Page images
PDF
EPUB

Part IV. man, whether the fingle Circumftance of our Saviour's rebuking his Mother in fuch a Cafe is fufficient to call in Question the Reality of a Miracle fo particularly and fo plainly related by the Evangelift.

I have now finished what I intended to say in vindication of these two Miracles of Jefus, his caufing the Barren Fig-tree to wither, and his turning the Water into Wine; and I affure the Reader, that the fame Ignorance and Difingenuity furnishes Mr. W. with his Objections against the rest of the Miracles: But, before I conclude, I must again take notice (as I have frequently done), that having in my First Part established the Refurrection of Jefus beyond all Doubt and Contradiction, I have laid a fure Foundation for the Credit of all the Miracles which the Evangelifts have afcribed to him: Allow but That to have been a Real one, and you must allow all the reft which are.. reported by the fame Authors. It is not enough to pick here and there a Hole in their Relation, and fet up a few Objections against them, which the more Ignorant a man is, the more plentifully he may be furnished with: Nothing lefs than the shewing that fome part of the Literal Story is abfolutely Impoffible to have happen'd, or that fomething which Jefus is faid to have done is Abfolutely Inconfiftent with the Divine Perfections, I fay nothing less than This can make a reasonable man Disbelieve, and even Then his Disbelief will go no farther than to the Cir cumftance which has This Weight lying on it. But the Objections, which Mr. W has thrown out against the Miracles that have been confider'd, and which may be fuppofed to be the Beft that his Party could furnish him with, are fo Weak and Feeble, that while He and They are giving up their Character as Chriftians, they are forfeiting it too as Scholars: In this respect they are vel Priamo miferanda manus: at least they would be fo, if Ignorance was their only Fault; but it has appeared to the Reader in many. Inftances, how little Regard the Author of thofe Difcourfes pays to Truth, how little even to the Certainty of being Detected in Falfhoods: Shall fuch as These have any Influence on our Faith, who neither Believe nor are to be Believed? who when they ftripp'd their own Religion of all its. Faith, tore off fo much of Morality with it; who with all the Arts and Cheats of Impoftors carry on their attacks againft. Christianity as a Cheat and Impofture, thereby Practifing what they Write againft, and putting on the very Character which they would fix upon the Apoftles? Whoever they be, that have been fo carried away with the bewitching Pleasure of Novelty as to be fond of fuch Writings, tho' they may have fome Excufe for their having been mifled, yet they can have no Excufe for continuing in their Error: for, not only the Badness of the Caufe is equalled by the Badness of the

Methods

Methods with which it is fupported; but the Writings of fuch Infidels are as Weak, as they are Difhoneft: They are an Infult upon the Common fenfe of Mankind, and every Reader must have the loweft Opinion of fuch Difcourfes, as fuppofe either that they fhall find men Fools, or that they fhall make them fo.

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

H

PART the FOURTH.

CONTAINING,

A Defence of the Literal Story of JESUS's healing the INFIRM MAN at the Pool of Bethefda.

AND

His healing the PARALYTICK, who was let down thro' the ROOF.

U

PON a careful Enquiry into thefe Miracles I found, that fomething New (to Me at least) offer'd itself to my thoughts; and fome Paffages, which I had met with in my Reading, feem'd to give a clearer Solution of the Difficulties ftarted, than the Common one does: Particularly, in the Account of the Miracle wrought by the troubling of the Waters at the Pool of Bethesda, I found Reason to differ a little from the receiv'd Opinions of the Commentators on that Chapter, and what I have propos'd as New on that Head, I have all along endeavour'd to fupport by fuch Authorities, as may feem to make my Suppofition appear at least not Improbable; This (methinks) may be faid with fome Certainty, that, if I am in the Right, Mr. W. is more clearly in the Wrong than upon any other fuppofition; tho' after all I am very fenfible, that a Sufficient Anfwer may be given to all his Objections, without thrusting any Criticism or Conjecture of Mine upon the Reader as neceffary in the Dispute.

BUT before I enter upon the Subject, I think it material to prepare the way with one Obfervation upon a Piece which Mr. W. lately published under the Title of A Defence of his Difcourfes, &c. where that Author endeavours to fhift the State of the Controverfy between Himfelf and his Oppofers. The True Queftion, upon which I and others closed with him is This, Whether the Literal Account of the Miracles afcrib'd to Jefus be True; not, Whether the Miracles (befides their Lite

ral

ral Meaning) may not have a Figurative and Allegorical one; much less is it, Whether the Fathers turn'd all the Actions of Jefus into Allegory or not: For had He done nothing more than add a Spiritual Senfe to them, or had he only try'd to fhew that the Fathers delighted in making them Emblems of whatever their Wit and Fancy fuggefted, he might have gone on writing as long as he pleased, without any Oppofers, and perhaps without any Readers.

