commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judæa, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld him, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."

The apostle John gives a much fuller account of the appearances of Jesus to his apostles after the resurrection than the other evangelists. The 20th chapter of his gospel, verses 19-29, relates the first two of those interviews: "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he

shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were

the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye. remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." The last interview mentioned by John to have taken place between Jesus and his disciples was in Galilee at the sea of Tiberias; but the particular time is not mentioned. The persons present were Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the two sons of Zebedee, James and John, and two other disciples. Nathanael is thought, I think on good grounds, to be the apostle Bartholomew. Whether the other two were apostles does not appear. These persons were all fishing on the

lake, and it was on this occasion that the transaction is said to have taken place which is usually called the Miraculous Draught of Fishes. It will not be necessary to state all that passed, but I will merely mention that a conversation ensued between Jesus and Peter of a highly interesting character as particularly concerning what was to befall him and the apostle John.

Let us now look back upon the evidence which has been produced, and inquire whether it affords a sufficient ground to believe that the apostles asserted that their Master had risen from the dead; and that they had on several occasions seen and conversed with him. The truth of the fact is another question which will be dealt with hereafter.

I will, however, first examine the different accounts of the visits of the women to the sepulchre, beginning with the objections to the credibility of the narratives founded on their apparent inconsistencies. First, as to the time of the visit. Matthew tells us that they came to the sepulchre at the end of the sabbath day, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the week; Mark says, it was very early in the morning, the first day of the week, at the rising of the sun; Luke, that is was very early in the morning; and John, that Mary Magdalene (whom alone he mentions) came to the sepulchre early, while it was yet dark. The inconsistency here is in the account of Mark, that it was at the rising of the sun. Though it had begun to dawn, it might without impropriety of language be said to have been still dark, therefore there is no real discrepancy between the accounts of Matthew and John, and Luke fixes no particular time, saying only that it was very early. Mark's account cannot be

reconciled with that of the other evangelists. It has been conjectured by Bishop Pearce that a mistake has occurred in copying this text, and that what the evangelist really wrote was, the sun not having yet risen. This is a mere conjecture, but, if admitted, it would reconcile Mark's narrative with that of the other evangelists.

Secondly, as to the persons who visited the sepulchre. Matthew mentions Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, that is Mary the mother of James; Mark adds Salome; John only names Mary Magdalene; and Luke mentions in the first instance no name, but afterwards says, it was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and other women which were with them, which told these things to the apostles. It must be a very forced construction of this text to apply it to any other persons than those whose visit to the sepulchre had just been described; yet from the circumstance that the name Joanna is here introduced, a strange hypothesis was first propounded by West in his 'Observations on the Resurrection,' which was received with great favour, and is now extensively adopted, that the women went in different parties to the sepulchre, and that the account of Luke relates to a second party of whom they have chosen to make Joanna the leader. This hypothesis is ingeniously defended by West, but as I cannot find the slightest scriptural foundation for it, I forbear making any remarks upon it. It certainly seems strange that the evangelists should have differed so much in their mention of the women at the sepulchre; but there is no contradiction, and therefore nothing to invalidate their testimony.

Thirdly, as to the appearance of the angel, and the

rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre, the conciseness of Matthew's narrative leaves us to get at the succession of events by inference, from comparing one part of the narrative with the others. The apostle then, I think, clearly indicates that the rolling away of the stone took place before the women arrived at the sepulchre. If they had been present, it would have been quite unnecessary for the angel to tell them that Jesus had risen. If then the soldiers alone were present, the information of the evangelist must have been received from them.

Fourthly, what happened when the women visited the sepulchre. Matthew says that the angel set upon the stone which he had rolled from the sepulchre ; and he adds: "The angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye; for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here, for he is risen as he said. Come and see the place where the Lord lay." It appears, therefore, that the evangelists understood the conversation to have taken place on the outside of the sepulchre; for if the women had entered into it they must have seen where the Lord lay; and an invitation to see it would have been wholly unnecessary. No one could collect from the narrative of Matthew that the women entered the sepulchre. Mark says that the women entered it, and saw a young man sitting on the right side clothed in a long white garment. This appears inconsistent with the account of Matthew, who describes the angel, evidently the same person as the young man mentioned by Mark, as sitting on a stone at the outside of the sepulchre. Grotius endeavours to reconcile these accounts by supposing that there was an enclosure round the