In the End of this Head, it will be a curious and diverting Subject to examine the Miracles of _Jesus_ as they are literally understood, by the Notions which our _Divines_ have advanced about Miracles; and to shew, that even their Notions compared with Christ's Miracles, are destructive of his Authority, and subversive of Christianity. This, I say, would be a most diverting Undertaking, and it will be strange, if some _Free-Thinker_, that loves Pleasure of this kind, does not take the Hint, and snatch the Work out of my Hands. If I do it my self, I shall have especial Regard to the Writers against the _Grounds_, without passing by Mr. _Chandler_'s _Essay on Miracles_; on which the more Remarks will be made, if it be but to pay my Respects to the _Archbishop_'s Judgment, and to shew my Admiration at those extravagant Praises, which his _Grace_ at _Lambeth_ has bestowed on that Author. Among other his notable Notions of a Miracle (and the _Archbishop_ says he has[75] _set the Notion of a Miracle upon a clear and sure Foundation_) one is,[76] _That Miracles should be Things probable as well as possible, that they do not carry along with them the Appearance of Romance and Fable, which would unavoidably prejudice Men against believing them_. This is certainly a good and right Notion of a divine Miracle; and I don't doubt, but according to it, Mr. _Chandler_ and the _Archbishop_ think, they can justify the literal Story of our Saviour's Miracles, against the Charge of _Fable_ and _Romance_: But whether they are able to do it or not, I shall go on, in some Discourses hereafter to be publish'd, to prove that our _Divines_, by espousing the Letter of Christ's Miracles, have deceived themselves into the Belief of the most arrant _Quixotism_ that can be devis'd and palm'd upon the Understandings of Mankind. I say, they have deceived themselves; for neither the Fathers, nor the Apostles, nor even _Jesus_ himself, means that his Miracles, as recorded in the _Evangelists_, should be taken in a literal Sense, but in[77] a mystical, figurative, and parabolical one. And this should bring me to the III. Head of my Discourse; that is, to consider what _Jesus_ means, when he appeals to his Works and Miracles, as to a Witness and Testimony of his divine Authority; and to shew, that he could not properly and truly refer to those supposed to be wrought by him in the _Flesh_, but to those mystical ones he would do in the _Spirit_, of which those seemingly wrought by him in the Flesh, are but Types and Shadows.