symbolized, one might treat more profoundly, and in a manner more adapted to their divine character, on a more suitable occasion, in a work expressly devoted to such subjects. The literal narrative, however, one might thus explain, viz. that it was appropriate for Him who had resolved to endure suspension upon the cross, to maintain all the accompaniments of the character He had assumed, in order that He who as a man had been put to death, and who as a man had died, might also as a man be buried. But even if it had been related in the Gospels, according to the view of Celsus, that Jesus had immediately disappeared from the cross, he and other unbelievers would have found fault with the narrative, and would have brought against it some such objection as this: “Why, pray, did he disappear after he had been put upon the cross, and not disappear before he suffered?” If, then, after learning from the Gospels that He did not at once disappear from the cross, they imagine that they can find fault with the narrative, because it did not invent, as they consider it ought to have done, any such instantaneous disappearance, but gave a true account of the matter, is it not reasonable that they should accord their faith also to His resurrection, and should believe that He, according to His pleasure, on one occasion, when the doors were shut, stood in the midst of His disciples, and on another, after distributing bread to two of His acquaintances, immediately disappeared from view, after He had spoken to them certain words? Footnote 198: Cf. Gal. vi. 14. Footnote 199: Rom. vi. 10. Footnote 200: Phil. iii. 10. Footnote 201: 2 Tim. ii. 11. Footnote 202: Cf. Rom. vi. 4. Footnote 203: Luke xxiii. 53, οὐκ ἦν οὔπω οὐδεὶς κείμενος. Footnote 204: John xix. 41, ἐν ᾧ οὐδέπω οὐδεὶς ἐτέθη. Footnote 205: Cf. Matt. xxvii. 60 with John xix. 41. Footnote 206: Cf. Luke xxiii. 53 with John xix. 41. Chapter LXX.