,rev4 ,felicia ,urbanski4 ,a ,,series ,,of ,,letters1 ,,in ,,defence ,,of ,,divine ,,revelation2 ,,in ,,reply ,,to ,,rev4 ,,abner ,,kneeland',s ,,serious ,,inquiry ,,into ,,the ,,authenticity ,,of ,,the ,,same4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,by ,,hosea ,,ballou1 ,pastor of the ,second ,universalist ,society in ,boston4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,to ,,which ,,is ,,added1 ,a ,,religious ,,correspondence1 ,,between ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou1 ,,and ,,the ,,rev4 ,,dr4 ,,joseph ,,buckminster ,,and ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,walton1 ,,pastors ,,of ,,congregational ,,churches ,,in ,,portsmouth1 ,n4 ,h4 ,district of ,massachusetts1 to wit3 ,district ,clerk's ,office4 ,be it remembered1 that on the twenty-fifth day of ,july1 ,a4 ,d4 #ahbj1 in the forty-fifth year of the ,independence of the ,united ,states of ,america1 ,,henry ,,bowen1 of the said district1 has deposited in this office1 the title of a book1 the right whereof he claims as ,proprietor in the words following1 to wit3 ,a ,series of ,letters1 in defence of ,divine ,revelation2 in reply to ,rev4 ,abner ,kneeland's ,serious ,inquiry into the authenticity of the same4 ,by ,,hosea ,,ballou1 ,pastor of the ,second ,universalist ,society in ,boston4 ,to which is added1 a ,religious ,correspondence1 between the ,rev4 ,hosea ,ballou1 and the ,rev4 ,dr4 ,joseph ,buckminster1 and ,rev4 ,joseph ,walton1 ,pastors of ,congregational ,churches in ,portsmouth1 ,n4 ,h4 ,in conformity to the ,act of the ,congress of the ,united ,states1 entitled1 ,an ,act for the ,encouragement of ,learning1 by securing the ,copies of ,maps1 ,charts and ,books1 to the ,authors and ,proprietors of such ,copies1 during the times therein mentioned3 and also to an ,act entitled1 ,an ,act supplementary to an ,act1 entitled1 an ,act for the ,encouragement of ,learning1 by securing the ,copies of ,maps1 ,charts and ,books1 to the ,authors and ,proprietors of such ,copies during the times therein mentioned2 and extending the benefits thereof to the ,arts of ,designing1 ,engraving1 and ,etching ,historical1 and other ,prints4 ,,john ,w4 ,,davis1 ,clerk of the ,district of ,massachusetts ,,to ,,the ,,reader4 ,some few suggestions respecting the following ,controversy are thought necessary in order to inform the reader how it was first introduced1 the motives which led to it1 and those which induced to its being published to the world4 ,we learn from the ,rev4 ,mr4 ,,kneeland1 that having at different times been exercised in his mind with serious doubts respecting the authenticity of the ,scriptures1 and the system of ,divine ,revelation1 recorded in them1 he was induced to solicit a correspondence with the ,rev4 ,mr4 ,,ballou on the subject4 ,that1 in order to render the controversy the more interesting1 by calling into action the energies of mind1 and by directing the correspondence to definite purposes1 he assumed the character of a real opponent1 determining to maintain the opposition1 in all its forms1 until reduced1 by necessity1 to yield to successful arguments directed against it4 ,it was with great reluctance that the advocate for the christian religion1 in this controversy1 consented to undertake a work of this nature2 not1 however1 because he esteemed it unnecessary1 or because he entertained any doubts with regard to the defensibility of revelation1 but1 as he contends1 on account of the want of abilities and means to do the subject justice4 ,his opponent1 however1 being a familiar acquaintance and friend1 as well as a preacher in the same profession of faith with himself1 having led him to believe that a labour of this kind was called for by the most sacred obligations of brother to brother1 he was induced to render what assistance was in his power1 without infringing too much on other important duties in which he was almost constantly engaged4 ,when the controversy closed1 ,mr4 ,,kneeland felt such an entire satisfaction in his own mind1 that the objections which he had stated were fairly answered1 and the validity of the ,scriptures vindicated1 that he was led to believe that to publish the correspondence would be of service to the cause of ,christ4 ,he therefore obtained leave of his correspondent1 and carried the manuscripts to the westward1 where he offered proposals for the work1 and obtained a number of subscribers2 but being called to remove to ,philadelphia1 he was under the necessity of postponing the publication for a season4 ,the publisher having obtained some knowledge of this correspondence1 and being informed by the ,rev4 ,mr4 ,,kneeland that the arguments which it contains were1 in his opinion1 calculated to strengthen the believer1 as well as confirm the doubting1 he negotiated for the manuscripts and now presents the work to the public1 entertaining a hope that it may serve the interest of christianity1 and promote a respect and veneration for the sacred writings4 ,the letters which passed between ,mr4 ,,ballou and two respectable clergymen in the town of ,portsmouth1 ,n4 ,h4 were some years since published in ,vermont2 but several circumstances rendered it proper that this work should be reprinted4 ,besides its being nearly or quite out of print1 the first edition was on an inferior paper1 the work badly executed1 and a number of errors were discovered4 ,to those who believe in the universality of divine goodness1 the publisher feels confident the following work will be received and read with no small satisfaction4 ,and a hope is entertained that it may be the means of enlightening some1 who though they possess the spirit of universal love and benevolence1 have not the felicity of believing in the divine goodness to the extent of their own desires4 ,h4 ,,bowen4 ,a ,,series ,,of ,,letters1 c4 ,,extracts ,no4 #a4 ,the first letter of the objector was designed merely as an ,introduction1 inviting ,mr4 ,b4 to the investigation of the important subject of moral truth1 or more particularly the truth of divine revelation4 ,the following are extracts4 ,the thought has long since occurred to me that the present age is an age of discovery and improvement4 ,the human mind seems to be developing its powers in a most wonderful manner2 new inventions1 new discoveries1 and new theories are the fruits of new experiments2 while many are improving upon theories and subjects already existing4 ,thus human nature seems to be almost prepared to make a regular advance in moral as well as scientific truth4 ,however pleasing this must be to every real lover to the arts and sciences1 yet there seems to be a disposition 7at least1 as it respects all moral and religious subjects7 to chain down the human mind to its present attainments1 and thereby prevent all further improvement4 ,o how long will it be before common sense shall burst this bubble of fanaticism1 and all its mists become evaporated and removed by the rays of simple and native truth8 ,then shall man know for himself that1 under ,god1 all his powers and faculties are as free as the element he breathes4 ,free to think1 free to speak1 and free to act as reason and good sense shall dictate4 ,supposing that you and ,i should think of setting an example for others1 by trying to throw off the prejudices of a false education1 so far as we have been thus entangled1 and search for the truth within us1 as the foundation of all ,,truth which materially concerns us to know4 ,who1 except our own consciences1 will ever call us to an account for so doing8 ,it gives me pain when ,i see what time and money1 what labour and toil have been expended1 and are still expending1 in plodding over1 as it were an old dead letter2 to learn languages which exist no where only on paper1 barely for the sake of reading the opinions of other men1 in other times2 men who lived in other ages of the world1 and under very different circumstances from ourselves2 whose opinions1 all of which are worth preserving1 might be given in our own language1 so as to answer every purpose which can be answered by them1 at less than a hundredth part of the expense it necessarily requires to obtain a competent knowledge of those languages in which almost every thing1 supposed to be valuable1 has been originally written4 ,and after all1 the truth1 or falsity1 of every proposition must depend on the truth or falsity of the principles embraced in it2 and not on the language in which it was originally written4 ,if the ,greek and ,hebrew languages be any security against things being uttered or written falsely in those languages1 ,i should not only think it important to learn them1 but to adopt them1 if possible1 as our vernacular tongue4--,but as ,i believe none will contend for this1 ,i should like to be informed of what possible service it can be to an ,american to learn either of those languages8 ,is it not a fact1 that every natural as well as moral truth may be fully unfolded to the understanding without them8 ,this will lead the way to one of the principal subjects which ,i mean to discuss4 ,it maybe said1 that the holy scriptures were originally written in ,greek and ,hebrew3 viz4 the bible1 which contains a revelation of the will of ,god concerning the duty1 interest1 and final destination of mankind4 ,this1 if admitted1 gives the ,greek and ,hebrew languages an importance that nothing else could4 ,hence the importance of preserving the ,greek and ,hebrew languages1 without which1 religion could not be preserved in its purity4 ,and as all have not an opportunity of attaining to a knowledge of those languages1 it is the more necessary that some should1 lest the knowledge of languages1 on which so much is supposed to depend1 should be lost to the world4 ,if ,i understand the above proposition1 it seems to be this3 ,the only revelation of ,god to man1 which was ever recorded on either vellum or paper1 was written partly in ,greek and partly in ,hebrew2 hence1 the revealed will of ,god cannot be known only through the medium of those languages4 ,if the truth of all this can be made to appear1 ,i should find no difficulty in admitting all the consequences which must result from such premises4 ,it appears a little extraordinary1 however1 to my understanding1 and not a very little neither1 that ,god should make a revelation of his will in one age1 and not in another2 to one nation2 and not to another2 or that he should make a revelation in one language1 and not in another6 ,if a special revelation1 was ever necessary at all1 it is difficult for me to see why it was not equally necessary in all ages of the world1 to all the nations of the earth1 and in all languages ever spoken by man4 ,how sweet is truth to the understanding6 ,and1 when spoken in a language every word of which is familiar1 how harmonious it sounds to the ear by which the sentiments find their way to the heart6 ,when ,god speaks to the inward man there is no need of going to ,lexicons1 ,dictionaries1 and ,commentaries to know what he means4 ,i would not complain1 however1 even of this method to ascertain truth1 if ,i could be so happy as always to come away satisfied4 ,but to consider a subject on which much is supposed to depend1 and1 desiring if possible to obtain the truth1 plod through the dark mists occasioned by the ambiguity and contradiction of authors1 and after all1 be obliged to dismiss the subject as much in the dark as it was found1 is too insupportable to be confided in as the only road to moral truth4 ,let it not be supposed however1 that ,i mean to insinuate that the bible contains no moral truth2 so far from this1 ,i conceive it to be replete with moral instruction2 that is to say1 there are excellent moral maxims in the bible2 but respecting these there is neither ambiguity nor obscurity2 and probably for this plain reason1 because there seems to be no dispute about them4 ,these however are none the more true for being written1 and would have been equally true if found in any other book1 and at the same time not found in the bible4 ,truth is truth wherever found1 and all moral truth1 as well as natural1 must be eternal in its nature4 ,much of the bible however1 is merely historical2 and whether most of the things there related are either true or not1 ,i do not see any connexion they either have1 or can have1 with either my present or future happiness4 ,as for instance1 ,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 fish6 any more than it is with the story of ,remus and ,romulus' being nursed by a she wolf6 ,and if not1 these things are matters of total indifference2 yea1 as much so as the extraordinary1 and1 were it not for comparing things supposed to be sacred with profane1 ,i would say1 ridiculous stories in the heathen mythology4 ,if it should be contended that the facts recorded in sacred history are necessary to prove the power and providence of ,god towards his children1 it may be answered that those in profane history1 if true1 are equally conclusive4 ,if it should be said that we cannot place the same confidence in profane history as in sacred1 it brings me to the very subject of my inquiry--viz4 ,if the things stated in the bible are no more reasonable than those in profane history1 what reason have we to believe these any more than those8 ,must not our own reason finally determine for ourselves whether or not either be true8 ,and if we are in no sense interested in the truth or falsity of those accounts why need we trouble ourselves about them8 ,yours1 c1 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,i4 ,much esteemed friend1--,the desire you express of attempting those researches which seem necessary to promote the further attainment of moral truth1 is appreciated as truly laudable2 and did ,i feel myself adequate to your wishes1 ,i should enjoy a peculiar felicity in complying with your request4 ,but so far from this ,i am very sensible that the magnitude of the general subject which you have introduced1 requires to be investigated by abilities far superior to those possessed by me1 and demands a tribute from resources not within my possession4 ,however1 as you have imposed an obligation on me by the communication which is here acknowledged1 ,i will make a feeble attempt to suggest a few reflections relative to the main subjects of your epistle1 which if they do nothing more1 will return merited acknowledgements and plead the necessity of calling to your assistance abilities more promising4 ,while ,i view the advances which are making in the knowledge of the arts and sciences1 with the pleasure of which you speak1 ,i am apprehensive that the propensity to chain down the human mind to its present attainments1 and thereby prevent all further improvements1 relative to moral truth1 may have its rise in a principle1 which1 so far from being inimical to man1 is1 in its general tendency1 incalculably beneficial4 ,no desire is entertained to justify all the zeal and all the means which are employed to prevent the free exercise of the human mind1 in its researches after divine knowledge1 and to retard the influx of that light which would prove unfavourable to doctrines which have little more than prescription for their support2 but it seems reasonable to make a proper distinction between what may be called a salutary principle in the human mind1 and a wrong application or an erroneous indulgence of it4 ,the principle referred to1 inclines us not only to hold in the highest veneration any improvements which we have made1 but also to retain such acquisitions in their purity4 ,now it is believed that what you complain of1 has its rise from the foregoing causes1 and is nothing more than a wrong or an erroneous indulgence of a natural desire which in its general tendency is advantageous4 ,nothing is more incident to man1 than to misapply his desires1 and to overate his reasonable duty4 ,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 on1 would be worse than the disorder4 ,and now the thought strikes me1 that the way by which we account for the improprieties which have just been traced up to their causes1 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 nature1 and which1 though through the wanderings of the human mind1 may have not a little hay1 wood and stubble1 yet possess too much gold1 silver and precious stones1 to be forsaken as a pile of rubbish4 ,it gives you pain to see what time and money1 what labour and toil have been expended and are still expending in plodding over as it were an old dead letter2 to learn languages which exist no where only on paper1 barely for the sake of reading the opinions of other men who lived in other times1 c4 ,but you allow that all this would be necessary if the only revelation of ,god to man1 which was ever recorded on vellum or paper was written partly in ,greek and partly in ,hebrew1 and that the will of ,god cannot be known only through the medium of those languages4 ,in this last particular1 you express what appears very reasonable1 and ,i presume you would be willing to consent to all this expense and toil1 even if the proposition were to lose part of its importance1 and it were only contended that ,god had actually made a revelation to man1 which was written originally partly in ,greek and partly in the ,hebrew1 without saying that he has never caused a revelation to be written originally in any other language4 ,a revelation from ,god1 if it were written only in the ,hebrew or ,greek1 would be considered of sufficient value to recompence the labour of learning the language4 ,but you contend that this revelation1 if real1 can be translated into ,english1 but1 you must allow that to translate it1 the original must be learned first4 ,will you say1 that after the translation is once made1 the original is of no more use8 ,how then are future ages to determine whether they have not been imposed on8 ,suppose no person of the present age understood the languages in which the scriptures were first written1 surely in this case1 those languages would be lost beyond recovery4 ,suppose then it should be doubted whether our bible was not a fabrication1 written originally not in ,hebrew nor in ,greek1 but in some more modern language1 how could the suggestion be refuted8 ,you appear to be perplexed with the disagreement of authors1 as commentators1 and ,i presume1 critics on the original text2 you speak on this subject1 as if it were too much for patience to endure4 ,now1 dear brother1 ,i confess ,i feel very differently on this subject4 ,i feel a devout1 a religious gratitude to him whose wisdom is foolishness in the sight of too many of my fellow creatures4 ,i view the very thing of which you complain1 as that fire and crucible which have preserved the written testimony from any considerable corruptions4 ,this is a subject on which volumes might be written to the instruction and edification of the disciples of ,jesus4 ,the queries which you state concerning a revelation's being made in one age and not in another1 in one nation and not in another1 in one language1 and not in another1 if a special revelation were necessary1 c4 are not considered as very weighty objections to the doctrine of the scriptures4 ,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 continued4 ,but why should the ,creator1 create a man and a woman at one time1 and not at all times when he sees fit to multiply his rational creatures8 ,it is not only evident that ,god saw that the laws of procreation were sufficient to perpetuate man1 and to multiply his rational offspring1 but it is likewise apparent that the connexions1 relations1 and harmonies of society are principally built on this law4 ,so ,i humbly conceive1 that the continuance and propagation of a divine revelation are even as well secured by the means which have been employed for that purpose1 as if the ,almighty had in every age1 and in every country made such a revelation1 and moreover1 it is likewise apparent1 that the mental labours necessary in obtaining a knowledge of these divine things greatly contribute to their enjoyment1 and render the christian fellowship1 faith and hope peculiarly interesting and edifying4 ,here again ,i can only suggest a subject on which voluminous writings might be profitable4 ,you seem to entertain an idea that the historical part of the bible can be of no importance to you1 as it has no connexion with your present or future happiness4 ,you instance the particulars of ,daniel's being cast into the den of lions1 and ,jonah's being swallowed by the fish1 c4 ,as these are circumstances in the history of that nation which continues a comment on1 and an evidence of prophesy1 they are too interesting to be dispensed with4 ,if you could produce the decree of a powerful monarch1 sent into all parts of his dominions1 which was occasioned by ,remus and ,romulus' being nursed by a she wolf1 the case would bear some marks of a parallel4 ,profane authors advert to such events as sufficient support of any fact which they endeavor to maintain4 ,i come now to your main object4 ,speaking in regard to the credibility of what is written by profane authors1 and of that which is recorded in the scriptures1 you ask--,must not our own reason finally determine for ourselves whether or not either be true8 ,to this ,i reply in the affirmative2 but then reason must have its means and its evidences4 ,for instance1 ,i read of the death and resurrection of the man ,christ ,jesus1 ,i consider this vastly important event as it stands in connexion with the evidences which support it1 and reason is the eye with which ,i examine these evidences1 and when reason is constrained to say all these circumstances could never have existed unless the fact were true1 it is then ,i am a believer in ,jesus4 ,but if ,i must consider the resurrection disconnected from the evidence1 reason has nothing to do with it4 ,please to accept these hasty remarks1 not as an answer1 but as suggestions which may lead to one1 and as a testimony of my respect and esteem4 ,yours1 c4 ,h4 ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,,ii4 ,a revelation from ,god1 let it be made in any language whatever1 ,i am very ready to admit1 must be considered of sufficient importance1 not only to justify all reasonable pains to preserve it1 but also to hand it down in its original purity to posterity4 ,we owe it1 not only in gratitude to the giver1 but we owe it in justice to future generations1 who would have just occasion to reproach us1 if they could know that so valuable a treasure was put into our hands1 which might have been handed down to them1 and that we suffered it to perish through what must be termed by them1 a criminal neglect4 ,you will perceive1 therefore1 that ,i had no particular allusion to a revelation from ,god1 when ,i spoke of translating the most valuable of ancient writings into ,english4 ,no one will pretend that such translations could not be made sufficiently accurate to answer all the purposes1 either of history or of the useful arts4 ,it is admitted that the case is quite different1 if there be a mystery in these writings1 the truth of which depends on literary criticism1 or grammatical exactness2 but if these writings are nothing more than the bare opinions and discoveries of men1 and of men too1 as liable to error as ourselves1 and if no one was to view them in a different light1 ,i apprehend there would be all the confidence placed in a translation1 that could with propriety be placed in the original itself4 ,for1 after all1 we should try the facts by other corroborating testimony2 and as to the opinions1 we should judge of them only by the reasonableness and fitness of things4 ,although ,i have heard it objected to the translation of ,seneca's ,morals1 that much of the beauty of the style is lost in the translation1 yet ,i never heard it pretended but that the ideas are sufficiently clear2 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 principles4 ,and ,i very much question whether there ever has been a translation of the bible1 or even of any other work1 in which the most important facts were not sufficiently apparent4 ,if the fact can be supposed otherwise1 it must be admitted that1 comparatively speaking1 but very few people at the present day are benefited by a revelation from ,god4 ,for the great mass of mankind have to receive the bible altogether on the credit of others4 ,and who are their guides in this case8 ,answer1 ,translators and ,commentators6 ,and as these men made no pretentions to inspiration1 unless the translation is substantially correct1 as to matters of fact1 how are the common people benefited by a revelation from ,god6 ,having adverted to the previous studies in the dead languages1 which are required before an admittance can be obtained in our common colleges1 the objector proceeds4 ,but ,i am off from my main subject4 ,i will now endeavour to call up all my mental faculties1 seriously to attend to a revelation from ,god4 ,the idea suggested in these words is beyond all expression awfully sublime4 ,yea1 not even the bursting of ,vesuvius1 not the aurora-borealis1 not the forked lightning1 not the tremendous earthquake1 no1 nor yet the greatest phenomenon in nature1 of which the human mind can conceive1 can afford such ideas of the truly sublime1 as the truth1 if it could be realized1 of the above proposition4 ,let me not hastily reject without serious reflection1 that1 which of all truths1 must be the most important4 ,o help me1 my dear friend1 help me also1 ,o thou who art the only source of truth1 thoroughly to investigate this momentous subject6 ,but let me not be deceived4 ,let me not receive for truth1 that which cannot be made sufficiently clear to my understanding4 ,there can be no more harm in doubting1 than in believing1 where the evidence is not clear4 ,all that which appertains to eternal truth will remain1 whether ,i now see it or not2 and that which does not appertain to it will never be realized1 although ,i may now be made to believe it4 ,there can be no harm1 therefore1 in investigating this subject in the same way and on the same principles1 as ,i would investigate all subjects4 ,although ,i cannot expect to offer any thing very new1 yet ,i am disposed to examine the subject for myself1 and that too1 in my own way4 ,i shall quote no authors1 for ,i have not read but few on this subject which meet my approbation1 and even them are not now by me4 ,my own understanding is the only author to which ,i shall appeal4 ,if that can be cleared of the difficulties which have fallen in its way1 ,i am willing1 yea ,i wish1 still to believe in divine revelation4 ,here let me close my preamble1 which is already made too lengthy1 and come immediately to discourse ',,on ,,divine ,,revelation4' ,in order to know the truth or falsity of any proposition1 we must in the first place understand the terms by which the proposition is made2 for without such previous knowledge1 we cannot know what is meant either to be affirmed or denied4 ,by divine revelation1 ,i understand 'a communication of sacred truth1' made directly from ,god to man4 ,in order for any man to know that a revelation has been made to him from ,god1 it must be made in such a way1 that neither his perception1 nor his judgment or understanding1 can possibly be mistaken4 ,for1 as man by his reason alone1 never could have foreseen that a revelation would be made1 therefore1 unless it should have been made in such a way that he could not have been deceived1 a rational man would be more likely to conclude that he was deceived1 than that1 which to him would seem more unlikely1 should be true4 ,it seems1 therefore1 that a revelation from ,god to all our conceptions of the fact1 must be considered1 if existing at all1 as something supernatural2 otherwise it could be nothing more than discovery1 or a fortuitous event4 ,hence a revelation from ,god1 however true1 and however clear1 to the person or persons to whom it was first communicated1 must lose its evidence1 in some degree1 when it comes to be communicated by him or them to others2 for1 being communicated to others1 although it is still revelation1 yet not being received immediately from ,god1 it cannot be accompanied with the same evidence which it was in the first place2 therefore1 to say the most of it1 it is nothing more than the history of a revelation4 ,it is made no less true than it was before2 but its truth now rests upon very different testimony4 ,the principles in nature all existed1 before they were discovered by man4 ,their being discovered1 neither changed their nature1 nor made them any more true4 ,what consternation a total eclipse of the sun1 or of the moon must have produced1 before their cause was known8 ,they are now viewed1 especially that of the latter1 among the common occurrences of nature4 ,yea1 many of the operations of nature1 which are now perfectly understood by chemists1 could they be viewed by the common people1 who know not their causes1 they would be inclined to believe they were supernatural4 ,at least1 it would not be difficult to make them believe so1 especially when this knowledge was confined to a few1 and those few were so disposed4 ,these remarks are not designed to do away the force of any arguments which may be founded on miracles2 for this is no proof that miracles may not exist2 but then1 how is a miracle a revelation of any thing more than what is contained in the miracle itself8 ,this is what ,i cannot see1 but ,i shall have occasion to say more on this subject hereafter4 ,it will be needless for me to object to the inferences drawn from miracles until a miracle is proven4 ,if a man absolutely knows something of which ,i am ignorant1 and informs me of it1 it makes no difference to me how he come by his knowledge--it is revelation to me4 ,it may not be divine revelation2 but supposing it is1 or is not1 in either case1 how am ,i to believe8 ,is it any thing that will admit of mathematical demonstration8 ,if so1 ,i shall take up with nothing short of being convinced in this way4 ,is it any thing which he has discovered8 ,if so1 he must give me evidence of such a discovery4 ,is it something to which he was an eye witness8 ,then the truth to me1 depends for the present1 entirely on his credibility4 ,i must be convinced in the first place that he was not deceived himself1 and secondly1 that he has no motive in deceiving me4 ,and evidence equally conclusive must accompany the truth of divine revelation1 or it ought not1 nay more1 it cannot1 rationally be believed4 ,but supposing that ,i am convinced of the truth1 and therefore believe2 and ,i relate the same to a third person2 is it equally revelation to him as it was to me8 ,yes1 it may be so considered1 in one sense1 at least1 for it informs him of something of which he was before ignorant1 as much so as it did me1 but then the truth of the fact does not rest with him on equal testimony1 and therefore he is more excusable if he does not believe4 ,if1 however1 he can believe all that ,i believe1 and in addition to that1 believe also in me1 then1 and not till then1 he will become a believer in the same truth4 ,but if he even suspects my veracity1 it weakens in his mind1 all the other testimony2 and though he may still believe in the main proposition1 yet he believes with less strength of evidence4 ,here a very important question arises in my mind4 ,is divine revelation something that rests entirely on matters of fact2 or is the most essential part1 which concerns us to know1 a mere matter of opinion8 ,on a few moments of reflection1 however1 it appears that this can hardly admit of a question4 ,for all that relates to a future1 and an eternal state1 must be a mere matter of opinion only2 and the facts recorded in the scriptures are supposed to corroborate and substantiate those opinions4 ,now1 as they respect matters of fact1 ,i believe the scriptures are substantially the same in all versions1 and in all languages into which they have been translated4 ,and if so1 there is no need of learning the original languages in order to become acquainted with the matters of fact recorded in the bible4 ,we never should have seen1 nor even heard1 of so much controversy and biblical criticism1 if the disputes had been wholly relative to matters of fact4 ,no1 all the various readings1 different translations1 and interpolations1 have little or nothing to do with a dispute of this kind4 ,but if the facts can he disputed1 they must be disputed upon other grounds than that of biblical criticism4 ,take1 for instance1 the 'death and resurrection of the man ,christ ,jesus1' which you have mentioned2 can any one suppose that there ever was1 or ever will be1 a translation which makes any thing more or less in favour of this fact8 ,this is not pretended4 ,and if not1 how does a knowledge of the ,greek language help me to believe this fact8 ,this brings me again to my main subject2 and now two very important questions arise in my mind4 #a4 ,in relation to the facts1 as stated1 respecting the life1 death1 and resurrection of the 'man ,christ ,jesus2' are they positively and absolutely true8 #b4 ,admitting the truth of the facts1 does it necessarily follow1 or is there any thing which renders it certain1 that1 in regard to other things1 neither he1 nor the apostles1 so called1 could be mistaken8 ,and that1 in all their writings1 they have stated nothing which is incorrect8 ,that is1 what certain evidence have we that the writers of the books1 which being compiled1 are called the ,new ,testament1 were all honest men8 ,that they could not have been mistaken relative to the things which they have written8 ,and that in every instance1 they have written the truth8 ,respecting the first proposition1 ,i have already observed that the truth of it does not1 neither can it1 depend on biblical criticism4 ,they are either facts1 which are substantially correct1 or they are fabrications4 ,the circumstantial differences between the original copies themselves1 as recorded by the four ,evangelists1 are much greater than what can be found in all the different versions1 translations1 c4 that have been collated4 ,hence no argument can be brought against the truth of those facts from either a real or supposed difference between the translation1 and their respective originals4 ,for even if not only the original copies1 but the language also in which they were originally written1 should be entirely lost1 it would not militate1 as ,i can see1 against the truth of the facts therein recorded4 ,the translation acknowledges and affirms itself to be a translation out of the 'original ,greek1' together with former translations compared1 c4 ,now permit me to ask1 is not this as good evidence of the existence of the original ,greek1 as the original ,greek is of the facts intended to be proved thereby8 ,i should consider the translation of any work1 which was generally known at the time of its translation1 better evidence of the existence of such a work1 though the original should be entirely lost1 than the work itself1 even in the original1 could be of the existence of facts1 which1 if they existed at all1 were known at first to but very few4 ,you have suggested1 sir1 that if the original of the scriptures were entirely lost1 future ages would not know but they had been 'imposed upon4' ,i think1 however1 you will not insist on this point1 lest you should destroy an argument1 which1 hereafter1 you may very much need4 ,i recall my words4 ,for this seems to imply that we are already engaged in a controversy2 whereas1 ,i trust we are both candidly in search of truth4 ,i suspect1 however1 there is too much truth in your suggestion2 but then its truth1 instead of relieving1 only increases my difficulty4 ,every one must know that when the translation of the scriptures was first made1 the original not only existed1 but it must have been known to others1 beside the translators1 who were able to detect the fraud1 if there had been any1 as to substantial matter of fact4 ,and1 in a work of so great importance1 this certainly would have been the case4 ,hence you will at once perceive1 that when the copies were few in number1 and before the art of printing was discovered1 fabrications and interpolations might find their way into the original scriptures with much greater facility1 than could any considerable variations by an intentionally erroneous translation2 especially after the work become generally known1 and so highly valued1 as to require a translation of it4 ,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 ,jesus1' and of course1 as ,i presume1 by which we are to examine the evidences in support of all other subjects1 ,i shall say no more upon this part of the subject until ,i hear your reasons for believing in the resurrection of ,jesus2 for this fact1 as ,i conceive1 must be considered the main hinge on which the whole ,christian system rests1 if it can be supported by any fact1 on which it will finally turn4 #b4 ,but after all1 my greatest difficulty is with my second proposition4 ,to relate facts substantially correct1 which persons have either seen or heard1 requires no degree of uncommon skill1 or uncommon honesty2 but to state things which will absolutely take place1 which are yet future1 requires something more than common skill2 and to state things correctly1 which will take place in eternity1 must1 as ,i conceive1 require nothing short of divine wisdom4 ,that the evangelists have stated nothing more than what is substantially correct1 as it respects matters of fact1 will be admitted by all3 for every one knows there is a circumstantial difference in their writings1 both as it respects the order of time1 and in several instances1 as it respects matters of fact4 ,if the account given us of ,jesus be even substantially correct1 ,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 existence4--,but ,i have been often struck with astonishment1 when reflecting on the subject1 that ,jesus said so little in regard to a future state6 ,notwithstanding he was long with his disciples1 as we are told after his resurrection1 and did eat and drink with them2 yet1 how silent he was upon the subject of eternity1 and of a future and spiritual world6 ,at the only time when we should rationally suppose that he could be a competent witness in the case1 admitting his death and resurrection true1 is the time when he is entirely silent as to the final and eternal state of man6 ,should we admit therefore that ,jesus at this time was capable of declaring eternal truths1 yet1 as he testified nothing on the subject1 nothing relative to the subject can be proved from his testimony4 ,it may be said that ,christ had plainly taught his disciples respecting this subject1 previous to his death1 and therefore it was not necessary for him to say any thing more respecting it4 ,but a confirmation of what he had before taught1 if it had been repeated after his resurrection1 would have added great weight to his former testimony4 ,we need not dwell however1 upon these niceties1 as the main question is not involved in them4 ,yet ,i am inclined to think that if all the words of ,christ1 which have been handed down to us1 should be closely examined1 they would be found to be much more silent on the subject of a future state than many have supposed4 ,but the main question is1 are we certain that he could not have been mistaken in the things whereof he affirmed8 ,this question may be thought blasphemous3 but ,i cannot see wherein the blasphemy consists2 for ,i cannot help making the inquiry1 in my own understanding1 and as my object is to gain instruction1 ,i put the inquiry on paper4 ,you may say that ,jesus was endowed with divine wisdom1 and therefore could not err4 ,that divine wisdom cannot err1 ,i admit1 but does divine wisdom secure man at all times1 and under all circumstances1 from mistake8 ,if the man ,christ ,jesus was in fact man 7and that he was man1 even ,trinitarians admit7 notwithstanding he was endowed with divine wisdom1 why might he not without any dishonour to the ,deity1 be sometimes left to exercise only the wisdom of man8 ,and to say that the wisdom of man cannot err1 would be saying contrary to daily experience4 ,i have not contended that ,jesus ever erred2 but ,i contend that he must have been liable to error1 or else he was not man4 ,and the supposition that he did not err1 not even in thought or opinion1 ought not to be admitted without the most conclusive testimony4 ,but whatever may be the conclusion on this subject1 as it respects the 'man ,christ ,jesus--a man approved of ,god1' yet what shall we say concerning the apostles8 ,were they also absolutely secured from error8 ,these men1 according to the confession of one of them at least1 not only had been1 but still were--sinners4 ,paul1 notwithstanding his apostleship1 still acknowledges the plague of his own heart ',i am carnal1 sold under sin--when ,i would do good1 evil is present with me--,o wretched man that ,i am6' c4 ,are such men absolutely proof against even the error of opinion8 ,it appears to me there are too many incidents of imperfection recorded in the lives of the apostles to admit all this4 ,peter once rebuked his master1 at another time denied him4 ,he once objected to the voice of the spirit1 and was afterwards accused by his brethren for obeying it4 ,paul accused ,peter to his face1 and also disagreed with ,barnabas4 ,and other circumstances might be named1 proving them to be destitute of intuitive knowledge4 ,considering1 therefore1 all these things1 how do we know but that in their zeal to do good1 7for ,i do not consider the apostles bad men2 neither do ,i think any the worse of ,paul for either acknowledging his own faults1 or detecting the dissimulation of ,peter17 ,i say therefore1 in their zeal to do good1 how do we know but that they stated things relative to another world1 which were only inferences1 which1 as they supposed1 were justly drawn from what they had either seen or heard1 or else what their own fruitful imagination dictated8 ,if we are at liberty to view the apostles in this light1 however highly their opinions are to be valued and respected1 yet ,i see no occasion of investigating their writings with the eye of biblical or grammatical criticism2 for after all1 they are but the opinions of men like ourselves4 ,but if it can be demonstrated that the opinions of the writers of the ,new ,testament can be relied on1 as containing eternal truth1 without any mixture of error1 then it is very important for us to know the meaning of all the words they used1 not only as it respects their general import1 but also the exact and particular sense in which they used them4 ,this however cannot be done without a thorough acquaintance1 not only with the ,greek1 but also with the ,hebrew language1 for they used many ,hebraisms1 which1 with a knowledge of the ,greek only1 we should not be likely fully to comprehend4 ,yours1 c4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,ii4 ,much esteemed friend1--,in replying to your second number1 you will excuse me if ,i begin by finding some fault1 in which1 however1 ,i will endeavour to be as sparing as the case will admit4 ,on the subject of the languages1 after reading in your first number the following in its connexion3 ,if ,i understand the above proposition1 it seems to be this2 the only revelation of ,god to man1 which was ever recorded on vellum or paper1 was written partly in ,greek and partly in ,hebrew2 hence the revealed will of ,god cannot be known only through the medium of these languages4 ,if the truth of all this could be made to appear1 c4 and after replying to your argument on this subject1 ,i can hardly account for the insinuation in your second number1 by which you suggest1 that you had no particular allusion to a revelation from ,god when you spoke of translating the most valuable of ancient writings1 c4 ,the subject of a revelation you acknowledge to be your main object2 if this be the case1 you have this object in view when you speak of the ,greek and ,hebrew1 and also when you speak of the arts and sciences4 ,you contend in your second number1 that the translation of the ,scriptures out of the original languages is as good evidence of the existence of the original1 as the original could be of the facts they relate1 c4 ,and this ,i believe is the only acknowledgement you make in favour of the original's having been any benefit4 ,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 correct1 which seems not easy to account for4 ,but ,i will give you no further trouble on the subject of this nature2 nor will ,i occupy my time in investigating the question relative to the necessity of studying those languages1 which you acknowledge is off from your main subject1 and take some notice of your queries respecting a divine revelation4 ,although ,i am unable to trace the connexion of many of your remarks with which you call your main subject1 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 particulars1 as subjects of your inquiry4 #ast4 ,is it reasonable to suppose that ,god has ever made a special revelation to man8 #b;d4 ,is the resurrection of ,jesus capable of being proved8 ,and1 #c;d4 ,if so1 does it follow that this was designed by divine wisdom to give us any hope respecting a future state8 ,it is not pretended that you have stated these questions just in this order1 but these are the subjects which your second number suggests to my mind4 ,i shall take a much nearer road to come to a solution of these questions1 than that which would lead me to follow you through all your remarks1 because you have furnished me with the means to do so4 #ast4 ,you acknowledge that a divine revelation if real1 is of all truths the most important4 ,here let the eye of reason examine4 ,why should a revelation from ,god be more important than those discoveries which our ,creator has enabled us to make in the arts and sciences8 ,why should such revelation be more important than the use of the mariner's compass1 or the art of printing8 ,even without contending that a divine revelation is of any greater importance than the arts and sciences1 your allowing it any importance at all1 is1 in the eye of reason an argument in its support4 ,had you taken the other road1 and contended that there was no necessity of a revelation1 and had you been able to make this appear1 you would have proved to the eye of reason1 that a ,being of infinite wisdom1 who can never act without a just cause1 had never made a revelation4 ,but if reason admits of its importance1 as long as this is the case1 it will be looking not only with a fervent desire1 but with expectation till it makes the discovery4 ,you will1 no doubt1 allow that a divinely munificient ,creator would not omit any thing which is of importance to his intelligent creatures4 ,perhaps you will1 7though ,i do not see why you should7 call up a former query1 which was answered in my first1 which answer was not receipted in your second1 and ask why this revelation was not made in every nation1 in every language1 and in every age8 ,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 society4 ,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 reasoning4 ,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 first1 why may not a revelation from ,god1 be perpetuated by different means than those which first made it1 and thereby the great object be even better secured than by a perpetual revelation1 which would seem to render research unnecessary1 and leave the reasoning powers without employ8 ,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 languages4 ,and furthermore1 permit me to tell you1 that if you are disposed to doubt and to disprove what you acknowledge to be of such vast importance1 it is your province to bring forward your strong reasoning1 if such you have1 by which the prophesies of the old testament1 those delivered by ,christ and his apostles shall be made to appear either to have no just analogy with the events of which they speak1 or that they were contrived by impostors since the events took place4 #b;d4 ,you acknowledge the validity of the evidences in favor of the resurrection of ,jesus4 ,you say2 ,that the evangelists have stated nothing more than what is substantially correct1 as it respects matters of fact1 will be admitted by all4 ,again2 ,i do not consider the apostles bad men4 ,now the apostles are the deponents who solemnly testify the fact of the resurrection of ,jesus4 ,why should you wish me to prove what you allow to be true8 ,why do you not take the other hand1 and say the apostles were impostors1 they were the opponents of the righteous rulers of the ,jews who put their master to death8 ,why do you not avail yourself of the story put into the mouths of the guard who watched the sepulchre1 and say that those timid disciples who all fled and left ,jesus when they saw him bound1 not only went to the sepulchre and stole the body of ,jesus and hid it where no mortal could ever find it1 but then went to ,jerusalem and boldly affirmed he was alive1 who was dead1 and then had the boldness and audacity to accuse the rulers of having denied the holy one and the just1 and desired a murderer to be delivered unto them2 and of having killed the prince of life1 whom ,god had raised from the dead8 ,the reason is obvious1 you see the impropriety of such argument4--,but3 #c;d4 ,allowing the resurrection of ,jesus1 the truth of divine revelation1 the honesty of the apostles of ,jesus1 are we to rely on what they say respecting a future state8 ,answer1 yes1 most assuredly4 ,for here let reason ask1 whether a divine revelation founded on the resurrection of ,jesus could have a more reasonable object1 than the bringing to light1 life and immortality8 ,again let reason ask whether the divine ,being would endow ,jesus and his apostles with the gift of miracles1 by which the divinity of their missions was proved to the understanding of all who believed1 and then suffer them to teach things of a moral1 a religious1 or of an eternal nature which were not true8 ,by so doing1 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 teach4 ,for myself ,i am perfectly satisfied that infinite goodness would never do any thing so imperfectly4 ,i am satisfied1 being convinced of the truth of the facts which you acknowledge1 that the testimony of ,jesus and his apostles respecting this and the coming world1 may be relied on with the utmost confidence and safety4 ,you intimate that ,jesus said but a little on the subject of a future state4 ,i am entirely of your opinion4 ,and yet ,i am persuaded that he and his apostles have said as much on the subject as is necessary for us to believe4 ,they have given sufficient proof that the design of our ,creator is a design of eternal goodness to our race of being4 ,jesus has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel4 ,the ,christian is enabled to hope for existence with ,god in an eternal state1 and this is as much as our present welfare requires4 ,i have no doubt that many passages of scripture have been applied to a future world1 by ,christian expositors1 which have no allusion to such a case--but this harms not the glorious truths and divine realities of the religion of the blessed ,saviour4 ,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 another1 and that a want of a correct knowledge of this revelation here1 would subject the ignorant to inconveniences in a future state4 ,such a sentiment is an impeachment of the wisdom and goodness of ,god4 ,for if this were the case1 why was the gospel not early published to all people8 ,why were ages after ages suffered to pass away1 and generations after generations permitted to sink into eternity without a ray of that light which was indispensable to their everlasting happiness8 ,was it not as easy for the eternal to send his son at the dawn of time as after so many ages had passed away8 ,was it not as easy for him to communicate to all nations as to one8 ,but divine wisdom has seen fit to manifest itself by degrees in the system of the gospel as well as in the knowledge of science2 and we have no more evidence to believe1 that those who go from this state to another ignorant of the gospel of ,christ1 will1 on that account1 be rejected of ,god from his favour1 than we have to believe that those who have died ignorant of the sciences1 will1 on that account be so rejected4 ,every communication from ,god1 whether relative to the moral or physical world is evidently designed for our profit in the state where such communication is made4 ,this improvement of the moral and religious state of man was the evident design of the revelation of ,god1 and to this agree all the prophets4 ,instead of the thorn shall come up the fir-tree1 and instead of the briar shall come up the myrtle-tree4 ,you seem to be opposed to biblical criticisms4 ,so am ,i1 if the object be to fix a creed to which all must conform on pain of being anathematized1 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 mountains1 no harm can ever arise from it1 but a benefit4 ,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 do2 but wisdom must direct in this great and necessary work4 ,it was those who had more zeal than discernment who asked if they should pluck up the tares from among the wheat8 ,they were told that they would pluck up the wheat with the tares4--,let us be careful1 my brother1 and in our zeal to cleanse1 take care and not destroy4 ,if you are troubled with unbelief1 if this plague have entered your heart1 permit me to suggest a remedy4 ,humility is the first step1 sincere piety towards ,god the second1 let these be followed by that for which the ,bereans were commended and the deadly virus of unbelief will soon be purged4 ,will you say2 physician heal thyself8 ,i reply1 ,i think ,i have found relief by the use of the prescription1 and am so much in favour of it1 that ,i am determined to continue its application myself as well as recommend it to others4 ,if you ask why ,i do not direct some arguments more cogently to prove divine revelation8 ,i answer1 in the first place1 you have granted the validity of the evidences2 and secondly1 if ,i think of the attempt1 the brilliant labours of better abilities argue the impropriety of it4 ,but if you think it necessary to labour this subject1 ,i will propose the single instance of the conversion of ,st4 ,paul for investigation4 ,by this means we shall be kept from rambling after different subjects4 ,if you can give a reasonable account of this conversion without admitting the truth of christianity1 ,i will acknowledge you have left me destitute of one evidence on which ,i now rely4 ,on the other hand1 if you fail in this1 you may reasonably suppose that you would fail in any other case of equal moment in this general controversy4 ,yours1 c4 ,h4 ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the letter containing extracts ,no4 #a1 having been laid before the ,rev4 ,,edward ,,turner1 of ,charlestown1 ,mass4 he saw fit to reply to it4 ,the following are extracts from his letter4 ,passing over the principal parts of your introduction1 which generally embrace sentiments to which ,i readily subscribe1 ,i will just notice what you say concerning the study of languages4 ,i am not so tenacious of this kind of study1 as to believe that too much time has not often been employed in it4 ,i am also convinced with you1 that 'the truth or falsity of every proposition must depend on the truth or falsity of the principles embraced in it4' ,but still ,i am not able to say that the study of ,greek and ,hebrew can be of no 'possible service to an ,american4' ,neither1 because those languages are not a perfect 'security' against falsehood1 does it necessarily follow that they are no 'security' at all4 ,for how shall we arrive at the knowledge of the 'principle embraced in a proposition' without the knowledge and use of language8 ,we cannot in any other way4 ,now if it be a fact1 that a proposition embracing certain principles may suffer by translation1 and even its principles be perverted and misrepresented1 then1 an understanding of the original1 in which the proposition was written1 may1 in my opinion1 be very useful4 ,it may assist a man to arrive at a true knowledge of the 'principles' upon which said proposition is founded4 ',it gives you pain to see what time and money1 what labour and toil are expended in plodding over an old dead letter1 to learn languages1 which exist no where only on paper1 barely for the sake of reading the opinions of other men1 in other times2 men who lived in other ages of the world1 and under very different circumstances from ourselves1 whose opinions 7all of which are worth preserving7 might be given in our own language1 so as to answer every purpose1' c4--,but if these 'opinions' should be given in our own language1 there must be some to understand ,greek and ,hebrew1 or the opinions of those ancient writers1 let them be worth ever so much1 would never find their way to us4 ,and when we have gained those supposed opinions1 through the translation1 how do we know that the translators were faithful8 ,who can say they were not warped by system8 not misled by preconceived ideas8 ,who can say they have not wilfully imposed upon us8 ,under such circumstances1 the ability to detect any inaccuracies or imposition1 would1 in my view1 be very desirable4 ,you have1 yourself1 my brother1 availed yourself of this ability1 and very justly merited the gratitude of your readers1 by rectifying the judgment1 upon certain terms used in the scriptures1 the former translation of which1 you have disavowed4 ,as ,i value those efforts of yours1 and have been instructed and edified by them1 ,i am proportionably sorry to find them treated in the language of disparagement4 ,you observe that 'the learned are as much at variance with each other as the unlearned1' and this circumstance you say1 'weakens your confidence4' ,but upon what subject are they not at variance1 even where ,greek and ,hebrew are not concerned8 ,have philosophers been always agreed1 when they have discoursed in one language8 ,have chemists been always of one opinion1 though the subjects of their investigations are material bodies8 ,you will not reply affirmatively4 ,and if not1 and no system can be found which is not in some degree 'liable to misconstruction1 disputation and deception1'--what are we to do8 ,shall we depend upon nothing8 ,shall we remain immovable for fear we should fall8 ,shall we never attempt to walk for fear we should stumble8 ,i must be allowed to express my concern1 that1 it should appear 'not a little extraordinary to you that ,god should make a revelation of his will in one age and not in another1 to one nation and not to another1 or in one language and not in another1 and if a special revelation was ever necessary at all it is difficult for you to see1 why it is not equally necessary1 in all ages of the world1 to all nations of the earth and in all languages ever spoken by man4' ,it is true1 ,i may be unable to see why a revelation was not equally necessary to one nation as well as to another1 and at the same time1 but is this a proof that no revelation was ever made to any nation at any time8 ,i know of no special reason why the laws of electricity were not developed to my grandfather as well as to ,dr4 ,franklin1 with whom he was contemporary2 or why the great principles of civil liberty should not have been discovered to other nations as well as to our own1 and at the same time1 or to ,,all nations1 a thousand years before they were discovered to one4 ,but all this is no discredit to those discoveries4 ,but ,i find reason to doubt whether a revelation 'is equally necessary in all ages of the world4' ,i doubt whether a special revelation is ,,now necessary2 and for a very obvious reason2 because a special revelation has already been made4 ,and as this1 though at first1 really special1 follows the general course of other things which are beneficial1 and which commence with a few and diffuse themselves to many1 it is a reason which precludes the necessity of a constant recurrence of miracles or any other special medium of revelation4 ,you certainly will not deny1 that1 admitting there has been a revelation from ,god1 it has been progressive like all things else1 which involve the interests of man4 ,if we admit these facts1 they will go far to explain some of the difficulties1 to which you allude2 but if we do not1 our disbelieving in a special revelation will not remove1 but increase our difficulties4 ,your's1 c4 ,e4 ,,turner4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,,iii4 ,to the extracts above1 the objector replied as follows4 ,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 scriptures1 our friend asks1 'upon what subject are they 7the learned7 not at variance1 even when ,greek and ,hebrew are not concerned8 ,have chemists been always of one opinion8' c4 which must be answered in the negative4 ,nevertheless ,i may take liberty to observe that inasmuch as they have disagreed1 it shews that the subjects about what they have disagreed1 are as yet obscure1 and therefore perhaps none of them are entitled to full and complete 'confidence3' for whatever is plain and obvious1 men seldom disagree about4 ,that the sun and moon are globes1 and not triangles1 all are agreed2 and it would be impossible to raise a dispute on the subject3 but whether either or both of them are inhabited1 or even capable of being inhabited1 by rational beings1 similar or like unto ourselves1 is a proposition not so clear1 and respecting which the greatest philosophers might possibly disagree4 ,the above remarks are intended to shew that when men differ in opinion1 whether learned or unlearned1 it is obvious that the truth about which they differ1 to say the most of it1 is yet but obscurely made manifest to their understanding4 ,in order to remove an objection1 to the idea of revelation1 on account of its being made only to one nation1 c4 our friend says1 ',it is true1 ,i may be unable to see why a revelation was not equally necessary to one nation as well as to another1 and at the same time2 but is this a proof that no revelation was ever made to any nation at any time8' ,i am very ready to answer this question in the negative4 ,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 electricity2 as mentioned by our brother2 and therefore my mind is not to be relieved from its difficulty in this way4 ,if it could be proved that the principles manifested by revelation were like the principles in nature1 against the developement of which there is no great barrier at one time than at another except what exists in the ignorance of man2 and if the ,christian could now try the experiment over again1 and thereby demonstrate the truth of the doctrine of the resurrection1 the same as the philosopher can try the experiment for himself1 and thereby demonstrate the truth of the doctrine of electricity1 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 removed4 ,but the very idea of a revelation supposes the manifestation of it to differ essentially from all the discoveries of man4 ,therefore the remarks of our friend relative to the laws of electricity1 c4 seem to be hardly in point4 ,the evidences of revelation to all1 excepting those to whom the revelation was first made1 are in their very nature essentially different from the evidences of natural philosophy1 chemistry1 c4 ,for these are founded in immutable principles which never vary1 and are ever open at all times to thorough investigation and experiment4 ,hence if the learned have any doubts on the subject1 those doubts may be removed by occular demonstration2 and even when they are enabled by any new discoveries to correct some former opinions1 which were either founded on mere conjecture or imperfect reasoning1 yet the first principles still remain1 and the former evidences1 instead of being weakened1 are increased by every new discovery or experiment in the developement of truth4 ,but not so with evidences of divine revelation4 ,although ever so clear at first1 and so well supported by facts1 concerning which the witness had the clearest evidence1 yet the evidences being of such a nature as preclude a repetition1 like those respecting a vision of the night or any other phenomenon1 are liable to suffer by passing from one to another1 and also to be impaired by every change which they are caused to pass4 ,and if the evidences of any fact may be weakened at all1 either by lapse of time1 or by passing through different hands2 by the same causes1 if continued1 they may lose all their strength4 ,that the evidences of some facts may be thus weakened1 ,i believe will not be denied4 ,hence what was once clear may be now doubtful1 and in process of time may become entitled to no credit4 ,if therefore the evidence of revelation either have been1 or ever shall by any circumstances whatever be thus impaired1 then a new revelation may become necessary either to revive or to strengthen the evidences of the old4 ,if ,christ should make his second appearance1 according to the opinions of some1 it would be as much of a revelation as his first appearance was2 and this new revelation would corroborate and confirm the old2 but if nothing of the kind should ever take place1 and if there should be nothing more to confirm the validity of prophesy1 but let the world pass on for several thousand years as we know it has for fifteen hundred years past1 how long will either the ,jews or christians believe in divine revelation8 ,i believe however1 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 necessary4 ,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 feelings2 and let it not be imagined for a moment that ,i feel at all disposed to shrink from my former assiduity2 for as long as the world1 or any considerable part thereof1 believe the scriptures to be divine revelation ,i think it very important that they should have a correct understanding of them4 ,so long therefore as ,i hold this to be my profession1 ,i mean faithfully to pursue it2 ever remembering that ,i am not accountable in the least degree either for the truth or falsity of the bible1 but only for my faithfulness in preaching1 taking heed that ,i do not preach that for bible1 which is not bible4 ,let not my brethren be 'concerned1' or made in the least degree unhappy on my account4 ,my mind was never more tranquil respecting religious subjects than at the present moment4 ,my doubts1 whatever they are1 give me no uneasiness2 they only excite me to diligence and assiduity in endeavouring by all possible means to ascertain the truth2 and wherever1 or in whatever light1 it shall be discovered1 ,i am fully satisfied that eternal truth is perfectly right1 yea just as it should be4 ,for1 provided deism should prove true in its stead1 what is there to be lost if christianity fails8 ,ought we not to be thankful for1 and also satisfied with the truth of either8 ,it appears to me that all ought to be satisfied with the truth whatever it may be2 and therefore my present object is to ascertain1 if possible1 what truth is4 ',did human reason1' saith he1 'unassisted by divine light make the discovery8' 7i4 e4 of the 'unity of ,god4'7--',then indeed would all nations1 in all ages1 have possessed the great object made manifest by revelation4' ,in answer to this1 ,i would only ask1 were not the laws of electricity discovered by 'human reason unassisted by divine light8' ,why then were they not known to 'all nations1 in all ages8'--,the fact is1 what reason is capable of discovering may also be long concealed from the eye of reason4 ,yours1 c4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,iii4 ,dear ,sir1 and ,brother1--,as ,i have not the opportunity of presenting your third number to our mutual friend and brother1 to whom it most properly belongs to reply1 ,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 suggested4 ,you wish us to take it for granted1 that those parts of our communications to which you make no reply1 are at least1 generally speaking1 satisfactory to your mind4 ,respecting this particular1 you will suffer me to point out1 what appears to me1 a very material defect in your proposed method4 ,suppose1 sir1 an argument be laid down on which much depends1 in the opinion of the writer1 and out of a proper reply to which1 he anticipates great advantages2 he waits for a reply--,no reply comes to this particular1 but the very same query which the argument was designed to answer is still urged2 is it not easy to see that much labour may be in vain in consequence of this method8 ,if you answer to a question1 stating with great seeming earnestness1 viewing the question of importance in the mind of him who states it1 you would not only expect1 but you might really need to be informed what effect your reply was allowed to have in the mind of your opponent4 ,and as he might not anticipate the use which you had designed to make of his answer1 you would not judge it advisable to submit to him whether he should reply or not4 ,you have finally put the dispute about the necessity of retaining the dead languages at issue on the question relative to a future state1 in the following words2 ,if the opinions recorded in scripture relative to a future state of existence are to be relied on1 as being dictated by ,god himself1 and in a way too1 that was not mistaken2 and that the writers of the scriptures being thus inspired1 have written nothing but the truth1 then ,i admit1 c4 ,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 inspired4 ,your discernment will at once discover that it would be imprudent in the extreme1 to obliterate1 without first knowing that what was to be defaced was of no utility4 ,a child1 ever so old1 who should utterly deface his father's last will and testament1 which had made ample provisions for his future wants1 merely because he had not a perfect understanding of it1 or on suspicion that there were some possible defects in it1 could not be considered prudent in so doing4 ,but if the will should finally fail1 and prove invalid1 no loss would be sustained even if it were committed to the devouring element4 ,to say1 the will may be destroyed until it has been proved1 would be absurd4 ,in your further remarks on our brother's communication1 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 nature4 ,but when you have contended successfully for this 7which by no means has any power to refute his argument7 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 mind1 as there are in the subjects themselves4 ,it is acknowledged1 without controversy1 that we cannot demonstrate by any mathematical or chemical process that there ever was such an emperor in ,rome as ,augustus ,caesar1 or such a governor in ,judea as ,pilate1 or such a man as ,jesus2 but then we are not1 on this account1 or any other1 unable to find such kind of evidence as the nature of the case admits1 and such as is sufficient to satisfy the candid mind4 ,should any one now pretend to deny that ,louis ,x,v,ith4 was beheaded1 and allege as proof that no such thing was to be credited1 because it had never been discovered as the result of a chemical process1 would you hesitate to fault his reasoning8 ,should it occur to your mind that you have contended that the evidence of revelation is as different from the evidence required in natural discoveries1 as the subjects themselves are different1 you are reminded that you have contended for this only with a view to weaken the force of the former1 and in a way to disallow its validity4 ,at the same time you state that you do not undertake to deny a special revelation from ,god1 but wish only to take a review of the evidences1 and see if they are such that it is impossible it should be false4 ,of these evidences you speak thus2 ,although ever so clear at first1 and ever so well supported by facts1 concerning which the witnesses had the clearest evidences1 yet the evidences being of such a nature as to preclude a repetition1 like those respecting a vision of the night or any other phenomenon1 are liable to suffer by passing from one to another1 and finally lose all their strength4 ,here it seems you pretend to state the character of the evidences of a divine revelation1 which evidences you wish to review4 ,permit me to ask1 dear brother1 if it would not have appeared more consistent with piety and candor to have reviewed before you fixed the character of the evidences8--,there is a proper order in which every thing should be conducted4 ,all our researches should be kept from the embarrassments of prejudice4 ,though ,i feel much reluctance in entering on so great a subject as the vindication of the truth of divine revelation1 fearing1 ,i should fail in doing that honour to the subject which ,i am confident it deserves1 ,i am inclined to suggest a few things which ,i think are worthy of some notice4 ,as you speak of a vision of the night1 the evidences of which were clear to the person and satisfactory at the time1 those evidences would naturally lose their force when communicated to others and finally lose their strength4 ,let us suppose a case4 ,a man shall have a vision of the night1 in which it shall be revealed to him that some time before the present generation shall leave the stage of life1 the kingdom of ,great ,britain