sort, it was natural for men of sense and learning to treat the whole account as fabulous, or at farthest to suspend their belief of it, until all things stood together in their full light. III. Besides, the Jews were branded not only for superstitions different from all the religions of the Pagan world, but in a particular manner ridiculed for being a credulous people; so that whatever reports of such a nature came out of that country, were looked upon by the heathen world as false, frivolous, and improbable. IV. We may further observe, that the ordinary practice of magic in those times, with the many pretended prodigies, divinations, apparitions, and local miracles among the heathens, made them less attentive to such news from Judea, till they had time to consider the nature, the occasion, and the end of our Saviour's miracles, and were awakened by many surprising events to allow them any consideration at all. V. We are indeed told by St. Matthew, that the fame of our Saviour, during his life, went throughout all Syria, and that there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, Judea, Decapolis, Idumæa, from beyond Jordan, and from Tyre and Sidon. Now had there been any historians of those times and places, we might have expected to have seen in them some account of those wonderful transactions in Judea; but there is not any single author extant, in any kind, of that age, in any of those countries. VI. How many books have perished in which possibly there might have been mention of our Saviour? Look among the Romans, how few of their writings are come down to our times? In the space of two hundred years from our Saviour's birth, when there was such a multitude of writers in all kinds, how small is the number of authors that have made their way to the present age? VII. One authentic record, and that the most authentic heathen record, we are pretty sure is lost. I mean the account sent by the Governor of Judea, under whom our Saviour was judged, condemned, and crucified. It was the custom in the Roman empire, as it is to this day in all the governments of the world, for the præfects and viceroys of distant provinces to transmit to their sovereign a summary relation of every thing remarkable in their administration. That Pontius Pilate, in his account, would have touched on so extraordinary an event in Judea, is not to be doubted; and that he actually did, we learn from Justin Martyr, who lived about a hundred years after our Saviour's death, resided, made converts, and suffered martyrdom at Rome, where he was engaged with philosophers, and in a particular manner with Crescens the cynic, who could easily have detected, and would not fail to have exposed him, had he quoted a record not in being, or made any false citation out of it. Would the great apologist have challenged Crescens to dispute the cause of Christianity with him before the Roman senate, had he forged such an evidence? or would Crescens have refused the challenge, could he have triumphed over him in the detection of such a forgery? To which we must add, that the apology which appeals to this record, was presented to a learned Emperor, and to the whole body of the Roman senate. This father in his apology, speaking of the death and suffering of our Saviour, refers the emperor for the truth of what he says to the acts of Pontius Pilate, which I have here mentioned. Tertullian, who wrote his apology about fifty years after Justin, doubtless referred to the same record, when he tells the Governor of Rome, that the Emperor Tiberius having received an account out of Palestine in Syria of the Divine Person, who had appeared in that country, paid him a particular regard; and threatened to punish any who should accuse the Christians; nay, that the emperor would have adopted him among the deities VOL. II.-18 whom they worshipped, had not the senate refused to come into his proposal. Tertullian, who gives us this history, was not only one of the most learned men of his age, but what adds a greater weight to his authority in this case, was eminently skilful and well read in the laws of the Roman empire. Nor can it be said, that Tertullian grounded his quotation upon the authority of Justin Martyr, because we find he mixes it with matters of fact which are not related by that author. Eusebius mentions the same ancient record, but as it was not extant in his time, I shall not insist upon his authority in this point. If it be objected, that this particular is not mentioned in any Roman historian, I shall use the same argument in a parallel case, and see whether it will carry any force with it. Ulpian the great Roman lawyer gathered together all the imperial edicts that had been made against the Christians, But did any one ever say, that there had been no such edicts, because they were not mentioned in the histories of those emperors? Besides, who knows but this circumstance of Tiberius was mentioned in other historians that have been lost, though not to be found in any still extant? Has not Suetonius many particulars of this emperor omitted by Tacitus, and Herodian many that are not so much as hinted at by either? As for the spurious acts of Pilate, now extant, we know the occasion and time of their writing, and that had there not been a true and authentic record of this nature, they would never have been forged. a VIII. The story of Agbarus king of Edessa, relating to the ■ The story of Agbarus, &c. Mr. Gibbon in his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire taking occasion I know not how or why, to mention this story of Agbarus king of