I. I will ſhow that the Miracles of Heal⯑ing all manner of Bodily Diſeaſes, which Jeſus was juſtly famed for; are none of the proper Miracles of the Meſſiah, nor are they ſo much as a good Proof of Jeſus's Divine Authority to found and introduce a Religion into the World.

And to do this, let us conſider firſt in general, what was the Opinion, of the Fa⯑thers about the Writings of the Evangeliſts, in which the Life of Chriſt is recorded. Eucherius ſays, ³ That the Scriptures of the New as well as Old Teſtament are to be in⯑terpreted in an Allegorical Senſe. And this his Opinion, is no other, than the common one of the firſt Ages of the Church, as might be proved by many the like Ex⯑preſſions [8] of other Fathers. As in ſuch Ex⯑preſſions, they do not except the Writings of the Evangeliſts; ſo they muſt include the Hiſtory of Chriſt's Miracles, which as well as other Parts of the Hyſtory of his Life is to be allegoriz'd for the ſake of its true meaning; conſequently the litteral Story of Chriſt's Miracles proves nothing.

But let's hear particularly their Opinion of the Actions and Miracles of our Saviour. Origen ſays, that ⁴ whatſoever Jeſus did in the Fleſh, was but Typical and Symbolical of what he would do in the Spirit; and to our Purpoſe, ⁵ that the ſeveral bodily Diſeaſes which he heal'd, were no other than Figures of the ſpiritual Infirmities of the Soul, that are to be cured by him. St. Hilary is of the ſame Mind with Origen, as any one may ſee by the ⁶ Expreſſions, referr'd to, and his Com⯑mentary on St. Matthew. St. Auguſtin ⁷ [9] and St. John ⁸ of Jeruſalem both ſay, that the Works of Jeſus import farther Myſteries; and with them, the reſt of the Fathers agree, making the Miracles, that Jeſus did then, no more than the Shadow of ſome more powerful and myſtical Operations to be done by him; as I could ſhow by more Citati⯑ons out of them, if it was needful. But from the foregoing Citations out of the Fa⯑thers it is plain, in their Opinion, that our modern Divines are in the wrong of it to lay much Streſs on any of the Operations of Jeſus, which he did in the Fleſh, for the Proof of his Divine Authority and Meſſiah⯑ſhip, which is only to be proved by his more myſterious Works, of which thoſe done in the Fleſh were but Type and Fi⯑gure.

But to come cloſer to the Purpoſe, let's ſee how indifferently, I had almoſt ſaid con⯑temptibly, the Fathers ſpeak of the Miracles of Jeſus, and particularly of his Power of Healing all bodily Diſeaſes, which by mo⯑dern Writers is ſo much magnified and ex⯑toll'd. St. Irenaeus ſays, ⁹ that if we conſi⯑der only the then temporal Uſe of Jeſus's Power [10] of Healing, he did nothing grand and won⯑derful; conſequently Irenaeus could not hold, that Jeſus's Miracles then wrought, were a ſufficient Proof of his Divine Authority much leſs of his Meſſiahſhip. Origen ſays, ¹⁰ that tho' many were brought to believe in Jeſus upon the fame of the Miracles, which he did once among the Jews, yet (what implies the inſufficiency of them for the Converſion of Men) he intimates that his greater and my⯑ſtical Works do prove his Authority. St. John of Jeruſalem ſays, ¹¹ that Jeſus's cures per⯑form'd upon the Blind, &c. were indeed conſi⯑derable and great, but unleſs he do daily as mighty Works in his Church, we ought to for⯑bear our Admiration of him. St. Auguſtin not only ſays, ¹² that if we examine into Jeſus's Miracles by humane Reaſon, we ſhall find he did nothing great, conſidering his Al⯑mighty Power, and conſidering his Goodneſs, what he did was but little, but he tells us al⯑ſo, that ¹³ such Works as Jeſus did, might [11] be imputed to, and effected by magic Art. And accordingly Moſes and our Saviour himſelf confeſs, that falſe Prophets and falſe Chriſt's will do Miracles; and Anti-chriſt himſelf, according to St. Paul, will do them to the Deception of Mankind. Nay, the Fathers ¹⁴ ſay, what I believe, that Anti-chriſt will imitate and equal Jeſus in all his Miracles, which he wrought of old. How then can we diſtinguiſh the true Pro⯑phet from the falſe, the true Chriſt from the Anti chriſt by Miracles? Our Divines will find it hard to do it, if what the Fathers ſay of Anti-chriſt be found true. Moreover Hiſtory affords us Inſtances of Men, ſuch as of Apollonius Tyanaeus, Veſpaſian, and of the Iriſh Stroker, Greatrex, who have miracu⯑louſly cured Diſeaſes to the Admiration of Mankind, as well as our Jeſus; but if any of them, or any other greater Worker of Miracles, than they were, ſhould withal aſſume to himſelf the Title of a Prophet, and Author of a new Religion, I humbly conceive, we ought not to give heed to him.

Neither is there the leaſt Reaſon, that we ſhould; for the Power of doing Mira⯑cles is no certain, nor rational Seal of the Commiſſion, and Authority of a Divine [12] Lawgiver. St. Paul ſays ¹⁵ there is a Diverſity of the Gifts of the Spirit, for to one is given by the Spirit, the Word of Wiſdom; to another the Word of Knowledge; to another the Gift of Healing; to another the working of Miracles; to another Prophecy; to another Diſcerning of Spirits; to another Divers Kinds of Tongues; to another the Interpretation of Tongues. Theſe Gifts may be given a part and ſeparately. One of them may be conferr'd on this Man, and another of them on his Neighbour. There is no neceſſity, that any two or more of theſe Gifts ſhould meet in one Man. To argue then, that a Man, who has one of theſe Gifts, muſt needs have the other, that is, that he muſt needs have the Gift of Wiſdom, or of Prophecy, or of Diſ⯑cerning of Spirits, or of Divers kinds of Tongues, becauſe he has the Gift of Heal⯑ing and of working Miracles, is very in⯑concluſive and falſe Reaſoning: And yet this is the Reaſoning of our modern Wri⯑ters who would prove Jeſus's Authority, to found a Religion, from his Miracles. I don't queſtion, but Jeſus had all the fore⯑ſaid Gifts, and Powers of the Spirit in a moſt ſuperlative Degree; but then it is unreaſonably inferr'd, for all that, that [13] a Man, becauſe he of certainty has ſome of them, muſt of conſequence have the other. St. Augustin ¹⁶ Cautions us againſt being deceived into a good Opinion of a Man's Wiſdom, becauſe of his Power to do Miracles. And I think accordingly, that we may as well ſay, that the ſtrong⯑eſt Man is the wiſeſt; or that a good Phyſician muſt needs be a good Caſuiſt; or that the beſt Mathematician is the ableſt Stateſman, as that Jeſus, becauſe he was a worker of Miracles, ſuch as his are, and a Healer of all manner of Diſeaſes, ought to be received as the Guide of our Con⯑ſciences, the Director of our Underſtand⯑ings, the Ruler of our Hearts, and the Author of a Religion.

What then will the Writers againſt the Grounds do to prove Jeſus's Authori⯑ty and Meſſiahſhip from his Miracles? Or how by his Miracles will they be able to diſtinguiſh him from an Impoſtor, a falſe Prophet, and the Antichriſt? Why they will ſay perhaps

[14] 1. That beſides Greatneſs of Power, there was nothing but Goodneſs, Kindneſs, and Love to Man-kind ſhewn in Jefus's Miracles. As to the Miracles of falſe Prophets and Impoſtors, if they be, many of them, of a kind and benevolent Aſpect, yet the Devil's Foot, if we look well to it, will diſcover it ſelf in ſome ludicrous and miſcheivous Pranks: But Jeſus's Miracles were all of a beneficent Nature, He went about doing good, healing all manner of Diſeaſes among the People, and did no wrong to any one; which is a good Argument they ſay, of his Divine Authority, or God would not have ſuffer'd, nor the Devil have work'd ſuch a Teſtimony in behalf of it. On this Head our Divines are copious and rhetorical, and many notable and florid Harangues have they made on it. But

In Anſwer to them, they don't ſeem to have their Memories at Hand, when they declaim at this Rate. The Fathers, upon whoſe Authority I write, will tell ſuch Orators, that Jeſus, if his Miracles are to be underſtood in the litteral ſence, did not only as fooliſh Things, as any Impoſtor could do, but very injurious ones to Man⯑kind. I ſhall not here inſtance in the ſeemingly fooliſh and injurious things which Jeſus did for Miracles, intending under the [15] next Head to ſpeak to ſome of them. But they are ſuch, if litterally true, as out Divines do believe, as are enough to turn our ſtomachs againſt ſuch a Prophet; and enough to make us take him for a Conjuror, a Sorcerer and a Wizard rather, than the Meſſiah and Prophet of the moſt High God. But

