unbelief could never discover the remotest blemish.

In the Gospels we see nothing important which, on the strictest investigation, does not fully accord with the truth. There may be some apparent discrepancies; and this very circumstance precludes the idea of collusion: but there are very few things which the indefatigable student cannot fully reconcile; and even what may remain, if indeed any do remain, are not so important, as to effect either the authenticity or Divine original of the Evangelical records. The Go spels have therefore their claims supported by the veracity which they invariably observe.

1. This veracity is displayed in the candour with which the Evangelists narrate events in which they themselves bore a part, and in the modesty with which they conceal circumstances reflecting credit on themselves. Had the Evangelists been guided by their natural feelings, they would have undoubtedly suppressed many accounts from which they derive no honour; but, influenced as they were by Christian feelings and motives, they uniformly give us a simple relation of facts, and leave it to their readers to deduce such reflections as their nature may suggest. It is almost unnecessary to adduce examples, since they are numerous and obvious ; but we may mention one or ⚫ two. It is observable that St. Matthew, whenever he has occasion to mention himself, affixes the word TEλwns to his name; and this will appear an instance of the greater candour, when we consider that he addresses his Gospel to the Jews, by whom nothing was held in such abhorrence as the name of a publican. None of the other Evangelists have mentioned his profession previous to his becoming a disciple; and his candid confession is the only source whence we derive this information. Another instance may be mentioned, the disclosure of which is not more honourable to

the veracity of the narrator than it was disgraceful to his feelings at the time it occurred. I allude to St. Peter's denial of our Lord. This Apostle is supposed to have furnished St. Mark with the materials for his history; and therefore the detail of this transaction may be regarded as proceeding from himself. It is related with every circumstance of aggravation; and, had the Apostle been desirous of preserving his reputation immaculate only from the fouler stains which adhere to it, he would certainly have been chiefly desirous of suppressing this. His previous firm assurance that he would never forsake his Master, notwithstanding the defection of others, rendered his subsequent cowardice the more inexcusable, especially when the reason which induced him to deny his Lord was neither cogent nor at all adequate to the degree of crime he exhibited. He seems in the narration of this circumstance to have been peculiarly solicitous to present every feature in its most aggravated shape.

2. The veracity of the Gospels is supported by their accordance with historical facts. Josephus is the principal writer who confirms many of the accounts left us by the Evangelists; and his testimony is the more valuable, when his principles and profession as a Jew are considered. That the coincidence is undesigned is evident from the nature of the case; and therefore the evidence in favour of the Gospel history must be decisive. But the internal evidence is equally authoritative. We find their allusions to be of so mixed a nature, that it was impossible for their authors to avoid contradictions, unless they were intimately acquainted with the customs and posture of affairs at the period to which their history relates. And to possess this acquaintance with Judea at the time of our Lord's appearance, it was necessary that an individual should be contemporary. After the cap

ture of Jerusalem a total revolution took place in the peculiar usages and character of the Jews, which existed while they continued a nation. We cannot therefore wonder at the ignorance of subsequent writers on these subjects, while the circumstance proves that the Evangelists were eye-witnesses of what they relate, and contemporary with the period to which this narrative refers.

The census mentioned by St. Luke, has been objected to as a proof of a want of veracity occasionally observable in the Gospels. This objection vanishes on examining the passage, and so easily that we cannot but wonder it should ever have been supposed to militate against the truth of the Gospel. Our translators render the passage, "and this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria." From Josephus we learn that Cyrenius did not succeed to the government of Syria till ten years after the death of Herod; but according to the Evangelist, the Saviour was born in the reign of Herod, and by consequence the present translation involves a contradiction. But it may be rendered with equal correctness, "this was the first taxing by Cyrenius, governor of Syria.' This individual is supposed to have been sent by Augustus in the latter part of Herod's reign; and by a figure of speech, of no uncommon occurrence, he is invested with an office, upon which he did not enter till some time afterwards. The absence of this event from the narrative of Josephus is perhaps attributable to another taxing, which he mentions as having taken place on the accession of Cyrenius to the throne, and as having been productive of the most disastrous consequences. The word porn is therefore very properly used by the Evangelist. Besides, I believe there is allusion made by Josephus to some enrolment at the close of Herod's reign; but as its having taken place reflected no credit on his administration, Josephus

πρώτη

does not give us the particulars. Another interpretation has been given of the passage equally satisfactory. "This taxing happened before that Cyrenius was, "&c. This is founded on the use of the word "poros in two or three instances. John i. 15, πρштос μου ην. Luke xvii. 25, πρωτον δε δει αυτον πολλα παθειν. Either of these interpretations vindicates the passage from objection: other historical discrepancies, alleged by the opponents of Christianity, admit of an equally satisfactory elucidation.

