at once admitted, that none of the writings of the Mahometans, the Hindoos, or the Chinese, would bear a comparison of claim to divine revelation with those contained in the Old and New Testament. If then, said the minister, they do not contain a revelation, there is none, and man is left to the dictates of his own judgment, for one man's reason can be no absolute rule for another man's reason; and intelligent beings are left without a standard of judgment, or rule of moral science, or religious hope. He acknowledged the subject was serious, and that he meant to treat it as such, but declined a logical mode of reasoning; and said, if you can remove the principal objections to the Scriptures being the word of God, I will acknowledge them, and endeavor to conform my principles and conduct to them. These preliminary remarks produced an apparent seriousness, and a gentleman-like mode of conversation, during near three hours very friendly intercourse.

This conversation was recited by the minister to several of his friends, and communicated by letter to others of them, soon after it occurred, so that the relation which is here given of it, is not only substantially true, but as verbally accurate, as the memory was capable of retaining it, and as was suited to meet the public eye.

It was stated by the minister, that it was unphilosophical, and contrary to the acknowledged methods of sound reasoning, to object to the truth of a proposition, because that truth contained some principles difficult to be comprehended. It is not the same as to say, I will not believe a proposition without sufficient evidence of its truth; but it is saying, I will not believe the truth of the proposition, however strong and numerous the evidences to confirm it, unless the nature of the truth contained in it is as obvious to my understanding, as the strength of the evidences by which this truth is established.

Such a prejudice would be a mighty barrier to the obtaining knowledge in almost every science. There are innumerable principles in natural history, chemistry, and even in the mathematics, the truth or reality of which is proved by such incontestible evidences, that no one who is acquainted with them, can for a moment refuse his assent to the truth which these evidences establish, though the truth itself contains inexplicable first principles. Voltaire's "Ignorant Philosopher" was cited as a proof; a treatise on which the philospher traces a variety of positions through their various evidences, as far as they will carry the mind, but which leave it in some first principle not within the sphere of our present strength of intellect, when he, as to every position, becomes "the ignorant philosopher." It was also urged, that such a mode of objecting would apply with equal force against Deism as against Christianity, for it might as strongly be urged against many positions in natural as in revealed religion. By this mode of reasoning, the existence of moral evil, of the providence of God, and even of spirit as distinct from matter, and consequently a future state of being, may be denied, for each of these truths have vast difficulties connected with them, and yet many Deists admit the evidences by which these truths are established. It is therefore unreasonable to object to enter into the evidences on which the truth of revelation is founded, because that truth is admitted to have difficulties connected with it. The Captain was asked how he would reply to an Atheist who should-object to some of the first principles of his system of natural religion on the same ground; his smile indicated that he felt himself pressed in the argument, and he said I would not refuse to go into an investigation of the evidences in favor of revelation, but I think, that if the principal objections I feel against admitting the

Scriptures to be the word of God, were removed, the evidences when presented in detail, would be received with the greater impartiality. The minister perceived that though the Captain's reason was in favor of the mode of argument proposed, his feelings did not appear to be controlled by his judgment, and that his feelings were those of habit and of long continuance, but his reason was only the flash of conviction elicited by argument; he therefore thought it best to meet his wishes and attempt to weaken his prejudices, by removing his objections. This is an object worthy of consideration in all personal debates upon moral and religious subjects, for the feelings of most men are more reluctant to follow the dictates of the understanding than the understanding is to follow the dictates of truth.

The Captain said, the objections were so many and so great in his mind, that it appeared next to impossible, that any evidences could satisfactorily prove to him that the Scriptures were from God. He was requested to state the objections, and after some conversation, the principal ones were reduced to the following:-That the Scriptures give an unlovely representation of the divine character, contrary to what appears from his conduct-that instead of removing the difficulties attending natural religion, they increased them by requiring us to believe mysteries or truths, not within the sphere of our understandings-that what is assumed as a revelation from God to the world, and as a sovereign remedy for all its intellectual errors and moral evils, had not, after so many thousand years, reached one tenth part of the inhabitants of the globe-that the magnitude of creation renders it altogether improbable that the Supreme Being has conducted himself towards the inhabitants of this comparatively insignificant spot of the universe, in the manner the Scriptures represent him to have done-and that

Judaism and Christianity instead of being a benefit, had been an injury to the world. These, said the Captain, are the principal difficulties in my mind, could these be removed, the minor ones would in detail have but little influence, though connected with these and in the aggregate they are very weighty.

These objections in various forms have often been made, and as often answered in a most satisfactory manner, said the minister, but though it can hardly be expected that they can be fully discussed in the time of our conversation, I will put a few considerations before you, my dear Captain, that may weaken their force, if not fully remove them.

In the first objection, you say the scriptures give an unlovely representation of the Deity-but let it be remembered that a character that would be very excellent in the esteem of one man, would be unlovely in the esteem of another; a disobedient son, an indolent servant, a criminal subject, would be very likely to think, that one was subject to an unkind father, the other to a hard master, and the third to a severe judge; though in the estimation of virtuous children, servants and subjects, they might each have an excellent character. It is affirmed by Christians, that God has given us his own character, and that his creatures are in a state of rebellion against him; no wonder then if they dislike the description he has given of himself. You, Sir, also admit the existence of moral evil, now are you sure that the character you deem a lovely one, is not a partial view of him, and if properly understood, would not want what is essential to every perfect character, consistency with itself?

It is possible, replied the Captain, but it appears to me to be a self-evident proposition, that goodness and munificence form the principal characteristics of the Deity, and that he loves his creatures as a

good father does all his children, with an equal affection-It is very natural for you, my good Captain, said the minister, with such a comfortable residence, pleasant gardens, friends, and attentive servants, to think that munificence is the character of the Deity; but would it be as easy in your application of the term munificence, to persuade some of the slaves in Africa, and in the mines of Peru, that such is his character? You are not, I perceive, of the class of Deists who admit the existence of the natural attributes of Deity, such as wisdom and power, but deny his moral perfections, for you say his principal feature is that of goodness; but how does this agree with his conduct? Had not the facts been indisputable, would your system have suffered you to believe, that in a world of his rational creatures, he would have permitted a few to enslave the mass, and make a trade of millions of them from generation to generation for their own benefit, and that a million of his creatures, because separated by some mountain or river, should exert the whole force of their mental and physical energies to destroy each other. I question if you will not perceive, upon a closer inspection, that facts are at variance with your principle; for though it is true that God is good, yet he is just and holy also, and is a sovereign in the dispensations of his will; parts of the divine character, which the scriptures associate with his goodness, in order to give a complete whole, and form the character of the moral governor of the world.

But, said the Captain, I cannot reconcile with my ideas of his character, the account the scriptures give of the commands of God to the Israelites, with respect to the nations around them; especially their destruction of the Canaanites.-These are matters of fact, replied the minister, and as such are parts of the divine government, in whatever view we con