CHRISTIANITY. 



Kind from this ume Jotephus, lht there were three 

 Herodt in the umc family ; *nd therefore, no improba- 

 bility in there being two Philips. We ilto know from 

 the hutorics of that period, that it was quite common 

 for the ume individual to have two names ; and this is 

 never more necemry, than when employed to distinguish 

 brother* who have one namr the same. The Herod who 

 ii called Philip, is jtiit ai likrly a distinction, as the Si- 

 moo who ii rilled Peter, or the Saul who is called Paul. 

 The name of the high-priest, at the time of our Savi- 

 our's crucifixion, was C linphas, according to the evan- 

 gelists. According to Joirphus, the name of the high- 

 priet at that period was Joseph. This would have been 

 precisely a difficulty of the same kind, had not Jotephus 

 happened tn mention, that this Joseph was also called 

 Caiaphas. Would it have been dealing fairly with the 

 evangelists, we ask, to have made their credibility de- 

 pend upon the accidental omission of another historian ? 

 Is it consistent with any acknowledged principle of sound 

 criticism, to bring four writers so entirely under the tri- 

 bunal of Josephus, each of whom stands as firmly sfip- 

 ported by all the evidences which can gie authority to 

 an historian ; and have greatly the advantage of him in 

 this, that they can add the argument of their concur- 

 rence to the argument of each separate and independent 

 testimony ? It so happens, however, in the present in- 

 stance, that even Jewish writers, in their narrative of the 

 ame circumstance, give the name of Philip to the first 

 husband of Herodias. We by no means conceive, that 

 any foreign testimony was tiecessary for the vindication 

 of the evangelists. Still, however, it must go far to 

 dissipate every suspicion of artifice in the construction 

 of their histories. It proved, that, in the confidence 

 with which they delivered themselves up to their own 

 information, they neglected appearance, and felt them- 

 ielvei independent of it. This apparent difficulty, like 

 many others <'f the same kind, lands us in a stronger 

 confirmation of the honesty of the evangelists ; and it is 

 delightful to perceive, how truth receives a fuller acces- 

 sion to its splendour, from the attempts which are made 

 to disgrace and to darken it. 



53. On this branch of the argument, the impartial 

 inquirer must be struck with the little indulgence which 

 infidels, and even Christiana, have given to the evange- 

 lical writers. In other cases, when we compare the 

 narratives of cotemporary historians, it is not expected, 

 that all the circumstances alluded to by one will be ta- 

 ken notice of by the rest ; and it often happens, that an 

 event or a custom is admitted upon the faith of a single 

 historian ; and the silence of all other writers is r.ot suf- 

 fered to attach suspicion or discredit to his testimony. 

 It is an allowed principle, that a scrupulous resemblance 

 betwixt two histories is very far from necessary to their 

 being held consistent with one another. And what is 

 more, it sometimes happens, that with cotemporary 

 historians, there may be an apparent contradiction, and 

 the credit of both parties remain as entire and unsuspi- 

 cious as before. Posterity is in these cases disposed to 

 make the most liberal allowances. Instead of calling it 

 a contradiction, they often call it a difficulty. They 

 are tentible, that, in many instances, a seeming variety 

 of statements has, upon a more extensive knowledge of 

 ancient hutory, admitted of a perfect reconciliation. In- 

 stead, then, of referring the difficulty in question to the 

 inaccuracy or bad faith of any of the parties, they, with 

 more justnesi and more modesty, refer it to their own 

 ignorance, and to that obscurity which necessarily hangs 

 over the hittory of every remote age. These principle* 

 art luffcrcd to hare great influence in every similar in- 



vestigation ; but so soon as, instead of a similar, it be- 

 comes a sacred investigation, every ordinary principle is 

 abandoned, and the suspicion annexed to the teachers of 

 religion is carried to the dereliction of all that candour 

 and liberality with which every other document of anti- 

 quity is judged of and appreciated. How docs it hap- 

 pen, that the authority of Josephus should be acqui- 

 esced i.i as a first principle, while every step, in ihe nar- 

 rative of the evangelists, i tirruiny to 

 confirm and support it ? How comes it, that the silence 

 of Josephus should be construed into an impeachment of 

 the testimony of t!> -ts, while it is never ad- 

 mitted for a single moment, that the silence of the evan- 

 gelists can impart the slightest blemish to the testimony 

 of Josephus ? How comes it, that the supposition of 

 two Philips in one family should throw a damp of scep- 

 ticism over the gospel narrative, while the only circum- 

 stance which renders that supposition nrce-snry is the 

 single testimony of Josephus ; in which very testimony 

 it is necessarily implied, that there are two Her 

 that same family ? How comes it, that the evangelists, 

 with as much internal, and a vast deal more of external 

 evidence in their favour, should be made to stand before 

 Josephus, like so many prisoners at the bar of jr. 

 In any other case, we are convinced, that this would be 

 looked upon as rough handling. But we are not sorry 

 for it. It has given more triumph and confidence to the 

 argument. And it is no small addition to our faith, that 

 its first teachers have survived an examination, which, in 

 point of rigour and severity, we believe to be quite un- 

 exampled in the annals of criticism. 



54. It is always looked upon as a favourable presump- 

 tion; when a story is told circumstantially. The art and 

 the safety of an impostor is to confine his narrative to 

 generals, and not to commit himself by too minute a spe- 

 cification of time and place, and allusion to the manners 

 or occurrences of the day. The more of circumstance 

 that we introduce into a story, we multiply the chan- 

 ces of detection, if false ; and therefore, where a great 

 deal of circumstance is introduced, it proves, that the 

 narrator feels the confidence of truth, and labours under 

 no apprehension for the fate of his narrative. Even 

 though we have it not in our power to verify the truth 

 of a single circumstance, yet the mere property of a sto- 

 ry being circumstantial is always felt to carry an evidence 

 in its favour. It imparts a more familiar air of life and 

 reality to the narrative. It is easy to believe, that the 

 groundwork of a story may be a fabrication ; but it re- 

 quires a more refined species of imposture than we can 

 well conceive, to construct a harmonious and well sus- 

 tained narrative, abounding in minute and circumstan- 

 tial details which support one another, and where, with 

 all our experience of real life, we can detect nothing 

 misplaced, or inconsistent, or improbable. 



55. To prosecute this argument in all its extent, it 

 would be necessary to present the reader with a complete 

 analysis or examination of the gospel history. But the 

 most superficial observer cannot fail to perceive, that it 

 maintains, in a very high degree, the character of being a 

 circumstantial narrative. When a miracle is recorded, 

 we have generally the name of the town or neighbour- 

 hood where it happened ; the names of the people con- 

 cerned ; the effect upon the hearts, and convictions of 

 the bye-standers ; the arguments and examinations it gave 

 birth to ; and all that minuteness of reference and de- 

 scription which impresses a strong character of reality 

 upon the whole history. If we take along with us the 

 time at which this history made its appearance, the argu- 

 ment becomes much stronger. It does not merely carry 



The cir- 

 cumstanti- 

 ality of th 

 go-pel nar- 

 rative 

 forms ano- 

 ther inter- 

 nal evi- 

 dence initt 

 favour. 



In the first 

 aeeof 

 Christiani- 

 ty, thit cir- 

 cumstance 

 coolii be 

 verified by 

 immediate 

 observa- 

 tion; 



