we cannot admit that he was deceived himself: he was neither an enthusiast, nor a dupe of others. In the whole narrative, he is exhibited in a very different light. Instead of presumptuously engaging in the great undertaking before him with the high confidence and overweening conduct of one carried away by his excited imagination and feelings, he evinced great reluctance toward entering on it; was frequently discouraged in its progress, and was alone enabled to persevere, by the unequivocal indications which he possessed of a divine support. But

III. He could not have imposed on the Israelites so as to induce their submission to institutions which were grounded on the facts detailed in their history. This is a consideration of very great weight. If the great facts of the exodus, and the subsequent transactions in their journeyings through the wilderness had not really taken place, it is utterly impossible that the Israelites could have respected the authority of Moses, or the authenticity of his writings. His narrative, indeed, exhibited repeated manifestations of the divine interposition on their behalf, and might thus flatter their vanity; but there was far more in this narrative of a character mortifying and degrading to them. But

IV. The credibility of Moses as an historian, is farther established by the fact that in his institutions

he paid no regard to his own interest, or that of his family. His own descendants were left in the humble station of ordinary Levites, while in his brother's family the priesthood was established, and the civil and military government was confided to a member of a different tribe.

As a last consideration I would state that some of his institutions were of such a nature, that no one who did not feel himself divinely authorized, would have ventured to impose them. As an example, take the institution of the sabbatical year; by which all cultivation of their lands was prohibited every seventh year. This measure, which was designed to inculcate the doctrine of a particular providence, would not be adopted without a strong confidence that this providence would be afforded. And this confidence could not reasonably be cherished, but in conformity with a divine promise; for it involved the fact that the production of one year would, under the supposed circumstances, always be sufficient for the maintenance of the people for two years. The imminent danger which would exist of the continual recurrence of famine, would prevent any ordinary lawgiver from establishing the institution to which we have had reference.

Upon these remarks, will be suffered to rest the first proposition, that the Old Testament is the most ancient history extant, and possesses undoubted

marks of authenticity. On another occasion, we shall consider the second proposition, that it contains representations of Deity, and exhibitions of human duty, far transcending the sublimest features of heathen philosophy.

187

SERMON XVII.

AUTHORITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. ARGUMENT
FROM PROPHECY.

2 PETER i. 21.

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man : but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

ON a former occasion your attention was directed some considerations on the genuineness and authenticity of the books of the Old Testament. If the argument, then proposed, should have been deemed satisfactory, there will be no difficulty in assenting to the following conclusions. The books in question contain a history of great antiquity. Those which were earliest written are now three centuries old, and their narrative extends backward as far as the creation. They, also, contain an authentic history. Excepting in

the instance of one book, they contain the accounts of those who were contemporary with the transactions detailed, which were not conveyed by oral tradition but committed to writing.

The Scriptures, moreover, furnish the only satisfactory and credible information in regard to the events which transpired in the early ages of the world, for it was long subsequent to these ages that profane history assumed any authentic form. If, then, no other claims were advanced on behalf of the writings of the Old Testament than are connected with the conclusions just stated, they should be the object of curiosity, of respect, and of diligent investigation. To these claims, however, others still higher are added. The Jewish Scriptures are the production of men, who were under the influence of divine inspiration. The sublime and pure system of religion which they unfolded has been adduced as furnishing one evidence of this fact. The fulfilment of prophecy is another medium of proof by which the same conclusion is supported. And upon this it is now designed to bestow some attention.

That the accurate prediction of future events is a certain criterion of divine inspiration cannot be doubted. Conjectures may be made with regard to things future, with which the event will often correspond. But human foresight is entirely limited to facts which bear an analogy to past transactions, and in regard to these it is far from being uniformly