2. To prove the Meſſiahſhip of the Holy Jeſus from his Miracles, our Divines urge the Prophecys of the Old Teſtament, ſuch as that of Iſaiah, C. XXXV. v. 5, 6. Then the Eyes of the blind ſhall be opened, and the Ears of the Deaf ſhall be unſtopp'd, then ſhall the lame Man leap as the Hart, and the Tongue of the Dumb ſing; and ſay that theſe Prophecys were accurately ful⯑fill'd by our Jeſus in the ſeveral ſpecifical Cures of Blindneſs, Deafneſs, Lameneſs and Dumbneſs, which he often perform'd upon one or other; and, in aſmuch as our Saviour ſeems to appeal to ſuch Pro⯑phecys, do conclude this his Accompliſh⯑ment of them to be no leſs than a De⯑monſtration, that he was the true Meſſiah, that great Prophet, who was to came in⯑to the World. To which I anſwer,

Firſt, That the Accompliſhment of Prophecys that can neither be given forth by human Foreſight, nor fulfill'd in a Counterfeit, are good Proofs of Jeſus's [16] Meſſiahſhip; But then, what ſhall we ſay if others beſides Jeſus ſhould do the like Cures and Miracles? It is ſaid of An⯑tichriſt, and I believe it, that he will not only, do all the Miracles, that Jeſus did, but will appeal to the like Prophecys too. How then we are to diſtinguiſh the true Chriſt from the falſe Chriſt by Mi⯑racles and Prophecys in this Caſe, is the Queſtion, which I leave with our Divines to conſider of an Anſwer to, againſt the Time, that it is proved that Antichriſt does all thoſe Miracles, which Jeſus in the Fleſh wrought. But

Secondly, The foreſaid Prophecys and others mention'd in Iſaiah neither were, nor could be Prophecys of the miraculous Cures of bodily Diſeaſes which Jeſus then did. And this may be made appear not only from the Context of thoſe Prophecy's, which received then no Accompliſhment from Jeſus, who ought to have fulfill'd one Part of the Prophecy as well as the other, or is not to be taken for the Fulfiller of either; bur from the Opinion of both Jews and Fathers, who adjourn the Accompliſh⯑ment of thoſe Prophecys to Chriſt's Spi⯑ritual Advent; But

Thirdly The Prophet Iſaiah in the Place above cited, ſpeaks not of bodily Blind⯑neſſ which the Meſſiah is to heal, but of [17] the ſpiritual Diſtempers of the Soul, me⯑taphorically ſo call'd; as may be eaſily proved, not only from the Prophecys themſelves, but from the old Jews, who were Allgorical Interpreters of thoſe Di⯑ſtempers, and from the antient Fathers, ¹⁷ who ſo underſtood them: Conſe⯑quently our Jeſus's Healing of thoſe bodily Diſeaſes was no proper Accompliſhment of thoſe Prophecys. It is true our Saviour, Matt, xi. 4, 5. ſeems to appeal to thoſe Prophecys, and to make his Cure of cor⯑poral Diſtempers an Accompliſhment of them: But he means not in the litteral ſenſe, that our Divines take him in, as I ſhall ſhow hereafter, when I come to con⯑ſider what Jeſus means, by appealing to his Works and Miracles, as bearing Witneſs of him.

Our Divines then may admire and adore Jeſus, as much as they pleaſe, for his Mi⯑racles of Healing bodily Diſtempers, but I am for the ſpiritual Meſſiah that cures thoſe Diſtempers of the Soul, that metaphorically [18] paſs under the Names of Blindneſs, Lame⯑neſs, Deafneſs, &c. And the Cure of theſe Spiritual Diſeaſes is the Proper and Mi⯑raculous Work of the true Meſſiah; for the ſake of which, ſays ¹⁸ St. Auguſtin, Jeſus condeſcended to do thoſe little Mi⯑racles of healing bodily Diſtempers, which were but the Type and Shadow of his more ſtupendous Miracles of Curing Spiri⯑tual Diſeaſes. The Cure of Spiritual In⯑firmities is a Godlike ¹⁹ Work, above the imitation of Man or of Anti-Chriſt, infinitely more Miraculous, than the Heal⯑ing any Bodily Diſtempers can be.

Whether our Jeſus be at this Day ſuch a Spiritual Meſſiah, I leave to our Divines to conſider, with thoſe Spiritual Diſtempers of the Church, that ſeem to want his Mi⯑raculous Hand and Touch. The Fathers of the Church ſaid, that Jeſus was in part ſuch a Spiritual Meſſiah in their Time, and ar⯑gued ²⁰ his Meſſiahſhip, not from bodily [19] Cures, but from his moſt Miraculous Cures of the Diſeaſes of the Soul; But there was another and future Time, in which he would be ſuch a Spiritual and Glorious Meſ⯑ſiah to the greateſt Perfection. In the mean while no Healing of Corporal Diſtempers can prove Jeſus to be the Meſſiah, nor any other of his Miraculous Works recorded in the Evangeliſts, ſo far from it. That

II. I ſhall prove, that the litteral Story of many of Jeſus's Miracles, as they are recorded in the Evangeliſts and commonly believed by Chriſtians, does imply Im⯑probabilities, and Incredibilities and the groſſeſt Abſuidities, very diſhonourable to the Name of Chriſt; conſequently, they, in Whole or in Part, were never wrought, but are only related as Prophetical and Para⯑bolical Naratives of what would be Myſteri⯑ouſly and more Wonderfully done by him.

The reading of this Head will, I doubt not, ſtrike with Horror, ſome of our ſqueamiſh Divines, who, notwithſtanding they will Sacrifice almoſt any Principles to their Intereſt, will not bear that our Lit⯑teral Evangelical Hiſtory of ſuch renown'd Miracles ſhould be thus call'd in Queſtion, and contemptuouſly ſpoken of. What does this Author mean, will ſome ſay, thus to do ſervice to Atheiſm and Infidelity? Away [20] with him! Our Indignation is moved a⯑gainſt him! No Cenſure and Puniſhment can be too ſevere for ſuch Impiety, Pro⯑faneneſs, and Blaſphemy, as is aim'd at, and imply'd in this Propoſition.

To calm therefore the Spirits and abate the Prejudices of ſuch Accuſers, I muſt proceed with the greater Caution; and with Reaſon and Authority well fortifie my ſelf before and behind, or I ſhall feel the Weight of the Diſpleaſure of our Divines, who are prepoſſeſs'd of the Belief of the Litteral Story of all Jeſus's Miracles.

Before then I enter upon the particular Examination of any of his Miracles, I will premiſe two or three general Aſſertions of the Fathers about them. And firſt Origen ²¹ ſays that in the Hiſtorical Part of the Scriptures, there are ſome Things in⯑ſcrted, as Hiſtory, which were never tranſ⯑acted, and which it was impoſſible ſhould be tranſacted, and other things again, that might poſſibly be done, but were not. This he aſ⯑ſerts of the writings of the Evangeliſts, as well as of the Old Teſtament; and gives many Inſtances to this Purpoſe. St. Hil⯑ary [21] ²² ſays, there are many Hiſtorical Paſ⯑ſages of the New Teſtament, that if they are taken litterally are contrary to Senſe and Reaſon, and therefore there is a Neceſſity of a Myſtical Interpretation. And St. Auguſtin ²³ ſays, that there are hidden Myſterys in the Works and Miracles of our Saviour, which if we inca [...]iouſly and literally inter⯑pret, we ſhall run into Errors and make grievous Blunders. Of the ſame Mind are the Reſt of the Fathers, as might be proved by expreſs or implicit Citations; but, ſtudying Brevity, I think the three Teſti⯑monys above enough to cool the Rage and aſſuage the Prejudices of my Adver⯑ſaries againſt the Propoſition before us, which I now come to a particular Conſide⯑ration of, that is, to ſhew that the ſtory of many of Jeſus's Miracles is literally ab⯑ſurd, improbable and incredible. And

1. To ſpeak to that Miracle of Jeſus's driving the Buyers and Sellers out of the [22] Temple, which all the ²⁴ four Evangeliſts make Mention of.

I have read in ſome modern Au⯑thor, whoſe Name dos not occur to my Memory, that this was, in his Opinion, the moſt ſtupendous Miracle, that Jeſus wrought. And in truth it was a moſt aſtoniſhing one, if literally true, and Jeſus muſt appear more than a Man, he muſt put on an awful and moſt Majeſtick Coun⯑tenance to effect it. It is hard to con⯑ceive, how any one in the Form of a Man, and of a deſpiſed one too, (and we don't read that Jeſus chang'd his human ſhape) with a Whip in his Hand could execute ſuch a Work upon a great Multitude of People; who were none of his Diſciples, nor had any regard for him. ſuppoſing he could, by his divine Power infuſe a Pannick Fear into the People; yet what was the Reaſon, that he was ſo eaten up with zeal againſt the Profanation of that Houſe, which he himſelf came to deſtroy, and which he permitted, I may ſay command⯑ed to be filthily polluted not long after. Put not to form by my ſelf an lnvective a⯑gainſt the letter of this Story, let's hear what the Fathers ſay to it.

[23] Origen makes the whole but a ²⁵ Pa⯑rable. His allegorical Expositions of it are frequent; and one time or other he gives us the myſtical meaning of every Part of it. By the Temple he underſtands the Church. By the ſellers in the Temple, he means ſuch Preachers, who make Mer⯑chandiſe of the Goſpel, whom the Spirit of Chriſt ſome Time or other would rid his Church of. He is ſo far from believing any Thing of the Letter of this Story, that he has form'd a ²⁶ large Argument a⯑gainſt it: The ſubſtance of which is, that [24] if Jeſus had attempted any ſuch Thing, the People would have reſiſted, and exe⯑cuted their Revenge on him; If he had ef⯑fected it, the Merchants of the Temple might have reproach'd him with Damage done to their Wares; and would have juſtly accuſed him of a Riot againſt Law and Authority. Whether there is not Reaſon in this Argument of Origen, let any one judge.

