it was as natural, according to the view here stated, to show them in one body as another. With respect to the silly plea which I have heard, that Jesus had gone into the house and concealed himself, while the doors were yet open, it implicates him in the commission of a fraud, or the disciples in an uncandid statement of facts; or both. For him to come into the midst of them, the doors being shut, if he had come in before, was no more extraordinary than for any other man to step into a company; and the supposition gives the whole narrative the appearance of fiction and affectation, and not a relation of simple facts: the notion is chimerical.

And

As for the objection which some make, that this view of the subject represents Jesus as putting a cheat on the disciples, persuading them it was the same body when it was not, it is easily obviated. This reply is plain and simple. That he was the same Jesus Christ who had before conversed with them and had been crucified, and that was the point to be proved; but that he was then clothed with the same animal body in which he had formerly dwelt, the disciples never tell us that it was the same or that they thought it was. admitting that in their ignorance of spiritual things and the earthly conceptions relative to the kingdom of God, which they then had and retained until after the ascension and the giving of the Holy Spirit, they had no other apprehension or conception, than that he appeared to them in the same body as before, that being the extent of their knowledge or prospects; this being an admissible case, (which I would not peremptorily contradict,) is no proof, either that the former animal body was a partaker of the true resurrection, or that the disciples were imposed on by any fraudulent or deceptive measures. They received such evidences of the truth as their weaknesses required, and their infancy in spiritual things admitted; for they were yet unacquainted with the distinction between the natural and spiritual creation-between the old man and the new. And there could be no deception in his appearing to them in the old creation, or body, or an assumed body in the appearance of the old, until they were convinced of his resurrection, his being alive and his really appearing to them, and until they obtained more correct knowledge of his true character in the new creation, more than in any man's putting on a coat which he had been accustomed to wear, or one resembling it where the people were not sufficiently acquainted with him to know him without such coat, and yet the necessity of his being known were indispensable.

If it was an imposition or cheat for Jesus Christ to show himself to his disciples in a form adapted to their senses and apprehension, when he was not clothed in the same flesh and blood which he had formerly taken on him, it was no less an imposition, to intimate that the wounds had remained as they were, after having passed through that which rendered it impossible. And no reason can be produced, why he should carry those wounds, after he arose, had he even inhabited the same body, except to accommodate himself to the senses and understanding of his disciples, so as to gain their consent to the truth of his being alive, or the truth of his resurrection. Figures and shadowy representations are not the substance; yet they are not false or fraudulent, when they subserve the purpose of conveying evidence to the under

standing and of establishing truth. The disciples were yet in nature, the Holy Spirit being not yet given, and needed natural and perceptible representations, to confirm them in the faith of that substance which is spiritual.

But the advocates for the resurrection of the animal body argue farther; That as the body had now become spiritual, it could be put into any form, or removed to any place, on any necessary occasion, with the utmost ease, a spiritual body being unresisted by matter. Without this expedient there is no accounting for the various appearances which took place, as passing into the house, the doors being shut, disappearing in the open light, and the like. But this argument militates directly against the common plea, that it was properly flesh and bones, and the same in which he was crucified. Thus the arguments on that side of the question destroy each other, and like the witnesses against Christ in old time, agree not among themselves. For the arguments adduced to prove the resurrection of the same material body, assert that it is yet material, flesh and bones, consequently that which cannot inherit the kingdom of God, and therefore can have no participation in the resurrection of Christ, as already proved. But if, to avoid this difficulty, it be argued that the body which was raised was spiritual, the one argument invalidates the other, and there remains no proof of its being the former material body. And if it be said that the body of Jesus is not asserted or believed to have been proper flesh and bones after the resurrection, but that which had been such, now become a spiritual body; I ask what peculiar faculty, or ability, such a spiritual body would possess to favour the appearance of flesh and bones, or what claim it would have to be so denominated, above that which was originally spiritual? Spirit is spirit; and that which is of the spirit is also spirit. And flesh is flesh, and that which is of the flesh is also flesh. So that all such notions of flesh and blood, or flesh and bones, becoming spirit, or being so modified as to constitute a spiritual body, are without foundation.

