they ftole it in the night, and that they ftole it while the guards were afleep. That Jefus came out of the fepulchre before the rifing of the fun, St. Matthew informs us, who fays, that the earthquake &c. happened at the time when Mary Magdalene and the other Mary fet out in order to take a view of the fepulchre, which was, juft as the day began to break. This fact was undoubtedly too notorious for the chief priests to venture at falfifying it, and was befides favourable to the two other articles; this therefore they admitted; and taking the hint from what the foldiers told them of their having been caft into a fwoon or trance (becoming like dead men) at the appearance of the angel, and confequently not having feen our Saviour come out of the fepulchre, they forged the remaining parts of this ftory, that his difciples came and ftole him away while they flept. They took the hint, I fay, of framing thefe two laft-mentioned articles from that circumftance related by St. Matthew, of the keepers fhaking and becoming like dead men upon the fight of the angel; for throughout this whole hiftory there was no other befides this upon which they could prevaricate and difpute. The ftone was rolled away from the fepulchre, and the body was gone; this the chief priests were to account for, without allowing that Jefus was rifen from the dead. The difciples, they faid, ftole it away. What! while the guards were there? Yes, the guards were afleep. With this answer they knew full well many would be fatisfied, without inquiring any farther into the matter: but they could not expect that every body would be fo contented; efpecially as they had reason to apprehend, that although the foldiers, who had taken their money, might be faithful to them, keep their fecret, and atteft the ftory they had framed for them, yet the truth might come out, by means of those whom they had not bribed; for St. Matthew fays *, that fome of the watch went into the city, "and fhewed unto the chief priests "all the things that were done." Some therefore remained behind, who probably had no fhare of the money which the chief priests gave to the foldiers; or, if they had, in all likelihood it came too late; they had already divulged the truth, as well from an eagerness, which all men naturally have, to tell a wonderful story, as from a defire of juftifying themfelves for having quitted their poft. The chief priests therefore were to guard against this event alfo; in order to which, nothing could be more effectual, than to counterwork the evidence of one part of the foldiers, by putting into the mouths of others of them a ftory, which, without directly contradicting the facts, might yet tend to overthrow the only conclufion which the difciples of Jefus would endeavour to draw from them, and which they were fo much concerned to difcredit, viz. That Jefus was risen from the dead. For if the difciples and partizans of Jefus, informed by one part of the foldiers of the feveral circumftances related in St. Matthew, fhould urge thefe miraculous events of fo many proofs of the refurrection of their Mafter, the unbelieving Jews were, by U 4

Chap. xxviii. ver. 11.

the

the teftimony of thofe fuborned witneffes, inftructed to answer, that the earthquake and the angel were illufions of dreams;that the foldiers had honeftly confeffed they were afleep, though fome of them, to fkreen themfelves from the fhame or punishment fuch a breach of difcipline deferved, pretended they were frightened into a fwoon or trance by an extraordinary appearance, which they never faw, or faw only in a dream ;--that while they flept, the difciples came and ftole the body; for none of the foldiers, not even thofe who faw the most, pretend to have feen Jefus come out of the fepulchre-they are all equally ignorant by what means the body was removed; when they awaked, it was miffing; and it was much more likely that the difciples fhould have ftolen it away, than that an impoftor fhould rife from the dead, I fhall not go about to confute this ftory; to unprejudiced and thinking people it carries its own confutation with it: But I muft obferve, that it is founded entirely upon the circumftance of the foldiers not having feen Jefus come out of the fepulchre; a circumftance that even thofe who told the real truth, could not contradict, though they accounted for it in a different manner, by faying they were frightened into a swoon or trance at the fight of a terrible apparition, that came and rolled away the ftone, and fat upon it. But this fact the chief priests thought it not prudent to allow, as favouring too much the opinion of Chrift's being rifen from the dead; neither did they think proper to reject it entirely, becaufe they intended to turn it to their own advantage; and therefore, denying every thing that was miraculous, they conftrued this fwoon or trance into a fleep; and with a large fum of money, and promifes of impunity, hired the foldiers to confefs a crime, and, by taking fhame to themfelves, to cover them from confufion. And fo far, it must be acknowledged, they gained their point; for, until fome proofs of the refurrection of Jefus fhould be produced, of which at that time they had heard nothing more, this story would undoubtedly have ferved to puzzle the caufe, and hold people in fufpenfe. Argument and reafon indeed were wholly on the other fide; but prejudice and authority were on theirs; and they were not ignorant to which the bulk of mankind were most difpoled to fubmit.