will be overcome by the power of ,france2 that very many of the flourishing cities of ,england will be destroyed in a very awful manner2 that ,london will be laid level with the ground2 that the distress of the inhabitants during the siege will be extreme2 that for some time before this great event1 there will be wars and rumors of wars among the nations1 and certain signs very wonderful will be seen in the heavens4 ,this man tells his vision very circumstantially and several persons write it down4 ,now suppose as the time passes away1 these events1 one after another1 should take place1 all in the same order in which the vision represented them2 do you feel willing to say that the evidences of the truth of this vision1 are all the time losing their force8 ,no surely they are not2 they are all the time gaining strength and waxing brighter4 ,whether ,i am able to satisfy you that the above case is a fair representation of the evidences of divine revelation1 or not1 it discovers in some degree the ground on which1 in my mind1 revelation is established4 ,compare1 if you please1 the prophesy of ,jesus recorded in the #bdth of ,matthew1 with the history of the events of which the divine messenger spake4 ,yours1 c4 ,h4 ,,ballou4 ,p4 ,s4 ,you have noticed1 no doubt1 in a parenthesis1 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 brother1 to which you replied4 ,it was evidently not his design to argue a similarity between the nature of these widely different subjects1 but to show that no greater partiality appears in the divine wisdom1 in not discovering the truths of revelation in all ages1 to all nations and in all languages1 than in its not leading the human mind to the discovery of electricity or any other of the laws of nature in the same manner4 ,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 inventions8 ,and if you allow it has1 why do you not assign a reason why these discoveries should not have been made in all ages1 to all nations1 and written or rather printed1 in all languages that cannot as well be applied in the other case8 ,in this way you would do away his reasoning and my own likewise1 for as you notice1 we were both of one mind on this subject4 ,before ,i close this postscript1 ,i wish to remark on the subject which you have in view1 in reviewing the evidences of divine revelation1 which you say is to see if they are such that it is impossible it should be false4 ,now it appears to your humble servant1 that faith does not require evidence of the description you lay down4 ,i grant it wants to be satisfied and it has a right to expect it2 it feels under no obligation to evidence which comes short of conviction2 but it does not require all possibility to be taken into its account4 ,this would seem to go beyond the limits of faith and enter into the regions of certainty4 ,if the evidences in support of faith be sufficient to give rest1 peace1 and consolation to the mind1 and if the faith be strong enough to effect the conduct of the believer in a proper manner1 the object of faith is obtained4 ,the hopes of the husbandman may serve to illustrate this particular4 ,he does not know for certainty that his fields will produce him any thing2 he does not know that the coming season will be favourable to his crops1 yet he plants and sows in comfortable expectation4 ,he rises early and labours cheerfully1 his expectations are full of comfort1 he sleeps quietly and enjoys content4 ,but if you ask him whether he views it impossible that he should fail of a harvest8 he will with but very little concern answer in the negative4 ,the just shall live by faith1 we walk by faith and not by sight4 ,all1 therefore1 that we can reasonably expect in the case before us1 is to find a decided balance of evidence in favour of the religion of the gospel4 ,and to review the evidences of this religion1 it seems necessary first to allow that there are evidences in existence which go to prove it1 if their validity be allowed4 ,for instance1 the four evangelists1 the acts of the apostles1 together with the epistles of the apostles are considered evidences of the truth of this religion4 ,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 writings8 ,there are a great many other evidences which serve to corroborate those mentioned1 but if you can do them away1 no doubt the others may be as easily removed4 ,you will duly consider that in disproving the religion of ,jesus ,christ1 you disprove all religion1 for ,i am satisfied that you will not pretend that you are making a choice between the gospel and some other doctrine4 ,no1 the choice is between the gospel and no religion at all4 ,come then1 strip away all the clouds of superstition1 and demonstrate at once that there has been no sun in the firmament during the whole of a cloudy day6 ,soar like the strong pinioned eagle1 make your tour beyond the mists of error and bring us the joyless tidings that there is no clear sky in the heavens4 ,can you imagine any thing to be more pleasing than the coming of one that brought good tidings8 ,but let us have the worst of it4 ,show from undoubted authority that there never was such a man as ,jesus1 or show that he was a wicked impostor and deservedly lost his life4 ,show moreover1 that there never were such men as the apostles of ,jesus1 or that they were likewise impostors1 and all suffered death for their wicked impiety6 ,give the particulars of ,saul's madly forsaking the honourable connexion in which he stood1 for the sake of practising a fraud which produced him an immense income of suffering6 ,but you say the apostles were not bad men4 ,very well1 then let us see how good men could tell so many things which they knew were not true1 and suffer and die in attestation of what they knew to be false4 ,you will see the danger of supposing that honest men can bear testimony to falsehood under the pretence of doing good1 as this would destroy all testimony at once2 even your own cannot be relied on after you maintain this abominable principle1 which has been practised a wicked priesthood for ages4 ,h4,b4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,,iv4 ,the objector in his fourth number begins by explaining himself in some particulars wherein he had not been fully understood1 and also by making some concessions respecting the importance of retaining the original languages in which the scriptures were written2 and1 bringing these remarks to a close1 he proceeds as follows3 ,in regard to a revelation from ,god1 the three propositions which you have stated answer my mind well enough1 as far as they go1 to which1 however1 ,i would wish to add a fourth2 and ask1 admitting the three first propositions true4 ',fourth4 ,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 eyes8--viz4 the miracles of ,christ1 the circumstances attending his death1 his resurrection1 and the miracles wrought by themselves in his name8' #ast4 ,is it reasonable to suppose that ,god has ever made a special revelation to man8 ,you say ,i have acknowledged that a divine revelation 'if real1 is of all truths the most important2' 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 sciences1 c4 ,i think these questions may be easily and correctly answered4 ,one relates to the blessings of eternity2 and the others to those only of time2 hence if the truths manifested by a revelation had been of no more importance to man than the truths in natural philosophy1 reason would say1 ,god would have left them also to be discovered1 if discovered at all1 like all other truths1 without a special revelation4 ,but1 you must excuse me for not being able to see the force and conclusiveness of your reasoning1 when you say that my 'allowing it any importance at all1 is1 in the eye of reason1 an argument in its support4' ,supposing ,i am informed of a large estate bequeathed to me by some benefactor4 ,i acknowledge that it is very important to me1 if true1 as ,i am in great need2 yet ,i do not believe it true4 ,now1 is my acknowledging its importance1 if true1 an argument in support of its truth8 ,if it is so1 the reason of it is out of my sight4 ,i should think that the reason of man 7the only reason with which we are acquainted7 would hardly undertake to say whether a revelation is either necessary or not necessary4 ,the only evidence that reason can have of its necessity is its truth2 and a supposition that it is not true equally supposes it not to be necessary4 ,for to suppose otherwise supposes that ,god has omitted something which was necessary to be done6 ,try the matter as it respects a new revelation4 ,who will undertake to say that a new revelation either is or is not necessary8 ,no one who believes in a revelation will deny the possibility of such an event4 ,suppose then for the moment it is true2 and something is brought to light infinitely more glorious than any thing of which the human mind has yet conceived2 will any one say it is unimportant8 ,or is the 'allowing it any importance--an argument in its support8' ,i am very ready to allow that a 'divinely munificent ,creator would not omit any thing which is of importance to his intelligent creatures3' and on this ground ,i admitted the importance of revelation 'if real2' but ,i am yet unable to see how this is any argument in its support4 ,it seems to me that this argument might be turned right the other way with equal force4 ,if revelation be not true1 it is not necessary it should be2 and man can be made just as happy in this world by knowing all that he can know without it1 as those are who believe in it2 and admitting it not true there is no more importance in all the stories about it1 than there is in the ,alcoran6 ,now1 supposing you should 'allow' all this1 would it be any argument against the truth of revelation8 ,i think not4 ,in answer therefore to the first particular1 ,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 predicated2 for1 aside from those evidences1 ,i do not see why mankind should be taught to believe in a future life and immortality by special revelation1 any more than they should be taught the arts and sciences by special revelation2 yet reason does not reject the evidences of such an event when they are made clear to the understanding4--,therefore1 it appears to me that your first proposition is involved in the second1 viz4 #b;d4 ,is the resurrection of ,jesus capable of being proved8 ,i should have said something more on the subject which was answered in your first number1 and which ,i neglected to acknowledge in my second1 if it had occurred to me as being necessary4 ,i will briefly state here that your reasoning on that subject is satisfactory2 and if a revelation can be fully proved ,i feel not disposed to complain on account of its seeming partiality4 ,infinite wisdom dispenses his blessings so as best to answer his benevolent designs2 and were we to object to the manner1 merely because we do not comprehend the equality1 we should be satisfied1 strictly speaking1 with nothing4 ,but you have excused yourself from undertaking to prove your second proposition in a way that ,i did not expect1 viz4 by finding1 as you supposed1 in my words1 an acknowledgement of its truth4 ,here again ,i must confess my misfortune in giving too much grounds for the wrong construction4 ,every one knows however the ambiguity of words1 and how the meaning of a sentence may be altered by placing the emphasis on a different word from what the author intended4 ,i acknowledge that my words will admit the construction you have given them2 yet you could but see that it was giving up at once what ,i had in a number of places1 both before and after1 considered a main question4 ,and then1 you ask me why ,i wish you to prove what ,i acknowledge to be true4 ,if you will be good enough to review the passage1 and notice that the word substantially was emphatic1 and contrasted with circumstantial1 a little below1 you will perceive that my meaning was simply this4 ,no one will pretend that the evangelists were correct in every minute particular1 but only correct in substance2 and by the ,,all1 by whom this will be admitted1 ,i mean those who believe in divine revelation2 that even they would acknowledge1 that in point of correctness1 the writers were 'no more' than substantially so4 ,however3 ,you think if ,i am 'disposed to doubt1' c4 it is my province to bring forward my 'strong reasoning1' c4 ,i know of no disposition that ,i feel respecting the subject but to ascertain1 if possible1 the truth4 ,if ,i have doubts1 it is not because ,i choose to doubt1 but because ,i cannot help them2 and if ,i have faith it is such as is given me4 ,of one thing ,i have no doubt2 that is1 that the truth1 whatever it is1 is right4 ,but3 ,admitting the scriptures are not true1 ,i shall not attempt to guess what is true respecting the subjects to which they relate4 ,for ,i might guess a hundred different ways to account for what we know is true1 and all of them be wrong4 ,my doubts on this subject are nothing more than doubts2 they do not amount to a confirmed unbelief2 because they admit the possibility of the account's being true4 ,yours1 c4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,iv4 ,much esteemed friend1--,your fourth number is hereby acknowledged2 and though occasions for finding fault are in some measure extenuated1 it still appears that you have lost the real connexion of your arguments1 and have made the subject of the languages one of your main subjects1 when judging from your first number1 it was no more than a vestibule to the grand edifice which it was in your mind to examine4 ,however1 you having paid more than half1 we will not stand about the fraction1 as long as we have a profitable object in view4 ,you call up what you call the subject4 ,i suppose the main subject4 ,this you state as follows3 ,in regard to a revelation from ,god1 the three propositions which you have stated answer my mind well enough1 as far as they go2 to which however1 ,i would wish to add a fourth1 and ask2 admitting the three first particulars true4--#dth4 ,is it reasonable to suppose1 that the apostles had any other means of forming their opinions1 relative to a future state1 than what passed before their eyes8 viz4 the miracles of ,christ1 the circumstance attending his death1 his resurrection1 and the miracles wrought by themselves in his name8 ,i wish1 in this place1 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 stated4 ,for if it be allowed1 as you propose1 that my propositions are true1 then you consent to the validity of the apostles' testimony respecting a future state1 which granted1 it makes no difference in what way the apostles come to the knowledge of futurity4 ,when a thing is known1 it is known4 ,the means by which it is known add nothing to either side of the argument4 ,if you allow that my argument on this subject is correct1 as it seems you do1 then you acknowledge that ,god would not endow men with the power to heal the sick and raise the dead1 whose testimony concerning a future state could be justly doubted4 ,i will not be too positive that ,i rightly apprehend your meaning on this subject1 but as you propose to allow my three propositions1 and as you make no attempt to do away my reasoning1 especially on my last1 ,i think ,i should not understand you according to your own proposal in any other way4 ,the methaphor which you use to help you away from my argument respecting the importance of a revelation from ,god1 does not appear fully adequate to the purpose for which you use it4 ,it might not be a reasonable1 a necessary disposition of property for the proposed benefactor1 to give you a large estate2 it might be1 in the eye of reason a very improper donation1 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 obedience4--,but if you will make the case a parallel1 and suppose you are an heir1 a lawful child1 and your father has a large estate to dispose of1 then you will see that it is right and just1 and no more than what you have reason to expect2 that it is necessary1 and that this necessity is the importance of the subject1 you will at once see that this importance is a reason1 yea an evidence that you have a right to expect it4 ,i called on you to prove that no revelation was needed2 ,i acknowledged that if none was necessary1 a being of infinite wisdom would make none4 ,you venture to say1 that the only evidence that reason can have of the necessity of divine revelation is its truth4 ,it is believed1 sir1 that this hypothesis involves too much4 ,it is saying that reason can discern the necessity of nothing until it obtains it1 whereas the truth is evidently the other side of the assertion4 ,we are frequently experiencing the necessity of things which we have not already attained1 and by this want we are incited to use the means by which we finally obtain them4--,ask1 and ye shall receive1 seek1 and ye shall find1 knock1 and it shall be opened unto you1 c4 ,it is believed1 and no doubt it may be argued with success1 that the moral and religious state of man really required a divine revelation4 ,never did the parched ground1 the withering plant1 the thirsty herds need the showers from heaven1 more than man1 that ,,word of life which descended as the rain and distilled as the dew1 when the gospel was published by a cloud of faithful witnesses1 called of ,god for that purpose4 ,after acknowledging that your words admit of the construction which ,i gave them respecting the apostles stating no more than what was substantially true1 you inform me that you meant something very different2 then1 sir1 it seems you must mean that they stated that which is not true4 ,and if so1 why do you not prove wherein they testified falsely1 which would at once cast their bands from us8 ,by this mean you would show that their testimony is deserving of no credit4 ,on the subjects of your doubts1 you recollected my request1 that you bring forward your reasons1 c4 ,but in room of doing this you inform me that your doubts are involuntary4 ,but ,i wish to know if this renders it improper for you to state your reasons for doubting8 ,you further inform me that your doubts do not amount to a confirmed unbelief4 ,again1 ,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 divine8 ,by these questions you will perceive that ,i am waiting for you1 and if ,i am not able to meet your arguments1 ,i am ready on making the discovery1 to acknowledge your reasoning too strong for my weak powers to manage4 ,yours1 c4 ,h4 ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,v4 ,after acknowledging the receipt of ,letters ,nos4 #c and #d1 and remarking on several parts of the reply to ,extracts ,no4 #b1 making some concessions1 c4 as he found it necessary1 the objector proceeds as follows4 ,but1 your final conclusion1 after all1 comes so near what ,i conceive to be the truth1 that1 were you as correct in every thing as you appear to be in this1 ,i should hardly think it expedient to pursue this controversy any further4 ,the ,christian is enabled1 you say1 to hope for existence with ,god in an eternal state1 and this is as much as our present welfare requires4 ,most excellent6 ,to this proposition ,i cherfully assent4 ,yea1 ,i would consent even to pruning it a little1 which no doubt would spoil it in your view4 ,instead of 'this is as much as1' read1 'even this is more than1' and your proposition would stand exactly right4 ,again1 you say1 ',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 another1 and that a want of a correct knowledge of this revelation here1 would subject the ignorant to inconvenience in a future state4 ,such a sentiment is an impeachment of the wisdom and goodness of ,god4' ,here again1 should ,i admit a divine revelation1 ,i most heartily agree with you2 and also with the reasoning which follows under this proposition4 ,for it is more consistent with reason and good sense to believe 7like the fool7 in the existence of no ,god1 than to believe in a ,god who is either partial or cruel6 ,if such were the general sentiment of mankind1 the evils resulting from it1 in my humble opinion1 would not be worse than the evils which have resulted from the belief in a ,god of the character just mentioned4 ,one who1 according to the sentiment1 has let millions1 even millions of millions1 of his rational creatures die ignorant of a divine revelation1 when he knew without the knowledge of1 and belief in1 such a revelation1 they must sink down into eternal ruin and misery6 ,and1 so far as a revelation respects the damned1 as though it was designed to aggravate and increase their misery by increasing their sensibility1 he makes known his will1 by special revelation1 to a few1 accompanied with the gift of his holy spirit1 through the divine efficacy of which1 a selected and chosen number will be admitted to bliss and glory1 to the utter and eternal exclusion of the millions above mentioned666 ,if such a sentiment does not impeach the divine character1 not only of partiality1 but of cruelty1 ,i know of nothing that could4 ,but1 ,sir1 ,are you not aware that your sentiment1 as above stated1 which has met my approbation1 on the supposition that divine revelation can be maintained1 is as much opposed to the general sentiment of ,christianity1 as it respects this particular1 as any thing which ,i have written or probably shall write on this subject8 ,i presume you are aware of all this1 and ,i hope you are prepared for its consequences4 ,you have more to apprehend1 however1 from this general sentiment1 than ,i have4 ,you have levelled an arrow at the very seat of life of what is considered orthodoxy in divinity1 it is impossible but that the wound should be severly felt4 ,for you are not insensible sir1 that it is not only the general1 but almost the universal sentiment of orthodoxy1 from his holiness the ,pope down to the smallest child who has been taught to lisp the christian name1 that the revelation of the gospel of ,jesus ,christ was designed to prepare mankind in this world for heaven and happiness in another4 ,hence it has been believed that those who have died ignorant of the gospel1 and being at the same time born of ignorant or unbelieving parents1 must be lost forever4 ,but those who hear and reject the gospel must be still more wretched in another world4 ,with this sentiment1 however1 it seems you have no more fellowship than ,i4 ,therefore1 my brother1 it may be well for both1 but more especially for you1 that the days of rigorous persecution are over4 ,for notwithstanding orthodoxy will consider us both equally opposed to christianity at heart1 yet1 of the two1 you will be considered the most dangerous character4 ,i shall be considered the open1 but you the secret enemy2 who1 under the garb of professed friendship1 are doing your utmost to sap the very foundation of the christian's hope6 ,and you will not be considered any the less dangerous for your writings1 being approved in any sense1 by one who has the audacity1 as they will term it1 to doubt of the truth1 of divine revelation6 ,instead of discovered impious blasphemy in the honest inquiry of your friend as it will be supposed you ought to have done1 and instead of threatening him with endless burnings therefor2--or for not being disposed to receive1 even truth1 without cautious and thorough examination1 you have painted christianity in such beautiful colours that infidelity itself finds but little cause to oppose it4 ,should these letters therefore ever come before the public you must be prepared for the gathering storm4 ,for should you be able to reconcile revelation with the above proposition1 if reason be not fully convinced of its truth1 it will find nothing to object to the principles it inculcates4 ,however1 as this is not the avowed sentiment of christians1 generally speaking1 you must permit me to proceed4 ,as it respects biblical criticism1 notwithstanding all ,i have written on the subject1 if the object is what you have proposed1 'to get the understanding of the sacred text1' ,i have no objection to it1 but1 for those who have time and inclination1 think it laudible4 ,your caution1 likewise1 that in our zeal to cleanse we 'take care and not destroy1' is no doubt reasonable1 and ,i trust duly appreciated4 ,your method also for curing or removing unbelief is happily chosen1 and is what ,i am now attempting1 which1 with your assistance1 ,i hope to make a proper1 if not a successful application4 ,although the 'validity of the evidences' of revelation was not intended to have been granted1 as ,i have informed you in my fourth number1 yet ,i shall not press you to argue the points till ,i have given you the reasons for my doubts2 for these being removed1 nothing more will be necessary4 ,yours c4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,,vi4 ,here twelve pages or more of the objector's manuscript are omitted1 as the nature of his arguments will pretty fully appear in the reply2 and as he has been obliged to rescind the ground he had taken1 it is not expedient to publish his remarks4 ,that the reader may see a little of the manner1 however1 in which he has given up his part of the argument1 the following is inserted4 ,speaking however on the evidences of revelation1 you have stated some things worthy of serious consideration2 which if correct1 and ,i cannot say but they are1 give me considerable satisfaction2 and are very grateful to my feelings4 ',it' 7faith7 say you 'does not require all possibility to be taken into the account3 this would seem to go beyond the limits of faith and enter into the regions of certainty4' ,according to this doctrine1 ,i may yet1 perhaps1 be considered a believer in divine revelation1 and of course in ,christianity4 ,if 'all possibility' is not required1 then certainly some doubts1 some possibility of failure1 may be admited without destroying the consistency of the ,christian faith4 ,here as it respects the argument1 you have seemingly forclosed every thing which ,i shall say by way of objection2 at least1 you have anticipated all my arguments on this subject4 ,for evidences and circumstances calculated to raise doubts in the mind2 and shewing the possibility of uncertainty1 are all the arguments which ,i have expected to produce in this case4 ,but it may not be improper to inquire how much uncertainty1 or possibility of uncertainty1 may ,i admit in my calculation without destroying the ,christian faith8 ,that there are evidences in favor of divine revelation1 and1 which would support it1 if there were nothing to counterbalance their testimony1 is a proposition which ,i admit1 and which ,i think cannot be disputed4 ,hence ,i conceive it must be admitted that there is a possibility1 at least1 of its being true4--,but after all1 if the weight of evidence in the mind of any one should preponderate against it1 ,i doubt whether such an one could consistently be called a believer in divine revelation4 ,you have suggested that in disproving the religion of ,jesus ,christ1 ,i should disprove all religion2 as there can be no choice between this and any other2 for if this can be proved false all may be proved false c4 or words to that effect4 ,in this ,i hardly know how to understand you4 ,so far as the religion of ,christ consists in 'feeding the hungry1 clothing the naked1 and keeping himself unspotted from the world1' ,i admit1 that 'in disproving the religion of ,christ1' ,i should 'disprove all religion3' that is to say1 in other words1 so far as the religion of ,christ is not founded on revelation1 but on the relation and dependence existing between man and man1 to disprove it would disprove all religion3 but if the religion of ,jesus ,christ consists purely and exclusively in believing in a future state of existence1 then disproving it would not disprove all religion4 ,a man may be what the poet calls 'the noblest work of ,god' i4e4 'an honest man1' and attend to all the duties embraced in that religion which ,st4 ,james calls 'pure and undefiled before ,god and the father1' and yet have no opinion1 that is1 no settled opinion1 in regard to a future state4 ,if a man has religion enough to be a good husband1 a good neighbor1 a good citizen1 and can rationably enjoy all the blessings which appertain to this life1 of what consequence is it to him1 or to any one else1 what he believes in regard to a future state8 ,this is a question worthy of serious consideration4 ,the denial of revelation1 much less to doubt its truth1 does not render it necessary that ,i should do what you have proposed2 neither is it my disposition to destroy if ,i could the peace even of an individual4 ,hence1 ,i have no wish to 'demonstrate that there is no sun in a cloudy day2' but only to prove that clouds and darkness are as necessary to the well being of man as clear sunshine4 ,neither would ,i be the bearer of the 'joyless tidings that there is no clear sky in the heavens2' but only to query whether our portion of 'clear sky' is not that which reflects upon the earth2 and that only during the short period of our lives8 ,who has a right to complain1 if our blessings are circumscribed to our sphere of action8 ,must we enjoy nothing1 because more is not allotted to our share8 ,it is very probable there may be millions of other suns1 enlightening other worlds1 and systems of worlds1 giving life1 light and warmth to rational beings like ourselves1 exceeding all imagination in number2 and yet1 have little of the blessings of those heavenly luminaries that falls to our enjoyment6 ,they merly form a beautiful canopy over our heads4 ,it is true1 their greatest use to us may be that of which we are mostly ignorant2 in balancing systems c4 but yet we must have some knowledge of those benefits1 before me can feel grateful for them4 ,dost thou wish to visit them8 ,dost thou desire to know more concerning them than thou canst know in this state8 ,calm and deliberate reason would say unto the1 ',be content1 ,o vain man6 with thine own lot1 and not try to soar above thy proper station6' ,the above is not designed as a reflection2 it is only what ,i take to myself4 ,you have proposed what ,i conceive you think is the only alternative to which ,i must flee1 when ,i give up the truth of divine revelation4 ,but may ,i not stop to inquire whether there is not some medium between the two extremes which you have mentioned8 ,must ,i believe that there was no such man as ,jesus1 or if there were1 that he was an impostor2 or else believe all that is stated concerning him8 ,must ,i also believe the same of the apostles or else believe them impeccable8 ,may not even good men be honestly deceived8 and being deceived1 honestly lead others into an error8--,that honest men do not bear 'testimony to falshood1' ,i admit2 neither could such a principle be justified even under a 'pretence of doing good2' yet ,i will not undertake to say that no such pious frauds have ever been practiced in the world1 and even among professed christians2 and how soon it was practiced after the days of the apostles1 and whether or not by some even in their day1 would be very difficult now to determine4 ,neither is it necessary ,i should say any thing more upon the subject1 as you admit this principle 'has been practised upon by a wicked priesthood for ages6' ,in remarking on my fourth proposition1 which ,i added to the three which you had proposed1 you say1 ',i will not be too positive that ,i rightly apprehend your meaning on this subject1 but as you propose to allow my three propositions1 and as you make no attempt to do away my reasoning1 especially on my last1' c4 ,here permit me to observe1 ,i am well persuaded you did not fully understand me1 whatever you did yourself1 on this subject4 ,you will perceive1 sir1 both by my fourth number1 and also by my fifth1 that my answer to your three propositions was not completed4 ,probably if you had waited for the whole of my answer you would have understood me much better1 and also would have seen the use and propriety of my fourth proposition4 ,i think1 as you will perceive by my fifth number that even honest men may be mistaken4 ,and if so1 it is very important to know whether the apostles judged only from outward circumstances1 or whether they had some internal evidence1 called inspiration1 by which they always knew the truth of the things whereof they affirmed4 ,this was the object of my fourth proposition4 ,that you did not fully understand me appears by your saying1 ',if it be allowed that my propositions are true1 then you consent to the validity of the apostles' testimony respecting a future state4' ,if this could be allowed1 it might then be admitted1 that in this argument it makes no difference how the apostles come by their 'knowledge of futurity4'--,but ,i did not know1 neither do ,i now perceive1 that my admitting the apostles to be honest men makes it necessary also to admit the validity of their 'testimony respecting a future state2' unless it can be shown that honest men are never mistaken respecting the things whereof they affirm4 ,i admit the 'honesty' of my good friend1 in the above quoted proposition2 but ,i can hardly be willing1 purely on this account1 to 'consent' to its truth4 ,as it respects an inheritance given in a ,,will1 c4 ,i have some doubts whether reason always carries things as far as you would wish to carry this metaphor to make it a parallel4 ,reason sometimes moves in a small circle2 and that too without being unreasonable4 ,if the benefit is said to have been absolutely made1 and reason is informed of the fact1 it has a right to take it for granted1 that the donor had the property to give1 and that it is not given to the injury of any one else4 ,but yet he consults his own interest1 and that only1 when he says1 'this is very important to me1 if true1 yet ,i doubt1 yea ,i have reasons for not believing it true4' ,would any one say that such a man talketh unreasonably8 ,you have called on me to prove 'that no revelation was needed2' and have acknowledged1 'that if none was necessary1 a being of infinite wisdom would make none4' ,and at the same time you have argued very pathetically indeed to prove the necessity of a revelation2 that is1 if that can be called argument which grows out of a man's own feelings3 ,a man1 however1 of different feelings might bring forward arguments equally energetic1 and perhaps equally conclusive1 but diametrically opposite4 ,i know not what evidence you wish1 or what evidence would be accepted1 to prove that a revelation is not necessary4 ,even if such were the fact1 it appears to me to be hardly susceptible of proof4 ,it may be no more difficult1 however1 than it is to prove that a revelation is true4 ,i presume that nothing short of a revelation would convince you that a revelation is not necessary6 ,for who but ,god can know what either is1 or is not necessary for ,god to make known8 ,but if arguments drawn from our feelings are admissible1 hear1 for once1 the voice of simple nature1 proclaiming in her simplicity by every thing which exists either in or around you1 that a revelation is neither necessary nor useful4 ,that every thing which can be enjoyed in life can be enjoyed equally as well1 and often better1 without either its knowledge or belief4 ,that every duty1 either to ,god or man1 can be performed as well1 and with the same beneficial effect4 ,and finally that man may be brought1 without either the aid1 knowledge1 or belief of revelation1 not only to be reconciled to his conditions and station in life1 but also to curtail all his anxious desires to which he not only believes but knows there is a natural possibility of obtaining4 ,if one could be brought who would solemnly testify to the truth of the above paragraph1 would you believe his testimony8 ,i presume not4 ,but why not8 ,will you say it is impossible it should be true8 ,no one can know this for a certainty1 except those whose misfortune it is1 if it be a misfortune not to believe in a future state of existence4 ,if such there are1 however1 and yet their lives are exactly correct1 their examples in society equally good1 and their enjoyments apparently equally as great as other men1 why should you doubt their testimony8 ,would you say they were bad men8--could you say they were dishonest men8--and if honest1 according to your argument1 why not believe them8 ,i can see no inducement that any one could have to deny a revelation1 if he believes it true2 but ,i can see a very great inducement for mankind to maintain the reality of a revelation1 although at the same time they may doubt its truth4 ,if you doubt whether the human mind can be brought to such a state as has been mentioned above1 it is only for the want of proper evidence2 the fact1 however1 is susceptible of proof4 ,yea1 it can be more than proved2 the happy unbeliever in idle tales1 but believing in eternal principles1 knows it for a certainty4 ,i do not mean that he knows for a certainty1 that there is no revelation1 but he knows for a certainty that a belief in revelation is not absolutely necessary to a happy life4 ,now1 if such characters exists1 will you receive their own testimony in support of the above fact8 ,if not1 it will be of no use to produce them4 ,in order to make a proper estimation of virtue1 we should take into consideration the motives and inducements a person has to be virtuous4 ,the virtue of some men seems to be predicated on the following principles2 on the consideration that they are going to heaven and happiness in another world1 while others1 whom they conceive not so good as themselves are going to hell1 a place of never ending torments4 ,on this ground they can be very pious also1 and do a great deal for religion4 ,at the same time they will tell you1 as many have1 if they believed all were to be alike happy in another world1 they would then stick at no crimes to obtain their object1 but would indulge themselves in all manner of gratifications1 c4 ,such virtue1 however1 ,i conclude does not stand very high in your estimation4 ,no2 but you would be virtuous on a more noble scale2 so long as you can believe that you shall have an eternal existence with ,god1 in a happy conscious identity1 you are willing every body else should enjoy the same blessing2 on supposition that this is true1 or as you can believe it1 you are for doing all the good in your power1 and at the same time taking all the comfort you can in doing it4 ,you are trying to make every one believe what you believe1 that they may enjoy what you enjoy4 ,but the moment this faith1 and this hope of yours is gone1 your virtue is gone with it2 you can now do nothing1 and of course enjoy nothing6 ,now compare this virtue with the virtue of one whom the christian world would call an infidel6 ,one whose faith1 and of course1 hope1 does not extend beyond what he knows has been the lot of some1 and1 as far as circumstances will admit1 may be his own2 and yet he is always faithful in the discharge of whatever appears to be his duty1 always enjoys life1 whether in prosperity or adversity1 and is always1 so far as it respects circumstances over which he has no control1 reconciled and contented with his lot4 ,he knows his life is uncertain1 and although he has no real faith or well grounded hope beyond the present state of existence1 yet the thought gives him neither anxiety nor concern4 ,his only object is to do good2 to enjoy life while it lasts1 to cultivate and improve human nature for the benefit of posterity2 to bear the evils and misfortunes of life with fortitude1 and to be unfeignedly thankful for all the happiness of which he is made susceptible4 ,therefore whether his life be for a day1 or for eternity1 it matters not1 because1 for the present1 it is all the same to him3 his duties are the same1 and his enjoyments are the same4 ,o how happy6 ,how inexpressibly happy1 is such a state as this6 ,while others are feasting their fruitful imaginations with the idle and visionary dreams of fanaticism2 with a kind of chimerical heaven of which they know nothing1 as to its certainty3 this man is in heaven already3 dwelling in love1 he 'dwelleth in ,god1 and ,god in him4' ,do you not wish1 my brother1 that you could find such a character among ,christians8 ,but ,christianity does not afford such a character1 in full1 nor is it possible that it ever should4 ,such a character1 however1 there may be1 and when the world1 or any considerable part of them can receive his testimony1 he may make his appearance4 ,you seem to think it may be successfully argued 'that the moral and religious state of man really required a divine revelation4' ,this argument1 if ,i understand you1 grows out of the ardent desires of man2 which1 it is admitted1 would be pretty conclusive if it could be made to appear that the desires of man are never fruitless4 ,man1 it is true1 rationally desires happiness2 for this is essential to his moral existence2 yet1 may he not1 through ignorance1 or from some other cause1 suppose things essential to his happiness1 which1 in fact1 are not essential1 and therefore ardently desire them8 ,but does it necessarily follow that the particular things desired in such cases are absolutely necessary8 and therefore will absolutely be granted8 ,i believe not4--,and if he may be thus deceived in any one thing1 why may he not be deceived in the supposed necessity of a divine revelation8 ,it is believed that a perfect reconciliation to the present state of man2 to what he is1 with the prospect only of what he yet may be in this life1 without either the hope or the fear of a future existence1 would be infinitely better than any thing which has yet been produced by a belief in divine revelation2 especially any further than a revelation is conducive to this end2 and if a revelation ever was necessary1 it was necessary only to reconcile man to his present state of existence4 ,but if man can be equally reconciled without the knowledge1 or1 what amounts to the same thing1 without the belief of divine revelation1 then the end of such a revelation is obtained4 ,it seems to be expedient that ,i should say a few more words1 'respecting the apostles' stating no more than what was substantially true4' ,i hope1 however1 we shall not lose sight of the main subject in debate1 by criticising on words4 ,i say main subject here1 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 sciences4 ,i am not disposed to think1 sir1 that you have designedly wrested the meaning of my words2 nor that you are unwilling to receive my meaning when it is fully understood2 and yet1 having once explained on this subject1 ,i am unable to account for your remarks4 ,after my informing you that you had misconstrued me1 and also stating my meaning1 as ,i supposed1 more explicitly1 you have informed me that if your first construction was not my meaning1 it seems that ,i must have meant the reverse of it1 which1 ,i must aver1 is as foreign from my meaning as your first construction6 ,for neither your former nor latter construction was in my mind when ,i wrote the sentence to which ,i allude3 but a different idea from either of your constructions was in my mind1 and was what ,i meant to state2 which idea1 as ,i conceive1 is as fairly expressed by my words1 and is a more just construction of them1 taking into consideration the sentence which follows1 than either of the ideas which you have expressed as their meaning4 ,permit me therefore to state again1 that whatever might have been my opinion respecting the writings of the apostles1 ,i did not mean to suggest1 and much less to affirm in that sentence 'that they stated that which is not true6'--,neither did ,i mean to acknowledge in that sentence that they had stated 'no more' than what is true1 at least in substance2 but ,i did mean this1 and this only1 that admitting those things were true1 all would admit that the design of the apostles was nothing more than to state the truth of those things in substance2 because all would acknowledge that they were not careful to be correct as to every minutiae4 ,but as this makes nothing either for or against the main point1 ,i wish to add no more respecting it1 than simply to remark1 that even if the apostles had gone on the opposite extreme of what ,i meant ,i should not think them 'deserving of no credit4' ,supposing they had descended into minutiae1 and related1 to an exact nicety1 every particular circumstance 7which is exactly the reverse of what ,i mean to state71 would they on this account have been deserving of no credit8 ,i think not4 ,considering the time1 however1 which had elapsed after the facts are said to have taken place1 before a history of them was given in writing1 ,i think the evangelists are entitled to more credit1 on the whole1 than what they would have been if their testimony had borne the complexion last mentioned4 ,to close this letter1 which perhaps is already too long1 ,i would here acknowledge that as ,i have expressed doubts in the subject of divine revelation1 you have a right to hear my reasons for doubting4 ,these ,i promised to give you 7as ,i thought7 at the close of my fourth number4 ,you have informed me1 verbally1 that ,i promised to give you my doubts only4 ,if ,i did so1 it was only a slip of the pen1 to which ,i am too prone2 it was my reasons for doubting1 which ,i meant to have promised you2 and in my next ,i shall endeavor to fulfil that promise4 ,yours1 c4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,v4 ,dear sir1 and brother1--,your fifth and sixth numbers were received together1 and will be noticed in the order in which they came to hand4 ,you observe that you know of no better evidence that there ever was such a story reported among the ,jews1 in the days of the apostles1 than there is to prove the actual resurrection of ,jesus1 c4 ,this suggestion leads to the following queries4 #ast4 ,was there in the days of the apostles1 such a man known in the country of the ,jews1 as ,jesus ,christ8 #b;d4 ,was this man put to death1 as the four evangelists and others testify8 #c;d4 ,did the apostles declare to the people who put him to death1 that they knew that he had arisen from the dead8 #dth4 ,if the ,jews who put ,jesus to death could go to his sepulchre and show his dead body to the people1 would the story of the resurrection ever have gained any credit among the ,jews8 #eth4 ,if they could not find the body of him who had been crucified1 would the opposers not endeavour to report something that might appear as plausible as they could1 especially as they had the keeping of the sepulchre in their own hands8 #fth4 ,what would more naturally suggest itself to the imagination of men1 in the situation of the rulers of the ,jews1 than the story of the disciples having stolen the dead body1 c4 ,or1 #gth4 ,was this account written long since the apostles' days1 by an unknown author1 who made the whole story as he wrote it8 ,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 reason1 it seems to follow that the #fth preceding question1 must be accepted in the affirmative1 which furnishes sufficient evidence to prove that such a story was reported among the ,jews in the days of the apostles4 ,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 body1 or not1 it appears to me1 that there is no proper ground on which the latter can even be doubted4 ,suppose a writer in vindicating believer's baptism in opposition to the sprinkling of infants1 should relate a wonderful story concerning the persecutions of the baptists1 in which he should set forth the particulars of one of their leading characters having been put to death by their opposers4 ,in this account1 the author says2 ,those murderers1 after they put the man to death1 for fear his friends should steal the body1 went and placed a strong guard round the tomb to watch for the space of three days and nights1 but before the expiration of this period1 the guard came to the rulers and make known that the body is gone1 and acknowledge at the same time1 that there were such wonders seen by them at the tomb1 that they were unable to endure the sight and retain their natural powers2 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 money1 and did as they were taught3 and this saying is commonly reported among the ,pdobaptists unto this day4 ,would this story appear any ways to the advantage of a cause1 with which reason and common sense have any thing to do8 ,reason1 sir1 for which you seem determined to contend1 is candid2 it readily acknowledges that the account of this report among the ,jews is a true account4 ,and it acknowledges also that the truth of this account is good evidence to prove that the rulers of the ,jews found it necessary1 in order to oppose the truth of the resurrection1 to get such a report in circulation4 ,you have not taken me exactly on the ground of my argument1 in supposing that1 by revelation1 ,i mean nothing more than what was revealed to me by the resurrection of ,jesus1 allowing the resurrection true4 ,my design was to consider the three propositions1 viz4 revelation1 the resurrection of ,jesus1 and the truth of the testimony of the apostles1 concerning matters of fact1 true1 disjunctively2 and also to avail myself of whatever might arise to the advantage of my argument from the relation of these facts4 ,all this you will1 as a generous and candid antagonist1 be willing to allow me to do1 on the supposition that the three propositions1 above named1 be granted4 ,for surely no necessary deduction from granted premises can mislead1 unless what is granted be false4 ,you will furthermore see1 that by granting the truth of divine revelation some degree of allowance is given to the probability1 at least1 of the testimony of the apostles respecting a future state4 ,the confining of the subject of revelation1 to that only which is revealed by the resurrection of ,jesus1 seems an unnecessary restriction1 which can answer no purpose but to embarrass an argument which it would have no real force in refuting2 for if the resurrection be admitted1 which affords such an important revelation as grows out of the fact1 it establishes the general truth of a ,,divine ,,revelation from ,god to man4 ,this being granted1 all that stands in a necessary relation to it may with propriety be used in defence of any particular question relative to the general subject4 ,i have already argued the truth of what the apostles say of a future state1 from the facts which you grant for the sake of the argument1 but you seem to misapprehend me in supposing that ,i mean to contend1 that what the apostles have said respecting a future state1 was spoken by way of conclusion from certain known facts4 ,the known facts1 such as the miracles of ,jesus1 his resurrection1 and the miracles wrought by the apostles1 ,i used as proof of the divine mission of these servants of ,god4 ,this divine mission being proved1 gives the ground on which ,i contend for the merit of their testimony concerning a future state4 ,you should have regarded my argument1 as placing the credibility of the apostles' testimony concerning a future state1 on the fact of their divine mission1 and not as you seem to have done1 on the supposition1 that they could not err in drawing conclusions1 c4 ,you have misunderstood me also1 in supposing that by the guess work of men1 ,i had any allusion to the known miracles related by the apostles4 ,what ,i called mere guess work of men1 was the opinions of the apostles on supposition they were not divinely directed1 in the testimony they laid down respecting a future state4 ,on this particular subject1 all you have said in reply to my reasoning1 has no just relation to my argument4 ,it was expected1 that in relation to the foregoing subject1 you would have seen the necessity of either denying the reality of those miracles1 which1 if true1 prove the divine mission of ,christ and his apostles1 or of granting the authority of their testimony4 ,but in room of finding what was so confidently expected1 ,i find the mistakes above pointed out1 which occupy considerable space1 without deciding any thing1 or furnishing ground on which ,i feel disposed to place any argument4 ,the next particular which demands notice is stated as follows3 ,your final conclusion1 after all1 comes so near what ,i conceive to be the truth1 that were you as correct in every thing as you appear to be in this1 ,i should hardly think it expedient to pursue this controversy any further4 ,you then quote me4 ,the ,christian is enabled to hope for existence with ,god in an eternal state1 and this is as much as our present welfare requires4 ,you rejoin2 ,most excellent6 to this proposition ,i cheerfully assent4 ,yea1 ,i would consent even to pruning it a little which no doubt would spoil it in your view4 ,instead of1 'this is as much as1' read1 'even this is more than1' and your proposition would stand exactly right4 ,you assure me that you are in search of truth4--,truth is the only design of your heart4 ,it would be uncharitable in me to doubt your sincerity4 ,you sincerely and cheerfully assent to the above proposition viz4 that the christian is enabled to hope for existence with ,god in an eternal state1 and this is as much as our present welfare requires4 ,this you say is most excellent4 ,but notwithstanding you cheerfully assent to this proposition1 and can pronounce it most excellent6 ,yet you think1 if the proposition was so altered as to allow us no hope of a future existence with ,god1 it would stand exactly right6 ,this variation is so small1 this difference is so little that you think if ,i were as correct in every thing as ,i am in this1 there would be no need of pursuing this controversy any further6 ,let me ask dear sir1 if such reasoning as this can promise a profitable reward for our labours1 and a recompence for the precious time we are spending8 ,the eye of reason1 ,i say is candid3 it sees and knows1 that if a hope of existence with ,god hereafter is more than our present welfare requires1 such an expectation is awfully dreadful beyond the power of language to describe4 ,reason knows that there is an infinite difference between no existence hereafter1 and an eternal existence4 ,and it knows1 that if the former is exactly what our present welfare requires1 the latter is completely repugnant to it4 ,with what you here contend for1 ,i will connect a passage from your sixth number4 ,he knows that a belief in revelation is not absolutely necessary to a happy life4 ,by bringing these passages together1 ,i am led to understand what you mean by the latter viz4 that a belief in a happy future state1 is not necessary to our present felicity4 ,this is what you know6 ,what then are you in pursuant of8 ,you pretend to be earnestly solicitous to have your doubts respecting divine revelation removed if possible2 you call on me to assist in this work as if you viewed it with deep concern4--,if your doubts should be removed1 if you should be altogether convinced that ,god has actually revealed the truth of a a happy immortality1 you know it would add nothing to your happiness4 ,furthermore you argue1 following the passage quoted from your sixth number1 that this belief in the revelation of a happy futurity is not necessary to produce a virtuous life4 ,allowing all you argue on this subject1 you feel sure that a real conviction of the truth of the christian doctrine1 and hope of future blessedness1 would be of no advantage to your virtue or happiness6 ,i ask again1 what are you in pursuit of8 ,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 trouble1 for that which gives him comfort4 ,and you advert to this particular sentiment of mine1 in your observations on ,st4 ,paul's conversion1 and very justly refuse to allow him to be an exception of the general rule4 ,but are you not an exception of this rule8 ,do you not appear to be solicitous to have your doubts removed without expecting the least advantage by it8 ,are you not employing your time in writing voluminously on a subject which you know can yield you no recompence8 ,in search after the evidences of the christian hope1 you cannot say3 where is that faithful1 that friendly witness by which ,i can believe1 and believing1 enjoy as a precious reality that hope which is as an anchor to the soul1 both sure and stedfast2 which entereth into that within the veil1 where our forerunner hath for us entered2 which hope would enable me to sing that triumphant song2 ,o death where is thy sting1 ,o grave where is thy victory8 ,thanks be to ,god who giveth us the victory through our ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,no1 this hope would add nothing to your happiness1 and what you want it for is not for me to imagine4 ,you can employ the powers of luminous reason in contemplating eternal nothing with sweet complacency4 ,this is exactly as it should be6 ,varying from this the proposition would need to be pruned6 ,dear brother1 does reason countenance all this absurdity8 ,if it be a pleasure to contemplate non-existence does it not involve the absurdity of enjoying the expectation of the discontinuance of enjoyment8 ,you have expressed1 with interjections1 the value of truth4 ,you seem almost disposed to arrogate to yourself a peculiar regard for this divine treasure4 ,i can fancy ,i hear your secret addresses to this lovely divinity2 in rapturous language1 with aspect of eager affection saying2 ,o truth1 the loveliest of all attractions1 thou art balsam for every wound1 antidote for every poison2 thou sweetenest every bitter cup2 the gloomy prospect of living1 in thy bright sunshine is by thee changed into the joyous expectation of soon losing sight of thee forever in the elysium of non-existence6 ,i will not burden you with further deductions1 so repugnant to the dictates of reason2 but ,i will cherish a hope1 that you will see sufficient reason for rescinding the arguments which lead to them4#a ,footnote #a3 ,perhaps the reader may be a little astonished here1 that the objector should ever have consented to publish arguments which makes him appear so much to a disadvantage4 ,but an honest objector1 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 ,god1 instead of feeling chagrined1 will feel grateful1 when his errors are honestly exposed4 ,believing1 therefore1 that others may be in the same predicament1 these arguments are published to the world4 ,on supposition divine revelation be true1 you agree with me on the subject wherein ,i differ from the general opinion1 that a knowledge of the gospel in this world is indispensable to the soul's felicity in the next1 but you are confident that this my sentiment will be viewed by the ,christian world in general1 with greater abhorrence than even your own arguments1 c4 ,and you hope ,i am prepared for the consequences4 ,reply--,i have little or no concern about what opinion reputed orthodoxy may entertain of the truths which reason and revelation harmonize in supporting1 nor am very careful about any preparation to meet the consequences which may result from the inseparable companions1 superstition and ignorance4 ,in my view1 the commonly received opinion1 on the subject under consideration1 is no more reasonable1 than the supposition that the happiness and wellbeing of our children1 in this world1 depend on their having had a correct knowledge of their parents1 of their wisdom and parental providence for them1 before they were born4 ,the wisdom and goodness of ,god1 according to scripture and reason1 are universal4 ,the ignorance of mortals concerning them1 on the one hand1 makes them no less1 and their knowledge1 on the other makes them no greater4 ,we must duly regard1 however1 the evident fact1 that the enjoyment of reasonable beings1 is extended by the extension of knowledge1 which renders acquirements in science and divinity an object of the first magnitude4 ,the sentiment which you express on the above subject is what ,i am well persuaded can never be refuted1 and it appears to me that by placing the system of divine revelation on the ground above noticed1 it is rendered free from these absurdities which have rendered it exceptionable to the eye of reason and philosophy4 ,the gospel of everlasting life1 like all real science1 has always existed1 but like the sciences1 has been developed by degrees1 and brought to the understanding of mankind as a mean of refinement1 improvement1 and of conformity to mortal principles1 as expressed by that eminent divine ,st4 ,paul1 #b ,cor4 #e1 #ah1 #ai1 #bj4 ,and all things are of ,god1 who hath reconciled us to himself by ,jesus ,christ1 and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation2 to wit1 that ,god was in ,christ reconciling the world unto himself1 not imputing their trespasses unto them3 and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation4 ,now then we are ambassadors for ,christ1 as though ,god did beseech you by us2 we pray you in ,christ's stead1 be ye reconciled to ,god4 ,now to suppose that men1 who on account of their ignorance of the gospel are unreconciled to ,god1 who has undertaken the gracious work of reconciling them to himself1 not imputing their trespasses unto them1 are on account of their unreconciliation excluded from being the objects of divine favour is a grand absurdity to say the least4 ,the fact is1 the gospel is a dispensation of general favour1 and it actually communicates many invaluable blessings to those who know nothing of its divine principles4 ,there are millions of people in the world who are blessed in a great variety of respects by means of civil government1 who know nothing of the principles of the governments by which they are protected4 ,how many blessings are constantly falling1 as it were like a shower1 on our infants and youth in ,america1 from the favourable government of our happy country1 and yet these children know not the difference between an absolute monarchy and a republic4 ,how many millions of the human race are daily fed from the products of agriculture1 who know nothing of the principles which produce those rich supplies4 ,so there are multitudes who enjoy many blessings procured by the gospel of ,christ1 who have no knowledge of the sublime principles of this religion4 ,but here again ,i will repeat the remark1 that our rational felicity is greatly increased by an extension of our knowledge in the principles of the doctrine of ,jesus1 which consideration is a proper incentive to grow in grace and in the knowledge of our ,lord and ,saviour ,jesus ,christ4 ,knowledge is food for the mind and nourishes and strengthens it as aliment does the body4 ,our youth learn to read the books which they are favoured with in consequence of the discovery of the art of printing1 and they obtain great advantages by means of those books1 while they remain entirely ignorant1 many of them1 of the art by which such a favour is put into their hands4 ,but still it is healthy to the youthful mind1 to receive the knowledge of this and other arts1 and even to know that an art so extensively useful was not known in the world four hundred years ago4 ,a person on being informed of the first discovery of this art1 and of its being practiced1 in the first place1 with separate wooden types1 might be disposed to doubt the ignorance of men in those times4 ,he might think it incredible that any thing so easy1 that even children can perform was unknown to the learned world in those times when learning flourished in ancient ,greece and ,rome4 ,and ,i am of opinion that many now1 who are disposed to doubt the circumstances which attended the first promulgation of the gospel1 and even call themselves unbelievers1 do in reality1 owe even their existence and of course every blessing they enjoy to those facts of which they now doubt4 ,yes1 sir1 the light of reason1 and the knowledge of moral principles1 on which you feel disposed to place so much consequence1 ,i am inclined to believe are reflections of that light which was the delightful theme of the evangelical ,isaiah1 chapters #f1 #g1 #h4 ,i the ,lord hath called thee in righteousness1 and will hold thine hand1 and will keep thee1 and give thee for a covenant of the people1 for a light of the ,gentiles2 to open the blind eyes1 to bring out the prisoners from the prison1 and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house4 ,i am the ,lord2 that is my name3 and my glory will ,i not give to another1 nor my praise to graven images4 ,am ,i deceived1 sir1 or is it evident1 that the glorious ,,light which illuminates our moral hemisphere1 and distinguishes our country from barbarism and savage ignorance1 is the gospel8 ,the name of ,jesus1 his doctrine1 the reformation1 seceding from the ,church of ,england and persecution for conscience sake1 rank as causes of the settlement of ,new ,england by our forefathers1 and of the existence of the men who are carrying on this correspondence4 ,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 principles4 ,and a hope is entertained that due regard will be paid to this self-evident fact1 that nothing ever took place without an adequate cause to produce it4 ,with this reflection1 ,i come to notice your remarks on the subject of ,st4 ,paul's conversion2 for it appears to me that you have allowed certain facts without assigning any adequate causes by which those facts came to exist4 ,you make no attempt to deny that there was such a man as ,st4 ,paul1 nor do you deny his having been educated1 and religiously instructed as the scripture history concerning this man sets forth4 ,but you assign no reason why he became a believer in ,jesus ,christ1 you assign no reason for his becoming a preacher of the doctrine of ,jesus1 you assign no reason why he should so patiently suffer for the religion1 the truth of which you are now calling in question4 ,you allow that before his conversion he persecuted unto death the weak and defenceless disciples of the meek and lowly ,jesus4 ,but you assign no reasons why weak and defenceless men should become the disciples of ,jesus4 ,you would fain insinuate that what he relates of the particular circumstance which happened to him on his way to ,damascus was a mere reverie4 ,but you make no attempt to show how such a reverie could produce in this learned pharisee a belief that ,jesus1 who was crucified had actually arose from the dead1 when there were not even the shadow of evidence existing to prove such an improbable fact4 ,you are inclined to this notion of a reverie on account of some experience of your own1 which your good sense and after reflection have discovered to be nothing on which dependence ought to be placed4 ,sir1 where is the similarity of your case with that of the learned pharisee8 ,do you really believe you ever experienced a reverie1 that would go in the least to cause you to believe in the resurrection of a man who was hanged in your sight1 and who you knew was buried1 and of whose resurrection you had no evidence1 only a vague reverie8 ,do you believe you ever experienced a mere imagination which was strong enough to produce the above belief1 and which could continue to influence you all your life long1 lead you to forsake a most honourable connexion1 and to espouse a religion which all the prejudices of your education opposed1 and to labour continually for its support and to suffer every thing for its defence8 ,no1 you pretend to no such thing1 therefore your case is very different from ,st4 ,paul's4 ,i agree with you1 that the case of this apostle comes under the rule which you recollect ,i suggested in my sermon4 ,he undoubtedly viewed the religion which he received in room of the one he parted with the most valuable4 ,and to this agrees his own testimony4 ,phil4 iii4 #g1 c4 ,but what things were gain to me1 those ,i counted loss for ,christ4 ,yea1 doubtless1 and ,i count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of ,christ ,jesus my ,lord2 for whom ,i have suffered the loss of all things1 and do count them but dung that ,i may win ,christ1 and be found in him1 not having mine own righteousness1 which is of the law1 but that which is through the faith of ,christ1 the righteousness which is of ,god by faith4 ,as you promise to say more on this subject1 ,i shall continue to expect an attempt to deny the conversion of such a man as ,st4 ,paul is set forth to have been1 to the ,christian religion1 under all the circumstances which the scripture account mentions2 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 realities2 or lastly1 an acknowledgment that this conversion may reasonably be allowed as evidence to us of the truth of the ,christian religion4 ,should you be disposed to disallow the account which the scripture gives of ,st4 ,paul1 ,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 ,st4 ,paul4 99 99 99 99 99 ,what follows is designed to notice your sixth number2 out of which the following subjects are selected1 on which some remarks are made4 #ast4 ,you observe that when we hear things1 which to our understanding are improbable1 the improbability of the facts raises a doubt in our minds2 and certainly there can be no harm in suspending our judgment1 nor yet in withholding our belief until we are fully satisfied4 ,this first subject regards the degrees of evidences which are required in different cases1 and the moral propriety of withholding the assent of the mind in the case of a want of evidence4 #b;d4 ,you are not disposed to doubt that many of the prophets were good men2 nor will you contend that they were not all such1 and taught the people according to the best of their abilities--,and yet you hesitate to allow the divinity of their testimony4 #c;d4 ,i notice that you acknowledge that there are evidences in favour of divine revelation1 which would support it1 if there were nothing to counterbalance their testimony4 #dth4 ,you hardly know how to understand me where ,i suggest1 that in disproving the religion of ,jesus ,christ1 you disprove all religion1 c4 #eth4 ,an inquiry whether ,jesus and the apostles might not be honest men1 and yet their testimony in certain cases not to be relied on6 #fth4 ,you suppose that arguments equally energetic and equally conclusive might be drawn from our feelings against1 as in favour of the necessity of divine revelation4 #gth4 ,in enumerating the virtues and enjoyments of one who does not even desire a future state1 you mention unfeigned thankfulness for all the happiness of which he is made susceptible4 #hth4 ,you assert1 that if a revelation ever was necessary1 it was necessary only to reconcile man to his present state efexistence4 ,and1 #ith4 ,you seem to fault me for supposing that in case you did not mean as ,i took you1 on the subject of the apostles' testimony1 you must mean the reverse1 c4 ,these nine particulars1 it is true1 do not comprehend every item contained in your sixth number1 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 communication4 #ast4 ,concerning the degrees of evidence required in certain cases to carry conviction of facts to the mind2 it has always been allowed by those who have vindicated the religion of ,jesus1 that a belief in miracles requires more evidence than a belief in ordinary events recorded in history4 ,having granted this they proceed to associate the evidences1 which ,god in his divine economy has given and preserved1 and conclude with grateful assurance that the evidence of the miracles of ,jesus1 his unspeakably glorious resurrection from the dead1 together with the miracles with which the first promulgation of the gospel was effected1 are abundantly sufficient to carry conviction to vastly the greatest part of candid minds4 ,in the mode the last sentence is concluded1 ,i must1 in justice to others1 take the sentiment there expressed to myself2 for ,i am sorry to say that christians1 who have contended against infidelity have1 generally1 been less charitable than the genius of the religion they have1 in many respects1 most ably defended4 ,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 fact4 ,i will therefore suppose that some who are candid1 may1 from some cause which we cannot analyze1 be unable to believe the great truths of the gospel1 on such evidence as is abundantly sufficient to convince others who are as scrupulous as necessary investigation requires4 ,it is1 sir1 the opinion of some very learned authors1 who stand in the very first rank1 for candor and erudition1 that the proofs of which the gospel is susceptible are1 in all respects1 equal to what they could have been in any other way concerted1 within the reach of human conception4 ,this is going to a great length ,i confess2 and yet ,i am strongly inclined to their opinion4 ,i will candidly state why ,i am so4--#ast4 ,taking the subject in the gross1 ,i am convinced of the truth of the gospel of ,christ4 ,now as ,i believe this gospel is not of man1 but of ,god1 ,i likewise believe that ,god in consummate wisdom has planned the evidences by which it is and will be supported in the world1 until it fills the whole earth4 #b;d4 ,as ,i believe that divine wisdom has planned1 ordered and directed all the means which will finally operate as evidences in defence of the gospel1 ,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 supported4 ,and #c;d4 ,i have spent much time in reflecting and studying on this momentous subject1 some time in reading authors on both sides of the question1 a great deal of time in reading