But we cannot feel sure that this would have _settled the point_. No doubt the Jews who saw Him would have been convinced, but the nation as a whole might, or might not, have accepted Christianity. If they did _not_, saying for instance it was due to a pretender, it would have been worse than useless. While if they did, the Romans would very likely have looked upon it as a national insurrection, and its progress would have been more than ever difficult. It would also have greatly weakened the force of _Prophecy_; since, in the absence of ancient manuscripts, people might think that the old Jewish prophecies had been tampered with, to make them suit their Christian interpretation. But now these prophecies, having been preserved by men who are opposed to Christianity, are above suspicion. Moreover, to get the world to believe in the Resurrection required not only evidence, but _missionaries_, that is to say, men who were so absolutely convinced of its truth, as to be willing to spend their whole lives in witnessing for it, in all lands and at all costs. And the chief object of the appearances may have been to produce such men; and it is obvious that (apart from a miraculous conversion like St. Paul's) there could not have been more than a few of them. For only a _few_ could have conversed with Christ, and eaten with Him after His death, so as to be quite certain that He was then alive; only a _few_ could have known Him so intimately before, as to be quite certain that it was really He, and only a _few_ had loved Him so dearly as to be willing to give up everything for His sake. In short, there were only a few _suitable_ witnesses available. And Christ's frequently appearing to these few--the _chosen witnesses_ as they are called[329]--in the private and intimate manner recorded in the Gospels, was evidently more likely to turn them into ardent missionaries (which it actually did) than any public appearance. Indeed it so often happens that what everybody should do, nobody does; that it may be doubted whether Christ's publicly appearing to a number of persons in Jerusalem would have induced even one of them to have faced a life of suffering, and a death of martyrdom, in spreading the news. This objection, then, cannot be maintained. [Footnote 329: Acts 10. 41.] In conclusion, it seems scarcely necessary to sum up the arguments in this chapter. We have discussed at some length the veracity, knowledge, investigation, and reasoning of the _first witnesses_ of the Resurrection; and as we have seen, not one of these points can be fairly doubted. In fact the evidence in favour of each is overwhelming. Therefore the alternative theories--the Falsehood, the Legend, the Vision, and the Swoon Theory--which are founded on denying these points, are all untenable. And this greatly supports the conclusion we arrived at in the last chapter; so that combining the two; we have an _extremely strong_ argument in favour of the Resurrection of Christ.