out their so much as thinking of him, and without any one else knowing that those cures were wrought by him: but then neither the men of that age, nor we, had had the proof we now have from his works, of the certainty of a future life, and of the other parts of Christ's doctrine, so admirably suited to raise men from sin to holiness, from earth to heaven, and to turn them from Satan to God: we had also lost that eminent and undeniable proof they now afford us of our Lord's great character: we had not been assured, as we now are, of that unspeakable instance of the love of God, in sending his Son into the world for our salvation.

How far Jesus may have extended his goodness even to the bodies of men, during his abode here on earth, beyond all those miraculous instances of his power for attesting his character, we cannot tell. But it was necessary that the exercise of his goodness in the way of working miracles for the proof of his mission and doctrine should be chiefly confined to those who were disposed to ask help of him; whether they were poor or wealthy, mean and obscure, or learned and honourable: and that the exercise of his goodness should be also regulated in a great measure by the nature of their desires. This way his miraculous works are free from ostentation, and are unexceptionable.

But yet, when he had an opportunity of doing good, without incurring the suspicion of ostentation or concert, he readily manifested his compassion and benignity to the distressed; as he did in particular to the widow of Nain, whose son he raised to life when he was carried out to be interred.

And herein indeed appear wisdom and goodness, that those acts of beneficence performed by him on the bodies of men, and those perhaps chiefly poor and mean persons, such mostly having come to him, though some wealthy and honourable (all however who came to him, none having been refused, and some who never sought to him) have been made to subserve the great design of Almighty God in saving mankind; and give credit to that doctrine, which is of such admirable use and tendency to cure the minds of men of all evil habits and dispositions: to cure, I say, the minds of men, not of one country or age, but of all the world in all time. This is the wisdom of God, and the power of God, and the goodness of God.

I should think,' says Mr. W. p. 24. Jesus ought to have raised an useful magistrate, whose life had been a common blessing; an industrious merchant, whose death ' was a public loss.'

The design of Christ in coming into the world was not barely to promote the temporal advantage of men, but for an infinitely higher end. For which reason, I should think, he should cure and raise those, whose cure or restoration would most serve this end. These are they only, who might be cured without suspicion of cheat or fraud; which are chiefly such as voluntarily came to him, or whom he casually met with; whether magistrates or subjects, wealthy or poor.

6

6

6

Soon after, he says, p. 25, Such instances of his power 'would have demonstrated him to be a most benign as well as mighty agent; and none in interest or prejudice could have opened their mouths against him, especially if the persons raised from the dead were selected upon the recommendation of this or that city.'

plea

Ridiculous! Should Jesus have gone to the magistrates and people of some town or city, and tell them: if they had lately lost any useful magistrate or worthy citizen, whom they wished to have restored again to life, and would be pleased to recommend such person to him, he would raise him up? I think no minister or inessenger of God, endowed with the power of working miracles, would be guilty of such meanness. And if no such persons came to Jesus, it was not his fault. However there were some such, and they were not refused, but were as readily gratified as any others. Thus in the case of the centurion, whose servant was "sick and ready to die," we are assured, "that when he heard of Jesus, he sent unto him the elders of the Jews, and when they came to Jesus, they besought him instantly, saying, that he was worthy for whom he should do this," Luke vii. 2, 3. And one of the persons raised to life by Jesus was the daughter of a ruler of a synagogue. And if any others had been recommended in a like manner by rulers or elders, there is no reason to doubt but they would have

been received.

But certainly it was by no means needful, that the miracles of Jesus, of any kind, should be generally performed on magistrates and wealthy men, or at their recommendation. This method might have served indeed to stop men's mouths, but not to convince them. There is an observation of Origen in his answer to Celsus, which is much more judicious than any thing said by our author upon this subject. It is not,' says Origen, a number of impostors met

* Ου γαρ συνελθοντες γοητες, χάριν τίνοντες βασιλει τινι κελεύοντι, η ἡγεμονι προστασσοντι, πεποιηκεναι εδοξαν αυτον είναι θεον, αλλ' κ. λ. Contr. Cels. 1. 3. p. 133. edit. Cantab.

together, who in compliance with the orders of a king or emperor have decreed, that he [Jesus] should be made a God; but the Creator of the world himself,' &c. It is much more for the honour of Jesus, for the credit of his miracles and religion, and for the satisfaction of men in all times, that his miracles and doctrine obtained belief and esteem without the power and authority of magistrates, by the force of their own internal excellence and evidence.

6

But now I am speaking,' says Mr. W. of the fitness and unfitness of deceased persons, to have this grand mi'racle wrought on them: it comes into my head to ask, why Jesus raised not John the Baptist to life again? A 'person of greater merits, and more worthy of the favour of Jesus, and of this miracle, could not be. This is a very 'reasonable question,' p. 25. A very silly one, most people will think. John the Baptist had performed his work, and finished his course. If he had been soon raised to life again, the value and merit of his testimony given to Jesus had been much weakened. If it had been related in the history of Jesus, that John the Baptist had been raised again to life by him; Mr. W. might have said, it gave ground for suspicion of collusion between the Principal and fore

runner.

