tion; but then was our freedom made manifest, when he came from the grave in triumph, and led captivity captive; when he ascended to the right hand of his Father to be our perpetual High Priest and Mediator: for as the Apostle argues, if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life;' i. e. by his resurrection to life and to glory.

This account, as it gives the true interpretation of the text, so likewise does it show of what great moment the resurrection of our Lord was, which was to be the basis and support of the whole Christian institution, and the ground of our hope and faith in him. That Christ died the death of a common malefactor, after a life spent in innocency, and a constant and laborious teaching of the great duties of religion and morality, was but common to him, and others before him, whom God had raised up to be shining lights of the world. Thus the prophets of old were persecuted and destroyed by sundry kinds of death: but in their blood there was no expiation for sin: the blood of Abel and of the prophets spoke no such language, but cried to God for vengeance against a cruel and a guilty world. Had Christ died like one of them, and been no more heard of, how should we have believed that his death had atoned for all the rest of the blood that had been spilt from the foundation of the world? or that the whole earth had obtained remission of sin from God by destroying one more, and him the greatest of all the prophets, in the most cruel manner? But when our Lord rose from the grave, and brought back with him the pardon which he had sealed with his own blood; when, instead of executing wrath on his enemies, he sent again the offer of peace and reconciliation, and took on himself to be their Mediator and Intercessor, as he had already been their Sacrifice; what room was there to doubt of the efficacy of his death, the efficacy of which was so undeniably confirmed by his resurrection? or what reason to mistrust the salvation he offered others, when, by saving himself from the power of death, he had given the fullest evidence how able he was to save others also? The most incredulous of his enemies desired him only to come down from the cross and they would believe him :' but how much better reason had they to believe him, when he came, not from the cross, but from the

grave, which was by much the surer hold, and from which before no mortal had ever escaped! How undeniable was this testimony of God's love to mankind, that, after the ill reception his Son had found among them, after all the cruel usage he had experienced, and the ignominious death he had suffered, he yet sent him once more from the grave to convince unbelievers, and to proclaim and confirm the pardon he had purchased for them!

His first coming was attended with a mean birth and narrow fortune; his education was suitable to his condition; and the greatest part of his life spent in obscurity: he had no form or comeliness that we should desire him; he was a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief:' and when he fell a victim to the malice and rage of the people, his best friends, the constant companions of his sorrow, gave him over for lost; they esteemed him stricken and smitten of God:' all their hopes died with him, and the remembrance of his miracles and mighty works was buried in the same tomb with himself; and nothing less was thought of than that this was he who should redeem Israel from all his sins.' But when he came again from the bosom of the earth, having subdued the powers of darkness and of death, then was he declared to be the Son of God with power; and the glory as of the only-begotten Son of God shone clearly through the veil of flesh which had so long obscured it. And from thenceforth our faith has stood, not in the words which the wisdom or cunning of man teacheth, but in the power and demonstration of the Spirit of life: and we can with assurance say, we know in whom we have trusted,' expecting life and salvation from him alone, who is the Lord of life and glory. But after all, if the resurrection of Christ is the support of all other articles of the Christian faith, how is itself supported? To our common apprehension nothing is more incredible than that a man dead and buried should be restored to life again. ·

6

To go into the particulars of the evidence of this great event, recorded in Scripture and the oldest writers of the church, would open too large a field of discourse at present; and indeed there are some objections which naturally arise in the minds of men, which ought previously to that inquiry to be removed; for the great difficulty at which men stick, does not arise so

much from the nature of the evidence we propose, as from the nature of the thing itself. The presumptions against the possibility of a resurrection operate so strongly in the minds of some, that they think it needless to inquire what evidence there is for it, being persuaded that the thing itself is not capable of being supported by any evidence. This prejudice was a very early one; for the Apostle expostulates this case with king Agrippa: Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you that God should raise the dead?'

Let us consider the force of this expostulation, and see whether it is strong enough to encounter the prejudice.

