called the torture, we are obliged to adopt plain reason, or, at most, when that fails us, the prison, fine, and pillory. But, it is to be hoped, that the happy time is not far off, when the priests of Britain may be able to argue with as much force as the spiritual directors of other countries; when the Clergy may approach the throne, and avow their readiness to stop the mouths of men, without being under the shameful necessity of contradicting themselves, by "disavowing all violence in the cause of religion.*" In those better days, the Lord Bishop of Chester may overthrow the arguments of an infidel peer, by declaring them" unworthy of a Reply;" and the Bishop of St. David may confirm the defeat, by affirming, that the arguments of unbelievers" deserve.no answer;" for every one will then say, they "would not" answer them, not that they "could not," as they impiously affirm at present. But as those glorious times are not yet arrived, we must be contented, in the mean while, to proceed in the old method of reasoning upon even ground with our adversaries. The weak, though zealous Christian, who has the honour, to address your Lordships on the present occasion, has presumed to lay before you a few of the Doubts of the Infidels, and he hopes you will answer * Vide the same address. them to his entire satisfaction. He is happy in reflecting that the late act of parliament forbids them to speak; but his satisfaction is infinitely greater, when he assures himself, that your Lordships' answer will convince them and make them ashamed even to write, speak, or think. Thus fervently prays your Lordships' unworthy co-operator, THE AUTHOR. * The following are the chapters, || The following are those chapters with many others, which con tain the most objectionable parts: which contain instances of cruel and torturous executions, and unrelenting vindictiveness. Genesis, chap. 16, 18, 19, 30, Genesis, chap. 34. 34, 35, 38, 39. Numbers, 25. Judges, 16, 19. 1 Samuel, 25. 2 Samuel, 11, 13, 16. Ezekiel, 4, 16, 22, 23. Numbers, 31. Joshua, 8, 10. THE DOUBTS OF INFIDELS, &c. 1. How can the attributes of God be vindicated, in having performed so great a number of miracles, for a long succession of very distant ages, and so few in latter times? If they were performed for the instruction of those times only, are they not equally necessary at present for us? or, if those ancient miracles were intended likewise for our instruction, are they adequate to the purpose? Can God, who gave us reason, act inconsistently with its dictates; and is it rational or fair to demand our belief of things, which are in their own nature far removed from common belief, or common sense, and require something more than the usual testimony of history for their support? When Livy affirms, that the Gauls conspired against Hannibal, we admit and believe the fact; but when in the same chapter he speaks of shields sweating blood, of its raining hot stones at Arpi, and the like, we justly reject and disbelieve these improbable assertions; neither is any credit given to the account of the wonderful method of curing diseases by the touch, said to be pos * T. Livii, lib. xxii. cap. 1. B sessed by Mr. Greatrix, though we find it in the Philosophical Transactions. The miracles of the Old Testament were all performed in those ages of which we have no credible history; what reply then can be made to those who affirm, that miracles have always been confined to the early and fabulous times; that all nations have had them, but that they disappeared in proportion as men became enlightened, and capable of discovering imposture and priestcraft. 2. Suppose a book to be published, containing assertions of historical facts long past, which had no collateral testimony of other authors; suppose those facts in general to be improbable and incredible; suppose the book to be anonymous, or, which is worse, ushered into the world under the name of a person who, from the internal evidence of the thing, could not have written it; can it be imagined, that such a book would find credit among people, who have the least pretensions to reason or common sense? Which, then, is the readiest way of confuting the enemies of our holy and only true religion, who do not scruple to affirm, that many books of canonical Scripture are in this predicament? They observe that the books of the Pentateuch bear many strong marks of an author long posterior to Moses; that the book of Numberst quotes the book of the Wars of the Lord, which, as first written, was most probably the book which Moses * Lowther's Abridgement, Vol. III. p. 11. Greatrix published a pamphlet, to which the attestations of Boyle, Wilkins, Cudworth, and many other great men were affixed. Vide Life of St. Evremont, printed with his works in English, 3 vols. 8vo. † Numb. xxi. 14. wrote; that Moses could not possibly have written the account of his own death and burial in Deuteronomy,* which nevertheless has no mark to distinguish it from the rest of the book. And supposing these and other objections of the like nature to be removed, what must we say in reply to their remark, that the Scripture, which we believe to be dictated by the inspiration of the unerring God, is frequently† contradictory with regard to facts, and very often represents the all-wise Creator as angry, repenting, unjust, arbitrary, &c. and that consequently we must either give up that dependence, which we naturally place on his goodness and rectitude, or reject those writings which represent him as a demon. Do not your Lordships apprehend, that, for want of better arguments, we shall be under the necessity of recurring to the argumentum pillorii, or of adopting some of those gentle methods which were lawfully used for the conversion of heretics in the mild and pious reign of Mary, Queen of England? 3. Is the account of the creation and fall of man, in the book of Genesis, physical or allegorical? Did God create light before the sun? How could he divide the light from darkness, since darkness is nothing but the mere privation of light? How could time be divided into days, before the creation of the sun, since a day is the time between sun-rise and sun-rise? How could the firmament be created, since there is no firmament, and the false notion of its existence is no more than an imagination of the ancient Grecians? Genesis vi. 6, 7. also Exod. vii. 3. xi. 9, 10. and ] Sam, xv. 35. |