But it is necessary first to see what the Apostles affirm
distinctly in their accounts of these facts; for I think more has been
said for them, than ever they said, or intended to say for themselves.
In one place [Luke 24:31] it is said, he vanished out of their sight.
Which translation is corrected in the margin of our Bibles thus: He
ceased to be seen of them. And the original imports no more.
It is said in another place, that the disciples being together,
and the doors shut, Jesus came and stood in the midst of them. How he
came, is not said; much less is it said that he came through the door,
or the keyhole; and for anything that is said to the contrary, he
might come in at the door, though the disciples saw not the door open,
nor him, till he was in the midst of them. But the Gentleman thinks
these passages prove that the disciples saw no real body, but an
apparition. I am afraid that the Gentleman, after all his contempt of
apparitions, and the superstition on which they are founded, has fallen
into the snare himself, and is arguing upon no better principles than
the common notions which the vulgar have of apparitions. Why else does
he imagine these passages to be inconsistent with the reality of
Christ's body? Is there no way for a real body to disappear? Try the
experiment now; do but put out the candles, we shall all disappear. If
a man falls asleep in the day-time, all things disappear to him; his
senses are all locked up; and yet all things about him continue to be
real, and his senses continue perfect. As shutting out all rays of
light would make all things disappear; so intercepting the rays of
light from any particular body, would make that disappear. Perhaps
something like this was the case; or perhaps something else, which we
know not. But, be the case what it will, the Gentleman's conclusion is
founded on no principle of true philosophy: for it does not follow
that a body is not real because I lose sight of it suddenly. I shall
be told, perhaps, that this way of accounting for the passages is as