THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS: THE TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES.

The writers through whose reports the testimony of the witnesses comes to us having been named, and their authenticity vindicated, we next proceed to inquire into the qualifications of the witnesses themselves. We have considered these to some extent in the last chapter, but only in the way of inquiring whether the witnesses are liable to certain charges which have been preferred against them by their enemies. We now take up the inquiry as an original question, and will conduct it as it should be conducted in regard to any witnesses of important events.

The force of human testimony depends on three things: first, the honesty of the witnesses; second, their competency; and third, their number. We ascertain whether they are honest, by considering their general character and their motives in the particular case. Hence, in attempting to impeach a witness in a court of justice, it is common to call on men who know him, to testify as to his general reputation for veracity; and also to inquire whether he is personally interested in establishing the facts to which he testifies. Competency is determined by considering the opportunities of the witness to obtain knowledge of that to which he testifies, and his mental capacity to observe and remember the facts. The requisite number varies with the degree of probability attached to the facts. The testimony of two honest and competent witnesses makes us feel more sure than that of one; and that of three, than that of two; but a limit is soon reached beyond which those who are convinced feel the need of no more, and those who are not yet convinced realize that more would not convince them. When this number has testified in any case, the number is sufficient, and a greater number would be useless.

Applying these tests to the witnesses of the resurrection of Jesus, we find that their general character, judged by all that we know of them, is good. The sentiments uttered by the principal witnesses are those which to this day guide the consciences of the most enlightened men in the world; and no teachers have ever insisted more strenuously than they on the duty of strict veracity. As to their motives in testifying to the fact of the resurrection, they are above suspicion. The motives which prompt men to false testimony are fear, avarice, and ambition; fear of some evil to themselves or others, which is to be averted by the testimony; desire of sordid gain; and ambition for some kind of distinction among men. Can any of these motives have prompted the Apostles to falsely testify that God had raised Jesus from the dead? It is impossible to see any threatened calamity which they or their friends would have escaped by this testimony it it is false. On the other hand, they must have anticipated much danger to themselves if they should publicly proclaim it; for to publicly proclaim it would be to proclaim the chief priests and Pilate murderers, convicted as such by the act OF God in raising from the dead him whom they had slain. For such an offense they could not expect anything but the severest punishment; or, if they hoped at first to convince these rulers, and to bring them to repentance, the hope was soon dissipated; for it was on account of this very testimony that they were arrested, thrown into prison, scourged, and pursued with all manner of persecution. Really the Twelve suffered the loss of all that men ordinarily hold dear in consequence of persisting in this testimony; and the honesty of no set of witnesses was ever so severely tested, or so clearly demonstrated. This is especially true of the Apostle Paul, who suffered more than any other witness. The demonstration is so complete that it has won the acknowledgment, especially with reference to Paul, of the most determined foes of the Christian faith. Thus the author of Supernatural Religion says: "As to the Apostle Paul himself, let it be said in the strongest and most emphatic manner possible, that we do not suggest the most distant suspicion of the sincerity of any historical statement he makes."1 Being honest, the witnesses believed that of which they testified; and if they believed it, it must be true unless they were mistaken. Whether they can have been mistaken or not, depends on their competency, and this we are next to consider.

Of the opportunities which these honest witnesses enjoyed for knowing that of which they testify, we are informed by their own statements. Of their mental capacity we have already spoken in full while discussing the charge that they were hallucinated. Under the head of competency, then, we have only to examine their several statements, and see whether their opportunities were such as to insure that they were not mistaken. We shall do this by considering, first, the testimony of the women; second, that of Cleopas and his unnamed companion; third, that of the Twelve; and fourth, that of Paul.

The women who went to the sepulcher on the third morning were Mary Magdalene, whose excellent character is sufficiently attested by the fact that she was the most intimate and devoted female friend of Jesus; Mary the mother of James and Joseph, of whom we only know that she was one of the company of Jesus; Salome, the honored mother of the two Apostles, James and John; Joanna, the wife of Herod's steward, who, considering her relation through her husband to that murderer of John the Baptist and persecutor of Jesus, could have become a follower of the latter only through the most disinterested motives; and "other women," whose names are not given because, perhaps, they were not conspicuous in the church at the time that our Gospels were written, or because it was thought by the writer that the names given were sufficient in number. All that is said in our Gospels to have been seen and heard by these women was of course derived from them by the writers, and it is their testimony.

