thew xvii. 18.) yet this was no more than his rebuking the winds and the sea, (as in Matthew viii. 26.)and they obeyed him, like as the Devil, that is, the diforder obeyed him as in the former cafe. These opinions, of men being poffefed with Devils, and of the appearance of Angels, and of witches and apparitions, all seem to be of a piece; and do not appear to have any other foundation than on the ignorance. and fuperftition of fome, and the cunning and craftiness of others. As to these circumstances, viz. the diforder entering into the wine, and the fwine running into the fea, and being choaked; thefe, I think, must be an improvement of the story,in order to make it more remarkable. If it fhould be faid, that this fuppofition bears hard upon the hiftorian, becaufe if thofe circumftances were added by him, to answer the purpose aforefaid; then he has greatly imposed upon his readers. Anfwer: The hiftorian may 'not have been the author, but only the relater of those additional circumstances, by delivering the story juft as he had received it. Moreover, it is better, and, I think, more ift, that the hiftorian fhould be cenfured,

an that Chrift's beautiful character fhould

be

be fullied, if one or other of these must take place, which may feem to be the cafe here. The circumstances referred to, if admitted, reflect great dishonour upon our Lord, and are contrary to his general character, and to the gracious purposes he proposed to anfwer in this world; and therefore, are very unlikely to have been the cafe. Again, we have an account, in the gospel according to St. John, chap. ii. That there was a marriage in Cana of Gallilee, and that both Jefus and his mother were at this wedding. And when they wanted wine, Jefus's mother faid unto him, they have no wine: To which he answered, in a very rough and churlish manner, faying, woman, what have I to do with thee? (or rather, one might think, it would have been more proper for him to have faid, woman what haft thou to do with me, or my affairs?) mine hour is not yet come. This very naturally leads me to observe, that, fuppofing they had no wine; yet, what was this to Chrift, who came there as a guest to be entertained, and not to make a provifion for the entertainment? and therefore, why fhould Chrift's mother fay to him, they have no wine? did the foreknow that Chrift would exercife his power in turning

water

water into wine? or that wine would be wanted to give occafion for the exercise of that power? or were these points fettled betwixt Chrift and his mother before they came there? Indeed, what Chrift's mother faid to the fervants, at verfe 5. viz. whatfoever he faith unto you do, makes it look as if those points had been before fettled betwixt them; but then, Chrift's answer to his mother, upon this fuppofition, feems to be greatly improper: For, if it had been agreed before-hand, that when the wine was spent, which had been provided for the entertainment, Christ should exercife his power in Supplying them with more; then, when that wine was spent, as thereby the time was come for him to give them that supply, so it must have been very proper for his mother to have acquainted him with it; and therefore, Chrift's answer, viz. Woman what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come, must have been greatly improper. And, indeed, the last part of his anfwer must have been fallacious, let the cafe be taken in any view, because he contradicted it by his fubfequent behaviour, in that he presently turned water into wine, to fupply that want his mother had told him of; which

I

Be

which plainly fhewed that his hour was come. In fictitious history there are usually fuch circumstances introduced as bewray it, and that seems to be the cafe here. fides, the difrefpectful behaviour of Chrift to his mother, in the answer he returned to her,viz. woman, what have I to do with thee? without any provocation given, and when his mother had only informed him, in a very civil manner, that they had no wine; this was fo contrary to Chrift's general character, as renders it most unlikely to be true; and therefore, I conclude that either this must be a falfe piece of history, or else that it has been very falfly related to us, either of which is to my purpose. Moreover, the miracle referred to feems to have been wrought, rather to anfwer the purpose of intemperance, than to fupply the wants and neceffities of men. Christ multiplied the food contained in fome loaves and fishes twice, and therewith fed five thousand people at one time, and four thousand at another; but then, this was done to answer a good purpose, and upon proper occafions, viz. when the people were almost ready to faint for want of food, and were in a defart place, where that want could not be

fup

supplied in an ordinary way, and therefore, were inftances of kindness: whereas at the wedding referred to, the guests had drank fo freely, as to have exhaufted that plenty of wine which had been prepared for the entertainment; and therefore, cannot reasonably be supposed to have stood in need of more; and, according to the proverb, when the barrel was empty, it was high time for the guests to have went off. So that, under these circumstances, for Chrift to turn fo large a quantity as fifteen or fixteen firkins of water into wine, when it could answer no other purpose than to furnish out materials for excess, is to me highly improbable. For, tho' Chrift came eating and drinking, that is, he did not exercife fuch aufterity as John the Baptift; yet, furely, he did not live intemperately himself, nor ufe his miracleworking power in making provifion for it in others; because that would be acting quite out of character, as he came to be a light to the world; and therefore, the forementioned branch of history must needs be greatly incredible. Again, St. Mark informs us, chap. xi. verses 12, 13, 14. And on the morrow, when they were come from Bethany, he was hungry. And feeing a fig

tree