the scriptures1 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 gospel1 or ever have invented such a chain of evidences for its support4 ,if the single miracle of the resurrection be considered1 as the fact on which all other facts relating to the gospel seem to rest1 it is confidently believed that no human invention could have concerted a system so well calculated to secure the fact to all future generations1 as that which has been adopted by the divine economy4 ,had the whole of the ,jewish nation with their ,gentile neighbours1 together with the ,roman authorities1 all confessed ,christianity1 being fully convinced of the resurrection of ,jesus1 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 decay1 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 invention4 ,but let us consider the unbelief of the ,jews1 the violent opposition of that ancient priesthood1 its coalition with the ,roman government against the gospel1 the great jealousy which the acknowledged miracles of ,jesus had excited1 the vigilance by which he was watched by his religious enemies1 the careful scrutiny employed to discover fraud in his miracles if it were possible2 and then add to these considerations that the miracles of ,jesus were publically performed1 and of such a nature as to admit of the easiest possible detection if they had not been real3 and finally to disarm unbelief at once1 consider that the ministry of the gospel was set up by the apostles1 on the bold declaration that ,god had raised the crucified ,jesus from the dead6 ,a declaration1 which if it had not been true1 mark well1 sir1 could have been as easily refuted and rendered the derision of all people as any declaration that could have been made4 ,but ,i shall lose myself1 and forget that you have not yet called my attention so directly to this subject1 as to justify my entering largely into it4 ,what you have said on the subject of believing in the testimony of ,david1 that the ,lord is good to all1 and his tender mercies are over all his works1 also the same sentiment communicated by ,jesus ,christ1 that ,god loves his enemies and that he requires of us the same exercise towards our enemies1 though perfectly reasonable1 as ,i view the subject1 seems to call up the question1 how it happens that thousands of professed ,christians1 who believe in the miracles of ,jesus1 his resurrection and the miracles of the apostles1 are notwithstanding hostile to this divine and glorious sentiment of the blessed ,jesus6 ,being compelled1 by the visible evidences of divine goodness1 seen in the rain and sunshine1 they advance so far as to acknowledge that temporal favours are generally distributed1 but that ,god does really love the wicked1 they utterly deny4 ,now while you can believe this great moral truth without a miracle1 ,christian people in general cannot believe it with one4 ,you are not to suppose that ,i am willing to allow that you believe this sentiment without a miracle1 though you would insinuate1 that this is the case4 ,my opinion is1 that had it not been for the miracles recorded in the new testament1 the truth of which you are disposed to call in question1 you and ,i1 if we had existed1 would have had no more light on this subject than the rudest savage1 or what is worse1 the most superstitious and contracted ,christian4 ,if you have any ground on which you can fairly refute my opinion on this subject1 ,i hope you will faithfully perform it2 if not1 it will be expected that you will express your acquiescence4 ,such is the power of natural prejudice which we know exists in the human mind1 that without a divine revelation from ,god1 supported by the most evident miracles1 man will not extend his views of divine benevolence scarcely beyond the rivers and mountains which environ the circumscribed vicinity of his birth4 ,trace the power and operation of this prejudice and you find it maintaining hostility against the light of revelation itself1 and it is only by slow degrees that it is brought into submission4 ,we reason very injudiciously when we bring ourselves to believe1 that by the light of reason we could know and understand all the moral truths which we have been taught by revelation2 we forget that revelation has illuminated our reason and taught it how to see and understand4--,just as well might the sprightly youth refuse to acknowledge that its mother learned it to walk1 and ever gave it nourishment and strength to perform the exercise1 and allege that it can walk as well as she can4 ,as well might the learned graduate refuse the grateful honours due to his instructors1 and say3 my reason1 my understanding comprehend these sciences1 of what use then are these learned professors and this college institution8 ,but would not reason point him to the condition of those1 to whom the blessings of instruction1 which1 through much difficulty had given him the light of science1 had not extended8 ,would it not force the comparison on his understanding1 and humble him into gratitude8 ,it seems impossible1 sir1 for reason to compare our situation with theirs1 who have not been enlightened by the gospel1 without kneeling1 like the woman in ,simon's house1 at the feet of ,jesus4 #b;d4 ,if the prophets where not divinely inspired1 will you suggest any way by which their pretentions to divine inspiration can be reconciled with their honesty8 ,they all speak in the name of the ,lord1 and evidently aim at the high pretention of being spoken to1 in a special manner1 by ,god himself4 ,will you say3 they were a set of poor deluded enthusiasts8 ,but this would contradict your reason which can see in every page of their writings a very different character4 ,a passage from the #ast chapter of ,jeremiah is here quoted for an example4 ,then the word of the ,lord came unto me1 saying1 before ,i formed thee c4 ,i sanctified thee2 and ,i ordained thee a prophet unto the nations4 ,then said ,i1 ah1 ,lord ,god6 behold1 ,i cannot speak1 for ,i am a child3 ,but the ,lord said unto me1 say not1 ,i am a child3 for thou shalt go to all that ,i shall send thee1 and whatsoever ,i command thee thou shalt speak4 ,be not afraid of their faces2 for ,i am with thee to deliver thee1 saith the ,lord4 ,then the ,lord put forth his hand and touched my mouth2 and the ,lord said unto me1 behold1 ,i have put my words in thy mouth4 ,here ,jeremiah evidently designed to declare himself an inspired prophet of ,god1 by which he was justified in speaking in his name4 ,now if all this was mere fiction1 how can it be entitled to a better character than that of blasphemy8 ,as a specimen of this prophet's knowledge of future events we may notice his prophesy of the seventy years captivity4 ,see chap4 xxv4 #aa1 c4 xxix4 #aj1 c4 ,compare with #b ,kings xxiv4 #b ,chron4 xxxvi4 ,ezra i4 #a1 and other corresponding passages4 ,i will ask you to consult the character of ,daniel1 and observe with what genuine humility he pretends to divine inspiration1 chap4 ii4 xxx4 ,but as for me1 the secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that ,i have more than any living1 but that the secret might be made known1 and that thou mightest know the thoughts of thy heart4 ,if ,daniel did not receive a divine revelation1 it must be allowed that he was deceived1 or that he meant to deceive the king4 ,but if he were deceived1 or if he meant to deceive1 can you give any good account how he could tell the king's dream and the interpretation1 which reached into the far distant periods of time1 and which has been remarkably fulfilled in the rise and fall of the four great empires of the world1 and is still fulfilling by the advances of the kingdom of ,christ8 ,i will say nothing of the prophet ,isaiah1 who speaks of the ,messiah more than seven hundred years before he was born1 as if he had been his contemporary4 ,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 history4 ,but ,i must insist on your paying some nice attention to the prophesies of ,christ concerning the destruction of ,jerusalem4 ,this prophesy is recorded very circumstantially in the #bdth of ,matt4 ,be so good1 sir1 as to compare this prophesy with the history written by ,josephus and let candor decide whether the author of that prophesy was divinely inspired1 or whether he was a poor deceived enthusiast4 ,if you allow that ,jesus ,christ was an honest man how is it possible for you to deny his being divinely inspired8 ,he certainly pretended to foretell events2 he most surely pretended to perform most astonishing miracles4 ,of these facts we have as much evidence as we have that there was such a man4 ,now1 sir1 if he were honest1 he was divinely inspired and endued1 or he was an enthusiast even to insanity4 ,and yet in every instance1 where the powers of his mind were tried1 by the profoundest learning1 and sharpest wit that could be brought against him1 he discovered a mind as clear as light4 ,a volume of vast extent could not exhaust the subject ,i am now upon1 but as you have the same opportunity and means which ,i have to trace it1 ,i shall insist on your treating this subject with candor and shall expect you to acknowledge that ,jesus was divinely inspired1 or show how he could be honest1 without this divine endowment4 #c;d4 ,you acknowledge1 that there are evidences in favour of divine revelation1 which would support it1 if there were nothing to counterbalance their testimony4 ,i shall here find some fault4 ,why do you allow that there are evidences in favour of divine revelation1 and not state what they are8 ,why do you insinuate that there is something to counterbalance their testimony and not state what it is8 ,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 is8 ,does he not need to know what his opponent is willing to allow to be evidence8 ,and does he not likewise need to know how this evidence is counterbalanced8 ,however1 as you have not favoured me with such necessary assistance1 ,i will attempt to proceed without it4 ,but here ,i must go partly on presumption and partly by guess4 ,in the first place ,i will inquire what particular circumstance recorded in scripture1 which1 if true1 would substantiate revelation2 and which you may suppose there is evidence sufficient to prove1 if there was nothing to counterbalance it8 ,this ,i will presume is the resurrection of ,jesus4 ,why ,i think you would be most likely to have this particular in your mind1 is1 because on this event1 ,i believe all will agree1 depend the validity of the prophecies1 the truth of the testimony of ,christ himself1 and the authority of the apostles4 ,i will then presume that you acknowledge that there is evidence of this wonderful fact2 but at the same time ,i am to understand1 that1 in your mind there is something to counterbalance1 in some degree1 if not entirely1 this evidence4 ,having proceeded so far1 ,i am now to guess what the evidence is that you think would support this all important fact1 if it were not counterbalanced4 ,but here ,i find myself in difficulty4 ,my difficulty is in finding any kind of evidence which could prove such an event1 if there were nothing to counterbalance it1 that could possibly be counterbalanced4 ,will you say that the testimony of the disciples1 that they had seen the man alive after his death would be sufficient evidence to prove the fact8 ,suppose twelve men of honest fame1 should report1 and even depose1 that the last man who was publicly executed in ,boston1 had actually arose from the dead1 and that they had ate and drank with him a number of times since he was executed4 ,should you suppose this sufficient evidence1 if there were nothing to do it away8 ,but what could do it away8 ,if the people could go to the grave and find the body there1 the testimony of the twelve would remain no evidence at all1 and therefore could not afterwards be called evidence sufficient to support the fact if there were nothing to counterbalance it4 ,but suppose the people cannot find the body1 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 secret8 ,but a guard is placed to watch the grave2 but a guard might be bribed4 ,the one we have account of was bribed1 according to the story2 and if they could be bribed by the chief priests and rulers1 why not by some body else8 ,finally1 would the testimony of these men be sufficient to prove such an extraordinary fact even if the body could not be found8 ,i think for myself1 that various opinions would result from such evidence4 ,some would believe that these men had entered into some very extraordinary plot1 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 resurrection4 ,others might believe them honest men1 but by some crafty contrivance imposed on4 ,others might believe that the spirit of this man had appeared to the twelve1 but that no real resurrection had taken place4 ,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 brought1 or if nothing could be brought against it4 ,such a circumstance would no doubt cause a great deal of talk1 the depositions and the names of the deponents would be published in the newspapers1 perhaps for several weeks1 but after a little time it would die away4 ,finally1 ,i cannot conceive of any evidence that could sufficiently support the fact that ,jesus who was crucified1 did actually rise from the dead1 if nothing could be brought to counterbalance it1 that could possibly admit of being counterbalanced4 ,the question seems to remain1 and the substance of it is this4 #ast4 ,if ,jesus did actually rise from the dead what kind of evidence would his disciples need in order to be satisfied of the fact8 ,and #b;d4 ,what kind of evidence must they be able to bring to the people in order to convince them of the fact8 ,i will here suppose that it is not necessary to prove that the disciples of ,jesus1 who preached him and his resurrection all their lives after they commenced at the day of pentecost1 really believed what they preached2 but the evidence by which they believed it ,i now inquire for4 ,we must notice that the disciples did not expect the resurrection1 they were not believers of this fact when their master was crucified4 ,they were awfully disappointed1 and not only disappointed but intimidated1 as the account fully shows4 ,they all forsook ,jesus at his trial1 and ,peter for fear of being involved with him denied being his disciple4 ,the evidence then of his resurrection must be such as will convince those of the fact who have no expectation of the event4 ,we will now look at the account4 ,and when the ,sabbath was past1 ,mary ,magdalene1 and ,mary the mother of ,james1 and ,salome1 had brought sweet spices1 that they might come and anoint him4 ,this very rational account shows as plainly as the case will admit that these women had no expectation of his resurrection4 ,i omit here what passed at the sepulchre when these women were there1 for this does not relate to the disciples4 ,the angel at the sepulchre told these women that ,jesus had risen1 and directed them to go and tell his disciples4 ,now when ,jesus was risen eariy1 the first day of the week1 he appeared first to ,mary ,magdalene1 out of whom he had cast seven devils4 ,and she went and told them that had been with him1 as they mourned and wept4 ,this mourning and weeping could not be the effect of the pleasing expectation of soon having their divine master with them2 no1 it was the natural effect of the amazing disappointment which had closed all the hopes they had entertained4 ,and they1 when they had heard that he was alive1 and had been seen of her1 believed8 no1 believed not4 ,after that he appeared in another form to two of them as they walked1 and went into the country4--,and they went and told it unto the residue3 neither believed they them4 ,afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat1 and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart1 because they believed not them which had seen him after he had risen4 ,it seems unnecessary to quote into this communication all the instances related by the four deponents of ,jesus' being seen of the eleven2 his frequently being with them1 eating with them1 holding lengthy conversations with them1 c4 ,now as these disciples knew that ,jesus had been crucified and buried1 and a guard had been placed to guard the sepulchre1 and moreover knowing for certainty that the body of ,jesus was not where it had been deposited1 and being favoured with his presence on a variety of occasions for forty days1 the evidence to the disciples was of a character described by the author of the ,acts4 ,to whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs1 being seen of them forty days1 and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of ,god4 ,i believe1 sir1 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 mind1 however prone they were to unbelief4 ,i am of opinion that such evidence would convince you and me of a similar fact4--,two questions are here necessary4 #ast4 ,can we conceive how the evidence could have been less without being insufficient8 ,and #b;d4 ,can we conceive how it could have been stronger8 ,i will not take up time to argue these questions1 ,i feel satisfied on them myself4 ,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 disciples8 ,thus we are brought to the suggestion1 that any evidence which could be sufficient to prove such a fact1 if no evidence appeared against it1 must be such as admits of no refutation4 ,you will not forget1 and think that ,i have been endeavouring to prove the resurrection of ,jesus1 or that the disciples even believed it2 all ,i have been seeking for is that kind of evidence which would be necessary to prove to the disciples such a fact1 and to show that such evidence cannot admit of refutation4 ,however1 you will at once see that1 allowing our reasoning to be correct1 and allowing the disciples did really believe the resurrection1 either of which1 ,i do not believe you will undertake to dispute1 the resurrection is proved beyond all contradiction4 #b;d4 ,let us now inquire what kind of evidence was necessary for the disciples of ,jesus to bring to the people1 in order to convince them of this all-important fact on which the whole scheme and ministry of the gospel rested4 ,it seems that the disciples did not believe on the testimony of others1 though of their own intimate acquaintance1 persons in whom they would place as much confidence as in any in the world1 no doubt4 ,of course1 they could not expect other people1 who had not been the disciples of ,jesus1 would believe in his resurrection on their testimony4 ,the evidence which the disciples had was sufficient for them1 but their testimony would surely be much less2 and any thing less would be insufficient as before stated4 ,we will now have recourse to the account4 ,but first let us notice1 that we are not endeavouring to prove that the disciples ever persuaded any to believe in the resurrection of ,jesus2 this is1 as it must be1 considered a fact1 not disputed4 ,the question is by what evidence did the apostles convince thousands of the people in ,jerusalem and its vicinity1 that ,jesus who was publicly executed1 was not only the true ,messiah promised in the law and prophets1 but that he had actually arose from the dead and ascended into heaven4 ,before ,jesus ascended1 he1 after saying many other things to his disciples who were together in the city of ,jerusalem1 said to them2 ,thus it is written1 and thus it behoveth ,christ to suffer1 and to rise from the dead the third day3 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations1 beginning at ,jerusalem4 ,and ye are witnesses of these things4 ,and behold1 ,i send the promise of my father upon you3 but tarry ye in the city of ,jerusalem until ye be endued with power from on high4 ,see the same account in ,acts1 ,but ye shall receive power1 after that the ,holy ,ghost is come upon you3 and ye shall be witnesses unto me1 both in ,jerusalem1 and in all ,judea1 and in ,samaria1 and unto the uttermost parts of the earth4 ,according to this account1 ,jesus did not direct his disciples to undertake to convince the people by their testimony1 but charged them to wait for divine power4 ,accordingly they did wait4 ,now look at the account which we have1 of what took place on the day of pentecost4 ,i will not mutilate this account by quoting parts1 there is no need of quoting what you have perfectly in your memory4 ,take particular notice of what ,peter said to the people who had been accessary to the crucifixion of ,jesus4 ,he who was so intimidated as to deny ,christ1 now stands in the midst of the people and boldly asserts1 that ,jesus of ,nazareth was a man approved of ,god among them by miracles and wonders1 and signs which ,god did by him1 among them2 and that they knew this to be the case4 ,he further tells them that they had with wicked hands crucified and slain this man who was thus approved of ,god4 ,and he assured the whole house of ,israel1 that ,god had made this same ,jesus whom they had crucified both ,lord and ,christ4 ,he moreover boldly declared that ,god had raised ,jesus from the dead4 ,now add to the testimony of ,peter1 the astonishing manifestation of the power of the ,holy ,spirit1 as described in the account1 and you have the evidence by which about three thousand souls were convinced of the resurrection of ,jesus in one day4 ,here let us consider2 the people had been acquainted with ,jesus1 and had been eye witnesses of his miracles2 many of them were personally acquainted with ,lazarus whom ,jesus raised from the dead4 ,they had been1 many of them1 fed by his miracles and had seen his wonderful works4 ,now put all together and it is evident that they had sufficient reason to believe4 ,i cannot conceive how reasonable people in the candid exercise of their judgments1 could avoid believing4 ,look1 sir1 at the account of the miraculous cure of the lame man1 who lay at the gate of the temple4 ,notice the words used to effect it4 ,in the name of ,jesus ,christ of ,nazareth1 rise up and walk4 ,and all the people saw him walking and praising ,god3 and they knew that it was he who sat for alms at the beautiful gate of the temple4 ,hear what ,peter says to the wondering multitude on this occasion4 ,ye men of ,israel1 why marvel ye at this8 or why look ye so earnestly on us1 as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk8 ,the ,god of ,abraham1 and of ,isaac1 and of ,jacob1 the ,god of our fathers1 hath glorified his son ,jesus2 whom ye delivered up1 and denied him in the presence of ,pilate1 when he was determined to let him go4 ,but ye denied the holy one and the just1 and desired a murderer to be granted unto you2 and killed the prince of life1 whom ,god hath raised from the dead3 whereof we are witnesses4 ,and his name1 through faith in his name1 hath made this man strong1 whom ye see and know3 yea1 and the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all4 ,here we have the evidence by which about five thousand men1 besides women1 believed--that is1 owned their belief4 ,when the high priest and others called ,peter and ,john before them1 and demanded1 by what power1 or by what name they had done this thing1 ,peter answers1 filled with the ,holy ,spirit2 ,ye rulers of the people1 and elders of ,israel1 if we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man1 by what means he is made whole3 be it known unto you all1 and to all the people of ,israel1 that by the name of ,jesus ,christ of ,nazareth1 whom ye crucified1 whom ,god raised from the dead1 even by him doth this man stand here before you whole4 ,this is the stone which was set at naught by you builders4 ,hear what these rulers say when ,peter and ,john were sent aside4 ,what shall we do to these men8 for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest to all them that dwell in ,jerusalem2 and we cannot deny it4 ,such evidence as we have noticed1 which the disciples were enabled to bring to the people1 of the resurrection of ,jesus1 was sufficient to remove every reasonable doubt and to bring over to this faith1 those who had been his murderers4 ,i will now inquire whether it is reasonable to suppose that less evidence would have effected such conviction8--,and on the other hand1 ,i will ask whether stronger proof could in the nature of things be given8 ,and lastly1 to come to our object again1 does such evidence possibly admit of being counterbalanced8 ,i understand that these questions admit of no other answers than such as go to show1 that if there be any evidence of the resurrection of ,jesus1 sufficient to support it1 if there were no evidence to counterbalance it1 such evidence is not capable of being counterbalanced4--,you will perceive that our reasoning must issue in the truth of the resurrection1 unless we assume the extravagant notion1 that the people who lived in ,jerusalem and its vicinity1 at the time of the crucifiction of ,jesus1 were not brought over to believe it4 ,it is hoped that no objection will be brought from the circumstance of the rejection of the gospel by the rulers of the ,jews1 and by the major part of that hierarchy1 as long as it is perfectly evident that their opposition and unbelief were indispensably necessary for the fulfilling of the prophecies1 for the carrying of conviction to the ,gentiles1 and for the purpose of perpetuating the necessary evidences on which we1 at this day1 must rest our belief of this religion4 #dth4 ,you hardly know how to understand me when ,i suggest1 that in disproving the religion of ,jesus ,christ1 you disprove all religion1 c4 ,i think ,i added1 that there is no choosing between this religion and some other1 we must have this1 or none4 ,by the religion of ,jesus ,christ1 ,i mean to comprehend all that the doctrine of the scriptures encourage us to believe in and hope for1 and also all that this doctrine requires1 also all that it teaches us to expect as resulting from obedience and disobedience4 ,i am fully persuaded that you never can disprove this religion1 so as to do away its effects on your own mind4 ,its maxims contain all the morality you know of1 and all that a ,deist calls natural religion1 he has been taught from the revealed wisdom of ,god4 ,the further you advance into the society of man1 where the light of the holy scriptures has least extended1 so much the more do you lose sight of the moral virtues2 and so much the more do you lose sight of the simple unity and divine benevolence of ,god4 ,my meaning1 sir1 however1 was not very extensive4 ,it was to say1 as in a familiar conversation1 ,i might express myself as follows3 ,brother1 if we disprove the religion of ,jesus ,christ1 that is1 if we give up our present belief1 there is no other religion1 that we have heard of1 that can have the least claim to our belief4 ,judaism1 ,paganism1 ,mahomedanism1 could neither of them have any claims2 nor in fact could what people call ,deism1 or the belief in one ,god4 ,if you say there is certainly demonstrated in the very nature of things an eternal unchangeable principle or law which governs all things2 ,i will answer1 ,i am surprised to hear a rational being1 who cannot remember forty-five of our short years1 and knows not that he shall live in the world another hour1 talk about eternal things1 use great swelling words of vanity about unchangeability1 and yet deny that ,god has made a revelation to man6 ,i am really of the sentiment expressed by him who is justly styled the light of the world1 who said ,no man knoweth the ,father save the ,son1 and he to whom the ,son revealeth him4 #eth4 ,you seem to inquire whether ,jesus and his apostles might not be honest men2 and yet their testimony1 concerning a future state be erroneous4 ,answer1 this case comes into the same argument as the case of the prophets1 to which attention has been paid4 ,we have no more reason to believe that ,jesus and his apostles were honest men1 than we have to believe that they pretended to divine inspiration1 and to the power of working many very astonishing miracles4 ,it does not appear reasonable to suppose that these servants of ,god1 thought they could1 and did heal the sick and raise the dead1 when in fact they could do no such thing4 ,therefore1 if they pretended to do such things and did them not1 they were all impostors1 and surely deserve no better appellation4 ,now if ,i can bring to your mind my inference1 it is this4 ,god would not endue ,jesus ,christ and his apostles with power to work miracles1 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 testimony1 and yet leave them in the dark concerning those things of which they speak to the people4 ,what you say on this subject1 indicates that you did not understand me to infer the validity of the apostles' testimony concerning a future state1 from any higher authority than their simple honesty unconnected with the other part of the argument1 which was as plainly set forth in my former communication as you will now find it in this4 #fth4 ,you suppose that arguments equally energetic1 and equally conclusive might be drawn from our feelings1 against1 as in favour of the necessity of divine revelation4 ,though ,i am not of your opinion1 yet ,i am disposed to think that desires very fervent may in some instances exercise the human heart against the knowledge of divine truth4 ,but1 sir1 this is the effect of moral disease1 not of a sound mind4 ,a foul stomach will nauseate at the sight of wholesome food2 distempered eyes are rendered painful by the rays of light2 one whose deeds are evil loves darkness for this very reason4 ,now that people affected with these infirmities should be exercised with fervent desires to avoid what gives them uneasiness is surely very natural2 but that a person in health and having good exercise should loathe that which is good and nourishing1 that one who has sound eyes should dislike the enlivening beams of the sun1 or that one whose works are wrought in ,god1 should love darkness rather than light is not reasonable4 ,you are cautioned against supposing that these remarks are designed to be applied to yourself1 for ,i bear you record that your exertions and assiduity for the attainment of true knowledge have been laudable1 and worthy of imitation4 ,but all this only proves to me that your reasoning is unnatural1 and that no man would be more rejoiced to know the truth of divine revelation than yourself4 #gth4 ,that a person who does not even desire a future existence should realize the goodness of the divine ,being1 and feel truly grateful for all enjoyments does not stand in a clear light in my mind4 ,i cannot conceive that it is possible that any thing could remove a desire to exist in the future1 except a very strong fear that that state would be awfully miserable4 ,to be thankful to ,god1 and to rejoice in his goodness1 and at the same time feel no desire to continue in the enjoyment of such favour is to me a complete solecism1 which sufficiently refutes itself4 #hth4 ,your assertion1 that if a revelation was ever necessary1 it was necessary only to reconcile man to his present state of existence1 is thought to be an error of no small magnitude4 ,if you had said that revelation was necessary only for the improvement of man in his present state it would have been more correct4 ,as for man's present existence1 it seems he has love enough2 people wish to live here1 and no doubt they would wish to stay forever if they had no hope in the future4 ,by improving our present state by a divine revelation1 ,i wish to be understood to comprehend all that is meant by the ministry of reconciliation4 ,this has for its object the reconciliation of man to ,god4 ,but it is a soul rejoicing fact1 that of the precious things brought forth by the sun of righteousness1 the hope of immortality is its most precious jewel4 ,this makes every thing valuable4 ,hence we may lay up our treasures where neither moth nor rust can corrupt1 nor thieves break through and steal4 ,here ,god's bright favour will never grow dim1 nor will our love and gratitude ever decay4 ,do you see this celestial form leaning on her anchor1 and while the raging waves of a restless sea dash against her1 feel unmoved8 ,do you observe her aspect firm1 and her eyes turned towards ,heaven8 ,and wouldst you wish to cast her down and wreck her on the quicksands of dismal doubt8 ,go1 brother1 to the chamber of sickness1 where life's waning embers can no longer warm the dying heart1 there hear from cold and quivering lips this hope expressed1 ,i long to be with ,christ1 ,i long to be at rest4 ,would you blast this amaranthine flower8 ,would you plant in its stead the night shade of dispair8 ,do not1 dear sir1 listen too long to the wild suggestions of vain fancy and wandering imagination1 under the specious pretence of searching after truth4 ,i am apprehensive that she who persuades you that she is truth1 really deserves another name4 ,jesus is the way1 the truth and the life1 he also is made unto us wisdom4 ,give me the light of this bright sun to see1 ,all other lights like met'ors are to me2 ,give me that way1 that pleasant path to know1 ,i'll walk no other path while here below4 ,wouldst thou be wise8 ,this wisdom learn to scan1 ,which brings to ,god1 the wandering heart of man4 #ith and last4 ,you misunderstand me in supposing that ,i meant to insinuate1 that by what you wrote respecting the apostles' stating nothing more than what was substantially true1 you must mean that they stated falsehood4 ,i meant1 if you do not believe that they stated the truth you must believe that they stated falsehood1 in which case ,i called on you to make a short work of our argument by proving that what they stated was not true4 ,i wonder you should not have thought of this way to understand me1 because there is no way to explain your words into the meaning which you supposed ,i had attached to them1 while what ,i now suggest is fairly the necessary result of what you stated4 ,on this subject ,i am disposed to say a little more4 ,if we find ourselves in serious doubts respecting any important particular of our religion1 and we wish to have the matter cleared up to our satisfaction1 why should we spend much time and write many sheets1 with no other apparent object1 than to keep away from the subject which labours in our minds8 ,if you were under the necessity of bringing a tree to the ground1 and of removing it from the forest1 would you ascend the tree and begin your work on the extreme twigs1 or would you cut the trunk off near the roots1 when the whole mass would come down together8 ,you will apprehend my meaning4 ,the fact is1 if the ,christian religion is ever overthown1 it must be done1 not by proving that professors of it have held errors and have been superstitious1 and have ever practised wickedness1 using the name of ,christ for a cloak1 c4 but by proving the testimony1 of the new testament false4 ,cut the trunk of the tree off at this place and the work is done4 ,but if it were possible1 in the nature of things for the testimony borne in the new testament to be proved false1 can you persuade yourself to believe that it would not have been done8 ,if a book containing the grossest falsehood1 the most palpable frauds1 pretensions the very easiest to be detected of any that can be imagined1 could be got up and published1 and be copied by many hands1 and be translated into different languages on purpose to overthrow the popular religion of all countries where the book is sent or carried1 and if in spite of truth1 and all the learning of a learned age1 if in spite of all sorts of superstition combined with civil government1 if in spite of reason1 argument1 persuasion1 the tender love and compassion of parents1 interest1 honour1 ease1 peace and quiet2 if in the face of the most cruel sufferings and most awful deaths1 this book1 with all its abominable lies1 and most palpable frauds could succeed1 its doctrines run and be glorified2 if ancient superstitions1 than which nothing can have a more despotic sway over the human heart1 if the priests of long venerated idols with thousands of their votaries were humbled before this testimony1 what is there now on which we can rely for success against it8 ,how beautiful are reason and candor4 ,dr4 ,gamaliel gives us a handsome specimen4 ,ye men of ,israel1 take heed to yourselves1 what ye intend to do as touching these men4--,for before these days rose up ,theudas1 boasting himself to be somebody3 to whom a number of men1 about four hundred1 joined themselves3 who was slain2 and all1 as many as obeyed him1 were scattered and brought to naught4 ,after this man rose up ,judas of ,galilee in the days of the taxing1 and drew away much people after him3 he also perished2 and all1 even as many as obeyed him1 wore dispersed4 ,and now1 ,i say unto you1 refrain from these men1 and let them alone3 for if this counsel or this work be of men1 it will come to naught2 but if it be of ,god1 ye cannot overthrow it2 lest haply ye be found even to fight against ,god4 ,let us remark1 #ast4 ,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 facts4 ,i will take it on myself to say that it does not appear reasonable that men who were fabricating a falsehood1 would ever have thought of such a method as this to give it currency4 #b;d4 ,you will naturally observe that this learned doctor of the law was himself persuaded of the truth of the apostles' testimony1 and though he was not willing to make so great a sacrifice as he must if he professed ,jesus openly1 he was willing to espouse the cause so far as his learning and influence would go1 without rendering himself odious to his friends4 #c;d4 ,it is pretty evident1 that whatever ,theudas made a handle of in order to obtain disciples1 ,judas of ,galilee had that very unpopular tax 7,i do not consult any authority as it is immaterial1 but only follow a probable suggestion7 which was collected about the time of the birth of ,jesus1 or some other1 by which he no doubt1 strove to disaffect the ,jews against the ,roman government1 which they very naturally were opposed to4 ,but ,judas did not succeed4 #dth4 ,jesus never tried to persuade the people against the civil authorities1 nor did he ever promise his disciples any worldly benefits1 nor try to allure the people after him by holding out1 as inducements1 any thing that the carnal passions of men are in love with2 and yet he succeeded though he lost his life4 #eth4 ,dr4 ,gamaliel was of opinion that if the gospel were not of ,god1 it would come to naught1 but it did not1 nor is there the least probability it ever will4 ,yours1 c4 ,h4 ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,,vii4 ,in this number the objector gives the whole ground of his objections1 and the reasons for his doubts3 which he states as follows1 viz4 #a4 ,mankind1 in all ages of the world1 have been1 and still are prone to superstition4 #b4 ,it cannot be denied1 but that a part of mankind at least1 have believed1 and still are believing in miracles and revelation1 which are spurious4 #c4 ,the facts on which religion is predicated are unlike every thing of which we have any positive knowledge4 ,under the first article1 the objector appealed to the known superstitions of the world3 not only of the ,pagan2 but of the ,jewish1 ,mahometan1 and ,christian world4 ,he took a view of the present state of ,asia1 spake of the voluntary sacrifices of human life to the great image at ,hugernaught6 and of women voluntarily climbing the funeral pile to be burned with their deceased husbands6 ,he took a view of the ,inquisition in ,old ,spain2 and finally of the various superstitious notions and practices among the different sects of christians in our own country4 ,under the second article1 he discanted largely on the pretension of ,mahomet1 and of their great influence and extent2 and also of the particular tone given to the ,christian religion by ,constantine1 who1 holding the reigns of government1 had superior means in extending his influence over the ,christian world4 ,having made these remarks1 the objector proceeds3 ,if therefore1 he had happened only to have favoured the opinions of the ,gnostics1 we might have expected1 and probably it would have been the fact1 that the learned clergy of the present day would have held that ,jesus was not a man in reality1 but only a man in appearance2 that he assumed a body that he could put on or throw off at pleasure2 and that he died and was raised again in appearance only4 ,or otherwise1 if he had been disposed to come down to the simplicity and understanding of the common people1 then indeed ,christ might still have been considered as the ,jews' expected ,messiah2 yet we should have considered him a man1 and nothing more than a man2 though 'a man approved of ,god2'--'a man who hath told us the truth2'--even ',jesus of ,nazareth1 the son of ,joseph2' as it seems was the opinion of ,peter1 ,john and ,philip4 ,but the former opinion had been too long treated as heresy by all the bishops to be imbibed by ,constantine1 while the bishops themselves1 on the other hand1 had been too long contaminated with the ,platonic philosophy to descend to the simplicity of the latter2 therefore we have a religion1 compounded1 partly of the simplicity of the truth1 and partly of ,platonism4 ,constantine1 however1 being supported by a great majority of all the bishops1 in a great measure effected his purpose2 though not fully to his expectation3 for it seems he did not expect that any one would presume to oppose the decisions of this grand council1 which he had summoned and convened at his own expense1 or at the expense of the empire1 but in this he was mistaken2 for many1 even after this1 would take the liberty not only to think for themselves1 but also to speak their own thoughts4 ,one circumstance more ,i cannot avoid mentioning in this place1 viz1 the conversion of ,constantine from heathenism to the ,christian faith4 ,great men1 if turned about at all1 must be turned about by great means6 ,but whatever might have been thought of ,constantine's conversion by the people of that day1 the account given of it does not argue any thing very forcibly in my mind1 in favour of the truth of divine revelation4 ,great men1 however1 are not always free from superstition2 and they are just as likely to be deceived respecting things which are above their comprehension as others4 ,this is the most charitable way in which ,i can reconcile the following account which1 as ,eusebius1 the contemporary and historian of ,constantine1 says1 was stated under the solemnity of an oath4 ,for a full account of this extraordinary story4 ,see the #b;d vol4 of ,dr4 ,priestley's ,church ,history1 per4 #g1 sec4 #i4 ,i shall not attempt to quote it in full1 nor is it necessary1 and what ,i do quote is from memory only1 as ,i write abroad1 my books not being with me4 ,reflecting on the ill success of his predecessors in the numerous wars in which they had been engaged1 when their priests and oracles had ever promised them success1 and also considering the better success of his father1 ,constantine concluded from these circumstances that his father prayed to1 and was assisted by a different god6 ,when he prayed1 therefore1 he always prayed to the ,god of his father4 ,and being thus praying one evening1 towards the going down of the sun1 with his face toward the same1 he saw the appearance of a cross in the sun1 with these words over it in ,greek1 ,greek3 tetw nika by this conquer4 ,not knowing1 7or else pretending not to know7 what this sign should mean1 he called together some of the christian priests for an explanation2 who explained it as might naturally have been supposed they would1 that it was a representation of the cross1 on which ,christ was crucified1 and that there could be no doubt but that he had now interposed as ,god1 in behalf of the christians1 to deliver them from their enemies1 and of course from further persecution6 ,i do not pretend to be any thing more than substantially correct in the above account 7by which you will further see how ,i use the word substantially1 about which we have had some dispute7 i4 e4 ,i may1 yea undoubtedly1 have differed1 as to words1 yet ,i know ,i am correct in the most material part1 and of the use which ,constantine made of this supposed miraculous1 or supernatural appearance4 ,he said also1 the soldiers saw it as well as himself6 ,now1 if we give full credit to this account1 what must we think of ,christianity8 ,the meek and lowly ,jesus1 who was led 'like a lamb to the slaughter1' without the least resistance1 and who had suffered thousands to follow him in the same way1 now1 by a miraculous interposition1 arms a man with carnal weapons1 and1 ,mahometan like1 authorizes him to vindicate his cause1 and avenge his wrongs1 by shedding the blood of his enemies6 ,or1 if we do not credit this account1 what must we think of ,constantine8 and also of ,christianity so far as it can be traced to1 and made to depend on his influence8 ,that candor and charity1 however1 which ,i ever wish to maintain1 will oblige me in this1 as in all other cases of a similar nature1 to take the middle course4 ,i shall therefore suppose that there was some natural appearance1 perhaps a parhelion1 the cause of which ,constantine did not fully understand1 and1 from the appearance in the sky around it1 his fancy1 aided by superstition1 painted to his imagination the supposed cross1 as also the ,greek words1 which being pointed out to the soldiers they might easily imagine the same1 or1 if they did not1 would not like to oppose the opinion of their general4 ,thus circumstanced1 whether he really believed it to be any thing supernatural or not1 ,constantine was disposed to make the most of it he could1 by turning it to the best possible account4#b ,footnote #b3 ,upon the whole1 says ,dr4 ,priestly1 7vol4 #b1 p4 #if7 it appears to me most probable1 that ,constantine and his friends saw a natural parhelion1 and that all the other circumstances were either imagined1 or invented2 and that the story has lost nothing in passing through the hands of ,eusebius4 ,constantine also states 7which ,i forgot to mention above7 that ,christ appeared to him in a dream1 the night following1 with the very same sign which he had seen in the heavens1 ordering him to make a military standard like it1 and assuring him that it would be his security in battles4 ,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 taken1 and that ,i find nothing in it materially erroneous4 ,it appears1 however1 after all1 that ,constantine was a man of great moderation1 and on the whole1 a very good man3 yet1 that he was not wholly clear from superstition is very evident from the following circumstance4 ,notwithstanding his extraordinary1 and what was supposed by all1 miraculous conversion1 together with his great pretensions2 and all that he had done for christianity1 yet he neglected his own baptism till he found he was very nigh his end2 when he dressed himself in white1 and the bed on which he lay1 also all in white1 in which dress he was baptised and partook of the sacrament6 and thus he continued in white till he died4 ,this was undoubtedly from a mistaken notion1 that there was something really purifying in those outward ceremonies1 and also from the doctrine of the ,navatians1 a certain sect1 whose opinions it was supposed he favoured1 though not very openly1 i4e4 if a person committed sin after having been thus purified he could not die in union with the church4 ,you may perhaps object here and say1 all this is to no purpose1 as christianity was well established before2 and had existed for nearly three centuries1 and increased too1 notwithstanding the many most bitter and cruel persecutions4 ,therefore what you say respecting ,constantine only proves that christianity has been corrupted1 but it is no objection against its truth4 ,very good4 ,if the facts above stated are admitted1 let them prove what they will1 ,i am not the author of those facts1 nor accountable for what is proved by them4 ,the conversion of ,constantine1 however1 if correct1 bears some analogy to the conversion of ,st4 ,paul3 hence1 the supposition that one is not correct1 brings a little doubt over the mind respecting the truth of the other3 for both being by means which were supernatural2 if both are supported on equal testimony1 why should they not both share the same fate in our minds8 ,both were equally possible2 it is the want of probability1 therefore1 arising from the want of equal evidence in its favour1 which leads us to reject the truth of the circumstances attending the conversion of ,constantine1 rather than those attending the conversion of ,st4 ,paul4 ,the conversion of ,constantine also1 if genuine1 seems to have been designed for a very different object1 and was attended with a very different effect4 ,this would incline me to believe in the validity of that of the apostle's1 rather than that of the emperor4 ,nevertheless1 as it respects the facts2 he who caused a light at mid-day1 above the brightness of the sun1 might as easily have painted the sign of the cross on his disk2 and he who spake to ,saul from ,heaven1 with an audible voice1 in the ,hebrew tongue1 might as easily have painted letters and words in ,greek1 so that they might be distinctly read in the firmament6 ,leaving all ancient miracles and revelation1 ,i will come down to those of our own times1 and in our own country4--,strange to tell1 there is a sect of people now among us1 who sprang up less than half a century ago1 whose religion is professedly founded on miracles and revelation4 ,on miracles wrought by the first founders of the sect1 as by ,christ and his apostles1 and on a revelation also made directly to them1 and through them to the believers1 as by the inspired writers of the new testament4 ,they appear to be something similar in sentiment1 as it respects the person of ,christ1 to the ancient ,arians2 with this difference only1 they conceived that as ,christ made his first appearance in ,jesus1 the son of a carpenter1 so he has made his second appearance in ,ann1 the daughter of a blacksmith1 whom they call mother2 and they consider their church the ,new ,jerusalem1 that holy city which was to come down from ,god out of ,heaven4 ,in the year #ahjh1 about the same time after their first rise as it was after the days of ,jesus to the writing of the new testament1 they published a history of their sect1 in a work entitled ',christ's second appearance1' or the ,new ,jerusalem ,church1 setting forth their rise1 progress and present state2 together with their principles1 customs and mode of worship4 ,this work contains an account of their mother ,ann1 and the first elders2 and particularly an account of the miracles said to have been wrought by them4 ,if my memory serves me1 7as the book is not by me7 there is an account of about forty miracles1 all of which are well attested1 and though they acknowledge that most of them are inferior to those wrought by ,jesus and his apostles1 yet they contend that they are no more inferior to those than those are to the miracles wrought by ,moses4 ,they contend that for the plagues in ,egypt1 the dividing the red sea1 bringing water out of the rock1 feeding ,israel forty years in the wilderness with bread from heaven1 and that there should always fall a double portion on the sixth day1 but none on the seventh1 that that which fell on the sixth day1 should keep two days1 but on all other days it would keep but one1 and that afterward1 some of the same bread or manna was laid up in the ark of the covenant which kept for ages1 as a memorial2 also the dividing the waters of the river ,jordan1 and the fall of the walls of ,jericho2 yea most or all of these1 according to reason or human appearance1 are as much greater than the miracles wrought by ,jesus and his apostles1 as those are greater than those wrought by ,ann and her elders6 ,it is true1 they did not pretend to raise the dead1 but either these accounts are all fabrications and lies1 or else they had among them the gift of healing1 and that too miraculously4 ,a woman who had fell with her horse1 by the falling of a bridge1 and had broken several of her ribs1 besides being otherwise very much bruised1 was cured in one evening1 so that she joined in the dance6 ,a boy who had cut his foot so that a person might have laid his finger into the wound1 which bled very profusely1 was cured in a few hours so that nothing was to be seen of the wound excepting a white streak1 about the bigness of a common thread6 and many others of a like kind1 too numerous to be mentioned in this place4 ,you will readily perceive that ,i allude to the ,shakers2 a people who are enjoying privileges among us which no other people enjoy1 except the ,friends1 called also ,quakers3 and who are debarred from no privileges excepting those from which they either religiously or superstitiously debar themselves4 ,thus people1 in consequence of their religion1 have entirely changed their manners1 customs1 and modes of worship4 ,they have also endured considerable persecution2 and that they have not suffered martyrdom in defence of their religion1 is no fault of theirs4 ,there can be no doubt but that there has been fanaticism enough on their part to have done it1 if there had been only bigotry and cruelty enough in the people1 at that time1 to have put it in execution4 ,let the same spirit reign among the people for a short time1 which reigned in ,boston when the ,quakers were put to death for their religion1 and the ,shakers also would be able to boast of their martyrs in defence of the truth of their particular sect1 and of course of the miracles and revelation on which it is said to have been founded4 ,and here ,i wish to remark a little on martyrdom1 seeing it is often brought in defence of the truth of divine revelation4 ,i am aware that great stress has been laid upon this1 and it will still be considered as one of its main pillars4 ,i apprehend1 however1 that more stress has been laid upon martyrdom than what it will justly bear4 ,if this is a test of the truth of religion1 there is scarcely any religion but what may be proved true4 ,only make death honourable1 of any kind whatever1 in the eyes of the people1 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 names4 ,but only let any particular kind of death be considered1 in the eyes of the people1 meritorious1 and the sure and certain road to endless bliss1 and there will not only be enough found willing to undergo this death1 if they can find any to inflict it upon them1 but they will absolutely court it6 ,instead therefore of having my faith strengthened by reading the book of martyrs1 as ,i thought ,i had some reason to expect1 it has produced a quite contrary effect4 ,notwithstanding these accounts were taken down by the friends of the martyrs1 and by them have been handed down to us1 who1 as we may well suppose1 were rather prejudiced in their favour1 yet nevertheless1 it is impossible to disguise the spirit and motives with which many of those infatuated people eagerly sought and met death4 ,in all those accounts it is but too clearly discovered1 what has been too often the fact1 that the most bitterly persecuted would have become the most violent persecutors1 if there had been only a chance for them so to have done1 and if there had been1 in their view1 an equal occasion4 ,the persecutors of people for their religion have always considered the persecuted1 either heretics or infidels2 who if persecuted by heathens1 unless they could be brought to sacrifice to their heathen gods1 or if by christians1 unless they could be brought to acknowledge the particular faith embraced by the orthodoxy of the day1 were considered as mere nuisances or pests to society2 and therefore for the public good1 it was thought necessary to take them out of the world6 ,while on the other hand1 the persecuted have always considered that1 if they suffered death in defence of their religion1 they were certain of being raised to great honour and dignity in another world2 a privilege which they undoubtedly believed their persecutors would never enjoy6 ,and1 whatever was the opinion of ,christ and his apostles on this subject1 it cannot be denied but that the idea very soon become prevalent among their followers that the distinction between them and a wicked world1 particularly their persecutors1 would be eternal6 ,under these circumstances1 ,i do not wonder at all that men have been found willing to die for their religion2 yea1 and even to court death by all the means of which their own consciences would approve6 ,but1 you may say1 all this does not account for the death of the first martyrs4 ,very true4 ,i admit that it does not4 ,but it shews that1 only let the work be begun1 from any cause whatever1 there is no difficulty in its being continued4 ,suppose then1 if you please1 that the first martyrs were killed by a mob1 a mere rabble1 without any legal process1 or even form of trial2 as1 from which appears by the account1 was the case with the death of ,stephen1 the first christian martyr2 and1 according to tradition1 most of the other apostles3 7and it may be remarked here1 it is only by tradition that we have any account of the death of the apostles2 as all authentic documents on the subject1 if there ever were any1 are lost37 ,i say1 let such a circumstance as the death of ,stephen take place in any country1 and in any age of the world2 but more especially in that age and country in which he lived2 and then let the same honour1 and the same supposed consequences be attached to such a death1 as undoubtedly were attached to the death of ,stephen2 and there can be no doubt but that others would be willing to follow the example4 ,only let the blood once begin to flow1 no matter how1 and then only attach eternal consequences to it1 and hold out inducements of an eternal nature1 and persuade men to believe them 7which is not so difficult a thing as some may imagine7 and you will never want for victims1 so long as you can find a zeal sufficiently blind and mad2 as to continue the slaughter4 ,in this way1 ,i conceive martyrdom1 of every species and kind1 may be rationally accounted for4 ,but it may be said all this does not disprove the miracles and revelation on which the christian religion is founded4 ,i acknowledge it does not2 neither do ,i expect to disprove them4 ,i admit that revelation1 and of course the christian religion may possibly be founded in truth1 notwithstanding the truth of all that ,i have as yet urged1 or shall urge against it4 ,but ,i call on you1 sir1 to disprove the miracles and revelation which ,i have mentioned1 of a more modern date1 or else acknowledge their truth4 ,if you acknowledge the truth of those miracles1 ,i shall expect you will conform to the religion predicated upon them2 and of course forsake your bosom companion 7which ,i presume would be a much greater cross than ever you have yet taken up17 and also your darling offspring 7or else take them with you7 and go and live with the ,shakers666 ,but if you prove them false1 it will only be that people may become so infatuated as to believe in miracles which are spurious4 ,for notwithstanding the smallness of the numbers of this people1 which by the way1 are considerable2 and notwithstanding the contemptible view in which they have been1 and still are held by the world2 yet1 you may find it more difficult to prove the falsity of their pretended miracles than at present you are aware2 for they are very well attested2 and some of the witnesses are still living1 or were so when their testimony was first published2 as also1 if ,i recollect right1 some of the persons on whom the miracles were said to have been wrought2 who1 no doubt1 would still testify to the same things4 ,if they testify falsely1 who can help it8--,although thousands may believe to the contrary2 many of whom being too in situations1 probably to have known these things1 if true2 yet ,i believe it would be difficult1 and very difficult indeed1 to find any who could absolutely say that those things did not take place4 ,and if there is a people now existing among us1 in different parts of the country1 and in different1 but large extensive families1 whose manners1 customs1 and worship are all very different from ours1 and who believe in miracles on which their religion is said to have been founded2 and if those miracles1 although not founded in truth1 cannot now be proved false1 notwithstanding they are said to have taken place in our own country1 and ever since we were born1 ,i would ask1 ought any one to be censured for not giving full credit to miracles said to have been wrought1 all of them nearly two1 and most of them above three thousand years ago2 and among a people too1 of which we know but very little8 ,i say1 ought any one to be censured for doing this1 although he should not be able to prove any of those miracles false8 ,i conclude ,i shall not be censured for not believing in the miracles said to have been wrought by the ,shakers2 but let the government undertake to annihilate that blind and superstitious class of people3 let them increase their numbers by persecution1 which1 like the effects of all other persecutions1 undoubtedly they would2 let them1 in the course of two or three centuries1 get the reins of government into their own hands2#c let them then follow the example of ,constantine in demolishing the temples of the heathen gods2 let them demolish every steepled meeting-house1 and introduce an entire new order of things2 let them also remake their scriptures1 change in some degree their mode of worship and manner of living1 and fix every thing to the policy of the state2 let the old opposition be entirely extinguished1 and new sects spring up among themselves2 let this be the order of things for a number of centuries1 and then let a man call in question the truth of ,shaker miracles or ,shaker revelation1 and he must do it as his peril6 ,it would undoubtedly cost him his life6 ,footnote #c3 ,were it not for other causes besides that of ,christianity1 ,i should think this full as likely as it was that ,christianity should ever get the reins of government1 judging from what ,christianity was when it had existed no longer than the ,shakers4 ,i might also mention here another person now living in the western part of the state of ,new-,york1 who also makes pretensions to be ,christ in his second coming1 and in imitation of him has chosen twelve as immediate apostles1 and who has a considerable number of followers4 ,but as this person is still living1 and it is uncertain whether the sect will take much root1 ,i choose to pass it over in silence4 ,i shall only call your attention to one circumstance more1 and then dismiss my second proposition4 ,you very well recollect1 ,i presume1 the account given by ,mrs4 ,a----1 of ,w----1 ,n4 ,h4 in which she affirms that she saw and conversed with her husband1 ,mr4 ,john ,a----1 for about an hour and a half1 who appeared to her some considerable time1 ,i believe about three months1 after he had been dead6 ,this is no fiction4 ,mrs4 ,a---- is still living1 and still affirms to the truth of what she has testified2 which account you know was published by two respectable witnesses who took it down1 for that purpose1 from her lips4 ,it is true1 there has been but very little said in the world respecting this matter1 and ,i presume1 for this plain and obvious reason2 the account did not correspond with the views of what is termed orthodoxy in ,christianity4 ,if if had1 i4 e4 if he had brought as much tidings concerning the supposed hell in another world1 as he did respecting the supposed heaven1 the account would have been published in every magazine1 in every religious tract1 and in every periodical work throughout the globe6 ,why not so1 as well as many accounts which were similar in other respects8 ,but as this account did not favour such views1 it is left to die in oblivion4 ,as the particulars of this account1 however1 make nothing either in favour or against my present purpose1 ,i shall not occupy time and room to relate it4 ,suffice it only to say1 if there were no mistake or deception in the matter1 this account can be nothing short of a revelation from ,god2 as much so as any revelation which has ever been made from ,god to man4 ,for no one can believe that ,mr4 ,a4 could appear to his wife1 after he was dead1 unless ,god sent him2 and if ,god sent him1 no one can doubt the truth of his testimony4 ,no one can well conceive of any motive ,mrs4 ,a4 could have in giving this account1 unless she fully believed it4 ,her daughter also was able to corroborate the account in some degree1 by saying that she heard her mother conversing in the bedroom1 but heard no other voice2 and she interrogated her on the subject when she came out1 by asking with whom she had been talking1 c4 ,but surprised on being informed that it was with her father1 and supposing1 as she naturally would1 that her mother had been talking in her sleep1 she requested her to say nothing about what she had either seen or heard1 saying1 that no one would believe her if she did4 ,but ,mrs4 ,a4 was able to convince her daughter that she had not been asleep1 by telling her of persons who had gone by her window during the time2 one man in a soldier's dress1 and another driving a yoke of oxen4 ,i state these things from memory only1 for ,i have not seen the account since soon after it was published1 or at least within three or four years1 that ,i now recollect2 yet ,i believe ,i could state the whole of it nearly verbatim as it was published4 ,now ,i do not believe that ,mrs4 ,a4 ever designed to state1 or that she now has the least idea that she has stated any thing incorrect on this subject4 ,and yet after all1 ,i doubt of its reality6 ,such is my incredulity2 and ,i see no way to avoid it4 ,if it be a fault in me1 may ,god forgive it2 though ,i am wholly unconscious of it's being one4 ,when one of two things presented to the mind must be true1 and the truth of one absolutely excludes the truth of the other1 a rational man will always believe that which to his own understanding is the most probable4 ,concerning therefore the account given by ,mrs4 ,a4 it stands1 in my mind thus3 either it is all a reality1 i4 e4 that her husband did absolutely appear to her2 that he did give her the account which she has stated2 and that that account is in fact true2 or else1 it was nothing more than the power of imagination1 which a certain train of ideas and reflections had produced in her mind1 which1 like a kind of reverie1 seemed to her like a reality4 ,and although ,i should not have made the same conclusion once1 yet from my present knowledge of human nature1 together with my own experience1 ,i do not hesitate to reject the former idea1 and believe the latter4 ,if in judging thus1 ,i do injustice either to ,mrs4 ,a4 or to the truth of ,god1 ,i can only ask forgiveness of a wrong1 which1 in truth1 is by no means intended4 ,but in justice to my own understanding ,i could not state differently1 if ,i knew this would be the last sentence ,i should ever write4 ,hence after making proper deduction for all that can be accounted for in this way1 laying out of the question at the same time all that we may justly suppose were the mere glosses of the historian1 or the lubricous figures of the poet1 which are very peculiar to the ancient style of writing2 after making due allowances also for interpolations1 or what in more modern times have been considered pious frauds6 and after rejecting every thing 7if any such there be7 which savors of gross imposition6 if there be any thing left to support the truth of divine revelation1 then it may rationally be believed4 #c4 ,the facts on which revelation is predicated are unlike every thing of which we have any positive knowledge4 ,of the truth of this proposition you must be sensible2 yea1 unless the revelation had been made directly to ourselves1 it is impossible that it should be otherwise than true4 ,neither of us have ever seen any thing miraculous6 ,the ancients1 however1 were carried away with this supposition2 the same as the moderns have been with the idea of witches1 wizards1 ghosts1 apparitions1 c4 and many things which once would have been considered ominous1 are now rationally accounted for4 ,in this way1 things once supposed to be miraculous also1 may have lost their supposed divine qualities4 ,this much1 however1 ,i believe1 and of this much ,i have no doubt1 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 ,christ2 and they were willing to preach and enforce them by all the means in their power1 even at the risk of their lives4 ,believing this1 and practising accordingly1 constituted them wise and good men2 and happy would it have been for the ,christian world if they had always followed in their steps1 without ever undertaking to dictate to others1 either modes or forms of worship1 or to use coercive means to compel men to the faith4 ,that the apostles also believed in the resurrection1 and also in eternal life1 ,i have no doubt2 this sentiment1 however1 was neither new nor peculiar to them1 but had been held long before1 not only by the pharisees1 among the ,jews1 but by some of the ,grecian philosophers2 and the truth of it ,i am not at all disposed to dispute2 yet nevertheless1 whether the evidences on which it was founded were not originally mere visionary1 like the appearance of ,mr ,a4 before mentioned1 is the subject under consideration4 ,there may be1 and undoubtedly are principles in nature which are not yet understood by any2 and many more which are understood only by a few4 ,the operations of these principles would undoubtedly1 even at the present day1 appear miraculous to thousands2 and must appear very extraordinary to every one until they are understood4 ,but this ,i conclude is not what is meant by miracles4 ,respecting miracles1 ,i have only to ask myself this question1 viz4--,which is the most likely to be true2 either that men should have been honestly deceived1 in the first instance1 or otherwise facts should have been so misrepresented1 that fabrication should have been honestly believed for truth2 or else1 that things so contrary to every principle of which ,i know in nature1 should have taken place8 ,let reason only dictate the answer4 ,another source of evidence in support of divine revelation is prophecy4 ,and here1 notwithstanding ,i think it very probable that much importance has been attached to many writings1 under the idea of their being prophetic1 which are nothing more than the poetic effusions of a fruitful imagination2 yet ,i have long been of opinion that there have been1 and perhaps still are men in the world who are endowed1 by nature1 with gifts and faculties differing from men in general2 and particularly1 say if you please1 with a spirit of prophecy1 which1 however1 ,i must consider nothing less nor more than a second or mental sight4 ,by this sense1 or faculty of seeing1 they are enabled to bring events which are yet future1 as well as those otherwise out of sight1 present to their minds2 and thus they can behold them with their mental eye1 as clearly as we behold objects at a distance4 ,this1 you may say1 is visionary indeed4 ,and you may wonder how ,i can doubt of the truth of miracles1 if ,i can believe in such a chimerical idea as this6 ,but stop1 my dear sir1 you believe in such a power some where or other2 for without it there could be no such thing as prophecy1 and if such a power exist1 even in the universe1 why may it not exist in man8 ,for myself1 ,i cannot account for the spirit of prophecy in man1 7and it must be in man1 or else men could not be prophets7 in a more rational way4 ,i should not be disposed1 however1 to consider such a power1 sense1 faculty1 or by what other name it might be called1 any more supernatural than the organs of sight and hearing4 ,if the natural eye is so formed that objects may be painted on it1 simply by the action of vision1 to the immense distance of the fixed stars1 so that we are enabled to behold them1 why may not the mental eye be so constituted as to bring future events present to the mind with equal certainty8 ,if such a power1 however1 were once known to exist1 it would be likely to be counterfeited2 and hence we may suppose1 arose that horde of impostors1 by the name of soothsayers1 sorcerers1 necromancers1 magicians1 c4 ,but even where this power exists1 if it be a natural power1 it must have its limits1 and some may have it to a greater degree than others1 and also some may make a good use of it1 and others bad4 ,accounting for prophecy in this way1 you will readily perceive that it is no certain evidence of a future state2 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 blessings1 yet it does not necessarily follow that you and ,i shall exist at that time6 i4e4 in conscious identity6 ,if ,i am asked why ,i wish to explain every thing upon natural principles1 without admitting the immediate agency of the ,deity1 my only answer is1 because to my understanding it is more rational1 and of course more likely to be true4 ,that men could divine1 or foretell future events1 or declare present things which are beyond their sight by intuition1 all of which seems to be embraced in the word prophecy1 is an idea which has existed perhaps from time immemorial2 