Visit https://testbankbell.

com to download the full version and

explore more testbank or solutions manual

Test Bank for Java How To Program (early objects),

9th Edition: Paul Deitel

_____ Click the link below to download _____

http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-java-how-to-
program-early-objects-9th-edition-paul-deitel/

Explore and download more testbank or solutions manual at testbankbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Solution Manual for Java How to Program, Early Objects

(11th Edition) (Deitel: How to Program) 11th Edition

http://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-java-how-to-
program-early-objects-11th-edition-deitel-how-to-program-11th-edition/

Solution Manual for C++ How to Program: Late Objects

Version, 7/E 7th Edition Paul Deitel, Harvey Deitel

http://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-c-how-to-program-
late-objects-version-7-e-7th-edition-paul-deitel-harvey-deitel/

Test Bank for C How to Program, 8th Edition, Paul J.

Deitel, Harvey Deitel

http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-c-how-to-program-8th-
edition-paul-j-deitel-harvey-deitel-2/

Solution Manual for Horngren’s Cost Accounting: A

Managerial Emphasis, 8th Canadian Edition, Srikant M.
Datar Madhav V. Rajan Louis Beaubien
http://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-horngrens-cost-
accounting-a-managerial-emphasis-8th-canadian-edition-srikant-m-datar-
madhav-v-rajan-louis-beaubien/
Solutions Manual to accompany Principles of Economics 4th
edition 9780324224726

http://testbankbell.com/product/solutions-manual-to-accompany-
principles-of-economics-4th-edition-9780324224726/

Test Bank for International Economics, 15th Edition

http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-international-
economics-15th-edition/

Test Bank for Environmental Science, 12th Edition: Enger

http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-environmental-
science-12th-edition-enger/

Concepts for Nursing Practice Giddens 1st Edition Test

Bank

http://testbankbell.com/product/concepts-for-nursing-practice-
giddens-1st-edition-test-bank/

Solution Manual for Olds’ Maternal-Newborn Nursing &

Women’s Health Across the Lifespan, 9/E 9th Edition :
0133073777
http://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-olds-maternal-
newborn-nursing-womens-health-across-the-lifespan-9-e-9th-
edition-0133073777/
Accounting Information System Gelinas Gelinas 10th Edition
Test Bank

http://testbankbell.com/product/accounting-information-system-gelinas-
gelinas-10th-edition-test-bank/
Java How to Program, 9/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 1 of 5

Java How To Program (early objects), 9th Ed

Full chapter at: https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-java-how-to-
program-early-objects-9th-edition-paul-deitel/

Chapter 1 Introduction to Computers and Java

Section 1.1 Introduction
1.1 Q1: Which of the following statements is false?
a. Object-oriented programming is today's key programming methodology.
b. Java has become the language of choice for implementing Internet-based applications and software for devices
that communicate over a network.
c. Software commands computer hardware to perform tasks.
d. In use today are more than a trillion general-purpose computers and trillions more Java-enabled cellphones,
smartphones and other handheld devices.
ANS: d. In use today are more than a trillion general-purpose computers and trillions more Java-enabled cellphones,
smartphones and other handheld devices.

1.1 Q2: Which edition of Java is geared toward developing large-scale, distributed networking applications and web-
based applications?
a. Standard Edition.
b. Industrial Edition.
c. Enterprise Edition.
d. Micro Edition.
ANS: c. Enterprise Edition.

Section 1.2 Computers: Hardware and Software

1.2 Q1: Which of the following is most closely associated with Moore's Law?
a. Every year or two, the price of computers has approximately doubled.
b. Object-oriented programming uses less memory than previous software-development methodologies.
c. Demand for communications bandwidth is decreasing dramatically each year.
d. Every year or two, the capacities of computers have approximately doubled without any increase in price.
ANS: d. Every year or two, the capacities of computers have approximately doubled without any increase in price.

1.2 Q2: Which of the following statements is false?

a. A quadrillion-instruction-per-section computer can perform in one second more than 100,000 instructions for
every person on the planet.
b. Today's key programming methodology is object-oriented programming.
c. The vast majority of the microprocessors produced each year are used in general-purpose computers.
d. Computers process data under the control of sets of instructions called computer programs..
ANS: c. The vast majority of the microprocessors produced each year are used in general-purpose computers.
Actually, they're used in embedded systems.

Section 1.3 Data Hierarchy

1.3 Q1: Which of the following statements is false?
a. The impressive functions performed by computers involve only the simplest manipulations of 1s and 2s .
b. ASCII is a popular subset of Unicode.
Java How to Program, 9/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 2 of 5

c. Fields are composed of characters or bytes.

d. On some operating systems, a file is viewed simply as a sequence of bytes.
ANS: a. The impressive functions performed by computers involve only the simplest manipulations of 1s and 2s .
It's 1s and 0s.

1.3 Q2: Which of the following data items are arranged from the smallest to the largest in the data hierarchy.
a. records, characters, fields, bits, files.
b. bits, files, fields, records, characters.
c. fields, characters, bits, files, records.
d. bits, characters, fields, records, files.
ANS: d. bits, characters, fields, records, files.

Section 1.4 Computer Organization

1.4 Q1: Which of the following is not one of the six logical units of a computer?
a. Input unit.
b. Output unit.
c. Central processing unit.
d. Printer.
ANS: d. Printer.

1.4 Q2: Which of the following statements is false?

a. Speaking to your computer is a form of input.
b. Playing a video is an example of output.
c. A multi-core processor implements several processors on a single integrated-circuit chip.
d. Information in the memory unit is persistent—it is retained when the computer's power is turned off.
ANS: Information in the memory unit is persistent—it is retained when the computer's power is turned off. Actually
the information is volatile—it's lost when power is turned off.

Section 1.5 Machine Languages, Assembly Languages and High-Level

Languages
1.5 Q1: Which of the following is not one of the three general types of computer languages?
a. Machine languages.
b. Assembly languages.
c. High-Level languages.
d. Spoken languages.
ANS: d. Spoken languages.

1.5 Q2: Which of the following statements is true?

a. Interpreted programs run faster than compiled programs.
b. Compilers translate high-level language programs into machine language programs.
c. Interpreter programs typically use machine language as input.
d. None of the above.
ANS: b. Compilers translate high-level language programs into machine language programs.

Section 1.6 Introduction to Object Technology

1. 6 Q1: ________ is a graphical language that allows people who design software systems to use an
industry standard notation to represent them.
a. The Unified Graphical Laguage
b. The Unified Design Language
c. The Unified Modeling Language
d. None of the above
ANS: c. The Unified Modeling Language.

1. 6 Q2: ________ models software in terms similar to those that people use to describe real-world objects.
Java How to Program, 9/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 3 of 5

a. Object-oriented programming
b. Object-oriented design
c. Procedural programming
d. None of the above
ANS: b. Object-oriented design.

1.6 Q3: Which statement is false?

a. Classes are reusable software components.
b. A class is to an object as a blueprint is to a house.
c. Performing a task in a program requires a method.
d. A class is an instance of its object.
ANS: A class is an instance of its object. The reverse is true.

