infallibly appear also in pride, covetousness, ambition, sensuality, the love of domination, in one form or other of selfishness. This is the brand which Providence puts upon imposture. Unblemished innocency is the seal of truth. This stamps our divine books. It is morally impossible that such men could have imposed knowingly and basely upon mankind.

Lastly, They had nothing to expect for their testimony but temporal calamities and death; which they actually incurred, and incurred without once shrinking from the facts they asserted. What was there to instigate the apostles to falsify the truth? What had they to look for? A miserable life, reproach, contempt, derision, the loss of property, home, country; the being made as the filth of the earth and the offscouring of all things; till a shameful and lingering execution delivered them up to posthumous ignominy and scorn. That men of such holy characters, should, in the face of such sufferings, persevere unto death in their testimony to certain broad and intelligible facts, before an enraged world-when they had only to hold their peace, and abstain from bearing their testimony, in order to enjoy tranquillity like other men-can only be accounted for on one supposition, the truth of what they asserted.

In short, this branch of our argument may

be summed up in the nervous lines of one of

our greatest poets.18

Whence, but from heaven, could men unskilled in arts,

In several ages born, in several parts,

Weave such agreeing truths? Or how or why

Should all conspire to cheat us with a lie?
Unasked their pains, ungrateful their advice;
Starving their gain, and martyrdom their price?

Two general considerations of some additional weight will conclude these proofs of the credibility.

Not one of the apostles or of their numerous converts ever came forward to complain of any imposition having been practised upon them. Now it is the most obvious dictate of common sense, that if our history be a forgery, and the events did not really take place, some one, out of the many thousands and tens of thousands who followed the religion, under some circumstances or other, must have exposed the deceit and have totally discomfited the enterprise. But where is the individual? Who has charged our books with falsehood? Did Judas, who stung with remorse, threw back his guilty gain, and declared he had betrayed the innocent blood? Or did the apostate of a later age, Julian, who admits every one of the

18 Dryden.

gospel facts? Our religion stands without an

accuser.

Again, if our accounts are false, where is the true one! Our narrative gives an account, a natural, an adequate, and nothing more than an adequate account of the facts. And where are the traces, where the vestiges of any other? What is the opposite statement? What the counter-hypothesis, that we may decide between them? All is silent as death. Every whisper of past tradition confirms our narrative. All accessible information falls in with it. Our account therefore is true. Nothing but a perverseness of mind, hardened against the force of moral evidence, can withhold us from reposing an entire confidence, a full acquiescence of the whole rational faculties of man, on the veracity of the evangelical history.

This would be the place for entering upon the authenticity and credibility of the Old Testament, in order that this branch of our whole subject being completed, we might pass on to the divine authority of the Christian revelation. But this point is so involved in the truth of the New Testament, and so immediately follows from it, that I shall confine myself to an observation or two upon the connexion.

For it is impossible to open the New Testament without perceiving that the Christian religion is the accomplishment of the Jewish, that our Lord and his apostles constantly appealed to the books of the Old Testament as acknowledged scriptures, quoted them as of unquestionable authority, and publicly professed to accomplish the prophecies which they contain. If, therefore, the New Testament be genuine and credible, the Old Testament is so likewise. The two are indissolubly linked together. The moment you open St. Matthew, the genealogy brings in an appeal to the whole history of the Old Testament; and the distinct references to Isaiah and Jeremiah and Micah, as well-authenticated prophets, whose predictions were to be accomplished in the Messiah, seal the truth of the Old Testament, if that of the New is admitted. In like manner our Lord appeals in his instructions, to these writings as a wellknown volume of authentic records, Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me. He recognizes also the three divisions of the sacred books, All things must be fulfilled which are written in the law of Moses and the Psalms and the prophets concerning me.

The history of the chief persons of the Old Testament is distinctly confirmed by St. Ste

phen, in his address to the council," and by the sacred author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 20 These contain summaries of the Jewish history agreeing in every part with the Old Testament records.

About one hundred and forty times do the Scriptures," Holy Scrip

solemn terms,

tures,"

66

66

Scriptures of the Prophets," "It is written," occur in the New Testament in attestation of the Old.

pro

But I need not dwell on so plain a point,' and one so universally admitted. I will content myself with appealing to St. Peter for the authority of the whole compass of the phetical parts of the Old Testament:-The prophecy came not of old time by the will of men; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. And to St. Paul for the truth of the ancient scriptures generally,-All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."

19 Acts vii.

20 11th chapter.

21 Some notice may perhaps be required as to the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament, after what we stated as to those of the New. The Apocryphal Books, then, of the Old Testament, differ from those of the New in several respects. 1. They were admitted into the sacred canon by the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century.-2. They are intermingled with the canonical books in the Roman Catholic editions of