i^l.^i 
 
.0^ a^/fi/^^^}^x 
 
 '•■f 
 
 Mo.;.,..... ., 
 
 ^mhi II 
 
 L^i vi&ioa J^; ::: ^/^-f C 
 
[MOSS (C.) Bp. of Bath and Wells'] 
 The Evidences of the Resurrection 
 cleared from the exceptions of [Annet], 
 8vo, calf, 1 /6. 1744 
 
THE 
 
 E V I D E N g E 
 
 '-'rjMi 
 
 Wj 
 
 O F T H E 
 
 RESURRECT 
 
 1 MAY 27 1911 
 
 ^ CLEARED 
 
 From the E X c E p T I o N s of ^ late 
 P A M P H L E T, 
 
 Entitled, 
 
 '"fhe Resurrection of J ESUS conjidered 
 
 by a Moral Fhilofopker ; in Anjwer to 
 
 The Tryal of the Witnesses, &c. 
 
 LONDON, 
 
 Printed for John and Henry Pemherton at the Goldm Bud 
 againft St. Dunjian's Church in Fhetjireet. 
 
 M DCC XLIV. 
 
 [Price Two Shillings,] 
 
T O T H E 
 
 LEARNED AUTHOR 
 
 O F 
 
 The Tryal of the Witnejfes 
 of the Refurre&iony 
 
 THE 
 
 FOLLOWING SHEETS 
 
 ARE INSCRIBED 
 
 With all Humility and Regard, ' 
 By his mojl Obedienty 
 And Devoted Humble Servant j 
 
 C. M. 
 
( r ) 
 
 THE 
 
 EVIDENCE 
 
 O F T H E 
 
 RESURRECTION 
 
 Cleared; in Anfwer to the Refur- 
 
 eBion Confidered- &c. 
 
 I. 
 
 THE Conjiderer introduces himfelf 
 and his Book to the World, in a very 
 extraordinafy and pompous Manner, 
 T!he T'ryal of the Witnejfes had, it feems, 
 gone through ten Editions ^ unanfwered ; had 
 (as he moil ingenioufly expreffes himfelf) mi-^ 
 racidoujly fupported the Miracles of the Go/pel-, 
 had gained an indif put able Co77queJi^ and reached 
 the remote ft Corners of Infidelity, What then 
 was to be done in ■ this Diftrefs ? Why he is 
 called upon by .his Friends to read it^ and by 
 his ardent Love to Truth , of anjwer it 5 and 
 
 * Firft Edit. p. i. Refurreftion Confidered. 
 
 B feems 
 
(O 
 
 feems to tlmik that all the Hopes of Infidelity 
 cei>ter in him. 
 
 An Author of fo much Vivacity, and fo fall 
 of himfelf, can hardly be expeded to keep the 
 dull Road of Reafoning ; his Wit will fome- 
 times run away with him. Hence it is that we 
 meet with fo much Pertnefs and Spirit in his 
 Performance; hence proceed thofe beautiful 
 Expreffions of miraculoujly jupported the Mira- 
 cles^ the datnnably bad Opinions of fomebody 
 or other; and the witty Conceit of introdu- 
 cing Ghofls /// '-Lvhite Sheets and dark Lan- 
 thorns ^, into this ferious Argument. Of all 
 which, and many others of equal Politenefs, 
 I take leave once for all, and give them up to 
 be enjoyed by the Author and his Admirers^^ 
 '\^ithout Difturbance. 
 
 Eat I muft needs commend this Author for 
 the open and frank Declaration of his Princi- 
 ples in refpedl to Religion. Some have pre- 
 tended Friendfliip to the Gofpel, that they 
 might the more fuccefsfuUy undermine the 
 Foundations of it ; bat this Author ads with 
 more Bravery and more Hcnefly. He fays- 
 fairly, In my Opinion great yzidgment and great 
 Faith are Juch ContradiBions that they ne^ 
 ver unite, Jo as to meet in one Perjbn ^ I dare 
 fay he did not make this Declaration upon any 
 Sufpicion he had of his own 'Judgtnent. Again, 
 
 . ^ Firfl Edit. p. 43. 
 
 Third Edit. p. 34. 
 
 ^' Firft 
 
 Idir. p. 6. 
 
 
 
 
 _^- 
 
 with 
 
(3 ) 
 
 ^th refpedl to Miracles, he tells us, every real 
 Miracle is an Abfurdity to common Senfe and 
 Underjlanding, and contrary to the Attributes of 
 God'. 
 
 After thefe exprefs Declarations one would 
 wonder how this Author could propofe him- 
 felf to the World as a proper Perfon to make a 
 fair Examination of the Evidence of the Re- 
 furredion, which is both the greateft Miracle, 
 and the greateft Article of the Chriftian Faith. 
 But he had his View in fo doing, and has been 
 fo good as to acquaint us, what he propofed by 
 his Anfwer to the Trial of the Wit7ie[jes ^ and 
 he ihaJl tell it himfelf. My Defign is to pj^o- 
 mote that Feneration for Wifdom and Virtue^ 
 which has been debafed and degraded by Faith -^ 
 by a Faith which has not fent Peace on Earthy 
 but a Sword. — Where this foolijh Faith bears 
 Sway^ the Tree of Knowledge produces dafn?2ing 
 Fruit ; but under the benign Influence of George 
 our King, in this glorious Day of Light and 
 Liberty^ this divine Hag ajid her pious Witch^ 
 crafts which were brought forth in Da?'knefs 
 and nouriped by Obfiurity, faint at the Ap- 
 proach of Day^ a?id vanijh upon Sight ^ 
 
 The Faith which the Gofpel propofes ia 
 Chrif Jefus^ the ever blefled Son of God, and 
 the only Name under Heaven by which we 
 may be faved, is here with ail aftonifhing De- 
 
 " Firil Ed;% p. 6^. Third Edit. p. 52. « Firft Edit, 
 p. So- Thiid Edit. p. 72. 
 
 B 2 gree 
 
( 4 ) 
 
 gree of Impiety, called a divine Hag with pi- 
 ous Witchcrafts, Unhappy Man ! what could 
 he mean by this ? I pity him from my Heart. 
 But what could he mean by abufing the King, 
 unlefs he had a Mind to (hew, that he is juft 
 as good a Subject as he is a Chriftian ? 
 
 Every ferious Man will read thefe Paffages 
 with Abhorrence ; and they are a Warning to 
 every Reader to be upon his Guard againft the 
 Reprefentations made of the Doctrines of the 
 Gofpel, and the Evidences of Chriftianity, by 
 fo determined, and fo inveterate an Enemy to 
 both. . 
 
 But let us examine this Author in another 
 refped:. So little qualified was he to write an 
 Anfwer to the T^ryal of the Witne[jes^ that he 
 did not underfland it, when he publillied his 
 Anfwer^ but miftook fometimes the Objedion 
 for the Anfwer to the Objedion, and lome- 
 times vice verfa ; and afcribed to the Author 
 of the Trial the very Opinion he was confut- 
 ing. A few Inftances will explain my 
 Meaning. 
 
 At Page 4 (ryZ Edit.) the Confaerer charges 
 the Author of the T^ryal w'whfoimdi^ig Faith, 
 en Education^ and ivriti^ig in Favour of that 
 Opinion. To flipport this Charge he quotes 
 from the '^ryal the very Words that diiclaim 
 that Opinion. The Words are — ^ — What pre- 
 vailed with thoje who firji received it (i. e. the 
 Belief of the Refurredion.) theyjcertainly did- 
 not follow the Examples of their Fathers. Here 
 
 then 
 
then h the Point y how did this Fact gain Credit 
 in the World at firjl? Credit it has gained with-^ 
 out doubt \ 'Tis marvellous how the Conli- 
 derer could read, could tranfcribe thefe Words 
 into his Book, and not feel that the Meaning 
 and Intent of them was to lay the Force of 
 Cuftom and Education quite out of the Cafe, 
 and to bring the Quedion to reft upon the ori- 
 ginal Evidence of the Refurredion at the firft, 
 before Cuftom or Education could pofiibly 
 have any Influence. It is hard to account for 
 his Miftake, but n:iiftake he does, and goes on 
 for a Page or two together with great Tri- 
 umph, reafoping againft this Phantom of his 
 own railing. "Jhen^ fays he, every Story that 
 has gained Credit in the World, as this has done^ 
 is aljo true 3 and concludes with this wife Say- 
 ing, believing Uruth for Compafjfs Sake is no 
 more meritorious than believi?2g Error, But he 
 has been fo far aftiamed of this Blunder, as to 
 drop the whole Paffage, and his own Reafon- 
 ing upon it, in his new Edition. 
 
 The Coniiderer (p. 5.) fays, 'tis argued the 
 Apojiles were fincere, therefore what they re^ 
 ported was true. He does not indeed diredily 
 charge the i\uthor of the T!ryal with arguing 
 thus; but whomfoever he means to charge, 
 he ftiows plainly, that he never underflood the 
 Ufe or Force of the Argument, drawn from 
 theTopic of Sincerity; which is never applied to 
 
 prove 
 
(6) 
 
 prove that the f^ncere Reporter delivers nothing 
 but Truth ; for he may be, and often is, im- 
 pofed on himfelf ; but is ufed merely to fhow, 
 that he is not a Deceiver himfelf, and ading 
 with a 'Defign to impofe on others. The Con- 
 fiderer has v^ith great Succefs encountered the 
 Miflake, w^hich he imputes to fomebody or 
 other ; but the only Thing he has made clear, 
 is, that he did not know what he was writing 
 about. But fome kind Friend pointed out this 
 Miftake, and it difappears upon the new 
 Edition. 
 
 The next Inftance of this kind, with which 
 I Ihall trouble the Reader, will hardly pafs 
 for a Miflake only. Whatever it is, it has re- 
 ceived the Approbation of the Co72fidercrs fer- 
 cond Thoughts, and found a Place in his new 
 Edition. 
 
 The Author of the Trial, or the Perfori 
 defigned by B in the Trials repeats an Ob- 
 ^dion, which Ay the Pleader againft the Re- 
 furredlion had inliiled on. There is (fays i?, or 
 the Author of the Trial) but one Obfervation 
 more, which the Gentleman (i.e. A the Ob- 
 iedor to the Rellirredlion) made under this 
 Head, Jefus, he fays, referred to the Autho- 
 rity of ancient Prophecies to prove, that the 
 Mefiras was to die and rife again. Tioe ancient 
 Books referred to are extant, and no fuch Pror- 
 phecies^ he fays, are to be found. Now whether 
 the Gentleman, (i. e. the- Objedor) can find 
 
 thcje 
 
 3 
 
ihofe Prophecies or no^ is not material to th 
 prejeiit ^lejlion^. 
 
 Is it not manifeft to Sight, that thofe Words, 
 " the ancient Books referred to are extant, 
 <f and no fuch Prophecies to be found," ex- 
 prefs the Senfe and Opinion of the Objedor to 
 the Refurredion ? But the Confiderer charges it 
 to the Author of the T'ryal as his own Senti- 
 ment, which he could not have done had he 
 quoted the Paffage fairly. For this Reafon he 
 has altered it, and left out all the Words which 
 exprefsly refer the Opinion to the Objedor. 
 His Quotation ftands thus, — 'The Author of the 
 Trial "^ (or Mr. B') fays that though Jefus re- 
 ferred to the Aatho?ity of the ancient Prophe- 
 cies to prove that the Meffias %vas to die and 
 rife again \ and that though the ancient Books 
 ' rejerred to are extant^ and no fuch Prophecies 
 to be founds ^whether the Prophecies can be found 
 or no^ it is not material to the prefent ^eftion, 
 
 I fliall leave the Confdcrers fair Dealing to 
 be tried upon a Comparifon wdth the Fafl'age, 
 as it ftands in the Tryal^ and as it- is tranfcribed 
 into his Anfwer : And let him account to his 
 Readers, as he can, for having fo grofsly im- 
 pofed on them. 
 
 The only Thing here properly to be charged 
 
 . on the Author of the Tryal^ is expreffed in 
 
 thofe Words, whether the Gentleiiian (i, e. the 
 
 Objedor) can find thofe Prophecies or m^ is not 
 
 ^ Tryalj p 30.. ^ Fird Edit. p. 20. ^ Third Edic. 
 p. 13. 
 
 material 
 
( 8 ) 
 
 material to the prejent ^ejlion. I think this is 
 faid very juftly 3 for fiirely Believers are not to 
 wait for the Evidence of Prophecy, 'till Infi^ 
 dels can or will fee it : and therefore whe- 
 ther the Gentleman (the Objedlor) could find 
 the Prophecies or no, was not material -, and 
 further, v/hether he could or not find the Pro- 
 phecies, it was not material to the prefent ^le- 
 JIw?7. The prefent Queftion related to the 
 Truth of the Refurreftion, confidered merely 
 as a Matter of Fad : And as Fads m.ufi: be 
 proved, not by Prophecy, but by hiflorical Evi- 
 dence, it was impertinent to talk of Prophecy, 
 when the Enquiry concerned a mere Fad 
 only. 
 
 But the Co?ifideref\ for want of Difcernment, 
 or fomething elfe, fays, // is granted the Gof^ 
 pel Hiftorians fiiggcfl there are Pi'Ophecies^ 
 "which are not to be found in the Books they re- 
 fer to ; but this is faid 7iot to be material. He 
 leaves out the Words, to the prefent ^ejlion^ 
 and o;oes on : Stra?7^e ! is it not materiaL isohe-- 
 ther what the Eroangelifls fay be true or falje? 
 Whether this is a true or falfe Infinuation to 
 countenance the Hifory ? whether through Igno- 
 rance they imagijied there were Prophecies which 
 there were 7iot^ and fo were deluded"? and whe- 
 ther through Defign they fuggcjied there were^ 
 and fo deceived others ^ ? All this is very well ; 
 but before the Cojfiderer can be entitled to the 
 
 ^ FirftEdir. p 21. Third Edit, p. 14. 
 
 full 
 
(9 ) 
 
 full Merit of it, he mull (hew what he is 
 doing, and whom he means to confute. He 
 appears to me to be hunting down nothing but 
 a very great Blunder of his own. 
 
 The Objedtor to the Truth of the Refur- 
 redlion fays, {'Tryal, p. 14.) In other Cafes 
 the Rvidence fupports the Credit of the Hflory^ 
 but here the Evidence itfef is prefumed only upon 
 the Credit which the Hijtory has gained. The 
 Confiderer quotes the Words, and introduces 
 them in this Manner, '' 'Tis true that in 
 ^"^ other Cafes ^ &c^, and refers the Reader to 
 the Tryal', as if the Words produced exprefled 
 the Senfe of the Author of the l^?yal himfelf. 
 The Cojjfderer was made fen fible of this Mi- 
 ftake, and tho' the Paffage ffiU ftands, and very 
 improperly, in his nev/ Edition ; yet he has ta- 
 ken fome Care to cover the Blunder, by drop- 
 ping the Reference to the I'ryaL 
 
 But let us fee in other Inftances how fairly 
 the Confiderer deals. 
 
 The Author of the "tryal^ to fliew that tha 
 yews, in guarding tlie Sepulchre, betrayed a fe- 
 cret Convidion of the Truth of the Miracles, 
 performed by Cbriji in his Life-time fays, 
 
 Tryal, p. 3S. The Confiderer quotes 
 
 For had they been per- thele Words thus : 
 
 fuaded that he wrought They being perfua- 
 
 fio Wonders in his Life^ ded he performed no Mi- 
 
 1 think they would not racks in hh Life^ wer& 
 
 have C noi 
 
 * Page 8- Firft Edit, 
 
(lo) 
 
 havi heeit afraid of fee- 7wt afraid of feeing any 
 ing any done by him after done by him after his 
 his Death, Death ^ 
 
 Again, p. 39. 
 The Author of the Try- 
 al^ to fliew the Incon- 
 fiftency of Woolfton?^ 
 Scheme, fays, 
 
 Surely this is a mofl fin- Therefore that they 
 gular Cafe ; when the fjjould kill him, that his 
 People thought him a Death might -put an End 
 Prophet, the chief Priefls to all Pretenfions \ yet 
 (ought to kill him, and think him not fafe, vjhen 
 'thought his Death would he was dead is, I muft 
 put an End to his Pre- own, a 7ieedlefs and pre- 
 tenfions ; when they and poflerous Fear, and a 
 the People had difc over ed moft fingular Cafe, as the 
 him to be a Cheat, then Gentleman ( meaning 
 they thought him notfafe, the Author of the "Pryal) 
 even when he was dead, rightly exprefles it. 
 iut were afraid he fhoiild 
 prove a true Prophet, 
 and, according to his own 
 Preditlion, rife again. 
 
 By this artful Abufe of the Language of the 
 ^ryal, he makes the Reader imagine, that he 
 has convided the author out of his own 
 Mcuth. 
 
 Once more ; amongft other things amazing- 
 ly aBed, as he exprefles himfelf, the Confjder- 
 er ^ reckons this for one, that St. Matthew 
 
 ^ Firft Edit. p. ^8. Third Edit. p. 25?. ' Firft 
 Edit, p, 48. Third Edit. p. 38. - 
 
 JJmild 
 
( XX ) 
 
 Jhouldbe admitted as an Evidence in a Courts to 
 prove a FaB when he was abjent ^ and for 
 this amazing thing he refers the Reader to 
 p. 42. of the ^ryal, 
 
 I thought it impoffible, that the Author of 
 the ^ryal fliould give any Handle for fo im- 
 pertinent an Objedtion to the Credit of St. Mat- 
 thew, St. Matthew is an Hiftorian, and who 
 ever objefted to an Hiftorian, that he was not 
 prefent at all the Tranfadions he reports? 
 However I turned to the Iryal, p. 42. but 
 not one Word is there about, the Credit of 
 St. Matthew ; nor is it eafy to difcern what 
 the Confiderer refers to without fuppofin.g him 
 guilty of a great Blunder, and not to know 
 the Difference between an Hiftorian, and one 
 produced as an Eye-Witnefs. 
 
 The Author of the T'ryal objedls to the Cre- 
 dibility of the Story made by the Guards of 
 the Sepulchre, becaufe their own Relation 
 fliews they were afleep, when the Things they 
 related happened. And to this Purpofe he fays, 
 1 would ajk the Gentleman whether he has any 
 Authorities in Point ^ to fiew that ever any 
 Man was admitted as an Evidence in any Court ^ 
 to prove a FaB which happened when he was 
 ajleep ? This, I fuppofe, muft be the Paflage, 
 upon the Strength of which the Author of 
 the I'ryal is made a Party to the Objedion 
 againft the Credit of St. Matthew, and it 
 (hews how well qualified the Confiderer is to 
 determine on the Credit of the Gofpel Hifto- 
 
 C z rians 
 
( I^ ) 
 
 rians, when he does not apprehend the plaineft 
 Thing relating to Evidence, what is neceffary 
 to give Credit to an Eye-Witnefs, and what to 
 an Hiilorian. 
 
 After thefe Inftances, there is little Reafon 
 to expect from this Hand a judicious or a fair 
 Anfwer to the 'TryaL 
 
 The Confiderer feems to me to have fet out 
 at firft, with a Defign only to write againft the 
 Credit of the Refurredion, as reported by the 
 Evangelifts ; and that it was an After-Thought, 
 and meant to give himfelf fome Air of Im- 
 portance, to work up his Book into an Anfwer 
 to the T^ryaL It is plainly a Piece of Patch- 
 Work, and has but little in it to entitle it to 
 be called an Aiifwer to the T'ryaL Has he 
 weighed the Arguments on both Sides of the 
 Queftion as ftated in the Tr>'j/, and ihewed 
 where the Author of the T'ryal either diffem- 
 bled the Force of the Objection, or failed in the 
 Anfwer to it? Nothing like it. He does not 
 fo much as pretend it. He has found an eafier 
 Method of making an Appearance of an An- 
 fwer to the Try ah fome Paffages taken inde- 
 pendently of the Argument of which they are 
 a Part, he has fingled out to furniih Matter 
 of Controverfy : but as thefe were too few 
 in Number to make a decent Appearance of 
 Quotations from a Book, which he profelTed 
 to anfwer -, he has taken the Liberty to ufe the 
 Language of the Tryal to his own Purpofe, 
 and has diftinguifhed it by Italics^ and referred 
 
 the 
 
( t3) 
 
 the Reader to the I'ryal^ even where the 
 Words by the Additions and Alterations made 
 by the Confiderer, are turned to a Senfe dired- 
 ly contrary to that, in which the Author of 
 the Tryal ufed them. And by this little Art 
 the Confiderer appears to an unwary Reader to 
 to be quoting and confuting the "Tryal of the 
 Witnejjes, 
 
 As much as the Confiderer has perverted, al- 
 tered, and mifapplyed the PaiTages he has ta- 
 ken from the Tryal, it is nothing in Compa- 
 rifon v/ith his Abuib of the Writers of the 
 New Teflament, whom he treats as Impoftors 
 and Cheats, and void even of Cunnino- to tell 
 their own Story plaufibly. 
 
 St. Matthew is charged with forging a Pro- 
 phecy ; and Matthew, Mark, and Luke, with 
 jraudulent Defigns ^ ; and again, there is Reajon^ 
 he fays, to fufpeB all the PredtBiofis of it (i, e. 
 the Refurred-ion) inferted in Matthew, Mark* 
 and Luke, to be Forgery ^ 
 
 St. Matthew has given an Account of guard- 
 ing and fealing the Sepulchre ; the other Evan- 
 gelifts fay nothing of it. Upon this the G?;/- 
 ftderer fays, they tell different Stories ^. How 
 fo ? does a Man who fays nothing of the Story 
 tell a different Story, or contradict the Story"? 
 Yes, this is the Confiderer's Logic, and he fays 
 exprefsly, in a like Cafe, St. ]o\m Jiiys not a Word 
 
 ^ Firft Edit. p. 28. 3T. Third Edit. p. 20. 2:? ^Firfl 
 97. Third Edit. p. 27. ^ ^ ' 
 
 of 
 
( 14) 
 
 (f ity but denies it alh. Upon this kind of 
 Reafoning, if it is Reafoning, the Cojifiderer 
 charges all the four Evangelifis with Forgery ; 
 and fuppofes that St. Matthew's Story being de- 
 teBed^ Mark and Luke tell another -y theirs be^ 
 ing alfo confuted^ John comes and tells a Story 
 d^erent from all the rejl : And this vehement 
 Charge is founded in this only, that Alark, 
 Liike^ and 'John fay nothing about it. 
 
 At this rate how eafily may all hiftorical 
 Fadts be confuted ? It is but %ing the Hifto- 
 ries are forged ; and it requires no great Head, 
 provided there be a good Face, to fay it of any 
 Hiftory in the World. But there will be an 
 Opportunity of examining this Fac5l of guard- 
 ing the Sepulchre, and the Confiderer's Rea- 
 foning upon it, in what is to follow. 
 
 But the Confiderer, not content to charge 
 the Evangelifts with Forgery, has, to impoie 
 on thofe who will rely on his Word, forged 
 Things for them. John the Baptift fays to the 
 Jews, think not 'to fay within your fehes^ we 
 \ave Abraham to our Father ; for I fay unto 
 you, that God is able of thefe Stones to raife up 
 Children to Abraham ^. Let us fee now how 
 the Confiderer reports this Paffage. His Words 
 are, Some believe that Abfurdities and Contra- 
 diBions are poffible to the Power of God-y he can 
 raife Children from the Loins of Abraham out 
 of the Stones of the Street \ He plainly faw 
 
 § FirftEdir. p. 32. Third Edit. p. 23. J Mat. iii. 9. 
 !FirftEdit. p.47- ThirdEdir. p. 37. 
 
 T that 
 
(15 ) 
 
 that the Paffage, as it flood in St. Matthew^ 
 afforded no Colour for his Abufe, and there- 
 fore he adds, from the Loins of Abraham. I 
 defire the Reader to confider whofe Forgery 
 this is. 
 
 At p. 67. of the firfl Edit, and p. 54. of 
 the third, there occurs one of the mofl extra- 
 ordinary Paflages that is any where to be found, 
 and fliews with what Confcience the Confiderer 
 applies Scripture to his Purpofe. He is treating 
 of the Afcenfion, and endeavours to prove, 
 that the Accounts given of it by the Evange- 
 lifts do not agree. With refpedt to St. ^ohn^ 
 he fays, fohi leaves its at all Uncertainties^ 
 and fays ^ Jefus went^ like a ns:andring]Q,w^ with- 
 out bidding them Good'b)\ the Lord knows where! 
 To fupport this Remark lie refers to John xxi. 
 19, 20, &c. The Cafe there is briefly this : 
 Our Lord after his Refurredlion foretells to 
 iPeter, by what Death he fiall glorify God. St. 
 Peter enquires, what was to become of St. John? 
 Our Lord fays, if I will that he tarry 
 till I come, what is that to thee ? Follow thou 
 me^ i. e. What is it to you what becomes of 
 him ? Do you follow the Example I have ie,t 
 youj and glorify God by your Death. One 
 may fometimes lee what Handle People take 
 to mifreprefent Scripture j but in this Inflance 
 it is difficult to difcern what could lead to this 
 wild Conceit. Could it be the Word follow'^ 
 Follow me ; did the Confiderer fuppofe him to 
 mean wandrino:; and ramblins; ovc£ the World ? 
 
 It 
 
{i6) 
 
 It can be nothing elfe. But does he fuppofe 
 that no Difciple can follow his Mailer, but 
 by taking a Journey with him ? I apprehend 
 the ConfJerer to be a Follower of Wooljlon and 
 the Moral Philofopber^ but I never enquired 
 how far he travelled with them. 
 
 Thefe Inftances, w^hich I have feledled from 
 many of the fame Kind, will fliew, how 
 confiderable and how fair an Adverfary this 
 Gentleman is. I have brought them in one 
 View, that they might not ftand in the way, 
 and divert us from attending to his Reafoning 
 againft the Truth of the Refurredtion. 
 
 II. 
 
 Before I come to the Points, which more 
 immediately affefl: the Evidence of the Refur- 
 redion, I iball take Notice of one Remark 
 which the Confiderer has dropt at the Clofe of 
 his Introdudion, and which relates to the Cre- 
 dit of Revelation in general. 
 
 It had been obferved in the T'ryal^ " thatReve- 
 *^ lation is by the common Confent of Mankind 
 " the very befl Foundation of Religion, and 
 " therefore every Impoftor pretends to it ^T 
 In anfwer to which the Conjiderer fays, I con- 
 ceive that which is the Foundation of any^ ?nuch 
 kfs of every falfe Religion ^ caiinot be the Foun- 
 dation of the true ^ What poor Sophiftry is 
 this ! Cannot this great Confiderer fee the Dif-- 
 
 l Tryal p. ir. ^Firft Ed. p. 17." Third Ed. p. 9. 
 
 ference 
 
( ry) 
 
 fererice between a real and a pretended Foun-*' 
 dation ? Let him try it in his own fiivourite 
 Virtue, Sincerity. Sincerity is by common 
 Confent the very bed Foundation of a good 
 Character, and therefore all Knaves pretend to 
 it. Will the Coijfiderer in this Cafe fay, that 
 which is the Foundation of every bad Chara- 
 d:er, cannot be the Foundation of a good one ? 
 It is to no Purpofe to controvert fuch Points ; 
 and I think this Paflage from the Tryal was 
 produced, only to give the Confiderer an Op- 
 portunity of entring into his darling common 
 Place of abufing Revelation, and drawing to- 
 gether what has been retailed an hundred times 
 over by all the little Traders in Infidelity, and 
 has been as often anfwered to the Satisfaftion 
 of all fober Enquirers. 
 
 The firft Point that more diredlly affeds the 
 Credit of the Refurredion, is the Nature and 
 Quality of the Evidence. The Confiderer be- 
 gins with complaining grievoufly, that all the 
 Evidence is on the Side of the Refurredtion, 
 and that he can find none again ft it ^. And 
 this he thinks is a very hard Cafe upon him. 
 If the Rejiwreclion^ fays he, he a Fraud or the 
 Evide?ice forged^ what Books have we to prove 
 it fo^? This is indeed a hard Cafe. But if 
 he fhould take it into his Head to prove that 
 Ccefir was not killed in the Senate-h'oufe, hq 
 
 ^ Firft Edir. J). 7. Third Edit. p. 5-. ^ Firft Edic. 
 
 p. 9. Third Edir. p. 
 
 D might 
 
( i8 ) 
 
 might begin with the fame Complaint ; for alt 
 the Evidence would be on one fide, and all 
 againft him. 
 
 But he imagines there was anciently a 
 great Stock of Evidence againft the Truth- 
 of the Refurreftion, but that it has been 
 unhappily loft or deftroyed. 'T'is certaiyi^. 
 he fays^ Booh have been wrote- by Porphyry, 
 Celfus, and others^ which contained what the 
 Chrijlians thought were bejt anjwered by Jli fling 
 and burning. It is well known Jrom fome Frag^ 
 ments of them in Origen, thaJ: they contradi^ed 
 what is related in the Evangelijls ^ Who fur- 
 nifhes the Conjiderer with his Learning, I know 
 not 3 but whoever he is, he has cheated him. 
 abominably. Fragments of Porphyry and &/- 
 fus in Or i gen I why Origen was dead before 
 Porphyry fet Pen to Paper. When Origen an- 
 Iwered Celjiis, Porphyry could not be above fix- 
 teen Years of Age, and not above twenty or 
 twenty one when Origen died. I imagine by 
 the Order in which he places them, that he 
 took Porphyry to be older than Celjiis, and that 
 Origen having wrote againft Celjiis^ could not 
 but take notice of Porphyry too. But there 
 was indeed about an hundred Years between 
 Celfus and Porphyry, 
 
 Porphyry and Celfus, he fays, cojitradiBed 
 what is related in the Eva?igeltfis ; and fo does 
 the Confiderer too j but what then ? Is the Cre- 
 
 ^ Firfl Edit. p. 8. Third Edit. p. 5. 
 
 dit 
 
( XP) 
 
 ^dit of any Hiftory the woife, becaufe it is 
 wantonly contradid:ed, without Evidence or 
 Authority of any Sort to fupport the Contra- 
 didtion ? The Conjiderer^ I fufped:, means to 
 introduce Celjia and Porphyry^ as Witneffcs 
 againft the Hiftory of the Gofpel. If he does, 
 he is miftaken. They were juft fuch Witnef- 
 fes againft the Gofpd as he is ; and for Want 
 of Evidence to contradidl the Evangelifts, they 
 were forced to rely upon the Dilagreements, 
 which they fuppofed were to be found in the 
 feveral Accounts given by the Evangelifts. 
 
 Had there ever been good Evidence againft 
 the Gofpel Hiftory, it could not have been 
 loft in Celjus\ Time. For Celjlis lived at no 
 great Diftance from the Apoftolic Age ; at a 
 Time when all Religions were tolerated but the 
 Chriftian ; when no Evidence was ftifled, no 
 Books deftroyed, but thofe of Chriftians. And 
 yet Celfiis laboured under the fame Want of 
 Evidence, as Wooljion and his Auxiliaries, and 
 had the Gofpel only to fearch (as Origen more 
 than once obferves) for Evidence againft the 
 'Gofpel. A ftrong Proof that there never had 
 been Books of any Credit in the World, that 
 queftioned the Gofpel Fads, when fo fpiteful 
 and fo artful an Adverfary as Celjus made no 
 life of them. 
 
 Celjus admits the Truth of Chrifl'?, Miracles. 
 The Difference between him and Origen lie? 
 in the Manner of accounting for them ; the 
 vone afcribing them to the Power of God, the 
 
 D z other 
 
( zo) 
 
 ether to the Power of Magic. So that if the 
 Cojifiderer will Hand to the Evidence of his own 
 Witnefs, the Queftion will not be, whether 
 the Miracles are true in Fad: (for that is grant- 
 ed on both Sides) but whether the Truth of 
 the Miracles infers the divine Authority of the 
 Performer? Now can.it be fuppofed that Gf/- 
 Jus would have admitted the Miracles of Chriji 
 as real Fads, had he not been compelled to it 
 by the univerfal Confent of all Men in the Age 
 he lived? 
 
 But why does the Confidejrr complain for 
 Want of the Affiflance of Celfm^ and lead his 
 Readers to imagine that the Books of Celjm 
 were deftroyed becaufe they could not be an- 
 fwered ?. Does he not know that there is hardly 
 a plaufible Argument, produced by Woolfton or 
 himfelf, that is not borrowed from Celjus ? The 
 Truth is, that the Objedions of Ce/Jus are pre- 
 fervcd, and prelervcd in his own Language. 
 Onga-is Anfwer is not a general Reply to Cel-- 
 /us, but a minute Examination of all his Ob- 
 ledions, even of thofe which appeared to Or/- 
 gen moft frivolous 5 for his Friend Ambrojins, to 
 whom he dedicates the Work, defires him to 
 omit nothing. In order to this Examination 
 Origen ftates the Objedions of Celjus in his 
 own Wprds; and that nothing might efcape 
 him, he takes them in the Order in which 
 Celjus had placed them. Celfils then, as it hap- 
 pens, is fafe ; and the Coiifidercr needs not la- 
 jnent over him any more. 
 
