CHAPTER IV.

On the Testimony of the Original Witnesses to the Truth of the Gospel Narrative

III. THERE was nothing in the situation | parted from, and no object of veneration

of the New Testament writers, which leads us to perceive that they had any possible inducement for publishing a falsehood.

abandoned. It did not involve in it the denial or relinquishment of our own gods, but only the addition of so many more gods to our catalogue.

In this respect, however, the Jews stood distinguished from every other people within the limits of the Roman empire. Their religious belief carried in it something more than attachment to their own system. It carried in it the contempt and detestation of every other. Yet, in spite of this circumstance, their religion was protected by the mild and equitable toleration of the Roman

We have not to allege the mere testimony of the Christian writers, for the danger to which the profession of Christianity exposed all its adherents at that period. We have the testimony of Tacitus to this effect. We have innumerable allusions, or express intimations, of the same circumstance in the Roman historians. The treatment and persecution of the Christians make a principle figure in the affairs of the empire; and there is no point better established in ancient his-government. The truth is, that there was tory, than that the bare circumstance of nothing in the habits or character of the being a Christian, brought many to the Jews, which was calculated to give much punishment of death, and exposed all to disturbance to the establishments of other the danger of a suffering the most appalling countries. Though they admitted converts and repulsive to the feelings of our nature. from other nations, yet their spirit of proseIt is not difficult to perceive, why the lytism was far from being of that active Roman government, in its treatment of or adventurous kind, which could alarm the Christians, departed from its usual princi- Roman government for the safety of any ples of toleration. We know it to have existing institutions. Their high and exbeen their uniform practice, to allow every clusive veneration for their own system indulgence to the religious belief of those gave an unsocial disdain to the Jewish different countries in which they estab-character, which was not at all inviting to lished themselves. The truth is, that such foreigners; but still, as it led to nothing an indulgence demanded of them no ex- mischievous in point of effect, it seems to ertion of moderation or principle. It was have been overlooked by the Roman governquite consonant with the Spirit of Pagan-ment as a piece of impotent vanity. ism. A different country worshipped different gods, but it was a general principle of Paganism, that each country had its gods, to which the inhabitants of that country owed their peculiar homage and veneration. In this way there was no interference between the different religions which prevailed in the world. It fell in with the policy of the Roman government to allow the fullest toleration to other religions, and it demanded no sacrifice of principle. It was even a dictate of principle with them to respect the gods of other countries; and the violation of a religion different from their own, seems to have been felt, not merely as a departure from policy or justice, but to be viewed with the same sentiment of horror which is annexed to blasphemy or sacrilege. So long as we were under Paganism, the truth of one religion did not involve in it the falsehood or rejection of another. In respecting the religion of another country, we did not abandon our own; nor did it follow, that the inhabitants of that other country annexed any contempt or discredit to the religion in which we had been educated. In this mutual reverence for the religion of each other, no principle was de

But the case was widely different with the Christian system. It did not confine itself to the denial or rejection of every other system. It was for imposing its own exclusive authority over the consciences of all, and for detaching as many as it could from their allegiance to the religion of their own country. It carried on its forehead all the offensive characters of a monopoly, and not merely excited resentment by the supposed arrogance of its pretensions, but from the rapidity and extent of its innovations, spread an alarm over the whole Roman empire for the security of al its establishments. Accordingly, at the com mencement of its progress, so long as it was confined to Judea and the immediate neighbourhood, it seems to have been in perfect safety from the persecution of the Roman government. It was at first looked upon as a mere modification of Judaism, and that the first Christians differed from the rest of their countrymen only in certain questions of their own superstition. For a few years after the crucifixion of our Saviour, it seems to have excited no alarm on the part of the Roman emperors, who did not depart from their usual maxims of toleration, till they

began to understand the magnitude of its | luntary martyrdom in the cause of their pretensions, and the unlooked for success religion? which attended them.

