other Matter that he has related as of his own Knowledge that 't is possible there might be Mistake in the Sign and Proof of the divine Revelation as well as in the Revelation its self that 't is possible that the Author of the Report whether it was the Prophet himself or any other Man who has reported the Miracles done by the Prophet as Matters of his own Knowledge did imagine he saw things which he did not see and that he heard things which he did not hear But if this be supposed possible that any Man and much more that several Men agreeing in the same Report the Organs of whose Senses were rightly disposed and who by all their other Actions and Discourses appeared to be sober and considerate and judicious should yet in the Day time and in a clear Light and when they were sure they were broad awake be mistaken in the plainest Matters of Sense then there is no such thing as Certainty in the World Then they that make the Objection can be no more sure of what they themselves see and hear than other Men can be And 't is to no Purpose to hold an Argument with such as dare not believe their own Eyes and Ears The only sense whereby I think such Men can be convinced must be Feeling And it will be well for them if they can carry the same Scepticism with them into the other World and when they are compassed about with the Flames of Hell can be able to doubt whether it be a real or a painted fire whether they are tormented in that Flame or not Leaving these therefore to be convinced in the other World as being I think not capable of Conviction here I shall content my self with having said what I suppose is enough to satisfie others That the Witness of a plain Matter of Fact may be sure of the Truth of what he witnesses and that 't is possible for God to speak so plainly to Men that they may be certain they have had a divine Revelation and that such Evidence may be given of the Veracity of an Author and of the Authority of a Book as is sufficient to satisfie a reasonable Man And by this and what was said before I hope I have made it appear that a Standing Revelation of God's Will may be so well contrived and so well attested as to be sufficient to effect its Design viz. to bring Men to Repentance Whether the Standing Revelation which we have in the Holy Scripture be sufficient for this Purpose will be Matter of Enquiry in the next Discourses In the mean time what has been already said may serve to dispose us to hear without Prejudice the Arguments that may be offered to prove the sufficiency of the Holy Scripture For 1. If it be possible that there may be such a Standing Revelation it is very probable that there is one for from that natural Notion that we have of the Goodness of God it may be fairly argued that he is not wanting to Men in the necessary Means of Salvation and therefore it being evident that there are not new Revelations made every Day it may be reasonably concluded that the Reason is because there is already some Standing Revelation of God's Will extant that is sufficient to direct us in the Way to Happiness And 2. If there be already any such Standing Revelation extant it may be strongly presumed that it is that which we have in the Holy Scripture because there is no other Book that we know of which has such good Evidences of divine Authority and Inspiration as that has Let us then be prepared to inquire into the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Faith and Religion with unprejudiced Minds with a sincere Love and Desire of Truth and with a Resolution to hear Reason and to be convinced by it And above all which indeed is the best Preparation for Truth and the best Security against Error let us in the Sincerity of our Hearts apply our selves to God for his Help and Direction And that our Prayer may be effectual let us be careful to approve our selves to him by a conscientious Discharge of all those Duties of Piety Justice Temperance and Charity which are clearly taught even by natural Reason and be readily disposed to practise whatever else we shall learn to be our Duty by any farther Illumination Joh. 7.17 for if any Man will do his Will he shall know of the Doctrine whether it be of God FINIS ERRATA IN Epist Ded. l. 3. r. Arch-Bishop p. 8. l. 31. r. forborn p. 13. l. 19. r. he who p. 14. l. 16. r. a Book THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE Scripture-Revelation As to the Matter of it A SERMON Preach'd at the CATHEDRAL-CHURCH of St. Paul February the 5 th 1699 700. BEING The Second for the Year 1700 of the LECTURE Founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle Esq By OFSPRING BLACKALL Rector of St. Mary Aldermary and Chaplain in Ordinary to His MAJESTY LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1700. St. LUKE XVI 29 30 31. Abraham saith unto him They have Moses and the Prophets let them hear them And he said Nay father Abraham but if one went unto them from the dead they will repent And he said unto him If they hear not Moses and the Prophets neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead THE first thing which I propounded to do in Discoursing on these Words was to endeavour to shew that the present Standing Revelation of God's Will contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament is abundantly sufficient to persuade Men to Repentance if they are not unreasonably blind and obstinate They have Moses and the Prophets they have also Christ and his Apostles let them hear them And if that Standing Revelation which God hath made to us of his Will in the Holy Scriptures can upon any Account be thought insufficient to effect this Design it must be I think either 1. Because no Standing Revelation can be sufficient for this Purpose Or 2. Because there are some particular Defects in that Revelation which we have in the Holy Scriptures which render it not so sufficient for this Purpose as 't is possible a Standing Revelation might be I have therefore in a former Discourse upon these Words endeavoured to shew in general that a Standing Revelation of God's Will may be so well contrived and so well attested as to be sufficient for this Purpose I proceed now in the second place 2. To Consider whether that Standing Revelation which we have in the Holy Scriptures be such a Revelation whether it be sufficient to persuade Men to Repentance and fully to direct them in the Way to Happiness Or whether there be not some particular Defects in this Revelation which render it not so sufficient for this Purpose as 't is possible a Standing Revelation might be And if there be any such Defect
our Freedom of Choice and with it the Virtue and Excellency of Believing for 't is not Faith to believe what we see and feel and 't is no Commendation to a Man to be good and Virtuous if his Virtue be not the Fruit of a wise Judgment and a free Choice which it would not be if his Judgment was over born by irrefragable Demonstration And if that farther Proof and Evidence that is desired of the Truth of Religion be no other than such as will leave us a Freedom of Choice and a Possibility of Doubting then I say 't is not likely it should be more convincing to us than that which we have already in the Standing Revelation of Holy Scripture For it may be considered further in the second Place 2. That the Proof and Evidence already given us of the Truth of Religion is such as cannot fairly be excepted against and that there is no Proof thereof that could be given us unless it be such as is not resistible and consequently such as is not fit for God to give us while we are here in a State of Trial but what is liable to foolish Cavils and unreasonable Exceptions so that consequently the same Temper and Disposition of Mind and the same unwillingness to believe which now disposes Men to Infidelity and prompts them to make Exceptions to the present Grounds of the Christian Faith would work the same Effect in case other Proof and Evidence were given of the Truth of it I say first That the Proof and Evidence already given us of the Truth of the Christian Religion is such as cannot fairly be excepted against To shew this has been the Design of several former Discourses Serm. III IV V VI. And therefore to what has been said I shall only adde that if the Exceptions