St. Hilary is of the ſame Mind with Ori⯑gin. He ſays that this Story is only a ²⁷ Praefiguration of what will be done in Chriſt's Church upon another Occaſion. And he admoniſhes ²⁸ us to ſearch into the profound and myſtical Import of every Part of it. Particularly he hints that ²⁹ by the Seats of thoſe, who ſell Doves, may be underſtood the Pulpits of Preachers, who make ſale of the Gifts of the Spirit, which is repreſented by a Dove. As to the Letter of the Story, he is plain enough, that there was no ſuch ³⁰ Market kept [25] in the Temple of Jeruſalem, and if any Hiſtorians beſides the Evangeliſts had aſ⯑ſerted it, I know of none, who would have been ſo fooliſh as to believe, that Oxen and Sheep and Goats were there ſold.

St. Ambroſe too is for the Myſtery and againſt the Letter of this Story, ſaying, ³¹ what ſhould be the Reaſon that Jeſus ſhould overturn the Seats of thoſe that ſold Doves? This muſt be, ſays he, a Figura⯑tive Story, and ſignifies nothing leſs than the future Ejection of Prieſts out of his Church, who ſhall make Gain and Mer⯑chandiſe of the Goſpel.

St. Jerome, as his manner is in other Caſes, firſt gives us a Litteral Expoſition of this Miracle, as far as it will bear it: But then corrects himſelf again, ſaying, there are ³² Abſurditys in the Letter; but, according to its Myſtical Meaning, Jeſus will enter his Temple of the Church, [26] and caſt out of it Biſhops, Prieſts and Dea⯑cons, who make a Trade of Preaching. and in another Place he tells us of the Myſtical ³³ Whip, that Jeſus will make uſe of to this Purpoſe.

St. Auguſtin alſo is againſt the Letter of the Story of this Miracle ſaying, ³⁴ where could be the great Sin of ſelling and buying things in the Temple, that were for the Uſe of it, and offer'd as Sacrifice in it? We muſt therefore, ſays he look for the Myſtery in this ³⁵ Figurative Story, and enquire what is ment by the Oxen and Sheep and Doves, and who are the ſellers of them in Chriſt's Church; and he is very poſitive that Eccleſiaſticks, who are ſelfiſh and make Worldly Gain of the Goſpel, are here meant. And as to the Expreſſion of turning the Temple into a Den of Theives, he ſays it has Reſpect: to the ³⁶ [27] Clergy in Time to come, who would make ſuch a Den of Chriſt's Church.

Laſtly with the foregoing Fathers agrees St. Theophylact, who is, an Allegoriſt too upon this Miracle, ſaying that thoſe, ³⁷ who ſell Doves, are the Prieſts, who ſell Spiritual Gifts, and that Chriſt ſometime or other would overturn their Seats, and clear his Church of them. In another Place he intimates, what are meant by Oxen and Sheep, viz. the litteral Sence of the Scriptures. And if the litteral Sence be irrational and nonſenſical, the Metaphor we muſt allow to be proper, in as much as now-a-days, dull and fooliſh and abſurd ſtuff we call Bulls, Fa [...]lings and Blunders.

Behold a wonderful Harmony among the Fathers in their Rejection of litteral and eſpouſal of the myſtical Senſe of this Miracle. It is ſaid of the Church in her firſt Ages, that ſhe was inſpir'd; and ſo ſhe was, or, before an Hire for the Prieſt⯑hood was eſtabliſhed, and pleaded for, ſhe could never have written in this faſhion. If the Fathers had lived now, and written thus, we ſhould have thought the Spirit of Quakeriſm was gotten amongſt them, or they would never have given ſuch an Ex⯑poſition [28] of this Story of favour an Enmity to an Hireling Prieſthood.

How and when Chriſ'sts Power according to the Figure and Parable before us, will enter his Church, and drive out of her theſe Eccleſiaſtical Merchants, is not the Queſtion. But when ever it dos ſo effectually, it will be a ſtupendous Miracle, Much greater than the Typical one is ſuppoſed to be, and not only a Proof of Chriſt's divine Power and Preſence in his Church, but an abſolute Demonſtration of his Meſſiahſhip, from his Accompliſhment both of the fore⯑ſaid Prophecys of the Fathers, and of other remarkable Ones of the Old Teſtament, which will be then clearly underſtood, and which it is not my Buſineſs here to apply or mention.

Againſt the aforeſaid Expoſition of this Miracle perhaps it may be Objected, that (excepting a little Reaſoning againſt the Letter of it) this is only the chimerical and whimſical Dream of the Fathers, whoſe Notions are obſolete, and who ³⁸ have adulterated Chriſtianity with their Cant and Jargan, and that none of our Proteſtant and Orthodox Divines have ever given into their Opinion.

I confeſs, that that none of our Proteſtant Divines, whom I know, do embrace the [29] foreſaid Expoſition of the Fathers, but it may be nothing the worſe for all that: And tho' their Expoſition may be very diſagreeable to the Prieſthood of this Age; yet I can tell them of the greateſt Man of theſe laſt Ages, and that was Eraſmus, who, cautiouſly expreſſing himſelf for fear of giving Offence to the Clergy, is of the ſame Mind with the Fathers; or he would not ſay that ³⁹ that Work of Jeſus did prefigure ſomewhat elſe. For Jeſus could not be zealous againſt the Profanation of that Temple of the Jews, which was ſoon to be deſtroy'd but meant to ſhew his diſlike and hatred of Eccleſiaſtical Covetouſneſs, which, after the Way of the Type, he would take his Opportunity to rid the Church of.

Before I diſmiſs this Miracle I muſt ob⯑ſerve, that if the Fathers are right above, then out Latin and English Tranſlations of the place in St. Matthew err in a main Point. Inſtead of reading, and Jeſus caſt out them, that ſold and bought, it ſhould be, [30] thoſe who ſold and preach'd, that is, ſold what they preach'd. For the Word [...] do's more properly ſignifie to preach than to buy; and in this ſenſe here, according to the Fathers, it ſhould be conſtrued.

Again, I muſt obſerve, that our Com⯑mentators are a little perplex'd to know who and what thoſe [...] Money-Changers were. The Greek ⁴⁰ Word dos import thoſe who have a Knack to barter away little baſe and braſs Money, with the Effigies of an Ox or Bull on it, in Ex⯑change for good Coin. How applicable the Word was to any Merchants of the old Temple at Jeruſalem is hard to con⯑ceive. But it is very agreeable to our Eccleſiaſtical Collybiſts, who, as I may ap⯑peal to Freethinkers, vend their braſen⯑faced Bulls and Blunders at an extravagant and great Price. And if [...] which is tranſlated Tables, do's properly ſignifie ⁴¹ Pulpits, who can help it?

So much then on the Miracle of Jeſus's driving the Sellersand Buyers out of the Temple. And now I appeal to our Di⯑vines, whether it be not an abſurd, im⯑probable, and incredible Story according to the Letter, and whether it be any other, [31] than, as the Fathers ſaid of it, a prophe⯑tical and parabolical Narative of what would be myſteriouſly and more wonder⯑fully done by Jeſus. And ſo I come to ſpeak to a

2. Second Miracle of Jeſus, and that is, that of his ⁴² casting the Devils out of the Mad⯑man or Madmen, and permitting them to enter into the Herd of Swine, which thereupon ran down a Precipice and were all choaked in the Sea.