But the crowning argument with some may be, that the body of Jesus was not transformed into a spiritual body, as long as he conversed with his disciples, but was thus translated when he ascended to heaven. But this proposition lacks proof. It also militates against the Scripture testimony, and even contradicts it, concerning the resurrection of the dead, of which the resurrection of Christ is maintained, not improperly, to be an example; It is raised a spiritual body: of this hereafter. Neither is the above proposition free from the former difficulty, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. And the Scripture makes no provision for any qualification of that unequivocal expression; for neither is there any doctrine in revelation, nor any principle in natural reason, philosophy or morals, to teach us that matter can, by any method or degree of modification, be transformed into spirit; all such conceptions therefore, are at best vague and groundless.

This sentence, "A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have," contains no real proof that it was the same body, when two things are considered: First; the intention of the expression; which was to convince the disciples that he was a real man, the same Lord Jesus whom they had formerly known, and by the way to dispel their

fears, and so bring them to be composed and conversable. For they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed they had seen a spirit. This shows that he had not the common appearance for why should they be terrified at the sight of a man with whom they had been so long conversant, or suppose him to be some unknown spirit, having already heard that he had risen? The answer, however, was well calculated to soothe their minds, until they should become better acquainted with him in his true order.

The terror with which the disciples were seized on that occasion, and the reason assigned, strongly indicate the necessity which existed, that he should show himself to them a man in full form with flesh and bones. They were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that. they had seen a spirit. From this it appears they knew very little about spirits: they had not yet understood that their Lord and Master was a spirit. But they were now in a kind of deserted, forlorn condition-their Lord had been crucified-the Jews were their enemies, for fear of whom they were gathered together into that houseand in the midst of these calamities, as if to perfect their misery, behold! a spirit-an evil spirit, or demon, as they supposed-a messenger of evil. For why should they have been afraid of a heavenly spirit-an angel of peace? But their understanding was small on these subjects. No method therefore was so proper, to calm their fears, as to present himself to them, a man in full form, and perfect in all his members, and give them a fair opportunity to examine him, together with the wounds which he had wisely retained for this purpose, until they were satisfied that THIS IS HE. It has been already evinced that such representations imply no fraud. Observe: It is not said, I am flesh, or, I have flesh and bones; but a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have-as ye behold or [εwpsire] contemplate me as having; a form of expression perfectly consistent with an accommodating appearance, or an assumed body for accommodation's sake. For the Lord, even Jesus Christ, is a Spirit, and therefore has neither flesh nor bones.

Secondly: We are told by the learned that, according to the idiom or manner of the Jews, whose language Jesus and his disciples used, they said any thing is so when it appeared to be; and there are examples in the Scriptures to confirm this observation. Accordingly it is said, (Gen. v. 24,) " And Enoch walked with God, and he was not: for God took him." He did not cease to be, he only disappeared from the earth. “And (Jno. i. 14) the Word was made flesh;" that is, was clothed with flesh, or, took on him flesh and blood such as the children had. Again, (2 Cor. v. 21:) "For he hath made him who knew no sin, sin for us. For our sakes he prepared him a body, and clothed him in flesh and blood, such as the children had, sinful as it was, thus laying on him the iniquity of us all. But who is dark enough to believe that the Word which was God was also proper flesh, or that Jesus Christ was really sin? Again, (Rom. v. 20:) "Moreover the law entered that the offence might abound." That it might be seen how much it did abound; for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Once more, (Rom. vi. 17:) "But God be thanked that ye were the servants of sin." That ye have seen that ye were servants, and taken the conviction. These examples are sufficient to confirm the observation, that

it was according to the Jews' manner to say, on many occasions, that such a matter is, when it appeared to be. The saying of Jesus, therefore, after the fullest examination, contains neither assertion nor conclusive proof that he then possessed the same animal body which he had formerly inhabited.