Now, nothing can be said to be incredible, if there is a power in any person able to effect it; for if there is such a power, that power may bring into existence that very thing which you doubt of; and it cannot be incredible that a thing should exist, which may possibly really exist. If we consider only the strength of children, it is incredible that they should build castles; but if we consider the strength and ability of men, it would be ridiculous to doubt whether they could or no. So that the credibility or incredibility of any thing depends on knowing whether there is, or is not, a power adequate to the undertaking. The resurrection of the dead is in truth a very stupendous work: but neither you nor I am to undertake it if it depended on us, it would be incredible indeed. It is the work of God, and of him only; and surely I have named one of credit and power sufficient to be trusted in this great affair. And this is St. Paul's argument, why should it be thought incredible that God should raise the dead?' whoever therefore affirms that a resurrection is in itself a thing incredible, must affirm that it is incredible that God has power to raise the dead. And now consider who it is that can, consistently with the common and allowed principles of reason and nature, deny this power to God. No one certainly, who admits that God made the world, can entertain this doubt; for if God has given us the life we now enjoy, what should hinder him from restoring life again, after this is lost? Can there be more difficulty in giving life the second time than there was at first? If there be any contradiction therefore in the notion of a resurrection, there must be the very same in the notion of crea

tion. And therefore natural religion is just as much concerned in this point as revelation; for though the belief of the fact, that the dead shall be raised, depends on revelation; yet our belief that God has power to raise the dead depends not on revelation, but on the clear dictates of reason, of that reason by which we discover him to be our Creator. And if you doubt even of this his power of creation, you must bid adieu to all religion at once: for if God created not the world, how are you at all related to him? If he did not make us, what right he has to govern us, or what pretence to our obedience, neither you from nature, nor we from revelation, can ever be satisfied.

The power of God being admitted to be equal to this work, the question of the resurrection of Christ comes to be a question of fact; and though I propose not to enter into the evidence of the fact, yet it may be proper to observe that a resurrection considered as a fact, is a fact as capable of evidence as any whatever; it is an object of sense, of every sense by which we judge of the reality of things without us.

6

We are told, that Christ died and rose again.' Of his death I suppose there is no great doubt: die he certainly did : and surely there could be no more difficulty to see and know that he was dead, than in knowing when others were dead, from Adam to this day. One would think, therefore, that those about him, who saw him crucified and buried, might be trusted when they report that he died.

But he came to life again: very true; and it was very easy for those who conversed with him to know whether he was

alive or no. There was no more difficulty in judging of his being alive, than of judging, in any other case, whether those we converse with are alive or no. His having been dead and buried could not possibly alter the case, or create any difficulty in judging whether he was really alive or no. So that the resurrection, considered as a fact, was in every part of it an object of sense, and as capable of being well attested as any other object of sense whatever. Lay these things together, the promise of God to give us life eternal, his power to make good his word, the confirmation he has given us of our hope by the resurrection of Christ; and what is wanting to make the belief of this article a rational act of faith?

SHERL.

VOL. I.

G

The promises of God have never borrowed help from moral probabilities. The promises to Abraham were not of this kind? so far otherwise, that it is said of him, that, against hope he believed in hope;' that is, he hoped where, humanly speaking, there was no ground for hope. There was no probability that his seed, who was a stranger and pilgrim on earth, should inherit the land of Canaan, possessed by great and powerful nations.

The promise of a son to him, when he and his wife were both too far advanced in years to expect one in the ordinary course of nature, was contrary to experience and to natural probability. But what says the Apostle? Abraham not being weak in faith, considered not his own body, now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's womb. But he staggered not at the promise of God-being fully persuaded that what he had promised he was able to perform.' This reliance on the promises of God, against all the presumptions of human experience and probability, was the very thing, as St. Paul tells us, that' was imputed to him for righteousness.'

Compare now this case with the case of Christians. We have great promises made to us by God in Christ Jesus, the promises of a resurrection to life. Inquire of the world; they know of no such thing, the ages past have afforded no instance of this kind, and, as far as they can see and judge, daily experience is a witness against this hope. Under these difficulties, whither shall we go for refuge and support? whither! but to the promises of God, and to this full persuasion, that what he has promised he is able to perform.' If we hold fast this persuasion, and stagger not through unbelief, then shall we indeed be the children of the faith of Abraham, whose faith was imputed to him for righteousness:' for as St. Paul tells us, this testimony of Abraham's faith was not written for his sake alone, but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead.' Here then is the great article of Christian faith, even of that faith which will be imputed to us for righteousness: it is a firm confidence and reliance on God, under this peculiar character, that he is the raiser-up of the dead, and will, according to his promise, raise us to life eternal.