diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 8225-8.txt | 10605 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 8225-8.zip | bin | 0 -> 218141 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 |
5 files changed, 10621 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/8225-8.txt b/8225-8.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f2a9989 --- /dev/null +++ b/8225-8.txt @@ -0,0 +1,10605 @@ +The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Series of Letters In Defence of Divine +Revelation, by Hosea Ballou + +Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the +copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing +this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook. + +This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project +Gutenberg file. Please do not remove it. Do not change or edit the +header without written permission. + +Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the +eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file. Included is +important information about your specific rights and restrictions in +how the file may be used. You can also find out about how to make a +donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved. + + +**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** + +**eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** + +*****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!***** + + +Title: A Series of Letters In Defence of Divine Revelation + +Author: Hosea Ballou + +Release Date: June, 2005 [EBook #8225] +[Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule] +[This file was first posted on July 3, 2003] + +Edition: 10 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-Latin-1 + +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A SERIES OF LETTERS IN *** + + + + +Produced by David Starner, David King and the Online Distributed +Proofreading Team from a book given for scanning by +Rev. Felicia Urbanski. + + + +A +SERIES OF LETTERS, +IN DEFENCE OF +DIVINE REVELATION; +IN REPLY TO +REV. ABNER KNEELAND'S SERIOUS INQUIRY INTO THE AUTHENTICITY +OF THE SAME. + + * * * * * + +BY HOSEA BALLOU, +Pastor of the Second Universalist Society in Boston. + + * * * * * + +TO WHICH IS ADDED, +A RELIGIOUS CORRESPONDENCE, +BETWEEN +THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU, AND THE REV. DR. JOSEPH BUCKMINSTER +AND REV. JOSEPH WALTON, PASTORS OF CONGREGATIONAL +CHURCHES IN PORTSMOUTH, N. H. + +_District of Massachusetts, to wit: +District Clerk's Office_. + +Be it remembered, that on the twenty-fifth day of July, A. D. 1820, in +the forty-fifth year of the Independence of the United States of +America, HENRY BOWEN, of the said district, has deposited in this +office, the title of a book, the right whereof he claims as Proprietor +in the words following, to wit: + +"A Series of Letters, in defence of Divine Revelation; in reply to +Rev. Abner Kneeland's Serious Inquiry into the authenticity of the +same. By HOSEA BALLOU, Pastor of the Second Universalist Society in +Boston. To which is added, a Religious Correspondence, between the +Rev. Hosea Ballou, and the Rev. Dr. Joseph Buckminster, and Rev. +Joseph Walton, Pastors of Congregational Churches in Portsmouth, N. +H." + +In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United States, +entitled, "An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by securing the +Copies of Maps, Charts and Books, to the Authors and Proprietors of +such Copies, during the times therein mentioned:" and also to an Act +entitled, "An Act supplementary to an Act, entitled, an Act for the +Encouragement of Learning, by securing the Copies of Maps, Charts and +Books, to the Authors and Proprietors of such Copies during the times +therein mentioned; and extending the benefits thereof to the Arts of +Designing, Engraving, and Etching Historical, and other Prints." + +JOHN W. DAVIS, _Clerk of the District of Massachusetts_ + +TO THE READER. + +Some few suggestions respecting the following Controversy are thought +necessary in order to inform the reader how it was first introduced, +the motives which led to it, and those which induced to its being +published to the world. + +We learn from the Rev. Mr. KNEELAND, that having at different times +been exercised in his mind with serious doubts respecting the +authenticity of the Scriptures, and the system of Divine Revelation, +recorded in them, he was induced to solicit a correspondence with the +Rev. Mr. BALLOU on the subject. That, in order to render the +controversy the more interesting, by calling into action the energies +of mind, and by directing the correspondence to definite purposes, he +assumed the character of a real opponent, determining to maintain the +opposition, in all its forms, until reduced, by necessity, to yield to +successful arguments directed against it. It was with great reluctance +that the advocate for the christian religion, in this controversy, +consented to undertake a work of this nature; not, however, because he +esteemed it unnecessary, or because he entertained any doubts with +regard to the defensibility of revelation, but, as he contends, on +account of the want of abilities and means to do the subject justice. +His opponent, however, being a familiar acquaintance and friend, as +well as a preacher in the same profession of faith with himself, +having led him to believe that a labour of this kind was called for by +the most sacred obligations of brother to brother, he was induced to +render what assistance was in his power, without infringing too much +on other important duties in which he was almost constantly engaged. + +When the controversy closed, Mr. KNEELAND felt such an entire +satisfaction in his own mind, that the objections which he had stated +were fairly answered, and the validity of the Scriptures vindicated, +that he was led to believe that to publish the correspondence would be +of service to the cause of Christ. He therefore obtained leave of his +correspondent, and carried the manuscripts to the westward, where he +offered proposals for the work, and obtained a number of subscribers; +but being called to remove to Philadelphia, he was under the necessity +of postponing the publication for a season. The publisher having +obtained some knowledge of this correspondence, and being informed by +the Rev. Mr. KNEELAND that the arguments which it contains were, in +his opinion, calculated to strengthen the believer, as well as confirm +the doubting, he negotiated for the manuscripts and now presents the +work to the public, entertaining a hope that it may serve the interest +of christianity, and promote a respect and veneration for the sacred +writings. + +The letters which passed between Mr. BALLOU and two respectable +clergymen in the town of Portsmouth, N. H. were some years since +published in Vermont; but several circumstances rendered it proper +that this work should be reprinted. Besides its being nearly or quite +out of print, the first edition was on an inferior paper, the work +badly executed, and a number of errors were discovered. + +To those who believe in the universality of divine goodness, the +publisher feels confident the following work will be received and read +with no small satisfaction. And a hope is entertained that it may be +the means of enlightening some, who though they possess the spirit of +universal love and benevolence, have not the felicity of believing in +the divine goodness to the extent of their own desires. + +H. BOWEN. + +A SERIES OF LETTERS, &c. + +EXTRACTS No. 1. + +[The first letter of the _objector_ was designed merely as an +Introduction, inviting Mr. B. to the investigation of the important +subject of _moral truth_, or more particularly the truth of _divine +revelation_. The following are extracts.] + +"The thought has long since occurred to me that the present age is an +age of discovery and improvement. The human mind seems to be +developing its powers in a most wonderful manner; new inventions, new +discoveries, and new theories are the fruits of new experiments; while +many are improving upon theories and subjects already existing. Thus +human nature seems to be almost prepared to make a regular advance in +_moral_ as well as _scientific truth_. + +"However pleasing this must be to every real lover to the arts and +sciences, yet there seems to be a disposition (at least, as it +respects all moral and religious subjects) to chain down the human +mind to its present attainments, and thereby prevent all further +improvement. O how long will it be before common sense shall burst +this bubble of fanaticism, and all its mists become evaporated and +removed by the rays of simple and native truth? Then shall man know +for himself that, under God, all his powers and faculties are as free +as the element he breathes. Free to think, free to speak, and free to +act as reason and good sense shall dictate. Supposing that you and I +should think of setting an example for others, by trying to throw off +the prejudices of a false education, so far as we have been thus +entangled, and search for the _truth within us_, as the foundation of +all TRUTH which materially concerns us to know. Who, except our own +consciences, will ever call us to an account for so doing? + +"It gives me pain when I see what time and money, what labour and toil +have been expended, and are still expending, in plodding over, as it +were an old dead letter; to learn languages which exist _no where_ +only on paper, barely for the sake of reading the opinions of other +men, in other times; men who lived in other ages of the world, and +under very different circumstances from ourselves; whose opinions, all +of which are worth preserving, might be given in our own language, so +as to answer every purpose which can be answered by them, at less than +a hundredth part of the expense it necessarily requires to obtain a +competent knowledge of those languages in which almost every thing, +supposed to be valuable, has been originally written. And after all, +the truth, or falsity, of every proposition must depend on the truth +or falsity of the principles embraced in it; and not on the language +in which it was originally written. + +"If the Greek and Hebrew languages be any security against things +being uttered or written falsely in those languages, I should not only +think it important to learn them, but to adopt them, if possible, as +our vernacular tongue.--But as I believe none will contend for this, I +should like to be informed of what possible service it can be to an +American to learn either of those languages? Is it not a fact, that +every natural as well as moral truth may be fully unfolded to the +understanding without them? This will lead the way to one of the +principal subjects which I mean to discuss. It maybe said, that the +_holy scriptures_ were originally written in Greek and Hebrew: viz. +the bible, which contains a revelation of the will of God concerning +the duty, interest, and final destination of mankind. This, if +admitted, gives the Greek and Hebrew languages an importance that +nothing else could. Hence the importance of preserving the Greek and +Hebrew languages, without which, religion could not be preserved in +its purity. And as all have not an opportunity of attaining to a +knowledge of those languages, it is the more necessary that some +should, lest the knowledge of languages, on which so much is supposed +to depend, should be lost to the world. + +"If I understand the above proposition, it seems to be this: The only +revelation of God to man, which was ever recorded on either vellum or +paper, was written partly in Greek and partly in Hebrew; hence, the +revealed will of God cannot be known only through the medium of those +languages. If the truth of all this can be made to appear, I should +find no difficulty in admitting all the consequences which must result +from such premises. It appears a little extraordinary, however, to my +understanding, and not a very little neither, that God should make a +revelation of his will in one age, and not in another; to one nation; +and not to another; or that he should make a revelation in one +_language_, and not in another! If a special revelation, was ever +necessary at all, it is difficult for me to see why it was not equally +necessary in all ages of the world, to all the nations of the earth, +and in all languages ever spoken by man. + +"How sweet is truth to the understanding! And, when spoken in a +language every word of which is familiar, how harmonious it sounds to +the ear by which the sentiments find their way to the heart! + +"When God speaks to the _inward man_ there is no need of going to +Lexicons, Dictionaries, and Commentaries to know what he means. I +would not complain, however, even of this method to ascertain truth, +if I could be so happy as always to come away satisfied. But to +consider a subject on which much is supposed to depend, and, desiring +if possible to obtain the truth, plod through the dark mists +occasioned by the ambiguity and contradiction of authors, and after +all, be obliged to dismiss the subject as much in the dark as it was +found, is too insupportable to be confided in as the only road to +moral truth. + +"Let it not be supposed however, that I mean to insinuate that the +bible contains no moral truth; so far from this, I conceive it to be +replete with moral instruction; that is to say, there are excellent +moral maxims in the bible; but respecting these there is neither +ambiguity nor obscurity; and probably for this plain reason, because +there seems to be no dispute about them. These however are none the +more true for being written, and would have been equally true if found +in any other book, and at the same time not found in the bible. Truth +is truth wherever found, and all moral truth, as well as natural, must +be eternal in its nature. + +"Much of the bible however, is merely historical; and whether most of +the things there related are either true or not, I do not see any +connexion they either have, or can have, with either my present or +future happiness. As for instance, I do not see how my happiness is at +all connected with the story of Daniel's being cast into the den of +lions--or of Jonah's being swallowed by a fish! any more than it is +with the story of Remus and Romulus' being nursed by a she wolf! And +if not, these things are matters of total indifference; yea, as much +so as the extraordinary, and, were it not for comparing things +supposed to be sacred with profane, I would say, ridiculous stories in +the heathen mythology. If it should be contended that the facts +recorded in sacred history are necessary to prove the power and +providence of God towards his children, it may be answered that those +in profane history, if true, are equally conclusive. If it should be +said that we cannot place the same confidence in profane history as in +sacred, it brings me to the very subject of my inquiry--viz. + +"If the things stated in the bible are no more reasonable than those +in profane history, what reason have we to believe _these_ any more +than _those_? Must not our own reason finally determine for ourselves +whether or not either be true? And if we are in no sense interested in +the truth or falsity of those accounts why need we trouble ourselves +about them? + +"Yours, &c, A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER I. + +_Much esteemed friend_,--The desire you express of attempting those +researches which seem necessary to promote the further attainment of +moral truth, is appreciated as truly laudable; and did I feel myself +adequate to your wishes, I should enjoy a peculiar felicity in +complying with your request. But so far from this I am very sensible +that the magnitude of the general subject which you have introduced, +requires to be investigated by abilities far superior to those +possessed by me, and demands a tribute from resources not within my +possession. However, as you have imposed an obligation on me by the +communication which is here acknowledged, I will make a feeble attempt +to suggest a few reflections relative to the main subjects of your +epistle, which if they do nothing more, will return merited +acknowledgements and plead the necessity of calling to your assistance +abilities more promising. + +While I view the advances which are making in the knowledge of the +arts and sciences, with the pleasure of which you speak, I am +apprehensive that the propensity "to chain down the human mind to its +present attainments, and thereby prevent all further improvements," +relative to moral truth, may have its rise in a principle, which, so +far from being inimical to man, is, in its general tendency, +incalculably beneficial. No desire is entertained to justify all the +zeal and all the means which are employed to prevent the free exercise +of the human mind, in its researches after divine knowledge, and to +retard the influx of that light which would prove unfavourable to +doctrines which have little more than prescription for their support; +but it seems reasonable to make a proper distinction between what may +be called a salutary principle in the human mind, and a wrong +application or an erroneous indulgence of it. The principle referred +to, inclines us not only to hold in the highest veneration any +improvements which we have made, but also to retain such acquisitions +in their purity. Now it is believed that what you complain of, has its +rise from the foregoing causes, and is nothing more than a wrong or an +erroneous indulgence of a natural desire which in its general tendency +is advantageous. Nothing is more incident to man, than to misapply his +desires, and to overate his reasonable duty. But it is at the same +time believed that a remedy of such defects which should consist in +the destruction of those principles which are improperly acted on, +would be worse than the disorder. And now the thought strikes me, that +the way by which we account for the improprieties which have just been +traced up to their causes, will as charitably account for what seems +to incite you to aim a fatal stroke at a fabric which has its +foundation in the immovable principles of our moral nature, and which, +though through the wanderings of the human mind, may have not a little +hay, wood and stubble, yet possess too much gold, silver and precious +stones, to be forsaken as a pile of rubbish. + +It gives you "pain to see what time and money, what labour and toil +have been expended and are still expending in plodding over as it were +an old dead letter; to learn languages which exist _no where_ only on +paper, barely for the sake of reading the opinions of other men who +lived in other times," &c. But you allow that all this would be +necessary if "the only revelation of God to man, which was ever +recorded on vellum or paper was written partly in Greek and partly in +Hebrew," and that "the will of God cannot be known only through the +medium of those languages." In this last particular, you express what +appears very reasonable, and I presume you would be willing to consent +to all this expense and toil, even if the proposition were to lose +part of its importance, and it were only contended that God had +actually made a revelation to man, which was written originally partly +in Greek and partly in the Hebrew, without saying that he has never +caused a revelation to be written originally in any other language. + +A revelation from God, if it were written only in the Hebrew or Greek, +would be considered of sufficient value to recompence the labour of +learning the language. But you contend that this revelation, if real, +can be translated into English, but, you must allow that to translate +it, the original must be learned first. Will you say, that after the +translation is once made, the original is of no more use? How then are +future ages to determine whether they have not been imposed on? +Suppose no person of the present age understood the languages in which +the scriptures were first written, surely in this case, those +languages would be lost beyond recovery. Suppose then it should be +doubted whether our bible was not a fabrication, written originally +not in Hebrew nor in Greek, but in some more modern language, how +could the suggestion be refuted? + +You appear to be perplexed with the disagreement of authors, as +commentators, and I presume, critics on the original text; you speak +on this subject, as if it were too much for patience to endure. Now, +dear brother, I confess I feel very differently on this subject. I +feel a devout, a religious gratitude to him whose wisdom is +foolishness in the sight of too many of my fellow creatures. I view +the very thing of which you complain, as that fire and crucible which +have preserved the written testimony from any considerable +corruptions. This is a subject on which volumes might be written to +the instruction and edification of the disciples of Jesus. + +The queries which you state concerning a revelation's being made in +one age and not in another, in one nation and not in another, in one +language, and not in another, if a special revelation were necessary, +&c. are not considered as very weighty objections to the doctrine of +the scriptures. I believe you will allow that our species of being +commenced on this earth in a different way than that by which it has +been continued. But why should the Creator, create a man and a woman +at one time, and not at all times when he sees fit to multiply his +rational creatures? It is not only evident that God saw that the laws +of procreation were sufficient to perpetuate man, and to multiply his +rational offspring, but it is likewise apparent that the connexions, +relations, and harmonies of society are principally built on this law. +So I humbly conceive, that the continuance and propagation of a divine +revelation are even as well secured by the means which have been +employed for that purpose, as if the Almighty had in every age, and in +every country made such a revelation, and moreover, it is likewise +apparent, that the mental labours necessary in obtaining a knowledge +of these divine things greatly contribute to their enjoyment, and +render the christian fellowship, faith and hope peculiarly interesting +and edifying. Here again I can only suggest a subject on which +voluminous writings might be profitable. + +You seem to entertain an idea that the historical part of the bible +can be of no importance to you, as it has no connexion with your +present or future happiness. You instance the particulars of Daniel's +being cast into the den of lions, and Jonah's being swallowed by the +fish, &c. As these are circumstances in the history of that nation +which continues a comment on, and an evidence of prophesy, they are +too interesting to be dispensed with. If you could produce the decree +of a powerful monarch, sent into all parts of his dominions, which was +occasioned by "Remus and Romulus' being nursed by a she wolf," the +case would bear some marks of a parallel. Profane authors advert to +such events as sufficient support of any fact which they endeavor to +maintain. + +I come now to your main object. Speaking in regard to the credibility +of what is written by profane authors, and of that which is recorded +in the scriptures, you ask--"Must not our own reason finally determine +for ourselves whether or not either be true?" To this I reply in the +affirmative; but then reason must have its means and its evidences. +For instance, I read of the death and resurrection of the man Christ +Jesus, I consider this vastly important event as it stands in +connexion with the evidences which support it, and reason is the _eye_ +with which I examine these evidences, and when reason is constrained +to say all these circumstances could never have existed unless the +fact were true, it is then I am a believer in Jesus. But if I must +consider the resurrection disconnected from the evidence, reason has +nothing to do with it. Please to accept these hasty remarks, not as an +answer, but as suggestions which may lead to one, and as a testimony +of my respect and esteem. + +Yours, &c. H. BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. II. + +"A revelation from God, let it be made in any language whatever, I am +very ready to admit, must be considered of sufficient importance, not +only to justify all reasonable pains to preserve it, but also to hand +it down in its original purity to posterity. We owe it, not only in +gratitude to the _giver_, but we owe it in justice to _future +generations_, who would have just occasion to reproach us, if they +could know that so valuable a treasure was put into our hands, which +might have been handed down to them, and that we suffered it to perish +through what must be termed by them, a _criminal neglect_. + +"You will perceive, therefore, that I had no particular allusion to a +revelation from God, when I spoke of translating the most valuable of +ancient writings into English. No one will pretend that such +translations could not be made sufficiently accurate to answer all the +purposes, either of history or of the useful arts. It is admitted that +the case is quite different, if there be a mystery in these writings, +the truth of which depends on literary criticism, or grammatical +exactness; but if these writings are nothing more than the bare +opinions and discoveries of _men_, and of men too, as liable to error +as ourselves, and if no one was to view them in a different light, I +apprehend there would be all the confidence placed in a translation, +that could with propriety be placed in the original itself. For, after +all, we should try the facts by other corroborating testimony; and as +to the opinions, we should judge of them only by the reasonableness +and fitness of things. Although I have heard it objected to the +translation of _Seneca's Morals_, that much of the beauty of the style +is lost in the translation, yet I never heard it pretended but that +the ideas are sufficiently clear; but the case would have been quite +different if mankind had ever been taught to believe that their final +and eternal salvation depended in the least degree on an exact +observance of those moral principles. And I very much question whether +there ever has been a translation of the bible, or even of any other +work, in which the most important facts were not sufficiently +apparent. If the fact can be supposed otherwise, it must be admitted +that, comparatively speaking, but very few people at the present day +are benefited by a revelation from God. For the great mass of mankind +have to receive the bible altogether on the credit of others. And who +are their guides in this case? Answer, Translators and Commentators! +And as these men made no pretentions to inspiration, unless the +translation is _substantially_ correct, as to matters of fact, how are +the common people benefited by a revelation from God!" + +[Having adverted to the previous studies in the dead languages, which +are required before an admittance can be obtained in our common +colleges, the objector proceeds.] + +"But I am off from my main subject. I will now endeavour to call up +all my mental faculties, seriously to attend to a revelation from God. +The idea suggested in these words is beyond all expression awfully +sublime. Yea, not even the bursting of _Vesuvius_, not the +_aurora-borealis_, not the forked _lightning_, not the tremendous +_earthquake_, no, nor yet the greatest _phenomenon in nature_, of +which the human mind can conceive, can afford such ideas of the truly +sublime, as the _truth_, if it could be realized, of the above +proposition. Let me not hastily reject without serious reflection, +that, which of all truths, must be the most important. O help me, my +dear friend, help me also, O thou who art the only source of truth, +thoroughly to investigate this momentous subject! But let me not be +deceived. Let me not receive for truth, that which cannot be made +sufficiently clear to my understanding. There can be no more harm in +_doubting_, than in _believing_, where the evidence is not clear. All +that which appertains to eternal truth will remain, whether I now see +it or not; and that which does not appertain to it will never be +realized, although I may now be made to believe it. There can be no +harm, therefore, in investigating this subject in the same way and on +the same principles, as I would investigate all subjects. Although I +cannot expect to offer any thing very new, yet I am disposed to +examine the subject for myself, and that too, in my own way. I shall +quote no authors, for I have not read but few on this subject which +meet my approbation, and even them are not now by me. My own +understanding is the only author to which I shall appeal. If that can +be cleared of the difficulties which have fallen in its way, I am +willing, yea I wish, still to believe in divine revelation. + +"Here let me close my preamble, which is already made too lengthy, and +come immediately to discourse 'ON DIVINE REVELATION.' + +"In order to know the truth or falsity of any proposition, we must in +the first place understand the terms by which the proposition is made; +for without such previous knowledge, we cannot know what is meant +either to be affirmed or denied. By _divine revelation_, I understand +'a communication of sacred truth,' made directly from God to man. In +order for any man to know that a revelation has been made to him from +God, it must be made in such a way, that neither his perception, nor +his judgment or understanding, can possibly be mistaken. For, as man +by his reason alone, never could have foreseen that a revelation would +be made, therefore, unless it should have been made in such a way that +he could not have been deceived, a rational man would be more likely +to conclude that he was deceived, than that, which to him would seem +more unlikely, should be true. It seems, therefore, that a revelation +from God to all our conceptions of the fact, must be considered, if +existing at all, as something supernatural; otherwise it could be +nothing more than discovery, or a fortuitous event. Hence a revelation +from God, however true, and however clear, to the person or persons to +whom it was first communicated, must lose its evidence, in some +degree, when it comes to be communicated by him or them to others; +for, being communicated to others, although it is still revelation, +yet not being received immediately from God, it cannot be accompanied +with the same evidence which it was in the first place; therefore, to +say the most of it, it is nothing more than the _history_ of a +revelation. It is made no less true than it was before; but its truth +now rests upon very different testimony. + +"The principles in nature all existed, before they were discovered by +man. Their being discovered, neither changed their nature, nor made +them any more true. What consternation a total eclipse of the sun, or +of the moon must have produced, before their cause was known? They are +now viewed, especially that of the latter, among the common +occurrences of nature. Yea, many of the operations of nature, which +are now perfectly understood by chemists, could they be viewed by the +common people, who know not their causes, they would be inclined to +believe they were supernatural. At least, it would not be difficult to +make them believe so, especially when this knowledge was confined to a +few, and those few were so disposed. These remarks are not designed to +do away the force of any arguments which may be founded on miracles; +for this is no proof that miracles may not exist; but then, how is a +miracle a revelation of any thing more than what is contained in the +miracle itself? This is what I cannot see, but I shall have occasion +to say more on this subject hereafter. It will be needless for me to +object to the inferences drawn from miracles until a miracle is +proven. + +"If a man absolutely knows something of which I am ignorant, and +informs me of it, it makes no difference to me how he come by his +knowledge--it is revelation to me. It may not be divine revelation; +but supposing it is, or is not, in either case, how am I to believe? +Is it any thing that will admit of mathematical demonstration? If so, +I shall take up with nothing short of being convinced in this way. Is +it any thing which he has discovered? If so, he must give me evidence +of such a discovery. Is it something to which he was an eye witness? +Then the truth to me, depends for the present, entirely on his +credibility. I must be convinced in the first place that he was not +deceived himself, and secondly, that he has no motive in deceiving me. +And evidence equally conclusive must accompany the truth of divine +revelation, or it ought not, nay more, it cannot, rationally be +believed. But supposing that I am convinced of the truth, and +therefore believe; and I relate the same to a third person; is it +equally revelation to him as it was to me? Yes, it may be so +considered, in one sense, at least, for it informs him of something of +which he was before ignorant, as much so as it did me, but then the +truth of the fact does not rest with him on equal testimony, and +therefore he is more excusable if he does not believe. If, however, he +can believe all that I believe, and in addition to that, believe also +in _me_, then, and not till then, he will become a believer in the +same truth. But if he even suspects my veracity, it weakens in his +mind, all the other testimony; and though he may still believe in the +main proposition, yet he believes with less strength of evidence. + +"Here a very important question arises in my mind. Is divine +revelation something that rests entirely on matters of _fact_; or is +the most essential part, which concerns us to know, a mere matter of +_opinion_? On a few moments of reflection, however, it appears that +this can hardly admit of a question. For all that relates to a future, +and an eternal state, must be a mere matter of opinion only; and the +facts recorded in the scriptures are supposed to corroborate and +substantiate those opinions. Now, as they respect matters of fact, I +believe the scriptures are substantially the same in all versions, and +in all languages into which they have been translated. And if so, +there is no need of learning the original languages in order to become +acquainted with the matters of fact recorded in the bible. We never +should have seen, nor even heard, of so much controversy and biblical +criticism, if the disputes had been wholly relative to matters of +fact. No, all the various readings, different translations, and +interpolations, have little or nothing to do with a dispute of this +kind. But if the facts can he disputed, they must be disputed upon +other grounds than that of biblical criticism. + +"Take, for instance, the 'death and resurrection of the man Christ +Jesus,' which you have mentioned; can any one suppose that there ever +was, or ever will be, a translation which makes any thing more or less +in favour of this fact? This is not pretended. And if not, how does a +knowledge of the Greek language help me to believe this fact? + +"This brings me again to my main subject; and now two very important +questions arise in my mind. + +"1. In relation to the facts, as stated, respecting the life, death, +and resurrection of the 'man Christ Jesus;' are they positively and +absolutely true? + +"2. Admitting the truth of the facts, does it necessarily follow, or +is there any thing which renders it certain, that, in regard to other +things, neither he, nor the apostles, so called, could be mistaken? +And that, in all their writings, they have stated nothing which is +incorrect? That is, what certain evidence have we that the writers of +the books, which being compiled, are called the New Testament, were +all honest men? That they could not have been mistaken relative to the +things which they have written? And that in every instance, they have +written the truth? + +"Respecting the first proposition, I have already observed that the +truth of it does not, neither can it, depend on biblical criticism. +They are either facts, which are substantially correct, or they are +fabrications. The circumstantial differences between the original +copies themselves, as recorded by the four Evangelists, are much +greater than what can be found in all the different versions, +translations, &c. that have been collated. Hence no argument can be +brought against the truth of those facts from either a real or +supposed difference between the translation, and their respective +originals. For even if not only the original copies, but the language +also in which they were originally written, should be entirely lost, +it would not militate, as I can see, against the truth of the facts +therein recorded. + +"The translation acknowledges and affirms itself to be a _translation_ +out of the 'original Greek,' together with former translations +compared, &c. Now permit me to ask, is not this as good evidence of +the existence of the _original Greek_, as the original Greek is of the +_facts_ intended to be proved thereby? I should consider the +translation of any work, which was generally known at the time of its +translation, better evidence of the existence of such a work, though +the original should be entirely lost, than the work itself, even in +the original, could be of the existence of facts, which, if they +existed at all, were known at first to but very few. + +"You have suggested, sir, that if the original of the scriptures were +entirely lost, future ages would not know but they had been 'imposed +upon.' I think, however, you will not insist on this point, lest you +should destroy an argument, which, hereafter, you may very much need. +I recall my words. For this seems to imply that we are already engaged +in a controversy; whereas, I trust we are both candidly in search of +truth. I suspect, however, there is too much truth in your suggestion; +but then its truth, instead of relieving, only increases my +difficulty. + +"Every one must know that when the translation of the scriptures was +first made, the original not only existed, but it must have been known +to others, beside the translators, who were able to detect the +_fraud_, if there had been any, as to substantial matter of fact. And, +in a work of so great importance, this certainly would have been the +case. Hence you will at once perceive, that when the copies were few +in number, and before the art of printing was discovered, fabrications +and interpolations might find their way into the original scriptures +with much greater facility, than could any considerable variations by +an intentionally erroneous translation; especially after the work +become generally known, and so highly valued, as to require a +translation of it. + +"As you admit that 'reason is the _eye_ by which we are to examine the +evidences' which stand in support of the 'resurrection of the man +Christ Jesus,' and of course, as I presume, by which we are to examine +the evidences in support of all other subjects, I shall say no more +upon this part of the subject until I hear your reasons for believing +in the resurrection of Jesus; for this fact, as I conceive, must be +considered the main hinge on which the whole Christian system rests, +if it can be supported by any fact, on which it will finally turn. + +2. "But after all, my greatest difficulty is with my second +proposition. To relate facts substantially correct, which persons have +either seen or heard, requires no degree of uncommon skill, or +uncommon honesty; but to state things which will absolutely take +place, which are yet future, requires something more than common +skill; and to state things correctly, which will take place in +eternity, must, as I conceive, require nothing short of _divine +wisdom_. That the evangelists have stated nothing more than what is +_substantially_ correct, as it respects matters of fact, will be +admitted by all: for every one knows there is a _circumstantial_ +difference in their writings, both as it respects the order of time, +and in several instances, as it respects matters of fact. + +"If the account given us of Jesus be even substantially correct, I +think there can be no reasonable doubt but that he was capable of +telling his disciples every thing which it concerns us to know +relative to a future state of existence.--But I have been often struck +with astonishment, when reflecting on the subject, that Jesus said so +little in regard to a future state! Notwithstanding he was long with +his disciples, as we are told after his resurrection, and did eat and +drink with them; yet, how silent he was upon the subject of eternity, +and of a future and spiritual world! At the only time when we should +rationally suppose that he could be a competent witness in the case, +admitting his death and resurrection true, is the time when he is +entirely silent as to the final and eternal state of man! Should we +admit therefore that Jesus at this time was capable of declaring +eternal truths, yet, as he testified nothing on the subject, nothing +relative to the subject can be proved from his testimony. + +"It may be said that Christ had plainly taught his disciples +respecting this subject, previous to his death, and therefore it was +not necessary for him to say any thing more respecting it. But a +confirmation of what he had before taught, if it had been repeated +after his resurrection, would have added great weight to his former +testimony. We need not dwell however, upon these niceties, as the main +question is not involved in them. Yet I am inclined to think that if +all the words of Christ, which have been handed down to us, should be +closely examined, they would be found to be much more silent on the +subject of a future state than many have supposed. But the main +question is, are we certain that he could not have been mistaken in +the things whereof he affirmed? This question may be thought +_blasphemous_: but I cannot see wherein the blasphemy consists; for I +cannot help making the inquiry, in my own understanding, and as my +object is to gain instruction, I put the inquiry on paper. You may say +that Jesus was endowed with _divine wisdom_, and therefore could not +err. That divine wisdom cannot err, I admit, but does divine wisdom +secure man at all times, and under all circumstances, from mistake? If +the man Christ Jesus was in fact _man_ (and that he was man, even +Trinitarians admit) notwithstanding he was endowed with divine wisdom, +why might he not without any dishonour to the Deity, be sometimes left +to exercise only the wisdom of _man_? And to say that the wisdom of +man cannot err, would be saying contrary to daily experience. I have +not contended that Jesus ever erred; but I contend that he must have +been liable to error, or else he was not man. And the supposition that +he did not err, not even in thought or opinion, ought not to be +admitted without the most conclusive testimony. + +"But whatever may be the conclusion on this subject, as it respects +the 'man Christ Jesus--a man approved of God,' yet what shall we say +concerning the apostles? Were they also absolutely secured from error? +These men, according to the confession of one of them at least, not +only had been, but still were--_sinners_. Paul, notwithstanding his +apostleship, still acknowledges the plague of his own heart 'I am +carnal, sold under sin--when I would do good, evil is present with +me--O wretched man that I am!' &c. Are such men absolutely proof +against even the error of opinion? It appears to me there are too many +incidents of imperfection recorded in the lives of the apostles to +admit all this. Peter once rebuked his master, at another time denied +him. He once objected to the voice of the spirit, and was afterwards +accused by his brethren for obeying it. Paul accused Peter to his +face, and also disagreed with Barnabas. And other circumstances might +be named, proving them to be destitute of intuitive knowledge. +Considering, therefore, all these things, how do we know but that in +their zeal to do good, (for I do not consider the apostles bad men; +neither do I think any the worse of Paul for either acknowledging his +own faults, or detecting the dissimulation of Peter,) I say therefore, +in their zeal to do good, how do we know but that they stated things +relative to another world, which were only inferences, which, as they +supposed, were justly drawn from what they had either seen or heard, +or else what their own fruitful imagination dictated? If we are at +liberty to view the apostles in this light, however highly their +opinions are to be valued and respected, yet I see no occasion of +investigating their writings with the eye of biblical or grammatical +criticism; for after all, they are but the opinions of men like +ourselves. + +"But if it can be demonstrated that the opinions of the writers of the +New Testament can be relied on, as containing eternal truth, without +any mixture of error, then it is very important for us to know the +meaning of all the words they used, not only as it respects their +general import, but also the exact and particular sense in which they +used them. This however cannot be done without a thorough +acquaintance, not only with the Greek, but also with the Hebrew +language, for they used many Hebraisms, which, with a knowledge of the +Greek only, we should not be likely fully to comprehend. + +"Yours, &c. + +A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER II. + +_Much esteemed friend_,--In replying to your second number, you will +excuse me if I begin by finding some fault, in which, however, I will +endeavour to be as sparing as the case will admit. + +On the subject of the languages, after reading in your first number +the following in its connexion: "If I understand the above +proposition, it seems to be this; the only revelation of God to man, +which was ever recorded on vellum or paper, was written partly in +Greek and partly in Hebrew; hence the revealed will of God cannot be +known only through the medium of these languages. If the truth of all +this could be made to appear," &c. and after replying to your argument +on this subject, I can hardly account for the insinuation in your +second number, by which you suggest, that you had no particular +allusion to a revelation from God when you spoke of translating the +most valuable of ancient writings, &c. The subject of a revelation you +acknowledge to be your main object; if this be the case, you have this +object in view when you speak of the Greek and Hebrew, and also when +you speak of the arts and sciences. + +You contend in your second number, that the translation of the +Scriptures out of the original languages is as good evidence of the +existence of the original, as the original could be of the facts they +relate, &c. And this I believe is the only acknowledgement you make in +favour of the original's having been any benefit. You seem not willing +to allow that the retaining of the original language is of any use in +proving to after generations that the translation was correct, which +seems not easy to account for. But I will give you no further trouble +on the subject of this nature; nor will I occupy my time in +investigating the question relative to the necessity of studying those +languages, which you acknowledge is off from your main subject, and +take some notice of your queries respecting a divine revelation. +Although I am unable to trace the connexion of many of your remarks +with which you call your main subject, yet I am not disposed to doubt +that you comprehend such connexion--I think I understand your +statements so as to be able to discern the following particulars, as +subjects of your inquiry. + +"1st. Is it reasonable to suppose that God has ever made a special +revelation to man? 2d. Is the resurrection of Jesus capable of being +proved? And, 3d. If so, does it follow that this was designed by +divine wisdom to give us any hope respecting a future state?" + +It is not pretended that you have stated these questions just in this +order, but these are the subjects which your second number suggests to +my mind. + +I shall take a much nearer road to come to a solution of these +questions, than that which would lead me to follow you through all +your remarks, because you have furnished me with the means to do so. + +1st. You acknowledge that a divine revelation "if real," is of "all +truths the most important." Here let the eye of reason examine. Why +should a revelation from God be more important than those discoveries +which our Creator has enabled us to make in the arts and sciences? Why +should such revelation be more important than the use of the mariner's +compass, or the art of printing? Even without contending that a divine +revelation is of any greater importance than the arts and sciences, +your allowing it any importance at all, is, in the eye of reason an +argument in its support. Had you taken the other road, and contended +that there was no necessity of a revelation, and had you been able to +make this appear, you would have proved to the eye of reason, that a +Being of infinite wisdom, who can never act without a just cause, had +never made a revelation. But if reason admits of its importance, as +long as this is the case, it will be looking not only with a fervent +desire, but with expectation till it makes the discovery. You will, no +doubt, allow that a divinely munificient Creator would not omit any +thing which is of importance to his intelligent creatures. + +Perhaps you will, (though I do not see why you should) call up a +former query, which was answered in my first, which answer was not +receipted in your second, and ask why this revelation was not made in +every nation, in every language, and in every age? But you will be +sensible that the same questions might be stated respecting the +progress of science and the discovery of the arts useful to a refined +state of society. + +You will not think it strange that I am some disappointed that you +took no notice of my remarks on the above query as I really attach +importance to that little piece of reasoning. If reason has no +reluctance in acknowledging that man is multiplied and continued here +by a law which was not able to bring him into existence at first, why +may not a revelation from God, be perpetuated by different means than +those which first made it, and thereby the great object be even better +secured than by a perpetual revelation, which would seem to render +research unnecessary, and leave the reasoning powers without employ? + +But it is time for me to inform you that I feel myself under no +obligations to labour to prove what you and I and many thousands of +others have considered sufficiently proved from ancient prophesy with +which our heavenly Father has favoured so many ages and nations and +languages. And furthermore, permit me to tell you, that if you are +disposed to doubt and to disprove what you acknowledge to be of such +vast importance, it is your province to bring forward your strong +reasoning, if such you have, by which the prophesies of the old +testament, those delivered by Christ and his apostles shall be made to +appear either to have no just analogy with the events of which they +speak, or that they were contrived by impostors since the events took +place. + +2d. You acknowledge the validity of the evidences in favor of the +resurrection of Jesus. You say; "That the evangelists have stated +nothing more than what is substantially correct, as it respects +matters of fact, will be admitted by all." Again; "I do not consider +the apostles bad men." Now the apostles are the deponents who solemnly +testify the fact of the resurrection of Jesus. Why should you wish me +to prove what you allow to be true? Why do you not take the other +hand, and say the apostles were impostors, they were the opponents of +the righteous rulers of the Jews who put their master to death? Why do +you not avail yourself of the story put into the mouths of the guard +who watched the sepulchre, and say that those timid disciples who all +fled and left Jesus when they saw him bound, not only went to the +sepulchre and stole the body of Jesus and hid it where no mortal could +ever find it, but then went to Jerusalem and boldly affirmed he was +alive, who was dead, and then had the boldness and audacity to accuse +the rulers of having "denied the holy one and the just, and desired a +murderer to be delivered unto them; and of having killed the prince of +life, whom God had raised from the dead?" The reason is obvious, you +see the impropriety of such argument.--But: + +3d. Allowing the resurrection of Jesus, the truth of divine +revelation, the honesty of the apostles of Jesus, are we to rely on +what they say respecting a future state? Answer, yes, most assuredly. +For here let reason ask, whether a divine revelation founded on the +resurrection of Jesus could have a more reasonable object, than the +bringing to light, life and immortality? Again let reason ask whether +the divine Being would endow Jesus and his apostles with the gift of +miracles, by which the divinity of their missions was proved to the +understanding of all who believed, and then suffer them to teach +things of a moral, a religious, or of an eternal nature which were not +true? By so doing, it would seem that God gave power to heal the sick +and to raise the dead for no other purpose than to gain the attention +of men to what was the mere guess work of men subject to error in the +things which they pretended to teach. + +For myself I am perfectly satisfied that infinite goodness would never +do any thing so imperfectly. I am satisfied, being convinced of the +truth of the facts which you acknowledge, that the testimony of Jesus +and his apostles respecting this and the coming world, may be relied +on with the utmost confidence and safety. You intimate that Jesus said +but a little on the subject of a future state. I am entirely of your +opinion. And yet I am persuaded that he and his apostles have said as +much on the subject as is necessary for us to believe. They have given +sufficient proof that the design of our Creator is a design of eternal +goodness to our race of being. Jesus has brought life and immortality +to light through the gospel. The Christian is enabled to hope for +existence with God in an eternal state, and this is as much as our +present welfare requires. I have no doubt that many passages of +scripture have been applied to a future world, by Christian +expositors, which have no allusion to such a case--but this harms not +the glorious truths and divine realities of the religion of the +blessed Saviour. + +I have many reasons for not believing in the general sentiment that +supposes the revelation contained in the scriptures was designed to +prepare men in this world for happiness in another, and that a want of +a correct knowledge of this revelation here, would subject the +ignorant to inconveniences in a future state. Such a sentiment is an +impeachment of the wisdom and goodness of God. For if this were the +case, why was the gospel not early published to all people? Why were +ages after ages suffered to pass away, and generations after +generations permitted to sink into eternity without a ray of that +light which was indispensable to their everlasting happiness? Was it +not as easy for the eternal to send his son at the dawn of time as +after so many ages had passed away? Was it not as easy for him to +communicate to all nations as to one? But divine wisdom has seen fit +to manifest itself by degrees in the system of the gospel as well as +in the knowledge of science; and we have no more evidence to believe, +that those who go from this state to another ignorant of the gospel of +Christ, will, on that account, be rejected of God from his favour, +than we have to believe that those who have died ignorant of the +sciences, will, on that account be so rejected. + +Every communication from God, whether relative to the moral or +physical world is evidently designed for our profit in the state where +such communication is made. This improvement of the moral and +religious state of man was the evident design of the revelation of +God, and to this agree all the prophets. "Instead of the thorn shall +come up the fir-tree, and instead of the briar shall come up the +myrtle-tree." + +You seem to be opposed to biblical criticisms. So am I, if the object +be to fix a creed to which all must conform on pain of being +anathematized, but if the object be to get the right understanding of +the sacred text all in humble submission to that CHARITY which is +greater than a FAITH that could remove mountains, no harm can ever +arise from it, but a benefit. + +No one can more sincerely wish to have the frivolities of superstition +and the endless multitude of nothings which arrogant creed-makers have +impiously superadded to pure christianity removed from the church than +I do; but wisdom must direct in this great and necessary work. It was +those who had more zeal than discernment who asked if they should +pluck up the tares from among the wheat? They were told that they +would pluck up the wheat with the tares.--Let us be careful, my +brother, and in our zeal to cleanse, take care and not destroy. + +If you are troubled with unbelief, if this plague have entered your +heart, permit me to suggest a remedy. Humility is the first step, +sincere piety towards God the second, let these be followed by that +for which the Bereans were commended and the deadly virus of unbelief +will soon be purged. Will you say; "physician heal thyself?" I reply, +I think I have found relief by the use of the prescription, and am so +much in favour of it, that I am determined to continue its application +myself as well as recommend it to others. If you ask why I do not +direct some arguments more cogently to prove divine revelation? I +answer, in the first place, you have granted the validity of the +evidences; and secondly, if I think of the attempt, the brilliant +labours of better abilities argue the impropriety of it. + +But if you think it necessary to labour this subject, I will propose +the single instance of the conversion of St. Paul for investigation. +By this means we shall be kept from rambling after different subjects. +If you can give a reasonable account of this conversion without +admitting the truth of christianity, I will acknowledge you have left +me destitute of one evidence on which I now rely. On the other hand, +if you fail in this, you may reasonably suppose that you would fail in +any other case of equal moment in this general controversy. + +Yours, &c. + +H. BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +[The letter containing _extracts_ No. 1, having been laid before the +Rev. EDWARD TURNER, of Charlestown, Mass. he saw fit to reply to it. +The following are extracts from his letter.] + +"Passing over the principal parts of your introduction, which +generally embrace sentiments to which I readily subscribe, I will just +notice what you say concerning the study of languages. I am not so +tenacious of this kind of study, as to believe that too much time has +not often been employed in it. I am also convinced with you, that 'the +truth or falsity of every proposition must depend on the truth or +falsity of the principles embraced in it.' But still I am not able to +say that the study of Greek and Hebrew can be of no 'possible service +to an American.' Neither, because those languages are not a perfect +'security' against falsehood, does it necessarily follow that they are +no 'security' at all. For how shall we arrive at the knowledge of the +'principle embraced in a proposition' without the knowledge and use of +language? We cannot in any other way. Now if it be a fact, that a +proposition embracing certain principles may suffer by translation, +and even its principles be perverted and misrepresented, then, an +understanding of the original, in which the proposition was written, +may, in my opinion, be very useful. It may assist a man to arrive at a +true knowledge of the 'principles' upon which said proposition is +founded. + +"'It gives you pain to see what time and money, what labour and toil +are expended in plodding over an old dead letter, to learn languages, +which exist no where only on paper, barely for the sake of reading the +opinions of other men, in other times; men who lived in other ages of +the world, and under very different circumstances from ourselves, +whose opinions (all of which are worth preserving) might be given in +our own language, so as to answer every purpose,' &c.--But if these +'opinions' should be given in our own language, there must be some to +understand Greek and Hebrew, or the opinions of those ancient writers, +let them be worth ever so much, would never find their way to us. And +when we have gained those supposed opinions, through the translation, +how do we know that the translators were faithful? Who can say they +were not warped by system? not misled by preconceived ideas? Who can +say they have not wilfully imposed upon us? Under such circumstances, +the ability to detect any inaccuracies or imposition, would, in my +view, be very desirable. You have, yourself, my brother, availed +yourself of this ability, and very justly merited the gratitude of +your readers, by rectifying the judgment, upon certain terms used in +the scriptures, the former translation of which, you have disavowed. +As I value those efforts of yours, and have been instructed and +edified by them, I am proportionably sorry to find them treated in the +language of disparagement. + +"You observe that 'the learned are as much at variance with each other +as the unlearned,' and this circumstance you say, 'weakens your +confidence.' But upon what subject are they not at variance, even +where Greek and Hebrew are not concerned? Have philosophers been +always agreed, when they have discoursed in one language? Have +chemists been always of one opinion, though the subjects of their +investigations are material bodies? You will not reply affirmatively. +And if not, and no system can be found which is not in some degree +'liable to misconstruction, disputation and deception,'--what are we +to do? Shall we depend upon nothing? Shall we remain immovable for +fear we should fall? Shall we never attempt to walk for fear we should +stumble? I must be allowed to express my concern, that, it should +appear 'not a little extraordinary to you that God should make a +revelation of his will in one age and not in another, to one nation +and not to another, or in one language and not in another, and if a +special revelation was ever necessary at all it is difficult for you +to see, why it is not equally necessary, in all ages of the world, to +all nations of the earth and in all languages ever spoken by man.' It +is true, I may be unable to see why a revelation was not equally +necessary to one nation as well as to another, and at the same time, +but is this a proof that no revelation was ever made to any nation at +any time? I know of no special reason why the laws of electricity were +not developed to my grandfather as well as to Dr. Franklin, with whom +he was contemporary; or why the great principles of civil liberty +should not have been discovered to other nations as well as to our +own, and at the same time, or to ALL nations, a thousand years before +they were discovered to one. But all this is no discredit to those +discoveries. But I find reason to doubt whether a revelation 'is +equally necessary in all ages of the world.' I doubt whether a special +revelation is NOW necessary; and for a very obvious reason; because a +special revelation has already been made. And as this, though at +first, really special, follows the general course of other things +which are beneficial, and which commence with a few and diffuse +themselves to many, it is a reason which precludes the necessity of a +constant recurrence of miracles or any other special medium of +revelation. You certainly will not deny, that, admitting there has +been a revelation from God, it has been progressive like all things +else, which involve the interests of man. If we admit these facts, +they will go far to explain some of the difficulties, to which you +allude; but if we do not, our disbelieving in a special revelation +will not remove, but increase our difficulties. + +"Your's, &c. + +E. TURNER." + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. III. + +[To the extracts above, the objector replied as follows.] + +"Remarking on the doubts which unavoidably arise in my mind on account +of the diversity in the opinions of the learned respecting the meaning +of certain parts of the scriptures, our friend asks, 'upon what +subject are they (the learned) not at variance, even when Greek and +Hebrew are not concerned? Have chemists been always of one opinion?' +&c. which must be answered in the negative. Nevertheless I may take +liberty to observe that inasmuch as they have disagreed, it shews that +the subjects about what they have disagreed, are as yet obscure, and +therefore perhaps none of them are entitled to full and complete +'confidence:' for whatever is plain and obvious, men seldom disagree +about. That the sun and moon are _globes_, and not _triangles_, all +are agreed; and it would be impossible to raise a dispute on the +subject: but whether either or both of them are inhabited, or even +capable of being inhabited, by rational beings, similar or like unto +ourselves, is a proposition not so clear, and respecting which the +greatest philosophers might possibly disagree. The above remarks are +intended to shew that when men differ in opinion, whether learned or +unlearned, it is obvious that the truth about which they differ, to +say the most of it, is yet but obscurely made manifest to their +understanding. + +"In order to remove an objection, to the idea of revelation, on +account of its being made only to one nation, &c. our friend says, 'It +is true, I may be unable to see why a revelation was not equally +necessary to one nation as well as to another, and at the same time; +but is this a proof that no revelation was ever made to any nation at +any time?' I am very ready to answer this question in the _negative_. +But at the same time I must be excused for not being able to see any +analogy between revelation and the discovery of the laws of +electricity; as mentioned by our brother; and therefore my mind is not +to be relieved from its difficulty in this way. If it could be proved +that the principles manifested by revelation were like the principles +in nature, against the developement of which there is no great barrier +at one time than at another except what exists in the ignorance of +man; and if the Christian could now try the experiment over again, and +thereby demonstrate the truth of the doctrine of the _resurrection_, +the same as the philosopher can try the experiment for himself, and +thereby demonstrate the truth of the doctrine _of electricity_, then +my doubts or surprise at the seeming partiality in the developement or +discovery of the principles of the doctrine _of revelation_ would be +entirely removed. But the very idea of a _revelation_ supposes the +manifestation of it to differ essentially from all the discoveries of +man. Therefore the remarks of our friend relative to the laws of +electricity, &c. seem to be hardly in point. The evidences of +revelation to all, excepting those to whom the revelation was first +made, are in their very nature essentially different from the +evidences of natural philosophy, chemistry, &c. For these are founded +in immutable principles which never vary, and are ever open at all +times to thorough investigation and experiment. Hence if the learned +have any doubts on the subject, those doubts may be removed by occular +demonstration; and even when they are enabled by any new discoveries +to correct some former opinions, which were either founded on mere +conjecture or imperfect reasoning, yet the first principles still +remain, and the former evidences, instead of being weakened, are +increased by every new discovery or experiment in the developement of +truth. But not so with evidences of divine revelation. Although ever +so clear at first, and so well supported by facts, concerning which +the witness had the clearest evidence, yet the evidences being of such +a nature as preclude a repetition, like those respecting a vision of +the night or any other phenomenon, are liable to suffer by passing +from one to another, and also to be impaired by every change which +they are caused to pass. And if the evidences of any fact may be +weakened at all, either by lapse of time, or by passing through +different hands; by the same causes, if continued, they may lose all +their strength. That the evidences of some facts may be thus weakened, +I believe will not be denied. Hence what was once clear may be now +doubtful, and in process of time may become entitled to no credit. If +therefore the evidence of revelation either have been, or ever shall +by any circumstances whatever be thus impaired, then a new revelation +may become necessary either to revive or to strengthen the evidences +of the old. If Christ should make his second appearance, according to +the opinions of some, it would be as much of a revelation as his first +appearance was; and this new revelation would corroborate and confirm +the old; but if nothing of the kind should ever take place, and if +there should be nothing more to confirm the validity of prophesy, but +let the world pass on for several thousand years as we know it has for +fifteen hundred years past, how long will either the Jews or +christians believe in divine revelation? + +"I believe however, we had better see whether the old revelation can +be fully proved before we go very far into the inquiry whether a new +one is necessary. + +"That I deserve any credit in the opinion of our friend or my own +conscience for the unwearied pains I have taken to ascertain the +correct ideas communicated to us in the scriptures is very grateful to +my feelings; and let it not be imagined for a moment that I feel at +all disposed to shrink from my former assiduity; for as long as the +world, or any considerable part thereof, believe the scriptures to be +divine revelation I think it very important that they should have a +correct understanding of them. So long therefore as I hold this to be +my profession, I mean faithfully to pursue it; ever remembering that I +am not accountable in the least degree either for the truth or falsity +of the bible, but only for my faithfulness in preaching, taking heed +that I do not preach that for bible, which is not bible. + +"Let not my brethren be 'concerned,' or made in the least degree +unhappy on my account. My mind was never more tranquil respecting +religious subjects than at the present moment. My doubts, whatever +they are, give me no uneasiness; they only excite me to diligence and +assiduity in endeavouring by all possible means to ascertain the +truth; and wherever, or in whatever light, it shall be discovered, I +am fully satisfied that eternal truth is perfectly right, yea just as +it should be. + +"For, provided deism should prove true in its stead, what is there to +be lost if christianity fails? Ought we not to be thankful for, and +also satisfied with the truth of either? It appears to me that all +ought to be satisfied with the truth whatever it may be; and therefore +my present object is to ascertain, if possible, what truth is. + +"'Did human reason,' saith he, 'unassisted by divine light make the +discovery?' (i. e. of the 'unity of God.')--'Then indeed would "all +nations, in all ages," have possessed the great object made manifest +by revelation.' In answer to this, I would only ask, were not the laws +of electricity discovered by 'human reason unassisted by divine +light?' Why then were they not known to 'all nations, in all +ages?'--The fact is, what reason is capable of discovering may also be +long concealed from the eye of reason. + +"Yours, &c. + +A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER III. + +_Dear Sir, and Brother_,--As I have not the opportunity of presenting +your third number to our mutual friend and brother, to whom it most +properly belongs to reply, I have thought it no more than reasonable +that I should acknowledge the receipt of your favour accompanying this +acknowledgement with some observations on the most essential parts of +what you have suggested. + +You wish us to take it for granted, that those parts of our +communications to which you make no reply, are at least, generally +speaking, satisfactory to your mind. Respecting this particular, you +will suffer me to point out, what appears to me, a very material +defect in your proposed method. + +Suppose, sir, an argument be laid down on which much depends, in the +opinion of the writer, and out of a proper reply to which, he +anticipates great advantages; he waits for a reply--No reply comes to +this particular, but the very same query which the argument was +designed to answer is still urged; is it not easy to see that much +labour may be in vain in consequence of this method? If you answer to +a question, stating with great seeming earnestness, viewing the +question of importance in the mind of him who states it, you would not +only expect, but you might really need to be informed what effect your +reply was allowed to have in the mind of your opponent. And as he +might not anticipate the use which you had designed to make of his +answer, you would not judge it advisable to submit to him whether he +should reply or not. + +You have finally put the dispute about the necessity of retaining the +dead languages at issue on the question relative to a future state, in +the following words; "If the opinions recorded in scripture relative +to a future state of existence are to be relied on, as being dictated +by God himself, and in a way too, that was not mistaken; and that the +writers of the scriptures being thus inspired, have written nothing +but the truth, then I admit," &c. Now from this your own statement you +will see the importance of retaining those languages until it be fully +discovered that no credit is due to these writings which we have been +in the habit of believing to be divinely inspired. Your discernment +will at once discover that it would be imprudent in the extreme, to +obliterate, without first knowing that what was to be defaced was of +no utility. A child, ever so old, who should utterly deface his +father's last will and testament, which had made ample provisions for +his future wants, merely because he had not a perfect understanding of +it, or on suspicion that there were some possible defects in it, could +not be considered prudent in so doing. But if the will should finally +fail, and prove invalid, no loss would be sustained even if it were +committed to the devouring element. To say, the will may be destroyed +until it has been proved, would be absurd. + +In your further remarks on our brother's communication, you find +occasion to suggest a difference between the subject of revelation and +the discoveries which have been made by men in the powers and +properties of nature. But when you have contended successfully for +this (which by no means has any power to refute his argument) you seem +not to realize that there must be as great a difference in the +evidences by which these different subjects are communicated to the +mind, as there are in the subjects themselves. It is acknowledged, +without controversy, that we cannot demonstrate by any mathematical or +chemical process that there ever was such an emperor in Rome as +Augustus Caesar, or such a governor in Judea as Pilate, or such a man +as Jesus; but then we are not, on this account, or any other, unable +to find such kind of evidence as the nature of the case admits, and +such as is sufficient to satisfy the candid mind. Should any one now +pretend to deny that Louis XVIth. was beheaded, and allege as proof +that no such thing was to be credited, because it had never been +discovered as the result of a chemical process, would you hesitate to +fault his reasoning? + +Should it occur to your mind that you have contended that the evidence +of revelation is as different from the evidence required in natural +discoveries, as the subjects themselves are different, you are +reminded that you have contended for this only with a view to _weaken_ +the force of the former, and in a way to disallow its validity. At the +same time you state that you do not undertake to deny a special +revelation from God, but "wish only to take a review of the evidences, +and see if they are such that it is _impossible_ it should be false." +Of these evidences you speak thus; "Although ever so clear at first, +and ever so well supported by facts, concerning which the witnesses +had the clearest evidences, yet the evidences being of such a nature +as to preclude a repetition, like those respecting a vision of the +night or any other phenomenon, are liable to suffer by passing from +one to another," and finally "lose all their strength." Here it seems +you pretend to state the character of the evidences of a divine +revelation, which evidences you wish to review. Permit me to ask, dear +brother, if it would not have appeared more consistent with piety and +candor to have reviewed before you fixed the character of the +evidences?