Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1839-10-30

ailusl0nS TO these circumstances supply US
with ample materials for it. The tact,
that they are borne out in their minute
and incidental illusions by the testimony
of other historians, gives strong weight I
of what has been called circumstantial ev-
idence in their favor. AS a specimen of
the argument, let us confne our observa-
tons to the history of our Savior's trial,
and execution, and burial. They bro't
him to Pontius Plate. We know both
from Tacitns and Josephus, that he was
at that time governor of Judea. A SEN
tence from him was necessary before they
could proceed to the execution Of Jesus so
and we know that the power of life and
death was usually vested in the Roman
governor. Our Savior was treated with
deriSion; and this we know to have been
customary practice at that time, preyi-
Gus to the execution Of criminals, and dur-
ing the time of it. Plate scoureed Jesus
before he gave him up to be cruciied.-
We know from ancient authors, that this
was very usual practice among the Ro.
mans. The account of an ecution gen.
orally run in this forms-he was stripned
whipped, and beheaded or executed. Ac-
cording to the evangelists, his accusation
\ was written on the top of the cross: and
we learn from Suetonius and others, that
the crime OF person to be executed was
affixed 10 the instrument of his punish-
ment. According to the evangelist. this
accusation Was written in three different
languages and we know from Josephus,
} that 1t was quite common in Jerusalem to
have all advertisements written in this
J manner. According to the evangelists
| Jesus had to bear his cross; and we know
J from other resources of information. that
tins was the constant practice of these
times. According to the evangelists, the
body OF Jesus was given up to be buried
at the request of friends. We know thai,
unless the criminal was Infamous. this
was the law, or the custom with ali Ro-
, man governors.
} These. and few more particulars of
the same kind, occur within the commas
Of single page of the evangelical histo-
ry. The circumstantial manner of the
7 history affords presumption in its favor.
t antecedent TO all examination into the
ruin OF the circumstances themselves
/ But II makes a strong addition TO the evi.
dence. when we find, that in all the subor-
, dinate parts OF the main story, the evan
gellsts maintain so great a consistency
with the testimony Of other authors. and
J with all we can collect from other sources
OF information, as to the manners and in
stitutlons of that period. 1t is difficult to
conceive. In the first instance, how the in
+ ventor of a fabricated story would hazard
such number of circumstances. each of
: them supplying point of comparison
: win other authors, and giving to the in
quirer an additional chance of detecting
the imposition. And it is still more diff
: cult to believe, that truth should have been
( so artfully blended with falsehood in the
} composition of this narrative, particularly
, as we perceive nothing like forced in
, PRODUCTION of any one circumstance
There appears TO be nothing out of place.
, nothing thrust in with the view of impart
ing an air of probability to the history
The circumstance upon which we bring
the evangelsts into comparison with pro-
fame authors, is often not intimated in
direct form, but in the form of slight or
. distant alluson. There is not the most
remote appearance of its being fetched or
sought for. 1t is brought in accidentally.
and flows in the most natural and unde-
signed manner out of the progress of the
narrative.
4 The circumstance, that none of the Cos.
pei writers arc inconsistent with one an
other, falls better under different branch
OF the argument. 1t is enough for our
present purpose, that there is not SINGLE
writer inconsistent with himself. 1t often
J happens, that falsehood carries its own re-
futatlon along with il: and that, throuoh
the artful DISCUSSES which are EMPLOYED
IN the construction of a fabricated story
we can often detect flaw or a contradic.
ton, which condemns the authority ofthe
whole narrative: Now, every single
piece of the. New Testament wants this |
mark or character of falsehood. The diff. |
ferent parts are found to sustain, and har-
monize, and flow out of each other. Each
has at least the merit of being a consistent
narrative. For any thing we see upon
the face of it, it may be true, and further |
hearing must be given before we can be
justified in rejecting it as the tale Of an
impostor.
There is another mark of falsehood
which each of the Gospel narratives ap.
pear TO be exempted from. There is lit
tie or no parading about their own integ-
rlty. We can collect their pretensions TO
credit from the history itself, bat we see
no anxious display of these pretensions.
We cannot fail to perceive the force of
that argument which is derived from the
publicity of the Christian miracles, and
the very minute and scrupulous examina-
ilon which they had TO sustain from the
rulers and official men of Judea. But