Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus Part 5

Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus Part 5

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.


The company rose up, and were beginning to pay their compliments to the judge and the council; but were interrupted by a Gentleman, who went up to the judge, and offered him a fee. Whats this? Says the judge. A fee, Sir, said the Gentleman. A fee to a judge is a bribe, said the judge. True, Sir, said the Gentleman; but you have resigned your commission, and will not be the first judge who has come from the bench without any diminution of honour. Now, Lazaruss case is to come on next, and this fee is to retain you on his side. There followed a confused noise of all speaking together, to persuade the judge to take the fee: but as the trial had lasted longer than I expected, and I had lapsed the time of an appointment for business, I was forced to slip away; and whether the judge was prevailed on to undertake the cause of Lazarus, or no, I cannot say.


FINIS