--There is a proper order in which every thing should be +conducted. All our researches should be kept from the embarrassments +of prejudice. Though I feel much reluctance in entering on so great a +subject as the vindication of the truth of divine revelation, fearing, +I should fail in doing that honour to the subject which I am confident +it deserves, I am inclined to suggest a few things which I think are +worthy of some notice. As you speak of a vision of the night, the +evidences of which were clear to the person and satisfactory at the +time, those evidences would naturally lose their force when +communicated to others and finally lose their strength. Let us suppose +a case. A man shall have a vision of the night, in which it shall be +revealed to him that some time before the present generation shall +leave the stage of life, the kingdom of Great Britain will be overcome +by the power of France; that very many of the flourishing cities of +England will be destroyed in a very awful manner; that London will be +laid level with the ground; that the distress of the inhabitants +during the siege will be extreme; that for some time before this great +event, there will be wars and rumors of wars among the nations, and +certain signs very wonderful will be seen in the heavens. This man +tells his vision very circumstantially and several persons write it +down. Now suppose as the time passes away, these events, one after +another, should take place, all in the same order in which the vision +represented them; do you feel willing to say that the evidences of the +truth of this vision, are all the time losing their force? No surely +they are not; they are all the time gaining strength and waxing +brighter. Whether I am able to satisfy you that the above case is a +fair representation of the evidences of divine revelation, or not, it +discovers in some degree the ground on which, in my mind, revelation +is established. + +Compare, if you please, the prophesy of Jesus recorded in the 24th of +Matthew, with the history of the events of which the divine messenger +spake. + +Yours, &c. + +H. BALLOU. + +P. S. You have noticed, no doubt, in a parenthesis, that I do not +allow your argument on the dissimilarity of divine revelation and +principles of nature to have any force to do away the argument of our +brother, to which you replied. It was evidently not his design to +argue a similarity between the nature of these widely different +subjects, but to show that no greater partiality appears in the divine +wisdom, in not discovering the truths of revelation in all ages, to +all nations and in all languages, than in its not leading the human +mind to the discovery of electricity or any other of the laws of +nature in the same manner. Will you endeavour to maintain that the +divine economy has nothing to do in directing means and circumstances +to the developement of the laws of nature and to the discovery of +useful inventions? And if you allow it has, why do you not assign a +reason why these discoveries should not have been made in all ages, to +all nations, and written or rather _printed_, in all languages that +cannot as well be applied in the other case? In this way you would do +away his reasoning and my own likewise, for as you notice, we were +both of one mind on this subject. + +Before I close this postscript, I wish to remark on the subject which +you have in view, in reviewing the evidences of divine revelation, +which you say is to "see if they are such that it is _impossible_ it +should be false." Now it appears to your humble servant, that faith +does not require evidence of the description you lay down. I grant it +wants to be satisfied and it has a right to expect it; it feels under +no obligation to evidence which comes short of conviction; but it does +not require all _possibility_ to be taken into its account. This would +seem to go beyond the limits of faith and enter into the regions of +certainty. If the evidences in support of faith be sufficient to give +rest, peace, and consolation to the mind, and if the faith be strong +enough to effect the conduct of the believer in a proper manner, the +object of faith is obtained. + +The hopes of the husbandman may serve to illustrate this particular. +He does not know for certainty that his fields will produce him any +thing; he does not know that the coming season will be favourable to +his crops, yet he plants and sows in comfortable expectation. He rises +early and labours cheerfully, his expectations are full of comfort, he +sleeps quietly and enjoys content. But if you ask him whether he views +it _impossible_ that he should fail of a harvest? he will with but +very little concern answer in the negative. + +"The just shall live by faith, we walk by faith and not by sight." +All, therefore, that we can reasonably expect in the case before us, +is to find a decided _balance_ of evidence in favour of the religion +of the gospel. And to _review_ the evidences of this religion, it +seems necessary first to allow that there are evidences in existence +which go to prove it, if their validity be allowed. For instance, the +four evangelists, the acts of the apostles, together with the epistles +of the apostles are considered evidences of the truth of this +religion. And can you reasonably require more until you are able to +show that all these come short of establishing the credibility of the +facts which they relate with apparent honesty and simplicity not to be +met with in any other ancient writings? + +There are a great many other evidences which serve to corroborate +those mentioned, but if you can do _them_ away, no doubt the others +may be as easily removed. + +You will duly consider that in disproving the religion of Jesus +Christ, you disprove all religion, for I am satisfied that you will +not pretend that you are making a choice between the gospel and some +other doctrine. No, the choice is between the gospel and no religion +at all. + +Come then, strip away all the clouds of superstition, and demonstrate +at once that there has been no sun in the firmament during the whole +of a cloudy day! Soar like the strong pinioned eagle, make your tour +beyond the mists of error and bring us the joyless tidings that there +is no clear sky in the heavens. Can you imagine any thing to be more +pleasing than the coming of one that brought _good_ tidings? But let +us have the worst of it. Show from undoubted authority that there +never was such a man as Jesus, or show that he was a wicked impostor +and deservedly lost his life. Show moreover, that there never were +such men as the apostles of Jesus, or that they were likewise +impostors, and all suffered death for their wicked impiety! Give the +particulars of Saul's madly forsaking the honourable connexion in +which he stood, for the sake of practising a fraud which produced him +an immense income of suffering! + +But you say the apostles were not bad men. Very well, then let us see +how good men could tell so many things which they knew were not true, +and suffer and die in attestation of what they knew to be false. You +will see the danger of supposing that honest men can bear testimony to +falsehood under the pretence of doing good, as this would destroy all +testimony at once; even your own cannot be relied on after you +maintain this abominable principle, which has been practised a wicked +priesthood for ages. H.B. + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. IV. + +[The objector in his fourth number begins by explaining himself in +some particulars wherein he had not been fully understood, and also by +making some concessions respecting the importance of retaining the +original languages in which the scriptures were written; and, bringing +these remarks to a close, he proceeds as follows:] + +"In regard to a revelation from God, the three propositions which you +have stated answer my mind well enough, as far as they go, to which, +however, I would wish to add a fourth; and ask, admitting the three +first propositions true. 'Fourth. Is it reasonable to suppose that the +apostles had any other means of forming their opinions relative to a +future state than what passed before their eyes?--viz. the miracles of +Christ, the circumstances attending his death, his resurrection, and +the miracles wrought by themselves in his name?' + +"1st. Is it reasonable to suppose that God has ever made a special +revelation to man? + +"You say I have acknowledged that a divine revelation 'if real, is of +all truths the most important;' hence you call upon the 'eye of +reason' to examine this proposition to see why it should be considered +more important than the discoveries made in the arts and sciences, &c. +I think these questions may be easily and correctly answered. One +relates to the blessings of _eternity_; and the others to those only +of _time_; hence if the truths manifested by a revelation had been of +no more importance to man than the truths in natural philosophy, +reason would say, God would have left them also to be discovered, if +discovered at all, like all other truths, without a special +revelation. But, you must excuse me for not being able to see the +force and conclusiveness of your reasoning, when you say that my +'allowing it any importance at all, is, in the eye of reason, an +argument in its support.' Supposing I am informed of a large estate +bequeathed to me by some benefactor. I acknowledge that it is very +important to me, if true, as I am in great need; yet I do not believe +it true. Now, is my acknowledging its importance, if true, an argument +in support of its truth? If it is so, the reason of it is out of my +sight. + +"I should think that the reason of man (the only reason with which we +are acquainted) would hardly undertake to say whether a revelation is +either necessary or not necessary. The only evidence that reason can +have of its necessity is its truth; and a supposition that it is not +true equally supposes it not to be necessary. For to suppose otherwise +supposes that God has omitted something which was necessary to be +done! Try the matter as it respects a new revelation. Who will +undertake to say that a new revelation either is or is not necessary? +No one who believes in a revelation will deny the possibility of such +an event. Suppose then for the moment it is true; and something is +brought to light infinitely more glorious than any thing of which the +human mind has yet conceived; will any one say it is unimportant? Or +is the 'allowing it any importance--an argument in its support?' + +"I am very ready to allow that a 'divinely munificent Creator would +not omit any thing which is of importance to his intelligent +creatures:' and on this ground I admitted the _importance_ of +revelation 'if real;' but I am yet unable to see how this is any +argument in its support. It seems to me that this argument might be +turned right the other way with equal force. If revelation be not +true, it is not necessary it should be; and man can be made just as +happy in this world by knowing all that he can know without it, as +those are who believe in it; and admitting it not true there is no +more importance in all the stories about it, than there is in the +_Alcoran_! Now, supposing you should 'allow' all this, would it be any +argument against the truth of revelation? I think not. + +"In answer therefore to the first particular, I must be allowed to say +that the only reason in favour of a divine revelation must grow out of +the evidence in support of the facts on which it is predicated; for, +aside from those evidences, I do not see why mankind should be taught +to believe in a future life and immortality by special revelation, any +more than they should be taught the arts and sciences by special +revelation; yet reason does not reject the evidences of such an event +when they are made clear to the understanding.--Therefore, it appears +to me that your first proposition is involved in the second, viz. + +"2d. Is the resurrection of Jesus capable of being proved? + +"I should have said something more on the subject which was answered +in your first number, and which I neglected to acknowledge in my +second, if it had occurred to me as being necessary. I will briefly +state here that your reasoning on that subject is satisfactory; and if +a revelation can be fully proved I feel not disposed to complain on +account of its seeming partiality. Infinite wisdom dispenses his +blessings so as best to answer his benevolent designs; and were we to +object to the _manner_, merely because we do not comprehend the +_equality_, we should be satisfied, strictly speaking, with nothing. + +"But you have excused yourself from undertaking to prove your second +proposition in a way that I did not expect, viz. by finding, as you +supposed, in my words, an acknowledgement of its truth. Here again I +must confess my misfortune in giving too much grounds for the wrong +construction. Every one knows however the ambiguity of words, and how +the meaning of a sentence may be altered by placing the emphasis on a +different word from what the author intended. I acknowledge that my +words will admit the construction you have given them; yet you could +but see that it was giving up at once what I had in a number of +places, both before and after, considered a main question. And then, +you ask me why I wish you to prove what I acknowledge to be true. If +you will be good enough to review the passage, and notice that the +word _substantially_ was emphatic, and contrasted with +_circumstantial_, a little below, you will perceive that my meaning +was simply this. No one will pretend that the evangelists were correct +in every minute particular, but only correct in _substance_; and by +the ALL, by whom this will be admitted, I mean those who believe in +divine revelation; that even they would acknowledge, that in point of +correctness, the writers were 'no more' than _substantially_ so. +However: + +"You think if I am 'disposed to doubt,' &c. it is my province to bring +forward my 'strong reasoning,' &c. I know of no disposition that I +feel respecting the subject but to ascertain, if possible, the truth. +If I have doubts, it is not because I choose to doubt, but because I +cannot help them; and if I have faith it is such as is given me. Of +one thing I have no doubt; that is, that the truth, whatever it is, is +right. But: + +"Admitting the scriptures are not true, I shall not attempt to guess +what is true respecting the subjects to which they relate. For I might +guess a hundred different ways to account for what we know is true, +and all of them be wrong. + +"My doubts on this subject are nothing more than _doubts_; they do not +amount to a confirmed _unbelief_; because they admit the possibility +of the account's being true. + +"Yours, &c. + +A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER IV. + +_Much esteemed friend_,--Your fourth number is hereby acknowledged; +and though occasions for finding fault are in some measure extenuated, +it still appears that you have lost the real connexion of your +arguments, and have made the subject of the languages one of your main +subjects, when judging from your first number, it was no more than a +vestibule to the grand edifice which it was in your mind to examine. + +However, you having paid more than half, we will not stand about the +fraction, as long as we have a profitable object in view. You call up +what you call the subject. I suppose the main subject. This you state +as follows: "In regard to a revelation from God, the three +propositions which you have stated answer my mind well enough, as far +as they go; to which however, I would wish to add a fourth, and ask; +admitting the three first particulars true.--4th. Is it reasonable to +suppose, that the apostles had any other means of forming their +opinions, relative to a future state, than what passed before their +eyes? viz. the miracles of Christ, the circumstance attending his +death, his resurrection, and the miracles wrought by themselves in his +name?" I wish, in this place, to show you that your added proposition +possesses no power relative to our argument which is not comprehended +in the last of the three which I stated. For if it be allowed, as you +propose, that my propositions are true, then you consent to the +validity of the apostles' testimony respecting a future state, which +granted, it makes no difference in what way the apostles come to the +knowledge of futurity. When a thing is known, it is known. The means +by which it is known add nothing to either side of the argument. If +you allow that my argument on this subject is correct, as it seems you +do, then you acknowledge that God would not endow men with the power +to heal the sick and raise the dead, whose testimony concerning a +future state could be justly doubted. I will not be too positive that +I rightly apprehend your meaning on this subject, but as you propose +to allow my three propositions, and as you make no attempt to do away +my reasoning, especially on my last, I think I should not understand +you according to your own proposal in any other way. + +The methaphor which you use to help you away from my argument +respecting the _importance_ of a revelation from God, does not appear +fully adequate to the purpose for which you use it. It might not be a +reasonable, a necessary disposition of property for the proposed +benefactor, to give you a large estate; it might be, in the eye of +reason a very improper donation, and one which would deprive +legitimate heirs of what they had a right to expect from a father +towards whom they had always acted with filial obedience.--But if you +will make the case a parallel, and suppose you are an heir, a lawful +child, and your father has a large estate to dispose of, then you will +see that it is right and just, and no more than what you have reason +to expect; that it is necessary, and that this necessity is the +importance of the subject, you will at once see that this importance +is a reason, yea an evidence that you have a right to expect it. I +called on you to prove that no revelation was needed; I acknowledged +that if none was necessary, a being of infinite wisdom would make +none. You venture to say, that the "only evidence that reason can have +of the necessity of divine revelation is its truth." It is believed, +sir, that this hypothesis involves too much. It is saying that reason +can discern the necessity of nothing until it obtains it, whereas the +truth is evidently the other side of the assertion. We are frequently +experiencing the necessity of things which we have not already +attained, and by this want we are incited to use the means by which we +finally obtain them.--"Ask, and ye shall receive, seek, and ye shall +find, knock, and it shall be opened unto you," &c. It is believed, and +no doubt it may be argued with success, that the moral and religious +state of man really required a divine revelation. Never did the +parched ground, the withering plant, the thirsty herds need the +showers from heaven, more than man, that WORD of life which descended +as the rain and distilled as the dew, when the gospel was published by +a cloud of faithful witnesses, called of God for that purpose. + +After acknowledging that your words admit of the construction which I +gave them respecting the apostles stating no more than what was +substantially true, you inform me that you meant something very +different; then, sir, it seems you must mean that they stated that +which is not true. And if so, why do you not prove wherein they +testified falsely, which would at once cast their bands from us? By +this mean you would show that their testimony is deserving of no +credit. + +On the subjects of your doubts, you recollected my request, that you +bring forward your reasons, &c. But in room of doing this you inform +me that your doubts are _involuntary_. But I wish to know if this +renders it improper for you to state your reasons for doubting? You +further inform me that your doubts do not amount to a confirmed +unbelief. Again, I would ask if it be necessary for you to wait until +you are a confirmed unbeliever before you state your reasons for +doubting the truth of the testimony which Christians call divine? + +By these questions you will perceive that I am waiting for you, and if +I am not able to meet your arguments, I am ready on making the +discovery, to acknowledge your reasoning too strong for my weak powers +to manage. + +Yours, &c. + +H. BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. V. + +[After acknowledging the receipt of _Letters_ Nos. 3 and 4, and +remarking on several parts of the reply to _Extracts_ No. 2, making +some concessions, &c. as he found it necessary, the _objector_ +proceeds as follows.] + +"But, your final conclusion, after all, comes so near what I conceive +to be the truth, that, were you as correct in every thing as you +appear to be in this, I should hardly think it expedient to pursue +this controversy any further. "The Christian is enabled," you say, "to +hope for existence with God in an eternal state, and this is as much +as our present welfare requires." Most excellent! To this proposition +I cherfully assent. Yea, I would consent even to pruning it a little, +which no doubt would spoil it in your view. Instead of 'this is as +much as,' read, 'even this is more than,' and your proposition would +stand exactly right. Again, you say, + +"'I have many reasons for not believing in the general sentiment that +supposes the revelation contained in the scriptures was designed to +prepare men in this world for happiness in another, and that a want of +a correct knowledge of this revelation here, would subject the +ignorant to inconvenience in a future state. Such a sentiment is an +impeachment of the wisdom and goodness of God.' + +"Here again, should I admit a divine revelation, I most heartily agree +with you; and also with the reasoning which follows under this +proposition. For it is more consistent with reason and good sense to +believe (like the fool) in the existence of no God, than to believe in +a God who is either partial or cruel! If such were the general +sentiment of mankind, the evils resulting from it, in my humble +opinion, would not be worse than the evils which have resulted from +the belief in a God of the character just mentioned. One who, +according to the sentiment, has let millions, even millions of +millions, of his rational creatures die ignorant of a divine +revelation, when he knew without the knowledge of, and belief in, such +a revelation, they must sink down into eternal ruin and misery! And, +so far as a revelation respects the damned, as though it was designed +to aggravate and increase their misery by increasing their +sensibility, he makes known his will, by special revelation, to a few, +accompanied with the gift of his holy spirit, through the divine +efficacy of which, a selected and chosen number will be admitted to +bliss and glory, to the utter and eternal exclusion of the millions +above mentioned!!! + +"If such a sentiment does not impeach the divine character, not only +of partiality, but of _cruelty_, I know of nothing that could. But, +Sir, + +"Are you not aware that your sentiment, as above stated, which has met +my approbation, on the supposition that divine revelation can be +maintained, is as much opposed to the general sentiment of +Christianity, as it respects this particular, as any thing which I +have written or probably shall write on this subject? I presume you +are aware of all this, and I hope you are prepared for its +consequences. You have more to apprehend, however, from this general +sentiment, than I have. You have levelled an arrow at the very seat of +life of what is considered _orthodoxy_ in divinity, it is impossible +but that the wound should be severly felt. For you are not insensible +sir, that it is not only the general, but almost the universal +sentiment of orthodoxy, from _his holiness the Pope_ down to the +smallest child who has been taught to lisp the christian name, that +the revelation of the gospel of Jesus Christ was designed to prepare +mankind in this world for heaven and happiness in another. Hence it +has been believed that those who have died ignorant of the gospel, and +being at the same time born of ignorant or unbelieving parents, must +be lost forever. But those who hear and reject the gospel must be +still more wretched in another world. With this sentiment, however, it +seems you have no more fellowship than I. Therefore, my brother, it +may be well for both, but more especially for you, that the days of +rigorous persecution are over. For notwithstanding orthodoxy will +consider us both equally opposed to christianity at heart, yet, of the +two, you will be considered the most dangerous character. I shall be +considered the _open_, but you the _secret enemy_; who, under the garb +of professed friendship, are doing your utmost to sap the very +foundation of the christian's hope! And you will not be considered any +the less dangerous for your writings, being approved in any sense, by +one who has the audacity, as they will term it, to doubt of the truth, +of divine revelation! Instead of discovered impious blasphemy in the +honest inquiry of your friend as it will be supposed you ought to have +done, and instead of threatening him with endless burnings +therefor;--or for not being disposed to receive, even truth, without +cautious and thorough examination, you have painted christianity in +such beautiful colours that infidelity itself finds but little cause +to oppose it. Should these letters therefore ever come before the +public you must be prepared for the gathering storm. For should you be +able to reconcile revelation with the above proposition, if reason be +not fully convinced of its truth, it will find nothing to object to +the principles it inculcates. However, as this is not the avowed +sentiment of christians, generally speaking, you must permit me to +proceed. + +"As it respects biblical criticism, notwithstanding all I have written +on the subject, if the object is what you have proposed, 'to get the +understanding of the sacred text,' I have no objection to it, but, for +those who have time and inclination, think it laudible. Your caution, +likewise, that in our zeal to cleanse we 'take care and not destroy,' +is no doubt reasonable, and I trust duly appreciated. Your method also +for curing or removing unbelief is happily chosen, and is what I am +now attempting, which, with your assistance, I hope to make a proper, +if not a successful application. + +"Although the 'validity of the evidences' of revelation was not +intended to have been granted, as I have informed you in my fourth +number, yet I shall not press you to argue the points till I have +given you the reasons for my doubts; for these being removed, nothing +more will be necessary. + +"Yours &c. + +A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. VI. + +[Here twelve pages or more of the objector's manuscript are omitted, +as the nature of his arguments will pretty fully appear in the reply; +and as he has been obliged to rescind the ground he had taken, it is +not expedient to publish his remarks. That the reader may see a little +of the manner, however, in which he has given up his part of the +argument, the following is inserted.] + +"Speaking however on the evidences of revelation, you have stated some +things worthy of serious consideration; which if correct, and I cannot +say but they are, give me considerable satisfaction; and are very +grateful to my feelings. 'It' (faith) say you 'does not require all +_possibility_ to be taken into the account: this would seem to go +beyond the limits of faith and enter into the regions of certainty.' + +"According to this doctrine, I may yet, perhaps, be considered a +believer in divine revelation, and of course in Christianity. If 'all +possibility' is not required, then certainly some _doubts_, some +_possibility_ of failure, may be admited without destroying the +consistency of the Christian faith. + +"Here as it respects the argument, you have seemingly forclosed every +thing which I shall say by way of objection; at least, you have +anticipated all my arguments on this subject. For evidences and +circumstances calculated to raise _doubts_ in the mind; and shewing +the _possibility_ of uncertainty, are all the arguments which I have +expected to produce in this case. But it may not be improper to +inquire how much uncertainty, or _possibility_ of uncertainty, may I +admit in my calculation without destroying the Christian faith? That +there are evidences in favor of divine revelation, and, which would +support it, if there were nothing to counterbalance their testimony, +is a proposition which I admit, and which I think cannot be disputed. +Hence I conceive it must be admitted that there is a _possibility_, at +least, of its being true.--But after all, if the weight of evidence in +the mind of any one should preponderate against it, I doubt whether +such an one could consistently be called a believer in divine +revelation. + +"You have suggested that in disproving the religion of Jesus Christ, I +should disprove all religion; as there can be no choice between this +and any other; for if this can be proved false all may be proved false +&c. or words to that effect. In this I hardly know how to understand +you. So far as the religion of Christ consists in 'feeding the hungry, +clothing the naked, and keeping himself unspotted from the world,' I +admit, that 'in disproving the religion of Christ,' I should 'disprove +all religion:' that is to say, in other words, so far as the religion +of Christ is not founded on revelation, but on the relation and +dependence existing between man and man, to disprove it would disprove +all religion: but if the religion of Jesus Christ consists purely and +exclusively in believing in a future state of existence, then +disproving it would not disprove all religion. A man may be what the +poet calls 'the noblest work of God' i.e. 'an honest man,' and attend +to all the duties embraced in that religion which St. James calls +'pure and undefiled before God and the father,' and yet have no +_opinion_, that is, no settled opinion, in regard to a future state. +If a man has religion enough to be a good husband, a good neighbor, a +good citizen, and can rationably enjoy all the blessings which +appertain to this life, of what consequence is it to him, or to any +one else, what he believes in regard to a future state? This is a +question worthy of serious consideration. + +"The denial of revelation, much less to doubt its truth, does not +render it necessary that I should do what you have proposed; neither +is it my disposition to destroy if I could the peace even of an +individual. Hence, I have no wish to 'demonstrate that there is no sun +in a cloudy day;' but only to prove that clouds and darkness are as +necessary to the well being of man as clear sunshine. Neither would I +be the bearer of the 'joyless tidings that there is no clear sky in +the heavens;' but only to query whether our portion of 'clear sky' is +not that which reflects upon the earth; and that only during the short +period of our lives? Who has a right to complain, if our blessings are +circumscribed to our sphere of action? Must we enjoy nothing, because +more is not allotted to our share? It is very probable there may be +millions of other suns, enlightening other worlds, and systems of +worlds, giving life, light and warmth to rational beings like +ourselves, exceeding all imagination in number; and yet, have little +of the blessings of those heavenly luminaries that falls to our +enjoyment! They merly form a beautiful canopy over our heads. It is +true, their greatest use to us may be that of which we are mostly +ignorant; in balancing systems &c. but yet we must have some knowledge +of those benefits, before me can feel grateful for them. Dost thou +wish to visit them? Dost thou desire to know more concerning them than +thou canst know in this state? Calm and deliberate reason would say +unto the, 'Be content, O vain man! with thine own lot, and not try to +soar above thy proper station!' + +"The above is not designed as a reflection; it is only what I take to +myself. + +"You have proposed what I conceive you think is the only alternative +to which I must flee, when I give up the truth of divine revelation. +But may I not stop to inquire whether there is not some medium between +the two extremes which you have mentioned? Must I believe that there +was no such man as Jesus, or if there were, that he was an impostor; +or else believe all that is stated concerning him? Must I also believe +the same of the apostles or else believe them impeccable? May not even +good men be honestly deceived? and being deceived, honestly lead +others into an error?--That honest men do not bear 'testimony to +falshood,' I admit; neither could such a principle be justified even +under a 'pretence of doing good;' yet I will not undertake to say that +no such _pious frauds_ have ever been practiced in the world, and even +among professed christians; and how soon it was practiced after the +days of the apostles, and whether or not by some even in their day, +would be very difficult now to determine. Neither is it necessary I +should say any thing more upon the subject, as you admit this +principle 'has been practised upon by a wicked priesthood for ages!' + +"In remarking on my fourth proposition, which I added to the _three_ +which you had proposed, you say, 'I will not be too positive that I +rightly apprehend your meaning on this subject, but as you propose to +allow my three propositions, and as you make no attempt to do away my +reasoning, especially on my last,' &c. Here permit me to observe, I am +well persuaded you did not fully understand me, whatever you did +yourself, on this subject. You will perceive, sir, both by my fourth +number, and also by my fifth, that my answer to your _three +propositions_ was not completed. Probably if you had waited for the +whole of my answer you would have understood me much better, and also +would have seen the use and propriety of my fourth proposition. + +"I think, as you will perceive by my fifth number that even honest men +may be mistaken. And if so, it is very important to know whether the +apostles judged only from outward circumstances, or whether they had +some internal evidence, called _inspiration_, by which they always +knew the truth of the things whereof they affirmed. This was the +object of my fourth proposition. + +"That you did not fully understand me appears by your saying, 'If it +be allowed that my propositions are true, then you _consent_ to the +validity of the apostles' testimony respecting a future state.' If +this could be allowed, it might then be admitted, that in this +argument it makes no difference how the apostles come by their +'knowledge of futurity.'--But I did not know, neither do I now +perceive, that my admitting the apostles to be honest men makes it +necessary also to admit the validity of their 'testimony respecting a +future state;' unless it can be shown that honest men are never +mistaken respecting the things whereof they affirm. I admit the +'_honesty_' of my good friend, in the above quoted proposition; but I +can hardly be willing, purely on this account, to '_consent_' to its +truth. + +"As it respects an inheritance given in a WILL, &c. I have some doubts +whether reason always carries things as far as you would wish to carry +this metaphor to make it a parallel. Reason sometimes moves in a small +circle; and that too without being unreasonable. If the benefit is +said to have been absolutely made, and reason is informed of the fact, +it has a right to take it for granted, that the donor had the property +to give, and that it is not given to the injury of any one else. But +yet he consults his own interest, and that only, when he says, 'this +is very important to me, if true, yet I doubt, yea I have reasons for +not believing it true.' Would any one say that such a man talketh +unreasonably? + +"You have called on me to prove 'that no revelation was needed;' and +have acknowledged, 'that if none was necessary, a being of infinite +wisdom would make none.' And at the same time you have argued very +pathetically indeed to prove the necessity of a revelation; that is, +if that can be called argument which grows out of a man's own +feelings: A man, however, of different feelings might bring forward +arguments equally energetic, and perhaps equally conclusive, but +diametrically opposite. + +"I know not what evidence you wish, or what evidence would be +accepted, to prove that a revelation is not necessary. Even if such +were the fact, it appears to me to be hardly susceptible of proof. It +may be no more difficult, however, than it is to prove that a +revelation is true. I presume that nothing short of a _revelation_ +would convince you that a _revelation_ is not necessary! For who but +God can know what either is, or is not necessary for God to make +known? + +"But if arguments drawn from our feelings are admissible, hear, for +once, the voice of simple nature, proclaiming in her simplicity by +every thing which exists either in or around you, that a revelation is +neither necessary nor useful. That every thing which can be enjoyed in +life can be enjoyed equally as well, and often better, without either +its knowledge or belief. That every duty, either to God or man, can be +performed as well, and with the same beneficial effect. And finally +that man may be brought, without either the aid, knowledge, or belief +of revelation, not only to be reconciled to his conditions and station +in life, but also to curtail all his _anxious_ desires to which he not +only _believes_ but _knows_ there is a natural possibility of +obtaining. + +"If one could be brought who would solemnly testify to the truth of +the above paragraph, would you believe his testimony? I presume not. +But why not? Will you say it is impossible it should be true? No one +can know this for a certainty, except those whose misfortune it is, if +it be a misfortune not to believe in a future state of existence. If +such there are, however, and yet their lives are exactly correct, +their examples in society equally good, and their enjoyments +apparently equally as great as other men, why should you doubt their +testimony? Would you say they were _bad men_?--could you say they were +_dishonest men_?--and if _honest_, according to your argument, why not +believe them? I can see no inducement that any one could have to deny +a revelation, if he believes it true; but I can see a very great +inducement for mankind to maintain the reality of a revelation, +although at the same time they may doubt its truth. + +"If you doubt whether the human mind can be brought to such a state as +has been mentioned above, it is only for the want of proper evidence; +the fact, however, is susceptible of proof. Yea, it can be more than +proved; _the happy unbeliever_ in idle tales, but believing in eternal +principles, knows it for a certainty. I do not mean that he knows for +a certainty, that there is no revelation, but he knows for a certainty +that a belief in revelation is not absolutely necessary to a happy +life. Now, if such characters exists, will you receive their own +testimony in support of the above fact? If not, it will be of no use +to produce them. + +"In order to make a proper estimation of virtue, we should take into +consideration the motives and inducements a person has to be virtuous. +The virtue of some men seems to be predicated on the following +principles; on the consideration that they are going to heaven and +happiness in another world, while others, whom they conceive not so +good as themselves are going to hell, a place of never ending +torments. On this ground they can be very _pious_ also, and do a great +deal for religion. At the same time they will tell you, as many have, +if they believed all were to be alike happy in another world, they +would then stick at no crimes to obtain their object, but would +indulge themselves in all manner of gratifications, &c. Such virtue, +however, I conclude does not stand very high in your estimation. No; +but you would be virtuous on a more noble scale; so long as you can +believe that you shall have an eternal existence with God, in a happy +conscious identity, you are willing every body else should enjoy the +same blessing; on supposition that this is true, or as you can believe +it, you are for doing all the good in your power, and at the same time +taking all the comfort you can in doing it. You are trying to make +every one believe what you believe, that they may enjoy what you +enjoy. But the moment this faith, and this hope of yours is gone, your +virtue is gone with it; you can now do nothing, and of course enjoy +nothing! + +"Now compare this virtue with the virtue of one whom the christian +world would call an infidel! One whose faith, and of course, hope, +does not extend beyond what he knows has been the lot of some, and, as +far as circumstances will admit, may be his own; and yet he is always +faithful in the discharge of whatever appears to be his duty, always +enjoys life, whether in prosperity or adversity, and is always, so far +as it respects circumstances over which he has no control, reconciled +and contented with his lot. He knows his life is uncertain, and +although he has no real faith or well grounded hope beyond the present +state of existence, yet the thought gives him neither anxiety nor +concern. His only object is to do good; to enjoy life while it lasts, +to cultivate and improve human nature for the benefit of posterity; to +bear the evils and misfortunes of life with fortitude, and to be +unfeignedly thankful for all the happiness of which he is made +susceptible. Therefore whether his life be for a day, or for eternity, +it matters not, because, for the present, it is all the same to him: +his duties are the same, and his enjoyments are the same. O how happy! +How inexpressibly happy, is such a state as this! + +"While others are feasting their fruitful imaginations with the idle +and visionary dreams of fanaticism; with a kind of chimerical heaven +of which they know _nothing_, as to its certainty: this man is in +heaven already: dwelling in love, he 'dwelleth in God, and God in +him.' + +"Do you not wish, my brother, that you could find such a character +among Christians? But Christianity does not afford such a character, +in _full_, nor is it possible that it ever should. Such a character, +however, there may be, and when the world, or any considerable part of +them can receive his testimony, he may make his appearance. + +"You seem to think it may be successfully argued 'that the moral and +religious state of man really required a divine revelation.' This +argument, if I understand you, grows out of the ardent desires of man; +which, it is admitted, would be pretty conclusive if it could be made +to appear that the desires of man are never fruitless. Man, it is +true, rationally desires happiness; for this is essential to his moral +existence; yet, may he not, through ignorance, or from some other +cause, suppose things essential to his happiness, which, in fact, are +not essential, and therefore ardently desire them? But does it +necessarily follow that the particular things desired in such cases +are absolutely necessary? and therefore will absolutely be granted? I +believe not.--And if he may be thus deceived in any one thing, why may +he not be deceived in the supposed necessity of a divine revelation? +It is believed that a perfect reconciliation to the present state of +man; to what he is, with the prospect only of what he yet may be in +this life, without either the hope or the fear of a future existence, +would be infinitely better than any thing which has yet been produced +by a belief in divine revelation; especially any further than a +revelation is conducive to this end; and if a revelation ever was +necessary, it was necessary only to reconcile man to his present state +of existence. But if man can be equally reconciled without the +_knowledge_, or, what amounts to the same thing, without the _belief_ +of divine revelation, then the end of such a revelation is obtained. + +"It seems to be expedient that I should say a few more words, +'respecting the apostles' stating no more than what was substantially +true.' + +"I hope, however, we shall not lose sight of the main subject in +debate, by criticising on words. I say _main subject_ here, as I think +there will be no occasion of saying any thing more on the subject of +the _languages_ in relation to the arts and sciences. + +"I am not disposed to think, sir, that you have designedly wrested the +meaning of my words; nor that you are unwilling to receive my meaning +when it is fully understood; and yet, having once explained on this +subject, I am unable to account for your remarks. + +"After my informing you that you had misconstrued me, and also stating +my meaning, as I supposed, more explicitly, you have informed me that +if your first construction was not my meaning, it seems that I must +have meant the reverse of it, which, I must aver, is as foreign from +my meaning as your first construction! For neither your former nor +latter construction was in my mind when I wrote the sentence to which +I allude: but a different idea from either of your constructions was +in my mind, and was what I meant to state; which idea, as I conceive, +is as fairly expressed by my words, and is a more just construction of +them, taking into consideration the sentence which follows, than +either of the ideas which you have expressed as their meaning. + +"Permit me therefore to state again, that whatever might have been my +opinion respecting the writings of the apostles, I did not mean to +suggest, and much less to affirm in that sentence 'that they stated +that which is not true!'--Neither did I mean to acknowledge in that +sentence that they had stated 'no more' than what is true, at least in +_substance_; but I did mean this, and this only, that admitting those +things were true, all would admit that the design of the apostles was +nothing _more_ than to state the truth of those things in _substance_; +because all would acknowledge that they were not careful to be correct +as to every _minutiae_. But as this makes nothing either for or +against the main point, I wish to add no more respecting it, than +simply to remark, that even if the apostles had gone on the opposite +extreme of what I meant I should not think them 'deserving of _no +credit_.' Supposing they had descended into _minutiae_, and related, +to an exact nicety, every particular circumstance (which is exactly +the reverse of what I mean to state), would they on this account have +been deserving of _no credit_? I think not. Considering the time, +however, which had elapsed after the facts are said to have taken +place, before a history of them was given in writing, I think the +evangelists are entitled to _more credit_, on the whole, than what +they would have been if their testimony had borne the complexion last +mentioned. + +"To close this letter, which perhaps is already too long, I would here +acknowledge that as I have expressed doubts in the subject of divine +revelation, you have a right to hear my reasons for doubting. These I +promised to give you (as I thought) at the close of my fourth number. +You have informed me, verbally, that I promised to give you my +_doubts_ only. If I did so, it was only a slip of the pen, to which I +am too prone; it was my _reasons for doubting_, which I meant to have +promised you; and in my next I shall endeavor to fulfil that promise. + +"Yours, &c. + +A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER V. + +_Dear sir, and brother_,--Your fifth and sixth numbers were received +together, and will be noticed in the order in which they came to hand. + +You observe that you know of no better evidence that "there ever was +such a story reported among the Jews, in the days of the apostles, +than there is to prove the actual resurrection of Jesus," &c. This +suggestion leads to the following queries. + +1st. Was there in the days of the apostles, such a man known in the +country of the Jews, as Jesus Christ? + +2d. Was this man put to death, as the four evangelists and others +testify? + +3d. Did the apostles declare to the people who put him to death, that +they knew that he had arisen from the dead? + +4th. If the Jews who put Jesus to death could go to his sepulchre and +show his dead body to the people, would the story of the resurrection +ever have gained any credit among the Jews? + +5th. If they could not find the body of him who had been crucified, +would the opposers not endeavour to report something that might appear +as plausible as they could, especially as they had the keeping of the +sepulchre in their own hands? + +6th. What would more naturally suggest itself to the imagination of +men, in the situation of the rulers of the Jews, than the story of the +disciples having stolen the dead body, &c. Or, + +7th. Was this account written long since the apostles' days, by an +unknown author, who made the whole story as he wrote it? If this last +question cannot be answered in the affirmative without doing violence +to the most authentic testimony and also to the plainest dictates of +reason, it seems to follow that the 6th preceding question, must be +accepted in the affirmative, which furnishes sufficient evidence to +prove that such a story was reported among the Jews in the days of the +apostles. + +Whether you are correct in supposing there is as much evidence to +prove the resurrection as to prove the report of the disciples' having +stolen the body, or not, it appears to me, that there is no proper +ground on which the latter can even be doubted. + +Suppose a writer in vindicating believer's baptism in opposition to +the sprinkling of infants, should relate a wonderful story concerning +the persecutions of the baptists, in which he should set forth the +particulars of one of their leading characters having been put to +death by their opposers. In this account, the author says; Those +murderers, after they put the man to death, for fear his friends +should steal the body, went and placed a strong guard round the tomb +to watch for the space of three days and nights, but before the +expiration of this period, the guard came to the rulers and make known +that the body is gone, and acknowledge at the same time, that there +were such wonders seen by them at the tomb, that they were unable to +endure the sight and retain their natural powers; that the rulers gave +them money to report that a number of the baptists came while the +guard was asleep and stole the body--"So they took the money, and did +as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the +Pædobaptists unto this day." Would this story appear any ways to the +advantage of a cause, with which reason and common sense have any +thing to do? + +Reason, sir, for which you seem determined to contend, is candid; it +readily acknowledges that the account of this report among the Jews is +a true account. And it acknowledges also that the truth of this +account is good evidence to prove that the rulers of the Jews found it +necessary, in order to oppose the truth of the resurrection, to get +such a report in circulation. + +You have not taken me exactly on the ground of my argument, in +supposing that, by _revelation_, I mean nothing more than "what was +revealed to me by the resurrection of Jesus, allowing the resurrection +true." My design was to consider the three propositions, viz. +revelation, the resurrection of Jesus, and the truth of the testimony +of the apostles, concerning matters of fact, true, disjunctively; and +also to avail myself of whatever might arise to the advantage of my +argument from the relation of these facts. All this you will, as a +generous and candid antagonist, be willing to allow me to do, on the +supposition that the three propositions, above named, be granted. For +surely no necessary deduction from granted premises can mislead, +unless what is granted be false. You will furthermore see, that by +granting the truth of divine revelation some degree of allowance is +given to the probability, at least, of the testimony of the apostles +respecting a future state. The confining of the subject of revelation, +to that only which is revealed by the resurrection of Jesus, seems an +unnecessary restriction, which can answer no purpose but to embarrass +an argument which it would have no real force in refuting; for if the +resurrection be admitted, which affords such an important revelation +as grows out of the fact, it establishes the general truth of a DIVINE +REVELATION from God to man. This being granted, all that stands in a +necessary relation to it may with propriety be used in defence of any +particular question relative to the general subject. I have already +argued the truth of what the apostles say of a future state, from the +facts which you grant for the sake of the argument, but you seem to +misapprehend me in supposing that I mean to contend, that what the +apostles have said respecting a future state, was spoken by way of +_conclusion_ from certain known facts. The known facts, such as the +miracles of Jesus, his resurrection, and the miracles wrought by the +apostles, I used as proof of the divine mission of these servants of +God. This divine mission being proved, gives the ground on which I +contend for the merit of their testimony concerning a future state. +You should have regarded my argument, as placing the credibility of +the apostles' testimony concerning a future state, on the fact of +their divine mission, and not as you seem to have done, on the +supposition, that they could not err in drawing conclusions, &c. + +You have misunderstood me also, in supposing that by "the guess work +of men," I had any allusion to the known miracles related by the +apostles. What I called "mere guess work of men," was the _opinions_ +of the apostles on supposition they were not divinely directed, in the +testimony they laid down respecting a future state. On this particular +subject, all you have said in reply to my reasoning, has no just +relation to my argument. + +It was expected, that in relation to the foregoing subject, you would +have seen the necessity of either denying the reality of those +miracles, which, if true, prove the divine mission of Christ and his +apostles, or of granting the authority of their testimony. But in room +of finding what was so confidently expected, I find the mistakes above +pointed out, which occupy considerable space, without deciding any +thing, or furnishing ground on which I feel disposed to place any +argument. + +The next particular which demands notice is stated as follows: "Your +final conclusion, after all, comes so near what I conceive to be the +truth, that were you as correct in every thing as you appear to be in +this, I should hardly think it expedient to pursue this controversy +any further." You then quote me. "The Christian is enabled to hope for +existence with God in an eternal state, and this is as much as our +present welfare requires." You rejoin; "Most excellent! to this +proposition I cheerfully assent. Yea, I would consent even to pruning +it a little which no doubt would spoil it in your view. Instead of, +'this is as much as,' read, 'even this is more than,' and your +proposition would stand exactly right." You assure me that you are in +search of truth.--Truth is the only design of your heart. It would be +uncharitable in me to doubt your sincerity. You sincerely and +cheerfully assent to the above proposition viz. that the christian is +enabled to hope for existence with God in an eternal state, and this +is as much as our present welfare requires. This you say is _most_ +excellent. But notwithstanding you cheerfully assent to this +proposition, and can pronounce it _most_ excellent! Yet you think, if +the proposition was so altered as to allow us no hope of a future +existence with God, it would stand _exactly_ right! This variation is +so small, this difference is so little that you think if I were as +correct in every thing as I am in this, there would be no need of +pursuing this controversy any further! Let me ask dear sir, if such +reasoning as this can promise a profitable reward for our labours, and +a recompence for the precious time we are spending? The eye of reason, +I say is candid: it sees and knows, that if a hope of existence with +God hereafter is _more than_ our present welfare requires, such an +expectation is awfully dreadful beyond the power of language to +describe. Reason knows that there is an infinite difference between no +existence hereafter, and an eternal existence. And it knows, that if +the former is exactly what our present welfare requires, the latter is +completely repugnant to it. + +With what you here contend for, I will connect a passage from your +sixth number. "He knows that a belief in revelation is not absolutely +necessary to a happy life." By bringing these passages together, I am +led to understand what you mean by the latter viz. that a belief in a +happy future state, is not necessary to our present felicity. This is +what you know! What then are you in pursuant of? You pretend to be +earnestly solicitous to have your doubts respecting divine revelation +removed if possible; you call on me to assist in this work as if you +viewed it with deep concern.--If your doubts should be removed, if you +should be altogether convinced that God has actually revealed the +truth of a a happy immortality, you know it would add nothing to your +happiness. Furthermore you argue, following the passage quoted from +your sixth number, that this belief in the revelation of a happy +futurity is not necessary to produce a virtuous life. Allowing all you +argue on this subject, you feel sure that a real conviction of the +truth of the christian doctrine, and hope of future blessedness, would +be of no advantage to your virtue or happiness! I ask again, what are +you in pursuit of? You compliment me too highly in your encomium on +the sermon in which I laid down that man is so constituted that he is +always willing to exchange that which gives him trouble, for that +which gives him comfort. And you advert to this particular sentiment +of mine, in your observations on St. Paul's conversion, and very +justly refuse to allow him to be an exception of the general rule. But +are you not an exception of this rule? Do you not appear to be +solicitous to have your doubts removed without expecting the least +advantage by it? Are you not employing your time in writing +voluminously on a subject which you _know_ can yield you no +recompence? In search after the evidences of the christian hope, you +cannot say: where is that faithful, that friendly witness by which I +can believe, and believing, enjoy as a precious reality that hope +which is as an anchor to the soul, both sure and stedfast; which +entereth into that within the veil, where our forerunner hath for us +entered; which hope would enable me to sing that triumphant song; "O +death where is thy sting, O grave where is thy victory? Thanks be to +God who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." No, this +hope would add nothing to your happiness, and what you want it for is +not for me to imagine. + +You can employ the powers of luminous reason in contemplating eternal +nothing with sweet complacency. This is "exactly" as it should be! +Varying from this the proposition would need to be "pruned!" Dear +brother, does reason countenance all this absurdity? If it be a +pleasure to contemplate non-existence does it not involve the +absurdity of enjoying the expectation of the discontinuance of +enjoyment? + +You have expressed, with interjections, the value of truth. You seem +almost disposed to arrogate to yourself a peculiar regard for this +divine treasure. I can fancy I hear your secret addresses to this +lovely divinity; in rapturous language, with aspect of eager affection +saying; O truth, the loveliest of all attractions, thou art balsam for +every wound, antidote for every poison; thou sweetenest every bitter +cup; the gloomy prospect of living, in thy bright sunshine is by thee +changed into the joyous expectation of soon losing sight of thee +forever in the elysium of non-existence! + +I will not burden you with further deductions, so repugnant to the +dictates of reason; but I will cherish a hope, that you will see +sufficient reason for rescinding the arguments which lead to them.[1] + +[Footnote 1: Perhaps the reader may be a little astonished here, that +the objector should ever have consented to publish arguments which +makes him appear so much to a disadvantage. But an honest objector, +who has been so blind to his own heart as not to perceive the real +cause of a perfect reconciliation to the general providence of God, +instead of feeling _chagrined_, will feel _grateful_, when his errors +are _honestly exposed_. Believing, therefore, that others may be in +the same predicament, these arguments are published to the world.] + +On supposition divine revelation be true, you agree with me on the +subject wherein I differ from the general opinion, that a knowledge of +the gospel in this world is indispensable to the soul's felicity in +the next, but you are confident that this my sentiment will be viewed +by the Christian world in general, with greater abhorrence than even +your own arguments, &c. And you hope I am prepared for the +consequences. Reply--I have little or no concern about what opinion +reputed orthodoxy may entertain of the truths which reason and +revelation harmonize in supporting, nor am very careful about any +preparation to meet the consequences which may result from the +inseparable companions, _superstition_ and _ignorance_. + +In my view, the commonly received opinion, on the subject under +consideration, is no more reasonable, than the supposition that the +happiness and wellbeing of our children, in this world, depend on +their having had a correct knowledge of their parents, of their wisdom +and parental providence for them, before they were born. The wisdom +and goodness of God, according to scripture and reason, are universal. +The ignorance of mortals concerning them, on the one hand, makes them +no less, and their knowledge, on the other makes them no greater. We +must duly regard, however, the evident fact, that the enjoyment of +reasonable beings, is extended by the extension of knowledge, which +renders acquirements in science and divinity an object of the first +magnitude. + +The sentiment which you express on the above subject is what I am well +persuaded can never be refuted, and it appears to me that by placing +the system of divine revelation on the ground above noticed, it is +rendered free from these absurdities which have rendered it +exceptionable to the eye of reason and philosophy. + +The gospel of everlasting life, like all real science, has always +existed, but like the sciences, has been developed by degrees, and +brought to the understanding of mankind as a mean of refinement, +improvement, and of conformity to mortal principles, as expressed by +that eminent divine St. Paul, 2 Cor. 5, 18, 19, 20. "And all things +are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and +hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; to wit, that God was +in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their +trespasses unto them: and hath committed unto us the word of +reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God +did beseech you by us; we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled +to God." Now to suppose that men, who on account of their ignorance of +the gospel are unreconciled to God, who has undertaken the gracious +work of reconciling them to himself, not imputing their trespasses +unto them, are on account of their unreconciliation excluded from +being the objects of divine favour is a grand absurdity to say the +least. + +The fact is, the gospel is a dispensation of general favour, and it +actually communicates many invaluable blessings to those who know +nothing of its divine principles. There are millions of people in the +world who are blessed in a great variety of respects by means of civil +government, who know nothing of the principles of the governments by +which they are protected. How many blessings are constantly falling, +as it were like a shower, on our infants and youth in America, from +the favourable government of our happy country, and yet these children +know not the difference between an absolute monarchy and a republic. + +How many millions of the human race are daily fed from the products of +agriculture, who know nothing of the principles which produce those +rich supplies. So there are multitudes who enjoy many blessings +procured by the gospel of Christ, who have no knowledge of the sublime +principles of this religion. But here again I will repeat the remark, +that our rational felicity is greatly increased by an extension of our +knowledge in the principles of the doctrine of Jesus, which +consideration is a proper incentive to grow in grace and in the +knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. + +Knowledge is food for the mind and nourishes and strengthens it as +aliment does the body. Our youth learn to read the books which they +are favoured with in consequence of the discovery of the art of +printing, and they obtain great advantages by means of those books, +while they remain entirely ignorant, many of them, of the art by which +such a favour is put into their hands. But still it is healthy to the +youthful mind, to receive the knowledge of this and other arts, and +even to know that an art so extensively useful was not known in the +world four hundred years ago. A person on being informed of the first +discovery of this art, and of its being practiced, in the first place, +with separate wooden types, might be disposed to doubt the ignorance +of men in those times. He might think it incredible that any thing so +easy, that even children can perform was unknown to the learned world +in those times when learning flourished in ancient Greece and Rome. +And I am of opinion that many now, who are disposed to doubt the +circumstances which attended the first promulgation of the gospel, and +even call themselves unbelievers, do in reality, owe even their +existence and of course every blessing they enjoy to those facts of +which they now doubt. Yes, sir, the light of reason, and the knowledge +of moral principles, on which you feel disposed to place so much +consequence, I am inclined to believe are reflections of that light +which was the delightful theme of the evangelical Isaiah, chapters 6, +7, 8. "I the Lord hath called thee in righteousness, and will hold +thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the +people, for a light of the Gentiles; to open the blind eyes, to bring +out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out +of the prison house. I am the Lord; that is my name: and my glory will +I not give to another, nor my praise to graven images." Am I deceived, +sir, or is it evident, that the glorious LIGHT which illuminates our +moral hemisphere, and distinguishes our country from barbarism and +savage ignorance, is the gospel? The name of Jesus, his doctrine, the +reformation, seceding from the Church of England and persecution for +conscience sake, rank as causes of the settlement of New England by +our forefathers, and of the existence of the men who are carrying on +this correspondence. This is mentioned with a view to direct your mind +to the consideration of that course of causes and effects by which we +are enabled to reason on what wo call moral and physical principles. +And a hope is entertained that due regard will be paid to this +self-evident fact, that nothing ever took place without an adequate +cause to produce it. + +With this reflection, I come to notice your remarks on the subject of +St. Paul's conversion; for it appears to me that you have allowed +certain facts without assigning any adequate causes by which those +facts came to exist. You make no attempt to deny that there was such a +man as St. Paul, nor do you deny his having been educated, and +religiously instructed as the scripture history concerning this man +sets forth. But you assign no reason why he became a believer in Jesus +Christ, you assign no reason for his becoming a preacher of the +doctrine of Jesus, you assign no reason why he should so patiently +suffer for the religion, the truth of which you are now calling in +question. You allow that before his conversion he persecuted unto +death the "weak and defenceless disciples of the meek and lowly +Jesus." But you assign no reasons why weak and defenceless men should +become the disciples of Jesus. You would fain insinuate that what he +relates of the particular circumstance which happened to him on his +way to Damascus was a mere reverie. But you make no attempt to show +how such a reverie could produce in this learned pharisee a belief +that Jesus, who was crucified had actually arose from the dead, when +there were not even the shadow of evidence existing to prove such an +improbable fact. You are inclined to this notion of a reverie on +account of some experience of your own, which your good sense and +after reflection have discovered to be nothing on which dependence +ought to be placed. Sir, where is the similarity of your case with +that of the learned pharisee? Do you really believe you ever +experienced a reverie, that would go in the least to cause you to +believe in the resurrection of a man who was hanged in your sight, and +who you knew was buried, and of whose resurrection you had no +evidence, only a vague reverie? Do you believe you ever experienced a +mere imagination which was strong enough to produce the above belief, +and which could continue to influence you all your life long, lead you +to forsake a most honourable connexion, and to espouse a religion +which all the prejudices of your education opposed, and to labour +continually for its support and to suffer every thing for its defence? +No, you pretend to no such thing, therefore your case is very +different from St. Paul's. + +I agree with you, that the case of this apostle comes under the rule +which you recollect I suggested in my sermon. He undoubtedly viewed +the religion which he received in room of the one he parted with the +most valuable. And to this agrees his own testimony. Phil. iii. 7, &c. +"But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. +Yea, doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of +the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord; for whom I have suffered the +loss of all things, and do count them but dung that I may win Christ, +and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of +the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the +righteousness which is of God by faith." + +As you promise to say more on this subject, I shall _continue_ to +expect an attempt to deny the conversion of such a man as St. Paul is +set forth to have been, to the Christian religion, under all the +circumstances which the scripture account mentions; or an attempt to +show that such a conversion could _probably_ take place without +supposing the facts on which the religion of Christ was founded were +realities; or lastly, an acknowledgment that this conversion may +reasonably be allowed as evidence to us of the truth of the Christian +religion. + +Should you be disposed to disallow the account which the scripture +gives of St. Paul, I will ask the favour of you to point out and show +to my understanding where in Paley's Horae Paulinae fails of proving +the truth of the scripture history of St. Paul. + + * * * * * + +What follows is designed to notice your sixth number; out of which the +following subjects are selected, on which some remarks are made. + +1st. You observe that "when we hear things, which to our understanding +are improbable, the improbability of the facts raises a doubt in our +minds; and certainly there can be no harm in suspending our judgment, +nor yet in withholding our belief until we are fully satisfied." This +first subject regards the degrees of evidences which are required in +different cases, and the moral propriety of withholding the assent of +the mind in the case of a want of evidence. + +2d. You are not disposed to doubt that many of the prophets were good +men; nor will you contend that they were not all such, and taught the +people according to the best of their abilities--And yet you hesitate +to allow the divinity of their testimony. + +3d. I notice that you acknowledge that there are evidences in favour +of divine revelation, which would support it, if there were nothing to +counterbalance their testimony. + +4th. You hardly know how to understand me where I suggest, that in +disproving the religion of Jesus Christ, you disprove all religion, +&c. + +5th. An inquiry whether Jesus and the apostles might not be honest +men, and yet their testimony in certain cases not to be relied on! + +6th. You suppose that arguments equally energetic and equally +conclusive might be drawn from our feelings against, as in favour of +the necessity of divine revelation. + +7th. In enumerating the virtues and enjoyments of one who does not +even desire a future state, you mention unfeigned thankfulness for all +the happiness of which he is made susceptible. + +8th. You assert, that if a revelation ever was necessary, it was +necessary only to reconcile man to his present state efexistence. And, + +9th. You seem to fault me for supposing that in case you did not mean +as I took you, on the subject of the apostles' testimony, you must +mean the reverse, &c. + +These nine particulars, it is true, do not comprehend every item +contained in your sixth number, but I believe that a candid reply to +each of them will satisfy you that a competent degree of attention has +been paid to this communication. + +1st. Concerning the degrees of evidence required in certain cases to +carry conviction of facts to the mind; it has always been allowed by +those who have vindicated the religion of Jesus, that a belief in +miracles requires more evidence than a belief in ordinary events +recorded in history. Having granted this they proceed to associate the +evidences, which God in his divine economy has given and preserved, +and conclude with grateful assurance that the evidence of the miracles +of Jesus, his unspeakably glorious resurrection from the dead, +together with the miracles with which the first promulgation of the +gospel was effected, are abundantly sufficient to carry conviction to +vastly the greatest part of candid minds. + +In the mode the last sentence is concluded, I must, in justice to +others, take the sentiment there expressed to myself; for I am sorry +to say that christians, who have contended against infidelity have, +generally, been less charitable than the genius of the religion they +have, in many respects, most ably defended. I cannot find authority +for denying candor to one who is unable to believe on the ground of +such evidence as may satisfy my mind of a fact. I will therefore +suppose that some who are candid, may, from some cause which we cannot +analyze, be unable to believe the great truths of the gospel, on such +evidence as is abundantly sufficient to convince others who are as +scrupulous as necessary investigation requires. + +It is, sir, the opinion of some very learned authors, who stand in the +very first rank, for candor and erudition, that the proofs of which +the gospel is susceptible are, in all respects, equal to what they +could have been in any other way concerted, within the reach of human +conception. This is going to a great length I confess; and yet I am +strongly inclined to their opinion. I will candidly state why I am +so.--1st. Taking the subject in the gross, I am convinced of the truth +of the gospel of Christ. Now as I believe this gospel is not of man, +but of God, I likewise believe that God in consummate wisdom has +planned the evidences by which it is and will be supported in the +world, until it fills the whole earth. 