To apply this to the present case:  If the apostles had wrought miracles, and said nothing of the resurrection, the miracles would have proved nothing about the resurrection one way or another.  But when as eye-witnesses they attested the truth of the resurrection, and wrought miracles to confirm their authority; the miracles did not directly prove the resurrection; but they confirmed and established beyond all suspicion the proper evidence, the evidence of eye-witnesses.  So that here is no change of the evidence from proper to improper; the fact still rests upon the evidence of sense, confirmed and strengthened by the authority of the Spirit.  If a witness calls in his neighbors to attest his veracity, they prove nothing as to the fact in question, but only confirm the evidence of the witness.  The case here is the same; though between the authorities brought in confirmation of the evidence, there is no comparison.

The second objection was, That this evidence, however good it may be in its kind, is yet nothing to us.  It was well, the Gentleman says, for those who had it; but what is that to us, who have it not?

To adjust this difficulty, I must observe to you, that the evidence now under consideration, was not a private evidence of the Spirit, or any inward light, like to that which the Quakers in our time pretend to; but an evidence appearing in the manifest and visible works of the Spirit:  and this evidence was capable of being transmitted, and actually has been transmitted to us upon unquestionable authority.  And to allow the evidence to have been good in the first ages, and not in this, seems to be to be a contradiction to the rules of reasoning:  for if we see enough to judge that the first ages had reason to believe, we must needs see at the same time, that it is reasonable for us also to believe.  As the present question only relates to the nature of the evidence, it was not necessary to produce from history the instances to shew in how plentiful a manner this evidence was granted to the church.  Whoever wants this satisfaction, may easily have it.

Gentlemen of the jury, I have laid before you the substance of what has been said on both sides.  You are now to consider of it, and to give your verdict.

        The jury consulted together, and the Foreman rose up.

        Foreman.  My Lord, We are ready to give our verdict.

        Judge.  Are you all agreed?

        Jury.  Yes.

        Judge.  Who shall speak for you?

        Jury.  Our Foreman.

Judge.  What say you?  Are the apostles guilty of giving false evidence in the case of the resurrection of Jesus, or not guilty?

        Foreman.  Not guilty.

Judge.  Very well.  And now, Gentlemen, I resign my commission and am your humble servant.