cribe to its true cause-an indifference to holiness and truth-that perverse ingenuity which can overlook the most luminous evidence, to follow some cloudy sophism, and which can adhere, amidst the blaze of evangelical light, to the darkness and uncertainty of human imaginations.

And it is only by imbibing this holy love to Christ, that the evidences now can have their full and proper effect upon the heart. It is then the Christian will stand most firm. Unmoved by the fearful examples of disobedience against conscience which abound, he will be only anxious to love his Bible more, to transcribe it into his heart and life with greater fidelity, and to rise by the means of these proofs of authenticity, to that spiritual elevation of faith and joy in God, and of holy obedience to his will, which it is the end of all external evidences to produce.

119

LECTURE VI.

CREDIBILITY OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY.

LUKE I. 1-4.

Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed amongst us; even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word. It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed.

HAVING proved that the books of the New Testament are authentic, the whole question as to the external evidence is virtually settled. In pursuance however of our design, of fixing in the susceptible heart a deeper reverence for Christianity, by tracing out the separate steps of the great argument, I go on to the next question in order, which is-Whether the history contained in the New Testament may be fully credited; that is, whether the sacred writers describe things as they really took place; whether their books deserve to be implicitly trusted, so that a fact ought to be accounted true, because it is found in them?

The question embraces what the critics call, the Credibility of the gospel history.

It is to this that the words of my text immediately apply. St. Luke wrote his narrative to set right, perhaps correct, the accounts given by others---to show on what foundation the " things most surely believed" by the first Christians rested---to do this by an appeal to those who "from the beginning had been eye-witnesses and ministers of the word"--and to do it as one who himself "had a perfect understanding of all things from the very first"---and thus to lay the firmest grounds of credibility, and teach them "the certainty of those things wherein they had been instructed."

On this question, then, the natural course for us to take, is to ask, in the first place, as we did on a former occasion, How do men act in common life under similar circumstances; in what way do they ascertain the credibility of historical works ?

I take up any celebrated writings of this kind :--Davila's History of the Civil Wars of France---Lord Clarendon's History of the Great Rebellion---Father Paul's History of the Council of Trent; and I ask, what are the grounds on which the credibility of such works rest?

Are the books themselves AUTHENTIC? Are the principal facts in them supported by OTHER TESTIMONIES? Do the HISTORIES THEMSELVES, and the CHARACTER OF THE WRITERS, furnish satisfactory proof of trust-worthiness? These are the questions which lead to the natural evidences of the truth and fidelity of a narrative.

In a similar way, then, I proceed as to the credibility of the New Testament books. I leave for the present the divine authority, inspiration, and other most important subsequent considerations. I confine myself to one plain point, Are the Christian writers deserving of entire credit in their narratives?

Το prove this, I appeal to the GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY of the books, as already establishedto all OTHER ACCESSIBLE SOURCES of information--to the CHARACTER AND CIRCUMSTANCES of the sacred writers themselves.

When I shall have gone through these particulars, a few observations will evince the authenticity and credibility of the books of the Old Testament, and the fidelity of our English authorized Translation, and conclude this first division of our whole course.

I. I appeal to the AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOKS of the New Testament, as involving their credibility.

Men

1. For it is very rare to meet with any authentic works of the historical kind, observes a profound writer,' in which the principal facts are untrue. who publish grave historical works, openly to the world, before all their countrymen, under their own name, can have no motive, no hope of being read, no possibility of compassing any one end, if they falsify the principal facts of their narrative. I know not that we have a single instance upon record of such an attempt. And much less is this possible, when the history itself is contemporary, and the writers record the facts of their own times, before the face of their own people and nation.

If Davila, or Lord Clarendon, or Father Paul, had falsified the principal facts on which their histories proceed, what would it have availed them? Who would have given the least credit to their books? What would have been the consequences of their dis

' Hartley.

For as to minor questions, errors in judgment, over-statements, and the other ordinary effects of human frailty, I say nothing; these were prevented, in the case of the sacred writers, by the inspiration, by which, as we shall hereafter prove, they were guided.

honesty, but shame and disgrace, without the accomplishment of one single object?

The attempt to falsify contemporary writings, becomes the more impracticable, in proportion as interest is excited, prejudices are opposed, new modes of thinking and acting are introduced, and established habits broken up.

Then I say, that the gospel history being authentic, is therefore credible; that is, having been published at the very time, by the Apostles, under their own names as eye-witnesses, before the face of mankind, enemies as well as friends, for the avowed purpose of propagating the Christian religion-is therefore deserving of credit---the main facts of it are true.

2. But, further, if the New Testament be authentic, the very small number of its principal facts, and the extraordinary prominence and importance of those facts, prove the credibility of them.

The Christian books do not treat of any long and difficult and remote scene of history, of a multitude of complicated events involved in secret negociations and transactions, as all our Histories of England do. But they record a few, a very few principal facts, in a period of time extremely brief; but these facts, so broad, so notorious, of such prodigious importance, so immediately affecting the business and bosoms of men, that it was utterly impossible that any imposition could be practised.

About six or seven principal events comprehend every thing. The birth of an extraordinary person, whom the apostles call the Son of God--his series of wonderful works wrought before the eyes of mankind--his holy and beneficent life-his violent death by crucifixion-his resurrection-the descent of the Holy Ghost. Upon the footing of these few facts, the apostles go forth to promulgate the Gospel and change the religion of the world; and whilst thus em