He asserts, that Peter was the only one of the men called apostles, who appears to have been near the spot at the crucifixion.

It is very plain from this, that Paine knows very little about what he is so abusive. Where was John?* Paine calls Luke and Mark apostles.

Let any person consult the list of those twelve honourable men, and see if he can find these two names among them.

He says, it appears from the evangelists, that the whole time, from the crucifixion to the ascension, was apparently not more than three or four days.

This assertion shews the most consummate ignorance of the subject upon which he writes.

He says, all the circumstances of Christ's conduct, between the resurrection and ascension, are reported to have happened about the same spot.

Some happened at and near Jerusalem, others in Galilee, which was upwards of fifty miles from Jerusalem.

He affirms that, according to Matthew, Christ met his disciples in Galilee, on the day of his resurrection. There is a plausibility in this assertion, of which many of the others are destitute, but it is without due consideration.

Paine insinuates, that Christ appeared only once after his resurrection.

Read the gospels, and judge what credit is due to such a writer. He appeared upon various occasions. He asserts, that we have only the evidence of eight or nine persons to the resurrection of Christ.

Such affirmations merit nothing but contempt. Were not the twelve apostles witnesses of this event? And what does he make of the 500 witnesses mentioned by Paul?

*Peter was not there at all.-Phil. editor.

He says, there was nothing miraculous or extraordinary in the conversion of Paul; he was struck down with lightening.

This is the apostle of infidelity! What strange credulity is necessary to make a complete deist!

Paine affirms, that Paul's discourse on the resurrection is" doubtful jargon-as destitute of meaning as the tolling of the bell at the funeral ;" and he has the audacity repeatedly to call Paul a fool.

Locke, Littleton, and Paley, will settle the matter of the apostle's foolishness with this doughty champion for unbelief.

After all these instances of ignorance, falsehood, maliciousness, or misrepresentation, will any person undertake to say that Paine is a wise man?

Paine roundly asserts, "that there was no such book as the New Testament till more than 300 years after Christ."

If priests and prophets are such "lying rascals," that there is no believing any thing they say, I close this long catalogue of strange assertions, by askingWho is the liar now?

The principal books, of which the New Testament consists, were in existence, and read as sacred writ, from the time they were first composed by the authors whose names they respectively bear. I defy Paine, or any other man, to disprove this assertion.

I give these as so many specimens of the false, ignorant, or malicious representations of this vain-glorious man. It were an easy matter to increase the number. These, however, may suffice. It can be of little use to enlarge the selection. From the whole, it appears, that misapprehension, misrepresentation, false wit, empty declamation, scurrilous language, and bitter invective, are the sum total, that the keenest capacity, and most virulent enmity can produce against the Sacred Writings. I have examined his books repeatedly, and with scrupulous attention, and

I declare, that he has not made good, and fairly substantiated, any one objection to the sacred volume, that, in the smallest degree, affects the business of human redemption, or the credit of the Divine records. He has, indeed, done his best. The book and the authors whom Milton, Locke, Addison, Boyle, Haller, Euler, and Newton had in reverence, almost to adoration, this ignorant and conceited man hath treated with all possible indignity and contempt. We have given the reader a few specimens of his ignorance; we will produce also a few instances of his insolence. Among other malignant things, with which his pamphlets abound, he says: "The books of Moses were written by some very ignorant and stupid pretenders to authorship.-Moses was one of the most vain and arrogant of coxcombs.-Genesis is but an anonymous book of stories, fables, and traditionary or invented absurdities, or of downright lies.-Among the detestable villains that in any period of the world have disgraced the name of man, it is impossible to find a greater than Moses.-The Bible is such a book of lies and contradictions, there is no knowing which part to believe, or whether any.-The book of Ruth is an idle, bungling story, foolishly told, nobody knows by whom, about a strolling country girl creeping slily to bed to her cousin Boaz.-Wrinkled fanaticism. Priestly ignorance.-Studied craft of the scripture-makers.-Cant phrase of all the prophets.Barefaced perversion.-The lying prophet and impostor Isaiah, and the book of falsehoods that bears his name. The traitor Jeremiah.-Stupidity of the Bible. A stupid book-maker, under the name of Jeremiah. the prophets are impostors and liars.-Jeremiah, another of the lying prophets.-The poetical, musical, conjuring, dreaming, strolling gentry, the prophets. Elisha was a conjurer. The prophets were famous for lying.-Some of them exulted in cursing. Frantic writing of the prophets.-The vi

cious and malignant character of a Bible-prophet, or a predicting priest. The cant language of a Bible-prophet.—This lying book the Bible.-The virgin Mary was debauched by a ghost.-Matthew was a dashing writer. The writer of the book of Matthew was an exceeding weak and foolish man.-' -The sum total of a parson's learning.-Priests and conjurors are of the same trade. It is better, far better, that we admitted, if it were possible, a thousand devils to roam at large, and to preach publicly the doctrine of devils, if there were any such, than that we permitted one such impostor or monster as Moses, Joshua, Samuel, and Bible-prophets, to come with the pretended word of` God in his mouth, and have credit among us.-What is it the Bible teaches us:-Rapine, cruelty, and murder. What is it the Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith.-Fragments of morality are irregularly and thinly scattered in the books of the New Testament. The obscurity and obscene nonsense of the Testament.-Faith hath its origin in a supposed debauchery. The descent of the Holy Ghost is such absurd stuff, as is fit only for tales of witches and wizards.-The grovelling tales and doctrines of the Bible and the Testament are fit only to excite contempt."

These are some of the flowers of Paine's Age of Reason. If any of my readers find a stomach for such stuff, he is very welcome to it. I envy not his taste. If he would give himself the trouble to read Watson's Apology for the Bible, he will see most of these scurrilities handsomely chastised. I shall only apply the words of one of these Bible writers, as he contemptuously calls them, to the case in hand :-"Why boastest thou thyself in mischief, O mighty man? Thy tongue deviseth mischief; like a sharp razor, working deceitfully. Thou lovest all devour

ing words, O thou deceitful tongue! But God shall destroy thee for ever, be shall take thee away, and pluck thee out of thy dwelling place, and root thee out of the land of the living. The righteous also shall see, and fear, and shall laugh at him. Lo! this is the man that made not God his strength-but strengthened himself in his wickedness."

"Some men have called in question the very existence of Jesus Christ, and have contended, that there never was any such person upon earth."

Those, that will call in question whether there ever existed upon earth such a person as Jesus Christ, may, with much greater reason question the existence of Alexander, Cæsar, Pompey, and all the other heroes of antiquity.

"Others there have been, who have presumed to reject the authority of the New Testament."

Those who will undertake to deny the genuineness and authenticity of the four gospels, with the writings of Peter, Paul, James, and John, may with much more appearance of truth, deny the authenticity of the writings of Homer and Hesiod, of Plato and Xenophon, of Horace and Virgil; seeing there is much more evidence for the authenticity of the former, than of the latter.

"Does it appear unaccountable, that the whole Jewish nation should entertain such a warm expectation of their Messiah's appearance, and that they should reject Christ when he actually did come, if he had not been an impostor?"

It is well known, that many thousands of the Jews and religious proselytes, were at first converted to the faith of Christ. This sufficiently proves, that the very general rejection of Christ, was not owing to a want of evidence concerning his mission, but to causes of a different nature.

If it is inquired what those causes were; it may be replied-Many false Messiahs rose about that time.