Full text of "Works"
^^^o^.
I
- A
.MA*;
m
THE
W O R K S
OF THE
RIGHT REVEREND
WILLIAM WARBURTON,D.D
LORD BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER.
A NEW EDITION,
IN TWELVE VOLUMES.
TO WHICH IS PREFIXED
A DISCOURSE BY WAY OF GENERAL PREFACED
CONTAINING
SOME ACCOUNT OF THE LIFE, WRITINGS, AND CHARACTER
OF THE AUTHOR ;
BY RICHARD HURD, D,D. \
LORD BISHOP OF WORCESTER. - rt \
VOLUME THE SIXT
H. M
Printed by ~Lul<c ftartsard c|- Sons, ntar Line obi s -Inn Pields,
FOR T. CADELL AND w. DAVIES, IN THE STRAND.
isn.
CONTENTS
\
OF
VOL. VI.
THE DIVINE LEGATION.
BOOK VI.
CONTAINS AN EXAMINATION OF ALL THE TEXTS
BROUGHT FROM THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS
TO PROVE A FUTURE STATE OF REWARDS AND
PUNISHMENTS DID MAKE PART QF THE MOSAIC
DISPENSATION :
continued
SECT. V. The agreement of the Proposition of no future
State in the Mosaic Dispensation, with the Vllth Article
pf the Church of England evinced. That the Old
Fathers looked for more than transitory Promises, illus
trated in the famous case of ABRAHAM, where it is
proved that the command to offer Isaac was merely an
information, in a representative Action instead of Words,
of the Redemption of Mankind by the great Sacrifice
of CHRIST. Siiewn how this Interpretation overturns
all the infidel objections against the truth of this part of
Abraham s history - pp. i 46
SECT. VI. To support the foregoing Interpretation, The
Original, Nature, and Use of TYPICAL RITES and SE
CONDARY SENSES in Prophecies are inquired into. In
the course of which Inquiry, the Principles of Mr.
Coilins s book concerning the Grounds and Reasons of
the Christian Religion are examined and confuted,
and likewise the ixeasoning of Dr. Sykes against all
Double Senses of Prophecies in his book intitled, The
Principles
IV CONTEXTS OF SIXTH VOLUME.
Principles and Connexion of Natural and Revealed Peti-
gion, cr. The Tsc and < importance of these Questions
to the subject of The Divine Legation explained. The
CONCLUSION of the argument, with a recapitulation
ofit - PP- 4<5i44
APPENDIX concerning the Book of JOB - pp. 145 i -4
to the Fifth and Sixth Sections - pp. 15- 2 io
BOOK IX.
BEING AN ATTEMPT TO F.XPLAIN THE TRUE NATURE
AND GENIUS OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION - p. 211
INTRODUCTION - pp. 213232
CHAPS. I. to VI. pp. 233348
PP- 349399
INDEX to The Divine Legation - - pp. 401 446
AUTHORS, &c. quoted in The Divine Legation; which
Quotations are not referred to in the Index, pp.447-
THE
DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES
DEMONSTRATED.
BOOK VI.
CONTINUED.
SECT. V.
BUT though it appear that a future state of Re*
wards and Punishments made no part of the Mosaic
Dispensation, yet the LAW had certainly a SPIRITUAL
meaning, to be understood when the fulness of time
should come : And hence it received the nature, and
afforded the efficacy, of PROPHECY. In the interim, the
MYSTERY OF THE GOSPEL was occasionally revealed
by GOD to his chosen Servants, the Fathers and Leaders
of the Jewish Nation ; and the dawning of it was gra
dually opened by the Prophets, to the People.
And which is exactly agreeable to what our excellent
Church in its SEVENTH ARTICLE of Religion teacheth
concerning this matter.
ARTICLE VII.
^fje <DlD Testament i* not contrary to tfje
for botj in tfce dDlo anU ^eto tCegftammt,
Hite ijs offered to apankma fc? Ctjrfet, \t>o ft tlje
onlp ^etitator betloecn dEfofc anD S^an. dllljertfocc
tljep are not to be Ijearti, toljict) feiffn tljat tje flDlU
$ atSergj tiiti look onlg for trangitorp ^rom^ejJ^
VOL. VI. B The
2 THE DIVINE LEGATION [BookVL.
The Old Testament is not contrary to the New, is
a proposition directed against the Manichean error, to
which the opinions of some Sectaries of these later times
seemed to approach. The Manicheans fancied there was
a. Good and an Evil Principle; that the Old Dispensa
tion was under the Evil, and that the New was the
work of the Good. Now it hath been proved, that the
Old Testament is so far from being contrary to the New,
that it was the Foundation, Rudiments, and Preparation
for it.
For both in the Old and New Testament, everlasting
life is offered to mankind by CHRIST, who is the only
Mediator between G,od and Mcu\ That the Church
could not mean by these words, that everlasting life was
offered to mankind by CHRIST in the Old Testament in
the SAME MANNER in which it is offered by the New,
is evident from these considerations:
1. The Church, in the preceding words, only says,
the Old Testament is NOT CONTRARY to the. New,
but did she mean that everlasting life was offered by
both, in the same manner, she would certainly have said,
The Old Testament is THE SAME with the New. This
farther appears from the inference drawn from the pro
position concerning everlasting life WHEREFORE they
are not to be heard, which feign that the old FATHERS
did look only for transitory promises. But was this pre
tended sense the true, then the inference had been, That
ALL THE ISRAELITES were instructed to look for more
than transitory promises.
2. The Church could not mean, that everlasting life is
offered in the Old and New Testament in the same
manner, because we learn from St. Austin, that this was
one of the old Pelagian heresies, condemned by the
Catholics in the Synod of Diospolis, QUOD LEX sic
Mi ! D REGNUM [cOELOBUMj QUEHADMODUM
ET EVAXGfcLIUM*.
*
De Genie Pelagii, c, xi. $ 24.
WImt
Sect 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 3
What was meant therefore by the words both in
the Old and New Testament, everlasting Life is offered
to Mankind by CHRIST, was plainly this; " That the
" offer of everlasting Life to Mankind by CHRIST in
" the New Testament was SHADOWED OUT in the Old;
" the SPIRITUAL meaning of the Law and the Pro-
" phets referring to that life and immortality, which
" was brought to light by JESUS CHRIST."
3. But lastly, Whatever meaning the Church had in.
these words, it cannot at all affect our Proposition, that
a future state was not taught by the Law of Mo .?;
because by the Old Testamemt is ever meant both the
Law and the Prophets. Now I hold that the Prophets
gave strong intimations, though in figurative language
borrowed from the Jewish Economy, of the everlasting
life offered to mankind by JESUS CHRIST.
The concluding words of the Article which relate to
this matter say, Wherefore they are not to be heard,
which feign that the OLD FATHERS did look only for
transitory promises ; and so say I : because JESUS him
self is to be heard, before all such ; and he affirms the
direct contrary of the Father of th& faithful in particular.
Your father Abraham (says he to the unbelieving Jews)
rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad*.
A fact not only of the utmost certainty in itself, but of
the highest importance to be rightly understood. That
I may not therefore be suspected of prevarication, I chuse
this instance (the noblest that ever was given of the
HARMONY between the Old and New Testament) to
illustrate this consistent truth.
I.
And I persuade myself that the learned Reader will
be content to go along with me, while I take occasion,
from these remarkable words of JES US, to explain the
liistory of the famous COMMAND TO ABRAHAM TO
* John viii. 56.
B 2 SITES
4 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
OFFER UP HIS SON ; for to this History, I shall prove,
the words refer ; and by their aid I shall be enabled to
justify a revolting circumstance in it, which has been
long the stumbling-block of Infidelity,
In the sense in which the History of the COMMAND
hath been hitherto understood, the best apology for
Abraham s behaviour (and it is hard we should be
obliged, at this time of day, to make apologies for an
action, which, we are told, had the greatest merit in the
sight of God) seems to be this, that having had much
intercourse with the GOD of Heaven, whose Revelations
(not to say, his voice of Nature) spoke him a good and
just Being, Abraham concluded that this command to
sacrifice his son, conveyed to him like the rest, by the
same strong and clear impression on the Sensory, came
also from the same GOD. How rational soever this
solution be, the Deist, perhaps, would be apt to tell us
it was little better than Electra s answer to Orestes, who,
staggering in his purpose to kill his Mother by the com
mand of Apollo, says : But if, after all, this should be
an evil Demon, who, bent ttpon mischief hath assumed
the form of a God? She replies, JFhat, an evil Demon
possess the sacred Tripod! It is not to be supposed*.
But the idea hitherto conceived of this important
History has subjected it even to a worse abuse than that
of Infidelity: Fanatics, carnally as well as spiritually
licentious, have employed it to countenance and support
the most abominable of their Doctrines and Practices.
liimius in his Candid Narrative hath given us a strange
passage from the writings of the Moravian Brethren,
which the reader, from a note of his, will find trans
cribed here below f,
However,
w. Eurip. Electra, ver, 979,
f " lie (tke Saviour) can dispose of life and soul; he can mak
* the ceconomy of salvation, and change it every hour, that the hin-
u dermost be the foremost ;.. He can make laws, and abrogate them ;
" UK CAST MA.KB THAT TO JJB MORAL, WHICH is AGAINST NA-
* TURE;
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 5
However, after saving and reserving to ourselves the
benefit of all those arguments, which have been hitherto
brought to support the history of the COMMAND; I beg
leave to say, that the source of all the difficulty is the veiy
wrong idea men have been taught to entertain of it, while it
was considered as given for a TRIAL ONLY of Abraham s
faith ; and consequently as a Revelation unsought by
him, and unrelated to any of those before vouchsafed
unto him : Whereas, in truth, it was a Revelation AR
DENTLY DESIRED, had the CLOSEST CONNEXION with,
and was, indeed, the COMPLETION OF ALL THE FORE
GOING ; which were all directed to one end ; as the
gradual view of the orderly parts of one intire Dispen
sation required : consequently, the principal purpose
of the COMMAND was not to try Abraham s faith,
although its nature was such, that in the very giving
of it, God did, indeed, tempt or try Abraham *.
In plain terms, the Action was enjoined as the con
veyance of information to the Actor, of something he had
requested to know : This mode of information by Signs
instead of Words being, as we have shewn, of common
practice in those early Ages : And as the force of the
following reasoning is founded on that ancient custom,
I must request the Reader carefully to review what
hath been said in an early part of the Fourth Volume,
Book IV. Sect. 4. concerning the origin, progress, and
various modes of personal converse ; where it is seen,
how the conveying information, and giving directions,
to Another, by Signs and Actions, instead of ft ords 9
came to be of general practice in the first rude Ages ;
and how, in compliance therewith, GOD was pleased
frequently
" TURF, ; the greatest virtue to be the most villanons action* and
* the most virtuous thoughts to be the most criminal : He can in
* a quarter of an hour, make ABRAHAM willing to kill his Son,
" which however is the most abominable thought a man can
Count Zinzendurf s Serm. in Rimius, p. 53,
* Gen. xxii. i.
6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
frequently to converse with the holy Patriarchs and
Prophets in that very manner.
Laying down therefore what hath been said on this
subject, in the place referred to, as a Postulatum;
I undertake to prove the following Proposition :
I.
THAT WHEN GOD SAYS TO ABRAHAM, TAKE NOW
THY SON, THINE ONLY SON ISAAC, $c * THE
COMMAND IS MERELY AN INFORMATION BY ACTION,
INSTEAD OF WORDS, OF THE GREAT SACRIFICE OF
CHRIST FOR THE REDEMPTION OF MANKIND, GIVEN
AT THE EARNEST REQUEST OF ABRAHAM, WHO LONGED
IMPATIENTLY TO SEE CHRIST S DAY-, and is,
in its nature, exactly the same as those informations to
the Prophets, where to this Man, God says, Make thee
bonds and yokes, and put them on thy neck f ; to another
Go take unto thee a wife of whoredoms J, <*c. and
to a third Prepare thee stuff for removing \ , S$c. that
is, AN INFORMATION OF HIS PURPOSE BY ACTION
INSTEAD OF WORDS ; in the first case, foretelling the
conquests of Nebuchadnezzar over Edom, Moab, Am-
mon, Tyre, and Sidon ; in the second, declaring his
abhorrence of the idolatries of the House of Israel ; and
in the third, the approaching Captivity of Zedekiah.
The foundation of my Thesis I lay in that scripture
of St. John, where JESUS says to the unbelieving Jews,
YOUR FATHER ABRAHAM REJOICED TO SEE MY DAY ;.
AND HE SAW IT, AND WAS GLAD||.
i. If we consider Abraham s personal character,
together with the choice made of him for head and origin
of that People which GOD would separate and make holy
to himself; from whence was to arise the REDEEMER
of Mankind, the ultimate end of that separation; we
cannot but conclude it probable, that the knowledge
Gen. xxii. a. f Jerem. xxvii. 2. J Ploseai. 2.
Ezek. xii. 3. jj Chap. viii. ver. 56.
Of
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 7
of this Redeemer would be revealed to him. Shall 1 hide
from Abraham that thing which I do*? says GOD, in a
matter that much less concerned the Father of the Faith
ful. And here, in the words of JESUS, we have this
probable truth arising from the nature of the thing,
made certain and put out of all reasonable question
Abraham rejoiced, says JESUS, to see my DAY f, f5}vty*c />
TW Iptv. Now when the figurative word day is used,
not to express in general the period of any ones existence,
but to denote his peculiar office and employment, it must
needs signify that very circumstance in his life, which is
characteristic of such office and employment. But
JESUS is here speaking of his peculiar office arid-employ
ment, as appears from the occasion of the debate, which
was his saying, If any man keep my commandments, lie
shall never taste of death, intimating thereby the virtue
of his office of Redeemer. Therefore, by the word DAT
must needs be meant that characteristic circumstance
of his life ; But that circumstance was the laying down
his life for the Redemption of Mankind. Consequently,
by the word DAY is meant the great sacrifice of
CHRIST I". Hence we may discover the real or affected
ignorance of the Socinian Comment upon this place ;
which would have day only to signify in general the life
of CHRIST, or the period of his abode here on earth.
To reconcile the learned Reader to the propriety and
elegance as well as to the truth of this sense of the word,
Day, he may observe, that as Jesus entitles his great Work,
in his state of humiliation, the Redemption of Mankind, by
the name of HIS DAY ; so is he pleased to give the same
appellation to his other great Work, in his triumphant
state, the Judgment of J\ I unkind. " For as the lightning
" (says he) that lightneth out of the one part under
" heaven, so shall also the Son of man be in HIS
DAY." But this figure is indeed as usual in Scrip-
* Gen. xviii. 17. f John viii. 56,
| See Note [A] at the end of this Book, Luke xvii, 34.
B 4 tare
8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
ture as it is natural in itself. Thus that signal catastrophe
in the fortunes of the Jewish People, both temporal and
spiritual, their Restoration, is called their DAY Then
shall the Children of Judah (says God by the Prophet
Hosea) and the children of Israel) be gathered together,
and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out
of the land: for great shall be THE DAY of Israel*.
2. But not only the matter, but the manner, likewise
of this great Revelation, is delivered in the text Abraham
rejoiced to SEE my day: and he SAW it, and was glad.
lyy. IAH* TW vpig&v ^w Iptv y^ i IAE This evidently shews
the Revelation to have been made, not by relation in
words, but by REPRESENTATION in action. The verb
ti$u is frequently used in the New Testament, in its
proper signification, to see sensibly, but whether used
literally or figuratively, it always denotes a lull intuition.
That the expression was as strong in the Syrian langi; ?;e
used by JESUS, as here in the Greek of his Historian,
appears from the reply the Jews made to him Thou
cut not yet fifty years old, and hast thou SEEN Abra
ham^? Plainly intimating that they understood the
assertion of Abrahams seeing Christ s day to be a real
beholding him in person. We must conclude therefore,
from the words of the text, that the Redemption of Man
kind was not only revealed to Abraham, but was revealed
likewise by representation. A late Writer, extremely well
skilled in the style of Scripture, was so sensible of the
force of JESUS S words, hat, though he had no suspicion
they related to any part of Abraham s recorded history,
yet he saw plainly they implied an information by repre
sentation Thus also Abraham (says he) saw the day
of CHRIST, and zvas glad. But this must be in a
typical or prophetical vision J. The excellent Dr. Scott
is of the same opinion. lie supposes " the words reler to
some peculiar discoveries, which the Spirit of God
* Chap i. ver. n. f John viii. 57.
J See Note [B] at the end of this Book.
" might
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 9
" might make to Abraham, for his own private conso-
" lation, though not recorded in Scripture**?
So far, then, is clear, that Abraham had indeed this
Revelation. The next question will be, whether we can
reasonably expect to find it in the history of his life,
recorded in the Old Testament? And that we may find
it here, both the words of JESUS, and the nature of the
thing, assure us.
i. We learn, by the history of CHRIST S Ministry, that
in his disputations with the Jew?, he never urged them
with any circumstance of GOD S Dispensations to their
Forefathers, which they either were not, or might not be,
well acquainted with by the study of their Scriptures.
The reason is evident. His credentials were twofold,
SCRIPTURE and MIRACLES. In the first way therefore
of confirming his Mission, if, instead of appealing to the
course of GOD S Dispensation to his chosen People, as
delivered in Scripture, he had given them an unknown
history of that Dispensation, (as was one of the tricks
of Mahomet in his Alcoran) such a method had been
so far from supporting his Character, that it would have
heightened the unfavourable prejudices of Unbelievers
towards him : as looking like a confession that the known
history was against him ; and that he was forced to invent
a new one, to countenance his pretensions. He must,
therefore, for the necessary support of his Character,
appeal to some acknowleged Facts. These were all
contained in SCRIPTURE and TRADITION. But, we
know, he always studiously declined supporting himself
on their Traditions, though they were full of circum
stances favourable to the Religion he came to propagate,
such as the doctrines of eternal Life, and the Resur
rection of the Body: Nay, he took all occasions of
decrying their TRADITIONS as impious corruptions, by
which they had rendered the WRITTEN word of none
effect. We conclude, therefore, from JESLJS S own
* Christian Life, Vol. V, p. 194.
words,
io THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
words, that the circumstance of Abraham s knowledge
of his Day is certainly to be found in Abraham s history :
Not in so clear a manner, indeed, as to be understood
by a Carnal-minded Jew, nor even by a System-making
Christian, for reasons hereafter to be explained; yet
certainly There ; and certainly proved to be There, by the
best rules of logic and criticism.
2. But though this did not (as it does) appear from
the words of JESUS, yet it might be collected from the
very nature of the thing. For, admit only the fact (as
we now must) that Abraham did see CHRIST S Day,
and it is utterly incredible that so capital a circumstance
should be omitted in his History, a sacred Record, pre
ordained for one of the supports and evidences of CHRIST S
Religion. That it could not be delivered in the book of
Genesis, in terms plainly to be understood by the People,
during the first periods of a preparatory Dispensation, is
very certain ; as will be seen hereafter : But then, this
is far from being a reason why it should not be recorded
at all : Great ends, such as supporting the truth of the
future Dispensation, being to be gained by the delivery
of it even in so obscure a manner.
Having thus far cleared our way, and shewn, that the
doctrine of Redemption was revealed to Abraham; and
that the history of that Revelation is recorded in Scrip
ture ; we proceed to the proof of these two points :
I. That there is no place, in the whole history of Abra-
liam, but this, where he is commanded to offer up his
Son, which bears the least marks or resemblance of such
a Revelation.
II. That this Command to offer up his Son, has all the
marks of such a Revelation.
I. On the first head, it will be necessary to give a short
abstract of Abraham s story : in which we find a regular
account of the course and order of GOD S Dispensations
to him, from the time of his being called out of Chaldea,
2 tO
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 11
to the Command to offer up his Son Isaac ; the last
of GOD S Revelations to him, recorded in Scripture.
The first notice given us of this Patriarch is in the
account of his Genealogy, Family, and Country*. We
are then toldf, that God called him from his father s
house to a Land which he should -shew him: And to ex*-
cite his obedience, he promises to make of him a great
Nation^: to have him in his peculiar protection, and to
make all the Nations of the Earth blessed through hirn^.
The last part of this promise is remarkable, as it con
tains the proper end of GOD S Choice and Separation of
him and his Posterity; and so, very fitly made, by the
sacred Writer, the foundation of the history of GOD S
Dispensations to him; and a mark to direct the reader
to what, they are all ultimately to be referred. Which,
by the way, exposes the extreme absurdity in Collins and
Tindal, who would have the blessing here promised to be
only an Eastern form of speech, honourable to the
Father of the Faithful. When Abraham, in obedience
to this command, was come into the land of Canaan ||,
GOD vouchsafed him a farther Revelation of his Will;
and now told him, that this was the Land (which he had
before said he would shew him) to be inherited by his
Seed**. When he returned from Egypt, GOD revealed
himself, still farther, and marked out the bounds^ of
that Land, which he assured him should be to him and
his Seed for ever J J. Which Seed should be as the dust of
the earth for number. After all these gracious and re
peated assurances, we may well suppose Abraham to be
now grown uneasy at his Wife s barrenness, and his own
want of issue to inherit the Promises. Accordingly,, we
find him much disturbed with these apprehensions j|||;
and that GOD, to remove them, appeared to him in a vision,
* Gen. xi. 27, & seq. -f- Chap. xii. ver. i. J Ver. 2,
Ver. 3. |j Ver. 5. ** Ver. 7.
tt Chap. xiii. ver. 14. J J Ver, 15. Ver. 16.
|j|j Chap, xv, ver, i.
and
12 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
and said, Fectr not, Abram? I am thy shield, and exceed
ing great reward. Abraham, thus encouraged to tell his
grief, confessed it to be for his want of issue, and for that
he suspected the promised blessings were to be inherited
Iby hrs adopted children, the sons of his servant Eliezer
ef Damascus*. To ease him of this disquiet, GOD
was now pleased to acquaint him, that his design was not,
that an adopted son should inherit, but one out of his
awn bowels^. And, for farther assurance, he instructs
feira in the various fortunes of his Posterity That his
Seed should be a stranger in a Land that was not theirs,
which Land should afflict them four hundred years, and
that then he would judge that Nation, and afterwards,
hrhig them out with great substance to inherit the Land
of Canaan^. At the same time GOD more particu
larly marks out the bounds of the Promised Land, and
reckons up the several Nations which then inhabited it.
Tilings being in this train, and Abraham now satisfied
that the Seed of his loins was to inherit the Promises ;
Sarah, on account of her sterility, persuaded her Hus
band to go in unto her Hand -maid Hagar, the Egyptian ||.
In this she indulged her own vanity mid ambition; she
would have a Son whom she might adopt; It may be
(says she} that I may obtain children by ACT**; and she
flattered herself with being, at the same time, an instru
ment to promote the designs of Providence : Behold now
(says she) the Lord hath restrained me from bearing.
To this project Abraham consented. Hagar conceived,
ami bare a Son, called Ishmael| |;. The good Patriarch
was now fully satisfied: He grew fond of Ishmael; and
reckoned upon him for the inheritor of the promises. To
correct this mistake, GOD vouchsafed him a new Reve
lation ; in \\hich he is told, that GOD would not only
(as had been before promised) bless and multiply his
* Chap, xv.ver. 2, 3. f Ver. 4. J Ver. 13, 14*
^ Ver. i&. to trie end. [| Chap. xvi. ** Ver. 3.
*H Ver. 15. }{ Chap. xvii.
Posterity
Sect 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, 13
Posterity in an extraordinary manner, but would sepa
rate them from all other Nations, and he would be their
GOD, and they should be his PEOPLE*. And this
national adoption requiring a mutual Covenant, the rite
of CIRCUMCISION is at the same time enjoined as the
mark of the Covenantf- Lastly/ Abraham is shewn his
foad mistake, and told, that it was not the Son of tlie
hond-u-oman, but of his Wife Sarah, who was ordained to
be Heir of the Promises J. But Abraham had so long in
dulged himself in his mistake, and consequently in Ms
.affection for Ishmael, that he begs GOD would indulge
it too O that Ishmael might live -before thee\. And
GOD, in compassion to his paternal fondness, graciously
promises that the Posterity of Ishmael should become
exceeding great and powerful j), but, that, nevertheless,
his Covenant should be with Isaac, and with Jus &&d
after him*. However, this Revelation having been re
ceived with some kind of doubt, as appears by the words
of the historian * *, God w r as pleased to repeat the pro
mise of a Son by Sarah ff : and even to mark the time
of his birth;); J ; according to which, Sarah conceived and
bore Abraham a Son . After this, GOD revealed him
self yet again to Abraham ||||, with a command to put
away his Son Ishmael; and to assure him, that the
CHOSEN POSTERITY should come from Isaac ; For
Abraham was not yet weaned from his unreasonable
partiality for Ishmael ; but still reckoned upon him as
his Second hopes, in case of any disaster or misfortune,
that should happen to Isaac. This appears from IshrnaeFs
insolent behaviour^; from Abraham s great unwil
lingness to dismiss him *f ; and from God s assuring him,
m order to make him easy, That in Isaac his Seed should
* Ver. 7, & seq. f See note [C] at the end of this Book.
J Ver. 16. Ver. 18. || Ver. 20, & seq.
1T Ver. 19. * * Ver. 17. f f Chap, xviii, -
JJ Ver. 10. 14. Chap. xxi.ver2. ||jl Ver. 12*
ff Ver, 9. *f Ver. u-
14 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
be called*. We now come to the famous History of
the Command to offer up his Son Isaac And it came
to pass (says the sacred historian) AFTER THESE THINGS,
that God did tempt Abraham, and said, Take now thy
Son, THINE ONLY sox Isaac, whom thou loves t, and get
thee unto the land of Moriah: and offer him there for a
burnt-offering upon one of the mountains which I will
tell thee of. And Abraham arose f, &c. This was the
last of God s Revelations to Abraham And it came to
pass after these things And with this, the history of
them is closed.