and however unaccountable it may seem1 yet1 to a certain degree1 at least1 we are obliged to admit the fact2 but whether1 after all1 this is any thing more than the effect of that kind of foresight or ratiocination1 which all men 7idiots excepted7 have to a greater or less degree1 but some much greater than others1 is still a question4 ,but should ,i be obliged to admit the truth of prophecy1 in the sense in which it is generally understood1 ,i should account for it in the way you have seen4 ,i do not perceive1 at present1 how a revelation could be made to the understanding of any man only through the medium of the operations of nature4 ,unless it were made to some of his outward senses1 how could he know whether it was any thing more than a chimera of his own brain8 ,if there were any faculty in his mind by which he could view these things over and over again1 7the same as we look at the heavenly bodies7 and did he always behold them in the same light1 then he would feel safe in declaring that such things did exist2 and unless the prophets had some such criterion by which they could determine on the truth of their predictions4 ,i do not see how that even they1 and much less we1 should feel safe in placing any real confidence in them4 ,the prophecies of our ,saviour1 however1 concerning the destruction of ,jerusalem1 are more clear and striking than any thing else we have of the kind2 and if it were certain that these were written before the event took place1 it would be a very strong proof of something more than what any one can suppose could have been the result of human foresight4 ,there must1 at least1 on such a supposition1 have been a faculty of seeing which we do not possess4 ,these predictions1 however1 if made by ,jesus1 must have been made in the hearing of ,john1 as well as ,matthew2 and of course1 he must have known them with more certainty than ,mark or ,luke2 who1 in consequence of not being personally acquainted with ,jesus1 could have known them only from hear say2 and as it is pretty generally agreed1 that ,john wrote his gospel more than twenty years after the event took place1 it is very remarkable that he should be entirely silent on this subject6 ,john1 as we must suppose1 knowing of this prediction2 knowing also that it had been recorded by all three of the other ,evangelists1 7though ,luke is not very particular on the subject7 and knowing also that they had all written before the event took place2 and he living to see the whole verified1 and then wrote his gospel afterwards1 how natural it would have been for him1 first to have recorded this prediction1 at least1 in substance1 and then to have mentioned its fulfillment1 as a confirmation of the prophecy6 ,but not a word on the subject4 ,this1 however1 is no evidence that ,jesus did not deliver those predictions1 and that they were not written by ,matthew and ,mark1 and also hinted at by ,luke before the events took place2 yet still it raises a doubt and a query in the mind whether these are not interpolations1 or else the books wholly written after the events took place1 and of course these predictions put into the mouth of ,jesus by the historian4 ,when the copies were few in number1 and those kept by the ,christians only1 interpolations might have been made without much danger of detection4 ,the heretics were early accused of interpolating1 altering1 and forging the scriptures2 and although they1 i4 e4 the majority of the believers1 as it is likely would be very careful to detect any thing which contradicted their views in point of doctrine1 yet whether they would be equally careful respecting those interpolations which favoured the ,christian faith is a question worthy of consideration4 ,in ,calmet's dictionary of the bible1 under the word gospel1 we have an account of between thirty and forty gospels1 of which he gives their names1 but none of which are now extant4 ,neither is there any thing1 which ,i now recollect1 of any disputes about the validity of the writing of the apostles1 except what is merely traditional1 until about the year #ahj1 when ,celsus undertook to disprove the whole4 ,i may be incorrect1 in this1 however1 if ,i am1 you will correct me3 for excepting barely the bible1 as ,i have informed you before1 ,i have no books by me on this subject4 ,another circumstance must be taken into consideration1 and which bears great weight in my mind4 ,that is1 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 printing2 an art for which we cannot be too thankful1 nor too highly appreciate its benefits4 ,for it would be very difficult now to realize the situation of mankind previous to the invention of this art4 ,writing1 it is true1 as we may rationally suppose1 was carried to a greater state of perfection at that time1 than it is at present2 for it was of more use1 yet its use must have been very limited1 and it is reasonable to suppose that a very great proportion of the common people could neither read nor write4 ,for it could be of but little use to them1 as they had nothing to read1 for books of all descriptions1 and upon all subjects1 must have been1 comparatively1 very few4 ,this1 as you would readily perceive1 would have a tendency to cause the common people to place great confidence in any thing that was written4 ,hence1 generally speaking1 it was sufficient barely to say1 concerning any matter1 ,greek3 gegraptai1 it is written to gain full belief4 ,it is with all ancient sects1 as it is with ancient nations and kingdoms2 their history may be traced back until we find it veiled in mystery1 and mingled with fable4 ,we are not to suppose1 however1 that these things were done at the time1 with an intent to deceive2 but after the events1 whatever they were1 had passed away1 and the imagination had been long in operation respecting the traditions concerning them1 they are dressed up with all the appearance of real history2 and might so be construed and believed1 were it not for improbability4 ,the probability is1 that when such histories were first written1 they deceived no one1 or at least1 no one thought it worth while to undertake to detect them1 because1 not knowing what effect they would have1 they considered their errors were of no material consequence4 ,the ,shaker ,book has been published nine years2 and although ,i conclude that very few1 if any1 except the ,shakers themselves1 believe the miracles therein recorded2 yet no one that ,i know of has thought it expedient to undertake to refute them4 ,and unless the sect should grow to more consequence than it is at present1 ,i presume that no one will give himself much trouble on the subject4 ,if it should be thought necessary1 however1 to refute these pretended miracles1 in order to prevent those in scripture from growing into disrepute1 then it will alter the case4 ,i am perfectly reconciled and willing1 however1 that whatever is truth should be true2 and have not the least inclination1 even if it were in my power1 to alter one truth respecting eternity4 ,this is the state of my mind exactly2 a state into which it has been growing1 gradually1 for many years2 and1 strange as it may seem to you1 ,i can assure you in the fear of that ,god before whom ,i stand or fall1 and by whom ,i have been supported hitherto1 it is the most happy state of mind in which mortals can be placed6 ,gloria in altissimis ,deo1 et in terra pax in homines benevolentia4 ,luke ii4 #ad1 ,beza4 ,whatever may be your opinion concerning miracles1 ,i believe it must be admitted that there was no more of a miracle in the production of man1 originally1 than there was in the production of other animals2 and as nature has not provided man with clothing for the body1 which it does for other animals1 especially those which inhabit cold climates1 it is evident that man was originally produced under the torrid zone2 and that he could not have lived in any other part of the world1 had it not been for art4 ,what alteration the discovery of the arts has made in the original constitution of man1 it would he difficult now to determine4 ,what man must have been previous to the discovery and use of fire1 is difficult now to conceive4 ,we can trace man down1 however1 from grade to grade1 until we are at a loss to determine whether such a race of beings belongs to the human species4 ,i have long desired1 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 creation2 and say where the human ends1 and where the brutal begins6 ,naturalists take care to say but little on this subject1 and ,i believe the task would be more difficult than what people in general imagine4 ,come then1 ye learn'd1 ye great and wise1 ,unfold the soul to mortal eyes2 ,say where eternal life shall end1 ,or where eternal death begins6 ,for death eternal theirs must be1 ,whose souls no future life shall see6 ,and why should mortals vainly weep ,for creatures wrapt in endless sleep8 ,they've had their day1 they've had their bliss1 ,their life1 their joy1 and happiness1 ,and now must we forever mourn1 ,because their life will not return6 ,o foolish man6 go1 and be wise6 ,learn where the source of greatness lies2 ,to be content is to be blest3 ,a cure for woes is endless rest4 ,if ,god be good to all the race ,of animals before his face1 ,although the life of some be short1 7,one day begins and ends their sport7 ,shall we presume he is less kind ,to human souls of nobler mind1 ,unless he lengthen out their days ,to endless years in future maze8 ,it cannot be6 ,his love is such1 ,whate'er he gives1 little or much1 ,is always good3 faith1 hope1 desires2 ,or any grace which he inspires4 ,all1 all are good3 for man indeed1 7,whilst here7 such gifts1 such helps may need6 ,all bring him to his final goal1 ,where nature's law winds up the whole6 ,but you will say1 does ,god inspire man with faith and hope barely to deceive him2 and does he not mean that he should ever realize the 'things hoped for8' which must be the case1 unless the hope is founded on a reality4 ,answer3 ,let us rather say1 unless the hope be a reality4 ,the hope of man is in fact a reality1 as much so as any thing else which exists4 ,it is1 however1 what it is1 i4 e4 hope2 and not what is not1 i4 e4 the 'things hoped for4' ,but hope never deceives any one1 it continues as long as the creature has any use for it2 and it is never taken away from any 7except a disordered mind1 to which all men are liable7 as long as it can be of any service to the creature4 ,that hope is given for thy blessing ,,now4--,pope4 ,mankind1 if ever1 are very seldom made unhappy and wretched in consequence of doubting the existence of a future state4 ,thousands1 no doubt1 think they should be wretched in this condition3 but1 although ,i have been acquainted with a number of this description1 ,i never saw one made unhappy in consequence4 ,it is the fear of endless misery which produces so much wretchedness in the world4--,this idea1 it is true1 beggars all description6 ,it produces that fear which hath torment4 ,it disturbs the brain2 destroys the mental faculties2 and1 by distracting the imagination1 fills the soul with horror6 ,it is infinitely more to be dreaded than endless death6 ,but what fear or dread can there be in the idea of endless sleep8 ,surely none4 ,people are too apt to confound the idea of the absence of immortality with endless misery1 believing this to be the only alternative4 ,this is not correct4 ,mortality and death are the only opposites to immortality and eternal life4 ,the former ,i know is true1 and yet ,i am satisfied with knowing1 7i4 e4 for an absolute certainty7 nothing further2 nevertheless1 as ,i feel truly thankful for my present existence1 should ,i be so happily disappointed as to find all my doubts1 founded in error1 ,i trust1 as ,i should be inexpressibly happy1 so ,i should be inexpressibly thankful for a future life4 ,yours1 c4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,vi4 ,dear sir1 and brother1--,in replying to your seventh number1 ,i propose taking the advantage which you have favoured me with1 by the division of your subject4 ,i hope by this1 to be able to compress my remarks on your reasoning1 and avoid any unnecessary protraction of this epistle4 ,you allow1 that a general view of the whole ground on which the scriptures seem to rest1 would be sufficient to support the truth of divine revelation1 were it not for the following considerations4 #a4 ,mankind1 in all ages of the world1 have been1 and still are prone to superstition4 #b4 ,it cannot be denied1 but that a part of mankind1 at least1 have believed1 and still are believing in miracles and revelations which are spurious4 #c4 ,the facts on which revelation is predicated1 are unlike every thing of which we have any positive knowledge4 ,if ,i rightly apprehend your meaning of the whole ground in which the scriptures seem to rest1 a general view of which would be sufficient to support a belief in revelation1 were it not for the three considerations above quoted2 it occupies1 at least1 prophecies concerning a ,messiah and the fulfillment of those prophecies by a ,messiah1 according to the account which we have in the ,new ,testament4 ,as it will serve to circumscribe the bounds of our present reasoning1 it is thought best to direct our inquiry to the consideration of the facts recorded in the ,new ,testament1 presuming if these be admitted1 the prophecies will not be denied4 ,but have ,i not occasion1 sir1 to be surprised to find your first proposition adduced as evidence unfavourable to the christian scriptures8 ,was there ever a time when the world of human kind1 both ,jews and ,gentiles1 was more deeply involved in the darkness and stupidity of superstition than when the ,messiah entered on his public ministry8 ,if the doctrine of ,jesus had been pleasing to the superstitious ,jews1 if it had accorded with the idolatrous notions of the ,gentiles1 7which was impossible7 if his ,messiahship had been espoused by both1 and by their consent and influence had been handed down1 and declared to have been evidenced by all the miracles recorded in the four ,evangelists1 do you not see that your first proposition would be of ,herculean strength against this religion8 ,on the contrary1 it being well established1 from unquestionable authority1 that as ,st4 ,paul observed1 ,christ crucified was a stumbling block to the ,jews1 and to the ,greeks foolishness1 the whole force of ,jewish and ,greek superstition1 as it opposed1 serves to strengthen the evidences of our faith4 ,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 blind1 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 reader4 ,this request might1 as ,i humbly conceive1 be made in respect to any of the other miracles2 but what ,i had in view1 particularly when this subject came to my mind1 was the following words1 spoken by the pharisees to him who had been blind2 ,thou art his disciple3 but we are ,moses' disciples4 ,we know that ,god spake unto ,moses2 as for this fellow we know not from whence he is4 ,is it not plain from this as well as from many other scriptures1 that in the same degree that the pharisees' superstition run in favour of ,moses1 it operated against ,jesus8 ,i know the objector may say1 the ,jews expected a ,messiah2 but then they did not expect such a character as was ,jesus4 ,they also expected ,elias to come first1 but they did not expect such a character as ,john4 ,you1 and all the world know that the protestant clergy in ,europe and ,america used to pray for the downfall of the ,pope2 but when he was humbled1 they all joined in fervent prayer to set him up again4 ,how did this inconsistency happen8 ,answer3 ,the way in which it pleased ,god to humble the ,pope1 was not the way which clerical wisdom and prudence had planned2 and we all see now1 that they are better pleased with the ,pope and the ,inquisition1 than they were to have him lose his power in a way which endangered their own4 ,now1 sir1 if liberal principles do obtain1 and if the cause of civil and religious liberty should finally triumph1 in spite of popish and protestant clergy with monarchy united1 do you believe that this triumph will ever be imputed to the superstition of king-craft and priestcraft8 ,on the ground of your first proposition this would be your conclusion4 ,the pharisees and those who adhered to them1 built the sepulchres of the prophets1 whom their fathers killed1 and said2 ,if we had been in the days of our fathers1 we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets4 ,these holy men were sure that they were much better than their fathers who persecuted the prophets2 they had no disposition to persecute2 all the wealth in the world could not have tempted these godly saints to kill a prophet of ,god4 ,however1 ,st4 ,paul writing to the ,thessalonians1 says1 ,for ye1 brethren1 became followers of the churches of ,god1 which in ,judea are in ,christ ,jesus3 for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen1 even as they have of the ,jews2 who both killed the ,lord ,jesus and their own prophets1 and have persecuted us2 and they please not ,god1 and are contrary to all men4 ,but the ,jews would not have put ,jesus to death if he had been a pharisee1 and had not departed from their traditions and superstitions4 ,but he was not a pharisee1 nor did he adhere to their superstitions2 and for this cause he was to them a root out of dry ground4 ,to them1 he had no form nor comeliness1 no1 nor had he any beauty that they should discern him4 ,say1 brother1 is not this the superstition which you are urging as unfavourable to the evidences of christianity8 ,and does not the passage above quoted from ,thessalonians go to prove what all ecclesiastical history as well as the ,new ,testament proves1 that the ,christians were persecuted by the ,jews and by the ,gentiles8 ,did any thing but superstition ever persecute8 ,it surely does not aim to build up that which it persecutes3 and therefore in room of its being evidence against the genuineness of what it opposes1 is justly admitted as a valid evidence in its favour4 ,it is well known that our ,christian doctors1 clergy1 and laity have been long persuaded that a glorious day of universal peace and gospel light is not only promised1 but fast approaching2 and if their prayers have any influence1 it is evident that the time is hastened by their means4 ,all this looks very well1 and a man would be thought to be impious1 if not insane1 who should intimate that these saints were superstitous or illiberal1 or that they possessed the spirit of persecution4--,but what has been their spirit for1 say1 twenty-five years past towards a doctrine which teaches universal peace on earth and good will towards man8 ,is there any thing bad which they have not spoken against this doctrine8 ,have they not treated its preachers with all the contempt and even ridicule of which they were capable8 ,have they not used all their influence to keep the doctrine from being preached in their meeting houses1 and have they not dealt with church members who have believed this benign doctrine of love1 with excommunications attended with as many aggravations as they could invent8 ,in a word1 is there one bitter herb in all the ground which was cursed for man's sake1 that has not been used against what is called the poison of this abominable heresy8 ,if they had the power of the pope1 if the inquisition were at their command1 would they let such power lie dormant for want of zeal8 ,balaam smote his ass with a staff1 but said3 ,i would there were a sword in mine hand1 for now would ,i kill thee4 ,but after all that has been said and done against this doctrine of universal benevolence and grace1 its progress confounds its enemies1 encourages its friends1 and calls to mind the parable of the mustard seed4 ,suppose for a century to come it should continue its advances according to what it has gained for the twenty-five years above mentioned1 is it not evident that the knowledge of ,god would cover the earth as the waters cover the sea8 ,but would any body then1 being acquainted with the history of these times1 think of making use of the superstition of our clergy to oppose the evidences of this doctrine8 ,would such a one say1 it is probable that in those times of superstition1 the clergy who had great influence with the common people1 might alter many passages of scripture1 and in room of using the word elect1 interpolate the words all men8 ,if ,i understand your argument1 this is the use you make of superstition4 ,but1 sir1 ,i am satisfied that the superstition of our times will be sufficient proof to future ages1 that the scriptures which so abundantly prove the doctrine of universal salvation1 were not the production of a superstitious clergy who were known to oppose this doctrine with all their learning and influence4 ,now if you please1 you may indulge in strengthening your hypothesis1 and prove by the faithful histories of different nations1 that ,jews1 ,greeks1 and ,romans were most stupidly superstitious4 ,also that ,india1 ,turkey1 and ,arabia are now groaning under the ponderous weight of this vanity4 ,go on and enlarge on all that you have said1 and point out all the superstitions of which we read or know2 show how powerful this superstition is in the human heart2 how it renders its votaries blind to reason and the principles of moral truth2 show how hard it is to break in upon this almost invincible phalanx2 but consider1 sir1 the blacker you represent this cloud1 the brighter you render the evidences of the religion of ,jesus4 ,you need not be informed1 what the ,christian world all knows1 that the doctrine of ,jesus ,christ1 founded on the miracles recorded in the four ,evangelists and in the ,acts of the ,apostles1 was propagated among ,jews and ,gentiles1 whose superstitions1 though various1 rendered them both hostile to this new religion1 and incited them to persecutions which subjected the weak and defenceless disciples of the meek and lowly ,jesus to trials and sufferings1 fears and temptations of which we can have but a faint conception4--,the grand hypothesis on which the gospel was advocated1 and by which it succeeded in obtaining vast multitudes of ,jewish as well as ,gentile converts1 was the resurrection of ,jesus1 who was publicly executed on a cross by the ,roman authority instigated by the rulers of the ,jews4 ,all this must be accounted for in a rational way4 ,the facts are as well attested as any thing of which history gives any account4 ,the four gospels have been commented on1 and quoted1 and adverted too by a greater number of controversial writers1 than any other book of which we have any knowledge4 ,the epistles of ,st4 ,paul when compared with the ,acts and with each other have all the necessary characteristics of being genuine1 and of relating nothing but realties4 ,you1 sir1 allow that the authority on which this religion rests1 would be sufficient to support it1 if it were not for the consideration of your three propositions1 the first of which1 ,i trust1 you will acknowledge stands in its vindication4 ,your second proposition may now be noticed4 ,that part of mankind have believed and still are believing in miracles and revelations which are spurious1 we have no interest in denying1 but we feel under no obligation to admit this fact as any evidence against ,christianity1 or of any force to counterbalance the evidences which stand in its favour4 ,what would you think of such kind of reasoning as should contend1 that as it is evident that many have been1 and still are imposed on by counterfeit money1 it justifies serious doubts whether there ever was any true money in the world8 ,would you not reply1 that as the counterfeit is entirely dependent on the true for its imposition1 in room of being evidence that there is no true money1 it demonstrates that there is8 ,it being well known1 nor ever doubted by the friends or enemies of ,christianity1 that its founder and his apostles proved the divinity of their missions by miracles alone1 it was nothing more than might be rationally expected1 that impostors would rise up under those sacred pretensions1 with a view to establish themselves4 ,but if this religion of ,jesus ,christ1 had not at first been built upon this foundation1 impostors would never have thought of imposing on people with such pretensions4 ,impostors1 therefore1 together with all their deceptions1 cannot1 as ,i humbly conceive1 be admitted as evidence against the genuineness of the gospel1 but in favour of it4 ,as to ,mahomet of whom you speak1 ,i have always understood that he made no pretensions to miracles4 ,he pretended to hold correspondence with the angel ,gabriel1 and to receive revelations from ,god in this way2 but he never attempted to sanction his divinity by miracles2 and indeed there was no need of this1 for he declared he was commissioned from heaven to propagate his religion by the sword1 and to destroy the monuments of idolatry4 ,his kingdom was of this world1 therefore did his servants fight2 but they did not fight always alone1 for he fought at nine battles or sieges in person1 and in ten years achieved fifty military enterprizes4 ,he united religion and plunder1 by which he allured the vagrant ,arabs to his standard4 ,he asserted that the sword was the key of heaven and hell2 that a drop of blood shed in the cause of ,god1 a night spent in arms are of more account than two months of fasting and prayer4 ,he assured those who should fall in battle1 that their sins should be forgiven at the day of judgment1 that their wounds would be resplendant as vermillion and odoriferous as myrrh1 and that the loss of limbs should be supplied by the wings of angels and cherubim4 ,but what you can find in ,mahometism which in the least militates against the evidences of ,christianity ,i know not4 ,it is affirmed by writers1 that he collected his ideas of ,god and of morals from the ,hebrew and ,christian scriptures4 ,from ,mahomet you go to the conversion of ,constantine1 taking particular notice of the account given of his seeing the sign of a cross in the sun1 c4 ,and as we are now on the subject of miracles1 we must not forget the miracles of the ,shakers which seem to shake your faith6 ,two notable miracles you have honoured with a place in your epistle1 or honoured your epistle with them1 which1 ,i shall not undertake to determine4 ,a bridge fell with a horse on it1 which fell with the bridge2 the rider was a woman2 by the fall several of her ribs were broken1 and she was otherwise bruised2 but she was miraculously recovered so as to be able to dance in one evening4 ,a boy cut his foot1 the wound bled profusely2 the boy was miraculously healed in a few hours4 ,these are the miracles2 but whether mother ,ann1 or some of her elders performed these miracles you do not inform me4 ,it seems to be allowed that most of these ,quaker miracles are inferior to the miracles recorded in the ,new ,testament1 but not more inferior to them1 than they are to the miracles of ,moses4 ,doctor ,priestley1 with his usual candor1 endeavours to assign a natural cause for what ,constantine saw1 and you are inclined to his opinion1 to all of which ,i have no objections to make2 and ,i am by no means certain1 that a proper attention to the pretended miracles of the ,shakers1 might not issue in assigning a natural cause for them4 ,but however this may be1 ,i cannot see how the matter affects our belief in ,jesus ,christ4 ,do you not discover a difference too wide between the case of ,jesus and his doctrine1 and ,ann ,lee and her principles to admit of the comparison which you seem inclined to make8 ,you have also mentioned the case of ,mrs4 ,a----'s seeing her husband and talking with him after he was dead1 which you would draw into the same comparison4 ,that ,mrs4 ,a---- may have satisfactory evidence of her having seen and conversed with her husband since his death1 ,i am not at all disposed to dispute2 but here the matter ends4 ,god has not seen fit to endue her with the power of working miracles4 ,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 husband1 and you and ,i should be present1 and see these marvellous things with our own eyes should we doubt the woman's testimony8 ,i have already1 in a former communication shown that the declaration of the apostles of the resurrection of ,jesus1 until it was accompanied with power from on high1 was never even communicated to the public1 or ordered to be communicated4 ,but in fact the disciples were strictly commanded to tarry at ,jerusalem until the gift of the ,holy ,spirit4 ,constantine would have had no occasion to depose under the solemnity of an oath1 concerning the sign of the cross1 c4 if he had had power to evidence his declaration by miracles4 ,if ,ann ,lee's disciples will heal the sick1 restore the lame1 and raise the dead in so public a manner that the people at large may know these facts1 then1 sir1 they will no longer need to purchase poor children in order to increase their societies4 ,and if ,god should see fit to call me from my wife and children by such evidences as these1 ,i hope ,i should not disobey his divine mandate4 ,but will you reply1 that miracles having ceased1 we have no right to expect them8 ,in return it may be asked1 how we are assured that miracles are not now necessary as they were twenty or thirty years ago8 ,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 apostles8 ,to this we reply3 the miracles on which the gospel was founded1 or propagated1 were of the most extraordinary kind2 they were of extensive publicity1 and of ocular notoriety2 they were vastly numerous1 extending to the infirmed of all descriptions2 and they were continued long enough to answer the purpose for which they were intended4 ,you will feel satisfied that the enemies of ,jesus and his apostles knew for certainty1 that those miracles wrought by them were realities2 and that they1 in room of imputing them to the divine agency1 violated their own reason1 by referring to an evil agent such power and acts of goodness2 ,i say you will feel satisfied of all this1 if you will set down and read all the accounts relative to this subject1 in the four gospels1 carefully regarding this question3 ,do these writers discover any marks of deception or fraud8 ,in no instance do the evangelists betray the least anxiety for fear what they relate will not be credited4 ,even when they pen the astonishing miracles of which they pretend to be eye witnesses1 they make no pause to clear up any thing2 but tell the whole as if the whole was publicly known4 ,in a word1 this history1 this sacred testimony1 carries its own competent evidence within itself4 ,it has been noticed by those who have written on this subject1 as evidence that ,matthew1 ,mark1 ,luke1 and ,john were the real authors of those books which bear their respective names1 that a great many passages are alluded to or quoted from the evangelists1 exactly as we read them now1 by a regular succession of ,christian writers1 from the time of the apostles down to this hour2 and at a very early period their names are mentioned as the authors of their respective gospels2 which is more than can he said of any other historian whatever4 ,see ,lardner and ,paley4 ,i will not call up ,ann ,lee in this place1 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 ,godhead4 ,this shall be undertaken by men who are wicked enough to attempt to deceive by pretended miracles4 ,one is selected as a leader1 and the others to the number of twelve profess to be his followers4 ,the leader pretends to a revelation from ,god1 the substance of which is1 that ,jesus ,christ is a created being and dependent on the ,father4 ,this doctrine he preaches and directs his followers to go into every town in ,new-,england and proclaim this truth to the people1 and exhort them to repent of their former doctrine and turn to ,god4 ,this impostor pretends to work miracles in confirmation of his divine mission2 and also pretends to give his disciples power to work miracles4 ,he informs his friends that he is to lose his life and that they must lose their's1 in order to establish this doctrine4 ,stop1 we have come to an absurdity4 ,who would undertake to deceive their fellow creatures for no other reward than the loss of their lives8 ,but let us pursue on4 ,this leader pretends to give sight to blind people1 to heal the sick with a word1 and to raise the dead4 ,it is reported all round the country that many such cases have actually taken place2 that the blind do receive their sight1 the sick are raised to health at once1 and one man in particular who was dead four days1 has been called out of his grave4 ,people now are waked up2 many believe the reports2 thousands are flocking from place to place to hear this man and to see his miracles4 ,in this case who would be most likely to place themselves very near to this pretender8 ,who would one expect to find near his person8 ,answer1 some of the ,trinitarians2 chosen ones too2 men of sound judgment1 and who could be depended on as able to detect any fraud4 ,how long is it reasonable to suppose these pretensions could possibly continue with any success8 ,it may be asked likewise1 whether all honest1 reasonable1 and candid ,unitarians would not express their abhorrence of such pretensions8 ,are you1 sir1 of opinion that such a fraud could possibly be managed in a way to insure success8 ,a moment's reflection is sufficient to put the question to rest4 ,but we will still pursue our supposition4 ,the ,trinitarians enter a complaint against this teacher1 to the authorities1 alleging that he is guilty of treason2 he is arrested1 convicted1 and publicly executed4 ,at the time of his arrest his disciples all forsake him1 and one being found near him denies that he knows the man4 ,all is over now1 and people go about their common avocations2 once in a while a word or two may be dropped on the subject of the impostor1 but the thing is dying away1 till all at once the twelve disciples of him who was executed came boldly before the public and proclaim the resurrection of their leader1 charge the rulers of the people of having murdered him1 and declare that ,god has raised him from the dead1 and appointed them to be witness of this to the people1 and to preach ,unitarianism4 ,what would be thought of these men8 ,would the doctrine of the divine unity be likely to triumph over its opposite1 the ,trinity1 by the preaching of the twelve8 ,would there be any attention paid to these men1 except by authority1 to disperse them and cause them to desist from such madness1 and go about some honest business8 ,but now they pretend to work miracles in confirmation of the truth of the resurrection6 ,enough4 ,suppose1 sir1 ,i should tell you that ,i believe such pretensions might be so managed as to succeed completely1 would you not reply1 that the success of such pretensions being altogether a fraud1 would itself be as great a miracle as is recorded in scripture1 with the addition of absurdity8 ,you will remember that you suggested that it would require a miracle to dissuade me from my belief2 and ,i hope you will see that you must believe in a miracle in order not to believe with me6 ,will you say that the foregoing does not come to the difficulty1 that the question is1 was not the account we have of those things in the gospels1 forged long since the days in which they are represented to have taken place8 ,then1 sir1 in room of the above supposed fraud1 undertaken to propagate ,unitarianism1 you may take the supposition of a forged book published by the friends of that doctrine1 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 pharisees4 ,can you1 sir1 conceive that the book would meet with any better success than the impostors themselves8 ,would our learned doctors of the ,trinitarian school be silent while such a book was in circulation8 ,would they suffer it to be handed down to posterity unanswered and unrefuted8 ,would they see their churches imposed on in this way1 their doctrine sat at nought1 and this most extravagant imposture obtain credit8 ,ask likewise on the other side2 would honest ,unitarians pay any attention to such a book8 ,would they impose on their fellow creatures in this way8 ,would they instruct their children to believe what they knew to be a lie8 ,it should be kept in mind that when the gospels were written and for more than two hundred years afterwards1 christianity was hated and persecuted beyond what we can easily conceive1 by the emperors of ,rome and their wicked governors1 who being authorized by special edicts for that purpose put to the most cruel tortures and horrid deaths the followers of ,jesus4 ,the superstitious priests of heathen idols1 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 temples4 ,it was not until ,a4 ,d4 #caa1 that ,maximin ,galerius1 who had been the author of the heaviest calamities on the christians1 published a solemn edict1 ordering the persecution to cease1 which his indescribable horrors and painful sickness compelled him to do4 ,the next year ,constantine1 and his colleague ,licinius granted to the christians a full power of living according to their own laws and institutions4 ,for nearly three hundred years then the gospel ministry1 founded on miracles1 which1 if not real1 were as easily detected as any falsehood whatever1 was oppressed by cruel edicts acted upon by the bitterest enemies4 ,where was all the boasted learning of this learned age8 ,where was all the sagacity of the sagacious8 ,could not a priesthood1 for ages improved in scarcely any thing but imposition and fraud1 succeed in detecting pretensions1 which1 if not real1 were too grossly absurd to impose on the most artless8 ,you1 sir1 are entirely right in saying you cannot prove this christian revelation and the miracles on which it was founded1 false4 ,for if this could ever have been done1 there can be no reasonable doubt that it would have been by its enemies in its first rise2 but the day is past for the detection of this fraud1 if it be one2 for the age in which all the means of detection were in possession of its enemies1 has long since passed away and those means are lost4 ,the imposition1 possessed at first of no solidity1 might have been blown into the air with a breath of common sense1 has magnified and petrified till it promises to fill the whole earth1 and is as hard as an adamant4 ,we hear of no writer's undertaking to disprove ,christianity till about one hundred years after the apostles' day1 when ,celsus wrote a violent work against the ,christians1 who were1 at the same time1 suffering severe persecutions4 ,but this author1 though a bitter enemy to ,christ1 allows his miracles2 but like the old pharisees imputes them to a different power from that of ,god4 ,why should this enemy of ,jesus1 his religion1 apostles and followers allow those miracles8--,it seems that there can be no good reason for this unless they were realities4 ,you say1 that no miracles or revelations that have come down to us are supported by so good authority as those recorded in the ,new ,testament1 ,i admit4 ,but how can you conceive of any good evidence of such miracles as are recorded in this book8 ,we have no account of any testimony under oath that they were realities4 ,and even if we had1 could the solemnity of an oath be admitted as good evidence8 ,i think not4 ,indeed there was no authority that would allow the apostles to depose in favour of the resurrection of ,jesus2 but there were no authorities that could prevent their bearing a mere convincing testimony4 ,i have endeavoured heretofore1 to show that there can be no good evidence of such a fact as the resurrection1 which is capable of being refuted2 and ,i will here add1 of admitting reasonable doubts of the fact1 in the mind4 ,it is a question which properly belongs to this subject1 and which should be often called up1 whether the evidences of the resurrection were not as strong as they could have been1 both to the disciples and to those who believed on ,jesus through their testimony2 and furthermore1 whether we can conceive how the evidences could have been stronger on which we believe1 without perpetual miracles1 which not only seems an absurdity1 but would1 if as powerful as they were at first1 preclude the exercise of our reasoning faculties and the necessity of investigation1 which is one of the most rational enjoyments of which we are capable4 ,i grant1 if the vulgar error1 that our eternal salvation depended on our being correctly acquainted with this subject1 were true1 it would follow1 of course1 that the least difficulty in the way of our knowing the whole matter1 might be attended with fatal and awful consequences4 ,and for myself1 should ,i adopt the popular opinion that those who go out of this world not understanding the doctrine1 or believing in ,jesus ,christ1 must hereafter be forever excluded from the blessed immortality which is brought to light through the gospel1 it would be difficult for me to account for the least obscurity nameable1 and much more difficult would it be to account for the limited circle in which divine truth has been caused to shine4 ,but ,i have before intimated that the consequences of our unbelief here1 can with no more propriety be carried into an eternal state1 than the consequences of our ignorance of any science4 ,it is derogatory to the sacred loveliness of divine truth1 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 sweetness1 or to threaten those who neglect so divine a treasure with any other inconvenience than the loss of such felicity during their foolish neglect4 ,it becomes the philosopher and perhaps more the christian to exercise patience1 but patience is sometimes tried with the bigotry and nonsense of the self-righteous1 self-wise1 and self-knowing1 who profess the religion of ,christ1 yet stand tiptoe1 like ,james and ,john1 to call fire from heaven to consume all who do not receive their master4 ,but the true spirit of our religion rebukes such blind zeal and foolish arrogance1 by showing that such a disposition is the malady which the gospel is designed to cure4 ,while the ,christian clergy have spent their breath and wore out their lungs in anathematising with eternal vengeance1 those whom they call infidels1 have been worse than infidels1 and brought a greater stigma on the name of ,jesus1 than his open enemies from ,celsus down to ,t4 ,paine4 ,i would by all means except from the above remark a goodly number who have done honour to our religion by treating its opposers1 as its spirit dictates1 with candor and sound argument well mingled with divine charity4 ,indeed ,i think ,i see much reason to look on what is called infidelity1 with a charitable disposition for this plain reason1 it has greatly contributed to enlighten the ,christian commonwealth1 by calling into action the very best of human abilities and directing them to search for the true grounds on which our faith securely rests4 ,i hardly know how ,i ought to reply to what you say about the persecution of ,stephen1 c4 ,at one time you write as if you would doubt the authenticity of those ,new ,testament accounts2 then again you advert to them for assistance4 ,but why should you go over such ground1 on which so much depends1 as if you did not realize that the subject was worthy of a pause for consideration8 ,when you advert to the martyrdom of ,stephen by a mob1 7which by the way was the council71 you take no notice of the cause of his being arrested1 accused or condemned4 ,let reason and candor look at the account4 ,and ,stephen full of faith and power1 did great wonders and miracles among the people4 ,then there arose certain of the synagogue1 which is called the synagogue of the libertines1 and ,cyrenians1 and ,alexandrians1 and of them of ,celicia and of ,asia1 disputing with ,stephen4 ,and they were not able to resist1 c4 ,then they suborned men1 which said1 we have heard him speak blasphemous words against ,moses1 and against ,god4 ,and they stirred up the people1 and the elders1 and the scribes1 and come upon him1 and caught him1 and brought him to the council1 and set up false witnesses1 which said1 this man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place1 and the law3 for we have heard him say1 that this ,jesus of ,nazareth shall destroy this place1 and change the customs which ,moses delivered us4 ,and all that sat in the council1 looking stedfastly on him1 saw his face as it had been the face of an angel4 ,then said the high priest1 are these things so8 ,here follows that admirable speech of ,stephen before the grand council of his nation1 which defies all conjecture of forgery1 and enraged his enemies against him4 ,and they stoned him for pretended blasphemy4 ,the concluding clause of this speech is particularly worthy of notice4 ,which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted8 ,and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the just one2 of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers2 who have received the law by the disposition of angels1 and have not kept it4 ,now1 sir1 is there any more evidence for believing that there was such a man as ,stephen stoned according to the above account1 than for believing that he was stoned by the authority of the council1 and for what is here set forth8 ,this council which put ,stephen to death1 was the same before which ,peter was arraigned on account of the miracle wrought on the impotent man2 which according to ,dr4 ,hammond was the ,sanhedrim4 ,but you seem much engaged to prove that martyrdom does not prove the truth of a belief for which the martyr dies4 ,here you have not been careful to distinguish cases4 ,a ,papist1 who has been brought up to believe in the divine presence1 might perhaps suffer death rather than renounce it2 and yet we should not consider this sufficient to prove the doctrine of transubstantiation2 but no candid person would doubt the sincerity of the martyr4 ,but why should we hesitate to believe the doctrine for which he suffered8 ,answer1 the doctrine is not a subject of which he could have positive knowledge4 ,he could not be eye nor ear witness of the fact4 ,but the testimony for which the disciples of ,jesus suffered1 was a testimony concerning a matter of fact1 of which their eyes and ears could take proper cognizance2 and if their sufferings are allowed to prove their sincerity1 then it is granted that they believed in the resurrection of ,jesus4 ,if the entire unbelief of the disciples in the resurrection could be overcome1 and they brought to believe that they saw ,jesus and talked with him1 and ate with him1 and were frequently in his company after his resurrection1 for forty days2 and if they were willing to suffer persecution and death rather than desist from troubling the people with this testimony1 it appears to me that reason will allow that this is1 at least1 some evidence of the truth of this astonishing fact2 though this was not the evidence which carried conviction to so many thousands of the ,jews as well as of the ,gentiles4 ,this we have before shown was the manifestation of the mighty power of ,god in the miraculous wonders which ,god wrought by the apostles4 ,you speak of the honour1 which was no doubt attached to the martyrdom of ,stephen1 as being an inducement to others to submit to this example1 c4 ,you hereby allow that the testimony for which he suffered was surely believed1 otherwise no honour could attach to those who suffered for it4 ,why then do you not attempt to show the probable ground on which this testimony was erroneously believed8 ,i humbly conceive that your observations which regard to the uprightness of the apostles are too indefinite4 ,you say1 ,this much1 however1 ,i believe1 and of this much ,i have no doubt1 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 ,christ2 and they were willing to preach and enforce them by all the means in their power1 even at the risk of their lives1 c4 ,and this you think1 constituted them wise and good men4 ,here1 sir1 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 powers1 when they had no belief in the former1 and knew the latter to be an imposition8 ,if these men endeavoured to enforce any principles by practicing such impositions1 however pure those principles were1 these men were vile impostors1 and merited all their sufferings4 ,i solemnly protest against the wisdom or goodness of any man who is an impostor4 ,i proceed to notice your third proposition1 which is as follows3 #c4 ,the facts on which revelation is predicated are unlike every thing of which we have any positive knowledge4 ,of the truth of this proposition1 you say ,i must be sensible4 ,you must indulge me1 sir1 in saying that you have made a mistake4 ,i am insensible of the correctness of your statement4 ,the ,,facts on which the ,christian faith is predicated1 are of that description which come within the observation of the outward senses of men4 ,i know of no fact on which ,jesus called the people to rest their faith1 that they could not as easily judge of1 through the medium of their senses as of any facts in nature4 ,see ,john v4 #cf1 ,but ,i have greater witness than that of ,john3 for the works which the ,father hath given me to finish1 the same works that ,i do bear witness of me1 that the ,father hath sent me4 #ajth1 #bdth1 #beth1 ,then came the ,jews round about him1 and said unto him1 how long doest thou make us to doubt8 ,if thou be the ,christ tell us plainly4 ,jesus answered them1 ,i told you1 and ye believed not3 the works that ,i do in my ,father's name1 they bear witness of me4 #cgth1 #chth1 ,if ,i do not the works of my ,father1 believe me not4 ,but if ,i do1 though ye believe not me1 believe the works2 that ye may know and believe that the ,father is in me and ,i in him4 ,all the works of which ,jesus spake1 were such as the people could know and examine by seeing and hearing1 and concerning which there was no necessity of their being ignorant or imposed upon4 ,see the account of ,john's sending two of his disciples to ask ,jesus if he were the ,christ4 ,luke vii4 #bj1 c4 ,when the men were come unto him1 they said1 ,john ,baptist hath sent us unto thee1 saying1 art thou he that should come8 or look we for another8 ,and in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues1 and of evil spirits2 and unto many that were blind he gave sight4 ,then ,jesus1 answering1 said unto them1 go your way1 and tell ,john what things ye have seen and heard2 how that the blind see1 the lame walk1 the lepers are cleansed1 the deaf hear1 the dead are raised1 to the poor the gospel is preached4 ,of such facts the people were capable of judging1 and on such facts the ,messiahship of ,jesus rested4 ,and furthermore1 it was on such facts that the testimony of the apostles concerning the resurrection of ,jesus rested4 ,now it is evident that those facts on which divine revelation is predicated1 are like facts of which we have positive knowledge1 in all respects as it regards the case of knowing them4 ,it was just as easy for people to know those things1 as it is for us to know the things which are familiar to our senses4 ,if you mean by the above proposition1 simply that miracles are not wrought before our eyes1 it is granted2 but have you shown that a continuance of miracles would more rationally vindicate the gospel1 than the divine economy has done by preserving the variety of evidence which is now at our command8 ,if this cannot be done1 then the discontinuance of miracles is no reason why we should doubt the truth of this revelation4 ,how then is your third proposition1 even in any sense in which it can be true1 to be understood unfavourable to divine revelation8 ,it may not be improper to notice some reasons why the continuance of the miracles1 on which the gospel was first propagated1 would not comport with the divine economy4 #ast4 ,as has been before suggested1 it would1 if combined with the force it first had1 preclude the exercise of the mental powers of investigation4 #b;d4 ,this power of working miracles must have been distributed to various sects and heresies1 or by being confined to one order1 prevent the existence of any other1 which would be another preventive of immense reasoning1 and tend to circumscribe the sphere in which the human mind is capacitated to move4 #c;d4 ,the continuance of those miracles must have changed the order of nature1 and continued men on earth forever1 or from generation to generation2 for if this power had been exercised on some and not to the advantage of others1 it would look like the partial systems of men1 and in room of commending the impartial goodness of ,god1 would have refuted it4 ,but1 the manifestation of this divine power1 in those miracles on which our religion is founded1 while it is attended with none of the evils which a continuance would evidently produce1 besides forming an immoveable rock on which so glorious a superstructure is safely founded1 furnishes an immense subject for the power of ratiocination4 ,you will excuse me for not noticing particularly all you say about modern pretensions to revelations and miracles1 as ,i think it would occupy time that may be better employed4 ,but ,i will observe on your opinion1 that it is remarkable1 that ,saul when he was converted1 did not go to ,jerusalem to inquire more fully into the circumstances of the resurrection1 that if he had done this1 you would not have hesitated to make use of it against his declaration recorded in ,gal4 i4 #aa1 #ab4 ,but ,i certify you1 brethren1 that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man4 ,for ,i neither received it of man1 neither was ,i taught it1 but by the revelation of ,jesus ,christ4 ,why do you mention that we have not a particular account of ,st4 ,paul's conversion written by his own hand8 ,do you think that what a man writes of himself is more to be depended on1 than what his biographer writes of him8 ,your suggestions on this subject seem to indicate1 at least1 some scruples respecting this conversion1 but not in a way to show where the ground of scruples lies4 ,what is there for me to answer8 ,why do you treat this subject with such neglect8 ,in a former communication1 ,i requested your attention to it in a special manner1 with a view to confine our reasoning to our subject1 and to avoid rambling from one thing to another without making ourselves acquainted with any thing4 ,in your reply you never attempted to give any account why ,saul should embrace the religion he had persecuted2 you made no attempt to give any reason why he preached ,jesus and the resurrection2 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 sake2 nor did you attempt to prove that there never was such a man and such a conversion4 ,the subject you considered still before you1 and in this seventh number you have spoken of it again1 but have paid no particular attention to it4 ,what you say on the subject of prophecy1 does not appear to me1 either to reflect any light on it1 or to call up any question of importance4 ,your query whether the books of the ,new ,testament were not written after the destruction of ,jerusalem1 which would suppose that the prophecy of the destruction of that city was written after the events took place of which the prophecy speaks1 is an old suggestion in which ,i am unable to see any thing very reasonable4 ,and ,i will remark here1 that men who seem to lay an uncommon claim to reason1 ought to make use of it when arguing on such momentous subjects4 ,what difference would it make whether ,st4 ,matthew wrote his gospel before1 or after the destruction of ,jerusalem1 as it respects the prophecy which ,jesus delivered concerning it8 ,you allow ,st4 ,matthew to be an honest man4 ,you do not doubt then but ,jesus did deliver such a prophecy before his death1 which was certainly before the destruction of the city4 ,then surely it makes no difference whether the prophecy was committed to paper before1 or after the fulfilment of it4 ,besides1 you seem to urge the silence of ,st4 ,john on the subject as unfavourable to the account1 because he wrote his gospel after ,jerusalem was destroyed4 ,as to interpolations which you think might have found their way into the gospels1 it appears to me1 sir1 that a candid consideration of this subject would issue in this conclusion2 if any important interpolations had been admitted1 they would have produced such a disagreement as to effectually destroy the validity of the books2 for if one heresy could be indulged1 it is reasonable to suppose that another would be1 and so on1 which in room of allowing us the scriptures in their present consistent form1 would either have destroyed their existence altogether1 or have varied so as to confound their ideas4 ,for a candid1 learned1 and impartial view of the scriptures of the ,new ,testament1 ,i refer you to ,paley's evidences1 and in particular to his eleven propositions1 which he has proved in a manner satisfactory1 as ,i conceive to the candid inquirer4 ,these propositions begin on page #ajc1 and are the following4 #a4 ,that the historical books of the ,new ,testament1 meaning thereby the four gospels1 and the ,acts of the ,apostles1 are quoted1 or alluded to1 by a series of christian writers1 beginning with those who were contemporary with the apostles1 or who immediately followed them1 and proceeding in close and regular succession from their time to the present4 #b4 ,that when they are quoted1 or alluded to1 they are quoted or alluded to with peculiar respect1 as books sui geneus1 as possessing an authority which belonged to no other books1 and as conclusive in all questions and controversies among christians4 #c4 ,that they were in very early times collected into a distinct volume4 #d4 ,that they were distinguished by appropriate names and titles of respect4 #e4 ,that they were publicly read and expounded in the religious assemblies of the ,christians4 #f4 ,that commentaries were written upon them1 harmonies formed out of them1 different copies carefully collected1 and versions of them made into different languages4 #g4 ,that they were received by ,christians of different sects1 by many heretics as well as catholics1 and usually appealed to by both sides in the controversies which arose in those days4 #h4 ,that the four ,gospels1 the ,acts of the ,apostles1 thirteen epistles of ,st4 ,paul1 the first epistle of ,john1 and the first of ,peter1 were received without doubt1 by those who doubted concerning the other books which are inclosed in our present canon4 #i4 ,that the gospels were attacked by the early adversaries of ,christianity1 as books containing the accounts upon which the religion was founded4 #aj4 ,that formal catalogues of authentic scriptures were published1 in all which our present sacred histories were recorded4 #aa4 ,that these propositions cannot be affirmed of any other books1 claiming to be books of scripture2 by which ,i mean those books which are commonly called ,apochryphal4 ,the first evidence adduced by this celebrated author to prove his first proposition1 proves that the gospel of ,st4 ,matthew1 which contains a very particular account of the prophecy of ,jesus concerning the destruction of ,jerusalem1 was written before the event took place4 ,this evidence is a quotation from the epistle of ,barnabas1 ,st4 ,paul's companion1 in the following words3 ,let us therefore1 beware lest it come upon us1 as it is written1 there are many called1 few chosen4 ,st4 ,matthew's gospel is the only book in which these words are found2 and you will perceive by the expression1 as it is written1 that ,barnabas quoted the passage from an author of authority4 ,barnabas wrote his epistle during the troubles which ended in the destruction of the ,jews and their city4 ,this epistle of ,barnabas is quoted by ,clement of ,alexandria1 ,a4,d4 #aid3 by ,origen1 ,a4,d4 #bcj4 ,it is mentioned by ,eusebius1 ,a4 ,d4 #cae1 and by ,jerome1 ,a4 ,d4 #cib4 7,paley's evidences1 p4 #ajf47 ,your insinuations that the origin of the christian scriptures is involved in fable and mystery1 should have been accompanied with a clear refutation of the arguments used by ,lardner1 ,paley1 and others1 who have with much learning and labour traced the stream to its fountain4 ,i must say something on the subject which you introduce concerning man1 as a species of being1 or you may think me inexcusable for the neglect4 ,there seem to be two main questions suggested on this subject2 the first inquires what man was farther back than history reaches2 and the other directs the mind to a line of demarcation between the human and the brute4 ,we have no account that ,i know of when the use of fire was not known4 ,we read ,gen4 iv4 #bb1 that ,tubal-cain was an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron1 and if reason has any thing to do in this case1 we may suppose that the use of fire was known to these mechanics4 ,the date to which this reading belongs1 is #chge years before ,christ2 but there can be no reasonable doubt but that the use of fire was known long before1 and that it was used in the offerings which were made by ,cain and ,abel4 ,that the discovery of arts and the progress of science have changed man from what he originally was1 is no more reasonable1 than to suppose that the education which a child acquires by degrees1 by the same degrees changes him in respect to his nature4 ,that the arts and sciences serve to improve and extend the human intellects is reasonable enough1 but that they add any thing to the natural principles or faculties of man is not conceivable4 ,in fixing the line of demarcation between the human nature and the brutal1 ,i will suggest two characteristics which you have noticed by which the distinction may be ascertained4 ,the first is the power or faculty of improving from generation to generation his condition by means of art1 and knowing how to advance from one degree of science to another4 ,this ,i will suppose belongs to man and is peculiar to our race of being4 ,we know of no other animal on earth that has ever improved his condition by the discovery of the arts or an increase of science4 ,the other characteristic is one of your propositions1 on which you build your system of doubting1 viz4 ,superstition4 ,this is found in no creature but such as is susceptible of religion4 ,man is the only religious animal1 if ,i may be allowed this form of expression1 found on the earth4 ,the progress which man has made in arts and sciences1 and the progress he has made in divine or religious knowledge distinguish him from the brutal creation4 ,as in the former he has run into thousands of errors1 so in the latter he has wandered in darkness1 with now and then a blessed ray of light which improved his mind4 ,when the knowledge of the arts became generally defused by means of the extension of the ,roman government1 it pleased our blessed ,creator to cause the sun of divine light to rise on the ,jew and ,gentile world4 ,and gave him a covenant of the people1 a light to lighten the ,gentiles1 and the glory of his people ,israel4 ,your opinion that men are seldom made unhappy in consequence of doubting a future existence1 may be true in a comparative sense1 for ,i believe there are few in comparison with the whole1 who do doubt on this subject4 ,generally speaking1 it is the few1 who like the philosopher that rendered himself blind by endeavouring to find out what the sun was composed of1 thought there was no sun nor any light1 that so far give up a hope of futurity as to be miserable in their belief4 ,that the idea of endless torment1 such as our clergy have represented1 and with which they have most horribly terrified thousands and driven them into black despair1 is more horrible than no existence at all will be allowed by every candid mind4 ,but in contemplating an infinite source of divine benevolence1 and his means of giving and perpetuating existence1 and of rendering existence a blessing1 the mind is not driven to the necessity of selecting between these two evils4 ,no1 sir1 the mind thus employed has sweeter themes and brighter prospects--in belief of that invaluable treasure1 that divine testimony of the inspired apostle3 ,as in ,adam all die1 even so in ,christ shall all be made alive2 which sentence you nor ,i ever heard a preacher of endless punishment recite in a sermon in our lives1 the soul rises by faith into sublime regions of future peace and everlasting enjoyment1 when death shall be swallowed up of life4 ,i need not tell you1 my brother1 that it has been through many trials1 afflictions1 doubts1 and temptations1 that your feeble humble servant has found the way to this rock2 you cannot be altogether ignorant of this travail of mind4 ,permit me then to call to remembrance the bondage we have escaped1 the sea through which we have passed1 the sweet songs of deliverance and salvation which we have chanted to our ,redeemer in the faith of our ,lord and ,saviour ,,jesus ,,christ4 ,and here permit me to request your assistance in giving me support1 and in strengthening my hands in the work of the ,lord4 ,yours1 c4 ,h4 ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,,viii4 ,in regard to the story reported among the ,jews1 respecting the body of ,jesus1 ,i admit there is a greater probability of there being such a report1 especially if the body could not be found1 and the apostles affirmed that he was risen from the dead1 than there is that the resurrection1 should be actually true3 hence1 perhaps1 ,i was not so much on my guard in the expression as ,i ought to have been4 ,what ,i particularly had in my mind was1 that ,i might find it difficult to prove even the existence of such a story1 i4 e4 in the days of the apostles2 and still more difficult to prove1 even on the ground that there was no resurrection1 that this story was true2 and therefore there could be no use in urging the truth of this story in order to invalidate the truth of the resurrection4 ,i do not conceive1 however1 that because ,i doubt the fact1 ,i am under obligations to account for the fallacy4 ,it always belongs to the advocates of the truth of any story1 to bring forward sufficient evidence to prove the same4 ,i can think of a solution1 however1 that would appear to my understanding much more probable1 than to suppose1 as mentioned in your seventh article1 the 'account written long since the apostles' day2' yet it may1 perhaps1 be attended with equal or greater difficulties1 viz4 that the body was not stolen by the apostles1 but was taken away by other persons1 who were willing that ,jesus should be deified1 according to the then common acceptation of that word among the ,greeks1 and who studied this stratagem with an express design to deceive the ,jews1 as a punishment to them for so cruelly putting him to death1 and also to deceive his disciples1 in order to inhance the honour of the name of ,jesus4 ,this might have been done1 as ,i conceive1 by persons who never became his open followers1 so far as to suffer death on his account1 but were contented in having gained their object2 to do which1 it was only necessary in the first instance to frighten the soldiers4 ,it may be difficult after all1 as ,i have observed concerning the human species1 to say where the truth of the account ends1 or where the fallacy begins2 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 true4 ,but ,i perceive that my expression1 concerning the report among the ,jews1 was a little too strong2 and carried rather more in it than what ,i was aware4 ,for even on my hypothesis1 as well as on every other which admits the absence of the body1 such a report would appear very probable4 ,it must be granted1 as you have suggested1 that there was such a report among the ,jews at the time when that record was made1 or else that record would not appear at all to 'advantage' in support of the truth of christianity4 ,that 'reason is candid1' ,i also admit2 and if ,i am blundering in making mistakes1 ,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 them4 ,respecting divine revelation1 it is true1 ,i understood you to mean something more than barely what is predicated on the resurrection of ,jesus2 yet in the second proposition of the three which you made1 viz4 ',is the resurrection of ,jesus capable of being proved1' ,i understand you to state one single fact1 on which you are willing to rest the final issue of the argument4 ,this being the most important fact1 relative to the truth of christianity1 and which1 probably1 is as difficult of proof as any1 ,i do not perceive any disingenuousness in confining you now to this proposition till it is either proved or admitted4 ,neither do ,i perceive how this can embarrass your argument1 as you have proposed to consider them 'true1 disjunctively1' as well as conjunctively4 ,when therefore you have proved the three propositions disjunctively2 particularly the second1 above named1 then ,i shall be willing you should avail yourself of their union4--,you may say1 perhaps1 ,i have proposed to admit the truth of your three propositions2 but you will also perceive1 it was only for the sake of introducing a fourth proposition1 which it will not be necessary for you to consider until the three first are proved true4 ,i conceive that reason has no more to do in this case than to judge of the evidences of facts2 and then1 if the facts are supported1 reason can judge of their relation one to the other2 but to assume1 in the first place1 the truth of revelation1 and then infer from that the probability of the truth of the resurrection of ,jesus1 appears to me to be unreasonable4 ,therefore1 if you attempt to prove the truth of revelation1 ,i conceive you must in the first place prove1 'disjunctively1' the truth of the resurrection4 ,if1 therefore1 you have considered yourself excused from proving the facts on which the truth of revelation seems to rest1 because ,i have granted them for the sake of the argument1 you have misapprehended my meaning4 ,i grant nothing1 respecting the main question1 until it is proved4 ,notwithstanding what you have said about 'the known facts1' and 'facts which you grant1 for the sake of the argument1' c4 you will perceive by my seventh number1 that ,i do not consider the 'miracles of ,jesus1 his resurrection1 and the miracles wrought by the apostles1' either granted or proved1 i4 e4 in relation to the main question2 and hence1 whatever weight your argument may have1 when you have succeeded in that 7if you should succeed at all7 at present they seem to be hardly conclusive4 ,i know it would save you much time1 if you could draw from me an acknowledgement of the truth of the facts on which you rely2 and you seem to argue1 if ,i understand you1 as though that was already the case2 but whatever you may have understood1 ,i must distinctly disavow any such acknowledgement2 and ,i shall still expect 7unless it is done in answer to my seventh number7 when you come to reply to this1 that you will state distinctly1 and together1 the evidences and arguments on which you mostly rely4 ,if1 however1 you have meant nothing more by all this than to point out the use you shall make of the miracles1 c4 7which have been granted for the sake of the argument7 when those miracles1 c4 shall have been either proven1 or else acknowledged true1 in relation to the main question1 then ,i have no fault to find2 but otherwise1 your argument in this place seems to be a little premature4 ,you say1 'the known facts1 such as the miracles1 c4 ,i used as proof of the divine mission of the servants of ,god4 ,this divine mission being proved gives the ground on which ,i contend for the merit of their testimony1 concerning a future state4' ,here you will perceive1 sir1 that1 according to your own statement1 to prove this divine mission1 you must first prove the certainty of those miracles1 c4 on which the truth of the divine mission is predicated4 ,and these are things about the truth of which1 as ,i indicated all along1 there may be serious doubts4 ,i am at a loss also to understand1 what you mean by a 'divine mission4' ,you inform me that ,i misapprehended you 'in supposing that' you 'mean to contend1 that what the apostles have said respecting a future state1 was spoken by way of conclusions from certain known facts4' ,here1 ,i must confess1 ,i am really at a loss to understand you3 how that either ,jesus1 or his apostles1 could understand a divine mission1 even if they had received one1 unless it were by conclusions from certain known facts1 that is1 facts well known to them1 ,i cannot conceive2 and therefore must have some further explanation on this subject before ,i can fully answer you4 ,for ,i must be better informed than ,i am at present1 what you mean by a divine mission1 before ,i can see the necessity of 'denying the reality of those miracles--or of granting the authority of their 7,christ and his apostles7 testimony2' that is1 in regard to a future state4 ,but even if ,i should be made to see this1 it would be of no use for the present2 because as it respects the final issue of the argument1 ,i have not1 neither do ,i now admit the reality of those miracles3 as you must have seen by my seventh number4 ,the next particular which demands notice is the quoted passage which ,i pronounced ,most excellent6 ,here a serious query suggests itself to my mind4 ,i