that are made to the Evidence already given us of the Truth of the Christian Religion were fair and reasonable they would be allowed by Mankind to be so in other Cases of the like Nature which yet they are not Nay if they who make these Exceptions in the Case of Religion did themselves think that they were just and reasonable they ought to make the same in all other Cases that are equally liable to the same Exceptions and in all other such Cases they ought to live and act as if they had the same Doubts and Scruples upon them which they say they have in the Case of Religion But we see the quite contrary every Day we live For that same Infidel who will not allow of the Testimony which was given to our Saviour by his Apostles tho' they gave the best Assurance that it was possible for Men to give both of their Knowledge of what they testified and of their Honesty in relating it yet readily allows that in all other Cases the Testimony of two or three Credible Persons should be received without any collateral Evidence of the Truth of their Testimony and thinks it reasonable that all Disputes and Controversies among Men concerning their Civil Rights their Estates nay and their Lives too should be thereby determined And he that questions whether the Books of the New Testament were written by the reputed Authors yet makes no Question but that other Books of as ancient or older Date and of the Authority of which there is not half so much Traditional Evidence were written by those Persons to whom they are ascribed and he would think those very unreasonable Men who when he was arguing any Point of Learning with them upon the Authority of Virgil or Cicero or Seneca should refuse to admit his Argument till he had first undeniably and demonstratively proved that the Aeneids were written by Virgil or that the other Pieces that have been allowed in all Ages ever since to have been written by Cicero or Seneca were not falsly Fathered upon those Authors The Infidel who doubts of the Truth of the Gospel-History at the same time has no Doubt at all of the Truth of other Histories as ancient and much more possible to be false and of the Truth of which there is not the hundredth part of thâ—t Evidence that there is of the Truth of this And he that pretends to be uncertain whether there ever was such a Man as Jesus of Nazareth and whether he said and did the things Recorded of him by the Evangelists and whether by the Preaching of his Apostles he did spread his Spiritual Empire over all the Countries of the World An Empire which is still kept up in most of the Countries over which it was first extended and of which there are evident Marks and Memorials still remaining even in those Countries that have since revolted from it He I say that doubts of these things altho' witnessed by the Writings of those who were Eye-Witnesses thereof yet makes no Doubt but that there was such a Man as Alexander the Great who lived above three Hundred years before and that he translated the Empire of the World from Persia to Greece and he also gives full Credit to the other things which he finds related of him by Curtius Plutarch and Arrian altho' none of these Authors were Eye-Witnesses of his Wars and Greatness but either Copied what they wrote from former Histories or took it up from Report and altho' there are perhaps no Remains of that Empire now left in the World And if he was but as sure of a good Estate as that the History of Alexander's Expedition and Conquests is in the main a true History he would not I believe give the Hundreth Part of its Value to ascertain his Title to it Those therefore are manifestly unreasonable Exceptions to the Proofs of Christianity which no Man will allow which even those that make them in this Case do not think reasonable to make in other Cases of the like Nature so that it is not at all likely that any Person that is not convinced by these Proofs should be convinced if more were given For as I farther noted there is no Proof that could be given us of the Truth of the Christian Religion unless it be such as is not resistible and consequently not fit for God to give us while we are here in a State of Trial but what is liable to foolish Cavils and unreasonable Exceptions This I think is so self-Evident that nothing plainer or more undeniable can be said to prove it For tho' the Demonstration of the Truth of Religion were as plain as Demonstrations in the Mathematicks yet even these may be cavil'd at by such as will allow of no Postulata's nor grant the Truth of the clearest Axioms Nay there have been Scepticks in the plainest Matters of Sense and some have denied Motion at the same time that their own Tongues were moving to deny it Not that I think the Demonstration of the Truth of Religion is as clear as any Propostion in Euclid or as the shining of the Sun at Noon for that can't be and I have
of Books as written by such and such Authors without sufficient Assurance thereof But I believe the Truth is There are some Men who for Reasons best known to themselves but which may some of them be easily enough guessed at will not allow that to be sufficient Evidence that a Book was written by a Prophet or an Apostle which they must and do allow to be sufficient Evidence in any other Case of the like Nature For in other Cases we make no Doubt to receive a Book as written by such an Author if he owns himself to be the Author of it or if it be shewn written with his own Hand or if they that are the Publishers of it declare that they had it from him as his own or that they transcribed or printed it from a Copy which they knew to be of his Hand-writing or if it passes current in common Fame and Report to be his and his most intimate friends believe it so and he himself does not disown it and there be none else that pretend any Claim or Title to it Where these or most of these Circumstances do concurr we never doubt but that the Person said to be the Author of such a Book is so indeed unless there be some very clear Reason grounded upon the known Incapacity of the Person to write in such a Language in such a Stile concerning such a Subject or the like whereby it may be demonstrated that whoever was he could not be the Author of it The truth is Now adays and I suppose the Case was much the same formerly whoever is the true Author of any Book finds very little Difficulty to make Men believe that the Book is his the greatest Difficulty is for a Man to conceal himself in case he be not willing to be known to be the Author of it And when once a Book is generally receiv'd as written by such a Person when I say 't is thus receiv'd in that Age in which it was first publish'd and by those that were in the best Capacity to inquire and to judge who was the true Author of it they that live in after times never think it reasonable to question the Authority thereof unless there be evidently something either in the Language Dialect or Stile or else in the Matter of the Book as in the Relation of some Piece of History the References to some ancient Customs the Citations out of other Authors or the like by which it may be clearly made out that the Book cannot be of such Antiquity as it pretends to or could not be the Writing of that Person who is reported and has been commonly taken to be the Author of it Upon such Reasons as these a great many Books are every Day received as written by such and such Authors and tho' we cannot be so sure of a thing that we believe upon these Inducements as we are of what we see with our own Eyes yet such Reasons as these are by the general Consent of Mankind judged to be sufficient in a Matter of this Nature which is hardly capable of better Proof And for a Man to disallow in one Case that same Evidence of the Truth of a Matter of Fact which in other Cases of the like kind he allows to be sufficient for a Man to receive a Book as written by another Person and not to receive a Book as written by a Prophet or an Apostle when he has as much Reason to receive one as the other and no more Reason to reject one than the other is not Judgment or Discretion or reasonable Caution but manifest Prejudice and Partiality But 2. It was further said That tho' we might be well enough assured that a Book was written