 I ^ The 
 
f 21 ) 
 
 The Cafe of Porphyry is different; there Is 
 little remaining of him, but fome dilperfed 
 Fragments to be found in Eufebius and Jerom* 
 However this is certain from the Account re- 
 maining of him, that he had no Evidence 
 againft the Gofpel Hiftory, but what the Gof- 
 pel itfelf fiirnifhed ; in which he thought he 
 law, or pretended to fee, Contradiction. How 
 indeed fhould he have any other Evidence, 
 wh^n Celjks had no other, who hved fo much 
 nearer the Apoftolic Age, than he did ? 
 
 If the Conjiderer is laying in a Stock of Evi- 
 dence on the Antichriftian Side, he may put 
 down in his Lift the Emperor Julian and the 
 Halmiidic Books of the Je^ws^ together with 
 fome others, whofe Evidence, fuch as it is, is 
 ftill in being. Here then are Witneffes againft 
 the Apoftles, the moft . determined Enemies 
 that Chriftianity ever had ; and yet the Confi- 
 derer will find no Reafon to thank them for 
 their Evidence. They agree with Celfus in ad- 
 mitting the Miracles, and fo in truth ferve on- 
 ly to fupport that Caufe, which they meant to 
 deftroy. 
 
 The Cafe then {landing thus, the Confiderer 
 muft be content to follow the Steps of his 
 great Leaders, and fearch the Gofpel for Ob- 
 jedions againft the Gofpel. This is another 
 Hardfhip and the Subjed: of another Complaint, 
 If the Refurredlion be a Fraud or the Evide?7ce 
 forged y what Books have ^we to prove it fo? Can 
 it be expe^cd that an equitable Iffue Jhould be 
 
 obtained 
 
{ ^o 
 
 obtained from what may be fairly reafoned out 
 of their own Report ^ ? — If the Confiderer had 
 no better Hopes, why did he trouble himfelf 
 and the World ? Did he propofe, becaufe no- 
 thing could htfaiHy reafoned out of the Gof- 
 pel, to reafon fomething out of it unjairly'? 
 He has indeed done fo ; but did not, I fuppofe, 
 mean to give Warning of ii-. 
 
 But this is not the Whole of liis Com- 
 plaint. Can that, fays he, be ejiecmed a fair 
 Trval^ ivhere the Evidences are only on one fide 
 the ^teJiiGn\ &c. Why not? was IliII and 
 clear Evidence ever rejeded, becaufa there was 
 no Evidence to be produced againft it ? The 
 Cafe muft always be fo where the Truth is 
 notorious. The main Fadi:s relating to our Sa- 
 viour were as public and as well known in fu- 
 dcea and the neighbouring Countries, when the 
 -Gofpels were piibliilied, as the Coronation of 
 Henry VIII. was known in his Time in Eng-- 
 land', and if the Confderer has a Mind to call 
 that Fad in Queftion, he will find the Wit- 
 neffes all on one fide. 
 
 He goes on. "to fid the Truth of a Cafe by 
 the Tejlimony of partial Evidence combined 
 agalnjl it^ mujl be owned to be a dificult 
 Tajk \ 
 
 ^ Firft Edit. p. 9. Third Edir. p. 6. ' Firft Edit, 
 p. 7. Third Edir. p. 5. [ Eirft Edit. p. 9. Third 
 EdiC. p. 6. 
 
 la 
 
( ^3 ) 
 
 In the firft Place, how does he know the 
 Witneffes are partial? it is not a Thino- to be 
 taken for granted ; and Proof he brings none. 
 I imagine he fuppofes every Witnefs to be par- 
 tial to the Side for which he gives Evidence • 
 and if fo, then every faithful Witnefs to Truth 
 is a partial Evidence ; and the more fincerely 
 concerned for the Truth^ the more partial 
 (till. ^ 
 
 Secondly, Why does he call the Evangelifts 
 combined WitneiTes ? Is it not the Purpoie and 
 Drift of his whole Book, to fhew them con- 
 tradiding one another in almofl every Inftance ? 
 How then were they cor7ibined together ? Was 
 it part of their Agreement to contradifl: one 
 another ? Why did he not tell us what was 
 their View in combining together ? We know 
 that they were oppreffed by Jews and Hea- 
 thens, that they attefted the Truth ot the 
 Fads they delivered at the Peril of their Lives^ 
 daily, and at laft died miferably and violently 
 in Confirmation of the Truth. You fee what 
 their Combination tended to ! 
 
 Another Queftion the Confiderer has chofen 
 to debate, is about the Nature of Chrijf^ King- 
 dom. It very little concerns the Refurredlion, 
 but we muft take it in our Way. Many Pafla- 
 ges s are produced from the Hryal, all fpeakine 
 to this Effed; « That Jefia did not pretend 
 '' to a temporal Kingdom • and that he expound- 
 
 8 Firll Edit. p. 13. ^c. Third Edit. p. 7. 
 
 '' ed 
 
^^ ed the ancient Prophecies relating to the 
 " Mejjias^ in a different Manner than his 
 *« Countrymen did, who expeded a temporal 
 *' Prince for their Meflias." Among thefe 
 Quotations fome are taken out of the Mouth 
 of the Pleader againfl the Refiirredlion, and 
 afcribed to the Author of the "Tryal ; but this 
 happens fo frequently, that it would be endlefs 
 to take Notice of it, as often as it occurs. But 
 let us fee to v/hat Purpofe thefe Paffages are 
 produced. 
 
 It was a Part of JVoolJlo7is Scheme, to charge 
 Chriji with a fecret Defign of getting tempo- 
 ral Power, notwithftanding he openly dif- 
 avowed all fuch Pretenfions. In anfwer to this 
 the Author of the T^ryal (hewed, from the 
 uniform Charader and Conduct of Jefus, that 
 WoolJlon\ Notion was void of all Colour of 
 Support. Does the Covjiderer now enter into 
 the Argument, as it ftands in the T^ryal ? No. 
 But he takes the Pafiages independently of the 
 Argument, of which they are a Part; and 
 thinks that taken by themfelves they are not 
 true. Be it fo ; what then does it fignify to 
 the Fafl of the Refurredlion which he was todif- 
 prove ? Why all this Parade of many Qiiotations 
 from the T?^^'^/, lince they do not relate to the 
 Point in Difpute ? Some good Friend, I fu- 
 fpedl, had aiked the Confiderer thefe Queftions 
 which he could not anfwer -, and tho' he was 
 unwilling to part with fo many Quotations at 
 once, yet, to prevent the fame Qneft ions being 
 
 afked 
 
{ M ) 
 
 afked him again, he has in his new Edition 
 confeffed, that be this (i. e, the ancient Pro- 
 phecies of the Kingdom) mypcally or condi- 
 tionally true, it concerns not the ReJurre£lion. 
 Tet let not Truth be denied''. 
 
 Well then 5 the Credit of the Refurreaion 
 is fo far fafe. But he thinks it not true, that 
 Chriji declined temporal Power; and Truth 
 muft not be denied. He goes on to produce Pro- 
 phecies, that God ivoidd give him the Throne oj 
 his Father David, and fays, that he was called 
 King of Ifrael, Ki?2g of the Jews, and rebuked 
 not thofe ivho gave him the Title. And why 
 ihould he rebuke them, fince he claimed that^ 
 Title, and never denied that he was Ki?ig of 
 the Jews? But the Confiderer feems not to 
 know that there never was a Queftion between 
 Jews and Chriflians, whether Jefiis was, or 
 pretended to be, a temporal Prince. Both fides 
 agree that he neither was nor pretended to be. 
 But the Queftion was and is, whether, accord- 
 ing to ancient Prophecy, the Meffias was to be 
 a temporal Prince. Had not the Prophets de- 
 clared him to be a great Prince, there would 
 have been no Difpute whether he was to be a 
 temporal or a fpiritual Prince. Quoting there- 
 fore thefe Prophecies will not determine the 
 Queftion; for the Doubt is not. Whether there 
 are fuch Prophecies or no? But what is the 
 Meaning of them ? 
 
 » Third Edir. p. 8. 
 
 E The 
 
( ^^ ) 
 
 The Confiderer fays, that Jefus was commonty 
 called King of the Jews, o?ily he had not the 
 Kingdom -y therefore when he was about to Juffer 
 for it^ he found it was not of this World. 
 ^his Confefjion he prudently made at a proper 
 ^ime^ tho' it had not the Effedf to fave his 
 Lfe K After what has aheady appeared of 
 this Author's Spirit, it is in vain to complain 
 of the Impiety of this Charge of Fraud and 
 Deceit upon our Bleffed Saviour, There is one 
 to whom he muft anfwer for it. In the mean 
 time, how will he anfwer to reafonable En- 
 quirers the Difingenuity of concealing, that 
 yefiis^ fo far from denying himfelf to be the 
 Ki?jg of the Jews, confelTed it before Pilate ^ ? 
 And as to the Nature of this Kingdom he de- 
 clared it not to be of this World ^. With what 
 Confcience now does the Confiderer afk, how it 
 appears by any thing recorded^ that Jefus ex-, 
 plained away the kingly Ofice of the MeJJias ? 
 Explain it away I No. He infifted on it to the 
 Lift. But if he means to ask, whether 'Jefus 
 ever explained away the temporal Kingdom ; 
 it is manifeft from every Part and every Cir- 
 cumftance of his Life, that he never claimed 
 It. If he means to ask, whether Jejiis ever ex- 
 plained the Nature of the Kingdom ^'the Mefli- 
 as; what more is wanting than his Confeffion to 
 Pilate^ that he was King of the Jews ^ and that 
 
 " FirftEdir. p. 15. Third Edit. p. 8. 
 * Matt. xxix. II. Mark xv. 2. Luke xxiju 3. John 
 xviii. 37- '^ John xviii. 36. 
 
 his 
 
( ^7 ) 
 
 bis Kingdom 'was not of this World ? Was it 
 not fufticiently declaring, that the ancient Pro- 
 phecies, which foretold the Kingdom of the 
 Meffias, did not mean a temporal Kingdom ? 
 
 But if Chrijl did not pretend to temporal 
 Power, the Confiderer fays^ why was the Go- 
 vernment alarmed and Jefus looked on as a Perjon 
 dangerous to the State, who was the befi Friend 
 among the Jews the Roman Government had, to 
 preferve the People from enthufiaftic Seditions ? 
 If this be true, it was the worfi Policy in the 
 World for the Romans to put hi?n to Death ^ 
 The Conjiderer here has by chance deviated in- 
 to more Truth than he was aware of. Jejiis 
 was indeed the very Perfon proper to preferve 
 the People from enthufiaflic Seditions, and fp 
 far a Friend to the Roman Government. But 
 who told him the Roman Government was 
 alarmed? why he has it from the I'ryah, but 
 according to Cuilom has taken the Objedor's 
 Words, for the Words of the Author of the 
 TryaL And the Confiderer would not have 
 argued upon this Suppofition, had he attended 
 in the leaft to the Gofpel Hiftory. Where 
 does he read that the Roman Government was 
 alarmed, and thought Jefiis a Perfon dange- 
 rous to the State ? Where does he find that the 
 Roman Government perfecuted him to Death ? 
 The Jewijlj Government indeed did : but 
 Pilate came unwillingly into their Meafures, 
 
 ' Firft Edit. p. 14. Third Edit. p. 7. 
 
 E 2 and 
 
( a8 ) 
 
 and confented not to his Death, till overborn 
 by Clamour and Sedition. 
 
 What the Ccnfiderer had in view in this 
 confufed Difcourfe about Chriji'z Kingdom, I 
 cannot guefs. He feems to think J ejus under- 
 flood the Prophecies to relate to a temporal 
 Kingdom, and in confequence claimed it, and 
 that he did not renounce a Kingdom of this 
 Worlds till driven to it by Defpair and Necef- 
 fity. But where did he learn this Secret ? not 
 from the Gofpel Hiftory, nor yet from any 
 Enemies of the Gofpel, whether Jews or Hea- 
 thens ; who never have charged Jefus with 
 fetting up for temporal Power. The Jews 
 obie<5l to him the Want of temporal Power, 
 which they imagine their Meffias is to exercife 
 2n the fulleft Extent, but never accufe him for 
 pretending to it. One would imagine it im- 
 poffible for any one, who had read the four 
 Gofpels or any one of them, to entertain this 
 Conceit. 
 
 Look into the Gofpel ; every Page will 
 afford a Proof that J ejus, though he claimed 
 to be the King of the Jews foretold in the an- 
 cient Prophets, yet he difclaimed all temporal 
 Power and Greatnefs. When one of the 
 Scribes offered to become his Difciple, what 
 Encouragement did he find ? Poffibly this Scribe 
 fnight conceive Hopes of having a Share 
 in the temDoral Kin2:dom, which he and his 
 
 J. O ' 
 
 Countrymen expecTied. But our Lord unde- 
 
 f:eives him, and tells him., the 'Foxes have Holes^ 
 
 3 a?2d 
 
( ^9 ) 
 
 and the Birds of the Air hair Nefts, but the 
 Son of Man hath not where to lay his Head\ 
 
 When our Lord fent out his twelve Difcl- 
 pies, he orders them exprefsly to preachy Jay^ 
 ing^ the Kingdom of Heaven is at ha?id^. In 
 order then to eftablifh this Kingdom, wliat 
 Power does he give them ? were they to iffue 
 out Proclamations notifying that the vidorious 
 Prince was come, and calling upon all his Sub- 
 jeds to arm, and to attend him ? Nothing lefs. 
 He gives them Power againjl unclean Spirits^ 
 and to heal all Difeafes^, But as to their Con- 
 dition in this World, he tells them, they fhould 
 be brought before Governors ^ for his Sake, and 
 be hated of all Men ^ ; and advifes them for 
 their Safety, when perfecuted in one City to fee 
 to another ^. Are thefe Proofs of his claiming 
 temporal Power ? 
 
 In like Manner, and with like Commiffion, 
 he fent out the feventy Difciples. They re- 
 turn with great Joy and relate to him their 
 Succefs : Lord^ even the Devils are fubjeB to 
 us thro' thy Name, And he fid unto them^ I be- 
 held Satan as Lightni?2g^ fall from Heaven"^, You 
 fee it was the Kingdom of Satan he came to 
 deftroy, and not the Kingdom of Ccefar. 
 
 The Apoflles were in the fame Miftake with 
 the reft of their Countrymen, and expeded a 
 temporal Kingdom; and the Sons of Zebedee 
 
 " ^Matt. viii. 20. ^ Ibid. x.'y. '^ ;^ i. '^ if iZ. 
 ^ Mat. X. 22. ^y'23. "^ Luke X. 17, 18. 
 
 were 
 
. ( 30 ) 
 
 xvere early Solicitors to be firfl Miniflers. Our 
 Lord corredts their Error, and tells them his 
 Kingdom was a very different Thing from 
 the Kingdoms of the World. Te know that 
 they which are accounted to- rule over the Gen- 
 tiles, exercife Lordjhip over them — But Jo it 
 Jhall not he among you ; but whofoever would be 
 great among you, fiall be your Minijter ". 
 
 The Confiderer thinks no regard is to be 
 had to our Lord's Confeffion before Pilate, 
 Let us fee then whether he had not made the 
 fame Declaration to the Rulers of the Jews be- 
 fore, and when he was in no immediate Danger, 
 
 The Rulers of the Jews very well knew, 
 that Jefus claimed to be King of the Jews 
 foretold by the ancient Prophets; and being 
 poffefled with an Opinion that their wilhed for 
 King was to be a temporal Prince, they v/ere 
 greatly fcandalized at his Pretenfions to be 
 King of the Jews, in whom they could difco- 
 ver no Power or Inclination to deliver them 
 from the Roman Yoke. They determine there- 
 fore to put him to the Proof, and to force 
 him either to declare againft the Roman Govern- 
 ment, or to renounce his Pretenlions to the 
 Kingdom of IJraeL The Phatijees and He^ 
 rodians addrefs him with profound Refpect, 
 the better to cover their enfnaring Queflion:. 
 Majler^ we know that thou art true^ and teach^ 
 eji the Way of God in Truths neither carejl- 
 
 "Mark x. 42, 43. 
 
 thou 
 
( 3i ) 
 
 thou for any Matty for thou regardejl riot the 
 Perjbn of Men, T'ell us therefore "what thinkefl 
 thou ? Is it lawful to give Tribute to Ca;far or 
 not''? Had our Lord declared againft the Ro-^ 
 man Power, they would have had Matter of 
 AccLifation againft him. Had he declared for 
 it, he would in their Opinion have renounced 
 his Claim to be King of the JewSy and given 
 them an Opportunity of inflaming the People 
 againft him, who could not bear the Thought, 
 that the King of the Jews (hould be lubjecft 
 to the King of the Romans, But he perceived 
 their Wickednefs and faidy Shew me the Tribute 
 Money, When they ftiev/ed a Penny, he ask- 
 ed, Whofe is this Image and Super fcription ? 
 They fay unto him CaefarV. Then faith he unto 
 theniy Render therefore unto Casfar the Things, 
 that are CoeCarV, and unto God the Things that 
 are God'^. Could a clearer Anfwer be given 
 to fliew, that the Kingdom to be fet up by 
 God, and the Kingdom of Cc^far were confift- 
 ent together, without interfering with each 
 other, lince the fews might pay Obedience to 
 both, without offending either? And if the 
 Kingdom to be fet up by God according to an- 
 cient Prophecies, was to fiibmit to the King- 
 dom of C^/^r, it is manifeft it could riot be a 
 temporal Kingdom; nor the Prince of that 
 Kingdom fuch a vid:orious Prince as the Scribes 
 and Pharifees expeded. Is not then this An- 
 
 • Mat» x\\\. i(), 17. 
 
 fwer 
 
{ 3^ ) 
 
 fwer to the Pharifees and Herodians the veiy 
 lame Thing with our Lord^s Confeffion before 
 Pilate^ That he was indeed King of the Jews^ 
 but his Kingdom was not of this World. 
 
 I will refer the Reader but to one Paffage 
 more on this Head. In Matt, xxi. our Lord, 
 in a Parable, fhews the Rulers of the Jews^ 
 that the Kingdom they expeded, would, for 
 their wicked and obftinate Behaviour, be taken 
 from them : an hard Leilon for them to learn, 
 who expected to conquer the World, when 
 once their Kingdom was come ! It is faid ex- 
 prefsly, f 45. that the chief Priefts and Phari- 
 fees perceived that he Jpake of them^ and fought 
 to lay Hands on him. 
 
 The Author of the T'rjal had faid that 
 "Jefiis fell into Difgrace with his Countrjmien, 
 and fufFered for oppofing their Notions of a 
 vidorious Meffias, To which the Confiderer 
 fays, / believe it cannot be proved that Jefus 
 ■fuffered jor this Caufe^. Very concife! but 
 what Conceit mufl he have of his own Opi- 
 nion, if he thinks it ought to pafs without 
 Proof for a fufficient Anfwer to fuch Evi- 
 dence ? 
 
 The next Queflion llarted by the Confiderer 
 is, " Whether Chrijl foretold his own Death 
 " and Refurredtion 'I ; and he is willing to 
 think he did not 5 but for no other Reafon that 
 
 p Firft Edit. p. 13. Third Edir. p, 7. ^ Firft Edic. 
 
 p. 20. Third Edit. p. 14. 
 
 I can 
 
( 33 ) 
 
 I can find, but becaufe the Author of the 
 ^ry^/ afferts that he did. The Confiderer had 
 obierved before, that the Conqueji the Tryat 
 Jce7ns to have over Mr, Woolfton, was occafiojted 
 by his granting too much''', and he is determin- 
 ed to avoid this Fault, and to grant nothing. 
 lara not Jure, fays he, /te Jefus did foretell 
 his own Death and Refurreclion, only that the 
 Evangelijts fay he did , ?7or that he referred to 
 the Authority of ancient Prophecies, to prove that 
 the Meffias was to die and rife again, only that 
 Iread fo^. What does all this amount to? 
 Has he not manifeftly given up this Point to 
 the Author of the Tryal? for what did that 
 Author undertake more than to fliew from 
 the Evangeliils, that Chrift foretold his Death 
 and RefurreBtcn? and the Confiderer admits 
 that the Evangelifts indeed tell him fo. One 
 would think now the Difpute over. No : the 
 Confiderer will not take their Word. Well then ; 
 what Proof has he to the contrary ? None ; he 
 pretends to none ; but is determined not to believe 
 them. I admire at his Modefty in calling his Book 
 an Anfwer to the ?>)WonIy; he might with 
 as good Reafon have called it, an Anfwer to 
 all that ever w^as, or ever v/ill be publifhed in 
 Defence of Chriftianity ; for all depends on 
 the Credit of the Gofpel Hiflory. 
 
 But he fays, the Evangeliils report Prophe- 
 
 "" Firll and third Edit, p, lo. ^ Firfl: Edit. p. 20. 
 
 Third Edit. p. 14. 
 
 cies 
 
{ 34 ) 
 
 cies which ivere never delivered ; and this he 
 proves from the Conceffion of the Author of 
 the l^ryah Bat this Piece of Management 
 (hardly to be called by fo foft a Name as a 
 Miitake) has been taken notice of before, ta 
 which I refer the Reader s 
 
 Let us then examine this Queftion, Whether 
 Chriji foretold his Death and Refurre6lion ? 
 
 1. The Confderer maintains that the chief 
 Priefts and Rulers of the Jews never heard of 
 any Prediction of the Death and RefurrecSion 
 of Chriji, and hence infers, that they had no 
 Pretence for guarding the Sepulchre, and con- 
 fequendy that the Account given by St. MaU 
 thew of guarding and fealing the Sepulchre is 
 all Forgery ^. 
 
 2. lie admits that Cbrijl five times fore- 
 told his Death and Refurredion to his Difci- 
 ples, and that in fo plain a Manner, that it 
 was impoffible for them not to underftand him 
 clearly. But it appearing in the Hiftory of 
 the Gofpel, that they did not underftand him^ 
 he infers there were no fuch Prediftions, but 
 that they are mere Forgery ^. 
 
 As he allows the five Prediflions to the 
 Difciples to be clear and exprefs, there is no- 
 thing wanting under this Head, but to account 
 for what is faid in the Gofpel, that the Difci- 
 
 ' Page 6, &c. ^ Firft E<iir. p. 32. 40. - Third 
 Edit. p. 24. 31. !Firil Edit, p, 32. ^-Third Edit. 
 
 p. 24.. 
 
 pies 
 
( 35 ) 
 
 pies did not underftand what was fa id to them, 
 which will be confidered in due Time. 
 
 As to the Jews^ whether they had any 
 reafon to apprehend that Chnjl might proba- 
 bly prove a true Prophet, and rife from the 
 dead, muft appear not only from the Pre- 
 didtions faid to be given them, but from what 
 they could not avoid knowing, the m.any Mira- 
 cles done in his Life Time ; for it is the Cha- 
 railer of the Perfon in this Cafe, that gives 
 Weight to the Predidion. The Author of 
 the T^ryal put it on this Foot, " It muft ne- 
 ^' ceifarily be that they had difcovered fome- 
 <^ thing in the Life and Adions of Chrijly 
 ^' which raifed this Jealoufy, and made them 
 «« liften to a Prophecy in this Cafe, which in 
 <' any dther they would have defpifed. — For 
 " had the Jews been perfaaded that he per- 
 '' formed no Wonders in his Life, they would 
 *' not have been afraid of feeing any done 
 .'' by him after his Death ^." 
 
 The Conjiderer, in Anfwer to this Reafon- 
 ing, reforts in the firft place to his ufual 
 Charge, that the Account given of the Appre- 
 henfion the Jews were under, and their Con- 
 cern to guard the Sepulchre, is all Forgery. 
 But out of this forged Account he has taken 
 two Words, which pafs with him for authen- 
 tic Hiftory. The Jews fay unto Pilate, Sir, 
 *we remeniber that Deceiver faid ^ while he was yet 
 
 F 2 
 
 live 
 
(36) 
 
 alive ^ After three Days I will rife again. Now 
 the Conjiderer fays, the Jews never applied 
 to Pilate-, but the whole Relation, every 
 
 Word of it is a Cheat-- excepting only the 
 
 . Words that Deceiver -, and from thence he 
 argues thus. The chief Priejis and Pharifees 
 believed fejiis to be a Deceiver^ if njoe take their 
 Opinion from their ow?i Words ^ viz. We remem^ 
 ber that Deceiver Jaid ^. From this lame, 
 crippled, and at bed mifreprefented Piece of 
 .Hiftory, the Co?i/iderer drav/s a Confequence 
 which is to fland againft the united Authority 
 of all the Gofpels, viz. that the Jews were per- 
 fuaded he pejforraed no Wonders in his Life^, 
 
 What now is to be done ? mufl I tranfcribe 
 great Part of the Gofpels to confute fo fhame-, 
 lefs an AfTertion ? I would hope that no Chri- 
 ftian is fo unacquainted with the Hiilory of 
 Chri/lj as to want any Afliflance in this Cafe. 
 But however, to give Satisfaftion to all, who 
 are v/illing to receive it, I will produce fome 
 few Paflages, in which the Scribes, Pharifees, 
 and chief Prieils themfelves, v/ere either Eye- 
 witncfTes of the Miracles, or appear fully ac- 
 quainted with them. 
 
 Upon our Lord's firft Appearance, and heal-- 
 i?2g all manner of Dijeafes among the People^ 
 his Fame went through all Syria — a?2d there foU 
 
 2 Firft Edit, p^ 37, and to the fame Purpofe, Third 
 Edir. p. 29. 
 ? Firft Edit. p. 38. Third Edit. p. 25?. 
 
 lowed 
 
f 37 ) 
 
 lowed him great Multitudes of People from Ga- 
 lilee^ and from Decapolis^ and from ferufalem^ 
 dndfromjudcea^ and from bey o?id Jordan K Is 
 it poflible when all the Country was thus 
 alarmed with the Miracles, that the chief 
 Prieils and Rulers fliould be the only Perfons 
 unacquainted with them ? Many of his Mi- 
 racles were performed in public Places of Re- 
 fort, in Prefence of the Scribes and Pharifees^ 
 and tkey took Counfel againji hi?n, ho^u they might 
 defroy him ^. But fo far were they from de- 
 nying that Miracles were wrought, that they 
 endeavour to account for the^^; this Fellow 
 doth not caji out Devils, but by Beelzebub the 
 Prince of the Devils K In the ve^^^emple it- 
 felf the Blind and the Lame came tohiim, and he 
 healed them "". And it follows ir^mediately, 
 when the chief Priejls a?id Pharifi c$ Jaw the 
 wonderful T'hi?2gs that he did — they%ire fore dif- 
 pleafed. When our Lord healed tl\ /'^;lind Man, 
 who fat begging by the Way, the P$'irifees had 
 the blind Man before them and Ms Parents 
 alfo, and examined them flridly ^s to his 
 miraculous Cure ". And after all their Enquiry 
 they were forced to admit the Truth of the Mi- 
 cles, however unwilling they were to admit 
 the divine Power of Jefus. The Scribes wCx^e 
 WitnefTes to the Cure wrought upon one fick 
 of the Palfy, in the Prefence of a great Mul- 
 
 ' Macr. iv. 23, ^c. ^ Mm. xii. 10, ^c. ^Ib. 
 
 ^24.. .™ Matc.xxi. 14.. . =John ix. 
 
 titude. 
 
{ 38 ) 
 
 titude "". When Lazarus was raifed from the 
 Dead, the chief Priefts and Pharifees debate 
 in Council, what was to be done upon it : 
 M^hat do we^ for this Man doth many Mi- 
 racles " '? 
 
 It would be endlefs to produce all the Pafla- 
 ges of Scripture that fpeak to the fame Pur- 
 pofe. Thefe already cited will enable the Rea- 
 der to apply the reft, which fo frequently 
 occur. 
 
 The Qu^eftion now is, What Effedl thefe 
 Miracles had upon the Scribes and chief Priefts ? 
 That they were extremely alarmed appears 
 plainly, and that they fought his Life, as the 
 only Meti?^^. to ftop the Influence he gained 
 over the Paople, is notorious. But were they 
 clear of all Doubts themfelves ? Had they no 
 Mifgivings of Mind, that he might poiTibly 
 be what he; pretended to be ? Coniider their 
 Behaviour ifter they had fecured his Perfon, 
 and carried him before Pilate: They accufe 
 him of rrjany Things, and among the reft, of 
 Sedition ugainft the Ro?nan Government. Had 
 they believed it themfelves, what need of fur- 
 ther Examination ? What Occafion had they 
 to enquire of a Cheat and an Impoftor, whether 
 he was the Chrifl of God, or no? And yet the 
 chief Priefts made this Enquiry with the ut- 
 moft Concern and Solemnity : I adjure thee 
 by the living God^ that thou tell us^ whether 
 
 ' f M rk ii . ^. " John xi. 4.7. 
 
 thou 
 
( 39 ) 
 
 thou be the Chriji the Son of God"", Had the 
 chief Prieft no Sufpicion, no Jealoufy that he 
 might be the Chriji ^ when he made this fo- 
 lemn Adjuration to him ? Would he have ufed 
 the fame Form to the fame Purpofe to Barab- 
 bas or any other common Malefador? The 
 Thing fpeaks itfelf, and fhews the Anxiety of 
 Mind under which the chief Prieft aded, and 
 how far he was from being fatisfied, that Je- 
 Jus was an Impoftor and a Deceiver. 
 
 When our bleffed Lord hung upon the Crofs, 
 the chief Priefts and Elders recovered Spirit 
 and faid, — he faved others^ him/elf he cannot 
 Jave P. He faved others ! What ! do they mean 
 that he never wrought any Miracles, as the 
 Confiderer fuppofes ? Quite other wife, they ac- 
 knowledge his Miracles by which others were 
 faved, referring ('tis probable) to his raifing the 
 Dead \ but they imagined now they had found 
 the Extent of his Power, and that he coidd not 
 jave himfelf. It will perhaps be faid, this was 
 Mockery. Be it fo ; there was no Mockery 
 m faying; he faved others-, the Infult is expref- 
 fed in the other Part, himfelf he cannot Ji2ve. 
 They go on with their Mockery ; if he be the 
 King oj Ifrael, let him 720%o come down from the 
 Crofs. But why all this Triumph in being de- 
 livered from the King of Ifrael ? had they ne- 
 ver fufpeded that he might polTibly prove fo 
 
 ^ Matt, XX vi. (5 3. P Ibid, xxvii. 41. 
 
 indeed 
 
f 40 ) 
 
 indeed, what Occafion fox^ this fudden Joy and 
 Exaltation ? 
 
 But this Mirth did not laft long. Vv^hen 
 Chriji died, Nature feemed to die with him y 
 there was Darlmefs over all the Earthy the Sim 
 was darkeiied and the Veil of the I'emple was 
 rent in the, Midfi'^. The Ro?nan Centurion 
 was fo afFedled with it, that he glorified God 
 faying^ This was a 7-ighteous Man. And all the 
 People that came together to that Sights behold- 
 ing the Tihings which were done^ fmote their 
 Bfeafts and retwmed \ In what Manner the 
 chief Priefls and Scribes behaved on this Oc- 
 cafion, we are not told. Probably they with- 
 drew filently, unv/illing to difcover any Fear 
 or Apprehenfion before the People. But could 
 they be unaffeded ? If ever they had heard of 
 our Lord's Prophecy, that he would rife again, 
 could they help reniembring it now.? They 
 had feen him expire on the Crofs, but that was 
 no Eafe to their Minds in receding on the Pro- 
 phecy of his Refurredion ; for he had foretold 
 his Death and the Manner of it, as Vv ell as 
 his Refurredion. The firft Part they had feen 
 accompliflied, and had Reafon to fear the laft 
 would be ^o. 
 
