing this vast uni
verse and the various orders of beings in it into existence, he had in
view the exercise and display of his own glorious perfections, not
merely of any one, but of all his perfections, his majesty and great
ness, his wisdom, power, holiness, and goodness, in conjunction.
This is an end worthy of God, as far as he can be said to propose an
end to himself. And when it is said, that he made his reasonable
creatures with a design to communicate happiness to them, it must
be understood thus : That he had it in view to make them happy,
in such a way, in such measures and degrees, in such times, seasons,
and proportions, as should seem fit to his infinite wisdom, and
should be most worthy of them, and becoming his own glorious per
fections. His end in creating them was not absolutely to make
every individual of them happy at all events, however they should
behave ; but conditionally to make them happy in the right use and
improvement of their own powers, and in such a way as is consis
tent with moral agency and government, and becoming his own in
finite wisdom, goodness, righteousness, and purity.
It is farther with a view to expose the doctrine of the divines
relating to the goodness of God, that he represents it as their gene
ral sentiment, that all things were made merely for the sake of man ;
that this vast universal system was formed for him alone : and he sets
himself to shew, as he might easily do, the absurdity of supposing
the whole universe to have been made merely for some minute
part of it. % This particularly is the subject of the 45th and 46th
of his fragments and essays. But it is observable, that he himself,
after having abused the divines for supposing that God made man
to communicate happiness to him, expressly asserts, that " God has
* Works, vol. v. p. 34.5. 392. 421. t Ibid. p. 315. } Ibid. p. 330,
V ¦">

324 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIII,
made us happy, and has put it into our power to make ourselves
happier, by a due use of our reason, which leads us into the practice
of moral virtue, and all the duties of society."* "That we are
obliged to our Creator for a certain rule, and sufficient means of
arriving at happiness, and have none to blame but ourselves
when we fail of it."t " That God made us to be happy here. He may
make us happier in another system of being. That there is even in
this world much more good than evil, and the present state of man
kind is happy in it." "f " And that the end of the 'human state is
human happiness." §
You are, I doubt not, by this time prepared for what I proposed
to show in the last place, the contradictions and inconsistencies our
author has fallen into in treating of this subject. I suppose vou to
bear in mind the severe censures he hath passed upon the divines for
pretending to connect the physical and moral attributes of God and
for ascribing to him moral attributes, justice and goodness, accordinc
to our ideas. And now I desire you to compare the passages already
produced with those that follow.
God shows us our duty, " by which we stand in the relation of
subjects and servants to a gracious and beneficent Lord and Master
who gave us laws neither captious nor ambiguous, and who commands
us nothing which it is not our interest to perfbrm."|| He here sup
poses it to be a thing evident from the law of nature, that we stand
in relation to God as our gracious and beneficent Lord and Master
who has our interest and happiness in view in the very laws he
enjoins. And is not this plainly to ascribe goodness to him, even
according to our ideas of goodness? And elsewhere he represents
it, as if he could not ask more of a beneficent Creator than he has
done for us. f He says, " the theist acknowledges whatever God
has done to be just and good in itself, though it doth not appear
such in every instance, conformably to his ideas of justice and o-ood-
ness. He imputes the difference to the defect of his ideas, and not
to any defect of the divine attributes. Where he sees them, he
owns them explicitly ; where he does not see them, he pronounces
nothing about them. He is as far from denying them" (that is,
from denying the justice and goodness of God), " as he is from
denying the wisdom and power of God."** The most orthodox
divine could hardly express himself more fully on this head than
Lord Bolingbroke has here done. To the same purpose he intro
duces a meditation or soliloquy of a sincere and devout theist in
which he represents him as saying, among other things " Man
enjoys numberless benefits by the fitness of his nature to° this con
stitution, unasked, unmerited, freely bestowed. The wisdom and
goodness of God are therefore manifest. May I enjoy thankfully the
benefits bestowed on me by the divine liberality; may I receive the
evils to which I am exposed patiently, nay, willingly !"ff
But what deserves particularly to be remarked is, that whereas he
* W,?rlf,V01' £p* 384* * ir3''?;-?- 388;c, * Ibid' p' 391> 392' § ^id. p. 544.
Hid. p. 97. IT Ibid. p. 481. •* ]Did D 31, 010
t + Ibid. p. 338, 339-See, also 1. iii. p. 353 P' '

Let. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 325
represents the ascribing goodness and justice to God according to
our ideas, to be what gives great advantage to the atheists with re
gard to the original of evil ; as if he thought it impossible to reconcile
the evil that is in the world with God's moral attributes, and the sup
position of his being good and righteous and holy, as well as power
ful and wise ; he .has taken great pains to confute his own
arguments. For not a few of his fragments and essays in his fifth
volume are taken up in endeavouring to remove and answer that
objection, and to show that the evil there is in the present constitu
tion of things in this world, is reconcileable to the justice and
goodness of God, even according to the ideas we form of them.*
He undertakes to defend the goodness of God against the atheists
and divines.t And having, as he pretends, done this, he proceeds
to vindicate the justice and righteousness of God against the same
confederates.^. Thus the same author who had used his utmost
efforts to show, in opposition to the divines, that moral attributes,
particularly justice and goodness, ought not to be ascribed to God
according to the ideas we conceive of them, and that we cannot
form any judgment concerning them, takes upon him afterwards to
vindicate those very attributes against the divines, who, he pretends,
are for destroying them. So strangely inconsistent is this writer's
scheme, that on the one hand, With a view to invalidate the argu
ment for a state of future retributions drawn from the moral attri
butes of God, he endeavours to take away those attributes, or
confound them with the physical, and to show that there is no such
thing as goodness or justice in God according to our ideas, nor any
thing equivalent to them ; and that the phenomena are repugnant
to those attributes ; and on the other hand, with the same view of
weakening or destroying the argument for a future state from those
attributes, he sets himself to prove, that the present state of things
is sufficiently conformable to our ideas of the divine justice and good
ness, and that these attributes are so fully exercised or displayed
here, that there is no need for any further manifestation or display
of them hereafter.
I shall only produce one passage more, and it is a very remarkable
one. Towards the conclusion of his last volume, when he pretends
to draw a line of separation between natural and artificial theology,
he observes, that by that, viz. natural theology, " we are taught to
acknowledge and adore the infinite wisdom and power of God,
manifested in every part of his creation, and ascribe goodness and
justice to him wherever he intended that we should so ascribe them,
that is, wherever either his works, or the dispensations of his provi
dence, do as necessarily communicate these notions to our minds, as
those of wisdom and power are communicated to us in the whole
extent of both. Wherever they are not so communicated, we may
assume very reasonably, that it is on motives strictly conformable to
all the divine attributes, and therefore to goodness and justice, though
* See vol. y. frag. 45, 44, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54.
t Ibid. p. 335. X Ibid. p. 393.

326 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIII.
unknown to us, from whom so many circumstances, with a relation
to which the divine providence acts, must be often concealed ; or, we
may resolve all into the wisdom of God, and not presume to account
for them morally."* The last part of this passage hath a reference
to his scheme of resolving all into the divine wisdom. But you
cannot but observe here, that after his repeated invectives against
the divines, and against artificial theology, for ascribing moral attri
butes to God, justice and goodness, according to our ideas of them,
he has in effect here acknowledged all that the divines themselves
teach. They believe that God is always good and just, though they
do not pretend to account for the exercise of goodness and justice in
every particular instance ; but that enough we know to convince us
of both ; the notions of which, this writer himself here owns to be, in
many instances at least, necessarily communicated to us from his
works ; and surely then we should endeavour to resemble him in
these his moral perfections, as far as we know them.
Before I conclude this letter, I shall take some notice, because I
shall not afterwards have so proper an opportunity for it, of what he
hath observed concerning eternal ideas in God, and concerning the
eternal reasons and fitnesses of things.
He finds great fault with Dr. Cudworth, Dr. Clarke, and others,
for talking of ideas in God, as if they supposed his manner of know
ing to be exactly the same with ours ; which certainly was far from
their intention. He pronounces, that " the doctrine of eternal ideas
in the divine mind has been much abused by those who are in the
delirium of metaphysical theology. It cannot be understood in a
literal sense." And he thinks " such a way of talking is profane as
well as presumptuous; and that it is silly too, and mere cant."t
He has several observations, which are for the most part very just,
to show, that God's manner of knowing is very different from ours,
and that he does not know by the help or intervention of ideas as
we do.}. I need not take particular notice of those observations,
which contain little in them, that will not be acknowledged by those
whom he has thought to oppose. The rash and improper use ofthe
word ideas, as applied to God, hath no doubt led to mistakes, and
to wrong and unwarrantable ways of expression ; as any one must
be convinced that knows what contentions there have been in the
schools about the divine ideas, which have given rise to arrogant and
foolish questions, scarce consistent with the veneration that is due
to the supreme incomprehensible Being. Yet the modest use of
that expression is not to be too rigidly censured. Our author him
self, who blames it so much in others, hath on several occasions fal
len into the same manner of expression himself. Thus he observes,
that "it might be determined in the divine ideas, that there should
be a gradation of life and intellect throughout the universe :"§ and
he repeats it again, "that this appeared necessary or fit in the
divine ideas, that is, to speak more rationally, to the supreme divine
reason or intention."!! Where he useth the term divine ideas as
* Works, vol. v. p. 517. | Ibid. vol. iii. p. 356.
t Ibid. p. 355—357. vol. v. p. 35—38. * Ibid vol v i> 337
|| Ibid. p. 365. " ' '

Let. XXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 327
equivalent to the divine reason, and intention, though ho thinks the
latter more proper. He elsewhere declares, that " the ideas of God,
if we may ascribe ideas to him, no more than his ways, are those of
man."* And in one of his most celebrated pieces, published in his
own lifetime, he saith, that " God in his eternal ideas, for we are
able to conceive no other manner of knowing, has prescribed to him
self that rule by which he governs the universe he created."f Here
he not only ascribes ideas to God, but eternal ideas, by which God
hath prescribed to himself a rule for his governing the world. This
rule he there explaineth to be " a fitness arising from the various
natures, and more various relations of things, in the system which
he hath constituted ;" which fitness he there supposeth to have been
known to God in his eternal ideas. And yet he hath frequently
inveighed against Dr. Clarke, for speaking of the eternal reasons
and relations of things. This particularly is the subject of the
second, fifty-eighth, and fifty-ninth of his fragments and essays in
the fifth volume of his works. He treats that learned divine as if
he maintained, that these reasons and fitnesses of things were real
natures, existing independently of God, and co-eternal with him ;
and yet he himself, speaking of Dr. Cudworth and others, observeth,
that when they talk of eternal ideas and essences independent on the
will of God, "they do not mean by these eternal independent
natures, any natures at all, but such intelligible essences and rationes
of things, as are objects of the mind."} And it is his own observa
tion, that " God knew from all eternity every system that he created
in time — the relations things should bear — and the proportions they
should have ;"§ and that " to the divine omniscience the future is like
the present;" and therefore he thinks it improper to talk of prescience
in God. He represents it as " a great truth, that the whole series
of things is at all times actually present to the divine mind, so that
we may say properly, that God knows things, because they are
actual to him." H According to his own representation therefore it
may be justly said, that all the fitnesses and relations of things were
from the beginning actually present to the divine mind. And he
accordingly declares, that God was determined by his infinite wisdom to
proceed with his creatures in all the exertions ot his power, according to
the fitness of things ;f or in other words, as he elsewhere expresseth
it, God does not govern by mere arbitrary will, but always does that
which is fittest to be done ; and which he from all eternity saw would
be fittest to be done. And this seems to be all that is really
intended by those who speak of the eternal reasons and fitnesses of
things. Whether therefore the manner of expression be strictly
proper or not, this writer had no right to pass so severe a censure
upon it as he has done, since it comes so near to his own.
But I believe you will think it is time to quit this subject, and
pass on to some other things in Lord Bolingbroke's works, which
* Works, vol. v. p. 344. t Idea of a Patriot King, in vol.t.iii. of his Works, p. 53.
X Works, p. 15. § Ibid. p. 7.
|| Ibid. vol. v.. p. 457, 458. f Ibid. p. 435.

328 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIV.
which will dese
I am yours, &c

relate to things of no small importance, and which will deserve a
particular consideration.

LETTER XXIV.

The Doctrine of Divine Providence nearly connected with that of the Existence of
God. — Lord Bolingbroke's Account of it considered. — He acknowledges a general
but denies a particular Providence, and asserts, that Providence relates only to col
lective Bodies, but doth not extend to Individuals. — The true Notion of Providence
stated.— What we are to understand by a particular Providence. — The Reasonable
ness of believing it, and the great Importance of it shown  The contrary Scheme is
absurd, and inconsistent with itself, and of the worst Consequence to Mankind. 
The Objections against a particular Providence examined.— Concerning occasional
Interpositions  They are not properly miraculous, nor Deviations from the general
Laws of Providence, but Applications of those Laws to particular Cases  To
acknowledge such Interpositions is not to suppose the World governed by Miracles,
nor to introduce an universal Theocracy like the Jewish. — Angels may be employed
in particular Cases as Ministers of Providence.
Sir,
The doctrine of divine providence hath a very near connexion
with that of the existence of the Deity, and is no less necessary to
be believed. To acknowledge a God that brought all things into
existence, and yet to deny that he afterwards taketh care of the
creatures he hath made, or that he exerciseth any inspection over
them, as a moral governor, or concerneth himself about their actions,
and the events relating to them, is, with regard to all the purposes
of religion, the same thing as not to acknowledge a God at all. It
is one great excellence of the holy Scriptures of the Old and New
Testament, that they every where teach us to have a constant regard
to the divine providence, as presiding over the universal system, and
all the orders of beings in it, and as in a particular manner exercising
a continual care and inspection towards mankind, observing all their
actions, and ordering and disposing the events relating to them with
infinite wisdom, righteousness, and goodness. But this doctrine of
providence, which, one should think, ought mightily to recommend
the Scriptures to every good mind, seems to have been one principal
ground of the prejudices which Lord Bolingbroke hath conceived
against those sacred writings. It is true, that he frequently affecteth
to show a zeal for divine providence ; he sets up as an advocate for
its proceedings against the divines, who, he pretends, join with the
atheists in misrepresenting and opposing it. But if his scheme be
narrowly examined, it will appear, that, notwithstanding his fair
pretences, he doth not acknowledge a providence in that sense in
which it is most useful and necessary to believe it.
He declares, that " in asserting the justice of providence, he has

Let. XXIV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 320
chosen rather to insist on the most visible and undeniable course of
a general providence, than to assume a dispensation of particular
providences."* He observes, that " the world is governed by laws,
which the Creator imposed on the physical and moral systems,
when he willed them into existence, and which must be in force as
long as they last ; and any change in which would be a change in
the systems themselves. These laws are invariable, but they are
general, and from this generality what we call contingencies arise."-f-
" The course of things rolls on through a vast variety of contingent
events ; for such they are to our apprehension ; according to the
first impressions of motion that were given it by the first Mover, and
under the direction of an universal providence. "J "As to
the brute animals, they are left under the direction of instinct ;
and as to men, God has given his human creatures the materials
of physical and moral happiness, in the physical and moral
constitution of things. He has given them faculties and
powers, necessary to collect and apply these materials, and to carry
on the work— this the Creator has done for us. What we shall do
for ourselves, he has left to the freedom of our elections. This is
the plan of divine wisdom ; and we know nothing more particular,
and indeed nothing more at all, of the dispensations of providence
than this."§ This then is all the part he allows to providence in the
moral world, that God has given man reason, and, as he elsewhere
observes, passion,|| and has left him to the freedom of his own will,
without ever concerning himself farther about the individuals
of the human race, or exercising any inspection over men's moral
conduct, in order to the rewarding the good, or punishing the bad.
That this is his intention is manifest, by comparing this with other
passages. He expressly declares, that " it is plain from the whole
course of God's providence, that he regards his human creatures
collectively, not individually, how worthy soever every one of them
deems himself to be a particular object ofthe divine care. "11 This,
of God's regarding men collectively, not individually, is what he
frequently repeats; and it appears to be a principal point in his
scheme. With the same view he declares, that the sanctions of the
law of nature relate not to individuals, but to collective bodies.**
He finds fault with the notion, which, he says, obtained among the
heathens, " that God was constantly attentive to the affairs of
men."t-|- And he asserts, that " God may foresee, or rather see, all
the most contingent events that happen in the course of his general
providence ; but not provide for particular cases, nor determine the
existence of particular men.""|;^ He observes, that " the divine pro
vidence has provided means to punish individuals, by directing men
to form societies, and to establish laws, in the execution of which
civil magistrates are the vicegerents of providence ; and when the
immorality of individuals becomes that of a whole society, then the
* Works, vol. v. p. 414. t Ibid. p. 416. X Ibid. p. 379.
$ Ibid. p. 473, 474. || Ibid. p. 417. It Ibid. p. 431.
11 * Ibid. p. 90. tt Ibid. p. 211. tl Ibid. p. 462.

330 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIV.
judgments of God follow, and men are punished collectively in the
course of a general providence." So that he allows no punishments
bv providence for individuals, but those which are executed by the
civil magistrates. And if a man can escape punishment from them,
he has nothing to fear from God, except the whole community be as
bad as himself ; and even then the punishment may not happen in
that or the next age, till he shall be no more.
Our author indeed sometimes declares, that " he neither affirms
nor denies particular providences."* And after having observed,
that there is little credit to be given to the reports concerning par
ticular acts of providence, wrought on particular occasions, he acids,
that " yet he will not presume to deny, that there have been any
such."f He makes the same declaration afterwards towards the end
of his book4 But notwithstanding these professions, it is a point
that he hath very much laboured to destroy, the belief of a
particular providence. This is the express design of several of
his Fragments and Essays in the fifth volume of his works;
especially of the fifty-fifth, fifty-sixth, fifty-seventh, sixty-second,
and sixty-fourth, of those Essays ; in all which he argues
directly, and in some of them largely, against that doctrine. And
after having observed, that what we find in the book qf nature is
undoubtedly the word of God, he asserts, that " there we shall find
no foundation for the scheme of a particular providence."^ He
declares indeed, " that he will not be so uncharitable as to say, that
divines mean to blaspheme [in their doctrines of a particular provi
dence]," yet that this he will take upon him to say, that he " who
follows them cannot avoid presumption and profaneness, and must
be much on his guard against blasphemy."!
That I may observe some order in my reflections upon this subject,
I shall first offer some observations for stating the right notion of
divine providence, and what we are to understand by a particular
providence ; and then shall proceed to show the absurdity and ill
consequences of the author's scheme ; and lastly, consider the argu
ments he hath urged in support of it, and the objections he hath
made against the doctrine of a particular providence.
By the doctrine of providence I understand the doctrine of an all-
perfect mind, preserving and governing the vast universe in all its
parts, presiding over all the creatures, especially rational moral
agents, inspecting their conduct, and superintending and ordering
the events relating to them, in the best and fittest manner, with in
finite wisdom, righteousness, and equity. And such a providence
cannot reasonably be denied by those, who believe that the world
was originally formed by a most wise and powerful and infinitely
perfect Cause and Author ; for whatever reasons induced him to
create the world, which may be justly supposed to have been for
the communication of his goodness, and for the joint exercise and
display of his glorious attributes and perfections, must equally dis
pose him to take care of it, and govern it, when made. Accord-
* Woiks, vol. v. p. 413, 4*4. t Ibid. p. 420. f Ibid 510
<* Ibid. p. 471. || Ibid. p. 401.

Let. XXIV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 331
ingly the Epicureans and others who denied a providence, did also
deny that the world was made by God, and attributed the formation
of it, not to the wisdom, the power, and will of an intelligent cause,
but to a wild chance, or fortuitous concourse of atoms, or to an
equally blind fatal necessity. And so far their scheme, however
false and absurd, was consistent with itself. For they could find
no effectual way to exclude God from the government of the world,
which was what they wanted to get rid of, but by excluding him
from the making of it too. Supposing one supreme absolutely-
perfect Cause and Author of all things, who made this vast uni
verse, and all the orders of beings in it, which is what Lord Boling
broke not only allows, but expressly asserts, it follows by the most
evident consequence, that the same infinite power, wisdom, and
goodness, which gave existence to the world and all things in it,
still presideth over the universal frame in all its parts. The beau
tiful and constant order which is still maintained in the inanimate
material system, plainly sheweth, that this stupendous frame of na
ture, consisting of such an inconceivable variety of parts, is under
the constant superintendence of a most wise and powerful presiding
mind, ever present to his own work. But the providence of God
is especially to be considered as exercised towards reasonable crea
tures, moral agents, which are undoubtedly the noblest and most
excellent of his creatures. The material system, whatever order or
beauty appeareth in it, is not itself conscious of that beauty and
order. Nor are mere sensitive beings capable of making proper re
flections upon it, or of admiring, adoring, obeying the great Parent
of the universe. This is the sole privilege of rational intelligent
beings. If therefore the providence of God extendeth to any of his
creatures at all, we may be sure that he exerciseth a special care
over his reasonable creatures ; and since he hath given them such
noble faculties and moral powers, will govern them in a way suitable
to those faculties and powers. And this certainly is the most ad
mirable part of the divine administration in the government of the
universe. For to govern numberless myriads of active intelligent
beings, in their several orders and degrees, each of whom have a
will and choice of their own, and a power of determining their own
actions ; to exercise a constant superintendency over them, and to
order the events relating to them, and to dispense to them proper
retributions, not only according to their outward actions, but the
inward dispositions and principles from which those actions flow ; I
say, thus to govern them, without infringing the liberty which be-
longeth to them as moral agents, must needs argue a wisdom as
well as power that exceedeth our comprehension. Yet who will
undertake to prove that this is impossible, or even difficult, to an
infinite, all-comprehending mind ? We may reasonably conceive
that that immense Being, whose essence possesseth every part of
this vast universe, is present to every individual of the human race.
And if- that most wise, holy, and absolutely-perfect Being, the Great
Governor ofthe world, be always present to every individual of the
human race, then every individual, and all their particular actions,

332 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIV.
cases, and circumstances, must be under his providential inspection
and superintendency. And as he knoweth all these things when
they actually happen, so he, to whom, by our author's own ac
knowledgment, future things are as if they were present, saw them
before they came to pass. And therefore it was not difficult for
him to form such a comprehensive scheme of things in his infinite
mind, as should extend to all their particular cases, and the events
relating to them, in a manner perfectly consistent with the exercise
of their reasonable moral powers, and the use of their own en
deavours. And now it appears what is to be understood by the doctrine of
a particular providence. It signifies, that Providence extends its
care to the particulars or individuals of the human race, which is
what this writer denies : that God exerciseth a continual inspection
over them, and knoweth and observeth both the good and evil ac
tions they perform, and even the most secret affections and disposi
tions of their hearts : that he observeth them not merely as an
unconcerned spectator, who is perfectly indifferent about them, but
as the supreme ruler and judge, so as to govern them with infinite
wisdom, in a way consistent with their moral agency, and to reward
or punish them in the properest manner, and in the fittest season.
And as all their actions, so the events which befall them, are under
his supreme direction and superintendency. Particular events are,
in the ordinary course of things, ordered in such a manner, as is
subordinate to the general laws of providence relating to the physi
cal and moral world. And what are usually called occasional in
terpositions, are properly to be considered as applications of general
laws to particular eases and occasions. They make a part of the
universal plan of providence, and are appointed and provided for in
it, as having been perfectly foreseen from the beginning, and origi
nally intended in the government of reasonable beings.
The doctrine of a particular providence taken in this view is of
vast consequence, and, if duly considered and believed, could scarce
fail to have a happy influence over our whole temper and deport
ment. How solicitous, how earnestly desirous should this make us
to approve ourselves to our supreme governor and judge, and to walk
always as in his sight! What an animating consideration is it,
when we set about the performance of a good action, to be assured,
that God in his holy providence observeth the good deed in every
circumstance, and is ready to assist and support us in it, and most
certainly will not suffer it to pass unrewarded ! On the other hand,
what an effectual restraint would it be to wicked actions, if we had
this thought strongly impressed upon our minds, that they are all
perfectly known in every circumstance to the most wise and righ
teous governor of the world ; and that if he should not at present
follow them with immediate punishment, yet the time is coming,
when he will call us to a strict account for them ! Finally, a firm
belief of a particular providence, as most wisely ordering and dis
posing the events relating to particular persons, is a source of satis
faction and comfort amidst all the uncertainties and fluctuations of

Let. XXIV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 333
this present world. No consideration is so well fitted to produce a
cheerful resignation, and an inward solid peace and joy of heart, as
this : that all things, all particular cases and circumstances, are
under the direction and government of the most perfect wisdom,
righteousness, and goodness ; and that nothing can befall us without
the direction or permission of the supreme disposer.
Nothing therefore could be worse founded than the boasts of the
Epicureans, who expected to be applauded as friends and benefac
tors to mankind, on the account of their endeavours to deliver them
from the apprehensions of a providence. This might indeed be
some relief to very bad men, and tend to make them easy in their
sins; but it was an attempt to rob good men of that which is the
chief support and comfort of their lives, and the most powerful en
couragement to the steady uniform practice of piety and virtue.
Lord Bolingbroke therefore was very ill employed, when he used
his utmost efforts to destroy the doctrine of providence, as extend
ing its care and inspection to individuals ; since without this, the
acknowledgment of what he calls a general providence would be of
no great advantage, and would be, with regard to all the purposes
of religion, little better than to deny that there is a providence
at all.
This leads me to what I proposed to show in the next place, viz.
the absurdity and the ill consequences of the scheme his Lordship
hath advanced.
It is an absurd and inconsistent scheme. He pretends to allow,
that God's providence extends to nations and large communities,
that it regards men collectively, but not individually. But it is
hard to conceive how a proper care could be taken of collective
bodies, if the individuals of which they were composed were abso
lutely neglected, and no regard had to them at all. A human go
vernment, that would have no regard to the cases of particular per
sons, to do them right or secure them from wrong, could scarce be
accounted a government. Besides it may be asked what his Lord
ship means by collective bodies. There was a time when men had
not yet formed themselves into political societies ; must it be said
that they were then not the objects of providence at all ? Or, will
it be allowed that providence extended its care to them whilst they
were only in families ? And how could families, either larger or
smaller, be taken care of, if the individuals, of which families con
sist, were neglected ? And when several families united together,
and formed larger communities, must it be said, that providence
quitted its care of the families to which it had extended before, and
confined its inspection to those larger communities ? And then it
might be enquired, how large must a community be, in order to its
being the proper object of divine providence ? Does providence
take notice of single cities, or smaller republics, or only of those
communities which are become so numerous as to be united into
large nations or empires ? It may be farther asked, in what sense
is it to be understood, that providence extends its care to collective
bodies ? All that he understands by it seems to be this : that " the

334 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIV.
course of things has been always the same ; that national virtue
and national vice have always produced national happiness or misery
in a due proportion, and are by consequence the great sanctions of
the law of nature."* The appointing this general constitution then
seems to be all the concern that he allows to divine providence with
regard to large communities or collective bodies ; and the only sanc
tions he allows of the law of nature (as I shall have occasion more
distinctly to show, when I come to consider the account he gives
of that law) are the public happiness or miseries of large societies or
nations ; and these are often some ages in operating. It frequently
happens, that nations and large communities continue for a consi
derable time in great outward prosperity, when there is little na
tional virtue remaining. And our author himself acknowledges,
that the motives drawn from the effects of virtue and vice on col
lective bodies, are "such as particular persons will be apt to think
do not concern them, because they consider themselves as indivi
duals, and catch at pleasure rather than happiness."f And as
nations are made up of families and smaller societies, if these be not
well constituted, as they cannot be where there is no sense of reli
gion, no fear of God, or regard to a providence as extending to indi
viduals, there cannot be much national order or virtue.
Lord Bolingbroke would, in my opinion, have been more consis
tent with himself, if he had absolutely denied that providence hath
any regard to mankind at al', than to pretend that it extends to
collective bodies, but not to individuals; for the same arguments,
which prove a providence as extending to mankind in general, do
also, if rightly considered, prove that it is exercised towards particu
lar persons, and extendeth to particular cases and circumstances.
This writer sets himself, as hath been already observed, with great
appearance of zeal, to vindicate the goodness and justice of divine
providence in its dispensations towards mankind, in opposition both
to atheists and divines. But how the justice and goodness of pro
vidence towards mankind can be vindicated, if no regard be had to
individuals, it is hard to see. He himself observes, that "justice
requires that punishments should be measured out in various de
grees and measures, according to the various circumstances of par
ticular cases, and in proportion to them.";]: And again he repeats
it, "that justice requires that rewards and punishments should be
measured out in every particular case, in proportion to the merit
and demerit of each individual."§ How then can he pretend to vin
dicate the justice of providence in this present state, when he makes
it essential to justice that regard should be had to the case of indi
viduals, and yet affirms that providence doth not consider men indi
vidually at all, but only collectively?
And as his scheme is absurd and inconsistent with itself, so it is
attended with the most pernicious consequences, which ou°-ht to
create a horror of it in every well-disposed mind. If providence
* Works, vol. v. p. 472. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 228. t Ibid, vol, v. p 494.
§ Ibid p. 495.

Let. XXIV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 335
hath no regard to individuals, there can be no sense of the divine
favour for good actions, no fear of the divine displeasure for evil
ones ; and, as will appear to be his Lordship's sentiment, no future
account to be apprehended. Thus every man is left to do what is
right in his own eyes, without the dread of a supreme Governor and
Judge. It is true, God hath established general laws at the begin
ning, but he concerneth himself no farther. And our author will
not allow that in these general laws, or the plan originally formed
in the divine mind, God had any regard unto, or made any provision
for, particular persons, actions, or events. Good men therefore
have no resource in their calamities ; no ground to apply to God for
support under them ; no expectation of assistance from him, or from
any other being acting under his direction, as the ministers and in
struments of his providence : they are deprived of the comforts
arising from a consciousness of his special approbation and compla
cency, and from the prospects of reward from him here or hereafter.
Thus hope is excluded, which, as his, Lordship observes, " above all
things softens the evils of this life, and is that cordial drop which
sweetens every bitter potion, even the last."* On the other hand,
wicked men have nothing to fear from God for their evil actions.
He says indeed, in a passage cited above, that " providence has pro
vided means to punish individuals, by directing men to form socie
ties, and to establish laws, in the execution of which civil magis
trates are the vicegerents of providence ;" but I do not see with
what propriety upon his scheme civil magistrates can be said to be
the vicegerents of providence ; for if providence doth not consider
men individually at all, how can magistrates, in punishing indivi
duals, be regarded as the vicegerents of providence? Or, if provi
dence constituted them its vicegerents, and there were no sanctions
at all proposed for particular persons but those of the civil laws, it
would follow, that men may be as wicked as they will, and give as
great a loose as they please to their appetites and passions, provided
they can manage so as to escape punishment from human judicato
ries, which a man may do, and yet be a very bad man. Human
magistrates are often themselves corrupt. Solomon's observation is
certainly j ust : / have seen the place of judgment, that wickedness was
there, and the place of righteousness, that iniquity was there, Eccl. iii.
16. Very unjust things are often done under colour of forms of
law. Or, suppose the laws good, and the magistrates just and up
right, no human laws can reward or punish inward good or bad
affections, intentions, and dispositions of the heart. If therefore
there were no regard to a supreme Governor or Judge, to the divine
approbation or displeasure, as extending to individuals, or to a
future account, there is great reason to think, that mankind in
general would be far more wicked and dissolute than they are. It
is his Lordship's observation, that "amidst the contingencies of
human affairs, the odds will always be on the side of appetite —
which reason cannot quite subdue in the strongest minds, and by
* Works, vol. v. p. 379.

336 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIV.
which she is perpetually subdued in the weakest."* And accord
ingly the ablest politicians have thought the aids of religion, which
especially includes a regard to providence as extending to indivi
duals, absolutely necessary for strengthening the bands of civil
government. I shall now consider the arguments Lord Bolingbroke hath
offered in support of his scheme, and the objections he hath ad
vanced against the doctrine of a particular providence.
He frequently intimates, that the doctrine of a particular provi
dence is needless ; " since the ordinary course of things, preserved
and conducted by a general providence, is sufficient to confirm what
the law of nature and reason teaches us."-]- But it appears from
what hath been already observed, that the doctrine of a general
providence, as he understands it, i. e. a providence that has no
regard to individuals at all, to their actions, or to the events that
befall them, is far from being sufficient to the purposes of religion
and virtue, or of human societies : that it neither furnisheth proper
comfort and supports for the encouragement of good men, nor is
sufficient to strike terror into bad men, and to be a restraint to vice
and wickedness. It hath also been shown, that the notion of a
general providence, as excluding all regard to individuals, and to
their actions and concernments, cannot be supported, nor made to
consist with reason or with itself. And whereas it is represented as
a degrading the divine Majesty, to suppose him to concern himself
about what relates to such inconsiderable beings, as are the indi
viduals of the human race : this objection, though varnished over
with a pretence of consulting God's honour, doth at the bottom
argue mean and unworthy notions of him. It is in effect a judging
of God by our own imperfections. Our views are narrow and
limited, and cannot take in many things at once, nor attend to
smaller matters without neglecting things of greater consequence :
but it is otherwise with a Being of infinite perfection, who is inti
mately present to every part of this vast universe, and knoweth and
taketh care of all things at once, with the same ease as if he had
only one single thing to attend to. He is capable of exercising a
most wise providential care towards all his creatures in a way suited
to their several natures, conditions, and circumstances : nor can the
multiplicity of things occasion the least confusion or perplexity in
his all-comprehending mind.
The arguments which he urgeth against a particular providence,
in the fifty-seventh of his Fragments and Essays, for several pages
together,*!" proceed upon a continued misrepresentation of the sense
of those whom he has thought fit to oppose. He there chargeth the
divines as maintaining, that God ought by particular providences to
interpose in every single instance, for giving an immediate reward
to every good action, and for punishing every evil one, even in this
present state. He supposes them also to hold, that some men are
necessarily determined to good actions by divine influences com-
* Works, vol. v. p. 479. t Ibid. p. 404. j Ibid. p. 424, & seq.

Let. XXIV. LORD BOLING-BROKE. 337
municated to them, and others for want of those influences un
avoidably determined to evil ; and then he argues, that on such a
supposition there would be no room for free choice, nor consequently
for virtue or vice, merit or demerit, nor therefore justice or injus
tice.* He urgeth further, that if good men were constantly and
remarkably distinguished by a particular providence, it would be
apt to produce presumption in them, to destroy or prevent their
benevolence, and consequently their goodness; and to harden the
wicked :f and that even on that supposition, the providence of
God could not be vindicated in the opinion of mankind, or of di
vines themselves, since still it would not be agreed who were good
men. The Mahometans, Christians, and different sects of the
latter, would insist upon it, that goodness includes a belief of their
distinguishing tenets, and an attachment to their several systems of
religion. " One would pass for a good man at Rome, another at
Geneva," &lc.% But he seems not to have considered, that upon
the supposition he puts, there could be no place for this objection :
since if every good man and good action was to be immediately and
remarkably distinguished by a particular interposition of divine
providence, and every bad man and evil action to be immediately
punished, there would be no room left for men's passing different
judgments concerning the goodness or badness of persons or actions;
for on that supposition, there would be a visible determination of
heaven in favour of every good man and good action ; so that no
man could doubt, upon seeing any person thus remarkably favour
ed and distinguished, that he was really good, whatever denomina
tion he might pass under. But the truth is, no divine ever ad
vanced such an hypothesis as he here argueth against. By the doc
trine of a particular providence, they do not mean a constant par
ticular interposition of divine providence for rewarding every good
man and virtuous action, and punishing every bad man and every
wicked action, in an immediate and visible manner .here on earth :
on the contrary, they universally maintain, that this present state
is a state of trial and discipline ; and that it would be no way agree
able to the nature of such a state to have all good men and good
actions immediately and remarkably rewarded, and all wicked men
immediately punished : that the temporary sufferings of good men,
and the prosperity of the wicked, are permitted for very wise ends,
and may be reasonably and consistently accounted for, on the sup
position that this present life is a state of trial ; though they could
not well be accounted for, if this were designed to be a state of final
retributions, or to be the only state of existence allotted us.
The greatest part of what he offers against a particular providence
in the sixty-second of his Fragments and Essays, relates to occa
sional interpositions, which he pretends would be miracles if they
were real. " Such," he says, " they would be strictly, whether
they were contrary to the established course of nature or not ; for
the miracle consists in the extraordinary interposition, as much as
* Works, vol. v. p. 425, 426. t Ibid. p. 428, 429. X Ibid. p. 431, 132.
7.

338 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIV.
in the nature ofthe thing brought to pass ; that the miracle would
be as real in the one case as in the other ; and the reality might be
made evident enough by the occasion, by the circumstance, by the
repetition of it on similar occasions, and in similar circumstances ;
and, above all, by this circumstance, that the assumed particular
providence was a direct answer to particular prayers and acts of de
votion offered up to procure it."* Here he takes upon him to give
a new and arbitrary definition of a miracle. Though a thing hath
nothing in it contrary to the established course of nature, yet it is to
be regarded as a miracle, if there be supposed to be any special
agency of the divine providence in it, suited to particular occasions
and circumstances; and, above all, if it be supposed to come in
answer to prayer. But if the occasional interpositions he refers to
be perfectly agreeable to the general laws of nature and of provi
dence, and be only special applications of general laws to particular
occasions, I do not see how they can be properly said to be miracu
lous at all; or how their being supposed to come in answer to
prayer can make them so.
But he urgeth farther, that " if providence were directed accord
ing to the particular desires, and even wants, of persons equally
well qualified and entitled to the divine favour, the whole order of
nature, physical and moral, would be subverted, the affairs of man
kind would fall into the utmost confusion — and if this scheme were
true, the world would be governed by miracles, till miracles lost
their name."-f'
But all this proceeds upon a great mistake of the point in ques
tion. None of the divines that hold a particular providence, i. e. a
providence which extendeth its care to particular persons or indi
viduals of the human race, maintain or suppose, that God must
interpose to satisfy all the different desires and prayers of men, many
of which, as he observes, are repugnant to one another. If the
prayers be of the right kind, such as reason and religion prescribe,
they must be always offered up with this condition or limitation,
which the Scripture expressly directs us to, viz. that we must desire
the things we pray for, so far and no farther than they are agreeable
to the divine will, and to what it seemeth fit to God in his infinite
wisdom to appoint. Supposing therefore a good man doth not
obtain the particular blessing he prays for, he may rest satisfied in
this, that it is what the divine wisdom doth not see fit to grant;
and he only desired it under that condition. Or if he receives that
particular good thing he prayed for, and regards it as an answer to
his prayer, still there is nothing miraculous in the case. There is
nothing done in contravention to the usual course of things which
the divine wisdom hath established. It may justly be supposed to
be a law of the moral world, that it is proper for us, in testimony of
our dependence upon God, and in acknowledgment of his provi
dence, to apply to him by prayer for the blessings we stand in need
of: and that prayer so qualified as God requireth, proceeding from
» Woiks, vol. v. p. 458, 459. t Ibid. p. 400.

Let. XXIV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 339
an honest and upright heart, and from good affections and inten
tions, and accompanied with the use of proper endeavours on our
parts, is among the means appointed by divine wisdom for obtain
ing the most valuable benefits, especially those of a spiritual nature.
And the blessings thus communicated may be justly said to be com
municated, not in a miraculous way, but in a way that is perfectly
agreeable to the general laws of providence, and the order which
the divine wisdom hath appointed. Any one that considers this
will easily see how little what our author has here offered is to the
purpose ; and yet he goes on to declaim after his manner, that par
ticular providence puts a force on the mechanical laws of nature,
and on the freedom of the will, in a multitude of instances ; and
that those who maintain this doctrine suppose, that the laws of
gravitation must be sometimes suspended, sometimes precipitated,
in compliance with men's desires, and the tottering edifice must be
kept miraculously from falling.*
Among the extraordinary interpositions of divine providence, he
reckons " the metaphysical or physical influence of spirits, sugges
tions, silent communications, injections of ideas. These things,"
he declares, " he cannot comprehend ; and he compares them
to the altering or suspending the course of the sun, or revolu
tions of the earth, in the physical system. And that all such in
terpositions in the intellectual system, as should give thoughts
and new dispositions to the minds of men, cannot be conceived
without altering in every such instance the natural progression
of the human understanding, and that freedom of the will which
every man is conscious that he has.''-f- Our author has here let us
know what he thinks of all revelations, inspirations, or communica
tions from God the Supreme Spirit, or from subordinate created
spirits, to the human mind ; that he regards them as inconsistent
with the laws of the intellectual system, and the natural progression
of the human understanding, or essential freedom of the will. But
whence could he know enough of the laws of the intellectual system,
to be able to pronounce that this is inconsistent with those laws ?
That one man may suggest or communicate thoughts and ideas to
another by words and language, and that there is nothing in this
contrary to the nature and order of the understanding, or freedom
of the will, is universally acknowledged : and why then should it be
thought inconsistent with these, for God himself, or spiritual beings
superior to man, to communicate thoughts or ideas to the human
mind ? The most natural way of working upon men as, reasonable
creatures, and of influencing their actions in a way agreeable to the
just order of their faculties, is by suggesting proper thoughts or
ideas to their minds, and our not being able particularly to explain
how this is done, is no just objection against it. This writer him
self elsewhere, speaking of that extraordinary action of God upon
the mind which the word Inspiration is now used to denote, expressly
acknowledges, that " it is no more incomprehensible than the ordi-
¦ "> Works, vol. v. p. 460. t Ibid p. 411, 415.

340 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIV.
nary action of mind On body, or body on mind."* And indeed it
cannot without the highest absurdity be denied, that God can work
upon the spirits of men by an immediate influence, and yet in such
a way as is perfectly agreeable to their rational natures, and which
may not put any constraint upon the freedom of their wills. And
many cases may be supposed, in which his doing so may answer
valuable ends. It may also be easily conceived, that he can make
impressions upon men's minds by various other means, which he
may make use of in his wise and sovereign providence to this pur
pose, without at all infringing the order of things in the natural or
moral world.
He farther argues, that to suppose a providence extending to
individuals, and particular occasional interpositions, "is to suppose
that there are as many providences as there are men ;" or, as he else
where expresseth it, that "common providence would break into a
multitude of particular providences for the supply of wants, and
grant of petitions.")"'' But there is no real foundation for this pre
tence. There is one universal providence, which may be considered
as extending to particular persons and cases, all of which are per
fectly known to God, and (as was before hinted), occasion no con
fusion or distraction in his infinite mind. Our author indeed
declares, that " they who have attempted to show that God may
act by particular and occasional interpositions, consistently with the
preservation of the general order, appear to him quite unintelligi
ble.""!: If it were so, our not being able distinctly to show how par
ticular occasional interpositions may consist with the doctrine of a
general providence, would be no argument at all against it; since, as
he himself observes upon another occasion, " It is impertinent to
deny the existence of any phenomenon, merely because we can
not account for it."§ And yet we may easily conceive in general,
that they are perfectly reconcileable, since, as hath been already
hinted, these occasional interpositions are usually no more than ihe
applications of the general laws of providence to particular cases
and circumstances. That there may be, or that there have been,
such interpositions, he does not pretend absolutely to deny ; but he
says, that "we have no foundation for them in our own experience,
or in any history except that of the Bible." || And yet soon after
observes, that " every religion boasts of many instances, wherein
the divine providence has been thus exercised. "H* And certain it
is, that this hath been the general sentiment of mankind. Besides
the ordinary course of things, which is to be regarded as under the
constant care and direction of a sovereign providence, there have
been events of a remarkable and uncommon nature, though not
properly miraculous, of which there are accounts in the most
authentic histories, and in which men have been apt to acknow
ledge a special interposition of divine providence. The most impor
tant events have been brought about by the seemingly smallest and
#* Works, vol. iii. p. 468. t Ibid. p. 420. J Ibid. p. 414. $ Ibid. p. 468.
|| Ibid. vol. v. p. 414. ^ Ibid. p. 413.

Let. XXIV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 341
most unlikely means. Things have been often strangely conducted
through many intricate turns to produce events contrary to all
human expectation. Actions have been over-ruled to effects and
issues quite opposite to the intentions of the actors. The most
artful schemes of human policy have been strangely baffled and
disappointed. Surprising changes have been wrought upon the
spirits of men, and restraints laid upon their passions, in a manner
that can scarce be accounted for, and upon which great events have
depended. Such things have naturally led mankind to acknowledge
a divine hand, and a providence, over-ruling human affairs. I am
sensible many of those who honour themselves with the title of
free-thinkers will be apt to ascribe this to superstition or enthusiasm.
But what right have they to pronounce against the general sentiments
of mankind, and which seem to have arisen from the observation of
events which argue the over-ruling interposition of a superior invi
sible agency?
He observes, with a sneer, that " there is many an old woman who
his ready to relate, with much spiritual pride, the particular provi
dences that attended her and hers."* As to the charge of spiritual
pride, it is no more than he hath advanced against all that believe
a particular providence, interesting itself in the affairs of men ; the
belief of which he imputeth to high notions qf human importance.
That he himself had high notions of his own sagacity cannot be
doubted ; but the sentiments he is pleased to ascribe to the old
woman, seem to me to be more reasonable, and would, if generally
entertained, have a much better influence on mankind than his
own. Is it not much better, and more agreeable to reason and
nature, for dependent creatures to regard the benefits they receive,
and the good events which befall them, as owing to the interposi
tion of a most wise and benign providence, and to acknowledge
with thankfulness the condescending care and goodness of God, in
such instances ; than to pass them over with a regardless eye,
from an apprehension that God doth not concern himself with the
affairs of men ; that he is utterly unmindful of individuals, and
taketh no notice of their actions, or of the events that relate to
them ? And this is the goodly scheme which this author hath
taken so much pains to establish.
But he urgeth, that it is of no use to acknowledge particular
interpositions of divine providence, since they cannot be distin
guished from events that happen in the course of God's general
providence. " The effects," saith he, '' that are assumed of parti
cular providences, are either false, or undistinguishable from those
of a general providence, and become particular by nothing more
than the application which vain superstition or pious fraud makes
of them."t And he observes, that this holds with respect to the
case not only of particular persons, but of collective bodies.
" Their circumstances are so nearly alike, and they return so often
to be equally objects of these supposed providences, that no man
* Bolingbroke's Works, vol. v. p. 418. t Ibid. p. 420. See also p. 450,

342 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIV.
will dare to determine where these providences have been, or should
have been employed, and where not."* It appears then, that though
he sometimes seems to acknowledge the care of divine provi
dence as extending to collective bodies, though not to individuals,
yet in reality he does not admit that providence interposes with
regard to the one more than the other ; or that in either case we can
justly ascribe any of the events that befall men, whether individually
or collectively considered, to divine providence ; since we cannot
discern or distinguish in what events providence has been employed,
and in what not. But the truth is, we need not be put to the diffi
culty of thus distinguishing, if we believe that providence is really
concerned in them all. It over-ruleth both the affairs and events
relating to nations and to particular persons, disposing and govern
ing them in the fittest manner, according to what seemeth most fit
to his infinite wisdom, to which all circumstances are perfectly
known. And even where the events seem contrary, prosperous to
one nation or particular person, adverse to another, providence is to
be regarded in both. For we can never err in judging that all
events whatsoever are under the wise direction and superintendency
of a sovereign providence, though, when we undertake to assign the
particular reasons of God's providential dispensations, we may easily
be mistaken.
Our author farther objecteth against the doctrine of a particular
providence, that it supposes all mankind to be under an universal
theocracy like the Jewish ; and he observes, that even in that case
it would not have the effect to engage men to virtue, or deter them
from vice and wickedness, any more than it did the Jews.t But
he here confoundeth things that are of distinct consideration. The
heathens, and all mankind in all ages, have been under the care and
superintendency of divine providence, and even of a particular pro
vidence, in the sense in which we are now considering it ; i. e. a
providence, which extendeth to the individuals of the human race,
inspecting their actions, and disposing and governing the events
relating to them. But they were not under the Jewish theocracy,
which was a peculiar constitution, established for very wise purposes,
the reasons and ends of which I shall afterwards have occasion more
particularly to consider. At present I shall only observe, that
though under that constitution we may justly suppose there were
extraordinary interpositions in a way of mercy and judgment, both
national, and relating to particular persons, more frequently than
there would have been under another constitution; yet the design of
it was not, as our author supposes, that providence should interpose
for giving a present immediate reward to every good man, and every
good action, and for immediately punishing every bad one. We
find frequent pathetical complaints even under that dispensation, of
the calamities and sufferings of good men, and the prosperity of the
wicked. This gave occasion to the 37th and 73d Psalms. See
- also Psalm xvii. 14. — Jer. xii. 1, 2. The proper ultimate reward of
» Works, vol. v. p. 460. t Ibid. p. 430.

Let. XXIV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 3-13
good men, and punishment of the wicked, was still reserved for a
future state of retributions, which, though not expressly mentioned
in their law, was believed and expected ; as appeareth from what
Solomon hath said concerning it, Eccles. iii. 16, 17. xii. 14.
I shall conclude this letter with taking notice of an observation of
our author, which is designed to take off the force of an argument
that Mr. WoUaston had offered. " It will be of little service," saith
he, " to the scheme of particular providences, to say, like WoUas
ton, that there may be incorporeal, or at least invisible beings, of intel
lect and powers superior to man, and capable of mighty things ; and
that these beings may be the ministers of God, and the authors of
those providences." He pretends, that there is no proof that there
are such beings ; and ridicules the doctrine of Genii or Daemons,
as having been " owing to ancient astrologers, and the knaves or
madmen that professed theurgic magic." And he argues, that "if
these angels act by the immediate command of God, it is in opposi
tion to his general providence, and to supply the defects of it; and
that it is to give up the government over mankind to those beings."*
But it is with an ill grace that this writer seems here to question the
existence of angels, when yet he frequently intimates, that there are
many orders of beings much superior to man, and that man is of
the lowest order of intellectual beings. He represents it as a thing
highly probable, that " there is a gradation from man through va
rious forms of sense, intelligence, and reason, up to beings unknown
to us, whose rank in the intellectual world is even above our con
ception.""!" And that " there may be as much difference between
some other creatures of God and man, as there is between man and
an oyster."J And if it be allowed, that there are created intelli
gences much superior to man, where is the absurdity of supposing
that they are employed by divine wisdom as the instruments and
agents of providence in its administrations towards the human race 1
Higher orders of creatures may, in the original plan of providence,
be designed to assist, and exercise some superintendency over the
lower. It may reasonably be conceived, that this may contribute to
promote the beauty and order of the universe, and to connect the
different orders of beings, and to carry on a proper intercourse be
tween them. It is certain, that the existence, and the interposition
of such beings on special occasions, have been generally believed by
mankind in all ages. And it is clearly determined in the revelation
contained in the holy Scripture ; so that it may be now assumed not
merely as a reasonable hypothesis, but as a truth that can be de
pended upon. Nor does the making use of angels as agents or in
struments in the administrations of providence argue any defect of
providence, as he is pleased to insinuate, which still oversees and
directs the whole. For when God makes use of instruments in the
course of his providence, it is not because, like human governors, he
is unable to do it immediately by himself, and cannot be personally
present : for he is still present to every part of the creation ; and all
* Works, vol. v. p. 403, 464. t Ibid. p. 320, 330. ' Ibid. vol. iv. p. 177.

3-14 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXV.
things are under his direction and superintendency. But he is
pleased to make use of some of his creatures as instruments in con
ferring benefits, or inflicting chastisements upon others, for the better
carrying on the order and economy of his kingdom, and for
many wise ends which we cannot pretend at present distinctly to
assign. In my next I shall consider what Lord Bolingbroke hath of
fered concerning the immortality of the soul, and a future state of
retributions, which will let us farther into the true intention of his
scheme. I am, &c.

LETTER XXV

Favourable Declarations of Lord Bolingbroke concerning the Immortality of the
Soul, and a future State.— He represents it as having been believed from the earliest
Antiquity, and acknowledges the great Usefulness of that doctrine. — Yet it appears
from many Passages in his Works,- that he himself was not for admitting it. — He
treats it as an Egyptian invention, taken up without Reason, a vulgar error, which
was rejected when Men began to examine. — He will not allow that the Soul is a spi
ritual Substance distinct from the Body, and pretends that all the Phenomena lead
us to think that the Soul dies with the Body  Reflections upon this. — The immate
riality of the Soul argued from its essential Properties, which are entirely different
from the Properties of Matter, and incompatible with them. — The Author's objec
tions answered. — Concerning the moral Argument for a future State drawn from the
unequal Distributions of this present State. — Lord Bolingbroke's Charge against this
Way of arguing, as blasphemous and injurious to divine Providence, considered.— His
great Inconsistency in setting up as an Advocate for the Goodness and Justice of
Providence — That Maxim, " Whatever [is, is best," examined.— If rightly under
stood, it is not inconsistent with the Belief of a future State.
Sir,
Having considered the attempt made by Lord Bolingbroke
against God's moral attributes, and against the doctrine of provi
dence, as exercising a care and inspection over the individuals ofthe
human race, I now come to another part of his -scheme, and which
seems to be designed to set aside the immortality of the soul, and a
future state of retributions. I join these together, because there is
a close connection between them, and his Lordship frequently repre
sents the one of these as the consequence of the other.
That I may make a fair representation of his sentiments, I shall
first produce those passages, in which he seems to express himself
very favourably with respect to the doctrine of a future state, and
then shall'compare them with other passages which have a contrary
aspect, that we may be the better able to form a just notion of his
real design.
He observes, that " the doctrine of the immortality of the soul,

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 345
and a future state of rewards and punishments, began to be taught
long before we have any light into antiquity ; and when we begin to
have any, we find it established :# That it was strongly inculcated
from time immemorial, and as early as the most ancient and learned
nations appear to us." And he expressly acknowledges the useful
ness of that doctrine to mankind, as well as its great antiquity. He
declares, that " the doctrine of future rewards and punishments,
which supposes the immortality of the soul, is no doubt a great
restraint to men."f That " it was invented by the ancient theists,
philosophers, and legislators, to give an additional strength to the
sanctions of the law of nature ; and that this motive every man
who believes it may and must apply to himself, and hope the
reward, and fear the punishment, for his secret as well as public
actions, nay, for his thoughts as well as his actions :"*(: That " the
greater part of the heathen philosophers did their utmost to encou
rage the belief of future rewards and punishments, that they might
allure men to virtue, and deter them from vice the more effectu
ally.'^ He observes, that " the hypothesis of a life after this,
served two purposes : The one was, that it furnished an answer to
the objections of the atheists with respect to the present unequal
distribution of good and evil." This seems unnecessary to him,
because he looks upon the accusation to be void of any foundation.
But the other purpose he says, "was no doubt very necessary, since
the belief of future rewards and punishments could not fail to have
some effect on the manners of men, to encourage virtue, and to
restrain vice." Accordingly he calls it " a doctrine useful to all
religions, and incorporated into all~*the systems of Paganism." ||
And he says, " the heathen legislators might have reason to add the
terrors of another life to that of the judgments of God, and the
laws of men. "IT
And as he owns, that this doctrine is very useful to mankind, so
he does not pretend positively to deny the truth of it. He intro
duces a plain man of common sound sense declaring his sentiments
upon this subject, and that though he could not affirm, he would
not deny the immortality of the soul ; and that there was nothing
to tempt him to deny it ; since whatever other worlds there may be,
the same God still governs ; and that he has no more to fear from
him in one world than in another : That, like the auditor in Tully's
first Tusculan disputation, he is .pleased with the prospect of immor
tality.** Again, he observes, that reason " will neither affirm nor
deny that there is a future state ; and that the doctrine of rewards
and punishments in it has so great a tendency to enforce the civil
laws, and to restrain the vices of men, that reason, which cannot
decide for it on principles of natural theology, will not decide
against it on principles of good policy. Let this doctrine rest on
the authority of revelation. A theist, who does not believe the
* Bolingbroke's Works, vol. v. p. 237. f Ibid- vo1- ui- P- 559-
X Ibid. vol. v. p. 288. § Ibid. p. 220. || Ibid. vol. v. p. 238.
f Ibid. p. 488. ** Ibid. vol. iii. p. 558, 559.

34G A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXV.
revelation, can have no aversion to the doctrine."* After having
mentioned the scheme of a future state proposed in the "Analogy
ofReason and Revelation," part 1. cap. 1. he says, " This hypothe
sis may be received ; and that it does not so much as imply any
thing repugnant to the perfections of the divine nature." He adds,
" I receive with joy the expectations it raises in my mind. And the
ancient and modern Epicureans provoke my indignation, when they
boast as a mighty acquisition their pretended certainty that the
body and the soul die together. If they had this certainty, could
this discovery be so very comfortable ? I should have no difficulty
which to choose, if the option was proposed to me, to exist after
death, or to die whole."+
If we were to judge of the author's real sentiments by such pas
sages as these, we might be apt to think, that though he was not
certain of the immortality of the soul, and a future state, yet he
was much inclined to favour that doctrine, as not only useful, but
probable too. But there are other passages by which it appears,
that, notwithstanding these fair professions, he did not really
acknowledge or believe that doctrine himself; and, as far as his rea
soning or authority could go, has endeavoured to weaken, if not
destroy, the belief of it in the minds of others too.
He represents this doctrine as at best no more than a useful in
vention. He expressly says, that " the ancient theists, polytheists,
philosophers, and legislators, invented the doctrine of future rewards
and punishments, to give an additional strength to the sanctions of
the law of nature ;"*}: and particularly, that the invention of it was
owing to Egypt, the mother qf good policy as well as superstition.^
The general prevalency of this opinion he attributes to the predomi
nant pride of the human heart ; and that " every one was flattered
by a system that raised him in imagination above corporeal nature,
and made him hope to pass in immortality in the fellowship of the
gods.|| And after having said, that it cannot be demonstrated by
reason, he adds, " it was originally an hypothesis, and may therefore
be a vulgar error ; it was taken upon trust by the people, till it
came to be disputed and denied by such as did examine."^ So that
he supposes, that those who believed it took it upon trust without
reason or examination, and that they who examined rejected it. He
pronounces, that the reasonings employed by divines in proof of a
future state are " problematical and futile ;" and that " the immor
tality of the soul rests on moral proofs, and those proofs are precari
ous, to say no worse of them."** After seeming to speak very
favourably, in a passage cited above, of the hypothesis of a future
state advanced in Butler's Analogy, he says, " it has no foundation
in reason, and is purely imaginary." Lie frequently supposes a con
nexion between the immortality of the soul and a future state ; that
the latter is in consequence of the former ; and he has endeavoured to
Works, vol. v. 322. 489. f Ibid, p. 491, 492. See also ibid. p. 500. 507.
X Ibid. p. 288. § Ibid. p. 352, 489. || Ibid. p. 237.
f Ibid. p. 352. ** Ibid. p. 323. 501.

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 347
subvert the foundation of that immortality, by denying that the soul
is a distinct substance from the body. This is what he hath set himself
pretty largely to show in several parts of his " Essay concerning
the Nature, Extent, and Reality of Human Knowledge," which
takes up nearly one half of the third volume of his works ; especi
ally in the first, eighth, and ninth sections of that Essay. He
expressly asserts, " that there is not any thing, philosophically
speaking, which obliges us to conclude, that we are compounded of
material and immaterial substance :"* That " immaterial spirits,
considered as distinct substances, are, in truth, the creatures of
metaphysics and theology :"f That " human pride was indulged by
heathen philosophers and Platonic Christians ; and since they could
not make man participant of the divine nature by his body, they
thought fit to add a distinct spiritual to his corporeal substance,
and to assume him to be a compound of both."*(: And that " the
notions that prevail about soul, spiritual substance, and spiritual
operations and things, took their rise in schools, where such doc
trines were taught as men would be sent to Bedlam for teaching
at this day."§ He has a long marginal note, vol. iii. p. 514, et. seq.
which is particularly designed to answer Mr. Wollaston's arguments
for the immortality of the soul. He there affirms, that " it neither
has been, nor can be proved, that the soul is a distinct substance
united to the body :" That " to suppose the soul may preserve a
faculty of thinking when the body is destroyed, is assumed without
any evidence from the phenomena ; nay, against a strong presump
tion derived from them :" That " whilst we are alive, we pre
serve the capacity, or rather faculty, of thinking, as we do
of moving, and other faculties plainly corporeal. When we are
dead, all these faculties are dead with us :" and, as he thinks,
"it might as reasonably be said, we shall walk eternally, as
think eternally." He says, " the word soul, in philosophical con
sideration, taken for a distinct substance united to the body," may
be parallel with " the primum mobile, and element of fire, which
were names invented to signify things which have no existence ;"
and adds, that " this figment of a soul, if it be a figment, received
strength from the superstitious theology of the heathens." || He
represents the hypothesis of two distinct substances in man as more
" inconceivable and absurd," than that of those who say there is no
such thing as material substance, or a material world :"f and yet he
says, " that there is material substance no man can doubt — and
that those who doubted it have either done it to exercise their wit,
or have been transported by overheated imaginations into a philoso
phical delirium."** He pronounces, that for philosophers to main
tain that the soul is an immaterial being, is as if they should agree
"that twice two makes five."tf And though, in a passage cited
before, he introduces a plain man saying, That as he could not
* Works, vol. iii. p. 363, 364. + Ibid. p. 427. X Ibid. p. 480.
Ubid. p. 534, 535. || Ibid. p. 516, 517, 518. IT Ibid. p. 522. ** Ibid. p. 379,
tt Ibid. p. 536.

348 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXV.
affirm, so he would not deny a future state, yet he makes him de
clare, that, " revelation apart, all the phenomena from our birth to
our death seem repugnant to the immateriality and immortality of
the soul ; so that he is forced to conclude with Lucretius,
-Gigni pariter cum corpore, et una

Crescere sentimus, pariterque senescere mentem."
That " God had given him reason to distinguish and judge, and
external and internal sense, by which to perceive and reflect ; but
that this very reason showed him the absurdity of embracing an
opinion, concerning body and mind, which neither of these senses
supports."* I believe you will be of opinion, upon considering what has been
now produced, that Lord Bolingbroke has left us little room to doubt
of his real sentiments in this matter. I shall now examine whether
he has offered any thing that is of force sufficient to invalidate a
doctrine, the belief of which he himself acknowledges to be of great
use to mankind.
As to that which lies at the foundation of his scheme, viz. his
denying that the soul is a spiritual or immaterial substance distinct
from the body, I do not find that he has produced any thing which
can be called a proof that such a supposition is unreasonable. He
indeed inveighs against metaphysicians and divines for talking about
spiritual and immaterial essences and substances ; he charges them
with fantastical ideas, and a pneumatical madness. But such invec
tives, which he repeats on all occasions, will hardly pass for argu
ments. He doth not pretend to say, as some have done, that spiritual or
immaterial substance implies a contradiction. He blames Spinosa
for maintaining that there is but one substance, that of matter ; and
asserts, " though we do not know the manner of God's being, yet
we acknowledge him to be immaterial, because a thousand absurdi
ties, and such as imply the strongest contradiction, result from the
supposition, that the Supreme Being is a system of matter.''f He
says indeed, that " of any other spirit we neither have nor can have
any knowledge;" and that "all spirits are hypothetical, but the
Infinite Spirit, the Father of Spirits."*}: But if there are other
beings, whose essential properties are inconsistent with the known
properties of matter, and particularly if our own souls are so, and if
absurd consequences would follow from the supposing them to be
material beings, may it not be reasonably argued, that they are sub
stances of a different kind from what we call matter or body? The
only way we have, by his own acknowledgment, of knowing dif
ferent substances, is by their different qualities or properties. He
observes, that " sensitive knowledge is not sufficient to know the
inward constitution of substances, and their real essence, but is
sufficient to prove to us their existence, and to distinguish them by
* Works, vol. iii. p. 557. f Ioid- P- 321- 503. X Ibid. p. 321. 427.

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 349
their effects;"* And that "the complex idea we have of every
substance is nothing more than a combination of several sensible
ideas, which determine the apparent nature of it to us." He de
clares, that "he cannot conceive, a substance otherwise than rela
tively to its modes, as something in which those modes subsist ;"f
and blames the philosophers for " talking of matter and spirit as if
they had a perfect idea of both, when in truth they knew nothing
of either, but a few phenomena insufficient to frame any hypo
thesis.""!; Yet he himself speaks of material substance, as a thing
" we perfectly know and are assured of, whilst we only assume or
guess at spiritual or immaterial substance."^ But we have as much
reason to be assured of the latter as of the former, since in neither
case the substance or essence itself is the object of our sense, but
we certainly infer it from the properties, which we know in the one
case as well as in the other. He does not pretend to deny that th
existence of spiritual substance is possible.|| Why then should not
he allow their actual existence, since there are properties or quali
ties, from which it may reasonably be inferred, that they actually
do exist?
He finds great fault with Mr. Locke for endeavouring to show,
that the notion of spirit involves no more difficulty or obscurity in
it than that of body, and that we know no more of the solid than
we do of the thinking substance, nor how we are extended than how
we think. In opposition to this he asserts, that we have clear ideas
of the primary properties belonging to body, which are solidity and
extension, but that we have not a positive idea of any one primary
property of spirit; and the only proof tie brings for this is, that
actual thought is not the essence of spirit. But if, instead of actual
thought being the essence of the soul, the faculty of thinking be
supposed to be one of its primary essential qualities or properties,
this is what we have as clear an idea of as we have of solidity and
extension.H He himself elsewhere observes, that " our ideas of re
flection are as clear and distinct as those of sensation, and convey
knowledge that may be said to be more real:"** And that "the
ideas we have of thought by reflection, and -of some few modes of
thinking, are as clear as those we have of extension, and the modes
of extension by sensation. "tt Why then may we not from those
ideas infer a thinking; as well as from the other a solid extended
substance ? and that these substances are absolutely distinct, and
of different natures, since their properties manifestly are so ? He
hath himself acknowledged enough to show the reasonableness of
this conclusion. " That we live, and move, and think," saith he,
" and that there must be something in the constitution of our sys
tem of being, beyond the known properties of matter, to produce
such phenomena as these are undeniable truths." He adds
indeed, " what that something is, we know not ; and surely it is
» Works, vol. iii. p. 371. + Ibid. p. 524. { Ibid. p. 509, 510, 512.
§ Ibid. p. 509. || Ibid. p. 5C9. If Ibid. p. 510, 511, 512.
** Ibid., p 365. tt Ibid. p. 427.

350 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXV.
high time we should be convinced that we cannot know it."* But
though we cannot describe its intimate essence, we may know
enough of it to be convinced, that it is not matter. It is to no pur
pose to pretend, that there may be unknown properties of matter,
by which it may be rendered capable of thinking ; for the properties
of matter that we do know are inconsistent with the power of self-
motion and consciousness. It is true, that he censures those as
proud dogmatists, who bestow the epithets of inert, senseless, stupid,
passive, upon matter ;t but in his calmer mood, when he is not car
ried away by the spirit of opposition, and has not his hypothesis in
view, he owns, that " matter is purely passive, and can act no
otherwise than it is acted upon.''"|" It is therefore inconsistent with
its nature to ascribe to it a principle of self-motion.
He expressly acknowledges, that "our idea of thought is not in
cluded in the idea of matter. "§ And that intellect is certainly
above the " power of motion and figure, according to all the ideas
we have of them ; and therefore (saith he) I embrace very readily
the opinion of those who assume, that God has been pleased to
superadd to several systems of matter, in such proportions as his
infinite wisdom has thought fit, the power of thinking. || This is
an hypothesis he seems fond of; he frequently refers to it, and says
it is little less than blasphemy to deny it.H Mr. Locke, as he ob
serves, supposed, that God might, if he pleased, give to certain sys
tems of created senseless matter, put together as he thinks fit, some
degree of sense, perception, and thought. But what Mr. Locke
had advanced as barely possible, for aught he knew, to Almighty
Power, our author assumes as having been actually done, and as
continually done in the ordinary course of things. But I think we
may safely leave it to any unprejudiced judgment, whether it be
not more reasonable and more philosophical, to assign different
substances as the subjects of properties s'o entirely different, than
to suppose properties merely superadded by omnipotency to which
they do not naturally belong ? Why should Lord Bolingbroke have
been so backward to acknowledge a distinct substance from matter
as the subject of these properties, when he himself was obliged to
acknowledge, that the idea of thought is not included in the idea qf
matter, and that intellect is above the power of motion and figure, ac
cording to all the ideas toe have of them ? Is it agreeable to the
divine wisdom, or to the order of things, to suppose, that God, in
the general course of his providence, continually superadds preter
natural or supernatural properties and powers to things not natu
rally fitted to receive them, rather than that he hath produced
spiritual substances, to which by the original constitution of their
natures these properties and powers do belong? It hath been often
shown by those that have treated this subject, that the essential
properties of body and spirit are not only distinct, but incompatible,

* Works, yol. iii. p. 509. t Ibid. p. 25. j Ibid vol v p 47*>
§ Ibid. vol. iii. p. 364. || Ibid. vol. v. p. 35. -f lbid.'vol.'iii'. p! 364."

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 351
and that therefore they cannot belong to the same substance, but
must be the properties of different substances. Matter being a
solid, figurable, divisible substance, consisting always of separable,
nay of actually separate and distinct parts, it is evident, from the
very nature of it, that it is not one indivisible substance, but is
compounded of innumerable little substances, which are really dis
tinct, though contiguous ; so that if the intelligent substance in us
were corporeal, it would be a compound of many intelligences and
consciousnesses, which could not be one and the same individual
intelligence and consciousness. Matter therefore is not a subject
capable of an individual consciousness, which consequently must
have some other subject to reside in. This argument is pursued
with admirable clearness and force by the learned Dr. Clarke, in
his letter to Mr. Dodwell, and in his several defences of it against
Mr. Collins, who pushed the argument for the materiality of the
soul as far as it could bear. Nor do I find that Lord Bolingbroke
hath advanced any thing that can be called new upon this subject.
He supposes, but does not prove, all the species of intellectual
beings to be material, and talks of an intellectual spring common to
them all ; which, he says, is the same spring in all, but differently
tempered, so as to have different degrees of force and elasticity in
some from what it has in others; and he resolves the surprising-
variety of its effects into the apparent difference in the constitutions
or organization of animals.* But it is justly argued, on the other
hand, that it is absurd to suppose, that that which is unintelligent
and insensible before organization, can become intelligent and self-
conscious by organization, since organization does not alter the
nature and essence of things.
These observations seem to me sufficient to take off the force of
what Lord Bolingbroke hath advanced, to shew that the soul is not
an immaterial substance distinct from the body.— His view in it is
plain ; it is to destroy the proof of its immortality, and to bring in
this conclusion, that since it is not a distinct substance from the
body, it must die with it. He pretends indeed, that the opinion of
the soul's immateriality adds no strength to that of its immortality,
and blames the metaphysical divines for clogging the belief of the
immortality ofthe soul with that of its immateriality ; and that by
resting too much on the latter they weaken the former.-}- But
the true reason of his finding fault with it is, that the immateriality
of the human soul furnisheth a strong presumption in favour of its
immortality, or at least that it may survive when the body is dis
solved. That he himself is sensible of this, appears from what he
acknowledges, that " on supposition of the soul's being a different
substance from matter, philosophers argue admirably well a priori,
and prove with great plausibility, that this mind, this soul, this
spirit, is not material, and is immortal." He urges indeed, that
" this assumption cannot stand an examination a posteriori ;"J that
is, as he elsewhere observes, all the phenomena from our birth to
?Works, vol. iii. p. 526, 527. f Ibid. p. 535. 539. J Ibid. p. 509.

352 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXV.
our death seem repugnant to the immateriality and immortality of
the soul. But all that these phenomena prove is, not that body
and soul are one and the same substance, but that there is a close
union between them, which there may be, and yet they may be
substances of very different natures ; and that they really are so
appears, as has been already shown, from their different essential
properties. The laws of this union were appointed by the author
of the human frame : and by virtue of those laws, soul and body
have a mutual influence upon one another whilst that union subsists.
But it by no means follows, that, when this union is dissolved, both
these substances, so different from one another, do alike fall into
the dust. Nor can this be concluded from the phenomena. — We
see indeed what becomes of the fleshy corruptible body ; but we
cannot pretend to decide, that therefore the thinking immaterial
substance is dissolved too, or to determine what becomes of it.
But he urgeth, that though " thinking and unthinking sub
stances should be supposed ever so distinct from one another, yet as
assumed souls were given to inform bodies, both are necessary to
complete the human system ; and that neither of them could exist
or act in a state of total separation from the other."* And he ob
serves, that Mr. WoUaston is so sensible of this, that he supposes,
that there is, besides the body which perishes, some fine vehicle that
dwells with the soul in the brain, and goes off with it at death.
Our author has not offered any thing to shew the absurdity of this
supposition, except by calling such a vehicle the shirt of the soul,
and talking of the soul's flying away in its shirt into the open fields
of heaven; which may, for aught I know, pass with some persons
for witty banter, but has no argument in it. Very able philosophers,
both ancient and modern, have supposed, that all created spirits are
attended with material vehicles. But whatever becomes of this sup
position with regard to the human soul, I do not see how it follows,
that a substance which is essentially active, intellective, and voli-
tive, should lose all intellect, action, and volition, merely on its
being separated from a material substance to which it was united,
and which is naturally void of these qualities. However it might
be bound by the laws of that union for a time, there is no reason to
think it should be still subject to those laws, and that it should be
unable to act or think at all, after this union is dissolved.
The only thing farther which hath any appearance of argument
is, that " if the philosopher asserts, that whatever thinks is a simple
being, immaterial, indissoluble, and therefore immortal, — we must
be reduced, if we receive this hypothesis, to suppose that other ani
mals besides have immaterial or immortal souls."f And if it be
allowed, that other animals have immaterial souls too, I do not see
what absurdity follows from it ; or why it may not be reasonably
supposed, that there may be innumerable gradations of immaterial
beings of very different capacities, and intended for different ends
and uses. But our author urges against those who suppose sensi-
* Works, vol. iii. p. 517. t Ibid. p. 528,

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 353
rive souls in brutes, and a rational soul in man, that " the power
of thinking is as necessary to perception of the slightest sensation,
as it is to geometrical reasoning; and that it manifestly implies a
contradiction to say, that a substance capable of thought by its
nature in one degree or instance, is by its nature incapable
of it in any other."* But I see not the least absurdity in
this; except it be said, that it necessarily follows, that a sub
stance capable of thought or sense in the lowest degree, must be
essentially capable of thought or sense in the highest degree. I
can easily conceive, that a nature may be supposed capable of the
former, and not of the latter. And must not he say so too, since
he asserts that brutes think, and yet I believe will hardly affirm
that they are capable as well as men of geometrical reasoning ?
There is no absurdity in supposing immaterial souls, which have
sensitive perceptions, and are capable of sensitive happiness, without
ever rising beyond this, or being properly capable of moral agency.
And supposing the brutes to have immaterial sensitive souls which
are not annihilated at death, what becomes of them after death,
whether they are made use of to animate other bodies, or what is
done with them, we cannot tell. Nor is our not being able to assign
any use for them so much as a presumption that they answer no
end at all, or that they do not exist. There may be a thousand
ways which the Lord of nature may have of disposing of them, which
we know nothing of.
It appears from what hath been offered, that there is a real foun
dation in reason for the doctrine of the soul's immortality, and that
therefore there is no need to resolve it, as this writer seems willing
to do, into the pride of the human heart. It is his own observation,
"that men were conscious ever since there race existed, that there
is an active thinking principle in their composition.— That there are
corporeal natures, we have sensitive knowledge: that there are spiri
tual natures distinct from all these, we have no knowledge at all.
We only infer that there are such, because we know that we
think, and are not able to conceive how material systems can think, "f
And this certainly is a very reasonable inference, as reasonable as it
is to infer a material substance from the affections and properties of
matter. But though it is agreeable to reason to believe, that the human
soul is immaterial and immortal, this doth not imply, as his lord
ship is pleased to insinuate, that " it is immortal by the necessity of
its nature, as God is self-existent by the necessity of his."*|: Nor is
it so understood by those who maintain the natural immortality of
the human soul. What they intend by it is only this : That God
made the soul originally of such a nature as to be fitted and designed
for an immortal duration; not naturally liable, as tbe body is, to
corruption and dissolution ; but not, as if it were rendered so neces
sarily existent as to be independent of God himself. Still it is in
his power to annihilate it, if he seeth fit to put an end to its exis
tence, though there is no reason to think that he will ever do so : for
* Works, vol. iii. p. 531. t Ibid. p. 5.30. f Ibid. p. 559.
A A

354 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXV.
since it was fitted for immortality by his own original constitution,
this may be regarded as an indication of his will, that it shall con
tinue in immortal being, though still in a dependence on the power
and will of the Creator.
It is proper to observe here, that our author hath acknowledged
several things which furnish a very reasonable presumption in favour
of the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. One is, the universal
prevalence of that doctrine from the oldest antiquity. For this
seems to show, that it is agreeable to the natural sentiments of the
human mind ; or at least that it was derived from a primitive uni
versal tradition received from the first ancestors of the human race,
and which was originally owing to divine revelation. Both these
may probably have contributed to the general spreading of this
notion. This writer, according to his custom, varies on this head;
for, after having expressly asserted, that this doctrine was inculcated
from time immemorial, and that it began to be taught long before we
have any light into antiquity* he pretends to assign the original of
it, and ascribes the invention of it to Egypt, and that it came from
thence to the Greeks, to whom it was brought by Orpheus, and
from the Greeks to the Romans.f But we find it was equally re
ceived among the most barbarous as among the most polite nations.
The ancient Indians, Scythians, Gauls, Germans, Britons, as well
as Greeks and Romans, believed that souls are immortal, and that
men should live in another state after death. There were scarce any
among the Americans, when the Europeans first arrived there, who
doubted of it. It has been almost as generally believed as the exis
tence of God ; so that it may well pass for a common notion.
Another thing taken notice of by this writer, and to which he
partly ascribes the belief of the soul's immortality, is what he calls
the powerful desire of continuing to exist. He observes, that this
desire was so strong, that " the multitude in the pagan world were
ready to embrace the hope of immortality, though it was accom
panied with the fear of damnation.""]; This strong desire of future
existence appears by his own account to be natural to the human
mind. And would the author of our beings have so constituted us,
if the object of this desire was vain, and if there were no future ex
istence to expect ? Is not this powerful desire or expectation of
immortality, which is implanted in the human heart, an argument
that he that made us, formed and designed us, not merely for this
present state and transitory life, but for afuture state of existence?
Lord Bolingbroke further observes, that one great cause of the
spreading of this doctrine was its being encouraged by the politi
cians and legislators, as well as philosophers, on the account of its
great usefulness to mankind, and because they looked upon it to be
necessary to enforce the sanctions of the law of nature.^ Now the
great usefulness and necessity of this doctrine is no small argument
of its truth. For if men are so framed, that they cannot be properly
governed without the hopes or fears of a future state ; if these are
» Works, vol. v. p. 237. 308. 'Ibid, p. 352. 480. * Ibid. 237. § Ibid. p. 281.351.

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 3j.">
necessary to preserve order and good government in the world, to
allure and engage men to virtue, and deter them from vice and
wickedness; this shows that the author of their beings designed
them for immortality, and a future state, and that consequently such
a state there really is ; except it be said, that he formed our natures
so as to make it necessary to govern us by a lie, and by false motives,
and imaginary hopes and fears.
It sufficiently appears from what has been already observed, that
our author, by denying that the soul is an immaterial substance dis
tinct from the body, hath done what he could to take away the
force of the natural argument for a future state of existence and
retributions after this life is at an end. It remains that we take
notice of what he hath offered to destroy the moral arguments
usually brought for it from the supposed unequal distributions of
this present state. He sets himself at great length to prove, that
the supposition is absolutely false and groundless ; that it is highly
injurious to God ; and tendeth to cast the most blasphemous reflec
tions upon his providence. In the management of this argument,
he hath broke out into the most opprobrious invectives against the
Christian divines and philosophers, whom he abuses and traduces
without the least regard to decency. He frequently charges them
as in a confederacy with the atheists ; and represents them as
" complaining of the uniform conduct of that providence of God
which is over all his works, and censuring their Creator in the
government of the world, which he has made and preserves. — That
they have done nothing more than repeat what all the atheists, from
Democritus and Epicurus, have said : That they have pushed their
arguments on this subject so far, that the whole tribe of these
writers, like WoUaston and Clarke, do in effect renounce God, as
much as the rankest of the atheistical tribe :" And he undertakes
to prove this, to their shame to be true.* That " the heathen deists
defended the divine providence against the atheists who attacked
it, and recommended a cheerful resignation to all the dispensations
of it; whereas Christian divines have made a common cause with
the atheists, to attack providence, and to murmur against the neces
sary submission that they pay."t That " the Christian philoso
phers, far from defending the providence of God, have joined in the
clamour against it." That " they have brought the self-existent
Being to the bar of humanity, — and he has been tried, convicted,
and condemned, like the governor of a province, or any other inferior
magistrate.""]: Accordingly he sets up as a zealous advocate for the " goodness and
righteousness of divine providence in the present constitution of
things, and with great solemnity undertakes to plead the cause qf
God against atheists and divines." He affirms, that, " notwithstand
ing the human race is exposed to various evils, there is no ground
for complaint, but abundant cause for thankfulness."§ That " if
we are subject to many evils, physical and moral, we can show
* Works, vol. v. p. 484, 485. f Ibid. p. 480. J Ibid. p. 488. § Ibid. 333,331.

356 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXV.
much more good of both kinds, which God hath bestowed upon us,
or put it into our power to procure ourselves." — That the means to
soften or prevent evils, the chief of which he reckons to be hope,
are " so many instances of the positive goodness of God :"* that
" neither the goodness or justice of God require that we should be
better, nor happier than we are ;"f that man "enjoys numberless
benefits by the fitness of his nature to the constitution of the world,
unasked, unmerited, freely bestowed.""]: He asserts, in opposition to
atheists anddivines, that "the general state of mankind in the present
scheme of providence is not only tolerable, but happy : — and that
there is in this world so much more good than evil, and the general
state of mankind is so ljappy in it, that there is no room for the
exaggerated descriptions that have been made of human misery ;"§
that " God has made us happy, and has put it into our power to
make ourselves happier, by a due use of our reason, which leads us
to the practice of moral virtue, and to all the duties of society ;"||
that " good men are often unhappy, and bad men happy, has," he
says, " been a subject of invective rather than argument, to Epicurus,
Cotta, and others among the ancients, and to eminent divines among
the moderns. "if And he particularly examines the instances pro
duced by Cotta in Cicero against the providence of God, and shows
what Balbus might have answered.** He finds great fault with Dr.
Clarke for saying, that " it is certain, from the moral attributes of
God, that there must be such a future state of existence, as that, by
an exact distribution of rewards and punishments, all the present
disorders and inequalities may be set right, and that the whole
scheme of providence may appear at its consummation to be a design
worthy of infinite wisdom, justice, and goodness." See Clarke's
Evidences of Natural aud Revealed Religion, prop. IV. For this he
calls him audacious and vain sophist ; and that " according to these
men, it appears actually unworthy of them at present. "ff And in
opposition, as he pretends, to divines, he shows the general tendency
of virtue to promote happiness, and of vice to produce misery.J"t
These things he enlarges upon in several of his Fragments and
Essays in the fifth volume of his works. See particularly the forty-
third, forty-fourth, forty-eighth, forty-ninth, fiftieth, fifty-first, fifty-
second, fifty-third, and fifty-fourth of those Fragments.
It will be necessary here to make some observations ; and a few
will be sufficient.
And 1. My first reflection is this: that Lord Bolingbroke had no
just pretensions to value himself upon being an advocate for the
goodness and righteousness of divine providence, nor could properly
attempt to vindicate it, in consistency with his scheme. He had
taken pains to show, that moral attributes are not to be ascribed to
God as distinguished from his physical attributes ; that there is no
such thing as justice and goodness in God, according to our ideas
* Works, vol. v. p. 336. f Ibid. p. 512. t Ibid. p. 339.
$ Ibid. p. 392. || Ibid p. 384. if ibid. p. 394.
** Ibid. p. 404, k seq. tt Ibid. p. 395. if Ibid. p. 399, & seq.

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 357
of them, nor can we form any judgment concerning them; and that
there are many phenomena in the present course of things, which
are absolutely repugnant to those moral attributes. But in that
part of his book where he undertakes to justify the providence of
God in this present state, he not only supposes justice and goodness
in God, but that they are conspicuous in the whole course of his
dispensations, and that the present state of things is agreeable to.
our ideas of those attributes. Another consideration which shows
his great inconsistency is, that at the same time that he sets up as
an advocate for the goodness and justice of providence in this pre
sent state, he yet will not allow that providence considers men
individually at all, though he himself owns that justice has neces
sarily a respect to individuals. I had occasion to observe in my
last letter, that he asserts, that "justice requires most certainly that
rewards and punishments should be measured out in every particular
case in proportion to the merit and demerit of each individual."*
With what consistency then can he undertake to demonstrate the
justice of providence in this present state, when he makes it essen
tial to justice, that regard should be had to the cases and circum
stances of individuals, and yet affirms, that providence in this pre
sent state hath no regard to individuals ? And he seems to make
its not extending to individuals here, an argument that it shall not
extend to them in a future state ; for he mentions it as an absurdity
in the Christian system, that " the proceedings of the future state
will be the very reverse of the present ; for that then every individual
human creature is to be tried, whereas here they are considered only
collectively ; that the most secret actions, nay, the very thoughts of
the heart, will be laid open, and sentence will be pronounced
accordingly ;"t where he seems to argue, that because individuals
are not called to an account, or rewarded and punished here, accord
ing to their particular merits or demerits, therefore they shall not be
so hereafter ; whereas the argument seems to hold stronglyihe other
way, supposing the justice of divine providence; that since justice
necessarily requires that a regard should be had to men's particular
actions, cases, and circumstances, and since there is not an exact
distribution of rewards and punishments to individuals in this pre
sent state, according to the personal merit or demerit of each
individual, therefore there shall be a future state, in which this shall
be done, and the righteousness of providence shall be fully mani
fested and vindicated. And it cannot but appear a little extraordi
nary, that this author should make such a mighty parade of his zeal
for vindicating the justice of divine providence, when according to
his scheme the justice of providence cannot consistently be said to
be exercised or displayed, either here or hereafter.
2ndly. It is proper farther to observe, that what Lord Bolingbroke
hath offered with so much pomp for vindicating the proceedings of
divine providence in the present constitution of things, hath nothing
in it that can be called new, or which had not been said as well, or
* Works, vol. v. p. 405. t Ibid. p. 494.

358 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Lot. XXV.
better, by Christian divines and philosophers before him. They
have frequently shown, that this present world is full of the effects
and instances of the divine goodness : that many of those that are
called natural evils are the effects of wise general laws, which are
best upon the whole : that the evils of this life are, for the most
part, tolerable, and overbalanced by the blessings bestowed upon us,
which, ordinarily speaking, are much superior to those evils: that in
the present constitution, virtue has a manifest tendency, in the ordi
nary course of things, to produce happiness, and vice misery ; and
that this constitution is the effect of a wise and good providence ;
from whence it may be concluded, that the great Author and
Governor of the world approves the one, and disapproves the other :
so that it may be justly said in general, that good and virtuous per
sons enjoy more true satisfaction and happiness, even in this present
life, than the bad and vicious. Divines may say much more on this
head than this author could consistently do. They maintain a pro
vidence which extends even to the individuals of the human race*
that good men may consider themselves as continually under God's
wise and fatherly care and inspection ; that they may regard the
good things they enjoy as the effects of his goodness, and are pro
vided with the properest consolations and supports under all the
evils of this present life, being persuaded that God, who knoweth
their circumstances, will overrule all these things for their benefit;
and that they are part of the discipline appointed to prepare them
for a better state ; the prospects of which diffuse joy and comfort
through all the gloomy scenes of adversity they may here meet with.
But in his scheme there is no solid foundation for that tranquillity
of mind, of which he speaks in such high terms, as the inseparable
companion of virtue, and for that hope, which, he says, gives a relish
to all the comforts, and takes off the bitter relish from all the mis
fortunes of life. If providence doth not concern itself about indi
viduals, the good man hath no effectual support under his calamities.
And it is worthy of observation, that our author himself, in vindi
cating the justice and goodness of providence in this present state,
is sometimes obliged to have recourse to the hypothesis of a particu
lar providence. Some of the answers he puts in the mouth of
Balbus, as what he might have opposed to Cotta's harangue against
providence, proceed upon the supposition of a providence which hath
a regard to the cases and circumstances of individuals.* And with
regard to public calamities, one of the ways he takes of accounting
for them is this, that " they may be considered as chastisements,
when there are any to be amended by partaking in them, or being
spectators of them.— And that they should teach mankind to adore
and fear that providence, which governs the world by particular as
well as general dispensations."f
A third reflection is this : That though it be very true in general,
that, in the present constitution of things, virtue hath a manifest
tendency to promote our happiness, and vice to produce misery, yet
* Works, vol. v. p. 412. t Ibid. p. 380, 381.

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 359
it cannot be denied, that it often happeneth in particular cases, that
as to the outward dispensations of providence, there is not a constant
and remarkable difference made between the righteous and the
wicked here on earth : That persons of eminent virtue have fre
quently been overwhelmed with evils and calamities of various kinds,
and have perished under them, without any recompense of that
virtue, if there be no future state; and that wicked men have often
been remarkably prosperous, and have met with great success in
their undertakings, and have continued prosperous to the end of
their lives. These things have been observed in all ages. And ac
cordingly he expressly owns, that " the ancient theists were per
suaded, that nothing less than the existence of all mankind in a
future state, and a more exact distribution of rewards and punish
ments, could excuse the assumed, irregular, and unjust proceedings
of providence in this life, on which atheists founded their objec
tions.''* He frequently intimates, that this was one great reason of
the philosophers assuming the doctrine of future rewards and punish
ments; though sometimes he seems to contradict this, and to say,
that the heathens did not take in the hypothesis of a future state in
order to vindicate the conduct of divine providence.t But without
endeavouring to reconcile this writer to himself, which it is often
impossible to do, we may proceed upon it as a certain thing, that
it hath been generally acknowledged in all ages, that good men have
been often in a very calamitous condition in this present state, and bad
men in very prosperous circumstances. It is true, that, as our
author observes, we may be deceived, and think those to be good
men who are not so ; but in many cases we may certainly pronounce,
that those who by their actions plainly show themselves to be bad
men, the unjust, the fraudulent, the cruel, and oppressive, prosper
and flourish, whilst men, whom it were the height of uncharitable
ness not to suppose persons of great goodness, integrity, and gene
rous honesty, suffer even by their very virtues, and are exposed to
grievous oppressions and reproach, without any redress from human
judicatories. It is bis own observation, that " there is room for
much contingency in the physical and moral world, under the
government of a general providence, and that amidst these contin
gencies, happiness, outward happiness at least, may fall to the lot of
the wicked, and outward unhappiness to the lot of good men.""]:
Mr. Hume has represented this matter with spirit and elegance
in the twenty-first of his moral and political Essays ; where he ob
serves, that " though virtue be undoubtedly the best choice where
it can be attained, yet such is the confusion and disorder of human
affairs, that no perfect economy, or regular distribution of happiness
or misery, is in this life ever to be expected. Not only are the
goods of fortune, and endowments of the body, unequally distributed
between the virtuous and the vicious ; but the most worthy cha
racter, by the very economy of the passions, doth not always enjoy
the highest felicity. Though all vice is pernicious, the disturbance
* Works, vol. v. p. 308. t Compare vol. v. 238, 487. ' Ibid. p. 485.

3G0 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXV.
or pain is not measured out by nature with exact proportion to the
degrees of vice ; nor is the man of highest virtue, even abstracting
from external accidents, always the most happy. A gloomy and
melancholy temper may be found in very worthy characters that
have a great sense of honour and integrity ; and yet this alone may
embitter life, and render a person completely miserable. On the
other hand, a selfish villain may possess a spring and alacrity of
temper, a certain gaiety of heart, which will compensate the uneasi
ness and remorse arising from all the other vices. If a man be
liable to a vice or imperfection, it may often happen, that a good
quality which he possesses along with it, will render him more mise
rable, than if he were completely vicious. A sense of shame in an
imperfoct character is certainly a virtue, but produces great uneasi
ness and remorse, from which the abandoned villain is entirely free."*
Though I lay no great stress on Mr. Hume's authority, yet I be
lieve this representation will be acknowledged to be agreeable to
observation and experience. And if it be so, what can be more
natural or reasonable, than the hypothesis of a future state, where
the rewards of virtue, and punishments of vice, shall be more equally
and regularly proportioned than they can ordinarily be in this pre
sent state?
It is hard to produce an instance of grosser calumny and abuse
than our author is guilty of, when he advanceth it as a general
charge against the Christian divines, that " they have made a com
mon cause with atheists to attack providence, and to murmur against
the necessary submission that they pay." And he gives it as the
character of the Christian, that " he goes murmuring and complain
ing through this life against the justice of God, and therefore de
serves little to taste of his goodness in a future state."-f But this
is strangely misrepresented. The Christian, instructed by the holy
Scriptures, believes, that God is perfectly just and righteous in ail
his ways : He is taught to regard all the good things he enjoys as
flowing from God's paternal benignity ; all the evils and afflictions
he endures, as ordered and governed for the most wise and righteous
ends. If there be any thing in the divine dispensations at present,
which he cannot well account for, or reconcile, he is far from accu
sing God, or entertaining a hard thought of his justice or goodness.
He believes, that these things are all wisely ordered, or permitted;
that they are what may be expected in a state of trial and discipline,
and make a part of the scheme of divine providence, which will ap
pear, when the whole comes to be viewed in its proper connection
and harmony, to have been ordered with the most perfect wisdom,
righteousness, and goodness. This present state only makes a part
of the glorious plan ; and they are the persons that defame and mis-
* Hume's moral and political Essays, p. 244, 245.
t Works, vol. v. p. 486. It is in the same spirit of misrepresentation and abuse,
that be thinks lit to charge Christians with assuming, that happiness consists princi
pally in health, and the advantages of fortune, and with pretending " to keep an account
with God, and to barter so much virtue, and so many acts of devotion, against so many
digues of honour, power, or riches.'' Vol. v. p. 401, 402.

Let. XXV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 361
represent providence, who are for separating and disjointing the
admirable scheme. What a strange perversion is it to represent the
hope and expectation which Christians entertain of a future state,
as arguing a bad temper of mind, and tending to render them un
worthy to taste of the divine goodness hereafter ! As if it were a
fault and a vice to aspire to a state where our nature shall be raised
to the perfection of holiness and virtue, where true piety shall re
ceive its proper and full reward, and the glory of the divine perfec
tions shall be most illustriously displayed.
As to the nature and extent of those future rewards and punish
ments, they will come more properly to be considered, when I come
to examine the objections he hath advanced against the accounts
that are given of them in the gospel.
The only thing farther which I shall at present take notice of is,
the use which he makes of that maxim, that Whatsoever is, is right.
He insinuates as if Christian divines were not for acknowledging,
that whatsoever God does is right ; which he looks upon to be a
most certain and important principle ; and that upon this principle
we ought to rest satisfied, that what is done in this present state is
right, without looking forward to a future state, or taking it into the
account at all.
For the explaining the principle our author mentions, Whatsoever
is, is right, it must be observed, that it is not to be applied to every
particular incident considered independently, and as confined to the
present moment, without any dependence on what went before, or
follows after. The maxim would not be true or just taken in this
view. The meaning therefore must be, that whatever is, considered
as a part of the universal scheme of providence, and taken in its
proper harmony and connexion with the past and future, as well as
with the present appointed course of things, is rightly and fitly
ordered. Thus, e. g. suppose a good man reduced to the greatest
misery and distress, and conflicting with the sorest evils and cala
mities, it is fit he should be so, because, considering that event in its
connexion, and taking in the past and future, it is permitted or ap
pointed for wise reasons, and is therefore best upon the whole ; but
considered independently, and as no part of the scheme of provi
dence, or as separated from the other parts of that scheme, it is not
in itself the best nor fittest. This maxim, therefore, which this
writer makes use of with a view to set aside a future state, is, if
understood in that sense in which alone it is true, perfectly consis
tent with the belief of a future state, and even leadeth us to the
acknowledgment of it. If we believe that God always does that
which is fittest to be done, and yet meet with some things which we
find it hard to reconcile to our ideas ofthe divine wisdom, righteous
ness, and goodness, our persuasion, that he always does that which
is right, will put us upon endeavouring to reconcile those appear
ances ; and if a probable hypothesis offers for reconciling them, it
is perfectly consistent with the veneration we owe to the Deity to
embrace that hypothesis; especially if it be not arbitrary, but hath
a real foundation in the nature of things ; and such is the hypothesis

362 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVI.
of a future state of retributions. There is great reason to believe,
that the thinking principle in man is an immaterial substance, quite
distinct from the body, and which shall not be dissolved with it;
and there are many things that seem to show, he was not designed
merely for this present transitory life on earth. The strong desire
of immortality, so natural to the human mind ; the vast capacities
and faculties of the human soul, capable of making an immortal pro
gress in knowledge, wisdom, and virtue, compared with the small
advances we have an opportunity of making in this present state;
our being formed moral agents, accountable creatures, which seems
plainly to show, that it was designed by the Author of our beings,
and who hath given us a law for the rule of our duty, that we should
be hereafter called to an account for our conduct ; of which we have
some forebodings in the judgment our own consciences naturally
pass upon our actions ; these, and other things that might be men
tioned, seem to show, that man was not designed merely for this
present state. And since there are several reasons which lead us
to look upon a future state of existence as probable, it is a most
natural thought, that then the seeming inequalities of this present
state will be rectified ; and that the consideration of that state is to
be taken in, in forming a judgment concerning God's providential
dispensations. And if with all this there be an express revelation
from God, assuring us of a future state, the evidence is complete,
and there is all the reason in the world to draw an argument from
that state to solve present contrary appearances. I am yours, 8cc.

LETTER XXVI.

Observations on Lord Bolingbroke's Account of the Law of Nature. — He asserts it
to be so plain and obvious to the meanest Understanding, that Men cannot be mis
taken about it. — The contrary shown from his own Acknowledgment. — He makes
Self-Love the only original Spring from which our moral Duties and Affections
flow ; yet supposes universal Benevolence to be the fundamental Law of our Nature.
He declares that we are obliged by the Law of Nature to place our Hope and Trust
in God, and address ourselves to him. — This shown to be inconsistent with the Prin
ciples he had advanced. — He asserts Polygamy to be founded in tbe Law of Nature.
—He will not allow, that there is any such thing as natural Shame or Modesty  The
Account he gives of the Sanctions of the Law of Nature, considered  He admits
no Sanctions of that Law with respect to Individuals. — The ill Consequences of his
Scheme to the Interests of Morality and Virtue, represented.
Sir,
From the observations that have been made in the foregoing
letters, I think it sufficiently appears, that Lord Bolingbroke hath
endeavoured to subvert, or at least to perplex and confound, some
of the main principles of what is usually called natural religion. I

Let. XXVI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 363
shall now proceed to examine the account he hath given of the law
of nature, considered as a rule of duty. He frequently speaks in
the highest terms of the clearness, the sufficiency, and perfection of
that law. He represents it as the only standing revelation of the
will of God to mankind, and which renders every other revelation
needless. Very learned and able men have treated of the law of
nature ; but our author seems not at all satisfied with what they
have written on that subject. He says, " they have been more in
tent to show their learning and acuteness, than to set their subject
in a clear and sufficient light : — That, instead of setting up a light
sufficient to enlighten a large room, they go about with a small
taper, and, whilst they illuminate one corner, darken the rest : —
That they puzzle and perplex the plainest thing in the world, some
times by citations little to the purpose, or of little authority ; some
times by a great apparatus of abstract reasoning, and by dint of
explanation. — Read Selden and Grotius, read Cumberland, read
Puffendorf, if you have leisure or patience for it. — There are many
curious researches, no doubt, and many excellent observations in
these writers ; but they seem to be great writers on this subject, by
much the same right as he might be called a great traveller who
should go from London to Paris by the Cape of Good Hope."* I
think it is not easy to convey a more contemptible idea of any
writers, than he hath here done of these great men. It is to be
supposed therefore, that he proposes to lead men a more clear and
direct way to the knowledge of the law of nature; especially since
he hath declared, that "all that can be said to any real or useful
purpose concerning that law, is extremely plain."t
Besides occasional passages in which he makes mention of the law
of nature, this is the principal subject of several of the Fragments
and Essays of which his fifth volume consists, particularly ofthe third,
fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth,
and twenty-second, of these Fragments and Essays. But all these
together are far from making up any thing that can with the least
propriety be called a treatise on the law of nature ; and, as his
Lordship generally seems to think himself above treating things in
a methodical way, we are left to collect his sentiments by comparing
several parts of his works together, and forming a judgment as well
as we can. He has neither distinctly explained the principles of that
law, nor pursued those principles to their regular consequences, nor
formed any deductions from them that can be of great use for the
direction and instruction of mankind.
As to the law of nature in general, he tells us, that " the law of
nature is the law of reason. A right use of that faculty which God
hath given us, collects that law from the nature of things, as they
stand in the system which he has constituted.""]: Or, as he else
where expresseth it, " It is a law which God has given to all his
human creatures, enacted in the constitution of their natures, and
discernible by the use of the faculties he has given them."§ He
* Works, vol. v. p. 68. t Ibid. p. 67. X Ibid- P- 83. § Ibid. p. 99.

364 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVI-
calls it, " the revelation God has made of his will by his works.
And what is the will of God," saith he, "is a question easily an
swered. To answer this, we need go no higher than the moral obli
gations that arise in our own system, and of which we have very
adequate ideas. The nature of the human system is independent
on man, and yet he is obliged to derive the rules of his conduct
from it. By employing our reason to collect the will of God from
the fund of our nature physical and moral, and by contemplating
frequently and seriously the laws that are plainly and necessarily
deducible from them, we may acquire not only a particular know
ledge of those laws, but a general, and, in some sort, an habitual
knowledge of the manner in which God is pleased to exercise his
supreme power in this system, beyond which we have no concern."*
This law he represents as absolutely certain, and obvious to all
mankind. " Natural revelation (for so," saith he, " I will call it)
produces knowledge, a series of intuitive knowledge from the first
principles to the last conclusions. The phenomena of nature are the
'first principles ; and reason, i. e. a realdivine illumination, leads us
from one necessary truth to another, through the whole course of
these demonstrations.— In all these cases we know, we do not be-
lieve."t He asserts, that " we more certainly know the will of God
in this way than we can know it in any other."*!: " And that the
tables of the natural law are hung up in the works of God, and are
obvious to the sight of all men, so obvious that no man who is able
to read the plainest characters can mistake them."§ And accord
ingly he declares, that " the will of God, signified by the law of
nature, and revealed by his works, is a revelation that admits of no
doubt, and shows the road to happiness to all mankind. "|| I shall
only mention one passage more, among many that might be pro
duced to the same purpose. Having asserted, that " natural religion
is the original revelation which God has made of himself, and of his
will, to all mankind in the constitution of things, and in the order
of his providence ; he observes, that human reason is able to discover
in the original revelation every conceivable duty that we owe to God
as our Creator, and to man as our fellow creature : that this system
of duty is fully proportioned by infinite wisdom to the human state,
and the end of its human happiness. — Natural religion therefore, is
relatively perfect; it is immutable; as long as God and man con
tinue to be what they are, and to stand in the same relations to one
another." He adds, " if it does not follow necessarily from this,
sure I am that it follows probably, that God has made no other reve
lation of himself and of his will to mankind.^ This is evidently the
main point our author had in view, in extolling so mightily as he
has done the absolute perfection, certainty, and clearness of the law
of nature.
From the several passages which have been produced, it appears,
that by the law of nature he understands what we may collect by
* Works, vol. v. p. 100. 154. 178. 196, 271. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 276. ± Ibid. p. S287.
§ Ibid. v. p. 153. || Ibid. p. 196. % Ibid. p. 543, 544.

Let. XXVI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 305
our reason, concerning the will of God and our duty, from the con
sideration of his works, but especially from the constitution of the
human system, or, as he expresseth it, from the fund of our nature,
physical and moral. Let us therefore enquire what account he gives
ofthe human system. He observes, that " man has two principles
of determination, affections and passions, excited by apparent good,
and reason, which is a sluggard, and cannot be so excited. Reason
must be willed into action ; and as this can rarely happen, when the
will is already determined by affections and passions, so when it
does happen, a sort of composition generally happens between the
two principles; and if the affections and passions cannot govern ab
solutely, they obtain more indulgence from reason than they deserve,
or than she would show them if she were entirely free from their
force, and free from their conduct."* He expressly declares, that
"the appetites, passions, and the immediate objects of pleasure, will
be always of greater force to determine us than reason ;"f and that
" amidst the contingencies that must arise from the constitution of
every individual, he needs not go about to prove that the odds will
always be on the side of appetite ; from which affections arise, as
affections grow up afterwards into passions, which reason cannot
always subdue in the strongest minds, and by which she is perpe
tually subdued in the weakest."*!: At the same time that he speaks
in such strong terms of the great power and prevalency of the ap
petites and passions, he will not allow that the Creator hath im
planted in the human mind any thing that can be called a natural
sense of good and evil, of right or wrong. He treats those as enthu
siasts in ethics, and as rendering natural religion ridiculous, who
maintain, that there is " a moral sense or instinct, by which men
distinguish what is morally good from what is morally evil, and per
ceive an agreeable or disagreeable intellectual sensation accord
ingly.'^ "This," he says, "may be acquired in some sort by long
habit, and by true philosophical devotion, but that it is whimsical
to assume it to be natural."!!
And now we may form some judgment, how far our author's de
clarations concerning the absolute clearness, as well as certainty, of
the law of nature, are to be depended on, which he makes with a
view to show that all extraordinary revelation is entirely needless.
He tells us, that " the law of nature has all the clearness, all the
precision that God can give, or man desire ;" which he proves, be
cause "the nature of our system, as far as the morality of actions
is concerned, is sufficiently known to us, and the laws of our nature
consequently, since they result from it."f It is to be observed, that
the clearness and precision he here attributes to the law of nature is
supposed by him to be of such a kind as to be obvious to all mankind.
And the only way he allows to any of the human race for knowing
that law and his own duty, is by sending him for information con
cerning it to the works of God, and especially to the human system,
* Works, vol. v. p. 150. See also ibid. p. 116. 137. 227. t Ibid. p. 267, 268.
X Ibid. p. 479. § Ibid. p. 86. || Ibid. p. 479. IT Ibid. p. 26. 97.

366 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVI.
and the laws that result from it. And is this so easy a task to
every man, even the most illiterate ? Can it be said that this is, as
he affirms, " intelligible at all times, and in all places alike, and pro
portioned to the meanest understanding?"* Is every man well
qualified to search into the fund of his nature, physical and moral,
and to form his conclusions accordingly, and draw up a system of
religion, of laws and rules for his own conduct ? How can he con
sistently suppose, that the human system is sufficiently known to
all, when according to him some of the wisest men in all ages, and
mankind in general, have been mistaken even in a point of such
importance relating to it, as the supposing the soul to be a distinct
substance from the body ? Besides which, the knowledge of the
human system takes in a due consideration of our senses, reason,
appetites, and passions. All these must be considered, that we may
know wherein consisteth the proper order and harmony of our
powers, which of them are to be subordinate, and which to govern ;
what are the just limits of our appetites and passions ; how far and
in what instances they are to be gratified, and how far restrained.
And is every particular person, if left to himself, able by the mere
force of his own reason to consider and compare all these, and from
thence to make the proper deductions, and acquire a particular
knowledge, as our author requires, of those laws that are deducible
from this system ?
He has another remarkable passage to the same purpose, which
it may be proper to take some notice of. " Whether the word of
God," saith he, " be his word, may be, and hath been disputed by
theists : but whether the works of God be his works, neither has
been nor can be disputed by any such. Natural religion therefore
being founded on human nature, which is the work of God, and the
necessary conditions of human happiness, which are imposed by the
whole system of it, every man who receives the law of nature re
ceives it on his own authority, and not on the authority of other
men known or unknown, and in their natural state as fallible as
himself. It is not communicated to him only by tradition and his
tory : it is a perpetual standing revelation, always made, always
making, and as present in these days as in the days of Adam to all
his offspring."f Here every man is directed, in forming a scheme
of the law of nature for himself, to despise all other authority, and
rely wholly on his own. It is even mentioned as an advantage, that
he receives it on his own authority, i. e. that he has no other proof
or authority for it, but the deductions he himself forms by his own
reason ; though that reason is, as this writer owns, for the most part
influenced and overborne by the appetites and passions. — And this
is cried up as a standing revelation to all the sons of Adam. But
if we apply this magnificent talk concerning the divine certainty
and clearness of the law of nature, to what our author plainly in
tends by it, the deductions drawn by every man for himself concern
ing his duty, and what he thinks most conducive to his happiness,
* Works, vol. v. p. 94. t Ibid. p. 92.

Let. XXVI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 367
the fallacy of his way of arguing will immediately appear ; for
though the works of God are certainly the works of God, and it will
not be denied that the human nature is his work, it doth not follow
that the conclusions formed by every particular person, from that
nature, and from the works of God, concerning duty and moral ob
ligation, are to be certainly depended upon. When therefore he
asserts, that " the contents of the law of nature are objects of such
a certainty, as the author of nature alone can communicate,"* if
the design be to signify, that the judgment every man forms for
himself by his own reason, and upon his own authority, as he ex
presseth it, concerning the law of nature, hath such a divine cer
tainty in it, it is manifestly false. He confounds the objective cer
tainty of the law as founded in the nature of things, with the
certainty of the judgment men form concerning it; which are very
different things. However certain the law of nature is in itself, men
may greatly mistake and misapprehend it. And it is certain in fact
that they do stand in great need of particular instruction to enable
them to acquire a right knowledge of it. And surely a divine in
struction concerning it, by persons extraordinarily sent and com
missioned to publish a revelation of the will of God to mankind,
and who give sufficient proofs of their divine mission, must be of
the highest advantage.
This writer himself, though he so often extols the absolute clear
ness, certainty, and perfection ofthe law of nature, i. e. of the judg
ment men form by reason concerning it ; yet at other times makes
acknowledgments which quite destroy the argument he would draw
from it against the necessity or usefulness of extraordinary revela
tion. He had affirmed in a passage cited above, that " natural
revelation (for so," says he, "I will call it,) produces a series of
intuitive knowledge from the first principles to the last conclusions;"
where he seems to make both the great principles of the law of
nature, and the conclusions that are drawn from it, to be infallibly
certain ; and yet he elsewhere declares that the laws of nature are
general, and intimates that a multitude of false deductions and wrong
applications have been often made of that law.t Among several.
passages to this purpose, there is one that deserves particular notice.
After having said, that " it is in vain to attempt to know any
thing more than God has showed us in the actual constitution of
things," he adds, that even when we judge of them thus, and make
particular applications of the general laws of nature, we are very
liable to mistakes. — That there are things fit and unfit, right and
wrong, just and unjust, in the human system, and discernible by
human reason, as far as our natural imperfections admit, I acknow
ledge most readily. But from the difficulty we have to judge, and
from the uncertainty of our judgments in a multitude of cases which
lie beyond our bounds, I would demonstrate the folly of those who
affect to have knowledge beyond them. They are unable on many
occasions to deduce from the constitution of their own system, and
* Works, vol. v. p. 23. t Ibid. p. 154.

368 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVI.
the laws of their own nature, with precision and certainty, what
these require of them; and what is right or wrong, just or unjust,
for them to do."* To this may be added the acknowledgment he
hath made, that " the law of nature is hid from our sight by all the
variegated clouds of civil laws and customs. Some gleams of true
light may be seen through them ; but they render it a dubious light,
and it can be no better to those who have the keenest sight, till
those interpositions are removed. "f So that after all his boasts, as
if the law of nature were so clear and obvious to all men that they
cannot mistake it, he owns it to have been hid from our sight by
the clouds of civil laws and customs, and that it is rendered a
dubious light even to those who have the keenest sight. And surely
nothing can be more proper to remove and dispel these interposi
tions of contrary laws and customs, than the light of divine
revelation enforced by a divine authority. He himself observes,
that ''Eusebius, in his first book of his evangelical prepara
tion, gives a long catalogue of absurd laws and customs, con
tradictory to the law of nature in all ages and countries, for
a very good purpose, to show in several instances, how such
absurd laws and customs as these have been reformed by the gospel,
that is, by a law which renewed and confirmed the original law of
nature.""J: These observations may suffice with regard to what Lord Boling
broke hath offered concerning the law of nature in general, and its
absolute certainty and clearness to all mankind : I shall now proceed
to make some particular reflections on the account he gives of the
contents of that law, or the duties which are there prescribed ; as
also of the grounds of the obligation of that law, and the sanction
whereby it is enforced.
I. With regard to the contents or matter of the law of nature,
he observed, that " self-love, .directed by instinct to mutual
pleasure, made the union between man and woman. Self-love
made that of parents and children : self-love begat sociability : and
reason, a principle of human nature as well as instinct, improved it,
extended it to relations more remote, and united several families into
one community, as instinct had united several individuals into one
family." See the third of his Fragments and Essays in his fifth
volume. And he treats this more largely in the sixth of those
Essays, where he observes, that " there is such a thing as natural
reason implanted in us by the author of our nature ; but that reason
would come too slowly to regulate the conduct of human life, if the
All-wise Creator had not implanted in us another principle, that of
self-love; which is the original spring of human actions, under the di
rection of instinct first, and reason afterwards. "§ — " That instinct and
reason may be considered as distinct promulgations of the same law.
Self-love directs necessarily to* sociability. — Instinct leads us to it by
the sense of pleasure, and reason confirms us in it by a sense of happi-
* Works, vol.v. p. 414 f Il)id P- 105. X Ibid. p. 100, 101.
§ Ibid. p. 79.

Let. XXVI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 369
ness."* — — " Sociability is the foundation of human happiness ; so
ciety cannot be maintained without benevolence, justice, and other
social virtues. Those virtues therefore are the foundation of society.
And thus are we led from the instinctive to the rational law of
nature.  Self-love operates in all these stages. We love our
selves, we love our families, we love the particular societies to which
we belong ; and our benevolence extends at last to the whole race
of mankind. Like so many different vortices, the centre of all
is self-love; and that which is the most distant from it is the
weakest."-!/ It appears from this account of the law of nature, that he makes
self-love to be the original spring of all human actions, the funda
mental principle of the law of nature, and centre of the moral system,
to which all the lines of it tend, and in which they terminate ; and
yet he elsewhere calls " universal benevolence, benevolence to all
rational beings, the great and fundamental principle of the law of
nature ;"% and asserts, that " the first principle of the religion of
nature and reason is a sociability that flows from universal benevo
lence. "§ In the passages above cited, he had expressly affirmed,
that self-love begets sociability, and had resolved benevolence into
self-love as the original principle from which it flows ; but here he
makes sociability to flow from universal benevolence. I do not well
see how this can be made to consist upon his scheme. Those may
justly regard universal benevolence as a fundamental law of our
nature, who suppose a social principle, and a benevolent disposition,
distinct from self-love, to be an original disposition, natural to the
human heart, and implanted by the Author of our beings ; but if
self-love be, as he represents it, the only original spring of human
actions, and the centre of the whole system, universal benevolence
cannot be properly represented as the fundamental law of our nature.
Upon this scheme the private interest of the individual, whenever
it happens to come in competition with the public good, ought to be
preferred. Lord Bolingbroke endeavours to answer Carneades's
argument against justice, who urged, that "either there is no
such thing as justice, or it would be extremely foolish, because that
in providing for the good of others, the just would hurt themselves. "||
This argument seems to me to be conclusive upon his Lordship's
scheme. For supposing, which seems to be his sentiment, that
there is no natural sense of right and wrong, of moral beauty and
deformity, implanted in the human heart; and that at the same
time a man is persuaded that providence has no regard to indivi
duals, to their actions, or the events which befall them ; and that
therefore he has nothing to hope or to fear from God ; and that this
life is the whole of his existence; and if he is also made to think,
that self-love is the original spring of human actions, and the cen
tral point to which all must tend ; and that a tendency to promote
his own happiness, his present happiness, is what gives the law of
* Works, vol. v. p. 80, 81. t Ibid. p. 82.
} Ibid. vol. iv. p. 282. vol. v. p. 98. § Ibid. p. 196. || Ibid, p 103.
B B

370 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVI.
nature its obligation, which, as shall be shown, is what Lord Bo
lingbroke avows : upon these principles, if in any particular instance
an unjust action may turn to his own advantage, and he knows he
is safe in committing it, he is justified in doing that action, when a
strict regard to justice, or fidelity to his word and promise, would
do him hurt. For his present advantage and interest in this un
certain life is what he is to have principally in view, and to which
every thing else must be subordinate.
In the eleventh of his Fragments and Essays, in which he parti
cularly treats of sociability, he observes, that "it is owing to our
being determined by self-love to seek our pleasure and utility in
society ; and that when these ends are sufficiently answered, natural
sociability declines, and natural insociability commences. The in
fluence of self-love reaches no farther; and when men are once
formed into societies, those societies become individuals, and thus
self-love, which promoted union among men, promotes discord
among them."* So that, according to him, self-love first produces
sociableness, and puts men upon forming societies; and when so
cieties are once formed, this same self-love produces unsociableness
and discord between those societies. And if this be the case, I
cannot see how he can maintain, as he sometimes does, that uni
versal benevolence flows from self-love, when, according to his ac
count of it, it is only a very limited sociableness which is produced
by self-love ; and self-love, instead of promoting an universal bene
volence, destroys it.
With regard to the particular duties included in the law of nature,
there is little in these Essays that can be of use, either to show
what those duties are, or how they are deducible from that law.
What he saith on this head is for the most part very general.
As to the duties we owe to God, he observes, that " the reli
gion and law of nature shows us the Supreme Being manifested in
all his works to be the true and only object of our adoration ; and
that it teaches us to worship him in spirit and in truth, that is, in
wardly and sincerely." But he seems to confine the worship pre
scribed in that law to inward worship. He adds, that " in the
existence God has given us, and in the benefits which attach us
strongly to it, this shows him to be the first and greatest object of
our gratitude : and in the established order of things, subject to so
many vicissitudes, and yet so constant, this religion shows him to
be the reasonable as well as necessary object of our resignation :
and finally, in the wants, distresses, and dangers which those vicis
situdes bring frequently upon us, to be the comfortable object of
our hope — in which hope, the religion of nature will teach us no
doubt to address ourselves to the Almighty, in a manner consistent
with an entire resignation to his will, as some ofthe heathens did."*
These are undoubtedly important duties. But it is not easy to see
what plea there is for making God the comfortable object of our hope
in the wants, distresses, and dangers we are exposed to, or for
* Works, vol. v. p. 115. f Ibid. p. 97, 98.

Let. XXVI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 371
addressing ourselves to him in an entire resignation to his will and
to his providence, if he exerciseth no care of individuals at all, nor
concerneth himself about their actions, their particular cases and
circumstances, in this present state, nor will ever recompense their
piety and virtue in a future one. The scheme our author hath ad
vanced on these heads, appeareth to me to be absolutely inconsistent
with what he himself here representeth as important duties of the
law of nature.
As to other particular duties required in that law, he says, " No
doubt can be entertained whether the law of nature forbids idolatry,
blasphemy, murder, theft, and I think incest, at least in the highest
instance of it." * These things he only mentions ; but that which
he most largely insists upon, as a precept of the law of nature, is
polygamy. This is the subject of the seventeenth, eighteenth, and
nineteenth, of his Fragments and Essays. The principal argument
which he brings to prove that polygamy is agreeable to the law of
nature, and is a duty bound upon us by that law, is, that it con
tributes to the increase and propagation of the human species. He
owns that " monogamy, or the confinement of one husband to one
wife while they both live, will unite the care of both parents in
breeding up subjects of the commonwealth :" but he asserts, that
" it will not serve as effectually, nor in as great numbers, to the be
getting them."t But it would not be a hard matter to show, that
polygamy, if universally allowed (and it must be so if it were a law
of nature), would not tend to the increase of mankind upon the
whole, but the contrary."): Seeing if one man had many wives,
several men must be without any, considering that providence has
ordered such an equality in numbers between the sexes ; and that,
as hath been observed by those who have examined this matter with
the greatest accuracy, there are generally more men born into the
world, than women. This shows, that in the order of nature, and
according to the present constitution of things, more than one
woman is not ordinarily designed for one man. And I believe it
will scarce be denied to be probable, that twenty men married to
twenty women would have more children among them, than one
man married to twenty women. The constant ordinary course of
providence throughout the world with respect to the proportion be
tween the sexes is, as Moses represents it to have been in the be
ginning, one man to one woman. And it is observable, that accord
ing to his account, polygamy had no place either at the first original
of the human race, or at the reparation of mankind immediately
after the deluge, though in both these cases the speedy multiplica
tion of the human species seemed to be necessary. If therefore we
judge, as Lord Bolingbroke would have us judge, of the law of
nature by the constitution of our system, monogamy is more agree
able to that law, and a more perfect institution than polygamy. But
* Works, vol. v. p. 156. t Ibid. p. 163.
X See, concerning this, the Rev. Dean Delany's excellent Reflections oi Po'y.
gamy. B 13 2

3/2 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVI.
I shall have occasion to resume this subject, when I come to con
sider his observations against the Christian law on this account.
I do not find that he any where represents adultery as a violation
of the law of nature ; he rather intimates the contrary, when he
gives it as a reason why in Greece and Rome, and several other
states, a plurality of wives was prohibited, and monogamy en
couraged, " because, notwithstanding their entering into single
marriages, nothing hindered them, nor their wives neither, except
the want of opportunity, from indulging their lust with others in
spite of their sacred bonds, and the legal property they had in one
another's persons." And he thinks it cannot be doubted that such
considerations have the same effect upon Christians, who look upon
those marriages to have been instituted by God himself.* But 1 am
persuaded the ancient pagans would not have alleged or admitted the
reason he gives for reconciling them to single marriages : as if no
man or woman entered into the marriage-bond, but with a resolution
to violate it as often as an opportunity offered. If that had been the
case, adultery would not have been so infamous a thing, nor so
severely punished, as it was in the best ages of Greece and Rome.
Nor were adulteries common among them, till an universal disso
luteness and corruption of manners prevailed, which prepared things
by degrees for the dissolution of their state. He plainly supposes
all men and women to be unchaste ; and that there is no such thing
as conjugal fidelity and chastity either among heathens or Chris
tians. Such a way of representing things is generally looked upon
as a suspicious sign of a vicious and corrupt heart, which judges of
the rest of mankind by its own depraved inclinations. And that his
Lordship had no great notion of the virtue or obligation of chastity,
farther appears from the account he gives of " the motives of that
modesty, with which almost all mankind, even the most savage, con
ceal the parts, and remove out of sight to perform the act, of gene
ration." He says, " the latent principle of this shame or modesty,
is a vanity inherent in our nature, which makes us fond of showing
how superior we are to other animals, and to hide how much we
participate of the same nature." As if the savage nations carried
their refinements so far, which would be an argument against eating
in open view, since in this we equally participate ofthe same nature
with other animals. He adds, that " an uncontrolled and undis
turbed indulgence to their mutual lust, is one of the principal reasons
for the solitude wherein the two sexes affect to copulate." So that
this shame and modesty, which forbids public copulations of human
creatures like brutes, is at last resolved into an excessive prevalence
of lust. He concludes therefore, that " this shame is artificial, and
has been inspired by human laws, by prejudice and the like."t As
to incest, he seems to think the law of nature forbids none but that
of the highest kind, viz. " the conjunction between fathers and
daughters, sons and mothers :" and whether this is forbidden by
that law he is not very positive ; but inclines to think it is forbidden;
* Works, vol. v. p. 1G7. t Ibid. p. 174.

Let. XXVI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 373
not for any repugnancy or abhorrence in nature to such copulations,
which he treats as a pretence that scarce deserves an answer, but.
because " as parents are the chief magistrates of families, every
thing that tends to diminish a reverence for them, or to convert it
into some, other sentiment, diminishes their authority, and dissolves
the order of these little commonwealths."* He mentions nations,
" among whom no regard was paid to the degrees of consanguinity
and affinity, but brothers mixed with sisters, fathers with their
daughters, and sons with their mothers : that they were had in
abomination by the Jews, who were in return held in contempt by
them and all others : that two of these nations, the Egyptians and
Babylonians, had been masters of the Jews in every sense, and from
whom the Greeks and Romans derived all their knowledge ; and
perhaps the first use of letters :"t And he observes, that " Eve was
in some sort the daughter of Adam. She was literally bone of his
bone, and flesh of his flesh."J This seems to be mentioned by him
with a design to give some sort of patronage for the conjunction
between fathers and daughters. But Eve could with no propriety
be called the daughter of Adam; though they might both be called
the children of God : Adam did not beget or form Eve, but God
formed them both.§
He concludes, that " increase and multiply is the law of nature.
The manner in which this precept shall be executed with the greatest
advantage to society, is the law of man." So that the only law of
nature that he allows in this case, is the natural instinct to increase
and multiply. Fornication, adultery, incest, are all left at large to
political considerations, and human laws, and to what men shall
think most for their pleasure and the propagation of the species,
without any divine law to restrain or regulate them ; which is to
open a wide door for a licentious indulgence to the carnal appetite.
The last thing I propose to consider with regard to Lord Boling
broke's account ofthe law of nature is, the ground ofthe obligation
of that law, and the sanctions whereby it is enforced.
As to the ground of its obligation, or from whence the obliging
force of that law arises, he observes, that that which makes it pro
perly obligatory is, not its being the will and appointment of God,
but its being conducive to human happiness. To this purpose he
declares, that " though the Supreme Being willed into existence
this system, and by consequence all the relations of things con
tained in it; yet it is not this will, it is in truth the constitution of
the system alone, that imposes these laws on mankind originally,
whatever power made this system."—  " The morality of actions,"
* Works, vol. v. p. 175. t Ibid. p. 172, 173. 175. X Ibid. p. 176,
§ Though our author seems in some of the passages above cited to speak of this
worst kind of incest in softening terms, which show no great abhorrence of it, yet
when he takes notice, in a sneering way, of the edifying anecdote of Lot's daughters,
he calls that incest a monstrous crime, and intimateth as if, according to the Mosaic ac
count, the goodness of their intention sanctified it. Vol. v. p. 112. But Moses con
tented himself with relating the fact as it really happened; nor can it possibly be sup
posed, that he had any design to sanctify that crime, which is forbidden and condemned
in his law in the strongest terms, and censured as an abomination.

374 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVI.
he thinks, " doth not consist in this, that they are prescribed by
will, even by the will of God : but it is this, that they are the means,
however imposed the practice of them may be, of acquiring happi
ness agreeable to our nature." And he seems to find fault with those
who " think there can be no law of nature, or at least that it can
not pass for a law in the sense of obliging and binding, without a
God :" though he owns, that " it is more fully and effectually so to
the theist, than to the atheist."* But though he has here ex
pressly declared, that it is not the will of God, but it is the consti
tution of the human system, which imposes these laws originally on
mankind ; yet afterwards, in opposition to Grotius, he asserts the
law of nature to be the positive law of God in every sense, a law of
will, and blames that great man, and others, for distinguishing
between the law of nature, and the positive law of God to man.f
With regard to the sanctions of the law of nature, he expressly
affirms, that the penalties which make the sanction of natural law,
affect nations collectively, not men individually.*!: This is not an
occasional thought, but is a fixed part of his scheme, and which he
frequently repeats. § The only penalties or sanctions which he al
lows properly to belong to the law of nature, are the public evils
which affects nations. With regard to particular persons, tbere are
no divine sanctions to enforce that law. But the punishment of in
dividuals is left wholly to the laws enacted by every community.
And it is certain that there are many breaches of the natural law,
which do not make men liable to any punishment by the civil laws.
There is no punishment provided by those laws, nor any, according
to our author's account, by the law of nature, for1 secret crimes,
however enormous ; nor do these laws ever punish internal bad dis
positions, any vices of the heart, or irregular and corrupt affections.
A man may be safely as wicked as he pleases, provided he can
manage so as to escape punishment by the laws of his country,
which very bad men, and those that are guilty of great vices, may
easily, and frequently do, evade. No other penalties has he to fear
(for I do not find that he ever reckons inward remorse or stings of
conscience among the sanctions ofthe natural law), except he hap
pens to be involved in national calamities ; among which he mentions
oppression, famine, pestilence, wars, and captivities ; and in these it
often happens, that good men as well as the wicked and vicious are
involved. So that he allows no punishments as proper divine sanc
tions of the law of nature, but what are common to those that keep
that law, as well as to those who violate it. All that he offers to
prove, that this divine sanction, as he calls it, of the natural law is
sufficient, amounts to this, that the sanctions of the law of Moses,
which is pretended to be a positive law given by God to his chosen
people, consisted only in temporal pains and penalties, and those
only such as affected the nation in general, and not individuals,
This, as far as the law of Moses is concerned, will be afterwards ex-
* Works, vol.iv. p. 283, 284. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 87. ' } Ibid. p. 90.
4 See particularly vol. iv. p. 288. vol. v. p. 472. 474. 494, 495,

Let. XXVI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 375
amined. At present I shall only observe, that it is a strange way of
arguing, to endeavour to prove, that the sanction of the law of
nature is divine, because it is the same with the sanction of the law
of Moses, which in our author's opinion was not divine.*
Allow me, before I conclude this letter, to make a brief represen
tation of that scheme of morality, or of the law of nature, which his
Lordship's principles naturally lead to.
The rule he lays down for judging of the law of nature, or of
moral obligation, is this : That man is to judge of it from his own
nature, and the system he is in. And man, according to his account
of him, is merely a superior animal, whose views are confined to
this present life, and who has no reasonable prospect of existing in
any other state. God has given him appetites and passions ; these
appetites lead him to pleasure, which is their only object. He has
reason indeed ; but this reason is only to enable him to provide and
contrive what is most conducive to his happiness ; that is, what
will yield him a continued permanent series ofthe most agreeable sen
sations or pleasures, which is the definition of happiness.-)- And if
no regard be had to futurity, he must govern himself by what he
thinks most conducive to his interest, or his pleasure, in his present
circumstances. The constitution of his nature is his only guide;
God has given him no other, and concerns himself no farther about
him, nor will ever call him to an account for his actions. In this
constitution his flesh or body is his all; there is no distinct imma
terial principle ; nor has he any moral sense or feelings naturally
implanted in his heart; and therefore to please the flesh, and pur
sue its interest, or gratify its appetites and inclinations, must be his
principal end. Only he must take care so to gratify them, as not
to expose himself to the penalties of human laws, which are the only
sanctions ofthe law of nature for particular persons. He may with
out any check of conscience debauch his neighbour's wife, when he
has an opportunity of doing it safely ; and needs be under no re
straint to the indulging his lusts, from shame or modesty, which is
only an artificial thing, owing to prejudice or pride. As to the re
fined sentiments of subjecting the appetites to reason, or the sub
jecting a man's own private interest, or that of his family, to the
r public good of the community, this cannot be reasonably done upon
his scheme. It is urged indeed, that " the good of individuals is so
closely connected with the good of society, that the means of pro
moting the one cannot be separated from those of promoting the
other."*!: But though it is generally so, yet it may happen in par
ticular cases, that these interests may be separated. It may be
more for a man's private interest to break the laws of his country ;
and if he can find his own private advantage, or gratify his ambition,
his love of power, or of riches, in doing what is prejudicial to the
community, there is nothing to restrain him from it, provided he can
do it safely ; for self-love is the centre of tbe whole moral system,
and the more extended the circle is, the weaker it grows. So that
* Works, vol. v. p. 91. t Ibid. p. 377, 378. J Ibid. p. 103.

376 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
the love of a man's country must be far weaker than his love of
himself, or regard to his own particular interest, which must be his
supreme governing principle and end.
But I shall not pursue this any farther. How far such a system
of morals would be for the good of mankind, it is easy to see; and
it seems to me fairly deducible from Lord Bolingbroke's principles
taken in their just connection, though I do not pretend to charge
his Lordship with expressly acknowledging or avowing all these con
sequences ; and sometimes he advances what is inconsistent with
them.

LETTER XXVII.

