When we read, that Chrift cured many of infirmities, and plagues, and evil spirits°; and that certain women had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities; is it not most natural, if not neceffary, by evil spirits to understand a disease, such as was originally afcribed to evil fpirits, and hence came to be described by these terms? Infirmities, plagues, and evil spirits, feem to be mentioned only as so many diftinct fpecies of difeafes, and as being equally the fubjects of Chrift's healing power. Evil fpirits, thus understood, might be faid with propriety, to be healed; or the patient might be said to be healed of them. But to heal evil spirits, literally taken, or to be healed of them,

The demon departed out of him, and the child was cured, Mat. xvii. 18. Jesus rebuked the unclean Spirit, and healed the child, Luke ix. 42. See above, p. 67.

al and improper manner of

e foregoing observations it apthe evangelifts were not unceffity of departing from the nguage of their age

and coun

ence to poffeffions for it was as well by thofe who afferted, e who denied, the reality of to defcribe the symptoms of niacs, and their cure. The leed, were originally borrowed ▪pprehended causes of both, the and ejection of demons; yet univerfally applied to the outfenfible effects, madness (in Ferent kinds and degrees) and o far all must allow the vulgar to be just, and that it conveyed ea of the subject, which is the or end of language. But this was not only univerfally apt very often confined, to the outcts just now mentioned; and in this

A a

countable for the error that gave occafion to it. The aftronomer, we have feen, ufes many expreffions that, in their strict and original meaning, are neither philofophically juft, not agreeable to his own conceptions; judging it fufficient that every one knows, what appearances or outward events thefe expreffions are used to describe.

From the principles here established, it will be easy to return an answer to all the other parts of the objection stated at the beginning of this chapter, which have not been already confidered. The evangelifts, it is pleaded, not only affirm that fome perfons were poffeffed by demons, and that the demons departed or were expelled from them, but expressly diftinguish demoniacs from the diseased, and their cure from the healing of difeases. On what grounds the facred writers diftinguifhed poffeffions, which

denoted a diforder of mind, from bo

dily

L

e fame reason for distinguishEn difpoffeffions and the cure feafes. Disorders merely mendifferent nature from those by body alone is affected. Now, if tand both poffeffions and difas they were understood and e ancients, concerning certain ffects, viz. the lofs and recozafon and understanding's you ith what propriety they are ed from mere bodily diseases

ure.

part of the objection that reoticed, is that taken from the which Chrift performed cures emoniacs, when he commanded to come out. "These comis faid, manifeftly suppose, -eings to whom they are adcapable of obeying them Chrift expected them to obey

thing with our Saviour to addrefs the elements, and other objects equally infenfible, as agents endowed with reafon To the dead, Jefus faid,

and liberty.

Arife. He rebuked the winds and the fea', faying, Peace, be still. Laftly, he rebuked a fever, and it left the patient.. Why then might he not rebuke a demon, even fuppofing demon to ftand merely for the diforder imputed to his influence, and fpeak in the fame tone of authority to it, as to other things equally incapable of a voluntary obedience? In all the inftances here mentioned, our Saviour's expreffions are accommodated to the occafion, but they muft not be interpreted with too much rigour. When he faid, Come out, thou dumb and deaf Spirit, he could not, as we have fhewn, mean to declare his belief of there being fpirits who are deaf

I Mat, viii. 26. t Luke iv. 39.

Mark iv. 39.

and