3. The veracity of the Gospels is supported by the exact fulfilment of prophecy which they display, and by the record of new predictions, which subsequent events have confirmed, and which are now gradually drawing to their completion. The Old Testament abounds with predictions relative to the advent of à Redeemer; and so evident is the relation they bear to this important period, that the Jews without hesitation applied them to him. Of this we have an instance in the Gospels. When Herod inquired of the chief priests where the Messiah was to be born, they answered, "Bethlehem; for thus it is written, And thou, Bethlehem, art not the least," &c. "for out of thee shall come a Ruler, who shall govern my people Israel." The prophecies which relate to the life and actions of the Saviour are applicable to that period which preceded the destruction of the second temple; and there was no individual, except the Saviour, who at that time resembled the minute delineations of the expected Redeemer contained in the Prophets. It is clear, therefore, that he was "the Shiloh" who should appear when "the kingdom" was about to "depart from Judah, and a lawgiver from between his feet:" nor are his claims to the Messiahship invalidated by the impostors who subsequently appeared. Admitting that no peculiar features should characterise the period of his incarnation, still the delineations of the character for which the promised Deliverer was

to be remarkable, were so exact and evident as to agree with that of our Lord alone. The claims of Mohammed are the only ones which can be brought into competition (if competition it may be called) with those of Jesus; and this not so much from the character of the man, or the actions he performed, as from the wide diffusion which his tenets have obtained. This diffusion was one of the consequences predicted to attend the promulgation of Christianity. The success of the Mohammedan religion is a phenomenon not difficult of explanation, and the character of its founder completely subverts its claims to a Divine origin. He was not a "man of sorrows and acquainted with grief". the burden of our sins was not laid upon him, neither were we healed by his stripes. He was not cut off for the sake of others, to make an end of transgression neither after his death was any city or sanctuary destroyed. To none of these characters has Mohammed any claims; and so sensible was he of his want of authority in this respect, that I am not aware of his ever having endeavoured to recommend himself or his doctrine by an appeal to prophecy. Our Lord, on the contrary, commands us to "search the Scriptures, for they are they which testify of" him. His constant appeal for the confirmation of his system is to the law and the testimony. He relies on no foreign aid for ensuring the permanency and universality of his religion. Its own native truth he regards as the only means to produce this effect. The difference between the mohammedan and Christian religions is in this point of view most remarkable, and the influence arising from the comparison is highly advantageous to the latter.

Again, the predictions recorded in the Gospels of events which have already transpired, are an additional confirmation of their veracity. We might enumerate, as the earliest of these predictions, such as relate

to the sufferings and treatment of the Saviour; but as most stress has been laid on that which relates to the capture and destruction of Jerusalem, I rather choose to ground the veracity of the Gospels on this circumstance especially. The first three Gospels were undoubtedly written at a date anterior to this event; and therefore, whatever declarations they give us respecting the fate of Jerusalem, are to be regarded in the exact light of prophecies. Josephus describes the destruction of the city in a way which completely answers to the description of our Lord. The eagles were to be gathered together as to a carcase; and after signs and wonders the devastation of the city and temple was to follow, and not one stone was to be left on another. Neither has impiety been able to defeat one part of the prophecy relating to this destruction. Jerusalem was to be trodden under foot by the Gentiles, till the time of the Gentiles should be fulfilled. A heathen historian has furnished us with a piece of information highly valuable. Julian attempted to rebuild the city; but, although aided by every means which riches and power could bestow, the attempt was defeated by appearances which plainly indicated the intervention of the Deity. The concomitant of the prophecy respecting Jerusalem--the dispersion of the Jewish people-is fulfilled in our own observation. The diffusion of the Gospel and the regular succession of authorised teachers of religion were to attend the promulgation of Christianity. Accordingly we find, that on and after the day of Pentecost, numbers were converted; and as these numbers increased, and additional means of instruction became necessary, bishops were regularly ordained to supply the several exigencies of the church. Christianity has in every succeeding age received fresh accessions to its cause; its benign influence is now rapidly extending itself over the most remote parts of the globe;

and, in conformity with the Evangelical predictions, there has been an uninterrupted succession of authorised and faithful teachers of the Gospel.

