be one, yet our sight is so feeble that we cannot always come to it directly, but by many inferences and layings of things together. But I think that, in the case before us, there is such a proof as you desire, and I will set it down as shortly and plainly as I can.

I suppose, then, that the truth of the Christian Doctrines will be sufficiently evinced, if the matters of fact recorded of Christ in the Gospels are proved to be true; for his miracles, if true, establish the truth of what he delivered. The same may be said with regard to Moses. If he led the children of Israel through the Red Sea, and did such other wonderful things as are recorded of him in the book of Exodus, it must necessarily follow that he was sent by God: these being the strongest evidences we can require, and which every Deist will confess he would admit, if he himself had witnessed their performance. So that the stress of this cause will depend upon the proof of the matters of fact.

With a view, therefore, to this proof, I shall proceed,

1. To lay down such Marks, as to the truth of matters of fact in general, that where they all meet, such matters of fact cannot be false; and,

2. To show that they all do meet in the matters of fact of Moses, and of Christ; and do not meet in those reported of Mahomet and of the Heathen Deities, nor can possibly meet in any imposture whatsoever.

1. The Marks are these:

(I.) That the fact be such, as men's outward senses can judge of;

(II.) That it be performed publicly in the presence of witnesses;

(III.) That there be public monuments and actions kept up in memory of it; and,

(IV.) That such monuments and actions be established, and commence at the time of the fact.

The two first of these Marks make it imposible for any false fact to be imposed upon men at the time, when it was said to be done, because every man's senses would contradict it. For example : -Suppose I should pretend that yesterday I divided the Thames, in the presence of all the people of London, and led the whole city over to Southwark on dry land, the water standing like a wall on each side. It would be morally impossible for me to convince the people of London, that this was true; when every man, woman, and child could contradict me, and affirm that they had not seen the Thames so divided, nor been led over to Southwark on dry land. I take it, then, for granted (and, I apprehend, with the allowance of all the Deists in the world) that no such imposition could be put upon mankind at the time, when such matter of fact was said to be done.

"But the fact might be invented, when the men of that generation, in which it was said to be done, were all past and gone; and the credulity of after ages might be induced to believe, that things had been performed in earlier times, which had not! "

From this the two latter Marks secure us, as much as the two first in the former case. For whenever such a fact was invented, if it were stated that not only public monuments of it remained, but likewise that public actions or observances had been kept up in memory of it ever since; the de

ceit must be detected by no such monuments appearing, and by the experience of every man, woman, and child, who must know that no such actions or observances had ever taken place. For example :- Suppose I should now fabricate a story of something done a thousand years ago, I might perhaps get a few persons to believe me; but if I were farther to add, that from that day to this every man at the age of twelve years had a joint of his little finger cut off in memory of it, and that (of course) every man then living actually wanted a joint of that finger, and vouched this institution in confirmation of its truth, it would be morally impossible for me to gain credit in such a case, because every man then living could contradict me, as to the circumstance of cutting off a joint of the finger; and that being an essential part of my original matter of fact, must prove the whole to be false.

2. Let us now come to the second point, and show that all these Marks do meet in the matters of fact of Moses, and of Christ; and do not meet in those reported of Mahomet and of the Heathen Deities, nor can possibly meet in any imposture whatsoever.

As to Moses, he (I take it for granted) could not have persuaded six hundred thousand men, that he had brought them out of Egypt by the Red Sea, fed them forty years with miraculous manna, &c. if it had not been true: because the senses of every man, who was then alive, would have contradicted him. So that here are the two first Marks.

For the same reason, it would have been equally impossible for him to have made them receive his

Five Books as true, which related all these things as done before their eyes, if they had not been so done. Observe, how positively he speaks to them (Deut. xi. 2-8.) "And know you this day, for I speak not with your children, which have not known, and which have not seen the chastisement of the Lord your God, his greatness, his mighty hand, and his stretched-out arm, and his miracles; -but your eyes have seen all the great acts of the Lord, which he did," &c. Hence we must admit it to be impossible that these Books, if written by Moses in support of an imposture, could have been put upon the people who were alive at the time, when such things were said to be done.

"But they might have been written in some age after Moses, and published as his!"

To this I reply, that, if it were so, it was impossible they should have been received as such; because they speak of themselves as delivered by Moses, and kept in the ark from his time (Deut. xxxi. 24-26.), and state, that a copy of them was likewise deposited in the hands of the king," that he might learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes to do them." (Deut. xvii. 19.) Here these Books expressly represent themselves as being not only the civil history, but also the established municipal law of the Jews, binding the king as well as the people. In whatever age, therefore, after Moses they might have been forged, it was impossible they should have gained any credit, because they could not then have been found either in the ark, or with the king, or any where else; and, when they were first published, every body must know that they had never heard of them before.

And they could still less receive them as their book of statutes, and the standing law of the land, by which they had all along been governed. Could any man at this day invent a set of Acts of Parliament for England, and make it pass upon the nation, as the only book of statutes which they had ever known? As impossible was it for these Books, if written in any age after Moses, to have been received for what they declare themselves to be, viz. the municipal laws of the Jews; and for any man to have persuaded that people, that they had owned them as their code of statutes from the time of Moses, that is, before they had ever heard of them! Nay more-they must instantly have forgotten their former laws, if they could receive these Books as such; and as such only could they receive them, because such they vouched themselves to be. Let me ask the Deists but one short question, "Was a book of sham-laws ever palined upon any nation, since the world began? not, with what face can they say this of the lawbooks of the Jews? Why will they affirm that of them, which they admit never to have happened in any other instance?

If

But they must be still more unreasonable. For the Books of Moses have an ampler demonstration of their truth, than even other law-books have; as they not only contain the laws themselves, but give an historical account of their institution and regular fulfilment of the Passover, for instance, in memory of their supernatural protection, upon the slaying of the first-born of Egypt; the Dedication of the first-born of Israel, both of man and beast; the preservation of Aaron's Rod which budded, of the pot of Manna, and of the brazen Serpent, which