ment.

it; but when a man, blind or lame from his birth, is made to see and walk by a word in an instant, there is no room for any supposition of other interference. Nor was the power of working miracles confined to such cures. There are many acts wrought by miracles besides cures, as turning the water into wine, feeding the five thousand with a few loaves and fishes, blighting the fig-tree, walking on the sea, and, above all, raising the dead. Lastly, which is a very material consideration, the miracles of Christ were of a permanent kind, such as would be very capable of being examined and inquired into afterwards. It was not like a spectre, appearing and disappearing on a sudden, and where, consequently, the whole proof must rest only upon the credit of those who saw it at that moThe thing in that case was gone and vanished, and admitted no search or investigation. When the blind man was restored to sight, as related in the 8th chapter of John, he continued upon the spot and to enjoy the use of his sight. We hear that he was produced and examined after the miracle, as he had all along lived and was known there before it. When the lame man, at the gate of the temple, was cured by Peter and John, the cure continued: every one that pleased was at liberty to inquire into and examine it, if they disputed the reality of it. It did not depend upon what the apostles or any one said: his condition before the miracle was notorious, and he was there for them to examine as to his condition after it. When Lazarus was raised from the dead, he did not die again immediately-merely speak or move, then sink into his former state-but he lived, and ate, and conversed like other people. The Jews and all had the opportunity, and many of them, we read, did go down to Bethany

to see him, sat at table with him, and at length the rulers formed a design of ruining and putting him to death for it.

Upon the whole, the facts are of such a nature, the persons who related them so prepared with knowledge and information, that I think we may rest satisfied in holding that they could not be imposed upon or deceived in what they tell us--that we have all the assurance of the truth of these reports which the number, credit, character of any witnesses or allegations can give us.

XLIII.

EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.

(PART III.)

JOHN XX. 31.

But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that, believing, ye might have life through his name.

THE only remaining supposition is, that the evangelists, the apostles, and many writers and preachers of the gospel, have all entered into a confederacy of imposing their story upon the world; for if the facts they relate, and their relation with respect to them, were of such a nature that they could not by any possibility be mistaken-that no enthusiasm or even madness will account for their being deceived in them-there is nothing left but either to admit these facts to be true, or to say that the disciples purposely joined and went about to cheat and deceive men. Now before we proceed any further, I would observe that this may always be said. In any cause or trial, let the fact be proved ever so clearly by witnesses ever so positive or many, or of ever so good character, it is easy to say that they have combined to impose upon the court-it is easy to say so, but nobody believes it, nobody attends to it, or is affected by it. The cause is decided upon the testimony

of these witnesses, and every one can rest satisfied with the decision, and can have no doubt about the matter; whereas those who were interested on the other side, when they had nothing else left to say, would have insinuated that the witnesses were all forsworn, and that it was all a story not to be believed.

But to return-let us now inquire into the probability, or even the possibility, of the supposition, that it was a conspiracy in the friends of Christianity to carry on a cheat.

Now the first impression which this supposition includes, and which alone, I conceive, would stagger the belief of any reasonable man, is that a handful of fishermen in a small town, near the lake of Galilee, should take into their heads a scheme of covertly setting up a new religion, and converting the world to it, and should leave their homes, families, and business, upon this errand, and should expect success in it by means of a tale made up of lies and forgeries. Is this creditable? Is it conceivable? Is it consistent with any principle in human nature or in the nature of things? Is there any instance of such an attempt in the history of the world? That Mahomet at the head of a victorious army should set up pretensions to a divine commission, and endeavour to establish a religion which redounded so much to the interest and glory of himself and his family, is nothing unnatural. With these advantages Mahomet appealed, as did the apostles, to public miracles. Had the apostles been statesmen or philosophers, there would have been more likelihood of such contrivances amongst them, as such men may some of them entertain ambitious views, and from their influence and celebrity might imagine themselves qualified for such an undertaking; but that a set of low and illiterate mechanics (for from such it is allowed both by

friends and enemies that christianity originated) should conceive a plan of this kind, knowing all the while the falsehood of what they were delivering, is too wild and extravagant a supposition to account for any of these stories; for, always active in finding out what may supply their wants-in carving and contriving at all times, the lower, laborious part of mankind have enough to do to support themselves and their families-their wants, their occupation, their domestic duties and affections are sufficient to engage the whole of their attention and employment. Is a scheme of setting up a religion in the world very likely to interest or engage such as these? or is it probable that such as these should plot and contrive together to do nothing less than to overturn the established religion in all countries of the world, and introduce into the place of it a fabulous tale of their own contriving? I know that we have examples of people of very low estate and little education quitting their own calling to turn preachers of religion; but that bears no resemblance to the present case, for these persons are most, or all of them, I think, sure of what they go about: whereas the apostles, evangelists, and first founders of christianity must, according to this account, have been impostors, and have known in their own breasts that they were so. Besides, these persons are led to what they do by the example of others in superior station, and after all do not aspire at founding a new religion, but only an unusual method of explaining or propagating the old one.

But secondly, what was it that all the apostles went about to overturn-the attachment of men to virtue and holiness? It must be allowed, whether what they wrote and preached was true or false, that the behaviour and morality which they inculcated were excellent; since all acknowledged, even those who were inclined to ques