་ which are too close and numerous to be ac counted for by accidental concurrences of fiction, must neceffarily have truth for their foundation. This argument appeared to my mind of fo much value (especially for its affuming nothing beside the existence of the books), that I have pursued it through St. Paul's thirteen epiftles, in a work published by me four years ago under the title of Hora Paulinæ. I am fenfible how feebly any argument, which depends upon an induction of particulars, is reprefented without examples. On which account, I wifhed to have abridged my own volume, in the manner in which I have treated Dr. Lardner's in the preceding chapter. But, upon making the attempt, I did not find it in my power to render the articles intelligible by fewer words than I have there used. I must be content, therefore, to refer the reader to the work itself. And I would particularly invite his attention to the obfervations which are made in it upon the three first epiftles. I per I perfuade myself that he will find the proofs, both of agreement and undefignedness, fupplied by these epiftles, fufficient to fupport the conclufion which is there maintained, in favour both of the genuineness of the writings, and the truth of the narrative. It remains only, in this place, to point out how the argument bears upon the general queftion of the Christian history. First, St. Paul in these letters affirms, in unequivocal terms, his own performance of miracles, and, what ought particularly to be remembered, "That miracles were the figns of an apoftle*." If this teftimony come from St. Paul's own hand, it is invaluable. And that it does fo, the argument before us fixes in my mind a firm affurance. Secondly, it shows that the series of action, represented in the epiftles of St. Paul, was real; which alone lays a foundation. Rom. xv. 18, 19. 2 Cor. xii. 12. for for the propofition which forms the fubject of the first part of our present work, viz. that the original witneffes of the Christian history devoted themselves to lives of toil, fuffering, and danger, in confequence of their belief of the truth of that history, and for the fake of communicating the knowledge of it to others. Thirdly, it proves that Luke, or whoever was the author of the Acts of the Apostles (for the argument does not depend upon the name of the author, though I know no reafon for queftioning it) was well acquainted with St. Paul's hiftory; and that he probably was, what he profeffes himself to be, a companion of St. Paul's travels: which, if true, establishes, in a confiderable degree, the credit even of his gofpel, because it fhews, that the writer, from his time, fituation, and connections, poffeffed opportunities of informing himfelf truly concerning the tranfactions which he relates. I have little difficulty in applying to the Gospel of St. Luke what is proved concerning the A&ş 4 Acts of the Apoftles, confidering them as two parts of the fame history; for, though there are inftances of fecond parts being forgeries, I know none where the second is genuine, and the first not so. part I will only observe, as a fequel of the argument, though not noticed in my work, the remarkable fimilitude between the style of St. John's gofpel, and of St. John's first epiftle. The style of St. John's is not at all the style of St. Paul's epiftles, though both are very fingular; nor is it the ftyle of St. James's or of St. Peter's epiftle: but it bears a resemblance to the ftyle of the gospel infcribed with St. John's name, fo far as that resemblance can be expected to appear, which is not in fimple narrative, so much as in reflections, and in the representation of difcourfes. Writings, fo circumstanced, prove themselves, and one another, to be genuine. This correfpondency is the more valuable, as the epiftle itself afferts, in St. John's manner indeed, but in terms fufficiently explicit, the writer's perfonal knowledge 0 4 ledge of Chrift's history: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the word of life, that which we have seen and heard, declare we unto you." Who would not defire, who perceives not the value of an account, delivered by a writer fo well informed as this? |