rusalem, which he faithfully describes, and which gave occasion to that prophecy? (Ant. ix. c. 12.) Would he have asserted that the oracle which proclaimed the advent of a Prince about that period who was to rule over the earth merely related to Vespasian, who was elected emperor whilst in Judea? (Bel. Jud. vi. 5. 4.) I shall omit all consideration of the passage which speaks of the death of James, "the brother of Jesus, who was called the Christ;" (Ant. xx. 8.1;) because, though we should allow it to be genuine, it proves nothing as to the creed of Josephus. Neither shall I stay to examine his testimony to the character of John the Baptist; for though that is probably his own, it is not to our purpose, since many Jews who did not believe in Christ, nevertheless believed John to be a prophet, and whose fate therefore it is natural enough to find recorded by a Jewish historian. From all these circumstances, I conclude that the evidence of Josephus is not the evidence of a friend to Christianity, and therefore that, for the object I use it, it is above suspicion :-that is, coincidences between him and the Evangelists, if any such there are, must be undesigned. Still, as I have said, all this is argument ex abundanti, curious rather than necessary; since, if we allow him to be a Christian, if we even allow him to have seen the writings of the Evangelists, he will nevertheless be an independent witness, as far as he goes, provided his corroborations of the Gospel be clearly unpremeditated and incidental. In short, he will then be received like St. Mark or St. John, as a partisan indeed; but yet as a partisan who, upon cross-examination, confirms both his own statements and those of his colleagues. 1. Before I bring forward individual examples of coincidence between Josephus and the Evangelists, I cannot help remarking the effect which the writings of the former have, when taken together and as a whole, in convincing us of the truth of gospel history. No man, I think, could rise from a perusal of the latter books of the Antiquities, and the account of the Jewish war, without a very strong impression, that the state of Judea, civil, political and moral, as far as it can be gathered from the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, is pourtrayed in these latter with the greatest accuracy, with the strictest attention to all the circumstances of the place and the times. It is impossible to impart this conviction to my readers in a paragraph; the nature of the case does not admit of it; it is the result of a thousand little facts, which it would be difficult to detach from the general narrative, and which, considered separately, might seem frivolous and fanciful. We close the pages of Josephus with the feeling that we have been reading of a country, which, for many years before its final fall, had been the scene of miserable anarchy and confusion; every where do we meet with open acts of petty violence, or the secret workings of plots, conspiracies, and frauds-the laws ineffectual, or very partially observed, and very wretchedly administered-oppression on the part of the rulers-amongst the people faction, discontent, seditions, tumults-robbers infesting the very streets, and most public places of resort, wandering about in arms, thirsting for blood no less than spoil, assembling in troops to the dismay of the more peaceable citizens, and with difficulty put down by military force ;society, in fact, altogether out of joint. Such would be our view of the condition of Judea, as collected from Josephus. Now let us turn to the New Testament; which, without professing to treat about Judea at all, nevertheless, by glimpses, by notices scattered, uncombined, never intended for such a purpose, actually conveys to us the very counterpart of the picture in Josephus. For instance, let us observe the character of the parables; stories evidently in many cases, and probably in most cases, taken from passing events, and adapted to the occasions on which they were delivered. In how many may be traced scenes of disorder, of rapine, of craft, of injustice, as if such scenes were but too familiar to the experience of those to whom they were addressed! We hear of a " man going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and falling among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead." (Luke, x. 30.) Of another, who planted a vineyard, and sent his servants to receive the fruits; but the "husbandmen took those servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another." (Matt. xxi. 35.) Of a "judge, which feared not God nor regarded man," and who avenged the widow only "lest by her continual coming she should weary him." (Luke, xviii. 2.) Of a steward, “who was accused unto the rich man of having wasted his goods," and who, by taking further liberties with his master's property, secured himself a retreat into the houses of his lord's debtors, "when he should be put out of the stewardship." (Luke, xvi. 1.) Of "the coming of the Son of Man," like that of a thief in the night, whose approach was to be watched, if the master would " not suffer his house to be broken up." (Matt. xxiv. 43.) Of a "kingdom divided against itself being brought to desolation." Of a " city or house divided against itself not being able to stand." (Matt. xii. 25.) Of the necessity of " binding the strong man" before " entering into his house and spoiling his goods." (Matt. xii. 29.) Of the folly of "laying up for ourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal." (Matt. vi. 19.) Of the enemy who had maliciously sown tares amongst his neighbor's wheat, " and went his way." (Matt. xiii. 25.) Of the man who found a treasure in another's field, and cunningly sold all that he had, and "bought that field." (Matt. xiii. 44.) These instances may suffice. Neither is it to the parables only that we must look for our proofs. Many historical incidents in the Gospels and Acts speak the same language. Thus when Christ would "have entered into a village of the Samaritans," they would not receive him, upon which his disciples James and John, who no doubt |