tion. We see that Modern Infidelity has been devoted to the defence of doctrines the most opposite and adverse, on every prominent point in theology, in morals, in philosophy, in sacred history, in reference to the past, the present and the future. Thus in regard to the first and most interesting of all inquiries, as to the being of a personal God, what endless disputes have we seen? held the most contradictory opinions set forth; some teaching the existence of God, and others denying it, and others again entertaining a modified view, that admits the existence of God, not as an individual person, but as the laws of nature, or the moral order of the universe.

We have be

In regard to the attributes and character of the Divine Being, infidels have held various views; inasmuch as He is sometimes represented as possessing every glorious attribute, and again He is described as unjust, changeable and imbecile. These writers have differed as to the possibility of a Revelation, some holding that such an event was possible, and others that it was impossible. They differ as to the necessity of a Revelation; many thinking that there is, and others that there is not any such necessity. They widely differ on every point of morals; and crimes which one class regards as of great importance, another represents as venial and insignificant. They vary in all their opinions of moral duties; and nothing could be imagined more hybrid and incongruous, than the various notions which have been proclaimed on every subject belonging to the ethical system. They differ as to the proper function of Reason in matters of religion; some holding that reason has no right to enter the domain of the infinite or superhuman; and others teaching that reason is the universal test of all truth.

They differ as to the immortality of the soul, some contending that it continues in an eternal duration, others,

that it expires with the body, and endures no more. They differ as to the responsibility of the present life, and its probationary character, some teaching that men's future depends on their present, others teaching the contrary. They differ as to the great purposes of the present existence; for some hold the pursuits of ambition, others of pleasure, others of self-defence as the highest aim. They differ as to the existence of a Providence; some contending for the universal prevalence of chance in the affairs of the universe, others holding the idea of Fatalism, and others again teaching the rational jurisdiction of the Providence of God. They differ as to the origin of the universe, some ascribing it to one process, and others to another equally irreconcilable. They differ as to the existence and character of angels;—as to the fact of the Fall, and as to the possibility of a future resurrection.

Thus, indeed, might we proceed to the enumeration of every point of the least consequence, which has ever engaged the attention of rational man, and say with truth, in regard to every one of them, that they contend, and disagree, and exhibit the most irreconcilable diversity. It would be difficult to say, upon what one point Modern Infidelity has ever been agreed. It would, indeed, be wholly impossible to designate one such solitary item. Any one who intelligently surveys this subject will perceive that Infidelity is wholly a negative system; it tears down everything, and builds up nothing. It destroys every human consolation and conviction; but gives nothing in return. Like a robber grasping always at the treasures of others, it has never imparted the smallest pittance to supply the most urgent wants of those whom it has defrauded.

From the preceding survey we deduce the following important inferences. The first is, in view of the endless contradictions of Modern Infidelity, that the truth cannot

possibly exist there. Truth cannot contradict itself. It is united and harmonious. Here in these infidel systems, we meet only with contradiction, and hence no harmonious truth can be found in it. We must first destroy these contradictions of Infidelity themselves. But if we venture on such a task, we destroy Infidelity itself—its nature is involved in these very contradictions. Had truth been there, it had long since shown and approved itself as such, and would have divested the opposers of the Bible, and the friends of unbelief of all their hostile attributes, and fused them into one. We infer again, that even if the truth existed in any one of the many forms of Infidelity, which we have described, it would be impossible to decide which one possessed it; inasmuch as each claims to be the only true one, and each claims to be judged by the same standard. Even if we were to grant that some one form of Infidelity possessed the truth, it would be impossible to decide the proper claimant, as each makes the same pretensions, and each has nearly equal evidences to sustain them. Now it is absurd to say, that truth was never designed to be known and recognized; its author God, intended it to be universally apprehended, and hence universally received. If he designed the truth to be obeyed at all, he must have intended it to be known. But in this endless variety we should be lost; and should be left in an uncertainty equal in hatefulness and danger, to entire ignorance itself. It may be asked whether, when we cannot ascertain whether a thing be true or not, it thereby becomes impossible for it to be truth? It would be so much so, that our uncertainty would prevent us from proving any other system to be false; nor could we prove the Bible then to be in error, even if it were so. From the diversified nature of

Modern Infidelity it results, that when men build up and

sustain one portion or school, by the same act, they pull down another portion or school. Hence they can never succeed in triumphing themselves, nor can they be successful in permanently injuring the religion of the Bible.

We infer again that even if Modern Infidelity could be established as true, it would be highly injurious to men in an intellectual respect. It debases the soul from its highest and noblest aspirations, and binds it down to associations which are transient and trivial. It would be of no service in a moral or social respect, for it removes every noble incentive to virtue, every honorable inducement to action and excellence. It would be of no use in a spiritual respect; for the immortality of the soul, and the heaven of the good as taught by Infidelity, and often denied by it, are unworthy of the regard or the attainment of a noble nature. If Infidelity be true, it disgraces God, sometimes by denying his existence altogether, and at others investing him with attributes which are unworthy and dishonorable. And if there was no other argument than this to condemn Infidelity, this would abundantly do it; for it is palpably absurd to regard truth as disgraceful to God, its necessary and only possible author. If Infidelity be true it affords far less peace and consolation to man, than the truths of the Bible, in the present life; and leaves our earthly existence barren, hopeless and cheerless. If it be true, it takes away all noble motive to virtuous action. It degrades man to the brute; it makes all his knowledge indistinct and worthless. It makes all duty and obligation uncertain; and deprives every cheering hope, which illumines the future to dying men, of its brilliancy, its surety, and its value.

Now in opposition to all these contradictions on the part of Modern Infidelity, we may assert with truth the unity and harmony of Christianity. The Bible is per

fectly consistent with itself, and its religion, though diffused through countless lands, and developed in distant climes, exhibits the same features. Though minor differences must and do exist among thinking men, on the fundamentals of Christianity all Christians do agree. No one can declare that such opposite elements are presented in the different portions of the genuine church of God on earth, as to make union and identity impossible between them. Now in reference to this feature, Christianity has a vast advantage over Infidelity at the outset. And so powerful is the influence of the disunion of Infidelity, as contrasted with the unity of Christianity, that even if the latter was proved untrue, much less would the former be unable to sustain itself. It would break down at the outset; for when the question would be asked, when truth is claimed for Infidelity-what is it? no definite and uniform answer could be given.

And yet this undefined, chaotic, contradictory and conflicting collection of "profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called," is offered to rational men, as a fit substitute for the venerable religion of the Bible! Why should mankind be invited to forsake a religion which has satisfied the intellects, and improved the hearts of the greatest of men; which has been illustrated by the virtues, and adorned by the faith of a Paul, an Augustine and a Newton, the honor of their race and the glory of their age? Why should they be urged to forsake a religion, to whose service these great and good men consecrated their noblest labors, on whose sacred altar they offered the tribute of their purest adoration, to which they looked when living, as their securest guide, and upon which they reposed when dying, as their sweetest consolation? These faithful monitors stand forth as giant watch-towers for all succeeding generations, pointing us