was told them; considering these things, this story of Matthew's is more like a conjecture of his own, than a divine truth. If it was true, the Priests and Pharisees were more attentive to his sayings, and understood them better than his own disciples! Matthew continues his story and says, "in the end of the Sabbath as it began to dawn, toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre; and behold there was a great earthquake, for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it; his countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow; and for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men! Here again information is wanting.

Who told Matthew that the angel descended from heaven, and rolled back the stone, and sat upon it? He was not there, and according to his own narrative, the women, so useful for carrying information, were not yet come, and the guard were hired not to tell. We have only his own unsupported assertion as evidence of this incredible tale.

Matthew continues his story, and says, that "some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the Chief priests all the things that were done; and when they were assembled with the Elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers, saying, say ye his disciples came by night and stole him away while we slept; and if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you; so they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews unto this day."

This whole story is doubtful and improbable; how did Matthew know what was said and done in the secret council of the Priests and Elders, when they were assembled to concert their plans? Who told him that they gave large money to the soldiers as a bribe to tell a clumsy falsehood, which every one could detect? he says that the soldiers did as they were commanded, but it is not likely that the Roman soldiers would have obeyed such instructions from the Jewish Priests. Under the Roman military discipline, a guard of soldiers who had slept at their post would have been punished with death; is it likely that the soldiers would have told they were sleeping on duty, and run such a risk for money? Would a Roman governor have been so easily persuaded to pass over such breach of military discipline, when it was publicly reported? These things are at least very improbable; but who informed Matthew concerning these secret contrivances? According to his own account, all these plans were devised in secret, and he does not pretend to have his knowledge by inspiration, he never mentions it. We may safely conclude from this want of information, that

Chap 28, v. 1.—t Chap. 28, v. 11, 15.

this story has been manufactured long after the events are said to have taken place. The expression, "and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews unto this day," refers to a great length of time before, and proves that it has been written long after the event it pretends to describe took place.

The whole story proves, that the author of this book has been a very credulous superstitious man, and quite regardless of accuracy or truth, when falsehood would forward his, cause to make up such a tale, (for it is his story, not theirs,) to represent a council of men, the rulers of a nation, hatching and propagating such a stupid falsehood, as that of men who had been sleeping, pretending to tell what was done when they were asleep, and to affirm that the nation commonly believed such evidence! This story of the Jews reporting, that the body of Jesus was stolen away by his disciples is also very doubtful, it is not hinted at by Josephus, and is not generally either reported or believed among them now, and probably never was, they disbelieve the greater part of the history of Jesus altogether; but Matthew's book was not likely known to the Jews, and certainly very little read by them, or else they would have detected many of his blundering falsehoods; indeed, copies of books were so scarce in these days, and there was so little reading at that time, and for many ages after, that an obscure author like Matthew, might have inserted almost any falsehood into his narrative without being detected, as his book would be seldom read by men who could detect and expose such falsehoods and inaccuracies.

This story of the guard, the earthquake, and the angel rolling back the stone, &c. (like that of the dead rising,) is only told by Matthew, neither Mark, Luke, nor John mention it, and Josephus is equally silent; if these things had really taken place, it is not likely that the other Evangelists would have omitted to mention them, and at the same time have written so many repetitions concerning trifles of far less importance. It certainly would have been of some value in corroborating the story of the resurrection, to prove by their united testimony, that there was a guard over the sepulchre; yet Mark, Luke and John, never allude to such a thing, according to their narratives, there was no guard there; if there had been one, they could hardly have avoided making some mention of it.

Remarks on the testimony concerning Christ's Resurrection, his appearance after it, and his ascension.

The account which the four Evangelists have given of Christ's rising from the tomb, although it was one of the most important events connected with his mission, said to be foretold by him

self, and meant to confirm all, is more confused and contradictory than any thing related before, and equally as perplexing as the accounts of his conception and birth.

Matthew has recorded,* that Jesus foretold he would lie three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, as Jonah had been three days and three nights in the whale's belly; but this prophecy was not fulfilled in any respect; they represent that he did not lie in the heart of the earth at all, that he was only from Friday night until early on Sabbath morning, [two nights and one day,] in a tomb of stone. This was not three days and three nights; but we should remember that a thousand years are with him the same as one day, so he could not be expected to speak very accurately as to days and hours, and we should remember above all, that he cannot lie!

There is an irreconcileable disagreement in the relation of almost every particular connected with this event, we may begin our comparison of the evidence with the account of the persons who came first to the sepulchre. Matthew† and Mark‡ inform us, that it was Mary Magdalene and another Mary, [no mention of any more ;] Luke says, it was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women; but according to John, it was Mary Magdalene alone. She is mentioned several times as alone, and not the smallest hint of any other person with her. Matthew relates, that they came to the sepulchre in the end of the Sabbath as it began to dawn.Mark says the Sabbath was past, it was at the rising of the sun; and John says it was yet dark. There is so much difference between the end of the Sabbath and its being past, between the dawn, the rising of the sun, and early in the morning while yet dark, that it makes this story very much like a falsehood.