 Lay thefe Things together: The chief 
 
 Priefts had been Witnefles of his Power to 
 
 work Miracles in his Life Time; they knew 
 
 *he claimed to be King of the Jews, they 
 
 ^ Luke xxiii. 44? 45^ ' ^' ^7i 4^» 
 
 knew 
 
(41) 
 
 knew he had owned to Pilate^ that he was 
 King of the Jews ; and under a moft folemn 
 Adjuration from the chief Prieft, even when 
 he was his Prifoner, he had confeffed that he 
 was the Chrijl the Son of God, and that they 
 fhould fee him again coming in Glory. They 
 had heard him even on the Crofs maintain his 
 Charad:er, and promife Paradife to the peni^ 
 tent Thief; they faw the Sun darkened, the 
 Veil of the Temple rent ; the Roman Guard at 
 the Crofs, and all the Spedators aftonifhed.— • 
 Surrounded with this amazing Scene, could 
 they defpife the Predidions of his Refurredlion ? 
 Could they remember them without great Ap- 
 prehenfions, that they might prove true ? Who- 
 ever can fuppofe it, not only contradifls the 
 exprefs Declaration of the Gofpel Hiftory, but 
 fhews himfelf to be but little acquainted with 
 the Sentiments of human Nature. 
 
 But here the Confiderer flops us again. He 
 fays, he finds 720 Account^ where or when fuch 
 public Prophecy was delivered before the Priefis 
 and PharifeeSy in any of the four Evangelifis ^. 
 But what if fuch Prophecies were delivered be- 
 fore others, and reported by Perfons of Credit, 
 to the chief Priefts and Pharifees, will not that 
 be fufficient ? He thinks not ; but all the Rea- 
 fon he has for thinking fo is, becaufe they fay 
 to Pilate, We remember that Deceiver faid^ while 
 he was yet alive ^ After three Days I will rife 
 
 » Firft Edir. p. 23. Third Edit. p. 16. 
 
 G aga!n\ 
 
(4i ) 
 
 iXgaln, Noiv, fays he, the Words^ we remem- 
 ber, fignify that they heard him fay fo. It is very 
 hard Work to be obliged to defend againft fuch a 
 Writer, not only common Senfe, but com- 
 mon Language. Where does he learn that the 
 Word remember is never ufed, but of Things 
 fpoken direftly to ourfelves? Cannot a Man 
 remember what he reads and what is re- 
 ported to him? The chief Priefts do not' fay, 
 We remember he faid TO us, but. We remember he 
 jaid^ while he was yet alive ; but to whom he 
 faid, or how it came to their Knowledge, they 
 do not fay. 
 
 The Confiderer thinks the Jews could not 
 poflibly underfland, what our Saviour faid of 
 the Sign of Jojzas^ to relate to his Refurredion. 
 I diflfer entirely with him 5 and though I do not 
 fuppofe our Saviour did intend it as a clear Pro- 
 phecy, to be underftood at the Time it was 
 fpoken ; yet the Words ufe^ came fo near to a 
 Defcription of a Refurredion, that if once the 
 Jews became at all apprehenfive of a Refur- 
 redion, they could not but apply our Saviour's 
 Words to it. But be this as it will; let us 
 examine whether the chief Priefts and Scribes 
 had not other Ways of coming to the Know- 
 ledge of what they affirm, that Jefus faid in 
 his Life Time, After three Days I will rife 
 again. 
 
 The Confiderer admits that our Lord did five 
 Times foretell to his Difcipjes, that he ihould 
 die and rife again the third Day. So plain 
 
 and 
 
(43 ) 
 
 and clear he takes thefe Predictions to be, that 
 he cannot believe there is any Truth in the 
 Gofpel, when it tells us, the Difciples under- 
 ftood them not. But though they did not un- 
 derhand the Meaning of the Prophecy, for 
 Reafons to be given hereafter, yet they under- 
 ftood the Language, or the Import of the 
 Words ; or elfe what did St. Peter (if he un- 
 deri-lood not the Words) reprove his Lord for, 
 when he foretold this Event ? If they under- 
 ftood the literal Senfe of the Words fpoken to 
 them, they might report them, and others un- 
 deritaud the Meaning, though they did not. 
 And thus at leaft, the chief Piiefls might com.e 
 to know, that J^jus had foretold his Refur- 
 re<fcion. 
 
 But the Confiderer feems to fuppofe that thefe 
 Predictions were private, given to the Apoftles 
 only, and that they were enjoined Secrecy; 
 and for the Sake of his Argument, he is wil- 
 ling for once to fuppofe the Apoftles to ad ho- 
 neftly, and to keep the Secret; and confe- 
 quently that the Report of thefe Prophecies 
 could not reach the chief Priefts. But his Rea- 
 foning is founded on two Miftakes; for firft it 
 does not appear that all the five Predictions 
 were made to the Apoftles only. Secondly, 
 it is plain in the Gofpel Hiftory, Secrecy was 
 not enjoined with refpedt to thefe Predidtions. 
 
 A little Attention to the Hiftory will clear up 
 thefe Fads. 
 
 We read in St, Luke of Chriji'% Difciples^ 
 
 G 2 before 
 
(44) 
 
 before ever he had chofen Apoftles ; and It is 
 faid exprefsly, Luke vi. 13. He called his 
 Difciples to him^ and out of them he chofe 
 twelve^ whom aljb he named j^pojiles. And at 
 jj" 17. they are diflinguifhed from the Com- 
 pany of Difciples^ who attend him. His 
 twelve Difciples or Apoftles are fent out to 
 preach, huke ix. i . Seventy other Difciples 
 are fent with like Commiffion, Ijuke x. i, 
 Thefe laft were Difciples, though not Apoftles. 
 This being the Cafe, there is no Reafon to 
 conclude, that when the Gofpel tells us, that 
 our Lord made any Declaration to his Difci- 
 ples, that fuch Declaration was made to the 
 Apoftles only. And it is obfervable, that when 
 the Evangelifts intend to diftinguifti the Apo- 
 ftles from other Difciples, they call them either 
 Apoftles^ or the Twelve^ and not fimply Dif-^ 
 ciples. Thus, Luke ix. i. When he had called the 
 twelve Difciples^ he gave them Power^ &c, 
 St. Matthew lixkewife denotes by the fame Cha-r 
 rader his twelve Difciples, x. i. and in the 
 following Verfe calls them Apojlles, In the 
 vi'^ of St. John the Diftindion is moft evi- 
 dent; at Hf 66. we read. From that '\ti?ne many 
 of his Difciples went back, and walked no more 
 with him. It follows; then faid Jefus unta 
 the T'welve, Will ye alfo go away ? The Dif- 
 ciples then prefent at our Lord's Difcourfe 
 were more, probably many more, than the Apo^ 
 ftles. It is not therefore neceffarily to be con^ 
 eluded, that, when our Saviour^ foretold bis 
 3 Refur-. 
 
(45 ) 
 
 Refurredion to his Dilciples, none were pre- 
 fent but the twelve Apoftles. 
 
 Let us now take the PredI6lions as they are 
 ranged by the Confiderer, The firft is made to 
 the Difciples^; the fecond only to Peter ^ 
 James, and Joh7i ' • the third to his Difciples'^ • 
 and the fourth and fifth were to the twelve 
 Apoftles only ^ And it is obfervable, that 
 all the Evangelifts who mention the fecond 
 Predidion, take Care to infoiin us, that it was 
 given to Peter, James, and John only 5 and all 
 who report the fourth and fifth, fay exprefsly, 
 it was given to the Twelve only. How comes 
 it then to pafs, that in reporting the firft and 
 third, they leave it at large, and tell us that 
 thefe Prediffions were made to the Difciples ? 
 Is there not Reafon to fuppofe, that they were 
 made to more than to the Twelve, who in the 
 other Inftances are diftinguiflied as the only 
 Perfons prefent? 
 
 The Confiderer obferves upon the third Pre- 
 didion, that St. Mark fays, he paffed through 
 Galilee, and would ?iot that any Man fiould 
 know it, for he taught his Difciples, "The Son of 
 Man is delivered, ^c.^andfljall rije the third 
 Day f. Upon which the Confiderer fays, Ob- 
 Jerve — the Reafon why Jefus defired ^Privacy 
 
 ''Matt. xvi. 13. 21, l^c, Markviif. 27. 31. Luke 
 ix. 18. 22. '^ Matt. xvii. I. 5>. Mark ix. 2. o. 
 
 Mart. xvii. 19. 22. Mark ix. 29. 31. « Matt. xx. 
 17, ^c. M^>rk X. 32, ^c. Luke xvii. 31, l^c. Mat, 
 xxvi. 20. 32. Markxiv. 17. 28. .^Markix. 30, esf^, 
 
 was^ 
 
( 40 
 
 was, becaufe he told this to his Difciples^ a?td 
 would have no Body elje hiow it. That our 
 Saviour told this to the Difciples and not to the 
 Multitude, is admitted. But the Queftion is, 
 who thefe Difciples were, whether the Twelve 
 only, or others together with them ; and the 
 Confiderer^ Obfervation is of no Moment to- 
 wards determining this Point. 
 
 I do not pretend to affirm, that the Twelve 
 may not be fometimes meant, where Difciples 
 only are mentioned without any other DifHn- 
 d:ion ; but, for the Reafons given, the Confiderer 
 had no Right to take it for granted, that all 
 the Predictions were given to the Twelve on- 
 ly, and to raife Speculations upon this Suppo- 
 fition. 
 
 Had the Conjiderer known, what a due At- 
 tention to the Gofpels would have taught him, 
 the Reafon of our Lord's opening to his Dif- 
 ciples and Apoftles the Sufferings he was to 
 undergo, he would not have fufpe61;ed any De- 
 ceit in his Condud:. When our Saviour ga- 
 thered Difciples at firft, and out of them chofe 
 twelve Apoflles, he fent them out to preach that 
 the Kingdom was at hand, and gave them great 
 Powers over unclean Spirits, and all Difeafes. 
 After fome time he enquires of them, what 
 the World thought of him 5 they report to 
 him the different Opinions the Country had of 
 him. He then afks. But whom fay ye that I 
 am ? Peter in the Name of the reil anfwers, 
 Thou art the Chriji, Upon whith he began 
 
 imme- 
 
( 47 ) 
 
 immediately (as the three Evangelifts exprefly 
 obferve) to teach them what things the Son 
 of Man (hould fufFer, and that he (hould rife 
 the third Day. Confider now what was the 
 Connexion between St. Peter's Confeffion, and 
 the Predidion of the Sufferings and Refurrec- 
 tion of Chrijiy which fo clofely followed it. 
 The Difciples had preached the Approach of 
 the Kingdom, had found, by the Powers be- 
 ftowed on them, what Power their Mafter 
 had ; and our Lord now perceived upon the 
 Confellion of Peter ^ that they took him to be 
 the Chriji, He well underflood what Confe- 
 quences this Notion would produce -, he knew 
 the Opinion of the Jews in general, and of the 
 Difciples too, was, 'That Chrtji abidethjor ever s. 
 and was to be fubjedl to no Power, but to 
 exercife Power and Dominion without End, 
 which they likewife apprehended to be tem- 
 poral Power and Dominion. Our Lord, who 
 took all proper Occafions to difclaim temporal 
 Power, found it neceffary now to guard the 
 Condud of his Difciples, who were very likely 
 to give Umbrage to the "Jews^ by the Hopes 
 they conceived themfelves of feeing their Ma- 
 tter a great temporal Prince. To prevent thefe 
 ill Effects, he charges them in the firft Place 
 to tell no Man, that he 'was the Chrijl ; for fuch 
 open Declaration to the People, confidering 
 what Notion they had of the Chfifl they ex- 
 
 s John xii. 3^. 
 
 peded ^ 
 
{ 4« ) 
 
 pefted, would have amounted to a Claim of 
 temporal Power. In the next place, to mo- 
 derate the Expectations of his Difciples, and 
 to beat down the Pride and Vanity, which 
 would naturally arife from them, he tells them 
 he was to fuffer many things, and even Death 
 itfelf ; but at the fame time, to keep them 
 from abfolute Defpair, he gives them to under- 
 ftand that he fhould rife again. 
 
 This Doftrine he began to teach upon the 
 Occaiion mentioned, as the Evangelifts parti- 
 cularly remark, intimating that it was frequent- 
 ly repeated and inculcated. So little were the 
 Difciples prepared to receive' it, that St. Pete?* 
 rebuked his Mafter for talking about fuffering ; 
 Be it far from thee ^ Lordy I'hisfiall not be unto 
 tkee ^. V/hich explains another Paffage in the 
 . following Chapter, very much abufed by the 
 Confiderer^ where our Saviour foretells again, 
 ^he Son ofManfball be betrayed into the Hands 
 of Men. — 'they Jhall kill hiniy and the third 
 Day hefiall rife again ; and they were exceeding 
 Jorrowful '. He iubjoins to this a Paffage from 
 St. Mark, where our Saviour tells the Difci- 
 ples, the Son of Man rntiji be killed^ arid, after he 
 is killed, hefiall rife the third Day : and they 
 underllood not that Saying ^. Hear now the 
 Co?2fiderer ; '"fis equally Jlrange, fays he, that 
 
 ^ Mjtt. Xvi. 22. 
 
 * Matt. xvii. 22, 23. 
 ^ Mark ix. 
 
 they 
 
( 49 ) 
 
 they fhould be forry for what they did not tinder^ 
 ftand^ as that they Jhoidd not imderjiand what 
 they were forry for ^ Was ever any thing fo 
 perverfe ! Is it not plain they were forry to hear 
 how much he was to fuffer j and that the Say- 
 ing which they did not underftand was his 
 rijing again jrom the Dead ? They could not 
 conceive how Chrijl could die, nor what could 
 be meant by his rifing again. Is there any 
 Inconliftency in this ? none, but to fuch as are 
 willfully blind. 
 
 Our Saviour found it neceflary on this Oc- 
 cafion, not only to acquaint his Difciples with 
 the Sufferings he was to fubmit to, but the 
 People alfo, in order to prevent their having 
 wrong Notions of him and his Kingdom, 
 fhould they hear or fufped: him to be the 
 Chrijl 'y and therefore he adds immediately, — 
 he called the People unto him, with his Difci^ 
 pies, and faid, Wbofoever will come after me, 
 let him deny himfelf\ and take up his Crofs, a7id 
 follow me ^. So far was our Lord from making a 
 Secret of his Sufferings, or giving the People 
 any Hopes of a temporal Deliverance ! 
 
 But the Confiderer liippofes, that the Apoftles 
 were enjoined Secrecy, and forbid to publifli 
 thefe Predidions. Upon the Strength of which 
 Suppofitions he argues, that the chief Priefts 
 could know nothing of thefe Predidlions. The 
 Apoftles are indeed enjoined Secrecy, not with 
 
 * FirftEdit. p. 30. Third Edit. p. 2:1. ^Ma;kix. 34. 
 
 H reiped; 
 
(5o) 
 
 refpeft to the Death and Refurredion of JefuSy 
 but with refped: exprefsly to this Point only, 
 that he was the Chriji, St. Matthew has fo de- 
 termined this, that there can be no Doubt ; 
 Then charged he his Dijciples, that they JJjoidd 
 tell no Man^ that he was Jefus the Chriji^, 
 After the Transfiguration, that the Difciples, 
 who had feen his furprizing Glory, fhould not 
 from thence raife falfe Notions of his Power, 
 he thought proper to enjoin them Secrecy till 
 after the Refurredion : But Secrecy in what ? 
 not that he was to fuffer and to rife again, but 
 Secrecy with refped to the glorious Vifion they 
 had feen, and the Voice from the Cloud, 
 which proclaimed him Chrijl the Son of God. 
 
 Lay now thefe Things together, and confider, 
 whether it was not probable that the chief 
 Priefts had perfed Intelligence even of thefe 
 Predidions. Our Saviour never made a Se- 
 cret of them ; and as fome of them were de- 
 livered to his Difciples in general, and many of 
 his Difciples forfook him (as we read in the 
 lixth of St. John) the chief Priefts, who were 
 very inquifitive into the Condud of J ejus ^ 
 might by Report from the Apoftles themlelves, 
 or at leaft by Report from thofe Difciples 
 who forfook him, have perfed Knowledge of 
 thefe Prophecies. But let us go on to other 
 Prophecies. The Confiderer fays, he has ex- 
 amined St. John, and finds that he Jays not a 
 
 » Mat. xvi. 20. 
 
 Word 
 
f 51 ) 
 
 Word of ity but denies it all^. If he fays not 
 a Word of it, I would fain know in what 
 Words he denies it all. But thefe Beauties oc- 
 cur too frequently to be attended to. As to his 
 Examination of St. Joh?2^ I am by no means 
 willing to rely on it, and muft beg Leave to 
 examine after him. But how comes he to be 
 fo furprifed to find the Prophecies of Chriji'^ 
 Death and Refurredtion, fo plainly contained in 
 other Gofpels, omitted in St. John ? Did he 
 never hear that St. yohn, who outlived the 
 other Evangelrfts, was defired by the Bifhops 
 of ^fia to publifh a Gofpel, to perfedt and 
 compleat the Relation of Chrijfs Life and Do- 
 d:rine ? They had without Queftion heard 
 many Things of him, not recorded by the other 
 Evangelifts ; and thought it of great Importance 
 to the Chriftian Church to have them tranf- 
 mltted to Pofterity, with the Authority of an 
 Apoftle. St. John therefore wrote his Gofpel, 
 not with a Defign of repeating what the other 
 Evangelifts had fully delivered, but chiefly to 
 preferve the Memory of what they had omit- 
 ted. Thefe Prophecies, therefore, being (as 
 the Confiderer admits) fo very clearly contained 
 in the other Gofpels, was the very Reafon why 
 St. John omitted them. Whoever with tole- 
 rable Care compares St. John with the other 
 Gofpels, will find this to be frequently the 
 Cafe. And it will appear plainly to be fo, in 
 
 * Firfi: Edit. p. 32. Third Edit. p. 23. 
 
 H 2 the 
 
(5^) 
 
 the Hiftory of the Women who went firft to 
 the Sepulchre, which th^ere will be Occafion 
 loon to confider. 
 
 But though St. Job?!, for the Reafon already 
 given, has omitted expreisly to repeat the Pre- 
 dictions mentioned by the other Evangelifts, yet 
 I own it would be furprizing to find no men^ 
 tion made by Chnji in his Life Time, of the 
 Circumftances of his Death and Refurredion ; 
 confidering how many Difcourfes of our Lord 
 to his Difciples and others are reported in St. 
 yobns Gofpel. Let us enquire then. 
 
 In the twelfth and following Chapters, a great 
 Part of our Lord's Difcourfes to hi^ Difciples 
 plainly refers to the Predictions he had given 
 them of his Death and Refurredlion. 'The 
 Hour is cmne^ fays our Lord, ^wkeii the Son of 
 Man Jhould be glorified^. Of what Hour he 
 fpeaks appears ^27. No^w is my Soul troubled ^ 
 and ivhat fiall I fay ? Father^ fave 7ne from this 
 Hour j but jor this • Caufe came I unto this 
 Hour, And at Chap. xiii. i . And ivhen Jefus 
 knew that his Hour was come^ that he Jhould 
 debart out of this Wcrld^ &c. The Ex- 
 preflion made ufe of by Jefus, the Hour is 
 come^ fuppofes the Difciples had Notice before, 
 that fuch an Hour was to be expefted. ]f fo, 
 thefe Paffii2:es have Reference to the Predifti- 
 ons recorded in the other Gofpels^ if not, 
 they are of themfelves Predictions, at ieail of 
 
 * John ':iXh «3. 
 
 his 
 
( 53 ) 
 
 his Death. That our Lord himfelf meant 
 thefe as Predidions is manifeftin Chap. xiii. 19. 
 where having f?id, that Judas fhould betray 
 him, he adds, Now I tell you before it come^ 
 that "when it is come to pafs^ ye may believe that 
 I am he. Having given them this Notice of 
 his Death, he endeavours to fupport their Spi- 
 rits under the Expedation of it. — ^ Let ?iot your 
 Heart be troubled — I go to prepare a Place for 
 you — I lanll not leave you comfortlefs^ I will 
 come to you s. Te now therefore have Sorrow^ 
 but I will fee you again ^ a?jd your Heart Jhall 
 rejoice^ and your Joy no Man Jhall take from 
 you ^. A little while and ye Jl:all not fee me^ 
 and again a little while and ye Jl:all Jee me^. 
 Thefe and many other like Paffiiges in St. 
 fohn relate plainly to the Death and Refur- 
 redion of Chrift ; of which, if you take the 
 Confderers Word, St. John has faid nothing. 
 So far were thefc Predidions from being de- 
 livered as Secrets to the Apoftlcs, that St. John 
 informs us, he foretold his Sufferings to many 
 others. When Nicodemus came to Inm, he 
 tells him, that as Mofes lifted up the Serpent in 
 the Wildernefs^ even fo ??nijl the Son of Man be 
 lifted up^. The fame Thing in the fame 
 Language is faid to the People \ The Coif- 
 derer will fay here is another Riddle ; what are 
 we to underftand by lifting up '? Can you have 
 ^ better Interpreter than St. John himfelf? He 
 
 ^Johnsiv. 1,2. g,^i8. ^ xvi. 22. Mb. 
 
 1^. ^ lb. ill. 14. .* lb. viii. 28. 
 
 J will 
 
( H) 
 
 will tell you, that our Lord ufed this Expref- 
 fion, Jignifying what Death he fiould die^. 
 And that the Language was well underflood at 
 the Time, appears by the Anfwer the People 
 made him ; IVe have heard out of the Law^ that 
 Chrift abideth for ever , a?2d how fay eft thoUy 
 ^heSon of Man muft be Ufted up"" ? In Confe- 
 quence of this Predidion he tells the Pharifees, 
 Tet a little while I am with you^ and then I go 
 unto him that fent me. Te Jhall feek ?ne and 
 JJjall not find me^ and where lam^ thither ye can- 
 not come °. Take now thefe Sayings of St. 
 yohn^ and apply them to the Sign of fonaSy 
 and the Expofition of it given by our Lord^ 
 that the Son of Man fliould be three Days and 
 three Nights in the Heart oj the Earthy and 
 they will give Light to each other, fuppofmg 
 the Jews to have had no clearer Predidlions of 
 Chrift' s Death and Refurredion before them. 
 But that they had clearer, has, I think, al- 
 ready appeared. 
 
 But there is ftill one way more by which 
 this Intelligence might come to them. The 
 lafi: Prophecy of his Death and Refurredior^ 
 was given at his laft Supper to the twelve Apo- 
 iiles : Judas was at the Supper, and heard the 
 Prophecy, and went diredly to the chief Priefts 
 to concert Meafures for apprehending Jefus. 
 Can you imagine, that they did not enquire, 
 
 "^ Chap. xii. 33. "lb. ver. 34. 
 
 • Chap. vii. 33, 3-f. 
 
 where 
 
( J5 ) 
 
 where his Maftev was, and what he was do- 
 ino- ? Can you imagine that Judas would omit 
 to^entertain them with an Account of the 
 Defpair in which he left him, prophefying of 
 his Death which he found unavoidable, and 
 filling his Difciples Heads with a filly Notion 
 of his rifing again ? If it is natural to fuppofe 
 this to have been the Cafe, you fee a plain 
 way, by which the chief Priefts came to know 
 \h.^\."jejus faid in his Life-time, that he would 
 rife after three Bays. 
 
 The Cmfderer having proved, as he fup- 
 pofes, that the chief Priefts knew nothing of 
 any Prophecy of a Refurredion, makes ufe of 
 it to charge St. Matthew with a Forgery, in 
 the Story he relates of their guarding the Se- 
 pulchre. Can any Man of common Senfe think 
 it probable, that the Priejis and Pharifees Jhould 
 be alarmed about the ReJiirreBion of Jefus, if 
 they never heard any thing more of it than has 
 been mejitioned"^^ Whether the chief Priefl:s 
 were as unacquainted with the Prophecies of 
 the RefurreSion, as he fuppofes, mufi: be left 
 to the Reader upon what has been already faid. 
 But the Cojifiderer has other Objedions a- 
 gainft the Story, told by St. Matthew of guard- 
 ing the Sepulchre, which mufi be attended to. 
 'Tisftrange that Jefus fJmdd fo exprefly foretel 
 bis RefurreBion to his Difciples, and fay nothing 
 plainly of it to the Scribes and Pharifees, yet that 
 
 p FirftEdic. p. ^3. Third Edit. p. 24. 
 
 thev 
 
(56) 
 
 they JJiOuld he Jo alarmed 'with the Words of d 
 Man they did not believe^ ai to watch for it, 
 and the Difciples not miderftand or expedi 
 it ^. In ftating this Cafe the Confiderer 
 takes it for granted, that the Scribes and Pha- 
 rifees had no Notice of a Refurreclion, but 
 from the dark Intimations to them, that the 
 Sign of Jonas^ &c. fliould be given them. 
 If I have given the Reader Satisfadion that 
 the Cafe was otherwife, and that the Scribes 
 and Pharifees were apprized of much clearer 
 and more exprefs Prophecies of the Refurrec- 
 tion, there will be no Occafion to give any far- 
 ther Account of their Solicitude in guarding 
 the Sepulchre. But one Queftion flill remains ; 
 How came the Difciples not to underlland thefe 
 Prophecies, and to have no Expectation of a 
 Refurredtion ? The Fad is admitted, and we 
 are called upon to give an Account of their 
 Behaviour. 
 
 There is, I think, but one way of account- 
 ing for the Adions of Men -, which is by com- 
 paring them with their Opinions and Perfua- 
 fions, and the Circumftances they were in at 
 the Time of doing fuch Adions ; and con- 
 fidering what Men under fuch Circumftances, 
 and fuch Perfuafions would naturally do. And 
 in this Method a very reafonable Account may 
 be given, both of the Condud of the Rulers 
 of the Jews^ and of the Difciples. 
 
 ^ lb. 
 
 Con- 
 
( 57) 
 
 ' Confider now ; it was the general and firm 
 Perfuafion of all the Jews, of the Rulers and 
 Difciples equally, that the Cbriji, whenever he 
 came, was to abide for ever ; to be a Prince of 
 Power, to fubdue his and his Country's E- 
 nemies with uninterrupted Succefs. This 
 Propofition therefore, that the Chrijl JJjotild die^ 
 according to the Jewifo Notion, contained an 
 abfolute Abfurdity. Now the Difciples were 
 flrong in this Opinion, that J ejus was the 
 Chriji', they were confirmed in it by every 
 frefli Inftance of Power and Authority which 
 they faw him exert. Oar Lord was fenfible 
 how this Opinion would operate, and therefore, 
 from the Time that he found they believed 
 him to be the CbriJl^ he began to preach to 
 them, what he was to fufFer, and that he was 
 to die and rife again. How they received thefc 
 Declarations, appears from St. Peter s rebuk- 
 ing our Lord for making them, and from ma- 
 ny other Inflances which need not be parti- 
 cularly referred to. Add to this, that all their 
 Hopes, all their Expedations depended on their 
 Mailer's being, a powerful Prince. So that to 
 think of his dying was contrary to all they 
 believed of Chriji^ and contrary to all they 
 hoped for themfelves. To overcome all their 
 Prejudices and all their Paffions at once was 
 more than they were able to do. The Pro- 
 phecies fpoke fo plainly of the Sufferings of 
 Chrijl^ that they were furprifed and afiiided to 
 hear tbem> but how to under ftand them they 
 
 I knew 
 
( 58 ) 
 
 knew not, becaufe taken literally they appeared 
 inconfiftent with the Faith they had profeffed, 
 that Jefus was the Chriji. As little did they 
 apprehend what rifing again meant ; and how 
 fliould they underftand it ? Since they could not 
 conceive how he could dye, they could have 
 no Notion how, or in what Manner, he could 
 rife. Poffibly they thought there was fome- 
 thing myfterious in it. It was ufual with their 
 Mafter to difcourfe them, as well as the Mul- 
 titude, in Parables -, and to ufe common Ex- 
 prefiions in a Senfe that was hidden and myfte- 
 rious. They had been long accuftomed -to 
 this Sort of Language, and had frequently 
 been puzzled with it. When he bade them to 
 beware of the Leaven of the Pharifees ^; they 
 had little Doubt about the Meaning of fo com- 
 mon a Phrafe, but the Matter they quite mi- 
 ftook. And when he was in the Temple, dif- 
 puting with the Jewifh Dodors, he faid he 
 •was about his Fathers Bufmefs^ y the literal 
 Senfe of the Words was obvious enough, but 
 the Meaning was not underftood. He told his 
 Difciples at another Time, that he had Meat to 
 eat^ which they knew not of'^ ; not meaning, as 
 they were ready to underftand it, common 
 Food, but fomething of quite another Na- 
 ture. 
 
 Thus when our Lord talked to his Difciples 
 of fuffering and dying, though fuch Language 
 
 *Matt. xvi. C, \ Luke ii, 4^. ^ Johniv. 32. 
 
 at 
 
(59 ) 
 
 at the firft muft needs alarm and afflid: them, 
 
 yet it was according to their Notions impoffi- 
 
 ble to be true in the literal Senfe. What then 
 
 was more natural than to conclude, that their 
 
 Mafler had fome hidden Meaning ? We have 
 
 a plain Inftance of this in a like Cafe. The 
 
 Jews looked upon a Man as defiled, that had 
 
 eaten with unwaflied Hands ; but our Saviour 
 
 tells the Scribes and Pharifees, Not that which 
 
 goeth into the Month dejileth a Man^ but that 
 
 which Cometh out ", What Words could be 
 
 plainer? But the Thing being fo oppofite to 
 
 Jewijh Maxims and Pradice, the Difciples no 
 
 more underftood how it could be, than how 
 
 the MeJJias could fuifer and dye ; and therefore 
 
 Peter deiires his Mafter to declare imto them the 
 
 Parable \ Thefe PrepofTeffions continued 'till 
 
 after the RefurrecTtion. When their Lord was 
 
 crucified, all their Hopes dyed with him ; and 
 
 when he was rifen again, it was fome Time 
 
 before they could credit their own Eyes, and 
 
 be perfuaded that they really beheld him. As 
 
 flrange as this may appear to the Confiderer^ I 
 
 can fee nothing unnatural in it. 
 
 Suppofe now this Account of the Difciples 
 Want of Underftanding to be true, it fhews 
 indeed their Honefty and Sincerity in report- 
 ing it fairly. But fuppofe (as the Confiderer 
 fuppofes) that it is all forged, I would fain 
 
 i Matt. XV. II. ^f 15. 
 
 I 2 know 
 
(60) 
 
 know, what Policy there was in the Contri- 
 vance. He fays, he fufpeds fome fraudulent 
 Dejign in it ; but what Purpofe was or could 
 be ferved by this Fraud? Did the Apoftlcs 
 get any thing, either Honour or Profit, by 
 relating their own Prejudices and Hardnefs 
 of Belief? 
 
 But what is to be faid for the chief Pricfts ? 
 how came they to be apprehenfive of a 
 Refurredlion. They no more believed that 
 Chrijl the King of the "Je^^s could dye and 
 rife again, than the Difciples did. Very true; 
 but that Prejudice flood not in their -Way, for 
 they did not admit J ejus to be Chrijl. If 
 they had, they would not have attempted to 
 kill him. Why then did they fear his Refur- 
 redion ? The plain and clear Anfwer is, Be- 
 caufe he had foretold it : for it was one Thins: 
 to believe him to be a great Prophet, and ano- 
 ther to believe him to be the Chrijl, That 
 this was a well known Diftinction amongft the 
 yews appears from the Difcourfe of the two 
 Difciples going to Emjiiaus -, who, though they 
 had given over all Hopes that J ejus was the 
 Chrijl^ were flill firm in the Periuafion that 
 he was a Prophet jnighty in Deed cind Word be- 
 Jore God and all the People ^. Now the Jews 
 had been WitnefTes to fo many Wonders and 
 Miracles wrought by him, that, whether they 
 
 ^ Luke^xxiv. i o. 
 
 tliought 
 
{ 6^ ) 
 
 thought him to be the Chrijl or no, they could 
 not but fufpedt that he was a great Prophet at 
 leafl, and might poffibly come from the Grave 
 armed with Power, to take Vengeance of their 
 wicked and cruel Treatment of him. This 
 was but a natural Apprehenfion^ and their 
 Fears and guilty Confciences added Weight to 
 every Sufpicion of this Kind ; and they were 
 exadly in Herod's Cafe, who, when he heard 
 the Fame of the great Miracles which Jefus 
 performed, faid, Tks is yoh?i the Bapttjl^ he 
 is rifen fj^om the Dead-, therefore mighty Works 
 do Jhew forth themjehes in him ^. What is 
 there in this, that is not natural and pro- 
 bable? 
 
