my hopes; I endeavour to find the true interpretation of it in itself, and not in the dreams and vifions of certain commentators: I compare text with text, doctrine with doctrine, each writer with himself, all the writers together, and the whole with the moft evident principles of reafon; and, having finished this serious, impartial, long-continued, and often-repeated examination, I find the fuppofed contradictions disappear, the fhades grow weaker, light breaking forth from the midst of darkness, and faith frequently uniting with reason, sometimes foaring above it, but never (b) ftanding in direct oppofition to its dictates.

(b) It is obvious, that the confideration of doctrines did not enter into the plan of a work, calculated for all Chrif tian focieties, in which I was to confine myself to the establishing the foundations of the credibility of revelation. But I fhall here repeat what I faid in the Anal. Effay, in concluding my expofition of the doctrine of the refurrection, § 754.-" The explanation which I have

ventured to give of one of the chief doctrines of "revelation, proves that revelation is not repugnant to "philofophical ideas; and this explanation fhews, that "other doctrines are equally fufceptible of fimilar ex"planations, were they better understood."

NATURE AND CONNECTION OF THE

PROOFS. CONCLUSION OF THE INQUI-
RIES INTO CHRISTIANITY.

TH

HUS have I confidered, in a philofophical light, the principal proofs of that revelation, which reafon pointed out to me, as neceffary to the happiness of mankind, I review these proofs diftinctly in my own mind; I weigh them over again. I do not allow them to be feparated; I take them collectively; I view them together; I evidently fee that they form a whole, and that each principal proof is an effential part of this whole. I difcover a fubordination, a connection, a harmony between all the parts, and a tendency in each to one common centre. I place myself in that centre, and thus receive the various impreffions which arife from all the points of the circumference. I feel the effect

of

of each particular impreffion, and that of the whole. I unfold the particular effects, I compare them together, and the general effect of this combination of evidence acts most forcibly on my mind.

I perceive then, that this powerful effect on the mind and heart would be almoft annihilated, if, instead of taking the proofs collectively, I took each of them separately, and did not unite them again together; the effect would still grow weaker, if I reduced these proofs to miracles alone.

My method is natural, and seems to come to the point by the shortest line. I will here briefly recapitulate it:-After having laid my foundations in the phyfical and moral conftitution of man (c), as it is known to us by experience and by reasoning, my business was first to inquire, Whether it was consistent with the analogy of this conftitution, that man, by the fole force of his reafon, should arrive at a fufficient certainty refpecting his future destiny (d)? And, as it

(c) Chap. i, ii. Part. xvi. Phil. Paling.
(4) Chap, viii. of this Part.

appeared evident to me that this was not poffible, it was natural to inquire, in the next place, Whether the Creator of man could not afford him this defirable certainty, without changing his prefent constitution. This great queftion led me (e), by a road no less philofophical than direct, to the fubject of miracles; for the question was, firft, to examine, whether God himself had spoken; then, how he had spoken; by whom, and to whom, he had fpoken (f).

&c.

But as, agreeably to my principles, miracles are nothing more than a particular fpecies of language, and that language is nothing more than a collection of figns, which by themselves have no fignification; I was then to confider the defign or object of this extraordinary language, which it seemed to me that the legislator of nature had addreffed to mankind. I was to confider alfo the moral character (g) of thofe extraordi(e) Book i.

(f) Chap. i, ii, iii. Book ii.
(g) Chap. ix. Book ii.

nary

nary men who had been commiffioned to interpret this language to mankind (b), the prophecies which had foretold the miffion of a celeftial meffenger (i), the doctrine of that celeftial meffenger, and the (k) fuccess of his miffion, &c. (1).

By thus bringing together, and comparing, the external (m) and internal (n) proofs of Christianity, this important confequence refults to my mind;-that there exists no antient hiftory fo well attefted, as that of Chrift ;that there are no historical facts established on fo great a number of proofs; on proofs fo folid, fo ftriking, and fo various, as those

(b) Chap. ii, Book ii.

(i) Chap. v. Book iv.

(k) Chap. i, ii, iii. of this Book.

(1) Chap. v. and vi. of this Book.

(m) The proofs which the miracles and prophecies, the character of our Saviour, and that of his difciples, exhibit, are called the external proofs. They are exterior to the doctrine confidered in itself; but they all concur with the doctrine in establishing the fame fundamental truth.

(n) The internal proofs, are those drawn from the nature of the doctrine itfelf; that is, its excellence, and fitnefs to the wants of human nature, &c.

on