fimilar method of accounting for the rest of his miracles.

After the Pharisees and rulers of the Jews had observed how thoroughly exasperated Jesus was against them, how he exposed all their pride and hypocrify, and how little disposed he was to shew them any favour, it is no wonder that they were determined to reject him in any character, thinking the Romans better masters than such a Meffiah as he would be with respect to them. Thus their fears and their interest together would lead them to oppose Jefus at all events, whether he was the Meffiah or not. The more reasonable and confiderate among them might, however, be fatisfied that God could not contradict himself, and that it was more probable that they had misinterpreted the scriptures, than that the undeniable miracles of Jesus were not proofs of an authority to which they ought to fubmit.

With the modern Jews it should be a fufficient anfwer to this objection, that their ancestors frequently opposed Mofes and the prophets, even perfecuting and killing some of them, notwithstanding their allowed character of messengers from God.

To assist us to form a right judgment in this cafe, let us confider what would be the probable effect of preaching against popery, even with the power of working miracles, in Spain or Portugal,

for

for the space of a year and a few months, which appears to me to have been the period of Chrift's. public ministry. In these circumstances, I should think, that to expect the immediate reformation of the whole country, strongly prejudiced as the people are known to be, would be to expect more than a just knowledge of human nature, and of the history of mankind would warrant. How many would there be who, not being in the way of the preacher, and not seeing the miracles themselves, would give no attention whatever to any reports concerning them; and who, being fatisfied within themselves that the reports could not possibly be true, would obstinately persist in rejecting all evidence in their favour; and if these perfons, as would probably be the cafe, were men of rank, and distinguished for their knowledge, it could not but have great influence upon the common people..

Upon the whole, it will hardly be thought improbable, that after such a person had opposed the superftition of an ignorant and vicious people, and had laboured to throw down the false foundation of their hopes of future happiness, they would endeavour to do by him as the Jews did by Chrift. At most, his fuccess could not be supposed to be much greater in proportion.

As to the miracles of the apostles, the fame motives, whatever they were, that led the Jews to oppose those of Chrift, would lead them to oppose theirs also; and the more, as they were now irritated by opposition, though the power of truth would make its way by degrees.

It is evident, that many of the most intelligent of the Heathens, especially Marcus Antoninus, would not give any proper attention to any accounts of miracles, so many things of this kind having been reported, which, upon examination, appeared to be tricks or illufions; though, had these men been satisfied that the course of nature had really been controlled, it cannot be supposed but that they must have been convinced of the interpofition of the divine power and providence. Many of the Greeks and Romans, however, had a great opinion of the power of Magic, and, without confidering the nature and circumstances of the christian miracles, supposed them to have been performed by some such means.

If we confider the state of the Gentile world, and of chriftianity in early times, we may very well account for the general rejection of it, without any impeachment of its truth.

The Gentiles in general could not reconcile the idea of the ignominious death of Chrift with the great power which his difciples ascribed to him. The more opulent and politer part of them were alfo disgusted, because the first proselytes to chriftianity were generally of the lower fort, and many of them flaves, whom they held in extreme contempt, and with whom they could not bear the thought of associating. The Greek philosophers were exceedingly fond of their knowledge and eloquence, and disdained to receive instruction from such illiterate persons as the apostles and the pri. mitive christians in general were. They were also exceedingly offended at the spirit of christianity, as being at enmity with all other religions; they being of opinion that different modes of worship, and different religions, were even pleasing to the Gods.

The leading men in all the heathen states had a very high idea of the authority of the civil magiftrate, and had always considered the business of religion as intirely subject to his controul; and therefore thought that the mere obstinacy of the christians, in refusing to submit to the laws, was, of itself, deserving of capital punishment. In this manner Trajan reasons in his answer to Pliny. Many of the Gentiles confounded the christians with the sects among the Jews, whom they held in contempt; and, therefore, they would not fo much as give any attention to their preaching or miracles. The common people considered all those who were enemies to their superstitions as atheists, and to this term the greatest odium was ever annexed; and there are several proofs of their regarding the Epicureans, and the christians in the same light. Besides, Paganism had the advantage, which is common to every thing that has been long established, the sanction of antiquity; whereas chriftianity was despised as a novel, and upstart thing.

We are not, however, to suppose that all the impression which the evidences of christianity made on the minds of men, is to be estimated by the numbers of the declared converts to it, since many both of Jews and Gentiles entertained a favourable opinion of the gospel, but were unwilling to own it for fear of censure, ridicule, and persecution, and hoped that God would overlook it, provided they did nothing in direct oppofition to chriftianity, and did not themselves join in the perfecution of christians.

It staggers some persons, that there should be so many unbelievers in the present age; but those who know the world, and the circumstances in which infidelity gains ground, will see nothing in it that is, in fact, unfavourable to the evidences of chriftianity. It would be unjust to unbelievers to rank them all in the same class. I shall, therefore, endeavour to point out the different sources of infido lity in the present age.

A great number of those who profess to reject christianity, are not only such persons as have never confidered the subject, or indeed have a fufficient stock of knowledge to examine it with proper attention, but they are also known to be, in general,