In the course of a very few years after its first promulgation, it drew upon it the hostility of the Roman government; and the fact is undoubted, that some of its first teachers, who announced themselves to be the companions of our Saviour, and the eye-witnesses of the remarkable events in his history, suffered martyrdom for their adherence to the religion which they taught.

The disposition of the Jews to the religion of Jesus was no less hostile; and it manifested itself at a still earlier stage of the business. The causes of this hostility are obvious to all who are in the slightest degree conversant with the history of those times. It is true, that the Jews did not at all times possess the power of life and death; nor was it competent for them to bring the Christians to execution by the exercise of legal authority. Still, however, their powers of mischief were considerable. Their wishes had always a certain controul over the measures of the Roman governor; and we know, that it was this controul which was the means of extorting from Pilate the unrighteous sentence by which the very first teacher of our religion was brought to a cruel and ignominious death. We also know, that under Herod Agrippa the power of life and death was vested in a Jewish sovereign, and that this power was actually exerted against the most distinguished Christians of that time. Add to this, that the Jews had, at all times, the power of inflicting the lesser punishments. They could whip, they could imprison. Besides all this, the Christians had to brave the frenzy of an enraged multitude; and some of them actually suffered martyrdom in the violence of the popular commotions.

Having premised these observations, we offer the following alternative to the mind of every candid inquirer. The first Christians either delivered a sincere testimony, or they imposed a story upon the world which they knew to be a fabrication.

The persecutions to which the first Christians voluntarily exposed themselves, compel us to adopt the first part of the alternative. It is not to be conceived, that a man would resign fortune, and character, and life, in the assertion of what he knew to be a falsehood. The first Christians must have believed their story to be true; and it only remains to prove, that if they believed it to be true, it must be true indeed.

A voluntary martyrdom must be looked upon as the highest possible evidence which it is in the power of man to give of his sincerity. The martyrdom of Socrates has never been questioned, as an undeniable proof of the sincere devotion of his mind to the principles of that philosophy for which he suffered. The death of Archbishop Cranmer will be allowed by all to be a decisive evidence of his sincere rejection of what he conceived to be the errors of Popery, and his thorough conviction in the truth of the opposite system. When the council of Geneva burnt Servetus, no one will question the sincerity of the latter's belief, however much he may question the truth of it. Now, in all these cases, the proof goes no farther than to establish the sincerity of the martyr's belief. It goes but a little way, indeed, in establishing the justness of it. This is a different question. A man may be mistaken, though he be sincere. His errors, if they are not seen to be such, will exercise all the influence and authority of truth over him. Martyrs have bled on the opposite sides of the question. It is impossible, then, to rest on this circumstance as an argument for the truth of either system; but the argument is always deemed incontrovertible, in as far as it goes to establish the sincerity of each of the parties, and that both died in the firm conviction of the doctrines which they professed.

Nothing is more evident than the utter disgrace which was annexed by the world at large to the profession of Christianity at that period. Tacitus calls it "superstitio exitiabilis," and accuses the Christians of enmity to mankind. By Epictetus and others, their heroism is termed obstinacy, and it was generally treated by the Roman Now, the martyrdom of the first Chrisgovernors as the infatuation of a miserable tians stands distinguished from all other exand despised people. There was none of amples by this circumstance, that it not that glory annexed to it which blazes merely proves the sincerity of the martyr's around the martyrdom of a patriot or a belief, but it also proves that what he bephilosopher. That constancy, which, in lieved was true. In other cases of martyranother case, would have made them, illus-dom, the sufferer, when he lays down his trious, was held to be a contemptible folly, which only exposed them to the derision and insolence of the multitude. A name and a reputation in the world might sustain the dying moments of Socrates or Regulus; but what earthly principles can account for the intrepidity of those poor and miserable outcasts, who consigned themselves to a vo

life, gives his testimony to the truth of an opinion. In the case of the Christians, when they laid down their lives, they gave their testimony to the truth of a fact of which they affirmed themselves to be the eye and the ear witnesses. The sincerity of both testimonies is unquestionable; but it is only in the latter case that the truth of the testi