To exorciſe or caſt Devils out of the Poſſeſs'd, without conſidering the Nature of ſuch a Poſſeſſion, or the Nature and Power of the Devil, we'll allow to be not only a kind and beneficent Act, but a great Miracle. But then, be the Miracle as great as can be imagin'd, it is no more, than what falſe Teachers, ⁴³ Workers of Iniquity, and even ſome Artiſts amongſt the Jews have before done, conſequently ſuch a Work of Exorciſm in our Saviour could be no Proof of his Divine Autho⯑rity. And if there was no more to be ſaid againſt this Miracle; this is enough to ſet it aſide, and to ſpoil the Argument of Jeſus's Divine Power from it. But there are many Circumſtances in the Story [32] litterally conſider'd, that would induce us to call the Truth of the Whole into Queſtion. How came thoſe Madmen to have their dwelling amongſt the Tombs of a Burying Ground? where was the Humanity of the People, that did not take Care of them in Pitty to them, as well as for the Safety of others? Or if no Chains, as the Text ſays, which is hardly credible, could hold them, it was poſſible ſurely as well as law⯑full to diſpatch them, rather than their Neighbours and Paſſengers ſhould be in Danger from them. Believe then this Part of the Story who can? But what's worſe, its not credible, there was any Herd of Swine in that Country. If any Hiſtorians but the Evangiliſts has ſaid ſo, none would have believed it. The Jews are forbidden to eat Swines Fleſh; what then ſhould they do with Swine which are good for nothing till they are dead) who eat neither Pigg, Pork nor Bacon? Some may ſay that they were kept there for the Uſe of Strangers: But this could not be; becauſe that after the Time of Antiochus, who polluted the Temple with the Sacrifice of an Hog, the Jews ⁴⁴ forbid, under the Pain of an Anathema, the keeping of any Swine in their Country. Perhaps is may be ſaid, that [33] the Gadarens, ſo call'd from the Place of their Abode, were not Jews but neighbou⯑ring Gentiles, with whom it was lawful to eat, and keep Swine. We will ſuppoſe ſo, tho' it is improbable; but then, it's unlike⯑ly (without better Reaſon than at preſent we are appriſed of) that our Saviour would permit the Devils to enter into a Herd of them to their Deſtruction. Where was the Goodneſs and Juſtice of his ſo doing? Let our Divines account for it, if they can. It is commonly ſaid of our Saviour, and I believe it, that his Life was entirely Inno⯑cent, that his Miracles were all uſeful and beneficial to Maniind, and that he did no Wrong to any one. But how can this be rightly ſaid of him, if this Story be litte⯑rally true? The Proprietors of the Swine were great Loſers and Sufferers; and we don't read that Jeſus make them amends, or that they deſerv'd ſuch Uſage from him. The Proprietors of the Swine, it ſeems, up⯑on this Damage done them by Jeſus. de⯑ſire him to depart out of their Coaſts, to pre⯑vent farther Miſchief, which was gentler Reſentment, than we can imagine any o⯑thers would have made of the like Injury. I know not what our Divines think of this Part of the Story, nor wherefore Jeſus eſcaped ſo well; but if any Exorciſt in this our Age and Nation had pretended to ex⯑pel [34] the Devil out of one poſſeſs'd, and per⯑mitted him to enter into a Flock of Sheep, the People would have ſaid, that he had bewitch'd both; and our Laws and Judges too of the laſt Age, would have made him to ſwing for it.

Without Offence, I hope, I have argued againſt the Letter of this ſtrange Story of the Holy Jeſus; I ſhould not have dared to have ſaid ſo much againſt it, but upon the Encouragement of Origen and other Fa⯑thers, who ſay, we ought to expoſe the Ab⯑surdities of the Letter, as much as may be, to turn Men's Heads to the myſtical and true meaning.

Let's hear then, what the Fathers ſay to this Miracle. Origen's Commentaries on this Part of St. Matthew, and St. Luke's Goſpel are loſt; otherwiſe unqueſtionably he would not only have told us, that he believed no more of the Letter of this Sto⯑ry, than he did of the Devil's ⁴⁵ taking our Saviour to the Top of a Mountain, and ſhewing him all the Kingdoms of the World; but, as he is an admirable My⯑ſtiſt, would have given us curious Light into the Allegory and Myſtery of it. But without Origen, we have enough in the o⯑ther Fathers againſt the Letter of this Story.

[35] St. Hilary reckoning up all the Parts of this Miracle together, ſays of it, that it is ⁴⁶ Typical and Parabolical, and written for our Meditation of what would be done hereafter by the Holy Jeſus. According to him, and other Fathers, the Madman is Mankind, or if they were two, they were Jew and Gentile at Chriſt's coming, who may be ſaid to ⁴⁷ be poſſeſs'd with De⯑vils, in as much as they were under the Rule of diabolical Sins, and ſubject to the Worſhip of [...] falſe Deities, which we translate Devils. They were ſo fierce ⁴⁸ as no Chains could hold them; becauſe of their moſt furious Rage and Enmity to the Church, whom no Bonds of Reaſon could reſtrain from doing Violence to the Chriſtians. They are ſaid to be ⁴⁹ na⯑ked; becauſe they were deſtitute of the Clothing of the Spirit, and of Grace. And [36] may be ſaid to be among the ⁵⁰ Tombs; becauſe they were dead in Treſpaſſes and Sins. After that Jeſus had exorcis'd theſe diabolical Spirits out of the Gentiles, and brought them to their right Senſes, which was upon their Converſion to the Faith; then a good Way off, ſome Ages after, did the like Devils by Divine Permiſſion enter into a ⁵¹ Herd of Swine, i e. into Here⯑ticks of impure Lives and furious Natures. What ſort of Hereticks are meant, or whe⯑ther they are not to be underſtood of Chri⯑ſtians in general, let our Divines conſider. But one would be apt to think that Mini⯑ſters of the Letter are included, ⁵² be⯑cauſe, the Letter of the Scripture is myſti⯑cally call'd Swines Food. I am not obli⯑ged to purſue the myſtical Interpretation of this Parable (for ſo I will call it) thro' all its Parts, nor to ſay what is meant by the Sea, that the Swine are to be abſorp't in: But leave our Divines to chew upon this myſtical Conſtruction given them in [37] part, and to conſider, whether there's not a Neceſſity for ſuch an Interpretation to make the Story credible.

And thus have I given you the Opinion and Expoſition of the Fathers upon this Miracle, which they turn all into Myſtery. If our Divines are ſtill for adhering to the Letter of this Story, let them Account for the Difficulties, it is involv'd with. To cure Men violently diſtracted, and poſ⯑ſeſs'd with Devils is, whether it be mira⯑culous or not, a good and great Work; but to ſend the Devils, who without Je⯑ſus's Permiſſion could not go, into the Herd of Swine, was an Injury done to the Proprietors, and unbecoming of the Good⯑neſs of the Holy Jeſus. Neither is there any other Way to ſolve the Difficulty, than by looking upon the Whole, with the Fathers, as Type and Figure.

If this Miraculous Story had been re⯑corded of Mahomet and not of Jeſus; our Divines, I dare ſay, would have work'd it up to a Confutation, of Mahometaniſm. Mahomet ſhould have been, with them, nothing leſs than a Wizard, an Enchanter, a dealer with familiar Spirits, a ſworn ſlave to the Devil; and his Muſſulmen would have been hard put to it to write a good Defence of him.

[38] When our Saviour was brought before Pilate to be arraign'd, try'd, and condem'd, Pilate put this Queſtion to the Jews, ſaying what evil hath Jeſus done? If both or either of the Stories above had been litterally true of Jeſus, there had been no need of falſe Witneſſes againſt him. The Merchants of the Temple were at hand, who could have ſworn "that he was the Author of an Uproar, and Riot, the like was never ſeen on their Market-day; that they were great Sufferers and Loſers in their Trades; and, whether he or his Party had ſtolen any of their Goods or not, yet ſome were embezzled and others damag'd; and all through the outragious Violence of this unruly Fellow againſt Law and Authority," If ſuch Evidence as this was not enough to convict him of a Capi⯑tal Crime; then the Swine-Herds of the Gadarenes might have depoſed, how they "believed him to be a Wizard and had loſt two thouſand Swine through his Falcinations. That he bid the Divels to go into our Cattle is not to be de⯑ny'd. And if he cured one or two of our Countrymen of a violent Poſſeſſion; yet in as much as he did us this Injury in our Swine, we juſtly ſuſpect him of Diabolical Practiſes upon both."

[39] Upon ſuch Evidence as this, Pilate asks the Opinion of Jews, ſaying, what think you? If they all had condemn'd him to be guilty of Death, it is no wonder, ſince there is not a Jury in England would have acquitted any one arraign'd and Ac⯑cuſed in the like Caſe.

It is well for our litteral Doctors, that ſuch Accuſations were not brought againſt Jeſus; or their Heads would have been ſadly puzzled to vindicate his Innocence, and to prove the Injuſtice and Undeſerved⯑neſs of his Death and Sufferings. But for this Reaſon, if no other, that no ſuch Crimes were laid to his Charge, I believe little or nothing of either of the ſeemingly miraculous Storys before us; but look upon them both, as Prophetical and Parabolical Narratives of what would myſteriouſly and more wonderfully, and conſiſtently with the Wiſdom and Goodneſs of Jeſus, be done by him. And ſo I paſs to a

3. Third Miracle of Jeſus, and that is his Transfiguration ⁵³ on the Mount. And this is the darkeſt and blindeſt Story of the whole Goſpel, which a Man can make nei⯑ther Head nor Foot of; and I queſtion whether the Conceptions of any two thinking Doctors do agree about it. To ſay [40] there is nothing in the Letter of this Story, we Believers muſt not; becauſe St. Peter ⁵⁴ ſays, he was an Eye-witneſs of Jeſus's Majeſty, ſaw his Glory on the Mount, and heard the Voice out of the Cloud. But as Infidels will be prying into the Conduct of Jeſus's Life and forming their Exceptions to the Credibility or Probability of this or that Part of it; ſo we Chriſtians ſhould be ready at an Anſwer, that might reaſon⯑ably ſatisfy them; and not forcibly bear down their Oppoſition, which will make no ſincere Converts of them. And I be⯑lieve they would eaſily diſtreſs us with Difficultys and Objections to the Letter of this Story.

St. Auguſtin himſelf ⁵⁵ owns, that the whole of it might be perform'd by Magic Art; And we know, in theſe our Days that ſome Jugglers are ſtrange Artiſts at the imitation of a Voice, and to make it as if it came from a far of, when it is ut⯑tered cloſe by us; and can caſt themſelves too into different forms and ſhapes, with⯑out a Miracle, to the Surpriſe and Admi⯑ration of ſpectators.