 Let us hear what the Corfiderer fays to it: 
 If we take the Opinion of the chief Priefts and 
 Pharifees fro?n their ow7i Words ^ as delivered by 
 St, Matthew, they believe Jefus was a Deceiver ^, 
 and appear afraid^ not oj his rifmg i?i the Day, 
 but of the Dijciples [iealing him away in the 
 Night '\ All that the Confderer fays here de- 
 pends upon his fuppofing, that the chief Priefts 
 and Pharifees fpoke their real Sentiments to Pi- 
 late without any Difguife ; for otherwife, if 
 they ufed any Art, or formed a Story merely 
 as a Pretence to obtain a Guard to watch the 
 Sepulchre, nothing can be concluded from 
 
 s iMatr. xiv. 2. ^ Firft Edit. p. 37. ^ Third 
 
 Edit. p. 2p, 
 
 what 
 
{6z) 
 
 what they tell Pilate^ but this only, that they 
 wanted a Guard to fecure the Sepulchre. Put 
 the Cafe that they were convinced of his Mi- 
 racles, apprifed of the Prophecy of his Refur- 
 redion, and under a real Apprehenfion, that 
 it might be fulfilled; and that, to fatisfy their 
 Doubts, they wanted to get a Guard ; I would 
 fain know what fort of Speech to Pilate, the 
 Co72jiderer would make for them. Would he 
 have them fay, " Sir, this Perfon whom you 
 *' crucified at our Inftigation was indeed a 
 *' mighty Prophet, and the Hand of God was 
 " with him in performing many wonderful 
 *^ Works : He faid too in his Life Time, that 
 *' he would rife from the Dead after three 
 ** Days, and we are very apprehenfive that 
 " he will rife indeed. Let therefore the Se- 
 *' pulchre be guarded." If thefe had been in- 
 deed their real Sentiments, would they have 
 told them to Pilate, after they had extorted 
 from him the Condemnation of J ejus, by re- 
 prefenting him as a Malefadlor worthy of Death, 
 and as an Enemy to the P.omaji Government ? 
 No body can think it. They were under a 
 Neceflity, whatever their private Thoughts 
 were, of carrying on the Shew before Pilate, 
 of treating Jefus as a Deceiver, and pretending 
 another Reafon than the true one for defiring 
 a Guard, viz. for fear his Difciples fliould 
 fteal away the Body. To argue therefore, 
 tliat the chief Priefls really believed all that 
 
 they 
 
(63) 
 
 they pretended to Pilate^ is childifh and ri- 
 diculous. 
 
 I have laid together the feveral Predidions 
 of our Lord's Refurredion, and the Circum- 
 jflances that attended them, in order to fhew, 
 what little Reafon the Confiderer had to fuppofe 
 the chief Priefts entire Strangers to them 3 up- 
 on wliich one Millake all his Reafoning againft 
 guarding and fealing the Sepulchre depends. 
 The Cojifiderer afferts, that the chief Priefts 
 had no Prophecy of the Refurredion, but 
 what could be deduced from the Sign of Jo- 
 ?ias ; and that, he fays, could not be under- 
 ftood by them. Let us admit it, and fee what 
 the Confequence will be. Is a Prophecy no 
 Prophecy unlefs it can be underftood by every 
 Body at the Time it is given ? If the Confiderer 
 can perfuade the World of this, he will do 
 more towards deftroying the Credit of Pro- 
 phecy, than all his Predeceffors have done from 
 Celfiis to this Time. We often find Jejus 
 fpeaking to the Jews in Parables, and explain- 
 ing them clearly to his Difciples. The Cafe 
 here was much the fame with refped to the 
 Prophecies of the Refurredion. Thofe to his 
 Difciples were clear ; thofe to the Scribes enig- 
 matical, yet delivered in Terms fo correfpond- 
 ing to the Event, that, when the Event liap- 
 pened, the Jews could not doubt whether the 
 Prophecy related to it. The fame may be 
 laid of that other Prophecy ; Dejlroy this T'e??!^ 
 
 pie, 
 
^ ^4 j 
 
 pte^ and in three Days Iniill raife if up ^. Th€ 
 Difciples underfiood not this, till after yefus 
 was rifen ; but when the Event had explained 
 the TeiTns, the Prophecy was clear, and had 
 the Effect that all Prophecy is meant to have, 
 that ijohen the thing comes to faj's^ we may be- 
 lieve. 
 
 Bat the Confiderer thinks the Prophecy from 
 the Cafe of Jonas^ not only dark and unintel- 
 ligible at firit ; but, when underfiood and ap- 
 plied to the Refurredion, falje in FaB in two 
 RejpeSis \ I fuppofe he means it did not corre- 
 fpond to the Fad foretold in two Refpeds. 
 Let us hear the Charge. 
 
 Fir ft, T^he Son of Man *ivas to lie three 
 Days and three Nights in the Earth ; whereas 
 Jefus lay but the I'ime oj one Day and a half] 
 that is two Nights and a Day K Secondly, l!'he 
 Sign promijed to be given, was 7iot given to thofe 
 it was promijed to s, i. e. to that evil and adul- 
 terous Generation. 
 
 It is fomevvhat ftrange, that this great Wri* 
 ter fhould be content to tread the dull Road 
 of vulgar Infidels and Sceptics \ repeating Dif- 
 ficulties and Objedions, that have been athou- 
 fand Times propofed, and as often confuted j 
 but it is ftill more ftrange, that they fhould be 
 fuch as are fully confidered, and moft clearly 
 explained in the very Bock he profefies to an- 
 
 * John ii. 19. 
 ^ FirftEdit. p. 27. Third Edit. p. 19. ^ 
 2 Firii: Edit. p. 28.- Third Edit. p. 20. 
 
 fwer. 
 
i^5) 
 
 fwer. How comes he to pafs over all that la 
 faid in the T'rya/ upon this Point ? Why fuch an 
 afFeded Silence here ? It would by no Means 
 have anfwered the Confiderer\ Purpofe, to take 
 Notice how that Author has explained Chrift'% 
 lying three Days in the Sepulchre; but I can 
 promife the Reader, it will abundantly anfwer 
 his Trouble to confult him upon this Subjed:; 
 and, if he has any Doubts or Scruples in the 
 Point, he may there receive Satisfadion. It 
 may be unneceffary to add any thing to what 
 has been already faid ; but that the Confiderer 
 may not think himfelf entirely negleded, I 
 fhall give a fhort Anfwer to his Objeftion, 're- 
 ferring for the reft to the Tryal itfelf. 
 
 It is w^ell known that the Jews reckoned their 
 Time inclufive; in their Computation of 
 Days, the firft Day and the laft were includ- 
 ed, in the Number. From one Sabbath to 
 another they reckoned eight Days, and this 
 when the Computation begun at the Clofe of 
 the firft, and ended at the very Beginning of 
 the fecond. And yet in this Cafe there can- 
 not be more than fix folar Days and fevenNights ; 
 and confequently there is the very fame Defici- 
 ency of two Days and a Night, which the G?/?- 
 Jiderer charges upon the Account given oiChriJi's 
 Refurredion. Three Nights and three Days, or 
 three vuxQ^i^'z^ot, were in common Language the 
 fame as three Days : They were equivalent Ex- 
 preffions and ufed the one for the othk \ 
 
 « So forty Days and forty Nights, an ExprefTion often 
 repeated in the Old Tejiament and the New, was the fame 
 
 K St. Luh 
 
i^6 ) 
 
 St. Luke^ fays, the Child Je/us was not 
 circumcifed, 'till eight Days were accomp/ij/jed -y 
 as ftrong an Expreffion, one would think, as 
 eight Days and eight Nights -, and yet the Birth 
 might, according to the known Way of reckon- 
 ing in this Cafe, be at the Clofe of the firft, 
 and the Circumcifion at the Beginning of the 
 laft. Again ; The Words after three Days 
 are very full and expreflive, and how are we to 
 underftand them ? The chief Priefls will in- 
 form us. 5/r, fay they to Pilate^ we remember 
 that Deceiver /aid ^ "while he "was yet alive ^ Af- 
 ter three Days I will rife again ; and yet their 
 Demand is that the Sepulchre be guarded only 
 //// the third Day, He has here the Authority 
 of his own Friends, the chief Priefls and Pha- 
 rifees^ that after three Days, and till the third 
 Day, are equivalent Expreffions, and were fo u- 
 fed and fo underftood in the common Language 
 of the Country. We have then the concurrent 
 Evidence of the chief Priefls and the Difciples, 
 and that too in a Point, which neither of them 
 could miftake , unlefs you can fuppofe them 
 not to underftand the Language of their own 
 People. How the Expreffions, three Days and 
 three Nights, after three Days, on the third 
 Day"^^ are to be underftood, Chrtji himfelf has 
 
 as forty Days; the firft Day and the laft being each 
 reckoned as a complete vyxS^V-^r,-, or Ni^H and Day, 
 though only a Portion of ii, 
 
 * Chap. ii. 21. 
 
 • The Jtwsy 'tis plain, v/ere not accurate to the Let- 
 
 cxadtly 
 
( 67) 
 
 cxprefly fliewn long enough before his Death 
 and Refurredion : / do Cures to day end to 
 
 ter in their Reckoning of Time. I lliall give the Rea- 
 der one Inftance amongft many to be found in the 
 Scriptures. It is 2 Kings xviii. 9^ 10, And it came to 
 pafs in the fourth Tear of King Hezekiah (which was 
 the feventh Tear of Hofea Son of Elah King of Ifrael) that 
 Salmanefer King of Affyria came up againfi Sa?naria and 
 hefiegedit j and at the End of three Tears took it. What can 
 be Wronger or more prccife^, than this appears to be? 
 Would the Read-er imagine it could mean any thing lefs 
 than three Years complete? And yet it is certainly noc 
 {o to be underftood j for after the Words at the End of 
 three Tears^ it follows immediately, even in the fixth Tear 
 cf Hezekiah [that is ^ in the ninth Tear of Hofea) Samaria 
 %{jas taken. Now it is evident to fight, that '\!i at the End 
 of three Tears was intended to lignify three Years com- 
 plete, Hezekiah muft have been in his feventh, and Hofea 
 ill his tenth Year, v/hen Samaria was taken.— After all, our 
 Saviour himfeif is the befl: Interpreter of his own Language. 
 In the many Predictions of his Refurredion the moft 
 ufual Expreffion i^ the third Day^ fometimes it is after 
 three Days^ and once three Days and three Nights^ in 
 which cafe the Expreffion feems to be varied for no other 
 Reafdn than to accommodate it to the Language and 
 Story of 'Jo7ias. Can it now be fuppofed, that fpeaking. 
 of the fame Event^ he does not mean the fame Note of 
 Time, though the Expreffion is a little varied ? li then 
 one of the Expreffions happens to be clear, the natural 
 irnJ rational Way is to explain the reil by it. Now this 
 Expreffion the third Day has nothing of Obfcurity in ir, 
 and coniequently will help us to underftand the reft. I 
 would fain know what view our Saviour could poffibly 
 have in applying thefe feveral Expreffions to the fame 
 Event, as implying the fam.e Note of Time? or whan 
 Intereft the Apoftlcs could have in publiffiing it to the 
 World, had they not been the common Language of the 
 Country, well known, and well underftood by every one, 
 as meaning one and die fame ihing ? Such a Condut^ 
 
 K 2 ■ mrrrow 
 
( 68) 
 
 morrow, and the third Day IJhall be perfeBed^i 
 exaftly conformable to the Cafe of aPerfon taken 
 ill one Day, being blooded the fecond, and 
 dying the third, as ftated in the 'Tryal ^ 
 
 Neither Jews nor Heathens of old ever ob- 
 jedted, that the Refarredion fell out too foon 
 for the Predi61ion> or that the Language of 
 Scripture in this Point was not confiftent. They 
 knew very well it was the current Language 
 of the Country, and the ufual Method of Com- 
 putation, The Honour of ftarting fuch Ob- 
 jevflions, is referved for the wife Men of this 
 Age 'y who, knowing little of ancient Ufages 
 and Cuftoms, are perpetually from their own 
 Miftakes raifmg Objedtions againft the Gofpel, 
 and fuch as the ancient and more learned In- 
 fidels would have been afliamed of. 
 
 Bat the Conjiderer has another Difficulty yet 
 behind, with regard to this Hiftory of Jonas. 
 T!he PrediBion, he fays, was not fulfilled , be- 
 caiife the Sign promifed to be given was not given 
 to thofe it was promifed to, i. e. to the evil and 
 adulterous Generation. 
 
 Where does the Confderer find the Promife 
 he talks of? I can fee no fuch Promife in the 
 Words referred to, Chriji tells them no Sign 
 fhould be given, but that of the Prophet Jonas. 
 What does he engage for here ? that he would 
 
 would only have expofed both Mafter and Difciples to 
 Scorn and Contempt. See Bifnop Pearfon'j Expofaion of 
 the Crced^ and B'lfhop Kidder'j DemOTtjfration of the Mef 
 ftas^ upon this Article, 
 
 f Lukexiii. 35. ! Page 4S. 
 
 appear 
 
(69) 
 
 appear to them in Perfon after the Refurrcc- 
 tion? There is not a Word about it. The 
 Promife, if you will have it a Promife, was 
 only that he would lie three Days in the Sepul- 
 chre. If this was not a Sign to the Jews^ nothing 
 could be a Sign to them, for they had the Evi- 
 dence of their ownEyes, and of their ownGuards. 
 
 But this Part of the GofpeUHiftory, the 
 Conjiderer will not admit ; and he thinks him- 
 felf able to prove the whole a Forgery. Let 
 him fpeak his own Senfe of this Matter ; l^hat 
 the Priefts aiid Pharifees y?/ no Watch^ and that 
 even the Dijcipks themfehes were not foreivarn- 
 ed of their Mafter's rifing again, will more fully 
 appear by the Fadls which the Evangclijls them-- 
 fehes relate ^. 
 
 Let us now attend to the Reafons, that are 
 to fupport this bold Undertaking. He firft 
 gives St. J obis Account of the Care taken of 
 the Body by Nicodemus ; who, together with 
 Jofeph, took the Body ofjefus a?id wound it in 
 linen Cloths with the Spices, and laid it in 
 the Sepulchre ^. 
 
 Upon thefe Fads the Confiderer argues thus. 
 He fuppofes, and veryjuflly, that when the 
 chief Priefts placed a Guard on the Sepulchre, 
 they took Care to fee that the Body was there ; 
 and then fays, If they Jaw the Body, they- mujl 
 needs fee how it was jpiced, or preferred for 
 keeping, if it was done -, they could not fee one 
 without the other K It is to little Purpofe to 
 
 f Firft Edit, p 34. Third Edit, p, 2j. ": lb. ^ lb. 
 
 difputc 
 
( 70 ) 
 
 difpute thefe Circumftances ; it is fufficient to 
 fhew, that his Obfervation is not fupported 
 by the Text he pretends to build on. St. "John 
 fays, the Body with the Spices was 'wound up in 
 linen Cloth -, and without Doubt the Spices 
 lay next the Body, and were covered by the 
 linen Cloth; and the Corpie bound in linen 
 might be feen, without feeing the Spices. 
 Suppofe, however, that they faw the Spices, 
 and how the Body was preferved for keeping ; 
 why then he fays, Would they 7iot then^ being 
 WitneJJes of that^ have taken the Soldiers backy 
 rejling contented that his Dijciples knew nothi7ig 
 of any Prophecy of his rifng again ; and therefore 
 could have no Defign u?ider that Pretence to fteal 
 away the Body^ and report he was I'ifen ? 
 
 It is hard to make out the Senfe of this Reafon- ' 
 ing ; but if it has any, it ftands upon thefe very 
 abfurd Suppofitions, i . That had the Difciples 
 expeded a Refurreftion, they would not have 
 buried the Body, according to the Cuftom 
 of the Country, with Spices, but would 
 have faved that Expence as being unneceflary, 
 2. That this was a fufficient Ground for the 
 chief Priefts to conclude, that the Difciples 
 expefted no Refurredion. 3. That they were 
 governed in this Affair merely by what they 
 knew or believed of the Sentiments of the 
 Difciples. As to the iirft of thefe Suppofi- 
 tions, the fpicing or not fpicing the Body could 
 have no Influence on the Refurred:ion 5 and 
 therefore the Difciples could not be deter- 
 
 mkied 
 
(71) 
 
 mined to add or omit Spices, by their believ- 
 ing or not believing the Refurredtion. Had 
 they expedled fully that "Jefus would rife, 
 v^ould that have prevented their fhev^ing the 
 common Refped to their Mailer, which all 
 the Country did to their dead Friends ? or 
 could the Charge of Spices enter into the Con- 
 fideration of this Matter ? 2. If there is no 
 Shew of Probability, in fuppoiing the Difciples 
 to be influenced in adding or omitting Spices, 
 by their Expedation of a Refurredlion, there 
 could be no Ground to conclude from their 
 fpicing the Body, that they did not exped: a 
 Refurredion. 3. There is not the leaft Inti- 
 mation in the Gofpel, that the chief Priefts 
 knew the Opinion of the Difciples in this Cafe, 
 or that they would have confidered it as of any 
 Weight or Moment at all. They had heard 
 of our Lord's Prophecy, that he would rile 
 again, and it filled them with great Anxiety ; 
 for to his great Power and wonderful Works 
 they had been WitnefTes. As to the Difciples, 
 they had them in Contempt ; and though, in 
 order to frame a plauiible Pretence to Pilate 
 for having a Watch for the Sepulchre, they tell 
 him of their Apprehenfions that the Difciples 
 might fteal the Body ; yet there is no Proba- 
 bihty that this Pretence was the true and only 
 Ground for their Fear. You fee now howhis 
 firft Demonftration againfl the Gofpel Hi- 
 ilory comes out. 
 
 His fecond is from the Behaviour of Mary 
 I . Magda- 
 
( 71) 
 
 Mdgdahie and the other Women. He iays, 
 'They knew to be fur e that Nicodemus had laid 
 the Body in Spices ; and yet Luke and Mark 
 fay they brought Spices early in the Morning, 
 when the Sabbath was paft, to anoint the Body. 
 And if this was the Cafe, fays he, what need 
 had it of more ? and fo infers that St. John's 
 Account of Spices ufed by Nicodemus^ and St. 
 Mark's and St. Luke's of the Women bringing 
 Spices afterwards, cannot be reconciled s. 
 
 As the Cojifidcrer pretends here to argue from 
 Fads related by the Evangelifts, I would afk 
 him, Whence he had the Fad: upon which all 
 this Reafoning depends ? The Evangelifts give 
 him no fuch Information. Nay, their Ac- 
 count is inconfiftent with it ; for the Women 
 were not prefent whtn J ofeph and Nicodemus 
 bound up the Body with Spices , nor does it ap- 
 pear that they faw theBody after it was bound up ; 
 if they did, they could not fee the Spices which 
 were hid by the linen Winding-fheet. St. 
 Matthew fays, the Women fat over agaiitjl the 
 Sepidchre ; St. Mark, that they beheld where 
 the Body was laid. Had they been concerned 
 in preparing the Body for Burial, would the 
 Evangelifts have feparated their Cafe from 
 that of Jojeph and Nicodemus fo remarkably ? 
 Would they have afcribed the whole Care of 
 the Body and the Funeral to the Men only, 
 and faid no more of the Women, than that 
 
 s Firft Edit, p. 35. Third Edit. p. 26r' 
 
 they 
 
(73) 
 
 they faw where the Body was laid ? Thefe 
 Accounts plainly fuppofe that the Women 
 were without watching, while the Body was 
 preparing, and that when it was carried out to 
 be buried, they went after to obferve the Place 
 where it was laid. St. Lukes Account is more 
 exprefly fo. His Words are, I'ke Womenfolk 
 lowed after ^ and beheld the Sepulchre^ and bow 
 the Body was laid. It is not, as at ^ 49. of 
 the fame Chapter, a-vvctKoX-dS-Tia-uG-ui, they went 
 in Company with Jojeph , but zxTaKo^aS-iicrci-' 
 &ai, they followed after him. The Evange-^ 
 lift adds, kS-eotj-uvTo to fjtvTjfjL&iov ndi cSg iriBvi to 
 c-atfJLOL* tog does not fignify, as the Conjiderer 
 underftands it, quo modo but qiiod\ and the Paf- 
 fage is not to be rendered quo modo pofitum eji^ 
 but quod pofJum^ or Jepultum ^ ejl corpus^ i. e. 
 they came to the SepulchrCj and faw that the 
 Body was buried. 
 
 But allowing for once, that the Women 
 knew what had already been done to the Body, 
 what then ? They could not but know that all 
 was done in great hafte, in a tumultuary Man- 
 ner. And will the Conjiderer pretend to fay^ 
 that as much had been done by Jojeph and 
 Nicodemus^ as was ufual or neceflary to be 
 done? and that the whole Ceremony was al- 
 ready cornpleated ? This is more than appears 
 from the Evangelifts, and much more than in 
 the Nature of the Thing is poffible to be true. 
 
 ^ Inllances in the 'Islew Tejiaimnt are frequent, . where 
 nih,fA.<, is Lifcd in this Senfe. 
 
 L N» 
 
(74) 
 
 No Nation was more careful of their Dead 
 than the Jeijos, The Body was firft to be 
 wa(hed all over and cleaned with much Care, 
 and afterwards to be anointed. But in regard 
 to Chriji\ Body, there was not Time before 
 the Sabbath to perform even thus much of the 
 Ceremony. When it was taken down from 
 the Crofs, the Evening was coming on ; and it 
 was not yet dark, when it was left in the Se- 
 pulchre ^. 
 
 The Funeral Ceremony, 'tis plain, was not, 
 nor could already be compleated. Offices of 
 this folema Kind, efpecklly for Perfons of 
 Charadler and Diftinclion, were not ufed to be 
 performed the Moment they 'were dead, nor 
 to be huddled up in fo hafty and negligent a 
 Manner. Mojes informs us that, when Jacob 
 was embalmed, no lefs than forty Days were 
 employed in the Operation ^. And Herodotvs 
 (whofe Authority perhaps the Philofopher may 
 like better) tells us, that amongft the Egyptiaiis^ 
 from whom the Jews borrowed that Pradice, 
 no lefs than feventy Days were required to 
 compleat it^ 
 
 Jojcpb and Nicodemus intended, no doubt,. 
 to interr the Body of Chriji^ in a Manner 
 agreeable to the Notion they had of his Dig- 
 nity and Charader. No lefs than an hundred 
 Pound Weight of Spices and Perfumes were 
 
 * Compare Miitt. xxvii. 57. with Luke xxiii. 54. 
 ^ Gpn. J. ?. ^ Herod, lib, ii. 
 
 procured 
 
(7J) 
 
 procured for this Purpofe -, not wholly to be 
 employed in preparing the Body, as the CoTi/i-^ 
 derer leems to imagine, but to be burnt both 
 before and after it was laid in the Sepulchre, and 
 to be ipent in a Manner well known to thofe, 
 who are at all acquainted with Antiquity, The 
 Sepulchre in which the Body wa$ laid, was 
 probably not that in which it was to be finally 
 depoiited. It was wrapped up with fome of 
 the Spices, and laid there for prefent Conve- 
 nience only ^, becaufe it happened to be near 
 the Place of Crucifixion ; and becaufe the gab- 
 bath was fo near, that it was impoflible to 
 carry it further. The Funeral Ceremonies 
 were referved to be performed after the Sab- 
 bath, had not Providence prevented it by a 
 more wonderful Event. 
 
 Whether the Women were acquainted 
 with the little that had already been done 
 to the Body is indeed nothing to the Pur- 
 pofe. They knew where it had been de- 
 pofited, and they knew probably that it was af- 
 terwards to be removed. They canie there- 
 fore early in the Morning to pay their laft Re- 
 fpedls to it, by anointing and perfuming it ; 
 a common Method of Ibewing Refped to 
 Perfons of Dignity and Diftindion both living 
 and dead ^ 
 
 What poffible Foundation then is there for 
 the Confiderer's abfurd Suggeilions ? " That 
 ^' there is no Dependance on Gofpel Hiltory^ 
 
 * John xix. 41. a fb. xii. 3. 
 
 L z ^'' that 
 
(7^) ■ 
 
 ^^ that the Evangelifts contradicS one another 
 " in this Point; that the Women had feen 
 " the Body laid in Spices, and that there was no 
 *^ Occalion for more." Inftead of conviding 
 the Evangelifts of contradicting one another, 
 he has only betrayed his own extreme Igno- 
 rance in Scripture and Antiquity; and that too 
 in a Cafe fo common and obvious, that a 
 Man muft take fome Pains to miftake it. 
 
 His next Demonftration againft St. Maf" 
 thews Account of guarding the Sepulchre, i^ 
 from thefe Words of the Women, Who pall 
 roll away the Stone from the Door of the SepuU 
 chre^? Which ^ he obferves, they would iiot have 
 Jaid^ if they had knozmi it was fealed^^ and a 
 Guard placed. And he thinks if there was 
 indeed a Watch, it is impoffible the Women 
 Ihould be ig-norant of it. I have confidered 
 the Account given by the Evangelifts, and 
 cannot fee the leaft Foundation for thefe Ima- 
 ginations. The Body was laid in the Sepul- 
 chre in the Evening of Friday ; the Women 
 went from thence and bought Spices, and on 
 the Sabbath (or Saturday) they refted without 
 flirring from home^. On the Sabbath (while 
 the Women were confined at home) the 
 Guards were placed. Early the next Morning 
 the Wopncn go diredtly from home to the Se- 
 pulchre^ cxpeding to find it as they left it, 
 
 ^ iMark xvi, %, ^ Firft Edir. p. 16, '"Third Edit, p. 27. 
 ^ 4-iUke x:aii. 500 
 
 with 
 
( 77 ) 
 
 with a Stone at the Mouth, too large and hea- 
 vy for them to move ^ and therefore they fay, 
 Who Jhall roll away the. Stone ? The Confiderer 
 fays. If thefe T^hmgs (i. e, placing a Guard, 
 6cc.) had been done^ how is it pojjible but they 
 7fiiiji have known them ? I cannot apprehend how 
 it was pofTible they fhould know them. I fuppofe 
 he does not imagine that either the Roman 
 Governor, or the chief Priefts thought it necef- 
 fary to inform thefe poor Women, what they 
 were doing. But he thinks lb public an Aciion 
 mufl needs come to their Knowledge. Who 
 fhould carry it to them ? It was the Sabbath 
 Day, when others, as well as they, ftaid at 
 home; for which Reafon it is very probable, 
 that this Adion was not publicly known on 
 that Day. 
 
 The Confiderer goes on ; beftdes^ nothing could 
 be hid from the Dtfciples -, St, Matthew inew 
 what the chief Priefts and Rulers faid in their 
 Privy Council', How does this appear? Why 
 St. Matthew ten or more Years afterwards, 
 when the Secret was divulged, relates what the 
 chief Priefls did in Council 3 and from thence 
 he infers, that St. Matthew knew every thing 
 done in Council, at the Time of doing it. I am 
 quite afhamed to fpend my own and Reader's 
 Time thus impertinently. 
 
 But why do thefe Evangelifts tell different 
 Stories'? What does the Confiderer mean? 
 
 ^ FirftEdi;. p. 3 (J. Third Edit. p. 27. ^ Ibid. 
 
(78) 
 
 St. Matthew alone tells the Story of guarding 
 the Sepulchre. The reft are quite lilent ia 
 that Point, but fay nothing that is inconiiftent 
 with it. How then do they differ ? Is it not 
 the moil ufual thing in the World, for Hiiio- 
 rians in reporting the fame Fadt, to relate fome 
 of them more, and fome fewer Cii'cumftances, 
 that attended it? And did ever any Man of 
 common Senfe charge them with Inconfiftency 
 on that Account ? Siippofe that in telling the 
 Story of Edzvard II. one Hiflorian fliould con- 
 clude with faying that he refjgned the Crov/n ; 
 and another fliould be more particular, and 
 give an Account of a Deputation fent to bim in 
 form to take his Reiignation 5 would the Co?2-^ 
 Jiderer queflion the Truth of the principal Fad, 
 that he refigned the Crown ? The Cafe is the 
 fame here. The principal Fads, the Death, 
 the Burial, the Refurredion of Chrijl are at- 
 tefted by all the Evangelifts. In the Circum- 
 ftances of the Hiftory fome relate more, fome 
 fewer ; does this invalidate their Teftimony in 
 reporting the principal Fads, ' in wliich they 
 entirely agree ? 
 
 The Account given by St. Matthew, of 
 guarding and fealing the Sepulchre, is a very 
 material Circumftance, and was particularly lb 
 to the ye%vs ; who had by this means of their 
 own Contrivance, the moft evident Demons 
 ftration of the only Sign intended ihem, the 
 Sign of the Prophet Jo?iiis. Our Lord told 
 them, that they fliould have this Sign, and 
 
 fhould 
 
( 79 ) 
 
 fhouid know that the Son of Man was three 
 Days and three Nights in the Heart of the 
 Earth. Had they been contented with feeing 
 him crucified and buried, and concerned them- 
 felves no farther, I know not how they would 
 have had the Evidence of his being three Days 
 in the Earth. But by the fecret working of 
 Providence, they themfelves furnifh out the 
 Evidence. They guard the Sepulchre, and 
 their own Guards report, that it was by irre-* 
 iiftible Power from above opened, and the 
 Prifoner releafed, on the third Day. 
 
 St. Matthew^ by the concurrent Teflimony 
 of all Antiquity, wrote his Gofpel for the Ufe 
 of the Hebi^ews particularly ; and this Story of 
 guarding the Sepulchre, being an Evidence of 
 the Completion of a Prophecy, given to that 
 Nation in particular, feems to be the Reafon 
 why he relates it fo punctually. Whoever will 
 read St. Matthew^ Gofpel, and compare it at- 
 tentively with other Goipels, will fee fo many 
 internal Marks to confirm the Report of Anti- 
 quity, that he wrote for the Ufe of his Country- 
 men, that he will have little Reafon to doubt it. 
 And fince one Evangelift only has mentioned 
 this Circumftance of guarding the Sepulchre, 
 how providential was it, that we have the Ac- 
 count in that Gofpel, which was written for 
 the Jews particularly ? When this Gofpel was 
 pubhlhed, there were Thousands living in that 
 Country, who knew and could inform others 
 of the Circumftances reported by St. Matthew, 
 
 And* 
 
( 8o ) 
 
 And is It credible that St. Matthew would havd 
 publillied this Account in Judaa itfelf, where^ 
 if falfe, it muft undoubtedly have been de- 
 tected. If this Story had appeared firft in an 
 Hiftory publiflied among the Heathens, at a 
 great Diftance flom Judaa, the Infidels would 
 have triumphed and told us, that the Hiflorian 
 took the Advantage of telling the People a 
 ftrange Story, but took Care to lay the Scene 
 of it at a Place, where it was not likely they 
 fliould fend to make Enquiries. We fliould 
 tlien have been aiked, why the Story was not 
 told in the Gofpel intended for the Ufe of the 
 Jeivs particularly, who had proper means to 
 examine the Truth of it. Well then ; the 
 Story happily was publilhed in Judaa itfelf, 
 and being found in St. Matthew'^ Gofpel, is an 
 Appeal to the whole Nation of the Jews for 
 the Truth of the Fadt, and probably made 
 whilft many were living, who were concerned 
 in the Tranladion. 
 
 That St. Matthew reports this Story, and 
 the other Evangelifts omit it, is not a lingular 
 Cafe." St. Matthews View in writing for the 
 yews, fliows itfelf in other like In fiances. The 
 Maffacre of the Infants by Herod is reported by 
 St. Matthew only, rnd for the fam^e Reafon ; 
 b^caufe it was a Fact of peculiar ?vloment to 
 the Jews, as it fliewed the Senfe of the Nation 
 in expeding the Mefliah at the very Time 
 when Chrijl was born, as it was the Comple- 
 tion of a Prophecy fet forth in their own Scrip- 
 tures 
 
( 8i ) 
 
 tures, and as it was a Fad that happened at 
 their own Door, in which they eould not be 
 impofed on. 
 
 For a like Reafon St. Matthew quotes many 
 Prophecies, and applies them to the Meffias in 
 a way well known and underflood by the yews^ 
 but in a way unknown to the Gentiles^ and 
 therefore they appear not in the other Go- 
 fpels. 
 
 So again the Genealogies of Chriji m St. 
 Luke and St. Matthew appear at firft Sight to 
 be very different, but are entirely reconcileable 
 by conlidering for whofe ufe the two Goipels 
 were intended : St. Matthew'^ for the yews ; 
 St. Luke's, for the Gentiles. There were two 
 ways of reckoning Defcents among the yews^ 
 one of them common to them and other Na- 
 tions, by the Courfe of Defcent from Father 
 to Son ; the other was by the legal Deicent, 
 eftabliflied in their Law ; according to which, 
 if an elder Brother dyed without Iffue, and left 
 a Widow, the next Brother was to take her 
 to Wife ; and their firft born Son was in Law 
 the Son of the eldeii Brother, and fucceeded 
 to his Eftate. It is manifeft that thefe Genea- 
 logies muft meet in the common Anceftor, for 
 Brothers Children have the fame Grandfather, 
 Now St. Luke writing to the Gentiles, deduces 
 the Genealogy oi Chriji in the way underftood 
 by them, fecimdiim jus fangninh. St. Matthew 
 writing to the yews^ follows the Method by 
 which the Right of Succeiiion was governed 
 
 M among 
 
( 8^ ) 
 
 among the Jews^ and draws out the Genealogy 
 according to the legal Defcent. Thefe In- 
 flances, and many others that might be given, 
 fhew how little Weight there is in objeding 
 againft a Piece of Hiftory, becaufe it appears 
 but in one, or fometimes but in two of the four 
 Evangelifts. 
 
