our Saviour's miniftry was originally addreffed to them, offers itself first to our confideration.

Now, upon the fubject of the truth of the Christian religion, with us there is but one queftion, viz. whether the miracles were actually wrought? From acknowledging the miracles we pafs inftantaneously to the acknowledgment of the whole. No doubt lies between the premises and the conclufion. If we believe the works, or any one of them, we believe in Jefus. And this order of reafoning is become fo univerfal and familiar, that we do not readily apprehend how it could ever have been otherwife. Yet it appears to me perfectly certain, that the state of thought, in the mind of a Jew of our Saviour's age, was totally. different from this. After allowing the reality of the miracle, he had a great deal to do to perfuade himself that Jefus was the Meffiah. This is clearly intimated by various paffages of the gofpel hiftory. It appears that, in the apprehenfion of the writers

of

of the New Tellament, the miracles did not irresistibly carry, even those who faw them, to the conclufion intended to be drawn from them; or fo compel affent, as to leave no room for fufpenfe, for the exercife of candour, or the effects of prejudice. And to this point, at leaft, the evangelifts may be allowed to be good witneffes; because it is a point, in which exaggeration or disguise would have been the other way. Their accounts, if they could be fufpected of falfehood, would rather have magnified, than diminished, the effects of the miracles.

John vii. 21-31. "Jefus anfwered, and faid unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel-If a man on the Sabbathday receive circumcifion, that the law of Mofes fhould not be broken, are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath-day? Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgement. Then faid fome of them of Jerufalem, Is not this he whom they feek to kill? but lo, he fpeaketh boldly,

and

and they fay nothing to him; do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ? Howbeit we know this man, whence he is; but, when Chrift cometh, no man knoweth whence he is. Then cried Jefus in the temple as he taught, faying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am; and I am not come of myfelf, but he that fent me is true, whom ye know not; but I know him, for I am from him, and he hath fent me. Then they fought to take him, but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come; and many of the people believed on him, and faid, When Chrift cometh, will be do more miracles than those which this man hath done ?"

This paffage is very obfervable. It exhibits the reasoning of different forts of perfons upon the occafion of a miracle, which perfons of all forts are reprefented to have acknowledged as real. One fort of men thought, that there was fomething very extraordinary in all this; but that fill Jefus could not be the Chrift, because there was

a circumftance in his appearance, which militated with an opinion concerning Chrift, in which they had been brought up, and of the truth of which, it is probable, they had never entertained a particle of doubt, viz. that when Chrift cometh no man knoweth whence he is." Another fort were inclined to believe him to be the Meffiah, But even thefe did not argue as we should; did not confider the miracle as of itself decifive of the question, as what, if once allowed, excluded all farther debate upon the fubject, but founded their opinion upon a kind of comparative reafoning, "When Chrift cometh, will he do more miracles than thos which this man hath done ?”

Another paffage in the fame evangelist, and obfervable for the fame purpose, is that in which he relates the refurrection of Lazarus: "Jefus," he tells us, (xi. 43, 44.). "when he had thus fpoken, cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth; and he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with grave clothes, and his face was bound

bound about with a napkin. Jefus faith un to them, Loofe him and let him go. One might have expected, that at least all thofe who stood by the fepulchre, when Lazarus was raifed, would have believed in Jefus. Yet the evangelift does not fo reprefent it. "Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him; but some of them went their ways to the Pharifees, and told them what things Jefus had done." We cannot fuppofe that the evangelift meant, by this account, to leave his readers to imagine that any of the fpectators doubted about the truth of the miracle. Far from it. Unqueftionably, he states the miracle to have been fully allowed: yet the perfons who allowed it, were, according to his representation, capable of retaining hoftile fentiments towards Jefus. Believing in Jefus" was not only to believe that he wrought miracles, but that he was the Meffiah. With us there is no difference between these two things; with them there was the greateft. And the difference is apparent in this tranfaction. If

St.