Now, although we had never heard of the apos tles having wrought a single miracle, yet the plain facts which have been stated, and which have never been controverted, sufficiently demonstrate that the gospel was miraculously propagated, or that it stood by the power of God, which is all the mira cle that we require.
Unbelievers have attempted to assign various secondary causes to account for the rapid progress of Christianity, without the necessity of a divine interference. Among other things, it has been alleged that the doctrine of the soul's immortality was taught so clearly by the first preachers,and is in itself so soothing and consolatory, that it excited immediate attention, and secured a ready recep tion to a religion in which it formed such a promi nent feature. This very concession on the part of unbelievers furnishes an unanswerable argument against their system; for it admits that this im portant doctrine, which ought to form the basis of all religion, was very imperfectly understood be fore. How then did the uneducated teachers of the gospel obtain such clear views on a subject so important, and so remote from the ordinary con ceptions of men? The most that the learned hea thens could say on the subject was, that it was a comfortable creed, and that even though it were false, yet the belief of it was pleasant in the mean time, and could be attended with no disagreeable after consequences. Certainly our Lord and his disciples took up a very different ground. They made the doctrine of a future state the primum mobile of life, and taught mankind to consider every thing as subservient to this great end. But before this doctrine can be regarded as an attractive one, we must consider what is implied in it, as enforced by the preaching Christ and his apostles. Accord ing to their statement, it is a doctrine that can be consolatory only to the righteous; that is, to those who receive the faith of the gospel and exhibit its fruits in their lives; but it is the most terrible doc trine that ever was preached to the wicked and disobedient; for it declares that they " shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of his power." Unless it could be shown that the gospel holds out the blessings of eternal life indiscriminately to all, it could have no attractions to the wicked, who always form the majority; and could it be shown to have such a tendency, the righteous would have reason to reject it as derogatory to the nature of God and subversive of his government.
It is indeed said in our translation that " Jesus Christ brought life and immortality to light." The word here translated immortality (/,c9/,gerilv) should be translated " incorruption," as is done 1 Cor. xv. 53, and elsewhere; and then it must be un derstood as relating to that spiritual incorruptible life which can be enjoyed only by "the pure in spirit" in the kingdom of heaven. In fact, the doc trine of " eternal life," taught in the gospel applies solely to the principles of the spiritual and divine life, which are planted in the soul in the present world, and which being perfected by the varied discipline of life and dispensations of providence, is at last ripened into complete holiness and bliss in the kingdom of God.
This was a doctrine which formed no article in the creed of the heathens. Their idea of immortality merely implied the continuance of existence, and the enjoyment of the same pleasures and pursuits in which they had been engaged in the present world. Their Elysium was much the same as the Mahome tan paradise. But the "eternal life" of Scripture is entirely the reverse of all this, so far as regards sensual enjoyments. In the Christian heaven there is no hunger nor thirst, no marrying nor giving in marriage, none of those relative ties which consti tute the duties and happiness of society in the pre sent world, and no feeling can be admitted there except these spiritual and divine habits which have been engrafted in the soul from the admiration and imitation of the divine perfections.
. Another misrepresentation has been advanced with a view to exclude divine influence from the pro pagation of the gospel, and to account for its suc cess from common and secondary causes. It is alleged that it takes responsibility from man; and relieves him of much trouble, by teaching him to depend on the merits of another; and that a reli gion characterized by such features, could not but he acceptable to the indolence of human nature.