The resurrection was the foundation of Christ’s new commission, which extended to all the world; then it was he declared that all power was given unto him in heaven and in earth; then he gave a new commission to his disciples, not restrained to the house of Israel, but to go and teach all nations. This prerogative the Jews had under this commission, that the gospel was every where first offered to them, but in no other terms than it was offered to the rest of the world. Since then this commission, of which the resurrection was the foundation, extended to all the world alike, what ground is there to demand special and particular evidence to the Jews? The emperor and the senate of Rome were a much more considerable part of the world than the chief priests and the synagogue; why does not the gentleman object then, that Christ did not shew himself to Tiberius and his senate? And since all men have an equal right in this case, why may not the same demand be made for every country? nay, for every age? and then the gentleman may bring the question nearer home, and ask, why Christ did not appear in England in king George’s reign? There is, to my apprehension, nothing more unreasonable than to neglect and despise plain and sufficient evidence before us, and to sit down to imagine what kind of evidence would have pleased us, and then to make the want of such evidence an objection to the truth, which yet, if well considered, would be found to be well established.

Thomas Sherlock, The Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection, from the 12th London ed. (Boston: John Eliot, 1809), pp. 81-82.