On reaching the sepulcher and finding it open they claim,; as we learn from Mark and Luke, to have entered into it--a circumstance of which Matthew says nothing. On entering' they found the tomb empty, and soon they saw within it two angels, though Matthew and Mark mention only one of them, the one who had opened the tomb and who immediately speaks to the women. His words, only partly reported by any one writer, when put together in their natural order, are these: "Fear not: for I know that ye seek Jesus who hath been crucified. Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, for he is risen, even as he said. Remember how he spake to you while he was yet in Galilee, saying that the Son of Man must be delivered up into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell his disciples he is risen from the dead; and lo, he goeth before you into Galilee; there ye shall see him: lo, I have told you." As they ran from the tomb to carry this message, Jesus himself met them, and saluted them with the word, "All hail." "They came and took hold of his feet, and worshiped him." While doing this, again they hear his voice: "Fear not: go tell my disciples, that they depart into Galilee, and there shall they see me."  

While the three synoptic Gospels give jointly the details' just recited, that of Mark, without explanation, informs us that Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdalene, which implies that before the appearance to the women just mentioned she had separated herself from the others, for had she been with them they would have seen him as soon as she did. The fourth Gospel accounts for this separation, and gives the particulars of the appearance to Mary. It informs us that when she saw that the stone was removed from the tomb she ran to John and Peter, and said: "They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we know not where they have laid him." As she had not entered the tomb, she inferred that the body had been removed from the mere fact that the tomb was open. From this passage we gather that her separation from the other women, implied in Mark's narrative, took place at the moment when they saw that the tomb was open, and that she did not go into the tomb with them. This circumstance Matthew failed to mention; consequently his narrative reads as if she continued with them. On hearing Mary's statement, Peter and .John ran to the sepulcher, and Mary followed them. After they departed she stood for awhile weeping, and "as she wept she stooped and looked into the tomb." When she did so she beheld the two angels who had showed themselves to the other women, but not to the men, and she observed that one of them sat at the head and the other at the feet of where Jesus had laid. She knew these spots not by having seen the body after it was laid in the tomb, but from having seen Joseph and Nicodemus take it in, and observing whether it was carried in head foremost or feet foremost. Her observation and her memory were very accurate. She testifies that the angels said (one of them of course doing the speaking): "Woman, why weepest thou?" She answered: "Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him." At this instant, for a reason which she does not give, she "turned herself back" and beheld Jesus standing near, but mistook him for the gardener. He said: 41 Woman, why weepest thou?" And she answered:" Sir, if thou hast borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away." She evidently thought that the gardener would be glad to be relieved of the dead body. For an answer she hears her own name. "She turneth herself," being only partially turned toward him before, recognizes him, and exclaims, "Rabboni." He says to her: "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended unto the Father: but go unto my brethren, and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God."

With this testimony before us, we ask, Did these women have good and sufficient opportunity to know beyond question that they saw what they claimed to have seen, and heard the words which they reported? When the male disciples heard it all, they believed it not; but their disbelief arose not from considering deliberately the question which we have just propounded, but from the foregone conclusion that Jesus was not to rise, the very reason why some in our own day will not believe. But when they considered the evidence maturely they accepted it as true, and so must every one today who considers it without prejudice.

To the testimony of the women in regard to the absence of the body from the tomb is added that of Peter and John. Luke says that alter the report of the women, Peter ran to the tomb, stooped and looked in, and saw the linen cloths by themselves. John, in his more minute account, adds to this too statement that both he and Peter went into the tomb, and saw the linen cloths lying, and the napkin that was upon his head not lying with the linen cloths, but rolled up in a place by itself. This testimony not only shows that the body had disappeared, but it furnishes strong evidence that it had not been removed in any of the ways suggested by unbelievers. If some of the disciples had taken it to bury it in Galilee, they would have taken it with the shroud still around it; so of the gardener, and so of the Jews. Only in ease the body went forth into life would it have been divested of the shroud in which all dead bodies were then buried.

