same fact will each relate what fell immediately before his own eyes, and affected his own mind most forcibly. It would require a second miracle to make all the witnesses of a miracle agree in their accounts of it, to that degree which some would require; for it certainly would be a violation of the usual course of things that the same event should strike different persons, differently situated in all points, alike, and that independent witnesses should give precisely the same account.

Edward. If witnesses thus agreed, it would have very much the appearance of design.

Maria. Is there not too much agreement, instead of too little, in the statements of the three first evangelists? May we not thence infer they copied from each other?

Mr. B. There are insuperable objections to the hypothesis of their having copied from each other; and the accounting both for the matter and for the words which they have in common is attended with considerable difficulties. You will find in the notes to Michaelis an ingenious hypothesis by the learned translator, which has excited a good deal of controversy upon the subject, and has not yet led to any decision. There can be little

doubt that the translator of St. Matthew has availed himself of the Gospels of St. Mark and St. Luke, where they had matter in common with the first, which accounts in some measure for the verbal agreement; but we know too little respecting the origin of the Gospels, for any great advances to be made towards the elucidation of the subject.

Edward. What matter they have in common, if unaccompanied by contradictory circumstances, must materially strengthen the credibility of the whole.

Mr. B. It does so: for hitherto no circumstances have been adduced of such a nature as to shake our belief.

33 What distinction in terms is here suggested as of importace?-34 How is this illustrated?-35 What questions does Maria ask respecting the statements of the three first evangelists?-36 What does Mr. B. say of this hypothesis, and what allusion, on the subject, does he make to Michaelis? 37 What admission is made in relation to St. Matthew?-38 How is the credibility of these books affected by the matters in common which they contain?

You will bear in mind also, that all which has been said before, as to the genuineness of these books, also confirms their credibility; for upon the truth of these narrations of miracles numbers hazarded their lives and all that was dear to them. The miracles of our Lord were expressly wrought to sanction his doctrine: upon the truth of that doctrine all the hopes of the first Christians depended; for the sake of that doctrine they ran the greatest risks, and underwent the greatest hardships; they would not therefore believe those miracles without the best authority.

Maria. But many persons have often been led away by false miracles: many Roman Catholics believe in miracles which Protestants despise.

Mr. B. That there have been many false miracles is undeniable, and that numbers have been deceived by them is equally true; but that does not in the least invalidate the fact of any well-authenticated miracle having been wrought.

Maria. But how shall a distinction be drawn between the true and the false?

Mr. B. Leslie, in his Short and Easy Method with the Deists, has given the following rules :

"1. That the matter of fact be such, as that men's outward senses, their eyes and ears, may be judges of it.

"2. That it be done publicly in the face of the world. "3. That not only public monuments be kept up in memory of it, but some outward actions to be performed.

66 4. That such monuments and such actions or observances be instituted, and do commence from the time that the matter of fact was done."-Leslie's Works, vol. i. p. 11.

Of these the two first exclude the possibility of imposition at the time, and the two last subsequently.

Edward. Are there examples given of the application of these rules?

39 For what purpose were the miracles of our Lord wrought?-40 What does Mr. B. say of the pretended miracles that have been named?— 41 Who has given rules for distinguishing between true and false miracles?-42 What are these rules?-43 What is said of them?

Mr. B. Leslie applies them, 1st, to Moses; 2dly, to Christ; and, 3dly, to Mahomet; and concludes on the whole, that no fabulous action has all these marks; that there is greater certainty for Christianity than for other received facts; and that the importance of the subject makes deception more difficult.

Maria. And have no miracles been ascertained as answering the conditions required in these rules except those of the Bible?

Mr. B. None, as far as my knowledge extends; and I believe the rules are pretty generally admitted as conclusive.

Maria. In what manner can the force of the evidences for the miracles of the New Testament be evaded, admitting its genuineness ?

Mr. B. The most singular perhaps is one which was attempted about an hundred years ago-in maintaining that they were to be understood allegorically, and not literally.

Maria. What could possibly give rise to so strange an idea?

Mr. B. Possibly a similar attempt made a short time before, in which the force of the argument from prophecy was attacked in the same way. It is hardly necessary to add, that both were wholly unavailing.