An Examination of what Lord Bolingbroke hath offered concerning Revelation in
general. — He asserts that mankind had no Need of an extraordinary Revelation 
The contrary fully shown. — A divine Revelation very needful to instruct men in the
most important Principles of Religion, especially those relating to the Unity, the
Perfections, and Providence of God; the worship that is to be rendered to him ;
moral Duty taken in its just Extent; the chief Good and Happiness of Man; the
Terms of our Acceptance with God, and the Means of Reconciliation when we have
offended him ; and the Rewards and Punishments of a future State  It may be
concluded from the Necessities of Mankind, that a Revelation was communicated
from the Beginning. — A Notion and Belief of this has very generally obtained.—
The wisest Men of Antiquity sensible that bare Reason alone is not sufficient to
enforce Doctrines and Laws with a due Authority upon Mankind — The most cele
brated Philosophers acknowledged their Want of divine Revelation  The Author's
Exceptions against this examined.— Under Pretence of extolling the great Effects
which a true divine Revelation must have produced, he endeavours to show, that no
true divine Revelation was ever really given. — His Scheme tends, contrary to his
own Intention, to show the Usefulness and Necessity of divine Revelation.
Sir,
Any one that reads Lord Bolingbroke's Works with attention
must be convinced, that one principal design he had in view, was
to destroy the authority of the divine revelation in general, and of
the Jewish and Christian in particular. I shall consider what he
hath offered with regard to each of these ; and shall begin with
what relates to divine revelation in general.
As to the possibility of an extraordinary revelation communicated
from God to men, his Lordship hath no where thought fit expressly
to deny it ; though he hath made some attempts which seem to look
that way. He frequently treats the notion of communion with
God and communications from God to men, as a great absurdity, and
the supposition of which is wholly owing to the pride of the human
heart ; and has declared, that he cannot "comprehend the metaphy
sical or physical influence of spirits, suggestions, silent communica
tions, injection of ideas. — And that all such interpositions in the
intellectual system cannot be conceived, without altering, in every

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 377
such instance, the natural progression ofthe human understanding,
and the freedom of the will."* Yet in a long digression about in
spiration, in his " Essay concerning the Nature, Extent, and
Reality, of Human Knowledge," after having done what he could to
expose and ridicule it, he expressly owns, that " an extraordinary
action of God on the human mind, which the word inspiration is
here used to denote, is not more inconceivable than the ordinary
action of mind on body, or of body on mind." — And that " it is im
pertinent to deny the existence of any phenomenon, merely because
we cannot account for it." But he urges, that " it would be silly
to assume inspiration to be true, because God can act mysteriously,
i. e. in ways unknown to us, on his creature man."t Nor was any
of the divines, whom he treats on all occasions with so much con
tempt, ever so silly, as to assume inspiration to be true, merely be
cause it is possible. The actual truth of it must be proved by other
arguments. I shall therefore take it for granted, that an extraordinary revela
tion from God to men, for instructing and directing them in the
knowledge of important truth, of his will and their duty, is possible ;
and that such a revelation might be so circumstanced, as to be of
real and signal advantage, our author himself seems sometimes will
ing to allow. After having observed, that we cannot be obliged to
believe against reason, he adds, that "when a revelation hath all
the authenticity of human testimony, when it appears consistent in
all its parts, and when it contains nothing inconsistent with any real
knowledge we have ofthe supreme all-perfect Being, and of natural
religion, such a revelation is to be received with the most profound
reverence, with the most entire submission, and with the most un
feigned thanksgiving."*!: This goes upon a supposition that an extra
ordinary revelation from God is not only possible, but may be of
signal benefit to mankind ; and, if really communicated, ought to be
received with great thankfulness. And he declares that he does
not " presume to assert, that God has made no such particular reve
lations of his will to mankind ;" though he adds, that the "opinion
that there have been such revelations, is not in any degree so agree
able to the notions of infinite knowledge and wisdom, as the con
trary opinion. "§
What he principally bends himself to prove is, that mankind had
no need of supernatural revelation ; and that therefore it is no way
probable that God would extraordinarily interpose to give such dis
coveries of his will. For this purpose he mightily extols the abso
lute clearness and perfection of the law of nature ; from whence, he
thinks, it follows, " that God has made no other revelation of him
self, and of his will to mankind." Many of the Fragments and
Essays in his fifth volume are particularly intended to invalidate
what Dr. Clarke had urged to show the need the world stood in of
a divine revelation. See particularly from the twenty-third to the
* Works, vol. v. p. 414,415. — See concerning this above, Letter VII.
t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 468. X Ibid. vol. iv. p. 279.— See also. vol. v. p. 201. § Ibid. p. 544.

378 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
twenty-eight of his Fragments and Essays ; as also the thirty-third
and thirty-fourth. But if we abstract from the overbearing confi
dence, and assuming air, so familiar to Lord Bolingbroke, we shall
find very little in those essays, which is of any consequence against
what that very learned writer had advanced.
The reflections that were made in my last letter on what his Lord
ship had offered concerned the absolute clearness of the law or
religion of nature to all mankind, might suffice to show, that there
is no just foundation for the inference he would draw from it. But
it will be proper to enter upon a more particular and distinct con
sideration of this matter. And to set it in a fair light, I shall men
tion some things of high importance to mankind, with regard to
which they stand in great need of particular instruction, and of hav
ing them cleared and ascertained by a divine revelation. Such are
the articles relating to the unity, the perfection, and providence of
God, the worship that is to be rendered to him, moral duty taken
in its just extent, the chief good and happiness of man, the terms of
our acceptance with God, and the means of reconciliation when we
have offended him, and the rewards and punishments of a future
state. 1. The first and fundamental principle of all religion relates to the
unity, the perfections, and providence of the one true God, the su
preme original Cause of all things, the Maker and Governor of the
world. This is justly represented by our author as the angular
stone of religion. And it comes to us confirmed by so many con
vincing proofs, that one would have been apt to expect that all
mankind in all ages should have agreed in acknowledging it; and
yet certain it is, that there is scarce any thing in which they have
fallen into more pernicious errors, than in their notions relating to
this great and fundamental article. This writer finds great fault
with Mr. Locke for asserting, in his " Reasonableness of Chris
tianity," that the heathens were deficient in the first article of
natural religion, the knowledge of one God, the Maker of all
things : and yet this is no more than what Lord Bolingbroke him
self acknowledges in strong terms. He observes, that " though
the first men could doubt no more, that some cause of the world,
than that the world itself, existed, yet a consequence of this great
event, and of the surprise, ignorance, and inexperience, of mankind
must have been much doubt and uncertainty concerning the first
cause : * that the variety of the phsenomena which struck their sense
would lead them to imagine a variety of causes. — That accordingly
polytheism and idolatry prevailed almost every-where, and therefore
seems more conformable to human ideas abstracted from the first
appearance of things, and better proportioned, by an analogy of
human conceptions, to the uncultivated reason of mankind, and to
understandings not sufficiently informed." He adds, that " poly
theism, and the consequence of it, idolatry, were avowed and
taught by legislators and philosophers, and they prevailed more
* Works, vol. iii. p. 253.

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 379
easily, because they were more conformable to the natural concep
tions of the human mind, than the belief of one first intelligent
Cause, the sole Creator, Preserver, and Governor of all things."*
And though he insinuates, that " afterwards, when nations became
civilized, and wise constitutions of government were formed, men
could not be ignorant of this great principle," yet he owns, that
" the vulgar among the Greeks and Romans, and all the learned
nations of the east, acknowledged a multitude of divinities, to which
they ascribed every excellence and every defect of their own
nature." t He endeavours indeed to apologize for them, by saying,
that '' the worship of this multiplicity of gods did not interfere
with the supreme Being in the minds of those that worshipped
them." "I" But in plain contradiction to this, he elsewhere saith,
that " they lost sight of him, and suffered imaginary beings to
intercept the worship due to him alone." § And speaking of the
crowd of imaginary divinities among the heathens, supercelcstial
and celestial gods, whole gods, and half gods, &c. he says, that
" they intercepted the worship of the supreme Being; and that this
monstrous assemblage made the object of vulgar adoration."|| And
indeed nothing can be more evident than it is from all the remaining
monuments of paganism, that the public worship prescribed and
established by their laws was paid to a multiplicity of deities ; nor
was there any injunction in any of their laws, that the supreme God,
and he only, was to be adored. The legislators, by his own ac
knowledgment, " thought it dangerous to cure, and useful to con
firm, the popular superstition." %
He is pleased indeed to give a magnificent account of the pagan
mysteries, as what were intended by tbe heathen legislators for re
forming the manners and religion of the people. He asserts as
positively as if he knew it, that " there are good grounds to be per
suaded, that the whole system of polytheism was unravelled in the
greater mysteries, or that no more of it was retained than was con
sistent with monotheism, with the belief of one supreme self-existent
Being :" and yet he ridicules those who pretend to give a minute
and circumstantial account of those mysteries, as if they had
assisted at the celebration of them. " These rites," he says, " were
kept secret, under the severest penalties, above two thousand years :
how then can we hope to have them revealed to us now?"** He
owns however, that " the vulgar gods still kept their places there,
and the absurdities of polytheism were retained, however mitigated:
and that the lesser mysteries preserved, and the greater tolerated,
the fictitious divinities which superstition and poetry had invented,
such as Jupiter, Mercury, and Venus, as well as the rites and cere
monies instituted in honour of them, " which,'' he says, " were
practised even by those who were consummated in the greater
mysteries." And that thus it was particularly in the Eleusinian
mysteries, which were the most sacred of them all.tf It gives one
* Works, vol. iii. p. 259, 260. f Ibid. vol. iv. p. 199, 200. X Ibid. vol. v. p. 305.
§ Ibid. vol. iv. p. 80. || Ibid. p. 461. f Ibid. p. 51. ** Ibid. p. 58.
ff Ibid. p. 74.

380 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WHITERS. Let. XXVII.
no very advantageous notion of the nature and design of those
mysteries, that Socrates would not be initiated in them. And cer
tain it is, . that, notwithstanding this boasted expedient, the people,
particularly the Athenians, who were remarkably strict in the cele
bration of those mysteries, still grew more and more addicted to
their superstitions and idolatries, which were never at a greater
height than when Christianity appeared.
With regard to the philosophers, he tells us, " they knew as well
as we know, that there is a first intelligent cause of all things, and
that the infinite wisdom and power of this Being made and preserves
the universe, and that his providence governs it.* But it cannot
be denied, that some whole sects of them did not acknowledge the
one supreme God, the Maker and Governor of the world : others of
them, as the Sceptics and Academics, represented these things as
matters of doubtful disputation." And as to those of them who ac
knowledged the existence ofthe monad or unity, he himself tells us,
that they neglected to worship him, and conformed to the practice
of idolatry, though not to the doctrines of polytheism." t And such
persons were certainly very unfit to instruct and reform mankind in
this important article. And after giving a very lively description of
the prevailing polytheism and idolatry, he adds, that " thus the
vulgar believed, and thus the priests encouraged, whilst the philo
sophers, overborne by the torrent of polytheism, suffered them thus
to believe, in ages when true theism was reputed atheism.""}: Some
of the greatest philosophers were of opinion, that God was not to
be named, or discoursed of among the vulgar, because they were
not capable of forming a just notion of him. Plato in his book of
laws did not prescribe to the people the worship ofthe one Supreme
God, because he looked upon him to be incomprehensible ; and that
what he is, or how he is to be worshipped, is not to be described or
declared. But he appointed twelve solemn festivals to be observed,
to the honour of the twelve principal gods, and proposed the worship
ofthe stars, whose divinity he recommended. See his eighth book
of laws, and his Epinomis, or appendix to his book of laws.
There was need therefore of an extraordinary divine interposition
to awaken the attention of mankind to this great and fundamental
article of all religion. To divine revelation it was owing, that the
belief, and acknowledgment, and adoration of the one true God,
and of him only, was established among the Jews, whilst the
learned and civilized nations all around them were immersed in the
most stupid idolatry and polytheism. And this writer acknowledges,
that " our Saviour found the world in a state of error concerning
this first principle of natural religion : and that the spreading of
Christianity has contributed to destroy polytheism and idolatry." §
As the existence and unity of the one true God, so his attributes
and perfections, and his governing providence, are of high import
ance to be clearly and certainly known. With regard to the divine
attributes and perfections, Lord Bolingbroke observes, that " though
* Works, vol. v. p. 217. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 48. X Ibid. p. 200. § Ibid. p. 24 1.

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 381
theists will concur in ascribing all possible perfections to tbe su
preme Being, yet they will always differ when they descend into
any detail, and pretend to be particular about them ; as they have
always differed in their notions of those perfections."* A revelation
from God therefore, in which he declares his own divine attributes
and perfections, must be of great advantage to mankind ; and it is
what one should think every true theist would wish for, that God
would be graciously pleased to make a discovery of himself, and of
his own glorious perfections, which may direct and assist men in
forming just and worthy notions of them, especially of what it most
nearly concerneth us to know, his moral attributes.
And as to the knowledge and belief of his governing providence,
in this also the heathens were greatly deficient. He observes,
speaking of some of the philosophers who acknowledged the monad,
or first unity, that " they reduced him in some sort to a nonentity, an
abstract or notional Being, and banished him almost entirely out of
the system of his works."-)- Tacitus, having represented it as un
certain, whether human affairs were governed by fate and immu
table necessity, or by chance, observes, that the wisest of the
ancients were of different sentiments about it ; and that many had
this opinion deeply fixed in their minds, that neither our beginning,
nor our end, nor men at all, were minded by the Gods.
Mihi hczc ac talia audienti in incerto judicium est, fatone res hu
mana,, et necessitate immutabili, an forte volvantur ; quippe sapien-
tissimos veterum, quique eorum sectam amulantur, diversos reperies,
at multis insitam opinionem non initia nostra, nonflnem, non denique
homines diis cura. Tacit. Annal. lib. 6.
Some, like our author, who pretended to own a general, denied
a particular providence, which extends to the individuals of the
human race; and, under pretence of high thoughts of the divine
majesty, were for secluding him from any concern with human
actions or affairs. This then is another matter of great importance,
in which an extraordinary revelation from God would be of signal
use. For if he should condescend by any well-attested revelation to
assure men of his concern even for the individuals of mankind, to
declare his kind and gracious intentions towards them, and his cog
nizance of their actions, and the events that relate to them, this
would greatly contribute to remove their doubts, and would lay the
foundation for an ingenuous confidence, an entire resignation, a
cheerful hope, and steady dependence.
It appears, from these short hints, of how great advantage a
well-attested revelation from God might be for instructing us in the
certain knowledge of God, of his attributes, and his providence — :
things of the highest moment in religion, and on which the duty
and happiness of mankind in a great measure depend.
2dly, Another thing that it is proper to observe here is, that a
* Works, vol. v. p. 235. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 466.

382 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
divine revelation is very needful to teach men not only to know and
acknowledge the one true God, his attributes, and providence, but
to instruct them how to worship him in an acceptable manner. Dr.
Clarke had urged, that "bare reason cannot discover in what
manner, and with what kind of service God will be worshipped."
Lord Bolingbroke takes notice of this, and in answer to it observes,
that " bare reason cannot discover how any external service that
man can pay should be acceptable to the supreme and all-perfect
Being." He acknowledges, that an inward adoration, a gratitude
to God for his benefits, and resignation to his providence, is neces
sary;* and that the law of nature teaches us " to worship God in
spirit and in truth, that is, inwardly and sincerely." t He seems to
confine the worship required in the law of nature to inward worship,
the devotion of the heart. But if it be necessary that meu should
worship the supreme Being inwardly, it seems highly proper that
there should be some outward acts of religious homage, openly ex
pressive of that inward adoration, reverence and gratitude. With
out some such external acts of worship, men cannot join in social
acts of devotion, or in rendering to God public worship, without
which scarce any appearance' of religion can be maintained in the
world. It is the voice of nature and reason, in which all mankind
have generally agreed, that there should be external as well as in
ternal worship rendered to God, and that there should be sacred
rites appointed for the better regulating and ordering that external
worship. Accordingly he owns, that " the best and wisest of the
heathens approved the political institutions of an external service,
as far as they helped to keep up a lively sense of these duties in the
minds of men, and to promote the practice of them :" J and he had
declared before, that " there may be laws and institutions relating
to such outward rites and observances, which may be proper and even
necessary means to promote the observation of those duties." But
he will not allow that " any such laws can be divine ordinances;
they can only pass for human institutions." $ But I cannot see
upon what foundation it can be pretended, that God cannot insti
tute ordinances relating to the external rites of divine worship, when
it is owned, that such ordinances may be instituted by men, and
may be useful to keep up a lively sense of the great duties of religion
in the minds of men, and to promote the observance and practice of
them. It is undeniably manifest, from the experience and observa
tion of all ages, that there is nothing in which men have been more
apt to err, than in what regards the external rites of religious
worship; and that, when left merely to human imagination and in
vention, these things have often hindered, instead of promoting, the
main ends of all religion. This shows how needful it was, that God
should himself institute that external religious service, which is so
necessary, and in which yet mankind have been so prone to fall into
the errors and extravagances of superstition. Our author himself
takes notice of " the numberless ridiculous and cruel rites of
* Works, vol. v. p. 208. t Ibid. p. 98. X Ibid. p. 208. § Ibid. p. 98.

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 383
paganism, which were held necessary to obtain the favour, and avert
the anger of heaven."* And surely there could not be a more
proper and effectual preservative against these absurd superstitions,
than for God to institute the external rites of his own worship, and
for men to keep close to his institutions. This was certainly one
valuable end for which we may suppose it proper that God should
extraordinarily interpose to reveal his will to mankind, viz. for di
recting them in the external worship he would have rendered to him,
that it might be regulated in such a manner, as to be a fit means
of promoting inward worship, and answering the main ends of
religion. 3dly, Another thing of great importance to mankind to know,
and in which a revelation from God is very needful, and of signal
use, is moral duty taken in its just extent. Lord Bolingbroke
himself represents it as taking in our duty towards God and man,
according to the different relations in which we stand to both.f To
which may be added, the duties and virtues which relate, to self-
government, and the conducting and regulating our own appetites
and passions. Now the only way we have of being fully instructed
and directed in the knowledge and practice of our duty, if all
regard to extraordinary divine revelation be thrown out of the case,
is either for every man to collect the whole of his duty for himself,
merely by the force of his own reason and observation, or to follow
the instructions and directions of philosophers and moralists, or the
institutions of civil laws.
As to the first, there are many passages in our author's writings,
that represent the law of nature in its whole extent, as so clear and
obvious to the meanest understanding, that man cannot be mistaken
in it. He frequently talks as if every man was able, without any
instruction, by considering the works of God, and the constitution
of the human system, to furnish out a scheme of natural religion for
himself, including the main principles and duties of the law of
nature. But this pretence is so contrary to matter-of-fact, and to
the experience and observation of all ages, and has been so often
exposed, that I need not take any farther pains, besides the hints
given in my former letter, to show the absurdity of it, especially as
I had occasion to consider it at large in the answer to Tindal.
The bulk of mankind, therefore, must be sent for the knowledge
of their duty, either to the instructions of their teachers and wise
men, or to the institutions of civil laws.
As to the former, if by teachers be meant the heathen priests, as
distinguished from the philosophers (though our author says that in
the earlier ages they were the same), I believe those of his senti
ments will easily allow, that they were not very proper to instruct
mankind in the right knowledge of religion, and in the true doc
trine of morals. But with regard to the philosophers, though he
represents them as venders of' false wares, and frequently spends
whole pages in invectives against them, yet when he has a mind to
* Works, vol. v. p. 208. t Ibid. p. 154. 543, 544.

384 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
show that there was no need of a divine revelation, he thinks fit to
represent them as very proper and sufficient guides and instructors
to mankind. Dr. Clarke, in his " Evidences of Natural and
Revealed Religion," had offered several considerations to prove that
they were not so. Lord Bolingbroke endeavours to take off the
force of his observations, especially in the twenty-third, twenty -fifth,
and twenty-sixth of his Fragments and Essays. And whereas that
learned writer had asserted, that " the heathen philosophers were
never able to prove clearly and distinctly enough, to persons of all
capacities, the obligations of virtue, and the will of God in matters
of morality — and that they were not able to frame to themselves any
complete, and regular, and consistent scheme or system of things ;"
in opposition to this, his Lordship affirms, that " there is no one
moral virtue, 'which has not been taught, explained, and proved, by
the heathen philosophers, both occasionally and purposely : That
they all agreed, that the practice of virtue was of necessary and
indispensable obligation, and that the happiness of mankind
depended upon it, in general, and in particular : And that they all
agreed also what was virtue, and what was vice."* And he again
insisteth upon it, that " there is no one moral precept in the whole
gospel which was not taught by the philosophers ; and that this is
strongly and largely exemplified by Huetius, in the third book of
his Alnetana Qutzstiones." And he blames Dr. Clarke for conceal
ing it.f
There are two observations which I shall make upon what his
Lordship has here offered.
The first is this : That if it were true, that there is no moral pre
cept enjoined in the gospel, but what may be found in the writings
of some one or other of the heathen philosophers, this would not
be sufficient to enforce those duties upon mankind, or to convince
them of their obligations to perform them. When so many of the
philosophers wrote upon moral subjects, it may be supposed, that
one or other of thern might, by a happy conjecture, light upon
some of the most sublime precepts of the gospel morality. But
what was it to mankind what a particular philosopher, or even sect
of philosophers, maintained or taught in their schools 1 They were
not the public teachers of religion ; and was it likely that their
refined speculations, unenforced by any authority, and contradicted
by others among themselves, should have any great influence upon
mankind, and be regarded by them as divine laws, especially with
regard to matters in which the gratification of their appetites and
passions was concerned, and their own prevailing inclinations were
to be restrained or governed ? They might, after hearing the rea
sonings of the philosophers, think they were not obliged to govern
themselves by their dictates, however plausible, and seemingly
rational. Whereas a divine revelation, clearly ascertaining and
determining their duty in plain and express propositions, would
carry far stronger conviction, and when received and believed, would
* Works, vol. v. p. 204, 205. t Ibid. p. 218.

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 305
leave no room to doubt of their obligation. And he himself seems
to acknowledge the usefulness of the Christian revelation to enforce
the practice qf morality by a superior authority.*
My second reflection is this : That what this writer assumes as
true is evidently false, namely, that the philosophers taught the
whole of our duty in the same extent as it is taught in the Gospel.
Moral duty by his own account of it, comprehendeth the duty we
owe to God as well as to our fellow-creatures. As to the social
and civil duties, on which the peace and order of political societies
immediately depend, these were generally acknowledged by the
several sects of philosophers ; though the regard that was paid by
the people to these duties, was more the effect of civil laws than of
the doctrines and dictates of the philosophers. But as to that part
of our duty which relates to God, with what face or consistency
can it be pretended, that this was taught by the philosophers in the
same extent that it is in the gospel ? Our author makes the adora
tion of the one true God, and of him only, to be a fundamental
obligation of the law of nature, and idolatry to be forbidden in that
law. And certain it is, that the most celebrated philosophers,
instead of instructing the people aright in this important part of
their duty, fell in themselves with the common superstition and
idolatry, and directed men to conform in their religious worship to
the rites and laws of their several countries ; by which polytheism
was established, and the public worship was directed to a multipli
city of deities.
And as to that part of duty which relateth to the government of
the appetites and passions, it is evident the philosophers were far
from being agreed what was virtue and what was vice. Some were
for giving much greater indulgence than others to the fleshly sensual
appetites and passions ; and even the unnatural sin was not only
permitted, but recommended, by some of them who were of great
name. He affirms, that " of a moral kind there were, properly speaking,
no disputes among philosophers- They were disputes about insig
nificant speculations, and no more. For the morality of Zeno, and
of Epicurus, reduced to practice were the same."-)- As if it were a
trifling dispute, whether the world was formed by a most wise,
benign, and powerful Cause and Author, or by a fortuitous jumble
of atoms ; whether the world and mankind are governed by a most
wise and righteous Providence ; or whether there is no providence
of God at all with regard to human affairs. It is evident, that sub
mission to God, dependence upon his providence, gratitude for his
benefits, and resignation to his will, concerning which, some of
the Stoics laid excellent things, could make no part of the morality
of Epicurus. Thus were the philosophers divided in tbe most
important points of religion, and consequently in the duties resulting
from it.
But what the philosophers were not qualified to do, was perhaps
* Works, vol. v. p. 294. t Ibid. p. 219.

386 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
effected by the legislators, and the institutions of civil laws. This
is what our author seems to lay the principal stress upon. He
observes, that " some few particular men may discover, explain, and
press upon others the moral obligations that are incumbent upon
all, and our moral state will be little improved by it : but that for
this purpose governments have been instituted, laws have been
made, customs established, and men have been deterred from
immorality, by various punishments which human justice inflicts ;"*
where he supposes human governments and laws to be the only effec
tual means for the security and improvement of virtue. But it is
manifest, that, as I had occasion to observe before, the civil laws of any
community are very imperfect measures of virtue, or moral obliga
tion. A man may obey those laws, and yet be far from being truly
virtuous ; he may not be obnoxious to the penalties of those laws,
and yet be a very vicious and bad man. Some of the most worthy
and excellent affections and dispositions are unrewarded by
those laws ; and some of the worst affections unpunished. The
heart, the proper seat of virtue and vice, is not within the cog
nizance of civil laws, or human governments. And what farther
shows that civil laws and customs are not to be depended upon for
direction in matters of morality, is, that it has often happened, that
those laws and customs have been contrary to the rules of real reli
gion and virtue. This writer, indeed, has taken upon him to assert,
that " whatever violations of the law of nature may have been
committed by particular men, yet none that were deemed to besuch,
and perhaps few that might be called strictly such, have been
enacted into laws, or have grown up into established customs."-)-
And that " the tables of the natural law, which are hung up in the
works of God., are obvious to the sight of all men ; and, therefore,
no political society ever formed a system of laws in direct and
avowed contradiction to them. ''% But though no legislators ever
declared in plain terms, that the laws they enacted were contrary to
the law of nature, which it were absurd to suppose, yet that many
laws have been enacted which were really contrary to that law, is
both undeniably evident from many well-known instances of such
laws, and is what he himself is obliged to acknowledge. He
observes, that " the law of nature has been blended with many
absurd and contradictory laws in all ages and countries, as well as
with customs, which, if they arose independent on laws, have
obtained the force of laws:§" And that "errors about the law of
nature, and contradictions to it, abound, and have always abounded,
in the laws and customs of society."||
Laying all these things together, it is manifest, that men stood in
great need of a divine revelation, to give them a clear and certain
direction concerning moral duty taken in its just extent. The laws
of nature, according to our author, are general, and men have betn
always very prone to make wrong deductions from them ; and there-
* Works, vol. v. p. 480, 481. t Ibid. p. 151. X Ibid p. 153. § Ibid. p. 100.
|| Ibid. p. 153.— See also ibid. p. 197. 201.

Let. XXVII. . LORD BOLINGBROKE. 387
fore if God should be pleased, in a way of extraordinary revelation, to
give a system of laws to mankind, plainly pointing out the particulars
of their duty, and determining it by his own divine authority, whereby
even the vulgar part of mankind might be certainly assured of their
duty in the most important instances, and what it is that God
required of them ; this would both give them the best direction, and
would, where really believed and received, have an influence in bind
ing their moral obligations upon them, whieh could not be expected,
either from the dictates of philosophers, or the force of human
laws. And, accordingly, some of the wisest lawgivers of antiquity,
in order to give their laws greater authority on the minds of men,
endeavoured to make them pass upon the people for divine. And
this writer himself declares, that " nothing may seem in speculation
so proper to enforce moral obligation, as a true revelation, or a reve
lation believed to be' true."* Mr. Locke, in his " Reasonableness of
Christianity," hath fully considered this matter ; where he hath
shown the insufficiency of human reason, unassisted by revelation,
in its great and proper business of morality. His Lordship has
taken some notice of this. But the account he is pleased to give of
Mr. Locke's argument is so poor and trifling, that though it be as
fine a piece of reasoning as can be met with on this subject, it is
hard to know it in his representation of it. This any man will be
convinced of, that compares it as it stands in Mr. Locke's works,
vol. ii. p. 573, et seq. edit. fol. 1740, with what Lord Bolingbroke
hath offered upon it, vol. iv. p. 295, 296.
4thly. It is a point of great importance to mankind to be in
structed to form right notions of happiness, or wherein their chief
good, and the proper felicity of the human nature, doth consist.
His lordship hath taken notice of what Dr. Clarke had observed,
that, according to Varro, " there were no less than two hundred
and fourscore different opinions about what was the chief good or
final happiness of man." He says, " that there were so many may
be doubted ; but that they must have been extremely various, is
certain. The summum bonum, or supreme good of man, as it was
understood and taught by the heathen philosophers, was a subject
wherein every man had a right to pronounce for himself, and no man
had a right to pronounce for another. These disputes were there
fore very trifling."+ But certainly if there be an enquiry of the
utmost importance to mankind, it is that about the chief good.
For to be wrong in this will lead a man wrong in his whole course ;
since his chief good must be his principal governing end. His
Lordship is for leaving every man to judge of this for himself, and
that no man has a right to judge for another. And since he
makes happiness to be what every man must pursue by the law and
dictates of nature, and that the morality of actions, and the proper
ground of their obligation, " consist in this, that they are the means
of acquiring happiness agreeable to our nature ;"% if men fix a
wrong happiness to themselves, it will put them upon improper
* Works, vol. v. p. 268. t Ibid. p. 206. J Ibid. p. 283, 284.
C C 2

388 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
measures, and give a wrong direction to their moral conduct. And
certain it is, that there is nothing in which men are more apt to be
mistaken, and to form wrong judgments, than this. This author
makes a distinction between pleasure-and happiness, and observes,
that instinct and appetite lead to the former, and reason to the lat
ter. But he owns, that most men are apt to confound these ; and
he himself defines happiness to be a continued permanent series of
agreeable sensations or pleasures.* And must every man be left to
himself, without any farther direction, to judge of his duty and hap
piness, from what he thinks will produce in him a series of the most
agreeable sensations and pleasures ; and that, abstracting (for so
our author would have it) from all consideration of another life, and
a future account ? If the passions be brought into the consultation
(and they will be apt to force themselves in, and claim being heard),
the judgment that is formed is like to be very unequal and
uncertain; especially considering the influence they have, by his
own account, in bringing over reason to pronounce on their side, or
at least to come to a kind of composition with them. It must needs
therefore be a mighty advantage to have this determined for us by a
divine authority ; and nothing could be more worthy of the divine
wisdom and goodness, than to grant an extraordinary revelation for
instructing men in what relates to the true happiness and perfection
of their nature, and directing them in the way that leads to it.
5thly. Another thing which it highly concerneth men to be well
informed of, relateth to the terms of their acceptance with God, and
the means of reconciliation when they have offended him ; and this
is a very proper subject for a divine revelation. Dr. Clarke had
urged this, in his Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion.]
But his Lordship, who had undertaken to answer him, thinks this
to be of small consequence, and scarce worth enquiring about. He
pronounces, that "neither reason nor experience will lead us to
enquire, what propitiation God will accept, nor in what manner a
reconciliation between the Supreme Being, and this worm man, is
to be made.":)" Indeed upon his scheme it would be to little pur
pose to make such an enquiry, since he would have us believe that
God doth not concern himself at all about the individuals of the
human race, nor taketh any notice of their actions, so as to be pleased
or displeased with them, or to reward or punish them on the account
of those actions. I shall not repeat what hath been already offered
to show that this scheme is contrary to reason, and, if pursued to
its genuine consequences, would be subversive of all virtue and good
order in the world. At present I shall only farther observe, that if
men are reasonable creatures, moral agents, and if God hath given
them a law, as this writer sometimes not only allows, but asserts,
and which must be acknowledged, if the law of nature be God's law;
then they must certainly be under indispensable obligations to obey
that law; nor can it consistently be supposed, that the great
* Works, vol. v. p. 378. t Clarke's Evidences of Natural and Revealed
Religion, p. 293. x Works, vol. v. p. 209.

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 3gQ
Governor ofthe world is perfectly indifferent, whether his reasonable
creatures obey his law or not. A transgression of that law, which is
the will of God, must certainly have a monstrous malignity in it, as
it is an offence committed by his reasonable creatures, and the sub
jects of his moral government, against the majesty and authority, as
well as goodness, of the supreme universal Lord and Sovereign of
the universe. And how can such creatures as we are pretend
positively to pronounce what punishment sin deserves, or how far it
may seem fit to God in his governing wisdom and righteousness to
punish his offending creatures, or upon what terms he will pardon
their transgressions, and restore them to his grace and favour, or
how far that pardon is to extend? These are things which
manifestly depend upon what seemeth most fit to his infinite wisdom,
and concerning which we could not presume to form a certain judg
ment, if he should not declare his will concerning it.
As to what our author adds, that ''repentance, as it implies
amendment, is one ofthe doctrines of natural religion ; and he does
not so much as suspect, that any farther revelation is necessary to
establish it ;" it will be easily owned, that repentance and amend
ment are necessary when we have sinned against God ; and that this
is a doctrine of natural religion : but that this alone is sufficient to
avert the penalty we had incurred by disobedience, natural reason
cannot assure us. It is certain, that to establish this rule inhuman
governments would go a great way to dissolve all order and govern
ment. And who can undertake to affirm, that in the divine govern
ment it must be an established rule, that as often as ever sinners repent,
they must not only be freed from the punishment they had incurred,
but be received to the divine favour, and their imperfect obedience
rewarded, as if they had not offended, without any farther expedient
to secure and vindicate the authority of his laws ? It is evident, that
in the natural course of things, as ordered by divine providence,
repentance and amendment do not avert many of those evils which
may be regarded as the punishments of men's crimes. They often
labour under evils brought upon them by those vices of which they
have heartily repented, and feel the penal effects of their evil courses,
even after they have forsaken them. And since by this constitu
tion the Author of nature hath declared, that repentance alone shall
not free men in all cases from punishment, who can take upon him
to determine, that our great offended Sovereign, the most wise and
righteous Lord and Governor of the world, may not judge some
thing farther necessary to show his displeasure against sin, and to
vindicate the majesty of his government, and the authority of his
laws '? And, accordingly, the natural sense of mankind hath
generally led them to be anxiously solicitous, when they were sen
sible of their having offended God, to use some means to avert
the divine displeasure. Their fears have given occasion to much
superstition, and many expedients have been devised, which have
been generally of such a kind, as to show how improper judges men
are of those things, if left to themselves. A divine revelation would
undoubtedly give the best and surest direction in matters of this.

390 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
nature, and the fullest satisfaction to the mind. It properly
belongeth to God to determine upon what terms he will be propi
tiated to guilty creatures, how far his forgiveness shall extend, and
what graces and favours he shall think fit to confer upon them.
The last thing I shall mention, as what shows the great need of
divine revelation, relates to the rewards and punishments of a future
state. That this is a doctrine of vast importance to mankind, for
engaging them to virtue, and restraining their vices, appears from
this writer's own express acknowledgments. Several passages were
produced to this purpose in my ninth letter. At the same time he
hath endeavoured to show, that we have no assurance of it by
human reason, but that it rather leadeth us to believe the contrary.
And yet he does not pretend absolutely to affirm, that it is evident
to reason there is no such state at all. Since therefore it is of great
importance to mankind to believe a state of future retributions, and
yet we have not sufficient assurance of it by human unassisted rea
son, it must certainly be a proper subject of divine revelation. Some
of the Deists, indeed, have in this case thought proper to take a
different method. In order to avoid the argument brought from
hence to show the necessity or the advantage of an extraordinary
revelation, they have pretended, that the doctrine of the immortality
of the soul, and a future state, is so evident to the natural reason of
mankind, and hath been so generally believed in all ages and
nations, that there was no need of a revelation to assure men of it.
But Lord Bolingbroke hath precluded himself from this way of ar
guing, since he hath taken pains to prove, that this doctrine is not
founded in reason. And though he sometimes delares it to have
been urged and recommended by the wisest men among the ancients,
he represents it as if it were what they regarded rather as an useful
doctrine than a true one, and as if they did not really believe it
themselves, though they thought it necessary that the people should
believe it. He affirms, that " the greatest part of the philosophers
did their utmost to establish the belief of rewards and punishments
in a future life, that they might allure to virtue, and deter from
vice, more effectually."* Yet afterwards he tells us, that " the most
zealous asserters of a supreme Being, and warmest defenders of his
providence, and they who were the most persuaded of the necessity
of religion to preserve government, either rejected the doctrine of a
future state, or they admitted it by halves, i. e. they did not admit
future punishments:" and that ""this doctrine was never firmly
enough established in the philosophical, whatever it was in the vul
gar creed." Yea, he asserts, that " it was not only problematical in
the opinions of theistical philosophers, butit seems in several instances
to have had little hold on vulgar opinion :" as he endeavours to
show, by a remarkable quotation from Cicero, Orat. pro A.
Cluentio; which he seems well pleased with, and refers to more
than once.t
The truth is, it would be equally wrong to affirm, that all the pbi-
*¦ Works, vol. v. p. 222. t ibid. p. 354, 355. '187.

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 391
losophers believed it, and that none of them did so. It is wrong on
the one hand to pretend, as Lord Bolingbroke has done, that there
is no foundation for it in reason ; or on the other, that it so clear
and demonstrable from human reason, that there was no need of a
divine revelation farther to confirm and enforce it. The arguments
for a future state in general, especially those of a moral kind, are of
great weight : but yet there are several things to be opposed to
them, which diminish the evidence, and will minister ground of sus
picion and doubt, if considered merely on the foot of natural reason.
And as to the nature, greatness, and duration, of those future
rewards and punishments, it is evident that unassisted reason can give
us"no information concerning it which can be depended upon. We
stand in great need, therefore, of an extraordinary revelation to
assure us of that invisible state. This plainly follows from what his
Lordship hath advanced. He represents " the rewards and punish
ments of a future state as the great bands that attach men to
revealed religion:" and introduces his plain man as saying, that "it
would be for the interest of these, and several other doctrines, to let
them rest on the authority of revelation."* And he directly declares,
" that this doctrine must stand on the bottom of revelation, or on
none. On this bottom it would do some good most certainly, and
it could do no hurt."-f-
The several considerations which have been offered may suffice
to show the need the world stood in of an extraordinary revelation ;
and that therefore it may be reasonably concluded from the wisdom
and goodness of God, that mankind have not been universally, and
at all times, left without the assistance of such a revelation. It is
particularly probable, from the circumstances of men in the first
ages of the world, that they were not left altogether destitute of
means that seemed so necessary to furnish them with a right know
ledge of God, and of their duty. This writer himself observes, in a
passage cited above, that " a consequence of the surprise, inexpe
rience, and ignorance, ofthe first men, must have been much doubt
and uncertainty concerning the first Cause." And that " to prove
the unity of the first Cause required more observation, and deeper
reflection, than the first men could make. "J And after having
observed, that " the precepts of the law of nature are general, and
that reason must be employed to make proper and necessary deduc
tions from those precepts, and to apply them in every case that
concerns our duty to God and man," he adds, that " human reason
being at best fallible, and having been little informed by experience
in the early ages, a multitude of false deductions, and wrong appli
cations, could not fail to be made."§ It is therefore highly probable,
from the goodness of God, and the necessities of mankind, that he
would graciously interpose to make some discoveries of himself, and
of his will, in the earliest ages, to the first parents and ancestors of
the human race, to be by them communicated to their offspring, for
* Works, vol. iii. p. 557.— See also vol. v. p. 322. 353. t Ibid. p. 488.
X Ibid. p. 259. $ Ibid- vol. v. p. 154.

392 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
instructing them in the main important principles of all religion, and
directing them in the principal articles of moral duty. And as this
may be plainly gathered from the accounts given us in Scripture,
so there are several facts in the history of mankind that almost ne
cessarily lead us to such a supposition. To this may principally be
ascribed the general belief of some of the main principles of reli
gion, which obtained before men had made any considerable im
provements in philosophy, or the art of reasoning ; particularly re
lating to the creation of the world, the immortality of the soul, and
a future state, which were generally received even among the most
illiterate and barbarous nations, and were probably derived from a
tradition transmitted from the first ages, and originally owing to
divine revelation. And accordingly it has been almost universally
believed among mankind, that divine revelations have been com
municated ; which belief may be probably ascribed to traditional
accounts of such revelations, as well as to the natural sense men
have generally had of their need of such assistances. There has
been no such thing as mere natural religion, abstracting from all
divine revelation, professed in any age, or in any nation of the
world. Lord Bolingbroke, in his inquiries this way, is forced to
have recourse to China, and to the fabulous ages of their history,
answering pretty much to the golden age of the poets, when he
supposes they were governed by mere natural religion.* But of
this he produceth no proofs. And if the ages there referred to
relate, as they probably do, to the early patriarchal times, the ori
ginal revelation might have been preserved in some degree of purity,
though in process of time it became greatly corrupted there, as well
as in other nations.
It adds a great weight to all that has been observed, that the
greatest men of antiquity seem to have been sensible, that bare
reason alone was not sufficient to enforce doctrines and laws with a
proper force upon mankind, without a divine authority and revela
tion. Our author observes, that " the most celebrated philosophers
and lawgivers did enforce their doctrines and laws by a divine au
thority, and call in an higher principle to the assistance of philoso-

* Bolingbroke's Works, vol. v. p. 228, 229. His Lordship expresses himself on this
head with a caution and modesty not usual with him. He saith, that "among the
countries with which we are better acquainted, he can find none where natural religion
was established in its full extent and purity, as it seems to have been once in China."
It may be observed by the way, that having highly extolled the ancient Chinese sage6,
le takes notice ofthe concise manner in which they expressed themselves, whenever
they spoke of the Supreme Beingv And that, " their refining successors have endea
voured, in part at least, to found their atheism upon what those sages had advanced."
Vol. v. p. 228. I think, according to this account, there must have been a great ob
scurity in their manner of expressing themselves concerning the Divinity ; and that they
were greatly deficient in the instructions they gave with regard to this great funda
mental article of all religion. How vastly superior in this respect was Moses to all
those admired sages, in whose writings, and in every part of the holy scriptures, tbe
existence, the perfections, and providence of God, are asserted and described in so
plain and strong a manner, as is fitted to lead people of common capacities to the firm
belief, obedience, and adoration of the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Governor
of the world !

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 393
phy than bare reason." He instances in "Zoroaster, Hostanes,
the Magi, Minos, Pythagoras, Numa, &c. and all those who founded
or formed religions and commonwealths ; who made these preten
sions, and passed for persons divinely inspired and commissioned."*
This shows that they built upon a principle deeply laid in the
human nature, concerning the need we stand in of a divine authority
and revelation, and which was probably strengthened by some re
mains of ancient traditions relating to such revelations. But „as
those philosophers and lawgivers he speaks of produced no proper
and authentic credentials, it could not be expected to have a very
lasting and extensive effect ; and yet the very pretences to it gave
their laws and institutions a force, which otherwise they would
not have had. But as the several sects of philosophers in subse
quent ages among- the Greeks and Romans only stood on the foot
of their own reasonings, and could not pretend to a divine authority,
this very much hindered the effect of their instructions. And indeed
the best and wisest among them confessed their sense of the want
of a divine revelation, and hoped for something of that nature. This
is what Dr. Clarke has shown by express testimonies : nor does
Lord Bolingbroke deny it. He says, "it must be admitted that
Plato insinuates in many places the want, or the necessity of a
divine revelation, to discover the external service God requires, and
the expiation for sirf, and to give stronger assurances of the rewards
and punishments that await men in another world."-)- But he
thinks it absurd and trifling to bring the opinion of Socrates, Plato,
and other philosophers, concerning their want of " divine revelation,
and their hopes that it would be supplied, as a proof that the want
was. real, and that, after it had been long complained of, it was sup
plied."} He attempts to show that their want was not real, as if he
knew better what they wanted than they themselves did, and were
a more proper judge ofthe true state of their case than they were.
He repeats what he had said before, that there is no moral precept
taught in the gospel which they did not teach ; and that " the phe
nomena that discovered to them the existence of God, discovered
the divine will in all the extent of moral obligation ;"§ as if it were
equally easy to discover the whole extent of moral obligation, as to
discover the existence of the Deity. He adds, that " they could
not know a revealed religion, nor any real want of it, before the re
velation was made." That they could be acquainted with the reve
lation before it was given, will be readily granted ; but it doth not
follow, that they could not be sensible of their want of it. He pro
nounces however, that " their complaints, and their expectations,
were founded in proud curiosity, and vain presumption." It was
pride, it seems, to be sensible of their ignorance, and need of farther
instruction ; it was presumption to hope or to desire any farther
illumination in things concerning which they were in doubt, and
which it was of great importance to them to know. He adds, that
Works, vol. v. p. 227. t Ibid. p. 214, 215. f Ibid. p. 216.
§ Ibid. p. 217.

394 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
" the knowledge they had was such as the Author of nature had
thought sufficient, since he had given them no more ;" and con
cludes, that " for Dr. Clarke to deduce from the supposed reason
ableness of their- complaints, the necessity of a farther revelation, is
to weigh his own opinion and theirs against providence."* But
allowing the necessity of revelation, there is no just pretence for
arraigning the conduct of divine providence : for however needful a
revelation is supposed to be for giving men Tull assurance and in
formation concerning things of high importance, yet those to whom
that revelation never was made known, shall not be accountable for
what they never had an opportunity of knowing. Besides, our
author goes upon the supposition, that the world had been left all
along without the assistance of divine revelation, and that the hea
thens had never had an opportunity of knowing more of religion
than they actually did know. But this is a wrong supposition.
God had been pleased to make revelations and discoveries of him
self, and of his will, from the beginning ; which, if they had been duly
improved, and carefully transmitted, as the importance of them
deserved, would have been of vast advantage. Great remains of
this original religion continued for a long time among the nations ;
and these traditions, together with their own reason, duly improved,
might have preserved the main principles of religion and morals
among them. And if, through the negligence and corruption of
mankind, this true primitive religion was in a great measure lost
and confounded in polytheism and idolatry, no blame could be cast
upon divine providence ; nor could the wisdom and righteousness of
God have been justly arraigned, though no more had ever been
done for the human race. But supposing, which was really the
case, that God was graciously pleased, at that time, and in that
manner which seemed fittest to his infinite wisdom, to communicate
a clearer and fuller discovery and revelation of his will than had
been ever yet given to mankind, for recovering them from the igno
rance, idolatry, and corruption, into which they were generally
fallen, this certainly ought to be acknowledged with great thankful
ness, as a most signal instance of the divine goodness and love to
mankind, and concern for human happiness.
There is one passage more which may deserve some notice.
Having observed, that bishop Wilkins seems to place the chief
distinction of human nature not in reason in general, but in religion,
the apprehension of a Deity, and the expectation of a future state,
which no creature below man doth partake of; he remarks upon it,
that " they who suppose all men incapable to attain a full know
ledge of natural religion and theology without revelation, take from
us the very essence and form of man, according to the bishop, and
deny that any of us have that degree of reason which is necessary to
distinguish our species, and sufficient to lead us to the unity of the
first intelligent Cause of all things."f But the bishop, by repre
senting man to be a religious creature, only intended to signify, that
* Works, vol. v. p. 220. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 71.

Let. XXVII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 395
he is naturally capable of knowing, and being instructed in it,
which the brutes are not ; but it is not to be understood, as if all
men had naturally an actual knowledge of religion, which is contrary
to fact and experience ; or as if all men were capable of attaining to
a full knowledge of it merely by the. force of their own reason, with
out any instruction or assistance at all. Man's being formed a
religious creature does not hinder the use and necessity of instruc
tion. It is still supposed, that all proper helps and assistances are
to be taken in. And notwithstanding his natural capacities, he
would never attain to such a knowledge of religion without the as
sistance of divine revelation, as he may attain to by that assistance.
These things are perfectly consistent : man's being in his original
design a religious creature, and his standing in need of divine reve
lation to instruct him in religion, and give him a fuller knowledge
of it. Revelation supposes hirn a creature capable of religion, and
applies to him as such.
It may not be improper to observe here, that this writer, who
leaves no method unattempted which he thinks may answer his
design, seems sometimes to cry up the great efficacy of a true divine
revelation, and the mighty effects it must have produced, if it had
actually been made, with a view to show that never was there any
revelation really given to mankind . He says, that " unexception
able revelations, real miracles, and certain traditions, could never
prove ineffectual :"* That " if the revelations that have been pre
tended, had not been pretended only ; if the same divine wisdom
that shows both the existence and will of God in his works, had
prescribed any particular form of worship to mankind, and had in
spired the particular application of his general laws, the necessary
consequence would have been, that the system of religion and go
vernment would have been uniform through the whole world, as
well as conformable to nature and reason, and the state of mankind
would have arrived at human perfection."t He proceeds so far as
to declare, that in a supernatural dispensation, the divine omnipotence
should have imposed it on all mankind, so as necessarily to engage
their assent^ And that it must have forced conviction, and taken
away even the possibility qf doubt.§ Can any thing be more unrea
sonable 1 As if revelation could be of no use at all, except by an
irresistible force it overpowered all men's understandings and wills.
But surely, if God gives men clear discoveries of his will and their
duty, this must be acknowledged to be a glorious instance of his
wisdom and goodness, though he does not absolutely constrain them
to assent, which would be to take away their free agency, and to
destroy the economy of his providence. May we not here apply in
the case of revelation what he himself saith with regard to reason ?
" It may be truly said, that God, when he gave us reason, left us
to our free-will, to make a proper or improper use of it ; so that we
are obliged to our Creator, for a certain rule, and sufficient means
* Works, vol. iv. p. 224. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 201. X Ibid. vol. iv. p. 267.
§ Ibid. p. 210.

396 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVII.
of arriving at happiness, and have none to blame but ourselves when
we fail of it. It is not reason, but perverse will, that makes men
fall short of attainable happiness. And we are self-condemned
when we deviate from the rule."* This holds strongly with regard
to revelation. God hath been graciously pleased to reveal doctrines
and laws to mankind, of great use and advantage for instructing
them in the knowledge of religion, and directing them in the way to
happiness. But when he has done this, and confirmed that reve
lation with sufficient credentials, still he thinks fit, as the wise moral
Governor, to leave them to their free-will, and the exercise of their
own moral powers ; and thus deals with them as reasonable crea
tures, and moral agents. If they do not receive, and make a rio-ht
use of this advantage, the divine wisdom and goodness is not to be
blamed, but their own obstinacy and perverseness.
But though a revelation, if really given, cannot be supposed to
come with such force as irresistibly to constrain men's assent, and
though it fail of producing all those effects which might be justly
expected, and which it is naturally fitted to produce, yet it may be
of very great use and benefit to mankind. This writer represents
the general reformation of men as an impossible thing : He observes
that neither human nor divine laws have been able to reform the
manners of men effectually ; yet he owns, that " this is so far from
making natural or revealed religion, or any means that tend to the
reformation of mankind, unnecessary, that it makes them all more
necessary. — And that nothing should be neglected that tends to en
force moral obligation, and all the doctrines of natural relio-ion.
And that nothing may seem in speculation so proper to this purpose
as a true revelation, or a revelation believed to be true."f And he
afterwards says, that " if the conflict between virtue and vice in the
great commonwealth of mankind was not maintained by religious
and civil institutions, the human state would be intolerable.";];
Those therefore must be very ill employed, and can in no sense be
regarded as the friends and benefactors of mankind, who take pains
to destroy these institutions, to subvert the main principles of natural
and revealed religion, and thereby to destroy all the influence it
might have on the minds of men. If the reformation of mankind be
so difficult, notwithstanding all the powers of reason, and all the
force of the additional light, and powerful motives, which revelation
furnishes, what could be expected, if all these were laid aside, and
men were taught to have no regard to them at all?
I shall conclude with observing, that Lord Bolingbroke's scheme,
contrary to his own intention, seems to furnish arguments to prove
the great usefulness and necessity of divine revelation. He has en
deavoured to show, that we can have no certainty, if we judge by
the phenomena, concerning the moral attributes of God, his justice
and goodness : That no argument can be brought from reason in
proof of a particular providence, though he does not pretend to say
it is impossible : That the immortality of the soul, and a future
* Works, vol. v. p. 288. t Ibid. p. 267, 268. ^ Ibid. p. 227.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 397
state, though useful to be believed, are things which we have no
ground from reason to believe, and which reason will neither affirm
nor deny : That the laws of nature are general, and the particulars
of moral duty derived from them are very uncertain, and in which
men have been always very apt to mistake, and make wrong con
clusions. Now if it be of high importance, as it manifestly is, that
men should be assured of the moral attributes of God; that they
should believe a particular providence, extending to the individuals
ofthe human race, and exercising an inspection over them, and their
actions and affairs ; that they should believe the immortality of the
soul, and a state of future rewards and punishments; and that they
should be rightly instructed in the particulars of moral duty ; if all
these be of unquestionable importance to be believed and known by
mankind (and yet we can, according to him, have no assurance of
them by mere natural reason), then there is great need of an extra
ordinary divine revelation to give us a proper certainty in these
matters ; and a well-attested revelation assuring us of these things,
and furnishing us with proper instructions concerning them, ought
to be received with the highest thankfulness.

LETTER XXVIII.
Lord Bolingbroke's strange Representation of the Jewish Revelation. — His Attempts
against the Truth of the Mosaic History  The Antiquity, Impartiality, and great
Usefulness of that History shown. — The Pretence, that Moses was not a contem
porary Author, and that his History is not confirmed by collateral Testimony, and
that there is no Proof that the Pentateuch was written by Moses, examined  The
Mosaic History and Laws not forged in tbe Time of the Judges, nor in that of the
Kings, nor after (he Babylonish Captivity. — The Charge of Inconsistencies in the
Mosaic Accounts considered. — The grand Objection against the Mosaic History,
drawn from the incredible Nature of the Facts themselves, examined at large. — The
Reason and Propriety of erecting the Mosaic Polity. — No Absurdity in supposing
God to have selected the Jews as a peculiar People. — The great and amazing Dif
ference between them and the heathen Nations, as to the Acknowledgment and
Adoration of the one true God, and him only. — The good Effects of the Jewish
Constitution, and the valuable Ends which were answered by it. — It is no just Ob
jection against the Truth of the Scriptures, that they come to us through the Hands
of the Jews.
Sir,
Having considered what Lord Bolingbroke hath offered with
regard to divine revelation in general, 1 now proceed to examine the
objections he has advanced against the Jewish and Christian reve
lation. Of the latter he. sometimes speaks with seeming respect
and decency; but with regard to the former, he sets no bounds to
invective and abuse. He here allows himself without reserve in all
the licentiousness of reproach. Far from admitting it to be a true
divine revelation, he every-where represents it as the very worst con-

398 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
stitution that ever pretended to a divine original, and as even worse
than atheism.
Besides occasional passages every-where interspersed in his writ
ings, there are some parts of his works, where he sets himself pur
posely and at large to expose the Mosaic revelation. This is the
principal design of the long letter in the third volume of his works,
occasioned by one of Archbishop Tillotson's sermons ; as also of the
second section of his third essay in the fourth volume, which is on
the Rise and Progress of Monotheism ; and ofthe fifteenth, twentieth,
twenty-first, seventy-third, seventy-fifth, of his Fragments and
Essays in the fifth volume.
In considering Lord Bolingbroke's objections against the holy
scriptures of the 01# Testament, and especially against the books
of Moses, I shall distinctly examine what he hath offered against
the truth of the scripture history, and against the divine authority
of the sacred writings. This is the method he himself hath pointed
out in the above-mentioned letter, occasioned by onejof Archbishop
Tillotson's sermons.
I shall begin with considering his objections against the truth of
the history. But first it will not be improper to make some general
observations upon the scripture history, and especially that which is
contained in the Mosaic writings.
And first it deserves our veneration and regard on the account of
its great antiquity. We have no accounts that can in any degree
be depended upon, or that have any pretence to be received as au
thentic records, prior to the Mosaic history, or indeed till some ages
after it was written. But though it relateth to the most ancient
times, it is observable that it doth not run up the history to a fabu
lous and incredible antiquity, as the Egyptians, Chaldeans, and
some other nations did. Moses's account of the time of the creation
of the world, the general deluge, &c. reduces the age of the world
within the rules of a moderate computation, perfectly consistent
with the best accounts, we have of the origin of nations, the founding
of cities and empires, the novelty of arts and sciences, and of the
most useful inventions of human life ; all which leads us to assign
an age to the world which comports very well with the Mosaic his
tory, but is no way compatible with the extravagant antiquities of
other eastern nations.
Another thing which should greatly recommend the scripture his
tory to our own esteem, is the remarkable simplicity and imparti
ality of it. It contains a plain narration of facts, delivered in a
simple unaffected style, without art or ornament. And never was
there any history that discovered a more equal and unbiassed regard
to truth. Several things are there recorded, which, if the historian
had not laid it down as a rule to himself, not only not to contradict
the truth, but not to conceal or disguise it, would not have been
mentioned. Of this kind is what our author refers to concerning
Jacob's obtaining the birth-right and blessing by fraud.* For
* Works, vol. iii. p. 304.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 399
though it is plain, from the prophecy that was given forth before
the birth of the children, that the blessing was originally designed
for Jacob the younger in preference to Esau the elder, yet the method
Jacob took, by the advice of his mother Rebekah, to engage his
father Issaac to pronounce the blessing upon him, had an appear
ance of art and circumvention, which, considering the known jea
lousy and antipathy between the Edomites and the people of Israel,
and the occasion it might give to the former to insult and reproach
the latter, it might be expected an Israelitish historian would have
endeavoured to conceal. To the same impartial regard to truth it
is owing, that Reuben's incest, and that of Judah with his daughter-
in-law Tamar, from which descended the principal families of the
noble tribe of Judah, are recorded ; as is also the cruel and perfidi
ous act of Simeon and Levi, the latter Moses's own ancestor, and
the curse pronounced upon them by Jacob on the account of it.
This writer indeed, who seems determined at all hazards, and upon
every supposition, to find fault with the sacred historians, has en
deavoured to turn even their impartiality to their disadvantage.
Having mentioned common sense and common honesty, he says, that
"the Jews, or the penmen of their traditions, had so little of either,
that they represent sometimes a patriarch like Jacob, and sometimes
a saintlike David, by characters that belong to none but the worst
of men."* This according to our author's manner is highly exag
gerated. But I think nothing can be a stronger proof of the most
unreasonable prejudice, than to produce that as an instance of the
want of common sense and common honesty, in those writings, which
in any other writers in the world would be regarded as the highest
proof of their honesty, their candour, and impartiality ; viz. their
not taking pains to disguise or conceal the faults of the most eminent
of their ancestors ; especially when it appears, that this is not done
from a principle of malignity, or to detract from their merits, since
their good actions, and the worthy parts of their character, are also
impartially represented, but merely from a regard to truth, and from
an unaffected simplicity, which every-where appears in their writ
ings, in a manner scarce to be paralleled in any other historians,
and which derives a mighty credit to all their narrations. But what
above all shows the impartiality of Moses, and of the other sacred
historians of the Old Testament, is, their relating without disguise,
not only the faults of their great men, but the frequent revolts and
infidelities of the Israelites, and the punishments which befel them
on that account. Lord Bolingbroke has indeed discovered, what
no man but himself would have been apt to suspect, that even this
was intended to flatter their pride and vanity ; " because though
they are represented as rebellious children, yet still as favourite chil
dren— Notwithstanding all their revolts, God's predilection for this
chosen people still subsists. — And he renews his promises to them
of future glory and triumph,— a Messiah, a kingdom that should
destroy all others, and last eternally."t As to the kingdom of the
* Works, vol. v. p. 194. t Ibidl voU "'' !>• 281'-

400 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
Messiah, which he refers to as promised to the Jews, it was to be of
a spiritual nature, and was not to be confined to the people of Israel
alone, but to be of general benefit to mankind. . And even the reject
ing of that Messiah by the body of their nation, and the punish
ments and desolations to which this should expose them, were fore
told. And it was certainly a most extraordinary expedient to flatter
the vanity of a people, to represent them as having carried it most
ungratefully towards God for all his benefits, and though not abso
lutely and finally rejected, yet as having frequently drawn upon
themselves the most signal effects of the divine displeasure. If the
view of the sacred historians had been to flatter the pride and pre
sumption of that people, surely they might have represented tnem
as the objects of the divine favour, without giving such an account
of their conduct; from which their enemies have taken occasion
bitterly to reproach them, as the most ungrateful and obstinate race
of men that ever appeared upon earth. Nothing could have induced
them to record facts which seemed to give such a disadvantageous
idea of their nation, but an honest and impartial regard to truth,
rarely to be found in other historians.
But that which especially distinguished Moses, and the other
sacred historians, is the spirit of unaffected piety that every-where
breathes in their writings. We may observe throughout a profound
veneration for the Deity, a zeal for the glory of his great name, a
desire of promoting his true fear and worship, and the practice of
righteousness, and to engage men to a dutiful obedience to his holy
and excellent laws. Their history was not written merely for poli
tical ends and views, or to gratify curiosity, but for nobler purposes.
The Mosaical history opens with an account of the creation of the
world, which, by the author's own acknowledgment, is an article of
the highest moment in religion. It gives an account of the forma
tion of man, of his primitive state, and his fall from that state, of
the universal deluge, the most remarkable event that ever happened
to mankind, of the lives of some of the patriarchs, and of many
most signal acts of providence, upon which depended the erection
and establishment of a sacred polity, the proper design of which
was to engage men to the adoration of the one living and true God,
the Maker and Governor of the world, and of him only, in oppo
sition to all idolatry and polytheism. The recording these things
was not only of immediate use to the people among whom they were
first published, but hath had a great effect in all ages ever since,
to promote a reverence of the Supreme Being among those who have
received these sacred writings ; and it tended also to prepare the
way for the last and most perfect revelation of the divine will that
was ever given to mankind. Nothing therefore can be more unjust
than the censure he hath been pleased to pass on a great part of the
Mosaic history, that it is fit only to amuse children ivith.*
Let us now consider the objections he hath advanced against this
history. • Works, vol. iii. p. 304.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE, /JO]
And first, he urges that Moses was not a contemporary author.
This is not true with respect to a considerable part of the history
recorded in the Pentateuch. Many of the things which are most
objected against, especially the extraordinary facts done in Egypt,
at the Red Sea, at the promulgation of the law at Sinai, and dur
ing the sojourning of the Israelites in the wilderness, were things to
which Moses was not only contemporary, but of which he was himself
an eye-witness. As to that part of the history which is contained in
the book of Genesis, and which relateth to events which happened
before the time of Moses, it cannot be justly objected against on
that account ; except it be laid down as a rule, that no history is to
be believed, which was written by an author who was not contem
porary to all the facts which he relates. But this has never yet been
allowed as a maxim in judging of the credit of any history ; and, if
admitted, would discard some of the best histories now in the world.
Nor does our author himself pretend to insist upon it as a general
rule; but he wants to know " where Moses got his materials, when
he wrote the book of Genesis." A most unreasonable demand at
this distance of time ! As to the far greater part of that book,
which relates to the lives of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,
Joseph, and to the first settlement of the Israelites in Egypt, these
are evidently things of which he may be supposed to have had full
information. And with regard to the events which happened be
fore the time of Abraham, the accounts given of them by Moses are
generally very short; consisting for the most part of little more than
the genealogies of persons and families, interspersed with a few
brief anecdotes, the memory of which was easily preserved. The
most remarkable event during that period, and of which Moses
gives the most particular account, was the universal deluge. And
this must have been then very well known. His not giving into the
extravagant antiquities of some of the eastern nations, and his not
attempting to fill up that period with such fabulous romantic ac
counts as have been invented since his time, among Jews, Chris
tians, and Mahometans, is a strong presumption in his favour; and
the plainness, simplicity, and impartial love of truth, which, as hath
been already observed, appears in his history, makes it reasonable
to believe, that he had the accounts he gives from memorials which
he knew might be depended upon. What ways they had of trans
mitting the memory of things in those ancient times, we cannot at
this distance distinctly explain, but that they had several ways of
doing this we may be well assured. And it has been often observed
by learned men, through how few stages the tradition might run
from Adam to Abraham, and from him to Moses, considering the
long lives of the first men.* The only thing mentioned by this
writer as what Moses could not have received by history or tradition,
is the circumstantial account given by hirn of the creation of the
* Mr. Hume makes the great length of men's lives, as recorded in the Mosaic his
tory, to be an objection against it. Essay on Miracles, p. 206. But Lord Boling
broke allows, that the lives of men in the first ages of the world vnre probably much
longer than ours. Vol iii. p. 244.
D D

402 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
world : with regard to which he observes, that " Adam himself
could only have related to him some of the circumstances of the
sixth day, but nothing that preceded this." It will be easily allowed,
that the account of this must have been originally owing to extra
ordinary revelation. And very worthy it was of the divine wisdom
to grant such a revelation to the first parents and ancestors of the
human race, since it was a matter of great importance to mankind
to be well acquainted with it; and our author himself owns, that
" it leads men to acknowledge a Supreme Being, by a proof levelled
to the meanest understanding."* And it may be justly concluded,
that the account of this was transmitted with great care from our
first parents to their descendants, and preserved among the most
religious of them : which might the better be done, if, as is very
probable, the observance of the seventh day was appointed from the
beginning to preserve the memorial of it. So that the preservation
of this very important tradition may be accounted for, even ab
stracting from Moses's divine inspiration, which, if in any thing
tradition had become imperfect, might easily enable him to supply
the defects of it.
Another objection, on which his Lordship seems to lay a great
stress, for invalidating the authority of the Mosaic history, is, that
the principal facts are not confirmed by collateral testimony : and
by collateral testimony he understands, the testimony of those who
had no common interest of country, religion, or profession.-]- But
such collateral testimony as this is no way necessary to the authen
ticity of history. Many histories are very reasonably believed which
have no such collateral testimony to confirm them. Such testimony
is frequently not to be had, nor could reasonably be expected with
relation to many of the facts recorded by Moses. As to that part
of the Mosaic history, which relateth to the times of greatest anti
quity, little help can be expected from collateral testimony, since
there is no history of those times now extant so ancient as his own.
And yet there are considerable traces of tradition which have been
preserved among other nations, concerning some of the most remark
able events during that period, as hath been often shown by learned
men;:}: especially with relation to that which is the most extraordi-
* Works, vol. iii. p. 253. t Ibid. p. 281, 282.
X His Lordship frequently speaks with great contempt of the attempts made by the
learned to support the history of Moses by collateral testimonies, those of Egyptians,
Phoenicians, Chaldeans, and even Greeks. See particularly vol. iii. p. 280, 281. Yet
he says, " The man who gives the least credit to the Mosaic history, will agree very
readily, that these five books contain traditions of a very great antiquity ; some of
which were preserved and propagated by other nations as well as the Israelites, and by
other historians as well as Moses. Many of them may be true, though they will not
serve as vouchers for one another." And he farther observes, that "three or four
ancient neighbouring nations, of whom we have some knowledge, seemed to have a
common fund of traditions, which they varied according to their different systems of
religion, philosophy, and policy." Ibid. p. 282. And since he here supposes, that
the nations he refers to had different systems of religion and policy, and were evidently
neither of the same country, nation, or religion, with the people of Israel, the testi
monies they give to the facts recorded in the Mosaic wiitings may be justly regarded us
collateral testimony, even according to the account he himself is pleaded to give of it,
viz. that it is the testimony of those who had no common interest qf country, religion, or

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 4();}
nary of them all, the universal deluge. Nor can any thino' be more
false and contrary to known fact, than what this writer boldly
affirms, that " the tradition of Noah's deluge is vouched by no other
authority than that of Moses; and that the memory of that catas
trophe was known only to one people, and preserved in one corner
of the earth." * Not only has there been a general tradition in con
firmation of it,f but there are many proofs of it all over the earth,
many phsenomena which plainly lead us to acknowledge that there
has been such a deluge, and which cannot otherwise be reasonably
accounted for.
With respect to that part of the history which rclateth to the
laws given to the Israelites, and the extraordinary facts whereby
the authority of those laws was established, they were not only
things of which Moses had certain knowledge, and in which he
could not be mistaken, but they were of a most public nature, and
to which the whole nation were witnesses. The facts were of such
a kind, that the accounts of them could not possibly have been im
posed by Moses at that time upon the people, if they had not been
true, nor could they have been made to believe that they were done
before their eyes, if they had not been done. And these facts hav
ing been all along from that time received by that people, together
with the laws in confirmation of which they were wrought, furnish-
eth a proof of authenticity to this part ofthe Mosaic history, which
can scarce be paralleled in any other.
I do not see how the force of this can be avoided, supposing
Moses to be the author of the Pentateuch. But this is what Lord
Bolingbroke thinks cannot be proved. He has made a kind of
representation after his own way of what Mr. Abbadie has offered
to this purpose ; and adds, that it would be hard to find an ex
ample of greater trifling.:': But whosoever will take pains to examine
profession. So that after all his clamours against the Mosaic history for want of colla
teral testimony, he himself in effect owns, that, in several instances at least, and with
regard to some of the facts there related, collateral testimonies may be produced, which
therefore are very properly taken notice of by the learned. These testimonies relate to
several things in the Mosaic account ofthe creation. The long lives ofthe first men—
the general deluge, with some of the remarkable particulars recorded by Moses relating
to it — the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah — the excellent character of Abraham,
and several particulars in his life, and that of Isaac and Jacob — Joseph's being envied
by his brethren, and sold into Egypt — his great advancement there, and wise adminis
tration, and preserving Egypt in a time of famine — many things relating to Moses him
self — his great wisdom — his being opposed by the Egyptian magicians — his leading the
Israelites out of Egypt, whilst the Egyptians who pursued them were compelled to
desist — his bringing them through the deserts of Arabia to Mount Sinai — the law given
by him as from God — his noble notions of the Deity, and prohibiting the representing
or worshipping him by any corporeal images — -many of the peculiarities of that law,
different from those of other nations. Tbe reader may see most of these things col
lected by Grotius de Verit. Relig. Christ, lib. i. sec. IC. I think any impartial person
will be of opinion, that there is as much collateral testimony as could be reasonably ex
pected concerning things of such remote antiquity, and from persons who were not of
the Jewish nation or religion, and several of whom were professed enemies to both.
* Works, vol. iii. p. 224.
t See concerning this, Grotius de Verit. Relig. Christ, lib. 1. sec. 16. bee also
Revektion examined with Candour, parti, dissert. 13, 14.
' Works, vol. iii. p. 275, 276.
D D 2

404 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
the argument, not as he is pleased to represent it, but as it stands
in Mr. Abbadie's own book, will find how little he has offered that
can in any degree take off tbe force of his reasoning. Indeed it is
hard to know what greater proof can reasonably be desired of
Moses's being the author of the Pentateuch than is given. The
whole nation, among whom those books have been always received
with great veneration, as containing the most authentic accounts of
their history and their laws, have constantly attributed them to
Moses. All those of foreign nations that have mentioned their
history or their laws, have always supposed Moses to have been the
author of them. Never has it been denied till these latter ages,
after so long a possession, upon some cavils and exceptions, which
are really trifling, and which have been sufficiently answered. And -
if all this will not be allowed to be a proof, it is impossible that any
thing of this nature should ever be proved. It hath all the proof
which the nature of the thing can admit of; and it would be un
reasonable, by Lord Bolingbroke's own acknowledgment, to demand
more. " Common sense," saith he, " requires that every thing
proposed to the understanding, should be accompanied with such
proof as the nature of it can furnish. He who requires more, is
guilty of absurdity ; he who requires less, of rashness."*
There is then all the evidence which can be desired in such a case,
that the books containing the original history and laws given to the
people of Israel were written by Moses, as the whole nation to whom
the history belonged, and who were governed by those laws, and
received them as the rule of their polity, have constantly affirmed.
And of this they must be allowed to be competent witnesses. His
Lordship indeed, with a view to show how little the testimony of
the Jews is to be depended upon, and how easily those laws might
be imposed upon them, mentions the little time that it took to estab
lish the divine authority of the Alcoran among the Arabs, a people
not more incapable to judge of Mahomet and his book, than we may
suppose the Israelites to have been to judge of Moses and his book,
if he left any, whether of law alone, or of history and law both."+
But this observation is little to the purpose. The Arabians were
sufficient vouchers, that the Alcoran was the book left them by
Mahomet, containing the revelations he pretended to have received
from heaven. In this they are to be credited. So are the Jews,
that the books containing the original history and laws of their
nation were written by Moses. As to the divine authority of those
laws, this must be tried by other arguments. But however stupid
we may suppose the Arabians to have been, it would not have been
in the power of Mahomet to have made them believe, that they
themselves had heard his laws distinctly delivered with the most
amazing solemnity from heaven in the presence of above six hundred
thousand men, if there had been no such thing : or that he wrought
a series of stupendous miracles before their eyes, if he had not done
so. And accordingly he was too wise to put the proof of his own
* Works, vol. iii. p. 246. t Ibid. p. 278.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 405
divine mission, or of the authority of his laws, upon facts of such a
nature ; which would have been the most effectual way he could
have taken to detect and expose his own imposture. But he pre
tended to have received communications and revelations from hea
ven, the truth of which depended upon his own credit. The same
observation may be made concerning those celebrated lawgivers of
antiquity, who pretended to have received their laws from the gods,
as Minos, Numa, and others. None of them ever put the proof of
the divine authority of their laws upon public facts of the most
miraculous and extraordinary nature, done in the presence of all the
people, and for the truth of which they appealed to them. They
pretended to directions from oracles, or to secret communications
with the deity, of which the people had no proof, and which they
received solely upon their authority. But Moses put the proof of
the divine authority of his laws upon sensible facts, of the most
public nature, and of which the whole body of the people, to whom
these laws were given, were witnesses. Appeals were made to the
people, at the time when these laws were delivered, concerning those
facts as done in their sight, and which they themselves could not
possibly deny. The accounts of those facts are so interwoven with
the laws, that they cannot be separated. Some of the principal
motives to engage the people to an observance of those laws are
founded on those facts. Many of the laws were peculiarly designed
to preserve the remembrance of the facts, and cannot be otherwise
accounted for than by supposing the truth of those facts to which
they relate. And this was the professed design of the institution of
several of their sacred rites, which were appointed to be solemnly
observed by the whole of the nation, in every age from the beginning
of their polity, i. e. from the time when they first received these
.laws, and their constitution was established. There were several
public monuments, which subsisted several ages, to perpetuate the
memory of the most remarkable of those facts. The people were
commanded, as by divine authority, frequently to consider those
facts, and to take care to transmit them to their children. To
which it may be added, that in all the remaining writings published
at different times, and in different ages, among that nation, whether
of an historical, moral, or devotional kind, there is a constant refer
ence to those facts as of undoubted credit and authority. They are
repeated on so many different occasions, so often and solemnly
appealed to, that it appeareth, with the utmost evidence which the
thing is capable of, that these facts have been all along universally
known and acknowledged, and the remembrance of them constantly
kept up among that people. And upon the truth and authority of
these facts, their peculiar constitution, whereby they were so remark
ably distinguished from all other nations, was plainly founded ; nor
can it well be conceived, how it could have been established among
them without those facts. It strengthens all this, when it is con
sidered, that scarce ever was there any people so well fitted by their
constitution for preserving and transmitting the remembrance of
their laws and facts, as the people of Israel. Their weekly Sabbath,

406 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
the observance of which was bound upon them in the strictest
manner, and which was a constant memorial to them of their reU
gion and law : the sabbatical years, an institution of the most
extraordinary nature, and which furnished a visible proof of the
divine original and authority of that law, and in which it was ordered
to be publicly read to the whole nation assembled together at their
solemn festivals : the exact care that was taken to keep up the dis
tinction of tribes, and the genealogies of the several families in their
tribes, on which their legal right to their inheritances and posses
sions depended, and which they could trace to the time when the
first division of the land was made, and their constitution estab
lished, with which the laws and facts were intimately connected : all
these things laid them under peculiar obligations, and gave them
peculiar advantages for preserving the remembrance of their law,
and the facts done in attestation to it. Taking these considerations
together, the evidence for the laws and facts is as strong as can rea
sonably be desired for any facts done in past ages. And I am per
suaded the evidence would never have been contested, if it had not
been for the pretended incredibility of the facts themselves. But
before I come to consider this, I shall take notice of some other
exceptions made by Lord Bolingbroke to the credit of this history.
He mentions it as a suspicious circumstance, that " the priests in
Egypt and Judea were intrusted with the public records," and that
this shows how little they are to be depended upon.* And he
asks, " With what face can we suspect the authenticity of the
Egyptian accounts by Manetho and others, which were compiled
and preserved by Egyptian priests, when we received the Old Tes
tament on the faith of Jewish scribes, a most ignorant and lying
race Vf But it is a great mistake, or gross misrepresentation to
pretend, that the Jewish history and sacred writings, particularly
those of Moses, were in the hands of the priests, or Jewish scribes,
alone. If, like the Egyptian laws and records, they had been wrapt
up in sacred characters and hieroglyphics, which the priests only
understood, and of which they alone were the authorised guardians
and interpreters, and which were carefully disguised and concealed
from the people, there might be some ground for this pretence.
But, on the contrary, their history and laws were put into the com
mon language; the people were commanded to make themselves
thoroughly acquainted with the laws that were given them, and with
the history of those facts by which their law was established. It
was urged upon them in the name of God himself, to meditate upon
them continually, to speak of them in their houses, and teach them
diligently to their children. They were taught to believe that their
interest in the favour of God, their public and private happiness,
depended upon it. No part of their history and laws was kept as a
secret from the people ; all was done open and undisguised. And
this was so different from the arts of impostors, or of designing
politicians, as affords a strong presumption, that all was founded on
truth and fact.
* Works, vol. iii. 22J, 226. t Ibid. p. 20,3.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 407
Our author is very willing to have it believed, that these writings
were forged after the time of Moses ; and the time he seems to fix
upon as the likeliest for such a forgery is that of the Judges.* But
there is not the least foundation for such a supposition. To sup
pose them to have been forged in the time of Joshua, or the elders
that immediately succeeded him, is the same thing as to suppose
them to have been forged in the days of Moses himself. It must
then have been very well known, whether these were the laws that
were given by Moses, and whether the facts there referred to as
things of public notoriety, and known to the whole nation, were
really done or not ; since great numbers must have been able to con
tradict or detect them, if they had been false : and after the death
of Joshua, and the elders that had lived in the time of Moses, and
seen those mighty acts, who could have had authority enough to
have imposed those laws and facts upon the people? The deliver
ance out of Egypt, the sojourning of the Israelites in the wilderness,
the laws and constitutions appointed by Moses in the name of God,
the extraordinary facts said to have been wrought by him, their
introduction into Canaan, and the manner of their settlement there,
must have been comparatively fresh in their remembrance. It
appears by Jephthah's answer to the king of the Ammonites, that
the people of Israel were in his time very well acquainted with their
own history, and with what had happened to them in the time of
Moses, Judges xi. 12, 8tc. The same thing appears from the Song
of Deborah, ch. v. 4, 5, and from the answer of Gideon, ch. vi. 13.
And it cannot without great absurdity be supposed, that they could
at that time have had a body of laws imposed upon them as the
laws of Moses, and laws by which their nation had been governed
ever since his time, though they had not known those laws before :
or, that they could have been make to believe, that the facts referred
to in those books were facts of which their whole nation had been
witnesses, and which they themselves had received from their ances^
tors, and the memory of which had been constantly preserved among
* His Lordship is pleased to observe, that "the four centuries the Israelites passed
under their Judges, may be well compared to the heroical " (by which he understands
the fabulous) "ages ofthe Greeks." The reason he gives for this is pretty extraordi
nary. He says, " those of the Greeks were generally bastards of some god or other ;
and those of the Jews were always appointed by God to defend his people, and destroy
their enemies. " As if the being a bastard of some god or other, and the being appointed
by God for delivering and defending his people, were of the same significancy, and
equally absurd and fabulous : though under such a polity as the Mosaical was, their
having their Judges and deliverers extraordinarily raised and appointed by God, had
nothing in it but what was perfectly agreeable to the nature of their constitution. And
whereas he mentions it to the disadvantage of the Jewish history under that period, that
we there read of Ehud an assassin, and Jephthah a robber, and David a captain qf ban
ditti, it may be observed, that this last does not properly belong to the times of the
Judges, and is only thrown in out of his great good will to the memory of that illus
trious prince ; and as to the two former, without entering into a particular considera
tion of the accounts which are given of them,t it may be justly affirmed, that these
instances do not afford a shadow of a proof, that the history is fabulous, and doth not
contain a true account of facts.
t See concerning Ehud, Answer to Christianity as oil as the Creation, Vol. ii. jv.
334. 2d edit.

408 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
them, though they had never heard of these facts : or, that such and
such sacred rites and ordinances had been instituted, and constantly
observed and solemnized in their nation, in remembrance of those
facts, if till then they had been utter strangers to the observance of
those rites. And what renders this still more improbable is, that
during that period there was for the most part no general governor
who had authority over the whole, as the kings had afterwards.
The several tribes seem to have been very much in a state of inde
pendency, and to have. had the government within themselves. Few
of their Judges exercised an authority over all the tribes; nor were
any of them priests till the time of Eli. In such a state of things,
how was it possible to have imposed a new body of laws and history
upon the whole nation, especially laws so different from the laws and
customs of all other countries, and which enacted the severest penal
ties against the idolatries to which the neighbouring nations were so
strongly addicted, and which the Israelites were so prone to
imitate? If some of the tribes had received them, what like
lihood is there that all would have done so, or would have regarded
them as the laws of Moses, and as obligatory on the whole com
munity, when they were so contrary to their own inclinations, and
had never been imposed upon their nation before ? Nothing less
than such an authority as that which Moses claimed in the name of
God himself, and which was enforced by such illustrious divine
attestations, could have prevailed with them to have submitted to
those laws, or to have received those facts. To which it may be
added, that it is manifest from the account given in the book of
Judges, which is the only account of that time that we have to
depend upon, that the general state of things during that period was
this : the people frequently fell into a compliance with the idolatrous
rites of the neighbouring countries ; but when public calamities
befel them, and which they regarded as punishments upon them for
their transgressions of their law, they were made sensible of their
guilt, and again returned to the observance of it, and to the adora
tion of the only true God as there prescribed ; and they were
encouraged by the great things God had formerly done for their
nation, to apply to him for deliverance from their oppressors. So
that every thing during that period shows, that the law of Moses,-
and the worship of God and of him alone, free from idolatry and
polytheism, was then the established constitution, which they them
selves regarded as of divine authority, notwithstanding they too
often suffered themselves to be seduced into deviations from it.
After the era of the Judges followed that of the Kings. King
David lived very early in that period ; and it appears with the utmost
evidence, from the history and writings of that great prince, that the
law of Moses was then held in the highest veneration, as of divine
authority, and that the facts there recorded were universally believed
and acknowledged ; and though some of the succeeding Kings
deviated from that -law into the idolatries of their neighbouring
nations, yet that law never lost its authority, and the observance of
it was soon restored. The design of the prophets, of whom there

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 409
was a succession during that period, was to keep the people close to
the observance of that law : and the extraordinary facts by which
the authority of it was established, were still had in remembrance :
and on the credit of that law, and of those extraordinary facts, they
still looked upon themselves to be God's peculiar people. This
writer indeed takes upon him to assert, that " there were times when
they had actually no body of law among them, particularly in the
reign of Josiah, when it had been long lost."* But there is no
ground to suppose, that ever there was a time under any of their
Kings, when they had actually no body of laws among them, or that
the book of the law of Moses had been ever entirely lost. This
cannot be justly concluded from the surprise expressed at Hilkiah's
the High Priest's finding the book of the law of the Lord in the
temple, when they repaired it in Josiah 's reign ; for this is justly
supposed to be either the original book of the law written by
Moses himself, and ordered to be lodged in a coffer at the side of
the ark, and which was found when the ark was removed, on occa
sion of the temple and holy of holies being repaired ; or at least an
authentic copy of great antiquity and authority, kept in the temple,
and which might have been neglected, or thought to have been lost.
But it would be absurd to imagine, that there was no copy of the
law at all remaining in any private hands, or in the hands of any of
the priests or prophets. And it may very reasonably be conceived,
that upon finding an authentic book of the law of such venerable
antiquity, the attention of tbe King and great men might be more
thoroughly awakened to the things contained there, and they might
make a much stronger impression upon them, than they had ever
done before, even supposing they had read or heard the same things
out of some other copy of the law, of 'less authority, and which was
not so much to be depended upon. There is not one word in the
account that is given us of this matter, of what our author mentions,
concerning the little time the reading of the book in the presence of
the King took up ; from whence he concludes, that it contained
nothing but the law strictly so called, or tbe recapitulation of it in
the book of Deuteronomy : though if that copy had contained no
more than the book of Deuteronomy, this is a collection not only of
the principal laws given by Moses, but of the extraordinary and
miraculous facts whereby the divine authority of the law was
attested. As to what he insinuates, that all the sacred writings of
the Jews were composed after the captivity, and that Esdras- and
his successors compiled the written law,t I shall not add any thing
here to what I have elsewhere offered to demonstrate the palpable
falsehood and absurdity of such a supposition.*): I shall only at
present observe, that the preserving of the Pentateuch among the
Samaritans, between whom, from the time of their first settling in
that country, and the Jews, there was a fixed antipathy and oppo
sition, affordeth a plain proof, that the code of the Mosaic history
* Works, vol. iii. p. 276. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 339. vol. v. p. 229.
X See " Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Use of History,"
p. 51, & seq.

410 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
and laws was not the invention or composition of Esdras, but had
been preserved among the Israelites of the ten tribes, in place of
whom the Samaritans came. And the remarkable conformity there
is between the Samaritan and Jewish code of the Pentateuch, both
in the laws and in the facts, gives a signal confirmation of the
antiquity and integrity of the Mosaic history and laws, and how far
the Hebrew code is- to be depended upon.
But to proceed to Lord Bolingbroke's farther objections. In
order to destroy the credit of the Mosaic history, be hath taken all
occasions to charge it with inconsistencies and contradictions. Thus
he tells us, that the Mosaic account is plainly inconsistent with
itself, in supposing that the unity of God was the original tradition
derived from Adam, and yet that it was lost, and polytheism estab
lished in its stead in the days of Serah ; or at least of Terah and
Abraham, four hundred years after the deluge. He thinks it absurd
to suppose, " that the knowledge of the existence of that God who
had destroyed and restored the world, just before, could be wholly
lost in the memory of mankind, and his worship entirely forgot,
whilst the eye-witnesses of the deluge were yet alive."* The whole
force of this objection depends upon his own absurd way of stating
the case, as if the knowledge of the only true God were supposed
to be then entirely lost and forgotten among mankind. True reli
gion and the true worship of God might have been considerably cor
rupted in that time, and idolatry might have made a great progress,
though the knowledge ofthe true God was not entirely lost and for
gotten among men ; as our author himself, when it is for his purpose,
thinks fit to own.
With the same view of proving inconsistencies on the Mosaic his
tory, he observes, that " it is repugnant to human nature to suppose,
that the Israelites should, in the course of so few generations, become
confirmed and hardened idolators in Egypt, and should in so short a
time not only forget the traditions of their fathers, and the God of
Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob ; but that they should have been as
much wedded to idolatry as the Egyptians themselves were."t He
himself furnishest an answer to this, when he observes, that " poly
theism and idolatry have a close connection with the ideas and
affections of rude and ignorant men." And that " the vulgar
embrace polytheism and idolatry very easily, even after the true doc
trine of a divine unity has been taught and received.""); Itmay well
be conceived, that during their abode in Egypt the Israelites might
have contracted a great fondness for the Egyptian customs. They
might be allured by the power and splendour of the Egyptians, to
entertain a good opinion of their religion ; and the extreme misery
and distress to which they were reduced by their servitude, might
lead many of them to question the promises made to Abraham and
their ancestors, and make them more ready to deviate from the reli
gion derived to them from their fathers ; though there is no reason
to think they entirely forgot it, but mixed idolatrous rites with it.
* Works, vol. vi. p. 19, 20.217, 218. t Ibid. p. 222, 223. i Ibid. p. 21, 22..

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE.

411

And even after their deliverance from Egypt, the idolatrous habits
and customs many of them had so deeply imbibed, were not soon
laid aside. It may easily be supposed, that they would endeavour
to reconcile and unite them with the religion Moses taught them.
And this seems particularly to have been the case with regard to the
worship of the golden calf. He mentions it as an incredible thing,
that " they forgot the true God even when he conducted them
through the desert : they revolted from him even whilst the peals
of thunder that proclaimed his descent on the mountain rattled in
their ears, and whilst he dictated his laws to them."* He adds, that
" if the miracles recorded to have been wrought had been really
wrought, nothing less than the greatest of all miracles could have
made these real miracles ineffectual." " I know farther," says he,
" most intuitively, that no creature of the same nature as I am of,
and I presume the Israelites were human creatures, could resist the
evidence of such revelations, such miracles, and such traditions, as
are recorded in the Bible : That they must have terrified the most
audacious, and have convinced the most incredulous."t Thus,
with a view to destroy the credit of the Mosaic history, he cries up
the irresistible force of the revelations and miracles wrought among
the Israelites. But perhaps he could not be so sure, as he pretends,
what he himself might have done in those circumstances. There is
scarce any answering for the extravagance and inconsistencies which
human nature may fall into. But he goes all along upon a wrong
supposition, as he had done before, as if the Israelites had entirely
forgotten God, or intended absolutely to abandon his worship. This
was not their intention in the instance he seems to have had parti
cularly in his view, their worshipping the golden calf. For it is
evident, they did not design to renounce the one true God, the God
of Israel, and to discard his worship. This appears from Aaron's
proclaiming on that occasion a feast to the Lord, Jehovah ; and
from the people's declaring, These be thy Gods, 0 Israel; or, as
it is elsewhere rendered, This is thy God, that brought thee out ofthe
land qf Egypt, Exod. xxxii. 4, 5, compared with Nehem. ix. 18.
Nothing can be plainer than that they intended by it to worship the
God of Israel, who they knew had so lately brought them out of the
land of Egypt ; and that the worship they rendered to the calf was
not designed to terminate there, but was done with a reference to
the Lord Jehovah, whom they were for worshipping by that symbol.
They might therefore flatter themselves, that this was consistent
with their acknowledging no other God but one, which had been so
solemnly enjoined them ; and that the prohibition of bowing down
before any image was designed only to forbid the worshipping false
gods, not the true God by such a symbol. This indeed was an in
excusable contravention of the law, which had been just promul
gated with great solemnity, and which was intended to forbid then-
worshipping and bowing down before any image of the Deity, under
any pretence whatsoever. But it was what minds, so strongly pre-
* Works, vol. iv. p. 223. t H*id' P- 223-

412 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
possessed with the notions and prejudices they had imbibed in
Egypt, might be supposed capable of falling into. I would observe,
by the way, that the recording this story affords a signal proof of
the impartiality of the sacred historian. Nothing but the strictest
regard to truth could have prevailed with him to have inserted a
thing which has been so often mentioned to the dishonour of that
people, even by their own writers, and by others ever since. And
it is very probable, that if the people in after-times durst have
made any alteration in the original sacred records, they would have
struck it out for the same reason for which Josephus has omitted it,
as he has done some other things which he thought would turn to
the discredit of his nation.
Another attempt this writer makes against the credit ofthe Mosaic
history, relates to the account given of their exode. He thinks it
incredible, that "the Israelites should bear the oppressions of the
Egyptians, when they were become so vastly numerous, and could
bring six hundred thousand fighting men into the field, which was
an army sufficient to have conquered Egypt."* But what could be
expected from an undisciplined and unarmed multitude, however
numerous, against the force of a powerful kingdom ? especially when
their spirits had been depressed by a long slavery, and a series of
grievous oppressions; in which cases vast multitudes have been
kept in subjection by a very few, of which there are many instances
in history. In what follows he lets us know, that he thinks the
accounts given by pagan authors of their exode not wholly fabulous,
and that " an epidemical infectious distemper in the Lower Egypt,
might make Pharaoh desirous to drive the inhabitants of that part
of his kingdom into the neighbouring deserts. — That many of the
inhabitants of the Lower Egypt were included with the Israelites in
that transmigration ; and that a common distemper, rather than a
common religion, united them in it." And again, he mentions it as
a reason of the Israelites staying forty years in the wilderness, that
" it was a sufficient time to wear out the leprosy, with which pro
fane history assures us, they were infected ."-f Thus he is for reviv
ing a false and scandalous story, the absurdity of which has been so
often exposed. The different accounts given by the pagan authors
relating to that matter will naturally lead every intelligent reader to
conclude, that the Egyptians endeavoured to conceal and disguise
the truth. They could not deny the departure ofthe Israelites out
of Egypt, and that it was in a manner and with circumstances very
disagreeable to them ; yet they did not think it consistent with the
honour of their own nation, to relate the fact with all its circum
stances as it really happened. But of all the stories they trumped
up on that occasion, that of the Israelites being expelled on the
account of their being generally infected with the leprosy, is the
most foolish and ridiculous. It appears indeed by the laws and
constitutions of Moses, that there were leprosies, and other cuta
neous distempers, among the Israelites, as well as among the neigh-
* Works, vol. v. p. 151. t Ibid. p. 142. 144, 145.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE.

413

bouring nations in that part ofthe world ; but it also appears, with
invincible evidence, that the body of that people were not infected
with those distempers, and that there were comparatively very few
who were so ; since the infected were ordered to be put out of the
camp, and were treated in such a way as they could not have been
treated, if a great part of the people had been leprous. But any
story is catched at, however void of all appearance of truth, that
tends to cast disgrace upon the Jews, and the holy scriptures.
The only remaining objection against the Mosaic history, and
which indeed seems to be what he layeth the principal stress upon,
is, that it is repugnant to the experience of mankind. That " in
credible anecdotes are not mentioned seldom or occasionally in
them, as in Livy or other historians, but the whole history is founded
on such, and consists of little else." He compares those that speak
of the Pentateuch as an authentic history to Don Quixote, and
represents them as not much less mad than he was. " When I sit
down (says he) to read this history, I am ready to think myself
transported into a sort of fairy land, where every thing is done by
magic and enchantment ; where a system of nature very different
from ours prevails; and all I meet with is repugnant to my expe
rience, and to the clearest and most distinct ideas I have. Almost
every event in it is incredible in its causes or consequences, and I
must accept ov reject the whole."* What his Lordship says
amounts in other words to this : that this history gives an account
of a series of miraculous facts and events, which were not according
to the usual and ordinary course of things. This will be easily ac
knowledged. But it is denied, that this is a just or sufficient
objection against the truth or authenticity of the history, or a valid
reason why it should be rejected. On the contrary, if the facts
there related had been only of the ordinary kind, they would not
have answered the end which the divine wisdom had in view. It was
necessary, as the case was circumstanced, that they should be mira
culous, and therefore their being miraculous is not a proof of their
being false ; and, considered in their causes and consequences, they
are so far from being incredible, that, taking in their causes and
consequences, they claim our belief and veneration. The way of
arguing made use of by our author, and others of the deistical writers
in such cases, deserves to be remarked. If the facts advanced in
proof of a divine revelation may possibly be accounted for in a na
tural way, then they are no miracles at all, and cannot give a suffi
cient attestation to the truth and authority of a supernatural revela
tion; and if they are of an extraordinary nature, and out of the
common course of our experience, and manifestly transcend all
human power, then the very extraordinariness of the facts, and their
being miraculous, though it is proper in such circumstances they
should be so, is made a reason for rejecting them.
But that we may consider this matter more distinctly, it is to be
observed, that it cannot be pretended, that the facts recorded in the
* Works, vol iii p. 280.

414 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
books of Moses are absolutely impossible, or beyond the power of
God to effect. If any reason therefore can be assigned to show,
that it was proper they should be wrought, and that it was worthy
ofthe divine wisdom to interpose in so extraordinary a way, those
facts, however miraculous they are supposed to be, become credible.
And if to this it be added, that we have all the proofs that these
facts were actually done, which the nature of the thing can admit of,
or which could be reasonably desired, supposing those things to
have really happened, this is all that can be justly expected, and it
would be unreasonable to insist on more.
The case that is here supposed is this : That when the nations
had fallen from the worship and adoration of the one true God, and
him only, and became involved in superstition, polytheism, and
idolatry, which was still growing and spreading, and in danger of
becoming universal, it pleased God, in his great wisdom and good
ness, in order to put a check to the spreading idolatry, and to pre
serve his knowledge and worship among men, to interpose in an
extraordinary way, by establishing among a people chosen for that
purpose a constitution of a peculiar kind, the fundamental principle
of which was the acknowledgment and adoration of the one true
God, in opposition to all idolatry and polytheism. And, in order to
give weight to this constitution, it was so ordered, that its divine
authority was confirmed by a series of wonderful acts, which ex
hibited the most illustrious displays of his divine power and glory.
And this constitution was designed farther to prepare the way for
another dispensation, which was intended to be of a more general
extent, and in which religion was in due season to be published to
the world in its most perfect form.
This is a general view of the case : let us now examine it more
distinctly. And first, that at the time when the law of Moses and the Is-
raelitish constitution where first established, idolatry and polytheism
were generally spread through the nations, is a fact that can scarce
be contested. This appears from all the remaining monuments of
those times, as far as we can carry our inquiries. Nor could Lord
Bolingbroke deny it. On the contrary he acknowledges, as shall
be more particularly observed afterwards, that so great and general
was the attachment of the people to idolatry and polytheism, that
the most celebrated legislators of antiquity were everywhere obliged
to fall in with it. And he himself asserts, that " polytheism and
idolatry, have so close a connexion, with the ideas and affections of
rude and ignorant men, that one of them could not fail to be their
first religious principle, nor the other their first religious practice."*
This may be thought to be carrying it too far; but it is certain, that
if we judge from fact and experience, there would have been little
hope or expectation of recovering mankind from the idolatry and
corruption into which they were fallen, without some extraordinary

Works, vol. iv. p. 21.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 415
expedient, above what either the legislators or philosophers were able
to effect.
If therefore it pleased God to interpose in an extraordinary man
ner for this purpose, it ought to be acknowledged to have been a
signal instance both of his wisdom and of his goodness. Our
author himself represents it as a fundamental article ofthe religion
of nature, that " the Supreme Being is the true, and only true, object
of our adoration."* He calls this that first and great principle qf
natural theology, and the angular stone of true theism. If ever there
fore it was worthy of God to interpose at all, or to concern himself
with the affairs of men, here was a proper occasion for it, for main
taining and preserving that fundamental principle of all religion,
which was become so greatly corrupted and perverted among men,
and overwhelmed under an amazing load of superstitions and
idolatries. This accordingly was the excellent design of the Mosaic consti
tution, and of all the extraordinary attestations whereby the divine
authority of it was established. It is undeniably manifest, that the
chief aim of that whole dispensation, and the principal point to
which all its laws were directed, was to establish the worship and
adoration of the one true God, the maker and preserver of all
things, the supreme Lord and governor of the world, and of him
alone ; and to forbid and suppress, as far as its influence reached,
that idolatry and superstition, which the wise men of other nations
humoured and encouraged, and thought it impossible to subdue.
If we compare the Mosaic institution with theirs, we shall find a
vast difference between them. Lord Bolingbroke, speaking of
the mighty degree of wealth and power to which the ancient priests,
who were also the ancient philosophers and wise men, arrived in
Egypt, Ethiopia, and the great eastern kingdoms, tells us, that " the
general scheme of their policy seems to have been this. They built
their whole system of philosophy on tbe superstitious opinions and
practices that had prevailed in days of the greatest ignorance.
They had other expedients which they employed artfully and suc
cessfully. Most of their doctrines were wrapped up in the sacred
veil of allegory. Most of them were propagated in the mysterious
cypher of sacred dialects, of sacerdotal letters, and of hieroglyphical
characters ; and the useful distinction of an outward and inward
doctrine was invented, one for the vulgar, and one for the initiated."t
He afterwards observes, that "the worship of one God, and the
simplicity of natural religion, would not serve their turn. Gods
were multiplied ; that devotions, and all the profitable rites and
ceremonies that belong them, might be so too. The invisible
Mithras, without the visible, would have been of little value to the
Magi."} It ought therefore to give us a very advantageous notion
of the divinity of the law of Moses, and the truth of his pretensions,
that the method he took was entirely different ; and that he was far
from making use of those arts and expedients, which the ancient
• Works, vol. v. p. 98. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 42, 43, 44, J Ibid. p. 49.

416 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
priests and sages of the east thought necessary. Lie did not found
his theology on false popular opinions ; on the contrary, the funda
mental principle of his system was subversive of that polytheism,
which his Lordship represents as the natural belief of men in the
first uncultivated ages, and to which a great part of mankind in
every age have been undeniably very prone. No variety or multi
plicity of Gods was allowed in his constitution : no false or idola
trous devotions, in order to bring a greater revenue to the priests.
He did not conceal his doctrines and laws in the cypher of sacred
dialects, and sacerdotal letters, and hieroglyphical characters. His
laws and doctrines were all designed for public universal use ; and
there was no such thing in his system as secret doctrines, to be
communicated only to a few, and concealed from the vulgar. On
the contrary, it was a maxim that lay at the foundation of that con
stitution, that all the people were to be instructed in the knowledge
and worship of the one true God, free from idolatry, and to be made
acquainted with his laws, and the duties there required. And
though our author speaks of the allegories in the Old Testament, as
if allegory passed for a literal relation qf facts among them, it is
certain, that in the historical parts of the Bible, particularly in the
Mosaic history, the facts are generally delivered in a plain, simple,
narrative style, obvious to the capacities of the people.
His Lordship speaks with high approbation of the celebrated
legislators of antiquity, whom he represents as the first, and he sup
poses the best missionaries that have been seen in the world* He
instances in Mercury, Zoroaster, Zamolxis, Minos, Charondas,
Numa ; and having told us, that they all, to give the greater sanc
tion to their religious and civil institutions, pretended to communi
cations with their gods, or to revelations from them, he declares,
that "he believes it probable, that many of the reformers of man
kind had discovered the existence of the one Supreme Beihg ; but
this knowledge might seem to them not sufficiently adapted to the
character of the people with whom they had to do." He adds, that
" it was necessary in their opinion to suit their doctrine to the gross
conceptions of the people, and to raise such affections and passions
by human images, and by objects that made strong impressions on
sense, as might be opposed with success to such as were raised by
sensible images and objects too, and were destructive of order, and
pernicious to society. They employed, for reforming the manners
of the half-savage people they civilized, the dread of superior
powers, maintained and cultivated by superstition, and applied by
policy ."t Thus Lord Bolingbroke, notwithstanding the zeal he pro
fesses for true theism, is pleased mightily to admire and applaud
the ancient legislators, who, by his own account, countenanced and
encouraged polytheism and idolatry ; whilst he abuses and vilifies
Moses, the main design of whose law was to forbid and suppress
it. Indeed, the method he took was such as showed that his law
had an higher original than human policy. He established the wor-
* Works, vol. iv. p. 25. t Ibid. p. 26, 27.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. .,-
ship of the one true God, the Creator and Governor of the universe
and of him only, as the foundation and central point of his whole
system. Nor did he, in order to suit his doctrine to the gross concep
tions of the people, indulge them in that idolatry and polytheism to
which the nations were so generally and strongly addicted. All
worship of inferior deities was prohibited; and he expressly forbade
the Hebrews to represent the pure essence of the Deity by any cor
poreal form, that he might accustom them to a more spiritual adora
tion ofthe Supreme Being; and if, as our author alleges, he
adopted some of the Egyptian rites and customs in accommoda
tion to the weakness and prejudices of the people,* though this is
far from being so certain as he pretends,t we may be sure they were
only such as might be innocently used, and not such as had a ten
dency to lead the people into idolatry, or out of which idolatry
arose; for all things of this kind he strongly and most expressly
prohibited ; and therefore commanded the people not to do after the
doings of the land of Egypt, or to walk after their ordinances, Lev.
xviii. 3. The other legislators pretended, as well as he, to commu
nications with the Divinity; yet whatever their private opinion
might be, they durst not so much as attempt to take the people off
from the superstition and idolatry they were so fond of. The reason
was, they were sensible that their communication with the Deity
was only pretended ; and therefore they could not depend upon any
extraordinary assistance to carry their designs into execution';
* Works, vol. iv. 31. 44.
t lt appears, indeed, from the accounts of the Egyptian rites and customs given by
some ancient writers, that there is a resemblance betweeii some of those rites and cus
toms, and those that were instituted in the Mosaical law; but there is no proof that
the latter was derived from the former ; nor, indeed, is there any proof which can be
depended on, that those particular rites were in use among the Egyptians so early as the
time of Moses, since the authors who mention them are of a much later date. And,
notwithstanding all that hath been said of the improbability ofthe Egyptians borrowing
them from the Israelites, yet the very high opinion the Egyptians of his time had con
ceived of Moses, as appeareth from Exod. xi. 3. and the great impressions which we
may well suppose to have beeii made upon them by the extraordinary divine interposi
tions, in favour of the Israelites, at their departure out of Egypt, and during their
abode in the wilderness, as well as at their entrance into the land of Canaan, of which
the Egyptians could scarce be ignorant, might give occasion to their copying after some
of the Mosaic institutions. They might possibly apprehend, that this would tend to
draw down divine blessings upon them, or to avert judgments and calamities. These
observances they might afterwardsjretain, though, in succeeding ages, when the first impres
sions were over, they were too proiul, to acknowledge from whence they had originally
derived them. Besides, it should be considered, that ofthe several rites and customs com
mon to the Israelites and Egyptians, might be derived to both from the patriarchal times.
The famous M. le Clerc, notwithstanding the zeal he frequently expresseth for the
hypothesis, that many of the Mosaic rites were instituted in imitation of the Egyptians,
yet in his notes on Levit. xxiii. 10. speaking of the offering up of the first-fruits to God,
observes, that this was neither derived from the Egyptians to the Hebrews, nor from
the Hebrews to the Egyptians, but was derived to both from the earliest ages, and pro
bably was originally of divine appointment. The same he thinks of the oblation of
sacrifices ; and adds, that there were perhaps many other things which both people
derived from the same source. Et alice forte nndta ex aiquo indidem traxit uterque
populus. So that many of those Jewish observances which some learned men, and M.
le Clerc among the rest, have been fond of deriving from the Egyptians, had probably
been in use in the times of the ancient patriarchs, and were retained, and farther con
firmed, as well as other additional rites instituted, in the law of Moses.
E E

418 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
but Moses not only pretended to have received his laws from God,
but knew that it really was so, and was able to give the most con
vincing proofs of his divine mission. He was sure of a supernatu
ral assistance, and this enabled him to accomplish what the ablest
legislators of antiquity did not dare to attempt. His Lordship
observes, that " the Israelites had the most singular establishment,
ecclesiastical and civil, that ever was formed."* And it must be
acknowledged to have been in many respects very different from
that which obtained in other nations. And it can hardly be con
ceived, how, as things were circumstanced, it could have been
established among the Israelites, but in an extraordinary and mira
culous way. The very nature of the constitution furnishes a strong
presumption of the truth of the miraculous facts by which the
authority of it was attested and confirmed, and rendereth the whole
account consistent and credible.
The chief objection which is urged against this, is drawn from
the absurdity of supposing, that God should select a pe'ople to him
self, among whom he would erect a peculiar constitution for pre
serving his knowledge and worship, apart from the rest of mankind.
Or, however, " if he had thought fit, that the sacred deposit
should be trusted to a people chosen to preserve it till the coming
of the Messiah, no people was less fit than the Israelites to be
chosen for this great trust, on every account. They broke the trust
continually. The revelations made to them were, as Mr. Locke
observes, shut up in a little corner of the world, amongst a people,
by that very law which they received with it, excluded from a com
merce and communication with the rest of mankind. A people so
little known, and contemned by those that knew them, were very
unfit and unable to propagate the doctrine of one God in the world."
He asks, " Wherefore then was this deposit made to them ? lt was
of no use to other nations before the coming of Christ, nor served
to prepare them for the reception of the gospel. And after his
coming, it was in this great respect of little use, if of any, to the
Jews themselves. ''-f-
There is scarce any thing that has been more the subject of ridi
cule, than the Jews being a chosen race, distinguished from all other
nations of the earth. And yet that the Jews were remarkably dis
tinguished above other nations, for the knowledge and worship of
the one true God, is a matter of fact which cannot possibly be denied.
Whosoever reads the monuments of heathen antiquity, of which
there are very large jemains extant, the constitution of their laws,
and system of their policy, and the writings of their historians, poets,
and philosophers, and compares them with the Jewish, will find an
astonishing difference that cannot but strike every man who con
siders it. It must be acknowledged, that many of the heathen
nations, particularly those of Greece and Rome, were renowned for
learning and politeness, peculiarly eminent for their knowledge in
the liberal arts and sciences, and for the fineness of their taste in
* Works, vol. v. p. 144. f Ibid. p. 242, 243.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 419
works of genius and literature, which has rendered them the admi
ration of all succeeding ages. But in matters of religion we meet
every where with the most unquestionable proofs of the grossest
idolatry and polytheism, in which not only were the vulgar univer
sally involved, but it was countenanced and practised by the wisest
and greatest men. That public worship which was instituted by
their most celebrated legislators, and a conformity to which was re
commended by the philosophers, was directed to a multiplicity of
deities. On the other hand, if we turn our views to the Jews, a
people no way eminent for their knowledge in the arts and sciences,
we shall find that monotheism,' the first and great principle, as he
calls it, of natural theology, the acknowledgment and worship of the
one true God, the Maker and Lord of the universe, and of him only,
was the fundamental principleof theirconstitution and of their state;
all worship of inferior deities, and of the true God by imao-es, was
most expressly prohibited in their laws.* If we examine their writ
ings, we may observe, that they every where discover the profoundest
veneration for the Deity ; they abound with the sublimest senti
ments of his divine Majesty, his incomparable perfections, his
supreme dominion, and all-disposing providence, and every where
express an utter detestation of all idolatry and polytheism. Nor is
this the spirit of their moral and devotional writings only, but of
their historical too ; the principal design of which is to promote the
great ends of religion, by representing the happy state of their
nation, when they adhered to the worship of God, and persisted in
obedience to his laws, and the calamities and miseries that befel them
as a punishment for their defections and revolts. Their very poetry
was vastly different from that of the heathen nations ; not designed,
like theirs, to celebrate the praises, the amours, the exploits of their
* Lord Bolingbroke takes notice, thai Moses had made the destruction of idolatrous
worship a principal object of his laws ; and the zeal against images was great among the
Jews. But he pretends that it was only carved or embossed images that were held in
horror; but a flat figure, either painted or embroidered, was allowed; as, he thinks, is
very clear from a passage which he has read, quoted from Maimonides. And he inti
mates, that " picture-worship came from the Jews to the Christians, as did that of
carved images from the pagans." See vol. iv. p. 308. If that were the casuistry, as
he calls it, of the Jews, it is certainly not chargeable on their law, which most expressly
prohibited the worshipping, npt only of graven images, but the likeness of any thing that
is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath. But this is one instance, among many
which might be produced, of the wrong use his Lordship has made of his too super
ficial reading. He was ready to take up with tbe slightest appearances in favour of any
darling point he had in view. He has here confounded the making or drawing pictures
or images with the worshipping them. Neither Maimonides, nor any other Jewish
author, ever pretended that it was lawful for them to worship painted, any more than
carved images. But as to the lawfulness of making images, or of painting and embroi
dering them, there were different opinions. Some carried it so far, that they were not
for allowing any figures at all, either painted or carved, not so much as for ornament,
for fear of giving occasion to idolatry. Others thought it lawful to have the figures of
animals either painted or carved, except those of men, which were not allowed to be
carved or embossed, though they might be painted, or drawn upon a plane ; but neither
the one nor the other were to be worshipped. If his Lordship had consulted Mr.
Selden, whom he hath sometimes quoted, he would have found all this distinctly re
presented. De jure nat. et gent, apud Hebr. lib. xi. cap. 6, 7, 8, 9. There is no foun
dation, therefore, for his new discovery, that picture-worship came from the Jews to
the Christians. E F. 2

420 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL AVRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
fictitious deities, but fitted to inspire the noblest ideas of God, and
containing the most elevated descriptions of his glory and perfection.
It is natural therefore to enquire whence comes this amazing dif
ference between the Jews and the most learned and civilized heathen
nations in the knowledge and worship of the Deity. It is his Lord
ship's own observation, that "without revelation the belief of the
unity of God could not be the faith of any one people, till observa
tion and meditation, till a full and vigorous exercise of reason, made
it such."* And again, he tells us, that " the rational, the orthodox
belief was not established, nor could be so, till the manhood of phi
losophy."-!; How comes it then, that the public acknowledgment
and adoration of the one true God, free from polytheism and idola
try, was the established religion of the Jews only ? Were they the
only people who had reason in a full and vigorous exercise, and
among whom philosophy was arrived at its manhood 1 If so, it is
wrong to represent them, as the deistical writers have frequently
done, as the most stupid of the human race, a people ignorant and
barbarous, as he and Mr. Hume calls them. Nor had he a right to
laugh at Mr. Abbadie, who, he says, has represented them as a
nation of sages and philosophers.^ It will be readily allowed, that
the Jews were not of themselves more wise and knowing, or better
philosophers than other nations, or that they had made deeper ob
servations and reflections ; on the contrary, they were inferior to
some in several branches of science. We have all the reason there
fore in the world to conclude, that, if left to themselxes, they would
have been involved in the common polytheism and idolatry, as well
as the nations round them ; and that it was owing only to their
having had the advantage of an extraordinary revelation, and to
their peculiar constitution, which was of divine original, and which
had been confirmed by the most illustrious attestations, that they
became so remarkably distinguished.
Lord Bolingbroke was very sensible how unfavourable this is to
his cause, and therefore finds great fault with Mr. Locke for assum
ing, that the belief and worship ofthe one true God was the national
religion of the Israelites alone, and that it was their particular pri
vilege and advantage to know the true God, and his true worship,
whilst the heathen nations were in a state of darkness and igno
rance. To take off the force of this seems to be the principal design
of his third Essay, which is of the rise and progress of monotheism.^
But what he offers to this purpose is extremely trifling. He is
forced quite to alter the true state of the question, and supposes
Mr. Locke and the Christian divines to assert, that there was not
any knowledge or worship of the true God in the world at all before
the erection of the Israelitish polity ; and that all the nations, except
the Israelites, had been ignorant of the true God from the begin
ning. And then he argues, that " this implies that the Israelites
were a nation from the beginning;" and gravely asks, "Were they
* Works, vol. iv. p. 20. t Ibid. p. 22, 23.
' Ibid. vol. iii. p. 283. § Ibid. vol. iv. p. 187. et seq,

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 42 J
so, if we reckon from Adam, or even from Noah, or even from the
vocation of their father Abraham ?"* Thus he frames a ridiculous
hypothesis for his adversaries, and then endeavours to expose it ;
whereas they maintain, what he thinks fit to deny, that the know
ledge and worship of the true God was the original primitive religion
of mankind, derived from the first parents and ancestors of the
human race ; but that before the time of Moses, the nations were
generally lapsed into pofytheism and idolatry, which appears from
his own acknowledgment to have been the case.
He affirms indeed, " it is plain that the knowledge of the one true
God would have been preserved in the world, if no such people as
the Jews had ever been. And nothing can be more impertinent
than the hypothesis, that this people, the least fit perhaps on many
accounts that could have been chosen, was chosen to preserve this
knowledge. It was acquired, and it was preserved indepen
dently of them, among the heathen philosophers. And it might
have become, and probably did become, the national belief in coun
tries unknown to us, or even in those who were fallen back into igno
rance, before they appear in the traditions we have."+ What an
extraordinary way of talking is this ! He argues from the supposed
national belief of countries unknown to us, and of which he confesses
we had no traditions extant, to show that religion would have been
preserved in the world, if no such people as the Jews had ever been.
As to the heathen philosophers, among whom, he says, the know
ledge of the true God was preserved, it is certain, and he himself
frequently owns it, that whatever knowledge some of them had this
way, it was of little use to hinder tbe polytheism and idolatry of the
people ; and that, instead of reclaiming them from it, they fell in it
with themselves, and even encouraged and advised the people to a
compliance with the public laws and customs, by which polytheism
was established.
Thus it appears, that after all the outcry and ridicule against the
Jews as the unfittest people in the world to have tbe sacred deposit
of the acknowledgment and adoration of the one true God committed
to them, they were the only people concerning whom we have any
proofs that they made a public national acknowledgment of this
great principle, and among whom it was established as the funda
mental law of their state.J It is urged indeed, that their constitu-
* Works, vol. iv. p. 233. t Ibid. p. 79.
X His Lordship shows a strange unwillingness, that the Jews should have the honour
of having had the knowledge and worship of the true God among them, in a degree far
superior to other nations. Sometimes he insinuateth, as some others of the deistical
writers have done, that the Israelites borrowed it from the Egyptians (though accord
ing to his own representation of the case, this was among the Egyptians part ^of their
secret doctrine, not communicated to the vulgar), or from the Babylonians. And then
the wonder will be how it came to pass, that the knowledge and worship ofthe one true
God was preserved among the Jews, whilst the Egyptians and Babylonians were im
mersed in the most absurd and stupid idolatries. He thinks he might venture to affirm,
that Abraham himself learned the orthodox faith, viz. relating to the knowledge an d _ wor
ship of the one true God, in Egypt and the neighbouring countries* And he had said.
the same thing before.t There cannot be a greater proof of unreasonable".pi'ejudice than
* Works, vol. iv. p. 203. t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 299.

422 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
tion had little effect upon them ; that " their history is little else
than a relation of their rebelling and repenting ; and these rebellions,
not those of particular men, surprised and hurried into disobedience
by their passions, but national deliberate violations of the law, in de
fiance of the Supreme Being."* But if we compare the history of
the Jews with that of the heathen nations, we shall find a very re
markable difference between them. Notwithstanding all the faults
and defections of the former, and though they too often fell into
idolatries and vicious practices, in a conformity to the customs ofthe
neighbouring countries, they again recovered from them, and re
turned to the acknowledgment and adoration of the one true God,
and him only, and often continued for a considerable number of
years together in the profession and practice of the true religion,
free from idolatry ; of which there are many proofs in all the ages of
their nation, from the days of Moses to the Babylonish captivity ;
during the time of their Judges, Kings, &c. as every one knows
that is at all acquainted with their history. This was owing to the
revelation they enjoyed ; they still had recourse to their law, and by
that reformed themselves, and returned to the pure worship of God
according to that law ; to which, after the Babylonish captivity, in
which they had suffered so much for their defections and revolts,
they adhered more closely than ever. But among the heathen
nations, even those of them that were most learned and civilized,
such as the Grecians and Romans, all was one continued course of
polytheism, and the most absurd idolatries ; nor can we name any
period of their history, in which they laid aside the public poly
theism, and returned to the acknowledgment and adoration of the
one true God, and of him only. It must be said, therefore, that the
Jewish history doth indeed furnish plain proofs of what the author.
observes, the proneness of mankind in all ages to polytheism and
idolatry; but it shows at the same time, that, by virtue of their pe
culiar constitution, the worship of God was maintained among them
in a manner in which it was not in any other nation ; and this
affordeth a signal proof of the benefit of revelation, and how far su
perior it is to the efforts of the wisest lawgivers and philosophers.
It appears then, that the Mosaic constitution did answer very
valuable ends. By this there was a people preserved, among whom
the knowledge and adoration of the one living and true God was
maintained, in a world over-run with superstition and idolatry, and
to whom an admirable system of laws was given.' And notwith
standing all that is said about the people of Israel being shut up in
a corner of the earth, they were placed in an advantageous situation,
in the centre of the then known world, between Egypt and
this. It is surmised not only without evidence, but against it, since nothing can be
plainer from the account given us of Abraham, than that he knew and worshipped the
one true God before he came into Canaan at all, and therefore long before he went into
Egypt. Nor did he learn it from tbe Chaldeans, among whom idolatry had then made
a considerable progress, as appears from Josh. xxiv. 2. And agreeably to this is the
universal tradition of the East; that he was the great restorer of the ancient true
religion, which had been corrupted with idolatry.
* Works, vol. v. p. 136.

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 423
Arabia on the one hand, and Syria, Chaldea, and Assyria on the
other, among whom the first great empires were erected, and from
whence knowledge and learning seem to have been derived to the
western parts ofthe world. And they were also in the neighbour
hood of Sidon and Tyre, the greatest emporiums in the world, from
whence ships went to all parts, even the most distant countries.
Their peculiar constitution, whereby they were so remarkably dis
tinguished from other nations, together with the extraordinary
things God had done for them, had a natural tendency to put the
neighbouring people upon enquiring into the design of all this, which
would be apt to lead them to the adoration of the one true God, and
into the knowledge of the true religion in its most necessary and
important principles, and to discover to them the folly and unreason
ableness of their own superstition and idolatry. That this was really
part of the design which the divine wisdom had in view in this con
stitution, and that therefore it was intended to be of use to other
nations besides the people of Israel, plainly appears from many pas
sages of Scripture.* They were indeed kept distinct from other
people, and it was necessary for wise ends they should be so ; but
they were always ready to receive among them those of other nations
that worshipped the one true God, though they did not conform to
the peculiar rites of their polity ; and in the most flourishing times
of their state,-particularly in the reigns of David and Solomon, they
had an extensive dominion and correspondence ; and afterwards they
had frequent intercourse with Egypt, Syria, Assyria, Chaldea, and
Persia. And if we consider what is related concerning the Queen
of Sheba, and Hiram, King of Tyre, as well as the memorable de
crees of Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, Darius the Mede,
Cyrus, Darius Hystaspes, and Artaxerxes, Kings of Persia, the
greatest monarchs then upon earth, and who published to the world
the regard and veneration they had for the Lord Jehovah, the God
whom the Jews worshipped ; it is very probable that the fame of
their laws, and the remarkable interpositions of providence on their
behalf, spread far and wide among the nations, and contributed, in
more instances than is commonly imagined, to keep up some know
ledge of the true God, the Maker and Lord of the universe, and to
give some check to the prevailing idolatry, and to preserve the
ancient patriarchal religion from being utterly extinguished. To
which it may be added, that, in the latter times of their state, vast
numbers of the Jews were dispersed through Egypt, Babylonia,
Persia, and other parts of the east; and afterwards through the
Lesser Asia, and the several parts of the Roman empire : and they
every-where turned many of the Gentiles from the common idolatry
and polytheism ; which the philosophers were scarce able to effect
in a single instance. It appears then, that the setting apart .that
people in so extraordinary a manner, the revelation that was given
them, and the marvellous acts of divine providence towards them,
* See particularly Exod. vii. 15. ix. 16. xiv. 4. Numb. xiv. 13, 14, 21. Deut. iv. 6.
I Kings viii. 41, 42, 43. Psal. xxvi. 3.

424 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII
were fitted for having an extensive effect for the advantage of other
nations as well as their own, and actually had that effect in multi
tudes of instances. By this constitution, there was a light set up,
shining in a dark place, to which other nations might have recourse.
And if, instead of making use of it as they ought to have done, they
generally neglected it, and even hated and despised the Jews for
having a religion so opposite to their own, and condemning their
superstitions and idolatries ; the fault is to be charged upon them
selves, who neglected those means and helps, as they had done
before the discoveries made to them by ancient tradition, and which
had been originally derived from revelation, and by the light of
nature, and the works of creation and providence. Besides this,
what farther shows the great propriety and usefulness of this pecu
liar constitution, and the revelation given to the people of Israel, is,
that it had a great tendency to prepare the world for receiving that
more perfect dispensation which was to succeed it, and which was
to be of a more general extent, and to be more universally diffused.
The first harvest of converts to Christianity was among the Jews
and their proselytes, of whom great numbers were brought over to
the Christian faith. The Jewish Scriptures were generally dis
persed, and had spread the knowledge of God, and had raised an
expectation of a glorious and divine person, by whom a new and
most excellent dispensation was to be introduced, and the Gentiles
were to be brought over, more generally than had hitherto been
done, from their superstitions and idolatries, from their abominable
vices and corruptions, to the pure worship of God, and the know
ledge and practice of true religion. This glorious person was fore
told and described in the Jewish prophecies by many remarkable
characters, which being accomplished in our Saviour gave a most
illustrious attestation to his divine mission. And these prophecies
were kept more clear and distinct, by being in the hands of a pe
culiar people as the depositaries of them : whereas if they had been,
like other traditions, left merely at large among the nations, they
would probably in process of time have been corrupted and lost,
and the testimony arising from them must have fallen.
Taking all these considerations together, it appears, that the pe
culiar Jewish economy answered many valuable and important
ends : and that therefore it was no way unworthy of the divine
wisdom to interpose in an extraordinary manner to give a divine
attestation to it. And that the miraculous facts, if really done,
were every way sufficient for this purpose, our author himself does
not deny. On the contrary, he looks upon them to have been so
strong and convincing, that it would have been impossible to resist
them; and he thinks they must have been sufficient, if they had
been really done, to have brought over all mankind to the belief and
acknowledgment of the one true God, not only in that age, but in
all succeeding ages. His manner of expressing himself is remark
able. He says, that " the reviving and continuing the primitive
faith and worship by such a series of revelations and miracles among
one people, would have made any revival of them unnecessary

Let. XXVIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 425
among any other ; because they would have been more than suffi
cient to continue them uncorrupted over the whole world ; not only
till the vocation of Abraham, four hundred years after the deluge ¦
not only till the coming of the Messiah, two thousand years after
that, but even to this hour, and to the consummation of all things." *
Not to insist upon the great absurdity of his supposing, that the
miracles wrought among the Israelites so long after the vocation of
Abraham, would have been sufficient to have kept the true religion
uncorrupted till the vocation of Abraham, a blunder which could
only have been owing to the most inexcusable negligence in writ
ing; I think it follows from his own concessions, that the miracles
and other extraordinary methods made use of for the establishment
ofthe Mosaic economy, were of such a nature as to be well fitted
to the end for which they were designed, the revival and establish
ment of the worship of the one true God, in opposition to idolatry
and polytheism. And though it be wrong to suppose, as he most
absurdly does, that they must have established it among all man
kind, and have prevented all deviations from it in all ages and
nations ; yet it will be acknowledged, that those facts were of such
a kind as to have been sufficient to convince all those to whom they
were known, that the laws, in attestation to which they were
wrought, were of a divine original. Accordingly the people of
Israel, notwithstanding their proneness to idolatry, and their obsti
nate prejudices, were brought to submit to those laws, as of divine
authority, and to receive them as the rule of their polity. And
though they fell off on several occasions to a compliance with the
idolatries -of the neighbouring nations, which they mixed with their
own rites, yet the remembrance and belief of those facts, which al
ways continued among them, had mighty effects, in every age of
their state, to bring them back to the true worship of God,- and to
an obedience to their laws. And they have had a great effect ever
since, wherever they have been believed, to fill men with a holy
fear of God, and with the most adoring thoughts of his divine un
equalled majesty and glory. This effect they continue to have
among Christians, and are like to have to the end of the world.
It is no just objection against the truth of the facts, that they
come to us through the hands of the Jews : for what other testi
mony can be reasonably desired, or can the nature of the thing ad
mit of, than the concurrent testimony of that people, to whom the
laws were given, and among whom the facts were done ? A testi
mony continued throughout all the ages of their nation, and appear
ing in all their records and monuments. The facts were done
among themselves, and therefore in the nature of things could only
be witnessed by themselves. If those of any other nation had
recorded them, they must have had their accounts from the people
of Israel : and if they had declared their belief of those facts, and
of the divine authority of those laws, there would have been an
equal pretence for rejecting their testimony, as for rejecting that of
* Works, vol. iv. p. 214.

426 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXVIII.
the Jews. But it is in truth very absurd to make it an objection,
that the accounts of these facts are transmitted to us by those who
were the only proper persons to give an account of those facts, and
by whom alone those accounts could have been originally given, if
they had been true. If it be pretended, that the facts were feigned
by them to do honour to their nation, it must be considered, that,
as was before hinted, they are so circumstanced, and mixed with
such disadvantageous accounts of the temper and conduct of that
people, as no man would have feigned who had their honour in
view, or who had not a greater regard to the truth of the facts, than
to the humouring and flattering that people. For it is plain, that
the facts might have been so contrived, if they had been fictitious,
as to have saved the honour of their nation, and not to have given
occasion to the severe censures and reproaches which have been cast
upon them in all ages on that account. And what farther derives
great credit to the relations of those extraordinary and miraculous
facts, is, that the books in which they are contained not only appear
to have been written with an unaffected simplicity, and a sincere
impartial regard to truth, mixed with a profound veneration for the
Deity, but they contain the most remarkable predictions of future
events, which it was impossible for any human sagacity to foresee;
particularly relating to the future fates of that nation ; the surpris
ing revolutions they should undergo ; the calamities, captivities,
and desolations, that should befal them ; their being scattered and
dispersed all over the face of the earth, and every where exposed to
hatred, contempt, and reproach, and yet still wonderfully preserved
as a distinct people, as we see they are at this day ; notwithstand
ing they have for so many ages lost their genealogies, and been de
prived of their most valued privileges, and rendered incapable of
exercising their most solemn sacred rites as prescribed in their law,
and without any prophets raised up among them, and acknowledged
by themselves as such, to support their hopes. These are things
for which no parallel can be found in any other nation upon earth.
So that the present state of that people, in all respects so extra
ordinary, is a living proof of the truth and divinity of those writings
which contain an account of the laws that were originally given them,
and of the wonderful facts by which those laws were enforced and
established. This is a proof still stronger to us, than it could have
been in the ages soon after those books were written, and affordeth
one instance in which the evidence of those facts, instead of being
diminished by time, has acquired new strength and force.
You will forgive the length of this letter, as I was willing to lay
together in one view all that I thought necessary for clearing and
establishing the truth of the Mosaic history against our author's
objections, and which, if it be well supported, the divinity of those
laws, and of that constitution, follows with invincible evidence.

Let. XXIX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 427

LETTER XXIX.
The excellent Nature and Tendency of the Mosaic Writings and the Scriptures of the
Old Testament.— Lord Bolingbroke treats it as Blasphemy to say that they are di
vinely inspired. — A Summary of his Objections against their divine Original and
Authority. — His Charge against the Scriptures, as giving mean and unworthy Ideas
of God, considered at large — The Representations he himself gives of God, and of
his Providence, shown to be unworthy, and of the worst Consequence. — Concerning
God's being represented in Scripture as entering into Covenant with Man. — The
Pretence of his being described as a tutelary God to Abraham, and to the People of
Israel, and of his being degraded to the meanest Offices and Employments, distinctly
examined. — The Passages in which bodily Parts seem to be ascribed to God, not
designed to be taken in a literal Sense  The Scripture itself sufficiently guards
against a wrong Interpretation of those Passages. — In what Sense human Passions
and Affections are attributed to the Supreme Being. — A remarkable PassiTge of
Mr. Collins to this Purpose.
Sir,
The design of my last letter was to vindicate the truth and credit
of the Mosaic history, and of the extraordinary facts there related.
And if that history be admitted as true, the divine original and
authority of the Mosaic constitution is established. But besides the
external proofs arising from the extraordinary and miraculous facts,
whosoever with an unprejudiced mind looks into the revelation itself
as contained in the sacred writings of the Old Testament, may ob
serve remarkable internal characters, which demonstrate its excellent
nature and tendency. At present I shall observe, that we are there
taught to form the worthiest notions of God, of hjs incomparable
perfections, and of his governing providence, as extending over all
his works, particularly towards mankind. We are at the same time
instructed in the true state of our own case, as we are weak, de
pendent, guilty creatures, and are directed to place our whole hope
and trust in God alone, and to refer all to him, as our chiefest good,
and highest end ; to be thankful to him for all the good things we
enjoy, and to be patient and resigned to his will under all the
afflictive events that befal us. Our moral duty is there set before
us in its just extent. The particulars of it are laid down in plain
and express precepts, enforced upon us in the name and by the
authority of God himself, whose love of righteousness, goodness,
and purity, and j ust detestation of vice and wickedness, are repre
sented in the strongest manner. Those sacred writings every-where
abound with the most encouraging declarations of his grace and
mercy towards the truly penitent, and with the most awful denun
ciations of his just displeasure against obstinate presumptuous trans
gressors. And the important lesson which runs through the whole
is this, that we are to make the pleasing and serving God the chief
business of our lives, and that our happiness consisteth in his favour,
which is only to be obtained in the uniform practice of piety and
virtue.

428 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIX.
Such evidently is the nature and tendency of the sacred writings
of the Old Testament. But very different is the representation
made of them by Lord Bolingbroke. Not content with endeavour
ing to destroy the credit of the history, he hath, by arguments
drawn from the nature ofthe revelation itself contained in the Jewish
Scriptures, used his utmost efforts to show, that it is absolutely
unworthy of God ; that " there are marks of an human original in
those books, which point out plainly the fraud and the impos
ture :"* and that " it is no less than blasphemy to assert them to
be divinely inspired." f
The objections he has advanced against the Scriptures of the Old
Testament, and especially against the Mosaic writings, are princi
pally these that follow :
1. That they give the most unworthy ideas of the Supreme Being:
they degrade him to the meanest offices and employments, and
attribute to him human passions, and even the worst of human im
perfections. 2. Some of the laws there given are absolutely contrary to the law
of nature, which is the law of God, and therefore cannot be of divine
original. He instanceth particularly in the command for extirpat
ing the Canaanites, and for punishing idolaters with death.
3. The first principle of the law of Moses is insociability ; and
it took the Jews out of all moral obligations to the rest of man
kind. 4. There are several passages in the Mosaic writings, which are
false, absurd, and unphilosophical ; as particularly the account there
given of the creation of the world, and the fall of man.
5. The sanctions of the law of Moses were wholly of a temporal
nature, and were contrived and fitted to humour and gratify the ap
petites and passions ; without any regard to a future state of rewards
and punishments.
These are the principal objections urged by Lord Bolingbroke
against the divine authority of the Scriptures of the Old Testament,
and particularly of the books of Moses. There are some other
smaller exceptions, which I shall take notice of as they come in
my way.
1. The first class of objections relateth to the mean and unworthy
representations that are made to us in Scripture of the Supreme
Being. It hath always been accounted one of the distinguishing
excellencies of the sacred writings, that they abound with the most
just and sublime descriptions ofthe Deity, which have a manifest
tendency to raise our minds to the most worthy and exalted concep
tions of his divine majesty, and his incomparable excellencies and
perfections. Our author himself thinks fit to acknowledge, that
" there are many passages in Scripture, which give most sublime
ideas of the majesty of the Supreme Being :'' And that " the con
ceptions which the Jews entertained of the Supreme Being were
very othodox in the eye of reason ; and their psalmists, and their
• Works, vol. iii. p. 286. t Ibid. p. 299.

Let. XXIX. LORD BOLINGBROKE.

