ALLOW that the Scripture fpeaks of things according to their appearances, and that Saul and his companions might be deceived by an impoftor in Samuel's guise; Was this author deceived, or did he mean to deceive me, when he gives me to understand, that the woman faw Samuel, and was frighted at the fight ?

SUPPOSE a poffibility, that Saul and his companions could be impofed upon by an impoftor on this occafion; yet, furely, the highest probability is on the other fide. Saul was far from having an implicit faith even in Samuel, although the manner of his coming to the kingdom demonftrated the divinity of the prophet's miffion. And would he easily be the dupe of a filly woman! He was perfectly acquainted with the voice, ftature, and figure of Samuel. He was a brave man; and, doubtless, his companions were fo. Can we doubt whether he chose two of his old tried friends on this occafion? And, if he did, they also must have been acquainted with Samuel. They came upon the woman by night, and unprepared. Had they allowed her the least time for juggle or artifice, or fuffered her fo much as one moment out

of their fight; would a facred historian, whose business it was to expose these practices, as far as truth would allow, omit these circumftances? Would he omit all mention of the preceding facrifices and incantations? Would he omit every circumftance that tended to detect the fraud? Would he omit every thing that tended to fhew it to be fraud, and infert every thing that tended to imply the real appearance of the prophet ?

SHALL this author relate in plain terms, that Saul perceived it was Samuel himself * ? and shall he relate this by a word which fignifies either certain knowledge, experience, or fenfible perception? and are we to understand by this word, (contrary to al! the rules of grammar, and rational interpretation) that he neither knew, nor had fenfible evidence of this? that he only imagined it was Samuel, by the description of an impoftor? a description that would fuit ten thoufand other men as well as Samuel!

BUT the text fays not, that Saul faw Samuel.

*It is a tonifhing, that the English translation fhould leave put this laft word, himself.

TRUE:

TRUE but it tells us fomething that plainly implies it, that he flooped with bis face to the earth, and bowed himself.

WHEN Jacob met Efau, (Gen. iii.) the text tells us, that the handmaids, and Leah and Rachel, and their children, bowed themselves; the facred penman does not tell us, that they faw Efau, or that it was to him they bowed. Are we to believe, for this reafon, that they did not fee him? or did not bow to him upon feeing him?

WHEN David arofe out of his hidingplace, upon the fignal that Jonathan gave him, the text tells us (1 Sam. xx. 41.), that he fell upon his face to the ground, and bowed himself; the text tells us not, either that he faw Jonathan, or bowed to Jonathan. Does any man doubt, for that reason, that he did not fee him? or did not bow to him, be cause he saw him?

WHEN the meffenger from Saul's camp came to David at Zicklag, the text tells us, that he fell to the earth, and did obeysance *

*The fame word is here rendered, did obeyfance; which, in this action of Saul's, is tranflated, bowed himfelf; and, in the margin of Pagnin's Bible, is translated, adored.

There is no mention either of his feeing David, or bowing to him. Are we to doubt, for that reason, whether he did fee him? It were eafy to add other inftances. When the facred writers exprefs themselves in the fame style, and in the very fame words, on occurrences of the fame kind, fuch as the behaviour of people upon occafion of seeing some extraordinary perfon; Are we not to understand them in the fame fense?

THE text is ftill stronger and fuller in this place. It first says, that Saul knew that it was Samuel himself; and then adds, that he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed himself. Muft we believe, notwithstanding all this, that he neither knew nor faw what he bowed to? that he bowed only to a creature of the Pythonefs's imagination * ? What strange fuppofitions are these and what violence must we do to the facred text, to the analogy of scripture, to common grammar, and to

*But fome think this must be an evil fpirit, because be does not reprove Saul for doing him obeyfance. The truth is, fuch obfervers are scarce worth regarding; fince this was undoubtedly no more than a civil falutation.

common sense, to gratify fome dogmatick doubters + !

BUT Saul was frightned out of his wits, and did not know what he said or did.

I AM very inclined to think, that they who furmife this, believe it.

BUT, pray, how does it appear ? The gentlemen, that object thus, have not, perhaps, confidered, that Saul defired Samuel to be raised up to him †, (not to the Pythones); which plainly shews, that he had no apprehenfion of fear, from the thoughts of seeing him. And when the woman was frightened, and fhrieked at the fight of Samuel, it is plain, that Saul he bids her not be afraid ||; know what it was fhe faw, cause her fears Be not afraid; for what

was not; for

and defires to

which could

faweft

* I mean here to cenfure those only, who think their doubting a fufficient reafon why others fhould disbelieve. A modeft and a candid doubter is a most amiable character.

† Bring up Samuel to ME.

But it is urged, that the knew Saul before, from the advantage of his ftature, and that her fears were only pretended; not as arifing from the fight of Samuel, but from the fear of Saul. But why? Saul had already given her all the affurance of fafety that he could give and it is plain, he apprehended her fears arofe from the fight of Samuel: for he gives her no more affurances now, and

only