ページの画像
PDF
ePub

But why need I insist upon this, when I can urge, farther, that even though there had been a confederacy amongst the witnesses of the gospel miracles, this could not have screened them from detection; as the persons who had all the means of inquiry in their hands were engaged in interest to exert themselves on the occasion, nay, actually did put their power in execution, against the reporters of these miracles?

Forged miracles may pass current where power and authority screen them from the too nice inquiry of examiners. But whenever it shall happen that those who are vested with the supreme power are bent upon opposing and detecting them, the progress which they make can be but small before the imposture is discovered, and sinks into obscurity and contempt. If this observation be well founded, as I am confident it is, that lying wonders should pass undetected amongst the papists will not be thought strange; for, as I have already mentioned, such stories amongst them have generally been countenanced, if not invented, by those with whom alone the power of detecting the imposture and of punishing the impostors was lodged. Now the miracles of Jesus, it is notorious, were not thus sheltered. The evident, the declared tendency of his works, was to introduce a total change into the state of the world with regard to religious opinions. Is it then to be thought, that those who were vested with the supreme power would look on with indifference, and allow this change to be brought about; a change which their interest prompted, and which their prejudices biassed them to prevent, and which, had there been any imposture in the case, they could

have prevented with the utmost ease, and in the most effectual manner, by examining into the facts appealed to, and dragging out the impostors to public infamy? Accordingly we find from history, that from the very beginning opposition of every kind was made to check the progress of Christianity by the rulers in that part of the world where it was first preached; Jesus, the great Founder of it, was put to an ignominious death, and the persons who witnessed his miracles, on the very spot where they had been performed, were beaten, imprisoned, scourged, and stoned. That there was no imposture detected, therefore, could not be owing to want of proper examination. For we see that they who were best furnished with the means of inquiry and opposition did all they could: whom they could not confute, they punished; whom they could not brand as impostors, they crowned as martyrs.

But perhaps you will object, what assurance have we that the witnesses of the miracles of Jesus were not detected? How can we be certain that the Jewish priests and rulers did not convict them of imposture, by disproving the wondrous works ascribed by them to their Master? Such an objection, though it may be urged by one who is resolved not to be convinced, can never be offered by any impartial inquirer after truth. We have as great certainty, as from the nature of the thing can be expected, that no such detection ever was made. Had the witnesses of Jesus's miracles been convicted of imposture, is it to be imagined that this remarkable fact would not have been handed down to posterity? And yet no such thing is mentioned in any one history, in any one writer, either amongst the Jews or amongst the

pagans. On the contrary, it is a point not to be controverted, that the truth of the facts was admitted by the enemies of Christianity in general. For can it be imagined, that if the gospel miracles had been looked upon by them as mere forgeries, that the Jewish rabbins would have imagined their ridiculous solution of them, by ascribing them to Jesus's having stolen the ineffable name of Jehovah out of the templef; or that Hierocles ®, Celsus h, Juliani, and the rest of the heathen antagonists would have endeavoured to account for them by magic? And if these

f See their Talmudical book called Avoda Zara, or of Idolatry, published by Edzard, at Hamburgb, in 4to, 1705.

5 ἡμεῖς μὲν τὸν τοιαῦτα πεποιηκότα (meaning Apollonius of Tyana) οὐ θεὸν, ἀλλὰ θεοῖς κεχαρισμένον ἄνδρα ἡγούμεθα. Οἱ δὲ δι ̓ ὀλίγας τερατείας τινὰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν Θεὸν ἀναγορεύουσι. Philostratorum Opera c. 11. Lipsiæ, 1709. In this quotation, Hierocles compares the miracles of Apollonius with those of Jesus, the truth of which he evidently admits, and only blames the Christians for worshipping Jesus as a God.