Here we see all these Revelations, except the last, are
plain and clear, as referring to TEMPORAL Felicities to
be conferred on^ Abraham and his Posterity after the
flesh ; through* whom, some way or other, a BLESSING
was to extend to all Mankind. Not one of these there
fore can pretend to be that Revelation of the Redemption
of the world. The last is the only dark and obscure
one of the whole; which, if indeed a Revelation of this
grand Mystery, must of necessity, as we shall shew, be
darkly and obscurely recorded.
But to this perhaps it may be objected, that the famous
Promise of GOD to Abraham, that in him should all the
Families of the earth be blessed^., is that Revelation ;
because St. Paul calls this the preaching of the Gospel
unto him And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would
justify the Heathen through Faith, preached before the
Gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations
of the earth be blessed \. To this 1 reply, that the
Apostle is here convincing the Galatians, that the
Gospel of CHRIST is founded on the same PRINCIPLE
\vith that which justified Abraham, namely, FAITH;
Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for
righteousness ||. He then pursues his argument in this
manner, Therefore, they which be of Faith> are blessed
* Chap. xxi. ver. ia. f Chap, xxii, ver. i, 2, 3.
J Chap. xii. ver. 3. GaU iii, 8, jj Ver, 6.
with
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMON STRATED. 15
with faithful Abraham*. The reason he gives is from
the promise in question, given in reward of Abraham s
Faith, that in him should all Nat torn be blessed. This is
the force of the argument ; and it is very finely managed
But then the terms, Faith and Gospel, are here used, as
they very often are in the apostolic writings f, not in their
specific but generic sense, for confidence in any one, and
glad tidings in general. For it is plain, Abraham s
Faith here recommended, was not that Christian Faith
in JESUS the MESSIAH, but, faith in GOD, who had
promised to make his Posterity according to the flesh, as
numerous as the stars of Heaven, when as yet he had no
offspring . In a like latitude of expression, St. Paul
uses the word vptvaykxfypvu, to preach the Gospel be
forehand ; not the tidings of the Messiah the Redeemer,
but the effects of the Redemption wrought by him, a
BLESSING on the whole race of mankind. Tidings
which indeed referred to a future Dispensation: and, in
this, differing from his use of the word Faith, which did
not. But then, this is very far from his SEEING CHRIST S
DAY ; of which indeed he speaks in another place, as
we shall see presently. It is true, this promised BLESS
ING was the preparatory Revelation, by which, we were
to estimate the ultimate end of all the following ; and on
which, we must suppose them to be built: And so much
we are concerned to prove it was. I conclude therefore,
that when Jesus says, Abraham saw his Day; and when
St. Paul says, that he had the, Gospel preached before
unto him, they spoke of two different Revelations. We
come, therefore,
II. To the second point : which is to shew, that the
COMMAND to offer up Isaac was the very revelation of
CHRIST S DAY, or the Redemption of mankind, by his
death and sufferings.
* Ver. 9.
t See what hath been said on this subject in the preceding dis
course on the xith chapter to the Utbrei&s.
| Gen, xy. 6.
i. We
x6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Bor>k VI.
1 . We may observe, from this short view of Abraham s
history, that all GOD S Revelations to him, even unto this
last, open by degrees ; and relate, primarily indeed, to
his Posterity according to the flesh, but ultimately, to
the whole race of Mankind : as appears from that
MY STICK Promise so early made to him as the foun
dation of all the following, that in Him should all the
Families of the earth be blessed. These are the two
great coincident Truths, to which all these Revelations
tend. But the last, the famous Command in question,
which one would naturally expect to find the confirmation
and completion of the rest, hath, if the common Inter
preters understand it right, no kind of relation to them, but
is entirely foreign to every thing that preceded. Hence
we conclude, and surely not unreasonably, that there is
something more in \he.Command than these Interpreters,
resting in the outside relation, have yet discovered to us.
2. But this is not all. The Command \ as it hath
been hitherto understood, is not only quite disjoined
from the rest of Abraham s history, but likewise occu
pies a place in it, which, according to our ideas of
things, it hath certainly usurped. The Command is sup
posed to be given as a Trial only*. Now when the
great Searcher of hearts is pleased to try any of his
Servants, either for example sake, or for some ether end
favourable of his Dispensations to mankind ; as in this,
he condescends to the manner of men, who cannot judge
of the merits of their inferior Agents without Trial, so we
may be assured, he would accommodate himself to their
manner likewise, in that which is the material circum
stance of a Trial : But, amongst men, the Agent is
always tried before he be set on work, or rewarded ;
and not after : because the Trial is in order to know,
or to make it known, whether he be fit for the work, or
deserving of the Reward. When we come therefore to
this place, and see a Command only to tempt or try
* See Note [D] at the end of this Book.
Abraham,
Sect. 5-] OP MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 17
Abraham, we naturally expect, on his answering to the
Trial, to find him importantly employed or greatly re
warded. On the contrary we are told, that this Trial
was made after all his Work was done, and all his
Reward received And it came to pass after these
things. Nay, what is still more strange, alter he had
been once tried already. For the promise to him, when
he was yet childless, his Wife barren, and both of them
far advanced in years, that his seed should be as tlie stars
of Heaven for multitude, was a Trial of his faith ; and
his believing, against all probability in a natural way,
the sacred Historian tells us, was accounted to him J or
righteousness*. Such therefore being the method Loth
of GOD and Men in this matter, we must needs con
clude, that the Command was not, according to the
common notion, a Trial only, because it comes ajter
all GOD S Dispensations f. Yet as the sacred text
assures us it was a Trial, and as a Trial necessarily
precedes the employment or reward of the person tr ied ;
we must needs conclude, that as no employment, so some
benefit followed this trial. Now, on our interpretation,
& benefit, as we shall see, did follow : We have reason
therefore to conclude that this interpretation is the true.
3. Having seen the difficulties arising from the com
mon interpretation of the Command, let us view it now
on the other .side ; in the new light in which we have
adventured to place it. And here we shall find that
every circumstance of the Story concurs to support our
interpretation. From the view given of Abraham s his
tory, we see, as was said before, how all GOD S reve
lations to him, to this last, ultimately related to that
mystic fundamental promise made to him, on his first
Vocation, that /// him sknildatl the families of the earth
be blessed. GOD opens the scheme of his Dispensations
by exact and regular steps ; and the Revelations follow
one another gradually and in order. Abraham is first
* Gen. xv. 6. | See Note [E] at the end of this Book.
VOL, VI. C commanded
i8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
commanded to go into a Land which should be shewn to
him then that Land, to be possessed by his numerous
posterity, is exhibited before him Its distinct boundaries
are afterwards- marked out He is next assured, while
yet childless, that his posterity, to which so much was
promised, should not be from an adapted son, but from
one out of iiis own loins He is then told that his son
should be born of Sarah which is- followed by a formal
execution of the COVENANT confirmed by the seal of
Circumcision After all this, the birth of Isaac is pre
dicted : who being born at the appointed time, Ishmael
is ordered to be sent away ; to design with more certainty
the succession of the son by Sarah. Here we see through
out, a gradual opening, and fit preparative for some
farther Revelation ; which, in pursuance of this regular
scheme of progressive Dispensations, could be no other
than that of the REDEMPTION OF MANKIND BY THE
MESSIAH, the completion of the whole Economy of
Grare, as it only is the explanation of his first and
fundamental Promise, that in Abraham should all the
families of the earth be bkswd. But now, the sole
remaining revelation of God s "Will to Abraham, recorded
by the sacred Historian, is the Command to offer up his
son Isaac. This CGMMANP, then, as there is no other
that can pretend to be the revelation in question, and as
ive have shewn it must be somewhere or other recorded
in Abraham s story, is the very revelation we seek ; which
perfects all the foregoing, and makes the whole series-
complete and uniform. And the place in which we find
it is its proper station ; for, being the completion of the
reit, it must needs be the last in order.
Such, in the intention of the Holy Spirit, doth St.
CHRYSOSTOM, in his comment on the place, understand
it to be TW Je HMEPAN i^Tvla poi JW^r Xiyi^v Tr,]f TS
And ;h this he is joined or followed by ERASMUS, in his
paraphrase. Hoc senigmate Jesus significavit, Abraham,
quuitv
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 19
quum pararet iminolare filium Isaac, per Prophetia? spi-
ritum vidisse Dominum Jesum in mortem crucis a patre
tradendum pro mundi salute. But these excellent men,
not reflecting on that ancient mode of information, where
the Inquirer is answered by a significative action instead
of speech, never conceived that this Command was an
imparted information of that kind, but rather a typical
representation unsought, and given in an enjoined Rite ;
of whose import Abraham had then no knowledge*.
4. Again, We find the Revelation of the redemption
of mankind in that very place, where, if considered only
in itself, and not relatively, as the completion of the rest,
we should, according to all the rules of plain sense,
be disposed to seek it. We must know then that this
Revelation, as shall be proved from the words of JESUS,
Abraham rejoiced to see my day., and he saw it, ami was
glad, was ardently desired and sought after by the
Patriarch. Now the happiness or REDEMPTION of man
kind promised, on Abraham s first Vocation, to come
through him, could not but make him more and more
inquisitive into the manner of its being brought about,
in proportion as he found himself to be more and more
personally concerned as the Instrument of so great a
blessing. But every new Revelation would shew him
still farther interested in this honour : Therefore, by the
time Ishmael was ordered to be sent away, and the
promised Seed fixed in Isaac, we must needs suppose
him very impatient to understand the Mystery of Re
demption ; and so, fitly prepared to receive this last and
supreme Revelation. This, in the like caics, we find to
be the disposition and state of n.ind in the holy nsen
of old. Thus Daniel, by the study of the Prophecies
of Jeremiah, understanding the approaching restoration of
the Jews, applies himself by tasting and prayer for God s
further information ; and the Angel Gabriel is sent unto
him. So John, anxious and solicitous for the suffering
* See note [F] at the end of this Book.
c 3 Churchj
20 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book. VI.
Church, being in prayers on ; the Lord s day, was favoured 1
with all his glorious Revelations.
5. Again, The new light in. which this^ Command is
placed, dispels all that perplexity in the common interpre
tation (taken notice of above) arising from our ideas
of a trial] where that which should in. use and reason
go before some extraordinary favour, Is made to come
after all. But now, according to our sense of the Com
mand, the trial, as is meet, precedes the last and greatest-
favour ever bestowed by God on Abraham.
6. To confirm all this, we may consider that this-
interpretation of the Command is most easy and natural,
fts being intirely agreeable to the ancient way ef com
municating information. We have shewn *" it to have
been the general custom of Antiquity-, in personal con
ferences, to instruct by actions instead of words ; a custom
begun out of necessity, but continued out of choice, for
the superior advantages it hath in: making an impression.
Eor motion, naturally significative, which* enters at the
eye, hath a much stronger effect than articulate sound?
only arbitrarily significative, which enters at the ear.
We have shewn likewise, by numerous examples, that
God himself vouchsafed, in compliance to a general
custom, to use this way of information, when he in
structed the holy Patriarchs and- Prophets in- his Will.
7. Again, As the high importance of this Revelation:
seemed to require its being given in the strong and
forcible way of action |, so nothing can be conceived
more apposite to convey the information required, than-
this very action. Abraham desired earnestly to be let
into the mystery of the REDEMPTION; and GOD, to
instruct him (in the best manner humanity is capable
of receiving- instruction) in the infinite extent of divine-
goodness to mankind, who spared not his own Son^bufr
delivered him up for us alt%, let Abraham feel, by exr
* See Book IV. 4. f See aote [G] at. the end of this Book.
J Iloca..viiL 32.
perience^
Sect 5.] OT MOSES DEMONSTRATED- -21
perience, what it was to lose a ibeloved Son ; Take now
<thy son, thine only son Isaac ; the Son born miraculously
when Sarah was past -child-bearing, as Jesus was miracu
lously born of a pure Virgin. The duration too of the
-action was the same as that between CHRIST S Death
:-and Resurrection ; both which were designed to be re
presented ?in it : and still farther, not only the final
jarchiet ypical Sacrifice of the Son -of GO-D was figured
in the command to offer Isaac, but the intermediate
Typical sacrifice, m the Mosaic Economy, was repre
sented, by the permitted sacrifice of the Ram offered up
anstead of Isaac.
8. The last reason I shall offer in support of this
.point, that the Command concerning Isaac was this
Revelation of Christ s -.day, or the redemption of mai;i~
.kind by his death and sufferings, ig the allusion which
Jesus makes (in these words, Abraham rejoiced to sac
my day, $c.) to the folio w-ing words of Moses, ia the
history of the command And Abraham called the name
of that place Jehovah-jireh : as it is said to this day. In
the mount of the Lord it shall be seen.
To shew that Jesus alluded to these words of Moses,
,-and had them hi his eye, when he speaks of Abraham
rejoicing to see his day, It will be proper .to -consider the
{true force and meaning of either text. The words of
.Jesus have been fully considered already *.
And, in the words of Moses-?- Abraham vailed the,
mime of that place Jehovak-jireh : as it is mid to this
/%, In the mount (f the Lord it shall be seen we have
the assertion of Jesus confirmed, that Abraham saw
Christ s day, and KJ&S glad. \.Jehovah-jireh signifies,
as several of the best interpreters agree, THE LORD
.SHALL B : E SEENf. JBut with what propriety could this
name
* See p. 6. & seq.
t " Dominus videbitur, (says the learned Father Houbigant)
_ i, TSonvidetur, ne ab futuro verbi aberremus. 2, Non videbit, non
* ,modo quia now adUi.tar quid sit Deus visurus, se4 etiara quia in tota
22 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
name be given to it by Abraham, if, in this transaction,
he had not seen the representation oi the Lord s passion,
which was to happen in a future age ? And if he did
see it, how apposite was the name! The Historian goes
on as it Is said to this day. In the mount of the Lord
it shall he sctu ; or more exactly to the Hebrew ^/or
he said, in the mount THE LORD SHALL BE SEEN. In
the first part of the verse, the sacred Historian tells us
that Abraham called the mount, The Lord shall be seen]
and in the latter part he acquaints us with the manner
how Abraham imposed that appellation, namely, by the
use of a proverbial speech implying the reason of the
name To-day in the mount, the Lord shall be seen*.
Proverbial speeches, before the general use of recording
abstract names ond things by writing, being the best and
safest conveyance of the memory of events to Posterity.
Conformably to this interpretation of the text, the Histo
rian on his entrance on the transaction calls the land of
Moriah,
* ilia visione, hominis est viderc, Domini, vidcri; propter quam
" causciin Deus locum istum mox nomine c-isionis insigniebat. Nimi-
" rum Deus Abrabamo id ostendit, quod Abraham vidit 4 gavisus
" est." The near relation of these words of Jesus to those of
Moses, was too strongly marked to be overlooked by this very judi
cious Critic, though he considered the transaction in no other light
than as a, Type of the death and passion of Jesus.
* Atque hoc illud est (says Father Houbigant) quod memoriae sem-
piternae Abraham consecrabat, cum ita subjungeret hodie in monte y
Domimts vidcbitur ; illud hodie sic accipiens, ut acccpit Paulus A p. illud
}3avidis, hodie si vucem cjns aitdientis; quod hodie tamdiu durat,
quamdiu biecuLi ilia durahunt, de quibus Apostolus donee hodie cogno-
iniHctur. Propterea Abraham non dicit, hodie Dominus ridftur,
Nam id spectaeuhim nuric solus videt Abraham, postea omnes visuri
sunt, et ad omnes pertinebit istud, videbitur, generatim dictum, cum
omnss Unigenitum in monte viderint generis humani victimamfactam.
Kec aliain sententiair. series verborum patitur. Kx quaserie illi de
viant, qui haec verba, dixit cnim hodie in mon.tt d> minus Mo&i sic
Darranti attrtbuurit, propferea dicitur hodie /n monte Domini quasi
yeu -rfet Moysies usurpatum bua aetate provei bium. Naai si sic erit, non
jumdoee r\\-, Luic loco nomen fecerit Duminiis ridebitur;
quam tainen iiomiuum ntatioriem in sacris pagiius non omittunt ii,
quicumque in-mina rebus imponunt. Quod contra plane aucebit
Abi "c, eo Moysis sic narrat, vocai it women, loci
isn i;^.; nam dixit, in monte Dcus vi
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 23
Moriah, to which Abraham went with Isaac (according
to Jerom s interpretation), the LAND OF VISION, which
shews that the words of Jesus. Abraham SAW MY DAT,
and KYW-GLAD, evidently allude to this extraordinary cir
cumstance; namely, the disposition of Abraham s mind
on the occasion, expressed in his memorial of a new
name imposed on the scene of action; the ancient way
of commemorating joyful and happy events. In a word,
Jesus says, Abraham saw his day ; and Abraham, by
the name he imposed upon the mount, d-eclares the same
thing. But as the VISION was of a public, not of a
private nature, he ex-presses himself in terms which
signify what mankind in general shall see, not what he
himself had seen THE LORD SHALL BE SEEN". From
a vague allusion, therefore, of the words of Jesus, to
this history of the command in general, we have now
fixed th^m to the very words of Moses, to which they
more particularly refer.
The sum then of the Argument is this JESUS ex
pressly says that Abraham saw, and rejoiced to ee, his
day, or the great Sacrifice for the sins of mankind by
representation The records of sacred History must
needs verify his assertion But there is no place in
Scripture which presents the least traces of this Revela
tion, except the history of the Command to offer Isaac.
This history not only easily and naturally admits of such
a sense, but even demands it And reciprocally, this
sense gives all imaginable light to the History ; and re
moves the greatest difficulties attending the common in
terpretation of it. Hence, we conclude with certainty,
that the command to Abraham to offer up his son was only
^an INFORMATION IN ACTION, which, ^. Abraham s
earnest request, God was graciously pleased to give him
of the great sacrifice of Christ for the Redemption of
mankind. The thing to be proved. Two great ends
seem to be gained by this interpretation : The one, to
free the Command from a supposed violation of natural
c 4 Law;
24 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
Law; The other, to support the connexion and d - pen
dency between the two Revelations ; for this interpre
tation makes the history of the Command a DIRECT
Prophesy of Christ as Redeemer of the world ; whereas
the common brings it, at most, but to a TYPICAL inti
mation. Now the Defenders * of the common inter
pretation confess, that " the evidence of direct Prophecies
is superior to that of Types.* 9
The only plausible Objection which can be made to my
explanation, I conceive to be the following ~" That what
" is here supposed the principal and proper reason of the
" Command, is not at all mentioned by the sacred Histo-
" rian ; but another, of a different nature ; namely, the
" Trial of Abraham s faith and obedience And it came
" to pass after these things, God did tempt Abraham,
* ai id said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac And
" when the affair is over, the same reason is again in-
" sinuated : By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord,
"for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not
" withheld thy son, thine only son, that in blessing f
" mil bless thcrf" <T.
i. To the first part of the Objection I answer, That
the knowledge of God s future dispensation in the re
demption of mankind by the death of his Son, revealed,
as a singular grace, to the Father of the Faithful, was
what could by no means be communicated to the Hebrew
People, when Moses wrote this History for their use ;
because they being then to continue long under a carnal
Economy, this knowledge, of the END OF THE LAW,
would have greatly indisposed them to a Dispensation,
with which (as a Schoolmaster, that was to bring them
by degrees, through a harsh and rugged discipline, to the
easy yoke of CHRIST) GOD, in his infinite wisdom,
thought fit to exercise them J. But he who does not see,
from the plain reason of the thing, the necessity of the
* Dr. Stebbing, f Gen. xxii. 16, 17.
J See note [11] at the end of this Book.
Historian s
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 25
Historian s silence, is referred, for farther satisfaction, to
what hath been already, and will be hereafter said, to
evince the necessity of such a conduct, in other momen
tous points relating to that future Dispensation,
In the mean time, I give him St. Paul s word for this
conduct of Moses, who expressly tells us, that he pb-
scuiTcl soine parts of his history, or put a veil over his
face, that the Israelites wight not see to the end of that
Law which was to be abolished. And what was that end,
if not the Redemption of mankind by the death and sacri
fice of Christ? J/oi &y (says he) put a veil over hisface^
that the Children of Israel could not stedfastly look to
the end of that which is abolished. But their minds
. were blinded: Jor until this day rtmalneth the same red
untaken away, in the reading of the Old Testament-,
which veil is done away in CHRIST*.
But it may be asked, perhaps, " If such Revelations
could not be clearly recorded, why were they recorded
at all?" For a very plain as well as weighty reason;
that when the fulness of time should come, they might
rise up in Evidence against Infidelity, for the real relation
and dependency between the two Dispensations of Moses
and of Christ^ ; when from this, and divers the like
instances it should appear, that the Jirst Dispensation
could be but very imperfectly understood without a re
ference to the latter.
But had not the sacred Writer designedly obscured
this illustrious Revelation, by an omission ef the atten
dant circumstances, yet the narrative of such a converse
by action was not in its nature so intelligible or obvious,
as that where God is shewn conversing by action, to the
Prophets, in the several instances formerly given J, And
the reason is this. Those informations, as they are
^given to the Prophets for the instruction of the People,
have necessarily, in the course of the history, their ex-
* 2 Cor. iii. 13, 14. And see note [I] at the end of this Book.
f See note [K] at the end of this Book. % See Bouk IV. 4.
planations
26 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
planations annexed. But .the information to Abraham
being solely for his own private consolation (as Dr. Scott
expresses it above) there was no room for that formal
explanation, which made the commanded actions to the
Prophets so clear and intelligible. Yet, as if I had
never said this, Dr. Slabbing tells the world, I make
this action of Abraham s parallel to those of the Prophets;
whereas (says he) it differ* from them all in a very ma
terial circumstance, as they had their several explana
tions annexed, and this had not. But to shew by example,
as well as comparison, that obscurity is naturally atten
dant on the relation of converse by action, where the in
formation is for the sake of the Actor only, I shall
instance in a case where no obscurity was affected by the
Historian. It is the relation of Jacob s wrestling with
the Angel*. The Patriarch, on his return from Haran
to his native Country, hearing of his brother Esau s
power, and dreading his resentment for the defrauded
Birthright, addresses himself for protection in this dis
tress to the GOD of his Fathers, with all humility and
confidence. GOD hears his prayer; and is pleased to
inform him of the happy issue of the adventure, by a
significative action ; The following night, he has a struggle
with an Angel, with whom he is suffered to make his
part so good, that from thence he collected GOD had
granted his petition. This is the circumstance in Jacob s
history, which affords such mirth to our illiterate Liber
tines: For this information by action concerning only
the Actor, who little needed to be told the meaning of a
mode of Instruction, at that time in vulgar use, hath now
an obscurity which the Scripture-relations of the siunc
mode of information to the Prophets are free from, by
reason of their being given for the use of the People,
to whom they were explained.
But it may perhaps be asked, " Why, when the fulness
of time was come, Scripture did not break its long silence,
* Gen. xxii. -74, etc,
aod
Sect. 5.] OP MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 27
and instruct us in the principal and proper reason of
tlie Command to offer Isaac?" I answer, that it has
done so. The words of Jesus are a convincing proou
Nay, I might up farther, and say that this is not the only
place when 1 the true reason of the Command is plainly
hinted at. The Author of the Epistle to rise Hebrews,
speaking of this very Command, says By faith Abraham,
when he was tried, offered up haac accounting chat
God was able to raise him up even Jrom the dead, from
whence also he received him IN A FIGURE*; EN HA-
PABOAHt, in a Parable: a mode of information either by
words or actions, which consists inputting one thing for
another. Now, in a Writer who regarded this com
manded action as a. representative information of the
Redemption of mankind, nothing could be more fine or
easy than this expression. For, though Abraham did not
indeed receive Isaac restored to life after a real dissoiu-^
tion, yet the Son being in this action to represent CHRIST
suffering death for the sins of the world, when the Father
brought him safe from mount Moriah after three days,
(during which the Son was in a state of condemnation to
death) the Father plainly i ceived him, under the cha
racter of CHRIST S Representative, as restored trotn the
dead. For, as his being brought to the mount, there
bound, and laid upon the Altar, figured the death and
sufferings of CHRIST, so his being taken from thence
alive, as properly figured CHRIST S Resurrection from
the dead. With the highest propriety therefore and ele
gance of speech, might Abraham be said to receive Isaac
from the dead in a parable, or in representation f. But
the nature of the command not being understood, these
words of the epistle have been hitherto interpreted, to
signify only that Isaac was a type of Christ, in the same
sense thai- the old Tabernacle, in this epistle |, is called
a type- frnff IIAPABOAH, that is, a thing designed by the
* Chap. xi. ver. 1719. f gee note [L] at the end.
| Chs-p. ix. ver. 9,
Holy
2S THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
Holy Spirit to have both a present significancy and a
future. Which amounts but just to this, That Abraham
receiving Isaac safe from mount Moriah, in the manner
related by Scripture, he thereby became a Type. An
ancient Interpretation, as appears from the reading of
the vulgar Latin Unde turn <$ IN PAUA.BOLAAI accepit,
for In parabola, as it ought to : have been translated con
formably to the Greek. However, I desire it may be
observed, in car ro bora tion of my -sense <of the Command,
that the resemblance to Christ s sacrifice in all the cir
cumstances of the story was so strong, that Interpreters
could never overlook the resemblance, i their comments
on ihe passage.