Our records leave it in some uncertainty whether the Apostle Peter, or Cleopas and his unnamed companion, was the first among the male disciples to see Jesus after he arose; but it is certain the latter are the first whose testimony is reported. Of the appearance to Peter nothing is said except the mere fact. Their testimony is given more in detail than that of the previous group of witnesses. In substance it is this: that as they were walking to Emmaus, a distance of seven and a half miles from the city, Jesus joined them; and appearing as a stranger, opened conversation by asking what communications they were having with each other as they walked; and on learning, he proceeded to show them out or the Scriptures that it behoved the Christ to suffer all that Jesus had suffered, and to enter into his glory. They say their eves were "holden" that they should not know him; and they say that while he was speaking to them by the way their hearts were burning within them. In answer to his first question, they said, among other things: "Certain women of our company amazed us, having been early at the tomb; and when they found not his body, they came, saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said that he was alive." In this they confirm what is said of the testimony of the women. They add: "And certain of them that were with us went to the tomb, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not." Now this last statement is entirely independent of Luke's statement in the previous paragraph, that Peter ran to the tomb, and saw the linen cloths by themselves; for they speak in the plural number, showing that they refer to more than one person. Their reference can be only to the visit of Peter and John described in John's Gospel, and yet it includes that of Peter mentioned in Luke. Here is an undesigned coincidence of an unmistakable kind, and it furnishes strong evidence that the story of Cleopas, who is the speaker, is reliable. He and his companion proceed to state that when they reached their destination the supposed stranger, after earnest solicitation, went in with them, that he sat down to eat, took bread, blessed, broke, and gave to them, and then vanished. Just before he vanished they recognized him as Jesus, their eyes at the instant being "opened." Who could have invented this story? Who, wishing to invent a story of having seen Jesus, could possibly have put it into this shape? And who, coming to them as this apparent stranger did, could possibly have given the instruction which he gave? There was not another man on earth who at that time possessed the ideas which were imparted. A conscious restraint upon their vision, which did not excite their suspicion at the time, but which was distinctly remembered after the interview was ended, accounts for their failure to recognize him sooner. If, on this account, their opportunity to know him was not so good as that of the women, the consideration just mentioned counterbalances this disadvantage, and leaves their testimony free from doubt.

The testimony of the Twelve is presented in two distinct forms in the New Testament, one in the closing chapters of the Gospels, and the other in the book of Acts. The former is their testimony as mere men to the one fact of the resurrection; the latter, their testimony as inspired men to the glorification of Christ in heaven, which involved his resurrection as a necessary antecedent. We shall consider the two divisions of the subject separately.  

Their testimony as found in the Gospels is connected with five distinct interviews held with him--three in Jerusalem, and two in Galilee. The first in Jerusalem is described by Mark, Luke and John, but omitted by Matthew. All told, the details are these: Ten of the Apostles, on the evening after the resurrection, were in a room securely closed for fear of the Jews. The two from Emmaus had been admitted and had told their story, which was received with discredit. The company were "sitting at meat." The two had scarcely completed their story when Jesus stood in their midst without having passed through the door. His first word was, "Peace be unto you." At the first moment they were "terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they beheld a spirit." He said: "Why are ye troubled; and wherefore do reasonings arise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me having." He also showed them his side. They still "disbelieved for joy," and they still wondered, till he asked if they had anything there to eat, and receiving a piece of broiled fish he ate it before them. They were then glad "when they saw the Lord," that is, when they saw it was the Lord in reality. He upbraided them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them who lad seen him after he was risen. He closed by saying, "Peace be unto you as the Father hath sent me, so I send you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said unto them "Receive ye the Holy Spirit: whosesoever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them; whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." How he disappeared at the close of this or of any other interview except the last, we are not informed; and this is one of the marvels of this wonderful testimony. It shows that the witnesses were not aiming to tell a long story of irrelevant, particulars, but to state simply and briefly the facts on which faith in the resurrection must rest. As regards these facts, does their story admit of the possibility that they were mistaken? Can they be mistaken as to the fact that it was Jesus whom they had seen, with whom they had conversed, whose wounds in the hands and feet and side they had beheld? Can they have been mistaken as to his having entered without opening the door, which they had securely closed for fear that an enemy might enter? Surely the story must be a series of conscious falsehoods, or it must be true: there is no middle ground.