 At Page 28, Gf^. of the third Edit, and 37, 
 &c, of the firft, the Confiderer fpends a great 
 deal of Paper and Pains, to confute fome Ima- 
 ginations, in which no body is concerned but 
 himfelf. He takes it for granted that the Jews^ 
 to account for their guarding the Sepulchre, 
 mull ad upon one or other of thefe Perfua- 
 fions ; they muft either be fully fatisfied that 
 Chriji would rife again 5 and then he fays, it 
 was to no Purpofe to guard the Sepulchre in 
 order to prevent it : or they muft be fully fa- 
 tisfied that he would not rife again 5 and then 
 there was no Reafon, he fays, to be appre- 
 henfive of a fraudulent Refurredion. It is 
 hardly pofiible that either of thele fhould be 
 their real Cafe. They were anxious and fo- 
 licitous about this Event; alarmed and con- 
 founded with recolleding his Miracles, and the 
 Prophecies of his rifing from the Dead ; unable 
 to fatisfy their own Doubts, or to calm the 
 Mifgivings of their own Minds. Sometimes 
 they imagined that poffibly he might rife; 
 fometimes perhaps that the Difciples might 
 fecrete the Body, and tell the People ftrange 
 Stories. How to extricate themfelves they 
 
 knew 
 
{ 83 ) 
 
 knew not ; and therefore they apply to Pilate 
 for a Guard, in hopes of finding fome Relief 
 in their Diflrefs, as Men in Diftrefs are ready 
 to take any thing for a Remedy, But that 
 they had as much Leifure, and as much cool 
 Infidelity, as the Confiderer had, when he ar- 
 gued their Caufe for them, is utterly incredi- 
 ble; and were they to give an Account for 
 themfelves, they would hardly plead their own 
 Caufe, as this wife Advocate, without attend- 
 ing to the Situation they were in, has done for 
 than. 
 
 The Condudt of the Jewi/l^ Rulers, with 
 regard to our Saviour, was the more likely to 
 be wrong, becaufe they judged and acfled 
 upon wrong Maxims. They were fo pofTefied 
 with the Exped:ation of a Mejjiah with tem- 
 poral Power, that no Reafbn could perfuade 
 them that Chriji was the Perfon, who pretend- 
 ed to no fuch Power ; and upon this Notion 
 they were fo refolutely determined to oppofe 
 his Pretenfions, that no Evidence could con^ 
 vince them, that his Claims were juft. The 
 People however were not fo infenfible as their 
 Leaders ; convinced by his Wonders, and en- 
 gaged by the many Ads of Benevolence he 
 daily did, they followed him in great Numbers, 
 The Governours concerned and enraged to fee 
 the People thus deluded, as they called it, by a 
 Pretender, determined to put an End to his 
 Pretenfions, by putting an End to his Life. 
 Accordingly they had him apprehended, accu- 
 M 2 fed 
 
( 84 ) 
 
 fed of Blafphemy againft God, and Treafon a- 
 
 gainft Ccejar^ and publickly executed. But 
 
 the Danger was not yet over. He prophefied 
 
 in his Life-time, that he fhould rife again in 
 
 three Days, and we have fliewn before, that 
 
 they had now Reafon to be alarmed at this 
 
 Prophecy. The Works done in his Life, 
 
 compared with the amazing Scene that was 
 
 opened at his Death, muft needs fill them with 
 
 Doubts and Fears. They could not tell but 
 
 fome extraordinary Power might .pbiTibly exert 
 
 itfelf in Behalf of one, at whofe Agonies all 
 
 Nature feemed to fympathize : Or if after all 
 
 he fhould fliould prove to be an Impoftor, they 
 
 imagined, or pretended to imagine, that the 
 
 Difciples might take Advantage of this Situation 
 
 of Things, and contrive to carry on the Cheat j 
 
 that they might polTibly remove the Body out 
 
 of Sight, and give out that the Prophecy was 
 
 fulfilled. Thus the Deln lions of the People, 
 
 though checked awhile by his Death, might 
 
 break out afrefli, and become more rivetted 
 
 and confirmed by a fuppofed Refurredion ; 
 
 and fo the laft Error be worfe than the firft. 
 
 To quiet their own Minds therefore, and to 
 
 be fully fatisfied about the Event, a Guard of 
 
 Soldiers is placed at the Sepulchre. But on the 
 
 third Day they are frighted from their Poft by 
 
 an Angel and an Earthquake, fly into the 
 
 City, and make their Report to the chief 
 
 Priefls. The chief Priefts w^l knew what 
 
 Efrefl: this Report v^ould naturally have on the 
 
 Minds 
 
( 85 ) 
 
 Minds of the People, if fairly made ; to pre- 
 vent which they refolve in the firft Place to 
 publifli a Story of their own ; and therefore, 
 with a rich Bribe in hand, and a full Aflarance 
 of Indemnity, they prevail with the Watch to 
 be filent as to what they had fctn at the Se- 
 pulchre, and to give out that the Difciples ilole 
 away the Body, whilft they were afleep. 
 
 But to juftify the Credit of this Piece of 
 Hiftory, we muft, it feems, anfwer all the 
 Imaginations of the Conjiderer ; who has given 
 his Judgment upon the Part aded by the 
 Guards and the chief Priefts, and is of Opi- 
 nion that neither of them could do what the 
 Hiftory afcribes to them. He has fummed up 
 his Reafoning at Page 48. firft Edit, and Page 
 38. third Edit. It is amazing — that the Guard 
 at the Sepulchre jlmild be temjied almojl to 
 Deaths with afionijhing Wonders^ and the high 
 Priefts and Rulers believe thejn, yet thefe Tubings 
 Jhouldhave no more Eff'e^ upon them than ij they 
 had not believed them ^. 
 
 Little Dealers in Hiftory and Politicks are 
 never more contemptible, than when they at- 
 tempt to afilgn Reafons for or againft plain 
 Fads, reported by Writers of Credit. The 
 Actions of a great General have been fometimes 
 called in queftion, becaufe a little Smatterer in 
 military Aifairs conceives the Schemes not to 
 have been well laid, or not v/ell conduced ; 
 
 I Firft Edk. p. 48. Third Edit. p. 38. 
 
 and 
 
( 8<^ ) 
 
 and then full of his own Wifdom he fays, 
 Could any great General ad: fo ? Upon the 
 Strength of which Reafoning he concludes the 
 Hiftory to be falfe. There are two fmall 
 Faults in this Way of arguing, firft, that he 
 who reafons fo, takes it for granted that he is 
 able to judge wifely in the Cafe himfelf , which 
 often happens to be otherwife. Secondly, that 
 Men in all Cafes atl wifely and reafonably, 
 which feldom is the Cafe. 
 
 But let us hear in the firft Place w^hat the 
 Confiderer has to fay for the Guards. 
 
 'T!is ftrangCy unaccountably Jiraiige ! that 
 ihofe Soldiers, wbo were juft now ahnojl Jiriick 
 dead with Terror^ fbould lofe the Impre£tons fo 
 ea/ily and Jo fcon, which it had made upon thern^ 
 which juft before Jcarce left them Power tojiy 
 from the deadly Fright which an Earthquake and 
 an Angel had put them in ! — that for Money 
 they fjould all agree together to lift theinf elves in 
 the Priejls Service to fight again ft God^ when 
 by fo doing they might expedl fome heavy Judg- 
 ment to fall upon them , but by afiirming the 
 I'ruth boldly^ conceive reafonable Hopes oj being 
 Captains in the Meffiah'^ viBorious Army, which 
 was to conquer all Natio?is ^. 
 
 Let us now confider the Grounds upon 
 which he builds. He fuppofes thefe common 
 Soldiers, who were Heathens, and bred up to 
 defpife the Religion of the Jews above all 
 
 ^ Firft Edit. p. 44. Third Edit. p. 34. 
 
 others^ 
 
( 87 ) 
 
 others, to be perfuaded, that, when they took a 
 Bribe of the chief Priefls, they lifted themjehes 
 to fight againft God — a?2d that they might expeB 
 fome heavy Judgment^ and that by ading other- 
 wife, they might have reajmiable Hopes of being 
 Captains in the Meffiah'j viBorious Army^ 
 which was to conquer all Nations. How 
 comes the Confiderer to furnifh the Soldiers 
 with thefe Sentiments ? Does he imagine that 
 a Fright would make them forget all the Re- 
 ligion of their own Country at once, and turn 
 Jews^ and firm Believers in the God of the 
 Jews ? and that it would give them the fame; 
 Opinion of the Mejjiah which the Je^i^s had ; 
 and make them think J ejus to be the Mejjiah^ 
 and fill them with Expedation of Employ- 
 ments under him ? Nothing furely can be 
 more out of Charader. But however, they 
 were terrified j and the Cojifiderer thinks it 
 ftrange, they JJoould kfe the Impi'ejjion fo eafily 
 and Jo Jbon. What ImprefTion does he mean ? 
 If he micans the Sentiments, which he has 
 afcribed to them, lam perfuaded they did not 
 lofe them, for they never had them. The 
 Roman Soldiers very probably knew nothing 
 more, than that they were appointed to watch 
 the Sepulchre, that the Body might not be 
 removed, and that they were acquainted with 
 the Charader and Pretenfions of the Perfon 
 lying in the Grave, there is not the leaft Rea- 
 fon to fufped ; much lefs had they any Ex- 
 pedation of being diihu'bed by inviiible Powers; 
 
 and 
 
( S8 ) 
 
 and when they were difturbed, what Probabi- 
 lity is there in making them reafon immediate- 
 ly like Jews, and to think of God and his 
 MeJJiab, as if they had been his Difciples ? But 
 fuppofe them (if you pleafe) to have iome Tin- 
 (5lure of Rehgion , fuppofe too they beheved 
 with the Centurion at the Crucifixion, that 
 Chriji was indeed a righteous Man 5 and yet 
 farther, that he was particularly favoured of 
 the Gods ; what is all this to the Purpofe ? If 
 he was a Favourite of the Gods, it was the 
 Gods of his own Country, with whom they ima- 
 gined they had nothing to do. They had Gods 
 of their own, to whom they were bound, and 
 whom they ferved, if they ferved any Gods at all. 
 As to the yewifi Religion, if they thought any 
 thing of it, they thought with the reft of the 
 Heathens that it was the worft of Superftitions^ 
 It remains then only that the Soldiers were 
 feared and terrified by a furprizing Sight, And 
 where is the Wonder, that, when the Fright 
 was over, they fliould be what they were be- 
 fore, mere common Soldiers ; and ready to 
 take Money, w-hich was to be earned at io 
 cheap a Rate, as reporting a Story made for 
 them by the chief Priefts ? It was all one to 
 them who moved the Body ; they were unaf- 
 fefted with the Confequences that alarmed the 
 chief Priefts ; and, I dare fay, ready Money 
 outweighed all Hopes, the Conftderer has given 
 them, of getting Commiflions under the Jewifi 
 Mejjiah. 
 
 I In 
 
( 89 ) 
 
 In the next Place he undertakes the Caufe of 
 the chief Priefts, and to prove that the Part 
 afligned to them in the Gofpel Hiftory, is a 
 weak one, and a wicked one 5 and thence he 
 concludes they neither did nor could ad: that 
 Part, and that the Account of it is forayed. 
 The firfl Part of his Tafk is indeed an eafy 
 one ', for the chief Priefts ad:ed very fooliflily 
 and very wickedly -, but I am in fome Pain for 
 his Confequence. Will he maintain that no 
 Men adt wickedly or weakly ? or though 
 many do, yet the chief Priefts never did or 
 could ? I doubt he will be at a full Stop here. 
 But let us hear him. The Pri^Jls, he fays, as 
 well as the People^ were credulous of Miracles^ 
 being nurfed up in the Belief of them, which 
 when attejted by their own Party, Perfons whofe 
 Veracity they could depend iipn {not the flying 
 Reports oj a giddy Mob) fnufl have prevented 
 them from doi?ig what 'tis here pretended thev 
 did\ ^ 
 
 But why fhould the chief Priefts be more 
 afFeded by Miracles, attejled by their own Party, 
 i, e. the Guards, than by thofe which they 
 fav7 themfelves ? Many fuch there were, fome 
 of them I have already mentioned ^ but how 
 were they affedted by them ? Did they not feek 
 the Life of Jefus for railing Lazarus, and the 
 Life of Lazarus that he might not live a Wit- 
 nefs of the Power oi Jefus? Did they not ad- 
 mit the Miracles, and yet afcribe them to the 
 Power of Beelzebub ? And might they iiot with 
 ! Firft Edit. p. 45. Third Edit. p. 3^ 
 
 N .the 
 
(9o) 
 
 the fame Reafon afcribe all the Guards report- 
 ed to be done at the Sepulchre to the fame 
 Power ? 
 
 If it be fuflicient to fet afide the Authority 
 of the Gofpel, becaufe it reprefents the chief 
 Priells ading unreafonably, the fame Argu- 
 ment will be too hard for the Credit of all the 
 Hiilories in Being ; for they all fliow us Men 
 ading with great Folly and great Wickednefs. 
 The Old Tejlament muft doubtlefs follow the 
 New ; for what is more unreafonable than the 
 Behaviour of the ancient Jews^ after their won- 
 derful Deliverance from Egypt ? May not the 
 Cofifiderer fay. Had God fo vifibly interpofed for 
 their Deliverance, it is impoffible they fhould 
 rebel fo foon as the Hiftory fays they did ; and 
 therefore the Hiftory muft be falfe ? But I leave 
 this to confider a Complaint of a much higher 
 Nature. 
 
 The ^ngel, it feems, who was the Minifter 
 of God, and aded as by him direded, did very 
 impolitickly in jrightcning away the Watch ^ he- 
 fore Jefus came out of the Sepulchre^ fo that they 
 could not be Wttfiefes of his Refurrediion ^, How 
 he knows that the Watch was terrified before 
 y^///i came out of the Sepulchre, I cannot tell 3 he 
 learns it not from the Gofpel. The Angel mov'd 
 the Stone for the Sake of thcfe who came to the 
 Sepulchre, that they might fee, and report what 
 they faw; our Lord certainly wanted not their 
 Help. But why were tlye Ailgels impolitic ? 
 
 * Firft Edit. p. 47. Third Edit. p. 38. 
 
 3 • were 
 
( 91 ) 
 
 were they to govern themfelves by the Politics of 
 tJie Chief Priefts, and follow their Meafures ? Had 
 God, or the Angels by his Diredion appointed 
 the Watch to be Witneffes of the Refurredion, 
 and they had been feared away before the 
 Time, the Objedion would have laid: But 
 how was God bound to give this Evidence to 
 the Guards ? Was it becaufe the Chief Prieils 
 had fet the Watch ? But what Right had they 
 to prefcribe to God, who ihould be Eye- Wit- 
 neffes of his Son*s Refurredion ? The fetting of the 
 Watch and what followed was iufficient to 
 convince the Jews^ that Jefus^ according to his 
 ov^n Prophecy, was three Days in the Heart of 
 the Earth, and then releafcd. This Evidence 
 rofe providentially out of theii" own Contrivance, 
 to watch the Body ; but their Contiivance laid 
 no Obligation on God, nor could it haften or 
 retard the Refurredion, or have any Effed on 
 the Manner of it. We find in the Gofpel, that 
 very particular Care was taken by our Lord, to 
 appoint chofcn Witneffes of the Refurredion. 
 To them he llievved himfelf alive, after the 
 Refurre6tion ; to them were given Powers from 
 on high to confirm this Evidence ; but where 
 does the Confiderer read, that it was referred to 
 the High Prielis, or that they had any Right to 
 appoint 'Witneffes in this Cafe? If they had no 
 Right to appoint them, no Injury was done in 
 not admitting them. And yet after all, though 
 the Confidererer thinks the Guards did not fee 
 enough, they faw fo much as to make their Re- 
 port of great Weight, had there not been an 
 N 2 incor- 
 
(90 
 
 incorrigible Obftinacy in the JewiJJj Rulers \ 
 enough to awaken their Attention, and to call 
 to their Remembrance the Sign of Jonas^ which 
 was to be given them ^ enough to raife 
 ferious Refledions upon all the Miracles oije- 
 fiis^ of which they had themfelves been Eye- 
 WitnelTes. 
 
 III. 
 We come now to confider the Inconfiftences, 
 which the Confiderer charges upon the Evange- 
 lifts in the Account they give of the Circum- 
 ftances of the Refurredion. One would ima- 
 gine this Gentleman had never read any Piece of 
 Hiftory reported by different Writers 3 or any 
 5r)'^/, whofe Fads are proved by many Wit- 
 neffes ; otherv/ife he would not have objedted to 
 the Relations of the Evangelifls, merely becaufe 
 fome mention Circumftances omitted by others, 
 though all agree in the principal Fads to be 
 proved ; and all the Circumftances, though all 
 riot mentioned by each Writer, are per- 
 fedly confiftent. For this is the Cafe of all, 
 Hiftorians, who treat of the fame Fads ; and 
 I am perfuaded, that, had the Gofpel Accounts 
 with all their Varieties related to any Matter of 
 civil Hillory, and been publiflied under the 
 Name of any Grecian or Ro?}ia?i Hiljorians, 
 thefe different Relations, inftead of being 
 thought Matter of Objedion, would have been 
 confidered as confirming and eftabliihing each 
 the other. Such Differences among Reporters 
 of the fame Fad, will always be found from 
 the Very Nature of Things, For all Fads be- 
 ''-' ing 
 
( 93 ) 
 
 ing attended with many Circumftances, and all 
 of them not of equal Importance, Hiftorians, 
 according to their different Judgments, choofe 
 to report fome more, fome fewer of thofe Cir- 
 cumftances. This, I fay, muft be the com- 
 pion Cafe, where Hiftorians write without Re- 
 gard to each other -, but it muft neceflarily be 
 fo, where a later Hiftorian publifties an Ac- 
 count on Purpofe to fupply the Defeds or O- 
 miffions of thofe before him j for then his very 
 Defign is to add fuch Things or Circumftances, 
 as the others had either totally neglected or im- 
 perfedly related. 
 
 The FourGofpels were not publiflied at the 
 fame Time, nor can the precife Date of the 
 -Publication of each of them be afcertained. 
 .St. Matthew by the general Confent of Anti- 
 quity is taken to be firft, and to have been pub- 
 lilhed not many Years after our Saviour's Cru- 
 cifixion, St. Mark and St. Luke came next in 
 Order. After all, and long after all came St. 
 Johns Gofpel, publifh'd in an extreme old Age, 
 and not above a Year before his Death. His 
 Intention was, as all Antiquity bears Witnefs, 
 to com pleat the Hiftory of our Saviour, by ad- 
 ding what the other Evangelifts had omitted, 
 and enlarging what they had concifely related. 
 
 This being the State of the Hiftory, as con- 
 tained in the Four Gofpels ; the true Way of 
 examining it is, to confider the Accounts given 
 by the three firft Evangelifts feparately (as be- 
 ing the Accounts which lay before St. John^ 
 \vhen he wrote his Gofpel) and then to com- 
 pare 
 
(94) 
 
 pare them with St. John. By \vhich means 
 we fhall fee, what he left as he found it, and 
 as wanting no Addition or Explanation ; and 
 alfo what Additions or Explanations he thought 
 proper to infert ; and fo be able to judge upon the 
 whole,whethertheHiftorybeconfiftent with itfelf. 
 
 In order 
 
 St. Matt. Chap, xxviii. 
 
 I. In the End of the 
 Eahbathy as it began to 
 dawn towards the firft 
 Day of the JVeekj came 
 Mary Magdalene^ and the 
 other Mary., to fee the 
 Sepulchre. 
 
 .2. Jnd behold there 
 was a great Earthquake-^ 
 for the /mgel of the Lord 
 defc ended from Heaven^ 
 and came and rolled back 
 the Stone from the Door^ 
 mtd fat upon it, _, , . 
 
 ^. His Countenance was 
 like LighSening^ and his 
 Raiment' white as Snow. 
 
 4. And for fear of him 
 the Keeper's did fhake^ and 
 became as dead Men. 
 
 .5. And the Angel an- 
 Jwered and faid unto the 
 iVomen^ Fear not ye^ for 
 J know that ye feek Jefus^ 
 which was crucified. 
 
 6. He is not here : For 
 he is rifen ^J he faid : 
 
 St. Mark, Chap. xvi. 
 
 1 . And when the Sab- 
 bath was pafl., Mary 
 Magdalene., and Mary the 
 Mother of James and Sa- 
 lome^ had brought Spices 
 that they might come^ and 
 anoint him. 
 
 2. And very ear'ly in 
 the Morning the firft Bay 
 of the Week., they came 
 to the Sepulchre., at the 
 riftng of the Sun. 
 
 3. yind they faid among 
 themfelves. Who fhall roll 
 us away the Stcr^^e from 
 the Door of the Sepul- 
 chre ? 
 
 4. And when they 
 looked^ they faw that the 
 Stone was rolled away, 
 for it was very great. 
 
 5. And entring into the 
 Sepulchre, they faw a 
 young Man" fitting on the 
 right Side, clothed in a 
 long white Garment^ and 
 they were affrighted. 
 
( p)- ) 
 
 in order to give the Reader the Light, which 
 I think will arife from this Method, I will lay 
 before him the Account of the three Evange- 
 lifts of what pafled at the Sepuchre ; and then 
 confider what the Difference between them is ; 
 and laftly compare them with St. John's Ac- 
 count, and confider how the Difference will 
 then ftand, upon the Foot of the Additions or 
 Explications given by him. 
 
 St. Luke^ Chap. xxiv. 
 
 1 . Now upon the jirfl 
 Day of the Week^ very 
 early in the Mornings they 
 came unto the Sepulchre^ 
 bringing the Spices^ which 
 they had prepared^ and 
 certain others with them. 
 
 2. And they found the 
 Stone rolled, away from 
 the Sepulchre. 
 
 3. And they entered 
 in^ and found not the 
 Body of the Lord Jefus, 
 
 4. A.nd it came to pafs 
 as they were much per- 
 plexed thereabout^ behold 
 two Men flood by them 
 in ftjining Garments. 
 
 5. And as they were 
 afraid^ and bowed down 
 their Faces to the Earthy 
 they faid unto thern^ Why 
 feekye the Living among 
 the Dead? 
 
St. Matt, Chap, xxviii. St. Mark^ Chap. xvi. 
 
 " Come fee the Place where 
 the Lard lay. 
 
 7. And go quick .^ and 
 tell his Difciples^ that he 
 is rifen from the Dead ; 
 and behold he goeth before 
 you into Galilee^ there 
 fhallyefee him \lo^I have 
 told you. 
 
 8. And they departed 
 quickly from the Sepul- 
 chre^ with Fear and great 
 Joy^ and did run to bring 
 his Difciples Word. 
 
 9. And as they went to 
 tell his Difciples^ behold^ 
 Jefus met them, faying^ 
 All Hail •, and they came 
 and held him by the Feet^ 
 and worfhipped him. 
 
 10. Then faid Jefus 
 unto them., Be not afraid: 
 go tell my Brethren^ that 
 they go into Galilee., and 
 there f}j all they fee me. 
 
 6. And he faith unto 
 them. Be not affrighted : 
 yefeek Jefus of Nazareth^ 
 which was crucified , he 
 is not here j behold the 
 Place where they laid 
 him. 
 
 7. But go your PFay, 
 tell his Difciples and Pe- 
 ter, that he goeth before 
 you into Galilee: There 
 fh all ye fee him as he faid 
 
 unto you. 
 
 S.And they went out 
 quickly, and fled from 
 the Sepulchre : For they 
 trembled and were amaz- 
 ed : Neither faid they any 
 thing to any Man : For 
 they were afraid, 
 
 9. Now when Jefus 
 was rifen early the frji 
 Day of the Week, he ap- 
 pearedfirfi to Mary Mag^ 
 dalene, out of whom he 
 had cafl feven Devils. 
 
 10. And fioe went and 
 told them that had been 
 with him, as they mourn- 
 ed and wept, 
 
 11. And they, when 
 they had heard that he 
 was alive^ and had been 
 feen of her^ believed not. 
 
 St. 
 
( 91 ) 
 
 St. Luh^ Chap. xxiv. 
 
 6. He is not here, hut 
 is rifen : Remember how 
 he [pake unto you^ when 
 he ^as yet in Galilee^ 
 
 7. Saying, The Son of 
 Man muft be delivered in- 
 to the Hands of finful 
 Men, and he crucified, 
 and the third Day rife 
 again, 
 
 8. And they rememher- 
 ed his Words, 
 
 9. And returned from 
 the Sepulchre, and told all 
 thefe things to the Eleven:, 
 and all the reft, 
 
 10. It was Mary Mag- 
 dalene and Joanna, and 
 Mary the Mother of 
 James, and other Wotnen 
 that were with them^ 
 which told thefe things 
 unto the Apoftles. 
 
 1 1 . And their Words 
 feemed to them as idle 
 Tales, and they believed 
 them not, 
 
 12. Then arofe Peter, 
 and ran unto the Sepul- 
 chre, and ft oping down, 
 he beheld the Linen Cloths 
 laid hy themfelves, and 
 departed, wondering in 
 himfelfat that which was 
 come to pafs. 
 
 O Yoa 
 
(98) 
 
 You fee St. Matthew is the only one, wha 
 mentions the Earthquake, and the Angels de- 
 fcending to roll away the Stone. As the reft fay 
 nothing of it, it is very abfurd to fay, as the Con- 
 Jiderer does, that they contradidt it. I fhall 
 only therefore obferve upon this Part, that our 
 Bngli/Jj Tranflation is not exad ^ for after re- 
 lating the coming of the Women to the Se- 
 pulchre,, it follows, and behold there was a great 
 Earthquake, &c. which may lead the Reader 
 to imagine, that the Earthquake happened, 
 whilft the Women were at the Sepulchre j 
 which it did not. St. Matthew was to account 
 for the Womens finding the Stone rolled, and 
 therefore inferts what happened juft before their 
 coming ; and his Words fhould be render'd,. 
 and behold there had been an Earthquake, Sec, 
 
 If you compare thefe three Evangelifts toge- 
 ther in other Refpedts,, the Difference between 
 them will lye in thefe Particulars. 
 
 1 . StMark and St. Luke fiy, theWomen came 
 early to the Sepulchre, bringing Spices to anoint 
 the Body ; St. Matthew fays they came early 
 to the Sepulchre, but £iys notliing of their 
 bringing Spices. 
 
 2. St. Matthew fays, tho two Marys came 
 to the Sepulchre; St. Mark, the two Marys and 
 Salome ; St. Luke fays, the Women who came 
 from Gall lee with him, and he tells us, ^ 1 1. 
 that they were the two Marys, Joanna, and 
 other Women with them. 
 
 3. The 
 
(99 ) 
 
 3 . The three Evangelifts agree that the Wo- 
 men faw a Vifion -, St. Matthew fays, an AngeJ ; 
 St. Mark, a young Man ; St. Luke, two Men, 
 whom f 2^, he calls two Angels. 
 
 4. St. Matthew and St. Mark agr^ in the 
 Meffage fent by the Angels to the Difciples, that 
 he would go before them into Galilee. St. 
 Luke does not mention this Meflage exprefsly, 
 but that the Angels remind the Women of 
 what Jefus had faid, being with them in Galilee, 
 of his Death and Refurreftion. 
 
 Thefe Differences cannot be accounted for by 
 any Thing added in the Gofpel of St. John, and 
 therefore I fliall poftpone the Confideration 
 of them, for the Sake of purfuing the View 
 before m.e. 
 
 The next and moft material Difference occurs 
 in the Account given of our Lord's appearing to 
 Mary Magdalene, St. Matthew fays, that as the 
 Women went from the Sepulchre to carry the 
 Meffage to the Difciples, jf ejus met them, and 
 gave them another Meffage to the Difciples. St. 
 Mark, after concluding the Account of what 
 pafTed at the Sepulchre fays, Now when J^fus 
 was rifen early the firfi Day of the Week,, he ap- 
 peared jirjl to Mary Magdalene, He does not 
 mention this as Part of what happened at the 
 Sepulchre, but as a new and diflind Account of 
 itfelf. St. Luke gives no Account of our Lord's 
 appearing to Mary:, 
 
 Thefe A-ccounts eonfidered together, the Cafe 
 •will fland thuj. Stop at St. Matthew^ Account 
 
 O 2 of 
 
{ 100 ) 
 of what pafTed at the Sepulchre, to the Wo- 
 mens going with the Angels Meffage to the 
 Difciples, which ends with f 8. and take St, 
 Marks> Account without tacking to it the fepa- 
 rate Relation of the Appearance to Mary Mag- 
 dalenCy (which is indeed no Part of the Account 
 as given by St. Mark of what happened at the 
 Sepulchre) and then the three Accounts are 
 (excepting the fmall Variations before men- 
 tioned, and hereafter to be accounted for) per* 
 feftly confiftent. 
 
 The Difficulty then remaining, is to account 
 for St. Liike^ faying nothing of this Appearance ; 
 for St. MarK^ fpeaking of it as diftindt from 
 what happened at the Sepulchre ; for St. Mat- 
 thews placing it before he had accounted for 
 the Delivery of the firft MefTage, and adding 
 a fecond Meflage of like Import from Chriji 
 himfelf. 
 
 The Difficulty with refpeft to St. Liih is not 
 great 5 he has omitted the Appearance -, for it came 
 not within the Compafs of what he proposed to 
 relate, as will appear prefently. Neither are St, 
 Matthew and St. Mark^ who relate this Ap- 
 pearance, at Variance. They agree in the Ap- 
 pearance, agree that it was early on the firft 
 Day of the Week ; St. Matthew fays, it was a^ 
 they went to tell the Difciples j and fo it might 
 be confidently with St. Mark, for he has faid 
 "nothing to the coatraiy. Thus the Cafe would 
 ftand, had we only the Hifl:ory as given by 
 thefe three Evangelifts. 
 
 When 
 
(lOl) 
 
 When St. John wrote his Gofpel, he had 
 Reafon to enlarge the Account given of what 
 paffed at the Sepulchre, for the fake of adding 
 bis own Teftimony, who had been himfelf an 
 Eye-Witnefs ; which Teftimony the other 
 Evangelifls had omitted. Compare St. yohi 
 and St. Luke together, and St. Joh7i plainly 
 carries on the Account, where St. Luke left it. 
 St. Luke relates how the Women went to the 
 Sepulchre, faw Angels, received a Meflage to 
 the Difciples ; that they delivered the MeiTage, 
 and that Feter upon hearing it went away to 
 the Sepulchre, and found every Thing to anfwer 
 the Relation. Now St. John went and was a 
 Witnefs of thefe Things as well as Peter ; he 
 leaves therefore St. Luke's Account, (which was 
 exadt as to what happened before Peter went) 
 as he found it -, and carries it on by beginning 
 with a clear and diftin6t Account of his own 
 going with Peter to the Sepulchre. To intro- 
 duce this Account he fays, 'T'he firjl Day of the 
 Week cometh Mary Magdaleiie early ^ when it 
 was yet dark, unto the Sepulchre ; and feeth the 
 Stone taken away from the Sepulchre, 'Then foe 
 run>ieth and cojjteth to Simon Peter, and the otbet 
 Difciple whom J ejus loved,^ &c. He then gives 
 an Account of what he and St. Peter obferved of 
 the State of the Sepulchre. It appeal's at ;^ ii. 
 that Mary returned to the Sepulchre, and flaid 
 there after him , that flie faw again a Vifion of 
 
 John XX. I, ^c. 
 
 Angels, 
 
( 102 ) 
 
 Angels, and faw Jefu^ himfelf, who gave her 
 a Meffage to deliver to the Difciples. 
 
 Let us fee nov^ how their Accounts will cor- 
 refpond together. 
 
 1. It is manifeft that Mary went twice to the 
 Sepulchre. 
 
 2. That St. yohn gives no other Account of 
 what paifed at her firft being there, except 
 that (he found the Stone taken away from the 
 Sepulchre, and this only as introdudlive to what 
 he had to add further. 
 
