Alleged Discrepancies.

[Footnote: The following extract from Dr. Orr's book, _The
Resurrection of Jesus_, will throw some light on the matter
of differences in testimony, while maintaining the credibility of
the fact itself. "An instructive example is furnished in a recent
issue of the _Bibliotheca Sacra_. A class in history was studying
the French Revolution, and the pupils were asked to look the matter
up, and report next day by what vote Louis XVI was condemned. Nearly
half the class reported that the vote was unanimous. A considerable
number protested that he was condemned by a majority of one. A few
gave the majority as 145 in a vote of 721. How utterly irreconcilable
these reports seemed! Yet for each the authority of reputable
historians could be given. In fact, all were true, and the full
truth was a combination of all three. On the first vote as to the
king's guilt there was no contrary voice. Some tell only of this.
The vote on the penalty was given individually, with reasons, and
a majority of 145 declared for the death penalty, at once or after
peace was made with Austria, or after confirmation by the people.
The votes for immediate death were only 361 as against 360. History
abounds with similar illustrations. As an example of another kind,
reference may be made to Rev. R. J. Campbell's volume of _Sermons
Addressed to Individuals_, where, on pp. 145-6 and pp. 181-2,
the same story of a Brighton man is told with affecting dramatic
details. The story is no doubt true in substance; but for
'discrepancies'--let the reader compare them, and never speak more
(or Mr. Campbell either) of the Gospels!"]

The seeming differences in the testimony of the witnesses to the
resurrection may be largely, if not altogether reconciled by a