It will be observed that my quotations from Mr. Evanson are unusually long. I purposely made them so, that he might not have any just reason to complain of me for dimi. nishing their strength. Still, however, I have left some articles untouched, but they are such as appeared to me to be least worthy of particular notice. After remarking upon almost every thing in his objections to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John, and the Epistle to the Romans, I thought it unnecessary even to mention his objections to some of the other Epistles. I also thought my readers would be tired of perusing things so very offensive to them, and at the same time so weak. But if Mr. Evanson, in his reply, should require it, I promise him to be as full in my remarks with respect to these, as I have been with respect to the former books.

Some who entertain my sentiments of Mr. Evanson's performance will wonder that a man of his abilities and learning, should write so weakly; and some, not being themselves judges of the controversy, will be apt to think there must be great uncertainty in the subject itself, when learned men can think so differently about it. But no person acquainted with the writings of Mr. Whiston, will think him to have been less able, or less learned, than Mr. Evanson; and yet his strange weakness of judgment with respect to subjects of Christian antiquity, (to which, notwithstanding, he did not fail to give much attention,) has not led any scholar to think that there is any particular uncertainty, or obscurity, in the subjects about which he has puzzled himself and some others so much. Single persons often entertain singular notions about politics, and things in common life; but it is a circumstance that has no effect on the decisiveness of the judg ment of other persons when they have themselves given proper attention to the subjects. At present Mr. Evanson's performance does not stagger the learned, * and after some time I am confident it will have no more effect than Mr.

* Mr. Dodson, however, published in the "Commentaries and Essays," (No. 4, 1796, II. pp. 313-346,) "A Letter to the Rev. Mr Evanson, in Defence of his principal Object, in his Book entitled The Dissonance of the Four generallyreceived Evangelists, and the Evidence of their respective Authenticity examined." Yet Mr. Dodson thus qualifies his approbation:

"I differ from you on several points; but I think that you have succeeded in your principal object. I cannot agree with you in rejecting any of the thirteen epistles which bear the name of St. Paul, the authenticity of the Epistles to the Komans and Philippians, which contain some important prophecies since fulfilled, and of the Epistle to the Colossians, which, in chap. ii. 5, represents the Apostle, at Rome, as miraculously seeing things transacted at Colosse, appearing to me to be as well supported as the authenticity of the seven Epistles to the Corinthians, Galatians and Thessalonians, and to Timothy, which you admit; and the external and fernal evidence of the genuineness of the Epistle to the Ephesians, which, it is

Whiston's new canon of the New Testament. His curious reasoning now only serves to amuse us, shewing the weakness of the human mind in certain respects, at the same time that we admire its strength in others.

In my references to the Christian fathers I have generally contented myself with quoting Dr. Lardner and Michaelis. My collection of the fathers, which had occupied me more than twenty years, was demolished in the Riot at Birmingham, and it is too late in life for me to restore it. In the present case I am satisfied that my readers will have no more distrust than I have of the care, or fidelity, with which the writers above-mentioned have made their quotations.

probable, ought to be considered as addressed to the Laodiceans, and of the Epistles to Titus and Philemon, being in my opinion, too strong to allow us to entertain any doubts about them. The observations of Dr. Paley on this subject, in his Hora Paulina, deserve particular attention.

"As to the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the seven Catholic Epistles, and also the Epistles to the seven churches of Asia, in the beginning of the Apocalypse, which you reject, I forbear to inquire, whether you are warranted in so doing, as it will be sufficient for my purpose if the thirteen epistles which bear the name of St. Paul are genuine. I also think, that you have unnecessarily, and on insufficient grounds, rejected some passages of St. Luke's Gospel." Com. and Essays, II. p. 313. See Mon. Repos. XIII. p. 605.

"A New Testament; or, the New Covenant according to Luke, Paul, and John, published in Conformity to the Plan of the late Rev. Edward Evanson, A.M." in 1807, contains Luke's Gospel and Acts, the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon; and the Revelation of John, excepting the epistles to the seven churches. Thus it appears from Mr. Dodson's Letter, that he received a more copious New Testament than Mr. Evanson.

In an Advertisement prefixed to this New Testament, it is remarked, "that few men lived and died with a firmer conviction of the truth and importance of the Christian revelation than Mr. Evanson," and that "he made its precepts the rule of his life and conduct; and seems to have enjoyed, in an eminent degree, the consolation and hopes which its promises hold forth to a dying race of creatures." Also, that "had Mr. Evanson lived, he would certainly have done that himself, which is performed, by his friend, as a memorial to his great talents, ardent assiduity, and inflexible integrity in the pursuit and promulgation of the truth.

"The cause of pure Christianity," adds this Editor, "has never yet been injured by fair inquiry and candid discussion; and it is confidently expected that the present publication, so far from increasing the number of unbelievers, will be the means of leading some persons to attend to the evidences of revelation, who have before discarded it as a cunningly-devised fable, on account of certain things attaching to it, which to them may seem to have been obviated by Mr. Evanson's inquiries." Advertisement, pp. vi. viii. ix.

Mr. Evanson died in 1805, (as mentioned, supra, p. 352, Note,) aged 74. "In February," says his biographer, "he was seized with the same complaint which terminated the valuable life of Dr. Priestley, a stricture in the Esophagus." Without suffering" the least apparent diminution of his cheerfulness or the clearness of his intellect, he continued growing weaker till the 24th September, when with the greatest fortitude and most perfect composure, from the reflection on a life spent in the uniform endeavour to obey the commands and follow the example of his Great Master, he laid himself down to rest, and so composed was his sleep, that, about five o'clock in the morning, he had breathed his last some minutes before it was perceived by his mournfully attending friends." Mon. Repos. I. pp. 59, 60.