 3. ThattheStory of her firft going, and what 
 related to it, ended at the Relation flbe made of 
 what ihe had feen, to Peter and John, 
 
 4. That the Appearance oi J ejiis to her, and 
 the Meffage given to her, was at her fecond be- 
 ing at the Sepulchre. 
 
 It comes out from thefe Lights given by St. 
 John, 
 
 ift. That St. Luke's, Account related only 
 to what happened at Marys firft going to the 
 Sepulchre ; for it ends at St. Peters fetting out 
 to view the Sepulchre, where St. Joh?! begins. 
 
 2dly. Since St. Luke's Account agrees with 
 St. Matthew's and St. Mark's^ in relating what 
 paffed at the Sepulchre, it follows that their 
 Accounts are Relations of what paffed only at 
 Marys firft coming, i, e, St. Matthews Ac- 
 count to if 8, inclufive, and St. Mark's to 
 3^ 8. inclufive. 
 
 3ly. St. John having informed us, that Chriji 
 appeared to Mary^ and delivered his Meffage to 
 
 her 
 
( ^o5 ) 
 
 her at her fecond corning to the Sepulchre ; it 
 follows that what St. Matthew fays f, 9, lo. 
 and ^l.Mark f. 9, 10, n. happened at her 
 fecond coming to the Sepulchre. 
 
 Thus St. Johns additional Account has given 
 us a clear Order of the whole Tranfadtion. 
 And it appears that St. Luke confidered the 
 Women merely as Meffengers of the News ta 
 the Difciples ; and as foon as the Melfage was 
 delivered, and the Difciples made acquainted 
 with it, he profecutes their Story no further. 
 St. Mark in like Manner, but adds the Ap- 
 pearance to Mary, as a diftina: and feparate 
 thing by itfelf. 
 
 St. Matthew has given an Account of what 
 happened at the firfl: going to the Sepulchre ; 
 and has alfo mentioned the Appearance to 
 Mary, which he has conneded to the former 
 Account as Part (and fo indeed it was) of the 
 fame Tranfaftidn. Had he mentioned this 
 Appearance, as St. Mark has mentioned it, 
 without making any Connection between the 
 Appearance and the Story of the iirft Vifit to 
 the Sepulchre, there had been no Difficulty in 
 this Part of the Cafe. 
 
 The Difficulty there now is, arifes from the 
 Manner in which St. Matthew connedls thefe 
 two Parts together ; he fays, that J ejus ap- 
 peared to the Women, as they went to tell the 
 Difciples ; St. Johri^i Account is, that he ap- 
 peared to Mary after (he had delivered the 
 Meflage (not to the Difciples, but) to himfelf 
 
 and 
 
( 104 ) 
 
 and Petery and had returned a fecond Tirne to 
 the Sepulchre. 
 
 I believe there are very fevs^ Hiilories in the 
 World, w^here Difficulties of this Sort, were 
 they nicely enquired into, do not frequently oc- 
 cur. Writers of Hiftory, to make one Thread 
 of Story, lay hold of any Circumftances to 
 make a Tranfition from one Fadt to another. 
 A little Agreement of the Fads in Place or 
 Time often ferves ; and we read in or near the 
 lame Place, or about the fame Time fuch and 
 fuch Things happened ; in which Exadlnefs is 
 not intended or expected. And had we no- 
 thing elfe to fay upon the prefent Difficulty, it 
 would be fufficient with reafonable Men. 
 
 But as this feeming Difagreement has been 
 fo ftrongly infifted on, I defire the Reader to 
 confider the following Obfervations. 
 
 .1. St. Matthews Account may very well 
 confift with St. Johns, St. Matthew does not 
 fay, the Women had delivered no MefTage to 
 the Difciples, nor does St. Jofm fay they had 
 delivered it to any but to himfelf and Pete?-. 
 Confider then -, the Women, who received 
 the Meffage from the Angel at their firft going 
 to the Sepulchre, could not deliver it to the Dif- 
 ciples all at once -, for it is not to be fuppofed that 
 they were all together fo early in the Morning % 
 For which Reafon the Womeri probably di- 
 vided themfelves, and fome went to fome of 
 the Difciples, and fome to others ; and that 
 Mary Magdalene^ and whoever elfe attended 
 
 her. 
 
( loy ) 
 
 her, went, in the firll Place, to Peter and John 
 to inform them, intending to go to others with 
 like Notice. But when they found that Pe- 
 ter and Joh?i went diredly to the Sepulchre, 
 they did, as it was extremely natural for thenn 
 to do, go after them, to fee the Sepulchre, 
 which they had left in Fear, but very delirous 
 to view it again in Company of the Men, in- 
 tending foon to return, and deliver the Mef- 
 fage to the other Difciples. Upon this Cafe, 
 it is evident, they returned to the Sepulchre 
 before they had delivered their Meffage, as 
 they were required to do, to the Difciples; 
 and St. Matthew might very well confider the 
 Appearance of Jejus^ as happening whilll: they 
 were employed in carrying the firfi: Meffage. 
 And this accounts like wife for our Saviour*s 
 giving them a fecond Meffage, much to the 
 fame Purpofe and Liiport as the firft. 
 
 2. There is no Reafon to think, that St. 
 Matthew's Words are to be taken fo ftricSly, a$ 
 to limit the Appearance of Jefus to the Wo- 
 men, to the very Moment in which they paf- 
 fed from the Sepulchre, with the firft Meffage 
 to the Difciples. 
 
 I. Becaufe there could not, from the firft 
 going to the Sepulchre, to the End of the whole 
 Account, including the Appearance to Mary, 
 be more than an Hour at moft employed ; and 
 Fads, crouded fo clofe together, are fcarcely 
 ever reported under different Dates, 
 
 P 2, Becaufe 
 
• ^. Becaufe St. Matthew^ throwing the whole 
 Tranfadion into one continued Story, would 
 naturally co?ifder no more than the general Or- 
 der in which Things happened, without di- 
 ftinguifliing the ihort Time, which the whole 
 took up, into different Periods. 
 
 3. Becaufe the Language, ufed by St. Mat-- 
 thew^ does really import no more than the 
 general Order in which things happened : He 
 fays, cig iTTc^evcPiO clTra^yiiKca^ as they ivere going 
 to tell. You have, at ver. 1 1 . the very lame 
 way of fpeaking, 'uo^iuoi^o:v j) cl^t'^^. It is the 
 very fame Note of Time > for he fpeaks of the 
 Women^s going with the Meffage, and fays, 
 ^Now when they (the Women) "were goings be- 
 hold the Watch came into th^ City^ andfl:ewed 
 the Chief Priejis all the T^hingi that "were done. 
 Can any one fuppofe, that the E'-cangeliJi means 
 more, than that the Watch went to the City 
 about the fame Time that the Women went 
 to the Difciples ? Or if it could pofTibly appear, 
 that the Watch were really a Quarter of an 
 Hour fooner or later than the Women -, would 
 this, in the Opinion of any Man living, im- 
 peach the Credit of the Hiftorian ? If any Per- 
 fon defires more Inilances of thefe Tranfitions, 
 they occur frequently in St. Matthew^ and in 
 <)ther Writers of the New T^eflament. 
 
 As to the Order in which we have placed 
 tl:e Traniadions at the Sepulchre, by Compa- 
 Yifon of the four Evangelifts together ; it is con- 
 firmed and eftabliflied, beyond all Doubt, by 
 
 the 
 
( I07 )' 
 
 the 'Account which the two Difcipics, going 
 t<^ Emfnmis, give our Saviour. This, fay they, 
 is the third Day fince the Crucifixion; yea^ and 
 certain Women aljb of our Company made us a- 
 lionijlded^ "which "were early at the Sepulchre -, aiid; 
 'wfj^n they found not his Body^ they came^ fay^ 
 ing, that they had feen a Vifion of jingels^ 'which 
 faid, that he was alive. And certain of them 
 that loere with us^ went to the Sepulchre^ and 
 found it even fo as the JVomen had faid-y but 
 k'lm they faw not ^. Compare this with St. 
 Luke^s own Account, and St. John'%^ as far as 
 it relates to what himfelf and Peter did at the 
 Sepulchre, and you will find the Fads report- 
 ed in the fame Order. Thefe two Difciples 
 left Jerufakm as foon as Peter and John had 
 made their Report, and before ^Mary Magdalene 
 had reported the Appearance of Chrift to her, 
 or had delivered his Meilage to tlie Difciples : 
 Which prove?, that the Account, as it ftands 
 in St. Matthew^ including the Appearance to 
 Mary Magdalene^ was not told to the Difciples. 
 at once, but muil be accounted for in the man- 
 ner above-mentioned. Otherwife thefe two 
 Difciples muft have known of the Appearance 
 of Chrijl^ as well as of the other Circumftances 
 prior to it, which they fo punctually relate. 
 
 You fee here plainly, that the two Difciples, 
 fpeaking of the firft Vifit the Women made to 
 the Sepulchre, fay, they found 7iot his Body ; and 
 
 f Luke xxiv. 21, ^c. 
 
 P 2 thence 
 
( io8 ; 
 
 thence the Conjiderer infers, they never faw 
 him; exprefsly contrary to the Account 
 given by St. John^ of their fecond Vifit to the 
 Sepulchre. And, for want of obferving the 
 Series of the Story, he goes on miftaking and 
 confounding the Circumftances, w^hich belong to 
 the firft and the fecond Vifit to the Sepulchre ; 
 and triumphs in difcovering Contradictions in 
 the Evangelijls ; whereas, in Truth, the only 
 thing he has difcovered is, that he does not un- 
 derftand them. 
 
 In ftating thus the Series and Order of what 
 paffed at the Sepulchre, there is one Difficulty 
 only to be accounted for, ijiz, St. "John fpeaks 
 of the Appearance of Jefus to Mary Magdalene 
 only 3 St. Matthew fpeaks of it as made to more 
 than one ; and St. Mark fays, that Jefus ap- 
 ipeared Jirji to Mary Magdalene, which may be 
 thought not to agree with St. Mattheivs Ac- 
 count \ 
 
 Now though St. John fpeaks only of Ma- 
 ry Magdalene, (he being the principal Per- 
 fon ; and it being not at all neceffary to his 
 purpofe to mention more (for a Mefiage deli- 
 vered by her, accounts as well for his going to 
 the Sepulchre, as if it had been delivered by 
 twenty;) yet if you confider what Mary Mag- 
 dalene lays herfelf, it will appear, that Ihe was 
 i^Qt alone. Her Words are, they have taken the 
 Lord out of the Sepulchre, and JVE know not 
 
 I RcfurreSz, Qonfid. Firil Ed. p. 50. Third Ed. p. H- 
 
 where 
 
( 109 ) 
 
 where they hcive hid him. WE imports that 
 iht had others with her at delivering this Mef- 
 iage; and, if (he had, it cannot be fuppofed, 
 that they left her to go alone to the Sepulchre, 
 when flie followed Peter and John-, or per- 
 mitted her to flay behind them alone at the 
 Sepulchre. Confequently the Appearance was 
 to Mary Magdalene when others were with her, 
 though file only is mentioned by St. "John 
 throughout his Account. 
 
 As to St. Mark^ he fays, "^Jcfus appeared fr/i 
 to Mary Magdalene, His Meaning is, that the 
 firjl Appearance he made was to her ^ but that 
 it was to her only^ he does not fay. And it is 
 mawfeft, that the Word /r/? (-ar^^Tov) relates 
 to the Order of Appearances ; for it follows, 
 ver. 12. after that he appeared in another 
 Form to two of them, and, ver. 14. ajternvard 
 he appeared unto the Eleven. The tirit Ap- 
 pearance then was certainly to Mar'^ Magda-^ 
 hie ; but whether to her alone, depends upon 
 a careful Comparifon of the lifi^an^dijU toge- 
 ther. And, upon the whole, 1 thiiik the /ic- 
 count here given feems to me to be tlic inoft 
 piobable 5 which I would be underilood to lay, 
 without Prejudice to other Interpretations, 
 which many .worthy iind learned Writers have 
 followed. 
 
 But let. us now look back to the Variations 
 between the three fi.;it Bvanglijls^ which we 
 paiTed over before. 
 
 'he 
 
( no ) 
 
 1. The firft is, that St. Mark and St. Luke 
 fay, the Women came early to the Sepulchre 
 bringing Spices ; St. Matthew fays nothing of 
 their bringi?ig Spices, 
 
 It gives Light to any Piece of Hiftory, to 
 fliew the Motives of the principal Adions re- 
 corded. But v^here the Fadt itfelf is the only 
 material thing, fuch Circumftances may, or 
 may not be added, as the Hiftorian pleafes. In 
 the'prefent Cafe the Fact itfelf, that the Women 
 "isoere early at the Sepulchre^ faw the Stone roU 
 led awa)\ and the Body not there, are the only 
 material things in the Narration. And whe- 
 ther they came early to the Sepulchre, for one 
 Reafon or for another, is of litde Confequence; 
 and is in the Difcretion of the Writer to add 
 or omit the Reafon as he pleafes, without Pre- 
 judice to the Hiftory, which depends on the 
 Truth of the Fad only. St. Matthew has faid 
 nothing to intimate, that they did not bring 
 Spices, nor has he affigned any other Reafon 
 for their coming ; and, the Conjiderer excepted, 
 I believe no Man can difcern any Contrariety 
 in the Accounts. 
 
 2. The fecond is, that St. Matthew idij^, the 
 two Marys came to the Sepulchre ; St. Mark^ 
 the two Marys and Salome -y St. huke, the 
 Women who came from Galilee^ and he rec- 
 kons, ver. II. the two Marys ^ Joanna^ and o- 
 ther Women with them. 
 
 The three Evangelijls agree in naming the 
 two Marys as the principal Perfons concerned j 
 
 fome 
 
( III ) 
 
 fome of them mention others as being in their 
 Company. And this is a Variation, which, I 
 believe, happens in every Part of Story reported 
 by different Writers, and is no Difcredit to any. 
 Suppofe that three News-writers fhould give 
 an Account of opening a Seffions of Parliament. 
 — The firft Qiould fay, " The King, attended 
 " by the Prince, came to Parliament." — The 
 Second, " The King, attended by the Prince. 
 <' and the Dake. " — The Third, " TheKing, 
 *^ attended by the Prince, the Duke, and the 
 *^ principal Officers of State:'* Would any 
 Man living imagine he faw Contradictions in 
 thefe Accounts ? Why then is the Gofpel fuf- 
 pedted in a Cafe, where no other Hiflory in the 
 World would be fufpedied ? 
 
 3 . The fame Anfwer may be applied to the 
 third Variation, as far as it relates to the Num- 
 ber of Angels feen. The mentioning one was 
 fufficient to anfwer all the purpofes of the Hi- 
 ftory ', and he w^ho fays there were two, does 
 not contradidl him who mentions one, unlefs he 
 has faid, there was iul one^ which none of the 
 Evange lifts has faid. 
 
 The Confiderer thinks there is no Harmony a^ 
 mong the Evangelifts, becaufe fome fpeak of the 
 Women feeing Angels^ others call them Men. 
 He might have faid St. Luke contradids him- 
 felf ; for he calls them both Men and Angels ^ 
 in diftln-ent Farts of his Relation. The Truth 
 is, the Angels are fometimes called Men, be- 
 caufe they appeared in the Form of Men ; for 
 
 the 
 
( ii^ ) 
 
 the lame Reaibii that Abraham called the An- 
 gels Men, who appeared to him on the Plains 
 of Marnre, 
 
 4. St. Matthew and St, Mark agree in the 
 Meflage fent by the Angels to the Difciples, 
 that he would go before them into Galilee. St. 
 Luke has not exprelsly mentioned the Mef- 
 lage, but has faid nothing inconfiilent with it. 
 The A^ngels tell the Women, He is not 
 here \ he is rifen-y reme??iber how he Jpake unto 
 you — exadly agreeable to St. Matthews 
 Account : He is not here ^ he is rifen^ as he 
 faid. As foon as the Women had received this 
 Information from the Angels, he fays they went 
 and told tlie Difciples \ and io fays St. Matthew^ 
 The Meffage then, as delivered by the Angels^ 
 and whatever elfe happened at the Sepulchre at 
 the firft Vifit made by the Women, ftands clear 
 of all Difficulties. 
 
 But it may be proper here to take Notice of 
 the fecond Meffiige given by our Saviour him- 
 felf, and mentioned by St. Matthew and St. 
 John. St. Matthew gives the fecond Meflage 
 in the fame Words with the firft : T^ell my Bre- 
 thren^ that they go into Galilee ^ and there jhall 
 they fee me. St. "John fays, tell them, I afcend 
 unto my Father and your Father^ and to my God 
 and your God. It is very probable, that the 
 Words in St. Matt hew ^ and thofe in St. John^ 
 are Parts of the fame Meflage ; and St. John^ 
 finding the firfl: Part reported by the Evange- 
 ///?< before him, left it as he found it, adding 
 
 only 
 
( "3 ) 
 
 only the fecond Part. As the firft Meflage Im- 
 ported no more, than that they (hould fee him 
 again, before he left them ; and plainly intimat- 
 ted, that the Time was come to take leave of 
 them (otherwife what Occafion was there to 
 appoint this Meeting merely to fee him, if he 
 was to continue with them?) This being, I fay, 
 the Cafe, the other Evangelijis mention the firft 
 Part of the Meffage as including the whole ^ 
 St. y^feadds the latter Part, to explain and af- 
 certain the Meaning. The whole MeiTage then 
 will ftand thus: " Go, tell my Difciples to go 
 *' into Galilee -, there they fliall fee me before 
 *' I leave this World, and afcend to my Fa- 
 " ther and your Father, &c, " Is not this Mef- 
 fage all of a piece ? Does not one Part imply 
 and infer the other ? If the Conifderer can think 
 otherwife, he has a greater Talent (and indeed 
 I think he has) of raifing Contradidions, than 
 any Philofopher, either moral or immoral^ ever 
 had before him. 
 
 The Coiijiderer h^^ farther Difficulties ftill 
 By St. Luke, he fays, // appears, that the Men 
 were at the Sepulchre after the Angels were gone-y 
 but by St, John, that they were there before the 
 Angels came. Therefore either the Men did not 
 fee the Angels, or the Witneffes do not agree in 
 their Evidence about it^. What a Work is 
 here about nothing ! Who told him the Men 
 did fee the Angels? It is manifeft they did not^> 
 
 * Fifft Edir. p. 51, 52. Third Edit. p. 41. 
 
 Q.. The 
 
r"4) 
 
 The firft Appearance of Angels was before 
 Peter and John came j the fecond was after 
 they were gone. But the Confiderer wants a 
 Reafon to be given, why the A^igeh withdrew^ 
 as he exprefl'es it, upon the Mens coming ^ ? He 
 may as well enquire, why they are withdrawn 
 now. If God thought proper to inform the 
 Women of the Refurredion, by an Appearance 
 of Angels, and not the Men, he had his Rea- 
 fon s, and wife ones doubtlefs, though the Con* 
 Jiderer cannot fee them. 
 
 But we have not yet done : St. Matthew re- 
 ports that Mary held Jefus by the Feet^ and wor- 
 pipped him ; St. John, that Jefm faid to her, 
 ^ouch me not. Here the Confiderer is puzzled 
 again ; but what offends him, I cannot imagine. 
 If Mary hafl not laid hold of Jejui% Feet, he 
 could have had no Occafion to fay, loiich me 
 not, Thefc Words therefore in St. John fup- 
 pofe the Cafe to liave been as reprefented by 
 St. Matthew ; and yet the Confiderer cannot, or 
 will not fee it. 
 
 From the Words, loiich me not ; for I ajn 
 not yet afcended to my Father -, a Sufpicion had 
 been raifed by IVoolfon, that Chrifl\ Body was 
 not a real tangible Body -, and the Author of 
 the ^ryal had expofed and confuted fo weak 
 and groundlefs a Suggeflion. *^ It could not, 
 " as he had proved, be inferred from the 
 " Words, Tioiich me not : for thoufands fay it 
 
 • Firft Edk. p. 5r> 52, Third Edit. p. 4.1. 
 
 '^ \ *^ every 
 
<c 
 
 ^y every Day, without giving the leaft fufpicion, 
 *^ that their Bodies are not capable of being 
 '^ touched : nor from the Words / am not yet 
 *^ afcended to my Father^ for tho* there is a 
 ^^ Difficulty in thefe Words, thei^' is no 
 '' difficulty in feeing that they have no 
 Relation to Chriji's Body, for of his Body 
 nothing is faid \" And v/hat fays the Conji^ 
 derer ? w^hy If the Words, touch me not (fays 
 he) did not jignify, touch not my body, what 
 did they Jignify^^ The Author of the Trvj/, 
 you fee, had faid that thefe Words, I a?n not 
 ajcended to my Father^ had no Relation to 
 Chriji's Body, and the Confiderer reprefents him 
 as faying, that the Words touch me ?2ot had no 
 Relation to it. This is the Confiderer' s Method 
 of anfwering Books ; becaufe he finds it difficult 
 to anfvver what the Author has faid, he is 
 refolved to confute what he has 7iot faid. 
 
 The next Appearance of Chrifi was on the 
 Day of the Refurredion, to two Difciples in 
 their Road to Emmaus, St. Mark has jufl 
 mention'd this Story ^ But we are indebted to 
 St. Luke for the particulars of it ^. One of 
 the two, St. Luke tells us, was Cleophas 3 and 
 the other, if we may believe the Confiderer, was 
 Simon Peter, Who it really was, is of little 
 Importance in itfelf ; that it was not Siviort 
 Peter, whatever he thinks of the Matter, is 
 moft evident. Had Peter been prefent, it is 
 
 . » Tryal p. a. »> Firft Edit. p. 53. Third Edit, 
 p. 42. * Chap. xvi. 12. ^ Chap. xxiv. 133 &c. 
 
 0^2 not 
 
(ii6) 
 
 not likely that an inferior Difciple would have 
 been the principal Spokefman ; efpecially when 
 a Part of the Converfation turned upon Pefer 
 himfelf It is the lefs likely, becaufe St. Peter 
 was probably then at 'Jerufalem^ where the fame 
 Evangelift informs us the Eleven were gathered 
 together ^ But to put the Matter out of all 
 Doubt, when the two Difciples returned from 
 Emmaus to the Apoftles at Jerufalem^ they 
 found them difcourfing about an Appearance of 
 Chrifi to Shnon Peter ; The Lord is rife?i indeed^ 
 and bath appeared to Simon ^ I defire to know, 
 what Appearance the Evangelift means here? 
 Is it that to the two Difciples in the Road to 
 Emmaus ? Impoffible. Thefe Difciples had not 
 yet made their Report ^ and it will be too much 
 for the Confiderer to Ciy, that the Eleven knew 
 it by Infpiration. 
 
 If the Reader is deiirous to know how the 
 Confiderer came by this Notion, I think I can 
 inform him. It is founded, if I miftake not, 
 upon this very Pafllige, the Lord is rifen^ and 
 hath appeared to Si?non^ v*^hich proves the diredl 
 contrary. Had the Confiderer argued that Mofes 
 wrote the Pentateuch, therefore S>i77ion Peter 
 was the Companion of Cleophas^ it would have 
 been much more excufable , bscaufe though it 
 would not have proved his Conclufion to be 
 true, it would not, as this Text does, prove it 
 to be falfe. The Confiderer fjppofes that to be 
 a. Report of the two Difciples to the Eleven, 
 
 f Ibid.y, 24. ^ Ibid. ^J. 34. \ 
 
 which 
 
(117) 
 
 which was in Fad a Report of tiie Eleven 
 to them, viz. that the Lord was rifen and had 
 appeared to Simon, Infenfible of this Blunder, 
 evident as it is, he goes on, and raifes this very 
 wife Refledion upon it, that it Jeems as if it 
 did not appear to be the Lord to Cleopkas, but to 
 Simon only s ; an Inference impertinent enough, 
 had his Conflrudion of the PafTage been right ; 
 but what can be faid of it, when the Con- 
 ftrudion is fo manifeftly wrong ? 
 
 His Remarks upon the Story itfelf are juft as 
 groundlefs, as thofe upon the Perfons of the two 
 Difciples. He is, I fuppofe, offended at it, 
 becaufe there appears to be fomething miraculous 
 in it. Miracles he treats every where as abfurd 
 and impoiTible, and feems to think that God 
 has no more Authority in his own Creation 
 than he and I have. St. Mark fays, our Saviour 
 appeared to the two Difciples in another Form ; 
 St. Luke^ that their Eyes were holden ; and this 
 the Confiderer places to the Account of Contra- 
 didions ^ '' one Evangelift m. king the Caufe to 
 " be in the Objed, and the other va the Eyes" ^. 
 It is ftrange the Gentleman will not underftand 
 common Language. Who does not fee that the 
 Evangelifts meant to exprefs the felf fame 
 Thing ? If Jefus appeared in another Form, 
 their Eyes of courfe were holden, that they 
 fhould not know him : All that the Hiftorians 
 mean to intimate is, that there was an Im^ 
 
 s Firft Edit. p. 5^. Third Edit. p. 44. ^ Firft Edit, 
 p. 5 J- Third Edic p. 43, 44. 
 
 pediment. 
 
(ii8) 
 
 pediment, which prevented their knowing him. 
 That this might happen either in a natural or 
 fupernatural way, the Author of the Tryal has 
 fliown, in a manner agreeable to Reafon and true 
 Philofophy, and fuch as will correfpond exad:ly 
 with the Expreffions of both Evangelifts. Th^ 
 Conjidcrer has thought proper to take no Notice 
 of This, or none that deferves any Anfwer. 
 
 One Queftion however he has put in Regard 
 to this Story, to which I fhall give him an An- 
 fwer. The Queftion is this -, Can a?iy good 
 Reafon be given, why J ejus did not difcover hifn- 
 felf to them by the Way, and give them the Joy^ 
 which jiich Di/covery woidd have made ^ ? 
 
 Now the Point difcuffed upon the Road was, 
 whether it was not agrceble to Prophecy, that 
 Chrijl fhould fufFer and rife again from the 
 dead. Chrijl himfelf undertook to prove this 
 Propoiition at large, from the Sciiptures of the 
 old Teftament, and the Argument feemed to 
 have its intended Effed. Suppofe now he had 
 firft made himfelf known, and then entered 
 upon this Argument, what would have been 
 the Confequence ? Plainly this ; the Surprize of 
 feeing one from the dead, and the Authority of 
 Chrijl reafoning from the Scriptures, muft have 
 difturb'd their Judgment, and made them 
 perhaps fubmit to his Interpretation of the 
 Prophecies, without confidering whether juft or 
 not. The plain Reafon therefore, why the 
 Difcovery was not made fooner is, that he might 
 
 \ Firft Edit. p. 55. Third Edit. p. 44. 
 
 convince 
 
( 119) 
 
 convince their Underftandings firfl, upon the 
 Strength of Reafon and Argument, whilfl their 
 Minds where yet free from any Impreffion by 
 the Event itfelf, and the irreliftible Foi-ce of 
 Chri/l's own Authority. This Reafon ought to 
 have great weight with the Con/iderer^ becaufe 
 it is founded on a Maxim very much talked of, 
 though very httle obferved by the Gentlemen 
 of his Stamp, that all Prejudice and Prepofleflion 
 ihould be excluded in fearching after Truth. 
 
 The Appearance of our Saviour at different 
 Times, to the Women and to one or two of 
 the Difciples detached from the refl, adds no 
 fmall weight to the general Evidence of the 
 Refurredion. But the greatefl Point fingly 
 confidered, is his fhewing himfelf to the whole 
 Body of Difciples ; eating, drinking, and con- 
 verfing with them, and giving them an Op- 
 portunity of being fatisfied of the FaCr at leifure, 
 by all proper Methods of Tryal, and by the 
 Variety of Evidence that a matter of Fad: is 
 capable of Such Appearances there are feveraL 
 The Credit of them fiands upon the united 
 Teftimony of all the New 'Tejiame?2t Writers. 
 The four Evangelifts, the Author of the A3s^ 
 and St, Paul arc unanimous in the Point. And 
 what has the Confiderer oppofed to Evidence fo 
 full and ftrong ? why he is puzzling himfelf 
 and his Readers with fome Circumftances of 
 Time and Place, which he either does not, or 
 will not underftand ; comparing the Concifenefs 
 of one Writer with the Copioufnefs of another, 
 miftaking one Appearance for another, and 
 
 wutb 
 3 
 
with his ufualDecency calling them Bicon/ijlenciesi 
 Improbabilities^ Abjicrdities^ and ConfradiSions ^. 
 
 Be his Objedlions what they will, the Im- 
 portance of the Subjed: demands, what the 
 Writer has no Claim to, a ferious Anfwer. I fhall 
 therefore compare the feveral Writers of the 
 Gofpel together, as to the manner of ftating 
 the Fadt, and take Notice of the Confiderers 
 Exceptions, as they fall in my Way. I would 
 afk then, wherein do Matthew^ Mark^ and Luke 
 differ as to the Point in Queftion ? Do they not 
 agree one and all that Chriji (hewed himfelf to 
 the Eleven Apojiles ? This, I think, is granted. 
 And do they not farther agree with Regard to 
 his Difcourie, that it v/as in Sum and Sub- 
 ftance the fime ? This the Cojifiderer does not 
 deny. Where then lies the Difference ? Why 
 Matthew^ it feems, difagrees with Luke as to 
 I'ime and Place ; for Matthew fays it was at a 
 Mountain i?i Galilee ; whereas, according to 
 Luke, it was at Jerufalem ^ The Corifiderer 
 will excufe me, if I take no Notice of his 
 pretended Difference of Time 5 the Matter of 
 Place being once explained, the Time will 
 redify itfelf. 
 
 It is allowed then, that the Place of Inter- 
 view, according to St. Matthew^ was in Ga- 
 lilee ; according to St. Luke^ at Jerufaleni. 
 What then ? Does St. Matthew fay that he met 
 his Difciples no where but in Galilee^ or St* 
 
 j> 
 ^ Firft Edit. p. 70. Third Edit. p. 5. ^ Firft Edit. p. 59- 
 Third Edit. p. 47. 
 
 Luke 
 
( III ) 
 
 Luke that he few them only at yeriifalem t 
 Nothing like it. What hinders then, but 
 that they might meet both in Galilee and Je^ 
 rufalem ? The Cmifiderer thinks that, in the 
 Senfe of thele Writers, they met for the jirjl 
 and laji 'time ; but here again he concludes, as 
 ufual, a great deal too fail, and outruns his 
 Evidence. Does either of them declare that it 
 was the firft and laft Time ? No. What Cir- 
 cumftance then is it, upon which the Conjiderer 
 builds fo pofitive a Conclufion ? Why it is 
 this ; neither of thefe Writers mentions more 
 than one Interview with Chrijl and his Apo- 
 ftles, therefore in their Senfe of the Matter, 
 there qould be but one. Is this the Logic, that 
 is to prove Chrijl and his Apoftles to be Cheats 
 and Impoftors ? T!o JIjow Mankind the Jtupid 
 Nature of Bigotry^ and to hold forth the accept-- 
 able Light of Truth ? ^ Is it not amazing that a 
 Man lliould fet up for a Difturber of Religion, 
 who is fo poorly provided with that natural 
 Logic of common Senfe, which all Men are 
 born with ? 
 
 Had the Conjiderer had the leafl: Inclination 
 to treat the Gofpel with any Fairnefs, he could 
 not have miftaken fo egregioufly in this Part. 
 Matthew and Luke^ he obferves, difdgree in 
 Time and Place, Is it not a natural Confe^ 
 quence that they fpeak of different Appearances ? 
 Doubtlefs it is. But inftead of making this 
 
 * Rige 87, 72. 
 
 R Ufe 
 
( 1^2; ) 
 
 Ufe of it, he fuppofes them, without the leafl 
 Proof for it, to fpeak of one and the fame Ap- 
 pearance, and to contradidt one another in af- 
 iigning different Tim.es and Places. 
 
 Bat that there may not remain any Doubt 
 or Obfcurity upon this Part of the Hiftory, it 
 is proper to take notice of the Reafon why the 
 Meffage fent from the Sepulchre, appointed the 
 Difciples to go into Galilee to fee 'J ejus ^ though 
 he notwithftanding appeared to them that very 
 Night at yerufalem. 
 
 Our Bleifed Lord before his Crucifixion told 
 his Difciples, After that I am rifen, I ^will go 
 bejore ym into Galilee ^ This was the Evi- 
 dence he promifcd to give of his Refurreftion ; 
 and Galilee probably was chofen for the Place, 
 becaufe he had fpent much Time, and had 
 many Difciples there, who were to have this 
 Evidence given them. This then was the pub- 
 lic Appearance, of which our Lord had given 
 Notice in his Life-time ; whereas the Appear- 
 ances at yerufalem were not upon Notice given, 
 and were to the eleven ApoiUes, and to fuch 
 only as happened to be with them. 
 