by the Person who is said to be the Author of it there is no Way to be sufficiently assured that who he was the Author of it did not design to impose upon his Readers It seems then there is no Way to be sufficiently satisfied that any Man is an honest Man and fit to be credited that he does not lye in every thing he says and intend a Cheat in every thing he does For if a Man may be believed in what he says he may as well be believed in what he writes And if he may be trusted in one Concern he may be as safely trusted in another unless good Reason can be shewed to the contrary But in judging of humane Nature in general Men commonly judge of others by themselves What they are inclined to they think is the Inclination of Mankind what they allow themselves in they think others whatever they may pretend make as little scruple of as they do what they freely practice they make no Doubt other Men would practise as freely on the same Occasions and upon the same Inducements So that when any Man is so very suspectful of the Honesty and Veracity of other Men it gives but too just Ground to think that the Reason of his Aptness to distrust all others is his Consciousness of his own evil Designs and of the little Regard that he himself has to Truth in his own Assertions And if those he has to deal with should refuse to give any Credit to any thing that he affirms because according to his own declared Opinion very little Credit can reasonably be given to the Report and Affirmation of others I do not see with what Reason he can blame them for so doing Not but that after all 't is possible that a Man may 't is doubtless what has been done by some give out a Report or write Book on purpose to deceive Mankind But nevertheless I say that it ought not without very good Reason to be suspected that this is any Man's Design and that we may have Assurance enough that a thing is not which yet we must grant was possible to have been Particularly as to the Matter we are now speaking of First In case the Author of any Book or of any Report relates a Matter of Fact of which there are not nor well could be any other Witnesses but himself as if he says that he has received from God such a Revelation with order to publish it to the World or that he himself was an Eye or Ear-witness that such a thing was privately done or spoken by another the Credibility of such a Report whether written or spoken depends Partly upon the Nature of the Report its self Partly upon the Credit of its Author And partly upon the Proofs that he gives of his Honesty and Veracity in that particular And where there is a full Concurrence of all these that is When the Matter of the Report is credible in its self when its Author is a Person of Credit and when he gives the best Proofs that can be of his Veracity in that particular there is no Reason to reject his Testimony there is sufficient Reason to give Credit to it 1. If the Matter of his Report be credible in its
Matters of Fact which they have recorded And 3. That if the Matters of Fact related in the New Testament are true they are sufficient Proofs of the Truth and Divine Authority of all the Doctrines that are therein taught And I hope enough was said the last time to shew that we have sufficient Reason to believe that the Books of the New Testament were written by those Persons who are said to be the Authors thereof What I am next to do is 2. To shew that there is sufficient Reason to give full Credit to these Authors in their Relations of those Matters of Fact which they have recorded And I hope none of you that hear me whom I presume to be all Christians will take Offence at it if now while I am arguing this Point I sometimes speak of the Holy Evangelists with the same Freedom that might be used in speaking concerning any other Authors and if I sometimes Plead for no more Credit to be given to them in their Relations than is fit and reasonable to be given to any other Historian that was naturally as well furnished and qualified to write a true History as they were and whose Fidelity and Veracity is as well attested and confirmed other Ways as theirs was For you will consider I hope that my Business is now with Infidels with whom we can argue only upon the Principles of common Reason And tho' we who are Christians already do believe as one of the first Principles of our Religion that these Sacred Writers were divinely and supernaturally assisted in their Work and that upon that Account they deserve much greater Credit in what they have written than other Historians do yet this is what those who are yet Infidels will not allow And in Disputation nothing is to be presumed on one side but what will be readily allowed by the other Party So that the divine Inspiration of the Evangelical Writers and the supernatural Assistance which we believe they had in their Writing cannot as yet be regularly insisted upon as an Argument to gain them Credit But it is what will easily be granted afterwards when the Truth of their History shall be well established upon other Grounds as I hope it will be in the following Discourse and 't is what may then serve to procure a religious Respect and Reverence to these Sacred Writings 1 Thess 2.13 and to ingage us to receive them not as the Word of Men but as they are in Truth as the Word of God But this one thing nevertheless I suppose I may presume viz. that if the Books of the New Testament the Historical Parts of it in particular were written by those Authors to whom they are ascribed which has been already proved the Matters of Fact recorded by the Evangelists in Writing are the same which they and the other Apostles testified by Word of Mouth in their Preaching For it cannot I think with any Reason be suspected that their Preaching and Writings were disagreeable to each other because such Disagreement would most certainly have utterly destroyed the Credit of them both And this being supposed I hope it will clearly appear that there is abundantly sufficient Reason to give full Credit to these Writings if these following things be considered 1. If we consider the Nature Conditions and Circumstances of the Matters that are recorded in the Historical Books of the New Testament and of the History its self 2. If we consider the good Capacity that the Authors thereof were in to know the Truth of the things they have related 3. If we consider the strong Obligations they were under to write nothing but the Truth according to the best of their Knowledge or Information 4. If we consider the good Evidences that we have of their Honesty and Faithfulness And 5. Lastly If we consider the Confirmation that was given to the Truth of their History by God himself 1. I say the Evangelical History will appear to be highly credible if without any Regard as yet had to the Ability and Integrity of its Authors we only consider the Nature Conditions and Circumstances of the Matters therein recorded and of the History its self Concerning which there are two things especially that may be observed 1. That the Matters recorded by the Evangelical Writers are such as might be certainly known And 2. That they are such and in such manner related by the Evangelists that if their History of them had been false it could never have gained Credit in the World 1. First I say the Matters recorded by the Evangelical Writers are such as might be certainly known I mean either by the Historians themselves or by those from whom they had their Information For 1. They are for the most part plain Matters of Sense which those who were present at them could have no doubt of without Distrusting their own Faculties of Hearing or Seeing and which those who testified them might be as certain of the Truth of as we can be of any thing that we hear with our own Ears or see with our own Eyes For thus whether our Saviour gave out himself to be the Messias foretold by the Prophets whether he said that he was the Son of God and whether he uttered those other Speeches which the Evangelists have recorded as spoken by him could not but be certainly known by the People who often heard him and especially by his Apostles who constantly attended him And so likewise whether he did those many wonderful Works which the Evangelists have recorded