the religion substantially different from ours; thirdly, the early and extensive prevalence of rites and inftitutions, which refult from our account; fourthly, our account bearing, in its construction, proof that it is an account. of facts, which were known and believed at the time, are fufficient, I conceive, to support an affurance, that the ftory which we have now, is, in general, the story which Christians had at the beginning. I fay in general; by which term I mean, that it is the fame in its texture, and in its principal facts. For inftance, I make no doubt, for the reasons above ftated, but that the refurrection of the founder of the religion was always a part of the Chriftian story. Nor can a doubt of this remain upon the mind of any one, who reflects that the refurre&ion is, in fome form or other, afferted, referred to, or affumed, in every Christian writing, of every description, which hath come down to us.

And if our evidence ftopped here, we should have a ftrong cafe to offer: for we should

have to alledge, that, in the reign of Tiberius Cæfar, a certain number of persons set about an attempt of establishing a new religion in the world; in the prosecution of which purpofe, they voluntarily encountered great dangers, undertook great labours, fuftained great fufferings, all for a miraculous story which they published wherever they came; and that the refurrection of a dead man, whom, during his life, they had followed and accompanied, was a constant part of this ftory. I know nothing in the above statement which can, with any appearance of reafon, be difputed: and I know nothing in the history of the human species fimilar to .it.

CHAP.

CHAP. VIII:

There is fatisfactory evidence, that many perfons, profeffing to have been original witnes fes of the Chriftian miracles, passed their lives in labours, dangers, and fufferings, voluntarily undergone in atteftation of the accounts which they delivered, and folely in conSequence of their belief of the truth of those accounts; and that they also fubmitted, from the fame motives, to new rules of conduct.

THAT the ftory which we have now is, in the main, the flory which the apostles published, is, I think, nearly certain from the confiderations which have been proposed. But whether, when we come to the particulars and the detail of the narrative, the hiftorical books of the New Teftament be deferving of credit as hiftories, fo that a fact ought to be accounted true because it is found in them; or whether they are entitled to be confidered as representing the accounts, which,

2

which, true or false, the apostles published; whether their authority, in either of these views, can be trufted to, is a point which neceffarily depends upon what we know of the books, and of their authors.

Now, in treating of this part of our argument, the first, and a moft material, obfervation upon the subject is, that, fuch was the fituation of the authors to whom the four gofpels are afcribed, that, if any one of the four be genuine, it is fufficient for our purpofe. The received author of the firft was an original apostle and emiffary of the religion. The received author of the second was an inhabitant of Jerufalem at the time, to whose house the apoftles were wont to refort, and himself an attendant upon one of the most eminent of that number. The received author of the third was a ftated companion and fellow traveller of the most active of all the teachers of the religion, and in the course of his travels frequently in the fociety of the original apoftles. The received author of the fourth, as well as of the first,

was

was one of these apoftles. No fronger evidence of the truth of a history can arise from the fituation of the hiftorian than what is here offered. The authors of all the hiftories. lived at the time and upon the spot. The authors of two of the hiftories were present at many of the scenes which they describe; eye-witneffes of the facts, ear-witneffes of the discourses; writing from perfonal knowledge and recollection; and, what strengthens their teftimony, writing upon a subject in which their minds were deeply engaged, and in which, as they must have been very frequently repeating the accounts to others, the paffages of the hiftory would be kept continually alive in their memory. Whoever reads the gospels (and they ought to be read for this particular purpose) will find in them not merely a general affirmation of miraculous powers, but detailed circumftantial accounts of miracles, with fpecifications of time, place, and perfons; and these accounts many and various. In the Gospels, therefore, which bear the name of Matthew and John, these narratives, if they really pro

ceeded