to charge his Adverfaries with (u) dishoneft Methods, without affigning one Inftance thereof to fupport his Charge.

II. So much of the Words of the Citation or Objection, as are yours, are self-evident Propofitions, and are not urged by you as an Objection to Miracles being a Proof of the Truth of the Chriftian Religion, but as an Objection to their being a Proof, on the Suppofition that the Meffiahfhip of JESUS of Nazareth cannot be made out from the Old Teftament. And your Objection is rightly understood and confirm'd by Dean SHERLOCK, as a juft and Christian Observation, who fays, (x) whether JESUs is the Perfon, or no, pro"mised by MOSES and the Prophets, must "be tried by the Words of Prophefy; and "that it has been very juftly, as well as acutely obferved, that the Proof of this Point. muft rely entirely on the Evidence of Prophefy." Miracles, fays the Dean, "in this Cafe afford no Help. If the Prophets have not spoken of Chrift, all the Miracles in "the World will not prove that they have fpoken of him."

So that Dr. LOBB is utterly mistaken in afferting your Objection to be an Objection against Miracles being a Proof of the Truth of Christianity; and moreover, by owning the Truth of your Objection, he owns it to

(#) p. vii.

(x) Sherlock's Ufe, p. 94

be

be a juft Objection to Miracles being a Proof of the Truth of Chriftianity.

III. It should therefore feem needless to confider his Anfwers to an Objection, which he mistakes the Design of, as well as falfly cites. However, let us confider the three Anfwers he pretends to give.

1. His first Answer is, (y)" that indeed no Manner of Arguments can prove That to "be true, which is falfe; or that Founda"tion to be valid, which is in itself in

valid; or a falfe Inference to be true; "or those Prophefies to be fulfill'd, which "have not been fulfill'd; or those Things "to be spoken concerning Chrift, which "were not spoken concerning him:" And THUS FAR HE AGREES With the OBJECTOR. But, adds he, "How does it appear, "that the Foundation of the Chriftian Religion is in itself invalid; or that any Inference drawn by CHRIST or his Apostles is falfe; or that any Prophefy, afferted by "CHRIST or his Apoftles to have been fulfill'd, has not been fulfill'd; or that any

Thing they fay was fpoken concerning "CHRIST, was not spoken concerning him? "None of these Particulars have been proved, "and therefore the Objection is groundless " and impertinent; and befides, the Allegations "to fupport it have been confuted."

(y) p. xii.

Herein

Herein he gives up the Point; for when he fays, he thus far agrees with the Objector, he agrees with you in all you fay. And as to his asking how it appears that the Foundation of the Chriftian Religion is in itself invalid, &c. what has That to do with the Truth of your Obfervation? The Invalidity of the Foundation of Chriftianity is not denied in it, (or any where else by you) but is merely fuppofed here in the Way of Argument; and your Obfervation is equally true, whethet the Foundation of Christianity be in itself valid or invalid. The Pertinency of your Obfervation, which Dr. Lobb calls groundlefs and impertinent, and Dean Sherlock calls juft and acute, lies in This; that Miracles prove nothing in the Cafe of the Application of Old Teftament-Prophefies, which are only to be judged pertinently or impertinently applied, from the Confideration of their Senfe, as they ftand in the Old Testament; much lefs do Miracles prove any Thing in Cafe the Prophefies are mifapplied.

દરે

His fecond Answer is, (x)" that tho' no Arguments can prove a Propofition to be true, which is in itself false; yet Miracles' may confirm a true Teftimony, the Truth "of which might not otherwise be fo evident; "and may make thofe Declarations to appear true, the Truth whereof could not other"wife be fo clearly demonftrated."

.

Herein alfo he yields to the Truth of your Obfervation, and afferts the fame Thing you do. And as to his faying Miracles may confirm a true Teftimony, the Truth of which might not otherwise be fo evident; he himfelf very juftly afferts That, as confiftent with the faid Obfervation; and confequently cannot make that Affertion to invalidate the Obfervation, without being inconfiftent with himself. I add, with Refpect to the Truth of the Propofition, that Miracles may confirm a true Teftimony, the Truth whereof might not otherwife be fo evident; that if he would make out that Propofition by Reason, he fhould prove that Miracles (which, as all agree, may be done by Beings inferior to God, and even by evil Beings) are certain Marks of the Veracity, as well as Power of their Author.

His third Answer is, (a) " that nothing can be more certain, than that the Chriftian Religion was confirm'd by Miracles; that confequently nothing can be more certain, "than the Truth of the Chriftian Religion; (b) and confequently, whatever Doctrine " is confirm'd by this Evidence must be con"cluded undoubtedly true, notwithstanding "ANY Difficulties, that may attend it."

To This I reply, that This indeed is contradicting you, and alfo himself. For if Miracles will confirm Doctrines, notwithstanding

(4) p. 15.

(b) p. 17.

ANY

ANY Difficulties in thofe Doctrines; they may then confirm Interpretations of the Old Teftament, which feem to us (or are) false; and may confirm Doctrines, which feem to us contrary to Reason, and to the common Notions of Morality. ANY Difficulty, as for Example, a Difficulty, which cannot be anfwer'd (as (c) Dr. LOBB elsewhere expreffes it) is a Demonftration of the Falfhood of the Propofition, to which it lies; and it manifeftly is fo of a probable Propofition or Propofition grounded on probable Evidence, and particularly in the Cafe of Miracles; which admit only of probable Evidence, that they were ever done, and can in themselves be pretended only to be probable Proofs of the Truth of Propofitions. And it can only be probable, that they are probable Proofs of the Truth of Propofitions. And if a Difficulty, which cannot be anfwer'd, is a Demonftration of the Falfhood of the Propofition, against which it lies, then to affert that "whatever Doctrine is "confirm'd by Miracles must be undoubtedly true, notwithstanding ANY Difficulties that may attend it, is all one as to fay, that << Miracles will prove what is falfe to be true." Thus I have confider'd the only direct Attack, that Dr. LоBB has made upon you; which, fince he was capable of grounding on a falfe Quotation; a Quotation not to be found your Book; a Quotation, which, though to

in

() P. 97.

A a 2

be