Section 1.7 Operating Systems

1.7 Q1 Which of the following statements is false?
a. The concepts of icons, menus and windows were originally developed by Xerox PARC.
b. Windows is an open source operating system.
c. The software that contains the core components of the operating system is called the kernel.
d. Linux source code is available to the public for examination and modification.
Ans: b. Windows is an open source operating system. Actually, Windows is a proprietary operating system.

1.7 Q2: Which of the following is not a key organization in the open-source community?
a. Apache.
b. SourceForge.
c. Firefox.
d. Eclipse.
ANS: c. Firefox (it's a web browser made by the open source organization Mozilla).

Section 1.8 Programming Languages

1.8 Q1: Today, virtually all new major operating systems are written in:
a. Objective-C.
b. C or C++.
c. Visual C#.
d. Ada.
ANS: b. C or C++.

1.8 Q2: Which of the following languages is used primarily for scientific and engineering applications?
a. Fortran.
b. COBOL.
c. Pascal.
d. Basic.
ANS: a. Fortran.

1.8 Q3: Which language was developed by Microsoft in the early 1990s to simplify the development of Windows
applications?
a. Visual C#.
b. Python.
c. Objective-C.
d. Visual Basic.
ANS: d. Visual Basic.

Section 1.9 Java and a Typical Java Development Environment

1.9 Q1: Java was originally developed for:
Java How to Program, 9/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 4 of 5

a. Operating systems development.

b. Intelligent consumer devices.
c. Personal computers.
d. Distributed computing.
ANS: b. Intelligent consumer devices.

1.9 Q2: Which of the following statements about Java Class Libraries is false:
a. Java class libraries consist of classes that consist of methods that perform tasks.
b. Java class libraries are also known as Java APIs (Application Programming Interfaces).
c. An advantage of using Java class libraries is saving the effort of designing, developing and testing new classes.
d. Java class libraries are not portable
ANS: d. Java class libraries are not portable. (Java class libraries are portable.)

1.9 Q3: The .class extension on a file means that the file:
a. Contains java source code
b. Contains HTML
c. is produced by the Java compiler (javac).
d. None of the above.
ANS: c. Is produced by the Java compiler (javac).

1.9 Q4 : The command ________ executes a Java application.

a. run
b. javac
c. java
d. None of the above
ANS: c. java.

Section 1.10 Test-Driving a Java Application

(none)

Section 1.11 Web 2.0: Going Social

1.11 Q1: ________ helps Internet-based applications perform like desktop applications.
a. Ajax
b. Blogging
c. RSS
d. Mashups
ANS: a. Ajax.

1.11 Q2: Which of the following companies is widely regarded at the "signature" company of Web 2.0 ?
a. Foursquare.
b. Facebook.
c. Google.
d. Groupon.
ANS: c. Google.

Section 1.12 Software Technologies

1.12 Q1: ________ involves reworking programs to make them clearer and easier to maintain while preserving their
correctness and functionality.
a. Object-oriented programming
b. Refactoring
c. Agile software development
d. LAMP
ANS: b. Refactoring.
Java How to Program, 9/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 5 of 5

1.12 Q2: Which software product release category is "generally feature complete and supposedly bug free, and ready
for use by the community?"
a. Alpha.
b. Beta.
c. Release candidate.
d. Continuous beta.
ANS: c. Release candidate.

Section 1.13 Keeping Up-to-Date with Information Technologies

(none).
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
Absurdities, we are of Necessity driven to the search after Mystery for
good Sense and Truth in it.
And thus have I spoken enough to the Miracle of Jesus's cursing the
Figtree, which according to the Letter is a foolish and absurd Story: But
the mystical Operation, of which the Letter is a Shadow, will be
ravishing, marvellous and stupendous; and not only a Proof of Christ's
Power, and Presence in his Church, but a Demonstration of his
Messiahship, in as much as an infinite Number of Prophecys upon
Prophecys, will thereupon be discern'd to be accomplish'd, or the Church
can't bring forth the Fruits of the Spirit, that is Spiritual Interpretations
of the Scriptures, like ripe Figs. And so I pass to an

