Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

comes greatly aggravated at the next step of our progress. We have to consider, that the Gospel was promulgated not by one, but by many persons; by the twelve apostles, St. Paul, and a great multitude of other evangelists and preachers. How could these, without the aid of infallible direction, have been consistent with each other? The wisdom of man could never have produced an agreement, among instructors so numerous, in their expositions of a doctrine so comprehensive. But should it even be asserted, in contradiction of reason and possibility, that the primitive teachers of our religion might have themselves excogitated the system of truths which they published to the world; and that each of them might have taught that system with a concurrence of doctrine so exact and uniform, as never to betray the least inconsistency with either himself or his many associates: it then remains to account for the correspondence and harmony of their doctrine with those anterior revelations which were preparatory to it. For it is to be remembered, that this correspondence was strikingly realized as to many particulars, which lay beyond the influence of their control. Lastly, it remains to be explained, how the messengers of those antecedent revelations could have framed their discoveries to an agreement with that mysterious and wonderful economy, which was to take place, at an age so remote as to baffle their calculations, and under circumstances totally

"autem [sc. apostolorum] traditio, quia vera est, quadrat undique, "ac sibi tota consentit; et ideo persuadet, quia constanti ratione suffulta est." Lact. Div. Inst. v. 3.

66

independent of their knowledge and their will. The Law contained the pattern of those heavenly things which the pregnancy of time was destined to bring to light in the Gospel. The Law contains no promise of eternal life: the Gospel does contain that promise. Herein is seen the harmony of the two economies, the silence of the former with the declarations of the latter: for the former provided not the sacrifice of a Redeemer, as a way of reconciliation between God and man; and the latter assures us, that eternal life is in no other way to be obtained. The Gospel sets forth no other name through which we can be saved, but only the name of Jesus Christ, the promised Messiah: and the Law gives no hope of a future life but that which stands connected with the prospect of his advent. Let it be remembered, that Moses was acquainted with the doctrine of a future state; that he must have known its importance; that he, in common with other lawgivers, must have felt the necessity of its influence towards the government of his people: and yet, in the code which he delivered to the Israelites, the sanction of future rewards and punishments is nowhere proposed as a motive to obedience. Of this striking omission, no other reasonable explanation can be given than the following. He could not introduce it without violating the consistency of revealed religion, and contravening that eternal purpose respecting the redemption of man, which was not to be fully disclosed till many ages after his death. Thus, the correspondence of the two covenants evinces the Divine origin of both. The omission of a future state in the one, and the discovery of it in

the other, concur to illustrate the constancy of the Divine counsels: and both the omission and the discovery concur to prove, that the power of an endless life belongs to the priesthood of Christ, and not to the ministry of Moses or the covenant of Sinai.

CHAPTER IX.

THE WANT OF ANTIQUITY AND UNIVERSALITY IN THE SCHEME OF REVELATION, CONSIDERED.

Κατα καιρους οικονομεί τα του κοσμου πραγματα ὁ Θεός, ὡς απαιτεί το Evλoryov. Orig. cont. Cels. vi. 79.

BUT that which has now been insisted on as affording an evidence of truth, has also been selected as a topic of objection: and the objection thus advanced has so near a connexion with the leading subject of this treatise, that the purpose of our inquiry would not be satisfied without an examination of it.

Why, it is said, was not the whole plan of our redemption laid open from the earliest times? Why was not the remedy held forth, as soon as the malady had begun to operate? The Gospel professes to be designed for the recovery of fallen man: why then was it not discovered to him immediately after the fall? Why are the communications of Divine grace dispensed with such a sparing hand? The wants of human nature have called aloud for them in every age which has elapsed since the creation : why then were they kept back from the old world, and bestowed exclusively within the last two thousand years?

This objection has been frequently alleged in every age since the first erection of the Christian church". A modern deistical writer appears to regard it with peculiar pride and self-complacency :

"See Orig. cont. Cels. iv. 7. and Arnob. adv. Gen. ii. 63.

since he expresses so strong a confidence of its value, as to be willing to rest the whole cause of infidelity upon it alone. Let us see how much it is worth.

Before, however, we enter on a distinct and particular consideration of it, there is one general observation which will not be undeserving of regard: because it applies in common to this and to many other objections, which are framed by the ignorance of man, on a view of those difficulties which are, in the nature of things, necessarily inherent in a scheme of revealed religion.

If a system of religious faith be offered to our acceptance, it is reasonable to expect satisfactory evidence of its authority. But it is quite unreasonable to demand a clear explanation of every circumstance connected with the mode of its introduction: as for instance, why one time of giving it was preferred to another? or, why it was disclosed gradually, and not all at once? If such circumstances involve no contradiction to any rational principle, we ought to rest satisfied. They may transcend the grasp of our intellect, they may lie beyond the appointed sphere of its exercise: but this ought to give no offence to our pride, since it is a necessary consequence of the difference between an infinite and a limited mind; that is, between the Creator and the creature P.

• Quoted by Law. Considerations on the Theory of Religion,

p. 42.

66

"Nihil inter Deum hominemque distaret, si consilia et dispositiones illius majestatis æternæ cogitatio assequeretur hu"mana." Lact. Div. Inst. i. 1. Ει τις τούτων σκοπούμενος βασανον

« AnteriorContinuar »