every Day, without giving the leaft fufpicion, "that their Bodies are not capable of being touched: nor from the Words I am not yet "afcended to my Father, for tho' there is a Difficulty in these Words, there is no difficulty in feeing that they have no "Relation to Chrift's Body, for of his Body nothing is faida." And what fays the Confiderer? why If the Words, touch me not (fays he) did not fignify, touch not my body, what did they fignify? The Author of the Tryal, you fee, had faid that thefe Words, I am not afcended to my Father, had no Relation to Chrift's Body, and the Confiderer represents him as faying, that the Words touch me not had no Relation to it. This is the Confiderer's Method of answering Books; because he finds it difficult to answer what the Author has faid, he is refolved to confute what he has not faid. One of The next Appearance of Chrift was on the Day of the Refurrection, to two Difciples in their Road to Emmaus. St. Mark has just mention'd this Story. But we are indebted to St. Luke for the particulars of it. the two, St. Luke tells us, was Cleophas; and the other, if we may believe the Confiderer, was Simon Peter. Who it really was, is of little Importance in itself; that it was not Simon Peter, whatever he thinks of the Matter, is moft evident. Had Peter been prefent, it is First Edit. p. 53. Third Edit. P. 4.2. ⚫ Chap. xvi. 12. Q2 not not likely that an inferior Difciple would have been the principal Spokesman; especially when a Part of the Converfation turned upon Peter himself. It is the less likely, because St. Peter was probably then at Jerufalem, where the fame Evangelift informs us the Eleven were gathered together. But to put the Matter out of all Doubt, when the two Difciples returned from Emmaus to the Apoftles at Jerufalem, they found them difcourfing about an Appearance of Chrift to Simon Peter; The Lord is rifen indeed, and bath appeared to Simon f. I desire to know, what Appearance the Evangelift means here? Is it that to the two Difciples in the Road to Emmaus? Impoffible. Thefe Difciples had not yet made their Report; and it will be too much for the Confiderer to fay, that the Eleven knew it by Inspiration. If the Reader is defirous to know how the Confiderer came by this Notion, I think I can inform him. It is founded, if I mistake not, upon this very Paffage, the Lord is rifen, and bath appeared to Simon, which proves the direct contrary, Had the Confiderer argued that Mojes wrote the Pentateuch, therefore Simon Peter was the Companion of Cleophas, it would have been much more excufable; because though it would not have proved his Conclufion to be true, it would not, as this Text does, prove it to be falfe. The Confiderer fuppofes that to be a Report of the two Difciples to the Eleven, very which was in Fact a Report of the Eleven to them, viz. that the Lord was rifen and had appeared to Simon. Infenfible of this Blunder, evident as it is, he goes on, and raises this wife Reflection upon it, that it feems as if it did not appear to be the Lord to Cleophas, but to Simon only; an Inference impertinent enough, had his Construction of the Paffage been right; but what can be faid of it, when the Conftruction is fo manifeftly wrong? His Remarks upon the Story itself are just as groundless, as those upon the Perfons of the two Difciples. He is, I fuppofe, offended at it, because there appears to be fomething miraculous in it. Miracles he treats every where as abfurd and impoffible, and feems to think that God has no more Authority in his own Creation. than he and I have. St. Mark fays, our Saviour appeared to the two Difciples in another Form; St. Luke, that their Eyes were holden; and this the Confiderer places to the Account of Contradictions; "one Evangelift making the Cause to " be in the Object, and the other in the Eyes" h. It is ftrange the Gentleman will not understand common Language. Who does not fee that the Evangelifts meant to exprefs the felf fame Thing? If Jefus appeared in another Form, their Eyes of courfe were holden, that they should not know him: All that the Hiftorians mean to intimate is, that there was an Im 8 First Edit. p. 55. Third Edit. p. 44. b First Edit. P. 55. Third Edit. p. 43, 44, pediment, pediment, which prevented their knowing him. That this might happen either in a natural or fupernatural way, the Author of the Tryal has shown, in a manner agreeable to Reafon and true Philofophy, and fuch as will correfpond exactly with the Expreffions of both Evangelifts. The Confiderer has thought proper to take no Notice of This, or none that deserves any Anfwer. One Question however he has put in Regard to this Story, to which I fhall give him an Anfwer. The Question is this; Can any good Reafon be given, why Jefus did not difcover himSelf to them by the Way, and give them the Joy, which fuch Difcovery would have made i ? Now the Point difcuffed upon the Road was, whether it was not agreeble to Prophecy, that Chrift fhould fuffer and rife again from the dead. Chrift himself undertook to prove this Propofition at large, from the Scriptures of the old Teftament, and the Argument feemed to have its intended Effect. Suppofe now he had firft made himself known, and then entered upon this Argument, what would have been the Confequence? Plainly this; the Surprize of feeing one from the dead, and the Authority of Chrift reafoning from the Scriptures, must have disturb'd their Judgment, and made them perhaps fubmit to his Interpretation of the Prophecies, without confidering whether just or not. The plain Reason therefore, why the Discovery was not made fooner is, that he might First Edit. p. 55. Third Edit. p. 44. convince convince their Understandings first, upon the Strength of Reason and Argument, whilft their Minds where yet free from any Impreffion by the Event itself, and the irrefiftible Force of Chrift's own Authority. This Reafon ought to have great weight with the Confiderer, becaufe it is founded on a Maxim very much talked of, though very little obferved by the Gentlemen of his Stamp, that all Prejudice and Prepoffeffion fhould be excluded in fearching after Truth. The Appearance of our Saviour at different Times, to the Women and to one or two of the Disciples detached from the reft, adds no fmall weight to the general Evidence of the Refurrection. But the greatest Point fingly confidered, is his fhewing himself to the whole Body of Difciples; eating, drinking, and converfing with them, and giving them an Opportunity of being fatisfied of the Fact at leifure, by all proper Methods of Tryal, and by the Variety of Evidence that a matter of Fact is capable of. Such Appearances there are feveral. The Credit of them ftands upon the united Testimony of all the New Teftament Writers. The four Evangelifts, the Author of the Acts, and St. Paul are unanimous in the Point. And what has the Confiderer oppofed to Evidence fo full and ftrong? why he is puzzling himself and his Readers with fome Circumftances of Time and Place, which he either does not, or will not understand; comparing the Conciseness of one Writer with the Copioufness of another, miftaking one Appearance for another, and 3 with ! |