Mr. Hume's theorem. If twelve men, whofe probity and good fenfe I had long known, fhould ferioufly and circumftantially relate to me an account of a miracle wrought before their eyes, and in which it was impoffible that they should be deceived; if the governor of the country, hearing a rumour of this account, fhould call these men into his prefence, and offer them a fhort propofal, either to confefs the impofture, or submit to be tied up to a gibbet; if they should refuse with one voice to acknowledge that there exifted any falfehood or imposture in the cafe; if this threat were communicated to them separately, yet with no different effect; if it was at laft executed if I myself faw them, one after another, confenting to be racked, burnt, or ftrangled, rather than give up the truth of their account; ftill, if Mr. Hume's rule be my guide, I am not to believe them. Now I undertake to fay that there exifts not a fceptic in the world who would not believe them ; or who would defend fuch incredulity.

;

Inftances

Inftances of fpurious miracles fupported by strong apparent teftimony undoubtedly demand examination. Mr. Hume has endeavoured to fortify his argument by fome examples of this kind. I hope in a proper place to show that none of them reach the ftrength or circumftances of the Chriftian evidence. In these however confifts the weight of his objection. In the principle itself I am perfuaded there is none.

PART

PART I

OF THE DIRECT HISTORICAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY, AND WHEREIN IT IS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE EVIDENCE ALLEDGED FOR OTHER MIRACLES.

THE two propofitions which I shall en

deavour to establish are these :

I. That there is fatisfactory evidence that many, profeffing to be original witnesses of the Chriftian miracles, paffed their lives in labours, dangers and fufferings, voluntarily undergone in atteftation of the accounts which they delivered, and folely in confequence of their belief of thofe accounts; and that they also fubmitted from the fame motive to new rules of conduct.

VOL. I.

C

II. That

II. That there is not fatisfactory evidence that persons profeffing to be original witneffes of other miracles, in their nature ast certain as these are, have ever acted in the fame manner, in atteftation of the accounts which they delivered, and properly in confequence of their belief of those accounts.

The first of these propofitions, as it forms the argument, will stand at the head of the following nine chapters.

CHAP.