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
If our _Chief Priests_ had trespass'd upon _Jesus_'s Patience, and
would not attend at the Sepulchre for the opening of the Seals, on the
Day and Time appointed; if they had been for confining him longer in
the Grave than was meet, according to Prophecy, then his Resurrection,
without their Presence, had been excusable and justifiable. But this
his pretended Rising to Life, not only a Day before the _Chief
Priests_ could imagine he would, or earlier in the Morning than he
should, for the Sake of their requisite Presence, is, together with
the Fracture of the Seals against the Law of Security, such a manifest
and indisputable Mark and Indication of Fraud, as is not to be
equall'd in all or any of the Impostures, that ever were attempted to
be put upon the World.
In short, by the sealing of the Stone of the Sepulchre, we are to
understand nothing less than a Covenant enter'd into between our _Chief
Priests_ and the _Apostles_, by which _Jesus_'s Veracity, Power and
_Messiahship_ was to be try'd. Tho' we read not of the Apostles giving
their Consent to the Covenant, yet it was reasonably presum'd and could
not have been refus'd, if ask'd. The Condition of the seal'd Covenant
was, that if _Jesus_ arose from the dead in the Presence of our _Chief
Priests_, upon their opening the Seals of the Sepulchre, at the Time
appointed; then was he to be acknowledg'd to be the _Messiah_: But if he
continued in a corrupt and putrified State of Mortality, then was he to
be granted to be an _Impostor_: Very wisely and rightly agreed! And if
the Apostles had stood to this Covenant, Christianity had been nipt in
its Bud, and suppress'd in its Birth. But they had other Views, and
another Game to play at all Adventures. The Body was to be removed and a
Resurrection pretended, to the Delusion, if possible, of all Mankind, in
which they have been more successful than could be imagin'd upon a
Project that had so little Sense or Reason, so little Colour of Truth or
Artifice in the Contrivance and Execution of it. Our _Chief Priests_
were apprehensive at first of their stealing the Body away, and
pretending a Resurrection: But after the _sealing_ of the _Stone_, those
Fears vanish'd; because upon the stealing the Body, away against such
Security and Precaution, the Fraud would be self-evident, and want no
Demonstration and Proof of it. But, for all this Precaution, I say, the
Body was in a barefaced Manner taken away, a Resurrection talk'd of, and
to the Amazement of every one, who can think freely, has been believed
thro' all Ages of the Church since. Upon the whole then, I think, you
may as well say, when a seal'd Closet is broken open, and the Treasure
gone without the Privity of the Signators, that there's no Wrong done;
as that in the Resurrection of _Jesus_, there was no Fraud. The Cases
are equal and parallel. What then can your Christian _Priests_ say to
this demonstrative Argument of a manifest and bare-faced Cheat in
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