of him could not but be known by those that were present with him They might be certain either that he did them or that he did not do them Thus for instance it might be certainly known to those that first affirmed that he gave Sight to the Blind whether those Persons had been once blind and whether afterwards they â—aw and to those that witnessed that he gave Strength â—o the Cripples whether the Men whom they said he wrought this Cure upon had been Lame or disabled â—n their Feet Hands or Body before and whether â—fterwards they walked and had Strength like other Men and to those that testified that he raised the Dead whether the Persons said to have been raised by â—im had been truly dead and whether afterwards â—hey lived But above all his own Resurrection which the preâ—ent Season as well as the Wonderfulness and Imporâ—ance of the thing obliges us to have a special â—egard to was a thing that might be most certainly â—nown to those that pretended to be Witnesses of it This Sermon was Preached on the Monday in Easter Week â—hey might be certain whether he had been once dead â—nd whether he shewed himself alive after his Passion â—y many infallible Proofs and was seen of them forty Days Of this they might be rather more certain than â—f any other of his Miracles because it was a thing â—ot to be judged of by one sense only as some of the â—est were
of the Apostles or else in after Times And if they were destroyed by the Christians this must have been done either soon after they were written or else after they had been for some time receiv'd and allow'd as true Histories by the Adversaries of the Christian Faith Now if it be suppos'd that these Books were not written till a good while after the Apostles had preach'd and the Evangelists written the Gospel they were written too late to be of sufficient Authority to weaken the Credit of the Gospel-History For how could those that were not born when the things recorded in the Gospel were said to be done pretend to contradict the Testimony of those who were living at that time and who testified either that they saw them with their own Eyes or that they receiv'd that Account of them which they publish'd from very credible Persons who said they had been Eye witnesses thereof But if it be supposed that these Books were written sooner even as soon almost as the Evangelists wrote or the Apostles began to publish by their Preaching the Gospel History then I say 't is impossible they should be suppress'd and destroy'd by the Christians either then or afterwards Not then for tho' we grant that Christianity from the very first Preaching of it made a very swift Progress in the World and from a Beginning no bigger than a Grain of Mustard-seed grew up quickly to be a goodly Tree shadowing many Nations under the Branches of it yet it did not spring up like a Mushroom in a Night it did not grow to this Bigness all at once And what were the Christians in the weak and infant state of the Church but an Handful of Men in Comparison with their numberless Opposers and those too without Wealth without Power of no Interest or Esteem in the World that they should undertake to corrupt or stifle the Evidence that was given against them which was supported by the Secular Power and gladly receiv'd and embrac'd by all other Men but themselves What were they that they should be able to call in all the Books that had been written against them and to suppress and destroy them at their pleasure and that too so fully and effectually as that with the Books themselves which they destroy'd all Memory of them should likewise perish A powerful and prevailing Party with the Government on its side may indeed do much in this kind and yet hardly so much as this But they that believe the Christians to have been such a powerful and prevailing Party early enough to hinder the spreading and dispersing of any Books that were written against them believe without any Ground or Warrant from History a more unaccountable and incredible thing than any that is recorded in the Gospel But if this could not be done then it might perhaps be done afterwards For in progress of Time 't is certain it may be said that the Christians did come to be of very great Power and Interest and able to bear down all their Opposers and 't is likely enough that then they might set themselves to destroy all those Monuments of Antiquity whereby their fabulous Gospels had been contradicted and disprov'd And 't is not incredible that they should so far succeed in their Attempt as to leave no means to Posterity to discern how weak and sandy a Foundation their Religion was built upon But this Supposition taking it altogether involves a greater Difficulty and supposes a greater Miracle than the former did For whatever the Christians might attempt to do or whatever they might be able to do after they had attained to such great Power and were become the most numerous and prevailing Party 't is utterly incredible that they ever could have attained to such great Power that they ever could have become the most numerous and prevailing Party if indeed the Gospel History had almost from the very Beginning been opposed and contradicted by other Histories that were more credible than the Gospel History was For it must be and is granted by all that at the first Preaching of Christianity all worldly Power and Interest were on the other side and engaged most strongly to hinder the Growth and spreading of it Now when Truth is on one side and Power and Interest on the other 't is not impossible that Truth may at last prevail against Interest and bring the Power also to be of its side But if Truth I mean that which hath most Appearance of Truth I say if Truth and Power and Interest are all on the same side from the Beginning as it must be allowed they were by those who say that the Gospel History was quickly prov'd false by other Histories written and publish'd about the same time than I say it is utterly impossible that an Imposture quickly discover'd to be an Imposture and which serv'd no worldly Interest should ever have so gained ground as Christianity did against that apparent Truth and mighty Power and Interest that were on the other side So that whatever Progress Christianity might have made for a short time at first by reason of the Boldness and Confidence of its first Preachers it must needs be that immediately from and after the Time that the Anti-Gospel Histories of better Credit and Authority than the Gospel History was were publish'd it must have declined much faster than it had before increased and in a very few Years have so dwindled to nothing that 't is like in the Age in which we live there would hardly have been so much as any Remembrance of it left And now if nothing more could be said upon this Subject for I have not time at present to take into Consideration the other Proofs before hinted at of the Truth of the Gospel-History I think what has been said already is enough to shew that there is sufficient Reason to give full Credit to the Evangelical Writers in their Relations of those Matters of Fact which they have recorded This I 'm sure of that upon much less Evidence and Assurance of Truth than we have in this we generally give Credit to other Histories For we believe other Historians in their Relation of such Matters as they could not have so certain Knowledge or so good Assurance of as the Evangelical Writers might have of those plain Matters of Fact and Sense which they have related in their History And again we believe other Historians giving an Account of things which they do not pretend to have had a personal Knowledge of which were done in Countries far Distant from them and in Times long before them which their Readers had no Means to enquire into the Truth of which were done in secret or when but few were by and which if they were falsly related none were engaged by any Worldly Interest to be at much Pains to disprove And lastly If two Historians of the same Antiquity give different or contradictory Accounts of the same Matter we do not for that Reason