8. Eighth Miracle of Jesus, and that is,[182] "of his healing a Man of an
Infirmity, of thirty eight Years Duration, at the Pool of Bethesda, that had
five Porches, in which lay a great Multitude of impotent Folk, blind, halt,
withered, waiting the troubling of the Waters, upon the Descent of an
Angel, who gave a Sanative Virtue to them, to the curing of any one, be
his Distemper of what kind soever, who first stept down into them."
This whole Story is what our Saviour calls a Camel of a monstrous Size
for Absurdities, Improbabilities and Incredibilities, which our Divines,
and their implicit Followers of these last Ages, have swallowed without
chewing; whilst they have been straining at Knats in Theology, and
hesitating at frivolous and indifferent Things of the Church, of no
Consequence.
As to Jesus's Miracle in this Story, which consisted in his healing a Man,
of no body knows what Infirmity, there neither is nor can be proved any
Thing supernatural in it, or there had been an express Description of the
Disease, without which it is impossible to say, there was a miraculous
Cure wrought. As far as one may reasonably guess, this Man's Infirmity
was more Lazyness than Lameness, and Jesus only shamed him out of
his pretended Illness, by bidden him to take up his Stool and walk off,
and not lie any longer, like a lazy Lubbard and Dissembler, among the
Diseased, who were real Objects of Pity and Compassion: Or, if he was
no Dissembler, he was only fancyfully sick, and Jesus by some proper
and seasonable Talk touch'd his Heart, to his Relief; and so, by the Help
of his own Imagination, he was cured, and went his Way. This is the
worst that can be made of this infirm Man's Case; and the best that can
be said of Jesus's Power in the Cure of him, as will appear, by and by,
upon Examination into it. But the other Parts of the Story of the healing
Virtue of the Waters, upon the Descent of an Angel into them, is not
only void of all good Foundation in History, but is a Contradiction to
common Sense and Reason, as will be manifest after an Inquiry into the
Particulars of it.
St. John was the beloved Disciple of our Lord, and I hope he lov'd his
Master: or he was worse than an Heathen, who loves those who love
him: But this Story, and some others, that are peculiar to his Gospel,
such as, of Jesus's telling the Samaritan Woman her Fortune; of his
healing the blind Man with Eye-Salve made of Clay and Spittle; Of his
turning Water into Wine for the Use of Men, who had before well drank;
and of his raising Lazarus from the Dead, are enough to tempt us to
think, that he wilfully design'd, either to blast the Reputation of his
Master, or to try how far the Credulity of Men who through blind Love
were running apace into Christianity, might be imposed on; or he had
never related such idle Tales, which, if the Priesthood, who should be
the philosophical Part of Mankind, had not been amply hired into the
Belief of them, would certainly have been rejected with Indignation and
Scorn before now.
St. John wrote his Gospel many Years after the other Evangelists: What
then should have been his peculiar Business? Certainly nothing more,
than to add some remarkable Passages of Life, to Jesus's Honour, which
they had omitted; and to confirm the Truths which they had before
reported of him. But St. John is so far from doing this, that the Stories,
he has particularly added, are not only derogatory to the Honour of
Jesus, but spoil his Fame for a Worker of Miracles, which the other
Evangelists would raise him to. By reading the other Evangelists, one
would think, that Jesus was a Healer of all manner of Diseases, however
incurable by Art and Nature, and that where-ever he came, all the sick
and the maim'd (excepting a few Infidels) were perfectly cured by him.
But this Story before us will be like a Demonstration, that Jesus was no
such Worker of Miracles and Healer of Diseases, as he is commonly
believed to have been; and that he wrought not near the Number of
Cures, he is supposed to have done, much less any great ones. The best
Conception that an impartial Reader of the Gospel can form of Jesus, is,
that he was a tolerable good natural Orator, and could handsomely
harangue the People off hand, and was according to the Philosophy of
the Times, a good Cabalist; and his Admirers finding him endewed with
the Gift of Utterance, which was thought by them more than human,
they fancy'd he must have the Gift of healing too, and would have him
to exercise it; which he did with Success, upon the Fancies and
Imaginations of many, who magnified his divine Power for it. And the
Apostles afterwards, to help forward the Credulity and Delusion of the
People, amplified his Fame with extravagant Assertions and strange
Stories of Miracles, passing the Belief of considerate and wise Men.
Whether this Representation of the Case, according to the Letter of the
Gospels, be false and improbable, let my Readers judge by the Story
before us, which I come now to dissect, and make a particular
Examination into the several Parts of it. Accordingly it is to be observ'd
First, that this Story of the Pool of Bethesda, abstractedly considered
from Jesus's Cure of an infirm Man at it, has no good Foundation in
History: It merits no man's Credit, nor will any reasonable Person give
any heed to it. St. John is the only Author that has made any mention of
this Story; and tho' his Authority may be good, and better than another
Man's in Relation to the Words and Actions of Jesus, in as much as he
was most familiar and conversant with him; yet, for foreign Matters, that
have no immediate Respect to Jesus's Life, he's no more to be regarded
than another Historian, who, if he palm upon his Readers an improbable
Tale of senseless and absurd Circumstances, will have his Authority
questioned, and his Story pry'd into by the Rules of Criticism, and
rejected or received as it is found worthy of Belief and Credit. If there
had been any Truth in this Story before us, I cannot think but Josephus
or some other Jewish Writers, it is so remarkable, peculiar and
astonishing an Instance of the Angelical Care and Love to the distressed
of Jerusalem, would have spoken of it: But I don't find they have; or our
modern Commentators would have refer'd to them, as to Testimony of
the Credibility of the Gospel-History. Josephus has professedly written
the History of the Jewish Nation, in which he seems to omit nothing that
makes for the Honour of his Country, or for the Manifestation of the
Providence of God over it. He tells us of the Conversation of Angels with
the Patriarchs and Prophets, and intermixes Extra-Scriptural Traditions,
as he thought them fit to be transmitted to Posterity. How came he then
and all other Jewish Writers to forget this Story of the Pool of Bethesda?
I think, we may as well suppose that a Writer of the natural History of
Somersetshire would neglect to speak of the medicinal Waters of Bath,
as Josephus should omit that Story, which, if true, was a singular Proof
of God's distinguishing Care of his peculiar People, or an Angel had
never been frequently, as we suppose, sent to this Relief of the Diseased
amongst them. Is then St. John's single Authority enough to convey this
Story down to us? Some may say, that there are several Prodigies, as
well as political Events of antient Times, that, tho' they are reported but
by one Historian, meet with Credit; and why may not St. John's
Testimony be equal to another Writer's? I grant it; and tho' it is hardly
probable but that this Story, if true, before us, must have had the
Fortune to be told by others; yet St. John's single Authority shall pass
sooner than another Man's, if the Matter be in itself credible and well
circumstanc'd. But where it is blindly imperfectly and with monstrously
incredible Circumstances related, like this before us, it ought to be
rejected. Which brings me,
Secondly, To ask, what was the true Occasion of the Angel's Descent
into this Pool? Was it to wash and bath himself? Or, was it to impart an
healing Quality to the Waters for some one diseased Person? The
Reason, that I ask the first of these two Questions, is, because some
antient Readings of v. 4. say[183] the Angel ελουετο was washed, which
supposes some bodily Defilement or Heat contracted in the Cælestial
Regions, that wanted Refrigeration or Purgaton in these Waters: But
how absurd such a Thought is, needs no Proof. To impart then
compassionately an healing Power to the Waters for the Benefit of the
Diseased was the sole Design of the Angel's Descent into them. And God
forbid, that any should philosophically debate the Matter, and enquire
how naturally the Waters deriv'd that Virtue from the Angel's corporal
Presence. The Thing was providential and miraculous, our Divines will
say, and so let it pass. But I may fairly ask, why one diseased Person
only at a Time reap'd the Benefit? Or why the whole Number of
impotent Folks were not at once healed? I have a notable Answer
presently to be given to these Questions; but I am afraid beforehand,
our Divines will not approve of it: Therefore they are to give one of their
own, and make the Matter consistent with the Goodness and Wisdom of
God; or the said Questions spoil the Credit of the Story, and make an
idle and ridiculous Romance of it. And when their Hands are in, to make,
what it impossible, a satisfactory Answer to the said Questions; I wish,
that, for the sake of Orthodoxy, they would determine, whether the
Angel descended with his Head or his Heels foremost, or whether he
might not come, swauping upon his Breast into the Waters, like a Goose
into a Horse-pond. But,
Thirdly, How often in the Week, the Month or the Year did the Angel
vouchsafe his Descent into the Pool? And for how many Ages before
Christ's Advent, and why not since and even[184] now, was this Gracious
and Angelical Favour granted? St. John should have been Particular as to
these Points, which he could not but know Philosophers would be
curious to enquire about. If it was but once in the Year, as St.
Chrysostom[185] hints, little Thanks are due to him for his Courtesy. One
would think sometimes, that his Descent was frequent; or such a
Multitude of impotent Folk, variously disorder'd had never attended on it.
And again at other Times, one would think that his Descent was seldom,
or the Diseased as fast as they came, which could not be faster than the
Angel could dabble himself in the Waters, had been charitably dismissed
with restor'd Health. Here then is a Defect in St. John's Story, and a
Block, at which wise and considerate Freethinkers will stumble. But,
Fourthly, How came it to pass, that there was not better Care taken,
either by the Providence of God, or of the Civil Magistrates of Jerusalem
about the Disposal of the Angelical Favour to this or that poor Man,
according to his Necessities or Deserts: But that he, who could
fortunately catch the Favour, was to have it. Just as he who runs fastest