2d. As I believe that divine +wisdom has planned, ordered and directed all the means which will +finally operate as evidences in defence of the gospel, I cannot +believe that the wisdom or sagacity of man could have suggested a +chain of evidences which could so well have secured the cause to be +supported. And 3d. I have spent much time in reflecting and studying +on this momentous subject, some time in reading authors on both sides +of the question, a great deal of time in reading the scriptures, and +have come to this conclusion that no set of men ever lived in this +world that could either have planned such a scheme as the gospel, or +ever have invented such a chain of evidences for its support. + +If the single miracle of the resurrection be considered, as the fact +on which all other facts relating to the gospel seem to rest, it is +confidently believed that no human invention could have concerted a +system so well calculated to secure the fact to all future +generations, as that which has been adopted by the divine economy. Had +the whole of the Jewish nation with their Gentile neighbours, together +with the Roman authorities, all confessed Christianity, being fully +convinced of the resurrection of Jesus, and had they inscribed all the +miracles recorded in the new testament on monuments which should defy +the hand of time to bring them to decay, it requires but a moment's +reflection to see that all this would have vastly increased the +difficulty now to prove that it was not all contrived by man's +invention. + +But let us consider the unbelief of the Jews, the violent opposition +of that ancient priesthood, its coalition with the Roman government +against the gospel, the great jealousy which the acknowledged miracles +of Jesus had excited, the vigilance by which he was watched by his +religious enemies, the careful scrutiny employed to discover fraud in +his miracles if it were possible; and then add to these considerations +that the miracles of Jesus were publically performed, and of such a +nature as to admit of the easiest possible detection if they had not +been real: and finally to disarm unbelief at once, consider that the +ministry of the gospel was set up by the apostles, on the bold +declaration that God had raised the crucified Jesus from the dead! A +declaration, which if it had not been true, mark well, sir, could have +been as easily refuted and rendered the derision of all people as any +declaration that could have been made. But I shall lose myself, and +forget that you have not yet called my attention so directly to this +subject, as to justify my entering largely into it. + +What you have said on the subject of believing in the testimony of +David, that the "Lord is good to all, and his tender mercies are over +all his works," also the same sentiment communicated by Jesus Christ, +that God loves his enemies and that he requires of us the same +exercise towards our enemies, though perfectly reasonable, as I view +the subject, seems to call up the question, how it happens that +thousands of professed Christians, who believe in the miracles of +Jesus, his resurrection and the miracles of the apostles, are +notwithstanding hostile to this divine and glorious sentiment of the +blessed Jesus! Being compelled, by the visible evidences of divine +goodness, seen in the rain and sunshine, they advance so far as to +acknowledge that _temporal_ favours are generally distributed, but +that God does really love the wicked, they utterly deny. Now while you +can believe this great moral truth without a miracle, Christian people +in general cannot believe it with one. You are not to suppose that I +am willing to allow that you believe this sentiment without a miracle, +though you would insinuate, that this is the case. My opinion is, that +had it not been for the miracles recorded in the new testament, the +truth of which you are disposed to call in question, you and I, if we +had existed, would have had no more light on this subject than the +rudest savage, or what is worse, the most superstitious and contracted +Christian. If you have any ground on which you can fairly refute my +opinion on this subject, I hope you will faithfully perform it; if +not, it will be expected that you will express your acquiescence. Such +is the power of natural prejudice which we know exists in the human +mind, that without a divine revelation from God, supported by the most +evident miracles, man will not extend his views of divine benevolence +scarcely beyond the rivers and mountains which environ the +circumscribed vicinity of his birth. Trace the power and operation of +this prejudice and you find it maintaining hostility against the light +of revelation itself, and it is only by slow degrees that it is +brought into submission. We reason very injudiciously when we bring +ourselves to believe, that by the light of reason we could know and +understand all the moral truths which we have been taught by +revelation; we forget that revelation has illuminated our reason and +taught it how to see and understand.--Just as well might the sprightly +youth refuse to acknowledge that its mother learned it to walk, and +ever gave it nourishment and strength to perform the exercise, and +allege that it can walk as well as she can. As well might the learned +graduate refuse the grateful honours due to his instructors, and say: +my reason, my understanding comprehend these sciences, of what use +then are these learned professors and this college institution? But +would not reason point him to the condition of those, to whom the +blessings of instruction, which, through much difficulty had given him +the light of science, had not extended? Would it not force the +comparison on his understanding, and humble him into gratitude? + +It seems impossible, sir, for reason to compare our situation with +theirs, who have not been enlightened by the gospel, without kneeling, +like the woman in Simon's house, at the feet of Jesus. + +2d. If the prophets where not divinely inspired, will you suggest any +way by which their pretentions to divine inspiration can be reconciled +with their honesty? They all speak in the name of the Lord, and +evidently aim at the high pretention of being spoken to, in a special +manner, by God himself. Will you say: they were a set of poor deluded +enthusiasts? But this would contradict your reason which can see in +every page of their writings a very different character. A passage +from the 1st chapter of Jeremiah is here quoted for an example. "Then +the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, before I formed thee &c. I +sanctified thee; and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. Then +said I, ah, Lord God! behold, I cannot speak, for I am a child: But +the Lord said unto me, say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all +that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt +speak. Be not afraid of their faces; for I am with thee to deliver +thee, saith the Lord. Then the Lord put forth his hand and touched my +mouth; and the Lord said unto me, behold, I have put my words in thy +mouth." + +Here Jeremiah evidently designed to declare himself an inspired +prophet of God, by which he was justified in speaking in his name. Now +if all this was mere fiction, how can it be entitled to a better +character than that of blasphemy? + +As a specimen of this prophet's knowledge of future events we may +notice his prophesy of the seventy years captivity. See chap. xxv. 11, +&c. xxix. 10, &c. Compare with 2 Kings xxiv. 2 Chron. xxxvi. Ezra i. +1, and other corresponding passages. + +I will ask you to consult the character of Daniel, and observe with +what genuine humility he pretends to divine inspiration, chap. ii. +xxx. "But as for me, the secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom +that I have more than any living, but that the secret might be made +known, and that thou mightest know the thoughts of thy heart." If +Daniel did not receive a divine revelation, it must be allowed that he +was deceived, or that he meant to deceive the king. But if he were +deceived, or if he meant to deceive, can you give any good account how +he could tell the king's dream and the interpretation, which reached +into the far distant periods of time, and which has been remarkably +fulfilled in the rise and fall of the four great empires of the world, +and is still fulfilling by the advances of the kingdom of Christ? I +will say nothing of the prophet Isaiah, who speaks of the Messiah more +than seven hundred years before he was born, as if he had been his +contemporary. Nor need I speak of Moses who foretold the dealings of +God with the house of Israel as if he had lived now and had written +their history. But I must insist on your paying some nice attention to +the prophesies of Christ concerning the destruction of Jerusalem. This +prophesy is recorded very circumstantially in the 24th of Matt. Be so +good, sir, as to compare this prophesy with the history written by +Josephus and let candor decide whether the author of that prophesy was +divinely inspired, or whether he was a poor deceived enthusiast. + +If you allow that Jesus Christ was an honest man how is it possible +for you to deny his being divinely inspired? He certainly pretended to +foretell events; he most surely pretended to perform most astonishing +miracles. Of these facts we have as much evidence as we have that +there was such a man. Now, sir, if he were honest, he was divinely +inspired and endued, or he was an enthusiast even to insanity. And yet +in every instance, where the powers of his mind were tried, by the +profoundest learning, and sharpest wit that could be brought against +him, he discovered a mind as clear as light. A volume of vast extent +could not exhaust the subject I am now upon, but as you have the same +opportunity and means which I have to trace it, I shall insist on your +treating this subject with candor and shall expect you to acknowledge +that Jesus was divinely inspired, or show how he could be honest, +without this divine endowment. + +3d. You acknowledge, that there are evidences in favour of divine +revelation, which would support it, if there were nothing to +counterbalance their testimony. I shall here find some fault. Why do +you allow that there are evidences in favour of divine revelation, and +not state what they are? Why do you insinuate that there is something +to counterbalance their testimony and not state what it is? When an +antagonist finds his opponent candid enough to allow that some +evidence stands on his side of the argument is it not necessary for +him at the same time to be informed what it is? Does he not need to +know what his opponent is willing to allow to be evidence? And does he +not likewise need to know how this evidence is counterbalanced? +However, as you have not favoured me with such necessary assistance, I +will attempt to proceed without it. But here I must go partly on +presumption and partly by guess. In the first place I will inquire +what particular circumstance recorded in scripture, which, if true, +would substantiate revelation; and which you may suppose there is +evidence sufficient to prove, if there was nothing to counterbalance +it? This I will presume is the resurrection of Jesus. Why I think you +would be most likely to have this particular in your mind, is, because +on this event, I believe all will agree, depend the validity of the +prophecies, the truth of the testimony of Christ himself, and the +authority of the apostles. I will then presume that you acknowledge +that there is evidence of this wonderful fact; but at the same time I +am to understand, that, in your mind there is something to +counterbalance, in some degree, if not entirely, this evidence. + +Having proceeded so far, I am now to guess what the evidence is that +you think would support this all important fact, if it were not +counterbalanced. But here I find myself in difficulty. My difficulty +is in finding any kind of evidence which could prove such an event, if +there were nothing to counterbalance it, that could possibly be +counterbalanced. Will you say that the testimony of the disciples, +that they had seen the man alive after his death would be sufficient +evidence to prove the fact? Suppose twelve men of honest fame, should +report, and even depose, that the last man who was publicly executed +in Boston, had actually arose from the dead, and that they had ate and +drank with him a number of times since he was executed. Should you +suppose this sufficient evidence, if there were nothing to do it away? +But what could do it away? If the people could go to the grave and +find the body there, the testimony of the twelve would remain no +evidence at all, and therefore could not afterwards be called evidence +sufficient to support the fact if there were nothing to counterbalance +it. But suppose the people cannot find the body, would it not be +thought that the body might possibly have been conveyed away by design +of some who might have occasion to keep it a secret? But a guard is +placed to watch the grave; but a guard might be bribed. The one we +have account of was bribed, according to the story; and if they could +be bribed by the chief priests and rulers, why not by some body else? +Finally, would the testimony of these men be sufficient to prove such +an extraordinary fact even if the body could not be found? I think for +myself, that various opinions would result from such evidence. Some +would believe that these men had entered into some very extraordinary +plot, and calculated that they should be most likely to succeed by +means of persuading the people that they were favoured with a +knowledge of this resurrection. Others might believe them honest men, +but by some crafty contrivance imposed on. Others might believe that +the spirit of this man had appeared to the twelve, but that no real +resurrection had taken place. But I very much doubt whether any very +stable people would consider the testimony of the twelve men +sufficient to support this fact if there were nothing brought, or if +nothing could be brought against it. Such a circumstance would no +doubt cause a great deal of talk, the depositions and the names of the +deponents would be published in the newspapers, perhaps for several +weeks, but after a little time it would die away. + +Finally, I cannot conceive of any evidence that could sufficiently +support the fact that Jesus who was crucified, did actually rise from +the dead, if nothing could be brought to counterbalance it, that could +possibly admit of being counterbalanced. + +The question seems to remain, and the substance of it is this. 1st. If +Jesus did actually rise from the dead what kind of evidence would his +disciples need in order to be satisfied of the fact? And 2d. What kind +of evidence must they be able to bring to the people in order to +convince them of the fact? + +I will here suppose that it is not necessary to prove that the +disciples of Jesus, who preached him and his resurrection all their +lives after they commenced at the day of pentecost, really believed +what they preached; but the evidence by which they believed it I now +inquire for. We must notice that the disciples did not expect the +resurrection, they were not believers of this fact when their master +was crucified. They were awfully disappointed, and not _only_ +disappointed but intimidated, as the account fully shows. They all +forsook Jesus at his trial, and Peter for fear of being involved with +him denied being his disciple. + +The evidence then of his resurrection must be such as will convince +those of the fact who have no expectation of the event. We will now +look at the account. "And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, +and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had brought sweet spices, +that they might come and anoint him." This very rational account shows +as plainly as the case will admit that these women had no expectation +of his resurrection. I omit here what passed at the sepulchre when +these women were there, for this does not relate to the disciples. The +angel at the sepulchre told these women that Jesus had risen, and +directed them to go and tell his disciples. "Now when Jesus was risen +eariy, the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, +out of whom he had cast seven devils. And she went and told them that +had been with him, as they mourned and wept." This mourning and +weeping could not be the effect of the pleasing expectation of soon +having their divine master with them; no, it was the natural effect of +the amazing disappointment which had closed all the hopes they had +entertained. "And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had +been seen of her," believed? no, "believed not." After that he +appeared in another form to two of them as they walked, and went into +the country.--And they went and told it unto the residue: neither +believed they them. "Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat +at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, +because they believed not them which had seen him after he had risen." +It seems unnecessary to quote into this communication all the +instances related by the four deponents of Jesus' being seen of the +eleven; his frequently being with them, eating with them, holding +lengthy conversations with them, &c. Now as these disciples knew that +Jesus had been crucified and buried, and a guard had been placed to +guard the sepulchre, and moreover knowing for certainty that the body +of Jesus was not where it had been deposited, and being favoured with +his presence on a variety of occasions for forty days, the evidence to +the disciples was of a character described by the author of the Acts. +"To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many +infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the +things pertaining to the kingdom of God." I believe, sir, that such +evidence as Jesus is said to have given his disciples of his +resurrection would be entirely sufficient to remove all doubts in +their mind, however prone they were to unbelief. I am of opinion that +such evidence would convince you and me of a similar fact.--Two +questions are here necessary. 1st. Can we conceive how the evidence +could have been less without being insufficient? And 2d. Can we +conceive how it could have been stronger? I will not take up time to +argue these questions, I feel satisfied on them myself. I will now ask +whether we can imagine the possibility of any evidence that could +counterbalance the evidence of the resurrection in the minds of the +disciples? Thus we are brought to the suggestion, that any evidence +which could be sufficient to prove such a fact, if no evidence +appeared against it, must be such as admits of no refutation. + +You will not forget, and think that I have been endeavouring to prove +the resurrection of Jesus, or that the disciples even believed it; all +I have been seeking for is that kind of evidence which would be +necessary to prove to the disciples such a fact, and to show that such +evidence cannot admit of refutation. However, you will at once see +that, allowing our reasoning to be correct, and allowing the disciples +did really believe the resurrection, either of which, I do not believe +you will undertake to dispute, the resurrection is proved beyond all +contradiction. + +2d. Let us now inquire what kind of evidence was necessary for the +disciples of Jesus to bring to the people, in order to convince them +of this all-important fact on which the whole scheme and ministry of +the gospel rested. It seems that the disciples did not believe on the +testimony of others, though of their own intimate acquaintance, +persons in whom they would place as much confidence as in any in the +world, no doubt. Of course, they could not expect other people, who +had not been the disciples of Jesus, would believe in his resurrection +on their testimony. The evidence which the disciples had was +sufficient for them, but their testimony would surely be much less; +and any thing less would be insufficient as before stated. + +We will now have recourse to the account. But first let us notice, +that we are not endeavouring to prove that the disciples ever +persuaded any to believe in the resurrection of Jesus; this is, as it +must be, considered a fact, not disputed. The question is by what +evidence did the apostles convince thousands of the people in +Jerusalem and its vicinity, that Jesus who was publicly executed, was +not only the true Messiah promised in the law and prophets, but that +he had actually arose from the dead and ascended into heaven. Before +Jesus ascended, he, after saying many other things to his disciples +who were together in the city of Jerusalem, said to them; "Thus it is +written, and thus it behoveth Christ to suffer, and to rise from the +dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should +be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And +ye are witnesses of these things. And behold, I send the promise of my +father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem until ye be +endued with power from on high." See the same account in Acts, "But ye +shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and +ye shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, +and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth." According +to this account, Jesus did not direct his disciples to undertake to +convince the people by their testimony, but charged them to wait for +divine power. Accordingly they did wait. Now look at the account which +we have, of what took place on the day of pentecost. I will not +mutilate this account by quoting parts, there is no need of quoting +what you have perfectly in your memory. Take particular notice of what +Peter said to the people who had been accessary to the crucifixion of +Jesus. He who was so intimidated as to deny Christ, now stands in the +midst of the people and boldly asserts, that Jesus of Nazareth was a +man approved of God among them by miracles and wonders, and signs +which God did by him, among them; and that they knew this to be the +case. He further tells them that they had with wicked hands crucified +and slain this man who was thus approved of God. And he assured the +whole house of Israel, that God had made this same Jesus whom they had +crucified both Lord and Christ. He moreover boldly declared that God +had raised Jesus from the dead. Now add to the testimony of Peter, the +astonishing manifestation of the power of the Holy Spirit, as +described in the account, and you have the evidence by which about +three thousand souls were convinced of the resurrection of Jesus in +one day. Here let us consider; the people had been acquainted with +Jesus, and had been eye witnesses of his miracles; many of them were +personally acquainted with Lazarus whom Jesus raised from the dead. +They had been, many of them, fed by his miracles and had seen his +wonderful works. Now put all together and it is evident that they had +sufficient reason to believe. I cannot conceive how reasonable people +in the candid exercise of their judgments, could avoid believing. + +Look, sir, at the account of the miraculous cure of the lame man, who +lay at the gate of the temple. Notice the words used to effect it. "In +the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk." "And all the +people saw him walking and praising God: and they knew that it was he +who sat for alms at the beautiful gate of the temple." Hear what Peter +says to the wondering multitude on this occasion. "Ye men of Israel, +why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by +our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk? The God of +Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath +glorified his son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the +presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go. But ye +denied the holy one and the just, and desired a murderer to be granted +unto you; and killed the prince of life, whom God hath raised from the +dead: whereof we are witnesses. And his name, through faith in his +name, hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, and the +faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the +presence of you all." Here we have the evidence by which about five +thousand men, besides women, believed--that is, owned their belief. +When the high priest and others called Peter and John before them, and +demanded, by what power, or by what name they had done this thing, +Peter answers, filled with the Holy Spirit; "Ye rulers of the people, +and elders of Israel, if we this day be examined of the good deed done +to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole: be it known unto +you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus +Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, +even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the +stone which was set at naught by you builders." Hear what these rulers +say when Peter and John were sent aside. "What shall we do to these +men? for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is +manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it." + +Such evidence as we have noticed, which the disciples were enabled to +bring to the people, of the resurrection of Jesus, was sufficient to +remove every reasonable doubt and to bring over to this faith, those +who had been his murderers. + +I will now inquire whether it is reasonable to suppose that less +evidence would have effected such conviction?--And on the other hand, +I will ask whether stronger proof could in the nature of things be +given? And lastly, to come to our object again, does such evidence +possibly admit of being counterbalanced? I understand that these +questions admit of no other answers than such as go to show, that if +there be any evidence of the resurrection of Jesus, sufficient to +support it, if there were no evidence to counterbalance it, such +evidence is not capable of being counterbalanced.--You will perceive +that our reasoning must issue in the truth of the resurrection, unless +we assume the extravagant notion, that the people who lived in +Jerusalem and its vicinity, at the time of the crucifiction of Jesus, +were not brought over to believe it. + +It is hoped that no objection will be brought from the circumstance of +the rejection of the gospel by the rulers of the Jews, and by the +major part of that hierarchy, as long as it is perfectly evident that +their opposition and unbelief were indispensably necessary for the +fulfilling of the prophecies, for the carrying of conviction to the +Gentiles, and for the purpose of perpetuating the necessary evidences +on which we, at this day, must rest our belief of this religion. + +4th. You hardly know how to understand me when I suggest, that in +disproving the religion of Jesus Christ, you disprove all religion, +&c. I think I added, that there is no choosing between this religion +and some other, we must have this, or none. + +By the religion of Jesus Christ, I mean to comprehend all that the +doctrine of the scriptures encourage us to believe in and hope for, +and also all that this doctrine requires, also all that it teaches us +to expect as resulting from obedience and disobedience. I am fully +persuaded that you never can disprove this religion, so as to do away +its effects on your own mind. Its maxims contain all the morality you +know of, and all that a Deist calls natural religion, he has been +taught from the revealed wisdom of God. The further you advance into +the society of man, where the light of the holy scriptures has least +extended, so much the more do you lose sight of the moral virtues; and +so much the more do you lose sight of the simple unity and divine +benevolence of God. + +My meaning, sir, however, was not very extensive. It was to say, as in +a familiar conversation, I might express myself as follows: Brother, +if we disprove the religion of Jesus Christ, that is, if we give up +our present belief, there is no other religion, that we have heard of, +that can have the least claim to our belief. Judaism, Paganism, +Mahomedanism, could neither of them have any claims; nor in fact could +what people call Deism, or the belief in one God. If you say there is +certainly demonstrated in the very nature of things an eternal +unchangeable principle or law which governs all things; I will answer, +I am surprised to hear a rational being, who cannot remember +forty-five of our short years, and knows not that he shall live in the +world another hour, talk about eternal things, use great swelling +words of vanity about unchangeability, and yet deny that God has made +a revelation to man! I am really of the sentiment expressed by him who +is justly styled the light of the world, who said "No man knoweth the +Father save the Son, and he to whom the Son revealeth him." + +5th. You seem to inquire whether Jesus and his apostles might not be +honest men; and yet their testimony, concerning a future state be +erroneous. Answer, this case comes into the same argument as the case +of the prophets, to which attention has been paid. We have no more +reason to believe that Jesus and his apostles were honest men, than we +have to believe that they pretended to divine inspiration, and to the +power of working many very astonishing miracles. It does not appear +reasonable to suppose that these servants of God, thought they could, +and did heal the sick and raise the dead, when in fact they could do +no such thing. Therefore, if they pretended to do such things and did +them not, they were all impostors, and surely deserve no better +appellation. Now if I can bring to your mind my inference, it is this. +God would not endue Jesus Christ and his apostles with power to work +miracles, by which the attention of the people would be drawn to them +and by which they would naturally be led to place confidence in their +testimony, and yet leave them in the dark concerning those things of +which they speak to the people. + +What you say on this subject, indicates that you did not understand me +to infer the validity of the apostles' testimony concerning a future +state, from any higher authority than their simple honesty unconnected +with the other part of the argument, which was as plainly set forth in +my former communication as you will now find it in this. + +6th. You suppose that arguments equally energetic, and equally +conclusive might be drawn from our feelings, against, as in favour of +the necessity of divine revelation. + +Though I am not of your opinion, yet I am disposed to think that +desires very fervent may in some instances exercise the human heart +against the knowledge of divine truth. But, sir, this is the effect of +moral disease, not of a sound mind. A foul stomach will nauseate at +the sight of wholesome food; distempered eyes are rendered painful by +the rays of light; one whose deeds are evil loves darkness for this +very reason. Now that people affected with these infirmities should be +exercised with fervent desires to avoid what gives them uneasiness is +surely very natural; but that a person in health and having good +exercise should loathe that which is good and nourishing, that one who +has sound eyes should dislike the enlivening beams of the sun, or that +one whose works are wrought in God, should love darkness rather than +light is not reasonable. + +You are cautioned against supposing that these remarks are designed to +be applied to yourself, for I bear you record that your exertions and +assiduity for the attainment of true knowledge have been laudable, and +worthy of imitation. But all this only proves to me that your +reasoning is unnatural, and that no man would be more rejoiced to know +the truth of divine revelation than yourself. + +7th. That a person who does not even desire a future existence should +realize the goodness of the divine Being, and feel truly grateful for +all enjoyments does not stand in a clear light in my mind. I cannot +conceive that it is possible that any thing could remove a desire to +exist in the future, except a very strong fear that that state would +be awfully miserable. To be thankful to God, and to rejoice in his +goodness, and at the same time feel no desire to continue in the +enjoyment of such favour is to me a complete solecism, which +sufficiently refutes itself. + +8th. Your assertion, that if a revelation was ever necessary, it was +necessary only to reconcile man to his present state of existence, is +thought to be an error of no small magnitude. If you had said that +revelation was necessary only for the improvement of man in his +present state it would have been more correct. + +As for man's present existence, it seems he has love enough; people +wish to live here, and no doubt they would wish to stay forever if +they had no hope in the future. By improving our present state by a +divine revelation, I wish to be understood to comprehend all that is +meant by the ministry of reconciliation. This has for its object the +reconciliation of man to God. But it is a soul rejoicing fact, that of +the precious things brought forth by the sun of righteousness, the +hope of immortality is its most precious jewel. This makes every thing +valuable. Hence we may lay up our treasures where neither moth nor +rust can corrupt, nor thieves break through and steal. Here God's +bright favour will never grow dim, nor will our love and gratitude +ever decay. Do you see this celestial form leaning on her anchor, and +while the raging waves of a restless sea dash against her, feel +unmoved? Do you observe her aspect firm, and her eyes turned towards +Heaven? And wouldst you wish to cast her down and wreck her on the +quicksands of dismal doubt? Go, brother, to the chamber of sickness, +where life's waning embers can no longer warm the dying heart, there +hear from cold and quivering lips this hope expressed, I long to be +with Christ, I long to be at rest. Would you blast this amaranthine +flower? Would you plant in its stead the night shade of dispair? + +Do not, dear sir, listen too long to the wild suggestions of vain +fancy and wandering imagination, under the specious pretence of +searching after truth. I am apprehensive that she who persuades you +that she is truth, really deserves another name. Jesus is the way, the +truth and the life, he also is made unto us wisdom. + + Give me the light of this bright sun to see, + All other lights like met'ors are to me; + Give me that way, that pleasant path to know, + I'll walk no other path while here below. + Wouldst thou be wise? This wisdom learn to scan, + Which brings to God, the wandering heart of man. + +9th and last. You misunderstand me in supposing that I meant to +insinuate, that by what you _wrote_ respecting the apostles' stating +nothing more than what was substantially true, you must mean that they +stated falsehood. I meant, if you do not believe that they stated the +truth you must believe that they stated falsehood, in which case I +called on you to make a short work of our argument by proving that +what they stated was not true. I wonder you should not have thought of +this way to understand me, because there is no way to explain your +words into the meaning which you supposed I had attached to them, +while what I now suggest is fairly the necessary result of what you +stated. + +On this subject I am disposed to say a little more. If we find +ourselves in serious doubts respecting any important particular of our +religion, and we wish to have the matter cleared up to our +satisfaction, why should we spend much time and write many sheets, +with no other apparent object, than to keep away from the subject +which labours in our minds? If you were under the necessity of +bringing a tree to the ground, and of removing it from the forest, +would you ascend the tree and begin your work on the extreme twigs, or +would you cut the trunk off near the roots, when the whole mass would +come down together? + +You will apprehend my meaning. The fact is, if the Christian religion +is ever overthown, it must be done, not by proving that professors of +it have held errors and have been superstitious, and have ever +practised wickedness, using the name of Christ for a cloak, &c. but by +proving the testimony, of the new testament false. Cut the trunk of +the tree off at this place and the work is done. + +But if it were possible, in the nature of things for the testimony +borne in the new testament to be proved false, can you persuade +yourself to believe that it would not have been done? If a book +containing the grossest falsehood, the most palpable frauds, +pretensions the very easiest to be detected of any that can be +imagined, could be got up and published, and be copied by many hands, +and be translated into different languages on purpose to overthrow the +popular religion of all countries where the book is sent or carried, +and if in spite of truth, and all the learning of a learned age, if in +spite of all sorts of superstition combined with civil government, if +in spite of reason, argument, persuasion, the tender love and +compassion of parents, interest, honour, ease, peace and quiet; if in +the face of the most cruel sufferings and most awful deaths, this +book, with all its abominable lies, and most palpable frauds could +succeed, its doctrines run and be glorified; if ancient superstitions, +than which nothing can have a more despotic sway over the human heart, +if the priests of long venerated idols with thousands of their +votaries were humbled before this testimony, what is there now on +which we can rely for success against it? + +How beautiful are reason and candor. Dr. Gamaliel gives us a handsome +specimen. "Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves, what ye intend +to do as touching these men.--For before these days rose up Theudas, +boasting himself to be somebody: to whom a number of men, about four +hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed +him, were scattered and brought to naught. After this man rose up +Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people +after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, wore +dispersed. And now, I say unto you, refrain from these men, and let +them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come +to naught; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye +be found even to fight against God." + +Let us remark, 1st. You will notice that this passage ranks with +hundreds of others which to the understanding of sound judgment wears +every feature of an honest and true statement of facts. I will take it +on myself to say that it does not appear reasonable that men who were +fabricating a falsehood, would ever have thought of such a method as +this to give it currency. 2d. You will naturally observe that this +learned doctor of the law was himself persuaded of the truth of the +apostles' testimony, and though he was not willing to make so great a +sacrifice as he must if he professed Jesus openly, he was willing to +espouse the cause so far as his learning and influence would go, +without rendering himself odious to his friends. + +3d. It is pretty evident, that whatever Theudas made a handle of in +order to obtain disciples, Judas of Galilee had that very unpopular +tax (I do not consult any authority as it is immaterial, but only +follow a probable suggestion) which was collected about the time of +the birth of Jesus, or some other, by which he no doubt, strove to +disaffect the Jews against the Roman government, which they very +naturally were opposed to. But Judas did not succeed. + +4th. Jesus never tried to persuade the people against the civil +authorities, nor did he ever promise his disciples any worldly +benefits, nor try to allure the people after him by holding out, as +inducements, any thing that the carnal passions of men are in love +with; and yet he succeeded though he lost his life. 5th. Dr. Gamaliel +was of opinion that if the gospel were not of God, it would come to +naught, but it did not, nor is there the least probability it ever +will. + +Yours, &c. + +H. BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. VII. + +[In this number the objector gives the whole ground of his objections, +and the reasons for his doubts: _which he states as follows_, viz. + +"1. Mankind, in all ages of the world, have been, and still are prone +to superstition. + +"2. It cannot be denied, but that a part of mankind at least, have +believed, and still are believing in miracles and revelation, which +are spurious. + +"3. The facts on which religion is predicated are unlike every thing +of which we have any positive knowledge." + +Under the first article, the objector appealed to the known +superstitions of the world: not only of the Pagan; but of the Jewish, +Mahometan, and Christian world. He took a view of the present state of +Asia, spake of the "voluntary sacrifices of human life to the great +image at Hugernaught!" and of women "voluntarily climbing the funeral +pile to be burned with their deceased husbands!" He took a view of the +_Inquisition_ in Old Spain; and finally of the various superstitious +notions and practices among the different sects of christians in our +own country. + +Under the second article, he discanted largely on the pretension of +Mahomet, and of their great influence and extent; and also of the +particular tone given to the Christian religion by Constantine, who, +holding the reigns of government, had superior means in extending his +influence over the Christian world. Having made these remarks, the +objector proceeds:] + +"If therefore, he had happened only to have favoured the opinions of +the Gnostics, we might have expected, and probably it would have been +the fact, that the learned clergy of the present day would have held +that Jesus was not a man in reality, but only a man in appearance; +that he assumed a body that he could put on or throw off at pleasure; +and that he died and was raised again _in appearance only_. Or +otherwise, if he had been disposed to come down to the simplicity and +understanding of the common people, then indeed Christ might still +have been considered as the Jews' expected Messiah; yet we should have +considered him a man, and nothing more than a man; though 'a man +approved of God;'--'a man who hath told us the truth;'--even 'Jesus of +Nazareth, the son of Joseph;' as it seems was the opinion of Peter, +John and Philip. But the former opinion had been too long treated as +heresy by all the bishops to be imbibed by Constantine, while the +bishops themselves, on the other hand, had been too long contaminated +with the Platonic philosophy to descend to the simplicity of the +latter; therefore we have a religion, compounded, partly of the +simplicity of the truth, and partly of Platonism. Constantine, +however, being supported by a great majority of all the bishops, in a +great measure effected his purpose; though not fully to his +expectation: for it seems he did not expect that any one would presume +to oppose the decisions of this grand council, which he had summoned +and convened at his own expense, or at the expense of the empire, but +in this he was mistaken; for many, even after this, would take the +liberty not only to think for themselves, but also to speak their own +thoughts. + +"One circumstance more I cannot avoid mentioning in this place, viz, +the conversion of Constantine from heathenism to the Christian faith. +Great men, if turned about at all, must be turned about by great +means! But whatever might have been thought of Constantine's +conversion by the people of that day, the account given of it does not +argue any thing very forcibly in my mind, in favour of the truth of +divine revelation. Great men, however, are not always free from +superstition; and they are just as likely to be deceived respecting +things which are above their comprehension as others. This is the most +charitable way in which I can reconcile the following account which, +as Eusebius, the contemporary and historian of Constantine, says, was +stated under the solemnity of an oath. For a full account of this +extraordinary story. See the 2d vol. of Dr. Priestley's Church +History, per. 7, sec. 9. I shall not attempt to quote it in full, nor +is it necessary, and what I do quote is from memory only, as I write +abroad, my books not being with me. + +"Reflecting on the ill success of his predecessors in the numerous +wars in which they had been engaged, when their priests and oracles +had ever promised them success, and also considering the better +success of his father, Constantine concluded from these circumstances +that his father prayed to, and was assisted by a different god! When +he prayed, therefore, he always prayed to the God of his father. And +being thus praying one evening, towards the going down of the sun, +with his face toward the same, he saw the appearance of a _cross_ in +the sun, with these words over it in Greek, [Greek: tetw nika] _by +this conquer_. Not knowing, (or else pretending not to know) what this +sign should mean, he called together some of the christian priests for +an explanation; who explained it as might naturally have been supposed +they would, that it was a representation of the cross, on which Christ +was crucified, and that there could be no doubt but that he had now +interposed as God, in behalf of the christians, to deliver them from +their enemies, and of course from further persecution! I do not +pretend to be any thing more than _substantially_ correct in the above +account (by which you will further see how I use the word +_substantially_, about which we have had some dispute) i. e. I may, +yea undoubtedly, have differed, as to words, yet I know I am correct +in the most material part, and of the use which Constantine made of +this supposed miraculous, or supernatural appearance. He said also, +the soldiers saw it as well as himself! Now, if we give full credit to +this account, what must we think of Christianity? The meek and lowly +Jesus, who was led 'like a lamb to the slaughter,' without the least +resistance, and who had suffered thousands to follow him in the same +way, now, by a miraculous interposition, arms a man with carnal +weapons, and, Mahometan like, authorizes him to vindicate his cause, +and avenge his wrongs, by shedding the blood of his enemies! Or, if we +do not credit this account, what must we think of Constantine? and +also of Christianity so far as it can be traced to, and made to depend +on his influence? That candor and charity, however, which I ever wish +to maintain, will oblige me in this, as in all other cases of a +similar nature, to take the middle course. I shall therefore suppose +that there was some natural appearance, perhaps a parhelion, the cause +of which Constantine did not fully understand, and, from the +appearance in the sky around it, his fancy, aided by superstition, +painted to his imagination the supposed cross, as also the Greek +words, which being pointed out to the soldiers they might easily +imagine the same, or, if they did not, would not like to oppose the +opinion of their general. Thus circumstanced, whether he really +believed it to be any thing supernatural or not, Constantine was +disposed to make the most of it he could, by turning it to the best +possible account.[2]" + +[Footnote 2: "Upon the whole," says Dr. Priestly, (vol. 2, p. 96) "it +appears to me most probable, that Constantine and his friends saw a +natural parhelion, and that all the other circumstances were either +imagined, or invented; and that the story has lost nothing in passing +through the hands of Eusebius." Constantine also states (which I +forgot to mention above) that "Christ appeared to him in a dream, the +night following, with the very same sign which he had seen in the +heavens, ordering him to make a military standard like it, and +assuring him that it would be his security in battles." "By this note +it will be perceived that I have compared what I have written with the +part of the history from whence it was taken, and that I find nothing +in it materially erroneous."] + +"It appears, however, after all, that Constantine was a man of great +moderation, and on the whole, a very good man: yet, that he was not +wholly clear from superstition is very evident from the following +circumstance. Notwithstanding his extraordinary, and what was supposed +by all, miraculous conversion, together with his great pretensions; +and all that he had done for christianity, yet he neglected his own +_baptism_ till he found he was very nigh his end; when he dressed +himself in white, and the bed on which he lay, also all in white, in +which dress he was baptised and partook of the _sacrament_! and thus +he continued in _white_ till he died. This was undoubtedly from a +mistaken notion, that there was something really purifying in those +outward ceremonies, and also from the doctrine of the Navatians, a +certain sect, whose opinions it was supposed he favoured, though not +very openly, i.e. if a person committed sin after having been thus +purified he could not die in union with the church. + +"You may perhaps object here and say, all this is to no purpose, as +christianity was well established before; and had existed for nearly +three centuries, and increased too, notwithstanding the many most +bitter and cruel persecutions. Therefore what you say respecting +Constantine only proves that christianity has been corrupted, but it +is no objection against its truth. Very good. If the facts above +stated are admitted, let them prove what they will, I am not the +author of those facts, nor accountable for what is proved by them. The +conversion of Constantine, however, if correct, bears some analogy to +the conversion of St. Paul: hence, the supposition that one is not +correct, brings a little doubt over the mind respecting the truth of +the other: for both being by means which were supernatural; if both +are supported on equal testimony, why should they not both share the +same fate in our minds? Both were equally possible; it is the want of +probability, therefore, arising from the want of equal evidence in its +favour, which leads us to reject the truth of the circumstances +attending the conversion of Constantine, rather than those attending +the conversion of St. Paul. The conversion of Constantine also, if +genuine, seems to have been designed for a very different object, and +was attended with a very different effect. This would incline me to +believe in the validity of that of the apostle's, rather than that of +the emperor. Nevertheless, as it respects the facts; he who caused a +light at mid-day, above the brightness of the sun, might as easily +have painted the sign of the cross on his disk; and he who spake to +Saul from Heaven, with an audible voice, in the Hebrew tongue, might +as easily have painted letters and words in Greek, so that they might +be distinctly read in the firmament! + +"Leaving all ancient miracles and revelation, I will come down to +those of our own times, and in our own country.--Strange to tell, +there is a sect of people now among us, who sprang up less than half a +century ago, whose religion is professedly founded on miracles and +revelation. On miracles wrought by the first founders of the sect, as +by Christ and his apostles, and on a revelation also made directly to +them, and through them to the believers, as by the inspired writers of +the new testament. They appear to be something similar in sentiment, +as it respects the person of Christ, to the ancient Arians; with this +difference only, they conceived that as Christ made his first +appearance in Jesus, the son of a _carpenter_, so he has made his +second appearance in Ann, the daughter of a _blacksmith_, whom they +call _mother_; and they consider their church the _New Jerusalem_, +that holy city which was to come down from God out of Heaven. + +In the year 1808, about the same time after their first rise as it was +after the days of Jesus to the writing of the new testament, they +published a history of their sect, in a work entitled '_Christ's +second appearance,' or the New Jerusalem Church_, setting forth their +rise, progress and present state; together with their principles, +customs and mode of worship. This work contains an account of their +mother _Ann_, and the first elders; and particularly an account of the +miracles said to have been wrought by them. If my memory serves me, +(as the book is not by me) there is an account of about _forty_ +miracles, all of which are well attested, and though they acknowledge +that most of them are inferior to those wrought by Jesus and his +apostles, yet they contend that they are no more inferior to those +than those are to the miracles wrought by Moses. They contend that for +the plagues in Egypt, the dividing the red sea, bringing water out of +the rock, feeding Israel forty years in the wilderness with bread from +heaven, and that there should always fall a double portion on the +sixth day, but none on the seventh, that that which fell on the sixth +day, should keep two days, but on all other days it would keep but +one, and that afterward, some of the same bread or manna was laid up +in the ark of the covenant which kept for ages, as a memorial; also +the dividing the waters of the river Jordan, and the fall of the walls +of Jericho; yea most or all of these, according to reason or human +appearance, are as much greater than the miracles wrought by Jesus and +his apostles, as those are greater than those wrought by Ann and her +elders! It is true, they did not pretend to raise the dead, but either +these accounts are all fabrications and lies, or else they had among +them the gift of healing, and that too miraculously. A woman who had +fell with her horse, by the falling of a bridge, and had broken +several of her ribs, besides being otherwise very much bruised, was +cured in one evening, so that she joined in the dance! A boy who had +cut his foot so that a person might have laid his finger into the +wound, which bled very profusely, was cured in a few hours so that +nothing was to be seen of the wound excepting a white streak, about +the bigness of a common thread! and many others of a like kind, too +numerous to be mentioned in this place. + +"You will readily perceive that I allude to the _Shakers_; a people +who are enjoying privileges among us which no other people enjoy, +except the Friends, called also _Quakers_: and who are debarred from +no privileges excepting those from which they either religiously or +_superstitiously_ debar themselves. Thus people, in consequence of +their religion, have entirely changed their manners, customs, and +modes of worship. They have also endured considerable persecution; and +that they have not suffered martyrdom in defence of their religion, is +no fault of theirs. There can be no doubt but that there has been +fanaticism enough on their part to have done it, if there had been +only bigotry and cruelty enough in the people, at that time, to have +put it in execution. Let the same spirit reign among the people for a +short time, which reigned in Boston when the _Quakers_ were put to +death for their religion, and the _Shakers_ also would be able to +boast of their martyrs in defence of the truth of their particular +sect, and of course of the miracles and revelation on which it is said +to have been founded. + +"And here I wish to remark a little on _martyrdom_, seeing it is often +brought in defence of the truth of divine revelation. I am aware that +great stress has been laid upon this, and it will still be considered +as one of its main pillars. I apprehend, however, that more stress has +been laid upon martyrdom than what it will justly bear. If this is a +test of the truth of religion, there is scarcely any religion but what +may be proved true. Only make death honourable, of any kind whatever, +in the eyes of the people, and there are always enough who are ready +and willing to die for the sake of the honour which will be in +consequence attached to their names. But only let any particular kind +of death be considered, in the eyes of the people, _meritorious_, and +the sure and certain road to _endless bliss_, and there will not only +be enough found willing to undergo this death, if they can find any to +inflict it upon them, but they will absolutely court it! Instead +therefore of having my faith strengthened by reading the book of +martyrs, as I thought I had some reason to expect, it has produced a +quite contrary effect. Notwithstanding these accounts were taken down +by the friends of the martyrs, and by them have been handed down to +us, who, as we may well suppose, were rather prejudiced in their +favour, yet nevertheless, it is impossible to disguise the spirit and +motives with which many of those infatuated people eagerly sought and +met death. + +"In all those accounts it is but too clearly discovered, what has been +too often the fact, that the most bitterly persecuted would have +become the most violent persecutors, if there had been only a chance +for them so to have done, and if there had been, in their view, an +equal occasion. The persecutors of people for their religion have +always considered the persecuted, either heretics or infidels; who if +persecuted by heathens, unless they could be brought to sacrifice to +their heathen gods, or if by christians, unless they could be brought +to acknowledge the particular faith embraced by the _orthodoxy_ of the +day, were considered as mere nuisances or pests to society; and +therefore for the public good, it was thought necessary to take them +out of the world! While on the other hand, the persecuted have always +considered that, if they suffered death in defence of their religion, +they were certain of being raised to great honour and dignity in +another world; a privilege which they undoubtedly believed their +persecutors would never enjoy! And, whatever was the opinion of Christ +and his apostles on this subject, it cannot be denied but that the +idea very soon become prevalent among their followers that the +distinction between them and a wicked world, particularly their +persecutors, would be eternal! Under these circumstances, I do not +wonder at all that men have been found willing to die for their +religion; yea, and even to court death by all the means of which their +own consciences would approve! + +"But, you may say, all this does not account for the death of the +first martyrs. Very true. I admit that it does not. But it shews that, +only let the work be begun, from any cause whatever, there is no +difficulty in its being continued. + +"Suppose then, if you please, that the first martyrs were killed by a +_mob_, a mere _rabble_, without any legal process, or even form of +_trial_; as, from which appears by the account, was the case with the +death of _Stephen_, the first christian martyr; and, according to +tradition, most of the other apostles: (and it may be remarked here, +it is only by tradition that we have any account of the death of the +apostles; as all authentic documents on the subject, if there ever +were any, are lost:) I say, let such a circumstance as the death of +Stephen take place in any country, and in any age of the world; but +more especially in that age and country in which he lived; and then +let the same honour, and the same supposed consequences be attached to +such a death, as undoubtedly were attached to the death of Stephen; +and there can be no doubt but that others would be willing to follow +the example. + +"Only let the blood once begin to flow, no matter how, and then only +attach eternal consequences to it, and hold out inducements of an +eternal nature, and persuade men to believe them (which is not so +difficult a thing as some may imagine) and you will never want for +victims, so long as you can find a zeal sufficiently blind and _mad_; +as to continue the slaughter. In this way, I conceive martyrdom, of +every species and kind, may be rationally accounted for. + +"But it may be said all this does not disprove the miracles and +revelation on which the christian religion is founded. + +"I acknowledge it does not; neither do I expect to disprove them. I +admit that revelation, and of course the christian religion may +possibly be founded in truth, notwithstanding the truth of all that I +have as yet urged, or shall urge against it. But I call on you, sir, +to disprove the miracles and revelation which I have mentioned, of a +more modern date, or else acknowledge their truth. If you acknowledge +the truth of those miracles, I shall expect you will conform to the +religion predicated upon them; and of course forsake your bosom +companion (which I presume would be a much greater cross than ever you +have yet taken up,) and also your darling offspring (or else take them +with you) and go and live with the _Shakers_!!! But if you prove them +false, it will only be that people may become so infatuated as to +believe in miracles which are spurious. + +"For notwithstanding the smallness of the numbers of this people, +which by the way, are considerable; and notwithstanding the +contemptible view in which they have been, and still are held by the +world; yet, you may find it more difficult to prove the falsity of +their pretended miracles than at present you are aware; for they are +very well attested; and some of the witnesses are still living, or +were so when their testimony was first published; as also, if I +recollect right, some of the persons on whom the miracles were said to +have been wrought; who, no doubt, would still testify to the same +things. If they testify falsely, who can help it?--Although thousands +may _believe_ to the contrary; many of whom being too in situations, +probably to have known these things, if true; yet I believe it would +be difficult, and very difficult indeed, to find any who could +absolutely say that those things did not take place. + +"And if there is a people now existing among us, in different parts of +the country, and in different, but large extensive families, whose +manners, customs, and worship are all very different from ours, and +who believe in miracles on which their religion is said to have been +founded; and if those miracles, although not founded in truth, cannot +now be proved false, notwithstanding they are said to have taken place +in our own country, and ever since we were born, I would ask, ought +any one to be censured for not giving full credit to miracles said to +have been wrought, all of them nearly two, and most of them above +three thousand years ago; and among a people too, of which we know but +very little? I say, ought any one to be censured for doing this, +although he should not be able to prove any of those miracles false? + +"I conclude I shall not be censured for not believing in the miracles +said to have been wrought by the Shakers; but let the government +undertake to annihilate that blind and superstitious class of people: +let them increase their numbers by persecution, which, like the +effects of all other persecutions, undoubtedly they would; let them, +in the course of two or three centuries, get the reins of government +into their own hands;[3] let them then follow the example of +Constantine in demolishing the temples of the heathen gods; let them +demolish every steepled meeting-house, and introduce an entire new +order of things; let them also remake their scriptures, change in some +degree their mode of worship and manner of living, and fix every thing +to the policy of the state; let the old opposition be entirely +extinguished, and new sects spring up among themselves; let this be +the order of things for a number of centuries, and then let a man call +in question the truth of Shaker miracles or Shaker revelation, and he +must do it as his peril! It would undoubtedly cost him his life! + +[Footnote 3: Were it not for other causes besides that of +Christianity, I should think this full as likely as it was that +Christianity should ever get the reins of government, judging from +what Christianity was when it had existed no longer than the Shakers.] + +"I might also mention here another person now living in the western +part of the state of New-York, who also makes pretensions to be Christ +in his second coming, and in imitation of him has chosen _twelve_ as +immediate apostles, and who has a considerable number of followers. +But as this person is still living, and it is uncertain whether the +sect will take much root, I choose to pass it over in silence. + +"I shall only call your attention to one circumstance more, and then +dismiss my second proposition. + +"You very well recollect, I presume, the account given by Mrs. A----, +of W----, N. H. in which she affirms that she saw and conversed with +her husband, Mr. John A----, for about an hour and a half, who +appeared to her some considerable time, I believe about three months, +after he had been dead! This is no fiction. Mrs. A---- is still +living, and still affirms to the truth of what she has testified; +which account you know was published by two respectable witnesses who +took it down, for that purpose, from her lips. + +"It is true, there has been but very little said in the world +respecting this matter, and I presume, for this plain and obvious +reason; the account did not correspond with the views of what is +termed _orthodoxy_ in Christianity. If if had, i. e. if he had brought +as much tidings concerning the supposed _hell_ in another world, as he +did respecting the supposed _heaven_, the account would have been +published in every magazine, in every religious tract, and in every +periodical work throughout the globe! Why not so, as well as many +accounts which were similar in other respects? But as this account did +not favour such views, it is left to die in oblivion. + +"As the particulars of this account, however, make nothing either in +favour or against my present purpose, I shall not occupy time and room +to relate it. Suffice it only to say, if there were no mistake or +deception in the matter, this account can be nothing short of a +revelation from God; as much so as any revelation which has ever been +made from God to man. + +"For no one can believe that Mr. A. could appear to his wife, after he +was dead, unless God sent him; and if God sent him, no one can doubt +the truth of his testimony. No one can well conceive of any motive +Mrs. A. could have in giving this account, unless she fully believed +it. Her daughter also was able to corroborate the account in some +degree, by saying that she heard her mother conversing in the bedroom, +but heard no other voice; and she interrogated her on the subject when +she came out, by asking with whom she had been talking, &c. But +surprised on being informed that it was with her father, and +supposing, as she naturally would, that her mother had been talking in +her sleep, she requested her to say nothing about what she had either +seen or heard, saying, that no one would believe her if she did. But +Mrs. A. was able to convince her daughter that she had not been +asleep, by telling her of persons who had gone by her window during +the time; one man in a soldier's dress, and another driving a yoke of +oxen. I state these things from memory only, for I have not seen the +account since soon after it was published, or at least within three or +four years, that I now recollect; yet I believe I could state the +whole of it nearly verbatim as it was published. Now I do not believe +that Mrs. A. ever designed to state, or that she now has the least +idea that she has stated any thing incorrect on this subject. And yet +after all, I doubt of its reality! + +"Such is my incredulity; and I see no way to avoid it. If it be a +fault in me, may God forgive it; though I am wholly unconscious of +it's being one. + +"When one of two things presented to the mind must be true, and the +truth of one absolutely excludes the truth of the other, a rational +man will always believe that which to his own understanding is the +most probable. Concerning therefore the account given by Mrs. A. it +stands, in my mind thus: either it is all a reality, i. e. that her +husband did absolutely appear to her; that he did give her the account +which she has stated; and that that account is in fact true; or else, +it was nothing more than the power of imagination, which a certain +train of ideas and reflections had produced in her mind, which, like a +kind of reverie, seemed to her like a reality. And although I should +not have made the same conclusion once, yet from my present knowledge +of human nature, together with my own experience, I do not hesitate to +reject the former idea, and believe the latter. If in judging thus, I +do injustice either to Mrs. A. or to the truth of God, I can only ask +forgiveness of a wrong, which, in truth, is by no means intended. But +in justice to my own understanding I could not state differently, if I +knew this would be the last sentence I should ever write. + +"Hence after making proper deduction for all that can be accounted for +in this way, laying out of the question at the same time all that we +may justly suppose were the mere glosses of the historian, or the +lubricous figures of the poet, which are very peculiar to the ancient +style of writing; after making due allowances also for interpolations, +or what in more modern times have been considered _pious frauds!_ and +after rejecting every thing (if any such there be) which savors of +gross imposition! if there be any thing left to support the truth of +divine revelation, then it may rationally be believed. + +"3. The facts on which revelation is predicated are unlike every thing +of which we have any positive knowledge. + +"Of the truth of this proposition you must be sensible; yea, unless +the revelation had been made directly to ourselves, it is impossible +that it should be otherwise than true. Neither of us have ever seen +any thing miraculous! The ancients, however, were carried away with +this _supposition_; the same as the moderns have been with the idea of +witches, wizards, ghosts, apparitions, &c. and many things which once +would have been considered _ominous_, are now rationally accounted +for. In this way, things once supposed to be _miraculous_ also, may +have lost their supposed divine qualities. + +"This much, however, I believe, and of this much I have no doubt, that +Paul and the other apostles were convinced of the truth and the +salutary effects of the moral precepts which had been taught and +practised by Christ; and they were willing to preach and enforce them +by all the means in their power, even at the risk of their lives. +Believing this, and practising accordingly, constituted them wise and +good men; and happy would it have been for the Christian world if they +had always followed in their steps, without ever undertaking to +dictate to others, either modes or forms of worship, or to use +coercive means to compel men to the faith. + +"That the apostles also believed in the resurrection, and also in +eternal life, I have no doubt; this sentiment, however, was neither +new nor peculiar to them, but had been held long before, not only by +the pharisees, among the Jews, but by some of the Grecian +philosophers; and the truth of it I am not at all disposed to dispute; +yet nevertheless, whether the evidences on which it was founded were +not originally mere _visionary_, like the appearance of Mr A. before +mentioned, is the subject under consideration. + +"There may be, and undoubtedly are principles in nature which are not +yet understood by any; and many more which are understood only by a +few. The operations of these principles would undoubtedly, even at the +present day, appear miraculous to thousands; and must appear very +extraordinary to every one until they are understood. But this I +conclude is not what is meant by miracles. Respecting miracles, I have +only to ask myself this question, viz.--Which is the most likely to be +true; either that men should have been honestly deceived, in the first +instance, or otherwise facts should have been so misrepresented, that +fabrication should have been honestly believed for truth; or else, +that things so contrary to every principle of which I know in nature, +should have taken place? Let reason only dictate the answer. + +"Another source of evidence in support of divine revelation is +prophecy. And here, notwithstanding I think it very probable that much +importance has been attached to many writings, under the idea of their +being prophetic, which are nothing more than the poetic effusions of a +fruitful imagination; yet I have long been of opinion that there have +been, and perhaps still are men in the world who are endowed, by +nature, with gifts and faculties differing from men in general; and +particularly, say if you please, with a _spirit of prophecy_, which, +however, I must consider nothing less nor more than a _second_ or +_mental sight_. By this sense, or faculty of seeing, they are enabled +to bring events which are yet future, as well as those otherwise out +of sight, present to their minds; and thus they can behold them with +their mental eye, as clearly as we behold objects at a distance. + +"This, you may say, is visionary indeed. And you may wonder how I can +doubt of the truth of miracles, if I can believe in such a chimerical +idea as this! + +"But stop, my dear sir, you believe in such a power some where or +other; for without it there could be no such thing as prophecy, and if +such a power exist, even in the universe, why may it not exist in man? +For myself, I cannot account for the spirit of prophecy in man, (and +it must be in man, or else men could not be prophets) in a more +rational way. I should not be disposed, however, to consider such a +power, sense, faculty, or by what other name it might be called, any +more supernatural than the organs of sight and hearing. If the natural +eye is so formed that objects may be painted on it, simply by the +action of vision, to the immense distance of the fixed stars, so that +we are enabled to behold them, why may not the mental eye be so +constituted as to bring future events present to the mind with equal +certainty? + +"If such a power, however, were once known to exist, it would be +likely to be counterfeited; and hence we may suppose, arose that horde +of impostors, by the name of soothsayers, sorcerers, necromancers, +magicians, &c. + +"But even where this power exists, if it be a natural power, it must +have its limits, and some may have it to a greater degree than others, +and also some may make a good use of it, and others bad. + +"Accounting for prophecy in this way, you will readily perceive that +it is no certain evidence of a future state; for although the time may +come when all creatures in all the vast dominions of God may be made +happy in the enjoyment of his blessings, yet it does not necessarily +follow that you and I shall _exist_ at that time! i.e. in conscious +identity! + +"If I am asked why I wish to explain every thing upon natural +principles, without admitting the immediate agency of the Deity, my +only answer is, because to my understanding it is more rational, and +of course more likely to be true. + +"That men could divine, or foretell future events, or declare present +things which are beyond their sight by intuition, all of which seems +to be embraced in the word _prophecy_, is an idea which has existed +perhaps from time immemorial; and however unaccountable it may seem, +yet, to a certain degree, at least, we are obliged to admit the fact; +but whether, after all, this is any thing more than the effect of that +kind of foresight or ratiocination, which all men (idiots excepted) +have to a greater or less degree, but some much greater than others, +is still a question. But should I be obliged to admit the truth of +prophecy, in the sense in which it is generally understood, I should +account for it in the way you have seen. + +"I do not perceive, at present, how a revelation could be made to the +understanding of any man only through the medium of the operations of +nature. Unless it were made to some of his outward senses, how could +he know whether it was any thing more than a chimera of his own brain? +If there were any faculty in his mind by which he could view these +things over and over again, (the same as we look at the heavenly +bodies) and did he always behold them in the same light, then he would +feel safe in declaring that such things did exist; and unless the +prophets had some such criterion by which they could determine on the +truth of their predictions. I do not see how that even _they_, and +much less _we_, should feel safe in placing any real confidence in +them. + +"The prophecies of our Saviour, however, concerning the destruction of +Jerusalem, are more clear and striking than any thing else we have of +the kind; and if it were certain that these were written before the +event took place, it would be a very strong proof of something more +than what any one can suppose could have been the result of human +foresight. There must, at least, on such a supposition, have been a +faculty of seeing which we do not possess. These predictions, however, +if made by Jesus, must have been made in the hearing of John, as well +as Matthew; and of course, he must have known them with more certainty +than Mark or Luke; who, in consequence of not being personally +acquainted with Jesus, could have known them only from hear say; and +as it is pretty generally agreed, that John wrote his gospel more than +twenty years after the event took place, it is very remarkable that he +should be entirely silent on this subject! John, as we must suppose, +knowing of this prediction; knowing also that it had been recorded by +all three of the other Evangelists, (though Luke is not very +particular on the subject) and knowing also that they had all written +before the event took place; and he living to see the whole verified, +and then wrote his gospel afterwards, how natural it would have been +for him, first to have recorded this prediction, at least, in +substance, and then to have mentioned its fulfillment, as a +confirmation of the prophecy! But not a word on the subject. + +"This, however, is no evidence that Jesus did not deliver those +predictions, and that they were not written by Matthew and Mark, and +also hinted at by Luke before the events took place; yet still it +raises a doubt and a query in the mind whether these are not +interpolations, or else the books wholly written after the events took +place, and of course these predictions put into the mouth of Jesus by +the historian. When the copies were few in number, and those kept by +the Christians only, interpolations might have been made without much +danger of detection. The heretics were early accused of interpolating, +altering, and forging the scriptures; and although they, i. e. the +majority of the believers, as it is likely would be very careful to +detect any thing which contradicted their views in point of doctrine, +yet whether they would be equally careful respecting those +interpolations which favoured the Christian faith is a question worthy +of consideration. + +"In Calmet's dictionary of the bible, under the word gospel, we have +an account of between thirty and forty gospels, of which he gives +their names, but none of which are now extant. Neither is there any +thing, which I now recollect, of any disputes about the validity of +the writing of the apostles, except what is merely traditional, until +about the year 180, when Celsus undertook to disprove the whole. I may +be incorrect, in this, however, if I am, you will correct me: for +excepting barely the bible, as I have informed you before, I have no +books by me on this subject. + +"Another circumstance must be taken into consideration, and which +bears great weight in my mind. That is, the great and astonishing +difference there has been made in the state and condition of mankind +by the discovery or invention of the art of printing; an art for which +we cannot be too thankful, nor too highly appreciate its benefits. For +it would be very difficult now to realize the situation of mankind +previous to the invention of this art. + +"Writing, it is true, as we may rationally suppose, was carried to a +greater state of perfection at that time, than it is at present; for +it was of more use, yet its use must have been very limited, and it is +reasonable to suppose that a very great proportion of the common +people could neither read nor write. For it could be of but little use +to them, as they had nothing to read, for books of all descriptions, +and upon all subjects, must have been, comparatively, very few. This, +as you would readily perceive, would have a tendency to cause the +common people to place great confidence in any thing that was written. +Hence, generally speaking, it was sufficient barely to say, concerning +any matter, [Greek: gegraptai], _it is written_ to gain full belief. + +"It is with all ancient sects, as it is with ancient nations and +kingdoms; their history may be traced back until we find it veiled in +mystery, and mingled with fable. We are not to suppose, however, that +these things were done at the time, with an intent to deceive; but +after the events, whatever they were, had passed away, and the +imagination had been long in operation respecting the traditions +concerning them, they are dressed up with all the appearance of real +history; and might so be construed and believed, were it not for +improbability. The probability is, that when such histories were first +written, they deceived no one, or at least, no one thought it worth +while to undertake to detect them, because, not knowing what effect +they would have, they considered their errors were of no material +consequence. The Shaker Book has been published nine years; and +although I conclude that very few, if any, except the Shakers +themselves, believe the miracles therein recorded; yet no one that I +know of has thought it expedient to undertake to refute them. And +unless the sect should grow to more consequence than it is at present, +I presume that no one will give himself much trouble on the subject. +If it should be thought necessary, however, to refute these pretended +miracles, in order to prevent those in scripture from growing into +disrepute, then it will alter the case. + +"I am perfectly reconciled and willing, however, that whatever is +truth should be true; and have not the least inclination, even if it +were in my power, to alter one truth respecting eternity. This is the +state of my mind exactly; a state into which it has been growing, +gradually, for many years; and, strange as it may seem to you, I can +assure you in the fear of that God before whom I stand or fall, and by +whom I have been supported hitherto, it is the most happy state of +mind in which mortals can be placed! "Gloria in altissimis Deo, et in +terra pax in homines benevolentia." Luke ii. 14, Beza. + +"Whatever may be your opinion concerning miracles, I believe it must +be admitted that there was no more of a miracle in the production of +man, originally, than there was in the production of other animals; +and as nature has not provided man with clothing for the body, which +it does for other animals, especially those which inhabit cold +climates, it is evident that man was originally produced under the +torrid zone; and that he could not have lived in any other part of the +world, had it not been for art. What alteration the discovery of the +arts has made in the original constitution of man, it would he +difficult now to determine. + +"What man must have been previous to the discovery and use of _fire_, +is difficult now to conceive. We can trace man down, however, from +grade to grade, until we are at a loss to determine whether such a +race of beings belongs to the human species. + +"I have long desired, and should be glad if some one of sufficient +learning and skill would point out to me the line of demonstration +between the human and brutal creation; and say where the human ends, +and where the brutal begins! + +"Naturalists take care to say but little on this subject, and I +believe the task would be more difficult than what people in general +imagine. + + "Come then, ye learn'd, ye great and wise, + Unfold the soul to mortal eyes; + Say where eternal life shall end, + Or where eternal death begins! + For death eternal theirs must be, + Whose souls no future life shall see! + And why should mortals vainly weep + For creatures wrapt in endless sleep? + They've had their day, they've had their bliss, + Their life, their joy, and happiness, + And now must we forever mourn, + Because their life will not return! + "O foolish man! go, and be wise! + Learn where the source of greatness lies; + To be content is to be blest: + A cure for woes is endless rest. + If God be good to all the race + Of animals before his face, + Although the life of some be short, + (One day begins and ends their sport) + Shall we presume he is less kind + To human souls of nobler mind, + Unless he lengthen out their days + To endless years in future maze? + "It cannot be! His love is such, + Whate'er he gives, little or much, + Is always good: faith, hope, desires; + Or any grace which he inspires. + All, all are good: for man indeed, + (Whilst here) such gifts, such helps may need! + All bring him to his final goal, + Where nature's law winds up the whole! + +"But you will say, does God inspire man with faith and hope barely to +deceive him; and does he not mean that he should ever realize the +'things hoped for?' which must be the case, unless the hope is founded +on a reality. Answer: Let us rather say, unless the _hope_ be a +reality. The hope of man is in fact a reality, as much so as any thing +else which exists. It is, however, what it is, i. e. _hope_; and not +what is not, i. e. the 'things hoped for.' But hope never deceives any +one, it continues as long as the creature has any use for it; and it +is never taken away from any (except a disordered mind, to which all +men are liable) as long as it can be of any service to the creature. + + "That hope is given for thy blessing NOW."