in such terms, as seem undeniably to imply their own persuasion of the fact; and that the distemper of these deplorable sufferers, was owing to the influence of some personal agents wholly distinct from themselves, and these no other than unclean, infernal spirits. For, says the historian-" The Devils besought him, saying, if thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine," "As they

went out, behold, they brought to him a dumb man possessed with a Devil. And when the Devil was cast out, the dumb spake; and the multitudes marvelled, saying, it was never so seen in Israel. But the Pharisees said, he casteth out Devils through the Prince of the Devils."+ "And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him and he was as one dead, insomuch that many said, he is dead." Thus it is evident, that the Evangelists believed in real possessions; otherwise, they must be considered as unfaithful historians, to declare as facts the expelling of demons, when no such thing ever took place. But if we suppose them constantly under infallible guidance, the opinion of those who deny real possessions leads to the grossest absurdity and contradiction. For it supposes them to be under infallible guidance, and not under infallible guidance, at the same time.

Thirdly. Our Saviour himself in the actual cure

* Matt. viii. 31. † Matt. ix. 32, 33, 34. ‡ Mark ix. 26.

of these demoniacs, and in his treatment of them, plainly appears to have looked upon them as not only nominally, but really such. The Devils besought him, saying-" If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. And he said unto them, Go." He speaks not to the man, but to some other conscious being possessing and acting upon him. "And Jesus rebuked him, (that is, the unclean spirit,) saying, hold thy peace, and come out of him." "And he healed many that were sick of divers diseases, and cast out many Devils, and suffered not the Devils to speak, because they knew him." "And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God. And he straitly charged them that they should not make him known."* And Devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuked them, and suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.‡

Fourthly. The denial of real possessions makes the gospel history to be a complication of absurdities, and renders it absolutely impossible to make any sense of many of its parts. For instance, the account which is given by St. Luke concerning the ejection of a demon. Now, read the word disease, instead of the word Devil, and the absurdity of such

* Mark iii. 11, 12.

Luke iv. 41.

an opinion appears in its true light; and the folly of those who are so absurd as to depart from the line of divine truth, is at once exhibited to public contempt. "And in the synagogue there was a man which had a spirit of an unclean discase, and the unclean disease cried out with a loud voice, Let us alone, what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? Art thou come to destroy us? I, the unclean disease, know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God. And Jesus rebuked the unclean disease, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the unclean disease had thrown him down in the midst, he (the unclean disease) came out of him, and hurt him not. And they were all ́amazed, and spake among themselves, saying, What a word is this; for with authority and power he commandeth the unclean diseases, and they come

out.

"It is well known," says Dr. Doddridge, “that a late learned and ingenious writer has revived the notion, long since maintained by Mr, Joseph Mede and Dr. Bekker, that these supposed demoniacs were only lunatics, or epileptics: but, on the most impartial perusal of what has passed between him and his learned antagonists, I am fully convinced that there is no sufficient reason for departing from the received interpretation; and I should think this story alone a convincing proof on the side of it.

*Luke iv. 33-36.

It is most incredible that an evangelist should have been left to ascribe this man's disorder to the spirit of an unclean demon, if it were only lunacy, or the falling sickness; or, that a physician of common sense should speak of it as a memorable circumstance, that such a distemper did not hurt a man by leaving him."-Again, our Lord represents an evil spirit or demon, after being cast out, as walking through desert places seeking rest and finding none. But supply the word disease instead of spirit, and the language of Jesus Christ becomes not only altogether unintelligible, but absolutely absurd. For instance, when the unclean spirit, or rather, according to the hypothesis of our opponents, the unclean disease, is gone out of a man, he (the unclean disease), walketh through dry places seeking rest, and findeth none. Then the unclean disease saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when the unclean disease is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. Then goeth the unclean disease and taketh with himself seven* other diseases more wicked than himself; and they, i. e. eight diseases, enter in and dwell there.†

*If the word seven be understood as denoting perfection, the words seven other spirits, mean a great number; therefore, according to the principles of those who deny the reality of possessions, this unclean disease took a great number of diseases more wicked than himself.

+ See Matt. xii, 43–45.

Thus it is evident, that if the opinions of these men who deny real possessions be correct, Jesus Christ, instead of speaking as never man spake, hath used language which amounts to nothing more than a mass of the most incoherent and ridiculous jargon. But if we understand the words of Christ as a faithful representation of what had previously taken place, his language on this occasion is intelligible and consistent with the general tenor of the gospel history. Thus it is evident that our adorable Redeemer considered possessions as real; otherwise, he would never have adopted the mode of expression made use of on this occasion.

II. A reply to the objections against this literal interpretation of these and similar expressions.

Objection 1st.-Mr. Heineken says, "In order as much as possible to narrow the ground of our present inquiry, it will be proper to observe, that in almost all these passages of Scripture, where men are described as possessed, our translators have injudiciously employed the term Devil, instead of Demon, which is the true meaning of the original word; and this circumstance has given rise to a very mistaken notion.”

This is only an assertion without the least shadow of proof brought to support it; and I would have Mr. H. to observe, that an assertion proves nothing without it be substantiated either by positive facts, or upon the principles of sound reason and argu