would have required to be proved; but conveyed to us as it is that is, not requiring to be formally stated, but only alluded to, in a letter to the party concerned-it involves the very testimony on which alone such a statement can rest.

To illustrate the argument by a supposed case analogous to it. If a Belgian were to bring to this country a report of a revolt in the Netherlands, and of scenes of bloodshed at Brussels and elsewhere, his report would not necessarily be true; and according to its improbability, would require more or less proof. But, suppose this Belgian a man of consequence in his own country, and conspicuous for the part he had taken in the Revolution: suppose him writing to his countrymen from England; not, of course, to relate occurrences which they had witnessed as well as he, but to give them directions about the management of their affairs, in consequence of the situation they were placed in by the late events: suppose him, moreover, reminding them of the claim he had to their acquiescence in his advice, from the part which he had borne in those scenes, as well as from some commission which he then actually held for their provisional government :

is it likely that such a letter would be sent, unless the writer were alluding to facts, not only true, but notoriously true? is it conceivable, that it should be not only received by the Belgians, but carefully preserved by them, and transmitted by them to posterity?

This sort of evidence, by which the writer of the first Epistle to the Corinthians is proved to have performed testimonial miracles, does not belong indeed to all the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament. To many however it does apply; although not always so forcibly, because in the instance of Paul's Epistle, the force of the evidence consists chiefly in the Scripture which contains the assertion, or implied assertion, of miracles, having been addressed to those who witnessed the miracles; and this circumstance, which is declared by the very form of an Epistle, requires to be proved in the case of history or of prophecy. The Pentateuch, for example, was addressed to eye-witnesses of the miracles asserted, no less than were St. Paul's Epistles; but the fact is not, of itself, so apparent. In some other portions of the Bible, our knowledge of this circumstance rests wholly on external evidences.

§. 6. Prophecy fulfilled a proof of Inspiration.

It is not my intention to enumerate the prophecies of the Old and New Testament, which become by their accomplishment evidence of scriptural inspiration; but, as in the case of the external evidence, shall chiefly direct my remarks to the principle which renders them evidence.

For this purpose it is necessary that four points be ascertained. I. That the prophecy was delivered previously to the event-else it would be no prophecy. II. That it applies to the event, and is applicable to no other; for a prediction that should seem to be fulfilled in more events than one, would not only leave it uncertain which was intended; but would betray the absence of that extraordinary prescience, which is displayed in fixing on the peculiar circumstances and distinct characteristics of the future event". III. It is

d What is called the double fulfilment of some of the prophecies, is, in fact, only a repetition of the prophecy, in one

requisite that the event be such as could not have been foreseen by any human means; for then its prediction might be proof of sagacity, but not of inspiration. IV. That it should not produce its own fulfilment-as in the case of those heathen oracles which so often suggested the measures by which they were apparently verified.

The most striking prophecies are accordingly those, which contradict the results of our ordinary calculations about the future. For example, it being requisite that the early Christians should be deeply impressed with the Lord's prediction of Jerusalem's destruction, and their own deliverance from the scene of ruin, he not only foretold this, but appended a direction which ran

of the cases. For example, Isaiah foretold that our Lord should open the eyes of the blind; and his miraculous cures of the blind were types and prophetical figures of the removal of that spiritual blindness, which was the real object of the prophecy. So in the case of those predictions which were fulfilled primarily in certain temporal events which befel the Israelites, secondarily and fully in the spiritual events of the Church-the true Israel, of which the former was the perpetual type.

counter to all views of human prudence and foresight. The disciples were commanded to tarry within Jerusalem, until they saw the city encompassed with hostile armies ". It is well known that they had faith to do this, and that by a change in the plans of the enemy, which no human foresight could have anticipated, they were then enabled to escape without harm.

Of the many prophecies of the Old Testament to which the test may be applied, it will be sufficient, for the sake of illustration, to select that of Isaiah: "" Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonished at thee; (his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men ;) so shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall they consider. Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? For he shall grow up

Luke xxi. 20, 21. compare Matt. xxiv. 15. and Mark xiii. 14. Chap. lii. 13-15. and chap. liii.

f