Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

Man

them; (a) for this had been sufficient to any
in his Senses, to have overthrown that Belief which
he had before entertained: Again, all Religion,
but particularly the Christian Religion, forbids
(b) Lying and False Witness, especially in Divine
Matters: they could not therefore be moved to
tell a Lye, out of Love to Religion, especially
such a Religion. To all which may be added,
that they were Men who led such a Life, as was
not blamed even by their Adversaries; and who
had no Objection made against them, (c) but only
their Simplicity, the Nature of which is the most

He Religion ale

distant that can be from forging a Lye. Andale

[ocr errors]

there was none of them, who did not undergo even the most grievous Things, for their Profession of the Resurrection of Jesus. Many of them endured the most exquisite Death for this Testimony. Now, suppose it possible, that any Man in hisWits could undergo such Things for an Opinion the men wh he had entertained in his Mind; yet for a Falsity they sigh and which is known to be a Falsity; that not only one Man, but very many should be willing towould not endure such Hardships, is a Thing plainly incre

dible. And that they were not mad, both theirmen of Ro Lives and their Writings sufficiently testify. Whate. they,

has been said of these first, the same may also be,

said of Paul, (d) who openly declared that he saw ffered for

(a) For this had been sufficient, &c.] Chrysostom handles this Argument at large, upon 1 Cor. i. towards the end. (b) Lying and false Witness, &c.] Matt. xii. 36. 44, 45. Eph. iv. 25. Rom. ix. 1. 2 Cor. vii. Gal. i. 20. Col. iii. 9. 1 Tim. i. 10. and ii. 7.

Matt. xxii. 16. Mark xii. 14. Lake xx. 21.

Eph. v. 9. and elsewhere.

[ocr errors]

John viii..

19. xi. 31.

Jam. iii. 14.

John xiv. 10% lezze

(6) But only their Simplicity, &c.] Even Celsus. See Origen

Book I.

(d) Who openly declared, &c.] 1 Cor. xv. 9. 2 Cor. xii. 4. Add to this what Luke the Disciple of Paul writes, Acts ix. 4. 5, 6. and xxii. 6, 7, 8.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

Christ reigning in Heaven, (a) and he did not want the Learning of the Jews, but had great Prospect of Honour, if he had trod the Paths of his Fathers. But on the contrary, he thought it his duty, for this Profession, to expose himself to the Hatred of his Relations; and to undertake difficult, dangerous, and troublesome Voyages all over the World, and at last to suffer an ignominious Death.

SECT. VII.

The Objection drawn from the seeming Impossibility of a Resurrection answered.

INDEED, nobody can withstand the Credibility of so many and so great Testimonies, without saying, that a Thing of this nature is impossible to be, such as we say all Things that imply a Contradiction are. (b) But this cannot be said of it. It

(a) And he did not want the Learning, &c.] Acts xxii. 3. There were two Gamaliels famous amongst the Hebrews on account of their Learning. Paul was the Disciple of one of them, who was very skilful, not only in the Law, but also in those Things that were delivered by the Doctors. See Epiphanius.

[ocr errors]

(b) But this cannot be said of it, &c.] See the seventh Answer to the Objections concerning the Resurrection, in the Works of Justin. "An Impossibility in itself, is one Thing; "and an Impossibility in any Particular, is another; an Impossibility in itself is, that the Diagonal of a Square should "be commensurate with the Side; a particular Impossibility “ is, that Nature should produce an Animal without Seed. "To which of these two Kinds of Impossibles do Unbelievers compare the Resurrection? If to the first, their Reasoning "is false; for a new Creation is not like making the Diagonal "commensurate with the Side; but they that rise again, "rise by a new Creation. If they mean a particular Impossibility; surely all Things are possible with God, though they may be impossible to any else." Concerning this Difference of Impossibilities, see the learned Notes of Maimonides, in his Guide to the Doubting, Part III. Ch. 15.

،،

[ocr errors]

66

IH Rawnsley Eson Collage. Or jou vry

might indeed, if any one should affirm, that the same Person was alive and dead at the same Time: But that a dead Man should be restored to Life, by the Power of him who first gave Life to Man, (a) there is no Reason why this should be thought impossible. Neither did wise Men believe it to be impossible: For Plato relates it of (b) Er the Armenian; (c) Heraclides Ponticus, of a certain Woman; (d) Herodotus, of Aristaus ; and (e) Plu

tarch,

(a) There is no Reason why, &c.] All those who are skilful in the true Philosophy, acknowledge that it is as hard to understand how the Fatus is formed in the Mother's Womb, as how the Dead should be raised to Life. But ignorant Men are not at all surprised at the Things which they commonly see; nor do they account them difficult, though they know not the Reason of them: But they think those Things which they never saw, are impossible to be done, though they are not at all more difficult than those Things they see every Day. Le Clerc.