12. To the second part of the Objection, I answer
thus ; It is the office of History to assign the Causes of
the facts related. In those facts therefore, which have
several Causes, of which the principal -cannot be con
veniently told, the inferior come in properly to take its
$)lace. Thus, in the case before us ; though it be made,,
I presume, very evident that the principal design of the
Command was to reveal to Abraham, by action instead
of words, the Redemption of mankind ; yet as this was a
favour of a very high nature, and conferred on Abraham
at his earnest request, it was but fit he should approve him*
self worthy of it by some proportionable Trial ; agreeably
to what we find in Scripture to be GOD S way of dealing
\vith his favoured Servants. On this account, therefore,
GOD was pleased, by the very manner in which this
Mystery was revealed, to tempt or try Abraham. Where
the making the favour itself the trial of his deserving it,
hath all that superior, elegance and beauty which is to be
conceived in the Dispensations of divine Wisdom only.
Now, as the principal reason of the Command could not
be conveniently told by the Historian, this inferior one
of the Trial is assigned with great truth and propriety
And it came to pass after these things, God did tempt
Abraham, and said, Take now thy son, c. And it is to
6 e
Sect. 5 J OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 2$
he observed, that the very manner of recording this
reason shews it to be indeed what we suppose it; an in
ferior one. For it is not said that God gave this Com
mand in order to try Abraham, which expresses a
principal reason ; but that, m> giving the Co mmand v
God did try him, which at most only implies an inferior
one. We have said, that a Trial, when approved, im
plied a following reward. Now as there may be inorer-
icasons than one for giving a Command r so there may be*
more rewards than one attendant on a Trial. Thus it
was in the case before us. And it is remarkable, that the
sacred Historian has observed the same pule with regard
t-o the reward of the Trial as to the reason of She Com*
marrd. The principal and peculiar reward of Abraham^
Trial here was the revelation of the mystery of Redemp
tion : this the Historian could not mention, for the
reasons given above : but besides this, GOD rewarded
him with a repetition of all the former Promises. This
the Historian could, and, in pursuance of the rules of
History, does mention :. ; By myself have I sworn, saith
the Lord, for because than hast done this thing? and hast
not withheld thy son, thine only son, that in blessing
I will bless, thce, and in multiplying I will multiply
thy seed as the stars af Heaven, and as the sand which
is Uipon the. sea sJiore ; and thy seed shall possess the gate
&f his enemies ; and in thy seed shall all the nations ef the.
earth be blessed, becausQ thou hast obeyed my voice *,
On the whole, This Objection to the interpretation,
the only one I can think of, is so far from obscuring, and
weakening, that it adds great light and strength unto it
For, admitting the sense here proposed, to be indeed the
true, we see the Story must of necessity have been told
in the very manner \ve find it to be recorded f.
Before I conclude this part of the Discourse, I shall,
but just take notice how strongly this interpretation of the
* Gen. xxii. ver. 16, & seq.
t S^e note [M] at the end of this Book.
Command
30 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
Command concludes against the SOCINIANS, for the real
sacrifice of CHRIST, and the proper Redemption of man
kind. For if the Command was an information by action
instead of words > the proof conveyed in it is decisive ;
there being here no room for their evasion of its Iteing a
figurative expression, since the figurative action, the
original of such expression, denotes either a real sacrifice^
or nothing at all.
II.
I come now to the other part of this Discourse, viz.
to shew, that the interpretation here given intirely dissi
pates all those blustering objections which Infidelity hath
raised up against the historic truth of the relation.
They say, " GOD could not give such a Command to
Abraham, because it would throw him into inextricable
doubts concerning the Author of it, as Whether it pro
ceeded from a good or an evil Being. Or if not so, but
that he might be satisfied it came from GOD, it would
then mislead him in his notions of the divine Attributes,
and of the fundamental principles of Morality. Because,,
though the revocation of the Command prevented the
homicide, yet the species of the action commanded not
being condemned when it was revoked, Abraham and his
Family must needs have thought HUMAN SACRIFICES
grateful to the Almighty: forasimple revi/King was not con
demning ; but would be more naturally thought a peculiar
indulgence for a ready obedience. Thus, the pagan fable
of Diana s substituting a Hind in the place of Iphigenia,
did not make Idolaters believe that she therefore abhorred
Human Sacrifices, they having before been persuaded of
the contrary, from the Command of that Idol to offer
up the daughter of Agamemnon." This is the substance,
only set in a clearer light, of all their dull cloudy dis
sertations on the case of Abraham *.
i. Let us see then how this case stood : GOD had
been pleased to reveal to him his eternal purpose of
* See mote [N] at the tnd of this Book.
making
Sect. 5.3 OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 31
making all mankind blessed through him : and likewise
to confirm this promise, in a regular course of successive
Revelations, each fuller and more explicit than the other.
By this time we cannot but suppose the Father of the-
Faithful must, from the nature of the thing, be become
very desirous of knowing the manner how this Blessing was
to be brought about : A Mystery, if we will believe the
Author of our Faith, that engaged the attention of other
holy men, less immediately concerned than Abraham,
and consequently less stimulated and excited by their
curiosity : And JESUS turned to his Disciples -, and said
privately, Blessed are the eyes which see the things which
ye see. For I tell you that -many Prophets and Kings
have DESIRED to see those things which ye see, and have
not seen them, and to hear those things which ye hear,
and have net heard them *. But we are assured, by the
same authority, that Abraham had, in fact, this very desire
highly raised in him ; Abraham rejoiced to see my- day
(says JESUS), and he saw it, and was glad] or rather,
He rejoiced THAT HE MIGHT SEE, INA IAH; which
implies, that the period of his joy was in the space
between the promise made, anil the actual performance
of it by the delivery of the Command ; consequently,
that it was granted at his earnest request f. In the
second place, we shall .shew from the same words, that
Abraham, at the time when the Command was given,
KXEW it to be that Revelation he had so earnestly re
quested. This is of the highest importance for the?
understanding the true nature of the Command. Your
Father Abraham rejoiced to see my Day, and he saw it,
and Was glad. *Apa,a, -a ^o vpw ?JyaAAiW!o INA
IAH* TJV vipsgu* THV Pjpip! >^ t*$tj ! *Xf*g9 We have
observed that TV a, i oV, in strict propriety, signifies that
be might see. The English phrase, to see } is equivocal
* Luke x. 23, 24.
t Thus all the Eastern Versions understand it : Syr. Cupidus fuit
videndi. Pcrs. Cupidus erat ut videret. Arab. Exoptavit videre.
op t Desidgravit, gavisus est ut Videret.
and
32 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
and ambiguous, and means either the present time, that
he then did see ; or the future, that he was promised he
should see: but the original 5W 1%, has only the latter
sense. So that the text plainly distinguishes two different
periods of Joy ; the first, when it wax promised he should
see] the second, when he actually saw : And it is to be
observed* that, according to the exact use oi the words,
in ayaAAtao^a* is implied the tumultuous pleasure which
the certain expectation of an approaching blessing, under
stood only in the gross, occasions ; and, in x^w that calm
and settled joy which arises from our knowledge, in the
possession of it. But the Translators, perhaps, not ap
prehending that there was any time between the Grant to
see, and the actual seeing, turned it, he rejoiced to see ;
as if it had been the Paraphrase of the Poet Nonnus,
jJVn/ y y a A XB jo S t/y/.w.
whereas this History of Abraham hath plainly three
distinct periods. The first contains GOD S promise to
grant Abraham s request, when he rejoiced that he should
see ; this, for reasons given above, was wisely omitted by
the Historian : Within the second period was the de
livery of the Command, with which Moses s account
begins : And Abraham s Obedience, through which he
saw CI-IUIST S day and was glad, includes the third f.
Thus the Patriarch, we find, had a promise that big-
request should be granted ; and, in regard to that pro
mise, an action is commanded, which, at that time, was
a common mode of information ; Abraham therefore
mu t needs know it was the very information so much
requested, so graciously promised, and so impatiently
expected. We conclude then, on the whole, that this,
Command being only the Grant of an earnest request,
and known by Abraham, at the time of imposing, to be
such Grant, he could not possibly have any doubt con
cerning the Author of it. He was soliciting the God
* See n te [O] at the end of this Book.
-\ See note [P] at the end of this
of
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 33
of Heaven to reveal to him the Mystery of Man s" Re
demption, and lie received the information, in a Com
mand to offer Isaac ; a Revelation, that had the closest
connexion with, and was the fullest completion of, the
whole series of the preceding Revelations.
2. For, (as we shall now shew, in answer to the second
part of the objection) the Command could occasion no mis
takes concerning the divine Attributes; it being, as was said,
only the conveyance of an information by action instead of
words, in conformity to the common mode of converse in
the more early times. This action therefore being mere
scenery, had NO MORA L IMPORT ; that is, it conveyed or
implied none of those Intentions in him who commanded
it, and in him who obeyed the Command, which go along
with actions that have a moral import*. Consequently the
injunction and obedience, in an action which hath no such
import, can no way afreet the moral character of the per
sons concerned : and consequently, this Command could
occasion no mistakes concerning the divine Attributes, with
regard to GOD S delighting in human sacrifices. On the
contrary, the very information conveyed by it, was the
highest assurance to the person informed, of God s good-
Mill towards man. Hence we see there was not the
least occasion, when GOD remitted the offering of Isaac>
that he should formally condemn human sacrifices, to
prevent Abraham or his family s falling into an opinion,
that such Sacrifices were not displeasing to hiinf, any
more than for the Prophet Ahijah J, when he had rent
* See note [Q] at the end of this Book.
f See note [li] at the end of this Book.
I " And it came to pass at that time, when Jeroboam went out of
" Jerusalem, that the Prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the
" way : and he had clad himself with a new garment: and they two
<* were alone in the field. And Ahijah caught the new garment that
" was on him, and rent it in twelve pieces. And he said to Jero-
" boam, Take thee ten pieces; for thus saith the Lord the God of
" Israel, Behold, I will rend the. kingdom out of the hand of Solomon,
" and will give ten tribes to thee." i Kings xi. 29 31. I he circum
stance of the 7iew garment was not insignificant : It was to denote
the Power of the kingdom at that time in its full strength and lustre.
VOL, VI. D Jeroboam s
34 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI;
Jeroboam s garment into twelve pieces to denote the en
suing division in the tribes of Israel, to deliver a moral
precept against the sin of despoiling, and insulting our
neighbour : For the command having no moral import ,
as being only an information by action, where one thing
stood for the representative of another, all the conse
quence that could be deduced from it was only this, that
the Son of GOD should be offered up for the sins of
mankind: therefore the conceptions they had of HUMAN
SACRIFICES, after the command, must needs be just the
same with those they had before; and therefore, instruc
tion, concerning the execrable nature of this Rite, was
not only needless, but altogethei; beside the question.
But this assertion that A SCENICAL REPRESENTATION
HAS NO MORAL IMPORT, having been misunderstood
by many, and misrepresented by more (though nothing,
as I then thought, could be clearer to men versed in
moral matters) I shall beg leave to explain myself.
He who affirms that a scenical representation has no moral
import, cannot possibly be understood to mean (if inter
preted on the ordinary rules of Logic and Common
sense) any thing else than that the representation or the
feigned aetion has none of that specific morality which
is in the real action. He can never be supposed to
mean that such a representation could never, even by
accident, give birth to a moral entity, of a different
species; though it kept within, much less if it trans
gressed the bounds, of its scenical nature. Give me leave
to explain this by an instance or two. The Tragic scene
we will suppose to exhibit a Pagan story, in which a
lewd Sacrifice to Venus is represented. Now I say this
scenical representation has no moral import. But do I
mean by this, that there was no immorality or any kind
in the scene? Far from it. I only mean that that specific
immorality was absent, which would have existed there,
had the action been real and not feigned; I mean
idolatry. Again, another set of Tragedians represent the
Conspiracy
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 35
Conspiracy against Julius Caesar in the Senate-house.,
This, I say, has no moral import: for neither could the
followers of Caesar s Cause call these fictitious Conspi
rators, enemies to their country; nor could the warmest
lovers of liberty call them patriots. But if in this repre
sentation, the Actors, instead of exhibiting an imaginary
assassination, should commit a real one, on the body of
the personated Caesar, Who ever supposed that such a
dramatic representation continued still to have no moral
import ? The men who committed the action dropt their
personated, and assumed their real character, being in
stigated by interest, malice, or revenge; and only waited
a fit opportunity to perpetrate their designs under the cover
of a drama. Here indeed, the parallel ceases. The
feigned Conspirators transgressed the bounds of a repre
sentation : while the real death of Isaac must be supposed
to make part of the scenical representation, in the Com
mand to Abraham. But it should have been considered,
and was not, that I employed the principle of a feigned
representations having no moral import, to free t ,e
Command from the infidel objection that it -as an
enjoined sacrifice ; not from the objection of its being
an enjoined death, simply : For a huimn Sacrifice com
manded was supposed to discredit Revelation, as giving
too much countenance and encouragement to that horrid
o
superstition ; whereas, with regard to a simple death com
manded, to justify this, I was ready to confide in the
common argument of Divines, taken from God s sovereign
right over his creatures : Whose power could instantane
ously repair the loss, or whose goodness would abundantly
reward the act of obedience. Yet the fair and candid
Dr. Rutherforth represents my position of a sctnical re
presentations having no moral import, to be the same
with saying, that though an act ion be ever so vile in itself,
yet, if it be done to represent somewhat else, it loses its
nature and becomes an indifferent one. Had I the pre
sumption to believe, that any thing I could say would
D 2 better
36 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
better his heart or mend his head, I should recommend
what hath been here said to his serious consideration.
3. And now we see the weakness of the third and last
part of the Objection, which supposes this Command
capable of affording a temptation to transgress the funda
mental principles of the Law of Nature: one of which
obliges us to cherish and protect our Offspring; and ano
ther, not to injure our Neighbour. For as, by the Com
mand, Abraham understood the nature of man s Redemp
tion; so, by the nature of that Redemption, he must
know how the scenical representation was to end. Isaac,
he saw, was made the person or representative of Christ
dying for us: The Son of GOD, he knew, could not
possibly lie under the dominion of the grave. Hence he
must needs conclude one of these two things, either that
GOD would stop his hand when he came to give the sacri
ficing stroke: or that, if trie Revelation of this mystery
was to be represented throughout in action, that then his
Son, sacrificed under the person of CHRIST, was, under
the same person, soon to be restored to lite : accounting
(as he well might) that God was able to raise him up
even from the dead, as the Author of the Epistle to the
Hebrews*, who seems to have been full of the idea here
explained, assures us he did believe.
Now where was the temptation to violate any Prin
ciple of Morality in all this? The Law of Nature com
mands us to cherish and protect our offspring : Was
that transgressed in giving a stroke whose hurt was pre
sently to be repaired ? Surely no more than if the stroke
had been in vision. The Law of Nature forbids all in
jury to our Fellow-creature: And was he injured, who,
by being thus highly honoured, in becoming the repre
sentative of the Son of God, was to share with his Father
Abraham in the rewards of his obedience? But though,
as we see, Abraham could have no struggles with himself,
from any doubts that he might violate Morality in paying
* Chap. xi. ver. 19.
obedience
Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 37
obedience to the Command ; yet did the merit of that
obedience, where the natural feelings were -so alarmed,
deserve all the encomiums bestowed upon it in Holy
Writ. For, in expressing his extreme readiness to obey,
he declared a full confidence in the promises of GOD.
From hence we may deduce these two corollaries.
1 . That tiic noble Author of the Characteristics hath
shewn as much ignorance as malevolence, when he sup
posed that Abraham s shewing no extreme surprise on
this trying Revelation was from the favourable notion he
had of Human Sacrifices, so common amongst the inha
bitants of Palestine and othtr neighbouring Nations*.
For we see the reason, why Abraham, instead of being
under any extreme surprise, was (as JESUS assures us)
under an extreme joy, was because he understood the
Command to be a communication of that Mystery in
which he had so earnestly requested to participate; and,
consequently, that Isaac must needs, at length, come
safe and unhurt from that scenical representation, in which
he bore the principal part.
2. That Sir John Marsham s suspicion of Abraham s
being struck by a superstitious imagination | is as ground
less, as it is injurious to the holy Patriarch, Kay, the.
very examples he gives might have shewn, him the folly
of such insinuations: For, according to his inferences,
Human Sacrifices were never offered but in cases of great
distress : Now Abraham was at this time in a full state
of peace, security, and affluence.
Tims, we presume, it appears that this Command was
a mere information by action : and that, when regarded
* See note [S] at the end of this Book.
t Ex istis satius est colligtre hanc Alrahami tcntationcm non
fitisse xx_aytJ3^,v>jy <8r4>v 5 actionem in not- u tain ; non rccens excogita-
tarn, scd ad pristinos Canant&mt* mores dcsignatam. Horrcndi sacri-
Jicii usum apud Phanicesfreqitentem indicat Porphyries : " Phoenices,
" inqttit, in magnis periculis ex bello, fame, pestilentia, clarissimorum
" aliquem ad id suffragiis publicis delectum, sacrificabant Saturno.
" Et victimarum talium plena est Sanchoniathonis historia Phceni-
" cice scripta, quam Philo Biblius Grsece interpretatus est libfis
* octo," Canon. Chron. p. 79.
P 3 iu
38 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
in this view, all the objections against GOD S giving it to
Abraham are absolutely enervated and overthrown.
For thus stands the case. If the trial of Abraham s
faith and obedience were the commanding a real sacrifice,
then was Abraham an Agent, and not a bare Instrument ;
and then it might be pretended that God commanded an
human agent to act against humanity. And his right
over his Creatures cannot solve the difficulty, as it may
when he employs a mere instrument to perform his \Vill
upon them. But if the trial were only the commanding
a scenical representation, the command had no moral
import ; and consequently Abraham was not put upon
any thing morally wrong; as is the offering up a human
sacrifice.
I have transcribed into the notes, as I have gone along,
some of the most considerable Objections my Adversaries
have been able to oppose to this interpretation of the
COMMAND TO ABRAHAM : which, I presume, when
fairly considered, will be no light confirmation of it. But,,
as I have no notions to advance, not founded in a sincere
clesire to find out, and do honour to, Truth, I would by
no means take advantage of an Adversary s weakness to
recommend them to the public favour. I hold it not honest,
therefore, to conceal the force of an Objection which I
myself L;:ve to offer, by far more plausible than any that
these learned Divines have urged against it. The objec
tion is this, " That it is difficult to conceive why a CIR
CUMSTANCE of such importance to Revelation, which
removes one of the strongest arguments against its truth,
and at ti: same time manifests a REAL CONNEXION
between the tv.o Dispensations of it, should never be
directly and minutely explained and insisted on by the
Writers ot the New Testament, though Abraham s His
torian might have had his reasons for concealing it."
Now, to my own Objection, I suppose, I may have leave
to reply, That many truths of great importance, for the
support of iteli&ioD, against Infidelity, were taught by
Jesus
Sect. 5-]. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 39
Jesus to his Disciples (amongst which, I reckon this In
terpretation to be one) which never came down, by their
conveyance, to the Church. But being, by the assistance
of God s Holy Spirit, discoverable by those who devote
themselves to the study of the Scriptures with a pure
mind, have, for the wise ends of Providence (many of
which are inscrutable to us) been left for the industry of
men to find out: that, as occasion required, every Age
might supply new evidence of God s Truth, to put to
silence the ignorance of foolish men : and in proportion
as the powers of Darkness prevailed, so might the Gospel-
light break out again with fresh splendor to curb and
repress them. In support of what is here said, I beg
the Reader to reflect on what is told us by the Evangelist,
of the conversation between JESUS (after his Resurrec
tion) and the two Disciples journeying to Emmaus;
where their Master says unto them, O fools, and slow of
heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken!
Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to
enter into his glory ? And beginning at MOSES and all
the Prophets, HE EXPOUNDED UXTO THEM the things
concerning himself*. Now, who can doubt but that many
things were at this time revealed, which, had they been
delivered clown to Posterity, in Writing, would have
greatly contributed to the improvement of Eusebius s
Evangelical Demonstration ? Yet hath Providence
thought fit to order matters otherwise. But, that the
Apostles used, and made a good use too, of those EXPO
SITIONS, long since forgotten and lost, w r e have great
reason to believe from their amazing success in the con
version of the w r orld, by such an application of Moses
and the Prophets, to Christ. And if I be not much de
ceived, amongst the Truths thus inforced, that, which I
presume to have discovered in the Command to Abraham,
held no inferior place. Let the unprejudiced Reader
judge. St. PAUL, making his Apology before king
* Luke xxiv. 25, 26, 27,
D 4 Agrippa,
40 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI:
Agrippa, concludes his Defence in these words : Having
therefore obtained help cf Gcd, I continue unto this day
witnessing both to small and great, saying none other
things than those which the Prophets and MOSES DID
SAY SHOULD COME: that C n R, i s T should suffer, and
that he should be the first that should rise from the
dead*. The G-reek is rather stronger, in predicating
this circumstance of Moses, rs ol wp^Jrai ixc&xwzv
ft\Xovruv yW0t, KAI MHIHS. Now where, let me
ask, in all his Writings, but in the Command to Abraham,
is there the least trace of any such circumstance, as that
Christ should suffer, and thai he should be thejirst that
should rise from the dead? Nor is it to be found there,
unless the Command be understood in the sense J have
given to it.
But this is the state in which it hath pleased Provi
dence to place the Church of Christ: With abundant
evidence in hand, to support itself against the attacks
of Infidelity ; yet much of this divine Treasure left
sealed up, to exercise our Faith, and (in time of need)
to excite our Industry : for it was not the intent of Pro
vidence that one of these virtues should thrive at the
expence of the other; but that Industry should as well
be rewarded by a successful search, as Faith, by peace
in believing. Therefore when my learned Adversary!,
in order, I will believe, to advance the Christian Faith,
would discourage. Christian Industry, by calumniating,
and rendering suspected what he is pleased to call
EXPERIMENTS in Religion, it is, I am afraid, at best
but a Zeal without know led ge. Indeed, M. Pascal
ascribes this contempt of experiments to a different
cause u Ceux qui sont capable** de in venter soht
jrares," says he. " Ceux qui n inventent point sont en
plus grand nombre, par consequent, les plus fortes ;
et voila pourquoi, lors que les Inventeurs cherchent la,
* Acts xxvi. 22, 23 ; and to the same purpose, xiii. 31,
f Dr. Slabbing.
Sect. 5,3 OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 41
gloire qinls meritent, tout ce qu ils y gagnent, c est qu on
les traite de VISIONNAIRES." It is true, if men will
coine to the study ot Scripture with unwashen hands, that
is, without a due reverence for the dignity of those sacred
Volumes, or, which is as ill, with unpurged heads, that
is, heads stuffed with bigot systems, or made giddy with
cahalistic flights, they will deserve that title which Pascal
observes is so unjustly given to those who deserve best
of the Pubiic.
But to return to those with whom I have principal
concern. I make no question but my Freethinking
Adversaries, to whose temper and talents I am no
stranger, will be ready to object,
I. " That tiie giving a solution of a difficulty in the
Old Testament by tiie assistance of the New, considered
together as making up one intire Dispensation, is an
unfair way of arguing against an Unbeliever : who sup
posing both the Jewish and Christian Religions to be
false, of consequence supposes them to be independent
on one another ; and that this pretended relation was a
contrivance of the Authors of the later imposture to give
it strength, by ingrafting the young shoot into the trunk
of an old flourishing Superstition. Therefore, will they
say, if we would argue with success against them, we must
seek a solution of their difficulties in that Religion alone,
from which they arise." Thus 1 may suppose them to
argue. And I apprehend they will have no reason to say
I have put worse arguments into their mouths than they
are accustomed to employ against Revelation.
I reply then, that it will admit of no dispute, but that,
if they may have the liberty of turning JUDAISM and
CHRISTIANITY into two Phantoms of their own devising,
they will have a very easy victory over Both. This is
an old trick, and has been often tried with success. By
this slight-of-hand conveyance TIN DAL hath juggled
fools out of their Religion. For, in a well-known book
written by him against Revelation, he hath taken ad
vantage
42 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
vantage of the indiscretion of some late Divines to lay
it down as a Principle, that Christianity is ONLY a re-
publication of the Religion of Nature : The consequence
of which is, that CHRISTIANITY and JUDAISM are
independent Institutions, But sure the Deist is not to
obtrude his own Inventions, in the place of those Re
ligions lie endeavours to overthrow. Much less is he
o
to beg the question of their falsity ; as the laying it down
that the Jewish and Christian are two independent
Religions, certainly is : because Christianity claims many
of its numerous Titles to divinity from and under Judaism,
if therefore Deists will not, yet Christians of necessity
must take their Religion as they find it. And if they
will remove objections to either Economy, they must
reason on the Principle of Dependency. And while
tfoey do so, their reasonings will not only be fair and
logical, but every solution, on such a Principle, will,
besides its determination on the particular point in
question, be a new proof of the divinity of Both, in
general ; because such a relation, connexion, and de
pendency between two Religions of so distant times,
could not come about by chance, or by human con
trivance, but must needs be the effect of Divine pre
vision. For a Deist, therefore, to bid us remove his
objections on the principle of independency, is to bid us
prove our religion true on a principle that implies its
fukchood ; the New Testament giving us no other idea
of Christianity than as of a Religion dependent on, con
nected with, and the completion of Judaism.
