CONVERSATION III. EDWARD. I FEAR I have wearied both you, sir, and my sister by my former objections; but my anxiety to have my mind at rest upon all preliminary points previously to entering upon the actual examination of the evidences themselves, induced me to press the doubts I have already expressed; and for the same reason, I should wish to consider one more and very serious objection, which appears to me to lie at the threshold of all further investigation, viz. that the whole proof of Christianity depends upon the veracity of those in It is from Yes, all, directly or indirectly. Christians that we have our accounts of the origin and history of Christianity. It is from them we have received the Scriptures which contain its precepts; from their hands, also, have we received the works of those who rejected this religion, and which may have been garbled to serve its cause. If even their own statement be correct, for fifteen hundred years every thing has to which they give occasion, we cannot in any case conclude that the original evidence is weak, or even that it is not obvious and striking. Were we to presume that every principle is dubious against which specious objections may be contrived, we should be quickly led into universal scepticism. The two ways in which the ingenuity of speculative men has been most commonly employed, are dogmatical assertions of doubtful opinions, and subtle cavils against certain truths." GERARD'S Dissertations, vol. ii. p. 4. EDWARD. I would not bring forward objections merely for the sake of shewing my own ingenuity in devising them; but, before I feel entirely satisfied as to the justice of your arguments against those who neglect to inquire into the truth of Christianity, and reject it without examination,-it appears to me necessary to shew that there is some reasonable prospect of their being able to come to a decision on the subject, — which I think is not the case: the dispute appears interminable. If there were any one treatise extant which Christians would agree in, as being that defence on which they were willing to rest the issue of the inquiry, there might be some hope of coming to a decision; but when the whole Christian world is at variance, not only as to what is Christianity, but also as to how it is to be defended, surely some allowance must be made for men who have other things to attend to, as well as theological inquiries. MR. B. There is no solid argument in your objection: any one who is really anxious on the subject will soon obtain sufficient information both as to what Christianity is, and by whom and in what manner it has been defended, and will naturally turn to the examination of that kind of proof which has most weight with him in other subjects. Besides, the clergy furnish a constant resource. EDWARD. But if Christianity be of that great importance which is alleged, why has not the whole body of proof been collected and arranged in such a manner as to enable every one at once to see all that can be said in its favour? I know, indeed, that there are collections professing to be demonstrations of the truth of the Christian religion; but there is none, so far as I have ever heard, which all agree in holding forth as such. Christianity is either capable of demonstration, or it is not: if the latter, I do not see how it can be defended at all, unless the threatening declarations of the New Testament are explained away; but if the former, why have we not such a proof as the Mécanique Céleste is of the Newtonian system of the world? MR. B. Because the nature of the subject hardly will admit of such a proof, and because if it did it would be useless. Absolute mathematical demonstration cannot be obtained. All that is neces tion on the subject; and these again dependent upon others; and then would come the calculation of chances of error. Judge from this one portion of what would be requisite, what the whole would be. On the other hand, such a proof as ought to convince a rational inquirer, may be soon made out; there are abundance already in circulation. Thus, when I say Christianity is the religion founded by Jesus Christ, as contained in the New Testament, which is a collection of writings of his first followers, and proves from facts which cannot be denied, and reasoning which cannot be overthrown, that the religion itself is from God; which is further established by the Scriptures of the Old Testament, by the internal evidence of the excellency of the religion, and by the history of the world, sum up the proof of Christianity; and if any one deny or doubt the truth of any of these assertions, I have a right to refer him to those authors whose works in detail fully prove these points. I may, to shorten his labour, give an analysis of the process used to establish each of these particulars; but it can no more be expected that I should give all the detail, than that Laplace should have first established the truth of every proposition in pure mathematics of which he makes use. EDWARD. But Laplace quotes them because they are indisputable now the proofs of the particular pro Not that I know of: but many eminent men have rejected Christianity, and have written against it. MR. B. You may rely upon it, that had any actual demonstration been made out against Christianity, you would not have been ignorant of the fact; its enemies have been too active to let any thing of that kind be passed over. Now consider for a moment the extent of proof on behalf of Christianity, and from how many quarters it has been open to exposure, if false. In its statements of historical facts, in criticism, in morality, in physical truth. If it could have been positively proved, for example, that such a person as our Lord Jesus Christ never existed, or that the New Testament was a forgery, or that it was contrary to sound morality, or that it contained statements contrary to what we know to be the real state of the earth, or commanded observances impossible, in the nature of things, to be observed by all men; at the same time that it professed to be of universal obligation; in any of these cases, the question would |