To the Sacred Scriptures, and the many valuable chriftian books of all defcriptions, to be found in every Library it isoped, this Effay may prove an aceptable addition; and a uterumpanion to thofe readersf the New Teftament efpecially, whofe fituation affords but few opportunes for attending on Divine Worfhip and public Inftruction.

The price of this Edition, from various causes, efpecially from the small number of copies that could be difpofed of in a country where Europeans are comparatively few, is neceffarily higher than could have been wifhed. That however, to thofe for whom it is chiefly intended, will be no great object.

It only remains for the Editor to obferve, that the prefent is a faithful Tranfcript of the Third Edition, printed in 1813, under the Author's own

eye.

MALACCA 17.}

March 4, 1817.

f

PREFACE.

THE following Treatife was drawn up at the requeft of the London Miffionary Society. That zealous and active body refolved at their annual meeting in May 1800, to print a very large edition of the New Teftament for the ufe of the people of France. On confidering the wide fpread of infidelity in that country, it was thought it would be for their edification, to accompany it with an EsJay on the Divine Authority of the Writings of the Evangelifts and Apofties. The office was affigned to me, and it was accepted by me. The difficulty of it was felt, when it was too late to retract: and I blushed to think, that I fhould have dared to take up the pen on a theme, to which many of the first men in the republic of letters, for talents, learning, and goodness, had bent the whole ftrength of their mind. However I had undertaken the tafk, and it was neceffary to proceed. One thing gave me encouragement, as it pointed out the neceffity of the work, namely, that though there were many books of the higheft excellence on the evidence of the chriftian religion, not one was fuited to our views: and a treatise more appropriate to the particular object was needed to answer the prefent purpose. Such a treatife it has been my endeavour to furnish.

But that the reader may judge of the Effay according to the writer's defign, I beg leave to lay before him the plan I perfued, as beft adapted to attain the proposed object.

I have endeavoured to keep always in view the perfons for whofe benefit it was intended. Deifts are the men addreffed. Atheists I leave entirely out of the question. To propose the evidences of christianity to men who cannot read the existence of God in the works of creation, is perdere et oleum et operam. The Deifts are fuppofed to hold what we call the principles of natural religion: and if in addition to this, they be confidered as in a great measure ignorant of the real doctrines of the gofpel, and prejudiced against it as containing all the fuperftition of the church of Rome, it will finish the outlines of their character. For fuch I write: and it will be proper for the English reader to keep

this in view.

It has been my ftudy to felect thofe arguments of which a perfon may fee the force by reading the New Teftament: and to it has been my conftant appeal. Such proofs as required a critical fkill in languages or history, did not appear fuited to the occafion. As the Effay fhould fuit the mafs, as well as men of fcience, what may be called common Jenfe arguments, addreffed to the understanding and confcience of men who had the new Testament in their hands, have been chiefly employed, as best adapted to general conviction.

Those who are intimately acquainted with the deiftical controverfy, and who need but a bint in order to recal a whole chain of reafoning to the mind, may complain that I have dwelt too long on each particular. Others who love to fee a fubject accurately treated, and arguments fully exposed to view, will find fault, because the particulars are not fufficiently illuftrated. My courfe lay between these two. The former was altogether im

proper, because the perfons I address are supposed to be in a great meafure unacquainted with the fubject. The latter would have been tedious to those for whom it is defigned, and befides would have fwelled the Effay into feveral volumes. It has been my aim to bring forward the substance of the evidence, and to illuftrate each particular fo far, that a person who previously had little knowledge of the fubject might fee and feel the force of the argument. Whether I have fucceeded, it is the province of the reader to judge. If I could have fpared more room, I fhould have enlarged (what fome may think leaft to the purpose) the first chapter of the Effay: because I believe that one grand reafon why many reject the New Testament, is because they are ignorant of its principles, and have taken up falfe ideas of the gospel of Jefus Christ.

If the arrangement be perfpicuous and eafily re membered, it will anfwer the author's wish. The divifions may appear formal; but he thought they would render an Effay of this kind more diftinct; and likewise that a person who would not venture on an undivided book, might be induced to read a fhort fection, and from one be led on to another. As to language, his endeavour has been to render the ideas as plain and as obvious as he could, to minds unaccustomed to religious inquiries; and to comprise as much ufeful matter in as few words, as Could be done without obfcurity. Whether he has been able to render it interefting must be left to the judgment of others. A more adorned ftyle might have been agreeable to many; but one man has his gift and tafte in one way, and another in another.

Readers need to be reminded of this diversity of

tafte in compofition; and that on this account all cannot poffibly have their own gratified in any one performance. How differently do men convey their ideas! We perceive a difference as to the matter, the form, the arrangement, the length and manner of illuftration, the style and degree of decoration. Very many perfons who read, but never wrote books, are not fufficiently confiderate as to this point. They expect a greater conformity to their tafte, than it is in the power, were it the in clination, of a writer to comply with; and if they do not find their own favourite mode of compofition, they condemn the work. But a man might as well infift, that others (hould have the fame contour of face, and eyes and hair of the fame colour with his own. It fhould be remembered, that every man has his manner; and if a perfon write a book, provided it be compofed fo as to answer the purpose in a fuitable degree, impartial and candid readers fhould allow him to do it, and indeed fhould expect him to do it in his own manner; and they have no juft reafon to complain on this ac

count.

It has been, as you will obferve, my ftudy to addrefs Deifts, without bitterness and without contempt. I have made ufe of no har terms nor furious invectives, being convinced that the wrath of man worketh not the righteoufnefs of God:" but I have treated them fairly, as I wish them to treat the gospel and its advocates. A perfon who is confcious of truth on his fide, is under no neceffity of having recourfe to fcurrility and abuse. Some writers on the subject have taken very high ground, and always fpeak of Deifts with fovereign contempt, and the most pointed virulence, as men deftitute of the fhadow of a pretence for their in