the son of Barachiah, and is so described in the superscription of his prophecy, but of whose death we have no account.

I have little doubt, but that the first Zacharias was the person spoken of by our Saviour; and that the name of the father has been since added, or changed, by some one, who took it from the title of the prophecy, which happened to be better known to him than the history in the Chronicles.

There is likewise a Zacharias, the son of Baruch, related by Josephus to have been slain in the temple a few years before the destruction of Jerusalem. It has been insinuated, that the words put into our Saviour's mouth contain a reference to this transaction, and were composed by some writer, who either confounded the time of the transaction with our Saviour's age, or inadvertently overlooked the anachronism.

Now suppose it to have been so; suppose these words to have been suggested by the transaction related in Josephus, and to have been falsely as cribed to Christ; and observe what extraordinary coincidences (accidentally, as it must in that case have been) attend the forger's mistake.

First, that we have a Zacharias in the book of Chronicles, whose death, and the manner of it, corresponds with the allusion.

are too close and numerous to be accounted for by accidental concurrences of fiction, must necessarily have truth for their foundation.

This argument appeared to my mind of so much value (especially for its assuming nothing beside the existence of the books,) that I have pursued it through Saint Paul's thirteen epistles, in a work published by me four years ago, under the title of Hora Paulinæ. I am sensible how feebly any argument which depends upon an induction of particulars, is represented without examples. On which account, I wished to have abridged my own volume, in the manner in which I have treated Dr. Lardner's in the preceding chapter. But, upon making the attempt, I did not find it in my power to render the articles intelligible by fewer words than I have there used. I must be content, therefore, to refer the reader to the work itself. And I would particularly invite his attention to the observations which are made in it upon the first three epistles. I persuade myself that he will find the proofs, both of agreement and undesignedness, supplied by these epistles, sufficient to support the conclusion which is there maintained, in favour both of the genuineness of the writings and the truth of the narrative.

It remains only, in this place, to point out how the argument bears upon the general question of the Christian history.

Secondly, that although the name of this person's father be erroneously put down in the Gospel, yet we have a way of accounting for the error, First, Saint Paul in these letters affirms in by showing another Zacharias in the Jewish unequivocal terms, his own performance of miraScriptures, much better known than the former, cles, and, what ought particularly to be rememwhose patronymic was actually that which ap-bered, "That miracles were the signs of an pears in the text. apostle." If this testimony come from Saint Paul's own hand, it is invaluable. And that it does so, the argument before us fixes in my mind a firm assurance.

Every one who thinks upon this subject, will find these to be circumstances which could not have met together in a mistake, which did not proceed from the circumstances themselves.

I have noticed, I think, all the difficulties of this kind. They are few: some of them admit of a clear, others of a probable solution. The reader will compare them with the number, the variety, the closeness, and the satisfactoriness, of the instances which are to be set against them; and he will remember the scantiness, in many cases, of our intelligence, and that difficulties always attend imperfect information.

CHAPTER VII.

Undesigned Coincidences.

Secondly, it shows that the series of action represented in the epistles of Saint Paul, was real; which alone lays a foundation for the proposition which forms the subject of the first part of our present work, riz. that the original witnesses of the Christian history devoted themselves to lives of toil, suffering, and danger, in consequence of their belief of the truth of that history, and for the sake of communicating the knowledge of it to others.

Thirdly, it proves that Luke, or whoever was the author of the Acts of the Apostles (for the argument does not depend upon the name of the author, though I know no reason for questioning it,) was well acquainted with Saint Paul's history; and that he probably was, what he professes himself to be, a companion of Saint Paul's travels; which, if true, establishes, in a considerable de BETWEEN the letters which bear the name of gree, the credit even of his Gospel, because it Saint Paul in our collection, and his history in shows, that the writer, from his time, situation, the Acts of the Apostles, there exist many notes and connexions, possessed opportunities of inof correspondency. The simple perusal of the forming himself truly concerning the transactions writings is sufficient to prove, that neither the his- which he relates. I have little difficulty in aptory was taken from the letters, nor the letters plying to the Gospel of Saint Luke what is from the history. And the undesignedness of proved concerning the Acts of the Apostles, conthe agreements (which undesignedness is gather-sidering them as two parts of the same history; ed from their latency, their minuteness, their obliquity, the suitableness of the circumstances in which they consist, to the places in which those circumstances occur, and the circuitous references by which they are traced out) demonstrates that they have not been produced by meditation, or by any fraudulent contrivance. But coincidences, from which these causes are excluded, and which

for, though there are instances of second parts being forgeries, I know none where the second part is genuine, and the first not so.

