plain and obvious meaning of the prophecy, to flee to enigmatical myfterious fenfes for fupporting the credit of the prophecy, and to fhew that it may be fulfilled in events, which did not at all correfpond to the literal fenfe, is mere trifling. And what can miracles do in this cafe? Is the sense of a prophecy to be determined by miracles? Or can miracles prove, that a prophecy is fulfilled, when we fee it is not fulfilled?" To fuch exceptions the apologists for Christianity have given particular substantial answers. But what I would fuggeft, is this, that to a man, who will think deliberately, and will impartially confider things, all fuch objections against the evidence from miracles will appear to be mere wrangling, and indeed unworthy of men of understanding. Is there a man of sense

at this day in Great Britain, who believeth, for inftance, the refurrection of our Saviour; and yet doth not believe him fent of God? Or is it in nature, that this ever fhould be the cafe? Let them infift, that there is not fufficient evidence of the refurrection and other miracles, and let that cafe be tried; but let all exceptions laid against the argument taken from these facts, upon supposition of the facts, be fet afide, as utterly unworthy of mention amongst the knowing and candid, until a man of understanding is found, who is convinced by the evidence, that Jesus Christ really rose from the dead, and yet believeth, that he was a deceiver, and his religion an imposture. And I cannot help faying, that to infift on fuch exceptions is the veriest trifling in a matter of the greatest moment.

;

And when we are told, that no one faw our bleffed Saviour rife from the dead, and that therefore there could be no evidence from eye-witneffes is not this perfectly puerile? If men were witneffes to his crucifixion and death, and if this is acknowledged to be undoubted fact, is not their seeing and converfing with him afterwards just as good proofs of his refurrection, as if each of these persons, who thus converfed with him, had been present, when he came out of the grave? Would fair disputants ever so much as mention these things?

It hath been alledged likewife, that the advocates for Chriftianity cannot agree amongst themselves, what it is, and what doctrines it teacheth; that they have filled the world with debates and controverfies about it, not to this day brought

to an iffue; that Christianity, as taught by fome, is quite different from what others would have it to be; all furiously contending for their own fenfe, and in very few things agreed; that it is time enough to enquire into the truth and divine authority of that religion, when it is once fairly settled what it is, that men may know what they are inquiring about. To this I would answer, by asking what there is in the whole compass of natural religion and morality, about which there have not been contentions and difputes in the world? Muft we therefore believe, that an honeft inquirer fhall not be able to attain to the knowledge of the truth in of thefe matters ? Is there no fuch thing therefore as natural religion and morality, because even the principal articles of both have

any

been

been called in queftion? Or will a candid inquirer make a wonder of it, that there fhould be debates in the Christian world, while men are fo different from one another in the measure of understanding; while their opportunities of inquiry, and their diligence in it, are so different; while from the prejudices of education, they are so apt obftinately to adhere to the opinions, which they have firft received; while many likewife are poffeffed of fuch a dread of running into error, as doth effectually and for ever prevent an impartial inquiry, and coming to the truth; and while many are under the power of corrupt lufts and impure affections, which, of all things, must indispose the minds of men for difcerning truth? Is it to be wondered at, when it requireth great care and attention in fome in

ftances,