But now suppose us to be in this excess of complaisance
for our Adversaries ; and then see whether the ingenuity
of their acceptance \vould not equal the reasonableness
of their demand. Without doubt, w r ere we once so
foolish to swallow their Chimeras for the heavenly
Manna of Revelation, we should have them amongst
the first to cry out upon the prevarication. I speak not
this at random. The fact hath already happened. Cer
tain
Sect 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 43
tain advocates of Religion, unable to reconcile to their
notions of logic, the sense of some Prophecies in the Old
Testament, as explained in the applications of the Writers
of the New, thought it best to throw aside the care of
the JEWISH RELIGION, (a burden which they could as
ill bear as the rebellious Israelites themselves) and try
to support the CHRISTIAN, by proving its divine Origi
nal, independently and from itself alone. Upon this
Mr. COLLINS (for I have chosen to instance in these two
general dealers in Free th inking ; the small retailers of
it vanishing as fast as they appear ; for who now talks
of B fount or Coward? or who hereafter will talk of
Strutt or Morgan ? *) that the world may see how little
they agreed about their own principles, or rather how little
regard they paid to any principles at all ; Mr. Collins,
I say, wrote a book to exclaim against our ill faith ; and
to remind us of, and to prove to us, the inseparable con
nexion between the Old and New Testament. This
was no unseasonable reproof, howsoever intended, for so
egregious a folly. I will endeavour to profit by it; and
manage this Controversy on their own terms. For what
ever prevarication appeared in the Objectors, I conceived
they had demanded no more than what they might rea
sonably expect. But the advantages arising to us from
this management soon made them draw back, and
retract what they had demanded ; and now they chicane
xvith us for calling in the assistance of the New Testa
ment to repel their attacks upon the Oldf ; while, at the
same time, they think themselves at liberty to use the
assistance of the Old to overthrow the New. Let the
Friends of Revelation, how r ever, constantly and uniformly
hold the inseparable connexion between the two Dispen
sations ; and then, let our Enemies, if they will, as they
fairly may, take all the advantages they fancy they have
pgainst us, from the necessity we lie under of so doing.
* See note [T] at tb* end of this Book.
t See pot* [UJ at the end of this Book,
In
44 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
In a word, We give them Judaism and Christianity
as Religions equally from Heaven ; with that reciprocal
dependence on each other, which arises between two
things bearing the mutual relation of foundation and
superstructure. They have it in their choice to oppose
our pretensions, either by disputing with us that depen
dency, or raising difficulties on the foot of it. But while
they only suppose it visionary ; and then argue against
each Religion on that supposition, they only beg the
question. And while they do that, we keep within the
rules of good logic, when we remove their objections on
that principle of dependency laid down in Scripture.
This restrictive rule of interpretation being however still
observed. That, in explaining any difficulty in the Old
Testament, we never, on pretence of such dependency,
forsake the genius and manners of the times in question,
and serve ourselves of those of the later Christian period,
as Collins (whether truly or no, let Them look to, who
are concerned in it) upbraids some defenders of Christi
anity for doing. This rule is here, I presume, observed
with sufficient exactness ; the foundation of my interpre
tation of the Command being that ancient mode of
converse, so much at that time in use, of conversing by
II. Hut the Adversaries of Revelation, how easily
soever they may be confuted, are not so easily silenced.
They are ready to object, that we fly to the old exploded
refuge of a TYPE, which the Author of the Grounds and
Reasons of ihe Christian Religion hath shewn to be
visionary and senseless.; the mere illogical whimsy of
Cabalistic Jews. To this I answer,
i. They are doubly mistaken. This interpretation is
not founded in any typical sense whatsoever ; the person
of Isaac on the Mount being no more a Type of Christ
than the six letters that compose the name are a Type
of him ; but only an arbitrary mark to stand for the idea
of Christ, as that word does. So that their cry against
Types,
Sect s-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 45
Types, whatever force it may have, does not at all affect
this interpretation.
2. But, secondly, I say, A TYPE is neither visionary,
nor senseless, notwithstanding the disgrace which this
mode of information hath undergone by the mad abuses
of Fanaticism and Superstition. On the contrary, I hold
it to be a just and reasonable manner of denoting one
tiling by another : not the creature of the imagination,
made out of nothing to serve a turn ; but as natural and
apposite a figure as any employed in human converse.
For Types arose from that original mode of communi
cation, the conversing by actions : the difference there
is between these t\vo mod; s of information being only this,
that, where the action is simply significative, it has no
moral import: For example, when Ezekiel is bid to shave
his beard, to weigh the hair in balances, to divide it into
three parts, to burn one, to strike another with a knife,
and to scatter the third part in the wind*, this action
having no moral import is merely significative of infor
mation given. But when the Israelites are commanded
to take a male lamb without blemish, and the, whole assem
bly of the congregation to hill it, and to sprinkle the
blood upon the door-posts "\, this action having a moral
import as being a religious Rite, and, at the same time,
representative of something future, is properly, typical.
Jleuce arose the mistake of the Interpreters of the
Command to offer Isaac. These men supposing the
action commanded to have a moral import, as being only
for a trial of Abraham s faith ; and, at the same time,
seeing in it the most exact resemblance of the death oi
CHRIST, very wrongly concluded that action to be typical
which was merely significative : and by this means,
Reaving in the action a moral import, subjected it to all
those cavils of infidelity, which, by taking away ail
moral import, as not belonging to it, are here entirely
evaded.
* Ezek. v, 1,2. f Exod. xii. 5, 6, 7.
4 6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,
But it being of the highest importance to Revelation
in general, and not a little conducive to the support of
our arguments for the Divine Legation of Moses in par
ticular, to shew the logical truth and propriety of Types
in action, and Secondary senses in speech, I shall take the
present opportunity to sift this matter to the bottom. For
having occasionally shewn, in several parts of the pre
ceding Discourse, that the references in the LAW to the
GOSPEL are in typical representations, and secondary
senses ; and the truth of Christianity depending on the
real relation (which is to be discovered by such refe
rences) between the two Dispensations, it will be incum
bent on me to prove the logical truth and propriety of
TYPES in action, and SECONDARY SENSES in speech.
And I enter on this subject with the greater pleasure,
as one of the most plausible books ever written, or likely
to be written, against Christianity, is intirely levelled at
them. In this enquiry I shall pursue the same method
I have hitherto taken with unbelieving Writers; examine
only the grounds and principles on which they go ; and
having removed and overthrown these, in as few words
O 7
as I am able, leave the superstructure to support itself,
as it may.
SECT. VI.
THE book I speak of is entitled, " A Discourse of
the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion,"
written, as is generally supposed, by Mr. Collins ; a
Writer, whose dexterity in the arts of Controversy was
so remarkably contrasted by his abilities in reasoning and
literature, as to be ever putting one in mind of what
travellers tell us of the genius of the proper Indians, who,
although the veriest bunglers in all the fine arts of
manual operation, yet excel every body in slight of hand
and the delusive feats of activity.
The purpose of his book is to prove that JESUS was
an impostor: and his grand argument stands thus,
12 " JESUS
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 47
" JESUS (as he shews) claims under the promised Mes
siah of the Jews; and proposes himself as the Deliverer
prophesied of in their sacred Books ; yet (as he attempts
to shew) none of these Prophesies can be understood of
JESUS but in a secondary sense only; now a secondary
sense (as he pretends) is fanatical, chimerical, and con
trary to all scholastic rules of interpretation: Conse
quently, JESUS not being prophesied of in the Jewish
Writings, his pretensions are false and groundless."
His conclusion, the reader sees, stands on the joint sup
port of these two Propositions, That there is no Jewish
Prophecy which relates to JESUS in a primary sense;
and That a secondary sense is enthusiastical and unscho*-
lastic. If either of these fail, his phantom of a conclu
sion sinks again into nothing.
Though I shall not omit occasionally to confute the firs^
yet it is the falsehood of the second I am principally con
cerned to expose That there are Jewish prophecies which
relate to JESUS in their direct and primary sense, hath been
proved with much force of reason and learning ; But, that
secondary Prophecies are riot enthusiastical and umcho-
lastic, hath not been shewn and insisted on, by the
Writers on this Question, with the same advantage. The
truth is, the nature of a DOUBLE SENSE in Prophecies
hath been so little seen or enquired into, that some
Divines, who agree in nothing else, have yet agreed to
second this assertion of Mr. Collins, and with the same
frankness and confidence to pronounce that a double
sense is indeed enthusiastical and unscholastic. To put
a stop therefore to this growing evil, sown first by
SOCINUS, and since become so pestilent to Revelation,
is not amongst the last purposes of the following dis
course.
I. It hath been shewn, that one of the most ancient
and simple Modes of human converse was communicating
the conceptions by an expressive ACTION. As this was
of familiar use in Civil matters, it was natural to carry
it
48 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
it into Religious. Hence, we see God giving his instruc
tions to the Prophet, and the Prophet delivering God s
commands to the People, in this very manner. Thus far
the nature of the action, both in civil and religious
matters, is exactly the same.
But in Religion it sometimes happens that a STAND
ING Information is necessary, and there the Action must
be continually repeated : This is done by holding out
the particular Truth (thus to be preserved) in a reli
gious Rite. Here then the Action begins to change its
nature; and, from a mere significative mark, of only arbi
trary import like words or letters, becomes an action
of moral import, and acquires the new name of TYPE.
Thus GOD, intending to record the future sacrifice of
CHRIST in Action, did it by the periodic Sacrifice of a
lamb without blemixh. This was not merely and so
DIRECTLY significative of CIIUIST (like the Command
to Abraham); but being a religious Rite, and so having
a moral import, it was typical, though NOT DIRECTLY
significative, of him. The very same may be said of
the Temporal rewards of the Law ; they were properly
typical of the Spiritual rewards of the Gospel, and had
a moral import of their own, as being the real sanction
of the Law.
Again, It hath been shewn*, how, in the gradual cul
tivation of Speech, the expression by Action was im
proved and refined into an ALLEGORY or Parable] in
which the words carry a double meaning; having, besides
their obvious sense which serves only for the Envelope,
one more material, and hidden. With this figure of
speech all the moral writings of Antiquity abound. But
when this figure is transferred from Civil use to Religious,
and employed in the writings of inspired Men, to convey
information of particular circumstances in two distinct
Dispensations, to a people who had an equal concern in
both, it is then what we call a DOUBLE SENSE; and
In the preceding volume.
undergoes
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 49
undergoes the very same change of its nature that an
expressive action underwent when converted into a Type;
that is, both the meanings, in the DOUBLE SENSE, are
of moral import ; whereas in the Allegory , one only of
the meanings is so : And this (which arises out of the
very nature of their conversion, from Civil to Religious
matters) is the only difference between expressive ac
tions and TYPES; and between allegories and DOUBLE
SENSES.
From hence it appears, that as TYPES are only reli
gious expressive Actions, and DOUBLE SENSES only re
ligious Allegories, and neither receive any change but
what the very manner of bringing those Civil figures into
Religion necessarily induces, they must needs have, in
this their tralatitious state, the same LOGICAL FITNESS
they had in their natural*. Therefore as expressive
actions, and Allegories, in Civil discourses, are esteemed
proper and reasonable modes of information, so must
TYPES and DOUBLE SENSES in Religious ; for the end
of both is the same, namely, COMMUNICATION OF
KNOWLEDGE. The consequence of this is, that Mr.
Collins s proposition, that a secondary or double sense is
enthusiastical and unscholastic (the necessary support of
his grand Argument) is entirely overthrown.
This is the true and simple origin of TYPES and
DOUBLE SENSES; which our adversaries, through igno
rance of the rise and progress of Speech, and unacquain-
tance with ancient Manners, have insolently treated as
the issue of distempered brains, and the fondlings of
Visionaries and Enthusiasts.
II. Having thus shewn their logical propriety, or that
they are rational Modes of information, I come now to
vindicate their Religious use, and to shew that they are
well suited to that Religion in which we find them em
ployed. An Objection which, I conceive, may be made
to this use, will lead us naturally into our Argument.
* See note [X] at the end of this Book,
VOL. VI. E The
50 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
The objection is this: " It hath been shewn*, that these
oblique Modes of converse, though at first invented out
of necessity > for general information, were employed, at
length, to a mysterious secretion of knowledge ; which
though it might be expedient, useful, and even neces
sary both in CIVIL MATTERS and in FALSE RELIGION,
could never be so in MORAL MATTERS, and in THE
RELIGION ; for this having nothing to hide from
of its followers, Types and Double senses (the same
mysterious conveyance of knowledge in Sacred matters,
which Allegoric words or Actions are in Civil) were alto
gether unfit to be employed in it."
To this I answer, The JEWISH RELIGIOX, in which
these Types and Sec-cndary .senses are to be found, was
given to one single People only ; just as the CHRISTIAN
is offered to all Mankind : Now the Christian, as Mr.
Collins | himself labours to prove, professes to bo
grounded on the Jewish. If therefore Christianity was
not only professedly, but really grounded on Judaism
(and the supposition is strictly logical in a defence of
Types find Double semes, whose reality depends on the
reality of that relation) then Judaism was preparatory
to Christianity, and Christianity the ultimate end of
Judaism : But it is not to be supposed that there should
be an intire silence concerning this ultimate Religion
during the preparatory, when the notice of it was not
only highly proper, but very expedient : i . First, to draw
* In the preceding volume.
f " Christianity is founded on Judgum, and the New Testament
" on the Old; and JESUS is the person said in the New Testament
" to be promised in the Old, under the character of the MESSIAH of
" the Jews, who, as such only, claims the obedience and submission
" of the world. Accordingly it is the design of the authors of the
" New, to prove all the parts of Christianity from the Old Testament,
" which is said to contain the words of eternal life, and to represent
* l JESUS and his apostles as fulfilling by their mission, doctrines, and
" works, the predic lions of the Prophets, the historical parts of the
" Old Testament, and the Jewish Law ; which last is expressly said
" to prophesy of, or testify Christianity/ Grounds and Reasons,
&c. pp. 4> 5-
those
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 51
those under the preparatory Religion, by just degrees to
the ultimate; a provision the more necessary, as the
nature and genius of the two Religions were different, the
one carnal, the other spiritual : 2. Secondly, to afford
convincing evidence to future Ages, of the truth of that
Ultimate Religion; which evidence, a circumstantial pre
diction of its advent and nature so long beforehand,
effectually does afford *. The Ultimate Religion there
fore must have had some notice given of it, in the Pre
paratory: and nothing was better fitted for this purpose
than the hyperbolical genius of the Eastern Speech.
Thus, when Isaiah says, Unto us a child is born, unto
us a son is given, and the government shall be upon
his shoulder : And his name shall be called, Wonderful,
Counsellor, The Mighty God, the Everlasting Father,
the Prince of Peace, Mr. Collins observes, it is the
eastern hyperbole which prevents our seeing that a
Jewish Monarch is literally and directly spoken of.
Should we allow this, yet we still see, that such a lan
guage was admirably fitted to connect together i\\ejirst
and second Senses : the hyperbole becoming a simple
speech, when transferred from a Jewish Monarch to the
monarch of the world.
Our next inquiry will be, in what manner this notice
must needs be given. Now the nature of the thing shews
us it could not be directly and openly; so as to be un
derstood by the People, at the time of giving: because
this would have defeated GOD S intermediate purpose;
which was to train them, by a long discipline, under his
preparatory Dispensation. For, this being a Religion
founded only on temporal Sanctions, and burdened with
.a minute and tiresome Ritual, had the People known it
-to be only preparatory to another, founded on better
Promises and easier Observances, they would never have
born the yoke of the Law, but would have shaken off
their subjection to Moses before the fulness of Time had
* See note [Y] at the end of this Book.
2 brought
52 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
brought their spiritual Deliverer amongst them; as, with
out this knowledge, they were but too apt to do, on every
imaginary prospect of advantage. But St. CHRYSOSTOM
will inforce this observation with more advantage. " Had
" the Jews (says he) been taught from the beginning
" that their Law was temporary and to have an end,
" they would have certainly despised it. On this ac-
" count, it seemed good to the divine Wisdom to throw
" a veil of obscurity over the Prophecies which related
" to the Christian Dispensation *." This information,
therefore, was to be delivered with caution ; and con
veyed under the covert language of their present Eco
nomy. Hence arose the fit and necessary use of TYPES
and SECONDARY SENSES. For the only safe and lasting
means of conveyance were their PUBLIC RITUAL, and
the WRITINGS OF THE PROPHETS. And a Speaking
action, and an Allegoric speech, when thus employed,
had all the secrecy that the occasion required. We
have observed, that in the simpler use of speaking by
Action j the Action itself hath no moral import : and so,
the information having but one moral meaning, that
which it conveys is clear and intelligible. But where a
Rite of Religion is used for this Speaking action, there
the ation hath a moral import ; and so the information
having two moral meanings, that which it conveys is
more obscure and mysterious. Hence it appears that
this mode of speaking by action, called a TYPE, is
exactly fitted for the information in question. Just so it
is again with the SECONDARY SENSE ; In the mere
allegory, the representing image has no moral import :
in the secondary seme, for a contrary reason (which the
very term imports), the representing image hath a moral
import ; and so, acquires the ^me fitting obscurity with
information by Types. For the typical Ritual, and the
double Prophecy, had each its obvious sense in the
present nature and future fortune of the Jewish Religion
* Jiomilia prima, De propbetarum obscuritate.
and
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 53
and Republic. And here we are easily led into the
essential difference (so much to the honour of Revela
tion) between the Pagan Oracles or Prophecies, and the
Jewish. The obscurity of the Pagan arose from the
ambiguity, equivocation or jargon OF EXPRESSION ; the
obscurity of the Jewish from the figurative represen
tation OF THINGS. The First (independent of any
other Religion) proceeded from ignorance of futurity ;
the Latter, dependent on the Christian, proceeded from
the necessity that those to whom the Prophecies were
delivered should not have too full a knowledge of them.
Dr. Middleton, indeed, would fain persuade us, that
the Oracles, or, as he chuses to call them, the Prophecies
of the Pythian Apollo, were neither better nor worse,
but exactly of the same absurd construction with the
Script tire Prophecies. He would hardly venture to
controvert what I have said of their logical fitness and
propriety, as a mode of information in the abstract,
because this would shew him ignorant of the nature and
progress of human converse. Much less, I suppose,
would he say, that this mode of informatiqn was not
suited to the genius of the Jewish Religion ; since he
owns that to be only a preparatory System calculated to
open and to prepare the way for one more perfect; and
consequently, that it must be so contrived as to connect,
and at the same time to hide from the vulgar eye, the
two parts of the Dispensation, and the relation they
have to one another. Now there is no conceivable way
of doing this but by types and secondary senses. What
then occasioned this insult upon them ? That which sup
ports all our free Writers in their contemptuous treat
ment of Religion, their mistaking the ABUSE of the tiling
for the thing ITSELF ; and giving the interpretations
of men, or the Doctrines of Churches, for Articles of
faith or Scripture history. What hath been here said
will shew the extreme weakness of this ingenious man s
parallel between the Scripture Prophecies and the Oracles
K 3 f
54 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
of the Pythian Apollo. " The PROPHECIES of the Py-
" thian Apollo (says he) were indeed obscure, equivocal
" and ambiguous, admitting not only different but con-
" trary senses ; so that the character here given of the
" Scripture Prophecies was undoubtedly true of them,
" that no event could restrain them to one determinate
" sense, when they ivere. originally capable of many. For
" if the obvious sense failed, as it often did, to the ruin
" of those who acted upon it, there was another always
" in reserve, to secure the veracity of the Oracle : till
" this very character of its ambiguous and senigmatical
" senses, confirmed by constant observation, gradually
" sunk its credit, and finally detected the imposture*."
The Prophecies of the Pythian Apollo were obscure,
equivocal arid ambiguous. And this (says he) was the
character of the Scripture Prophecies. Just otherwise,
as is seen above. Scripture Prophecies were obscure]
but the obscurity arose neither from equivocation nor
ambiguity (which two qualities proceed from the EX
PRESSION) but from the figurative representation of
THINGS. So that the obscurity, which the Pythian
Oracle and the Scripture Prophecies had in common,,
arising from the most different grounds, the character
given of the Oracles, that no event could restrain them
to one determinate sense when they were originally capa
ble of many, by no means belongs to the Scripture Pro
phecies, whatever the men he writes against (who appear
to know as little of the DOUBLE SENSE of Prophecies as
himself) might imagine. For though equivocal and am
biguous EXPRESSION may make a speech or writing,
where the objects are unconfined, capable of many
senses, yet a figurative representation of THINGS can
give no more senses than two to the obscurest Prophecy.
Hence it will follow, that while the expedient in support
ing the Pythian Oracles, by having a sense always in
* Examination of tfie Bishop of London s Discourses on Pro
phecy, &c. pp. 8g, yo.
reserve
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 55
reserve to satisfy the inquirer, would gradually sink their
credit, and finally detect the imposture; the discovery
of a SECONDARY 5EXSE of Prophecy, relative to the
completory Dispensation, will necessarily tend to confirm
and establish the divine origin of Scripture Prophecy.
Such was the wonderful economy of divine Wisdom,
in connecting together two dependent Religions, the parts
of one grand Dispensation : by this means, making one
preparatory of the other ; and each mutually to reflect
light upon the other. Hence we see the desperate
humour of that learned man, though very zealous Chris
tian *, who, because most of the prophecies relating to
JESUS, in the Old Testament, are of the nature described
above, took it into his head that the Bible was corrupted
by the enemies of JESUS. Whereas, on the very supposi
tion of a mediate and an ultimate Religion, which this
good man held, the main body of Prophecies in the Old
Testament relating to the New must, according to all
our ideas of fitness and expediency, needs be prophecies
with a DOUBLE SENSE. l>ut it is the usual support of
folly to throw its distresses upon knavery. And thus, as
we observed, the Mahometan likewise, who pretends to
claim under the Jewish religion, not iinding the doctrine
of & future state of rewards ami punishments in the Law,
is as positive that the Jews have corrupted their own
scriptures in pure spite to his great Prophet f.
III. Having thus shewn the reasonable use and great
expediency of these modes of sacred information, under
the Jewish Economy ; the next question is, Whether
they be indeecf there. This we shall endeavour to shew.
And that none of the common prejudices may lie
against our reasoning, the example given shall be of
TYPES and DOUBLE SENSES employed even in subjects
relating to the Jewish dispensation only.
i. The whole ordinance of the paw over was a TYPE
of the redemption from Egypt. The striking the blood
* Mr. Whision. f See B0te [ z ] at tlie ea<i of this Book.
E 4 oa
56 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,
on the side-posts, the eating flesh with unleavened bread
and bitter herbs, and in a posture of departure and ex
pedition, were all significative of their bondage and
deliverance. This will admit of no doubt, because the
Institutor himself has thus explained the Type And
thou shalt shew thy son (says he) in that day, say
ing, This is done because of that which the Lord did
unto me when 1 came forth out of Egypt. And it shall be
for a sign untothee upon thine hand, and for a memorial
between thine eyes ; that the Lord s law may be in thy
mouth : for with a strong hand hath the Lord brought
thee out of Egypt. Thou shalt therefore keep this ordi
nance in his season from year to year *. As therefore it
was of the genius of these holy Rites to be Typical or
significative of God s past, present, and future dispen
sations to his people, we cannot in the least doubt, but
that Moses, had he not been restrained by those im
portant considerations explained above, would have told
them that the sacrifice of the lamb without blemish was a
Type, a sign or memorial of THE DEATH OF CHRIST.
2. With regard to DOUBLE SENSES, take this instance
from Joel : who, in his prediction of an approaching
ravage by Locusts, foretells likewise, in the same words,
a succeeding desolation by the Assyrian army. For we
are to observe that this was GOD S method both in
warning and in punishing a sinful people. Thus, when
the seven nations for their exceeding wickedness were to
be exterminated, GOD promises his chosen people to
send hornets before them, which should drhe out the
Hivite, the Canaa trite, and the Hittite from before
them f. Now Joel, under one and the same Prophecy,
contained
* Exod. xiii. 8, & seq.
f Exod. xxiii. 23. This, the author of the book called the
" Wisdom of Solomon" admirably paraphrases:" For it was
" thy will to destroy by the hands of our fathers both those old
" inhabitants of thy holy land, whom thou hatedst for doing most
" odious works of witchcrafts, and wicked sacrifices; and also those
merciless murderers of children, and devourers of man s flesh,
and
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 57
contained in the first and second Chapters of his book,
foretells, as we say, both these plagues ; the locusts
in the primary sense, and the Assyrian army in the
secondary "Awake, ye drunkards, and weep; and howl
" all ye drinkers of wine, because of the new wine, for it
" is cut off from your mouth. For a nation is come up
" upon my land, strong, and without number, whose
" teeth are the teeth of a lion, and he hath the cheek-
" teeth of a great lion. He hath laid my vine waste,
" and barked my fig-tree : he hath made it clean bare,
" and cast it away : the branches thereof are made
" white. . .The field is wasted, the land mourneth; for
" the corn is wasted : the new wine is dried up, the
" oil languisheth. Be ye ashamed, O ye husbandmen ;
" howl, O ye vine-dressers, for the wheat and for the
" barley ; because the harvest of the field is perished*.
" Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in
" my holy mountain : Let all the inhabitants of the
" land tremble : for the day of the Lord cometh, for it is
" nigh at hand ; A day of darkness and of gloominess,
" a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning
" spread upon the mountains : a great people and a
" strong ; there hath not been ever the like A fire de-
" voureth before them, and behind them a flame burneth :
" the land is as the garden of Eden before them, and
" behind them a desolate wilderness ; yea, and nothing
" shall
" and the feasts of blood, with their priests out of the midst of their
" idolatrous crew, and the parents that killed, with their own hands,
" souls destitute of help : That the land winch thou esteemedst
" above all other might receive a worthy colony of GOD S children.
tl Nevertheless even those thou sparedstas men, and didst send wasps,
(t forerunners of thine host, to destroy them by little and little. Not
" that thou wast unable to bring the ungodly under the hand of the
u righteous in battle, or to destroy them at once with cruel beasts t
" or with one rough word: But executing thy judgments upon them
" by little and little, thou gavest them place of repentance, riot
" being ignorant that they were a naughty generation, and that
u their malice was bred in them, and that their cogitation would
f never be changed/ Chap, xii. ver. 3, & seq.
