If a man told a mixed company that Captain Webb swam the English Channel, he would have a good chance of belief. The incident happened but a few years ago; it was reported in all the newspapers of the day. It is not in itself an impossible thing for a man to do. But if the same man told the same audience that five hundred years ago an Irish sailor had swum from Holyhead to New York, his statement would be received with less confidence. Because five centuries is a long time, there is no credible record of the feat, and we _cannot believe_ any man capable of swimming about four thousand miles. Let us look once more at the statement made by the believers in the Resurrection. We are asked to believe that the all-powerful eternal God, the God who created twenty millions of suns, came down to earth, was born of a woman, was crucified, was dead, was laid in a tomb for three days, and then came to life again, and ascended into Heaven. What is the nature of the evidence produced in support of this tremendous miracle? Is there any man or woman alive who has seen God? No. Is there any man or woman alive who has seen Christ? No. There is no human being alive who can say that God exists or that Christ exists. The most they can say is that they _believe_ that God and Christ exist. No historian claims that any God has been seen on earth for nearly nineteen centuries. The Christians deny the assertions of all other religions as to divine visits; and all the other religions deny their assertions about God and Christ. There is no reason why God should have come down to earth, to be born of a woman, and die on the cross. He could have convinced and won over mankind without any such act. He has _not_ convinced or won over mankind by that act. Not one-third of mankind are professing Christians to-day, and of those not one in ten is a true Christian and a true believer. The Resurrection, therefore, seems to have been unreasonable, unnecessary, and futile. It is also contrary to science and to human experience. What is the nature of the evidence? The common idea of the man in the street is the idea that the Gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were contemporaries of Christ; and that the Gospels were written and circulated during the lives of the authors. There is no evidence to support these beliefs. There is no evidence, outside the New Testament, that any of the Apostles ever existed. We know nothing about Paul, Peter, John, Mark, Luke, or Matthew, except what is told in the New Testament. Outside the Testament there is not a word of historical evidence of the divinity of Christ, of the Virgin Birth, of the Resurrection or Ascension. Therefore it is obvious that, before we can be expected to believe the tremendous story of the Resurrection, we must be shown overwhelming evidence of the authenticity of the Scriptures. Before you can prove your miracle you have to prove your book.