from being of his mind, that
wanted not only more difficulties, but even impossibilities in the
Christian religion, to exercise his faith upon.

Leaving to the Church of Rome that foolhardiness of faith, to believe
things to be true which at the same time their reason plainly tells
them are impossible, I shall at this time endeavor to assert and
vindicate this article of the resurrection from the pretended
impossibility of it. And I hope, by God's assistance, to make the
possibility of the thing so plain as to leave no considerable scruple
about it in any free and unprejudiced mind. And this I shall do from
these words of St. Paul, which are part of the defense which he made
for himself before Festus and Agrippa, the substance whereof is this,
that he had lived a blameless and inoffensive life among the Jews, in
whose religion he had been bred up; that he was of the strictest sect
of that religion, a Pharisee, which, in opposition to the Sadducees,
maintained the resurrection of the dead and a future state of rewards
and punishments in another life; and that for the hope of this he was
called in question, and accused by the Jews. "And now I stand here,
and am judged, for the hope of the promise made unto the fathers; unto
which promise our twelve scribes, instantly serving God day and night,
hope to come; for which hope's sake, King Agrippa, I am accused of the
Jews." That is, he was accused for preaching that Jesus was risen from
the dead, which is a particular instance of the general doctrine of
the resurrection which was entertained by the greatest part of the
Jews, and which to the natural reason of mankind (however the heathen
in opposition to the Christian religion were prejudiced against it),
hath nothing in it that is incredible. And for this he appeals to
his judges, Festus and Agrippa: "why should it be thought a thing
incredible with you that God should raise the dead?"

Which words being a question without an answer, imply in them these
two propositions:

First, That it was thought by some a thing incredible that the dead
should be raised. This is supposed in the question, as the foundation
of it: for he who asks why a thing is so, supposeth it to be so.

Secondly, That this apprehension, that it is a thing incredible that
God should raise the dead, is very unreasonable. For the question
being left unanswered, implies its own answer, and is to be resolved
into this affirmative, that there is no reason w