Matthew informs us, that when the women came to see the sepulchre, the angel of the Lord sat upon the stone at the door of it; but according to Mark, Luke, and John, there was no angel at the door, for if he had been there, and told them that Jesus was risen, as Matthew asserts, it is not likely they would have gone into the sepulchre to examine it, which Mark and Luke say they did; and if they had seen this mighty angel [with a countenance like lightning,] at the door seemingly without fear, they would not have been afraid of a young man in the inside, which Mark says they were. According to Matthew, they, or as John has it, she [for he always mentions Mary Magdalene alone,] went away from the sepulchre quickly, apparently without going into it; but Mark and Luke relate, that they did go in. Mark tells us, when they entered in they saw one young man clothed in a long white garment, sitting at the right side; Luke says they saw two men, who stood by

*

Chap. 12, v, 40.-t Chap. 28, v. 1.—‡ Chap. 16, v. 1.—§ Chap. 24, v. 10, '. Chap. 20, v. 1.-¶Chap 16, v. 5.

them in shining garments. Mark tells us, that the young man who was within, gave them the same message to carry to the disciples, which Matthew says the angel without gave them; but according to Luke, the words were quite different.

Matthew and Luke inform us, that they went away to tell the disciples the words which the angel or angels spake to them; and Luke says expressly,* that they told all these things to the eleven, and all the rest; but Mark tells us,† that they said nothing to any man, for they were afraid; according to John's account, they, or rather she, had no message to tell, for she saw neither man nor angel at this time to give her any information, she only told the disciples that they had taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre.

Matthew relates, that Jesus himself appeared to the women as they returned from the sepulchre; but Mark, Luke and John, leave us no reason to believe any such thing; Luke informs us, that when the women told these things to the apostles, Peter arose and ran unto the sepulchre, apparently alone, there is no mention of any other with him. John says it was Peter and another disciple, probably himself; but Matthew and Mark's narratives make no mention of these disciples going to the sepulchre at all; Mark and Luke say,‡ that the disciples did not believe the women when they told them that he was risen, and what they had seen.

According to Luke's narrative,§ when Peter came to the sepulchre, he did not go into it, he only stooped down and beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed wondering; but John says, that it was the other disciple who stooping down looked in; but when Peter came he did go in, and then the other disciple went in also, and saw, after which they went away home.

John relates that Mary stood weeping at the sepulchre, [still alone,] and she saw two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. According to Luke, it was when she and her companions came first to the sepulchre that the two angels appeared unto them; in Matthew's narrative, we hear only of one angel, who was sitting at the door; and Mark also tells us of only one, who was sitting within; Luke relates, that the two were standing, but John says they were sitting; all these are evidently different relations of the same story, and display such agreement as is generally met with among those who relate stories of apparitions and ghosts; but the whole is very unlike the harmony of divine truth.

John relates, that after Mary had spoken to the angels, she turned back and saw Jesus standing by her, but did not know him. According to John's account, this seems his first appear

*Ch. 24, v. 9—†Ch. 16, v. 8—‡Ch. 24, v. 11—§Ch. 24, v. 12—|| Ch. 20, v. 5, 6.

ance to her; but Matthew informs us, that he appeared the first time as they returned from the sepulchre; which if he did, how did Mary not know him again, so short time after, when we hear of no difficulty in knowing him the first time?

*

T

Matthew informs us, that when they saw him they worshipped him, and held him, by the feet, but according to John,† he would not let Mary touch him, because he was not yet ascended to his Father. This was very strange, when according to the same account by John, even before he ascended, he made Thomas not only to touch him, but to thrust his hand into his side! The Evangelists have collected many absurd and inconsis tent stories concerning Christ's resurrection, and have proba bly invented and added many of their own; but they have not ventured to assert, that any individual whatever, saw Jesus rising from the tomb; there is not the testimony of a single individual who was witness of that improbable event; why was a matter of such vital importance to Christianity accomplished in a manner so obscure and suspicious? He ought to have risen openly before as many witnesses as were present at the crucifixion; at least plainly before credible and competent witnesses. It is singular that the most important events connected with Christ's exaltation, his transfiguration and resurrection, [if such events ever took place,] were accomplished in secret, and his ascension before none but a few interested followers; and that all the accounts of these strange things are related in the most confused and contradictory manner, by some ignorant, superstitious, and partial disciples, and by no other person.

According to Matthew's narrative, when the woman had delivered the message to the eleven disciples, they went away into Galilee, [apparently without any delay,] "into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them; and when they saw him, they worshipped him, but some doubted ;" and with some directions to them, Matthew here ends the story, without any notice of the disciples going to the sepulchre; without the smallest hint of any other appearance, either to them or to any other person; without even mentioning his ascension; nor could any person think from his narrative, that such things had ever taken place.

According to Mark and Luke, Jesus appeared to two of his disciples on the same day that he arose, as they went to the country, and walked with them to Emmaus; but when they returned to Jerusalem, and told the other disciples of it, Mark

* Ch. 28, v. 9.--t Ch. 20, v. 17.- If his disciples doubted in his presence, we have much more reason to doubt now.

any

Matthew leaves no room to believe that Jesus appeared to any of his disciples before this pretended meeting in Galilee, for if he had appeared to of them, he might have made the appointment to meet with them in Galilee hinself, rather than by a message.