But what, I trow, do our Divines mean by Jeſus's Transfiguration. We read that [41] his Countenance did ſhine like the Sun, and his Rayment was made as white as Snow, and that's all. And is this enough can we think to demonſtrate that Tranſ⯑action, a Miraclous Transfiguration? Phy⯑loſophers will tell us, that the Reflections of the Light of the Sun will change the Appearance of Colours, and to none more than whiteneſs; And Sceptics will ſay that its no wonder if the Countenance of Jeſus look'd Rubicund when the Sun might ſhine on it.

The Word in the Original for transfi⯑gured is [...] that is, he was meta⯑morphoſed, transform'd or if you will transfigured. And what is to be underſtood by a Metamorphoſis, we are to learn not only from the natural Import of the Word but from the ancient uſe of it. Accordingly it ſignifies nothing leſs than the Change or Transformation of a Perſon into the Forms, Shapes and Eſſences of Creatures and Things of a quite different Species, Size and Figure. But Jeſus, it is conceived, was not ſo transfigured. Our Divines, I ſuppoſe would not have him thought ſuch a Poſture-Maſter for the whole World. If I or any one elſe ſhould aſſert, that Jeſus upon the Mount transform'd himſelf into a Calf, a Lyon, a Bear, a Ram, a Goat, an Hydra, a Stone, a Tree, and into many [42] other things of the animate and inanimate World, I dare ſay there would, among our Orthodox Divines, be ſuch Exclamations againſt me for Blaſphemy, as the like were never heard of. They, to be ſure will not hear of ſuch a Transfiguration; nor, like good plain Believers, will bear any thing more than that Jeſus's Countenance did ſhine like the Sun, and the Colour of his Countenance was changed; which whether it comes up to the import of a Metamorphoſis or not, they dont care.

But to cloſe with our Divines, and ac⯑knowledge, that the glorious Change of Jeſus's Countenance, and of the Colour of his Veſtments was a true and proper Tranſ⯑ſiguration, and that it was as real and wonderful a Miracle as could be wrought; But then we may, I hope, ask them, what was the particular Reaſon and Uſe of this Miracle? Was it a Miracle only for the ſake of a Miracle? That's an Abſurdity in the Opinion of ⁵⁶ St. Auguſtin, who ſays, what is reaſonable to think, that all and every one of Jeſus's Miracles had its par⯑ticular End and Uſe; or he who is the Wiſdom as well as Power of God had ne⯑ver wrought it. And what, I pray was the [43] Uſe of this Miracle? Of that the Evan⯑gelical Hiſtory is ſilent; and our Divines with all their Reaſoning Facultys can ſay nothing to it.

And what did Moſes and Elias on the Mount with Jeſus? was it in their own proper Perſons that they appear'd? or were they only ſome Specters and Apparitions in Reſemblance of them? It is ſaid, that they were talking with Jeſus; what then did they talk about? The three greateſt Prophets and Philoſophers of the Univerſe could not poſſibly meet and confer together, but on the moſt ſublime, uſeful, and edify⯑ing Subject. It's ſtrange, that the Apoſtles, who over-heard their Confabulation, did not make a Report of it, and tranſmit it to Poſterity for our Edification and Inſtruction. St. Luke, as our Engliſh Tranſlation has it, ſeems to ſay that they talk'd together of Jeſus's Deceaſe which he ſhould accompliſh at Jeruſalem, but this can't be the meaning of St. Luke's ⁵⁷ Words, which ſo interpreted, are no leſs than a Barbariſm, and. I appeal to our Greek Critics, an improper Ex⯑preſſion of ſuch ſignification. We muſt then look for a more proper Conſtruction of the Phraſe in St. Luke, or we muſt re⯑main [44] in the dark, as to the Subject, that Moſes and Elias talked with Jeſus about.

But further, why could not this Mira⯑cle have been wrought in the Valley as well as upon a Mountain, whither Jeſus and his three Apoſtles aſcended for the Work of it? Naughty Infidels will ſay, it was for the Advantage of a Cloud, which often moves and reſts on the Tops of Mountains, to diſplay his Pranks in. And why was it not done in the Preſence of the Multitude, as well as of his three A⯑puſtles? The more Witneſſes of a Mira⯑cle, the better it is atteſted, and the more reaſonably Credited; and there could not ſurely be too many Witneſſes of this, any more than of others of Jeſus's Miracles, if real ones. Ought not the unbelieving Multitude, for many Unbelievers unque⯑ſtionably were amongſt them, to have had a Sight and Hearing of this Miracle, as well as the Apoſtles? Who ſhould rather ſee the Miracle, than thoſe who wanted Conviction? Were they to take the Re⯑port of the Miracle upon the Word of the Apoſtles, who were Partys in the Cauſe? Our Divines may poſſibly ſay they ought: But Infidels and Free Think⯑ers would cry out againſt them, for jug⯑gling Tricks, and pious Impoſtures.

[45] Theſe are all Difficultys and hard Que⯑ſtions about the Miracle of Chriſt's Tranſ⯑figuration, which our Clergy, who are Ad⯑mirers of the Letter of that Story are ob⯑liged to Account for; and I believe it will be long enough, before they give a proper and ſatisfactory Anſwer to many of them.

Let's hear then what the Fathers ſay to this miraculous Story of Jeſus's Transfigu⯑ration. And it is agreed amongſt them, that the whole is, but a Type, ⁵⁸ Prefi⯑guration, and ⁵⁹ Aenigmatical Reſem⯑blance of a future and more glorious and real Transfiguration. And whenever they ſpeak of any Part of the Story, they ne⯑ver explain to us, how the Matter went upon Mount Tabor; but tell us, of what this or that Part of it is Figurative and Emblematical; and how it is to be un⯑derſtood, and will be fulfill'd in future Time. As thus, by the ⁶⁰ Six Days, [46] they under&ſtand ſix Ages of the World, after which a real and myſterious Tranſ⯑figuration will be exhibited to our intelle⯑ctual Views. By Moſes and Elias ⁶¹ talking with Jeſus, they mean the Law and the Prophets, upon an Allegorical Interpretation, bearing Teſtimony unto Chriſt, as the Fulfiller of them. By the ⁶² Mountain on which this future Tranſ⯑figuration will be exhibited, they under⯑s;tand the ſublime and anagogical Senſe of the Law and the Prophets. By his Tranſ⯑figuration it ſelf, they mean his taking upon him, and paſſing through the Forms of all the Types of him under the Law, as of a Lamb, a Lion, a Serpent, a Calf, a Rock, a Stone, and of many others, which he is to fulfil, and which will then be clearly diſcern'd by us. By the black Cloud ⁶³ that at preſent ob⯑ſtructs this Viſion, they underſtand the Letter of the Old Teſtament. By the [47] white ⁶⁴ Veſtments of Jeſus, they mean the Words of the Scriptures, which will then ſhine clear and bright. By the Voice out of the Cloud, they mean with St. Pe⯑ter, the Word of Prophecy, that will ſound in the Ears of our Apprehenſions. And laſtly, they tell us, that the Way to at⯑tain to the Sight of this glorious Viſion, is by aſcending (not by local Motion, but by Reaſon) to the Tops of the Mountain of the myſterious and ſublime Senſe of the Law and the Prophets. If we conti⯑nue in the Plains and Valley ⁶⁵ of the Letter, like the Multitude under the Moun⯑tain, we ſhall never ſee Jeſus in his ſhi⯑ning Veſtments, nor how he was tranſ⯑form'd into the Types of the Law, nor Moſes and Elias talking with him; not the Law and the Prophets agreeing har⯑moniouſly in a Teſtimony to him.

After this Faſhion do the Fathers, one or other of them, Copiouſly Treat on every [48] Part of this Transfiguration of Jeſus. I could collect an almoſt infinite Number of Paſſages out of their Writings to this Pur⯑poſe: But from theſe few it is plain, they look'd on the Story of Chriſt's Transfigu⯑ration, but as a Figure and Parable; and they were certainly in the right on't, in as much as this their Senſe of the Matter and no other, will ſolve the Difficultys before ſtarted againſt the Letter, as any one may diſcern if he attentively review and com⯑pare one with the other; As for Inſtance; this their Senſe and Interpretation lets us into the Reaſon of Moſes and Elias's ap⯑pearing on the Mount with Jeſus; and gives us to underſtand what they talk'd about, and that was, not on Jeſus's Deceaſe which he would accompliſh at Jeruſalem, as our Tranſlation has it, but on the Pro⯑phecy of the old Teſtament; particularly, as St. Luke ſays, on Moſe's Book of Exodus, and how he would fulfill it at the New Je⯑ruſalem.

Whether any, beſides my ſelf, do's really apprehended and is willing to underſtand this Story of Chriſt's Transfiguration, as I do, I neither know nor care. I am not bound to find others, Ears, Eyes, and Capacitys. What I have ſaid is enough to ſhew the Senſe of the Fathers about this Matter. If any diſlike their concurrent Opinions of Jeſus's Tranſ⯑figuraton's [49] being an Emblem, an Enigma, and Figurative Repreſentation of a Future and moſt Glorious Transfiguration, ſuch a one as they ſpeak of; let him account for the Difficultys and Objections, which I have before raiſed againſt the Letter of this Story. In the mean Time I ſhall think it, litterally, an abſurd, improbable, and incredible one, and no other than a Prophetical and Para⯑bolical Narrative of what will be Myſteri⯑ouſly and more wonderfully done by Jeſus.

