of paffover, when both Jerufalem itself and all the neighbouring places must have been crouded with people from all parts of Judea.

It adds to the improbability of this story, that the discipline of the Roman foldiers is known to have been exceedingly ftrict; fo that they must all of them have expected either death, or some severe punishment for fleeping upon watch; nor could they have expected any mercy in this cafe; leaft of all could they imagine that the Jewish rulers would interpofe in their favour, when it was at their particular request that the guard was obtained, and they were fo much interested in the watch being strictly kept; and yet no punishment followed upon the occafion, which amounts to a full proof that the Jewish rulers were convinced that the foldiers had done all that could be expected of them.

If it be asked how the foldiers could be. brought to fall into the measures of the Jewish rulers, and fo readily to tell the lye

which they put into their mouths; it may be answered, that, in the terror and confternation they were in, and afraid of punishment, they might be glad to do any thing they were directed to do, especially upon the promife of impunity and a reward. They might be fatisfied that Pilate and their Roman officers would believe nothing of their account of the appearance of an angel, and the miraculous removing of the stone (and they faw nothing more) and they could not pretend that they had been overpowered, when they returned without any marks of having made refiftance. Improbable, therefore, as the story was, they might think it the best thing they could do in their circumftances to tell it. It is not unlikely, however, that, reflecting upon the affair afterwards, and hearing the teftimony of the apofties to the truth of the refurrection, some of them, at least, might be convinced of it, and give a faithful account of all that they knew concerning it.

If the difciples of Chrift had really stolen his body, in the circumstances above-mentioned,

tioned, it is very extraordinary that the Jews fhould never have pretended to produce, at least, one pofitive evidence of the fact. If it had been poffible, they would, no doubt, have found fomebody, who would have declared that they faw the disciples of Chrift in the act of removing the ftone, of taking or carrying away the body, or fomething which they might suppose to be the body; or that fome perfons, fuppofed to be the difciples, might have been doing fomething of this kind, about that time, and near the proper place. We may be fatisfied, therefore, that there was no circumftance of this kind of which the Jewish rulers could hope to avail themselves, in order to ftrengthen their affertion of the body having been ftolen.

When the apoftles, prefently after this, appeared publicly in Jerufalem, preaching the gofpel, and boldly afferting the refurrection of Chrift, do the Jewish rulers behave to them as men whom they could convict of a notorious cheat? Nay, they were so far from venturing to charge them with VOL. I.

Z

any

any fuch thing, that they only punished and threatened them, infifting that they fhould fay no more of the matter. Would the orator Tertullus have miffed fo fine a topic of declamation, had there been the leaft colour of truth in this ftory, when, before King Agrippa, he was bitterly inveighing against Paul, who affirmed that Jefus was alive, when the Jews faid that he was dead? Or could Gamaliel, one of the most eminent of the Jewish doctors, have poffibly fuppofed that the hand of God might be with the apoftles, and have given the advice which he did upon that occafion, if he had known that a cheat had been difcovered with refpect to the refurrection; or would the whole Sanhedrim have fo readily followed his advice, upon that fuppofition?

Lastly, it may be obferved, as a proof of the extreme futility of this ftory, that the only Evangelift who mentions it, makes no attempt to refute it, feeming to regard it as a thing that was palpably false, and sufficiently known to be so.

Upon

The

Upon the whole, it feems to be hardly poffible, that the circumstances attending the refurrection of Chrift, or the promulgation of the gofpel, which was confequent upon it, could have been better adapted to gain the full conviction of the world in general, and especially in diftant ages. ingenuity of man may fancy a resurrection, and the promulgation of such a religion as the chriftian, fo circumftanced, as, it may be thought, would have produced a greater effect; but it does not feem difficult to demonftrate, that any alteration which has yet been fuggefted for this purpose would have been unfavourable to the real weight of the evidence.

It has been faid that Chrift ought to have made his appearance to the chief priests and rulers of the Jews, in full affembly, and have appeared as publicly after, as he had done before his refurrection. But admitting that this had been the case, I doubt not but the fame obdurate minds, which were not conciliated, but more exasperated against him after their being themselves Z 2 witneffes