At the second interview', which occurred just one week, as we count time, after the first, eleven were present, and this interview seems to have been granted especially for the benefit of Thomas, who was not present at the first. When he was told of the first interview he exclaimed: "Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe." His idea evidently was that the ten had seen some one whose person and voice so closely resembled those of Jesus that, like twin brothers, they could not be distinguished; and as for the wounds, he thought that his brethren should have felt them as well as seen them before believing. The wounds he would admit as conclusive evidence if they were real, for he knew that it was impossible for another man perfectly like Jesus in every other particular to also bear those wounds, and to be going about alive. The eleven were in the same room, with the doors closed as before, when Jesus a second time stood suddenly in their midst, and exclaimed: "Peace be unto you." Then, addressing Thomas, he says: "Reach hither thy finger, and see my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and put it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing." Thomas exclaimed, "My Lord and my God;" but whether he put his finger and his hand into the wounds or not, we are not informed. It appears rather that the sight of the wounds was more convincing than he had supposed, and that this, with the other evidence of his eyes and his ears, was enough. Jesus said to him: "Because thou hast seen, thou hast believed: blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed." This ended the interview; and surely if the truth is told about it there was no chance for Thomas or any of the others to be mistaken.

The next interview was with seven of the disciples, including six of the Apostles. It was on the lake shore, and early in the morning. They were in their boat fishing, and he was about one hundred yards distant on the shore. The first evidence that it was he was the fact that at his command to drop their net on the right hand side of the boat, they caught an immense draught of fishes where they had fished all night and caught nothing. This caused them to hasten ashore. There they found that he had prepared for them a breakfast of broiled fish and some bread, which he deliberately distributed among them. He then entered into an elaborate conversation with Peter in their presence, at the close of which he walked away. Here there was none of the wild excitement which arose at his appearance to them on previous occasions; but all was calm and deliberate from beginning to end. No company of men ever met a friend unexpectedly and spent an hour in conversation with him, who could be more certain that it was he than these were that it was Jesus with whom they conversed. A mistake on their part is inconceivable.

The next appearance to the eleven was in Galilee, on "the mountain where he had appointed them." Matthew says: "When they saw hi in they worshiped him; but some doubted." If this last remark means, as it has been construed by some skeptics, that they doubted all through the interview, we have one instance in which the evidence was not convincing to all who were present: but is this the meaning? The remainder of the account shows that it is not. The very next clause is, "And Jesus came to them and spake to them," which shows that at the moment of the doubt he was not very near to them and had not yet spoken to them. There is no difference, then, between the doubt on this occasion and on the first, when they thought for a time that he was a ghost. Let us observe, too, that the very admission of this doubt is an indubitable mark of naturalness and truthfulness in the narrative; for it could certainly not have been thought of had it not been true; and even though true, it would have been omitted if the author had been more anxious to make the ease a strong one than to tell it as it was. After coming to them as stated Jesus said to them: "All authority hath been given to me, in heaven and on earth. Go ye, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world." These are the words of the commission, under the authority of which they proceeded to labor and suffer all the rest of their lives. To have been mistaken in thinking that they had heard them would have been a fundamental mistake; and to have been doubtful would have given weakness in place of the strength which they ever afterward exhibited. Their opportunity for both seeing and hearing was TOO good to allow the supposition that they could have been mistaken.

The last of these interviews occurred in Jerusalem on the day of the ascension. Its incidents must be collected from the last six verses of Mark, verses 45-53 of the last chapter of Luke, and verses 4-11 of the first chapter of Acts. He pointed out more fully than before the prophecies which must needs be fulfilled in him; and he opened their minds that they might understand these Scriptures. He showed them particularly that his death and resurrection were in accordance with these Scriptures, and that "repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name to all the nations, beginning at Jerusalem." He commanded them to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature, and promised them power to work signs and wonders in his name. He charged them, however, not to depart from Jerusalem until they should be clothed with power from on high, which he explains by the words: "Ye shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days hence;" and he calls this "the promise of the Father." They were bold enough to ask him, "Dost thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" but were told that it was not for them to know times and seasons. They were told the order in which they should carry their message to different communities: to Jerusalem first, then to Judea and Samaria, and then to all the earth. While this conversation was in progress he had led them from the city out across the Kedron, up the slope of the mount of Olives, and past the nearer summit of this mountain to the vicinity of Bethany; and as he concluded he lifted up his hands to bless them, and was himself lifted up till a cloud received him out of their sight. They stood gazing into the sky where he had disappeared, until two angels stood by them, and told them that he would return in like manner as they had seen him go into heaven. Now here is the most protracted interview of all those described in our books; it was the most free and unconstrained on the part of the Eleven; and even were there ground to suppose in previous interviews too great excitement on the part of the latter for reliable observation, there certainly can be none in this. We conclude that all these accounts were given by men and women guilty of conscious falsehood, or that they all describe real events. The honesty of the witnesses precludes the former alternative, and we have therefore no choice but to accept the latter.