Evidence of his own Senses But the Gospel of St. Luke it must be granted is not of this sort He himself does not pretend that the Matters by him recorded were of his own Knowledge he only says Luke 1.2 3. He had perfect understanding of them from the very first from those who from the Beginning were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word And of some few Matters recorded by the other Evangelists the same must likewise be granted particularly of the things that were done before they were called to be Apostles of these things I say it must be granted that 't is most probable they were not Matters of their own Knowledge that they recorded them only upon credible Information from others But when 't is consider'd on the other hand that there are very few things related by St. Luke which are not to be found in some of the other Gospels his Testimony that he had perfect Information of the things he has recorded from several Eye-witnesses adds a Degree of credibility even to the other Gospels and is a good corroborating Evidence of their Truth And all the Matters recorded by him or the other Evangelists only upon Information of others must be granted to be more credible than the Matter of most other ancient Histories of good Credit is if we reflect upon what was said in the former Discourse concerning the Nature and Circumstances of the things recorded particularly that they were such things as might be most certainly known and were capable of the best attestation and that they were things done in the same Age and in the same Countrey in which they lived who have written the History thereof And what hath been said is I hope sufficient to shew the good Capacity the Authors of the Historical Parts of the New Testament were in to know the Truth of the Things they have recorded most of them being such as 't is probable three of the Evangelists as Two of them without all Dispute were Eye witnesses of and the rest such as they might have certain Information of from several Persons then alive and well able to witness the same Of the Ability then of these Authors to write a true History of these Matters I think there can be no reasonable Doubt And that there is as little Reason to doubt of their Honesty and Faithfulness will in part appear if we consider in the third place 3 The strong Obligations they were under to write nothing but the Truth according to the best of their Knowledge or Information Now the Obligations that Men are under to speak or write Truth may be reduc'd to two Heads Honour and Conscience By both which the Evangelical Writers were more strongly obliged to Truth in their Relations than commonly other Historians are 1. One Obligation that lies on all Men to speak or write nothing but what is true is Honour For there is nothing that is generally accounted more base or dishonourable than to tell a Lye there is nothing that by those who stand most upon their Honour is thought more reflecting and disparaging and more necessary to be resented as an high Affront than to have the Lye given them What therefore is generally thought to be a great Reproach it may reasonably be presumed unless the contrary appears a Man will be careful to avoid by not giving any just Occasion to have it cast upon him And this is one Ground of that great Credit that is generally given to ancient Histories 't is presum'd unless there be evident cause to think otherwise that the Authors of them were Men of so much Honour and that they had such a sense of the Reproach and Discredit that it would be to them to be found out in a Lye as made them careful not to record any thing as a certain Truth but what they had good Knowledge or Information of But that this Obligation to Truth was stronger on the Authors of the Evangelical History than on most other Historians is abundantly evident from what was noted the last time concerning the Nature and Conditions of the things by them related and of their History of them For the Matter of most other ancient Histories is such that the Historians might report many things untruly or upon slight Information and yet be pretty well assur'd that they should not be reputed Liars because the Matters recorded by them being things either done in some Places a good way of or in some time long before or in the Presence of but few Persons they might know that none of those into whose Hands their Histories would fall would be in a Capacity to contradict them tho' they were false Or they might reasonably suppose that their Readers would rather acquiesce in their Report than travel so far or take so much Pains as they must have done to disprove it especially if it was a Matter of no great Consequence to their Readers whether their Report was true or false But in the Gospel History the Case was quite otherwise and the Historians themselves could not but know that it was so For there were a great many concern'd to find out some Falsity in it and there were a great many that would have taken any pains to have done it and yet the Matters related by the Evangelists and their Manner of relating them were such that their History if it had been false in any particular might have been disprov'd with the greatest ease without being at any Pains to do it because most of those into whose Hands it first came would either have known it to be false or would readily have been told that it was so by abundance of Persons that could of their own Knowledge have contradicted it So that if it be supposed that the Evangelists had any Regard at all to their own Reputation it can't be imagin'd either that they did record any thing contrary to their Knowledge or that in Matters that were not of their own Knowledge they neglected to get the best Information and Intelligence that could be had because if they had done either of these they could not have been so vain as to hope to escape being Censured as the most notorious and shameless Liars that ever wrote But 2. The strongest Obligation that lies on all Men to speak or write nothing but the Truth is Conscience And the sense that all Men are supposed to have of the natural Turpitude of a Lye is the chief ground of that very great Credit that we give to humane Testimony in Cases of the greatest Concern and Consequence But this Obligation to Truth was likewise stronger on the Authors of the Evangelical History than on most other Historians 't was indeed so very strong that nothing less than an evident Proof of their Falsity can justifie the entertaining so much as a suspicion of it For to speak and write the Truth was what they were obliged to not only by the Law of Nature to which all Men are alike
is enough in all Reason and as much as could be expected in this Case supposing there Facts to be true that they are not by any Historians that were of another Religion contradicted or attempted to be disprov'd more than this would have been too much And should we now in some ancient Manuscript History new brought 〈◊〉 Light and bearing the Name of some Jewish or Heathen Author find a large and formal Account of any of those Facts relating to the Christian Religion that are recorded in the Gospel this would give very just ground to suspect that the whole History whatever other Appearance it had of Truth was forged and counterfeit or at least that those Passages speaking honourably of the Christian Religion or the Author of it were knavishly foisted into the Book by some Christian Transcriber For this is indeed the best Argument that is brought to discredit some Passages of this kind that are now to be found in some Heathen or Jewish Historians and particularly in Josephus viz. that they say more than was proper or likely to be said by Heathens or Jews that if those Passages are genuine and the Authors had believed what they themselves wrote they must have been Christians Now this I 'm sure is not fair Dealing that the Paucity and slenderness of those corroborating Testimonies to the Truth of the Christian History that are to be met with in other Historians and that the Multitude and Fulness of such Testimonies should both be urged as Arguments against Christianity And therefore when they are both urged as they are and have been by our Adversaries we may reasonably conclude that the Truth is in the Mean and that there are indeed no more nor no fewer Testimonies of this kind to be met with in other Writers and that they are not either