obtains the Prize: So here the Diseased, who was most nimble and
watchful of the Angel's Descent, and could first plunge himself into the
Pool, carried off the Gift of Sanation. An odd and a merry Way of
conferring a divine Mercy. And one would think that the Angels of God
did this for their own Diversion, more than to do good to Mankind. Just
as some throw a Bone among a Kennel of Hounds, for the Pleasure of
seeing them quarrel for it; or as others cast a Piece of Money among a
Company of Boys for the Sport of seeing them scramble for it: So was
the Pastime of the Angels here. It was the Opinion of some Heathens,
that Homines sunt Lusus Deorum, the Gods sport themselves with the
Miseries of Mankind; but I never thought, before I considered this Story,
that the Angels of the God of the Jews did so too. But if they delighted
in it, rare sport it was to them, as could be to a Town-Mobb. For as the
poor and distressed Wretches were not to be supposed to be of such a
polite Conversation, as in Complaisance to give place to their betters, or
in Compassion to make way for the most miserable; but upon the Sight
or Sound of the Angel's Fall into the Pool, would without Respect of
Persons strive who should be first: So those who were behind and
unlikely to be cured, would like an unciviliz'd Rabble, push and press all
before them into it. What a Number then, of some hundreds perhaps, of
poor Creatures were at once tumbled into the Waters to the Diversion of
the City Mob, as well as of God's Angels? And if one arose out of it, with
the Cure of his Disease, the rest came forth like drown'd Rats, to the
Laughter of the foresaid Spectators; and it was well if there was not
sometimes more Mischief done, than the healing of one could be of
Advantage, to those People. Believe then this Part of the Story, let him
that can. If any Angel was concern'd in this Work, it was an Angel of
Satan who delights in Mischief; and if he healed one upon such an
Occasion, he did it by way of Bait, to draw others into Danger of Life
and Limb. But as our Divines will not, I suppose, bear the Thoughts of
its being a bad Angel; so I leave them to consider upon our Reasonings,
whether it was credible that either a good or a bad Angel was
concerned, and desire them to remember to give me a better Reason,
why but one at a Time was healed.
If any Pool or Cistern of Water about this City of London was so blessed
with the Descent of an Angel to such an End, the Magistrates, such is
their Wisdom, would, if God did not direct, take care of the prudent
Disposal of the Mercy to the best Advantage of the Diseased. And if they
sold it to an infirm Lord or Merchant, who could give for it most Money,
to be distributed among other Poor and distressed People, would it not
be wisely done of them? To suppose they would leave the Angelick
Favour to the Struggle of a Multitude, is absurd and incredible. And why
then should we think otherwise of the Magistrates of Jerusalem? Away
then with the Letter of this Story! And if this be not enough to confute
it. Then,
Fifthly, Let us consider, to its farther Confutation, who and what were
the impotent Folk, that lay in the Porches of Bethesda, waiting the
Troubling of the Waters. St. John says they were Blind, Halt, Withered,
and as some Manuscripts[186] have it, Paraliticks. And what did any of
these there? How could any of them be supposed to be nimble enough
of Foot to step down first into the Waters, and carry off the Prize of
Sanation, before many others of various Distempers? Tho' the troubled
Waters might be of such medicinal Force as to heal a Man of whatsoever
Disease he had; yet none of the foresaid Persons for want of good Feet
and Eyes could expect the Benefit of it. Tho' the Ears of the Blind might
serve him to hear, when the Angel plump't like a Stone into the Waters,
yet through want of Sight for the guidance of his Steps, he would by
others be jostled out of the right Way down into them. And if the Lame
had good Eyes to discern the Descent of the Angel, yet Feet were all in
all to this Purpose: Consequently these impotent Folk, specified by St.
John, might as well have stay'd at Home, as resorted to Bethesda for
Cure. I know not what Fools the Diseased of Jerusalem of old might be,
but if there was such a Prize of Health to be strove for, by the
Distempered of this City, I appeal to all Men of common Sense, whether
the Blind, the Lame, the withered and Paralyticks would offer to put in
for it. St. John then forgot himself, or else blundered egregiously, or put
the Banter upon us, to try how far an absurd Tale would pass upon the
World with Credit. There might be, if there was any litteral Sense in the
Story, many of other Distempers, but there could be neither blind, halt
nor withered, without such an Absurdity, as absolutely disparages the
Story, blasts the Credit of the Relator, or rather brings to mind the
Assertion of St. Ambrose, that the Letter of the New as well as of the
Old Testament lies abominably. If what I have here said does not
overthrow the Letter of this Story; Then what I have,
Sixthly, To add, will do it more effectually, and that is, of the certain
Man, that had an Infirmity thirty and eight Years, and lay at this Pool for
an Opportunity to be cured of it. Tho' these thirty and eight Years are, in
our English Translation prædicated of this Man's Infirmity, yet more truly,
according to the Original, are they spoken of the Time he lay there? and
the Fathers so understood St. John's Words. What this Man's Infirmity
was, we are uncertain: For ασθενεια Weakness or Infirmity is a general
Name of all Distempers, and may be equally apply'd to one as well as to
another: Whereupon, tho' we can't certainly say from this Man's
Infirmity, that he was a Fool to lay there so long, expecting that Cure,
which it was impossible for him to obtain; yet what he says to our
Saviour, I have no Man, when the Waters are troubled to put me into the
Pool, but while I am coming another steppeth down before me, does
imply his Folly sufficiently, or rather the Incredibility of the whole Story.
What then did this infirm Man at this Pool, if he had neither Legs of his
own good enough, nor a Friend to assist him, in the Attainment of
Sanation? Was he not a Fool, if it was possible for any to be so great a
one, for his Patience? Would it not have been as wisely done of him to
wait, in the Fields so long, the Falling of the Sky, that he might catch
Larks? The Fathers say, this Man's Infirmity was the Palsy; but whether
they said so for the Sake of the Mystery, or to expose the Letter, I know
not. But that Distemper, after thirty and eight Years Duration, and
Increase; if it was more curable than another at first, had in that time
undoubtedly so weakened and render'd him uncapable to struggle with
others for this Relief, that it is without Sense and Reason to think he
should wait so long for it. Our Divines, if they so please, may commend
this Man for his Patience, but after a few Years, or rather a few Days
Experience, another Man would have been convinc'd of the Folly and
Vanity of his Hopes, and returned Home. If he could not put in for this
Benefit, with Prospect of Success in his more youthful Days, when the
Distemper was young too, much less Reason had he to hope for it in his
old Age, after thirty and eight Years Affliction, unless he dream'd of,
what was not to be imagin'd, an Opportunity, without Molestation and
Competition, to go off with it. Whatever then our Divines may think of
this Man and his Patience, I will not believe there ever was such a Fool;
and for this Reason will not suppose St. John could literally so romance,
unless he meant to bambouzle Mankind into the Belief of the greatest
Absurdity. A Man that Lies with a Grace to deceive others, makes his
Story so hang together, as to carry the Face and Appearance of Truth
along with it; which this of St. John, that for many Ages has been
swallowed, for the Reason before us, has not. But what is the worst of
all against this Story is,
Seventhly, That which follows, and absolutely destroys the Fame and
Credit of Jesus for a Worker of Miracles. And V. 1, 2, 3. Jesus went up to
Jerusalem, where there was by the Sheep-Market, a Pool, called
Bethesda, having five Porches, in which lay a great Multitude of
impotent Folk, blind, halt, withered. Why then did not Jesus heal them?
Here was a rare Opportunity for the Display of his Healing and Almighty
Power; and why did he not exercise it, to the Relief of that Multitude of
impotent Folk? If he could not cure them, there's an End of his Power of
Miracles? and if he would not, it was want of Mercy and Compassion in
him. Which way soever we take this Case, it turns to the Dishonour of
the Holy Jesus. What then was the Reason, that of so great a Multitude
of diseased People, Jesus exerted his Power, and extended his Mercy, on
only one poor Paralytick? St. Augustin[187] puts this Question and
Objection into my Mouth; and tho' neither He nor I start it for the
Service of Infidelity, but to make Way for the Mystery, yet I know not
why Infidels may not make Use of it, till Ministers of the Letter can give
a satisfactory Answer and Solution to it.
The Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, tell such Stories of Jesus's
healing Power, as would incline us to think he cured all where-ever he
came. He heal'd, they say, all Manner of Diseases among the People,
and they make mention of particular Times and Places, where all the
Diseased were healed by him, which Assertions imply, that Jesus's
healing Power was most extensive and (excepting to an hard-hearted
and unbelieving Pharisee now and then) universal; so far that it might
be question'd, whether any died, during the Time of his Ministry, the
Places where he came: And our Divines have so harangued on Jesus's
Miracles, as would confirm us in such an Opinion: But this Story in St.
John confutes and confounds all. St. John in no Place of his Gospel talks
of Jesus's healing of many, nor of all manner of Diseases, much less of
all that were Diseased; which, if it be not like a Contradiction to the
other Evangelists, is some Diminution of their Authority, and enough to
make us suspect, that they stretch'd much in praise of their Master, and
said more to his Honour than was strictly true. But this Place before us is
a flat Contradiction to them, and Jesus is not to be supposed to heal
many in any Place, much less all manner of Diseases, or he had never
let such a Multitude of poor Wretches pass without the Exercise of his
Power and Pity on them. Some good Reason then must be given for
Jesus's Conduct here, and such a one as will adjust it to the Reports of
the other Evangelists; or Infidels will think, that either they romanc'd for
the Honour of their Master, or that St. John in Spite told this Story to the
Degradation of him. I can conceive no better of this Matter according to
the Letter.