429

prophets, strained their imaginations to express the most elevated
sentiments of God, and of his works, and of the methods of his pro
vidence."* If therefore there be any passages which, literally taken,
seem to be unworthy of God, they ought, by all the rules of candour
and fair criticism to be interpreted in a consistency with these ;
since it cannot be reasonably supposed, that those who entertained
such noble and sublime sentiments of the Divinity, should at the
same time, as he would persuade us they did, form the meanest and
unworthiest conceptions of him.
But let us consider the particulars of his charge : and it amounts
in effect to this : That the scriptures degrade the Supreme Being, by
representing him as descending to the meanest offices and employ
ments : and that they attribute to him human passions, and even the
worst of human imperfections.
As to the first part of the charge, the degrading the Divine Ma
jesty to the meanest, the unworthiest, offices and employments, he
observes, that, according to the Mosaic account, " the Supreme
Being condescended to be the tutelary God of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob, and under this character he acted a part which a sensible
heathen, not transported by presumptuous notions of bis own im
portance, nor by the impudence of enthusiasm, would have thouo-ht
too mean and too low for any of his inferior gods or demons. "t This
objection he frequently repeats in various forms. He introduces one
of the heathen sages as alleging, that among the Mosaic supersti
tions there was one, which could be charged neither on the Egyp
tians, nor any other heathen nation, and which surpassed the most
extravagant of theirs ; and this was, that the Supreme Being is
represented as having taken upon him a name, which was a very
magnificent one indeed, and such as might denote the Supreme
Being, but still a name by which he might be distinguished as the
tutelar God of one family first, and then of one nation particularly,
and almost exclusively of all others. "J But there is no passage
where he pushes this objection more strongly, than in p. 463 of vol.
iv. where he observes, that " the eternal and infinite Being is repre
sented in the Jewish histories, and in the whole system of their
religion, as a local tutelar deity, carried about in a trunk, or residing
in a temple ; as an ally, who had entered into covenant with their
fathers ; as a king, who had actually held the reins of their govern
ment; and as an industrious magistrate, who descended into all the
particulars of religious and civil administration, even into the most
minute and meanest. Thus were the Jews accustomed to familiarize
themselves with the Supreme Being, and to imagine that he fami
liarized with them, and to figure him to themselves receiving their
sacrifices, and listening to their prayers, sometimes at least, as
grossly as Lucian represents Jupiter." He seems to think the hea
thens were in the right, when they blamed the Jews for " bringing
the first and only God too near to man, and making him an actor
* Works, vol. iii. p. 99. vol. iv. p. 463. t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 304.
X Ibid. vol. iv. p. 34.

430 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIX.
immediately, and personally as it were, in the creation and govern-
ment of the world."* And he had before observed, that, according
to the scripture, " the correspondence between God and man was
often immediate, and even intimate and familiar with his elect, and
with such purified souls as were prepared for it. And that the
whole tenor of the sacred writings represented the Supreme Being
in frequent conferences with his creatures : God covenanting and
making bargains with man, and man with God : God holding the
language of man, reasoning, arguing, expostulating, in a very human
manner, animated by human affections, and appealing to human
knowledge, "f
Before I enter on a particular discussion of what his Lordship hath
here offered, it is proper to observe, that though, in a passage just
now cited, the Jews seemed to be blamed for bringing the Supreme
Being too mar. to man, and supposing him to be an actor immedi
ately, and as it were personally, in the government of the world; yet
he elsewhere finds fault with the heathen philosophers for excluding
the Monad, or supreme unity, from the creation and government of
the world, and banishing him almost entirely from the system of his
works, whereby he became in some sort a nonentity, an abstract or no
tional being.% And he censures them for " imaging a divine mo
narchy, on a human plan, the administration of which was not
carried on by the immediate agency of God himself, but mediately,
as in terrestrial monarchies, by that of inferior agents, according to
the ranks and provinces allotted them."§ And to this notion he
thinks a considerable "part of the heathen idolatry is to be ascribed."
It is hard to know what idea this writer would have us form
ofthe divine government. On the one hand, he seems to think it
a demeaning the majesty of the Supreme Being to suppose him to
act immediately , and personally, as it were, in the government of the
world ; and on the other hand, he will not allow, that the divine
administration is carried on mediately by the ministry of inferior
agents. And if God does not govern the world, either by his own
personal immediate agency, or by that of subordinate agents and
instruments, it cannot easily be conceived in what sense he can be
said to govern the world at all.
Indeed any one that impartially considers the several passages
above mentioned, relating to the Jewish scriptures, and many others
of the like kind, which occur in Lord Bolingbroke's writings, and
compares them with the scheme which he himself hath advanced,
and of which an account was given in the eighth letter, will be apt
to think that the real original ground of his prejudices against the
sacred writings is this : That they every where represent God as
interesting himself in the affairs of men : whereas he looks upon it
to be unworthy of the divine majesty to suppose that he now con
cerneth himself about them, or exerciseth any care with respect to
the individuals of the human race. And since he asserts, that " the
•Works, vol. iv. p. 463. t Iui<]- P- 155- X Ibid. p. 460.
§ Ibid. p. 73.

Let. XXIX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 43]
most elevated of finite intelligent beings are not a jot nearer to the
Supreme Intelligence than the lowest,"* he must, upon his scheme,
think it as unbecoming the majesty of God to exercise any special
care towards the highest of angelical beings, or whatever inhabitants
there may be in any part of this vast universe, as towards the indi
viduals of mankind. This scheme is not only, as was shown before,
of a most pernicious tendency, and manifestly subversive of all reli
gion and the fear of God, but at the bottom argueth, notwithstand
ing all its glorious pretences, very dishonourable and unworthy
conceptions of the Supreme Being. For either it supposeth him
not to be present to the creatures he hath made, which is to deny
the immensity of his essence, or that, if he be present, he hath not
a certain knowledge of them, and of their actions and affairs, and
consequently is not omniscient; though our author himself says,
"It may be demonstrated, that the All-perfect Being must be om
niscient, as well as self-existent."t Or that if he hath a perfect
knowledge of the actions and affairs of his reasonable creatures, yet
he is absolutely indifferent about them, whether they obey his laws
or not; whether good or evil, virtue or vice, happiness or misery,'
prevail in the moral world. This must be owned to be very well
suited to the character of an Epicurean deity, whose happiness con
sisteth in an..eternal indolence, and who is supposed to be of a nice
and delicate constitution, unable to bear the noise, the clamours, and
confusion, of this lower world, but is no way consistent with the
idea of the infinitely-perfect Being. How much nobler is the idea
that is given us of the Deity in the holy scriptures ! where he is
represented as filling heaven and earth with his presence, and exer
cising a constant inspection over all his creatures, and all their
actions, as disposing and ordering all events, without distraction or
confusion, in such a manner, as in the final issue of things to pro
vide for the happiness of those that sincerely obey him, and go on
in the practice of righteousness and virtue, and to manifest a just
displeasure against those who obstinately persist in an impertinent
course of vice and wickedness ; and in a word, as governing the
world, and all the orders of beings in it, with infinite wisdom, righ
teousness, and equity, and with the same almighty facility with
which he created them ! Such an idea of God is not only of the
greatest consequence to the interests of religion and virtue in the
world, butjs infinitely more august and noble in itself, and more
conformable to the highest notions we can form of infinite perfection,
than that which this writer would substitute in its stead.
I shall not add any thing here to what was offered in my eighth
Letter, concerning a particular providence, as extending even to the
individuals of the human race. If providence doth not interpose in
human affairs at all, it cannot be expected that God should at any
time communicate extraordinary discoveries and revelations of his
will to mankind. But if, as hath been shown, providence doth
concern itself even for individuals, and for promoting human happi-
* Works, vol. iv. p. 183. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 36.

432 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIX.
ness, in a way consistent with moral agency, it is very reasonable to
suppose, that it may please God to make discoveries and revelations
of his will, for promoting the knowledge and practice of religion and
virtue in the word, and that he may communicate such discoveries
to particular persons, or to larger communities, in such a way as
may best answer the intentions of his wise and holy providence, of
which he must be allowed to be the properest judge. And if he
seeth fit to make such revelations of his will, they must be commu
nicated in such a manner as is accommodated to human understand
ings, and fitted to work* upon human affections : and therefore, if
they be addressed to men in a way ot reasoning, arguing, and ex
postulation, it would be absurd to make this an objection, as this
writer seems to do, since there is nothing in this, but what is wisely
suited to the end we may suppose the Supreme Wisdom and Good
ness to have had in view in giving such revelations.
He represents it as altogether unworthy of the Supreme Being to
suppose him to enter into covenant with man ; and in order to ex
pose this, he is pleased to represent it under the mean idea of God's
making bargains with man, or man with God. . But if we consider
what is really intended by it, we shall find, that a covenant in this
case is properly to be understood of a conditional promise, whereby
blessings and benefits are promised on God's part, and duties re
quired on ours : it is a law of God enjoining obedience, with a pro
mise or promises annexed to it, by which God condescendeth to
oblige himself to confer certain benefits upon his creatures, the sub
jects of his moral government, if they fulfil and obey the injunctions
he hath laid upon them, and comply with the terms which he hath
appointed. And considered in this view, it is so far from being a
just objection against the sacred writings, that it may be regarded
as their great excellence, and what should mightily recommend
them to our esteem, that God is there represented as dealing with
man in a way of covenant ; that is, in a way admirably suited to us
as we are reasonable creatures, moral agents. By this God doth
not divest himself of his character and authority as our supreme
universal Lord. He hath an undoubted right to give laws to his
creatures, and lay what commands or injunctions upon them he
seeth fit, in a way of absolute sovereignty, without bringing himself
under any promises and engagements ; but he condescendeth, in
his marvellous wisdom and goodness, to encourage and animate our
obedience by express promises and assurances of his grace and
favour ; and we on our parts bring ourselves under the most solemn
engagements, which bind us more strictly to our duty, by our own
express consent ; than which no way of dealing with us can have a
greater tendency to promote our comfort, and the interests of reli
gion and virtue in the world.
As to the particular covenant made with Abraham, and God's en:
gaging, as he loves to express it, to be a tutejary God to him ; this
put into other words signifies no more than this, that it pleased God
to grant to this excellent person express promises of his special
grace and favour, upon condition of his faith and obedience ; and

Let. XXIX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 433
particularly, that he promised to give the land of Canaan to his de
scendants ; and that from him should proceed that glorious person,
who had been promised from the beginning, and who was actually
to come into the world in the fulness of time, and in whom all the
families of the earth were to be blessed. This covenant made with
Abraham was not only proper, as it was a distinguishing mark of
the divine favour and goodness to a person, who was an eminent
example of piety and virtue, and the fame of whose excellent quali
ties is spread all over the east, even to this day, but as it made a
part of a glorious scheme which the divine wisdom had in view, and
which was to be accomplished in the fittest season, and to be of
extensive benefit to mankind. So that this particular covenant was
really intended in a subserviency to the general good.
With regard to the covenant made with the people of Israel at
Horeb, the design of it was to erect a sacred polity, the fundamental
article of which was the acknowledgment and adoration of the one
true God, the Maker and Governor of the world, free from all idola
try and polytheism. This transaction was carried on with a majesty
and solemnity becoming the great Lord of the universe, and which
tended to inspire the profoundest veneration for him, and for the
laws he was pleased to promulgate. And at the same time it was
wisely ordered, that the people should bind themselves by their
own express consent, and solemn stipulation, to receive that con
stitution, and obey those laws. The moral laws given to that
people were excellent: the judicial laws just and equitable: the
ceremonial laws were instituted for wise reasons, some of which we
are able to assign at this distance ; and there is no doubt to be
made, that if we were well acquainted with the circumstances of
that time and people, we should be convinced of the great propriety
of many of those ceremonious injunctions, which now we are not
able particularly to account for. Our author talks of the priest's
wearing a ridiculous cap and breast-plate, fringes, and bells, and
thinks it absurd to suppose, that such trifles as these were the insti
tutions qf divine wisdom.* But it was wisely ordered under that
constitution, that nothing relating to divine worship should be left
to their own invention. It was judged proper to give them rules
descending even to minute particulars, and to confine them to those
rules, the more effectually to hinder them from deviating into end
less superstitions. The particulars referred to, contributed to pro
mote order and decency in the externals of religious service ; nor
was there any thing in the Jewish instituted rites absurd, indecent,
ridiculous, or impure, as were many of the rites in use among the
pagan nations.
As to God's being a tutelary Deity to the people of Israel, this, if
stripped of the form of expression which he has chosen in order to
ridicule it, only signifies, that God was pleased to make special reve
lations and discoveries of his will to that people, and to give them
holy and excellent laws, at the same time promising, if they obeyed
* Works, vol. v. p. 98.
F F

434 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIX.
those laws, to grant them his special protection, to honour them
with great privileges and advantages, and to make them happy in
the effects of his grace and favour; and threatening, if they proved
obstinate and disobedient, to inflict upon them awful punishments,
the tokens of his righteous displeasure. And that there is any
thing in this unbecoming the wise and righteous Lord and Governor
of the world, supposing him to concern himself in human affairs,
this writer has not proved, except confident assertions must pass for
proofs. And as to his being the King of Israel, this is not to be
understood as if he did not still continue to be the universal Sovereign
and Lord of all mankind. He was never regarded as having di
vested himself of that character. No where is his universal domi
nion and governing providence, as extending to all his creatures,
and especially to the whole human race, more strongly asserted, or
more nobly described, than in the Jewish Scriptures. But it pleased
him, for wise purposes, to erect a peculiar constitution among the
people of Israel, according to which he condescended to be, in a
special sense, their King and Sovereign. And what we are to un
derstand by it is properly this : that he gave them laws at the first
establishment of their polity, which were to be the rule of their
state, and by which they were to be governed ; and upon their ob
servance of which the preservation of their national privileges de
pended ; and that he raised up judges and governors, who were to
rule them in his name, and as by his authority, and to be the leaders
and generals of their armies, for delivering them from their enemies
and oppressors ; and he was pleased also to give them direction in
matters of great and public moment, by the oracle of Urim and
Thummim, which was by his appointment established among them
for that purpose. There was nothing in all this but what was
wisely suited to the nature and design of that particular constitu
tion, and tended to confirm and establish that people in the belief
and adoration of the one true God, and to exhibit a glorious sensible
proof of his governing providence among them. But the theocracy
was never designed to supersede the office and authority of the or
dinary magistrates, as this writer seems to insinuate, by telling us,
that under that constitution God " acted as an industrious magis
trate, who descended into all the particulars of religious and civil
administration, even into the most minute and meanest." For
though the laws were originally given by God, the execution of
those laws was ordinarily vested in the magistrates appointed for
that purpose, and chosen by the people in their several tribes. So
they were in the days of Moses, and under the judges, when the
people were more properly and immediately under the administra
tion of the theocracy.
But it is farther urged, that God is represented in the Jewish
Scriptures as a local Deity, residing and dwelling in a temple, or
carried about by the Levites in a wooden chest or trunk. The author
seems fond of this observation, for he has it over three or four times
on different occasions. But by this reflection he has exposed him
self rather than the Jews. That people, instructed by their Scrip-

Let. XXIX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 435
tures, had nobler notions of the Deity than to be capable of imagin
ing, that the Lord of the universe, who, they were taught to believe,
made and governeth the world, and filleth heaven and earth, was
shut up and confined in a wooden chest. It is true, that the more
effectually to preserve that people from idolatry, and to impress and
affect their minds with a lively sense of God's special presence
among them, there was one sacred place appointed, the tabernacle
first, and the temple afterwards, which was peculiarly dedicated to
his solemn worship and service. There their most solemn acts of
devotion were to be performed ; and there was the ark or sacred
chest he speaks of, in which were deposited the tables of the original
covenant between God and them ; there also was a cloud of glory,
the majestic symbol of God's immediate presence. It cannot be
reasonably denied, that God may, if he thinks fit, give illustrious
exhibitions of his divine presence and majesty by a visible external
glory and splendour, in certain places, or on certain occasions. But
it doth not follow, that he is therefore a limited Being, or that his
essence is circumscribed, or confined to that particular place, where
it pleaseth him thus peculiarly to manifest his special presence.
How far the Israelites were from forming such mean notions ofthe
Divinity as this writer is pleased to insinuate, we have an authentic
proof in the admirable prayer offered up by Solomon at the dedica
tion ofthe temple, in the name and presence of all the people; in
which he addresseth himself to God in that noble manner : But
will God indeed dwell on the earth ? Behold, the heaven and heaven
of heavens cannot contain thee ! how much less this house which I
have builded! 1 Kings viii. 27. See also Isa. lxvi. 1.
It has often given me great pleasure to reflect upon what every
one that impartially considers the scriptures of the Old Testament
must be sensible of, that the Jews, if they governed themselves by
their sacred writings, were instructed, in their ideas of God, to unite
the most incomprehensible greatness and majesty, and the most
marvellous grace and condescension : .to regard him as filling heaven
and earth with the immensity of his presence, and yet as vouch
safing to grant visible tokens and symbols of his special presence
among them by his ark and temple : as humbling himself even in
beholding the things that are done in heaven, and yet as regarding
the things that are done in the earth. They acknowledged the
glorious hosts of angels as the attendants ofthe divine majesty, the
blessed ministers of his power and wisdom : but still as infinitely
inferior, and even chargeable with folly before him : and instead of
erecting them into deities, and adoring them as the heathens did,
they called upon them to join with them in worshipping and ador
ing the supreme universal Lord. They were ready to cry out, with
a devout admiration in the contemplation of God's unequalled dig
nity and glory, Who in the heavens can be compared unto the
Lord? What is man, that thou art mindful of him'? But they did
not under this pretence represent him as'taking no notice of men, or
their concernments. They considered him as infinitely raised
above the highest of his creatures, yet not neglecting or despising
f f2

436 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIX.
the meanest : That his name is exalted above all blessing and praise,
and yet he hath a gracious regard to our prayers and praises, if
offered up from sincere and upright hearts. Thus they were taught
in Scripture to celebrate and adore his matchless grace and conde
scending goodness, without impairing the splendour and glory of
his infinite majesty. And accordingly, in the patterns of devotion
that are set before us in Scripture, we may observe the most adoring
thoughts, the most sublime conceptions, of God's unsearchable
greatness, and supreme dominion, and spotless purity ; and the most
humbling sense of human weakness, guilt and unworthiness, mixed
with an ingenuous confidence in his infinite grace and sovereign
mercy. Thus I have considered pretty largely that part ofthe objection,
which chargeth the Scriptures with degrading the Deity to mean
and unworthy offices and employments, and shall now take some notice
of the other part of the charge, viz. that the Scriptures ascribe to
him bodily parts, and human passions and affections, and even those
ofthe worst kind.
With respect to the former, he observeth, that the Jewish Scrip
tures ascribe to God " not only corporeal appearances, but corporeal
action, and all the instruments of it, eyes, ears, mouth, hands, and
feet. — And that they are apt in many places to make those who read
them represent the Supreme Being to themselves like an old man
looking out of the clouds.''* He says, " the literal signification of
such expressions is abominable." And he ridicules those who throw
what he calls a flimsy allegorical veil over them, as having stolen it
from the wardrobe qf Epicurus. But the ridicule lights upon him
self, who I believe was the first man that would have thought of
having recourse to Epicurus to interpret the sense of Moses. There
needs no more than common attention, and a comparing the Scrip
ture with itself, to be convinced that it is incapable of the absurd
representation he would put upon those passages. He observes in
deed, that "images taken from corporeal substance, from corporeal
action, and from the instruments of it, cannot give us notions in any
degree proper, of God's manner of being, nor of that divine incon
ceivable energy in which the action of God consists." Nor are those
expressions of hands, feet, eyes, and ears, when ascribed to God in
scripture, designed to signify either the manner of his being, or of
his divine energy, concerning which there are many noble expres
sions in the sacred writings, which have an admirable sublimity in
them ; but by an easy metaphor, understood by all the world, hands
signify power, eyes and ears signify knowledge. And whereas he
adds, that " they cannot exalt, they must debase our conceptions,
and accustom the mind insensibly to confound divine with human
ideas and notions, God with man ;" the answer is obvious : That
sufficient care is taken in the holy scriptures to prevent this, by fur
nishing us with the most sublime ideas of the Divinity that can pos
sibly enter into the human mind. God's incomprehensible majesty,
* Works, vol. v. p. 520.

Let. XXIX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 437
his immense greatness, his almighty power, the infiniteness of his
understanding, his omnipresence, are frequently represented and
described in so admirable a manner, as shows, with the last degree
of evidence, that the expressions which seem to ascribe bodily parts
and members to him cannot be understood in a gross literal sense.
Our author himself, ascribing motives to God, observes, that " we
must speak of God after the manner of men."*' And indeed we must
either not speak of God at all, or we must speak of him in ways of
expression, originally derived from something relating to our own
bodies or minds. This writer elsewhere insinuates, that we resem
ble God no more in our souls than we do in our bodies; and that to
say his intellect is like ours, is as bad as the anthropomorphites.-f/
So that, according to him, expressions drawn from the faculties of
the soul, are as improper as those drawn from the members of the
body. Thus, under pretence of a profound veneration for the Deity,
we must not speak of God at all, as some of the ancient philosopheis
thought it unlawful to name him, or to worship him, except in silence.
Yea, we must not so much as think of him; for our ideas of God
fall, no doubt, infinitely short of his real majesty and glory, as well
as our expressions. But it may be observed, that this forward cen-
surer falls into that way of talking himself which he finds fault with
in the holy scriptures. He represents God as speaking to men by the
law of nature ; he calls it the voice of God, and the word of God.
He speaks of the hands qf God,% and of his seeing all things. And
though he represents the ascribing ideas to God as no less improper,
and even profane, than the ascribing hands and feet to him, yet on
several occasions he talks of the divine ideas.
But he farther urges, that the scriptures attribute to God human
affections and passions, and even those of the worst kind ; that
"they impute such things to the Divinity as would be a disgrace to
humanity :"§ That " the Jewish system contained such instances
of partiality in love and hatred, of furious anger, and unrelenting-
vengeance, in a long series of arbitrary judgments, as no people on
earth but this would have ascribed, 1 do not say to God, but to the
worst of those monsters, who are suffered or sent by God, for a short
time, to punish the iniquities of men.''|| To the same purpose he
afterwards observes, that according to the representations made in
scripture, God " loves with partiality, his mercy is arbitrary, and
depends on mere will — And towards mankind his anger is often
furious, his hatred inveterate, his vengeance unrelenting; but when
the wicked repent of their sins, he repents sometimes of his severity."
And then he asks, " What a description is this of the All-perfect
Being?" But this description is his own, and is founded on a gross
misrepresentation of the true intention and design of the sacred writ
ings. As to loving with partiality, if by that be meant his favour
ing and distinguishing some with greater privileges and advantages,
and giving them more valuable means of improvement than others ;
* Works, vol. v. p. 468. f !"id- P- 35- t Ibid- vol. iv. p. 395,
§ Ibid. vol. iii. p. 299. || Ibid. vol. v. p._515.

430 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXIX.
nothing can be more evident, than that this has been often and still
is done in the course of his providence. Nor is this any more to be
found fault with, than his making different species of beings, some
vastly transcending others in their faculties, and capacities for hap
piness. He is the absolute Lord and dispenser of his own gifts,
and his goodness is that of a free and sovereign Benefactor; and
it would be the height of absurdity and profaneness to pretend to
tie him down to give to all men precisely the same capacities, the
same advantages and opportunities, and to limit him so, that he
shall not dispense his gifts in such measures and proportions as he
thinks fit, nor shall have it in his power to do any thing for any one
person or people, but what he does precisely for every person and
for all people. But if by partiality be meant partiality in judgment,
and in the distribution of rewards and punishments, it is very unjust
to charge the holy scriptures as attributing such partiality to the
Supreme Being. There is nothing more strongly and expressly
asserted there, than that God accepteth not the persons of men, and
that he judgeth without respect qf persons. It is evident, not merely
from a single passage, but from the whole tenor of the sacred writ
ings, that the righteous Lord loveth righteousness; that he exten
deth his favour to all those ofthe human race, of whatever family or
nation, who sincerely love and obey him, and go on in a course of
real piety and virtue ; that such persons alone can hope for an
interest in his favour, and to obtain the divine acceptance and appro
bation ; and that all wicked and presumptuous sinners, of whatso
ever nation or profession, shall be exposed to his just displeasure.
Nor are there any such things ascribed to God in scripture as arbi
trary judgments. And whereas this author charges it as unworthy
of God to represent him as repenting of his severity when the wicked
repent of their sins ; the thing really intended by this must be ac
knowledged to be agreeable to the best ideas we can form of his
governing wisdom, righteousness, and goodness ; for it only signi
fies, that when sinners forsake their evil ways, God is graciously
pleased to change the methods of his dealings towards them, and
is willing to receive them to his grace and favour. But in reality
there is no change in the divine purposes or counsels. The change
that is wjought is in the mind and temper of the sinner ; God acts
uniformly according to tbe stated rules of his administrations ; and
nothing has happened but what he perfectly foreknew."* But re-
* His Lordship seems to think it an unanswerable objection against the Mosaic
writings, that in the account there given of the flood, God is represented as having
"repented that he made man."
But it is manifest, that this is only an emphatical way of expression, to signify God's
just displeasure at the great and universal wickedness of mankind, and at their having
so far fallen from the noble end of their creation ; and that therefore, after having tried
the methods of indulgence towards them, he saw fit to send a destructive deluge for ex
terminating that incorrigible race. And it is plain, that according to the doctrine of
the sacred writings, which every where represent God as foreknowing tbe actions of
men, this corruption of mankind was what he foresaw from the beginning; and the
punishing them in this manner made a part of the original scheme of divine providence,
though it did not actually take effect till the proper time came for executing it. As to
what he mentions in a sneering way, concerning God's smelting the sweet savour of

Let. XXIX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 439
penting, in a strict and proper sense, as it is a mark of human im
perfection and mutability, is expressly denied of God in the holy
scripture; where we are assured, that God is not as the son of man
that he should repent.
As to the expressions of anger, wrath, fury, hatred, vengeance, as
ascribed to God in the sacred writings, it is a thing so obvious that
it can scarce be mistaken, that these are only strong expressions,
designed to impress the hearts of men with a more lively. sense of
God's righteous displeasure against sin and wickedness, and reso
lution to punish it ; which it is of the highest importance to man
kind to consider and believe. Any one that allows himself to think
impartially, must be sensible, that such ways of representing things
are absolutely necessary in a revelation designed for common use ;
and that it is far more for the good of the world in general, and for
promoting the interests of virtue, and restraining vice and wicked
ness, that men should conceive of God as loving and taking pleasure
in the good and righteous, and as full of just resentment against
evil-doers, than as utterly unconcerned about the actions and affairs
of men, or alike affected towards the righteous and the wicked.
Yea, the former notions are not only more useful, and of better in
fluence, but more just and rational in themselves, and more worthy
of the All-perfect Being. For what idea is this of God, to represent
him as neither delighting in order and virtue, nor displeased with
vice and wickedness, but solacing himself in an eternal indolence,
and no-way concerned about the good or ill-behaviour, the happiness
or misery of his reasonable creatures ! A God destitute of all affec
tions, or of any thing correspondent to them, would not be the most
perfect Being. There are spiritual affections, which have nothing to
do with body, and which as properly belong to spirits or minds, as
intellect or will ; and I can as easily suppose them destitute of the
latter as of the former. Our affections indeed have usually a great
mixture of bodily passions, and consequently of imperfection ; but
there are affections of a nobler kind, and which we may conceive in
pure spirits ; yea, they cannot be conceived without them ; nor can
we avoid ascribing some affections, or what is analagous or equiva
lent to them, to God, provided we remove from them all those im
perfections and defects with which they are attended in us. A love
of order, goodness, purity, virtue, and a just detestation of moral
evil, is absolutely inseparable from the idea of the Infinitely-perfect
Being, the most wise and righteous Governor of the world.
I shall conclude my observations on this part of Lord Bolingbroke's
book with a passage from an author whom no man will suppose to
Noah's burnt offering, it is sufficient to observe, that the design of the expression is
plain and easily intelligible, viz. to signify God's gracious acceptance of the act of devo
tion performed by that good man, to acknowledge his gratitude, and implore the divine
mercy ; and that on that occasion God was pleased, after having made so signal a display
of his justice, to allay and dissipate the fears which might be apt to arise in the hearts of
men, and to assure them of his merciful intentions towards them, and that he would not
any more send an universal deluge upon the earth ; of which the rainbow in the clouds
should be a constant memorial.

440 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
have been prejudiced in favour of the Scriptures ; it is Mr. Anthony
Collins, in an Essay, which he published in 1707, concerning the Use
of Reason in Propositions, the Evidence whereof depends upon
Human Testimony. After having observed, that " one use of reason
in things which by the testimony of men are supposed to come from
God, is to endeavour to find out such a sense of a supposed divine
revelation as is agreeable to the discoveries of our reason, if the
words under any kind of construction will bear it, though at first
view they may seem repugnant to reason, and to one another;" he
adds. " this is certainly a great piece of justice, and what is due to
words that upon the least evidence can be supposed to come from
God, especially since expressions that do literally quadrate with the
maxims of reason and philosophy, are necessary to make a revelation
have any effect upon common people's minds. For was not God to
be represented by expressions, which, literally understood, attribute
to him human passions and actions, they who by their occupations
in the world are incapable of those more just ideas which men of
thought know to belong to that Being, would perhaps think him
incapable of taking cognizance of their actions; and therefore to
make a revelation useful and credible in itself, it must consist of
words whose literal meaning is false, but whose real meaning is con
sistent with the justest notions of reason and philosophy. And
therefore we ought to examine whether the words under any con
struction will bear a reasonable sense," p. 17, 18. Mr. Collins then
applies this observation to the revelation which we acknowledge, and
considers those passages of scripture where God is said to rest, repent,
be angry, <Sfc. It must be owned, that this gentleman judges much
more reasonably and equitably in this matter than Lord Bolingbroke
has done.
This may suffice at present. In my next I shall consider the
other objections which his Lordship hath urged against the divine
authority of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, especially of the
Mosaic writings.

LETTER XXX.

Farther Objections against the Mosaic Writings and the Scriptures of the Old Testa
ment considered. — The Laws of Moses not contrary to the Law of Nature. — This
particularly shown with regard to the command for exterminating the Canaanites,
and the Law for punishing those among the Israelites that should revolt to Idolatry
with Death.— The Law of Moses not accountable for the Fury of the Zealots. — -The
Instances of Phineas and Mattathias considered. — Insociability not the first Principle
of the Law of Moses, nor did that Law take the Jews out of all Moral Obligations
to the rest of Mankind. — There is nbthing false or absurd in the Mosaical Account
of the Creation of the World and the Fall of Man. — Concerning the Sanctions of
the Law of Moses  The not making express Mention of Future Rewards and
Punishments in that Law, no Argument against its divine Original. — Some other
Objections against the Scriptures obviated.

Let. XXX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 441
Sir,
1 now proceed to another set of objections, which are de
signed to show that some of the laws of Moses are absolutely con
trary to the law of nature, which is the law of God, and there
fore cannot come from him. He instances particularly in the
command for exterminating the Canaanites, and the law for punish
ing idolaters among the Israelites with death. " In both which,"
he says, " it is supposed impiously, against principles as self-evident
as any of those necessary truths which are such of all knowledge,
that the Supreme Being commands by one law what he forbids by
another ;"* and that " he approved and commanded, on particular
occasions, the most abominable violations of the general laws of
nature.''t I shall consider what he has offered with regard to each
of these.
As to the command for exterminating the Canaanites, it is what
he frequently inveighs against, as the greatest piece of injustice
and cruelty that ever was committed. % And he has pro
nounced, that " the men who justify such cruelties upon any hypo
thesis whatsoever, must have very ill hearts as well as heads :"
and that " he who imputes them to the Supreme Being is
worse than an atheist, though he pass for a saint. "§ I shall ven
ture, however, to examine what this rigid censurer has offered on
this subject.
He first layeth it down as a principle, that " God cannot com
mand in particular, what he forbids in general. He who has made
benevolence to all rational beings the fundamental law of our nature,
can never command some to rob or to murder others; to usurp on
the rights of their fellow-creatures, and to exterminate whole
nations."! The force of his argument here lies wholly in the words
rob and murder, both which carry the idea of depriving others of
their lives and properties, without a just cause, and without lawful
authority. But though God has forbidden us, both in the law of
nature and in the decalogue, to murder, he can command some to
put others to death for just causes, in which case it is not murder.
He never, by giving this law to mankind, divested himself of the
dominion he hath over the lives of his creatures. He can also com
mission, for wise ends, some to deprive others of their properties.
For the law of nature is always to be understood with this limita
tion, except in cases where God himself shall otherwise appoint. It
is no principle of that law, that God can never without injustice
exterminate nations. That he can do it in a way of immediate
judgment, by sending destructive calamities, famines, pestilences,
earthquakes, deluges, and the like, cannot be denied by any theist
who believes a providence governing mankind, and interposing in
the affairs of men. And if he can do it immediately himself, he can
commission men to do it, provided he gives sufficient credentials of
* Works, vol. v. p. 180. t Ibid. p. 181. t See particularly vol. iii. p. 305.
vol. v. p. 99. 146. v Vol. iii. p. 306. || Vol. v. p. 99.

442 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
that commission ; and such the Israelites had, according to the
accounts given in the books of Moses. And in judging of the
case, how far it is justifiable, we must take it in all its circumstances
as there represented. Our author himself supposes the miracles
done among them, if really done, to be sufficient to convince all
mankind, not only at that time, but in all succeeding generations to
the end of the world, of the divine authority of that law and consti
tution; and therefore sufficient to convince the people of Israel.
All therefore that remained was, that they should be satisfied of the
truth of the facts, and of this they could not doubt, as they were
done before their eyes. And the same books which give an account
of the facts, give an account of the divine commission to the Israel
ites^ and the reasons and ends of it. And whereas it is urged, that
" the Canaanites were obnoxious to the divine vengeance in no
other respect than that which was common to them with all the
heathen nations, namely, their idolatry."*' This is not true accord
ing to the account given by Moses, Lev. xviii. -24, 25, 27. whereby
it appears, that it was not merely for their idolatry, but for their
monstrous vices and wickedness of all kinds, that they were ordered
to be exterminated ; and that never was there upon earth a more
profligate and abandoned race of men. And supposing this to be
true, and that God had determined to signalize his righteous ven
geance against them in the severest manner, he might, without any
pretence for arraigning the justice of his proceedings, have con
sumed them by fire from heaven, as he did part of them at Sodom
and Gomorrah, or have overwhelmed them with an inundation, or
have swallowed them up by an earthquake, and thereby utterly
destroyed that people, their little ones as well as the adult. Nor
could it have been said in such a case, that this was contrary to the
law of nature. But then it would not have been so apparent, that
this calamity was inflicted in a way of punishment for their idolatry
and detestable wickedness. It might have been possibly attributed
to some natural cause, or have been regarded as an unaccountable
and fortuitous event ; but when they were ordered to be extermi
nated for their abominable crimes by an express command of God,
attested by a series of the most amazing miracles and divine inter
positions, and this appointed to be executed by another nation, who
were peculiarly set apart by their original constitution to the acknow
ledgment and adoration of the one true God, and of him only, and
to whom God had given the most holy and excellent laws ; at the
same time threatening them with the like punishments if they com
mitted the like crimes ; in this case the reason of the judgment was
as apparent, as when a malefactor is put to death by an officer of
justice for a crime, in execution of the sentence of a just magis
trate. Nor is there any thing in such a procedure that can be
proved to be inconsistent with the wisdom and righteousness of the
Supreme Being, or contradictory to his own laws ; since there is no
law of nature that debars God from executing judgments on parti-
* Works, vol. v. p. 184.

Let. XXX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 443
cular persons, or guilty nations, for their crimes and vices, even to
extermination, or from employing, if he thinks fit, one or more
nations to execute his judgments upon others. Nor has this confi
dent and assuming writer brought any proof that it is so. As to
his comparing the invasion of Canaan by the Israelites, and what
they did there, to the cruelties exercised by the Spaniards in
America,* and to the ravages of the Huns under Attila, who, he
says, were much more merciful than they,f there is this vast dif
ference between the cases, that the latter had no motive or pretence,
but their own ambition, avarice and cruelty, whereas the former did
it in execution of the express command of God, and by a commis
sion from him, the truth of which was confirmed by a series of the
most extraordinary divine attestations that ever the world saw.
This, therefore can be no precedent to any other nation to do the
like, except they can produce the same or equal proofs of a divine
commission ; which no other since have been able to do, and proba
bly never will. This may suffice with regard to the command for
the extermination of the Canaanites ; which I have elsewhere con
sidered more largely. See " Answer to Christianity as old as the
Creation, vol. ii. p. 429. 437 ; and the " Answer to Morgan, vol. ii.
p. 97. et. seq.
The other command produced by this author to prove that the
law of Moses is contrary to the law of nature, and therefore cannot
be of divine original, is the law for putting a false prophet to death
that should attempt to seduce the people to idolatry, and for the
inflicting a capital punishment upon any particular person among
the Israelites that should revolt to idolatry, and even destroying a
city that should do so. Concerning this, he very dogmatically pro
nounces : "I say, that the law of nature is the law of God. Of
this I have the same demonstrative knowledge that I have of the
existence of God, the all-perfect Being. I say, that the all-perfect
Being cannot contradict himself; that he would contradict himself,
if the laws contained in the thirteenth chapter of Deuteronomy were
his laws, since they contradict those of nature ; and, therefore, that
they are not his laws. Of all this I have as certain, as intuitive a
knowledge, as I have that two and two are equal to four, or that
the whole is bigger than a part.""|: A very short and decisive deter
mination of the controversy ! But we are by this time too well
acquainted with his Lordship's manner, to lay any great stress
on his positive assertions, though delivered with the most assuming
air. The argument he makes use of here is the same that he had used
before, namely, that the law of nature forbids murder. This will
be easily allowed. But it is not inconsistent with that law which
forbids murder, to put persons to death who are guilty of crimes
that by the fundamental laws of the community deserve death. If
God should have enacted a general law obligatory on all mankind,
that whosoever 'should commit idolatry, or worship any other god,
should be put to death, as well as that any man that should
* Works, vol. iii. p. 305. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 148. t Ibid. p. 191.

444 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
shed the blood of another without cause should be put to death ;
this author might be challenged, with all his confidence, to
prove that such a divine law would be contradictory to the
law of nature. Idolatry, by his own acknowledgment, is for
bidden in the law of nature, and is a breach of the first and
great article of that law ; and he represents it as one of the greatest
of crimes.* But God has not thought fit to enact a general law
obligatory on all mankind for punishing idolaters with death, and
without his appointment it ought not to be executed. But when it
pleased him for wise ends to select a particular nation, among them
to erect a peculiar sacred polity, and to appoint that the ado
ration of the one true God, and of him only, should be the very
basis of their constitution, on which all their privileges, their
national properties, and their right to their country, depended, it is
evident that under such a constitution to revolt to idolatry and
polytheism, was, in the most criminal sense to be traitors to the
community ; and to arraign a law for inflicting a capital punish
ment upon idolaters under that particular constitution is highly
absurd. Nor could any thing be more just in such a case, than to
order that a false prophet, who should endeavour to seduce the
people to idolatry, should be put to death ; though this writer
objects against it as unjust, for this strange reason, that " miracles
were daily, and almost hourly, wrought in the sight of all Israel."!
This is absolutely false, if understood of miracles strictly so called;
or if it were true, it is an odd thing to urge, that which made the
crime of the false prophet the greater, to be a reason for exempting
hitn-from punishment.
But what he chiefly finds fault with, is the law for destroying any
Israelitish city, that should fall off to the worship of idols, Deut.
xiii. 13 — 16. He urges, that "the innocent were to be involved
in the same punishment with the guilty ; neither man, nor woman,
nor beast, neither the brother, the daughter, the wife, nor the friend,
was to be spared ; and that the whole chapter is such an edict as
could not be imputed to Attila without injustice." And after ex
claiming against the obstinacy of those that pretend to justify the
law of Moses in this instance, he observes, that " by that law the
undistinguishing extermination of collective bodies, and especially
for matters of opinion, is allowed."*}; And afterwards, arguing
against Mr. Locke, he adds, that " even supposing God to be their
King, the objections of injustice and cruelty in those laws will
remain in their full force ; and that to suppose him to have given
these laws would be to degrade the All-perfect Being to the charac
ter of an unjust and cruel tyrant, who authorized and even com
manded his ministers expressly, to punish without measure, without
discernment, and without forms of justice."§ And he insinuates,
that there are precepts in that chapter, " from which the inquisition
copied the instructions she gives to her farniliars."|| But this is a
gross misrepresentation. He himself elsewhere observes, that " the
* Works, vol. v. p. 195. t Ibid. p. 183. X Ibid. p. 184. § Ibid. p. 194.
|| Ibid. p. 183.

Let. XXX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 445
cruel principle of persecution for opinions " was never known till
Christians introduced it into the world ;"* though contrary, as he
owns, to the true spirit of the Gospel. And it is manifest, that the
punishments referred to, Deut. xiii. were not to be inflicted for mat
ters of opinion but of practice, for open acts of idolatry, in subver
sion of the fundamental constitution of their state ; and great care
was to be taken, that the punishment should not be executed with
out due inquiry, and full proof. They were to inquire, and make
search, and ask diligently, so as to be assured that it was truth, and
the thing certain. Great deliberation was to be used ; and except
the whole city was obstinately addicted to idolatry, and determined
to persist in it, they were not to be exterminated. And considering
the design and nature of that peculiar constitution, a decree or law,
for exterminating a city among themselves that should revolt to the
worship of false gods, seemed necessary, and was like the cutting
off a corrupt or gangrened limb, which was requisite to save the
whole. If God had, at the original establishment of that polity,
declared that he himself would in an immediate way by pestilence,
or fire from heaven, or some other extraordinary judgment, extermi
nate or destroy any city among them that should revolt to the wor
ship of idols, it could not be pretended, that this would have been
unjust, though children as well as adult would be involved in it.
But he chose that the punishment should be inflicted in a judicial
way by the hands of the magistrates, and by the authority of the
nation or whole community, pursuant to a law for that purpose.
And the punishment was both ordered to be executed with great
solemnity, and to be attended with circumstances of peculiar
severity, so as to proceed to utter extermination, the more effectu
ally, to create a horror and detestation of the crime, and to show
that so wicked a race was to be entirely destroyed. To which it
must be added, that this punishment was denounced in consequence
of the original contract or covenant between God and that people.
By coming into that covenant for themselves and their children, they
voluntarily subjected themselves and them to the severest penalties
in case of a revolt. And considering the mighty advantages they
had as a nation by the theocracy, and by their peculiar constitution,
and the signal blessings that would have followed upon their
obedience, it was a condition which could not be reasonably objected
against, since they might so easily avoid the threatened calamities,
by obedience to a law so just and agreeable to reason, as is that of
the worship of the one true God, the Lord of the universe, and of
him only.
And to have legally tolerated any among them, whether particular
persons or communities, that should openly revolt to idolatry, would
have been manifestly absurd, and absolutely subversive of their
whole polity.
This writer takes particular notice of " the rights the zealots as
sumed to assassinate any Jew that should seem to them to violate,
* Works, vol. v. p. 313.

446 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
by public and strong appearances, the sanctity of the Divinity, of
the temple, and of the nation ;" and that " this produced such
scenes of horror among Jews as no other nation ever produced." It
will be owned, that the zealots in the latter times of the Jewish
state carried this to an excess of madness and fury ; but the law is
not accountable for it. It is evident from the thirteenth chapter of
Deuteronomy, which orders the punishment of those that should
revolt to idolatry, that the whole was to be transacted in an orderly
and legal way, with great deliberation, and by public authority.
And the same thing is repeated, Deut. xvii. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. where it is
ordained, that with regard to any particular person that had served
other gods, they should, before they punished him, inquire and
search diligently. And it is expressly appointed, that at the mouth
of two or three witnesses he should be put to death, but that at the
mouth qf one witness he should not be put to death. Nor does
Lord Bolingbroke pretend to produce any law to authorize the mad
ness of the zealots. He only mentions two instances, which, he
thinks, countenanced it, viz. that of Phineas, and that of Mattathias.
As to the former, he says, "Phineas murdered Zimri and Cosbi in
the act of fornication.'' But this was not a simple act of fornication.
It was joined with avowed idolatry, and, as it was circumstanced,
was a most insolent defiance of all law and authority, one of the
most flagrant crimes, in open opposition to God and man, that
could be committed. The person who inflicted the punishment
was himself a chief magistrate, of high authority, and in a case
which needed no proof, and admitted of no delay, when a plague
from God was broke out among the people, on the account of that
very crime which these persons so impudently avowed ; and it was
also in consequence of an order which Moses had given by the com
mand of God to the Judges of Israel, to slay those that were joined
to Baal Peor — Numbers xxv. 4, 5. So that Phineas had full legal
authority for what he did. And therefore this was no warrant to
those who without any authority assassinated any man they thought
fit, under pretence of his violating the law, of which they set up
themselves forjudges. As to the instance of Mattathias, our author
observes, that "in the fury of his holy zeal he rushed on the Jew
that was about to sacrifice in obedience to the edict of Antiochus,
and on the officer appointed to take care of the execution of the
edict, and murdered them both."* That we may judge of this, it
is to be considered, that never was there a greater tyrant than Anti
ochus. He had entirely subverted the whole Jewish constitution,
abolished the ancient laws, and massacred the people. If ever there
was a just foundation for rising up in defence of religion, law, and
liberty, here was an occasion that loudly called for it. In these cir
cumstances Mattathias, who was not a mere private person, but a
ruler, and a great and honourable man in the city of Modin where he
dwelt, slew a Jew, who was then openly committing a crime, for
which by the fundamental laws of his country he ought to have suf-
* Works, vol \ . p. 180.

Let. XXX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 447
fered death, but at a time when no legal justice in the usual forms
could be had. He also killed the King's officer, who was then com
pelling the people to subvert the laws. This he designed as a signal
to the insurrection which he immediately began ; an insurrection
fully justifiable, if ever any was so, and which was carried on with
a noble spirit and fortitude, and with a success that ended in the
subversion of the horrid tyranny, and the happy restoration of their
liberties and laws. Such an action, so circumstanced as that of
Mattathias, if it had been performed by a Greek or Roman, in oppo
sition to horrid barefaced tyranny and cruelty, and in vindication
of the essential laws and liberties of his country, would have been
highly celebrated, and transmitted to all succeeding ages as a most
glorious act of heroism.
The only thing farther that I shall mention is, what he observes
concerning " the massacre which the Levites made of three thousand
men in one day, when they were commanded, without any other form
of proceeding, to take every man his sword, and to slay his neigh
bour."* This must be owned to be an extraordinary punishment,
and the occasion was extraordinary. The revolt of the people was
the most inexcusable, by this writer's own acknowledgment, that
could be supposed. It happened when the law had been just pro
mulgated with the most amazing solemnity, and the constitution
established, to which they had given their own consent. The body
ofthe people had thereby exposed themselves to destruction ; and if
they had been consumed in an immediate way by a plague, or fire,
or some extraordinary judgment from heaven, it was no more than
they deserved. It was necessary that so open, so public, so aggra
vated a revolt and insurrection against the majesty and authority of
the supreme universal Lord, to whom they themselves had so lately
in the most solemn manner vowed subjection and obedience, should
be distinguished with marks of great severity. In cases of crimes
where great numbers have been concerned, it has sometimes been
thought just to decimate them, to make one in ten suffer the death
they all deserved. But here of above six hundred thousand, three
thousand only suffered, not above the twonhundredth part of the
whole. The numbers that were concerned rendered the trying each
of them in a formal process, which is what he seems to require, im
practicable. Nor was there any need of it. The fact was public
and notorious ; and the persons that suffered were undoubtedly
such as were known to be most guilty, and to have been most active
in promoting the defection and revolt. And the immediate punish-
ment of these was the most speedy way of quelling the insurrection,
and bringing the whole body to a sense of their guilt and of their
duty. The third objection I proposed to take notice of, as raised by
this writer against the Mosaic economy, is this: That "the first
principles, and the whole tenor of the Jewish laws, took that people
out of all moral obligations to the rest of mankind : That they were
* Works, vol. v. p. 146.

448 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
taught to think themselves a chosen race, distinct from the rest of
mankind, and who were far from owing to other men, what other
men owed to them, and to one another. This produced a legal in
justice and cruelty in their whole conduct, authorized by their law,
and pressed upon them by their priests and prophets."* And he
elsewhere observes, that " the first principle of their polity, ecclesi
astical and civil, was insociability ; and accordingly their manners
were rendered unsuitable to the common nature and genius of man-
kind."f This is a heavy charge; but, if closely examined, this insociability
amount.eth to no more than this : That they had not a community
of religion and rites with the heathens, as the heathens had with
one another, and which they could not have without absolutely de
stroying and defeating the end of their most excellent constitution;
that they were not to intermarry with idolaters, and were obliged to
keep close to the observation of their own peculiar laws and customs ;
several of which were designed to preserve them as a distinct body
from mixing and incorporating with other nations. And considering
how different their constitution was from that which obtained in
other countries ; that all the world about them was immersed in
idolatry and polytheism, and that they themselves were very apt to
fall in with the idolatrous customs of the neighbouring nations, and
to which mankind in all ages have been very prone ; considering
these things, if great care had not been taken to keep them distinct,
by several peculiar rites and customs, and to hinder them from inter
marrying with their idolatrous neighbours, they could not possibly
have preserved their constitution; they must have been soon mixed
and confounded with other nations ; the consequence of which
would have been, that they would have fallen into a conformity to
their religion and worship, and have lost their own. And so the
whole design of that admirable polity, so well fitted to preserve the
knowledge and worship of the one true God, and of him only, in
opposition to the universally-prevailing polytheism and idolatry,
would have been defeated ; and all nations would have been involved
in the same common idolatry, and perhaps have continued in it to
this day. For, according to the plan laid by the divine wisdom,
Judaism prepared the way for Christianity ; and all that is good in
Mahometanism is derived from the one or the other of these. But
though the people of Israel were obliged thus to keep themselves
distinct, and though none were regarded as strictly and properly in
corporated into their body who did not conform to the peculiar laws
of their polity, they were not obliged to confine their benevolence to
those of their own nation: They were directed, by many express
precepts in their law, to show great kindness to those of other nations,
to the strangers that passed through their land, or that sojourned
among them; to exercise great humanity towards them, and serve
them in all friendly offices. This is not only allowed, but strongly
* Works, vol. iii. p. 290. See also ibid. p. 283.
t Ibid. vol. v. p. 148. See also ibid. p. 198.

Let. XXX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 449
pressed upon them in their law, as any one will be convinced that
impartially considers the passages referred to at the bottom of the
page.* And the Jews themselves observe, that the precepts prescrib
ing a kind conduct towards strangers are inculcated one-and-twenty
times in the law.
It is mere calumny and abuse to say, that the Jews were autho
rized by their law, and pressed by their prophets, to exercise cruelty
and injustice towards the rest of mankind ; and that they were ab
solved from all moral obligations, and from all rules of justice, equity,
and fidelity with regard to them. Nor was there any thing in their
law to oblige them to persecute others for their opinions in religion,
or to compel them to conform to their peculiar rites. On the con
trary, they allowed those of any other nation to dwell among them,
and to worship at the temple, where there was a court provided for
them who worshipped the one true God, the maker and preserver
of all things, though they did not observe the rites which were pe
culiarly prescribed to those of their own body. And how happy
would it have been, if the principles of toleration had been always
carried thus far among those of other professions !
Their looking upon themselves to be God's chosen people ought
to have engaged them to great thankfulness to God for such eminent
advantages, and to have put them upon distinguishing themselves
by the pure practice of religion and every virtue, that they might
walk worthy of their character and privileges ; if they abused this
to pride and insolence, the fault was not in their law, but in them
selves. Mankind have been always too prone to abuse their real or
supposed advantages. The Greeks regarded the rest of the world
as barbarians. And Socrates is introduced by Plato, in his fifth
book of laws, as directing the Greeks to regard the barbarians as by
¦nature their enemies, and as prescribing a conduct towards them
which is little reconcileable to the common rules of humanity.
Christians cannot but look upon it as their great advantage, that
they are distinguished from many other nations whieh are sunk in
the grossest ignorance and barbarism. And it would argue the most
inexcusable stupidity and ingratitude not to be very thankful to
providence on this account. But this is no just reason for treating
those nations with contempt and cruelty.
The fourth objection which was mentioned was, that there are
several passages in the scriptures which are false, absurd, and un-
philosophical. And he particularly instances in the account there
given of the creation of the world, and the fall of man.
With respect to the former, he says, " It is impossible to read
what Moses writ on that subject, without feeling contempt for him
as a philosopher, and horror as a divine. For he is to be considered
under both these characters. "f And he takes upon him to pro
nounce, that " wecannot admit Moses's testimony concerning the be
ginning of the world for divine, without absurdity and blasphemy.":):
• Lev. xix. 24. xxv. 35. Numb. xxvi. 1 1 . Deut. *. 17, 18, 19. xxiv. 19, 20, 21, 22.
t Works, vol. iii. p. 231. 283. X Ibid. p. 308.
G G

450 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
There cannot in my opinion be a greater instance of the most un
reasonable prejudice, than the objections that have been raised
against the authority of Moses, from the account he gives of the
creation. Whosoever will take the pains impartially to compare
it with the accounts left us in the traditions of the most ancient
nations, concerning which the reader may see the introduction to
the Universal History, relating to the Cosmogony, or the Creation qf
the World, will find the account given by Moses so vastly superior,
as will naturally lead him to regard it as of an higher original. There
is a majesty and sublimity, as well as simplicity and plainness in it,
which hath greatly -recommended it to the best judges. Nothing
could be so proper to answer the design he had in view, as to begin
his book with an account of the creation of the world. If he had
merely asserted in general, that God created the world, and all
things that are therein, this would not have made such an impres
sion upon the people as was proper and necessary in a matter of such
vast importance, and which, according to the author's own obser
vation, " leads to the acknowledgment ofthe Supreme Being, by a
proof levelled to the meanest understanding."* And therefore it
was proper to give them more distinct notions of the formation of
things by the divine power and wisdom. Accordingly he distinctly
mentions the light, the firmament, the sun, the moon, and stars,
the earth, the sea, the plants, and vegetable products of the earth,
the various kinds of animals, and lastly, man himself; and assures
them, that these various appearances were not owing to a variety of
causes, which, according to Lord Bolingbroke, the first men in the
rude uncultivated ages would be naturally led to believe, but were
all owing to one and the same glorious original cause and author.
It is evident, that what was principally designed was to give an
account of the formation of our system, as far as relates particularly
to our earth ; at the same time assuring them, that the sun, moon,
and stars, all the heavenly bodies, which the nations were apt to
adore, were created by God. The whole' is represented as having
been effected with an Almighty facility. That God only spoke or
commanded, and it was done. All things were created by the word
of his power, which tends to give a noble idea of the power and
majesty of the great Creator. Yet this great work, according to
Moses, was carried on in an orderly progressive way. There is a
general account given of the visible and successive changes wrought
each day upon the face of the earth till it was completed. But our
author, who is determined on every supposition to find fault with
the Mosaic account, blames Moses for representing the solar system,
or even this our planet, as having been the work of six days. He
thinks " such precipitation seems repugnant to that general order
of nature which God established, and which he observes in his pro
ductions." + As if the first formation of things must necessarily
have been carried on in the slow way which is now observed, after
the order and course of nature is once established. It is perfectly
* Works, vol. iii. p. 253. t Md. p. 233.

Let. XXX. LORD BOLINGBROKE.

451

agreeable to reason to believe that the first formation of the world,
and the several species of things in it, did not take up a long space
of time; and yet there is no reason to think that it was all perfected
in an instant, without any intervals, though it would have been
easy to the divine power to have done so. And this writer, who
seems here to think the creation as represented by Moses to have
been too much precipitated, and accomplished in too short a time,
seems elsewhere to think that it was too slowly carried on. For he
says, " we must not conceive the world to have been made by a la
borious progression — God willed it to exist, and it existed."*
As to the particular order in which the creation was carried on,
according to the account given by Moses, this writer, with all his
confidence, has not been able to prove, that there is any thing in it
inconsistent with reason or with true philosophy : though he has
passed a severe censure on those who have endeavoured to " recon
cile the Mosaic account to reason and nature, and to. wrest natural
philosophy into an agreement with it."-)- He instances in Moses's
saying, that " light was created, and the distinction of night and
day, of evening and morning, was made, before the sun, the moon,
and the stars.":): But we know so little of the real nature of light,
that no man can pretend positively to determine, that it could not
have made its appearance before the sun and moon and planets were
completed in their present form and order. As it seems to be the
noblest substance in the material world, it is reasonable to believe,
that at the first formation of things it was first created, or at least
separated from the chaotic mass, and put in motion, so as to make
a distinction between light and darkness, and some kind of succes
sion and vicissitude of the one and the other, answering to day and
night, evening and morning : though it is evident, from the account
given of the work of the fourth day, that it was not till then that
the sun, moon, and stars, were rendered conspicuous lo the earth,
and the order and course of things fully settled, so as to cause the
proper distinction of times andr-seasons, days, months, years; for
which reason no notice is taken of the formation of those heavenly
bodies till that day. It is to little purpose to say, as his Lordship
has done, that " Moses was as ignorant of the true system of
the universe as any of the people of his age." This is more than he
can prove. But if it were so, it was not necessary, supposing him
inspired as a prophet or a lawgiver, that he should be inspired also
with a knowledge of the true system of philosophy and astronomy.
Or, if he had been ever so well acquainted with it, it would have
been altogether improper to have given an exactly philosophical
account ofthe creation; nor could any such account of it have been
given, considering the different systems of philosophy that have
obtained, but what would have been as much found fault with, and
perhaps more, than that which he has given. The truth is, such an
account would have been no way accommodated to the capacities of
the people; it would have perplexed and confounded, instead of
* Works, vol. iv. p. 111. t Ibid. p. 181. i Ibid. vol. iii. p. 301.
G G 2

452 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
instructing them. It was proper, for many reasons, that the ac
count should be drawn up in a popular way, and yet in a way that
is at the bottom agreeable to the real truth of things. So the moon
is very fitly called a great light, and it may be truly called so, be
cause it yields great light to us, though, strictly and philosophically
speaking, it has no light of its own at all. ' And now, after all our
improvements in philosophy and astronomy, we still speak of the
light of the moon, of the sun's motion, rising, and setting. — And
the man that in a moral or theological, or in an historical discourse,
would use a different language, would only render himself ridiculous.
Lord Bolingbroke farther objects, that though Moses ascribes
the creation to God, " yet when God proceeds to "the creation of
man, he calls in other beings to co-operate with him, and make
man in his and their image. This seems to lay a foundation for
polytheism, which is inconsistent with that unity of God which my
reason shows me, and which the general tenor even of the Mosaic
history attests."* And since by his own acknowledgment the gene
ral tenor of the Mosaic writings leads us to assert the unity of God,
this plainly shows that the passage he refers to was not designed to
infer polytheism. And if there be something unusual in the man
ner of expression, it must be interpreted in a consistency with the
whole Mosaic law; nor can it be supposed that Moses intended it
otherwise. And this plainly appears from the very passage itself,
considered in its connexion. For after having told us, Gen. i. ver. 26.
that God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: he
adds, ver. 27. And God created man in his image, in the image of
God created he him: where it is plain, that what it expressed
plurally in one verse is singular in the other : and that the design of
those expressions, Let us make man in our image, was not to signify
that other beings joined with God in the formation of man, and in
making him in their as well as God's image ; since it is expressly
declared in the words immediately following, that God created man
in his own image, and for the greater emphasis, and as it were on
purpose to prevent such a construction, it is again repeated, in the
image qf God created he him. I would observe by the way, how
much nobler the account is, that is given by Moses of the formation
of man, than that which was given by the ancient Egyptians, of
whose wisdom and philosophy our author speaks in such high
terms, and from whom he would have us believe Moses derived all
his wisdom and knowledge. They taught, as he observes from
Diodorus Siculus, that " the first of human kind were quickened
into life by the sun, and were animated systems of mud." And he
thinks, that " if we are persuaded that this world had a beginning
in time, we must of necessity assume, that the first man and the
first woman, or that one man and one woman at least, were pro
duced in full strength and vigour of body and mind."t This is
agreeable to the Mosaic account, which is perfectly consistent with
reason, though there is no great likelihood that reason alone could
* Works, vol. iii. p. 300. f Ibid- vol. v. p. 107, 108.

Let. XXX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 453
have assured us of it ; for, as his Lordship there observes, " how
men came into the world, reason will tell us no better than history
or tradition does" This therefore is a proper subject of divine
revelation. It argues a strange disposition to find fault, to lay such a stress
as Lord Bolingbroke has done, upon that particular manner of
expression Moses -makes use of, that God rested the seventh day
from all his work, as if it were alone sufficient to destroy the au
thority of the Mosaic writings. No man that impartially considers
the noble account there given of the creation, that God is repre
sented as having only spoke and it was done, can reasonably imagine,
that the design of those expressions was to signify, that God was
wearied with the laborious work of creation, as our author expresses
it, and needed rest after it, as men do who are tired with their
work. Hast thou not known, saith the prophet Isaiah, Hast thou
not heard, that the everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the
ends ofthe earth, fainteth not, neither is wea,ry? Isaiah xl. 28.
All therefore that can be understood by that manner of expression,
is only this, that God had then finished the work of the creation,
and had a divine complacency in it.
As to the Mosaic account of the fall of man, it is what his Lord
ship has frequently endeavoured to expose. And it has been a con
stant subject of ridicule to the deistical writers in every age. But
if it be candidly and impartially examined, as it stands connected
with the account given by Moses of man's original dignity, it will
appear to be of great importance, and to furnish instructions of ex
cellent use.
The account given by Moses of the state in which man was at
first created, is short, but such as tends to give a noble idea of his
dignity; as having been created in the image of God, in a state of
purity and innocence, and invested with a dominion over all the
other creatures in this lower world. His Lordship, in a passage
cited above, says, that " supposing the world to have had a begin
ning in time, we must of necessity assume, that the first man and
the first woman, or that one man and one woman at least, were
produced in full strength and vigour of body and mind." And in
deed man cannot reasonably be supposed to have been at first
created in a state of infancy, for then he must soon have perished.
He was therefore formed in a state of maturity, as were the other
animals, and undoubtedly in a sound and happy constitution of
body ; and it is equally reasonable to suppose that he was created
in an answerable perfection of mind : and that consequently there
was in man at his first creation a perfect harmony and just balance
in the several faculties of his nature, that his intellectual and moral
powers were sound and clear, and uncorrupt, his appetites and
passions in a state of just subjection'to reason and the law of the
mind, and his affections rightly disposed. Here then is a state of
moral rectitude, in which, according to all the dictates of reason
and good sense, man must be supposed to have been created. Nor

454 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
can any thing be more absurd than to suppose, that this noble
creature, who was constituted lord of this inferior creation, the
crown and ornament of God's works here below, made his first ap
pearance in the world, as a huge over-grown infant, in full vigour
indeed and beauty of body, but a mere child in understanding, and
with a soul utterly unfurnished. It is reasonable to believe, that he
that made him would not turn him out into the world absolutely
destitute of knowledge and ideas, but that he immediately endued
him with so much knowledge of things, especially of his Maker, of
the creation of the world, and of his duty, as qualified him for
answering the ends of his being. Moses informs us, that great
things were done for him by the beneficent Creator : that he was
pleased, in his great goodness, to provide a peculiarly delightful seat
for the entertainment of his innocent creature, a blissful paradise,
where he was placed amidst a profusion of joys. And as there was
none among the inferior animals that, were put under his dominion,
with whom he could cultivate that society and friendship for which
his nature was formed, it pleased God to make another creature of
his own kind, bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh, adorned with
all the charms of beauty and innocence, to whom he was to be
united in the dearest ties of love. And from them was to proceed a
race of creatures of the same species.
In this state man was undoubtedly obliged by the law of his
creation to obey and adore his Creator and Sovereign Lord and
Benefactor, and to yield a ready obedience to all his known com
mands. But though universal obedience was his duty, Moses ac
quaints us, that there was a particular command given him by way
of trial. Nor was there any thing in this unbecoming the Supreme
Wisdom and Goodness. Since God was pleased to constitute him
lord of this inferior creation, and had given him so large a grant,
and so many advantages, it was manifestly proper, in the nature of
things, that he should require some particular instance of homage
and fealty, to put him in mind that he was under the dominion of a
higher Lord, on whom he depended, and to whom he owed an un
reserved subjection. And what properer instance could there be, in
the circumstances man was then in, than his being obliged, in obe
dience to the divine command, to abstain from one or more of the
delicious fruits of paradise ? It pleased God to insist only upon
his abstaining from one, at the same time that he indulged him a
full liberty as to all the rest. And this served both as an act of
homage to the Supreme Lord, from whose bountiful grant he held
paradise, and all its enjoyments, and it was also fitted to teach him
a noble and useful lesson of abstinence and self-denial, one of the
most important lessons in a state of probation, and also of unreserved
submission to God's authority and will, and an implicit resignation
to his sovereign wisdom and goodness. It tended to habituate him
to keep his sensitive appetite in a perfect subjection to the law of
reason, in which consists the proper order and harmony of the hu
man nature, and to take him off from too close an attachment to

Let. XAA. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 4.-,.i
sensible good, and also to keep his desire after knowledge within
just bounds, so as to be content with knowing what is good and
useful, and not to pry with an unwarrantable curiosity into things
that it did not belong to him to know.
Moses farther informs us, that our first parents transgressed the
command given them for the trial of their obedience, by eating the
forbidden fruit. How they came to do this, when they were created
innocent and upright, may seem strange, and really is so. But the
same objection might have been made with regard to the first sin,
or transgression of the divine law, whenever it happened, whether
among men or angels. For, except we suppose them to have been
created actually depraved, or under a necessity of sinning, which
would be to make God himself the author of sin, they must have
been formed in a state of purity and rectitude, and capable of keep
ing the law of God, which was given them as the rule of their obe
dience : and then the difficulty would recur, how came they to fall
and disobey, when they might so easily have stood and continued
in their obedience ? All that can be said, is, that man, though
created upright, and without any wrong affections or dispositions,
yet was a free agent, and therefore had it in his power to disobey.
The account given by Moses of the first sin is very short. There were
probably several circumstances attending it, which we are not in
formed of. But from what is said of it, we may gather, that the
tempter, who, by the consent of the Jewish and Christian church,
was an evil spirit making use of the serpent as an instrument, en
deavoured both to work upon the sensitive appetite, and upon that
desire of knowledge and pre-eminence so natural to the human mind,
and which is of great advantage when kept within proper bounds.
He might probably pretend, that the tree had a hidden excellent
virtue in it, of which he might plead his own experience as a proof;
and that therefore they had some way misunderstood the command,
or at least God would not be severe upon them if they transgressed
it. If they had exercised their thinking powers, as they might and
ought to have done, they might easily have seen through these spe
cious illusions. But this they neglected, and were inexcusable in
doing so ; since they ought not to have hearkened to any pretences
or insinuations whatsoever, against an express divine command, so
plainly given, and which was particularly designed as a trial of their
obedience, and was so easy to be observed. Their disobeying in
such circumstances was in effect an attempt to throw off the allegi
ance they owed to God, an insurrection against his sovereign au
thority, and an arraigning his governing wisdom, and the basest
ingratitude to his infinite goodness, which had placed them in such
a noble and happy station, and had heaped so many favours and
benefits upon them. And now they had nothing but dismal pros
pects before them: there was an unhappy change in the face of
things : they were expelled out of paradise : the earth lost much of
its beauty and fertility: and they became subject to many pains,
diseases, and death. Yet God did not utterly cast them off. He
gave them tokens of his readiness to receive them to his grace and

456 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
favour upon their sincere repentance : and by the original promise,
the true nature and design of which was probably more distinctly
explained to our first parents than is mentioned in that short account,
he gave them to understand, that he would not leave them to perish
without remedy under the curse and misery brought upon them by
means of the tempter ; and that he would raise up for them a glori
ous Deliverer, who was to proceed from the woman's seed, and to
rescue them from the miseries and ruin to which they had exposed
themselves by their sin and apostacy. And there is reason to think,
that, they had hopes given them, that though they were still to be
subject to many evils, and to temporal death, as the effects and
punishment of sin, yet upon their repentance, and sincere, though
imperfect obedience, they were to be raised to a better life. And
accordingly the hopes of pardoning mercy, and the expectation of a
future life, seem to have obtained from the beginning, and to have
spread generally among mankind, and made a part of the primitive
religion. derived from the first parents and ancestors of the human
race. I have laid these things together, that we may the better form a
judgment concerning the Mosaic account. The sum of it is this :
That man was originally created pure and upright, constituted soon
after his creation in a happy paradise, and admitted to many tokens
ofthe divine love and favour; but that he fell from that state, by
sinning against God, and violating the command given him as a
test of his obedience ; and that he thereby brought death and misery
into the world, with all the penal evils to which the human nature
is now obnoxious. And these are excellent instructions. What
can be more agreeable to right reason, or have a better effect, when
really believed, than that God made man at first upright and happy,
in a state of moral rectitude : that sin, which was owing to his wil
ful defection from God, was the source of all the evils to which the
human nature is now exposed, and which therefore are not charge
able on God, or on his original constitution, but on man himself:
that mankind are now in a lapsed state, but not forsaken of God,
who hath in his great goodness provided a proper remedy, and hath
been pleased to assure them of his readiness to receive them to his
grace and favour, and to accept and reward their repentance and sin
cere obedience.
And now upon this view of things it will be no hard matter to
answer the objections which Lord Bolingbroke hath urged against
the Mosaic account ofthe fall.
He represents it as absurd to suppose, that " this moral system
was destroyed by the wiles of a serpent, and by the eating of an
apple, almost as soon as it began, against the intention as well as
command ofthe Creator."* As to the command given to our first
parents to abstain from the fruit of a particular tree, at the same
time that they had a full grant made to them of all the other deli
cious fruits of paradise, it had nothing in it inconsistent with the
divine goodness ; and it hath been shown, that in the circumstances
* Works, vol. iii. p. 301,

Let. XXX. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 457
man was then in, it was a command very proper to be given ; and
the transgressing this command, at the solicitations of any tempter
whatsoever, was an inexcusable act of disobedience ; that this sin
was committed against the intention as well as command of the
Creator, is very true, if by its being against his intention be under
stood that it was what he did not encourage or approve ; though it
was what he foresaw, and thought fit in his wise providence to per
mit. He urges indeed, that " God might have prevented man's
fall by a little less indulgence to what is called free-will."* And
he elsewhere mentions the " severity with which God punished our
first parents, for a fault which he foreknew they would commit,
when he abandoned their free-will to the temptation of committing
it."f This, if it proved any thing, would prove that it is unjust in
God ever to punish any man for any sin at all ; for whenever men
sin, it may be said that he leaves them to their own free-will, and
that it is what he foreknew. No doubt God might, by an exertion
of his absolute omnipotency, have hindered our first parents from
sinning ; and he might have hindered either men or angels from
ever sinning at all. But we see, that in fact he chuses, as a moral
governor, to deal with men as moral agents, and leaves them to the
liberty of their own wills. And in the case here referred to, man
had full power to have stood, and to have resisted the temptation ;
and his not so doing was his own fault, and not owing to any defect
of goodness in God. He himself furnishes a proper answer to his
own objection, when he observes, that " it may be truly said that
God, when he gave us our reason, left us to our free-will, to make
a proper or improper use of it; so that we are obliged to our
Creator for a certain rule and sufficient means of arriving at hap
piness, and have none to blame but ourselves when we fail of it.'**j:
And to the same purpose he saith, that " God has given to his
human creatures the materials of physical and moral happiness, and
has given them faculties and powers to recollect and apply these
materials. What we shall do for ourselves, he has left to the free
dom of our elections."§
He urges, that " the doctrine of two independent principles, the
one good, the other evil, is not so absurd as the doctrine of an in
ferior dependent being, who is assumed to be the author of all evil ;
and that to affirm, that a God sovereignly good, suffers an inferior
dependent being to deface his work in any sort, and to make his
other creatures both criminal and miserable, is still more injurious
to the Supreme Being." || And again he repeats it, that " it is in-
* Works, vol. iii. p. 301. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 321. X Ibid. p. 388.
§ Ibid. p. 474.
|| Ibid. vol. iv. p. 20. The scripture doctrine of evil angels, of whom Satan is re
presented as the head, hath been so often found fault with, that it may not be improper
on this occasion to offer something for obviating the prejudices which some have con
ceived against the sacred writings on this account. That God made creatures oi a
noble order, and of sublime capacities and powers vastly superior to man, is what Lord
Bolingbroke himself allows to be very probable.* And as it is reasonable to believe
* Works, vol. iv. p. 177. Vol. v. p. 329, 330.

458 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
consistent with the goodness and wisdom of God, to suffer an
inferior being, his creature, and a creature in actual rebellion, to
baffle his designs."* And if he suffered this evil being to compel
them to be criminal and miserable, it would be so ; but not, if he
suffered him only to tempt and to seduce, and at the same time
made them every way able to withstand the temptation, and pro
vided them with sufficient means to that purpose ; which was the
case of our first parents. God had done all that was proper for him
to do as a moral governor, to prevent the defection. He had formed
them in a state of moral rectitude, and endued them with good
dispositions. The creation was fresh about them, and the glorious
evidences of the divine wisdom, power, and goodness ! They knew
that he was the Author of their beings, and that from him flowed
all the blessings they enjoyed. He had given them the most ex
press injunction in the plainest terms, and strongly enforced, to pre
vent their disobedience. I see not therefore why God should exert
his own omnipotency to hinder Satan from tempting them, since he
could only tempt but not compel ; and they were sufficiently armed
and provided against every temptation that could befal them, if
they would but use the strength and advantages they had ; which,
all things considered, were superior to. those that any of their pos
terity have been since possessed of.
that they were made free agents, why may it not be supposed that some of them made
a wrong use of their liberty, and became depraved and corrupt ? And if one of them,
of distinguished power and dignity above the rest, by a perversion of his great abilities,
became eminent in evil and wickedness, and particularly instrumental to draw others to
sin and disobedience, it cannot be pretended that this supposition carrieth any absurdity
in it. And in such a case it might be expected, that he and his associates would prove
enemies to all goodness and virtue, and that having fallen from their own felicity and
glory, they would envy the happiness of others, and endeavour to draw them into guilt
and misery. This is what we often see bad men do, who are arrived to a great degree
of corruption and depravity. His Lordship indeed pretendeth, that the supposition of
an inferior dependent being who is assumed to be the author qfall evil, is more absurd than
the doctrine of two independent principles, the one good, the other evil. If by being the
author qfall evil, be understood that there is any one inferior dependent being, who is
the sole universal cause of all evil, and that there is no evil but what he is the author
of, it is wrong to charge the scriptures or christian divines with assuming it; but to
pass by this misrepresentation, it is evident to the common sense of mankind, that there
is a vast diiference between the supposition of an Almighty and independent evil being,
a supposition full of absurdity and horror, and that of an inferior dependent being, who
was made originally pure and upright, but fell by his own voluntary defection into vice
and wickedness, and who, though permitted in many instances to do mischief, and to
act according to his evil inclinations, as wicked men are often permitted to do in this
present state, yet is still under the sovereign controul of the most holy, wise, and
powerful governor of the world. For in this case we may be sure, from the divine
wisdom, justice and goodness, that God will in the fittest season inflict a punishment
upon that evil being, and his associates, proportionable to their crimes ; and that in the
mean time he setteth bounds to their malice and rage, and provideth sufficient assistance
for those whom they endeavour to seduce to evil, whereby they may be enabled to repel
their temptations, if it be not their own faults ; and that he will in his superior wisdom
bring good out of their evil, and overrule even their malice and wickedness, for promoting
the great ends of his government. This is the representation made to us of this mat
ter in the Holy Scripture ; nor is there any thing in this that can be proved to be con
trary to sound reason. And we may justly conclude, that in the final issue of things,
the wisdom, as well as righteousness, of this part of the divine administration, will most
illustriously appear. » Works, vol. v. p. 321.

Let. XXX. LORD bolingbroke. 45g
His Lordship takes notice of "the severity which had been exer
cised on the whole race of mankind, who share in the punishment,
though not in the crime."* And again he charges the divines for
supposing " that all mankind were punished for the sin of one.''-|-
That mankind are now subject to the evils Moses mentions as the
consequence of the fall, barrenness of the ground, pains and sick
ness in child-bearing, diseases and death, is undeniable. The only
difference between the Mosaic account, and that of those who ridi
cule it, is, that they suppose all these evils to be the necessary
effects ofthe original constitution and appointment of God, at the
first formation of man and of the world ; but Moses supposes the
original constitution of things to have been much more happy, and
that all these evils were brought into the world in consequence of
man's voluntary defection from God. And which of these supposi
tions is most honourable to God, and most likely, if believed, to
have a good effect upon the minds of men, may be left to any im
partial and thinking person to determine. And it seems very odd,
that it should be represented as unjust in God, to lay those evils
upon men in consequence ofthe sin of our first parents, which they
might easily have avoided, when it is accounted no reflection upon
the justice and goodness of God to lay those evils upon men by the
original constitution, without any regard to sin, either of their first
parents, or their own.
On supposition that Adam and Eve were the fountains and pro
toplasts of the human race, it seems evident, that their posterity
must suffer under the consequences of their defection. If they were
banished from paradise, and it was just they should be so, their
posterity could not expect to be continued in it. If their natures
became tainted, and subject to diseases and death, they could only
convey tainted and mortal natures to their offspring. It cannot be
denied, that, in the course of providence, children often suffer evils
that were originally owing to the crimes of their parents and ances
tors. Wicked parents often by their bad conduct forfeit advantages
for their children as well as themselves, and not only propagate
distempered bodies to them, but, considering the great influence
that the bodily crasis and temperament hath upon the dispositions
of the mind, they are frequently instrumental in conveying bodily
constitutions, which incline them to vicious affections and disorderly
passions, though they do not bring them under an absolute neces
sity of sinning, or imitating their father's vices. Since it is ap
pointed that mankind should be propagated in a way of successive
generation, it is evident that children must in many cases be greatly
dependent on their parents, and derive great blessings or evils from
them. And this may on many accounts be supposed to hold much
more strongly with respect to the first parents of the human race,
than any others.
As to the exceptions our author makes against some particular
expressions made use of, and circumstances related, in the Mosaic
* Works, vol. v. p. 321. t Ibid. p. 485.— See also ibid. p. 284.

460 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
account of the fall, they are no other than what have been frequently
repeated and answered. Dr. Tindal had urged the same objections,
and several others, more distinctly, and with greater force ; and I
have considered them largely and particularly in my answer to that
writer : to which therefore I beg leave to refer, having already in
sisted longer on this subject than I intended.* I would only
further observe, that some remarkable traces of the primitive para
disiacal state of man, and a fall from that state, are observable in
the traditions of the ancient sages, in different parts of the world.
And there is great reason to think, that at the time when Moses
writ, those traditions were more distinctly known. Lord Boling
broke pronounces the account of the fall to be a moral, philosophical,
Egyptian allegory, designed to account for the introduction ofevil.f
And if he had looked upon it in that light, he had no right to urge
the literal sense of it as an objection against the authority of the
Mosaic writings.
I proceed in the last place to consider what his Lordship has
offered with regard to the sanctions of the law of Moses. He ob
serves, that " in the twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy, Moses,
on the renewal of the covenant between God and the people, em
ploys no argument to induce the latter to a strict observation of it,
of an higher nature than promises of immediate good, and threa
tenings of immediate evil. They are exhorted to keep the law, not
for the sake of the law, nor for the sake of God, but for considera
tions of another kind, and where not only their wants were to be sup
plied, but all their appetites and passions to be gratified — their
avarice, all their other appetites and passions. God purchased, as
it were, their obedience with this mercenary bargain."*): That we
may judge ofthe consistency of this writer, it is to be observed, that
he himself, when speaking in high terms of the law of nature, as
having sufficient proofs of a divine sanction, and a divine original,
affirms the sanctions of that law to be only temporal, and that they
are such as affect nations collectively, not men individually. And he
proves these divine sanctions, as he calls them, to be sufficient, be
cause such as these were the sanctions of the law of Moses. § He
often insists upon it, that the only sanction of the natural law ap
pointed by divine providence is this, that national virtue shall pro
duce national happiness, and national vice shall produce national
misery. If therefore national blessings were promised in the Mosaic
constitution as rewards of their obedience, and national evils and
calamities denounced as the punishment of their wickedness and
disobedience, there was nothing in this, according to his scheme, but
what was highly proper, and perfectly agreeable to the law of nature.
Yet he thinks fit to represent it as a mercenary bargain; as if it
were wrong to annex any sanctions at all to that law ; for if any
were annexed, they must, upon his scheme of principles, be only of a
temporal nature. As to what he observes, that " the Israelites were
* See Answer to Christianity as old as the Creation, vol. ii. chap. xiv.
t Works, vol. v. p. 350. \ Ibid. vol. iii. p. 291, 292. § Ibid. vol. v. p. 90, 91.

Let. XXX. lord bolingbroke. 46]
exhorted to keep the law, not for the sake of the law, nor for the
sake of God, but for considerations of another kind, in which all
their appetites and passions, their ambition, avarice, &c. were to be
gratified," this is very unfairly represented. The blessings promised
in the passage he refers to, Deut. xxviii. I — 14. are indeed chiefly of
a national kind. But there is no promise made to them of extensive
conquest and universal empire : and it is evident, as I have elsewhere
shown,* that their constitution was not designed or fitted for it. If
they obeyed the laws given them, they were to have fruitful and
healthful seasons, to enjoy peace, plenty, and many blessings, in
their own land. And it was promised them, that if they were in
vaded by their enemies, they should be protected against them,
and prove victorious over them : That they should be happy and
honourable above all other nations : And that God would establish
them an holy people to himself, which included a promise of having
their spiritual privileges continued to them, with the tokens of God's
special favour and gracious presence among them, which was their
happiness and their glory. Any one that impartially considers the
Mosaic writings, will find, that the laws their given to the Israelites
are enforced upon them by a great variety of important considera
tions. The excellency of the laws themselves is represented ; as
particularly Deut. iv. 6, 7, 8. And frequently is that short but
comprehensive declaration subjoined to their laws, I am the Lord,
Jehovah. They are urged to obedience by the consideration of
God's sovereign authority and supreme dominion, of his infinite
righteousness and goodness, of the great things he hath done for
them, and the special relation he stood in towards them, by the
gratitude they owed to him for all his benefits, by the hope of his
favour, and fear of his displeasure. For they were taught that
noble lesson, that in and from him alone they were to look for happi
ness, whether relating to the people in general, or to particular per
sons. And they were instructed to regard him as exercising a
constant inspection over them, and taking cognizance both of their
outward actions, and of the inward affections and dispositions of
their hearts.
It may not be improper on this occasion to observe, that his Lord
ship has taken upon him to affirm, that " there cannot be any thing
so impiously interested and craving, as the sentiments ascribed by
Moses to the patriarchs." And he instances "in Jacob's vow, and
the conditional engagement he took with God," Gen. xxviii. 20, 21,
22.f But to set this matter in a proper light, of whieh he has been
pleased to make a most unjust representation, it must be considered,
that immediately before the account which is given of Jacob's vow,
we are informed of a vision he had when he was setting out upon
his journey to Padan-Aram, in which God renewed the promises to
him, which had been made to Abraham, concerning the giving the
land of Canaan to his posterity, and that in his seed all the families
of the earth should be blessed ; at the same time assuring him, that
* See Answer to Morgan, vol. i. p. 134, 135. t Works, vol. iii. p. 291, 892.

462 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
he would be with him in all places whither he went, and would
bring him again into that land, ver. 12 — 15. It was in consequence
of this vision that Jacob made his vow the next morning ; the design
of which was to express the sense he had of the divine goodness,
and his confidence in God's gracious protection ; and to declare his
solemn resolution, that if God would be with him, and keep him in
his way, and would give him bread to eat and raiment to put on
[which shows the moderation of his desires], so that he should come
again to his father's house in peace, he would after his return make
an open public acknowledgment of his gratitude and devotion to the
Lord as his God, set apart that place where God had appeared to
him to his worship, and would devote the tenth of all the substance
God should give him to his service. This, instead of being impiously
interested and craving will appear to every person that judges can
didly and impartially to be a great argument of the simplicity and
goodness of Jacob's heart, and of a pious and well-disposed mind ;
though undoubtedly it must appear absurd to our author, who does
not believe that God concerneth himself with the individuals ofthe
human race.
His Lordship frequently observes, that in the law of Moses there
is no mention made of future rewards and punishments. He some
times positively asserts, that Moses did not believe the immortality
of the soul, nor the rewards and punishments of another life ; for if
he had, he would have taught it to that people; and that Solomon,
the wisest of their kings, decides against it.* But in other passages
he insinuates, that Moses might possibly believe it himself, though
he did not think proper to mention it to the people ; and represents
it as a most surprizing thing, that " a doctrine so useful to all reli
gions, and therefore incorporated into all the systems of Paganism,
should be left wholly out of that of the Jews."f And he endeavours
to draw an argument from this against the divine original of this
constitution. This is what he particularly urgeth in the conclusion
of the twenty-first of his Fragments and Essays in his fifth volume,
where he introduces it in a very pompous manner, "as an observa
tion, which he does not remember to have seen or heard urged on
one side, or anticipated on the other, and which he thinks evidently
shows how absurd as well as improper it is to ascribe these Mosaical
laws to God." The observation is this : That " neither the people
of Israel, nor their legislator perhaps, knew any thing of another
life, wherein the crimes committed in this life are to be punished. —
Although he might have learned this doctrine, which was not so
much a secret doctrine, as it may be presumed the unity of the Su
preme God was, among the Egyptians. Whether Moses had learned
this among their schools, cannot be determined ; but this may be
advanced with assurance : If Moses knew that crimes, and therefore
idolatry, one of the greatest, were to be punished in another life, he
deceived the people, in the covenant they made by his intervention
with God. If he did not know it, I say it with horror, the conse-
» Works, vol. iii. p. 290. f Ibid. vol. v. p. 238, 239.

Let. XXX. lord bolingbroke. 463
Juence, according to the hypothesis I oppose, must be, that God
eceived both him and them. In either case, a covenant or bargain
was made, wherein the conditions of obedience or disobedience were
not fully, nor by consequence fairly stated. The Israelites had better
things to hope, and worse to fear, than those that were expressed in
it. And their whole history seems to show how much need they
had of these additional motives to restrain them from polytheism
and idolatry, and to answer the assumed purpose of divine provi
dence."* This is his boasted argument ; and what seems mightily
to recommend it to him, he looks upon it to be new, and what no
man had insisted on before.
My first remark upon it is this : That he could not with any con
sistency urge the not making express mention of a future state, as
an argument to prove, that it is absurd and impious to ascribe the
Mosaical law to God, since it appears from several parts of his book,
that he himself did not believe the rewards and punishments of a
future state. He ought rather, upon his hypothesis, to have con
ceived a high opinion of Moses's strict regard to truth, since he
chose not to make use of a pious fraud, or of false and deceitful
motives, when it would have been his interest, and for the advantage
of his laws, to have done so. If it be said, that this is only urged as
an argument ad hominem, which, though false and inconclusive in
itself, yet is conclusive upon the hypothesis of his adversaries, and
proper to distress and embarrass them, they will perhaps find it no
difficult matter to defend themselves against this dilemma ; for if it
should be allowed, that neither Moses, nor any of the people, had
any assurance of a future state, it would not follow, that God in not
revealing it had deceived him or them. If indeed he had expressly-
told them, that the notion of a future state was false, and that they
had no rewards or punishments to fear after this life is at an end,
then supposing there were future rewards and punishments, this
would have been a deceiving them, in the strictest, properest sense.
But merely not to reveal it to them, was not to deceive them. And
whereas he urges, that on that supposition there was a covenant or
bargain made, in which the conditions of obedience and disobedience
were not fully, nor by consequence fairly stated ; this proceeds upon
the supposition, that if God made a covenant with them, he would
not deal fairly, if he did not lay before them all the rewards and
punishments of their obedience and disobedience ; which is certainly
a conclusion that cannot be justified. If God had only assured
them in general, that, if they kept his commandments, they should
be entitled to his favour, and, if they disobeyed, they should feel the
awful effects of his displeasure, this ought to have been enough to
have engaged them ; and it could not be said in that case that he
dealt unfairly by them ; especially since he might have commanded
their obedience, and demanded their subjection to his laws, in a way
of absolute authority, without any express stipulations on his part
at all. Whatever particular promises or threatenings he added, de-
* Works, vol. v. p. 195.

464 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXX.
pended upon his sovereign good pleasure, and he might reveal those
things, in what measure or degree he in his wisdom should think fit.
Our author himself has found out a reason for it, viz. that the doc
trine of future rewards and punishments " was dressed up with so
many fabulous circumstances among the Egyptians, that it was
hard to teach or renew this doctrine in the minds of the Israelites,
without giving an occasion the more to recal the poly theistical fables,
and practise the idolatrous rites, they had learned during their cap
tivity in Egypt."*
But let us put the other supposition, and which I take to be the
true one, viz. that Moses and the Israelites did believe a future state
of rewards and punishments. This writer himself frequently inti
mates, that it was believed among the Egyptians, and that it was not
a part of the secret doctrine, confined only to a few, but was spread
and propagated among the vulgar. It is therefore reasonable to be
lieve, that this doctrine obtained among the Israelites too, especially
as, by his own acknowledgment, it obtained among the Babylonians,
and indeed among all the ancient nations, as far as we have any ac
counts left us of their sentiments. And it cannot with the least
probability be supposed, that the Israelites were the only people
that were ignorant of it, and had no notions of that kind among
them at all ; except we imagine that they were taught to believe the
contrary ; of which there is not the least proof: nor is there any
thing in the writings of Moses to contradict that notion. On the
contrary, there are several in those writings which by a fair con
struction imply it. Our author seems to think, that the Mosaical
account of the formation of man implies that his soul was a particle
of the divinity.-)- There is no reason to suppose this. But it cer
tainly leads us to acknowledge a remarkable distinction of the soul
from the body ; that it is a nobler substance, more nearly resembling
the divinity, and not, like the body, formed of the dust of the ground.
What Moses saith of God's gracious acceptance of Abel's sacrifice,
who yet was murdered, and met with no reward of his piety, no
good effects of God's acceptance of him, except we take in the con
sideration of a future state : The account he gives of the translation
of Enoch, that he walked with God, and that he was not, for God
took him, which, in the most natural construction, implies the tak
ing him out of this world to a better state : His representing the
patriarchs, as calling this there present life the few and evils days
of their pilgrimage, which showed they looked for a better country,
that is, an heavenly: To which may be added, the accounts there
given of the appearances of angels, which naturally led the Israelites
to acknowledge an invisible world of spirits : nor can any instance
be brought of any nation, who believed the existence of angels and
separate intelligences, and yet did not believe the immortality ofthe
soul, and a future state : The express declarations of Solomon, that
the righteous hath hope in his death ; the clear distinction he makes
between the soul and body, that at death the latter shall return to
» Works, vol. v. p. 240, 241. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 489.

Let. XXX. lord bolingbroke. 405
the earth as it was, and the former, the spirit shall return to God
that gave it; and that there shall be a future account, in which
every work shall be brought into judgment, with every secret thing,
whether it be good or whether it be evil : The assumption of Elias
into heaven, which naturally led the thoughts of all that heard of it
to another world, where good men shall be eminently rewarded :
All these things, not to mention several passages in the Psalms and
in the Prophets which plainly look this way, convince me, that a
future state was all along believed among thepeople.* And indeed
it does not appear, that, at the time of Moses, any man had arisen,
as there did in the latter ages, who, through the vain deceit and
false refinements of philosophy, denied it. As to the promises and
threatenings addressed to the people of Israel as a collective body,
of which kind those seem to be which are mentioned, Lev. xxvi. and
Deut. xxviii. these no doubt were directly and immediately of a tem
poral nature ; and the striking representations that are there made
of the consequences of their obedience or disobedience in this present
world, seem very well fitted to make strong and vigorous impres
sions upon them, and to give them a lively sense of the constant
interposition of divine providence. But besides this, the tenor of
their law led them to think that the happiness of every individual
person among them, and his interest in the favour of God, depended
upon his obedience to the divine commands, and the practice of
righteousness. This especially seems to have been the design of
that general declaration in the law, that the man that did the pre
cepts there enjoined should live by them. And there is no reason
to think that they looked upon this as wholly confined to this present
world. That it was understood to have a more extensive view, may
be reasonably concluded from what is said in the eighteenth chapter
of Ezekiel, where the equity of the divine proceedings is vindicated,
and where it is expressly declared, with tbe greatest solemnity, con
cerning every particular person that should forsake his evil ways, and
turn to the practice of righteousness, that he should not die, but
should surely live, i. e. be happy ; and concerning every wicked and
impenitent sinner, that he should surely die, i. e. be miserable ;
which must have its principal effect in a future state of rewards and
punishments ; since even under that constitution it often happened,
that particular good men were exposed to many outward evils and
calamities, and that bad men had great outward prosperity. What
made it more necessary to insist explicitly and fully upon the doctrine
of a future state in the gospel, was, that through the corruption of
mankind the ancient belief of the immortality of the soul and a
future state was very much obscured and defaced. As to the hea
thens, there were many among those who made great pretensions to
learning and philosophy that absolutely rejected it, and most of
those who did not positively reject it, yet treated it as a thing doubt
ful and uncertain. And it had been so much blended with fables,
that at last it seemed to have little hold even on vulgar opinion ;
* See this more fully proved in the Answer to Dr. Morgan, vol. i. p. 339, et seq.
H H

466 a view of the deistical writers. Let. XXX.
as his Lordship observes, in a passage cited above. To which it
may be added, that there was at that time a considerable party even
among the Jews' themselves, considerable for their power and quality,
. though not for their numbers, who denied it. On all these accounts,
it became the divine wisdom to interpose by a more express revela
tion, containing clearer discoveries, and fuller proofs of it, than had
been ever given to mankind before. And this revelation was veiy
properly brought by the most illustrious messenger that could be
sent from heaven, the Son of God himself, that glorious and divine
person whose coming had been so long promised and foretold. To
which it may be added, that as the gospel did not contain a system
of laws immediately addressed to any particular nation, as the Mo-
saical was, so none of the promises or threatenings there delivered
relate directly and immediately to national blessings or calamities,
but are such in which every individual of the human race should
look upon himself as nearly interested.
Thus I have considered the principal objections advanced by Lord
Bolingbroke against the holy scriptures of the Old Testament, and
especially against the Mosaic writings. There are some other ob
jections interspersed, and which he rather briefly hints at than pur
sues, and which scarce deserve a distinct consideration. He thinks
that a divine law ought always to have the effect. " Human laws
may be eluded, and miss of the effect. But if God gives a law, it
may be presumed, that effectual care should be taken to make that
law observed ; whereas there never was a law that less had the de
signed effect than that of Moses, from which the people were con
tinually revolting."* This argument would hold equally against
the law of nature, which he himself affirms to be the law of God,
and yet owns that men have revolted from it in all ages. But it has
been shown, that the law of Moses had actually a great effect, and
that by virtue of it the worship ofthe one true God was maintained
among the Jews, in a manner which eminently distinguished them
above the heathen nations : and that polity was surprizingly pre
served in all the revolutions of their state till the coming of our Sa
viour, for which it remarkably prepared the way, and thus answered
the ends the divine wisdom had in view in instituting it.
He ssems to blame Moses for not having taken the proper mea
sures to make his laws observed, as Ezra and Nehemiah did after
wards. But if the directions which Moses gave had been pursued,
never were there better and wiser precautions taken to engage the
people to make themselves acquainted with their law, and oblige
them to a careful observation of it. And all that Ezra and Nehe
miah did was to bring things back as near as possible to the original
institution and design. The signal calamities inflicted upon the
Jews in the time ofthe Babylonish captivity, the greatest that had
ever befallen them, the utter desolation of their country, and their
having been so long banished from it, which calamities had been
originally threatened in the law itself, and were regarded by them
* Works, vol. iii. p. 393.

Let. XXX. lord bolingbroke. 4tJ7
as signal punishments from heaven for their violation of it ; this, to-
getber with their wonderful restoration at the time that had been
fixed for it by the prophets, awakened in them a zeal against ido
latry, and an attachment to their law, greater than ever they had
shown before.
He urges farther, that " a divine law should have such a clearness
and precision in its terms, that it may not be in the power of persons
to elude and perplex the meaning of it. And that if it be. not so, all
that is said about marks of divinity in any law that pretends to be
revealed by God is mere cant."* This is particularly intended
against the law of Moses. And yet certain it is, that if the people
frequently fell off into idolatrous practices, and perhaps endeavoured
to reconcile these their practices with the worship of God as there
prescribed, this could not be j.ustly charged upon any want of
precision in the terms of the law. For what can be clearer and more
precise than the commands there given against polytheism and ido
latry 1 Nothing can be more unreasonable, than what he sometimes
insinuates, that if a revelation be given at all, it must be such as it
should not bein the power of man to misapprehend or misrepresent.f
It may be of signal use to persons of honest and candid minds,
though it be not absolutely incapable of being perverted and abused ;
which it could not be, if delivered in human language ; except God
should, by an omnipotent energy, and by a constant miracle, over
rule all the passions, inclinations, and prejudices of the human
nature ; the absurdity" of which supposition, though it be what this
writer seems sometimes to insist upon, I need not take means to
expose. He thinks, " the scriptures ought to be more perfect, according to'
our ideas of human perfection, whether we consider them as books
of law or of history, than any other books that are avowedly human."*):
I suppose he means that there should be greater elegance of com
position, beauty of language, exactness of method, or that they
should be more strictly philosophical. But perhaps what seems
elegant to one nation would not appear so to another. The notions
of elegance in style and composition were different among the Greeks
and Romans, from what they were in the Eastern nations. And what
might render the scriptures more perfect in the eyes of some persons,
might render them less perfect in other respects, and less fitted to
answer the end for which they were designed. To talk of elegance
of composition in human laws, or to blame acts of parliament for
not being oratorical, would be thought a very odd objection. But
it is the great excellency ofthe sacred writings, that there is in the
different parts of scripture what may please persons of all tastes.
There is a simplicity and plainness accommodated to the vulgar ; and
yet there is in many passages a sublimity and majesty not to be
equalled, and which has gained the admiration of the ablest judges.
As to what he sometimes mentions concerning the multiplicity of
* Works, vol. iii. {..292, 293.296.
t Ibid. vol. v. p. 545. vol. iv. p. 261. 267. X Ibid. vol. m- p. 290.
H H 2

468 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
copies, various readings, interpolations, I had occasion fully to con
sider these things in the " Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters
on the Study and Use of History," p. 65, et seq. and shall not repeat
what is there offered. He has flirts here and there against some
particular passages of scripture, a distinct examination of which
would carry me too far. And they are only such as Dr. Tindal had
urged before him, and which have been considered and obviated in
the answers that were made to that writer. See particularly
" Answer to Christianity as old as the Creation," vol. ii. chap. xi. xii.

LETTER XXXI.
The favourable Representation made by Lord Bolingbroke of the excellent Nature and
Design of the original Christian Revelation. — He gives up several of the Deistical
Objections, and even seems to acknowledge its divine Original  Yet he endeavours
to expose its Doctrines, and to invalidate its Proofs and Evidences. — The Law of
Nature and Christianity npt to be opposed to one another. — The Gospel not a Re
publication of the Doctrine of Plato. — The pretended Opposition between the Gospel
of Christ and that of St. Paul considered  This Apostle vindicated against the
Censures and Reproaches cast upon him. — The Miracles of Christianity, if really
wrought, owned by Lord Bolingbroke to be a sufficient Proof. — The Gospels, by his
own Acknowledgment, give a just Account of the Discourses and Actions of Jesus. —
Yet he has attempted to destroy their Credit. — His Pretence, that it would be neces
sary to have the Originals of the Gospels in our hands, or attested Copies of those
Originals examined. — The several Ways he takes to Account for the Propagation of
Christianity shown to be insufficient. — What he offers concerning the little Effect
Christianity has bad in the Reformation of Mankind, considered. — Want of Univer
sality no Argument against the Divinity of the Christian Revelation. — Its being
founded on Faith not inconsistent with its being founded on rational Evidence.
Sir,
I now come, according to the method I proposed, to consider
what relates to the Christian revelation, strictly and properly so
called, as it was taught by Christ and his apostles, and is contained
in the sacred writings of the New Testament. Indeed whosoever
carefully considers and compares the several parts of Lord Boling
broke's scheme, must be sensible, that the whole of it may justly be
regarded as an attempt against Christianity. If the principles he
has laid down with regard to the moral attributes of God, divine
providence, the immortality of the soul, and a future state, should
take place, the Christian religion would be subverted at the very
foundations. This is also the manifest intention of the account he
gives of the law of nature. And one reason of the extreme viru
lence with which he hath attacked the law of Moses and the Scrip
tures of the Old Testament, seems to be, the near connection there
is between this and the religion of Jesus, which he represents to have
been originally intended by our Saviour as a system of Judaism, and

Let. XXXI. lord bolingbroke. 469
designed for no other nation but the Jews only.* But though all
he hath offered against the Scriptures of the Old Testament may
be regarded as designed to strike at the authority of tbe Christian
revelation, yet there are some parts of his work which appear to be
more particularly intended for that purpose, which therefore it will
be necessary to take a distinct notice of.
But first it will be proper to make some observations on several
passages in his writings, in which he seems to make very remarkable
concessions in favour of pure genuine Christianity, as taught by our
Saviour and his apostles in the New Testament, and to make an ad
vantageous representation of its excellent nature and tendency.
After having observed, that some represent all religion founded
on divine revelation as inconsistent with civil sovereignty, and erect
ing a private conscience that may and often is inconsistent with the
public conscience of the state, and after inveighing against the spirit
of Judaism, and Mahometanism, he undertakes to defend Christi
anity against this objection, and asserts, that no "religion ever ap
peared in the world whose natural tendency was so much directed
to promote the peace and happiness of mankind." See the fourth
section of his fourth Essay. f He declares, that "no system can be
more simple and plain than that of natural religion, as it stands in
the gospel."*): And after having observed, that "besides natural
religion, there are two other parts into which Christianity may be
analyzed — Duties superadded to those of the former, and articles of
belief that reason neither could discover, nor can comprehend ;'' he
acknowledges, that " both the duties required to be practised, and
the propositions required to be believed, are concisely and plainly
enough expressed in the original gospel, properly so called, which
Christ taught, and which his four evangelists recorded. But they
have been alike corrupted by theology. "§ Speaking of the Chris
tian sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, he says, " no
institutions can be imagined more simple, nor more void of all those
pompous rites and theatrical representations that abounded in the
religious worship of the heathens and Jews, than these two were in
their origin. They were not only innocent but profitable ceremonies,
because they were extremely proper to keep up the spirit of true
natural religion, by keeping up that of Christianity, and to promote
the observation of moral duties, by maintaining a respect for the re
velation which confirmed them."|| He declares, that " he will not
say, that the belief that Jesus was the Messiah' is the only article of
belief necessary to make men Christians. There are other things
doubtless contained in the revelation he made of himself, dependent
on and relative to this article, without the belief of which, I suppose,
our Christianity would be very defective. But this I say, that the
system of religion Which Christ published, and his evangelists re
corded, is a complete system, to all the purposes of religion natural
and revealed. It contains all the duties of the former ; it enforces
* Works, vol. iv. p. 305. 328. 350. t Ibid. p. 281, 282.
X Ibid. p. 290. 292. § Ibid. p. 294. II Ibid. p. 301, 302.

470 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
them Jby asserting the divine mission of the Publisher, who proved
his assertions at the same time by his miracles ; and it enforces the
whole law of faith by promising rewards, and threatening punish
ments, which he declares he will distribute when he comes to judge
the world."* And he afterwards repeats it, that " Christianity, as
it stands in the gospel, contains not only a complete but a very plain
system of religion. It is in truth the system of natural religion, and
such it might have continued, to the unspeakable advantage of man
kind, if it had been propagated with the same simplicity with which
it was originally taught by Christ himself."t He says, that "sup
posing Christianity to have been a human invention, it- had been
the most amiable and the most useful invention that was ever im
posed on mankind for their good : And that Christianity, as it came
out of the hands of God, if 1 may use the expression, was a most
simple and intelligible rule of belief, worship, and manners, which is
the true notion of a religion. As soon as men presumed to add any
thing of their own to it, the human alloy corrupted the divine mass,
and it became an object of vain, intricate, arid contentious science. "f
After having observed, that "the political views of Constantine, in
the establishment of Christianity, were to attach the subjects of the
empire more firmly to himself and his successors, and the several
nations which composed it to one another, by the bonds of a religion
common to all of them ; to soften the ferocity of the armies ; to re
form the licentiousness ofthe provinces; and by infusing a spirit of
moderation, and submission to government, to extinguish those prin
ciples of avarice and ambition, of injustice and violence, by which
so many factions were formed, and the peace of the empire so often
and so fatally broken;" he declares, that "no religion was ever so
well proportioned, nor so well directed, as that of Christianity seemed
to be, to all these purposes." He adds, that " it had no tendency
to inspire that love of the country ,§ nor that zeal for the glory and
grandeur of it, which glowed in the heart of every Roman citizen
in the tirne ofthe commonwealth ; but it recommended what Con
stantine liked better, benevolence, patience, humility, and all the
softer virtues. "|| He alloweth, that " the gospel is in' all cases one
continued lesson of the strictest morality, of justice, of benevolence,
and of universal charity." He mentions " Christ's blaming his dis
ciples for been willing to call for fire from heaven against the Sama
ritans : And that the miracles wrought by him, in the mild and
beneficent spirit of Christianity, tended to the good of mankind."H
He observes, that " the .theology contained in the gospel lies in a
narrow compass. It is marvellous indeed, but it is plain, and it is
employed throughout to enforce natural religion."** After having
said, that " the articles of faith have furnished matter of contention
in, as well as frpm the apostolical age, and have added a motive! to
* Works, vol. iv. p. 314. t Ibid. p. 316. f Ibid. p. 394, 395.
§ That Christianity tends to produce and promote a true love to our country, in that
sense in which it is properly a virtue, see above, vol. i. p. 59, '60, marg. note.
|'[ Works, vol. iv. p. 4-33. f Ibid. p. 188, lt*9. ** Ibid. p. 261.

Let. XXXI. lord bolingbroke. 47]
that cruel principle, which was never known till Christians intro
duced it into the world, to persecution even for opinions ;" he adds,
that " the charge which the enemies of religion bring against Chris
tianity on this accoun-f.'is unjustly brought. These effects have not
been caused by the Gospel, but by the system raised upon it ; not
by the revelations of -God, but by the inventions of men."* He
professes a great concern for true Christianity in opposition to the
ology, and says, that "genuine Christianity was taught of God-" -f
And not to multiply passages for this purpose, he pronounces, that
" the Christian system of faith and practice was revealed by God
himself, and it is absurd and impious to assert, that the divine Logos
revealed it incompletely or imperfectly. Its simplicity and plain
ness showed, that it was designed to be the religion of mankind,
and manifested likewise the divinity of its original. "J
I have chosen to lay together these several passages relating to
Christianity in one view. And if we were to look no farther, we
should certainly entertain a very favourable opinion of Lord Boling
broke's sentiments with regard to the truth, the excellency, and
divine original, of the gospel of Jesus.
I shall here subjoin some reflections which have occurred to me in
reviewing these passages, and others of the like import, which are to
be found in his-Lordship's writings.
The first reflection is this : That there must certainly be a won
derful beauty and excellency in the religion of Jesus, considered in
its original purity and simplicity, which could force such acknow
ledgments from a person so strongly prejudiced against it, as his
Lordship appears to have been. According to the representation
he himself has been pleased to make of it, it was a most amiable and
most useful institution, whose natural tendency was directed to pro
mote the peace and happiness of .mankind. It contains all the duties
qf natural religion, and teaches them in the most plain and simple
manner: It is one continued lesson ofthe strictest morality, of justice,
of benevolence, and of universal charily : and tends to extinguish
those principles of avarice and ambition, of injustice and violence, which
have done so much mischief in the world, and disturbed the peace
and order of society. As its moral precepts are excellent, so its
positive^institutions are not only innocent but profitable, and extremely
proper to keep up the spirit qf religion. He acknowledges, that,
considered in its original simplicity, it was a most simple and intelli
gible rule of belief, worship, and practice ; that the theology con
tained in the Gospel is marvellous, but plain : and that the system qf
religion there taught is a complete system, to all the purposes of religion.
natural and revealed, and might have continued so, to the unspeak
able advantage of mtinkind, if it had been propagated with the same
simplicity with which it was taught by Christ himself. I think it
. plainly follows from this representation of the nature and tendency
of the Christian religion as taught by our Saviour and his apostles,
that those can in no sense be regarded as real friends to mankind,
* Works, vol. iv. 313. f Ibid, p. 319.— See also vol. iii. p. 339. X Ibid. p. 451,

472 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
who do what they can to subvert its authority, and thereby destroy
its influence on the minds of men, and who by artful insinuations, or
even open attempts, endeavour to bring true original Christianity
into contempt ; as it will appear this writer, notwithstanding all his
fair professions, hath done.
Another reflection that may be made on Lord Bolingbroke's con
cessions is this : that he has in effect given up several objections
which have been urged by the deistical writers, and on which great
stress has been laid, and has acknowledged them to be of no force
against the religion of Jesus as laid down in the gospel. It has
been pretended, that Christianity, or revealed religion, is not friendly
to civil sovereignty or government ; but he treats those that make
this objection, if designed against Christianity as revealed in the
Gospel, and not merely against the duties that have been superadded
to it, as falling below notice, and scarce deserving an answer ;* and
praises the policy of Constantine in endeavouring to establish Chris
tianity as the religion of the empire, as being the best fitted of all
religions to promote the public peace and order, to reform licentious
ness, to curb factions, and to infuse a spirit of moderation, and sub
mission to government. See the passages cited above from vol. iv.
p. 282. 433.
Again, Christianity, or revealed religion, hath been often objected
against on account of its positive precepts, or institutions, added to
the law of nature. But his Lordship thinks "it may be admitted,
that things entirely and exactly consistent with the law of our na
ture may be superadded to it by the same divine authority, and that
positive precepts may be given about things which are indifferent
by the law of our nature, and which become obligatory as soon as
they are enjoined by such positive precepts."+ And particularly
with regard to the positive institutions of Christianity, or the Chris
tian sacraments, as enjoined in the gospel, in their primitive simpli
city, "he acknowledges, in a passage above produced, that they were
extremely proper to keep up the spirit of true religion, and to pro
mote the observation of moral duties.*);
Another objection which hath been urged against Christianity, is
drawn from that spirit of persecution which hath obtained amongst
Christians on account of opinions in religion. But he saith, that
" the charge which the enemies of Christianity bring against
it on this account is unjustly brought ; that these effects have
not been caused by the gospel, but by the system raised upon
it ; not by the revelations of God, but by the inventions of
men." And he mentions Christ's blaming his disciples for being
willing to call for fire from heaven upon the Samaritans ; and that
all he instructed his apostles to do, even in cases of the most enor
mous crimes, was to separate sinners from the communion of the
faithful. §
There is no objection which hath been more frequently urged
* Works, vol. iv. p. 300, 301. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 547.
X Ibid. vol. iv. p. 301  See also ibid. p. 310, 311. 591.
§ Ibid. vol. iv. p. 188, 189. 313.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 473
against the Christian religion, than its teaching doctrines or articles
of belief that reason neither could discover, nor can comprehend. He
asserts that there are articles or doctrines of this kind in the gospel,
but that they are concisely and plainly enough expressed in the origi
nal gospel properly so called, which Christ taught, and which his four
Evangelists recorded ; though they have been since corrupted by
theology.* And speaking of " reasonable men who have received
the Christian revelation for genuine, after a sufficient examination
of the external and internal proofs," he says, " such men having
found nothing that makes it inconsistent with itself, nor that is
repugnant to any of the divine truths which reason and the works
of God demonstrate to them, will never set up reason in contradic
tion to it, on account of things plainly taught, but incomprehensible
as to their manner of being. If they did, their reason would be
false and deceitful'; they would cease to be reasonable men."f It is
true that he elsewhere saith, that "if the things contained in any
revelation be above reason, that is, incomprehensible, I do not say
in their manner of being, for that alone would not make them liable
to objection, but in themselves, and according to the terms in which
they are communicated, there is no criterion left by which to judge
whether they are agreeable or repugnant to the religion of nature
and of reason. They are not therefore to be received.""); But it is
to be considered, that when divines talk of things above reason in
the Christian system, all that they mean by it is, that they are
things not contrary to reason, but as to the manner of them incon
ceivable, and according to his own concession, it can be no objection
against the truth or divinity of revelation, that it containeth an
account of some things which are incomprehensible in their manner
qf being.
Another reflection that is proper to be made upon what Lord
Bolingbroke hath acknowledged with regard to the original Chris
tian revelation as laid down in the gospel of Jesus, is, that he hath
on several occasions seemed expressly and formally to own its
divine original. In some of the passages above cited, he directly
declares, that genuine Christianity was taught by God. That the
Christian system qf faith and practice was revealed by God himself.
And that the first publisher of Christianity proved his assertions by
his miracles. To which I shall add another remarkable passage in
the conclusion of this fourth Essay, which is concerning authority in
matters of religion. " Christianity," saith he, " genuine Chris
tianity, is contained in the gospel; it is the word of God. It
requires, therefore, our veneration and strict conformity to it."§ He
ought, therefore, if he were consistent with himself, on the autho
rity of that revelation, to receive what is there plainly revealed
concerning the moral attributes of God, concerning divine provi
dence as extending to the individuals of the human race, con-
* Works, vol. iv. p. 294: f Ibid. p. 384— See also p. 279.
X Ibid. vol. v. p. 546.
$ Ibid vol. iv. p. 631, 632.— See also ibid. p. 279. and vol. iii. p. 339.

474 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
cerning Christ's being the great Mediator between God and
man, and concerning our redemption by his blood, and con
cerning a state of future rewards and punishments. And yet he
hath endeavoured to subvert all these. Notwithstanding his pro
fessed regard for Christianity, he hath on several occasions used his
utmost efforts to weaken or destroy the proofs of its divine original,
to misrepresent and expose its doctrines and laws, those doctrines
which he himself declares to have been original doctrines of the
Christian religion. How far such a conduct is consistent with
that truth and candour, that honesty and simplicity of heart, which
become a sincere inquirer, and who declareth, that he hath nothing
but truth in view, may be left to any fair and impartial person to
determine. In' my- reflections on this part of Lord Bolingbroke's works,
the method I shall observe is this : I shall first consider those pas
sages that seem designed to strike at the authority of Christianity
in general ; and then shall proceed to consider the objections he
hath urged against some particular laws and doctrines of our holy
religion. With regard to Christianity in general, he runs a parallel, in the
seventh and eighth of his Fragments and Essays, between the law
of nature and Christianity. He compares the clearness and certainty
of the former with that of the latter. He compares, also, their
sanctions, and endeavours to show, that the law of nature rests on
fuller proofs than any that have been found or can be given, of the
divine institution of Christianity.* In all that he offers on this
head, he goes upon the supposition of the absolute clearness and
certainty of the law of nature to the whole human race ; and what
he has urged to this purpose has been considered in my ninth let
ter. But it may be easily shown, that the whole parallel- he there
draws between the law of nature and Christianity, and between the
proofs of the former and of the latter, is entirely impertinent. He
himself there declares, that " every friend to Christianity admits,
that the Christian law is nothing else than the law of nature con
firmed by a new revelationj and that this is what the worst of its
enemies does not deny, though he denies the reality of the revela
tion."-]- It is not true that the Christian law is nothing else than the
law of nature ; but that it comprehends it, that it clears and enforces
it, is very true. It does not take off from any rational argument or
evidence brought in favour of that law, and besides confirmeth it by
an express divine testimony. And must not common sense lead
every man to acknowledge, that it must be a mighty advantage
to have the law of nature thus farther cleared and confirmed?
The proofs therefore of Christianity, and of the law of nature, are
not to be opposed to one another. Both have a friendly harmony ;
and Christians have the great advantage of having both these
proofs in conjunction. Christianity supposeth the law of nature,
cleareth it where it was obscured, enforceth it by the strongest sanc-
* Works, vol.v. p. 90. et sen.. t Ibid. p. 93.

Let. XXai. lord bolingbroke. 475
tions, and addeth things which could not be known merely by that
law, and which yet it was of importance to mankind to be ac
quainted with. So that Christianity, as far as it relates to and
republishes the law of nature, has all the advantages which this
writer ascribes to that law, because it is that very law more clearly
published, and strongly confirmed ; and in this respect there is no
competition between them. And with respect to those things in
Christianity which are not clearly comprehended in that law, and
which we could not have discovered merely by own unassisted rea
son, it is not to be wondered at if they are not so obvious to our under
standings ; but as far as they are necessary to be known by us, they
are revealed in the gospel ; and we are not obliged to believe them
farther than they are there revealed. Nor shall those be condemned
for not believing them, who have had no opportunity of being
acquainted with, that revelation. Though our author, in order to
cast an odium on Christianity, after having observed, that " the
law of nature is universally given to all mankind," adds, that
" the greatest part of the world are invincibly ignorant of the first
principles of Christianity, without the knowledge of which, and
without faith in which, they are all condemned to eternal punish
ment."* We have seen that our author declareth Christianity to be the law
of nature enforced by a new revelation ; so that according to this
representation, it is a divine republication qf the law of nature. Yet
he elsewhere thinks proper to represent it as only a republication of
the doctrines of Plato ; and any one that considers the representa
tion he hath frequently made of that philosopher and his doctrines,
must be sensible that this is far from being designed as a compli
ment to the Christian revelation. Some account of his invectives
against him was given in the fifth Letter. He calls him a mad
theologist; and tells us, that no man ever dreamed so wildly as Plato
wrote; and that he' introduced a false light into philosophy, and
oftener led men out of the way of truth than into it. Yet he says, it
is strange to observe " the strange conformity there is between
Platonism and genuine Christianity 'itself, such as it is taught in the
original gospel. We need not stand to compare .them here. In
general, the Platonic and Christian systems have a very near resem
blance, qualis decet esse sororum, and several of the ancient fathers
and modern divines have endeavoured to make it appear still greater.
That this may give unbelievers occasion to say that if the doctrines
are the same, they must have been deduced from the same principle;
and to ask what that principle was, whether reason or revelation ?
If the latter, Plato must have been illuminated by the Holy Ghost,
and must have been the precursor of the Saviour, and of more impor
tance than St. John. He anticipated the gospel on so many princi
pal articles of belief and practice, that unbelievers will say, it was a
republication of the theology of Plato ; and that as the republica
tion was by divine revelation, the publication must have been so
* Works, vol, v. p. 91.

476 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
too ; and they will ask with a sneer, whether a man, whose passion
for courtezans and handsome boys inspired him to write so many
lewd verses, was likely to be inspired by the Holy Ghost ?"* This is
mean banter, taking advantage of the too great admiration some
particular persons have expressed for Plato. But he has not traced
the conformity between Platonism and genuine original Christianity,
under pretence that it was needless. He owns, that Plato blun
dered on. some divine truths :f That on some occasions he wrote
like a very pious and rational theist and moralist ; and that very ele
vated sentiments may be collected from his writings : That there is in
them a mixture of the brightest truths, and the foulest errors.% It is
not to be wondered at therefore, that there was in several instances,
a conformity between the doctrine of Plato, and that of the gospel,
But he himself acknowledges, that there were many things in his
scheme contrary to that of Christianity. He says, that "some of
Plato's writings abound in notions that are agreeable to the " Chris
tian system, and in others that are repugnant to it."§ That " far
from going about to destroy the pagan superstition, he refined it,
and made it more plausible, and more secure from the attacks to
which it was exposed before.''|| And that, accordingly, "Platonism
answered the purposes of those who opposed Christianity."!! I
would only farther observe, that there is no writer whom he repre
sents as so unintelligible as Plato ; and yet he intimates, that if he
had known and taught the peculiar doctrines of the gospel, " he,
who is so often unintelligible now would have been vastly more so,
and less fitted for the great work of reforming mankind."** This
is a very odd insinuation from one who has acknowledged, that true
original Christianity is a plain and intelligible system of belief and
practice : and that its simplicity and plainness shewed, that it was
designed to be the religion qf mankind, and manifested likeivise the
divinity qf its original.
It may be looked upon as a farther proof of his regard to Chris
tianity, that he represents it as an inconsistent scheme. He pre
tends, that the New Testament consisteth of two gospels, the one
published by our Saviour himself, and recorded by the evangelists,-
and the other by St. Paul.
He observes, that " Christ was to outward appearance a Jew,
and ordered his disciples to do what the scribes and pharisees who
sat in Moses's chair taught : and that when he commissioned his
apostles to teach and baptize all nations, he only meant if of the
Jews dispersed into all nations." He asserts, that, " the mystery
of God's taking the Gentiles to be his people without subjecting
them to circumcision, or the law of Moses, was inconsistent with
the declarations and practice of Jesus." +t He asks therefore, " if
this was the purpose of God, to take the Gentiles to be his people
under the Messiah, how came it that the Messiah himself gave no
instructions about it to his apostles, when he sent them to preach
* Works, vol. iv. p. 340. f Ibid. p. 348. X H»d- P- 345. 352. § Ibid. p. 344, 345.
Ibid. p. 355. 1 Ibid. p. 359. ** Ibid. vol. v. p. 226. tt Ibid. vol. iv. p. 305.

Let. XXai. lord bolingbroke. 477
his gospel to all nations? Why was the revelation of this important
mystery, so necessary at the first publication of the gospel, reserved
for St. Paul, who had been a persecutor? Shall we say, that this
eternal purpose of the Father was unknown to the Son ? Or, that
if it was known to him, he neglected to communicate it to the first
preachers of the gospel ?" He seems to think these questions un
answerable, and that " the perlness and impudence of the men that
pretend to account for these things deserve no regard."* And yet
it is no hard matter to solve these difficulties. The calling of the
Gentiles was originally included in our Saviour's scheme. It was a
remarkable part of the character ofthe Messiah, clearly pointed out
in the prophetical writings, by many express predictions. Our
Lord himself, during his own personal ministry, gave plain intima
tions of his design that way, and after his ascension into heaven in
structed his apostles in it by his Spirit, whom he sent to guide them
into all truth. And the gradual discovery of this, in a way fitted to
remove their prejudices, was conducted with admirable wisdom as
well as condescension.
Mr. Chubb had insisted on this objection at great length; and I
shall therefore refer to the remarks made upon that writer in the
fourteenth Letter : yet, upon no better foundation than this, his
Lordship hath taken upon him to affirm, that the " gospel St. Paul
preached was contradictory to that of Jesus Christ :" and that " he
taught several doctrines, which were directly repugnant to the word
and example of the Messiah." f And indeed our author hath on
many occasions discovered a particular prejudice against that great
apostle. He calls him a true cabbalistical architect, t a loose para-
phraser and cabbalistical commentator, as much at least as any an
cient or modem rabbi: and that the different manner of his preaching
the gospel, and that of the other apostles, " marks strongly the
different schools in which they had been educated, the school of
Christ, and the school of Gamaliel. "§ But nothing is more evident
to every one that reads the New Testament with attention, than that
there is a perfect harmony between St. Paul and the other apostles :
and that the scheme of religion taught in the gospels and in the
epistles is every-where the same. Such a harmony there is, as shows
they were all directed by the same spirit. The gospel which St.
Paul preached was what he received by revelation from Jesus Christ,
as he himself declares, Gal. i. 12. He had not learned it in the
school of Gamaliel. On the contrary, in that school he had im
bibed the strongest prejudices against the religion of Jesus, and
which nothing less than a power of evidence, which he was not able
to resist, could overcome. He was very well versed in tbe Jewish
learning; yet none of the apostles so frequently warned the Chris
tian converts against the Jewish fables, or speaks with such con
tempt of their vain traditions, their endless genealogies, their strifes
and questions about words, as he has done.
There are several invidious charges brought by our author against
* Works, vol. iv. p. 326. t Ibid. p. 328. X Ibid- vol. iii. p. 288.
§ Ibid. p. 327, 328.

478 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
this excellent person. He is pleased to represent him as a loose de-
claimer, as a vain-glorious boaster, as having been guilty of great
hypocrisy and dissimulation in his conduct towards the Jewish Chris
tians, as writing obscurely and unintelligibly, and that where he is
intelligible, he is absurd, profane, and trifling. * He particularly
instances in his doctrine concerning Fpredestination ; f though he
owns, that " this doctrine is very much softened, and the assumed
proceedings of God towards men are brought almost within the
bounds of credibility, by Mr. Locke's exposition of the ninth chapter
of the epistle to the Romans," which he calls a forced one, but
offers nothing to prove it so; and acknowledges, that this sense
might be admitted. $ He also charges him with teaching passive
obedience, and as employing religion to support good and bad govern
ments alike: § though any one that impartially considers the
apostle's doctrine in the passage he refers to, viz. the thirteenth
chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, will find it wise and excel
lent : Mr. Chubb had advanced the same charge, as well as most of
the others that are produced by Lord Bolingbroke against that emi
nent apostle : and that I may not be guilty of needless repetitions,
I shall refer to the remarks made on that writer in the fourteenth
Letter. His Lordship mentions that passage, 1 Cor. xi. 5. 14. about
women's prophesying with their heads uncovered, and that it is a
shameful thing for men to wear long hair, which he says, is the
most intelligible trifling that we find in the gospel. This is very im
properly brought in by the author here, where he proposes to show
that where St. Paul is not obscure he is profane and trifling ; for
this is generally acknowledged to be one of the obscurest passages in
St. Paul's Epistles. But this is no real objection against their au
thority. Some obscure and difficult passages must be expected in
the most excellent of ancient writings, especially in things that have
a special reference to the customs and usages of those times. He
is pleased to say, that the argument may not appear very conclusive,
nor indeed very intelligible to us : and if so, he has done wrong to
produce it as an instance of intelligible trifling: but he sneeringly
adds, that it was both, he doubts not, to the Corinthians. And I
doubt not they understood it better than we at this distance can
pretend to. He then mentions the apostle's directions to the
Corinthians with regard to the prudent and orderly exercise of those
spiritual gifts : and these directions cannot reasonably be turned to
the disadvantage of the apostle, since they are undeniably wise and
excellent. Among other charges which Lord Bolingbroke bringeth against
St. Paul, one is that of madness. He asks, " Can he be less than
mad, who boast a revelation superadded to reason to supply the
defects of it, and who superadds reason to revelation to supply the
defects of this too at the same time ? This is madness, or there is
no such thing incident to our nature." And he mentions several
* Works, vol. iii. p. 328. 330, 331. t Ibid. p. 331. 509. vol. v. p. 567.
X Ibid. p. 456. § Ibid. vol. iv. p. 509. 516.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 47!)
persons of great name as having been guilty of this madness, and
particularly St. Paul.* That reason and revelation are in their
several ways necessary, and assistant to each other, is easily con
ceivable, and so far from being an absurdity, that it is a certain
truth. But the stress of his Lordship's observation lies wholly in
the turn of the expression, and in the improper way of putting the
case. The revelation may be of signal use to assist and enlighten
our reason in the knowledge of things which we could not have
known at all, or not so certainly, by our own unassisted reason
without it, is plainly signified by St. Paul, and is what the whole
Gospel supposes. And on the other hand it is manifest, that reason
is necessary to our understanding revelation, and making a proper
use of it; and that in judging of that revelation, and of its meaning
and evidences, we must exercise .our reasoning faculties and powers:
i. e. revelation supposeth us to be reasonable creatures, and to have
the use of our reason, and addresseth us as such. But this doth
not imply that revelation is defective, or that reason is superadded *
to supply the defects of it. For let revelation be ever so sufficient
and perfect in its kind, or well fitted to answer the end for which it
is given, yet still reason is necessary to understand and apply it.
This is St. Paul's scheme, and there is nothing in it but what is
perfectly consistent. It is evident from his writings, that he sup
poseth the revelation which hath been given to be sufficient for all
the purposes for which it was designed, able to make us wise unto
salvation, and to instruct us in things of great importance, which
reason, if left merely to itself, could not have discovered. And at
the same time he supposeth those to whom the revelation is pub
lished to be capable of exercising their reasoning faculties, for ex
amining and judging of that revelation, and exhorteth them to do
so. And though he frequently asserteth his own apostolical au
thority, and the revelation he received from Jesus Christ, yet he
useth a great deal of reasoning in all his Epistles. Thus are reason
and revelation to be joined together, and are mutually helpful to
one another. And in this view there is a real harmony between
them. And what there i§ in this scheme that looks like madness,
it is hard to see.
His Lordship, in his prejudice against St. Paul, carrieth it so far
as to pronounce, that " St. Paul received nothing immediately from
Christ :" though this apostle himself, in the passage before referred
to> affirms, that he received the Gospel he preached, not of man,
neither was he taught it, but by tke revelation of Jesus Christ. He
adds, that " St. Paul had no apostolical commission, except that
which he assumes in the Acts of the Apostles, written by St. Luke,
and dictated probably by himself."f And again, that " he entered
a volunteer into the apostleship ; at least his extraordinary vocation
was known to none but himself." And if St. Paul dictated that
account- to St. Luke, it deserves the greatest credit, since he was
the properest person in the world to give an account of it. But the
* Works, vol. iv. p. 171. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 388, 389.

