Mr. B. My Lord, I was unwilling to disturb the Gentleman by breaking in upon his scheme; otherwise I would have reminded him that this court sits to examine evidence, and not to be entertained with fine imaginations.  You have had a scheme laid before you, but not one bit of evidence to support any part of it; no, not so much as a pretence to any evidence.  The Gentleman was, I remember, very sorry that the old books of the Jews were lost, which would, as he supposes, have set forth all this matter; and I agree with him, that he has much reason to be sorry, considering his great scarcity of proof.  And since I have mentioned this, that I may not be to return to it again, I would ask the Gentleman now, how he knows there ever were such books?  And since, if ever there were any, they are lost, how he knows what they contained?  I doubt I shall have frequent occasion to ask such questions.  It would indeed be a sufficient answer to the whole, to repeat the several suppositions that have been made, and to call for the evidence upon which they stand.  This would plainly discover every part of the story to be mere fiction.  But since the Gentleman seems to have endeavored to bring under one view the many insinuations which have of late been spread abroad by different hands, and to work the whole into a consistent scheme; I will, if your patience shall permit, examine this plot, and see to whom the honour of the contrivance belongs.

The Gentleman begins with expressing his “amazement, that the resurrection has been believed in all ages of the church.”  If you ask him, Why? he must answer , Because the account of it is a forgery; for it is no amazement to him, surely, that a true account should be generally well received.  So that this remark proceeds indeed from confidence rather than amazement; and comes only to this, that he is sure that there was no resurrection.  And I am sure that this is no evidence that there was none.  Whether he is mistaken in his confidence, or I in mine, the court must judge.

The Gentleman’s observation, That the general belief of the resurrection creates a presumption that it stands upon good evidence, and therefore people look no farther, but follow their fathers, as their fathers did their grandfathers before them, is in great measure true; but it is a truth nothing to his purpose.  He allows, that the resurrection has been believed in all ages of the church; that is, from the very time of the resurrection:  what then prevailed with those who first received it?  They certainly did not follow the example of their fathers.  Here then is the point, How did this fact gain credit in the world at first?  Credit it has gained without doubt.  If the multitude at present go into this belief through prejudice, example, and for company sake, they do in this case no more, nor otherwise, than they do in all cases.  And it cannot be denied, but that truth may be received through prejudice,