more or less to the Purpose than supposing the Christian History to be true might fairly be expected It only remains then that we enquire whether there be in the Gospel History any intrinsick Evidences of Falshood And 't is pretended by the Adversaries of our Religion that there are many such For there are they say some things related in the Gospel History that are altogether incredible and there is they say oftentimes great Difference in the several Relations of the same Story by the several Evangelists And not only so but there are they say besides in their several Histories compared together some flat Contradictions and Repugnancies I intended therefore at the End of this Discourse if I had had time for it to have spoken largely upon this Subject But because I have not must referr you to those Books that have been written on purpose to give an Account of the difficult Texts of Scripture and to reconcile those that are seemingly repugnant Or for want of such Books to any good Commentary on the Bible in which you will hardly fail to meet with Satisfaction in any Difficulty of this kind if you read it with a Mind disposed to receive satisfaction And I shall conclude this Discourse with only observing in General 1. That the pretended Impossibilities that are said to be related in the Sacred History are only Difficulties They are indeed Events above and beyond the known Power and common Course of Nature but they are such as are easily Credible when they are ascribed as they must be to the Almighty power of God 2. That the Difference that may sometimes be observ'd in the several Relations of the same Story by the several Evangelists is very inconsiderable consisting only in this That one perhaps relates the Story in a different Order of things than another does Or that One tells it briefly another more at large Or One with a few another with more Circumstances Or that some Circumstances are mentioned by each of them which the other had omitted So that this Observation is so far from being a just Objection against the Truth of the History that it is rather a Proof and Confirmation of it For 't is an Argument that the Evangelists did not conferr together in the Writing of their Histories and that they did not Copy or Transcribe from one another but that every one of them reported the Story he wrote in such manner as he himself remembred it to have been and with such Circumstances as he himself took most notice of And 3. As to the Repugnancies and Inconsistences that are said to be in the Evangelical History These we absolutely deny I have not time now to consider or attempt to reconcile all the Places that are pretended to be contradictory to each other but those Passages which seem most liable to this Exception are I think the Relation of Judas's Death and the Account of our Saviour's Genealogy But as to the first There is plainly no Impossibility no Contradiction in it if we should say that after he had hanged himself as St. Matthew Mat. 27.5 Acts 1.18 says he did fall down and his Bowels gush'd out as St. Luke affirms Or it may be that he did not hang himself but only was * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 choaked or suffocated by the violence of his Grief and that the same Passion by which he was strangled made him also fall down headlong and burst assunder in the midst so that all his Bowels gushed out And as to the other when 't is remembred that by the Jewish Law the next of Kin was to raise up Seed to his near Relation that died without Issue Deut. 25.5 by Marrying his Widow and that the First-born of the Woman after such second Marriage was reputed in Law the Son as well as he was the Heir of the Deceased so that consequently the same Person might be the Legal Son of one Man and the Natural Son of another Man tho' it may be difficult perhaps impossible for us at this Distance of Time to say with certainty which of the two different Lines by which our Saviour's Pedigree is deduced from David is the Legal and which the Natural Line it is very easie nevertheless to believe that one is the Legal and that the other is the Natural Line and if so there is plainly no Contradiction between the two Evangelists altho' St. Matthew Mat. 1.16 makes our Saviour to be descended from Solomon and St. Luke from Nathan altho' St. Matthew says that Joseph the Husband of the Blessed Virgin was the Son of Jacob and St. Luke Luâ—e 3.23 that he was the Son of Heli. And now the Truth of the Gospel History being as I hope by what hath bâ—en said sufficiently established I should proceed to shew That if the Matters of Fact related in the New Testament are true they are sufficient Proofs of the Truth and Divine Authority of all the Doctrines that are therein Taught But I am sensible that I have trespassed too much upon your Patience already and so shall reserve this for the Subject of my next Discourse FINIS ERRATA IN
Sermon III. Page 25. Line 1. for once read now for those read these ADVERTISEMENT THE Three remaining Lectures for this Year are to be at St. Paul's on the first Mondays in September October and November But the first Monday in September being the Fast-Day for the Fire of London when there will be in the Morning a Sermon suitable to that Occasion Preached before the Lord Mayor Aldermen and Companies of the City Mr. Boyle's Lecture on that Day is Order'd to be Preached in the Afternoon THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE Scripture-Revelation As to the Proof of it PART III. A SERMON Preach'd at the CATHEDRAL-CHURCH of St. Paul September 2d 1700. BEING The Sixth for the Year 1700 of thâ— LECTURE Founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle Esq By OFSPRING BLACKALL D. D. Rector of St. Mary Aldermary and Chaplain in Ordinary to His MAJESTY LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1700. St. LUKE XVI 29 30 31. Abraham saith unto him They have Moses and the Prophets let them hear them And he said Nay father Abraham but if one went unto them from the dead they will repent And he said unto him If they hear not Moses and the Prophets neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead IN Order to shew that we have sufficient Reason given us to convince us of the Truth and Authority of the New-Testament and of all the Doctrines that are taught by it I have formerly propounded to shew 1. That we have sufficient Reason to believe that the Books of the New-Testament were written by those Persons who are said to be the Authors thereof 2. That there is sufficient Reason to give full Credit to them in their Relation of those Matters of Fact which they have recorded And 3. That if the Matters of Fact therein recorded are true they are sufficient Proofs of the Truth and Divine Authority of all the Doctrines that are therein taught And the two first of these Points I have I hope already made good I proceed now to the third viz. 3. To shew That the Doctrine of the Gospel is well grounded upon the History of it That if the Matters of Fact recorded in the New-Testament are true they are sufficient Proofs of the Truth and Divine Authority of all the Doctrines that are therein taught And Here by the Doctrines of the Gospel I understand both the Articles of Faith which it proposes to our Belief and the Rules which it prescribes to our Practice Many of the former of which are themselves Parts of the Gospel History as the Incarnation Life Sufferings Death Resurrection and Ascension of our Saviour and the rest of both sorts are taught in the New Testament either by our Saviour himself or by his Apostles And I suppose it will be readily granted that all their Doctrines are true and also of divine Authority if it shall appear that they were commissioned and sent by God to instruct the World for he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God Joh. iii. 34. The single Point therefore to be consider'd at this time is whether there be sufficient Evidence from the Matters of Fact recorded in the History of the New Testament that our Saviour and his Apostles were commissioned and sent by God to instruct the World And first Whether there be sufficient Evidence from thence that our Saviour himself was a Teacher sent from God Now that he said he was sent from God