Go to natural religion: lay before her Mahomet and his disciples arrayed in armor and blood, &c. Show them to her in their retirement, the slaves of lust, &c., which they justify by a divine commission-then show her the blessed Jesus, humble, and meek, and doing good to all men; injured, but not provoked; and praying for his very enemies in the agony of death: when she has viewed both, ask, which is the prophet of God? But we have already had her answer from the lips of the centurion at the cross-Truly this man was the Son of God.

SHERL.

VOL. I.

H

DISCOURSE IX.

JOHN, CHAP. XX.-VERSES 30, 31.

And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

THESE words stand towards the close of St. John's gospel, and are by some thought to be the last of his own writing. They give us an account of the nature of his gospel, and of his end and design in publishing it to the world. The Apostle does not pretend his gospel to be a perfect and complete narrative of all that our Lord did whilst he conversed among men, not even of all the miracles and wonders which he wrought in confirmation of his doctrine: Many other signs truly did Jesus-which are not written in this book.' He adds farther, that the signs omitted in his account were done in the presence of his disciples,' and were consequently of as good authority as those related by himself. This was but a necessary piece of caution; for St. John wrote his gospel late, towards the end of his life, after the Apostles and disciples of Christ had spread the gospel far and near, and had both by preaching and writing published the great works and signs done by their Master. To prevent therefore the suspicions which some might be apt to entertain of their teachers, when they found the great evidences insisted on by them not mentioned by St. John, who, being the last writer of the Apostles, would naturally, for that reason, be supposed to be the most accurate; he declares that he had not recounted all the signs done by Jesus, but that there were many others, which, having

been wrought in the presence of the disciples, might very well be taught and published by them, though omitted by himself. But why does St. John, speaking of the miracles of Jesus, take notice only that they were done in the presence of the disciples?' whereas in truth they were done in the face of the sun, in the most open and public manner, in the sight of friends and foes; which is so advantageous a circumstance, and which adds so much to the credibility of the signs, that it ought ever to be remembered. St. John knew this very well, having in the course of his gospel often taken notice of this very thing particularly in the story of Lazarus, he tells us,` 'that many Jews were with Martha and Mary to comfort them concerning their brother,' who followed Jesus to the grave, and saw Lazarus come forth to life on his call: many of which,' says St. John, chap. xi. 45, 46. having seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him: but some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done.' But the reason why this is not insisted on in the text is, that it was not to St. John's purpose: he is there speaking of the authoritative promulgation of the gospel, as is evident from the last verse, 'These things are written that ye might believe:' and this led him no farther than to observe that the preachers and publishers of the gospel were eye-witnesses of the things they attested, and therefore unexceptionable witnesses. This is the true foundation of the Apostles' authority considered as promulgers of Christianity; which depended on what they themselves had seen or heard, and not on what others had seen or heard, whether friends or foes. Other circumstances may be good collateral evidence; but the testimony of the Apostles rests on this, that they themselves saw and heard what they have reported. And therefore the same Apostle in his first Epistle sets forth this evidence in the very same manner : That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked on, and our hands have handled, of the word of life-that which we have seen and heard, declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us.'

You have also the reason assigned which moved St. John to publish his gospel, which extends likewise to all the other writ

ings of the New Testament: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name.' This reason is not so strictly to be urged, as if writing were the only way of publishing the gospel, which we know was effectually published to great multitudes, before any book of the New Testament was written, by the preaching and working of the Apostles. But thus far perhaps we may justly argue, that writing is the best, if not the only method of perpetuating the testimony, and delivering down the doctrines of Christ uncorrupted to distant ages: and this way has had the consent and approbation of all civilized nations; from whence it is that scripta lex is used in the best writers to signify an instituted law, as distinguished from the law of nature arising either from instinct or reason.

The gospels then were published that they might be a standing evidence to all ages of God's purpose to redeem the world by sending his Son to take our nature on him, 'that he might die for our sins, and rise again for our justification' and it was absolutely necessary to convey this knowlege to the world by a proper authority; for revelation cannot obtain the force and authority of law, or any way oblige the consciences of men, till it be sufficiently published and declared. This is universally true of all laws whatever, both human and divine: and the reason of it is plain; because otherwise men would be bound to an impossibility, to obey a law before they knew what the law was. For the same reason also it must be allowed, that the promulgation of the law is the proper care and concern of the lawgiver for the law must come from the governor to the governed; and the subject, till he knows the law, that is, till it is promulged and sufficiently declared to him, can have no concern in it. Apply this to revelation, and you will perceive that it is absurd to suppose that God has given any law to the world which he has not sufficiently promulged and declared ; for that would be to suppose that God intended to give, and not to give, a law to mankind at the same time. An insufficient promulgation is no promulgation; and therefore all powers and qualities necessary to give credit and authority to the publishers of a revelation are always supposed, when we speak of the truth and authority of revelation. God may reveal what he sees fit

to one or two or more men; but unless such men are commissioned and duly qualified to satisfy others that such things have been made known to them, others are no more concerned in the revelation than if it had never been made. It would take up too much of your time to inquire particularly what are the necessary qualifications to constitute a proper witness to revelation. It may suffice to observe, that no man is naturally qualified for it, for this plain reason, because all natural qualifications are easily counterfeited to serve a purpose, Honesty, sincerity, and religion, may be put on in appearance; and a man may bear himself so well in the disguise, as not to be discovered. Things in common life are easily believed on the report of honest men: but then it must be considered that the moral probability of such things goes a great way in rendering them credible. It is no shock to our minds to believe that such a thing happened at such a time, which we know often does happen in the course of things, and probably might happen then. In such cases a small weight inclines the mind to assent: but it requires other kind of evidence to make the mind submit to the belief of things which are supported by no moral probability, but are quite out of the ordinary course and nature of things. This shows that no revelation can be sufficiently promulged and declared to the world by men, unless they are extraordinarily qualified and commissioned to that purpose. We do not therefore rely merely on the honesty or moral character of the first preachers of the gospel, but on their authority proved and supported by many wonderful works which God enabled them to do, and on their integrity sufficiently established by what they did and suffered for the sake of the gospel.

But here the question is asked, How shall we distinguish between the pretences to revelation, which are so many and various, all of which have an equal right to be heard, that it is endless to look for religion in such a crowd of pretenders to it, and difficult to determine the merit of the several claims? So that the only sure way is to take up with natural religion, which is every where uniformly the same, and in which there is no danger of being deluded and misled by imposture: for natural religion admits of no counterfeit and since every man's reason is judge in this case, no man can be cheated but by himself;