mony follows as a necessary consequence | founding a new faith; but what glory did of its sincerity. An opinion comes under the latter propose to themselves from being the cognizance of the understanding, ever the dupes of an imposition so ruinous to liable, as we all know, to error and delusion. every earthly interest, and held in such A fact comes under the cognizance of the low and disgraceful estimation by the world senses, which have ever been esteemed as at large? Abandon the teachers of Chrisinfallible, when they give their testimony to tianity to every imputation which infidelity, such plain, and obvious, and palpable appear-on the rack for conjectures to give plausiances, as those which make up the evangelical story. We are still at liberty to question the philosophy of Socrates, or the orthodoxy of Cranmer and Servetus; but if we were told by a Christian teacher in the solemnity of his dying hour, and with the dreadful apparatus of martyrdom before him, that he saw Jesus after he had risen from the dead; that he conversed with him many days; that he put his hand into the print of his sides; and, in the ardour of his joyful conviction, exclaimed, "My Lord, and my God!" we should feel that there was no truth in the world, did this language and this testimony deceive us.

bility to its system, can desire, how shall we explain the concurrence of its disciples? There may be a glory in leading, but we see no glory in being led. If Christianity were false, and Paul had the effrontery to appeal to his five hundred living witnesses, whom he alleges to have seen Christ after his resurrection, the submissive acquiescence of his disciples remains a very inexplicable circumstance. The same Paul, in his epistles to the Corinthians, tells them that some of them had the gift of healing, and the power of working miracles; and that the signs of an apostle had been wrought among them in wonders and mighty deeds. A man aspiring to the glory of an accredited teacher, would never have committed himself on a subject, where his

If Christianity be not true, then the first Christians must have been mistaken as to the subject of their testimony. This supposition is destroyed by the nature of the sub-falsehood could have been so readily exject. It was not testimony to a doctrine posed. And in the veneration with which which might deceive the understanding. It we know his epistles to have been preserved was something more than testimony to a by the church of Corinth, we have not dream, or a trance, or a midnight fancy, merely the testimony of their writer to the which might deceive the imagination. It truth of the Christian miracles, but the teswas testimony to a multitude, and a succes-timony of a whole people, who had no insion of palpable facts, which could never terest in being deceived. have deceived the senses, and which pre- Had Christianity been false, the reputaclude all possibility of mistake, even though tion of its first teachers lay at the mercy of it had been the testimony only of one indi- every individual among the numerous providual. But when, in addition to this, we selytes which they had gained to their sysconsider, that it is the testimony, not of one tem. It may not be competent for an unbut of many individuals; that it is a story lettered peasant to detect the absurdity of a repeated in a variety of forms, but substan- doctrine; but he can at all times lift his tially the same; that it is the concurring testimony against a fact, said to have haptestimony of different eye-witnesses, or the pened in his presence, and under the obcompanions of eye-witnesses-we may, af-servation of his senses. Now it so happens, ter this, take refuge in the idea of falsehood and collusion; but it is not to be admitted, that these eight different writers of the New Testament, could have all blundered the matter with such method, and such uniformity.

that in a number of the epistles, there are allusions to, or express intimations of, the miracles that had been wrought in the different churches to which these epistles are addressed. How comes it, if it be all a fabrication, that it was never exposed? We We know, that, in spite of the magnitude know, that some of the disciples were of their sufferings, there are infidels, who, driven, by the terrors of persecuting viodriven from the first part of the alternative, lence, to resign their profession. How have recurred to the second, and have af should it happen, that none of them ever firmed, that the glory of establishing a new attempted to vindicate their apostacy, by religion, induced the first Christians to as- laying open the artifice and insincerity of sert, and to persist in asserting, what they their Christian teachers? We may be sure knew to be a falsehood. But (though we that such a testimony would have been should be anticipating the last branch of the highly acceptable to the existing authorities argument) they forget, that we have the of that period. The Jews would have concurrence of two parties to the truth of made the most of it; and the vigilant and Christianity, and that it is the conduct only discerning officers of the Roman governof one of the parties, which can be account-ment would not have failed to turn it to aced for by the supposition in question. The count. The mystery would have been extwo parties are the teachers and the taught. posed and laid open, and the curiosity of The former may aspire to the glory of latter ages would have been satisfied as to