* Chap. i. ver. 5, seq.
5$ THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
" shall escape them. The appearance of them is as
" the appearance of horses ; and as horsemen, so shall
" they run. Like the noise of chariots on the tops of
u mountains shall they leap, like the noise of a flame
" of fire that devoureth the stubbie, as a strong people
" set in battle array. Before their face the people shall
" be much pained : all faces shall gather blackness.
" They shall run like mighty men, they shall climb the
" wall like men of war; and they shall march every one
" on his ways, and they shall not break their ranks.
" Neither shall one thrust another, they shall walk every
" one in his path : and when they fall upon the sword,
" they shall not be wounded. They shall run to and
* fro in the city ; they shall run upon the wall, they
" shall climb up upon the houses ; they shall enter in at
** the windows like a thief. The earth shall quake before
- them, the heavens shall tremble; the sun and the
" moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their
" shining*."
The fine conversion of the subjects is remarkable.
The prophecy is delivered in the first chapter, Awake,.
1/e drunkards, &c. and repeated in the second Blow ye
the trumpet in Zion, Sic. In the first chapter, the
LOCUSTS are described as a people ;For a nation is
come np upon nn* land, strong and without number. But,
that we may not be mistaken in the PRIMARY sense,
namely the plague of locusts, the ravages described are
the ravages of insects : They lay waste the vine, they
bark the Jig-tree, make the branches clean bare, and
wither the corn and fruit-trees. In the second chapter,
the hostile PEOPLE are described as locusts: AS THE
MORNING SPREAD UPON THE MOUNTAINS. The Op-
pearance of them is AS the appearance af horses, and AS
horsemen so shall they run, AS a strong people set in
battle array. They shall run LIKE mighty men, they
shall climb the wall LIKE men of war. But that we may
* Chap. ii. ver. i to 10.
not
Sect. 6.) OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 59
not mistake the SECONDARY sense, namely the invasion
of a foreign enemy, they are compared, we see, to a
mighty army. This art, in the contexture of the Pro
phecy, is truly divine ; and renders all chicane to evade
a double sense ineffectual. For in some places of this
Prophecy, dearth by insects must needs be understood ;
in others, desolation by war. So that both senses are of
necessity to be admitted. And here let me observe, that
had the Commentators on this Prophecy but attended to
the nature of the double sense, they would not have suffered
themselves to be so embarrassed ; nor have spent so much
time in freeing the Prophet from an imaginary embarras
(though at the expence of the context) on account of the
same Prophecy s having in one part that signification
primary -, which, in another, is secondary. A circumstance
so far from making an inaccuracy, that it gives the highest
elegance to the discourse ; and joins the tico senses so
closely as to obviate all pretence for a division, to the in
jury of the Holy Spirit. Here then we have a DOUBLE
SENSE, not arising from the interpretation of a single
verse, and so obnoxious to mistake, but of a whole and
very large descriptive Prophecy.
But as this species of double prophecy, when confined
to the events of one single Dispensation, takes off the
most plausible objection to primary and secondary senses
in general, it may not be improper to give another in
stance of it, which shall be taken from a Time when one
would least expect to find a double prophecy employed, I
mean, under the Gospel Dispensation. I have observed,
somewhere or other, that the ECONOMY OF GRACE
having little or nothing to hide or to shadow out, like the
LAW, it had small occasion for typical Rites or Cele
brations, or for Prophecies with a double sense; and that
therefore they are not to be expected, nor indeed are they
to be found, under the Gospel.
Yet the example I am about to give is an illustrious
exception to this general truth. The explanation of this
2 example
60 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
example will rectify a great deal of embarras and mistake
concerning it, and, at the same time, support the general
Truth. The Prophecy I mean, is that in which Jesus
foretels his FIRST and SECOND COMING IN JUDGMENT,
not only under the same ideas, but in one and the same
Prediction, as it is recorded, in nearly the same terms, by
Matthew, Mark, and Luke; though omitted by St. John,
for the reason hereafter to be given.
But to comprehend the full import of this Prophecy,
it will be proper to consider the occasion of it. Jesus,
after having warmly upbraided the Scribes and Pharisees
whom he found in the Temple, with their superstitious
abuses of the Law ; with their aversion to be reformed ;
and their obstinate rejection of their promised Messiah ;
left them with a dreadful denunciation of the ruin* then
banging over their Civil and Religious Policy. His Dis
ciples, who followed him through the Temple, greatly
.affected with these threats, and yet possessed with the
national prejudice of the Eternity of the Law, pointed as
he passed along, at the Temple Buildings, and desired
him to observe the stupendous solidity and magnificence
of the Work. As much as to say, " Here are no marks
of that speedy destruction which you have just now pre
dicted : on the contrary, this mighty Mass seems calcu
lated to endure till the general dissolution of all things."
To which, Jesus, understanding their thoughts, replied,
that in a very little time there should not be left one stone
upon another, of all the wonders they saw before them.
And from thence takes occasion to prophesy of the speedy
destruction of the Jewish Nation. But as the bare pre
diction of the ruin of that splendid Economy would be
likely to scandalize these carnal-minded men, while they
saw notiiing erected in its stead, by their Messiah and
Deliverer, it seemed good to divine Wisdom to repre
sent this destruction under the image of their Messiah s
coming to execute judgment on the devoted City, and of
* Matt. 3xiii. Mark xii. 34, Luke xvi. 25.
his
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 61
his raising a new Economy on its ruin ; as was done by
the establishment of the Christian Policy *.
But yet, as this was to be unattended with the circum
stances of exterior grandeur, He relieves the picture of the
Church-militant, erected on his coming TO JUDGE
JERUSALEM, with all the splendours of the Church-
triumphant, which were to be displayed at his second
coming TO JUDGE THE WORLD. Arid this, which was
so proper for the ornament, and useful for the dignity of
the Scene, was necessary for the completion of the Sub
ject, which was a full and entire view of the Dispensation of
Grace. Thus, as JOEL in one and the same descrip
tion had combined the previous ravages of the Locusts
with the succeeding devastations of the Assyrians, so
here, JESUS hath embroidered into one Piece the inter
mediate judgment of the Jews, and the finat judgment
of mankind f .
Let us now see what there was in the notions and lan
guage of the Jewish People, that facilitated the easy in
troduction of the secondary sense ; and gave the style,
which was proper to that sense, an expressive elegance
when applied to the primary.
The Jews, besotted with their fancied Eternity of the
Law, had entertained a notion that the destruction of
Jerusalem was to be immediately followed with the de*
struction of the World. This made the closeness in the
connexion between the primary and secondary sense of
the descriptive prophecy, easy and natural ; and as-it
made the two destructions scarce dividual, so it left no
room to distinguish, in any formal manner, between the
Jirst and second coming in Judgment. f r .
The old prophetic language was of equal use and ad
vantage to interweave the two senses into one another,
which the, not ion here mentioned had drawn together an^i
combined. The change of Magistracy, the fall of King-
* See Julian, or a Discourse concerning his attempt to rebuild the
Temple.
f Matt. xxiv. Mark xiii. Luke xxi.
doms,
62 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
doms, and the revolutions of States, are described, in the
old language of inspiration, by disasters in the Heavens,
by the fall of Stars, and by eclipses of the greater Lumi
naries. This admirably served the purpose of conveying
both events under the same set of images ; indeed, under
one and the same description ; namely, the destruction
of Jerusalem in the FIGURATIVE sense; and the de
struction of the world in the LITERAL. The sun shall
be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light : and
the stars of heaven shall foil, and the powers that are
in heaven shall be shaken. And they shall see the Son of
man coming in the Clouds with great power and glory*.
So that we see, the representation of a double seme in
this Prophecy hath all the ease, and strength, and art,
which we can conceive possible to enter into a sacred in
formation of this nature. And the close contexture of
its parts is so far from obscuring any thing in the two
great correlative pictures, portrayed upon it, that it serves
to render each more distinct, and better defined. Diffe
rent indeed in this from most of the Jewish Prophecies
of the same kind : And the reason of the difference is
obvious. In the Jewish Prophecies, the secondary sense,
relating to matters in another Dispensation, was of neces
sity to be left obscure, as unsuitable to the knowledge of
the time in which the Prophecy was delivered. Whereas
the first and secondary senses of the Prophecy before
us, were equally objective to the contemplation of Christ s
Disciples ; as the two capital parts of the Dispensation
to which they were now become subject.
But it will be said, u Tiiat before all this pains had
been taken to explain the beauties of the double sense,
we should have proved the existence of it ; since, accord
ing to our own account of the matter, the magnificent
terms employed, which are the principal mark of a
SECONDARY sense, are the common prophetic Language
to express the subject of the PRIMARY : And because,
* Mark xiii. 2426. Matt, xxiv, 29, 30.
when
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 63
when Jesus, in few words, repeats the substance of this
Prophecy to the High- Priest, on the like occasion for
which he delivered it at large to his Disciples, he de
scribes the destruction of Jerusalem in those high terms
from whence the SECONDARY sense is inferred: for when
Jesus was accused of threatening, or of designing to
destroy the Temple, and was urged by the High- Priest to
make his defence, he says -Hereafter shall ye see the
Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and
coming in the clouds of heaven* ; which words the con
text necessarily confines to his coming in judgement on
Jerusalem,"
To this I answer, That it was not for fear of being put
to the proof, that it was taken for granted that this Pro
phecy had a double seme, a primary and a secondary ;
because it is only quoting a passage or two in it, to
$hew that it must necessarily be confessed to have both.
1. That Jesus prophesies of the destruction of Jeru
salem, appears from the concluding words recorded by all
the three Evangelists Verily, I say unto you, that THUS
GENERATION shall not pass away till ALL these things
be done or fulfilled^. Hence, by the way, let me observe,
that this fulfilling in the primary sense being termed the
fulfilling all, seems to be the reason why St. John, who
wrote his Gospel after the destruction of Jerusalem,
hath omitted to record this Prophecy of his Master.
2. That Jesus at the same time speaks of the destruc
tion of the World, at his coming to judge it, appears
likewise from his own words recorded by the same
Evangelists But of that day ami hourknwveth no man;
m not the Angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the
Father^. For if the Whole be to be understood only
of one single event, then do these two texts expressly
contradict one another; the first telling us that the event
should come to pass near the close of that very genera*
Matt xxvi, 64. Mark xiv, 62, Luke xxii. 6y.
t Mattxxiv. 34. Mark xiii. 30. Jjalte xxi, 32,
Mark xiii,
tion;
64 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
tion ; the latter telling us that the time is unknown to all
men, nay even to the Angels and to the Son himself: -
then does the last quoted text expressly contradict the
Prophecy of Daniel *, that very Prophecy to which
Jesus all the. way refers; for in that prophecy, the day
and hour, that is, the precise time of the destruction of
Jerusalem, is minutely foretold.
Hence it follows that this famous Prophecy hath
indeed a DOUBLE SENSE, the one primary, and the other
secondary.
It is true, the infant-Church saw the destruction of the
world so plainly foretold in this Prophecy, as to suffer
an error to creep into it, of the speedy and instant con
summation of all things. This, St. Paul found necessary
to correct Now I beseech you, says he, that ye be not
soon shaken in mind, or troubled, as that the day of
Christ is at hand, &c.| And it was on this account,
I suppose, that St. Luke, who wrote the latest of the
three Evangelists, records this Prophecy in much lower
terms than the other two, and entirely omits the words in
the text quoted above, which fixes the secondary sense of
the Prophecy of that day and hour, Sec.
If St. Paul exhorted his followers not to be shaken
in mind on this account ; his fellow-labourer St. Peter,
when he had in like manner reproved the scoffers, who
said, where is the promise of his coming ? went still
further, and, to shew his followers that the Church was
to be of long continuance here on earth, explains to
them the nature of that evidence which future times
were to have of the truth of the Gospel ; an evidence
even superior to that which the primitive times enjoyed
of MIRACLES J; We have also a more sure word of
PROPHECY ; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as
unto a light which shineth in a dark place, until the day
dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts^. This
* Chap. viii. ver. 13, 14. f 2 - Thess. ii. i. & seq,
J 2 Peter, i. 17. Ver. 19.
evidence
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 65
evidence of PROPHECY is justly qualified a more sure
word*, when compared to MIRACLES, whose demon
strative evidence is confined to that age in which the
power of them was bestowed upon the Church : whereas
the prophecies here meant, namely, those of St. Paul and
St. Johnf, concerning the GREAT APOSTASY, were always
fulfilling even to the last consummation of all things ;
and so, affording this demonstrative evidence to the men
of all generations.
However, if from this prophecy the first Christians
drew a wrong conclusion, it was not hy the fault cf the
Divine Prophet, but their own. Jewish Tradition might
at first mislead the followers of Jesus to believe that the
destruction of the World was very soon to follow the
destruction of Jerusalem : But these men soon put off
Tradition, with the Law : And Scripture, which was
then recommended to them as their only study, with
the DOUBLE SENSES with which it abounds, might easily
have led them to a distinction of times in this Prophecy,
a Prophecy formed, as they must needs see, upon the
ancient models.
But as Providence is always educing good out of evil
(though neither for this, nor any other reason, is evil
ever connived at by the disciples of Christ, as appears
from the conduct of St. Paul, just mentioned above) this
error was fruitful of much service to truth. It nourished
and increased a spirit of piety, seriousness, and chanty,
which wonderfully contributed to the speedy propagation
of the Gospel.
Before I conclude, let me just observe (what I have
always principally in view), that this explanation of the
Prophecy obviates all those impious and absurd insinu
ations of licentious men, as if Jesus was led either by
craft or enthusiasm, either by the gloominess of his own
* Bt&MPTffefr, more -firm, constant, *nd durable.
f See Sir Isaac Newton on the Prophecies, c. i. of his Observations
upon the Apocalypse of St. John.
VOL. VI. F ideas,
66 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
ideas, or by his knowledge of the advantage of inspiring
such into his Followers, to prophesy of the speedy
destruction of the World.
But by strange ill fortune even some Believers, as
we havfc observed, are come at length to deny the very
existence of double semex and secondary prophecies. A
late writer hath employed some pages to proclaim his
utter disbelief of all such fancies. I shall .take the liberty
to examine this bold rectifier of prejudices : not for any
thing he hath opposed to the Principles here laid down ;
for I dare say these were never in his thoughts ; but only
to shew, that all he hath written is wide of the purpose;
though, to say the truth, no wider than the notions of
those whom lie opposes ; men who contend for Types
and Secondary senses in as extravagant a way as lie
argues against them; that is, such who take a handle
from the doctrine of double senses to give a loose to the
extravagancies of a vague imagination : consequently his
arguments, which are aimed against their very being and
use, hold only against their abuse. And that abuse,
which others indeed have urged as a proof against the
uxt, he sets himself to* confute: a mighty undertaking!
; and then mistakes his reasoning tor a confutation of
the use.
His Argument against double semes in Prophecies, as
-for as I understand it, may be divided into two parts,
\. Replies to the reasoning of others for double, senses.
-2. liis GWQ reasoning against them. With his Replies
I have nothing to do (except where something of argu-
meat -against the reality of double senses is contained)
because they arc replies to no reasonings of mine, nor to
any that I approve. I have only therefore to consider
what he hath to say against the thing itself.
\. His first argument against more senses than one,
is as follows " Supposing that the opinion or judgment
Tlui Principles and Conn^xiruj of Natural and Revealed Religion,
considered, p, 421* by Dr. Svkes.
" of
Sect. 6.} OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 67
" of the Prophet or Apostle is not to be considered in
" matters of Prophecy more than the judgment of a
" mere amanuensis is, and that the point is not what
" the opinion of the amanuensis was, but what the inditcr
" intended to express; yet it must be granted, that if
" God had any views to some remoter events, at the,
" same time that the words which were used were
u equally applicable to, and designed to express, nearer
" events : those remoter events, as well as the nearer,
" were in the intention of GOD : And if both the nearer
" and remoter events were equally intended by God in
" any Proposition, then the LITERAL SENSE OF THEM
" IS NOT THE ONE NOR THE OTHER SI> GLY AND
" APART. BUT BOTH TOGETHER must be the full mean-
" ing of such passages." p. 219.
-~-Tlien the literal sense of them is not the one nor the
other singly and apart, but both of them together, e. i. e.
if both together make up but one literal sense, then tnere
is neither a secondary nor a double sense : and so there is
an end of the controversy. A formidable Adversary
truly ! He threatens to overthrow the thing, and gives
us an argument against the propriety of the name. Let
him but allow his adversaries that a nearer and a remoter
event are both the subjects of one and the same Predic
tion, and, I suppose, it will be in different to them whether
he call it, \\ith them, a Prophecy of a double and figura-*
tive sense, or they call it, with him, a Prophecy of a single
literal sense : And he may be thankful for so much com
plaisance ; for it is plain, they have the better of him
even in the propriety.} of the name. It is confessed that
GOD, in these prediction?, might have views to nearer
and remoter events : now those nearer and remoter
events were events under two different Dispensations,
the Jewish and the Christian. The Prediction is ad
dressed to the Jews, who had not only a more immediate
concern with the first, but, at the time of giving the
Prophecy, were not to be let into the secrets of the
F 2 other:
68 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
other : Hence th^ prediction of the nearer event was
properly the literal or primary sense, as given for the
present infoimation of GOD S Servants; and the more
remote event for their future information, and so was as
properly the secondary sense, called with great propriety
Jig lira tree, because conveyed under the terms which
predicted the nearer event. But I hope a jirst and a
second, a literal and a jigurative, may both together at
least make up a DOUBLE SENSE. SELDEN understood
this matter better, when he said, " The Scripture may
" have more senses besides the literal, because GOD
u understands all things at once ; but a man s writing
" has but one true sense, which is that which the author
<c meant when he writ it*."
2. His second argument runs thus, " WORDS are
<c the signs of our thoughts, and therefore stand for the
" ideas in the mind of him that uses them. If then
* words arc made use of to signify two or more things
" at the same time, their significancy is really lost, and
" it is impossible to understand the real certain intention
( of him that uses them. Were GOD therefore to dis-
" cover any thing to mankind by any written Revelation,
" and were he to make use of such TERMS as stand
<: for ideas in men s minds, he must speak to them so as
" to be understood by them. They must have in their
u minds the ideas which God intended to excite in them,
" or else it would be in vain to attempt to make dis-
{{ coveries of his Will ; and the TERMS made use of must
<; be such as were wont to raise such certain ideas, or
" else there could be no. written Revelation. The true
" sense therefore of ANY PASSAGE of Scripture can be
" but ONE; or if it be said to contain more senses than
" one, if such multiplicity be not revealed, the Revelation
" becomes useless, because .unintelligible." pp. 222, 223.
Men may talk what they please of the obscurity of
Writers who iiave two wnses, but it has been my fortune
* Table Talk.
tot,
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATE!). 6$
to meet with it much oftener in those who have none.
Our Reasoner has here mistaken the very Question,
which is, whether a Scripture PROPOSITION (for all
Prophecies are reducible to Propositions) he capable
of two senses ; and, to support the negative, he labours
to prove that WORDS OR TERMS can have but one. //
then WORDS arc made use of to signify two or more
THINGS at the same time, their rigtftfaa&fjf is really
lost such TERMS as stand for ideas in mens minds
TERMS made use of must be such aft are wont to raise
such certain ideas All this is readily allowed ; but how
wide of the purpose, may be seen by this instance :
Jacob says, I will go down into Sheol unto my son mourn
ing. Now if SHEOL signify in the ancient Hebrew,
only the Grave, it would be abusing the TERM to make
it signify likewise, with . the vulgar Latin, in infernuuiy
because if WORDS (as he says) be made to signify two or
more things at the same time, their signijicancy is lost.
But when this PROPOSITION of the Psalmist comes to be
interpreted, Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hell [SiiEoi]
neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption ;
though it literally signifies security from the curse of
the Law, upon tra-nsgressors, viz. immature death, yet
it is very reasonable to understand it in a spiritual sense,
of the resurrection of CHRIST from the dead ; in which,
the words or terms translated Soul and Hell, arc left in
the meaning they bear in the Hebrew tongue, of Body
and Grave.
But let us suppose our Reasoner to mean that a
PROPOSITION is not capable of fico senses, as perhaps he
did in his confusion of ideas, for notwithstanding his
express words to the contrary, before he conies to the
end of his argument, he talks of the true sense of ANY
PASSAGE being but one ; and then his assertion must be,
That if one Proposition have two Senses, its sigrujicancy
is really lost ; and that it is impossible to understand
:the real certain intention \ of him that use* them; co; -
F 3 sequentiy
70 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
sequent ly Revelation will become useless, because unhi*
tclligible.
Now this I will take the liberty to deny. In the fol
lowing instances, a single Proposition was intended by
the writers and speakers to have a double sense. The
poet Virgil says,
" Talia, per clypetim Volcani, dona parentis
" Miratur : rerumque ignarus, imagine gatidet,
" ATTOLLENS HUMERO FAMAMQUE ET FATA NEPO-
" TUM* "
The last line has these two senses : First, that JEneas
bore on his shoulders a shield, on which was engraved a
prophetic picture of the fame and fortunes of his posterity:
Secondly, that under the protection of that piece of
armour he established their fame and fortunes, and was
enabled to make a settlement in Latium, which proved
the foundation of the Roman empire f.
Here then is a double sense, which, I believe, none who
have any taste of Virgil will deny. The preceding verse
introduces it with great art,
" Miratur, rerumque ignarus imagine gaudet :"
and prepares us for something mysterious, and hid
behind the letter.
On Peter s refusing to eat of elean and unclean meats
promiscuously, in the vision presented to him, the Holy
Spirit says, What Gad hath cleansed, that call not thou
common J. The single proposition is, That which God
hath cleansed is not common or impure , but no one
who reads this story can doubt of its having this double
sense : i . That the distinction between clean and unclean
meats icas to be abolished. 2. And That the Gentiles
were to be called into the Church of CHRIST. Here
then the true sense of these PASSAGES is not one, but
two: and yet the intention or meaning is not, on this
* yEneid. lib. viii. in fin.
t See Note [AA] at the eiid of this Book, I Acts x. 15.
account.
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 71
account, the least obscured or lost, or rendered doubtful
or unintelligible.
He will say, perhaps, " that the very nature of the
subject, in both cases, determines the two senses here ex- ,
plained." And does he think, we will not say the same
of double senses in the Prophecies ? But he seems to take
it for granted, tiiat Judaism and Christianity have no kind
of relation to one another: Why else would he bring, in
discredit of a double sense, th< se t vo verses of Virgil;
" Hi motus animorum, atque haec certaimna tanta
. " Pulveris exigui jactu composta quiescunt."
On which he thus descants The words are determi
nate and clear* Suppose new a man having occasion to
speak of intermitting Jtroers and the ruffle of a mans
spirits, and the easy cure of the disorder by pulverized
bark, c. p. 225. To make this pertinent, we must
suppose no more relation between the fortunes of the
Jjewish Church and the Christian, than between a battle
of Bees 9 and the tumult of the animal Spirits: if this
were not his meaning, it will be hard to know what was,
wnkss to shew his happy talent at a parody.
But as he seems to delight in classical authorities, I
will give him one not quite so absurd; where he himself
shall confess that a double meaning does in fact run through
one of the finest Odes of Antiquity. Horace thus ad
dresses a crazy ship in which his friends had embarked
for the yEgean sea:
O navis, referent in mare te noyi
Pluctus! 6 quid agis ? fortiter pccupa
Portum: nonne vides ut
Nudum remigio latus*, &c.
In the first and primary sense, he describes the dangers
of his friends in a weak unmanned vessel, and in a tem
pestuous sea: in the secondary,, the dangers of the Re
public in entering into a new civil war, after all the losses
and disasters of the old. As to the secondary sense,
* Hor. Od. lib.i. Od. 14,
r 4 which
72 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,
which is ever the most questionable and obscure, we have
the testimony of early Antiquity delivered by Quintilian:
As to the primary seme, the following will r;ot suffer us
to doubt of it:
Nuper sollicitum quae mini tedium,
Nunc desiderium, curaque non levis,
Interfusa nitentes
Vites aequora Cycladas.
But there being, as we have shewn above, two kinds of
allegories; (the first, viz. the proper allegory; which
hath but one real sense, because the literal meaning, serving
only for the envelope, and without a moral Import*, is
not to be reckoned ; the second, the improper, which hath
two, because the literal meaning is of moral import; and
of this nature are Prophecies with a double sense) the
Critics on Horace, not apprehending the different natures
of these two kinds, have engaged in very warm contests.
The one side seeing some parts of the Ode to have a
necessary relation with a real ship, contend for its being
purely historical; at the head of these is Tanaquil Faber,
who first started this criticism, after fifteen centuries
peaceable possession of the Allegory : the other side, on
the authority of Quintilian, who gives the ode as an ex
ample of this figure, will have it to be purely allegoricaL
Whereas it is evidently both one and the other ; of the
nature of the second kind of allegories, which have a
double, sense; and this double sense, which does not in the
least obscure the meaning, the learned reader may see,
adds infinite beauty to the whole turn of the Apostrophe.
