exalted felicity in a higher ftage of existence, Of all the views of God which had been ever given, none was fo calculated to endear him to us, and to inspire our hearts with confidence, as this fhort but interefting defcription, of which the fcheme of redemption affords a pleafing illuftration, "God is love." What men in all ages had in vain wished for, an atonement for fin, which confcience and their natural notions of divine juf tice taught them to be neceffary, the facred books point out in the death of Jefus, whofe blood, in confequence of the dignity of his perfon, our reafon perceives to have been of fufficient value to expiate the guilt of innumerable millions. In favour of the immortality of the foul, a point fo important, but which to the wifeft of the Gentiles feemed fo doubtful, they speak in the clearest and most decifive language; and they hold up to the hopes and fears of mankind, rewards and punishments fuited to their nature, and worthy of God to distribute. The fyftem of morality contained in them is pure and rational; alike remote from the over-ftrained precepts of fuperftition and enthufiafm, and the loofe, compliant maxims of worldly policy. It comprehends all

the

the duties which we owe to God and to man; it is calculated for every rank and order, and speaks with equal ftri&tnefs and authority to the rich and honourable, and to the poor and ignoble; and the happy effect of it, if it were generally practised, would be to change the face of the world, and make it resemble heaven.

Such are the outlines of the fyftem of doctrine taught in the books of the New Teftament. From this flight sketch, every person who has turned his attention to fubjects of this nature, will be convinced, that no religion which was ever contrived by men, can come into competition with it. A comparifon between the fentiments of the apoftles, and the most eminent philofophers of antiquity on the preceding articles, would turn out completely to the disadvantage of the latter. Their best defcriptions of God would be found blended with puerilities and errors; their difquifitions on the immortality of the foul, full of hesitation, uncertainty, and arguments which could fatisfy no ra tional enquirer; their notions of the mode of propitiating the Deity, as diftant from the truth as thofe of the vulgar, with whofe rites, frequently childish, and fometimes abominable, they com

plied; their fchemes of morality, deficient in their catalogues of virtues and vices, the one being in fome inftances put for the other, feparated from religion, the ftock on which morality must be grafted, or it will never grow, and defigned rather to furnish a fubject of fpeculation, than to purify the heart, and regulate the practice. Who were the men that fo far excelled them? Were they their fuperiors in genius, fcience, and learning? Had they read much, and reflected much; and was their fyftem the fruit of profound refearch, and long meditation? No; one of them was a publican, feveral of them were fishermen, and, with the exception of Paul, who had some Jewish learning, which was of very little value, they were all rude and illiterate in the highest degree, and had fcarcely thought on any fubject but their daily occupations. From fuch men we could not have expected a regular, connected fyftem of religion; and ftill lefs could we have looked for a religion, which, in the fublimity of its doctrines, and the purity of its precepts, fhould tranfcend every other that had appeared in the world. Whence, then, had they this wildom, which is fo confpicuous in their writings? Must

it not have defcended from the Father of lights, whofe power is feen in perfecting praise out of the mouths of these babes and fucklings? It is impoffible to account for the doctrine of the New Teftament, as coming from fuch men, without admitting that they had received it by immediate

revelation.

That the force of this argument may be fully perceived, I beg the attention of the reader to two particulars in their fyftem; their notions of the Meffiah, and their views with refpect to the Gentiles.

That the Jews were expecting a person whom they called the Meffiah, is a historical fact, which will not be controverted. It is equally certain, that their ideas of his character were very different from thofe which the facred writers have adopted. We learn from the New Teftament, and more fully from the writings of the Jews, that they flattered themselves with the hope of a temporal prince, who would command armies, fubdue the nations of the world, and give the chofen people dominion and riches. That the difciples of Christ originally entertained the fame notions with their countrymen, is not only high

ly

ly probable, but is rendered certain by their own. acknowledgment. They thought that his kingdom would be a kingdom of this world, in which there would be places of emolument and dignity, to be enjoyed by the favourites of the prince*. To what cause, then, fhall we attribute fo complete a change in their fentiments, that in their writings they speak only of a spiritual Meffiah, who would fave his people, not by fighting, but by dying; and would fave them, not from the power of the Romans, but from fin, and death, and hell? The tranfition from carnal to fpiritual ideas is flow and difficult; and is leaft of all to be expected from perfons of uncultivated minds, whose conceptions are naturally grofs and corporeal. This mental revolution, therefore, is certainly very furprising; and no fatisfactory account of it can be given, but that which is fuggested by the following words : "Bleffed art thou, Simon Bar-jona for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in hea ven t."

*Mat. xx. 21. Acts i. 6.

+ Mat. xvi. 17.

The