of his cause. I do allow that the gentleman maintains nothing but what his father, and grandfather, and his ancestors, beyond time of man's memory, maintained before him: I allow too, that prescription in many cases makes a good title; but it must always be with this condition, that the thing is capable of being prescribed for: and I insist, that the prescription cannot run against reason and common sense. Customs may be pleaded by prescription; but if, upon shewing the custom, any thing unreasonable appears in it, the prescription fails, for length of time works nothing towards the establishing any thing that could never have a legal commencement. And if this objection will overthrow all prescriptions for customs; the mischief of which extends perhaps to one poor village only, and affects them in no greater a concern, than their right of common upon a ragged mountain; shall it not much more prevail, when the interest of mankind is concerned, and in no less a point than his happiness in this life, and in all his hopes for futurity? Besides, if prescription must be allowed in this case, how will you deal with it in others? What will you say to the ancient Persians, and their fire-altars? Nay, what to the Turks, who have been long enough in possession of their faith to plead

Mr. B. I beg pardon for interrupting the gentleman. But it is to save him trouble. He is going into his favourite common-place, and has brought us from Persia to Turkey already; and if he goes

2

on,

I know we must follow him round the globe. To save us from this long journey, I'll wave all advantage from the antiquity of the resurrection, and the general reception the belief of it has found in the world; and am content to consider it as a fact which happened but last year, and was never heard of either by the gentleman's grandfather, or by mine.

Mr. A. I should not have taken quite so long a journey as the gentleman imagines, nor, indeed, need any man go so far from home to find instances to the purpose I was upon. But since this advantage is quitted, I am as willing to spare my pains, as the gentleman is desirous that I should. And yet I suspect some art even in this concession, fair and candid as it seems to be. For I am persuaded that one reason, perhaps the main reason, why men believe this history of Jesus, is, that they cannot conceive that any one should attempt, much less succeed in such an attempt as this, upon the foundation of mere human cunning and policy; and it is worth the while to go round the globe, as the gentleman expressed himself, to see various instances of the like kind, in order to remove this prejudice. But I stand corrected, and will go directly to the point now in judgment.

Mr. B. My lord, the gentleman in justification of his first argument has entered upon another of a very different kind. I think he is sensible of it, and seeming to yield up one of his popular topics, is indeed artfully getting rid of another; which has made

a very good figure in many late writings, but will not bear in any place, where he who maintains it may be asked questions. The mere antiquity of the resurrection I gave up; for if the evidence was not good at first, it cannot be good now. The gentleman is willing, he says, to spare us his history of ancient errors, and intimates, that upon this account he passes over many instances of frauds that were like in circumstances to the case before us. By no means, my lord, let them be passed over. I would not have the main strength of his cause betrayed in complaisance to me. Nothing can be more material than to shew a fraud of this kind, that prevailed universally in the world. Christ Jesus declared himself a prophet, and put the proof of his mission on this, that he should die openly and publicly, and rise again the third day. This surely was the hardest plot in the world to be managed; and if there be one instance of this kind, or in any degree like it, by all means let it be produced.

Mr. A. My lord, there has hardly been an instance of a false religion in the world, but it has also afforded a like instance to this before us. Have they not all pretended to inspiration? Upon what foot did Pythagoras, Numa, and others, set up? Did they not all converse with the Gods, and pretend to deliver oracles?

Mr. B. This only shews that revelation is, by the common consent of mankind, the very best foundation of religion, and therefore every impostor pre

tends to it. But is a man's hiding himself in a cave for some years, and then coming out into the world, to be compared to a man's dying and rising to life again? So far from it, that you and I and every man may do the one, but no man can do the other.

Mr. A. Sir, I suppose it will be allowed to be as great a thing to go to heaven and converse with angels, and with God, and to come down to the earth again, as it is to die and rise again? Now this very thing Mahomet pretended to do, and all his disciples believe it, can you deny this fact?

Mr. B. Deny it, sir? No. But tell us who went with Mahomet? Who were his witnesses? I expect before we have done, to hear of the guards set over the sepulchre of Christ, and the seal of the stone: What guard watched Mahomet in his going and returning? What seals and credentials had he? He himself pretends to none. His followers pretend to nothing but his own word. We are now to consider the evidence of Christ's resurrection, and you think to parallel it by producing a case, for which no one ever pretended there was any evidence. You have Mahomet's word; and no man ever told a lie, but you had his word for the truth of what he said; and therefore you need not go round the globe to find such instances as these. But this story, it is said, has gained great credit, and is received by many nations. Very well: and how was it received? Was not every man converted to this faith with the sword at his

throat? in our case, every witness to the resurrection, and every believer of it was hourly exposed to death. In the other case, whoever refused to believe, died; or what was as bad, lived a wretched, conquered slave. And will you pretend these cases to be alike? one case indeed there was within our own memory, which in some circumstances came near to the case now before us. The French prophets put the credit of their mission upon the resurrection of Dr. Emmes, and gave public notice of it. If the gentleman pleases to make use of this instance, it is at his service.

Mr. A. The instance of Dr. Emmes is so far to the purpose, that it shews to what lengths enthusiasm will carry men. And why might not the same thing happen at Jerusalem which happened but a few years ago in our own country? Matthew, and John, and the rest of them, managed that affair with more dexterity than the French prophets; so that the resurrection of Jesus gained credit in the world, and the French prophets sunk under their ridiculous pretensions. That is all the difference.

Mr. B. Is it so? And a very wide difference, I promise you. In one case every thing happened that was proper to convince the world of the truth of the resurrection; in the other, the event mani- . fested the cheat; and upon the view of these circumstances, you think it sufficient to say, with great coolness, That is all the difference. Why, what