is a Matter of Fact and a part of the Gospel History Joh. xii 49. See Joh. 5.37 38.8.38.14.10 24. I have not spoken of my self but the Father which sent me he gave me a Commandment what I should say and what I should speak And that he said that he was the Messiah which had been foretold by the Prophets is likewise Matter of Fact and a Part of the same History Joh. iv 25 26. The Woman of Samaria saith unto him I know that Messias cometh which is called Christ Mat. 16.16 17. Mar. 9.41 Luke 24.46 Joh. 9.47 when he is come he will tell us all things Jesus saith unto him I that speak unto thee am HE. The Question therefore is whether from the things which are recorded of him by the Evangelists there be sufficient Ground to believe the Truth of either or both these Pretences I say of either or both of them because either of them is a sufficient Reason to receive his Doctrine as True and Divine for which cause therefore I shall not in speaking to this Subject distinguish between the Evidences which the Gospel-History affords of his being a Prophet and those which it affords of his being the Messiah but shall propose them promiscuously as they come to mind And here I shall consider First The Credibility of our Saviour's own Testimony concerning himself and Secondly The Confirmation that was given to this Testimony by God grounding all that shall be said on both these Heads upon the Gospel-History the Truth of which I now take for granted as being I hope already sufficiently prov'd First then I shall consider the Credibility of our Saviour's own Testimony concerning himself when he said that he was sent by God and that he was the Christ the Son of God And I know 't is commonly said that a Man is not to be believed in his own Case And this very thing was objected to our Saviour by the Jews Joh. viii 13. Thou bearest Record of thy self thy Record is not true But this Saying is not without Exception When indeed what a Man witnesses is for his own Benefit his Testimony if it be single may reasonably be rejected especially if any Proof be made that at other times he hath told a Lye or done any other ill thing for his Advantage But otherwise a Man's Testimony concerning himself may be credible nay in some cases it may be more credible than another Man's because he may sometimes be surer of what he says concerning himself than another Man could be And therefore our Saviour who in Joh. v. 31. allows of the Reasonableness of that Saying If I bear witness of my self my Witness is not true yet when this very thing was afterwards objected to him by the Pharisees in the Place before-cited makes answer in the following words Tho' I bear Record of my self Joh. 8.14 yet my Record is true for I know whence I came c. And that the Testimony of our Lord concerning his own divine Mission was such as we might rationally give Credit to tho' we had no other Evidence of it will I suppose sufficiently appear if these following things be consider'd 1. That his whole Life according to the Account that is given of it by the Evangelists which we now build upon as true was in all Respects spotless and unblameable 1 Pet. 2.22 1 Pet. 1.19 He did no Sin neither was Guile found in his Mouth He was a Lamb without blemish and without spot
Mat. 26.31 He told the rest of the Disciples that they would all forsake him when they every one profess'd themselves resolv'd to suffer with him Joh. 3.14.8.28.12.32 rather than leave him He signified before by what Death he should die and who should be instrumental therein Mat. 16.21.26.32.28.16 He assured his Disciples that after three Days he would rise again and appointed them a Place in Galilee where they should all see him He Prophesied that notwithstanding the Contempt he was had in and the greater Contempt that his ignominious Death would bring upon him his Religion should by their means a Company of poor illiterate Fishermen be preached with good success in all Parts of the World Mat. 24.14.3.19 He foretold likewise the utter Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple Mat. 24. Mar. 13. Luk. 21. before that Generation passed away and the Dispersion of the Jews into all Nations And several other things which it would take up too much time now to mention he foretold should be just in that manner in which they afterwards came to pass Concerning which it may be noted that some of his Prophecies were fulfilled soon after they were spoken the punctual Accomplishment whereof was to those that both heard them spoken and saw them fulfilled an evident Proof of his Prophetical Spirit and a just Ground of expecting the Accomplishment of all his other Prophecies in their Season and that others were not to be fulfilled 'till a good while after the Accomplishment whereof at the time foretold and long after the Predictions thereof had been recorded by the Evangelists was a good Evidence to those that lived then and is also to us that live now and either read the Accomplishment thereof in History or see the same with our own Eyes that he was endued with a Divine Spirit and likewise takes away all reasonable Ground of a Suspicion which we might otherwise have had that in those Instances wherein both the Prophecy and the Accomplishment of it are related by the same Authors the Prophecies were forged after the Events were come to pass Now if this be true and it is certainly true if the Gospel-History be so that our Saviour did foretell many things which afterwards happened and those very casual and contingent things depending upon the free will of Men this was an evident token that he had a divine Spirit for none can certainly foretell such things but God only or those whom he enlightens with his Spirit And therefore the Prophet Isaiah made this Challenge to the Idols of the Heathens Isa 41.23 Shew the things that shall be hereafter that we may know that ye are Gods And if to this it should be objected that future Events have been sometimes foretold by such as have not been true Prophets of God nor enlightned by his Spirit as by Diviners Astrologers and South-Sayers and by the Oracles of the Heathens this may be granted without any weakning of the Argument I am now upon for the Proof of our Saviour's divine Mission For there may be some future Events upforeseen by us and yet depending so intirely upon the Course of Natural Causes that unless hindred by a Miracle they will as certainly come to pass as the Sun will rise tomorrow And these the Devil who understands much better than we do the Power and Course of Nature may foresee and consequently foretell and When such a thing is foretold we who understand very little of Nature may think it a Prophecy whereas in truth there is no more of a Prophetical Spirit in the Devil when he foretells such things than there is in a skilful Astronomer when he Calculates and foretells to a Minute for several Ages to come the Motions and Eclipses of the Sun Moon and Planets And even in future Contingencies 't is no wonder that the Events have sometimes verified the Predictions of the Devil and his Prophets for this also may well enough be accounted for without allowing that any Being hath a certain Foreknowledge of future Contingencies but God only if we do but suppose as we may very reasonably do that the Devil hath a perfecter Knowledge than we can have of the Counsels Intrigues and Interests of Men that he understands their Tempers and Inclinations that he hath lived a great while and made very exact observations that he hath had a long Experience of things and hath also a notable sagacity much beyond what is in any Man for so even a wise observing and experienc'd Man may without a Spirit of Prophecy see much further before him than Men commonly do and may foretell by a Guess that shall rarely fail a great many things which a less thinking and experienc'd Man would never have thought of And when the thing happens that was foretold it may be past the Skill of others to judge whether it was foretold by a Sagacious Guess or by a certain Foreknowledge of what would be And that the Predictions of Diviners and the Oracles of the Heathens concerning future Contingencies have been no more than only probable Conjectures unless when they have been borrowed from divine Prophecies