Some modern _Commentators_, being aware of these difficulties in this Story, and willing to reconcile Men to the earlier belief of it, say, as _Drusius_[258] did, that the Houses of _Judæa_ were _flat-roof'd, and not ridg'd_: And Doctors, _Lightfoot_ and _Whitby_[259] say, there was a Door on their flat Roofs, by which the _Jews_ used to ascend to the top of their Houses, where they discours'd on the Law and religious Matters; and that it was thro' such a Door, by a little widening of the sides of it, that the _Paralytick_ was let down in the presence of _Jesus_. To which Opinion I would yield, if it was not liable to these Objections, _viz._ that it is not reconcilable to what St. _Luke_ says, of _their letting the Paralytick down thro' the Tiling with his Couch, in the midst, where Jesus was_; nor hardly consistent with what St. _Mark_ says of their _uncovering_ and _breaking up the Roof of the House_: which Expressions the _Evangelists_ had never used, if there had been a Door for him to descend by. But to indulge _Lightfoot_ and _Whitby_ in their Notion; I may ask them, what occasion was there then of widening the doorway, and breaking down the sides of it? They'll say, because the Passage otherwise was too narrow, for the Man's Couch to get thro'. Why then did not they take him out of his Couch, and let him down in a Blanket, a Chair, or a Basket? Or rather, why did not _Jesus_, to prevent this Trouble and Damage to the House, ascend thro' this Door, to the Top of it, and their speak the healing Word to this poor Man? To say, that _Jesus_ could not or would not go up to the Paralytick, I would not, for Fear of an Imputation of Blasphemy against me. Our _Divines_ therefore are to look for, what they'll hardly find, an Answer to the said Question, which will consist with the Wisdom, the Goodness and Honour of _Jesus_; or here will be another and insuperable Bar to the Credibility of this Story.