Six Discourses on the Miracles of Our Saviour, and Defences of His DiscoursesWoolston, Thomas
Religion
Six Discourses on the Miracles of Our Saviour, and Defences of His Discourses
Woolston, Thomas
Gibson, Edmund, 1669-1748; Jesus Christ -- Miracles -- Early works to 1800; Smalbroke, Richard, 1672-1749
"But to come nearer home to you; supposing _John_ (who was then
above a Hundred, and in his Dotage) had not reported this Miracle
of _Lazarus_; but that _Clement_ (joining it with his[281]
incredible Story of the Resurrection of a _Phoenix_) or _Ignatius_,
or _Polycarp_, or the Author of the _Apostolical Constitutions_ had
related it; would not your Christian _Critics_ have been at work to
explode it? There is not an antient extra-evangelical Tradition of
any Note about _Jesus_, that some or other of your _Critics_ have
not boggled at; but such a Story as this of _Lazarus_ would have
been received by none. I question, whether Mr. _Whiston_ would not
have rejected the _Constitutions_ upon such a Story in them; or if
his Fancy for some other Things in them had overcome his Reason
against this; yet _Bishop Smallbroke_, who has written against the
Canonicalness of the _Constitutions_, with his judicious
Animadversions upon this Story, would absolutely have overthrown
their Authority. And what would he have said here? Not only that
the Miracle smells rankly of Forgery and Fraud, or the
_Evangelists_, especially _Matthew_, had never forgotten to record
it; but he would have reminded us of intrinsic Notes (_hereafter to
be mention'd_) of Absurdity, and Incredibility, that would for ever
have cashier'd the Belief of it. And whether we _Infidels_ ought
not to take the same Liberty to criticize on _John_'s Gospel, which
you do on your Apostolical Fathers, who wrote before him, let the
impartial and unprejudiced judge: If in justice we ought to take
it; we are sure we could give two or three notable Reasons (but
that We will not now put Christians out of Temper with them) why
_John_ may be suspected of a Mistake or Fraud in this Miracle,
rather than any other Christian Writer of the _first_ or _second_
Century."
To such an unhappy Objection, arising from the unnatural and
preposterous Order of Time, in which they are recorded, are these
three Miracles before us obnoxious. And I am thinking how Ministers of
the Letter will be able to get over it. As for my self, who am for the
mystical Interpretation of these Miracles, I have a solid and
substantial Answer at hand to the foresaid Objection, an Answer that
curiously accounts for the Order of Time in which these Miracles are
related; but my Answer will not please our _Divines_, nor stand them
in any stead; therefore they must look up another good one of their
own, that will comport with the _Letter_; or the said Objection,
improved with another presently against _Lazarus_'s Resurrection, will
be too hard, not for Christianity it self, but for their Ministry.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account