But as no other than prefumptive arguments in favour of the refurrection could be drawn from what happened to the foldiers at the fepulchre, even though the chief priests had permitted them to tell the truth; St. Matthew, in his narration, proceeds to fecond and con firm thofe arguments by pofitive evidence, producing witneffes who had feen and converfed with Jefus Chrift, after he was rifen from the dead of thefe, as may be gathered from the other gofpels, the number was very confiderable; and very numerous were the inftances. of Chrift's appearing after his refurrection: yet from the latter has St. Matthew felected only two, upon each of which I beg leave to make a few remarks. The firft appearance of Chrift is to the wamen, which happened as they went to tell the difciples the meffage of the angel that had appeared to them in the fepulchre. I have

already

already proved, in my observations upon St. John, that Mary Magdalene was not one of those women; and yet the words of St. Matthew, by the common rule of conftruction, feem to import the contrary. For, in the first place, the paragraph" (and the angel answered and faid to the women)" is, in our tranflation, connected with the preceding by the copulative" and." 2dly, As in the foregoing part of this chapter no mention is made of any other women than Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, and no hint given of any other angel than that described as defçending from heaven, &c. the words in this paragraph" (the angel and the women)" must be taken to relate to them. To which I anfwer, 1ft, That this paragraph is not to be fo connected with the preceding, as if nothing had intervened; fince we shall find upon a clofer examination of it, and comparing it with its parallel in St. Mark, that between the keepers becoming like dead men, and the angels fpeaking to the women, Salome had joined the two Marys in their way to the fepulchre; that before they arrived there the keepers were fled, and the angel was removed from off the ftone, and was feated within the fepulchre: for which reafon the particle, inftead of being rendered by the copulative and, should rather be expreffed by the disjunctive but, or now, as denoting an interruption in the narration, and the beginning of a new paragraph. 2dly, I allow the angel here fpoken of to be the fame with that mentioned in the foregoing verfes, and the other Mary to be one of those women to whom this angel in the fepulchre, and afterwards Chrift himself, appeared; and therefore admit the words, "the angel " and the women," in this verfe, relate to them. But this will not remove the difficulty; and it will be faid, that either Mary MagdaJene was with the other Mary in the fepulchre, or there is an inaccuracy in the expreffion; for the words, "women," and "fear not ye," being plural, imply there were more than one. I grant it, and St. Mark informs us that Salome was there.-But then, instead of one inaccuracy to be charged upon St. Matthew, here are two: Mary Magdalene, who was not prefent when the other Mary faw the angel, is, by the natural conftruction of his words, faid to be there; and Salome, who was prefent, he takes no notice of at all,I allow it, and let those who are given to object make the most of it: but let it at the fame time be remembered, that the greatest part of the evangelical writers were illiterate men, not skilled in the rules of eloquence, or grammatical niceties, against the laws of which it is eafy to point out many faults in the writings of most of them. The other paffage I purposed to make fome remarks upon, affords another inftance of the fame kind; it is as follows: "Then the eleven difciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain, where Jefus had "appointed them; and when they faw him, they worshipped him; but fome doubted." Here the words, "fome doubted," by the ftrict rules of grammar, must be understood of fome of the eleven, difciples, who immediately before are faid, when they faw Jefus, to have worshipped him; which furely is not very confiftent with their doubting: neither is it very probable that a writer, however illiterate,

fhould

fhould mean to contradict himself in the compafs of three words. Another interpretation therefore, though it be not fo ftrictly agreeable to the grammar rules, is to be fought after, fince it is crime to offend against grammar than against common fenfe. "Some doubted," must mean fome, befides the eleven who were present upon that occafion, doubted. And indeed had St. Matthew, in the former part of this narration, taken notice that others befides the eleven were there, there would have been no difficulty in understanding, even according to the ftricteft laws of the fyntax, to whom the "fome doubted" did belong; &, and & dè, fet in oppofition to each other, and fignifying fome and others, thefe and thofe, are frequently to be met with in Greek authors of the greateft authority; and no reafon can be given, why, according to this manner of fpeaking, the ὁ δὲ ἔνδεκα μαθηταὶ προσεκυνήσαν αυτῷ ὁἱ δὲ ἐδίσασαν, fhould not be interpreted now or then, the eleven difciples-worshipped him, but others doubted; but that fome words to which the fecond & de (others) refer, are wanting.