--_Pope_. + +"Mankind, if ever, are very seldom made unhappy and wretched in +consequence of doubting the existence of a future state. Thousands, no +doubt, think they should be wretched in this condition: but, although +I have been acquainted with a number of this description, I never saw +one made unhappy in consequence. It is the _fear of endless misery_ +which produces so much wretchedness in the world.--This idea, it is +true, beggars all description! It produces that fear which hath +torment. It disturbs the brain; destroys the mental faculties; and, by +distracting the imagination, fills the soul with horror! It is +infinitely more to be dreaded than _endless death_! But what fear or +dread can there be in the idea of _endless sleep_? Surely none. People +are too apt to confound the idea of the absence of immortality with +endless misery, believing this to be the only alternative. This is not +correct. Mortality and death are the only opposites to immortality and +eternal life. The former I know is true, and yet I am satisfied with +knowing, (i. e. for an absolute certainty) nothing further; +nevertheless, as I feel truly thankful for my present existence, +should I be so happily disappointed as to find all my doubts, founded +in error, I trust, as I should be inexpressibly happy, so I should be +inexpressibly thankful for a future life." + +"Yours, &c. + +A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER VI. + +_Dear sir, and brother_,--In replying to your seventh number, I +propose taking the advantage which you have favoured me with, by the +division of your subject. I hope by this, to be able to compress my +remarks on your reasoning, and avoid any unnecessary protraction of +this epistle. + +You allow, that a "general view of the whole ground" on which the +scriptures seem to rest, would be sufficient to support the truth of +divine revelation, were it not for the following considerations. + +1. Mankind, in all ages of the world, have been, and still are prone +to superstition. + +2. It cannot be denied, but that a part of mankind, at least, have +believed, and still are believing in miracles and revelations which +are spurious. + +3. The facts on which revelation is predicated, are unlike every thing +of which we have any positive knowledge. + +If I rightly apprehend your meaning of "the whole ground" in which the +scriptures seem to rest, a general view of which would be sufficient +to support a belief in revelation, were it not for the three +considerations above quoted; it occupies, at least, prophecies +concerning a Messiah and the fulfillment of those prophecies by a +Messiah, according to the account which we have in the New Testament. + +As it will serve to circumscribe the bounds of our present reasoning, +it is thought best to direct our inquiry to the consideration of the +facts recorded in the New Testament, presuming if these be admitted, +the prophecies will not be denied. + +But have I not occasion, sir, to be surprised to find your first +proposition adduced as evidence unfavourable to the christian +scriptures? Was there ever a time when the world of human kind, both +Jews and Gentiles, was more deeply involved in the darkness and +stupidity of superstition than when the Messiah entered on his public +ministry? If the doctrine of Jesus had been pleasing to the +superstitious Jews, if it had accorded with the idolatrous notions of +the Gentiles, (which was impossible) if his Messiahship had been +espoused by both, and by their consent and influence had been handed +down, and declared to have been evidenced by all the miracles recorded +in the four Evangelists, do you not see that your first proposition +would be of Herculean strength against this religion? On the contrary, +it being well established, from unquestionable authority, that as St. +Paul observed, Christ crucified was a stumbling block to the Jews, and +to the Greeks foolishness, the whole force of Jewish and Greek +superstition, as it opposed, serves to strengthen the evidences of our +faith. + +Will you be so good as to read the account which is recorded of the +miracle which Jesus wrought in giving sight to the man who was born +blind, and inquire carefully from beginning to end for any thing that +looks in the least as if the writer was endeavouring to write a +falsehood in a way to have it deceive the reader. This request might, +as I humbly conceive, be made in respect to any of the other miracles; +but what I had in view, particularly when this subject came to my +mind, was the following words, spoken by the pharisees to him who had +been blind; "Thou art his disciple: but we are Moses' disciples. We +know that God spake unto Moses; as for this fellow we know not from +whence he is." Is it not plain from this as well as from many other +scriptures, that in the same degree that the pharisees' superstition +run in favour of Moses, it operated against Jesus? I know the objector +may say, the Jews expected a Messiah; but then they did not expect +such a character as was Jesus. They also expected Elias to come first, +but they did not expect such a character as John. You, and all the +world know that the protestant clergy in Europe and America used to +pray for the downfall of the Pope; but when he was humbled, they all +joined in fervent prayer to set him up again. How did this +inconsistency happen? Answer: The way in which it pleased God to +humble the Pope, was not the way which clerical wisdom and prudence +had planned; and we all see now, that they are better pleased with the +Pope and the Inquisition, than they were to have him lose his power in +a way which endangered their own. Now, sir, if liberal principles do +obtain, and if the cause of civil and religious liberty should finally +triumph, in spite of popish and protestant clergy with monarchy +united, do you believe that this triumph will ever be imputed to the +superstition of king-craft and priestcraft? On the ground of your +first proposition this would be your conclusion. The pharisees and +those who adhered to them, built the sepulchres of the prophets, whom +their fathers killed, and said; "If we had been in the days of our +fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of +the prophets." These _holy_ men were sure that they were much better +than their fathers who persecuted the prophets; they had no +disposition to persecute; all the wealth in the world could not have +tempted these _godly saints_ to kill a prophet of God. However, St. +Paul writing to the Thessalonians, says, "For ye, brethren, became +followers of the churches of God, which in Judea are in Christ Jesus: +for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as +they have of the Jews; who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own +prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are +contrary to all men." But the Jews would not have put Jesus to death +if he had been a pharisee, and had not departed from their traditions +and superstitions. But he was not a pharisee, nor did he adhere to +their superstitions; and for this cause he was to them "a root out of +dry ground." To them, he had no form nor comeliness, no, nor had he +any beauty that they should discern him. Say, brother, is not this the +superstition which you are urging as unfavourable to the evidences of +christianity? And does not the passage above quoted from Thessalonians +go to prove what all ecclesiastical history as well as the New +Testament proves, that the Christians were persecuted by the Jews and +by the Gentiles? Did any thing but superstition ever persecute? It +surely does not aim to build up that which it persecutes: and +therefore in room of its being evidence against the genuineness of +what it opposes, is justly admitted as a valid evidence in its favour. +It is well known that our Christian doctors, clergy, and laity have +been long persuaded that a glorious day of universal peace and gospel +light is not only promised, but fast approaching; and if their prayers +have any influence, it is evident that the time is hastened by their +means. All this looks very well, and a man would be thought to be +impious, if not insane, who should intimate that these saints were +superstitous or illiberal, or that they possessed the spirit of +persecution.--But what has been their spirit for, say, twenty-five +years past towards a doctrine which teaches universal peace on earth +and good will towards man? Is there any thing bad which they have not +spoken against this doctrine? Have they not treated its preachers with +all the contempt and even ridicule of which they were capable? Have +they not used all their influence to keep the doctrine from being +preached in their meeting houses, and have they not dealt with church +members who have believed this benign doctrine of love, with +excommunications attended with as many aggravations as they could +invent? In a word, is there one bitter herb in all the ground which +was cursed for man's sake, that has not been used against what is +called the poison of this abominable heresy? If they had the power of +the pope, if the inquisition were at their command, would they let +such power lie dormant for want of zeal? Balaam smote his ass with a +_staff_, but said: "I would there were a _sword_ in mine hand, for now +would I kill thee." + +But after all that has been said and done against this doctrine of +universal benevolence and grace, its progress confounds its enemies, +encourages its friends, and calls to mind the parable of the mustard +seed. Suppose for a century to come it should continue its advances +according to what it has gained for the twenty-five years above +mentioned, is it not evident that the knowledge of God would cover the +earth as the waters cover the sea? But would any body then, being +acquainted with the history of these times, think of making use of the +superstition of our clergy to oppose the evidences of this doctrine? +Would such a one say, it is probable that in those times of +superstition, the clergy who had great influence with the common +people, might alter many passages of scripture, and in room of using +the word _elect_, interpolate the words _all men_? If I understand +your argument, this is the use you make of superstition. But, sir, I +am satisfied that the superstition of our times will be sufficient +proof to future ages, that the scriptures which so abundantly prove +the doctrine of universal salvation, were not the production of a +superstitious clergy who were known to oppose this doctrine with all +their learning and influence. + +Now if you please, you may indulge in strengthening your hypothesis, +and prove by the faithful histories of different nations, that Jews, +Greeks, and Romans were most stupidly superstitious. Also that India, +Turkey, and Arabia are now groaning under the ponderous weight of this +vanity. Go on and enlarge on all that you have said, and point out all +the superstitions of which we read or know; show how powerful this +superstition is in the human heart; how it renders its votaries blind +to reason and the principles of moral truth; show how hard it is to +break in upon this almost invincible phalanx; but consider, sir, the +blacker you represent this cloud, the brighter you render the +evidences of the religion of Jesus. + +You need not be informed, what the Christian world all knows, that the +doctrine of Jesus Christ, founded on the miracles recorded in the four +Evangelists and in the Acts of the Apostles, was propagated among Jews +and Gentiles, whose superstitions, though various, rendered them both +hostile to this new religion, and incited them to persecutions which +subjected the "weak and defenceless disciples of the meek and lowly +Jesus" to trials and sufferings, fears and temptations of which we can +have but a faint conception.--The grand hypothesis on which the gospel +was advocated, and by which it succeeded in obtaining vast multitudes +of Jewish as well as Gentile converts, was the resurrection of Jesus, +who was publicly executed on a cross by the Roman authority instigated +by the rulers of the Jews. All this must be accounted for in a +rational way. The facts are as well attested as any thing of which +history gives any account. The four gospels have been commented on, +and quoted, and adverted too by a greater number of controversial +writers, than any other book of which we have any knowledge. The +epistles of St. Paul when compared with the Acts and with each other +have all the necessary characteristics of being genuine, and of +relating nothing but realties. + +You, sir, allow that the authority on which this religion rests, would +be sufficient to support it, if it were not for the consideration of +your three propositions, the first of which, I trust, you will +acknowledge stands in its vindication. + +Your second proposition may now be noticed. + +That part of mankind have believed and still are believing in miracles +and revelations which are spurious, we have no interest in denying, +but we feel under no obligation to admit this fact as any evidence +against Christianity, or of any force to counterbalance the evidences +which stand in its favour. What would you think of such kind of +reasoning as should contend, that as it is evident that many have +been, and still are imposed on by counterfeit money, it justifies +serious doubts whether there ever was any true money in the world? +Would you not reply, that as the counterfeit is entirely dependent on +the true for its imposition, in room of being evidence that there is +no true money, it demonstrates that there is? + +It being well known, nor ever doubted by the friends or enemies of +Christianity, that its founder and his apostles proved the divinity of +their missions by miracles alone, it was nothing more than might be +rationally expected, that impostors would rise up under those sacred +pretensions, with a view to establish themselves. But if this religion +of Jesus Christ, had not at first been built upon this foundation, +impostors would never have thought of imposing on people with such +pretensions. Impostors, therefore, together with all their deceptions, +cannot, as I humbly conceive, be admitted as evidence _against_ the +genuineness of the gospel, but in _favour_ of it. + +As to Mahomet of whom you speak, I have always understood that he made +no pretensions to miracles. He pretended to hold correspondence with +the angel Gabriel, and to receive revelations from God in this way; +but he never attempted to sanction his divinity by miracles; and +indeed there was no need of this, for he declared he was commissioned +from heaven to propagate his religion by the sword, and to destroy the +monuments of idolatry. His kingdom was of this world, therefore did +his servants fight; but they did not fight always alone, for he fought +at nine battles or sieges in person, and in ten years achieved fifty +military enterprizes. He united religion and plunder, by which he +allured the vagrant Arabs to his standard. He asserted that the sword +was the key of heaven and hell; that a drop of blood shed in the cause +of God, a night spent in arms are of more account than two months of +fasting and prayer. He assured those who should fall in battle, that +their sins should be forgiven at the day of judgment, that their +wounds would be resplendant as vermillion and odoriferous as myrrh, +and that the loss of limbs should be supplied by the wings of angels +and cherubim. But what you can find in Mahometism which in the least +militates against the evidences of Christianity I know not. It is +affirmed by writers, that he collected his ideas of God and of morals +from the Hebrew and Christian scriptures. + +From Mahomet you go to the conversion of Constantine, taking +particular notice of the account given of his seeing the sign of a +cross in the sun, &c. And as we are now on the subject of miracles, we +must not forget the miracles of the _Shakers_ which seem to _shake_ +your faith! Two _notable_ miracles you have honoured with a place in +your epistle, or honoured your epistle with them, which, I shall not +undertake to determine. A bridge fell with a horse on it, which fell +with the bridge; the rider was a woman; by the fall several of her +ribs were broken, and she was otherwise bruised; but she was +miraculously recovered so as to be able to dance in one evening. A boy +cut his foot, the wound bled profusely; the boy was miraculously +healed in a few hours. These are the miracles; but whether mother Ann, +or some of her elders performed these miracles you do not inform me. +It seems to be allowed that _most_ of these Quaker miracles are +inferior to the miracles recorded in the New Testament, but not more +inferior to them, than they are to the miracles of Moses. + +Doctor Priestley, with his usual candor, endeavours to assign a +natural cause for what Constantine saw, and you are inclined to his +opinion, to all of which I have no objections to make; and I am by no +means certain, that a proper attention to the pretended miracles of +the Shakers, might not issue in assigning a natural cause for them. +But however this may be, I cannot see how the matter affects our +belief in Jesus Christ. Do you not discover a difference too wide +between the case of Jesus and his doctrine, and Ann Lee and her +principles to admit of the comparison which you seem inclined to make? +You have also mentioned the case of Mrs. A----'s seeing her husband +and talking with him after he was dead, which you would draw into the +same comparison. That Mrs. A---- may have satisfactory evidence of her +having seen and conversed with her husband since his death, I am not +at all disposed to dispute; but here the matter ends. God has not seen +fit to endue her with the power of working miracles. If this woman +should come into a public assembly and work astonishing miracles +before all the people as an attestation of her having seen her +husband, and you and I should be present, and see these marvellous +things with our own eyes should we doubt the woman's testimony? + +I have already, in a former communication shown that the declaration +of the apostles of the resurrection of Jesus, until it was accompanied +with power from on high, was never even communicated to the public, or +ordered to be communicated. But in fact the disciples were strictly +commanded to tarry at Jerusalem until the gift of the Holy Spirit. + +Constantine would have had no occasion to depose under the solemnity +of an oath, concerning the sign of the cross, &c. if he had had power +to evidence his declaration by miracles. If Ann Lee's disciples will +heal the sick, restore the lame, and raise the dead in so public a +manner that the people at large may know these facts, then, sir, they +will no longer need to purchase poor children in order to increase +their societies. And if God should see fit to call me from my wife and +children by such evidences as these, I hope I should not disobey his +divine mandate. + +But will you reply, that miracles having ceased, we have no right to +expect them? In return it may be asked, how we are assured that +miracles are not now necessary as they were twenty or thirty years +ago? Will you retort this question and ask why miracles are not now as +necessary to evince the truth of christianity as in the days of Jesus +and his apostles? To this we reply: the miracles on which the gospel +was founded, or propagated, were of the most extraordinary kind; they +were of extensive publicity, and of ocular notoriety; they were vastly +numerous, extending to the infirmed of all descriptions; and they were +continued long enough to answer the purpose for which they were +intended. + +You will feel satisfied that the _enemies_ of Jesus and his apostles +knew for certainty, that those miracles wrought by them were +realities; and that they, in room of imputing them to the divine +agency, violated their own reason, by referring to an evil agent such +power and acts of goodness; I say you will feel satisfied of all this, +if you will set down and read all the accounts relative to this +subject, in the four gospels, carefully regarding this question: Do +these writers discover any marks of deception or fraud? + +In no instance do the evangelists betray the least anxiety for fear +what they relate will not be credited. Even when they pen the +astonishing miracles of which they pretend to be eye witnesses, they +make no pause to clear up any thing; but tell the whole as if the +whole was publicly known. In a word, this history, this sacred +testimony, carries its own competent evidence within itself. + +It has been noticed by those who have written on this subject, as +evidence that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were the real authors of +those books which bear their respective names, that a great many +passages are alluded to or quoted from the evangelists, exactly as we +read them now, by a regular succession of Christian writers, from the +time of the apostles down to this hour; and at a very early period +their names are mentioned as the authors of their respective gospels; +which is more than can he said of any other historian whatever. See +Lardner and Paley. I will not call up Ann Lee in this place, but I +will suppose an attempt should be made now in New-England to convince +Trinitarians of the error of supposing there are three persons in the +Godhead. This shall be undertaken by men who are wicked enough to +attempt to deceive by pretended miracles. One is selected as a leader, +and the others to the number of twelve profess to be his followers. +The leader pretends to a revelation from God, the substance of which +is, that Jesus Christ is a created being and dependent on the Father. +This doctrine he preaches and directs his followers to go into every +town in New-England and proclaim this truth to the people, and exhort +them to repent of their former doctrine and turn to God. This impostor +pretends to work miracles in confirmation of his divine mission; and +also pretends to give his disciples power to work miracles. He informs +his friends that he is to lose his life and that they must lose +their's, in order to establish this doctrine. Stop, we have come to an +absurdity. Who would undertake to deceive their fellow creatures for +no other reward than the loss of their lives? But let us pursue on. +This leader pretends to give sight to blind people, to heal the sick +with a word, and to raise the dead. It is reported all round the +country that many such cases have actually taken place; that the blind +do receive their sight, the sick are raised to health at once, and one +man in particular who was dead four days, has been called out of his +grave. People now are waked up; many believe the reports; thousands +are flocking from place to place to hear this man and to see his +miracles. In this case who would be most likely to place themselves +very near to this pretender? Who would one expect to find near his +person? Answer, some of the Trinitarians; chosen ones too; men of +sound judgment, and who could be depended on as able to detect any +fraud. How long is it reasonable to suppose these pretensions could +possibly continue with any success? It may be asked likewise, whether +all honest, reasonable, and candid Unitarians would not express their +abhorrence of such pretensions? Are you, sir, of opinion that such a +fraud could possibly be managed in a way to insure success? A moment's +reflection is sufficient to put the question to rest. + +But we will still pursue our supposition. The Trinitarians enter a +complaint against this teacher, to the authorities, alleging that he +is guilty of treason; he is arrested, convicted, and publicly +executed. At the time of his arrest his disciples all forsake him, and +one being found near him denies that he knows the man. All is over +now, and people go about their common avocations; once in a while a +word or two may be dropped on the subject of the impostor, but the +thing is dying away, till all at once the twelve disciples of him who +was executed came boldly before the public and proclaim the +resurrection of their leader, charge the rulers of the people of +having murdered him, and declare that God has raised him from the +dead, and appointed them to be witness of this to the people, and to +preach Unitarianism. What would be thought of these men? Would the +doctrine of the divine unity be likely to triumph over its opposite, +the Trinity, by the preaching of the twelve? Would there be any +attention paid to these men, except by authority, to disperse them and +cause them to desist from such madness, and go about some honest +business? But now they pretend to work miracles in confirmation of the +truth of the resurrection! Enough. Suppose, sir, I should tell you +that I believe such pretensions might be so managed as to succeed +completely, would you not reply, that the success of such pretensions +being altogether a fraud, would itself be as great a miracle as is +recorded in scripture, with the addition of absurdity? You will +remember that you suggested that it would require a miracle to +dissuade me from my belief; and I hope you will see that you must +believe in a miracle in order not to believe with me! + +Will you say that the foregoing does not come to the difficulty, that +the question is, was not the account we have of those things in the +gospels, forged long since the days in which they are represented to +have taken place? Then, sir, in room of the above supposed fraud, +undertaken to propagate _Unitarianism_, you may take the supposition +of a forged book published by the friends of that doctrine, in which +just such a story is told of the first propagations of the sentiment +as is told in the New Testament of Jesus and his apostles--and the +Trinitarians shall be made to act the part of the old pharisees. Can +you, sir, conceive that the book would meet with any better success +than the impostors themselves? Would our learned doctors of the +Trinitarian school be silent while such a book was in circulation? + +Would they suffer it to be handed down to posterity unanswered and +unrefuted? Would they see their churches imposed on in this way, their +doctrine sat at nought, and this most extravagant imposture obtain +credit? Ask likewise on the other side; would honest Unitarians pay +any attention to such a book? Would they impose on their fellow +creatures in this way? Would they instruct their children to believe +what they knew to be a lie? + +It should be kept in mind that when the gospels were written and for +more than two hundred years afterwards, christianity was hated and +persecuted beyond what we can easily conceive, by the emperors of Rome +and their wicked governors, who being authorized by special edicts for +that purpose put to the most cruel tortures and horrid deaths the +followers of Jesus. The superstitious priests of heathen idols, were +constantly active with all possible inventions calculated to excite +jealousies and sharpen the edge of persecution against a doctrine that +was calculated to subvert their order and demolish their temples. It +was not until A. D. 311, that Maximin Galerius, who had been the +author of the heaviest calamities on the christians, published a +solemn edict, ordering the persecution to cease, which his +indescribable horrors and painful sickness compelled him to do. The +next year Constantine, and his colleague Licinius granted to the +christians a full power of living according to their own laws and +institutions. + +For nearly three hundred years then the gospel ministry, founded on +miracles, which, if not real, were as easily detected as any falsehood +whatever, was oppressed by cruel edicts acted upon by the bitterest +enemies. Where was all the boasted learning of this learned age? Where +was all the sagacity of the sagacious? Could not a priesthood, for +ages improved in scarcely any thing but imposition and fraud, succeed +in detecting pretensions, which, if not real, were too grossly absurd +to impose on the most artless? + +You, sir, are entirely right in saying you cannot prove this christian +revelation and the miracles on which it was founded, false. For if +this could ever have been done, there can be no reasonable doubt that +it would have been by its enemies in its first rise; but the day is +past for the detection of this fraud, if it be one; for the age in +which all the means of detection were in possession of its enemies, +has long since passed away and those means are lost. The imposition, +possessed at first of no solidity, might have been blown into the air +with a breath of common sense, has magnified and petrified till it +promises to fill the whole earth, and is as hard as an adamant. + +We hear of no writer's undertaking to disprove Christianity till about +one hundred years after the apostles' day, when Celsus wrote a violent +work against the Christians, who were, at the same time, suffering +severe persecutions. But this author, though a bitter enemy to Christ, +allows his miracles; but like the old pharisees imputes them to a +different power from that of God. Why should this enemy of Jesus, his +religion, apostles and followers allow those miracles?--It seems that +there can be no good reason for this unless they were realities. You +say, "that no miracles or revelations that have come down to us are +supported by so good authority as those recorded in the New Testament, +I admit." But how can you conceive of _any good evidence_ of such +miracles as are recorded in this book? We have no account of any +testimony under oath that they were realities. And even if we had, +could the solemnity of an oath be admitted as good evidence? I think +not. Indeed there was no authority that would allow the apostles to +depose in favour of the resurrection of Jesus; but there were no +authorities that could prevent their bearing a mere convincing +testimony. I have endeavoured heretofore, to show that there can be no +good evidence of such a fact as the resurrection, which is capable of +being refuted; and I will here add, of admitting reasonable doubts of +the fact, in the mind. It is a question which properly belongs to this +subject, and which should be often called up, whether the evidences of +the resurrection were not as strong as they could have been, both to +the disciples and to those who believed on Jesus through their +testimony; and furthermore, whether we can conceive how the evidences +could have been stronger on which we believe, without perpetual +miracles, which not only seems an absurdity, but would, if as powerful +as they were at first, preclude the exercise of our reasoning +faculties and the necessity of investigation, which is one of the most +rational enjoyments of which we are capable. + +I grant, if the vulgar error, that our eternal salvation depended on +our being correctly acquainted with this subject, were true, it would +follow, of course, that the least difficulty in the way of our knowing +the whole matter, might be attended with fatal and awful consequences. +And for myself, should I adopt the popular opinion that those who go +out of this world not understanding the doctrine, or believing in +Jesus Christ, must hereafter be forever excluded from the blessed +immortality which is brought to light through the gospel, it would be +difficult for me to account for the least obscurity nameable, and much +more difficult would it be to account for the limited circle in which +divine truth has been caused to shine. But I have before intimated +that the consequences of our unbelief here, can with no more propriety +be carried into an eternal state, than the consequences of our +ignorance of any science. It is derogatory to the sacred loveliness of +divine truth, either to promise any further reward to those who seek +and find her than the enjoyment she brings to the soul in her own +native sweetness, or to threaten those who neglect so divine a +treasure with any other inconvenience than the loss of such felicity +during their foolish neglect. + +It becomes the philosopher and perhaps more the christian to exercise +patience, but patience is sometimes tried with the bigotry and +nonsense of the self-righteous, self-wise, and self-knowing, who +profess the religion of Christ, yet stand tiptoe, like James and John, +to call fire from heaven to consume all who do not receive their +master. But the true spirit of our religion rebukes such blind zeal +and foolish arrogance, by showing that such a disposition is the +malady which the gospel is designed to cure. While the Christian +clergy have spent their breath and wore out their lungs in +anathematising with eternal vengeance, those whom they call infidels, +have been worse than infidels, and brought a greater stigma on the +name of Jesus, than his open enemies from _Celsus_ down to T. Paine. I +would by all means except from the above remark a goodly number who +have done honour to our religion by treating its opposers, as its +spirit dictates, with candor and sound argument well mingled with +divine charity. + +Indeed I think I see much reason to look on what is called infidelity, +with a charitable disposition for this plain reason, it has greatly +contributed to enlighten the Christian commonwealth, by calling into +action the very best of human abilities and directing them to search +for the true grounds on which our faith securely rests. + +I hardly know how I ought to reply to what you say about the +persecution of Stephen, &c. At one time you write as if you would +doubt the authenticity of those New Testament accounts; then again you +advert to them for assistance. But why should you go over such ground, +on which so much depends, as if you did not realize that the subject +was worthy of a pause for consideration? + +When you advert to the martyrdom of Stephen by a mob, (which by the +way was _the council_), you take no notice of the cause of his being +arrested, accused or condemned. + +Let reason and candor look at the account. "And Stephen full of faith +and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people. Then there +arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the +libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Celicia +and of Asia, disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to resist, +&c. Then they suborned men, which said, we have heard him speak +blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. And they stirred up +the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and come upon him, and +caught him, and brought him to the council, and set up false +witnesses, which said, this man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words +against this holy place, and the law: for we have heard him say, that +this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and change the +customs which Moses delivered us. And all that sat in the council, +looking stedfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an +angel. Then said the high priest, are these things so?" Here follows +that admirable speech of Stephen before the grand council of his +nation, which defies all conjecture of forgery, and enraged his +enemies against him. And they stoned him for pretended blasphemy. The +concluding clause of this speech is particularly worthy of notice. +"Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? And they have +slain them which shewed before of the coming of the just one; of whom +ye have been now the betrayers and murderers; who have received the +law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it." Now, sir, is +there any more evidence for believing that there was such a man as +Stephen stoned according to the above account, than for believing that +he was stoned by the authority of the council, and for what is here +set forth? + +This council which put Stephen to death, was the same before which +Peter was arraigned on account of the miracle wrought on the impotent +man; which according to Dr. Hammond was the Sanhedrim. + +But you seem much engaged to prove that martyrdom does not prove the +truth of a belief for which the martyr dies. Here you have not been +careful to distinguish cases. A _Papist, who has been brought up to +believe in the divine presence_, might perhaps suffer death rather +than renounce it; and yet we should not consider this sufficient to +prove the doctrine of _transubstantiation_; but no candid person would +doubt the _sincerity_ of the martyr. But why should we hesitate to +believe the doctrine for which he suffered? Answer, the doctrine is +not a subject of which he could have positive knowledge. He could not +be eye nor ear witness of the fact. But the testimony for which the +disciples of Jesus suffered, was a testimony concerning a matter of +fact, of which their eyes and ears could take proper cognizance; and +if their sufferings are allowed to prove their sincerity, then it is +granted that they believed in the resurrection of Jesus. If the entire +unbelief of the disciples in the resurrection could be overcome, and +they brought to believe that they saw Jesus and talked with him, and +ate with him, and were frequently in his company after his +resurrection, for forty days; and if they were willing to suffer +persecution and death rather than desist from troubling the people +with this testimony, it appears to me that reason will allow that this +is, at least, some evidence of the truth of this astonishing fact; +though this was not the evidence which carried conviction to so many +thousands of the Jews as well as of the Gentiles. This we have before +shown was the manifestation of the mighty power of God in the +miraculous wonders which God wrought by the apostles. + +You speak of the honour, which was no doubt attached to the martyrdom +of Stephen, as being an inducement to others to submit to this +example, &c. You hereby allow that the testimony for which he suffered +was surely believed, otherwise no honour could attach to those who +suffered for it. Why then do you not attempt to show the probable +ground on which this testimony was erroneously believed? + +I humbly conceive that your observations which regard to the +uprightness of the apostles are too indefinite. You say, "This much, +however, I believe, and of this much I have no doubt, that Paul and +the other apostles were convinced of the truth and the salutary +effects of the moral precepts which had been taught and preached by +Christ; and they were willing to preach and enforce them by all the +means in their power, even at the risk of their lives," &c. And this +you think, "constituted them wise and good men." Here, sir, do you not +leave room for the notion that the apostles would enforce their moral +doctrine with the testimony of the resurrection of Jesus and their +pretensions to miraculous powers, when they had no belief in the +former, and knew the latter to be an imposition? If these men +endeavoured to enforce any principles by practicing such impositions, +however pure those principles were, these men were vile impostors, and +merited all their sufferings. I solemnly protest against the wisdom or +goodness of any man who is an impostor. + +I proceed to notice your third proposition, which is as follows: + +"3. The facts on which revelation is predicated are unlike every thing +of which we have any positive knowledge." "Of the truth of this +proposition," you say I "must be sensible." You must indulge me, sir, +in saying that you have made a mistake. I am insensible of the +correctness of your statement. The FACTS on which the Christian faith +is predicated, are of that description which come within the +observation of the outward senses of men. + +I know of no fact on which Jesus called the people to rest their +faith, that they could not as easily judge of, through the medium of +their senses as of any facts in nature. See John v. 36, "But I have +greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath +given me to finish, the same works that I do bear witness of me, that +the Father hath sent me." 10th, 24th, 25th, "Then came the Jews round +about him, and said unto him, how long doest thou make us to doubt? If +thou be the Christ tell us plainly. Jesus answered them, I told you, +and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they +bear witness of me." 37th, 38th, "If I do not the works of my Father, +believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the +works; that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in +him." + +All the works of which Jesus spake, were such as the people could know +and examine by seeing and hearing, and concerning which there was no +necessity of their being ignorant or imposed upon. See the account of +John's sending two of his disciples to ask Jesus if he were the +Christ. Luke vii. 20, &c. "When the men were come unto him, they said, +John Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, art thou he that should +come? or look we for another? And in that same hour he cured many of +their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits; and unto many that +were blind he gave sight. Then Jesus, answering, said unto them, go +your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that +the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, +the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached." Of such +facts the people were capable of judging, and on such facts the +Messiahship of Jesus rested. And furthermore, it was on such facts +that the testimony of the apostles concerning the resurrection of +Jesus rested. Now it is evident that those facts on which divine +revelation is predicated, are like facts of which we have positive +knowledge, in all respects as it regards the case of knowing them. It +was just as easy for people to know those things, as it is for us to +know the things which are familiar to our senses. + +If you mean by the above proposition, simply that miracles are not +wrought before our eyes, it is granted; but have you shown that a +_continuance_ of miracles would more rationally vindicate the gospel, +than the divine economy has done by preserving the _variety of +evidence_ which is now at our command? If this cannot be done, then +the discontinuance of miracles is no reason why we should doubt the +truth of this revelation. How then is your third proposition, even in +any sense in which it can be true, to be understood unfavourable to +divine revelation? + +It may not be improper to notice some reasons why the continuance of +the miracles, on which the gospel was first propagated, would not +comport with the divine economy. + +1st. As has been before suggested, it would, if combined with the +force it first had, preclude the exercise of the mental powers of +investigation. + +2d. This power of working miracles must have been distributed to +various sects and heresies, or by being confined to one order, prevent +the existence of any other, which would be another preventive of +immense reasoning, and tend to circumscribe the sphere in which the +human mind is capacitated to move. + +3d. The continuance of those miracles must have changed the order of +nature, and continued men on earth forever, or from generation to +generation; for if this power had been exercised on some and not to +the advantage of others, it would look like the partial systems of +men, and in room of commending the impartial goodness of God, would +have refuted it. + +But, the manifestation of this divine power, in those miracles on +which our religion is founded, while it is attended with none of the +evils which a continuance would evidently produce, besides forming an +immoveable rock on which so glorious a superstructure is safely +founded, furnishes an immense subject for the power of ratiocination. + +You will excuse me for not noticing particularly all you say about +modern pretensions to revelations and miracles, as I think it would +occupy time that may be better employed. But I will observe on your +opinion, that it is remarkable, that Saul when he was converted, did +not go to Jerusalem to inquire more fully into the circumstances of +the resurrection, that if he had done this, you would not have +hesitated to make use of it against his declaration recorded in Gal. +i. 11, 12. "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was +preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, +neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." + +Why do you mention that we have not a particular account of St. Paul's +conversion written by his own hand? Do you think that what a man +writes of himself is more to be depended on, than what his biographer +writes of him? Your suggestions on this subject seem to indicate, at +least, some scruples respecting this conversion, but not in a way to +show where the ground of scruples lies. What is there for me to +answer? Why do you treat this subject with such neglect? In a former +communication, I requested your attention to it in a special manner, +with a view to confine our reasoning to our subject, and to avoid +rambling from one thing to another without making ourselves acquainted +with any thing. In your reply you never attempted to give any account +why Saul should embrace the religion he had persecuted; you made no +attempt to give any reason why he preached Jesus and the resurrection; +nor did you assign any reason why he should be willing to suffer the +loss of all earthly enjoyments and endure persecutions for Christ's +sake; nor did you attempt to prove that there never was such a man and +such a conversion. The subject you considered still before you, and in +this seventh number you have spoken of it again, but have paid no +particular attention to it. + +What you say on the subject of prophecy, does not appear to me, either +to reflect any light on it, or to call up any question of importance. +Your query whether the books of the New Testament were not written +after the destruction of Jerusalem, which would suppose that the +prophecy of the destruction of that city was written after the events +took place of which the prophecy speaks, is an old suggestion in which +I am unable to see any thing very reasonable. And I will remark here, +that men who seem to lay an uncommon claim to reason, ought to make +use of it when arguing on such momentous subjects. What difference +would it make whether St. Matthew wrote his gospel before, or after +the destruction of Jerusalem, as it respects the prophecy which Jesus +delivered concerning it? You allow St. Matthew to be an honest man. +You do not doubt then but Jesus did deliver such a prophecy before his +death, which was certainly before the destruction of the city. Then +surely it makes no difference whether the prophecy was committed to +paper before, or after the fulfilment of it. Besides, you seem to urge +the _silence_ of St. John on the subject as unfavourable to the +account, because he wrote his gospel after Jerusalem was destroyed. As +to interpolations which you think might have found their way into the +gospels, it appears to me, sir, that a candid consideration of this +subject would issue in this conclusion; if any important +interpolations had been admitted, they would have produced such a +disagreement as to effectually destroy the validity of the books; for +if one heresy could be indulged, it is reasonable to suppose that +another would be, and so on, which in room of allowing us the +scriptures in their present consistent form, would either have +destroyed their existence altogether, or have varied so as to confound +their ideas. + +For a candid, learned, and impartial view of the scriptures of the New +Testament, I refer you to Paley's evidences, and in particular to his +eleven propositions, which he has proved in a manner satisfactory, as +I conceive to the candid inquirer. + +These propositions begin on page 103, and are the following. + +1. "That the historical books of the New Testament, meaning thereby +the four gospels, and the Acts of the Apostles, are quoted, or alluded +to, by a series of christian writers, beginning with those who were +contemporary with the apostles, or who immediately followed them, and +proceeding in close and regular succession from their time to the +present. + +2. "That when they are quoted, or alluded to, they are quoted or +alluded to with peculiar respect, as books _sui geneus_, as possessing +an authority which belonged to no other books, and as conclusive in +all questions and controversies among christians. + +3. "That they were in very early times collected into a distinct +volume. + +4. "That they were distinguished by appropriate names and titles of +respect. + +5. "That they were publicly read and expounded in the religious +assemblies of the Christians. + +6. "That commentaries were written upon them, harmonies formed out of +them, different copies carefully collected, and versions of them made +into different languages. + +7. "That they were received by Christians of different sects, by many +heretics as well as catholics, and usually appealed to by both sides +in the controversies which arose in those days. + +8. "That the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen epistles +of St. Paul, the first epistle of John, and the first of Peter, were +received without doubt, by those who doubted concerning the other +books which are inclosed in our present canon. + +9. "That the gospels were attacked by the early adversaries of +Christianity, as books containing the accounts upon which the religion +was founded. + +10. "That formal catalogues of authentic scriptures were published, in +all which our present sacred histories were recorded. + +11. "That these propositions cannot be affirmed of any other books, +claiming to be books of scripture; by which I mean those books which +are commonly called Apochryphal." + +The first evidence adduced by this celebrated author to prove his +first proposition, proves that the gospel of St. Matthew, which +contains a very particular account of the prophecy of Jesus concerning +the destruction of Jerusalem, was written before the event took place. +This evidence is a quotation from the epistle of Barnabas, St. Paul's +companion, in the following words: "Let us therefore, beware lest it +come upon us, _as it is written_, there are many called, few chosen." +St. Matthew's gospel is the only book in which these words are found; +and you will perceive by the expression, "as it is written," that +Barnabas quoted the passage from an author of authority. Barnabas +wrote his epistle during the troubles which ended in the destruction +of the Jews and their city. This epistle of Barnabas is quoted by +Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 194: by Origen, A.D. 230. It is mentioned +by Eusebius, A. D. 315, and by Jerome, A. D. 392. (Paley's evidences, +p. 106.) + +Your insinuations that the origin of the christian scriptures is +involved in fable and mystery, should have been accompanied with a +clear refutation of the arguments used by Lardner, Paley, and others, +who have with much learning and labour traced the stream to its +fountain. + +I must say something on the subject which you introduce concerning +man, as a species of being, or you may think me inexcusable for the +neglect. There seem to be two main questions suggested on this +subject; the first inquires what man was farther back than history +reaches; and the other directs the mind to a "line of demarcation" +between the human and the brute. + +We have no account that I know of when the use of fire was not known. +We read Gen. iv. 22, that Tubal-cain was an instructor of every +artificer in brass and iron, and if reason has any thing to do in this +case, we may suppose that the use of fire was known to these +mechanics. The date to which this reading belongs, is 3875 years +before Christ; but there can be no reasonable doubt but that the use +of fire was known long before, and that it was used in the offerings +which were made by Cain and Abel. + +That the discovery of arts and the progress of science have changed +man from what he originally was, is no more reasonable, than to +suppose that the education which a child acquires by degrees, by the +same degrees changes him in respect to his nature. That the arts and +sciences serve to improve and extend the human intellects is +reasonable enough, but that they add any thing to the natural +principles or faculties of man is not conceivable. + +In fixing the "line of demarcation" between the human nature and the +brutal, I will suggest two characteristics which you have noticed by +which the distinction may be ascertained. + +The first is the power or faculty of improving from generation to +generation his condition by means of art, and knowing how to advance +from one degree of science to another. This I will suppose belongs to +man and is peculiar to our race of being. We know of no other animal +on earth that has ever improved his condition by the discovery of the +arts or an increase of science. + +The other characteristic is one of your propositions, on which you +build your system of doubting, viz. _Superstition_. This is found in +no creature but such as is susceptible of religion. Man is the only +religious animal, if I may be allowed this form of expression, found +on the earth. + +The progress which man has made in arts and sciences, and the progress +he has made in divine or religious knowledge distinguish him from the +brutal creation. As in the former he has run into thousands of errors, +so in the latter he has wandered in darkness, with now and then a +blessed ray of light which improved his mind. When the knowledge of +the arts became generally defused by means of the extension of the +Roman government, it pleased our blessed Creator to cause the sun of +divine light to rise on the Jew and Gentile world. And gave him a +covenant of the people, a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory +of his people Israel. + +Your opinion that men are seldom made unhappy in consequence of +doubting a future existence, may be true in a comparative sense, for I +believe there are few in comparison with the whole, who do doubt on +this subject. Generally speaking, it is the few, who like the +philosopher that rendered himself blind by endeavouring to find out +what the sun was composed of, thought there was no sun nor any light, +that so far give up a hope of futurity as to be miserable in their +belief. + +That the idea of endless torment, such as our clergy have represented, +and with which they have most horribly terrified thousands and driven +them into black despair, is more horrible than no existence at all +will be allowed by every candid mind. But in contemplating an infinite +source of divine benevolence, and his means of giving and perpetuating +existence, and of rendering existence a blessing, the mind is not +driven to the necessity of selecting between these two evils. No, sir, +the mind thus employed has sweeter themes and brighter prospects--in +belief of that invaluable treasure, that divine testimony of the +inspired apostle: "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be +made alive;" which sentence you nor I ever heard a preacher of endless +punishment recite in a sermon in our lives, the soul rises by faith +into sublime regions of future peace and everlasting enjoyment, when +death shall be swallowed up of life. + +I need not tell you, my brother, that it has been through many trials, +afflictions, doubts, and temptations, that your feeble humble servant +has found the way to this rock; you cannot be altogether ignorant of +this travail of mind. Permit me then to call to remembrance the +bondage we have escaped, the sea through which we have passed, the +sweet songs of deliverance and salvation which we have chanted to our +Redeemer in the faith of our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST. And here +permit me to request your assistance in giving me support, and in +strengthening my hands in the work of the Lord. + +Yours, &c. + +H. BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. VIII. + +"In regard to the story reported among the Jews, respecting the body +of Jesus, I admit there is a greater probability of there being such a +report, especially if the body could not be found, and the apostles +affirmed that he was risen from the dead, than there is that the +resurrection, should be actually true: hence, perhaps, I was not so +much on my guard in the expression as I ought to have been. What I +particularly had in my mind was, that I might find it difficult to +prove even the existence of such a story, i. e. in the days of the +apostles; and still more difficult to prove, even on the ground that +there was no resurrection, that this story was true; and therefore +there could be no use in urging the truth of this story in order to +invalidate the truth of the resurrection. I do not conceive, however, +that because I doubt the _fact_, I am under obligations to account for +the _fallacy_. It always belongs to the advocates of the truth of any +story, to bring forward sufficient evidence to prove the same. I can +think of a solution, however, that would appear to my understanding +much more probable, than to suppose, as mentioned in your seventh +article, the 'account written long since the apostles' day;' yet it +may, perhaps, be attended with equal or greater difficulties, viz. +that the body was not stolen by the apostles, but was taken away by +other persons, who were willing that Jesus should be _deified_, +according to the then common acceptation of that word among the +Greeks, and who studied this stratagem with an express design to +deceive the Jews, as a punishment to them for so cruelly putting him +to death, and also to deceive his disciples, in order to inhance the +honour of the name of Jesus. + +"This might have been done, as I conceive, by persons who never became +his open followers, so far as to suffer death on his account, but were +contented in having gained their object; to do which, it was only +necessary in the first instance to frighten the soldiers. It may be +difficult after all, as I have observed concerning the human species, +to say where the truth of the account ends, or where the fallacy +begins; but that some such thing should have taken place is more +probable to my understanding than that the literal resurrection of +Jesus should have been true. But I perceive that my expression, +concerning the report among the Jews, was a little too strong; and +carried rather more in it than what I was aware. For even on my +hypothesis, as well as on every other which admits the absence of the +body, such a report would appear very probable. + +"It must be granted, as you have suggested, that there was such a +report among the Jews at the time when that record was made, or else +that record would not appear at all to 'advantage' in support of the +truth of christianity. + +"That 'reason is candid,' I also admit; and if I am blundering in +making mistakes, I believe you will have the goodness to acknowledge +that I am candid in retracting them again when they are so pointed out +to me that I can see them. + +"Respecting divine revelation, it is true, I understood you to mean +something more than barely what is predicated on the resurrection of +Jesus; yet in the second proposition of the three which you made, viz. +'Is the resurrection of Jesus capable of being proved,' I understand +you to state one single fact, on which you are willing to rest the +final issue of the argument. This being the most important fact, +relative to the truth of christianity, and which, probably, is as +difficult of proof as any, I do not perceive any disingenuousness in +confining you _now_ to this proposition till it is either proved or +admitted. Neither do I perceive how this can embarrass your argument, +as you have proposed to consider them 'true, disjunctively,' as well +as conjunctively. When therefore you have proved the three +propositions _disjunctively_; particularly the second, above named, +then I shall be willing you should avail yourself of their +_union_.--You may say, perhaps, I have proposed to admit the truth of +your three propositions; but you will also perceive, it was only for +the sake of introducing a fourth proposition, which it will not be +necessary for you to consider until the three first are proved true. + +"I conceive that reason has no more to do in this case than to judge +of the evidences of facts; and then, if the facts are supported, +reason can judge of their relation one to the other; but to assume, in +the first place, the truth of revelation, and then infer from _that_ +the probability of the truth of the resurrection of Jesus, appears to +me to be unreasonable. Therefore, if you attempt to prove the truth of +revelation, I conceive you must in the first place prove, +'disjunctively,' the truth of the resurrection. If, therefore, you +have considered yourself excused from proving the facts on which the +truth of revelation seems to rest, because I have granted them for the +sake of the argument, you have misapprehended my meaning. I grant +_nothing_, respecting the main question, until it is _proved_. + +"Notwithstanding what you have said about 'the known facts,' and +'facts which you grant, for the sake of the argument,' &c. you will +perceive by my seventh number, that I do not consider the 'miracles of +Jesus, his resurrection, and the miracles wrought by the apostles,' +either granted or proved, i. e. in relation to the main question; and +hence, whatever weight your argument may have, when you have succeeded +in that (if you should succeed at all) at present they seem to be +hardly conclusive. I know it would save you much time, if you could +draw from me an acknowledgement of the truth of the facts on which you +rely; and you seem to argue, if I understand you, as though that was +already the case; but whatever you may have understood, I must +distinctly disavow any such acknowledgement; and I shall still expect +(unless it is done in answer to my seventh number) when you come to +reply to this, that you will state distinctly, and together, the +evidences and arguments on which you mostly rely. + +"If, however, you have meant nothing more by all this than to point +out the use you shall make of the miracles, &c. (which have been +granted for the sake of the argument) when those miracles, &c. shall +have been either proven, or else acknowledged true, in relation to the +main question, then I have no fault to find; but otherwise, your +argument in this place seems to be a little premature. + +"You say, 'the known facts, such as the miracles, &c. I used as proof +of the divine mission of the servants of God. This divine mission +being proved gives the ground on which I contend for the merit of +their testimony, concerning a future state.' + +"Here you will perceive, sir, that, according to your own statement, +to prove this divine mission, you must first prove the certainty of +those miracles, &c. on which the truth of the divine mission is +predicated. And these are things about the truth of which, as I +indicated all along, there may be serious doubts. + +"I am at a loss also to understand, what you mean by a 'divine +mission.' You inform me that I misapprehended you 'in supposing that' +you 'mean to contend, that what the apostles have said respecting a +future state, was spoken by way of _conclusions_ from certain known +facts.' Here, I must confess, I am really at a loss to understand you: +how that either Jesus, or his apostles, could understand a divine +mission, even if they had received one, unless it were by +_conclusions_ from _certain known facts_, that is, facts well known to +them, I cannot conceive; and therefore must have some further +explanation on this subject before I can fully answer you. For I must +be better informed than I am at present, what you mean by a _divine +mission_, before I can see the necessity of 'denying the reality of +those miracles--or of granting the authority of their (Christ and his +apostles) testimony;' that is, in regard to a future state. But even +if I should be made to see this, it would be of no use for the +present; because as it respects the final issue of the argument, I +have not, neither do I now admit the reality of those miracles: as you +must have seen by my seventh number. + +"The next particular which demands notice is the quoted passage which +I pronounced _Most excellent_! + +"Here a serious query suggests itself to my mind. I ask myself: am I, +or am I not, as capable of writing my sentiments, so as to be +understood by a rational man, as those plain illiterate men who wrote +the gospels? And yet if my words are so wrested by logical +_twisticisms_ (if I may be allowed to use that expression) so as to +mean what never entered my heart, and all this with apparent serious +candor too, what may have been the fate of the writings of the +evangelists? Now this is something in which I cannot be deceived, i. +e. as it respects myself; for any man of common sense does know his +own meaning, whether his words fully express his meaning or not, or +whether they may be made to mean something else or not. + +"Permit me therefore once more to explain. The expression, _Most +excellent_! was not so much intended to have been applied to the +sentence preceding it, as to the author of that sentence, whose +goodness, in stating so explicitly what he understands by the +christian faith, I commended. And you must excuse me for not being +able to see any inconsistency, absurdity, or contradiction in my words +which follow that expression. Suppose a case. You have a good and +faithful servant, who feels happy in your service, and is perfectly +contented with his fare. You promise him with some favours which you +had never before made known to him. He is elated with the idea of your +goodness, which he has never doubted, but did not know till now that +it was to be manifested in this particular way. You tell him that a +knowledge of this, with his former knowledge, 'is as much as his +present welfare requires.' He very readily assents to the truth of the +proposition; and further adds, it is even 'more than is necessary for +his present welfare,' for he was contented and happy before. Would any +rational man say that your servant talked unreasonably? Would he say +that such reasoning was absurd? I think not. Your servant does not +despise either your goodness or your bounty; he considers that his +master knows best, what is best for his servant; and he receives with +gratitude whatever is bestowed. Your argument would have appeared to +me more just, if, after fully understanding me, which I perceive, by +the use you have made of the quotation from my sixth number, you now +do, you had proved from well known facts, or from conclusive argument, +the absolute necessity of the hope of a christian in order for the +'present welfare' of mankind. In doing this you would have ingenuously +refuted the proposition which I say would have been _exactly right_. + +"You do not seem, sir, yet to have fully understood me as to my object +in searching for truth. You ask, saying, 'Do you not appear to be +solicitous to have your doubts removed, without expecting the least +advantage by it?' You must know, sir, that this is only on +supposition, that my doubts are founded in error; in which case I +should reap the advantage, as my object is truth. You will recollect +that my first object was to search for _moral truth_; without being at +all solicitous where, or on what ground it shall be found. Truth +_only_ is my object. In this _only_ I feel at all interested in this +argument. Hence I shall be just as much obliged to you to _confirm_ me +in my doubts, admitting they are founded in truth, as I shall to +_remove_ them, admitting they are founded in error. + +"I once thought just as you, viz. that the idea and contemplation of +enjoying future life was absolutely necessary to present enjoyment; +but I am now fully convinced, yea, more, it is absolutely known to be +a fact, that the idea is altogether visionary and illusive. I admit +that a knowledge of the truth, so far as the truth may be known, is +perfectly _congenial_ with the present happiness of mankind: though it +is often the case that a partial knowledge of the truth, in relation +to any particular subject, produces distress and misery rather than +enjoyment. I now am very happy in knowing some things, which, once, +only the idea of their being true would have given me pain. I am +inclined to think that the idea of _now_ enjoying the pleasures, or +_now_ enduring the pains of a future life is altogether chimerical. I +can enjoy the life or lives of others in a future tense just as well +as I can _now_ enjoy my own future life. I have as much reason to +believe that rational intelligence always did exist, as I have to +believe it always will; yea, one idea is just as certain to me as the +other, and no more so. And as I cannot reflect on the idea of eternity +past, only with a kind of reverential _awe_ mingled with sublime +pleasure; so the idea of eternity to come produces in me the same +sensation; yea, feeling myself equally ignorant of both, (which must +be the case on the supposition that revelation is not true.) I can +perceive no difference. I feel anxious to know, however, every thing +which can be known on this subject; and yet, at the same time, I am +inclined to think I should _doubt_ of every revelation of which I can +have any conception, unless it should be so made that I could see its +truth, (or at least the evidences of its truth) over and over again, +and that they should still remain by me at all times, so that I could +examine them, and re-examine them, the same as I now look at the stars +in the firmament. + +"Thus I have opened my mind to you, more fully than I have ever done +before, on this subject; and notwithstanding your writings may be very +beneficial to others (as well as mine, for some may stand in need of +one, and some of the other) yet, here comes up my doubts again, if I +am benefited by them, I expect it will be in a different way than that +of being any more persuaded of the truth of divine revelation. +Nevertheless, I am no less anxious to continue the correspondence on +this account. + +"Your address to TRUTH, which you are pleased to put into the mouth of +my argument, is closed with an idea which does not grow out of my +hypothesis. 