ask myself3 am ,i1 or am ,i not1 as capable of writing my sentiments1 so as to be understood by a rational man1 as those plain illiterate men who wrote the gospels8 ,and yet if my words are so wrested by logical twisticisms 7if ,i may be allowed to use that expression7 so as to mean what never entered my heart1 and all this with apparent serious candor too1 what may have been the fate of the writings of the evangelists8 ,now this is something in which ,i cannot be deceived1 i4 e4 as it respects myself2 for any man of common sense does know his own meaning1 whether his words fully express his meaning or not1 or whether they may be made to mean something else or not4 ,permit me therefore once more to explain4 ,the expression1 ,most excellent6 was not so much intended to have been applied to the sentence preceding it1 as to the author of that sentence1 whose goodness1 in stating so explicitly what he understands by the christian faith1 ,i commended4 ,and you must excuse me for not being able to see any inconsistency1 absurdity1 or contradiction in my words which follow that expression4 ,suppose a case4 ,you have a good and faithful servant1 who feels happy in your service1 and is perfectly contented with his fare4 ,you promise him with some favours which you had never before made known to him4 ,he is elated with the idea of your goodness1 which he has never doubted1 but did not know till now that it was to be manifested in this particular way4 ,you tell him that a knowledge of this1 with his former knowledge1 'is as much as his present welfare requires4' ,he very readily assents to the truth of the proposition2 and further adds1 it is even 'more than is necessary for his present welfare1' for he was contented and happy before4 ,would any rational man say that your servant talked unreasonably8 ,would he say that such reasoning was absurd8 ,i think not4 ,your servant does not despise either your goodness or your bounty2 he considers that his master knows best1 what is best for his servant2 and he receives with gratitude whatever is bestowed4 ,your argument would have appeared to me more just1 if1 after fully understanding me1 which ,i perceive1 by the use you have made of the quotation from my sixth number1 you now do1 you had proved from well known facts1 or from conclusive argument1 the absolute necessity of the hope of a christian in order for the 'present welfare' of mankind4 ,in doing this you would have ingenuously refuted the proposition which ,i say would have been exactly right4 ,you do not seem1 sir1 yet to have fully understood me as to my object in searching for truth4 ,you ask1 saying1 ',do you not appear to be solicitous to have your doubts removed1 without expecting the least advantage by it8' ,you must know1 sir1 that this is only on supposition1 that my doubts are founded in error2 in which case ,i should reap the advantage1 as my object is truth4 ,you will recollect that my first object was to search for moral truth2 without being at all solicitous where1 or on what ground it shall be found4 ,truth only is my object4 ,in this only ,i feel at all interested in this argument4 ,hence ,i shall be just as much obliged to you to confirm me in my doubts1 admitting they are founded in truth1 as ,i shall to remove them1 admitting they are founded in error4 ,i once thought just as you1 viz4 that the idea and contemplation of enjoying future life was absolutely necessary to present enjoyment2 but ,i am now fully convinced1 yea1 more1 it is absolutely known to be a fact1 that the idea is altogether visionary and illusive4 ,i admit that a knowledge of the truth1 so far as the truth may be known1 is perfectly congenial with the present happiness of mankind3 though it is often the case that a partial knowledge of the truth1 in relation to any particular subject1 produces distress and misery rather than enjoyment4 ,i now am very happy in knowing some things1 which1 once1 only the idea of their being true would have given me pain4 ,i am inclined to think that the idea of now enjoying the pleasures1 or now enduring the pains of a future life is altogether chimerical4 ,i can enjoy the life or lives of others in a future tense just as well as ,i can now enjoy my own future life4 ,i have as much reason to believe that rational intelligence always did exist1 as ,i have to believe it always will2 yea1 one idea is just as certain to me as the other1 and no more so4 ,and as ,i cannot reflect on the idea of eternity past1 only with a kind of reverential awe mingled with sublime pleasure2 so the idea of eternity to come produces in me the same sensation2 yea1 feeling myself equally ignorant of both1 7which must be the case on the supposition that revelation is not true47 ,i can perceive no difference4 ,i feel anxious to know1 however1 every thing which can be known on this subject2 and yet1 at the same time1 ,i am inclined to think ,i should doubt of every revelation of which ,i can have any conception1 unless it should be so made that ,i could see its truth1 7or at least the evidences of its truth7 over and over again1 and that they should still remain by me at all times1 so that ,i could examine them1 and re-examine them1 the same as ,i now look at the stars in the firmament4 ,thus ,i have opened my mind to you1 more fully than ,i have ever done before1 on this subject2 and notwithstanding your writings may be very beneficial to others 7as well as mine1 for some may stand in need of one1 and some of the other7 yet1 here comes up my doubts again1 if ,i am benefited by them1 ,i expect it will be in a different way than that of being any more persuaded of the truth of divine revelation4 ,nevertheless1 ,i am no less anxious to continue the correspondence on this account4 ,your address to ,,truth1 which you are pleased to put into the mouth of my argument1 is closed with an idea which does not grow out of my hypothesis4 ',the joyous expectation of soon losing sight of thee 7i4 e4 truth7 forever in the ellysium of non existence6' ,non-existence1 sir1 does not exist6 ,neither does the term convey an idea to my understanding of any thing4 ,i know of no existence1 neither can ,i conceive of any1 except that which ,i believe to be eternal in its nature4 ,and the idea of something being formed or made out of nothing1 or of something's returning to nothing again1 ,i have long since exploded4 ,every thing1 however1 excepting first principles1 is liable to change4 ,hence arises the various modes1 states1 circumstances1 conditions and situations in beings and things3 also their different properties1 relations and dependences4 ,i know not whether consciousness is a being1 or whether it be only a mode of being4 ,if it be the former1 it always did1 and always will exist1 in some state or other2 if the latter1 the state of the being may be so changed that although identity exists1 yet consciousness is not there4 ,and there is no more absurdity in this idea than there is in supposing that the same matter which forms a cube1 may become a globe4 ,i can as well conceive of a conscious being to day1 becoming unconscious to-morrow1 as ,i can conceive of a person in a sound sleep4 ,but non-existence 7strictly speaking7 sounds to my understanding something like the falsity of truth6 ,i now come to your reply to my sixth number2 and in my remarks1 which will be but few1 ,i shall follow the arrangement which you have made4 #ast4 ,the candid concessions which you have made1 and the charity which you have extended towards doubting ,christians1 or candid unbelievers 7for such ,i conceive there may be7 is honourable both to yourself and to the cause which you have espoused1 and your writing1 of course gains a much more favourable reception than the writings of those who appear to be filled with a spirit of acrimony1 and are ready at once to deal out anathemas against every thing of which they cannot approve4 ,but1 sir1 you will permit me to say1 we ought to be cautious1 lest our personal attachment to an author1 and his charitable feelings towards us be such1 as imperceptibly to blind us to correct reason1 and cause us to imbibe his errors1 merely because they are his1 and mistake them for truth4 ,i am well aware that ,i should find it difficult to prove that ,i now believe what ,i do without a miracle1 as you have suggested2 for if miracles have existed they may have1 indirectly1 more influence in my mind than ,i am at present sensible of2 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 ,being4 ,i am disposed to acknowledge in humble gratitude all the blessings which ,i have received1 and am made sensible of1 let them come to me by what means1 or through what channel soever4 ,but ,i do not see how you had a right to expect that ,i should either refute1 or else acquiesce in your opinion on this subject4--,what6 must ,i either prove that there have been no such things as miracles1 or else admit their truth6 ,must ,i either refute your notion that they have had great influence on my faith and practice1 or else 'express my acquiescence' that such is the fact6 ,hard lines6 ,i choose to take the easier course1 and confess that ,i am too ignorant to do either4 ,i am willing1 however1 still to be instructed4 #b;d4 ,i have nothing at present to say on the subject of prophecy2 i4e4 to reconcile the pretensions to it with the honesty of the prophets1 without admitting divine inspiration1 better than what ,i have written in my seventh number4 ,when ,i have received your answer to that ,i may have something more to write4 ,i would suggest1 however1 here1 that as you frequently make use of the expression 'divine inspiration1' ,i want the expression more fully defined and explained4 ,i have no distinct idea1 that ,i know of1 of divine inspiration4 ,i suppose you mean the same by it which you did by the 'divine mission1' given to the apostles1 or at least something similar2 but still ,i am ignorant of the subject4 ,you have sometimes spoken of divine revelation1 as though it was something distinct from this divine mission1 and which was a proof of it2 but1 you must excuse me1 ,i am still all in the dark about it4 ,do be so good as to inform me how you suppose the prophets1 or apostles1 or even ,jesus1 could know for a certainty that they were divinely inspired8 #c4 ,when ,i acknowledged that there are evidences in favour of divine revelation1 ,i did not suppose it necessary to state what those evidences are2 because some of them1 to say the least1 are very apparent4 ,the bare report of any thing1 ,i conceive to be evidence of the report's being true2 and would be sufficient to acquire belief should nothing arise in the mind to counterbalance it3 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 subject4 ,but as it respects this matter ,i am all patience and submission1 if it may be so that truth shall finally come to light4 ,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 counterbalanced1 c4 ,and if ,i understand what you have written it amounts in my mind to about the following1 viz4 the apostles could not have been convinced of the fact of the resurrection by any evidence short of the fact itself4 #b;dly4 ,if the fact did exist there is no evidence which can conterbalance it4 ,ergo4 ,as the apostles were convinced of the truth1 the fact did exist4 ,this is pretty much like saying1 if the fact were true1 it could not have been false6 ,but ,i spoke of the evidence in relation to ourselves rather than the apostles3 we believe or disbelieve for ourselves1 and by such evidence as we have4 ,you think if twelve men should testify in favour of a resurrection1 and the body could not be found1 'various opinions would result from such evidence4' ,if so1 some might believe the account true2 and they might persuade others to believe it2 and only let it be reported and believed that some one had died for the truth of it1 and it would make no difference after this1 as it respects the influence of faith1 whether the account was true or false4 ,you will excuse me for making no further remarks on what you have written under this article till you have answered my seventh number1 and also given me a more clear definition of divine inspiration4 #d4 ,what you have written under the fourth article1 generally speaking1 is satisfactory1 till ,i come to the last sentence2 and even with that ,i have not much fault to charge you with4 ,it is true we may be mistaken as to our ideas of the eternity or immutability of any thing2 but then1 as it respects argument1 it is just as well as though we were correct1 as no one can prove us otherwise2 no1 nor even raise a reasonable doubt on the subject4 ,but even if it could be demonstrated that there is not a rational being now in the universe who existed two centuries ago1 or one who will exist two centuries hence1 ,i conceive1 as the fact could not1 so the knowledge of the fact ought not to make any difference in the relation1 dependence and moral obligation between man and man4 ,man learns by his own experience1 as well as from the experience of others2 and vice versa2 hence we profit by the experience of those who have gone before us4 ,when man shall universally learn this great moral truth that much of his happiness is inseparably connected with the happiness of his fellow beings1 which is one of the immutable principles of moral nature1 then each individual will strive to the utmost to promote the general welfare2 for in so doing he increases his own individual happiness1 and also the happiness of posterity4 #e4 ,what you have said under the fifth article1 for reasons already given1 will be considered in my next number1 when ,i hope ,i shall he furnished with more light on the subject4 ,i will only observe here that a miracle1 as ,i conceive1 must be performed agreeable to1 or else it must be a violation of the laws of nature4 ,if the former1 whatever it might be to others1 to those who understood the means of its operation1 it could be1 strictly speaking1 no miracle2 and if no miracle1 no evidence1 to them1 of divine inspiration3 but if the latter1 and those who performed the same were ignorant of the power by which they were performed1 ,i do not see how that the performance of a miracle could give them any knowledge of futurity4 ,and if not1 what did give it to them1 and in what way was it given8 ,it will still be recollected that ,i do not admit the existence of miracles1 although ,i speak of them as though they were true1 merely to shew that even if they were true ,i should still have my difficulties respecting the truth of divine revelation4 #fth4 ,your remarks under the sixth article are satisfactory1 though they have not convinced me of the incorrectness of my opinion2 because that which is founded in truth is1 after all the only thing that is 'good and nourishing' to the understanding4 ,the sound mind pants only after truth2 and as he knows eternal truth is unalterable1 he is not foolish enough even to desire1 it should be what it is not4 ,the reason why we often desire that which we cannot have is because1 not knowing the whole truth1 we do not know but that we may have the things we desire4 #gth4 ,as it respects 'not even deserving a future existence1' ,i was not fully understood4 ,i only meant an anxious desire1 as ,i expressed a little before1 and as also ,i expressed anxious concern a little after2 that is a desire which is incompatible with reconciliation to truth whether that truth gives us little or much4 ,had not truth been favourable to our existence we certainly should not have existed2 and ,i can see no reason to fear a truth which has been so favourable as to give us being4 ,it is true1 a desire to exist as long as we can enjoy life seems to be inseparably connected with our moral nature2 and yet ,i can see no terror in that which takes away our sensibility1 whether it be for a night1 for ages1 or for eternity4 ,i should just as soon think of being terrified at the idea of a sound and sweet sleep4 ,if the truth be what ,i suspect it is1 ,i see no good reason why it should be revealed to us1 any more than the hour of our death6 ,this truth is wisely concealed from us4 #hth4 ,you have seen me so long in the dark that ,i begin to doubt whether you would be willing to own me correct1 even if ,i should come fully into the light2 i4 e4 according to your understanding4 ,is it possible sir1 that you should suppose me capable of writing so great a solecism as the following1 viz43 ,if a revelation were ever necessary1 it was necessary only to convince mankind that a revelation is not true6 ,but it seems that such must have been your construction1 or very near it1 or else you could not have found the error of so great magnitude1 of which you speak4 ,although ,i did not express my idea so full and explicit as ,i might1 and perhaps ought to have done1 yet ,i can assure you that1 by reconciling man to his present state1 ,i meant nothing less than what you have expressed in a former letter2 and ,i meant to include all for which you have contended in the article now under consideration4 ,for #ast4 ,if divine revelation were necessary1 the thing revealed is undoubtedly true4 #b;d4 ,if true1 ,i am fully satisfied with your views on the subject4 #ith4 ,your explanation relative to what you suggested in a former letter 7i4 e4 that ,i must mean that the apostles stated falsehood7 is satisfactory2 though what you now say you meant1 as ,i have already informed you1 was not exactly my meaning4 ,the fact is1 ,i did not mean to express any opinion as to the truth or to the falsity of the apostles' testimony4 ,i very readily grant1 however1 that1 if ,i 'do not believe that they stated the truth' ',i must believe that they stated falsehood2' unless 7which would be very extraordinary7 the weight of evidence be so exactly balanced in my mind that it is impossible for me to form an opinion on the subject4--,but supposing ,i disbelieved their testimony altogether2 what could ,i do more than to give my reasons for not believing it8 ,would it be reasonable to call on me to prove their testimony false8 ,it is a very hard thing to prove a negative6 ,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 false4 ,no1 whatever might have been the case in the time of it1 they were neglected too long before any attempt of this kind was made1 though the accounts should have been supposed ever so erroneous as to promise any success in their refutation4 ,and ,i am inclined to think that one century then would involve facts in as much obscurity as five centuries would now4 ,but ,i have already expressed my doubts whether the facts on which the religion of the ,shakers is said to be predicated1 although not half a century standing1 can now be proved false2 and yet if they are true they are nothing short of miraculous4 ,the ,christian religion therefore1 true or false1 undoubtedly will stand1 in some shape or other1 and be believed more or less1 as long as man remains upon the earth4 ,for if it was introduced without any violations of the laws of nature1 i4 e4 without miracles1 which probably was the case1 if false1 we cannot expect any such violations for the sake of destroying it2 and without such violations ,i do not see how it could be destroyed1 because the believers of it1 invariably1 believe it to be established on such mysterious supernatural principles2 and ,i expect but very few1 comparatively1 will ever have sufficient strength of mind to throw off the mystic veil4 ,yours1 c4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,vii4 ,dear sir1 and brother--,desiring to bring our present correspondence to a close as soon as the merits of its subject will admit1 ,i propose in replying to your #hth number1 to remark only on the most essential particulars1 taking no particular notice of two classes contained in your communication1 viz4 that which seems to grow out of a misconstruction of my arguments and that in which you appear to agree with them4 ,indulging in this liberty1 the subjects to which ,i will endeavour to confirm myself are the following4 #ast4 ,your method of accounting for the absence of the crucified ,jesus1 from the sepulchre where it was laid and guarded by the ,roman soldiers4 #b;d4 ,what you suggest respecting the divine mission of ,christ and his apostles1 the miracles which were wrought by them in attestation of the ,messiah1 and the credibility of their testimony regarding a future state4 #c;d4 ,what you contend for respecting the utility1 or inutility of the christian hope of future felicity4 #dth4 ,something on the instructions of ,jesus to his disciples respecting their conduct toward their enemies4 #eth4 ,what you suggest respecting ,jesus' not being known to the two disciples1 c4 #fth4 ,your criticism on my argument respecting the evidences of the resurrection1 c4 #ast4 ,you propose to account for the absence of the body of ,jesus1 by supposing1 that some persons by frightening the guards were enabled thereby to convey the body away1 which they did being willing that ,jesus should be thought to have risen from the dead1 whereby he would be deified1 according to the notions of the ,greeks respecting deifying men after they were dead1 c4 ,those who thus stole the body were not the disciples of ,jesus1 but some persons who were desirous thereby to punish the ,jews for so cruelly putting ,jesus to death4 ,here you have proposed two subjects as forming the cause1 in the mind of those who stole the body1 of their undertaking so hazarduous an enterprise1 neither of which appears to me to wear the necessary marks of probability4--#ast4 ,if they wished to have ,jesus deified according to the notions of the ,greeks1 there was no need of establishing the belief of his having rose from the dead4 ,this was not the case with those who among the ,greeks were deified after their death4 ,the tombs of their heroes whom they placed among the gods1 remained among the people4 #b;d4 ,who that then lived in ,jerusalem or its vicinity could look on the crucifixion of ,jesus as an act of cruelty8 ,others than ,jews would not feel very much interested in this affair1 as ,jesus had confined his ministry to the ,jews1 and directed his disciples not to enter into any of the cities of the ,gentiles1 this matter was a case which seemed to concern the ,jews only4 ,now look at the case4 ,the ,jews expected a ,messiah1 a deliverer1 one who should become their prince1 and deliver them from the bondage of the ,romans4 ,jesus pretended to be sent of ,god as their ,messiah of whom the ancient prophets had spoken2 he pretended to work miracles in confirmation of his divine mission2 but in room of delivering the ,jews from the ,roman yoke1 he prophecied of their destruction by the ,romans4 ,now1 sir1 if ,jesus made all these pretensions without divine authority for so doing1 if he caused to be reported that he wrought miracles when he never wrought one in his life1 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 deceptions2 and in order to quiet the people1 and have things go on in a regular order1 those who were charged with the public concerns brought about the crucifixion of this impostor1 who knowing all these things1 being a ,jew would think of accusing these godly pharisees and rulers of cruelty for so doing8 ,if ,jesus did not do the works which he pretended to do1 he certainly was an impostor1 and it is in vain to attempt to save him from such a charge4 ,and if he were such a blasphemous impostor as to pretend to work miracles by the power of ,god1 when he knew he had no such power1 it appears very plain that he deserved to die according to ,jewish customs4 ,if the miracles of ,jesus had been of a different description1 there might have been some deception4 ,that is1 if such miracles had been pretended as you state of the ,shakers2 in such a case nobody would trouble their heads about the matter4 ,some would say1 the good woman perhaps was badly hurt1 and she thought her ribs were broken1 when in fact they were not1 and with a little good nursing she was able to join the dance2 others might be extravagant enough to suppose that something marvelous had taken place1 but who would know8 ,or1 ,i will add1 who would care8 ,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 blind1 to heal all manner of diseases with a word1 and to raise the dead from their graves8 ,no1 sir1 if ,jesus did not perform the miracles which he pretended to perform1 there is no propriety in believing that any body was disposed to charge the ,jews with cruelty for ridding community of such an impostor4 ,but after all1 even allowing your proposed method of accounting for the absence of the body1 which by no means is half as probable a story as that reported by the ,jews1 as this does not account for the disciples' believing that ,jesus had actually arose from the dead4 ,what is to be done with this circumstance8 ,are we to suppose that as soon as the disciples found that the body was missing1 they took it into their heads that he had actually arose from the dead without any further evidence8 ,well if they really believed it they could honestly state their belief to the people4 ,you will remember that you have agreed that the apostles were honest men4 ,but then the apostles go further1 they assert that they were certified of the real resurrection of ,jesus by many infallible proofs1 that they saw him1 conversed with him1 ate with him1 heard his discourses in which he expounded the scriptures of the law1 of the prophets1 and of the psalms which respected his passion and resurrection4 ,will you allow these men to have been honest men1 and still suppose that somebody stole the body of ,jesus from the sepulchre8 ,the boldness of the disciples in declaring the resurrection1 their willingness to suffer all manner of persecutions for the name of ,jesus1 show plainly that they did believe in his resurrection4 ,here ,i refer you to my former arguments in which ,i have attempted to make it appear that the disciples could not have been deceived4 ,but even allowing1 that the body was stolen1 and that the disciples were deceived1 there is still1 if possible1 a greater difficulty to account for1 viz4 the success of the preaching of ,jesus and him crucified4 ,here ,i wish1 in a special manner1 to call your attention4 ,the four evangelists and the acts of the apostles were written in the life time of the disciples of ,jesus2 this1 ,paley1 in his ,evidences of ,christianity1 fully proves4 ,he likewise proves beyond any reasonable doubt that they were written by the men whose names they bear4 ,these historians then relate all the miracles recorded in the four gospels1 and inform us that ,jesus actually performed them4 ,they give each of them an account of the crucifixion and resurrection of their divine master4 ,they relate the things of which they were eye witnesses4 ,but supposing they were deceived1 which ,i humbly conceive1 is not supposable1 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 writings8 ,but the apostles had not these books to assist them in their ministry2 they went on in preaching ,jesus and the resurrection1 first in the city of ,jerusalem1 and throughout all ,judea1 and among the ,gentiles with astonishing success before they wrote the accounts which we have4 ,now1 sir1 on the supposition that the body was stolen will you account for the people's being persuaded that ,jesus rose from the dead8--,is it possible to conceive of any thing to which the ,jews could have been more opposed1 than to the testimony1 that the man whom they had crucified was the ,messiah1 and that ,god had raised him from the dead8 ,now turn to the account given in ,acts1 chap4 ii4 and let reason and candor have their voice in the matter under consideration4 ,therefore let all the house of ,israel know assuredly1 that ,god hath made that same ,jesus1 whom ye have crucified1 both ,lord and ,christ4 ,can you conceive of any thing that could have been more trying to the feelings of the people8 ,observe1 whom ye have crucified4 ,bring the matter home to yourself4 ,suppose you had been active in the prosecution of one of your fellow creatures1 and the prosecution should have terminated in the execution of the accused1 how would it try your feelings for your neighbours to come and tell you1 that you had been the murderer of a good and innocent man8 ,but in the case under consideration there are circumstances that heighten the importance of the subject4 ,the great ,messiah in which all the ,jews were educated to believe1 as much as we are educated to believe in ,christ2 this personage is the subject4 ,see the account1 ,now1 when they heard this1 they1 were pricked in their heart1 and said unto ,peter1 and to the rest of the apostles1 men and brethren1 what shall we do8 ,why do we hear this exclamation8 ,men and brethren1 what shall we do8 ,why should the people now feel thus affected8 ,why do they not cry out against the men who accuse them of having done this wickedness1 as they did against ,jesus a few days before8 ,can you1 sir1 believe that all that caused this1 was the body's having been stolen from the sepulchre1 the disciples having gotten the whim into their heads that ,jesus had arose from the dead1 now run about like mad men and accuse the people of having murdered the great ,messiah1 the anointed of ,god1 affirming that ,god had raised him from the dead1 when barely the absence of the dead body was all the evidence on which this could be founded8 ,not only did the testimony of ,peter1 on this occasion1 which will remain a most memorable one while the world stands1 carry pungent conviction to the very hearts of the people1 but it happily issued in the glorious triumph of faith in the risen ,jesus in about three thousand of the then present audience4 ,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 people2 and to no other cause1 ,i humbly conceive1 can we impute such consequences4 ,permit me to remark here1 that all that ingenuity has ever invented about how the body of ,jesus was disposed of1 can have no weight at all against the doctrine of the resurrection which the apostles propagated4 ,the body's being absent from the sepulchre never convinced one reasonable being in the world1 of the fact of the resurrection4 ,it did not convince those who first saw the sepulchre empty4 ,mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping2 and they 7the angels7 say unto her1 woman1 why weepest thou8 ,she saith unto him1 because they have taken away my ,lord1 and ,i know not where they have laid him4 ,and when she had thus said1 she turned herself back1 and saw ,jesus standing1 and knew not that it was ,jesus4 ,jesus saith unto her1 woman1 why weepest thou8 ,whom seekest thou8 ,she supposing him to be the gardner1 saith unto him1 sir1 if thou have borne him hence1 tell me where thou hast laid him1 and ,i will take him away4 ,jesus saith unto her1 ',mary4' ,she replied1 ',,rabboni6' ,how naturally is this account given4 ,in what an artless manner is the story told4 ,i so much admire the sincerity and unaffected love of ,mary to her master that the following reflections demand a place here4 ,the person who but three days before was crowned with thorns1 was reviled and spat upon1 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 body4 ,i cannot doubt the truth of ,mary's being here1 for the story is told without any design4 ,but why is ,mary here8 ,if ,jesus was an impostor she never knew of his working a miracle in her life4 ,but if ,jesus was in fact what he pretended to be and if he wrought those miracles which are recorded of him1 all is explained4 ,but it is evident that ,mary had not thought of ,jesus' having been raised from the dead1 when she saw that he was absent from the sepulchre4 ,when ,jesus spake to her1 and called her by name as he had frequently done before1 she knew him4 ,when this ,mary and the other women that were with her went to the eleven1 and told them the story1 they did not believe it1 nor does it appear that ,peter believed in the resurrection1 even after ,mary and others had certified him1 and he had been himself to the sepulchre and found it empty2 but he went away wondering in himself at that which was come to pass4 ,the evidences by which the disciples believed in this all-important truth were equal to its importance and to its extraordinary character4 ,these evidences have been noticed4 #b;d4 ,the mission of ,christ and his apostles1 the miracles wrought by them in attestation of that mission1 and the credibility of their testimony respecting a future state may now receive some notice4 ,you are disposed to call on me to inform you what ,i mean by this mission1 to which ,i reply2 ,i mean a divine appointment to act in a certain official character1 accompanied with certain powers by which they were enabled to evince1 by miracles1 this their appointment4 ,jesus was appointed by ,god himself to reveal the divine character1 nature1 and will of the ,father to the world1 by his preaching1 by his miracles of mercy1 by his sufferings1 by his death and resurrection4 ,the apostles were sent by ,jesus ,christ on the same mission1 on which ,jesus himself was sent4 ,see his prayer1 ,john xvii4 ,as thou has sent me into the world1 even so have ,i also sent them into the world4 ,those who believed in ,jesus1 and acknowledged him to be the ,messiah1 believed on account of the miracles which he wrought1 and as ,i have before argued1 ,jesus never required of any a belief in him1 barely on his testimony of himself1 but on the evidence afforded by the works which he did in his ,father's name4 ,so likewise1 those who believed on ,jesus through the ministry of the apostles1 never were called on to believe but by the authority of as great wonders as were wrought by ,christ himself4 ,i need not say much on this particular1 as you must know that the ground on which ,i have here placed this subject1 is the ground on which the ,new ,testament places it4 ,the absurd notions which have been erroneously adopted by ,christian doctors and councils concerning the mission of ,christ to appease the divine wrath1 to reconcile ,god to man1 to suffer the penalty of the divine law1 c4 c4 which have rendered the gospel a mystery and a mist1 in room of a high way for the ransomed of the ,lord to return to ,zion in1 is chargeable to the enemy who sowed tares among the wheat4 ,these opinions with a multitude of studied inventions about a mysterious work of sovereign elective grace wrought in certain individuals1 in an unknown way and frequently in an unknown time all which is to be followed by a system of mysterious sanctification1 connected most mysteriously with final perseverance1 together with all the intricate unknown items set down in the ,westminister ,catechism1 have only served to perplex some1 puff others up with spiritual pride and exalt them in the kingdom of spiritual wickedness in high places1 to drive some to despair1 and to disgust reason and common sense in others4 ,there is not a word of all the above jargon in the sacred scriptures1 which give us a most rational account of the great object of the gospel ministry4 ,this object is the redemption of mankind from moral darkness1 which is the whole occasion of moral evil1 and to produce that improvement in the religious world which science is designed to effect in the political4 ,it is to bring truth to light1 to commend the character of ,god to man1 to lead all men into the true knowledge1 spirit1 and temper of the divine nature4 ,thus we discover in ,jesus no partialist1 no sectarian1 no friend to any one denomination1 more than another4 ,and when he had accomplished1 by his sufferings1 what the prophets had foretold1 he then sent his gospel of the love and mercy of ,god to the whole world4 ,his divinely inspired apostles followed the examples of their leader and preached the universal1 impartial goodness of ,god to all men1 and confirmed their mission by similar miracles to those wrought by ,jesus4 ,you further inquire the grounds on which we are to believe ,jesus and his apostles respecting a future state4 ,reply1 on the same ground on which we believe them in other matters1 viz4 because they have proved the divinity of their mission or appointment to teach truth by the power of the ,god of truth4 ,see #b ,cor4 xii4 #ab1 ,truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience1 in signs1 and wonders1 and mighty deeds4 ,you need not be told that an apostle is a messenger1 and that a messenger must have a mission4 ,what then were the signs of ,st4 ,paul's mission8 ,answer1 patience1 signs1 wonders1 and mighty deeds4 ,jesus is said to be the great apostle1 and high priest of our profession1 and he evinced his apostleship by signs1 by wonders1 and mighty deeds4 ,now1 sir1 as these signs were designed to prove to us that ,jesus and his apostles were divinely inspired1 so they are the ground on which we may safely believe their testimony in all things4 ,if your inquiry extends further than the plain statements and facts go1 you will at once see that they go beyond the demands of reason1 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 true1 than it has pleased ,god to enable his messenger to make known4 ,when the pharisees asked the man who was born blind1 to whom ,jesus had given sight1 ,what sayest thou of him8 that he hath opened thine eyes8 he said1 he is a prophet4 ,how comes this man to believe that ,jesus was a prophet8 ,because the sign of a messenger of ,god had been given4 ,if the pharisees had asked him1 how he knew that ,jesus was a prophet1 would he not answer them by the miracle wrought upon him8 ,if they should further ask him of particulars1 how ,jesus could be a prophet1 how he knew things which others did not know1 would they have discovered any wisdom in their questions8 or would he have discovered any in attempting to answer them8 ,if ,i may further remark on the mission of ,jesus and his apostles1 it seems reasonable to say that it comprehends the whole doctrine of the gospel1 that is to say1 they were appointed to preach the gospel which comprehends the whole ministry of reconciliation1 or a manifestation of reconciling truth4 ,there is1 therefore1 no truth in the gospel which is not calculated in its nature to reconcile man to ,god1 when such truth is understood4 ,if our heavenly ,father had from all eternity predestinated far the greatest part of mankind to a state of endless un-reconciliation1 the revelation of this to them who were thus destined1 could have no effect in reconciling them to ,god4 ,what had ,jesus or his apostles to do with such doctrine as this8 ,nothing4 ,they make no mention of any such thing4 ,if according to the vain traditions received from the wisdom of this world that cometh to nought1 our tender babes were doomed to everlasting wrath for the sin of the first man who lived on earth1 the manifestation of such a truth could reconcile none of those victims to this ,god of unmerciful vengeance4 ,but what had ,jesus to do with such blasphemous doctrine8 ,see him as the representative of ,god1 as the great apostle of heaven to man1 notice what he does and what he says4 ,he takes young children in his arms and blesses them1 he says suffer little children1 and forbid them not to come unto me1 for of such is the kingdom of heaven4 ,if our ,creator was full of wrath and vindictive vengeance towards sinners1 the manifestation of such a truth would by no means reconcile sinners to ,god2 but when ,god commendeth his love towards the sinner through the mission1 ministry1 or dispensation of ,jesus ,christ1 such truth when revealed1 naturally reconciles the sinner to ,god4 ,god is eternally the same1 his love is the same1 his will to do his creatures good is always the same1 and his means to carry his good will into effect are always at his command4 ,jesus taught sinners1 enemies to ,god1 that ,god to whom they were enemies1 loved them4 ,this he demonstrated by the rain and sun shine which was communicated to the evil and the good1 and this impartial love of ,god1 he urged as the perfect pattern for our imitation1 and set it up as the mark where lies the prize to be won by our ,christian vocation4 ,i say unto you love your enemies1 pray for them that use you spitefully and persecute you1 that ye may be the children of your ,father which is in heaven2 that is1 that you may imitate him in your conduct and moral character4 ,now1 sir1 what has all this to do about reconciling ,god to man8 ,what has it to do about appeasing divine wrath8 ,if ,jesus taught the doctrine of ,god's love to sinners1 and our doctrine taught by our ,christian doctors of ,god's wrath and hatred towards sinners be true1 the matter is settled at once4 ,these doctors being ministers of divine truth1 ,jesus may be any thing else1 but he cannot be an apostle and high priest of ,god4 ,but ,i need not extend this article1 you are as well persuaded of the erroneousness of these doctrines of men as ,i am2 but it belongs to this subject1 to take a general view of the ministry of ,jesus and his apostles4 ,it is so especially1 because this view shows at once the necessity as well as the nature of this divine ministry4 ,if you view the nature of truth as you have heretofore expressed it1 and as ,i am confident you do1 you cannot reasonably doubt the necessity of having it manifested to the world4 ,it was necessary then for ,god to endue one with this ministry of truth1 it is reasonable that others1 being taught by him should be appointed to the same ministry2 but you will see at once that truth could not be preached to the ,jews without moving the superstitious scribes1 pharisees1 and doctors of the law against it1 this opposition hid its natural tendency1 and terminated in the death of the divine teacher2 and if the disciples had gone on and preached the same doctrine1 reason would suppose that they would all have been put to death immediately1 and the work of reformation would have stopped4 ,now1 sir1 if ,i am able to reason at all1 it was necessary for ,god to make a display of divine power in vindicating truth1 which would place it on ground too high for all the superstition of the world to remove4 ,you contend that the voice of reason should be heard4 ,what does it say8 ,it says that ,god produced man in the first place on this earth1 in a different way from that by which man is now multiplied4 ,reason says1 there was a necessity for this2 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 exist4 ,the same reason will contend that in the establishment of the gospel ministry in the world1 different means were necessary from those which are successfully employed in perpetuating it4 #c;d4 ,you contend that the ,christian hope of a future happy existence1 is not necessary to our present happiness2 and that there is nothing more disagreeable in the thought of an eternal cessation of existence1 than there is in the thought of reposing ourselves in quiet sleep4 ,notwithstanding what you say about non existence1 all your play on words makes no difference about the thing talked of4 ,nor do ,i see that reason in your observations on this subject1 for which you contend4 ,you very well know that to cease to possess an identity of being and of intellect is what we mean by non-existence1 and this is just the thing for which you argue4 ,now when we contemplate taking refreshment in sleep1 it is in hope of awaking again in a better condition for enjoying ourselves and others1 and for the performance of our duty4 ,but the contemplation of passing out of existence1 never to have another thought is certainly very widely different as to the nature of the subject1 from the former4 ,now1 sir1 why should not these different subjects produce different sensations in the mind8 ,and wherein one is entirely repugnant to the other1 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 subjects8 ,if it be a pleasure to a parent to contemplate1 when he retires to rest with his family1 the expectation of seeing them again in the morning1 all refreshed and invigorated anew is it not reasonable to suppose that a contemplation exactly reverse from this would produce mental pain8 ,i can conceive1 without any violation of my reason or senses1 how a fond mother can take satisfaction in nursing her babe to sleep1 knowing that the tender being needs this repose2 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 eternity4 ,i feel grateful to the giver of every good and perfect gift1 that he has given that blessed hope which is as an anchor to the soul1 whereby the ,christian in his dying hour is enabled to take a short farewell of his friends1 expressing his hope of meeting them soon in a better world4 ,and ,i think it unreasonable1 even in the extreme1 to suppose that a rational person could1 in a similar situation1 feel as well satisfied with an expectation of an extinction of being4 ,you fault the address to truth1 which you say ,i put into the mouth of your argument1 but this you do without the least occasion1 nor is it in your power1 sir1 to show that your argument does not afford all ,i have made it say4 ,you might1 or rather you have varied the language a little1 but the sentiment is preserved entire4 ,the address to truth would1 as before1 extoll her existence1 express the most ardent and constant love for her divinity and finish the climax by soaring down to non-existence1 which you can contemplate with as much satisfaction as you could an eternal existence in the enjoyment of the object of your love6 ,but you contend that truth is lovely1 and if your doubts are consistent with truth you shall be happy to be confirmed in them2 c4 ,this hypothesis1 sir1 is too large to suit your own views2 for you have before decided a choice between the doctrine of eternal misery and that of1 ,i will call it1 annihilation for this is its true meaning4 ,you have revolted at the thought of eternal misery1 but your hypothesis allows you no such liberty4 ,truth is lovely1 and if the doctrine of eternal punishment1 with all the fire and brimstone that has ever been preached by the most zealous advocates of torment be truth1 your hypothesis compels you to embrace the goddess1 and contemplate eternal misery with the same pleasure that you do non-existence1 or with the same you would everlasting felicity did you believe in it6 ,if we would reason well1 we must reason from what we know4 ,we know that man is capable of being miserable1 he is capable of great sufferings2 likewise he is capable of being happy1 he is capable of great enjoyments4 ,now to pretend that he has no choice1 that it is as well for him to be miserable as to be happy1 as well for him not to exist as to exist1 is the reverse of reason4 #dth4 ,as ,jesus1 in the instructions which he gave to his disciples1 respecting their conduct towards their enemies1 had no design reaching to the laws of a body politic1 but only to the conduct by which the ministry of the gospel would best succeed in its early beginning1 while it was necessary for it to be persecuted1 by which we are now favoured with its evidences1 we may now err in applying those instructions differently from their primary design4 ,st4 ,paul1 as much as any of the disciples of ,jesus1 submitted himself to the directions of non-resistance1 yet he insists on submission to the higher powers1 because they were the ministers of ,god1 even revengers to execute wrath upon them that do evil4 #eth4 ,with a confidence rather unusual1 you challenge me to account for ,jesus' not being known by the two disciples while he walked with them on their way to ,emmaus2 you bring a comparison1 and urge the subject in a way to signify that you have found something in the scripture account that refutes itself4 ,you might have considered ,mary's case too as a similar one4 ,she saw ,jesus with whom she had had a familiar acquaintance1 but she thought it had been the gardner1 and talked with him without knowing him1 until1 in the same manner as he used to address her1 he said ,mary1 when in a moment she knew him4 ,so the two brethren walked on the way with ,jesus1 and attended to his conversation1 which must have been of considerable length1 yet knew him not until he performed an office at table in which no doubt1 he appeared as he had done many times before1 which led them to know him at once4 ,but ,i am called on to tell how they could walk and discourse with him and not know him4 ,well1 sir1 do you not understand that your question is asked on supposition that the miracle of the resurrection was a fact1 and on the supposition that ,jesus could appear and disappear to persons as he pleased8 ,we are informed that when the two brethren knew him1 he vanished out of their sight4 ,on the supposition then1 that ,jesus could appear and disappear at pleasure1 is it at all difficult to allow that he could appear to his acquaintance as a stranger1 if he pleased8 ,it seems to me1 sir1 a little unaccountable why you should take hold of this subject with so much seeming earnestness4 ,is it possible that you should suppose that the fate of this particular should have any power on our general subject8 ,without the least concern for the argument in which ,i am engaged1 ,i might allow that ,st4 ,luke was wrongly informed respecting this particular1 but that he wrote it just as he understood the matter4 ,and what would follow8 ,would this prove any thing false on which christianity rests8 ,i am unable to see how it affects the argument one way or the other4 ,i am not the less inclined to believe the account1 because it does not affect the truth of the resurrection2 and ,i should think that as this story does not seem at all necessary in proof of that fact1 it would be considered an evidence that the writer of it was not endeavouring to make a story for such a purpose4 ,if we read the several accounts of the resurrection1 we shall perceive that the writers probably put down as many particulars as come into their minds at the time of writing1 without thoughts coming into their minds how the truth of the resurrection would be proved by the incidents which they wrote4 ,there is no design of this sort in what they have written that we can see4 ,they write as if they knew for certainty that ,jesus rose from the dead1 and as if the matter was out of all dispute4 ,they discover no concern for fear the account they were giving would not be believed4 ,there is not one instance of an attempt to guard the story by clearing up any difficulty4 ,would impostors write in this way8 ,it is not believed that there was ever the instance4 ,imposture is like a thief who starts at his own shadow1 and discovers guilt by endeavouring to hide it4 ,but truth having no concern of this sort1 discovers none4--,and this is in all respects the apparent character of the four gospels4 #fth4 ,your criticism on my argument respecting the evidences of the resurrection ,i shall now endeavour to show to be incorrect4 ,you criticise as follows2 ,the apostles could not have been convinced of the fact of the resurrection by any evidence short of the fact itself4 #b;d4 ,if the fact did exist there is no evidence which can counterbalance it4 ,ergo1 as the apostles were convinced of the truth1 the fact did exist4 ,this is pretty much like saying1 if the fact were true it could not have been false6 ,the first member of your criticism supposes that ,i contend that the apostles had no evidence of the resurrection but the fact itself4 ,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 it4 ,now in both of these you are under a mistake1 ,i never urged the fact of the resurrection as evidence of itself to the apostles4 ,i never pretended that they saw him rise4 ,we have no account that any body saw this act performed4 ,if the apostles had stood by the sepulchre and had seen the body of ,jesus rise up and walk out of the house of death1 then their evidences of his resurrection would have been the fact itself2 but this was not the case1 nor did ,i use any intimations of this nature4 ,so the first member of your criticism is an error of yours4 #b;dly4 ,if ,jesus had rose from the dead and ascended into heaven1 and never had given any proofs of this to any one1 would the fact of his having risen be any evidence of itself to any person8 ,it surely would not4 ,nor have ,i suggested any thing which intimates that the resurrection could not have been true without proving itself to be so to the apostles4 ,what seems a little remarkable respecting this subject1 is1 you profess to care for nothing but simple truth1 and yet you seem to study how to avoid it1 as the above criticism seems to evince4 ,i say seems to evince1 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 right1 without understanding what the amount of it is4 ,after having laboured1 in a lengthy manner1 as you acknowledge1 to prove that the evidences which proved to the apostles the truth of the resurrection could not be counterbalanced1 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 criticism4 ,if ,i did not make my argument clear why should you neglect to point out to me wherein it was wanting8 ,why should ,i not expect to have my errors corrected1 as well as to be called on to correct my brother's8 ,should not these kind offices be reciprocal8 ,if you conduct in this way1 ,i shall certainly grow vain1 and boast of doing more for you1 than you do for me4 ,having noticed in a brief manner1 the several particulars which were proposed on my first page1 ,i will occupy a few more with some observations on the evidences which we are favoured with1 on which to build our belief in the resurrection of ,jesus4 ,i have in one or two instances referred you to ,paley1 who has1 with abilities and learning suited to such a task1 brought forward the authorities on which the credibility of the gospels rests4 ,i have set down his eleven propositions respecting the scriptures1 and ,i humbly request you to examine the proof which he has brought to support them4 ,if he has fairly supported all these propositions1 as ,i humbly conceive he has1 will you show why the scriptures of the ,new ,testament are not worthy to be credited by us8 ,i am loath to attempt to present the evidences on which ,i conceive our faith rests1 because in the first place they are vastly numerous2 #bndly1 ,i do not believe that ,i am capable of doing that justice to the subject which it justly claims2 and #c;dly1 ,paley has done it by the assistance of ,dr4 ,lardner's works1 to so great an extent1 that it renders unnecessary any attempt of mine4 ,however1 as there seems a particular sort of pleasure in it1 ,i will here make a little addition to what ,i quoted in my former communication1 and notice that1 following the passage from the epistle of ,barnabas1 ,paley mentions an epistle written by ,clement1 bishop of ,rome1#d another of ,st4 ,paul's fellow labourers4 ,this epistle is spoken of by the ancients as an epistle acknowledged by all2 and as ,irenus well represents its value1 written by ,,clement1 who had seen the blessed apostles and conversed with them1 who had the preaching of the apostles still sounding in his ears1 and their traditions before his eyes4 ,in this epistle of ,clement1 he quotes ,mat4 v4 #g1 xviii4 #f4 ,next to ,clement1 ,paley notices ,hermes who is mentioned by ,st4 ,paul1 ,rom4 xvi4 #ad1 in a catalogue of ,roman ,christians4 ,hermes wrote a work called the ,shepherd or ,pastor of ,hermes4#e ,says our author1 ,its antiquity is incontestible from the quotations of it in ,irenus1 ,a4,d4 #agh1 ,clement of ,alexandria1 ,a4,d4 #aid1 ,tertullian1 ,a4,d4 #bjj1 ,origen1 ,a4 ,d4 #bcj4 ,in the epistle there are allusions to ,st4 ,matthew's1 ,st4 ,luke's1 and ,st4 ,john's gospels4 ,footnote #d3 ,paley's ,evidences1 p4 #ajg4 ,referred to ,dr4 ,lardner's ,creed1 vol4 #a1 p4 #fb1 et seq4 ,footnote #e3 ,paley's ,evidences1 p4 #aaj4 ,lardner's ,creed1 vol4 #a1 p4 #aaa4 ,next to ,hermes our author mentions ,,ignatius1 who became bishop of ,antioch1 about thirty-seven years after the ascension of ,christ2 and was without doubt personally acquainted with the apostles4 ,epistles of ,ignatius are referred to by ,polycarp his contemporary4 ,passages1 found in the epistles now extant under his name1 are quoted by ,irenus1 ,a4,d4 #agh1 by ,origen1 ,a4,d4 #acj4 ,in these epistles there are various undoubted allusions to the gospels of ,st4 ,matthew and ,st4 ,john4 ,of these allusions the following are clear specimens3 ,christ was baptised of ,john1 that all righteousness might be fulfilled by him4 ,be ye wise as serpents in all things1 and harmless as doves4 ,yet the spirit is not deceived1 being from ,god2 for it knows whence it comes1 and whether it goes4 ,he 7,christ7 is the door of the ,father1 by which enters in ,abraham and ,isaac and ,jacob1 and the apostles and the church4 ,ignatius speaks of ,st ,paul in terms of high respect1 and quotes his epistles to the ,ephesians by name4 ,next to ,ignatius1 our author mentions ,,polycarp who had been taught by the apostles2 had conversed with many who had seen ,christ1 was also by the apostles appointed bishop of ,smyrna4 ,this testimony concerning ,polycarp is given by ,irenus1 who in his youth had seen him4 ,i can tell the place1 saith ,irennus1 in which the blessed ,polycarp sat and taught1 and his going out and coming in1 and the manner of his life1 and the form of his person1 and the discourses he made to the people1 and how he related his conversation with ,john amid others who had seen the ,lord1 and how he related their sayings1 and what he had heard concerning the ,lord1 both concerning his miracles and his doctrine1 as he had received them from the eye witness of the word of life3 all which ,polycarp related agreeably to the scriptures4 ,in one short letter of ,polycarp's1 there are near forty clear allusions to books of the ,new ,testament3 which is strong evidence of the respect which ,christians of that age hear for these books1 and positive evidence that the gospel had been written before this epistle4 ,papias1 a hearer of ,john1 and companion of ,polycarp1 as ,irenus attests1 and of that age1 as all agree1 expressly ascribes the respective gospels to ,matthew and ,mark1 in a passage quoted by ,eusebius4 ,he informs us that ,mark collected his gospel from ,peter's preaching1 and that ,matthew wrote his gospel in ,hebrew4 ,this authority fully shows that the gospels bore these names at this early period4 ,the authors which are here mentioned1 all lived in the days of the apostles1 that is1 when the apostles were aged men1 these were their pupils in the gospel1 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 bear4 ,from these most early authors1 ,paley goes on1 and brings down1 by regular succession1 the christian authors1 until he comes into the fourth century1 when they are vastly numerous4 ,by the foregoing authority1 together with an innumerable multitude of corroborating circumstances1 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 relate2 and that the gospel of ,luke was written by a person of this name1 who had his information from undoubted testimony of the apostles2 and that ,mark wrote his gospel from ,st4 ,peter's mouth1 and that this gospel may be called the gospel of ,peter4 ,those eye witnesses then wrote what they saw1 and if they were honest men they wrote the truth4 ,we1 sir1 do certainly know as well as we know any thing which ancient history records1 that the testimony of the miracles and resurrection of ,jesus was believed in the age to which these things are referred1 and that this testimony was sealed by the sufferings and death of vast multitudes of believers4 ,it should be noticed1 that according to all accounts which have come to us1 there were no worldly motives of any sort by which the propagators of the gospel were induced to labour in this cause4 ,but on the contrary1 every earthly consideration was direct against them2 and furthermore let us remember1 that the whole hierarchy of the ,jews and all the superstition of the ,gentiles were in arms against this religion1 as ,i have before observed1 nearly #cjj years4 ,hoping1 dear brother1 that these hasty remarks will be favourably received1 and duly considered4 ,i remain1 ,yours1 c4 ,h4 ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,,ix4 ,as the objector here begins to give up his ground1 his letters from this place will be given nearly entire4 ,he commences this number as follows1 viz4 ,dear sir and brother--,your reply to my seventh number has been received1 and hereby duly acknowledged4 ,i have just given it a second reading1 with peculiar care and attention2 and ,i must add1 generally speaking1 with peculiar satisfaction too2 for as it has tended in some degree to revive my almost extinguished faith in divine revelation1 so it has in the same ratio served to obliterate1 in some degree1 those doubts which seemed to be rising mountains high1 in my apprehension1 and portended ere long to overturn all my former faith4 ,there are some of my objections1 however1 which seem not yet to have been fully met on their proper ground1 and of course not fully removed2 and ,i must therefore be yet indulged with a few remarks4 #ast4 ,notwithstanding all the learning of the ,greeks and ,romans1 in the days of ,jesus and his apostles1 yet1 as you very justly insinuate1 ,i am inclined to believe there never was a time in which 'the world of human kind1 both ,jews and ,gentiles1 was more deeply involved in the darkness and stupidity of superstition than when the ,messiah 7i4 e4 ,jesus7 entered on his public ministry4' ,and notwithstanding your argument drawn from superstition1 is admitted as good1 and weighty1 as far as it goes2 yet1 as it is conceived1 it does not fully come to the point4 ,for1 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 leaders4 ,these will be more easily wrought upon4 ,and although they may be directed by various circumstances to fix the mind upon something much better in point of moral principle1 yet how far this would prevent them from connecting many of the superstitious notions of the age with those moral principles1 only giving them a different dress1 ,i am not able to say2 neither do ,i see how the superstition of the ,jews and ,gentiles1 generally1 would be likely to prevent a thing of that kind4--,it is the suspected superstition of the apostles and primitive christians and not the superstition of their opposers1 to which the proposition alludes4 ,men1 ,i conceive1 may be honest1 and yet superstitious2 they may also give up one superstition1 by being convinced of its error1 and yet another will gradually grow in its stead4 ,i am sensible1 however1 that this argument will better apply to those who were converted to christianity after the days of the apostles1 when it is agreed that miracles had ceased1 than it will to the apostles themselves4 ,but1 from what you have written1 together with my further investigation of this subject1 ,i cannot but perceive that this argument1 even on its proper ground1 does not contain all that force which1 at first view1 ,i thought it might3 because1 #ast1 it must apply to the apostles1 or else1 as it respects the main question1 it does not seem to have any real bearing on the subject2 and #b;dly1 the change of the appostles appears to have been too sudden1 and too extraordinary1 to be accounted for in this way4 ,that superstitions1 however1 have arisen1 even in the christian church1 you do not undertake to deny1 but seem rather to admit2 and it was on this fact that the first proposition was founded2 but ,i perceive there is a difficulty in carrying this objection back to the apostles2 for then the doctrine was new1 and without precedent2 and 7unless the miracles on which it is said to have been founded were real7 without any certain prospect of success4 ,although therefore the religion of the despised ,galatians 7for such were the christians called by the ,romans7 was considered by their persecutors1 to be nothing more than a gross1 and even impious superstition1 yet no one can expect successfully to account 'in a rational way1' for the facts1 whether real or supposed1 on which that supposed superstition is said to have been founded4 ,hence the doubts growing out of my first proposition seem to be rendered equally1 if not more doubtful than the reality of that truth1 the evidence of which this objection was supposed in some degree to counterbalance4 #b;d4 ,the truth of my second proposition1 viz4 that a part of mankind at least have been and still are believing in miracles and revelations which are spurious1 you seem not disposed to deny2 but yet1 at the same time you think you are 'under no obligation to admit this fact as any evidence against christianity4' ,that a spurious or pretended miracle does not invalidate a real one ,i admit2 yet if a spurious miracle may obtain credit1 and be in fact believed1 it raises a query whether there have ever been any others but spurious4 ,your argument respecting 'counterfeit money' is admitted good in relation to that subject1 but whether it will apply with equal weight to the subject of miracles may admit of a doubt4 ,i do not see how the pretended miracles of the ,shakers are at all 'dependent' on the miracles of ,jesus for their 'imposition4' ,i meant nothing more by the miracles of ,mahomet than his pretended 'correspondence with the angel ,gabriel1' which ,i considered1 if true1 miraculous2 as ,i conceive every revelation must be let it be communicated how it will4 ,i have nothing to object to the picture which you have given of the life and religion of ,mahomet2 and as to what ,i have said in regard to the conversion and influence of ,constantine1 in giving a particular tone to the christian religion1 you are not disposed to disagree with me3 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 them4' ,of all this ,i have no doubt4 ,but1 that these miracles are believed by the ,shakers1 you do not undertake to deny2 nor that their religion1 their faith in ,ann1 as being ,christ in his second coming1 and that their present mode of worship are all predicated upon them4 ,they do not deny the miracles of ,christ and his apostles any more than ,christians in general deny the miracles of ,moses and the prophets2 but appeal to theirs as being equally of divine origin1 and thereby clothing their religion with the same divine authority4 ,now1 unless these things can be accounted for 'in a rational way1' which you seem to think may be the case1 though you do not attempt it1 they certainly raise a query in the mind at least whether the miracles recorded in scripture rest upon any better foundation4 ,if a thing is absolutely known or believed to be miraculous1 it is miraculous2 7at least to those who thus believe7 and whether any thing can be justly argued from the inferiority or superiority of a miracle1 ,i know not4 ,in the raising of ,lazarus1 it is true1 though the effect was the same1 we discover as great a miracle1 and perhaps greater1 than in the raising of a son of the ,shunamite by ,elisha the prophet2 #b ,kings iv4 #cd1 #ce1 but the miracle of the resurrection of ,jesus can hardly be said to have been wrought either by ,jesus or by his apostles1 and therefore that was not particularly referred to in the comparison of miracles2 neither do ,i know that the comparison1 in any sense1 has much weight4 ,whether ,lazarus ever died again or not we are not informed3 neither do ,i recollect of ever hearing an opinion on the subject2 but1 if he died1 it seems that his resurrection must have been very different from the resurrection of ,jesus2 i4e4 to an immortal state1 so that he 'dieth no more4' ,you admit1 if ,i understood you1 that the testimony of the apostles1 concerning the resurrection of ,jesus1 had it not been accompanied with plain and astonishing miracles in the open day1 and before the surrounding multitudes1 who had ocular demonstration of their truth1 would have been entitled to no more credit than the testimony of ,mrs4 ,a----1 respecting her conversation with her deceased husband4 ,for although it might have been true1 and we could have no good reason to doubt the sincerity or belief of the witnesses1 yet after all1 its truth would solely rest on their mere ipse dixit1 which would not be sufficient to establish so important a truth in the world4 ,hence1 as you very justly observe1 'the declaration of the apostles of the resurrection of ,jesus1 until it was accompanied with power from on high1 was never even communicated to the public1 or ordered to be communicated4' ,in this manner ,i understood your reasoning1 and ,i think ,i understand you correctly2 and all this appears to be very candid2 it is acknowledging all ,i would wish you to acknowledge on this subject4 ,but here comes the difficulty4 ,miracles in process of time cease2 and now people must believe1 if they believe at all1 without the testimony's being 'accompanied with power from on high4' ,and how can we believe in the miracles said to have been wrought by the apostles1 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 miracles8 ,you have already anticipated this objection1 and have endeavoured to answer it by arguing that 'perpetual miracles would1 if as powerful as they were at first1 preclude the exercise of our reasoning faculties and the necessity of investigation1 which is one of the most rational enjoyments of which we are capable4' ,although this argument1 it is confessed1 has considerable weight1 yet it does not seem wholly to remove the difficulty4 ,i feel very much like those ,jews who proposed the question to ,jesus2 'how long dost thou make us to doubt8 ,if thou be the ,christ tell us plainly4' ,i am not satisfied that the evidence of the truth of the resurrection is as great1 at this day1 whatever it was then1 as it could have been4 ,if ,jesus had remained on the earth till this time1 or if he had appeared to every generation since1 it appears to me the evidence would have been much greater2 and yet not so great as to 'preclude the exercise of our reasoning faculties4' ,in your statement respecting the controversy between ,unitarians and ,trinitarians1 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 parallel4 ,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 written2 during which calamity1 as the history of those times inform us1 about one million one hundred thousand ,jews were cut off1 and among whom1 it is more than probable1 all their leaders1 who were then concerned in the death of ,jesus1 were included2 and only about ninety-seven thousand1 not a tenth part1 were taken prisoners4 ,the ,jews in the adjacent countries1 however1 probably are not taken into this account1 but they were all equally subdued to the ,romans4 ,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 governor1 what must we suppose was their power after the destruction of their city and temple8 ,on a review of the subject1 therefore1 ,i think you will perceive that your case1 however plausibly stated1 falls very far short of being a parallel4 ,we may well suppose1 ,i think1 that the ,jews were so humbled by the ,romans1 that1 #ast1 they had not the power2 and1 #b;dly1 they might not under these circumstances be inclined any longer to persecute and put to death the christians4 ,and this was the only way it seems1 at that day1 that either ,jews or ,gentiles thought of putting down what they considered heresy or superstition4 ,i consider therefore the destruction of the ,jews as giving a very favourable opportunity to get up a new system of religion1 partly or wholly based on theirs1 but a little removed from it1 so as to neglect the use of sacrifices1 which1 if ,i mistake not1 according to the ,jewish traditions1 could only be offered at ,jerusalem4 ,and the long lapse of time1 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 obscurity1 that it stands now in no danger of refutation from that source4 ,some may be made to doubt1 others to disbelieve1 but nevertheless no one can prove it false4 ,if it be proved true1 however1 it must be proved from the record which we have2 for ,i know of nothing which can now add much weight to that testimony1 unless it be the fulfilment of some sinking prophecies which yet remain to be fulfilled1 or else the return of miraclous powers and a new revelation in further confirmation of what we already have4 ,and if what we have be true1 it seems we have a right to expect1 ere long1 something of the kind4 ,the ten last chapters of the prophecy of ,ezekiel1 ,i think no one will pretend has ever been fulfilled1 as yet2 and when fulfilled1 the events will prove the divine inspiration of that prophecy4 ,but if it should never be fulfilled1 or its fulfilment be delayed till the ,jews every where should give up all hope and expectation of any thing of this kind2 and should1 through unbelief1 neglect their present customs1 as many of them already have done1 by intermarrying with other nations1 and thereby should become both lost to themselves and to the world1 which would be the same as though they were extinct1 ,i apprehend that no confidence would be placed in that part of the prophecy after such a period4 ,in like manner the fulfilment or the non-fulfilment of the following words will have a similar effect4 ',this same ,jesus1 which is taken up from you into heaven1 shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven4' ,some pretend to say that even this prophecy has been already fulfilled2 but we have no evidence