dead. But he does not consider, that by this supposition he strips the
disciples of every part of their character at once, and presents to us
a new set of men, in every respect different from the former. The
former disciples were weak, plain men; but these are bold, hardy,
cunning, and contriving: the former were full of the superstitions of
their country, and expected a prince from the authority of their
Prophets; but these were despisers of the Prophets, and of the notions
of their countrymen, and are designing to turn these fables to their
own advantage; for it cannot be supposed that they believed the
Prophets, and at the same time thought to accomplish or defeat them by
so manifest a cheat, to which they themselves at least were conscious.

But let us take leave of these suppositions, and see how the true
evidence is this case stands. Guards were placed, and they did their
duty. But what are guards and sentinels against the power of God? An
angel of the Lord opened the sepulchre; the guards saw him, and became
like dead men. This account they gave to the chief priests, who, still
persisting in their obstinacy, bribed the guards to tell the
contradictory story, of their being asleep, and the body stolen.

I cannot but observe to your Lordship, that all these
circumstances, so much questioned and suspected, were necessary
circumstances, supposing the resurrection to be true. The seal was
broken, the body came out of the sepulchre, the guards were placed in
vain to prevent it. Be it so: I desire to know, whether the Gentleman
thinks that the seal put God under covenant? or could prescribe to him
a method for performing this great work? or whether he thinks the
guards were placed to maintain the seal in opposition to the power of
God? If he will maintain neither of these points, then the opening of
the seals, notwithstanding the guard set upon them, will be an