'The joyous expectation of soon losing sight of thee (i. +e. truth) forever in the ellysium of non existence!' _Non-existence_, +sir, does not _exist_! Neither does the term convey an idea to my +understanding of any thing. I know of no existence, neither can I +conceive of any, except that which I believe to be eternal in its +nature. And the idea of _something_ being formed or made out of +_nothing_, or of something's returning to nothing again, I have long +since exploded. Every thing, however, excepting first principles, is +liable to _change_. Hence arises the various modes, states, +circumstances, conditions and situations in beings and things: also +their different properties, relations and dependences. + +"I know not whether consciousness is a being, or whether it be only a +mode of being. If it be the former, it always did, and always will +exist, in some state or other; if the latter, the state of the being +may be so changed that although identity exists, yet consciousness is +not there. And there is no more absurdity in this idea than there is +in supposing that the same matter which forms a _cube_, may become a +_globe_. I can as well conceive of a conscious being to day, becoming +unconscious to-morrow, as I can conceive of a person in a sound sleep. +But _non-existence_ (strictly speaking) sounds to my understanding +something like the _falsity of truth_! + +"I now come to your reply to my sixth number; and in my remarks, which +will be but few, I shall follow the arrangement which you have made. + +"1st. The candid concessions which you have made, and the charity +which you have extended towards doubting Christians, or candid +unbelievers (for such I conceive there may be) is honourable both to +yourself and to the cause which you have espoused, and your writing, +of course gains a much more favourable reception than the writings of +those who appear to be filled with a spirit of acrimony, and are ready +at once to deal out anathemas against every thing of which they cannot +approve. But, sir, you will permit me to say, we ought to be cautious, +lest our personal attachment to an author, and his charitable feelings +towards us be such, as imperceptibly to blind us to correct reason, +and cause us to imbibe his errors, merely because they are his, and +mistake them for truth. + +"I am well aware that I should find it difficult to prove that I now +believe what I do without a miracle, as you have suggested; for if +miracles have existed they may have, indirectly, more influence in my +mind than I am at present sensible of; and therefore I will not +undertake to say that I am not principally indebted to them for my +present views of the character of the supreme Being. I am disposed to +acknowledge in humble gratitude all the blessings which I have +received, and am made sensible of, let them come to me by what means, +or through what channel soever. But I do not see how you had a right +to expect that I should either _refute_, or else _acquiesce_ in your +opinion on this subject.--What! must I either prove that there have +been no such things as miracles, or else admit their truth! Must I +either refute your notion that they have had great influence on my +faith and practice, or else '_express my acquiescence_' that such is +the fact! Hard lines! I choose to take the easier course, and confess +that I am too ignorant to do either. I am willing, however, still to +be instructed. + +"2d. I have nothing at present to say on the subject of prophecy; i.e. +to reconcile the pretensions to it with the honesty of the prophets, +without admitting divine inspiration, better than what I have written +in my seventh number. When I have received your answer to that I may +have something more to write. I would suggest, however, here, that as +you frequently make use of the expression 'divine inspiration,' I want +the expression more fully defined and explained. I have no distinct +idea, that I know of, of _divine inspiration_. I suppose you mean the +same by it which you did by the 'divine mission,' given to the +apostles, or at least something similar; but still I am ignorant of +the subject. You have sometimes spoken of divine revelation, as though +it was something distinct from this divine mission, and which was a +proof of it; but, you must excuse me, I am still all in the dark about +it. Do be so good as to inform me how you suppose the prophets, or +apostles, or even Jesus, could know for a certainty that they were +divinely inspired? + +"3. When I acknowledged that there are evidences in favour of divine +revelation, I did not suppose it necessary to state what those +evidences are; because some of them, to say the least, are very +apparent. The bare report of any thing, I conceive to be evidence of +the report's being true; and would be sufficient to acquire belief +should nothing arise in the mind to counterbalance it: and as I had +repeatedly promised to give you the reasons for my doubts I expected +to have been indulged a little longer before I should have been again +faulted on this subject. But as it respects this matter I am all +patience and submission, if it may be so that truth shall finally come +to light. + +"Under this article you have gone into a very lengthy discussion to +shew that the evidence by which the apostles believed in the +resurretion could not be counterbalanced, &c. And if I understand what +you have written it amounts in my mind to about the following, viz. +the apostles could not have been convinced of the fact of the +resurrection by any evidence short of the fact itself. 2dly. If the +fact did exist there is no evidence which can conterbalance it. +_Ergo_. As the apostles were convinced of the truth, the fact did +exist. This is pretty much like saying, if the fact were _true_, it +could not have been _false_! But I spoke of the evidence in relation +to _ourselves_ rather than the _apostles_: we believe or disbelieve +for ourselves, and by such evidence as _we_ have. You think if twelve +men should testify in favour of a resurrection, and the body could not +be found, 'various opinions would result from such evidence.' If so, +some might believe the account true; and they might persuade others to +believe it; and only let it be reported and believed that some one had +died for the truth of it, and it would make no difference after this, +as it respects the influence of faith, whether the account was true or +false. + +"You will excuse me for making no further remarks on what you have +written under this article till you have answered my seventh number, +and also given me a more clear definition of _divine inspiration_. + +"4. What you have written under the fourth article, generally +speaking, is satisfactory, till I come to the last sentence; and even +with that I have not much fault to charge you with. It is true we may +be mistaken as to our ideas of the eternity or immutability of any +thing; but then, as it respects argument, it is just as well as though +we were correct, as no one can prove us otherwise; no, nor even raise +a reasonable doubt on the subject. But even if it could be +demonstrated that there is not a rational being now in the universe +who existed two centuries ago, or one who will exist two centuries +hence, I conceive, as the fact could not, so the knowledge of the fact +ought not to make any difference in the relation, dependence and moral +obligation between man and man. Man learns by his own experience, as +well as from the experience of others; and _vice versa_; hence we +profit by the experience of those who have gone before us. + +"When man shall universally learn this great moral truth that much of +his happiness is inseparably connected with the happiness of his +fellow beings, which is one of the immutable principles of moral +nature, then each individual will strive to the utmost to promote the +general welfare; for in so doing he increases his own individual +happiness, and also the happiness of posterity. + +"5. What you have said under the fifth article, for reasons already +given, will be considered in my next number, when I hope I shall he +furnished with more light on the subject. + +"I will only observe here that a miracle, as I conceive, must be +performed agreeable to, or else it must be a violation of the laws of +nature. If the former, whatever it might be to others, to those who +understood the means of its operation, it could be, strictly speaking, +no miracle; and if no miracle, no evidence, to them, of divine +inspiration: but if the latter, and those who performed the same were +ignorant of the power by which they were performed, I do not see how +that the performance of a miracle could give them any knowledge of +futurity. And if not, what did give it to them, and in what way was it +given? + +"It will still be recollected that I do not admit the existence of +miracles, although I speak of them as though they were true, merely to +shew that even if they were true I should still have my difficulties +respecting the truth of divine revelation. + +"6th. Your remarks under the sixth article are satisfactory, though +they have not convinced me of the incorrectness of my opinion; because +that which is founded in _truth_ is, after all the only thing that is +'good and nourishing' to the understanding. The sound mind pants only +after truth; and as he knows eternal truth is unalterable, he is not +foolish enough even to desire, it should be what it is not. The reason +why we often desire that which we cannot have is because, not knowing +the whole truth, we do not know but that we may have the things we +desire. + +"7th. As it respects 'not even deserving a future existence,' I was +not fully understood. I only meant an _anxious_ desire, as I expressed +a little before, and as also I expressed _anxious concern_ a little +after; that is a desire which is incompatible with reconciliation to +truth whether that truth gives us little or much. Had not truth been +favourable to our existence we certainly should not have existed; and +I can see no reason to fear a truth which has been so favourable as to +give us being. It is true, a desire to exist as long as we can enjoy +life seems to be inseparably connected with our moral nature; and yet +I can see no terror in that which takes away our sensibility, whether +it be for a night, for ages, or for eternity. I should just as soon +think of being terrified at the idea of a sound and sweet sleep. If +the truth be what I suspect it is, I see no good reason why it should +be revealed to us, any more than the hour of our death! This truth is +wisely concealed from us. + +"8th. You have seen me so long in the dark that I begin to doubt +whether you would be willing to own me correct, even if I should come +fully into the light; i. e. according to your understanding. Is it +possible sir, that you should suppose me capable of writing so great a +solecism as the following, viz.: If a revelation were ever necessary, +it was necessary only to convince mankind that a revelation is not +true! But it seems that such must have been your construction, or very +near it, or else you could not have found the error of so great +magnitude, of which you speak. Although I did not express my idea so +full and explicit as I might, and perhaps ought to have done, yet I +can assure you that, by reconciling man to his present state, I meant +nothing less than what you have expressed in a former letter; and I +meant to include all for which you have contended in the article now +under consideration. For 1st. If divine revelation were necessary, the +thing revealed is undoubtedly true. 2d. If true, I am fully satisfied +with your views on the subject. + +"9th. Your explanation relative to what you suggested in a former +letter (i. e. _that I must mean that the apostles stated falsehood_) +is satisfactory; though what you now say you meant, as I have already +informed you, was not exactly my meaning. The fact is, I did not mean +to express any opinion as to the truth or to the falsity of the +apostles' testimony. I very readily grant, however, that, if I 'do not +_believe_ that they stated the truth' 'I must believe that they stated +falsehood;' unless (which would be very extraordinary) the weight of +evidence be so exactly balanced in my mind that it is impossible for +me to form an opinion on the subject.--But supposing I disbelieved +their testimony altogether; what could I do more than to give my +reasons for not believing it? Would it be reasonable to call on me to +prove their testimony false? It is a very hard thing to prove a +negative! + +"You will have already perceived by my seventh number that I have no +idea that the facts on which the Christian religion is said to have +been founded can now be proved false. No, whatever might have been the +case in the time of it, they were neglected too long before any +attempt of this kind was made, though the accounts should have been +supposed ever so erroneous as to promise any success in their +refutation. And I am inclined to think that one century _then_ would +involve facts in as much obscurity as five centuries would _now_. But +I have already expressed my doubts whether the facts on which the +religion of the _Shakers_ is said to be predicated, although not half +a century standing, can now be proved false; and yet if they are true +they are nothing short of miraculous. + +"The Christian religion therefore, true or false, undoubtedly will +stand, in some shape or other, and be believed more or less, as long +as man remains upon the earth. For if it was introduced without any +violations of the laws of nature, i. e. without miracles, which +probably was the case, if false, we cannot expect any such violations +for the sake of destroying it; and without such violations I do not +see how it could be destroyed, because the believers of it, +invariably, believe it to be established on such mysterious +supernatural principles; and I expect but very few, comparatively, +will ever have sufficient strength of mind to throw off the mystic +veil. + +"Yours, &c. + +A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER VII. + +_Dear sir, and brother_--Desiring to bring our present correspondence +to a close as soon as the merits of its subject will admit, I propose +in replying to your 8th number, to remark only on the most essential +particulars, taking no particular notice of two classes contained in +your communication, viz. that which seems to grow out of a +misconstruction of my arguments and that in which you appear to agree +with them. Indulging in this liberty, the subjects to which I will +endeavour to confirm myself are the following. + +1st. Your method of accounting for the absence of the crucified Jesus, +from the sepulchre where it was laid and guarded by the Roman +soldiers. + +2d. What you suggest respecting the divine mission of Christ and his +apostles, the miracles which were wrought by them in attestation of +the Messiah, and the credibility of their testimony regarding a future +state. + +3d. What you contend for respecting the _utility_, or _inutility_ of +the christian hope of future felicity. + +4th. Something on the instructions of Jesus to his disciples +respecting their conduct toward their enemies. + +5th. What you suggest respecting Jesus' not being known to the two +disciples, &c. + +6th. Your criticism on my argument respecting the evidences of the +resurrection, &c. + +1st. You propose to account for the absence of the body of Jesus, by +supposing, that some persons by frightening the guards were enabled +thereby to convey the body away, which they did being willing that +Jesus should be thought to have risen from the dead, whereby he would +be deified, according to the notions of the Greeks respecting deifying +men after they were dead, &c. Those who thus stole the body were not +the disciples of Jesus, but some persons who were desirous thereby to +punish the Jews for so cruelly putting Jesus to death. + +Here you have proposed two subjects as forming the cause, in the mind +of those who stole the body, of their undertaking so hazarduous an +enterprise, neither of which appears to me to wear the necessary marks +of probability.--1st. If they wished to have Jesus deified according +to the notions of the Greeks, there was no need of establishing the +belief of his having rose from the dead. This was not the case with +those who among the Greeks were deified after their death. The tombs +of their heroes whom they placed among the gods, remained among the +people. + +2d. Who that then lived in Jerusalem or its vicinity could look on the +crucifixion of Jesus as an act of cruelty? Others than Jews would not +feel very much interested in this affair, as Jesus had confined his +ministry to the Jews, and directed his disciples not to enter into any +of the cities of the Gentiles, this matter was a case which seemed to +concern the Jews only. Now look at the case. The Jews expected a +Messiah, a deliverer, one who should become their prince, and deliver +them from the bondage of the Romans. Jesus pretended to be sent of God +as their Messiah of whom the ancient prophets had spoken; he pretended +to work miracles in confirmation of his divine mission; but in room of +delivering the Jews from the Roman yoke, he prophecied of their +destruction by the Romans. Now, sir, if Jesus made all these +pretensions without divine authority for so doing, if he caused to be +reported that he wrought miracles when he never wrought one in his +life, if he kept the people in a continual uproar driving about the +country from one extreme of Palestine to another all by his frauds and +fascinating deceptions; and in order to quiet the people, and have +things go on in a regular order, those who were charged with the +public concerns brought about the crucifixion of this impostor, who +knowing all these things, being a Jew would think of accusing these +godly pharisees and rulers of cruelty for so doing? If Jesus did not +do the works which he pretended to do, he certainly was an impostor, +and it is in vain to attempt to save him from such a charge. And if he +were such a _blasphemous_ impostor as to pretend to work miracles by +the power of God, when he knew he had no such power, it appears very +plain that he deserved to die according to Jewish customs. If the +miracles of Jesus had been of a different description, there might +have been some deception. That is, if such miracles had been pretended +as you state of the Shakers; in such a case nobody would trouble their +heads about the matter. Some would say, the good woman perhaps was +badly hurt, and she thought her ribs were broken, when in fact they +were not, and with a little good nursing she was able to join the +dance; others might be extravagant enough to suppose that something +marvelous had taken place, but who would know? Or, I will add, who +would care? But will you undertake to argue that the most learned and +artful could impose on people by pretending to have power from God to +open the eyes of the blind, to heal all manner of diseases with a +word, and to raise the dead from their graves? No, sir, if Jesus did +not perform the miracles which he pretended to perform, there is no +propriety in believing that any body was disposed to charge the Jews +with cruelty for ridding community of such an impostor. But after all, +even allowing your proposed method of accounting for the absence of +the body, which by no means is half as probable a story as that +reported by the Jews, as this does not account for the disciples' +believing that Jesus had actually arose from the dead. What is to be +done with this circumstance? Are we to suppose that as soon as the +disciples found that the body was missing, they took it into their +heads that he had actually arose from the dead without any further +evidence? Well if they really believed it they could honestly state +their belief to the people. You will remember that you have agreed +that the apostles were honest men. But then the apostles go further, +they assert that they were certified of the real resurrection of Jesus +by many _infallible_ proofs, that they saw him, conversed with him, +ate with him, heard his discourses in which he expounded the +scriptures of the law, of the prophets, and of the psalms which +respected his passion and resurrection. Will you allow these men to +have been honest men, and still suppose that somebody stole the body +of Jesus from the sepulchre? The boldness of the disciples in +declaring the resurrection, their willingness to suffer all manner of +persecutions for the name of Jesus, show plainly that they did believe +in his resurrection. Here I refer you to my former arguments in which +I have attempted to make it appear that the disciples could not have +been deceived. + +But even allowing, that the body was stolen, and that the disciples +were deceived, there is still, if possible, a greater difficulty to +account for, viz. the success of the preaching of Jesus and him +crucified. Here I wish, in a special manner, to call your attention. +The four evangelists and the acts of the apostles were written in the +life time of the disciples of Jesus; this, Paley, in his Evidences of +Christianity, fully proves. He likewise proves beyond any reasonable +doubt that they were written by the men whose names they bear. These +historians then relate all the miracles recorded in the four gospels, +and inform us that Jesus actually performed them. They give each of +them an account of the crucifixion and resurrection of their divine +master. They relate the things of which they were eye witnesses. But +supposing they were deceived, which I humbly conceive, is not +supposable, can we reasonably believe that these gospels in which such +barefaced falsehoods were recorded would ever gain credit among a +people whose religious education was to be all overthrown by coming +into the belief of those writings? + +But the apostles had not these books to assist them in their ministry; +they went on in preaching Jesus and the resurrection, first in the +city of Jerusalem, and throughout all Judea, and among the Gentiles +with astonishing success before they wrote the accounts which we have. +Now, sir, on the supposition that the body was stolen will you account +for the people's being persuaded that Jesus rose from the dead?--Is it +possible to conceive of any thing to which the Jews could have been +more opposed, than to the testimony, that the man whom they had +crucified was the Messiah, and that God had raised him from the dead? +Now turn to the account given in Acts, chap. ii. and let reason and +candor have their voice in the matter under consideration. "Therefore +let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that +same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." Can you +conceive of any thing that could have been more trying to the feelings +of the people? Observe, "whom ye have crucified." Bring the matter +home to yourself. Suppose you had been active in the prosecution of +one of your fellow creatures, and the prosecution should have +terminated in the execution of the accused, how would it try your +feelings for your neighbours to come and tell you, that you had been +the murderer of a good and innocent man? But in the case under +consideration there are circumstances that heighten the importance of +the subject. The great Messiah in which all the Jews were educated to +believe, as much as we are educated to believe in Christ; this +personage is the subject. See the account, "Now, when they heard this, +they, were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter, and to the +rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do?" Why do we +hear this exclamation? "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Why +should the people now feel thus affected? Why do they not cry out +against the men who accuse them of having done this wickedness, as +they did against Jesus a few days before? Can you, sir, believe that +all that caused this, was the body's having been stolen from the +sepulchre, the disciples having gotten the whim into their heads that +Jesus had arose from the dead, now run about like mad men and accuse +the people of having murdered the great Messiah, the anointed of God, +affirming that God had raised him from the dead, when barely the +absence of the dead body was all the evidence on which this could be +founded? Not only did the testimony of Peter, on this occasion, which +will remain a most memorable one while the world stands, carry pungent +conviction to the very hearts of the people, but it happily issued in +the glorious triumph of faith in the risen Jesus in about three +thousand of the then present audience. + +In the fore part of this chapter we have an account of the +manifestation of the mighty and miraculous power of God which was the +evident cause of the conviction of the people; and to no other cause, +I humbly conceive, can we impute such consequences. + +Permit me to remark here, that all that ingenuity has ever invented +about how the body of Jesus was disposed of, can have no weight at all +against the doctrine of the resurrection which the apostles +propagated. The body's being absent from the sepulchre never convinced +one reasonable being in the world, of the fact of the resurrection. It +did not convince those who first saw the sepulchre empty. + +"Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping; and they (the angels) +say unto her, woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto him, because +they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him. +And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus +standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, woman, +why weepest thou? Whom seekest thou? She supposing him to be the +gardner, saith unto him, sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me +where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto +her, 'Mary.' She replied, 'RABBONI!'" How naturally is this account +given. In what an artless manner is the story told. I so much admire +the sincerity and unaffected love of Mary to her master that the +following reflections demand a place here. The person who but three +days before was crowned with thorns, was reviled and spat upon, was +most ignominiously crucified between two thieves and laid in the +sepulchre is so much the object of Mary's affection that she appears +solicitous for the body. I cannot doubt the truth of Mary's being +here, for the story is told without any design. But why is Mary here? +If Jesus was an impostor she never knew of his working a miracle in +her life. But if Jesus was in fact what he pretended to be and if he +wrought those miracles which are recorded of him, all is explained. +But it is evident that Mary had not thought of Jesus' having been +raised from the dead, when she saw that he was absent from the +sepulchre. When Jesus spake to her, and called her by name as he had +frequently done before, she knew him. When this Mary and the other +women that were with her went to the eleven, and told them the story, +they did not believe it, nor does it appear that Peter believed in the +resurrection, even after Mary and others had certified him, and he had +been himself to the sepulchre and found it empty; but he went away +"wondering in himself at that which was come to pass." + +The evidences by which the disciples believed in this all-important +truth were equal to its importance and to its extraordinary character. +These evidences have been noticed. + +2d. The mission of Christ and his apostles, the miracles wrought by +them in attestation of that mission, and the credibility of their +testimony respecting a future state may now receive some notice. + +You are disposed to call on me to inform you what I mean by this +mission, to which I reply; I mean a divine appointment to act in a +certain official character, accompanied with certain powers by which +they were _enabled to evince_, by miracles, this their appointment. + +Jesus was appointed by God himself to reveal the divine character, +nature, and will of the Father to the world, by his preaching, by his +miracles of mercy, by his sufferings, by his death and resurrection. +The apostles were sent by Jesus Christ on the same mission, on which +Jesus himself was sent. See his prayer, John xvii. "As thou has sent +me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world." +Those who believed in Jesus, and acknowledged him to be the Messiah, +believed on account of the miracles which he wrought, and as I have +before argued, Jesus never required of any a belief in him, barely on +his testimony of himself, but on the evidence afforded by the works +which he did in his Father's name. So likewise, those who believed on +Jesus through the ministry of the apostles, never were called on to +believe but by the authority of as great wonders as were wrought by +Christ himself. I need not say much on this particular, as you must +know that the ground on which I have here placed this subject, is the +ground on which the New Testament places it. + +The absurd notions which have been erroneously adopted by Christian +doctors and councils concerning the mission of Christ to appease the +divine wrath, to reconcile God to man, to suffer the penalty of the +divine law, &c. &c. which have rendered the gospel a mystery and a +mist, in room of a high way for the ransomed of the Lord to return to +Zion in, is chargeable to the enemy who sowed tares among the wheat. +These opinions with a multitude of studied inventions about a +mysterious work of sovereign elective grace wrought in certain +individuals, in an unknown way and frequently in an unknown time all +which is to be followed by a system of mysterious sanctification, +connected most mysteriously with final perseverance, together with all +the intricate unknown items set down in the Westminister Catechism, +have only served to perplex some, puff others up with spiritual pride +and exalt them in the kingdom of spiritual wickedness in high places, +to drive some to despair, and to disgust reason and common sense in +others. There is not a word of all the above jargon in the sacred +scriptures, which give us a most rational account of the great object +of the gospel ministry. This object is the redemption of mankind from +moral darkness, which is the whole occasion of moral evil, and to +produce that improvement in the religious world which science is +designed to effect in the political. It is to bring truth to light, to +commend the character of God to man, to lead all men into the true +knowledge, spirit, and temper of the divine nature. Thus we discover +in Jesus no partialist, no sectarian, no friend to any one +denomination, more than another. And when he had accomplished, by his +sufferings, what the prophets had foretold, he then sent his gospel of +the love and mercy of God to the whole world. His divinely inspired +apostles followed the examples of their leader and preached the +universal, impartial goodness of God to all men, and confirmed their +mission by similar miracles to those wrought by Jesus. + +You further inquire the grounds on which we are to believe Jesus and +his apostles respecting a future state. Reply, on the same ground on +which we believe them in other matters, viz. because they have proved +the divinity of their mission or appointment to teach truth by the +power of the God of truth. See 2 Cor. xii. 12, "Truly the signs of an +apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, +and mighty deeds." You need not be told that an _apostle_ is a +messenger, and that a messenger must have a mission. What then were +the signs of St. Paul's mission? Answer, patience, signs, wonders, and +mighty deeds. Jesus is said to be the great _apostle_, and high priest +of our profession, and he evinced his apostleship by signs, by +wonders, and mighty deeds. Now, sir, as these signs were designed to +prove to us that Jesus and his apostles were divinely inspired, so +they are the ground on which we may safely believe their testimony in +all things. + +If your inquiry extends further than the plain statements and facts +go, you will at once see that they go beyond the demands of reason, +for it is an unreasonable thing to require of an uninspired person any +further account concerning the way by which an inspired man knows what +he says to be true, than it has pleased God to enable his messenger to +make known. + +When the pharisees asked the man who was born blind, to whom Jesus had +given sight, "What sayest thou of him? that he hath opened thine eyes? +he said, he is a prophet." How comes this man to believe that Jesus +was a prophet? Because the sign of a messenger of God had been given. +If the pharisees had asked him, how he knew that Jesus was a prophet, +would he not answer them by the miracle wrought upon him? If they +should further ask him of particulars, how Jesus could be a prophet, +how he knew things which others did not know, would they have +discovered any wisdom in their questions? or would he have discovered +any in attempting to answer them? + +If I may further remark on the mission of Jesus and his apostles, it +seems reasonable to say that it comprehends the whole doctrine of the +gospel, that is to say, they were appointed to preach the gospel which +comprehends the whole ministry of reconciliation, or a manifestation +of reconciling truth. There is, therefore, no truth in the gospel +which is not calculated in its nature to reconcile man to God, when +such truth is understood. + +If our heavenly Father had from all eternity predestinated far the +greatest part of mankind to a state of endless un-reconciliation, the +revelation of this to them who were thus destined, could have no +effect in reconciling them to God. What had Jesus or his apostles to +do with such doctrine as this? Nothing. They make no mention of any +such thing. If according to the vain traditions received from the +wisdom of this world that cometh to nought, our tender babes were +doomed to everlasting wrath for the sin of the first man who lived on +earth, the manifestation of such a truth could reconcile none of those +victims to this God of unmerciful vengeance. But what had Jesus to do +with such blasphemous doctrine? See him as the representative of God, +as the great apostle of heaven to man, notice what he does and what he +says. He takes young children in his arms and blesses them, he says +suffer little children, and forbid them not to come unto me, for of +such is the kingdom of heaven. If our Creator was full of wrath and +vindictive vengeance towards sinners, the manifestation of such a +truth would by no means reconcile sinners to God; but when God +commendeth his love towards the sinner through the mission, ministry, +or dispensation of Jesus Christ, such truth when revealed, naturally +reconciles the sinner to God. God is eternally the same, his love is +the same, his will to do his creatures good is always the same, and +his means to carry his good will into effect are always at his +command. + +Jesus taught sinners, enemies to God, that God to whom they were +enemies, loved them. This he demonstrated by the rain and sun shine +which was communicated to the evil and the good, and this impartial +love of God, he urged as the perfect pattern for our imitation, and +set it up as the mark where lies the prize to be won by our Christian +vocation. I say unto you love your enemies, pray for them that use you +spitefully and persecute you, that ye may be the children of your +Father which is in heaven; that is, that you may imitate him in your +conduct and moral character. Now, sir, what has all this to do about +reconciling God to man? What has it to do about appeasing divine +wrath? If Jesus taught the doctrine of God's love to sinners, and our +doctrine taught by our Christian doctors of God's wrath and hatred +towards sinners be true, the matter is settled at once. These doctors +being ministers of divine truth, Jesus may be any thing else, but he +cannot be an apostle and high priest of God. + +But I need not extend this article, you are as well persuaded of the +erroneousness of these doctrines of men as I am; but it belongs to +this subject, to take a general view of the ministry of Jesus and his +apostles. It is so especially, because this view shows at once the +necessity as well as the nature of this divine ministry. If you view +the nature of truth as you have heretofore expressed it, and as I am +confident you do, you cannot reasonably doubt the necessity of having +it manifested to the world. + +It was necessary then for God to endue one with this ministry of +truth, it is reasonable that others, being taught by him should be +appointed to the same ministry; but you will see at once that truth +could not be preached to the Jews without moving the superstitious +scribes, pharisees, and doctors of the law against it, this opposition +hid its natural tendency, and terminated in the death of the divine +teacher; and if the disciples had gone on and preached the same +doctrine, reason would suppose that they would all have been put to +death immediately, and the work of reformation would have stopped. +Now, sir, if I am able to reason at all, it was necessary for God to +make a display of divine power in vindicating truth, which would place +it on ground too high for all the superstition of the world to remove. +You contend that the voice of reason should be heard. What does it +say? It says that God produced man in the first place on this earth, +in a different way from that by which man is now multiplied. Reason +says, there was a necessity for this; but it does not say that the +means of procreation now do not answer even a better purpose than to +have man multiplied by the same means by which he came first to exist. +The same reason will contend that in the establishment of the gospel +ministry in the world, different means were necessary from those which +are successfully employed in perpetuating it. + +3d. You contend that the Christian hope of a future happy existence, +is not necessary to our present happiness; and that there is nothing +more disagreeable in the thought of an eternal cessation of existence, +than there is in the thought of reposing ourselves in quiet sleep. +Notwithstanding what you say about non existence, all your play on +words makes no difference about the thing talked of. Nor do I see that +reason in your observations on this subject, for which you contend. +You very well know that to cease to possess an identity of being and +of intellect is what we mean by non-existence, and this is just the +thing for which you argue. Now when we contemplate taking refreshment +in sleep, it is in hope of awaking again in a better condition for +enjoying ourselves and others, and for the performance of our duty. +But the contemplation of passing out of existence, never to have +another thought is certainly very widely different as to the nature of +the subject, from the former. Now, sir, why should not these different +subjects produce different sensations in the mind? And wherein one is +entirely repugnant to the other, why is it not reasonable that the +contemplation of them should be attended with effects in the mind as +repugnant to each other as are the subjects? If it be a pleasure to a +parent to contemplate, when he retires to rest with his family, the +expectation of seeing them again in the morning, all refreshed and +invigorated anew is it not reasonable to suppose that a contemplation +exactly reverse from this would produce mental pain? I can conceive, +without any violation of my reason or senses, how a fond mother can +take satisfaction in nursing her babe to sleep, knowing that the +tender being needs this repose; but I cannot conceive how the same +affectionate mother could be equally pleased with the thought that her +child would never wake again in time or in eternity. I feel grateful +to the giver of every good and perfect gift, that he has given that +blessed hope which is as an anchor to the soul, whereby the Christian +in his dying hour is enabled to take a short farewell of his friends, +expressing his hope of meeting them soon in a better world. And I +think it unreasonable, even in the extreme, to suppose that a rational +person could, in a similar situation, feel as well satisfied with an +expectation of an extinction of being. + +You fault the address to truth, which you say I put into the mouth of +your argument, but this you do without the least occasion, nor is it +in your power, sir, to show that your argument does not afford all I +have made it say. You might, or rather you have varied the language a +little, but the sentiment is preserved entire. The address to truth +would, as before, extoll her existence, express the most ardent and +constant love for her divinity and finish the climax by _soaring down_ +to non-existence, which you can contemplate with as much satisfaction +as you could an eternal existence in the enjoyment of the object of +your love! + +But you contend that truth is lovely, and if your doubts are +consistent with truth you shall be happy to be confirmed in them; &c. +This hypothesis, sir, is too large to suit your own views; for you +have before decided a choice between the doctrine of eternal misery +and that of, I will call it, annihilation for this is its true +meaning. You have revolted at the thought of eternal misery, but your +hypothesis allows you no such liberty. Truth is lovely, and if the +doctrine of eternal punishment, with all the fire and brimstone that +has ever been preached by the most zealous advocates of torment be +truth, your hypothesis compels you to embrace the goddess, and +contemplate eternal misery with the same pleasure that you do +non-existence, or with the same you would everlasting felicity did you +believe in it! + +If we would reason well, we must reason from what we know. We know +that man is capable of being miserable, he is capable of great +sufferings; likewise he is capable of being happy, he is capable of +great enjoyments. Now to pretend that he has no choice, that it is as +well for him to be miserable as to be happy, as well for him not to +exist as to exist, is the reverse of reason. + +4th. As Jesus, in the instructions which he gave to his disciples, +respecting their conduct towards their enemies, had no design reaching +to the laws of a body politic, but only to the conduct by which the +ministry of the gospel would best succeed in its early beginning, +while it was _necessary_ for it to be persecuted, by which we are now +favoured with its evidences, we may now err in applying those +instructions differently from their primary design. St. Paul, as much +as any of the disciples of Jesus, submitted himself to the directions +of non-resistance, yet he insists on submission to the higher powers, +because they were the ministers of God, even revengers to execute +wrath upon them that do evil. + +5th. With a confidence rather unusual, you challenge me to account for +Jesus' not being known by the two disciples while he walked with them +on their way to Emmaus; you bring a comparison, and urge the subject +in a way to signify that you have found something in the scripture +account that "_refutes itself_." You might have considered Mary's case +too as a similar one. She saw Jesus with whom she had had a familiar +acquaintance, but she thought it had been the gardner, and talked with +him without knowing him, until, in the same manner as he used to +address her, he said _Mary_, when in a moment she knew him. So the two +brethren walked on the way with Jesus, and attended to his +conversation, which must have been of considerable length, yet knew +him not until he performed an office at table in which no doubt, he +appeared as he had done many times before, which led them to know him +at once. But I am called on to tell how they could walk and discourse +with him and not know him. Well, sir, do you not understand that your +question is asked on supposition that the miracle of the resurrection +was a fact, and on the supposition that Jesus could appear and +disappear to persons as he pleased? We are informed that when the two +brethren knew him, "he vanished out of their sight." On the +supposition then, that Jesus could appear and disappear at pleasure, +is it at all difficult to allow that he could appear to his +acquaintance as a stranger, if he pleased? + +It seems to me, sir, a little unaccountable why you should take hold +of this subject with so much seeming earnestness. Is it possible that +you should suppose that the fate of this particular should have any +power on our general subject? Without the least concern for the +argument in which I am engaged, I might allow that St. Luke was +wrongly informed respecting this particular, but that he wrote it just +as he understood the matter. And what would follow? Would this prove +any thing false on which christianity rests? I am unable to see how it +affects the argument one way or the other. I am not the less inclined +to believe the account, because it does not affect the truth of the +resurrection; and I should think that as this story does not seem at +all necessary in proof of that fact, it would be considered an +evidence that the writer of it was not endeavouring to make a story +for such a purpose. If we read the several accounts of the +resurrection, we shall perceive that the writers probably put down as +many particulars as come into their minds at the time of writing, +without thoughts coming into their minds how the truth of the +resurrection would be proved by the incidents which they wrote. There +is no design of this sort in what they have written that we can see. +They write as if they knew for certainty that Jesus rose from the +dead, and as if the matter was out of all dispute. They discover no +concern for fear the account they were giving would not be believed. +There is not one instance of an attempt to guard the story by clearing +up any difficulty. Would impostors write in this way? It is not +believed that there was ever the instance. Imposture is like a thief +who starts at his own shadow, and discovers guilt by endeavouring to +hide it. But truth having no concern of this sort, discovers +none.--And this is in all respects the apparent character of the four +gospels. + +6th. Your criticism on my argument respecting the evidences of the +resurrection I shall now endeavour to show to be incorrect. + +You criticise as follows; "The apostles could not have been convinced +of the fact of the resurrection by any evidence short of the fact +itself. 2d. If the fact did exist there is no evidence which can +counterbalance it. _Ergo_, as the apostles were convinced of the +truth, the fact did exist. This is pretty much like saying, if the +fact were _true_ it could not have been false!" + +The first member of your criticism supposes that I contend that the +apostles had no evidence of the resurrection but the fact itself. The +second member of your criticism supposes that I contend the fact of +the resurrection could not exist without proving itself to the +apostles in such a way that no evidence could counterbalance it. Now +in both of these you are under a mistake, I never urged the fact of +the resurrection as evidence of itself to the apostles. I never +pretended that they saw him rise. We have no account that any body saw +this act performed. If the apostles had stood by the sepulchre and had +seen the body of Jesus rise up and walk out of the house of death, +then their evidences of his resurrection would have been the fact +itself; but this was not the case, nor did I use any intimations of +this nature. So the first member of your criticism is an error of +yours. 2dly. If Jesus had rose from the dead and ascended into heaven, +and never had given any proofs of this to any one, would the fact of +his having risen be any evidence of itself to any person? It surely +would not. Nor have I suggested any thing which intimates that the +resurrection could not have been true without proving itself to be so +to the apostles. What seems a little remarkable respecting this +subject, is, you profess to care for nothing but simple truth, and yet +you seem to study how to avoid it, as the above criticism seems to +evince. I say _seems_ to evince, for I am not prepared to accuse you +of such a fault--I would charitably believe that you thought your +criticism would hit something or another nearly about right, without +understanding what the amount of it is. + +After having laboured, in a lengthy manner, as you acknowledge, to +prove that the evidences which proved to the apostles the truth of the +resurrection could not be counterbalanced, you must reasonably suppose +that I feel a little disappointed that you should condescend to pay no +other attention to my reasoning than the above criticism. If I did not +make my argument clear why should you neglect to point out to me +wherein it was wanting? Why should I not expect to have my errors +corrected, as well as to be called on to correct my brother's? Should +not these kind offices be reciprocal? If you conduct in this way, I +shall certainly grow vain, and boast of doing more for you, than you +do for me. + +Having noticed in a brief manner, the several particulars which were +proposed on my first page, I will occupy a few more with some +observations on the evidences which we are favoured with, on which to +build our belief in the resurrection of Jesus. + +I have in one or two instances referred you to Paley, who has, with +abilities and learning suited to such a task, brought forward the +authorities on which the credibility of the gospels rests. I have set +down his eleven propositions respecting the scriptures, and I humbly +request you to examine the proof which he has brought to support them. +If he has fairly supported all these propositions, as I humbly +conceive he has, will you show why the scriptures of the New Testament +are not worthy to be credited by us? + +I am loath to attempt to present the evidences on which I conceive our +faith rests, because in the first place they are vastly numerous; +2ndly, I do not believe that I am capable of doing that justice to the +subject which it justly claims; and 3dly, Paley has done it by the +assistance of Dr. Lardner's works, to so great an extent, that it +renders unnecessary any attempt of mine. + +However, as there seems a particular sort of pleasure in it, I will +here make a little addition to what I quoted in my former +communication, and notice that, following the passage from the epistle +of Barnabas, Paley mentions an epistle written by Clement, bishop of +Rome,[4] another of St. Paul's fellow labourers. "This epistle is +spoken of by the ancients as an epistle acknowledged by all; and as +Irenæus well represents its value," "written by CLEMENT, who had seen +the blessed apostles and conversed with them, who had the preaching of +the apostles still sounding in his ears, and their traditions before +his eyes." In this epistle of _Clement_, he quotes Mat. v. 7, xviii. +6. Next to _Clement_, Paley notices _Hermes_ who is mentioned by St. +Paul, Rom. xvi. 14, in a catalogue of Roman Christians. Hermes wrote a +work called the _Shepherd or Pastor of Hermes_.[5] Says our author, +"Its antiquity is incontestible from the quotations of it in Irenæus, +A.D. 178, Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 194, Tertullian, A.D. 200, +Origen, A. D. 230." In the epistle there are allusions to St. +Matthew's, St. Luke's, and St. John's gospels. + +[Footnote 4: Paley's Evidences, p. 107. Referred to Dr. Lardner's +Creed, vol. 1, p. 62, et seq.] + +[Footnote 5: Paley's Evidences, p. 110. Lardner's Creed, vol. 1, p. +111.] + +Next to Hermes our author mentions IGNATIUS, who became bishop of +Antioch, about thirty-seven years after the ascension of Christ; and +was without doubt personally acquainted with the apostles. Epistles of +Ignatius are referred to by Polycarp his contemporary. Passages, found +in the epistles now extant under his name, are quoted by Irenæus, A.D. +178, by Origen, A.D. 130. In these epistles there are various +undoubted allusions to the gospels of St. Matthew and St. John. Of +these allusions the following are clear specimens: "Christ was +baptised of John, that all righteousness might be fulfilled by him." +"_Be ye wise as serpents_ in all things, _and harmless as doves_." +"Yet the spirit is not deceived, being from God; for it knows whence +it comes, and whether it goes." "He (Christ) is the door of the +Father, by which enters in Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and the +apostles and the church." Ignatius speaks of St Paul in terms of high +respect, and quotes his epistles to the Ephesians by name. + +Next to Ignatius, our author mentions POLYCARP who had been taught by +the apostles; had conversed with many who had seen Christ, was also by +the apostles appointed bishop of Smyrna. This testimony concerning +Polycarp is given by Irenæus, who in his youth had seen him. "I can +tell the place," saith Irenænus, "in which the blessed Polycarp sat +and taught, and his going out and coming in, and the manner of his +life, and the form of his person, and the discourses he made to the +people, and how he related his conversation with John amid others who +had seen the Lord, and how he related their sayings, and what he had +heard concerning the Lord, both concerning his miracles and his +doctrine, as he had received them from the eye witness of the word of +life: all which Polycarp related _agreeably_ to the scriptures." + +In one short letter of Polycarp's, there are near forty clear +allusions to books of the New Testament: which is strong evidence of +the respect which Christians of that age hear for these books, and +positive evidence that the gospel had been written before this +epistle. + +Papias, a hearer of John, and companion of Polycarp, as Irenæus +attests, and of that age, as all agree, expressly ascribes the +respective gospels to Matthew and Mark, in a passage quoted by +Eusebius. He informs us that Mark collected his gospel from Peter's +preaching, and that Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew. This authority +fully shows that the gospels bore these names at this early period. + +The authors which are here mentioned, all lived in the days of the +apostles, that is, when the apostles were aged men, these were their +pupils in the gospel, and their epistles which have reference to the +gospels are very justly used to prove that the gospels were written by +the men whose names they bear. From these most early authors, Paley +goes on, and brings down, by regular succession, the christian +authors, until he comes into the fourth century, when they are vastly +numerous. + +By the foregoing authority, together with an innumerable multitude of +corroborating circumstances, we are led to entertain no doubts but +that the gospels of Matthew and John were written by these eye +witnesses of the things which they relate; and that the gospel of Luke +was written by a person of this name, who had his information from +undoubted testimony of the apostles; and that Mark wrote his gospel +from St. Peter's mouth, and that this gospel may be called the gospel +of Peter. + +Those eye witnesses then wrote what they saw, and if they were honest +men they wrote the truth. + +We, sir, do certainly know as well as we know any thing which ancient +history records, that the testimony of the miracles and resurrection +of Jesus was believed in the age to which these things are referred, +and that this testimony was sealed by the sufferings and death of vast +multitudes of believers. + +It should be noticed, that according to all accounts which have come +to us, there were no worldly motives of any sort by which the +propagators of the gospel were induced to labour in this cause. But on +the contrary, every earthly consideration was direct against them; and +furthermore let us remember, that the whole hierarchy of the Jews and +all the superstition of the Gentiles were in arms against this +religion, as I have before observed, nearly 300 years. + +Hoping, dear brother, that these hasty remarks will be favourably +received, and duly considered. I remain, + +Yours, &c. + +H. BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. IX. + +[As the objector here begins to give up his ground, his letters from +this place will be given nearly entire. He commences this number as +follows, viz.] + +"_Dear sir and brother_--Your reply to my seventh number has been +received, and hereby duly acknowledged. I have just given it a second +reading, with peculiar care and attention; and I must add, generally +speaking, with peculiar satisfaction too; for as it has tended in some +degree to revive my almost extinguished faith in divine revelation, so +it has in the same ratio served to obliterate, in some degree, those +doubts which seemed to be rising _mountains high_, in my apprehension, +and portended ere long to overturn all my former faith. + +"There are some of my objections, however, which seem not yet to have +been fully met on their proper ground, and of course not fully +removed; and I must therefore be yet indulged with a few remarks. + +"1st. Notwithstanding all the learning of the Greeks and Romans, in +the days of Jesus and his apostles, yet, as you very justly insinuate, +I am inclined to believe there never was a time in which 'the world of +human kind, both Jews and Gentiles, was more deeply involved in the +darkness and stupidity of superstition than when the Messiah (i. e. +Jesus) entered on his public ministry.' And notwithstanding your +argument drawn from superstition, is admitted as good, and weighty, as +far as it goes; yet, as it is conceived, it does not fully come to the +point. + +"For, in the grossest ages of superstition it is reasonable to suppose +that there are always some who entertain serious doubts and scruples +in regard to the propriety of many of the superstitious notions of +their leaders. These will be more easily wrought upon. And although +they may be directed by various circumstances to fix the mind upon +something much better in point of moral principle, yet how far this +would prevent them from connecting many of the superstitious notions +of the age with those moral principles, only giving them a different +dress, I am not able to say; neither do I see how the superstition of +the Jews and Gentiles, generally, would be likely to prevent a thing +of that kind.--It is the suspected superstition of the apostles and +primitive christians and not the superstition of their opposers, to +which the proposition alludes. Men, I conceive, may be honest, and yet +superstitious; they may also give up one superstition, by being +convinced of its error, and yet another will gradually grow in its +stead. I am sensible, however, that this argument will better apply to +those who were converted to christianity after the days of the +apostles, when it is agreed that miracles had ceased, than it will to +the apostles themselves. + +"But, from what you have written, together with my further +investigation of this subject, I cannot but perceive that this +argument, even on its proper ground, does not contain all that force +which, at first view, I thought it might: because, 1st, it must apply +to the apostles, or else, as it respects the main question, it does +not seem to have any real bearing on the subject; and 2dly, the change +of the appostles appears to have been too sudden, and too +extraordinary, to be accounted for in this way. That superstitions, +however, have arisen, even in the christian church, you do not +undertake to deny, but seem rather to admit; and it was on this fact +that the first proposition was founded; but I perceive there is a +difficulty in carrying this objection back to the apostles; for then +the doctrine was new, and without precedent; and (unless the miracles +on which it is said to have been founded were real) without any +certain prospect of success. Although therefore the religion of the +despised _Galatians_ (for such were the christians called by the +Romans) was considered by their persecutors, to be nothing more than a +gross, and even impious superstition, yet no one can expect +successfully to account 'in a rational way,' for the facts, whether +real or supposed, on which that supposed superstition is said to have +been founded. Hence the doubts growing out of my first proposition +seem to be rendered equally, if not more doubtful than the reality of +that truth, the evidence of which this objection was supposed in some +degree to counterbalance. + +"2d. The truth of my second proposition, viz. that a part of mankind +at least have been and still are believing in miracles and revelations +which are spurious, you seem not disposed to deny; but yet, at the +same time you think you are 'under no obligation to admit this fact as +any evidence against christianity.' That a spurious or pretended +miracle does not invalidate a real one I admit; yet if a spurious +miracle may obtain credit, and be in fact believed, it raises a query +whether there have ever been any others but spurious. Your argument +respecting 'counterfeit money' is admitted good in relation to that +subject, but whether it will apply with equal weight to the subject of +miracles may admit of a doubt. I do not see how the pretended miracles +of the Shakers are at all 'dependent' on the miracles of Jesus for +their 'imposition.' + +"I meant nothing more by the miracles of Mahomet than his pretended +'correspondence with the angel Gabriel,' which I considered, if true, +_miraculous_; as I conceive every revelation must be let it be +communicated how it will. + +"I have nothing to object to the picture which you have given of the +life and religion of Mahomet; and as to what I have said in regard to +the conversion and influence of Constantine, in giving a particular +tone to the christian religion, you are not disposed to disagree with +me: and at the same time you are 'by no means certain that a proper +attention to the pretended miracles of the Shakers might not issue in +assigning a natural cause for them.' Of all this I have no doubt. But, +that these miracles are believed by the Shakers, you do not undertake +to deny; nor that their religion, their faith in Ann, as being Christ +in his second coming, and that their present mode of worship are all +predicated upon them. They do not deny the miracles of Christ and his +apostles any more than Christians in general deny the miracles of +Moses and the prophets; but appeal to _theirs_ as being equally of +divine origin, and thereby clothing their religion with the same +divine authority. Now, unless these things can be accounted for 'in a +rational way,' which you seem to think may be the case, though you do +not attempt it, they certainly raise a query in the mind at least +whether the miracles recorded in scripture rest upon any better +foundation. + +"If a thing is absolutely known or believed to be miraculous, it is +miraculous; (at least to those who thus believe) and whether any thing +can be justly argued from the inferiority or superiority of a miracle, +I know not. In the raising of Lazarus, it is true, though the effect +was the same, we discover as great a miracle, and perhaps greater, +than in the raising of a son of the Shunamite by Elisha the prophet; 2 +Kings iv. 34, 35, but the miracle of the resurrection of Jesus can +hardly be said to have been wrought either by Jesus or by his +apostles, and therefore that was not particularly referred to in the +comparison of miracles; neither do I know that the comparison, in any +sense, has much weight. Whether Lazarus ever died again or not we are +not informed: neither do I recollect of ever hearing an opinion on the +subject; but, if he died, it seems that his resurrection must have +been very different from the resurrection of Jesus; i.e. to an +immortal state, so that he 'dieth no more.' + +"You admit, if I understood you, that the testimony of the apostles, +concerning the resurrection of Jesus, had it not been accompanied with +plain and astonishing miracles in the open day, and before the +surrounding multitudes, who had ocular demonstration of their truth, +would have been entitled to no more credit than the testimony of Mrs. +A----, respecting her conversation with her deceased husband. For +although it might have been true, and we could have no good reason to +doubt the sincerity or belief of the witnesses, yet after all, its +truth would solely rest on their mere _ipse dixit_, which would not be +sufficient to establish so important a truth in the world. Hence, as +you very justly observe, 'the declaration of the apostles of the +resurrection of Jesus, until it was accompanied with power from on +high, was never even communicated to the public, or ordered to be +communicated.' + +"In this manner I understood your reasoning, and I think I understand +you correctly; and all this appears to be very candid; it is +acknowledging all I would wish you to acknowledge on this subject. But +here comes the difficulty. Miracles in process of time cease; and now +people must believe, if they believe at all, without the testimony's +being 'accompanied with power from on high.' And how can we believe in +the miracles said to have been wrought by the apostles, without the +testimony's being accompanied by miracles any more than they could at +first believe in the miracles of the resurrection of Jesus without the +testimony's being accompanied by miracles? You have already +anticipated this objection, and have endeavoured to answer it by +arguing that 'perpetual miracles would, if as powerful as they were at +first, preclude the exercise of our reasoning faculties and the +necessity of investigation, which is one of the most rational +enjoyments of which we are capable.' Although this argument, it is +confessed, has considerable weight, yet it does not seem wholly to +remove the difficulty. I feel very much like those Jews who proposed +the question to Jesus; 'how long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou +be the Christ tell us plainly.' I am not satisfied that the evidence +of the truth of the resurrection is as great, at this day, whatever it +was then, as it could have been. If Jesus had remained on the earth +till this time, or if he had appeared to every generation since, it +appears to me the evidence would have been much greater; and yet not +so great as to 'preclude the exercise of our reasoning faculties.' + +"In your statement respecting the controversy between _Unitarians_ and +_Trinitarians_, it appears to me you have left out some very important +circumstances which ought to have been taken into the account to have +made it any thing near a parallel. You seem to have forgotten the +destruction of the Jews by the Romans about the time the books of the +New Testament are said to have been written; during which calamity, as +the history of those times inform us, about one million one hundred +thousand Jews were cut off, and among whom, it is more than probable, +all their leaders, who were then concerned in the death of Jesus, were +included; and only about ninety-seven thousand, not a tenth part, were +taken prisoners. The Jews in the adjacent countries, however, probably +are not taken into this account, but they were all equally subdued to +the Romans. And if the power of the Jews were so limited at the +crucifixion of Jesus that they could not lawfully put a man to death +without liberty from the Roman governor, what must we suppose was +their power after the destruction of their city and temple? On a +review of the subject, therefore, I think you will perceive that your +case, however plausibly stated, falls very far short of being a +parallel. We may well suppose, I think, that the Jews were so humbled +by the Romans, that, 1st, they had not the power; and, 2dly, they +might not under these circumstances be inclined any longer to +persecute and put to death the christians. And this was the only way +it seems, at that day, that either Jews or Gentiles thought of putting +down what they considered heresy or superstition. I consider therefore +the destruction of the Jews as giving a very favourable opportunity to +get up a new system of religion, partly or wholly based on theirs, but +a little removed from it, so as to neglect the use of sacrifices, +which, if I mistake not, according to the Jewish traditions, could +only be offered at Jerusalem. And the long lapse of time, before the +dogmas of this new sect was attempted to be refuted by argument gave +an opportunity to involve the supposed facts on which the christian +religion is predicated in such obscurity, that it stands now in no +danger of refutation from that source. Some may be made to doubt, +others to disbelieve, but nevertheless no one can prove it false. + +"If it be proved true, however, it must be proved from the record +which we have; for I know of nothing which can now add much weight to +that testimony, unless it be the fulfilment of some sinking prophecies +which yet remain to be fulfilled, or else the return of miraclous +powers and a new revelation in further confirmation of what we already +have. And if what we have be true, it seems we have a right to expect, +ere long, something of the kind. The ten last chapters of the prophecy +of Ezekiel, I think no one will pretend has ever been fulfilled, as +yet; and when fulfilled, the events will prove the divine inspiration +of that prophecy. But if it should never be fulfilled, or its +fulfilment be delayed till the Jews every where should give up all +hope and expectation of any thing of this kind; and should, through +unbelief, neglect their present customs, as many of them already have +done, by intermarrying with other nations, and thereby should become +both lost to themselves and to the world, which would be the same as +though they were extinct, I apprehend that no confidence would be +placed in that part of the prophecy after such a period. In like +manner the fulfilment or the non-fulfilment of the following words +will have a similar effect. 'This same Jesus, which is taken up from +you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go +into heaven.' Some pretend to say that even this prophecy has been +already fulfilled; but we have no evidence of it, and I think we may +say the prophecy in Ezekiel, above mentioned, has been fulfilled, with +as much propriety. But this is rather off the point. + +"In regard to the death of Stephen, notwithstanding his trial seems to +have been by the council, yet the manner of his death, as stated, +seems to have been rather turbulent than otherwise. 'When they heard +these things they were cut to the heart, and _they_ (whether the +council, or the spectators I cannot say) gnashed on him with their +teeth--then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, +and ran upon him with one accord, and cast him out of the city and +stoned him.' Such proceedings at this day, as this appears to have +been, we should be inclined to call a _mob_, let it bear what other +appellation it may. + +"That the first martyrs, however, did, from some circumstance or +other, believe in the resurrection of Jesus, on which all their hope +seems to have been predicated, I think cannot admit of a rational +doubt. For to suppose otherwise, supposes such madness and folly in +those unfortunate men, who suffered every thing which could be +inflicted upon them rather than to give up their testimony; that it +seems nothing can be a parallel, unless it be the madness and folly of +such unreasonable doubts.[6] And this seems to be all for which you +contend, as it respects the present query; because you seem to think +the first believers in this all-important truth could not have +believed by any evidence which could have existed had it not been for +the truth of the fact believed in. Now here is the mistake, as I +conceive, if there be any; i.e. in supposing that the apostles and +primitive Christians could not believe short of such indubitable +evidence. Only suppose the resurrection to have been actually +believed, by any evidence, or any circumstance whatever, no matter +what, for it makes no difference in this argument, and the report +would naturally be like all other reports of such an extraordinary +nature. Both zeal and imagination would be enlisted on the side of its +truth. Extraordinary discourses would be put into the mouths of the +martyrs, after they were dead, as well as extraordinary deeds into +their hands; and altho' contradicted ever so many times by their +enemies and persecutors, yet the contradictions would never so out run +the report but that many would still believe. When much strength of +testimony had been thus added, by verbal reports, during twenty or +thirty years, let a few men undertake to paint up real histories and +letters in the name of the first disciples, and let these be kept in +the hands of those who are strong in the faith, and let them be read +for a long time, only in their own assemblies or churches although +they might contain something of which they had not before heard, this +is only what would be natural for them to expect, and as it contained +the main thing which was the object of faith, and those other things, +if true, went to establish their faith still more, who would be likely +to call the truth of such writings in question? Not those who believe +in the main question certainly. They would be a thousand times more +likely to pass over in silence things of which they had some scruples, +for the sake of the main question, then they would be to endanger the +truth of the main question, as they might think they should, by +criticising on mere circumstantial things. I am not now speaking of +the apostles, whom I have considered _honest_ men; yet I should +suppose that even these men might have much good at heart, although +they should conduct exactly in the way which I have suggested. And how +little time would it require to put this matter beyond all possible +refutation? Not so long, I conceive, as did elapse before that work +was attempted by Celsus. + +[Footnote 6: I have here expressed myself in strong terms, with a view +to check my doubts and prevent their running wild.] + +"You will see by this, sir, in what light my argument views the +apostles. It does not suppose 'that the apostles would enforce their +moral doctrine with their pretentions to miraculous powers,' although +they might with the 'testimony of the resurrection of Jesus,' but it +supposes that their successors might contend that the apostles worked +miracles, and many of them might believe that they did, just as the +apostles believed in the resurrection, when no such thing as the +resurrection or the miracles of the apostles ever existed in fact. +This is what the argument supposes, and it is wholly predicated on the +possibility of the apostles' being made to believe, some how or other, +I do not pretend to say how, that Jesus had risen from the dead when +no such thing had taken place. But, only believe in the resurrection, +and there is no difficulty in believing in the miracles of Jesus or +the miracles of his apostles. They are equally well attested, and no +more improbable. Yea, if they were true, they were not _believed_, but +absolutely _known_ to be true by the apostles. They knew it as well as +they could know the truth of any object of sight. And the truth of +what they knew being all which they needed in support of what they +taught, I do not see, on this supposition, how they could have the +occasion, or the motive, to state one thing falsely concerning it. No, +nor could their followers have any occasion to add to their testimony, +for nothing which they could add would be of any more weight than that +which we may suppose was already in their possession. The two first +chapters of Matthew and Luke (or all except the genealogy in Matthew, +and the preface of Luke) the authenticity of which has been suspected +by some of the learned, and I believe not without pretty good reasons, +do not contain a single word in support of the resurrection; neither +is the subject of them, as I now recollect, mentioned either by Christ +or any of the apostles in any other part of the New Testament. And +although the truth of those narratives is no more miraculous than the +resurrection, yet I presume you would not contend that a belief of +these, also, is absolutely necessary to the Christian faith. + +"With these observations, I shall once more, and probably for the last +time quit my second proposition, and proceed to take notice of what +you have written on my third. + +"And here you must pardon me if I remark, without the least view of +finding any fault, that if my words will admit of a bad construction, +that construction seems to be the first one which strikes your mind. +If you suppose me capable of such an abominable absurdity as to say, +that if the man of this town who was born blind should be restored to +his sight by some one's anointing his eyes with clay and spittle, and +this done in our presence, we could not know it! that we could not +know but that the seeing man was a total stranger whom we had never +before seen, and that the blind man had absconded no body knows how or +where! I say, if this was the way in which you understood my third +proposition, you are perfectly excusable: otherwise, it is difficult +to account for your remarks. But, having thus found your antagonist, +you level your artillery against him, nor desist until you have put to +death without mercy this creature of your own fruitful imagination. +Having done, you begin to query whether you had not mistaken my +meaning; and after making a wonderful effort, by calling up these +penetrating powers of research, which are only summoned on +extraordinary occasions, you dive through the mists of obscurity, in +which my words seem to be too often placed, and behold my proposition +in its true light! + +"My proposition is no sooner seen than 'granted': which is, that we +have no positive knowledge of miracles; or, to use your own words, +'miracles are not now wrought before our eyes.' But although you grant +the truth of my proposition, you do not admit that this is any +objection against the truth of divine revelation, for a number of +reasons which you have given; all of which, no doubt, are satisfactory +to your own mind. + +"But sir, this is a matter of opinion only, and if I agree with you at +all, it must be from the consideration that the Governor of the +universe must do right. But, although the time may not be yet, +nevertheless I am clear in the opinion that the revival of miracles +will, in process of time, be absolutely necessary in order to preserve +the faith in those which have already been. But, I contend, if the +scriptures be true, we have a right to expect the revival of miracles; +and I do not see how they can be fulfilled without. Considering the +prejudices of the Jews, as a people, I cannot suppose that they will +ever believe in Jesus, as their promised Messias, short of being +convinced of its truth by a miracle; and should they return to the +land of Palestine, and there rebuild their temple, at Jerusalem, it +would be such a clear fulfilment of the prophecy of Ezekiel, that it +would be equal to a miracle, and do as much towards corroborating the +truth of all the other prophecies. + +"You finally come once more to the circumstance of the conversion of +St. Paul, where you again find some fault (and I must confess, not +without some reason) at my neglect to meet your arguments on this +subject; or in other words, to do away the scripture account, and +reconcile it with my hypothesis; i.e. that of supposing him to be +converted without a miracle. To be ingenuous with you, sir, I must +acknowledge that I have ever supposed this to be the most difficult +task I should have to do; and therefore I wished to hear all you had +to say on the subject of the resurrection before I attempted it. + +"Since I wrote my last I have examined Paley's _Horæ Paulinæ_, a work +of extraordinary merit which had never before fallen into my hands: +his _Evidences of Christianity_, I have read several years ago, but +have not lately particularly examined that work. In the exposition of +the argument, (of the work first mentioned) Paley sets forth, as I +conceive, the only possible grounds on which either the epistles of +St. Paul, or the acts of the apostles, can be supposed to be +forgeries, in their full force. And then he attempts to prove their +genuineness by their internal evidence, which they contain within +themselves, entirely aside from those objections; and which would have +been of equal weight even on the supposition that the whole had been +concealed from the time they were written till now, and we should now, +for the first time, examine them. And although I might not fully agree +with him in all points, yet I think he proves, beyond all +contradiction or rational doubt, what he mainly attempts to prove; i. +e. that the epistles were written by some person acquainted with the +circumstances mentioned in the history, and that the writer of the +history must have been acquainted with the circumstances alluded to in +the epistles, where, at the same time, there is not the least apparent +design in those references or allusions; which, as he very justly +argues, prove the genuineness of both. I do not pretend to quote his +words, as the book is not now by me. + +"This, it must be confessed, is a great acquisition in favour of the +truth of christianity; because it evidently carries the writings back +into those times when every thing was fresh in the minds of all who +had any knowledge of the subject of which those writings treated. Now +comes the point. Paul expressly declares that he saw Christ after he +was risen from the dead. His declaring that he was seen of Cephas, +then of the twelve, could have been only from the report of others; +but it agrees pretty well with what has been recorded by the +evangelists. His declaring that he had been seen 'of above five +hundred brethren at once,' must have been also by report, which report +might have been incorrect, as there is no mention made of it in either +of the gospels. Yet if incorrect it might have been very easily +refuted. But when he comes to say, 'And last of all he was seen of me +also, as of one born out of due time,' there remains for him no such +excuse. Paul, as it seems, could not believe that he had seen Jesus, +literally, and personally, when he had not. And if he knew that he had +not, and yet declared that he had, and meant that others should +believe that he had, he was not _honest_, as I before admitted that he +was; and now to say that he was not honest, as I clearly see, would +involve me in still greater difficulty, as then I could give no +rational account for his life and conduct. What shift shall I now +make? For having supposed that my doubts were really founded on +reason, I must have good reason for so doing before I can give them +up: i.e. I must be fully convinced that they are founded in error. + +"What can we suppose that Paul meant by Christ's being seen _of above +five hundred brethren at once_? Is it at all likely that such an +extraordinary circumstance should have happened without any mention +being made of it in either of the five histories which we have of +those times? Might he not mean the same which the author of the Acts +means, speaking of the day of Pentecost? And therefore the whole might +not have been designed to be understood literally, but spiritually +true? And notwithstanding the literality of the language, may not all +the miracles of Christ and the apostles, and even the account we have +of the resurrection, be all accounted for and reconciled in the same +way? But here I involve myself in difficulty again; for, if I mistake +not, this was very near the opinion of the Gnostics, whom the apostles +and fathers every where spake against.