Had it been purely historical, nothing had been more
cold or trifling; had it been purely allegorical, nothing
less natural or gracious, on account of the enormous
length into which it is drawn. Ezekiel has an allegory of
that sort uhich Quintilian supposes this to. be, (namely,
a proper allegory with only one real sense) and ho
manages it with that brevity and expedition which ^proper
See the beuinniim of this volume.
o
allegory
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 73
allegory demands, when used in the place of a metaphor.
vS peaking of Tyre under the image of a Ship, he says,
77?j/ Rowers have brought thee into great waters : the
east wind hath broken tliee in the midst of the Seas-**
But suppose the Ode to be both historical and allego
rical, and that, under his immediate concern for his
Friends, he conveyed his more distant apprehensions
for the Republic ; and then there appears so much ease,
and art, and dignity, in every period, as make us justly
^esteem it the most finished composition of Antiquity.
What is it then which makes the double seme so ridi
culous and absurd in, Hi motus animorum, 8$c. and so
noble and rational in, O Navis referent, 8$c. but this,
That, in the latter case, the subject of the two senses
had a close connexion in the INTERESTS OF THE
WRITER; in the former, none at all ? Now that which
makes two senses reasonable, does, at the same time,
always make them intelligible and obvious. But if this
be true, then a double sense in Prophecies must be both
reasonable and intelligible: For I think no Believer will
deny that there was the closest connexion between the
Jewish and Christian systems, in the Dispensations of
the Holy Spirit. This will shew us, with what know
ledge of his subject the late Lord Bolingbroke was en
dowed, when he endeavoured to discredit Types and
Figures by this wise observation, " That Scripture Types
" and Figures have NO MORE RELATION TO the things
" said to be typified, than to any thing that passes now
" in France f."
3. His next argument runs thus" If GOD is dis-
" posed to reveal to mankind any truths he must con-
" vey them in such a manner that they may be under-
". stood if he speaks to men, he must condescend to.
" their infirmities and capacities Now if he were to
c contrive a Proposition in such a manner that the
" same Proposition should relate to several events; the
* Chap.xxvii. ver. 26, f Works, vol. iii. p. 306.
" consequence
74 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
" consequence would be, that as often as events happened
" which agreed to any Proposition, so often would the
" Revelation be accomplished. But this would only
" serve to increase the confusion of men s minds, aiui
" never to clear up any Prophecy : No man could say
" what was intended by the Spirit of GOD: And if
* c MANY events were intended, it would be the same
" thing as if NO event was intended at all/* p. 226,
I all along suspected he was talking against what he did
not understand. He proposed to prove the absurdity of a
double -or secondary sense (p. 221) of Prophecies; and
now he tells us of MANY senses; and endeavours to shew
how this would make Prophecy useless. But sure he
should have known, what the very phrase itself intimates,
that no prophetic proposition is pretended to have more
than TWO senses : And farther, that the subject of each i
supposed to relate to two connected arid successive Dis
pensations : which is so far from creating any confu& wtt
in men s minds, or mailing a Prophecy useless, that it
cannot but strengthen and confirm our belief of, and give
double evidence to, the divinity of the Prediction. Ou
the contrary, he appears to think that what orthodox
Divines mean by a second sense, is the same with what
the Scotch Prophets mean by a second sight ; the seeing
one thing alter another as long as the imagination will
liold out.
4. His last argument is " Nor is it any ground for
^ such a supposition, that the Prophets being FULL or
; " THE IDEAS of the Messiah, and his glorious kingdom,
" MADE USE OF IMAGES taken from thence, to express
* the- points upon which they had occasion to speak.
" From whencesoeverthey took their ideas, yet when they
i: spoke of present facts, it was present facts only that
i; were to be understood. Common language, and the
" figures of it, and the manner of expression; themeta-
" ffhors, the kyperbelcf, and all the usual forms of speech,
" are to be considered : And if the occasions of the
" expression
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED: 75.,
" expression are taken from a future state, yet still the
" Proposition is to be interpreted of that one thing to
". which it is particularly applied." p. 227.
Orthodox Divines have supported the reasonableness
and probability of double semes by this material Obser
vation, that the inspired Writers were full of the ideas
of the Christian Dispensation. That is, there being a
close relation between the Christian and the Jewish, of
which the Christian was the completion, whenever the
Prophets spoke of any of the remarkable fortunes of the,
one, they interwove with it those of the other. A truth.,
which no man could be so hardy to deny, who believes,
1. That there is that relation between the two Religions : .
and, 2. That these inspired men were let into the nature
and future fortunes of both. See now in what manner
our Author represents this observation. It is no ground,
says he, for a double sense, that the Prophets were full
of the ideas of a Messiah and his glorious kingdom, and
made use of images taken from thence ; [that is, that they
ennobled their style by their habitual contemplation of
magnificent ideas.] For (continues he) whencesocccr
they took their ideas, when they spoke of present facts,
present facts alone were to be understood. Common-
language and the figures of it, &c. \Vithout doubt, from
such KJulness oj ideas, as only raised and ennobled their
style, it could be no more concluded that they meant
future facts, when they speak of present, than that Virgil,
because he was lull of the magnificent ideas of the
Roman grandeur, where he says, Priami Lnperlum
Divum Domus, Ilium, 8$ Ingens gloria Teucrorum^
meant Rome as well as Troy, But what is all this to
the purpose? Orthodox Divines talk of a fulness of ideas
arising from the Holy Spirits revealing the mutual de
pendency and future fortunes of the two Dispensations;
and revealing them for the information, solace, and support
of the Christian Church: And Dr. Sykes talks of. a
fulness of ideas got nobody knows how, and used nobody
knows
7<S THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book. VI.
knows why, to raise (I think he says) their style and
ennoble their images. Let him give some good account
of this representation, and then we may be able to de
termine, if it be worth the trouble, whether he here put
the change upon himself or his readers. To all this
Dr. Sykes replies, " It was no answer, to shew that
" there are allegories and allegorical interpretation^
** for these were never by me denied/ Exam. p. 363.
Why does he tell us of his never denying allegories, when
he is called upon for denying secondary semes f Does he
take these things to be different ? If he does, his answer
is nothing to the purpose, for he is only charged, in
express words, with denying secondary semes, Does he
take them to be the same f He must then allow secondary
senses ; and so give up the question ; that is, retract the
passages here quoted from him. He is reduced to this
dilemma, either to acknowledge that he first writ, or that
he now answers, to no purpose *.
From hence, to the end of the chapter, he goes on
to examine particular texts urged against his opinion ;
with which I have at present nothing to do : first*
because the proper subject of this section is the general
nature only of types and double senses : and secondly,
because what room I have to spare, on this head, is for
a much welcomer Guest, whom I am now returning
to, the original author of these profound reasonings,
Mr. COLLINS himself.
II.
We have shewn that types and secondary senses are
rational, logical, and scholastic modes of information:
that they were expedient and highly useful under the
Jewish Economy : and that they are indeed to be found
in the Institutes of the Law and the Prophets. But now
it will be objected, cf that, as far as relates to the Jewish
Economy, a double seme may be allowed ; because the.
future affairs of that Dispensation may be well supposed
* See note [BBJ at the end of this Book.
to
Sect 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 77
to occupy the thoughts of the Prophet; but it is un
reasonable to make one of the senses relate to a different
and remote Dispensation, never surely in his thoughts.
For the hooks of the. Old Testament (Mr. Collins tells us)
seem the wast plain of all ancient writings, and wherein
there appears not the hast trace of a Typical or Allegori-
.cal intention in the Authors, or in any other Jews of
their time *."
I reply, that was it even as our adversaries suggest,
that ail the Prophecies, which, we say, relate to JESUS,
relate to him only in a secondary sense ; and that there
were no other intimations of the New Dispensation but
what such Prophecies convey ; it would not follow that
such sense was false or groundless. And this I have
clearly shewn in the account of their nature, original,
and use. Thus much I confess, that without miracles,
in confirmation of such sense, somef of them would with
difficulty be proved to have it ; because we have shewn,
that a com m odious and designed obscurity attends both
their nature and their use. But then, This let me add,
and these Pretenders to superior reason would do well
to consider it, that the authority of divine Wisdom as
rationally forces tlie assent to a determined meaning of
an obscure and doubtful Proposition, as any other kind
of logical evidence whatsoever.
But this which is here put, is by no means the case.
For we say, i. That some of the Prophecies relate to
JESUS in & primary sense. 2. That besides these, there
are in tlie prophetic Writings the most clear and certain
intimations of the Gospel Economy, which are alone
.sufficient to ascertain the reality of the secondary.
L That SOME Prophecies relate to the MESSIAH in
a primary sense, hath been invincibly proved by many
learned men before me : I shall mention therefore but
px E ; and that, only because Mr. Collins hath made
some- remarks upon it, which will afford occasion for a
-* (ground*, p,82, f See note [CC] at the end of this Book.
farther
78 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI
farther illustration of the subject JESUS declares, of
John the Baptist This is the ELI AS that was for to
come. " Wherein (says the Author of the Grounds, &c.)
" he is supposed to refer to these words of Malachi,
" Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the
" coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord;
" which, according to their LITERAL sense, are a Pro-
" phesy that Elijah or Ellas was to come in person, and
" therefore not LITERALLY but MYSTICALLY fulfilled
" in John the Baptist" pp. 47, 48. And again, in his
Scheme of literal Prophecy considered, speaking of this
passage of Malachi, he says, " But to cut off all pretence
" for a literal Prophecy, I observe, first, That the literal
" interpretation of this place is, that Ellas, the real
" Ellas, was to come. And is it not a MOST PLEASANT
" literal interpretation to make Ellas not signify Ellas,
" but somebody who resembled him in qualities?
" Secondly I observe, that the Septuagint Translators
" render it, Ellas the Tishblte, and that the Jews,
* since CHRIST S time, have generally understood, from
" the passage before us, that Elias is to come in person.
" But John Baptist himself, who must be supposed to
" know who he was himself, when the question was
" asked him, whether he icas Elias, denied himself to he
" Ellas ; and when asked who he was, said, he was the
" voice of one crying in the Wilderness, Sfc. which is $
" passage taken from Isaiah" p. 127.
i . The first thing observable in these curious remarks
is, that this great Advocate of Infidelity did not so much
as understand the terms of the question. The words,
says he, according to their literal sense, are a Prophesy
that Elijah teas to come in person, and therefore- not
literally but mystically fit IjiUed in John the Baptist. lie
did not so much as know the meaning of a primary and
secondary sense, about which he makes all this stir.
A secondary sense indeed implies o, figurative interpre
tation ; a primary implies a literal: But yet. this primary
SEXSJE
><-et.&] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. ?<j
SE\ T SE does not exclitfte^ftgtfiwti&e TEIIMS. The primary
or literal sense of the Prophecy in question is, that,
?>eibre the great and terrible day of the Lord, a messen
ger should be sent, resembling in character the Prophet
Elijah ; this messenger, by & figure, is called the Prophet
Elijah. A figure too of the mast easy and natural im
port ; and of especial use amongst the Hebrews, -who
were accustomed to denote any character or action bv
that of the kind vvhich was hecbrfie most known or
celebrated. Thus the Prophet Isaiah : ** And the Lord
* shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea ?
" and with his mighty win-d shall he shake his hand over
" the river, and shall smite it in the scxeu slwams *V
Here, a second passage through the Red Sea is promised
in literal terms : But who thereibre will say that this is
the literal waubig ? The literal meaning, though the
prophecy be \i\Jigurative terms, is simply redemption
from bondage. For EGYPT, in the Hebrew phrase,
signified a place of bondage. So again Jeremiah says ;
" A voice was heard in llamah, lamentation and bitter
" weeping: RACHEL weeping ibr lier children refused
<v to be comforted because they were not f. r The
primary sense of these words, according to Grotius. is a
prediction of the weeping of the Jewish matrons for their
children can led captive to Babylon by Nabuzaradan,
Will he say therefore that this Prophecy was not literally
fulfilled, because Rachel was dead many ages before,
and did not, that we read ot\ return to life on this occa
sion ? Does not he see that, by the most common and
easy figure, the Matrons of the tribe of Benjamin were
called by the name of this their great Parent? As the
Israelites, in Scripture, are called Jacob, and the posterity
of the son of Jesse by the name of David: So a^aih,
Isaiah says, " Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of
" SODOM ; give ear unto the Law oi our GOD, ye people
" of GojuoititAirj;." Will he say, the people of Sodom
Jb, xi. ver. 15, f Ch. xjpi ver. 15, * Ch. i. ver. 10.
ani
8o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
and Gomorrah are here addressed to in \he primary sense,
and the people of the Jews only in the secondary ? But
the preceding words, which shew the people of Sodom
and Gomorrah could not now be addressed to, because
there were none left, shew likewise that it is the Jewish
Nation which is called by these names. Except the
Lord of Hosts had left us a very small remnant, we
should have been as Sodom, and we should have been
like unto Gomorrah *. Would not he be thought an
admirable interpreter of Virgil, who should criticise the
Roman Poet in the same manner? Virgil seems the
most plain of all ancient writings : And lie says,
" Jain redit & Virgo, redeunt Saturnia regna."
Which, according to its literal meaning, is, that the
Virgin returns, and old Saturn reigns again, in person ;
and therefore not LITERALLY, but MYSTICALLY fid-
Jilled in the justice and felicity of Augustus s reign. And
it is a MOST PLEASANT literal interpretation, to make
the Virgin and Saturn not signify the Virgin and Saturn,
but somebody who resembled them in qualities. Such
reasoning on a Classic, would be called nonsense in every
language. But Freethinking sanctifies all sorts of im
pertinence. Let me observe further, that this was a
kind of compound blunder : LITERAL, in common speech,
being opposed both to figurative, and to spiritual ; and
MYSTICAL signifying both Jiguratire and spiritual; he
fairly confounded the distinct and different meanings
both of LITERAL and of MYSTICAL.
He goes on / observe, that the Septuagint Trans
lators render it Elias the Tishbite and that the Jews
since CHRIST S time have generally understood from this
passage,, that Elias is to come in person. And John
Baptist himself, who must be supposed to know who he
was himself, when the question was asked, him, denied
himself to be Elias. Why does lie say, Since CHRIST S
thne, and not before, when it appears to be before as well
* Chap, i. ver. 9, Q
Sect 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 81
as since, from his own account of the translation of the
Septuagint? For a good reason. We should then have
seen why John the Baptist, when asked, denied himself
to be Ellas ; which j it was not Mr. Collins s design we
should see; if indeed we do not ascribe too much to his
knowledge in this matter. The case stood thus : At the
time of the SeptuRgint translation, and from thence to
the time of CHRIST, the doctrine of a Transmigration,
and of a Resurrection of the body, to repossess the
Land of Judea, were national opinions ; which occa
sioned the Jews by degrees to understand all these
sorts of figurative expressions literally. Hence, amongst
their many visions, this was one, that Elias should come
again in person. Which shews what it was the Jews-
asked John the Baptist ; and what it was he answered,
when he denied himself to be Elias : Not that he was not
the Messenger prophesied of by Malachi (for his pre
tending to be that Messenger evidently occasioned the
question) but that he was not, nor did the prophecy
imply that the Messenger should be, Elias in person.
But to set his reasoning in the fullest light, Let us
consider a similar prophecy of Amos : Behold the days
come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a FAMINE
in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water
but of hearing the words of the Lord*. I would ask,
is this a Prophecy of a famine of the word in a literal,
or in a mystical sense? Without doubt the Deist will
own, (if ever he expects we should appeal again to Iris
ingenuity) in a literal. But now strike out the expla
nation [not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water]
and what is it then ? Is it not still a famine of the word
in a literal sense ? Mystical, if you will, in the meaning
of metaphorically obscure, but not in the meaning; of
spiritual. But mystical in this latter signification onlv,
is opposed to literal, in the question about secondary
senses. It appears then, that a want of preaching th$
* Chap. viii. ver. 11.
VOL. VI. G
82 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book
tcord is still the literal mean ing of the Prophecy,
whether the explanation be in or out, though the Jfgu-
rathe, term [famine] be used to express that meaning.
And the reason vrhy the Prophet explains the term,,
was not, because it was .a harsh or unnatural Jigtixe, to
denote want of preaching, any more than the term
Elijah to denote a similar character, which Malachi does
not explain ; but because the Prophecy of Amos might
have been for ever mistaken, and tliejigicrafhc. term un
derstood literally ; the People being at that time, oiler*
punished for their sins by & famine of bread
. But this abusive cavil at figurative terms will re mm A
us of his observations en the following Prophecy of
Isaiah " Even them will I bring to my holy mountain^
" and make them joyful in my house of prayer : their
" burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted
" upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an
" house of Prayer FOR ALL PEOPLE*." This, he says,
must needs relate to Jewish, not to Ghristiarn times..
Why? Because sacrifices are mentioned. But how could
this truth be told the Jewish People, that all nations
should be gathered to the. true GOD, otherwise than by
MS ing terms taken from Rites familiar to them ; unless
the nature of the Christian Dispensation had been pre
viously explained r A matter evidently irjfit for their in
formation, when they were yet to live so long under the
Jewish. For though the Prophets speak of the little,
value of, and small regard due to, the ceremonial Law ^
they always mean (and always make their meaning un
derstood) when the ceremonial Law is supcrstitionslyr
observed, and observed to a neglect of the moral \ which
last they describe in the purity and perfection of the*
Gospel. So admirable was this conduct! that while ifc
hid the future Dispensation, it prepared men for it.
Thus then stands the argument of this mighty Reasoncr..
There arc no Prophecies, he says, which: relate to JLSU&
* Chap..!vi. ver. 7,
but
Sect CJ OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 83
but in a secondary sense. Now a secondary sense h
unscholastic and enthusiasticaL To this we answer, that
the Prophecy of Malachi about Elijah, and of Isaiah
about bringing ail people to his holy mountain, relate
to JESUS in a primary sense. He replies, No, but in
a mystical, only. Here he begins to quibble, the sure
sign of an expiring argument: Mystical signifies as well
secondary asjigwativt. In the sense of secondary, the
interpretation of these Prophecies to JESUS is nettoystieafy
in the sense of Jiguratrct it is. But is the use of a
figurative term enthusiastical or unschclastic, when the
end is only to convey information concerning a less
known thing in the terms of one more known ? Now
whether we are to charge this to ill faith or a worse
understanding, his Followers shall determine for me.
2. But we will suppose all that an ingenuous Adver
sary can ask " That most of the Prophecies in question
relate to JESUS in a secondary sense only ; the rest in a
primary, but expressed m figurative terms ; which, till
their completion, threw a shade over their meaning, and
kept them in a certain degree of obscurity." Now, to
shew how all this came about, will add still farther light to
this very perplexed question.
We have seen, from the nature and long duration of the
Jewish economy, that the Prophecies which relate to JES u s,
must needs be darkly and enigmatically delivered: We
have seen how the allegoric Mode of speech, then much
in use, furnished the means, by what we call a double
sense in Prophecies, of doing this with all the requisite
obscurity. But as some of these Prophecies by their
proper light alone, without the confirmation of miracles,
could hardly have their subiimer sense so well ascer
tained; to render all opposers of the Gospel without ex
cuse, it pleased the Holy Spirit, under the last race of
the Prophets, to give credentials to the mission of JESUS
by predictions of him in a primary and literal sense.
Yet the Jewish Economy being to continue long, there
G a till
S* THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VII.
still remained the same necessity of a covert and myste
rious conveyance. That figurative expression therefore,
which was before employed in the proposition, was*
IKJW used in the terms* Hence, the Prophecies of a
swiglts&ui* come to be in highly figurative wo*ds :.. as>
before, the earlier prophecies of a double sense (which-
had a primary .meaning in the affairs of the Jewish State r
and, for the present information of ttiat People) were
delivered in a much simpler phrase.
The Jewish Doctors, whose obstinate adherence, not?
to the letter of the Law, as this Writer ignorantly or
fraudulently suggests, but to the mystical interpretation s
of the CaJmla, prevents their seeing -the -true cause of
Uiis difference in the LANGUAGE, between the earlier and
later Prophets; the Jewish Doctors, I say, are extremely-
perplexed to give a tolerable account of this matter.
What they best agree in is, that the Jig it rat ire enigmatic
style of the later Prophets (which however they make-
infinitely more obscure by cabalistic meanings, . than it
really is, in order to evade the relation which the Pre
dictions have to. JESUS) is owing to the declining state of
Srophecy. Every Prophtt^ says- the famous Rabbi,
Joseph Albo, that is of a strong, .wguciinM, ami piercing*
itnderstaudingy.wili apprehend the thing nakedly without
any similitude;, who we it comes to paw that alt hi* .say-*
rugs are distinct and clear, and j^ee from all obscurity,
having a literal truth in them : But u Prophet of an
:jerior wink or degree, his words axe obscure, cmcrapped.
in riddle* ami parable* \~ and therefore, lurcc not a literal
but allegorical truth contained in them*. And indeed*
insr fictitious RabbLseeaas to have had as little knowledge!
of this matter as the* other; for in answer to what Mr.
"WhSston, who, extravagant as he was in rejecting all
double saw*, yet knew the difference between a secondary*
and enigmatic prophecy, which, we- shall see, Mr. Collins^
did not, in answer, I say, to Mr. Whiston, who observed*
* Smith s Select Discourses, p. .180.
. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. -85
4hat the Prophetic* [meaning the primary] which *-relate
to Christianity arc cowred, --mystical and enigmatical, re-
t piies, This is exactly equal mysticism \cith, and just ait
remote from the real literal seme, as-ihe -mysticism GJ the
\Allegorists [i.c the -Contenders fer a double sense] and
is altogether as OV>SCVIIY. to the understanding*. Ilk
argument against secondary senses -is, that they are umcho-
lastic and Kthtt$ia$tie&L Mr. Whiston, to humour him,
^presents him with direct and primary Prophecies, buttelk;
him at the same time, they ate expressed in covered,
mystical, and enigmatic terms. This will not satisfy \hiin;
it is no better than the mysticism of the Allegoristn.
Jiow- so : We may think perhaps, that he would pretend
to prove, because his argument requires he should prove,
that enigmatical egressions are as iinscholastic and en-
thusiastical as secondary senses. "No such matter. All
\he says is, that they are as OBSGUKE to. the understanding.
But obscurity is not his quarrel with secondary seines.
lie objects to them as i<nscliolastic-and,.enhii>sia$ticaL But
.liere lay the difficulty; no man, w! A o pretended to any
language, could affirm this, oi figurative enigmatical ex
pressions ; he was forced therefore to .have recourse to his
usual refuse. OBSCURITY.
o 7
It is true, he says, -these wi/st icdl ciii gmaiic Prophet -
(as Air. Whiston -calls them) arc equally remote from
the real literal sense, as the mysticis/n of the Allegorists.
.But this is only a repetition of the blunder exposed above,
where he could not distinguish between the literal sense
.of a Term, and the literal sense of a Proposition. And
how gross that ignorance is we may see by the follouing
"instance. Isaiah says, The Wolf also shall diccil icith tie
Lamb, and the Leopard shall, lie down icith tlie Kid , and
the Calf, and the young Lion, and the Falling together,
and a little Child shall lead thaw]:. Now I will take it
. for granted that his Followers understand this, as Grotius
aloes, of the profound peace which was to follow after
*. The Grounds, &c. p. 242. -j Chap. xi. vcr 6.
G 3 ths
86 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
the times of Seuacberib, under Hczckiah : but though
the terms be mystical, yet sure they call this the literal
sense of liic prophecy: .For Grotius makes the ntjsticfil
sense to refer to the Gospel. Mr. Whiston, I suppose,
denies that this has any thing to do w ith the times of
Hezekiah, but that it refers to those of CHRIST only. Is
not his interpretation therefore literal as well as that of
Grotius? unless it i in mediately becomes oddly typical,
uns.ciiotastic, and entJtusia&tica^ as soon as ever JESUS
comes into the question.
II. Eut now, besides the literal primary prophecies
concerning the PERSON of JESUS, we say, in the second
place, that there are other, which give a primary and
direct intimation of the CHAXGE OF THE DISPENSA
TION". Isaiah foretels great mercies to the Jewish
People, in a future Age; which, though represented by
such metaphors as bore analogy to the blessings peculiar
to the Jewish economy, yet, to shew that they were in
deed different from what faz figurative terms alluded to,
the Prophet at the same time adds, My thoughts are not
as your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, smth
the Lord*. This surely implies a different DISPENSA
TION. That the change was from carnal to spiritual,
is elegantly intimated in the subjoining words, For as
the HEAVENS are higher than the EARTH, so are my
tvays higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your
thoughts \. But tliis higher and more excellent Dispen
sation is more plainly revealed in the following tigure :
Instead of the thorn shall come up the jir-irce, and
instead of the brier shall mm up the myrtle-tree ^^
i. e. the -new Religion shall as far excel the old, as the
fir-tree docs the thorn, or the myrtle the brier. In a
following Prophecy he shews the EXTENT of this new
Religion, as here he had shewn its NATURE; that it was
to spread beyond Judea, and to take in the whole race
of mankind, The GENTILES shall come to thy light., and
* Chap.lv. ver. 8. t Ver. 9. ; Ver. 13.
king*
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 87
:kbi<rs to the brightness of thy rising*, &c. Which idea
the Prophet Zephaniah expresses in so strong a manner,
-as to lea.vc no room for evasion : The Lord will be
terrible -unto them, for he rev // .FAMISH all the GODS-
aOF THE EARTH; and men shall worship him .ever?/ one
i-Mieii IMS PLACE, .even all the isles of the G EX TILES f.-
The expression is noble, and alludes to the popular
Superstitions of Paganism, which conceived that their
Gods were nourished by -the steam of sacrifices. But,
when were the Pagan Gods thus famished, but in the
first ages of Christianity? Every one from his place*
that is, they were not to go up to JERUSALEM to
worship. Even all the isles of the Gentiles: but when
<lid these worship the God of Israel every one from his
place, before the ; p reaching of the Apostles? Then indeed
their speedy and general conversion distinguished them
>frorn the rest of the nations. This he expresses yet more
plainly in another place. " In that day shall there be an
" altar to the Lord in the midst of the Land of
u Egypt $ ;" i. e. the Temple-service shall be abolished;
,and .the God of Israel worshipped with the most solemn
rites, even in the most abhorred and unsanctified places,
such as the Jews esteemed Egypt. Which Malachi thus
diversifies in -the expression, And ui every place incense,
diatt he offered wito my name, and a PURE OFFERING^;
A. e. it shall not be the Jess acceptable for not being at
the Temple.