I will only observe, as a sequel of the argument, though not noticed in my work, the remarkable similitude between the style of Saint John's Gos

* Rom. xv. 18, 19. 2 Cor. xii. 12.

pel, and of Saint John's Epistle. The style of the resurrection, no such discussion is necessary, Saint John's is not at all the style of Saint Paul's because no such doubt can be entertained. The Epistles, though both are very singular; nor is it only points which can enter into our consideration the style of Saint James's or of Saint Peter's are, whether the apostles knowingly published a Epistle but it bears a resemblance to the style of falsehood, or whether they were themselves dethe Gospel inscribed with Saint John's name, so ceived; whether either of these suppositions be far as that resemblance can be expected to appear, possible. The first, I think, is pretty generally which is not in simple narrative, so much as in given up. The nature of the undertaking, and of reflections, and in the representation of discourses. the men; the extreme unlikelihood that such men Writings, so circumstanced, prove themselves, should engage in such a measure as a scheme; and one another, to be genuine. This corres- their personal toils, and dangers, and sufferings, pondency is the more valuable, as the epistle in the cause; their appropriation of their whole itself asserts, in Saint John's manner indeed, but time to the object; the warm, and seemingly unin terms sufficiently explicit, the writer's personal affected, zeal and earnestness with which they knowledge of Christ's history; "That which was profess their sincerity; exempt their memory from from the beginning, which we have heard, which the suspicion of imposture. The solution more we have seen with our eyes, which we have look- deserving of notice, is that which would resolve ed upon, and our hands have handled, of the word the conduct of the apostles into enthusiasm ; of life; that which we have seen and heard, de- which would class the evidence of Christ's resurclare we unto you."* Who would not desire-rection with the numerous stories that are extant who perceives not the value of an account, delivered by a writer so well informed as this?

CHAPTER VIII.

Of the History of the Resurrection. THE history of the resurrection of Christ is a part of the evidence of Christianity: but I do not know, whether the proper strength of this passage of the Christian history, or wherein its peculiar value, as a head of evidence, consists, be generally understood. It is not that, as a miracle, the resurrection ought to be accounted a more decisive proof of supernatural agency than other miracles are; it is not that, as it stands in the Gospels, it is better attested than some others; it is not, for either of these reasons, that more weight belongs to it than to other miracles, but for the following, viz. That it is completely certain that the apostles of Christ, and the first teachers of Christianity, asserted the fact. And this would have been certain, 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 call themselves Christians, as alleged from the beginning by the propagators of the institution, and alleged as the centre of their testimony. Nothing, I apprehend, which a man does not himself see or hear, can be more certain to him than this point. I do not mean, that nothing can be more certain than that Christ rose from the dead; but that nothing can be more certain, than that his apostles, and the first teachers of Christianity, gave out that he did so. In the other parts of the gospel narrative, a question may be made, whether the things related of Christ be the very things which the apostles and first teachers of the religion delivered concerning him? And this question depends a good deal upon the evidence we possess of the genuineness, or rather, perhaps, of the antiquity, credit, and reception, of the books. On the subject of

Chap. i. ver. 1-3.