of it1 and ,i think we may say the prophecy in ,ezekiel1 above mentioned1 has been fulfilled1 with as much propriety4 ,but this is rather off the point4 ,in regard to the death of ,stephen1 notwithstanding his trial seems to have been by the council1 yet the manner of his death1 as stated1 seems to have been rather turbulent than otherwise4 ',when they heard these things they were cut to the heart1 and they 7whether the council1 or the spectators ,i cannot say7 gnashed on him with their teeth--then they cried out with a loud voice1 and stopped their ears1 and ran upon him with one accord1 and cast him out of the city and stoned him4' ,such proceedings at this day1 as this appears to have been1 we should be inclined to call a mob1 let it bear what other appellation it may4 ,that the first martyrs1 however1 did1 from some circumstance or other1 believe in the resurrection of ,jesus1 on which all their hope seems to have been predicated1 ,i think cannot admit of a rational doubt4 ,for to suppose otherwise1 supposes such madness and folly in those unfortunate men1 who suffered every thing which could be inflicted upon them rather than to give up their testimony2 that it seems nothing can be a parallel1 unless it be the madness and folly of such unreasonable doubts4#f ,and this seems to be all for which you contend1 as it respects the present query2 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 in4 ,now here is the mistake1 as ,i conceive1 if there be any2 i4e4 in supposing that the apostles and primitive ,christians could not believe short of such indubitable evidence4 ,only suppose the resurrection to have been actually believed1 by any evidence1 or any circumstance whatever1 no matter what1 for it makes no difference in this argument1 and the report would naturally be like all other reports of such an extraordinary nature4 ,both zeal and imagination would be enlisted on the side of its truth4 ,extraordinary discourses would be put into the mouths of the martyrs1 after they were dead1 as well as extraordinary deeds into their hands2 and altho' contradicted ever so many times by their enemies and persecutors1 yet the contradictions would never so out run the report but that many would still believe4 ,when much strength of testimony had been thus added1 by verbal reports1 during twenty or thirty years1 let a few men undertake to paint up real histories and letters in the name of the first disciples1 and let these be kept in the hands of those who are strong in the faith1 and let them be read for a long time1 only in their own assemblies or churches although they might contain something of which they had not before heard1 this is only what would be natural for them to expect1 and as it contained the main thing which was the object of faith1 and those other things1 if true1 went to establish their faith still more1 who would be likely to call the truth of such writings in question8 ,not those who believe in the main question certainly4 ,they would be a thousand times more likely to pass over in silence things of which they had some scruples1 for the sake of the main question1 then they would be to endanger the truth of the main question1 as they might think they should1 by criticising on mere circumstantial things4 ,i am not now speaking of the apostles1 whom ,i have considered honest men2 yet ,i should suppose that even these men might have much good at heart1 although they should conduct exactly in the way which ,i have suggested4 ,and how little time would it require to put this matter beyond all possible refutation8 ,not so long1 ,i conceive1 as did elapse before that work was attempted by ,celsus4 ,footnote #f3 ,i have here expressed myself in strong terms1 with a view to check my doubts and prevent their running wild4 ,you will see by this1 sir1 in what light my argument views the apostles4 ,it does not suppose 'that the apostles would enforce their moral doctrine with their pretentions to miraculous powers1' although they might with the 'testimony of the resurrection of ,jesus1' but it supposes that their successors might contend that the apostles worked miracles1 and many of them might believe that they did1 just as the apostles believed in the resurrection1 when no such thing as the resurrection or the miracles of the apostles ever existed in fact4 ,this is what the argument supposes1 and it is wholly predicated on the possibility of the apostles' being made to believe1 some how or other1 ,i do not pretend to say how1 that ,jesus had risen from the dead when no such thing had taken place4 ,but1 only believe in the resurrection1 and there is no difficulty in believing in the miracles of ,jesus or the miracles of his apostles4 ,they are equally well attested1 and no more improbable4 ,yea1 if they were true1 they were not believed1 but absolutely known to be true by the apostles4 ,they knew it as well as they could know the truth of any object of sight4 ,and the truth of what they knew being all which they needed in support of what they taught1 ,i do not see1 on this supposition1 how they could have the occasion1 or the motive1 to state one thing falsely concerning it4 ,no1 nor could their followers have any occasion to add to their testimony1 for nothing which they could add would be of any more weight than that which we may suppose was already in their possession4 ,the two first chapters of ,matthew and ,luke 7or all except the genealogy in ,matthew1 and the preface of ,luke7 the authenticity of which has been suspected by some of the learned1 and ,i believe not without pretty good reasons1 do not contain a single word in support of the resurrection2 neither is the subject of them1 as ,i now recollect1 mentioned either by ,christ or any of the apostles in any other part of the ,new ,testament4 ,and although the truth of those narratives is no more miraculous than the resurrection1 yet ,i presume you would not contend that a belief of these1 also1 is absolutely necessary to the ,christian faith4 ,with these observations1 ,i shall once more1 and probably for the last time quit my second proposition1 and proceed to take notice of what you have written on my third4 ,and here you must pardon me if ,i remark1 without the least view of finding any fault1 that if my words will admit of a bad construction1 that construction seems to be the first one which strikes your mind4 ,if you suppose me capable of such an abominable absurdity as to say1 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 spittle1 and this done in our presence1 we could not know it6 that we could not know but that the seeing man was a total stranger whom we had never before seen1 and that the blind man had absconded no body knows how or where6 ,i say1 if this was the way in which you understood my third proposition1 you are perfectly excusable3 otherwise1 it is difficult to account for your remarks4 ,but1 having thus found your antagonist1 you level your artillery against him1 nor desist until you have put to death without mercy this creature of your own fruitful imagination4 ,having done1 you begin to query whether you had not mistaken my meaning2 and after making a wonderful effort1 by calling up these penetrating powers of research1 which are only summoned on extraordinary occasions1 you dive through the mists of obscurity1 in which my words seem to be too often placed1 and behold my proposition in its true light6 ,my proposition is no sooner seen than 'granted'3 which is1 that we have no positive knowledge of miracles2 or1 to use your own words1 'miracles are not now wrought before our eyes4' ,but although you grant the truth of my proposition1 you do not admit that this is any objection against the truth of divine revelation1 for a number of reasons which you have given2 all of which1 no doubt1 are satisfactory to your own mind4 ,but sir1 this is a matter of opinion only1 and if ,i agree with you at all1 it must be from the consideration that the ,governor of the universe must do right4 ,but1 although the time may not be yet1 nevertheless ,i am clear in the opinion that the revival of miracles will1 in process of time1 be absolutely necessary in order to preserve the faith in those which have already been4 ,but1 ,i contend1 if the scriptures be true1 we have a right to expect the revival of miracles2 and ,i do not see how they can be fulfilled without4 ,considering the prejudices of the ,jews1 as a people1 ,i cannot suppose that they will ever believe in ,jesus1 as their promised ,messias1 short of being convinced of its truth by a miracle2 and should they return to the land of ,palestine1 and there rebuild their temple1 at ,jerusalem1 it would be such a clear fulfilment of the prophecy of ,ezekiel1 that it would be equal to a miracle1 and do as much towards corroborating the truth of all the other prophecies4 ,you finally come once more to the circumstance of the conversion of ,st4 ,paul1 where you again find some fault 7and ,i must confess1 not without some reason7 at my neglect to meet your arguments on this subject2 or in other words1 to do away the scripture account1 and reconcile it with my hypothesis2 i4e4 that of supposing him to be converted without a miracle4 ,to be ingenuous with you1 sir1 ,i must acknowledge that ,i have ever supposed this to be the most difficult task ,i should have to do2 and therefore ,i wished to hear all you had to say on the subject of the resurrection before ,i attempted it4 ,since ,i wrote my last ,i have examined ,paley's ,hor ,paulin1 a work of extraordinary merit which had never before fallen into my hands3 his ,evidences of ,christianity1 ,i have read several years ago1 but have not lately particularly examined that work4 ,in the exposition of the argument1 7of the work first mentioned7 ,paley sets forth1 as ,i conceive1 the only possible grounds on which either the epistles of ,st4 ,paul1 or the acts of the apostles1 can be supposed to be forgeries1 in their full force4 ,and then he attempts to prove their genuineness by their internal evidence1 which they contain within themselves1 entirely aside from those objections2 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 now1 and we should now1 for the first time1 examine them4 ,and although ,i might not fully agree with him in all points1 yet ,i think he proves1 beyond all contradiction or rational doubt1 what he mainly attempts to prove2 i4 e4 that the epistles were written by some person acquainted with the circumstances mentioned in the history1 and that the writer of the history must have been acquainted with the circumstances alluded to in the epistles1 where1 at the same time1 there is not the least apparent design in those references or allusions2 which1 as he very justly argues1 prove the genuineness of both4 ,i do not pretend to quote his words1 as the book is not now by me4 ,this1 it must be confessed1 is a great acquisition in favour of the truth of christianity2 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 treated4 ,now comes the point4 ,paul expressly declares that he saw ,christ after he was risen from the dead4 ,his declaring that he was seen of ,cephas1 then of the twelve1 could have been only from the report of others2 but it agrees pretty well with what has been recorded by the evangelists4 ,his declaring that he had been seen 'of above five hundred brethren at once1' must have been also by report1 which report might have been incorrect1 as there is no mention made of it in either of the gospels4 ,yet if incorrect it might have been very easily refuted4 ,but when he comes to say1 ',and last of all he was seen of me also1 as of one born out of due time1' there remains for him no such excuse4 ,paul1 as it seems1 could not believe that he had seen ,jesus1 literally1 and personally1 when he had not4 ,and if he knew that he had not1 and yet declared that he had1 and meant that others should believe that he had1 he was not honest1 as ,i before admitted that he was2 and now to say that he was not honest1 as ,i clearly see1 would involve me in still greater difficulty1 as then ,i could give no rational account for his life and conduct4 ,what shift shall ,i now make8 ,for having supposed that my doubts were really founded on reason1 ,i must have good reason for so doing before ,i can give them up3 i4e4 ,i must be fully convinced that they are founded in error4 ,what can we suppose that ,paul meant by ,christ's being seen of above five hundred brethren at once8 ,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 times8 ,might he not mean the same which the author of the ,acts means1 speaking of the day of ,pentecost8 ,and therefore the whole might not have been designed to be understood literally1 but spiritually true8 ,and notwithstanding the literality of the language1 may not all the miracles of ,christ and the apostles1 and even the account we have of the resurrection1 be all accounted for and reconciled in the same way8 ,but here ,i involve myself in difficulty again2 for1 if ,i mistake not1 this was very near the opinion of the ,gnostics1 whom the apostles and fathers every where spake against4--',these1' says ,dr4 ,priestley1 'taught that it was not ,jesus that was properly the ,christ1 or that he had not flesh and blood like other men4' ,they also 'denied the doctrine of the resurrection4' ,these therefore1 ',paul1 ,peter1 ,jude1 and ,john1 most strenuously opposed4' ,again1 says he1 ',the apostles they considered as judging only by their senses1 which were deceived in this case3 and though they gave entire credit to them with respect to every thing which they had seen1 or heard1 they considered them as plain unlettered men who were ignorant of what was not within the sphere of their senses4' ,to these it is supposed that ,john alludes in his first ,epistle iv4 #a--c4 ,if1 therefore1 the apostles did believe1 and contend for the literal resurrection1 and personal appearing of ,jesus1 and if in this they were opposed by the ,gnostics1 even in their day2 there is no way now1 that ,i see1 any longer for me to maintain my doubts only by believing that the first disciples1 as well as ,paul1 thought they saw ,jesus when in fact they did not1 and that the idea of miracles by which these things were said to have been propagated and which carried conviction to the multitudes1 was nothing more than the bold figurative language of the day1 designed1 in reality1 to deceive no one2 or else mere exaggerations3 or1 what perhaps is still more probable1 partly of both4 ,but enough6 ,i confess ,i begin to grow dissatisfied with this kind of reasoning4 ,what does it all amount to8 ,what am ,i bringing1 after all1 to oppose the laboured researches of ,drs4 ,lardner1 ,paley1 ,priestley1 and others1 as well as the pertinent observations of my worthy friend who has so long borne with me1 and obliged me with his friendly and christian-like aid on this subject8 ,let me pause and consider--,i have acknowledged that there are evidences in favour of divine revelation2 have ,i proved any of those evidences false8--,no6 this ,i have acknowledged ,i could not do4 ,what have ,i put into the other end of the scale1 to weigh down those evidences8 ,ah6 what indeed6 ,nothing6 except it be my own ignorance1 and the errors of other men1 in whose errors ,i have no more faith than those who believe in the truth of that which ,i have been disputing6 ,i will therefore1 instead of pursuing the dispute any further1 begin to think once more whether the thing for which you so ardently contend may not in reality be true4 ,but1 here again1 ,i must be cautious1 lest ,i should err as far on the other hand4 ,for notwithstanding when ,i found that ,i could not help doubting1 ,i tried to reconcile myself to my doubts1 and have sincerely and honestly tried to make myself believe that ,i was perfectly reconciled either way2 yet the moment ,i begin to think about the certainty of immortality and eternal life1 ,i am all on fire6 ,i hardly know how to contain myself6 ,and were it not for the special obligations1 which ,i feel to my family1 and to the world1 more than any thing which ,i ever expect to receive from the world1 ,i should long to 'depart1 and be with ,christ1 which is far better4' ,thus my doubts1 whatever they are1 may be needful for me4 ,your remarks respecting my claims to the privilege of one who is weak in the faith are very pertinent and just4 ,for ,i must confess in proportion as my doubts arose1 as to the truth of the resurrection1 equal doubts would arise as to the propriety of preaching it for a truth4 ,i wish you to understand1 however1 that my mind has never been settled there1 if it has ever vibrated that way1 it was only momentary1 and rather on mere supposition than any confirmed opinion4 ,in answer to what you say in regard to hope1 ,i will only add3 ,though a man should have ever so firm a hope in any thing whatever1 and should afterwards find that his hope was founded in error1 the hope would be taken away2 but if at the same time he should find that the truth is absolutely better than the error hoped for1 he would also find that a better thing is given in lieu of his hope3 but if a man has hope1 though that hope should be founded in error1 if the hope remain as long as the man exists1 it is not taken away from him1 as both cease to exist together4 ,once more1 and finally3 a hope which is founded in truth1 a knowledge of the truth can never take away4 ,although a man may hope1 and ardently desire to exist eternally1 yet ,i do not see how a man can extend either his hope1 or his desires1 beyond the possibility of his existence4 ,to my understanding1 this is just like supposing that a man which does not exist may yet hope and desire2 or that a man may hope and desire1 after he shall have ceased to exist4 ,after returning you my sincere thanks for your kind indulgence and labours of love1 ,i shall close the present number4 ,i cannot take my leave of this number1 however1 without expressing my humble gratitude to the ,allwise disposer of events1 that he has given such abundant manifestations of his unspeakable goodness to his creatures2 that he has also1 as ,i may perhaps be permitted to hope with you1 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 nature1 regarding at the same time all other beings and things1 and that he had raised up so many faithful witnesses who have set to their seals that this testimony is true4 ,yours1 c4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,viii4 ,dear sir1 and brother1--,the particulars contained in your ninth letter1 which ,i have selected as the subject of this1 are the following3 #ast4 ,you do not see how the miracles of the ,shakers are at all dependant on the miracles of ,jesus for their imposition4 #b;d4 ,you think1 if ,jesus had remained on the earth until now1 or had appeared to every generation since his resurrection1 the evidence would have been much greater2 and yet not so great as to preclude the exercise of our reasoning faculties4 #c;d4 ,in the supposed controversy between the ,unitarians and ,trinitarians1 you think ,i have failed of making the case a parallel with my subject1 not considering the great change which took place in the state of the ,jews in consequence of their destruction by the ,romans4 #dth4 ,the argument which you rest on the supposition1 that the apostles did in reality believe in the resurrection of ,jesus1 when in fact the thing was not true4 #eth4 ,what you say of the necessity of miracles in some future time1 to confirm the belief of those which have been4 #fth4 ,the difficulty you suggest concerning ,st4 ,paul's saying that ,jesus was seen1 after his resurrection1 by more than five hundred brethren at once4 #ast4 ,as you object to the idea that the miracles of the ,shakers depend at all on the miracles of ,jesus for their imposition1 it may be considered sufficient1 on my part1 if ,i show that you have fully supported the proposition which you profess not to see4 ,i will1 however1 first presume1 that ,i am not authorised to say that the miracles of the ,shakers are imposition1 ,i have not contended that they are2 the ground for which ,i contend is this1 viz4 if these or any other pretended miracles among us are impositions1 they depend on the miracles of ,jesus for this power1 as much as counterfeit money depends on the true for its imposition4 ,that you have given sufficient support to what ,i have stated1 you will see at once by the following passage quoted from your arguments on this subject3 ,they do not deny the miracles of ,christ and his apostles any more than ,christians in general deny the miracles of ,moses and the prophets2 but appeal to theirs as being equally of divine origin1 and thereby clothe their religion with the same divine authority4 ,is it possible that the writer of the foregoing sentence should not see1 that he established the very thing which he had just said he could not see8 ,what is that divine authority with which the religion of ,moses1 the prophets and of ,christ is clothed8 ,answer1 miracles4 ,what authority do you pretend the ,shakers make use of to clothe their religion8 ,answer the same4 ,how does this differ from counterfeit money1 on the supposition that these miracles are imposition8 ,it is abundantly evident that the ,jews expected that the ,messiah1 when he came1 would establish his character by miracles as ,moses did his1 and as some of the prophets were enabled to do4 ,therefore1 do we read ,matt4 xii4 #bb1 #bc4--,then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil1 blind and dumb3 and he healed him insomuch1 that the blind and dumb both spake and saw4 ,and all the people were amazed and said1 is not this the son of ,david8 ,jesus himself saith1 ,luke iv4 #bd1 #bg4 ,verily ,i say unto you1 no prophet is accepted in his own country4 ,but ,i tell you of a truth1 many widows were in ,israel in the days of ,elias1 when the heaven was shut up three years and six months1 when great famine was throughout all the land2 but unto none of them was ,elias sent1 save unto ,sarepta1 a city of ,sidon1 unto a woman that was a widow2 and many lepers were in ,israel in the time of ,eliseus the prophet2 and none of them was cleansed1 saveing ,naaman the ,syrian4--,see ,john vii4 #ca4 ,and many of the people believed on him1 and said1 when ,christ cometh1 will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done8 ,by the foregoing quotations1 as by many other passages1 we learn that the ,jews expected the ,messiah would establish his character as a prophet like unto ,moses and others1 and also that ,jesus did in reality a multitude of miracles more than the prophets did4 ,now is it not evident1 that if the miracles of ,jesus were supposed to be impositions1 they were dependant on those of ,moses and the prophets for any power to impose on the people8 ,just so are all miracles wrought or pretended to be wrought since ,christ1 dependant on his miracles for any imposing power which they possess4 ,if our religion had not been first propagated by the means of those miracles which are recorded in the ,new ,testament1 of what use would any pretended miracles be to any sect of ,christians8 #b;d4 ,what you say of the greater evidence of the resurrection which would have been furnished by ,christ's continuance on earth until now1 or by his making his appearance in every generation since his time1 appears to me to be rather wanting in its merits by which it claims a reply4--,why should you neglect to delineate some special reasons for your suppositions1 by showing how wide the difference would have been from the evidence we now have1 and how that difference would have recommended your scheme8--,you have left me to conjecture the particular features of your argument1 and if ,i mistake them1 you will reply that ,i understand you incorrectly4 ,however1 this is the way ,i must proceed4 ,we will suppose then that ,jesus1 in room of ascending into heaven1 had remained on earth4 ,would this have done any good1 unless he had made himself known to all the people8 ,well1 we will suppose he had made himself known after his resurrection1 to the whole house of ,israel1 would the people not have believed8 ,they would have believed most assuredly1 or his making himself known to them would have done no good4 ,if they had all believed they would not have persecuted the religion of ,christ1 all would have embraced it at once being convinced by their eyes1 that ,jesus who was crucified1 had actually rose from the dead1 and was not subject to death any more4 ,all this would have been as evident to the ,roman government as to the ,jewish hierarchy1 and the whole would have been christianized at once4 ,how long would all this remain a wonder8 ,jesus remains on earth from generation to generation4 ,how long ago would the conjecture have arisen1 that this man who has lived through so many ages1 had always been here on earth1 and that the tradition of his once having been mortal like other men1 was nothing but a superstition gotten up in some age of antiquity beyond our reach8 ,there would have been no occasion of preserving any records of the wonderful works of ,jesus in the days of his flesh1 for as the whole would become immediately connected to christianity1 there would have been no necessity nor excitement to write and preserve the accounts we have in the gospel1 or if they had been written1 they could have had no support now but ancient tradition4 ,not one martyr1 not one instance of persecution1 not a ,celsus in the second1 a ,porphyry in the third1 nor a ,julian in the fourth centuries to oppose the truth1 and thereby bear testimony to the antiquity of the christian history4 ,this immortal man would be here on earth1 and the sun and the moon and the stars would be in the heavens1 the mountains and the rivers here on earth2 and the same mind that would conjecture that all these visible things were from everlasting to everlasting1 would make no exception of this man ,christ ,jesus4 ,but now you are called on to prove your christian tradition2 and what have you to convince the ,deist with8 ,will you say my conjectures are by no means correct8 ,well1 ,i expected it would turn out so4 ,you mean then that ,jesus should not only remain on earth1 but that he should continue the evidences of his having been mortal1 of his having died1 and of his resurrection as clear as they were when they convinced the world in the first place4--,would there1 in this case1 be any room for any inquiry8 any for doubts8 ,would there be as many denominations of christians as there are now8 ,should we get at this religion by reasoning8 ,perhaps you would prefer your second proposal1 and have ,jesus manifested in every generation4 ,but this would have been a regular return of the same event1 and would have been placed among the phenomena of nature1 and the ,deist would say that there never had been any beginning to this regular operation1 it has always been so from time beyond date4 ,thus far1 but no more4 ,the evidences of our religion are like the religion itself1 infinitely superior to any thing ever contrived by human wisdom4 ,and it is an opinion in which ,i am the more confirmed1 the more ,i examine it1 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 world1 that scheme which they would have projected1 would of itself defeated the object4 ,the wisdom of this great scheme corresponds with the divine power which has been manifested in it4 ,what set of impostors1 either wise or simple1 learned or unlearned would ever have thought of such an undertaking as that of which we have an account in the four evangelists8 ,would they be likely to find one who would be their leader1 the one to die1 and leave the rest to make the people believe that he arose from the dead8 ,could a man be found now who would be willing to undertake such a piece of madness and folly8 ,if we pretend to reason shall we not keep to human nature1 and reason according to those laws by which ourselves and others are governed8 ,do you believe1 sir1 that a man could be found who would undertake to lead a party1 whose object should be to impose on the people by a pretended resurrection1 and consent himself to be the hero of this imposture8 ,you answer1 no4 ,but then ask2 if this wonderful story was not written some considerable time after that period to which the dates of the writings are assigned1 and such large additions made that the whole appears entirely different from what was really true8 ,this brings me to consider the third particular selected for consideration1 out of your epistle4 #c;dly4 ,in allusion to the supposed controversy between the ,unitarians and ,trinitarians1 you think ,i ought to have considered the circumstance of the destruction of the ,jews by the ,romans1 as giving a favourable opportunity for the fabricating the books of the evangelists1 and of giving them success in the world1 as the old pharisees and rulers of the ,jews were principally cut off in that awful destruction of their nation and city4 ,you will observe that by your suggestion you leave the first section of the argument to which you refer1 in which no book or books were used1 and notice only the last section in which you were indulged1 for sake of the argument1 in the supposition that the gospels were not written until after the destruction of ,jerusalem1 nor propagated on the miracles on which the gospels have founded it4 ,here1 sir1 have ,i not an occasion of some little complaint8 ,if you really thought that the gospels were1 none of them1 written in the life time of the apostles1 and considered it safe to predicate an argument on this ground1 why should you withhold the proof of this fact8 ,why did you not inform me of the authority by which your argument is supported in your own mind8 ,and furthermore1 why do you try to get away from the argument as stated in its first form1 without showing its want of force1 or without allowing its merit8 ,by conducting arguments in this way1 in room of converguing them to some definite point of conclusion1 they are diverged indefinitely1 and the mind seems bewildered without an object4 ,however1 ,i am disposed to follow you1 and will now endeavour to shew the probability of the gospel's having been written even before the destruction of ,jerusalem4 ,the following passages are quoted from ,paley's evidences from page #ajf and on-- ,from the epistle of ,barnabas1 to which ,i have before alluded2 ,let us1 therefore1 beware lest it come upon us1 as it is written1 there are many called1 few chosen4 ,our author justly adds3 ,from the expression1 'as it is written1' we infer with certainty1 that1 at the time when the author of this epistle lived1 there was a book extant1 well known to christians1 and of authority among them1 containing these words--',many are called1 few chosen4' ,for the authority of this epistle ,i refer unto ,clement of ,alexandria1 ,origen1 ,eusebius1 and ,jerome1 noticed in a former communication4 ,if ,clement were liable to mistake the author1 it seems hardly probable that he would be deceived concerning the time when this epistle1 purporting to have been written by ,barnabas1 was written2 as it is no later than ,a4,d4 #aid that he quotes this epistle as an ancient work4 ,it may be proper to remark1 that although authors differ respecting the genuineness of this epistle1 both ,dr4 ,priestly and ,paley acknowledge and maintain its antiquity1 and place it very near to the time of the destruction of ,jerusalem1 which gives it all the authority for which it is here quoted2 for the thing now to be proved is1 that it is probable that the gospel of ,matthew was written before the destruction of the ,jewish hierarchy4 ,now as this epistle of ,barnabas was written soon after this destruction1 and refers to the gospel of ,matthew in the manner above quoted1 as refering to what was an acknowledged writing of scripture authority1 it seems reasonable to infer that ,st4 ,matthew's gospel had been written long enough before1 to obtain its establishment among ,christian churches1 which fairly throws its antiquity anterior to the destruction of ,jerusalem4 ,sir1 ,i see nothing to forbid this conclusion from being highly probable1 and this1 ,i expect to show1 is all that is necessary to be made out in this case4 ,of ,polycarp1 who was appointed bishop of ,symrna by the apostles themselves1 says our author1 we have one undoubted epistle remaining4 ,and this1 though a short letter1 contains nearly forty clear allusions to books of the ,new ,testament2 which is strong evidence of the respect which christians of that age bore for those books4 ,it appears from this account1 that1 as ,polycarp was a contemporary of the apostles1 and referred to the books of the ,new ,testament in his writings1 as to books of established authority1 these books must have been written as early as the time in which their reputed authors lived1 which places their date prior to the destruction of ,jerusalem2 as it is not pretended that any of the evangelists continued until after the destruction of that city except ,st4 ,john who is supposed to have lived to a very great age4 ,one more from our author3 ,papias1 a hearer of ,john1 and companion of ,polycarp1 as ,irenus attests1 and of that age1 as all agree1 in a passage quoted by ,eusebius1 from a work now lost1 expressly ascribes the respective gospels to ,matthew and ,mark1 and in a manner which proves that those gospels must have publicly borne the names of these authors at that time1 and probably long before4 ,all this appears perfectly consistent with the idea that these gospels were written by the evangelists themselves1 and proves together with the following considerations the probability of its being correct4 ,further considerations to be taken into the foregoing account are the following4 ,st4 ,matthew1 ,st4 ,luke and ,st4 ,mark1 all speak of the prophesy of ,jesus respecting the destruction of ,jerusalem1 but do not even hint that this prophesy had been fulfilled4 ,in ,st4 ,john's gospel no mention is made of this prophesy1 and it is reasonable enough to suppose that this omission was on account of the prophesy's having been fulfilled before his gospel was written4 ,again1 if the gospels had not been written by these reputed authors1 nor in the time that the evangelists lived1 but some time after the destruction of ,jerusalem1 and these had been fabricated by designing men1 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 ,testament4 ,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 notions4 ,now this would never have taken place if these ,gnostics could have proved that these ,gospels were frauds1 which they certainly could have done1 for they existed as early as these writings are supposed to have been written4 ,furthermore1 if the gospels had been forged books1 written after the destruction of ,jerusalem1 it would have been an easy task for ,celsus to have exposed the whole fraud4 ,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 forgeries4 ,but this neither he nor the learned ,porphyry attempted to do4 ,i have suggested1 that1 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 argument4 ,and so1 ,i think1 it will appear to you1 when you combine with this probability two more important considerations4 #ast4 ,that the internal evidences contained in the books of the ,new ,testament1 of their genuineness1 are sufficient of themselves to establish their character as such2 and3 #b;d4 ,that the above probability of itself is to be relied on even from external evidence if no external proof can be proved against it1 which is not pretended4 ,it should be kept in mind1 that the writings of the evangelists are guarded by the early attacks of the enemies of christianity1 who ever treated them as being1 what they pretended to be1 a faithful history of the origin of the religion they inculcated2 and also by the opposition of the early sects who arose from the church1 who would have demolished their foundations if they had been spurious4 #dth4 ,the argument you rest on the supposition that the apostles did1 in reality1 believe in the resurrection of ,jesus1 when in fact the thing was not true1 may now be noticed4--,as you would naturally expect1 ,i shall by no means allow either your premises or conclusions4 #ast4 ,why should ,i allow your premises8 ,you have brought no argument1 nor attempted to bring any to disprove what ,i contended for1 viz4 that the apostles could not have been persuaded to believe the resurrection with any evidence short of that recorded in the evangelists4 ,here1 you say lies the mistake if there be any2 and to this ,i agree4 ,where then is your argument against mine1 on which so much depends8 ,you have attempted to bring none4 ,but you say3 only suppose the resurrection to have been actually believed1 by any evidence1 or circumstance whatever1 no matter what4 ,what argument is there sir1 in this only suppose8 ,i contend the thing is not supposable4 ,it was as true in that age of the world1 that a fact naturally incredible requires indubitable evidence to substantiate it1 as it is now4 ,i would allow that it is supposable1 that one man might1 in a sort of a delirium1 which generally throws the brain into a situation1 by which1 what only exists in the mind1 appears a reality to the sense of sight1 might think he saw ,jesus after his crucifixion1 when in fact he did not4 ,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 more1 and all be persuaded against the prejudices of their minds1 that they saw ,jesus1 and that at a number of times1 and in diverse manners1 when there was no such thing4 ,but3 #b;d4 ,even allowing your supposition1 your consequences would be very unlikely to follow4 ,you surely would not suppose that the apostles could believe they saw ,jesus when they did not1 if they had the use of their reason properly4 ,we must suppose them to have been insane then4--,what then would have been the consequences8 ,would the authority have put these mad-men to death8 ,would they have been persecuted at all for their misfortune8 ,but these mad-men preached ,jesus and the resurrection to the people1 and so convinced them of the fact1 that multitudes believed them1 and on this supposition we are now to suppose our religion was first established in the world6 ,if we may suppose such things1 there are no absurdities that we may not suppose4 ,you must suppose it to be a very dangerous thing to try a man for his life by a jury of twelve men1 for if the man was innocent of the murder for which he was indicted and no evidence was produced to convict him on1 these men might all be made to believe1 some how1 by some circumstance1 no matter what1 that they all saw the murder committed by this very innocent person on trial4 #eth4 ,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 ,messiah1 but being a little more careful1 than at first1 ,i find you seem to give up this matter4 ,you say3 considering the prejudices of the ,jews1 as a people1 ,i cannot suppose that they will ever believe in ,jesus1 as their promised ,messias short of being convinced of its truth by a miracle2 and should they return to the land of ,palestine1 and there rebuild their temple1 at ,jerusalem1 it would be such a clear fulfilment of the prophesy of ,ezekiel1 that it would be equal to a miracle1 and do as much towards corroborating the truth of all the other prophecies4 ,if the return of the ,jews1 etc4 be equal to miracles1 then it may preclude their necessity4 ,but as this particular does not immediately concern our general subject it is dismissed4 #fth4 ,as none of the evangelists have been particular respecting the meeting in ,galilee1 and as this was an appointment even before the crucifixion1 as well as afterward1 it is fairly within the reach of probable conjecture1 that this meeting was sufficiently numerous to justify ,st4 ,paul's words4 ,he does not speak of this matter as of a subject with which his acquaintance was small1 for he says2 he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once2 of whom the greater part remain unto this present1 but some are fallen asleep4 ,he no doubt1 had seen many of this great number and had been informed of the circumstances of the occasion1 and of the time when this multitude was favoured with this sight4 ,to conclude2 ,i heartily join with you in grateful acknowledgements1 to the ,almighty disposer of events1 for the manifestations of his universal benevolence to his creatures1 and especially unto man whom he hath seen fit to induce with the attributes of his own nature1 and constituted him an heir of life and immortality4 ,in view of this1 ,i can be thankful for any faithfulness discoverable in those who publish the word of life1 and endeavour to defend it in the spirit of meekness and ,christian love4 ,and ,i will further add1 that ,i feel a peculiar pleasure in finding your mind to be somewhat divested of its incumberances1 and that your doubts of the grounds of your precious faith1 are dispersing more and more from your mind1 while the evidences of divine truth find a sincere reception in your understanding4 ,let us endeavour to cherish1 not only the evidences of truth1 but truth itself in our afflictions1 and in room of being idlers in the markets1 go early into our ,lord's vineyard trusting the words of him who saith2 whatsoever is right1 ye shall receive4 ,yours1 c4 ,h4 ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,extracts ,no4 ,x4 ,dear sir and brother--,in remarking on your reply to my #hth number1 as in a former case ,i shall follow the arrangement which you have made2 taking up the articles in the same order4 #ast4 ,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 objections2 and these objections are increased by connecting with them1 circumstances which1 if the resurrection be false1 must be considered equally false4 ,because1 if the resurrection of ,jesus was not a truth1 whatever was the truth on which that belief was founded1 must be now all mere conjecture4 ,there might be persons1 however1 who thought that ,jesus suffered death very wrongfully although he never pretended literally to perform those miracles4 ,yea ,i conceive it possible that when this language was first adopted1 i4 e4 of his feeding the hungry1 opening the eyes of the blind1 raising the dead1 c4 it was not understood1 nor meant to be understood literally4 ,therefore although the account at first might have been literally false1 though not so much so as what it grew to be afterward1 yet it might have been considered spiritually true2 and therefore not designed absolutely to deceive4 ,the only difficulty1 i4e4 the only irreconcilable difficulty1 which ,i conceive in the case1 is in supposing that the first disciples could be made to believe in the resurrection1 by any evidence which could have existed1 and yet the resurrection not to be true4 ,but we must suppose this1 ,i think1 in order to raise a reasonable doubt of the truth of the resurrection4 ,for1 if the disciples did not believe it1 they could have had no interest or motive1 7or certainly no justifiable motive7 in making others believe it2 and without this1 it is difficult to account even for the existence of such a report4 ,i should not think it so strange1 however1 that others1 after the report was once in circulation1 and that even ,st4 ,paul himself should have been made to believe this1 merely by some visionary scene4 ,i think therefore the question may be reduced to this point4 ,which of the two is the most incredible1 either that the first disciples should absolutely believe in the resurrection1 by any evidence which did not grow out of this truth1 or that the resurrection should have been absolutely true8 ,here is where the two propositions1 when reduced to their simplicity must finally come4 ,and ,i contend that when two propositions are thus clearly placed before the mind or understanding1 whether the judgment be right or wrong1 the mind or understanding must reject1 yea it is impossible to avoid rejecting1 that which to the mind or understanding1 is the most incredible4 ,but when we admit that the disciples did believe in the resurrection1 we are not obliged to admit that they had all or any of the evidences of that fact which have come down to us4 ,this we may suppose might have been mostly or altogether fictitious2 written by later hands1 and attributed to the apostles4 ,and here we must not suppose that the account was altogether made up at once1 but grew gradually2 and not to come out in writing until the persons1 who could either attest or deny the literal truth of these facts1 were taken off of the stage4 ,here as it respects the records also1 the same question again occurs4 ,which is the most incredible 7not to miraculous1 for one miracle is no more miraculous1 that ,i know of than another2 ,i therefore say which is the most incredible7 that such histories should have been thus1 or in some other way got up1 and be believed1 altho' the various accounts1 so far as they relate to miracles1 and other circumstances necessary to be taken into the account only for the sake of supporting the truth of those miracles1 should have been altogether fictitious1 and such parts only true as could be accounted for in a rational way1 without admitting the existence of miracles2 or that all those miracles1 or at least the most essential of them1 should have been literally and absolutely true8 ,the answer to these two propositions1 i4 e4 the above questions1 will1 and must1 decide the whole controversy4 ,now1 were it not for the internal evidences which the writings of the ,new ,testament do1 and ever will1 possess 7the external evidences falling so far short of being conclusive in my mind1 as ,i shall show more fully hereafter1 when ,i come to speak of those evidences7 ,i should still be inclined1 in my own understanding1 to reject the latter proposition in each of the above questions1 and adhere to the former4--,much of the external evidence1 ,i am very ready to admit is perfectly consistent with the supposed truth of the internal1 but after all1 in my humble opinion1 it does not quite come to the point4 ,but the internal evidence1 ,i confess1 ,i cannot withstand4 ,the more ,i investigate the subject1 the more ,i discover its force1 its clearness1 and its irresistibility2 and although the truth it unfolds is so august1 so momentous1 so astonishingly and inexpressibly sublime1 that it is with the profoundest and most reverential awe ,i speak1 when ,i acknowledge my faith in the divine origin of those testimonies2 yet1 as ,i cannot resist their force1 so ,i am obliged to acknowledge them true4 ,the illusion1 however1 if it be one1 ,i know is happifying to the mind2 but this is no good reason1 that ,i know of1 why we should either embrace it ourselves1 or propagate it in the world4 ,although ,i have endeavoured to calm my conscience1 while meditating on my doubts1 with the consideration that ,i am not accountable for the truth or the falsity of the scriptures2 yet1 ,i must confess1 this did not fully satisfy my mind2 and therefore ,i come to a determination to be more thoroughly persuaded of their truth1 if possible1 or else be more thoroughly convinced of their fallacy4 ,with this motive ,i entered on the present controversy2 and ,i feel very happy in its termination1 having been much strengthened in my faith thereby1 and humbly pray1 that should it ever come before the public1 it may be blest to the benefit of others4 #b;d4 ,what you have said on the divine mission1 c4 of the apostles is satisfactory4 ,for although it has not fully come to my question1 yet it has had the same good effect by convincing me that my question went a little beyond the bounds of reason2 for it was too much like asking a blind man how it is that other men see6 ,it is not reasonable to suppose that the apostles themselves could have informed persons who were uninspired to their understanding1 how or by what means1 they were inspired4 ,it was sufficient to demonstrate the fact by the works which they were enabled to perform1 7admitting the account true17 in the name of ,,jesus4 #c;d4 ,my argument respecting a hope of future existence has been extended rather beyond my design4 ,without taking up time to recapitulate1 ,i will only say ,i admit the truth of your argument on this subject2 neither do ,i see how it stands altogether in opposition to mine4 ,what ,i contend for is this4 ,the idea of non-existence1 i4e4 of existing only in ,god1 without retaining our individual consciousness of being1 does not1 like the idea of endless misery1 absolutely destroy our present comforts4 ,it only cuts short1 or else prevents1 future prospects4 ,if it can be demonstrated1 as ,i believe it can1 that ,god is good to the animal creation1 in giving them existence1 on the supposition1 that they have no future state1 ,i contend that man is equally1 if not more abundantly blessed1 even on the same supposition4--,but ,i never meant to contend that eternal life would not be still infinitely better1 according to our conceptions of good1 if true4 ,to state a case1 which will illustrate in some degree my ideas of this subject1 the following may come something nigh it2 viz4 ,i should be pleased with the idea of living1 say1 ten years1 in reference only to the blessing of this life1 although ,i might know ,i should die at that time1 provided that1 during the ten years1 ,i should enjoy the common blessings of life4 ,this does not prevent my desiring to live longer2 neither does a certain knowledge that ,i shall not prevent me from desiring to live1 nor from being pleased with the idea of living1 till that time4 ,but let me know for a certainty1 or1 which would be the same thing to me1 let me absolutely believe that ,i should live fifty years1 and that although the ten first would be attended with all the common blessings of life1 as usual1 yet that the remaining forty years1 which would be the remaining whole of my natural life1 ,i should be placed in the most distressed and aggravated circumstances1 of which ,i could possibly conceive2 now1 in reference to the whole fifty years1 could ,i desire to live8 ,no6 ,i say1 ,i rather choose instant death6 ,when ,i look around on the circumstances and condition of men1 ,i am so fully convinced that the aggregate of happiness so far overbalances the aggregate of misery1 that ,i am firmly of opinion1 yea1 ,i do not entertain the least possible doubt of its truth1 and therefore think ,i ever shall contend1 that this life is a blessing1 and we have abundant reason to be very thankful for it1 without the least reference to a future state4 ,but1 nevertheless1 ,i am very ready to admit1 that1 when futurity and immortality are taken into the account1 and are connected with the same view of the character of the ,deity1 these blessings are all extended and magnified to infinity4 ,but on the supposition that truth is any where connected with endless misery1 the scene is wholly changed4 ,on this supposition ,i am not reconciled to truth at all2 ,i can find nothing in my moral nature1 which ,i call good1 but what stands directly opposed to it2 ,hence1 the very brightest and most brilliant part of the picture is deformed by the awful idea2 it takes away all the pleasure of investigation1 and if this be truth1 my only desire and prayer to ,god1 is that ,i might be permitted to remain eternally ignorant of it6 ,it is my confidence therefore in the goodness of the truth1 and this only1 which has reconciled my mind to it4 ,you may contend that ,i have not obtained this confidence without the knowledge of divine revelation4 ,be that as it may2 on this supposition only ,i am reconciled1 and something must destroy this confidence before ,i can become unreconciled to truth4 ,i think now ,i must be fully understood1 and will therefore add no more on this subject4 #dth4 ,what you say under the fourth article is satisfactory4 ,errors1 no doubt1 may be1 and often are committed by applying instructions 'differently from their primary design4' #eth4 ,your remarks under the sixth article are very judicious4 ,much injury no doubt is often done to the truth of divine revelation by contending so tenaciously as some do for things1 which1 if true1 are not essential to its support4--,it is often the case that1 by trying to prove too much1 we weaken the evidence1 in the minds of many1 respecting the main thing we wish to establish4 ,hence1 the opposer1 not being able1 or else not disposed1 to make proper distinction1 considers it all of one piece2 and not being able to see the propriety of many things1 which are contended for with equal zeal1 sets the whole down as a fallacy4 #fth4 ,it is true1 ,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 counterbalanced4 ,this induced me to state that supposed absurdity in still more glaring colors1 with a hope that you would thereby be induced to take a review of your argument1 and not without some expectation1 that you would be able to see some defects in it4 ,but in this ,i have been disappointed4 ,you still hold on upon your argument1 and turn the error wholly on your friend4 ,but1 as this is the turning point1 ,i shall not blame you for straining every nerve1 and holding on upon every fibre which gives you the least possible support4 ,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 true2 7which1 by the way1 was what ,i meant by the first member of my criticism1 though not exactly so expressed27 for the moment this is admitted1 doubt and unbelief will soon contend that they were so convinced4 ,imagination may soon call up such evidence in the mind1 without supposing any thing miraculous1 and all the rest of the account may be supposed to be fictitious4 ,i did not mean to insinuate1 however1 that you have contended that the apostles must have seen ,jesus rise in order to be convinced of the fact4 ,i suppose their seeing him after he was risen was as full a demonstration to them as though they had seen him rise4 ,and if they could not have been convinced of its truth by any thing short of this1 then they could not be convinced by any thing short of the fact2 i4e4 what was the same to them as the fact4 ,the second member of my criticism1 viz4 ',if the fact did exist there is no evidence which can counterbalance it1' does not1 as ,i conceive1 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 it2' but it supposes that if the fact did exist1 no evidence could prove that it did not exist1 as it is always difficult to prove a negative1 and utterly impossible when the positive is true4--,hence my conclusion2 viz4 ,as the apostles were convinced of the truth of the resurrection1 which they could not have been only by evidence which could not have existed had not the fact been true1 the fact did exist4 ,how far does this criticism fall short of my other8 7for it is exactly what ,i meant by my other47 ,or how far does it go beyond your argument8 ,finally1 ,i cannot conceive of any evidence that could sufficiently support the fact that ,jesus who was crucified1 did actually rise from the dead1 if nothing could be brought to counterbalance it1 that could possibly admit of being counterbalanced2 and again3 ',thus we are brought to the suggestion1 that any evidence which could be sufficient to prove such a fact1 if no evidence appeared against it1 must be such as admits1 of no refutation4' ,unless it may be reasonably supposed that the apostles were not absolutely so guarded against an error of this kind as this argument suggests1 ,i know of no way to withstand its force4 ,and ,i am sure ,i feel no disposition to withstand it1 even against probability4 ,it is the improbability of the fact it goes to prove1 i4 e4 in my mind1 that ever induced me to oppose it4 ,i shall now take notice of the external evidence in support of the truth of divine revelation1 which you have quoted from ,paley in his view of the evidences of christianity4 ,in your reply to my seventh number1 you mentioned a quotation from the epistle of ,barnabas1 ,st4 ,paul's companion1 in the following words1 ',let us therefore1 beware lest it come upon us1 as it is written1 there are many called1 few chosen4' ,the object of this quotation is to prove that the gospel of ,matthew 7from which here is a quotation7 was written before this epistle1 and here appealed to as to a book of divine authority4 ,and although it is perfectly consistent with such a supposition1 yet there is great room to doubt whether such was the fact4 ,or1 at least1 there is room to conjecture that the gospel of ,matthew might have been written before this epistle1 and yet not written till after the destruction of ,jerusalem4 ,speaking of the writers of this period1 ,dr4 ,priestly observes#g ',the oldest work of the age1 if it had been genuine1 is that which goes by the name of ,the epistle of ,barnabas4 ,whoever was the author of this epistle1 it was probably written soon after the destruction of ,jerusalem4--,it abounds with interpretations of the ,old ,testament which discover more of imagination1 than judgement4' ,by this you will perceive that the authority of this epistle is doubtful4 ,i should also have gathered the same idea1 from what ,paley himself says1 whose work ,i have examined1 on this subject1 since ,i wrote my last number4 ,it might have been written at a much later period than what is supposed and palmed upon ,barnabas2 and therefore does not1 as was supposed1 absolutely prove that the gospel of ,matthew was written prior to the destruction of ,jerusalem4 ,it seems that christians of a later period were in the habit of palming works upon their predecessors2 or in other words1 writing in their name4 ,after speaking of the epistle of ,clemens1 ,priestly observes 7p4 #cja7 there is extant another epistle ascribed to this ,clemens1 but it is evidently spurious1 and was probably written in the middle of the third century4 ,several other writings were palmed upon him also1 especially the ,apostolical ,constitution and the ,clementine homilies4 ,the epistle of ,barnabas1 it seems1 is first quoted by ,clement of ,alexandria1 ,a4,d4 #aid4 ,this certainly gives room for my conjecture for aught which appears to the contrary1 it might have been written a whole century after the days of the apostles4 ,footnote #g3 ,ch4 ,hist4 vol4 i4 p4 #bjj4 ,the next which ,paley mentions is an epistle written by ,clement1 bishop of ,rome4 ,this is the same which ,priestly calls ,clemens4 ',this epistle1' he says1 'was held in the highest esteem by all christians1 and1 like the scriptures1 was publicly read in many churches4' ,in this epistle of ,clement1 you say1 'he quotes ,matt4 v4 #g4 xviii4 #f4' ,but how does he quote those passages8 ,not as the writing of ,matthew1 but as the words of 'our ,lord4' ,although this therefore1 as ,i have before suggested1 is perfectly consistent with the supposed truth1 it falls far short1 in my mind1 of proving that the gospel of ,matthew1 was written before this epistle4 ,clement or ,clemens might have written this by tradition even if he had never seen the gospel of ,matthew1 or any other4 ,it only proves that these words in the gospel and those in the epistle were indebted to the same original source1 viz4 the words of ,jesus4 ,i am not disposed to dispute1 however1 the genuineness of this epistle4 ',it is an earnest dissuasive1' says ,priestly1 'from the spirit of faction1 which appeared in the church of ,corinth1 and which1 indeed1 was sufficiently conspicuous when ,paul wrote his epistles4' ',another work of doubtful authority1' says ,priestly1 'is the ,shepherd of ,hermes1 by some thought to be that ,hermes who is mentioned by ,paul in his epistle to the ,romans2 but by others supposed to be either spurious1 or to have been written by a later ,hermes1 or rather ,hermes1 brother of ,pius1 bishop of ,rome1 about the year #adj4 ,whoever was the author of this work 7and though it was so much esteemed by many christians1 as to be publicly read in their churches7 it is certainly a very poor performance4' ,if this work therefore be of so late a date1 as1 according to this account1 it may be1 and1 from all which appears to the contrary1 we may presume it is1 as the first quotation of it is by ,irenaeus1 ,a4 ,d4 #agh1 it falls short of the proof we want4 ,the same observations will apply to the allusions to the gospels in the epistles of ,ignatius1 as was mentioned in regard to the epistle of ,clement4 ,they are not literal quotations1 and therefore might have been only traditions4 ,i consider them no certain proof that the gospels were written previous to this time1 though it is very natural to suppose that to have been the fact4 ,the same will apply to the epistle of ,polycarp1 as we know not exactly what was meant at that time by the scriptures2 neither do allusions to certain passages in the scriptures1 especially such as the words of ,jesus1 prove the existence of those scriptures at that time4 ,in the time of ,eusebius there were extant five books of ,papias1 bishop of ,hierapolis in ,syria1 of the interpretation of the divine oracles4 ',papias1' says ,priestly1 'was a great collector of the sayings of the apostles2 and one of the traditions preserved by him was that1 after the resurrection1 ,christ would reign upon earth a thousand years1 an opinion which1 from his authority1 was long respected by many4'#h ,papias1 it seems1 is the first who speaks of the gospels by name1 and he mentions only ,matthew and ,mark4 ,that all the gospels1 however1 existed in his day1 and also bore the names which they now do1 ,i should not be disposed to dispute2 neither is there any thing to contradict the idea of their being written by the persons reputed to be the authors of them4 ,footnote #h3 ,ch4 ,hist4 vol4 i4 p4 #bjc ,euseb4 ,hist4 ,lib4 iii4 ,cap4 #ci p4 #ace4 ,but1 supposing a few of these first bishops had taken it into ther heads1 having succeeded so well1 during a little respite from persecution1 in consequence of those troublesome times at the destruction of ,jerusalem1 as to get appointed to their respective offices1 and thinking it would lead greatly to their future success1 ,i say1 supposing they had taken it into their heads to write the four gospels and the acts of the apostles themselves1 embracing all the traditions1 which they knew1 of the apostles1 dressed up in the figurative style in which those things1 even from the first1 had been reported1 together with many fictions of their own4 ,and that they did write these books in the name of the apostles2 who would be likely1 or would be able1 to contradict them8 ,or supposing1 without any previous concert1 some one should have written the gospel of ,matthew2 another1 after having seen it1 should write one in the name of ,mark2 a third1 who had seen them both1 should write that of ,luke1 and the acts of the apostles2 and a fourth should write that of ,john4--,these1 of course1 would make their first appearance at different times1 and in different parts of the country2 or1 in other words1 in different countries4 ,some story or other might have been got up1 in regard to their first discovery1 which should go currently with the common people1 and which1 after the works were received as canonical1 would of course be done away4 ,as a justification of the above hypothesis 7which ,i am very sensible is not without its difficulties7 in addition to what have said in regard to the writings palmed upon ,clemens1 ,i will mention the following from ,priestly's ,ch4 ,hist4 vol4 ii4 p4 #dab4 ,it appears to have been a quotation from ,sozomen1 by ,socrates1 ,lib4 vii4 chap4 #ai1 p4 #cjg4 ',the revelation of ,peter1 which is rejected as a spurious book by the ancients1 is read once every year in some churches in ,palestine on good ,friday1 which is a religious fast in commemoration of our ,lord's sufferings4 ,the book that is called the revelation of the apostle ,paul1 which was unknown to the ancients1 is greatly commended by many of the monks4 ,some say that this book was first found in the reign of ,theodosius4 ,for they say that in the house of ,paul at ,tarsus1 there was a marble chest in a subterraneous place1 in which this book was deposited1 and that it was discovered by a particular revelation4' ,any work of this kind1 got up at so late a period as that of the reign of ,theodosius1 would not be likely to be generally received among the churches2 yet if it could be received by any1 why might not a similar work1 or similar works1 which made their appearance so soon after the apostles1 as might well be supposed to have been written by them and when too1 the churches were few in number1 without the least suspicion of fraud1 have been received by all8 ,or if any fraud had been suspected1 yet1 believing in the main thing which all these were designed to support1 those frauds whatever they were1 might have been considered really pious6 ,but1 sir1 you will perceive that ,i am not altogether pleased1 nor fully satisfied1 with this argument4 ,i know it has its difficulties2 but the question is1 whether it has greater than the one which it is brought to oppose8 ,the question is not1 whether these things look probable8 ,for ,i acknowledge they do not look probable4 ,but the question is1 which is the most incredible2 either that the above hypothesis1 or something like it1 should be true2 or else that the extraordinary miracles1 related in the books referred to1 should be true8 ,if there were no better evidence in favor of the miracles than that which ,i have been examining1 ,i should be obliged to decide against the latter1 let me think what ,i might respecting the former4 ,the most that we can say of this testimony is1 it does not contradict the truth of those histories1 but1 so far as it goes1 it is perfectly consistent with the truth of the main question4 ,the weight of this testimony therefore1 whatever it is1 seems to be on the side of the truth of christianity4 ,but what carries the most conviction to my mind is not who wrote those books2 not the manner in which they have been handed down to us1 nor in which they can now be traced to the apostles2 but the manner in which the story itself is told4 ,it must be confessed that1 excepting a few things1 which may be supposed to have been early interpolations1 it carries in it all the internal marks of ,,truth4 ,when this is admitted1 we must also admit the propriety of bringing in these external evidences as auxiliaries2 and when we find that they also1 instead of being contradictory to1 are perfectly consistent with the supposed truth1 they add not a little to the weight of testimony4 ,hence we find that our faith is strengthened by the consideration of circumstances1 which would not have been sufficient1 in themselves alone1 to have originated1 or produced1 that faith4 ,the question may be still asked1 why do you now believe8 ,to which ,i give this plain and simple answer4 ,it is because1 notwithstanding the incredibility of the miracles of ,christ1 and of the apostles1 and the resurrection1 the truth of which these miracles go to confirm and substantiate2 yet1 the idea that this story should ever have been told in the manner it is1 without having truth for its foundation1 in spite of all my incredibility1 is still more incredible6 ,and it is my humble opinion that whoever will give themselves the trouble1 to pay the same attention to the subject1 must be of the same opinion3 for1 ,i am inclined to think that no one has been more predisposed to unbelief4 ,not that ,i ever felt any real opposition to the truth of the holy scriptures1 as ,i now understand them1 but ,i did not wish to be deceived4 ,i had rather that my hopes and expectations should never be raised1 than to have them raised upon a fruitless or spurious foundation4 ,but after all1 it will be perceived that ,i make no pretensions to a miraculous1 or mysterious1 conversion4 ,my conversion1 whatever it is1 is altogether rational4 ,it grows out of the evidence which ,i plainly have before my eyes4 ,and it is my humble opinion that those who pretend to such conversions ought to be able to confirm the same by miracles1 the same as the truth was first confirmed2 and unless they can do it1 it ought to be considered as nothing more than mere pretension4--,according to the ideas of some1 and of much too of that which is termed orthodox1 every conversion is as much a miracle as was the resurrection of ,christ4 ,but as this is a fact1 which if true1 is entirely out of sight of the unconverted1 and of which they can form no conception1 nor judge of it in any sense whatever1 is it not reasonable that they should have a demonstration of its truth1 by some fact1 of the truth of which they can judge1 that they may know that the work is of ,god8 ,and until we have such demonstration1 may we not consider all such pretensions to be of men8 ,with these remarks ,i hasten to a ,,conclusion4 ,in taking leave of this subject1 considering it probable that these letters will1 at some future time1 come before the public1 it is but just that ,i should more fully avow my motives in this controversy4 ,you will have perceived1 all along1 the ground on which ,i stood4 ,i have endeavoured to personate an honest inquirer after truth2 but one who was filled with doubts concerning every thing of which there is not positive demonstration4 ,how far ,i have acted up to such a character1 you and the public can best judge4 ,i thought1 however1 ,i should be the most likely to do this1 by bringing those objections1 and these only1 which1 at one time or another1 have occupied my own mind4 ,but1 that the controversy might not appear as a mere farce1 or like a man raising objections against himself 7in which case he generally takes care to raise none but what he thinks he can answer7 and that ,i might engage all your interest and energy on the subject1 ,i have carried the idea1 through the whole1 both by my letters and by my private conversation with you during the time 7as you very well know7 that those objections were now laboring in my mind with all their force4 ,i have therefore endeavoured to dispute every inch of ground1 and give way only as ,i found myself obliged to give way1 by the force of your arguments4 ,that ,i have not acted my part better must be imputed to want of ability and not to want of good will4 ,i have endeavoured to throw every block in your way which ,i could think of1 without deviating from the character which ,i had assumed2 and that ,i have not made your task more arduous1 is because ,i did not see how ,i could do it without betraying a manifest dishonesty on my part4 ,the result is such as ,i anticipated4 ,my real motive must be my only apology for the part ,i have taken4 ,you know that no work of the kind has ever been really and seriously attempted by any one who is avowedly of our order2 that our religious opponents are continualiy throwing the gauntlet of aspersions at us1 as being nothing more than mere pretenders to christianity1 but in reality1 ,deists in disguise4 ,to repel1 therefore1 those charges1 as well as to let the unbelieving world know our views on this subject1 ,i thought a work of this kind was really needed4 ,and it appeared to me that the work1 in the first place1 would be more likely to be read1 and1 in the end1 more sure of success1 to have it come forth by the way of controversy1 than what it would in any other way4 ,it is true1 ,i may not have brought all the objections which some would wish to have brought2 but if what ,i have brought are so far removed as not to remain a serious obstacle in the mind of candid readers 7which ,i conclude will be the case1 with others1 as it is with me7 then all objections may be as easily removed4 ,that this work may be an instrument1 in the hands of ,god1 of removing the prejudices from the minds of many of our religious opponents1 of strengthening the faith of many who are wavering1 and1 as it were1 halting between two opinions1 and of calling up the attention of those who1 like ,gallis1 'care for none of these things1' is the sincere prayer of3 ,yours in the bonds of the gospel4 ,a4 ,,kneeland4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,ix4 ,dear sir1 and brother1--,a careful perusal of your tenth number has given me much satisfaction1 and seems to suggest that my reply may be general4 ,you discover the rational ground on which your scruples are removed1 and state no difficulty that you do not surmount4 ,i agree with you1 that the gloomy doctrine of eternal misery1 when by the imagination it becomes incorporated into the system of divine revelation1 reverses the whole scene1 and renders that1 which in its divine and native beauty possesses the most powerful attractions1 the most deformed picture that ever repelled the human affections4 ,it is this heaven-dishonouring doctrine1 so repugnant to and irreconcilable with the known goodness of ,god manifested to all nations in his divine providence1 that has1 more than any thing else1 so buffeted all the best feelings of man1 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 ascribed4 ,but let the scriptures be once considered as free from the above horrible sentiment as in reality they are1 they will then perfectly correspond with the demonstrations of universal benevolence and grace1 rendered conspicuous in all the ways of ,god2 they will also compare as a perfect transcript of that inward light and love which renders man an image of his ever adorable ,creator4 ,as the christian