There are several things to be considered, in determining whether they were deceived. First, in respect to time. There were no appearances till after the fact that the tomb was empty was fully understood, _nor till some hours after_. This lapse of time has been overlooked by most writers; and, from want of attention to it, inconsistencies as to occurrences at the sepulchre, as to the number and appearance of angels, the companies of women, the persons composing them, the messages received and carried, and the appearances to them, of our risen Lord, have been imagined, that are easily explained, upon the very natural hypothesis of several transactions of like character during the six hours or more[3] which elapsed before the journey to Emmaus. At that time no one had seen the Lord; for it cannot be doubted that his appearance would be reported as soon as possible after its occurrence. When Jesus joined the two disciples, their eyes were “holden,” until in a long discourse he had prepared them for a revelation of himself. Peter must have meditated some hours upon the absence of the body, before Jesus showed himself to him. It was not till after this, and after the return of the disciples from Emmaus, that he said to the others, “Peace be unto you.” Then a whole week, before he returns. Then, probably after a longer interval (for they returned to Galilee), he shows himself at the Sea of Tiberias. Then, after some days, to above five hundred brethren, at a place to which they had been directed to go by the angels, and by Jesus both before and after his resurrection. Then to James. And then at Jerusalem to the Apostles, whom he led out over against Bethany; and while he blessed them, he parted from them and was carried up into heaven. In all this, we see how they were prepared to exercise a sober and intelligent judgment, so that neither they, nor we, should be in doubt whether what they beheld was their risen Lord, or a phantom of their own imagination. And will any one tell us, right here, what better proof Jesus _could_ have given his disciples, of his Resurrection? If the evidence was sufficient for them, it may be sufficient for us, unless we are prepared to say that the miracle shall _be repeated whenever it is challenged_! Was it essential to a reasonable conviction on their part that the Scribes and Pharisees should also be convinced? (Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea, _were_ convinced.) It must be admitted that the disciples, of all others, were qualified to judge, if any persons could be qualified. What force could the belief of the Sanhedrim have added to the testimony of their own senses?