400 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
truth of his apostolical commission did not depend merely upon his
own word. It was made manifest by the most illustrious proofs and
credentials, to which he could with confidence appeal,* and was ac
knowledged by the other apostles, though this writer is pleased to
insinuate the contrary.-^ Indeed the plain meaning of his whole
charge here is, that St. Paul was an impostor, and that his call to
the apostolical office was entirely his own fiction. But the great
absurdity of this pretence has been so fully exposed in Sir George
Lyttleton's Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of St.
Paul, that it is perfectly needless to add any thing farther on that
head. I shall only observe, that whosoever with a candid and un
prejudiced mind considers the whole character and conduct of that
great apostle, as represented in the Acts of the Apostles, and the
temper and spirit which breathes in his admirable Epistles, will be
apt to think that never was there among mere men a more perfect
character than that of St. Paul. In him we may behold a shining
example of the most exalted and unaffected piety towards God, the
most fervent and active zeal for the divine glory, yet not a blind
enthusiastic heat, but a zeal according to knowledge, and conducted
with great prudence : the most extensive and disinterested charity
and benevolence towards mankind, and the most earnest and affec
tionate concern for their salvation and happiness ; the most steady
fortitude and constancy under the severest trials and sufferings,
which he endured with patience, and even with joy, supported and
animated by the earnest desire he had to serve the glorious cause of
truth and righteousness, and by the sublime hopes of an everlasting
reward in a better world for his faithful services in this. Never was
there a truer greatness of mind than that which he manifested. And
all this accompanied with a most amiable humility, and a great
tenderness of spirit in bearing with the weakness and infirmities of
others. He was a most glorious instrument in the hand of Provi
dence for promoting the sacred interests of pure and undefiled reli
gion in the world. Our author says, that Socrates was the apostle
ofthe Gentiles in natural religion, as St. Paul was in revealed. But
no instance can be brought of any one person whom the former con
verted from the prevailing polytheism and idolatry. And how
should this be expected, when he himself, as his Lordship owns-,
countenanced it by his own practice, and was for the religion estab
lished by the laws!% But the latter turned thousands in many dif
ferent nations from darkness unto light, and from serving idols to
serve the living and true God, and from the most abandoned vice
and dissoluteness of manners to the practice of virtue and righteous
ness ; which he performed in opposition to the seemingly most in
superable difficulties, and through a succession of the greatest
labours and sufferings that any one man ever endured. This has
always highly recommended him to the esteem and admiration of
those who have a zeal for true original Christianity. And on the
other hand, the enemies of our holy religion have always discovered
» 2 Cor. xii. 11, 12. t Gal. xi. 7, 8, 9. \ Works, vol. iv. p. 193.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 481
a peculiar aversion to this excellent person, who was so successful
an instrument in propagating it. And this seems to be the true
reason of that obloquy and reproach which Lord Bolingbroke has
been so industrious to fix on so admirable a character.
His real intentions towards Christianity will farther appear, if we
consider the attempts he hath made to invalidate the proofs and
evidences of it.
He frequently speaks with the utmost contempt of those that
insist upon the internal characters of a divine original, which are to
be observed in the revelation delivered in the holy Scriptures. By
rejecting the internal characters, he pretends to assert the authority
of the Bible, and very gravely advises the divines to confine them
selves to the external proofs, and to dwell very little on the internal
characters ; and represents them as talking a great deal of blasphemy
on this head."* And yet he himself, as appears from some of the
passages that have been above cited, has acknowledged several
things with regard to Christianity as taught in the gospels, which
have been deservedly reckoned among the internal characters, which
lead us to acknowledge that it came from God : such .as, the excel
lent tendency of its doctrines, precepts, and sacraments ; its being
one continued lesson ofthe strictest morality, qf justice, of charity, and
universal benevolence; its being a complete system, to all the purposes
of religion natural and revealed; its plainness and simplicity, which,
he says, shewed that it was designed to be the religion of mankind,
and manifested likewise the divinity of its original. It is true that
he charges those with madness, and something worse than madness,
who, in arguing concerning the internal characters, " pretend to
comprehend the whole economy of the divine wisdom from Adam
down to Christ, and even to the consummation of all things, and to
connect all the dispensations." And this is one part of his quarrel
with St. Paul, whom, as well as the divines, he very unfairly repre
sents as undertaking to show the sufficient reason of Providence in
every particular instance from the beginning of the world to the end
of it.f But however he is pleased to represent it, it is a noble con
templation, and highly for the honour of the sacred writings, that
there we may observe one and the same glorious plan carried on by
the divine wisdom and goodness from the beginning, for the recovery
and salvation of lapsed man : successive revelations communicated
at different times and in divers manners, and at the distance of
several ages from one another, yet all subservient to the same glori
ous purposes, and mutually confirming and illustrating each other:
the law and the prophets in their several ways conspiring to prepare
the way for the revelation of Jesus Christ, and to furnish divine
attestations to it. The religion carried on under the several dispen
sations, still for substance the same ; and whatever seeming variety
there may be in the parts, an admirable harmony in the whole.
His Lordship, speaking of what he calls tbe internal proofs of

* Works, vol. iii. p. 271, 272. vol. iv. p. 229
t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 271, 272. vol. iv. p. 129.
I I

482 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI
the Christian revelation, observes, in a sneering way, that " the
contents of the whole Christian system laid down in our scriptures
are objects of such a probability, as may force assent very reasonably
in such a case, without doubt; although a concurrence of various
circumstances, improved by the credulity of some men, and the
artifice of others, forced this assent in cases not very dissimilar."*
He has not thought fit to produce an instance of a false revelation,
whose evidence can be justly compared to that of Christianity. And
as to his expression ot forcing assent by a probability, it is, like
many others of his, very improper. No Christian talks of forcing
assent, nor would a forced belief have any great merit in it. But
that there are sufficient grounds to make it reasonable to assent to
it, is very true. And this is what his Lordship ought to have ac
knowledged, if, as he himself confesses, " it has all the proofs
which the manner in which it was revealed, and the nature of it,
allowed it to have."+ This is in effect to own, that the proofs of
Christianity are sufficient in their kind. And if this be the case, it
is, according to the rule he himself has laid down, unreasonable to
demand more. For he observes, that " common sense requires that
every thing proposed to the understanding, should be accompanied
with such proofs as the nature of it can furnish. He who requires
more, is guilty of absurdity : he who requires less, of rashness.""];
With regard to the external proofs of Christianity, his Lordship
does not, as several ofthe deistical writers have done, deny miracles
to be proper or sufficient proofs. On the contrary, he sometimes
affects to cry up the mighty efficacy of miracles as alone sufficient,
without any consideration of the goodness of the cause for which
they were wrought, or examination of the doctrines they attest ;
and finds fault with " that maxim as contrary to common sense,
that is not for admitting miracles as proofs of a divine original,
without consideration of the cause or doctrines : since real miracles
can be operated by no power but that of God, nor for any purpose,
by consequence, but such as infinite wisdom and truth direct and
sanctify. "§ Accordingly he declares, speaking of the Christian
revelation, that "considering the glorious person by whom it was
brought, and the stupendous miracles that were wrought to confirm
it, we might be ready to conclude, that it must have forced con
viction, and have taken away even a possibility of doubt." || And
he repeats it again, that " Christianity was confirmed by miracles,
and the proof was no doubt sufficient for the conviction of all those
who heard the publication of this doctrine, and saw the confirma
tion of it. One can only wonder that any such remained uncon
vinced." 1f His design was undoubtedly to insinuate, that the
miracles were not really wrought; because, if they had been
wrought, they must have convinced all those that saw them. To
talk of miracles as forcing conviction is to carry it to an unreason
able extreme, as any man must be sensible, that considers human
• Works, vol. v. p. 93. t Ibid. p. 91. X U'id vol. iii. p. 246.
§ Ibid. vol. iv. p. 227, 228. || Ibid, p. 461. ^ Ibid. p. 91.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 483
nature, and the mighty influence of prejudices, passions, and
worldly interests. We have however his concession, that miracles
are sufficient for convincing those who saw them : and if so, they
must be proportionably sufficient for the conviction of those who
have a reasonable ground of assurance, that these miracles were
really wrought, though they were not themselves eye-witnesses of
them. The original proof of Christianity therefore was by his own
account every-way sufficient. The only question that remains is,
whether we have proper evidence to convince us that these miracles
were actually performed. And of this we have evidence sufficient
to satisfy every candid and impartial enquirer, and all that could
be reasonably insisted upon in such a case. For the proof of this I
shall refer to what has-been already observed in my fourth Letter,
in answer to Mr. Hume.
The most remarkable of all the miracles by which the divine
authority of the Christian religion is confirmed, is the resurrection
of Jesus Christ. And as to this, his Lordship observes, that
" Christ scarce showed himself to the few who were said to have
seen him after his resurrection in such a manner, as they could
know by it certainly that it was he whom they had. seen. I say the
few, because St. Paul, who had not probably ever seen Jesus, de
serves no credit when he affirms against the whole tenor of- the
gospels, that he and above five hundred brethren at once had seen
him after his resurrection." He has here plainly let us know, that
after all his professed regard to Christianity, he is very willing to
deny that which is the principal proof of our Saviour's divine mission,
and to which he himself ultimately appealed as such. But we have
nothing but, confident assertions, after his Lordship's manner, and
a bold charging St. Paul with a falsehood, without the least proof:
for as to his pretence, that it is contrary to the whole tenor of the
gospels, there is no foundation for it. The more to expose St. Paul,
he represents it as if he had affirmed, that he himself was present,
and saw Jesus at the same time that he was seen of five hundred
brethren at once. Whereas he saith no such thing, but rather the
contrary, 1 Cor. xv. 6. 8. But as to Christ's being seen by so many
persons, St. Paul speaks of it as a thing certainly known, and that
the greater part of them were then alive when he wrote to the
Corinthians. And the question is, whether St. Paul is to be be
lieved in a fact which he publicly affirmed in that very age, and for
the truth of which he appeals to great numbers of persons then
living, or this writer, who, at the distance of seventeen hundred
years, gives us his own word for it that there was no such thing?
But I shall not need to add any thing "farther on this subject
here, having considered it so fully in the twelfth Letter of this
volume, which contains remarks on the Resurrection of Jesus con
sidered. The accounts of the extraordinary facts whereby Christianity was
attested, as well as of its original doctrines, are transmitted to us
in the sacred writings of the New -Testament, particularly in those
of the Evangelists, and in the Acts of the Apostles. And it has
l i 2

484 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
been often shown, that never were there any writings which carry
greater marks of purity, simplicity, and uncorrupted integrity, and
of an impartial regard to truth, or which have been transmitted with
a clearer and a more continued evidence. With regard to the writ
ings of the Evangelists, Lord Bolingbroke hath himself acknow
ledged, that, " it is out of dispute, that we have in our hands the
gospels of Matthew and John, who gave themselves out for eye
and ear-witnesses of all that Christ did and taught. That two
channels were as sufficient as four to convey those doctrines to the
world, and to preserve them in their original purity. The manner
too in which these Evangelists recorded them, was much better
adapted to this purpose than that of Plato, or even of Xenophon,
to preserve the doctrines of Socrates. The Evangelists did not con
tent themselves to give a general account of the doctrines of Jesus
Christ in their own words, nor presume in feigned dialogues to
make him deliver their opinions in his own name. They recorded
his doctrines in the very words in which he taught them, and they
were careful to mention the several occasions, on which he delivered
them to his disciples or others. If therefore Plato and Xenophon
tell us with a good degree of certainty what Socrates taught, the
two Evangelists seem to tell us with much more what the Saviour
taught and commanded them to teach."* He finds fault indeed
with Erasmus for making Christ to say to his disciples, in his para
phrase on the first chapter of the Acts, that " the Holy Spirit
would not only recal to their minds all he had taught them, but
suggest likewise unto them whatever it might be necessary for them
to know." And he adds, that " cavillers will say that these words
were added by Erasmus to the text for reasons very obvious, and
are not contained in the text." But there is certainly very little
ground for such a cavil, since it appears from the sacred text itself,
that, our Saviour did both promise to send his Spirit to bring all
things to their remembrance, whatsoever he had said unto them, and
also to lead them into all truth, and instruct them in things in
which he himself had not fully instructed them during his personal
ministry, because they were not then able to bear them. John xiv.
26. xvi. 12, 13, 14. And whereas he urgeth, that " if we do not
acknowledge the system of belief and practice which Jesus left
behind him to be complete and perfect, we must be reduced to the
greatest absurdity, and to little less than blasphemy ; and that it
must be otherwise said, that he executed his commission imper
fectly." t It will appear, if the matter be rightly considered, that
it was no way dishonourable to our Saviour, that there were several
things more explicitly revealed to the apostles afterwards, than was
done during his personal ministry. Some things were not proper
to be openly and distinctly published till after Christ's resurrection :
nor were his disciples fully prepared for receiving them before that
time. He himself told them before his passion, that there were
some things they did not know then, but should know afterwards.
* Works, vol. iv. p. 390. t Ibid. p. 315, 316.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 485
And the revelation published by his apostles, according to his com
mission, and under the influence of his Spirit, and by power derived
from him, was as truly the revelation of Jesus Christ, as St. Paul
calls it, as that which he delivered himself in the days of his personal
ministry; nor did it really differ from it in any article, but more
fully explained several things, than was seasonable, or could be
conveniently done, before. So that Christ was faithful to the com
mission he had received, and the whole was conducted with admi
rable wisdom, and condescending goodness.
Notwithstanding the fair acknowledgment Lord Bolingbroke had
made of the credibility of the Gospels which are now in our hands,
he hath thrown out several hints which are plainly designed to
destroy the credit of them. Thus he talks of a multitude of dif
ferent Gospels which were composed in the first ages, he thinks,
no less than forty — and asks, " If the gospels received into the canon
are favourable to the orthodox belief, how do we know that the
other gospels were exactly conformable to these ?" He talks, as
Mr. Hobbes had done before him, as if " the authenticity of the
four Gospels depended on the council of Laodicea, which admitted
four, and rejected the rest ;" and adds, " that every church judged
ofthe inspiration of authors, and of the divine authority of books ;
and those books were canonized, in which every particular church
found the greatest conformity with their own sentiments."* But
this is very unfairly represented. There is nothing capable of a
clearer proof, than that there was a general agreement in the churches
throughout the world, from the first age of Christianity, in receiv
ing the four Gospels, the Acts ofthe Apostles, and St. Paul's Epis
tles ; and that the spurious gospels he speaks of were never gene
rally received in the Christian church as of divine authority : and
that the primitive Christians were very careful and scrupulous not
to receive any books into the sacred canon, but those of whose au
thority they had sufficient proofs. Nothing can be more absurd,
and more contrary to plain undeniable fact, than to pretend that the
sacred books of the New Testament were not looked upon as au
thentic ahd divine before the council of Laodicea, which was not
held till after the middle of the fourth century. They were not first
made so by that council, which only declared what had been long
before received as of divine authority in the Christian church. 1
need not say any more upon this subject in this place, but shall
refer to the fourth Letter of this volume, which contains some
account of Toland's Amyntor, and the answers that were made to
it. To which may be added, what I have offered in the Reflections
on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Use of History, at
the end of this volume.
In order to weaken the credit of the original sacred records of the
Christian religion, his Lordship hath further observed, that "in
other historians, if the passages which we deem genuine should be
spurious, if others should be corrupted or interpolated, and if the
* Works, vol. iv. p. 401, 405.

486 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
authors should have purposely or through deception disguised the
truth, or advanced untruth, no great hurt could be done ;" but that
" in the Scripture, besides all the other circumstances necessary to
constitute historical probability, it is not enough that the tenor of
facts and doctrines be true ; the least error is of consequence." He
produces two instances to prove it, neither of which relate to any
Scripture expressions at all. — And then he adds, that "when we
meet with any record cited in history, we accept the historical proof,
and content ourselves with it, of how many copies soever it be the
copy. But this proof would not be admitted in judicature, as Mr.
Locke observes, nor any thing less than an attested copy of the
record." And he thinks, that " if such a precaution be necessary in
matters of private property, much more is it necessary that we re
ceive nothing for the word of God, that is not sufficiently attested to
be so." He takes notice of what the reverend Dr. Conybeare, late
Lord Bishop of Bristol, has said in answer to this ; of whom he
speaks with a respect which is extremely just, but which, consider
ing his usual manner of treating the Christian divines, could scarce
have been expected from him, towards one who had distinguished
himself in defending the Christian cause. The answer df Dr.
Conybeare which he refers to is this : " That the ground of this
proceeding in civil causes seems to be, that the original re
cord, or an attested copy, is capable of being produced ; and
that therefore to offer any distant proof might look as if some
art were intended to corrupt matters, and disguise the truth.
But it is not in the nature of things possible to produce the
originals or attested copies of the Scriptures." This appeareth
to me to be a good observation. But his Lordship is not satisfied
with it. He answers, that " the reason why the copy of a copy is
refused in proof, is not solely because the original or an attested
copy may be had, but because the proof would be too distant
whether they could be had or no." — And he thinks " if the rule be
thought reasonable in the one case, it cannot be thought, without
absurdity, unreasonable in the other. — However it happens, the
want of an original or of an attested copy is a want of proof."* But
it is not the want of any proof that can be reasonably desired, or
that is possible to be had, or that is necessary in any cases of the
like kind. By the consent of all mankind, there may be sufficient
evidence ofthe truth and authority of ancient writings to convince
any reasonable person, though neither the originals, nor any at
tested copies of the originals, be now remaining.-f- And the man
* Works, vol. iv. p. 272.
' How long the originals of tbe apostolic writings continued in the churches, we
cannot take upon us certainly to determine. Whether the noted passage of Tertullian,
in which he speaks of the authentic^ litera apostolorum as still read in the apostolical
churches, relateth to the original manuscripts of the apostolic writings, or not, about
which the learned are not agreed, it is very possible, and not at all improbable, that
some of the originals might have continued to that time. And considering how long
pieces of that kind may be preserved, we are not removed at so vast a distance from
the originals as may appear at first view. In the year 1715, when Cardinal Ximenes
set forward the Complutensian edition of the Scriptures, there were some manuscripts

Let. A1\I. LORD BOLINGBROKE.

4H7

would only render himself ridiculous that should reject them as
unworthy of credit, and give no other reason for rejecting them, but
the want of such originals or attested copies. And why should a
condition be insisted on as necessary with regard to the Scriptures,
which would be accounted absurd to the last degree, if insisted on
with regard to any other ancient writings whatsoever ? To which
it may be added, that when great numbers of copies are taken from
an original, and got into many hands, and dispersed into various
parts, by comparing these copies there arises a stronger proof in the
nature of things, to satisfy a reasonable person, that those writings
have not been materially corrupted or falsified, than if there were
only one single copy remaining, though it should be attested by a
living witness to have been faithfully copied and compared with the
original; which yet by the author's own acknowledgment would
be sufficient in a court of judicature. It is manifest, that there
would be more room to suspect a fraud or imposition in this case
than in the other. As to what he alleges, that it is of much
greater importance to guard against any mistakes in the word of
God than in any thing that relates to matters of private property,
and that therefore as great or even greater precautions are necessary
with regard to the former than the latter, it must be acknowledged,
that if the revelation were of such a nature, that it consisted in a
single precise point, as often is the case of a deed to be produced in
evidence in a court of judicature, where a single expression or clause
may determine the whole, and gain or lose the cause, there might
be some pretence for insisting on the strictest nicety of proofs, even
as to all the several particular clauses and forms of expression, be
cause a single mistake might be of the worst consequence, and
defeat the design of the whole. But it is manifest this is not the
case with regard to the revelation contained in the holy Scriptures.
The doctrines there taught, and precepts there enjoined, the pro
mises there made, the important facts there related, are so often
repeated and referred to, and placed in such various lights, that
nothing less than a general corruption, which could not have been
effected, could defeat the design for which that revelation was
given. If a particular passage was altered or interpolated, still there
would be many others to preserve to us the substance of that reve
lation, and to prevent the wrong use that might be attempted to be
made of such a passage. There is not therefore so scrupulous a
nicety and exactness required in this case as in the other. The
made use of which were looked upon to be then twelve hundred years old. The famous
Alexandrian manuscript presented by Cyrillus Lucaris to our King Charles I. though
learned men are not quite agreed about its age, is universally allowed to be of very high
antiquity. Dr Grabe thinks it might have been written about the latter end of the
fourth century. Others, as Dr. Mill, suppose it was not written till near the end of
the fifth century. If we take the latter computation, it may fairly be supposed, that
there were at that time, viz. at the close of the fifth century, copies two or three hun
dred years old ; and if the Alexandrian manuscript was copied from one of this sort,
which is no unreasonable supposition, this will bring us to the third or latter end ol the
second century, when probably the very originals, or at least several copies taken from
the originals, were in being.

488 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
divine wisdom hath so ordered it, that the revelation was originally
contained in several writings, published by different persons, and
copies taken of them at different times, all confirming one another,
and which render a general corruption of that revelation impractica
ble. The account of the facts there given is not confined to one
book, nor are the articles of religion there mentioned merely men
tioned once for all, or drawn up in one form or system ; but the
facts are so often referred to, and the articles or doctrines so often
repeated, and delivered on so many different occasions, that no
mistakes in particular passages, or in a particular copy or copies,
could destroy the intent or use of the original revelation.
It is with the same view of weakening and invalidating the evi
dence of Christianity, that his Lordship is pleased to observe what
hath been often urged by others of the deistical writers before him,
that " the external evidence of the Christian revelation is diminished
by time." This he represents as " so evident that no divines would
be so ridiculous as to deny it."* And after seeming to grant, in a
passage cited above, that the proof of Christianity, by miracles, was
sufficient for the conviction of all those who heard the publication
of this doctrine, and saw the confirmation of it, he adds, that " this
proof became in a little time traditional and historical; and we
might be allowed to wonder how the effect of it continued and in
creased too, as the force of it diminished, if the reasons of this phe
nomenon were not obvious in history. "f As he has not thought fit
to mention those reasons, no notice can be taken of them. But he
ought not to have represented it as a thing which is universally ac
knowledged, that the external evidence of Christianity is diminished
by time. The absurdity of that maxim, that the certainty and
credibility of moral evidence is continually diminishing in proportion
to the length of time, has been often exposed ; particularly by Mr.
Ditton in his Treatise on the Resurrection, part ii. The evidence
of Christianity hath in some respects increased instead of being
diminished, since the first publication of it; especially the proof's
arising from the wonderful propagation ofthe gospel, contrary to all
human appearance, notwithstanding the amazing difficulties it had
to encounter with ; and from the accomplishment of many remark
able predictions which they that lived in the first age of Christianity
could not see the completion of.*f To talk of the proofs becoming
traditional and historical may pass with those that govern them
selves by sounds, as if the words traditional and historical, and
doubtful and uncertain, were terms of the same signification ; when
every one knows that many facts come to us by tradition and history
with such an evidence, that no reasonable man can doubt of them
any more than of what he hears or sees. He pronounceth indeed,
according to his manner, with a decisive tone, that " it was not pos
sible, that traditions derived from the first and through the most
early ages of Christianity, should convey either facts or doctrines
* Works, vol. iv. p. 269, 270. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 91.
X This is fully shown by Mr. Le Moine on Miracles, p. 252—280.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 439
down with a due authenticity and precision, unless a continued
miracle had subsisted to alter the nature of things, and to produce
effects repugnant to their causes."* This is very positively deter
mined ; but we have no proof of it but his own authority. And if
it be understood not merely of facts or doctrines delivered down by
oral tradition, which for the most part cannot be much depended
upon, but of facts or doctrines contained in the sacred writings, there
is no real foundation for this assertion. We have proof sufficient to
convince any reasonable person, as I shall hereafter show.f that
those writings were published in the first age of the Christian
Church, whilst the apostles, and their immediate companions, the
first publishers of Christianity, were yet alive. In which age, if
any had attempted to corrupt those writings in the accounts of doc
trines and facts, such an attempt must have been unavoidably de
tected and exposed. And in the age immediately succeeding, those
writings became so generally dispersed and known, so many copies
of them were taken, and spread through different countries, they
were had in such veneration among Christians, and so constantly
read in their religious assemblies, that a general corruption of them
would have been an impossible thing. Nor can any time be fixed
upon from that age to this, in which such a general corruption of
them could have been accomplished : and all attempts to prove such
a corruption have been evidently vain and ridiculous, and have
turned only to the confusion of those who have pretended it. As
to what he urges about the false apostles and teachers in the first
age, and their high pretensions to revelations and extraordinary gifts,
and the many sects which were then formed ; and that though the
apostles opposed them, " it was often without effect, and always
with great difficulty, as we may judge by that which St. Paul had
to maintain his authority in the church of Corinth, and others ;"J
this is so far from diminishing the original evidence of Christianity,
that it rather confirms it. Since the evidence brought for the true
Christian religion by the apostles and first publishers of it, must
have been exceeding strong and cogent, and their authority, which
had nothing but the force of truth, and the attestations given to
their divine mission, to support it, must have been on a very solid
basis, which was able to overcome all those complicated difficulties,
arising from open enemies without, Jews and heathens, and from
false brethren within, and the scandals and offences of the several
sects which sprung up under various leaders, some of them persons
of great parts and subtilty, and who put on very specious appear
ances. What strong proofs of a divine original, and what a mighty
energy must have accompanied genuine primitive Christianity, by
which it triumphed over all the apparently insuperable difficulties
and oppositions of all kinds, which it had to encounter with, even
at its first appearance !
* Works, vol. iv. p. 398.
t See Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Use of History.
X Works, vol. iv. p. 398.

490 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
The propagation and establishment of Christianity, taking it in
all its circumstances, is indeed a most astonishing event, and has
been always justly regarded as furnishing an argument of great
weight to prove its divine original, and the truth of the extraordi
nary facts and attestations by which it was confirmed. Lord
Bolingbroke was sensible of this, and therefore has done what he
could to take off the force of it, by endeavouring to account for the
spreading of Christianity without any thing extraordinary or super
natural in the case. To this purpose he observes, that " indulgence
to the Jews and to the Gentiles, in order to gain both, was a funda
mental principle of apostolical conduct from the first preaching of
the Gospel : and that by such prudent conduct the Gospel was suc
cessively propagated, and converts flocked apace into the pale of
Christianity from these different and opposite quarters."* He treats
this, as if it were a piece of political conduct in St. Paul and the
other apostles, in which they deviated from the original plan laid
down by our Saviour himself. But this is a great mistake. The
taking the Jews and Gentiles into the Christian Church, and unit
ing them both into one body, was part of the original plan of Chris
tianity, which was evidently designed by the great Author of our
holy religion, in accomplishment of the glorious scheme formed
by the divine wisdom from the beginning, and which had been
clearly pointed out in the ancient prophecies. But so far was the
indulgence shown to the Gentiles, and the incorporating them into
the Christian Church along with the Jews, from helping to bring
the Jews into it, that it was one of the greatest obstacles to their en
tering into the pale of Christianity, and raised in them strong preju
dices against it, which had so far possessed the minds even of the
apostles, that it was with great difficulty, and by degrees, that they
themselves were brought to embrace this part of the Christian
scheme. Nor can it be supposed that St. Paul, who had been
educated in the school of Gamaliel, and in the strictest Pharisaical
notions, for which. he was extremely zealous, would of himself have
ever formed such a scheme, in opposition to all his prejudices, if it
had not been, as he himself affirms, communicated to him by a
divine revelation, which came to him with an evidence that abso
lutely convinced him, and overpowered all his prejudices.
With regard to the Gentiles, the taking them into the Christian
Church was only an admitting them into the body of those who
professed the belief and acknowledgment of a crucified Saviour.
And what was there in this to allure or engage them to forsake their
ancient religion, and those superstitions and idolatries to which they
were so strongly addicted ? To tell the Jews, that they should form
one Church with the Gentiles, whom they looked upon with disdain,
as utterly unworthy of such a privilege ; and to tell the Gentiles,
that they should form one Church with the Jews, for whose religion
and nation, his Lordship observes, that they had a contempt and
aversion ; and that they should with them be reckoned among the
* Works, vol. iv. p. 316.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 491
disciples of a crucified Jesus, that is, of a Jew that had been put to
a cruel and ignominious death by the heads of his own nation, and
whom they were to acknowledge for their Saviour and theiraLord ;
could this possibly have been an inducement either to Jews or Gen
tiles to embrace Christianity, which was so opposite to the prejudices
of both, if it had not been for the conspicuous evidences of a divine
attestion accompanying it ?
Another way he takes of accounting for the propagation of Chris
tianity is this : that " no ages nor countries could be more prepared
to adopt every theological and metaphysical notion, even the most
extravagant and least intelligible, than that wherein the Christian
religion was first published and propagated."* And he frequently
intimates, that the heathen philosophy, especially the Platonic, had
greatly helped forward the spreading of the Christian faith. If this
had been the case, one would have expected, that the chief harvest
of converts to Christianity, at its first appearance, would have been
among the philosophers and metaphysicians, and those who were
bred up in their schools. But it is evident the fact was otherwise.
No persons were more generally averse to the Christian scheme, than
the several sects of philosophers in the heathen world, who opposed
it with all the learning and subtilty they were masters of. And
indeed it was in some of its fundamental principles, directly oppo
site to their favourite notions and prejudices. Nor could it be ex
pected, that they who valued themselvesjso highly upon their learning,
wisdom, and eloquence, would submit to be the disciples of a cruci
fied Jesus, or learn their religion from such persons as the apostles
were. The doctrine of salvation through Christ crucified, was fool
ishness to the proud Greeks, who pretended to seek after ivisdom,
and was not agreeable to any of their schemes. And so far was St.
Paul, the most learned of the apostles, from blending the Pagan
philosophy with the Christian system which he preached, that he
thought it necessary to warn the Christian converts against it.
" Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain
deceit." Col. ii. 8.
Another thing he mentions as having been a great advantage to
the propagation of Christianity was, that " great collections were
made, and every church had a common purse. By these means they
supported their poor ; and every man who embraced Christianity
being sure not to want bread, the Gospel was more effectually pro
pagated, and great numbers of the lowest rank of people were
brought into the pale."f One would be apt to think by his repre
sentation, that the Christians were for taking in all the poor that
offered themselves, idle persons who only wanted to be maintained,
in order to gain a number of converts and proselytes. But this is
a very wrong representation. Every one knows, that great care was
taken in the admitting persons. into the Christian Church. They
were to have a good assurance both of their faith and of their
morals. No idle poor were- to be supported. On the contrary, they
* Works, vol. iv. p. 337. t Ibid. p. 422.

492 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXh
were discountenanced, and were treated as persons that walked dis
orderly. It was a constitution established by apostolical authority
as in the name of Christ, that if " any would not work, neither
should he eat ;" and that every man should " work with quietness,"
and " eat his own bread ;" and that he should " labour, working
with his hands that which is good, that he might have to give to
him that needeth." 2 Thess. iii. 10—12. Eph. iv. 28. That
spirit of charity and brotherly love which prevailed among the first
Christians, was a noble effect of the Gospel of Jesus; and that
which so opened their hearts and hands was the full conviction and
persuasion they had of the truth and divinity of our holy religion.
Thus faith worked by love. As to the reflections he makes upon
their selling their possessions, and laying the money at the apostles'
feet, from whence he concludes, that less than the whole would not
satisfy the Church, this and the case of Ananias and Sapphira, are
considered in the remarks on Chubb's posthumous works in
Letter XIV. p. 189. et. seq. to which I choose to refer rather
than.be guilty of unnecessary repetitions.
It is a topic often insisted upon by the deistical writers, that
revealed religion, particularly the Christian revelation, has been of
little or no advantage for promoting the reformation of mankind.
Lord Bolingbroke seems to lay a particular stress upon this. He
says, " It may be a full answer to all that Dr. Clarke had advanced
against the heathen philosophers, and their being sufficient for the
instruction and reformation of mankind, to ask, Whether that refor
mation which the heathen philosophers could not bring about effec
tually, has been effected under the Jewish or Christian dispensation ?"*
What he saith concerning the effects of the Jewish dispensation
hath been above considered ; I shall here take notice of what he
hath observed with regard to the effects of Christianity. He assert
eth, that " the world hath not been effectually reformed, nor any one
nation in it, by the promulgation of. the Gospel, even where
Christianity flourished most."t And after mentioning the Chris
tian martyrs and saints, of whom he frequently speaks with great
contempt, he observes, that " as to holiness and austerity of life,
that of particular men, or of some particular orders of men, will be
far from proving the reformation of the world by Christianity ; since
there were formerly among the heathens, Chaldeans, Gymnosophists,
and are now among them and the Mahometans, instances of
as great or greater austerity.":): But he has not fairly represented
the argument brought to prove the reformation of the world by
Christianity. In order to judge of this, it is necessary to consider
the state of the world when Christianity first appeared. Not only
were the nations universally involved in the grossest polytheism and
idolatry, but never was there an age more immersed in vice, and all
manner of wickedness. The picture St. Paul draws of it, Rom. i.
21. 32. shocking as it seems to be, is a very just representation of
the general state of the heathen world. But in proportion as the
* Works, vol. v. p. 256. t Ibid. p. 258. "' Ibid. p. 261. et seq.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 493
gospel prevailed, many myriads were "turned from idols to serve
the living and true God," brought from the most stupid idolatry to
the pure adoration of the Deity, and from the most abominable
vices to the practice of virtue and righteousness. He himself acknow
ledges, that " our Saviour at his coming found the whole world in a
state of error concerning the first principle of natural religion,
namely, the unity and perfections of God, though not of absolute
darkness; and that the spreading of Christianity has contributed to
destroy polytheism and idolatry."* And he observes, that " Eusebius,
in the first book of his evangelical preparation, has given a long
catalogue of absurd laws and customs, contradictory to the law of
nature in all ages and countries, for a very good purpose, to show in
several instances, how such laws and customs as these have been
reformed by the Gospel."*!" He takes notice, indeed of " the faults
there were among the Christian. converts, for which the apostle re
proves them ; but it is manifest from many passages in the New
Testament, that wonderful was the reformation which was then
wrought in the religion and manners of men."*}; The primitive
Christians were, taking them generally, the most pious and virtuous
body of men that ever appeared in the world. And though some
times the ancient Christian writers, in the ardour of their zeal, com
plain of the corruption and degeneracy that are growing among
them, as Cyprian particularly has done, especially in his book " De
Lapsis," whose testimony our author more than once refers to, yet it
appeareth from many passages in their writings, that the body of
the Christians was then remarkably distinguished by the purity of
their lives and manners from the Pagans. One of the topics they
constantly insist upon in their writings against the heathens, and in
their apologies for Christianity, is the mighty change that it wrought
in the lives and manners of those who embraced it. And though
his Lordship banters Lactantius for the challenge he makes, in a
passage to which Dr. Clarke refers, yet this I think may be plainly
concluded from it, that the good effects wrought by the Christian
religion, in reforming those who were converted to it, were so mani
fest, that their adversaries themselves were not able to deny it. And
accordingly, we have express testimonies of pagan writers to this
purpose. That of Pliny is very remarkable, and well known. And
even Julian, notwithstanding all his prejudices, in his Epistle to
Arsacias, recommends the purity and charity of the Christians, and
of their priests, to the imitation of the Pagans, and represents it as
one cause of the progress Christianity had made ; though no doubt
they were then degenerated from what they had been in the first
ages. As to the present state of the Christian world, his Lordship
thinks " it will not be said, that luxury and debauchery have been
restrained by Christianity. Where is the court or city in which
Christianity is professed, to which that phrase might not be applied,
Daphnicis moribus vivere ?" But there needs little observation to
* Works, vol. iv. p. 243. t Ibid- vo1- v- P- 10°-
X See I Cor. vi. 9, 10, 11  Eph. iv. 18. 24.— Gal. v. 24.— 1 Thess. i. 3. 9, 10.—
Col. i. 6. — 1 Pet. iv. 3, 4.

494 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXI.
convince us, that the corruption and dissoluteness he speaks of is
chiefly to be found among those who have little more of Christianity
than the name, and who are in reality indifferent to all religion.
And if the restraints of the Christian religion were removed, the
corruption would certainly be much greater and more general than
it is. Many thousands, who would otherwise be very corrupt and
dissol-ute, are engaged by the motives and precepts of Christianity
to lead a sober, righteous, and godly life. A real Christian walking
according to the rules of the Gospel, and I doubt not that, notwith
standing the corruption complained of, there are still great numbers
of such, forms a far more complete and excellent character for virtue,
taken in its j ust extent, as comprehending rational piety and devo
tion, and extensive benevolence, and exemplary purity of manners,
than is to be found among the most admired Pagans. And, indeed,
Christians are taught to keep themselves pure from several prac
tices which the heathens scarce looked upon to be any crimes at all.
As to what he mentions of the cruel wars, persecutions, and massa
cres, among Christians, he himself acknowledges, that no part of
this ought to be ascribed to the Gospel, nor can be reconciled to the
principles of it.* The most effectual way therefore of promoting real
piety, virtue and charity, would be to endeavour to engage men to a
closer adherence to the doctrines and laws of Christianity, and, in
stead of setting them loose from its sacred restraints, to enforce its
important motives upon their hearts and consciences.
I need not take any particular notice of what his Lordship hath
offered against the Christian revelation, drawn from its not having
been universally published in all nations and ages, f The chief
force of what he hath urged depends upon this supposition, that,
according to the gospel, all those should be damned, that do not
believe in Christ, whether they ever heard of him or not, damned,
as he expresses it, even in their involuntary ignorance ;% which is
expressly contrary to the tenor of St. Paul's reasoning in the second
chapter of the ;£pistle to the Romans. The declarations made in
the gospel of the necessity of believing in Christ, and the punish
ment of those who do not believe, plainly relate to those who have
an opportunity of being acquainted with the Christian revelation.
I shall only farther observe, that whereas it has been often urged
by the advocates for Christianity, that it appears from the analogy
of the divine procedure, that God may, in a consistence with his
wisdom and goodness, grant to some men and some nations much
greater helps and means for knowledge and moral improvement than
to others, our author hath no way of avoiding this, but by boldly
asserting, in contradiction to manifest fact and experience, that all
men have the same means ; § which is akin to another extraordinary
assertion of his, that there never was a time when it could be justly
said, that the law of nature was imperfectly known ; || though he
himself frequently represents the greater part of mankind as having
* Works, vol. v. p. 264. t Concerning this objection, see p. 15.
X Works, vol. v. p. 295. § Ibid. p. 294. || Ibid. p. 202.

Let. XXXI. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 495
been ignorant for many ages together of what he owns to be the
great fundamental principle of that law. And it is to be observed
that after having said, in the passage just now referred to, that all
men have the same means, he soon after declares, that " they shall
be accountable for no more than they had capacities or means of
knowing:" which plainly supposes that they all have not the same
means and advantages, but that there will not be as much required
of those who had less advantages, as of those who had greater ;
which the friends of the Christian revelation will readily allow.
I shall conclude this letter with mentioning a passage, which is
undoubtedly intended by the author to expose Christianity. He ob
serves, that " natural law is founded in reason ; but Christianity is
founded in faith ; and faith proceeds from grace ; and whether a
man shall have grace or no, depends not on him."* This is a way
of talking usual with those who laugh both at faith and grace. His
Lordship is pleased on some other occasions to make mention of
divine grace ; but always in a way of ridicule. The notion of divine
assistance has nothing in it but what is agreeable to reason, and to
the sentiments of some of the best and wisest men in all ages. And
he himself, even where he treats it as a vain and groundless notion,
yet thinks fit to own, that our not being able to explain how it ope
rates, is no just objection against it; and that a well-attested reve
lation is a sufficient ground for believing that such a thing there is.t
And to our unspeakable satisfaction we are assured by the Christian
revelation, that God is ready on his part to communicate his gracious
aids to those that humbly apply to him for them, and are at the
same time diligent in the use of their own endeavours. This writer
here supposes faith to be opposed to reason ; and that Christianity
is not founded on reason, but on faith as opposed to it. But faith,
if it be ofthe right kind, always supposes that there is a good reason
for believing. We are not to believe without reason, nor against it.
Christianity is founded on rational evidence. The proof of the
Christian law, arising both from the external evidences and attesta
tions given to it, and from the internal characters of goodness and
purity, and the excellent tendency of the whole, is such as is proper
to convince the reason and judgment ; and it has actually had that
effect upon many of the ablest persons in all ages, ever since it was
first promulgated. • Works, vol. v. p. 93. t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 488.

496 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXII.

LETTER XXXII.
Objections against the Laws and Doctrines of Christianity considered. — The Scripture
Precepts not delivered in a formal Code or System, but in a way that is really more
useful; and they comprehend all the Duties of Morality. — Concerning our Saviour's
Precepts in his Sermon on the Mount. — The Gospel-Law with respect to Polygamy
and Divorces not contrary to Reason and Nature, but wise and excellent.— The
Christian Doctrine of a Mediator, and of our Redemption by the Blood of Christ,
vindicated against his injurious Representation of it. — It gives worthy Ideas of God,
and shows the divine Perfections in their proper Harmony. — It is full of Comfort to
good Men, but gives no Encouragement to the obstinately wicked and presumptuous,
— It is not contrary to Reason, though it could not have been discovered by it  .
This Doctrine not owing to the Pride of the human Heart. — Traces of the Doctrine
of the Trinity to be found, according to Lord Bolingbroke, in all the ancient theis-
tical Philosophers.
SlR,
Having in my last Letter considered what Lord Bolingbroke
hath offered with regard to the Christian revelation in general, and
its evidences, I now proceed to examine his objections agairist the
laws and doctrines of Christianity.
With respect to the laws of Christianity, he observes, that
" Christ did not reveal an entire body of ethics — That the gospel
does not contain a code reaching to all the duties of life — That
moral obligations are only occasionally recommended — And that if
all the precepts scattered about through the whole New Testament
were collected and put together in the very words of the sacred
writers, they would compose a very short as well as unconnected
system of ethics ; and that a system thus collected from the writ
ings of heathen moralists would be more full, more entire, and co
herent."* But it must be considered, that the New Testament
supposes and confirms the authority of the Old. And out of both
together might be compiled a much more complete body of ethics,
than out of all the writings of the ancient philosophers and moralists,
which would be found defective in some duties of great consequence,
as was observed before, letter XXVII. p. 385, &c. They are not in
deed delivered in a philosophical way, and Lord Bolingbroke him
self owns, that " this does not take off from the dignity, the authority,
or the utility, even in moral doctrines, of revealed religion. —
Since revelation was not given to convince men of the reasonable
ness of morality — by arguments drawn from the reason of things —
but to enforce the practice of it by a superior authority."-)- They
are urged in the name of God, and as his laws. They are not
wrought up into a formal code, and delivered merely once for all in
a system : but they are delivered in various ways, and on different
occasions, often in plain and express precepts, at other times by al
lusions, parables, and comparisons, recommended by excellent exam-
* Works, vol. iv. p. 297. t Ibid.

Let. XXXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 497
pies, and enforced by motives of the highest importance, by divine
promises and threatenings. And what shows their great usefulness
and excellence, though they seem to be delivered occasionally, yet
it is so ordered, that not one duty of consequence is omitted in the
holy scriptures. All the duties of morality are there frequently re
peated and inculcated, and variously enforced.
His Lordship owns, that " our Saviour's sermon on the mount
contains, no doubt, many excellent precepts of morality." And if
some of them seem too sublime, he thinks the same reason may be
given for them that Tully gives for the severer doctrines of the
Stoics. That " men will always stop short of that pitch of virtue
which is proposed in them ; and it is therefore right to carry the
notions of it as high as possible." p. 298, 299. Some have objected
it as an instance of our Saviour's carrying things to an excessive
rigour, that he not only forbids murder, but the being angry without
a cause ; and not only prohibits the gross act of adultery, but hath
declared, that whosoever looketh on a woman, to lust after her, hath
already committed adultery with her in his heart. Mat. v. 28. But
his Lordship acknowledge th, that the law which forbids the com
mission of a crime, does certainly imply, that we should not desire
to commit it ; and that to want or extinguish that desire is the best
security of our obedience.* Yet he afterwards observes, that some
of Christ's precepts " were fit and proper enough for a religious sect
or order of men, like the Essenes, and might be properly enough ex
acted from those who were Christ's companions, and disciples in a
stricter sense ; but, considered as general duties, are impracticable,
inconsistent with natural instinct as well as law, and quite destruc
tive of society. "f It is acknowledged that some of Christ's precepts
were not designed to be of universal obligation at all times, and to
all his disciples, but were directed to particular persons, and were
only to take place on extraordinary occasions. Such was that which
he mentions of selling all and following Christ. But it does not ap
pear, that in any of our Saviour's precepts he had any view to the
Essenes, who are not once mentioned in the whole gospel. But as
to other precepts which this writermentions, and which are contained
in the sermon on the mount, and directed to all the disciples, as that
concerning the not resisting evil, the taking no thought for the mor
row, the laying up treasures, not on earth, but in heaven ; these pre
cepts, which are delivered in a concise proverbial way, taken in the
true sense and intention of them, are of great and general use, as de
signed to restrain a malevolent revengeful spirit, anxious distracting
cares, and an inordinate love of worldly riches. These and other
precepts Mr. Chubb had endeavoured to expose, and I shall refer to
the remarks that are made in the beginning of the fourteenth
Letter. Among the precepts of Christianity may be reckoned those re
lating to polygamy and divorces. Our author looks upon a prohi
bition of polygamy to be a prohibition of what the law of nature
* Works, vol. iv. p. 298, 299. t Ibid r- 30°-
K K

498 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXII.
permits in the fullest manner, and even requires too on several occa
sions : concerning which see what was observed above, Letter
XXVI. As to divorces, he declares, that " with them monogamy
may be thought a reasonable institution ; without them it is an un
natural, absurd, and cruel imposition ; that it crosses the intention
of nature, and stands in opposition to the most effectual means
of multiplying the human species."* He seems very much to ap
prove the law of Moses for allowing polygamy and divorces, and to
think it in this instance much more reasonable and conformable to
the law of nature than Christianity is. But he has not fairly re
presented the Mosaical doctrine concerning divorces. He says,
"the legal causes for divorces had a great latitude," among which
he reckons this for one, " because the husband found another wo
man whom he thought handsomer, or whom it was more convenient
for him to marry ."t Where he represents it, as if these were legal
causes of divorce, i. e. causes specified in the original law itself;
which is not true. It was only a corrupt ¦ gloss of some of the
Jewish doctors, who in this as well as other instances perverted the
design of the original law. There is no express mention of divorces
in the Jewish sacred history, after the law made concerning this
matter, till they are occasionally mentioned by Isaiah and Jeremiah.
In the latter times of the Jewish state, divorces seem to have been
more frequent, and for slighter causes ; though even then there were
many among the Jews, who opposed the loose interpretation of that
law given by others of their doctors. This writer mentions "the
differences between the schools of " Hillel and Sammeas about
divorces ; and that Christ decided in favour of the latter, and speci
fied but one kind of turpitude as a just cause of divorce.";]; And
in this he plainly lets us know he thinks our Saviour was in the
wrong. And he goes on to say in a sneering way, that " the law of
grace was superior in time to the natural and Mosaical law among
Christians."§ What follows is mean banter, mixe*d with a scanda
lous insinuation against the chastity of the Blessed Virgin, because
Joseph had thoughts of divorcing her, having suspected her to have
been got with child before her marriage. This he produces as an
anecdote from Justin Martyr, as if it were a piece of secret history,
when every one that has read the gospel knows, that the evangelist
both mentions the suspicion, and shows how causeless it was, and
how it was removed, Mat. i. 18 — 24.
* Works, vol. v. p. 163.
f He is pleased to observe, that " the people of God had an advantage in this respect
above other people. Plurality of wives might have made divorces less necessary ; or,
if they were all alike disagreeable, the husbands had the resource of concubines."
Where he represents it as if there were an allowance to the people of God, in their law
itself, both to have a plurality of wives, and, besides these, to have concubines, which
were not wives. So it is indeed in the law of Mahomet, where every man is allowed
four wives, and as many female slaves as he can keep. But there is no such constitu
tion in the Mosaical law. And the concubines we read of in Scripture, were really
wives, though without a dowry ; thus in the case of the Levite's concubine, Judges
xix. he is said expressly to be her husband, and her father is several times called his
father-in-law, ver. 3, 4, 5, 7, &c.
X Works, vol. v. p. 170. § Ibid. p. 171.

Let. AAAll, LORD BOLINGBROKE. 4<Jf)
He expressly calls polygamy and divorces institutions which have
reason and revelation on their side ,- where he seems willing to allow
for a while, that the Mosaical law was from God, that he may draw
a patronage from thence for polygamy and divorces ; and he speaks
of them as if they were positive institutions, expressly prescribed
and enjoined in that law as by divine authority. But this is not
fairly represented. They were at best barely permitted. Polygamy
is no-where expressly allowed, much less commanded in the law of
Moses. But there are several things that plainly imply a disappro
bation of it. As particularly the account there given of God's hav
ing at the first creation formed one woman for one man, and ap
pointed that there should be an inseparable union between them,
and that they should be one flesh. And though Moses gives instances
of polygamy among some of the patriarchs, they are so circumstanced
as to make a very disadvantageous representation of that practice,
and the consequences of it. The utmost that can be said is, that it
is not expressly prohibited in that law. And there are some wise
regulations added, which indeed suppose it to be what was then
practised, but seem plainly designed to discourage it, and to correct
and restrain the abuses which it tended to produce. See Exod. xxi.
9, 10. Deut. xxi. 15, 16, 17. The law about divorces, Deut. xxiv.
1 — 4. specifies some matter of uncleanness as the cause of divorce,
which some of the Jewish doctors themselves, particularly the
Caraites, who keep close to the letter ofthe law, understand of adul
tery, or at least of some immodest and unchaste behaviour. And
Moses supposes the woman that was divorced to be defiled by a
second marriage, and therefore ordains that the first husband should
never have it in his power to take her again ; which was manifestly
intended to discourage that practice. Our Saviour indeed saith, that
Moses suffered it for the hardness of their hearts, Mat. xix. 8. This
our author is pleased to represent as if Christ maintained, that " God
tolerated superstitious practices, or permitted even crimes to have
the sanction of his law, because of the hardness of their hearts."*
But to this may be applied the distinction which he himself mentions,
and seems to approve, made by the Civilians, " between a plenary
and less plenary permission, one of which gives a right to do, and
the other exempts from punishment for doing. "f It is the latter
kind of permission which was given to polygamy and divorces, and
which our Saviour refers to, when he talks of their being suffered to
do it for the hardness of their hearts ; not as if it was what God
countenanced and approved, but they were so far suffered to do it
as not to incur a legal penalty by doing it ; but when he sent his
well-beloved Son to bring the clearest and most perfect scheme of
religion, this practice was more plainly prohibited than it had been
before. And this, instead of being "a just objection against the
Christian law, is a proof of its great excellence; which has hereby
provided for preserving to both sexes their just, rights, for strength
ening the union between tbe married pair, which it is of great im-
* Woiks, vol. v. p. 170. t Ibid. vol. iv. p. 151. ]74.
K K 2

500 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXII.
portance to strengthen and improve, for uniting the care of both
parents in the education of children, for maintaining the peace and
order of families, and for restraining an unbounded dissoluteness
and licentiousness. Whereas the contrary practice of polygamy and
frequent divorces has a tendency to reduce one half of the human
species to a miserable servitude, and to deprive them of their natural
rights, to produce the most bitter jealousies and distractions in
families, and to hinder the orderly education of children. It gives
occasion to unnatural mutilations, and lets the reins loose to a licen
tious appetite. I shall only farther observe, that an author whom
no man will suspect of being prejudiced in favour of the Christian
law, has, in an ingenious Essay, upon considering and comparing
what may be said for and against polygamy and divorces, shown
that the law forbidding them is founded upon better reasons, and
more for the general good of mankind, and order of society, than the
contrary. See Mr. Hume's Moral and Political Essays, Essay
twenty-second, on polygamy and divorces.
As to the doctrines of Christianity, that of Christ being the
mediator between God and man, and of our redemption by his
blood, they are evidently of great importance. Our author himself
represents them as fundamental doctrines of true original Chris
tianity, for which he sometimes professes so great a regard, and
yet hath done all in his power to expose them.
The doctrine of a mediator in general he represents as unreason
able and absurd, and as having been originally derived from the
heathens. He says, " the doctrine of a mediator between God and
man was established in the heathen theology, and the Christians
held a mediation likewise- But the former seem the most excusable.
For the Christian believes that he may have access at all times to
the throne of grace : but the poor heathen, filled with a religious
horror, durst not approach the divine Monarch except through
the mediation of his ministers."* And again, among the ex
travagant hypotheses of the pagan, he reckons their notions
of mediators and intercessors with God on the behalf of mankind,
of atonement and expiation.-)- That the heathens had some
notion of the necessity of a mediator or mediators between God
and man is very true, which might be owing both to the natural
sense they had of their own guilt and unworthiness, compared
with the infinite majesty, greatness, and purity, of the Supreme
Being, and to some traditions originally derived from extraordinary
revelation. But this, like other articles of the ancient primitive
religion, became greatly corrupted, and gave occasion tp much su
perstition and confusion in their worship. But in the Christian
scheme this doctrine is set in a clear and noble light. The Chris
tian indeed believes, as this writer hath observed, that he hath
access at all times to the throne of grace ; but he also believes, that
it is through the great Mediator whom God hath in his infinite
wisdom and goodness appointed, that he hath freedom of access.
* Works, vol. iv. p. 81. t Ibid. p. 372,373.

Let. XXXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 501
And nothing can give a more amiable idea of the Supreme Being,
or have a greater tendency to strengthen our hope and affiance in
him, than to consider him as a God in Christ reconciling the world
unto himself, and as having appointed his well-beloved Son, a person
of infinite dignity, as the great and only Mediator, through whom
he is pleased to communicate the blessings of his grace to sinners of
the human race, and in whose name they are to offer up their
prayers and praises to him, the Father of mercies, and the God of
love. It is impossible to prove that there is any thing in such a
constitution unworthy of the supreme and infinitely-perfect Being.
And if we are assured by a well-attested revelation, that this is the
order appointed by God in his sovereign wisdom, it ought to be re
ceived and improved with the highest thankfulness. And it nearly
imports those to whom this revelation is made known, to take care
that they do not reject the grace and mercy of God, and his offered
salvation, by refusing to accept it in that way in which he himself
hath thought fit to appoint. If this be a divine constitution (and
we are as sure that it is so, as that the gospel is true), they are not
chargeable with a slight guilt, who, instead of making a proper use
of it, and taking- the advantage it is fitted to yield, presume to
cavil at it, and rashly to arraign the proceedings of the Supreme
Wisdom and Goodness, in a case of which they cannot possibly
pretend to be competent judges.
With respect to the doctrine of redemption, which, he observes
from Dr. Clarke, is a main and fundamental article of the Christian
faith, he takes upon him to pronounce, that " the utmost endea
vours have been and always must be employed in vain, to reduce the
entire plan of the divine wisdom, in the mission of Christ, and the
redemption of man, to a coherent, intelligible, and reasonable
scheme of doctrines and facts."* And it is the entire design ofthe
thirty-sixth and thirty-seventh of his Fragments and Essays, to ex
pose that doctrine, and to answer what Dr. Clarke had offered to
show, that there is nothing in it contrary td reason.f
He observes, that " the fall of man lies at the foundation of the
doctrine of redemption, and that the account of it is irreconcileable
to every idea we have of the wisdom, justice, and goodness, to say
nothing of the dignity, of the Supreme Being. "X I need not add
any thing here to what has been already offered on that subject in
my thirteenth Letter. The great corruption of mankind has been
acknowledged by the most diligent observers in all ages ; and great
is the guilt and misery they have thereby incurred : and it is no
way reasonable to suppose that this was the original state of the
human nature. The redemption of mankind is a provision made by
infinite wisdom and goodness, for recovering them from the corrup
tion into which they had fallen, and the guilt they had incurred,
and for restoring them to righteousness and true holiness, and even
raising them to everlasting felicity, in such a way as is most con
sistent with the honour of God's government, and of his illustrious
* Works, vol. iv. p. 318. f Ibid. vol. v. p. 279, et seq. X Ibid, p- 283, 284.

502 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXII.
moral excellencies. And if there be some things relating to the
methods of our redemption which we are not well able distinctly to
explain or comprehend, it is not to be wondered at, considering that
these are things of a high nature, and which depend upon the deter
minations and councils of the divine wisdom, of which, without his
revelation of them, we cannot assume to be proper judges.
There are two questions here proper to be considered ; one con
cerning expiation in general; the other concerning that particular
method of expiation held forth to us in the Gospel, by the death and
sufferings of Jesus Christ, as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.
As to the general question, it can scarce be reasonably denied,
that if we consider God as the wise and righteous governor of the
world, who is infinitely just as well as merciful; if any expedient
can be fixed upon for his pardoning his sinful offending creatures,
and dispensing his graces and benefits to them, in such a way as at
the same time to manifest his invariable love of order, his just de
testation of all moral evil, and the steady regard he hath to the
vindicating the authority of his government and laws ; this would
be most worthy of his rectoral wisdom, apd show forth his attributes,
especially bis justice and mercy, in their proper harmony, so as to
render him both most amiable and most venerable.
If it be alleged, that repentance alone is a sufficient expiation,
not to repeat what hath been already offered on this head in the
XXVIIth Letter, p. 389, it may be demanded whether God could
in strict justice punish sinners for their transgressions of his laws,
and for the crimes they have committed ? If he could, it is because
those transgressions and crimes really deserve punishment. If those
crimes deserve punishment, it must be an act of free sovereign grace
and mercy to remit or not to inflict the deserved penalty. And as
it is an act of sovereignty, it must depend upon what shall seem fit
to the supreme and infinitely wise and perfect Mind to determine,
upon a full view of what is best and properest upon the whole.
And are we so well acquainted with what the Infinite Majesty oweth
to himself, and what the greatest good of the moral world doth re
quire, as to take upon us positively to determine a thing in which
the divine authority and prerogatives, and the reason of his govern
ment, are so nearly concerned ? Upon what foundation can we
pretend to be sure, that the great Governor of the world is obliged
to pardon sinners at all times and in all cases, barely and immedi
ately upon their repentance, and even to crown their imperfect
obedience, though attended with many failures and defects, with the
glorious reward of eternal life ? And if no man can pretend without
an inexcusable rashness and ignorance to be sure of this, who can
take upon him to determine, what expiation or satisfaction for sin,
besides the repentance of the sinner, the most wise and righteous
Governor of the world may see fit to insist upon ? This, if any
thing, seems to be a proper subject for divine revelation.
Dr. Clarke had argued, as his Lordship observes, that the '* cus
tom of sacrifices which universally obtained shows it to have been
the general sense of mankind, that some expiation was necessary

Let. XXXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 503
for sin, and that God would not be appeased without some punish
ment and satisfaction." * Our author speaks of this way of argu
ing with great contempt.
He says, that " the most absurd notions which superstition ever
spread in contradiction to the law of nature and reason, are applied
to the proceedings of God with man." But since it is a matter of
fact that cannot be denied, that the offering sacrifices to God was
one of the most ancient external rites of religion of which we have
any account ; since it obtained early and universally, not only
among polytheists and idolaters, but among the most religious
adorers of the one true God; this naturally leadeth us to conclude,
that it was a part of the primitive religion originally enjoined to the
first ancestors of the human race, and from them transmitted to
their descendants. Upon any other supposition it is hard to con
ceive, how men should come so universally to look upon the taking
away the life of a beast, to be well-pleasing in the sight of God,
and an acceptable piece of divine worship. The best way of ac
counting for this seems to be, that it was a sacred rite of divine ap
pointment, which was originally intended for wise and valuable
purposes ; viz. to impress men's minds with a sense of the evil and
demerit of sin, and to be an acknowledgment on the part of the
sinner that his sins deserved punishment ; and at the same time to
be a pledge and token of God's being willing to receive an atone
ment, and of his pardoning grace and mercy. And since it appears
to have been an original part ofthe divine scheme, that God would
send his Son into the world, in the fulness of time, to suffer and
die for the redemption of mankind, in whose blood that covenant
was founded, by virtue of which good men in all ages were to be
saved upon their repentance, and sincere though imperfect obedi
ence;, then supposing that some discovery of this was made to the
first parents of the human race after their apostacy, as a foundation
for their hope and comfort, this gives a most reasonable account of
the institution of such a sacred rite ; than which nothing could be
better fitted to keep up a notion and expectation of a suffering Re
deemer, and to be a constant memorial to them both of their own
guilt and of the divine mercy. And hence those sacrifices were very
properly accompanied with prayers, confessions of sin, and thanks
givings, and were regarded as federal rites, and tokens of friendship
and reconciliation between God and man. But this, like other
parts ofthe primitive religion, became corrupted. The true original
design of sacrifices was forgotten and lost, though the external rite
still continued ; and they were looked upon as in themselves and of
their own nature properly expiatory.
Our way is now prepared to consider the question as it relates
particularly to that method of expiation, which is held forth to us
in the Gospel by the sufferings and death of our Lord Jesus Christ,
a Mediator of infinite dignity. And with regard to this he urgeth,
that " our notions of God's moral attributes will lead us to think,
* Works, vol. v. p. 286.

504 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXII.
that God would be satisfied more agreeably to his mercy and good
ness without any expiation upon the repentance of the offenders,
and more agreeably to his justice with any other expiation rather
than this."* In opposition to this, it may be affirmed, that sup
posing an expiation to have been necessary on the behalf of sinful
men, none can be conceived more worthy, or more valuable, or
more capable of answering the most excellent ends, than that which
is set before us in the Gospel.
We are there taught, that upon a foresight of man's apostacy, and
the miseries and ruin to which the human race would be exposed by
their iniquities and transgressions, God had, in his infinite wisdom
and grace, determined to provide a Saviour for recovering them
from their guilt and misery to holiness and happiness : and that it
was appointed in the divine councils that this Saviour should, in
order to the accomplishing this great design, take upon him human
flesh, and should not only bring a clear revelation ofthe divine will
to mankind, and exhibit a most perfect example of universal holi
ness, goodness, and purity, but that he should on the behalf of sin
ful men, and to make atonement for their offences, submit to undergo
tbe most grievous sufferings and death : that accordingly, in that
season which seemed fittest to the divine wisdom, God sent his
own well-beloved Son into the world, a person of infinite dignity,
upon this most gracious and benevolent purpose and design : That
this glorious person actually took upon him our nature, and lived
and conversed among men here on earth : That he brought the
most perfect discoveries ofthe divine will that had been ever made
to mankind, for instructing them in those things which it was of
the highest importance to them to know: That in his sacred life
and practice he exhibited all the beauties of holiness, and yielded
the most perfect obedience to the divine law, which he exemplified
in the dignity of its authority and in the excellency of its precepts :
That besides this, prompted by his own generous love to mankind,
and in obedience to the divine appointment, he voluntarily submitted
for our sakes to the deepest humiliations and abasements, and the
most dolorous agonies and passions, followed by a most cruel and
ignominious death, that he might obtain eternal redemption for us.
He suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us
back unto God. By these his sufferings and obedience on our be
half, which was infinitely pleasing in the sight of God, he became
the propitiation for the sins of the world, and did that in reality
which the sacrifices could only do in type and figure. And on the
account of what he hath done and suffered on the behalf of sinful
men, God has been graciously pleased to promise to grant a full
and free pardon of all their sins, upon their sincere repentance, to
communicate to them through this great Mediator the blessings of
his grace, and to crown their sincere though imperfect obedience
with the glorious reward of eternal life : That accordingly that suf
fering Saviour having by himself purged our sins, was raised again
* Works, vol. v. p. 286.

Let. XXXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 5O5
from the dead, and crowned with glory and honour : That he now
appears for guilty men as their great advocate and intercessor: And
is constituted the great dispenser of those spiritual blessings which
he had by the divine appointment procured for us, and is the author
of eternal salvation to them that obey him.
This is one illustrious instance of what our author declares, that
the theology of the gospel is marvellous. It could only have been
known by divine revelation ; and now that it is discovered to us, it
calls for our highest admiration and thankfulness.
Let us now consider the objections he hath urged against it.
He represents it as absurd to suppose, that " God sent his only
begotten Son, who had not offended him, to be sacrificed for men
who had offended him, that he might expiate their sins, and satisfy
his own anger."* As to God's sending his own Son to be the
Saviour of sinful men, to redeem them from misery and ruin, and to
raise them to eternal life, it cannot reasonably be denied, that the
more glorious and wonderful the person was, and the greater his
dignity, the better was he fitted for accomplishing the great work to
which he was designed ; and the greater value it derived to the
obedience he yielded, aud the sufferings he endured on our behalf.
This writer observes, that " the means of reconciling all sinners to
an offended Deity were made by the pagan theology extremely
easy." And he particularly instances in expiatory sacrifices.-)- But
no such thing can be justly objected against the doctrine of our
redemption by the blood of Christ. It is certainly of the highest
importance to mankind, that they should not entertain too slight
thoughts ofthe evil of sin, or look upon it as too easy a matter to
obtain the favour of God when they had offended him, or imagine
that his just displeasure against sin may be averted by trivial expe
dients. All this is effectually provided against in the gospel scheme.
The expiation in this case is supposed to be effected by a sacrifice
of infinite virtue, not to be equalled or repeated. This gives the
most effectual conviction, that it is not a slight or trifling matter, to
atone for the sins of men, and to offer such an expiation as is suited
to the majesty of God to accept. No man that believes this can
possibly entertain slight thoughts of the evil and demerit of sin. It
tendeth to fill us with the most awful reverential conceptions of the
infinite majesty of the Supreme Being, his righteousness and purity,
and the inviolable regard he hath to the authority of his govern
ment and laws.
As to the other part of the objection, that it is absurd to suppose,
that " the Son of God who had not offended should be sacrificed for
men who had offended him," the truth is, that if he had not been
perfectly innocent and holy, he could not have been properly fitted
to expiate the sins of men. Had he been himself guilty and a sin
ner, instead of making an atonement for the sins of others, he must
have been punished for his own. Nor could his oblation have been
of such value and merit as to be proper for answering the great ends
* Works, vol. v. p. 286. t Ibid. p. 210.

506 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXII.
for which it was designed. If it be still objected, that it is unjust
and cruel that an innocent person should be punished for the guilty,
I answer, that it will be allowed, that if the evils and sufferings the
guilty had incurred by their crimes should, by the mere arbitrary
act and authority of the supreme ruling power, be laid on an inno
cent person without and against his own consent, this would be
contrary to all the rules both of goodness and justice, and would be
a confounding the whole order of things. But this is far from being
the case. The sufferings of our Lord Jesus Christ were not arbi
trarily imposed upon him by the mere authority of God. He him
self freely undertook the great work of our redemption. He con
sented to undergo these temporary sufferings for the most valuable
ends, for promoting the glory of God, and the salvation of mankind.
The admitting him therefore to suffer on our behalf, was not doing
him any injustice, but giving him an opportunity of performing the
most wonderful act of obedience, and exhibiting the most astonish
ing instance of love and goodness towards perishing sinners, from
whence, according to the divine compact and covenant, the most
glorious benefits were to redound to the human race ; and he him
self was to be recompensed with the highest glory in that nature
which he assumed. It is no hard matter therefore to answer the
question our author puts, " Whether the truth of that maxim — that
it is not equally fit that an innocent person should be extremely
miserable, as that he should be free from such misery — the inno
cence ofthe Lamb of God, and the sufferings and ignominious death
of Christ, can be reconciled together, and how?"*'* That Christ
endured the most grievous sufferings, and was put to a most cruel
and ignominious death, and consequently that in his case a person
perfectly innocent was exposed to the greatest sufferings, is a matter
of fact which cannot be denied. And it cannot reasonably be pre
tended, that it renders those sufferings more unjust, that he should
suffer on the account of sinful men, to make atonement for their
sins, and to procure for them the most valuable blessings, than if he
had endured those sufferings without any such view at all. The
sufferings of a most holy and righteous person are perfectly recon-
cileable to all the rules of justice, and to the order and reason of
things, provided those sufferings are what he himself hath volunta
rily undertaken, and that they answer a most valuable and excellent
end for the public good, and that the suffering person himself after
wards receives a glorious recompence. And according to the ac
count given us in the Gospel, all these circumstances concurred in
the sufferings of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Dr. Clarke had mentioned some of the excellent ends which the
sufferings and death of Christ were designed and fitted to answer :
such as, that this method " tends to discountenance and prevent
presumption, to discourage men from repeating their transgressions,
to give them a deep sense of the heinous nature of sin, and to con
vince them of the excellence and importance ofthe laws of God, and
* Works, vol. f. p. 288.

Let. XXXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE,

507

the indispensable necessity of paying obedience to them."* Lord
Bolingbroke has not offered any argument to prove, that redemption
by the death of Christ was not well fitted to answer these ends, but in
his dictatorial manner has pronounced, that " the prudential reasons
assigned by Dr. Clarke for the death of Christ would appear futile
and impertinent, if applied to human councils ; but in their appli
cation to the divine, they became profane and impious. — That the
death of Christ, instead of being proper to discountenance presump
tion, and to discourage men from repeating their transgressions, as
Clarke pretends, might, and in fact has countenanced presumption,
without discouraging- men from repeating their transgressions. "-f-
There is no doctrine but may be abused by the perverseness of bad
and licentious men. Sinners may take encouragement from the
goodness and mercy of God to continue in their evil courses, in
hopes that he will not punish them for their crimes. And on the
other hand, the doctrine concerning the justice of God may be
abused, to harden men in their sins, and to cut them off from all
hopes of mercy, which would have an equal tendency to destroy all
piety and virtue, and subvert the very foundations of religion. But
the Gospel scheme of our reconciliation by the death of Christ pro
vides admirably against both these extremes. On the one hand,
the fullest discoveries are made of the infinite grace and goodness
of God towards mankind, in that he gave his only-begotten Son,
that through his sufferings and death a way might be opened for
redeeming and saving the lost human race. A free and universal
offer is made of pardon and salvation to all sinners without excep
tion, that shall accept of offered mercy upon the gracious and rea
sonable terms which are there appointed. The most exceeding
great and precious promises are made, the most gracious assistances
are provided to help our infirmities, and we are raised to the privi
leges of the children of God, and to the most animating hopes of a
glorious resurrection and eternal life, as the reward even of our im
perfect obedience. It is impossible that any thing should give us a
more amiable idea ofthe Supreme Being, and of his wonderful love
to mankind. Nothing can have a greater tendency to enlarge our
joys, and to excite the most grateful and devout affections towards
our heavenly Father, as the father of mercies, and the God of love,
and towards the Lord Jesus Christ, the great Saviour and lover of
our natures, and to lay us under the strongest engagements to love
and obey him.
But then on the other hand, lest this should be abused, the Gos
pel presents the Supreme Being as of infinite justice, righteousness,
and purity, who hath such a hatred against sin, and such a regard
to the authority of his government and laws, that he would not re
ceive guilty transgressors of the human race to his grace and favour,
upon any less consideration than the sufferings and sacrifice of his
well-beloved Son on their behalf; than which nothing could possibly
* Clarke's Evidences of natural and revealed Religion, p. 351. Ed. 7th.
t Works, vol. v. .p. 289.

508 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXII.
exhibit a more awful display of God's displeasure against sin : so
that he hath taken care to manifest his righteousness and justice,
even in the methods of our reconciliation. We are farther assured,
that though the sacrifice Christ hath offered be so infinitely meri
torious, yet the virtue of it is only applied upon such terms as the
divine wisdom hath appointed, i. e. to those only that return to God
by a sincere repentance and new obedience. So that on this plan
the necessity of holiness and obedience is most strongly and effec
tually secured, since without this there can be no interest in that
great atonement, and consequently no hope of pardon and salvation.
And the several threatenings are denounced against those who abuse
all this grace, and turn it into licentiousness : and they are warned,
that their punishments shall be heightened in proportion to the ag
gravations of their crime. Thus the Gospel scheme of redemption
through Jesus Christ hath an admirable propriety and harmony in
it, and bears upon it the illustrious characters of a divine original.
It giveth the greatest hopes to the upright and sincere, without
affording the least ground of encouragement to the obstinately
wicked and presumptuous sinner. It represents God as most amia
ble and most awful, infinitely good, gracious, and merciful, and at
the same time infinitely just, righteous, and holy. These characters
in a lower degree must concur in an excellent earthly prince; much
more must they be supposed to be united in the highest possible
degree of eminence in the Supreme Being, the All-wise and All-
perfect Governor of the world.
He concludes his remarks on what Dr. Clarke had offered to
show" that the doctrine of our redemption by Christ is not contrary
to reason, with a general reflection or two. ' One is this, " Let us
suppose a great prince governing a wicked and rebellious people .
he has it in his power to punish, but thinks fit to pardon them.
But he orders his only and well-beloved son to be put to death, to
expiate their sins, and satisfy his royal vengeance." And then he
asks, " Would this proceeding appear to the eye of reason, and in
the unprejudiced light of nature, wise, or just, or good? No man
dares to say that it would, except it be a divine."* But no divine
would put so absurd a case, which, as he represents it, could not
possibly answer any valuable end. The King would have no right
to put his son to death for the crimes of rebels ; and to do it against
his consent, would be the height of injustice and cruelty : and even
if he should consent, it would be the irretrievable loss of an hopeful
Prince, both to the King his father, and to the community who had
an interest in his life. But if a ca^e could be supposed, in which
the death of an excellent Prince would be the saving of a state from
ruin, and the best and properest means for averting the greatest
public evils and calamities, and for procuring the greatest public
happiness, I believe it would be acknowledged to be a glorious ac
tion for a King to give up his son, and for the Prince his son to give
himself up to death, for so extensive a benefit, and would be cele-
* Works, vol. v. p. 289.

Let. XXXII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 509
brated as such to all succeeding ages. Though still in that case
there could be no hope of the suffering person's being restored to
life, or to the public, or having a proper reward given him for so
consummate a virtue : which makes a vast difference between this
case, or indeed any other that could be put in human governments,
and our redemption by the sufferings and death of Christ as stated
in the gospel.
His second reflection is, that " Dr. Clarke acknowledges, that
human reason could never have discovered such a method as this
for the reconciliation of sinners to an offended God." From whence
he argues, that *' therefore it cannot be said, that this method is
agreeable to sound unprejudiced reason, which is what Dr. Clarke,
here undertook to show."* But there is no inconsistency between
these. A thing may be of such a kind, that reason could not have
discovered it, and yet when discovered may have nothing in it con
trary to reason, and may be such as unprejudiced reason will approve.
And this I take to be the case of the scripture doctrine of our re
demption. Our author indeed hath attempted to show, that this
doctrine is more absurd than any thing that can be found in any
system of paganism. But what he offers to this purpose is entirely
to be charged, not upon the doctrine itself as laid down in scripture,
but upon the base and injurious representation he is pleased to make
of it. He concludes with saying, that "the heathens could not
imagine any thing so repugnant, as the doctrine of our redemption
by the death of Christ, to all their ideas of order, of justice, of
goodness, and even of theism. "f If these were so, the heathen
world were far from being so disposed and prepared for receiving the
Christian mysteries as he sometimes pretends they were, lt will be
acknowledged, that Christ crucified was to the Greeks, who had a
high conceit of their own wisdom and learning, foolishness ; but it
was the wisdom and power of God, as St. Paul expresseth it. And
accordingly this doctrine of the cross of Christ triumphed over all
the opposition which their boasted learning and philosophy, assisted
by the power and authority of the civil magistrate, the influence and
artifices of the priests, and the prejudices of the vulgar, and the
vices and passions of men, could raise against it. There are, no
doubt, great difficulties attending the scheme of our redemption.
But this writer, if he were consistent with himself, ought not to
make this an objection against its truth or divine original. He ob
serves, that " nothing is more conformable to our ideas of the infi
nitely Perfect Being, than to believe, that human reason cannot
account for the proceedings of infinite wisdom in a multitude of
instances, in many of those perhaps that seem the most obvious to
it."J And he elsewhere declares, that " if infinite wisdom and
power created and governs the universe, we must prepare to meet
with several appearances, which we cannot explain, nor reconcile to
the ideas we endeavour to form of the divine perfections, and which
are disproportionable to our and every other finite understanding.'^
* Works, vol. ». p. 290. f ^id. p. 291. X Ibid. p. 182. § Ibid. p. 365.

510 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXII.
And finding fault with the pertness and presumption of divines, he
says, " it would pass for downright madness, if we were not accus
tomed to it, to hear a creature of the lowest form of intelligent
beings undertake to penetrate the designs, to fathom the depths,
and to unveil the mysteries of infinite wisdom, which the most ex
alted of created intelligencies w6uld adore in silence."* This may
be justly turned against himself. It is no presumption to believe
what God has revealed of his councils concerning the methods of our
salvation, or to think and speak of them as far as he has been
pleased to declare them. But it is an inexcusable arrogance to pre
sume to arraign the proceedings of infinite wisdom made known to
us in a well-attested revelation, because there are some things rela
ting to them which we are not able distinctly to explain, or to account
for. This is what our author hath done with a rashness and inso
lence that is shocking. Some passages of this kind have been
already produced, to which I shall add one more. Speaking ofthe
mystery of our redemption by the blood of Christ, he asserts, that
" the love there displayed is partiality, and the justice there showed
is injustice — And that injustice and cruelty are united in this ; that
mankind would not have been redeemed, if the Jews had not cruci
fied Christ ; and yet they were rejected and punished for crucifying
him."f He here chargeth it as a great injustice and cruelty to reject
and punish the Jews for crucifying Christ, because mankind could
not have been redeemed without it ; and yet he had before observed,
that " Christ was sacrificed by men who meaned no expiation, and
who meaned a murder, not a sacrifice.""); God's bringing the
greatest good out of the injustice and wickedness of the Jews, which
he foresaw and permitted, but did not cause, is indeed an illustrious
proof of his infinite wisdom, but is no extenuation of their crime ;
and therefore there was no injustice in punishing them for it. But, if
the Jews had not crucified Christ, which is the case this writer puts,
and which depends upon the modest supposition of God's being mis
taken in his prescience, it would not follow, that his designs for the
redemption of mankind would have been disappointed ; infinite
wisdom would not have been at a loss for proper methods to accom
plish its own glorious views.
This is not the only passage, in which our author, who upon all
occasions sets no bounds to his invectives against the Jews, expresses
some pity towaids them, as having been very hardly dealt with, in
being punished for crucifying our Lord. He observes, that " Christ
contrived at his death to appear innccent to the Roman governor,
and at the same time contrived to appear guilty to the Jews, and to
make them the instruments of his death, by a sequel of the most
artful behaviour — That they were rejected for not believing him to
be the Messiah — And he kept them in their error; at least he did
nothing to draw them out of it, that they might bring him to the
cross, and complete the redemption of mankind, without knowing
that they did it at their own expence."§ Nothing can possibly be
* Works, vol. v. p. 297. t Ibid. p. 582. t Ibid. p. 291.
§ Ibid. vol. iv. p. 537, 538, 539.

Let. XXa.ii. lord bolingbroke. 511
more unfair and disingenuous than this representation. It is evident,
that our Lord took all proper opportunities of laying before tbe Jews'
the proofs of his Messiahship; and that nothing could be more
wisely conducted than the way he took gradually to remove their
prejudices, though he did not make an express and public declara
tion of his being the Messiah, till the evidence should be completed,
and it should plainly appear, that his kingdom was not of this world.
Instead of laying plots to engage the Jews to put him to death, he
on many occasions used the most prudent precautions to avoid the
effects of their malice, till he could do it no longer, without betray
ing the truth, and counteracting the design upon which he was sent.
The last thing I shall take notice of with regard to what Lord
Bolingbroke hath offered concerning the doctrine of our redemption,
is, that he represents it as having proceeded from the pride of the
human heart. He blames Archbishop Tillotson for observing, very
pathetically, at the close of one of his sermons, that " when the
angels fell, God left them in their fallen state ; but when man fell,
he sent his Son, his only-begotten Son, his dearly-beloved Son, to
redeem the race by his sufferings and passion." Upon which he
remarks, that " this raises us not only to an equality with the angels,
but to a superiority over them."* And he afterwards censures the
divines, for being "unwilling to leave their notions of human worth
and importance, or of the designs of God in favour of men ;" and
says, that "though our religion forbids pride, and teaches humility,
yet the whole system of it tends to inspire the former." He instances
in its teaching, that " man was made after the image of God, and
that God abandoned myriads of angels, but determined to raise man
from his fall by the sacrifice of his Son." And he asks, " is it pos
sible to conceive higher notions of a created being than these revealed
truths must inspire V'f It is certain, that, according to the scripture
account, God spared not the angels that sinned, though originally
superior to the human race, but sent his Son to redeem mankind.
And undoubtedly there were wise reasons for that proceeding, which
God hath not thought fit to reveal to us, and which therefore we can
not pretend to judge of. But whatever was the reason of it, God's
extending his grace and mercy to mankind in so marvellous a way,
certainly demandeth our most grateful acknowledgments. We are
taught every where in scripture to ascribe the great things God
hath done for us, not to any worthiness in ourselves, but merely to
his sovereign unobliged grace and goodness. It is manifest that the
whole scheme of Christianity tendeth to inspire us with the most
adoring thoughts of God's infinite majesty, greatness, and purity,
and at the same time to impress and affect our hearts with the most
humbling sense of our own meanness, guilt, and unworthiness. It
tendeth not to inspire us with pride, but with gratitude for unde
served favours and benefits ; and at the same time that it filleth us
with the highest admiration of the divine condescension and good
ness towards us, it teacheth us to sink low into the very dust before
* Works, vol. iv. p. 506, 507. t Ibid. vol. v. p. 347.

512 A view of the deistical writers. Let. XXXII.
his glorious majesty, acknowledging that we are less than the least
of his mercies, and giving him the whole glory of our salvation.
It is observable, that Lord Bolingbroke seems on many occasions
very solicitous to prevent our having too high a conceit of our own
excellence and importance. He blames the pagan theists for flatter
ing human nature, when they taught, that a good man imitates God,
and that God is a lover of mankind, and made man to be happy.* To
human pride and ambition he attributes the notion of the soul's
being a spiritual substance distinct from the body, and the belief of
its immortality.-f- To this also he ascribes the doctrine of a par
ticular providence, and the notion that God is attentive to the
prayers and wants of men ; and is ready on many occasions to assist,
protect, and reward the good, and to punish or reclaim the wicked. J
It seems then that, for fear of being thought too proud and assum
ing, we must deny that we have any souls distinct from our bodies,
or at least must confess them to be like our bodies, corruptible and
mortal ; we must not dare to aspire after a conformity to the Deity
in his moral excellencies, nor to think that he loveth us, or is con
cerned for our happiness ; we must either not address ourselves to
him at all, or not presume to imagine that he heareth or regardeth
our prayers. It would be thinking too highly of our own impor
tance to imagine, that God exerciseth any care or inspection over
us, or that he taketh notice of our actions with approbation or dis
pleasure, or will call us to an account for them. Thus this sagacious
writer hath found out the secret of banishing religion out of the
world, under pretence of guarding against the pride of the human
heart. I need not take any particular notice of what his Lordship hath
offered concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. He affirms, that
" the Scriptures which are come down to us are very far from being
vouchers of the Trinity we profess to believe. — And that we may
assure ourselves, that many of the Scriptures and traditions which
obtained in the primitive ages, deposed against this Trinity. ''§
Where he talks with as much confidence of Scriptures and tradi
tions which he supposes to be lost, and of what was contained in
them, as if he himself had seen and read them. He chargeth St.
Peter and St. Paul with inconsistency and contradiction, in some
times calling Christ a man, and at other times talking a different
language, and calling him God. || Though supposing him to have
the human nature in a near union with the divine, there is no con
tradiction in it at all. He has a long marginal note about the senti
ments of the primitive fathers concerning the Trinity, and censures
bishop Bull.f And he afterwards enlarges on the differences among
Christians relating to it, and the disputes between Arius and
Athanasius.** But he says nothing on this subject but what is very
common, and has been often more fully and distinctly insisted upon
by others, and therefore deserves no particular consideration here.
* Works, vol. v. p. 317, 318. f Ib'd. vol. iv. p. 481. X Ibid. vol. v. p. 418.
§ Ibid. vol. iv. p. 493. || Ibid. p. 488. f Ibid. p. 98, ct seq. *» Ibid.p. 1H3, et seq.

Let. XXXII. lord bolingbroke. 513
What seems more peculiar to him is, that in the account he gives
of the doctrine of the Trinity, he represents it as having been
originally derived from the heathen theology. He says, that the
heathen philosophers " assumed a Trinity of divine hypostases in
the Godhead. They held a Monad or Unity above all essence, a
second proceeding eternally from the first, and a third proceeding
eternally from the second, or from the first and second." * That the
hypothesis of the Trinity made a part of the Egyptian theology.
" It was brought from Egypt into Greece by Orpheus, whosoever
he was, and probably by others in that remote antiquity : and that
it was in much use afterwards : and we find the traces of it in all
the theistical philosophers taught." f He speaks of the Egyptian,
Pythagorean, Platonic, and of the Zoroastrian, Chaldaic, and Sa-
mothracian Trinity. J And he mentions it also as having been
anciently taught among the Chinese, and produces a passage out of
one of their ancient books to this purpose. § A late ingenious
author has carried this still farther, and has endeavoured at large to
show, that some vestiges of the doctrine of the Trinity are to be
found among the sages of all nations, times, and religions. || But
he differs from Lord Bolingbroke in this, that whereas his Lord
ship charges it on the vain subtleties and reveries of the ancient
metaphysical theology, this gentleman supposes it must have been
owing to supernatural revelation, or some tradition originally derived
from thence. And I cannot help thinking, that supposing the fact
to have been as they both represent it, this seems to be a more
reasonable way of accounting for it. Since it is otherwise not easy
to conceive how it should come to pass, that so many great and wise
men in different ages and nations, from the most ancient times,
should have agreed in acknowledging some kind of triad in the
divine nature.
I shall only take notice of one passage more in Lord Boling
broke's works relating to the Trinity : it is this : that " the doc
trine of the Trinity gives the Mahometans as much reason to say,
that the revelation which Mahomet published was necessary to
establish the unity of the Supreme Being, in opposition to the poly
theism which Christianity had introduced, as- Christians have to
insist, that the revelation which Christ published a few centuries
before, was necessary to establish the unity of the Godhead against
the pagan polytheism. "If But the case was very different. The
unity of God could not be more strongly and expressly asserted
than it is in the holy Scriptures, both of the Old Testament and
the New ; so that the pretended revelation of Mahomet was need
less in this respect. It is a fundamental principle of Christianity,
that there is but one God, and one Mediator between God and man,
and that Jesus Christ is he. Those who maintain the doctrine of
* Works, vol. iv. p. 94, 95. t Ibid. p. 97. 470, 471. \ Ibid. p. 472.
§ Ibid. vol. v. p. 230. „ ,,„,..
|| See Chevalier Ramsay's Principles of Natural and Revea.ed Religion, vol. n.
chap. 2.
I Works, vol. iv. p. 501. L L

514 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXIII.
the Trinity still hold the unity of the Godhead. Convince them
that the Trinity is inconsistent with that unity, and they will aban
don it. They cannot therefore be justly charged with polytheism,
which is only imputed to them by a consequence which they ex
pressly deny and disavow.

LETTER XXXIII.
The Christian Doctrine of future Retributions vindicated. — It does not charge God
with Injustice in this present State  Future Punishments not contrary to Reason
or the divine Attributes. — The Pretence, that they can be of no Use either for
Reparation or Terror, examined. — The Rewards and Punishments of a future
State shall be proportioned to the different Degrees of Virtue and Vice  The Pro
priety of appointing a State of Trial to reasonable Beings  It is wisely ordered,
that the Sentence at the Day of Judgment shall be final and irreversible  The
Christian Representation of that Judgment and its Consequences, solemn and affec
ting, and of excellent Use. — Lord Bolingbroke's injurious Charge against the pri
mitive Christians. — His Complaints of the Corruptions brought into the Christian
Church. — Such Writers very improper to set up for Reformers. — True genuine
Christianity needs not fear the Assaults of its ablest Adversaries. — Conclusion of
the Observations on Lord Bolingbroke's Posthumous Works.
Sir,
It is a satisfaction to me, as I am apt to think it is to you, that
the work is drawing near to a conclusion ; and the more so, as you
know that I have, during a considerable part of the time in which I
have been engaged in it, laboured under great indisposition of body,
which has rendered it more tedious and fatiguing to me, than other
wise it would have been. It will be well, if some marks of this do
not appear in the performance itself. If this be the case, I hope
candid allowance will be made for it.
The only thing that now remains to be considered, with regard
to Lord Bolingbroke's attempts against Christianity, relateth to
what he has offered concerning the Scripture doctrine of future
rewards and punishments. He has done all he could to expose
that doctrine, and Christianity on the account of it, especially the
doctrine of future punishments. This is the principal design of
several of his Fragments and Essays in the latter part of the fifth
volume of his works; particularly ofthe sixty-sixth, sixty-seventh,
sixty-eighth, sixty-ninth, seventieth, seventy-first, seventy-second,
and seventy-seventh, of those Fragments and Essays.
Before I enter on a distinct consideration of what he has offered
on that subject, I would make two general observations.
The one is, that he asserts the doctrine of future rewards and
punishments to be an original doctrine of the Christian religion.
He expressly asserts, that " future rewards and punishments, are

Let. XXXIII. lord bolingbroke. 515
sanctions of the evangelical law ;" * that " it was part of the origi
nal revelation.  And when the Christians adopted this doctrine,
they received the new law and the new sanction together on the faith
ofthe same revelation." f And indeed it cannot be denied, that
this is a doctrine strongly and most expressly insisted on by our
blessed Saviour himself, as a doctrine of principal importance. So
that this may be justly regarded as a fundamental doctrine of that
original Christianity, for which this writer professeth so great an
esteem, and the truth, the excellence, and even divinity of which
he sometimes pretends to acknowledge.
The other observation is this : that he makes the worst represen
tation imaginable of this doctrine, as both false, and of a pernicious
tendency. He asserts, that " the double sanction of rewards and
punishments in a future state was, in fact, invented by men. It
appears to be so by the evident marks of humanity that characterise
it.  That these notions favour more of the human passions, than
of justice or prudence. — That the vulgar heathens believed their
Jupiter liable to so many human passions, that they might easily
believe him liable, in his government of mankind, to those of love
and hatred, of anger and vengeance. — That the Jews entertained
such unworthy notions of God, and their system contained such
instances of partiality in love and hatred, of furious anger, and un
relenting vengeance, in a long series of arbitrary judgments, that
they would be ready to receive this heathenish doctrine of his arbi
trary and cruel proceedings hereafter. — That accordingly this doc
trine was in vogue in the Church of Moses, when that of Jesus
began. And that it made a part of the original Christian reve-
lation."X — This doctrine he frequently represents as not only of
human invention, but as absurd and impious, and even as blasphe
mous ; and he asserts, that it " is impossible to reconcile it to the
divine attributes.' '§ And after having said that the Jews " blended
together at once, in the moral character of God, injustice, cruelty,
and partiality," he adds, that " the moral character imputed to the
Supreme Being by the Christian theology, differs little from that
imputed to him by the Jewish." Yea, he makes it the worse of
the two.  That " sudden and violent anger are imputed to him
in the one system, slow and silent revenge in the other. That he is
represented by the latter as waiting to punish hereafter with unre
lenting vengeance and eternal torments, when it is too late to
terrify, because it is too late to reform." || Thus he represents that
which he would have pass for an essential article in the original
Christian revelation, as giving a worse idea of God than the Jewish
revelation, which yet he pretends makes such a representation ofthe
Deity as is worse than atheism.
I shall now examine what he has offered to make good so heavy
and injurious a charge.
Some of his arguments are designed, if they prove any thing at
* Works, vol, v. p. 513. f Ibid. p. 516. X Ibid. p. 515, 516. § Ibid.
|| Ibid. p. 532, o33.

i. L

9

516 A view of the deistical writers. Let. XXXIII.
all, to bear against future rewards and punishments in general;
and some are particularly levelled against the Christian doctrine of
future rewards and punishments.
As to the former, some notice has been already taken of what he
had urged to invalidate the belief of a future state of retribution. I
shall not repeat what has been offered above in the eighth Letter to
this purpose, but shall proceed to mention some things, which I
had occasion there to insist upon, as they make a part of the argu
ment, as he has managed it, against the Christian revelation.
He charges those who assert, as Dr. Clarke has done, that " fu
ture retributions are necessary to set the present disorders and
inequalities right, and to justify, upon the whole, the scheme of
providence," as in effect maintaining, that " God acts against his
attributes, and the perfections of his nature in one system, only to
have a reason the more for acting agreeably to them in another,"*
He urges, " that it is profane to insinuate, much more to affirm
peremptorily, that the proceedings of God towards men in the pre
sent life are unjust ; and that if that could be admitted, it would be
absurd to admit that this may be set right, which means, if the
words have any meaning, that this injustice must cease to be in
justice on the received hypothesis of his proceedings towards man
in another life." And he argues, that " omnipotence itself cannot
cause that which has been done not to have been done." t The
force of this argument depends upon a gross misrepresentation of the
sense of those whom he has thought fit to oppose. No Christian
divines pretend, that God's proceedings towards men in this present
life are unjust. On the contrary, they maintain, that it is just and
wise in God, and suitable to the nature of this state of trial and
discipline, to suffer things to go on as they do in their present
course; and that it is agreeable to the order of things, that a state
of final retribution should succeed. They are far from thinking,
that what is now injustice will in a future state cease to be injustice ;
but they maintain, that that justice, the execution of which is for
very wise reasons delayed, shall be exercised and displayed in the
fittest season : that that punishment of the wicked which is not for
the present inflicted, though designed, shall be executed, when it is
most proper it should be so : and that reward of the righteous,
which is not as yet actually conferred, shall be conferred when it is
fittest it should be conferred, and when they are best prepared for re
ceiving it They assert, that the evils and sufferings which good
men endure in this present state are perfectly consistent with the
divine justice, because they are either sent as chastisements and
corrections for their sins and miscarriages, or as seasonable trials
for the exercise and improvement of their virtues, and to discipline
them for a better world ; and that in a future state the trial shall be
over, and their virtue fully rewarded, and they shall arrive at the
true felicity and perfection of their nature : and on the other hand,
that wicked persons are here often suffered to prosper, and have
* Works, vol. v. p. 356. t Ibid. p. 493, 494.

Let. XXXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 3j»
many advantages and benefits given them, to lead them to repent
ance, and to answer many wise ends of providence. And if they
prove incorrigible to the methods of discipline which are here made
use of, those punishments which were here deferred, shall be at
length inflicted, and God's righteousness, and just detestation
against sin, shall be awfully manifested and displayed.
But it is especially against future punishments that he bends his
force. He observes, that "the heathen philosophers, even those of
them who assumed providence to be the most active in directing the
affairs of this world, were unanimous in their opinion, that the
Supreme Being was never angry, or ever did harm ;" for which he
cites a passage from Tully's Offices, lib. 3. Num iratum timemus
Jovem ? At hoc quidem commune est onnium philosophorum — Nun-
quarn nee irasci Deum, nee nocere* It will be easily allowed, that
anger, strictly speaking, as it signifies a passionate emotion, such as
is to be found in such imperfect creatures as we are, cannot be
ascribed to God ; but to deny that he is displeased or offended with
the sins of his creatures, - which is all that is intended, when anger
is ascribed to him in the sacred writings, is really to strike at the
foundation of all religion, and, under pretence of honourable
thoughts of God, to banish the fear of a Deity out of the world. It
was a maxim of the Epicureans concerning the divine nature,
Nee bene promeritis capitur, nee tangitur ira.
And their design in it was to deny the providence of God, and to
represent him as absolutely unconcerned about the actions of men,
so as neither to reward the good, nor to punish evil doers. And
this, if it holdeth at all, will equally hold against God's punishing
the wicked in this life, and in the next. And it looks as if this was
our author's intention. He urges, that " neither reason nor expe-.
rience will show us, in the Author of nature, an angry, revengeful
judge, or bloody executioner. "+ But to miscall things does not
alter their nature. It is easy to throw a hard name, and to call jus
tice vengeance and cruelty ; but no argument can be drawn from
this to prove, that that which is one of the most glorious perfections,
and inseparable from the wise and righteous Governor of the world,
ought to pass for the worst of characters. If the Supreme Being
be not utterly indifferent to virtue and vice, to good and evil, to the
happiness and misery of his creatures, it must be said that he ap-
proveth the one, and is displeased with the other ; and in that case
he will show his approbation and displeasure by suitable effects.
What should we think of an earthly prince, that should not concern
himself whether his laws be observed or not, and should suffer them
to be transgressed with impunity ? And is this the idea we should
form ofthe Supreme Lord of the universe? If this were the case,
what could be expected but universal disorder and confusion in the
moral world ? It is the same thing, as if all things were left to a
wild chance, without a Supreme Governor and Judge.
* Works, vol. v. p. 510. f Ibid. p. 209,

518 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXIII.
There is a very extraordinary way of arguing which this writer
makes use of to set aside future punishments. He observes, that
"to assume that the divine providence towards mankind in this
world has one criterion, and in the next another, would be extrava
gant;"* and therefore he mentions it as an absurdity in the Chris
tian scheme, that "the proceedings ofthe future state shall be the
very reverse of the present; for then every individual human crea
ture is to be tried ; whereas here they are only considered collec
tively ; that the most secret actions, nay the very thoughts of the
heart, will be laid open, and sentence will be pronounced accord-
ingly."+ The plain meaning of this is, that the individuals of man
kind shall not be obnoxious to any punishment from God, either in
this world or in the next ; and consequently that there shall be no
exercise of divine justice here or hereafter. For he himself declares,
that "justice requires, that rewards and punishments should be
measured out in various degrees, according to the various circum
stances of particular cases, and in proportion to them." He has
endeavoured to turn that into an argument against the Christian
account of a future judgment, which is really its glory, and a great
proof of its truth, viz. that men's secret actions, and even the
thoughts of their hearts, shall then be laid open. These are things
that lie quite out of the reach of human judicatories, and yet upon
these it is that the morality of actions doth properly depend. If
therefore there be no account to be given of them here or hereafter,
men's best or worst actions or dispositions will go unrewarded or
unpunished, which is the highest absurdity, supposing there is a
Supreme moral Governor or Judge. But according to the account
given us in the gospel, the secrets of all hearts shall be revealed, the
hidden springs shall be inquired into, from whence good and evil
actions flow, men shall be shown in their true characters, no real
good action shall pass unrewarded, or evil one unpunished ; than
which nothing can possibly have a greater influence to engage us
to exercise a constant care over our inward temper, and our outward
conduct. Another argument he makes use of, which, as far as it is of any
force, bears against future punishments in general ; it is this : that
"reparation and terror are objects essential to the constitution of
human justice. But what does that justice require, if it may be
called justice, when it tends neither to reparation nor terror?""); He
acknowledges, what some engaged in the same cause have thought
fit to deny, that " to reform offenders is not the sole nor the prin
cipal end of punishment. Those that are capital must have some
other. The criminal is executed for the sake of others, and that he
may do some good by the terror of his death. The prince that
should punish without regard to reparation or terror, could have no
motive to punish but the pleasure of punishing ; which no spirit but
that of anger, vengeance, or cruelty, can inspire." He asks there
fore, " what effects can punishments have, when the system of
* Works, vol. v. p. 498. t Ibid, p. 494. X Ibid. p. 494, 495.

Let. Xa.a.111. lord bolingbroke.

519

human government is at an end, the state of probation is over, when
there is no farther means for reformation of the wicked, nor repara
tion to the injured by those who injured them, and when the eternal
lots of all mankind are cast, and terror is of no farther use ?* But
it is to be considered, that the terror of the future punishment is of
great use in this present state. The proper design of the threaten
ings of future punishment is not to inflict the punishment, but to
prevent the wickedness, and thereby to prevent the punishment.
But when once those threatenings are denounced, justice and truth,
and the majesty of the Supreme Ruler, require that they should be
ordinarily executed upon those who, notwithstanding those threaten
ings, persist in their wicked courses. For if it were laid down as a
principle, that though these threatenings were denounced, justice
or goodness would not suffer them to be executed, it would be the
same thing as if there were no threatenings at all ; since they would
in that case answer no purpose, and could not be said to be so much
as in terrorem. But besides the necessity there is that such punish
ments should be threatened here, for the sake of preserving order,
and restraining wickedness among mankind, even in this present
state, and consequently, that they should be executed hereafter
upon those that have incurred the threatened penalties, of what use
the execution of them may be to other orders of beings in a future
state, to inspire an abhorrence of sin,' and a fear of the divine ma
jesty, and how far the influence of them may extend, no man can
take upon him to determine. The Scripture intimates, as if the
future judgment were to be transacted in a most solemn manner, in
the view not merely ofthe whole human race, but of other orders of
intelligent beings. Mention is often made of great numbers of
angels as present on that occasion. Those punishments may there
fore be of very extensive use, for any thing that can be proved to
the contrary, for promoting the general good, for displaying the
evil of sin, and vindicating the majesty of the divine laws and go
vernment, and may .serve as solemn warnings to the intellectual
creation. God takes no pleasure in their torments, as such, but in
answering the great ends of his government, in taking the properest
methods to promote the good of the whole, in the exercise and dis
play of his own infinite righteousness and purity, in separating the
just from the unj ust, and putting a visible eternal discrimination
between the obstinate opposers of his authority and goodness, and
those who loved and served him in sincerity.
When this writer reckoneth reparation among the ends of punish
ment, he seemeth by reparation to mean only the repairing the inju
ries done by one creature to another ; as if all the malignity and
demerit of sin consisted only in its being a wrong done to our
fellow creatures ; and as if it were not to be considered or punished
at all as an offence against the divine majesty, and a violation of
the laws of the supreme universal Lord. But this is a great mis
take. Sin is indeed a great evil, considered as an offence committed
* Works, vol. v. p. 507,508.

520 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL AVRITERS. Let. XXXIII.
against our fellow-creatures, and against the true dignity, perfec
tion, and happiness of our own natures, and a counteracting the
proper end and order of our beings; but the principal part of its
malignity is its being an insurrection against the majesty and autho
rity of the great Lord of the universe, to whom we owe all possible
subjection and obedience, an opposing our wills and appetites to
the will and law of the Supreme, the basest ingratitude to his infi
nite goodness, a casting an indignity on his adorable perfections,
and on the wisdom and righteousness of his government, and there
fore a breach of universal order. This is what renders sin princi
pally criminal and odious, and what we ought to have a chief
regard to in our humble confessions, or else we are not true penitents.
And as it is in this that its malignity chiefly consisteth, and as God
would have us abhor it principally on this account, so it is on this
account especially that he punisheth it : for he judgeth of things
as they really are. If the greatest evil of sin consisteth in its being
an offence committed against the divine majesty, a wilful transgres
sion of his known laws, and an opposition to his authority and
goodness ; if the more there is of this in any sin, the more heinous
its guilt must be acknowledged to be ; if this carrieth an infinitely
greater, a more monstrous malignity in it, than its being merely an
offence against creatures like ourselves ; it is contrary to all the
dictates of reason and good sense to suppose, that the most wise and
righteous Governor of the world, in punishing sin, hath not princi
pally a regard to that, on the account of which it principally deserv
eth punishment. It is true that God cannot be really hurt by our
sins and vices, nor beatified by our obedience and our virtues. But
this is only owing to the transcendent excellence of his own most
perfect nature. And it would be a strange thing to make the infi
nite perfection of his nature a reason why his creatures should be
allowed to transgress his laws with impunity. On the contrary, the
greater the excellency of his nature is, the greater is the evil of sin as
committed against his infinite majesty; and that very perfection of
his nature makes it impossible for him not to hate all moral evil.
For it is manifest, that an eternal love of order, purity and righte
ousness, is necessarily included in infinite perfection. And how
shall he show his just abhorrence of sin, and aversion to the breach
of moral order, but by the marks and effects of his displeasure
against it, that is, by punishing obstinate presumptuous trans
gressors ?
Our author tells us, that " future punishments were not believed
by the philosophers, not even by Plato and Pythagoras, though
they talked of them."* And that " at the coming of our Saviour
they were general disregarded even by the vulgar." If this were so,
it became the more necessary to renew the discovery, and set it in
a clearer and stronger light, since it was of vast importance to man
kind to believe it. By his own acknowledgment, the ablest philo
sophers and legislators thought so. And he himself frequently
* Works, vol. >. p. 513.

Let. XXXIII. LORD bolingbroke. 521
owns the great usefulness of this doctrine. And its usefulness is, as
I have before observed, in conjunction with other considerations, no
small argument of its truth.
Having considered what he hath offered with relation to future
rewards and punishments in general, I shall now examine the par
ticular objections he hath urged against the accounts given of them
in the Christian revelation.
He observes, that " had the doctrine of future rewards and pun
ishments been more general, and less descriptive ; had future pun
ishments been represented like the rewards, to be simply such as
eye never saw, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man could conceive, it
might have been maintained in credit, and have had an universal
and real influence — perhaps to the great advantage of religion. But
besides the absurdity of supposing that God inflicts eternal punish
ments on his creatures, which would render their non-existence in
finitely preferable to their existence on the whole ;" he apprehends
that " an air of ridicule has been cast on this doctrine by preserv
ing all the idle tales and burlesque images, which were propagated
in those days." He represents it as " nearly resembling the mytho-
logia de inferis, which has been so often laughed at."* As to the
account given us in the gospel of the future reward, it is incompa
rably noble and excellent, and not quite so general as he represents
it, but such as is fitted to raise in us the highest ideas of the felicity
and perfection to which good men shall be raised in the heavenly
world. The descriptions there set before us of future punishments
are general, but very expressive. And the burlesque images he
speaks of are awful and striking representations, designed and
fitted to convey images of terror, but not mixed with any trifling
or ridiculous circumstances, like the poetical tales and fables he
refers to.
But what he seems to lay a principal stress upon, for exposing
the Christian doctrine of future rewards and punishments, is this :
that "justice requires most certainly that rewards and punishments
should be measured out in every particular case, in proportion to the
merit and demerit of each individual. But instead of this, it is as
sured, that the righteous and the wicked are transported into heaven,
or plunged into hell, without any distinction of the particular cases
which have been so solemnly determined, and without any propor
tion observed between the various degrees of merit and demerit in
the application of those rewards and punishments."f And in all
that he offers in the latter part of the sixty-eighth of his Fragments
and Essays, he proceeds upon this supposition, that " the greatest
and least degree of virtue shall be rewarded, and the greatest and
least degree of vice punished alike :" And that it is " arbitrary
and tyrannical to make no distinction of persons in dissimilar
cases."J And again he urges, that " the hypothesis of all being
saved alike, or damned in the lump, tends to destroy little by little
* Works, vol. v. p. 542. t Ibid. p. 495. X Ibid. p. 496.

522 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXIII,
all those impressions which the belief of a future state is so usefully
designed to give."*
All that his Lordship here offers depends upon a great misappre
hension, or a wilful misrepresentation of the Christian doctrine on
this head. If men were to be rewarded and punished hereafter only
collectively, and no regard had to individuals, which our author
would persuade us is the method of God's proceedings towards
mankind in this present state, then it might be admitted that men
are saved and damned only in the lump, as he is pleased to express
it. But this is not the Scripture representation of God's proceed
ings in a future state. We are there most expressly assured, that
the case of every individual shall be examined and judged. It is
thus that our Lord, who is to be our judge, represents it : he tells
us, that he will come in his glory, and all his holy angels with him,
and then shall he reward every man according to his works, Mat. xvi.
27. St. Paul expressly declares, that God will render to every man
according to his deeds, Rom. ii. 6. That every one qf us shall give
an account of himself to God, Rom. xiv. 12. That we must all
appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive
the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it
be good or bad, 2 Cor. v. 10. That every man's work shall be tried,
and made manifest, 1 Cor. iii. 13. In speaking of the respective
duties of masters and servants, he lets them know, that the meanest
shall not be neglected, but shall receive a proper reward : That
whatsoever good thing a man doth, the same shall he receive qf the
Lord, whether he be bond or free : but he that doeth wrong, shall re
ceive for the wrong which he hath done, and there is no respect qf
persons, Eph. vi. 8. 9. Col. iii. 25. St. Peter assureth us, that God
without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, 1
Pet. i. 17. Christ is introduced as declaring, lam he which searcheth
the reins and hearts ; and I will give unto every one of you according
to your works, Rev. ii. 23. And in the description of the future
judgment, Rev. xx. 12. to show the exactness of that judgment, it
is said, that the books were opened, and the dead were judged out of
those things which were written in the books according to their works.
And it is repeated again, ver. 13. they were judged, every man ac
cording to their works.
From these several passages compared together, it appears with
the utmost evidence, that according to the whole tenor of the New
Testament, in the dispensing future retributions, the rewards and
punishments shall be measured out in every particular case, in propor
tion to the merit and demerit of each individual, which our author
saith is what justice requires. It is therefore manifest, that what is
there said concerning that future state of rewards and punishments,
must be understood in a consistency with the making an exact dis
tribution according to particular cases and circumstances ; and that
the general representations there made of heaven as a state of future
* Works, vol. v. p. 503.

23

Let. XXX111. LORD BOLINGBROKE.
happiness to the righteous, and of hell as a state of future punish
ment to the wicked, must be so taken and explained as to comport
with the different degrees of rewards and punishments to the one
and to the other ; and not as if all men were to be raised to the
same degree of future glory and happiness ; and all bad men to be
punished with the same degree of misery ; since it is so frequently
and expressly declared, that God will then, without respect of per
sons, render to every man according to his deeds; and that every
man shall then receive according to what he hath done in the body.
The general descriptions of that future glory are indeed sublime
and noble, and represent it in a most attractive view. And it was
proper it should be so. They set before us a happiness beyond
imagination great and glorious, the more effectually to animate us
to a patient continuance in well-doing. And it is signified, that it
is of such a nature, so transcendently great and excellent, as vastly
to exceed what any of the human race could in strictness of justice
have deserved. For the obedience of the best of men is very imper
fect, and mixed with many defects ; and therefore that eternal life
and happiness is represented as the gift of God, through Jesus
Christ. That reward is the effect of free sovereign grace and good
ness. And therefore none can find fault, if the glory and happiness
which shall be conferred upon good men hereafter be above what
they could be said to have strictly merited. But though the very
lowest degree of reward and happiness in that future state shall be
far superior to what the best of men could have pretended to have
challenged, as in strictness of justice due to his merits, yet God
shall so order it, in his infinite wisdom and righteousness, that there
shall be an admirable proportion observed in giving different degrees
of glory, according to the different proficiencies men had made in
real goodness during their state of trial. Nothing can be clearer to
this purpose than our Saviour's determination, in the parable of the
pounds, Luke xix. 12. 20. where he represents higher honours and
rewards conferred upon some than upon others, according to their
different degrees of usefulness, and the different improvements they
had made of what was committed to them. And in the blessings
he pronounceth upon those that are persecuted for righteousness
sake, he plainly intimates, that they should be distinguished with a
higher reward in heaven than many others, in proportion to their
greater sufferings and services. And in general he declares, that in
his Father' 's house are many mansions; which supposes that there
shall be different abodes provided for good men in that future world,
into which they shall be distributed, each of them happy in their
several ways, and each contented with the lot assigned them. But
no-where are we particularly told, what shall be the lowest de
gree of happiness and reward which shall be conferred on the
lowest degrees of real virtue and righteousness, nor would such a
discovery be of any use to mankind, or answer any valuable pur-

As to future punishments, in the inflicting of these the strictest
regard shall be had to the rules of justice, so that no man shall be

524 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXIII.
punished beyond his demerits. This incontestably follows from the
frequent declarations that are made, and which have been already
produced, that God will render to every man according to his deeds,
without respect of persons. But besides these general declarations,
there are several passages of Scripture which are designed to show,
that there shall be a remarkable difference made between some bad
men and others in the punishments inflicted on them ; and that in
the inflicting these punishments, a regard shall be had to the dif
ferent aggravations of their crimes. This is what our Lord plainly
signifies, when he declares with great solemnity, that it shall be more
tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, that is,
for the most profligate parts of the heathen world, than for those
that obstinately rejected and abused the gospel offers of mercy and
salvation, and who go on in an obstinate course of presumptuous sin
and disobedience, in opposition to the clearest light and most glo
rious advantages. And again, he declares, that that servant which
knew his Lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according
to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not,
and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few
stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be
required: and to whom men have committed much, of him will they
ask the more, Luke xii. 47. 48. Nothing can be plainer than it is
from this representation, that among those who shall be punished
in a future state, great difference shall be made in the degrees of
punishment inflicted on them, according to their different demerits ;
and that an exact consideration shall be had of their several cases,
and an equitable proportion shall be observed, and all proper allow
ances made. The general descriptions therefore of these future
punishments are to be interpreted in a consistency with supposing a
very great difference made between some and others in the degrees
of their punishment. In these general descriptions, the strongest
images of terror are made use of, and it is highly proper it should
be so. The punishments are described in their highest degree, as
they shall be inflicted on the most obstinate and heinous offenders.
No-where are we particularly told what shall be the lowest degree
of punishment which shall be inflicted in that future world; nor
what that state of vice and guilt is which shall subject men to the
least punishment. Such declarations could answer no good end,
and would probably be abused. It is more wisely done to leave that
matter in general expressions ; at the same time assuring us, that
every man shall be punished in a strict proportion to the circum
stances of his crime.
A due consideration of this will in a great measure obviate the
principal objections this author hath urged against the eternal dura
tion of that future punishment, which depend principally upon this
supposition, that all shall be alike subjected to the most extreme
degree of torment and misery, and so shall continue for ever:
whereas, if it be considered, that there shall be a great difference
made between some and others, in that future world ; that the state
of some shall be tolerable, compared with that of others ; and that

Let. XXXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 50.J
every man's case shall be considered, and his condition wisely
and exactly proportioned to what he had deserved ; on this sup
position, whatever the duration of it is supposed to be, it is still
just. Here it will not be improper to take notice of a remarkable pas
sage of this writer in relation to this present subject. He says,
"he could easily persuade himself, that the mercy of God pardons
the offenders who amend, consistently with his justice ; for else, as
all men offend, all men would be punished ; and that his goodness
may carry on the work his mercy has begun, and place such as are
the objects of both in a state where they will be exempt perhaps
eternally from all natural, and, as much as finite creatures can be,
from all moral evil. He could persuade himself, that they who are
the objects of neither, and are not therefore pardoned, remain, if
they do remain, excluded from the happiness of the others, and
reduced to a forlorn state. Some such hypothesis, where no cer
tainty is to be had, I could admit," says he, " as probable, because
it contradicts none of the divine attributes, sets none of them at
variance, nor breaks their harmony." Here he supposes it to be a
probable hypothesis, and perfectly consistent with the divine attri
butes, not only that some men, who are the proper objects ofthe
divine goodness and mercy, may continue eternally in a happy state
exempt from all evil ; but that others, who by their conduct have
rendered themselves not the proper objects of the divine mercy, may
be debarred from pardon, and may remain, whilst they do remain,
and consequently may remain eternally, supposing them to continue
in eternal existence, excluded from that happiness which the others
enjoy, and reduced to a forlorn state. If therefore we be assured
by a well-attested revelation, that this shall really be the case, he
ought not to object against it.
But he urges, that " it is absurd to suppose, that our state of
probation ends with this present life, and that judgment will be
determined by what we have done in this state.— And that a virtue
or wickedness of fifty or sixty years, should be rewarded with eternal
happiness, or punished with eternal misery."* The objection that
is drawn from the disproportion there is between the duration of the
state of trial, and the eternity that is to succeed it, might be made,
whatever we suppose the continuance of the time of trial to be. But
the shortness of this state of trial furnisheth a powerful considera
tion to engage us to improve it. And very probably, if it were
ordinarily much longer than it is, the condition of mankind might
be worse, in the present corrupt state of the human nature, than it
now is ; as the length of men's lives before the flood probably con
tributed to the wickedness that so much abounded. The argument,
therefore, as far as there is any weight in it, holdeth against the
supposing any state of trial at all, of whatever continuance. But
do we know enough of the measures and designs of the divine go
vernment, to be able to pronounce, that it may not be worthy of
- Wo:ks, vol. v. p. 493, 504, 505.

526 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXIII,
God, as the Supreme Governor of the world, to appoint to his rea
sonable creatures a state of trial and discipline, and to deal with
them according to their behaviour in such a state, and let them
know, that if they obstinately persist in their rebellion and disobe
dience, he will at length shut up his grace from them, and they
shall be excluded from that glory and felicity, with which he would
have bountifully rewarded their perseverance in a course of piety
and virtue during the time of trial allotted them? It may be left
to impartial reason, whether this constitution would not be more
wisely ordained, and more likely to promote the interests of virtue
and good order in the world, and to repress vice and wickedness,
than to set no bounds at all to the offers of his mercy, and to assure
them, that let them behave ever so wickedly and presumptuously,
and abuse and reject all the methods of his grace, yet still after they
leave this world, and at any other time throughout eternity, when
ever they repent, they shall be forgiven, and even restored to favour,
and raised to glory and felicity ? Would this be a rule of govern
ment worthy of the divine wisdom, or fit to be published throughout
the whole intellectual world ?
As reason leads us to conclude, that it is necessary, for answer
ing the great ends of moral government, that punishments should
be denounced against the obstinate transgressors of the divine laws,
so it may be justly doubted whether to creatures designed for an
immortal existence, the threatening of none but temporary punish
ments would be sufficient ; especially if they apprehended that they
should outlive those punishments for infinite ages in bliss and glory.
It certainly 'becometh us, in our inquiries concerning such matters
as these, to proceed with great modesty, since we cannot pretend of
ourselves, to be proper judges of what the governing wisdom and
righteousness of the Supreme Lord of the universe doth require,
and what is most worthy of God, and most for the good ofthe
whole, which is of far greater importance than the interests of par
ticular beings.
To consider the sentence which shall pass upon bad men at the
great day of judgment, as final and irreversible ; and that after this
there shall be no fresh offers of grace and mercy, but they shall
continue under the effects of that sentence during the whole of their
existence ; is certainly a consideration of the highest moment, and
must needs have a wonderful weight to engage us to make the best
use of the present state of trial allotted us, and to lay hold on the
offers of salvation that are now made to us upon the reasonable
terms of the new covenant. Whereas if we had reason to appre
hend, that there were to be new states of trial, new seasons and offers
of grace, after the general judgment, it would greatly weaken the
influence ofthe motives drawn from the threatenings of future pun
ishment. Nor is there any thing in this constitution which can be
proved to be inconsistent with the wisdom, justice, and equity of
the divine government. For as to the exclusion from the heavenly
felicity, which shall be a considerable part of that future punish
ment, there is no reasonable ground for expecting, that those who

Let. XXXIII. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 627
now reject the divine grace and mercy should ever be admitted to
that transcendent bliss and glory, which God hath been pleased of
his own free and rich goodness to promise to the righteous, and
which no man could pretend to challenge as in strictness of justice
due to him. Nor is it any impeachment of the divine wisdom and
goodness to leave obstinate sinners during the whole course of their
existence under that part of the punishment which ariseth from the
stinging reflections of their own guilty consciences, or from the na
tural effects of their wickedness and bad temper of mind. And what
ever farther punishments there may be more directly and immedi
ately inflicted by the divine hand, we may be sure they shall be in
such measures and proportions to each individual, as never to exceed
the demerit of their crimes.
What has been said may help us to judge of the strange repre
sentation this author is pleased to make of the Scripture doctrine of
future punishments : That " such a proceeding can be ascribed to
no principle, but to the revenge of a being, who punishes to the
full extent of his power, and merely for the pleasure of punishing,
and without any regard to justice, creatures who did not offend
him, merely for the pleasure of offending him ; creatures who had
free-will, and made wrong elections ; creatures who might plead, in
mitigation of their punishments, their frailties, their passions, the
imperfections of their natures, and the numerous temptations to
which they stood exposed."* This representation is unjust in every
article. The tendency of it is plainly this : to apologize for sin,
and to diminish the evil of it. And what good can be proposed by
this, it is hard to say. Nothing can be more contrary to the honour
of God, to the good of mankind, to the peace and order of the moral
world, than to endeavour to make men entertain slight thoughts of
the evil of sin. To what purpose is it to say, that sinners do not
offend God merely for the pleasure of offending him ? If they do
it for the pleasure of gratifying their own corrupt inclinations and
appetites, which they oppose and prefer to the most wise and holy
will and law of the sovereign Lord of the universe, is not this a
very heinous guilt? Their having free-will, and making wrong
elections, when it was in their choice to have done otherwise,
though mentioned here in mitigation of their guilt, is a great aggra
vation of their crime, and an abuse of their reason and liberty which
are amongst the noblest gifts of God. To plead passions and temp
tations, is an excuse, which, if admitted, may serve to apologize for
the greatest crimes. But they are not allowed by any wise human
judicatories as a reason for exempting those that transgress the laws
from the penalties to which their transgressions had exposed them.
And Lord Bolingbroke himself has elsewhere very properly ob
served, that those very persons who pretend that inclinations can
not be restrained, and who speak most of the power of the appetites
and passions, can resist and control them, when any evident in-
* Works, vol. v. p. 518.

528 A VIEW OF THE DEI6TICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXIII.
terest, or contrary inclination, leads them to do so.* And as to
any transgressions that may properly be called frailties and infirmi
ties, and which have little of the will in them, the wise and just
Ruler of the world will no doubt make all the allowances that
equity can demand.
Upon the whole, the Christian doctrine of future rewards and
punishments is so far from furnishing a just objection against the
divine original of the gospel revelation, that, if rightly considered,
it yieldeth a noble evidence of its usefulness and truth. It is scarce
possible to form an idea of any thing more solemn and affecting,
and better fitted to make a strong impression on the human mind,
than the representation given in the New Testament of the future
judgment. The whole human race convened before the sovereign
universal Judge, innumerable myriads of holy angels attending, the
judicial process carried on with the greatest solemnity, a strict and
impartial inquiry made, the most hidden actions brought to light,
and the very secrets of the heart laid open, and all followed by
eternal retributions. It seemeth plain from our Saviour's manner
of representing. things, that he regarded it as a matter of great im
portance, that sinners should have no hope or expectation given
them of obtaining mercy and salvation, if they persisted to the end
of this present life in a course of impenitence, presumptuous sin,
and disobedience. He nowhere giveth the least intimation, that
the punishment ofthe wicked in a future state shall have an end.
On the contrary, he still speaketh of it in terms, which, according
to the natural import of the expressions, seem to signify that it shall
be of a perpetual duration, without adding any thing to qualify
those expressions. And for any persons to flatter themselves, that
God may in his absolute sovereignty dispense with the rigour of his
threatenings, and to depend upon such an expectation, would be
an extreme folly, when the plain tenor of the revelation seems to go
the other way.
I have now finished the design I had in view, which was to de
fend, natural and revealed religion against the attacks made upon
both by this very confident and assuming author. In the execution
of this design, I have principally confined myself to the reasoning
part of his Lordship's works, as far as religion is concerned, and
have not willingly overlooked any thing that had the appearance of
argument. But I have not attempted to follow him in several of
those excursions which seem to have been principally intended to
show the variety of his reading, of which it must be owned there is
a great appearance, though I cannot say he has given many proofs
of his having maturely digested it. Several things there are in his
scheme of metaphysics, and in the account he has given of the sen
timents of the ancient philosophers, which might be justly animad
verted upon, though it will not be denied that some of his observa
tions on these heads are just and curious. But as a distinct exami
nation of them would have very much enlarged this work, which is
* See his Letters on the Study and Use of History, let. iii. sect. 1.

Let. XXXIII. Lorn, bolingbroke. 529
already longer than I at first intended, or than I would have wished
it to be, I have chosen to omit them : for the same reason I have
taken no particular notice of the reflections he has occasionally cast
upon the ancient fathers of the Christian Church, and upon the
body ofthe primitive Christians,* of whom he has made a most in
jurious representation, and has in effect Justified the persecutions
raised by the heathens against them. He tells us, that " their
clergy were, under pretence of religion, a very lawless tribe. — That
they broke the laws in the most public manner, and instigated
others to break them, by popular insurrections against the authority
of magistrates, and by tumults and riots, in which they insulted
the established religion of the empire. — And he believes the list of
the martyrs consisted more of those who suffered for breaking the
peace, than of those who suffered quietly for the sake of their re
ligion." f Such is the charge he has thought fit to bring against a
worthy and peaceable body of men (for so the primitive Christians
generally were) ; whose innocent and virtuous behaviour has been
acknowledged by some of their pagan adversaries themselves.
You will observe, that I have, for the most part, except where
the argument led to it, passed over the bitter sarcasms he so fre
quently throws out against the Christian divines. They have the
honour to be reviled and insulted in every work that is designed
against revealed religion. But it must be owned, that his Lordship
has in obloquy and reproach far exceeded all that have gone before
him. He has found out, what the world did not know before, that
the divines are in a formed alliance and confederacy with the atheists
against God and his providence, and that the latter are not such
dangerous enemies to religion as tbe former.
I have not thought, myself obliged to take any distinct notice of
the long account he has given in his fourth essay, of the encroach
ments of the ecclesiastical upon the civil power, and the several
* As a specimen how ready our author is to lay hold of the slightest appearances
for casting a slur upon the ancient fathers and primitive Christians, I would observe,
that after mentioning the Gnostics, and their pretences, he adds, that " the orthodox
grew in time as much Gnostics as others ; and we see that the church of Alexandria
thought it necessary to be so, in order to be truly religious."* He is so fond of this
thought, that he afterwards repeateth it, and talks of the " heretics assuming the
pompous title of Gnostics, and despising the first preachers of Christianity, as igno
rant and illiterate men : and that Clement of Alexandria maintained, that to be a good
Christian it was necessary to be a good Gnostic, "f It would be hard to produce an
instance of greater disingenuity than Lord Bolingbroke is here guilty of, and it can
scarcely be supposed that he was so ignorant as not to be sensible of it. The word
Gnostic properly signifies a man of knowledge. Some corrupters of Christianity in
the primitive times, who made high pretences to extraordinary knowledge, assumed
that title to themselves. And because Clement describes the true Gnostics in oppo
sition to the false, to show that this name, in which those heretics gloried, belonged in
its just sense only to the true Christian ; therefore he and the orthodox Christians
were Gnostics, i. e. of the same principles and practices with that sect which they
condemned. It may be safely left to the reader to judge of the fairness of such a con
duct. * Works, vol. iv. p. 336. t Ibid. p. 458.
t Works, vol. iv. p. 434.
M M

530 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXIII.
steps by which those encroachments were carried on, especially in
the times ofthe papal usurpation. He has advanced little on these
heads that can be called new, or which had not been observed by
others before him. And we have his Lordship's own acknowledg
ment frequently repeated, that this is by no means chargeable on
true original Christianity. It would therefore be very disingenuous,
to turn that to the disadvantage of the religion of Jesus, which has
been only owing to a gross abuse and corruption of it, a corruption
which was plainly foretold in the sacred writings, at a time when
it was impossible for any human sagacity to foresee it.
He frequently exclaims against artificial theology, and complains
ofthe profane mixtures which have been brought into the Christian
religion, by the subtilties of a vain philosophy, and by idle tradi
tions. It must be acknowledged, that there has often been too
much ground for such complaints. And to endeavour to separate
pure uncorrupted Christianity, as taught by Christ and his apostles,
from debasing mixtures and the corrupt additions that have been
made to it, is undoubtedly a noble and useful work, and, when
properly performed, is doing a real service to Christianity, and
tendeth to establish the credit of it, and to promote its sacred
interests. But such writers as Lord Bolingbroke are certainly the'
unfittest persons in the world to undertake it:
Non tali auxilio, nee defensoribus istis,
Tempus eget.
Instead of promoting the good work of reformation, and of con
tributing to restore religion in its primitive purity, they bring a dis
grace upon those who would in good earnest attempt it, and furnish
the patrons of those corruptions with a plausible pretence for re
proaching and misrepresenting such persons, as having an ill inten
tion against Christianity itself, and as serving the cause of deists
and infidels.
His Lordship charges the mischiefs which have befallen the
Christian Church as having been chiefly owing to this : that " the
pure word of God neither is nor has been the sole criterion of ortho
doxy."* He asserts, that " no human authority can supply or
alter, much less improve, what the Son of God came on earth to
reveal."t He says, that " divines should return to the Gospel, as
philosophers'" have returned to Nature, and presume to dogmatize
no farther than the plain import of it will justify.'' -f And here he
recommends it as the most effectual way to remove the scandals
arising from the dissensions among Christians, that the Christian
divines " should be content to explain what they understand, to
adore what they understand not, and to leave in mystery all that
Christ and his apostles have left so." §
* Works, vol. iv. p. 448. t Ibid. p. 627. t Ibid. p. 449.
« Ibid. p. 629.

Let. XXXIV. LORD BOLINGBROKE. 531
These advices, considered in themselves, might have been thought
to proceed from a good and friendly intention. But every thing is
suspected that comes from such a hand. Yet a real friend to Chris
tianity will know how to make a proper use of admonitions and
reproofs, even when given by an enemy.
I shall conclude with this observation : that the religion of Jesus,
as delivered in the New Testament in its original purity and sim
plicity, will be ever able to stand its ground against all the assaults
of the most subtile and most malicious adversaries. It hath a dignity
and excellence in it, which hath often extorted favourable acknow
ledgments even from those who have appeared to be strongly pre
judiced against it, of which we have a remarkable instance in the
late Lord Bolingbroke. And I am persuaded, that the more any
thinking man considereth it with a free and unprejudiced mind, the
more fie will admire it, and will be the more convinced of its truth
and excellence, and of its divine original. You will, I doubt not,
join with me in earnest prayer to God, that this holy religion may
be more universally diffused, that it may be made known to those
who know it not, and that where it is known and professed, it may
have more of the happy effects which it is so well fitted to produce.
I am,
Reverend and dear Sir,
Most sincerely and affectionately yours,
JOHN LELAND.

LETTER XXXIV.
Sir,
The foregoing Letter finished the observations I had made
on Lord Bolingbroke's posthumous works. In the course of those
observations, I had occasion to make some references to a small
treatise I had published before, intituled, Reflections on the late
Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Use of History, which
was the first of his Lordship's writings in which he had appeared in
an avowed opposition to the Christian cause. And it having been
thought proper to reprint those Reflections, I was advised by you
and other friends to insert them in the Supplement to the View ofthe
Deistical Writers, lately published, as they bear a near affinity to
m m 2

532 A VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. Let. XXXIV.
the subjects there treated of, and might render that part which re
lates to Lord Bolingbroke more complete. For the same reasons
these Reflections are retained in this new edition of the View ofthe
Deistical Writers, and are here subjoined to the observations on
the late Lord Bolingbroke's posthumous works. But whereas in
the two first editions of those Reflections, besides the remarks which
were made upon those passages in his Lordship's Letters that relate
to Christianity and the holy Scriptures, there were several things
added of a political nature, and which were designed to examine and
detect his Lordship's misrepresentations ; in the third, fourth, and
this edition, it was thought proper not to intermix any thing of a
political nature, which would not be so well suited to the design of
the present work. For this reason, whereas in the first and second
editions of these Reflections, it was proposed to distribute the re
marks into three heads, the third of which related to the severe re
flections Lord Bolingbroke had made upon the consequences of the
late revolution, and the state of things under the present establish
ment ; this third head, which in those editions reached from p. 133
to p. 166, is omitted. But there are additions and improvements
made in other parts of these Reflections ; the most considerable of
which relates to the curse pronounced by Noah upon Canaan, which,
in the opinion of some judicious friends, was not so fully considered
before as it ought to have been.
This addition was drawn up, as you know, some time ago, and
sent over in order to be inserted in the new edition of these Reflec
tions, before I saw Dr. Newton's accurate dissertation on this sub
ject, in his excellent Dissertations upon Prophecy, which came but
very lately into my hands. It will now probably be thought not so
necessary; but I have chosen to let it stand as it was first drawn up,
because it may possibly not be without its use, and will tend to
render the Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study
and Use of History more complete. The method I have pursued is
something different from Dr. Newton's. He seems to incline to
think there is a defect in the Hebrew copies. But I choose to defend
the passage according to the present reading of the Hebrew copies,
which is followed by almost all the ancient versions, as well as by
our own translators.
The Preface to the Reflections is somewhat long ; but it was not
thought proper to omit it, as it contains several things, which, in
the opinion of some whose judgment I regard, may be as useful as
any part of those Reflections.

REFLECTIONS

LATE LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS,

STUDY AND USE OF HISTORY ;
ESPECIALLY SO FAR AS THEY RELATE TO CHRISTIANITY,
AND THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.

These " Reflections" were first published in the Year 1753, and before any
part of this " View of the Deistical Writers" was written.

CONTENTS

REFLECTIONS, &c.

An account of some illustrious Laymen, who have either professedly written
in defence of Christianity and the holy Scriptures, or have in their writings
shown a high esteem and veneration for them . . . Pref. 541
The enquiry, whether Christianity be true and of a divine original, is of the
highest importance  . _ 542
A brief representation of the excellent nature and design of the Christian
religion  .... 543
Those are no friends to mankind who endeavour to subvert its divine authority 544
PART I.
ON THE STUDY ANt> USE OF HISTORY.
The high encomiums Lord Bolingbroke is pleased to bestow upon himself . 545
There is a great appearance of vanity in his Letters, and a strong affectation
ofnovelty  547
He discovers great keenness and bitterness of spirit, and writes as if he were
out of humour with mankind .  548
Many of his observations on history are just and curious, but there is not much
in them that can be called entirely new  549
History rightly improved is of great use ; but not, as his Lordship seems to
represent it, the only proper means of instruction  550
He would have us read the histories of the ancients, but not to study any but
those of the two last centuries  552
The reflections Lord Bolingbroke has made upon literature examined . . 553
He passes the most contemptuous censure upon grammarians, critics, revisers.
and publishers, of ancient manuscripts — but especially upon antiquaries and
chronologers, 553, and upon the learned in general  554
The tendency of his representations is to bring learning into contempt and to
introduce barbarism  556
The labours and writings of studious men are of great advantage forpromoting
improvement in knowledge  . 557
An arrogant self-sufficiency, and contempt of the labours and judgments of
others, no proper disposition for finding out truth ..... 557

536

CONTENTS OF

PART II.

AN EXAMINATION OF THE PRINCIPAL THINGS OFFERED BY LORD BOLINGBROKE,
TO INVALIDATE THE AUTHORITY AND CREDIBILITY OF THE SACRED HISTORY.
SECTION I.
HIS LORDSHIP'S OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE SCRIPTURES OF THE OLD
TESTAMENT CONSIDERED.
A sura mary account of those objections  561
It is no just prejudice against the authority of those writings, that the Jews
had been slaves to the Egyptians, Assyrians, Persians, &c. 561 ; or, that
they were for a long time unknown to the Greeks, or despised by them . 562
The heathen writers generally took up with idle reports against the Jews,
without making a due enquiry  564
The advantageous testimony given by Strabo concerning Moses and the Jewish
nation ... .  ib.
The excellent nature and tendency of the Jewish Scriptures show they were
not fictions of a superstitious and lying people  565
There are peculiar characters of simplicity, and an impartial regard to truth
in the sacred history  566
The Scriptures were not forged or corrupted by the latter Jews, 568 ; Nor by
Ezra, and the compilers of the sacred canon, upon their return from the
Babylonish captivity  568
The Hebrew language was not entirely forgotten in the captivity, but con
tinued in use after it .  568
The Jewish sacred books not lost in the captivity  569
The people were in possession of those books, and had a great veneration for
them, before Ezra was sent to Jerusalem . . .... 570
The establishing of the sacred canon by Ezra, and the men of the great syna
gogue, how to be understood  571
Ezra did not give authority to the law of Moses, nor first publish the facts by
which that law was attested ...  572
Those facts were of a very public nature, and could not have been imposed
upon the people, if they had not been true — and were in all ages received
and acknowledged by the whole nation ....... 573
No parallel between the Hellenistical fables and the sacred records . . 574
The accidents to which the Scriptures were liable from errors of transcribers,
&c. no argument against their truth or divine authority . . . . ib.
The variations of the copies in smaller instances confirm their harmony in the
main  575
The objectionsdrawn from the differencesbetween Jews and Christians examined 577
They are generally agreed in what relates to the divine authority of the Jewish
Scriptures  -  ib.
The curse pronounced by Noah upon Canaan largely considered, and shown
to be no just objection against the authority of the Mosaic writings . . 579
SECTION II.
THE SCRIPTURES AND HISTORY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT VINDICATED AGAINST
HIS LORDSHIP'S EXCEPTIONS.
The frauds and falsehood of professed Christians no just prejudice against
the authority of the sacred books of the New Testament, or the credibility
of the facts recorded there  . 58H
No encouragement given to such frauds in the New Testament, nor have any
persons taken more pains to detect those frauds than Christian divines and
critics .'  ib.
The pretence that the Church destroyed the heathen writings, especially those
that were written against Christianity, examined  ib.

THE REFLECTIONS, ETC. 537
Lord Bolingbroke charges Christians, even the most learned, as not having
honesty or sagacity enough, to take an accurate examination of the Jewish
and Christian system  590
He allegeth, that Christianity is wholly founded upon facts, and that those
facts have not been proved, as all other facts which pass for authentic ought
to be proved  ib.
All the conditions requisite to render the accounts of any past facts credible,
concur in relation to the important facts on which Christianity is founded . 591
Those facts were done in the most open and public manner . . . ib.
The accounts of them were published in the age when the facts were done . 592
And by persons perfectly acquainted with those facts, and who were of great
probity and simplicity, and discover an impartial regard to truth . . ib.
They had no temptation to disguise or falsify the facts — but bore witness to
them, in opposition to their worldly interests and rooted prej udices ; and
though they were thereby exposed to the most grievous sufferings . . 593
Tbe.writings themselves have all the characters of genuine purity and simpli
city and uncorrupted integrity ; and have been transmitted to us with an
unquestionable evidence, greater than can be produced for any other
writings in the world  ib.
What farther confirms the truth of the facts, is, the conversion of vast num
bers of both Jews and Gentiles, who were brought by the evidence of those
facte to embrace the religion of Jesus  594
If those facts had not been true, that religion must have sunk in the beginning,
considering the circumstances under which it made its first appearance in
the world, and the difficulties it had to encounter with . . . 595
What his Lordship offereth to show, that there is no proof that the gospels
were written in the first age of Christianity, examined . . . 596
The apostolical fathers all along supposed the facts recorded in the gospels to
be of undoubted truth, and have frequent references to passages found in
the gospels. — This shown particularly concerning Barnabas, Clement, Igna
tius, and Polycarp ....  597
The gospels we have now in our hands were certainly extant in the apostolic
age, and regarded as authentic. — And in the beginning of the second cen
tury were universally spread, and read in the public assemblies of Christians 599
The four gospels, and these only, were generally received as of divine authority
in the Christian church, in the ages nearest the apostles, and have continued
to be acknowledged ever since .... .... 600
The enemies of Christianity, whether Jews or Heathens, who lived nearest
those times, never pretended to deny that they were written by Christ's own
disciples and attendants  ib.
The books themselves have all the marks and characters of the apostolic age,
and which plainly point to the time in which they were written, and not
one mark of a later date  .... 601
The pretence, that there had been historical evidence against Christianity, but
that it was afterwards suppressed, shown to be vain and groundless . . 603
The objection, that the facts on which Christianity is founded are only
attested by Christians, examined  604
We have the testimony of adversaries concerning those facts, as far as could
be expected from adversaries £  605
The Christians that attest the facts whereby the gospel was established, were
such as were themselves converted to Christianity upon the evidence of those
facts, which gives force to their testimony . ... 607
St. Paul's testimony particularly considered  ib.
Lord Bolingbroke's argument to prove that there is at present no standard at
all of Christianity ..•¦•••• 608
The Romish writers, in endeavouring to show that the Scripture is insufficient
to be a complete rule of faith and practice, have really served the infidel
cause  ¦ ¦ . .- ¦ • ib.
The pretence, that the most extravagant and contradictory opinions may be
founded upon the same text, and plausibly defended by the same authority,
examined  • . . . . 609

538 CONTENTS OF THE REFLECTIONS, ETC.
Tlie different interpretations which have been put upon Scripture, no proof
that they are not sufficiently clear and determinate to be a rule of faith and
practice  610
Let a revelation be ever so clear, it would be absurd to expect that all men
should agree in their sense of it : but this does not hinder its being of great
use  ih.
After all the clamour that has been raised about differences among Christians
there hath been a general agreement among them in all ages, about many
matters of the highest importance  ib.
True Christianity, instead of receiving a fatal blow, as his Lordship pretends,
at the resurrection of letters, had then a glorious revival . . . .611
The Conclusion  612

PREFACE.