The testimony of the Apostles as given in Acts begins with the scenes of Pentecost; for that which we have just; considered from the first chapter is a mere supplement to Luke's Gospel. On the next Pentecost after the resurrection, the testimony of the Apostles was first given to the public; and it was given by all the Twelve; for they all stood up with Peter, and he was their spokesman. Peter approached the testimony by an argument from the prophecies of David, intended to remove from the minds of his Jewish hearers the antecedent improbability of the resurrection (verses 22-31), and then he presented the testimony of himself and his companions in these words: "This Jesus did God raise up, whereof we are all witnesses." This testimony to the fact of the resurrection is subordinated in the sermon to that concerning the glorification of Jesus in heaven. The account shows that Peter was now qualified to speak on this latter subject; for we not only have Luke's statement that he and all the Twelve were now filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in all the tongues known to the assembled multitude, but, what is more to the point of our present argument, we have the testimony of Peter and those for whom he spoke, to the same effect. He explains the phenomenon which had astonished the multitude by telling them that it was the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, that the Holy Spirit should be poured forth upon men so that they should prophesy (16-18; and he solemnly declares to them that this gift of the Spirit had been sent down from heaven by Jesus, who had been exalted by the right hand of God and had taken a seat on his throne (32-36). Now, whatever may be thought of the possibility of the audience being mistaken as to the nature of the gin bestowed on the Twelve, it is certain that they could not be mistaken in thinking that they heard them speaking in the various tongues with which they were familiar. There is perhaps nothing in human experience in which a man is less liable to mistake than in recognizing his native language when he unexpectedly hears it spoken. And it is equally certain that the Apostles were not mistaken in thinking themselves the subjects of this phenomenon. It was a matter of consciousness to them; so here again we have a case in which the alternative is to charge4 these honest witnesses with a most stupendous fraud, or to confess not only that Jesus arose from the dead, but that he was exalted to such a position and authority in heaven as to send forth the Spirit of God to continue the work which he had himself begun on the earth. This testimony was repeated again and again, and it was the chief burden of the Apostolic preaching to the unbelieving world, as well as the chief cause of all the persecutions which they endured. See Acts iii. 13-16, 20, 21; iv. 1, 2, 18-20; v. 17, 18. 30-32, 40; x. 38-42. It is all epitomised in the closing statement of Mark's Gospel: "And they went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word by the signs that followed." When our first three Gospels were written, this work was in full progress, and the strongest evidence to the people that Jesus had risen from the dead was not the personal testimony of those who saw him between the resurrection and the ascension, but the testimony of the Twelve who were going about among the people proclaiming Jesus as the glorified ruler of heaven and earth, living at the right hand of God, and by his own power performing the signs, wonders and miracles which they continually wrought in his name. This accounts for the meagerness of the evidence of the resurrection arrayed in the closing chapters of the Gospels--meagerness in the number of appearances of Jesus reported in each, but not in the conclusiveness of the evidence which is given. In the presence of more convincing and comprehensive evidence, it was not important to elaborate that which was less so.  