But thefe defects, how grievous foever they may feem to grammarians, or cavillers, ftill more fcrupulous and more punctilious than grammarians themfelves, will by no means impeach the veracity of this evangelift in the opinion of those who, in making a judgment of his writings, are willing to take into the account the purpofe he had in compofing his gofpel. He wrote, as obferved before, at the request of the Jewish converts; who, as St. Chryfoftom informs us*, came to him and befought him to leave, in writing, what they heard from him by word of mouth. His view, in writing the gofpel therefore to the Jews, was to repeat what he had before preached to them: in doing of which, it was not at all incumbent upon him to relate every minute circumftance, which he could not but know they were well acquainted with, and which the mention of the principal fact could not fail to recall to their memories. Thus in the two paffages above cited (to confine myself to them) it was not neceffary for him, writing to the Jews, as it was for St. Mark, who wrote for the Egyptian converts +, to explain the business that carried Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to the fepulchre. It was doubtles known among the Jews that they had bought fpices, and went to the fepulchre in order to embalm the body of Jefus. Neither was it worth while, for the fake of a little grammatical exactness, to interrupt the course of his narration, to acquaint them that Salome joined the two Marys as they were going to the fepulchre, and went with them thither; and that Mary Magdalene, upon feeing the stone rolled away, ran immediately to inform Peter and John of it; efpecially as he did not think proper to take notice of Chrift's having appeared to her: and he feems to me to have mentioned Chrift's appearing to the other women, only because it was connected with the principal fact, the ftory of his appearing in Galilee to the eleven difciples

difciples and others. The difciples going to meet their Mafter on a mountain in Galilee, where he had appointed them, must needs have made a great noife among the Jews; efpecially as it did not fall out till above a week at leaft after the refurrection; during which time he had appeared thrice to his difciples *, not including his appearance to Peter, to the two difciples, and the women. And as above twenty people were witneffes to one or other of these appearances, the fame of them was in all probability diffused not only through Jerufalem, but throughout all Judea. It is no wonder, therefore, that upon this folemn occafion, which had been notified fo long before, not only by an angel at the fepulchre, and by Chrift himfelf on the day of his refurrection, but foretold by him even before his death; it is no wonder, I fay, that upon fo folemn an occafion a great multitude, befides the eleven, fhould be got together. St. Paul mentions an appearance of Chrift to above five hundred brethren at once, which cannot, with fo good reason, be understood of any other but this in Galilee. And though out of fo large an affembly fome doubted, as St. Matthew fays, yet that very exception implies, that the greatest number believed; and even those who doubted must have agreed in fome common points with those who believed. They, as well as the eleven, faw Jefus; but, not having had the fame fenfible evidences of the reality of his body, doubted whether it was himself or his apparition which they beheld; while the latter, who needed no farther conviction, when they faw him, fell down and worfhipped. Here then was a fact, which could not in all its circumftances but be very notorious to the Jews, and was therefore highly proper to be mentioned by St. Matthew. Here was a cloud of witneffes 1, the greatest part of whom were alive when St. Paul wrote his epiftle to the Corinthians §, and therefore were certainly living when St. Matthew compofed his gospel; and many of them probably were of the number of thofe converts, for whom he wrote. Upon any of these fuppofitions, and especially the last, it is eafy to account for the concife manner in which he has related this important event. It either was, or might eafily be, known with all its circumstances by thofe to whom he addreffed his Gofpel. The little attendant circumftances, therefore, it were as needlefs for him to mention, as it was proper to take notice of the event itself. The Gospel of Chrift and the faith of Chriftians are both vain, if Christ be not rifen from the dead. It was therefore abfolutely neceffary for the apoftles and preachers of the gospel to prove the refurrection; this they did as well by their own teftimony, as by that of others, who had feen Jefus after he was rifen. Thus | St. Paul relates feveral appearances of Chrift to Cephas and others, and clofes all with his own evidence; adding, "and laft of all he was seen of me alfo." The Evangelifts in like manner produce many inftances of the

+ Cor. chap. xv. 6.

*See John, chap. xxi. ver. 14. I Cor. xv. 6. St. Paul's 1ft Epistle to the Corinthians was written A. D. 57. See Mr. Locke, ad locum. The Gofpel according to St. Matthew, about the year 53.

1 Cor. xv. 5-8.