Body, that I think no Man is concern'd to enquire, whether they were ever done, or no, or to trouble himself about them, any more than about all the infinite Relations of the like Kind, vented to fupport the various and contradictory Notions fpread throughout the World. The Senfe of the Words is plain, as confider'd with their Context, and carry fuch Evidence along with them against the Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation, as cannot be fubverted by any foreign Confideration, much lefs by any Facts, attefted and related by fallible Men; whofe Credibility and Narrations are to be judged of by the Hiftories we have of their Proceedings in all Ages of the World, and in all Religions, and every Day in the Roman Church, which pretends to a constant Power to do Miracles, in this Matter of atIt is tefted, or fuppofed attefted Miracles. faid, that the Pope lately caft a Devil out of a Man poffefs'd, publickly before his whole Company at Mafs; but fhould he be faid to have caft out ten thousand Devils, or to have done any other Miracles, no one ought in the leaft to be moved by them, fo as to think, from them, that the Mafs or Popery was taught in the Bible.

4. That all Parts of the Chriftian Scheme ought to be made out and defended, and efpecially the fundamental Article thereof, that JESUS of Nazareth is the Meffiah, or Perfon promised in the Old Teftament, by those, who propofe that it fhould be rationally received, by infifting on and making good the

feveral

several Foundations, on which JESUS and his Apostles founded his Meffiahship, Miffion, and Doctrines; and that one Defect in the faid Scheme, and one Argument against that Scheme, which cannot be anfwer'd, affects the whole Scheme.

For Example, if it does not appear from the Old Testament, that JESU s, as characterized in the New Teftament, is the Meffiah, promised in the Old, there is no Pretence to proceed a Step farther towards the Maintenance or Support of Christianity; for the Term Meffiab fignifies a Perfon there described and foretold. And to talk of, and to pretend to believe in JESUs, as the Perfon promised in a Book, when that Book is not to be our fole Guide and Rule, to know whether he be promised in that Book, or no, is, as appears to me, the greatest Contradiction to common Senfe, and the greatest Satire upon the Gospel, and upon JESUS and his Apoftles, for appealing to the Old Teftament, that is poffible. It implies, that there is one Book, which is to be interpreted, differently from all other Books. It implies, that the Matter, for which an Appeal is made, is not to be found in the Book. It is flying in the Face of JESUS CHRIST and his Apoftles, and declining an Appeal, which they make; and, in a word, it discovers a mere pretended Regard to JESUS CHRIST and his Apoftles, and a real Regard to nothing but our own Schemes.

Again, if the Refurrection of JESUS from the Dead, which is also an effential Part of Christianity,

T 3

་

Christianity, firft, as it ought to come to pafs as a Fact supposed to be foretold in the Old Teftament, and, fecondly, as it is a Fact testify'd of in the New Teftament, cannot be (i) proved true, and defended, Christianity fails. For if fuch a Matter could be made out to be a Falfhood, or to be deftitute of Proof, here is fuch a Weakness, fuch a Failure in Evidence for Christianity, as fuperfedes the Confideration of any other Topicks in its Behalf, and, indeed, fufficiently implies, that every other Part thereof must be invalid.

In a Word, as the Bereans fearch'd the Scriptures, or Old Teftament, to fee, whether what the Apoftles taught was founded thereon, or no, and would have acted right in rejecting the Teaching of the Apoftles, had they not found it in the Old Teftament; fo others would no less have acted rightly, in rejecting their Teaching, if the Refurrection of JESUS had not been made out to them; for as the Apostle very well argues, (k) If CHRIST be not rifen, then is our Preaching vain, and your Faith is alfo vain.

You have confider'd Matters like the Bereans, and have fearch'd the Old Testament, to find out the prophetical Foundation of Christianity; and if you have not exprefly ftated the Affair of gofpel Miracles, and particularly the Miracle of the Refurrection of JESUS, the great Miracle of the Gofpel; it was because it was needlefs, and fufficiently

(i) Letters, p. 8.

(k) 1 Cor. xv. 14.

obviated

obviated by you, and for other manifeft Reafons; but not for the (1) Reafon affign'd by Mr. GREEN, who pretends, by his Prerogative, to know the Secret of your Heart, as well as the (m) Secret of God.

Wherefore, all true Defenders of Christianity must either manitain the whole, or give up the whole.

To pretend therefore, that Miracles are a Proof of the Meffiahfhip of JESUS, upon a Suppofition, that the Meffiahfhip is not, or cannot be made out, from the Old Teftament, or that the Teft or Proof thereof from the Old Teftament may be declined, really implies, either that Miracles are no Proofs of Chriftianity, (no lefs than declining, or not being able to prove the Truth of the Refurrection, implies Prophefy, and all other Arguments for Christianity, invalid) or elfe implies the Miracles not done, That is, without just Proof that they were done. And let me add, with Respect to Mr. GREEN, that if the Meffiahfhip cannot be made out from the Old Teftament, (which is a Suppofition only used in the Way of Argument; for you contend, like all Chriftians, except one or two of your Adversaries, that the Meffiahfhip, is made out from the Old Teftament by the Apostles, who endeavour to prove the Jewish Law and Hiftory, to be prophetick, or to be a Type of the Gofpel) I fay, that if the Meffiabfhip cannot be made out from the Old Teftament,

(1) Letters, p. 21.

(m) ib. p. 4. I 4

there

there is probably fome Defect in Mr. GREEN'S Affertions about thofe Miracles, who fays from the Gospels, that (n) they were done in the most publick Manner, (he cannot mean the Refurrection of JESUS from the Dead ;) that they were related by Eye and Ear-witnesses, who had no Ends to ferve by impofing on the World, and feveral of whom laid down their Lives, for the Sake of a Religion, which was founded on the Facts related in them; and who also affirms the Relations of thofe Facts to have been publish'd at the Time when they were fresh in every Bodies Memories. I fay, a Defect may be fuppofed in these mere Affertions; which he does not pretend to make out by diftinct and clear Proofs, in Relation to the Authors of the Gofpels, their Authority, and divine Inspiration; to the Time when the faid Gofpels were publifh'd; to the particular Condition, Callings, Lives, Preaching, Sufferings, and Death of any of the Apostles; tho' I think it became him to do fo, against fuch as he pretends to write againft, who, he must know, pay no Manner of Regard to his mere Affertions, and who, I fuppofe, he muft fay, would be guilty of a great Fault, if they took any Thing upon Trust from him.

What I have faid here, does, as I conceive, fubvert and confute all that Mr. GREEN has faid any where in his Letters, and particularly in his third Letter, (which is nothing but a Scene