as they may have often been is evident by their uncertain Accomplishment Some things indeed have happened as they have been foretold but others have not so happened and because the Devil could not always certainly tell what the Events of those things would be which he was Consulted with about he commonly gave out his Oracles in ambiguous Expressions that so whatever happen'd he might be thought to have foretold it And when the Predictions of any Person pretending to Prophecy have fail'd in some Instances tho' in others they have been accomplish'd this is a certain Argument that he did not Prophesie by a divine Spirit according to what is said Deut. xviii 21 22. If thou say in thine heart How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken When a Prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord if the thing follow not nor come to pass that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken but the Propheth hath spoken it presumptuously In which words it seems to be implied tho' it be not expresly said that if the thing foretold did come to pass and especially that if of many things which the Prophet had foretold and which could not be fore-known by the greatest Skill in Natural Causes such as are the Actions of a free Agent not one thing fail'd but his words were made good by the Event in every particular they might then depend upon it that he was a true Prophet except only in one Case mentioned in Deut. 13. Deut. 13.1 2 3. viz. When he made use of that Credit which the Accomplishment of his Predictions had gain'd him to draw Men from the Worship of the true and only God to the Worship of Idols And accordingly 't is observ'd in 1 Sam. iii. 19 20. that because the Lord did let none of Samuel's
Power of working Miracles should cease too at least till such time as God should think fit to make some Alteration in or Addition to his former Revelations which we have good Reason to think he will never do or 'till he should please to undertake the Conversion of those Nations to the Christian Faith to whom the Knowledge of the former Miracles that had been wrought for its Confirmation could not be so well communicated by credible History as it is to us For as was hinted before Credible History is all the Proof and Evidence that we ever think reasonable to require in other Cases of the like Nature As for instance When a new Law is made concerning any Matter it is requisite according to the Custom of our Country that it should pass both Houses of Parliament and that the King should ratifie and confirm it and that afterwards it should be some way so published and promulged that all the Subjects that are then alive should have sufficient Assurance given them that such a Law is made But after this Law has been once so passed and ratified and promulged it is passed and ratified and promulged for ever and no Man is so unreasonable as to expect that every Parliament that is called afterwards should read and pass over again all the Laws that have been made before their Time or that every King that succeeds to the Throne should afresh ratifie and publish all the Laws that were made by all his Predecessors But all the Proof that we ever require of the Authority of any ancient Law is a true Copy of it and a good History or Record of its being made at such a time by such a King confirmed by the Tradition of all the intermediate Ages to our Time which have allowed of its Authority by citing it as a Law of the Land by Pleading from it and by giving Judgment according to it And he who will not allow of the same Proof and Evidence of the Authority of the Christian Institution so many hundred years ago established but would needs have new Miracles and new Revelations to confirm the former is every whit as unreasonable as that Criminal would be who being Indicted upon some Ancient Statute should refuse to plead to his Indictment upon Pretence that he knew not whether there was any such Law or not it being made if ever it was made long before his Time and there being none now alive that were present at the making of it Shew him the Law in the Statute Book why how does he know he 'd say but that the Printers had a mind to put a Cheat upon the Nation by Printing a Law of their own making as a Law made by some of our ancient Kings nay shew him the Original Record still he 'd say There have been abundance of Forgeries in the World and how does he know but that this is one The Record he 'd own perhaps looks like an Ancient Deed and has all the Marks of such Antiquity as it pretends to but after all 't is possible it may be and therefore he cannot be sure it is not a Forgery and 'till he is assured of this he will not plead to an Indictment that is grounded upon it But if the King and Parliament that now are will be pleased to declare that this is a good Law and if he himself may be allowed to be by when they shall declare it or if at least two or three Witnesses that he can trust shall testifie upon Oath that they were present when it was passed into a Law then he will allow it to be a good Law and after that will be content to suffer the Punishment of it if he shall ever again be a Transgressor Now what Man is there that would think this a reasonable Demand Or what Judge or Court would ever allow of such a Plea And yet as unreasonable as it is it is just the same with theirs who pretending to be more wise and cautious than their Neighbours will not allow of the same sort of Proof tho' indeed much better in its kind of the Truth of the Christian Religion but tho' we have as Authentick Histories as any are in the World such Histories as the greatest Adversaries of Christianity have not been able to say any thing to invalidate the Truth of which declare that Christ and his Apostles taught such and such Doctrines and wrought such and such Miracles to confirm the Truth of their Doctrine yet will not believe that the Doctrine of Christianity is true and Divine unless they may have special Messengers sent to them to declare a-fresh all the same things which the Apostles once did and those endued with a Power of working in their sight and presence the same Miracles over again that are said to have been formerly done by Christ and his Apostles to confirm the Testimony that they gave 2. The Unreasonableness of that Request which the Rich Man here makes in the Behalf of his Brethren viz. That God would make a new Revelation for their particular Conversion or in general The Unreasonableness of our now desiring fresh Revelations new Miracles or Apparitions of Men from the dead to confirm the Truth of those things which are already sufficiently proved to us by the Standing Revelation of the Gospel will further appear if we consider That to us who live now in Christian Countries other Grounds of Faith or stronger Motives to Repentance than we have already in the standing Revelation of the Gospel might be inconsistent with the Excellency of Faith might destroy the Virtue of Believing and might be too great a Force and Constraint upon us such as would in a manner take away our Liberty of Choice For there is no Virtue at all in Believing what we see there is no Praise or Thanks at all due for doing what we are driven or forced to do and for us who have already abundantly sufficient Grounds to believe and embrace Christianity to have fresh Miracles wrought every day before our own eyes such Miracles as we could not possibly doubt the Truth of to confirm those Doctrines which are already sufficiently confirmed would not be to persuade us but to force us to be Chistians so that then the State we are now in would not be as God designed it should be a State of Trial for the Trial of Wisdom is when there are some Reasons on both sides and he is the Wise Man who in that Case gives Judgment on that side on which the Reasons are strongest But against what I have now said perhaps it may be objected That the Evidence which we desire of the Truth of Religion is no more than we are told has been already given to some Men particularly to those who lived in our Saviour's and his Apostle's times and we can't see why it would be more inconsistent with the Nature of Faith and Religion now than it was then or how it would more destroy our Freedom