Page:Saducismus Triumphatus.djvu/262

 SECT. XVII.

Other Arguments of Mr. Webster, for a Room distinct from that Saul was in, proposed and answered.

Mr. Webster's third Argument to prove a Closet, is that it had been incongruous for Saul to have askt, what sawest thou? if they had been in one Room: But what is the incongruity, or what the wonder, if one in his condition should speak incongruously?

His Fourth and Fifth Arguments are to prove, that Saul had yet seen nothing, when he askt the Woman upon her Out-cry, what she had seen. They prove that she saw the Apparition first, which is granted, but her being in another Room, cannot thence be inferred, as I have shewn, though that be the thing he should make out, or all is impertinent.

The Sixth Argument is, That after all, Samuel was but coming up. An old Man cometh up, which proves nothing for Mr. Webster, but against him; for now, she shews him to Saul; she saw the first beginning of his appearing, which Saul did not. When he was risen higher out of the Earth, she shews him to the King, who 'tis said, perceived then it was Samuel, and bowed himself, v. 14. which is very easie and congruous, applied to one and the same Room. And what then makes Mr. Webster insult in the Conclusion of this Argument in these Words: Now let Mr. Glanvil consider, and answer whether it be not only intimated, but clearly holden forth in the Text, that either they were in two Rooms, or that nothing visible did appear before Saul, p. 171. His seeing nothing at first, I grant, but the two Rooms there is no ground for, and he doth not prove it. Whether he did not see Samuel after, I shall not now enquire. Hitherto I have nothing to do, but with the conceit of the Closet, or the other Room which Mr. Scot made for the Woman, and Mr. Webster endeavours to uphold, with much good Will, but little Success.