(b) Er the Armenian, &c.] The Place of Plato concerncerning this Matter, is extant in his Tenth Book of Republics, transcribed by Eusebius, in his Gospel Preparat. Book XI. Chap. 35. The Report of which History is in Valerius Maximus, Book I. Chap. 8. the first foreign Example. In the Hortatory Discourse among the Works of Justin; in Clemens, Strom. V. in Origen, Book II. against Celsus; in Plutarch, Symposiac. IX. 5. and in Macrobius, in the Beginning upon Scipio's Dream.'

(c) Heraclides Ponticus, &c.] There was a Book of his Concerning the Dead, mentioned by Diogenes Laërtius in his Preface, and in his Empedocles; and by Galen in the VIth. concerning the Parts that are affected. Pliny speaks thus of him, Book VII. Chap. 32. "That noble Volume of Hera"clides amongst the Greeks, of a Woman's being restored to "Life, after she had been dead seven Days." And Diogenes Laërtius, in the latter place, assigns her thirty Days.

(d) Herodotus, &c.] In his Melpomene. See Pliny's Nat. Hist. Book VIII. Chap. 52. Plutarch's Romulus, and Hesichius concerning the Philosophers.

(e) Plutarch, &c.] of Thespesius. Plutarch has this in his Discourse of God's deferring Punishment. And Antyllus, concerning whom Eusebius has preserved that Place of Plu

H 2

tarch,

tarch, out of another; which, whether they were in the Powestrue or false, shews the Opinion of learned Men,

God to take concerning the Possibility of the Thing. away life.es

ch

he gave its

·

God would

not have.

The Truth of Jesus's Doctrine proved from his

Resurrection.

IF it be not impossible that Christ should return to Life again, and if it be proved from sufficient Testimonies, such as convinced (a) Bechai, a Teacher of the Jews, so far as to acknowledge the Truth of it; and Christ himself (as both his own Disciples and Strangers confess) declared a new Doctrine, as by a Divine Command: It will certainly follow, that this Doctrine is true; because it is repugnant to the Justice and Wisdom of God to bestow such Endowments upon him who had bertad Juchbeen guilty of a Falsity, in a Matter of so great Moment. Especially when he had, before his Endowment Death, declared to his Disciples, that he should upon one who die, and what Manner of Death; and also that he was false, a should return to Life again; (b) and that these fred us to Things should therefore come to pass, that they be mislead might confirm the Truth of his Doctrine.

the Huth of Religion

SECT. VIII.

That the Christian Religion exceeds all others. THESE Arguments are drawn from Matters. of Fact; we come now to those which are drawn

tarch, from his First Book of the Soul, in his Prepar. Book XI. Chap. 38. and Theodoret, Serm. XI.

(a) Bechai, &c.] It were to be wished that Grotius had quoted the Place; for though his Reasoning, drawn from the Resurrection of Christ, does not want the Approbation of R. Bechai, yet perhaps the Jews might, be affected with his Authority. Le Clerc.

(b) And that these Things, &c.] See John xvii. Luke xxiv. 46, 47.

from

from the Nature of the Doctrine. Certainly all Manner of Worship of God must be rejected; (which can never enter into any Man's Mind, who has any Sense of the Existence of God, and of his Government of the Creation; and who considers the Excellency of Man's Understanding, and the Power of chusing moral Good or Evil, with which he is endued; and consequently that the Cause, as of Reward, so of Punishment, is in himself;) or else he must receive this Religion, not only upon the Testimony of the Facts, which

[ocr errors]

we have now treated of; but likewise for the Sake of those Things that are intrinsical in Religion; since there cannot be any produced, in any Age or Nation, whose Rewards are more excellent, Fach or whose Precepts are more perfect, or the Me-Reward thod in which it was commanded to be propaatha gated, more wonderful.

SECT. IX.

The Excellency of the Reward proposed.

all perfech

TO begin with the Reward, that is, with the End proposed to Man; because, as we are used to say, that which is the last in Execution, is the First in Intention; (a) Moses, in his Institution of the Jewish Religion, if we regard the express Condition of the Law, made no Promises beyond the good Things of this Life, such as a fruitful Land, Abundance of Riches, Victory over their Enemies, long Life and Health, and Hope of their Posterities surviving them. And if there be any Thing more, it is only obscurely hinted, and must be collected from wise and strong Arguing: Which is the Reason why many who professed to follow the

(a) Moses, in his Institution, &c.] Deut. xi. and xxviii. Heb. viii. 6,

Law

« ForrigeFortsæt »