--'These,' says Dr. Priestley, +'taught that it was not _Jesus_ that was properly _the Christ_, or +that he had not flesh and blood like other men.' They also 'denied the +doctrine of the resurrection.' These therefore, 'Paul, Peter, Jude, +and John, most strenuously opposed.' Again, says he, 'The apostles +they considered as judging only by their senses, which were deceived +in this case: and though they gave entire credit to them with respect +to every thing which they had seen, or heard, they considered them as +plain unlettered men who were ignorant of what was not within the +sphere of their senses.' To these it is supposed that John alludes in +his first Epistle iv. 1--3. If, therefore, the apostles did believe, +and contend for the literal resurrection, and personal appearing of +Jesus, and if in this they were opposed by the Gnostics, even in their +day; there is no way now, that I see, any longer for me to maintain my +doubts only by believing that the first disciples, as well as Paul, +thought they saw Jesus when in fact they did not, and that the idea of +miracles by which these things were said to have been propagated and +which carried conviction to the multitudes, was nothing more than the +bold figurative language of the day, designed, in reality, to deceive +no one; or else mere exaggerations: or, what perhaps is still more +probable, partly of both. But enough! + +"I confess I begin to grow dissatisfied with this kind of reasoning. +What does it all amount to? What am I bringing, after all, to oppose +the laboured researches of Drs. Lardner, Paley, Priestley, and others, +as well as the pertinent observations of my worthy friend who has so +long borne with me, and obliged me with his friendly and +christian-like aid on this subject? Let me pause and consider--I have +acknowledged that there are evidences in favour of divine revelation; +have I proved any of those evidences false?--No! this I have +acknowledged I could not do. What have I put into the other end of the +scale, to weigh down those evidences? Ah! what indeed! Nothing! except +it be my own ignorance, and the errors of other men, in whose errors I +have no more faith than those who believe in the truth of that which I +have been disputing! I will therefore, instead of pursuing the dispute +any further, begin to think once more whether the thing for which you +so ardently contend may not in reality be true. + +"But, here again, I must be cautious, lest I should err as far on the +other hand. For notwithstanding when I found that I could not help +doubting, I tried to reconcile myself to my doubts, and have sincerely +and honestly tried to make myself believe that I was perfectly +reconciled either way; yet the moment I begin to think about the +certainty of immortality and eternal life, I am all on fire! I hardly +know how to contain myself! And were it not for the special +obligations, which I feel to my family, and to the world, more than +any thing which I ever expect to receive from the world, I should long +to 'depart, and be with Christ, which is far better.' Thus my doubts, +whatever they are, may be needful for me. + +"Your remarks respecting my claims to the privilege of one who is weak +in the faith are very pertinent and just. For I must confess in +proportion as my doubts arose, as to the truth of the resurrection, +equal doubts would arise as to the propriety of preaching it for a +truth. I wish you to understand, however, that my mind has never been +settled there, if it has ever vibrated that way, it was only +momentary, and rather on mere supposition than any confirmed opinion. + +"In answer to what you say in regard to hope, I will only add: Though +a man should have ever so firm a hope in any thing whatever, and +should afterwards find that his hope was founded in error, the hope +would be taken away; but if at the same time he should find that the +truth is absolutely better than the error hoped for, he would also +find that a better thing is given in lieu of his hope: but if a man +has hope, though that hope should be founded in error, if the hope +remain as long as the man exists, it is not taken away from him, as +both cease to exist together. Once more, and finally: a hope which is +founded in truth, a knowledge of the truth can never take away. +Although a man may hope, and ardently desire to exist eternally, yet I +do not see how a man can extend either his hope, or his desires, +beyond the possibility of his existence. To my understanding, this is +just like supposing that a man which does not exist may yet hope and +desire; or that a man may hope and desire, after he shall have ceased +to exist. + +"After returning you my sincere thanks for your kind indulgence and +labours of love, I shall close the present number. I cannot take my +leave of this number, however, without expressing my humble gratitude +to the Allwise disposer of events, that he has given such abundant +manifestations of his unspeakable goodness to his creatures; that he +has also, as I may perhaps be permitted to hope with you, given a +divine testimony of his infinite love and universal benevolence to +that part of his creation whom he hath distinguished with the +attributes of his own nature, regarding at the same time all other +beings and things, and that he had raised up so many faithful +witnesses who have set to their seals that this testimony is true. + +"Yours, &c. + +A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER VIII. + +_Dear sir, and brother_,--The particulars contained in your ninth +letter, which I have selected as the subject of this, are the +following: + +1st. You "do not see how the miracles of the Shakers are at all +dependant on the miracles of Jesus for their imposition." + +2d. You think, if Jesus had remained on the earth until now, or had +appeared to every generation since his resurrection, the evidence +would have been much greater; and yet not so great as to preclude the +exercise of our reasoning faculties. + +3d. In the supposed controversy between the Unitarians and +Trinitarians, you think I have failed of making the case a parallel +with my subject, not considering the great change which took place in +the state of the Jews in consequence of their destruction by the +Romans. + +4th. The argument which you rest on the supposition, that the apostles +did in reality believe in the resurrection of Jesus, when in fact the +thing was not true. + +5th. What you say of the necessity of miracles in some future time, to +confirm the belief of those which have been. + +6th. The difficulty you suggest concerning St. Paul's saying that +Jesus was seen, after his resurrection, by more than five hundred +brethren at once. + +1st. As you object to the idea that the miracles of the Shakers depend +at all on the miracles of Jesus for their imposition, it may be +considered sufficient, on my part, if I show that you have fully +supported the proposition which you profess not to see. + +I will, however, first presume, that I am not authorised to say that +the miracles of the Shakers are imposition, I have not contended that +they are; the ground for which I contend is this, viz. if these or any +other pretended miracles among us are impositions, they depend on the +miracles of Jesus for this power, as much as counterfeit money depends +on the true for its imposition. That you have given sufficient support +to what I have stated, you will see at once by the following passage +quoted from your arguments on this subject: "They do not deny the +miracles of Christ and his apostles any more than Christians in +general deny the miracles of Moses and the prophets; but appeal to +_theirs_ as being equally of divine origin, and thereby clothe their +religion with the same divine authority." Is it possible that the +writer of the foregoing sentence should not see, that he established +the very thing which he had just said he could not see? What is that +_divine authority_ with which the religion of Moses, the prophets and +of Christ is clothed? Answer, _miracles_. What authority do you +pretend the Shakers make use of to clothe their religion? Answer "_the +same_." How does this differ from counterfeit money, on the +supposition that these miracles are imposition? + +It is abundantly evident that the Jews expected that the Messiah, when +he came, would establish his character by miracles as Moses did his, +and as some of the prophets were enabled to do. Therefore, do we read +Matt. xii. 22, 23.--"Then was brought unto him one possessed with a +devil, blind and dumb: and he healed him insomuch, that the blind and +dumb both spake and saw. And all the people were amazed and said, is +not this the son of David?" + +Jesus himself saith, Luke iv. 24, 27. "Verily I say unto you, no +prophet is accepted in his own country. But I tell you of a truth, +many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was +shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout +all the land; but unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, +a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow; and many lepers were +in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was +cleansed, saveing Naaman the Syrian."--See John vii. 31. "And many of +the people believed on him, and said, when Christ cometh, will he do +more miracles than these which this man hath done?" + +By the foregoing quotations, as by many other passages, we learn that +the Jews expected the Messiah would establish his character as a +prophet like unto Moses and others, and also that Jesus did in reality +a multitude of miracles more than the prophets did. + +Now is it not evident, that if the miracles of Jesus were supposed to +be impositions, they were dependant on those of Moses and the prophets +for any power to impose on the people? Just so are all miracles +wrought or pretended to be wrought since Christ, dependant on his +miracles for any imposing power which they possess. If our religion +had not been first propagated by the means of those miracles which are +recorded in the New Testament, of what use would any pretended +miracles be to any sect of Christians? + +2d. What you say of the greater evidence of the resurrection which +would have been furnished by Christ's continuance on earth until now, +or by his making his appearance in every generation since his time, +appears to me to be rather wanting in its merits by which it claims a +reply.--Why should you neglect to delineate some special reasons for +your suppositions, by showing how wide the difference would have been +from the evidence we now have, and how that difference would have +recommended your scheme?--You have left me to conjecture the +particular features of your argument, and if I mistake them, you will +reply that I understand you incorrectly. However, this is the way I +must proceed. + +We will suppose then that Jesus, in room of ascending into heaven, had +remained on earth. Would this have done any good, unless he had made +himself known to all the people? Well, we will suppose he had made +himself known after his resurrection, to the whole house of Israel, +would the people not have believed? They would have believed most +assuredly, or his making himself known to them would have done no +good. If they had all believed they would not have persecuted the +religion of Christ, all would have embraced it at once being convinced +by their eyes, that Jesus who was crucified, had actually rose from +the dead, and was not subject to death any more. All this would have +been as evident to the Roman government as to the Jewish hierarchy, +and the whole would have been christianized at once. How long would +all this remain a wonder? Jesus remains on earth from generation to +generation. How long ago would the conjecture have arisen, that this +man who has lived through so many ages, had always been here on earth, +and that the tradition of his once having been mortal like other men, +was nothing but a superstition gotten up in some age of antiquity +beyond our reach? There would have been no occasion of preserving any +records of the wonderful works of Jesus in the days of his flesh, for +as the whole would become immediately connected to christianity, there +would have been no necessity nor excitement to write and preserve the +accounts we have in the gospel, or if they had been written, they +could have had no support now but ancient tradition. Not one martyr, +not one instance of persecution, not a Celsus in the second, a +Porphyry in the third, nor a Julian in the fourth centuries to oppose +the truth, and thereby bear testimony to the antiquity of the +christian history. + +This immortal man would be here on earth, and the sun and the moon and +the stars would be in the heavens, the mountains and the rivers here +on earth; and the same mind that would conjecture that all these +visible things were from everlasting to everlasting, would make no +exception of this man Christ Jesus. But now you are called on to prove +your christian tradition; and what have you to convince the Deist +with? Will you say my conjectures are by no means correct? Well, I +expected it would turn out so. You mean then that Jesus should not +only remain on earth, but that he should continue the evidences of his +having been mortal, of his having died, and of his resurrection as +clear as they were when they convinced the world in the first +place.--Would there, in this case, be any room for any inquiry? any +for doubts? Would there be as many denominations of christians as +there are now? Should we get at this religion by reasoning? Perhaps +you would prefer your second proposal, and have Jesus manifested in +every generation. But this would have been a regular return of the +same event, and would have been placed among the phenomena of nature, +and the Deist would say that there never had been any beginning to +this regular operation, it has always been so from time beyond date. + +Thus far, but no more. The evidences of our religion are like the +religion itself, infinitely superior to any thing ever contrived by +human wisdom. And it is an opinion in which I am the more confirmed, +the more I examine it, that if the wisest set of philosophers which +ever lived on earth had been a council to contrive a method by which +christianity could have been perpetuated in the world, that scheme +which they would have projected, would of itself defeated the object. + +The wisdom of this great scheme corresponds with the divine power +which has been manifested in it. What set of impostors, either wise or +simple, learned or unlearned would ever have thought of such an +undertaking as that of which we have an account in the four +evangelists? Would they be likely to find one who would be their +leader, the one to die, and leave the rest to make the people believe +that he arose from the dead? Could a man be found now who would be +willing to undertake such a piece of madness and folly? If we pretend +to reason shall we not keep to human nature, and reason according to +those laws by which ourselves and others are governed? + +Do you believe, sir, that a man could be found who would undertake to +lead a party, whose object should be to impose on the people by a +pretended resurrection, and consent himself to be the hero of this +imposture? + +You answer, no. But then ask; if this wonderful story was not written +some considerable time after that period to which the dates of the +writings are assigned, and such large additions made that the whole +appears entirely different from what was really true? + +This brings me to consider the third particular selected for +consideration, out of your epistle. + +3dly. In allusion to the supposed controversy between the Unitarians +and Trinitarians, you think I ought to have considered the +circumstance of the destruction of the Jews by the Romans, as giving a +favourable opportunity for the fabricating the books of the +evangelists, and of giving them success in the world, as the old +pharisees and rulers of the Jews were principally cut off in that +awful destruction of their nation and city. + +You will observe that by your suggestion you leave the first section +of the argument to which you refer, in which no book or books were +used, and notice only the last section in which you were indulged, for +sake of the argument, in the supposition that the gospels were not +written until after the destruction of Jerusalem, nor propagated on +the miracles on which the gospels have founded it. Here, sir, have I +not an occasion of some little complaint? If you really thought that +the gospels were, none of them, written in the life time of the +apostles, and considered it safe to predicate an argument on this +ground, why should you withhold the proof of this fact? Why did you +not inform me of the authority by which your argument is supported in +your own mind? And furthermore, why do you try to get away from the +argument as stated in its first form, without showing its want of +force, or without allowing its merit? By conducting arguments in this +way, in room of converguing them to some definite point of conclusion, +they are diverged indefinitely, and the mind seems bewildered without +an object. + +However, I am disposed to follow you, and will now endeavour to shew +the probability of the gospel's having been written even before the +destruction of Jerusalem. + +The following passages are quoted from Paley's evidences from page 106 +and on-- + +From the epistle of Barnabas, to which I have before alluded; "Let us, +therefore, beware lest it come upon us, as it is written, there are +many called, few chosen." Our author justly adds: "From the +expression, '_as it is written_,' we infer with certainty, that, at +the time when the author of this epistle lived, there was a book +extant, well known to christians, and of authority among them, +containing these words--'Many are called, few chosen.'" For the +authority of this epistle I refer unto Clement of Alexandria, Origen, +Eusebius, and Jerome, noticed in a former communication. If Clement +were liable to mistake the author, it seems hardly probable that he +would be deceived concerning the time when this epistle, purporting to +have been written by Barnabas, was written; as it is no later than +A.D. 194 that he quotes this epistle as an ancient work. It may be +proper to remark, that although authors differ respecting the +genuineness of this epistle, both Dr. Priestly and Paley acknowledge +and maintain its antiquity, and place it very near to the time of the +destruction of Jerusalem, which gives it all the authority for which +it is here quoted; for the thing now to be proved is, that it is +probable that the gospel of Matthew was written before the destruction +of the Jewish hierarchy. Now as this epistle of Barnabas was written +soon after this destruction, and refers to the gospel of Matthew in +the manner above quoted, as refering to what was an acknowledged +writing of scripture authority, it seems reasonable to infer that St. +Matthew's gospel had been written long enough before, to obtain its +establishment among Christian churches, which fairly throws its +antiquity anterior to the destruction of Jerusalem. Sir, I see nothing +to forbid this conclusion from being highly probable, and this, I +expect to show, is all that is necessary to be made out in this case. + +"Of Polycarp," who was appointed bishop of Symrna by the apostles +themselves, says our author, "we have one undoubted epistle remaining. +And this, though a short letter, contains nearly forty clear allusions +to books of the New Testament; which is strong evidence of the respect +which christians of that age bore for those books." It appears from +this account, that, as Polycarp was a contemporary of the apostles, +and referred to the books of the New Testament in his writings, as to +books of established authority, these books must have been written as +early as the time in which their reputed authors lived, which places +their date prior to the destruction of Jerusalem; as it is not +pretended that any of the evangelists continued until after the +destruction of that city except St. John who is supposed to have lived +to a very great age. + +One more from our author: "Papias, a hearer of John, and companion of +Polycarp, as Irenæus attests, and of that age, as all agree, in a +passage quoted by Eusebius, from a work now lost, expressly ascribes +the respective gospels to Matthew and Mark, and in a manner which +proves that those gospels must have publicly borne the names of these +authors at that time, and probably long before." All this appears +perfectly consistent with the idea that these gospels were written by +the evangelists themselves, and proves together with the following +considerations the probability of its being correct. Further +considerations to be taken into the foregoing account are the +following. St. Matthew, St. Luke and St. Mark, all speak of the +prophesy of Jesus respecting the destruction of Jerusalem, but do not +even hint that this prophesy had been fulfilled. In St. John's gospel +no mention is made of this prophesy, and it is reasonable enough to +suppose that this omission was on account of the prophesy's having +been fulfilled before his gospel was written. + +Again, if the gospels had not been written by these reputed authors, +nor in the time that the evangelists lived, but some time after the +destruction of Jerusalem, and these had been fabricated by designing +men, they would certainly have been exposed as a fraud by the Gnostics +who held many opinions so very contrary to the scriptures of the New +Testament. So very contrary were some of the early heresies to the +writings of the evangelists that they erased many things from them +that they might the better maintain their own notions. Now this would +never have taken place if these Gnostics could have proved that these +Gospels were frauds, which they certainly could have done, for they +existed as early as these writings are supposed to have been written. +Furthermore, if the gospels had been forged books, written after the +destruction of Jerusalem, it would have been an easy task for Celsus +to have exposed the whole fraud. He certainly would never have +admitted the truth of the miracles of Jesus if he could have proved +that the books in which they were recorded were forgeries. But this +neither he nor the learned Porphyry attempted to do. + +I have suggested, that, if the probability of the gospel's having been +written before the destruction of Jerusalem and by the evangelists +themselves be proved it is sufficient for our present argument. And +so, I think, it will appear to you, when you combine with this +probability two more important considerations. + +1st. That the internal evidences contained in the books of the New +Testament, of their genuineness, are sufficient of themselves to +establish their character as such; and: + +2d. That the above probability of itself is to be relied on even from +external evidence if no external proof can be proved against it, which +is not pretended. + +It should be kept in mind, that the writings of the evangelists are +guarded by the early attacks of the enemies of christianity, who ever +treated them as being, what they pretended to be, a faithful history +of the origin of the religion they inculcated; and also by the +opposition of the early sects who arose from the church, who would +have demolished their foundations if they had been spurious. + +4th. The argument you rest on the supposition that the apostles did, +in reality, believe in the resurrection of Jesus, when in fact the +thing was not true, may now be noticed.--As you would naturally +expect, I shall by no means allow either your premises or conclusions. + +1st. Why should I allow your premises? You have brought no argument, +nor attempted to bring any to disprove what I contended for, viz. that +the apostles could not have been persuaded to believe the resurrection +with any evidence short of that recorded in the evangelists. "Here," +you say "lies the mistake if there be any;" and to this I agree. Where +then is your argument against mine, on which so much depends? You have +attempted to bring none. But you say: "only suppose the resurrection +to have been actually believed, by any evidence, or circumstance +whatever, no matter what." What argument is there sir, in this "_only +suppose_?" I contend the thing is not supposable. It was as true in +that age of the world, that a fact naturally incredible requires +indubitable evidence to substantiate it, as it is now. I would allow +that it is supposable, that one man might, in a sort of a delirium, +which generally throws the brain into a situation, by which, what only +exists in the mind, appears a reality to the sense of sight, might +think he saw Jesus after his crucifixion, when in fact he did not. But +I cannot allow it to be a supposable case that the whole eleven +apostles should all become delirious at once and with them a number +more, and all be persuaded against the prejudices of their minds, that +they saw Jesus, and that at a number of times, and in diverse manners, +when there was no such thing. But: + +2d. Even allowing your supposition, your consequences would be very +unlikely to follow. You surely would not suppose that the apostles +could believe they saw Jesus when they did not, if they had the use of +their reason properly. We must suppose them to have been insane +then.--What then would have been the consequences? Would the authority +have put these mad-men to death? Would they have been persecuted at +all for their misfortune? But these mad-men preached Jesus and the +resurrection to the people, and so convinced them of the fact, that +multitudes believed them, and on this supposition we are now to +_suppose_ our religion was first established in the world! If we may +suppose such things, there are no absurdities that we may not suppose. +You must suppose it to be a very dangerous thing to try a man for his +life by a jury of twelve men, for if the man was innocent of the +murder for which he was indicted and no evidence was produced to +convict him on, these men might all be made to believe, some how, by +some circumstance, "no matter what," that they all saw the murder +committed by this very innocent person on trial. + +5th. I thought of saying something on your suggestion of the necessity +of miracles in some future time to convince the Jews that Jesus is the +Messiah, but being a little more careful, than at first, I find you +seem to give up this matter. You say: "considering the prejudices of +the Jews, as a people, I cannot suppose that they will ever believe in +Jesus, as their promised Messias short of being convinced of its truth +by a miracle; and should they return to the land of Palestine, and +there rebuild their temple, at Jerusalem, it would be such a clear +fulfilment of the prophesy of Ezekiel, that it would be equal to a +miracle, and do as much towards corroborating the truth of all the +other prophecies." If the return of the Jews, etc. be equal to +miracles, then it may preclude their necessity. But as this particular +does not immediately concern our general subject it is dismissed. + +6th. As none of the evangelists have been particular respecting the +meeting in Galilee, and as this was an appointment even before the +crucifixion, as well as afterward, it is fairly within the reach of +probable conjecture, that this meeting was sufficiently numerous to +justify St. Paul's words. He does not speak of this matter as of a +subject with which his acquaintance was small, for he says; "he was +seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part +remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep." He no doubt, +had seen many of this great number and had been informed of the +circumstances of the occasion, and of the time when this multitude was +favoured with this sight. + +To conclude; I heartily join with you in grateful acknowledgements, to +the Almighty disposer of events, for the manifestations of his +universal benevolence to his creatures, and especially unto man whom +he hath seen fit to induce with the attributes of his own nature, and +constituted him an heir of life and immortality. In view of this, I +can be thankful for any faithfulness discoverable in those who publish +the word of life, and endeavour to defend it in the spirit of meekness +and Christian love. + +And I will further add, that I feel a peculiar pleasure in finding +your mind to be somewhat divested of its incumberances, and that your +doubts of the grounds of your precious faith, are dispersing more and +more from your mind, while the evidences of divine truth find a +sincere reception in your understanding. + +Let us endeavour to cherish, not only the evidences of truth, but +truth itself in our afflictions, and in room of being idlers in the +markets, go early into our Lord's vineyard trusting the words of him +who saith; "whatsoever is right, ye shall receive." + +Yours, &c. + +H. BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +EXTRACTS No. X. + +"_Dear sir and brother_--In remarking on your reply to my 8th number, +as in a former case I shall follow the arrangement which you have +made; taking up the articles in the same order. + +"1st. I did not suppose but that the method which I proposed to +account for the absence of the body of Jesus would be liable to +serious objections; and these objections are increased by connecting +with them, circumstances which, if the resurrection be false, must be +considered equally false. Because, if the resurrection of Jesus was +not a truth, whatever was the truth on which that belief was founded, +must be now all mere conjecture. + +"There might be persons, however, who thought that Jesus suffered +death very wrongfully although he never pretended literally to perform +those miracles. Yea I conceive it possible that when this language was +first adopted, i. e. of his feeding the hungry, opening the eyes of +the blind, raising the dead, &c. it was not understood, nor meant to +be understood literally. Therefore although the account at first might +have been _literally false_, though not so much so as what it grew to +be afterward, yet it might have been considered _spiritually true_; +and therefore not designed absolutely to deceive. The only difficulty, +i.e. the only irreconcilable difficulty, which I conceive in the case, +is in supposing that the first disciples could be made to believe in +the resurrection, by any evidence which could have existed, and yet +the resurrection not to be true. But we must suppose this, I think, in +order to raise a reasonable doubt of the truth of the resurrection. +For, if the disciples did not believe it, they could have had no +interest or motive, (or certainly no justifiable motive) in making +others believe it; and without this, it is difficult to account even +for the existence of such a report. I should not think it so strange, +however, that others, after the report was once in circulation, and +that even St. Paul himself should have been made to believe this, +merely by some visionary scene. + +"I think therefore the question may be reduced to this point. Which of +the two is the most _incredible_, either that the first disciples +should absolutely believe in the resurrection, by any evidence which +did not grow out of this truth, or that the resurrection should have +been absolutely true? + +"Here is where the two propositions, when reduced to their simplicity +must finally come. And I contend that when two propositions are thus +clearly placed before the mind or understanding, whether the judgment +be right or wrong, the mind or understanding must reject, yea it is +impossible to avoid rejecting, that which to the mind or +understanding, is the most incredible. + +"But when we admit that the disciples did believe in the resurrection, +we are not obliged to admit that they had all or any of the evidences +of that fact which have come down to us. This we may suppose might +have been mostly or altogether fictitious; written by later hands, and +attributed to the apostles. And here we must not suppose that the +account was altogether made up at once, but grew gradually; and not to +come out in writing until the persons, who could either attest or deny +the literal truth of these facts, were taken off of the stage. Here as +it respects the records also, the same question again occurs. Which is +the most _incredible_ (not to _miraculous_, for one miracle is no more +miraculous, that I know of than another; I therefore say which is the +most _incredible_) that such histories should have been thus, or in +some other way got up, and be believed, altho' the various accounts, +so far as they relate to miracles, and other circumstances necessary +to be taken into the account only for the sake of supporting the truth +of those miracles, should have been altogether fictitious, and such +parts only true as could be accounted for in a rational way, without +admitting the existence of miracles; or that all those miracles, or at +least the most essential of them, should have been literally and +absolutely true? The answer to these two propositions, i. e. the above +questions, will, and must, decide the whole controversy. + +"Now, were it not for the internal evidences which the writings of the +New Testament do, and ever will, possess (the external evidences +falling so far short of being conclusive in my mind, as I shall show +more fully hereafter, when I come to speak of those evidences) I +should still be inclined, in my own understanding, to reject the +latter proposition in each of the above questions, and adhere to the +former.--Much of the external evidence, I am very ready to admit is +perfectly consistent with the supposed truth of the internal, but +after all, in my humble opinion, it does not quite come to the point. +But the internal evidence, I confess, I cannot withstand. The more I +investigate the subject, the more I discover its force, its clearness, +and its irresistibility; and although the truth it unfolds is so +august, so momentous, so astonishingly and inexpressibly sublime, that +it is with the profoundest and most reverential awe I speak, when I +acknowledge my faith in the divine origin of those testimonies; yet, +as I cannot resist their force, so I am obliged to acknowledge them +true. The illusion, however, if it be one, I know is happifying to the +mind; but this is no good reason, that I know of, why we should either +embrace it ourselves, or propagate it in the world. Although I have +endeavoured to calm my conscience, while meditating on my doubts, with +the consideration that I am not accountable for the truth or the +falsity of the scriptures; yet, I must confess, this did not fully +satisfy my mind; and therefore I come to a determination to be more +thoroughly persuaded of their truth, if possible, or else be more +thoroughly convinced of their fallacy. With this motive I entered on +the present controversy; and I feel very happy in its termination, +having been much strengthened in my faith thereby, and humbly pray, +that should it ever come before the public, it may be blest to the +benefit of others. + +"2d. What you have said on the divine mission, &c. of the apostles is +satisfactory. For although it has not fully come to my question, yet +it has had the same good effect by convincing me that my question went +a little beyond the bounds of reason; for it was too much like asking +a blind man how it is that other men see! It is not reasonable to +suppose that the apostles themselves could have informed persons who +were uninspired to their understanding, how or by what means, they +were inspired. It was sufficient to demonstrate the fact by the works +which they were enabled to perform, (admitting the account true,) in +the name of JESUS. + +"3d. My argument respecting a hope of future existence has been +extended rather beyond my design. Without taking up time to +recapitulate, I will only say I admit the truth of your argument on +this subject; neither do I see how it stands altogether in opposition +to mine. What I contend for is this. The idea of non-existence, i.e. +of existing only in God, without retaining our individual +consciousness of being, does not, like the idea of endless misery, +absolutely destroy our present comforts. It only cuts short, or else +prevents, future prospects. If it can be demonstrated, as I believe it +can, that God is good to the animal creation, in giving them +existence, on the supposition, that they have no future state, I +contend that man is equally, if not more abundantly blessed, even on +the same supposition.--But I never meant to contend that eternal life +would not be still infinitely better, according to our conceptions of +good, if true. To state a case, which will illustrate in some degree +my ideas of this subject, the following may come something nigh it; +viz. I should be pleased with the idea of living, say, ten years, in +reference only to the blessing of this life, although I might know I +should die at that time, provided that, during the ten years, I should +enjoy the common blessings of life. This does not prevent my desiring +to live longer; neither does a certain knowledge that I shall not +prevent me from desiring to live, nor from being pleased with the idea +of living, till that time. But let me know for a certainty, or, which +would be the same thing to me, let me absolutely believe that I should +live fifty years, and that although the ten first would be attended +with all the common blessings of life, as usual, yet that the +remaining forty years, which would be the remaining whole of my +natural life, I should be placed in the most distressed and aggravated +circumstances, of which I could possibly conceive; now, in reference +to the whole fifty years, could I desire to live? No! I say, I rather +choose instant death! + +"When I look around on the circumstances and condition of men, I am so +fully convinced that the aggregate of happiness so far overbalances +the aggregate of misery, that I am firmly of opinion, yea, I do not +entertain the least possible doubt of its truth, and therefore think I +ever shall contend, that this life is a blessing, and we have abundant +reason to be very thankful for it, without the least reference to a +future state. But, nevertheless, I am very ready to admit, that, when +futurity and immortality are taken into the account, and are connected +with the same view of the character of the Deity, these blessings are +all extended and magnified to infinity. + +"But on the supposition that truth is any where connected with +_endless misery_, the scene is wholly changed. On this supposition I +am not reconciled to truth at all; I can find nothing in my moral +nature, which I call good, but what stands directly opposed to it; +Hence, the very brightest and most brilliant part of the picture is +deformed by the awful idea; it takes away all the pleasure of +investigation, and if this be truth, my only desire and prayer to God, +is that I might be permitted to remain eternally ignorant of it! It is +my confidence therefore in the goodness of the truth, and this only, +which has reconciled my mind to it. You may contend that I have not +obtained this confidence without the knowledge of divine revelation. +Be that as it may; on this supposition only I am reconciled, and +something must destroy this confidence before I can become +unreconciled to truth. I think now I must be fully understood, and +will therefore add no more on this subject. + +"4th. What you say under the fourth article is satisfactory. Errors, +no doubt, may be, and often are committed by applying instructions +'differently from their primary design.' + +"5th. Your remarks under the sixth article are very judicious. Much +injury no doubt is often done to the truth of divine revelation by +contending so tenaciously as some do for things, which, if true, are +not essential to its support.--It is often the case that, by trying to +prove too much, we weaken the evidence, in the minds of many, +respecting the main thing we wish to establish. Hence, the opposer, +not being able, or else not disposed, to make proper distinction, +considers it all of one piece; and not being able to see the propriety +of many things, which are contended for with equal zeal, sets the +whole down as a fallacy. + +"6th. It is true, I thought you strained the argument a little too far +in supposing that the apostles could not have been convinced of the +truth of the resurrection by any evidence which could be +counterbalanced. This induced me to state that supposed absurdity in +still more glaring colors, with a hope that you would thereby be +induced to take a review of your argument, and not without some +expectation, that you would be able to see some defects in it. But in +this I have been disappointed. You still hold on upon your argument, +and turn the error wholly on your friend. + +"But, as this is the turning point, I shall not blame you for +straining every nerve, and holding on upon every fibre which gives you +the least possible support. + +"It would not do for you to give up the idea that the apostles could +not have been convinced of the truth of the resurrection by any +evidence which could have existed short of the fact's being true; +(which, by the way, was what I meant by the first member of my +criticism, though not exactly so expressed;) for the moment this is +admitted, doubt and unbelief will soon contend that they were so +convinced. Imagination may soon call up such evidence in the mind, +without supposing any thing miraculous, and all the rest of the +account may be supposed to be fictitious. I did not mean to insinuate, +however, that you have contended that the apostles must have seen +Jesus rise in order to be convinced of the fact. I suppose their +seeing him after he was risen was as full a demonstration to them as +though they had seen him rise. And if they could not have been +convinced of its truth by any thing short of this, then they could not +be convinced by any thing short of the fact; i.e. what was the same to +them as the fact. The second member of my criticism, viz. 'If the fact +did exist there is no evidence which can counterbalance it,' does not, +as I conceive, suppose that you contend 'that the fact of the +resurrection could not exist without proving itself to the apostles in +such a way that no evidence could counterbalance it;' but it supposes +that if the fact did exist, no evidence could prove that it did not +exist, as it is always difficult to prove a negative, and utterly +impossible when the positive is true.--Hence my conclusion; viz. As +the apostles were convinced of the truth of the resurrection, which +they could not have been only by evidence which could not have existed +had not the fact been true, the fact did exist. How far does this +criticism fall short of my other? (for it is exactly what I meant by +my other.) Or how far does it go beyond your argument? + +"Finally, I cannot conceive of any evidence that could sufficiently +support the fact that Jesus who was crucified, did actually rise from +the dead, if nothing could be brought to counterbalance it, that could +possibly admit of being counterbalanced; and again: 'Thus we are +brought to the suggestion, that any evidence which could be sufficient +to prove such a fact, if no evidence appeared against it, must be such +as admits, of no refutation.' + +"Unless it may be reasonably supposed that the apostles were not +absolutely so guarded against an error of this kind as this argument +suggests, I know of no way to withstand its force. And I am sure I +feel no disposition to withstand it, even against probability. It is +the improbability of the fact it goes to prove, i. e. in my mind, that +ever induced me to oppose it. + +"I shall now take notice of the external evidence in support of the +truth of divine revelation, which you have quoted from Paley in his +view of the evidences of christianity. + +"In your reply to my seventh number, you mentioned a quotation from +the epistle of Barnabas, St. Paul's companion, in the following words, +'Let us therefore, beware lest it come upon us, _as it is written_, +there are many called, few chosen.' The object of this quotation is to +prove that the gospel of Matthew (from which here is a quotation) was +written before this epistle, and here appealed to as to a book of +divine authority. And although it is perfectly consistent with such a +supposition, yet there is great room to doubt whether such was the +fact. Or, at least, there is room to conjecture that the gospel of +Matthew might have been written before this epistle, and yet not +written till after the destruction of Jerusalem. + +"Speaking of the writers of this period, Dr. Priestly observes[7] 'The +oldest work of the age, if it had been genuine, is that which goes by +the name of _The epistle of Barnabas_. Whoever was the author of this +epistle, it was probably written soon after the destruction of +Jerusalem.--It abounds with interpretations of the Old Testament which +discover more of imagination, than judgement.' By this you will +perceive that the authority of this epistle is doubtful. I should also +have gathered the same idea, from what Paley himself says, whose work +I have examined, on this subject, since I wrote my last number. It +might have been written at a much later period than what is supposed +and palmed upon Barnabas; and therefore does not, as was supposed, +absolutely prove that the gospel of Matthew was written prior to the +destruction of Jerusalem. It seems that christians of a later period +were in the habit of palming works upon their predecessors; or in +other words, writing in their name. After speaking of the epistle of +Clemens, Priestly observes (p. 301) there is extant another epistle +ascribed to this Clemens, but it is evidently spurious, and was +probably written in the middle of the third century. Several other +writings were palmed upon him also, especially the _Apostolical +Constitution_ and the _Clementine homilies_. The epistle of Barnabas, +it seems, is first quoted by Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 194. This +certainly gives room for my conjecture for aught which appears to the +contrary, it might have been written a whole century after the days of +the apostles. + +[Footnote 7: Ch. Hist. vol. i. p. 200.] + +"The next which Paley mentions is an epistle written by Clement, +bishop of Rome. This is the same which Priestly calls _Clemens_. 'This +epistle,' he says, 'was held in the highest esteem by all christians, +and, like the scriptures, was publicly read in many churches.' In this +epistle of _Clement_, you say, 'he quotes Matt. v. 7. xviii. 6.' But +how does he quote those passages? Not as the writing of Matthew, but +as the words of 'our Lord.' Although this therefore, as I have before +suggested, is perfectly consistent with the supposed truth, it falls +far short, in my mind, of proving that the gospel of Matthew, was +written before this epistle. Clement or Clemens might have written +this by tradition even if he had never seen the gospel of Matthew, or +any other. It only proves that these words in the gospel and those in +the epistle were indebted to the same original source, viz. the words +of Jesus. I am not disposed to dispute, however, the genuineness of +this epistle. 'It is an earnest dissuasive,' says Priestly, 'from the +spirit of faction, which appeared in the church of Corinth, and which, +indeed, was sufficiently conspicuous when Paul wrote his epistles.' + +"'Another work of doubtful authority,' says Priestly, 'is _the +Shepherd of Hermes_, by some thought to be that Hermes who is +mentioned by Paul in his epistle to the Romans; but by others supposed +to be either spurious, or to have been written by a later Hermes, or +rather Hermes, brother of Pius, bishop of Rome, about the year 140. +Whoever was the author of this work (and though it was so much +esteemed by many christians, as to be publicly read in their churches) +it is certainly a very poor performance.' If this work therefore be of +so late a date, as, according to this account, it may be, and, from +all which appears to the contrary, we may presume it is, as the first +quotation of it is by Irenaeus, A. D. 178, it falls short of the proof +we want. + +"The same observations will apply to the allusions to the gospels in +the epistles of _Ignatius_, as was mentioned in regard to the epistle +of _Clement_. They are not literal quotations, and therefore might +have been only traditions. I consider them no certain proof that the +gospels were written previous to this time, though it is very natural +to suppose _that_ to have been the fact. The same will apply to the +epistle of _Polycarp_, as we know not exactly what was meant at that +time by the scriptures; neither do allusions to certain passages in +the scriptures, especially such as the words of Jesus, prove the +existence of those scriptures at that time. + +"In the time of Eusebius there were extant _five books of Papias, +bishop of_ Hierapolis in Syria, of _the interpretation of the divine +oracles_. 'Papias,' says Priestly, 'was a great collector of the +sayings of the apostles; and one of the traditions preserved by him +was that, after the resurrection, Christ would reign upon earth a +thousand years, an opinion which, from his authority, was long +respected by many.'[8] Papias, it seems, is the first who speaks of +the gospels by name, and he mentions only Matthew and Mark. That all +the gospels, however, existed in his day, and also bore the names +which they now do, I should not be disposed to dispute; neither is +there any thing to contradict the idea of their being written by the +persons reputed to be the authors of them. + +[Footnote 8: Ch. Hist. vol. i. p. 203 Euseb. Hist. Lib. iii. Cap. 39 +p. 135.] + +"But, supposing a few of these first bishops had taken it into ther +heads, having succeeded so well, during a little respite from +persecution, in consequence of those troublesome times at the +destruction of Jerusalem, as to get appointed to their respective +offices, and thinking it would lead greatly to their future success, I +say, supposing they had taken it into their heads to write the four +gospels and the acts of the apostles themselves, embracing all the +traditions, which they knew, of the apostles, dressed up in the +figurative style in which those things, even from the first, had been +reported, together with many fictions of their own. And that they did +write these books in the name of the apostles; who would be likely, or +would be able, to contradict them? Or supposing, without any previous +concert, some one should have written the gospel of Matthew; another, +after having seen it, should write one in the name of Mark; a third, +who had seen them both, should write that of Luke, and the acts of the +apostles; and a fourth should write that of John.--These, of course, +would make their first appearance at different times, and in different +parts of the country; or, in other words, in different countries. Some +story or other might have been got up, in regard to their first +discovery, which should go currently with the common people, and +which, after the works were received as canonical, would of course be +done away. + +"As a justification of the above hypothesis (which I am very sensible +is not without its difficulties) in addition to what have said in +regard to the writings palmed upon Clemens, I will mention the +following from Priestly's Ch. Hist. vol. ii. p. 412. It appears to +have been a quotation from Sozomen, by Socrates, Lib. vii. chap. 19, +p. 307. '_The revelation of Peter_, which is rejected as a spurious +book by the ancients, is read once every year in some churches in +Palestine on good Friday, which is a religious fast in commemoration +of our Lord's sufferings. The book that is called the _revelation of +the apostle Paul_, which was unknown to the ancients, is greatly +commended by many of the monks. Some say that this book was first +found in the reign of Theodosius. For they say that in the house of +Paul at Tarsus, there was a marble chest in a subterraneous place, in +which this book was deposited, and that it was discovered by a +particular revelation.' + +"Any work of this kind, got up at so late a period as that of the +reign of Theodosius, would not be likely to be generally received +among the churches; yet if it could be received by any, why might not +a similar work, or similar works, which made their appearance so soon +after the apostles, as might well be supposed to have been written by +them and when too, the churches were few in number, without the least +suspicion of fraud, have been received by all? Or if any fraud had +been suspected, yet, believing in the main thing which all these were +designed to support, those frauds whatever they _were_, might have +been considered really _pious_! + +"But, sir, you will perceive that I am not altogether pleased, nor +fully satisfied, with this argument. I know it has its difficulties; +but the question is, whether it has greater than the one which it is +brought to oppose? The question is _not_, whether these things look +probable? For I acknowledge they do not look probable. But the +question is, which is the most _incredible_; either that the above +hypothesis, or something like it, should be true; or else that the +extraordinary miracles, related in the books referred to, should be +true? If there were no better evidence in favor of the miracles than +that which I have been examining, I should be obliged to decide +against the latter, let me think what I might respecting the former. +The most that we can say of this testimony is, it does not contradict +the truth of those histories, but, so far as it goes, it is perfectly +consistent with the truth of the main question. The weight of this +testimony therefore, whatever it is, seems to be on the side of the +truth of christianity. + +"But what carries the most conviction to my mind is _not_ who wrote +those books; not the manner in which they have been handed down to us, +nor in which they can now be traced to the apostles; but the manner in +which the _story itself is_ told. It must be confessed that, excepting +a few things, which may be supposed to have been early interpolations, +it carries in it all the internal marks of TRUTH. When this is +admitted, we must also admit the propriety of bringing in these +external evidences as auxiliaries; and when we find that they also, +instead of being contradictory _to_, are perfectly consistent _with_ +the supposed truth, they add _not a little_ to the weight of +testimony. Hence we find that our faith is strengthened by the +consideration of circumstances, which would not have been sufficient, +in themselves alone, to have originated, or produced, that faith. The +question may be still asked, why do you now believe? To which I give +this plain and simple answer. It is because, notwithstanding the +_incredibility_ of the miracles of Christ, and of the apostles, and +the resurrection, the truth of which these miracles go to confirm and +substantiate; yet, the idea that this story should ever have been told +in the manner it is, without having truth for its foundation, in spite +of all my _incredibility_, is still more _incredible_! And it is my +humble opinion that whoever will give themselves the trouble, to pay +the same attention to the subject, must be of the same opinion: for, I +am inclined to think that no one has been more predisposed to +unbelief. Not that I ever felt any real opposition to the truth of the +holy scriptures, as I now understand them, but I did not wish to be +deceived. I had rather that my hopes and expectations should never be +raised, than to have them raised upon a fruitless or spurious +foundation. + +"But after all, it will be perceived that I make no pretensions to a +_miraculous_, or _mysterious_, conversion. My conversion, whatever it +is, is altogether rational. It grows out of the evidence which I +plainly have before my eyes. And it is my humble opinion that those +who pretend to such conversions ought to be able to confirm the same +by miracles, the same as the truth was first confirmed; and unless +they can do it, it ought to be considered as nothing more than mere +_pretension_.--According to the ideas of some, and of much too of that +which is termed _orthodox_, every conversion is as much a _miracle_ as +was the resurrection of Christ. But as this is a fact, which if true, +is entirely out of sight of the unconverted, and of which they can +form no conception, nor judge of it in any sense whatever, is it not +reasonable that they should have a demonstration of its truth, by some +fact, of the truth of which they can judge, that they may know that +the work is of God? And until we have such demonstration, may we not +consider all such pretensions to be of men? + +"With these remarks I hasten to a _CONCLUSION_. + +"In taking leave of this subject, considering it probable that these +letters will, at some future time, come before the public, it is but +just that I should more fully avow my motives in this controversy. You +will have perceived, all along, the ground on which I stood. I have +endeavoured to personate an honest inquirer after truth; but one who +was filled with doubts concerning every thing of which there is not +positive demonstration. How far I have acted up to such a character, +you and the public can best judge. + +"I thought, however, I should be the most likely to do this, by +bringing those objections, and these only, which, at one time or +another, have occupied my own mind. But, that the controversy might +not appear as a mere _farce_, or like a man raising objections against +himself (in which case he generally takes care to raise none but what +he thinks he can answer) and that I might engage all your interest and +energy on the subject, I have carried the idea, through the whole, +both by my letters and by my private conversation with you during the +time (as you very well know) that those objections were now laboring +in my mind with all their force. I have therefore endeavoured to +dispute every inch of ground, and give way only as I found myself +obliged to give way, by the force of your arguments. That I have not +acted my part better must be imputed to want of ability and not to +want of good will. I have endeavoured to throw every block in your way +which I could think of, without deviating from the character which I +had assumed; and that I have not made your task more arduous, is +because I did not see how I could do it without betraying a manifest +dishonesty on my part. The result is such as I anticipated. + +"My real motive must be my only apology for the part I have taken. You +know that no work of the kind has ever been really and seriously +attempted by any one who is avowedly of our order; that our religious +opponents are continualiy throwing the gauntlet of aspersions at us, +as being nothing more than mere pretenders to christianity, but in +reality, _Deists_ in disguise. To repel, therefore, those charges, as +well as to let the unbelieving world know our views on this subject, I +thought a work of this kind was really needed. And it appeared to me +that the work, in the first place, would be more likely to be read, +and, in the end, more sure of success, to have it come forth by the +way of controversy, than what it would in any other way. + +"It is true, I may not have brought all the objections which some +would wish to have brought; but if what I have brought are so far +removed as not to remain a serious obstacle in the mind of candid +readers (which I conclude will be the case, with others, as it is with +me) then all objections may be as easily removed. + +"That this work may be an instrument, in the hands of God, of removing +the prejudices from the minds of many of our religious opponents, of +strengthening the faith of many who are wavering, and, as it were, +halting between two opinions, and of calling up the attention of those +who, like Gallis, 'care for none of these things,' is the sincere +prayer of: + +"Yours in the bonds of the gospel. + +"A. KNEELAND." + + * * * * * + +LETTER IX. + +_Dear sir, and brother_,--A careful perusal of your tenth number has +given me much satisfaction, and seems to suggest that my reply may be +general. You discover the rational ground on which your scruples are +removed, and state no difficulty that you do not surmount. + +I agree with you, that the gloomy doctrine of eternal misery, when by +the imagination it becomes incorporated into the system of divine +revelation, "reverses the whole scene," and renders that, which in its +divine and native beauty possesses the most powerful attractions, the +most deformed picture that ever repelled the human affections. It is +this heaven-dishonouring doctrine, so repugnant to and irreconcilable +with the known goodness of God manifested to all nations in his divine +providence, that has, more than any thing else, so buffeted all the +best feelings of man, as in thousands of instances to drive the heart +of benevolence to lay aside the scriptures to whose authority this +unmerciful doctrine has been erroneously ascribed. + +But let the scriptures be once considered as free from the above +horrible sentiment as in reality they are, they will then perfectly +correspond with the demonstrations of universal benevolence and grace, +rendered conspicuous in all the ways of God; they will also compare as +a perfect transcript of that inward light and love which renders man +an image of his ever adorable Creator. + +As the christian church emerges from the city of mystery Babylon and +its suburbs, and advances into the light of the wisdom of God, the +doctrine above mentioned loses its influence and its votaries; nor +will it be in the power of our self-styled orthodox clergy, long to +chain the public mind to such a forbidding absurdity. + +Nothing discovers the deplorable state of depravity, to which the +human mind is subject, by force of tradition, more than the unnatural +and absurd notion of enhancing future bliss, by beholding fellow +creatures of the nearest connexion in a state of indescribable misery, +there to remain time without end! + +It seems to us astonishing that parents were ever capable of causing +their children to pass through the fire to an idol, but what is this +compared with what our pious fathers and mothers have believed +concerning their children's sufferings in the eternal world, for the +glory of that God who is the Father of the spirits of all flesh? + +Tradition makes the most horrible things acceptable to the mind which +becomes blind to their deformity, and even the most detestable things, +desirable, by a certain feigned sanctity which it attaches to them. +But the charm once broken, the rational mind becomes transformed into +another image, totally different, and entirely repugnant to the things +which it before venerated as divine. You very justly remark, that if +truth be in any way connected with endless misery, you are not +reconciled to it; but the time has been when you and I viewed this +doctrine as an essential article of the faith of the gospel. What an +absurdity! Eternal misery an essential article of the faith of a +Saviour! + +And this very moment there are thousands who set their feet on this +vagary, believing it to be the only rock of safety. + +But we have reason to be thankful for our happy deliverance from such +a pernicious tradition; a tradition which has poisoned the doctrine of +the church, and hardened the hearts of Christian professors to such a +degree, that cruelty of the worst kind has become habitual. + +Will our _pious clergy_ contend against this charge? Let them account +then for all the persecutions, the anathemas, the hangings and the +burnings, which owe their origin to this doctrine of eternal misery. +Let them account for their own sermons, in our day, which sentence +age, middle age, and infancy to endless torture, for offences they +never heard of, nor will they ever be informed of them until they find +themselves in hell for what a man and a woman did thousands of years +before they were born, and of whom they never had heard one word in +the land of the living! This they as constantly preach as they contend +that man must be sensible of his fall in Adam, of the justice of his +being eternally miserable for that offence, and of pardon through the +atonement of Christ in this life, or be miserable forever hereafter; +for thousands in all ages have lived and died who never heard this +absurd story while on earth. + +Sir, we have no reason to wonder that religion is so little set by, +while it is held up in such a character. Let it put on the mild form +of the meek and humble Jesus, let it appear in the mercy of him who +said "the son of man came not to destroy men's lives but to save +them," let it be represented by its own similitude, by pouring oil and +wine into the wounds of an enemy, let it be heard when it declares in +apostolic language, God "will have all men to be saved, and to come +unto the knowledge of the truth," let its language be strictly +regarded when it informs us that charity is greater than faith or +hope, then it will be pure and undefiled before God and the Father; it +will engage the best affections of the human heart, and call to its +devotion all the energies of man. Who can count the damages which have +been occasioned by the preposterous error of setting up _faith_ as a +criterion of _charity_? Creed makers and creed defenders surely must +have been averse to St. Paul's sentiment concerning the superiority of +charity over faith; for they have sat charity at defiance with +undefined items in their creeds, which were acknowledged mysterious in +their own minds, and evidently repugnant to reason in the judgment of +those who were proscribed as heretics by their authority. + +Relative to my quotations from the epistle of Barnabas and others, +your argument, as far as it is intended to lessen our belief in the +genuineness of these epistles, has no direct bearing on the argument +which I endeavoured to support by them; for it makes no difference +_who wrote_ those epistles, it is their containing quotations from the +New Testament which gives them the consequence for which they were +quoted. + +In reply to what you say respecting Clement's not quoting Mat. v. 7, +xviii. 6. as the writing of St Matthew, but as the words of "our +Lord," I here set down Paley's answer. + +"It may be said, that, as Clement hath not used words of quotation, it +is not certain that he refers to any book whatever. The words of +Christ, which he has put down, he might himself have heard from the +apostles, or might have received them through the ordinary medium of +oral tradition. This has been said; but that no such inference can be +drawn from the absence of words of quotation is proved by the three +following considerations:--First, that Clement in the very same +manner, namely, without any mark of reference, uses a passage now +found in the epistle to the Romans;[9] which passage from the +peculiarity of the words which compose it, and from their order, it is +manifest that he must have taken from the book. The same remark may be +repeated of some very singular sentiments in the epistle to the +Hebrews. Secondly, that there are many sentences of St. Paul's epistle +to the Corinthians standing in Clement's epistle without any sign of +quotation, which yet are certainly quotations; because it appears that +Clement had St. Paul's epistle before him, inasmuch as in one place he +mentions it in terms too express to leave us in any doubt--'Take into +your hands the epistle of the blessed apostle Paul.' Thirdly, that +this method of adopting words of scripture, without reference or +acknowledgment, was, as will appear in the sequel, a method in general +use among the most ancient christian writers. These analogies not only +repel the objection, but cast the presumption on the other side; and +afford a considerable degree of positive proof that the words in +question have been borrowed from the places of scripture in which we +now find them."[10] + +[Footnote 9: Rom. i. 29.] + +[Footnote 10: Paley's Evidences, p. 109, 110.] + +I think, if we take into consideration the authority of external +evidence, especially if we duly consider how easily Celsus couid have +overthrown the gospels, if they had not been genuine, it must be +acknowledged sufficient, even of itself, to establish any matter of +fact however important, allowing no natural improbability were +involved in the fact. And this is as much as we want of external +evidence, of the sort refered to. + +But as even the internal evidences of scripture would be insufficient +to support their authority without the concurrence of external +evidence, so would the external be found wanting without the internal. +But these together are abundantly sufficient to establish the +credibility of this gospel, which is, like every thing else of the +work and wisdom of God, the wonder and admiration of the believing +soul. + +The purity of your motives in writing on the subject of our +discussion, will fully justify the exertions you have made to draw +forth such arguments as your brother has been enabled to adduce in +support of our common faith. I regret that my almost constant employ +on other subjects and other duties, has afforded so little time as I +have been able to devote to your queries, which, together with my want +of abilities to do justice to a subject of this importance is now an +embarrassment on my mind in regard to giving my consent to the +publication of this correspondence. And there is still another +circumstance which seems to operate as an objection to the publishing +of these letters, viz. the want of _extension of argument_ in many +instances, which would have been attended to, if the work had been +written for the conviction of common readers, which was not thought to +be necessary for the benefit of the mover of the queries. + +However, as all human productions are imperfect and ought so to be +considered, and especially those from your humble servant, I am +willing to appear to some disadvantage if any considerable advantage +may thereby result to the cause of Jesus Christ our Lord. + +I cannot close this valedictory epistle without a solemn +acknowledgement of heart felt gratitude to the merciful disposer of +all events, for the ample evidence which his providence and grace have +given of the truth of our religion, especially when consider the +glorious hope set before us; and am permitted to anticipate the +promised era when there shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor +crying; when there shall be no more pain; but when tears shall be +wiped from all faces, and the rebuke of the nations removed from off +all the earth, and every creature in heaven, and on the earth, and +under the earth, and such as are in the sea shall harmoniously ascribe +blessing, and glory, and honor unto him who sitteth upon the throne +and unto the lamb forever and ever, I loose myself in the +contemplation of the transporting scene. + +To conclude, as you, my brother, have laboured together with your +fellow servant, to look into, and examine these things which belong to +the kingdom of righteousness, and as we have been favoured with mutual +satisfaction in these researches, may it please the Great Head of the +church still to hold us in his hand, still to engage us in his blessed +cause, and render our mutual labours promotive of his grace among men. +And however distant from each other it may best suit the captain of +our salvation to place us, may it be his pleasure to continue our +fellowship in the bonds of the gospel. + +Yours affectionately, + +H. BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +A SERIES OF LETTERS, BETWEEN +THE REV. JOSEPH BUCKMINSTER, D.D. +THE REV. JOSEPH WALTON, A.M. +PASTORS OF CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES IN PORTSMOUTH, N.H. +AND THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU. + + +A SERIES OF LETTERS + + +LETTER I. + +FROM THE REV. JOSEPH BUCKMINSTER TO THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU. + +PORTSMOUTH, DEC. 28, 1809. + +_Dear Sir_,--At the close of the interview which we had at my house, +some little time since, you expressed a wish to live in habits of +friendship with the ministers of this town, and I think I expressed a +hope that I should be always disposed to treat you and all men with +those fruits of benevolence and friendship which the law of our common +nature and the spirit and principles of the Christian religion, demand +of me; with this profession, without its fruits, my conscience is not +satisfied. It was neither friendship nor piety that dictated that +early question, "_Am I my brother's keeper_?"