And thus I have conſider'd Three of the Miracles of our Saviour, and ſhewn how they are Abſurdities, according to the Let⯑ter, conſequently do make nothing for his Authority and Meſſiahſhip. I can and will do as much by his other Miracles; for I would not have any one think, I am got⯑ten to the End of my Tedder, but for ſome Reaſons beſt known to my ſelf, I publiſh theſe Remarks on theſe three firſt. After the Clergy have chew'd upon theſe a while, I will take into Examination ſome others of Jeſus's Miracles, which for their litteral Story are admired by them. As for Inſtance I will take to task his Miracle ⁶⁵ of changing Water into Wine at a Marriage in Cana of Galilee; which was the beginning of Jeſus's Miracles, and ſhould by right have been firſt ſpoken to; but I am almoſt too [50] grave to handle the Letter of this Story as I ought; and if I had treated it as ludicrouſ⯑ly as it deſerves, I don't know, but at ſet⯑ting out, I ſhould have put the Clergy quite out of all Temper I would not now for the World be ſo impious and prophane, as to believe, with out Divines, what is contain'd and imply'd in the Letter of this Story. If Apollonius Tyanaeus, and not Jeſus, had been the Author of this Miracle, we ſhould often have reproached his Memory with it. It is ſaid of Apollonius Tyanaeus, that a Table was all on a ſudden, at his Command, mira⯑culouſly ſpread with variety of nice Diſhes for the Entertainment of himſelf and his Gueſts; which Miracle, our Divines can tell him makes not at all to his Credit, in as much as it was done for the ſervice and pleaſure of luxurious Appetites. But if Apol⯑lonius had done, as our Jeſus did at this Wedding, they would have ſaid much worſe of him; and that modeſtly ſpeaking, he delighted to make his Friends thoroughly merry, or he would not be at the Pains of a Miracle to turn ſo much Water into Wine, after they had before well drank. If the Fathers then don't help us out at the myſtical and true meaning of this Mi⯑racle, ſuch farther Objections may be form'd againſt the Letter, as may make our Divines aſham'd of it.

[51] I will alſo take into Examination Jeſus's Miracles ⁶⁶ of feeding many thouſands in the Wilderneſs with a few Loaves and Fiſhes, which according to the Letter are moſt to⯑mantick Tales. I don't in the leaſt queſtion Jeſus's Power to magnifie or multiply the Loaves, and, if he pleas'd to meliorate the Bread. But that many thouſands of Men, Women and Children ſhould follow him into the Wilderneſs, and ſtay with him three Days and Nights too, without eating, is a little againſt Senſe and Reaſon. Whether the Wilderneſs was near to, or far from the Peoples Habitations, the difficultys at⯑tending the Story are equally great. I wonder how Jeſus amuſed them all the while, that they had the Patience to ſtay with him without Food; But I much more wonder, that no Victualers beſides the Lad with his Loaves and Fiſhes, of whom, and his Occupation, whether it was that of a Baker or Fiſhmonger; and of his neglect of his Maſter's Buſineſs here; and of the Rea⯑ſon, that he met with no hungry Chapmen for his Bread before, we ſhall make ſome Enquiry; but particurly why he alone, I ſay, and no other Victualers, no other Re⯑talers of Cakes and Gingerbread followed the Camp. In ſhort, for all the imaginary greatneſs of the Miracle (which there is a [52] way to reduce and leſſen) of Jeſus's feeding his thouſands with a few Loaves, there muſt be ſome Faſcination or Enchantment (con⯑demn'd by the Laws of the Jews as well as of other Nations) in the Matter; or the People, if they had ſtay'd one Day, would not two, much leſs three to faint, but would, eſpecially the Women and Children have been for returning, the firſt Night, home. We muſt then ſeek to the Fathers (who ſay the five Books of Moſes are the five Barley Loaves, &c. and the ſeptiform'd Spi⯑rit, the ſeven Loaves, &c.) for a good No⯑tion of this Miracle, and if they don't make it a Parable; do what our Divines can, it will turn to the diſhonour of the Holy Jeſus.

I will alſo conſider the Miracle of Jeſus's ⁶⁷ curing the Man ſick of the Palſy, for whom the Roof of the Houſe was broken up, to let him down into the Room where Jeſus was, becauſe his Bearers could not enter in at the Door for the Preſs of the People. This Litterally is ſuch a Rodomontado, that were Men to ſtretch, for a wager, againſt Reaſon and Truth, none could out-doe it. Where was the Humanity of the People, and wherefore did they ſo tumultuate a⯑gainſt the Door of the Houſe? It's ſtrange they had not ſo much Compaſſion on the Paralytick, as to give Way to him: [53] It's more ſtrange, that his Bearers could get to the Top of the Houſe with him and his Bed too, when they could not get to the Door, nor the Sides of it: It's yet ſtranger, that the good Man of the Houſe would ſuffer his Houſe to be broken up, when it could not be long, 'ere the Tu⯑mult of the People would be appeas'd: But moſt ſtrange, that Jeſus, who could drive his thouſands out of the Temple be⯑fore him, and draw as many after him in⯑to the Wilderneſs, did not, by Force or Perſwaſion, make the People to retreat, but that ſuch needleſs Trouble and Pains muſt be taken for the miraculous Cure of this poor Man. Let's think of theſe Things a⯑gainſt the Time, that out of the Fathers I prove this Story to be a Parable.

I will alſo take into Conſideration the Miracle of Jeſus's curing the ⁶⁸ Blind Man, for whom Eye-Salve was made of Clay and Spittle; which Eye-Salve, whether it was balſamick or not, do's equally affect the Credit of the Miracle. If it was na⯑turally medicinal, there's an End of the Mi⯑racle; and if it was not at all medicinal, it was fooliſhly and impertinently ap⯑ply'd, and can be no otherwiſe accounted for, than by conſidering it, with the Fa⯑thers, as a figurative Act in Jeſus.

[54] I will alſo take into Conſideration the ſeveral Stories of Jeſus's raiſing of the dead; and, without queſtioning his actual bring⯑ing of the Dead to Life again, will prove from the Circumſtances of thoſe Storys, that they are parabotical, and are not lit⯑terally to be apply'd to the Proof of Jeſus's Divine Authority and Meſſiahſhip; or, for Inſtance, Jeſus, when he raiſed Jarius's ⁶⁹ Daughter from the dead, would never have turned the People out of the Houſe, who ſhould have been his beſt and propereſt Wit⯑neſſes.

I will alſo Conſider the Miracle of Je⯑ſus's ⁷⁰ Curſing the Fig-Tree, for its not bearing Fruit out of Seaſon; which, upon the bare mention of it, appears to be a fooliſh, abſurd, and ridiculous Act, if not figurative.

I will alſo conſider the ⁷¹ Journey of the Wiſemen out of the Eaſt, with their (litte⯑rally) ſenſeleſs and ridiculous Preſents of Frankincence and Myrrhe to a new-born Babe. If with their Gold, which could be but little, they had brought their Dozens of Su⯑gar, Soap, and Candles, which would have been of uſe to the Child and his poor Mo⯑ther in the Straw, they had acted like wiſe as well as good Men. But what, I [55] pray, was the Meaning and Reaſon of a Star, like a Will a Whiſp, for their Guide to the Place, where the Holy Infant lay. Could not God by Divine Impulſe, in a Viſion or in a Dream, as he ordered their Return Home, have ſent them on this im⯑portant Errand; but that a Star muſt be taken or made out of Courſe to this Pur⯑poſe? I wonder what Communication paſ⯑ſed between theſe Wiſe Men and the Star, or how they came to know one another's Uſe and Intention. But the Fathers ſhall ſpeak hereafter farther to the ſenſeleſneſs of this Story litterally; and make out the Myſtery and true meaning of it.

I will alſo, by the Leave of our Divines, take again into Conſideration the miracu⯑lous Conception of the Virgin Mary, and the Reſurrection of Jeſus from the Dead. I do believe, if it may ſo pleaſe our Divines, that Jeſus was born of a pure Virgin, and that he aroſe from the Dead; but ſpeaking too briefly, in the Moderator, to theſe two Miracles, they took Offence. I will therefore give them a Review, and ſpeak Home to them; par⯑ticularly to Chriſt's Reſurrection, the E⯑vangelical Story of which litterally, is ſuch a Complication of Abſurditys, In⯑coherences, and Contradictions, that un⯑leſs the Fathers can help us to a better [56] Underſtanding of the Evangeliſts than we have at preſent, we muſt of Neceſſity give up the Belief of it.

Theſe and many ⁷² other of the hi⯑ſtorical and miraculous Parts of Jeſus's Life, will I take into Examination, and ſhew, that none of them litterally do prove his Divine Authority, ſo far from it, that they are full of Abſurdities, Im⯑probabilities and Incredibilities; but that his whole Life in the Fleſh, is but ⁷³ Type, Figure and Parable of his myſte⯑rious and ſpiritual Life and Operations in Mankind.