 The Angels therefore, and our Lord him- 
 felf in his firft Appearance, remind the Difci- 
 ples to go into Galilee^ to receive the Evidence 
 he had promifed to give them of his Refurre- 
 dlion. There was no Occafion to mention his 
 Intention to fee them that Night at Jerujalemy 
 of which no Expedation had been given. 
 
 ^ Matt. xxvi. 32. Mark xiy. 28. 
 
 Now 
 
{ ^H ) 
 
 Now though the Appearance at yeriifalem 
 was to the Eleven only ; yet the Meffage to 
 meet him in Galilee was to all his Difciples. 
 St. Mark makes the Promife of this Appearance 
 to concern the Women as well as the Men. 
 The Words of the Angels to the Women are^ 
 there Jhall ye fee him as he [aid unto you. This 
 then was a public Meeting before an Aflembly 
 warned to be prefent -, and here it was (as there 
 is great Reafon to fuppofe) that our Lord ap-- 
 peared to above five hundred Brethren at once, 
 according to the Relation made by St. Paul ^ 
 
 The intermediate Appearance to the Apoftles 
 interfered not with this Appointment, which 
 was obferved by the Apoftles, who went into 
 Galilee to fee Jejiis there. This being the Ap- 
 pearance foretold, and the Evidence fpecially 
 promifed, St. Matthew paffes over all the other 
 Appearances, and reports this as the Completion 
 of our Lord's Prophecy, as the AlTurance given 
 in his Life-time, repeated by the Angels, and 
 by himfelf at the Sepulchre. He mentions the 
 Eleven only as travelling into Galilee^ in Obe- 
 dience to the Command they received j but it 
 is to be colleded from his fhort Account, that 
 
 others were prefent and iaw the Lord For 
 
 he fays of the Eleven^ When they faw him they 
 worjhipped him — and adds, but Jbme doubted j 
 who can hardly be fuppofed to be any of thofe^ 
 
 * I Cor. xv: 
 
 R 2 >yho 
 
( 1^4 ) 
 
 who had feen him before at yertifalem^ and up- 
 on feeing him now worfliipped him. 
 
 But it may be proper to confider under one 
 View the fevefal Appearances of Jefus^ and the 
 Order of them, as it may be mX\ B \ from the 
 facred Hiftorians. 
 
 1. The firft, which was at or near the Se* 
 pulchre, to Mary Magdalene and other Women, 
 has been accounted for at large ah-eady, 
 
 2. That to the two Difciples going to Em- 
 tnaus was on the Day of the Refurredtion, and 
 is attended with no material EHfficulty ariling 
 from the Account as to Time or Place, or any 
 other Circumftances. The Conjiderer has no 
 Fault to find, but that there is fomething mi- 
 raculous in the Circnmftances of it. This too 
 has been confidered, as far as was neceflary. 
 
 3. The fame Day our Lord appeared to St, 
 Teter^ but whether before he converfed with the 
 two Difciples or after, is not certain. It was 
 not till after the two Difciples had left yernfa^ 
 lem^ and fet out for Emmaus -, for it appears in 
 the Account they give our Lord of what had 
 come to their Knowledge, that they knew no- 
 thing of any Appearance to Peter : And yet it 
 was before thefe two Difciples returned to 
 'Jerufakm ; for they found the Eleven dif- 
 courfing of this Appearance to Peter, \t is 
 doubtful therefore whether of the two laft men- 
 tioned fliould be placed firft; but they both 
 happened on the Day of the Refurreftion. 
 
 4. The 
 
( lij ) 
 
 4. The next in order is the Appearance on 
 the Evening of the fame Day unto the Eleven^ 
 mentione'd by St. Mark^ xvi. 14. and St. Luke^ 
 xxiv. 36. and St. John, xx. 19. St. Luke and 
 ^ujohn plainly enough defcribe the Time of 
 this Appearance ; and that St. Mark means the 
 fame Appearance may be coliefted from our Savi- 
 our upbraiding the Eleven — becauje they believ- 
 ed not them which had J e en him after he was 
 rifen-y which fhows that this v/as the j5rfl: Time, 
 he had appeared to them himfelf. 
 
 5. The Appearance to the Eleven v^hen 
 ^ho?nas was with them, John^ xx. 26. which 
 was eight Days after. 
 
 -6. The Appearance to the feventy Difci- 
 pies at the Sea of l^iberiaSy John, xxi. i . 
 
 7. The Appearance in Galilee mentioned ex- 
 prefsly by St. Matthew only, but referred to 
 A(^s i. 4'. 
 
 8. The Appearance at Jerufalem before his 
 Afcenfion, ABs, u 6. It is plain this Appearance 
 was at Jerufalem ^ for f, 4. our Lord orders 
 the Apoftles to tarry at Jerufalem 3 and that 
 he met them juft before his Afcenfion is evi- 
 dent, Sf. 12, for they returned to Jerufalem, 
 from whence they had followed him to Mount 
 Olivet, to be WitneiTes of his Afcenfion. 
 
 : I omit the Relation of Appearances given by 
 St. Paul, I Cor. 15. for his Account .creates no 
 Difficulty. 
 
 The Time of the five firft Appearances is 
 clear enough. The Sixth which is the Appear- 
 ance 
 
( 126 ) 
 
 ance at the Sea of Tiberias^ was before the 
 Command given them, not to depart from Je- 
 rufahn^ for after that Command they could 
 not have gone to the Sea of T'iberias. The 
 Seventh then was that wherein they received the 
 Command to flay at yerufakm^ and was the 
 Appearance appointed in Galilee by our Lord in 
 his Life Time, and by the Angels at the Se- 
 pulchre. The Eighth was the lafl, and is right- 
 ly placed as to the Order of Time and as to the 
 Place 'y for it followed the Injundlon to ftay at 
 yerufaleniy and was that wherein our Lord af- 
 cended, which was the lafl Appearance to the 
 Apoftles. 
 
 Let us fee now whether by this Light, we 
 can account for the Manner in which the Evan- 
 geliils relate thefe Appearances. If you read 
 Matthew by himfelf, you have an Account of 
 one Appearance only. The fame may be faid 
 with Refpedl to Mark and Luke -, v/ho both 
 feem to fpeak of the fame Appearance, but ma- 
 nifeftly a different one from that of St. Matthe%Vy 
 which was in Galilee ; v/hereas the other was at 
 yeriifalem. How comes it now to pafs that 
 thefe Evangelifls mention each of them but one 
 Appearance, if there were indeed fo many more } 
 The Truth is, that the Evangelifls did not 
 write full Hiflories of our Saviour's Life, but 
 fhort Annals or Commentaries ; and fometimes 
 contraded into one Difcourfe or Narration; 
 Things relating to the fame Matter, though 
 fpoken or done at different Times. What St. 
 
 Jolm 
 
yohn lays of his own Gofpel, Ma?2y other Signs 
 did Jefus in the Prefence of his Dijcipks^ which 
 are not written in this BooJz^^ may be faid very 
 fairly of the reft. The Words of St. John fol- 
 low immediately after the Account he has given 
 of the Appearances to the Difciples after the 
 Refurredlion, and probably referred to the Opi- 
 nion in his Gofpel of many other Appearances 
 made to the Difciples. 
 
 Now though St. Matthew reports only the 
 Appearance in Galileey and St. Mark and St. 
 Luke feem to report only that on the Day of the 
 Refurredion at ^erufalem ; yet St. Mark has 
 given a plain Intimation of that in Galilee^ by 
 the Meffage from the Angels to the t)ifciples ; 
 and St. John has reported and diflinguifhed 
 three Appearances, and given Notice that there 
 were others not written in his Book. 
 
 St. Luke in the Ads of the Apoftles has re- 
 ferred to feveral Appearances, telling us, that 
 Jefus Jhewed himfelf alive after his PaJJion by 
 many infallible Proofs, beeng feen of them forty 
 Days, and [peaking of the T^hings pertaining to the 
 Kingdofn of God. ^ You have hei;e a concife ge- 
 neral Account of our Lord's appearing to his 
 Difciples, and of the lubjed: Matter of his Dif- 
 courfes to them at thofe Times, that he fpoke 
 of the Things pertaining to the Kingdom of God, 
 After this general Account he mentions two 
 diftind: Appearances, which were necefiary to 
 
 f Jphnxx. 30. l.kd:^ i. 3. 
 ^- , be 
 
( 128 ) 
 
 be taken Notice of, to introduce the Account 
 he had to give of the Afcenfion. The firft Is, 
 that wherein he orders them to tarry at Jerii^ 
 falem-, thejecond is that at ^erufakm^ when 
 he took leave of them and afcended. The firft 
 of thefe Appearances is remarkably intro-- 
 duced — ^ 4. and being ajjembled together with 
 tbem-y the Original is, koci a-vvctXitfiiimg -^fupple 
 dur^g ; which Words are properly to be render- 
 ed, and having ajfembled them together,^ The 
 other Appearances recorded feem to be acci- 
 dental, by our Lord*s coming in when the Eleven 
 were not together ; but this is fpoken of as a 
 Meeting fummoned by himfelf, and was, I 
 doubt not, that Meeting which he had ap- 
 pointed the Day of his Refurredtion, by the 
 Me{mge fent to the Difciples by the Angels and by 
 himfelf j and is the very lame Meeting in Galilee 
 mentioned by St. Matthew, At this Meeting 
 St. Luke fays, the Difciples received the Order 
 to tarry at Jerufalem ; after which they could 
 not travel into Galilee^ as they were command- 
 ed, and confequently this Appearance was itfelf 
 the Appearance at Galilee ; or happened after it, 
 which there h no Reafon to think. 
 
 Tlie Difciples being thus ordered to yert^ 
 
 falem^ repair thither. When they therefore wer6 
 
 come together y they ajked him^ j^ 6. Wilt thou 
 
 at this TJ>/2^ re/lore the Kingdom to Ifrael ? This 
 
 Queftion was not afked at the afiembling men-- 
 
 f Vide Grotium m loc^ 
 
 i tioned 
 
( 12$ ) 
 
 tioned f 4. which is clearly diftind from that 
 mentioned ^ 6. for what Occalion was there to 
 mention again their coming together, after we 
 had been juft told they were together ? Had it 
 been faid, then they ajked^ &c. it would have been 
 a Continuation of the Diicourfe with the flime 
 Aflenibly ; but when their Meeting together is 
 fo dillindly mentioned, it fhews it to be ano- 
 ther and a difl'erent Meetings after the Difciples 
 were got together at jerujalem. 
 
 At this Meeting our Lord afiures them they 
 fhould receive Power by the coming of the holy 
 Ghoft ; then led them to Bethany, or Moimt 
 Olivet, and in their Prefence afcended. 
 
 Let us examine now how far thefe particular 
 Accounts will enable us to adjuft the abridg'd 
 Narration of pur Saviour's Appearances in ihe 
 three firfl Evangelifls. The fulleil: is that of 
 St. Luke ; he mentions our Lord's appearing to 
 the Eleven, and thofe with them on the Even- 
 ing of the Refurrediion. But it is manifefl, un- 
 der that Appearance, he brought together the 
 Sam of what was- done and faid by our Saviour, 
 during his Abode on Earth after the Refurrec- 
 tion. For he begins to fpeak of his Appearing 
 the Day of the Refurredion, xxiv. '? ^. and con- 
 tinues his Narration to tht Afcenfion, f 51. 
 He tells us himfelf in the A5ls, that there were 
 forty Days between the Refurreclion and Afcen- 
 fion. It is undeniable then, that his Account in 
 the Gofpel is an abridg'd Account of what 
 paffed, in our Lord's Meeting his Difciples 
 
 S duxiog 
 
( 130 ) 
 
 during that Time -, and this clearly appears to 
 be the Cafe by comparing his abridg'd Account 
 with the more particular Accounts akeady 
 mentioned. 
 
 Lukexxiv. from f 36, to \ 
 40 incluiive — you have the/ 
 fameAccountof whatpafiedMohn XX. 19, 20, 
 at the firfl: Appearance whichl 
 St. John gives. J 
 
 At 3^49. you have what ") 
 paffed at the Meeting in G^-^Mat.xxyiii. i6,C5f^. 
 lilee^ mentioned hy Mattheiv^ Ads i. 4. 
 and Luke. 3 
 
 ^^ f 50, 51. y^u bave*^. 
 what paffed at the laft Meet- I 
 ing at jfefii/akm, before the I ^^^ '^' ^ — 9' 
 Afcenfion mentioned in the i^jyi^j.]^ xvi.'iq. 
 ^^s, and referred to in St. * ^' 
 
 Mark. J 
 
 St. Luke fays, that our Lord came to the 
 Eleven juft as the two Difciples had reported 
 what had paffed in the Journey to Emmaus 5, 
 snd as our Lord expounded to them the Scrip- 
 tures and eat v/ith them, fo now he gives the 
 iame Evidence and the fame Expofition of the 
 Scriptiu'es to the reft : And furely it was a na- 
 tural Thing to take up the fame Difcourfe, and 
 open the Underflandings of the Eleven, as he 
 had opened the Underftanding of the two before^ 
 and to give them the iame Evidence of the 
 
 Reality 
 
( I30 
 
 Reality of his Refurredion, and this takes up 
 from j^ 4K to 48. 
 
 St. Marfis Narration is Oiorter than St. Liike^^ 
 but plainly of the fame Kind : He begins with 
 an Account of our Saviour's appearing, as St. 
 Luke Aqq^^ xvi. 14. and ends with his Afcen- 
 fion, :^ 19. 
 
 But as much abridged as thefe Acounts are, 
 one material Thing tliere is, which none of the 
 Writers have omitted, viz. the Commiffion 
 then given to the Apoftles ta teach all Nations ^ 
 and in Confequence of it a Promifeof Power and 
 Affiifance from above?. St. Luke fays, A5is i. 3. 
 that the Subjed: of his Difcourfes to his Dif- 
 ciples were the T^hing^ pertaining to the Kingdotn 
 of God, Thefe Things are tranlhiitted to us by 
 every Writer ; and though none has mentioned 
 every particular Appearance, yet the Sum of 
 what was faid at all the Appearances is faith- 
 fully recorded by all. 
 
 I have ftated this Part of our Saviour's Hi- 
 ftory for the Sake of thofe who have Patience 
 and Attention enough to confider it ; and I hope 
 fuch may find fome Light and Satisfa6tion from 
 what has been faid. But with regard not only 
 to this, but to all other Parts of the Hiflory, it 
 may te proper to obferve, that the Number of 
 Writers makes amends for the Deficiencies of 
 any one. The Chriftian has a large Field to 
 
 8 Mac. xxviii. 1% 20. Mark xvi. 15. Luke xxiv. 47 
 48, 49. John XX. 21, 22, 
 
 S 2 ^ range 
 
range in j he is not to feek his Faith in one 
 Evangelift, but in all. In all together he is 
 fure to find a fatisfad]:ory Account of his Ma- 
 ker's Life and Dodlrine -, abundantly fufficient 
 to dired: his Judgment, to convince his Under- 
 ftanding, and to give him the Satisfadion that 
 is proper for a rational Being. 
 
 It is to no Purpofe to go over the Con/tderer^ 
 Objections to this Part of the Hiftory. If the 
 Reader has the Curiofity to fee them, he will 
 find them all coUeded together at Pages 68, 
 69, of the Firfl: Edition, and 55, 56, of the 
 Third. All he has faid vi^ill, by comparing it 
 with the foregoing Account, be found to be 
 built on his own Mifliakes. Some of them 
 feem to be wilful -, he fuppofes Matthew and 
 Mark^ who report our Lord's Order to meet 
 •tim in Galilee^ to be contradicted by St. Luh^ 
 who reports an Order to them not to. depart 
 from jerufakm ^\ He could not, I think, but 
 lee, that thefe were different Orders, given at 
 difl'erent Times, and upon different Occaiions. 
 But; be it to himfelf. 
 
 His Objections to the Relation given of the 
 Afcenfion of Je/us^ are pf the fame kind, and 
 they will be ealily accounted for, by confider^ 
 mz the Series of the Tranfadions above. 
 
 It is fcarce Vv^orth while to obferve, becaufe 
 \t is obvious to the mofl: indifferent Reader, that 
 afier the PvC volt of 'Judas ^ 'The^ Ele-ven was the 
 
 ^ Firft Edit. p. 58. Third Edit. p. 47. 
 
 5 corrrem 
 
i 133 ) 
 
 current Style for the whole College of Apoftles j 
 and after the Call of Matthias to the Apofto- 
 late, they were again called the T^welve, In 
 Virtue of this Style, a general Meeting of the 
 Apoftles, is called a Meeting of the Eleven^ or 
 of the T'lvehe^ though one or more may happen 
 to be abfent. This is agreeable to both ancient 
 and modern Ufage in the Cafe of Senates, 
 Councils, and the like. Hence it is that St. 
 Luke fays, xxiv. 20. the Elcce?! were gather- 
 ed together, though it appeais by St. John^ 
 XX. 24. that "Thomas was abfent. St. Paul^ 
 I Cor. XV. 5» calls it a Meeting of the Twelve^ 
 becaufe he was not converted till after the Ele- 
 ftion of Matthias y when tliat came again to be 
 the ufual Style, Had the Confiderer had Senfe 
 enough to have i'ttvi this (and a very little 
 would have been fufficient for the Purpofe) he 
 might have fpared himfelf the Trouble and the 
 Shame of charging ^i, John, St. Luke^ and St. 
 Paul with contradidling one another. But he 
 might perhaps hope that his Readers would 
 excufe a fmall Blunder, for the Sake of fome 
 Beauties, that rife out of it 3 fuch as his Query 
 (pag. 66.) with Regard to St. PauP^ Account, 
 ivhether Judas ims there to make up the Num-^ 
 ber ? And his Excufe for the Apoftle (p. 68.) 
 that perhaps he had forgot that one of them was 
 fallen afkep. Conceits which he is fo fond of, 
 that they have paifed the Cenfure of his and 
 his Friend's fecond Thoughts, and have flill a 
 Place in die laft Edition^ pag, 53 — 55, 
 
 The 
 
(134) 
 
 The Story which St. John has left us of St. 
 Thomas is fo flrong a Proof of the Refurredioii ' 
 of Cbriji^ and fo remarkable an Evidence of the 
 Reality of his Body, that I do not woiider to 
 find the Confiderer difpleafed with it. He has 
 attacked it with a double Portion of the Spirit 
 of Folly and Impiety, and has not that I can 
 find dropt any thing, that carries the Face of 
 .an Objection. He thinks his Infidelity "very ex- 
 traordinary^ becaufe he would not believe that ye^ 
 fus was rifen from the Dead^ except he Jaw 
 md felt the Wounds that caufed his Deaths and 
 afks if tliefe were better to be known than the 
 Form of his Perfon^ which they had Jo often feen '. 
 This I am afraid carries an Implication with it, 
 which the Confiderer was not aware of ; that 
 Thomas had no Reafon to be fb nice and fcru- 
 pulous; that the Evidence of Sight, and the 
 well known Idea of his Face and Perfon were 
 fufiicient for Convidion. Truth, I find, will 
 fometimes obtrude itfelf upon a Man, even - 
 againft his Thoughts and Inclinations. As to 
 the Wounds that cauj'ed his Death there is not, 
 that I can find, one Word about Wounds in 
 this whole Story. The Tdirog rcov i^xcov, the 
 Print of the Nails, or the Scar that was left af- 
 ter the Wounds were cured is two or three 
 Times repeated, but nothing further. Why 
 tlien does the Confiderer talk of Wounds ? Why, 
 to iiUroduce this very wife Queftion, Is it to 
 
 ' Ibid. 
 
 be 
 
( 135 ) 
 
 be fuppofed that the^ Power which raifed hi?n to 
 Life did not cure thoje Wounds ? It is with juft 
 as little Meaning that he alks, whether another 
 Pe?Jbn who rnigfot have a Mind to deceive could 
 not make Scars ? The Reader, I believe, will not 
 ^xpedl to have a formal Confutation of fuch 
 impertinent and fenfelefs Suggeftions ; barely 
 reciting them is expofmg them effediially. 
 
 Much about the fame Size w^ith thefe is an* 
 other Exception he makes to this Story. Be- 
 caufe the Wound in the Side is mentioned on- 
 ly by St. John, he thinks Hhomas and the 
 other Apoftles knew nothing of the Matter ^. 
 As if fo extraordinary a Circumftance was like- 
 ly to be a Secret to any of them 5 and as if T^ho^ 
 mas's dired Appeal to this Circumflance was 
 not a Demonitration, that it was no Secret to 
 him. I leave it with the Reader, without any 
 £irther Anfvver, as one Inftance, amongft a 
 Thoufand, of the Folly and Abfurdity into 
 w^hich a Man is fure to be betrayed, when the 
 unclean Spirit of Singularity has once feized 
 him. The Conjiderer has faid fomething more 
 of this Piece of Hiftcry, but it is fo like the 
 Sample already given, that it would be an Af- 
 front to the Reader to take anyfurther Notice of it. 
 
 After having gone through his Proofs againft 
 the Credit of tlie Gofpel-Hiftory, the Confiderer 
 returns to the l^ryal of the Witneffes, The Au- 
 thor of the T^ryal had obferved, that in all 
 Cafes of Coafequence Men take Care to make 
 Choice of proper unexceptionable WitnelTes, 
 
 ! Ibid. 
 
 that 
 
that the fame Care was taken in theRefurrediion^ 
 and then adds, " How comes it to pafs then, that 
 " the very Thing which fliuts out ail Siifpicion in 
 ** other Cafes, ihould in this Cafe only be of all 
 *^ others the mofi: fufpicious Thing itfelf.^'* The 
 Conjiderer anfwers, becaufe this Cafe of all others 
 is the moji uncommon ^ Is that a Reafon why it 
 fhould not be fupported by the beft Evidence, 
 that human Wifdom is able to think of in the 
 mofl: material Cafes ? He goes on; Is it not abfurd^ 
 that the meanejl Witncljes fiould be pickd and 
 cult d out for the beji and great eft Affairs ? What 
 he intends by the meatieft I know not. . Men 
 may furely be good Witnefles without having 
 great Eftates, and be able to report what they fee 
 with their Eyes without being Philofbphers : 
 As far then as the Truth of the Refurredlion de- 
 pended on the Evidence of Senfe, the Apoftles 
 were duly qualiiied. But how comes he to 
 lay fuch Strefs upon their Meannefs ? did their 
 Meannefs ftand in the Way of the Evidence, 
 which arofe from the great Powers with which 
 they were endowed fi'om above ? Conlider their 
 natural and fupernatural Qualifications, they 
 were in every refped: proper Witnefles ; take 
 thefe Qualifications together, and they were 
 Witneffes without Exception. But the Confix 
 derer thinks the Apoftles were interefled in the 
 Affair y and that half a dozen Watchmen ivould 
 have been better than a dozen Apoftles"^. I 
 
 ^ Tryal^ p. 47. » Firft Edit. p. 72. 3. Third Edit, 
 p. 5 8. " Firii Edit. p. 94. Third Edic. p. (J4. 
 
 would 
 
f »37 ) 
 
 would fain know, what fort of Witnefles he 
 requires. Suppofe half-a-dozen Watchmen 
 had {e^n and believed the Refurredion, I 
 doubt their being Believers would have been, in 
 his way of Reckoning, an Objedtion; he 
 would have told us, they expefted Commiffi- 
 ons in the Mejia/js Army ^, Would he then 
 have Evidence from Unbelievers ? A Witnefs, 
 who does not believe the Truth of what he 
 affirms, is a mere Cheat. No body therefore 
 could be a Witnefs to the Refurredion but a 
 Believer; and fuch an one he efteems to ht 
 interefted. But this is an abfurd Objedion, 
 becaufe it is an Objedlion to every honeft Wit- 
 nefs that ever lived ; for every honeft Witnefs 
 believes the Truth of what he fays. If he 
 means to charge the Apoflles with Views or 
 Hopes of temporal Advantage to themfelves, he 
 ihews himfelf to be a mere Stranger to the 
 Hiftory of the Church, or wilfully impofes on 
 his ignorant Readers. How much the Apo- 
 flles endured and fufFered for the Teftimony of 
 the Truth , what Havock was made among 
 the Converts to Chriftianity, by Perfecution 
 upon Perfecution, for three hundred Years to- 
 gether, 'till the Empire became Chriftian, is 
 as notorious as any Part of Hiftory^ and he 
 may as well, and with as much Truth, deny 
 that there were any Heathen Emperors of 
 
 * Page 44. ^5. 
 
 T Rome J 
 
{ ^8 ) 
 
 Rome^ as that the Apoftles, and firft Chrifti- 
 ans, were afflidted, tormented, and put to cruel 
 Deaths by them. 
 
 In the next Page the Confiderer repeats the 
 old Objedion, " that Jejm did not fliew 
 *' himlelf to the Jews after his Refurredion." 
 This Plea had been examined, and anfwered 
 in the Tryal-, and lince the Confiderer has 
 thought fit to pafs over in Silence what he found 
 there, I muft refer the Reader to the I'ryal it- 
 felf for an Anfwer to this old Objeftion. And, 
 if he wants farther Satisfadion, I recommeixi 
 to him a little Piece wrote upon this Point on- 
 ly, and publifhed in 1730*. The Cofijiderer 
 wonders, that an extraordmnry ASlion^ — highly 
 necejjary to be hiown to Mankind^ Jhould be Jo 
 fecretly done^ that no Man Jaw it 3 — and that 
 ]tim JImdd require Men to believe his Difciples^ 
 rather than their own Senfes ^ When fo ma- 
 ny faw him dead, and fo many faw and con- 
 verfed with him after he arofe from the Grave, 
 it is furprizing to hear this Aflertion, that no 
 Man Jaw the Refurredion. Is any thing more 
 wanting to complete a fenfible Proof of a Refur- 
 redion, than to fee a Man dead and buried, 
 and to fee him alive again ? But, it feems, the 
 Jews could not believe the Diiciples in the 
 
 ^ An Impartial Exa?mnation^ and full Confutaiion of the 
 Argument^ iffc, aga'injl the Truth of our Saviour's Refur- 
 reaion^ viz. That he appeared osly to the Difciples. 
 PriTited for J. Roberts /?/ Warwick-fane, 1730, 
 ' ! Firft Edit, p, 7V Third Edit, p, 5^. 
 
 Report 
 
(139) 
 
 Report they made of the Refurrc(3tion5 without 
 contradifting their own Senfes, They had then, 
 in this Writer's Opinion, the Evidence of 
 Se72fe againft the Truth of the Refurreftion. 
 This is great News, and it is Pity this Evi- 
 dence was not produced ; it would have been 
 material to inform us, which of their Senfes 
 afforded that Evidence; and by what Means 
 he came to know this Piece of Evidence which 
 the Jews had, and which the World never 
 heard of before, and which probably they will 
 never hear of again. 
 
 The Author of the "Tryal had taken Notice 
 of our Saviour's Predidlon juft before his Death, 
 that the Jews ihould fee him no more, till they 
 faid, Blejjed is he that cometh in the Name of the 
 Lord^', and then added, " The yfc"i£;^ were not 
 " in this Difpolition after the Refurredlion, 
 " nor are they in it yet" ^. The Confiderer lays 
 that "Jefus himfelf found them in that Di/pofition 
 before his Death ^ ; and he refers for Proof of 
 this bold Allertion to Luke xix. 38. The Cafe 
 there is this : Upon our Lord's Entrance into 
 Jeru/alem, the Multitude of Difciples cryed, 
 Blejfed be the King that cometh in the Name of 
 the Lord. This was the Language of the Dif- 
 ciples only, and the Co?2fiderer does not thinfe 
 all the Jews were Difciples. How comes he 
 
 a Luke xiii. 35. ^ Tr. p, 77. 
 
 ! Firft Edit, p. jS. Third Edit. p. ^i. 
 
 T 2 th^ji 
 
( 140 ) 
 then to abufe the Scripture and his Reader fo 
 grofsly, as to quote this PalTage as a Proof of 
 the Difpofition of the Jews ? Did he not read in 
 the very next verfe that the Pharifees called 
 upon Chrift^ to rebuke the Difciples for what 
 they faid ? How could he be fo ihamelefs as to 
 give this for Evidence, that the Jews were in a 
 good Difpofition, which proves fo undeniably 
 that they were in a bad one ? 
 
 The Author of the "Tryal obferved, that 
 notwithftanding the Story propagated among the 
 People, that the Difciples ftole the Body, yet 
 in all the Perfecutions raifed againft them upon 
 feveral Pretences, as of Herefy, Sedition, &c. 
 they never were charged with any Fraud in the 
 Refurredion. He obferved too that the Chri- 
 ftian Faith being grounded on the Truth of 
 the Refurredion, as the Bafis and Foundation 
 of the whole, " The thing for which they 
 ^' fufFered was the Truth of the Refurredion". 
 So tben^ fays this fmart Writer, the chief 
 Priejls never fo much as charged the Apoftles with 
 any Fraud in the Refurredion^ but they put them 
 to Death becaufe they believed it ^. 
 
 Iwifh this Writer loved trifling lefs, or 
 that I liked it better, for at prefent 'tis too 
 hard Work to follow him. But I fubmit, 
 and defire him to fay, whether every Man 
 
 •• Firll Edit, p. 83. Third Edir^ p. 69. 
 
 that 
 
( I4X ) 
 
 that does not believe the Story of the ftealing 
 the Body by the Difciples, muft neceffarily 
 believe the Refurredion -, if not, then furely 
 the chief Priefts might, confiftently vi^ith their 
 Notions, perfecute the Apoftles for preaching 
 the Refurredtion, though they did not charge 
 them with ftealing the Body, or any Fraud 
 in contriving the Refurredtion. 
 
 The Evidence of the Spirit in the Signs 
 and .Wonders wrought by the Difciples in 
 Confirmation of the Truth of their Dodrine, 
 was infifted on in the Tryal, and I refer the 
 Reader to it, fince the Conjiderer has made 
 no Reply to it. He fays, in ^ this Age we 
 have almoji loft it^ except amongfi the Difci^ 
 pies of the infpired Mr, Whitfield, who has 
 
 blown lip a new Light of it ^and has 
 
 ventilated it by his Bellows^, What can be 
 done with this profane BufFoonry ! I am for- 
 ty to fee it; and if the Author is not quite 
 obdurate, I wifh he may come to fuch a 
 Temper of Mind, as to be forry for it too. 
 
 When the Apoftles were brought before 
 the chief Priefts and the Council of the Jews^ 
 and preached to them the RefurreBion^ Ga- 
 maliely one of the Council, laid, If this be 
 the Work of Men, it will come to Nought ^ 
 but if it be of God , ye cannot overthrow 
 it ^ From this Paifage the Author of 
 
 * Firft Edit. p. 84. Thiid Edit. p. ^0. «» Aj:3 v, 
 
 the 
 
( mo 
 
 the ^ryal argued, that Gamaliel could not 
 poffibly have faid this, or the Council heard 
 it with Patience, if they had believed the Re- 
 furreftion a Cheat, and that the Difciples 
 had ftole the Body. The Argument was 
 too ftrong for the Conjiderer^ and therefore 
 he queftions the Truth of Gamaltel\ titter^ 
 ing thefe IVords^ ; and for Fear that ihould 
 not be fufficient, he fays, Gamaliel 7night be 
 be fo much a Philofopher^ as well as a Scho- 
 lar, to diffuade them from rigid Perfecution, 
 How his Philofophical Notion of Perfecution 
 comes in here is hard to fay ; one would 
 think he was dreaming of Perfecution and 
 talking in his Sleep. The QueftioL is, How 
 Gamaliel could make the Suppofition, that 
 the Refurred:ion might be the Work of God, 
 if he knew it to be the Fraud and Cheat of 
 Men ? What has his Notion of Perfecution 
 to do here ? Befides, if Gamaliel knew the 
 Apoftles to be Cheats, would his Philofophy 
 about Perfecution incline him to fpare Cheats, 
 who (if they were Cheats) were guilty of 
 Forgery and Perjury and every other Crime, 
 neceffary to carry on fuch a Fraud ? 
 
 The Cafe of Agrippa, and the Argument 
 from it in the ^ryal is much of the fame 
 Kind. The Confiderer fuppofes Agrippa to 
 mean, that Paul was mad, and fays, he had 
 told Paul before, he was a MadmarjL \ Agrippa 
 never did tell Paul fo. The Confderer, I 
 
 I Firft Edit. p. 8^. Third Edit. p. 71. ^ Ibid. 
 
 fuppofe 
 
( H3 ) 
 
 fuppofe, miftook Jgrippa for Fejlus. It was 
 natural for the Roman Soldier, who knew 
 nothing of the Jewijh Prophets, when he 
 he^rd Paul appealing to them, to fay, much 
 Learning had made him mad^-, but to put 
 thefe Words into Jgrippas Mouth, who 
 was bred up in a Regard to the Prophets, 
 is quite out of CharacSer, as well as falfe in 
 
 Faa. 
 