Maria. Was then the attempt to overthrow the miracles given up?

Mr. B. The great miracle of all, the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, was more particularly attacked, which produced many excellent defences of it, particularly Sherlock's "Trial of the Witnesses," in which the evidence for this particular miracle is placed in a very striking light.

Edward. But are there not serious difficulties, if not contradictions, in the account of the resurrection?

44 What application of these rules is given?-45 Have any miracles been ascertained, except those in the Bible, answering the conditions required in these rules?-46 After having admitted the genuineness of the miracles in the New Testament, what method has been attempted to evade their force?-47 What could have given rise to so strange an idea?-48 Maria asks, if the attempt to overthrow the miracles was given up-what as the answer to this question?

Mr. B. I think the work just mentioned will satisfy you; but you may also read Mr. West's book on the same subject, in which he has harmonised the accounts of the evangelists very satisfactorily.

Maria. All the evangelists bear witness to that fact. Mr. B. Not only so; but "It is completely certain that the apostles of Christ and the first teachers of Chris tianity asserted the fact; and this would have been cer tain if the four Gospels had been lost or never written Every piece of Scripture recognises the resurrection, every epistle of every apostle, every author contemporary with the apostles, of the age immediately succeeding the apostles, every writing from that age to the present, genuine or spurious, on the side of Christianity or against it, concur in representing the resurrection of Christ as an article of his history received without doubt or disagreement by all who called themselves Christians, as alleged from the beginning by the propagators of the institution, and alleged as the centre of their testimony."-Paley, vol. ii. p. 97.

Edward. On these accounts it is no wonder that the Jews, who acknowledge the other miracles of our Lord, should deny this; and it may well be the great object of infidels to overthrow it.

Mr. B. The fact seems, however, beyond the reach of human power to disturb. The New Testament statement of the resurrection accounts satisfactorily for that which without it is unaccountable. The Jewish account of the body being stolen whilst the guards stationed to watch at the sepulchre were asleep is palpably absurd: the body never could be produced or traced, nor has any tolerable account yet been drawn up more probable. If the resurrection had not taken place, there was no reason why the disciples should propagate this new faith; they were Jews, and must have looked for another; they were poor and unlearned men, wholly unequal to con

49 What is said of Mr. West's book on the resurrection?-50 What does Paley say upon the same subject?-51 What distinction do the Jews make between the resurrection of our Lord and the other miracles?-52 What is said of the Jewish account of the resurrection?-53 If the resur rection had not taken place, what assertion is made respecting the disciples?

tending with the power of the state, and must have been more disposed to let the matter be forgotten than to expose themselves for one who had disappointed their expectations. On this great fact every one can judge: all parties agree that the Founder of this religion was put to death; all agree that his first followers were taken from very low stations; all agree that, from the time assigned for his resurrection, the exertions of his followers were great and successful, beyond any thing in the history of mankind. It is also certain that from them we have received the only system of professedly revealed religion capable of universal dissemination, and adapted for every age, which has yet been produced; that this alone contains a perfect morality, and motives sufficiently powerful to affect all ranks and stations in life. We also know, that to transmit this to us they endured the heaviest afflictions, and closed lives of the most arduous exertion by painful and ignominious deaths; and to the last persisted in giving the same account, and made the fact of the resurrection of their Lord their great ground of consolation, as they had ever made it the great motive for action. Now, under all these circumstances, who will venture to reject their testimony? who will be so affectedly incredulous as to doubt the truth of that thus solemnly assured to him, and yet be so grossly credulous as to believe that a dozen fishermen and the like, in a despised corner of a despised province of the Roman empire, totally destitute of all outward help, could project and execute such a project as the overthrow of the various religions which were held throughout its territory, though interwoven with the state, with domestic life, and with the recollections of past glory?

Maria. It cannot be: their statement must be true.

Mr. B. But if any Jew, or set of Jews, had intellect to project such an undertaking, would they not also have something like common sense in conducting it? Would they attempt the most arduous of all schemes by the very

54 In what do all parties agree?-55 What else do we know respecting them?-56 In view of these facts, what questions are propounded?-57 What ones are respecting the Jews, as having an agency in the proposed delusion?