In the end of this Head, it will be a curious and diverting Subject to examine the Miracles of Jeſus, as they are litte⯑rally underſtood, by the Notions, which our Divines have advanced about Mira⯑cles; and to ſhew, that even their Noti⯑ons compared with Chriſt's Miracles, are deſtructive of his Authority, and ſubver⯑ſive of Chriſtianity. This, I ſay, would be a moſt diverting Undertaking, and it will be ſtrange, if ſome Free-Thinker, that loves Pleaſure of this kind, do's not take [57] the hint and ſnatch the Work out of my Hands. If I do it ray ſelf, I ſhall have eſpe⯑cial regard to the Writers againſt the Grounds, without paſſing by Mr. Chandler's Eſſay on Miracles, on which the more Remarks will be made, if it be but to pay my Reſpects to the Arch Biſhop's Judg⯑ment, and to ſhew my Admiration at thoſe extravagant Praiſes, which his Grace at Lambeth has beſtow'd on that Author. A⯑mong other his notable Notions of a Mi⯑racle (and the Arch-Biſhop ſays, he has ⁷⁴ ſet the Notion of a Miracle upon a clear and ſure Foundation) one is, ⁷⁵ That Miracles ſhould be Things probable as well us poſſible, that they do not carry along with them the Appearance of Romance and Fable, which would unavoidably prejudice Men againſt believing them. This is certainly a good and right Notion of a Divine Mira⯑cle; and I don't doubt, but according to it, Mr. Chandler and the Arch-Biſhop think, they can juſtifie the litteral Story of our Saviour's Miracles, againſt the Charge of Fable and Romance: But whether they are able to do it or not; I ſhall go on, in ſome Diſcourſes hereafter to be publiſh'd, [58] to prove, that our Divines, by eſpouſing the Letter of Chriſt's Miracles, have decei⯑ved themſelves into the Belief of the moſt arrant Quixotiſm, that can be deviſed and palm'd upon the Underſtandings of Man⯑kind. I ſay they have deceived them⯑ſelves; for neither the Fathers, nor the A⯑poſtles, nor even Jeſus himſelf meant that his Miracles, as recorded in the Evange⯑liſts, ſhould be taken in a litteral Senſe, but in ⁷⁶ a myſtical, figurative and pa⯑rabolical One. And this ſhould bring me to the

III. Head of my Diſcourſe, that is, to conſider what Jeſus means, when he ap⯑peals to his Works and Miracles, as to a Witneſs and Teſtimony of his Divine Au⯑thority; and to ſhew, that he could not properly and truly refer to thoſe ſuppoſed to be wrought by him in the Fleſh, but to thoſe myſtical Ones, he would do in the Spirit, of which thoſe ſeemingly wrought by him in the Fleſh, are but Types and Shadows.

But this Head can't be rightly ſpoken to, till I have more amply diſcuſs'd the Form⯑er, which by God's leave I Promiſe to do: [59] And if my Curteous Readers, will be ſo kind as to truſt me till that Time, I aſſure them to prove, that no Ignorance and Stu⯑pidity can be greater, than the Imaginati⯑on, that Jeſus really appeal'd to his Mira⯑cles, ſuppoſed to have been wrought by him in the Fleſh, as to a Witneſs and Teſtimony of his Divine Authority, and Meſſiahſhip.

In the mean Time our Divines may go on in their own Way, if they think fit, and admire Jeſus of old, and celebrate his Power and Praiſes for healing of bodily Diſeaſes, and doing other notable Feats according to the Letter of the Evangeli⯑cal Story; but I am for the ſpirirual Je⯑ſus and Meſſiah, who cures the worſe ⁷⁷ Diſtempers of the Soul, and do's other myſte⯑rious and moſt miraculous Works, of which thoſe recorded in the Evangeliſts are but Figure and Parable. This is the Primitive and concurrent Opinion about the true Meſſiah, which the Fathers univerſally ad⯑her'd to. Whether our Jeſus, at this Day, be ſuch a ſpiritual Meſſiah to his Church, or whether ſhe do's not ſtand in need of ſuch a one, is the Queſtion that our Di⯑vines are to ſee to. But I will add here, [60] what I believe, and ſhall have another Op⯑portunity to prove, that God on purpoſe ſuffer'd or empower'd falſe, as well as true Prophets; bad as well us good Men, ſuch as Apollonius, Veſpaſian, and many others to cure Diſeaſes, and to do other mighty Works, equal to what are literally report⯑ed of Jeſus, not only to defeat us of all Diſtinction between true and falſe Miracles, which are the Object of our bodily Senſes, but to raiſe and keep up our Thoughts to the conſtant Contemplation of Jeſuſ's ſpi⯑ritual, myſterious, and moſt miraculous Works, which are the Object of our Underſtandings, and loudly beſpeak the Power, Wiſdom and Goodneſs of God, and which are to be the abſolute Demonſtration of Jeſus's Divine Authority and Meſſiahſhip to the Converſion of Jews and Infidels.

I have no more to do at preſent, but, like a Moderator, to conclude with a ſhort Addreſs and Exhortation, to Infidels and Apoſtates, the two contending Partys in the preſent Controverſy. And

Firſt, To Apoſtates, I mean the Writers againſt the Grounds and Scheme. Whether you, Grave Sirs, who account your ſelves Orthodox Divines, tho' there is little but Contradiction and Inconſiſtency amongſt you, do like the Name of Apoſtates which [61] is given you, I much Queſtion: But it is the propereſt, I could think of, for your Deſertion of Primitive Doctrine about Pro⯑phecy and Miracles. I could, not im⯑properly, have given you a worſe Title, but I was willing to Compliment you, ra⯑ther than Reproach you wish this.

But ſetting aſide the Title of Apoſtates, whether it be, in your Opinion, opprobi⯑ous or not; you may plainly perceive, that I am, Sirs, on your ſide, as to the Truth of Chriſtianity, and if you'll accept of my Aſſiſtance, for the Proof of Jesus's Meſſiahſhip from Prophecy, upon the Terms of the Allegorical Scheme propoſed in my Moderator, you ſhall find me your hearty Abettor. Upon the Allegorical Scheme I don't doubt, but we ſhall ſoundly drub and maul Infidels, and beat them out of the Field of Battle. If you, being wedded to the litteral Scheme, will not accept of my Aſſiſtance, you may go on in your own Way, and ſee the Event of the Con⯑troverſy, which in the End will turn to your Diſhonour.

You, Sirs, can't but be ſenſible, how thoſe two great Generals, Mr. Grounds, and Mr. Scheme, with their potent Armies of Reaſons, and Authorities againſt your litteral Prophecies, have greivouſly diſtreſs'd and gall'd you; and, if you don't make an [62] honourable Retreat in Time, and ſeek to Allegoriſts for help, will gain a compleat Victory, and Triumph over you.

Inſtead of the help of Allegoriſts, you, I find, under the Diſappointment of your litteral Scheme, chuſe rather to have Re⯑courſe to Jeſus's Miracles: But what little Dependance there is upon his Miracles, in your Senſe, I have in Part proved in this Diſcourſe; and this I have done (give me leave repeatedly to declare it) not for the Service of your unbelieving Adverſaries, but to reduce you to the good old Way of interpreting Oracles, which, upon the Te⯑ſtimony of the Fathers, will, one Day, be the Converſion of the Jews and Gentiles.

Whether you, Sirs, will be pleas'd with this ſhort Diſcourſe on Chriſt's Miracles, I much Queſtion. But before you put your ſelves into a Rage againſt it, I beg of you to read St. Theophilus of Antioch, Ori⯑gen, St. Hilary, St. Auguſtin, St. Ambroſe, St. Jerome, St. Chryſoſtom, St. John of Je⯑ruſalem, St. Theophylact, and other occaſio⯑nal ancient Pieces on one Part or other of the Evangeliſts; and you'll find, how they countenance ſuch a Diſcourſe as this on Miracles, and will abundantly aſſiſt me in the Proſecution of it.

I expect, Sirs, that ſome of you will be ready to rave againſt me for this Diſ⯑courſe; [63] but this is my Comfort, that if your Paſſion ſhould ariſe to another Pro⯑ſecution of me, you can't poſſibly ſepe⯑rate any of mine from the Opinions of the Fathers to ground a Proſecution on: And what Diſhonor in the End will redown to Proteſtant and pretendedly learned Divines of the Church of England to perſecute a⯑gain the Fathers for primitive Doctrine, I deſire you to think on.

But as I ſuppoſe you'll have more Wit, Sirs, than to proſecute me again for this Diſcourſe; ſo I hope you'll have more In⯑genuity than odiouſly (after your wonted manner) to repreſent me to the Populace, for Profaneneſs, Blaſphemy and Infedelity. If you diſlike the whole or any Part of this Diſcourſe, appear like Men and Scho⯑lars, from the Preſs againſt it. Uſe me as roughly in Print as you think fit, I'll not take it ill.

I deſire nothing more than to be furiouſly attack'd from the Preſs, which, if I am not much miſtaken, would give me a long'd for opportunity to expoſe your Ignorance to more Advantage.

