great body of the Jews were spectators of the works which Christ performed; and indeed this is rendered certain from the very nature of the case. Hundreds and thousands may have witnessed every separate miracle, and yet there would be an hundred to one who had not seen any of them. Christ wrought, say, fifty miracles: suppose five thousand different persons to have witnessed each one, there would then be two hundred and fifty thousand eye-witnesses;-but this was but a small part of the inhabitants of Palestine. The rejection of these miracles, therefore, was not altogether the rejection of those who actually saw them, as the argument in question unfairly insinuates; and the great mass of those who did see them, believed.

4. Beside this, there were doubtless very many who believed on Christ without acknowledging this openly, through fear of being excommunicated from among the faithful. To some extent we are certain of this, for one of the historians assures us that this was the case; he informs his readers that many of the "chief rulers believed on him, but confessed him not because of the Pharisees, lest they should be put out of the synagogue." There were unquestionably many in the same situation with Nichodemus and Gamaliel, who wanted to be Christians, and acknowledge Jesus, but were afraid to do it; many like these rulers, who from dread of the Pharisees chose to believe on Christ secretly. To judge of the really converted, therefore, by the number who followed him openly, would result in a false esti

mate.

5. So far as regards the unbelieving part of the Jews, their scepticism may be accounted for without half the difficulty which the object in review supposes. In the first place, then, the views which the Jewish people had cherished respecting the Messiah, were of a character as

wide as possible from those with which they looked upon Jesus. They had ever associated with the very name of the Messiah all their highest conceptions of grandeur and glory; his coming was to be that of a mighty conqueror, with the pomp and parade of royalty; before him their enemies and oppressors were to be humbled even to the dust; Jerusalem, the beloved city, was to be restored to her former glory; and by the might of his single arm their nation was to be exalted to the very heavens, while he as their king was to sway the sceptre over a subjugated world! How was it possible, then, that they should receive the despised Nazarene as this glorious Messiah-how was it possible that they could believe on him as their deliverer, when they considered his humble condition and appearance, when they saw him teaching the publican and sinner, and heard him repeatedly declaring that his kingdom was not of this world? True, it was certain that he performed wonderful works; but it was equally certain also, in their opinion, that the Messiah would not come in such humble garb, in such lowly condition as he.

6. And here we have but to remember that a belief in the agency of evil spirits, and in magic, prevailed almost universally in this age, and we shall have not the least cause for wonder that the miracles of Christ did not convince a greater number. He could not be the Messiah; of this they were satisfied, and being satisfied, they readily accounted for his miracles by referring them to Beelzebub, the prince of demons, with whom he was supposed to be in league, or to the assistance of some subordinate evil spirit. Did he cast out devils, or, in other words, heal the sick? It was by the aid of the prince of devils. Did he give sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, or speech to the dumb? He did it by the power of demons. Did he raise the dead? It was through the agency of

evil spirits. Here then was a complete solution of all difficulties, a key to which their minds unlocked the mystery of his miraculous powers. And in this view of the state of things at the period in question, the wonder is, that, with their high notions of the rank, and splendor, and power of the Messiah, and with this belief in the supernatural agency of evil spirits, and their power to work miracles-the wonder is, we repeat, that so many believed on Christ as actually did.

CHAPTER X.

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. THE MYTHICAL SYSTEM, AS
DEVELOPED BY STRAUSS, EXAMINED.

INTRODUCTORY.

1. The "Life of Jesus," by Professor Strauss,* is one of the most remarkable books of the age, for many reasons. It has carried to its legitimate results the rationalistic and destructive criticism which has so long time been growing up in Germany, and which recently has shown itself, in a somewhat diseased condition, in this country. It has produced an extraordinary sensation in the theological world. This is not because the idea or theory of the work is new, for it was started long ago; but because the theory has been carried out to its final issues without fear or wavering; because what others have done in part

* We have devoted a large space to the review of the mythic theory of Strauss, for two reasons; first, because of the acknowledged ability and popularity of his work-and second, because it embodies in it the spirit of almost all the current objections to, and attacks upon, the New Testament history. This the reader will discover as he proceeds with the perusal. The references are to the English translatien from the 4th German edition: London, 1846. 3 vols. 8 vo.

with apologistic hesitiation, Strauss has done as a whole, with far greater ability, and with a stoicism as imperturbable as the ability is great. That the "Life of Jesus" is a production of much power and immense learning, no one will dispute; and the argument is carried on with a patient and dissecting analysis, with a lavish variety of illustration, a depth of research, a delicasy of perception in the smallest minutiæ of criticism, a never baffled ingenuity, and withal an utter absence of every vestige of feeling, which are truly astonishing. And it will probably be allowed by all parties that rationalism, or scepticism, at least in one of its phases, has here reached its culminating point. Dr. Strauss has exhausted the subject. There remains nothing more in this direction that is probable; nothing that, beyond this, can claim even a decent possibility for itself.

2. The author of the "Leben Jesu" does not absolutely banish the personality of Jesus into the regions of legend; but he allows, as the historical basis of his mythical system, that he lived, was baptized of John, was persecuted of the Pharisees, and crucified. So much, possibly, with some other small matters, is true-the rest legendary, fabulous, or, in plain words, false. He allows a space of thirty years from the death of Christ to the preparation of the first Gospel by the compiler, whoever it was. This time he thinks is sufficient for introducing into the common faith of the early Christian the mythical or legendary stories of the Gospel narratives, respecting the birth, miracles, death, and resurrection of Christ.

3. The term "myth " is employed by him to represent both the process and result of this early tendency to "glorify" Jesus. In saying that the evangelical histories are

66

mythical," ," he does not accuse the authors, or the first Christians, of any intentional deception. They designed no fraud or imposition upon their cotemporaries,