nation, than that all the nations, whither christianity is spread, fhould confpire in the corruption of the gofpel: which most facred inftitution is to all chriftians of infinitely greater concern and value than their temporal laws, and all the fecular immunities and privileges which they fecure to them.

And without fuch a wicked concert, or fuch an astonishing carelessness and negligence in all christian people and nations fuppofed, (which would be a monftrous fuppofition) no fuch forgery, no fuch alteration of ef fentials could pass undiscovered in the gofpel, which was spread in the hands, hearts and memories of myriads of rational devout christians of all ranks, qualities and fex, was conftantly read in private families, frequently explained in fchools, and daily ufed in public divine Offices. It was impoffible then in the nature of things that there could be any fuch alterations or corruptions introduced into the facred text as would affect its doctrines, morals, or truth of its historical relations, or defeat the bleffed end and defign of the gofpel revelation in any period of time, from the beginning of christianity to this prefent age (43).

1

And

(43) For further Satisfaction on this Article, and to be convinced that the books of the New Testament,

And if from this unanfwerable way of reafoning in defence of the genuine purity of the facred fcriptures, we look next upon the providence of the Great God in this important cafe, is it not confonant to found fenfe and the notions that rational creatures must have of the fupreme and all-perfect Being, firmly to believe that the fame goodnefs and providence, which took care for the writing, would likewife take care for preferving thefe inestimable books, fo free at leaft from corruption, that they might be fufficient for the gracious ends for which they were written, and be able to make us wife to falvation? I think fo. To me it is evident, that fince infinite goodness was pleased to reveal a religion, that teaches

as we now have them, are the word of God, fee, reader, the facred claffics and Jones's method of fettling the canonical authority of the Teftament. By the way, if Jacob Ilive, who stood in the pillory, the 30th of June, 1756, for writing and publishing a thing called, Modeft Remarks on the Bishop of London's fermons (Dr. Sherlock) in a letter to his lordship, price 1 s. 6d. had read with attention the books I have mentioned, (and Dr. Lardner's Credibility of the gospel-history) he would not, I imagine, have compofed a pamphlet, that manifests not only an impious licentioufnefs, but an ignorance the greatest and most despicable, in relation to the subjects he pretended to write on.

The reader will find in my appendix to this Journal, among other curious things, fome ftrictures on

Mr. Ilive's letter.

men

men to know Jehovah to be the true God, and to know Jefus Chrift, whom he hath fent; his providence muft not only preferve the book on which the doctrine depends, but fo fecure it from corruption, as to render it a plain rule to mankind. While there is a providence, the holy fcriptures will remain the facred and unalterable standard of true religion.

What you fay (Mr. Berrisfort replied) feems to me to be true. I have nothing to object. But once more-let me ask you, in respect of the afcenfion, which followed the refurrection of Jefus, is it not very strange, that this is not mentioned by any of the apostles who are faid to have been eye-witneffes of the fact, but Luke and. Mark only are the relators of the thing, who were not apostles, and had all they writ from the information of the apostles. If the apostles, Matthew and John, did really fee with their eyes the Lord Jefus taken up from them into heaven, might we not expect, that they would write the hif tory of that still more wonderful transaction, as well as they had fo exactly related the refurrection of Jesus? for the men, who ftood gazing up into heaven, after the Lord. was carried up in a cloud (as Luke fays they did) not to mention fo very wonderful and interefting an affair in their gospels ;M 3

and

and men who did not fee the things, to relate it as part of the hiftory they had received from the apostles; this is what aftonishes me. If it was a truth, furely fo important a one ought not to be omitted by. those who faw it: fince Matthew and John did write hiftories of Chrift, why should they be filent on this grand article, and take no notice of it in their records? What do you fay to this ?

I will tell you, (I replied): in the first place, noftrum non eft providentie divinæ rationes reddere. Placuit fpiritu fandto ita dirigere calamos Matthæi et Joannis, ut narratione refurrectionis dominice evangelia fua concluderent. (Sic refert Phillippus a Limborch). It does not become us to call Providence to account, or affign the ways it ought to act in infinite wifdom thought fit. to appoint, that Matthew and John thould end their gofpels with the relation of our Lord's refurrection: the refurrection demonstrated the divine miffion of Jefus Christ. To it, as a proof the most valid, and unexceptionable, our Lord referred the Jews, and therefore to it, as the great fundamen-. tal, Matthew and John appealed: they proved it by declaring that they had converfed with Jefus Chrift after he arose from the fepulchre; and when that was proved, there could be no difpute about any thing

else.

elfe. The divinity of the chriftian religion, and the afcenfion and glory of their Lord, rest on this base. All the bleffings likewise of the gofpel, regeneration, our refurrection, and life eternal, are afcribed by the apostles, Peter and Paul, to the refurrection of Chrift: and for these reasons, to be fure, when John had defcribed his Lord's resurrection, he added, and many other figns truly did Jefus in the prefence of his disciples, which are not written in this bookBut these are written, that ye might believe that Jefus is the Chrift, the Son of God, and that believing, ye might have life through his name. We: muft allow then, that the account of the afcenfion by Luke and Mark, may be authentic, tho' not mentioned by Matthews and John.

In the next place, St. John is not totally filent as to the afcenfion of our Lord. In his fixth chapter, ver. 62. it is writtenWhat and if you shall fee the Son of Man af cend up where he was before? and in the viith chapter, ver. 39th. But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe in him fhould receive. For the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jefus was not yet glorified. Here most Here moft certainly the apoftle fpeaks of the afcenfion of his Mafter, and tho' he did not write the hiftory of it, yet, not obfcurely, fays the thing was to be; which

M 4