is mentioned, and eagerly affirmed by him, looks as if the author was aware of the likelihood of a suspicion of the fact we are trying to prove probable, and that he wrote this in order to obviate it.  And after all, the gospel according to John was certainly not written by him, and, therefore, what the author of it observes, may be true, or not.  You will observe also, reader, that the body of Jesus was given by Pilate to his friends immediately; a favour never vouchsafed by the Romans in such a case, except “speciali gratia.”  You will observe also, that the body was taken down by his friends, no doubt with great care; probably was washed from the blood, and rubbed perfectly dry; and was deposited in the cave or sepulchre, with a large quantity of spices, and aromatics.  Now suppose that Jesus only swooned on the cross, and that his naked body, after being cleansed as aforesaid, was laid in the new sepulchre where the air was cool and fresh, wrapped in a considerable quantity of dry linen, together with many spices, and aromatics, what could be more opportune, or proper, to stimulate his drowsed senses, and recall the unfortunate sufferer to life?  Suppose then, that on awaking from his trance, he disengaged himself, and took himself away as secretly as possible, might not all this have happened?  Is it impossible?  And does it not look plausible?  It is not improbable that he might after this have shewed himself privately to his particular disciples; for you will recollect, reader, that the appearances of Jesus to his disciples after his crucifixion were to them, only, and for the most part in the night.  And it is by no means impossible, that the twelve apostles, who were, I doubt not, well meaning men, though extremely simple and credulous; I say it is thus by no means impossible, that they might have believed sincerely, that their master had risen from the dead.  This hypothesis must not be considered only as the brain work of an unbelieving sceptic; for it has been (in its main principle) advanced, and elaborately defended by Dr. Paulus the professor of divinity in the principal University in Bavaria.

It is true, that it may be said, that this is all hypothesis, and mere conjecture.  We allow it; it is true; and we assert that the account given by the Evangelists is no better, nay, worse than conjecture, as it is a mere forgery of the second century!  For no man, we think, who knows all that has been made known by biblical critics, in later years, will now seriously contend for the literal truth of that account. [See Appendix A.]

If all this will not satisfy the man that “believeth all things,” our last resource is to demy the act of this resurrection.  And this we can do with perfect sang froid, as we know very well that it cannot be proved; for the only testimony in favour of it, are the four evangelists; four witnesses, the like of whose written testimony, with reference thereto, (being as contradic-tory as that is,) to say no more,