of the apparitions of dead men. There are circumstances in the narrative, as it is preserved in our histories, which destroy this comparison entirely. It was not one person, but many, who saw him; they saw him not only separately but together, not only by night but by day, not at a distance but near, not once but several times; they not only saw him, but touched him, conversed with him, ate with him, examined his person to satisfy their doubts. These particulars are decisive but they stand, I do admit, upon the credit of our records. I would answer, therefore, the insinuation of enthusiasm, by a circumstance which arises out of the nature of the thing; and the reality of which must be confessed by all who allow, what I believe is not denied, that the resurrection of Christ, whether true or false, was asserted by his disciples from the beginning; and that circumstance is, the non-production of the dead body. It is related in the history, what indeed the story of the resurrection necessarily implies, that the corpse was missing out of the sepulchre: it is related also in the history, that the Jews reported that the followers of Christ had stolen it away. And this account, though loaded with great improbabilities, such as the situation of the disciples, their fears for their own safety at the time, the unlikelihood of their expecting to succeed, the difficulty of actual success, and the inevitable consequence of detection and failure, was, nevertheless, the most credible account that could be given of the matter. But it proceeds entirely upon the supposition of fraud, as all the old objections did. What account can be given of the body, upon the supposition of enthusiasm? It is impossible our Lord's followers could believe that he was risen from the dead, if his corpse

"And this saying (Saint Matthew writes) is commonly reported amongst the Jews until this day," chap. xxviii. 15. The evangelist may be thought good authority as to this point, even by those who do not admit his evidence in every other point: and this point is sufficient to prove that the body was missing.

It has been rightly, I think, observed by Dr. Townshend, (Dis. upon the Res. p. 126,) that the story of the guards carried collusion upon the face of it:-"His disciples came by night and stole him away, while we slept." Men in their circumstances would not have made such an acknowledgment of their negligence, without previous assurances of protection and impunity.

"Especially at the full moon, the city full of people,

many probably passing the whole night, as Jesus and

his disciples had done, in the open air, the sepulchre so near the city as to be now enclosed within the walls." -Priestley on the Resurr. p. 24.

was lying before them. No enthusiasm ever reached to such a pitch of extravagancy as that: a spirit may be an illusion; a body is a real thing, an object of sense, in which there can be no mistake. All accounts of spectres leave the body in the grave. And, although the body of Christ might be removed by fraud, and for the purposes of fraud, yet, without any such intention, and by sincere but deluded men (which is the representation of the apostolic character we are now examining,) no such attempt could be made. The presence and the absence of the dead body are alike inconsistent with the hypothesis of enthusiasm; for, if present, it must have cured their enthusiasm at once; if absent, fraud, not enthusiasm, must have carried it away.

into any order; that it was at this time even understood that a new religion (in the sense which that term conveys to us) was to be set up in the world, or how the professors of that religion were to be distinguished from the rest of mankind. The death of Christ had left, we may suppose, the generality of his disciples in great doubt, both as to what they were to do, and concerning what was to follow.

This meeting was holden, as we have already said, a few days after Christ's ascension: for, ten days after that event was the day of Pentecost, when, as our history relates,* upon a signal display of Divine agency attending the persons of the apostles, there were added to the society "about three thousand souls."+ But here, it is not, 1 think, to be taken, that these three thousand were all converted by this single miracle; but rather that many, who before were believers in Christ, became now professors of Christianity; that is to say, when they found that a religion was to be established, a society formed and set up in the name of Christ, governed by his laws, avowing their belief in his mission, united amongst themselves, and separated from the rest of the world by visible distinctions; in pursuance of their former conviction, and by virtue of what they had heard and seen and known of Christ's history, they publicly became members of it.