Η Ανέπλασε δέ τι ἕτερον συγκατατιθέμενος μέν, πως ταῖς παραδόξοις δυνάμεσιν ἃς Ἰησοῦς ἐποίησεν, ἐν αἷς τοὺς πολλοὺς ἔπεισεν ἀκολουθεῖν αὐτῷ ὡς Χριστῷ· διαβάλλειν δ ̓ αὐτὰς βουλόμενος ὡς ἀπὸ μαγείας, καὶ οὐ θείᾳ δυνάμει γεγενημένας. φησὶ, γὰρ, αὐτὸν σκότιον τραφέντα, μισθαρνήσαντα εἰς Αἴγυπτον, δυνάμεών τινων πειραθέντα, ἐκεῖθεν ἐπανελθεῖν, Θεὸν δι ̓ ἐκείνας τὰς δυνάμεις ἑαυτὸν ἀναγορεύοντα. Origen. contra Celsum, lib. i. c. 38. p. 356. p. 30. ed. Spens. The meaning of which quotation is, that Celsus, though he owned that Jesus performed miracles, ascribed them to magic, affirming, that Jesus having been educated in Egypt had there learnt their art of doing wonders.

† Ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς—ὀλίγους πρὸς τοῖς τριακοσίοις ἐνιαυτοῖς ὀνομάζεται, ἐργασάμενος παρ' ὃν ἐζηχρόνον ἔργον οὐδὲν ἀκοῆς ἄξιον, εἰ μή τις οἴεται τοὺς κυλλοὺς καὶ τυφλοὺς ἰάσασθαι καὶ δαιμονῶντας ἐφορκίζειν, ἐν Βηθσαϊδᾷ καὶ ἐν Βηθανίᾳ ταῖς κώμαις, τῶν μεγίστων ἔργων εἶναι. Cyril contra Julianum, lib. vi. p. 191. Lipsia, 1696. Though Julian here speaks of the miracles of Jesus with the utmost contempt, he admits their truth.

champions against the gospel, in its earliest ages, had it not in their power to call in question the truth of the miracles of Jesus, how unreasonable would it be at our time of day to pretend that such detection was ever made! Besides, had the charge of imposture been fixed upon the witnesses of these miracles, is it to be imagined that they could have made so much as one convert? If, for instance, the truth of their Master's resurrection could have been overturned, is it to be imagined that, within fifty days after it was said to have happened, the discourse of St. Peter, in which this miracle was so strongly insisted upon, could have added three thousand to the faith. Had the miracles appealed to by the first preachers of Christianity been detected to be false, the same age and the same place, which saw this religion first preached, would have seen it forgotten in oblivion and contempt.

As, therefore, the miracles of Jesus did not escape detection from want of examination at their first publication, I here repeat, what I have aimed to prove, (I hope not altogether without success,) that they stand upon a stronger testimony than the spurious pretences which have been represented as vying with them. For though some of these, as I have granted, may, equally with those of the Gospels, be traced up to contemporary witnesses, and be allowed to have been published on the spot, yet I am confident that you cannot produce any one instance, amongst the endless catalogue of them, where it will not be easy, from the circumstances of the case, to satisfy you, that if the imposture escaped detection, it escaped it, because it was proposed to those who did not examine it, or was sheltered and protected

by those who had it in their power to prevent any examination.

But the protestant Christian is not warranted to admit the miracles recorded in his New Testament while he rejects those of a later date, merely because the former are better attested than the latter. His reasons for making the distinction will appear to still greater advantage, if I can prove, as I proposed, that the testimony which supports the miracles of the New Testament is not only stronger than that which supports any pretended wonders, but also the strongest that can be supposed, or that, from the nature of the thing, could be had.

Two qualifications must concur to establish the credibility of witnesses; a sufficient knowledge of the matters of fact they attest, and a disposition not to falsify what they know. And when these two qualifications do concur, we think ourselves obliged to admit what is attested as true.

Now, that the persons whose testimony we have for the miracles of Jesus had the first qualification, it would be impertinent in me to suppose that you can dispute. Let us then see whether they can be proved to have had the other qualification also; and I flatter myself that I shall be able to shew that they had it, and that, if ever there can be any assurance of the integrity of witnesses in any one instance, we have such an assurance with regard to the witnesses of the miracles of Jesus.

That any credit is paid to human testimony is in general owing to the knowledge we have of human nature, which is so constituted, that men cannot be supposed capable of giving a false attestation, when they are not under the influence of interested views

« 前へ次へ »