teries in religion. Aware that while the prejudice against whatever is mysterious subsists, the saving truths of the gospel can find no entrance, the author has taken great, and, as far as the force of argument can operate, successful pains, to point out the weakness of the foundations on which that prejudice rests. He has shewn, by a large induction of particulars, in natural religion, natural philosophy, and in pure and mixed mathematics, that, with respect to each of these sciences, we arrive by infal lible steps to conclusions, of which we can form no clear determinate conceptions; and that the higher parts of mathematics especially, the science which glories in its superior light and demonstration, teem with mysteries as incomprehensible to the full as those which demand our assent in Revelation. His skill as a mathematician, for which he has long been distinguished, serves him on this occasion to excellent purpose, by enabling him to illustrate his subject by well-selected examples from his favourite science, and by that means to prove in the most satisfactory manner that the mysterious parts of Christianity are exactly analogous to the difficulties inseparable from other branches of knowledge, not excepting those which make the justest pretensions to demonstration. We run no hazard in affirming, that rarely, if ever, have superior philosophical attainments been turned to a better account, or a richer offering brought from the fields of science into the temple of God. Some of his illustrations being drawn from the sublimer speculations of mathematics, must necessarily be unintelligible to ordinary readers: but many of them are plain and popular; and he has succeeded in making the principle on which he reasons throughout, perfectly plain and perspicuous, which is this -that we are able, in a multitude of instances, to ascertain the relations of things, while we know little or nothing of the nature of the things themselves. If the distinction itself is not entirely new, the force of argument with which it is supported, and the extent to which its illustration is carried, are such as evince much original thinking. We should seriously recommend this part of the work to the perusal of the Barrister, if he were capable of understanding it; and to all, without exception, who have been perverted by the shallow and ambiguous sophism first broached, we believe, by Dr. Foster, that where mystery begins, religion ends;-when the fact is, that religion and mystery both begin and end together; a portion of what is inscrutable to our faculties, being intimately and inseparably blended with its most vital and operative truths. A religion without its mysteries is a temple without its God.

Having thus marked out the ground, removed the rubbish, and made room for the foundation, our author proceeds with the skill of a master to erect a firm and noble structure, con

ducting the argument for the truth of Christianity through all its stages, and commencing his labours in this part of the subject, with establishing the genuineness and authenticity of the sacred volume. As he manifestly aims at utility, not at display, we are glad to find he has availed himself of the profound and original reasoning of Hartley, which he has fortified all along with ingenious reflections of his own, and crowned by an appeal to the principal testimonies of Christian and Pagan antiquity. The letter devoted to this subject is long, but not more so than the occasion demanded, and is replete with varied and extensive information. To the whole he has annexed a very accurate and particular account of the researches and discoveries of Dr. Buchanan, made during his visit to the Syrian Churches in India; nor are we aware that there is a single consideration of moment, tending to confirm the genuineness and integrity of the scriptures in their present state, which, in the course of our author's extended investigation, has escaped his notice. By some he will be blamed for placing the proofs of the authenticity of the sacred records before the argument from prophecy and miracles: but we think he is right in adopting such an arrangement; since the reasoning on this part not only stands independent of the sequel, but greatly abridges his subsequent labour, by enabling him to appeal, on every occasion, to the testimony of scripture, not indeed as inspired, but as an authentic document, that point having been previously established; while it is in perfect unison with that solicitude, he every where evinces, to imbue the mind of his readers with a serious and devotional spirit. Here is a book

of a singular character, and of high antiquity, from which Christians profess to derive the whole of their information on religion, and it comes down to us under such circumstances that every thing relating to it is capable of being investigated, apart from the consideration of prophecies and miracles, except its claim to inspiration. Why then should not the pretensions of this book be examined at the very outset, as far as they are susceptible of an independent examination, since the proof of its being genuine and authentic, will extend its consequences so far into the subsequent matter of discussion, as well as exert a great and salutary influence on the mind of the inquirer.

The next letter is devoted to the subject of prophecy: in which, after noticing a few of the more remarkable predictions relating to the revolutions of power and empire, he descends to a more particular investigation of the prophecies relating to the Messiah, which he arranges under three heads; such as respect the time and place of his appearance-his character, doctrine, rejection, and final triumph-and the exact correspondence betwixt his contemptuous treatment and sufferings, and

the representations of the ancient oracles. Under the last, he embraces the opportunity of rescuing the proof from the 53d chapter of Isaiah, from the cavils of the Jews, as well from the insinuation of certain infidels, that the prophecy was written after the event; which he triumphantly refutes by an appeal to a remarkable passage in the books of Origen against Celsus. In confirming the inference from prophecy, we again meet with a judicious application of the author's mathematical skill, by which he demonstrates, from the doctrine of chances, the almost infinite improbability of the occurrence of even a small number of contingent events predicted of any one individual; and of the absolute impossibility, consequently, of accounting for the accomplishment of such numerous predictions as were accomplished in the person of the Messiah, without ascribing it to the power and wisdom of the Deity.

