, 1876-10-08
THE RESURRECTION.

Judge Booth. Reaflrms His D:sbelies
in Christ's Return from the
| Tomb. -
First Meeting Of the Season Of The
Philosophical Society.
| The Philosophical Society held it's first meet
ing Of the season last night at their rooms in
Hate's Block, corner Of Washington and State
streets. There were about 200 persons present,
| quite number Of them being ladies, and the
| opening was considered auspicious. The fen
ture OF the evening was lecture by Judge
Booth on "Eridences OF the Resurrection
Recousldered, "a reply to the criticisms upon
his lecture on the same subject do
livered year ago, with additionn
points and evidence In SUPPORT ot
the views then started. He expressed his graft
acation at the high degree Of candor and court,
esy with which most Of his clerical friends had
conducted the argument On their side. Progress
had been made, however, since the burning Of
Servetus, and for the freedom Of thought and
influence In the Investigation Of truth We should
be thankful Some haa thought to crush him
under an array OF distinguished names, Truth
needed not such authority. Error had ALWAYS
been ready to Invoke great names, and often
perpetrated its hold on the minds Of men by
such means. He then restatel the original ques.
tion, saying that 1t should be borne In mind
that what he attempted WINS an examination OF
the events OF the resurrection Of the body ot
Christ as generally accepted By the various OF
thodox churches; and it was Necessary to show
that the dogma OF fnfalHbiity, asserted In be.
half Of the Ne1 Testament writers, Wis based
only upon the testimony Of falfihle men. He
gathered from his learned critics. views that
they we're not quite clear what was meant bt IN
fallibility from an orthodox standpoint. Az
cording to the early teachings the doctrine was
plain, and the Scriptures were held to be ver-
balfy inspired and htera1fY the work of God. But
it would seem TINT the tendency had been 1atterly
to abate somewhat from this standpoint, and
it was dlfiicult to determine now what the raith
was. The leading orthodox hcsftated In their
views, apparently uncertain of their ground.
Their teachings were to the effect that inspira-:
ton was Intallible only in things Of real import
ance, leaving sufficient margin for literary in
accuracies and incidental mistakes in miner and
CErMPoKTAST MATTERS.
He then proceeded to show that the dogma In
this modified form Was only dogma,
denying that tie writer's assumed for them,, item,
selves the attitude OF infalIb1lty in any degrec
or to any extent Whatever, and challenging Ills
Of the four e7angelists spectasd, distinctly Ind
uneQuivocal1y made such = claim for himself,
much less for either OF the others. In support
Of bis views he pointed out the inconsistencies
in the Gospels, claiming that nothing
in numerous instances, the writer's had
attempted to repeat the same words Of
Jesus uttered on the same occasions, yet disa-
greed materially in their statements, giving a.
IN instance the Sermon on the Mount.
He ncxl proceeded to the main question. Re-
iectlng tk2 last twelve verses Of Marks Gospel
as spurious, the miracle of the Ascension rested
solely on the testimony Of Luke; but he, by his
own confession, had no personal know ledge Of
The h facts be H. related only prossss to gve
witnesses and ministers Of the VOID.
We're they inspircd7 Who youchet for
thema There we're four biographcrs Of
Christ, yet three of them are strangely silent
about this marvellous event. Matthew and John
.reditcd. Eleven disciples were there, but nome
who SAW tho miracle saw fit to give an account
of 1t. He then dfssectcd the accounts OF the
defyfng any one to fc1 anything
N them which Indicated more than one visit by
Mary to the sepulehre, and claiming that the
second visit was an invention to sup
port IN assumption OF Instructions.
Mark and Luke said nothing about
'thnrA 1nftm1t11n
he wrffe-s that there was anv annearan',? of
Jesus or the Angels to the other women. She
xas made the chief witness Of ali The super-
natural appearances that morning. and he chal-
lsnrred his clsrical friends to point out stnrle
adj OF ali the wonderful scenes that did lot
rome unler her Observation, The attclnpt to
reconcile the conflicting accounts hy ASSERTING
.hat Something tfanspired in her absence had
no warrant in the narratives, and
WOULD UTTERLY PAN.
f it had, ConcedinK for the purpose OF the H.
yument all that the most Jealous had ever
Claimed for the authenticity Of the writers, IT,
he evidence when thus examined was found
Insufficient to establish the fact OF the resur-
:ectiou, be submitted there was no point Of
rev for which it could be found sufficient
Forced to this conclusion, he found it uuneces-
ary to discuss the authenticity OF the writings.
riticism rendered it quite doubtful whether
oin u tb,+ 0spe ~ a,thsntc3tv ~ fho o;hers haa
,ecn ssr,ns1v questioned. The tendency of