PART had written, and what he fays he had feen. IV. Tho' he had been the only witnefs, yet his teftimony would ftill be of very great weight. But he was fupported by the authority of two other martyrs, who were also eye-witneffes of what he had related: and the evangelifts join with them in attefting the truth. If we refufe to credit fuch men, whom fhall we believe? and on what history can we depend, if the testimony of three eye-witneffes, who laid down their lives in defence of what they had seen, and whofe fincerity is confirmed by the affurances of men prepared like them for martyrdom, be not fufficient to remove our doubts on this head?

But let us admire with what modefty and humility Saint Peter gives his teftimony. He has juft faid that he was a fpectator of the glory of Chrift, and that he himself heard the voice of his heavenly Father acknowledging him to be his well-beloved Son; and he adds thefe wonderful words: "We have also a more "fure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do "well that ye take heed, as unto a light that "fhineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, "and the day-ftar arife in your hearts." seems to weaken his own teftimony by giving the preference to the ancient prophecies, tho' it appeared more natural to prefer an actual accomplishment to a bare prediction, and ocular demonftration to a prophecy. But 'tis upon this account that his teftimony becomes more convincing; fuch a modefty being an unqueftionable mark of fincerity, the effect

He

of

of an eminent virtue, and a gift of the divine CHAP.
Spirit, who fpake by the prophets, and who IX.
from age to age increafed their authority by
the accomplishment of what they foretold,
and latterly by the miracles and glory of Chrift,
of which the apoftles were witnesses.

ARTICLE III.

Farther and more particular proofs of
this miracle, which render the truth
of it more obvious.

I

S there then any occafion for ftill more particular proofs, that the hiftory of the tranffiguration of Chrift is not an human invention, and that the evangelifts and apostles wrote it only because it was unquestionable? I am ready however to enter into this difcuffion, for the fatisfaction of those who may think it neceffary, not without compaffionating their imbecillity, at the fame time as I throw in a gentle rebuke for their want of belief. Let thofe perfons therefore who are so much afraid of being deceived, and at the fame time are fo bold as to expose themfelves to all the dangers of incredulity; let them, I fay, examine with me the circumftances of the recital, which ftill appear to them queftionable, and let them tell me, if it be poffible to doubt of the fincerity of men, who confefs fo many mortifying things of themselves, which they might eafily

have

PART have fuppreffed, and which in the main bore IV. no relation to the mystery.

The three apoftles chosen out of the rest by a particular privilege, avowed that they flept whilft Chrift was at prayer, and that they were not witneffes of his glory, and of the alteration of his countenance and drefs, till they awaked; as in another place they confefs, that they could not pray one hour with him at the timeof his greatest forrow and agony. Should we have fufpected fuch an heavinefs and indiffe rence, if they had not affirmed it? fhould we have judged that the favourite apostles should, in two fuch oppofite conditions of Chrift, be fo negligent and ftupid? and if this circumftance had been fuppreffed, in what would the history of the transfiguration have been deficient ?

They condemn, and very feverely, what Saint Peter faid, when he offered to pitch three tents, one for Chrift, and the other two for Mofes and Elias, by faying, That he knew not what he faid; yet without pointing out in what confifted his ignorance and error, which it is not fo eafy to conjecture as may generally be imagined.

They do not diffemble, that they did not comprehend what Chrift faid of his future refurrection, when he charged them to tell no man what they had feen, before he was risen from the dead and yet nothing appeared more plain or fimple than this difcourfe. And we fhould not imagine that they had then fo little

know

knowledge, if they had not taken care to con-CHap. vince us of it by their writings.. IX.

How could fuch men, to whom Chrift's death and refurrection, tho' clearly revealed, appeared unfathomable myfteries, how could they, I fay, think that the conference of Mofes and Elias with Chrift fhould have been about his fufferings, and the kind of death he was to die at Jerufalem? Was there any thing in itself more diftant from their notions than this mystery? would they have caused Elias to defcend from heaven, and raifed Mofes again from the dead, only to converfe upon fo afflicting a fubject? would they have chofen a day of glory and triumph for a conference apparently contrary to fuch grandeur and majesty?

The queftions, which they proposed to Chrift upon the coming of Elias, prove that they never conceived, that this prophet should make so short and fecret an apparition. They, as well as all the reft of the Jews, were in expectation of his being employed in a public and lasting miniftry. They were astonished, when they faw him difappear fo fuddenly.

Befides, is it credible, that if they had blended truth with fictions, they would have faid nothing more particular of this prophet or Mofes ? that they would ftop where the Holy Spirit stopped them? and that they would have thus refufed to fatisfy our curiofity in regard to points, on which we are naturally fo inquifitive?

Is it natural that they should be so reserved and clofe, if they were the inventors, and upon a mat

ter

PART.ter where there is fo ample a field for the imagiIV. nation? Is it natural to make no reflections in

writing of fuch ferious and magnificent affairs, whofe importance and value is known; to be fatisfied with a bare recital, and even to abridge that, fo as searce to leave an opportunity for the reader to form a juft idea of it, being forced in order to gain an adequate idea, to join together the relation of different evangelifts?

But why fhould they keep the fecret till after the refurrection of Chrift? What fecret was this if nothing happened? and how long was this fecret to be kept if there was to be no refurrection? If the fact be true, all this is reasonable; but if it be falfe, the whole is unintelligible for the apoftles by imagining a falfe miracle, had no reafon to wait for a falfe refurrection to publifh it; it was even their intereft to feign that this miracle had been public and notorious from the time it happened; and instead of forging only three witneffes, they fhould make all the apostles, nay all the difciples, fpectators; there being as little trouble to fuppofe a greater number as three, and the ftory deriving greater credit from the multitude of witneffes.

ARTICLE