2. Second Answer to it, _viz. That tho' the Chief Priests, the Sealers of the Stone of the Sepulchre, were not present, opening the Seals and beholding the Miracle; yet his Resurrection was afterwards made as manifest to them, as if they had been there present_. Ay, this is somewhat like an Answer, if there be any Truth in it. A Manifestation of _Christ risen_ afterwards to our _Chief Priests_ would have been equivalent to their Presence at and Sight of the Miracle. But how was his Resurrection manifested to them? did _Jesus_ ever afterwards appear personally to them, to their Satisfaction, that he was the same Person, whom they crucified and put to Death for a Deceiver and false Prophet? No; this is not once affected by your _Evangelists_ or ever insinuated by any antient or modern Writer. How then was _Jesus_'s Resurrection made manifest to our Chief Priests? Why; your _Divines_ say, what is all that can be said here, that the Words of the Disciples, who, being Men of Honesty, Simplicity and Integrity, would not lye, are to be taken for it. Very fine, indeed! our Chief Priests are to take the Words of the Disciples for _Jesus_'s Resurrection, and look upon them as Men of Veracity, when they knew and experienc'd them to be grand Cheats, not only in stealing the Body of _Jesus_ away, but in the _known Imposture_ of _Lazarus_'s Resurrection, or your _Evangelist_ had never implicitly called it so. When therefore Deceivers will not be _Lyars_; nor Thieves _Dissemblers_ of the Fact they are accused of, I will own _Jesus_'s Resurrection to have been manifest enough to our _Chief Priests_. There's no need of more Argument here: He that bellows more Words on it, loses Time.