Another ftill more remarkable fact occurs, in fupport of this. I read in the history of the times, that the members of the society of which I am speaking, exposed themselves to the greatest punishments, rather than give up to their perfecutors those books which they reputed facred and authentic, and which thofe violent perfecutors committed to the

which were handed about in the churches. And the great care which they took to distribute them into different claffes, according to their degree of authenticity, is an additional proof. The indefatigable and profound Origen, who lived in the third century, diftributed them into three claffes; in the firft, he placed the truly authenticated writings; the apocryphal, in the second; and the mixed or doubtful, composed the third. Amongst others, it was in this laft clafs he placed the fecond epistle of St. Peter, the fecond and third of St. John, the epiftle of St. Jude, &c. The judicious and learned Eufebius, the father of ecclefiaftical history, who flourished in the following century, made almoft a fimilar divifion.-The excellent difcourfe of Mr. de Beaufobre, on the Authenticity of the Evangelical Writings (Hiftory of Manicheifm, vol. i. p. 438) may be confulted on this fubject. Men, therefore, capable of making fuch logical and critical diftinctions, did not receive indifcriminately all the writings, which fell into their hands.

flames.

Aames (n). Can I prefume that the most zealous advocates for the glory of Greece, would have thus facrificed themselves, to fave the writings either of Thucydides or Polybius ?

If I afterwards direct my attention towards the accounts given of the manuscripts containing the narrative, I fhall not find it difficult to convince myself, that the principal parts of that narrative have, in those

(n) I fhould be ill understood, were it imagined that I exhibit this remarkable fact as a proof of the authenticity and truth of those books; a Turk might expose himself to be burnt for the Koran; but a Turk, who fhould expofe himself to the faggot, for the Koran, would not be a proof of the authenticity or truth of the Koran. This may be easily conceived, without being a very nice critic. But, on the other hand, it would be very unreasonable not to allow, that a Turk could not exhibit a ftronger proof of the fincerity of his faith, and adherence to that faith, than by expofing himself to be burnt for the Koran. It would then remain, to compare the proofs which the Turk would exhibit, in support of his opinion, with those which the primitive Chriftians had of the authenticity and truth of their facred books; and thefe are the proofs which I have endeavoured to collect, in an abridged manner, in thefe inquiries.

manufcripts, the names of the fame authors to whom the fociety of which I fpeak had always afcribed them; and this proof will be the more convincing, in proportion to the early date of some of thefe manuscripts, which may be traced up to the highest antiquity (0).

&

In fupport, therefore, of the authenticity of the narrations, I have the most ancient, the most conftant and uniform teftimony of the fociety which is the depofitory of them; and, befides this, I have the teftimony of the most ancient innovators, and of the earliest adverfaries of Christianity, and the authority of the more original manuscripts. What can I then oppofe to fo many united teftimonies, of fo great weight and notoriety? Am I better qualified than were the first innovators, or the firft adversaries of the gospel, to contradict the invariable and unanimous teftimony of the primitive fociety? And is there any book of the fame date, the au

(0) Amongst others, the Vatican manufcript; and that of Alexandria, fuppofed to be of the fourth or fifth century.

thenticity

thenticity of which refts on fo many folid, extraordinary, and striking proofs, and of so many different kinds?

CHA P. II.

WHETHER THE WRITTEN NARRATIVE - HAS BEEN ALTERED OR FORGED IN ITS ESSENTIAL PARTS?

I

Cannot lay much ftrefs on the poffibility of the authentic text having been altered neither can I admit that this text may have been forged. At first fight, it appears very improbable it thould have happened, during the life of the authors (the Apostles); their oppofition and authority would presently have confounded the forgers.

It appears equally improbable, that such forgeries fhould have taken place immeM 2 diately

diately after the death of the authors; their inftructions and their writings were too recent, and already in too many hands.

The improbability feems to increase indefinitely during the following ages; for it very plainly appears, that it would increase in proportion to the prodigious number of copies, and the multitude of verfions, which were continually making from the authentic text, and which were dispersed through every part of the known world: How could so many copies, fo many verfions, be falfified at the fame time? Nay, how would it be poffible for fuch an idea to come into any man's mind?

I know, moreover, that the hiftory of the times proves, that the first innovators did not begin writing till after the death of the firft witneffes. Had thefe innovators undertaken to falfify the writings of the witnesses, or those of the most eminent difciples, in order to countenance their private opinions, would not fo (p) numerous and vigilant a fociety, the guardians of these writings, have powerfully oppofed such a fraud?

(p) The Chriftian church.

And