But Isaiah, as he proceeds, is still more explicit, and
declares, in direct terms, that the Dispensation should be
changed, Behold 1 create XEW HEAVEXS^/AY/ a NEW
EARTH; and tke former thai! not be remembered nor come
into ?nhul\\. . This, m the prophetic style, means a NEW
IIELIGIOX and a XEW LAW; the metaphors, as \ve have
shewn elsewhere, being taken from hieroglyphicai ex
pression. He speaks in another place, of the consequence
of this ctoftjige; namely, the transferring the benefits of
* Ch. Ix. ver. 3. f Ch, Ji. ver. 11.. J Cli. xix. ver. 19.
[ ,See poie D Dj at the end of this Book. j| Isai. Ixv. 17.
G 4 lleiigiou
88 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
Religion from the Jewish to the Christian Dispensation.
Is it not yet a very little while, " and Lebanon [the
" isles of the Gentiles] .shall be turned into a fruitful
" field, and the fruitful field [the land of Judea] shall
" be esteemed as a forest * ? " To make it yet more clear,
I observe farther, that the Prophet goes on to declare
the change of the SANCTION ; and this was a necessary
consequence of the change of the Dispensation. There
shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old
man that hath -not Jilted Ids days : For the cliild diall die.
an hundred years old, but the sinner being an hundred
years old shall be accursed | ; /. c. the SANCTION OF
TEMPORAL REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS shall be 11O
longer administered in an extraordinary manner; for we
must remember, that long life for obedience, and sudden
and untimely death for transgressions, bore an eminent
part in the Sanction of the Jewish Law. Now these arc
expressly said to be abrogated in the Dispensation pro
mised, it being declared that the Virtuous, though dying
immaturely, should be as if they had lived an hundred
years ; and sinners, though living to an hundred years, as
if they had died immaturely.
The very same prophecy in Jeremiah, delivered in less
figurative terms, supports this interpretation beyond all
possibility of cavil : " Behold the days come, saith the
" Lord, that I will make a NEW COVENANT with the
" house of Israel, and with the house of Jitdah; not
" according to the Covenant that I made with their fa-
" thers, in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring
" them out of the land of tigypt. But this shall be the
" Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel,
4i After those days, saith the Lord, / will put my Law
"in their INWARD PA UTS, and write it in their
HEARTS;!:.
What Isaiah figuratively names a new Heaven and
a new Hearth, Jeremiah simply and literally calls a m\v
* Ch. xxix. ver. 1 7. t Cli. Ixv, ver. -20 J Ch. xxxi. ver. 3 1 .
Covenant.
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 89
Covenant. And what kind of Covenant ? Not such an
one as was made with their Fathers. This was declara
tive enough of its nature ; yet, to prevent mistakes, he
*ives as well a ppsitjve as a negative description of it:
This shall be the Covenant, I icill put my Law in their
inward parts, fyc. i. e. this Law shall be spiritual, as the
other given to their Fathers was carnal: For the Cere
monial Law did not scrutinize tiie heart, but rested in ex
ternal obedience and observances.
Lastly, to crown the whole, we may observe, that
Jeremiah too, like Isaiah, fixes the true, nature of the
Dispensation by declaring the CHANGE of the SANCTION:
* In those days they shall say no more, the fathers have
tc eaten a sour grape, and the child rens" teeth are set on
" edge. But every one shall die lor his own iniquity;
" every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be
tc set on edge*." For it was part of the Sanction of the
Jewish Law, that children should bear the iniquity of
their fathers, c. a mode of punishing vvhich hath been
already explained and justified. Yet all these Prophecies
of the GOSPEL being delivered in terms appropriate to
the LAW, the Jews of that time uould naturally, as they
in fact did, undeis and them- as speaking of the extension
and completion of the OLD Dispensation, rather than the
perfection of it by the introduction of a NEW. And thus
.jtlieir reverence tor the present System, under which they
were yet to continue, was preserved. I he necessity of
this proceeding, for the present time; the effects it would
afterwards produce through the perversity ot the super-*
stitious followers of the Law; and the divine ^oodnesa
as well as wisdom manifested in this proceeding are all
finely touched in the following passage of Isaiah f
" Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he
make to understand doctrine? Them that are weaned
" from the milk, and .drawn from the breasts ]:. For
* Ver. <20. f Chap, xxviii. 9, & se q.
t i. e. Those who were most free from the prejudices of the
Etfrjiitu of t^e LUYV.
" precept
*> THE DIV1XE LEGATION [BookVL
* s precept must be [or hath beai] upon precept, precept
" upon precept, line upon line, line upon line *, here a
* little and there a little. For with stammering lips and
" another tongue will he speak to this People j\ To
" whom he said, This is the rest, and this is the refresh-
* l H1 t> y o *ky would not hear. But the word of the
* Lord was unto them, precept upon precept, precept
* upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a
* little and the- re a little ; that they might go and fall
* backward, and he broken and snared and taken ."
Notwithstanding all this, if you will believe our Ad
versary, The books of the Old Testament seem the
most PLAIN" of ail ancient writings, and wherein there
appears NOT THE LEAST TRACE OF TYPICAL OR
ALLEGORICAL INTENTION* hi the Authors, or in any
ether Jews of their trincs^.. Ife that answers a Free
thinker will find employment enough. Not the leclst
trace of a typical or allegorical intention! lie might,
a-s well have said there is not the least trace of poetry in
Virgil, or of eloquence in Cicero. But there is none, he
says, cither in the Authors, or in any other Jews of tin-! r
times. Of both which Assertions, this single Text of
Ezckiel will be an abundant confutation Ah, Lord,
TIIF.T SAV OF ME, LOTH TIE NOT SPEAK PARABLES^"?
The Prophet con j plains that his ineffectual Mission
proceeded from his speaking, and from the People s
conceiving him to sp^ak, of things mysteriously, and in
a mode of delivery not understood by them. The Author
recluplicuiion of the jtln-use was to add force and energy to
the sense.
t i.e. Gospel truths delivered in the language of the Law.
i.e. The glad tidings of the Gospel.
i.e. This gradual yet re j o^ted instruction, wliich was given with
so much iiK-rey and iiidnlgenre, to lead them by slow and gentle
6tps from t}ie Law to the. Gospel, being abused so as to defeat tlie
ft f,d, God in punishment made it the occasion of blinding their eyes
nd hardfuing their hearts.
|j Grounds, &c. p. 8-2. J Chap, xx. -ver. 49*
of
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 91
of the book of Ecclesiasticus, who is reasonably supposed
to have been contemporary with Antiochus Epiphanes,
represents holy Scripture as fully fraught with typical
and allegoric wisdom : " lie that jilveth his mind to the
46 Law of the Most High, and is occupied in the medita-
" tion thereof, will seek out the wisdom of the Ancients,
" AND BE OCCUPIED IN PKOPHF.CIES. He will keep
" the sayings of the renowned men ; and where SUBTILE
" PARABLES are, he will be there also. lie will seek
<k out the SECRETS OF cu AVE SENTENCES, and be
" conversant in DARK PARABLES*." Hence it appears
that -the Jewish Prophecies were not so plain as our
Adversary represents them; and that their obscurity
arose from their having TyfifCffl or Allegorical intentions ;
which figures too related not to the present, but to a
future Dispensation, as is farther seen from what Ezekiel
says . in another place Son of man, behold they of titc
house of Israel say, THE VISION THAT HE SKETII is
FOR MANY DAYS TO COME, AND HE PROPII ESI ETH OF
THE TIM ES THAT ARE FAR OFF |~. So that tilCSG People tO
whom the Prophecies were so plain, and who understood
them to respect their own times dvAy,&ithwt any Typical
or sll/egvric lii&dningi complaia of obscurities in them,
and consider them as referring to very rernote times .
But I am ashamed of being longer serious with so idle
a Caviller. The English Bible lies open to every FREE-
TILT XKER of Great Britain ; -Where they may read it
that will, and understand it that can.
As for such Writers as the Author of the Grounds
and Reasons, To say the truth, one would never wish to
see them otherwise employed : But when so great and so
good a man as GROTIUS hath unwarily contributed to
support the dotages of Infidelity, this is such a mbad-r
venture as one cannot but lament.
ay*j-ca^a*It Ch. xxxix. vc; f 1, ; 2, 3.
mp. xii. ver.^j,
- This
*)C THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
This excellent Person (for it as not to br d^uised)
3iath made it his constant endeavour throughout his whole
KJornment x>n the Prophets, to find a double sense even
iin those <&Vee Prophecies which relate to JESUS ; and to
urn the tinman/ sense upon the affairs of the Jewish
Dispensation; only permitting them to relate to JLSU&
.in a -secondary : .and by that affected strain of interpre
tation, hath done alaiost as much harm to Revelation as
-his other writings have done it service: not ivom any
strength there is in his Criticisms (for this, and his
Comment on the Apocalypse, are the opprobrium of his
-great learning), but /jnly from the name ; tliey .carry witk
The Principle which Grotlus went upon, in com-
ancnting the Bible, was, that it should be interpreted OH
ihe same rules of Criticism that men use in the study
<of all other ancient Writings. Nothing could be more
^reasonable than his Principle : but unluckily he deceived
Jiimseif in the application of it. These .rules teach us
,<that the GEXIUS, PURPOSE, and .AUTIIUIU/IV of the
Writer should be carefully studied. Under the head
of his authority t it is.to.be considered, whether he be a
.incre huxuin or an inspired Writer, Thus far Grotius
Tvent right : he examined that authority ; and pronounced
the Writers to bejnffiwd, and .the Prophecies divine:
Jkit when he came to apply these premisses, he utterly
dorgot his conclusion ; and interpreted the Prophecies
by rules very diiTv ivut from vv hat the confession of their
divine original required : for seeing them pronounced by
Jewish Proph-.ls, occupied Jn Jewish Af^iirs, he con-
dudcni lUcir >olc Object was Jewish; and consequently
i the proper <cii:%j of the Prophecies referred to these
.only. liut t.his \vas faliiiig back irom one of the grounds
lie weut upon, That the Wriicrs were inspired : for his
futerpretation was only reasonable oji the supposition that
i se Writers prophesied in the very manner which the
Pagans understood their Prophets sometimes to have
.6 .done,
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED: g$
done, by a natural sagacity : For, on the allowance off
a real inspiration, it was GOD, and not the Writer, who
was the proper Author of the Prophecy; mid to under
stand his- purpose -, which the rules of interpretation^
require us to seek, we must examine the nature, reason,
and end- of that Religion which he gave to the Jews.
For on these, common sense assures us, the meaning 1
of the Prophesies must be intirely regulated. Now if y
(n enquiry, it should be found, that this whieh Grotius-
admitted for a divine Dispensation, was only preparatory
of another more perfect, it would then appear not to l>e
improbable that some of these -Prophecies might relate,
in them literal,, primary, and immediate sense, to that?
more perfect Dispensation. And whether they did so*
or not was to be determined by the joint evidence of the*
context, and of the nature of GOD S whole Dispensation
to mankind, so far forth as it is discoverable to us. But
Grotius, instead of making the matter thus reasonably
problematical) and to- be determined by evidence, deter
mined first, andTaid it down as a kind of Principle, that
t?he Prophecies related directly and properly to Jewish
affairs : and into this system he wiredrew all his. ex
planations. This, as- w-c say, was falsely applying a true
rule of interpretation. lie went on this reasonable-
ground, that the Prophecies should he interpreted like
all other ancient. Writings :, and, OH-. examining their
authority^ he found them to be truly divine. Vv lien he
had gone thus far, he then preposterously went back,
again, and commented as it they were confessed to be-
merely human : The consequence was, that- several of
his criticisms, to speak of them eoly as the performance
of a man of learning, are so forced, unnatural, and absurd,
so opposed to the rational canon of interpretation, that
I will venture to affirm they are, in all respects, the
worst that ever came, from the hand of an. acute and:
able. Critic,.
m,
94 - THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
( . III.
. Having now proved that the Principles which
J,Ir. Collins went upon are in themselves false and
extravagant, one has little reason to regard how he
employed them. But as this extraordinary Writer was
as great a Freethinker in Logic as in Divinity, it may
not he improper to shew the fashionable World what
sort of man they have chosen for their Guide, to lead
them from their Religion, when they would no longer
bear with any to direct them in it.
His argument against what he calls typical, allegorical,
but properly, secondary senses, stands thus : " Christi
anity pretends to derive itself from Judaism. JESUS
appeals to the religious hooks of the Jews as prophesying
of his Mission. None of these Prophecies can be
undertood of him but in a typical allegoric sense. Now
that sense is absurd, and contrary to all scholastic rules
of interpretation. Christianity, therefore, not being
i:eally predicted of in the Jewish Writings, is conse
quently false." The contestabie Proposition, on which
the whole argument rests, is, That a typical or allegoric
sense is absurd, and contrary to ail scholastic rules of
interpretation.
Would the Reader now believe that Mr. Collins has
himself, i;i this very book, given a thorough confutation
of his own capital Proposition ? Yet so it is ; and, con
trary too to his usual way 0J< reasoning, h ( > has done it in
a very clear and convincing manner ; by shewing that
the typical and allegorical way of writing was uni
versally practised by Antiquity. "Allegory (says he)
-was much in use amongst the Pagans, being culti-
" vated by many of the Philosophers themselves as well
" as Theologers. By SOME, AS THE METHOD OF DELI-
" VERING DOCTRINES ; but bv most, as the method of
" explaining away what, according to the letter, appeared
s" ub^urd in the ancient fables or histories of their Gods.
"
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, $$
M Religion itself was deemed a mysterious tiling amongst.
* tlic Pagans, and not to be publicly and plainly
" declared. Wherefore it vvas never simply represented
" to the People, but was most obscurely deliverer,
** and vaii d under Allegories, or Parables,, or liiero-
" glyphics ; and especially amongst the Egyptians,
" Chaldeans, and the Oriental Nations. They allege-
" rized many things of nature, and particularly the-
" heavenly bodies They allegorized all their ancient
" fables and stories, and pretended to discover in them,
" the secrets of Natural Philosophy, Medicine, Politics,
" and iu a word all Arts and Sciences. Tlae works-
" of Homer in particular have furnished infinite materials
" for all soits of allegorical Commentators to work
" upon. The ancient Greek Poets were reputed to
" involve divine, and natural, and historical notions of
" their Gods under mystical and parabolical expres-
" sions The Pythagorean Philosophy was wholly de-
K livered in mystical language, the signification whereof
" was entirely unkown to the world abroad The &ici&
" Piiiicsophers are particularly iamous for allegorkkig;
" the whole heathen Theology Vv e have se^-eral
" treatises of heathen Philosophers on the subject oif
" allegorical interpretation *."
If now this kind of allegorizing, which involved the:.
Proposition in a double XCMW, was ia use amongst the-
Pagan Oraclea, Divines, PlJIo^ophers and I 5 oets ? is not
the understiiixling aneient wiiLings Qllegoyioattyt or in a
double .ycvwe, agreeab-Se to all rational, scholastic rules
of interpretation ? Surely, as much so as the. understand
ing mere mcliiphwical expressions in .a tropical sig-
niiicaticMi ; whose propriety no one ever yet called in
question. For the- sense of Propositions is .imposed as
arbitrarily as the sense of wonts. And if men, ..in the
communication of their thoughts, agree to give, on some
occasions, a double sense to Propositions, as well as. on
* Grounds, &c. pp. 8^. 84, 85, 86.
others
g6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,
others, a single, the interpreting the first in two meanings
is as agreeable to all scholastic rules, as interpreting the
other in one: And Proposition*, with a double and single
sense, are as easily distinguishable from each other, by
the help of the context, as Word* \vith a literal and
figurative meaning. But this great Philosopher seems
to have imagined, that the single .sense of a Proposition
was imposed by Nature ; and that therefore, pi vino them
a double meaning, was the same offence against Reason
as the deviating from the unity of pure Theism into
Polytheism : and, consequently, that the universal lapse
into ALLEGORY and IDOLATRY rendered neither the one
nor other of them the less absurd *.
I say, he seems to think so. More one cannot say of
such a Writer. Besides, he seems to think otherwise,
where, in another place, as if aware that Use would
rescue a double -sense from his irrational and untcholastic
censure, he endeavours to prove, that the Jews, during
the prophetic period, did not use this allegoric way of
expression. Now if we be right in this last conjecture
about his meaning, he abuses the terms he employs,
under a miserable quibble ; and, by Scholastic and un-
scholastic rules, only means interpreting in a single or a
double sense.
The Header perhaps will be curious to know how it
happened, that this great Rcasoner should, ail at once,
overthrow what he had been so long labouring to build.
This fatal issue of his two books of the GROUNDS, &c*
and SCHEME, &c. had these causes:
i. lie had a pressing and immediate objection to re
move. And, as he had no great stock of argument, and
but small forecast, any tiling at a plunge, would be
received, which came, to his relief.
The objection was this " That the allegorical inter-
* pretations of the Apostles were not designed for
" absolute proofs of Christianity, but for arguments ad
* Senote [EBJ at the end of this Book.
" homines
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 97
" homines only to the Jews, who were accustomed to
iC that way of reasoning," p. 79. Thus, he himself tells
us, some Divines are accustomed to talk. He gives
them indeed a solid answer ; but he dreams not of the
consequence. He says, this allegoric reasoning was
common to all mankind. Was it so ? Then the grand
Proposition on which his whole Work supports itself is
entirely overthrown. For if all mankind used it, the
method must needs be rational and scholastic. But this
he was not aware of. What kept him in the dark, was
his never being able to distinguish between the USE and
the ABUSE of this mode of information. These two
things he perpetually confounds, The Pagan Oracles
delivered themselves in allegories ; this was the use :
Their later Divines turned all their Religion into
allegory ; this was the abuse. The elder Pythagoreans
gave their Precepts in allegory, this was the use:
The later Stoics allegorized every thing; this was the
abuse. Homer had some allegories ; this was the use :
His Commentators turned all to allegory ; and this again
was the abuse. But though he has talked so much of
these things, yet he knew no more of them than old JOHN
BUNYAN ; whose honester ignorance, joined to a good
meaning, disposed him to admire that which the malig
nity of our Author s folly inclined him to decry : and
each in the like ridiculous extreme.
2. But the other cause of this subversion of his own
system was the delight he took to blacken the splendour
of Religion. He supposed, we may be sure, it would
prove an effectual discredit to Revelation, to have it seen,
that there was this conformity between the Pagan and
Jewish method of delivering Religion and Morality.
His attempt hath been already exposed as it deserves *.
But in this instance it labours under much additional
folly. For the different reasons which induced the
Propagators of Paganism, and the Author of Judaism,
* See Bock iv. i. at the end,
VOL. VI, ,11 to
98 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
to employ the same method of information, are obvious-
to the meanest capacity, if advanced but so far in the
knowledge of nature to know, that different ends are vei-y
commonly prosecuted by the same means. The Pagans
allegorized in order to hide the wetness ami absurdities
of their national Religions ; the Author of Judaism
allegorized in order to prepare li/s follovvers i /or/*e recep
tion, of ft wore per fccf Dh-pcmaticMy founded pn-Judai$m y
which was preparatory of it ; and, at the same time, to
prevent their premature rejection of Judaism, under which
they were still to he long exercised;
Thus we sec how this formidable Ertemy of our Faith
has himself overturned hh> whole Argument by an unwary
answer to an occasional objection. Hut this is but one y
of a Work full of contradictions. I have no occasion to
be particular, after removing his main- Principles; yet,
for the Reader s diversion, I shall give biui a taste of
them. In his 8 1st page, he says And there has been
for a long tiwe,< and Is (it this time a* little use #f allegory
in those respects amongst them [the Jews] as there seem*
to have been during the time the books of the Old Testtt-
mcnt were written, which seem the most plabi of att
ancient jyritings, and wherein there appears not the
least trace of a typical or allegorical intention in the
Authors, or in ami other Jews of their times. Yet it is-
but at tlie 8">th page that we find him saying And in
this [iv^. in delivering his Philosophy in mystical lan
guage] PYTHAGORAS came up to SOLOMON S character
of icise men., u ho dealt in dark sayings, and acted not
much unlike the most divine TeacJicr that ei cr was. Our
Saviour spake with many parable^ c. Now it seems,
it was Solomon s character of wise men, that they dealt
in dark sayings. 15 tit these wise men were the Authors
:f the Jewish Scriptures. And yet he had but just
before assured us, That the books of the Old Testa
ment seem the most plain of all ancient // r/V/^v, and
wherein there appears not the least trace of a typical
or
Sect. 6,] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 99
or allegorical intention in the Authors, or in any Jews of
their times.
Again, in his pages 85, 86, lie says, " The Pythagorean
" Philosophy was wholly delivered in mystical language;
" the signification whereof was intircly unknown to the
" world abroad, and but gradually explained to those of
" the sect, as they grew into years, or were proper to be
" informed The Stoic Philosophers were particularly
* famous for allegorizing We have several treatises of
" heathen Philosophers on the subject of allegorical inter*
" pretation And from Philoso|)hers, Platonists, and
" Stoics, the famous Origen is said to have derived a
" great deal of his skill in allegorizing the books .of the
" Old Testament." This he says, and yet at the 94th page
he tells us, " That the Apostles, and particularly St.
" Paul, wholly discarded all other methods of reasoning
u used by Philosophers, except the allegorical: and set
<( that up as the true and ONJ.Y reasoning proper to
" brin- all men to the faith of CHRIST : and the Gen-
o
" tiles were to be WHOLLY beat out of the literal way
iC of anminxi. and to argue as became Jews. And the
o o o
u event of preaching the Gospel has been suited to
" matters considered in this view and light. Tor we know
u that the WISE did not receive the Gospel at first, and
" that they were the latest Converts: I Hitch PLAINLY
" arose from their using -maxims oj reasoning and din*
" putlng WHOLLY opposite to those of Christians^ l]y
these wise, can be meant none but the Pagan Philoso
phers: and these, according to our Author, were altoge
ther given up to mystery and allegory. Yet St. Paul, and
the rest of the Apostles, who, he says, were likewise given
up to the same method, could make no converts amongst
these wise men. Why ? It would now inethinks have
suited his talents as well as temper, to have told us, it
>vas because two of a trade could not agree: No, says
this incomparable Logician, it was because the
i\ 2
TOO THE DIVINE LEGATION [BookVt
phers used maxims of reasoning and disputing wholly?
opposite to the Christians.
What now but the name and authority of Freethinking
could hinder such a Writer from becoming the contempt
of all who know either how to make, or to understand
an argument? These men profane the light tkey receive
from Revelation in employing it to rob the treasures of
the Sanctuary. But REEIGIOX arrests them in the
manner, and pronounces one common doom upon the
whole race.
" Ne IGNIS NOSTER facinopi praeluceat^
" Per quern eolendos ceasuit Piefcas Deos,
" VETO ESSE TALE LUMINIS COMMERCIUM*."
Hence the fate that attends them all, in the inseparable
connexion between impkty and blundering ; which always
follow one another as the crime and the punishment.
If it be asked then, What it is thatf hatsh so strangd j
prejudiced our modern Reasoners against this ancient
anode of information by TYPICAL aad SECONDARY senses?
I answer, the folly of Fanatics,, who have abused it ia
.support of the most abominable nonsense. But how un
reasonable is this prejudice! Was there ever any thing
rational or excellent amongst Men, that hath not been
thus abused ? Is it any disparagement to the method of
Geometers, that same conceited writers on Morality and
Religion have of late taken it up, to give an air of weight
and demonstration to the whimsies of pedantic importance ?
Is there no truth of nature, or reasonableness of art, i$i
Grammatical construction, because cabalistic Dunces
have in every age abused it to pervert all human meaning?
We might as well say that the ancient Egyptians did not
write in Hieroglyphics, because Kircher, who endeavoured
to explain them, hath given us nothing but his own
visions, as that the ancient Jews had not types and scconr
* Phad. 1. iv. IaU, 10.
dary
Sect 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 101
dary senses, because modem Enthusiasts have allegorized
their whole Story.
But I from these abuses would draw a very contrary
conclusion. The rage of allegorizing in Religion hath in
fected all ages: Can there be a stronger proof that the
^original mode was founded in the common conceptions of
mankind? The Pagans began the abuse] and the pesti
lent infection sooa spread amongst the followers of true
Religion.
o
1. The early propagators 0f PAG A Kim, in order to
<hide the weakness of the national Religion.; delivered
many things in Types and Allegories. But a growing
Superstition, accompanied with an equal advance an know*
ledge,, made it at length impossible to screes ithe folly
even of the less obnoxious parts from common observers.
Their Successors therefore, to support its credit, went on
where the others had left off; and allegorized all the tra
ditional stories of their Gods into natural^ moral, and
(Urine Entities, This, notwithstanding the extravagance of
the means, fully answered the end.