But farther, if we admit, upon the concurrent testimony of all the histories, so much of the account as states that the religion of Jesus was set up at Jerusalem, and set up with asserting, in the very place in which he had been buried, and a few days after he had been buried, his resurrection out of the grave, it is evident that, if his body could have been found, the Jews would have produced it, as the shortest and completest answer possible to the whole story. The attempt of the apostles could not have survived this refutation a moment. If we also admit, upon the authority of Saint Matthew, that the Jews were advertised of the expectation of Christ's followers, and that they had taken due precaution We read in the fourth chapter of the Acts, in consequence of this notice, and that the body that, soon after this, "the number of the men," was in marked and public custody, the observa- i. e. the society openly professing their belief in tion receives more force still. For, notwithstand-Christ, "was about five thousand." So that here ing their precaution, and although, thus prepared is an increase of two thousand within a very short and forewarned; when the story of the resurrec- time. And it is probable that there were many, tion of Christ came forth, as it immediately did; both now and afterward, who, although they bewhen it was publicly asserted by his disciples, and lieved in Christ, did not think it necessary to made the ground and basis of their preaching in join themselves to this society; or who waited to his name, and collecting followers to his religion, see what was likely to become of it. Gamaliel, the Jews had not the body to produce: but were whose advice to the Jewish council is recorded obliged to meet the testimony of the apostles by an Acts v. 34, appears to have been of this descripanswer, not containing indeed any impossibility tion; perhaps Nicodemus, and perhaps also Join itself, but absolutely inconsistent with the sup- seph of Arimathea. This class of men, their position of their integrity; that is, in other words, character and their rank, are likewise pointed out inconsistent with the supposition which would re- by Saint John, in the twelfth chapter of his Gossolve their conduct into enthusiasm. pel: "Nevertheless, among the chief rulers also, many believed on him: but because of the Pharisees, they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue, for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." Persons, such as these, might admit the miracles of Christ, without being immediately convinced that they were under obligation to make a public profession of Christianity, at the risk of all that was dear to them in life, and even of life itself.s

CHAPTER IX.

The Propagation of Christianity.

↑ Acts ii. 41.

↑ Ver. 4.

In this argument, the first consideration is the fact; in what degree, within what time, and to what extent, Christianity was actually propagated. The accounts of the matter, which can be col*Acts ii. 1. lected from our books, are as follow: A few days ed and opposed, Christianity, there were, in all proba "Beside those who professed, and those who rejectafter Christ's disappearance out of the world, bility, multitudes between both, neither perfect Chriswe find an assembly of disciples at Jerusalem, to tians, nor yet unbelievers. They had a favourable the number of "about one hundred and twenty;" opinion of the Gospel, but worldly considerations made which hundred and twenty were, probably, a lit-them unwilling to own it. There were many circumstances which inclined them to think that Christianity tle association of believers, met together, not was a Divine revelation, but there were many incon merely as believers in Christ, but as personally veniences which attended the open profession of it : and connected with the apostles, and with one another. they could not find in themselves courage enough to Whatever was the number of believers then in bear them, to disoblige their friends and family, to ruin their fortunes, to lose their reputation, their liberty, and Jerusalem, we have no reason to be surprised that their life, for the sake of the new religion. Therefore so small a company should assemble: for there is they were willing to hope, that if they endeavoured to no proof, that the followers of Christ were yet observe the great principles of morality, which Christ formed into a society; that the society was reduced had represented as the principal part, the sum and substance, of religion; if they thought honourably of the gospel, if they offered no injury to the Christians, if they did them all the services that they could safely

*Acts i. 15.

Christianity, however, proceeded to increase in Jerusalem by a progress equally rapid with its first success; for, in the next chapter of our history, we read that "believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.” And this enlargement of the new society appears in the first verse of the succeeding chapter, where-year after this, a great multitude of Gentiles were in we are told, that, "when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected:"+ and, afterward in the same chapter, it is declared expressly, that "the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly, and that a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith."

a short time of their continuing together at Jerusalem; and even of this period the account is very concise. The work afterward consists of a few important passages of Peter's ministry, of the speech and death of Stephen, of the preaching of Philip the deacon; and the sequel of the volume, that is, two thirds of the whole, is taken up with the conversion, the travels, the discourses and his

also, large portions of time are often passed over with very scanty notice.

Now lay these three periods together, and observe | in fact a history of the twelve apostles only during how the progress of the religion by these accounts is represented. The institution, which properly began only after its author's removal from the world, before the end of thirty years had spread itself through Judea, Galilee, and Samaria, almost all the numerous districts of the Lesser Asia, through Greece, and the Islands of the Egean Sea, the sea-coast of Africa, and had extended itself to Rome, and into Italy. At Antioch in Sy-tory of the new apostle Paul; in which history, ria, at Joppa, Ephesus, Corinth, Thessalonica, Berea, Iconium, Derbe, Antioch in Pisidia, at Lydda, Saron, the number of converts is intimated by the expressions, "a great number," "great multitudes,' "much people." Converts are mentioned, without any designation of their number,*gress of Christianity, he would undoubtedly have at Tyre, Cesarea, Troas, Athens, Philippi, Lystra, Damascus. During all this time, Jerusalem continued not only the centre of the mission, but a principal seat of the religion; for when Saint Paul turned thither at the conclusion of the period of which we are now considering the accounts, the other apostles pointed out to him, as a reason for his compliance with their advice, "how many thousands (myriads, ten thousands) there were in that city who believed."+