From the consideration of prophecy, he proceeds to the evidence from miracles, and the credibility of human testimony. He begins with stating, in few and simple terms, but with much precision, the just idea of a miracle, which, he remarks, has oftener been obscured than elucidated by definition, while the sentiments entertained by good men upon the subject have been almost uniformly correct, when they have not been entangled or heated by controversy. This branch of the evidences of revelation is certainly very little indebted to the introduction of subtle refinements. In resting the evidence of the Jewish and Christian revelations on the ground of miracles, the author restricts his proposition to uncontrolled miracles; on the propriety of which, different judgements will probably be formed by his readers. We believe him to be right: since, admitting the limitation to be unnecessary, it is but an extreme of caution, a leaning to the safe side; for who will deny, that it is much easier to prove it to be inconsistent with the wisdom and goodness of the Deity, to permit an uncontrolled miracle to be performed in support of error, than to demonstrate from a metaphysical consideration of the powers and capacities of spiritual agents of a high order, their incapacity of accomplishing what to our apprehensions must appear supernatural. The writer of this, at least, must confess for himself, he could never find any satisfaction in such speculalations, not even in those of Farmer, ingenious as they are, which always appeared to him to be like advancing to an object by a circuitous and intricate path, rather than take the nearest road. But to return to the present performance. After exhibiting the most approved answers to the flimsy sophistry of Hume, intended to evince the incredibility of miracles; and corroborating them by a copious illustration of the four criteria of miraculous facts, suggested by Leslie in his admirable

work, intitled "A short Method with the Deists," he reduces the only suppositions which can be formed, respecting the miracles recorded in the New Testament, to the four following, which we shall give in the words of the author:

Either first the recorded accounts of those miracles were absolute fictions, wickedly invented by some who had a wish to impose upon mankind:

• Or, secondly, Jesus did not work any true miracles; but the senses of the people were in some way or other deluded, so that they believed he really did perform miracles, when, in fact, he did not :

⚫ Or, thirdly, that the spectators were not in any way deluded, but knew very well he wrought no miracles; yet were all, (both enemies and friends, the Jews themselves not excepted, though they daily "sought occasion against him,") united in a close confederacy, to persuade the world he wrought the most surprising things. So that while some actively circulated reports of those amazing occurrences, the rest kept their counsel, never offering to unmask the fraud, but nanaging the matter with so much dexterity and cunning, and such an exact harmony and correspondence, that the story of Jesus Christ's performing miracles should become current, should obtain almost universal credit, and not a single person be able to disprove it:

Or, fourthly, that he did actually perform those astonishing works, and that the accounts given of them by the Christian writers in the New Testament are authentic and correct.

ter of

He that does not adopt the last of these conclusions will find it a matvery small consequence which of the three he chooses; for that. the stories cannot be fictions, is evident from the reasoning of Leslie, already adduced and it will be seen further, from a moment's consideration, that the denial of the miracles of Jesus Christ, in any way, leads necessarily to the admission of a series of real miracles of another kind.'

He closes this part of his disquisition with an elaborate confutation of the notion too generally admitted by the advocates of revelation, that the evidence of miraculous facts necessarily grows weaker in proportion to the distance of the time at which they were performed; and in no part does the vigour of his understanding appear to more advantage than in his reasonings on this point, where, among many excellent, we meet with the following profound remark :

It is only,' he observes, with regard to the facts recorded in the Bible, that men ever talk of the daily diminution of credibility. Who complains of a decay of evidence in relation to the actions of Alexander, Hannibal, Pompey, or Cæsar? How many fewer of the events recorded by Plutarch, or Polybius, or Livy, are believed now (on account of a diminution of evidence) than were believed by Mr. Addison, or Lord Clarendon, or Geoffrey Chaucer? We never hear persons wishing they had lived ages earlier, that they might have had better proofs that Cyrus was the conqueror of Babylon, that Darius was beaten in several battles by Alexander, that Titus destroyed Jerusalem, that Hannibal was entirely routed by Scipio, or Pompey by Julius Cæsar, though we sometimes find

men of excellent and enterprising minds exclaiming, "O that I had lived, and been present, when such splendid events occurred; how lively an interest should I have taken in such scenes, how much concern in their termination!" And indeed it is the frequent hearing of such exclama tions that causes men to confound weight of evidence with warmth or depth of feeling; and to lose sight of the essential difference between real evidence, or the true basis of belief in history, and the sensible impression or influence which such history may make upon the mind.”

We have only to remark, before we dismiss this subject, that, whereas the evidence of facts which occurred at a distant period is usually placed under the head of successive evidence, this distinction, as applicable to the miracles of the Gospel, must either be rejected altogether, or admitted with a caution against being misled by the ambiguous use of words. The evidence, in this case, is not to be confounded for a moment with that of a report transmitted through successive ages to the present time, since the record which contains the miraculous facts carries us back to the apostolic age; so that admitting its antiquity to be what it pretends, of which there is the most satisfactory evidence, the only link in the succession is that which separates the performers or spectators of the miracles from their narrators, who in the case before us, however, are frequently the same persons.

In order to give that conspicuous place which is due to the greatest and most momentous of these miracles, as well as to do justice to the independent train of proofs by which it is supported, Dr. G. has assigned a separate letter to the Resurrec tion of Christ, in which he has placed this great fact in the clearest light; and, to remove every shadow of hesitation arising from the minute variations in the account given of it by the evangelists, has taken the pains to digest from their separate narratives a distinct statement of the whole transaction, which, as far as we have had time to examine it, appears very satisfactory.

To this succeeds an ample illustration of the argument for the truth of Christianity, drawn from its early and extensive propagation where the fact is placed beyond all contradiction, by numerous and decisive testimonies, adduced from the ancient apologists and pagan writers; the dates of the ten successive persecutions are accurately assigned; and the most striking circumstances attending the last, in particular, are distinctly and forcibly exhibited. This forms the subject of the 9th letter, which closes with some admirable observations on the intrinsic excellence of the religion of Jesus, tending to shew that it corresponds to all the characters, and fulfils all the indications, which a revelation from heaven might be expected to possess.