church emerges from the city of mystery ,babylon and its suburbs1 and advances into the light of the wisdom of ,god1 the doctrine above mentioned loses its influence and its votaries2 nor will it be in the power of our self-styled orthodox clergy1 long to chain the public mind to such a forbidding absurdity4 ,nothing discovers the deplorable state of depravity1 to which the human mind is subject1 by force of tradition1 more than the unnatural and absurd notion of enhancing future bliss1 by beholding fellow creatures of the nearest connexion in a state of indescribable misery1 there to remain time without end6 ,it seems to us astonishing that parents were ever capable of causing their children to pass through the fire to an idol1 but what is this compared with what our pious fathers and mothers have believed concerning their children's sufferings in the eternal world1 for the glory of that ,god who is the ,father of the spirits of all flesh8 ,tradition makes the most horrible things acceptable to the mind which becomes blind to their deformity1 and even the most detestable things1 desirable1 by a certain feigned sanctity which it attaches to them4 ,but the charm once broken1 the rational mind becomes transformed into another image1 totally different1 and entirely repugnant to the things which it before venerated as divine4 ,you very justly remark1 that if truth be in any way connected with endless misery1 you are not reconciled to it2 but the time has been when you and ,i viewed this doctrine as an essential article of the faith of the gospel4 ,what an absurdity6 ,eternal misery an essential article of the faith of a ,saviour6 ,and this very moment there are thousands who set their feet on this vagary1 believing it to be the only rock of safety4 ,but we have reason to be thankful for our happy deliverance from such a pernicious tradition2 a tradition which has poisoned the doctrine of the church1 and hardened the hearts of ,christian professors to such a degree1 that cruelty of the worst kind has become habitual4 ,will our pious clergy contend against this charge8 ,let them account then for all the persecutions1 the anathemas1 the hangings and the burnings1 which owe their origin to this doctrine of eternal misery4 ,let them account for their own sermons1 in our day1 which sentence age1 middle age1 and infancy to endless torture1 for offences they never heard of1 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 born1 and of whom they never had heard one word in the land of the living6 ,this they as constantly preach as they contend that man must be sensible of his fall in ,adam1 of the justice of his being eternally miserable for that offence1 and of pardon through the atonement of ,christ in this life1 or be miserable forever hereafter2 for thousands in all ages have lived and died who never heard this absurd story while on earth4 ,sir1 we have no reason to wonder that religion is so little set by1 while it is held up in such a character4 ,let it put on the mild form of the meek and humble ,jesus1 let it appear in the mercy of him who said the son of man came not to destroy men's lives but to save them1 let it be represented by its own similitude1 by pouring oil and wine into the wounds of an enemy1 let it be heard when it declares in apostolic language1 ,god will have all men to be saved1 and to come unto the knowledge of the truth1 let its language be strictly regarded when it informs us that charity is greater than faith or hope1 then it will be pure and undefiled before ,god and the ,father2 it will engage the best affections of the human heart1 and call to its devotion all the energies of man4 ,who can count the damages which have been occasioned by the preposterous error of setting up faith as a criterion of charity8 ,creed makers and creed defenders surely must have been averse to ,st4 ,paul's sentiment concerning the superiority of charity over faith2 for they have sat charity at defiance with undefined items in their creeds1 which were acknowledged mysterious in their own minds1 and evidently repugnant to reason in the judgment of those who were proscribed as heretics by their authority4 ,relative to my quotations from the epistle of ,barnabas and others1 your argument1 as far as it is intended to lessen our belief in the genuineness of these epistles1 has no direct bearing on the argument which ,i endeavoured to support by them2 for it makes no difference who wrote those epistles1 it is their containing quotations from the ,new ,testament which gives them the consequence for which they were quoted4 ,in reply to what you say respecting ,clement's not quoting ,mat4 v4 #g1 xviii4 #f4 as the writing of ,st ,matthew1 but as the words of our ,lord1 ,i here set down ,paley's answer4 ,it may be said1 that1 as ,clement hath not used words of quotation1 it is not certain that he refers to any book whatever4 ,the words of ,christ1 which he has put down1 he might himself have heard from the apostles1 or might have received them through the ordinary medium of oral tradition4 ,this has been said2 but that no such inference can be drawn from the absence of words of quotation is proved by the three following considerations3--,first1 that ,clement in the very same manner1 namely1 without any mark of reference1 uses a passage now found in the epistle to the ,romans2#i which passage from the peculiarity of the words which compose it1 and from their order1 it is manifest that he must have taken from the book4 ,the same remark may be repeated of some very singular sentiments in the epistle to the ,hebrews4 ,secondly1 that there are many sentences of ,st4 ,paul's epistle to the ,corinthians standing in ,clement's epistle without any sign of quotation1 which yet are certainly quotations2 because it appears that ,clement had ,st4 ,paul's epistle before him1 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 ,paul4' ,thirdly1 that this method of adopting words of scripture1 without reference or acknowledgment1 was1 as will appear in the sequel1 a method in general use among the most ancient christian writers4 ,these analogies not only repel the objection1 but cast the presumption on the other side2 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 them4#aj ,footnote #i3 ,rom4 i4 #bi4 ,footnote #aj3 ,paley's ,evidences1 p4 #aji1 #aaj4 ,i think1 if we take into consideration the authority of external evidence1 especially if we duly consider how easily ,celsus couid have overthrown the gospels1 if they had not been genuine1 it must be acknowledged sufficient1 even of itself1 to establish any matter of fact however important1 allowing no natural improbability were involved in the fact4 ,and this is as much as we want of external evidence1 of the sort refered to4 ,but as even the internal evidences of scripture would be insufficient to support their authority without the concurrence of external evidence1 so would the external be found wanting without the internal4 ,but these together are abundantly sufficient to establish the credibility of this gospel1 which is1 like every thing else of the work and wisdom of ,god1 the wonder and admiration of the believing soul4 ,the purity of your motives in writing on the subject of our discussion1 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 faith4 ,i regret that my almost constant employ on other subjects and other duties1 has afforded so little time as ,i have been able to devote to your queries1 which1 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 correspondence4 ,and there is still another circumstance which seems to operate as an objection to the publishing of these letters1 viz4 the want of extension of argument in many instances1 which would have been attended to1 if the work had been written for the conviction of common readers1 which was not thought to be necessary for the benefit of the mover of the queries4 ,however1 as all human productions are imperfect and ought so to be considered1 and especially those from your humble servant1 ,i am willing to appear to some disadvantage if any considerable advantage may thereby result to the cause of ,jesus ,christ our ,lord4 ,i cannot close this valedictory epistle without a solemn acknowledgement of heart felt gratitude to the merciful disposer of all events1 for the ample evidence which his providence and grace have given of the truth of our religion1 especially when consider the glorious hope set before us2 and am permitted to anticipate the promised era when there shall be no more death1 neither sorrow nor crying2 when there shall be no more pain2 but when tears shall be wiped from all faces1 and the rebuke of the nations removed from off all the earth1 and every creature in heaven1 and on the earth1 and under the earth1 and such as are in the sea shall harmoniously ascribe blessing1 and glory1 and honor unto him who sitteth upon the throne and unto the lamb forever and ever1 ,i loose myself in the contemplation of the transporting scene4 ,to conclude1 as you1 my brother1 have laboured together with your fellow servant1 to look into1 and examine these things which belong to the kingdom of righteousness1 and as we have been favoured with mutual satisfaction in these researches1 may it please the ,great ,head of the church still to hold us in his hand1 still to engage us in his blessed cause1 and render our mutual labours promotive of his grace among men4 ,and however distant from each other it may best suit the captain of our salvation to place us1 may it be his pleasure to continue our fellowship in the bonds of the gospel4 ,yours affectionately1 ,h4 ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,a ,,series ,,of ,,letters1 ,,between ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,buckminster1 ,d4,d4 ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,walton1 ,a4,m4 ,,pastors ,,of ,,congregational ,,churches ,,in ,,portsmouth1 ,n4,h4 ,,and ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 ,a ,,series ,,of ,,letters ,,letter ,i4 ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,buckminster ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 ,,portsmouth1 ,,dec4 #bh1 #ahji4 ,dear ,sir1--,at the close of the interview which we had at my house1 some little time since1 you expressed a wish to live in habits of friendship with the ministers of this town1 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 religion1 demand of me2 with this profession1 without its fruits1 my conscience is not satisfied4 ,it was neither friendship nor piety that dictated that early question1 ,am ,i my brother's keeper8--,there is a reciprocal responsibility among mankind1 both for the interest of time and eternity4 ,were ,i to see you or any others exposing themselves to danger1 or running into situations that ,i apprehend would be prejudicial and destructive1 friendship would require me to warn and admonish1 and endeavour to restrain2 and can ,i support my pretensions to this principle in withholding my warning and admonition1 while ,i am verily persuaded that the present tendency and final issue of that system of sentiments which you have embraced1 and which you have come among us to advocate and to support1 will expose you1 and those that embrace and build upon it1 to danger and distress1 with which no temporal calamity or ruin can bear any sort of comparison8 ,i know not what system of ,universalism you have embraced or advocate1 nor is it of any material consequence in my view2 ,i presume ,i do not mistake or injure you in supposing that you publicly preach and advocate the final salvation of all mankind1 their restoration and association with ,jesus ,christ in realms of glory4 ,whatever human ingenuity or plausible and sophistic reasoning may do with respect to either of these systems1 they each and all of them are1 in my view1 destitute of divine authority1 and have not a thus saith the ,lord1 for their support4 ,there may be some little difference in the present tendency and effect of these different systems upon the present conduct of men1 and so upon the interest of society2 but in their general influence1 and in their final results1 they meet in the same point1 and will be attended with the same dreadful consequences4 ,they are neither of them true1 and so can have no effect in quickening into life or sanctifying the soul1 for it is the spirit that quickeneth1 and the truth that sanctifieth2 they may exhilarate1 please1 and produce triumph2 but it will be a triumphing that is short1 and a joy that is but for a moment2 for ,god1 to my apprehension1 has been so far from giving any countenance to either of those systems1 that he hath long ago pronounced them false1 and their tendency destructive--these are his words3,because with lies ye have made the hearts of the righteous sad1 whom ,i have not made sad1 and strengthened the hands of the wicked1 that he should not return from his wicked way by promising him life4 ,but it is not my intention to enter into a dispute upon this subject1 neither to enlarge upon arguments to support my own sentiments1 nor to disprove yours2 ,i have no apprehension that any good would result from it2 it would be a tax upon time that might be better employed4 ,when persons have adopted a system and are engaged in its support1 when the pride of peculiarity or the influence of party views are enlisted as auxiliaries1 there is little ground to hope for a conviction of its errors by formal disputation1 however temperately conducted2 nothing will effect a change of views and feelings but that still small voice which induced the prophet to wrap his face in his mantle4 ,this voice is more likely to attend our calm1 retired reflections1 than the perusal of arguments that tend to disprove what we have been accustomed to advocate and support4 ,the object of this letter is not to revile1 to censure1 nor to dispute2 but1 in friendship and affection1 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 judgment1 and realize yourself called upon to give an account of your stewardship4 ,i am not disposed1 my dear sir1 to impeach your sincerity and honesty4 ,i know how far men may be deluded and deceived4 ,i am disposed to believe that you conscientiously think the sentiments you advocate are true4 ,but remember1 dear sir1 this does not make them true1 nor secure you from the dreadful consequences in which they may issue4 ,with all this moral sincerity and uprightness1 if you cease to warn the wicked1 that he turn from his wicked way 7and how can this be more effectually done than by leading him to expect final1 everlasting happiness7 his blood will be required at your hands4 ,the apostle ,paul most conscientiously persecuted the christians and declared to the council before whom he was arraigned1 that he had lived in all good conscience before ,god till that day4 ,he verily thought he ought to do many things contrary to the name of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 yet his persuasion did not acquit him from guilt1 nor would it have shielded him from destruction had he not been renewed to repentance and faith in ,christ1 while as yet ,christ was in the way with him4 ,christ said to his disciples1 ,the time will come when whosoever killeth you will think he doth ,god's service2 and he has added1 many will say unto me1 in that day1 ,lord1 ,lord1 have we not prophesied in thy name1 and in thy name cast out devils1 and in thy name done many wonderful works8 then will ,i profess unto them1 ,i never knew you1 depart from me ye that work iniquity4 ,what must be your situation in the day of retribution if the system you advocate should in final evidence prove false8 of which ,i have not the least shadow of doubt upon my mind1 and therefore have all the forebodings for my erring and deceived fellow mortals which may be supposed to be the result of such conviction4--,i cannot cease to warn and to entreat you to consider1 friendship forbids1 my withholding the voice of warning and adjuration2 and both duty and respect to my own safety require me to endeavour to save you from the issue1 of which ,i have such awful forebodings4 ,we must both stand before the ,son of man1 and each one must give an account of himself and of his stewardship to ,god4--,from our connextion here1 there will probably be some interest in each other in that day2 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 vision1 and all the hopes built upon it will be like the spider's web and like the giving up of the ghost1 that you should be able to say1 ,i never warned you of this issue1 nor admonished you of your danger4 ,i know not with what sentiments you will receive this address1 nor what use you may make of it2 my concern is with the sentiments and spirit that dictate it4 ,i think they are such as will induce me continually to pray that you may not pierce yourself through with many sorrows1 nor be left to mourn at the last4 ,your friend and humble servant1 ,j4 ,,buckminster4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,ii4 ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,buckminster4 ,,portsmouth1 ,,jan',y4 #a1 #ahaj4 ,rev4 ,sir1--,the receipt of your affectionate1 friendly address1 bearing date ,december #bh1 #ahji1 is gratefully acknowledged1 and although ,i have not words fully adequate to express the satisfaction ,i feel arising from the circumstance and spirit of your epistle1 ,i cannot be willing to suppress my feelings so much as not to notice1 that it is with uncommon pleasure that ,i appreciate your favour1 which1 ,i am happy to acknowledge1 is a demonstration of that friendship first reciprocated at your house1 and secondly recapitulated in your epistle4 ,this friendship founded1 as you justly observe1 in the law of our common nature and in the spirit and principles of the christian religion1 is such an inexhaustible treasure of moral riches that the aggregate sum of earthly wealth is poverty in the comparison4 ,this friendship1 sir1 being founded on such principles1 will undoubtedly last as long as such principles remain2 and if you are my real friend on the principle of the law of our common nature1 so long as you possess the law of our common nature1 you will be my real friend2 and if you are my real friend1 on the principles and spirit of the christian religion1 so long as you possess the principles and spirit of the christian religion1 you will remain my real friend4 ,and if ,i be1 as ,i trust in ,god ,i am1 your real friend1 on those imperishable principles1 ,i shall continue to possess this friendship for you so long as ,i possess those principles4 ,if these observations on friendship be correct1 as ,i conceive they are1 you will know why ,i so highly prize the treasure1 especially when ,i find it in a man capable of exercising it to so much advantage as your learning1 ability and experience enable you to do4 ,you justly observe that neither piety nor friendship dictated the question1 ,am ,i my brother's keeper8 ,how different must have been the spirit which dictated that question from the spirit of him who saith1 ,i will declare thy name unto my brethren1 my mother's children were angry with me1 they made me the keeper of the vineyards1 but mine own vineyard have ,i not kept8 ,your next observation is highly worthy1 not only of general consideration1 but of particular notice2 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 observation2 your words are1 there is a reciprocal responsibility among mankind both for the interest of time and eternity4 ,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 principles1 so when it is acknowledged that a reciprocal responsibility exists among mankind for their eternal interest1 it is evident that this reciprocal responsibility is eternal4 ,should any conviction of mind render it necessary that we give up the idea of the eternal nature of this reciprocal responsibility1 that conviction would drive the idea of eternal interest1 predicated on such responsibility from our mind4 ,how noble are your sentiments communicated in this observation6 ,how rich must you and ,i feel in the enjoyment of such reciprocal principles and in the consequent interest arising from them2 not only for time1 but for eternity6 ,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 destructive1 friendship would require me to warn and admonish1 and to endeavour to restrain4 ,these expressions1 sir1 illustrate the good fruits of real friendship1 and as our ,saviour has told us that the tree is known by its fruits1 so we are to distinguish between real and pretended friends by their fruits4 ,suppose1 sir1 we move the position a little1 and say1 notwithstanding you warn me and endeavour to restrain me from danger1 ,i persist in my error1 and my calamity comes upon me2 in this situation you come and tell me that you are heartily glad that ,i am tormented1 and that you are glad to think there is no probability of my misery's being any less2 that you feel no pity for me now2 could ,i look back and remember your warning1 and believe that you warned me out of real friendship8 ,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 principles4 ,it is no less the characteristic of real friendship to endeavour to meliorate than to preserve from sufferings4 ,on observing your admonitions1 and believing you sincere in them1 ,i am led to say1 that had ,i such a friend as you are who possessed the means for making me eternally happy1 ,i might entertain no doubt of obtaining the inestimable enjoyment2 nor do ,i view you1 sir1 less a friend because you do not possess a power which is equal to the putting of all your friendly desires into full execution1 but will acknowledge you my worthy friend1 and accept the warnings which you give me against the system of doctrine which1 as you say1 ,i have embraced and come among this people to advocate1 as a token of that friendship which would1 if connected with suitable power1 place me out of all final danger1 or which would cause you to rejoice exceedingly1 had you the evidence to believe that one who has such power possesses even stronger desires for my eternal welfare than you do4 ,you inform me that you do not know what system of ,universalism ,i have embraced4 ,permit me1 sir1 to inform you1 though you do not request it1 that ,i have embraced the system of ,universalism1 which ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob embraced1 in believing ,god1 who said1 ,in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed2 and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed4 ,if this faith of ,abraham were imputed to him for righteousness1 it must be a true faith1 and if true1 worthy to be embraced by all nations and families of the earth1 without the exception of an individual4 ,permit me further to observe that ,i disclaim all authors as divine guides1 except the divine author of those scriptures which cannot be broken4 ,you rightly apprehend me in supposing that ,i believe and teach that all mankind will be saved1 restored and associated with ,christ ,jesus in realms of glory2 but ,i do not believe as you intimate1 that human ingenuity1 or plausible and sophistic reasoning are necessary to the support of this doctrine among men2 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 false2 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 transpire1 in which ,i might be justly thus charged4 ,although in order to please myself1 ,i might explain your meaning as directed against some others of the advocates of the heavenly gospel of universal salvation2 ,i could find but little satisfaction in thus endeavoring to avoid any reproach which is directed against the true disciples of my divine ,master4 ,you inform me that as universal salvation is not true1 it can have no effect in quickening into life or of sanctifying the soul1 for it is the spirit that quickeneth1 and the truth1 which sanctifies4 ,if1 dear sir1 you do not believe that the spirit of salvation quickeneth into life1 would it not have been proper to inform me what spirit does8 ,and ,i should have highly esteemed an illustration of the evidence which you have1 that the truth1 that mankind will remain eternally unsanctified1 will sanctify the soul6 ,i fully believe that as far as any proposition is capable of being proved from the written word1 or of being demonstrated by logical reasoning from acknowledged facts1 the doctrine of the salvation of all men is capable of being proved and substantially maintained4 ,does it require human ingenuity or plausible and sophistic reasoning to make it appear from the scriptures that ,jesus ,christ1 by the grace of ,god1 tasted death for every man2 that he gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time2 that he is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world2 that it is the will of ,god that all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth2 that he worketh all things after the council of his own will8--,does it require this ingenuity1 c4 to substantiate from the written word that the promise to ,abraham will be fulfilled1 and that all nations whom ,god hath made shall come and worship before him and glorify his name2 that ,jesus will in the fulness of time1 reconcile all things unto himself1 whether they be things in heaven or things on earth1 or things under the earth2 that he will gather together in one all things in ,christ both which are in heaven and which are on earth1 even in him8 ,if it be an acknowledged fact that ,god will bless all the families of the earth in ,christ1 that all nations which ,god hath made shall come and worship before him and glorify his name1 that ,jesus gave himseif a ransom for all men to be testified in due time1 that he did by the grace of ,god taste death for every man1 that he will have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth1 that he hath made known the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself1 that in the dispensation of the fulness of times1 he would gather together in one1 all things in ,christ1 both which are in heaven and which are on earth1 and that he worketh all things after the council of his own will1 then the doctrine of the salvation of all men is as fully acknowledged as language can possibly express1 or my error lies in not understanding the force of words and sentences4 ,by what method1 sir1 would it be proper for me to express my surprise at your introducing the words recorded in the #acth chapter of ,ezekiel1 and at the #bb;d verse1 as a testimony against the doctrine of universal salvation8 ,because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad1 whom ,i have not made sad1 and strengthened the hands of the wicked that he should not turn from his wicked way by promising him life2--,must ,i suppose1 sir1 that you believe1 that the lies mentioned in this quotation were promises of life in the seed of ,abraham1 in whom all the families of the earth are to be blessed8 ,i cannot believe this of a man of your understanding1 and yet cannot conceive why you adduce this passage as proof that ,christ is not the life of all men4 ,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 established1 by which they made void the law8 ,and what does the ,lord say that he would finally do in this case8--,see verse #bc;d1 ,therefore ye shall see no more vanity1 nor divine divinations2 for ,i will deliver my people out of your hands1 and ye shall know that ,i am the ,lord4 ,this is very far from saying that they should be endlessly miserable4 ,christ is the ,lord our righteousness1 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 religion3 and ,i would acknowledge this passage justly urged against the doctrine which ,i should vindicate1 should ,i set up any thing but ,christ and him crucified1 on which to depend for life and salvation2 but you leave this quotation as if you had done what you hardly meant to do1 by observing that you do not intend to enter into a dispute on this subject1 neither to enlarge on arguments to support your own sentiments nor to disprove mine4 ,you think that no good would result from the argument however temperately conducted it might be1 assigning the pride of peculiarity1 and the influence of party views as sufficient barriers to prevent success4 ,in this observation may ,i say without offending1 sir1 you are inexplicit1 or wanting in propriety1 and premature in application4 ,temperate men are not governed in their religious researches by the pride of peculiarity nor the influence of party views1 and a faithful trial ought to have been made in order to convince of error before the charge of pride of peculiarity1 or the influence of party views1 could with propriety have been made4 ,i am disposed to believe when persons are candid and temperate in an investigation1 they generally obtain light and edification4 ,i will say for myself1 notwithstanding ,i highly prize your solemn warnings1 and believe them as proceeding from the most commendable sentiments of friendship1 ,i should have been much pleased if you had accompanied them with the best and most forcible arguments of which you are master1 against the doctrine which you are disposed to say in so many words it not true4 ,the small still voice to which you recommended my attention has never told me that ,christ was not the ,saviour of all men4 ,may we not suppose that this voice is uniform in its testimony8 ,do tell me1 sir1 if that voice ever told you that it was not the will of ,god that all men should be saved6 ,is it not by the influence of the spirit of this voice that you pray for the salvation of all men8 ,and would this small still voice tell you that it is not ,god's will to save all men1 and then induce you to pray for all men8 ,if ,i be not a stranger to this heavenly voice which teaches me to wrap myself in my mantle1 the ,lord my righteousness1 it influences me to pray in faith1 nothing doubting1 for the salvation of all men4 ,in your truly affecting entreaty you direct my mind to the day of judgment when ,i am called to give an account of my stewardship1 and ask what my situation must be1 if the system ,i advocate should in final evidence1 prove false8 ,i have seriously thought on this question2 and this is my conclusion3 ,my judge will know that ,i am1 in this instance1 honest and sincere2 he will know how hardly ,i wrestled against his written word in order to avoid believing that he would save all men1 and he will know that my deception was in understanding his word as a simple1 honest man would understand a plain testimony void of scholastic dress4 ,in this case ,i am willing to throw myself on the mercy of the judge4 ,on the other hand1 dear sir1 ,i have made a calculation too4 ,suppose ,i adhere to your testimony1 that the doctrine ,i believe is not true1 and abandon it as a heresy1 preach it down to the utmost of my ability1 and the doctrine at last1 when you and ,i stand before that judge who knows the hearts of all men1 should in final evidence of the law and prophets1 prove true1 of which ,i have not the least shadow of doubt in my mind1 with what a blush must ,i give up my account6 ,my judge who has suffered every thing for me1 asks me1 why did you deny me1 forsake my cause1 and use the abilities which ,i gave you to preach that dishonourable doctrine that ,i did not redeem all men1 or that ,i would not finally reconcile all men to myself1 and cause them all to love me heartily in bliss and glory8 ,i1 abashed beyond description1 must answer1 a man1 who1 ,i conceived was my friend and who preached that ,god my ,saviour1 never intended to save all men1 told me the doctrine ,i preached was not true6 ,o1 how would my soul thrill with grief when a look1 such as was cast on ,peter after he denied his ,lord1 should accompany this question1 and who told you in the first place it was true8 ,i appeal to the searcher of hearts for the sincerity of my soul when ,i say1 my dear sir1 ,i feel an uncommon desire to cultivate friendship with you1 and were it possible for me to gratify you in any thing that should be consistent with my duty to my ,god1 ,i think ,i should not shrink from the service2 but should the multitude1 whose hearts have been made joyful in the salvation of all men1 become so blinded as to renounce the sentiments1 ,i must remain unshaken1 until more than human testimony stands against the doctrine4 ,i am very sensible of the propriety of the observation1 that the sincerity of a belief does not prove the thing believed to be true2 for though ,i cannot say so much as you do1 viz4 that ,i know how far men may be deluded and deceived1 yet ,i am sensible that men may be deceived and yet be honest2 and it is on this ground1 that ,i have charity for those who believe and preach different from me4 ,towards the conclusion of your epistle1 you intimate that you wish not to have me say at last1 when my doctrine issues in my mourning1 that you had not warned me4 ,be assured1 sir1 if ,i may be so much at my own disposal at the last day1 that ,i will not say1 you did not warn me2 but if my doctrine be false at last1 and you are asked why you did not prove from the written word to my understanding that ,i was in an error1 will you say in answer1 that it would have been such a tax upon time1 that you could not afford it1 that you could not or did not wish to8 ,as the passages which you quote on your last page are designed to illustrate what ,i believe to be a fact1 ,i forbear1 at this time1 an illustration of them1 in which1 the impropriety of the common mode of understanding them might be made to appear4 ,should you be disposed to attempt to correct my ideas in this epistle1 or my doctrine in general1 by turning to the great touchstone1 the law and the testimony1 be as ample1 sir1 as your inclination and opportunity will admit4 ,every argument shall be duly attended to with prayerful solicitude to obtain conviction1 if it can be found2 and whatever light ,i gain ,i will gratefully acknowledge1 and wherein ,i do not agree with you1 ,i will give you my reasons4 ,your most obliged friend and humble servant1 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 ,rev4 ,j4 ,,buckminster4 ,p4,s4 ,if ,i have been so unfortunate1 in the foregoing epistle make choice of any words which indicate too much freedom1 please to impute it to a frankness which perhaps ,i sometimes indulge to a fault1 and not to any want of due respect4 ,h4,b4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,iii ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,buckminster ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 ,,portsmouth1 ,,jan4 #aj1 #ahaj4 ,dear ,sir1--,it was not my intention1 in the letter which ,i sometime since addressed to you1 to enter into a discussion of the subject of ,universalism1 much less1 for reasons that were suggested1 provoke a dispute upon it4 ,i therefore endeavoured so to express myself that no reply should be necessary4 ,my object was to discharge what ,i thought a duty of friendship and affection1 rendered more necessary by my personal declarations to you at my house1 by stating to you with frankness and decision what ,i was persuaded would be the final result of that sentiment which you have embraced1 and are advocating among us2 and to fulfil a duty which ,i owe to myself1 and to ,him who has set me here to be a watchman1 that ,i might use every proper precaution to appear before my ,judge at last with unstained garments1 preclude an occasion for a crimination and reproach1 and give up my account with joy and not with grief4 ,i might have a secret hope that the apprehensions so seriously and candidly suggested might excite you to review your sentiments1 and renewedly compare them with the only standard1 and that this serious1 calm and retired exercise might be accompanied with an influence from above1 that might alter your views and conclusions upon the subject2 but my principal design was to discharge what ,i thought my duty as above stated4 ,you have thought it your duty to remark upon the address1 and intimate an expectation that ,i should rejoin2 your professions and candor have induced me for a time1 to hesitate whether ,i ought not1 in this instance1 to depart from my general resolutions1 and this hesitation has had influence in my delay to notice your letter4 ,but the result of my hesitations1 reflections and prayer1 is a more full persuasion1 that if the writings of ,dr4 ,edwards1 ,dr4 ,strong and others who have discussed the subject1 and which doubtless you have seen1 have produced no hesitation or conviction in your mind1 it would be vain and idle to expect it from any efforts of mine2 and that it would be a misuse of time1 which might be employed in more hopeful prospects of usefulness4 ,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 subject1 and ,i trust it will be accepted at the tribunal of ,god4 ,to that tribunal ,i humbly and cheerfully refer the decision of the question that would be matter of dispute between us1 from which decision there will be no appeal1 and to which there will be no liberty to reply4 ,i reciprocate the tender of every office of friendship consistent with what ,i think my duty to ,god and my conscience1 and shall not cease to pray that those who have erred from the truth may be recovered from their errors1 and being sanctified by the truth1 may be saved in the day of the ,lord ,jesus4 ,your friend and well wisher4 ,j4 ,,buckminster4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,iv4 ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,buckminster4 ,,portsmouth1 ,,jan4 #aa1 #ahaj4 ,rev4 ,sir1--,your favour of yesterday is acknowledged with that respectful submission which your age and experience1 together with the spirit and import of your note justly impose1 and with gratitude also1 for an obligation which ,i wished to be under in being satisfied of your having received my epistle of the #ast inst4 ,this ,i learn by the friendly rebuke in your first section in which you speak of my reply as unnecessary1 and also by your condescending to refer to it again in your fourth section4 ,had ,i1 sir1 viewed your address altogether in the light which you inform me you did1 or had you informed me that a reply would not be expected1 ,i should by no means have troubled you contrary to your wishes4 ,however1 as you are an experienced judge of all such matters1 so you will condescend to pardon me if in your judgment my epistle is destitute of important subjects4 ,you are so kind as to repeat the design of your address again1 certifying me that your object was to discharge the office of friendship1 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 advocating4 ,no man1 sir1 will ever be more ready to acknowledge a friendly office with sentiments of gratitude than your humble servant2 but ,i am sure it cannot be expected by you1 that ,i should receive the testimony of a man1 however friendly to me1 as a decision against that gospel which ,i did not receive of man1 nor by man1 but by the revelation of ,jesus ,christ4 ,your precautions in warning me as they regard your final justification before ,god1 ,i hope will be superceded by the acceptable atonement of the ,lamb of ,god which taketh away the sins of the world2 though that shall not render your faithfulness void of approbation in a subordinate sense4 ,the secret hope which you entertained of exciting me1 by your serious apprehensions to review my sentiments and renewedly to compare them with the only standard1 would perhaps appear not altogether so necessary1 did you know that my daily business is to study the law and the testimony1 which increase their light as they are more examined1 and furnish every hour ,i study them1 new proofs of the unbounded goodness of ,god to the sinful race of ,adam4 ,o my dear friend6 ,could you but know the inexpressible consolation and peace which ,i enjoy in believing that he1 who gave himself a ransom for all men1 will finally see of the travail of his soul1 and be satisfied1 you could not feel concerned about the final issue of the doctrine which ,i believe and advocate6 ,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 free2 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 mankind4 ,i believe1 dear sir1 if it should please ,god to discover this soul rejoicing truth to you1 that the angels would rejoice in heaven1 and saints on earth would be made exceeding glad3 yes1 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 uncleanness1 and to which the fulness of the ,gentiles shall be gathered4 ,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 testimony2 though ,i should hardly have believed that in your judgment1 such a testimony could have been thought proper unless preceded or succeeded by some colour of evidence4 ,no man1 my dear sir1 is less calculated to enjoy a dry1 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 fear4 ,the arguments of ,dr4 ,edwards and ,dr4 ,strong being disposed to represent the divine economy of grace less extensive than the plain and positive promises of ,god1 the testimony of the prophets1 the word of life through ,christ and the witnessing apostles1 have declared it to be1 stand forever refuted by that cloud of witnesses1 as they are also by the spirit of ,christ in every humble believing heart4 ,it is far more easy for the rational lover of ,christ to believe those learned doctors1 deceived by the vain traditions of the schools1 than to believe that the grace of ,god in ,christ ,jesus is less extensive than his word and spirit declare it to be4 ,if there never were a true ,christian whose desires did not extend to the whole human race1 that all might be brought to a saving repentance and to holy and happy life in ,christ1 then ,jesus has never left himself without a witness in his disciples1 that all the creeds of men which limit the divine favour are false4 ,with whatsoever panics worms of the dust may have struck their fellow worms by challenging them to a decision of their weak1 insignificant notions at a tribunal of an omnipotent judge1 such solemn appeals can have but little effect on the humble mind who leans not to his own wisdom1 and who views every thing already decided in the eternal system of that ,god whose tender mercies are over all the works of his hands4 ,the mode in which you express the circumstance of final judgment is rather indicative of what ,i hope you do not mean1 as it intimates that too much freedom has been assumed by me in presuming to reply to your address4 ,there is much to excite my gratitude in the assurance you give me of reciprocating offices of friendship1 consistent with duty to ,god2--and while you1 sir1 give me to understand that ,i have an interest in your prayers1 permit me to beg your supplications1 that ,i may be faithful unto death2 and to assure you of my humble desire that you may continue to be useful to your fellow pilgrims while you live1 and find acceptance with ,god through ,christ at last4 ,your most obliged friend and humble servant in ,christ4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,a ,,note ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,dr4 ,,buckminster ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,mr4 ,,ballou4 ,,friday1 ,p4 ,m4 ,it is a duty which ,mr4 ,buckminster owes to himself to declare that the thought of intimating that it was any assumption or presumption in ,mr4 ,ballou to reply to his address1 never once entered his mind2 and he is sorry if any thing in ,mr4 ,buckminster's communications could give ground to suspect such foolish vanity2 but it confirms the correctness of the opinion1 that disputes however temperately conducted are rarely productive of any good4 ,all that he meant was that the decision at the tribunal of ,god would be final4 99 99 99 99 99 ,a ,,note ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,mr4 ,,ballou ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,dr4 ,,buckminster1 ,,in ,,reply4 ,,saturday1 ,p4 ,m4 ,mr4 ,ballou is happy to acknowledge the honour done him by the ,doctor's note of ,friday1 ,p4 ,m4 by which he realizes the hope expressed in his epistle of the #aath inst1 that what appeared to be intimated by the ,doctor's letter of the #ajth inst4 in relation to final judgment was not meant4 ,in the mean time ,mr4 ,ballou thinks it a duty which he owes to himself to point out to the ,doctor the items in his letter which were misunderstood4 ,the ,doctor's expression1 ,i therefore endeavoured so to express myself that no reply should be necessary1 was understood to intimate that the reply was unnecessary2 and the ,doctor's expression1 there will be no liberty to reply1 was understood to intimate that liberty had been assumed unnecessarily4 ,in confirming the opinion1 that disputes however temperately conducted1 are rarely productive of any good4 ,mr4 ,ballou thinks his mistake has produced but little consequence1 as that opinion was so confirmed before1 that even a reason for an assertion could not with propriety be given4 ,,letter ,i4 ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,walton ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 ,,portsmouth1 ,nov4 #ai1 #ahaj4 ,dear ,friend1--,i take this method to write to you1 with a desire you would receive it as a friendly admonition4 ,you recollect1 no doubt1 that ,i have heard you make two speeches at funerals1 as they are commonly called1 one at the grave and the other at the house of sorrow and mourning1 upon a very solemn and singular occasion4 ,at the grave you were short1 and said1 if ,i mistake not1 viewing the grave1 this is the house appointed for all living1 two or three times1 and then said1 what reflection shall we make from it8 is it done by an enemy8 has the ,almighty suffered the government to be taken out of his hands8--and spake as if death was originally designed by the ,almighty for the good of mankind1 and made it a very desirable thing4 ,my dear sir1 doth not the bible1 which is the word of ,god1 or the scriptures of truth say1 ,wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world1 and death by sin1 and so death passed upon all men1 for that all have sinned1 ,rom4 v4 #ab1 and ,rom4 vi4 #bc1 ,for the wages of sin is death4 ,god who is a gracious and holy sovereign made man upright1 but he sought out many inventions4 ,by listening unto that apostate spirit1 ,satan1 he transgressed and disobeyed his maker and sovereign1 by eating the forbidden fruit4 ,god made man in his own image1 in the image of ,god created he him1 male and female created he them4 ,and the ,lord ,god took the man and put him into the garden of ,eden1 to dress it and to keep it2 and the ,lord ,god commanded the man1 saying1 of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat1 but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil1 thou shall not eat of it1 for in the day thou eatest thereof1 thou shall surely die4 ,gen4 ii4 #ae1 #ag4 ,sin is that enemy that introduced or was the cause of death1 as we may further see by considering that portion of scripture1 ,i ,john4 iii4 #h1 ,he that committeth sin is of the devil1 for the devil sinneth from the beginning4 ,for this purpose the ,son of ,god was manifested1 that he might destroy the works of the devil4 ,sin is the work of the devil2 the soul that sins shall die4 ,if you will read the whole chapter and seriously consider it1 and pray to ,god through ,jesus ,christ to open your understanding1 that you may understand the scriptures1 you would not misappply and pervert them as ,i fear you do4 ,in your speaking at the house of mourning1 you began and spake very eloquently at first upon death2 then you brought forward the same ideas1 with respect to death1 as you did before at the grave4 ,i do not remember that you1 at either place1 spake one word of the necessity or nature of repentance4 ,christ began his personal and public ministry by preaching repentance1 saying1 ,repent1 for the kingdom of heaven is at hand--again1 but except ye repent1 ye shall all likewise perish1 ,luke xiii4 #e4 ,and after his resurrection from the dead he appeared to his disciples and confirmed them in the certainty of it1 and chose them witnesses of the truth of it1 and said thus it is written1 and thus it behoveth ,christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day4 ,and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in my name among all nations1 beginning at ,jerusalem4 ,and ye are witnesses of these things1 ,luke xxiv4 #df1 #dg1 #dh4 ,the apostles1 after ,christ's ascension1 practised as he commanded them1 as we may see by reading the ,acts of the apostles1 ,peter in particular1 in the #b;d and #c;d chapters2 and we do not find that they ever gave any encouragement that their hearers could or should be forgiven their sins without faith and repentance4 ,peter says1 ,repent1 and be converted1 that your sins may be blotted out2 which presupposes that if they did not repent and be turned to ,god by converting grace their sins would not be forgiven4 ,thus the apostle ,paul preached1 see ,acts xxvi4 #ah1 #ai1 #bj1 which ,i entreat you to read and seriously to consider4 ,see likewise #bjth chap4 of the ,acts of the apostles1 how he appealed to the elders of the church2 in the #agth verse it is written1 ,and from ,miletus he sent to ,ephesus1 and called the elders of the church2 and when they were come to him he said unto them1 ye know from the first day ,i came into ,asia after what manner ,i have been with you at all seasons1 serving the ,lord with all humility of mind1 and with many tears and temptations which befell me1 by the lying in wait of the ,jews2 and how ,i kept back nothing that was profitable unto you1 but have shewed you and have taught you publicly and from house to house1 testifying both to the ,jews and also to the ,greeks1 repentance towards ,god1 and faith towards our ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,the apostles spake of the nature of repentance that they should bring forth fruits meet for repentance1 and that ,godly sorrow worked repentance to salvation1 not to be repented of2 but the sorrow of the world worketh death4 ,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 state1 whether they have repented or no1 is not preaching as ,christ and his apostles preached4 ,if we know not ,god1 and obey not the gospel of our ,lord ,jesus ,christ1 what will be the consequence8 ,see #b ,thes4 i4 #h1 #i4 ,ministers are directed by the inspired apostle ,paul2 see in his epistles to ,timothy and ,titus4 ,see #b ,tim4 #dth chap4 from #ast to the end1 the #eth verse1 which ,i would entreat and beseech you to read and seriously consider4 ,he1 in some of those verses referred to1 says to ,timothy1 ,reprove1 rebuke1 exhort1 with all long suffering and doctrine2 for the time will come when men will not endure sound doctrine1 but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears4 ,and they shall turn away their ears from the truth1 and shall be turned unto fables4 ,but watch thou in all things1 endure afflictions1 do the work of an evangelist1 make proof of thy ministry4 ,paul was just about to leave the world2 the time of his departure was at hand2 the above were his dying words to his beloved son ,timothy 7in the faith47 ,the blessed and beloved apostle had through grace kept the faith1 that is1 the true faith of the gospel2 he had finished his course1 he had fought a good fight1 and henceforth he says1 there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness which ,god the righteous judge shall give me at that day2 and not only to me1 but unto all them also1 that love his appearing4 ,you1 my friend1 once professed the true faith of the gospel--have you kept it8 ,i think not4 ,i fear you have fallen from it4 ,you are now preaching a doctrine which pleases the world1 but it makes against you1 according to scripture2 the apostle ,john says1 in #ast epistle1 #dth chap1 #eth and #fth verses1 ,they are of the world2 therefore the world heareth them4 ,we are of ,god2 he that knoweth ,god heareth us2 he that is not of ,god heareth not us2 hereby know we the spirit of truth1 and the spirit of error4 ,i beseech you again1 my friend1 examine and seriously consider the first five verses of that chapter1 and pray ,god through ,jesus ,christ that he would open it to your understanding3 ,solomon says1 ,my son1 lean not to your own understanding4 ,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 ,salvation4 ,would ,christ or the apostles preach ,universal ,salvation in one place of scripture1 and in another contradict it8 ,i believe they would not4 ,i am an old man1 and have studied the scriptures twenty or thirty years2 yea1 ,i may say more or less from my youth up2 ,i find it the best way of study1 to compare scripture with scripture2 to consider the preceding and following context2 to be self-diffident2 and to be much in prayer1 that it would please ,god1 by his holy spirit1 to lead and guide us into all necessary truth2 and ,i do not think it amiss to use sound authors1 for as we are in some measure dependant on one another for temporal1 so ,i think we may1 under ,god1 be for spiritual assistance2 though by no means to put our trust in an arm of flesh4 ,we may observe how earnest ,david in prayer to ,god was in the #beth ,psalm4 ,he was a prophet as well the royal ,psalmist1 yet he comes in a very humble manner to ,god in prayer that he would shew him his ways1 and teach him his paths2 and in that ,psalm1 #hth verse1 says1 good and upright is the ,lord3 therefore will he teach sinners in the way4 ,the meek will he guide in judgment2 and the meek he will teach his way4 ,but if men will undertake to explain scripture in their own strength and wisdom1 what must we expect but to have them mangled and made havoc of1 or explained in a mere mystical or literal sense8 ,the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of ,god3 for they are foolishness unto him1 neither can he know them1 because they are spiritually discerned4 ,see ,i ,cor4 ii4 #ad4 ,as you did not say any thing about the resurrection of the dead in either of your speeches1 ,i began to query in my mind whether you believed it or no4 ,i think1 yea1 ,i know1 it was preached by ,christ1 and explained so as to confute the ,sadducees4 ,our ,lord says1 ,marvel not at this1 for the hour is coming in the which all that are in their graves shall hear his voice1 and shall come forth2 they that have done good unto the resurrection of life1 and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation4 ,st4 ,paul in his defence before the ,roman governor when accused by an orator1 whom the ,jews employed1 as he was allowed to speak for himself1 said1 they cannot prove the thing1 whereof they now accuse me2 but this ,i confess after the way which they call heresy2 so worship ,i the ,god of my fathers1 believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets1 and have hope towards ,god1 which they themselves also allow2 that there shall be a resurrection of the dead1 both of the just and unjust2 and herein do ,i exercise myself to have always a conscience void of offence toward ,god1 and toward man4 ,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 life4 ,in #b ,cor4 v4 #aj1 #aa1 speaking of a day of judgment1 when every one must give an account for himself as the deeds have been done in the body1 that every one may receive the things done in his body according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad2 and says1 knowing the terror of the ,lord1 we persuade men4 ,my friend1 is there the least room for us to believe from this scripture and many others1 that the wicked who have died impenitent and in a disbelief of the gospel or without the true knowledge of ,god and ,jesus ,christ1 whom ,god hath sent1 have eternal life1 in the fruition and enjoyment of ,god8 ,heaven consists in being made like ,god1 and enjoying him3 hence it is1 that the pious thirst for ,god1 the living ,god1 saying1 when shall ,i come and appear before him8 ,again1 ,whom have ,i in heaven but thee8 and there is none upon earth ,i desire besides thee4 ,my flesh and heart fail me1 but ,god is the strength of my heart and portion forever4 ,these pious breathings are the exercises of the children of ,god4 ,o may they be ours4 ,,joseph ,,walton4 ,,porstmouth1 ,nov4 #ai1 #ahaj4 ,p4 ,s4 ,the within1 enclosed1 my friend1 ,i can assure you was not written to you in this manner1 as ,god is my judge1 from an envious and bitter spirit1 for ,i love and esteem your person1 as a friend1 who has1 from my first acquaintance with you1 treated me with great respect4 ,i see1 on the ,lord's days1 great numbers of precious souls going and returning from your meeting2 and1 as far as ,i know my own heart1 ,i do not envy you for that2 but have often prayed that the gifts and natural abilities you have might be sanctified and turned into right improvements1 which is the glory of ,god and the saving benefit of your hearers4 ,may it please ,god to make you an able and faithful minister of the ,new ,testament1 not of the letter1 but of the spirit1 for the letter killeth1 but the spirit giveth life4 ,from your friend and humble servant1 ,,joseph ,,walton1 ,pastor1 ,of the ,independent ,congregational ,church in ,portsmouth4 ,,to ,,mr4 ,,hosea ,,ballou1 ,,pastor ,,of ,,the ,,universal ,,church ,,and ,,society ,,in ,,portsmouth4 ,sir1--,you may observe by the date1 the letter has been written some time2 but by several avocations ,i have not had time to correct and copy it until the present date1 ,december #g1 #ahaj4 ,j4,w4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,ii4 ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,walton4 ,,portsmouth1 ,,dec4 #aa1 #ahaj4 ,rev4 ,sir1--,it is with pleasure that ,i hasten to acknowledge the receipt of your friendly admonition1 bearing date ,december #gth1 which came to my hand late last evening1 which ,i assure you is accepted as a token of friendship1 and a mark of particular attention2 and merits1 as ,i conceive1 a grateful acknowledgement as well as an early answer4 ,your admonition begins by taking notice of what you conceive an egregious error which you have heard me suggest at two several funerals4 ,you say that ,i spake as if death was originally designed1 by the ,almighty1 for the good of mankind4 ,this statement you consider of such a dangerous nature that it renders an admonition necessary4 ,but1 dear sir1 there are two important ideas contained in the above short sentence1 and you have not distinguished between them1 nor informed me whether it be both1 or only one which is thus reprehensible4 ,that ,god originally designed death1 is one idea2 that he designed it for the good of mankind is another idea4 ,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 sentiments1 ,i must suppose that you would not wish to fault the first of those ideas1 as it is an item in your creed1 that ,god foreordained whatsoever comes to pass2 of course1 you believe that ,god originally designed death4 ,but1 that ,god designed death for the good of mankind1 ,i do not know it to be an article of your faith1 and therefore1 may1 without doing you any injustice1 suppose that you believed that ,god originally designed death1 but not for the good of mankind6 ,here1 sir1 ,i acknowledge that my sentiment differs from yours2 and as you have given me no reason why ,god should not have designed death for the good of mankind1 ,i have only to consider the friendly admonition1 with which you oppose my idea4 ,i would query why the idea that ,god should design death for the good of mankind renders me justly admonishable8 ,would the idea1 should ,i avow it1 that ,god designed death for the damage of mankind1 render me commendable8 ,so1 it seems2 but at this expense ,i cannot avoid admonition6 ,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 death8 ,and ,i think it expedient to ask how ,god can be justified1 in the sight of his rational creatures1 if the idea be once established that he designed evil against them1 even before they existed8 ,i feel it to be my duty1 dear sir1 to call on you to support this high allegation against the ,father of our spirits4 ,i would not pretend that you designed to bring an allegation against our ,creator1 but ,i am satisfied that every unprejudiced mind must see the nature of an allegation in what you are disposed to maintain4 ,for if we say ,god1 our ,creator1 designed death for the damage of those dependent beings whom he has made1 it is giving him a character which1 ,i believe1 the wisest of men would find it difficult to justify4 ,again1 if the notion be true1 that ,god designed death for the damage of mankind1 is it not from hence evident that he was an enemy to mankind when he thus designed8 ,now1 if ,god be considered an enemy to mankind even before he made them1 ,i wish to know what reason can be given why mankind ought to love ,god since creation8 ,in relation to a number of scriptures which you have quoted1 seemingly with a design to illustrate the foregoing subject1 ,i can only say1 that if any or all those passages relate at all to the subject1 that relation is out of my sight4 ,and ,i can truly say1 that ,i am glad that there is nothing1 in any part of the scripture1 so contrary to good sense and reason as to support the notion that ,god is an enemy to the works of his own hands4 ,i believe1 sir1 if ,i prove from scripture that ,god designed death for the good of mankind1 it must be considered a substantial support of what you wish to oppose2 and will also be considered as placing the scripture doctrine on the most reasonable principle4 #ast4 ,i will show that death is not a token of ,god's enmity towards mankind4 ,as a proof of this1 see ,rom4 viii4 #ch1 #ci1 ,for ,i am persuaded1 that neither death1 nor life1 nor angels1 nor principalities1 nor powers1 nor things present1 nor things to come1 nor height1 nor depth1 nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of ,god which is in ,christ ,jesus our ,lord4 ,this passage is a full and positive proof that neither death nor any thing else1 is a token of ,god's enmity to mankind4 #b;d4 ,i will now show that death was designed by ,god for the good of men4 ,which to do1 ,i must learn of ,jesus4 ,he is the truth4 ,was his death designed1 by the eternal ,father1 for the good of mankind1 or not8 ,was his death a token of ,god's love to the world1 or was it a token of his enmity8 ,see ,rom4 v4 #h1 ,but ,god commendeth his love towards us in that while we were yet sinners ,christ died for us4 ,this same apostle1 believing in ,christ1 who1 he says1 was delivered for our offences1 and was raised again for our justification1 in a short1 but comprehensive inventory of the things which are ours1 has placed death among them4 ,see #a ,cor4 iii4 #ba1 #bb1 #bc1 ,therefore1 let no man glory in men3 for all things are yours2 whether ,paul1 or ,apollos1 or ,cephas1 or the world1 or life1 or death1 or things present1 or things to come2 all are yours2 and ye are ,christ's2 and ,christ is ,god's4 ,again1 he says1 to the ,phil4 i4 #ba1 ,for me to live is ,christ1 and to die is gain4 ,nothing appears more evident than that the death of ,christ was designed for the good of mankind2 and as he is the head of every man1 so his death is considered1 in the scriptures1 a gracious benefit to every man2 as the apostle expresses it1 ,that he1 by the grace of ,god1 should taste death for every man4 ,and again1 ,as in ,adam all die1 even so in ,christ1 shall all be made alive4 ,who can impartially consider those scriptures and suppose that ,god designed death for a damage to mankind8 ,i view death1 sir1 as an appointment of ,god1 a friendly messenger1 sent to dissolve a tabernacle of corruption and vanity1 at the dissolution of which1 the dust returns to the earth as it was1 and the spirit unto ,god who gave it4 ,your admonition in the next place suggests1 that if ,i will read the whole chapter 7meaning the #c;d chapter of the #ast of ,john7 and seriously consider it1 and pray to ,god1 through ,jesus ,christ1 to open my understanding1 that ,i may understand the scriptures1 ,i would not misapply and pervert them1 as you fear ,i do4 ,rev4 ,sir1 are you sufficiently acquainted with my preaching and writing on the scriptures to warrant the propriety of the suggestion1 that ,i am in the habit of misapplying and perverting the holy writings8 ,are you sufficiently acquainted with my retired studies and religious exercises to warrant the suggestion that ,i get along without acknowledging the wisdom of ,god8 ,i humbly request you to reconsider this part of your admonition1 and see if it do not wear the appearance of judging another who must stand or fall to his own master4 ,in the mean time ,i wish to observe1 that a friendly advice to be constant in fervent supplication and prayer would be received by me as a mark of christian friendship and fellowship4 ,but ,i will ask you the question1 if you would be willing to have me go into your desk with you in presence of your church and congregation1 and there read the whole of the above named chapter1 then in humble and solemn prayer to ,almighty ,god1 through ,christ ,jesus1 implore a just and true understanding of his word and truth contained in that portion of his written will1 and close my performance with a candid dissertation on the chapter8 ,grant me liberty to do this in your hearing2 after which ,i will not object to your pointing out any misapplication or perversion which you may think you discover4 ,by what law is a man condemned without first hearing his defence8 ,again1 your admonition suggests1 that ,i did not1 at either of the funerals where you heard me perform1 speak one word of the necessity or nature of repentance4 ,in this particular ,i believe you made a mistake at both places1 which mistake1 ,i believe ,i can rectify to your recollection4 ,in the first place1 ,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 writings4 ,but1 after all1 you and ,i may entertain very different ideas respecting the preaching of repentance4 ,the opinion that repentance is preached when a public speaker tells his congregation that their eternal salvation depends on their repentance1 that eternal misery must inevitably be their doom unless they repent is an opinion to which ,i have no reason to subscribe4 ,preaching repentance1 ,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 world2 which teaching produces a returning of the mind to the things of ,god and his ever blessed kingdom4 ,the word repent may or may not be used in the giving of such instructions4 ,i conceive a preacher of ,jesus ,christ1 warmed with the spirit of eternal love1 breathing forth the gracious words of truth1 may successfully preach repentance as well without the use of the word repent as with it4 ,at both those places of sorrow1 dear sir1 ,i endeavoured to lead the mourners' minds to the consideration of eternal things2 ,i endeavoured to represent ,god our ,creator and ,governor1 as a friend to his creatures1 and strove to the utmost of my power to fix the love1 regard and confidence of our mourning friends on ,god our ,creator4 ,this you will recollect1 and ,i cannot suppose that you believe that a person can truly believe in the divine goodness1 and love his ,creator as the greatest good1 and put confidence in him1 so as to draw consolation1 in the day of adversity1 from such confidence1 and still be a stranger to true penitence4 ,the many scriptures which you have judiciously quoted to prove the propriety of the doctrine of repentance are justly applied1 as ,i conceive2 and ,i accord with you in their use and meaning as far as you have explained them4 ,i would wish to be understood that whenever repentance is spoken of as a creature act1 originating in creature agency1 it is represented directly contrary to the scripture sense as expressed in ,acts v4 #ca1 ,him hath ,god exalted with his right hand to be a ,prince and a ,saviour1 for to give repentance to ,israel and forgiveness of sins4 ,from the above passage it is evident that repentance is no more dependent on creature agency than the forgiveness of sins2 and the idea that repentance is a grant of divine favour is plainly expressed in ,acts xi4 #ah1 ,then hath ,god also1 to the ,gentiles1 granted repentance unto life4 ,by the above testimonies the idea that repentance is a creature condition1 on which the divine favour is bestowed1 is proved erroneous4 ,the next particular which your friendly admonition occupies1 is the subject of ,universal ,salvation in the following words3 ,i could not but observe with what emphasis you1 at the grave1 mentioned those selected texts of scripture which you supposed would confirm your hearers in the doctrine of ,universal ,salvation4 ,would ,christ or the apostles preach ,universal ,salvation in one place of scripture1 and in another contradict it8 ,i believe they would not4 ,in the above particular1 sir1 ,i agree with you in all which you express4 ,i do not believe that ,christ or any of his apostles ever contradicted the glorious doctrine1 in which they all preached of ,universal ,salvation4 ,and until this contradiction can be shewn in their preaching1 you and ,i have full liberty to believe in ,god as the ,saviour of all men4 ,christ gave himself a ransom for all men2 tasted death for every man2 is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world4 ,he says he will draw all men unto him1 and he also says that him that cometh after me ,i will in no wise cast out4 ,st4 ,paul says that ,god will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth4 ,to which testimony we might add an immense number of scriptures from the ,old and ,new ,testaments2 and as you agree that ,christ and his apostles would not preach ,universal ,salvation in one place1 and contradict it in another1 so you must1 of necessity subscribe to the uniformity of the scripture doctrine in the ,salvation of all men4 ,you inform me1 that you are an old man2 this ,i was sensible of before1 in consequence of which1 ,i have more particularly endeavoured to cultivate an acquaintance with you1 since ,i have been in this town2 for ,i conceive that the aged are not only entitled to the respects and attention of the younger1 but the younger are also entitled to the advantages of their experience and wisdom4 ,you further tell me1 that you have studied the scriptures twenty or thirty years4 ,on this account1 sir1 ,i covet earnestly your assistance2 for although ,i have studied the scriptures almost constantly twenty years out of less than forty1 yet ,i find but a few who are notable to assist me in this agreeable employment4 ,the happy method which you recommend1 ,i have for many years endeavoured to observe1 for ,i am sure that most of the vulgar errors1 in respect to the scriptures1 are for the want of a careful examination of all which is said on the same subjects4 ,wherein you recommend the pious example of the prophet ,david1 ,i fully accord in it1 and would humbly hope and strive to be a partaker of the benefits arising from such an example4 ,what you say of men's explaining scripture in their own ,strength and wisdom1 and of their making havoc of1 and mangling them by explaining them in a mystical or literal sense1 ,i find myself rather embarrassed about4 ,you begin your epistle under the character of a friendly admonition1 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 wrong1 ,i must leave for you to explain when it is convenient4 ,nor is it easy for me to understand you when you represent both the mystical and literal explanation of scripture equally erroneous4 ,you immediately conclude those observations with the following quotation3 ,the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of ,god1 for they are foolishness unto him4 ,did you mean that the natural man1 supposing the things of the spirit of ,god to be foolishness1 would say that the spirit mangled and made havoc of the scriptures8 ,this could not be your meaning4 ,your concluding query is the following2 ,my friend1 is there the least room for us to believe from this scripture 7meaning #b ,cor4 v4 #aj1 #aa7 and many others1 that the wicked who have lived impenitent and in a disbelief of the gospel1 or without the true knowledge of ,god1 and of ,jesus ,christ whom ,god hath sent1 have eternal life in the fruition and enjoyment of ,god8 ,this query ,i will endeavour to answer as plainly as possible4 #ast4 ,unless we grant that a man has eternal life in ,jesus ,christ1 given him before the foundation of the world1 we cannot justly call him an unbeliever because he does not believe he has this eternal life in ,christ4 ,nor can we say1 with the least propriety1 that he does not know the truth1 because he does not know that which is not4 #b;d4 ,if we allow that a man has eternal life in ,christ1 we must allow him to be an unbeliever if he do not believe it2 and that he does not know the truth as it is in ,jesus1 if he be ignorant of this gift of eternal life4 #c;d4 ,while a man is in a state of unbelief he is not in the enjoyment of the truth4 ,i conceive1 sir1 these observations must appear reasonable to any reasonable man2 and therefore ,i suppose they will appear reasonable to you4 ,the passage in ,corinthians alluded to1 fully refutes the notion of endless rewards and punishments2 for there it is stated1 that every one may receive the things done in his body1 according to that he hath done1 whether it be good or bad4 ,now as this same apostle