Dr. Lardner here obferves, that the Chriftians, and their principles, were in old times ridiculed by their ancient adverfaries. It is therefore, fays he, a mistake of thofe moderns who have imagined that the old heathens neglected this method of oppofing Chriftianity. We fee, however, continues he, how poorly fome of them reafoned. They ridiculed the most just and reasonable doctrines; fuch as the creation of the world, a divine providence, or obfervance of the actions of men, in order to a future retribation. Whilft they rejected the Chriftian revelation, they rejected alfo and endeavoured to expofe and weaken those principles of religion, which reafon alone, if attended to and improved, might have taught them with a good degree of evidence and certainty.'

In the twentieth chapter the author produces feveral paffages from the writings of Ariftides the fophift, and Dion Chryfoftom, in which our author thinks he can trace most of the common reflections which were made upon the Chriftians in those days, and are particularly taken notice of in our ancient apo-logifts.

The twenty-firft chapter contains the teftimony of Galen. This author, it feems, has two or three times mentioned Mofes, Christ, and his followers.

*

In one place he blames Achigenes for not giving a demonstration, nor fo much as a probable reason for some things advanced by him.. "So that, fays he, we feem rather to be in a fchool of Mofes, or Christ, where we must receive laws without any reafon affigned, and that in a point where demonftration ought not by any means to be omitted."

Here, fays our author, is a juft defcription of Chrift's delivering his precepts, without any long deduction of reasons and arguments. And he allows that reafons were not there abfolutely neceffary, or however, not fo requifite, as in the points treated of by the author whom he cenfures. I think we may hence be disposed to think it probable, that Galen was not unacquainted with our gofpels.'

In another place the fays; "It is easier to convince the difciples of Mofes and Chrift, than phyficians and philofophers who are addicted to particular fects.”

Here, the doctor obferves, is an acknowledgment of the feadiness of Chriftians in the profeffion of their principles, of which he may have seen many inftances in the persecuting reign of Antonin the Philofopher.'

In the twenty-fecond chapter, the author collects fome hea-.

then sayings of the Chriftians; fome anecdotes concerning divers heathen governors of provinces, who perfecuted the Chriftians, or were favourable to them; and concludes this volume with the following remarks on the filence of contemporary heathen authors concerning Chriftianity, for feveral ages; or their mentioning all affairs relating to them in a flight and fuperficial manner.

Some fubjects (fays he) are more agreeable to authors, be cause they are more entertaining to the generality of readers, Eufebius well obferves in the preface to the fifth book of his Ecclefiaftical Hiftorie, "That most historians have employed their pens in recording wars and victories, and trophies erected over vanquished enemies, the valour of generals, and the exploits of foldiers, befmeared with the blood of innumerable laughters for their country, their children, and their eftates."

Many writers of great worth, and many affairs of no fmall importance, have long lain in obfcurity, or have been totally buried in oblivion.

It has been obferved, that Velleius Paterculus, a man of a good family, who flourished in the time of Tiberius, and wrote an abridgment of the Roman Hiftory, in two books, has been mentioned by no ancient writer, excepting Priscian. "But the moderns have done him more juftice by publishing him fre quently with notes and commentaries."

M. Annaeus Seneca, father of L. A. Seneca the philofopher, and author of divers works, has been confounded with his fon, and has been almost unknown, as a writer.

Lucian, a fubje&t of the Roman empire, who has writ fo many things, and fo many forts of works, has taken little notice of Roman authors, or Roman affairs. He has laboured encomium of Demofthenes; but fays nothing of Cicero: tho' a comparison between those two great orators would have been very proper, and has been made by Plutarch, and Longinus.

• Maximus Tyrius, a Platonic philofopher, flourished in the time of Antonin the Pious, and feveral of his differtations were writ at Rome: nevertheless, as Davies, one of his editors, fays, he appears little acquainted with Roman affairs. Nay, fays he, I do not recollect, that he has made any reference to the Roman history,

We now know of two fons of the emperor Mark Antonin, which are not mentioned by any ancient historians,

Some writers are filent from reafons of policy. We are gold, in the history of the reformation of the Low Countries, that Margaret, governess in that country, in the year 1525,

Bafnag. ann. 180. num. ii.

fent

fent orders to all the convents, enjoining them to forbid preachers to mention Luther and his doctrine, and the opinions of ancient heretics." "This order, fays the abridger of the large work of Gerard Brandt, was very judicious. The best way of stopping the progrefs of herefies, is to feem to neglect them."

From this principle of policy Jofephus may have been filent about the Chriftians, and their affairs, in his writings, that he might bury them in oblivion.

Epictetus, and others, may have fuppreffed their own thoughts, and have been referved in their difcourfes, left they fhould excite inquifitivenefs in their hearers, and occafion doubts about the popular deities, and the worship paid to

them.

I might add, that it is not impoffible, nor very improbable, that fome writings of heathen authors have been loft, in which the Chriftians were mentioned. For very few writers in the Syriac language are come down to us.

• After all, we have now seen a goodly catalogue of heathen writers, in the firft and fecond century, men of great eminence for their wit and learning, their high ftations, and their credit in the world, who have, in their way, bore teftimony to Jefus Chrift, and the things concerning him, and to the Chrif tians, his disciples and followers, their numbers, their principles, their manners, and their fortitude and patience, under heavy fufferings, and a great variety of difficulties, and difcou ragements, which they met with for the profeffion of what they were perfuaded to be the truth, And Celfus, who in this period wrote against the Chriftians, has bore a large teftimony to the books of the New Teftament, and to the history of our Saviour.