The Bishop of Litchfield very remarkably says,[188] that Jesus where-

ever he went, healed all that came to him without Distinction, the
impotent, halt, withered. He certainly had this Text of St. John in his
Eye, when he said so, because Impotent, Halt, Withered, are only
mention'd here, where Jesus cured none of them: Whereupon if his
Lordship had made but a marginal Reference to this Text, it would have
been the best Jest and Banter, with a Sneer, that ever was put upon
Jesus and his Power of Miracles: As it is, it's a very good one, and I
desire my Readers to take Notice of it, that his Lordship may not lose
the Credit and Praise of it. It's for such Circumspection of Thought,
Exactness of Expression, and Acuteness of Wit, that I admire that
Prelate, and must needs say of him, whether he ever be translated to
Canterbury or York, or not, that he's an arch Bishop.
But to return and go on. The Conduct of Jesus, to all Appearance, is not
only blameable, his Power of healing disputable, and his Mercy
indefensible, for that he cured but one infirm Man out of a Multitude, at
Bethesda, but,
Eightly, and lastly, it may reasonably be questioned, whether he wrought
any Miracle in the healing of this one Man. Miracles (to say nothing of
the ridiculous Distinction between divine and diabolical ones) are Works
done out of the Course of Nature, and beyond the Imitation of human
Art or Power. Now whether the Cure of this infirm Man can be brought
under this Definition of a Miracle, may be doubted. What this Man's
Infirmity, which is a general Name for all Distempers, was, we know not.
How then can we say he was miraculously cured, unless we knew his
Disease to be incurable by Art, which none can affirm? The worst that
we know of this Man's Case, is, that it was of a long Continuance, no
less than of eight and thirty Years: And the Bishop of Litchfield and
others in their florid Harangues of Jesus's Works, make the Cure of such
Chronical Diseases to be miraculous: But why so? Many Instances may
be given of Infirmities of human Nature, of a long Duration, which in
Time, and especially in old Age, wear off. If such Infirmities don't occur
to the Memory of our Divines, I could put them in Mind of them. And
who knows but this was the Case of this impotent Man, whose Infirmity
Jesus observing to be wearing off, bid him to be gone, and take up his
Couch, for he would soon be made whole.
The Fathers indeed call this Man's Infirmity the Palsy, which in truth is
generally worse than better by Time, and after thirty and eight Years,
must needs be very deplorable, and incurable without a Miracle. But why
do they call it the Palsy? They have no Authority for it from the Text,
without which, as our litteral Doctors will not subscribe to their Opinions
in other Cases; so why should I here? In short, the Fathers had never
call'd it the Palsy, but for the sake of the Mystery; and I am not bound
to own that to have been the Distemper, any more than it was want of
Legs; for that would be making of Miracles for Jesus, without Reason
and Authority.
If Jesus here had healed the whole Multitude of impotent Folk; without
Enquiry what Numbers there might be of them, I should have believed
that he wrought there many great Miracles, in as much as in such a
great Multitude, there must needs, in all Probability, be some incurable
by Art or Nature: But since he cured only this one Man, it affords Matter
of Speculation, whether he was the most or the least diseased amongst
them. Our Divines, for the sake of the Miracle, may possibly suppose
him to be the most grievously afflicted of any; but Infidels, on the other
hand, will say, not so: but with their Cavils will urge that this infirm Man
was either a Dissembler, whom Jesus shamed out of his pretended
Disease, or that he was only hippish, and fancyfully more than really
distemper'd of a long Time, whom Jesus by suitable Exhortations and
Admonitions, working upon his Imagination, persuaded into a Belief of
his Cure, and bid him to walk off. Certain it is, that Infidels will say, it
was not a Power of Miracles in Jesus which heal'd him, or he had used it
then and there for the Sanation of others also.
And thus have I finish'd my Invective against the Letter of this Story;
which, if any are offended at, they enjoy, what is the most reasonable
Thing in the World, the same Liberty to write for the Letter, which I have
used against it: And so I pass to the Consideration of the Opinions and
Expositions of the Fathers on this strange Story.
The Fathers, upon whose Authority I form'd my preceding Invective
against the Letter, so universally betake themselves to the mystical
Interpretation of this Story, that it may be question'd, whether any of
them, more than myself, believ'd any Thing at all of the Letter of it. St.
Chrysostom, who is as much a litteral Interpreter of the Scriptures as
any of them, here intirely discards the Letter, saying admirably thus,[189]
what a strange Way and Story of healing the Diseased is here? but what
is the Mystery of it? that we are to look to. The Matter could not be so
simply and unadvisedly transacted litterally, as it is related. There must
be somewhat future here, as by a Type and Figure, signify'd; or the
Story, it is so incredible in itself, will give Offence to many. St.
Chrysostom was certainly in the right on't; and I wonder, for which no
Reason but want of Liberty can be given, that Infidels have not before
now, with their Jests and Cavils, ridiculed this Story. St. Augustin, to the
same Purpose, says,[190] Can any one believe, that these Waters of
Bethesda were wont to be troubled in this Fashion, and that there was
not Mystery, and a spiritual Signification in it? Yes, I could tell St.
Augustin, that our modern Divines seem to believe it, tho' he, if he was
now alive, would laugh at them for it. But to come to the profound
Mystery signified by this Story, which to use the Words of[191] St.
Augustin, as God shall enable me, I will now speak to.
Our English Version says, There is at Jerusalem by the Sheep-Market, a
Pool. How our Translators came by the Notion of a Market here, I can't
imagine, since there is nothing to favour it in the Original, which stands
thus, επι τη προβατικη κολυμβηθρα: By κολυμβηθρα, the Fathers
understand[192] Baptism, or the spiritual Laver of Regeneration; and
who is that for, but the Flock of Christ, signified by προβατικη? So we
have another and clearer Interpretation of these two Words. And as to
Bethesda, that is a mystical Name of the Church, which according to the
Signification of Bethesda, is the House of Grace. And if it is said to be at
Jerusalem, it is not to be understood of the Old Jerusalem, but of the
New and Apocalyptical Jerusalem, at the Entrance into which the Flock
of Christ will be baptiz'd by the Waters of the Spirit, as in a mystical
Laver.
Bethesda is said to have five Porches, that is, as the Fathers[193] agree,
the five Books of Moses, which are as so many Doors of Entrance into
the House of Wisdom, or of the Grace of Christ.
At these five Porches of the five Books of Moses lay a great Multitude of
impotent Folk, blind, halt, withered. And who are these mystically? The
ignorant, erroneous, and unstable in Faith and Principle, as the Fathers
often understand them spiritually. And what is the Reason of these their
mystical Diseases? Because, as St. Augustin[194] and other Fathers say,
they rest on the Letter of the Law, which throws them into various
Errors, like Diseases, of different Kinds, of which they can't be cured
without the Descent of the Spirit, like an Angel, to instruct them
mystically to interpret.
With these impotent Folk lay a certain Man who had an Infirmity. And
who is this infirm Man? Mankind in general, say St. Cyril[195] and[196] St.
Augustin, And what is his Infirmity? The Fathers call it the[197] Palsy,
because of his Instability, and Unsteadiness in Faith and Principles,
which is now the Case of Mankind. St. John calls it ασθενειαν a
Weakness, which being a general Name of all Distempers, we can't
guess what might be here the specifical one. But reasonably speaking,
according to the Rule of Interpretation, this Man's Infirmity is the same
with the Woman's Spirit of Infirmity, and that is a Weakness at the Spirit
of Prophecy, which Mankind, as well as the Woman of the Church, is to
be cured of in the Perfection of Time.
And how long did this Man with his Infirmity lay in these Porches of
Bethesda? Thirty eight Years: So has Mankind with his Weakness at the
Spirit of Prophecy lay eight and thirty (hundred)[198] Years, reckoning
two thousand under the Law, and eighteen hundred since under the
Gospel. St. Augustin[199] has an ingenious and more mystical way of
Computation of these thirty and eight Years, which pleases me too, but
possibly some Readers may not so easily apprehend it, unless they are
well acquainted with the Mystery of Prophetical Numbers.
And how is Mankind to be cured of his Infirmity at the Spirit of
Prophecy? By being instructed, by the Spirit of Truth, who is to come at
the Conclusion of the said thirty and eight mystical Years, to arise and
take up his bed and walk, that is, to raise his Thoughts to the
Contemplation of the divine Mysteries of the Law, and to lift up his Bed
of the Letter, on which he has hitherto rested, into a sublime Sense, and
then he will walk uprightly and steadily in the Faith, without wavering
like a Paralytick.
And at what Season did Jesus come to this infirm Man? It was at a Feast
of the Jews. Irenæus, Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Cyril call it the
Feast of Penticost. And the grand Feast of Penticost is, as St. Cyril[200]
says upon the Place at the Perfection of Time, the Time of the
Evangelical Sabbath, and of Jesus's spiritual Advent, which will be a
Time of feasting on intellectual and divine Mysteries, of seeing Visions
and of dreaming Dreams; consequently at that Time, as the ancient
