concile the the purity of their lives with the continual asseveration of a lie. Reasoning thus from the well known principles of human nature, and human action, we must come to the conclusion that the facts were as they stated."

All this is very pretty, and would be very strong if the premises were true: but these apostles were not reduced to penury, did not journey, and labor, and toil, and endure privations-did not receive stripes, except in one instance--did not suffer martyrdom in the cause of christianity. There is not the least hint in the scriptures that one of them ever left Jerusalem after Pentecest, except John and Peter, both of whom went down about thirty miles into Samaria, to confirm a few disciples that Philip the deacon had made and baptised, and the latter of whom went down through all parts, after-mind that—after the churches had rest, that is, after all danger was over, to visit those churches that the disciples-not the apostlesbut the churches that the disciples had established--those disciples that fled from Jerusalem on account of the persecution that arose after the death of Stephen. One of the letters ascribed to Peter, is dated at Babylon. These are all the travels or missionary tours of all the apostles that the book gives us any account or intimation of. Not a single church out of Jerusalem unless Cornelius and his family be called one, was founded by any apostle.

The scriptures are not altogether silent on this subject; for Paul, in his letter to the Galatians, tells us that on his second visit to Jerusalem, John, Peter, and James, who were pillars, were there. This must have been nineteen years after the ascension, on the supposition that Paul was converted in the third year thereafter; as he tells us he went there three years after his conversion, and then fourteen years thereafter, he made a second visit. Luke in his 15th chapter says, that Paul and Barnabas went up to Jerusalem, to refer the Gentile question to the apostles, that they found there the apostles and elders—and the apostles and elders wrote a letter, &c., &c. According to your chronological tables, this journey was made in the year 51, eighteen years after the asoension. Luke also tells us they were all there on Paul's first visit. Thus we find these apostles at Jerutalem, in the fifth and nineteenth year after the ascension, and as we are no where told they ever left that city, we are authorised in the conclusion that they did not. But this is not all. It seems that persecution could not drive them from it; for when the disciples they had made there, were compelled to leave their homes in consequence of a real or sham persecution, the apostles remained. All the Christians fled except the apostles. What has become of the journeys, the labors, the fatigues, the penury, the starvation, the watchings, the contumely, the stripes, the per

secution, and the martyrdoms of your great champions of the cross?Where shall I find them? Will you direct me to that huge pile of pious frauds and forgeries, called the books of the fathers? Bring them forward entire-not a scrap here and there from this author and from that. Let your missionary and bible and other societies for the spread and advance. ment of the gospel, publish one, or some, or all of these works and present them to the people, if, in their opinion, they will aid in establishing its truth. They will not be guilty of so suicidal an act. They know full well there is no man in our country so weak as not to discover that the authors are liars and impostors, and, consequently, not entitled to the least credit whatever. Such a step as a dissemination of these works would be a death blow to their religion.

Let us return to the question as to the time when the selfishness of these apostles was converted into disinterestedness; for one position of your argument is that they were disinterested, and had the present and eternal happiness of their fellow beings only in view in the promulgation of these facts. I answer never: and affirm that man cannot conceive of a situation presenting stronger temptations, or more powerful motives to fabricate falsehoods and adhering to them with pertinacity, than that in which the apostles found themselves on the night succeeding the crucifixion.

They had left all to follow Jesus-their wives, kindreds, and friends, and no doubt, in opposition to their wishes, and in spite of their most earnest remonstrances. They were undoubtedly, apprised, that their friends and neighbors looked upon them, as the kindred of Jesus looked upon him, as beings demented--had heard their jeers, and taunts, and gibes, and listened to their insulting inquiries, as to what places they were respectively to ocdupy, in the new and splendid court about to be established.

Their great leader died—their hopes were blasted, Try to conceive of the intensity of their chagrin and mortification-their horror at the thought of meeting their good-natured jriends. What must have been their several self communings. Let us listen to some one of them, say Peter, in soliloquy.

"He is dead, and I am not a prince--my friends told me it would be so, they ridiculed the pretensions of our leader, but I heeded them not. But now!the thought drives me to madness--Can I go for home? The citizens of Bethsaida will meet me in mock procession--present to me mock petitions, and in mockery question me, as to where I shall establish my court--what is to be the fashion of my coronet, the length of my batoon, and the dimensions and color of my state robe. I will not see my friends, unless something can be divised, that shall remove this stigma. Stop!A thought strikes me.-He shall be our King "although he be dead”

-a

King in heaven, and we his vicegerents on earth-he shall rise from the dead, and ascend to heaven, and we will all say we saw him, and make some of the women say so too, and we will persist in the assertion even unto death-better to die, than to live and have the children point at us, and say: "there goes one of the dupes, there goes his grace, Prince Peter."

Is this unnatural? Is it not just such a soliloquy as any man, under the same circumstances, would make? Were not here motives incomparably strong, to induce the Apostles to fabricate falsehoods? I do not introduce them as proofs that Jesus did not rise, I have argued that question already, but to rebut your arguments, bottomed on the position, that the Apostles had no motives for asserting, and persisting in a lie.

I will now trace the history of these men more particularly, with a view to the question of disinterestedness. On the day of Pentecost, the first of their commencing operations, we are told they made about three thousand converts. (I have agreed to admit every thing but the miracles) In a few days thereafter, we hear of five thousand men, more, believing—then that the number of disciples in Jerusalem increased greatly, even a great company of priests became obedient to the faith. The number of men must have been about ten thousand. This is the estimation of your most learned bishops. All of these sold all their possessions, and laid the price at the Apostles' feet, thus making them the depositaries of a common-fund—each one gave up all he had-called nothing his own.