In addition to all that we have cited from Acts and the Gospels, we have separate testimony from Peter and John in their own writings. In the first Epistle of Peter, there are repeated references to the resurrection of Jesus as an established fact, and to his present living power in heaven. See i. 3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 21; iii. 18, 21; iv. 11, 13. He gives none of the details of the interviews with Jesus by which he had gained a certainty of the fact of the resurrection; but he indirectly affirms what Luke says of him in Acts, by saying that he and others had preached the gospel "by the Holy Spirit sent forth from heaven" (1. 12), thus affirming his inspiration, and his consequent power to speak authoritatively of things in the heavenly world. The Apostle John, in the opening of his first Epistle, bears the following testimony: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (for the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and show unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full." No doubt there is reference here to the manifestation of the "Word of life" both in the natural life of Jesus, and in his life subsequent to the resurrection; but the reference is more particularly to the latter; for otherwise the employing of ears, eyes and hands in identifying him would not be so insisted on. The passage is a reiteration by John in person of the testimony given in the gospels; and it renders the possibility of having been mistaken completely out of the question. In the opening statements of the Apocalypse, the same Apostle gives fresh testimony by describing a new appearance of Jesus to him, which occurred after the close of all the testimony given by the other Apostles, and after their death. He declares that Jesus appeared to him in a glorified form which he minutely describes, showing that he saw him distinctly; that notwithstanding the glory of his form he was "like unto the Son of man;" that he himself, overpowered by the sight, fell at his feet as a dead man; that Jesus came to him, laid his "right hand" upon him, and declared himself to be he who was dead, but is now alive forevermore; and that he then dictated in an audible voice seven epistles to seven of the churches in Asia (i. 9-18). This testimony, let it be remembered, is admitted by infidels to be the genuine testimony of John; and as it is admitted that he was an honest writer, the only question about it is, Can he have been mistaken? We think that every unbiased mind in the world would promptly answer that the story was either made up from the imagination of the writer, or it describes a reality. This is the concluding section of the testimony of the original witnesses, as given in the New Testament. Let the reader judge, as he will answer to God, whether it establishes as a fact the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, and his ascension to the right hand of God in heaven.

The testimony of Paul given in his Epistles furnishes none of those details by which we can judge whether he or the other witnesses of whom he speaks could have been mistaken; but it is a reiteration of the main fact in very positive terms. He presents the witnesses in solid array as follows:" I delivered to you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised the third day according to the Scriptures; and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the Twelve; then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep; then he appeared to James; then to all the Apostles; and last of all he appeared to me also " (I. Cor. xv. 3-8). Like the Gospel writers, he selects for mention a certain number of the appearances of Jesus, and omits the others; but he mentions more of them than any other writer, and he mentions one--that to James--omitted by all the others. This passage shows that he had already made the Corinthians familiar with this evidence, having made it the foremost subject matter of his preaching, and this accounts for the absence of those details which are so carefully given in the Gospels and in Acts. But the chief value of Paul's testimony in the Epistles is found in what he says of the powers which he had received from the risen Christ. Whatever may be thought of his being mistaken about miracles wrought by other persons, he could not be mistaken in his claim to work them himself. On this point his testimony is explicit. To the Romans he says: "I will not dare to speak of any things save only those which Christ bath wrought through me, for the obedience of the Gentiles, by word and deed, in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the Holy Spirit; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ" (Rom. xv. 18, 19). Here, by "the power of signs and wonders" and "the power of the Holy Spirit," he unmistakably means the miraculous powers exercised by the Apostles. To the Corinthians he says: "Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience by signs, wonders and mighty works" (II. Cor. xii. 12). Here there are three things to be noted: first, that his expression for the miracles which he had wrought is precisely that which was used by Peer in his sermon on Pentecost for the miracles of Jesus; that is, signs, wonders and mighty works, which shows that he speaks of the same class of works; second, that these were then known to the Corinthians as "the signs of an apostle;" that is, the indispensable proofs that a man was an apostle, and that all the Apostles were known to be workers of such miracles; third, that this language was used in writing to a people who knew whether he had wrought such miracles among them, and a part of whom were his personal enemies, denying that he was an apostle; under such circumstances it is inconceivable that he should have claimed to work miracles among them if he had not. We have this evidence in addition to the admitted veracity of Paul, that he wrought these miracles in the name of Christ, and that therefore Christ was not only alive, but in the possession of infinite power.

The testimonies which we have now considered combine to prove that Jesus certainly arose from the dead, and ascended up to heaven. In thus establishing as real the great miracle of the New Testament on which all the others depend for their value, all ground and all motive for denying the latter are removed. If Jesus rose from the dead it was because he was what his disciples represent him to be, the Son of God; and from this it follows that he was possessed of all power.

There is no need, therefore, that we go back over the accounts of miracles in the Gospels, and look into the evidence for these in detail; the whole ground is now covered, and we are brought to the conclusion that the New Testament writers are credible when writing about the miraculous as well as when writing of the natural and the ordinary. 

1 Sup. Rel., iii. 496.