in the same guilt as the parties who commit the crimes? And I imagine the Deity saw also, the cruelties committed upon the Christians in the third century, which Eusebius says were so horrid as to draw tears out of flint stones. Surely these men will not say, that the Deity had not, nor has not the power to prevent these cruelties; and yet if they do not, the Deity, according to their doctrine, is accessary to the fact, and involved in the same guilt as the parties who commit the crimes! These things, my Lord, require explanation, and a man of your learning and your station and your salary ought to give us that explanation.

I shall now enter upon the subject of the forgery and fraud, in the case of Porphyry, a powerful opponent of the Christian religion in the third century. As I observed in a preceding Letter, the Christians, after the death of Porphyry, forged a work in favour of the Christian religion, and affixed his name to it, pretending that it was his, and they used it as a means of making converts to "our Holy religion." Dr. Lardner, in his Jewish and Heathen Testimonies, in giving an account of the works of Porphyry, notices this work as follows, vol. III. page 193

"There is another work, ascribed to Porphyry, and often quoted by Eusebius, [Eusebius again,] entitled The Philosophy of Oracles. Lucas Holstenius in his Life of Porphyry, has given an account of all his works, and of this in particular, without any suspicion of its being spurious. Fabricius likewise still thinks it genuine, notwithstanding the objections of Fontenelle. Another learned man says: Some have suspected, but without sufficient reason, this book of Porphyry's to be forged.' Dr. Gregory Sharpe also makes use of this work in his Argument for Christianity, taken from the Concessions of the most Ancient Adversaries. He seems not to have had any doubt of its genuineness. For after having quoted a good deal from it, he says:

'I will only make this one observation upon this long quotation from Eusebius: That it contains not only the opinion of Porphyry, but the testimony of their Gods, or if you please, of their priests, who did not dare to deny the excellence of the character of Jesus. These Oracles cannot be called the forgeries of Christians. And whatever may be justly said against those of the Sybils, these must have their weight with all, who regard the authority of Porphyry, or the testimony of our adversaries.'

"This work is also approved by Mr. Mosheim and Dr. Chapman.

"It is also much approved by Colonia, who, besides other things, says, Porphyry declares, and makes our greatest mysteries to be declared by the Oracles of Apollo.' Again: 'He makes the Goddess Hecate say, and he acknowledgeth himself, that Jesus Christ is a man illustrious for piety, and that he is more powerful than Aesculapius, and all the other Gods.'

"This work is quoted with approbation by many other learned men.

"Dr. Doddridge observes: 'Porphyry also, though an inveterate enemy to Christianity, not only allowed, there was such a man as Christ, but honoured him, as a most wise and pious man, translated into heaven, as being approved by the Gods, and accordingly quotes some Oracles, referring to his sufferings, and virtues, with their subsequent rewards.'

"Dr. Macknight says: 'The same Porphyry gives a most honourable testimony to the character of Jesus, which must not be omitted here. It is preserved by Eusebius, in his Evangelic Demonstration.'

The preceding quotation from Dr. Lardner, will give us some idea of the immense service of the Philosophy of Oracles, in the way of proving the "truths of our Holy

HAVE

religion.' The whole of the writers above referred to, evidently valued this book most highly. Yet it was a downright forgery, or a rank forgery, to use the language of Dr. Warburton, in relation to the forgery in Josephus. And I shall show this, from the reasoning and testimony of Dr. Lardner. One writer says, the Oracles of Porphyry, MUST HAVE THEIR WEIGHT. That is to say, FORGERIES MUST THEIR WEIGHT! Another says, he [Porphyry] acknowledgeth Jesus Christ to be a man illustrious for piety, and more powerful than Aesculapius, and all the other Gods. Another says, he honoured Jesus as a most wise and pious man, translated into heaven; and so they go on. Were these men knaves, or were they labouring under a most egregious mistake? Were they joining in the fraud commenced by the Fathers, with regard to this book, and deceiving people; or were they monstrously mistaken as to the character of this book? One or the other of these, they must have been, and whichever it is, their authority in favour of the Christian religion is not worth a straw. I shall proceed with this subject in my next Letter.

I am, my Lord, respectfully,

Hulme, November 13th 1840.

C. J. HASLAM.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

All communications must be addressed in future, 65, Stott-Street, George-Street, Hulme, Manchester.

PRINTED BY C. J. HASLAM, HULME.

LETTER XII.

TO THE BISHOP OF EXETER:

CONTAINING

MATERIALS FOR DECIDING THE QUESTION,

WHETHER OR NOT

THE BIBLE IS THE WORD OF GOD?

BY C. J. HASLAM.

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR, HULME, MANCHESTER.

MY LORD,

Price one Penny.

In the passage which I transcribed in my last Letter from Dr. Lardner, respecting the Philosophy of Oracles, we saw that a number of learned men referred to, and quoted from that work, for the purpose of convincing people of the truth of the Christian religion. Whether these men were honest or not, that is to say, whether they were following the example of the Fathers, and other ancient advocates of the Christian religion, and deceiving people with regard to this book, or whether they were mistaken as to its character, is a question which might be discussed. I have no doubt but arguments could be advanced on either side. But I decline entering into this discussion, seeing that whichever way

it be, the result is the same: for if they were mistaken, their authority is worth nothing; and if they were deceiving people, it is worth less, if it be possible. If they were mistaken, they might be mistaken with regard to other books as well as this; and if they were deceiving people, they were dishonest men, and unworthy of confidence in both cases. My argument is the same, whether these men were honest or dishonest; and your lordship can take which side you please.

As to

Before I proceed with the testimony of Dr. Lardner, with regard to this book, I will just transcribe here a passage from Du Pin, which bears upon the question here noticed; namely, whether the Fathers, and other advocates of the Christian religion, in using spurious writings for the purpose of advancing that religion, were dishonest men, or whether they were mistaken men? That is to say, whether they really deceived people designedly, with spurious writings, or whether they were mistaken as to the character of those writings? those Fathers, and other advocates, who forged the writings, there can be no doubt as to their dishonesty. Their fraud and imposture must be apparent to the dullest comprehension. And with respect to those who did not forge them, but merely made use of them for the purpose of convincing people of the truth of the Christian religion, I am quite satisfied in my own mind, that the great majority of them, were decidedly dishonest men; that they were conscious of the spurious character of the writings they made use of, and consequently, by imposing them upon the people as genuine, they deceived people designedly. In my preceding Letters, on several occasions, I have advanced arguments to show, that this must have been the case. And those arguments I regard as beyond the power of your lordship to contravert. But for the sake of allowing the best explanation that can be given, of proceedings so disgraceful to the character of priests, I quote the following passage from Du Pin, wherein he wishes to produce an impression, that the