On the supposition they had fifty dollars a piece, and this is very moderate, the common fund must have amounted to half a million, all ready cash too--a very pretty sum for twelve poor fishermen to have the control of-a very tempting bait indeed. What became of these deposits?

Before proceeding to answer this question, let us review the case of Annanias and Saphira. It appears they sold their possessions, but keptback part of the price in their own hands. Peter was made acquainted. (by whom we are not informed) with this retention. He charges it home upon Annanias in a very sharp speech. Annanias thereupon, falls down dead at his feet. This must have been a very sharp speech. Some young men came in, and wound him up, and carried him out instautly, and buried him. I say instantly, because they could not have dug the grave, and covered him up, and been back in three hours, unless they had taken him up and carried him out immediately after he fell. On their return, or a few moments before, which was about three hours after Annanias died, his wife, rather, his widow, came into the presence of Peter, not knowing what had happened. Yet, we are informed, that great fear came upon all them that had heard of Annanias's death. Who were all them? How many had

heard, on whom such great fear had come? Sufficient time had not elapsed for the news to have reached far, before another similar catastrophe happened, which caused great fear also, to all the church. Saphira had not heard of it, and she was one of the same society, and no doubt, was somewhere about the premises: it must, therefore, have been purposely concealed from her, or but few could have heard of it, previous to her making her appearance before Peter.

We hear frequently, of great fear coming upon the disciples, and others, and here we are told, that the deaths of Annanias and his wife, caused great fear to come upon the whole church. What were they afraid of?——— Did they fear that Peter would put them to death, believing that he had the power to call down the wrath of God, to destroy whom he pleased. Had he done so before? Was the great fear spoken of before, the result of a like cause? Did the meek and lowly Jesus give him this power? Was the system the Apostles were enjoined to set up, to be one of terror and of blood? We are told at the present that it is a system of love, of peace, and of joy. Did Christ tell them to revolutionize the world, by effecting a radical change in the organization of society? Did he say, "go and preach my gospel to every creature, commanding each and every individual that believes, to sell his lands and houses, and place the price at your feet."

Let us return to Saphira, whom we left in the presence of Peter. On the supposition, that Annanias did actually die of fright, or fall down in convulsions under a deep sense of guilt, (I feel compunction in making this supposition) from which he did not recover; I say, on the supposition that all was fair, in the case of Annanias, and that Peter was filled with that mild, amiable, and philanthropic spirit which prompts one to forgive tresspasses, and to pray, "lead us not into temptation," and to say,"blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy;" on these suppositions, I ask, what ought Peter to have done, and said, on the death of Annanias? He should immediately have sent for Saphira, and as her guardian, her spiritual guide, have shown to her, her dead Lord, and told her all the circumstances, regretted her misfortune, wiped the tear from her eye, should have apprised her of his knowledge of their keeping back a part of the price, implored her to repent and make restitution, and assured her, that on such repentance her Saviour would forgive her. But, instead of this, he proceeds against her with all the stealth of a tiger, and when he gets her within his reach, he pounces upon her with all the ferocity of that merciless animal. Without giving her the least intimation of what had happened, he endeavored to entrap her, by putting the leading question: "tell me whether ye sold the land for so much." He must have been assured, nay, he must have wished, "she would answer in the affirmative: "yea, for so much." This answer

Ꮓ

was made, on the supposition that her husband was alive, and she did not intend to betray him; and Peter was convinced she would not, when he asked the question.

Was this the proper course for an Apostle to pursue, towards a sister in the church, whose duty it should be, to endeavor to reclaim the backslider? An advocate, desirous of distinction, might practice such finesse towards a notorious and hardened offender; but, for an Apostle to do it, towards an erring sister, who had already been punished by the death of her husband, is monstrous! Can you, in the face of your God, declare, that this language is too harsh? So far for the stealth: now for the ferocity—the savage joy, with which he announces to her the death of her husband, and the similar fate that awaited her. "How is it, (says he) that ye have agreed together to tempt the spirit of the Lord? Behold the feet of them, which have buried thy husband, are at the door, and shall carry thee out."

What a scene for the tragic muse! How a Shakspeare and a Byron would have revelled here! If the blood of Abel cried from the ground, hers must have SCREAMED in the ear of the fancied Archangel, against the deep damnation of her taking off. Say, ye mothers and daughters of my country: have your tears all been shed-your sympaties all been exhausted for your fictitious martyrs-have ye none left to feel for the fate-none to bedew the grave of your sister Saphira, who with no friend near-the death tale of her husband stunning her ears-the dagger red with his blood, and brandished by his croaking murderer, searing her eye balls—and the announcement of her own instant doom curdling her hearts blood, at the same instant.-Say, can ye not mourn the fate of her, that was hurried to her grave under such appalling circumstances.

He predicts her death. Christ, we are told, brought people back to the world after they had left it, but we never hear of his taking any out, by virtue of his miracle-working power. If he had gone through the country killing folks, he never would have been admired for his philanthropy, nor have had any followers. Certainly, that man's faith must be more than sufficient to remove mouutains, who can believe, that any such power was conferred on any man, by the God and Father of all. As Peter predicted, he must have determined upon her death.

Was her guilt of so deep a dye, as to call down the wrath of God in this miraculous manner? Ought she to have been denied all space for preparation to meet her God? I put these questions to christians. Was her's a greater crime than Peter's denial of his Lord, and confirming it by vulgar oaths? Why was not he struck down? This same Peter was guilty of dissimulation before the Jews, at Antioch, (so says St. Paul.) yet his life was spared. James advises Paul to play the hypocrite, by going into the temple, for