Q. Particularise some reasons for this conclusion? A. 1st, Because it was not like the introduction of a new Deity, without questioning the reality of others; and from the facility with which such an addition was frequently accomplished, nothing can be argued as to the toleration of a system which swept away all others; 2nd, It was not like philosophers' doubts of the popular creed, in their schools or their books; for they did not enjoin their followers to withdraw from the worship of the temples, nor attempt to make proselytes, both which the Christians did; 3rd, The danger of Christians was not merely from judicial acts or public edicts, but from popular violence; and although it might be some time before the Roman government might take up this affair and denounce a persecution, the traducers of Paganism might fear and suffer from the license of the populace, and the neglect or rashness of magistrates.

Q. Were the Christians likely to find protection from the general disbelief of the popular theology which prevailed among intelligent Heathens ?

A. No; because a change of religion is not likely to be patronised by Infidels, since they are ready to conform to any thing, and are foremost to procure conformity in others.

Q. Can you give any instances showing how little the wisest of that age understood the true principles of toleration ?

A. Yes; Pliny the younger judicially declares, "that those who persisted in Christianity, he ordered

to be led to punishment, not doubting that, whatever they confessed, obstinacy ought to be punished." Trajan also commanded that those brought before him (Pliny) should be punished.

Q. How is this accounted for?

A. By considering that the ancients considered religion as incorporated with the state, and as the offices of the priesthood were often held by statesmen and warriors, they resented every affront put upon their religion as an opposition to government.

Q. Can you give any other reasons ?

A. The long establishment of the worship, its pompous and magnificent ceremonies, and its intimate connexion with every circumstance of public or private life.

Q. How would the Christian religion probably be received in the Roman world, where Gibbon says, the modes of worship were considered by the people as all equally true, by the philosopher as all equally false, and by the magistrate as all equally useful?

A. It would receive no protection from the people, whose public religion it would entirely subvert, none from the philosopher, who would regard it as a false and troublesome innovation, none from the magistrate, satisfied with the utility of the existing mode.

Q. Does any other strong proof arise from the nature of the case?

A. Yes; the original teachers of Christianity adopted, in consequence of it, a new and singular course of life. This we may be allowed to presume,

because all new teachers of religions do it; and as we know how pure its precepts are, this inference is of great importance, since such a thorough change of habits of life is most difficult, especially when against natural inclination, and with the loss of usual indulgences.

Q. What inference, then, could we draw with no more information than that of the existence of the religion, of the general story, and that no act of power was concerned in its first success?

A. It might be inferred, that the Author of the religion, and his immediate disciples, in publishing it, underwent the labours which new missionaries are observed to undergo; that the attempt was dangerous, that they must have been in constant fear of their lives, that they would be opposed by opinion and prejudices, and that their lives, visibly at least, must correspond with their teaching, and being new, must require constant self-denial.

CHAPTER II.

Q. HAVING thus considered what was likely to happen, will you proceed to inquire how the transaction is represented in the accounts that have come down to us?

A. The heathen writers who had gained some obscure notion of Christianity, mention it incidentally;

and among these a quotation from Tacitus, when speaking of the fire at Rome in the time of Nero, deserves particular attention. In this, the torments of the Christians are specified, the crime of burning the city having been alleged against them by the emperor.

Q. What conclusions can be formed from the account of Tacitus ?

A. It proves three things. 1st. That the Founder of the religion was put to death: 2nd. That in the country where he was executed, the religion, after a short check, broke out again and spread: 3rd. That it so spread, that within 34 years from the author's death, a very great number (ingens multitudo) of them were found at Rome. It is concluded from these, that the original teachers could not have been idle, and that the work must have been perilous.

Q. What other heathen writers refer to the subject ?

A. Suetonius, who calls Christianity superstitio nova et malefica, Juvenal, who mentions the dreadful punishment of the Christians; Pliny, who addressed a letter to Trajan on the subject of punishing them; Martial, whose allusion shows that the executions of the Christians were martyrdoms; Epictetus, who imputes their constancy to madness; and M. Aurelius, who ascribes it to obstinacy.

CHAPTER III.

Q. How is the distant and general view of Christianity which the Heathen writers afford, to be explained?

A. Because none is so likely to give a detail of Christianity as a Christian, we therefore seek for the interior of the transaction in our own books?

Q. What do these books comprise?

A. Four histories of Christ, and a narrative from his death, of the propagation of the religion, for a space of thirty years; also a collection of letters by agents in the business, and upon the subject; and these writings attest the point contended for; viz. the sufferings of the witnesses of the history, in every variety of form.

Q. Why is this variety of form remarked?

A. Because in examining ancient records, it is of the greatest importance to attend to casual and undesigned arguments, which are least of all capable of fraud or misrepresentation.

Q. Suggest some conclusions of this sort, before you proceed to direct testimony?

A. Our books state that the Founder of Christianity, in consequence of his undertaking, was put to death at Jerusalem; Tacitus confirms this. The religion, notwithstanding, was preached there; and spread over the Roman empire; also confirmed by