Edessa, and his correspondence with our Saviour (to which some countenance is here given) reprobates that tradition, and its abettors, in the following terms: "The evidence for these epistles is stated and rejected by the candid Lardner. Among the herd of bigots who are forcibly driven from this convenient, but untenable post, I am ashamed, with the Grabes, Caves, Tillemonts, &c., to discover Mr. Addison. an English gentleman; but his letter which he sent to our Saviour, and to that which he received from him, is a record of great authority; and though I will not insist upon it, may venture to say, that had we such an evidence for any fact in Pagan history, an author would be thought very unreasonable who should reject it. I believe you will be of my opinion, if you will peruse, with other authors, who have appeared in vindication of these letters as genuine, the additional arguments which have been made use of by the late famous and learned Dr. Grabe, in the second volume of his Spicilegium. superficial tract on the Christian Religion owes its credit to his name, his style, and the interested applause of our clergy." Thus the historian, out of a liberal zeal against a herd of bigots. But he blushes to find Mr. Addison in that number; and, in good breeding, he could do no less, considering that Mr. Addison was not a pedant like the Grabes, Caves, and Tillemonts, but an English Gentleman. Let the civility of this phrase then be acknowledged; and yet, as I know what a wag we have to deal with, I more than suspect it was employed only as the oily vehicle of his satire. For he immediately adds, that this tract of the English gentleman on the Christian Religion is a superficial tract; and that it owes its credit to his name, his style, and the interested applause of our clergy. A superficial tract!-As if the author, or any body else for him, had given it out, as an elaborate and complete work on the subject. Yet, if by superficial he means, not solid, or deficient in point of argument, I apprehend our critical historian is much mistaken. A single mistake (if the story he alludes to be one) in a large collection of evidence, will not prove the charge: and a more exact and minute detail of facts could only set his arguments in a stronger light; not turn a bad argument into a good one. But superficial as it is, it has gained credit in the world, which, however, he ascribes to his name (and with reason, for it is a very good one) and to his style (very reasonably again, for his style is excellent, and must needs do honour to any work, in which it is employed) and to the interested applause of our clergy. Here the reason is not so apparent. The clergy, it seems, have cried up his defence of Christianity, because they have an interest in his defence of it. But, what interest, let me ask, besides that which all honest men have in the maintenance of truth, virtue, and piety: in the prevalence of which, all their dearest interests, present and to come, are included? No, he will say, "it is the interest which the clergy have in supporting falsehood and imposture, for the sake of the emoluments annexed to the teaching of the Christian Religion." That is, he thinks the English clergy ready to say any thing for a piece of bread, and that, for the most part, a coarse and scanty one, too. Such is the candour of our virtuous historian. But let him think of our clergy as he sees fit. They will certainly go on to applaud such writers as Mr. Addison, who to an excellent head joined an honest heart; and who knew how to instruct, at once, and delight his readers, with good sense, unspoiled by philosophy; and a style of writing not corrupted by affectation. SECTION II. I. What facts in the history of our Saviour might be taken notice of by Pagan authors. III. How Celsus represents our Saviour's miracles. IV. The same representation made of them by other unbelievers, and proved unreasonable V. What facts in our Saviour's history not to be expected from Pagan writers. I. We now come to consider what undoubted authorities are extant among Pagan writers; and here we must premise, that some parts of our Saviour's history may be reasonably expected from Pagans. I mean such parts as might be known to those who lived at a distance from Judea, as well as to those who were the followers and eye-witnesses of Christ. II. Such particulars are most of these which follow, and which are all attested by some one or other of those heathen authors, who lived in or near the age of our Saviour and his disciples. That Augustus Cæsar had ordered the whole empire to be censed or taxed, which brought our Saviour's reputed parents to Bethlehem: this is mentioned by several Roman historians, as Tacitus, Suetonius, and Dion. That a great light, or a new. star appeared in the east, which directed the wise men to our Saviour' this is recorded by Chalcidius. That Herod, the king of Palestine, so often mentioned in the Roman history, made a great slaughter of innocent children,' being so jealous of his successor, that he put to death his own sons on that account: this character of him is given by several historians, and this cruel fact mentioned by Macrobius, a heathen author, who tells it as a known thing, without any mark or doubt upon it. 'That our Saviour had been in Egypt:' this Celsus, though he raises a monstrous story upon it, is so far from denying, that he tells us our Saviour learned the arts of magic in that country. 'That Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, that our Saviour was brought in judgment before him, and by him condemned and |