FOR what is it to the Caufe of Truth, whether the Fathers or He could find out more Meanings of Jefus's Miracles than the Evangelifts thought proper to give us. But Mr. W's Dif courfes do exprefly and frequently deny, that the Miracles of Jefus were Truly and Really wrought; and he afferts, That, Literally understood, they are full of Abfurdities, Improbabilities, and Contradictions. And yet in this Defence, p. 26. he would have us believe, in regard to the Story of the Buyers and Sellers driven out of the Temple, that it is to no purpose to support the Letter of the Story against him, unless it can be prov'd, that the Miracle neither was nor could be a Shadow or Refemblance of fomething Future. And the fame he had faid before concerning all the Miracles of Jefus, Difc. 2. p. 70. viz. that he, who would write against him to the Purpose, must prove two things: That the Fathers did not hold Jefus's Miracles to be Typical and Figurative; and That thofe Miracles neither will, nor can receive a Myfterious Accomplishment. On the contrary, if the Learned Bishop of St. Davids and other Writers against Mr. W. fhould allow, that All the Fathers did affect to turn Jefus's Miracles into Allegory; and if they should allow too, that their Allegories and Mr. W's are Juft and Well-grounded, yet the Writings of Mr. W's Oppofers might be full and proper Answers to His, because they support the Truth of the Literal Story, which he fo often and fo peremptorily denies: For we may clearly prove the Literal Meaning, tho' we don't attempt to difprove the Allegorical one, if they be two diftinct things; as every one of his Difcourfes plainly makes them, while it denies the Letter of the Miracles, and endeavours to fet up the Allegory only. If He can confider them separately, fo may We; This Liberty I have taken, and fhall again take in the enfuing Difcourfe; perhaps in fome Inftances I may allow, that the Miracles recorded in the Gofpel were Typical; for I have no Quarrels with Types and Figures: I only oppofe one who would fet them up to the Ruin of the Letter; and the Drift of This and my preceding Difcourfes is only to fhew, that the Miracles afcrib'd to Jefus were truly wrought by him, and that there is an Account of the Literal Story to be given, which is clear of all the Objections that Mr. W. has fo unskilfully made to them.

In this view I proceed to confider

I. THE

Part III. I. THE Story of the Miracle, or rather Miracles, wrought at the Pool of Bethesda; of which St. John chap. v. has given us a particular Account, and which Mr. W. (b) calls a Camel, of a Monftrous fize for Abfurdities, Improbabilities, and Incredibilities, and he has spent above twenty Pages in fixing these upon it.

BUT for the clearer Anfwer to all his Objections on this Head, the Reader is defir'd to obferve that in this Narration of St. John there are two diftinct Miracles to be feparately confider'd, That which was wrought by the Pool after the Water of it was troubled; and That which Jefus wrought upon the Infirm Man who lay there: The former is only a Narration, in which our Saviour is not at all concern'd, nor the Miracle which he wrought on the Impotent Man: fo that, if we could not account for the particular Circumftances that attended the Relation of the Firft, it would not in the least affect the Miracle of our Saviour's healing this Man: the Truth of which Fact only we are engag'd to vindicate. However because This is the Introductory Story in St. John, and because Mr. W. has been very large and ftrong in his Objections against the Letter of it, I fhall begin there.

I S. AGAINST the Sanative Virtue of the Pool in the Circumftances defcrib'd by the Evangelift, Mr. W. has made feveral Objections by way of Queftion; but before I give an Answer to his Queftions, I fhall lay before the Reader, what I conceive to be the true Account of the Story; and I do this the rather, because I think, that it has not been understood aright by the Generality of Commentators, whofe Miftakes on this Article have helped to furnish our Author with fome of those Difficulties, with which he has fo heavily loaded this Miracle.

THE State of the Cafe (I think) was this: At Jerufalem, near the Place called the Sheep-Market, or rather the Sheep-gate (mention'd by Nehem. chap. iii. 1. and xii. 39.) there was a Bath built for the use of such of the Common People, as lov'd to swim and bathe themselves in the Water: This is the proper fense of the Word (c) noxvμluleg, ufed by St. John on this occafion, and by other Writers, and in the Old Latin Verfion (called the Italic) it was render'd by Natatoria, a Bath or Swimming-place. Nothing was more Common or more Useful

(6) Difcourfe 3. P. 33.

(c) Thus nonvubav fignifies to fwim, in A&s xxvii. 43. The old Tranflation of Irenæus, 1. 2. c. 22. has Paralyticum, qui juxta Natatoriam jacebat: and the three very Ancient Latin MSS. of the Gofpels, which, as Calmet fays, contain the Old Italic Verfion before St. Jerome reform'd it, agree in rendring xoλuμChoeg by Natatoria, as may be feen by confulting the various Readings of thofe MSS. publifh'd by Calmet at the end of his Commentary on the Acts of the Apoftles.

than

« PreviousContinue »