discovered the cheat of the resurrection a little time before, have
entertained such a suspicion?

The last period commences at the resurrection, and takes in the
evidence upon which the credit of this fact stands.

The council for Woolston, among other difficulties, started one,
which, if well grounded, excludes all evidence out of this case. The
resurrection being a thing out of the course of nature, he thinks the
testimony of nature, held forth to us in her constant method of
working, a stronger evidence against the possibility of a resurrection,
than any human evidence can be for the reality of one.

In answer to this, it is said, on the other side,

First, That a resurrection is a thing to be judged of by mens
senses; and this cannot be doubted. We all know when a man is dead;
and should he come to life again, we might judge whether he was alive
or no, by the very same means by which we judge those about us to be
living men.

Secondly, That the notion of a resurrection, contradicts no one
principle of right reason, interferes with no law of nature: and that
whoever admits that God gave man life at first, cannot possibly doubt
of his power to restore it when lost.

Thirdly, That appealing to the settled course of nature, is
referring the matter in dispute, not to rules or maxims of reason and
true philosophy, but to the prejudices and mistakes of men; which are
various and infinite, and differ sometimes according to the climate men