Jews and Fathers assert, Mankind will be cured of this Infirmity at the
Spirit of Prophecy. And this too is the certain Season, that the Angel will
descend and trouble the Waters. By Angel is here meant[201] the Spirit
of Christ. And by Waters the Fathers understand,[202] the People of all
Nations. But how will the Descent of the Spirit of Truth, like an Angel,
trouble these Waters, that is, give any Molestations and Disturbance to
the People? Is there not a Mistake in the Oracle? If the Clergy will be but
greater Lovers of Truth than of their Interests; if they, who should be
Teachers of Forbearance of one another in Love, will but keep their
Temper, there would be found a mistake in it. But alas!
Lastly, The Jews, as is intimated, seem to have been mov'd with
Indignation at the Cure of the infirm Man, saying to him, ver. 10. it is the
Sabbath, it is not lawful for thee to carry thy Bed; which litterally could
not be true. The Jews were not such precise Observers of the Sabbath;
nor so stupid and foolish, as St. Cyril,[203] says, as to think the taking up
and carrying a Stool to be a Breach of it. But mystically, it is to be fear'd,
this will be most true, and that the Clergy, who would be Jews inwardly,
and the Circumcision in Spirit, will be bitter Enemies to Man's Exaltation
of his Couch of the Letter of the Scriptures on or against the Evangelical
Sabbath, and will make it, if possible, an unlawful Work; because it will
bring to them Shame, Dishonour and Loss of Interests along with it.
After this Manner is every other Circumstance of this Story to be
allegorically apply'd out of the Fathers. The Moral or Mystery of the
whole, in short, is this, that at the Perfection of Time, signified by the
Sabbath, the Pentecost, the End of thirty eight Years, the Spirit of Truth
will descend on Mankind, to their Illumination in Prophecy, and to the
healing of their Errors, call'd Diseases; which is admirably represented
by the Parable before us, that according to the Letter, has neither
Reason nor common Sense in it.
And thus have I spoken to eight of the Miracles of Jesus; and whether I
have not shew'd them, in whole or Part, according to the Proposition
before us, to consist of Absurdities, Improbabilities, and Incredibilities;
and whether they are not prophetical and parabolical Narratives of what
will be mysteriously, and more wonderfully done by Jesus, I appeal to
my Readers.
After another Discourse of some other Miracles, I intend to take into
Examination the several Stories of Jesus's raising of the Dead as of
Lazarus, Jairus's Daughter, and the Widow's Son of Naim; which
reputedly are Jesus's grand Miracles; but, for all the seeming Greatness
and Excellency of them, I don't doubt but to give the Letter of these
Stories a Toss out of the Creed of a considerate and wise Man; at least
show their Insufficiency for the Purpose for which they have been
hitherto apply'd. And if I should afterwards, by the Leave and Patience
of the Bishop of London, give my Objection against Christ's Resurrection
a Review, and some more Force, then what will become of the Argument
of Christ's Power, Authority, and Messiahship from his Miracles?
But, besides Jesus's Miracles, I am, as Opportunity serves, to take into
Consideration some of the Historical Parts of his Life; and shew them to
be no less sensless, absurd and ridiculous than his Miracles.
And why may I not sometimes treat on the Parables of Jesus, and show
what nonsensical and absurd Things they are, according to the
Expositions of our most famous Commentators of these last Ages. Jesus
was certainly the absolute, and most consummate Perfection of a
Cabalist, Mystist, Parabolist and Enigmatist; but according to modern
Commentaries and Paraphrases, he was the merest Ideot and Blockhead
that ever open'd his Mouth, in that sort of Learning, to the Instruction of
Mankind. And I am oblig'd a little to speak to the Absurdities of Christ's
Doctrine and Parables, because one Article of the Prosecution against
me was for saying, that any of the Philosophers of the Gentiles, or any
rational Man (meaning according to modern Expositions) would make a
better Teacher, than Jesus was.
What a great deal of Work have I upon my Hands, which, if God spare
my Life and Health, I intend to go on with: If what I have already done
in it be not acceptable to the Clergy, their Way to prevent the
Prosecution of this great Undertaking, is to battle me upon what's past.
Who knows but they may write, if they would try their Strength, so
acutely in Defence of the Letter of Jesus's Miracles already discuss'd, as
may effectually stop my Mouth, and prevent my giving them any more
Trouble of this Kind? And I suppose I have now gotten an Adversary in
the Bishop of St. David's, who has already discharg'd one Fool's Bolt at
me.
There has nothing been a more common Subject of Declamation among
the Clergy than the Reasonableness of Christianity, which must be
understood of the History of Christ's Life and Doctrine, or the Application
of the Word Reasonableness to the Christian Religion is impertinent. But
if I proceed, as I have begun in this Work, I shall shew Christianity, as it
is understood, to be the most unreasonable and absurd Story, that ever
was told; and our modern Systems of Theology groundless and sensless
in almost every Part of them. Mahometanism, without Offence be it
spoken, is a more reasonable Religion than the Christian, upon modern
Schemes and Systems.
If what I here say is offensive to our Divines, the Press is open for them
as well as for myself, and they may, if they can, shew their Resentment
of it. Thanks unto God and our most excellent Civil Government for such
a Liberty of the Press: A Liberty that will lead and conduct us to the
Fountain of Wisdom and Philosophy, which Restraint is a down-right
Enemy to. And that this Blessing of Liberty may be continued, for all
Bishop Smallbrook and Dr. Roger's Hobbism, is, I dare say, the Desire of
the curious, inquisitive, and philosophical Part of Mankind. If this Liberty
should be taken away, what a notable Figure will our Divines make from
the Press and Pulpit, declaiming on the Reasonableness, Excellency and
Perfection of the Christian Religion, without an Adversary; and telling
their Congregations, that all, their bitterest and acutest Enemies can
object, is clearly answered!
The Press, of late Years, has been productive of so many cogent and
persuasive Arguments for Liberty of debate, and the Advocates for this
Liberty, in the Judgment of the impartial and considerate, have so far
gotten the better of their Adversaries, that I wonder any one can appear
in behalf of Persecution. If I was a Bishop or Doctor in Divinity, I shou'd
think it a Disgrace to my Station and Education to ask the Assistance of
the Civil Authority to protect my Religion: I should judge my self
unworthy of the Wages and Emoluments I enjoy'd, for the Preaching
and Propagation of the Gospel, if I was unable to give an Answer to any
one, that ask'd a Reason of my Faith; Or if I was so Shallow-pated, as to
think Heresy and Infidelity punishable by the Civil Magistrate, I should
think myself as much oblig'd to confute by Reason, as he is to punish by
the Sword. If the Bishop of London had taken this Course with me; if he
had publish'd a Refutation of my supposed Errors, as well as
endeavour'd at a Prosecution of me for them, I had forgiven him the
Wrongs and Injuries done me, and made no repeated Demands of
Satisfaction for them.
Christianity is, as I believe, founded on a Rock of Wisdom; and what's
more, has an omnipotent and omniscient God on its Side, who can
incline the Hearts of Men to believe, and open the Eyes of their
Understanding to discern the Truth of it; consequently there can be no
Danger in the Attempts of our Adversaries, whether, Jews, Turks or
Domestick Infidels, against it. But Persecution implys Weakness and
Impotency in God to defend his own Cause; or his Priests would not
move for the Help of the Arm of Flesh in Vindication of it. And if, at this
Time of Day, after so many Treatises of Infidels, and some of them as
yet unanswered, against our Religion, this good Cause should be taken
out of the Hands of God, and committed to the Care of the Civil
Magistrate; if instead of Reason the Clergy should have Recourse to
Force, what will By-standers, and even Well-wishers to Christianity say?
Nothing less than that Infidels had gotten the better of Christ's
Ministers, and beaten them at their own Weapons of Reason and
Argument.
The two great Pleaders for Persecution, to the Disgrace of themselves
and Dishonour of our Religion, that have lately arose are Dr. Rogers and
the Bishop of St. David's. Dr. Rogers's chief Reason against Liberty of
Debate, is because, as he says it is pernicious to the Peace and Welfare
of the Community, by unsettling the Minds of the People about the
Religion established: But here's no consequence, unless it could be
proved, that such as the great Mr. Grounds and Mr. Scheme, have it in
their Hearts to raise Mobbs upon the Government, and to beat out the
Brains of the Clergy. All the Harm, or rather Good, they aim at, is to
exercise the Wits of the Clergy with their Doubts and Objections; and if
the Passions of our Ecclesiasticks are not raised upon it, to the doing of
Violence to these Gentlemen, the Peace of the Publick will never be
disturb'd. As to myself, tho' I have a vast and numerous Party on my
Side, no less than all the Fathers and primitive Christians for some Ages;
yet as we were peaceable and quiet Subjects of old and passively
obedient to the Emperors of Rome; so we will continue to the Civil
Authority of this Nation. We only take the Liberty to awaken the Clergy
out of a Lethargy of Dulness and Ignorance; and hope the Civil
Magistrate will consider the Goodness and Charity of our Intentions, and
guard us against their Insults for it.

