had it not been for this, I say, their evidence in this cafe would not have been equal to the weight of those truths it is to fupport. And farther, fince this appearance was in confequence of the prediction he made of his own refurrection, there is no room to doubt that it was a true and proper refurrection of his body for it is much eafier to imagine that he fhould come to life, and fulfil his prediction, than that he should, being really dead, contrive and execute any thing that should feem to fulfil it.

Poffibly this may be allowed, and yet not give fatisfaction in this matter: for it is not, you will say, that the refurrection of our Saviour is fuch a work as is not proper to fatisfy all doubts, that makes you defire to see one from the dead; but it is, that you would willingly be satisfied by your own eyes, and not depend upon the credit of another for a thing of this nature: had you been in the place of the Apoftles, and feen our Lord come from the grave, that then you would not have defired to have seen any body elfe; but now you think you might find that conviction in seeing one come from the dead yourself, which you cannot find in the reports of those who pretend to have seen one.

Let us confider this cafe then; whether he who believes upon the credit of a private apparition to himself, believes upon a furer evidence, than he who receives the Gospel account upon that evidence on which it at present ftands. I will not deny but that a man's fancy may be more powerfully wrought on, not only by feeing, but even by fuppofing that he fees, one from the dead: but this is fo far from being an advantage, that in truth it is quite other

wife; for, the more work things of this nature find for the imagination, the lefs room do they leave for the judgment to exercise itself in. Our fenfes at all times are liable to be imposed on, but never more than when we are in a fright or surprise. In such cases it is common to overlook our friends, and not to know who was with us, or who not: and the very surprise, that would neceffarily attend upon seeing one come from the dead, would be a great reafon for us to fufpect afterwards the report our fenfes made of what they had feen. And this was indeed the cafe of those who faw our Saviour upon his first appearance: nor could any thing have cured this, but his ftaying with them fo long as he did; fo that at laft they were able to fee him without being disturbed, or fuffering any alteration in their usual temper: and this qualified them to judge for themselves, and report to others with authority what they faw. So that the circumstances of our Saviour's refurrection were fuch as admitted a due teftimony; whereas it is very much to be doubted, whether he who fees one come from the dead be capable to give himself fatisfaction afterwards, either as to what he saw, or what he heard. And judge you, whether you would choose to believe the concurring teftimony of many perfons in their right fenfes fo well qualified to judge, or rely upon yourfelf at a time when you are hardly mafter of your fenfes.

But farther; fuppofe you could converse with a man from the dead with the fame temper and calmness that you do with one of your friends or acquaintance; what would be the confequence?

you would probably reft affured that you had feen a man from the dead, and perhaps be more fatisfied of this, than at prefent you are that the disciples faw Chrift after his death. Allowing this, what follows? The queftion is not, whether he that fees a man come from the dead, may be sure he fees a man come from the dead; but whether he has a better foundation for faith and religion, than the present revelation affords? This is what our Saviour affirms: If they hear not Mofes and the prophets, neither will they be perfuaded though one rofe from the dead. The fame reafons, that move you to reject the authority of Chrift and his Apoftles, would move you to reject the authority of your new acquaintance from the dead: which will appear by confidering,

Secondly, That the objections which unbelievers urge against the authority of revelation, will lie stronger against the authority of one coming from the dead: for, first, as to the nature of this fort of evidence, if it be any evidence at all, it is a revelation and therefore whatever has been faid against the authority of revelation will be applicable to this kind of it: and, confequently, thofe who, upon the foot of natural religion, ftand out against the doctrine of the Gospel, would much more ftand out against the authority of one coming from the dead. And whether it would weigh more with the Atheist, let any one confider: for no revelation can weigh with him; for the being of God, which he difbelieves, is fupported with greater arguments, and greater works, than any revelation can be: and therefore, ftanding out against the evidence of all

nature, speaking in the wonderful works of the creation, he can never reasonably submit to a lefs evidence. Let then one from the dead appear to him; and he will, and certainly may, as eafily account for one dead man's recovering life and motion, as he does for the life and motion of so many men, whom he fees every day. Is it not as hard, do you think, to make a man at firft, and breathe into him the breath of life, as it is to make him up again, after he has once been dead? And therefore he that can fatisfy himself as to the firft, need not be troubled about the last. For I am fure the appearance of a dead man could never teach the Atheist, upon his own principles, to reason himself into the belief of a Deity, though poffibly it might fcare him into it: which is too low a defign for the providence of God to be concerned in, and therefore can never be a reason for his giving this fort of evidence to mankind.

But farther; let us suppose a man free from all these prejudices, and then fee what we can make of this evidence. If a dead man fhould come to you, you muft suppose either that he speaks from himself, and that his errand to you is the effect of his own private affection for you, or that he comes by commiffion and authority from God. As to the first cafe, you have but the word of a man for all you hear: and how will you prove that a dead man is incapable of practising a cheat upon you? Or, allowing the appearance to be real, and the defign honeft, do you think every dead man knows the counfels of God, and his will with respect to his creatures here on earth? If you do not think this, and I can

not fee poffibly how you fhould think it, what use will you make of this kind of revelation? Should he tell you that the Chriftian faith is the true faith, the way to heaven and happiness, and that God will reward all true believers; you would have much less reason to believe him, than now you have to believe Chrift and his Apostles: and therefore, if you reject Chrift and his Apostles, neither can this new evidence prevail with you: for, suppose that a man from the dead fhould prefume to teach you a new religion, to inftruct you in new rites and ceremonies, to institute new facrifices and oblations; would you think yourself warranted by a fufficient authority to do and practise as he taught you? Would you not require better evidence of his knowing the will of God, than merely feeing him come from the dead? And yet this is the cafe: should an unbeliever receive the Gospel upon fuch evidence, he receives a new religion; for to an unbeliever it is new, and the whole weight of his faith muft reft upon the credit and authority of this man from the dead; and it would be as reasonable for an unbeliever to receive a perfectly new doctrine upon this authority, as to receive an old one, which he before difbelieved. But, on the other fide, should you suppose this man to come by the particular order and appointment of God, and confequently that what he says is the word and command of God; you must then be prepared to answer fuch objections, as you are now ready to make against the miffion and authority of Chrift and his Apoftles. Firft then we afk, How this commiffion appears? If you fay, because he comes from the dead, we cannot reft here; because