Paganism did not become extinct till the sixth century, and with the seventh arose Mahometanism: Judaism never was extinct; yet not one of these three bodies of adversaries have disproved the facts. It was reserved for those of later time to become sceptical upon these points.

Maria. This is, however, only a general and negative argument in favour of their veracity.

Mr. B. Let us then descend to particulars, and examine them in those points where we have most information from their adversaries, and the truth may positively be ascertained. It is not uncommon for rational and religious prejudices very materially to warp the mind. What accounts, then, do the New Testament writers give of themselves and others, and how far do these agree with the statements of their adversaries?

Now, with regard to the Jews, look at their own books, their favourite authors, and you will find the nation was not in the least different from the accounts given of them by the writers of the New Testament. Or if you turn from these to Josephus, whom they now abhor, is his account any better? Or do the Pagans give a more favourable account of this proud and bigoted nation?

Again, with regard to the Pagans, St. Paul's statements, strong as they are, do not go beyond those of their own writers, and even to the finer shades we find the same scrupulous accuracy.

Or take the characters of individuals described by both parties. Do the accounts of Herod, Pilate, Agrippa, Felix, and others differ from those of Josephus and the Roman writers who have mentioned them?

Edward. And in all these instances prejudice would be likely to influence them.

Mr. B. Again, with regard to themselves, in no respects do they appear to over-rate the character or influ

21 How does Mr. B. propose to vary the argument?-22 How does he show that the New Testament account of the Jews is correct?-23 What is said of the New Testament account of the Pagans?-24 What cases of individuals are named in further proof of the same trait in the New Testament account of character?-25 How does Edward speak of these instances?-26 How do the writers of the New Testament speak of themrelves?

ence of their converts, in order to magnify their own importance. Pliny, you have seen, bears witness to the purity of their conduct; nor do any other accounts enable us to detect false statements in this respect.

Edward. Still these are in some respects general statements also: are they found equally correct in minutiæ? Mr. B. In general we find an accuracy of fact, and sometimes with an appearance of carelessness in expression, which is strongly corroborative of their veracity. To give one example, St. Luke speaks of Sergius Paulus as proconsul of Cyprus. Now Strabo and Dio expressly state that Cyprus was a prætorian and not a proconsular province: and till very lately it was supposed, on their authority, that St. Luke was incorrect; but closer investigation has proved his accuracy in this respect, a coin having been found, bearing an inscription, in which the very term used by St. Luke occurs. We find similar accuracy wherever the scene of action is laid. Now even a learned man, however well informed on general topics, could hardly have preserved uniform accuracy in all points of a work of fiction on so extended a scale; and the most consummate art would be requisite to preserve it with that appearance of freedom and carelessness observable in these books.

Maria. If the apostles had not really lived and travelled as they profess to have done, it is then most improbable that they would have adhered to truth so closely, or indeed have been informed of facts so minute, as to escape the observation of more learned men.

Mr. B. In the narratives of the Gospels, there is the same propriety of expression with regard to things purely local, which at least fully proves that the whole was so familiar to the writer's mind, that he naturally made use of proper and determinate expressions. Palestine to this. day remains an evidence for the veracity of the evangel

27 What case of St. Luke's great accuracy is given?-28 Is there a similar degree of accuracy in other parts of the New Testament?-29 What conclusion does Maria draw from this accuracy in the statement of facts?-30 What does Mr. B. say of the narratives of the Gospels generally, and of Palestine in particular, in relation to the same subject?

ists,--a noble evidence, whose testimony cannot be silenced or misrepresented.

Maria. But if we find them correct with regard to historical and geographical minutiæ, we must conclude that they were writing altogether what was true; or that they were engaged in compiling a laboured, false account with the greatest care, and affecting accuracy in some things, the truth of which could be ascertained, that they might be the more readily believed in others, when this was not the case.

Mr. B. Yet nothing can be more contrary to matter of fact than the latter supposition; for from one end to the other common facts are mentioned with the greatest indifference, or merely alluded to so as to connect the narrative of the life of their Master with the history of the times, and enable all, by the mention of time and place, to ascertain the reality of the extraordinary occurrences on which their attention was fixed. There is no effort in the Gospels, no display; all minor considerations are lost sight of in the greatness of the subject on which the authors are engaged; and even then, it is not so much the giving a full account of our Lord, as the stating what they themselves knew, as in the case of St. Matthew, and St. John, or of the truth of which they were assured by eye-witnesses, as in the case of St. Luke and St. Mark.