And we can alledge two Roman emperors, Adrian and Titus Antonin, who have been favourable to us. And Adrian, in his letter to Servian, writ in the year 134, bears witness to the numbers and the influence of Chriftians in Egypt, at that time.

We must say the fame of Serenus Granianus, proconful of Afia, who wrote fo much in favour of the Chriftians to Adrian, and of his fucceffor in the fame province, Minucius Fundanus, to whom Adrian's refcript was sent.

To them ought to be added fome governors of provinces, mentioned in this chapter from Tertullian.

All these great men had fome acquaintance with the Chrif tians, and saw through the thick mitt of calumnies, with which the Chriftians were afperfed by the vulgar, and by many others. They perceived, that though the Chriftians had fome religious

fenfiments

fentiments peculiar to themfelves, and did not join in the ef tablished rites, they were not disturbers of the public peace; nor were justly chargeable with any of thofe crimes, which are generally punished by civil magiftrates: and, confequently, they were entitled to protection and favour.'

II. Theological Differtations; containing, 1. The Nature of the Sinai Covenant. 2. The Character and Privileges of the Apo ftolical Churches, with an Examination of Dr. Taylor's Key to the Epifles. 3. The Nature of Saving Faith. 4. The Law of Nature fufficiently promulgated to the Heathens. 5. An At: tempt to promote the frequent difpenfing the Lord's Supper. By John Erfkine, M. A. 12mo. Pr. 35. Dilly.

T

HE three first of thefe differtations were never before published; the two laft were printed in Scotland several years ago.

In the firft, the author examines the fcripture account of the Mofaic covenant, and particularly of the parties covenant, ing; the good things promifed, and the condition on which the beftowing of them depended.

That God, he fays, was one of the parties in the Mofaic roverant, is univerfally acknowledged; and the party with whom God made this covenant, was the Jewish nation, not excluding the unregenerate, and inwardly difaffe&ted to God and goodness.

• Of this covenant the chief promifes were, that the Ifraelites fhould, with little difficulty, fubdue the nations of Canaan; that they should enjoy a long, quiet, and peaceable poffeffion of that country, under the divine protection; that their land fhould abound with corn and wine, milk and honey, and every thing elfe neceffary for their outward prosperity; that they thould be preferved from famine, peftilence, and the other plagues and difeafes that God had inflicted on Ægypt; that he would multiply them as the fars of heaven; and that he would give them victory over their enemies; and place among them the external fymbols of his prefence.

The condition of this covenant was, an abftinence from fervile work on the fabbath; freedom from legal impurities and grofs vices; the offering of the facrifices prefcribed in the law; in time of war, the depending on God alone for fuccefs, and not having recourse to horses, chariots, or alliance with idolatrous ftates; and, in general, obedience to the letter of the law, even when it did not flow from a principle of faith and love.

In the mean time, thefe laws, though wifely calculated to reftrain from idolatry and other grofs fins, could not make perfect as pertaining to the confcience. Obedience to thera

was never defigned to entitle to heavenly and fpiritual bleffings. Thefe laft are only to be looked for through another and a better covenant, established upon better promifes.'

Our author explains and illuftrates thefe particulars, and endeavours to remove the difficulties attending his opinion.

In the fecond Differtation he confiders the character and privileges of the Chriftian church.

We have feen, be fays, in the firft differtation, that under the Old Teftament, men deftitute of inward piety were really in covenant with God, and had a juft claim to certain external covenant bleffings. In the course of the argument, feveral fcriptures have been occafionally illuftrated, which reprefent the nature of the Chriftian difpenfation as, in these refpe&s, diametrically oppofite to that of the Sinai covenant. Many, however, maintain that an external covenant fubfifts under the gofpel, by which profeffors of chriftianity, though inwardly difaffected to God and goodness, are intitled to certain outward bleffings and church privileges.'

Our author, in this paffage, alludes to Dr. Taylor's Key to the Apoftolic Writings, in which the doctor maintains that election, adoption, vocation, falvation, juftification, fanctifi cation, regeneration, &c. are antecedent bleffings belonging at prefent to all Chriftians, even thofe who for their wickedness hall perish eternally.

Mr. Erfkine, in oppofition to this opinion, endeavours to prove, that thefe bleffings are not to be understood in the low fenfe in which the Dr. reprefents them; that they are necef. farily connected with eternal life; that thofe only were confidered by the apoftles as true members of the church, who were endued with the temper and fpirit of Christ, and thereby fecured against total and final apoftacy. But the apoftolic writers certainly speak of the first Chriftians, in general, as called, faved, fanctified, &c. St. Paul, in particular, addreffes himself to all the Chriftians at Rome, and reprefents them as JindiWbEYTES, baving been juftified; yet none of them are fuppofed to be fecured against total and final apoftacy: they are exhorted to caft off the aworks of darkness, to mortify the deeds of the body, and to walk in newness of life: which is inconfitent. with that fecurity of which this writer fpeaks. The indefectibility of true believers is a notion which has been fufficiently exploded; and notwithstanding all that our author has advanced, it feems to be very clear, that falvation, juftification, and words of the like import, are used by the apoftolic writers