Although no man needs to make an apology for using his best
endeavours in defence of our common Christianity, when it is openly
attacked; yet as my engaging again in this cause, after having done
it on some former occasions, might have an appearance of too much
forwardness, it was with some reluctance that I was persuaded to
undertake it. What had great weight with me, was the judgment
and advice of a person of great worth,* of whose sincere friendship
I have had many proofs, and' whom I greatly honour for his truly
Christian and candid spirit, as well as his zeal for our holy religion.
He urged, that it was highly proper to take notice of the contempt
and abuse attempted to be thrown upon Christianity and the holy
Scriptures, by a writer of so great name, and whose specious insinua
tions, and confident assertions, might probably make disadvantage
ous impressions upon minds too well prepared to receive them. And,
as he had not then heard that any other had undertaken it, or
intended to do so, he thought my drawing up Remarks on these
Letters, which had made so much noise, might be of some use.
This determined me to attempt it ; and how far what is now offered
is fitted to answer the intention, must be submitted to the judgment
ofthe public. I am sensible of the disadvantage one is under in appear
ing against a writer of so distinguished a character as the late Lord
Viscount Bolingbroke. His Lordship's admirers will no doubt expect,
that a proper decent respect should be paid to his great abilities and
talents, as well as quality. This 1 readily acknowledge : but there
is certainly a still greater regard due to the honour of Christianity,
which he hath unworthily insulted. However, it is hoped the rea
der will find, that care has been taken not to transgress the rules of
decency, or to push the charge against him farther than his own
words give just ground for; and that angry and reproachful expres
sions have not been made use of, even where there seemed to be a
sufficient provocation given.
It might have been expected, from a person of his Lordship's
genius, and who seems fond of saying things which had not been
insisted upon before, that when he thought fit to appear against the
authority of the holy Scriptures, and the Christian religion, he would
have managed the argument in a different manner, and to greater
advantage, than had been done by others in the same cause before
him. But I do not find, that, with all his sagacity and penetration,
he hath advanced any thing on the argument, that can be properly
called a new discovery ; or that he hath given any additional force to
the objections which have been urged by others, and to which suf
ficient answers have been made.
In that part of his Letters, in which he attempteth to expose the
Scripture history as false and uncertain, there are several things
* The Rev. Dr. Thomas Wilson, Rector of Walbrook, and Prebendary of West
minster.

540

PREFACE.

thrown in, which seem rather calculated to show his Lordship's
reading, than to answer the main design he appears to have had in
view. It would be no difficult matter to point to some mistakes and
inaccuracies he hath fallen into. But I have chosen for the most
part to pass them by, and confine myself to those things that have
a nearer relation to the argument.
Any one that is conversant with those that are called the Deistical
Writers, must have observed, that it is very usual for them to put
on an appearance of respect for Christianity, at the same time that
they do all in their power to subvert it. In this his Lordship hath
thought fit to imitate them.
He hath sometimes expressed a seeming regard for the holy
Scriptures ; and hath carried it so far as to make a show of owning
the divine inspiration of some parts of them. But I believe he
would have been loath to have had it thought, that he was in earnest.
It is not easy to see the justice, or even the good sense, of such a
conduct; since the disguise is too thin to impose upon the most un
wary reader ; nor can I see what end it can answer, but to give one
no very good opinion of the writer's sincerity.
This justice, however, must be done to the noble author, that he
hath brought the controversy, relating to the divine authority ofthe
Christian religion, into a narrower compass than some others engaged
in the same cause have seemed willing to do. He asserteth, that
Christianity is a religion founded upon facts ; and fairly acknowledg
ed that if the facts can be proved to be true, the divine original
and authority of the Christian religion are established. And what
he requireth is, that these facts should be proved, as all other past
facts, that are judged worthy of credit, are proved, viz. by good
historical evidence. This bringeth the controversy to a short issue :
for if it can be shown, that the great important facts, recorded in
the evangelical writings, have been transmitted to us with as much
evidence as could be reasonably expected, supposing those facts to
have been really done ; then, by his Lordship's concessions, and
according to his own way of stating the case, they are to be re
ceived as true; and consequently the Christian religion is of divine
authority. His Lordship had too much sense to deny (as some have been
willing to do) the certainty of all historical evidence as to past facts,
or to insist upon ocular demonstration for things done in former
ages. Since therefore the best way of knowing and being assured of
past facts is, by authentic accounts, written and published in the age
in which the facts were done ; all that properly remains is, to prove
the credibility and authenticity ofthe gospel-records ; and that they
have been transmitted to us with such a degree of evidence, as may
be safely depended upon. And notwithstanding what his Lordship
hath insinuated to the contrary, this hath been often done with
great clearness and force, by the writers that have appeared on the
behalf of Christianity. What is offered in this way in the following
Reflections, will, I hope, be judged sufficient; though I have done
little more than point to the heads of things, which might easily

&

PREFACE. 541
have been enlarged upon, if I had not been afraid of swelling these
Reflections to too great a bulk.
The chief danger to be apprehended from his Lordship's book,
appears to me to arise from the contemptuous insinuation he has
thrown out against Christianity, as if it could not bear the light, or
stand the test of an impartial enquiry, and as if every man of sense
that examines into first principles without prejudice, must imme
diately see through the delusion. This, from a man of his Lordship's
known abilities, and fine taste, may be apt to do mischief among
those, who, without any uncommon abilities, or giving themselves
the trouble of much thinking, yet want to pass for persons of extra
ordinary penetration, and raised above vulgar prejudices. But if
authority were to decide this cause, it were easy to produce, on the
side of Christianity, many great names of persons, whose learning
and good sense, and eminent merit, are universally acknowledged. I
shall not mention any of the clergy on this occasion, because they
might perhaps be excepted against : though, if extensive knowledge
and learning, if depth of thought and exactness of judgment, if
great candour and probity of manners, or if fineness of genius, and
elegance of taste in polite literature, might recommend them as fit
to judge in these matters, many of them might be named, so con
fessedly eminent in all these respects, as would render them orna
ments to any profession in the world. But it may not be improper
to mention some illustrious Laymen, who have either professedly
written in defence of Christianity, and the holy Scriptures, or have,
in their writings, shown an high esteem and veneration for them.
Of foreigners, among many that might be mentioned to advantage,
I shall only take notice of the Lord Du Plessis Mornay, who was
both a very wise statesman, and eminently learned ; the celebrated
M. Pascal, one of the finest writers, and greatest geniuses of the
last age ; that extraordinary man, Grotius, not easily to be paral
leled for force and extent of genius, as well as variety of learning ;
those great men, the Barons Puffendorfand Ezekiel Spanheim, the
former deservedly admired for his great knowledge of the law of
nature and nations, the latter peculiarly eminent for his acquaintance
with the Belles Lettres, and refined taste in the politer parts of
learning. To these might be added many excellent persons of our
own nation, such as Lord Bacon, Mr. Selden, Sir Charles Wolsely,
Sir Matthew Hale, the honourable Robert Boyle, Mr. Locke, Sir
Isaac Newton, Mr. Addison, Mr. Forbes the late Lord President of
Scotland. I believe there are few but would think it an honour to
be ranked with these illustrious names, some of them remarkable for
their eminent station and figure in the world, and great political
abilities ; and all of them justly admired for the extent of their
learning and knowledge, the solidity of their judgment, or correct
ness of their taste. And I cannot help, on this occasion, mention
ing two gentlemen (the latter lately deceased) of acknowledged
learning and fine sense, who have distinguished themselves by their
writings in defence of Christianity, Sir George Lyttleton and Mr.
West.

542 PREFACE.
No man needs therefore be apprehensive as if his appearing to
show a zeal for Christianity might be looked upon as a reflection
upon his understanding, or as a mark of a narrow and bigoted way
of thinking ; since it cannot be denied, that some of the wisest men,
the greatest geniuses, and exactest reasoners of the age, have been
persons that professed an high regard for the Christian religion.
And the same might, I doubt not, be said of numbers of gentlemen
now living, of eminent abilities, and distinguished worth, who might
be mentioned with great honour, though they have had no occasion
of appearing in the world as writers. But the controversy is not to
be decided by the authority of great names. Christianity does not
stand in need of that support. It standeth fixed on its own solid
basis, and only requireth to be considered with an attention suitable
to its vast importance. It hath nothing to fear from a true freedom
of thought, from deep reasoning, and impartial enquiry. What it
hath most to apprehend, is a thoughtless levity and inattention of
mind, and an absolute indifference to all religion, and to all enqui
ries about it. It is no easy matter to prevail with those to think
closely in such a case as this, who are under the power of sensual
affections and appetites, who are sunk in indolence and a love of
ease, or carried off with a perpetual hurry of diversions and amuse
ments, or engaged in the warm pursuits of ambition or avarice.
But surely, if the voice of reason is to be heard, and if there be any
thing at all that deserveth a serious attention, it is this. The en
quiry whether Christianity be true, and of a divine original, or not,
is a matter of high importance, and upon which a great deal de
pendeth. The gospel itself most certainly representeth it so. If
' Christianity be true and divine, those to whom it is published, and
who have an opportunity of enquiring into it, and yet neglect to do
so, can never be able to justify their conduct to the great Ruler and
Judge of the world. It cannot with any consistency be supposed,
that if God hath sent his Son into the world, to bring a' clear reve
lation of his will, and to guide men in the way of salvation, it is a
matter of indifference whether those to whom it is offered, and made
known, pay any regard to this signification of the divine will, or
not, or comply with the terms which are there prescribed. And
therefore for such persons to reject it at a venture, without giving
themselves the trouble of a serious enquiry, or to continue in a wil
ful negligence and careless suspense of mind in a matter of such
vast consequence, is a most unaccountable and inexcusable conduct,
altogether unworthy of reasonable thinking beings.
Let Christianity therefore be carefully examined. Let the evi
dence for the facts on which its divine authority is supported, be
coolly and impartially considered ; whether it is not as much as
could be reasonably desired, supposing those facts were true, and
which would be accounted sufficient in any other case. Let the
original records of Christianity be inquired into : whether they have
not the characters of genuine simplicity, integrity, and a sincere
regard to truth ; and whether they have not been transmitted to us
with an evidence equal or superior to what can be produced for any

TREFACE. 543
other writings whatsoever. Let the nature and tendency of the
religion itself be considered : whether the idea there given us of the
Deity be not such as tendeth to render him both amiable and most
venerable, to fill our hearts with a superlative love to God, as having
given the most amazing proofs of his wonderful love and goodness
towards mankind, and at the same time with a sacred awe and reve
rence of him as the wise and righteous governor of the world, a
lover of order, and a hater of vice and wickedness ; whether its pre
cepts be not unquestionably pure and holy, and such as, if faithfully
complied with, would raise our natures to an high degree of moral
excellence ; whether the uniform tendency of the whole scheme of
religion there held forth to us, be not to promote the honour of God
and the good of mankind, and the cause of piety, righteousness, and
virtue in the world ; to engage us to worship God with a pure ado
ration and devotion, to deal justly, kindly, and equitably with all
men, and to subdue the sensual irregular affections and lusts, and
keep them within proper bounds. Superstition and false devotion
have frequently put men upon unnatural and excessive rigours and
austerities ; but Christianity, like the blessed author of it, keeps
clear of all extremes. It abridgeth us of no pleasures within the
bounds of purity and innocence : nor doth it oblige us to extinguish
our natural appetites and passions, but to govern and moderate
them, and preserve them in a regular subjection to reason, and the
law of the mind : and certainly it is necessary, for our own quiet
and happiness, and for the good order of society, that we should do
so. And finally, let it be considered, whether any motives could
possibly be exhibited more powerful and engaging than those which
the gospel setteth before us. It proposeth the noblest models for
our imitation : God himself, in his imitable moral excellencies ; and
his well-beloved Son, the most perfect, image of his own goodness
and purity. It display eth all the charms and attractions of redeem
ing grace and love, to allure us. It giveth the greatest encourage
ment to sinners to repent, and forsake their evil ways ; and pro-
miseth the most gracious assistances to help our infirmities, and to
strengthen our weak but sincere endeavours in the performance of
our duty. It raiseth us to the most glorious prospects and sublime
hopes, than which nothing can possibly have a happier tendency
to engage us to a patient continuance in well-doing, amidst the
many difficulties and temptations of this present state. The re
wards it proposeth are such as are fitted to animate holy and gene
rous souls, and to produce, not a servile and mercenary frame of
spirit, but a true greatness of mind, viz. a happiness consisting in
the perfection of our natures, in a conformity to God, and the eter
nal enjoyment of him, and in the pure pleasures of society and
friendship with glorious angels, and the spirits of the just made per
fect. And on the other hand, to make an impression upon those
that are insensible to the charms and beauty of virtue, it maketh
the most lively and affecting representations of the terrors of the
wrath to come, and the punishments that shall be executed in a
future state upon those that obstinately persist in a course of pre
sumptuous sin and disobedience.

544

PREFACE.

This is an imperfect sketch of the nature and design of Chris
tianity, as laid down in the gospel. In this view let it be considered,
and not be unjustly charged, as it hath often been, with corruptions
that are only owing to a deviation from its original purity ; or with
the practices of those who, though they make a profession of believ
ing it, allow themselves in courses which it forbids and condemns.
What a happy world would this be, if men could be more generally
persuaded to yield a willing subjection to its divine authority, and
to comply with its true spirit and design, and to give them
selves up to be governed by its excellent precepts and important
motives !
What then can those propose, that take pains to turn men from
such a religion as this, and to weaken or subvert the evidences of
its divine authority 1 Can they pretend to introduce a more pure
and sublime morality, or to enforce it with more powerful motives ?
Do they propose to render men more holy and virtuous, more pious
and devout towards God, more just and kind and benevolent
towards men, more. temperate and careful in the due government of
their appetites and passions, than the gospel requireth and obligeth
them to be ? Do they intend to advance the interests of virtue, by
depriving it of its most effectual encouragements and supports ; or
to exalt the joys of good men, by weakening their hopes of everlast
ing happiness ; or to restrain and reclaim the wicked and vicious,
by freeing them from the fears of future punishment ?
There is a great complaint of a growing dissoluteness of manners,
and of a general corruption. His Lordship representeth this in the
most lively terms ; but, instead of ascribing it to the proper causes,
he is for laying the whole load of it on the present establishment.
Far from directing to the proper cure, he hath done what he could
to take away that which would be the most effectual remedy, the
influence of Christianity on the minds and consciences of men.
When the restraints of religion are once taken off, what can be ex
pected but that they should abandon themselves to the conduct of
their passions ? Human laws and penalties will be found to be
weak ties where there is no fear of God, nor regard to a future
state, or the powers of the world to come. In proportion as a
neglect or contempt of religion groweth amongst us, a dissoluteness
of morals will prevail ; and when once this becometh general among
a people, true probity and virtue, a right public spirit, and generous
concern for the real interests of our country, will be extinguished.
Surely then all that wish well to the good order of society, and to
the happiness of mankind, ought to wish that true uncorrupted
Christianity should generally obtain and prevail ; and that men
should not only heartily believe, but seriously consider it, and en
deavour to get it wrought into the very frame and temper of their
souls. For Christianity is not a mere outward form and profession,
but a living principle, of a practical nature and tendency. And it
is not enough to have a speculative notion and belief of it ; but we
must consider it with that attention which becometh us, and do
what we can to enforce its excellent doctrines and motives upon our
hearts.

REFLECTIONS

ON THE LATE

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS.

PART I.
On the Study and Use of History.
The late Lord Bolingbroke has generally obtained the reputation of
being one of the finest writers in our language. This hath pro
cured him a kind of authority in the world, which makes way for
an easy and favourable reception of any thing that is published
under his name. A writer possessed of such talents hath it in his
power to be signally serviceable to religion, and the true interest of
his country ; and on the other hand, there is scarce any thing of
more pernicious influence than such talents misapplied. When the
public was first informed of Letters written by him on the Study
and Use of History, it was natural to expect something very enter
taining and improving from such an author on such a subject. And
it will not be denied, that he has many good, and some very curious
observations, expressed in a very genteel manner, and with great ele
gance and purity of style ; but these are interspersed with others of
a very different kind, and of a dangerous tendency.
In these Letters his Lordship has done what he could to expose
the authority of the Scriptures to contempt ; and at the same time
has made the most disadvantageous representation of the present
state of the government and constitution of his country. If we are
to trust the accounts he giveth us, Christianity hath no real founda
tion of truth in fact to depend upon ; it hath been upheld *by super
stition, ignorance, and imposture ; and hath been visibly decaying
ever since the revival of learning and knowledge. And our civil
constitution, instead of being rendered better at the late Revolution,
hath been ever since growing worse ; and our liberties are in more
real danger than they were in before. The natural tendency of such
representations is to inspire a thorough contempt and disregard of
the religion into which we were baptized, and to produce endless
jealousies and discontents, if not open insurrections, against the
government under which we live. No man, therefore, who hath a
N N

546 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
just zeal for either of these, can see without concern such an inso
lent attempt against both. And in this case, the quality, the abi
lity, the reputation of the writer, as it maketh the attempt more
dangerous, rendereth it more necessary to guard against it. If an
inferior writer had said all that his Lordship hath advanced, it
would have deserved very little notice. But there are too many
that are ready almost implicitly to swallow down any thing that
cometh to them recommended by a great name; especially if it be
advanced with a very peremptory and decisive air. And if an
author's account of himself must be taken, there perhaps scarce ever
was a writer whose judgment ought to have greater weight, or who
better deserves that an almost inplicit regard should be had to his
dictates, than the author of these Letters.
He enters upon his first Letter with declaring, that the rules he
is going to recommend as necessary to be observed in the study of
history, were  " very different from those which writers on the
same subject have recommended, and which are commonly prac
tised." — But he assureth his reader (and I believe him) that 
" this never gave him any distrust of them." — And therefore he pro
poseth to tell his sentiments  " without any regard to the opinion
and practice even of the learned world."* — He declareth it as his
opinion, that  "A creditable kind of ignorance is the whole be
nefit which the generality of men, even of the most learned, reap
from the study of history, which yet appeareth to him of all other
the most proper to train us up to private and public virtue. "f —
Surely then the world must be mightily obliged to an author, who
comes to give them instructions and directions in a matter of such
great importance, which the generality of men, even of the most
learned, were unacquainted with before.
In his Letter on the True Use qf Retirement and Study, he finely
representeth, what  " a desirable thing it must be to every think
ing man, to have the opportunity indulged to so few, of living some
years at least to ourselves, in a state of freedom, under the laws of
reason, instead of passing our whole time under those of authority
and custom.'' — And asks  " Is it not worth our while to con
template ourselves and others, and all the things of this world, once
before we leave them, through the medium of pure and undefiled
reason V'%  He observes that '* they who can abstract themselves
from the prejudices, and habits, and pleasures, and business ofthe
world, which," he says, " is what many are, though all are not,
capable of doing, may elevate their souls in retreat to a higher sta
tion, and may take from thence such a view of the world as the
second Scipio took, in his dream, from the seats of the blessed."
 That this will enable them to  " distinguish every degree of
probability, from the lowest to the highest, and mark the difference
between this and certainty, and to establish peace of mind, where
alone it can rest securely, on resignation. "§ In what follows he
* Works, vol. i. p. 1, 2. t Ibid. p. 15. X Ibid- vol. ii. p. 197.
$ Ibid. p. 199.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 547
seems to apply this to his own case. He represents himself as in a
state of retirement from the world, abstracted from its pleasures,
and disengaged from the habits of business : though at the same
time he declareth his resolution, in his retreat, to contribute as much
as he can to defend and preserve the British constitution qf govern
ment ; for which he expected his reward from God alone, to whom
he paid this service* He goes on to observe in the same Letter,
that  " he who has not cultivated his reason young, will be ut
terly unable to improve it old." — And that  " not only a love of
study, and a desire of knowledge, must have grown up with us, but
such an industrious application likewise, as requires the whole
vigour of the mind to be exerted in the pursuit of truth, through
long trains of discourse, and all those dark recesses, wherein man,
not God, has hid it."  And then he declares, that this love, and
this desire, he h&sfelt all his life, and is not quite a stranger to this
industry and application.f
His Reflections upon Exile tend also to give one an high idea of
the author. Speaking of the necessity of standing watchful as
centinels, to discover the secret wiles and open attacks of thatcapri-
1 cious goddess, Fortune, before they can reach us, he adds, " I
learned this important lesson long ago, and never trusted to For
tune, even while she seemed to be at peace with me. The riches,
the honours, the reputation, and all the advantages which her
treacherous indulgence poured upon me, I placed so, that she might
snatch them away without giving me any disturbance. I kept a
.great interval between me and them. She took them, but she could
not tear them from me.""J" He frequently expresseth himself in
those Reflections, as one superior to fortune and exile, and that
had attained to a perfect philosophic calmness and tranquillity,
whose mind was not to be discomposed by any outward evils ; as
one who was far from the hurry ofthe world, and almost an uncon
cerned spectator of what passes in it, and who, having paid in a public
life what he owed to the present age,, was resolved to pay in a private
life what he owes to posterity ; and who was determined to write as
well as live without passion.§ And who would not be inclined to
pay a vast regard to the sentiments of a great genius, that had
always from his youth loved study, and desired knowledge, and to
this added industry and application : who had an opportunity for
retirement from the world, and knew how to improve it; and who
had made use of his solitude to contemplate himself and others, and
all the things of this world, through the medium of pure and unde
filed reason !
But there are several things that tend to take off from that de
pendence one might otherwise be apt to have upon an author pos
sessed of so many advantages.
It can scarcely be denied, that there is a great appearance of vanity
in these Letters. A certain air of sufficiency breathes through the
* Works, vol. ii. p. 201, 202. f Ibid' P- 205> 206' * Ibid' P' 234*'
§ Ibid. p. 28*.
N N 2

548 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
whole. He everywhere pronounceth in a dogmatical and decisive
way, and with a kind of dictatorial authority ; and seemeth to
regard himself as placed in a distinguished sphere, from whence he
looketh down with superiority and contempt upon those that have
hitherto passed for learned and knowing. To this may be added,
what can scarcely escape the notice of the commonest reader, a visi
ble affectation of advancing something new, and which had not been
thought of, or insisted upon, before. How often doth the polite
author of these Letters, v/hen giving his directions, and making his
observations upon the study and use of history, put his noble cor
respondent in mind, that they were quite different from any thing
that had been observed by those learned men who had treated of
this subject before him ? In this I think him mistaken. But at
present I only mention it as a proof of the desire he was possessed
with of appearing to think in a way different from, and superior to,
the rest of mankind, even of the learned world. Such a desire and
affectation of novelty, and of thinking out of the common way, may
lead persons of great parts astray in their enquiries after truth, and
hath often dono so.
But there are other passions and affections that have a still less
friendly influence, and which are apt to give a wrong bias to the
mind. Such is that keenness and bitterness of spirit which dis
posed! a man to find fault, and to put the most unfavourable con
structions upon persons and things. I will not charge the late Lord
Bolingbroke with having been really under the influence of such a
temper ; but there are several things in his Letters which have that
appearance. In his Reflections upon Exile, he layeth it down as a
rule, to live and write without passion : he talks as if he had got
above all outward evils, and had attained to a perfect tranquillity.
And yet in these very Reflections, there are several passages that
discover a very strong resentment, and great bitterness of spirit.
He there intimates, that  — " his country had reaped the benefit of
his services, and he suffered for them  That the persons in op
position to whom he served, and even saved the public, conspired
and accomplished his private ruin  That these were his accusers,
and the giddy ungrateful crowd his judges  That art, joined to
malice, endeavoured to make his best actions pass for crimes, and
to stain his character  That for this purpose the sacred voice of
the senate was made to pronounce a lie; and those records, which
ought to be the eternal monuments of truth, became the vouchers
of imposture and calumny."* This is very strongly expressed. I
shall not at present inquire into the truth and justness of those Re
flections. I shall only observe, that this is not the language of a
man who lives and writes without passion, or who is so indifferent to
common censure or approbation, as he professeth himself to be.f
Nor is it easy to reconcile this with that philosophic calmness, that
moderation, and tranquillity of mind, which he sometimes makes so
great a show of. There are several parts of his Letters, as I may
* Works, vol. ii. p. 270, 271. t Ibid. vol. i. p. 6.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 549
have occasion more distinctly to observe afterwards, in which he ex
presseth himself with all the rage and virulence of a passionate party-
writer. It were not so much to be wondered at, if he discovered a resent
ment against those whom he might apprehend to be the authors of
his sufferings ; but there are several things that look as if he were
out of humour with mankind. Of the critics, chronologers, anti
quaries, and of the learned in general, even those of them that have
been in the highest reputation, he frequently expresseth the utmost
contempt. He inveighs severely against the divines, ancient and
modern ; and represents even those of them who, he says, may be
called so without a sneer, as not sagacious or not honest enough,
to make an impartial examination. The gentlemen of the law fall
under his heavy censure ; and he will scarcely allow, that since Lord
Bacon, and the Earl of Clarendon, there have been any of them
that have attained to any eminent degree of learning and know
ledge ; and he taketh upon him to foretel, that, except there should
come some better age, there will not be any such among them for
the future. The members of parliament he represents as regarding
the business of parliament only as a trade ; that few know, and
scarce any respect, the British constitution ; and that the very idea
of wit, and all that can be called taste, has been lost among the
great. Such general censures might be expected in a writer that
professedly sets himself to display his talents in satire and ridicule ;
but do not look so well in one that appeareth in a superior charac
ter, and who taketh upon him to instruct and guide, to form men's -
taste, and direct their conduct, and enable them to pass right judg
ments on persons and things. Such a temper is not a very good
disposition for an impartial enquiry ; it is apt to represent persons
and things in a disadvantageous light, and to give a malignant tinc
ture to the Reflections ; nor is it very surprising to see a writer of
this turn pass harsh and severe censures, not only on the adminis
tration, but on the religion, of his country.
All the use I would make of these observations is, to keep us
from suffering ourselves to be too strongly biassed in favour of a
writer so distinguished by his abilities, and who putteth on such
specious appearances.
I shall, now proceed to a more distinct examination of Lord
Bolingbroke's Letters.
In them we may find, as hath been already hinted, many good
and fine observations relating to the study and use of history,
delivered with great clearness of expression, and propriety of senti
ment. His directions are full of good sense, and many of them
very aptly illustrated by proper and well-chosen instances. In
general, it must be allowed, that his observations concerning the
usefulness of history, the advantages he ascribes to it, and the ends
to be proposed in it, are, for the most part, just ; but there is not
much in them that can be regarded as perfectly new. I do not say
this by way of disparagement, to detract from the merit of his Re
flections i perhaps on such a subject it is scarce possible to make

550 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
any observation which hath not been made by some one or other
before. It is a sufficient commendation of an author, if he hath
placed his reflections and- observations in an agreeable and advan
tageous light, if he hath disposed them in a beautiful order, and
illustrated his rules by proper exemplifications. But his Lordship
seems not. to be contented with the praise of having done this. He
appears to be extremely desirous to have it thought, that his obser
vations are not only just, but new, and such as other writers have
not made before him. He declareth, in a passage cited before from
his first Letter, that the rules he gives — " are very different from
those which writers on the same subject have recommended, and
which are commonly practised :"*  And that  " he will have
no regard to the methods prescribed by others, or to the opinion
and practice even of the learned world."f  And he speaks to the
same purpose in his third Letter.:)" And after having declared, that
the study of history will prepare us for action and observation, and
that — — " history is conversant about the past ; and by knowing the
things that have been, we become better able to judge of the things
that are ;"  he adds,  " This use, my Lord, which I make the
proper and principal use of the study of history, is not insisted on
by those who have written concerning the method to be followed in
this study ; and since we propose different ends, we must of course
take different ways. "§ He immediately subjoins, " Few of their
treatises have fallen into my hands." And is it not a little strange
thS; he should so positively pronounce, that others have not, in
their treatises concerning the method to be followed in the study of
history, insisted on that which he makes the proper and principal
use of it, when at the same time he acknowledged that few of their
treatises had fallen into his hands ? One would think, by his way
of representing it, that none before this noble writer had mentioned
it as the proper use and end of history, to promote our improvement
in virtue, to make us better men and better citizens, to teach us by
example, and to prepare us for action and observation, that by know
ing the things that have been, we may become better able to judge
of the things that are. And yet I am apt to think, that few have
set themselves to show the use that is to be made of history, the
ends to be proposed in it, and the advantages arising from it, but
have in effect said the same thing. And it were no hard matter,
if it were necessary, to fill up several pages with quotations to this
purpose, from authors ancient and modern.
History is, no doubt, capable of being improved to excellent pur
poses; and yet the author of these Letters seems sometimes to have
carried it too far, as if history (not sacred history — for this, with
the examples it affordeth, he discards as of little or no use) were the
best, the only school of virtue, the most universal and necessary
means of instruction, alone sufficient to make us good men and good
citizens, and to furnish us with all the knowledge that is proper for
* Works, vol. i. p. I . t Ibid. p. 2. x Ibid. p. 69.
§ Ibid. p. 67, 68.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 551
our direction in practice. He observes,  "that history is philo
sophy, teaching us by example, how to conduct ourselves in all the
stations of private and public life."  And that  " it is of all
other the most proper to train us up to public and private virtue."*
He declares, that  " every one that is able to read, and to reflect
upon what he reads, is able to make that use of history which he
recommends : and every one who makes it, will find in his degree
the benefit that arises from an early acquaintance with mankind,
contracted in this method."+  He adds, that  "we are only
passengers or sojourners in this world ; but we are absolute
strangers at the first steps we take in it. Our guides are often ig
norant, often unfaithful. But by this map of the country which
history spreads before us, we may learn, if we please, to guide our
selves."  So that history is the guide he proposeth to all men to
conduct them in their journey through this world, and by which
every man is capable of guiding himself in all the situations and cir
cumstances of public and private life.
History is, no doubt, very useful in its proper place ; but there
are other means of instruction to be joined with it, in order to its
answering the end. It is not to serve instead of every thing, and
to supersede all other methods of instruction. We stand in need of
being well seasoned and principled with a just sense of the moral
differences of things, and with the excellent rules of religion, and
the important considerations it setteth before us,^that we may form
just sentiments of things, and_may make a right use of history for
our improvement in virtue, and may know properly how to apply
the examples it furnisheth. Accordingly our author himself insisteth
upon it, that we must apply ourselves to history  " in a philoso
phical spirit and manner." %  He observeth, that — — " particular
examples in history may be of use sometimes in particular cases, but
that the application of them is dangerous." — He would have a man
therefore study history as he would study philosophy. And in the
account he gives in his third Letter of what is necessary in order to
make a right use of history, he carrieth it so far, and really maketh
the work so difficult, as to be above what can be expected from the
generality of mankind ; and concludeth with saying, that  " by
such methods as these a man of parts may improve the study of
history to its proper and principal use.''§  Where he seemeth to
represent the making a right use of history as a very difficult thing,
which none but men of parts and philosophic spirits are capable of,
and which requireth the exactest judgment, and nicest discernment,
as well as a very close application. In this passage the use and ad
vantage of history seems to be confined within too narrow bounds,
as in some of the former it had been extended too far.
As to the method to be followed in the study of history, though
the author of these Letters speaks with great disregard, and even
contempt, of those that have written on this subject before him, yet
* Works, vol. i. p. 15. .57. t Ibid. p. 171, 172. X Ibid. p. 58.
$ Ibid. p. 65, 66.

552 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
the only one he particularly mentions is Bodin. He observeth, that
" in his method we are apt to take first a general view of universal
history and chronology in short abstracts, and then to study all par
ticular histories and systems."  Upon which his Lordship re-
marketh, that — " This would take up our whole lives, and leave us
no time for action, or would make us unfit for it."*  And after
wards he observes, that  '' the man who reads without discern
ment and choice, and, like Bodin's pupil, resolves to read all, will
not have time, nor capacity neither, to do any thing else." f — But
I cannot think it was Bodin's intention to lay it as an injunction
upon his pupil to read without choice and discernment all the par
ticular histories that have ever been published. But the meaning is,
that the best and most regular way of reading and studying history
is, first to take a brief general view and survey of universal history
and chronology, and then to proceed to the histories of particular
countries, nations, and ages. And this appeareth to be a very
reasonable and natural method. And if Bodin proposes the taking
a large scope and compass in reading history, his Lordship, though
he seems here to blame him for it, sometimes expresseth himself in
a manner that looks no less extensive : for he recommendeth the
reading history of all kinds, of civilized and uncivilized, of ancient
and modern nations, as necessary to give us a right knowledge of
the human species, and of ourselves, fle observes in his fifth Letter,
that " man is the subject of every history, and to know him well,
we must see him and consider him, as history alone can present him
to us, in every age, in every country, in every state, in life and in
death. History therefore of all kinds, of civilized and uncivilized,
of ancient and modern nations, in short, all history that descends
to a sufficient detail of human actions and characters, is useful to
bring us acquainted with our species, nay with ourselves," + And
particularly with respect to ancient history, he mentioneth it in his
second Letter as a great advantage, that " in ancient history the
beginning, the progression, and the end, appear, not of particular
reigns, much less of particular enterprizes, or systems of policy
alone, but of governments, of nations, of empires, and of all the
various systems that have succeeded one another in the course of
their duration." § And yet he afterwards seems to confine our
attention to modern history. He will allow us indeed to read the
histories of former ages and nations, because it would be shameful
to be entirely ignorant of them ; but he would not have us study any
histories, but those ofthe two last centuries. That these deserve a
particular attention, will easily be acknowledged, for several reasons ;
and, among others, for that which he assigns ; the great change
that has been brought about in the civil and ecclesiastical polity of
these parts of the world since the latter end of the fifteenth century ;
of which he gives an elegant representation in his sixth Letter. But
certainly there are many things in the histories of the preceding ages,
both in other countries, and in our own, that well deserve to be not
* Works, vol. i. p. 69. t Ibid. p. 142, 143. X Ibid. p. 170. § Ibid. p. 42.

LORD BOLINGBROKE S LETTERS. 553
only read, but to be thoroughly considered by us ; and which are
capable of furnishing very useful reflections, and answering those
excellent ends, for which, in the former part of these Letters, he
had recommended the study of history. This might easily be shown,
if it admitted of any doubt, both with regard to civil history and
ecclesiastical. But, not to insist longer upon this, and some other observations
that might be made on particular passages in these Letters, I shall
proceed to what is the principal intention of these Remarks, viz.
to consider those things in them, of which a bad use may be made,
or which appear to be of a pernicious tendency.
And here I shall first consider the reflections he has cast upon
literature ; and then shall proceed to those passages in his Letters
which are designed to expose the holy Scriptures, and the Chris
tian religion.
It may seem a little surprising, that so polite a writer, and one
who, as he lets us know, always from his youth loved study and
application, should yet, in several parts of these Letters, express
himself in a manner that seems calculated to throw a contempt upon
learning, and to put men off from applying themselves to the pur
suit of it. Every friend of learning should, I think, acknowledge,
that there is a regard due to those that in their several ways have
contributed to promote it. But this ingenious writer takes every
occasion to place them in a ridiculous or contemptible light. In his
first Letter, he gives a very disadvantageous idea of those who, as
he expresseth it, " make fair copies of foul manuscripts, give the
signification of hard words, and take a great deal of other gram
matical pains." He owns indeed, that they enable others to study
with greater ease, and to purposes more useful; but he assures us,
that they neither grow wiser nor better by study themselves. Lie adds,
that " the obligation to these men would be great indeed, if they
were in general able to do any thing better, and submitted to this
drudgery for the use of the public, as some of them, it must be
owned with gratitude, have done ; but not later, I think, than
about the time of the resurrection of letters." And he at length con
descendeth to declare, that " they deserve encouragement, . whilst
they continue to compile, and neither affect wit, nor presume to
reason."* This is a very hard censure pronounced upon all those,
without distinction, that since the time ofthe resurrection of letters,
i. e. for these two centuries past, have compiled dictionaries or
glossaries, or have revised and published ancient manuscripts, or
correct editions of books ; or who have been employed in explaining
hard words, and in clearing obscure passages in ancient authors, or
making critical observations upon them, and in other things of that
kind. Not content to represent them as absolutely void of genius,
and having no pretensions to wit or reason, and as neither wiser nor
better for their studies themselves, he will not allow, that any of
them had the public good in view, in the drudgery they submitted
* Works, vol. i. p. 5, 6.

554 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
to. But I scarce know a greater sign of a malignity of temper, than
a disposition to give the worst turn to every thing, and to judge
harshly of the inward intentions of men's hearts, when there is
nothing in their actions to support such a judgment. It were easy
to name persons, that, within these two last centuries, have em
ployed themselves in the way he mentions, who were unquestion
ably men of great judgment and genius, as well as industry : or, at
least, a small share of good-nature and candour would incline one
to allow them the praise of having had the public utility in view, in
works, which, by his own acknowledgment, have greatly served
the interests of learning, and contributed to the spreading of it.
But how meanly soever he thinks of the grammarians, critics,
compilers of dictionaries, and revisers and publishers of manuscripts,
he maketh a still more disadvantageous representation of antiquaries
and chronologers. Speaking of persons that have hitherto been
regarded as of great figure and eminence in the republic of letters,
he avoweth " a thorough contempt for the whole business of their
learned lives ; for all the researches into antiquity, for all the sys
tems of chronology and history, that we owe to the immense labours
of a Scaliger, a Bochart, a Petavius, an Usher, and even a Mar-
sham." * It seems very odd, for one that speaks so highly of the
advantage of history, to express such a contempt for the labours of
chronologers, which certainly are of great use for digesting history
into its proper periods, in order to a regular and orderly conception
and understanding of it. In a passage cited above, he mentioneth
it among the advantages of history, especially ancient history, that
we there see events as they followed one another; " that there the
beginning, the progression, and the end, appear, not of particular
reigns, much less of particular enterprizes, or systems of policy
alone, but of governments, of nations, of empires, and of all the
various systems that have succeeded one another in the course of
their duration." This seems to show the advantage, and even ne
cessity, of chronology ; and, with regard to this, the labours of a
Scaliger, a Petavius, and Usher, are highly useful and commend
able. To endeavour to digest the history of mankind, and of the
principal events that have happened in the world, in a regular series,
to mark the rise and fall of cities and empires, to compare and con
nect the histories of different countries and nations, sacred history
and profane ; and, in order to this, to lay together the scattered
hints and fragments of different ages, is, notwithstanding his de
grading representation of it, a noble employment, an employment
that even a Sir Isaac Newton judged not to be unworthy of his
great genius. One would be apt to think, that every impartial per
son, who hath a just value for learning, must have a great honour
for those that have taken pains to set these things in a proper
light : and where absolute certainty cannot be attained to, an
happy conjecture may be both pleasing and useful.
In his third letter, he findeth great fault with those that make
* Works, vol. i. p. 6.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 555
laborious inquiries into the first originals of nations. And in his
fifth letter, he warneth the noble Lord to whom he writes, to throw
none of his time away, as he saith he himself had done, in groping
in the dark in his searches into antiquity. * He speaks with con
tempt ol what he calls dry registers of useless anecdotes ; and declares
that " ten millions of such anecdotes, though they were true; and
complete authentic volumes of Egyptian or Chaldean, of Greek or
Latin, of Gallic or British, of French or Saxon records ; would be
of no value in his sense, because of no use towards our improvement
in wisdom and virtue ; if they continued nothing more than dynasties
and genealogies, and a bare mention of remarkable events in the
order of time, like journals, chronological tables, or dry and
meagre annals." f — But whatever opinion I may have of his Lord
ship's taste, I cannot help thinking, that in this he is too rigid. It
seems to be a very natural and unblameable curiosity, to search as
far as we can into the recesses of antiquity, and the originals of
nations; and there is a pleasure even in those glimmerings of light
that break through the obscurity, provided we do not represent
those things as certainties, which are only conjectural. And I be
lieve there are few but would be apt to wish, that there were 
" authentic volumes of Egyptian or Chaldean, Greek or Latin,
Galic or British records "  even though they were only like what
he calls  "dry and meagre annals,"— — or, as he elsewhere says,
 '' the gazettes of antiquity ;"  and contained dynasties and
genealogies, with a mention of remarkable events that happened to
those nations in the order of time, like journals, or chronological
tables. And if any learned man could discover such ancient or au
thentic records or monuments, few, I should think, would blame
him, or think him idly employed in publishing them to the world.
It looks a little odd, that there is no kind of men for whom,
throughout these letters, he sheweth a less regard than for those
that are generally accounted men of learning. Speaking of those
who " affect the reputation of great scholars, at the expence of grop
ing all their- lives in the dark mazes of antiquity," he says, that
" all these mistake the true design of study, and the true use of
history." Great as the advantages are that he ascribeth to history,
and which he thinks every man is capable of that is able to read, and
to reflect upon what he reads, yet  " a creditable kind of ignorance
is, in his opinion, the whole benefit which the generality even of the
most learned reap from it."  And he intimates, that the only
effect of their reading and studying history is, to become pedants,
i. e. as he explaineth it, " worse than ignorant, always incapable,
sometimes meddling and presuming."  And elsewhere he repre-
senteth the credulous learned as only employed — " in wrangling
about ancient traditions, and ringing different changes on the same
set of bells." §
To all which may be added, what he saith, in his letter on the
true use of retirement and study, concerning  " the scholar and
* Works, vol. i. p. 149. t Ibid. p. 150. X Ibid. p. 14, 15. 21. « Ibid. p. 169.

556 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
philosopher, who, far from owning that he throws away his time,
reproves others for doing it ; that solemn mortal who abstains from
the pleasures, and declines the business of the world, that he may
dedicate his whole time to the search of truth, and the improvement
of knowledge."  He supposes him to have read " till he is become
a great critic in Latin and Greek, in the oriental tongues, in history
and chronology ; and not only so, but to have spent years in study
ing philosophers, commentators, and rabbies, and whole legions of
modern doctors, and to be extremely well versed in all that has been
written concerning the nature of God, and of the soul of man, about
matter and form, body and spirit, &c."*  And yet he pronounceth,
that notwithstanding all his learning, he is in a state of ignorance,-
for want of having  " examined the first principles, and the fun
damental facts on which these questions depend, with an absolute
indifference of judgment, and scrupulous exactness."-!; This he
supposeth to be the case of many a great scholar, many a profound
philosopher, many a dogmatical casuist;" yea, and as appeareth
from other passages in his letters, of every learned man, of every
philosopher and divine whatsoever, that believeth Christianity. On
the other hand, he declareth concerning  " the man who hath
passed his life in the pleasures or business of the world,"  that
whenever he sets about the work of examining principles, and judg
ing for himself  " concerning those things that are of greatest
importance to us here, and may be so hereafter, he will soon have
the advantage over the learned philosopher. For he will soon have
secured what is necessary to his happiness, and may sit down in
the peaceful enjoyment of that knowledge ; or proceed with greater
advantage and satisfaction to the acquisition of new knowledge;
whilst the other continues his search after things that are in their
nature, to say the best of them, hypothetical, precarious, and su
perfluous." J
The natural tendency of these, and other reflections of a like
kind, which occur in these letters, seems to be to pour contempt
upon what have been hitherto esteemed valuable branches of litera
ture. Researches into antiquity, chronological studies, criticism
and philosophy, disquisitions concerning the nature of God, the
human soul, and other philosophical and theological subjects, all
these are represented as of little or no use ; and only a more specious
kind of idleness. And if this be the case, I think it is wrong to
complain of the Goths, Vandals, Saracens, and other barbarous
nations, that burnt whole libraries, and destroyed the monuments
of learning. They rid the world of a great deal of useless lumber,
which tempted men to mis-spend their time and pains ; and it would
have been an advantage to mankind, if more of them had been de
stroyed. Instead of being thankful to those learned persons that
have taken such pains to recover and publish ancient monuments,
we are only to regard them as industrious triflers, to whose labours
the world is very little obliged. Nor can I see, upon such a view of
* Work?, vol. ii. p. 211, 212. f Ibid, p. 213, 214. J Ibid. p. 216, 217.

LORD BOLINGBROKE S LETTERS. 557
things, what use or need there is of seminaries of learning. But in
good earnest, can this be regarded as a proper way to mend our
taste, and help forward our improvement ? Such a way of think
ing, if it generally obtained, would, it is to be feared, instead of
producing an extraordinary refinement of taste, tend rather to sink
us into ignorance and barbarism, and bring us back to the darkness
of the most illiterate ages.
Taken in this view, I cannot think that these letters have a favour
able aspect on the interests of literature. Methinks there appeareth
to be no great necessity at present of warning persons not to spend
their lives in laborious pursuits of learning. The prevailing turn of
the age doth not seem to lie this way. Many of our gentlemen will
no doubt be very well pleased to be assured, that though they pass
their lives in the business or pleasures of the world, yet if they at
length set themselves to examine first principles, and consult the
oracle of their own reason, without any regard to the opinion of
others, or troubling themselves to read the writings of philosophers
or divines, they are inja more likely way of discovering truth, and
making a progress in useful knowledge, than any of those " solemn
mortals, who abstain from the pleasures, and decline the business of
the world, that they may dedicate their whole time to the search of
truth, and the improvement of knowledge." This is certainly a very
flattering scheme, and seems to open a very short and easy way for
attaining to wisdom. When they find a man of his Lordship's fine
and elegant taste, and great talents, and who by his own account
hath spent so much time and pains in the learned enquiries, pro
nouncing them absolutely vain and useless, they will be very apt to
take his word for it, and not give themselves the trouble of labori
ous study ; the result of which might be only filling their heads with
what he calleth learned lumber, and exposing them to the ridiculous
character ot pedants, i. e. as he describeth them, " men worse than
ignorant, always incapable, sometimes meddling and presuming."
Instead of such learned drudgery, the more easy and delightful task
of studying modern history may be sufficient to furnish them with
all the knowledge they want, and answer every end of useful im
provement. But surely such a manner of representing things is not altogether
just, nor is this the most effectual way of promoting real improve
ment in wisdom and virtue. Great is the extent, and wide the field,
of science. Many noble subjects there are of enquiry, which well
deserve our attention. The desire of knowledge is the strongest in
the noblest minds ; but comparatively small is the progress that a
man is capable of making by his own unassisted ability, within the
short compass of this present life: and therefore, be his abilities
ever so great, he will need the assistance of others, and ought to be
very thankful for it. Many excellent persons in different ages have
employed their pains this way ; and a mighty advantage that man
hath, who has the opportunity, and knows how to improve it, of
profiting by their labours. He may, by reading, vastly increase his
stock of knowledge, may meet with many valuable hints, which

558 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
else would not have occurred to him, and may find important sub
jects set in a clearer light than otherwise he would have seen them.
The Author of our beings, who hath implanted in us the desire of
knowledge, and fitted us for communicating our sentiments, un
doubtedly designed, that, in acquiring knowledge as well as in other
things, we should be helpful to one another, and not depend merely
upon ourselves. And this is the great advantage of language, and
of letters. We must indeed make use of our own reason, but we
ought also to take in all the helps and advantages we can get : and
he that is careful to improve those helps which are afforded him,
and who, without submitting implicitly to the judgments and opi
nions of others, endeavours to make the best use he can of their
labours and studies, as well as of his own thoughts, is in a far more
likely way of improving his knowledge, and will better approve
himself to God, and to all wise men, than he that, from a vain con
fidence in his own judgment, despiseth and rejecteth those helps;
and, under pretence of consulting the oracle of reason in his own
breast, (for, as his Lordship expresseth it, " every man's reason is
every man's oracle,") will not give himself the trouble to read and
to examine what others have said and thought before him. Such an
high conceit of a man's own capacity and judgment, such an arro
gant self-sufficiency, and a contempt of the labours and judgments
of others, is not a very proper disposition for finding out truth. A
man of this character was Epicurus, who boasted that his know
ledge was all of his own acquiring, and scorned to seem to be be
holden to any other for his notions.
Having considered those parts of the late Lord Bolingbroke's
Letters that seem not very favourable to the interests of literature,
I shall now proceed to what is the principal design of these Re
marks, to examine the reflections he has cast upon the sacred monu
ments of our religion. He first attacks the history of the Bible,
especially as contained in the books of the Old Testament ; and then
proceeds to a more direct attempt upon Christianity. And this
appears not to be a -thing he treats of merely by the bye, but to be
a point he has formally in view, and for which he professes a
kind of zeal. I shall therefore consider distinctly what he hath
offered. In his third Letter on the study of history, he setteth himself to
consider the state of ancient history, both sacred and profane, and
begins with declaring his resolution — " to speak plainly and parti
cularly in favour of common sense, against an absurdity which is
almost sanctified."* After having made some observations on the
state of ancient profane history, and shown," that it is full of fables,
and altogether uncertain, he next comes to apply these observations
to ancient sacred history.t What he seems at first to propose, is,
to show, that it is "insufficient to give us light into the original of
ancient nations, and the history of those ages we commonly call the
first ages." But it is evident, that, under pretence of showing this,
* Works, vol. i. p. 70. t Ibid. p. 83, &c seq.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 559
his intention is, to represent the whole history of the Bible as abso
lutely uncertain, and not at all to be depended upon for a just ac
count of facts. He not only denieth, that the writers of the histo
rical parts of the Old Testament were divinely inspired, but he will
not allow them the credit that is due to any common honest histo
rians. He represents those histories as " delivered to us on the faith
of a superstitious people, among whom the custom and art of lying
prevailed remarkably.* And observes, that " the Jewish history
never obtained any credit in the world, till Christianity was estab
lished. "t He sometimes expresseth himself, as if he were willing
to allow the divine inspiration of the doctrinal and prophetical parts
ofthe Bible, and were only for rejecting the historical. And this
he pretends to be the best way to defend the authority of the Scrip-
tures4 But it is evident that this is only a sneer. For he was, no
doubt, sensible, that the sacred history is so interwoven with the
prophecies and laws, that if the former is to be regarded as lying
fiction, and not at all to be depended upon, the divine authority of
the other cannot be supported. And what he afterwards repeatedly
afnrmeth of Christianity, that the credit of its divine institution de
pendeth upon facts, holdeth equally concerning the Old Testament
economy. After having done what he can, in his third Letter, to show the
uncertainty of ancient sacred as well as profane history, he begins
his fourth with observing, that as " we are apt naturally to apply
to ourselves what has happened to other men ; and as examples
take their force from hence; so what we do not believe to have
happened, we shall not thus apply ; and, for want ofthe same appli
cation, the examples will not have the same effect." And then he
adds, "ancient history, such ancient history as 1 have described,"
[in which ancient sacred history is manifestly comprehended] " is
quite unfit in this respect to answer the ends that every reasonable
man should promise to himself in his study ; because such ancient
history will never gain sufficient credit with any reasonable man."§
And afterwards speaking of ancient fabulous narrations, he declares,
that "such narrations cannot make the slightest momentary im
pression on a mind fraught with knowledge and void of superstition.
Imposed by authority, and assisted by artifice, the delusion hardly
prevails over common sense ; blind ignorance almost sees, and rash
superstition hesitates : nothing less than enthusiasm and phrensy
can give credit to such histories, or apply such examples." He
thinks, that what he has said will " not be much controverted by
any man that has examined our ancient traditions without prepos
session :" And that all the difference between them, and Amadis
of Gaul, is this, that " in Amadis of Gaul we have a thread of ab
surdities that lay no claim to belief; but ancient traditions are a
heap of fables, under which some particular truths inscrutable, and
therefore useless to mankind, may lie concealed, which have a just
« Works, vol. i. p. 87. t Ibid. p. 91. X Ibid. p. 93. 98, 99.
' § Ibid. p. 118.

560 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
pretence to nothing more," [i. e. to no more credit than Amadis of
Gaul] " and yet impose themselves upon us, and become, under the
venerable name of ancient history, the foundation of modern fables."*
He doth not directly apply this to the Scriptures; but no one can
doubt that this was his intention. It is too evident, that these are
designed to be included in what he calleth " our ancient traditions ;"
(a word which he had applied several times before to the sacred re
cords;) and which he representeth as "imposed by authority, and
assisted by artifice." And I think it scarce possible to express a
greater contempt of any writing, than he here doth of the history of
the Bible, and the examples it affords.

PART II.

SECTION I.

The History and Scriptures of the Old Testament vindicated against
his Lordship's Exceptions.
Having given this general view of the author's design, I shall now
proceed to a more distinct and particular examination of the prin
cipal things he hath offered to invalidate the authority of the Old
Testament history. What he saith of Christianity shall be consi
dered afterwards.
I need not take much notice of what he hath urged to show, that
the writers of the Sacred Books did not intend an universal history,
or system of chronology .f I know nobody that supposes they did ;
so that he might have spared that part of his pains. But notwith
standing the Bible was not designed for an universal history, or to
exhibit a complete system of chronology, though it may safely be
affirmed, that no one book in the world gives so great helps this
way, it is sufficient if it gives us a true history as far as it goes, and
which may be safely depended upon. This is what our author will
not allow. It is manifest, that he placeth it in the same rank with
the most fabulous accounts of ancient times. This then is the
point we are to consider. Let us therefore examine what proofs or
arguments he hath brought against the truth and credit of the
Sacred History.
Some of the things offered by him to this purpose have scarcely so
much as the appearance of argument. Of this kind is what he saith
concerning the use that has been made by Jewish Rabbies, and
Christian fathers, and Mahometan doctors, of the short and imper
fect accounts given by Moses of the times from the creation to the
* Works, vol. i. p. 120, 121. f Ibid. p. 202, et seq.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 561
deluge. Let us grant, that the fables they have feigned concerning
Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Enoch, Noah, and his sons, &c. are
such as " Bonzes or Talapoins would almost blush to relate ;" I do
not see how this can be reasonably turned to the disadvantage of
the books of Moses, or hurt the credit of them ; since his Lordship
owns, that these fables are " prophane extensions of this part of the
Mosaic history ;" and that history is certainly no-way answerable
for the additions which have been made to it. It would have been
easy for Moses, if he had been a fabulous writer, to have filled up
this part of his history with marvellous relations, and to have em
bellished it with such fictions, concerning our first parents, and the
most ancient patriarchs, as our author here referreth to ; and his not
having done so is a strong presumption in his favour,, that he did
not give way to fancy or invention, but wrote down the facts as they
came to him, with an unaffected simplicity. His accounts are
short, because he kept close to truth, and took care to record no
more of those times than he had good information of, or than was
necessary to the design he had in view ; which seems principally to
have been to give a brief account of the creation, the formation of
the first human pair, the placing them in Paradise, the fall, arid the
flood, which were the most remarkable events of that period ; and to
continue the line from Adam by Seth to Noah, as afterwards he
does from him to Abraham.
What his Lordship observes concerning the blunders of the
Jewish chronologers,* is not much more to his purpose, except he
could prove, that those blunders are chargeable upon the Scriptures;
which is so far from being true, that, if accurately examined, argu
ments may be brought from those very Scriptures to confute the
blunders he mentions
As to the differences he takes notice of,f between the Scripture
accounts of the Assyrian empire, and those given by profane authors ;
i. e. by Ctesias, and them that copy from him, very able chronolo
gers have endeavoured to show, that those accounts may be recon
ciled. But if not, it would only follow, that the Scripture-history
differeth from Ctesias, who, in his Lordship's own judgment, and
by the acknowledgment of the most judicious among the Greeks
themselves, was a very fabulous writer ;% and how this can be fairly
thought to derogate from the credit and authority of the sacred his
tory, I cannot see.
But to come to those things on which he seems to lay a greater
stress. The sum of what he hath offered to destroy the truth and
credit of the sacred writings amounteth to this : " That the Jews,
upon whose faith they are delivered to us, were a people unknown
to the Greeks, till the time of Alexander the Great : That they had
been slaves to the Egyptians, Assyrians, Medes, and Persians, as
these several empires prevailed : That a great part of them had been
carried captive, and lost in the east ; and the remainder were car
ried captive to Babylon, where they forgot their couutry, and even
* Works, vol. i. p. 104. f Ibid- P' m> 115' * Ibid p' 76' 80'
O o

562 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
their language :" And he intimates, that " there also they lost
their ancient sacred books : That they were a superstitious people,
among whom the cusiom and art of pious lying prevailed remarka
bly : That the original of the Scriptures was compiled in their own
country, and, as it were, out of the sight of the rest of the world :
That the Jewish historv never obtained any credit till Christianity
was established ; but though both Jews and Christians hold the
same books in great veneration, yet each condemns the other for not
understanding, or for abusing them : That the accidents which have
happened to alter the text of the bible show, that it could not have
been originally given by divine inspiration ; and that they are come
down to us broken and confused, full of additions, interpolations,
and transpositions : That they are nothing more than compilations
of old traditions, and abridgments of old records made in later
times : And that Jews and Christians differ among themselves con
cerning almost every point that is necessary to establish the autho
rity of those books." He concludes with ''some observations on
the curse said to be pronounced by Noah upon Canaan," which he
would have pass for " an absurd fiction of the writer of the book of
Genesis;" and he seemeth to have singled out this as one of the
properest instances he could find for exposing the Scripture.
Let us consider these things distinctly.
It is no just prejudice against the credit ofthe Scripture history,
that the Jews, among whom those writings were preserved, and
whose affairs are there recorded, were, as appeareth from those writ
ings, " slaves to the Egyptians, Assyrians, Medes, and Persians, as
their several empires prevailed."* it rather furnisheth a proof of
the truth and impartiality of those records, that they give an undis
guised account, not only of the flourishing times of their state (for
there were times in which they were flourishing, free, and indepen
dent), but of their disgraces, defeats, captivities, and all the calami
ties that befell them, which, according to these accounts, were in a
way of just punishment for their national iniquities, their disobe
dience and ingratitude. Yet under all these various revolutions,
their nation was never entirely lost, nor incorporated with their con
querors. Though many of them revolted, still there was a number
of them that with an unalterable zeal and constancy adhered to their
ancient religion and laws, which they regarded as of a divine origi
nal : a religion remarkably distinct from that of the nations to which
they were subjected, and on the account of which they were fre
quently exposed to hatred, persecution, and reproach.
If the Jews were unknown to the Greeks before Alexander the
Great, this affordeth not the least probable presumption, that their
ancient history is not to be depended upon. The Greeks, by this
author's own acknowledgment, did not begin to write history till
very late. The knowledge they had of other nations was very nar
row and confined ; and, particularly, they were in a great measure
strangers to the languages, laws, customs, and history, of the eastern
* Works, vol. i. p. 84.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 563
nations. He himself observes, that after the times of Alexander
the Great, and even long after the Jewish Scriptures were translated
into Greek, the Jews, and their history were neglected by them,
and continued to be almost as much unknown as before.* And
yet certain it is, that the Jews were then a considerable people, and
that the Greeks had many opportunities of being acquainted with
them. Let us grant what he insinuates, that this was owing, not to
want of curiosity in the Greeks, since they were, as he observes,
"inquisitive to the highest degree, and published as many idle tra
ditions of other nations as of their own ;"f but to the contempt they
had for the Jews. What can be inferred from thence ? Doth it
follow that the Jewish Scriptures are not authentic, nor their his
tories to be credited,- because the Greeks neglected or despised them,
and did not own their authority 1 This is easily accounted for by
any one that considers the nature of the Jewish institutions. It is
not to be wondered at, that a people so excessively vain as the
Greeks, and who looked upon the rest of the world as barbarians,
should conceive an aversion or contempt for a nation, whose laws
and religion were so different from their own, among whom all
image-worship was most expressly prohibited, and no adoration was
paid to inferior deities, in which the religion of the Greeks, and of
which they were extremely fond, principally consisted. If the
Jewish sacred books had contained strange stories of the exploits of
their gods, of their genealogies, battles, and amours, or traditions
that tended to support a system of idolatry, the Greeks undoubtedly
would been ready enough to transcribe these things into their writ
ings ; these fables would have been suited to their taste. But it can
not be supposed, that they should pay any regard to the accounts given
of extraordinary miraculous facts, that were designed to establish
and give sanction to a constitution, the manifest tendency of which
was to condemn and subvert that idolatrous worship, to which they
were so excessively addicted.
Among all the heathen nations, none expressed a greater enmity
to the Jews than the Egyptians, who were themselves of all people
the most stupidly idolatrous. One of their writers, Apion of Alex
andria, is particularly mentioned by our author as having "spoken
ofthe Jews in a manner neither much to their honour, nor to that
of their histories." This seems to have recommended him to his
Lordship's favour; for he speaks of him as a man "of much erudi
tion, and as having passed for a curious, a laborious, and learned
antiquary," though he owns that he passed also " for a vain and
noisy pedant.""j; But if we may judge of him by the fragments of
his work which Josephus has given us, he was, with regard to the
Jews, an ignorant and malicious writer, who does not appear to
have been acquainted with their histories and laws, though he pre
tended to write against them, and might so easily have procured
information, if he had desired it. And this appears to have been
the case of several others of the heathen writers that mention the
* Works, vol. i. p. 90. t Ibid. p. 88. X Ibid. p. 90, 91.
o o 2

564 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
Jews. They seem not to have given themselves the trouble to make
any diligent inquiry into their history or laws, as delivered by them
selves, but took up with idle reports and traditions to their preju
dice ; and yet in the accounts given of the Jews by the heathen
writers, imperfect as they are, there are some valuable hints and
traces to be discerned, which show the falsehood of other things
they report concerning them.*
It is therefore a little odd, that such a stress should be laid upon
this, that " the Jewish history never obtained any credit in the
world, till Christianity was established :" i. e. it obtained no credit
among the heathen nations ; or as he elsewhere expresseth it, " we
do not find, that the authority of these books prevailed among the
pagan world. "+ How could it be expected that it should ? Since
the heathens could not acknowledge it, and continue heathens ; for
it was absolutely subversive ofthe whole system of paganism. The
authority of those books was believed and received among all those,
by whom it could be reasonably expected that it should be believed
and received : that is, it was acknowledged and received by that
nation among whom those writings, and the memory of the laws
and facts, had been constantly preserved, and who regarded them
with great veneration, as of a divine original ; and also by those
among the heathens themselves, who, upon the credit of the Jewish
religion, laws, and records, quitted the heathen idolatry : and these
were all that could be reasonably expected to acknowledge the au
thority of the Jewish sacred books, even supposing their authority
to have been ever so well founded.
But it is urged as a ground of suspicion against the Jewish Scrip
tures, that " they were compiled in their own country, and, as it
were, out ofthe sight of the rest ofthe world." And it was cer
tainly most proper, that the books in which their laws, and the most
remarkable events relating to their nation, are recorded, should be
published in their own country, the scene where the chief actions
were laid. This is no diminution of their credit, but the contrary;
and if they had been compiled in any other country, or by foreigners,
and persons not of their own nation, it might have been said, and
not without some appearance of reason, that they might be mis
taken, and take up with wrong and imperfect accounts, both of laws
and facts.
But what this author seems chiefly to insist upon, to show that

* There is an heathen writer, of a very different character from Apion, who gives a
much more candid account of the Jewish nation : 1 mean tbe judicious Strabo, of
whom our author himself speaks with the highest esteem. He makes the cause of
Moses's forsaking Egypt to be his being dissatisfied with the false notions of God, and
his worship, that had obtained among the Egyptians ; and supposes him to have enter
tained juster and nobler notions of the divinity than tbe Egyptians, or Libyans, or
Greeks : that with him went from Egypt many that honoured the deity, 7ro\\oi TiptSivTig
ri> Oeiov ; that he persuaded many good men, and brought them into the country where
Jerusalem is built ; and that there they continued, practising justice or righteousness,
and being truly religious, or sincere worshippers of God, BiKaiirpayovvrtg Kal kvatteig iig
aXnBuic. ovreg, but that afterwards they degenerated. — See Strabo, lib. xvi.
t Works, vol. i. p. 87. 91.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 605
little credit is to be given to these writings, is, "that they are
histories delivered to us on the faith of a superstitious people;
among whom the custom and art of pious lying prevailed remark
ably."* In order to form a proper judgment of this matter, let us take a
brief view of the Jewish Scriptures, that we may see what likeli
hood there is of their having been feigned by a superstitious and
lying people.
In general, it may be observed, that if we compare the sacred
books ofthe Jews with those of any other the most admired nations,
such as Greece and Rome, we shall soon see a most striking and
amazing difference. Their whole constitution was of a peculiar
nature ; so vastly different from that of other countries, that it well
deserveth the attention and admiration of every impartial and con
sidering observer. It was the only constitution in the world, where
the acknowledgment and worship ofthe one true God, the sovereign
Lord ofthe universe, and of him alone, is made the fundamental
maxim of their state, and principle of their government, in which all
their laws centre, and the main end to which they are all directed.
All worship of inferior deities is forbidden; no deified heroes ad
mitted ; no images suffered. Many of their sacred rites seem to
have been instituted in a designed opposition to those of the neigh
bouring nations, that they might not incorporate with them, or learn
their idolatrous customs, to which the Israelites, for a long time,
were very prone. Nor is there any likelihood that they would have
embraced or submitted to a constitution so different from the then
generally prevailing idolatry, if it had not been for the manifest
proofs that were given them of its divine original. The author of
these Letters indeed intimates, that many of their rites were de
rived from the Egyptians ; but whatever conformity there might be
in some particular instances, nothing is more certain and evident,
than that the whole system of the Jewish religion was most essen
tially opposite to that of the Egyptians, and other Pagan nations,
and tended to cast contempt on their adored deities, and on that
idolatrous worship to which the heathens were so much addicted,
and which was established by the laws of their respective coun
tries. As to the moral and devotional treatises, which make up another
part of their sacred writings, they are incontestably excellent.
Their poetry is of a most divine strain, far superior to that of other
ancient nations, having an unexampled dignity, elevation, and
sublimity in it, filled with the noblest sentiments of the Divinity,
and of his glorious incomparable perfections, and governing pro
vidence. The same observation may be made on the prophetical writings,
in which we may discern many remarkable characters of genuine
truth and purity. A fervent zeal for God, and for pure and unde
filed religion, everywhere appears ; nor is there any thing in them
* Works, vol. i. p. 87.

5b'6 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
that breathes the spirit of this world, or that savours of ambition,
artifice, or imposture. The whole intention of them is manifestly to
reclaim the people from idolatry, vice, and wickedness, to engage
them to the pure worship of God, and to the practice of universal
righteousness. With a noble freedom and impartiality do they
reprove their kings, princes, priests, people ; denouncing the most
awful threatenings against them, if they should persist in their evil
and sinful courses ; and encouraging them with the most gracious
promises to repentance, and new obedience ; and all this mixed with
many remarkable and express predictions of future events, which
no human sagacity could have foreseen, and which derived such an
authority to them, that though they were often reproached and per
secuted when alive, their character and writings were afterwards
regarded by the whole nation with the profoundest veneration.
And it deserveth to be particularly remarked, that whereas the
Jews, as well as mankind in all ages, have been prone to place reli
gion chiefly in external forms, and ritual observances, as if these
would compensate for the neglect of the moral precepts, there are
many passages in their sacred books, especially those of the prophets,
which in the strongest terms represent the utter insufficiency of all
ritual observances without real holiness of heart and life, and even
speak of them in a very diminutive manner, and with a seeming
contempt, when opposed to, or abstracted from, moral goodness and
virtue ; and such writings certainly do not look like the inventions
of a superstitious and lying people.
But as the sacred history is what this writer setteth himself par
ticularly to expose and invalidate, let us take a brief view of the his
torical parts of Scripture ; and these are no less remarkable, and
worthy of our attention, than the laws, the prophecies, the moral and
devotional writings.
As to a general idea of their history, it is of as different a com
plexion from that of other nations as their laws, and is of the same
noble tendency with their other sacred books, It everywhere
breathes the profoundest veneration for the Deity. The chief de
sign of it is not merely to answer civil or political views, or to pre
serve the annals of their nation, or trace it up to its original (though
this also is done), but for nobler purposes ; to promote the true
worship of God, and the practice of piety and virtue ; to preserve
the remembrance of God's wonderful works of providence towards
his professing people ; to show the favours, the blessings, the deli
verances, vouchsafed to them, the prosperity and happiness they
enjoyed, when they kept close to the laws of God, and continued in
the practice of virtue and righteousness ; and on the other hand,
the great calamities which befell them when they broke the divine
law and covenant, and lapsed into idolatry, vice, and wickedness.
Such are the useful lessons which their history is designed to teach,
and to this excellent end is it directed.
To which it may be added, that there are observable in it remark
able characters of simplicity, and an impartial regard to truth. It
is plain, from the whole tenor of their history, that it was not com-

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 567
piled to give false and flattering accounts of their nation, or partial
and elegant encomiums of their great men. Their great actions
indeed are recorded, but their faults are also related, with a simpli
city and impartiality that deserves to be admired. Neither Romans,
Greeks, Egyptians, nor any other people, have formed their histories
so much to the disadvantage of their own nation, or charged them
with such repeated revolts from the religion and laws of their coun
try. Let us suppose the Jews ever so much possessed with the spirit
of lying, it would never have put them upon forging a body of his
tory so much to the prejudice of their own national character. It
tendeth indeed to give an high idea of the great things God had
done for them, of the privileges conferred upon them, and the ex
cellency of their laws, (and that their laws are excellent, no man
can doubt that seriously reads and considers them), but at the same
time it setteth the ingratitude, the disobedience, the stupidity, of
that people, their opposition to God's authority, and abuse of his
goodness, their manifold backslidings and unsteadfastness in his
covenant, in the strongest light. Their disgraces, defeats, captivi
ties, are nowhere concealed; they are represented as frequently
brought under the yoke of the neighbouring nations, in a manner
much to their dishonour ; and their deliverances are ascribed, not
to their own wisdom, conduct, and bravery, but to the mercy of
God, upon their repentance. In a word, their history is a continued
account of God's goodness, patience, and justice, exercised towards
them ; and of their own strange, perverse, and unaccountable con
duct. This is so manifest, that it hath been often turned to their
reproach, and hath given occasion to the representing them as an ob
stinate, ungrateful, and rebellious race, and to such a charge as St.
Stephen advanceth against them from their own Scriptures : Ye
stiffnecked, anehuncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist
the Holy Ghqsf: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the pro
phets have not your fathers persecuted? Acts vii. 51. These consi
derations naturally tend to derive a peculiar credit to the Jewish
Scriptures, as containing true and faithful accounts, not forged by
a superstitious lying people. Whatever opinion therefore we may have
of the Jews, yet their sacred books deserve great regard. Nor is there
any ground to suppose, that these books of records were of their in
venting. At least, I believe, this will scarcely be pretended with regard
to the Jews in the latter times of their state, however they might
otherwise be addicted to fiction and embellishment. They received
these books as sacred from their ancestors, and were themselves so
fully persuaded of the divine original and authority of their laws,
and the certainty and authenticity of these records, that they ad
hered to them with a zeal scarce to be paralleled in any other nation.
So great was the veneration they had for them, that after the canon
was completed, they were extremely scrupulous not to make any
additions to their sacred books, or receive any others into their num
ber as of equal authority, though written by the greatest and wisest
men of their nation. And if any person had endeavoured to alter
or corrupt them, the fraud, the imposture, must have been immedi-

508 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
ately detected. For these sacred books were not, like those of other
nations, confined to the priests only; they were in the hands ofthe
people, constantly and publicly read in their synagogues ; the laws,
and the facts, were what they were all acquainted with, and in
structed in, from their infancy.
If therefore there be any ground of suspicion, it must fall, not
upon the latter Jews, but upon Ezra, and those by whom the sacred
canon was finished. If their history and sacred books were forged
or corrupted, the most likely time that can be fixed for it, is upon
their return from the Babylonish captivity. And this seems to be
the sera fixed upon by the author of these Letters. He observes,
that, " the Babylonish captivity lasted so long, and such circum
stances, whatever they were, accompanied it, that the captives forgot
their country, and even their language, the Hebrew dialect, at least,
and character."* And afterwards he intimates, that the Scriptures
were " lost during the captivity."f And he observes, that " Ezra
began, and Simon the Just finished, the canon of the Scriptures. "J
Let us grant, that in the Babylonish captivity, the Jews learned
the Chaldee language, which thenceforth became more familiar to
them than the Hebrew ; and that the old Hebrew character was, as
many learned men suppose, though it is far from being certain,
changed for the Chaldee ; the latter being fairer, easier, and more
generally used among the people ; yet this is far from proving, either
that the Hebrew language was entirely forgotten by them, or that
their sacred books were lost in the captivity. There are many
things that plainly show the contrary. The prophet Ezekiel, who
prophesied during the captivity to the Jews in Chaldea, wrote and
published his prophecies in Hebrew. So did the prophets Haggai,
Zechariah, and Malachi, who prophesied several years after the
return from the Babylonish captivity ; which shows, that the He
brew language was still in use, and was understood by many ofthe
people. The same thing may be concluded from this : that all the
sacred books that were written after the captivity were written in
Hebrew, except a part of Ezra and Daniel. Nehemiah, who had
been a great man in the Persian court, wrote his own memoirs in
Hebrew ; which shows, that the Jews who continued in Persia, their
great men at least, still retained the knowledge of that language.
And as the Hebrew language was not absolutely forgotten among
the Jews in their captivity, so neither were their sacred books en
tirely lost. Indeed it were absurd to suppose it. That captivity,
though it lasted seventy years from the first beginning of it under
Jehoiakim, yet from the time of the utter desolation of Jerusalem,
and the temple, and the carrying away the last remainder of the
people to Babylon, continued but about fifty years. And there were
not a few of them that had been carried away from Jerusalem, who
survived the whole time, and lived to come back. " Many of the
priests and Levites, and chief of the fathers, who were ancient men,
that had seen the first house, when the foundation of the second
* Works, vol. i. p. 81. f ]bid. p. 101. X Ibid, p. 85.

LORD BOLINGBROKE S LETTERS. 509
house was laid before their eyes, wept with a loud voice." Ezra iii.
12. All those among them that lived to seventy or eighty years
were twenty or thirty years old when Jerusalem and the temple were
destroyed ; and to suppose, that these should entirely forget their
language, or their religion, history, and laws, is very absurd ; add
to this, that the people were in expectation of a deliverance, and
restitution to their own land, of which the prophets had assured
them ; and this would naturally make them more careful to preserve
their laws, and the ancient authentic records and memorials of their
nation. It appeareth from the accounts given of those that returned,
that many of the priests, the Levites, the singers, the porters, the
Nethinims, 8cc. had preserved their genealogies during the capti
vity, in prospect of their return, and of their being again employed
in the sacred functions ; and those who could not clearly show their
genealogies, were put from the priesthood, Ezra ii. 62. Neh. vii. 64.
Great numbers of the people could also prove their genealogies ;
and where there were any that could not do this, it is particularly
taken notice of, that " they could not show their father's house,"
Ezra ii. 59. It is manifest therefore, that there were registers of
genealogies preserved in Babylon ; and is it not reasonable to con
clude, that they would be no less careful to preserve their sacred
books, especially those of Moses, in which were their original
records, and the laws on which their whole constitution depended?
If the Jews had been for changing their own laws and customs,
we may suppose it must have been in order to their adopting those
of their conquerors, and of the country to which they were trans
planted, and in which they settled. But it is evident, that, in fact,
they did not do this : since the whole system of their worship and
constitution was, upon their return, very different from that of the
Babylonians. If therefore they learned their language, or used
their letters and characters in writing ; yet still it is certain, that
they worshipped not their gods, nor adopted their religion, and
sacred rites. They still preserved their own ; and the captivity and
desolation of their nation, which they looked upon as a punishment
for their manifold revolts, idolatries, and deviations from their law,
tended to increase, instead of extinguishing, their veneration for it.
By Daniel's solemn supplication and fasting, when the time came
that had been marked out in the prophecies for their return, it ap
peareth, that he had the book of Jeremiah's prophecies before him,
Dan. ix. 2. And the confession he there maketh is remarkable :
All Israel have transgressed thy law, therefore the curse is come
upon us ; and the oath that is written in the law of Moses, the servant
of God, because we have sinned against him : and he hath confirmed
his words which he spake against us, and against our judges that
judged us. As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil ts come
upon us, ver. 11, 12, 13. Here it is plainly supposed, that there
was a written law of Moses extant in his time, known to him and
to the people, and which was regarded as the law of God himselt :
that they had transgressed that law, and thereby had exposed them
selves to the dreadful judgment denounced against them, and

570 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
written in that law, as the just punishment of their revolt and dis
obedience. Soon after this, when the people returned, under the
conduct of Zerubbabel, Jeshua, and others, we find them gathered
together to celebrate the feast of tabernacles, in the seventh month,
and offering the daily burnt offerings, and those of the new moons,
and set feasts, besides free-will offerings : and all of this is said to
be done as written in the law of Moses, Ezra iii. 1 — 6: and this
plainly showeth, that they had the written law of Moses with them.
They also appointed the priests and Levites, in their several courses,
and the singers, and sefrvice of the temple, according to the ordi
nances of David, the man of God, Ezra iii. 10, 11. The sacred
hymns or psalms, therefore, that had been used in the temple wor
ship, were not lost in the captivity ; and indeed the Psalms of David
carry evident characters of genuineness in them. They were many
of them composed on special occasions, and adapted to his pe
culiar circumstances, in a manner which plainly showed they were
not forged in after-times. And the preserving so many of the
psalms and hymns, some of which contain an abridgment of their
sacred history, is a manifest indication of the care they took; and
that there was not a general destruction of their sacred books in the
captivity. The same observation may be applied to the prophetical
writings, and to their sacred records. It is plain, that the history
of their kings was preserved ; to which there is frequent reference
in the books compiled after the Babylonish captivity.
The commission afterwards given to Ezra by Artaxerxes, plainly
supposed the law of Moses to be then in being, and in the highest
authority ; and only empowered him to regulate every thing accord
ing to that law. He is described in Artaxerxes's commission as a
ready scribe in the law of Moses : as one greatly skilled in that law,
and fit to instruct others in it ; and is required to set magistrates and
judges to judge the people, such as knew the law of God, Ezra vii.
6. 10. 25. Soon after Ezra came Nehemiah, a great man in the
Persian court, and who was appointed governor of Judea ; and every
thing throughout his book discovereth, that he and the whole
people professed the highest veneration for the law of Moses. Be
fore he came to Judea, he was well acquainted with that law, and
regarded it as of divine authority, Neh. i. 7, 8, 9. During his ad
ministration, we have an account of a solemn reading of the law,
by Ezra, in the hearing of all the people ; who heard it with the
utmost reverence and attention : in this he was assisted by several
Levites, who read in the book, in the law qf God, distinctly, and
gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading, Neh. viii.
1 — 9. Again, we are told of another solemn reading of the law,
before all the people, Neh. ix. 1, 2, 3. And in the admirable confes
sion made on that occasion by the Levites, there is an excellent
summary of the principal events recorded in the historical parts of
the books of Moses; such as the calling of Abraham ; their bondage
and oppression in Egypt ; their being brought out from thence with
signs and wonders, and dreadful judgments executed upon Pharaoh
and his people ; the dividing of the sea before them, so that they

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 571
passed through it as on dry land, whilst the Egyptians that pursued
them were overwhelmed in the deep; the promulgation of the law at
Sinai, with remarkable tokens of the divine presence and glory ;
the miracles wrought in the wilderness, the leading them by a cloud
in the day, and a pillar of fire by night ; the giving them manna
bread from heaven to eat, and cleaving the rock to give them water
to drink : and finally, bringing them into possession of the land
of Canaan. These things, which are the most remarkable facts in
the history of their nation, together with their frequent rebellions,
disobedience, and ingratitude, particularly their making and wor
shipping the molten calf in the wilderness, the standing disgrace of
their nation, and their subsequent revolts, calamities, and deliver
ances, after they came into the land of Canaan, are there taken
notice of in the public confessions and acknowledgments made to
God in the name and presence of all the people; and are men
tioned as things commonly known and acknowledged among them,
and as of undoubted truth and certainty.
Taking these things together, it seems to appear, with all the
evidence which the nature of the thing is capable of, that the Jew
ish sacred books and records were not lost in the Babylonish cap
tivity; that they were in possession of them, and held them in
great veneration^ before Ezra came to Jerusalem : and it would be a
wild imagination to suppose, that he had it in his power, even if he
had it in his inclination, so far to impose upon all the Jews,
both those in Judea, and those that continued in Babylon, and
other parts ofthe Persian empire, as to make them all with one con
sent receive those for their ancient laws, by which their nation had
been always governed, which were not their ancient laws ; and those
for their ancient authentic histories, and sacred records, which were
not the ancient authentic records. All that his commission from
Artaxerxes extended to, was, to order things according to the law
of Moses; and this he effected. When he came, he found several
abuses contrary to that law, countenanced by men of great power
and interest, and in which several of the chief priests, as well as
numbers of the people, were engaged ; and he set himself to reform
them according to that law ; and these regulations would not have
been tamely submitted to, if it had not been well known, that the
laws and constitutions he urged upon them, were the true original
laws of Moses.
As to the establishing the sacred canon, which is attributed to
Ezra, and to those whom the Jews call the men of the great syna
gogue, the last of whom was Simon the Just, this is not to be
understood as if these books were not accounted sacred, or were re
garded as of no authority before. The books were already well
known, and looked upon as sacred : they had not their authority,
because Ezra acknowledged them : but he collected and published
them, because they were known to be authentic. It may indeed be
well supposed, that faults and variations might have crept into the
copies of those books, and that they needed to be carefully revised :
and this was a work for which Ezra was admirably fitted, by his

572 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
great skill in the law, and in the sacred records of his nation, as well
as his noted integrity". And if he accordingly revised the original
sacred books, and published a more correct edition of them, or
abridged some of their ancient records, to render them of more
general use among the people, and here and there inserted some
passages, for explaining and illustrating things that were grown
obscure ; this was certainly a work of great use. And supposing
him to have done this, and that this work continued to be afterwards
carried on by some of the most knowing and excellent men of their
nation, till it was with great care completed, I do not see how it in
the least affects the authority or credibility of those books. The
whole nation in general were so sensible of Ezra's great fidelity and
diligence, that he was always afterwards had in the highest honour:
and they were so convinced that these were the original sacred books,
that they-received them with an extraordinary veneration. Nor did
they ever pay the same regard to any other subsequent writings in
their own nation : and though the Sanhedrim continued to have
great authority among them, they never pretended to put any other
books upon them as divine, or as of equal authority with the sacred
books. Now how comes it, that they put so great a difference be
tween them, and that the authority of these books was universally
acknowledged by the whole nation, and the other not? This
showeth, that however credulous the Jews might be in other things,
yet they were particularly exact and scrupulous in not receiving any
books into the sacred canon, but what they judged they had good
reason to look upon as authentic.
The most remarkable part of the Jewish history is, that which is
contained in the books of Moses. It is there we have an account
of the first constitution of their sacred polity ; the promulgation of
the ten commandments, with the most amazing demonstrations of a
divine power and majesty ; and the extraordinary miraculous facts
done in Egypt and in the wilderness, by which the authority of that
law was established. And whosoever alloweth this part of the
Jewish history to be authentic, will not much scruple the subse
quent parts of their history. Now it is evident, that as it was not
Ezra that gave authority to the law of Moses, which was in the
highest authority before, or who caused the people to receive it as
divine; so neither were the facts, whereby the authority of that law
was attested, first published by him. They had been all along be
lieved, and the remembrance of them kept up, among the people.
The books of Moses exhibit a remarkable intermixture of laws and
facts: and it appears to have been so from the beginning, though
our author insinuates the contrary, but gives no reason for it.*
And it was wisely ordered, that the facts should go along with the
laws ; several of which suppose those, facts, and have a manifest re
lation to them. And as the laws were received with great venera
tion, so the facts were equally received and believed among the
people, in all ages, from the time in which those laws were given.
* Works, vol. i. p. 100.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 573
And it deserveth to be remarked, that the facts were of such a kind,
that they could not have been imposed upon the people, however
stupid we suppose them to have been, at the time the laws were
given, if they had not been true. If Moses had only told the
Israelites, as Mahomet did the Arabians, instead of working
miracles before them, as they demanded, of a journey he made to
heaven, where he received the law : or as Numa did the ancient
Romans, of conferences he had with the goddess Egeria in a wood
or grove, to which no other persons were witnesses, and which de
pended entirely upon his own word ; this might have administered
ground of suspicion, that he only feigned a divine commission, the
more effectually to enforce his laws upon an ignorant and supersti
tious people. But he took a quite different method. The facts he
relateth, and upon the credit of which the divine authority of his laws
is rested, were of a most public nature, done in open view before
the people, of which they were all said to be witnesses, and in which
therefore, if they had not been true, it would have been the easiest
thing in the world to have detected him. And indeed, considering
the stubborn disposition of the people, and their great proneness to
idolatry, it can scarcely be conceived, that they would have received
or submitted to such a law and constitution, if'they themselves had
not been assured of the truth of those facts whereby the divinity of
it was confirmed. In the admirable recapitulation of the law, con
tained in the book of Deuteronomy, which carrieth as strong evi
dences of genuine antiquity, simplicity, and integrity, as any writ
ings can possibly have, and in which he delivereth himself with an
inimitable gravity, dignity, and- authority, mixed with the most
affectionate tenderness and concern, as becometh the lawgiver and
father of his people, and exhorteth them to the observance of the law
in the most pathetical and engaging manner ; there is a constant
reference to the great and extraordinary facts wrought in Egypt, and
in the wilderness ; an appeal is made to the people concerning them,
as things which they themselves had seen and known. And never
was there greater care taken to preserve a remembrance of any laws
and facts than there was of these. He delivered the book of the
law, containing an account both of laws and facts, not only to the
priests, but to the elders of Israel, the heads of the several tribes,
before his death : and the original of the law was deposited in the
sides of the ark, in the most holy place. A most solemn charge was
laid upon the people, in the name of God, as they valued his favour,
and their own happiness, frequently to consider those laws and facts
themselves, and to teach them diligently to their children. Sacred
rites were instituted, and public festivals appointed, to preserve the
memorials of the principal facts, from the time in which those facts
were done. And accordingly the remembrance of them was con
stantly preserved among them in all ages. In all the succeeding
monuments of their nation, throughout their whole history, and in
their devotional and prophetical writings, and in their public solemn
forms of confession and thanksgiving, there was still a constant re
ference to those facts as of undoubted credit ; and upon the credit of

574 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
those facts, those laws were both at first received, and continued
afterwards to be acknowledged and submitted to : for notwithstand
ing the frequent defections of the people to the idolatrous rites and
customs of the neighbouring nations, yet they never totally and uni
versally apostatised from the law of Moses, but still acknowledged
its sacredness and divine authority.*
The author of these Letters taketh particular notice of the fables
invented by the Hellenistic Jews, to authorize the Greek version of
the Hebrew Scriptures.-f- But I do not see how any argument can
be fairly drawn from these fables to the prejudice of the sacred
books themselves, which were thus translated, or to destroy their
authority or credibility. The strong persuasion they had of the
divine authority of the original Scriptures, might make the Jews at
Alexandria more ready to entertain stories in favour of the transla
tion of these Scriptures into Greek, from which they found great
benefit; this being the language they best understood, and which
was then become of general use. But those stories were not gene
rally received by the Jewish nation, though they all universally
agreed in acknowledging the authority of the originals ; nor were
they ever inserted in the sacred writings, or in any books, the au
thority of which was generally received among them.
The first thing that gave rise to those stories was, the history of
Aristeas ; which seems to have been contrived on purpose to do
honour to that version, and gives a pompous account of it. And
yet even in that history there is nothing said of those miraculous
circumstances, which were afterwards invented to show, that those
interpreters were under an extraordinary divine guidance. On the
contrary, that book, though it be the foundation of all that is said
concerning the Septuagint, may be proved to be plainly inconsistent
with those subsequent fables and fictions, and is sufficient to detect
the falsity of them. There is therefore no parallel at all between
these Hellenistical fables, and the sacred Hebrew records ; except it
could be proved, that one part of those ancient records is inconsistent
with other subsequent parts of them, and furnishes manifest proofs
of their falsehood; which neither his Lordship, nor any other, has
been able to show.
Another argument, on which he seems to lay a mighty stress, in
order to set aside the authority of the Scripture, is drawn from the
accidents that have happened to the sacred text. He will not allow
the answer made by Abbadie and others, that " such accidents
could not have been prevented without a perpetual standing miracle,
and that a perpetual standing miracle is not in the order of Provi
dence." On the contrary, it seems evident to him, that if the
* That the law of Moses, with tbe facts there recorded, may be traced, from the
time in which that law was given, and the facts done, through all the succeeding ages
of the Jewish nation ; and that we have all the evidence of their having been trans
mitted without any material corruption or alteration, that can be reasonably desired; I
have elsewhere more fully shown, in the Answer to Christianity as old as the Creation,
vol. ii. chap. 4. * Works, vol. i. p. 85, 86.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 575
Scriptures had been originally given by divine inspiration, " either
such accidents would not have happened, or the Scriptures would
have been preserved entirely in their genuine purity, notwithstand
ing these accidents." He thinks the proof of this " is obvious and
easy, according to our clearest and most distinct ideas of wisdom,
and moral fitness."* But besides that the present question, as he
has managed it, relating to the sacred history, is not about the di
vine inspiration of it, but whether it be a true and faithful history,
an honest and credible relation of facts, which he absolutely denies;
I see no consequence at all in his way of reasoning, even if the ques
tion were, whether those sacred books were originally written by per
sons divinely inspired. For all that could be reasonably concluded,
supposing any books to have been originally given by divine inspira
tion, is, that Providence would take care, that those books should
be transmitted with a sufficient degree of certainty and integrity, to
answer the end for which they were originally intended. But it was
no-way necessary to this purpose, that all the transcribers that should
ever copy these writings in any age or nation, should be under an
infallible guidance, so as to be kept by an extraordinary interposi
tion from ever committing any mistake or blunder, or being guilty
of any slips or negligences ; or that all those that have ever revised
and compared those copies, should, in every instance, be infallibly
guided in their judgments concerning them. This is evidently ab
surd. It would be multiplying miracles without necessity, and
would therefore be unworthy of the divine wisdom, and not very
consistent with the methods of God's moral government of men, con
sidered as reasonable creatures, free agents. For, will any man, in
good earnest, undertake to prove, that supposing an excellent re
velation given, of doctrines, laws, &c. together with authentic ac
counts of extraordinary facts, tending to confirm and establish the
divine authority of those doctrines and laws, this revelation could
not be of any use, nor could those accounts of facts be at all fit to
be depended on, if there were any variations, omissions, transposi
tions, or mistakes, in any copies of them that should be taken of
them in any age ? If, notwithstanding those variations, the copies
should still so far agree, that from thence a sufficient notion might
be formed of the doctrines and laws contained in that original reve
lation, and of the truth of the facts whereby it was attested and con
firmed, this would be sufficient to answer the end which we might .
suppose the divine wisdom to have had in view in giving such a re
velation. And this is actually the case with regard to the holy
Scriptures. Whatever additions, interpolations, or transpositions,
may be supposed to have crept into any of the copies, yet all the
main laws and facts are still preserved. Of this we have a remark
able proof, by comparing the Hebrew and Samaritan codes of the
Pentateuch. There are differences between them : but the laws, the
precepts, the history, the important facts, whereby the law was
attested, are the same in both. And in general it may be justly
* Works, vol. i. p. 95.

576 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
affirmed, that notwithstanding all the differences in the copies,
about which such a clamour has been raised, yet there is a sufficient
agreement among them to satisfy us, that such and such laws were
originally given, such prophecies were delivered, and that such
facts were done : and the variations among the copies in smaller
matters, the mistakes that have crept into the genealogies, numbers,
dates, catalogues of names, ages of some of the patriarchs, and the
like (for it is in these things that the differences principally lie), do
really confirm their harmony in the main ; and therefore are far
from destroying the authority of the sacred writings, or the credi
bility of the scripture history.
The learned Capellus, who had thoroughly considered this matter,
and who, it is well known, allowed himself great liberties in judging
concerning the variations in the copies of the Hebrew Scriptures,
justly observeth, in his defence of his Critica Sacra, that all these
variations are of little or no moment as to faith or manners ; so that
in that respect it is indifferent which reading we follow : Sane omnes
iliac varietates, uti scepius in Critica Sacra repeto, nullius aut pent) nul-
lius sunt quoad fidem et mores momenti, ut eo respectu perinde sit ham
an Mam sequaris lectionem. And I believe there are few competent
and impartial judges of these things, but will be ready to own, with
M. Le Clerc, the freedom of whose judgment in such matters must
be acknowledged, that, through the good providence of God, no
books from the earliest antiquity, have come to us equally correct
with the sacred books of the Hebrews, particularly the Masoretical
copies. Nullos libros ex ultima antiquitate ad nos, Dei beneficio, per-
venisse ezqud emendates ac sacros Hebraorum codices, et quidem Maso-
reticos. See his Dissertatio de Lingua Hebreea, prefixed to his Com
mentary on the Pentateuch.
What our author himself maketh a show of granting is very true,
that—" amidst all the changes and chances to which the books, in
which they are recorded, have been exposed, neither original writers
nor later compilers, have been suffered to make any essential alte
rations, such as would have falsified the law of Goel, and the prin
ciples of the Jewish and Christian religion, iii any of those divine
fundamental points."* And indeed the precepts, the doctrines of
religion inculcated in the Scriptures of the Old Testament, are so
frequently repeated, and the principal facts there related are so often
referred to, in different parts of those sacred volumes, as to be abun
dantly sufficient to answer the design for which they were originally
intended ; viz. to instruct men in the knowledge, adoration, and
obedience of the one true God, and to engage them to the
practice of righteousness, and to prepare the way for a more perfect
dispensation, which was to be introduced, in the fulness of time, by
that Divine Person, whose coming, character, offices, sufferings, glory,
and kingdom, were there prefigured and foretold. Accordingly our
Saviour speaketh of the writings of Moses and the Prophets, as of
signal use to instruct and direct men in the knowledge arid practice
* Works, vol. i. p. 97, 98.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 577
of religion, Luke xvi. 29, 30, 31. And though it be not true, which
our author asserteth, that the Jewish Scriptures had no authority
but what they derived from Christianity (for they had an authority
founded upon sufficient credentials before Christianity was esta
blished) ; yet their being acknowledged as divine by Christ and his
apostles, giveth them a farther confirmation ; for when a subse
quent revelation, which is itself founded on convincing proofs and
evidences, giveth testimony to a prior revelation, and referreth to it
as of divine authority ; when both together concur to form one sys
tem of religion, and to exhibit the history of God's various dispen
sations towards his church, the former being subservient and pre
paratory to the latter, and the latter giving farther light and a fuller
completion to the former ; this confirmeth the authority of both,
and showeth one great uniform design and plan carried on by the
divine wisdom and goodness from the beginning.
It is no just objection against the authority of the sacred books
of the Old Testament, though the writer of these letters seems to
think it so, that "though Jews and Christians hold the same books
in great veneration, yet each condemns the other for not understand
ing, or for abusing, them."* This is to be understood, not of the
sacred history, which yet he would be thought to have particularly
in view : for, as to this, the Jews and Christians are generally
agreed ; but of some passages in the prophetical writings, in the in
terpretation of which they differ. And with respect to these, it may
be observed, that if the Jews, at the time of our Saviour's appearing,
had universally interpreted the prophetical writings as the Christians
do, and applied them to Jesus Christ ; and had accordingly turned
Christians, and embraced Jesus as the Messiah promised to their
fathers; it would undoubtedly have been alleged, that they forged
or corrupted the prophecies in favour of the Christian system;
whereas now there is no room for this pretence. Their vouching
and acknowledging those writings, as of divine authority, not
withstanding the difficulty they have been put to in answering
the arguments brought from thence against their own favourite
notions and prejudices, giveth their testimony to the prophetical
books great force.
There is another remarkable passage in his third letter, which it
is proper to take some notice of. He observes,f that " the Jews and
Christians differ among themselves, and from one another, concern
ing almost every point that is necessary to be known and agreed
upon, in order to establish the authority of books which both have
received as authentic and sacred. Who were the authors of these
scriptures, when they were published, how they were composed,
and preserved, or renewed ; in fine, how they were lost during the
captivity, and how they were retrieved after it ; are all matters of
controversy to this day." That the sacred books were not lost in
the captivity, and that consequently they were not retrieved after it
by immediate inspiration, hath been clearly shown ; a fiction which
* Works, vol. i. p. 92. t Ibid. p. 100, 101.
P P

578 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATF.
seems to have had its rise from the apocryphal second book of
Esdras, the authority of which never was acknowledged either in
the Jewish or Christian church. There are indeed differences, both
among Jews and Christians, concerning several points relating to
these sacred books; but these differences are, for the most part,
about things that do not properly concern the divine authority or
credibility of those writings. There is a general agreement among
them, that the prophetical books were writings by persons divinely
inspired; and that the Pentateuch was written by* Moses, the
greatest of all the prophets ; and that the historical writings were
either the very original authentic records, or faithfully compiled out
of them ; and were received and acknowledged by the whole nation,
as containing true and just accounts of facts. And whereas he
urgeth, that it is matter of controversy, who were the authors of
those scriptures or, when they were composed or published ; it is
certain, that, with respect to the much greater part of the sacred
books,' both Jews and Christians are generally agreed who were the
authors of them.
This is true concerning all the writings of the prophets, the books
of Solomon, most ofthe Psalms, the five books of Moses, which have
been constantly received by the Jewish and Christian church, in all
ages, as written by Moses ; though a few in these latter times have
attempted to contest it. The books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel,
seem plainly to show their authors ; and concerning all these, there
has been a general agreement. The books therefore, concerning the
authors of which there is properly any ground of controversy, are
the historical books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Chro
nicles. As to the first of these, viz. the book of Joshua, the ancient
Jews in general, and the greater part of Christian writers, with good
reason, look upon it to have been written by Joshua himself; though
there are some particular passages in- it that were inserted after
wards, by way of illustration. It is principally concerning the books
of Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, that there is any colour
able pretence for saying with our author, that they were " abridg
ments of old records made in later times."* Some of them seem
plainly to have been compiled after the return from the Babylonish
captivity, probably by Ezra, from ancient authentic records, which
are frequently quoted and referred to in them, as books of acknow
ledged credit and authority ; so that there is little room to doubt of
the truth and certainty of the accounts there given. For that they
were faithfully extracted from those original records, to which they
refer for a larger account ofthe things there related, there is the
highest reason to believe. And it was wisely ordered, that these
shorter accounts should be inserted in the sacred canon, when it was
to be brought, as it were, into one volume, for the lasting instruction
and edification of the church. For as the sacred history was in
tended not merely to gratify curiosity, but to promote the purposes
of religion, piety, and virtue, and to keep up the remembrance of the
« Works, vol. i. p. 9G.

LORD BOLINGBROKE S LETTERS. ' 579
remarkable actings of divine providence towards them, both in a way
of mercy and judgment, according to their behaviour, it was proper
that it should be brought into as narrow a compass as was consistent
with that design. This would make it more generally known and
easily remembered ; whereas larger and more particular accounts
might have been too voluminous for a book designed for universal
use. The only thing that yet reinaineth to be considered, with regard
to the sacred books ofthe Old Testament, is, what he saith concern
ing the curse pronounced upon Canaan by Noah ; of which we have
an account, Gen. ix. 24, 25, 26, 27. This he seems to have fixed
upon as one of the properest instances he could find to expose the
authority of the scripture. He treateth it as an invention of the
writer to justify the Israelites in their invasion of the Canaanites,
and representeth this curse as contradicting all our notions of order
and justice. " One is tempted to think," says he, " that the patri
arch was still drunk, and that no man in his senses could hold such
language, or pass such a sentence. Certain it is, that no writer but
a Jew could impute to the economy of Providence the accomplish
ment of such a prediction, nor make the Supreme Being the executor
of such a curse."
His Lordship observes, that, " Ham alone offended ; Canaan was
innocent — Canaan was however alone cursed, and became, according
to his grandfather's prophecy, a servant qf servants, i. e. the vilest
and meanest of slaves — to Shem, not to Japheth, when the Israelites
conquered Palestine ; to one of his uncles, not to his brethren.
Will it be said — it has been said — that where we read Canaan we
are to understand Ham, whose brethren Shem and Japheth were ? At
this rate, we shall never know what we read ; as these critics never
care what they say. Will it be said — this has been said too — that
Ham was punished in his posterity, when Canaan was cursed, and
his descendants were exterminated ? But who does not see, that
the curse and punishment in this case fell on Canaan and his pos
terity, exclusive of the rest of the posterity of Ham ; and were there
fore the curse and punishment of the son, not of the father properly ?
The descendants of Misraim, another of his sons, were the Egyp
tians ; and they were so far from being servants of servants to their
cousins the Shemites, that these were servants of servants unto
them, during more than fourscore years. Why the posterity of
Canaan was to be deemed an accursed race, it is easy to account ;
and I have mentioned it just now ; but it is not so easy to account
why the posterity of the righteous Shem, that great example of filial
reverence, became slaves to another branch of the family of Harn."-"
Before I proceed to a distinct consideration of what Lord Boling
broke hath offered, it will be proper to lay before the reader the
sacred text, as it is in our translation, Gen. ix. 21 — 27. " Noah —
was uncovered within his tent : and Ham, the father of Canaan, saw
the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
* Works, vol. i. p. 110, 111, 112.
PP 2

580 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their
shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their
father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their
father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what
his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be
Canaan^ a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And
he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan shall be
his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the
tents of Shem: and Canaan shall be his servant.''
It is acknowledged, that there is a considerable difficulty in this
passage. And if we were not able to account for it at all at this
distance, it would be much more reasonable to suppose, that some
circumstances have been passed by in this short narrative, which,
if known, would help to clear it ; or that there may have been some
defects in the copies, not now to be remedied ; than, upon the
account of one difficult and obscure passage, to throw off all regard
to writings, which have the most just pretensions both to the greatest
antiquity and most venerable authority.
But that the difficulties which his Lordship hath urged are far
from being unanswerable, will appear from the following observa
tions. First, The foundation of the whole charge, and that upon which
the greatest stress is laid, is this, that " Ham alone offended :
Canaan was innocent. Canaan however was alone cursed ; and he
became, according to his grandfather's prophecy, a servant of servants,
i. e. the vilest and worst of slaves." Some learned persons have
supposed, that where the curse is pronounced upon Canaan, ver. 25.
the word aba, father, is to be understood, which is expressly men
tioned, ver. 22. ; and that instead of Cursed be Canaan, it should be
read, Cursed be Ham, the father of Canaan. And though Lord
Bolingbroke speaks of this with great contempt, there are instances
of such ellipses or omissions to be found in some other passages of
Scripture. A remarkable one of this kind is in 2 Sam. xxi. 19.
where our translation has it, that " Elhanan  slew the brother of
Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's
beam ;" which is certainly right, as appears from the nature of the
thing, and from a parallel passage, 1 Chron. xx. 5. where he is ex-
.pressly called " the brother of Goliath the Gittite, &c." But the
word brother is not in our present copies of the original, in 2 Sam.
xxi. 19. where it runs thus, " Elhanan  slew Goliath the Gittite,
&c." instead of" the brother of Goliath the Gittite." In like manner
the word father may be supplied here, as well as the word brother
in the place now mentioned ; so that for Cursed be Canaan, it may
be read, Cursed be Ham, the father of Canaan. So the Arabic reads
it, and so Vatablus renders it. And it is followed by other learned
writers, particularly by the Bishop of Clogher, in his " Vindication
of the Histories of the Old and New Testament." But if that be
not admitted, as not only the Hebrew, but the Samaritan, the Sep
tuagint, and all the ancient versions, except the Arabic, which is of

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 581
no great authority, read as we do,* this will not prove, either that
Canaan was entirely innocent, or that he alone was cursed. The
Jews are generally of opinion, in which they follow a very ancient
tradition, that Canaan was the first that saw Noah's nakedness, and
made a jest of it to his father, Ham ; who, instead of reproving
him, went himself to see it, and in a mocking way told it to his
brothers, Shem and Japheth. Lord Bolingbroke makes mention of
this, and endeavoureth to obviate it by observing, that " the Hebrew
and other doctors, who would make the son an accomplice with his
father, affirm not only without, but against the express authority of
the text." This is confidently said. But if the text doth not ex
pressly mention Canaan as an accomplice, neither can it be said^
* It may be justly laid down as a rule, not to be lightly departed from, that where*
tbfi Hebrew and Samaritan, and best ancient versions, agree in any reading, that reading
is not to be altered or given up without necessity ; and I cannot see any necessity in the
present case. There are few readings that have a more general consent in their favour,
than that which our translators have followed in the passage before us. Not only the'
Hebrew and Samaritan, but the Septuagint, in those copies that are of the greatest
authority, particularly in the Roman and Alexandrian, to which may be added the Com
plutensian, and many others, and the remains of Origen's Hexapla, collected by Mont-
faucon, the Targums, both of Onkelos and Ben Uzziel, the Syriae, the vulgar Latin,
agree in it. There are indeed some copies of tbe Septuagint which read Ham instead
of Canaan ; and so it was in the first Venetian edition ; but it appears to me, that
both in those copies of the Septuagint, and in the Arabic, this reading is rather an in-
terpoliitioii, inserted for avoiding the difficulty, then to have been a version taken from
the original. And it may more easily be accounted for, why Ham's name should be
afterwards inserted in the text, than why it should have been dropped or omitted, sup
posing it to have been expressly mentioned in the original. Nor is it likely that that
omission should have been repeated three times together in the compass of three or
four lines.
If the present reading be at all altered, that reading which puts the least force upon
the text is, that which instead of Canaan substitutes Ham, the father of Canaan. But
it does not seem to me very likely, that Ham should be so often over described under
the character of the father of Canaan in so short a prediction. At least it does not
seem to. me probable that Noah himself, in pronouncing it, should three times over cha
racterise Ham as the father qf Canaan. Let any man read over the prediction with
this addition so often repeated, and see if it has not an odd appearance. If it be said,
that it was Moses himself, who, in repeating Noah's malediction against Ham, added
this of his being the father qf Canaan, to put the Israelites in mind that Canaan was
the offspring of accursed Ham ; even in this view the so freqnent repetition seems to be
needless. The sacred historian had in the 18th verse of this chapter observed, that
Ham was the father of Canaan ,¦ and again, in the 2Sind verse, in entering upon this nar
ration, he had characterised Hamas the father qf Canaan. The mention of this was
certainly very proper in the beginning of the account, on supposition that Canaan was
concerned with his father Ham in that affair, and also to prepare tbe reader for the dis
tinct mention of Canaan, in the prediction which was pronounced upon occasion of
Ham's wickedness. But this being done, it does not seem likely that Moses should
think it necessary, in recounting that short prediction, to repeat it so often over, that
Hani was the father qf Canaan.
Besides, it seems to me to be of some weight, that if that be admitted to be the
original reading, Canaan is not directly pointed out in the prediction at all. The being
the servant qf servants, and servant both to Shem and Japheth, is not in that case said of
Canaan, but of Ham. At the most it is only insinuated, by calling Ham the fattier qf
Canaan, that Canaan might be involved in tbe curse, as one of Ham's sons ; but it is
not expressly applied to him. Whereas in the common reading it contains a manifest
prediction of the curse and servitude as relating to Canaan. And this was a very good
reason for Moses' taking care to record it. It is not improbable, that Noah might have
said more on that occasion than is mentioned ; but Moses contented himself with re
cording that part of the prediction or prophetic curse which related to Canaan ; as it
was that which more immediately answered his design, and which it most nearly con...
cerned the Israelites to know.

582 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
that the authority of the text is expressly against that notion. On
the contrary, whosoever impartially examineth the story as there
related, will be naturally led to believe, that Canaan was in some
degree accessory to his father's crime. Ham is in this story parti
cularly characterised as the father of Canaan, and Canaan being so
often mentioned affordeth a plain intimation, that he was some way
or other concerned, and might either be the first that saw his grand
father's nakedness, and acquainted his father with it, or might be
with his father when he saw it, and joined with him in making a
mock of it. But as Ham was Canaan's father, from whom better
might have been expected, considering his age, and the dutiful
regard he owed to his father, Noah, with whom he had been saved
from the deluge, he alone is expressly mentioned in this short nar
ration ; though the curse pronounced upon Canaan leads us to
think, that he was some way partaker of his father's crime.- And
supposing this to be so, and that he was Ham's favourite son,
and like him in his dispositions, the Curse pronounced upon him
was really intended against both. If we met with the same account
in any wise and credible historian, this is the construction we should
have been apt to put upon it, that both Canaan and his father
were concerned in the affair. And it is no very unusual thing in
Scripture, and in other histories too, to omit some circumstances in
a short narration, which are plainly implied, and which the reader
is left to collect. Indeed, if what some expositors suppose be ad
mitted, it is not only implied in the text that Canaan was an accom
plice, but is expressly signified in those words, ver. 24. that Noah
knew what his younger son had done unto him. Where by younger
son, they understand his grandson; for a grandson, according to the
Hebrew idiom, may be properly called a son ; and they think Ham
was not the youngest of Noah's sons, but the middlemost, according
to the order in which he is always placed, Shem, Ham, and Japheth ;
so Theodoret and Drusius, after some of the Hebrew writers, with
whom agrees bishop Patrick. But whatever becomes of this con
jecture, and though we should suppose Ham to be here intended by
the younger son, (which he might really be, though mentioned be
tween Shem and Japheth, since the order of their birth and age is
not designed to be signified by it; for Japheth was the eldest, Gen.
x. 21.) Yet still the strain of the story seems to imply, that Canaan
had a guilty part in it, who alone of all Ham's sons is expressly
mentioned upon this occasion.
But secondly. Let us suppose that Canaan was innocent, and no
way accessory to this particular instance of Ham's impiety and
wickedness, the prophetic curse and prediction may notwithstanding
this be fairly accounted for. It must be said in that case, that the
curse was not properly pronounced upon Canaan for Ham's crime,
but that, upon occasion of Ham's wickedness, Noah foretold the
miseries and calamities that should befall his posterity, and particu
larly his descendants by Canaan. And supposing Noah to have
been then enabled by a prophetic spirit to foresee, that from Ham
would proceed a profligate and impious race, like him in wicked-

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 583
ness, and whose crimes would at length bring down the vengeance
of heaven upon them, and subject them to the basest servitude and
punishment, his mentioning it on this occasion, and pointing to that
branch of his posterity on whom this curse should particularly fall,
had a manifest propriety in it. This could not but greatly humble
Ham, and had a tendency to cause him to reflect on his own wicked
ness, and affect him with sorrow and remorse on the account of it,
if any thing could do it. For who that has the bowels of the human
nature, would not be greatly affected at the thought, that his pos
terity should be infamous and abandoned, and among the most
wretched of the human race ? And though Canaan alone be men
tioned in this short account, it doth not follow that no other of
Ham's posterity fell under the curse. Noah might have named
others of Ham's" sons or descendants, though Moses only takes
notice of what related to Canaan, because this was what more es
pecially concerned the people of Israel to know. ,
This leads me to observe,
Thirdly, That as to the insinuation that this prophecy or pre
diction was feigned to justify the cruelties exercised by Joshua upon
the Canaanites* it is the author's own groundless suspicion, with
out producing any proof of it. Supposing it to have been a real
prophecy originally delivered by Noah, the tradition of which had
been preserved in the family of Shem, and which was transmitted
by Abraham, who might have had it from Shem himself, to his
descendants, it is easily accounted for that Moses should take care
to commit it to writing. Nor will it be denied, that one end he
might have in view in recording it, was to encourage and animate
the Israelites, as he knew the time was at hand for the accomplish
ment of that prediction, and that the Israelites were to be the in
struments of it. Such a true prophecy, known to have proceeded
originally from Noah, was much more likely to answer Moses's end,
than if it had been a mere fiction of his own, which had never been
heard of before. And that Moses did not feign this prophecy may
be justly concluded, because, if it had been invented by himself
purely to bring an odium upon Canaan and his descendants, the
story would probably have been contrived otherwise than it is. It
would have been pretended, not that Ham, but that Canaan had
been guilty of that impiety and irreverence towards Noah, the
second father of mankind, and repairer 'of the world, and who was
had in great veneration. Thus would Moses have laid it, if the
whole had been his own fiction. He would not have contented him
self with leaving the reader to collect from the story that Canaan
was some way faulty, but would have taken care to have made it
more directly answer his purpose, by expressly charging the crime
upon Canaan himself. But as it was a real prophecy of Noah,
Moses gave it as he had received it, without altering the original
story, or adding new circumstances.
* Lord Bolingbroke, in other parts of his works, frequently insists upon these
cruelties, as a demonstration that the Mosaic constitution could not be of divine original.
See this fully examined, View ofthe Deistical Writers, p. -140, ct seq.

584 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
This leads me to a fourth observation upon this remarkable
passage, viz.
That if rightly understood, instead of furnishing a just objection
against the authority of Scripture, it rather confirmeth it, and
should increase our veneration for it. For we have here a most re
markable prophecy, which extended to events at the distance of
many ages, and hath been wonderfully fulfilled in all its parts. It
is manifest, that what is here foretold concerning Canaan, Shem,
and Japheth, relateth to them, not merely considered in their own
persons, but to their offspring, in whom it was chiefly to receive its
accomplishment : and the blessings pronounced by Isaac upon
Jacob and Esau, and afterwards by Jacob upon his twelve sons,
though applied to them by name, were principally to be understood
of their descendants. Taking it in this view, the prophecy here pro
nounced by Noah is of a great extent. The blessings which should
attend Shem is foretold, and it is intimated that God would be in a
special manner his God, and would pour forth so many blessings
upon his posterity, as would lay a foundation for praises and thanks
givings ; so that whosoever observed it, should have reason to say,
" Blessed be the Lord God of Shem." And this was signally ful
filled; since among his posterity the knowledge and worship ofthe
true God was preserved, when the rest of the world was deeply im
mersed in idolatry ; and from his seed the great Messiah sprung. It
was also foretold, that " God should enlarge Japheth :" and accord
ingly his posterity wonderfully increased, and spread through a
great part of the world. Bochart and others have observed, that not
only all Europe, but the Lesser Asia, Iberia, Albania, part of Ar
menia, Media, and the vast regions in the northern parts of Asia,
and probably America, were peopled by his descendants. It is also
foretold that he should " dwell in the tents of Shem ;" which was
accomplished both by his posterity's possessing part of the countries
in which the Shemites inhabited, and especially by their being ad
mitted to a participation of the same spiritual privileges, and re
ceived into the true church. So that this may be regarded as an
illustrious prophecy of the conversion of the Gentiles, many ages
before it happened. As to that part of Noah's prophecy which re
lateth to Canaan, this hath also received a remarkable completion.
Noah was enabled to foretell the curse and punishment which a long
time after befell the Canaanites, for their execrable wickedness and
impurity. For that the true and proper ground of the punishment
which was inflicted upon them was their own wickedness, is evident
from many express declarations of Scripture, particularly Levit. xviii.
24, 25. 27, 28. Deut. ix. 5. This wickedness of theirs God per
fectly foresaw, and determined, on the account of it, to inflict ex
emplary punishment upon them; though he would not suffer the
threatened punishment and curse to take place, till their " iniquities
were full," i. e. till they were arrived at the height. And when this
was the case, it tended to render the punishment more remarkable,
that it had been foretold so long before. And it was wisely ordered,
that this prophecy should be recorded by Moses, that, when it came

LonD bolingbroke's letters. 585 i-

to be visibly accomplished in Canaan's posterity, the hand of Prov.
dence in it might be more distinctly observed. It is far therefore
from being true, that Noah pronounced this in a passion or drunken
fit, as his Lordship seems willing to represent it. It was not pro
perly an imprecation, but a prophecy, and it might be fitly rendered,
" Cursed shall Canaan be." It was a prediction of what should
befall Hani's descendants by Canaan, who resembled Ham, their
ancestor, in wickedness and impurity.
Lord Bolingbroke hath several little cavils, which are designed to
invalidate the credit of this prophecy. One is, that Canaan was a
servant of servants, not to his brethren, as is foretold, ver. 25, but
to his uncles, viz. Shem and Japheth. But this objection seems to
betray an utter ignorance of the Hebrew idiom, according to which
the word brethren is of a large extent, and taketh in not only
brothers strictly so called, but even distant relations, of which
many instances might be given. And it must be farther considered,
that the prophecy was not properly designed to signify, that Canaan,
in person, should be servant of servants to his uncles Shem and
Japheth, but that his posterity should be servants to theirs, who
might, by reason of the original relation between them, be called
their brethren.
It is farther urged, that Canaan became a servant of servants
unto Shem indeed, but not to Japheth, though this is foretold,
ver. 27. But this cavil is no better founded than the former. For
the Canaanites became servants to the posterity of Japheth as well
as of Shem. The most powerful and famous of Canaan's descend
ants, the Tyrians and Carthaginians, after having made a great
figure in the world, were destroyed, or reduced to the most miser
able servitude; the former by the Greeks under Alexander the
Great, the latter by the Romans, both of whom descended from
Japheth. Another objection, which he insinuates, is, that Shem's poste
rity were servants of servants for above fourscore years to the Egyp
tians, who were the descendants of Mizraim, another of Ham's
sons. But there is no pretence for urging this as a breach of the
prediction, since no express mention is made there of any of Ham's
sons, but Canaan, concerning whom it is foretold, that he should
be a servant of servants unto Shem and Japheth, which was re
markably fulfilled. Or, if we suppose, as many great divines have
done, that the curse was designed to extend to others of Ham's
posterity, as well as the Canaanites, though not particularly men
tioned in this short account, because Moses' design led him only to
take express notice of that part of the curse which related to the
Canaanites, who were more than ordinarily corrupt, and upon whom
the curse took place in the fullest manner ; even on this view of it,
the prophecy may be fully justified. Ham's descendants have had
a brand upon them, and been generally among the most abject and
wretched of the human race. It is true, that the Israelites, who
were a branch of Shem's posterity, were for a time held in the
bitterest bondage by the Egyptians, who proceeded from Ham.

586 reflections on the late
This was permitted for very valuable ends, and ended in a glorious
deliverance of the former from the tyranny and oppression of the
latter. To which it may be added, that notwithstanding the Egyp
tians were for a long time a flourishing people, and had great power
and dominion, yet they also became remarkably subjected to the
posterity of Shem and Japheth, and so have continued for a great
number of ages. They have been subjected successively to the
Persians, Grecians, Romans, Saracens, Mamalukes, Turks, so as
to verify that remarkable prophecy of Ezekiel, that Egypt should
be the basest of kingdoms, neither should it exalt itself any more
among the nations, Ezek. xxix. 15.
Thus it appears, that this boasted objection, upon which so
mighty a stress has been laid, as if it were alone sufficient to over
throw the authority of Holy Writ, turneth out rather to the confir
mation of it.

SECTION II.

His Lordship's Attempt against the Gospel History, and the Divine
Authority of the Christian Religion, considered.
Having examined what the late Lord Bolingbroke hath urged
against the authority and credibility of the Scriptures of the Old
Testament, let us next consider the attempt he makes against the
authority of the New. He had indeed, whilst he expressed a great
contempt ofthe Jewish scriptures, affected to speak with a favour
able regard to Christianity. But he afterwards throws off the dis
guise, and makes it plainly appear, that he hath as little veneration
and esteem for the one as for the other. It is no great sign of his
respect for Christianity, that at the same time that; he does all he
can to destroy the credit of the Jewish history, and to show that it
is not at all to be depended upon, he declares — " that the founda
tion of tlie Christian system is laid partly in those histories, and in
the prophecies joined to them, or inserted in them."* But, not
content with this general insinuation, he afterwards proceedeth, in
his fifth Letter, to a more direct attack upon the Christian revela
tion, "f He insisteth upon it, that the facts, upon which the au
thority of the Christian religion is founded, have not been proved
as all historical facts, to which credit should be given, ought to be
proved. He declares to the noble Lord to whom he writes, " that
this is a matter of great moment; and that therefore he makes no
excuse for the zeal which obliges him to dwell a little on it.""]; And
after having endeavoured to show, that " there remains at this time
no standard at all of Christianity," either in the text of Scripture,
* Woiks, vol. i. j). 91, 9-2. t Ibid. p. 174—185. 1 Ibid. p. 17C.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 507
or in tradition, he argues, that " by consequence, either this reli
gion was not originally of divine institution, or else God has not
provided effectually for preserving the genuine purity of it, and the
gates of hell have actually prevailed, in contradiction to his promise,
against the Church." He must be worse than an atheist that affirms
the last ; and therefore the best effect of this reasoning that can be
hoped for, is, that men should fall into theism, and subscribe to
the first. And accordingly he roundly declares, that '' Christia
nity may lean on the civil and ecclesiastical power, and be supported
by the forcible influence of education : but the proper force of
religion, that force which subdues the mind, and awes the con
science by conviction, will be wanting."* He adds, " Since I have
said so much on the subject, in my zeal for Christianity, I will add
this further. — The resurrection of letters was a fatal period : the
Christian- system has been attacked, and wounded too, very se
verely since that time."f And again, speaking of those of the
clergy who act for spiritual, not temporal ends, and are desirous
that men should believe and practise the doctrines of Christianity,
he saith, that " they will feel and own the weight ofthe considera
tions he offers; and will agree, that however the people have been,
or may be, amused, yet Christianity has been in decay ever since
the resurrection of letters.""); This is an odd proof of his pretended
zeal for Christianity, to insinuate, that all good and honest divines
will agree with him, that Christianity has been losing ground ever
since the revival of learning and knowledge ; as if it could not bear
the light, and only subsisted by darkness and ignorance. It will
help farther to show his design in this, if we compare it with what
he saith in his sixth Letter; § where he mentions the resurrection
of letters, after the art of printing had been invented, as one ofthe
principal causes that contributed to the diminution ofthe papal au
thority and usurpations. And he observes, that " as soon as the
means of acquiring and spreading information grew common, it is
no wonder that a system was unravelled, which could not have
been woven with success in any age, but those of gross ignorance,
and credulous superstition." We may see by this what a compli
ment he designs to Christianity, when he represents it as having
received a fatal blow at the resurrection of letters, and as having
been in decay ever since. He plainly puts it on a level with the
papal authority and usurpation, and supposes the same of Christi
anity that he does of popery, that it was a system which could only
have been woven in the ages of ignorance and superstition, which
owed its reception and prevalency to times of darkness, and has been
decaying ever since the means of acquiring and spreading informa
tion grew common.
This may suffice to show the respect that the writer of these
Letters bears to Christianity. Before I enter on a distinct exami
nation of what he hath offered, I would observe, that he endeavour-
*- Works, vol. i. p. 180, 181, 182. + Ibid. p. 182. fund. p. 185.
§ Ibid. p. 206, 207.

5S58 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
eth to prepare his way by declaiming, for several pages together,
against the priests, divines,, and ecclesiastical historians, on the ac
count of that spirit of lying that hath prevailed among them in all
ages. * But he himself well observes and proves, in opposition to
an historical Pyrrhonism, that though there have been abundance
of lies and false history put upon the world, this ought not to di
minish the credit of the true. And therefore the frauds and false
hoods of many that have professed a zeal for Christianity, ought to
be no prejudice against the authority of the New Testament, or the
credibility of the facts on which it is supported, provided it can be
shown, that these facts come to us with a sufficient degree of evi
dence to make it reasonable for us to receive them as true.
If, as he asserts, " numberless fables have been invented to sup
port Judaism and Christianity; and for this purpose false history as
well as false miracles have been employed ;"  it is certain, that
no persons have taken greater pains, or been more successful in
their attempts to detect and expose such frauds and false history,
than Christian divines and critics ; many of whom have exercised
themselves this way with great judgment and impartiality, as being
sensible that Christianity needeth no such supports, and that such
frauds dishonour the cause they are intended to serve. If we ex
amine the New Testament, we shall find no encouragement there
given to such methods. A remarkable simplicity, and impartial
regard to truth, every-where appear. And to lie for the glory of
God, or to do evil that good may come of it, is there most expressly
condemned. It was when men began to fall from the true original
spirit of Christianity, and not content with the simplicity of religion
as Christ and his apostles left it, attempted to bring in innovations,
additions, alterations in the Christian doctrine and worship; it was
then that fraud and imposture, or a foolish credulity, began to pre
vail, and grew more and more, the farther they removed from the
first and purest ages. And it is capable of a clear proof, that it
was principally in favour of those corrupt additions and abuses of
Christianity, that false history and false miracles have been artfully
contrived, and zealously propagated. And why should it be turned
to the disadvantage of the gospel-history or miracles, that history
has been corrupted and falsified, in favour of doctrines or practices,
e. g. the invocation qf saints, p'urgatory, the worship ef images,
relics, &c, which Christianity has not countenanced or authorized?
To which it may be added, that it is plainly foretold in the New
Testament, that there should be a great apostacy from the purity of
religion, and that the corruption should be introduced, and carried
on, by signs and lying wonders. And if this hath actually been the
case, instead of furnishing a proper objection against true original
Christianity, it affordeth a manifest proof of the perfect foreknow
ledge of its divine authority.
He seems to lay a great stress upon it, that "the church has had this
advantage over her adversaries — that the works of those who have
* Works, vol. i. p. 123, et seq.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 589
written against her have been destroyed ; and whatever she advanceth
to justify herself, and to defame her adversaries, is preserved in her
annals and the writings of her doctors."*— And he takes particular
notice "of Gregory the Great's proclaiming war to all heathen learn
ing, in order to promote Christian verity."-]- But it is certain, that the
humour of destroying the heathen writings never generally obtained
in the Christian church. On the contrary, it was principally owing to
Christians that so many of those writings have been transmitted to
us. The Mahometans, and some ofthe barbarous nations, destroyed
libraries, and monuments of learning, wherever they came. But it
is a matter of fact not to be contested, that great numbers of
heathen writings and monuments have been preserved ; by Chris
tians they have been preserved ; and from thence the learned have
been able to give an ample account of their religion, rites, laws, and
history. And this is so far from being a disadvantage to Christi
anity, that great use hath been made of the heathen learning to serve
and promote the Christian cause. The emperor Julian was so sen
sible of this, that he formed a design of modelling the schools, so
that the Christians should not be acquainted with the heathen
writers. As to the books that have been written against Christi
anity,:): it is possible that the ill-judged zeal of some Christians may
have occasioned the loss of some of them : but I am apt to think it
was owing in most instances to the same causes and accidents, to
which we may attribute the loss of so many ancient monuments and
admired writings, not only of the heathens, but of eminent fathers,
and ancient writers of the Christian church. Many celebrated apo
logies for Christianity, and books in defence of religion, have been
lost ; when, on the contrary, the works even of Lucretius, a system
of Epicurism, the life of ApoUonius Tyaneus, and others of the like
sort, have come down to our times.
These insinuations do not properly come up to the main point.
But in his fifth letter, under pretence of giving advice to divines,
and showing that it is incumbent upon them to apply themselves to
the study of history, he sets himself more directly to attack the au
thority of the Christian religion, and to subvert, as far as in him
lieth, the foundations on which the proof of its divine original de
pends. And the course of his reasoning- is plainly this : that Chris
tianity is wholly founded upon facts, and that those facts do not
come to us with a sufficient degree of evidence to be relied on :
they have not been proved as matters of fact ought to be proved. He
declares, that—" it has been long matter of astonishment to him,
* Works, vol. i. p. 127, 128. t Ioid- P- 13L
} The heathen writers against Christianity seem not to have been much esteemed
among the Pagans themselves ; and this may be one reason why they were not very
carefully preserved. There is a remarkable passage of Chrysostom to this purpose,
who, in a discourse addressed to the heathens, observes, That the philosophers, and
famous rhetoricians, who were against Christianity, had only rendered themselves
ridiculous : that they had not been able to persuade any one among so many people,
either wise or simple, man or woman; that the books written by them were had in
such contempt, that they disappeared almost as soon as they were published : and that
if any of them were preserved, it was among Christians that one might find them.
Chrys. torn. ii. p. 559. Edit. Bened.