 IV. 
 
 We have now gone through the Confide^ 
 rer\ Exceptions to the Evidence of the Re- 
 furreftion, and to the Defence of that Evi- 
 dence in the tryal of the Witnejfes-, but the 
 Bufinefs is not yet over. The Conjiderer has 
 one Argument ftill in Referve, which, were 
 there any thing in it, would ftrike at the 
 Credit of Revelation in general. He had gi- 
 ven his Opinion of Miracles incidentally in 
 feveral Parts of his Book, but at the Conclu- 
 fion he endeavours to fupport it at large. He 
 thinks, " That Miracles of any Kind are 
 *' impoffible and exclude all Evidence ^ that 
 «^ they are an Abfurdity to common Senfe 
 « and Underftanding ; that they are in- 
 <« confiftent with the Reafon of Man and 
 <« Nature of Things; that they contradifl: 
 <« all that Mankind calls Truth and Reafon ; 
 «« that they are contrary to the Experience 
 <« and Reafon of all Mankind, and utterly 
 c« impoffible.^" 
 
 « Aasxxvi. 24. ^ Firft Edit. p. 6^. 8p, ^o, 5>i. 
 
 ThirdEdic.p.5-74-7J. j ^^jj 
 
( 144 ) 
 
 I fhall difcufs this Point with him. and 
 lee what Reafon he has thus to dogmatifc 
 in Oppofition to the general Opinion of all 
 Mankind in all Ages of the World. 
 
 For the Poffibility of the Refurredion, 
 I muft do the Reader the Juflice once more 
 to refer him to the Tryal cf the Witneffes\ 
 where he will find this Point flated and ex- 
 plained in fuch a Manner that no Man, 
 that is lefs a Sceptic than the Confiderer^ can 
 have any Doubt about it. The Confiderer 
 has made a Shew of anfwering this Part of 
 tjie Tryal, without ftating the Author's Ar- 
 gument, without feeming to underftand one 
 Word of the Scope of it, and without citing 
 one Sentence fairly. So far as that Author 
 is concerned, it is fufiicient to fay in his own 
 Words, what is the real Truth, that he has 
 faid nothi?ig upon this Occajion, tha?i what 
 any Man who never faw Ice^ might fay againjl 
 an hundred honeji Witnejfes^ who ajfert that 
 Water turns to Ice in cold Climates ^. 
 
 For the Reafon and Poffibility of Miracles 
 in general, I fliall now beg Leave to talk 
 with-him. He is very frank in declaring his 
 Opinion with regard to this Point, and I have 
 laid it before the Reader in his own Words. 
 Nothing can well be ftronger than the Lan- 
 
 ^ Tryal, p. 60. ' 
 
 guage 
 
( I4J ) 
 
 guage in which he has expreffed it. He feems 
 plainly to declare that Miracles are not only 
 impoffible in a moral, but in a phyfical Senfe ; 
 that they are not only inconfiftent with the 
 moral Attributes, but impoffible even to the 
 Power of God. 
 
 But be this as it will. I fhall take the Ar- 
 guments, as he himfelf has fiated them, and 
 examine them by the Rules of common 
 Language and common Senfe. He has in- 
 deed fo involved himfelf in Words, that when 
 he has a Meaning, it is not eafy to come at 
 it. Reafon, right Reafon, Truth, and the 
 Nature of Things, are Words of great Weight 
 in the Apprehenfions of moft Men. Let us 
 fee what Place they hold in the Confiderers 
 Eftimation. What CoJiceptions any Man 
 ^J^rames to himfelf of the Coirrfe of Natu?^e 
 from his own Experience and Obfervation^ 
 are not Prejudices and I?naginations ; but 
 what Senfe a?id Reafon are concerned about. 
 *This is the very Foundation of that Right 
 Reafon, which can never cojitradidl the Truth 
 of Things^, In the firft Edition it ftands 
 thus, This is the very Foundation of right 
 Reafon y and Reafon^ formed frofn he7ice^ can 
 .never contradiB the Truth ofThi?igs^. 
 
 If every Man's Notion of the Courfe of Na- 
 ture is the very Foundatioii &c. of right 
 Reafon 'y then right Reafon varies as much 
 
 ! Third Edit. p. 74. ^ Page 90. 
 
 U as 
 
(14^) 
 
 as People's Notions of the Courfe of Nature^ 
 •—It is then right Reafon that fays the Sun 
 goes round the Globe, for this the Vulgar 
 reckon to be the Courfe of Nature. It is 
 right Reafon alfo, to fay the Sun is fixed, 
 and the Planets move round him; for this 
 appears from the Experience and Obfervatiort 
 of Aftronomers to be the Courfe of Nature. 
 But how abfurd is it to make right Reafon 
 depend upon the Notions, which Men enter- 
 tain of the Courfe of Nature; when it is the 
 very Office and Bufinefs of Reafon to rectify 
 the Errors, which Men perpetually fall into 
 in the Judgments they make in this Cafe, 
 Experience and Obfervation ihew, that a Cane 
 half in the Water, and half out, is crooked -^ 
 but Reafon, upon the Principle of true Sci- 
 ence, informs us otherwife. Here then Ex-, 
 perience and Obfervation are on one Side, 
 and Reafon on the other : And the fame 
 Conclufion holds true in a thoufand Inftances, 
 and every Inflance indeed where Men make 
 a wrong Judgment of what they fee. xA.nd 
 the Fault in this Cafe does not lye in the Ex- 
 perience and Obfervation, but in the reafon- 
 ing upon them. Thus Men do not err in their 
 Obfervation, when they fay that Water ne- 
 ver grows folid in hot Climates; but they 
 err in reafoning upon this Obfervation, and 
 concluding that the Cafe can never be other- 
 wife. That Men dye, and come not to Life 
 again here, is a true Obfervation : But will 
 
 this 
 
{ ^47 ; 
 
 this Obfervation prove that it can never he 
 otherwife ? We fee by Obfervation the EfFeds 
 of the Courfe of Nature, but this Courfe of 
 Nature depends on Caufes removed out of 
 our Sight. Obfervation (hews how thefe 
 Caufes operate generally, but cannot fhew 
 that they are immutable, and muft operate 
 invariably in every Inftance. 
 
 But let fee us fee how he reafons the Point of 
 Miracles. Take the Propoiition as it ftands, firft 
 Edit. p. 90. and third Edit. p. 74. with theRea- 
 fon annexed. Things afferted which are con- 
 trary to the Experience and Reafon of all Ma?!- 
 kind^ and what they hiow oj the Law and 
 ufual Courfe of Nature (i, e. Miracles) are to 
 the common Senfe and Underjianding of Man 
 utterly impojjible. We muft redify the Pro- 
 poiition, before we come to the Reafon. In 
 the firft Part, which is intended as a Defcrip- 
 tion of Miracles, the Confiderer afiumes too 
 much; a Miracle is indeed contrary to com- 
 mon Experience, and the ufual Courfe of 
 Nature, but why contrary to Reafon ? If by 
 Reafon he means right Reafon or Truth, 
 it is fuppofing the very Thing in Queftion: 
 If he means the Faculty of Reafon, it will 
 come to the fame Thing, fuppofing that Fa- 
 culty to be rightly ufed, otherwife it is no- 
 thing to the Purpofe. 
 
 With the Confiderer s Leave then, I fliall 
 
 expunge the Word Reafon (which will not 
 
 injure the Argument) and the Propofition 
 
 U 2 will 
 
(148 J 
 
 Will ftand thus ; Things ajfertedy which are 
 contrary to the Experience of all Mankindy 
 and to what they know of the Laws and 
 nfual Courfe of Nature (i, e. Miracles) arCy 
 to the common Senfe and IJnderJlajiding of 
 McHy utterly tmpojjible. Now comes the Rea- 
 fonj becaufe fuch AJjertions contradidi all 
 Mens Notions of fuch Laws, that are known 
 by Experience, That is to fay, Things con- 
 trary to Experience are impoffible, becaufe 
 they are contrary to Experience^ or things 
 contrary to what Men know of the Laws of 
 Nature, are impoffible, becaufe they are con- 
 trary to what Men know of the Laws of Na- 
 ture. This is what ihtConfiderer calls giving 
 a Reafon. 
 
 But I cannot yet part with the Propofition. 
 Miracles, it feems, are to the common Senfe 
 and U?iderfanding of Men impofible. How 
 are we to underftand this Expreffion ? does 
 he mean impoffible to the Reafon of Men, 
 or impoffible to the Conceptions of Men ? 
 Impoffible to the Reafon of Man they are not, 
 becaufe the Reafon of Man tells him, there is 
 a Being, who originally gave Laws to Mat- 
 ter and regulates the Courfe of Nature j and 
 confequently who can, if he pleafes, alter or 
 fufpend thofe Laws, and change the Courfe 
 of Nature, If he means that Miracles are 
 impoffible to the Conceptions of Men, it is 
 granted 3 that is, it is granted that Men do 
 \\ol conceive how they are wrought j they do 
 
 not 
 
( V49 ) 
 
 not conceive how, or in what manner, a dead 
 Body is raifed to Life, nor how, or in what 
 manner, a Word only fhould give a blind Man 
 Sight. In this Senfe the Co?7fiderers Propo- 
 fition may be true, but then it is nothing to 
 his Purpofe. Miracles are inconceivable: 
 Yes, and fo are many things that happen 
 every Day, which we do not reckon miracu- 
 lous. It is inconceivable how Matter ads on 
 Matter, either in Gravitation, Attradion, 
 Magnetifm, or in any other well known O- 
 peration ; but we do not therefore give the 
 Lye to our Senfes, and fay it does not ad:, 
 becaufe we cannot conceive how it ads. 
 So that if the Confiderer means that Miracles 
 are impoffible to the Reafon of Men, it is 
 evidently falfe^ if he means that they are im- 
 poffible to the Conceptions of Men, it may 
 be true, but is quite befide his Purpofe. 
 
 But let us fee how this Point is argued in 
 the next Page. Perhaps we fhall meet with 
 a better Reafon there. To believe it pojihle^ 
 (i. e. for a dead Body to rife again) contra- 
 diBs this Maxim y '' That Nature is ileddy 
 " and uniform in her Operations.'' Nature, 
 or the Laws of Nature, would doubtlefs, 
 when not controuled by the Author of Na- 
 ture, operate fteddily and uniformly. A Lyon 
 would produce a Lyon, an Acorn an Oak : 
 Matter would continue to gravitate, human 
 Beings to dye, and dead Bodies to mix with 
 the Earth, and not coi;ne to Life again. What 
 
 does 
 
does the Maxim prove then ? Only that a dead 
 Body cannot come to Life again in the na- 
 tural Way. No body difputes this with the 
 Conjiderer. The Queftion is, Whether it 
 may not be done in a fapernatural Way; 
 whether the great Author of Nature, when- 
 ever he thinks it convenient, cannot fuperfede 
 or fufpend the general Laws of Nature. Will 
 the Confiderer deny this ? If lie believes a 
 God and a Providence, as he profelTes to do, 
 he canr>ot. Weil ; but it contradidts the a- 
 forefaid Maxim, becaufe, one Miracle or Ac- 
 tion done contrary to her (i. e. Nature's) LawSy 
 contradiBs all her regular Spri?2gi and Move- 
 ments^ and all that Majikind calls Truth and 
 Reafon, How does fuch an Adion contra- 
 di(5t all Nature's uniform Movements ? Does 
 it imply that her Movements are not uni- 
 form, when uncontrouled ? Nothing like it. 
 Does it imply that they are not uniform in 
 that particular Inftance ? that is, that her 
 Movements in that Inftance are contrary to 
 the general Con rfe of Nature ? Moft certainly 
 it does> for it is of the E (fence of a Miracle 
 to be contrary to the general Courfe of Na- 
 ture. What then ? This proves nothing ; it 
 is only giving the Thing in Difpute as a Rea- 
 fon agoinft itfelf But let us hear the other 
 Part ot'the Reafon, A Miracle contradiSs all 
 that Mankind calls Truth and Reafon, How 
 does this appear ? Why you n^uit take the 
 Confdercrs Word for it. But does he not 
 
 know 
 
(Ml) 
 
 know that it is the very Thing in Queftion ? 
 The Enquiry is, Whether Miracles are con- 
 trary to Reafon. The Cojifiderer undertakes 
 to prove that they are; and hov/ does he 
 prove it ? Why thus ; « Miracles are con- 
 " trary to Reafon, becaufe they contradidl 
 " this Maxim, that Nature is fteddy and uni- 
 " form in her Operations/* And how do 
 they contradidl this Maxim? Why, becaufe 
 *' they contradia what Mankind calls Truth 
 *' and Reafon.'* Is not this faying that Mi- 
 racles are contrary to Reafon, becaufe they 
 are contrary to Reafon ? 
 
 A Miracle^ the Confiderer fays, contradict 
 all that Marikmd calk Truth and Reafon. 
 Let us try it in a particular Inftance. We 
 read in the Gofpel, that our Saviour walked 
 upon the Water. What Truth or v;hat Rea* 
 fon does this contradia: ? It is a well known 
 Truth that all Bodies gravitate, and it is an-^ 
 other that human Bodies will fmk in Fluids. 
 Does it contradia either or both thefe Truths ? 
 furely not. All Bodies continue to gravitate, 
 and human Bodies to fink in Fluids, as they 
 did before; and ChrijVs own Body followed 
 the fame Law of Gravitation, that particular 
 Cafe only excepted. All that this Fad fup- 
 pofes is, that there is a Power in Nature that 
 can fufpend the Laws of Gravity, or change 
 Fluids into Solids. If this is contradiding 
 Truth, let the Confderer Hicw it. 
 
 3 It 
 
It is an unwelcome and an unprofitable 
 Tafk, to deal with an Author who gives 
 Words only, for Arguments. By the Speci- 
 men I have given of this Author's Reafoning 
 upon the natural Poflibility of Miracles, the 
 Reader, I believe, will find this to be the 
 Cafe here. He goes on to fhew, that they are 
 impofliblc in a moral View, that, fuppofing 
 God to have Power over his own Works, or 
 as he expreffes it *^, that he can do "Things con^ 
 trary to Nature^ there is 720 Reafon that he 
 ever did or will do it. It is, he thinks, con- 
 trary to the Perfedtion of his Nature, to his 
 Unchangeablenefs, his Wifdom, his Juftice, 
 and his Goodnefs. Let us fee how he proves 
 it. 
 
 Thofe^ fays he ^, who found Religion en ex- 
 traordinary Pretenfions, fay^ that Nature^ 
 which is the Offspring of God^ is degenerate 
 and deficiejtt. It is not eafy to deal with an 
 Author, who ufes Terms fo equivocally, that 
 one can come at his Meaning only by Guefs* 
 It is difficult to fiy, what we are to under- 
 lland by Nature. If by Nature the Co7fi' 
 derer means, what he feems moft com- 
 monly to underftand by it, the Conffitu- 
 tion of the material World, the Propofiti- 
 on is evidently falfe : Extraordinary Preten- 
 fions do not imply that Nature, in this 
 Senfe, is deficient, nor indeed 4o they imply 
 
 f Page 76. Third Edit. ^ Page 92, Firft Edir. 
 
 any 
 
^ { 1^3 } 
 
 ftny thing with regard to Nature; for what 
 Connexion is there between the extraordi- 
 nary Pretenfions of the Chriftian Religion, and 
 the Perfedion of the material World ? When 
 our Lord, for Inftance, by a Word caufed the 
 Fig-tree to wither, did it fuppofe any Defi- 
 ciency in the Conftitution of Vegetables? No 
 more than if the Tree had been felled by an 
 Axe. Whatever the Conftitution of Vegeta- 
 bles, or whatever the Conftitution of the ma- 
 terial World be, fuch Aftions declare nothing 
 either as to their Peifedion or Imperfedtion ; 
 they only declare that the God of Nature has 
 Authority over his own Workmanfliip. 
 
 But perhaps by Nature the Conftderer 
 means human Nature, or the moral Nature 
 of Man. Let us try the Propofition in this 
 Senfe. 'Thofe who found Religion on extra- 
 ordinary PretenfonSy fay, that human Na- 
 ture, which is the Offspring of God, is 
 deficient, Man is fubjedl to Error and Cor- 
 ruption ; and, in this Senfe, human Nature 
 may well be faid to be deficient, whether 
 God interpofes or not. Whether ReHgion be 
 founded on extraordinary Pretenfions or not, 
 human Nature is ftill deficient ; if this be an 
 Objedion under revealed Religion, it is an 
 Objedtion under natural Religion too. 
 When a Youth is taught to read and to write; 
 when he is inftrufted in Religion^ and the 
 Sciences 5 does it not imply, that human Na- 
 
 X turc 
 
( 154 ) 
 
 ture wants Help, and is in itfelf deficient? 
 And what does it imply more, when God 
 vouchfafes to help and affift it ? It is very 
 improper, it is falfe to fay, the Offspring of 
 God, or the Work of God is deficient y but 
 it is not improper to fay, that Man is imper- 
 feft or deficient. The Truth is, the Senfe of 
 the Word deficient is different in one Cafe 
 from what it is in the other. God's Works 
 are faid to be perfedl in this particular View, 
 that they are adapted to the End for which 
 they were defigned> and yet Man, or any o- 
 ther created Being, is imperfedl or deficient^ 
 when compared with a greater Being, and e- 
 fpecially when compared with the greatefl of 
 all Beings, 
 
 The Confiiderer has another Argument, 
 which bears a near Refemblance to this, and is 
 as follows: The "whole Produ6tion ofi God's 
 Wifdomy Goodfxefs, and Power mufi be a per- 
 
 fedl Work j therefore cannot be better. If 
 
 God be a perfect Beings his Works are perfeB^ 
 and cannot be mended ^. The Confiiderer 
 talks fometimes of Providence; I fhould be 
 glad to know, what is his Notion of Provi- 
 dence. He feems to fuppofe, that God 
 formed the Univerfe, as a vafl: Machine, 
 with the feveral Orders of Beings in it, 
 and then, like the Epicurean Deities, left 
 it to (hift for itfelf, without concerning him- 
 
 * FirflEdit. p. 5)5. Third Edit. p. 7^. 
 
 felf 
 
(155 ) 
 felf at all about it. If there be fuch a thing 
 as Providence, which the Confiderer him- 
 felf confeffes, if God ever interpofes in his 
 own Creation, it muft be to mend fome- 
 thing, though not to mend his own ordinal 
 Work. It is not proper to fay, that God s 
 Work is mended by Revelation, as the Conji- 
 derer fuppofes, in any other Senfe than it is 
 mended by a good School-mafter, or an able 
 Profeffor of the Sciences. Revelation indeed 
 mends or improves Men, that is, it furnifhes 
 them with greater and better Lights than 
 mere Reafon could; but it alters not the Na- 
 ture and Conftitution of Men, it aflFefts not 
 the original WorkmanOiip of God _ 
 
 But farther: The material World is (like 
 all Machines of human Contrivance) govern- 
 ed by necelTary Laws, and the Conftitution _ot 
 it cannot be altered, by any Power within it- 
 felf But it is not fo in the moral World. 
 Man was originally endued with Properties 
 of a different kind from thofe of Matten He 
 has a Power over his own Anions, a Power 
 of improving or depraving his moral Nature 
 One Man makes the proper Improvement ot 
 the Powers which Nature gave him, another 
 abufes them. One Nation, or one Age makes 
 high Advances in Knowledge and Virtue, an- 
 other is funk in Ignorance and Corruption. 
 If fuch Enormities are the natural Conle- 
 quences of the original Conftitution of Man, 
 
( IJ^ ) 
 
 what Reafon is there to exclude Providence 
 from regulating and ^correding them ? If the 
 Syftem of Man is to be confidered under the 
 Notion of one great Machine, it mufl be con- 
 fidered as a Machine that has a Power with- 
 in itfelf of putting itfelf out of Order; and, 
 if It iTiould be out of Order, as from the Na^ 
 ture of its feveral Springs and Wheels it may 
 well be fuppofed to be, where is the Impro- 
 priety of the great Artificer interpofing and 
 correding it ? If Man has a Power of chuf- 
 ing Good or Evil, he may chufe the latter; 
 if he has Faculties for difcovering Truth, he 
 may notwithftanding negledl it, he may o- 
 verlook or miftake it: It is eafy to fee what 
 Room here is for Error and Corruption. So 
 that, however pcrfea the original Work was. 
 It may in time, from the Nature of the thino-,' 
 want mending, ^' 
 
 . Natural Powers, the Confiderer fays, are 
 fit to anfwer all the Ends of Religion, there- 
 fore fuper natural Powers are needlefs \ What 
 he means by anfwering the Ends of Reli- 
 gion, he tells you in what follows ; to teach 
 the moji excellent Morals, with a reafo?iable 
 Belief of one God and Provideiice, I (hall 
 .not difpute with the Confiderer, how far fome 
 Men may advance upon the Strength of mere 
 Reafon : Some have no doubt gone great 
 
 fFirftEdit. p.pj. Third Edit. p. 77. 
 
 ^ Lengths; 
 
Lengths ; but Man, the Confid^rer knows, is 
 not infallible. He may embrace Error under 
 the Notion of Truth, and teach it as fuch; 
 and the Corruption may fpread and become 
 general. What is to be done in this Cafe? 
 The Confiderer feems to think that a Man of 
 honejiy and JJuderjlandrng would be well able 
 to cure his Diforder, without fupernatural 
 Endowments, I am not of his Opinion 5 in- 
 veterate Error is not to be expelled foeafily; 
 human Reafon and human Authroity, efpe- 
 cially when it comes to be general, do not 
 feem to be a Match for it. If we may Reafon 
 from FacS, there is nothing more fure than 
 this. There were no doubt fome Men of Ho^ 
 nejly and Vnderjlanding in the heathen World ; 
 but what Progrefs did they make in reforming 
 it.? how far did they advance in remoying that 
 univerfal Corruption with which it was over- 
 ma ? Take a View of Paganifm from the 
 Time of Socrates to the Time of Chriji, the 
 mofl enlightened Period of Antiquity, and fee 
 what Progrefs Truth had made. What were 
 the public Inftitutions of Religion, but the 
 worft and groiTeft Superftition and Impiety ? 
 So much of Truth as had been difcovered was 
 confined to the Few 3 and if happily they might 
 chance to keep it, it was not likely to get any 
 farther. Every National Religion was looked 
 on as the Dilates of the Gods, and forbid to 
 be altered by Man 3 fo that Truth was as it 
 
 were 
 
( 158 ) 
 
 were prohibited by Law. How then was it 
 to be recovered, with the civil Power and the 
 Prejudices and Paffions of Mankind agairift it? 
 Let the Confide rer Ihew, if he can, that a 
 Man of Honefiy mid Under (landing without 
 anyfupernatural Powers would be equal to this 
 Work. 
 
 But the Confiderer thinks a Power of work-- 
 ing Miracles is contrary to the Unchangeable- 
 nefs of God ^ iov the fa?ne Caifes^ht {diySy mujl 
 always produce the fame EffeSls^, His Reafon, 
 if he intended it as a Reafon, is a very un- 
 lucky one, I cannot fee the mod diftant Re- 
 lation between the Premifes and the Conclu- 
 lion. T^he fame Caufes produce the fame Ef- 
 feB, Right ! but in Miracles a new Caufe is 
 introduced ; and if his Argument proves any 
 Thing, it proves that natural Caufes will not 
 produce Miracles ; but do we afcribe Mi- 
 racles to natural Caufes ? He goes on ; But 
 Miracles are urged to prove a Change in the 
 Will of God 'y that is^ impojjible things are urged 
 to prove an ImpoJJibility, According to the 
 Cofjfiderer, it feems, it is a Principle agreed 
 on by both Believers and Unbelievers, that 
 Miracles are ufed to prove a Change in the 
 Will of God. If you grant him this, and ad- 
 mit too that Miracles are impoffible, he will 
 draw this notable Conclufion, that Impoffibili" 
 ties are urged to prove an ImpoJfibilit\\ 
 
 t Firft Edit. p. 94., Third Edit. p. 78. ^ 
 
 But 
 
{ 159 ) 
 
 But fuppofe neither of them is granted, 
 what will become of his Conckifion ? The 
 Reader has already feen his Reafons, if they 
 may be called Reafons, for thinking Mira- 
 cles to be impoffible. But what Pretence 
 has he to fay. that Miracles are urged to 
 prove a Change in the Will of God ? where 
 or when were they ever urged to thisPur- 
 pofe? or how indeed do they prove it? The 
 Confiderer is entirely filent as to all thefe 
 Points, and yet he goes on reafoning upon the 
 Suppofition of Miracles proving a Change, 
 nay, of their being allowed to prove a Change 
 in the Will of God. 
 
 The Confiderer has puzzled himfelf un- 
 accountably with the Immutability of God, 
 than which there is not one Attribute in the 
 divine Nature more clear and precife. It is his 
 Being and Perfeftions that are immutable, 
 and not his Adlions, unlefs you will fuppofe 
 Men, and all other Beings immutable too. 
 His Adlions are always the fame, when Cir- 
 cumftances are the fame 5 but what Senfe is 
 there in fuppoiing that immutable Wifdom 
 muft ad: in all Cafes, how different foever, in the 
 fame Way ? The Counfels of Providence are 
 direfted by unerring Wifdom 5 but the fame 
 Wifdom prefcribes different Meafures upon 
 different Occafions, Miracles of themfelves 
 can be no Proof that God's Counfels are 
 mutable, either with refpeft to the natiu'al or 
 
 tl^c 
 
the moral World ; not with refped to the na- 
 tural, becaufe fufpending fome one Law of 
 Matter to ferve lome moral Purpofe, is no 
 Proof that the Counfel of God is changed 
 with regard to the general Laws and Confti- 
 tution of Matter ; not in the m.oral, becaufe 
 Miracles may, for any Thing that appears to 
 the contrary, be ufeful to anfwer fome moral 
 End, and to ferve the great Purpofes of Pro- 
 vidence, in fome Cafes and not in others. 
 
 This th^ CojTfiderer is not willing to allow; 
 for if Miracles were ever neceffary^ they miijl 
 in his Judgment be always necejfary. 
 
 The Conjiderer has fo good a Talent at 
 Reafoning, that I cannot refufe him and the 
 Reader the Juftice of producing his Argument, 
 as he himfeifhas ftated it. If Miracles were 
 ever neceffary^ whether the divine and human 
 Nature^ or the Nature of things be change- 
 able OR UNCHANGEABLE, ?nuji be always 
 neceffary. For if God ever w?' ought Miracles to 
 be the Proof of the Knowledge of his Will, he will 
 always pur fue the fame Methods^ ifhe isan 
 UNCHANGEABLE Being ^. " That is to fay, 
 " The Proportion is true, whether God be 
 " changeable or not, for a Reafon which ex- 
 *' prefsly fuppofes him to be unchangeable." 
 The Conjiderer has generally the Fortune to 
 have his Poiitions and his Reafons hang very ill 
 
 ? Firft Edit. p. ^€. Third Edit. p. 80. 
 
 together. 
 
 I 
 
ix6i) 
 
 together. But let us examine the latter Part 
 of the Argument by itfdf, and fee what there 
 is in it. " God is an unchangeable Being : 
 " Therefore, if he ever wrought Miracles as 
 " a Proof of his Will, he will always purfue 
 « the fame Method/' It is allowed that God 
 is an unchangeable Being. It follows from 
 thence that his Conduct will always be the 
 fame, in the fame State of Things; if he 
 works Miracles in one Cafe, he will do it again 
 whenever the fame Cafe, with all its Circum- 
 ftances, returns. But if he does it when the 
 State of Mankind requires it, it does not fol- 
 low that he will do it, when the State of 
 Mankind does not require it. Let the Gttj/?- 
 derer fl:iew that it cannot be expedient for 
 Mankind at one time, and not at an other. 
 Till he can prove this, he proves nothing. 
 Let us try his Reafoning in a common 
 Cafe. Should the Subjeds of fome great Prince 
 rife in Arms againft him, and fhould he quiet 
 them by offering a general Pardon without pu- 
 nifhing their Crime 3 will it follow that he 
 ought to purfue the fame Method in every Re^ 
 bellion ? And will it follow that his Counfels 
 are mutable, if he does not ? The Cojifiderer" 
 himfelf will not have the Folly to affert it. Le- 
 nity may be necefTary at one time, and Severity 
 at another ; and each of thefe Meafures, tho' 
 not only different but oppofite, may be the Ef- 
 feft of the fame Wifdom and Prudence. 
 
 Y But 
 
(i6t) 
 
 But if God has wrought Wonders in one Ge- 
 neration and not another^ it feems, he mujl be a 
 partial Being ^ Th^ConJiderer does not know 
 what he is about when he charges God with 
 Partiality. According to his little View of 
 Things, Providence may be accufed as partial 
 in many other Inftances, and with more Ap- 
 pearance of Reafon than in this. Why does 
 he not complain that one Man has greater na- 
 tural Endowments than another, that he is fu- 
 perior in Wealth, in Dignity, in Power, or 
 : whatever elfe is efteemed great and illuftrious ? 
 If that is to be looked on as Partiality, which 
 the Confiderer judges to be fuch, I leave him to 
 .refledl where his Opinion will terminate. He 
 fays, " That Miracles are equally neceffary to 
 *' all People, and therefore if God grants them 
 <' to one Generation and not another he is a 
 " partial Being." If bold Affertions were to be 
 admitted as Proofs, there is nothing w^hich the 
 Confiderer is not capable of proving. . Let him 
 prove (inflead of afferting) that Miracles are 
 equally neceffary in all Ages, and then it will 
 be time to talk with him. Here is a Maxim 
 which the Confiderer himfelf allows to be a juft 
 one, that Providence does nothing in vain. If 
 then a Series of Wonders are wrought in one 
 Age, why may not the Memory of them be 
 duly preferved for the Benefit of fucceeding 
 
 <= Firft Edit. p. 98. Third Edir. p. 82. 
 
 f Ages ? 
 
Ages ? And if they are fo prefervedj would not 
 , repeating them in fucceeding Ages be unnecef- 
 Xary? When Error and Corruption have been 
 once conquered, and the true Religion efta- 
 bliihed by the Help of Miracles ; why are not 
 fuch Miracles when recorded by proper Hands 
 fufficient to fupport and preferve it ? The Con- 
 fiderer calls upon us to (liew. What lofting 
 . Monuments we have of them, by which they may 
 be clearly evidenced^ aJidmay appear true againjl 
 all ContradiBion ^ He needs not go to the Place 
 in which they were wrought, where only he 
 thinks fuch Monuments are to be found ^ 
 They are much nearer home, than he is will- 
 ing to believe 5 they are . already in his own 
 Hands, if he knew how to ufe them, and fet 
 a juft Value on them. The Gofpels are the 
 Monuments, wherein thofe Miracles are re- 
 corded, and he mufl prove them to be all a 
 Forgery, before he can with Reafon complain 
 for want of authentic Monuments; which he 
 will find it no eafy Matter to do, againft the 
 Teftimony of all Antiquity, of the Enemies of 
 Chriflianity, as well as its Friends. 
 
 I have now gone through the material 
 Things, and to my own Sorrow, many imma- 
 terial Things in the ConJiderer\ Book. When the 
 Book firft appeared, it feemed to require no 
 Anfwer ; and to thofe who can judge of the 
 Weight of Arguments, it required none. But 
 
 ^^ lb. ^ P. 5^2. Firfl Edit. p. -jG, Third Edir. 
 
 when 
 
( x64 ) 
 
 when it came into the Hands of thofc v^ho 
 were not able to fee how they were impofed on, 
 the Cafe was altered. For their Sakes this An- 
 fwer was prepared, and isnow publifhed. One 
 Thing at lead they may learn from thefe Pa- 
 pers, not to truft a Man, who abufes Religion 
 out of Love to Truth. It is not Scripture he 
 attacks, whatever he pretends ; but Scripture 
 diftorted and perverted. Look over the pre- 
 tended Anfwer to the 'Tryal -, where is there 
 an Argument of any Weight, that is built up- 
 on a true Reprefentation of Scripture ? I will 
 not fay that all his Miftakes of this Kind are 
 wilful ; many of them, I am afriad, are fo. 
 But I judge him not. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
DATE DUE \ 
 
 ^Pf-"-^ 
 
 :- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 DEMCO 38-297 
 
1 
 
sa,-fw 
 
 '^ 
 
 i-.r.-Sr 
 
 7^ 
 
 ':^'y 
 
 f-yt^'^ 
 
 m& 
 
 '^m 
 
 m^ 
 
 ,1^ .4 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 H 
 
 i?^^ 
 
 If' cV 
 
 ':^%> ->/■ 
 
 '-^'' 
 
 «(in 
 
 -M'-i