least with the remark that, "as external evidence," the testimony of Paul "is probably the best that can be produced." We know at least who the witness really is, which is an advantage denied us in the case of the Gospels. It would be premature to express surprise, however, that we find the case of miracles, and more especially of such stupendous miracles as the Resurrection and Ascension, practically resting upon the testimony of a single witness. This thought will intrude itself, but cannot at present be pursued. The allegation which we have to examine is that the Founder of Christianity, after being dead and buried, rose from the dead and did not again die, but after remaining sometime with his disciples ascended with his body into heaven.(1) It is unnecessary to complicate the question by adding the other doctrines regarding the miraculous birth and divine origin and personality of Jesus. In the problem before us, certain objective facts are asserted which admit of being judicially tested. We have nothing to do here with the vague modern representation of these events, by means of which the objective facts vanish, and are replaced by subjective impressions and tricks of consciousness or symbols of spiritual life. Those who adopt such views have, of course, abandoned all that is real and supernatural in the supposed events. The Resurrection and Ascension which we have to deal with are events precisely as objective and real as the 1 In the Articles of the Church of England this is expressed as follows: Art. ii. ".....who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, &c., &c." Art. iii. "As Christ died for us, and was buried; so also it is to be believed that He went down into Hell." Art iv. "Christ did truly rise again from death, and took again Hie Body, with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection of man's nature, wherewith He ascended into Heaven, and there sitteth, until He return to judge all men at the last day." {401}