590 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
that Christian divines, those of them that can be called so without
a sneer, could take so much silly pains to establish mystery on
metaphysics, revelation on philosophy, and matters of fact on ab
stract reasoning. A religion founded on the authority of a divine
mission, confirmed by prophecies and miracles, appeals to facts :
and the facts must be proved, as all other facts that pass for au
thentic, are proved. If they are thus proved, the religion will pre
vail without the assistance of so much profound reasoning; if they
are not thus proved, the authority of it will sink in the world, even
with this assistance."* — He therefore blames the divines for using
improper proofs in their disputes with deists. He asks — " What
do they mean to din improper proofs in ears that are open to proper
proofs ?'' Thus it is that he characterises the deists ; and after
wards describes them as persons — " of minds candid, but not im
plicit ; willing to be informed, but curious to examine. "t But how
different is the account he giveth even of the most learned Chris
tians! 'He affirms, that "they have not been hitherto impartial
enough, to take an accurate examination of the Jewish and Chris
tian system, or have not been honest enough to communicate it." J
— This is a very severe and confident censure. There have been
many persons, not only among divines, but among the laity, of
distinguished eminence for probity and virtue, as well as for learn
ing and judgment, and who, to speak modestly, were in these re
spects no way inferior to the late Lord Bolingbroke, that have pro
fessed to examine with all the attention they were capable of, and
with an earnest desire of knowing the truth, the evidences of the
Jewish and Christian system : but because, as the result of their in
quiries, they were confirmed in the belief of the divine original of
the Jewish and Christian revelation, therefore in his judgment, not
one of them was honest or sagacious enough to make an accurate
examination : and I apprehend they have no other way of obtaining
the character of sagacity or impartiality from writers of this cast,
but by renouncing Christianity. If they do this, they shall be
allowed to be sagacious and impartial inquirers ; but otherwise, they
must be content to have their judgment or honesty called in ques
tion. But if we may judge by the writings of the deists that have
hitherto appeared, not excepting those of his Lordship, they have
not given very favourable indications, either of an uncommon sa
gacity, or of a candid and impartial inquiry.
He tells the noble Lord to whom he writes, — " You will find
reason perhaps to think as I do, that it is high time the clergy in
all Christian communions should join their forces, and establish
those historical facts, which are the foundations ofthe whole system,
on clear and unquestionable historical authority, such as they re
quire in all cases of moment from others, and reject candidly what
cannot be thus established." §
Christian divines have frequently done what his Lordship blames
them for not doing. The facts on which the Christian system is
* Works, vol. i. p. 175. t Ibid. p. 179. X Ibid. p. 181. <* Ibid. p. 183.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 591
founded, relate principally to what is recorded in the writings of the
New Testament, concerning the holy life, and excellent character,
of our blessed Saviour, his admirable discourses, the many illustrious
miracles he performed during the course of his personal ministry in
proof of his divine mission, his resurrection from the dead, and con
sequent exaltation, the extraordinary effusion of the Holy Ghost
upon his disciples, and the miraculous attestations that were given
to his apostles, and the first publishers of the Christian revelation.
The question is, what reason have we to think that those facts were
really done? His Lordship requires, that these facts should be
proved, as all other facts that pass for authentic are proved : and
that divines should establish the credit of those facts on clear and
unquestionable historical authority, such as they require in all cases
of moment from others. The Christian divines are willing to join
issue on this point. The best, the properest way of proving the
truth of ancient facts is undoubtedly by authentic accounts published
in the age in which the facts were done, and transmitted with suf
ficient marks of credibility to our own times. And several things are
to be considered, in order to our judging whether, and how far, those
accounts may be depended on. — If the facts there related were of a
public nature, done for the most part in open view, and for which
an appeal is made to numbers of witnesses : — if the accounts of
those facts were given by persons that were perfectly well acquainted
with the facts, and who, having had full opportunity to know them,
were theniselves absolutely persuaded of the truth and reality of
those facts; if they appear from their whole character to have been
persons of great probity, and undesigning simplicity, and who
could have no worldly interest to serve by feigning or disguising
those facts; and if their prejudices had not any tendency to bias
them in favour of those facts, but the contrary : if the writings
themselves have all the characters of genuine simplicity, and an
impartial regard to truth, that can be reasonably desired : and if
they can be clearly traced from the age in which they were written,
and the facts were said to be done, through the succeeding ages, to
our own times : and finally, if it is undeniably evident, that there
were surprizing effects produced in the very age in which the facts
were said to bedone, and which cannot otherwise be accounted for,
than by allowing the truth of those facts, and the effects of which
continue to this day : where these several circumstances concur,
they lay a just foundation for receiving the accounts given of facts
as true. According to the justest rules of criticism, such accounts
of facts may be depended on : and many facts are generally received
and believed, that fall greatly short of this evidence.
Now it is capable of being proved, and has been often proved
with great clearness and strength, that all these circumstances con
cur in relation to the important facts on which the Christian system
is founded. The facts themselves were, for the most part, done in
open view, and of which there were many witnesses. Christy
whole personal ministry was a very public thing. The scene of it
was not laid in a dark obscure corner, nor was it earned on merely

592 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
in a private way. His admirable discourses were, for the most part,
delivered, and his miracles wrought, in places of the most public
concourse, before great multitudes of people, and even before his
enemies themselves, and those who were most strongly prejudiced
against him. Many of his wonderful works are represented as hav
ing been done at Jerusalem, at the time of their solemn festivals,
when there was a vast concourse of people from all parts. The same
may be said of the remarkable circumstances which attended his
crucifixion, the earthquake, the splitting of the rock, the extraor
dinary preternatural darkness that covered the whole land for the
space of three hours, &o. ; which things happened at the time ofthe
Jewish passover, and could not have been imposed upon the people
of that age, if they had not been known to be incontestably true.
And the relating such things was, in effect, appealing to thousands
of witnesses. And though Jesus did not appear publicly after his
resurrection to all the people ; yet, besides that he showed himself
alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, to his apostles and
others, who best knew him, and were therefore most capable of
judging that it was he himself, and not another; and was seen even
by five hundred at once, who all concurred in their testimony; be
sides this, the extraordinary effusion of the Holy Ghost upon his
disciples on the day of Pentecost, which was the most illustrious
confirmation of his resurrection and ascension, is represented to have
been ofthe most public nature, in the presence of vast multitudes,
then gathered together at Jerusalem from all parts of the world.
To which it may be added, that many of the miracles that were
wrought in the name, and by the power, of a risen Jesus, and which
were so many additional proofs of his resurrection, were also done
in open view, before great numbers of people. The accounts of
these facts were written and published in the very age in which the
facts were clone, and the laws and doctrines delivered, which are
there recorded, and by persons who appear to have been perfectly
acquainted with the things they relate, and fully persuaded of the
truth of them. And many of the facts were of such a nature, and
so circumstanced, that they could not be deceived in them, allow
ing them to have had their senses, which I think it is but reasonable
to suppose.
The writers of these accounts appear to have been persons of
plain sense, and of great probity and simplicity, and to have had a
sincere regard to truth. They write without art, without passion,
or any of that heat which enthusiasm is wont to inspire : they take
no pains to prepossess or captivate the reader ; but content them
selves with a plain simple narration of facts, without ornament,
amplification, or disguise : they relate with a calm simplicity, and
in a manner that hath not the least sign of an over-heated imagina
tion, Christ's wonderful actions, and excellent discourses, without
interposing any reflections of their own. With the same coolness
they relate the bitter censures, the scoffs and reproaches, that were
cast upon him by his adversaries, and the grievous and ignominious
sufferings he endured, without expressing their indignation against

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 593
the authors of them. And it is observable, that they do not repre
sent him, as one might be apt to expect they would have done, as
triumphing over those sufferings with an exulting bravery, but rather
as manifesting great tenderness of heart and sensibility under them,
though mixed with remarkable constancy and resignation.
It is a farther proof of that impartial regard to truth, which is
observable in the writers of those accounts, that, though some of
them were apostles themselves, and others their special friends and
intimates, yet they relate, without disguise, things which seem to
bear hard upon their characters. They relate not only the lowness
and meanness of their condition and circumstances, but their igno
rance, their dulness of apprehension, the weakness of their faith,
the power of their prejudices, their vain ambition, and contentions
among themselves who should be the greatest, the reproofs they re
ceived from their Lord, their cowardly forsaking him in his last suf
ferings, and particularly the shameful fall of Peter, one of the chief
of them, and his denial of his Lord and master, with the aggravat
ing circumstances that attended it. They have not attempted to
conceal any of these things, which they might easily have done, or
to excuse or disguise them ; than which nothing could better show
their impartiality, and love of truth.
It farther strengthens the credit of their relations, when it is con
sidered, that they had no temptation to disguise or falsify the great
facts recorded in the gospels, in order to serve any worldly interest,
or to humour and confirm any darling prejudices. On the contrary,
it appeareth, that they were themselves brought, by the irresistible
evidence of the facts they relate, to embraee a religion, which was
not only contrary to their worldly interests, and exposed them to
all manner of reproaches, persecutions, and sufferings, but which
was also contrary to their former most favourite notions, and rooted
prejudices. For what could be more contrary to the notions and
prejudices, which then universally possessed the minds of the Jews,
both of the learned and of the vulgar, than the doctrine of a cruci
fied Messiah, who was to erect a kingdom, not of this world, but
of a spiritual nature, in the benefits and privileges of which the
Gentiles were to be joint sharers with the Jews? And, finally, they
gave the highest proof of their being themselves persuaded of the
truth of those facts, by their persisting in their testimony with an
unshaken constancy, in opposition to all the powers and terrors of
this world. To this it may be added, that the writings themselves
have all the characters of genuine purity, simplicity, and uncor
rupted integrity, that any writings can have ; nor is there any thing
in them that gives the least ground of suspicion of their having been
written in any later age, or that savours of the spirit of this world,
of ambition, avarice, or sensuality. And these writings have been
transmitted to us with an unquestionable evidence, greater than can
be produced for any other writings in the world. We can clearly
trace them through all the intermediate ages up to that immediately
succeeding the apostles, and have the most convincing proof of their
having been still extant, and still received and acknowledged among
Q Q

594 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
Christians. There are great numbers of books, now in our hands,
that were written and published in the several ages between that
time and this, in which there are continual references to the gospels,
and other sacred books of the New Testament. And by the nume
rous quotations from them, and large portions transcribed out of
them in every age, it is incontestably manifest, that the accounts of
the facts, discourses, doctrines, &,c. which now appear in them, are
the same that were to be found in them in the first ages. Innume
rable copies of them were soon spread abroad in different, nations :
they have been translated into various languages : many commen
taries have been written upon them by different authors, who have
inserted the sacred text in their writings : they have been constantly
applied to on many occasions, by persons of different sects, parties,
inclinations, and interests. These are things which no man can be
so hardy as to deny. And by this kind of evidence, the greatest
and the most convincing which the nature ofthe thing can possibly
admit of, we are assured, that the evangelical records, which are
now in our hands, have been transmitted safe to us, and are the
same that were originally published in the apostolical age; and
that a general corruption of them, or a substitution of other accounts
instead of them, if any had attempted it, would have been an im
possible thing.
Taking all these considerations together, it appeareth, that never
were there any accounts of facts that better deserved to be depended
on. And what mightily confirmeth the credit of those writings,
and of the facts there related, is, that it cannot be contested, that
great numbers, both of Jews and heathens, upon the credit of those
facts, forsaking the religion of their ancestors, were brought to re
ceive the religion of Jesus in the first age, when they had the best
opportunity of inquiring into the truth and certainty of those facts ;
and this in opposition to their most inveterate prejudices, and when,
by embracing it, they exposed themselves to all manner of evils and
sufferings. The spreading of the Christian religion, as the case
was circumstanced, furnisheth a very strong proof of the truth of
the facts on which it was founded, and cannot otherwise be ac
counted for.
Our author asserts, that " if the facts can be proved, the Chris
tian religion will prevail, without the assistance of profound reason
ing ; but, if the facts cannot be proved, the authority of it will sink
in the world, even with this assistance."* I think it may be fairly
argued from this, that if the extraordinary facts had not been true,
on the evidence of which alone Christianity is founded, it must have
sunk at the very beginning, and could never have been established
in the world at all; considering the nature of this religion, and tbe
difficulties and oppositions it had to encounter with. It was mani
festly contrary to the prevailing prejudices both of Jews and Gen
tiles : it tended entirely to subvert the whole system of the pagan
superstition and idolatry, which was wrought into their civil consti-
* Works, vol. i. p. 75.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 595
tution, and upon which the prosperity of the Roman empire, and
the establishment of their state, were thought to depend. It also
tended to set aside the peculiar polity of the Jews, upon which they
so highly valued themselves, and to subvert all the pleasing hopes
and expectations ofthe temporal kingdom ofthe Messiah, with which
they were so infinitely delighted. It obliged them to receive one
that had been ignominiously condemned and crucified, as their Re
deemer and their Lord, the Son of God, and Saviour of the world.
It proposed no temporal advantages to its votaries, to bribe men to
embrace it; gave no indulgence to their corrupt lusts, nor had any
thing in it to sooth and gratify their vicious appetites and inclina
tions. At the same time it had all the powers of the world engaged
against it ; yet it soon triumphed over all opposition, though propa
gated by the seemingly meanest instruments ; and made an astonish
ing progress through a great part of the Roman empire, then the
most knowing and civilized part of the earth. This is a strong ad
ditional confirmation of the truth of those accounts which are con
tained in the gospel records ; since there could not be, as the case
was circumstanced, any possible inducement to Jews or Gentiles to
embrace Christianity, but a thorough conviction of its divine origi
nal, and of the truth of those extraordinary facts by which it was
attested. And if the first propagators of this religion had offered no other
proof but their own words in support of it, and in confirmation of
the divine authority of a crucified Jesus, it cannot, with any con
sistency, be supposed, that a scheme of religion, so destitute of all
worldly advantages, and so opposite to men's prejudices, as well as
vices, and which subjected those that made profession of it to such
bitter reproaches and persecutions, could possibly have prevailed in
the world.
If, at the time when Christianity made its first appearance in the
world, it had been embraced by the Roman emperor, as it after
wards was by Constantine the Great, if it had been countenanced
by the higher powers, there might have been some pretence for
ascribing the progress it made to the encouragement it met with
from the great and powerful. The author of these Letters, speaking
of the miracles said to be wrought at the tomb of the Abbe Paris,
observes, "That, if the first minister had been a Jansenist, all
France had kept his festival ; and those silly impostures would have
been transmitted, in all the solemn pomp of history, from the knaves
of his age to the fools of the next."* But this very instance, in
which the deists have triumphed so much, may be turned against
them, since it affordeth a plain proof, how difficult it is to maintain
the credit of miraculous facts, when they are discountenanced by the
civil power. The miracles supposed to be wrought at the tomb of
the Abbe Paris were quashed, and a stop put to the course of the
miraculous operations, and the falsehood of some of them plainly
detected, notwithstanding there was a numerous, a powerful, . and
* Works, vol. i. p. 125, 126.
Q Q 2

596 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
artful body of men engaged, in reputation and interest, to support
the credit of them. It may therefore be justly concluded, that if
the extraordinary facts, on which Christianity was founded, had been
false, the credit of them must soon have sunk, and that religion with
it, when all the reigning powers of the world, Jewish and heathen,
joined their forces and influence to suppress it.*
In what hath been said above, to show the credit that is due to
the accounts given of the facts by which Christianity is established,
it is supposed, that these accounts were written by Christ's own
disciples, or their most intimate •companions, and in the first age,
the age in which the facts were done, i. e. by persons perfectly well
acquainted with those facts. But this is what our author seems
unwilling to allow. In his fifth Letter, after having observed, that
— " false history has been employed to propagate Christianity for
merly, and that the same abuse of history is still continued" — he
instances in Mr. Abbadie's saying, that — " the gospel of St. Mat
thew is cited by Clemens, bishop of Rome, a disciple of the Apos
tles ; that Barnabas cites it in his Epistle ; that Ignatius and Poly-
carp receive it ; and that the same fathers give testimony for St.
Mark." He adds, that " the bishop of London, in his third Pas
toral Letter, speaks to the same effect." And then he proceeds —
" I presume the fact advanced by the minister and the bishop, is a
mistake. If the fathers of the first century do mention some pas
sages that are agreeable to what we read in our Evangelists, will it
follow, that these fathers had the same gospels before them ? To
say so, is a manifest abuse of history, and quite inexcusable in
writers that knew, or might have known, that these fathers made
use of other gospels, wherein such passages might be contained, or
they might be preserved in unwritten tradition. Besides which, I
would almost venture to affirm, that the fathers of the first century
do not expressly name the gospels we have of Matthew, Mark,
Luke, and John."t His design is plainly to signify, that there is
no proof, that the Gospels, the books of the Evangelists which
we now have in our hands, were written in the first age of Chris
tianity. As this is a matter of importance, I shall offer some observations
upon it.
And, first, it is to be observed, that though but few of the writ
ings of the fathers of the first century are come down to us, and
those generally very short ; yet it cannot be denied, that in all these
writings the facts recorded in the gospels, especially relating to our
Lord's passion and resurrection, and the scheme of religion there
taught, are all along supposed, and referred to, as of undoubted truth
and certainty, and of divine original : so that those writings of the
apostolical fathers bear testimony materially to the gospels, and to
the facts there related, and come in aid of those accounts. It is
* The difficulties Christianity had to encounter with, are elegantly represented by
Mr. West, in his admirable Treatise on the Resurrection.
f Works, vol. i. p. 177, 178.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 597
also manifest, that there are several particular passages quoted in
these writings, which seem plainly to refer to passages that are now
found in the Evangelists ; and these passages are mentioned in a
manner which shows, that they regarded them as of divine authority.
Nor is it a valid objection against this, that they do not cite the
gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, by name : for it is not
their custom, in mentioning passages of Scripture, to name the par
ticular books out of which these passages are extracted ; they con
tent themselves with producing- the passages, or giving the sense of
them. This they generally do with regard to testimonies produced
from the sacred books of the Old Testament; and yet no one will
deny, that they had those books in their hands, and acknowledged
their divine authority.
Barnabas, in his Epistle, has some plain references to passages
that are to be found in St. Matthew's gospel ; and with regard to
one of them, he introduced it with saying, It is written ; which was
a form of quotation usual among the Jews in citing their sacred
books, and seems plainly to show, that he referred to written accounts
of the actions and discourses of our Saviour.
Clement, in his Epistle, mentions several remarkable passages in
our Lord's discourses, recorded by the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark,
and Luke ; he calls them, the words of the Lord Jesus, which he spaker
and represents them as of the highest authority, and deserving the
greatest regard.
Ignatius hath several passages, which either are plain- references^
or manifest allusions, to passages that are to be found in St. Mat
thew's gospel, and to several other books of the New Testament.
He tells those to whom he writes, that they " ought to hearken to
the Prophets, but especially to the gospel, in which the passion has
been manifested to us, and the resurrection perfected."* Where, as
by the Prophets are undoubtedly to be understood the prophetical
writings, so by the Gospel seems plainly to be understood the writ
ings of the Evangelists, collected into one book called, the Gospel.
And in other passages he speaks to the same purpose.t and in a
manner which shows, that this book of the gospel was of the most
sacred authority among Christians.
Polycarp, in his Epistle, though very short, hath- many passages
that plainly refer or allude to texts of the New Testament ; and
quoting some passages which are expressly found in the Evange
lists, he introduces them thus, The Lord hath said. He expresses
his confidence, that the Philippians, to whom he writes, were well
exercised in the Holy Scriptures. And it is manifest from what
he there- adds, that by the Holy Scriptures he particularly intends
the sacred writings of the New Testament: which shows, that
they were had in the greatest veneration by the Christians of
He that would see a more distinct account of these things, may
consult the learned Dr. Lardner's accurate collection of the passages,
* Ep. ad Smyrn. s. 7. t Ep. ^ Pbiladclph. s. 5, et 9.

598 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
from the apostolical fathers, in his Credibility qf the Gospel History,
part ii. vol. i.
It appeareth from this brief account, that the apostolical fathers
have taken as much notice of the evangelical writings, as could be
reasonably expected, or as- they had occasion to do. And therefore
I see not why Mr. Abbadie should be charged with an abuse of his
tory, for representing the fathers of the first century as having cited
the books of the Evangelists ; since though they do not expressly
quote them by name, yet they quote passages as of sacred authority,
which are to be found in these books ; and therefore it may be rea
sonably supposed, that they refer to those books, which, as I shall
presently show, were then extant, and the authority of which was
then acknowledged.
But it is urged, that if the fathers of the first century do mention
some passages that are agreeable to what we read in our Evange
lists, it does not follow, that they had the same gospels before them ;
because "those fathers made use of other gospels, wherein such
passages might be contained, or they might be preserved in unwrit
ten tradition." But this way of stating the case does not afford
the least presumption, that the books of our Evangelists were not
then extant. It is only supposed, that there might be other ac
counts in that age, in which the same things might be contained ;
and that the actions and discourses of our Lord were well known
among the Christians of the first age, both by written accounts, and
by tradition received from the preaching of the Apostles. And this
certainly confirmeth, instead of invalidating, the accounts given in
the gospels, and supposeth the facts there recorded to have been of
well-known credit and authority. But he ought not to mention it
as a thing that is and must be acknowledged by all the learned, that
those fathers of the first century made use of other gospels besides
those of the Evangelists. It cannot be proved, that they ever refer
to any other gospels. The only passage in all the apostolical
fathers, which seems to look that way, is one in Ignatius, which
some suppose was taken out of the gospel of the Hebrews, which
itself was really St. Matthew's gospel, with some interpolations
and additions ; and yet that passage may be fairly interpreted, as
referring to the words of our Saviour, recorded by St. Luke, chap.
xxiv. 39.*
It may be gathered indeed from the introduction of St. Luke's
gospel, that many in that first age had undertaken to write an ac
count of the history of our Saviour's life, miracles, discourses, &c,
but it does not appear, that those writings were generally received
among Christians as authentic ; probably because they were not
done with sufficient exactness, and had a mixture of things false or
uncertain. And therefore it is not likely, that the passages referred
to by the fathers of the first century, were taken from those writ
ings : it is far more probable, that they were taken from the books
of the Evangelists, where we still find them, and which were then
extant, and their authority acknowledged among Christians.
* See Lardner's Credibility, &c. partii. vol. i. p. 184, 185, 186.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 599
That the gospels which we have now in our hands were undoubt
edly extant in the apostolical age, and regarded as authentic, ad
mitteth of a clear proof, if it be considered, that in the age imme
diately succeeding we find them universally received and acknow
ledged in the Christian church. There are several books come down
to our times, which were written by authors who unquestionably
lived in the second century, in which these gospels are frequently
and by name referred to as of divine authority, and many express
quotations drawn from them ; by which it is manifest, that they
were then received with great veneration in the Christian churches.
And it appeareth from the first Apology of Justin Martyr, published
about an hundred years after the death of our Saviour, that it was
then the ordinary practice to read the memoirs of the Apostles, and
the writings qf the Prophets, in the religious assemblies of Christians.
And that by the memoirs qf the Apostles he means the books of the
Evangelists, is evident from several passages in his writings ; and
particularly from a passage in this very Apology, where, having
mentioned the memoirs composed by the Apostles, he adds, which are
called Gospels ; and there are frequent citations from all of them in
his writings ; which plainly show, that he looked upon those books
as authentic histories of Jesus Christ. The same may be observed
concerning other writers in that century. And since it is manifest,
that the four gospels were generally received, and had in the high
est esteem and veneration, among Christians in the second century,
even in the former part of it (for that Apology was written about
the year 139 or 140), this plainly showeth, that the gospels must
have been written and published in the apostolical age itself. And
it was, because they were known to have been written by the Apos
tles, or their companions and intimates ; and that the accounts there
given were authentic, and absolutely to be depended upon ; that
these writings were so early and generally received. Eusebius,
speaking of Quadratus, and other eminent persons, who " held the
first rank in the succession ofthe Apostles," informs us, " that they
travelled abroad, performed the work of Evangelists, being ambitious
to preach Christ, and deliver the Scripture of the divine Gospels."*
The persons he speaketh of flourished in the reign of Trajan, in the
beginning of the second century, and had undoubtedly lived a good
part of their time in the first ; and their carrying the books of the
gospels with them where they preached, and delivering them to
their converts, showeth that those gospels were then well known to
be genuine, and had in great esteem. And indeed if they had not
been written in the apostolical age, and then known to be genuine,
it cannot be conceived, that so soon after, even in the next age, they
could have been so generally dispersed, and statedly read in the
Christian assemblies, and regarded as of equal authority with the
writings of the ancient prophets, which had been for some ages
read in the synagogues on the Sabbath-days. And though a great.
clamour hath been raised concerning some spurious gospels which,
* Euseb. Eccles. Hist. lib. iii. cap. 37.

600 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
appeared in the primitive times, there is nothing capable of a
clearer proof, than that the four gospels, and those only, were
generally received as of divine authority in the Christian church,
in the ages nearest the apostles; and have continued so ever
since, and have been all along regarded with the profoundest vene
ration. To this ought to be added, that the heathen writers, who lived
hearest those times, never pretended to deny, that the books of
the Evangelists received among Christians were written by Christ's
own disciples. Celsus lived in the second century. He speaks of
Jesus, the author ofthe Christian religion, as having lived 7rpo iravv
6\iyCov itwv, a very few years before. He mentions many things
recorded in our Evangelists, relating to the birth, life, miracles, suf
ferings, and resurrection, of Jesus Christ ; and tells the Christians
— " These things we have produced out of your own writings." He
all along supposeth them to have been written by Christ's own dis
ciples, that lived and conversed with him, though he does all he can
to ridicule and expose them.* To this it may be added, that the
Emperor Julian, who flourished about the middle of the fourth cen
tury, and who was both of great acuteness, and very well disposed
to take all advantages against Christianity, and had, no doubt, an
opportunity of reading whatsoever books had been written against
the Christians before his time, never pretends to contest the gospels
being written by Christ's own disciples, and those whose names
they bear, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John ; whom he expressly
mentions as the writers of those books ;f though, no doubt, he would
have been very well pleased, if he could have met with any proof or
presumption that could make it probable, that the books of the
Evangelists, so generally received among Christians, were written,
not by Christ's own immediate disciples, or their companions, orin
the apostolical age, but were compiled afterwards, and falsely
ascribed to the Apostles. To which it may be added, that none of
the Jews, in any of their writings against Christianity, though they
often mention the books of the Evangelists, have ever pretended,
that those books were not written by those to whom they are attri
buted, but by others, in after-times, under their names ; nor do they
ever mention any charge or suspicion of this kind, as having been
brought against those books by their ancestors.
Thus we find, by the acknowledgment of friends and enemies,
who lived nearest to those times, that the accounts contained in the
books of the Evangelists were written in the apostolical age ; the
age in which those facts are said to have been done, which are there
recorded. There are plain references to them, and passages pro
duced out of them, in the few writings that remain of the first cen
tury. And in the age immediately succeeding, we have full proof,
that they were universally received in the Christian church as of
divine authority, and read as such in the Christian assemblies, and
* Orig. contra Celf. lib. ii. p. 67. 69, 70.
f Cyril Alex contra Julian, lib. \. p. 327. Edit. Spanheim.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 601
were ascribed to Christ's own immediate attendants, or their inti
mate companions, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, by name. This
hath been universally admitted ever since in all ages : and these
books have been transmitted down to our times with such an un
interrupted and continued evidence, as cannot be produced for any
other books whatsoever. He would be accounted a very unreason
able man, that should deny, or even question it, whether the books
of Livy, Sallust, Tacitus, were written by those whose names they
bear. But the deists, and his Lordship among the rest, most unrea
sonably reject that historical testimony and evidence in behalf of the
Scriptures, which they would account to be sufficient with regard to
any other books in the world.
It gives a mighty force to all this, that, upon a careful examining
and considering the books themselves, they bear the plain marks and
characters of the first, the apostolical age, and not one mark of a
later date. Though three of the Evangelists make particular men
tion of our Saviour's predictions concerning the destruction of Jeru
salem and the temple, yet there is not any intimation given, in any
one book of the New Testament, of that destruction as having been
actually accomplished, which yet was in forty years after our Lord's
crucifixion. And it could scarcely have been avoided, but that some
or other of them must have taken notice of it, considering the many-
occasions there were for mentioning it, if these books had been
generally written after that event. It appeareth, from the beginning
of St. Luke's gospel, compared with the introduction to the Acts of
the Apostles, that he wrote his gospel before he wrote the Acts.
And yet this latter was evidently written in the apostolical age, and
sometime before the death of St. Paul. For it is plain, from the
accounts given in that book, that the writer of it was a companion v
of St. Paul in his labours and travels, and particularly was with
him in his voyage to Rome ; with an account of which, and of his
preaching there two years in his own hired house, the book ends.
It taketh no notice of his after labours and travels, and of his
martyrdom at Rome ; which it would undoubtedly have done, as
well as of the martyrdom of St. James, if it had been written after
those events happened. And it is a great proof of the high venera
tion the first Christians had for those writings, and how careful
they were not to insert any accounts into them which were not
originally there, that none of them ever pretended to make supple
mental additions to that book, either with regard to St. Paul him
self, or any other of the apostles. And as we may justly conclude,
that St. Luke's gospel was published in the apostolical age itself,
whilst many of the apostles were yet living, so it hath been gene
rally agreed, that St. Matthew's gospel was published before that
of St. Luke; and that the gospel of St. John was written last of all.
And yet this last, as is manifest from the book itself, was written
by one of Christ's own disciples, " the disciple whom Jesus loved."
And it appeareth to have been principally designed to record several
thino-s, which were not distinctly taken notice of by the other evan
gelical writers. Accordingly we find, that though the facts are

(302 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
there plainly supposed, which are related by the other Evangelists)
yet those miracles and discourses of our Lord are chiefly insisted
upon, which either were omitted by them, or but slightly mentioned.
Indeed whosoever impartially considereth the writings of the New
Testament, will easily observe in them many peculiar characters,
which plainly point to the time in which they were written. And
there is all the reason in the world to think, that if these books had
been written in any succeeding age, they would have been in seve
ral respects different from what they now are. The Christian re
ligion here appeareth in its primitive simplicity, without any of the
mixtures of following ages. The idea that is given of the Christian
church, in the writings ofthe New Testament, is such as is proper
to the first age, and from which there were some variations, even
in that which immediately followed. The discourses of our blessed
Lord, as recorded by the Evangelists, are of such a nature, so full
of divine wisdom, and admirable sentiments, as would manifestly
appear, if there were room in this place to enter on a particular con
sideration of them : they are delivered with so much gravity and
authority, and yet, for the most part, in such a particular way,
that they carry the evident proofs of their own genuineness. The
character given of our Saviour, in the books of the Evangelists,
seems plainly to have been drawn from the life. And it may be
justly affirmed, that it was not in the power of such writers, desti
tute, as they appear to be, of all art and ornament, to have feigned
such a character: a character, in which is wonderfully united, a
divine dignity becoming the Son of God, and an amiable humility
and condescension becoming the Saviour of men ; an admirable
wisdom, in conjunction with the greatest candour and simplicity of
heart ; an ardent zeal for the glory of God, and the most extensive
charity and benevolence towards mankind ; an impartial freedom
and severity in reproving faults, and great tenderness in bearing
with men's weaknesses and infirmities ; an unparalleled purity and
sanctity of manners, without any thing sour or unsociable, or a su
percilious contempt of others ; the most exemplary patience and
fortitude under the greatest sufferings, joined with a remarkable
tenderness and sensibility of spirit. To this may be added, the
beauty of his maxims, the solidity of his reflections, the just and
sublime notions of religion which he every-where inculcateth, far
superior to any thing that was taught by the most celebrated doctors
of the Jewish nation. The morals he is represented as having
taught are the most pure and refined, and yet without running into
any superstitious extremes, such as were the affected strictnesses of
the Pharisees and Essenes, or the false refinements of some Chris
tians in the following ages. The motives there proposed are the
most powerful and efficacious that can be presented to the human
mind, drawn from all the charms of the divine love and goodness ;
from the engaging offers of grace and mercy made to the truly peni
tent, which yet are so ordered as not to give the least encourage
ment to the obstinately wicked and disobedient ; from the promises
of divine aids to assist our sincere endeavours in the performance of

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. G03
our duty; from the important solemnities of the future judgment,
and the eternal retributions ofthe world to come; the inexpressible
glory and felicity prepared for good men, and the dreadful punish
ments that shall be inflicted upon the wicked. In a word, so per
fect is the idea of religion contained in those writings, that all
attempts to add to it in succeeding ages, or raise it to an higher
degree of perfection, have really fallen short of its original excel
lence, and tended to tarnish its primitive beauty and glory.
Taking all these considerations together, they form a very strong
and convincing proof of the truth- and authenticity of the gospel
records ; and that, whether we consider the method of conveyance,
whereby they have been transmitted to us, and which we can trace
up with a continued evidence to the first age, or the internal charac
ters of original truth and purity, and genuine integrity, which ap
pear in the writings themselves.
To take off the force of the evidence brought for the facts on
which Christianity is established, it hath been urged, that these
facts are only attested by Christians. The author of these Letters
observes, that the church has this advantage over her adversaries,
that the books that were written against her have been destroyed,
whilst whatever tends to justify her has been preserved in her annals :
and that " he must be very implicit indeed, who receives for true
the history of any nation or religion, and much more that of any
sect or party, without having the means of confronting it with some
other history."* He here seems to suppose it as a thing certain,
that there had been historical evidence against Christianity, but that
the church had suppressed it.f But this is a precarious supposition,
without any thing to support it. The account of the facts on which
Christianity is founded, was published, as hath been shown, by
persons who pretended to be perfectly well acquainted with those
facts, and in the age in which they were done, and who speak of
them as things publicly known, and of undoubted certainty. The
proper way therefore for the enemies of Christianity to have taken,
would have been, to have published, if they were able, contrary
authentic accounts, in that very age, for disproving those facts;
which it would have been easy to have done, if they had been false :
for, in that case, thousands must have known them to be so ; since
many of the facts are represented as having been done in public
view, and in the presence of great multitudes. But that no such
contrary historical evidence was then produced or published, we
may confidently affirm ; not only because there is no account of any
such evidence, but because if the facts on which Christianity is
* Works, vol. i. p. 128. 132.
t Lord Bolingbroke seems to have laid a great stress upon this thought, for he else
where observes, that " if time had brought to us all the proof for Christianity and
against it, we should have been puzzled by contradictory proofs. See his Works,
vol. iv. p. 270. where he presumes upon it as a thing certain, though he does not
attempt to produce the least evidence for it, that there was formerly proof against
Christianity, which, if it had come down to us, would have destroyed the evidence
brought for it, or, at least, have very much weakened the force of that evidence, and
kept the mind in suspense.

004 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
established had been authentically disproved, even in the age in
which they were said to have been done ; and if there had been good
historical evidence produced on the other side, by which it appeared
that those facts were false; the Christian religion, considering the
other disadvantages that attended it, and that it was principally
supported by those facts, must have sunk at once. How is it con
ceivable, that in that case it would have flourished more and more ;
and that vast numbers, and many of them persons of considerable
sense and learning, would have continued to embrace it, in the face
of the greatest difficulties and discouragements ? How comes it,
that none of the Apologies for Christianity that were published very
early, and presented to the Roman emperors, some of which are
still extant, take any notice of such contrary historical evidence, or
endeavour to confute it, but still speak of those facts as incontest
ably true and certain ? The first heathen author that appears to
have written a formal book against the Christian religion, is Celsus:
and what he advanced to this purpose, we learn from his own words,
preserved by Origen, in his excellent answer to him. He endeavour-
eth, as far as he can, to turn the gospel accounts to ridicule ; but
he never referreth to any authentic history, or book of credit and
authority, which had been published, to show that the facts, recorded
by the Evangelists, and believed by the Christians, were false. He
pretended indeed, that " he could tell many other things, relating to
Jesus, truer than those things that were written of him by his own
disciples ; but that he willingly passed them by :" * but we may be
sure, that if he had been able to produce any contrary historical evi
dence, which he thought was of weight sufficient to invalidate the
evangelical records, a man of his virulence and acuteness would not
have failed to produce it; and his not having done so, plainly show
eth that he knew of none such ; though, if there had been any such,
he must have known it. Nor do I find that Julian, when he wrote
against Christianity, pretended to produce any contrary historical
evidence for disproving the facts recorded in the gospels : if he had,
something of it would have appeared in Cyril's answer, in which
there are many fragments of his book preserved. I think therefore
the pretence of' there having been contrary evidence to disprove the
facts recorded in the gospel, which evidence was afterwards sup
pressed by the Christians, is absolutely vain and groundless. And
to refuse our assent to the gospel history, for want of having an
opportunity to confront it with contrary historical evidence, when
we have no reason to think there ever was such evidence, would be
the most unreasonable conduct in the world.
But still it is urged, that the accounts of those facts, in order to
their obtaining full credit from any impartial person, ought to be
confirmed by the testimony of those who were not themselves Chris
tians ; since Christians may be excepted against as prejudiced per
sons ; and that, if there be no such testimony, it administers just
ground of suspicion. As a great stress has been frequently laid
upon this, I shall consider it distinctly.
* Orig. contra Cels. lib. ii. p. 67, Edit. Spencer.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 605
To expect that professed enemies, who reviled and persecuted the
Christians, should acknowledge the truth of the main facts on which
Christianity is founded, is an absurdity and contradiction. And if
any testimonies to this purpose were now to be found in their writ
ings, it would undoubtedly be alleged by those gentlemen, who now
complain of the want of such testimonies, that those passages were
foisted in by Christians, and ought to be rejected as supposititious.
But yet we have the testimony of adversaries concerning many facts
relating to Christianity, as far as can be expected from adversaries.
It cannot be expected, that Jews or heathens, continuing such,
should acknowledge Christ's divine mission; that he was the Son of
God, the Saviour of the world : but none of them ever pretended to
deny, that there was such a person as Jesus Christ, who was the
author ofthe Christian religion, and appeared in Judea in the reign
of Tiberius. Tacitus's testimony, as well as that of Celsus, is very
express to this purpose.* And some of the heathens went so far as
to speak very honourably of him. So did the emperor Alexander
Severus, who would have built a temple to him, if some of the pagans
about him hadnot made strong remonstrances against it, as Lam-
pridius informs us in his life, t And even Porphyry himself, whose
words Eusebius hath preserved, speaks of him as a pious man, whose
soul was taken into heaven."): Tt would be unreasonable to expect,
that the enemies of Christianity should acknowledge the accounts
given of Christ by the Evangelists to be true and authentic, and
absolutely to be depended upon ; for then they must have turned
Christians. But yet they never denied, what some of our modern
unbelievers seem unwilling to acknowledge, that Christ's own dis
ciples, who had lived and conversed with him, had written accounts
of his life, and actions, and discourses, which were received by
Christians as true and authentic. The testimony of Celsus, as was
observed before, is very full to the purpose. It cannot be expected,
that Jews and heathens should acknowledge Christ's miracles to have
been really wrought by a divine power. But they do not deny, that
he did, or seemed to do, wonderful works. And the way they take
to account for them amounteth to an acknowledgment of the facts.
Some ascribed them to magical arts, as Celsus, who saith, that, on
the account ofthe strange things he performed, Jesus claimed to be
regarded as a God.§ Others, as Hierocles, opposed to them the
wonders pretended to have been wrought by ApoUonius Tyanseus.
The Jews ascribed tbe works he performed to the virtue ofthe in
effable Name, which he stole out of ^the temple. And the emperor
Julian expressly acknowledgeth some of his miraculous works, par
ticularly his healing the lame and the blind, and casting out devils,
at the same time that he affects to speak of them in a very slight and
diminishing manner.|) As to Christ's having suffered under Pon
tius Pilate, the heathens and Jews were so far from denying it, that
* Tacit. Annal. lib. xv. t Cap. xxix. xliii. Hist. August, torn. i. Edit. Var.
t Euseb. Demonstrat. Evangel, lib. iii. p. 134.
§ Orig. contra Cels. lib. i. p. 7. 22. 30.
jj See his words in Cyril contra Julian, lib. vi. p. 121. Edit. Spanbeim.

606 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
they endeavoured to turn it to the reproach of Christians, that they
believed in, and worshipped, one that had been crucified. It can
not be expected indeed, that they should own, that he really rose
again from the dead on the third day, as he himself had foretold ;
but they acknowledge, that his disciples declared that he did so,
and professed to have seen him, and conversed with him, after his
resurrection. This appeareth from the testimony of Celsus, at the
same time that he endeavours to ridicule the account given by the
Evangelists of Christ's resurrection. * The Jews, by pretending
that the disciples stole away the body of Jesus, whilst the soldiers
that were appointed to guard it slept, plainly acknowledged, that
the body did not remain in the sepulchre where it had been laid
after his crucifixion ; and that therefore he might have risen from
the dead, for any thing they could prove to the contrary. The
early and remarkable diffusion of Christianity, notwithstanding all
the difficulties it had to encounter with, and the persecutions to
which the professors of it were exposed, is a very important fact,
and which, as the case was circumstanced, tends very much to con
firm the truth of the gospel accounts. And this is very fully attested
by heathen writers, though it cannot be expected, that they would
ascribe this propagation of Christianity to its proper causes, the force
of truth, and a divine power accompanying it.
Tacitus, in a passage where he expresseth himself in a manner
that shows he was strongly prejudiced against Christianity, informs
us, that there was a great multitude of Christians at Rome in Nero's
time, which was in little more than thirty years after the death of
our Saviour ; and gives an account of the terrible torments and suf
ferings to which they were exposed.-)- Julian, speaking of the Evan
gelist John, whom he represents as one of Christ's own disciples,
saith, that in his time a great multitude, in most of the cities of
Greece and Italy, were seized with that disease (for so he calls
Christianity), and that John, observing this, was encouraged to
assert that Christ was God, which none of the other apostles had
done. J And we learn from the younger Pliny, that in the reign of
Trajan, i. e. about seventy years after our Lord's crucifixion, the
Christian faith had made such a progress in several parts of the
Roman empire, that the temples of the gods were almost desolate ;
their solemn sacred rites long neglected; and that there were very
few that would buy the sacrifices.§ It cannot be expected, that
heathens, continuing such, should acknowledge that the Christians
were right in their notions of religion ; but the last mentioned cele
brated heathen gives a noble testimony to the innocency of their
lives and manners, and that they bound themselves by the most
sacred engagements to the practice of righteousness and virtue, and
not to allow themselves in vice and wickedness, falsehood and im
purity. Even Celsus, than whom Christianity never had a more
bitter enemy, owns, that there were among Christians many tempe-
* Orig. contra Cels. lib. ii. p. 94. 96, 97. lib. vii. p. 355.
t Tacit. Annal. lib. xv. X See tne Pass'lg'" 'n Cyril, lib. x. p. 327.
§ Plin. lib. x. Ep. 97. ad Trajan.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 607
rate, modest, and understanding persons."* And Julian recommends
to his heathen pontiff Arsacius the example of the Christians, for
their kindness and humanity to strangers, and not only to those of
their own religion, but to the heathens; and for their apparent
sanctity of life ; and this he supposes to be the chief cause why
Christianity had made such aprogress.t If none but Christian wri
ters had celebrated the constancy of the ancient martyrs, some
would have been ready to have suspected, that they feigned this to
do them honour, or, at least, greatly heightened it ; but it appeareth
from the undoubted testimonies of the above mentioned Pliny, of
Arrian, who flourished under the reign of Hadrian, and of the em
peror Marcus Antoninus, that the ancient Christians were very re
markable for their fortitude and contempt of torments and death, and
for their inflexible firmness and constancy to their religion under the
greatest sufferings.*):
Though therefore it were absurd to expect, that the enemies of
Christianity, continuing such, should directly attest the truth and
certainty of the main facts on which the Christian religion is
founded ; yet we have several testimonies from them, that contribute
not a little to the confirmation of those facts. Besides which, what
ought to have great weight with us, we have the testimony of per
sons who were once Jews or heathens, and strongly prejudiced
against the Christian system, who yet, upon the convincing evidence
they had of those facts, were themselves brought over to the religion
of Jesus. § Of such persons there were great numbers even in the
first age, the age in which the facts were done, and in which they
had the best opportunity of inquiring into the truth and certainty of
them. But there could not be a more remarkable instance of this
kind than the apostle Paul. Never was there any man more
strongly prejudiced against Christianity than he; which had carried
him so far, that he was very active in persecuting the professors of
it, and thought that in doing so he had done God good service.
He was at the same time a person of great parts and acuteness, and
who had a learned education ; yet he was brought over to the Chris
tian faith by a divine power and evidence, which he was not able to
resist; and thenceforth did more than any other of the apostles to
propagate the religion of Jesus ; though thereby he not only forfeited
all his hopes of worldly interest and advancement, but exposed him
self to a succession of the most grievous reproaches, persecutions,
and sufferings ; all which he bore with an invincible constancy, and
even with a divine exultation and joy. In his admirable epistles,
which were undeniably written in the first age of Christianity, and
than which no writings can bear more uncontested marks of genuine
puritv and integrity, there are continual references to the principal
facts recorded in the gospels, as of undoubted truth and certainty.
And it manifestly appeareth, that great miracles were then wrought
in the name of Jesus, and that extraordinary gifts were poured forth
* Orig. contra Cels. lib. i. p. 22. t Julian, Ep. xlix. ad Arsac.
X Plin ubi sup. Arrian Epict. lib. iv. cap. 7. Marcus Anton, lib. xi. 3.
§ See Addison's Treatise of the Christian Religion, sect. in. iv.

608 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
upon the disciples. And why should not his testimony in favour of
Christianity be of the greatest force ? Must it be disregarded be
cause of his turning Christian, i. e. because he was so convinced of
those facts by the strongest evidence, that it over-ruled all his pre
judices, and brought him over to Christianity, in opposition to all
his former notions, inclinations, and interests '.' Whereas it is this
very thing that giveth his testimony a peculiar force.* And if he
had not turned Christian, his testimony in favour of Christianity, if
he had given any, would not have had so great weight, as being in
sufficient for his own conviction ; or it would have been rejected as
a forgery, under pretence that he could not say and believe such
things without embracing the Christian faith.
This very pretence has been made use of to set aside the remark
able testimony of Josephus. And indeed, if that testimony be
genuine (and a great deal has been strongly urged to prove it so,
at least for the substance of it), it must be acknowledged, that he
was far from being an enemy to Christianity, though he was perhaps
too much a courtier openly to profess it.
There is another argument, which the ingenious author of these
Letters proposeth, and upon which he layeth no small stress, as if it
were a demonstration against the divine authority of the Christian
religion. He observes, that — " the writers of the Romish religion
have attempted to show, that the text of the holy writ is on many
accounts insufficient to be the sole criterion of orthodoxy ;" and he
apprehends they have shown it : " And the writers of the reformed
religion have erected their batteries against tradition : and that they
have jointly laid their axes to the root of Christianity : that men
will be apt to reason upon what they have advanced, that there re
mains at this time no standard at all of Christianity : and that, by
consequence, either this religion was not originally of divine institu
tion, or else God has not provided effectually for preserving the genu
ine purity of it, and the gates of hell have actually prevailed, in
contradiction to his promise, against the Church. He must be
worse than an atheist that affirms the last ; and therefore the best
effect of this reasoning that can be hoped for is, that men should
fall into Theism, and subscribe to the first ;" — viz. that the Christian
religion was not originally of divine institution.-]- He seems to think
this dilemma unanswerable ; and in order to this, he pronounceth,
on the side of the Romish church, that their writers have shown,
that the sacred text is — "insufficient to be the sole criterion of
orthodoxy ;" — or, as he afterwards expresseth it, that — " it hath not
that authenticity, clearness, and precision, which are necessary to
establish it as a divine and certain rule of faith and practice." — Why
his Lordship giveth the preference to the Romish divines in this
controversy, is very evident. It is because it best answereth the
design he hath in view ; which manifestly is, to subvert the credit
* See this clearly and solidly argued in Sir George Lyttleton's excellent Observa
tions on the Conversion and Apostleship of St. Paul.
t Bolingbroke's Works, vol. i. p. 179, 180, 181.

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 609
and authority of the Christian religion, and leave it nothing to de
pend upon but the force of education, and the civil and ecclesiastical
power. It cannot be denied, that some writers of the Romish Church,
whilst they have endeavoured to show that the scripture is insuffi
cient to be a complete rule of faith and practice, have said as much
to expose the sacred text, as if they were in league with the infidels
against it, though they, as well as we, profess to own its divine
original. The enemies of Christianity have not failed to take advan
tage of this. And indeed there cannot be a greater absurdity than
to suppose, that God should inspire men to reveal his will to man
kind, and to instruct them in the way of salvation, and order it so,
that they should commit that revelation to writing, for the use and
benefit of his church ; and yet that it should be insufficient to answer
the end, or to guide those that, in the sincerity of their hearts, and
with the attention which becometh them in an affair of such infinite
importance, apply themselves to the understanding and practising
of it.
What his Lordship here offers (and it contains the sum of what
has been advanced by the Romish writers on this subject), is this —
" I am sure that experience, from the first promulgation of Christi
anity to this hour, shows abundantly, with how much ease and
success, the most opposite, the most extravagant, nay, the most im
pious opinions, and the most contradictory faiths, may be founded
on the same text, and plausibly defended by the same authority."*
— This way of arguing beareth a near affinity to that which lieth at
the foundation of all scepticism, viz. that there is no certain criterion
of truth, or right reason, because reason is pretended for the most
contradictory opinions ; and that it is impossible to be certain of
any thing, because of the differences among mankind about
every thing; that there are no certain principles at all, even in
natural religion or morality ; since there are none, not even those
relating to the existence and perfections of God, a Providence, a
future state, the natural differences of good and evil, but what have
been controverted, and that by persons who have pretended to learn
ing, to wisdom, and philosophy. Rut the absurdity of this way of
arguing is very evident. The principle is fallacious, that whatever
hath been controverted is uncertain. As well might it be said, that
whatever is capable of being abused is not good or useful. It doth
not follow, that the scriptures are not sufficiently clearand determi
nate to be a rule of faith and practice in all that is essential or neces
sary to salvation, because there have been men in every age that
have interpreted them in different senses. The plainest passages in
any writings whatsoever may be perverted ; nor is men's differing
about the meaning of the sacred text any argument against its cer
tainty or perspicuity. Laws may be of great use, though they do
not absolutely exclude chicanery "and evasion. That can never be a
good argument to prove, that the scriptures are not a rule to be de-
* Works, vol. i. p. 179.
R R

610 REFLECTIONS ON THE LATE
pended upon, which would equally prove, that no revelation that
God could give could possibly be a rule of faith and practice, or of
any use to guide men to truth and happiness. If God should make
a revelation of his will, for instructing mankind in what it most
nearly concerneth them to know, and for directing them in the way
of salvation (the possibility of which cannot be denied by any theist),
and should for this purpose appoint a code to be published, contain
ing doctrines and laws; it may be justly questioned, whether it
could possibly be made so clear and explicit, as that all men in all
ages should agree in their sense of it. This could hardly be ex
pected, except God should miraculously interpose, with an irresis
tible influence, to cause them all to think the same way, and give
them the same precise ideas of things, the same measures of natural
abilities, and exactly the same means and opportunities for acquir
ing improvement, the same sagacity, the same leisure, the same
diligence; and except he should exert his divine power in an extra
ordinary manner, for subduing or removing all their prejudices, and
over-ruling their different passions, humours, inclinations, and
interests ; and should place them all exactly in the same situation
and circumstances. And this would be by no means consistent with
the wisdom of the divine government, or with the nature of man,
and his freedom as a moral agent, and with the methods and orders
of Providence. Nor is there any necessity for so extraordinary a
procedure ; for it would be absurd to the last degree to pretend, that
the scripture can be of no use to any man, except all men were to
agree about it ; or that it is not sufficiently clear to answer the end,
if there be any persons that pervert or abuse it.
Yet, after all the clamour that has been raised about differences
among Christians as to the sense of Scrpture, there are many things
of great importance, about which there hath been in all ages a very
general agreement among professed Christians : They are agreed,
that there is one God, who made heaven and earth, and all things
which are therein : That he preserveth all things by the word of his
Power, and governeth all things by his Providence : That he is in
finitely powerful, wise, and good, and is to be loved, feared, adored,
obeyed, above all : That as there is one God, so there is one Medi
ator between God and man, Jesus Christ the righteous, whom he, in
his infinite love and mercy, sent into the world to save and to redeem
us : That he came to instruct us by his doctrine, and bring a clear
revelation of the divine will, and to set before us a bright and most
perfect example for our imitation : That he submitted to the most
grievous sufferings, and to death itself, for our sakes, that he might
obtain eternal redemption for us : That he rose again from the dead,
and ascended into heaven, and is now crowned with glory and
honour, and ever liveth to make intercession for us : That through
him, and in his name, we are to offer up our prayers, and hope for
the acceptance of our persons and services, and for gracious assis
tances in the performance of our duty : That in him there is a new
covenant established, and published to the world, in which there is
a free and universal offer of pardon and mercy to all the truly peni-

LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS. 611
tent, and a most express promise of eternal life, as the reward of our
sincere, though imperfect obedience : That it is not enough to have
a bare speculative faith, but we must be formed into an holy and
godlike temper ; and, in order to be prepared for that future happi
ness, must live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world :
That there shall be a resurrection both of the just and of the un
just, and a future judgment, when Christ shall judge the world in
the Father's name, and give to every man according to his deeds :
That the wicked shall be doomed to the most grievous punishments ;
and the righteous shall be unspeakably happy to all eternity. These
are things of great consequence, and which have been generally
acknowledged by Christians in all ages. And if there have been
several things advanced by those that call themselves Christians,
which are not well consistent with these generally-acknowledged
principles ; if- there have been controversies among them about
points of considerable importance, as well as many contentions
about things of little or no moment, this is no argument against the
divine authority or usefulness of the sacred writings. Those that
wrest the Scriptures must be accountable to him that gave them, for
that perversion and abuse; as men must be accountable for the
abuse of their reason ; but this is far from proving, that therefore
the Scriptures answer no valuable purpose, and could not be of a
divine original. Still it is true, that whosoever will, with a teach
able and attentive mind, and an upright intention to know and do
the will of God, apply himself to read and consider the holy Scrip
tures, in an humble dependence on God's gracious assistances, will
find vast advantage for instructing him in the knowledge of religion,
and engaging him to the practice of it, and for guiding him in the
way of salvation.
It appears then, that the foundation, on which this formidable
dilemma is built, will not bear. There is at this time, a standard for
Christianity ; even the doctrines and laws of our Saviour and his
apostles, as contained in the holy Scriptures. It must be and is
acknowledged by all that profess themselves Christians, that what
ever is revealed in those sacred books is true and certain, and what
ever can be shown to be contrary to what is there revealed is false.
The Romanists as well as Protestants own the divinity and authen
ticity of the sacred text, though for particular views they would
join unwritten tradition with it; and are for giving the church alone
the authority to interpret the Scriptures. The reason of their con
duct is evident. It is not because they look upon the sacred text to
be so obscure and ambiguous, that it cannot be understood by the
people ; but because they think the people, if left to themselves, will
understand it so far as to see the inconsistency there is between true
primitive Christianity, as laid down in the New Testament, and the
papal system, and because their corrupt additions to Christianity
cannot be proved by' Scripture authority.
I have already taken notice of what he saith concerning the fatal
blow that Christianity received by the resurrection of letters. I
suppose we are to take his word as a decisive proof of this; for no
R r 2

612 LORD BOLINGBROKE'S LETTERS.
other proof of it is offered. But it may be affirmed on the contrary,
that true primitive Christianity, that is, Christianity as laid down
in the New Testament, had then a glorious revival. Many corrupt
additions that had been made to it were thrown off. It hath never
been better understood, nor its evidences set in a clearer light, than
since that time. Some of the most admired names in the republic
of letters have thought themselves worthily employed in endeavour
ing to illustrate the beauties of Scripture, and to clear its difficul
ties. It were easy to show, if it were not a thing so well known as
to render it needless, that those who have done most for the revival
and spreading of learning and knowledge in all its branches, and
who were most celebrated for their genius, judgment, various read
ing, and probity, have been persons that expressed a great ad
miration for the holy Scriptures, and an hearty zeal for Chris
tianity. Thus I have considered what the late Lord Bolingbroke hath
offered in these Letters against the authority of the holy Scripture,
and the Christian religion, as far as may be necessary to take off the
force ofthe objections he hath raised against it, and which seem to
have nothing in them proportioned to the unusual confidence with
which they are advanced. It is hard to see what good end could be
proposed by such an attempt. But perhaps it may be thought an
advantage, that by "discovering error in first principles founded
upon facts, and breaking the charm, the enchanted castle, the steepy
rock, the burning lake will disappear."* And there are persons,
no doubt, that would be well pleased to see it proved, that Chris
tianity is no better than delusion and enchantment ; and particu
larly, that the wicked have nothing to fear from the burning lake,
some apprehensions of which may probably tend to make them
uneasy in their vicious courses. But I should think, that a true
lover of virtue, and of mankind, who impartially considers the purity
of the gospel morals, the excellent tendency of its doctrines and pre
cepts, and the power of its motives for engaging men to the practice
of piety and virtue, and deterring them from vice and wickedness,
will be apt to look upon it as a very ill employment, to endeavour
to expose this religion to contempt, and to set bad men free from
the wholesome terrors it inspires, and deprive good men of the sub
lime hopes and sacred joys it yields. But Christianity hath with
stood much more formidable attacks, and will, I doubt not, continue
to approve itself to those that examine it, and the evidences by
which it is established, with minds free from vicious prejudices,
and with that sincerity and simplicity of heart, that seriousness
and attention, which becomes them in an affair of such vast im
portance. * See his Letter on the Use of Study and Retirement, vol. ii. p. 221.

613

LETTER XXXV.
The Account ofthe Deistical Writers closed  General Reflections on those Writers.
—The high Encomiums they bestow upon themselves, and their own Performances
and the Contempt they express for others. — They differ among themselves about the
most important Principles of natural Religion. — The unfair Methods they take with
regard to Christianity. — No Writers discover stronger Marks of Prejudice. — The
Guilt and Danger of rejecting the Christian Revelation. — An Aversion to the Laws
ofthe Gospel, one of the principal Causes of Infidelity. — Terms proposed by the
Deists for making up the Differences between them and the Christians.— Their
Pretence of placing Religion wholly in Practice, and not in useless Speculations
considered.

Sir,
I shall now close the account of the deistical writers who have
appeared among us for above a century past, and shall take occasion
to subjoin some reflections which seem naturally to arise upon this
subject. If we were to judge of the merit of these writers, by the enco
miums they have bestowed upon their own performances, and the
account they have given of their designs and views, we should be
apt to entertain a very favourable opinion of them, as persons to
whom the world is under great obligations. Dr. Tindal begins and
ends his book with declaring, that his scheme " tends to the honour
of God, and the happiness of human societies;" that there "is none
who wish well to mankind, but must also wish his hypothesis to be
true ;" and that " it most effectually prevents the growth both of
scepticism and enthusiasm." The "Moral Philosopher" every
where speaks very advantageously of himself, as having nothing in
view but to vindicate and promote the cause of real religion, and
moral truth and righteousness. The author of " Christianity not
founded on Argument," spends some pages in recapitulating and
extolling his own work. The same observation may be made con
cerning the author of the " Resurrection of Jesus considered." He
declares " that reason is his only rule, and the displaying truth his
only aim : that his design is to recover the dignity of virtue, and to
promote that veneration for wisdom and truth, which have been
destroyed by faith."* And he concludes with expressing his hope,
that his " treatise will be of real service to religion, and make men's
practice better, when they find they have nothing else to depend
upon for happiness, here and hereafter, but their own personal righ
teousness, with their love of wisdom and truth."f In like manner
Mr. Chubb has, in his "Farewell to his Readers," with great
solemnity, told the world how much they are obliged to him for
* Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 72. f. Ibid, p. 82.

614 GENERAL REFLECTIONS on Let. XXXV
having taken care to leave them his instructions in matters of tbe
highest importance. Mr. Hume assumes the merit of throwing
light upon the most curious and sublime subjects, with regard to
which all the received systems had been extremely defective, and which
had escaped the most elaborate scrutiny and examination. He pro
poses to " reconcile profound inquiry with clearness, and truth with
novelty," and to " undermine the foundations of an abstruse philo
sophy, which seems to have served hitherto only as a shelter to su
perstition, and a , cover to absurdity and error."* And he begins
his " Essay upon Miracles'* with declaring, that " he flatters him
self that he has discovered an argument, which, if just, will with
the wise and learned be an everlasting check to all kinds of super
stitious delusion, and consequently will be useful as long as the
world endures, "f Lord Bolingbroke makes the most pompous pro
fessions of his intentions to " separate truth from falsehood, know
ledge from ignorance, revelations of the Creator from inventions of
the creature, dictates of reason from the sallies of enthusiasm — and
to go to the root of that error, which sustains our pride, fortifies our
prejudices, and gives pretence to delusion — to discover the true na
ture of human knowledge — how far it is real, and how it begins to
be fantastical — that the gaudy visions of error being dispelled, men
may be accustomed to the simplicity of truth."^
Nor do these gentlemen only join in representing themselves as
persons of extraordinary penetration, and of the most upright inten
tions : but they sometimes seem to claim a kind of infallibility.
They talk of having their "understandings irradiated with the
beams of immutable eternal reason, so that they are sure not to run
into any errors of moment." And that they have an "infallible
mark and criterion of divine truth, in which men cannot be mis
taken.'^ They propose to direct men to "the eternal and in
variable rule of right and wrong, as to an infallible guide, and as
the solid ground of peace and.safety."|| They assure us, that deism,
or the religion they would recommend, is " bright as the heavenly
light, and free from all ambiguities ; that it makes all men happy
that embrace it ; that it perfectly satisfies all doubts, and procures
the troubled soul unshaken rest."1T
And as they take care to recommend themselves, and their own
writings, to the esteem and admiration of mankind, so they give a
very disadvantageous idea of those that stand up as advocates for
revealed religion. They speak in a sneering contemptuous way of
such books as Stillingfleet's " Origines Sacrse," Dr. Clarke's "Dis
course of Natural and Revealed Religion, the Analogy of Reason
and Revelation, &c." and the excellent discourses at Boyle's lec-

* Hume's Philosophical Essays, p. 18, 19. and his Enquiry concerning the Principles
of Morals, p. 172.
t See Hume's Philosophical Essays, p. 174.
X Bolingbroke's Works, vol. iii. p. 328. 331.
§ Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 336. edit. 8vo. Mor. Phil. vol. i. p. 92.
|| Chubb's Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 249.
% Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 9.

Let. XJLX.V. THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. 615
tures.* A writer of great note among them thinks fit to represent
the Christian divines, as, for the most part, " mortal enemies to the
exercise of reason, and below brutes."t Another charges them, as
acting as if they " wanted either understanding or honesty." And
he assures us, that "those who think most freely, have the least
share of faith, and that in proportion as our understandings are im
proved, faith diminishes." The same writer expressly calls itfoolish
faith, and saith, that " in this glorious time of light and iiberty,
this divine hag, with her pious witchcrafts, which were brought
forth in darkness, and nourished by obscurity, faint at the approach
of day, and vanish upon sight.""); And one of their latest and most
admired authors have thought fit to pass this arrogant censure upon
all that believe the Christian religion — that " Whosoever is moved
by faith to assent to it, is conscious of a continued miracle in his
own person, which subverts all the principles of his understanding,
and gives him a determination to believe whatever is most contrary
to custom and experience."§ Lord Bolingbroke brings it as a
charge against both clergy and laity, who believe Christianity, that
they have been hitherto either " not impartial, or sagacious enough,
to take an accurate examination, or not honest enough to commu
nicate it." || And he takes all occasions to pour forth the most viru
lent contempt and reproach upon the most eminent Christian di
vines and pbilosophers, both ancient and modern. Many instances
of this kind have been observed above in this work, 22nd Letter and
Letter 25th.
After such specious professions, it would be natural to expect,
that these gentlemen should oblige the world with clearer directions
than have been hitherto given to lead mankind to truth and happi
ness. But this is far from being the case : they indeed all join in
endeavouring to subvert revealed religion, but they are by no means
agreed what to substitute in its room. They often speak magnifi
cently of keeping close to the eternal reason and nature of things,
and profess a high esteem for what they call the uncorrupted re
ligion of reason and nature, which is always invariably the same.%
But when they come to explain themselves more particularly, it is
not easy to know what they intend by it. Some of them have
reckoned among the principles of natural religion, and which are of
great importance to mankind, the belief of God's universal and par
ticular providence, his moral government of the world and of man
kind, the obligations we are under to pray to him and worship him,
the natural differences of moral good and evil, man's free agency,
the immortality of the soul, and a future state of retributions.
Others of their applauded writers deny several of these principles,
or, at least, represent them as absolutely uncertain. And though,
when they want to make a fair appearance to the world, these prin-
* Christianity not founded on Argument.
t Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 250,251.
X Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 4. 8. 72. § Ibid.
|| Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Use of History, vol. l. p. Itii.
T Chubb's Posthumous Works, vol. ii. in the Appendix.

616 GENERAL REFLECTIONS ON Let. XXXV.
ciples are to pass as making a part of the deist's creed, yet it can
not be denied, that the general effect and tendency of their writings
has rather been to unsettle these foundations, and introduce an uni
versal scepticism and indifference to all religion. When such per
sons therefore, set up for benefactors to mankind, it puts one in
mind of the boasts of the Epicureans, who speak in high terms of
the obligations the world was under to their great master Epicurus,
for undertaking the glorious work of rescuing mankind from the un-
sufferable yoke of superstition, by freeing them from the fear of God,
and the apprehensions of providence, and a future state of retri
butions. And even with regard to those of the deists that put on
the fairest appearances, I think it may be truly said, that it is not
among them that we must look for the best and most perfect scheme,
even of natural religion. What has been done to greatest advan
tage this way has been done by Christian writers, who have pro
duced the noblest systems of natural religion, and have taken pains
to establish its great principles on the surest foundations. And to
what can this be reasonably ascribed, but to the clearer light which
the Christian revelation hath thrown upon this subject, and the ex
cellent helps and assistances it hath brought us? lt appeareth then,
that if it be of any advantage to mankind to have natural religion
set in a clear light, and strongly enforced, the deists have no right
to appropriate tbe honour of this to themselves, or to set up for bene
factors to mankind on this account. Much less have they reason
to value themselves upon their opposition to the Christian religion.
If the account some of tnemselves have given of the nature and de
sign of Christianity be just, they must be very badly employed that
endeavour to subvert its credit and authority. . Lord Herbert calls it
the best, religion, and saith, that all its doctrines, ordinances, pre
cepts, sacraments, aim at the establishment of those five important
articles, in which he makes all religion to consist.* Dr. Tindal
owns, that " Christianity itself, stripped of all additions that policy,
mistake, and the circumstances of time have made to it, is a most
holy religion. "f The Moral Philosopher frequently expresseth him
self to the same purpose ; and Mr. Chubb acknowledged, that
" Christianity, if it could be separated from every thing that hath
been blended with it, yields a much clearer light, and is a more
safe guide to mankind, than any other traditionary religion, as
being better adapted to improve and perfect human nature. "J Lord
Bolingbroke represents it as a most amiable and useful institution,
and that its natural tendency is to promote the peace and happiness qf
mankind. jThat the system of religion it teaches is a complete system,
to all the purposes of religion natural and revealed, — and might
have continued so, to the unspeakable advantage of mankind, if it had
been propagated with the same simplicity with which it was taught by
Christ himself. § If therefore they had laid out their pains in en-
* Herbert relig. laici, p. 9, 10.
f Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 382. edit. 8vo.
X Chubb's Posthumous Works, vol. ii. p. 370.
§ Several other Passages- to this purpose are collected above in the 31st Letter.

Let. Xaav. the deistical writers. 017
deayouring to separate true original Christianity from the corrupt
additions that have been made to it, and to engage men to a stricter
adherence, in principle and practice, to the religion of Jesus in its
primitive purity and simplicity, as delivered by Christ and his
apostles in the New Testament, they might have had some pre
tence to the character they seem willing to claim, of friends and
benefactors to mankind. But the method they have taken is very
different : at the same time that they have affected to commend
pure original Christianity, they have used their utmost efforts to
subvert its divine authority, and thus to deprive it of its influence
on the minds of men, and set them loose from all obligations to be
lieve and obey it. This is a manifest proof, that it is not merely
the corruptions of Christianity that they find fault with, but the
Christian revelation itself, which they have not scrupled to represent
as the product of enthusiasm or imposture.
Various are the ways they have taken to destroy its credit and
authority, as sufficiently appeareth from the account which hath
been given in the foregoing Letters. And considering how many
writers have appeared in this cause within this century past, and
what liberty they have had to propose their reasonings and their
objections, it can hardly be supposed they have left any thing un-
attempted that had the face of argument, by which they thought
they could answer their end. And therefore if it appears, as I hope
it does, upon the view which hath been taken of them, that their
most plausible objections have been solidly answered; it is to be
hoped, that their attempts, however ill intended, will turn to the
advantage of the Christian cause ; as it will thence appear, how
little its enemies have been able to say against it, considered in its
original purity, even where they have had the utmost freedom of
proposing their sentiments. They have appealed to the bar of
reason; the advocates for Christianity have followed them to the
bar, and have fairly shown, that the evidences of revealed religion
are such as approve themselves to impartial reason, and, if taken
together, are fully sufficient to satisfy an honest and unprejudiced
mind. Although therefore it cannot but give great concern to all that
have a just zeal for our holy religion, that so many, instead of being
duly thankful for the glorious light of the gospel which shineth
among us, have used their utmost endeavours to expose it to con
tempt and reproach : yet, on the other hand, it yields matter of
agreeable reflection, that there have been as many valuable defences
of Christianity published among us within this century past, as can
be produced in any age. Besides those mentioned in the foregoing
Letters, there have been many excellent treatises, setting forth the
reasons and evidences of the Christian religion, which the nature
of the work I have been engaged in did not lead me to take notice
of, as they were not written professedly in answer to any of those
deistical books which I had occasion to mention.
It is a reflection that must obviously occur, upon a review of the

618 general reflections on Let. XXXV.
account which hath been given of the authors who have appeared
against Christianity, that they have been far from contenting them
selves with sober reasoning, as might be expected in a case on
which so much depends. The weapons they have chiefly made use
of, are those of misrepresentation and ridicule, and often even low
jest and buffoonery. This seems to be a presumption in favour
of Christianity, that its adversaries are themselves sensible that
little can be done against it, in a way of plain reason and argument.
It is* true, there are no writers who make greater pretensions to
freedom of thought, or inveigh more strongly against prepossession
and bigotry ; so that one would expect, that they should every
where discover minds open to conviction and evidence : and yet it
may safely be affirmed, that no writers whatsoever discover stronger
signs of prejudice ; and there is great reason to complain that they
have not carried on the debate with that fairness and candour
which becomes the importance of the subject.*
Any one that is acquainted with their writings must be sensible,
that it is not their way to make a fair and just representation of
true original Christianity as contained in the Holy Scriptures.
They throw it into false lights, in order to expose it, and often
charge it with corruptions and abuses, which they themselves well
know do not really and originally belong to it. In some of their
books which are written in the way of dialogue, they introduce
Christian dialogists, who are to make a show of defending the
Christian cause ; but it is evident that it is only to betray it. These
dialogists make a most despicable figure in their writings, and are
scarcely allowed to say any thing that discovers learning or even com
mon sense, nor ever fairly state the argument or evidence on the
side of Christianity. Any one that has read Tindal's " Christianity
as old as the Creation," or the first volume of the " Moral Philo
sopher," cannot but have observed this.
In their treatment of the scriptures, they have every-where dis
covered an eager desire and resolution to expose and run them down
at any rate. In examining writings of) venerable antiquity and au
thority, a man of candour, and an impartial enquirer after truth,
would be inclined to put the most favourable interpretation upon
them that they will bear ; but instead of this, these writers seem
only solicitous to find out something that may make the scriptures
appear ridiculous. They take pains to wrest and pervert them, as
if they thought it meritorious to treat those sacred writings in a
manner that would not be borne with regard to any other books of
the least credit. Of this many instances might be produced. If
they meet with any passages of scripture that have difficulty in
them, and which at this distance are not easy to explain ; and some
such passages must be expected in books of so great antiquity,
written in times and places, as well as dialects, so different from
our own ; this is immediately improved, as if it were sufficient to
* See this clearly shown in Dr. Duchal's Preface to his excellent Sermons on the
presumptive Evidences of Christianity.

Let. XXXV. the deistical writers. 619
show that the whole sacred volume is false, or so corrupted as not
be depended on. Thus a late celebrated author, who has endea
voured to expose the scripture history, has thought the curse said
to have been pronounced by Noah upon Canaan, sufficient to de
stroy the credit of it ; but not to repeat what has been offered for
explaining or vindicating that passage, supposing we were not able
in any manner to account for it, would it not be far more reasonable
and becoming a man of sense and candour, to suppose that in so
short a relation some circumstances are omitted, which, if known,
would set it in a fair light, rather than, on account of an obscure
passage, to reject and discard the authority of the whole ?
What can be a plainer proof of the power of their prejudices, than
to advance rules, in judging of the truth and credibility of scripture
history, which would be absolutely rejected and exploded, if applied
to any other history, in the world ; and to reject the evidence as in
sufficient with regard to the facts recorded in the gospel, which
they themselves would count sufficient with regard to any other
facts done in past ages ? What greater sign of prejudice, than
when they are not able to invalidate the truth of the gospel records,
or to show that they have not been safely transmitted to us, to fly
out into general clamours and invectives against all historical evi
dence whatsoever, as absolutely uncertain 1 The author of " Chris
tianity not founded on Argument" speaks out, and plainly declares
that no man ought to believe any thing but what he sees with his
own eyes. " To believe a thing," says he, " because another man
says he saw it, is a very unprecedented and new sort of logic."*
And it is a constant topic with these writers to declaim against every
thing as uncertain that comes to us through the hands of fallible
men. As if no man could be sure that there is such a place as
Paris, except he had been there, or that there had been such a
person as Queen Elizabeth. Moral certainty is ridiculed and ex
posed; though nothing can be more plain, from the very frame of
our nature, and the circumstances in which we are placed by divine
providence here on earth, than that the author of our beings de
signed that we should in many cases be determined by moral evi
dence and testimony, and that we should acquiesce in it, as fully
sufficient, f It is what all men, even the wisest, do in numberless
instances, and think it reasonable to do so. And to reject all this
at once, is a certain sign of their being reduced to the last distress
in point of argument. And if the advocates for revelation were
driven to such shifts, they would no doubt be treated as irreconcil
able enemies to reason and common sense.
Many other things might be mentioned which show the strength
of their prejudices against Christianity. They often make use of
arguments, which, if they were good for any thing, would hold for
casting off all religion, all certainty of reason, all learning and in
struction, and, if pursued to their genuine consequences, would, in-
* " Christianity not founded on Argument," p. 53.
t See this excellently stated and cleared in Ditton on the Resurrection, part 2d.

620 general reflections on Let. XXXV.
troduce universal barbarism. And what a strange prejudice does
this argue, to have such an aversion for Christianity, as to be
willing to throw off all religion, learning, and knowledge, rather
than admit it ! If they can but expose revealed religion, it seems
to give them very little concern, though natural religion falls with
it; some of their admired authors argue against all methods of
education, all attempts to instruct children in the principles of reli
gion or morality. This is an extraordinary refinement of the present
age. ¦ The best and wisest men of all former ages have looked upon
it to be a thing of vast consequence, to season the minds of children
betimes, with good and just notions of things. But some of our
modern free-thinkers have, in their superior wisdom, found out, that
the best way would be to leave children entirely to themselves,
without any instruction or cultivation at all. This is the scheme
of the author of "Christianity not founded on Argument;" and
another of their applauded writers, Dr. Tindal, seems sometimes to
declare against all instruction, by word or writing, as useless or
needless, and as only tending to turn men aside from attending
to the things themselves, and to the pure simple dictates of
nature. Their desire at any rate to subvert Christianity has involved them
in many inconsistencies. Sometimes, to show that there is no need
or use of divine revelation, the powers of reason in matters of reli
gion are mightily extolled, as if it were able to do every thing by its
own force, without any assistance. At other times, to render us in
different to religion, reason is degraded ; and it is expressly de
clared, that "it is not her proper province to judge of religion at
all ; nor is this an affair in which she has the least concern."*
Sometimes all men, even those that cannot read their mother tongue,
are supposed to be so clear-sighted, as to be able, without any in
struction, to know the whole of religion. At other times, the bulk
of mankind are represented as unable to know any thing of reli
gion, and therefore not under any obligation to believe it, and as not
capable of judging where there is any thing of induction or inference
in the case.
If the doctrines of the gospel appear, upon a strict examination,
to be such as right reason approves when once they are discovered,
then it is urged that reason alone might have discovered them, and
that a revelation in such cases is perfectly needless, and of no use at
all. But if there be any thing in these discoveries which was not
discoverable by unassisted reason, and which we could not have
known but by extraordinary revelation, this is made an objection
against receiving it; and to believe in that case is branded as an
implicit faith, and a giving up our reason.
"Sometimes the apostles are represented as hot-brained enthu
siasts, who really believed themselves to be inspired of God, and
were so mad as to imagine that they wrought miracles, and had
extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, when there was no such
* Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 7.

Let. XXXV. the deistical writers. 621
thing. At other times they are represented as artful impostors, who
formed a scheme of worldly power and grandeur under spiritual
pretences, and forged facts and evidences which they knew to be
false. The character of our blessed Lord, as set before us in'the gospel,
is so excellent and admirable, that the enemies of our holy religion
know not well how to fix a stain upon it. But when they can find
nothing in his doctrine, or in his temper or conduct, that savours of
the spirit of this world, or of a carnal policy, they are willing to
suppose that under these specious appearances he concealed am
bitious and interested views, which were to take effect in the proper
time. Lord Shaftesbury had insinuated this ; and it was a part of
Mr. Woolston's scheme to charge Christ with a secret design of
aspiring to temporal power and dominion, and with encouraging the
Jews to take him for their king. The same thing is pretended by
the " Moral Philosopher," and by the author of " The Resurrection
of Jesus considered." Thus, this malignant insinuation is repeated
by one of these writers after another, without any thing to support
it but the malice ofthe accusers, and an earnest desire to find a flaw
in the most perfuct character; since both the whole of his life and
conduct, and the entire strain and tendency of the religion he taught,
afford the strongest proofs to the contrary. And at this rate the
best and noblest characters may pass for the worst ; and the greater
marks there are of self-denial and disinterestedness, the greater will
the ground of suspicion be.
Sometimes Jesus and his apostles are represented as teaching
wholly in a way of authority, and never applying to men's reason
at all, and even absolutely forbidding them to use their under
standings. This is what the author of " Christianity not founded
on Argument" has laboured to prove. At other times, it is as
serted, as it is particularly by the " Moral Philosopher,'' that Christ
appealed wholly to men's own reason, and would not have them
take any thing upon his authority at all as a teacher sent from
God, or upon any other evidence than the reason and nature of the
thing.* When they are not able to produce any ancient evidences against
Christianity, they presume upon it as a certain thing, that there
was evidence formerly against it, but that this evidence was de
stroyed, and that it was because of the strength of the evidence, that it
was found necessary to destroy it. Thus, these gentlemen know
how to turn even the want of evidence against Christianity, into an
argument against its truth. I shall not here repeat what has been
above offered to show the vanity and unreasonableness of this pre
tence. I shall only observe, that, according to their usual way of
repeating continually the same objections, this has been urged with
great confidence by Mr. Woolston, by the author of " The Resur
rection of Jesus considered," and very lately by a writer of quality,
who hath distinguished himself in the same cause.
* Moral Philosopher, vol. ii. p. 23, 24. 41, 42.

622 GENERAL REFLECTIONS ON , Let. XXXV.
Many other instances might be produced, by which it appears,
that no writers whatsoever show more apparent signs of strong pre
judice and prepossession, than those that honour themselves with
the title of Free-thinkers. It were greatly to be wished for their
own sakes, as well as for the sake of others, whom they take pains
to pervert, that they would endeavour to divest themselves of their
prejudices, and would consider the evidences for Christianity with
that seriousness and attention which becomes them in an affair of
such vast importance. I am sensible indeed, that many are ready
to represent this as a thing of no consequence at all. They look
upon all forms of religion to be alike with regard -to the favour of
God, and that it is perfectly indifferent what a man -professes, pro
vided he be a man of virtue. But real piety and virtue will engage
a man to receive whatever he has reason to think is a true signifi
cation ofthe divine will. And if Christianity be indeed a true reve
lation from God, as it claims to be, and if the declarations there
made in the name of God are to be depended upon, it cannot pos
sibly be a matter of indifference, whether those to whom it is pub
lished and made known, receive or reject it : the believing and
receiving it must in that case needs be of great consequence to our
happiness, and to disbelieve and reject it is infinitely hazardous. It
therefore highly concerneth us to inquire, whether Christianity be
in reality a true divine revelation ; whether the laws there prescribed
in the name of God be indeed his laws, and be obeyed as such:
whether the terms of acceptance there proposed be of his own ap
pointment ; whether the promises there made are to be regarded as
his promises, and the threatenings there denounced are to be con
sidered as really enforced by his authority. For if they really be so,
and we reject them without examination, or refuse to consider them,
as if they were not worthy of a serious thought, we shall be abso
lutely without excuse, and shall never be able to justify our conduct
to God, or our own consciences.
A noted deistical author, after having insinuated that we need not
give ourselves the trouble to inquire into the several pretended reve
lations that have appeared in the world, yet thinks fit to own, that
" when a revelation which assumes a divine character comes to our
own door, and offers itself to our consideration, and as it may pos
sibly be what it is pretended to be, and as such we may possibly be
interested in it, this may excite our concern to try and prove it ;
otherwise we can be under no obligation with regard to it."*
Where he plainly supposes, that, in the case he puts, we are under
an obligation to try and prove a revelation which assumes a divine
character, and offers itself to our consideration. And it strengthens
this, if the revelation itself, supposing it to be really given by God,
does in his name require and demand our attention and submission,
as a condition of our being interested in his favour. In such a case,
it must^be no small guilt to disregard and reject it at once without
a due inquiry, but especially to cast contempt and reproach upon it,
and endeavour to engage others to reject it.
* Chubb's Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. II.

Let. XXXV. the deistical writers. 623
And the guilt and danger of rejecting that revelation is mightily
heightened, if it should be found, that the true cause of that infide
lity, and of the disregard shown to that revelation, is the strength
of'vicious appetite, and an aversion to the holy and excellent laws
which are there prescribed. And this, it is to be feared, is the case
ofthe generality of those among us who reject the gospel-revelation.
When we see them, under pretence of disbelieving the doctrines,
discarding the morals of the gospel ; when with Christianity they
seem to throw off' the fear of God, and give themselves up to bound
less licentiousness ; there is too just reason to apprehend, that the
true cause of their dislike to the Christian revelation, is not so much
their being dissatisfied with the evidences produced for it, as be
cause they cannot bear the restraints it lays upon their corrupt lusts
and passions. The real end they aim at is expressed by one of
themselves to be, " to save a soul from the dismal apprehensions of
eternal damnation ;" to relieve a person " from labouring under that
uneasiness of mind, which he often is under, when pleasure and
Christianity come in competition."* And a late noble writer men
tions it as an advantage ofthe way of thinking he recommends, that
the burning lake will then disappear.f And if, by shutting their
eyes against the evidence, they could alter the real state of the case,
and render their condition safer than it would otherwise be ; if their
not believing eternal damnation would secure them against the
danger of that damnation; it would be wisely done to take pains to
disbelieve it. But if their unbelief in such a case, instead of
making the danger less, only aggravates their guilt, and heightens
their danger, and puts them off from taking the properest methods
for avoiding it, the folly of such a conduct is very apparent. Chris
tianity professes to direct to a true and certain way, both of avoid
ing that future punishment, and of obtaining the greatest glory and
felicity that can possibly be proposed to the human mind. But if
these gentlemen will rather venture to expose themselves to that
future punishment, than endeavour to prevent it by a true repent
ance, and by abandoning their vicious courses; and if they will
choose rather to forfeit the hopes of everlasting happiness, than go
on in that uniform course of piety and virtue that leads to it ; there
is no remedy : they must take the consequences. But certainly the
bare possibility of the wrath to come is so dreadful a thing, that a
wise man would not run the hazard of it for a few transcient vicious
gratifications. For what one of their own admired authors says,
though in a sneering way, is a sober and momentous truth, and
what the reason of mankind cannot but approve, that " where there
is a hell on the other side, it is but natural prudence to take readily
to the safest side."J
I shall conclude this letter with taking notice of a proposal, made
by a deistical writer, for putting an end to the important controversy
* See two Letters from a Deist to his friend, p. 17. 19, cited by Dr. Waterland in
his preface to the first part of Script. Vind. ..
f Lord Bolingbroke's Letter on the Study and Use of History, vol. u. p. Ml.
X Christianity not founded on Argument, p. 88.

624 GENERAL REFLECTIONS ON Let. XXXV.
between the Christians and the deists. " If those learned gentle
men," says he, " that are the directors of others, will choose to give
up speculative principles, and an historical faith, and insist only on
that practice which will recommend men in every religion to the
favour of God, the good-will of men, and peace of their own con
science, and own, that the whole of the Christian religion, which is
worth contending for, are all relative and social virtues, then the
contention between the Christians and deists will drop."* So then
we see here upon what terms the deists are willing to be at peace
with the Christian divines. They must give up speculative princi
ples, and an historical faith. By an historical faith, in these gentle
men's language, must be understood faith in Jesus Christ, a belief
of what is related in the gospels concerning him, concerning his
person, ministry, miracles, sufferings, resurrection, ascension ; and
all this must be given up as of no consequence to mankind at all.
And speculative principles must also be abandoned. And what is
intended by these, and how far this demand is to extend, it is hard
to know. With some that call themselves deists, the most import
ant principles of natural religion, the belief of a providence, of the
immortality ofthe soul, and a state of future judgment and retri
bution, are looked upon to be needless speculations, and either de
nied, or treated as matters of doubtful disputation. But let us sup
pose that no stress is to be laid upon any doctrines or principles at
all, and that practice alone is to be insisted on, though some prin
ciples seem to lie at the foundation of a good and virtuous practice,
yet still it will be found no easy matter for the Christian and deist
to agree what that practice is which is to be regarded as necessary.
This writer would have the divines own, that '' the whole of the
Christian religion, which is worth contending for, are all relative
and social virtues." Here is not a word said ofthe duties of piety
and devotion, of love, reverence, adoration, submission, affiance, and
resignation towards the supreme Being, or of prayer, confession of
sins, thanksgiving, praise, and the outward acts of religious homage
which we owe to God. Yet this is an important part of our duty,
on which Christianity, and even right reason itself, teacheth us to
lay a great stress ; though it is treated by many among the deists as
a thing of small consequence. Nor is there any thing here said of
the duties of self-government, chastity, purity, humility, temperance,
and the due regulation of our appetites and passions. And when
this comes to be explained, there is likely to be a wide difference
between the Christians and deists, as to the particulars included in
this part of our duty. It is very probable, that these gentlemen will
plead for allowing much greater liberties, in indulging their sensual
appetites and passions, than is consistent with the morals of the
gospel, and with that purity of heart and life which Christianity re
quireth. And even as to relative and social virtues, in which this
author makes the whole of religion to consist, the deists have often
objected against that forgiveness of injuries, that charity and bene-
* Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 83.

Let. XXXV. THE DEISTICAL WRITERS. 625
volence, even towards our enemies themselves, that returning good
for evil, which the great author of our religion hath urged upon his
disciples, both by his doctrine and by his example. It is to be
feared, upon the whole, that they will be as far from agreeing to the
morals as to the doctrines of the gospel ; and that some of its laws
and practical precepts stand more in their way, and create greater
prejudices against it, than its mysteries themselves, though it is a
little more plausible and decent to put the reason of their rejecting
Christianity upon the latter than upon the former.
This may help us to judge, whether there be any just ground for
their pretences, as if the world were greatly obliged to them, for en
deavouring to take men off from useless speculations, and teaching
them to lay the whole stress upon practice. The last- mentioned
author concludes his treatise against the resurrection of Jesus with
declaring his hope, that it " will be of real service to religion, and
make men's practice better, when they shall find they have nothing
else to depend upon for happiness here and hereafter, but their own
personal righteousness, with their love of wisdom and truth.''* And
others of them have made the same boast, but very undeservedly.
For can the necessity of personal obedience and righteousness be
more expressly insisted upon than in the gospel of Jesus, or be
bound upon us by stronger and more sacred arguments? Do these
gentlemen pretend to teach more excellent morals than the Chris
tian religion does, or to carry piety, charity, benevolence, purity of
manners, and universal righteousness, to a nobler height, or to en
force the practice of it by more powerful and prevailing motives 1
Or, do they propose to make men's practice better, by leaving them
at large, without any express divine precepts determining the par
ticulars of their duty, and by taking away the glorious hopes and
promises of the gospel, which are designed to animate us to obe
dience, and the awful threatenings which are there denounced
against vice and wickedness ?
But enough has been said of these gentlemen and their pretences;
and I intended here, as a proper conclusion of this work, to have
given a summary representation of the principal arguments and evi
dences for the truth and divinity of the Christian revelation. But as
you will probably think this letter lo be already of sufficient length,
I choose to reserve it for the subject of my next.
I am yours, &c.
J. LELAND.

* Resurrection of Jesus considered, p. 82.

s s

G2G A SUMMARY OF THE Let. XXXVI.

LETTER XXXVI.
An extraordinary Revelation from God to Mankind possible to be given.— The Pro
priety and Usefulness of such a Revelation shown — Those to whom it is made
known indispensably obliged to embrace it. — The Marks and Evidences by which
we may be satisfied that such a Revelation is really given, viz. when the Revelation
itself is of an excellent Nature and Tendency, and when it is accompanied by the
most extraordinary Divine Attestations, especially Miracles and Prophecy — The
Proof from Miracles vindicated  Confession of some of; the Deists themselves to
this Purpose. — The Revelation contained in the Holy Scriptures confirmed by a
" Series of the most extraordinary Works, which manifestly argued a divine Interpo
sition. — The Nature of the Revelation itself considered. — Distinguished into three
Periods, under each of which the Religion, for Substance, the same. — First, The
Patriarchal Religion. — The Second relates to the Mosaical Dispensation — The
Third, which was the Perfection of all the rest, is the Christian Revelation. — The
God-like Character of its Author  The Nature and Tendency of the Religion itself
particularly considered, and shown to be worthy of God. — It could not be the Effect
either of Imposture or Enthusiasm, and therefore must be of divine Original. — The
Christian Scheme of the Mediator wise and excellent. — The Difficulties attending
it, no just Objection against Christianity. — The Conclusion.
Sir,
Having finished the account of the deistical writers, it will not
be improper to lay together some considerations, relating to the
reasons we have to believe that Christianity is a true revelation from
God, and that therefore they to whom it is published and made
known are under indispensable obligations to believe and embrace it.
With regard to revelation in general, the first thing that comes
to be considered, is the possibility of it. That God can, if he thinks
fit, make extraordinary discoveries of his will, and communicate
important truths to one or more men, to be by them communicated
to others in his name, cannot be denied with the least appearance of
reason. For upon what foundation can any man go, in pretending
that this is impossible? Is there any thing in it which implieth a
contradiction either to the nature of God or man ? This cannot be
pretended, nor has any man attempted to show that it involveth a
contradiction. Accordingly, the possibility of a revelation has been
generally acknowledged by those who believe the existence of God
and a providence, nor do I see how any man that acknowledgeth a
God and a providence can consistently deny it.
And 'as the possibility of God's making an extraordinary revela
tion of his will to mankind must be acknowledged, so the propriety
of it, or that it is worthy of God to grant such a revelation, suppos
ing, which hath been unanswerably proved to have been the case in
fact, mankind to have been sunk into a state of great darkness and
corruption in matters of religion and morals; and that if he should
grant such a revelation, for guiding men into the knowledge of im-

Let. XXXVI. EVIDENCES FOR CHRISTIANITY. 027
portant truths, or for enforcing their duty upon them, it would be a
signal instance of the divine wisdom and goodness, cannot be
reasonably contested. And indeed, this is no more than what some
of the deists themselves have thought fit to acknowledge. The
" Moral Philosopher" expressly owns it, and a remarkable passage
from Mr. Chubb to the same purpose was cited in my thirteenth
letter. It greatly strengthens this, when it is considered, that several
things there are of great importance to mankind to know, particularly
concerning the attributes and providence of God ; the most accept
able way of worshipping him ; the extent of the duty we owe him,
and the methods of his dealings towards his offending creatures ;
how far and upon what terms he will pardon their iniquities, and
receive them to his grace and favour; what rewards it will please
him to confer upon those that serve him in sincerity, though their
obedience is mixed with infirmities and defects; and what punish
ment he will inflict upon obstinate presumptuous transgressors : I
say, there are several things, with respect to these and such like
matters, which as they relate to things invisible, or things future,
and which depend upon God's most wise counsels, of which, if left
to ourselves, we cannot pretend to be competent judges, we could
not have a clear and full assurance of by the mere light of our own
unassisted reason. It seems evident therefore that mankind stood
in great need of an extraordinary revelation from God, and that this
would be of the most signal advantage. And though it cannot
without great rashness be pretended, that God is absolutely obliged
to give this advantage to any, or that, if he gives it to any, he is
obliged to give it equally to all men, since it is manifest in fact that
in the course of his providence much greater advantages are given
to some than to others, with respect to the means of religious and
moral improvement; yet it is reasonable to conclude, that he hath
not left all mankind at all times entirely destitute of an assistance
of such great consequence and so much wanted. This affordeth a
strong presumption, that God hath at some time or other made
discoveries of his will to mankind in a way of extraordinary 'revela
tion, additional to the common light of nature.
It is also manifest, that supposing such a revelation to have been
really given from God, and that men have sufficient evidence to
convince them that it was from God, those to whom this revelation
is made known, are indispensably obliged to receive and embrace it.
This every man must acknowledge, who hath just notions of the
Deity, or that God is the moral governor of the world, and hath a
right to give laws to his creatures, and to require obedience to those
laws. And it were the greatest absurdity to suppose, that men may
innocently reject what they have good reason to regard as the signi
fications of the divine will, made to them for this purpose, that they
should believe and obey tbem. i
These are principles which cannot justly be contested ; the grand
question then is, whether any sufficient proofs or evidences can be
produced, that such a revelation hath been really given, and what
S S iC

C28 A SUMMARY OF THE Let. XXXVL
those proofs and evidences are. Some there are who seem not will
ing to allow that any persons, but those to whom the revelation is
immediately made, can have sufficient evidence or proof to satisfy
them that it is a true revelation from God. This is what Lord
Herbert insisteth upon in his book " De Veritate," and in several
parts of his other works, where he makes it a necessary condition
of a man's having a certain knowledge of a divine revelation, that it
be made immediately to himself, and that he should feel a divine
afflatus in the reception of it. In this his Lordship has been followed
by other writers that have appeared in the same cause. According
to this scheme, it is vain for those that have received a revelation
from God to offer to produce any proofs of their divine mission, since
no proofs or evidences can be offered that will be sufficient, except
every one of those to whom they impart this have another particular
revelation to assure them of it. This is in effect to pronounce, that
supposing God to have communicated to any person or persons ex
traordinary discoveries of his will, to be by them communicated for
the use and instruction of mankind, it is absolutely out of his power
to furnish them with such credentials of their divine mission as may
make it reasonable for others to receive the doctrines and laws de
livered by such persons in Jiis name as of divine authority. But
such an assertion cannot be excused from great rashness and arro
gance, and is a most unwarrantable limitation of the divine power
and wisdom. It will indeed be readily allowed, that supposing per
sons to declare with ever so great confidence that they are extraor
dinarily sent of God, we are not to receive their bare word for a proof
of it; and though they themselves should be firmly persuaded of
the truth and divinity of the revelation made immediately to them,
this their persuasion is not a sufficient warrant for others to receive
that revelation as true and divine, except some farther proofs and
evidences are given. And it is reasonable to believe, that in that
case, if God hath sent persons, and extraordinarily inspired them
to deliver doctrines and laws of great importance to mankind in his
name, he will furnish them with such proofs and evidences as may
be a sufficient ground to those to whom this revelation is not imme
diately made, to receive those doctrines and laws as of divine au
thority. And here in judging of these, it must be acknowledged,
that great care and caution is necessary, since it cannot be denied
that there have been false pretences to revelation, the effects of en
thusiasm or imposture, which have given rise to impositions that
have been of ill consequence to mankind. And though that is not
a just reason for rejecting all revelation at once, as false or uncer
tain, yet it is a very good reason for making a very careful inquiry
into the evidences that are produced for any pretended revelation.
And with regard to this it may be observed, that where persons
pretending to bring a system of doctrines and laws, which they pro
fess to have received by revelation from God, have had (heir divine
mission confirmed by a series ofthe most extraordinary works, bear
ing the illustrious characters of a divine interposition, and which
they have been enabled to- perform in declared attestation of it ;

Let. XXXVI. evidences for Christianity. 029
especially, if they have been enabled also to make express predic
tions in the name of God, concerning things' future, which no hu
man sagacity could foresee ; and if at the same time the revelation
itself appeareth to be of a most excellent tendency, manifestly con
ducive to the glory of God, and to the good of mankind, and to the
promoting the interest of important truth, righteousness, and virtue
in the world, and thereby answering the main ends of all religion;
there seems in that case to be sufficient evidence to produce a reason
able conviction, that, this is a revelation from God, and consequently
to justify and demand our receiving and submitting to it as of divine
authority. For in this case, there seemeth to be as much evidence
given to satisfy an honest and impartial inquirer as could be reason
ably expected or desired, supposing a revelation really given. And
that this hath actually been the case with regard to the revelation
contained in the Holy Scriptures, the advocates for Christianity
have set themselves to show, with great force of reason and argu
ment. With regard to the external attestations given to the truth and
divinity of the Scripture-revelation, there is scarcely any thing in
which the deistical writers have been more generally agreed than
in bending their force against the proof from. miracles. The methods
they have taken to this purpose have been various : sometimes they
have gone so far as to pretend to prove, that miracles are absolutely
impossible ; at other times that they are needless and useless, and
are incapable of showing the divine mission of persons, or truth of
doctrines, because there is no connexion between power and truth.
But though it will be readily acknowledged, that power and truth
are distinct ideas, this does by no means prove, that the former can
in no case give attestation to the latter : for if power be exerted in
such a way as to manifest an extraordinary divine interposition in
favour of a person professing to bring doctrines and laws from God
to mankind, and be appealed to for that purpose, in such a case
power so exerted may give an attestation to the truth and authority
of those doctrines and laws. Some of the deists themselves are so
sensible of this, that, after all their pretences, they are obliged to
make acknowledgments with regard to the use of miracles that are
of no small disservice to their cause. They acknowledge that they
may be of use to excite and engage attention to doctrines and laws;
which supposes them to carry something in them of the nature of
an attestation or proof, since otherwise no more regard ought to be
paid to doctrines or laws on the account of miracles, than if they
were not attended with miracles at all. The Moral Philosopher
owns, that " miracles, especially if wrought for the good of man
kind, are perhaps the most effectual means of removing prejudices,
and procuring attention to what is delivered." Mr. Collins goes so
far as to acknowledge, that miracles, when done in proof of doctrines
* and precepts that are consistent with reason, and for the honour of
God and the good of mankind, ought to determine men to believe
-and receive them ; and that Christ's miracles might have been suf
ficient, if he had not appealed to prophecy, and laid the principal

630 A SUMMARY OF the Let. XXXVI.
stress of the proof of his divine mission upon it, as this writer pre
tends he did.* Mr. Woolston says, " I believe it will be granted on
all hands, that the restoring a person indisputably dead to life is a
stupendous miracle, and that two or three such miracles, well attested
and credibly reported, are enough to conciliate the belief, that the
author of them was a divine agent, and invested with the power of
God."t And Spinosa is said to have declared, that if he could be
lieve that the resurrection of Lazarus was really wrought as it is
related, he would give up his system.
That God can, if he thinketh fit, alter or suspend the course of
natural causes in particular instances, must be allowed by all who
acknowledge that he is the Lord of nature, and the Sovereign ofthe
universe. And that it may be agreeable to his wisdom to do so on
some extraordinary occasions, may appear from this consideration,
that such interpositions may be of use to awaken in men a sense of
a governing providence, and to convince them that the course of
nature is not a fatal series of blind necessary causes, but under the
regulation of a most wise and free, as well as powerful mind ; which,
as it hath very properly appointed that things should ordinarily go
on in an uniform course according to established laws, so it can
alter or over-rule, interrupt or suspend, the effect and influence of
natural causes, and deviate from the usual course of things on special
occasions for valuable purposes : and such a valuable purpose it .
would be for providence to interpose for giving rn illustrious attesta
tion to doctrines and laws of great importance to mankind, and to
the divine mission of persons sent to instruct them in religion, to re
cover them from great errors and corruptions, and guide them to a
true knowledge, obedience, and adoration of the deity, and to a
holy and virtuous practice. Extraordinary miraculous interposi
tions in such a case would answer an excellent end, and be worthy
of the divine wisdom and goodness. This seems to be a way of
God's giving his testimony the most powerful and striking that can
be, and which is peculiarly fitted for engaging mankind to receive
and submit to such a revelation as of divine authority. And thus it
was with regard to the miracles wrought at the first establishment
of the Jewish and Christian dispensations. There was not inerely
a single extraordinary event or two, in which case it might have
been supposed that it was only some strange thing that had hap
pened, of which no account can be given, and from which nothing
certain can be concluded ; but there was a marvellous succession and
concurrence ofthe most extraordinary facts, done in the most open
public manner, in a great number of instances, and for a series of
years together, all visibly tending to the same important end, viz.
to give attestation to the divine authority of a system of doctrines
and laws delivered in the name of God himself. And these facts
were of such a nature, so manifestly transcending all human power,
and which bore such evident marks of divine interposition, that,
¦* Scheme of Literal Prophecy, p. 321, 322.
f Fifth Discourse on Miracles, p. 3.

Let. XXXVI. EVIDENCES FOR CHRISTIANITY. 031
taken together, they form as strong an evidence as could be reason
ably expected and desired. And I believe few, if any, can be
found, who are really persuaded of the truth of those facts, and do
not also acknowledge the divine original and authority of the revela
tion thus attested and confirmed. And supposing such miraculous
attestations to have been really given, at the first promulgation and
establishment of a system of doctrines and laws, which is declared
to have come from God ; this is sufficient to establish its authority,
not only at that time, but to succeeding ages, provided that the
accounts of those doctrines and laws, and of the extraordinary facts
whereby they were attested, were faithfully transmitted, in a man
ner which may be safely depended upon. And that this has been
the case with regard to the Mosaic and Christian revelation, hath
been often clearly shown.
With regard to the former, never were there in the world facts of
a more public nature, than those by which the Mosaical law was
attested. They were not merely things done in a way of secret
intercourse and communication with the Deity, in which case there
might have been some suspicion of imposture, but they were facts
done openly in the view of all the people, who, let us suppose them
ever so stupid, could not possibly have been made to believe that
all these things happened in their own sight, and that they them
selves had been witnesses to them, if they had not been so. Nor
can it be supposed that Moses, who was certainly a wise man,
would have attempted so wild a thing as to have appealed to the
people, as he does all along, for the truth of those facts, and to have
put the authority of his laws upon them, if at the same time they
all knew them to be false. If therefore Moses published those facts
himself to all the people, the facts were true. And that he did him
self publish those facts, we have the same proof which we have
that he gave the laws. And that he gave the laws to the people of
Israel, as the whole nation who were governed by those laws have
constantly affirmed, no reasonable man can deny. The accounts
of the facts are so interwoven with the very body of the laws, that
they cannot be separated. Some of the principal motives to engage
the people to the observance of those laws are taken from those facts.
Many of the laws were peculiarly designed to preserve the remem
brance of those facts. And this was the professed end of the insti
tution of some of their most solemn sacred rites, which were to be
constantly observed by the whole nation, in every age from the be
ginning of their policy. These laws and facts were not transmitted
merely by oral tradition, which in many cases is a very uncertain
conveyance, but were immediately committed to, writing. And
those writings were not kept secret, in the hands of a few, but,
from the time they were first written, were published to the people,
who were commanded in the name of God to acquaint themselves
with those laws and facts, and to teach them diligently to then-
children, and were assured that, upon their preserving and keeping
them, their prosperity and happiness, public and private, and all
their privileges, depended. Accordingly, in all the remaining writ-

632 A SUMMARY OF the Let. XXXVI.
ings of that nation, whether of an historical, moral, or devotional
kind, there is a constant reference not only to the laws, as having
been originally given bv Moses in the name of God to their nation,
but to the wonderful facts that were done in attestation to those
laws, as of undoubted credit, and as things universally known and
acknowledged among them. If those facts had been only mentioned
in a few passages, it might possibly be pretended, that the accounts
of them were interpolations, afterwards inserted in these writings.
But as the case is circumstanced, there is no room for this pretence.
The facts are repeated and referred to on so many different occasions,
that it appears with the utmost evidence, that those facts have been
all along known and acknowledged, and the remembrance of them
constan'ly kept up among that people in all ages. Their peculiar
constitution, whereby they were so remarkably distinguished from
all other nations, was plainly founded upon the truth and authority
of those facts, nor could have been established without them.
To all which it may be added, that the very quality of the writ
ings which contain an account of those facts, or in which they are
referred to as of undoubted truth, derives no small credit to them.
A profound veneration for the Deity every where appears, together
with a remarkable unaffected simplicity and integrity, and an im
partial love of truth. It cannot reasonably be pretended, that they
were forged to humour and flatter their nation ; for with the utmost
freedom they jelate things greatly to the disadvantage of their
national character. They represent, impartially and without dis
guise, their frequent defections from their law, their disobedience
and ingratitude to God for all his benefits, and the great punish
ments inflicted upon them on that account. Besides which it is to
be observed, that there are in those writings clear and express pre
dictions of future extraordinary events, which no human sagacity
could foresee, and which yet have been most remarkably accom
plished. And particularly it is there most expressly foretold, that
the people of Israel, for whom God had done such great things,
should yet be distinguished with judgments and calamities above
all other nations ; that they should be dispersed all over the face of
the earth, exposed to universal obloquy, and yet not be utterly lost
or destroyed, but still preserved as a distinct people ; which we see
most signally verified at this day : a thing so wonderful, taken in
all its circumstances, that this people may be regarded as a living
continued monument of the truth of their own ancient sacred writ
ings, and of the extraordinary facts there recorded.
As to the extraordinary and miraculous facts whereby the divine
original and authority of the Christian revelation was attested and
confirmed, never were there any facts that had clearer and more
convincing evidence attending them. They were many in number,
done for the most part in the most public, manner, and for a series
of years together, and produced the most wonderful effects, in
bringing over vast numbers both of Jews and Gentiles, in the very
age in which the facts were done, and when they had the best
opportunity of knowing the truth of those facts, to receive a cruci-

Let. XXAVl. evidences for Christianity. C33
fied Jesus as their Saviour and their Lord, than which nothing
could me imagined more contrary to the prejudices which then
universally obtained. The accounts of these facts, as well as of the
pure and excellent laws and doctrines in attestation of which they
were wrought, were published in the very age in which these laws
were delivered, and those facts were done, and by persons who were
perfectly acquainted with the things they relate. And the facts
themselves were of such a nature, that they could not be deceived
in them themselves, supposing they had their senses. Nor had
they any temptation or interest to put them upon endeavouring to
impose upon others, by giving false accounts of those facts. For,
besides that the falsehood of those accounts must, as the case was
circumstanced, have been immediately detected and exposed, the
religion which was confirmed by those facts was in many things
directly contrary to those notions and prejudices with which their
own minds had been most strongly prepossessed, and which nothing
less than the undeniable evidence they had of those facts was able
to overcome. And it strengthens this when it is considered, that
this religion, instead of promising them any worldly advantages,
exposed them to the most cruel reproaches, persecutions, and suf
ferings, and to whatever is most grievious to human nature ; which
they endured with an amazing constancy, persisting in their testi
mony, even to death. To which it may be added, that if we
examine the writings themselves, we shall find in them all the cha
racters of genuine purity, integrity, undisguised simplicity, and an
impartial regard to truth, that any writings can possibly have.
And the whole scheme of religion there laid down is uniformly
directed to the glory of God, and the good of mankind, and to serve
the cause of virtue and righteousness in the world. Accordingly,
these writings were immediately received with great veneration in
the very age in which they were first written and published, and
from that time regarded as of undoubted truth and of divine
authority, They were soon spread far and wide, read in the public
religious assemblies of Christians, translated into various languages,
and they have been constantly cited by great numbers of writers in
every age since, whose works are still extant, many of whom have
not only quoted particular passages, but have transcribed large por
tions of them into their writings, by which it incontestably appears,
that they were the same, both with regard to the accounts of doc
trines and facts, that are now in our hands. They have been on
numberless occasions appealed to by persons of different sects, par
ties, and opinions in religion ; so that it would not have been in the
power of any party of men, if they had been so disposed, to have
destroyed or corrupted all the copies, or to have made a general
alteration in the scheme of religion there taught, or in the accounts
of the facts there recorded. And it is evident, in fact, that no such
alterations have been made, since religion there appeareth in its
primitive simplicity, as it was in the first age of the Christian
church, without any of the corruptions of latter ages. And, upon
the whole, it may upon good grounds be affirmed, that the proofs

634 A SUMMARY OF the Let. XXXVI.
which are brought to shew that the Scriptures are safely transmitted
to us are greater than can be produced for any other books in the
world. This hath been often fully vindicated, and set in so clear a
light, that the enemies of Christianity have had no other way of
avoiding the evidence, but by most absurdly flying out (as hath
been observed before) into invectives against all historical evidence,
and against the credit of all past facts whatsoever. It may, there
fore, be justly said, that no greater evidence of the truth of the
extraordinary facts wherehy Christianity was attested, can reason
ably be desired, except all these stupendous facts were to be done
over again for our conviction. And if one man thinks he may
justly demand this, another man hath an equal right to demand it,
and so every man may demand it. And those facts must be
repeated in every age, in every nation, and in the sight of every
single person, which would be the most absurd and unreasonable
thing in the world, and the most unworthy of the divine wisdom.
This may suffice with regard to the extraordinary attestations
given to the revelation contained in the Holy Scriptures of the Old
and New Testament, and which exhibit illustrious convincing
proofs of its divine original. It will be proper next to consider the
nature and excellence of the revelation itself, with the scheme of
religion there delivered to us; and, it will appear, upon the most
impartial examination, to be worthy of God, of a most admirable
tendency, and well fitted to answer the important ends for which
we might suppose a revelation to have been given to mankind.
That we may have a juster notion of the religion held forth to us
in the Holy Scriptures, it is proper to take a brief view of it from
the beginning. The sacred volume opens with that which lies at
the foundation of religion, an account of God's having created the
world, which is there described in a plain and familiar manner,
accommodated to the capacities of the people, and with a noble sim
plicity ; as is also the original formation of man, who is represented
as having been formed afterthe divine image, invested with a
dominion over the inferior creation, with a reservation of the homage
he himself owed to God as his sovereign Lord, and constituted in a
paradisaical state, a' happy state of purity and innocence. There
is nothing in this but what is agreeable to right reason, as well as
to the most ancient traditions that have obtained among the
nations. We are farther there informed, that man fell from that
state by sinning against his Maker; and that sin brought death
into the world, and all the evils and miseries to which the human
race is now obnoxious : but that the merciful Parent of our being,
in his great goodness and compassion, was pleased to make such
revelations and discoveries of his grace and mercy, as laid a proper
foundation for the faith and hope of his offending creatures, and
for the exercise of religion towards him. Accordingly, the relio-ion
delivered in the Scripture is the religion of man in his lapsed state ;
and any one that impartially and carefully considers it, will find one
scheme of religion, substantially the same, carried all along through

Let. XXXVI. evidences for Christianity. 035
the whole, till it was brought to its full perfection and accomplish
ment by Jesus Christ.
This religion may be considered principally under three periods.
The first is the religion of the patriarchal times, which consisted in
the pure adoration of the Deity, free from idolatry, in a firm belief
of his universal and particular providence, a hope of his pardoning
mercy towards penitent sinners, aud a confiding in him as the great
rewarder of them that diligently seek him : which reward they
looked for, not merely in this present world, but in a future state :
for we are told, that they sought a better country, that is an heavenly.
These were the main principles of their religion, together with a
strong sense of their obligation to the practice of piety, virtue, and
universal righteousness. To which it may be added, that there
seems to have been a hope and expectation from the beginning,
originally founded on a divine promise, of a great Saviour, who
was to redeem mankind from the miseries and ruin to which they
were exposed, and through whom God was to make the fullest dis
coveries and exhibitions of his grace and mercy towards the human
race, and to raise them to a high degree of glory and felicity. As to
the external rites of religion then made use of, the most ancient rite
of which we have any account, is that of offering sacrifice to God :
and its having so early and universally obtained among all nations,
and in the most ancient times, as a sacred rite of religion, can
scarcely be otherwise accounted for, than by supposing it to have
been a part of the primitive religion, originally enjoined by divine
appointment to the first ancestors of the human race, and from
them transmitted to their descendants. This patriarchal religion,
as it has been described, seems to have been the religion of Adam
after his fall, of Abel, Seth, Enoch, and the antediluvian patriarchs;
and afterwards of Noah, the second parent of mankind, and of the
several heads of families derived from him, who probably carried it
into their several dispersions. But, above all, this religion was
signally exemplified in Abraham, who was illustrious for his faith,
piety, and righteousness, and whom God was pleased to favour with
special discoveries of his will. From him descended many great
nations, among whom. this religion, in its main principles, seems to
have been preserved, of which there are noble remains in the book
of Job. There were also remarkable vestiges of it for a long time
preserved among several other nations ; and, indeed, the belief of
one supreme God, of a providence, a hope of pardoning mercy, a
sense of the obligations of piety and virtue, and of the acceptance
and reward of sincere obedience, and the expectation of a future
state, were never entirely extinguished. And whosoever among the
Gentiles at any time, or" in any nation, was a fearer of God, and a
worker of righteousness, might be justly regarded as of the ancient
patriarchal religion, and was favourably accepted with God, But
in process of time, the nations became generally depraved, sunk
into a deplorable darkness and corruption, and the great principles
of religion were in a great measure covered and overwhelmed with

636 A SUMMARY OF THE Let. XXXVI.
an amazing load of superstitions, idolatries, and corruptions of all
kinds. The second view of religion, as set before us in the Scriptures, is,
that which relates to the Mosaical dispensation. This was really
and essentially the same religion, for substance, which was pro
fessed and practised in the ancient patriarchal times, with the addi
tion of a special covenant made with a particular people, among
whom God was pleased, for wise ends, to erect a sacred polity, and
to whom he gave a revelation of his will, which was committed to
writing as the safest conveyance ; whereas religion had been
hitherto preserved chiefly by tradition, which was more easily main
tained during the long lives of men in the first ages. The special
covenant was no ways inconsistent with God's universal providence
and goodness towards mankind ; nor did it in any degree vacate or
infringe the ancient primitive religion which had obtained from the
beginning, but was designed to be subservient to the great, ends of
it, and to preserve it from being utterly depraved and extinguished.
The principal end of that polity, and the main view to which it was
all directed, was to restore and preserve the true worship and adora
tion of the one living and true God, and of him only, in opposition
to that polytheism and idolatry which began then to spread gener
ally through the nations ; and to engage those to whom it was
made known, to the practice of piety, virtue, and righteousness, by
giving them holy and excellent laws, expressly prescribing the par
ticulars of their duty, and enforced by tbe sanctions of a divine
authority, and by promises and threatenings in the name of God.
And also to keep up the hope and expectation of the Redeemer,
who had been promised from the beginning, and to prepare men for
that most perfect and complete dispensation of religion, which he
was to introduce. And whosoever impartially examines that con
stitution must be obliged to acknowledge, that it was admirably
fitted to answer these important ends. The laws of Moses, and the
sacred writings of the Old Testament, teach us to form the justest
and noblest notions of God, as having created all things by his
power, as preserving and governing all things by his providence, as
possessed of all possible perfections ; infinitely powerful, wise and
good, holy, just, and true, a lover of righteousness, a hater of sin
and wickedness; omnipresent, omniscient; to whom we owe the
highest love, the profoundest reverence, the most absolute submis
sion and resignation, and the most steady dependence. There is a
strain of unequalled piety every where running through those sacred
writings. We are there taught to refer all to God, to do every thing
we do as in his presence, and in a subordination to his glory. We
have there also excellent precepts given us with regard to the
duties we owe to our fellow-creatures. All social duties may be
regarded as comprehended in that admirable precept of the law
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. A just, a kind, and bene
volent conduct is prescribed, and not only are all injurious actions
forbidden in the strongest manner, but even all inordinate desires
and coverings after what belongeth to others, which lie at the foun-

Let. XXXVI. evidences for Christianity. 637
dation of all the injustice men are guilty of towards their neigh
bours. The ten commandments, which contain a comprehensive
summary of the moral precepts, were, that they might make the
greater impression, delivered with the greatest majesty and solem
nity that can be conceived. There was indeed a variety of ritual
injunctions prescribed under that constitution, the reasons of all
which cannot be clearly assigned at this distance. But some of
them were manifestly intended in opposition to the rites of the
neighbouring nations, and with a view to preserve them as a dis
tinct people, and keep them free from the infections of their idola
tries. Others of their rites were instituted to keep up the memo
rials of the signal and extraordinary acts of divine providence
towards them, especially those by which their law had been con
firmed and established. And some of them seem to have been
originally designed as types and prefigu rations of good things to
come, under that more perfect dispensation which was to succeed.
The rite of sacrificing, which had been in use from the most ancient
times, and began to be greatly perverted and abused among the
nations, was brought under distinct regulations, and only to be
performed to the honour of the one true God, the great Creator
and Lord of the universe. Polytheism and the worship of inferior
deities were forbidden ; no obscene or filthy rites, no unnatural
rigours or austerities, no human sacrifices or cruel oblations, made a
part of their religion, as among- many other nations. And the
absolute necessity of virtue and righteousness, in order to their
acceptance with God, was strongly inculcated, and on this they
were directed to lay the principal stress, and not merely on external
rites or forms. This constitution is represented as having been
introduced and established with the most amazing demonstrations
and displays of God's supreme dominion and glorious majesty, and
with a visible triumph over idolatry in its proper seat (for so Egypt
and Canaan may be looked upon to have been), and with the most
awful manifestations of God's just displeasure against those abomi
nable vices as well as idolatries, which were then making a great
progress in the world, and of which the Canaanites were remark
ably guilty.
What is especially observable is, that under that constitution
there was a succession of prophets, who were sent to reclaim the
people from the idolatries and corruptions into which they had
fallen, and to enforce upon them the practice of real religion and
righteousness. Their writings every where abound with the sub
limest descriptions and representations of the Deity ; they discover
a pure and ardent zeal for the glory of God, a noble impartial detes
tation against vice and wickedness, and a deep and earnest concern
for promoting the interests of substantial piety and virtue, and
taking men off from a too great dependence on outward forms and
ritual observances. And what is peculiarly remarkable, they con
tain the most illustrious predictions of future events, many of them
clear, express, and circumstantial, relating to nations, both of then-
own and others, and to particular persons. Some of which events

638 A SUMMARY OF THE Let. XXXVI.
were to take place in their own times, or soon after, and were most
remarkably fulfilled ; and others were removed to the distance of
several ages from the time in which those prophets lived and uttered
their predictions, and though absolutely beyond the reach of any
human sagacity to foresee, bave also received their accomplishment.
This shews that they were extraordinarily inspired by Him who
alone can foretel future contingencies; and their prophecies gave a
farther proof and attestation to the divine original of the Mosaic
constitution, since they were designed to engage the people to the
observance of the excellent laws that had been given them ; and
they were also intended to prepare them for expecting a more glo
rious dispensation, to be brought by a person of unparalleled dig
nity, whose coming they foretold, and whom they described by the
most remarkable characters. Some of these prophets described him
by one part of his office and undertaking, and some by another.
They pointed to the tribe and family from which he was to spring,
the time of his appearance, the place of his birth, the miracles he
should perform, the exemplary holiness of his life, his great wisdom
and excellence as a teacher; they spoke in the highest terms of his
divine dignity, and yet foretold that he was to undergo the most
grievous humiliations and bitter sufferings for the sins of men ;
they testified not only his sufferings, but the glories that should
follow; his wonderful exaltation, and the kingdom of righteousness
and truth which he was to erect and establish ; that the Jews
would generally reject him, and that the Gentiles should receive his
law, and be sharers of the benefits of his kingdom.
Accordingly the third period relates to that dispensation of religion
which was brought by that glorious and divine person whom the
prophets had foretold. This is properly the Christian dispensation,
which was designed and fitted for an universal extent, arid in which,
considered in its original purity, religion is brought to its highest
perfection and noblest improvement. An admirable wisdom, good
ness, and purity, shone forth in the whole conduct and character of
the great author of it. He came in the fulness of time, the time
which had been pointed out in the prophetical writings. In him
the several predictions relating to the extraordinary person that was
to come were fulfilled, and the several characters by which he was
described were wonderfully united, and in no other. He appeared,
as was foretold concerning him, mean in his outward condition and
circumstances, and yet maintained in his whole conduct a dignity
becoming his divine character. Many of his miracles were of such
a kind, and performed in such a manner, as seemed to argue a
dominion over nature, and its established laws, and they were acts
of great goodness as well as power. He went about doing good to
the bodies and to the souls of men; and the admirable instructions
he gave were delivered with a divine authority, and yet with great
familiarity and condescension. And his own practice was every
way suited to the excellence of his precepts. He exhibited the most
finished pattern of universal holiness, of love to God, of zeal for the
divine glory, of the most wonderful charity and benevolence towards

Let. XXXVI. EVIDENCES FOR CHRISTIANITY. 63!)
mankind, of the most unparalleled self-denial, of the most heavenly
mind and life, of meekness and patience, humility and condescension.
Never was there so perfect a character, so god-like, venerable, and
amiable, so remote from that of an enthusiast or an impostor. He
himself most expressly foretold his own sufferings, the cruel and
ignominious death he was to undergo, his resurrection from the
dead on the third day, his ascension into heaven, the dreadful judg
ments and calamities that should be inflicted on the Jewish nation,
and what seemed the most improbable thing in the world, the
wonderful progress of his own gospel from the smallest beginnings,
notwithstanding the persecutions and difficulties he foretold it should
meet with. All this was most exactly fulfilled; he rose again on
the third day, and showed himself alive to his disciples after his
passion by many infallible proofs, when their hopes were so sunk,
that they could hardly believe that he was risen, till they could
no longer doubt of it, without renouncing the testimony of all their
senses. He gave them commission to go and preach his gospel to
all nations ; and promised that, to enable them to do it with success,
they should be endued with the most extraordinary powers and
gifts of the Holy Ghost. This accordingly they did, and though
destitute of all worldly advantages, without power, riches, interest,
policy, learning, or eloquence, they went through the world, preach
ing up a crucified Jesus, as the Saviour and Lord of men, and teach
ing the things which he had commanded them ; and by the
wonderful powers which they were invested with, and the evidences
they produced of their divine mission, they prevailed, and spread
the religion of Jesus, as their great Master had foretold, in the mid";t
of sufferings and persecutions, and in opposition to the reigning
inveterate prejudices both of Jews and Gentiles.
If we examine the nature and tendency of the religion itself,
which was taught by Christ, and by the apostles in his name, we
shall find it to be worthy of God. It retaineth all the excellencies
of the Old Testament revelation ; for our Saviour came not to destroy
the law and the prophets, but to fulfil them, and carry the scheme
of religion there laid down to a still higher degree of excellence.
The idea given us of God, of his incomparable perfections, and his
governing providence, as extending to all his creatures, particularly
towards mankind, is the noblest that can be conceived, and the most
proper to produce worthy affections and dispositions towards him.
Great care is especially taken to instruct us to form just notions
of God's illustrious moral excellencies, of his wisdom, his faithful
ness, and truth, his impartial justice, and righteousness, and spotless
purity ; but, above all, of his goodness and love to mankind, of which
the gospel contains and exhibits the most glorious and attractive
discoveries and displays that were ever made to the world. The
¦exceeding riches of the divine grace and mercy are repre
sented in the most engaging manner. Pardon and salvation
are freely offered upon the most gracious terms ; the very chief of
sinners are invited, and the strongest possible assurances given of
God's readiness to receive them, upon their sincere repentance and

640 A SUMMARY of the £Let. XXXVI.
reformation ; and at the same time, to prevent an abuse of this, the
most striking representations are made of God's just wrath and dis
pleasure against those that obstinately go on in presumptuous sin
and disobedience. It is especially the glory of the gospel, that the
great realities of an unseen eternal world are there set in the most
clear and open light ; there are clearer discoveries made, and -far
stronger assurances given, of that future life and immortality, than
were ever given to mankind before.
As to the precepts of Christianity, they are unquestionably holy
and excellent. The purest morality is taught in all its just and
noble extent, as taking in the whole of our duty towards God, our
neighbours, and ourselves.
As to piety towards God, the idea there given of it is venerable,
amiable, and engaging; we are required to fear God, but it is not
with a servile horror, such as superstition inspires, but with a filial
reverence. We are directed and encouraged to address ourselves to
him as our heavenly Father, through Jesus Christ, the Son of his
love, and in his name to offer up our prayers and praises, our con
fessions and thanksgivings, with the profoundest humility, becoming
creatures deeply sensible of their own unworthiness, and yet with an
ingenuous affiance, hope, and joy. We are to yield the most unre
served submission to God as our sovereign Lord, our most wise and
righteous Governor, and most gracious Benefactor ; to resign our
selves to his dispbsal, and acquiesce in his providential dispensations,
as being persuaded that he ordereth all things really for the best ;
to walk continually as in his sight, and with a regard to his appro
bation, setting him before us as our great all-seeing witness and
judge, our chiefest good and highest end. Above all we are re
quired to love the Lord our God with all our heart, and mind, and
strength, and to show that we love him, by keeping his command
ments, by aspiring after a conformity to him in his imitable perfec
tions, and by endeavouring, as fur as we are able, to glorify him in
the world. As to the external worship of God, according to the
idea given of it in the New Testament, it is pure and spiritual, and
hath a noble simplicity in it. The numerous rites of the Mosaical
dispensation, which, though wisely suited to that time and state,
were marks ofthe imperfection of that economy, are now abolished.
The ordinances of Christianity, as prescribed in the gospel, are few
in number, easy of observance, and noble in their use and signifi-
cancy. Not only doth Christianity give the most excellent directions as
to the duty we more immediately owe to God, but a mighty stress
is there laid upon social duties and social virtues, which it hath a
manifest tendency to promote and improve. The constant exercise
of justice, and righteousness, and fidelity, is most expressly enjoined ;
the rendering to all their dues, and a diligent discharge of the duties
of our several stations and relations, is bound upon us, not merely
by civil considerations, but as a necessary part of religion. But
what ought especially to recommend Christianity is, that a true and
extensive benevolence is there carried to the noblest heights ; it

Let. XXXVI. evidences for Christianity. G41
strengthens the natural ties of humanity, and adds other sacred and
most engaging ties to bind us still more strongly to another. We are
taught to love our neighbours as ourselves, to rejoice in their happi
ness, and endeavour to promote it, to do good to all as far as we have
opportunity; yea, even to extend our benevolence toour enemies them
selves, and to those that have injured us ; and to be ready to render
good for evil, and overcome evil with good. It tends to discoun
tenance and suppress that malice and envy, hatred and revenge,
those boisterous angry passions, and malevolent affections and dis
positions, which have done so much mischief in the world.
As to the exercise of self-government, Christianity is manifestly
designed to improve and perfect human nature. It teaches us not
only to regulate the outward actions, but the inward affections and
dispositions of the soul ; to labour after real purity of heart, simpli
city and godly sincerity, as that without which no outward appear
ances can be pleasing in the sight of God. It strikes at the root of
all our disorders and corruptions, by obliging us to correct and regu
late that inordinate self-love, which causeth us to centre all our views
in ourselves, in our own pleasure, or glory, or interest, and by instruct
ing- us to mortify and subdue our sensual appetites and inclinations.
It is designed to assert the dominion of the rational and moral
powers over the inferior part of our nature, of the spirit over the
flesh, which alone can lay a just foundation for that moral liberty,
and that tranquillity of mind, which it is the design of all true phi
losophy to procure and establish. And whereas a too great love of
the world, and its enjoyments, its riches, honours, or pleasures, is
the source of numberless disorders in human life, and turns us astray
in our whole course, it teacheth us to rectify our false opinions of
these things, and not to seek happiness in them, but to set our
affections principally on things of a far higher and nobler nature,
things celestial and eternal. And with regard to the evils of this
present life and world, it tendeth to inspire us with the noblest for
titude, and to render us superior to those evils, as being persuaded
that God will cause them to work together for our good, and will
over-rule them to our greater happiness. It provideth the best
remedy both against our cares and fears, especially against the fear
of death itself.
All that are acquainted with the New Testament know, that this
is a true though imperfect representation of the nature and tendency
of the religion of Jesus ; nor need I point to the particular passages
that prove it. Indeed the excellence of the morals there prescribed
is so evident, that the enemies of Christianity have been obliged to
pretend that its precepts are carried to a too great degree of strict
ness, impracticable to human nature in its present state. But not
to urge, that the rule set before us ought to be perfect, and that
though perhaps none of us can in every instance fully come up to it,
yet it tendeth to inspire a laudable ambition, and to put us upon a
constant endeavour of going on towards perfection, that we may
approach still nearer to the prescribed pattern of excellence ; not to
urge this, it deserveth special observation, that though morality is
T T

642 A SUMMARY OF THE Let. XXXVI.
carried by our Saviour both in his precepts and example to the
height of purity and excellence, yet it is not, under pretence of ex
traordinary refinement, carried to unwarrantable extremes. It is not
required of us to extinguish the passions, as the Stoics pretended to
do, but to govern and moderate them, and keep them within proper
bounds. Christianity doth not prescribe an unfeeling apathy, or
pretend to render us insensible to the evils of this present life : but
directeth us to bear up under them with patience and constancy,
supported by the considerations of reason and religion, and encou
raged by the glorious prospects that are before us. We are taught
to deny ourselves ; but the intention is only that we should subject
our inferior appetites to the noble part of our natures, and that the
pleasures and interests of the flesh and the world should be made to
give way to interests of a higher nature, to the duty we owe to God,
and to the love of truth, virtue, and righteousness, whenever they
happen to come into competition. We are required not to make
provision "for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof; but we are not
urged to macerate our bodies with excessive rigours and austerities,
or to chastise them with bloody discipline. We are to be heavenly-
minded, and to set our affections upon the things which are above ;
but so as not to neglect the duties, businesses, and offices of human
life ; an attendance to which is expressly required of us in the
gospel law. We are not commanded absolutely to quit the world ;
but, which is a much nobler attainment, to live above the world,
whilst we are in it, and to keep ourselves free from its pollutions ;
not wholly to renounce our present enjoyments, but to be moderate
in the use of them, and so to use this world as not to abuse it. All
drunkenness and gluttony and excesses of riot are forbidden, and
we are required to exercise a regular sobriety and temperance in our
food; but we are not commanded to abstain from divers kinds of
meats, and are taught that every creature of God is good, and
nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving, for it is
sanctified by the word of God and prayer. It is required of us, that
we may be chaste and pure, keeping our vessels clean in sanctifica
tion and honour, and not in the lusts of concupiscence ; and yet an
undue stress is not laid upon virginity or celibacy, as was too much
done in after ages, but marriage is declared to be " honourable in all,
and the bed undefiled." Polygamy, which was formerly in some
measure tolerated, is no longer so under the perfect institution of
our Saviour. And the gospel precepts in this respect, though ex
claimed against as harsh and severe, are really most agreeable to
the original intention of marriage, and the balance maintained by
providence between the sexes. The Christian people are directed
to pay a due reverence to their pastors, and to esteem them very
highly in love for their work's sake ; but they are not commanded
to yield a blind submission to them ; and their pastors are forbidden
to act as lords over God's heritage, or as having dominion over their
faith, but as helpers qf their joy. And finally it is evident, that in
the whole scheme of the Christian religion, as taught by Christ and
his Apostles, there is not the least trace to be found of worldly

Let. XXXVI. evidences for Christianity. 043
ambition, avarice, or sensuality. Virtue is there placed on the best
and most solid foundations ; our duties are urged upon us in their
proper order, they are traced from their true source, and directed to
their proper end. We are taught to aspire continually to higher
degrees of holiness and virtue, and not to take up with a meaner
felicity than that which ariseth from a perfect conformity to God
himself, and the eternal enjoyment of him. In one word, Christian
morality, or the duty required of us, is summed up by our great
heavenly teacher, in love, love to God, and charity towards mankind,
accompanied with real purity of heart and life. And all this is to
be attended with an amiable humility. We must abound in good
works, but not glory in them ; when we have done our best, and
aspired to the noblest attainments that we are capable of in this
present state, all vain-glorious boasting, all confidence in our own
righteousness or merits, is excluded. On God and his grace we
must place our dependence, and to this ascribe the glory.
What a lovely idea is here set before us of moral excellence !
And as the gospel precepts are so pure, prescribing our duty in its
proper extent, so the strength and power of the motives there pro
posed, if duly attended to, will be found answerable to the purity of
the precepts. And in this all the moral systems that natural reli
gion or philosophy can furnish, are very deficient. Our duty is
bound upon us in the holy Scripture, by the express authority and
command of God himself, which must needs give a mighty weight
to the precepts and directions there prescribed. All the charms of
the divine goodness, grace, and love, are represented to our view, to
lead us to repentance and holy obedience. The most perfect models
are set before us : God himself is exhibited to our imitation, as the
great original of moral goodness and excellence ; and the example
of his well-beloved Son, who was the living image of his own love,
goodness, and purity here below. Good men are honoured with the
most glorious characters, and are invested with the most valuable
privileges, that they may be excited and engaged to walk worthy of
those characters and privileges, and of the high calling wherewith
they are called. And for our greater encouragement, the most ex
press assurances are given us of God's readiness to communicate
the gracious influences of his Holy Spirit ; not to render our own
endeavours needless, but to assist and animate our "sincere endea
vours. The important solemnities of a future judgment are dis
played before us in the most striking manner, when every man must
give an account of himself to God, and must receive according to
the things done in his body, whether good or evil. Nothing Can
possibly be more noble and more engaging than the idea that is
there given us of a glorious resurrection, and of that eternal life
which is prepared for good men in the heavenly world, which is re
presented to us not merely as a paradise of sensual delights, but as
a pure and sublime felicity, fitted to animate the most virtuous and
excellent minds. And on the other hand, the punishments that
shall be inflicted on the obstinately impenitent ariddisobedient, are
represented in such a manner as is most proper to awaken and deter
1 t t 2

644 a summary of the Let. XXXVI.
presumptuous sinners, who will not be wrought upon by the beauty
and excellence of virtue, and the charms of divine love and good
ness. Any man that impartially considers these things, if he be really
and in good earnest a friend to virtue and to mankind, would be
apt to wish the Christian revelation true, and to acknowledge the
great advantage of it where it is heartily believed and embraced.
For, must it not be a mighty advantage to have the great principles
of religion, which are of such vast importance to our happiness, con
firmed by the testimony of God himself? — to have our duty urged
upon us in his name, and plainly set before us in express precepts,
which must needs come with a far superior force, considered as
enjoined by a divine authority, than as the dictates of philosophers
or moralists ? — to have the most explicit declarations made to us in
the name of God himself, concerning the terms upon which forgive
ness is to be obtained, and concerning the extent of that forgive
ness, with respect to which many anxious jealousies and fears
might otherwise be apt to arise in our hearts ? And finally, to be
assured by express revelation from God, of the nature, greatness,
and eternal duration of that reward, with which he will crown our
sincere though imperfect obedience : a reward far transcending not
only our deserts, but even all that we could expect, or were able to
conceive !
And now, upon reviewing this scheme of religion, which is un
doubtedly tbe scheme of Christianity, as set before us in the New
Testament, it is a reflection that naturally offereth itself, that, sup
posing God had thought fit to make an extraordinary revelation of
his will to mankind, it can scarcely be conceived that it could be fuller
of goodness and purity, that it could contain more excellent pre
cepts, or set before us a more perfect model and example, or be en
forced by more powerful motives, or be directed to nobler ends.
Could such a scheme of religion as hath been mentioned, be the
product either of imposture or enthusiasm 1 Its whole nature, de
sign, and tendency, manifestly show, that it could not be the work
of impostors ; especially of impostors so wicked, as to forge a series
ofthe most extraordinary facts; not merely a single imposture, but
.a chain of impostures, and solemnly attest them in the name of .God
himself, when they themselves knew them to be absolutely false.
There is nothing in the whole contexture of this religion that
savours of .private selfish interests, or carnal views, or worldly
policy. And is it consistent with the character of impostors,
without any regard to their own worldly advantage, to expose
themselves to all manner of sufferings, reproaches, and persecu
tions, and even to death itself, for publishing a scheme of pure
religion, piety, and righteousness, merely from a desire of pro
moting the glory of God, and the good of mankind ? To which
may be added, that the persons who, we know, first published
this religion to the world, were absolutely incapable of invent
ing such an admirable scheme of religion as Christianity is. If
they could have entertained a design of putting a religion of their

Let. XXXVI. EVIDENCES FOR CHRISTIANITY. 645
own invention upon the world, it must have been, considering their
notions and prejudices, very different in many things from that
which is taught in the New Testament. Nor could they have had
it in their power, if they had been willing, to have imposed such a
series of facts in that age, many of them represented to be of a very
public nature, if they had been false. And it is equally absurd to
suppose this religion to have been the product of enthusiasm, as of
imposture. Could enthusiasts produce such a beautiful and regu
lar scheme, so consistent in all its parts, exhibiting such just and
noble ideas of God and of religion, such a perfect rule of duty, in
which moral excellence is raised to the highest degree of purity,
without running to extremes, and is enforced by such engaging
motives, so admirably fitted to the excellence of the precepts ?
Surely this, which is so vastly superior to any scheme of religion or
morals taught by the most wise and learned philosophers and moral
ists, could not be the work of enthusiasts, especially of such frantic
enthusiasts as they must have been, if they really believed that the
wonderful facts recorded in the gospels were done before; there eyes,
and that they themselves were endued with such extraordinary gifts
of the Holy Ghost, and performed the most stupendous miracles,
when there was no such thing. And since the gospel scheme of
religion was neither the product of enthusiasm nor of imposture, it
was not of human invention ; and as it cannot be supposed to have
had its rise from evil beings, superior to man, who would never
lend their assistance to enforce and establish such an excellent
scheme of religion, virtue, and righteousness, it followeth that the
account given by the first publishers of it was true, and that they
received it, as they themselves declared, by revelation, from. God*
himself. Upon the whole, taking all these things together, there seems to>.
be as much evidence of the truth and divinity of the Scripture reve
lation, as could be reasonably expected and desired, supposing a
revelation really given-. For on the one hand, it hath the most ex
cellent internal characters of truth and goodness in its nature and
tendency, whereby it appeareth to be worthy of God, pure, holy,
and heavenly, admirably calculated to promote the glory of God,
and the good of mankind, and the cause of righteousness and virtue
in the world, and to prepare men by a life of holy obedience on earth
for the eternal enjoyment of God in heaven. On the other hand,
it was accompanied with the most illustrious external attestations,
such as carried the manifest proofs of a divine interposition, and
which it cannot reasonably be supposed God would ever give, or
permit to be given, to an imposture1.
As to the Christian scheme of a Mediator, the prejudices which
some have been apt to entertain against Christianity on that account,
seem principally to have arisen from misapprehensions or misrepre
sentations of that doctrine. It has been represented, as if the
notion of a mediator between God and man, supposed the supreme
Being, the Father of the universe, to be in himself implacable and
inexorable, and to have had no thoughts of mercy or pity towards

646 a summary of the Let. XXXVI.
sinners of the human race, till he was prevailed upon, contrary to
his own inclinations, by the solicitations of a powerful Mediator.
But this is not the idea of the Mediator given us in the holy Scrip
tures. On the contrary, the very appointment of the Mediator is
there represented as wholly owing to the free and sovereign grace
and goodness of God, the Father of all, who being full of love and
compassion, arid determined to show mercy towards his guilty crea
tures, fixed upon this way of doing it, by sending his own Son into
the world to recover them from their guilt, corruption, and misery,
to holiness and happiness.
In what method it may please God to transact with guilty crea
tures, who have offended him by their transgressions and disobedi
ence, and to dispense his acts of grace and favour towards them, wd
cannot take upon us certainly to determine, except he should please
to reveal it. This dependeth upon what seemeth most becoming
his own glorious majesty, and most meet to his infinite wisdom, for
answering the great ends and reasons of his government ; of which
we cannot pretend, if left to ourselves, to be competent judges. But
the making use of a Mediator in the way the gospel informeth us,
through whom his benefits are conferred upon us, and in whose
name our prayers and services are offered to his acceptance, seemeth
to be admirably fitted for preserving the dignity of his supreme au
thority and government, and an awful sense and veneration of his
infinite majesty and greatness, his righteousness and purity, in the
minds of his creatures, together with an humbling sense and con
viction of their own guilt and unworthiness, and the great evil of
their sins and transgressions ; and at the same time it greatly con-
tributeth to dispel their guilty jealousies and fears, and to inspire
them with ingenuous affiance in his grace and mercy, and a hope of
his gracious acceptance.
Some notion of the propriety of a Mediator, through whom we
have access to God, and his benefits are communicated to us, hath
very generally obtained among mankind, which probably might
have its rise in a tradition derived from the earliest ages. But this,
like other principles of that most ancient primitive religion, became
very much corrupted among the nations, who worshipped a great
number of idol gods and idol mediators. Under the Jewish eco
nomy, the great Mediator was typified and prefigured, both by
Moses, who was appointed to transact between God and the people,
and especially in the office of the high-priest, and the solemnities
of the service he was to perform on their behalf on the great day of
expiation. And there was also preserved amongst them, a notion
and expectation of a glorious deliverer, described under the most
divine characters, who was to appear in the fulness of time, and
who, according to the prophecies concerning him, was to make re
conciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness ;
though they afterwards perverted the true sense of those prophecies
to accommodate them to their own carnal prejudices, and to their
worldly hopes and views.
But in the gospel this part of the divine economy is brought into

Let. Xaavi. evidences for Christianity. 647
the clearest light ; and the idea that is there given of the Mediator
is the noblest that can be conceived ; whether we consider the glo
rious dignity of his person, in which the divine and human nature
is wonderfully united, or the offices ascribed to him, which are such
as are admirably fitted to the great work upon which he was sent,
the saving and redeeming mankind. What can possibly give us a
higher idea of God's unparalleled grace and goodness, than that for
us men, and for our salvation, he sent his own Son, to assume our
nature, to instruct us as our great heavenly Teacher, and bring
the clearest and fullest revelation of the divine will tfiat was ever
given to mankind ; and to make a declaration in the Father's name,
of his free grace and mercy towards sinners ofthe human race, and
ofthe gracious terms upon which he will receive them to his favour,
and give them eternal life ; to guide and lead us by his own exam
ple, and exhibit in his own sacred life and practice the most perfect
model of universal goodness and purity, and of every amiable virtue,
for our imitation ; to make an atonement for our sins by his most
meritorious obedience and sufferings, that he might obtain eternal
redemption for us ; to give us a certain pledge and assurance of a
blessed resurrection, and of the happiness prepared for good men in
the highest heavens, by his own resurrection from the dead, his as
cension into heaven, and exaltation to glory ; to rule us as the great
King and Head of his Church, by his holy and most excellent laws
and ordinances ; and to appear for us in the heavenly sanctuary as
our great advocate with the Father, who ever continueth to inter
pose for sinful men, and in whose name we are to offer up our
prayers, and to hope for the acceptance of our services. Add to
this, that he is constituted the great dispenser of spiritual benefits,
through whom God is pleased to communicate the blessings of his
grace, and the aids of his Holy Spirit, for assisting us in our sincere
endeavours, and training us up by a life of holy obedience for eter
nal felicity. And to complete the glorious scheme, this great
' Saviour and Mediator is appointed to raise the dead, and judge the
world in the Father's name, and to dispense eternal retributions of
rewards and punishments to men according to their deeds, the con
sideration of which must needs give a mighty weight* to his authority
and laws.
These are things great and astonishing, and which could not
have entered into the human mind, if God had not revealed them.
But now that they are revealed, they form a most grand and harmo
nious system, the several parts of which are like so many links of a
beautiful chain, one part answering to another, and all concurring
to exhibit an admirable plan, in which the wisdom, the grace, and
goodness, and the righteousness of God, most eminently shine
forth. So that, instead of being a just cause of objection against
the Christian revelation, it rather furnisheth a new proof of its
divine original, and that it was not a mere human invention, but
came by revelation from God himself. A most glorious and amaz
ing scene is here opened, which tendeth to fill the believing mind
with the highest admiration and reverence, love and joy. It is

648 a summary of the Let. XXXVI.
true, there are great difficulties attending the Christian scheme of
the Mediator, and the doctrine of the Trinity which is connected
with it. But there is nothing in it that can be proved to be contra
dictory or impossible, taking it in the simplicity in which it is
delivered in holy writ, and not as it has been perplexed and ob
scured by the subtilties and rash decisions of men. And it would
be a wrong and unreasonable conduct to reject a revelation of so
excellent a nature, and such an admirable tendency, and enforced
by so many convincing proofs and illustrious attestations, because
there are some things in it of a high and mysterious nature, and
attended with difficulties, which we are not well able to solve : for,
surely, if we have good proof of its being a divine revelation, the
authority of God is a sufficient reason for our receiving it, notwith
standing those difficulties. If we are resolved to admit nothing as
true that hath great difficulties, nothing but what we are able
clearly to explain, we must renounce all religion, and have recourse
to atheism, which yet, besides its shocking and horrid consequences,
hath the most unsurmountable difficulties of all. What is there
more certain, and yet harder to forma distinct and consistent notion
of, than absolute eternity ? The immensity of the Supreme Being,
whatever way we take of explaining it, is attended with difficulties
too great for the human mind. There is not any thing in all nature
more evident than the characters of wisdom and design in the
frame of the universe ; and yet there are many particular things re
lating to it, the design of which it is scarcely possible for us to
account for in this present state, from whence persons of an atheis
tical turn have taken occasion to deny an infinitely wise presiding
mind. The same thing may be said with regard to the goodness of
God, which is established by the strongest proofs, and of which we
feel the most lively sensations in our own breasts ; and yet every
one knows, who has carried his inquiries deep into these things,
that there are many appearances which we find it extremely hard
to reconcile to our ideas of goodness, and which probably never
will be fully cleared till we have a more extensive view of the plan
of the divine administration than now we can attain to. There is
nothing we are more intimately conscious of than human liberty
and free agency, or which is of greater importance to the very foun
dations of government and morality ; and yet if we consider it
metaphysically, no subject is attended with greater difficulties, as
the ablest metaphysicians and philosophers in all ages have acknow
ledged. The same may be said of the notion of spiritual and
material substance, and the infinite divisibility of the latter, and of
many other things ofthe like nature. It is a principle, which hath
been admitted by the greatest masters of reason, that when once a
thing is proved by proper evidences, and arguments sufficient in
their kind, we are not to reject it, merely because it may be
attended with difficulties, which we know not how to solve. This
principle is admitted in philosophy; it must be admitted with regard
to natural religion ; and why then should it not be admitted with
regard to Christianity too?

