God given to mankind in the resurrection of his beloved Son Jesus Christ.

But what need, you will say, of this new evidence? Were not the arguments which natural religion affords, sufficient to support the belief and expectation of a future judgment? If so, to what purpose is it to call men from a dependence on their reason, to rely on the evidence of men for the truth of a fact so uncommon, and in the nature of it so surprising, as not easily to gain admittance to our belief? a fact, which had we seen ourselves, we might perhaps have suspected the report of our own senses, and cannot therefore easily refer ourselves to the senses of others, in a matter of so great moment and consequence?

Whoever, in answer to this difficulty, endeavors to weaken and enervate the natural arguments for a future state, is, I think, very ill employed: to me they appear so convincing, that I cannot, so amiable, that I would not lessen your opinion of them but then it is certain that they require more thought and speculation to place them before the mind in their true and strongest light, than the generality of men are capable of exercising. And whether this be so or no, is a matter fitter to be determined by the evidence of history, than by reasoning on the case. We are very ill judges, under the light we now enjoy, how far the generality of men could go by the mere strength of reason, without the assistances we have. A right notion of God is the foundation of all true religion; and who is there that thinks himself obliged to any thing but his own reason for this notion? and yet, if this be the case, the world is mightily improved in reason these last ages: for we certainly know many ages past, when the true notion of God was hardly to be found in any nation, commonly to be found in none. Since the publication of the gospel the darkness has been dispelled, and reason sees and approves the truths which were before in great measure hid from her eyes. The case is the same with respect to the natural arguments for a future state: the arguments duly proposed and considered are of great weight: but yet it is evident they had little weight in the world for many ages together. The natural notion was so buried under superstitious fables and absurd representations,

that it yielded no comfort or satisfaction; was so liable to be exposed and ridiculed for the extravagant representations which attended it, that it afforded no certainty, or even probability, to support the hopes of virtue: the vulgar had no ability to reason much on the case; and the learned, who did, were full of doubts and uncertainties, and found no sure ground to stand on. To remedy this evil, God has proposed a new evidence to the world: he called his Son from the grave, and showed him before chosen witnesses for many days: who were sent into the world to publish his resurrection, as an evidence of a future general resurrection of all men, and to seal the truth of their doctrine with their own blood.

Now, as to this evidence, it is in the nature of it the properest for the generality of men; it requires no abstracted reasoning, no refinements, to show the force of it: nay, were the wisest man to choose an evidence for himself of the certainty of a resurrection, I know not what he could desire more than to see one rise from the dead.

As to those who pretend to be real and true Deists, I cannot see what there is in this evidence to offend them: the main thing we prove by it they acknowlege to be true, that God will judge the world. Since then the Christian religion has no private design to serve by this evidence, but produces it in confirmation of the general sense of nature which all true religion does admit, why should it be suspected of deceit ?

Besides, the belief of a future state, supported by the evidence of the resurrection of Christ, is applied to no other purposes in the Christian religion, than every wise and good man would desire it should be applied to, were it a matter to be submitted to his choice. Let us see: the gospel labors to assure us of the certainty of our resurrection to eternal life; and not content with the common evidence of reason for a future state, has given us a new proof from the very hand and immediate power of God there is such a concern showed in the gospel for fixing and establishing this proof, that we may be sure this proof was provided for the sake of carrying on the great end and design of the gospel, whatever it is: so that if there is any thing amiss, any delusion or deceit in the gospel, we may certainly find it leaning on this article of the resur

rection for its support. But now, what does the gospel require of us, in virtue of our belief of this article? Why, nothing but what reason and natural religion require of us: to live soberly and righteously, in obedience to God, and in love with our brethren. Where is there any ground now for suspicion in the case? Men do not use to play tricks, or endeavor to impose on the world for nothing. Show us then any one use made of this article in the gospel, but what all sober-minded men will allow to be a just and proper use, and we will part with our evidence: but if no such thing can be showed, never suspect any guile or deceit in the evidence calculated to serve and promote such noble and worthy purposes.

One thing there is in the Scripture account of a future state that is new, the designation of the man Christ Jesus for Judge of the quick and the dead: but this is such a new thing as is liable to no objections on the part of natural religion; for it is no part of natural religion to maintain that God must do every thing immediately by himself, and in his own person, without using the agency or ministry of other beings. This designation of Christ to be Judge of the world is no impeachment of the authority of God: the Son acts by the Father's commission, who hath given all judgment to him: it makes no change in the nature of the judgment: we shall answer for nothing to Christ, but what our reason tells us we are accountable for. So that take in all the circumstances belonging to this article of Christian faith, and yet there is nothing for you to do, nothing for you to expect, but what you are already persuaded you ought to do and expect, if you are in truth so honest and sincere a professor of natural religion as to believe in God, and that he will judge the world in truth and justice. This difference there is between you and a Christian believer: you have such hopes of futurity as reason and reflexion can furnish out: the Christian has the same hopes, and in the same degree; but has moreover the express promise and testimony of God, confirmed by the resurrection of his only Son, to strengthen his expectations of immortality. Suppose the Christian mistaken, even then he stands on the same ground that you do; suppose his faith to be well established, he stands on much better, and

is able to render to himself a better account of the hope that is in him. This is the advantage we draw from this great article of faith an article introduced to serve true religion, founded on an evidence of such force, that it can make its way to every understanding, and wants no help from philosophy to support it.

Thus you see how the gospel has supplied the defect of natural religion in this momentous point: how wisely this provision of the gospel was made, let experience bear witness. Wherever the gospel prevails, the hopes of immortality are clear and distinct: the preaching the resurrection of Christ conveys to the lowest member of the church of Christ a clear conception of his own future condition.

The resurrection itself was indeed a great and stupendous work; but the hand that performed it was greater. No one, who believes that God made all men at first, can possibly doubt of his power to raise them again from the grave. Allow, you will say, to the power of God all that can be desired; yet still the resurrection remains to be proved as to the fact and proved it is by the concurrent testimony of eye-witnesses, who have given not only their words, but their very lives, in confirmation of this truth and surely they were in very good earnest, when they embraced and taught the doctrine on such hard terms. And methinks no serious man should be very hard of belief in this case. Did the article of the resurrection make any alteration in our notions of God or of religion; did it bring any new burden on us of any sort, it would be no wonder to see men very careful how they admitted it: but now that it requires nothing at our hands but what reason and nature require, is attended with no burden or expense to us, pretends only to establish and confirm the hopes of nature, what pretence for being so very scrupulous? Admit the article, your hopes are much improved, your duty nothing increased; reject the article, your duty is the same, and your hopes much less.

How kind a provision has the gospel made for our weakness! how powerfully has it supported the interest of true religion, by furnishing the world with so plain and yet so strong a proof of a future state, and a judgment to be executed in

righteousness, by the man Christ Jesus, whom God raised from the dead, and hath ordained to be the Judge of all the world! Let us hold fast this hope: let this hope be our constant encouragement in doing the work of the Lord; let us do his work cheerfully and heartily, knowing for certain that 'our labor shall not be in vain in the Lord,'