This would be to deny their _reasoning_, and say that they did not draw the right conclusion, since Christ's appearances were due to His not having died. But this theory also has immense difficulties. (_E._) CONCLUSION. The alleged difficulties of the Christian Theory, extremely strong argument in favour of the Resurrection. We decided in the last chapter that the Resurrection of Christ was _probably true_; that is to say, we carefully examined the various narratives, and came to the conclusion that they had every appearance of being candidly and truthfully written. We have now to consider, more in detail, _the testimony of its first witnesses_. And, as we shall see, this affords strong additional evidence in its favour; since all attempts to account for this testimony, without admitting its truth, fail hopelessly. By the _first witnesses_, we mean those persons who saw, or said they saw, Christ alive after His Crucifixion. This will include the twelve Apostles, and over 500 other Christians, most of whom St. Paul says were still alive when he wrote. It will also include two persons, who at the time were _not_ Christians,--St. Paul himself, an avowed enemy, and St. James who, though he was Christ's brother, does not seem to have believed in Him.[312] [Footnote 312: John 7. 5.] And before discussing the value of their testimony, it may be well to glance at some general rules in regard to all testimony. If, then, a person plainly asserts that a certain event took place, before we believe that it did take place, we must inquire first as to his _Veracity_: did he speak the truth as far as he knew it? Next as to his _Knowledge_: had he the means of knowing the truth? Next as to his _Investigation_: did he avail himself of those means? And lastly, as to his _Reasoning_: did he draw the right conclusion? And all possible ways of denying the truth of a man's statement can be brought under one or other of these heads. For if it is not true, it must be either:-- Intentionally false = want of Veracity. { had not the } { means of } or { knowing the } = want of Knowledge. { truth } { Unintentionally { false, in which { or { did not } = want of Investigation. case he either { { use them } { had the means,{ or { and either { used them } { { wrongly } = want of Reasoning.