is not more generally known throughout the world, is the fault of Christians, who take not the right method to propagate it; but have, the greater part, ever done their utmost, either foolishly or wickedly, to marr its progress. The Christian Religion can only be propagated in the rational way of argument and persuasion; and it is the integrity and purity of the lives of professing christians; and their moderation and humanity towards unbelievers, that ever will have the
[print edition page 125]
greatest influence to recommend Christianity, and promote the belief and love of it. The temper and spirit which true and genuine Christianity inspires, is a spirit of meekness and gentleness, charity and compassion; slow to wrath; ready to forgive; prompt to good works.* And <33> where this temper is not found, there is not the same spirit that was in CHRIST and his Apostles; nor the disposition that only can render agreeable to GOD who sent him into the world to teach humility, and benevolence, and to reprove every vitious affection; to exemplify all the moral virtues in his life and conduct; as well as to give the strongest inducements to the practice of them by his doctrines.
SECTION X
But by this time, my friend, I am afraid you begin to dread a sermon. And therefore to return to the argument:
If it is allowed, as it must certainly be, that the doctrines so often repeated are the chief doctrines of Christianity; Christianity carries the same evidence along with it, that any doctrine does, which is confirmed by the plainest, the most proper, or analogous experiments.
“The works of JESUS CHRIST considered as samples of the power he claimed, are not Disperates, with regard to his doctrines, as Spinosa alledges miracles must be with regard to doctrines.”7
It is true, miracles, when considered in a general abstract view, do not appear to have any relation to doctrines: nothing at first sight can seem more distinct or remote the one from the other. And therefore it is commonly objected against the proof offered from miracles: what can miracles have to do in the case; miracles <34> may prove power; but what is that to the truth of doctrines? But take the doctrines and the works of CHRIST, and compare them together; and the relation and connexion is obvious. Samples of power to raise the dead, prove the power to raise the dead: and samples
[print edition page 126]
of power to make happy, prove the power to make happy: in the same way that samples of gravity prove gravity; or samples of elasticity prove elasticity; or that samples of skill in any sort, prove skill of that sort. There is the same relation, in one word, betwixt the doctrines of JESUS CHRIST and his works, that there is betwixt any experiment, and the conclusion that naturally follows from it.
“Nor are the works of JESUS CHRIST arguments ad ignorantiam, (as the same author says) miracles must ever be.”8 For the works of JESUS CHRIST, however much above our comprehension, bear a plain relation to his doctrines; and it is only the truth of the facts or samples, and their relation to the doctrine, that we are concerned to understand. That can never be said to be a proof ad ignorantiam, the connexion of which with the thing proved, or the conclusion inferred, is clearly perceived.
The works of JESUS CHRIST are not arguments of power, we know not what: they are arguments of the very power he pretended to; because samples of that very power. Arguments of his power to raise the dead; forgive sins; make happy or miserable. Arguments of an universal knowledge of nature; and unlimited authority over all things; arguments, in short, <35> of the whole of his pretension; because samples of all he pretended to.
Tho’ we understand not the nature of that power which raises the dead; tho’ the raising the dead be a work above our ability and comprehension; yet a sample of power to raise the dead, proves that power; and the connexion betwixt the sample and the power pretended to is not above our comprehension, but is easily understood. Attraction, say all the philosophers, is above our comprehension: they cannot explain how bodies attract: but experience or samples certainly prove that there is attraction. And proper experiments or samples, must equally prove the power of raising the dead, tho’ we do not understand, or cannot explain, that power.
But because there is so much controversy about that common distinction betwixt things above our reason, and things contrary to our reason, it may not be amiss, on this occasion to say something about it.9
[print edition page 127]
And an example taken from natural philosophy will soon clear the matter: Attraction can only be known by experience, and samples abundantly prove it. But it is above our reason or comprehension? What is the meaning of that? why it is only to say, that a thousand questions may be ask’d about it, to which no answer can be given; because we know not enough about it, to answer them. We know that it is; and some of the laws according to which it produces its effects: And that is all we know of it. And our not being able to give satisfying answers to <36> other questions, that may be asked about it, only proves that there is a great deal relating to it, we do not know.
In the same manner a thousand questions may be ask’d about raising the dead, which we can’t answer. A sample however proves the possibility: and many samples as certainly prove the power to raise the dead; as samples of attraction prove attraction. Nor indeed can the power of raising the dead, be said to be above our comprehension in any sense, that attraction, and twenty other properties of bodies, may not be said to be above our comprehension. What we clearly see to be absurd, we clearly see to be so; but there is a great difference betwixt seeing a thing to be absurd, and not knowing every thing that belongs to it; or not being able to answer every question that may be asked concerning it. Some seem however to confound insolvable questions about a truth, with insolvable or invincible objections against a truth. And because there may be difficult, nay unanswerable, questions relating to a known truth; maintain there may be insolvable objections against a known truth. But an insolvable objection against a truth, is an argument ad absurdum against a truth, or a proof that a known truth cannot possibly be true.* Those who delight in sophistry and grubbing, may
[print edition page 128]
perplex the ignorant or incautious: and no science has escaped this puzzling, perplexing art. But by a fatal calamity, none has suffer’d more than Divinity. Yet when the artful terms of the schools, intro-<37>duced on purpose to darken and embroil the clearest truths, and to be an everlasting source of controversy and wrangling; when all artful, captious, equivocal terms are thrown aside; and truths are expressed in common, simple, plain language, the sophistry is easily seen thro’, and its mists evanish.*
This way of considering the works of JESUS CHRIST, as samples of his doctrines, makes the connexion betwixt his works and his doctrines obvious to every capacity. Because we all reason in this way every day, about a thousand different things: thus the meanest labourer of the ground, or poorest mechanick, must argue frequently: we judge of friends and enemies by samples; by samples and experiments, in short, almost all our affairs in life are regulated. And therefore in this way of handling the question concerning the connexion betwixt the works and the doctrines of our SAVIOUR, I can’t be blamed for having talked so much of miracles hitherto, without giving a definition of them. Because taking the miracles of JESUS CHRIST in this view, nothing more is necessary than to consider them as certain works that shewed such and such power.
It does not belong in the least, to the question, whether these works are above, or contrary to, the established laws of nature; whether superior to human power, as they plainly are; or whether above the power of all created <38> agents. But only what they were; and what power they were samples or experiments of. And of this any body may judge; the relation and connexion is so conspicuous and glaring.
The only thing I fear, my friend, is, that you think I have been too tedious;