Of prophecy, which relates to the future, it is not to the purpose of the present argument to speak. The plans of the Divine Providence are necessarily mysterious and beyond our comprehension. From the past we may be sure that every thing which has been the subject of prophecy, will in its own time be exactly fulfilled, but of that time, and the manner in which it will be fulfilled, we can only form very imperfect conjectures. This we know, that the last discoveries have been made to man, and that there seems in the natural and moral world a rapid tendency to the consummation of all things. Plans of beneficence have ever formed a part of the Divine administration; and in whatever way they will terminate, and to whatever degree they will ultimately affect the condition of man, this we know that the Judge of all things will do right. It is our business to admire the goodness which his successive revelations display. It is our part to perform the intentions for which we were allotted our being; and it is our interest to aid in the production of those mighty events, the completion of which is the ultimate end of all the Divine administrations; and then we may be satisfied, that we shall share in the delights and purity they were intended to consummate. 4. The veracity of the Gospels is supported by the accounts with which they furnish us respecting the miracles of the Saviour. It is not my intention to enter into a defence of miracles; but in order to establish the argument we draw from them in confirmation of the Gospels, we may remark, that there is nothing antecedently incredible in miracles. As the Deity himself established the laws by which the universe is governed, it is surely possible for him to suspend them, whenever an object is intended of sufficient magniCHRIST. OBSERV. No. 294.

tude to justify such a suspension. A miracle is therefore so far from being incredible, that the probability is strongly in its favour; and when to this is superadded testimony of the most unexceptionable nature, its reality is as completely demonstrated, as any other subject of probable evidence. The Christian miracles were of sufficient magnitude, as to their end, to warrant a suspension of the laws of the universe. Whatever was to evidence the divinity and authority of that Personage who was to deliver us from the consequence of sin by the sacrifice of himself, and whatever was to confirm the assurances he gave us of the existence of a future state, and thus to define with greater distinctness the boundaries between right and wrong, was surely worthy of the intervention of a miracle. Independently of this reasoning from probability there exists testimony which puts the matter beyond dispute. The Evangelists unequivocally assert the reality of our Saviour's miracles, and to those too who had an opportunity of knowing personally whether the assertion were correct. So far from its being contradicted, the existence of the miracles was allowed, while their operation was attributed to the influence of demons in an age when the Deity had so long ceased to make any visible display of his power. There are among us some who even presume to be more sceptical than the prejudiced Pharisees; but notwithstanding all their attempts to undervalue the testimony in favour of miracles, its irrefragable nature will appear the more evident from examination, and will ever continue, as has hitherto been the case, to be most decisive in the weight of Christian evidences.

To these we might add various other proofs of the divine origin of the Gospels. We might shew by the scheme they display, as having been formed for the redemption of man by the vicarious sacrifice of the Son of God, and by the doctrines 2 U

they unfold for our belief, that they can have emanated from the Supreme Being alone. But the inquiry into which this would lead us is too extended for our present purpose. Neither is it necessary to notice some objections which have been urged from the alleged corruption of the sacred text, or from the supposed inadequacy of the Gospels to produce that complete effect on mankind which is to be expected from a religion. These objections are more in words than in reality.

From the whole, therefore, we may conclude, that the Gospels are supported by proof's which may well allay our doubts in the certainty of God's promises, and engage our firmest belief in the completeness of our holy religion. In these Gospels we behold the exact fulfilment of ancient prophecy, the commencement of a better order of things, and ample provision made for the wants of mankind. We behold the delineation of a system capable of guarding us against the shocks which otherwise would inevitably ruin our peace, and, by raising our hopes and affections to spiritual objects, preparing us for the perfect enjoyment of those pleasures which are at God's right hand. If the Gospels are found to produce these desirable effects, they are every way worthy of the Deity; and that these are their legitimate and necessary consequences has, I trust, been partly established by the review into which I have entered. Our Lord's kingdom is not of this world; and therefore, his religion comes with no claims suited to the ambition or the vanity of the natural mind. The first principles are generated and strengthened in this life; but their ultimate effects can only be fully appreciated and felt in another world. But although, from the imperfections of human nature, it is necessarily limited in the extent of its influence on the happiness of man, we are not to ascribe the failure to any defect in the system; for, so far as the depraved

condition of society admits, it evidently produces all the amelioration which can reasonably be anticipated. But while we are travelling through the thorny and intricate paths of life, we have the eye of our faith continually directed to that happy land where every trouble, of whatever nature, will be surmounted, and the defects of the man absorbed in the perfection of the saint. There alone shall we be able to estimate the excellencies of the Christian system, and ascertain the extent its influence and character really embraced; and there, in the full fruition of our Father's joys, it will be our delight to dwell with admiration on these excellencies, and to adore the wisdom which so wonderfully contrived them for our everlasting benefit. G. W.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer. I SHOULD be obliged to any of your correspondents to correct me if I am mistaken in imagining that an expression in 1 John i. 7, which is often interpreted as referring to the communion of saints with one another, rather refers to their communion with the Father. The Apostle, having declared that the end of his preaching was, that his disciples might have the fellowship which he enjoyed, explains the nature and evidences of that fellowship. "And truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ."-"If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth; but if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." The expression