--There is a reciprocal +responsibility among mankind, both for the interest of time and +eternity. Were I to see you or any others exposing themselves to +danger, or running into situations that I apprehend would be +prejudicial and destructive, friendship would require me to warn and +admonish, and endeavour to restrain; and can I support my pretensions +to this principle in withholding my warning and admonition, while I am +verily persuaded that the present tendency and final issue of that +system of sentiments which you have embraced, and which you have come +among us to advocate and to support, will expose you, and those that +embrace and build upon it, to danger and distress, with which no +temporal calamity or ruin can bear any sort of comparison? + +I know not what system of Universalism you have embraced or advocate, +nor is it of any material consequence in my view; I presume I do not +mistake or injure you in supposing that you publicly preach and +advocate the final salvation of all mankind, their restoration and +association with Jesus Christ in realms of glory. Whatever human +ingenuity or plausible and sophistic reasoning may do with respect to +either of these systems, they each and all of them are, in my view, +destitute of divine authority, and have not a "thus saith the Lord," +for their support. + +There may be some little difference in the present tendency and effect +of these different systems upon the present conduct of men, and so +upon the interest of society; but in their general influence, and in +their final results, they meet in the same point, and will be attended +with the same dreadful consequences. They are neither of them true, +and so can have no effect in quickening into life or sanctifying the +soul, for it is the _spirit_ that _quickeneth_, and the _truth_ that +_sanctifieth_; they may exhilarate, please, and produce triumph; but +it will be a triumphing that is short, and a joy that is but for a +moment; for God, to my apprehension, has been so far from giving any +countenance to either of those systems, that he hath long ago +pronounced them false, and their tendency destructive--these are his +words:"_Because with lies ye have made the hearts of the righteous +sad, whom I have not made sad, and strengthened the hands of the +wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way by promising him +life_." But it is not my intention to enter into a dispute upon this +subject, neither to enlarge upon arguments to support my own +sentiments, nor to disprove yours; I have no apprehension that any +good would result from it; it would be a tax upon time that might be +better employed. + +When persons have adopted a system and are engaged in its support, +when the pride of peculiarity or the influence of party views are +enlisted as auxiliaries, there is little ground to hope for a +conviction of its errors by formal disputation, however temperately +conducted; nothing will effect a change of views and feelings but +"_that still small voice_" which induced the prophet to wrap his face +in his mantle. This voice is more likely to attend our calm, retired +reflections, than the perusal of arguments that tend to disprove what +we have been accustomed to advocate and support. + +The object of this letter is not to revile, to censure, nor to +dispute; but, in friendship and affection, to entreat you to reflect +and consider the consequences to yourself and others of that system of +sentiments which you are advocating--anticipate the day of judgment, +and realize yourself called upon to give an account of your +stewardship. I am not disposed, my dear sir, to impeach your sincerity +and honesty. I know how far men may be deluded and deceived. I am +disposed to believe that you conscientiously think the sentiments you +advocate are true. But remember, dear sir, this does not make them +true, nor secure you from the dreadful consequences in which they may +issue. With all this moral sincerity and uprightness, if you cease to +warn the wicked, that he turn from his wicked way (and how can this be +more effectually done than by leading him to expect final, everlasting +happiness) his blood will be required at your hands. The apostle Paul +most conscientiously persecuted the christians and declared to the +council before whom he was arraigned, that he had lived in all good +conscience before God till that day. He verily thought he ought to do +many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth, yet his +persuasion did not acquit him from guilt, nor would it have shielded +him from destruction had he not been renewed to repentance and faith +in Christ, while as yet Christ was in the way with him. Christ said to +his disciples, "The time will come when whosoever killeth you will +think he doth God's service;" and he has added, "many will say unto +me, in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and +in thy name cast out devils, and in thy name done many wonderful +works? then will I profess unto them, I never knew you, depart from me +ye that work iniquity." What must be your situation in the day of +retribution if the system you advocate should in final evidence prove +false? of which I have not the least shadow of doubt upon my mind, and +therefore have all the forebodings for my erring and deceived fellow +mortals which may be supposed to be the result of such conviction.--I +cannot cease to warn and to entreat you to consider, friendship +forbids, my withholding the voice of warning and adjuration; and both +duty and respect to my own safety require me to endeavour to save you +from the issue, of which I have such awful forebodings. We must both +stand before the Son of man, and each one must give an account of +himself and of his stewardship to God.--From our connextion here, +there will probably be some interest in each other in that day; and I +cannot bear the thought of your being able to say when the scheme of +Universalism shall all vanish like the baseless fabric of a vision, +and all the hopes built upon it will be like the spider's web and like +the giving up of the ghost, that you should be able to say, I never +warned you of this issue, nor admonished you of your danger. + +I know not with what sentiments you will receive this address, nor +what use you may make of it; my concern is with the sentiments and +spirit that dictate it. I think they are such as will induce me +continually to pray that you may not pierce yourself through with many +sorrows, nor be left to mourn at the last. + +Your friend and humble servant, + +J. BUCKMINSTER. + + * * * * * + +LETTER II. + +FROM THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU TO THE REV. JOSEPH BUCKMINSTER. + +PORTSMOUTH, JAN'Y. 1, 1810. + +_Rev. Sir_,--The receipt of your affectionate, friendly address, +bearing date December 28, 1809, is gratefully acknowledged, and +although I have not words fully adequate to express the satisfaction I +feel arising from the circumstance and spirit of your epistle, I +cannot be willing to suppress my feelings so much as not to notice, +that it is with uncommon pleasure that I appreciate your favour, +which, I am happy to acknowledge, is a demonstration of that +friendship first reciprocated at your house, and secondly +recapitulated in your epistle. This friendship founded, as you justly +observe, in the _law_ of our _common nature_ and in the _spirit_ and +_principles_ of the _christian religion_, is such an inexhaustible +treasure of moral riches that the aggregate sum of earthly wealth is +poverty in the comparison. + +This friendship, sir, being founded on such principles, will +undoubtedly last as long as such principles remain; and if you are my +real friend on the principle of the law of our common nature, so long +as you possess the law of our common nature, you will be my real +friend; and if you are my real friend, on the principles and spirit of +the christian religion, so long as you possess the principles and +spirit of the christian religion, you will remain my real friend. And +if I be, as I trust in God I am, your real friend, on those +imperishable principles, I shall continue to possess this friendship +for you so long as I possess those principles. If these observations +on friendship be correct, as I conceive they are, you will know why I +so highly prize the treasure, especially when I find it in a man +capable of exercising it to so much advantage as your learning, +ability and experience enable you to do. You justly observe that +neither piety nor friendship dictated the question, "Am I my brother's +keeper?" How different must have been the spirit which dictated that +question from the spirit of him who saith, I will declare thy name +unto my brethren, my mother's children were angry with me, they made +me the keeper of the vineyards, but mine own vineyard have I not kept? + +Your next observation is highly worthy, not only of general +consideration, but of particular notice; and I am the more pleased +with it on account of its falling from your pen as I am sure you must +understand the truths which are necessarily connected with the one +expressed in the observation; your words are, "there is a reciprocal +responsibility among mankind both for the interest of time and +eternity." As it cannot reasonably require any argument to discover +the propriety of supposing that the eternal interest of mankind is +connected with eternal causes and predicated on eternal principles, so +when it is acknowledged that a reciprocal responsibility exists among +mankind for their eternal interest, it is evident that this reciprocal +responsibility is eternal. Should any conviction of mind render it +necessary that we give up the idea of the eternal nature of this +reciprocal responsibility, that conviction would drive the idea of +eternal interest, predicated on such responsibility from our mind. How +noble are your sentiments communicated in this observation! How rich +must you and I feel in the enjoyment of such reciprocal principles and +in the consequent interest arising from them; not only for time, but +for eternity! + +You very justly observe again--"Were I to see you or any others +exposing themselves to danger or running into situations which I +apprehended would be destructive, friendship would require me to warn +and admonish, and to endeavour to restrain." These expressions, sir, +illustrate the good fruits of real friendship, and as our Saviour has +told us that the tree is known by its fruits, so we are to distinguish +between real and pretended friends by their fruits. Suppose, sir, we +move the position a little, and say, notwithstanding you warn me and +endeavour to restrain me from danger, I persist in my error, and my +calamity comes upon me; in this situation you come and tell me that +you are heartily glad that I am tormented, and that you are glad to +think there is no probability of my misery's being any less; that you +feel no pity for me now; could I look back and remember your warning, +and believe that you warned me out of real friendship? We have just +seen that friendship predicated on the law of our common nature and on +the principles and spirit of the Christian religion must necessarily +be as durable as those eternal principles. It is no less the +characteristic of real friendship to endeavour to meliorate than to +preserve from sufferings. + +On observing your admonitions, and believing you sincere in them, I am +led to say, that had I such a friend as you are who possessed the +means for making me eternally happy, I might entertain no doubt of +obtaining the inestimable enjoyment; nor do I view you, sir, less a +friend because you do not possess a power which is equal to the +putting of all your friendly desires into full execution, but will +acknowledge you my worthy friend, and accept the warnings which you +give me against the system of doctrine which, as you say, I have +embraced and come among this people to advocate, as a token of that +friendship which would, if connected with suitable power, place me out +of all final danger, or which would cause you to rejoice exceedingly, +had you the evidence to believe that one who has such power possesses +even stronger desires for my eternal welfare than you do. + +You inform me that you do not know what system of Universalism I have +embraced. Permit me, sir, to inform you, though you do not request it, +that I have embraced the system of Universalism, which Abraham, Isaac, +and Jacob embraced, in believing God, who said, "In thee shall all the +families of the earth be blessed; and in thy seed shall all the +nations of the earth be blessed." If this faith of Abraham were +imputed to him for righteousness, it must be a true faith, and if +true, worthy to be embraced by all nations and families of the earth, +without the exception of an individual. Permit me further to observe +that I disclaim all authors as divine guides, except the divine author +of those scriptures which cannot be broken. + +You rightly apprehend me in supposing that I believe and teach that +all mankind will be saved, restored and associated with Christ Jesus +in realms of glory; but I do not believe as you intimate, that human +ingenuity, or plausible and sophistic reasoning are necessary to the +support of this doctrine among men; nor will I attempt to say how +sorry I am that you should declare the doctrine not true until you had +produced a "_thus saith the Lord_" to prove it false; or that you +should intimate that I am employing human ingenuity or plausible and +sophistic reasoning to support the universal benevolence of God until +the disagreeable circumstance should transpire, in which I might be +justly thus charged. + +Although in order to please myself, I might explain your meaning as +directed against some others of the advocates of the heavenly gospel +of universal salvation; I could find but little satisfaction in thus +endeavoring to avoid any reproach which is directed against the true +disciples of my divine Master. + +You inform me that as universal salvation is not true, "it can have no +effect in quickening into life or of sanctifying the soul, for it is +the spirit that quickeneth, and the truth, which sanctifies." If, dear +sir, you do not believe that the spirit of salvation quickeneth into +life, would it not have been proper to inform me what spirit does? And +I should have highly esteemed an illustration of the evidence which +you have, that the truth, _that mankind will remain eternally +unsanctified_, will sanctify the soul! I fully believe that as far as +any proposition is capable of being proved from the written word, or +of being demonstrated by logical reasoning from acknowledged facts, +the doctrine of the salvation of all men is capable of being proved +and substantially maintained. Does it require human ingenuity or +plausible and sophistic reasoning to make it appear from the +scriptures that Jesus Christ, by the grace of God, tasted death for +every man; that he gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in +due time; that he is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world; +that it is the will of God that all men should be saved and come to +the knowledge of the truth; that he worketh all things after the +council of his own will?--Does it require this ingenuity, &c. to +substantiate from the written word that the promise to Abraham will be +fulfilled, and that all nations whom God hath made shall come and +worship before him and glorify his name; that Jesus will in the +fulness of time, reconcile all things unto himself, whether they be +things in heaven or things on earth, or things under the earth; that +he will gather together in one all things in Christ both which are in +heaven and which are on earth, even in him? If it be an acknowledged +fact that God will bless all the families of the earth in Christ, that +all nations which God hath made shall come and worship before him and +glorify his name, that Jesus gave himseif a ransom for all men to be +testified in due time, that he did by the grace of God taste death for +every man, that he will have all men to be saved and come to the +knowledge of the truth, that he hath made known the mystery of his +will according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself, +that in the dispensation of the fulness of times, he would gather +together in one, all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and +which are on earth, and that he worketh all things after the council +of his own will, then the doctrine of the salvation of all men is as +fully acknowledged as language can possibly express, or my error lies +in not understanding the force of words and sentences. + +By what method, sir, would it be proper for me to express my surprise +at your introducing the words recorded in the 13th chapter of Ezekiel, +and at the 22d verse, as a testimony against the doctrine of universal +salvation? "Because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous +sad, whom I have not made sad, and strengthened the hands of the +wicked that he should not turn from his wicked way by promising him +life;"--Must I suppose, sir, that you believe, that the lies mentioned +in this quotation were promises of life in the seed of Abraham, in +whom all the families of the earth are to be blessed? I cannot believe +this of a man of your understanding, and yet cannot conceive why you +adduce this passage as proof that Christ is not the life of all men. +Is it not evident that those who were addressed in that text were such +as promised the people life in the vain traditions which they had +established, by which they made void the law? And what does the Lord +say that he would finally do in this case?--See verse 23d, "Therefore +ye shall see no more vanity, nor divine divinations; for I will +deliver my people out of your hands, and ye shall know that I am the +Lord." This is very far from saying that they should be endlessly +miserable. Christ is the Lord our righteousness, and his heart was +made sad by the traditions of the house of Israel and by the Rabbis +who promised the people life in their vain customs which they had +established for religion: and I would acknowledge this passage justly +urged against the doctrine which I should vindicate, should I set up +any thing but Christ and him crucified, on which to depend for life +and salvation; but you leave this quotation as if you had done what +you hardly meant to do, by observing that you do not intend to enter +into a dispute on this subject, neither to enlarge on arguments to +support your own sentiments nor to disprove mine. + +You think that no good would result from the argument however +temperately conducted it might be, assigning the pride of peculiarity, +and the influence of party views as sufficient barriers to prevent +success. In this observation may I say without offending, sir, you are +inexplicit, or wanting in propriety, and premature in application. +Temperate men are not governed in their religious researches by the +pride of peculiarity nor the influence of party views, and a faithful +trial ought to have been made in order to convince of error before the +charge of _pride of peculiarity_, or the influence of party views, +could with propriety have been made. I am disposed to believe when +persons are candid and temperate in an investigation, they generally +obtain light and edification. I will say for myself, notwithstanding I +highly prize your solemn warnings, and believe them as proceeding from +the most commendable sentiments of friendship, I should have been much +pleased if you had accompanied them with the best and most forcible +arguments of which you are master, against the doctrine which you are +disposed to say in so many words "_it not true_." The small still +voice to which you recommended my attention has never told me that +Christ was not the Saviour of all men. + +May we not suppose that this voice is uniform in its testimony? Do +tell me, sir, if that voice ever told you that it was not the will of +God that all men should be saved! Is it not by the influence of the +spirit of this voice that you pray for the salvation of all men? And +would this small still voice tell you that it is not God's will to +save all men, and then induce you to pray for all men? If I be not a +stranger to this heavenly voice which teaches me to wrap myself in my +mantle, the Lord my righteousness, it influences me to pray in faith, +nothing doubting, for the salvation of all men. + +In your truly affecting entreaty you direct my mind to the day of +judgment when I am called to give an account of my stewardship, and +ask what my situation must be, if the system I advocate should in +final evidence, prove false? I have seriously thought on this +question; and this is my conclusion: My judge will know that I am, in +this instance, honest and sincere; he will know how hardly I wrestled +against his written word in order to avoid believing that he would +save all men, and he will know that my deception was in understanding +his word as a simple, honest man would understand a plain testimony +void of scholastic dress. In this case I am willing to throw myself on +the mercy of the judge. On the other hand, dear sir, I have made a +calculation too. Suppose I adhere to your testimony, that the doctrine +I believe is not true, and abandon it as a heresy, preach it down to +the utmost of my ability, and the doctrine at last, when you and I +stand before that judge who knows the hearts of all men, should in +final evidence of the law and prophets, prove true, of which I have +not the least shadow of doubt in my mind, with what a blush must I +give up my account! My judge who has suffered every thing for me, asks +me, why did you deny me, forsake my cause, and use the abilities which +I gave you to preach that dishonourable doctrine that I did not redeem +all men, or that I would not finally reconcile all men to myself, and +cause them all to love me heartily in bliss and glory? I, abashed +beyond description, must answer, a man, who, I conceived was my friend +and who preached that God my Saviour, never intended to save all men, +told me the doctrine I preached was _not true_! O, how would my soul +thrill with grief when a look, such as was cast on Peter after he +denied his Lord, should accompany this question, and who told you in +the first place it was true? + +I appeal to the searcher of hearts for the sincerity of my soul when I +say, my dear sir, I feel an uncommon desire to cultivate friendship +with you, and were it possible for me to gratify you in any thing that +should be consistent with my duty to my God, I think I should not +shrink from the service; but should the multitude, whose hearts have +been made joyful in the salvation of all men, become so blinded as to +renounce the sentiments, I must remain unshaken, until more than human +testimony stands against the doctrine. + +I am very sensible of the propriety of the observation, that the +sincerity of a belief does not prove the thing believed to be true; +for though I cannot say so much as you do, viz. "that I know how far +men may be deluded and deceived," yet I am sensible that men may be +deceived and yet be honest; and it is on this ground, that I have +charity for those who believe and preach different from me. + +Towards the conclusion of your epistle, you intimate that you wish not +to have me say at last, when my doctrine issues in my mourning, that +you had not warned me. Be assured, sir, if I may be so much at my own +disposal at the last day, that I will not say, you did not warn me; +but if my doctrine be false at last, and you are asked why you did not +prove from the written word to my understanding that I was in an +error, will you say in answer, that it would have been such a tax upon +time, that you could not afford it, that you could not or did not wish +to? As the passages which you quote on your last page are designed to +illustrate what I believe to be a fact, I forbear, at this time, an +illustration of them, in which, the impropriety of the common mode of +understanding them might be made to appear. Should you be disposed to +attempt to correct my ideas in this epistle, or my doctrine in +general, by turning to the great touchstone, the law and the +testimony, be as ample, sir, as your inclination and opportunity will +admit. Every argument shall be duly attended to with prayerful +solicitude to obtain conviction, if it can be found; and whatever +light I gain I will gratefully acknowledge, and wherein I do not agree +with you, I will give you my reasons. + +Your most obliged friend and humble servant, + +HOSEA BALLOU. + +Rev. J. BUCKMINSTER. + +P.S. If I have been so unfortunate, in the foregoing epistle make +choice of any words which indicate too much freedom, please to impute +it to a frankness which perhaps I sometimes indulge to a fault, and +not to any want of due respect. H.B. + + * * * * * + +LETTER III +FROM THE REV. JOSEPH BUCKMINSTER TO THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU. + +PORTSMOUTH, JAN. 10, 1810. + +_Dear Sir_,--It was not my intention, in the letter which I sometime +since addressed to you, to enter into a discussion of the subject of +Universalism, much less, for reasons that were suggested, provoke a +dispute upon it. I therefore endeavoured so to express myself that no +reply should be necessary. + +My object was to discharge what I thought a duty of friendship and +affection, rendered more necessary by my personal declarations to you +at my house, by stating to you with frankness and decision what I was +persuaded would be the final result of that sentiment which you have +embraced, and are advocating among us; and to fulfil a duty which I +owe to myself, and to Him who has set me here to be a watchman, that I +might use every proper precaution to appear before my Judge at last +with unstained garments, preclude an occasion for a crimination and +reproach, and give up my account with joy and not with grief. + +I might have a secret hope that the apprehensions so seriously and +candidly suggested might excite you to review your sentiments, and +renewedly compare them with the only standard, and that this serious, +calm and retired exercise might be accompanied with an influence from +above, that might alter your views and conclusions upon the subject; +but my principal design was to discharge what I thought my duty as +above stated. You have thought it your duty to remark upon the +address, and intimate an expectation that I should rejoin; your +professions and candor have induced me for a time, to hesitate whether +I ought not, in this instance, to depart from my general resolutions, +and this hesitation has had influence in my delay to notice your +letter. But the result of my hesitations, reflections and prayer, is a +more full persuasion, that if the writings of Dr. Edwards, Dr. Strong +and others who have discussed the subject, and which doubtless you +have seen, have produced no hesitation or conviction in your mind, it +would be vain and idle to expect it from any efforts of mine; and that +it would be a misuse of time, which might be employed in more hopeful +prospects of usefulness. This is a reason which I at present feel +satisfied to give to God and my conscience for declining to enter upon +a discussion of this subject, and I trust it will be accepted at the +tribunal of God. To that tribunal I humbly and cheerfully refer the +decision of the question that would be matter of dispute between us, +from which decision there will be no appeal, and to which there will +be no liberty to reply. I reciprocate the tender of every office of +friendship consistent with what I think my duty to God and my +conscience, and shall not cease to pray that those who have erred from +the truth may be recovered from their errors, and being sanctified by +the truth, may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your friend and +well wisher. + +J. BUCKMINSTER. + + * * * * * + +LETTER IV. + +FROM THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU TO THE REV. JOSEPH BUCKMINSTER. + +PORTSMOUTH, JAN. 11, 1810. + +_Rev. Sir_,--Your favour of yesterday is acknowledged with that +respectful submission which your age and experience, together with the +spirit and import of your note justly impose, and with gratitude also, +for an obligation which I wished to be under in being satisfied of +your having received my epistle of the 1st inst. This I learn by the +friendly rebuke in your first section in which you speak of my reply +as unnecessary, and also by your condescending to refer to it again in +your fourth section. Had I, sir, viewed your address altogether in the +light which you inform me you did, or had you informed me that a reply +would not be expected, I should by no means have troubled you contrary +to your wishes. However, as you are an experienced judge of all such +matters, so you will condescend to pardon me if in your judgment my +epistle is destitute of important subjects. You are so kind as to +repeat the design of your address again, certifying me that your +object was to discharge the office of friendship, by stating to me +with frankness and decision what you are persuaded will be the final +result of that sentiment which I have embraced and am advocating. No +man, sir, will ever be more ready to acknowledge a friendly office +with sentiments of gratitude than your humble servant; but I am sure +it cannot be expected by you, that I should receive the testimony of a +man, however friendly to me, as a decision against that gospel which I +did not receive of man, nor by man, but by the revelation of Jesus +Christ. + +Your precautions in warning me as they regard your final justification +before God, I hope will be superceded by the acceptable atonement of +the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world; though that +shall not render your faithfulness void of approbation in a +subordinate sense. The secret hope which you entertained of exciting +me, by your serious apprehensions to review my sentiments and +renewedly to compare them with the only standard, would perhaps appear +not altogether so necessary, did you know that my daily business is to +study the law and the testimony, which increase their light as they +are more examined, and furnish every hour I study them, new proofs of +the unbounded goodness of God to the sinful race of Adam. O my dear +friend! Could you but know the inexpressible consolation and peace +which I enjoy in believing that he, who gave himself a ransom for all +men, will finally see of the travail of his soul, and be satisfied, +you could not feel concerned about the final issue of the doctrine +which I believe and advocate! + +I feel that my blessed Lord and kind Redeemer deserves every exertion +of mine to persuade men to the knowledge of that truth which would +make them free; nor can I easily forbear to express my desire that +your greater experience and better abilities might be employed in +shewing to poor benighted sinners the divine amplitude of gospel grace +for the salvation of all mankind. I believe, dear sir, if it should +please God to discover this soul rejoicing truth to you, that the +angels would rejoice in heaven, and saints on earth would be made +exceeding glad: yes, your church and parish would follow you with +rapturous joy to the fountain which is open for Judah and Jerusalem to +wash in from sin and uncleanness, and to which the fulness of the +Gentiles shall be gathered. + +I am not at all disposed to complain of your decision not to enter +into an investigation of the doctrine against the truth of which you +have opposed your testimony; though I should hardly have believed that +in your judgment, such a testimony could have been thought proper +unless preceded or succeeded by some colour of evidence. No man, my +dear sir, is less calculated to enjoy a dry, unfruitful controversy on +religious sentiments than I am--though I wish to hold myself in +perpetual readiness to give an answer to every man who may ask me a +reason for the hope that is within me with meekness and fear. + +The arguments of Dr. Edwards and Dr. Strong being disposed to +represent the divine economy of grace less extensive than the plain +and positive promises of God, the testimony of the prophets, the word +of life through Christ and the witnessing apostles, have declared it +to be, stand forever refuted by that cloud of witnesses, as they are +also by the spirit of Christ in every humble believing heart. It is +far more easy for the rational lover of Christ to believe those +learned doctors, deceived by the vain traditions of the schools, than +to believe that the grace of God in Christ Jesus is less extensive +than his word and spirit declare it to be. + +If there never were a true Christian whose desires did not extend to +the whole human race, that all might be brought to a saving repentance +and to holy and happy life in Christ, then Jesus has never left +himself without a witness in his disciples, that all the creeds of men +which limit the divine favour are false. With whatsoever panics worms +of the dust may have struck their fellow worms by challenging them to +a decision of their weak, insignificant notions at a tribunal of an +omnipotent judge, such solemn appeals can have but little effect on +the humble mind who leans not to his own wisdom, and who views every +thing already decided in the eternal system of that God whose tender +mercies are over all the works of his hands. + +The mode in which you express the circumstance of final judgment is +rather indicative of what I hope you do not mean, as it intimates that +too much freedom has been assumed by me in presuming to reply to your +address. There is much to excite my gratitude in the assurance you +give me of reciprocating offices of friendship, consistent with duty +to God;--and while you, sir, give me to understand that I have an +interest in your prayers, permit me to beg your supplications, that I +may be faithful unto death; and to assure you of my humble desire that +you may continue to be useful to your fellow pilgrims while you live, +and find acceptance with God through Christ at last. Your most obliged +friend and humble servant in Christ. HOSEA BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +A NOTE FROM THE REV. DR. BUCKMINSTER TO THE REV. MR. BALLOU. + +FRIDAY, P. M. + +It is a duty which Mr. Buckminster owes to himself to declare that the +thought of intimating that it was any assumption or presumption in Mr. +Ballou to reply to his address, never once entered his mind; and he is +sorry if any thing in Mr. Buckminster's communications could give +ground to suspect such foolish vanity; but it confirms the correctness +of the opinion, that _disputes however temperately conducted are +rarely productive of any good_. All that he meant was that the +decision at the tribunal of God would be final. + + * * * * * + +A NOTE FROM THE REV. MR. BALLOU TO THE REV. DR. BUCKMINSTER, +IN REPLY. + +SATURDAY, P. M. + +Mr. Ballou is happy to acknowledge the honour done him by the Doctor's +note of Friday, P. M. by which he realizes the hope expressed in his +epistle of the 11th inst, that what appeared to be intimated by the +Doctor's letter of the 10th inst. in relation to final judgment was +not meant. In the mean time Mr. Ballou thinks it a duty which he owes +to himself to point out to the Doctor the items in his letter which +were misunderstood. The Doctor's expression, "I therefore endeavoured +so to express myself that no reply should be necessary," was +understood to intimate that the reply was unnecessary; and the +Doctor's expression, "there will be no liberty to reply," was +understood to intimate that liberty had been assumed unnecessarily. In +confirming the opinion, that "_disputes however temperately conducted, +are rarely productive of any good_." Mr. Ballou thinks his mistake has +produced but little consequence, as that opinion was so confirmed +before, that even a reason for an assertion could not with propriety +be given. + + +LETTER I. + +FROM THE REV. JOSEPH WALTON TO THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU. + +PORTSMOUTH, Nov. 19, 1810. + +_Dear Friend_,--I take this method to write to you, with a desire you +would receive it as a friendly admonition. You recollect, no doubt, +that I have heard you make two speeches at funerals, as they are +commonly called, one at the grave and the other at the house of sorrow +and mourning, upon a very solemn and singular occasion. At the grave +you were short, and said, if I mistake not, viewing the grave, "this +is the house appointed for all living," two or three times, and then +said, "what reflection shall we make from it? is it done by an enemy? +has the Almighty suffered the government to be taken out of his +hands?"--and spake as if death was originally designed by the Almighty +for the good of mankind, and made it a very desirable thing. My dear +sir, doth not the bible, which is the word of God, or the scriptures +of truth say, "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and +death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have +sinned," Rom. v. 12, and Rom. vi. 23, "For the wages of sin is death." +God who is a gracious and holy sovereign "made man upright, but he +sought out many inventions." By listening unto that apostate spirit, +Satan, he transgressed and disobeyed his maker and sovereign, by +eating the forbidden fruit. "God made man in his own image, in the +image of God created he him, male and female created he them. And the +Lord God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden, to dress it +and to keep it; and the Lord God commanded the man, saying, of every +tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat, but of the tree of +knowledge of good and evil, thou shall not eat of it, for in the day +thou eatest thereof, thou shall surely die." Gen. ii. 15, 17. Sin is +that enemy that introduced or was the cause of death, as we may +further see by considering that portion of scripture, I John. iii. 8, +"He that committeth sin is of the devil, for the devil sinneth from +the beginning." For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that +he might destroy the works of the devil. Sin is the work of the devil; +"the soul that sins shall die." If you will read the whole chapter and +seriously consider it, and pray to God through Jesus Christ to open +your understanding, that you may understand the scriptures, you would +not misappply and pervert them as I fear you do. In your speaking at +the house of mourning, you began and spake very eloquently at first +upon death; then you brought forward the same ideas, with respect to +death, as you did before at the grave. I do not remember that you, at +either place, spake one word of the necessity or nature of repentance. +Christ began his personal and public ministry by preaching repentance, +saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand"--again, "but +except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish," Luke xiii. 5. And +after his resurrection from the dead he appeared to his disciples and +confirmed them in the certainty of it, and chose them witnesses of the +truth of it, and said "thus it is written, and thus it behoveth Christ +to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day. And that repentance +and remission of sins should be preached in my name among all nations, +beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things," Luke +xxiv. 46, 47, 48. The apostles, after Christ's ascension, practised as +he commanded them, as we may see by reading the Acts of the apostles, +Peter in particular, in the 2d and 3d chapters; and we do not find +that they ever gave any encouragement that their hearers could or +should be forgiven their sins without faith and repentance. Peter +says, "Repent, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out;" +which presupposes that if they did not repent and be turned to God by +converting grace their sins would not be forgiven. Thus the apostle +Paul preached, see Acts xxvi. 18, 19, 20, which I entreat you to read +and seriously to consider. See likewise 20th chap. of the Acts of the +apostles, how he appealed to the elders of the church; in the 17th +verse it is written, "And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called +the elders of the church; and when they were come to him he said unto +them, ye know from the first day I came into Asia after what manner I +have been with you at all seasons, serving the Lord with all humility +of mind, and with many tears and temptations which befell me, by the +lying in wait of the Jews; and how I kept back nothing that was +profitable unto you, but have shewed you and have taught you publicly +and from house to house, testifying both to the Jews and also to the +Greeks, repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus +Christ." The apostles spake of the nature of repentance that they +should bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and that Godly sorrow +worked repentance to salvation, not to be repented of; but the sorrow +of the world worketh death. For a minister of the New Testament to +advance such doctrine as will give hopes to their hearers that all +will be happy in a future state, whether they have repented or no, is +not preaching as Christ and his apostles preached. If we know not God, +and obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, what will be the +consequence? See 2 Thes. i. 8, 9. Ministers are directed by the +inspired apostle Paul; see in his epistles to Timothy and Titus. See 2 +Tim. 4th chap. from 1st to the end, the 5th verse, which I would +entreat and beseech you to read and seriously consider. He, in some of +those verses referred to, says to Timothy, "Reprove, rebuke, exhort, +with all long suffering and doctrine; for the time will come when men +will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall they +heap to themselves teachers having itching ears. And they shall turn +away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. But +watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an +evangelist, make proof of thy ministry." Paul was just about to leave +the world; the time of his departure was at hand; the above were his +dying words to his beloved son Timothy (in the faith.) The blessed and +beloved apostle had through grace kept the faith, that is, the true +faith of the gospel; he had finished his course, he had fought a good +fight, and henceforth he says, there is laid up for me a crown of +righteousness which God the righteous judge shall give me at that day; +and not only to me, but unto all them also, that love his appearing. +You, my friend, once professed the true faith of the gospel--have you +kept it? I think not. I fear you have fallen from it. You are now +preaching a doctrine which pleases the world, but it makes against +you, according to scripture; the apostle John says, in 1st epistle, +4th chap, 5th and 6th verses, "They are of the world; therefore the +world heareth them. We are of God; he that knoweth God heareth us; he +that is not of God heareth not us; hereby know we the spirit of truth, +and the spirit of error." I beseech you again, my friend, examine and +seriously consider the first five verses of that chapter, and pray God +through Jesus Christ that he would open it to your understanding: +Solomon says, "My son, lean not to your own understanding." I could +not but observe with what an _emphasis_ you at the grave mentioned +those selected texts of scripture which you supposed would confirm +your hearers in the doctrine of Universal Salvation. Would Christ or +the apostles preach Universal Salvation in one place of scripture, and +in another contradict it? I believe they would not. I am an _old man_, +and have studied the scriptures twenty or thirty years; yea, I may say +more or less from my youth up; I find it the best way of study, to +compare scripture with scripture; to consider the preceding and +following context; to be self-diffident; and to be much in prayer, +that it would please God, by his holy spirit, to lead and guide us +into all necessary truth; and I do not think it amiss to use sound +authors, for as we are in some measure dependant on one another for +temporal, so I think we may, under God, be for spiritual assistance; +though by no means to put our trust in an arm of flesh. + +We may observe how earnest David in prayer to God was in the 25th +Psalm. He was a prophet as well the royal Psalmist, yet he comes in a +very humble manner to God in prayer that he would shew him his ways, +and teach him his paths; and in that Psalm, 8th verse, says, "good and +upright is the Lord: therefore will he teach sinners in the way. The +meek will he guide in judgment; and the meek he will teach his way." +But if men will undertake to explain scripture in their own strength +and wisdom, what must we expect but to have them mangled and made +havoc of, or explained in a mere mystical or literal sense? "The +natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God: for they +are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are +spiritually discerned." See I Cor. ii. 14. + +As you did not say any thing about the resurrection of the dead in +either of your speeches, I began to query in my mind whether you +believed it or no. I think, yea, I know, it was preached by Christ, +and explained so as to confute the Sadducees. Our Lord says, "Marvel +not at this, for the hour is coming in the which all that are in their +graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done +good unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto +the resurrection of damnation." St. Paul in his defence before the +Roman governor when accused by an orator, whom the Jews employed, as +he was allowed to speak for himself, said, "they cannot prove the +thing, whereof they now accuse me; but this I confess after the way +which they call heresy; so worship I the God of my fathers, believing +all things which are written in the law and the prophets, and have +hope towards God, which they themselves also allow; that there shall +be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust; and herein +do I exercise myself to have always a conscience void of offence +toward God, and toward man." We may observe what an influence the +belief of a future state of rewards and punishments had on the blessed +apostle to excite him to live a godly and self-denying life. In 2 Cor. +v. 10, 11, speaking of a day of judgment, "when every one must give an +account for himself as the deeds have been done in the body, that +every one may receive the things done in his body according to that he +hath done whether it be good or bad;" and says, "knowing the terror of +the Lord, we persuade men." My friend, is there the least room for us +to believe from this scripture and many others, that the wicked who +have died impenitent and in a disbelief of the gospel or without the +true knowledge of God and Jesus Christ, whom God hath sent, have +eternal life, in the fruition and enjoyment of God? Heaven consists in +being made like God, and enjoying him: hence it is, that the pious +thirst for God, the living God, saying, when shall I come and appear +before him? Again, "Whom have I in heaven but thee? and there is none +upon earth I desire besides thee. My flesh and heart fail me, but God +is the strength of my heart and portion forever." These pious +breathings are the exercises of the children of God. O may they be +ours. + +JOSEPH WALTON. + +PORSTMOUTH, Nov. 19, 1810. + +P. S. The within, enclosed, my friend, I can assure you was not +written to you in this manner, as God is my judge, from an envious and +bitter spirit, for I love and esteem your person, as a friend, who +has, from my first acquaintance with you, treated me with great +respect. I see, on the Lord's days, great numbers of precious souls +going and returning from your meeting; and, as far as I know my own +heart, I do not envy you for that; but have often prayed that the +gifts and natural abilities you have might be sanctified and turned +into right improvements, which is the glory of God and the saving +benefit of your hearers. May it please God to make you an able and +faithful minister of the New Testament, not of the letter, but of the +spirit, for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. From your +friend and humble servant, JOSEPH WALTON, _Pastor, + +Of the Independent Congregational Church in Portsmouth_. + +TO MR. HOSEA BALLOU, PASTOR OF THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH AND +SOCIETY IN PORTSMOUTH. + +_Sir_,--You may observe by the date, the letter has been written some +time; but by several avocations I have not had time to correct and +copy it until the present date, December 7, 1810. + +J.W. + + * * * * * + +LETTER II. + +FROM THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU TO THE REV. JOSEPH WALTON. + +PORTSMOUTH, DEC. 11, 1810. + +_Rev. Sir_,--It is with pleasure that I hasten to acknowledge the +receipt of your "friendly admonition," bearing date December 7th, +which came to my hand late last evening, which I assure you is +accepted as a token of friendship, and a mark of particular attention; +and merits, as I conceive, a grateful acknowledgement as well as an +early answer. + +Your admonition begins by taking notice of what you conceive an +egregious error which you have heard me suggest at two several +funerals. You say that I "spake as if death was originally designed, +by the Almighty, for the good of mankind." This statement you consider +of such a dangerous nature that it renders an admonition necessary. +But, dear sir, there are two important ideas contained in the above +short sentence, and you have not distinguished between them, nor +informed me whether it be both, or only one which is thus +reprehensible. + +That _God originally designed death_, is one idea; that he _designed_ +it for the _good of mankind_ is another idea. In order to do you +justice and to attach no other meaning to your communication than such +as I conceive to be consistent with your real sentiments, I must +suppose that you would not wish to fault the first of those ideas, as +it is an item in your creed, that "God foreordained whatsoever comes +to pass;" of course, you believe that God _originally designed death_. +But, that God designed death for the _good of mankind_, I do not know +it to be an article of your faith, and therefore, may, without doing +you any injustice, suppose that you believed that God originally +designed death, but _not_ for _the good of mankind_! Here, sir, I +acknowledge that my sentiment differs from yours; and as you have +given me no reason why God should not have designed death for the +_good_ of mankind, I have only to consider the "friendly admonition," +with which you oppose my idea. I would query why the idea that God +should design death for the good of mankind renders me justly +admonishable? Would the idea, should I avow it, that God designed +death for the _damage_ of mankind, render me commendable? So, it +seems; but at this expense I cannot avoid admonition! I would further +query what interest God could have consulted which required him to +design death for a _damage_ to those creatures whom he made subject to +death? And I think it expedient to ask how God can be justified, in +the sight of his rational creatures, if the idea be once established +that he designed evil against them, even before they existed? + +I feel it to be my duty, dear sir, to call on you to support this high +allegation against the Father of our spirits. I would not pretend that +you designed to bring an allegation against our Creator, but I am +satisfied that every unprejudiced mind must see the nature of an +allegation in what you are disposed to maintain. For if we say God, +our Creator, designed death for the damage of those dependent beings +whom he has made, it is giving him a character which, I believe, the +wisest of men would find it difficult to justify. + +Again, if the notion be true, that God designed death for the damage +of mankind, is it not from hence evident that he was an enemy to +mankind when he thus designed? Now, if God be considered an enemy to +mankind even before he made them, I wish to know what reason can be +given why mankind ought to love God since creation? + +In relation to a number of scriptures which you have quoted, seemingly +with a design to illustrate the foregoing subject, I can only say, +that if any or all those passages relate at all to the subject, _that +relation_ is out of my sight. And I can truly say, that I am glad that +there is nothing, in any part of the scripture, so contrary to good +sense and reason as to support the notion that God is an enemy to the +works of his own hands. I believe, sir, if I prove from scripture that +God designed death for the good of mankind, it must be considered a +substantial support of what you wish to oppose; and will also be +considered as placing the scripture doctrine on the most reasonable +principle. + +1st. I will show that death is not a token of God's enmity towards +mankind. As a proof of this, see Rom. viii. 38, 39, "For I am +persuaded, that neither _death_, nor _life_, nor _angels_, nor +_principalities_, nor _powers_, nor _things present_, nor _things to +come_, nor _height_, nor _depth_, nor _any other creature_ shall be +able to separate us from the _love_ of God which is _in Christ Jesus +our Lord_." This passage is a full and positive proof that neither +_death_ nor any thing else, is a token of God's enmity to mankind. + +2d. I will now show that _death_ was designed by God for the _good_ of +men. Which to do, I must learn of Jesus. He is the truth. Was his +_death_ designed, by the eternal Father, for the good of mankind, or +not? Was his death a token of God's love to the world, or was it a +token of his enmity? See Rom. v. 8, "But God _commendeth_ his _love_ +towards us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us." This +same apostle, believing in Christ, who, he says, was delivered for our +offences, and was raised again for our justification, in a short, but +comprehensive inventory of the things which are ours, has placed +_death_ among them. See 1 Cor. iii. 21, 22, 23, "Therefore, let no man +glory in men: for all things are yours; whether Paul, or Apollos, or +Cephas, or the world, or life, or _death_, or things present, or +things to come; all are yours; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is +God's." Again, he says, to the Phil. i. 21, "For me to live is Christ, +and to _die_ is _gain_." Nothing appears more evident than that the +death of Christ was designed for the good of mankind; and as he is the +head of every man, so his death is considered, in the scriptures, a +gracious benefit to every man; as the apostle expresses it, "That he, +by the grace of God, should taste _death_ for every man." And again, +"As in Adam all die, even so in Christ, shall all be made alive." Who +can impartially consider those scriptures and suppose that God +designed _death_ for a damage to mankind? I view _death_, sir, as an +appointment of God, a friendly messenger, sent to dissolve a +tabernacle of corruption and vanity, at the dissolution of which, "the +dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit unto God who gave +it." + +Your admonition in the next place suggests, that "if" I "will read the +whole chapter (meaning the 3d chapter of the 1st of John) and +seriously consider it, and pray to God, through Jesus Christ, to open" +my "understanding, that" I "may understand the scriptures," I "would +not _misapply_ and _pervert_ them, as" you "fear" I "do." + +Rev. Sir, are you sufficiently acquainted with my preaching and +writing on the scriptures to warrant the propriety of the suggestion, +that I am in the habit of _misapplying_ and _perverting_ the holy +writings? Are you sufficiently acquainted with my retired studies and +religious exercises to warrant the suggestion that I get along without +acknowledging the wisdom of God? I humbly request you to reconsider +this part of your admonition, and see if it do not wear the appearance +of _judging another_ who must stand or fall to his own master. In the +mean time I wish to observe, that a friendly advice to be constant in +fervent supplication and prayer would be received by me as a mark of +_christian friendship_ and _fellowship_. But I will ask you the +question, if you would be willing to have me go into your desk with +you in presence of your church and congregation, and there read the +whole of the above named chapter, then in humble and solemn prayer to +Almighty God, through Christ Jesus, implore a just and true +understanding of his word and truth contained in that portion of his +written will, and close my performance with a candid dissertation on +the chapter? Grant me liberty to do this in your hearing; after which +I will not object to your pointing out any _misapplication_ or +_perversion_ which you may think you discover. By what law is a man +condemned without first hearing his defence? + +Again, your admonition suggests, that I did not, at either of the +funerals where you heard me perform, speak one word of the necessity +or nature of repentance. In this particular I believe you made a +mistake at both places, which mistake, I believe I can rectify to your +recollection. In the first place, I wish to observe that I as much +believe in those scriptures which speak of the necessity of repentance +as I do in any part of the sacred writings. But, after all, you and I +may entertain very different ideas respecting the _preaching_ of +repentance. The opinion that repentance is preached when a public +speaker tells his congregation that their eternal salvation depends on +their repentance, that eternal misery must inevitably be their doom +unless they repent is an opinion to which I have no reason to +subscribe. + +_Preaching repentance_, I conceive _is teaching_ men and giving them +such divine instructions as bring their minds to discover more +glorious things than the sins and carnal vanities of this world; which +_teaching_ produces a returning of the mind to the things of God and +his ever blessed kingdom. The word _repent_ may or may not be used in +the giving of such instructions. I conceive a preacher of Jesus +Christ, warmed with the spirit of eternal love, breathing forth the +gracious words of truth, may successfully preach repentance as well +without the use of the word _repent_ as with it. At both those places +of sorrow, dear sir, I endeavoured to lead the mourners' minds to the +consideration _of eternal things_; I endeavoured to represent God our +Creator and Governor, as a friend to his creatures, and strove to the +utmost of my power to fix the love, regard and confidence of our +mourning friends on God our Creator. This you will recollect, and I +cannot suppose that you believe that a person can truly believe in the +divine goodness, and love his Creator as the greatest good, and put +confidence in him, so as to draw consolation, in the day of adversity, +from such confidence, and still be a stranger to true penitence. + +The many scriptures which you have judiciously quoted to prove the +propriety of the doctrine of repentance are justly applied, as I +conceive; and I accord with you in their use and meaning as far as you +have explained them. I would wish to be understood that whenever +repentance is spoken of as a creature act, originating in creature +agency, it is represented directly contrary to the scripture sense as +expressed in Acts v. 31, "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to +be a _Prince_ and a _Saviour_, for to _give repentance_ to Israel and +forgiveness of sins." + +From the above passage it is evident that repentance is no more +dependent on creature agency than the forgiveness of sins; and the +idea that repentance is a grant of divine favour is plainly expressed +in Acts xi. 18, "Then hath God also, to the Gentiles, _granted +repentance_ unto life." By the above testimonies the idea that +_repentance_ is a _creature condition_, on which the divine favour is +bestowed, is proved erroneous. + +The next particular which your "friendly admonition" occupies, is the +subject of _Universal Salvation_ in the following words: "I could not +but observe with what _emphasis_ you, at the grave, mentioned those +selected texts of scripture which you supposed would confirm your +hearers in the doctrine of Universal Salvation. Would Christ or the +apostles preach Universal Salvation in one place of scripture, and in +another contradict it? I believe they would not." In the above +particular, sir, I agree with you in all which you express. I do not +believe that Christ or any of his apostles ever contradicted the +glorious doctrine, in which they all preached of Universal Salvation. +And until this contradiction can be shewn in their preaching, you and +I have full liberty to believe in God as "the Saviour of all men." +Christ gave himself a ransom for all men; tasted death for every man; +is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. He says he will +draw all men unto him, and he also says that "him that cometh after me +I will in no wise cast out." St. Paul says that God will have all men +to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. To which +testimony we might add an immense number of scriptures from the Old +and New Testaments; and as you agree that Christ and his apostles +would not preach Universal Salvation in one place, and contradict it +in another, so you must, of necessity subscribe to the _uniformity_ of +the scripture doctrine in the Salvation of all men. + +You inform me, that you are an "_old man_;" this I was sensible of +before, in consequence of which, I have more particularly endeavoured +to cultivate an acquaintance with you, since I have been in this town; +for I conceive that the aged are not only entitled to the respects and +attention of the younger, but the younger are also entitled to the +advantages of their experience and wisdom. + +You further tell me, that you have studied the scriptures twenty or +thirty years. On this account, sir, I covet earnestly your assistance; +for although I have studied the scriptures almost constantly twenty +years out of less than forty, yet I find but a few who are notable to +assist me in this agreeable employment. The happy method which you +recommend, I have for many years endeavoured to observe, for I am sure +that most of the vulgar errors, in respect to the scriptures, are for +the want of a careful examination of all which is said on the same +subjects. + +Wherein you recommend the pious example of the prophet David, I fully +accord in it, and would humbly hope and strive to be a partaker of the +benefits arising from such an example. + +What you say of men's explaining scripture in their own Strength and +wisdom, and of their making _havoc_ of, and _mangling_ them by +explaining them in a mystical or literal sense, I find myself rather +embarrassed about. You begin your epistle under the character of a +"friendly admonition," but what you mean by accusing me of the folly +of mangling and making havoc of the scriptures when you do not attempt +to show wherein I ever explained a passage wrong, I must leave for you +to explain when it is convenient. Nor is it easy for me to understand +you when you represent both the _mystical_ and _literal_ explanation of +scripture equally erroneous. You immediately conclude those +observations with the following quotation: "The natural man receiveth +not the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto +him." Did you mean that the natural man, supposing the things of the +spirit of God to be foolishness, would say that the spirit _mangled_ +and made _havoc_ of the scriptures? This could not be your meaning. + +Your concluding query is the following; "My friend, is there the least +room for us to believe from this scripture (meaning 2 Cor. v. 10, 11) +and many others, that the wicked who have lived impenitent and in a +disbelief of the gospel, or without the true knowledge of God, and of +Jesus Christ whom God hath sent, have eternal life in the fruition and +enjoyment of God?" This query I will endeavour to answer as plainly as +possible. + +1st. Unless we grant that a man has eternal life in Jesus Christ, +given him before the foundation of the world, we cannot justly call +him an _unbeliever_ because he does not believe he has this eternal +life in Christ. Nor can we say, with the least propriety, that he does +not _know_ the _truth_, because he does not know that which is not. + +2d. If we allow that a man has eternal life in Christ, we must allow +him to be an unbeliever if he do not believe it; and that he does not +know the truth as it is in Jesus, if he be ignorant of this gift of +eternal life. + +3d. While a man is in a state of unbelief he is not in the _enjoyment_ +of the truth. + +I conceive, sir, these observations must appear reasonable to any +reasonable man; and therefore I suppose they will appear reasonable to +you. + +The passage in Corinthians alluded to, fully refutes the notion of +_endless_ rewards and punishments; for there it is stated, that +"_every one_ may receive the things done in his body, according to +that he hath done, whether it be good or bad." Now as this same +apostle tells us that all have sinned and come short of the glory of +God, if he mean that all who have sinned must be endlessly punished, +he cannot mean that any of the human race will be eternally blessed +according to their own works, nor yet according to the grace of God. +And you, sir, cannot but see if one sinner can be rewarded according +to his works and yet be saved by grace through faith, and that not of +himself, but by the gift of God, all the sinners of Adam's race may be +thus rewarded according to what they have done either _good_ or _bad_, +and yet be saved by grace as above. + +Your suggestions respecting the resurrection require no other answer +than that I profess to believe in the doctrine of the resurrection as +taught by the scriptures, though I cannot flatter myself that that +opinion agrees with the opinion of what you call _sound authors_. For +myself, I call the writers of the holy scriptures _sound authors_, and +those who differ from them I am willing to call orthodox according to +our common schools of divinity. I join with you in a humble desire +that the holy breathings of the true children of God may be yours and +mine; and I am sensible if they be we shall not judge one another, nor +condemn one another; but strive for the unity of the spirit in the +bonds of divine peace. Yes, sir, I am confident that the true temper +and spirit of the gospel, if possessed and practiced by the public +ministers in this town, would lead them to open their doors to each +other, to meet together and pray, preach, sing and exhort, in love and +fellowship; but Antichrist's spirit is directly the reverse. + +The assurance you give me in your postscript, that what you wrote to +me was not written in an envious spirit is duly appreciated; nor do I +much wonder that you do not envy me the numbers who attend my public +ministry, while you suppose that they with innumerable multitudes of +others are reprobated to endless sin and misery. Envy, in such a case, +would be truly unaccountable! I will not say that I fully comprehend +your meaning in calling the "great numbers" who attend my meeting, +"_precious souls_." Why are they precious? To whom are they precious? +If you view them the objects of divine love, of course you must +suppose them to be precious in God's sight; but if not, why do you +call them precious? + +Your flattering acknowledgements of civilities received from me and +the acceptableness of my person to you, is very gratefully considered, +for it is an object with me to deserve the approbation of the pious +who have treasured up much valuable knowledge by experience; and I +wish to give you the fullest assurance possible that I consider my +acquaintance with yourself highly worthy of further cultivation and +improvement, which I shall always endeavour to promote, as opportunity +may present, and it shall please you to favour. + +Having noted the most important sections of your "friendly admonition" +in as concise a manner as was convenient, permit me, dear sir, to make +a few observations on the doctrine of Universal Salvation, that being +a subject to which you allude in your epistle, though you did not see +fit to plant any particular arguments against it. This doctrine I +openly profess, and preach as a doctrine which I conceive is plainly +taught in the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; a doctrine +which all good men in the world desire the truth of; a doctrine the +most worthy of God of any ever published; a doctrine the best +calculated to fill the soul of the believer with love to God and to +our fellow creatures; a doctrine which harmonizes the divine +attributes, the scriptures and every principle of reason and good +sense, in a surprising and an astonishing manner; a doctrine, more +than any other, calculated to destroy the hurtful animosities existing +in the religious world; and to produce general fellowship and +brotherly love; and in a word, I believe it to be the only doctrine +which can be supported by reason or scripture, to a mind not +improperly biased by tradition. Though I am sensible of your greater +experience, yet I am willing to say to a man of your piety and +Christian candor, that any arguments which you should see cause to lay +before me, on the above subject, shall, by the blessing of God, +receive an early attention and a judicious discussion. + +In the spirit of the New Testament and not in the letter; in the +spirit of life, and not in the death of the letter, in the spirit of +salvation, and not of condemnation, I pray God, I may ever live and +act according to your friendly desire; and feeling the same fervent +desire for my highly esteemed and venerable friend, I acknowledge +myself your most obliged and very humble servant, for Christ's sake. + +HOSEA BALLOU. + +Rev. Joseph Walton. + +P.S. I have reserved three particulars in your "friendly admonition" +for the subject of another communication. + + * * * * * + +LETTER. III. + +From the Same to the Same. + +Portsmouth, Jan. 5, 1811. + +_Rev. Sir_,--Having notified you in a postscript of my letter of Dec. +11th, that I had reserved three particulars in your "friendly +admonition" for the subject of another communication, I am disposed to +embrace this opportunity to fulfil my engagement. The three +particulars reserved are expressed, in your letter, in the following +words: + +"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but +after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having +itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and +shall be turned unto fables. You, my friend, once professed the true +faith of the gospel--have you kept it? I think not. I fear you have +fallen from it. You are now preaching a doctrine which pleases the +world, but it makes against you according to scripture. The apostle +John says in his 1st epistle 4th chapter 5th and 6th verses, They are +of the world; therefore the world heareth them; we are of God; he that +knoweth God, heareth us, he that is not of God, heareth not us; hereby +know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error." I would not, +dear sir, knowingly misapply your words, nor make a use of the above +quotation contrary to their most plain and evident sense which I +conceive is as follows: + +1st. The doctrine which I believed before I believed as I do now, is +the true gospel according to the testimony of the apostle John, in his +1st epistle, 4th chapter 5th and 6th verses. + +2d. That in believing as I now do, I have fallen from that faith, and +turned unto fables. + +3d. My now preaching a doctrine which pleases the world is good proof +that my doctrine is not of God, and that those who hear me are justly +described by the apostle as heaping to themselves teachers having +itching ears. + +In the first place I shall agree with you in the supposition that when +I first made a profession of religion, I believed the true gospel. + +In the second place I shall endeavour to show that I have not fallen +from that faith. + +In the third place I will attempt to show that the evidence, which you +think makes against me, is by no means sufficient to prove that the +doctrine I now believe and preach is consistent with the _lusts_ of +the _world_ or contrary to the true faith of the gospel. + +1st. The true faith of the gospel as expressed in 1 John, 4th, &c. is +as follows--see verse 2, 3, "Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus +Christ is come in the flesh is of God; and every spirit that +confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God." +The apostle here states in the most simple terms the true Christian +faith, and brings it into such a short compass that none can mistake +him. The belief that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is the true +faith, and a denial of that fact is a false faith. + +When I first professed religion I professed to believe that "Jesus +Christ is come in the flesh;" and this I am willing to say now is the +true faith of the gospel, and the only article of faith which +constituted a Christian believer in the opinion of the apostles; +restricting this belief, at the same time, to Jesus of Nazareth, that +he was the Christ. + +2d. I as much believe now as I ever did that Jesus Christ is come in +the flesh. I have as clear evidences now as I ever had that Jesus of +Nazareth is the Christ. These things being facts, the conclusion is +that I have not _fallen_ from the true christian faith. + +3d. The above faith I preach, believing and testifying that God sent +his Son to be the _Saviour_ of the _world_; and I have reason to bless +God that such feeble means are at all prospered, and that as you +observe, "Great numbers of precious souls" adhere to the word, which I +conceive is no evidence that the faith I preach is not of God, or that +it is consistent with the lusts of the world. We are informed in the +word of God, that the _common people heard Christ gladly_. Who did not +hear him gladly? Answer, the Scribes and Pharisees. Do you think, sir, +that the common people's hearing Christ gladly was a justifiable +evidence to the Pharisees that he was not the true Messiah? When many +thousands of men, women, and children flocked from their cities into +desert places to hear the gracious words which proceeded from the lips +of him who spake as never man spake, was it a justifiable evidence +that he and his doctrine were not of God? To bring this matter, if +possible, nearer home, should you find your meeting house crowded with +hearers who expressed in their countenances an approbation of the +doctrine which you preach, would it be sufficient evidence to convince +you that your doctrine was not of God? + +That the testimony that God sent his Son to be the Saviour of the +_world_ is not consistent with the _lusts_ of the _world_, is shown by +St. Paul to Titus; "For the grace of God which bringeth salvation to +_all men_, hath appeared, teaching us, that denying ungodliness and +_worldly lusts_, we should live soberly, righteously and godly in this +present world." + +I have not the least doubt in my mind, that if you and I preached more +like our blessed master than we do, people in general, would be more +engaged to hear us, and our meeting houses would be more thronged than +they are now. + +Should you hear a shepherd complaining that the increase of his flock +was small, or that it rather diminished, you would think _that_ +evidence made against _him_. + +I suppose the particular idea which you had in view, which +constitutes, in your mind, an _Apostasy_, is, that Jesus Christ, who +was manifested in the flesh, will, pursuant to power given to him of +his father, save all men from their sins, and reconcile all things +unto himself. This idea, I acknowledge, I did not see clearly in, when +I first made a profession of a belief in Christ; but now am fully +persuaded in it. However, I cannot see why the adopting of this +particular idea should be called an _Apostasy_. + +I will, sir, mention some similar cases, not wishing however, to be +considered an equal subject to the personage whom I shall introduce. +The apostle Peter was a believer in the true faith of the gospel, that +is, he believed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God: +and Jesus says to him, on that confession, that flesh and blood had +not revealed it to him, but his Father. This belief Peter had before +he believed that Christ should suffer on the cross and rise from the +dead. After many trials and dreadful temptations in which this poor, +dependent brother of ours experienced the fallibility of all human +strength, he was privileged with positive evidence of the resurrection +of Christ from the dead.