popular topics, is indeed artfully getting rid of another, which has made a very good figure in many late writings, but will not bear in any place, where he who maintains it may be asked questions. The mere antiquity of the resurrection I gave up; for if the evidence was not good at first, it cannot be good.now. The gentleman is willing, he says, to spare us his history of ancient errors, and intimates that on this account he passes over many instances of fraud that were like in circumstances to the case before us. By no means, my lord, let them be passed over. I would not have the main strength of his cause betrayed in complaisance to me. Nothing can be more material than to show a fraud of this kind that prevailed universally in the world. Christ Jesus declared himself a prophet, and put the proof of his mission on this; that he should die openly and publicly, and rise again the third day. This surely was the hardest plot in the world to be managed; and if there be one instance of this kind, or in any degree like it, by all means let it be produced.

Mr. A.-My Lord, there has hardly been an instance of a false religion in the world, but it has also afforded a like instance to this before us. Have they not all pretended to inspiration? On what foot did Pythagoras, Numa, and others set up? Did they not all converse with the gods, and pretend to deliver oracles.

Mr. B. This only shows that revelation is by the common consent of mankind the very best foundation of religion, and therefore every impostor pretends to it. But is a man's hiding himself in a cave for some years, and then coming out into the world, to be compared to a man's dying and rising to life again? So far from it, that you and I and every man may do the one, but no man can do the other.

Mr. A.-Sir, I suppose it will be allowed to be as great a thing to go to heaven and converse with angels and with God, and to come down to the earth again, as it is to die and rise again. Now this very thing Mahomet pretended to do, and all his disciples believe it. Can you deny this fact? Mr. B.-Deny it, Sir? No. But tell us who went with Mahomet? Who were his witnesses? I expect, before we have done, to hear of the guards set over the sepulchre of Christ, and

the seal of the stone: what guard watched Mahomet in his going or returning? What seals and credentials had he? He himself pretends to none. His followers pretend to nothing but his own word. We are now to consider the evidence of Christ's resurrection, and you think to parallel it by producing a case, for which no one ever pretended there was any evidence. You have Mahomet's word; and no man ever told a lie but you had his word for the truth of what he said; and therefore you need not go round the globe to find such instances as these. But this story, it is said, has gained great credit, and is received by many nations; very well, and how was it received? Was not every man converted to this faith with the sword at his throat? In our case, every witness to the resurrection, and every believer of it was hourly exposed to death in the other case, whoever refused to believe, died, or what was as bad, lived a wretched conquered slave and will you pretend these cases to be alike? One case indeed there was within our own memory, which in some circumstances came near to the case now before us. The French prophets put the credit of their mission on the resurrection of Dr. Emmes, and gave public notice of it. If the gentleman pleases to make use of this instance, it is at his service.

:

Mr. A.-The instance of Dr. Emmes is so far to the purpose, that it shows to what lengths enthusiasm will carry men. And why might not the same thing happen at Jerusalem which happened but a few years ago in our own country? Matthew and John and the rest of them managed that affair with more dexterity than the French prophets; so that the resurrection of Jesus gained credit in the world, and the French prophets sank under their ridiculous pretensions. That is all the difference.

Mr. B.-Is it so? And a very wide difference, I promise you. In one case, every thing happened that was proper to convince the world of the truth of the resurrection; in the other, the event manifested the cheat: and on the view of these circumstances, you think it sufficient to say, with great coolness, that is all the difference. Why, what difference do you expect between truth and falsehood? What distinction

Judge.-Gentlemen, you forget that you are in a court, and are falling into dialogue. Courts do not allow of chit-chat. Look

ye, the evidence of the resurrection of Jesus is before the court, recorded by Matthew, Mark, and others. You must take it as it is; you can neither make it better nor worse. These witnesses are accused of giving false evidence. Come to the point; and let us hear what you have to offer to prove the accusation.

Mr. B.-Is it your meaning, Sir, that the objections should be stated and argued all together, and that the answer should be to the whole at once? Or would you have the objections argued singly, and answered separately by themselves.

Judge. I think this court may dispense with the strict forms of legal proceedings, and therefore I leave this to the choice of the jury.

After the jury had consulted together, the foreman rose up. The foreman of the Jury.-We desire to hear the objections argued and answered separately. We shall be better able to form a judgment by hearing the answer, whilst the objection is fresh in our minds.

on.