the wonderful and unaccountable steps by ated, by martyrdom, the guilt which they which a religion could make such head in felt they had incurred by their dereliction the world, though it rested its whole autho- of the truth. This furnishes a strong exrity on facts, the falsehood of which was ample of the power of conviction, and accessible to all who were at the trouble to when we join with it, that it is conviction inquire about them. But no! We hear of in the integrity of those teachers who apno such testimony from the apostates of pealed to miracles which had been wrought that period. We read of some, who, ago- among them, it appears to us a testimony nized at the reflection of their treachery, in favour of our religion which is altogether returned to their first profession, and expi- irresistible.

CHAPTER V.

On the Testimony of Subsequent Witnesses.

IV. BUT this brings us to the last division | were either agents or eye-witnesses of the of the argument, viz. that the leading facts transactions recorded, who could not be in the history of the Gospel are corroborated by the testimony of others.

deceived, who had no interest, and no glory to gain by supporting a falsehood, and who, by their sufferings in the cause of what they professed to be their belief, gave the highest evidence that human nature can give of sincerity.

The evidence we have already brought forward for the antiquity of the New Testament, and the veneration in which it was held from the earliest ages of the church, is an implied testimony of all the Christians In this circumstance, it may be perceivof that period to the truth of the Gospel his-ed how much the evidence for Christianity tory. By proving the authenticity of St. goes beyond all ordinary historical eviPaul's Epistles to the Corinthians, we not dence. A profane historian relates a semerely establish his testimony to the truth ries of events which happen in a particuof the Christian miracles,—we establish the lar age; and we count it well, if it be his additional testimony of the whole church own age, and if the history which he gives of Corinth, who would never have respect- us be the testimony of a contemporary aued these Epistles, if Paul had ventured thor. Another historian succeeds him at upon a falsehood so open to detection, as the distance of years, and, by repeating the the assertion, that miracles were wrought same story, gives the additional evidence among them, which not a single individual of his testimony to its truth. A third hisever witnessed. By proving the authen-torian perhaps goes over the same ground, ticity of the New Testament at large, we and lends another confirmation to the hissecure, not merely that argument, which is tory. And it is thus, by collecting all the founded on the testimony and concurrence lights which are thinly scattered over the of its different writers, but also the testi-tract of ages and of centuries, that we obmony of those immense multitudes, who, in tain all the evidence which can be got, and distant countries, submitted to the New all the evidence that is generally wishTestament as the rule of their faith. The ed for. testimony of the teachers, whether we take Now, there is room for a thousand preinto consideration the subject of that testi- sumptions, which, if admitted, would overmony, or the circumstances under which it turn the whole of this evidence. For any was delivered, is of itself a stronger argu- thing we know, the first historians may ment for the truth of the Gospel history, have had some interest in disguising the than can be alleged for the truth of any truth, or substituting in its place a falseother history, which has been transmitted hood, and a fabrication. True, it has not down to us from ancient times. The con- been contradicted, but they form a very currence of the taught carries along with small number of men, who feel strongly or it a host of additional testimonies, which particularly interested in a question of hisgives an evidence to the evangelical story, tory. The literary and speculative men of that is altogether unexampled. On a point that age may have perhaps been engaged of ordinary history, the testimony of Ta- in other pursuits, or their testimonies may citus is held decisive, because it is not have perished in the wreck of centuries. contradicted. The history of the New Tes- The second historian may have been so far tament is not only not contradicted, but removed in point of time from the events of confirmed by the strongest possible ex- his narratives, that he can furnish us, not pressions which men can give of their ac- with an independent, but with a derived quiescence in its truth; by thousands who testimony. He may have copied his ac