SECTION IV.

ANSWER TO MR. WOOLSTON'S FOURTH OBJECTION.

PAGE 26, he says, That none of these raised persons ' had been long enough dead to amputate all doubt of Jesus's ⚫ miraculous power in their resurrection.' They have been long enough dead to assure us of a miracle, if they are raised, who have been so long dead that their nearest and most affectionate friends bury them, or carry them out to be buried: as have they also, who have on them such evident tokens of their being expired, that their friends hope no longer for help from those, on whose assistance they before depended, so long as there were any signs of life. The foriner is the case of the widow of Nain's son, and of Lazarus; the latter of Jairus's daughter. When Jairus came to Christ his daughter was expiring, for he says in Matthew, "My daughter is even now dead;" in Mark," lieth at the point of death." Still he had hopes of help from Jesus, for he says: "But come and lay thy hand upon her and she shall live." But before Jesus got to the house she expired, and

all hopes were gone. "And there came (says St. Mark) from the ruler of the synagogue's house, certain which said, Thy daughter is dead, why troublest thou the Master any further?" ch. v. 25. This is good reason to suppose she was really dead. These messengers doubtless were despatched away to Jairus, to acquaint him with the death of his daughter, by those persons that attended her during her sickness, and were convinced of her being expired.

Mr. W. says a good deal more about the time these persons ought to have been dead. Speaking of Jairus's daughter, he says, p. 27, Supposing she was really dead, yet for the sake of an indisputable miracle in her resurrection, it 'must be granted, that she ought to have been much longer, some days, if not weeks, dead and buried.' And of the event at Nain, he says, p. 29, All I have to say here, is, ' that if Jesus had a mind to raise the son of this widow, in 'testimony of his divine power, he should have suffered him to have been buried two or three weeks first.'

6

Mr. W.'s first proposition here appears to me very strange, That supposing she was really dead, yet for the sake of an indisputable miracle-she ought to have been dead much 'longer.' If she was really dead (as she certainly was) and was restored again to life, it is with all men of sense and reason an indisputable miracle.

6

As for the time which Mr. W. requires, that a person must be some days, if not weeks, dead and buried; buried two or three weeks first:' this is not needful. If we could not be certainly assured of the death of persons, by evident tokens appearing in their bodies, in less time than Mr. W. prescribes here, we should not be justified in committing to the grave any man in less time. Much less could we endure to bury our dearest friends and relations under two or three weeks or more after they seem to have expired. We cannot justify burying men, but on a well-grounded supposal that they are really dead. We cannot justify the laying out of men's bodies, as we do very soon after visible tokens of death, if those tokens were not sufficient.

And since they buried their deceased friends much sooner in those warm countries, than we do here, this must doubtless have been, because dead bodies became also much sooner offensive there, than in our cold climate. This circumstance strengthens my argument: for how can we imagine that persons should, by burying their deceased friends so early, put them absolutely and entirely beyond any manner of possibility of reviving, unless they might well and safely depend

upon some certain, experienced, and uncontestable proofs and evidences of their being already deprived of any remaining life?

There may have been mistakes made sometimes, though but very rarely; and even those accidents have chiefly happened in cases of sudden death. Where any dangerous distemper precedes, the possibility of mistake is very small, and can seldom happen. This was the case, we know, of Jairus's daughter, and of Lazarus: and this confirms us still more in the belief, that their friends were not mistaken in the persuasion of their death; upon which persuasion the one had been buried, and for the other the public mourners were come to make lamentations. And as for the young man at Nain; though we do not know how he died, whether suddenly, or of a gradual illness, we may rely upon the fondness of a mother, a widow too, that she would not have carried forth to burial her only son without knowing he was become a dead corpse.

It is so natural, and even unavoidable for men that argue against plain truth, to contradict themselves; that it is hardly worth while to take any notice of Mr. W.'s self-contradictions. I shall only just observe, that this story of Lazarus's resurrection, which before was represented by him as the miracle of miracles, superlatively great, and monstrously huge, as if nothing greater and more prodigious could be devised or thought of, is here pretended not to be big enough to assure us it was any miracle at all. For he says, p. 31: It is plain that Lazarus was not so 'long dead and buried, as that there is no room to doubt of the miracle of his resurrection.'

6

Mr. W. says, p. 28, 29: And where there is a possibility of fraud, it is nonsense, and mere credulity to talk of a real, certain, and stupendous miracle, especially where the juggler and pretended worker of miracles has been detected in some of his other tricks.' Perhaps there are few or no cases where there is an absolute impossibility of fraud. It is sufficient that fraud be improbable, unlikely, and next to impossible. In such a case (which is ours) it is not nonsense and mere credulity, but the highest reason to admit the truth of a relation; and to assert a real, certain, and great, or if you choose, stupendous miracle. A fraud is as easy to happen in a person who has been dead and buried many weeks, as in one publicly carried out to burial.

Herein however I readily agree with Mr. W. that it is mere credulity to talk of such a thing, where a juggler has