set up in opposition to all the prejudices and prophecies of the
country. Where was the art and cunning then of taking this method?
Could anything be expected from it but hatred, contempt, and
persecution? And did Christ in fact meet with any other treatment from
the Jews? And yet when he found, as the Gentleman allows he did, that
he must perish in this attempt, did he change his note? did he come
about, and drop any intimations agreeable to the notions of the people?
It is not pretended. This, which, in any other case which ever
happened, would be taken to be a plain mark of great honesty, or great
stupidity, or of both, is in the present case art, policy, and
contrivance.

But, it seems, Jesus dared not set up to be the victorious prince
expected, for victories are not to be counterfeited. I hope it was no
crime in him that he did not assume this false character, and try to
abuse the credibility of the people; if he had done so, it certainly
would have been a crime; and therefore in this point at least he is
innocent. I do not suppose the Gentleman imagines the Jews were well
founded in their expectation of a temporal prince: and therefore when
Christ opposed this conceit at the manifest hazard of his life, as he
certainly had truth on his side, so the presumption is, that it was for
the sake of truth that he exposed himself.

No. He wanted, we are told, the common and necessary foundation
for a new revelation, the authority of an old one to build on. Very
well. I will not inquire how common, or how necessary this foundation
is to a new revelation; for, be that case as it will, it is evident,
that in the method Christ took, he had not, nor could have the supposed
advantage of such foundation. For why is this foundation necessary? A
friend of the Gentleman's shall tell you "Because it must be difficult,