Let. XXXVI. evidences for Christianity. 649
As to the corruptions of Christians, and the abuses of Christianity,
and the additions that have been made to it, which have furnished
the deists with their most plausible objections, it ought to be consi
dered, that the Christian religion cannot in reason be made account
able for those abuses and corruptions. The proper remedy in that
case is not to throw off all regard for the gospel, but to endeavour
to recover men from their deviations from it. And in this, the
pains of those that pretend to a true liberty of thinking might be
profitably employed. If they have a true regard to the happiness
of mankind, and to the cause of virtue in the world, the best way to
answer that design is, not to endeavour to expose the Scriptures to
contempt, but to engage men to a greater veneration for those sacred
oracles, and a closer adherence to them in doctrine and practice ;
not to attempt to set men free from the obligations of Christianity,
but to do what they can, that the hearts and consciences of men
may be brought under the power of its excellent instructions and
important motives, and may be governed by its holy laws, which
would be of the happiest consequence both to larger societies and
particular persons.
To conclude: It is to be hoped that the view that hath been
taken of the attempts which have been made against Christianity
among us, beyond the example of former ages, instead of ^shocking
the faith of true Christians, will only tend to convince them that it
standeth upon the most solid foundation, not to be shaken by the
malice or subtilty of its ablest adversaries. The strange eagerness
so many have shown to subvert the credit and authority of the
gospel, should awaken in us a well-conducted zeal for the interests
of our holy religion, and should heighten our esteem for true uncor
rupted Christianity as taught in the holy scriptures. We can never
be sufficiently thankful to God for so glorious an advantage as that
of the light ofthe gospel shining among us. This we should esteem
the most valuable of all our privileges, and should regard every
attempt to deprive us of it, as an attempt to deprive us of our hap
piness and glory, and to bring us into darkness and misery ; to rob
good men of their noblest joys and comforts, the most powerful
helps, and the most animating motives to the practice of piety and
virtue ; and to free bad men from their apprehensions of the wrath
of God and future punishment, and thereby remove the most effec
tual restraints to vice and wickedness. The cause of Christianity is
the cause of God. Let us, therefore, take the most effectual me
thods in our power to maintain and to promote it. And this calleth
for the united endeavours of all that bear the glorious name of
Christians. A great deal has been done in this age in a way of
reason and argument. But this, however proper and laudable, is
not alone sufficient. For it is a thing which cannot be too much
inculcated, that a mere notional and speculative belief of Christianity
will be of small avail; and that the principal care of those who pro
fess it should be, to get their hearts and lives brought under the
governing influence of its divine doctrines and excellent precepts,
that it may not be merely an outward form, but a living principle

650 A SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCES, &C. Let. XXXVI.
within them. Among the many unhappy consequences which have
arisen from the disputes that have with so much indecency and
eagerness been carried on against our holy religion, this is not the
least, that it hath carried men's minds too much off from the vital
part of religion, and hath led them to regard it as a matter of specu
lation and dispute, rather than of practice. But this is to forget
the very nature and design of Christianity, which is not a bare
system of speculative opinions, but a practical institution, a spiritual
and heavenly discipline, full of life and power, all whose doctrines,
precepts, ordinances, motives, are manifestly intended to form us to a
godlike temper, to real holiness of heart and life. And those good
men who are not able to do much for it in a way of argumentation,
may yet effectually promote its sacred interests, by walking accord
ing to the excellent rules of the gospel, and showing the advan
tageous influence it hath upon their temper and conduct, and thus
making an amiable representation of it to the world. And though
it highly becometh those, whose office it is to teach and instruct
others, to be well furnished with divine knowledge, so as to be able
by sound reason and argument to convince, or at least to confute,
the gainsayers ; yet one of the most essential services they can do
to the Christian cause, is, by their doctrine and by their example to
lead the Christian people into the practice of all holiness and good
ness. This would tend more than any thing else to stop the mouths
of adversaries, and would probably, as it did in many instances in
the first ages of the Christian church, gain them over to a good
opinion of that religion, which is fitted to produce such excellent
fruits. These are reflections which naturally arise upon this subject.
But I shall not insist farther upon them at present ; especially as I
shall have occasion to resume some of them in an address to Deists
and professed Christians, which I shall here subjoin as a proper
conclusion of the whole work.
I am, dear and worthy Sir,
Your most affectionate and obliged
Friend and Servant,
JOHN LELAND.

651

THE CONCLUSION,

ADDRESS TO DEISTS AND PROFESSED CHRISTIANS.

Those are inexcusable who reject Christianity at a venture,.without due Examination.
— Deistical Authors unsafe Guides, and shew little Sign of a fair and impartial
Inquiry. — Several of their Objections such as cannot be reasonably urged against
Christianity at all. — Those Objections only are of real Weight which tend to invali
date its Proofs and Evidences, or which are drawn from the Nature of the Religion
itself, to shew that it is unworthy of God. — The Attempts ofthe Deists on each of
these Heads shewn to be insufficient. — An Expostulation with them concerning
the great Guilt and Danger of their Conduct, and the ill Consequences of it both to
themselves and to the Community. — Those professed Christians highly culpable,
who live in an habitual Negligence and Inconsideration with regard to Religion, or
who slight public Worship and the Christian Institutions, or who indulge themselves
in an immoral and vicious Practice. — A wicked Christian, of all Characters, the
most inconsistent. — Advice to those who profess to believe the Gospel.  They
should be thankful to God for their Privileges. — They should labour to be well
acquainted with the Holy Scriptures. — And, above all, they should be careful to
adorn their Profession by a holy and virtuous Life. — A Christian acting up to the
Obligations of Christianity forms a glorious Character, which imparts a Splendour
to the most exalted Station. — This illustriously exemplified in a great Personage of
the highest Dignity. — The vast Importance of a careful Education of Children, and
the bad Effects of neglecting it. — And here also the same eminent Example is
recommended to the Imitation of all, especially of the great and noble.
Having endeavoured to give as clear a general view as 1 was able
of the principal deistical writers of the last and presenj; age, and
having made large and particular remarks on the two most noted
authors who have appeared of late among us in that cause, I shall
now, as a conclusion of this work, take the liberty to address my
self, both to those that take upon them the character of deists and
free-thinkers, and who reject the Christian revelation ; and to those
who are honoured with the name of Christians, and who profess to
receive the religion of Jesus as of divine authority.
The former may be ranked principally into two sorts. They are
either such as, taking it for granted that Christianity has been
proved to be an imposition on mankind, reject it at a venture, with
out being able to assign a reason for rejecting it, or at most take up
with some slight objections, and content themselves with general
clamours of priestcraft/ and imposture, without giving themselves
the trouble of making 'a distinct inquiry into the nature of the re
ligion itself, or examining its proofs and evidences ; or, they are

052 CONCLUSION.
such as pretend to reject Christianity, because, upon a due exami
nation and inquiry, they have found it to be destitute of sufficient
proof, and have discovered in it the marks of falsehood and impos
ture, which convince them that it cannot be of divine original.
There is reason to apprehend, that the greater part of those among
us who pass under the name of deists, come under the former of
these characters. But the conduct of such persons is so manifestly
absurd as to admit of no excuse. For what pretence have they to
glory in the title of Free-thinkers, who will not be at the pains to
think closely and seriously at all, "even in matters of the highest con
sequence ? There are few therefore who are willing to own that this
is their case. Whether they have really given themselves the
trouble of a free and diligent examination and inquiry, or not, they
would be thought to have done so, and not to have rejected the
Christian revelation without having good reasons for their unbelief.
It is therefore to such persons that I would now address myself.
Of this sort professedly are those that have appeared among us
under the character of deistical writers. They have made a show of
attacking Christianity in a way of reason and argument. But,
upon the view which hath been taken of them it may, I think, be
safely declared, that whatever they have offered that had the face of
argument, hath been solidly confuted, the evidences of Christianity
have been placed in a fair and consistent light, and their objections
against it have been shown to be vain and insufficient. Though
there never were writers more confident and assuming, or who have
expressed a greater admiration of themselves, and contempt of
others, it hath been shown, that, taking them generally, they have
had little to support such glorious pretences : that no writers ever
acted a part more unfair and disingenuous : that though they have
set up for advocates of natural religion in opposition to revealed, yet
many of them have endeavoured to subvert the main articles even of
natural religion, and have used arguments which bear equally
against all religion, and tend to banish it out of the world : that
they have often put on a show of great regard for genuine original
Christianity, whilst at the same time they have used their utmost
efforts to destroy its evidences, and subvert its authority : that in
stead of representing the Christian religion fairly as it is, ,th>y have
had recourse to misrepresentation and abuse, and have treated the
holy Scriptures in a manner which would not be borne, if put in
practice against any other ancient writings of the least reputation,
and which is indeed inconsistent with all the rules of candour and
decency : that with regard to the extraordinary facts by which
Christianity is attested, they have advanced principles which would
be accounted perfectly ridiculous if applied to any other facts, and
which really tend to destroy all moral evidence, and the credit of all
past facts whatsoever : and finally, that never were there writers
more inconsistent with themselves and with one another, or who have
discovered more apparent signs of obstinate prepossession and pre
judice. And should not all this naturally create a suspicion of a
cause which stands in need of such management, and of writers who

CONCLUSION. 053
have been obliged to have recourse to arts so little reconcileable to
truth and candour ? And yet it is to be apprehended, that many of
those who laugh at others for relying upon their teachers, are ready
to resign themselves to their deistical leaders, and to take their pre
tences and confident assertions, and even their jests and sarcasms,
for arguments.
Many of the objections which have been produced with great
pomp, and which have created some of (he strongest prejudices
against Christianity, are such as cannot be properly urged against
it with any appearance of reason at all. Such are the objections
drawn from the abuses and corruptions which have been introduced
contrary to its original design, or from the ill conduct of many of its
professors and ministers. For whilst the Christian religion, as
taught by Christ and his apostles, and delivered in the holy Scrip
tures, may be demonstrated to be of a most useful and admirable
nature and tendency, whilst the proofs and evidences of it stand
entire, and the truth of the facts whereby it was attested is suffici
ently established, the reason for embracing it still holds good: and
to reject a religion in itself excellent, for abuses and corruptions,
which many of those that make the objection acknowledge are not
justly chargeable upon true original Christianity, is a conduct that
cannot be justified, and is indeed contrary to the dictates of reason
and good sense. The same observation may be made with regard
to some other objections which have been frequently urged against
the Christian revelation, and particularly that whicb is drawn from
its not having been universally promulgated. For if the evidences
which are brought to prove that Christianity is a true divine revela
tion, and that this revelation was really given, are good and valid,
then its not having been made known to all mankind will never
prove, that such a revelation was not given. And such a way of
arguing in any other case would be counted impertinent. It is argu
ing from a thing, the reasons of which we do not know, against the
truth and certainty of a thing that we do know, and of which we
are able to bring sufficient proofs.
The only objections therefore, or arguments, which can really be
of weight against Christianity, are those which either tend to in
validate its proofs and evidences, and to show that the divine attes
tations which were given to it are not to be depended upon, or which
are drawn from the nature of the revelation itself, to show that it is
absurd and unworthy of God. And accordingly both these have
been attempted. But whosoever will impartially consider the writ
ings of the deistical authors, and compare them with those of the
advocates for Christianity, will find how little they have advanced
on either of these heads that is really to the purpose. The attesta
tions given to Christianity are of such an extraordinary nature, and
carry in them such manifest proofs of a divine interposition, that
few, if any, have ever owned the truth of those facts, and yet denied
the divine original of the Christian revelation. Its adversaries there
fore have chiefly bent their force to destroy the credit of the facts.
But they have not been able to invalidate the arguments which have

054 CONCLUSION.
been brought to prove that those facts were really done : it hath been
shown, that the evidence produced for them is as great as could
reasonably be expected and desired for any past facts whatsoever :
that never was there any testimony, all things considered, more
worthy of credit than that of the original witnesses to those facts :
and that those accounts have been transmitted to us by a convey
ance so s'ure and uninterrupted as can hardly be paralleled in any
other case. This has been evinced by a clear deduction of proofs,
to which little has been opposed but conjectures and suspicions of
fraud, and general clamours against moral evidence, and human
testimony, without taking off the force of the proofs that have been
brought on the other side.
As to the arguments urged against the Christian revelation from
the nature of the revelation itself, these must relate either to its doc
trines or laws. With respect to the laws of Christianity, it cannot
reasonably be denied, that its moral precepts are pure and excellent,
and have a manifest tendency to promote the practice of piety and
virtue in its just extent, and the peace and good order ofthe world.
And they are enforced with the most powerful and important motives
that can possibly be conceived, and the best fitted to work upon the
human nature.
When the moral precepts of Christianity could not be justly found
fault with, a great clamour has been raised against its positive pre
cepts and institutions. And yet it is capable of being proved — it
hath been often clearly proved, that these positive institutions, taken
in their primitive purity, and according to their original design, are
admirably fitted to promote the great ends of all religion, and to
strengthen our obligations to a holy and a virtuous life. And this
some of the most noted deistical writers have not been able to deny.
And it has been lately fully acknowledged by Lord Bolingbroke.
The only objection, therefore, which properly remains is against
the doctrines of Christianity. And before this objection can be
properly brought to bear, two things are to be proved. The one is,
that the doctrines objected against are doctrines of the true original
Christian religion as taught by Christ and his apostles, and deli
vered in the holy Scriptures. The other is, that these doctrines, as
there taught, are really absurd and contrary to reason. For a doc
trine may be attended with great difficulties, very hard to be ac
counted for, and yet may be really true, and not contradictory to
reason : which is evidently the case with respect to several import
ant principles of what is called natural religion. The difficulty
attending any doctrine, in our manner of conceiving it, is not a
proper argument against its truth, if we have otherwise sufficient
evidence to convince us that that doctrine is true ; and its being
plainly asserted in a revelation proved to be divine is a sufficient evi
dence. For to acknowledge a divine revelation to have been given,
and yet receive nothing upon the credit of it, nothing but what we
can prove to be true, or at least highly probable, independently of
that revelation, is a most absurd and inconsistent conduct. It is to
make a divine testimony pass for nothing, and to pay no greater

CONCLUSION. G55
regard to a thing on account of its being divinely revealed, than if
it had not been revealed at all. In this case, what, is said by a per
son who cannot be supposed to be prejudiced in favour of Christi
anity appears to be very reasonable; which I shall here beg leave to
repeat, though I had occasion to take notice of it before, viz. that
" when persons have received the Christian revelation for genuine,
after sufficient examination of its external and internal proofs, and
have found nothing that makes it inconsistent with itself, nor that
is repugnant to any of those divine truths, which reason and the
works of God demonstrate to them, such persons will never set up
reason in contradiction to it, on account of things plainly taught, but
incomprehensible as to their manner of being: if they did, their
reason would be false and deceitful, they would cease to be reason
able men."* And elsewhere, after having observed that we cannot
be obliged to believe against reason, he saith, that when a revela
tion hath passed through the necessary trials, " it is to be received
with the most profound reverence, with the most entire submission,
and with the most unfeigned thanksgiving. Reason has exercised
her whole prerogative then, and delivers us- over to faith. To be
lieve before all these trials, or to doubt after them, is alike unrea-
sonable."t And now, upon such a view of things, you will allow me, gentle
men, seriously to expostulate with you, and to beseech you to reflect
whether, in rejecting and endeavouring to expose Christianity, you
act a wise and reasonable part, and what is like to be the effect of
your conduct both with regard to yourselves, and to the public.
And first with regard to yourselves. Consider that the case now
before you is not merely a matter of indifference, or of small import
ance. Your own most essential interests are nearly concerned. If
the gospel be true and divine, to reject it will involve you in the
greatest guilt, and will expose you to the greater danger. The best
that can be said of your case upon such a supposition is, that it is
infinitely hazardous. If in fact it should be found, that you have
rejected a true divine revelation, which God himself hath confirmed
with the most illustrious attestations ; that you have refused the
testimony which he had given of his Son, and have poured contempt
on the Saviour whom he hath in his infinite wisdom and love pro
vided for us ; that you have slighted the authority of his laws, and
the1 offers of his grace, and have despised all his glorious promises,
and set at nought his awful threatenings ; this cannot possibly be a
slight guilt, and therefore you have reason in that case to appre
hend the severe effects of the divine displeasure. Whatever favour
able allowances may be made to those who never heard ofthe gospel,
or had no opportunity of being instructed in it in its original purity,
it is plain, from the whole tenor ofthe gospel declarations, that those
to whom it is clearly published, and who have its evidences plainly
laid before them, and yet shut their eyes against the heavenly light,
and despise its offered salvation, are in a very dangerous state.
* Bolingbroke's Works, vol. v. p. 384. t Ibid. p. 279.

650 CONCLUSION.
And though it may be said, that this is immediately to be under
stood of those who lived in the age when the gospel was first pub
lished, yet it holds in proportion with regard to those in after-ages,
to whom that revelation and its evidences are made known, and
who yet wilfully reject it. For since God designed that revelation
not merely for the age when it was first delivered, but for succeed
ing ages ; and since accordingly it was so ordered, that both the
revelation itself, its doctrines and laws, and an account ofthe divine
attestations that were given to it, have been transmitted to us in
such a manner, as layeth a just foundation .for our being assured,
that this is the true original revelation, and that these facts were
really done ; then the obligation which lies upon those to whom that
revelation is made known to receive and submit to it, and conse
quently the guilt of rejecting it, still subsists. Examine the revela
tion itself. Could you possibly expect a revelation given for nobler
purposes, than to instruct us to form the most worthy notions of
God, of his perfections, and of his providence, to set before us the
whole of our duty in its just extent, to instruct us in the terms of
our acceptance with God, to assure us of his readiness to pardon our
iniquities, and to receive us to his grace and favour upon our un
feigned repentance, and to crown our sincere though imperfect
obedience with the glorious reward of eternal life ? Could any re
velation be expected, whose precepts are more pure and excellent,
or enforced by more weighty motives, or the uniform tendency of
which is more manifestly fitted to promote the cause of virtue and
righteousness in the world ? Or, could any revelation, supposing a
revelation really given, be attended with more illustrious attesta
tions ? Will it be an excuse fit to be offered to the great Ruler and
Judge of the world, that you did not yourselves see the miracles
that were wrought, nor were witnesses to the attestations that were
given ? This is in effect to demand, that all these facts should be
done over again for your conviction, or you will not believe them.
But how unreasonable is this, when the accounts of these facts are
transmitted with a degree of evidence sufficient to satisfy any un
prejudiced mind, an evidence which must be admitted, except no
past facts at all are to be believed, and which you yourselves would
account sufficient in any other case ! Or, will it be accepted as a
just excuse, that it contains some doctrines, which are 'attended
with great difficulties that we are not able to account for, and which
relate to things that transcend our comprehension, when at the
same time it cannot be denied that there are several things both in
religion and philosophy which the most wise and considering men
think it reasonable to believe, though they are liable to objections
which they cannot give a clear solution of?* Or, is the true reason
of your rejecting the gospel your aversion to its holy laws, and that
* One of the most subtile writers that- have of late appeared against Christianity,
says," that no priestly dogmas ever shocked common sense so much as the infinite di
visibility of matter, with its consequences," which yet has not hindered the ablest
mathematicians from believing it to be demonstrably true. And he gives some other
instances of the like kind. See Hume's Philosophical Essays, p. 346, 347.

CONCLUSION. (i-r)7
purity of heart and life that is there required ? But is this a reason
fit to be pleaded before God, or proper to satisfy your own consci
ences? "This is the condemnation," saith our Saviour, " that light
is come into the world, but men have loved darkness rather than
light, because their deeds are evil." If this should be found to be
really your case, and the true cause of your opposition to the gospel,
your guilt is of a very aggravated, nature ! It is to hate and oppose
the light that should convince and reform you, and to make the
very excellence ofthe gospel a reason for rejecting it. The best and
wisest men in all ages have owned the necessity of keeping the
appetites and passions within proper bounds, and in a just subjec
tion to the dominion of reason. And this is the great design of the
Christian law. And yet its precepts are not carried to an unreason
able rigour and austerity : it is not designed to extinguish the pas
sions, but to moderate them, and allows them to be gratified within
the bounds of temperance and innocence. Its precepts, if reduced
to practice, would both tend to the true dignity and perfection of
our nature, and lay a just foundation for an inward tranquillity and
satisfaction of mind, and for a true moral liberty, the noblest liberty
in the world; as no slavery is to be compared to a moral servitude,
which consisteth in a vassalage to the vicious appetites and passions.
A life led in conformity to the gospel precepts, is, whatever you may
think of it, the most delightful life in the world. It tendeth to im
prove and enlarge the social affections, to inspire an universal bene
volence, to render men good and useful in every relation, and to re
strain and -govern those furious and malignant passions of envy,
hatred, and revenge, which carry- torment and bitterness in their
nature. It directs us to a rational piety and devotion towards God,
and tends to produce a noble and ingenuous confidence in him, and
an entire resignation to his will, and to refresh and cheer the soul
with a consciousness of the divine approbation. To this add the
satisfactions and joys arising from all the wonders of the divine grace
and goodness, as displayed in the gospel, from the charms of re
deeming love, and the great things Christ hath done and suffered
for our salvation, from the glorious promises of the new covenant,
from the gracious aids and influences of the Holy Spirit, and from
the ravishing and transporting prospects that are before us. A
blessed resurrection and immortal life ! You will be ready perhaps
to charge this as enthusiasm : but I see no reason for it, except the
noblestemotions of the human mind, and the exercise of our best
affections upon the best and most excellent objects, must pass under
that name. Consider, I beseech you, what1 valuable privileges, what
divine satisfaction, what ravishing prospects, you deprive yourselves
of by your infidelity ! And what have you in exchange, but per
plexing doubts and' uncertainties, gloomy prospects, and what you
will hardly be able to get entirely rid of, anxious suspicions and
fears enough, where they prevail, to mar the comfort and satisfac
tion of life !
But let me now in the next place desire you to reflect upon what
may be the consequences of your conduct with regard to the public.

u u

*G58 CONCLUSION.
There are great and general complaints, and it were to be wished
there was not a just foundation for them, of a dissoluteness of man
ners which seems to be growing among us. This is a matter in
which the interests of the community are very nearly concerned.
When once the corruption spreads through all orders and degrees
of persons, those in higher and in lower stations, it must needs be
attended with a perversion of all public order, and sap the very
foundation of the public glory and happiness. In proportion as
vice and dissoluteness prevail, it produces a neglect of honest indus
try, trade consequently decays, fraud and violence increase, the
reverence of oaths is lost, and all the ties and bands that keep so
ciety together are in danger of being dissolved. Machiavel himself
has decided, that a free government cannot be long maintained,
when once a people are become generally corrupt. All true friends
therefore to the public order and liberty must wish, that virtue may
flourish, and that men's vicious appetites and passions may be kept
under proper restraints. And nothing is so fit to answer this end
as religion. If the influence of religion were removed from the
minds of men, and there were no fear of God before their eyes, civil
laws would be found feeble restraints. This the ablest politicians
have been sensible of, and never was there any civilized government
that did not take in religion for its support.* And it maybe easily
proved that never was there any religion so well fitted for answering
all these purposes as the Christian, The two latest writers who
have appeared against Christianity have made full acknowledgments
ofthe great usefulness of religion, especially that part .of it which
relateth to future rewards and punishments, to public communities ;
though both of them have most inconsistently endeavoured to sub
vert that doctrine of future retributions, the belief of which they
own to be necessary for preserving public peace and order. Mr.
Hume, speaking ofthe received notion, that " the deity will inflict
punishments on vice, and infinite rewards on virtue," says that
" those who attempt to disabuse them of such prejudices, may, for
aught he knows, be good reasoners, but he cannot allow them to be
good citizens and politicians ; since they free men from one restraint
upon their passions, and make the infringement of the laws of equity
* Lord Bolingbroke observes, that " the good effects of maintaining, and bad effects
of neglecting, religion, were extremely visible in the whole course of tlie Roman go
vernment. — That though the Roman religion established by Numa was very absurd,
yet by keeping up an awe of superior power, and the belief of a providence that
ordered the course of events, it produced all the marvellous effects which Machiavel,
after Polybius, Cicero, and Plutarch, ascribes to it." He adds, that " the neglect of
religion was a principal cause of the evils that Rome afterwards suffered. •Religion
decayed, and the state decayed with her."* And if even a false religion, by keeping
up an awe of superior power, and the belief of a providence, had so advantageous an
influence on the prosperity of the state, and the neglect of religion brought such evils
upon it ; can they possibly be regarded as true friends to the public, who take so much
pains to subvert the religion professed among us, a religion established upon the most
rational and solid foundations, and to set men loose from the awe of a superior power,
and the belief of a providence ordering the course of events, and the manifest tendency
of whose attempts and endeavours is to leave us without any religion at all?
* Lord Bolingbroke's Works, vol. iv. p. 428.

CONCLUSION.. G5<)
and society, in one respect more easy and secure."* Lord Boling
broke, speaking 0f those who "contrived religion for the sake of
government," observes, that " they saw that the public external reli
gion would not answer their end, nor enforce effectually the obliga
tions of virtue and morality, without the doctrine of future rewards
and punish ments."f And he says, " the doctrine of rewards and
punishments in a future state has so great a tendency to enforce the
civil laws, and to restrain the vices of men, that reason, which, as
he pretends, cannot decide for it on principles of natural theology,
will not decide against it on principles of good policy."*]: And it is
certain, that no religion placeth those future retributions in so strong
and affecting a light as Christianity does. The last-mentioned
author goes so far as to say, that " if the conflict between virtue
and vice in the great commonwealth of mankind was not maintained
by religious and civil institutions, the human life would be intolera
ble. "§ And now, I think, I may justly expostulate with those gen
tlemen, who do what they can to propagate infidelity among us.
What real good to mankind, what benefit to the society or commu
nity, can you propose by endeavouring to expose Christianity, its
ministry and ordinances, to contempt, and to subvert its divine au
thority, and thereby destroy its influence on the minds and con
sciences of men ? Can you propose to assert and promote the cause
of virtue, by taking away its strongest supports, and those motives
which have the greatest tendency to engage men to the practice of
it? Or, can you propose to put a check to abounding licentious
ness, by removing the most powerful restraints to vice and wicked
ness ? If it be so hard to restrain the corruption of mankind, and
to keep their disorderly appetites within proper bounds, even taking
in all the aids of religion, and the amazing power of those motives
which Christianity furnisheth, what could be expected, if all these
were discarded, and men were left to gratify their passions without
the dread of a supreme governor or judge? Surely then, however
unfavourable to Christianity your private sentiments might be, you
ought, for the sake of the public, to conceal them, if you would ap
prove yourselves true lovers of your country, and zealous for the
liberty and prosperity of it, and not take pains to propagate princi
ples which in their consequences must have the worst influence on
the peace, the welfare, and good order of the community. If what
Lord Bolingbroke saith is true, that "no religion ever appeared in
the world, whose natural tendency was so much directed to promote
the peace and happiness of mankind, as the Christian religion, con
sidered as taught by Christ and his apostles ;"|| with what face or
consistency can these pretend to public spirit, or to a concern for
the public happiness, who use their utmost efforts to subvert it, and
represent its important motives as vain bugbears ? Especially how
can such persons pretend to be real friends to the present constitu-
* Hume's Philosophical Essays, p. 231.
t Bolingbroke's Works, vol. iv. p. GO. X Ibid. vol. v. p. 322. § Ibid, p, 227.
|| Ibid. vol. iv. p. 291.
u u 2

660 CONCLUSION.
tion and government, which is founded on an attempt to maintain
Christianity in its purity as delivered in the holy Scriptures, a zeal
for which will always prove its greatest security?
I hope, gentlemen, you will forgive the freedom of this expostula-
tory address, which is not designed to reproach you, or to return
railing for railing, which our holy religion forbids, but proceeds
from an earnest concern for your happiness, and for promoting
your best interests here and hereafter, as well as from a desire,
as far as my ability reaches, to serve the public, the welfare
of which is very nearly concerned in the consequences of your
conduct. I shall now beg leave to address myself to those who profess to
value themselves upon the name of Christians ; a name truly glo
rious, expressive of the most sacred obligations and engagements,
the most valuable privileges, and the most sublime hopes. But the
bare name of Christians will be of little advantage, without the true
spirit and practice of Christianity. And it is impossible for any
friend to religion and to mankind to observe, without a very sensible
concern, what numbers there are of those who would take it ill not
to be called and accounted Christians, that yet take little care to act
suitably to that sacred and honourable character.
Many professed Christians there are, who scarcely ever bestow a
serious thought upon those things which it is the great design of
the gospel to inculcate on the hearts and minds of men. Let me
desire such persons to reflect a little what an inconsistent conduct
they are guilty of. To profess to believe that God hath sent his
Son from heaven with messages of grace to sinful men, and to bring
discoveries of the highest importance, in which our everlasting sal
vation is very nearly concerned, and yet not to allow these things a
place in their thoughts, and to prefer the veriest trifles before
them ! Will you dare to say in words, that you do not think it
worth your while to attend to what God thought fit to send his own
Son to reveal ? Why then do you act as if you thought so ? No
pretence of worldly business, though it is our duty to be diligent in
it, can excuse an utter habitual inconsideration and neglect of those
things, which, by professing to believe Christianity, we profess to
believe to be of the greatest importance. Much less will a hurry of
diversions be allowed to be a sufficient excuse. And yet how many
are there whose time is taken up in low trifling pleasures and amuse
ments, and who make that which at best should only be the enter
tainment of a vacant hour, the very business of their lives ! It is to
be lamented, that this is too often the case with persons distin
guished by their birth, their fortunes, and figure, in the world. As
if all the advantage they proposed by those shining distinctions,
was only the privilege of leading idle unmeaning lives, useless to
themselves, and to the community. Can reasonable creatures
think, that by such a constant trifling away their precious time,
they answer the end of their beings, the end for which they had the
noble powers of reason given them? As if they were sent into the
world only to divert themselves. Much less can Christians believe,

CONCLUSION. G61
that they were formed for no higher and more valuable purposes.
How often are the duties of the church and closet, those of the social
relations, the care of children and of families, the kind offices and
exercises of a noble and generous benevolence towards the poor, the
indigent, the afflicted and disconsolate, neglected and postponed, for
the sake ofthe most trifling amusements ; an immoderate fondness
and attachment to which tends, even when it is least hurtful, to
produce a disinclination to serious thought, and to impair the relish
for that which is truly good, excellent, and improving !
But this is still worse, when what are called diversions, tend to
lay snares for virtue and innocence, and open the way to scenes of
dissoluteness and debauchery. Or, when what is called play aud
amusement is carried to such an excess as to hurt and squander
away fortunes, which might be employed to the most valuable
and useful purposes, and thereby disables persons of distinguished
rank from the duties they owe to their families and to the commu
nity, from the exercise of generous charity and benevolence, and
even of justice too. To which may be added, the tendency it often
hath to excite and exercise unworthy and disorderly passions, and
to produce the habits of fraud, falsehood, and a base illiberal thirst
after gain.
If our own observation and experience did not convince us of it,
one would scarcely think there could be persons who profess to be
lieve the gospel, and to acknowledge its divine authority, and yet
live in an habitual neglect of its public worship and sacred institu
tions. But that such a neglect is becoming general among us, be
yond the example of former times, cannot escape the notice of the
most superficial observer. There scarcely ever was an institution
more wisely and beneficially calculated for preserving and promoting
the interests of religion and virtue in the world, than that of setting
apart one day in a week from worldly businesses and cares, for the
solemnities of public worship, and for instructing the people in the
knowledge of religion, and exhorting them to the practice of it ;
and yet many there are that would take it ill not to be accounted
Christians, who seem to affect an open neglect, or even contempt of
it. But it is not easy to conceive, what reasonable pretence or ex
cuse can be alleged for such a conduct. Will they, in good earnest,
aver, that they look upon it to be a reflection upon their sense, or
unworthy of their quality, to pay their public homage to their
Maker and Redeemer ; and to make open professions of their regard
to that religion, which yet they would be thought to believe ? Or,
have they such an aversion to the exercises of religion, that the
spending an hour or two in solemn acts of adoration, in prayer and
thanksgiving, and in receiving instructions and admonitions from his
holy word, is a weariness which they cannot bear 1 But what is
this, but to avow the great degeneracy of their own minds, and their
want of a proper temper and disposition for the noblest exercises,
which best deserve the attention of reasonable beings f Or, do they
pretend a high regard for moral virtue, as an excuse for neglecting
positive institutions? But will any man, of the least reflection,

062 CONCLUSION.
who knoweth the true state of things among us, take upon him to
declare, that the growing neglect of the ordinances of religion hath
contributed to the promoting the practice of virtue ? Or, that men's
morals are generally mended, since they became more indifferent to
those sacred solemnities ? Nothing is more evident to any one, who
impartially considereth the nature of those divine institutions and
ordinances, which are appointed in the gospel, than that a due ob
servance of them according to their original institution, besides its
being a public avowal of our religious homage, and of our faith in
God, and in our Lord Jesus Christ, hath a manifest tendency to
promote our moral improvement, and to exercise and strengthen
those good affections and dispositions which naturally lead to a holy
and virtuous practice.
And as there are too many professed Christians, who openly
neglect the institutions of religion, there are others who seem to
flatter themselves that a mere outward attendance on divine ordi
nances, and the keeping up a form of religion, will be alone sufficient,
though they at the same time indulge themselves in a practice con
trary to the rules of virtue and morality. But all expedients for re
conciling the practice of vice, of dissoluteness, or dishonesty, with
the faith and hope ofthe gospel, are visibly absurd and vain. The
most inconsistent of all characters is a wicked and vicious Christian,
which to any one that is acquainted with the true nature and design
of Christianity, seems to be a kind of contradiction in terms. For
nothing is more evident than that a bad and dissolute life is the
most manifest contradiction to the whole design ofthe gospel reve
lation. What a strange inconsistency is it for persons to profess
themselves the disciples of the holy Jesus, and yet to counteract the
very end he came into the world for ! To profess to hope for sal
vation from him as promised in the gospel, and yet to neglect the
necessary terms, without which, we are there assured, salvation is
not to be obtained ! To believe that he came to destroy the works
' of the devil, and yet allow themselves in those works which he came
to destroy ! What an unamiable representation do such persons
make of Christianity, if a judgment were to be formed of it from their
conduct and practice ! You would perhaps conceive a horror at the
thought of blaspheming Christ, and openly renouncing all hope of
salvation from him, and yet the plain tendency of your practice is
to harden the hearts of infidels, and give occasion to the enemies of
Christianity to blaspheme. And should not you tremble to think of
being charged as accessory to the indignities and reproaches cast on
that venerable name into which you were baptized, and on that ex
cellent system of religion, whose divine original you profess to
believe ? Surely then it highly concerneth you, for your own sakes,
and that of the gospel, to set yourselves heartily to reform a conduct
so irreconcileable to all the rules of reason, and to your own most
evident interests. Implore the mercy of God through Jesus Christ,
and the assistances of his grace, which shall not be wanting to the
truly penitent, and show yourselves Christians, by endeavouring to
get your souls effectually brought under the influence of our holy

CONCLUSION. 063
religion, the natural tendency of which, wherever it is sincerely be
lieved and embraced, is to inspire an ingenuous hope, confidence,
and joy.
I shall conclude therefore with laying a few advices before those
who take upon them the name of Christians, and who profess to
receive the gospel as of divine authority.
And 1. Let us be thankful to God for our glorious privileges. It
is our unspeakable advantage, that we are not left merely to the un
certain lights, or feeble conjectures of our own unassisted reason in
matters of the highest importance. We have God himself instruc
ting us by his word concerning his own glorious perfections, and his
governing providence, as extending to the individuals of the human
race, displaying all the riches of his grace and goodness towards
perishing sinners, setting our duty before us in its just extent, and
animating us to the practice of it by the most exceeding great and
precious promises, and assuring us of the aids of his Holy Spirit to
assist our weak endeavours. We are raised to the most glorious
hopes and views. A happiness is provided for us as the reward of
our patient continuance in well-doing, transcending all that we are
now able to express, or even to conceive. These things certainly
call for a devout admiration and adoring thankfulness, and for all
the returns of love and gratitude that are in our power. Our civil
liberties are j ustly to be valued, but our privileges as Christians are
of a yet higher and nobler nature.
2dly, Another thing which naturally follows upon this is, that we
should consider and improve the revelation we profess to believe,
and that we should endeavour to be well acquainted with it, especi
ally as it is contained in the holy Scriptures. There those discove
ries are to be found which God was pleased to make of his will at
sundry times and in divers manners, by the mouth of his holy pro
phets ; but especially there is that last and most perfect revelation
he gave by his well-beloved Son. We are ready to think they had
a mighty advantage who saw our Saviour in the flesh, who heard
his excellent discourses, and were witnesses to his holy life, and to
the miracles he performed. And in the sacred writings we have all
these things faithfully recorded. Those very discourses which he
delivered are there transmitted to us, with an account of the wonder
ful works he did, his most holy and useful life, and most perfect
example. What a strange inconsistent conduct would it be, to pro
fess to believe that there is a revelation given from heaven relating
to matters of the highest moment, and that this revelation is con
tained in the holy Scriptures, and yet to suffer the Bible to lie neg
lected by us, as if this, which is the most worthy of all our attention,.
were the only book that deserved no attention at all ! Let us there
fore search the Scriptures, which are able to make us wise unto
salvation. And if we meet with difficulties there, as may justly be
expected in such ancient writings, and which relate to a great variety
of things, some of them of a very extraordinary nature, let not this
discourage us. For besides that by a careful considering and com
paring the Scriptures themselves, and making a proper use of the

664 CONCLUSION.
helps that are afforded us, we may have the satisfaction of having
many of those difficulties cleared up to us, it must be observed, that
those things that are most necessary to be known, and which are of
the greatest importance, are there most plainly revealed, and fre
quently inculcated ; and these things we should especially labour to
get impressed upon our hearts and consciences.
But that which should be our principal concern, is to take care
that our whole conversation be such as becometh the gospel of Christ,
worthy of our glorious privileges and sublime hopes. He must be
an utter stranger to Christianity who is not sensible that it lays
us under the most sacred obligations, and gives us the greatest helps
and encouragements to a holy and virtuous practice. Let us, there
fore, as we would secure our own salvation and happiness, and
would promote the honour of our blessed Redeemer, and of the re
velation he brought from heaven, endeavour to adorn the doctrine of
God our Saviour by all the virtues of a sober, a righteous, and godly
life. A mere form of godliness will not be sufficient; the power, the
energy, the beauty of religion, must appear in our whole temper and
conduct. This is in a peculiar manner expected of those who are
honoured with the office of the holy ministry. But the gospel is
not designed merely for any particular order of men, but to extend
its influence to persons of all orders and degrees. And how amiable
is the idea of a Christian acting up to the obligations of Christianity !
Consider him in the exercise of piety and devotion towards God,
diligent in attending on the ordinances of religion, filled with a pro
found reverence of the divine Majesty, with a devout admiration of
the supreme original Goodness and Excellence, his soul rising in
grateful emotions towards his sovereign Benefactor, exercising an
unrepining submission and resignation to his will, and a steady de
pendence on his providence, rejoicing in Christ Jesus as his Saviour
and Lord, in the beauties of his example, and in the wonders of his
love. But the religion of a real Christian is not confined to immediate
acts of devotions. It influenceth and animateth his whole conduct.
It teacheth him to render unto all their dues, to be strictly just and
generously honest, to behave suitably in every relation, the conjugal,
parental, and fllial relation, and to fulfil the duties of the civil and
social life. It tendeth to suppress the bitter and malevolent affec
tions, and to diffuse a sweetness and complacency through his whole
behaviour. It maketh him ready to bear with the infirmities of
others, to rejoice in their happiness, and endeavour to promote it,
and instead of being overcome of evil, to overcome evil with good.
Behold him in another view, as exercising a noble self-govern
ment, keeping his appetites and passions under a proper discipline,
and in a regular subjection to the laws of religion and reason, dis
daining to dishonour and defile his body and soul with unclean lusts,
and vicious excesses, yet not unreasonably austere, but allowing
himself the moderate and cheerful use of the innocent pleasures and
enjoyments of life, and every enjoyment heightened by the glorious
prospects which are before him. To which it may be added, that

CONCLUSION. 665
religion tends to inspire him with a true sense of honour, as that sig
nified! an abhorrence of every thing base, false, unjust, and impure,
and with a real greatness of soul, and a noble constancy and forti
tude, not to be bribed or terrified from his duty.
Such a character, even in a low condition, as far as it hath an op
portunity of exerting itself, cannot but attract the approbation and
esteem of those that observe it. But when it is found in conjunction
with nobility of extraction, dignity of station, splendour and affluence
of fortune, what a glory does it diffuse ! And it gives a real pleasure
to every friend to Christianity among us to reflect, that of this we
have an illustrous instance in a person of the most exalted dignity,
but who is still more distinguished by her princely and Christian
virtues, than by the eminency of her station. We have here a shin
ing proof, what a just and general esteem and admiration, solid
rational piety, a well-regulated zeal for Christianity, and a life amia
bly conducted by its sacred rules, in a condition so elevated, has a
natural tendency to create, and what a splendour and beauty it adds
to the highest titles and dignities. And if persons distinguished by
their rank and figure in life were more generally careful to copy
after so bright a pattern, it is to be hoped, this might happily con
tribute to reform the licentiousness of the age ; and that the influ
ence of their authority and example would extend to those inferior
stations, and have a general good effect ; particularly that it would
tend lo cure that false and vicious shame, which has so often dis
couraged persons from openly avowing their regard and adherence
to that which is the ornament and glory of our nature, religion and
virtue. It is proper to observe, in the last place, that those who have any
true zeal for Christianity, and who really believe it to be the most
excellent religion, are bound by every obligation to endeavour to
promote it in their own families, by carefully training up their chil
dren to an early acquaintance with this holy religion, and veneration
for it. It is of great consequence to endeavour to season their young
and tender minds with its important principles, and to inspire them
with a just reverence of things sacred, with a love of goodness and
virtue, and an abhorrence of what is base, false, vicious, and impure.
The necessity of an early good education, and the benefits arising
from it, have been acknowledged.by the best and wisest men in all
ages. And we have certainly a mighty advantage this way, who
enjoy the light of the gospel revelation. And therefore it highly
concerneth Christian parents to do what they can, that their chil
dren may be by times acquainted with the holy scriptures, and may
have the word of Christ dwelling richly in them. Minds which are
early filled and possessed with the great objects of religion, and
with the noble and sublime hopes of the gospel, carry abou.t with
them the most effectual preservation against the vanities and follies,
the corrupt customs and practices, of a sinful world, and the most
animating motives to the practice of every amiable virtue, and uni
versal righteousness. And yet this, which is the most important
and most essential part of a good education, seems to be that which

666 CONCLUSION.
is least attended to. For want of this it is, that notwithstanding
the advantages we enjoy, many among us, though they call them
selves Christians, are shamefully ignorant of the nature and design
of Christianity, and even of the first principles ofthe oracles of God.
And indeed the general neglect ofthe education of children, and of
family order and religion, is one of the most unhappy symptoms of
the great degeneracy of the present age, and which gives us the most
melancholy prospects of the succeeding one. For what can be ex
pected from those who are bred up under parents, that take no care
to instil worthy principles into their minds, and in families where
they see no signs of religion or the fear of God ? Unnatural parents !
who seem to make the real welfare and happiness of their children,
the least of their concern ; or, if they take some care to adorn their
bodies and form their outward behaviour, neglect the culture of their
better parts, their minds, or at least take no care to train them up
to a just sense of religion and morals, or to a taste for what is truly
laudable and excellent ! Unhappy children ! in whom, for want of
proper early instruction and discipline, irregular appetites and pas
sions, and evil habits, are daily gathering strength, till at length
they are turned out, unfurnished with good principles, or worthy
sentiments of things, into a world full of temptations and snares. Is
it to be wondered at, if such persons become an easy prey to wicked
and impious seducers, and are soon drawn into profaneness and
infidelity, and into dissoluteness and debauchery, which, where it
prevails, tendeth to corrupt or to extinguish true probity and public
spirit, and every noble and generous affection and sentiment? And
in that case, the higher their condition is, and the greater their
affluence of fortune, the more pernicious is the contagion of their
example ; and those who otherwise might have been the ornament
and support, become the disgrace and pest of the community;
. On the contary, how agreeable is it to behold well-regulated
families, children bred up in the fear of God, their minds early prin
cipled with just notions of things, and good affections, and worthy
habits, carefully cherished and improved ! Those of the one sex,
formed under the influence of religion to a just and delicate sense of
purity and virtue, and to that modesty and gentleness of manners
and behaviour, which hath been always esteemed one of their love
liest ornaments: those of the other, trained up by a proper institu
tion and discipline to a rational piety, and the government of their
appetites and passions, and to a just and manly sense of what is
truly honourable, virtuous, and praise-worthy. And here again the
same great example presenteth itself, of a most eminent personage of
the highest dignity, who, amidst all the pomps and splendours of a
court, hath esteemed it one of her most pleasing employments, to
inspect the education of her illustrious offspring, and to this hath
applied her princely cares and personal attendance. And surely it
must be the earnest wish of every good mind, that she may have the
sincere and noble satisfaction of seeing them grow up under her
tender and watchful eye, in every virtue and excellence, which may
render them public ornaments and blessings, and diffuse a beneficial

CONCLUSION. 607
and extensive influence, of great use in the present age, and the
(.fleets of which may be transmitted to succeeding generations.
How happy would it be for these nations, if, in conformity to an
example so justly admired, the great and noble would look upon the
care of their children and families to be one ofthe worthiest objects
of their attention and concern ! This could scarcely fail to have a
good effect upon those of the lower rank. Then might we hope to
see religion and virtue flourish, and a new and hopeful generation
springing up among us, the surest earnest of national glory and hap
piness. For it is a maxim of undoubted truth, as well as of great
importance, That a careful education of children will lay the best
foundation for well-ordered families, as these will contribute the
most of any thing to the peace and good order of the community.
I shall conclude this address with the admirable words of St.
Paul : " Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever
things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are
pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good
report ; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on
these things."
I have now finished the design I undertook, and which hath been
carried on to a much greater length than I at first designed. God
grant that what hath been offered in this volume, may answer
the end for which it was sincerely intended, the serving the cause
of important truth, piety, and virtue in the world, and especially
in these nations, in which such open insults have been offered
to religion, and particularly to the holy Gospel of our blessed
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. For myself, what I desire above
all things, is, that I may feel the power and influence of that excel
lent religion upon my own soul, animating and regulating my con
duct in life, supporting and comforting me in death, and preparing
me for that better state which we are raised to the hope of by the
gospel.

668

APPENDIX.
CONTAINING REFLECTIONS ON THE PRESENT STATE
OF THINGS IN THESE NATIONS.

There is a great and growing Corruption in these Lands, notwithstanding the signal
Advantages we enjoy. — This Corruption not justly chargeable on our Religion as
Christians and Protestants, but on the Neglect or Contempt of it. — Tbe unaccount
able Eagerness that hath been shown in spreading the principles of Infidelity, of
very ill Consequence to the Public. — The Tendency of Irreligion and Vice to bring
Misery and Ruin upon a People, both in the natural Course of Things, and by the
just Judgments of God. — Many things in the late and present Course of God's
Dispensations have an alarming Appearance.— Repentance and Reformation, and a
strict Adherence to the Faith and Practice of Christianity, the properest Way of
averting the Tokens of the divine Displeasure, and promoting the national Pros
perity  The happy State of Things which this would introduce.
' Though the following considerations do not directly and imme
diately relate to the View of the Deistical Writers, yet they may
perhaps come in not improperly as an appendix to it ; and will, I
hope, not be thought altogether unsuitable to the general nature
and design of the preceding work.
It was with great satisfaction that I read the order for a General
and Public Fast, to be religiously observed by all his Majesty's
subjects in these kingdoms, and which is drawn up with great
seriousness and solemnity. It is there acknowledged, that " the
manifold sins and wickedness of these kingdoms have most justly
deserved heavy and severe punishments from the hand of heaven."
We are called upon to humble ourselves before almighty God, and
in a most devout and solemn manner to send up our prayers and
supplications to the divine Majesty, to avert all those judgments
which we most justly have deserved, to continue his mercies, and
perpetuate the enjoyment of the Protestant religion among us, and
safety and prosperity to his Majesty's kingdoms and dominions.
Having so great an authority to bear me out, I shall add some
reflections, which have made a deep impression upon my mind,
with reference to the present state of things among us.
We have been eminently distinguished above most other nations
by happy privileges and advantages. Providence hath blessed us
with an abundance of those things which are usually thought to
contribute to the public prosperity and happiness. Never had any
people a fuller enjoyment of liberty ; a profusion of wealth has
flowed in upon us by our widely extended commerce. We have had
great advantages for improvement in the arts and sciences, and
every branch of useful knowledge : especially that which is the

APPENDIX. 009
most valuable and important of all others, the knowledge of religion
in its truth and purity. The light ofthe glorious gospel of Christ,
freed from the absurdities, the superstitions, and idolatries with
which it hath been incumbered in many other countries professing
the Christian Faith, hath long shone among us. The holy Scrip
tures are not locked up in an unknown tongue, nor confined to the
studies of the learned, but are put into the hands of the people : so
that all men may have access to that sacred rule of faith and prac
tice, the original standard of the Christian religion. The treasures
of knowledge are opened, and the public instructions so frequently
and freely dispensed, that it may be said, that " wisdom crieth
without, she uttereth fier voice in the streets."
It might be expected, that a people so distinguished by advan
tages for religious and moral improvement, should also be remark
ably distinguished by the knowledge and practice of piety, wisdom,
and virtue, and by a zeal for our holy religion. But though it is
to be hoped there are many among us, who are unfeignedly thank
ful for our inestimable privileges, and careful to make a right
improvement of them, yet it cannot be denied, that a great corrup
tion hath spread itself, and seems to be growing among all orders
and degrees of men. This is a very disagreeable subject ; but the
first step to a proper remedy is to be duly sensible of the true state
of our own case. Our wealth and plenty hath been abused to an
amazing luxury, and our liberty to a boundless licentiousness.
Many act as if they had no other way of showing that they are free
but by casting off all restraints, and setting themselves loose from
all the ties of religion and virtue. Atheism hath appeared almost
without disguise ; or, which in effect comes to the same thing, the
disbelief of a Providence, of God's moral attributes and govern
ment, and of a future state. The most virulent reproach and con
tempt hath been cast upon the adorable Jesus, and the methods of
our redemption and salvation by him. All that part of our duty
which more immediately relateth to the supreme Being, seemeth to
be regarded by many as a matter of indifference. And the slightest
observation may convince us, that there is a growing neglect of
public worship, as if the properest way of showing our gratitude to
God for the glorious privilege we have of worshipping him according
to the dictates of our own consciences, were not to render him any
public homage or religious worship at all. That holy day, which is
by divine appointment, and by that of our own laws, set apart from
worldly businesses and cares, for the purposes of religion, for
receiving public instructions, and for attending on divine worship,
hath been treated with great contempt. And in this too many of
those who, by their authority and influence, should set a good
example to others, have unhappily led the way. Can there be a
greater contempt cast upon it than to hold gaming assemblies on
that day ? And when this is done by persons of rank, can it be
wondered at, that by the lower kind of people it is often the worst
emploved of any day in the week, and devoted to idleness and
vice ? " And it cannot but give concern to every good mind,, that an

670 APPENDIX.
institution, so admirably calculated for the advancement of religious
knowledge, piety, and virtue, and for promoting good order in tho
community, should be so strangely perverted and abused.
Having mentioned the practice of gaming, I cannot help observ
ing, that among other unfavourable symptoms of the growing cor
ruption among us, this is not the least, that that practice is of late
years become more general, and carried to a greater excess, than
has been known before in these kingdoms. The wisest men of all
nations have been so sensible both of the pernicious effects of this
vice to particular persons and families, and its ill influence on the
community, that it would fill a large volume barely to recite the
laws that have been made against it, both in former and latter ages.
Our own laws have fixed a brand upon it, and in effect declared
the gain made by it to be dishonourable and infamous ; yet is the
being instructed in the mysteries of it become a necessary part of
education, whilst the seasoning the tender minds of young persons
with principles of religion and just sentiments of things, and forming
them to the worthiest practices, is, it is to be feared, in a great
measure neglected.
But what affordeth the most melancholy apprehensions is, the
great corruption and depravity of manners which is so generally
and justly complained of. — The most blasphemous abuse of the
name of God, by shocking oaths and imprecations, and the most
corrupt and wilful perjuries, drunkennesses, and excesses of riot,
but especially by the excessive drinking of distilled spirituous
liquors, the health, morals, and religion of the laborious and useful
parts of these kingdoms are well-nigh destroyed. Fired with this
infernal poison, they are spirited to perpetrate and execute the most
bold, daring, and mischievous enterprizes, and, shaking off all fear
and shame, become audaciously impudent in all manner of vice,
lewdness, immorality, and profaneness, in defiance of all laws
human and divine. But it doth not stop here : its malignant influ
ence reaches to the children yet unborn, who come half-burnt up
and shrivelled into the world, and who, as soon as born, suck in
this deadly poison with their mother's or nurse's milk : so that, if
this worse than all plagues be suffered to go on, it will make a
general havoc, especially amongst the soldiers, sailors, and laborious
part of the nation, who are manifestly degenerated from the more
manly constitutions of preceding generations.* Besides an amazing
"* See " Distilled Spirituous Liquors the Bane of the Nation," 8vo. 2nd Edit. 17S6,
London. Dr. Stephen Hales's " Friendly Admonition to the Drinkers of Gin,
Brandy, and other Spirituous Liquors, which are so destructive of the Industry,
Morals, Health, and Lives of the People;" a new edition with additions, and an
appendix ; and is in the catalogue of the books distributed by the Society for promot
ing Christian Knowledge, London. — This worthy divine and excellent philosopher
(whose whole life has been usefully employed in promoting the honour of God and
the welfare of mankind), in a treatise upon the distilling of sea-water, and tlie use of
ventilators, &c, just published, speaking of distilled spirituous liquors, says — " How
much therefore does it behove all, who have any concern for the honour and dignity of
their own kindred species, any indignation at its being thus debased and disgraced,
any bowels of pity for the vast multitudes, not less perhaps than a million, that are
yearly destroyed all over the world, by the moral as well as natural, and therefore

APPENDIX. 671
dissoluteness, and impurities of all kinds, even those that are most
unnatural, and which arc not fit to be named amongst Christians.
To which may be added, the horrid crime of self-murder, not only
frequently practised, but pleaded for : a practice deservedly rendered
infamous by our laws, as being a murder committed by a man upon
his own person, in opposition not only to the most sacred obli
gations of religion, and the rights of the community, but to the
strongest instincts of the human nature, wisely implanted in us by
the great Author of our beings, as a bar to such monstrous prac
tices. — To all which may be added, that barbarous practice of men's
murdering one another, upon a pretended point of honour, as it is
called, for the most slight and trivial offences, below the cognizance
of our laws. A crime inexcusable in a civilized country, and which
yet generally passes unpunished, and thus leaves the guilt of blood
upon the land, crying aloud for vengeance.— lt is impossible for a
thinking man, that has a true zeal for the honour of God and the
interests of religion and virtue, and who hath the welfare and
happiness of his country really at heart, not to be deeply affected
with such a view of things, and solicitous what the consequence
may prove.
And now it is a natural inquiry, what can this be owing to ?
Whence can it be, that nations so happily privileged, and favoured
with so many advantages for the knowledge and practice of religion,
should have sunk into such an amazing corruption and degeneracy ?
Can this be consistently charged on religion itself, either the Chris
tian religion or the Protestant, which is the religion of Jesus, as
taught in the holy scriptures, and freed from the abuses and corrup
tions that have been brought into it ? The deists have pretended
the first, the enemies to the reformation the last. The answer to
both is in effect the same. Can that be the cause of corruptions
among Christians, which, if steadily adhered to, is the best remedy
against those corruptions? Can that occasion an abounding in
vice and wickedness, which, if really believed and seriously consi
dered, exhibiteth the most powerful dissuasives from it that can
enter into the human mind ? Can the furnishing the people with
the means of knowledge, and bringing them to an acquaintance
with the holy scriptures, which are able to make us " wise unto sal
vation," and are " profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction,
for instruction in righteousness," can this have any tendency to
encourage them in vice and dissoluteness ? Such a supposition is
worst of all evils, that ever befell unhappy man ; to use their utmost endeavours to
deliver mankind from the pest ! But notwithstanding this astonishing ravage and de
struction of the human species, yet the unhappy unrelenting nations of the world seem
as unconcerned about it as if only so many thousands, nay millions, of caterpillars or
locusts were destroyed thereby. Was there ever a more important occasion to rouse
the indignation of mankind? Can we be calm and undisturbed, when this mighty-
destroyer rears up its envenomed head ? The most zealous advocates for drams, even
the unhappy besotted dramists themselves, the prolonging of whose lives, and whose
real welfare, both here and hereafter, is hereby sincerely intended, cannot iind fault
with this well-meant remonstrance, in defence of them and of all mankind, against
this universal destroyer, from one who has long been labouring, and that not without
success, in finding means to preserve multitudes of lives by various means."

672 APPENDIX.
contrary to the plainest dictates of common sense. Tho corruption
therefore complained of can never be the natural effect or product
of our advantages, and especially of the religion we profess. On
the contrary, the best and surest preservative against this growing
corruption, and the most effectual way of recovering from it, would
be to have a high esteem for those divine oracles, to read and con
sider them with attention, and to lay to heart the excellent instruc
tions and directions which are there set before us.
There is a far more natural account to be given of that corrup
tion of manners, that vice and wickedness which so much aboundeth
among us. It is owing not to the knowledge or belief of religion,
but to the neglect or contempt of it ; to a strange indifference to
wards it in some, whilst others use their utmost endeavours to tra
duce and expose it under the vilifying characters of superstition,
priestcraft, or enthusiasm. Great numbers of impious books have
swarmed among us, both formerly and of late : some of which are
not only levelled against Christianity, but strike at the foundations
of all religion, the attributes and providence of God, and a future
state of retribution. The manifest tendency of them has been to
banish the fear of the Deity, to confound the moral differences of
things, to degrade the human nature to a level with the brutes, and
thereby extinguish every noble and generous sentiment, to deprive
good men of the blessed hope of immortality, and to free bad men
from the fears of future punishments, and the apprehensions of a
supreme Governor and Judge. These principles, and the books
that contain them, have been propagated with great eagerness and
industry, both in these kingdoms, and in our plantations abroad,
and sometimes at a considerable expence. This preposterous kind
of zeal for infidelity may, to a considerate observer, seem to be an
odd phenomenon, of which no rational account can be given. One
may, in some degree, account for a man's being hurried away by the
violence of his appetites and passions, to do what his own mind
disapproves and condemns : but that any man should coolly take
pains to set other men loose from all the restraints of religion and
conscience, and thereby, as far as in him lies, attempt to dissolve
the bands of society and public order, and encourage men to gratify
and fulfil their appetites and passions without controul, the natural
consequence of which would be to introduce universal confusion, in
which he himself may be a great sufferer, is absolutely unaccount
able on any principles of good sense or sound policy ; so that, if we
did not see frequent instances of it, we should be apt to think
it scarcely possible that any men in their senses should act so
strange a part.
One very pernicious consequence of such open attempts against
religion is, the spreading profaneness and dissoluteness of manners
among the lower kind of people, who easily catch the contagion,
when once men of higher degree, or at least that pretend to a su
perior sagacity, have set the example. And who can, without deep
concern, observe, that this is very much become the case among us
at present? Great numbers of those who belong to what ought to

APPENDIX. (>73
be the most industrious body ofthe people, are sunk into irreligion
a.n , vice : an<* m proportion as these prevail, they become averse to
all honest labour and industry, and prone to the most flagitious
crimes, which have the worst effect imaginable on the peace and
good order of the community. And it is easy to see what mischief
and confusion must thence ensue. A sober and industrious populace
is the strength, the riches, the glory of a nation : but when those,
that should be the labouring hands, become vicious and dissolute,
they are prepared for every kind of wickedness and disorder. As,
from their rank and education, they have, for the most part, little
regard to the appearances of honour and decency, if at the same
time they have cast off the ties of religion, and the fear of God, and
a regard to the powers of the world to come, and are abandoned to
their appetites and passions, what are they not capable of? It is
an observation which hath generally held, and is verified by the
experience of all ages, that " righteousness exalteth a nation, but
sin (i. e. abounding vice and wickedness) is a reproach unto any
people" (i. e. it bringeth disgrace and misery upon them), Prov.
xiii. 10. When once a neglect of religion and a corruption of man
ners become general, they have a natural tendency to dissolve and
enervate a nation, and to extinguish true public spirit and a manly
fortitude. Nor have any people long maintained their liberties,
after having lost their probity and virtue.
Thus it is in the natural course of things, and thus it also is by
the just judgment of God, and according to the stated rules ofthe
divine procedure towards nations or large communities. God may
indeed, in his great wisdom and goodness, long bear with a degene
rate people, and may even continue to pour forth many blessings
upon them when they are in a corrupt state, especially if there be a
considerable remnant of good men still to be found among them.
But when their iniquities are grown up to such a height, and have
continued so long, that he doth not see fit to bear with them any
longer, the measure of their iniquities is said to be full ; the time is
come for executing a severe vengeance upon them, and the punish
ment falls heavier for being so long delayed.
Whosoever duly considereth these things will be apt to think,
that, according to the ordinary method of God's providential deal
ings towards backsliding nations and churches, we have too much
reason to apprehend his righteous judgments. The present situa
tion of things hath an alarming appearance, and, if we be not
utterly stupid, must tend to awaken us out of our security. Scarcely
ever was there a time in which it might be more justly said, that
" God's judgments are abroad in the earth." I need not enter into
particulars : they are very well known, and fresh in our remembrance.
There have been, to use our Saviour's emphatical expressions, " com
motions and great earthquakes in divers places, — distress of nations
with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring : men's hearts failing
them for fear, and for looking after those things that shall come
upon the earth," Luke xxi. 9. 11. 25. Of so vast an extent have
the amazing concussions been, reaching to many parts of Europe,

x x

674 APPENDIX.
Africa, and America, at a great distance from one another, arid in
divers places have produced such dreadful effects, even to the sub
version of great and populous cities, that it looketh as if God were
about some great and remarkable work of judgment, " to punish the
world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquities," as the pro
phet expresseth it, Is. xiii. 11. Surely every man, who believeth
that there is a Providence which extendeth its care to mankind,
must believe that it hath a special concernment in events of such a
nature, which so nearly affect nations and large communities, and
on which the lives and fortunes of so many thousands depend.
Though second causes are admitted, still it must be considered,
that they are all under the direction and superintendence of God's
sovereign providence, which so ordereth and over-ruleth the cir
cumstances of things, and the course of natural causes, as to sub
serve the ends of his moral administration with regard to his reason
able creatures, and to execute his purposes towards them, whether
in a way of judgment or of mercy. And, in every such case, we
should fix our views not merely or principally on second causes,
but should look above them to the supreme Disposer, and endeavour
to comport with the designs of his infinite wisdom and righteous
ness. Calamitous events of a public nature are not to be considered
as concerning only the particular persons or people that immediately
suffer by them. They have a more extensive view, and are designed
and fitted to give instructive lessons to all mankind that hear them.
The natural tendency of all such dispensations is to awaken in the
minds of men a holy fear of the divine Majesty, and to give them
-a, most affecting conviction ofthe vanity and instability of all worldly
hopes and dependencies. The prophet Isaiah, after having de
scribed in a very lively manner the striking impressions that should
be made upon the hearts pf men because of " the fear of the Lord,
and the glory of his Majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the
earth," very properly adds, " Cease ye from man whose breath is
in his nostrils : for wherein is he to be accounted of? Is. xi. 20, 21..
Of what avail, in such a time of awful visitation, are the arts of
human policy, the pomp of courts, or the power of mighty armies,
or the riches and grandeur of the most populous and magnificent
cities ? The plain voice of such dispensations, a voice intelligible
to all mankind, is this : " Let all the earth fear the Lord : let all
the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him." Psal. xxxiii. 8.
" The Lord is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlast
ing King : at his wrath the earth shall tremble ; and the nations
shall not be able to abide his indignation. Jer. x. 10. Surely we
should be ready, to cry out on such occasions, " Great and marvel
lous are thy works, Lord God Almighty, just and true are thy
ways, thou King of saints. Who would not fear thee, and glorify
thy name ? for thou only art holy. For all nations shall come and
worship before thee : for thy judgments are made manifest." Rev.
xv. 3, 4. The great use which is to be made of such awful dispen
sations, is well expressed by the prophet Isaiah, xxvi. 9. " When
thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will

APPENDIX. 075
learn righteousness;" i. e. they ought to do so ; and it is the natural
tendency of such judgments to engage them to do so. The cala
mities inflicted upon others should .be regarded by us as solemn
warnings and admonitions, which it highly concerneth us to improve.
The language of such dispensations to all that hear of them, is the
same with that of our Saviour to the Jews, when speaking of those
persons on whom the tower of Siloam fell, and of those whose blood
Pilate mingled with their sacrifices, " Except ye repent, ye shall
all likewise perish." Luke xiii. 3. 5. How inexcusable shall we
therefore be, if, instead of laying these things seriously to heart,
we continue careless and unaffected still, and go on in a thoughtless
round of gaieties and pleasures, like those the prophet mentions,
Is. v. 12. " The harp and the viol, the tabret and pipe, and wine
are in their feasts : but they regard not the work of the Lord,
neither consider the operation of his hands." Against such persons
a solemn woe is there denounced. And elsewhere, speaking of
some who continued to indulge themselves in luxury and riot, and
all kinds of sensual mirth, at a time when the circumstances of
things called for deep humiliation and repentance, he saith, " It
was revealed in mine ears by the Lord of hosts, Surely this iniquity
shall not be purged from you till ye die, saith the Lord God of
hosts." Is. xxii. 12, 13, 14.
Whosoever carefully observeth the course of the divine dispensa
tions towards us for some time past, will be sensible that we have
had many warnings given us. A pestilence amongst the cattle in
England for many years past, and though abated, still continues in
some parts of this country. But a few years ago the sword of war
raged in one part of the united kingdom of Great Britain, and was
near penetrating to the centre of it, and threatened the subversion of
that constitution, on which the preservation of our religion, laws, and
liberties, in a great measure dependeth : but, through the great
goodness of God, our fears were, after some time, happily dispelled.
More lately encroachments have been made upon our possessions
and plantations abroad, in which our national safety and prosperity
is very nearly interested. And now it is not many weeks since a
most dreadful calamity hath befallen a kingdom, so very nearly con
nected with us in interest and alliance, that the calamity may be
regarded as, in a considerable degree, our own. And in fact, we
have been and are great sufferers by it. Many lives have been lost
of his Majesty's subjects belonging to Great Britain and Ireland,
and many more there are, who, by the sudden subversion, have
either been totally, or in a considerable degree, deprived of their
worldly substance, and reduced to circumstances of distress. A
present stop is put to the course of a most advantageous commerce.
The springs of our wealth are obstructed ; a great blow is struck at
our trade, in which we are so apt to place our confidence : and this
at the very time when we seem to be entering upon a war with a
mighty nation, a war that threatens to be very hazardous, and
which must needs put us to a vast expence, which we are not very
well able to bear. That particular judgment, under which some of

676 APPENDIX.
the neighbouring nations have so severely suffered, and which is
one of the most dreadful of all others, hath greatly threatened us.
It is but a very few years since that great city, which is the metro
polis of these kingdoms, and the centre of our wealth and commerce,
felt an alarming sbock, though, through the great mercy of God, it
did little more than threaten and terrify. Since that time, and very
lately, there have been several very unusual phaenomena among us,
of such a nature as to have a threatening aspect : extraordinary agi
tations of the water both on our coasts and within land, and shocks
of an earthquake felt in several parts of Great Britain and Ireland,
and of his Majesty's dominions abroad.
Thus the divine judgments seem to be advancing upon us, and
have gradually begun to operate. But such is the mercy and for
bearance of God towards us, that he seems loath to inflict upon us
the fierceness of his anger, or to pour forth all his wrath. He is
pleased to give us previous warnings, to awaken and rouse us out of
our security, that by a timely repentance, and by humbling our
selves under his mighty hand, we may prevent the necessity of in
flicting severer punishments. His hand is lifted up, but the awful
stroke seemeth to be suspended for a while, as if be were unwilling
to proceed to extremities with us. Upon considering these things,
that most affecting expostulation comes to my mind, which God
condescended to make by his prophet Hosea, with regard to his
people Israel, when in a very dangerous backsliding state. " How
shall I give thee up, Ephraim? How shall I deliver thee up, Israel?
How shall I make thee as Admah ? How shall I set thee as Zeboim?
Mine heart is turned within me, my repentings are kindled together.
I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger ; I will not return to
destroy Ephraim : for I am God, and not man, the Holy One in the
midst of thee." Hos. xi. 8, 9. Yet we find at length, upon their
obstinately persisting in their disobedience and ingratitude, and
abusing the methods of his indulgence, and even growing more and
more corrupted, he saw it necessary to execute his awful judgments
upon them, even to the utter subverting that kingdom, and sub
jecting it to a foreign yoke. God forbid that this should be our
case ! Let us therefore make a right use of the divine forbearance.
We have hitherto had reason to " sing of mercy as well as of judg
ment." Let us not, by our abuse of his goodness, provoke him to pour
forth upon us the full vials of his penal wrath. With an ingenuous
sorrow and self-abasement we should acknowledge our aggravated
transgressions, our neglect and abuse of the privileges and advan
tages we have so long enjoyed, the contempt that hath been cast on
his glorious gospel, and the profaneness and dissoluteness of man
ners, which hath so much prevailed. On these accounts, let us
humble ourselves deeply before God, and implore his mercy, and
contribute, as far as in us lieth, to the carrying on a work of
national repentance and reformation, It is undoubtedly our duty,
in the present conj uncture of affairs, when we seem to be entering
upon an hazardous and expensive war, to exert our utmost efforts
for assisting and supporting the government, and to apply ourselves

APPENDIX. 077
to the use of all proper means which human prudence may suggest.
but still we must get this fixed upon our minds, that whatever pro
jects may be formed for procuring national advantages, and promot-
¦q1^ -if P1'*3**0 Prosperity, all other expedients to make a people
flourish, without reformation of manners, and without the know
ledge and practice of religion and public virtue, however they may
seem to have an effect for a while, will, in the issue, prove ineffec
tual and vain.
The most proper way we can take to avert impending judgments,
to preserve and maintain our valuable privileges, and promote the
public welfare and happiness, is not to express a clamorous zeal for
liberty at the same time that we abuse it to an unrestrained licen
tiousness, than which nothing hath a greater tendency, both
through the righteous judgment of God, and in the nature of the
thing, to deprive us of our liberties ; but it is to endeavour to make
a just and wise improvement of our advantages, to maintain a strict
regard to religion, probity, and purity of manners, and to guard
against vice, libertinism, profaneness, and debauchery. This, and
this alone, will preserve us a free, a flourishing, and happy people.
God grant that this may be the blessing of these nations to the
latest posterity ; and that we may long enjoy the light of the glo
rious gospel of Christ shining among us in its genuine purity, and
the inestimable advantage of a freedom to profess it, and to worship
God according to the directions of his word, and the dictates of
our own consciences, without being exposed to persecuting rage
and violence ! Happy nations that we still are ! if we be but duly
sensible of our happiness ! and careful to make a right use of our
privileges ! What a glorious face of things would soon appear
among us, if, as we have the best religion in the world, we took
care to govern ourselves by its sacred rules, and to act under the
influence of its divine instructions and important motives ! Virtue,
supported and animated by the glorious hopes of the gospel, would
appear in its genuine sacred charms, and in its lovely beauty and
excellence. Love, the true spirit of Christianity, would prevail,
and produce a mutual forbearance in lesser differences, at the same
time that there would be a happy agreement in matters of the
highest importance ; there would be a zeal without bigotry, a liberty
without licentiousness. The natural consequence o- all this would
be peace and harmony in larger and lesser societies. Such would
be the face of things among us, as far as could be expected in this
state of imperfection, if the religion of Jesus were firmly believed,
and duly considered, and men would be more generally persuaded
to give up themselves to its divine conduct. This would render
persons in high stations signally useful to the public, and ornaments
as well as supports to their country, And at the same time sobri
ety, industry, temperance, and good order, would spread among the
body ofthe people. Nor would true bravery and fortitude be want
ing. For though superstition tendeth to produce mean and unmanly
fears, true religion, and a steady belief of a ivise and righteous Pro
vidence, hath a tendency to fortify and establish the mind, and to

67B APPENDIX.
produce a real courage and greatness qf soul, which will enable a
man to meet death with a calm intrepidity in a noble and just cause,
and stand the shock of the greatest terrors.
It is a reflection which hath frequently occurred to my mind,
especially on occasion of the late dreadful judgments of God, how
different, under the apprehension or pressure of an amazing calamity,
must be the state of one that firmly believeth Christianity, and en-
deavoureth to govern his practice by its excellent rules, from that of
the atheist and unbeliever, or ofthe man who, though he profess
eth to believe tbe Christian religion, liveth in a plain contradiction
to its sacred obligations. The former, however black and disas
trous the face of things may appear to be, which naturally tend to
create fears in the human mind, yet is persuaded, that all things are
under the direction of infinite wisdom, righteousness, and goodness,
and that we live in a world where every thing, above, beneath, and
on every side of us, is in the hand of God, and under the direction
of his Providence ; who, as he can arm all his creatures against us,
and make them the instruments of his just displeasure ; so, if we be
careful to please him, and approve ourselves in his sight, can make
the whole creation around us to be as it were in a covenant of peace
and friendship with us. Or, if a good man be involved in the same
outward calamities with others, as must often, without a miracle,
be expected, in calamities which happen to large communities, still
he hath this to support him, that the great Lord of the universe is
his father and his friend, and will cause those outward evils to turn,
in the final issue, to his greatest benefit. Death itself, if this shall
befal him, shall prove a real gain to him, and shall introduce him to
a better world, and a nobler society. It is justly observed concern
ing the " man that feareth the Lord, that delighteth greatly in his
commandments, that he shall not be afraid of evil tidings, his heart
is fixed, trusting in the Lord, Psal. cxi. 1. 7. Not only may he
say, upon good grounds, with the Psalmist, " The Lord is on my
side, I will not fear: what can man do unto me?" Psal. cxviii. 6.
And again, " Though an host should encamp against me, my heart
shall not fear ; though war should rise against me, in this will I be
confident, Psal. xxvii. 2. But he may break forth into that noble
strain of triumph, " God is our refuge and strength, a very present
help in trouble. Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be
removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst ofthe
sea : though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, and though
the mountains shake with the swelling thereof," Psal. xlvi. 1, 2, 3.
On the other hand the wicked and ungodly man, continuing such,
hath no proper resource, no solid comfort or support in a day of
calamity, when all things seem black and dismal about him. For
either he looketh upon them to be the effects of a wild chance, or
blind necessity, which cannot possibly be the object of a rational
trust and confidence, and which leaves no room for hope, but in
that which nature hath an abhorrence of, an utter extinction of
being : or, he apprehendeth them to be the just judgments of the
wise and righteous governor of the world, whom he hath offended

APPENDIX. 079
by his sins. And vain it is to brave it against the wrath of heaven.
Not to fear creatures like ourselves, in a just cause, argueth a noble
and manly fortitude : but not to fear God, the Almighty Lord of
the universe, is not courage, but madness. The only proper thing
which remaineth for such persons to do, and it is what reason, as
well as Scripture, directeth to, is to humble themselves deeply under
the mighty hand of God, and to flee to his infinite mercy, through
Jesus Christ, in a hearty compliance with the most reasonable and
gracious terms which he hath appointed, for obtaining an interest
in his grace and favour.
Upon the whole, the best thing that can be wished for the ho
nour of God, for the happiness of mankind, and for the real wel
fare of our country, is, that a hearty zeal for the knowledge and
practice of our holy religion may have a revival among us ; and
that persons of all orders and conditions may join in contributing
to promote its sacred interests. And notwithstanding the corrup
tion too justly complained of, there are many, I am persuaded,
among us, and may the number of them daily increase ; who are
earnestly desirous to do this. Every man hath it in his power to
contribute something towards it, at least by endeavouring to " walk
in a conversation becoming the gospel." But there are some per
sons who have peculiar advantages for doing honour and service to
Christianity. Those especially that are distinguished by their high
rank, their fortune, and quality, should make use of the influence
this gives them for recommending and promoting true religion and
virtue, which will add a lustre to their titles, and dignities, and is
one of the best ways they can take to show their regard to the pub
lic happiness. Magistrates should account it their duty and their
honour to employ the authority they are invested with, for serving
the interests of religion, and discountenancing vice and wickedness;
since for this purpose they are appointed, that they " may be for the
punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them that do well."
And it is then that their authority will have its proper influence,
when it is strengthened by that of their own good example. But,
above all, they who are honoured with the character of the ministers
of the holy Jesus should make it the very business of their lives to
spread and promote real vital Christianity, to instruct the people in its
important doctrines, and build them up in their most holy faith, and
to enforce upon them the excellent duties it enjoins, by all the
powerful and most engaging motives which the gospel sets before us.
And that their instructions may have the proper effect, it highly
concerneth them to keep themselves free from the fashionable vices
and follies of the age, and to endeavour to be ensamples to their
flocks, by a well tempered zeal, piety and charity, and the virtues
of a holy life. Thus will they not only do the highest service to re
ligion, but procure the greatest honour to themselves, and the most
just veneration for their sacred character, which, where it is not
disgraced by a conduct unworthy of it, naturally demandeth the
esteem and regard of all the true friends to religion and virtue.
For these valuable and excellent purposes, may the God of all

680 APPENDIX.
grace pour forth his Holy Spirit upon all orders ahd degrees of men
in these nations, that, as they bear the honourable name of Chris
tians, they may " adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things;
and, being filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and
spiritual understanding, may walk worthy of the Lord unto all
pleasing ; being fruitful in every good work."
I may be thought perhaps to have insisted too largely upon these
things. But I cannot but think, that one of the principal things
which ought to be proposed in books written in defence of Christi
anity, should be not merely to promote the speculative belief of it,
but to engage men to that which is the main design of its excellent
doctrines, as well as precepts — a holy and a virtuous practice.

A P P E N D 1 X,

CONTAINING

A VIEW OF THE PRESENT TIMES,

WITH REGARD TO RELIGION AND MORALS.

By W. L. BROWN,
PRINCIPAL OF MARISCirAL COLLEGE, PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY"., AND MINISTER
OF GREYFRIAR3 CHURCH, ABERDEEN.

CONTENTS OF THIS APPENDIX.

INTRODUCTION.

Page
Reasons for writing this Appendix, and the Plan of it . . 685

SECTION I.
The present aspect of the Times, with Regard to Religion and Morals 680
SECTION II.
The Religious and Moral Instruction dictated by the present awful State of
the Christian World  692
Art. i. The Divine Wisdom and Justice vindicated in the present Dispen
sations ............ ibid
Art ii. Admonitions to Civil Rulers and Magistrates .... 696
Art. hi. Admonitions to Persons of Rank and Fortune .... 698
Art. iv. Admonition to the Clergy  699
Art. v. Admonition to the People  701
Art. vi. The present Times strongly call on all Christians rightly to esti
mate, and firmly to maintain their Religion . . . . . 702
SECTION III.
Of the happy tendency of Christianity to produce temporal, and particularly
National Happiness  '°4
SECTION IV.
Inferences from the preceding Discussion ; particularly the Necessity of a
geueral Reformation of Manners . . . • ¦ • • -711

085

APPENDIX.

Containing a View of the present Times, with regard to Religion and Morals  Re.
flections suggested by that View.— An Illustration of the excellent Tendency of
Christianity to promote even temporal, and particularly, national Happiness. — An
Enforcement of the Necessity of a general Reformation of Manners.— And Cautions
against the Poison of Infidelity.

INTRODUCTION.
The principles, contained in the preceding Appendix, are not
only just and salutary in themselves, but have been singularly illus
trated and enforced by the events which have happened on the
grand theatre of human affairs, since it was written. As the con
sideration of these events, and of the most prominent causes which
have produced them, must strongly tend to awake the dormant at
tention of mankind to religious concerns, and, particularly, to the
great and important doctrines of Christianity, it appears highly
proper at this time, and on occasion of a new edition of Leland's
most excellent work, to take a cursory view of the awful dispensa
tions of divine Providence which a short course of years has exhi
bited to an astonished world, and to bestow some serious reflection
on the principles and conduct which they so strongly inculcate on
all ranks and conditions of men. This shall be the chief subject
of this additional Appendix. Its comprehensive nature, its intimate
connexion with the highest interests of mankind, and its peculiar
relation to the present times, would demand botfi a fuller discus
sion than is compatible with the. limits of this paper, and greater
abilities than the writer of it pretends to possess. Such, however,
as it is, it may do some good, and with this view solely it was com
posed. The considerations now to be presented to the reader, arise di
rectly from the contemplation ofthe present state of Europe, and
those striking convulsions and revolutions which it exhibits. Reli
gion, not politics, is the writer's object. But, as religious concerns
have been strongly affected by political agitations, and as an irreli
gious spirit has much contributed to produce the most dreadful
calamities of the times, it is necessary, to the end in view, to direct
a considerable portion of attention to the political world, and to sur
vey its most remarkable appearances.
That the gross corruptions of Christianity, which have so long
prevailed in countries called Christian, have, on the one hand, pow
erfully contributed to the rejection of all religious principle, and to

686 APPENDIX.
the dreadful disorders which this has occasioned, will not be ques
tioned by any person of discernment who is, in the smallest degree,
acquainted with the present, and preceding, state of these countries.
On the other hand, the uncertain speculations of pretended philoso
phy, in contempt of the sure and salutary dictates of divine truth,
even in countries where access is opened to the best sources of reli
gious information, have been productive of the most fatal conse
quences to morals, and to the happiness of civil society, which rests
on no other foundation, but public and private virtue. Pure and
genuine Christianity, unknown or despised, has failed to produce
its blessed fruits on the earth. Its shadow and external form only
have been preserved among the greater part of Christian nations ;
and, even among those where its substance is to be found, its pure
instructions, its power, its spirit, and its practice, are confined within
very narrow bounds, while dissipation, immorality, and unrestrained
licentiousness, reign through the greater part of the community.
The time is now come when the judgments qf God in the earth are
proclaimed with such a loud and terrific voice, that they must rouse
the most inattentive, convince the most prejudiced, and, one should
also think, bend the most obdurate to learn righteousness. In order
to impress this awful truth more strongly on the reader's mind, it
will be proper to consider the principal events of the present time;
to attend to the instruction which they convey ; and to show the
admirable tendency of the Christian religion to promote even the
temporal happiness of mankind.

SECTION I.
Ofthe present Aspect of the Times.
Within the space of a few years, wonderful, and almost incredi
ble changes have happened on the great theatre of the world. The
American revolution was not only extremely important in itself, but
has been productive of a series of astonishing events. The princi
ple, on which the American republic claimed and established its in
dependence, attracted universal attention. The foundations of civil
society, the natural rights of man, and the reciprocal duties of rulers
and subjects, were universally discussed; and, in the course of the
discussion, views and opinions with respect to the political and civil
condition of mankind, to which the generality of men had, hitherto,
been strangers, were spread as far as the influence of the press could
extend. Unhappily the greater part of European governments had
equally departed from the principles of the religion they professed,
and from those eternal maxims of justice by which every government
ought to be directed, and substituted, in the place of these, the dic
tates of the most crooked and insidious policy. Corruption, begin
ning at the head, had diffused its baneful contagion through the

APPENDIX. 687
whole social body. Although mankind were almost everywhere
panting for liberty, they were little qualified for its enjoyment, which
can be obtained only in conjunction with that morality which directs
freedom to its proper ends, and prevents it from degenerating into
the grossest licentiousness.
One of the most corrupt courts of Europe was certainly that of
France. Its unvarying aim had, forages, been its own aggrandize
ment ; and the means, which it employed for this purpose, were
either craft, or violence, as the one or the other appeared most con
ducive to tho immediate object in view. Actuated solely by that
policy which dictated the diminution of a rival's power, this court,
as regardless ofthe dangers which threatened itself, as it was indif
ferent to the principles of liberty, embraced the American cause, and
powerfully contributed to its triumph.
The same policy led to foment discontents and dissensions in
other countries, and to undertake the defence of schemes of govern
ment the reverse of those by which its own administration was con
ducted. How short-sighted, how weak is the deepest policy of
man ! What, in the view of those, who pursued these plans, ap
peared the most penetrating sagacity, and the most comprehensive
wisdom, turned out, to them, the most egregious folly, and the most
fatal delusion.
The arts that were then practised, the pretexts that were employed,
the writings that were disseminated, the armies and the fleets that
were sent out to accomplish the designs of the French government
— all contributed to diffuse, through France, political opinions, and
a national spirit unknown to it before. That flagrant abuses in
almost every department of the state; scandalous dilapidations of
public treasure ; the consequent derangement of finance ; the want
of regular resources to supply the deficiency; the impotence of royal
power to procure extraordinary ones without some appearance of
national consent ; the impious attacks against not only every form
and description of revealed, but even the fundamental principles of
natural, religion, contained in the most admired and popular writ
ings ; and the libertinism and dissolution of manners universally
diffused, but particularly prevalent in the higher classes of society
— that all these circumstances had prepared the French nation for
some portentous and wide-extending revolution cannot be called in
question. Its beginnings, indeed, wore a smiling appearance, and afforded a
pleasing prospect of public felicity. Those who wished well to
mankind, and ardently desired more equitable and benificent plans
of public administration to be universally adopted, easily cherished
the delightful expectation of a happier era beginning to dawn upon
Europe. But, in this expectation, it is evident that they rather indulged
the representation of benevolent fancy, than consulted the calm dic
tates of rational anticipation. It could not reasonably be supposed
that a nation of such levity of character, of such ardent and impe
tuous passions, and so corrupted by luxury, and still more by irre-

68($ APPENDIX.
ligion, would, when set free from those restraints to which it had
so long been subject, remain within any bounds of moderation.
Scenes of tremendous desolation ought, at all events, to have been
expected. It was impossible, also, in the nature of things, that the
violent agitations of France should not, in some way or other, affect
every neighbouring state, and ultimately extend their convulsive in
fluence to the remotest parts of Europe.
The Jacobin faction, the most desperate and profligate mentioned
in history, speedily spread, through their own country, confusion,
anarchy, and every species of unbridled licentiousness, trampled
under foot every feeling and sentiment of humanity, confounded
every moral distinction, and invested, with the badges of honour,
the most detestable forms of criminality. These men had seen, in
the writings of pretended philosophers, the grossest corruptions of
Christianity exposed as the genuine doctrines of our holy faith.
They had seen the virulent persecutions, which these corruptions, in
subservience to the most iniquitous passions of the human breast,
had occasioned, imputed to a religion which breathes universal cha
rity and kindness, and prepares man for heaven by rendering him
beneficent and virtuous on earth. They had seen its purest pre
cepts, which soar far above morality merely human, represented as
impracticable, or pernicious. They had learned to consider every
real Christian as a fanatic, and to class every species of religion
with superstition and hypocrisy. Rejecting Christianity, therefore,
as a fable, they resolved to extirpate it wherever their power might
extend, and, with a spirit of freedom disdaining submission even to
infinite wisdom, goodness, and power, to dethrone, in idea, the
Sovereign of the universe. Pretending to wage war with fanati
cism, they exhibited it in a form and shape unknown and uncon-
ceived before — the fanaticism of atheism, the burning zeal of im
piety, the sublimated spirit of political intolerance.
Now, for the first time, was displayed, to the world, the spectacle
of a legislative body renouncing all regard for religion, and openly
proclaiming, as the perfection of wisdom, the disbelief of a Deity
and of a future state. The strongest ties by which mankind are
bound, and the most powerful motives by which they are influenced
to the practice of virtue, were, under the sanction of avowed prin
ciple, broken and destroyed, and what reason itself had established,
on the strongest foundations, was considered as the reverie of dis
ordered fancy.
So nearly, however, are extremes allied, that, in the midst of this
flagrant renunciation of all religious principle, the open profession
and practice of idolatry and polytheism were adopted. Those, who
disclaimed the religion of Christ, and the worship of God, erected
altars to the imaginary goddess of liberty, and to the deified personi
fication of their country, and attempted to revive the absurd reli
gious ceremonies of Greece and Rome. So that, among all the
other extravagancies of the present age, was exhibited the incon
sistent union of atheism, and superstition, while each of these dis
cordant principles counteracted the effect of the other; atheism pre-

APPENDIX. C89
venting superstition from affording any check to the crimes of its
professors, and superstition inspiring that fanatical rage which
atheism pretends to prevent — An appearance of delusion and frenzy
hitherto unexampled in the annals ofthe world.
As this frantic spirit endeavoured to propagate its tenets through
every surrounding nation, and to overturn every established form
of government, it was not surprising that princes and states should
combine to resist it ; and, if ever there was a time, when mutual in
terest dictated mutual and cordial co-operation, and the abandon
ment of all narrow, partial, and selfish views, it was surely that in
which the coalition was formed against the torrent of the French
anarchical system. But, the reverse of all this took place. The
Continental powers were united by no principle of common welfare.
They were actuated by no regard for the happiness either of their
own subjects, or of mankind in general. That old system of crooked
and narrow politics, by which the cabinets of Europe have been too
much influenced for two hundred years backwards, dictated their
measures, and directed the whole of their proceedings. Each
sought only some little acquisition of territory, of treasure, or of
power. Their subsequent conduct justified the imputations of their
enemies; and while they professed to stop the torrent of impiety,
anarchy, and cruelty, they contributed to its more extensive and
rapid course. What has been the result ? Their feeble and ill-
concerted opposition has afforded, to a power the most enterprising
and dangerous that has appeared in the world since the times of
ancient Rome, all that advantage which attends the splendour and
the dread of victory; and, while their weakness has removed every
restraint of fear, they have lost that respect which would, at least,
have been attached to principle. The fiends of war have been let
loose to ravage and desolate Europe ; poverty, distress, bloodshed,
and almost every species of misery have been widely extended,
with no other effect, but that of augmenting that very evil, the
prevention or diminution of which was to have been the sole com
pensation of such immediate calamities. Wherever we turn our
view, nothing is presented but the most melancholy subjects of con
templation. We behold the strongest bonds of society burst asunder over a
considerable part of Christendom, the tenderest charities of nature
trodden under foot, impiety, blasphemy, and atheism stalking on
the earth with daring front, and bidding defiance to the thunder of
the Almighty. We behold a nation, esteemed one of the most civi
lized of Europe, stained with deeds of barbarity by which the most
ferocious savages would have deemed themselves disgraced. We
behold the wild and impious leaders of that nation, not content with
having deluged its fields and its streets with the blood of thousands
of victims sacrificed to fear, to revenge, or to wanton cruelty ; with
having depopulated and laid waste its cities, dissolved all social
order and extinguished, in the breasts of their countrymen, all true
sense' of justice, humanity, and religion, successfully employed in
spreading the same confusion and misery through every other nation

690 APPENDIX.
to which they can extend their power. We behold some of the prin
cipal Sovereigns of Europe now trembling before the gigantic French
Republic, eagerly courting reconciliation with her, joining in the
bands of amity with those whom they had proclaimed the most
atrocious malefactors, and, in order to compensate the losses they
have sustained in the contest, in which they have been engaged,
adopting those very schemes of invasion of their weaker neighbours,
which in her they had so strongly reprobated. We behold two
powerful states deprived of political existence, and divided by the
hand of rapine,* and others stripped of half their possessions. We
see our own country almost exhausted by a bloody, expensive, and
exasperated war ; and although, by the divine undeserved mercy,
we have, hitherto, been preserved from that confusion, disorder, and
ruin which have .overwhelmed other nations, we are uncertain how
long this advantage may be continued.
Never before did modern Europe experience a more dreadful con
cussion — a concussion already productive of the greatest changes,
and announcing still greater, and more numerous. For, the fer
mentation, which everywhere agitates the minds of men, cannot soon
subside. Passions, so strongly, and so generally excited, must,
like water which has burst every bank and mound that contained it,
spread their inundations far and wide, till they, at last, find their
own level. Notwithstanding the general desire, and, acknowledged
necessity of peace to all Europe, there is little probability of its
complete restoration, and still less, of its continuance, for a series of
succeeding years. From this country the insolence and injustice of
its enemies have removed all hopes of pacification for the present.
The spirit of conquest, and of universal dominion appears evidently
to have seized the present rulers of France. Peace is contrary both
to their immediate possession of power, and to their exorbitant
schemes of aggrandizement, nor till these are completely and irre
trievably frustrated, are there any hopes of a general and permanent
pacification. The last general ferment which Christendom experienced was
that which was occasioned by the reformation. Wars and rumours
of wars did not subside for nearly a century after they commenced.
It is true that all these commotions and calamities were ultimately
productive of the greatest good both to the civil and religious inte
rests of mankind. But, while human corruption is so deeply rooted
and so widely spread, it is hardly possible that correction, amend
ment, and final peace can be obtained without great and lasting
severities. The ferment, which now exists, is, indeed, of a com
plexion very different from that just stated. It is merely politi
cal, and strongly irreligious. But, it is a great and extensive
ferment, and must produce effects adequate to its force and dif
fusion. Now, if these are not the judgments of God in the earth, when did
they ever exist ? When has his arm ever been more conspicuously
* Poland and Venice.

APPENDIX. 691
displayed, from the clouds, wielding the threatening sword, to im
press, on the inhabitants of the world, the long forgotten lessons of
righteousness ? These judgments are not to be confounded with the
more doubtful ones of hurricanes, earthquakes, tempests, or inun
dations, which, though adapted to rouse men to reflection, and to a
serious review of their moral state, spring not immediately from
human depravity, and bear not along with them the distinct im
pressions of moral evil. The judgments, which now afflict mankind,
can all be traced back to the most polluted sources of corruption,
and, originating in the profligacy of the higher stations of society,
have diffused their contagion through the whole social mass.
" From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness
in it; but wounds and bruises and putrifying sores."* "It is of
the Lord's mercies that we are not consumed, because his compas
sions fail not."-f-
The love of money, the root of all evil, is universally predominant.
The commercial spirit, laudable, indeed, and salutary, when re
strained within due bounds, and regulated by the principles of
piety and morality, now appears to absorb every other consideration,
to prescribe the most extensive gain as the measure of public inte
rest, to extinguish the genuine love of country, and to eradicate all
sense of national honour. The masculine, elevated, and wise senti
ments of our ancestors seem to have given place to a sordid desire,
and an ignoble veneration, of wealth, to an intemperate love of plea
sure, to wasting luxury, and to all the frivolity and effeminacy of a
luxurious and opulent age. Dissipation and profanity are no longer
confined to the higher ranks, where they long resided, but have de
scended to the lower, aggravated by all that coarseness of excess
which always accompanies a mean education. Among them, the
doctrines of infidelity have also been disseminated with a facility of
reception which would, a few years ago, have been accounted im
possible. Never before were those conjugal ties, the sanctity of
which is the surest pledge of purity of morals and of public happi
ness, so wantonly broken ; never was domestic felicity so frequently
stabbed, and all that people owe to their children and families, so
shamefully neglected or forgotten; never was there a period in
which religion was so little studied, in theory, and so little mani
fested in practice; in so much, that it appears to be the only
subject which ought not to occupy people's thoughts, and the
only principle that ought not to influence their conduct. Even
when any regard for religion remains, how often does it degene
rate either into bigotry or fanaticism, or into mere external ob
servance, and a respect for public institutions ? The small in
fluence of genuine piety is evident from this circumstance, that
it very frequently happens, that persons, who are uncommonly
zealous for a particular system of religious opinions, are by no
means affected by the attempts of deists or atheists to sap the
foundations of all religion both natural and revealed, and even ap-
* Isaiah i. 6. t Lament, iii. 22.
Y Y 2

692 APPENDIX.
plaud their pernicious doctrines, merely because they agree with
them oh certain political points. Can this be called anything else
but an obstinate sectarian spirit, devoid of all pure religious princi
ple 1 Public spirit is generally either a blind attachment to party,
or an invincible devotion to opinions adverse to rational freedom,
and good government, either by their tendency to despotic oppression,
or to democratical anarchy. Thanks be to God ! for the remnant of
virtue that is still preserved among us, in the humanity and charity
which characterize our nation, and, in some measure, redeem the
manifold turpitude by which it is disgraced.
After this view of the calamities and the vices of the present times,
of the events which have so recently happened, and of that peculiar
aspect of the world, which admits of no other solution but that of
an extraordinary appointment of divine providence, to punish the
sins of men, to reprove, in particular, the decay of religion, and
to warn us to return, before it be too late, to her forsaken paths,
it will now be proper to collect the instruction, which the judg
ments of God, so loudly proclaimed, are evidently calculated to
convey.

SECTION II.

Thd Teligious and moral Instruction dictated by the present awful State of the
Christian World.
I. It is clear that divine Providence is prosecuting some great and
extensive plan in this lower world. What its peculiar nature may
be, it would be rash and presumptuous to determine. But, with a
desire of moral and religious improvement, it certainly becomes us
to attend to the most striking features of the divine dispensations,
as far as they can be discerned by our feeble and clouded sight.
Every thing, now happening on the great theatre of human affairs,
is extraordinary and repugnant to the experience of ages immedi
ately preceding. An attentive eye, however, may easily discover,
in these events, the progress of overruling wisdom, and the decisions
of sovereign justice — A people, extremely corrupt and irreligious,
has been let loose to scourge the greatest potentates of the earth ;
and, as their policy was chiefly derived from the French school, and
the libertinism, which they encouraged both by their precept and
example, also flowed from the same source ; so has this been the very
quarter from which their humiliation and their sufferings have pro
ceeded. The attempts of despotism to check the rising spirit of
liberty, and to crush it for ever, have completely failed. Her sceptre
has been broken by the blow by which she intended to intimidate
mankind. The great ones of the earth have received impressive ad
monitions, in the fate of the nobility and privileged orders of France,

APPENDIX. 693
to beware of abusing their distinctions and advantages, and of pro
voking the indignation of mankind, by their pride, their profligacy,
and their irreligion. The writings of sceptical and infidel authors
were chiefly admired and recommended in the higher spheres of life.
Many persons in these ranks were pleased with them, because they
set them free from moral and religious obligations. What their
depravity led them to wish, their ignorance prepared them to receive
as truth. From them the admiration of these writings, and the
adoption of their pernicious sentiments, descended through the other
orders of society, till the contagion of impiety, universally diffused,
prepared the French nation for the reception of those shocking doc
trines, which have produced the most dreadful disasters, of which
the severity has chiefly fallen on the higher stations.* On the
other hand, the popish hierarchy, and all its absurd and corrupting
systems of superstition and intolerance have been overturned, not
only in France, but in other countries, and a way opened for
destroying them in those where they still appear to be firmly
established. Lest, however, greater evils than those which have been reproved
and chastised, should be introduced ; lest all moral distinctions
should be confounded ; lest blasphemy, atheism, atrocious cruelty,
the most dreadful oppression, and every species and every degree of
wickedness, should appear completely successful and triumphant ;
that very people, which has been used as the scourge of other na
tions and their princes, has endured, in a double measure, the
calamities it has inflicted, and, in the midst of its external victories,
suffers at home every description of national misery. Its streets
have been deluged with the blood of their inhabitants, shed by
their fellow citizens. The flames have consumed its villages and
many of its towns, and the fields have been covered with dead
bodies. Trade and manufactures annihilated, agriculture neglected,
every source of national prosperity dried up, suspicion, jealousy,
distrust, and revenge reign almost in every heart. Parties have
risen upon parties ; revolutions have succeeded revolutions ; agita
tions and convulsions have never ceased. All the temporary leaders
of factions have perished either by their own hands, or by those of
the executioner, or by those of the assassin, or have been driven into
exile. Even while I am writing, the last revolution has exhibited
one of the most astonishing strokes of despotism that ever terrified
mankind. Their most distinguished legislators, politicians, and
warriors have, without form of trial, been sentenced to transporta
tion, and sent off, in covered waggons, like so many wild beasts.
In all this, so extraordinary, so glaringly repugnant to the usual
train of human affairs, may we not observe a peculiar direction of
Providence, pursuing some grand and ultimately salutary plan .
Do we not clearly perceive, that the impotence of despotism, un-
* See in particular, the Posthumous Works ofthe late King of Prussia, abounding
with themosPt poT"onous infidelity, and the most virulent calumnies against the Chris
tian religion, and its divine Author.

694 appendix.
supported by the attachment and affection of subjects, has been
exposed ; the gross corruptions of Christianity have, in many places,
been exploded ; the folly, dissipation, and oppression of the elevated
and opulent have received an alarming admonition : That, on the
other hand, the calamities of unprincipled licentiousness, abusing
the sacred name of liberty, the horrors of irreligious philosophy, and
the devastations of anarchy and democratical tumult, have been
presented to mankind in such a horrid and ghastly shape, that it is
impossible the lesson can be soon forgotten : That, from the serious
review of both sides of the picture, this conclusion must inevitably
follow : that a government equally removed from anarchy and ar
bitrary power ; that pure and undefiled religion, such as is incul
cated by the sacred Scriptures; that justice, moderation, and con
descension in high and wealthy stations ; and contentment, industry,
and a becoming respect for superiors in the lower classes of society,
are the chief bonds of civil union, 'and the grand sources of public
and private felicity ; and that wbatever, in either extreme, is repug
nant to these, ougbt to be viewed with abhorrence, and repressed
with vigour.
A general indifference for religion had begun to spread over
Europe. Ashamed of superstition and bigotry, of fanaticism and
intolerance, mankind were verging to the contrary extreme, and
the flame of piety was fast expiring in every heart. Political, com
mercial," and economical subjects wholly engrossed the enquiries of
philosophers, and constituted the chief study of those who devoted
any part of their time to serious reading. Theology was no more
attended to ; and, even in protestant countries, the grossest igno
rance of religious truth began to prevail. It was no disgrace for a
man of education, who was not, by profession, a divine, to know
nothing of the fundamental doctrines of the religion which he pro
fessed, ofthe discriminating articles of faith, discipline, and worship
of the different churches into which Christians are divided, or of
those evidences of divine original by which they concur in defending
their religion against the attacks of deists. As for practice, how
few, in any Christian country, thought of regulating their lives by
the precepts of Christ, or allowed their plans of conduct to be in
fluenced by their views of heaven !
Infidels, availing themselves of this neglect of religion, so gene
rally prevalent, formed the design of extirpating every species and
description of Christianity, and of putting their atheistical philo
sophy in its place. In the prosecution of this design, and of poli
tical schemes connected with it, the most atrocious actions have
been committed, and the strongest sensations of horror impressed on
every good and feeling heart. Mankind may now clearly see that
fanatical excess is not peculiar to religious zeal, but accompanies
other violent and outrageous passions, and that men may persecute
from irreligious, as well as from religious, motives. Every impartial
person, who will attend to the subject, must be convinced of the
mild and beneficent tendency of Christianity. This conviction when
the natural effects of this religion are contrasted with those of prin-

APPENDIX. 6t)5
ciples hostile to it, will come home to every mind with greater force.
The spirit of piety may thus gradually revive; the Christian faith
may be more respected and loved than it had been for a considerable
period before. Of this there are already some indications. The
higher ranks of society appear to be convinced how pernicious it is,
even to their worldly interest, to spread through the community,
that disregard for religion, which soon brings along with it a con
tempt for human authority. They begin to be more attentive to the
external duties of religion ; and, although this principle, as long as
it is confined to appearances, is of little account in religious estima
tion, yet, what commences in fear and interest alone, if it super
induce serious and reflecting habits, may terminate in love, and the
sincere practice of piety. Even that general agitation which pre
vails, although, at present, directed to political subjects, may also
admit of religious impressions, if seasonably and forcibly applied.
When men's minds are roused to exertion, they frequently grow dis
gusted with one subject of enquiry, and love to vary the channel of
their activity, Total indifference to religion is unnatural to the hu
man soul ; and, when investigation, whatever be its immediate
object, is once set on foot, a subject, of all the most important, can
hardly fail to attract attention, whenever its light and evidence are
allowed to shine without the interposing clouds of prejudice. Re
ligious zeal appears, even now, to be rekindling for the extension of
the gospel to heathen nations. The design is highly laudable in it
self; but the more important and laudable any design is, the more
necessary it is to conduct it with wisdom, a proper application ofthe
most effectual means, and, on the grand principles of Christianity,
unconfined by the distinctive tenets of parties and sects.* The sub
version of the power of the Romish Church, over so large an extent
of its former dominion, opens an extensive field for disseminating
the original simplicity ofthe gospel, if protestants in those countries
had but the zeal, and the courage to undertake it. That we have
never heard of any attempt of this kind, is a lamentable proof of
the decay of religious principle, where it might have been expected
to retain some portion of vigour. While we so frequently hear of
political communications ; while republicanism and democracy are
so prone to receive, and to impart, assistance ; while the most im
portant interests of the human race are alleged as the predominant
motive; it is surprising that interests, far more important than any
confined to this earth, should animate to no attempts to communi
cate the full light of gospel-truth, either to those who behold only
its feeble glimmerings, or to those who turn away their eyes from it
altogether. This is a species of fraternity unknown in our day, to
which, however, the peculiar complexion of the times strongly in
vites. ' Nor can I help thinking that some of that zeal, labour, and
expence, which is now engrossed by extending the gospel to heathen
nations, might, with as great advantage, and as fair a prospect of
* How far this has been the case in the present instance, the issue will probably de
termine.

696 ArPENDix.
success, be employed in communicating, to those countries, in which
the power of the Romish Church has been overturned, the unadul
terated truths, and the pure morality of reformed Christianity.
Whatever be the ultimate object ofthe awful dispensations of di
vine Providence now in the earth, which no human foresight can,
without presumption, pretend to discover, it is certain, that the re
flections, above stated, are evidently dictated by them at present,
and that, from these, considerable improvement in righteousness
might be derived. In the midst of such impressive scenes, can we
remaiu as indifferent, careless, and secure, as if the whole aspect of
human affairs were illumined with the brightest sunshine, and in
vested with the most pleasing colours? Shall we not be brought
to serious reflection both on our national, and private sins, which
expose us to the divine vengeance, already displayed on every side
of us, and endeavour, by sincere repentance and amendment, to
avert from ourselves the calamities which have overwhelmed so many
others, and which might also have justly fallen to our share, but
for the undeserved mercy of God 1 Must it not become the most
anxious wish, and most earnest care of every reflecting person, that
he may not be taken off his guard, but be found watching and sober;
that, though he should be stripped of every other possession, he may
still retain one treasure which is subject to no corruption, and ex
posed to no violence or fraud ;• that, if he should be subject to
" tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness,
or peril, or sword," he may still retain the " love of Christ;" and
that, if it should please God to inflict these severities upon him ;
either as trials, or as chastisements, he may not " lay on him more
than he is able to bear," and direct his visitations more by his infi
nite mercy, than by the desert of the sufferer.
On the review ofthe scenes which the world, at present, exhibits,
such reflections will unavoidably force themselves on the mind of
every man who entertains any sense of religion. If they made that
general impression, which they are certainly calculated to produce,
the calamities, which have fallen to the share of so many ofthe hu
man race, would not have been appointed in vain ! We proceed to
more particular reflections.
II. " The judgments of God now in the earth" loudly call on all
civil rulers and magistrates, to keep constantly in view the public
good, to acquire the most enlarged and comprehensive knowledge of
it, to discharge their trust with the greatest integrity, and to con
ciliate obedience and attachment by the wisdom and benignity of
their administration. Let them consider that their offices are insti
tuted solely for the public benefit, that their talents and their labour
ought to be devoted to this object, and that every neglect, much
more every wilful violation, of duty is not only highly criminal in
itself, but, in the present times, must unavoidably expose them to
the severest reproach, if not to the most imminent danger.
It is the height of folly for any person, intrusted with the public
administration, to pursue a crooked and selfish policy, in opposition
to the most evident schemes of national advantage. The generality

APPENDIX. 607
of mankind are, at all times, apt to impute, to their governors, the
most iniquitous and unjustifiable views. Of late years, they have
grown uncommonly vigilant with regard to their conduct, and "sharp-
sighted in detecting its errors and defects. Sedition not only exag
gerates real, but maliciously imputes fictitious, grounds of accusa
tion. These calumnies must be refuted by a wise and benignant
government. The experience of security, of increasing sources of
prosperity, and of happiness, generally diffused, must impress, on
the minds of the governed, the most conciliatory conviction ; and
the confusion, iniquity, and distress, produced by the absurd sys
tem of " outrageous liberty and tyrannical equality," must be con
trasted with the pleasing display of order, of justice, and ofthe full
enjoyment of every civil and political right, as far as is compatible
with civil society. The days, when rank and office were illumined
with the brightest lustre, are past. The atmosphere is overspread
with clouds, and agitated with tempests. The gloom can be dissi
pated, and tranquillity restored, only by the steady and inextin
guishable lights of beneficent talents, and of well-informed integrity.
The present times, in particular, inculcate, in the most impres
sive language, on princes, and rulers of every description, to encou
rage, protect, and advance the knowledge, and the practice of pure
and undefiled religion, and of every useful and liberal science. Ig
norance and prejudice are the great obstructers of national improve
ment. Genuine and substantial knowledge is the firmest support
of lawful authority, the surest guard of order and peace, and the
most certain pledge of dutiful submission to law, and to its consti
tutional administration. The conduct, which reason prescribes, re
ligion still more powerfully enforces. A people, accustomed to free
enquiry, and to that calm and steady investigation which leads to
the discovery of truth, will not be easily misled by the false lights
of atheistical philosophy, by the meteor glare of fanaticism, or by
the funereal torch of superstition. These are soon eclipsed by the
bright and steady sunshine of sound reason, and of nevealed truth,
which both discovers, and invigorates to pursue, the true road of
happiness. Let it never be said that ignorance is the mother either
of devotion, or of any thing good and valuable. Ignorance can con
fer no benefit, but a circumscribed capacity of doing evil. A person
brutishly ignorant, is innocent, or useful, as far as he resembles an
ox or a horse whose bodily strength may be usefully directed and
applied by human intelligence. Even the value of inferior animals
is increased in proportion to the sagacity and docility of their
natures: and can it ever be maintained that ignorance and stupidity
can be beneficial to any class or condition of men? Ignorance is
the darkness of night which is as favourable to the approach of an
'enemy, as to our concealment from his view. Knowledge is the
beneficent light of day, which, disclosing to us the surrounding
"objects in their true colours, and their just relations, enables us to
pursue, or to avoid them, according to our circumstances. Igno
rance is the insurmountable lot of brutes, and the temporary con
dition of infants. Knowledge is the acquisition of men, one gion-

698 APPENDIX.
ous quality of angels, and one supereminent attribute of God him
self. From ignorance of true religion, of sound morality, and of
manly politics, have, in a great measure, proceeded the excesses
committed by the French in the midst of their arrogant pretensions
to superior knowledge. Under a new form of government they con
tinue to display that union of frivolity, and of the most flagrant vio
lation of virtuous principle, which they have so frequently exhibited
under the old. Real knowledge, purchased by the dearest experi
ence, may perhaps lead them back to the right path in which alone
true liberty, and its concomitant happiness, can be found.
III. The instruction, dictated to civil rulers by the present awful
dispensation of Providence, is equally applicable to all persons of
rank and fortune, though invested with no public office. On them
a most sacred obligation is imposed, even in the most tranquil states
of society, to use, with moderation and beneficence, the advantages
which they enjoy. If, by indulging in every species of extravagance,
of dissipation, and debauchery, they grossly abuse them ; if they
not only debase themselves by their vices, but, by their scandalous
conduct, and pernicious example, spread corruption through the
whole community ; if they think themselves entitled to bid defiance
to all those obligations and decencies which they consider as bind
ing upon their inferiors ; if they lay hold of every opportunity of
outraging their Creator, and insulting that very religion, whose in
fluence prevents their destruction; they are rebels against the
Sovereign of the universe, and the declared enemies of mankind.
" For all these things God will bring them to judgment."
The day of trial is already come. Their indictment has been
read with a tremendous voice, and they are called to plead to
it. The abettors of the levelling system, the patrons of fana
tical equality, the professed preachers of political regeneration,
openly accuse the privileged orders, and the generality of the
opulent, of ignorance and folly, of dissipation and debauchery, of
pride and insolence, of incapacity to discharge the important duties
of civil life, of indifference to all that is really excellent, and praise
worthy, of veneration for the most contemptible accomplishments,
and for their worthless possessors, and of the most hard-hearted
oppression, whenever their capricious wills are opposed. These ac
cusations, false, indeed, and malicious, in a great variety of instances,
can be fully refuted only by a conduct the reverse of what is laid to
their charge, and by an example as attractive of veneration and
love, as its opposite is productive of contempt or hatred. A mere
title, or even an opulent estate, no more secure reverential awe to
their possessors : on the contrary, they are considered, by many, as
sufficient grounds of reproach and obloquy. Real and substantial
merit ought, therefore, now to be employed to support the assailed
edifice of external and privileged pre-eminence : and such still is the
propensity of mankind to respect illustrious ancestry, and to admire
the glitter of wealth, that, if these are guarded by the virtues of the
possessor, they will, in every society, not agitated by revolutionary
convulsions, remain secured against the secret arts, or open machi-

APPENDIX. 699
nations of the enemies of all order and distinction. Let those, there
fore, who are raised in the scale of society, whether by birth or by
riches, endeavour to command the respect, and to conciliate the be
nevolence of mankind by their reverence for religion, and by the
practice of every social, civil, and domestic virtue. Let them be
particularly careful in the education of their children, that they may
qualify thern to assert their hereditary honours, and to preserve their
estates, which are, at present, exposed to such danger, on the one
hand, by the vices of the great and wealthy, and by the licentious
ness of the lower orders, on the other.
IV. The awful events of the present times convey an important
lesson to the clergy. They exhort them, with the most impressive
voice, to exert their utmost diligence, and their best abilities, to
guard, from the contagion of impiety, and all its concomitant vices,
those who are committed to their pastoral care. They warn them
to try, by the standard of the Holy Scriptures, the doctrines which
they teach, to see whether they be really of God, or the tradition
and commandments of men. They exhibit to them infidelity and
atheism, the children of corrupted religion, and of worldly policy,
now employed in destroying their parents ; and as they proclaim,
that the counsel of God cannot be overthrown, and that the gates of
hell shall never prevail against the church of Christ ; so, they an
nounce, that the counsel and the work of men, whenever they are
inconsistent with the one and adverse to the other, will come to
nought. The clergy are called upon to consider whether much of
the impiety and profligacy of the present age is not occasioned by
their indifference, their negligence, and, sometimes, by their attach
ment to worldly pleasures and preferments. Let them reflect, that
if the sail has lost its savour, the corruption of the whole mass is
unavoidable ; that if those who should defend, preserve, and extend
religion, are accessary to its overthrow, their guilt will be aggra
vated by the importance of the duties they have violated, by the
loss of all the good they might have done both to the temporal and
spiritual concerns of their brethren, and by the unspeakable misery
which they have actually occasioned; and that their punishment
must be proportionably increased. On the other hand, every gene
rous and noble principle of their souls ought to be called into action
by the efforts of infidels and profligates for the ruin of mankind; by
the glorious nature of the struggle in which they must engage ; by
the assurance of sufficient succour from the great source of light and
power; and by the eternal and splendid reward which is promised
to their magnanimity and perseverance.
To them are, in a particular manner, committed both the eternal
and temporal interests of their brethren, and on their exertions
chiefly depends the preservation of those fundamental principles of
justice, humanity, and temperance, which pure religion so firmly
establishes, and so awfully sanctions. The contest, in the present
day, is not between one particular form of religion and another, but
between the existence of any religion whatever, and the total extir
pation of it ; which last must be, of all calamities, the most dreadful

700 APPENDIX.
that ever assailed the human race. It is a foolish notion to sup
pose, and direct experience contradicts the supposition, that infidels
are adverse to corrupt forms of Christianity only, and that they are
(as they ought to be, if consistent with their profession,) more
friendly to the faith and worship of protestants. The reverse is the
case. Infidels are infinitely more lenient to the absurdities and cor
ruptions of popery than to the pure doctrines which the reformation
restored. The reason is obvious : the more absurd any form of
Christianity is, a wider field is opened for their attacks against it,
for the introduction of their schemes of deism, and, by easy conse
quence, for the dissemination of atheism itself; a system, at pre
sent, much more widely prevalent than good men are willing to
suppose. To the honour of the established clergy of both the churches of
England and Scotland, the far greater part of them has been deci
dedly hostile to the atbeistical doctrines ofthe French school. Less
aversion, I shall not say, more favour, has been shown to this abo
minable sect by dissenters in both countries. Charity obliges us,
and reason also disposes us, to believe that this is to be ascribed
rather to political than to religious, or, to speak more properly, irre
ligious motives. The success of the French atheistical system is
connected with the success of certain political opinions, and, for the
sake of the latter, the former is not opposed. Great zeal is pro
fessed against popery, and its overthrow is a subject of great exulta
tion. This is just and becoming in all who have any regard for pure
Christianity. But the same principle ought certainly to inspire still
greater aversion from atheism openly professed, and followed in con
duct; or, if this is considered as an exaggeration, which I am far
from granting that it is, at least, from manifest, avowed, bigoted,
and fanatical deism !
As the obligation is strong on all professed Christians, especially
in the present times, to evince the efficacy of religious conviction by
a virtuous and holy life ; it is particularly so, on the clergy. If ever
it was necessary to make their light shine, that men seeing their good
works may glorify their father which is in heaven, that necessity
exists at present. By the purity of the lives of Christians in gene
ral, and particularly of those whose peculiar office it is to teach and
defend religion, its cause is most effectually served, and the calum
nies of its enemies triumphantly confuted. Notbing has done so
much injury to the interests of Christianity, as the unchristian
lives of its professors. There is, in mankind, a general propen
sity to judge of the truth of any religious system by the con
duct of those who have embraced it. Hence, the enemies of our
holy faith, perceiving that it produces not those blessed effects
on manners, which we maintain ought to flow from the belief of
it, transfer, to the doctrines of Christ, that disgrace which ought
to rest solely with the vices of Christians. Their reasoning is
cer.tainly fallacious and unfair; for, whatever be the conduct
of those who profess them, the doctrines and precepts of Chris
tianity remain equally true and excellent; nor is it to be ques-

APPENDIX. 701
tioned that they produce the most salutary effects in the hearts and
lives of thousands of believers, who, cultivating holiness in secret,
shall be openly rewarded by their heavenly Father. But if Chris
tians had, in general, lived more conformably to their profession,
fewer cavils would have been raised against Christianity, lt may
be safely asserted, that the happy change which it produced in con
verts to the primitive church, that that admirable perfection of
divine morality, that incarnate spirit of evangelical excellence which
they displayed, were as effectual for the propagation of the gospel,
as the miracles by which its celestial origin was attested and con
firmed. If the happy period shall ever arrive (and may God grant
that it may be hastened !) when the knowledge and belief of pure,
unadulterated, restored, Christianity shall generally reform those
vices which the corruptions or the ignorance of it have so much
contributed to engender and cherish, the most effectual answer will
be given to the calumnies of its enemies ; the streams will declare
the purity of the fountain from which they flow : and, while peace
and good-will reign among men, glory will also be given to God in
the highest.
V. To the people, in general, the lesson, conveyed by the striking
events of our times, runs in this strain : — " Beware of revolutions
of government, and of all sudden and violent changes. Beware lest,
instead of some partial inconveniences you now experience, and
think intolerable grievances, you draw, on yourselves, the unqualified
pressure of irreparable calamities. Guard against the inflammatory
addresses, or secret suggestions of insidious demagogues, who en
deavour to rouse your passions, as the instruments of their ambition,
and of your misery. Such men are always tyrants in their hearts.
They wish to shake off all established control, to obtain much
greater for themselves, and their connexions. They have liberty
constantly in their mouths, and oppression in their thoughts. The
profligacy ofthe present age has introduced a distinction between
public, and private character, as if a bad man, in private life,
might be a real patriot. But, there is no foundation for this dis
tinction in the nature of things ; and pretended regard for the rights
of men, when united with private depravity, will ever be found to
cover the most ambitious and tyrannical designs. View the greater
part of demagogues, and of those who aspire at this distinction in
their own families, and in every relation in which they are called to
act, and you perceive them haughty, overbearing, impatient of con
tradiction, and executing, with a high hand, every measure they
have adopted. Is it possible that, if such men were invested with
civil power, they would, in opposition to their own interest and
exaltation, maintain, with inflexible integrity, and fortitude, the
genuine principles of liberty, and of the equal enjoyment of right?
In order to continue the delusion among the multitude, they would
never cease to talk and harangue on these topics ; but, while their
speech was so magnanimous, their actions would bear every expres
sion of iniquity and usurpation. What has the French revolution at-

702 APPENDIX.
tested, but one uninterrupted series of jargon, and cant, and noise
about liberty and the rights of man, conjoined with the violation of
every civil and religious right, with the most unqualified oppres
sion, and with the most atrocious cruelty in every variety of shape ?
" The lower classes of the community, which turbulent and sedi
tious men chiefly use as their instruments, commonly gain least by
every innovation. The anarchy and distress, which popular com
motions produce, arrest the progress of industry, the source of their
subsistence. The profits and honours, arising from successful in
surrections, are seized by those who concerted and conducted them.
The situation of their humble followers either remains as it was be
fore, or is rendered worse by the oppression with which usurpation
is accompanied. When you have the happiness to live under a
constitution of government founded on principles of liberty both
civil and religious, and administered with moderation and mildness,
cherish the enjoyment as one of the most precious gifts of heaven ;
acquiesce cheerfully in the dictates of law, and willingly submit to
constitutional authority, which is the safeguard of your lives, your
properties, your reputations, your liberties, of all domestic comfort,
of whatever you account most valuable and dear. If you see
abuses, and desire the reformation of them, endeavour to obtain this
by regular, calm, and constitutional means. But, above all, read
in the horrible example of France, understand, and remember, that
religion is the grand basis of social union, the foundation of virtue,
the source of true happiness, whether private or public, domestic or
civil ; that, when men abandon God and his worship, be gives them
up to all the workings, and all the consequences of a reprobate
mind; and, when they abjure and blaspheme the heavenly father
of the great family of mankind, they become the slaves of that
infernal fiend who is the tempter to wickedness, and the author
of misery."
VI. All Christians are certainly called, by the complexion of the
present times, to value their religion as the most precious treasure,
to adhere to it with firmness, and to exert themselves, to the utmost
of their abilities, for its defence and extension. Every sincere be
liever of the gospel blesses God for his unspeakable gift of Jesus
Christ, and is firmly persuaded, that, as life and immortality are
brought to light by the gospel, so, he has great joy and peace in be
lieving. With such glorious prospects as our divine religion unfolds
to us, with such blessed assurances of reconciliation with God, and
of eternal happiness as it gives, with such complete evidence of its
truth as it lays before us, how different is the condition of man, thus
enlightened and supported, than when left to his own uncertain specu
lations, and abandoned to his own unassisted weakness. Degradation
is converted into dignity, terror into composure, and distress into hap
piness. Can any Christian, then, behold, with indifference, the im
pious attempts of infidels and atheists to wage war with heaven
itself, to deface God's fairest work on earth, his second creation of
man to righteousness and holiness, and to snatch, from him, the

APPENDIX. 703
firmest support of virtue, and the most soothing consolation of
calamity and affliction. Shall the divine instructions, the glad news
of salvation, the blessed sound of the glorious gospel of peace, pro
claimed by the Son of God, and by his inspired apostles, seem as
idle tales, and be classed with the absurdities of heathen mythology ?
Shall the first teachers of Christianity have sealed, with their blood,
their testimony to its truth, only to obtain, in these last days, the
character of weak and deluded fanatics? Shall so many bloody
persecutions have been undergone, with unshaken patience, and un
daunted fortitude, for the establishment of Christianity; shall such
cruel sufferings have been endured, so many valuable and exemplary
lives have been sacrificed, and such magnanimous resistance have
been opposed to spiritual tyranny, for the glorious reformation of
religion ; shall Christianity, thus, have been planted, propagated,
and restored at such a vast expence of divine interposition, and of
human virtue ; and shall, in these latter times, a sect of false philo
sophers proclaim that the truth of God is a lie, and endeavour to
extinguish its light? No: it is impossible that any, who under
stand, and have sincerely embraced the doctrines of Christianity,
and professed obedience to its precepts, can be deluded by this im
potent sophistry. Let those, who have never known our religion,
but in its grossest corruptions, who have never felt its divine in
fluence on their hearts, who have never seriously reflected on the
nature and perfections, or even on the evidences of the existence of
the Supreme Being ; let such lend an ear to the miserable sophisms
by which the enemies of religion support and propagate their ab
surd and pernicious doctrines, which both outrage heaven, and sap
the foundations of society. But, no person, who has ever studied
Christianity, and been convinced, on rational grounds, of its truth,
can run the smallest risk of being shaken in his belief, and much
less, of being perverted in his conduct, by the arguments of the
enemies of religion, which are frequently repeated, because they
are destitute of all solidity, in order that the frequency of their ap
plication may compensate their want of strength. Indeed, to this
wretched ignorance, and culpable neglect of Christianity, are chiefly
owing the calamities which have overwhelmed the country, where
this irreligious frenzy principally prevails, as well as most of those
which its arms have subdued. When the arts of imposture were
detected and exposed, and the chains of superstition were broken,
the true doctrine of Christ was unknown ; and the reveries of dis
eased philosophy, meeting with no opposition from the dictates either
of sound reason, or of divine revelation, were palmed upon mankind
as truths equally solid and salutary.

