observance of it with a curse. Of the fact of its observance or non-observance, and of the fulfilment of that promise or that curse, all were equally able to judge; and therefore it cannot be imagined that any one would, after the time of Moses, produce a law couched in terms that must have been its own destruction.

BEATRICE.

Any person possessed of sufficient talents to forge a code of laws, like those in the Pentateuch, would never have exposed the whole to such a test, at once so unnecessary and so fatal to imposture.

MR. B.

This is also not the only test of the same kind; but we have not time to consider more; and the Pentateuch itself will afford the best proofs of its genuineness. But, again, if the Pentateuch be not genuine, the other Scriptures which refer to it cannot be genuine; and if no part of the Old Testament, ascribed to authors before the time of Ezra, be genuine, by whom could they have been composed? Certainly not by any one individual, nor yet by any number of contemporaries acting in concert, the internal evidence being most decisively against either supposition; but if these books were written in different ages, and yet are all spurious, we are compelled to acknowledge a miracle for no purpose against them, in order to escape the ac

knowledgment of much more reasonable miracles contained in them.

BEATRICE.

The supposition of imposture seems attended with insuperable difficulties, as connected with the authors of these books, both with reference to their authenticity and credibility.

MR. B.

And their reception by the Jews only involves still more difficulties. In defence of this volume, and the faith they build upon it, what have they not suffered! yet, look at its contents, and where is the ground of attachment, if any doubt had ever existed among them as to its truth? What generation would ever have taken up such a yoke of bondage, had it been unknown to their fathers, or destitute of the evidence of miracles? What could induce them to continue to hold in veneration records so disgraceful to them, but a conviction that their origin was such as is alleged?

EDWARD.

I do not think their belief in the Old Testament has ever been seriously questioned; but this is only their belief.

MR. B.

Still of how great force is the belief of a nation

situated as they have been in a matter of this nature? If it cannot be proved that these writings are spurious, how can the argument, derived both from external and internal evidence, be evaded? The unbelief of other nations cannot make void belief so attested as theirs has been. We have no coeval testimony against the Old Testament. We have no internal evidence involving absurdity or impossibility. Many of the authors of these books probably little anticipated the scrutiny they would undergo, and even the latest period which could be assigned for their production was not that in which works would appear which would stand the test of ages. The religion of the Old Testament is such as no other country ever has produced where that was unknown. It has always been the great delight of infidels to despise the country, and ridicule the people, whence these records have proceeded; apparently forgetful that the more contempt they heap upon this nation, the more difficult it becomes to account for their works.

CONVERSATION XIV.

MR. B.

WE have hitherto considered the evidences for the Old and New Testaments separate from each other, and in either case found the strongest probability for the truth of each. By connecting them, we shall increase those probabilities to a degree amounting so near to certainty, that it is only exceeded by mathematical demonstration.

BEATRICE.

By what means do you effect this?

MR. B.

By shewing that the whole Bible only contains a succession of revelations connected with various dispensations, of which each was designed to be preparatory for that which was to follow; so that the Old Testament is completed and perfected in the New, to which it formed a necessary introduction.

EDWARD.

This merely depends, then, upon the history of the Bible?

MR. B.

The Scriptures are of course our only guide, and since at present we have every reason to be

lieve they are from God, we must follow their leading implicitly. The knowledge of the great Creator of all things, which may be derived from observation on his works, is of course very limited; nor can the experience of mankind, as to his providence, add much. We "believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." As we do not perceive any fixed law of reward in this life, we hope for it in another state of being, to which we appear to be fast hastening, for which this present state seems only preparatory, and which is to us, therefore, of the utmost importance.

Ꭼ Ꭰ Ꮃ Ꭺ Ꭱ Ꭰ .

From the Scriptures we learn that these opinions are just, so that we may proceed safely, being at least so far agreed.

MR. B.

From the Scriptures we also learn many things which otherwise we could not have known, and of a nature to prove the necessity of a divine revelation, as well as its expediency.

BEATRICE.

But these we only admit on the authority of Scripture, having no further testimony to them.

MR. B.

Not exactly so even to these additional statements, the certainty as well as the knowledge of