the Father hath sent me:* and again, The works that I do in my Father's name, the same bear witness of me:† and if I do not the works of my Father, believe me not: but if i do, though ye believe not me, [upon my word] believe the works; that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him. So again, Believe me, that I am in the Father, and the Father in me, or else believe me for the very works' sake. This way of arguing was looked upon as so strictly conclusive, that Jesus declares, If I had not done the works which none other man did, they had not had sin.|| And it was on this foundation that the apostles argued that Jesus of Nazareth was to be received as Lord, and the Christ, or Messiah, because he was a man approved of God among you by miracles, wonders, and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you." The first instance which appears of the divine presence with the apostles, is the miraculous effusion of the Spirit at the feast of Pentecost.**"With great power, says St. Luke, gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.++ "God bore them witness, both by signs and wonders, and with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost."‡‡ They went forth and preached every where,the Lord working with them and confirming the

* John v. 36. † Ib. x, 25.

Ib. v, 37. § xiv. 11.

xv. 24. Sykes' Essay on the Truth of the Christian Religion, p. 129. **Acts ii. 33, 36. † Acts iv. 33. # Heb. ii. 4.

word with signs following:* the Lord gave testimony to the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands. In fact the evangelical history is miraculous throughout, as was the propagation of the gospel which it relates, and one may truly say of the New Testament, what has been insidiously said of the Old, "It is all a prodigy."+ But a greater than any it relates is, that it should be thought possible to account for the rise, progress, and diffusion of Christianity by human arts, or human means.

What has already been remarked upon the tests of a true prophet, as prescribed by Moses, is an anticipation of most that need be said upon those texts, which are adduced to show that our Lord warned his disciples against the miracles of impostors. "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that (if it were possible,) they shall deceive the very elect," and the wicked one is spoken of by St. Paul, "whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power, and signs, and lying wonders." It is a matter of real surprise that these passages of scripture should have been so often and extensively misapprehended. Our Saviour predicts false prophets, and says they shall give signs and wonders. Now what sort of won

Mark xvi. 20.

Acts xiv. 3. See Farmer on Miracles, p. 245, 2d. Ed. ↑ Voltaire's Essai sur les Mœurs, tom. i. p. 170.

Matthew xxiv. 24.

§ 2 Thessal. ii. 9.

ders should we reasonably suppose a false prophet would give? The terms themselves, 'signs and wonders,' are equivocal.* But is it not extremely obvious that a false prophet, an impostor, could have none but false signs and lying wonders to exhibit; impositions upon the senses and imaginations of their followers, such as every age almost has witness. ed? Our Saviour declares that the false prophets and false christs, which shall arise, will give these false signs and wonders, and gives his disciples notice that they shall be exhibited with such art and dexterity, as to delude all but those who were too firmly persuaded of the true Christ, to listen to a false one, insomuch as to deceive, if it were possible, the very elect. This interpretation of these passages, besides that it is so reasonable in itself, receives the most plenary confirmation from the history, which fulfils the predictions they contain. We shall have occasion, in the sequel of this essay, to mention particularly some of the false prophets, which sprung up in that

• The text in Thessalonians, as has already been noticed by Farmer, is mistranslated. Ev παση δυνάμεις και σημείοις, ка Tepati Yeudas, should certainly be rendered, With all lying power, signs, and wonders. Farmer on Miracles, p. 204, second edition.

Should it be said, that if lying wonders be so delusive, no reliance could be placed on true ones, it is obvious to answer that the conclusion does not follow. There are optical illusions which impose upon the sight, but they do not weaken the strength of the evidences of the senses. So in a larger view, sophisms, and other arts of false reasoning, may delude the understanding, but this fact does not diminish the value of sound reasoning. Miracles, like every thing else, must be rationally examined as to the reality of the facts.

disastrous age, which immediately preceded the destruction of Jerusalem. If we may trust to Josephus, who cannot be suspected of bearing testimony to Christ, these desperate adventurers assumed the character, which was so ardently cherished in the expectations of the Jews, and under pretence of delivering them from the Roman power, led them on to provoke its vengeance. They promised however, and pretended to exhibit miraculous proofs of their powers, and were but too successful in their attempts to delude their countrymen. And it is not hard to imagine, when we remember with what painful and importunate anxiety the prophesied deliverer was expected, that nothing but the firm belief which the Christians had, that he had already appeared, could have been a certain security from the plausibility of these pretensions. The object they proposed, the motives they urged, and the arts they employed, would have deceived, had it been possible, the very elect.*

In his second chapter, which is transcribed from Collins, Mr. English claims the authority of St. Peter, as confirming the preference of prophetical to miraculous testimony. "Prophecies," say Collins and English, "when delivered in an inspired book, are, when fulfilled, such as may justly be deemed sure and de

This subject is well treated in Farmer's learned and judicious work on miracles, a book not read as it deserves. Vid. p. 194, et seq. 2d. ed.

monstrative proof; and which Peter (2 Peteri. 19.) prefers as an argument for the truth of Christianity, to that miraculous attestation (whereof he and two other apostles are said to have been witnesses) given by God himself to the mission of Jesus of Nazareth. His argument appears to be as follows, "Laying this foundation, that prophecy as it proceeds from the Holy Spirit, is a stronger argument than a miracle, which depends upon external evidence and testimony."* It need not be replied to this argument, which is foisted upon St. Peter, that a miracle proceeds as directly from the Holy Ghost as a prophecy, and that a prophecy is as dependent upon human testimony as a miracle. The whole objection is founded upon a mistake of the words of Peter; a mistake into which these writers were led by our common version of the New Testament. The words of Peter as they stand in this version are, "For Jesus Christ received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, and this voice which came from heaven, we heard when we were with him in the holy mount. We have also a more sure word of prophecy, &c." Now the original of the passage in italicks is thus read in Griesbach, και ταυτην την φωνην ήμεις ηκουσαμεν εξ ουρανου ενεχθεισαν, συν αυτῷ οντες εν τῷ οξει τω άγιῳ, και εχομεν βεβαιοτερον τον προφητικών

*

English's Grounds of Christiarity examined, p. 5, 6. Collins Grounds and Reasons, p. 27,