contends for, that in the cafe before us, the power of imagination could have no placeTM. It was never faid, that the fwine fancied themselves poffeffed; their diforder, I admit, was real, but not therefore demoniacal. So great a miracle as that wrought upon them, can be afcribed to no other agency than that of God. Accordingly, we are told, that it was performed at the word or command of Chrift: Forthwith Jefus

tiles at the Jewish passover, a punitive miracle * ? And, in the cafe before us, the doctor allows, (p. 18.) that Chrift's leave was asked, and granted; which is making Chrift answerable for what was done.

Some doubt whether this was any miracle at all; but whoever confiders, that those who ufually came from all parts to celebrate the paffover, were not fewer in number than three millions, (Joseph. Bell. Jud. lib. ii. cap. 14. § 3. See alfo lib. vi. cap. ix. § 3.) and that, in the court of the Gen. tiles, were exposed to sale, by authority of the Jewish rulers, all the animals that were to be offered up in facrifice, (not less than 256, 500, according to Jofephus, Bel. Jud. lib, vi. cap. 9. § 3. p. 399, ed. Havercamp.) and whatever elfe the fervice of the fanctuary required; and that neither the mercenary traffickers, nor any of the multitude made any oppofition to Chrift, will perhaps be of opinion, that they were intimidated and overawed by a divine power, and agree with Jerome, (in Matt. tom. ix, p. 31. ed. Bafil. 1516). that it was the most wonderful of all the miracles of Jesus.

U 3

gave

gave them (the demons, the reputed caufes of madness) leave, and faid unto them, Go.

Should any inquire into the reasons of this divine difpenfation, I might answer, that he who gave life to all, hath a right to refume it, and doth often refume it, both from men and beasts, and visit their bodies with diforders, for reafons unfearchable by the human understanding; but many wife and important purposes were anfwered by the miraculous destruction of the fwine.

n

1. It was a just punishment of the owners. For though Jofephus calls Gadara (near which this miracle was wrought) a Greek city°, and it was a part of the provine of Syria; yet, during the reign of Herod, it had belonged to Judea, on which country it bordered, and was, no doubt,

n

Some think the lofs was inconfiderable to the owners of the fwine, as the Heathens would not fcruple eating the flesh of strangled animals.

Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 11. § 4. He elsewhere (Bell. Jud. lib. ii. c. 18. § 1.) fpeaks of it as a city of the Syrians.

in part inhabited by Jews, who probably owned the fwine; for to that people Christ's perfonal miniftry was confined, and on their territory he then ftood. Now, the Jews were prohibited by the laws of Hyrcanus from keeping fwine, and by the law of Mofes from partaking of them as food. Their breach of the former naturally led to the violation of the latter. Our Lord, though he declined acting as a magifrate, yet, as a prophet, he might be commiffioned by God, to punish them either for this or any other crimes. And there

See Dr. Doddridge's Fam. Expos. vol. i. p. 428. 2d. edit. Dr. Whitby and Grotius on Mat. viii. 31.

From this prohibition of Mofes, fome have inferred, that it is very improbable that the Jews fhould breed up fwine. But that the Jews did breed up fwine, is evident from the laws of Hyrcanus against this practice. The owners of the swine here spoken of, fuppofing them to be Jews, very probably bred them for sale (in part,) having an opportunity of difpofing of them to the Greeks in Gadara, and other Heathens, in whose neighbourhood they lived.

was the greater propriety in his doing it for their offence, as they were not subject to the jurifdiction of the Jewish Sanhedrim, living under heathen government. The difpofition they discovered upon this occafion, in being more impreffed with the loss of their substance than with the miracle wrought for their conviction, fhews how well they deserved correction; as the miracle itself served to manifeft Christ's own regard to the law of God.

2. The deftruction of the swine ferved to afcertain the reality, and to spread the fame of the miracle performed upon the demoniacs. No miracle is more suspicious than the fuppofed expulfion of demons, abftracted from the cure of bodily diforders, there being much room left for collufion between the perfon imagined to be poffeffed and the exorcift. Frauds of this kind, both amongst Jews and Gentiles, were common in that age; as they have alfo fince been in a very fcandalous degree amongst Chriftians. But it is felf-evident,

- that

that a herd of fwine could not be confede-' rates in any fraud. Those who were ftrangers to the demoniacs (and fuch the attendants of Chrift probably were) could not doubt of the reality of their diforder or its cure, when they faw it fo wonderfully transferred to the fwine. Hereby Christ established the credit, not only of the miracle performed upon these, but upon all other demoniacs, for the conviction and benefit of mankind. That Chrift's intention was benevolent, more especially towards the Gadarenes, is certain from his refufing to give the perfons whom he cured leave to accompany him, and ordering them to acquaint their coun

Befides his own difciples, and the failors who belonged to the fhip in which Chrift and his difciples had arrived, he was attended by many others, (Mark 1. 36.) and all of them it is probable were ftrangers to the demoniacs. Before this time, he was followed with uncommon zeal by multitudes wherever he went. Mark i. 45. 42, 43. Lardner against Ward, p. 13.

Luke iv.

trymen,