The saying of Matthew, " And they came and held him by the feet," contains no decisive proof that it was the same body. Before any such fact can be established from that saying, we must have it proved that the body which Christ possessed when divested of the clay tenement, and which saints also possess eventually, is incapable of perceptibility and form, and also that he was unable to assume perceptibility for the satisfaction of those women.

Another particular related by Luke, of that first memorable evening, was his eating, (xxiv. 41-43:) "And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them." It is presumable that few, if any, will be so weak as to suppose this was done for any thing else than a sign, to take off their excessive commotion of mind, to render them more conversable by becoming more familiar with them, and eventually to confirm their faith in the resurrection, and in him as their Lord and Master. Now if this sign could not have been given without the use of the same body which he formerly inhabited, it must undoubtedly have been there. But I presume none will say that Jesus had not power to give it through some other medium; it therefore fails of proving the presence of the same body.

CHAPTER II.

THE SUBJECT CONTINUED ; WITH SOME ATTENTION TO PROPHETIC

SCRIPTURES.

SEVERAL other particulars are recorded by the evangelists in confirmation of the fact that Jesus rose from the dead; but I have purposely selected those which had the greatest appearance of favouring those who plead that the same material body arose, and ascended, and that the same material bodies of the saints must also arise. My object in selecting these has been that the labour might be shortened, both in writing and reading; for these comprehend every evidence contained in the other particulars, and so present the whole in a shorter view than could have been done by quoting every passage which speaks of these things. And in all these, and all the rest, although there is sufficient proof that Jesus rose from the dead, yet there is none either by express testimony or by necessary consequence, that the same body arose; because all the language is capable of a different acceptation

consistently with truth. For, as before intimated, it is perfectly just to plead, that as long as the language alleged in proof of the fact is capable of a different acceptation, it cannot pass for proof, especially considering that other Scriptures of equal authenticity more explicitly teach the contrary. Uncertain consequential arguments, and these partly analogical, however plausible, without explicit testimony, must not be allowed to overbalance proposed and explicit teachings of equal authority; neither can literal and natural representations of a spiritual work, adapted to the understanding of natural men, be admitted as being capable of communicating the knowledge and understanding of said work, as well as the work itself, or the language and experience of those who travel in it.

The subjects of every new dispensation require the light and teachings of that dispensation before they can understand the nature and order of its works. The apostles were just emerging from a dispensation which consisted in outward things, in meats and drinks, and divers washings and carnal ordinances, and which had only a shadow of good things to come, and not even the real image of the things, (Heb. ix. 10 and x. 1,) and were properly in a carnal state, and had earthly conceptions of the work of Christ and kingdom of God, as their works and language every where show. At one time they were inclined to command fire to come down from heaven to consume those who did not receive their master. (Luke ix. 54.) At another time they undertook to defend him with the sword. (Jno. xviii. 10; Matt. xxvi. 51.) And at another time Peter undertook to rebuke Jesus himself, because he showed them what should befall him, "That he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and be raised again the third day. Then Peter took him and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee." No doubt but he intended to fight courageously. But Jesus ordered him to get behind him, as one who stood in his way, and called him Satan, an enemy, telling him in plain terms that he savoured the things of men, who seek ease and protection to the flesh, and not the things of God, whose way is to crucify the flesh that the spirit may be saved, "Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence to me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.” (Matt. xvi. 21–23.) And so deeply were they all lost in a carnal sense of things, and in ignorance of the work and kingdom of God, that when Jesus was taken and crucified, they felt themselves forsaken, and became disconsolate, as though all had been lost. For notwithstanding all the teachings which they had received from his own mouth, and the writings of their own prophets, they knew not that he was to be put to death and to rise again, "For as yet they knew not the Scripture, that he must rise again from the dead," (Jno. xx. 9,) and when it came to pass, they were with difficulty prevailed on to believe, by the plainest testimony of their own senses, as their history shows. And even after he had risen and they had believed and conversed with him about forty days, their carnal sense greatly remained, and they still expected an earthly kingdom. And hoping, that as he was risen from the dead to their full conviction and satisfaction, the time had come when he would commence his reign with them for ever,