--Here I ask, was this new acquisition in +Peter's faith an apostasy? Was it not an advancement? You will agree +with me in this. + +Again, this same apostle, even after he was endowed with power from on +high, and preached and healed in the name of Jesus, did not know that +the Gentiles were fellow heirs and of the same body, and partakers of +the promises of God, in Christ, by the gospel. It was not until the +angel of the Lord appeared unto Cornelius and directed him to send for +Peter, that God gave to that apostle the knowledge of the fact which +he acknowledged to Cornelius, that God had shewed him that he should +call _no man common_ or _unclean_. It is very evident that the apostle +Peter had more extensive knowledge of the gospel of the grace of God +in consequence of the vision of the sheet by the sea of Joppa than he +had before; but would any real Christian, knowing all the +circumstances, suppose that Peter had _apostatised_ from the true +faith, because he believed that millions would be benefited by Christ +more than were comprehended in his former belief? While they who were +of the circumcision remained ignorant of the revelation given to +Peter, we find they "_contended_ with him, saying, thou wentest in to +men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them." But when Peter had +"rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order +unto them, they held their peace and glorified God, saying, then hath +God also to the Gentiles, _granted repentance_ unto life." Thus we see +that the church in Jerusalem, who were of the circumcision, though +believers in Christ were, until Peter's defence further enlightened +them, ignorant of the extension of divine grace to the Gentiles +through the gospel. But surely no real Christian would suppose that +this enlargement of their faith in the great salvation was an +_apostasy_ from the true faith! + +With profound deference, sir, permit me to suggest, that should the +foregoing observations present yourself, to your own mind, in a +similar situation with those of the circumcision, yet they acknowledge +you a believer in Christ, a minister of his word and a candidate for +greater manifestation of that grace of God by which Jesus tasted death +for every man. + +I believe I may venture to say that unless the belief that _God is not +the Saviour of all men_ can be maintained by positive scripture as an +essential article of apostolic faith, I cannot be justly _admonished +for falling_ from the true faith. May I not, with great propriety, +call on my Rev. friend to show, if he can, that such an article of +faith was ever required by Christ or his apostles as a term of +christian fellowship and charity? + +Let us look into the written word of God and see what is there +required of us to believe. See Rom. x. 9, "If thou shalt confess with +thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God +hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Acts viii. 37, +"And Philip said if thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest. +And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of +God." Matt. x. 32. "Whosoever, therefore, shall confess me before men, +him will I confess also before my father which is in heaven." Luke +xii. 8, "Also I say unto you, whosoever shall confess me before men, +him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God." Not +to multiply quotations, permit me to query whether there be in those +passages, or in any other scripture on the same point any intimations +given that the candidate must believe that this precious Saviour will +not, through the peace made by the blood of his cross, reconcile all +things to God? Are you fully satisfied, dear sir, that you are +authorised to _admonish_ as an _apostate_, one who confesses with his +mouth the Lord Jesus, and who believes in his heart that God hath +raised him from the dead? Why did not Philip demand of the Eunuch a +particular confession of a belief in _limited grace_ and _salvation_? +Was there not the same authority to require this article of faith +then, as there is now? If Jesus hath promised, in his word, that he +will confess before his Father in Heaven, whosoever confesseth him +before men are you satisfied with the authority by which you denounce, +disfellowship, and deny those little ones? The thought is truly +solemn! I feel a _chill_ in every vein of my body, when I consider the +vain traditions of a corrupted church, in which it has long been a +religious habit to anathematise those who confess Christ before men, +because they _cannot_ believe in certain tenets never required by +Christ or his apostles! + +Rev. Sir, I can say in the sincerity of my soul, that I believe that +Jesus of Nazareth is the true Christ, I believe him to be the Son of +the living God, who was delivered for our offences and was raised +again for our justification. And though I feel myself the most +unworthy of the subjects of salvation, yet I should be ungrateful not +to acknowledge the goodness of God my Saviour. Whatever men may think +or say of me, I know that my soul experiences joys unspeakable in +sweet meditations on the glories and inexpressible beauties of my +Redeemer; and the thought that I am owned as his child before the +angels of God, is infinitely better than to receive the approbation of +men who are disposed to judge without knowing the heart. + +If the Christian clergy were once disposed to strip their creeds and +confessions of faith till they were reduced to the simplicity that is +in Christ, and require no other belief than Christ and his apostles +required, there would be an end at once of all the discord and +animosity which have wounded the character of Christianity for ages. +And the prayer of the blessed Jesus would be fulfilled in the +_oneness_ of all who believe in him, which would convince the world +that the Father sent him. + +Although you have not yet found it convenient to favour me with any +observations on my former letter, I have not done expecting it. And I +shall endeavour to hold myself in readiness to pay an early attention +to any communication which shall come from your hand. In hopes that +nothing contained in this letter will be considered inconsistent with +the true spirit of a humble believer in Christ, I remain, sir, your +humble servant, for Christ's sake. + +HOSEA BALLOU. + +Rev. JOSEPH WALTON. + + * * * * * + +LETTER IV. + +FROM THE REV. JOSEPH WALTON TO THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU. + +PORTSMOUTH, JAN. 11, 1811. + +_Sir_,--I have received your answer to my letter sent you, dated Dec. +7, 1810, and now desire to answer it, in the fear of God, in as +concise a manner as I am capable, agreeable to the scriptures of +_truth_. Sir, I thank you for the civilities you manifest toward me, +and that you received my letter in a friendly manner as I think I sent +it, wishing it might be received and improved for your benefit; not +that I supposed that I was capable of convincing or confuting you of +what I conceive to be erroneous in your doctrine or principles, but +relying on the blessing of God to make it effectual for your +everlasting good, and those you profess to be over in the Lord. + +I shall not take into consideration every argument you make use of, +but shall give it a general answer. Since I have received it I have +had a great number of scriptures occuring to my mind which I might +quote if I thought expedient. In the first place you speak or write as +if I thought death was originally designed by the Almighty for the +damage of mankind; I say death was threatened to be the consequence, +if mankind did transgress the law of their Creator; our first parents +transgressed, and the penalty was executed according to the +threatening, "Thou shall surely die;" they were condemned to die; they +were under sentence of death; they became spiritually dead, +immediately; they lost the knowledge of their Creator; darkness +covered their minds; they endeavoured to hide themselves from God +among the trees of the garden; they brought misery upon themselves and +upon their posterity; we feel the woeful effects of their fall and +apostasy until this day; by nature we are spiritually dead; as it is +written, "you hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins." +Sir, if there is a law made by our legislature, is there not a penalty +annexed unto it? If that law is transgressed, is not the person who +transgressed punished some way or other?--Yet the law is made for the +good of the whole; the legislature is not to be impeached, as if he +made it for the damage of his people, whom he governs; the law-breaker +is punished either in his own person or his surety, though the pain, +shame and punishment is for the damage of the transgressor, yet the +law is for the good of the whole, and the law maker is not in the +least to blame; the transgressor also, if he repents and is reformed, +is benefited by it, &c. + +I think, sir, your giving your hearers encouragement in your preaching +that Christ will save them all, whether they repent and believe the +gospel or no, is of a dangerous nature. Christ has said, "if ye +believe not that I am he ye shall die in your sins," John viii. 24. +Read, if you please, the proceeding context. The decrees of God, you +say, is my creed, and that I believe that God foreordained whatsoever +come to pass. I do not think I ever told you so. And so you think God +foreordained, according to my _creed_, death, for a damage to his +creatures. I have said death is punishment for sin, as I wrote, and I +can maintain it from scripture; death was introduced by sin; the +person that lives a life of sin and dies without regenerating grace, +which all true believers in Christ have, will be miserable, and be +"punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord +and the glory of his power." I believe every true believer is a true +penitent, is regenerated, is in Christ by a vital union is a "new +creature," and that those persons will be saved and none else, +according to the doctrine of Christ and his apostles. I believe that +God the Father worketh all things according to the council of his own +will; that his redeemed and saved people should be to his glory. You +say, in my writing to you, I said, "do you think Christ or his +apostles would preach universal salvation in one place of scripture +and contradict it in another? I believe they would not."--Here you +designedly, I think mistake; I do not believe that Christ or his +apostles ever did preach universal salvation, that is, that every son +and daughter of apostate Adam, would be saved. I believe that this +gospel of the kingdom is to be preached to every creature, and +"whosoever believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that +believeth not shall be damned." Do me justice, sir; do not animadvert +upon what I have just quoted, as if I think our Saviour is to be +understood as if every individual would have the privilege of hearing +the gospel. I conceive that the apostles' commission runs thus: "Go +into all the world and preach the gospel to every human or rational +creature."--What I meant by saying, do you think Christ would preach +universal salvation in one place, and in another contradict it, is, +that those texts which you suppose supports your doctrine, is not to +be understood as you apply them; for if they prove universal +salvation, as you would have them, then they will contradict many +texts which Christ and his apostles improved otherwise; therefore I +still assert, that the scriptures ought to be carefully examined, +conscientiously improved and applied. The faithful minister of Christ +will renounce the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in +craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by +manifestation of the _truth_, commending themselves to every man's +conscience in the sight of God. "For we are not as many which corrupt +the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of +God, speak we in Christ."--See 2d Corinthians, ii. 17. And I would +take it as a favour, if you would read the 15th and 16th verses in the +same chapter, and seriously consider them. Those texts of scripture, +which you have quoted from Rom. 8th chapter, are not to be applied as +you apply them, neither doth the apostle apply them so. And methinks +you know they are not, if you consider the connexion from the 28th +verse of the chapter to the end. And that passage of scripture quoted +from 1 Cor. iii. 21, 22, 23, is only to be applied to real Christians; +and this, sir, I presume you know; but it would not suit you and your +scheme of Universal Salvation to apply them so. + +I would ask you, if, when I am writing a letter or an epistle to Mr. +Hosea Ballou, it would be proper for me to apply what I write in +particular to you, concerning your affairs or circumstances, to the +whole world? Ministers of Christ should rightly "divide the word;" and +should take the precious from the vile; then they would be as God's +mouth to the people. See Jeremiah xv. 19, see likewise, Ezekiel xiiv. +23, "The priests of the Lord are to teach the Lord's people the +difference between the holy and the profane," and cause them to +discern between the unclean and the clean;" it is by this _general_ +way of preaching, errors are introduced, not only by your +denomination, but by others also. I could multiply quotations from the +Bible, both from the Old and New Testaments, but what would it avail, +unless you will consider them and endeavour to improve them, and apply +them as the Holy Ghost would have us to to? "For holy men of God spake +as they were moved by the Holy Ghost," see 2 Peter i. 25. You say, you +were somewhat embarrassed in understanding what I meant when I wrote +that men undertaking to explain the scriptures in their own strength +and wisdom, and their making havoc of them, &c. by explaining them in +a mystical or literal sense. I will endeavour to explain what I +meant--1st. To allegorize the scriptures in a mere moral or mystical +sense, or altogether in a figurative sense, is a degree of enthusiasm, +(as to say there is no _devil_ but our carnal nature, &c.) and in a +mere literal sense is to understand and improve them not in that +spiritual sense in which they are to be understood, but resting in the +letter only; as we may observe when Christ said in St. John, 6th +chapter, "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his +blood, ye have no life in you;" "Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my +blood hath eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day;" +"These things said he in the synagogue as he taught in Capernaum;" +"Many therefore of his disciples when they heard this, said, this is a +hard saying, who can hear it? Christ said, doth this offend you?"--And +informed them he did not mean that they should eat his human flesh, +and drink his blood literally, but he was to be understood in a +spiritual sense. He informed them "it is the spirit that quickeneth, +the flesh profiteth nothing, the words I speak unto you they are +spirit and life." Some have since misunderstood him, and, to this day, +misunderstand this piece of scripture; and have from thence introduced +the absurd doctrine of transubstantiation, that after the words of +consecration, the bread and wine are the real body and blood of +Christ. So some adhere only to the letter of the word and expound the +law of God in a mere literal sense. It seems the apostle Paul, before +his conversion, understood it so.--Read the 7th chapter of Romans, +from the 6th to the end of the 13th verse. Paul was brought up at the +feet of Gamaliel, a doctor of the law; yet, while in his unregenerate +state, knew not the spiritual meaning of the law of God, (I mean the +holy or moral law) and no doubt he spake by experience when he says, +(as I wrote to you from I Cor. ii. 14) "But the natural man received +not the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto +him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually +discerned." By the natural man, I conceive, the apostle meant the +unregenerate man: yea, with the highest degree of human teaching and +knowledge without he is taught of God, by his word and spirit, he +cannot truly understand the things of the spirit of God; and therefore +they are, as I say, misapplied, mangled and made havoc of. Faith is, +by some, only held as a bare assent that Jesus Christ came in the +flesh. None do truly believe that, but by the Holy Ghost. + +You still will continue to maintain the doctrine of Universal +Salvation, by those texts, which I said you spake at the grave with +such an _emphasis_; if they are to be understood only in a literal +sense as they are expressed, I can quote as many or more spoken by +Christ and his apostles which will contradict them in their literal +sense: Christ says, "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved; +but he that believeth not shall be damned. Then shall he say unto them +on his left hand, depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire, +prepared for the devil and his angels. And these shall go away into +everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal. Then said +Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me and shall die +in your sins: whither I go ye cannot come." John viii. 21, 24, "I said +therefore unto you that ye shall die in your sins; for if ye believe +not that I am he ye shall die in your sins." With respect to that text +you quote from John xii. 32, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, +will draw all men unto me." It is, I conceive, explained by Christ +himself in John iii. 14, 15, "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in +the wilderness even so must the son of man be lifted up; that +whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting +life." By Christ being lifted on the cross the way of salvation is to +be preached to all men; but it is only those that believe who will not +perish and have eternal life, according to the foregoing scriptures I +have quoted from Mark xvi. 16, and Mat. xxv. 41, 46. I could quote +many more scriptures spoken by our Lord himself and explained by him; +and I hope, sir, you will allow our Lord to be the best expositor of +his own word. I conceive you think you have got a mighty argument when +you mention the apostle Peter, who had a vision which instructed him +in his duty to preach the gospel to the Gentiles; but remember, Peter +says, "I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in every +nation, he that feareth God and worketh righteousness, is accepted of +him." Then he began to preach the gospel to Cornelius and his friends; +he preached Christ to them; he preached Jesus and the resurrection; he +shows he is ordained of God to be the Judge of the quick and the dead; +and says, "To him give all the prophets witness that through his name +whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins." Did he +say that every individual of the human race would be saved? No such +thing! And though he had further light concerning the Gentiles, he +never, as I can find, preached Universal Salvation, but to the +contrary. Read his epistles, first and second, particularly 2d +epistle, 2d chapter from 1st to the end of the 9th verse. "The Lord +knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation; and to reserve the +unjust to the day of judgment, to be _punished_;" not to be +_liberated_! Read 3d chapter, 7th verse, "But the heavens and the +earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store reserved unto +fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." Peter +wrote these epistles after he had further light with respect to the +Gentiles' having the gospel preached unto them. + +As to what you write about my saying I do not envy you because great +numbers go to hear you, I still say it, as far as I know my wicked and +deceitful heart, and wish you might preach the pure and simple gospel, +and that your hearers might desire nothing more than the sincere milk +of the word, as new-born babes, preached unto them; that they might +grow thereby, &c. + +That place I directed you to in 1 John, iv. 5, 6, and wished you to +consider, though I have in some measure already considered it, I will +attempt more particular to consider it. 1st. You say, John says, "And +every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the +flesh is not of God, and this is that spirit of Antichrist whereof you +have heard it should come and even now already is in the world." John +in the preceding verse said, that every spirit that confesseth Jesus +Christ is come in the flesh, is of God; do you think, sir, that every +person that assents to this truth is a true believer? But few that +have been born in a land of gospel light but what assents to this; but +the soul that is born of God truly believes it, according to what the +same apostle writes, 5th Chapter 1st epistle 1st verse, "Whosoever +believeth Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and every one that +loveth him that begat, loveth him also that is begotten of him." Do +all men that confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh profess to +be born of God? Do they love the children of God that bear his image? +No; they, if unregenerate, are of the world; they "love darkness +rather than light, because their deeds are evil." Who does our Lord +mean when he says, "If the world hate you, it hated me before it hated +you, if ye were of the world the world would love his own; but because +ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, +therefore the world hateth you?" Sir, you know that there has been +many antichristian professors of this truth, _that Jesus Christ is +come in the flesh_, that have shed much human blood, because they +hated the dear children of God. Therefore I conceive this is the +meaning of the text: we must know for ourselves that Jesus Christ is +the Son of God, as Peter did when he confessed him, and Christ said to +him, "Blessed art thou Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood has not +revealed this unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven--upon this +rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail +against it." I believe that true and saving faith is wrought in the +heart by the spirit of the _living God_; and the soul that believes +truly, is, as I have already said, born of God, is in union with +Christ, is partaker of the divine nature, and has escaped the +corruption that is in the world through lust, and is pressing forward +towards the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ +Jesus. I have wrote more than I intended, having received your other +epistle and have considered some of it. This remains to be considered: +what you wrote concerning your having great numbers of hearers. It is +true Christ had a great number which followed, and heard him, but few +which followed because they loved his doctrine, and followed him from +right motives. He said unto them, "Ye seek me not because ye saw the +miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled. Labour +not for the meat that perisheth, but for the meat which endureth unto +everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you, for him +hath God the Father sealed," John vi. 26, 27. Our Lord says, John +viii. 47, "He that is of God heareth God's words; ye therefore hear +them not because ye are not of God." Hence you may see how our Lord +and his beloved disciple John agree; it is not the truth as it is in +Jesus, the populace are after; it is to gratify their curiosity, or +hear something about their salvation in a way that has no cross in it. +But Christ says, "If any man will be my disciple let him deny himself +and take up his cross, and follow me." When Christ preached soul +searching doctrine as he did in the 6th of John, "Many of his +disciples went back and followed no more with him." And I believe when +you preach repentance and faith, and shew what fruits they will +produce in the true penitent and true believer, the world will not +hear you and cordially like your doctrine. But they, as John says, are +of the world, therefore they speak of the world, and the world heareth +them; "We are of God, we that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not +of God heareth not us: hereby know we the spirit of truth and the +spirit of error." I have reason to think some popular preachers are +good men, but the world do not like them nor their doctrine, because +they are so; but because of their popularity their curiosity is fed, +or gratified--and not their souls with the pure milk of the word. Sir, +you answer in some way which is ambiguous to me about your preaching +repentance, and say repentance may be preached without speaking the +word repentance. What makes you shun speaking plainly as Christ did? +Be explicit in preaching it. You cannot deny, but Christ and his +apostles preached it explicitly. Christ said in plain language, +"Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish," Luke xiii. 3, 5. In +your answer concerning the resurrection of the dead, you do not speak +of that in a clear and explicit way, and your not mentioning it at +either of the funerals, makes me doubt whether you believe it in as +clear and literal a manner as it is expressed in the scriptures by +Christ and his apostles. Paul says, "Seeing we have such hope we use +great plainness of speech." I hope, sir, you will not be offended with +me for plain dealing. + +As to your apostasy, I hope I shall have an opportunity to confer with +you about it. I am happy to say I feel no rancour or enmity against +your person or people, as a neighbour and friend, but should be +willing to assist you in, and as far as my ability and power with a +good conscience will admit; and hope this will not interrupt our +meeting together as usual in visiting the schools. I think we had best +drop the controversy, and I think I shall no more write to you, and +hope you will no more write to me on this subject. You may make what +use you please of it; I hope it will be made of good use to you. + +I now, dear sir, "commend you to God and the word of his grace, which +is able to build yon up in the _truth_ as it is in _Jesus_, and give +you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified." + +From your friend, and well wisher in the gospel of our dear Lord Jesus +Christ. + +JOSEPH WALTON. + +Mr. Hosea Ballou, _Pastor of a Church_. + + * * * * * + +LETTER V. + +FROM THE REV. HOSEA BALLOU TO THE REV. JOSEPH WALTON. + +PORTSMOUTH, JAN. 15, 1811. + +_Rev. Sir_,--Yours of the 11th inst. is before me, and according to my +_promise_ I hasten to pay _an early attention_ to its contents, +notwithstanding you express a _hope_ that I should write to you no +more on this subject. In your desire, sir, that I should write no more +I believe you to be _really sincere_, for I believe you to be a man +disposed to give your friends as little trouble as possible; but I +have several reasons for answering your last, which, when I have +stated, I presume, will fully satisfy you that my answer is required +in justice to myself. + +1st. I find myself accused of _baseness_, of which, were I guilty, the +forfeiture would be that of _confidence_. + +2d. I find my preaching misrepresented, and that in direct violation +of my own declaration in the present correspondence. + +3d. I find questions proposed for my discussion, which renders it +reasonable that you should have an answer, as I was in hopes of +obtaining to the questions which I stated to you. + +4th. I find you quite off from the subjects of your admonitions, not +attempting to support them, nor yet willing to exonerate me from +charges. + +5th. I find the scriptures of our blessed Lord and Saviour quoted with +a manifest design to limit his grace and salvation. + +I might go on and state a number more reasons why I conceive it to be +my duty to reply, but the five already given will undoubtedly satisfy +your mind; and they furnish subjects sufficiently ample for an +epistle. To them I shall conform myself, and endeavour to be as +concise as is consistent with the importance of the subject. + +1st. Your accusation is in the following words:-- + +"Here you designedly, I think, mistake." "Those texts of scripture +which you have quoted from Rom. 8th chapt. are not to be applied as +you apply them, neither doth the apostle apply them so. And methinks +you know they are not, if you consider the connexion from the 28th +verse of the chapter to the end. And that passage of scripture quoted +from 1 Cor. iii. 21, 22, 23, is only to be applied to real christians; +and this, sir, I presume you know; but it would not suit your and your +scheme of Universal Salvation to apply them so." + +Here I am accused, 1st of _designedly mistaking_ you! And, 2d of a +_wilful misapplication_ of the _sacred word_! To these high charges, +sir, I beg the privilege of pleading _not guilty_; and, after making +my defence, of submitting my cause to impartial judges. + +With regard to the _designed mistake_, my defence is that no mistake +was made by me either _designed_ or _not designed_.--I have examined +and find that I quoted you verbatim. I also find that I fully agreed +with you in the sentence quoted as to what was necessarily signified +by it. I applied the sentence according to my own mind; but did not +pretend nor say that you applied it as I did. Where then is the +_designed mistake_? Could an action lie against a man for murder if no +_body_ were found, on which murder had been committed?--Could an +indictment for theft be supported against a man if no property were +missing from the owner? Is it proper to bring an allegation thus, +without pointing out some sort of _mistake_? I will not be so +uncharitable, sir, as to suppose that you _designed_ to bring _a false +accusation_ in this instance. No, sir, you are not capable of such +wickedness; I have ever believed you to be an _honest, sincere +christian_; and that opinion is so congenial to my feelings that I +shall never give it up while I can find a reasonable excuse for +retaining it. + +My opinion is, that you, finding that I had made such ready use of +your sentence apparently to my own advantage, thought I designed to +mistake you, and feeling a little disagreeably on the occasion, did +not _look minutely_ to see if you had rightly apprehended me, or not. + +With regard to the _wilful misapplication of the sacred word_ my +defence is to be made from the sacred text itself. In this defence, +sir, it is sufficient if I give you reasons which induce me to apply +the scripture as I do. It is not necessary that I convince you or any +body else that my application is right, for we are all liable to err. +What I shall aim at is to show that if my applications are _not +correct_ yet I am not guilty of _wilfully misapplying_ the _sacred +text_. 1st. Of the passage in the 8th of Rom. the following are my +reasons for a general application of that scripture to mankind. + +1st. The whole human family, at least, is made the primary subject of +the apostle's application as may be seen by looking at the 19th verse +and onward. "For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for +the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made +subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who subjected +the same in hope; because the creature itself also shall be delivered +from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the +children of God. For we know that the _whole creation groaneth_ and +_travaileth_ in _pain together_ until now; and not only they, but +ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the spirit, even we +ourselves _groan_ within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, +the redemption of our body." + +I understand by the above quotation that St. Paul meant the same by +the "_whole creation_" as he did by the "_creature_" who was "made +subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath +subjected the same in hope." And this creature which he calls the +"whole creation" he says shall be delivered from the bondage of +corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. This is +the apostle's primary application of the love and mercy of God. In a +_minor_ sense he is _particular_ as may be seen in the above +quotation, "and not only they," that is the whole creation at large, +but ourselves also, which have the _first fruits_ of the _spirit_, +even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to +wit, the redemption of our body." I know of no way to understand the +apostle here to mean otherwise than that the whole human race _groan_ +and _travail_ for the same deliverance and redemption that those do +who are blessed with the first fruits of the spirit. Nor do I find any +expression, in relation to this subject, more significant of the +deliverance of those who have the first fruits of the spirit, than of +the deliverance of the whole creation, or creature made subject to +vanity. By turning back only to the 5th chap, we find the apostle +laboring the subject of grace and salvation in just as extensive a +manner. See verse 18th, "Therefore as by the offence of one, judgment +came upon _all men_ unto _condemnation_, even so, by the righteousness +of one, the free gift came upon _all men_ unto _justification of +life_." Consistently with this positive and particular declaration of +the apostle's belief in the _justification_ of _all men_ through the +_righteousness_ of _Jesus Christ_, we find his following testimony. +See 1 Tim. ii. 4, &c. "Who will have all men to be saved and come unto +the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator +between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom +for _all_ to be testified in due time." Heb. ii. 9. "But we see Jesus +who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of +death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God +should taste death for every man." Rom. iv. 25.--"who was delivered +for our offences and was raised again for our justification." v. 8. +"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet +sinners, Christ died for us." + +In the above testimony the apostle says, that Christ gave himself a +ransom for _all men_, that he, by the _grace_ of _God_, tasted death +for _every man_, that he was delivered for our offences and was raised +again for our justification, that his death for sinners is a +commendation of God's love to them. Now I am willing to acknowledge to +you, sir, and to all the world, that I can make no sense of the above +testimony without applying it to all mankind. In the apostle's +observations in the close of the 8th of Rom. of nothing being able to +separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus, there is a +perfect analogy with the foregoing testimony. The love of God which is +in Christ Jesus, was commended to a sinful world in that Christ tasted +death, by the grace of God, for every man. If one of all those for +whom Christ died can be separated from that love by which Christ died +for him, I know not why the whole may not be, by the same argument. + +2d. Of the passage in 1st Cor. 3d, &c. This passage, you say, you +_presume_ I _know_ ought not to be applied to any _but real +christians_! See the text. "Therefore let _no man_, glory in men; for +all things are yours; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the +world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all +are yours; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's." Are you willing, +sir, to _presume_ that I _know_ that the apostle Paul did not mean to +dissuade any but _real christians_ from trusting in men? This you must +_presume_ in order to _presume_ that I _know_ the text ought to be +applied to none but real Christians. Is not the sense of "_no man_" as +universal in the negative, as the sense of "_all men_" is in the +positive? Why did you not attempt to give some reason for such a +_presumption_? I hope dear sir, you will not allow yourself to think, +even for one moment, that I am so uncharitable as to suppose you +_presumed_ thus, contrary to impressions of your own mind, though you +cannot think any worse of me than is implied in the presumption. I +tell you, sir, that I seriously believe that the above text ought to +be applied to all men; I believe it is wrong for any man to put his +trust in man, according to that scripture; and I believe it to be +perfectly right to exhort _all men_ to put their trust in God who has +given his son to die for us all, and who will with him freely give us +all things richly to enjoy. + +I do not doubt your sincerity in the above _presumption_, but I doubt +your having paid a suitable attention to the subject before you thus +presumed. Hasty judgments and sudden conclusions frequently make work +for repentance; but the true christian will, on cool reflection, be +willing to acknowledge his faults and to remove unjust accusations.-- +"By their fruits ye shall know them." On considering the usage with +which I meet in this unsolicited and unexpected correspondence, I +cannot but call to mind the very different treatment which the +_devil_ received from an heavenly dignitary, who dared not to bring +against his opponent a _railing accusation_! As a further evidence +that the text in Corinthians ought to be applied to all men, or to +men in general, see the words of the same apostle to the Ephesians, +chapter iv. 8, 11, &c. "Wherefore he saith, when he ascended up on +high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. And he +gave some apostles; and some prophets; and some evangelists; and +some pastors and teachers."--Now look again to the passage in +Corinthians, "For all things are yours, whether _Paul_, or Apollos, +or Cephas," &c. These were the gifts given unto men. The question +now is, were those gifts which were given unto men, given to any but +real christians? See Psalm lxviii. 18, to which the apostle alludes +in his words quoted from Eph. iv. "Thou hast ascended on high; thou +hast led captivity captive; thou hast received gifts for men; yea, +for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them." +Are you willing, sir, to _presume_ that I _know_ that the prophet +David and St. Paul meant to apply those scriptures to none but _real +christians_? I must acknowledge my suprise at such _presumption_. +I will now take my leave of those accusations, just remarking that +I feel no fear in submitting my case to any impartial tribunal. + +The 2d general particular is that of my preaching being +misrepresented, and that in direct violation of my own declarations in +the present correspondence. This misrepresentation I find in your +letter in the following words: "I think, sir, your giving your hearers +encouragement in your preaching that Christ will save them all whether +they repent and believe the gospel or no, is of a dangerous nature." +In the first place I call my whole congregation to witness against +this misrepresentation. In the second place I call my own testimony in +this correspondence which you had before you, to witness against this +misrepresentation. The following are my own words verbatim:--"In the +first place I wish to observe that I as much believe in those +scriptures which speak of the necessity of repentance, as I do in any +part of the sacred writings. The many scriptures which you have +_judiciously_ quoted to prove the propriety of the doctrine of +repentance are justly applied as I conceive, and I accord with you in +their use and meaning as far as you have explained them. While a man +is in a state of unbelief he is not in the enjoyment of the truth." +These quotations, sir, are all in direct opposition to your +representation of the subject of repentance. + +Here again I ought to observe, that I am far from accusing you of an +_intentional fault_, or a wilful misrepresentation; though in order to +suppose you clear from such a fault, I must charitably suppose that +the _perturbations_ of your mind were such that you did not give my +letter a careful examination. I proved by plain and positive scripture +that _repentance_ is as much a gift of Christ as the forgiveness of +sins, which is, with the passage quoted from my letter, sufficient to +convince any man, who is not "improperly biased by tradition," that I +do not exclude the necessity of repentance. + +3d. I find questions proposed for my discussion, which renders it +necessary that you should receive an answer, as I was in hope of +obtaining to the questions which I stated to you. + +These questions are in the following words: "I would ask you, if, when +I am writing a letter or an epistle to Mr. Hosea Ballou, it would be +proper for me to apply what I wrote in particular to you concerning +your affairs, or circumstances, to the whole world? Who does our Lord +mean when he says, 'If the world hate you it hated me before it hated +you,' &c." To the first of these questions I answer, should you state +in a letter to me that _no man_ ought to preach the doctrine which I +preach, I should suppose that your observation would apply to the +whole world of mankind as well as to me; or if I should say in a +letter to the Rev. Joseph Walton, _no man_ ought to _presume_ his +_friend_ to be guilty of _wilful mistakes_, and _misapplications_ of +scripture without the _best possible evidence_ I believe you would see +the propriety of applying my observation to all men, even if you +should feel yourself particularly admonished by it. + +The second question I conceive may be justly answered thus: The +_world_ which hated Christ was that religious order among the Jews who +accused him of being a friend to publicans and sinners; who thought +themselves so much better than their neighbours, as to say, "Stand by +thyself; come not nigh me, for I am holier than thou." + +_Enmity_ to _Christ_ grows out of a Pharisaical notion of our own +righteousness, and it is an invariable mark of a Pharisee to oppose +the humiliating doctrine of _equal guilt_ and _equal grace_. No man +ever hated Christ who felt the weight of his own sins and the need of +a Saviour. No set of men ever fomented persecutions but such as +thought themselves the more particular favourites of God than others. + +When I hear certain characters raising such queries, I am almost +induced to use the freedom with them which the prophet Nathan used +with his terrible majesty the king, and say. "Thou art the man!" But I +dare not assume the place of judgment; and I know my own fallibility +so well that I have no need to accuse others. + +4thly. I find you quite off from the subjects of your admonition, not +attempting to support them, nor yet willing to exonerate me from +charges. Quite off, I say, from the subjects of admonition; for you +have not attempted to distinguish between the two ideas contained in +what you stated as the first subject of admonition, nor have you told +me whether it be one, or both which you consider thus +reprehensible.--You labour some time on another subject which concerns +the mode by which death was introduced, but you have said nothing +about whether God _originally designed death_, or not. Not knowing +your real mind from what you expressed on this subject, I queried in +my mind how I ought to understand you, and supposing you consistent +with yourself, and having sufficient reason to believe that your +_creed_ contains the belief that God foreordained whatsoever comes to +pass, I explained the sentence accordingly; but you neither +acknowledge me right in this particular, nor object; but you say that +you do not think you ever told me so! Here again, sir, I can easily +suppose you speak the truth, though I am under the necessity of +charitably supposing that your memory fails, for at the first visit +which I had the happiness of making you, I heard you recommend the +Catechism to be taught in schools which contains this very article of +faith. And now, sir, I must either believe that you would recommend +that which you do not believe, or I must still suppose that you +believe that God foreordained whatsoever comes to pass; and of course +that he foreordained _death_. And as you _admonish_ me for suggesting +that God originally designed death for the good of mankind you cannot +be consistent with yourself, as I can see, without believing that God +originally designed death for a _damage_ to _mankind_. And as you do +not deny believing thus, I cannot but marvel that you should wholly +neglect to answer my queries on this subject: a subject which +evidently involves the moral character of God. Do you feel, sir, as if +you had honourably acquitted yourself in this particular, by only +exulting in your forgetfulness concerning having given me to +understand your creed? Does this look altogether like renouncing the +hidden things of dishonesty? Did you believe your creed in respect to +the subject of admonition was hid from me? Why then did you not openly +decide either one way or the other? May I not without doing you the +least injustice suppose you were straightened by the glaring +inconsistency of your _admonition_? If you avowed the suggested _item_ +all the abominable absurdity which I posted full in sight must have +been charged to your account. If you disavowed the suggested _item_ +then away went the _darling Catechism_, in a moment, and with it, more +of the preposterous inventions of priestcraft than could be easily +replaced to the advantage of the cause of superstition and ignorance! +I would by no means suggest that you did any thing or neglected to do +any thing from a motive which your own conscience disallowed; but I am +impelled, even by charity itself, to attribute your conduct in the +above case to an improper prejudice against a doctrine of which you +know but very little. + +Another subject of your admonition is that of my having apostatised +from the true faith. On this subject, on which I was particular, you +make no defence, nor yet exhonerate me from the charge. You observe +you hope for an opportunity to confer with me about this matter. Why +were you unwilling to write your defence of this allegation, or be so +kind as to withdraw it. I must use the plainness, sir, to say, if you +accuse of _designed mistakes_ in _writing_ where no mistakes exist, if +I have a verbal conference with you on these matters, I should wish to +have it before a ready scribe who could produce the conservation +afterwards. You are not to suppose by this precaution I mean to +intimate that you would report the conversation contrary to truth, +designedly; I mean if when my letters are before your eyes, you +misunderstand, you might be as likely to misunderstand conversation. + +You admonished me for preaching a doctrine which pleases the world, +meaning the populace; and I endeavoured to defend myself in that +particular: but you neither attempt to show my reasoning faulty, nor +yet, acknowledge me correct. This is _admonishing_, I should suppose, +in the _unaccountable_ manner in which _Popes_ admonish! You say that +many followed Christ for the sake of the loaves. Dear sir, I did not +say but they all did; and if they did, the question is, does that +prove his doctrine not of God? Here, sir, you will see, if you look +one moment, that you were off, far off from the subject. + +5th. I find the scriptures of our blessed Lord and Saviour quoted with +a manifest design to _limit_ his _grace_ and _salvation_. + +You introduce those quotations as follows: "You still will continue to +maintain the doctrine of Universal Salvation by those texts which I +said you spoke at the grave with such an _emphasis_. If they are to be +understood only in a literal sense as they are expressed, I can quote +as many, or more spoken by Christ and his apostles, which will +contradict them in their literal sense. Christ says, 'He that +believeth and is baptised shall be saved, but he that believeth not +shall be damned. Then shall he say unto them on his left hand depart +from me ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his +angels. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the +righteous into life eternal.'--'Then said Jesus again unto them, I go +my way and ye shall seek me and shall die in your sins; whither I go +ye cannot come. John viii. 21, 24. I said therefore unto you that ye +shall die in your sins, for if ye believe not I am he ye shall die in +your sins.'" + +These passages you say contradict those which I make use of to prove +Universal Salvation, if we understand those which I thus use in a +literal sense, as they are expressed. I will state one passage only as +an example, which I have before quoted. Rom. v. 18, "Therefore, as by +the offence of one, judgment came upon all men unto condemnation, even +so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto +justification of life." Nothing can be said on the above text which +can tend to make its meaning more plain than it is, if its most +natural sense be the true sense. This, sir, I presume, you will allow: +Now let us look for a contradiction of this text in the passages which +you quoted. "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved, and he +that believeth not shall be damned." I ask how long the unbeliever +will be damned? Answer--As long as he is an unbeliever, and no longer, +according to the text. Is there any expression in the text, or context +that even intimates that any will remain eternally in unbelief? No. +Where is the contradiction then? There is none. The passage which you +quote from the 25th of Mat. says, "And these shall _go_ away into +everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal." As the +word everlasting is very frequently used in the scriptures to signify +ages and dispensations, is there any certainty that it has not such a +meaning in this place? Answer: No. Where is the contradiction then? +There is none. The very expression "_punishment_" shows plainly that +what is inflicted is designed as an emendation of the punished. I have +shown in a late publication,[11] that it is in direct violation of the +words of Christ, to explain the above text to signify a punishment in +another state of existence; and yet, if we were under the necessity of +understanding it so, it would fall after all infinitely short of +proving that, at some period known to a merciful God, all men will not +be justified unto life.--Therefore no contradiction can be found. The +passage which speaks of those who should die in their sins will fall +equally short of contradicting the testimony of Universal +Justification. I will ask in the first place, whether a man's being +_dead_ in _sin_ render it impossible for him to be quickened unto life +by the spirit of God? See a passage which you quote, "You hath he +quickened who were _dead_ in _trespasses_ and _sins_." If those who +are _dead_ in _trespasses_ and _sins_ can be _quickened_ according to +this passage, what is the reason that those Jews to whom Christ spake +can never be _quickened_? You must see, sir, that the passage which +you quote refutes your notion about this contradiction. You will say +that Christ told the Jews "whither I go ye cannot come," but you +cannot but remember that he said the same thing to his own disciples. +"As I said unto the Jews so I say unto you, whither I go ye cannot +come;" and afterwards explains himself to mean that they could not +come immediately.--Let us now turn this subject round and ask how the +text quoted from Romans can be true if your notion of endless misery +be granted to be the true meaning of the passages you quote? Will you +undertake to say that men who are justified unto life by the +righteousness of Christ will remain endlessly in a state of death and +condemnation? If you do not feel competent to the task of maintaining +such palpable contradiction, why would it not be doing yourself a +kindness just to examine that _soul chilling_ and _heaven dishonouring +doctrine_ of _endless, unmerciful punishment_! One moment's +examination of such an idea when brought in sight of the fountain +which is opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of +Jerusalem to wash in from sin and uncleanness would abolish it +forever. I acknowledge, sir, that my five particulars do not +comprehend every particular of your letter; nor have I attended to all +which they do comprehend so extensively as I would if I could suppose +it necessary; but as you were in hopes of receiving nothing, it is not +to be expected that you will find fault because there is no more. + +[Footnote 11: "Candid Review," or Answer to Robinson.] + +I cannot be willing to close this epistle without giving you credit of +following the apostle's direction in your observation concerning my +argument in respect to St. Peter. You say "I conceive you think you +have got a _mighty_ argument," &c. The apostle exhorts us to be +_children_ in _malice_, and I am sure St. Paul, nor any body else ever +heard a more _childish expression_ which communicated the least +possible disaffection. + +What you quote from St. Peter with a design to prove endless misery, +without attempting to show that such was his meaning, I forbear +commenting upon. If you had shown that Peter could consistently +believe that no man was common or unclean considered in the sheet +which he saw in vision, and at the same time believe that the greatest +part of mankind would remain in sin and uncleanness eternally you +would have done more than you have. I hope, sir, if you are determined +to take your leave of this correspondence without supporting the +subjects of your admonition, and without supporting the heavy charges +you have stated against me, and, likewise, without acknowledging the +impropriety of your admonition, and the incorrectness of your charges, +that you will never attack another of your fellow creatures in the +same way. I do not express this because I feel the least +unfriendliness to you in consequence of the method you have pursued, +but because I think it is contrary to the spirit of Christianity; it +is not doing as we wish to be done by. I do not believe that your soul +feels satisfied with it; but you have some remains of pride yet which +keeps you from giving up ground which you are sensible you cannot +maintain. I hope, sir, you will entertain no apprehensions respecting +my cordial friendship to you, or my readiness to join you in any +possible usefulness to our fellow creatures. And, as you +affectionately committed me to God and to the word of his grace, +please to accept the sincere desires for your present and everlasting +welfare, of sir, your humble servant, for Christ's sake. + +HOSEA BALLOU. + + * * * * * + +LETTER VI. + +FROM THE SAME TO THE SAME. + +PORTSMOUTH, FEB. 1, 1811. + +_Rev. Sir_,--Having taken into serious consideration the whole +correspondence which has passed between us, I have felt very deep +impressions on my mind arising from the following coosiderations. + +1st. You and I are accountable beings, and must undoubtedly, sooner or +later, be called to account for the propriety, or impropriety of our +labours with each other. + +2d. Our professional character must, without doubt, be a high +consideration in our accountability. + +3d. The eyes of society are ever watchful, and God has made us +accountable, not only to himself, but to our fellow creatures, who +have a just demand upon us. + +While these important considerations were revolving in my mind, I felt +a sense of my youth, compared with your age, my inexperience, the +proneness of the human heart to the vanity of self confidence, the +blindness of prejudice to which old and young are more or less +subject, and also, the friendship which has hitherto happily subsisted +between us since our first acquaintance. + +These circumstances and those considerations, led my mind to the +conclusion that I ought to lay the whole matter before God, and to ask +of him suitable wisdom to guide me in relation to so weighty a +subject. + +The result of my devotional supplications is a forcible application of +the divine direction, given by St. Paul 1 Tim. v. 1, "Rebuke not an +elder but entreat him as a father, and the younger men as brethren." + +How far your communications to me are consistent, or inconsistent with +the apostle's direction, in the above test, I do not conceive it my +duty to judge, any farther than a discharge of my own duty, pursuant +to the apostle's direction, may require. On the most deliberate +recapitulation of all which I have written, I cannot now say, that I +could wish to recall a single idea, argument, application of +scripture, or sentiment; though I will not even suggest that better +information might not produce a different conclusion. I trust I have +hitherto treated you, sir, and the subjects of your communications +with all the propriety of which my understanding is master; and my +fervent desire is, that I may complete the labours enjoined on me by +the above text, in strict conformity to that most holy spirit which +inspired such excellent counsel. Therefore, Rev. Sir, I _entreat you_ +as a _father_ to consider, + +1st. Whether you entreated your humble servant as a _brother_ when you +admonished him for important particulars which you wholly refuse to +substantiate either as facts or wrongs? + +2d. Whether you entreated me as a brother in refusing to decide, as to +your meaning, in the first subject of your admonition, and in not +giving me to understand whether I had rightly apprehended you or not? + +3d. Whether you entreated me as a brother in not acknowledging an +agreement of sentiment on the subject of _repentance_ after I had +given _you_ the fullest assurance possible, that I believed in its +necessity and importance? + +4th. Whether you entreated me as a brother in admonishing me as an +apostate from the true faith of the gospel, while I profess to believe +in Christ the Son of God, as the Saviour of the world; and stand in +society, in my various relation by the blessing of God, unimpeached as +to morality? + +5th. Whether you entreated me as a brother in admonishing me against a +doctrine which commends the love and mercy of God in the final +reconciliation and everlasting happiness of all unreconciled beings; +and in opposing said doctrine with no other argument than saying, in +effect, that if the scriptures which prove the doctrine are allowed to +mean as they naturally read, other scriptures contradict them! Thus +furnishing the infidel with his darling weapon against the divinity of +the scriptures? + +6th. Whether you entreated me as a brother in stating those heavy +charges against me, in which you _accuse me_ of a _designed mistake_, +and of _wilful misapplications_ of scriptures where neither _mistake_ +or _misapplications_ of scriptures can be made to appear? + +7th. Whether you entreated me as a brother in misrepresenting my +preaching when you never heard me perform in the particular capacity +of a preacher? + +8th. Whether you entreated me as a brother in taking your leave of +this correspondence without supporting one single particular of your +admonition, or one single charge against me. And also, without +acknowledging the incorrectness of your admonition, or the impropriety +of your charges. + +I entreat you, sir, as a father, to consider whether the spirit which +you manifested, in bring such _unreasonable_ charges against me, be +consistent with the directions given by St. Paul to Timothy, and also +with the example and precept of him who loved his enemies and +commanded his disciples to do likewise? + +I entreat you seriously to consider what the conduct of the Saviour +would have been, if he had been disposed to _judge, denounce, reject_ +and _disfellowship_ all those who sincerely believe in him and strove +to honour him with becoming obedience to his commands, on account of +their not understanding every thing as well as he did? + +I entreat you to call in question your treatment of me because I do +not believe in every thing as you do; and carefully examine if it +correspond with the conduct of him, who, out of pity to human +weakness, submitted himself to the scorn and hatred of those who +considered themselves more righteous than others? + +In relation to the doctrine, to which you appear so violently opposed, +I entreat you, as a father, to take into consideration, 1st. The +promises of God to Abraham by which the doctrine is supported. 2dly. +The corroborating testimonies in the New Testament by which we are to +understand those promises. 3dly. The consistency of the doctrine with +the character of _infinite goodness_. And, 4thly. The consistency of +the doctrine with every benevolent and godlike desire of the human +heart. + +If God promised to bless all the families, nations and kindreds of the +earth in the seed of Abraham, who is Christ, and if St. Paul has +informed us that this blessing is _justification through faith_, I +entreat you to consider by what authority you condemn the doctrine of +_Universal Justification_. + +If the apostle has also argued that God has made peace through the +blood of the cross of Jesus, by him to reconcile _all things_ to +himself, I entreat you to consider by what authority you condemn the +doctrine of _Universal Reconciliation_. + +If in perfect conformity to the promises of God, the prophet has given +his testimony that _all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation +of our God_, I entreat you to consider by what authority you condemn +the doctrine of _Universal Salvation_. + +If you make use of scripture to contradict such plain and positive +declarations, by explaining _parables_ and _doubtful sayings_ for that +purpose, I entreat you candidly to consider whether you can do any +thing more to the dishonour of the sacred word, or more pleasing to +those who wish to bring the scriptures into disrepute. + +If you feel determined to maintain and inculcate the idea of God's +punishing his rational offspring eternally without mercy, love, or +pity towards them, I entreat you, as a father, to consider whether you +can invent any idea which, applied to God, would make his character +appear more contrary to the spirit of him who loved his enemies and +died for them. + +I entreat you to examine carefully and see if it be possible to +reconcile the doctrine of endless misery with the benevolent desires +of the true spiritual children of God; and consider seriously whether +it be proper to pray for the salvation of all men, and then condemn +the belief of it as a heresy. + +I entreat you, as a father, to call into serious consideration the +real cause of all the persecutions and abominable cruelties which have +been practiced in Christendom, on account of religion, and see if you +can find a foundation for these things except in the blasphemous +notion that God is unmerciful towards the impenitent. + +Endeavour, sir, to satisfy yourself how the foolish prejudices of +ignorant zealots could ever have succeeded in establishing so many +middle walls of partition, and in making so many pernicious +distinctions in the Christian world, if the blasphemous notion of +partiality in God had not been the rage of an apostatised church. + +Find out, if you can, I entreat you, sir, the cause of all the madness +and folly, which appear in the habitual coldness and bitterness +exercised by the clergy, of different denominations towards each +other, if it be not the blasphemous notion that their foolish +prejudices are sanctioned by God! + +Adieu, I write no more. I feel that I have done my duty. I have +entreated you as a father in love and faithfuness. I leave the effects +with God; humbly praying and joyfully believing, that when we are +purged from our hay, wood and stubble, with the spirit of judgment and +the spirit of burning, we shall see eye to eye and be admitted to a +humble seat at the feet of our blessed Saviour, for whose sake I +remain, sir, your most obedient and very humble servant. + +HOSEA BALLOU + +Rev. JOSEPH WALTON. + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of A Series of Letters In Defence of +Divine Revelation, by Hosea Ballou + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A SERIES OF LETTERS IN *** + +This file should be named 8225-8.txt or 8225-8.zip + +Produced by David Starner, David King and the Online Distributed +Proofreading Team from a book given for scanning by +Rev. Felicia Urbanski. + +Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the US +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we usually do not +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +We are now trying to release all our eBooks one year in advance +of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing. +Please be encouraged to tell us about any error or corrections, +even years after the official publication date. + +Please note neither this listing nor its contents are final til +midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. +The official release date of all Project Gutenberg eBooks is at +Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A +preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment +and editing by those who wish to do so. + +Most people start at our Web sites at: +https://gutenberg.org or +http://promo.net/pg + +These Web sites include award-winning information about Project +Gutenberg, including how to donate, how to help produce our new +eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter (free!). + + +Those of you who want to download any eBook before announcement +can get to them as follows, and just download by date. This is +also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the +indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an +announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter. + +http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03 or +ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext03 + +Or /etext02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90 + +Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want, +as it appears in our Newsletters. + + +Information about Project Gutenberg (one page) + +We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The +time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours +to get any eBook selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright +searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. Our +projected audience is one hundred million readers. If the value +per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 +million dollars per hour in 2002 as we release over 100 new text +files per month: 1240 more eBooks in 2001 for a total of 4000+ +We are already on our way to trying for 2000 more eBooks in 2002 +If they reach just 1-2% of the world's population then the total +will reach over half a trillion eBooks given away by year's end. + +The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away 1 Trillion eBooks! +This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, +which is only about 4% of the present number of computer users. + +Here is the briefest record of our progress (* means estimated): + +eBooks Year Month + + 1 1971 July + 10 1991 January + 100 1994 January + 1000 1997 August + 1500 1998 October + 2000 1999 December + 2500 2000 December + 3000 2001 November + 4000 2001 October/November + 6000 2002 December* + 9000 2003 November* +10000 2004 January* + + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been created +to secure a future for Project Gutenberg into the next millennium. + +We need your donations more than ever! + +As of February, 2002, contributions are being solicited from people +and organizations in: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, +Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, +Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, +Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New +Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, +Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South +Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West +Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. + +We have filed in all 50 states now, but these are the only ones +that have responded. + +As the requirements for other states are met, additions to this list +will be made and fund raising will begin in the additional states. +Please feel free to ask to check the status of your state. + +In answer to various questions we have received on this: + +We are constantly working on finishing the paperwork to legally +request donations in all 50 states. If your state is not listed and +you would like to know if we have added it since the list you have, +just ask. + +While we cannot solicit donations from people in states where we are +not yet registered, we know of no prohibition against accepting +donations from donors in these states who approach us with an offer to +donate. + +International donations are accepted, but we don't know ANYTHING about +how to make them tax-deductible, or even if they CAN be made +deductible, and don't have the staff to handle it even if there are +ways. + +Donations by check or money order may be sent to: + +Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +PMB 113 +1739 University Ave. +Oxford, MS 38655-4109 + +Contact us if you want to arrange for a wire transfer or payment +method other than by check or money order. + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been approved by +the US Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) organization with EIN +[Employee Identification Number] 64-622154. Donations are +tax-deductible to the maximum extent permitted by law. As fund-raising +requirements for other states are met, additions to this list will be +made and fund-raising will begin in the additional states. + +We need your donations more than ever! + +You can get up to date donation information online at: + +https://www.gutenberg.org/donation.html + + +*** + +If you can't reach Project Gutenberg, +you can always email directly to: + +Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com> + +Prof. Hart will answer or forward your message. + +We would prefer to send you information by email. + + +**The Legal Small Print** + + +(Three Pages) + +***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS**START*** +Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers. +They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with +your copy of this eBook, even if you got it for free from +someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our +fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement +disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how +you may distribute copies of this eBook if you want to. + +*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS EBOOK +By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +eBook, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept +this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive +a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this eBook by +sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person +you got it from. If you received this eBook on a physical +medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request. + +ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM EBOOKS +This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBooks, +is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor Michael S. Hart +through the Project Gutenberg Association (the "Project"). +Among other things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright +on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and +distribute it in the United States without permission and +without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth +below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this eBook +under the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark. + +Please do not use the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark to market +any commercial products without permission. + +To create these eBooks, the Project expends considerable +efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain +works. Despite these efforts, the Project's eBooks and any +medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other +things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged +disk or other eBook medium, a computer virus, or computer +codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. + +LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES +But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below, +[1] Michael Hart and the Foundation (and any other party you may +receive this eBook from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook) disclaims +all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including +legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR +UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, +INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE +OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE +POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. + +If you discover a Defect in this eBook within 90 days of +receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) +you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that +time to the person you received it from. If you received it +on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and +such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement +copy. If you received it electronically, such person may +choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to +receive it electronically. + +THIS EBOOK IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS +TO THE EBOOK OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A +PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or +the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the +above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you +may have other legal rights. + +INDEMNITY +You will indemnify and hold Michael Hart, the Foundation, +and its trustees and agents, and any volunteers associated +with the production and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm +texts harmless, from all liability, cost and expense, including +legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the +following that you do or cause: [1] distribution of this eBook, +[2] alteration, modification, or addition to the eBook, +or [3] any Defect. + +DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm" +You may distribute copies of this eBook electronically, or by +disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this +"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg, +or: + +[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this + requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the + eBook or this "small print!" statement. You may however, + if you wish, distribute this eBook in machine readable + binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, + including any form resulting from conversion by word + processing or hypertext software, but only so long as + *EITHER*: + + [*] The eBook, when displayed, is clearly readable, and + does *not* contain characters other than those + intended by the author of the work, although tilde + (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may + be used to convey punctuation intended by the + author, and additional characters may be used to + indicate hypertext links; OR + + [*] The eBook may be readily converted by the reader at + no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent + form by the program that displays the eBook (as is + the case, for instance, with most word processors); + OR + + [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at + no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the + eBook in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC + or other equivalent proprietary form). + +[2] Honor the eBook refund and replacement provisions of this + "Small Print!" statement. + +[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Foundation of 20% of the + gross profits you derive calculated using the method you + already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you + don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are + payable to "Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation" + the 60 days following each date you prepare (or were + legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent + periodic) tax return. Please contact us beforehand to + let us know your plans and to work out the details. + +WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO? +Project Gutenberg is dedicated to increasing the number of +public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed +in machine readable form. + +The Project gratefully accepts contributions of money, time, +public domain materials, or royalty free copyright licenses. +Money should be paid to the: +"Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +If you are interested in contributing scanning equipment or +software or other items, please contact Michael Hart at: +hart@pobox.com + +[Portions of this eBook's header and trailer may be reprinted only +when distributed free of all fees. Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 by +Michael S. Hart. Project Gutenberg is a TradeMark and may not be +used in any sales of Project Gutenberg eBooks or other materials be +they hardware or software or any other related product without +express permission.] + +*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS*Ver.02/11/02*END* + diff --git a/8225-8.zip b/8225-8.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..33aefba --- /dev/null +++ b/8225-8.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b90ce3c --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #8225 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/8225) |