I am so far from thinking there was any such Fraud in this supposed Miracle of _Jesus_, that I don't believe it was at all done by him according to the Letter: And for this I have not only a clear and intrinsick Proof from the Story itself; but the Authority of the Fathers. St. _Ambrose_, treating on the Parable of the Figtree in[156] St. _Luke_, intimates, that what St. _Matthew_ and St. _Mark_ write of _Jesus_'s cursing the Figtree, is but[157] Part of the same Parable. And St. _John_ of _Jerusalem_[158] says expressly enough, that the three _Evangelists_ write of one and the same Figtree, consequently parabolically, and that, what St. _Matthew_ and St. _Mark_ write of it, was no more a literal Transaction, than the Parable in St. _Luke_. Thanks to these holy Fathers for their ridding us of the Belief of the Letter of this Story, which otherwise might have perplex'd us with its Absurdities before urg'd. And to their Opinion I desire it may be added and considered, whether it be not as reasonable in itself to take what the three _Evangelists_ write of this Figtree as Part of one Story, as well as, what they write of the _Woman with her Issue of Blood_, and of _Jesus's calling the Devils out of the Madmen_, and of other Miracles which are but several Relations of the same Story, Parable or Miracle, Neither is it any Argument for a literal Transaction of this Miracle, that the _Evangelists_ speak of it, as a Thing done: For, as _Origen_ says, there are some Things spoken of in the _Evangelists_, as Facts, which were never transacted; so it is of the Nature of Prophecy (and our Saviour in his whole Life prophesied) to speak of Things to come, as if they were already past; because such Prophecies are not to be understood till after their Accomplishment, and then the Reason of the Use of the _præter_, instead of the _future_ Tense, in Prophecy, will be visible. But what, in my Opinion, is an absolute Demonstration, that there's no Truth in the Letter of this Story, is, what our Saviour adds, upon the Disciples wondering at the sudden withering of the Figtree, saying,[159] _that if they had Faith they should not only do what was done to the Figtree; but should say to this Mountain_, (that was near him, I suppose) _be thou removed and cast into the Sea, and it shall be done_. But these Things were never litterally done by them, consequently _Jesus_ himself did not litterally curse the Figtree; or the Disciples wanted Faith for the doing the said Miracles, which is an Absurdity to suppose; or _Jesus_ talked idly of a Promise to invest them with a Power, they were never to be possess'd of. But of what ill Consequence to Religion, either of these Suppositions is, let the old Objection in _Paschasius Rathertus_[160] speak; which I shall not stay here to urge and revive; but only say at present, that if _Jesus_ actually cursed a Figtree, his Disciples ought to have done so too, and to remove Mountains.