The Bishop of St. David's[204] says, "It is absurd to assert, that the
Liberties of any Nation will allow, with Impunity, a Set of distinguish'd
Infidels to insult and treat with the greatest Contempt and Scorn the
most sacred and important Truths, that are openly professed, by the
whole Body of the People, of whatever Denomination." By a Set of
Infidels, I suppose, he means me and the Fathers: And by treating with
Contempt and Scorn the most sacred and important Truths, he means,
our burlesquing, bantering and ridiculing the Clergy for their Ministry of
the Letter: And for this he would, I conceive, have incensed the
Societies for Reformation of Manners to a Prosecution of me. And if they
had not been wiser, and more merciful than their Preacher, I must have
gone to Pot. But why should the Bishop dislike this way of Writing? Don't
he know, that the Fathers of the Church used to jest and scoff at the
Gentiles and their Priests for their foolish Superititions? Don't he know,
that our Reformers banter'd and ridicul'd Popery out of Doors, and
almost within the Memory of Man, it was reckon'd but a dull Sermon,
that was not well humm'd for its Puns and Jest on the Papists? why then
should the Bishop be against that way of writing, which was of good Use
to the Reformers, and first Christians? The grand Subject for Burlesque
and Banter, in my Opinion, is Infidelity; and that Bishop, who can't
break two Jests upon Infidels for their one upon Christianity, has but a
small Share of Wit. The Christian Religion according to the Bishop, will
abide the Test of calm and sedate Reasoning against it, but can't bear a
Jest; O strange!
But to leave these two Contenders for Persecution to the Chastisement
of acuter Pens. What I have here pleaded for Liberty is not thro' any
Fears of Danger to myself, but for the Love of Truth and Advancement of
Christianity, which, without it, can't be defended, propagated and
sincerely embraced. And therefore hope, that the Controversy before us,
between Infidels and Apostates will be continued by the Indulgence of
the Government, till Truth arises and shines bright to the Dissipation of
the Mists of Error and Ignorance; like the Light of the Sun to the
Dispersion of the Darkness of the Night. I will by God's Leave, go on to
bear my part in the Controversy; And, if it was not more against the
Interests than Reason of the Clergy to believe me, would again solemnly
declare that what I do in it is with a View to the Honour of Jesus, our
spiritual Messiah, to whom be Glory for ever. Amen.

