1. How can _the attributes_ of God be vindicated, in having performed so great a number of miracles, for a long succession of very distant ages, and so few in _latter times?_ If they were performed for the instruction of those times only, are they not equally necessary at present for us? or, if those ancient miracles were intended likewise for our instruction, are they adequate to the purpose? Can God, who gave us reason, act inconsistently with its dictates; and is it rational or fair to demand our belief of things, which are in their own nature far removed from common belief, or common sense, and require something more than the usual testimony of history for their support? When Livy affirms,* that the Gauls conspired against Hannibal, we admit and believe the fact; but when in the same chapter he speaks of shields sweating blood, of its raining hot stones at Arpi, and the like, we justly reject and disbelieve these improbable assertions; neither is any credit given to the account of the wonderful method of curing diseases by the touch, said to be possessed by Mr. Greatrix,* though we find it in the Philosophical Transactions. The miracles of the Old Testament were all performed in those ages of which we have no credible history; what reply then can be made to those who affirm, that miracles have always been confined to the early and fabulous times; that all nations have had them, but that they disappeared in proportion as men became enlightened, and capable of discovering _imposture_ and _priestcraft_. * T. Livii, lib. xxii, cap. 1. 2. Suppose a book to be published, containing assertions of historical facts long past, which had no collateral testimony of other authors; suppose those facts in general to be improbable and incredible; suppose the book to be anonymous, or, which is worse, ushered into the world under the name of a person who, from the internal evidence of the thing, could not have written it; can it be imagined, that such a book would find credit among people, who have the least pretensions to reason or common sense? Which, then, is the readiest way of confuting the enemies of our holy and only true religion, who do not scruple to affirm, that many books of canonical Scripture are in this predicament? They observe that the books of the Pentateuch bear many strong marks of an author long posterior to Moses; that the book of Numbers** quotes the book of the Wars of the Lord, which, as first written, was most probably the book which Moses wrote; that Moses could not possibly have written the account of his own _death and burial_ in Deuteronomy,**** which nevertheless has no mark to distinguish it from the rest of the book. * Lowther's Abridgement, Vol. III. p. II. Greatrix published a pamphlet, to which the attestations of Boyle, Wilkins, Cud-worth, and many other great men were affixed. Vide Life of St. Evremont, printed with his works in English, 3 vols. 8vo. ** Numb. xxi. 14.