Judge.-Gentlemen, you hear the opinion of the jury. Go

Mr. A.-I am now to disclose to you a scene, of all others the most surprising. "The resurrection has been long talked of, and to the amazement of every one who can think freely, has been believed through all ages of the church.”* This general and constant belief creates in most minds a presumption that it was founded on good evidence. In other cases the evidence supports the credit of the history; but here the evidence itself is presumed only on the credit which the story has gained. I wish the books dispersed against Jesus by the ancient Jews had not been lost; for they would have given us a clear insight into this contrivance. But it is happy for us, that the very account given by the pretended witnesses of this fact is sufficient to destroy the credit of it.

The resurrection was not a thing contrived for its own sake. No! It was undertaken to support great views, and for the sake of great consequences that were to attend it. It will be necessary therefore to lay before you these views, that you may

* Sixth Discourse, p. 17.

+ Ibid. p. 4.

the better judge of this part of the contrivance, when you have the whole scene before you.

The Jews were a weak superstitious people, and, as is common among such people, gave great credit to some traditionary prophecies about their own country. They had besides some old books among them, which they esteemed to be writings of certain prophets who had formerly lived among them, and whose memory they had in great veneration. From such old books and traditions they formed many extravagant expectations; and among the rest one was, that some time or other a great victorious prince should arise among them, and subdue all their enemies, and make them lords of the world. In Augustus's time they were in a low state, reduced under the Roman yoke; and as they never wanted a deliverer more, so the eagerness of this hope, as it happens to weak minds, turned into a firm expectation that he would soon come. This proved a temptation to some bold and to some cunning men, to personate the prince so much expected; and "nothing is more natural and common to promote rebellions, than to ground them on new prophecies, or new interpretations of old ones; prophecies being suited to the vulgar superstition, and operating with the force of religion."* Accordingly many such impostors rose, pretending to be the victorious prince expected; and they and the people who followed them perished in the folly of their attempt.

But Jesus, knowing that victories and triumphs are not things to be counterfeited; that the people were not to be delivered from the Roman yoke by sleight of hand; and having no hope of being able to cope with the emperor of Rome in good earnest, took another and more successful method to carry on his design. He took on him to be the prince foretold in the ancient prophets; but then he insisted that the true sense of the prophecies had been mistaken; that they related not to the kingdoms of this world, but to the kingdom of heaven; that the Messias was not to be a conquering prince, but a suffering one; that he was not to come with horses of war and chariots of war, but was to be meek and lowly, and riding on an ass. By this means he

See Scheme of Literal Prophecy, p. 26.

+ Ibid. p. 27.

got the common and necessary foundation for a new revelation, which is to be built and founded on a precedent revelation.*

To carry on this design, he made choice of twelve men of no fortunes or education, and of such understandings as gave no jealousy that they would discover the plot. And what is most wonderful, and shows their ability, whilst the master was preaching the kingdom of heaven, these poor men, not weaned from the prejudices of their country, expected every day that he would declare himself a king, and were quarrelling who should be his first minister. This expectation had a good effect on the service, for it kept them constant to their master.

I must observe farther, that the Jews were under strange apprehensions of supernatural powers; and as their own religion was founded on the belief of certain miracles said to be wrought by their lawgiver Moses, so were they ever running after wonders and miracles, and ready to take up with any stories of this kind. Now as something extraordinary was necessary to support the pretensions of Jesus, he dexterously laid hold on this weakness of the people, and set up to be a wonder-worker. His disciples were well qualified to receive this impression; they saw, or thought they saw, many strange things, and were able to spread the fame and report of them abroad.

This conduct had the desired success. The whole country was alarmed, and full of the news of a great prophet's being come among them. They were too full of their own imagination to attend to the notion of a kingdom of heaven: here was one mighty in deed and in word; and they concluded he was the very prince their nation expected. Accordingly they once attempted to set him up for a king, and at another time attended him in triumph to Jerusalem. This natural consequence opens the natural design of the attempt. If things had gone on successfully to the end, it is probable the kingdom of heaven would have been changed into a kingdom of this world. The design indeed failed, by the impatience and over-hastiness of the multitude, which alarmed not only the chief of the Jews, but the Roman governor also.

The case being come to this point, and Jesus seeing that he

* See Discourse of the Grounds, &c. Ch. iv.