the supposition that the internal evidence was actually offered in conjunction with the external; it must necessarily be a point of great difficulty, to establish the entire inefficacy of the former. Historical evidence in proof of this point also, we may safely affirm to be altogether wanting. The effect of the different kinds of Christian evidence, we know to be estimated in our times very variously by different minds. While some lean mainly on the evidence of miracles of power,-while on them no other sort of evidence perhaps would have made sufficient impression ;-others assign much more weight to those of know. ledge. Some lay great stress on the direct testimony of the first publishers, viewed in conjunction with their characters;-and other minds are so constituted that to them no evidence seems so irresistible, as that which arises from the consonancy of the Christian doctrine with the principles and feelings of our rational and moral nature; and the admirable adaptation of the whole system to the wants and fears and hopes of humanity. Unlike those babes in Christ, who are startled at every frivolous objection with which infidels assail the character of Christianity, they consider the supposition as beyond measure incredible, that

so pure, harmonious, and appropriate a system, -so worthy of God to give, so important for man to receive, should have owed its origin to men such as the first promulgators of the Christian religion were, if really uninspired. Supposing the various evidences to have been exhibited in conjunction, it will be difficult to prove that the same variety of feeling, in regard to the relative effect and conclusiveness of the different species, did not prevail among the converts to whom the author alludes. The probability is, that the impressions at first made, would in many cases be of an indefinite nature; difficult to be analysed or referred to their proper causes and that time and a course of instruction would be requisite, for establishing faith on a stable and definite basis.

As there seems no method, then, of establishing the conclusion, that the internal evidence, supposing it exhibited to the Gentiles, had no share whatever in effecting their conversion; it becomes requisite in order to prove that this great work was effected by means of external evidence exclusively, to shew that the internal evidence was not exhibited. The probation of this point, indeed, is not merely required for the establishment

of that particular fact which Dr C. has asserted, but is indispensably necessary to the support of his whole scheme of evidence.The conclusions which reason, unaided by revelation, draws, regarding the existence, character, and administration of God,-from whatsoever source these conclusions may be derived, are, according to his system, absolute fallacies. As we are completely unqualified, therefore, for forming any judgment respecting the character of the revelation offered, every sort of evidence founded upon that character is equally nugatory. It is false philosophy to apply the paltry experience' of man, to the 'counsels' of the Most High ;it is presumption' on the part of theologi'ans' to 'talk of the reason of the thing ;'the authority of every revelation rests' exclu sively upon the external evidence.'-To suppose then, that the publishers of Christianity would employ fallacious evidence ;-that they would represent the false and presumptuous conclusions of natural theology as trustworthy, that men under the influence of the Spirit of Truth could act in this manner,is not only self-contradictory but impious. If, then, instead of its being proved that they never did employ the internal evidence,-it should on the contrary be shewn that they did

on many occasions exhibit it, representing the conclusions of reason on which it rests as ad. misssible and valid,-all other evidence of the fallacy of those principles on which our Author's theory is built, cannot but be deemed altogether superfluous by Christians.

Of the many distinguished persons employed in the conversion of the heathen world, no one certainly is entitled to higher consideration and authority, than the great Apostle of the Gentiles. If we can by any means ascertain with certainty what his sentiments were, respecting the validity of theological conclusions founded on observation of the phenomena of nature, and in regard to the authority due to the moral perceptions of the human mind, we may consider the point as in great measure determined. Now it happens that his sentiments upon these important subjects are distinctly recorded. That which may be 'known of God is manifest among them,' (among Pagans as well as others,) for God hath manifested it to them. For His invisible things, even his eternal power and Godhead, since the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being under stood by the things 'that are made.' *— God left not himself ' without witness, in that he did good, and

* Rom. i. 19.

gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and glad'ness.'*' When the Gentiles, who have not 'the law, do by nature the things contained ' in the law, these persons having not the law, 'are a law unto themselves: who shew the 'work of the law written in their hearts, their 'conscience bearing witness, and also their 'reasonings between one another, when they " accuse or else excuse each other.' +-Nothing can be more decided and unequivocal, than the opinion here expressed, of the authority due to the native moral perceptions of the human mind, and of the validity of the argument from Final Causes. Nay the reasoning of the Apostle, grounded on principles which he here lays down, is intended to shew that men are altogether inexcuseable who do not yield themselves to the guidance of those intimations of moral truth which the constitution of their minds affords; and who do not from experience' and 'observation' of effects, infer the existence, character, and government of an 'Invisible Intelligent Cause.' ‡ Rom. ii. 15.

*Acts xiv. 17.

There is perhaps nothing more thoroughly beyond the cognizance of the human faculties than the truths of religion, and the ways of that mighty and invisible Being who is the

object of it.'-CHALMERS.