701 APPENDIX.

SECTION III.
Of the happy Tendency of Christianity to produce temporal, and, particularly,
national Happiness.
The prevailing passion of the times is the establishment of such
forms of government as are most conducive to the happiness of
mankind. However laudable this object may be in itself, the' result
of its prosecution has, hitherto, been disorder, carnage, and misery.
Whether any thing beneficial and salutary may, afterwards, arise,
in compensation for such calamities, is still matter of uncertainty.
But, when projected improvements are begun on false principles, it
is much to be apprehended that the ultimate result will hardly be
productive of happiness, as far, at least, as the views of fanatical
philosophers are concerned. That divine direction may probably
draw good out of evil has already been shown. This, however, cannot
be pleaded in behalf of systems which directly produce the evil, and
have no natural tendency to the remoter good.
If the Christian morality, which is the only part ofthe Christian
scheme, with which, as having immediate influence on the happiness
of society, we are, at present, concerned, be the purest that was
ever delivered to mankind, the best adapted to every capacity, and
confirmed by the most efficacious sanctions, whatever system of
polity either rejects this altogether, or enfeebles its energy, must, in
so far, counteract the moral improvement of our species, and, of con
sequence, its greatest happiness. The chief object of all good laws
is to establish the grand principles of justice, equity, and humanity.
By the Christian religion this very end is uniformly pursued. In
as far, then, as sound morality should constitute the essence of all
just and salutary legislation, in so far the Christian precepts ought
to be cherished by civil rulers, and the sacred source from which
they proceed, and the supreme authority by which they are sanc
tioned, to be constantly kept in view, in order that greater force and
efficacy may be given to those rules of action which are the bands
and supports of civil society. It has, of late, become a popular
tenet that political institutions ought to have no connexion with
religion, and neither to support, nor to be supported by it ; in a word,
that national religion is equally pernicious to religious principle, and
to the public welfare. From the union of politics and religion, it
has been maintained, have proceeded the impostures of priestcraft,
the worst arts of oppressive politics, and the prostitution of piety to
the most flagitious purposes. Hence, the only means of securing,
to religion, her uncontaminated influence, and of depriving political
craft of one of its most powerful engines, is to separate religious,
from political, institutions, and never to suffer them, in future, to
form any alliance.
If, by religion, be understood only a certain system of speculative

ArPENDix. 705
opinions, whose object is the establishment or maintenance of a
certain form of religious ceremonies, without any regard to their in
fluence on morals, the truth of these propositions will not be denied.
The whole strength of the argument lies in supposing that religion
and morality are founded on different principles, and lead to dif
ferent results; in a word, that religion and superstition are the
same. But, if this opinion be false (as it most certainly is), if
religion is no more to be confounded with superstition, than erudition
with pedantry, or economy with avarice, equally false must be every
conclusion drawn from this hypothesis. If the proper notion of
religion be, in general, the method of pleasing God by practising,
on just principles, every domestic, social, and civil virtue ; so far is
it from being true that civil government should disclaim all con
nexion with religious institutions, that the more it proceeds on those
principles, which pure and undefiled religion prescribes and enforces,
the more likely it is to attain the ends for which it is appointed ;
and the more it departs from them, the more corrupt it will be in
itself, and the more pernicious to society. The only question then
is, not whether every form of religion should be equally patronised
or equally rejected by any state, or whether political and religious in
terests be totally separate, and independent of each other, but whether
the religion, adopted by any state, be true or false, salutary or per
nicious. For, a civil community ought surely to advance and protect
that system of religion, which it is convinced has a tendency to pro
mote the highest happiness of mankind, for the same reasons that
any individual, who is impressed with such conviction, not only may,
but is even bound, in con-science, to encourage and extend it, with
out encroaching, however, on the rights of those who may differ
from him. If civil duties form an essential branch of religious pre
cept, and if these duties are more strongly enforced by religious
motives, than they can possibly be by human laws, it must; be an
egregious defect in every system of government to disregard those
principles and institutions, which afford the most efficacious means
of advancing the great ends which it ought constantly to pursue.
It has, indeed, been frequently asserted, that Christianity, con
sidered as a system of duty, can have no auspicious influence on
the civil prosperity of mankind, and must even have a contrary
effect, by directing men's views wholly to another world, and, thus,
disqualifying every sincere and zealous professor of it from dis
charging the most important duties of a citizen. This false notion,
which, I believe, was first broached by Rousseau, has had great in
fluence in bringing pure Christianity into discredit among all those
who consider religion only as a political engine. As, to the mis
fortune of mankind, the greater part of politicians have adopted
political systems formed on the most contracted scale, subservient
only to the ambition, or the interest of a few, and not to the general
welfare of the community, it is no wonder that they have been
either totally indifferent to an institution which embraces the highest
good, both temporal and eternal, not of one nation or country only,
but of the whole human race, or have patronised those corruptions
7. Z

706 APPENDIX.
of it which were most compatible with their selfish and illicit pur
poses. Thus, politics and religion have both been corrupted, and
have mutually tended to corrupt each other more and more. But,
because vicious politics have contributed to corrupt Christianity,
and corrupted Christianity has contributed to support vicious
politics, it will not follow that the pure religion of Christ will not
have the happiest influence on the civil condition of mankind. The
reverse will be found, on the slightest examination, to be the case.
Of this some of the principal reasons have been already stated, and
it will still more evidently appear by considering the chief objections
which have been made to the effects of the Christian precepts on
civil conduct.
Christianity, it has been said, inculcates no patriotism, rouses to
no heroic deeds, and fires not the soul with the love of glory. The
answer is, that this very circumstance, by affording an instance of
benevolent comprehension unknown to any other religion whatever,
is a striking proof both of its intrinsic excellence, and of the divine
source from which that excellence flows. Christianity inculcates
not patriotism in express words, because her influence is not confined
to^one particular sect or country, but tends to unite the whole
human race in one great and happy family, of which God is the
Father. But, she inculcates universal benevolence, in which
patriotism is included, and opposed to which, far from being a virtue,
it is a most pernicious and tyrannical vice. Of this the patriotic
virtues ofthe celebrated heroes of antiquity frequently exhibited the
most flagrant examples. Christianity animates not to feats of
martial valour, because she abhors carnage and desolation, because
" Christ came not to destroy, but to save men's lives," and because
it was the object of his doctrine to form men to that heavenly
temper which would banish war from the earth, and secure everlast
ing peace by the practice of everlasting righteousness. But, in
defence of truth and right, she requires the most undaunted fortitude,
and the most unshaken perseverance, commanding us " not to fear
those who can kill the body, but to fear him who can cast both soul
and body into hell." Incorporating, with her canon, all the Scrip
tures of the Old Testament, she records, with honour and distin
guished applause, the glorious exploits of those illustrious champions,
who fought the battles of the Lord against the heathen, and con
ducted his people to the promised land, or maintained them in the
possession of it, by their prudence and valour. She also exhibits,
for examples, a band of Christian heroes who, in the extent of their
views, in the purity of their motives, and in the sublimity of their
principles, as much surpassed the brightest patterns of pagan anti
quity, as the sun outshines the lesser luminaries of (the firmament.
Christianity fires not the soul with the love of glory, because what
is commonly called by this name is base in its origin, destructive in
its operations, and miserable in its issue. But, she warms it with
the love of God and of mankind; she excites it to aim at that most
distinguished excellence which advances the glory of the former, by
promoting the happiness of the latter, and, by diffusing truth and

APPENDIX. 707
virtue through the world ; and she animates to these honourable
and beneficent pursuits by holding up, as their reward, a "crown of
glory, which is incorruptible, and fadeth not away."
With such extensive views, such elevated principles, and such
animating motives, the true Christian must necessarily feel the full
force of that genuine patriotism which consists in desiring and pro
moting, to the utmost of his power, the best interests of his country,
in conjunction with a regard for that universal justice, which com
prehends the whole human race, and loses not its force in the midst
of hostility. When his country is assailed by the unjust attacks of
external enemies, the pure flame of patriotism must burn in his
breast with redoubled brightness and vigour. Fortune will be
readily offered up to the public support, and life cheerfully exposed
for the common defence. That temperance, which our holy religion
inculcates, must strengthen its professors to endure military fatigue.
Love of order and obedience to legal government, so strongly en
joined by the Christian morality, will make them observe the most
regular discipline. A just sense of the blessings of well-regulated
society, joined to the right appreciation of civil and religious freedom,
a confidence in the protection of the Almighty, and the hopes of
immortal glory will reconcile them to hardship in a good cause,
make them despise danger and death, and animate them with a
courage which the most formidable enemy will not damp. Religion
inspires with a valour which is not rash and inconsiderate, but manly,
firm, and collected. Of all the armies in the world a skilful general
would choose most to command, and least to encounter, that which
should be composed of men inured to temperance and honest labour,
accustomed to obedience and discipline, considering each other as
brethren, and members not only of a terrestrial but also of a heavenly
community, assured of the blessing of the Lord of hosts, and de
termined, under this, to sacrifice their lives to their country's
defence. Such exactly would be the army composed of Christians
sincere and rightly informed. So far, therefore, is our religion from
being adverse to military virtue, in its best and noblest sense, that
it inspires, encourages, and invigorates it, in a degree unknown to
any other system of religious belief whatever. Influenced by such
principles, animated by such motives, and looking up for protection
to Him, whose name is the God of hosts, an army would lead victory
in its ranks. Nor would that intemperate desire of aggrandizement,
and that false security which victory so commonly produces, ever
expose men of this character to disgraceful reverses. For, as the
maintenance of their rights would ever be the only spring of their
warlike operations ; so would it also be their termination. They
would show themselves as ready to lay down their arms, as they
were able to hold them. In the midst of triumph they would abhor
war, and cherish the prospect, and facilitate the restoration of peace,
on the most moderate and equitable terms.
All the social and civil virtues are so fully and strongly enforced
by Christianity, that, by strict and complete obedience to its dic
tates those follies and vices which are the bane of civil life would
zz2

708 APPENDIX.
be entirely removed, and, even by the tolerable observance of them,
would be greatly diminished. Neither princes and governors would
be oppressive, nor subjects rebellious, nor fellow citizens unjust to
each other; but every state would be a family of brethren, assisting
each other in the progress of their terrestrial journey towards that
everlasting city, "whose builder and maker is God." Different
states would only be different families, connected not only by the
ties of a common nature, but by the still stronger bonds of Chris
tian union, and of their relation to one Saviour, and head of the
universal church. If ever the time shall come when the dreadful
scourge of war, now so hypocritically deplored by those who con
stantly aggravate and extend it, shall be banished from the earth,
we may safely predict that this will be only when the Christian
religion, evinced to the understandings, has taken firm hold of the
hearts, and influences the conduct of men.
The mild, the amiable, the domestic virtues are prescribed, by
our religion, in a degree infinitely pre-eminent to that which any
system of mere morality can exhibit. And what, in every system
of duty, is of the first consequence, it enforces its precepts by the
most powerful sanctions, reaching not the external actions of men
only, but penetrating into the inmost recesses of the heart. It
encourages obedience by the promise of the most precious and
exalted rewards, intimidates transgression by the menaces of the
most dreadful punishments, and strengthens the soul by the most
efficacious succours.
Let infidel philosophers try to "substitute, instead of this admir
able system of duty, any other of equal efficacy. They will soon
find how ineffectual their abstract speculations are to affect the
heart, to restrain the passions, to overcome the power of temptation,
to check the insolence of prosperity, to moderate the oppressive
spirit of power, to bridle the licentiousness of tumult, to soothe the
pangs of affliction, and to ensure the practice of virtue in every
circumstance and condition of life. Woful experience has already
proved that their vague and unprincipled speculations, even when
clothed with the most fascinating appearances of benevolence, and
adorned with all the colourings of popular oratory, have produced
nothing but profligacy, barbarity, and devastation. Man requires
a fixed and definite code, not abstract theory, for a rule of conduct.
That rule must be dictated by an authority, acknowledged, and
revered, as supreme, and that authority must be maintained by
penal sanctions, which cannot be eluded. All this religion alone
can supply ; and the Christian religion has this peculiar advantage
above every other, that, while it touches all those springs of hope
and fear, by which mankind must ever be moved, it also possesses
such evidence of its truth as can stand the most scrupulous exaini-
• nation. If abstract philosophy, however solid and sound, which is the
reverse of infidel and atheistical systems, is ever to be held sufficient
for the regulation of life, why are not the abettors of such opinions,
at least, so far consistent with themselves, as also to maintain that

APPENDIX. 70!)
all the laws of civil society, and all the penalties by which they are
enforced, ought to give place to those speculations of abstract mo
rality which they proclaim, to the world, with so much pomp, and
affected benevolence, as the highest perfection of reason, and the
firmest bonds of union among men? If they reply, that, without
laws enforced by visible penalties, society could not subsist, then,
the same arguments also establisb the necessity of religious prin-
cipley because, from this, even human laws derive that obligatory
force, without a sense of which all human sanctions would not be
sufficient to ensure even that degree of obedience which now exists
in the world. Such speculators, therefore, if they are not blinded
by prejudice, or hardened by corruption, must acknowledge that
the admirable adaptation of the Christian morality to the nature,
the circumstances, and the general condition of man, is a strong in
ternal proof of its divine origin, and a powerful recommendation of
its utility. But, such men are little affected by considerations of dis
interested benevolence. Vain-glory, and an intemperate desire of
influencing the opinions of the world, and of directing it at pleasure,
are the real motives of those actions which they ascribe to the
purest philanthropy. Never, surely, was that disposition so glar
ingly manifested as in the present times, nor this shameful hypo
crisy so infamously practised. Yet, these are the men who vilify the
Saviour of the world, who, after a life of unparalleled beneficence,
endured the most excruciating death, to accomplish the design
which infinite goodness alone could conceive. These are the men
who calumniate the character of his apostles, who relinquished
every worldly prospect for the propagation of truth and virtue; and,
in a very short space of time, turned such vast numbers of the
human race " from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan
to the living and true God.''
Thus, the doctrines and precepts of Christianity must, from
their very nature, have the happiest effects on all the sources of
national welfare. " Righteousness exalteth a nation : but sin is
the reproach of any people." That corruption of manners, civil
dissensions, the inexorable inveteracy of party-spirit, and uncon
trolled ambition, have uniformly produced the subversion of poli
tical communities; and that the contrary virtues have established
and preserved their security, their power, their splendour, and their
happiness, the history ofthe world sufficiently evinces.
Corruption, universally spread through a nation, taints and
poisons every spring of public prosperity, and destroys the vital
principles of civil association. For, neither good laws, nor the
vigorous execution of them, will ensure the public weal, unless a
considerable proportion of virtue still influence the community.
Without this, the state must necessarily fall to pieces, submitting
either to the yoke of a foreign invader, or reduced to the most
wretched and contemptible condition by internal disorders. To the
preservation of a free constitution of government purity of morals is
particularly necessary. Freedom and general profligacy are incom
patible with each other. What is profligate freedom '.' lt is the

710 APPENDIX.
freedom of confusion, of tumult, of anarchy, of rapine, and murder,
and every species of wickedness. It is the escape of every furious
and pestilential passion of the human soul. It is, in the first stage
of settlement, the uncontrolled dominion of a powerful few, and, in
the last, the bopeless subjection of all to the arbitrary and relent
less sway of a single despot ; the only form of government of which
such a people is any longer susceptible. It is, therefore, the greatest
absurdity to suppose that a nation, extremely corrupt, can establish,
on durable foundations, a constitution compatible only with great
simplicity of manners, and with the general prevalence of religious
principle. To the British nation also, enjoying a free government, founded,
indeed, on principles very different from those of the French fana
tics, it is a matter of the most serious concern, that we cannot pre
serve our invaluable privileges, whether civil or religious, but by
the same virtues by which our ancestors obtained them — by piety,
industry, sobriety, and undaunted courage in defence of our
country. By these virtues alone, proceeding from faith in Jesus
Christ, and constantly influenced by it, can we expect the favour
and blessing of God, as individuals, or as a community; and, with
out His protection, " who enlargeth and straiteneth the nations,"
the deepest human policy is childish ignorance, and the greatest
human power is contemptible imbecility.
The divine justice seems, moreover, particularly interested in the
present distribution of conspicuous rewards and punishments to
civil communities. On the grand theatre of political action, virtue
and vice are both eminently displayed, and have a peculiar and dif
fusive influence on the happiness of mankind. It is neces
sary, therefore, that the rewards of the former, and the punish
ments of the latter, should be marked in the most distinguishable
manner. In the present world alone the characteristical distinction
of nations subsists. In the next, there will be neither " Greek, nor
Jew, Barbarian, Scythian ; bond or free : tongues, kindreds, and
nations" will be no more. The blessed and the reprobate will be
the only classes and divisions of men. If the divine government is
to be manifested with regard to political societies, which seems still
more necessary, for the interests of virtue and religion, than with
regard to individuals, the sanctions of the divine laws must, as far
as relates to the former, be executed in the present state of things.
That they are completely executed, in the most invariable manner,
the history of all ages, as has been already observed, sufficiently
testifies. Thus, both the natural tendency of things themselves,
and our notions ofthe divine justice, concur to convince us that the
pure precepts of the gospel must have the happiest effects in
advancing the welfare of every nation by which they are respected
and observed.

APPENDIX. 71 1

SECTION IV.
Inferences from the preceding Discussion.
If it has fully appeared that piety and virtue, and, particularly,
that pure system, both of theory and practice, which Christianity
inculcates, must necessarily have the happiest influence on national
prosperity ; and that irreligion and vice are the certain causes of
public, as well as of private, misery; it follows that every sentiment
of rational patriotism, of a regard for our country, for its laws, its
liberties, its prosperity, and its honour, loudly calls for a reforma
tion of manners, and a revival of" pure and undefiled religion.'' It
may be alleged that the corruption of the times has ever been a
subject of complaint, and that, as this corruption, equally prevalent
in preceding ages, has, hitherto, produced no catastrophe, we have
no reason to apprehend a worse fate to our country than our fore
fathers experienced. Although the premises were true in their
utmost extent, the conclusion, drawn from them, would be false and
delusive. For, if the vices of our ancestors were as great as those
of their posterity, this circumstance, so far from affording any just
cause of composure ahd security, ought the more to awaken our
apprehensions. The evil would, in this case, be of longer continu
ance, have acquired a more inveterate and confirmed complexion,
and be, thus, approaching nearer and nearer to its fatal termination.
It would appear a strange argument, indeed, that the distemper,
with which any person was affected, was not dangerous, because it
was deeply rooted in his constitution, and had bidden defiance to
every remedy that had been administered for its cure.
But, if the case be duly considered, it will be found that the
vices, now prevalent among us, have a more fatal tendency, with
regard to national welfare, than those of preceding times. It is
readily allowed, that depravity has been too prevalent in every age
of the world, and that every state of civil society, like every period
of human life, has its peculiar vices. But, there are vices, which,
like certain diseases, are of such a debilitating kind, that, when the
civil community is deeply infected with them, it can hardly ever
recover its pristine vigour, but must die by a gradual decay. It is,
therefore, of the greatest consequence to guard against these from
the beginning, or, if they have been unhappily contracted, to apply
to them the most efficacious remedies. Luxury, effeminacy, and
voluptuousness; a sordid insatiable thirst of gain, as the only
means of procuring such indulgences ; profusion of expence, yet the
highest estimation of riches ; selfishness, and indifference to the
true welfare and glory of men's country ; real, or affected infidelity,
an open contempt of things sacred, or a constrained observance of
tehm  these are the vices which characterize the age, and these are
the vices which have the strongest tendency to subvert national
felicity.

712 APPENDIX.
Our depravity is greatly aggravated by the singular and distin
guished privileges which we enjoy, and by our situation when com
pared with that of other contiguous countries, groaning under the
complicated calamities of conquest, extortion, pillage, desolation,
and every species of degradation that can fall to the lot of man ;
when compared with that people which, while it glories in its vic
tories, endures the most dreadful internal distresses. As this is the
most striking proof of the divine benignity towards us ; so, it de
mands our most lively gratitude, and, as the only proper expression
of it, loudly calls for a reformation of manners.
" The judgments of God," it must be repeated, " are abroad in
the earth." He is exercising his justice on political communities.
Some nations he is afflicting with the most dreadful calamities.
Hardly any country of Europe is exempted from some species of
afflicting dispensations. Our own situation is generally confessed
to be critical. All concur in the desire of its amelioration by ex
changing the calamities of war for the blessings of peace. Repeated
attempts have, in vain, been made to attain the happy purpose.
But, in the midst of various schemes of national improvement, and
of an universal desire of peace, of the unmolested pursuits of com
merce and wealth, of the undisturbed enjoyment ofease, affluence,
and tranquillity, how few look up to God, with the eye of faith,
with the soul of piety, and with the heart of contrition ? Is confi
dence placed in the divine goodness, and the hope of brighter days
excited by the views of true religion ? Have public calamities pro
duced any tendency to national reformation of manners, any plans
for its commencement? The existence of abuses, the necessity of
their correction, the most effectual means of its accomplishment are
daily agitated, 'and discussed. But, no mention is. ever made of
the only radical and effectual reform, a reform of heart and conduct.
It is astonishing, that, in this reforming and regenerating age, the
reformation of manners and the regeneration of the soul should be
entirely forgotten. By some our distresses are imputed to our
rulers; by others, to their opponents; by both, to some cause in
which the complainant has no share ; and by none, to the grand,
the primary, and the universal one — a general corruption of morals,
tainting the first springs of national welfare, destroying unanimity,
masking, with the most specious appearances, the most selfish and
unlawful passions, enervating our vigour, spreading dissension, and
animosity, removing those grand, elevating, and unconquerable
principles which religion alone can supply, and exposing us to the
merited vengeance of heaven. If every person would seriously think
of reforming himself, a general reformation of manners would be the
necessary consequence ; and this would produce every other salutary
reform. If political abuses exist, and that they do exist is undeni
able, they are the offspring of national corruption. The fountain it
self must be purified before it can send forth pure and salutary
streams. The influence of genuine religion, and of virtue, its con
sequence, would speedily restore health and vigour to the whole
political body. Without this every other medicine may palliate, but

APPENDIX. 713
can never radically cure; may delay, but never can completely pre
vent the fatal issue of national distemper. The mischief is, that the
more mankind are corrupted, the less sensible they are of their cor
ruption, and the more they are disposed to complain of its natural
and necessary effects, and to ascribe them to every cause, but the
real one, which, till removed, must continue to operate with in
creasing violence.
That deistical writings have more powerfully, than any other
cause, whatever, contributed, in this, and other countries of Eu
rope, to the dissemination of vice, and to the destruction of all
those principles which either adorn or preserve society, can hardly
be doubted by any reflecting mind. The pernicious effects of those
writings have been proved by the most melancholy experience; and
are depicted, in the most glaring colours, in the convulsions and
calamities of the present times. The futility of their reasonings
has been sufficiently evinced by the masterly answers which have
been made, to them, as the preceding volumes of the learned and
accurate Leland have clearly shown, in relation to the deistical per
formances, of any reputation, which had made their appearance be
fore he wrote. Those, which have been since published, although,
in many instances, the productions of men eminent in the literary
world, have also been triumphantly refuted. An account of these,
and of the defences opposed to them, might form a very useful
additional volume : and, if God shall grant, to the writer of this
Appendix, the necessary health and leisure, he may, perhaps, turn
his thoughts to this undertaking, which, however, he should be
happy to see executed by some abler hand.
After all, it is not so much the strength of deistical arguments,
that has given such currency to infidelity, as the corrupt inclina
tions which they so strongly favour ; and nothing can so powerfully
tend to check these, as the experience of the evil consequences of
their indulgence. Religion has, in former times, been exposed to
contempt by the cant and jargon of its zealous, but ignorant, or
hypocritical defenders and propagators. Philosophy, endeavouring
to rise on her ruins, and load even true religion with all the censure,
which is due to the false only, has, at last, had its turn of disgrace.
It is surely impossible to conceive greater nonsense, absurdity, and
madness, than have been vented under that specious name. Philo
sophy has been supposed to consist with the rejection of every prin
ciple of common sense, and of every dictate of experience, with
barbarism, cruelty, and the devastation of all that is fair, and good,
and honourable in life. A person, who considers the vulgar and
common acceptation of the term, as established by recent use, must
dread the appellation of a philosopher as implying every thing
absurd and pernicious. But, the wise and the good will ever dis
criminate between the real, and the fictitious names, between the
use and abuse of things. As they know that true religion, contained
in the divine oracles, is the most precious gift of heaven ; so, they
will be more strongly attached to it by those very corruptions which
have proceeded from the ignorance and depravity of men. In like

714 APPENDIX.
manner, while they abhor that pretended philosophy, which is dis
seminated) by imposture, received by credulity, cherished by vice,
and detected, at last, by its baneful consequences, they will ever re
spect and cultivate that real improvement of reason, which is the
result, of experience, and of patient enquiry, which enlarges and
humanizes^the soul, strengthens every pure religious principle, ex
tends the reign of order, peace, and happiness, and unites the
highest enjoyments of the present life with the exhilarating assur
ance of a blessed immortality. A philosophical mind of this com
plexion will regard every infidel writer as an enemy to the best
interests of mankind, will discourage, to the utmost of his power,
and oppose his principles ; and, although, in conformity to the ex
press dictates, and to the general spirit of our holy faith, he will
hate every persecution of his person, or defamation of his character,
will view his attempts to subvert the grand principles of religion,
with contempt, or abhorrence, as he appears to be influenced either
by a weak judgment, or by a corrupt heart.

715

INDEX

VIEW OF THE DEISTICAL WRITERS.

N.B. The subjects treated of in the " Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on
the Study and Use of History," are not mentioned in this Index, as there is a copious
Table of Contents preceding that piece, p. 535, h&c

ABBADIE, Mr. — His arguments to prove that Moses was the author of the Pen
tateuch, not fairly represented by Lord Bolingbroke, p. 403.
Abbe de Paris — The miracles pretended to be wrought at his tomb considered : and
* it is shown, that no argument can be justly drawn from thence to the disad
vantage of the miracles wrought by Christ and his apostles, 257. The high
opinion of his sanctity chiefly owing to his extraordinary austerities, 286. He
carried superstition to an excess, 286. Voluntarily and designedly hastened
his own death, 287. His conduct and character of a different kind from that
rational and solid piety recommended by the precepts and example of our
Saviour and his apostles, 288, 289.
Abraham — God's entering into covenant with him had nothing in it unworthy
of the divine wisdom and goodness, 432. It was designed to be of extensive
benefit to mankind, 433. He did not learn the knowledge and worship of the
one true God from the Egyptians or Chaldeans, 417, marg. note.
Allegories of the Old Testament — Not designed to be passed upon the people as a
literal narration of facts, 416.
Angels — The notion of them represented by Lord Bolingbroke as owing to the
ancient astrologers and professors of magic, 343. Yet he owns, that there are
many orders of superior intelligences vastly exceeding the human kind, 343.
They are employed as the instruments of divine Providence, 343.
Angels Fallen — Nothing in the Scripture doctrine concerning them inconsistent
with reason, 457, marg. note.
Apostles — An entire harmony among them in the gospel which they preached,
111. Wrongly charged with having worldly interests and advantages in view,
189. The revelation they published truly and properly the revelation of Jesus
Christ, as well as that which he himself delivered in the days of his personal
ministry, 485.
Atheism — hath a direct tendency to take away or pervert the natural sense of right
and wrong, 63. It is subversive of all virtue, 64.
Atheists — can only cavil, but cannot reason against the existence of the First Cause,
309. According to Lord Bolingbroke, they only deny God, but the divines
defame him, 304. Pretended alliance between them and divines, 355. Lord
Shaftesbury seems to assert, that Atheists may be really virtuous, 59. Yet

716 INDEX.
owns, that he that denies a Deity, sets up an opinion against the sentimenLs of
mankind, and being of society, and it is justly punishable by the magistrate, 64.
Atkey, Mr. Anthony — Author of The main Argument of a. late Book, entitled,
Christianity as old as the Creation, fairly stated and examined, 99,
Atkinson, Mr. — His Vindication of the literal Sense of three Miracles of Christ, in
answer to Woolston, 89.
Attributes of God — Moral attributes necessarily included in the idea of the infi
nitely perfect Being, 314. Inseparable from his wisdom, 317, &c. Rightly
distinguished from his physical attributes, 318, 319. Lord Bolingbroke's ob
jections against ascribing moral attributes to God, according to our ideas of
them, considered and obviated, 320. B.
Balguy, Mr. John — His Letter to the Deists, containing reflections on Lord Shaf
tesbury, 52. His second Letter to the Deists, in answer to Tindal, 99. His
Essay on Redemption, 99.
Baxter, Mr. Richard — His Animadversions on Lord Herbert's book de Veritate, 17.
Benson, Dr. George — An account of his book of the Reasonableness of Christianity
as delivered in the Scriptures, in answer to Christianity not founded on Argu
ment, 134. His Reflections on Deism fairly stated, 206.
Bentley, Dr. Richard — His Remarks on CoUins's Discourse on Free Thinking, 70
to 72.
Berrow, Mr. Capel — His Answer to Deism fairly stated, 207.
Blount, Mr. Charles — His notes on Philostratus's account of the life of ApoUonius
Tyana^us, 31. His Religio Laici copied, for the most part, from Lord Her
bert, 32. He was one of the chief authors of the Oracles of Reason, 32. His
argument against the worship of God through a Mediator considered, 32. tie
acknowledgeth Deism not to be safe without Christianity, 33.
Bolingbroke, Lord Viscount — His Letters on the Study and Use of History, 455. etseq.
His Posthumous Works, 298. et seq. Heraisethhimself aboveallother writers,
ancient or modern, 300. His invectives against the holy Scriptures, 301, 302.
Against the ancient philosophers, 302, &c. And especially against ancient
and modern Christian writers, 304, &c. Charges those that differ from him
with madness, 304, 305. The main principles of his scheme represented, 307,
308. He treats those as profane who talk of imitating God in his moral attri
butes, 312, 313. Offers several objections against ascribing moral attributes
to the Deity, 318, hScc. Yet in effect acknowledgeth those attributes, 324. &c.
He denies that God's end in making man was to communicate happiness to
him, 323. Professes to own a general Providence with regard to collective
bodies ; but denies a Providence, as extending to individuals, 329. The in
consistency of his scheme shown, and its ill consequences to mankind, 334,
Ike. He acknowledges the great antiquity and usefulness of the doctrine con
cerning the immortality of the soul, and a future state, 345. Pretends neither
to affirm nor deny it, 345. Yet treats it as a fiction, 348. Will not allow that
the soul is an immaterial substance distinct from the body, 348. Attempts to
destroy the moral argument for a future state from the present unequal distri
bution of divine Providence, 356, &c. Sets up as an advocate for Providence,
356. His great inconsistency in this shown, 357. He speaks with contempt
of those that have written of the law of nature before him, 363. Asserts the
universal clearness of that law to all mankind, and that no man can mistake
it, 364. Yet owns that it is often mistaken, and affords a dubious light, 368.
Makes polygamy to be a precept of the law of nature, 371. His loose way of
talking about marriage, 372. Supposes modesty and chastity to have no
foundation in nature, but to be owing to human vanity, 372. The pernici
ous tendency of his scheme, with respect to morals, 375, &c. He denies that
mankind have any need of extraordinary supernatural revelation, and en
deavours to answer Dr. Clarke's arguments for it, 377, &c. Yet his own
scheme, contrary to his intention, tendeth to show the usefulness and neces
sity of revelation, 396. His attempts to disprove the truth and authenticity of
the Mosaic history, 400. et seq. His charge against the Scriptures, particularly

INDEX. 717
the Mosaic writings, for degrading the Deity to mean and unworthy offices and
employments, 429, &c. And for ascribing to God human parts and p.assions,
436. And for commanding things contrary to the law of nature, 441. His
objections against the Mosaic account of the creation, 449, &c. And of the
foil, 449, 453, &c. The acknowledgments he makes in favour of Christia-
tianity, 469, &c. He seems to give up several of the deistical objections, 472.
His great inconsistency on this head, 473. He pretends that Christianity is a
republication of the doctrine of Plato, but more unintelligible than it, 475,
476. And that the New Testament consisteth of two different gospels, con
trary to one another ; that of Christ, and of St. Paul, 476, 477. His invec
tives against this apostle, 478, &c. Seems to acknowledge the gospels to be
credible and authentic records of Christ's discourses and actions, 483. Yet
does all he can to destroy their credit, 484, &c. The way he takes to account
for the propagation of Christianity shown to be insufficient, 490, &c. Pretends
that Christianity has been of no advantage to the reformation of mankind,
492. His objections against the doctrine of a Mediator, and of redemption by
the blood of Christ, 500, &c. He endeavours to expose the Christian doctrine
of future rewards and punishments, ans absurd, and contrary to the divine at
tributes, 516. Seems to deny the divine exercise of divine justice, either here
or hereafter, 517. Finds fault with the gospel doctrine of a future judgment,
for teaching that men shall then be called to an account for the thoughts and
dispositions of their hearts, 518. Pretends that, according to the representa
tions made in the New Testament, men shall be saved or damned in the lump,
without any regard to the different degrees of virtue or vice, 522, &cc. Ob
jects against the eternity of future punishments, 524. Remarkable acknow
ledgment of his on this head, 525. Pretends that future punishments cannot
be reconciled to the belief of an all-perfect Being, 527.
Bradley, Mr. John — His reflections on the Oracles of Reason, 35.
Bramhall, Archbishop — His writings against Hobbes, 29.
Brown, Mr. John, now Dr. — His Essays on the Earl of Shaftesbury's Charac
teristics, 52.
Brown, Mr. Simon — His Rebuke to a ludicrous Infidel, in answer to Mr. Wool -
ston, 89. His Answer to Dr. Tindal's Christianity as old as the Creation, 105.
Bullock, Dr. Richard — His Answer to CoUins's Discourse of the Grounds and
Reasons of the Christian Religion, 78. And to his Scheme of Literal Prophecy
considered, 79.
Burnet, Dr. Thomas — His Conferences, in answer to Tindal's Christianity as old
as the Creation, 98. C.
Canaanites— The command for exterminating them not inconsistent with the law
of nature, 117, 440, &c.
Cause — According to Mr. Hume, there is no connexion between Cause and Effect ;
nor is there any way of knowing it, either by reason, or by experience, 210.
The manner in which the Cause produces the Effect is inexplicable ; but this
no argument against it, 212.
Chandler, Dr. Bishop of Coventry and Litchfield— An account of his Defence of
Christianity, from the Prophecies of the Old Testament— in answer to Mr.
CoUins's Discourse on the Grounds, &c. 76. His Vindication of it, in answer
to the Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered, 80.
Chandler, Dr. Samuel— An account of his Vindication of the Christian Religion,
in answer to Mr. CoUins's Discourse on the Grounds, &c. 77. His Vindica
tion ofthe Antiquity and Authority of Daniel's Prophecies, against the objec
tions ofthe Scheme- of Literal Prophecy considered, 80. His Vindication ot
the History of the Old Testament— against the third volume of the Moral
Philosopher, 120. His Witnesses of the Resurrection re-examined, and proved
consistent— in answer to the Resurrection of Jesus considered, 152.
Chapman, Dr. John— An account of his Answer to the Moral Philosopher, entitled
Eusebius, 112, 122. .
Chinese— Their ancient sages expressed themselves obscurely concerning the

718 INDEX,
Deity, 392, marg. note. Great difference between them and Moses in this
respect, 392.
Christ — Taught religion with great simplicity, 470. Lord Bolingbroke pretends
that he artfully engaged the Jews to put him to death, 510. The doctrine of
his being appointed to judge the world, pretended by the Deists to be of no
use to mankind, 204. The usefulness and importance of it shown, 204.
Christian Revelation — Has set the principles of natural religion in the clearest light,
12, 13. et seq. Want of universality no just objection against it, 14. A sum
mary of the evidences for Christianity, 626. et seq. Its great usefulness and
excellency acknowledged by Lord Bolingbroke, 471, &c. It has contributed to
destroy polytheism and idolatry, and has reformed many laws and customs
contrary to the law of nature, 492. It does not teach light and trivial expia
tions for sin, 505. It is not true, that the whole system of Christianity in
spires and flatters the pride of the human heart, 511. Nor that it consists
merely of unintelligible doctrines, and useless institutions, 203.
Christianity not founded on Argument — A pamphlet so called, 123. Observations
upon it, 124, 134. Those represented by Mr. Hume as dangerous friends,
or disguised enemies, to Christianity, who endeavour to prove it by reason, 269.
Christians — Unjustly charged by Lord Bolingbroke with murmuring through this
life against the justice of God ; and therefore unworthy to taste of his good
ness in a future state, 360. And with assuming that happiness consisteth
principally in the advantages of fortune, 360. Note. Divisions among them
no argument against the truth or certainty ofthe Christian religion, 4, 5, 178,
609. The corruptions of professed Christians no just objection against true
original Christianity, 205.
Chubb, Mr. Thomas — Published several tracts, in which, under pretence of a great
regard for pure uncorrupted Christianity, he endeavoured to betray it, 157.
His posthumous works manifestly intended against revealed religion, 158.
His high pretences and self-sufficiency, 158. Denies a particular providence,
159. Sometimes seems to assert a future state, at other times represents it as
altogether uncertain, and that no proof can be given of it, 160, 161, <kc. He
absolutely rejects the Jewish revelation, 165. But speaks very favourably of
Mahometanism, 166. Professes to believe Christ's divine mission as probable,
167. Yet endeavours to subvert the evidence by which it is proved, 169. He
represents the Scriptures as an unsafe guide, and of a pernicious tendency ;
yet blames the church of Rome for locking them up from the laity, and that
this tends to involve the people in the most gross ignorance, superstition, and
slavery, 170. His attempt to expose our Saviour's precepts in his sermon on
the mount, 233, 234. He grossly misrepresents the gospel doctrine of atone
ment, 174, 175, &c. Pretends that the Scriptures were corrupted in the times
of Popery, 178, 179. That the apostles changed the original scheme of Chris
tianity as laid down by our Saviour, 188. And that they had worldly wealth
and power in view, 189, &c. He abuses St. Paul, 191. Represents all reli
gions as indifferent, 192. Sets up Deism as an infallible guide, 194. Runs
a parallel between the progress of Christianity and that of Methodism, 187.
Clarendon, Earl of — His Brief View and Survey of the pernicious Errors in
Hobbes's Leviathan, 30.
Clarke, Dr. Samuel — His Reflections on Toland's Amyntor, 38. His answers to
Mr Collins on the immateriality and immortality of the human soul, 68,351.
Invectives against him by Lord Bolingbroke, 305. Censured by his Lordship
for supposing that justice and goodness are the same in God as in our ideas of
them. 311, 312. And for representing God as having a tender concern for
the happiness of man, 311. And for supposing that there are inequalities
and disorders in the present state of things, and arguing from thence for a
future state of retributions, 356. His arguments to prove the necessity of re
velation vindicated against Lord Bolingbroke, 378.
Clergy — Those of the primitive Church charged by Lord Bolingbroke with being a
very lawless tribe, and stirring up the people to tumults and insurrections, 529.
Clogher, Bishop of — His Vindication of the Histories of the Old and New Testa
ment — in answer to* Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Use of
History, 208.

INDEX. 71!)
Collins, Mr. Anthony— Writes against the immateriality and immortality of the
soul, and against human liberty, 69. His Discourse of Free-thinking, 68.
Observations upon it, 69. He pretends to prove, that there was a general
alteration of the four gospels in the sixth century, 70 His Discourse on the
Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion, designed to show that Christi
anity hath no just foundation at all, 73, 74. An account of the answers that
were made to it, 76. His Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered, 79. Books
published in answer to it, &c. 80. Pretends that Christ's resurrection, if it
could be proved, would not be a sufficient proof of the truth of the Christian
revelation, 137. Remarkable passage of his concerning the ascribing human
passions and affections to the Supreme Being, 439. Unfair management in
the French translation of his Discourse of Free-Thinking, 73, note.
Conybeare, Dr. John, late Bishop of Bristol — An account of his Defence of re
vealed Religion, in answer to Tindal's Christianity as old as the Creation, 100.
His argument to show that there is no necessity to produce the originals or
attested copies of the Scriptures, 486
Country — Love of our country, how far countenanced and recommended by Chris
tianity, 43, note.
Creation — Mosaic account of it simple and noble, 449. Vindicated against Lord
Bolingbroke's objections, 451. God's resting from the works of creation, how
to he understood, 453.
Cudworth, Dr. — Unworthy censure passed upon him by Lord Bolingbroke, 305
Cumberland, Bishop — His hook De Legibus Natura, in answer to Mr. Hobbes,
30. Charged by Lord Bolingbroke with metaphysical jargon and theological
blasphemy, 305. D.
Deism fairly Stated, and fully Vindicated. — A pamphlet so called, observations
upon it, 195 — 207. That author's pompous account of deism, and his way
of stating the question between Christians and deists examined, 196, et seq.
Deists — -Who first assumed that name, 1. Mortal and immortal deists, 2. Great
differences .among them about the main articles of natural religion, 7. 615.
Their unwearied attempts against Christianity, and different attacks upon it,
91. Their specious pretences, and high opinion of themselves, and contempt of
others, 96, et seq. They often profess an esteem for Christianity, whilst they do
all in their power to subvert it, 6 1 6. Their unfair and disingenuous conduct,
618, 619. They seem frequently to discard all moral evidence, and advance
maxims which seem to destroy the credit of all history, 919, 620. Their in
consistencies and contradictions, 620,621. Address to them, 603.
Deluge — General tradition of it, 402.
Divines — Virulent reproaches and invectives against them by Lord Bolingbroke,
304. Represented as forming a confederacy with the atheists against the attri
butes and providence of God, 304. 356. And as worse than atheists, 304.
Charged with denying the tendency of virtue to make men happy, 356. And
with censuring their Creator in the government of the world, and accusing
him of injustice, 355. 521.
Divorces — Lord Bolingbroke's wrong account of the legal causes of divorce, 498.
Differences among the Jewish doctors on that head, 498. In what sense it
must be understood that divorces were permitted to the Jews for the hardness
of their hearts, 499.
Douglass, Rev. Mr.— His Criterion, or Miracles examined, an account of it, 295.
E.
Education of Children recommended— The great importance of it shown, and bad
effects of neglecting it, 665.
Egyptians— Their history in the hands of the pi-tests, and concealed from the vulgar
in hieroglyphics and sacred characters, 406. Their account of the exode of
the Israelites out of Egypt not to be depended upon, 412. Their absurd ac-

720 INDEX.
count of the original formation of man, 453. There is no sufficient proof
that Moses adopted their rites and customs, 417, marg. note.
Evidence, Moral — The.sufficiency of it shown for giving assurance of facts, 118,
119. 618,619. The near connection between moral .evidence and physical,
218, 219. 232, 233. 248. -In some cases it yields a certainty equivalent to that
which arises from demonstration, 276.
Experience— The abuse Mr. Hume makes of that word, 221. How far and in
what sense it may be said to be a guide in reasoning concerning matters of
fact, 232. 252. Uniform experience is so far from being a full proof against
the existence of miracles, that it affordeth no proof against it at all, 238, 239.
Expiation by the Blood of Christ — Disingenuous representation of it by Mr. Chubb,
174. 175. And by Lord Bolingbroke, 505, 506, 507, 508. It answers the
most valuable ends, 506, 507, 508. F.
Facts extraordinary — By which the law of Moses was attested, were of the most
public nature, and the accounts of them coeval with the law itself, 631, &c.
Those accounts to be depended on as safely transmitted to us, 405, &c. The
same thing shown with regard to the facts by which Christianity is attested,
242, 488, 489. 632.
Faith — That which is required in the gospel not a bare speculative assent, 4, 130.
Not inconsistent with reason, nor to be opposed to it, 134, 135, 495. The dif
ference between faith and fiction resolved by Mr. Hume into a more lively and
forcible feeling, 269, marg. note.
Fall of Man — The Mosaic account of it vindicated against the objections of Lord
Bolingbroke, 453, &c.
Fathers of the Christian Church — Contemptuous representation of them by Lord
Bolingbroke, 304.
Foster, Dr. James — An account of his Answer to Dr. Tindal's Christianity as old
as the Creation, 99.
Free-thinkers — Blamed by Lord Bolingbroke for a factious spirit, under pretence
of liberty, 301.
Friendship — The pretence that it is not required in the gospel considered, 71.
Future State of Rewards and Punishments — Represented by Lord Herbert as an
essential article of natural religion, 3. Deists divided about it, 2, 3, 7. Lord
Shaftesbury insinuates, that the belief of it may he of bad influence in morals,
41, &c. 57, 58. Chubb's variations with regard to a future state, 161, 162,
&c. This doctrine believed from the earliest antiquity, 345. A part of the
primitive religion communicated to the first ancestors of the human race, 354.
The great usefulness of that doctrine acknowledged by Mr. Hume and Lord
Bolingbroke, 658, 659. Justly argued from the present unequal distribution of
Divine Providence, 226, 227. 361. To assure us of this, one important end and
use of divine revelation, 389. It is plainly implied in the law of Moses,
though not expressly mentioned there, 464,465,466. At the time of our
Saviour's coming, it was not only denied or doubted of by many among the
philosophers, but had little hold of vulgar minds, 466. And therefore a clear
and express revelation of it was then necessary, 466. The Christian doctrine
of future retributions vindicated against Lord Bolingbroke's objections, 522.
G.
Gildon, Mr. Charles — Published the Oracles of Reason, 32. Afterwards wrote a
book against the deists, intitled, The Deist's Manual, 35.
Gnostics— Lord Bolingbroke's pretence that the primitive Christians were Gnostics,
529, marg. note.
God — Our notions of his attributes, though inadequate, not false, 321. Noble
idea of God in the sacred writings, 428 — 43 1 . Concerning God's being the
tutelary God of Abraham, and of the people of Israel, 435. In the idea of
God, as represented in Scripture, there is united the highest majesty, aud the
most marvellous condescension, 432, 433. In what sense affections may lie
ascribed to God, 437, &c.

INDEX. 721
Gospels— The spurious ones were never generally received in the Christian
church, and therefore no argument to be drawn from them to the prejudice
of the true Gospels, which were received from the beginning as of divine
authority, 37, &c, 485. Pretended corruption of the Gospels in the sixth
century, false and absurd, 70. The Gospels now received acknowledged by
Mr. Hobbes and Lord Bolingbroke to have been written in the times of the
apostles, and to contain a true account of the discourses and actions of our
Saviour, 27. 484. Transmitted to us with an evidence which maybe safely
depended upon, 489. Not necessary to have the originals or attested copies
of them in our own hands, 486. Some copies of them so ancient as to bring
us near to the first ages of the church, 486, marg. note.
Government— Religion necessary to government, and Christianity particularly
friendly to it, 472.
Grace, divine — Never mentioned Jby Lord Bolingbroke but in a way of sneer,
495. The notion of it not inconsistent with reason, 495.
Greene, Mr. John — His Letters to the author of the Discourse on the Grounds,
&c, concerning the application made in the New Testament of passages in
the Old, 79. H.
Hallet, Mr. Joseph — His Discourse of the Nature, Kinds, and Numbers of our
Saviour's Miracles — in answer to Woolston, 89. His Immorality of the
Moral Philosopher, and Vindication of it, 112. His Rebuke to the Moral
Philosopher, for the Errors and Immoralities in his third Volume, 122. His
Consistent Christian, in answer to Mr. Chubb's True Gospel of Jesus Christ
asserted, 167.
Halyburton, Mr. — His Natural Religion insufficient, and revealed necessary to
Man's Happiness, in answer to Lord Herbert, 18.
Happiness — Differences among the philosophers about it, 387. Men apt to con
found pleasure with happiness, 388. Divine revelation of great use to
instruct men in the nature of true happiness, and direct them in the way
that leads to it, id. 388. How it is to be understood that God made men to
be happy, 323.
Harris, Dr. — His Remarks on the Case of Lazarus, in answer to Woolston, 89.
Hervey, Mr. — His Remarks on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Use
of History, 208.
Heathens — The sun the principal object of their adoration, 8. They were, by
Lord Herbert's acknowledgment, involved in universal darkness, 11. The
wrong notions the vulgar entertained of God, 379. They worshipped a
monstrous assembl.oge of divinities, 379. True theism among them passed
for atheism, 380. Their numberless ridiculous and cruel rites, 382.
Henry, Dr. — His defence of Scripture History, in answer to Mr. Woolston, 89.
His Discourse of our Saviour's miraculous Power of healing, 89.1
Herbert, Lord, of Cherbury — One of the first and most eminent Deists that have
appeared among us, 2. The first that formed deism into a system, 3. The
five articles in which he makes all religion to consist, 3. The deists them
selves not agreed in them, 6. Those articles not so universally known and
received among the heathens as to make any farther revelation needless, 7,
&c. Set in the best light by the Christian revelation, 13. Answers to Lord
Herbert, 17. Curious anecdote relating to him — with reflections upon it,
19, &c. His pretence that no man can be certain of a revelation, except it
be made immediately to himself, considered, 629.
History— No impropriety in endeavouring to illustrate sacred history by profane,
207 403.
History/ Mosaic— Its antiquity, impartiality, and excellent tendency, 398. Not
forged in the time of the Judges, 407. See Moses. .
Hoadly Mr. Benjamin, late Lord Bishop of Winchester— His Queries addressed
to the Authors of a Discourse of Free-Thinking, 72.
Hobbes, Mr.— Sometimes speaks honourably of the holy Scriptures, 26. Allows
the writings of the apostles to have been written by eye-witnesses, 27.

722 INDEX.
Pretends that the Scripture depends upon the magistrate for its authority,
and that he is the only interpreter of Scripture, 28, 29. Allows men to deny
the faith with their mouths, provided they keep it in their hearts, 27. The
strange account he gives of religion, 28. Asserts the materiality and mor
tality of the human soul, 28. - His principles destructive of natural religion,
morality, and government, 28, 29. Answers published against him, 30,
&e. Declares his persuasion, that the clergy did not falsify the Scripture in
favour of their own power and sovereignty, 47.
Hume, Mr. David — An ingenious, but very sceptical writer, 209. Speaks highly
in praise of his own performances, 210. Denies any connexion between
Cause and Effect, 211. The absurdity and ill consequences of his scheme,
212, et seq. Will not allow that we can have any assurance of the existence
of God by his works, because the object lies entirely beyond the reach of
human experience, 220. His argument against a future state, 223. Remarks
upon it, 224, et seq. Yet he acknowledgeth the belief of it to be of great
advantage to mankind, 227. He intimates, that it is presumption in us to
ascribe any attribute or perfection to God, 228. His Essay on Miracles,
229, et seq. Endeavours to show that miracles are incapable of being
proved by any evidence or testimony whatsoever, ib. 230. Yet afterwards
seems to allow, that they may admit of proof from testimony, except when
wrought in favour of religion, 251. The insolent reproach he casteth upon
those that believe Christianity, 236. He pretends that the miracles of the
Abbe de Paris much surpass those of our Saviour in credit and authority,
257. Represents those as dangerous friends, or disguised enemies, to the
Christian religion, who endeavour to prove it by reason, 269. His odd
account of the nature of faith,-otl>e"iefj 269, note. He attempts to cast a
slur upon the gospel morality, 291.
Humility required in the gospel — An amiable and excellent virtue, 294.
I.
Jackson, Mr. John — His Remarks on Christianity as old as the Creation, 99.
His Proof of Revealed Religion from Miracles and Prophecies — in answer to
The Resurrection of Jesus considered, 153.
Ideas — Whether ideas can be ascribed to God, 326, Uc. Eternal ideas and
essences how to be understood, 327. Our ideas of reflection as clear and
distinct as those of sensation, and often, convey knowledge that may be said
to be more real, 349.
Idolatry — Forbidden by the law of nature, 371. 443. The command for putting
idolatrous Israelites to death,1 under the Mosaic constitution, vindicated,
444.
Jeffrey, Mr. Thomas — His review of the Controversy between the Author of the
Grounds and his Adversaries, 79. His Christianity the Perfection of all
Religion — in answer to The Scheme of literal Prophecy considered, 81.
Jews — See Israelites.
Imitation of God — Those that speak of it charged by Lord Bolingbroke with
impiety and blasphemy, 313.
Interpositions, occasional — Not properly miraculous, nor inconsistent with the
general laws of Providence, 332. 338. 340.
Inspiration — God's communicating thoughts or ideas by inspiration, not incon
sistent with the laws of the intellectual system, or with the freedom of the
will, 339, &c. Inspiration, as it signifies an extraordinary' action of God
upon the human mind, acknowledged by Lord Bolingbroke not to be more
inconceivable than the ordinary action of mind on body, or of body on mind,
Jones, Mr. Jeremiah — His New and full Method of settling the Canonical
Authority of the New Testament, 38.
Israelites — Probably more free from idolatry than the neighbouring nations,
when they were first erected into a sacred polity, 165. Their Scriptures
not designed to flatter their pride and presumption, 299. 426. Not driven
out of Egypt for leprosy, 412. The wisdom and propriety of setting them

index. 723
apart as a peculiar people, vindicated, 165. 414. 418. 423. Notwithstanding
their frequent revolts, their law had a great effect in preserving the worship
ol God among them, in a manner which eminently distinguished them from
the heathen nations, 421. 466. They did not allow the worship of painted,
any more than of carved images, 419, note.
K.
Knowledge — Our knowledge not sufficient to discover to us the inward
essences of things, but to prove their existence, and distinguish them by
their properties, 348. L.
Lardner, Dr. Nathaniel — His Credibility of the Gospel-history, 39. His Vindi
cation of three of our Saviour's Miracles — in answer to Mr. Woolston's fifth
discourse, 89.
Law, Mr — His Case of Reason, or Natural Religion fairly and fully stated — in
answer to Tindal's Christianity as old as the Creation, 99.
Law of nature — Lord Bolingbroke s contemptuous representation of those that
have written on that subject, 363. His own account of that law considered,
363, &c. His pretence of the absolute clearness of that law to all mankind,
contradicted by experience and by his own acknowledgments, 366. He
denies any sanctions of that law with respect to individuals, 368. Pre
tended opposition between the proofs and evidences of the Law of Nature,
and those of the Christian revelation, 474.
Laws, civil — Very imperfect measures of virtue, and not alone sufficient for the
security and improvement of it, 335. 374. 386. Many laws in all countries
have been contrary to the Law of Nature, 386. Christianity has been of
use to correct and reform many such laws, 493.
Leland, Dr. John — Account of his Answer to Tindal's Christianity as old as the
Creation, 102, &c. His Divine Authority of the Old and New Testament
asserted — in answer to the Moral Philosopher, 114, &c, 120. His Remarks
on Christianity not founded on Argument, 135. His Reflections on Lord
Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Use of History, 208, et seq.
Levites — Dr. Morgan's extravagant computation of their revenues, 121. The
appointment of them, and provision made for them, in the law of Moses,
just and reasonable, 166. The charge brought against them of massaciing
three thousand men by Moses's order, considered, 447.
Le Moine, Mr. Abraham — His Treatise on Miracles — in answer to Mr. Chubb's
discourse on that subject, 158.
Locke, Mr. John — His observation on Lord Herbert's five articles, 17. He proves
the insufficiency' of natural reason unassisted by revelation, in its great and
proper business of morality, 206. His high esteem for St. Paul, 190. He
is charged by Lord Bolingbroke with a philosophical delirium, 305. And
blamed by him for representing the heathens as deficient in the first article
of natural religion, the knowledge of the one true God, the Maker of all
things, 378. Lord Bolingbroke owns that he has reduced St. Paul's doctrine
of predestination within the bounds of credibility, 478. Remarkable passage
of his concerning the reasonableness of giving assent to miracles upon a fair
testimony, 281.
London, late Bishop of, Dr. Gibson — His Pastoral Letters, in answer to Wool
ston and Tindal, 88, 89. „ „ , ¦ ,
London, late Bishop of, Dr. Sherlock— His Use and Intent of Prophecy in the
several Ages of the Church, 79. His Trial of the Witnesses of the Resur
rection of Jesus, — in answer to Woolston, 89.
Lowman, Mr. Moses— His Argument from Prophecy, in proof that Jesus was the
" Messiah, vindicated, 79. His Dissertation on the Civil Government of the
Hebrews, 117. His Appendix to that Dissertation, in answer to Morgan,
120
Lyttleton Sir George— His Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of
St. Paul, 156. o A Z

724 index.

M.

Mahometanism — Mr. Chubb's favourable account of it, 166. He pretends it was
not propagated by the sword, 166. The Mahometans not only expressly
allow a plurality of wives, but that they make use of their female slaves as
often as they please, 49.3, marg. note. The revelation of Mahomet not
necessary to establish the unity of God among Christians, 513.
Mediator — The Scripture doctrine of » Mediator doth not derogate from the
Divine Mercy, 32. It is a doctrine worthy of God, and which makes an
eminent display of the Divine Wisdom and Goodness, 33. 500, et seq. The
heathens had some notions of the propriety or necessity of a Mediator ; but
Christianity sets it in the noblest light, 503, &c.
Messiah — Many of the Old Testament prophecies relate literally to" the Messiah,
andjwere so understood by the ancient Jews, 72, &c. The Messiah foretold
by the prophets not merely a temporal prince, 115, &c.
Miracles — The pretended ones of ApoUonius Tyanseus opposed to those of our
Saviour, 31. Mr. Woolston's objections against them considered, 83, &c.
Difference between the popish miracles and those recorded in the Gospel,
185. A series of uncontrolled miracles a proper proof of divine revelation,
113. 631. Acknowledged by some of the deists themselves to be of great
force, 630. Uniform experience affordeth no proof against miracles, 237.
240. 284. They are not impossible to the Divine Power, 237. Not con
trary to the immutability of God, 238. Nor unworthy of his wisdom — and
may answer very valuable ends, 239. 630. False miracles no just objection
against the true, 255. The miracles wrought among the Jews, if really
wrought, sufficient, according to Lord Bolingbroke, to have convinced them,
and other nations, of the divine authority of their law, 424. The same
thing acknowledged by him with regard to those wrought in attestation to
Christianity, 482. Positive evidence for those miracles, and no evidence at
all against them, 278.
Montgeron, Mons. de — His book in defence of the miracles wrought by the in
tercession of the Abb€ de Paris, 258.
Morality — of actions, according to Lord Bolingbroke, consisteth not in their
being prescribed by God, but in their being the means of our acquiring
happiness, 373. It is not true, that morality was carried to the same extent
by the heathen philosophers as it is in the Gospel, 385. Nothing so proper,
by Lord BoUngbroke's acknowledgment, to enforce moral obligations, as a
true divine revelation, 387.
Moral sense — Lord Bolingbroke ridicules those that speak of it ; and treats it as
enthusiasm, 365.
Moral evidence and certainty— See Evidence.
Morgan, Dr. Thomas — An Account of his Moral Philosopher, 102, &c. He acknow
ledges the great usefulness of divine revelation in the present state of man
kind, and particularly ofthe Christian revelation, 103. But leaves no way
of knowing when a revelation is really given, nor will allow us to receive
any thing upon the authority of it, 107. Denies miracles or prophecy to be
proofs of divine revelation, 109. His invectives against the Old Testament,
and against the ancient prophets, 110. He professes a great veneration for
our; Saviour, yet insinuates several unworthy reflections upon his person
jmd character, 110. Pretends that the apostles preached different, and even
contrary Gospels, 111. His pretence, that the New Testament was cor
rupted by the Jews, examined, 111. Answers to the first volume of his
Moral Philosopher, 112, &e. An account of his second volume, and remarks
upon it, 116, &c. His gross misrepresentations of the Scripture-history,
114, 115. 120. An account of his third volume, and the answers to it, 120.
Mortification required in the Gospel — How to be understood, 293.
Moses — Lord Bolingbroke's invectives against his writings, 299. 301 . 398, &c.
The great antiquity, impartiality, and excellent tendency of his history,
398, &c. He. was cotemporary to many of the facts he relates, and had
sufficient assurance of the rest, 401. There is all the proof that he was the
author of the Pentateuch that can be reasonably desired, or which the nature

index. 725
of the' thing admits of, 403. His history cleared from the charge of inconsisten
cies and contradictions, 410, &c. He used none of the arts or palliating
methods of the ancient priests and lawgivers, 415. Vastly superior to the
most celebrated legislators of antiquity, 417. Did not adopt the idolatrous
superstitions of Egypt, 417. Cleared from the charge of making mean and
unworthy representations of the Deity, 428, &c. His account of the creation
oi the world, and of the original formation of man, noble and rational, 449.
lhe sanctions of his law considered, 460, &c. Why he makes no express
mention of a future state, 465, &c.
Mysteries, pagan— Lord Bolingbroke's magnificent account of their nature and
design, 379. Yet owns that we know little about them ; and that the
absurdities of polytheism were retained in them, however mitigated, 379.
Socrates would never be initiated in those mysteries, 381.
N.
Nature, human — Original dignity of it asserted by Moses, 453. It is now in a
corrupt state, 501.
Nature, law of — See Law.
Natural religion— No account of any nation that ever professed it in its purity,
abst.racting from aU revelation, 342, note. Set in the clearest light by the
Christian revelation, 13. Nowhere so clearly taught and understood as
among Christians, 107. 616. .No opposition between this and the Christian
revelation, or between the proofs of the one and of the other, 474, 475.
Nichols, Dr. — His Conference with a Theist, opposed to the Oracles of Reason,
35.
Nye, Mr. Stephen — His Defence of the Canon of the New Testament — in
answer to Toland's Amyntor, 37. P. -
Paris — See Abbadie.
Paul, St. — His conversion furnisheth a remarkable proof in favour of Christianity,
23, 24. Not the author of a different gospel from that of Christ and the
other apostles, 115. 122. His account of Jesus's having been seen by above
five hundred brethren at once, vindicated against Mr. Chubb and Lord
Bolingbroke, 146, 147. 483. His sense greatly misrepresented, and injurious
charges brought against him by Mr. Chubb, 165, <Stc. 191. Lord Boling
broke's invectives against him, 302. 477. His excellent character, 479.
Vindicated against the charge of madness, 478.
Pearce, Dr. Zachary, Bishop of Bangor — His Miracles of Jesus Vindicated —
against Mr. Woolston, 8B.
Pentateuch — See Moses — Great conformity between the Hebrew and Samaritan
code ofthe Pentateuch, a proof of its authenticity, 410.
Philosophers — Insufficient to recover mankind from the corruption into which
they had fallen, or to guide them in religion, or moral duty, 11. 384, &c.
Lord Bolingbroke observes, that those of them who acknowledged the
Monad neglected to worship him, 380. And that they conformed to the
practice of idolatry, though not to the doctrines of Polytheism, 380. It is
not true, that there is no moral precept required in the gospel but what they
recommended, or that they all agreed what is virtue and what is vice, 385.
The best and wisest of them were sensible of their need of a divine revela
tion, 392.
Plato — Lord Bolingbroke speaks of him with great contempt— The reason of it,
303. He pretends that Christianity is only a republication of the doctrine
of Plato, 475. His banter about Plato's being the precursor of our Saviour,
and inspired by the Holy Ghost, 476. Excellent things in Plato, but mixed
with many errors, 476. ...
Polygamy — According to Lord Bolingbroke, allowed, and even required by the
law of nature, 371. The contrary shown, 371. Barely permitted in the law
of Moses ; not encouraged, but rather discountenanced by that law, 499.
The prohibition of it under the Gospel an argument of the great excellence
of the Christian revelation, 499.

726 index.
Polytheism — According to Lord Bolingbroke more conformable to the natural
sentiments of the human mind, especially in the first uncultivated ages, than
the belief of one only Supreme Cause of all things, 378. Countenanced by
the most ancient philosophers and legislators, who thought it dangerous to
cure, and useful to confirm it, 379.
Prayer— Objections against it insinuated by Mr. Blount, 34. Mr. Chubb thinks
there is an impropriety in praying to God ; and that there is reason to appre
hend that it is displeasing to him, 160. Lord Bolingbroke seems to acknow
ledge it to be a duty of the law of nature, 370. Events coming in answer
to prayer no argument of their being miraculous, 338.
Pride — Not encouraged by the Christian system, 511. The principal doctrines
of religion attributed by Lord Bolingbroke to the pride of the human heart,
511.
Proofs — Absurd to require greater proofs than the nature of the thing can bear,
404. 482.
Prophecy — The argument from it vindicated, 179. Wisely added to miracles,
in proof of divine revelation, 179.
Prophecies of the Old Testament— Not merely to be understood in an allegorical
sense, 75. Many of them literally applied to our Saviour, 76. Others of
them typical^ 76. The double sense of prophecy vindicated, 76. Some of
the passages which are regarded as prophecies only cited by way of accom
modation, 78.
Prophets, ancient — Misrepresented by Mr. Collins, 70. Inveighed against by
Dr. Morgan, as the great disturbers of their country, and causes of its ruin,
110.
Propositions — The truth of them to be acknowledged, when fairly proved,
though we are unable clearly to solve the difficulties relating to them, 648.
Providence — A particular one denied by Mr. Chubb, 1 59. Lord Bolingbroke
pretends neither to affirm nor deny a particular Providence ; yet argues
against it at large, 330. The doctrine of Providence asserted and explained,
330, et seq. It naturally follows upon the existence of God, and his creation
of the world, 331. What we are to understand by a particular Providence,
332. The great importance of that doctrine shown, 332. The absurdity of
Lord Bolingbroke's notion, that Providence regards men collectively, and
not individually, 333. His arguments against a particular Providence
proceed upon a false .foundation, 336. He charges the doctrine of a
Particular Providence as owing to human pride, 341. His injustice in
charging Christians with accusing Divine Providence in this present state,
360. 516.
Punishments, Future — The belief of them acknowledged to be of great use in
this present state, by the Earl of Shaftesbury, 44. By Mr. Hume, 227. 658.
And by Lord Bolingbroke, 344. Not believed by many of the philosophers,
and at the time of our Saviour's coming generally disregarded, even by the
vulgar, 391. 520. The Gospel account of future punishments vindicated
against Lord Bolingbroke's objections, 518, et seq. The degrees of punish
ment proportioned to the different degrees of men's crimes, 621.
R.
Randolph, Dr. Thomas — His "Christian's Faith a rational Assent;" in answer to
" Christianity not founded on Argument," 134.
Ray, Mr. Thomas — His " Vindication of our Saviour's Miracles ;" in answer to
Woolston, 88.
Reason — Generally seduced by passion, 365. According to Lord Bolingbroke,
appetites and passions are always of greater force to determine us than
reason, 365. Reason was little informed by experience in the earliest ages,
and made very wrong applications and false deductions from the law of
nature, 391. The greatest men in the heathen world sensible that bare
reason is insufficient to enforce doctrines and laws upon mankind without
a divine authority, 393.
Redemption by Christ — The doctrine of it worthy of God, 32. 504, et seq. 645,

index. 727
et seq. It does not encourage presumption, 507. Not contrary to reason,
though not discoverable by it, 508, 509. See Expiation.
Religion — Its close connexion with virtue, and great influence upon it, 64, et
seq. Man born to religion, according to Lord Shaftesbury and Lord
Bolingbroke, 67.
Repent — In what sense God is said to repent, 438. His repenting that he made
man, how to be understood, 438, note.
Repentance — Alone, not a sufficient expiation or satisfaction for sin, 389. 502.
Resurrection of Christ — His not showing himself after his resurrection to the
chief priests no just objection against it, 87. Christ's resurrection an article
of the highest importance, and furnisheth an evident proof of his divine
mission, 136, 137. The objections against the account given of it in the
gospel, examined, 86, &c. 137. et seq. Lord Bolingbroke's insinuations
against it, 483. The evidence given of it every way sufficient, and suited
to the importance of the case, 241, et seq.
Resurrection of Jesus considered — A pamphlet so called, 137. Observations
upon it, 137. 151. Answers that were made to it, 151, et seq.
Revelation, divine — Of great use in the present corrupt state of mankind, 11.
107. A divine revelation possible, 11. 107. 163. 376. The great need men
stand in of divine revelation to instruct them in matters of the highest
importance, 13. 106. 377, et seq. 626. And to enforce moral obligation,
387. The supposing the necessity of revelation doth not cast a reflection
on Divine Providence, 394. Lord Bolingbroke's own scheme, contrary to
his intention, tends to show the usefulness and necessity of divine revela
tion, 396. A revelation communicated from the beginning to the first
ancestors of the human race, 14. 392, 8cc. 454. Revelation not designed to
come with irresistible force, so as to constrain men's assent, 396. When
sufficiently proved, it ought to be received with the most profound reve
rence, with the most entire submission, and with the most unfeigned
thanksgiving, 377- Its teaching things incomprehensible, as to their
manner of being, no just objection against it, 473. 648. 656.
Reward, future — Promised in the Gospel — noble and excellent, 42. 57. The
being animated with the hope of it consistent with the most eminent virtue,
andnath nothing in it disingenuous and slavish, but is rather an argument
of a great and noble mind, 44, 56, &c. It doth not hinder our loving
virtue for its own sake, but rather heightens our esteem of its worth and
amiableness, 57. The rewards of a future state admit of different degrees,
in proportion to men's different proficiencies in holiness and virtue, 524.
Richardson, Mr.— His " Canon of the New Testament Vindicated," in answer
to Toland's "Amyntor," 38.
Ridicule — Not the properest test of truth, 49, &c. A turn to ridicule not the
best disposition for making an impartial inquiry, 49. When wrongly
applied, it hath often been of great disservice to religion and virtue, 49.
Right — That maxim, "Whatsoever is, is right," in what sense to be understood,
361. When properly explained, it is perfectly consistent with the suppo
sition of a future state, 361.
Rogers, Dr.— His Sermons on the " Necessity of Revelation ;" and Remarks on
" CoUins's Scheme of literal Prophecy" considered, 80.
Roman state— Its prosperity, according to Lord Bolingbroke, owing to religion,
and the belief a Providence; and the neglect of religion the cause of Us
ruin, 658, note. S.
Sacraments of the New Testament acknowledged by Lord Bolingbroke to be
simple and useful institutions, 469.
Sacrifices— Of divine original and appointment, 503. The reasons and ends oi
their institution, 504.
Satisfaction — See Expiation.
Scriptures, holy— Not corrupted . by the Clergy, 42. 69. Nor by the
Jews, 110. Nor by any others, 178. 486. Transmitted to us in a
manner that may be safely depended upon, 113. 117. 132. 488. 632.

728 index.
Excellent tendency of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, 427. 632. And
of those of the New, 639, et seq. The important doctrines and facts so
often repeated there, that no particular interpolations could destroy their
usefulness or authority, 111. 151. Not necessary that the Scriptures should
be more perfect than any other book, according to human ideas of perfec
tion, 467. The argument from the internal characters of Scripture treated
by Lord Bolingbroke with great contempt, 481. 632. The differences
among Christians about the way of knowing the Scriptures to be the word
of God, not so great as some would represent them, 201.
Self-denial — Required in the Gospel, how to be understood — Its necessity and
usefulness, 291, &c.
Shaftesbury, Earl of — A fine writer, but inconsistent in his accounts of Chris
tianity, 40. Throws out frequent insinuations against the being influenced
by a regard to future eternal rewards, as of bad influence in morals, 41. 55,
&c. Yet acknowledgeth the belief of them to be an advantage and support
to virtue, 44. Agrees with Mr. Hobbes in making the authority of holy
writ depend wholly upon the civil magistrate, 46. Endeavoureth to expose
the Scriptures to ridicule, 47. His unworthy insinuations against the cha
racter of our Saviour, 47. Treats the sacred records as the pure invention
and artificial compilement of a self-interested Clergy, 47. What he saith
concerning ridicule, as the best criterion of truth, examined, 46, <&c. He
places the obligation to virtue in its being conducive to our happiness, 58.
Seems to erect such a scheme of virtue as is independent on religion, and
the belief of a^deity, 60. His apology for doing so, 60. He fully acknow
ledges the connexion there is between religion and virtue, and the great
influence the former hath upon the latter, 64.
Smallbrook, Dr. Bishop of St. David's — His " Vindication of our Saviour's Mi
racles, in answer to Woolston," 88.
Socrates — Censured by Lord Bolingbroke for making the contemplation of God,
and the abstraction of the soul from corporeal sense, the two offices of
philosophy, 303. And for teaching his auditors to endeavour after a con
formity to God, 313. Represented by Lord Bolingbroke as the apostle of
the Gentiles in natural religion as St. Paul was in revealed, 480. He fell in
with the idolatries of his country, 480.
Soul of man — Proved to be an immaterial substance distinct from the body, 347,
&c. The idea of thought not included in the idea of matter, 350. Intellect
above the mere power of motion and figure, 350. The supposition of
God's superadding a power of thinking to a system of matter absurd and
unphilosophical, 350. Lord Bolingbroke's objections against the immate
riality and immortahty of the soul answered, 351, et seq. He hath acknow
ledged several things that yield a strong presumption of the soul's immor
tality, 363. The soul's being naturally immortal doth not imply a necessity
of its existence independent of God, 353.
Souls of brutes — No argument can be justly drawn from them against the im
materiality and immortality of the human soul, 352.
Spinosa — His argument against miracles, from the immutability of God, shown
to be inconclusive, 239. He has taken pains to form Atheism into a system,
62. According to him, every man hath a natural right to do whatever he
hath power to do, and his incUnation prompts him to, 62, et seq. His
principles subversive of aU virtue, 63.
Stackhouse, Mr. — His " Fair State of the Controversy between Mr. Woolston
and his Adversaries," 90.
Stebbing, Dr. — His "Discourse of the Use and Advantage of the Gospel Reve
lation," in answer to the objections of Dr. Tindal, in his " Christianity as
old as the Creation, 99. His " Defence of Dr. Clarke's Evidences," &c.
against ditto, 99. '
Stillingfleet, Bishop — His " Origines Sacrse," 35. Treated with contempt by
the author of " Christianity not founded on Argument," 614. And by Lord
Bolingbroke, 305.
Sykes, Dr. — His "Essay on the Truth of the Christian Religion ;" in answer to
Collins, 78. His "True Grounds of the Expectation of the Messiah," 80.

index. 729
T.
Tenison, Mr., afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury— His "Creed of Mr.
Hobbes examined/' 30.
Theists, ancient— Censured by Lord Bolingbroke for being seduced into a con
federacy with the Atheists in acknowledging the present unequal distribu
tions of Divine Providence, 304. And for teaching that God is just and
good, as well as powerful and wise, 311. And for saying, that God made
man to communicate happiness to him ; and that he is a lover of mankind,
311.
Theocracy, Jewish— How to be understood, 342. 433. Did not supersede the
office of the ordinary magistrate, 434.
Tillotson, Archbishop — His argument for the existence of God, from the consent
of nations, answered by Lord Bolingbroke ; yet, in effect, acknowledged
by him, 310. Charged with flattering human pride, in asserting, that God
passed by the fallen angels, but sent his Son to redeem man, 511.
Tindal, Dr. Matthew— His "Christianity as old as the Creation," 92. A
general account of his scheme, which is designed to set aside all revealed
religion, and to subvert the authority of the Scriptures, 93. Observations
upon his scheme, 93, 94, et seq. The inconsistency of it shown, 95.
Account of the answers published against him, 98, et seq.
Toland, Mr. John — Fond of asserting paradoxes, 38. An admirer of the Pan
theistic, i. e. the Spinosan philosophy, 49. His "Amyntor" designed to
invalidate the authority of the sacred canon of the New Testament, 38.
He gives a catalogue of the spurious Gospels, and writings falsely attri
buted to the apostles ; and pretends, that they are of equal authority with
the present Gospels, 38. His great unfairness and disingenuity, 38. An
swers published against him, 37.
Tradition — That by which the Gospel is transmitted, is to be depended upon,
488. 632.
Traditions — Of several nations conformable, in many instances, to the facts re
corded in the Mosaic history, 402, note.
Trial — It is agreeable to the Divine wisdom that there should be a state of trial
and discipline appointed for mankind, 616. 525.
Trinity — According to Lord Bolingbroke, a Trinity in the Deity was generally
acknowledged among the ancient sages of all nations,. 513. Those that
hold it not justly charged with denying the unity of God, 513.
V.
Virtue — Not wholly confined to good affections towards mankind ; but takes in
proper affections towards the Deity as an essential part of it, 65.
Voeux, M. Des. — His " Lettres sur les Miracles," and his " Critique Generate
du Livre de Mr. de Montgeron," 259. W.
Wade, Dr.— His " Appeal to the Miracles of Christ for his Messiahship;" and
his " Demonstration of the Truth and Certainty of Christ's Resurrection ;"
in answer to Woolston, 89.
Waterland, Dr.— His " Scripture Vindicated ;" in answer to Tindal s "Chris
tianity as old as the Creation," 98.
West, Mr.' Gilbert— An account of his "Observations on the History and Resur
rection of Jesus Christ. 153, et seq.
Whiston, Mr.— His " Literal Accomplishment of Scripture Prophecies ; in
answer to Collins; and his "Supplement "to it, 78. _ _
Whitby, Dr.— His " Necessity and Usefulness of the Christian Revelation, 18.
Witnesses for Christianity— All the conditions requisite to make any testimony
credible, concurred in them, and that in the highest degree, 245—251.
WoUaston Mr.— Severe and contemptuous censure passed upon him by Lord
Bolingbroke 304. Represented as a learned lunatic, 305. He supposes
that the soul is clothed with a fine material vehicle when it leaves the body,
352
Woolston Mr.— His " Discourses on our Saviour's Miracles," 82. His gross
3b

730 index.
scurrility, 83. His false quotations, and misrepresentations of the ancient
fathers, 83. His disingenuity and prevarication, 82. Remarks on the
account he gives of several of Christ's miracles, 83. The answers published
against him, 88, et seq.
Worship — Lord Bolingbroke seems to deny that any external worship is required
by the law of nature, 370. Revelation necessary to instruct us in the
right manner of divine worship, 370. Neglect of public worship inexcus
able in professed Christians, 661. Z.
Zeal, preposterous kind of — For propagating infidelity — not to be accounted for
upon any principles of good sense or sound policy, 672.
Zealots among the Jews — Their fury not justly chargeable on the law of Moses,
445. Nor properly authorized by the instances of Phineas and Mattathias,
447.

J. BADDON, PRINTER, CASTLE STREET, FTNSBURY.

London, Cheapside, 1848.
WILLIAM TEGG & C°-
HAVE JUST ISSUED THE FOLLOWING NEW PUBLICATIONS.

¦$& Sold by
BIBLICAL CRITICISM AND INTERPRETATION.
Barnes's Notes "on the Epistle of Paul, &e. 12tno £ s. d.
 — to the Hebrews. 12mo . . . .020
 — — to the Ephesians, &e. 12mo . ..020
 to the Romans. 12mo . . . .020
 Matthew and Mark. Vof. 1  0 2 6
 to the Acts. 12mo . . . . . . . .026
 ¦  1st op Galatians. 12mo. Cloth  0 2 0
 2nd op Corinthians and Galatians. 12mo. Cloth .026
 Luke and John . . . . . ... 0 2 6
Brown's Dictionary op the Holy Bible. 8vo  0 9 0
 Concordance of the Holy Scriptures. 24mo . . . .020
Border's Oriental Customs. New Edition, by Ixroser. 8vo . ..090
Calvin's Commentary on the Psalms. 3 vols. Svo . . . . . 1 10 0
Campbell's Notes on the Gospels. 2 vols. 8vo . . . . . . 0 16 0
Carpenter's Biblical Companion. Imperial 8vo  0 12 0
Chalmers's (Dr.) Lectures on the Romans. 4 vols. 8vo . . ..220
Clarke's (Dr. Adam) Commentary on the Old and New Testaments. 6 vols.
Imperial 8vo  680
Doddridge's Family Expositor. Imperial 8vo  110
Elsley's Annotations on the Gospels and Acts. By Walker. 8vo .0120
Fleury's Manners of the Ancient Israelites. By A. Clarke. 12mo .060
Gray and Percy's Key to the Old and New Testaments. Svo . ..080
- Gurney's Dictionary op the Bible. 24mo. Cloth, gilt . . . .026
Hawker's (Dr.) Commentary on the New Testament. 4to . ..220
Henry's Commentary on the Scriptures. By Blompield. 4to . . 1 10 0
Horne's (Bp.) Commentary on the Psalms. 8vo.'  080
Jennings's Jewish Antiquities. 8vo  0 7 0
Jones's Biblical Cyclopaedia. 8vo  0 10 0
Leland's Divine Authority of the Old and New Testaments. Svo .070
Locke and Dodd's Common-place Book to the Bible. 8vo . ..090
Lowth's (Bp.) Literal Translation op Isaiah. 8vo . . . .070
 Lectures on Hebrew Poetry. 8vo . . . ..080
Luther on the Galatians. 8vo . . . . • ¦ • . 0 10 6
Nf.wton's (Bp.) Dissertations on the Prophfxies. 8vo . . ..080
Owen's Exposition op the Hebrews. 4 vols. 8vo  2 16 0
Patrick, Lowth, Arnald, Whitby, and Lowman's Commentary on the Old
and New Testaments. 4 vols. Imp. 8vo .  4 10 0
Pearson on the Creed. New Edition. 8vo. Cloth  0 8 0
Prideaux on the Old and New Testaments. By Dr. M'Caul. 2 vols. 8vo 0 18 0
Scott's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments. 3 vols. 4to ..400
Stuart's Commentary on the Romans. 8vo  0 9 0
 .  Hebrews. 8vo  0 9 0
Trollope's New Testament in Greek, and English Notes. 8vo . .110
Wells's Geography of the Old and New Testaments. 8vo . . . 0 12 0
Wiieatly on the Common Prayer. Svo. Cloth . . . . .04b
Whitby and Lowman's Commentary on the New Testament. Imp. ..150

LIGHT READING & BOOKS IN THE PICKWICK STYLE.
Adventures op Captain Bolio. 32 Engravings. 1 1 2mo . . . .090
 Paul Periwinkle, or the Press-Gang. 40 Outs . ..lit!
Grace Darling. A Tale. 20 EDgravings. 8vo

Arabian Nights. 3 vols. 32mo
Colman's Broad Grins, with Cuts. 32mo
Comic Arithmetic. By Martin. 40 Cuts. 3 vo
Doings in London. 30 Engravings. 10th Edition. Svo
Egan's Pilgrims of the Thames. 26 Plates. Svo . .
 Book of Sports and Mirror of Life. Cuts. Svo .
Fortunes and Adventures of Raby Rattler. 28 Plates. Svo
Gideon Giles the Roper. By, Miller. Plates. 8vo . .
Godfrey Malvern. By Miller. Plates. 8vo. . ¦
Grant's Sketches in London. 24 Engravings by Phiz. Svo

0 5 0
0 12 0
0 16
0 7 0
0 8 0
0 8 0
0 7 0
0 9 0
0 13 0
0 14 0
0 8 0

Xiignt Beading, &,c, continued.

Hone's Strutt's Sports of the People of England. 8vo .
•  Every. day Book and Table Book. 3 vols. Svo .
 Year Book. Cuts. 8vo 
Maxwell's Fortunes of Hector O'Halloran. 8vo .
Memoirs of the Extraordinary Career of John Shipp. 12ido. Cloth
Mornings at Bow- street. Cuts by Cruikshank. Feap. 8vo
Parterre op Historical Romance, Anecdote, &<•. 4 vols. 8vo
Pickwick Abroad. By Reynolds ; Plates by Phiz, &c. 8vo
Punch and Judy. 24 Plates by Cruikshank. Post 8vo
Robert Macaire. 18 Plates by I'niz. Post 8vo .
Story-Teller (The), or, Table Book of Popular Literature. Imp. 8vo .
Syntax's (Dr.) Tour in Search of the Picturesque. 8vo
Titmarsh's Comic Tales. 20 Plates. 2 vols, post 8vo ....
World (The) op London By John Fisher Murray, Esq. 12mo

£

s.

d.

0

10

6

2

2

0

0

11

0

0

9

0

0

3

6

0

5

0

0

16

0

0

12

0

0

4

0

0

10

6

0

4

6

0

12

0

1

1

0

0

5

0

GEOGRAPHY, HISTORY, AND BIOGRAPHY.

Addison's Damascus and Palmyra. 2
vols. 8vo, 14s.
Adventures in Algiers. 3 vols. 8vo,
15s. ea.
Barrow's Peter the Great. ISmo, 5s.
Blunt's Reformation. 18mo, 5s.
Brookes's General Gazetteer, New Edi
tion. BvFindlay. Svo, 12s.
Brookes's General Gazetteer, in Minia
ture. By Findlay. 18mo, 7s.
Cave's Lives of the Fathers. New
Edition. By Cary. 3 vols. 8vo, \l. 4s.
Cave's Lives op the Apostles. New Edi
tion. By Cary. 8vo, 8s.
Cecil's Life of Newton. 32mo, 2s.
Conder's Modern Traveller. Maps and
Plates; each -vvoik told separatelv, viz.: —
20 vols. 91.
Africa. 3 vols. Maps and Plates, llinio, 15s.
America. 2 vols. 18mo, 10s.
Arabia. ISmo, 5s.
Assam and Siam. 18mo, 5s.
Brazil and Buenos Ayres. 2 vols. 18mo,
10s.
Columbia. 18mo, 5s.
Egypt, Nubia, and Abyssinia. 2 vols.
18mo, 10s.
Greece. 2 vols. 18u.o 10'«.
India. 4 vols. 18mo, 1*.
Italy. 3 vols. 18mi>, ISs.
Mexico and Guatemala. 2 vols. 18mo, 10s.
Palestine. 18rao, 5s.
Persia and China 2 vols. ISmo, 10s,
Peru and Chili. 18mo, 5s.
Russia. 18mo, 5s.
Spain and Portugal. 2 vols. 18mo, 10s.
Syria and Asia Minor. 2 vols. 18mo, IOs.
Turkey. ISmo. 5s.
Cunningham's (Allan) Lives of British
Painters, Sculptors, &c. 6 vols. 18mo, 11. 10s.
Davenport's Life op Ali Pacha, Vizier
of Epirus. 18mo>5s.
Davenport's History of the Bastille.
18mo, 5s.
Drummond's Autobiography op A. H.
Rowan, E.«q. Sto, 7s. Bd.
Edmonds's Life and Times op Washing
ton. 2 vols. 18mo, 10s.
Eustace's Classical Tour in Italy.
3 yols. ISmo, 15s.
Fuller's Church History of Britain.
By Nichols. 3 vols. 8vo, 11. 7s.
Fuller's History op Cambridge, Wal-
tham Abbey, and Injured Innocence. By
Nichols. 8vo, 14s.

Fuller's Worthies of England. By
NUTTALL. 3 VOlS. SVO, 11. 7s.
Goldsmith's History of England. (Chis-
¦wick.) 12mo, 6s.
Guthrie's Geography in Miniature, By
Davenport. 18rao, 5s.
History of the Jews. By Milman.
3 vols. 18mo, los.
Hollings's Life of Gustavus Adolphus.
18mo, 5s.
Irving's Life and Voyages of Chris
topher Columbus. 18mo, 5s.
Johnson's Lives op Highwaymen, &c.
8vo, 9*.
Josephus's History of the Wars. Com
plete in 1 vol. 8vo., 7s. Bd.
Lander's Discoveries on the Niger.
2 vols. 18mo, 10s.
Langhorne's Plutarch. 8vo, 9s.
Life of Cicero. By Hollings. 18mo, 5s.
Life of Richard I. ISmo, 5s.
Life op Mahommed Ali. 18n>o, 3s.
Life of Mahomet. By Rev. S. Green.
18mo, 5s.
Life of Bruce. By Major Head. 18mo,
5s.
Lives op Eminent Physicians. 18mo, 5s.
Memoirs op the Life of Dr. A. Clarke.
By One of the Family. 8vo, 7s. Bd.
Memoirs of John Shipp. New Edition.
Fcp. 8vo, 3s. 6d.
M'Farlane's Lives and Exploits op Ban
ditti and Robbers. 18mo, 5s.
Napoleon Buonaparte's Life and Adven
tures. 2 vols. l8mo, 10s.
Napoleon Buonaparte, the Court and
Camp of. 18mo, 5s.
Neal's History of the Puritans. By
TOULMTN. 3 VOlS. 8VO, 11. IBS.
Palgra ve's Anglo-Saxons. 1 8mo, 5s.
Pilkington's Dictionary of Painters.
By Allan Cunningham. 8vo, 21s.
Rollin's Ancient History. 6 vols. 8vo.
Maps, 11. 12s.
Segur's Narrative of Napoleon's Expe
dition in Russia. 2 vols. 18mo, 10s.
Sketches from the History of Venice.
Maps anil Cuts. 2 vols. 18mo, 10s.
Southey's Life of Nelson. Cuts, &c.
ISmo, 5s.
Tour through South Holland and up
the Rhine. 18mo, 5s.
Tytler's Lives of Scottish Worthies.
3 vols. 18mo, 15s.
Tytler's Universal History. 6 vols.
18mo, 11. 10s.

Geography, History, and Biography, continued.

Watson's Life of Philip II. 8vo, 9s.
Watson's Life of Philip III. 8vo, 9s.
Wells's Geography of the Old and
New Testaments. Maps. 8vo, 12s.

Williams's Life and Actions of Alex
ander the Giievt. 18mo, 5s.
Wilson's Missionary Voyage to the
South Seas. 2s.

NOVELS AND ROMANCES.

Cavendish, or The Patrician at Sea,
12mo, 6s.
Cooper's Lionel Lincoln. 12mo, 3s.
De Foe's Life and Adventures of Ro
binson Crusoe. 2 vols. 12mo, 10s.
De Foe's Life and Adventures of Cap
tain Singleton. 12mo, 5s.
De Foe's Life and Adventures of
Colonel Jack. 12mo, 5s.
De Foe's Memoirs of a Cavalier. 12mo,
5s.
De Foe's Fortunate Mistress, or Life
- op Roxana. 12mo, 5s.
De Foe's Carlton's Memoirs and Life
of Mother Ross. 12mo, 5s.
Irving's Knickerbocker's History of
New York. 12mo, 5s.

Jack Tench, or Midshipman turnud
Idler. 18 Plates. 8vo, 10s. Bd.
Life and Times of Dick Whittington.
22 Plates. 8vo, 8s.
Pickwick Abroad. By Reynolds. 41
Plates. 8vo, 12s.
Porter's ( M iss) Lake of Killahney. A
Tale. 12mo, 4s. Bd.
Raby Rattler (Adventures op) and his
Man Floss. With 28 Spirited Illustrations,
8vo, 20s.
Robert Macaire in England. Plates by
Phiz. Svo, 10s. Bd. ¦
Titmarsh's Comic Tales and Sketches.
12 Plates. 2 vols. fcap. 8vo, 21s.
Treasury of Wit and Anecdote. 32mo,
2s. Bd.
Wortley Montague. 3 vols., 31s. 6d.

BOOKS FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE.

jEsop's Fables (Whittingham). 32mo,
3s. 6d.
Aikin's Calendar op Nature. 2s. 6a!.
Boy's Own Book. Plates. Square.
Breakfast-table Science. 18mo, 2s. On*.
Brewster's Natural Magic. 18mo, 5s.
Chesterfield's Advice to his Son on
Men and Manners. 18mo, Is. Bd.
Child's (Mrs.) Stories for Holiday
Evenings. 18mo, 2s. Bd.
Child's (The) Own Book. 7th Edition.
Cuts. Square 16mo, 7s. Gd.
Child's (The) Botany. Square 16mo, 2s.
Copley's Early Friendship. A Tale.
18mo, 2s. Bd.
Copley's Poplar Grove. 18mo, 2s. 6o".
Cream of Scientific Knowledge. ISmo, 3s.
Early Impressions. ByaLady. 18rno, ls.6o*.
Edgeworth's Early Lessons. 2 vols.
18mo, 5s.
Edgeworth's Rosamond. 2 vols. 18mo,
5s.
Endless Amusements. 18mo, 2s.
Entertainment for the Nursery. 155
Cuts. 18mo, 4'.
Excitement (The), or A Book to In
duce Young People to Read. Plates. ISmo,
3s. Bd.
Fisher's Young Man's Companion. 12tno,
2s. Bd.
Girl's Own Book. By Mrs. Child. 145
Cuts. Square, 4s. Bd.
Griffin's Book of Tradfs. Sq., 4s. 6d.
Helme's Life of Columbus. 12mo, 5s. 6d.
History of Sandford and Merton. l'imo,
4s. Bd.
Home. By Miss Sedgwick. 32mo, 2s.
Mary Howitt's Juvenile Books. 18mo.
Sold separately at 2s. Bd.
1. Strive and Thrive.

2. Hope on, Hope ever.
3. Sowing and Reaping.
4. Alice Franklin.
5. VtTio shall be Great
est?
6 . Which, is the Wiser ?
7. Little Coin, much Care.

Work and Wages.
9. No Sense like Com
mon Sense.
10. Love and Money.
11. My Uncle, the Clock-
maker.
12. TheTwoApprentjces.
13. My Own Story.

Janeway's Token for Children. 32mo,
Bd.
Juvenile Scrap-Book, Tales, &e. 4to, 4s.
Juvenile Every-day Book. 4s.
Looking-glass for the Mind. llimo,
2s. Bd.
Love-toke.v for Children. By Miss
Sedgwick. 32mo, 2s.
Peter Parley's Tales about Europe,
Asia, Africa, and America. Square, 7s. Bd.

The Sea, and Pacific
Ocean. 4s. Bd.

Rome and Modern Italy.
Sq., 4s. Bd.
Mythology of Greece and
Rome. Sq., 4s. Bd.
Plants. Edited by Mrs.
Loudon. Sq.,7s. Bd.
Universal History. Sq.,
4s. Bd.
Shipwrecks and Disasters
at Sea. Sq., 4s. Bd.
Grammar of Geography.
Square, 4s. Bd.
Lives of Franklin and
Washington. Square,
4s. Bd.

The Sun, Moon, and
Stars. Sq., 4s. Bd.
England, Ireland, and
Scotland. Sq., 7s. Bd.
Ancient and Modern
Greece. Sq., 4s. Bd.
Christmas and its
Festivals. Sq., 7s.6rf.
Animals. Sq., 7s. Bd.
The United States of
America. Sq., 4s. Bd.
Philips's Conversations about the
Whale Fishery. Sq., 4s. Bd.
Philips's Conversations about the Tools
and Trades of Animals. Sq., 4s. Bd.
Rich Poor Man and Poor Rich Man.
Bv Miss Sedgwick. 32mo, 2s.
Rural Pickings, or Attractive Points
in Country Life. Plates. Fcp. 8vo, 7s.
Stories about Poland. 18nio, 2s. 6d.
Tom Telescope's Newtonian Philosophy.
Cuts. Sq., is. 6d.
Village and the "Vicarage. 18mo, 2s. 6d.
Watts's Divine Songs. 18mo, 6d.
Watts's Divine Songs. With Essay, by
Scott. Bd.
White's Natural History of Selborne.
By Lady Dover. 12mo, 3s. Bd.
Wright's Ocean-work. 18mo, 2s. 6d.
Young Man's Aid to Knowledge. 24mo,
2s. Bd.
Young Ladies' Story-teller. By Miss
Leslie, ISnio, 2s.

£ s. d.
Adams's Private Thoughts on Religion. 18mo  0 2 0
Alleine's Alarm to Unconverted Sinners. 32mo  0 2 (I
Ambrose's (I.) Looking unto Jesus, and his other Works. 8vo ..080
Baxter's Saints' Everlasting Rest. 18mo  0 3 0
Berkeley's (Bishop) Works. Notes and Essays Translated. 2 vols. 8vo . 0 16 0
Blair's (Dr. Hugh) Sermons. 8vo  0 8 0
Bolton's Treatise on Comforting Afflicted Consciences. 18mo . .026
Bridge's (Rev. William) Works. Now first collected. 5 vols. 8vo . . 1 17 6
Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. With Life, by Adam Clarke. 12mo .030
 With Plates. 8vo  0 12 0
 27 Plates (Seeley's). 18mo . . .040
 Holy War. New Edition. 18mo . .... 0 3 0

Burder's Rites and Ceremonies op Religion. 8vo  0 12 0
Burnet's Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles. 8vo . ..070
Butlers (Bishop) Analogy of Religion. With Index. 12mo . ..030
 Sermons. 12mo  0 3 0
Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion. 2 vols  17 0
Campbell's (D. D.) Works. Now first collected. 6 vols. 8 vo . .220
 • Lectures on Ecclesiastical History. 8vo . ..080
 Dissertation on Miracles. 8vo  0 7 0
 Pulpit Eloquence, &c. 8vo . . . ..070
Cave's Primitive Christianity. New Edition by Cary. 8vo . . .080
Chillingworth's Religion of Protestants. A Safe Way to Salvation. 12mo 0 7 0
Clarke on the Promises op Scripture. 32mo  0 16
Clarke's (Dr. Adam) Sermons. With great Additions. 4 vols. 12mo ..140
Coles on God's Sovereignty. 12mo  0 4 6
Cudworth's Intellectual System, with Mosheim's Notes Translated.
3 vols. 8vo  2 2 0
Davies's Lectures on Prophecy. 12mo . . . . . . .020
Doddridge's Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul. 32mo .016
Dunn's Selections from the Works of Rev. J. Howe. 12mo . . .066
 Calvin. 12mo

Dwight's System of Theology. 5 vols. 8vo
 5 vols. 18mo. Pocket Edition

0 6 0
1 10 0
0 14 0
0 6 0
0 5 0,
0 4 0
0 5 0
0 5 0
0 10 6
1 1 0
0 12 0
0 12 0
0 12 0
0 3 6
0 14 0
0 12 0

Ellis's Knowledge of Divine Things from Revelation. 12mo
Evans's Sketch of All Religions. New Edition. 12mo
Finney's Sermons on Important Subjects. 12mo
Fisher's Marrow of Modern Divinity. 12nio
Fuller's (D. D.) Discourses on the Book of Genesis. 12mo
Fuller's Hbly and Profane Life. Portraits. 8vo
Gill's Body op Practical Divinity. 2 vols. 8vo
Gill's Cause of God and Truth. 8vo 
Goodwin's Redemption Redeemed. New Edition. 8vo
Gurnall's Christian in Complete Armour. By Campbell. 8vo
Hall's (Rev. Robert) Select Theological Works. 12mo
Halyburton's Theological Works. 8vo ....
Hannam's Pulpit Assistant. New Edition. 8vo .
Hawker's (Rev. Robert) Poor Man's Morning Portion and Evening
Portion. 8vo  0 15 0
Henry (Rev. M.) Life of the Rev. P. Henry, enlarged by Williams. Imp. 8vo. 0 7 6
Hervey's Theron and Aspasio. 8vo  0106
 Meditations and Contemplations. Svo  0 5 0
Hill's (Rev. Rowland) Village Dialogues. 34th Edition. 12mo . .040
Howe's (Rev. T.) Works, as Published during his Life. Portrait from Sir P.
Lely. 3 vols. 8vo  170
Jortin's Remarks on Ecclesiastical History. 2 vols. 8vo . . .10 0
Laws op Christ respecting Civil Obedience, &c. 8vo . . . . 0 16 0
Leighton's (Archbishop) Lectures, Theological, &c. 12mo . . ..026
Lowth's (Bishop) Sermons. By Hall. 8vo  0 12 0
Mason on Self-Knowledge. 32mo  0 2 0
Mason's Spiritual Treasury for the Children of God. 8vo . . .070
More's (Hannah) Practical Piety. 32mo  0 2 6
Morning Exercises at Cripplegate, and Giles-in-the-Fields. New Edi
tion, by J. Nichols. 6 vols. 8vo .  3 14 0
Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History. 2 vols. 8vo  110
Nelson's Fasts and Festivals of the Church of England. 8vo . .080
Olney Hymns. By Cowper and Newton. 32mo  0 16

Theology, &.c, continued.

Orion's (Rev. Job) Practical Works. 2 vols. 8vo
Paley's Works, with Notes and Illustrations by Paxton. 5 vols. 8vo
Pascal's Thoughts on Religion. 18mo 
Pearson on the Creed. A New Edition, by Nichols. 8vo .
Pitman's Sermons for every Sunday in the Year. 2 vols. 8vo
 Second Course. 2 vols. 8vo
Porteus's (Bishop) Lectures on St. Matthew. 8vo
Pulpit (The British). 6 vols. 8vo. (Scarce)
Uuarles's Divine and Moral Emblems. Square 32rao
 School of the Heart. Square 32mo
Roberts's Oriental Illustration of the Scriptures. 8vo
Robinson's Scripture Characters. 8vo 
Romaine's Theological Works. 8vo ....
Rowe's Devout Exercises of the Heart. 32mo .
Scott's (Rev. Thomas) Theological Works. (Chiswick.) 12mo
Simpson's Plea for Religion and the Sacred Writings. 12mo
South's Sermons and Posthumous Works. 4 vols. 8vo
Spring's Obligations op the World to the Bible. 32mo
Sturm's Reflections on the Works of God. By Dr. Clarke. 2 vols. 12mo
The Sabbath School as it should be. Royal 32mo
Todd's Sabbath School Teacher. 8vo ...
 Works on Sunday School Teaching, iSce. 8vo
Wake's (Bishop) Genuine Apostolical Epistles. L2mo
Warden's System of Revealed Religion. By Nichols. 8vo . .
Watts's Psalms and Hymns. 64mo. Pocket Edition
 Scripture History. 12mo
 Hopeful Youth falling short of Heaven. 18mo . . .
 Guide to Prayer. 32ino . . . .
 Death and Heaven. 32mo ....
Wesley's Sermons. By Drew. 2 vols. 8vo
Wheatly on the Book of Common Prayer. 8vo .
Wilberforce's Practical View of Christianity. 32mo
Williams's Christian Preacher. By Jackson. 12mo ....
Witsius on the Covenant between God and Man. 2 vols. 8vo .

£

s.

d.

1

4

0

2

5

0

0

2

6

0

8

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

7

0

2

14

0

0

3

0

0

2

6

0

12

0

0

9

0

0

fl

0

0

1

(i

0

8

0

0

4

0

2

0

0

0

3

0

0

12

0

0

2

G

0

3

0

0

8

0

0

5

0

0

10

0

0

1

6

0

4

0

0

1

0

0

1

6

0

1

G

1

1

0

0

4

6

0

2

0

0

4

6

1

4

0

CHEMISTRY, NATURAL HISTORY, BOTANY, MEDICINE, 84c.

Abercrombie's Pocket Gardener's Ca
lendar. 18mo, 2s.
Berthollet on Dyeing. By "Ore. 8vo, 12s.
Best's Art of Angling. 32mo, 2s. Gd.
Buciian's Domestic Medicine. 8vo, 7s. dd.
Chemical Recreations. New Edition, by
Griffin. 18mo, 7s. Bd.
Gardens and Menagerie of the Zoologi
cal Society. 222 Cuts. 2.vols. 8vo, 21s.
Graham's Domestic Medicine. 8vo, 16s.
Huber's Observations on the Honey-Bee.
12mo, 6s.

Mawe's Every Man his own Gardener.
12mo, 6s.
Natural History of Insects. Cuts. 2 vols.
ISmo, 10s.
Rose's Practical Treatise of Chemical
Analysis. By Dr. Normandy. 8vo, 16s.
Rydge's Veterinary Surgeon's Manual.
4th Edition. 12mo, Cs,
Thomson's Inorganic Chemistry. 2 vols.
8vo, 11. 5s.
White's Natural History of Selborne.
By Lady Dover. 12mo, 3s. Bd.

GENERAL ENGLISH LITERATURE.

ABBOTT'S HOARY HEAD AND THE VALLEY
BELOW. 32mo, 2s. Bd.
ABBOTT'S (JACOB AND JOHN) WORKS. 11
vols. 64mo. Cloth, gilt, 11.
BARROW'S HISTORY OF THE MUTINY OF
THE BOUNTY. 18mo, is.
BLAIR'S LECTURES ON RHETORIC, AND
BELLES LETTRES; with Introduction by
BOOKAlOF TRADES, OR PARENT'S GUIDE
BUcSGGANECDOTES, MORAL, RELIGIOUS,
AND ENTERTAINING. 12mo, 5s.
BUCKE'S HARMONIES AND SUBLIMITIES
OF NATURE. 3 vols. 8vo, 11. lis. Bd.
BUCKE'S RUINS OF ANCIENT CITIES 2 vote. 10s.
RITT.WER'S ATHENS. 2 vols. Svo, 11. lis. Bd.
BriALLERY. 36 Plates. 4to. Ooth, It. is. ^
CAMPBELL'S PHILOSOPHY OF RHETORIC.
8vo, 9s.

New

CHILD'S (MRS.) FRUGAL HOUSEWIFE.
Edition, 32mo, 2s.
CHILD'S (MRS.) FAMILY NURSE. Companion
to the above. 12mo, 3s. Bd.
CHILD'S (MRS.) MOTHER'S BOOK. 32mo, 2s.
COLERIDGE'S SIX MONTHS' RESIDENCE IN
THE WEST INDIES. 18mo, is.
COMMON SENSE FOR COMMON PEOPLE. By
Martin Doyle. 18mo, is.
COWPER'S LIFE AND WORKS. By Grimshawe.
8 vols. 12mo, 11. is.
 POEMS. By Grimshawe. 18mo, 4s.
 12mo, plates, 8s.
CROKER'S FAIRY LEGENDS, See., OF THE
SOUTH OF IRELAND. 18mo, 5s.
CURTIS'S SIMPLICITY OF LIVING AND PRE-
SERVATION OF HEALTH. 12m®, 6s. Bd.
CYCLOPAEDIA OF POPULAR SONGS. ISmo, 5s.
DE FOE'S NOVELS AND MISCELLANEOUS
WORKS. 20 vols. 12mo. Separately at 5s.
Robinson Crusoe complete, 2 vols. — Life and

General English literature, continued.

Adventures of Captain Singleton. — Fortunes and
Misfortunes of the famous Moll Flanders. — Life
and Adventures of Colonel Jack. — Memoirs of a
Cavalier.— New Voyage round the World. —
Memoirs of Captain Carleton and Mrs. Davies.
— History of the Plague ; and the Consolidator.
—History of the Devil. — Roxana ; or, the For
tunate Mistress. — A System of Magic. — History
and Reality of Apparitions. — Religious Court
ship, with an Appendix. — Family Instructor,
complete, 2 vols. — Complete English Tradesman,
2 vols. — Memoirs of Duncan Campbell. — Life, &c.
DIARY OF AN AMERICAN PHYSICIAN. 32mo, 2s.
DOUCE'S ILLUSTRATION OF SHAKSPEARE.
40 Engravings. 8vo, 14s.
ELEGANT EXTRACTS, PROSE. 6 vols. 18mo,
11. 10s.
ELEGANT EXTRACTS, VERSE. 6 vols. 18mo,
11. 10s.
ENFIELD'S HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. Svo.
14s.
EPHRAIM HOLDING'S DOMESTIC ADDRESSES.
32mo, 2s.
FERGUSON'S LECTURES ON MECHANICS, <8cc.
8vo. 10s.
FLOWERS OF LOVELINESS. 12 Groups. By
Paris. Folio, 11. lis. Bd.

Uhwin. 11. lis. Bd.

 By
 By
L. E. L. 11. lis. Bd.
FOX'S BOOK OF MARTYRS. By Milner. 8vo,
15s
FAMILY LIBRARY, THE, IN EIGHTY VOLS.
Sold separately at 5s.
Life of Buonaparte, 2 vols.— Life of Alexander the
Great. — Lives of British Artists, 6 vols.— History
of the Jews, 3 vols. — Insects, 2 vols.— Court and
Camp of Buonaparte. — Life and Voyages of
Columbus. — Life of Nelson, by Southey. — Lives
of British Physicians. — History of British India,
4 vols. — Demonology and Witchcraft, by Scott. —
Life and Travels of Bruce.— Voyages of Colum
bus's Companions.— Venetian History, 2 vols. —
History of the Anglo-Saxons. — Lives of Scottish
Worthies, 3 vols.— Tour in South Holland.— Life
of Sir Isaac Newton. — Mutiny of the Bounty.
— Reformation in England. — Lander's Travels
in Africa, 2 vols. — Sahnagundi, by Washington
Irving. — Trials of Charles I. and the Regicides.
— Brewster's Natural Magic. — Life of Peter the
Great.— Six Months in the West Indies. — Sketch-
Book, by Irving, 2 vols. — Tytler's General
Historv, 6 vols. — Croker's Fairy Legends. — Me
moirs "of the Plague, by De Foe and Brayley. —
Life and Times of General Washington, 2 vols. —
Knickerbocker's History of New York.—
Wesley's Philosophy, 3 vols. — Segur's Narrative
of Napoleon's Expedition to Russia, 2 vols.—
Life of Ali Pacha. — Lives of Banditti and Rob
bers. — Sketches of Imposture, Deception, and
Credulity.— History of tbe Bastille. — History of
Gustavus Adolphus. — Chronicles of London
Bridge. — Life of Duke of Marlborough. — Life of
Cervantes, by Roscoe. — Life of Cicero. — Ruins
of Cities, 2 vols.— Life of Richard Coeur de
Lion.— Life of Mahomet. — Peril and Suffering,
2 vols. — Eustace's Classical Tour in Italy, 3 vols.
— Lives of Eminent Men. — Mutiny at the Nore.
HISTORY OF THE MUTINY AT THE NORE.
By W. J. Neale. 18mo, 5s.
HONE'S EVERY-DAY BOOK. Numerous Cuts.
2 vols. 8vo, 16s.
 TABLE-BOOK. 8vo, 8s.
 YEAR-BOOK. 8vo, 8s.
HOLLAND'S DOMESTIC COOKERY. 12mo, 3s.
HOWARD'S BEAUTIES OFBYRON. 18mo, 2s. Bd.
IRVING'S (WASHINGTON) SKETCH-BOOK. 2
vols. 18mo, 10s.
KALMES'S ELEMENTS OF CRITICISM. 8vo, 7s.
LANGHORNE'S PLUTARCH LIVES. 8vo, 6s.
LAVATER ON PHYSIOGNOMY. 400 Cuts. 8vo, 16s.
LELAND'S VIEW OF DEISTICAL WRITERS.
By EDMOND8. 8VO, 12s.
LIVE AND LET LIVE. By Miss Sedgwick. 32mo,
2s. Bd.
LOCKE'S ESSAY ON THE HUMAN UNDER
STANDING. 8vo, 9s.

MANUAL OF ASTROLOGY. New Edition. By
Raphael. 8vo, 5s.
MASON'S TREATISE ON SELF-KNOWLEDGE.
32mo, 2s.
MEMOIRS OF JOHN SHIPP. 12mo, 5s.
MILTON'S POETICAL WORKS. By Sir Eoerton
Brydges. 8vo, 16s.
 POETICAL WORKS. 18mo, 3s. Bd.
 PARADISE LOST. 18mo, 2s.
MORE'S (HANNAH) TALES FOR THE COMMON
PEOPLE. 32mo, 2s. Bd.
 . STORIES FOR THE MID
DLE RANKS. S2mo, 2s. Bd.
MISCELLANEOUS WORKS.

2 vols. 8vo, 11. is.

SEARCH & ESSAYS. 2s. Bd.
 FEMALE EDUCATION.
ISmo, 3s.
NARRATIVES OF PERIL AND SUFFERING.
By Davenport. 2 vols. 18mo, 10s.
OWEN'S BOOK OF ROADS. ISmo, 2s.
PATTERSON'S BOOK OF ROADS. 8vo, 18s.
PERKLN'S TREATISE ON HABERDASHERY.
ISmo, 4s.
PHILOSOPHY OF COMMON SENSE. 32mo, 2s.
POST CAPTAIN; ou, THE WOODEN WALLS
WELL MANNED. Royal 32mo, 2s. Bd.
REID'S ESSAYS ON THE INTELLECTUAL
POWERS OF THE HUMAN MIND. With
Examination Questions, Sie. Svo, 12s.
REID'S ESSAY ON THE ACTIVE POWERS OF
MAN, AN INQUIRY INTO THE HUMAN
MIND ; Essay on Quality, Sec. 8vo, 12s.
SCENES IN SCOTLAND. By Leighton. 12mo, 5s.
SCOTT'S LETTERS ON DEMONOLOGY AND
WITCHCRAFT. 18mo, 5s.
 MINSTRELSY OF THE SCOTTISH
BORDER. 8vo, 7s. Bd.
SHAKSPEARE'S DRAMATIC WORKS. Diamond
Edition. Fep. 8vo, 7s.
SIGOURNEY'S LETTERS TO MOTHERS. 32mo. 2s.
SIMPSON AND WISE'S READIEST RECKONER
ever invented. 12mo, 5s.
SKETCHES OF IMPOSTURE, DECEPTION, AND
CREDULITY. 18mo, 5s.
SPECTATOR (THE). With Lives of the Authors.
8vo, 12s.
STANFLELD'S COAST SCENERY. 40 Plates,
Royal 8vo, cloth, 12s.
 40 Plates,
4to, cloth, 11. 5s.
 40 Plates,
4to, Morocco, 11. lis. Bd.
STEWART'S (DUGALD) PHILOSOPHY OF THE
HUMAN MIND. New Edition, with the Latin
Quotations translated. 8vo, 10s. Gd.
THOMSON'S (JAMES) POETICAL and DRAMA
TIC WORKS, with Life by Murdock, and Notes
by Nichols, 7 Illustrations from Drawings by
J. Gilbert, and Engraved on Steel by Greatbach.
Fcp. Svo, cloth.
 Seasons,|and Castle of Indolence. Fcp.
Svo, cloth.
THREE EXPERIMENTS OF LIVING. 32mo, 2s.
TODD'S STUDENT'S MANUAL. 32mo, 3s.
 LECTURES TO CHILDREN. 32mo, 2s.
 TRUTH MADE SIMPLE. 32mo, 2s.
 SIMPLE SKETCHES. 32mo, 2s.
TREASURY OF WIT AND ANECDOTE. Royal
32mo, 2s. Bd.
TRIALS OF CHARLES THE FIRST AND THE
REGICIDES. 18mo, 5s.
TWO YEARS BEFORE THE MAST. 24mo, 2s.
VOCAL COMPANION, on SINGER'S OWN BOOK.
12mo, 3s. Bd.
WARTON'S HISTORY OF ENGLISH POETRY.
New Edition. 3 vols. 8vo, 1/. 16s.
WATTS ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE
MIND. 18mo, 2s.
WESLEYANA : A SELECTION FROM WESLEY'S
WRITINGS. 18mo,3s.
WESLEY'S NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. By Robert
Mehie. 3 vols. LSnio, 15s.
WESLEY FAMILY. By Dr. A. Clahke. 2 vols 12s.
WONDERS OF HUMAN NATURE. 12mo, 5s.
YOUNG ENTHUSIAST IN HUMBLE LIFE. 18mo,
2s. Bd.
YOUNG'S NIGHT THOUGHTS ON LIFE, DEATH,
AND IMMORTALITY. 18mo, 2s.

SCHOOL BOOKS.

ADAM'S ROMAN ANTIQUITIES. Twelfth Edition,
^b^T&";Sm01'ous Notcs- **? D--- b°yi>- 12mo, 7 s.
AESCHYLUS, a New Translation. 18mo, 5s.
iESOV'S FABLES. (Chiswick.) 32mo, 3s. Bd.
AIKIN'S CALENDAR OF NATURE. 18mo, Is. Bd.
ALKIN AND BARBAULb'S EVENINGS AT
HOME. 18mo, 4s.
AINSWORTH'S LATIN-ENGLISH DICTIONARY.
By Dymock. 18mo, 7s.
ALEXANDER THE GREAT, LIFE OF. By Rev.
J. Williams. 18mo, 5s.
ALDERSON'S ORTHOGRAPHICAL EXERCISES.
ISmo, Is.
ANTHON'S HOMER'S ILIAD, FIRST THREE
BOOKS. By Dr. Davies. 12mo, 7s. Bd.
ANTHON'S VIRGIL'S ECLOGUES & GEORGICS,
Sec. By Nichols. 12mo, roan, Bs.
ANTHON'S VIRGIL'S 2ENEID. By Trollope.
12mo, 7s. 6*.
ANTHON'S HORACE, with English Notes. By Dr.
Bovn. 1 2mo, 7s. Gd.
ANTHON'S SALLUST, with English Notes. By
Dr. Boyd. 12mo, 5s.
ANTHON'S CICERO'S ORATIONS, with English
Notes. By Dr. Boyd. 12mo, 6s.
ANTHON'S GREEK READER, with EnglishNotes.
By Dr. Boyd. 12mo, 7s. Bd.
ANTHON'S CESAR'S COMMENTARIES, with
Maps and Plates. 12mo, 6s.
ANTHON'S GREEK GRAMMAR. By Dr. Major,
King's College. 12mo, 4s.
ANTHON'S GREEK PROSODY. By Dr. Major,
King's College. 12mo, 2s. 6d.
ANTHON'S LATIN GRAMMAR. By Rev. W.
Hayes, King's College. 12mo, 4s.
BALDWIN'S ROME. 12mo, 3s. Gd.
BALDWIN'S GREECE. 12mo, 3s. Bd.
BALDWIN'S PANTHEON OF THE HEATHEN
DEITIES. 12mo, 4s. Bd.
BALDWIN'S FABLES. Cuts. 12mo, 4s.
BARROW'S PETER THE GREAT. 18mo, 5s.
BUCHANAN'S TECHNOLOGICAL DICTIONARY.
18mo, 7s.
BUFFON.— NOUVEAUX MORCEAUX CHOISIS
DE BUFFON. 18mo, 2s. Bd.
BURGESS'S (BISHOP) HEBREW ELEMENTS.
12mo, 6s.
BURGESS'S (BISHOP) RUDIMENTS OF HE
BREW GRAMMAR. 12mo, 7s.
BONNYCASTLE'S SCHOOL BOOKS. Edited by
Rev. E. C. Tyson, viz.—

Arithmetic, 3s. Bd.
Key to Ditto, 4s. Bd.
Introduction to Alge
bra, 4s.

Key to Algebia, 4s. Bd.
Introduction to Mensura.
tion, i".
Key to Mensuration, 5s.

CAMPBELL'S LIVES OF THE BRITISH ADMI
RALS, AND NAVAL HISTORY OF GREAT
BRITAIN. Engravings. 12mo, 7s.
CARPENTER'S DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH
SYNONYMBS. 18mo, 2s. Bd.
CHEMICAL RECREATIONS. New Edition, by
Griffin. 18mo, 7s. Gd.
CICERO. — SELECT ORATIONS OF CICERO.
Translated by William Duncan. 8vo, 7s.
COBBLN'S PICTORIAL SCHOOL HAND-BOOK
TO THE HOLY BIBLE. 18mo, 2s.
CRABB'S DICTIONARY OF GENERAL KNOW
LEDGE. Fourth Edition. 12mo, 7s.
CREAM OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE ; a Note-
Book of General Information. 18mo, 3s.
DAVENPORT'S WALKER'S DICTIONARY IN
MINIATURE. 18mo, 5s.
DEMOSTHENES— AEM020EN0TS MAinni-
KOI KAI STMBOTAETTIKOI. Textus ap-
nositu est Lectio Reiskiana. 8vo, 3s. 6<J.
DUNCAN'S (Rev. Dr.) HEBREW LEXICON AND
GRAMMAR. 18mo, 7s.
ELLIS'S LATIN EXERCISES. New Edition, by
Wright. 12mo, 3s. Bd.
ENFIELD'S SPEAKER. 12mo, 3s. Bd.
ENFIELD'S PROGRESSIVE SPELLING-BOOK.
New Edition. 12mo, Is. Sd.
ETON GREEK GRAMMAR. By Homer, 12mo, 4s.
EUCLID -THE ELEMENTS OF EUCLID, vlz.-
the First 14 Books, together with the Eleventh
and Twelfth. From the text of Dr. Simson.
P.v William Rutherford, F.R.A.S. 18mo, 5s.
FINDLAY'S GENERAL SCHOOL ATLAS. Royal

FINDLAY'S OUTLINE MArS. Royal Svo, 5s.
A LIST OF THE MAI'S IN FINDLAY'S GENERAL
ATLAS, any of whioh may be had separately,

17. Turkey in Europe,
and Greece.
18. ABia.
1 9. Turkey in Asia.
20. India.
21. China.
22. Oceanica.
23. New South Wales.
24. Tasmania, or Van
Diemen's Land.
25. Africa.
26. North America.
27. Canada.
28. United States.
29. West Indies.
30. South America.

1. Eastern Hemisphere.
2. Westernllemisphere.
8. Europe.
i. England and Wales.
5. Scotland.
B. Ireland.
7. France.
8. HollandandBclgium.
9. Germany.
10. Prussia.
11. Austria.
12. Sweden, Norway, and
Denmark.
13. Russia in Europe.
14. Spain and Portugal.
15. Switzerland.
16. Italy.
FINDLAY'S ANCIENT ATLAS, according to the
latest Discoveries^ Royal Svo, balf-bound, 12s.
LIST OF MAPS IN FINDLAY'S ANCIENT
ATLAS :—
1. Orbis veteribusnotus.
2. Roma.
3. Italia Septentrionalis.
4. Italia Media.
5. Italia Meridionalis.
6. Athenaa.
7. Peloponnesus et At
tica.
8. Grascia Septentrion
alis.
9. Insulas Maris Mgzei
et Creta.
10. Macedonia, Thracia,
Illyria, Mcesia et
Dacia.
11. Britannia.
12. Insulae Britannicas.
13. Gallia.

14. Germania.
15. Vindelicia, Noricum,
RhEetia, Pannonia
et Illyricum.
16. Hispania.
17. Africa Septentrion
alis.
18. ^Egyptas.
19. Asia Minor.
2*0. Palaastina.
21. Syria.
22. Armenia, Mesopota
mia, Assyria et Ba
bylonia. •
23. Arabia.
24. Imperium Persicum.
25. Indiae.
26. Plan of Italy.
FRENCH (THE) INTERPRETER, OK, PRONOUN
CING GRAMMAR, by Dufief. Square, Is. Bd.
FRENCH CLASSICS FOR SCHOOLS. Edited by
Ventouillac 18mo, viz. —
Nouveaux Morceaux I Choix des Contcs Mo-
Choisis de Button. raux de Marmontel.
2s. 6d. 2s. Bd.
LaChaumierelndienne. Histoire de Pierre le
St. Pierre. 2s. Gd. I Grand. Voltaire. 5s.
Pensees de Pascal. 2s. Bd.
GEOGRAPHY AND HISTORY. By a Lady. New
Edition, by Wright. 12mo, 4s. Bd.
GOLDSMITH'S GRAMMAR OF GEOGRAPHY.
New Edition, by Wright. 18mo, 3s. Bd.
GOLDSMITH'S GEOGRAPHY, KEY TO. 18mo,
sewed, 9d.
GOLDSMITH'S HISTORY OF ENGLAND. Chis
wick Edition. 12mo, 6s.
GRIESBACH'S NOVUM TESTAMENTUM
GREECE. Glasguse. 5s.
GUTHRIE'S GEOGRAPHICAL, HISTORICAL,
AND COMMERCIAL GRAMMAR. By R. A.
Davenport. With numerous Maps. 18mo, 5s.
HOLLINGS'S LIFE OF GUSTA VUS ADOLPHUS,
Surnamed the Great, King of Sweden. 18mo, 5s.
HOLLINGS'S LIFE OF MARCUS TULLIUS CI
CERO. 18mo, 5s.
HOMER'S (Rev. P.) INTRODUCTION TO THE
GREEK TONGUE. 12mo, 4s.
HUTTON'S MATHEMATICS. A New Edition. By
RCTHBRFORD. 8vO, 12s.
HUTTON'S MATHEMATICAL RECREATIONS.
By Riddle. 8vo, 12s.
JOHNSON'S ENGLISH DICTIONARY. (Pocket
size.) 2s.
JONES'S SHERIDAN'S PRONOUNCING DIC
TIONARY. Square, 3s. Bd.
JOYCE'S INTRODUCTION TO THE ARTS AND
SCIENCES. 12mo, 3s. Bd.
JOYCE'S SCIENTIFIC DIALOGUES. 12mo, 2s. Bd.
KEITH ON THE USE OF THE GLOBES. New
Edition, by Wright. 12mo, Gs. Gd.
LEMPRIERE'S CLASSICAL DICTIONARY. By
Parke. 18mo, 7s.

School Books, continued.

LENNIE'3 ENGLISH GRAMMAR. Twenty-sixth
Edition. 18mo, Is. Bd.
LIVY.— EXCERPTA EX LTVIO CUM J. B. L.
CREVIERII NOTIS INTEGRIS ALIORUM-
QUE SELECTISSLMIS LN USUM SCHOEA-
RUM. 12mo, 4s.
MADAN'S JUVENAL. 2 vols. 8vo, 14s.
MANGNALL'S HISTORICAL AND MISCELLA
NEOUS QUESTIONS. 12mo, 4s. Bd.
MAVOR'S SPELLING-BOOK. 12mo, Is.
MEADOWS'S ITALIAN AND ENGLISH DIC
TIONARY. 18rao, 7s.
MEADOWS'S FRENCH AND ENGLISH PRO
NOUNCING DICTIONARY. 18mo, 7s.
MEADOWS'S SPANISH AND ENGLISH DIC
TIONARY. 18mo, 7s.
MEADOWS'S NEW SPANISH GRAMMAR. 18mo,
Is. Bd.
MORRISON'S BOOK-KEEPING. 8vo, 8s.
MURRAY'S (LlNDLEY) SCHOOL-BOOKS. Edited
by Tyson, viz. :-

English Gram. 4s.
- (Abridged).

18mo, Is.

Exercises.

English Reader. 12mo,
4s.
introduction to the Eng
lish Reader. 12mo_, 2s.
Grammar and Exercises.
By Gartley. 18mo,
2s. , 4s. Bd. Sq.,

12mo, 2s. Bd.
Key to the Exercises,
12mo, 2s. Bd.
PARLEY'S UNIVERSAL HISTORY.
PARLEY'S GRAMMAR OF GEOGRAPHY,
4s. Bd.
PARLEY'S TALES ABOUT ANIMALS. Sq., 7s. Bd.
PARLEY'S TALES ABOUT GREECE. Sq., 4s. Bd.
PARLEY'S TALES ABOUT ROME. Sq., 4s. Bd.
PARLEY'S MYTHOLOGY OF GREECE. Sq., 4s. Gd.
PEASE'S COURSE OF PRACTICAL GEOMETRY.
12mo, 2s.
PERRIN'S ELEMENTS OF FRENCH CONVER
SATION. By Wright. 12mo, Is. Gd.
PERRIN'S FRENCH FABLES. 12mo, 2s. Bd.
PERRIN'S FRENCH SPELLING-BOOK. By
Wright. 12mo, 2s.
PINDARI CARMLNA. By Heyne. 32mo, 4s.
PINNOCK'S ENGLAND. New Edit. 12mo, 5s. Bd.

POPHAM'S CATECHISM OF USEFUL KNOW
LEDGE. 18mo, 9d.
POTTER'S ANTIQUITIES OF GREECE. By
Boyd. 12mo, 9s.
QUESTIONS ON ADAM'S ROMAN ANTIQUI
TIES. By Boyd. Is. Sd.
RAMSHORN'S DICTIONARY OF LATIN SYNO-
NYMES. 8vo, 7s.
ROBINSON'S GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 8vo, 8s. Bd.
SEPTUAGINT (The) GREEK. 2 vols. 32mo, 12s.
SIMSON'S EUCLID. By Rutherford. 18mo, 5s.
SOUTHEY'S LIFE OF LORD NELSON. The
Eighth Edition. 18mo, 5s.
SPELLING BY DICTATION. A series of Progres
sive Exercises in English Orthography. 18mo, Is.
TEGG'S FIRST BOOK FOR CHILDREN. 18mo, Bd.
TERENCE -THE ANDRIAN, HEAUTONTIMO-
RUMENOS, AND HECYRA. By Jonathan
Adair Phillips. 8vo. 8s.
TOM TELESCOPE'S NEWTONIAN PHILOSO
PHY. Sq. Cuts. 4s. Bd.
TOOKE'S (HORNE) DIVERSIONS OF PURLEY.
New Edition. By Taylor. 8vo, 14s.
TROLLOPE'S (Rey. W., 'M.A.) GREEK TESTA
MENT. 8vo, 21s.
TRIMMER'S DESCRIPTION AND A SET OF
PRINTS TO ROMAN HISTORY, CONTAINED
IN A SET OF EASY LESSONS. 2 vols., 5s.
WALKER'S CRITICAL PRONOUNCING DIC
TIONARY AND EXPOSITOR OF THE
ENGLISH LANGUAGE. 8vo, 7s.
WALKER'S KEY TO THE CLASSICAL PRO
NUNCIATION OF GREEK, LATIN, AND
SCRIPTURE PROPER NAMES. 18mo, Is. Gd.
WALKING AME'S TUTOR. 12mo, 2s.
WANOSTROCHT'S RECUEIL CHOISI. 12mo, 3s.
WATTS'S VIEW OF SCRIPTURE HISTORY.
12mo, 4s. Bd.
WILLIAMS'S LIFE AND ACTIONS OF ALEX
ANDER THE GREAT. 18mo, 5s.
WRIGHT'S COMMENTARY ON NEWTON'S
PRINCIPIA. 2 vols., 11. 8s.
WRIGHT'S GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON.
18mo, 7s.

DICTIONARIES, LEXICONS, 8tc.

BROWN'S (REV. JOHN) DICTIONARY OF THE
HOLY BIBLE. 8vo, 9s.
BUCHANAN'S TECHNOLOGICAL DICTIONARY.
18mo, 7s.
BUCK'S THEOLOGICAL DICTIONARY, New
Edition. By Henderson. 8vo, 10s.
CALMET'S DICTIONARY OF THE HOLY BIBLE.
Ey Taylor. Imperial 8vo, 11.
CARPENTER'S DICTIONARY OF SYNONYMES.
Third Edition. 18mo, 2s. Bd.
CRABB'S DICTIONARY OF GENERAL KNOW
LEDGE. Fourth Edition. 12mo, 7s.
CRUDEN'S CONCORDANCE OF THE OLD AND
NEW TESTAMENTS. Imp. 8vo, 18s.
CUNNINGHAM'S (A.) PILKINGTON'S DIC
TIONARY OF PAINTERS. 8vo, 21s.
DAVENPORT'S WALKER'SPRONOUNCING DIC
TIONARY. 18mo, 5s.
DUNCAN'S (REV. DR.) HEBREW LEXICON AND
GRAMMAR. 18mo, 7s.
DYMOCK'S ATNSWORTH'S LATIN AND ENG
LISH DICTIONARY. 18mo, 7s.
FINDLAY'S BROOKES'S GENERAL GAZET
TEER. 8vo, 12s.
FINDLAY'S BROOKES'S GENERAL GAZETTEER
IN MINIATURE. 18mo, 7s.
GUTHRIE'S DIAMOND DICTIONARY OF THE
BIBLE. 24mo.

GUTHRIE'S GEOGRAPHY IN MINIATURE. By
Davenport. 18mo, 5s.
JOHNSON'S DIAMOND DICTIONARY OF THE
ENGLISH LANGUAGE. 32mo, 2s.
JOHNSON'S DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH
LANGUAGE. 2 vols. 4to, il. 2s.
JONES'S (STEPHEN) BIOGRAPHICAL DIC
TIONARY. 18mo, 6s.
JONES'S BIBLICAL CYCLOPAEDIA. 10s.
LEMPRIERE'S CLASSICAL DICTIONARY. By
Parke. 18mo, 7s.
MEADOWS'S ITALIAN AND ENGLISH DIC
TIONARY. 18mo, 7s.
MEADOWS'S FRENCH AND ENGLISH PRO
NOUNCING DICTIONARY. 18mo, 7s.
MEADOWS'S SPANISH AND ENGLISH DIC
TIONARY. 18mo, 7s.
MEADOWS'S NEW SPANISH GRAMMAR. 18mo,
Is. 6d.
MITCHELL'S PORTABLE CYCLOP2EDIA. 50
Plates. 8vo, 11. Is.
ROBINSON'S GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 8vo, 8s. Bd.
TEGG'S DICTIONARY of CHRONOLOGY. 12mo,
6s. '
WALKER AND JOHNSON (COMBINED). 8vo,
7s.
WALKER'S PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY, and
the Key to Proper Names. 8vo, 7s.

This Catalogue of Popular Standard Works forwarded Free to all parts of the world
by letter addressed to Messrs. William Tegg & Co.

Bradbury & Evans, Printers, "Whitefriar«.

3 9002 00857 1474