Upon this abstract, and the writing from which it is drawn, the following observations seem material to be made:

III. That the account, so far as it goes, is for this very reason more credible. Had it been the author's design to have displayed the early procollected, or, at least, have set forth, accounts of the preaching of the rest of the apostles, who cannot, without extreme improbability, be supposed to have remained silent and inactive, or not to have met with a share of that success which attended their colleagues. To which may be added, as an observation of the same kind,

verts in several of the passages in which that notice now appears. All this tends to remove the suspicion of a design to exaggerate or deceive.

IV. That the intimations of the number of converts, and of the success of the preaching of the apostles, come out for the most part incidentally; are drawn from the historian by the occasion; such as the murmuring of the Grecian converts; the rest from persecution; Herod's death; I. That the account comes from a person, who the sending of Barnabas to Antioch, and Barnawas himself concerned in a portion of what he re- bas calling Paul to his assistance; Paul coming lates, and was contemporary with the whole of it; to a place, and finding there disciples; the clamour who visited Jerusalem, and frequented the society of the Jews; the complaint of artificers interested of those who had acted, and were acting, the chief in the support of the popular religion; the reason parts in the transaction. I lay down this point assigned to induce Paul to give satisfaction to the positively; for had the ancient attestations to this Christians of Jerusalem. Had it not been for valuable record been less satisfactory than they these occasions, it is probable that no notice whatare, the unaffectedness and simplicity with whichever would have been taken of the number of conthe author notes his presence upon certain occasions, and the entire absence of art and design from these notices, would have been sufficient to persuade my mind, that whoever he was, he ac- PARALLEL TESTIMONIES with the history, are tually lived in the times, and occupied the situa- the letters of Saint Paul, and of the other apostles, tion, in which he represents himself to be. When which have come down to us. Those of Saint I say, "whoever he was," I do not mean to cast a Paul are addressed to the churches of Corinth, doubt upon the name to which antiquity hath as- Philippi, Thessalonica, the church of Galatia, and, cribed the Acts of the Apostles (for there is no if the inscription be right, of Ephesus; his miniscause that I am acquainted with, for questioning try at all which places, is recorded in the history: it,) but to observe, that, in such a case as this, the to the church of Colosse, or rather to the churches time and situation of the author is of more import- of Colosse and Laodicea jointly, which he had not ance than his name; and that these appear from then visited. They recognise by reference the the work itself, and in the most unsuspicious form. churches of Judea, the churches of Asia, and “all II. That this account is a very incomplete ac- the churches of the Gentiles." In the Epistle to count of the preaching and propagation of Chris-the Romans, the author is led to deliver a retianity; I mean, that, if what we read in the his-markable declaration concerning the extent of his tory be true, much more than what the history contains must be true also. For although the narrative from which our information is derived, has been entitled the Acts of the Apostles, it is

preaching, its efficacy, and the cause to which he ascribes it,-"to make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, *Considering the extreme conciseness of many parts the Epistle to the Colossians, we find an oblique I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ." In of the history, the silence about the numbers of converts is no proof of their paucity; for at Philippi, no mention but very strong signification of the then general whatever is made of the number, yet Saint Paul ad- state of the Christian mission, at least as it ap dressed an epistle to that church. The churches of Ga-peared to Saint Paul:-"If ye continue in the

latia, and the affairs of those churches, were consider.

able enough to be the subject of another letter, and of much of Saint Paul's solicitude: yet no account is preserved in the history of his success, or even of his preaching in that country, except the sli, ht notice which these words convey;-" When they had gone throughout Phrygia, and the region of Galatia-they essayed to go into Bithynia."-Acts xvi. 6.

† Acts xxi. 20.

faith, grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the Gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under hearen;" which Gospel, he had