Edward. If these writers had to support a false story, it is indeed improbable that they should have thus acted; that they should have neglected to avail themselves of their own advantages, and left themselves exposed to animadversion from the narratives being different.

Mr. B. But besides this positive testimony to the veracity of the evangelists, we must not omit the negative testimony afforded, in that their enemies never denied many things, which, if false, they must have had the

31 What are the two cases supposed by Maria, one of which must be applicable to the writers of these books?-32 What does Mr. B. say of her latter supposition?-33 How were the authors of the Gospels governeb in writing those histories?-34 What does Edward say, in relation to them, is improbable?-35 Besides the positive testimony in favour of the veracity of the evangelists, what other testimony is there?

power of detecting and exposing. It concerned the whole Jewish nation to show the falsity of the pretensions of him whom they had put to death, to deny or to vindicate the accounts given of the conduct of their rulers, with regard to his crucifixion. It afterwards became a matter of the greatest consequence to the Roman empire to decide upon this question. The Christians had increas

ed in numbers and influence to a great degree, and persecutions only added to their strength. What then was the direct course to be pursued, if the Christian statements could be proved false? Certainly to prove that fact. The evangelists had given all the details of the death of the Founder of this religion with the utmost care, and the Christian apologists in later times were ever daring them to the proof. If Pilate never had condemned our Lord to the peculiar kind of death, and under all the circumstances alleged, why was not the fact disproved? The Christians justly laid the greatest stress upon the leading events of the life of their Master: that an extraordinary person was at that particular time expected to arise, was known throughout the whole of the eastern parts of the empire, and probably in the west also; that the Jews were in full expectation that he was to spring from the house of David, and that the time for his appearance was come, is also known. The full belief of that nation induced them to brave all the power of the Roman empire, and to the very last they were sanguine in their hopes of the appearance of the Messias. Now under these circumstances a person did appear, whose life so influenced many, that the whole world was shortly after astonished at their boldness, their zeal, and perseverance. There appeared a stronger probability every year that they would ultimately succeed; and yet neither Jews nor Romans, though most desirous to crush them, attempted that which would have had the greatest tendency.

36 Who were interested in proving the falsity of Christianity?—37 How would they probably have proceeded in doing it?-38 On what did Christians lay great stress?-39 What was the case of the Jews and of the Romans in relation to the establishment of Christianity?

Maria. The New Testament statements have never, then, been shown to be false, as regards our Lord?

Mr. B. They have not: and on this I lay the greatest stress; for if there had been the means of proving them false, it is utterly incredible that they should have been acknowledged as true.

Maria. But all the New Testament statements have not been acknowledged as true.

Mr. B. None have been proved to be false, and some of the greatest importance have been owned true. Edward. What is confessed as true?

Mr. B. It is owned that Christ worked miracles.

Maria. But by whom?

Mr. B. Both Jews and Pagans.

Maria. But by any near the time of Christ?

Mr. B. Even by the first antagonist of his religion, Celsus.

Maria. But if he owned the fact, why did he not become a Christian?

Mr. B. Because he absurdly supposed those miracles could have been wrought by magic, which we know they could not. The Jews had the same mode of accounting for them. Now no reasoning upon the subject whatsoever can get over the stubborn fact, that the miracles of Christ were acknowledged by those of his opponents who lived nearest to his time, and had the best means of ascertaining the truth.

Edward. But if this be admitted, the whole question seems decided.

Mr. B. It does not follow, that because enemies as well as friends believed that he worked miracles, that therefore he did: it only follows, that we have no means of proving that he did not, by means of historical testimony. But unless we find reason to believe, from inter

40 What question does Maria ask respecting the New Testament statements of our Lord?-41 What reply does Mr. B. make to it?-42 What general remark does he make of the other New Testament accounts?-43 What is confessed as true?-44 By whom?-45 At how early a period?46 If Celsus admitted the fact, why did he not become a Christian?47 What use in the argument can be made of this and other similar admis