was said or done by Christ or by others. We cannot, without examination and thought, refer the actions and discourses recorded to that state of mind in the speaker, or to that existing state of things, by which they were occasioned. In order to understand different portions of these books, we are obliged to take into consideration many circumstances not expressly recorded, or not recorded in connection with the portion to be explained. In the careful study of these writings, therefore, we bring together a great variety of facts, which, corresponding with different parts of the narrative, serve to explain what the writers themselves have left unexplained. We regard these in connection with the general view which they have given us of the character of Christ and the purpose of his ministry. We thus obtain something like a full and correct conception of that state of things and series of events, not expressly related, which must have accompanied the ministry of Christ, supposing the truth of what is actually related concerning it. But of this state of things and series of events only a very partial account is given in the Gospels. The narratives in these writings, however, accord with all that we can learn or reasonably infer respecting the subject. But there is

something more to be said. The narratives in the Gospels require, for their explanation, to be considered in connection with all our knowledge concerning the subjects to which they relate. They are but fragments of the great history of the times; and we must complete the tablet, as far as we can, in order to perceive their proper place and connection. Now such a consistency between fiction or error, on the one hand, and truth and probability, on the other, that the latter should be required to explain the former, may fairly be regarded as impossible. If the Gospels were not true, we could not succeed in explaining them by attempting to do so in the manner described; that is, by proceeding throughout on the false supposition of their being true. In such a case, our facts and inferences, instead of continually affording new illustration, would be continually presenting new contradictions, inconsistencies, and difficulties. This argument applies with peculiar force to the Gospels, with far greater force than to any other writings whatever; because the Gospels contain accounts of events so extraordinary, and which must have had such important bearings and relations; and because they are composed so inartificially, the narratives contained in them are so

often imperfect, facts are so nakedly recorded, with so little explanation and so few circumstances, and the relation of different portions to each other, or to what is not stated in the books themselves, is so rarely pointed out. From the nature of the facts related, they are subjected to the strongest test of credibility, and at the same time, from the mode of their relation, there is a constant demand for explanation. We are continually obliged to bring what is before us into comparison with what we know from other sources, or with what we may reasonably or consistently suppose to be true.

It appears, therefore, that the writers of the Gospels had, generally speaking, a very just and lively conception of that most extraordinary state of things, and of those numerous facts and circumstances, which must or which might have existed if their history be true, but which certainly did not exist if it be a fiction. Supposing the truth of the Gospels, the justness of this conception is easily accounted for. It was the result of personal knowledge and experience. Their writers were themselves familiar with the facts relating to the history of Christ, or derived their knowledge from those who were so. But, sup

posing the Gospels to be narratives not of real, but of fictitious events, then it could have been only by a most vigorous and most singular effort of imagination, that the writers of them thus brought before their minds all the bearings of different portions of these narratives upon a state of things not described, and the numerous particulars and important consequences involved in the supposed truth of the wonderful events which they relate. These writers must, at the same time, have exercised an unaccountable forbearance in leaving the connections and bearings of their narratives so obscure, and in not pointing out or intimating to their readers what might appear to explain or confirm their relations in so striking a manner. extraordinary faculties supposed, and this extraordinary use of them, must likewise have been found, not in one only, but in four contemporary individuals. But it is useless to multiply objections to an hypothesis so improbable as to give an air of trifling to the arguments brought against it. I will, therefore, only add, that it would imply a fact opposite to the evident and undisputed character of these histories; that is, it would imply that they were works of consummate skill and artifice.

The

The appearances in the Gospels, if they are

such as have been stated, admit of no other explanation, than that the narratives rest on the authority of those who were witnesses of what is related, and were themselves concerned in the transactions recorded. It follows, therefore, that these histories were committed to writing either by some of the immediate disciples of Christ, or by persons who derived, generally speaking, correct and particular information from such disciples. But if this conclusion be admitted, no important doubt can remain that they are the works of those particular individuals to whom they have always been ascribed. Their character establishes the truth of the testimony to their genuineness.

THE argument which I have endeavored to state is of the kind technically called cumulative. Its strength does not appear in any individual case, but in the number and accumulation of instances which may be adduced. Its whole force is to be perceived only by a careful and judicious study of the Gospels. In proportion as they are better understood, the latent marks of truth which run through every part of them will become more apparent and irresistible. All I shall now attempt will be to give a very few examples of its applica