360

LETTERS TO A YOUNG MAN.

PART II.

LETTER I. ·

Of the Nature of Historical Evidence, illustrated by that of the Propagation of Christianity.

DEAR SIR,

I AM happy to find that, in my former Letters, I was able to give you satisfaction with respect to the propriety of public worship, and of the observance of the Lord's day for that purpose, in reply to the objections of Mr. Wakefield and Mr. Evanson. You have since read, as every scholar will do, Mr. Evanson's Treatise on "the Dissonance of the Four generally-received Evangelists ;" and, as I perceive, you are, with many others, considerably impressed by it.

You are inclined to think that the Christian church has received the three Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John, as well as several of the Epistles, without sufficient authority, and that the only authentic history of the origin and first planting of Christianity is to be found in the Gospel of Luke, and the Acts of the Apostles. You are also disposed to lay but little stress upon any evidence arising from testimony, with respect to events so remote and extraordinary, and to rely on that of completed prophecy in preference to it. You wish, however, to have my free thoughts on these subjects, and I shall have much pleasure in giving you them. The investigation of truth is always a pleasing employment, and it is more particularly interesting when the subject is religion.

You will naturally enough suspect, though you will not tell me so, that it is owing to prejudice, that I am unwilling to accede to opinions so novel and startling as those advanced

* Supra, pp. 314-330.

by Mr. Evanson; and it would be vain for me to deny that I am as subject to prejudice as other men; though, in general, I have not objected to any opinions on account of their novelty, or their not having been generally received, whether advanced by other persons, or suggested by myself. You will attend, however, to the arguments that I shall produce, and compare them with those of Mr. Evanson; and let us both endeavour to keep our minds as free from prejudice as we can, that we may neither be misled ourselves, nor contribute to mislead others.

In the first place, I shall consider what Mr. Evanson has advanced with respect to historical evidence in general, as applied by him to the evidence of Christianity. "To all future ages," he says, "prophecy, the completed prediction of events out of the power of human sagacity to foresee, is the only supernatural testimony that can be alleged in proof of the authenticity of any revelation. To those, or example, of the present age, who have any doubt about the certainty of the Christian revelation, and consequently of the truth and authenticity of those histories in which it is recorded, it cannot be of the least use to allege the miraculous acts there, and there only, related to have been performed by the first preachers of that revelation; because those acts making a very considerable part of the narration, the authority and credibility of the histories must be firmly established before the miracles contained in them can reasonably be admitted as real facts. Prophecy, therefore,' he adds, "is by far the most satisfactory, and the only lasting, supernatural evidence of the truth of any revelation."** And, that the supernatural power of working miracles could only be intended to gain the new religion attention from the world, and to be a present testimony of its divine origin and authority, till the more lasting and more satisfactory proof of completed prophecy could take place."†

I would be far from undervaluing the evidence of completed prophecy in favour of revelation. I value Christianity too much to neglect any proper argument in favour of it. Since God only can see into remote futurity, the causes of distant events being concealed from all human penetration, if we have sufficient evidence of any event being distinctly foretold, and we are satisfied that the prediction was no random conjecture, we necessarily conclude that it was dictated by God, and that any declaration con

* Dissonance, 1792, pp. 5, 6. (P.) Ed. 2, pp. 22, 23.

↑ Ibid. pp. 18, 19. (P.) Ed. 2, p. 36.

nected with it may be depended upon, since the Supreme Being could not intend to impose upon his creatures. I also believe that in the Scriptures there are several such predictions, the publication of which may be clearly proved to have been prior to the events.

But notwithstanding this, the proper and universally satisfactory evidence of all past events, miraculous as well as others, is the testimony of persons who were eye-witnesses of them. It depends upon a principle which no person will deny, viz. that human nature has been the same in all ages, and therefore that, if the testimony of persons now living, who could not be deceived themselves, and who had no motive to impose upon others, may be depended upon, that of persons in the same circumstances a hundred or a thousand years ago may be depended upon. They are but few things that we can see with our own eyes; but we are well satisfied with the evidence of their having been seen by others.

The evidence of the truth of Christianity is of this satisfactory kind; and if the facts on which it depends be of an extraordinary kind, as not being analogous to any thing that we ourselves are witnesses to; the testimony by which they are ascertained is in full proportion copious and definite; persons then living having had every motive that men could have to examine and re-examine every thing relating to them, both its friends and its enemies having been sufficiently interested so to do, and while the facts were recent, and capable of being easily investigated.

In the preceding extract, Mr. Evanson says, that the evidence of miracles is not to be depended upon," because they make a considerable part of the narration, the truth of which is questioned." But if the narrative be sufficiently authenticated, the truth of the miracles is as well established as that of any other facts; and there can be no objection to them, but what affects the narrative, that is, the books which contain the account of them. To make this objection of any weight, Mr. Evanson must maintain, with Mr. Hume, that no account of miracles can be credible. If they be credible at all, their credibility may be ascertained by sufficient testimony.

If, as he says, miracles could only be designed to excite attention,† till another kind of proof, viz. that" of completed

This extract from the quotation (p. 361) will be seen to be incorrect. Mr. Evanson, whose manner is too often uncourteous, describes it as "a gross misrepresentation." Letter, p. 3.

+ Mr. Evanson here complains of the words " and to be a present testimony of its divine origin and authority," being unnoticed in this reference to p. 561. Ibid. p. 4.