FINIS.

A FOURTH

DISCOURSE
 ON THE

MIRACLES
OF OUR
SAVIOUR,
 In View of the Present Controversy
between Infidels and Apostates.

Canes qui oblatrant contra Inquisitionem Veritatis. Clem. Alex.

The Third Edition.

By Tho. Woolston, B.D. sometime Fellow of

Sidney-College in Cambridge.

LONDON:
ted for the Author, and Sold by him next door to the Star, in
Aldermanbury, and by the Booksellers of London, and Westminster,
1728.
[Price One Shilling.]
 TO THE
Right Reverend Father in God
 FRANCIS,
Lord Bishop of St. Asaph.
My Lord,
f the Convocation had been sitting, I would have made this
Dedication to them, and humbly implored of them, what, for
their Love to the Fathers, they would readily have granted, a
Recommendation of these my Discourses on Miracles to the
Clergy: But being unhappily disappointed of a Session of that
Reverend and Learned Body, for whose wise Debates and orthodox
Votes I have such a Veneration, as is not to be express'd in a few Words,
I presently turn'd my Thoughts on your Lordship, to whom a Dedication
is due, because of your Respect, often declared, for the Authority of the
Fathers, which induces me to think, you now approve of the Use I have
made of them.
But what I am here to applaud your Lordship for, is, your Discourse
call'd Difficulties and Discouragements, &c. That admirable Satire against
modern Orthodoxy and Persecution! How was I tickled in the Perusal of
it! It is plainly the Sense of your Soul, or you had set your Name to it:
And if the Temptation of Praise for it, had not been too great to be
resisted, I could have wish'd you had always conceal'd your self; and
then you had not written against the Grain, an aukward Piece on Church
Power, like a Retraction, to reingratiate your self with some Ecclesiastical
Noodles, whom you no more, than, I need to care for.
I have sometimes wondered, My Lord, where and when the Great Mr.
Grounds imbibed his notable Notions about Religion and Liberty; for he
suck'd them not in with his Mothers Milk, who, I suppose, train'd him up
in the Belief of Christianity: But when I consider'd, that he was once the
Pupil of Mr. Hare at Cambridge, my wonder ceas'd. Under your
Lordship's Tuition, it seems he laid the Foundation of his distinguish'd
Learning and Opinions! His Pupillage will be your immortal Honour! I
wonder, none of the Writers against him have as yet celebrated your
Praise for it! How does he imitate and resemble his Tutor in Principles! I
can't say, he surpasses you, since there is such a Freedom of Thought
and Expression in your Difficulties, &c. so strongly savouring of Infid—ty,
that he has not as yet equall'd.
Upon your Lordship's Advancement to a Bishoprick, Difficultys and
Discouragements of the Government in the choice of not withstanding, I
wish'd, without prescribing to the Wisdom a learned Prelate, that the
great Mr. Grounds, for the good of the Church too, might be soon
consecrated: And I should not have despair'd of it, but that he is a
Gentleman of real Probity and Conscience, and might possibly boggle at
Subscriptions, unless you and Bishop Hoadly could help him to some of
your Reserves and Distinctions, wherewith you must be both well
Stock'd, to overcome that Difficulty. And why should not Dean Swift for
his Writings, as well as some others, be made a Bishop? I should like to
see him one; if the then Right Reverend Bishop Grounds would not think
him, for his Tale of a Tub, too loose in the Faith, for his Company.
Don't, imagine, My Lord, that I am forming of Schemes for my self to be
a Bishop. Tho' these my Discourses on Miracles are of very great Merit,
as well as your Lordship's Difficulties, &c. yet you may be assured, I
have no such View, when I tell you, that the Honour, the Fathers have
exalted me to, of a Moderator in this Controversy, sets me above all
Ecclesiastical Preferment, excepting the Arch-Bishoprick of Canterbury,
which I'm afraid will be void, before the King is apprised of my singular
Worth and Qualifications for it.
But however, if such excellent Prelates, as Grounds, Hoadly, Swift, Hare
and my self were at the Head of Ecclesiastical Affairs, what would we
do? What should we not do? What would not this free-thinking Age
expect from us? Nothing less, than that, according to our Principles, we
should endeavour to set Mankind at perfect Liberty, and to lay open the
dirty Fences of the Church, call'd Subscriptions, which are not only the
Stain of a good Conscience, but the Discouragements, your Lordship
hints at, in the Study of the Scriptures: And if we made a Push for an
Act of P——t to turn the Clergy to Grass, after King Henry VIIIth's Monks
and Fryars; where would be the Harm of it? Nay, the Advantage to the
Publick, as well as to Religion, would be great, if their Revenues were
apply'd to the Payment of National Debts; with a Reserve to our selves
(remember, My Lord) of large Emoluments out of them, according to our
great Merits; otherwise worldly-wise Men will repute us impolitick Fools,
which you and Bishop Hoadly, I humbly presume, will never endure the
Reproach of.
So, hoping your Lordship will accept of this Dedication to your Praise, in
as much Sincerity as it is written, I subscribe myself,
My LORD,
The Admirer of your
London, May
14. 1728. Difficultys and
Discouragements,
Thomas Woolston.

A FOURTH
DISCOURSE
ON THE

MIRACLES
OF OUR
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

testbankbell.com