Be not longer miſtaken, Good Sirs. The Hiſtory of Jeſus's Life, as recorded in the [64] Evangeliſts is an emblematical Repreſenta⯑tion of his Spiritual Life in the Soul of Man; and his Miracles are Figures of his myſterious Operations. The four Goſpels are in no Part a litteral Story, but a Syſtem of myſtical Phyloſophy or Theology.

If you are reſolv'd not to come into this Opinion, I beg of you again, before you break forth into a Paſſion, to try to viudi⯑cate the litteral Story of the three Mira⯑cles ſpoken to in this Diſcourſe, viz. thoſe of Jeſus's driving the Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple; of his exorciſing the Devil out of the Madman; and of his Transfigu⯑ration on the Mount; which if you are able to defend againſt the Fathers and my Ob⯑jections, I'll give up the Cauſe to you, and own my ſelf (what I am ſarr enough from being) an impious Inſidel and Blaſ⯑phemer, and deſerving of the worſt Puniſh⯑ment. In the mean time I make bold again to aſſert, that the litteral Story of Chriſt' Life and Miracles is an abſurd and incredible Romance, full of Contradictions and Inconſiſtencys; and that modern Para⯑phraſes are not only a conſequential Re⯑flection on the Intellects of the Evangeliſts and their Divine Gifts of the Spirit, as if they could not write an intelligible and coherent Piece of Biography without your Help at this Diſtance of Time; but have [65] are like an high-mettal'd blind Horſe, that, were they not ridden by the Civil Autho⯑rity with a ſtrait Rein, would be oppreſ⯑ſing and trampling upon all, that ſtood in the Way of their Intereſts, to the Diſtur⯑bance of Civil Society.

Profaneneſs to do's the Biſhop charge me with. But why ſo? Becauſe I ridicule the Nonſenſe and Abſurditys of Jeſus's Miracles according to the Letter, which he venerates. Very fine indeed! The Biſhop would worſhip the Head of an Aſs, and a wiſer Man than himſelf, without the Charge of Profaneneſs, muſt not laugh at his fooliſh Superſtition.

And Blaſphemy laſtly does the Biſhop accuſe me of: And this is a ſad Bugbear Word, that has frighted Abundance of People into dreadful Apprehenſions of my Guilt, even to the Abhorrence of me. But the Biſhop ſhould firſt have defined, what is meant by Blaſphemy, and have proved one guilty of it, before he made his Ex⯑clamations: Or the Turks may ſay that a Jeſt upon their Alcoran, in which there are no Contradictions, is as much a Blaſ⯑phemy, as any Ludicrouſneſs upon the Goſpels, which are full of Inconſiſtencies. That there is ſuch a Sin or Error, call'd Blaſphemy, according to the Scriptures, is certain: But our Divines are undetermined [66] about the Nature of it. I intend to take my Opportunity to treat on the Sin of Blaſphemy, and to prove, Miniſters of the Letter are the only Perſons, that can be guilty of it. Miniſters of the Letter, upon the Authority of the Fathers are the Worſhippers of the Apocalyptical Beaſt; and anti-allegorical Expoſitions are that Blaſphemy, St. John writes of, which the Beaſt and his Worſhippers, will open their Mouths in, againſt the moſt High. This ſhall be proved as clear as the Light. But when I do it, I would not have any think, it is with an Intention, to bring the Biſhops of London, Litchfield, and St. Davids or any other Divines, under Proſe⯑cution for that heinous Sin: No, my God is omnipotent, omniſcient and omnipre⯑ſent; and knows how and when to reckon with ſuch Blaſphemers, without calling upon the civil Magiſtrate to do it for him. Should I importune the Civil Au⯑thority to execute Vengeance upon them▪ I ſhould make a fooliſh Calf or a Senſe⯑leſs Idol of my God, that was unable or knew not how, nor when to vindi⯑cate his own Cauſe. Surely the Biſho [...] of London, upon his Proſecution of [...] for Blaſphemy, muſt think his God [...] aſleep or gone a Journey from Home; [...] he would not be for taking God's [...] [67] Work out of his Hands, and committing it to the Care of the Civil Magiſtrate.

The Biſhop moreover ſhould conſider, that the Words profane and blaſphemous are of no uſe and ſignificaiton among Philoſophers, who in Diſputation never caſt them at each other, however they may differ in Opinion. Philoſophers are all ſuppoſed to be ſuch profound Vene⯑rators of the Deity, as they would not be guilty of Profaneneſs and Blaſphemy for the whole World. If any of our School of Free-Thinkers ſhould ſay of his Opponent that he's profane and blaſphe⯑mous, he would be reprimanded for want of Wit, Temper and good Manners; and be told that he's like a Billing ſgate Scold, who had Recourſe to impertinent bad Lan⯑guage, when her Reaſon fails her for bet⯑ter Rhetorick.

But it may be, for ought I know, the Biſhop has ſome Deſign in his Accuſa⯑tions againſt me for Profaneneſs and Blaſ⯑phemy; but I hope it is a better than to prejudice the Civil Magiſtrate, or to in⯑cenſe the Populace.

According to the Fathers I am ſo far from being a Blaſphemer, that they ſay, Chriſt upon the litteral interpretation of his Miracles is metamorphoſed into the falſe-Chriſt, call'd Anti-Chriſt. Whether there [68] is any Truth in this their Opinion I can't be poſitive, till the Experiment is fully made. But if our Clergy will keep their Temper, and grant me a clear Stage of Battle, I'll try it out; and ſee whether I I can't, by the Club of Reaſon and primi⯑tive Authority give their Anti-Chriſt a fa⯑tal Blow: Who knows but I may give Peace to the Church, and reconcile all Partys by it?

However this may be; I am ſure, no Man can wiſh for a greater Advantage over his Enemy, than I have over the Biſhop in this Controverſy: But he ſhall find me a generous Adverſary, who will make no worſe uſe of my Advantage over him than now and then to put him in Mind of his Paſtoral Letter, and of the Proſecution; unleſs I ſhould be tempted, ere long, to publiſh my Moderatorial Letter, like his Paſtoral one, to the Peo⯑ple of London and Weſtminſter, with Ten wholeſome Rules in it, not only to cau⯑tion them againſt falſe Prophets and falſe Teachers, without forgetting the Biſhop of the Dioceſe, but to direct them to the Eccleſiaſtical Fountain of the growing Sins, Errors and Infidelity of the Age, which the Clergy know I am of Ability to lay open.

[69] When I began the Publication of theſe Diſcourſes, I own, I laid a Trap for ſome conſiderable Clergyman; but little ima⯑gined, the great Biſhop of London would be caught in it. But now I have taken hold of him, I'll not releaſe him out of the Controverſy, till he has ſorely repented of his Ignorance or Malice in calling me a Writer, in Favour of Infidelity.

So much at preſent for the Biſhop of London. I have been the quicker of late in the printing of this; becauſe I am given to underſtand, the Biſhop of St. Davids ſtays for it, intending to make but one Work of it, and anſwer all ſix Diſcourſes together. I hope my Rabbi's Letter here will be thought by him, a good Payment for his Patience, And now I ſhall be in Expectation of his Mountainous Produc⯑tion, and where I ſhall hide myſelf from the terrible Strokes of his Pen, I have not as yet conſider'd.

I am not a little pleas'd to ſee a Couple of Diſſenting Preachers, viz. Dr. Harris and Mr. Atkinſon, liſted into the Contro⯑verſy againſt me. If they had kept their Necks out of the Collar, they might have diſſembled and pretended, that, upon the Concluſion of the Battle, when it would have appear'd, I am a real Contender for [70] Primitive Chriſtianity, they had a better Underſtanding of the Fathers, and a clearer View of my Deſign, than to ſuſ⯑pect me of Blaſphemy and Infidelity: But now they are engaged with equal Spite, Ignorance and Defamations againſt me, they muſt take their ſhare of the Fate and Shame, with the Clergy, upon the Concluſion of the Controverſy

There's no Body can think it worth my while to beſtow a Sixpenny Pamphlet upon either of theſe Gentlemen, but for all that, they ſhall not be altogether ſlighted and neglected by me. I have made a Collec⯑tion of their Rhetorical Flowers, which occaſionally ſhall be preſented to the Pub⯑lick, to the Admiration of their Wit, Reaſon, Learning and Eloquence. And at preſent only take Notice, that they are both for the Perſecution of me; but not ſo much for my Opinions, as the In⯑decency, Irreverence, and Immorality of my Stile; forfooth ! which is ſuch a Diſtinction, as may be eaſily Stretch'd to the Juſtification of the Perſecution of all Authors, whom the Prieſthood in Power ſhall not like. Mr. Atkinſon's Argument for the Preſecution of me, is much the ſame with that, which John Calvin uſed for the Perſecution of that great Philoſo⯑pher Servetus; the Injuſtice and Cruelty of [71] whoſe death and ſufferings is a greater Reproach to the Name of Calvin, than the Martyrdom of any Proteſtant can be to the Memory of any Popiſh Prelate.

To conclude, what I have written, in theſe Six Diſcourſes, is with a View to the Glory of God, the Advancement of Truth, the Happineſs of Mankind, the Demolition of Babylon, the Edification of Jeruſalem, and the Demonſtration of the Meſſiahſhip of our Spiritual Jeſus, to whom be Glory for ever. Amen.