tells us that all have sinned and come short of the glory of ,god1 if he mean that all who have sinned must be endlessly punished1 he cannot mean that any of the human race will be eternally blessed according to their own works1 nor yet according to the grace of ,god4 ,and you1 sir1 cannot but see if one sinner can be rewarded according to his works and yet be saved by grace through faith1 and that not of himself1 but by the gift of ,god1 all the sinners of ,adam's race may be thus rewarded according to what they have done either good or bad1 and yet be saved by grace as above4 ,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 scriptures1 though ,i cannot flatter myself that that opinion agrees with the opinion of what you call sound authors4 ,for myself1 ,i call the writers of the holy scriptures sound authors1 and those who differ from them ,i am willing to call orthodox according to our common schools of divinity4 ,i join with you in a humble desire that the holy breathings of the true children of ,god may be yours and mine2 and ,i am sensible if they be we shall not judge one another1 nor condemn one another2 but strive for the unity of the spirit in the bonds of divine peace4 ,yes1 sir1 ,i am confident that the true temper and spirit of the gospel1 if possessed and practiced by the public ministers in this town1 would lead them to open their doors to each other1 to meet together and pray1 preach1 sing and exhort1 in love and fellowship2 but ,antichrist's spirit is directly the reverse4 ,the assurance you give me in your postscript1 that what you wrote to me was not written in an envious spirit is duly appreciated2 nor do ,i much wonder that you do not envy me the numbers who attend my public ministry1 while you suppose that they with innumerable multitudes of others are reprobated to endless sin and misery4 ,envy1 in such a case1 would be truly unaccountable6 ,i will not say that ,i fully comprehend your meaning in calling the great numbers who attend my meeting1 precious souls4 ,why are they precious8 ,to whom are they precious8 ,if you view them the objects of divine love1 of course you must suppose them to be precious in ,god's sight2 but if not1 why do you call them precious8 ,your flattering acknowledgements of civilities received from me and the acceptableness of my person to you1 is very gratefully considered1 for it is an object with me to deserve the approbation of the pious who have treasured up much valuable knowledge by experience2 and ,i wish to give you the fullest assurance possible that ,i consider my acquaintance with yourself highly worthy of further cultivation and improvement1 which ,i shall always endeavour to promote1 as opportunity may present1 and it shall please you to favour4 ,having noted the most important sections of your friendly admonition in as concise a manner as was convenient1 permit me1 dear sir1 to make a few observations on the doctrine of ,universal ,salvation1 that being a subject to which you allude in your epistle1 though you did not see fit to plant any particular arguments against it4 ,this doctrine ,i openly profess1 and preach as a doctrine which ,i conceive is plainly taught in the scriptures of the ,old and ,new ,testaments2 a doctrine which all good men in the world desire the truth of2 a doctrine the most worthy of ,god of any ever published2 a doctrine the best calculated to fill the soul of the believer with love to ,god and to our fellow creatures2 a doctrine which harmonizes the divine attributes1 the scriptures and every principle of reason and good sense1 in a surprising and an astonishing manner2 a doctrine1 more than any other1 calculated to destroy the hurtful animosities existing in the religious world2 and to produce general fellowship and brotherly love2 and in a word1 ,i believe it to be the only doctrine which can be supported by reason or scripture1 to a mind not improperly biased by tradition4 ,though ,i am sensible of your greater experience1 yet ,i am willing to say to a man of your piety and ,christian candor1 that any arguments which you should see cause to lay before me1 on the above subject1 shall1 by the blessing of ,god1 receive an early attention and a judicious discussion4 ,in the spirit of the ,new ,testament and not in the letter2 in the spirit of life1 and not in the death of the letter1 in the spirit of salvation1 and not of condemnation1 ,i pray ,god1 ,i may ever live and act according to your friendly desire2 and feeling the same fervent desire for my highly esteemed and venerable friend1 ,i acknowledge myself your most obliged and very humble servant1 for ,christ's sake4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 ,rev4 ,joseph ,walton4 ,p4,s4 ,i have reserved three particulars in your friendly admonition for the subject of another communication4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter4 ,,iii4 ,from the ,same to the ,same4 ,portsmouth1 ,jan4 #e1 #ahaa4 ,rev4 ,sir1--,having notified you in a postscript of my letter of ,dec4 #aath1 that ,i had reserved three particulars in your friendly admonition for the subject of another communication1 ,i am disposed to embrace this opportunity to fulfil my engagement4 ,the three particulars reserved are expressed1 in your letter1 in the following words3 ,for the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine1 but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears2 and they shall turn away their ears from the truth1 and shall be turned unto fables4 ,you1 my friend1 once professed the true faith of the gospel--have you kept it8 ,i think not4 ,i fear you have fallen from it4 ,you are now preaching a doctrine which pleases the world1 but it makes against you according to scripture4 ,the apostle ,john says in his #ast epistle #dth chapter #eth and #fth verses1 ,they are of the world2 therefore the world heareth them2 we are of ,god2 he that knoweth ,god1 heareth us1 he that is not of ,god1 heareth not us2 hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error4 ,i would not1 dear sir1 knowingly misapply your words1 nor make a use of the above quotation contrary to their most plain and evident sense which ,i conceive is as follows3 #ast4 ,the doctrine which ,i believed before ,i believed as ,i do now1 is the true gospel according to the testimony of the apostle ,john1 in his #ast epistle1 #dth chapter #eth and #fth verses4 #b;d4 ,that in believing as ,i now do1 ,i have fallen from that faith1 and turned unto fables4 #c;d4 ,my now preaching a doctrine which pleases the world is good proof that my doctrine is not of ,god1 and that those who hear me are justly described by the apostle as heaping to themselves teachers having itching ears4 ,in the first place ,i shall agree with you in the supposition that when ,i first made a profession of religion1 ,i believed the true gospel4 ,in the second place ,i shall endeavour to show that ,i have not fallen from that faith4 ,in the third place ,i will attempt to show that the evidence1 which you think makes against me1 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 gospel4 #ast4 ,the true faith of the gospel as expressed in #a ,john1 #dth1 c4 is as follows--see verse #b1 #c1 ,every spirit that confesseth that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh is of ,god2 and every spirit that confesseth not that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh is not of ,god4 ,the apostle here states in the most simple terms the true ,christian faith1 and brings it into such a short compass that none can mistake him4 ,the belief that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh is the true faith1 and a denial of that fact is a false faith4 ,when ,i first professed religion ,i professed to believe that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh2 and this ,i am willing to say now is the true faith of the gospel1 and the only article of faith which constituted a ,christian believer in the opinion of the apostles2 restricting this belief1 at the same time1 to ,jesus of ,nazareth1 that he was the ,christ4 #b;d4 ,i as much believe now as ,i ever did that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh4 ,i have as clear evidences now as ,i ever had that ,jesus of ,nazareth is the ,christ4 ,these things being facts1 the conclusion is that ,i have not fallen from the true christian faith4 #c;d4 ,the above faith ,i preach1 believing and testifying that ,god sent his ,son to be the ,saviour of the world2 and ,i have reason to bless ,god that such feeble means are at all prospered1 and that as you observe1 ,great numbers of precious souls adhere to the word1 which ,i conceive is no evidence that the faith ,i preach is not of ,god1 or that it is consistent with the lusts of the world4 ,we are informed in the word of ,god1 that the common people heard ,christ gladly4 ,who did not hear him gladly8 ,answer1 the ,scribes and ,pharisees4 ,do you think1 sir1 that the common people's hearing ,christ gladly was a justifiable evidence to the ,pharisees that he was not the true ,messiah8 ,when many thousands of men1 women1 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 spake1 was it a justifiable evidence that he and his doctrine were not of ,god8 ,to bring this matter1 if possible1 nearer home1 should you find your meeting house crowded with hearers who expressed in their countenances an approbation of the doctrine which you preach1 would it be sufficient evidence to convince you that your doctrine was not of ,god8 ,that the testimony that ,god sent his ,son to be the ,saviour of the world is not consistent with the lusts of the world1 is shown by ,st4 ,paul to ,titus2 ,for the grace of ,god which bringeth salvation to all men1 hath appeared1 teaching us1 that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts1 we should live soberly1 righteously and godly in this present world4 ,i have not the least doubt in my mind1 that if you and ,i preached more like our blessed master than we do1 people in general1 would be more engaged to hear us1 and our meeting houses would be more thronged than they are now4 ,should you hear a shepherd complaining that the increase of his flock was small1 or that it rather diminished1 you would think that evidence made against him4 ,i suppose the particular idea which you had in view1 which constitutes1 in your mind1 an ,apostasy1 is1 that ,jesus ,christ1 who was manifested in the flesh1 will1 pursuant to power given to him of his father1 save all men from their sins1 and reconcile all things unto himself4 ,this idea1 ,i acknowledge1 ,i did not see clearly in1 when ,i first made a profession of a belief in ,christ2 but now am fully persuaded in it4 ,however1 ,i cannot see why the adopting of this particular idea should be called an ,apostasy4 ,i will1 sir1 mention some similar cases1 not wishing however1 to be considered an equal subject to the personage whom ,i shall introduce4 ,the apostle ,peter was a believer in the true faith of the gospel1 that is1 he believed that ,jesus was the ,christ1 the ,son of the living ,god3 and ,jesus says to him1 on that confession1 that flesh and blood had not revealed it to him1 but his ,father4 ,this belief ,peter had before he believed that ,christ should suffer on the cross and rise from the dead4 ,after many trials and dreadful temptations in which this poor1 dependent brother of ours experienced the fallibility of all human strength1 he was privileged with positive evidence of the resurrection of ,christ from the dead4--,here ,i ask1 was this new acquisition in ,peter's faith an apostasy8 ,was it not an advancement8 ,you will agree with me in this4 ,again1 this same apostle1 even after he was endowed with power from on high1 and preached and healed in the name of ,jesus1 did not know that the ,gentiles were fellow heirs and of the same body1 and partakers of the promises of ,god1 in ,christ1 by the gospel4 ,it was not until the angel of the ,lord appeared unto ,cornelius and directed him to send for ,peter1 that ,god gave to that apostle the knowledge of the fact which he acknowledged to ,cornelius1 that ,god had shewed him that he should call no man common or unclean4 ,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 before2 but would any real ,christian1 knowing all the circumstances1 suppose that ,peter had apostatised from the true faith1 because he believed that millions would be benefited by ,christ more than were comprehended in his former belief8 ,while they who were of the circumcision remained ignorant of the revelation given to ,peter1 we find they contended with him1 saying1 thou wentest in to men uncircumcised1 and didst eat with them4 ,but when ,peter had rehearsed the matter from the beginning1 and expounded it by order unto them1 they held their peace and glorified ,god1 saying1 then hath ,god also to the ,gentiles1 granted repentance unto life4 ,thus we see that the church in ,jerusalem1 who were of the circumcision1 though believers in ,christ were1 until ,peter's defence further enlightened them1 ignorant of the extension of divine grace to the ,gentiles through the gospel4 ,but surely no real ,christian would suppose that this enlargement of their faith in the great salvation was an apostasy from the true faith6 ,with profound deference1 sir1 permit me to suggest1 that should the foregoing observations present yourself1 to your own mind1 in a similar situation with those of the circumcision1 yet they acknowledge you a believer in ,christ1 a minister of his word and a candidate for greater manifestation of that grace of ,god by which ,jesus tasted death for every man4 ,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 faith1 ,i cannot be justly admonished for falling from the true faith4 ,may ,i not1 with great propriety1 call on my ,rev4 friend to show1 if he can1 that such an article of faith was ever required by ,christ or his apostles as a term of christian fellowship and charity8 ,let us look into the written word of ,god and see what is there required of us to believe4 ,see ,rom4 x4 #i1 ,if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the ,lord ,jesus1 and shalt believe in thine heart that ,god hath raised him from the dead1 thou shalt be saved4 ,acts viii4 #cg1 ,and ,philip said if thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest4 ,and he answered and said1 ,i believe that ,jesus ,christ is the ,son of ,god4 ,matt4 x4 #cb4 ,whosoever1 therefore1 shall confess me before men1 him will ,i confess also before my father which is in heaven4 ,luke xii4 #h1 ,also ,i say unto you1 whosoever shall confess me before men1 him shall the ,son of man also confess before the angels of ,god4 ,not to multiply quotations1 permit me to query whether there be in those passages1 or in any other scripture on the same point any intimations given that the candidate must believe that this precious ,saviour will not1 through the peace made by the blood of his cross1 reconcile all things to ,god8 ,are you fully satisfied1 dear sir1 that you are authorised to admonish as an apostate1 one who confesses with his mouth the ,lord ,jesus1 and who believes in his heart that ,god hath raised him from the dead8 ,why did not ,philip demand of the ,eunuch a particular confession of a belief in limited grace and salvation8 ,was there not the same authority to require this article of faith then1 as there is now8 ,if ,jesus hath promised1 in his word1 that he will confess before his ,father in ,heaven1 whosoever confesseth him before men are you satisfied with the authority by which you denounce1 disfellowship1 and deny those little ones8 ,the thought is truly solemn6 ,i feel a chill in every vein of my body1 when ,i consider the vain traditions of a corrupted church1 in which it has long been a religious habit to anathematise those who confess ,christ before men1 because they cannot believe in certain tenets never required by ,christ or his apostles6 ,rev4 ,sir1 ,i can say in the sincerity of my soul1 that ,i believe that ,jesus of ,nazareth is the true ,christ1 ,i believe him to be the ,son of the living ,god1 who was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our justification4 ,and though ,i feel myself the most unworthy of the subjects of salvation1 yet ,i should be ungrateful not to acknowledge the goodness of ,god my ,saviour4 ,whatever men may think or say of me1 ,i know that my soul experiences joys unspeakable in sweet meditations on the glories and inexpressible beauties of my ,redeemer2 and the thought that ,i am owned as his child before the angels of ,god1 is infinitely better than to receive the approbation of men who are disposed to judge without knowing the heart4 ,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 ,christ1 and require no other belief than ,christ and his apostles required1 there would be an end at once of all the discord and animosity which have wounded the character of ,christianity for ages4 ,and the prayer of the blessed ,jesus would be fulfilled in the oneness of all who believe in him1 which would convince the world that the ,father sent him4 ,although you have not yet found it convenient to favour me with any observations on my former letter1 ,i have not done expecting it4 ,and ,i shall endeavour to hold myself in readiness to pay an early attention to any communication which shall come from your hand4 ,in hopes that nothing contained in this letter will be considered inconsistent with the true spirit of a humble believer in ,christ1 ,i remain1 sir1 your humble servant1 for ,christ's sake4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 ,rev4 ,,joseph ,,walton4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,iv4 ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,walton ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 ,,portsmouth1 ,,jan4 #aa1 #ahaa4 ,sir1--,i have received your answer to my letter sent you1 dated ,dec4 #g1 #ahaj1 and now desire to answer it1 in the fear of ,god1 in as concise a manner as ,i am capable1 agreeable to the scriptures of truth4 ,sir1 ,i thank you for the civilities you manifest toward me1 and that you received my letter in a friendly manner as ,i think ,i sent it1 wishing it might be received and improved for your benefit2 not that ,i supposed that ,i was capable of convincing or confuting you of what ,i conceive to be erroneous in your doctrine or principles1 but relying on the blessing of ,god to make it effectual for your everlasting good1 and those you profess to be over in the ,lord4 ,i shall not take into consideration every argument you make use of1 but shall give it a general answer4 ,since ,i have received it ,i have had a great number of scriptures occuring to my mind which ,i might quote if ,i thought expedient4 ,in the first place you speak or write as if ,i thought death was originally designed by the ,almighty for the damage of mankind2 ,i say death was threatened to be the consequence1 if mankind did transgress the law of their ,creator2 our first parents transgressed1 and the penalty was executed according to the threatening1 ,thou shall surely die2 they were condemned to die2 they were under sentence of death2 they became spiritually dead1 immediately2 they lost the knowledge of their ,creator2 darkness covered their minds2 they endeavoured to hide themselves from ,god among the trees of the garden2 they brought misery upon themselves and upon their posterity2 we feel the woeful effects of their fall and apostasy until this day2 by nature we are spiritually dead2 as it is written1 you hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins4 ,sir1 if there is a law made by our legislature1 is there not a penalty annexed unto it8 ,if that law is transgressed1 is not the person who transgressed punished some way or other8--,yet the law is made for the good of the whole2 the legislature is not to be impeached1 as if he made it for the damage of his people1 whom he governs2 the law-breaker is punished either in his own person or his surety1 though the pain1 shame and punishment is for the damage of the transgressor1 yet the law is for the good of the whole1 and the law maker is not in the least to blame2 the transgressor also1 if he repents and is reformed1 is benefited by it1 c4 ,i think1 sir1 your giving your hearers encouragement in your preaching that ,christ will save them all1 whether they repent and believe the gospel or no1 is of a dangerous nature4 ,christ has said1 if ye believe not that ,i am he ye shall die in your sins1 ,john viii4 #bd4 ,read1 if you please1 the proceeding context4 ,the decrees of ,god1 you say1 is my creed1 and that ,i believe that ,god foreordained whatsoever come to pass4 ,i do not think ,i ever told you so4 ,and so you think ,god foreordained1 according to my creed1 death1 for a damage to his creatures4 ,i have said death is punishment for sin1 as ,i wrote1 and ,i can maintain it from scripture2 death was introduced by sin2 the person that lives a life of sin and dies without regenerating grace1 which all true believers in ,christ have1 will be miserable1 and be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the ,lord and the glory of his power4 ,i believe every true believer is a true penitent1 is regenerated1 is in ,christ by a vital union is a new creature1 and that those persons will be saved and none else1 according to the doctrine of ,christ and his apostles4 ,i believe that ,god the ,father worketh all things according to the council of his own will2 that his redeemed and saved people should be to his glory4 ,you say1 in my writing to you1 ,i said1 do you think ,christ or his apostles would preach universal salvation in one place of scripture and contradict it in another8 ,i believe they would not4--,here you designedly1 ,i think mistake2 ,i do not believe that ,christ or his apostles ever did preach universal salvation1 that is1 that every son and daughter of apostate ,adam1 would be saved4 ,i believe that this gospel of the kingdom is to be preached to every creature1 and whosoever believeth and is baptized shall be saved2 but he that believeth not shall be damned4 ,do me justice1 sir2 do not animadvert upon what ,i have just quoted1 as if ,i think our ,saviour is to be understood as if every individual would have the privilege of hearing the gospel4 ,i conceive that the apostles' commission runs thus3 ,go into all the world and preach the gospel to every human or rational creature4--,what ,i meant by saying1 do you think ,christ would preach universal salvation in one place1 and in another contradict it1 is1 that those texts which you suppose supports your doctrine1 is not to be understood as you apply them2 for if they prove universal salvation1 as you would have them1 then they will contradict many texts which ,christ and his apostles improved otherwise2 therefore ,i still assert1 that the scriptures ought to be carefully examined1 conscientiously improved and applied4 ,the faithful minister of ,christ will renounce the hidden things of dishonesty1 not walking in craftiness1 nor handling the word of ,god deceitfully1 but by manifestation of the truth1 commending themselves to every man's conscience in the sight of ,god4 ,for we are not as many which corrupt the word of ,god2 but as of sincerity1 but as of ,god1 in the sight of ,god1 speak we in ,christ4--,see #b;d ,corinthians1 ii4 #ag4 ,and ,i would take it as a favour1 if you would read the #aeth and #afth verses in the same chapter1 and seriously consider them4 ,those texts of scripture1 which you have quoted from ,rom4 #hth chapter1 are not to be applied as you apply them1 neither doth the apostle apply them so4 ,and methinks you know they are not1 if you consider the connexion from the #bhth verse of the chapter to the end4 ,and that passage of scripture quoted from #a ,cor4 iii4 #ba1 #bb1 #bc1 is only to be applied to real ,christians2 and this1 sir1 ,i presume you know2 but it would not suit you and your scheme of ,universal ,salvation to apply them so4 ,i would ask you1 if1 when ,i am writing a letter or an epistle to ,mr4 ,hosea ,ballou1 it would be proper for me to apply what ,i write in particular to you1 concerning your affairs or circumstances1 to the whole world8 ,ministers of ,christ should rightly divide the word2 and should take the precious from the vile2 then they would be as ,god's mouth to the people4 ,see ,jeremiah xv4 #ai1 see likewise1 ,ezekiel xiiv4 #bc1 ,the priests of the ,lord are to teach the ,lord's people the difference between the holy and the profane1 and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean2 it is by this general way of preaching1 errors are introduced1 not only by your denomination1 but by others also4 ,i could multiply quotations from the ,bible1 both from the ,old and ,new ,testaments1 but what would it avail1 unless you will consider them and endeavour to improve them1 and apply them as the ,holy ,ghost would have us to to8 ,for holy men of ,god spake as they were moved by the ,holy ,ghost1 see #b ,peter i4 #be4 ,you say1 you were somewhat embarrassed in understanding what ,i meant when ,i wrote that men undertaking to explain the scriptures in their own strength and wisdom1 and their making havoc of them1 c4 by explaining them in a mystical or literal sense4 ,i will endeavour to explain what ,i meant--#ast4 ,to allegorize the scriptures in a mere moral or mystical sense1 or altogether in a figurative sense1 is a degree of enthusiasm1 7as to say there is no devil but our carnal nature1 c47 and in a mere literal sense is to understand and improve them not in that spiritual sense in which they are to be understood1 but resting in the letter only2 as we may observe when ,christ said in ,st4 ,john1 #fth chapter1 ,except ye eat the flesh of the ,son of man and drink his blood1 ye have no life in you2 ,whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life1 and ,i will raise him up at the last day2 ,these things said he in the synagogue as he taught in ,capernaum2 ,many therefore of his disciples when they heard this1 said1 this is a hard saying1 who can hear it8 ,christ said1 doth this offend you8--,and informed them he did not mean that they should eat his human flesh1 and drink his blood literally1 but he was to be understood in a spiritual sense4 ,he informed them it is the spirit that quickeneth1 the flesh profiteth nothing1 the words ,i speak unto you they are spirit and life4 ,some have since misunderstood him1 and1 to this day1 misunderstand this piece of scripture2 and have from thence introduced the absurd doctrine of transubstantiation1 that after the words of consecration1 the bread and wine are the real body and blood of ,christ4 ,so some adhere only to the letter of the word and expound the law of ,god in a mere literal sense4 ,it seems the apostle ,paul1 before his conversion1 understood it so4--,read the #gth chapter of ,romans1 from the #fth to the end of the #acth verse4 ,paul was brought up at the feet of ,gamaliel1 a doctor of the law2 yet1 while in his unregenerate state1 knew not the spiritual meaning of the law of ,god1 7,i mean the holy or moral law7 and no doubt he spake by experience when he says1 7as ,i wrote to you from ,i ,cor4 ii4 #ad7 ,but the natural man received not the things of the spirit of ,god1 for they are foolishness unto him1 neither can he know them1 because they are spiritually discerned4 ,by the natural man1 ,i conceive1 the apostle meant the unregenerate man3 yea1 with the highest degree of human teaching and knowledge without he is taught of ,god1 by his word and spirit1 he cannot truly understand the things of the spirit of ,god2 and therefore they are1 as ,i say1 misapplied1 mangled and made havoc of4 ,faith is1 by some1 only held as a bare assent that ,jesus ,christ came in the flesh4 ,none do truly believe that1 but by the ,holy ,ghost4 ,you still will continue to maintain the doctrine of ,universal ,salvation1 by those texts1 which ,i said you spake at the grave with such an emphasis2 if they are to be understood only in a literal sense as they are expressed1 ,i can quote as many or more spoken by ,christ and his apostles which will contradict them in their literal sense3 ,christ says1 ,he that believeth and is baptised shall be saved2 but he that believeth not shall be damned4 ,then shall he say unto them on his left hand1 depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire1 prepared for the devil and his angels4 ,and these shall go away into everlasting punishment2 but the righteous into life eternal4 ,then said ,jesus again unto them1 ,i go my way1 and ye shall seek me and shall die in your sins3 whither ,i go ye cannot come4 ,john viii4 #ba1 #bd1 ,i said therefore unto you that ye shall die in your sins2 for if ye believe not that ,i am he ye shall die in your sins4 ,with respect to that text you quote from ,john xii4 #cb1 ,and ,i1 if ,i be lifted up from the earth1 will draw all men unto me4 ,it is1 ,i conceive1 explained by ,christ himself in ,john iii4 #ad1 #ae1 ,and as ,moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness even so must the son of man be lifted up2 that whosoever believeth on him should not perish1 but have everlasting life4 ,by ,christ being lifted on the cross the way of salvation is to be preached to all men2 but it is only those that believe who will not perish and have eternal life1 according to the foregoing scriptures ,i have quoted from ,mark xvi4 #af1 and ,mat4 xxv4 #da1 #df4 ,i could quote many more scriptures spoken by our ,lord himself and explained by him2 and ,i hope1 sir1 you will allow our ,lord to be the best expositor of his own word4 ,i conceive you think you have got a mighty argument when you mention the apostle ,peter1 who had a vision which instructed him in his duty to preach the gospel to the ,gentiles2 but remember1 ,peter says1 ,i perceive that ,god is no respecter of persons3 but in every nation1 he that feareth ,god and worketh righteousness1 is accepted of him4 ,then he began to preach the gospel to ,cornelius and his friends2 he preached ,christ to them2 he preached ,jesus and the resurrection2 he shows he is ordained of ,god to be the ,judge of the quick and the dead2 and says1 ,to him give all the prophets witness that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins4 ,did he say that every individual of the human race would be saved8 ,no such thing6 ,and though he had further light concerning the ,gentiles1 he never1 as ,i can find1 preached ,universal ,salvation1 but to the contrary4 ,read his epistles1 first and second1 particularly #b;d epistle1 #b;d chapter from #ast to the end of the #ith verse4 ,the ,lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation2 and to reserve the unjust to the day of judgment1 to be punished2 not to be liberated6 ,read #c;d chapter1 #gth verse1 ,but the heavens and the earth which are now1 by the same word are kept in store reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men4 ,peter wrote these epistles after he had further light with respect to the ,gentiles' having the gospel preached unto them4 ,as to what you write about my saying ,i do not envy you because great numbers go to hear you1 ,i still say it1 as far as ,i know my wicked and deceitful heart1 and wish you might preach the pure and simple gospel1 and that your hearers might desire nothing more than the sincere milk of the word1 as new-born babes1 preached unto them2 that they might grow thereby1 c4 ,that place ,i directed you to in #a ,john1 iv4 #e1 #f1 and wished you to consider1 though ,i have in some measure already considered it1 ,i will attempt more particular to consider it4 #ast4 ,you say1 ,john says1 ,and every spirit that confesseth not that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh is not of ,god1 and this is that spirit of ,antichrist whereof you have heard it should come and even now already is in the world4 ,john in the preceding verse said1 that every spirit that confesseth ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh1 is of ,god2 do you think1 sir1 that every person that assents to this truth is a true believer8 ,but few that have been born in a land of gospel light but what assents to this2 but the soul that is born of ,god truly believes it1 according to what the same apostle writes1 #eth ,chapter #ast epistle #ast verse1 ,whosoever believeth ,jesus is the ,christ is born of ,god1 and every one that loveth him that begat1 loveth him also that is begotten of him4 ,do all men that confess that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh profess to be born of ,god8 ,do they love the children of ,god that bear his image8 ,no2 they1 if unregenerate1 are of the world2 they love darkness rather than light1 because their deeds are evil4 ,who does our ,lord mean when he says1 ,if the world hate you1 it hated me before it hated you1 if ye were of the world the world would love his own2 but because ye are not of the world1 but ,i have chosen you out of the world1 therefore the world hateth you8 ,sir1 you know that there has been many antichristian professors of this truth1 that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh1 that have shed much human blood1 because they hated the dear children of ,god4 ,therefore ,i conceive this is the meaning of the text3 we must know for ourselves that ,jesus ,christ is the ,son of ,god1 as ,peter did when he confessed him1 and ,christ said to him1 ,blessed art thou ,simon ,barjona1 for flesh and blood has not revealed this unto thee1 but my ,father which is in heaven--upon this rock ,i will build my church1 and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it4 ,i believe that true and saving faith is wrought in the heart by the spirit of the living ,god2 and the soul that believes truly1 is1 as ,i have already said1 born of ,god1 is in union with ,christ1 is partaker of the divine nature1 and has escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust1 and is pressing forward towards the mark for the prize of the high calling of ,god in ,christ ,jesus4 ,i have wrote more than ,i intended1 having received your other epistle and have considered some of it4 ,this remains to be considered3 what you wrote concerning your having great numbers of hearers4 ,it is true ,christ had a great number which followed1 and heard him1 but few which followed because they loved his doctrine1 and followed him from right motives4 ,he said unto them1 ,ye seek me not because ye saw the miracles1 but because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled4 ,labour not for the meat that perisheth1 but for the meat which endureth unto everlasting life1 which the ,son of man shall give unto you1 for him hath ,god the ,father sealed1 ,john vi4 #bf1 #bg4 ,our ,lord says1 ,john viii4 #dg1 ,he that is of ,god heareth ,god's words2 ye therefore hear them not because ye are not of ,god4 ,hence you may see how our ,lord and his beloved disciple ,john agree2 it is not the truth as it is in ,jesus1 the populace are after2 it is to gratify their curiosity1 or hear something about their salvation in a way that has no cross in it4 ,but ,christ says1 ,if any man will be my disciple let him deny himself and take up his cross1 and follow me4 ,when ,christ preached soul searching doctrine as he did in the #fth of ,john1 ,many of his disciples went back and followed no more with him4 ,and ,i believe when you preach repentance and faith1 and shew what fruits they will produce in the true penitent and true believer1 the world will not hear you and cordially like your doctrine4 ,but they1 as ,john says1 are of the world1 therefore they speak of the world1 and the world heareth them2 ,we are of ,god1 we that knoweth ,god heareth us2 he that is not of ,god heareth not us3 hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error4 ,i have reason to think some popular preachers are good men1 but the world do not like them nor their doctrine1 because they are so2 but because of their popularity their curiosity is fed1 or gratified--and not their souls with the pure milk of the word4 ,sir1 you answer in some way which is ambiguous to me about your preaching repentance1 and say repentance may be preached without speaking the word repentance4 ,what makes you shun speaking plainly as ,christ did8 ,be explicit in preaching it4 ,you cannot deny1 but ,christ and his apostles preached it explicitly4 ,christ said in plain language1 ,except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish1 ,luke xiii4 #c1 #e4 ,in your answer concerning the resurrection of the dead1 you do not speak of that in a clear and explicit way1 and your not mentioning it at either of the funerals1 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 apostles4 ,paul says1 ,seeing we have such hope we use great plainness of speech4 ,i hope1 sir1 you will not be offended with me for plain dealing4 ,as to your apostasy1 ,i hope ,i shall have an opportunity to confer with you about it4 ,i am happy to say ,i feel no rancour or enmity against your person or people1 as a neighbour and friend1 but should be willing to assist you in1 and as far as my ability and power with a good conscience will admit2 and hope this will not interrupt our meeting together as usual in visiting the schools4 ,i think we had best drop the controversy1 and ,i think ,i shall no more write to you1 and hope you will no more write to me on this subject4 ,you may make what use you please of it2 ,i hope it will be made of good use to you4 ,i now1 dear sir1 commend you to ,god and the word of his grace1 which is able to build yon up in the truth as it is in ,jesus1 and give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified4 ,from your friend1 and well wisher in the gospel of our dear ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,,joseph ,,walton4 ,mr4 ,hosea ,ballou1 ,pastor of a ,church4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,v4 ,,from ,,the ,,rev4 ,,hosea ,,ballou ,,to ,,the ,,rev4 ,,joseph ,,walton4 ,,portsmouth1 ,,jan4 #ae1 #ahaa4 ,rev4 ,sir1--,yours of the #aath inst4 is before me1 and according to my promise ,i hasten to pay an early attention to its contents1 notwithstanding you express a hope that ,i should write to you no more on this subject4 ,in your desire1 sir1 that ,i should write no more ,i believe you to be really sincere1 for ,i believe you to be a man disposed to give your friends as little trouble as possible2 but ,i have several reasons for answering your last1 which1 when ,i have stated1 ,i presume1 will fully satisfy you that my answer is required in justice to myself4 #ast4 ,i find myself accused of baseness1 of which1 were ,i guilty1 the forfeiture would be that of confidence4 #b;d4 ,i find my preaching misrepresented1 and that in direct violation of my own declaration in the present correspondence4 #c;d4 ,i find questions proposed for my discussion1 which renders it reasonable that you should have an answer1 as ,i was in hopes of obtaining to the questions which ,i stated to you4 #dth4 ,i find you quite off from the subjects of your admonitions1 not attempting to support them1 nor yet willing to exonerate me from charges4 #eth4 ,i find the scriptures of our blessed ,lord and ,saviour quoted with a manifest design to limit his grace and salvation4 ,i might go on and state a number more reasons why ,i conceive it to be my duty to reply1 but the five already given will undoubtedly satisfy your mind2 and they furnish subjects sufficiently ample for an epistle4 ,to them ,i shall conform myself1 and endeavour to be as concise as is consistent with the importance of the subject4 #ast4 ,your accusation is in the following words3-- ,here you designedly1 ,i think1 mistake4 ,those texts of scripture which you have quoted from ,rom4 #hth chapt4 are not to be applied as you apply them1 neither doth the apostle apply them so4 ,and methinks you know they are not1 if you consider the connexion from the #bhth verse of the chapter to the end4 ,and that passage of scripture quoted from #a ,cor4 iii4 #ba1 #bb1 #bc1 is only to be applied to real christians2 and this1 sir1 ,i presume you know2 but it would not suit your and your scheme of ,universal ,salvation to apply them so4 ,here ,i am accused1 #ast of designedly mistaking you6 ,and1 #b;d of a wilful misapplication of the sacred word6 ,to these high charges1 sir1 ,i beg the privilege of pleading not guilty2 and1 after making my defence1 of submitting my cause to impartial judges4 ,with regard to the designed mistake1 my defence is that no mistake was made by me either designed or not designed4--,i have examined and find that ,i quoted you verbatim4 ,i also find that ,i fully agreed with you in the sentence quoted as to what was necessarily signified by it4 ,i applied the sentence according to my own mind2 but did not pretend nor say that you applied it as ,i did4 ,where then is the designed mistake8 ,could an action lie against a man for murder if no body were found1 on which murder had been committed8--,could an indictment for theft be supported against a man if no property were missing from the owner8 ,is it proper to bring an allegation thus1 without pointing out some sort of mistake8 ,i will not be so uncharitable1 sir1 as to suppose that you designed to bring a false accusation in this instance4 ,no1 sir1 you are not capable of such wickedness2 ,i have ever believed you to be an honest1 sincere christian2 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 it4 ,my opinion is1 that you1 finding that ,i had made such ready use of your sentence apparently to my own advantage1 thought ,i designed to mistake you1 and feeling a little disagreeably on the occasion1 did not look minutely to see if you had rightly apprehended me1 or not4 ,with regard to the wilful misapplication of the sacred word my defence is to be made from the sacred text itself4 ,in this defence1 sir1 it is sufficient if ,i give you reasons which induce me to apply the scripture as ,i do4 ,it is not necessary that ,i convince you or any body else that my application is right1 for we are all liable to err4 ,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 text4 #ast4 ,of the passage in the #hth of ,rom4 the following are my reasons for a general application of that scripture to mankind4 #ast4 ,the whole human family1 at least1 is made the primary subject of the apostle's application as may be seen by looking at the #aith verse and onward4 ,for the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of ,god4 ,for the creature was made subject to vanity1 not willingly1 but by reason of him who subjected the same in hope2 because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of ,god4 ,for we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now2 and not only they1 but ourselves also1 which have the first fruits of the spirit1 even we ourselves groan within ourselves1 waiting for the adoption1 to wit1 the redemption of our body4 ,i understand by the above quotation that ,st4 ,paul meant the same by the whole creation as he did by the creature who was made subject to vanity1 not willingly1 but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope4 ,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 ,god4 ,this is the apostle's primary application of the love and mercy of ,god4 ,in a minor sense he is particular as may be seen in the above quotation1 and not only they1 that is the whole creation at large1 but ourselves also1 which have the first fruits of the spirit1 even we ourselves groan within ourselves1 waiting for the adoption1 to wit1 the redemption of our body4 ,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 spirit4 ,nor do ,i find any expression1 in relation to this subject1 more significant of the deliverance of those who have the first fruits of the spirit1 than of the deliverance of the whole creation1 or creature made subject to vanity4 ,by turning back only to the #eth chap1 we find the apostle laboring the subject of grace and salvation in just as extensive a manner4 ,see verse #ahth1 ,therefore as by the offence of one1 judgment came upon all men unto condemnation1 even so1 by the righteousness of one1 the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life4 ,consistently with this positive and particular declaration of the apostle's belief in the justification of all men through the righteousness of ,jesus ,christ1 we find his following testimony4 ,see #a ,tim4 ii4 #d1 c4 ,who will have all men to be saved and come unto the knowledge of the truth4 ,for there is one ,god and one mediator between ,god and men1 the man ,christ ,jesus2 who gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time4 ,heb4 ii4 #i4 ,but we see ,jesus who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death1 crowned with glory and honor2 that he by the grace of ,god should taste death for every man4 ,rom4 iv4 #be4--who was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our justification4 v4 #h4 ,but ,god commendeth his love toward us1 in that1 while we were yet sinners1 ,christ died for us4 ,in the above testimony the apostle says1 that ,christ gave himself a ransom for all men1 that he1 by the grace of ,god1 tasted death for every man1 that he was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our justification1 that his death for sinners is a commendation of ,god's love to them4 ,now ,i am willing to acknowledge to you1 sir1 and to all the world1 that ,i can make no sense of the above testimony without applying it to all mankind4 ,in the apostle's observations in the close of the #hth of ,rom4 of nothing being able to separate us from the love of ,god1 which is in ,christ ,jesus1 there is a perfect analogy with the foregoing testimony4 ,the love of ,god which is in ,christ ,jesus1 was commended to a sinful world in that ,christ tasted death1 by the grace of ,god1 for every man4 ,if one of all those for whom ,christ died can be separated from that love by which ,christ died for him1 ,i know not why the whole may not be1 by the same argument4 #b;d4 ,of the passage in #ast ,cor4 #c;d1 c4 ,this passage1 you say1 you presume ,i know ought not to be applied to any but real christians6 ,see the text4 ,therefore let no man1 glory in men2 for all things are yours2 whether ,paul1 or ,apollos1 or ,cephas1 or the world1 or life1 or death1 or things present1 or things to come2 all are yours2 and ye are ,christ's2 and ,christ is ,god's4 ,are you willing1 sir1 to presume that ,i know that the apostle ,paul did not mean to dissuade any but real christians from trusting in men8 ,this you must presume in order to presume that ,i know the text ought to be applied to none but real ,christians4 ,is not the sense of no man as universal in the negative1 as the sense of all men is in the positive8 ,why did you not attempt to give some reason for such a presumption8 ,i hope dear sir1 you will not allow yourself to think1 even for one moment1 that ,i am so uncharitable as to suppose you presumed thus1 contrary to impressions of your own mind1 though you cannot think any worse of me than is implied in the presumption4 ,i tell you1 sir1 that ,i seriously believe that the above text ought to be applied to all men2 ,i believe it is wrong for any man to put his trust in man1 according to that scripture2 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 all1 and who will with him freely give us all things richly to enjoy4 ,i do not doubt your sincerity in the above presumption1 but ,i doubt your having paid a suitable attention to the subject before you thus presumed4 ,hasty judgments and sudden conclusions frequently make work for repentance2 but the true christian will1 on cool reflection1 be willing to acknowledge his faults and to remove unjust accusations4-- ,by their fruits ye shall know them4 ,on considering the usage with which ,i meet in this unsolicited and unexpected correspondence1 ,i cannot but call to mind the very different treatment which the devil received from an heavenly dignitary1 who dared not to bring against his opponent a railing accusation6 ,as a further evidence that the text in ,corinthians ought to be applied to all men1 or to men in general1 see the words of the same apostle to the ,ephesians1 chapter iv4 #h1 #aa1 c4 ,wherefore he saith1 when he ascended up on high1 he led captivity captive1 and gave gifts unto men4 ,and he gave some apostles2 and some prophets2 and some evangelists2 and some pastors and teachers4--,now look again to the passage in ,corinthians1 ,for all things are yours1 whether ,paul1 or ,apollos1 or ,cephas1 c4 ,these were the gifts given unto men4 ,the question now is1 were those gifts which were given unto men1 given to any but real christians8 ,see ,psalm lxviii4 #ah1 to which the apostle alludes in his words quoted from ,eph4 iv4 ,thou hast ascended on high2 thou hast led captivity captive2 thou hast received gifts for men2 yea1 for the rebellious also1 that the ,lord ,god might dwell among them4 ,are you willing1 sir1 to presume that ,i know that the prophet ,david and ,st4 ,paul meant to apply those scriptures to none but real christians8 ,i must acknowledge my suprise at such presumption4 ,i will now take my leave of those accusations1 just remarking that ,i feel no fear in submitting my case to any impartial tribunal4 ,the #b;d general particular is that of my preaching being misrepresented1 and that in direct violation of my own declarations in the present correspondence4 ,this misrepresentation ,i find in your letter in the following words3 ,i think1 sir1 your giving your hearers encouragement in your preaching that ,christ will save them all whether they repent and believe the gospel or no1 is of a dangerous nature4 ,in the first place ,i call my whole congregation to witness against this misrepresentation4 ,in the second place ,i call my own testimony in this correspondence which you had before you1 to witness against this misrepresentation4 ,the following are my own words verbatim3--,in the first place ,i wish to observe that ,i as much believe in those scriptures which speak of the necessity of repentance1 as ,i do in any part of the sacred writings4 ,the many scriptures which you have judiciously quoted to prove the propriety of the doctrine of repentance are justly applied as ,i conceive1 and ,i accord with you in their use and meaning as far as you have explained them4 ,while a man is in a state of unbelief he is not in the enjoyment of the truth4 ,these quotations1 sir1 are all in direct opposition to your representation of the subject of repentance4 ,here again ,i ought to observe1 that ,i am far from accusing you of an intentional fault1 or a wilful misrepresentation2 though in order to suppose you clear from such a fault1 ,i must charitably suppose that the perturbations of your mind were such that you did not give my letter a careful examination4 ,i proved by plain and positive scripture that repentance is as much a gift of ,christ as the forgiveness of sins1 which is1 with the passage quoted from my letter1 sufficient to convince any man1 who is not improperly biased by tradition1 that ,i do not exclude the necessity of repentance4 #c;d4 ,i find questions proposed for my discussion1 which renders it necessary that you should receive an answer1 as ,i was in hope of obtaining to the questions which ,i stated to you4 ,these questions are in the following words3 ,i would ask you1 if1 when ,i am writing a letter or an epistle to ,mr4 ,hosea ,ballou1 it would be proper for me to apply what ,i wrote in particular to you concerning your affairs1 or circumstances1 to the whole world8 ,who does our ,lord mean when he says1 ',if the world hate you it hated me before it hated you1' c4 ,to the first of these questions ,i answer1 should you state in a letter to me that no man ought to preach the doctrine which ,i preach1 ,i should suppose that your observation would apply to the whole world of mankind as well as to me2 or if ,i should say in a letter to the ,rev4 ,joseph ,walton1 no man ought to presume his friend to be guilty of wilful mistakes1 and misapplications of scripture without the best possible evidence ,i believe you would see the propriety of applying my observation to all men1 even if you should feel yourself particularly admonished by it4 ,the second question ,i conceive may be justly answered thus3 ,the world which hated ,christ was that religious order among the ,jews who accused him of being a friend to publicans and sinners2 who thought themselves so much better than their neighbours1 as to say1 ,stand by thyself2 come not nigh me1 for ,i am holier than thou4 ,enmity to ,christ grows out of a ,pharisaical notion of our own righteousness1 and it is an invariable mark of a ,pharisee to oppose the humiliating doctrine of equal guilt and equal grace4 ,no man ever hated ,christ who felt the weight of his own sins and the need of a ,saviour4 ,no set of men ever fomented persecutions but such as thought themselves the more particular favourites of ,god than others4 ,when ,i hear certain characters raising such queries1 ,i am almost induced to use the freedom with them which the prophet ,nathan used with his terrible majesty the king1 and say4 ,thou art the man6 ,but ,i dare not assume the place of judgment2 and ,i know my own fallibility so well that ,i have no need to accuse others4 #dthly4 ,i find you quite off from the subjects of your admonition1 not attempting to support them1 nor yet willing to exonerate me from charges4 ,quite off1 ,i say1 from the subjects of admonition2 for you have not attempted to distinguish between the two ideas contained in what you stated as the first subject of admonition1 nor have you told me whether it be one1 or both which you consider thus reprehensible4--,you labour some time on another subject which concerns the mode by which death was introduced1 but you have said nothing about whether ,god originally designed death1 or not4 ,not knowing your real mind from what you expressed on this subject1 ,i queried in my mind how ,i ought to understand you1 and supposing you consistent with yourself1 and having sufficient reason to believe that your creed contains the belief that ,god foreordained whatsoever comes to pass1 ,i explained the sentence accordingly2 but you neither acknowledge me right in this particular1 nor object2 but you say that you do not think you ever told me so6 ,here again1 sir1 ,i can easily suppose you speak the truth1 though ,i am under the necessity of charitably supposing that your memory fails1 for at the first visit which ,i had the happiness of making you1 ,i heard you recommend the ,catechism to be taught in schools which contains this very article of faith4 ,and now1 sir1 ,i must either believe that you would recommend that which you do not believe1 or ,i must still suppose that you believe that ,god foreordained whatsoever comes to pass2 and of course that he foreordained death4 ,and as you admonish me for suggesting that ,god originally designed death for the good of mankind you cannot be consistent with yourself1 as ,i can see1 without believing that ,god originally designed death for a damage to mankind4 ,and as you do not deny believing thus1 ,i cannot but marvel that you should wholly neglect to answer my queries on this subject3 a subject which evidently involves the moral character of ,god4 ,do you feel1 sir1 as if you had honourably acquitted yourself in this particular1 by only exulting in your forgetfulness concerning having given me to understand your creed8 ,does this look altogether like renouncing the hidden things of dishonesty8 ,did you believe your creed in respect to the subject of admonition was hid from me8 ,why then did you not openly decide either one way or the other8 ,may ,i not without doing you the least injustice suppose you were straightened by the glaring inconsistency of your admonition8 ,if you avowed the suggested item all the abominable absurdity which ,i posted full in sight must have been charged to your account4 ,if you disavowed the suggested item then away went the darling ,catechism1 in a moment1 and with it1 more of the preposterous inventions of priestcraft than could be easily replaced to the advantage of the cause of superstition and ignorance6 ,i would by no means suggest that you did any thing or neglected to do any thing from a motive which your own conscience disallowed2 but ,i am impelled1 even by charity itself1 to attribute your conduct in the above case to an improper prejudice against a doctrine of which you know but very little4 ,another subject of your admonition is that of my having apostatised from the true faith4 ,on this subject1 on which ,i was particular1 you make no defence1 nor yet exhonerate me from the charge4 ,you observe you hope for an opportunity to confer with me about this matter4 ,why were you unwilling to write your defence of this allegation1 or be so kind as to withdraw it4 ,i must use the plainness1 sir1 to say1 if you accuse of designed mistakes in writing where no mistakes exist1 if ,i have a verbal conference with you on these matters1 ,i should wish to have it before a ready scribe who could produce the conservation afterwards4 ,you are not to suppose by this precaution ,i mean to intimate that you would report the conversation contrary to truth1 designedly2 ,i mean if when my letters are before your eyes1 you misunderstand1 you might be as likely to misunderstand conversation4 ,you admonished me for preaching a doctrine which pleases the world1 meaning the populace2 and ,i endeavoured to defend myself in that particular3 but you neither attempt to show my reasoning faulty1 nor yet1 acknowledge me correct4 ,this is admonishing1 ,i should suppose1 in the unaccountable manner in which ,popes admonish6 ,you say that many followed ,christ for the sake of the loaves4 ,dear sir1 ,i did not say but they all did2 and if they did1 the question is1 does that prove his doctrine not of ,god8 ,here1 sir1 you will see1 if you look one moment1 that you were off1 far off from the subject4 #eth4 ,i find the scriptures of our blessed ,lord and ,saviour quoted with a manifest design to limit his grace and salvation4 ,you introduce those quotations as follows3 ,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 emphasis4 ,if they are to be understood only in a literal sense as they are expressed1 ,i can quote as many1 or more spoken by ,christ and his apostles1 which will contradict them in their literal sense4 ,christ says1 ',he that believeth and is baptised shall be saved1 but he that believeth not shall be damned4 ,then shall he say unto them on his left hand depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels4 ,and these shall go away into everlasting punishment1 but the righteous into life eternal4'--',then said ,jesus again unto them1 ,i go my way and ye shall seek me and shall die in your sins2 whither ,i go ye cannot come4 ,john viii4 #ba1 #bd4 ,i said therefore unto you that ye shall die in your sins1 for if ye believe not ,i am he ye shall die in your sins4' ,these passages you say contradict those which ,i make use of to prove ,universal ,salvation1 if we understand those which ,i thus use in a literal sense1 as they are expressed4 ,i will state one passage only as an example1 which ,i have before quoted4 ,rom4 v4 #ah1 ,therefore1 as by the offence of one1 judgment came upon all men unto condemnation1 even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life4 ,nothing can be said on the above text which can tend to make its meaning more plain than it is1 if its most natural sense be the true sense4 ,this1 sir1 ,i presume1 you will allow3 ,now let us look for a contradiction of this text in the passages which you quoted4 ,he that believeth and is baptised shall be saved1 and he that believeth not shall be damned4 ,i ask how long the unbeliever will be damned8 ,answer--,as long as he is an unbeliever1 and no longer1 according to the text4 ,is there any expression in the text1 or context that even intimates that any will remain eternally in unbelief8 ,no4 ,where is the contradiction then8 ,there is none4 ,the passage which you quote from the #beth of ,mat4 says1 ,and these shall go away into everlasting punishment1 but the righteous into life eternal4 ,as the word everlasting is very frequently used in the scriptures to signify ages and dispensations1 is there any certainty that it has not such a meaning in this place8 ,answer3 ,no4 ,where is the contradiction then8 ,there is none4 ,the very expression punishment shows plainly that what is inflicted is designed as an emendation of the punished4 ,i have shown in a late publication1#aa that it is in direct violation of the words of ,christ1 to explain the above text to signify a punishment in another state of existence2 and yet1 if we were under the necessity of understanding it so1 it would fall after all infinitely short of proving that1 at some period known to a merciful ,god1 all men will not be justified unto life4--,therefore no contradiction can be found4 ,the passage which speaks of those who should die in their sins will fall equally short of contradicting the testimony of ,universal ,justification4 ,i will ask in the first place1 whether a man's being dead in sin render it impossible for him to be quickened unto life by the spirit of ,god8 ,see a passage which you quote1 ,you hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins4 ,if those who are dead in trespasses and sins can be quickened according to this passage1 what is the reason that those ,jews to whom ,christ spake can never be quickened8 ,you must see1 sir1 that the passage which you quote refutes your notion about this contradiction4 ,you will say that ,christ told the ,jews whither ,i go ye cannot come1 but you cannot but remember that he said the same thing to his own disciples4 ,as ,i said unto the ,jews so ,i say unto you1 whither ,i go ye cannot come2 and afterwards explains himself to mean that they could not come immediately4--,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 quote8 ,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 condemnation8 ,if you do not feel competent to the task of maintaining such palpable contradiction1 why would it not be doing yourself a kindness just to examine that soul chilling and heaven dishonouring doctrine of endless1 unmerciful punishment6 ,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 forever4 ,i acknowledge1 sir1 that my five particulars do not comprehend every particular of your letter2 nor have ,i attended to all which they do comprehend so extensively as ,i would if ,i could suppose it necessary2 but as you were in hopes of receiving nothing1 it is not to be expected that you will find fault because there is no more4 ,footnote #aa3 ,candid ,review1 or ,answer to ,robinson4 ,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 ,st4 ,peter4 ,you say ,i conceive you think you have got a mighty argument1 c4 ,the apostle exhorts us to be children in malice1 and ,i am sure ,st4 ,paul1 nor any body else ever heard a more childish expression which communicated the least possible disaffection4 ,what you quote from ,st4 ,peter with a design to prove endless misery1 without attempting to show that such was his meaning1 ,i forbear commenting upon4 ,if you had shown that ,peter could consistently believe that no man was common or unclean considered in the sheet which he saw in vision1 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 have4 ,i hope1 sir1 if you are determined to take your leave of this correspondence without supporting the subjects of your admonition1 and without supporting the heavy charges you have stated against me1 and1 likewise1 without acknowledging the impropriety of your admonition1 and the incorrectness of your charges1 that you will never attack another of your fellow creatures in the same way4 ,i do not express this because ,i feel the least unfriendliness to you in consequence of the method you have pursued1 but because ,i think it is contrary to the spirit of ,christianity2 it is not doing as we wish to be done by4 ,i do not believe that your soul feels satisfied with it2 but you have some remains of pride yet which keeps you from giving up ground which you are sensible you cannot maintain4 ,i hope1 sir1 you will entertain no apprehensions respecting my cordial friendship to you1 or my readiness to join you in any possible usefulness to our fellow creatures4 ,and1 as you affectionately committed me to ,god and to the word of his grace1 please to accept the sincere desires for your present and everlasting welfare1 of sir1 your humble servant1 for ,christ's sake4 ,,hosea ,,ballou4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,letter ,,vi4 ,,from ,,the ,,same ,,to ,,the ,,same4 ,,portsmouth1 ,,feb4 #a1 #ahaa4 ,rev4 ,sir1--,having taken into serious consideration the whole correspondence which has passed between us1 ,i have felt very deep impressions on my mind arising from the following coosiderations4 #ast4 ,you and ,i are accountable beings1 and must undoubtedly1 sooner or later1 be called to account for the propriety1 or impropriety of our labours with each other4 #b;d4 ,our professional character must1 without doubt1 be a high consideration in our accountability4 #c;d4 ,the eyes of society are ever watchful1 and ,god has made us accountable1 not only to himself1 but to our fellow creatures1 who have a just demand upon us4 ,while these important considerations were revolving in my mind1 ,i felt a sense of my youth1 compared with your age1 my inexperience1 the proneness of the human heart to the vanity of self confidence1 the blindness of prejudice to which old and young are more or less subject1 and also1 the friendship which has hitherto happily subsisted between us since our first acquaintance4 ,these circumstances and those considerations1 led my mind to the conclusion that ,i ought to lay the whole matter before ,god1 and to ask of him suitable wisdom to guide me in relation to so weighty a subject4 ,the result of my devotional supplications is a forcible application of the divine direction1 given by ,st4 ,paul #a ,tim4 v4 #a1 ,rebuke not an elder but entreat him as a father1 and the younger men as brethren4 ,how far your communications to me are consistent1 or inconsistent with the apostle's direction1 in the above test1 ,i do not conceive it my duty to judge1 any farther than a discharge of my own duty1 pursuant to the apostle's direction1 may require4 ,on the most deliberate recapitulation of all which ,i have written1 ,i cannot now say1 that ,i could wish to recall a single idea1 argument1 application of scripture1 or sentiment2 though ,i will not even suggest that better information might not produce a different conclusion4 ,i trust ,i have hitherto treated you1 sir1 and the subjects of your communications with all the propriety of which my understanding is master2 and my fervent desire is1 that ,i may complete the labours enjoined on me by the above text1 in strict conformity to that most holy spirit which inspired such excellent counsel4 ,therefore1 ,rev4 ,sir1 ,i entreat you as a father to consider1 #ast4 ,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 wrongs8 #b;d4 ,whether you entreated me as a brother in refusing to decide1 as to your meaning1 in the first subject of your admonition1 and in not giving me to understand whether ,i had rightly apprehended you or not8 #c;d4 ,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 possible1 that ,i believed in its necessity and importance8 #dth4 ,whether you entreated me as a brother in admonishing me as an apostate from the true faith of the gospel1 while ,i profess to believe in ,christ the ,son of ,god1 as the ,saviour of the world2 and stand in society1 in my various relation by the blessing of ,god1 unimpeached as to morality8 #eth4 ,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 beings2 and in opposing said doctrine with no other argument than saying1 in effect1 that if the scriptures which prove the doctrine are allowed to mean as they naturally read1 other scriptures contradict them6 ,thus furnishing the infidel with his darling weapon against the divinity of the scriptures8 #fth4 ,whether you entreated me as a brother in stating those heavy charges against me1 in which you accuse me of a designed mistake1 and of wilful misapplications of scriptures where neither mistake or misapplications of scriptures can be made to appear8 #gth4 ,whether you entreated me as a brother in misrepresenting my preaching when you never heard me perform in the particular capacity of a preacher8 #hth4 ,whether you entreated me as a brother in taking your leave of this correspondence without supporting one single particular of your admonition1 or one single charge against me4 ,and also1 without acknowledging the incorrectness of your admonition1 or the impropriety of your charges4 ,i entreat you1 sir1 as a father1 to consider whether the spirit which you manifested1 in bring such unreasonable charges against me1 be consistent with the directions given by ,st4 ,paul to ,timothy1 and also with the example and precept of him who loved his enemies and commanded his disciples to do likewise8 ,i entreat you seriously to consider what the conduct of the ,saviour would have been1 if he had been disposed to judge1 denounce1 reject and disfellowship all those who sincerely believe in him and strove to honour him with becoming obedience to his commands1 on account of their not understanding every thing as well as he did8 ,i entreat you to call in question your treatment of me because ,i do not believe in every thing as you do2 and carefully examine if it correspond with the conduct of him1 who1 out of pity to human weakness1 submitted himself to the scorn and hatred of those who considered themselves more righteous than others8 ,in relation to the doctrine1 to which you appear so violently opposed1 ,i entreat you1 as a father1 to take into consideration1 #ast4 ,the promises of ,god to ,abraham by which the doctrine is supported4 #b;dly4 ,the corroborating testimonies in the ,new ,testament by which we are to understand those promises4 #c;dly4 ,the consistency of the doctrine with the character of infinite goodness4 ,and1 #dthly4 ,the consistency of the doctrine with every benevolent and godlike desire of the human heart4 ,if ,god promised to bless all the families1 nations and kindreds of the earth in the seed of ,abraham1 who is ,christ1 and if ,st4 ,paul has informed us that this blessing is justification through faith1 ,i entreat you to consider by what authority you condemn the doctrine of ,universal ,justification4 ,if the apostle has also argued that ,god has made peace through the blood of the cross of ,jesus1 by him to reconcile all things to himself1 ,i entreat you to consider by what authority you condemn the doctrine of ,universal ,reconciliation4 ,if in perfect conformity to the promises of ,god1 the prophet has given his testimony that all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our ,god1 ,i entreat you to consider by what authority you condemn the doctrine of ,universal ,salvation4 ,if you make use of scripture to contradict such plain and positive declarations1 by explaining parables and doubtful sayings for that purpose1 ,i entreat you candidly to consider whether you can do any thing more to the dishonour of the sacred word1 or more pleasing to those who wish to bring the scriptures into disrepute4 ,if you feel determined to maintain and inculcate the idea of ,god's punishing his rational offspring eternally without mercy1 love1 or pity towards them1 ,i entreat you1 as a father1 to consider whether you can invent any idea which1 applied to ,god1 would make his character appear more contrary to the spirit of him who loved his enemies and died for them4 ,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 ,god2 and consider seriously whether it be proper to pray for the salvation of all men1 and then condemn the belief of it as a heresy4 ,i entreat you1 as a father1 to call into serious consideration the real cause of all the persecutions and abominable cruelties which have been practiced in ,christendom1 on account of religion1 and see if you can find a foundation for these things except in the blasphemous notion that ,god is unmerciful towards the impenitent4 ,endeavour1 sir1 to satisfy yourself how the foolish prejudices of ignorant zealots could ever have succeeded in establishing so many middle walls of partition1 and in making so many pernicious distinctions in the ,christian world1 if the blasphemous notion of partiality in ,god had not been the rage of an apostatised church4 ,find out1 if you can1 ,i entreat you1 sir1 the cause of all the madness and folly1 which appear in the habitual coldness and bitterness exercised by the clergy1 of different denominations towards each other1 if it be not the blasphemous notion that their foolish prejudices are sanctioned by ,god6 ,adieu1 ,i write no more4 ,i feel that ,i have done my duty4 ,i have entreated you as a father in love and faithfuness4 ,i leave the effects with ,god2 humbly praying and joyfully believing1 that when we are purged from our hay1 wood and stubble1 with the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning1 we shall see eye to eye and be admitted to a humble seat at the feet of our blessed ,saviour1 for whose sake ,i remain1 sir1 your most obedient and very humble servant4 ,,hosea ,,ballou ,rev4 ,,joseph ,,walton4