riously charged. Indeed, so far is Christianity from giving encouragement to priestcraft, that the true Christian spirit must be at conftant enmity with it. For, what is the Antichrift, which we fee in the New Teftament defcribed with fuch hateful features, but a fpirit of domination, supported by all the cunning, and arts, and impofitions, of priestcraft? No matter who the particular perfon or perfons be, who poffefs the domination; this the spirit of it, which conftituteth the character. And fhall we charge Christianity with a production, which, of all things, the genius of it most abhorreth? And, in truth, to infist upon fuch a charge, fo much as it hath been infifted on, can answer no end, but to mislead the injudicious and inattentive, and feemeth

to be very unworthy of a candid

fpirit.

Another thing, which may appear not a little furprifing, is, that fome writers against Christianity have expreffed themselves, as if they were above all doubt, that it is a fiction, and that there is not the leaft probability of its being of divine authority. No man, indeed, ought to be blamed, for fetting his argument in the strongest and cleareft light, or faying all that he can to invalidate the arguments used by his adversaries, or for decrying what he thinks unnatural and abfurd. But who can imagine, that a person of candor, who hath perused the defences of Chriftianity, published by the ancients and by late authors, will find the evidences they have offered for the support of it, of fo little moment, as to give him no

difficulty

difficulty in his unbelief? The real truth feemeth to be, that he, who doth not believe Christianity, muft, if he giveth himself leave to think, find himself involved in the very greatest difficulties, and under a neceffity of receiving and defending things, as repugnant to reafon as can well be imagined. Can any man be fatisfied, that there never was, in the world, fuch a person as Jefus Chrift? No fuch perfons as the apoftles Peter and Paul, and the reft? That there was no fuch thing as the religion of Chrift, taught firft in Judea, and thence propagated into the neighbouring countries? That there were not fuch churches as those of Jerufalem, Rome, Galatia, Corinth, and the reft, which we read of in the New Teftament; nor any fuch epiftles extant, in those days, as are said to

have been written to them by the apostles? Just as well might we believe, that there never was fuch an affembly as the council of Nice, or fuch an emperor as Conftantine, who called it. But if, indeed, we will acknowledge there were fuch perfons as Jefus Chrift and his apoftles, and that they did teach fuch a religion, which was, in a little time, received by great numbers of all nations, and continued to prevail in the world, notwithstanding the most cruel perfecutions, till, in about three hundredy years after the first publication, it obtained the protection of the Roman emperor; it will then be incumbent upon him, who admitteth of the above facts, to inquire how fuch a religion could obtain a religion, propagated by a few perfons, in direct oppofition to all the powers

on

on earth, and at fo much expence of fuffering, and of blood, to the profeffors of it; and to find out fome rational account of this matter, in which he may reft with fatisfaction to his own mind. If the gofpel history is true, concerning the miracles worked by our Saviour, his refurrection from the dead, and the miracles worked by the apoftles, all the difficulty vanisheth, and the matter is easily accounted for. We can no longer wonder at the swift progrefs of Christianity, nor at the aftonishing patience and conftancy, with which the profeffors of it fuffered. But if all this history is fiction, then what reasonable cause of this amazing appearance is to be affigned? It is, upon this fuppofition, evident, that the propagation of Christianity must be owing to the fubtilty and craft of those, who

B 3