wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and

willin(cuithoughChap. IV. Rival with our Saviour Chrifl. 267tifiimonio, .enhn de fe dicenti poteft crsdi? ) fed prophetarum teflimonio^qui omnia qua fecit ac fnffus eft, multo ante cecinerunt ; fidem divinitatis accepit; quod neque Apollonio neque Apuleio neque cuiquam tnagorum poteftaliquando contingere. It is manifeft, that we Chrijlians are wifer than yonPagans^ , that we do not prefently attribute divinity to a perfon merely becaufeof his wonders ; whereas a few portentous things, or extraordinaryactions,.be enough with you to make you deify the doer of them ; (and foindeed did fome of them, however Hierocles denies it, deify Apollonius.)Let this writer againft Chriftianity therefore learn, {if he have any under^Jianding or fenfe in him) that Chrift was not therefore believed to be a Godby us Chriftians, merely becaufe of his miracles, but becaufe we faw all thofethings done by, and accomplifhed in him, which were long before f.redi£led tous by the prophets. He did miracles, and we fljould therefore have fufpeSfedhim for a magician (as you now call him, and as the Jews then fuppofed himto be) bad not all the prophets with one voice foretold, that he Jhould do fetchthings. JVe believe him therefore to be God, no more for his miracles than fromthat very crofs of his, which ycu fo much quarrel with, becaufe that was likewifeforetold. So that our belief of Chrift's divinity is not founded upon hisown tefimony (for who can be believed concerning himjelf ? ) but upon theteftimony of the prophets, who fang long, before of all thofe things, which heboth did and ftffered. MlAch is fuch a peculiar advantage and privilege ofhis, as that neither Apollonius nor Apuleius, nor any other magician, couldever ftoare therein. Now, as for the life and morals of this Apollonius Tya^naus, as i: was a thing abfolutely necefTary for the carrying on of fuch a diabolicaldefign, that the perfon made life of for an inftrument fliould havefome colourable and plaulible pretence to virtue ; fo did A}ollonius accordinglytake upon him the profeffion of a Pythagorean ; and indeed z&. thatpart externally fo well, that even Sidonius Apollinaris \, a Chriftian,was fo dazzled with the glittering fhew and luftre of his counterfeitvircue«, as if he had been inchanted by this magician fo long after hisdeath. Neverthelefs, whofoever is not very dim-fighted in fuch matters asthefe, or partially afieifled, may eafily perceive, that this Apollonius was fofar from having any thing of that divine Ipirit which rHanifefted itfclf inour Saviour Chrill:, (tranfcending all the philofophers that ever were) thathe fell i\\r iliort of the better moralized Pagans ; as for example Socrates,fitthere being a plain appearance of much pride and vain -glory (befides otherfoolery) diicoverable both in his words and aftions. And this Eufebius *undertakes to evince from Philoftratus his own hiftory (though containingmany falfhoods m it) iS' hi sVifixE^i xj [j.n^!oii ivS^dcvj ol^ioii iyx^lvn]/, iy^ o-rrug7w (TKTJi^i »)|awv Xj:5~M wa^art^hxt tov ' A'^o'aXujiov, 'That Apollonius was fofar from defervm^ to be compared with our Saviour Chrift, that he was notto be ranked amongft the moderately and indifferently honeft men. Wherefore,as to his repiued miracle, if credit be to be given to thofe relationSj,and fuch things were really done by him, it mud for this reafon alfo beconcluded, that thev were done no otherwife than by magick and necromancyand that this Apollonius was but an Archimago or grand Magician.-,Neither ought this to be fufpe^ted ior a mere flander caft upon him by partiallyI Epillolar. Lib. VIII. Epill, III, p. 46^, 463. ^ Adverf. Hisrodcra, Cap. IV. p. 431.