2. The JEWS ingrafted @ta thdr p^ecfecessors, just as
the Pagans had done on theirs ; and with the same secular
policy : For being -possessed with a national prejudice,
that their Religion was to endure for ever, and yet seeing
in it the marks of a carnal, temporary, and preparatory
Dispensation, they cunningly allegorized its Rites and
Precepts into a spiritual meaning, which covered every
thing that was a real deficiency in a Religion which they
considered as perfect and perpetual, Both these sorts of
Allegorists therefore had reason in their rage.
3. Afterwards came a set of CHRISTIAN Writers,
brought out from amongst ,/etrsaiad Gentiles , and these
too would needs be in the fashion, and allegorize their
Religion likewise ; but with infinitely less judgment than
the others; though alas! with equal success. In their
hands, the end proved as hurtful to truth as the means
%vere extravagant in nature. And how should itbeother-
a 3 wise
jQ3 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
wise in a licligion both divine and perfect ? For in such
an one, there was nothing cither to HIDE or to SUPPLY.
We have shewn that types and secondary senses were em -
ployed in the Jewish Religion for the sake of the C/inx-
tian, of which the Jewish was the groundwork and pre
paration. When therefore the Christ ian was come, these
modes of information must needs cease, there being no
farther occasion, nor indeed room, for them. As clear
as this is to the lowest understanding, yet would some
primitive Doctors of the Church needs contend with
Jewish llabbins, and Pagan Philosophers, in all the rage
of allegorizing: Deaf to the voice of Reason, which
called aloud tp tell then], that those very arguments,
which provcc} that there were, and must needs be, types
and secondary senses in the Old Testament, proved as
plainly that there neither were, nor could be any, in the
JYccT. Thus, to the inexpressible damage of Christianity,
they exposed a reasonable Service, and a perfected Dis
pensation (wherq nothing was taught but Truth, plain,
simple, and open) to the laughter and contempt of
Infidels ; who, bcwi! o ercd in the universal maze of this
allegoric mode of information, were never able to know
what it was in its original, nor how to distinguish between
the use and the abuse,
To CONCLUDE, Let not the Header think I have been
all this while leading him "out of the way, while I have
engaged his attention to the book v/ Jon ; to the Cas$ of
ABU AII AM ; and toTvPi-.s anii secondary senses under
the Jewish Dispensation. All these strictly belong to the
Argument :
1. First, as they greatly contribute to shew the IIAR-
ViON V of Truth ; and how all the parts of the .Jewish
Dispensation support and illustrate one another.
2. Secondly, as they contribute to shew the UNIFOR
MITY of it; and how the Holy Spirit, quite throughout
(TOD S grand economy, from his first giving of the Law
tp the completion of it by the Gospel, observed the same
unvaried
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 103
-unvaried method of the GRADUAL COMMUNICATION of
Truth.
3. Thirdly, as -they -contribute to shew the JOLLY of
ihose who contend that -the Christian Doctrine of a
Future State was revealed to the early Jews ; since this
opinion destroys all the reason -of -a secondary sense of
Prophecies : and of how great importance the reality of
this seme is to the -truth of Christianity hath been largely
explained : For how can it be .known with certainty, from
,the Prophecies .themselves, that they contain double senses,
but from hence, tiiat the old Law was preparatory to, and
.the rudiment of, the netc? How shall this relation be
certainly knawn, but from hence, that no future statetii
Rewards and Punishments is to he found, in the Mosaic
Dispensation*? So close a dependence have all these imr
Principles on one another.
RECAPITULATION.
AND now, if the length of the Demonstration have
not tired out the Reader s patience, or, to speak more
properly, if length of time have not worn out his attention
to the Subject, it may be proper (the Argument being
here concluded) to take a retrospective view of the" whole,
as it hath been inforced in this and the preceding Volume \..
For the deep Professor, who hath digested his Theology
into Sums and Systems, and the florid Preacher, who
never suffered his thoughts to expatiate beyond the limits
of a pulpit-essay, will be ready to tell me, that I had pro
mised to DEMONSTRATE THE I)l s VIXJK LEGATION OF
MOSES; and that now I had written two large Volumes
on that subject, " all that they could find in them \f ere
Discourses on the foundation of ; iorality the origin of
civjl and religious Society the. Alliance between Church
.-and State the policy of Lawgivers tne Mysteries of the
Priests- and ,th? opinions of the Greek Philosophers
The Antiquity of Egy.pt their Hieroglyphics their
* See Note [1-T] nt Uie.i-nd of .this Book.
f Books "1. II. 111. & IV. V. VI. originally appeared in t\vo Vols.4tq.
ii 4 Heroes
104 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book T I.
Heroes and their Brute-worship. That, indeed, at last
I speak a little of the Jewish policy; but I soon break
away from it, as from a subject I would avoid, and
employ the remaining part of the Volume on the Sacrifice
of Isaac on the book of Job and on primary and se
condary Prophecies. But what (say they) is all this to
The Divine Legation of Mcsta ?
Die, Posthume! ck tribus Cape His"
To call the Topic I went upon a PARADOX, was said,
\\ithout doubt, to my discredit; but not to see that I had
proved it in form, will, -I am afraid, redound to their own.
Yet I had already bespoke their best attention in the
words of Cicero, who, I believe, often found himself in
my situation : " Video hanc primarn ingressionem mcam
non ex ORATORTS disputationibus cluctam, sed e media
Philosophia repetitam, et earn quidem cum antiquani turn
subobscuram, aut REPREHEXSIOXIS aliquid, aut certe
ADMIRATIONS habituram. Nam aut mirabantur QUID
H/EC PERTINEAXT AD EA QU/E QUJERIMUS I quibllS
satisfaciet res ipsa cognita, ut non sine causa ALTE re-
petita videatur ; aut reprehendent, QUOD IXUSITATAS
VIAS INDAGEMUS, TRITAS RELINQUAMUS. EgO autem
me saepe nova videre dicere inteliigo cum pervetcra dicara,
sed inaudita plerisque*."
But as this Apology hath not answered its purpose,
and as the ARGUMENT is indeed drawn out to an un
common length; raised upon a great variety of supports ;
and sought out from every quarter of antiquity, and some
times out of corners the most remote and dark ; it was
the less to be admired if every inattentive Reader did not
see their force and various purpose ; or if every attentive
Keader could not combine them into the body of a com
pleted Syllogism; and still less if the envious and the
prejudiced should concur to represent these Volumes as
an indigested and inconnected heap of discourses, thrown
out upon one another, to disburthen a common-place.
J or the satisfaction therefore of the more candid, who
* Cicero,
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 105
acknowledge the fairness of the attempt, who saw some
thing of the progress of the argument, but misled by the
notice of a remaining part, neglected to pursue the proof
to the CoxcLUSjpx here deduced, I shall endeavour to
lay open, in one plain and simple view, the whole conduct
of these mysterious Volumes.
Nor shall i neglect the other sort of Readers, though
it be odds we part again as dissatisfied with one another
as the Toyman of Bath and his Customer: Of whom the
story goes, that a grave well-dressed man coming into the
shop of this ingenious inventor, and reliever of the dis
tresses of those who are too dull to know what they want,
and too rich to be at ease with what they have, de
manded to see some of his best reading-glasses ; which
when he had tried to no purpose, he returned. The
Toyman, surprised at so strange a phenomenon, gravely
asked him, whether ever he had learnt to read ? to which
the other as gravly replied, that if he had been so happy,
he should have-had no need of his assistance. Now, before
I bring the distant parts of my Argument to converge, for
the use of these dim-sighted Gentlemen, may I ask them,
without offence, a similar question? They have A NSWERED ;
without asking ; but not with the same ingenuity.
In reading the LAW and HISTORY of the JEWS,
with all the attention I could give to them, amongst the
many circumstances peculiar to that amazing Dispensa
tion (from several of which, as I conceive, the divinity
of its original may be fairly proved) these two particu
lars most forcibly struck my observation, THE OMISSION"
OF THE DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE STATE, and THE
ADMINISTRATION OF AN E X T RA O R D I N A R Y PROVI-
i)ENE. As unaccountable as the first circumstance
appeared when considered separately and alone, yet when
$et against the other, and their mutual relations examined
and compared, the omission was not only well explained,
tut was found to be an invincible medium for the proof
of the DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES: which, as Un
believers
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
^believers had been long accustomed to decry from thi
very circumstance, I chose it preferably to any other.
"The Argument -appeared to rue in a supreme degree
strong and simple, imd not need-ing many words to intbrce
,it, or, when intbrced, to make it well understood.
RELIGION" hath always been held necessary to the
support uf civil, SOCIETY, because human Laws alone
are ineffectual to restrain men iVojujevil, with a force
sufficient to carry on -the affairs of public regimen : and
Bunder the common dispensation of Providence) a p UT
TURK STATE of rewards and punishments is confessed
to be as necessary to the support of REEK;IOX, -because
.nothing else can remove the objections to God s moral
^Government under a Providence so apparently unequal,
whose phaeiiomena are apt to disturb the serious pro
fessors of RELLGION with doubts and suspicions con-
ing it, as it is of the essence of -religious profession
believe, that God k a rcwarder of them that -diligently
Moses, who instituted a RELi.oiox.nel a RT- PUBLIC
arid incorporated them into-orie another, stands in<jlr
amongst anrimt and modern Lawgivers, in teaching; a
I-IELJGIOV, without the safiettQft, or even so much as the
WUtt-rrl of a FUTLUK STATE OF KKW.AHDS A\ D Pl>
XJSii3iE\Tc:. The same Moses, with a singularity as
great, by uniting the Bejjgion and^ejyj \ .-m-niunity of the
Jews iaio one incorporar/" 1 - ;, n, . ; :le God, by natural
consequence, tlieir supreme civil Af":- >; -r.rHte, wiiax l>v tfie
n of Government arising froni thence became truly
^;)d essentially a TIIK( . But as the Admkmtra^-
tlun of Govenuneiit i ily follows its Form, that
before us could i>c-no otiier than AN EXTU^OU-DIXARY on
J-LQUAL PROVIDENCE. And such indeed not only the
Jewish Lawgiver himself, but ail the. succeeding Rulers
and Prophets of this Republic, hav ; c invariably repre--
sented it to be. In the mean time, aio Lawgiver or
founder of Religion amougst any other People ever pn>
Sect.G.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 107
-wised so singular a Distinction ; no Historian ever dared
to record so remarkable a Prerogative.
This being the true and acknowledged state of the
case ; Whenever the Unbeliever attempts to disprove, and
the Advocate of^Religion to support, the divinity of the
Mosaic Dispensation, the obvious question (if each be
willing to bring it to a speedy decision) will be, " Whether
" the EXTRAORDINARY PROVIDENCE thus prophetically
" promised, and afterwards historically recorded to be
" performed, was REAL or PRETENDED only?"
We Believers hold that it was REAL : and I, as an
Advocate for Revelation, undertake to prove it was so ;
employing for this purpose, as my medium, THE OMIS
SION OF A FUTURE STATE OF REWARDS AND PU
NISHMENTS. The argument stands thus :
If Religion be necessary Jto civil Government, and if
Religion cannot subsist, under the common dispensation
of Providence, without a future state of Rewards and
Punishments ; so consummate a Lawgiver would never
have neglected to inculcate the belief of such a state, had
he not been well assured that an EXTRAORDINARY PRO
VIDENCE was indeed to be administered over his People^
Or were it possible he had been so infatuated, the impo-
tcncy of a Religion wanting a future state must very soon
have concluded in the destruction of his Republic : Yet
nevertheless it flourished and continued sovereign for
many ages.
These t\vo proofs of the proposition (that an extra
ordinary providence icas really adininktered) drawn from
the THING OMITTED and the PERSON OMITTING, may
be reduced to the following SYLLOGISMS.
I. Whatsoever Religion and Society have no future State
for their support, must be supported by an extraordinary
Providence.
The Jewish Religion and Society had no future State
jfor their support :
Therefore
*o$ THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
Therefore the Jewish Religion and Society were sup
ported by an extraordinary Providence.
And again,
IL The Ancient Lawgivers universally believed, that
a Religion without a future State could be supported only
by an extraordinary Providence.
Moses, an Ancient Lawgiver, learned in all the wis
dom of die Egyptians (die principal branch of which
wisdom was inculcating the doctrine of a future state)
instituted such a Religion :
Therefore Moses believed that his Religion was sup
ported by an extraordinary Providence.
This is the ARGUMENT OF THE DIVIXE LEGATION ;
plain, simple, and convincing, in the opinion of the
Author;, a PARADOX, in the representation of his
Adversaries : Attempts of this nature being still attended
with the fortune they have long undergone. JVilHam of
Xewbourg, speaking of Gregory the Eighth, tells us, that
lie was, " Vir plane sapicntire et vita? sinceritate con-
" spicuus, femulationem Dei habens in omnibus secnn-
" (him sclent lam \ et superstitiosanun coiisuetudinum
quarum in Ecclesia per quorimdam rusticam sim-
fi plicitatem citra Scripturarum auctoritatem multitudo
" inplevit, Reprehensor acerrlnius. Uncle a qitibiistlam
" mums (ifJcrcfis putatus est turhato per nimiam absti-
" ncntiani ccrcbro delirare." This curious passage shews
what hath been, and what is likely to be, the fate of all
opposcrs of foolish and superstitious practices and
opinions, when opposes are most wanted, that is to say,
to be thought mad. Only one sees there was this dif
ference between J Fill} aw s age ad our own. In the
time of good Gregory, they were the People of least
discretion who passed this judgment on every Reformer s
head-piece ; whereas in our times, they are the more
discreet who have made this discovery,
Our Author s adversaries proved to be of two sorts,
6 FUEE-
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED.
FREETHINKERS and SYSTEMATICAL DIVIXES. Those
doniedTIierMajor of the two Syllogisms; These, the
Minor : yet one could not be done without contradicting
the universal voice of Antiquity ; nor the other, without
explaining away the sense, as well as letter, of sacred
Scripture. Had it not been for this odd combination,
my Demonstration of the Divine Legation of Moses-
had not only been as strong but as short too as any of
Euclid s : whose theorems, as Hobbes somewhere ob
serves, should they ever happen to be connected with
the passions and interests of men, would soon become
as much matter of dispute and contradiction as any moral
or theological Proposition whatsoever.
It was not long, therefore, before I found that the
discovery of this important Truth would engage me in.
a full dilucidation of the three following Pi -o posit ions--
1. " That inculcating the doctrine of a future state of
t rewards and punishments, is necessary to the weii-h^ing
" of civil Society/
2. " That all mankind, especially the most wise and
" learned nations of Antiquity, have concurred in be*
" licving and teaching, that this doctrine was of such
" use to civil Society."
3. " That the doctrine of a future state of rewards
" and punishments is not to be found in, nor did make
" part of, the Mosaic Dispensation."
Neither a short nor an easy task. The two first
requiring a severe search into th lleltghm, the Politic*,
and the Philosophy of ancient times : And, the latter, a
minute examination into the nature ami genius of t/ie
Hebrew Constitution.
To the first part of this enquiry, therefore, I assigned
the first Volume of this work; and to the other, the
second.
I.
I. The first Volume begins with proving the MAJOR
of the first Syllogism, that whatsoever Religion .and
Society
no THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
Society hare no future State for their support > must be
supported by an extraordinary Providence. In order to
which, the FIRST PROPOSITION was to be inforccd, That
the inculcating the doc trine of a future state of rewards
and punishments is necessary to the icell-beiug of Society.
This is done in the following manner J3y shewing
that CIVIL SOCIETY, which was instituted as a remedy
against force and injustice, falls short, in many instances,
of its effects as it cannot, by its own proper force,
provide for the observance of above one third part of
moral duties ; and, of that third, but imperfectly ; and
further, which is a matter of still greater importance, that
it totally wants the first of those t\vo great hinges on
which Government is supposed to turn, and without
which it cannot be carried on, namely, REWARD and
PUNISHMENT. Some other coactive power was there*
fore to be added to civil Society, to supply its wants and
imperfections. This power is shewn to be no other
than RELIGION ; which, teaching the just Government
of the Deity, provides for all the natural deficiencies, of
aivil Society. But this government, it is seen, can be no
otherwise supported than by the general belief of a
future sj ate ; or of an extraordinary Providence, that is,
by a Dispensation of things very different from what we
see administered at present.
This being proved, the discourse proceeds to remove
objections. The Reader observes, that the steps and
gradations of this capital truth advance thus, A future
state is necessary as it supports Religion Religion is
necessary as it supports . Morality And Morality as it
supports (though it be reciprocally supported by) civil
Society, which only can procure such accommodations
of life as man s nature requires. Hence I concluded, that
the Doctrine of a future state was necessary to civil
Society, under the present administration of Providence.
Now there are various kinds or rather degrees of
Some, though they own Morality to be
necessary
Sect 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. rir
necessary to Society, yet deny Religion to be necessary.
Others again deny it even to Morality.- As botli equally
attempt to break the chain of my reasoning, both come
equally under my examination. And, opportunely for my
purpose, a great Name hi the first instance, and a great
Book, in the second, invited me to this entertainment.
1. The famous M. IJ AY LK had attempted to prove,
that lleliglon was not necessary to Society ; and that,
simple morality, a-s distinguished from Religion, might
well supply its place : which Mora-Iky too, an ATIH;;V O
might completely possess. His arguments in support of
these propositions I have carefully examined : and having
occasion, when I came to the last of them, to enquire
into the true foundation of Afomlity, I state all its pre
tences, consider all its advantages, and shew that OBI. i-
ciATiox, properly so called, proceeds from WILL, and
from WILL only. This enquiry was directly to Tny point,
us the result of it proves that the morality of the stthcixt
must be without any Jtr u e found ati on, and consequently
weak^and unstable. It had a further propriety, as the
Religion, whose divine original I am here attempting to-
demonstrate. has founded moral ohliguthm in // ///only;
and had a peculiar expediency likewise, as it is become
the fashion of the times to seek tor this < jbtdidatioH any
where but there where Religion has placed it.
2. But M ANDEVILLE, the Author of the Fable of the
.Bees, went a large step farther ; and pretended to prove
that MORALITY was so far from being necessary to
Society, that it was vice and not virtue which rendered
states flourishing amTTiappy. This c xecrable Doctrine,
that would cut away my Argument l-.y the roots, wa*
lrc$ented to the People \\ith much laboured art and
plausible insinuation. It was necessary therefore to
Confute and expose it. This 1 have done with the same
care, but with better faith than it was inibrced.
In this manner I endeavoured to prove the MAJOR
PiiorosiT.io.v of the first Syllogism : and v,ith this
the
ii2 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
the first book of the Divine Legation of Moses con
cludes.
II. The second Book begins \vith establishing the
MAJOR of the second Syllogism, That the ancient Law
givers universally believed that a Religion without a
future state could be supported only by an extraordinary
Providence. In order to which, the SECOND PROPOSI
TION was to be inforced, That ait mankind, especially the
most wise and learned tuitions of Antiquity, have con
curred in believing and teaching, that the Doctrine of a
future state was necessary to the well-being of civil
Society.
The proof of this proposition divides itself into two
parts The conduct of the LAWGIVERS ; and the opinion
of the PH i LOSOPH KRS.
The first part is the subject of the present Book ; as
the second part is of the following.
In proving this proposition from the conduct of the
Lawgrcers, 1 shew,
i. Their, care to PROPAGATE Religion in general,
i . As it appears from the effects, the state of Religion
every where in the civilized World. 2. As it appears
from the jft/M, such as their universal pretence to
inspiration, in order to instil the belief of the Divine
Superintendent over human aiiairs ; and such as their
universal practice in prefacing their Laics, in order to
establish the belief of Ltiat Supenntcndci:cy, And here
it should be observed, thut in proving their care to pro
pagate Religion in general, I prove their care to propagate
ilic doctrine of a jutitra. state (f Rez?arci*s and Punish-
me iils ; since there never was a formed Religion in the
World, the Jewish excepted, of which this Doctrine did
not make an essential part.
2. But I shew, in the second place, their care to pro
pagate this Doctrine, with more than common attention
and assiduity. And as the most effectual method they
employed to this end was the instiuuion of. the MYSTE
RIES,
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 113
RIES, a large account is given of their rise and progress,
from Egypt into Greece, and from thence, throughout
the civilized world. I have attempted to discover the
APOPPHTA, or hidden doctrines of these Mysteries, ^
which were THE _UNtTYjOF_ THE GODHEAD and the
ERROR OK THE GROSSER POLYTHEISM, namely, the
Worship of dead men, deified. This discovery not only
confirms all that is advanced, concerning the rise, pro
gress, and order of the several specieses of Idolatry, but
clears up and rectifies much embarras and mistake even
of die most celebrated Moderns, such as Cudzvorth,
Stilling fleet, Pridcauv, Newt on, &c. who, contrary to
the tenour of Holy Scripture, in order to do imaginary
honour to Religion, have ventured to maintain, that_Me
one true God was generally known and worshipped in the
Pagan World ; for, finding many, in divers countries,
speaking of the one true God, they concluded, that he
must needs have a national Worship. Now the Dis
covery of the *rJ|jH}TA of the Mysteries enables us to
explain the perfect consistency between sacred and pro
fane Antiquity ; which, left to speak for themselves,
concur to inform us of this plain and consistent truth,
" That the Doctrine of the one, true God was indeed
* . !. - ""
taught in all places, but as a profound secret, to the FEW,
in the celebration of their mysterious Rites ; while, in
the Land of JUDEA alone, he had a public and national
jrorship" For to the Hebrew PEOPLE alone, (as Eu-
sebius expresses it) was reserved the honour of being
INITIATED into the knowledge of the Creator of all
things. And of this difference, God himself speaks by
the Prophet, / have not spoken IN SECRET, ix A
DARK PLACE OF THE EARTH* And the holy Apostle
Paul informs us of the consequence of that mysterious
manner of teaching the true God amongst the Pa<mn
O c? " O
nations, that when, by this means, they came to the
knowledge of him, they g/ori/ied him not as
* Isaiah xlv. 19. f Rom. i, 21.
VOL. VI. I To
IU THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
To confirm and illustrate my account of the M VSTEUIKS,
I subjoin a Dissertation on the sixth Book of Jlrgil\*
./KVf.-v.s- ; and another on the ATetanwrphosis of Aptilthis.
The first of which books is shewn to be one continued
clt -script ion of the Eleusinian MysAri^ ; and the other
to be purposely written to recommend the use and
efficacy of the Pagan Mysteries in general.
And here the attentive Reader will observe, that
throughout the course of this whole argument, on the
conduct of the ancient LAWGIVERS, it appears, that
all the fundamental principles of their Policy were bor
rowed from EGYPT. A truth which will be made greatly
subservient to the minor of the second Syllogism ; that
Moses, though learned in all the Wisdom of Egypt, yet
} instituted the Jewish Religion and Society without a
future State.
From this, and from what has been said above of
M o R A L o B LI G A T i o x , th e intel 1 igeiit R ea (.1 cr will per-
ceive, that, throughout the D ninc Legation, I have all
along endeavoured to select for my purpose such kiinl
of arguments, in support of the pctrtieiilar question in
hand, as may, at the same time, illustrate the truth of
Revelation in general, or serve as principles to proceed
upon in the progress of the present Argument. Of
which will be given, as occasion serves, several other
instances in the course of this review. And now having
shewn- the Legislators care to propagate Religion in-
general, and the Doctrine of a future state of Rewards
and Punishments in particular (in which is p.een their
sense of the inseparable connexion between them) ; I go
on, to explain the contrivances they employed to per
petuate the knowledge and influence of them : by which
it appears that, in their opinion, RELIGIOX was not a
temporary expedient, useful only to secure their own
power and authority, but a necessary support to civil
$OCJCt^ : "If
i. The
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 115
1. The first instance of this care was, as we shew,
their ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL RELIGION, pro
tected by the Laics of the State, in all places where they
were concerned. But as Men, ignorant of true Religion,
could hardly avoid falling into mistakes in contriving the
mode of this Establishment, 1 have therefore (the subject
of rny Work being no idle speculation, but such a one as
affects us in our highest interests, as Men and Citizens)
attempted to deliver the true Theory of the Alliance
between Church and State, as the best defence of the
justice and equity of an ESTABLISHED RELIGION.
2. The second instance of their care, I shew to have
been the allowance of a GENERAL TOLERATION; which
as it would, for the like reason, be as imperfectly framed
-as an Establishment, I have ventured to give the true
Theory of that likewise. The ancient Lawgiver contrived
to establish one mode of Religion, by allying it to the
State, for the sake of its DURATION : He tolerated other
modes of it, for the sake of their INFLUENCE, for a Religion
forced upon man, has none ; and the Lawgiver concerns
himself with Religion only for the sake of its influence.
.Discoursing upon this Subject, I was naturally led to
vindicate true Religion from an aspersion of Infidelity:
Where, I shew, that the first persecution for Religion
was not that which was committed, but that which was
undergone by the Christian Church : And that the ill
success attending its propagation amongst barbarous
Nations in our times, is altogether owing to the prepos
terous method employed for that purpose. And with
this, the second Book of the Divine Legation concludes.
III. The third Book goes on in supporting the MAJOR
of the second Syllogism, by the opinions of the PHILOSO
PHERS. For as the great waste and ravages f time have
destroyed most of the Monuments of ancient Legislation,
I held it not improper to strengthen my position of the
sense of their Lawgivers, by that of their Sages and Phi-
* iosophers. In this is shewn,
I 2 i. From
ii6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
1 . From their own words, the conviction they in general
had of the necessity of the doctrine of a Jut lire state of
Rewards and Punishments to civil society. And, to set
this conviction in the strongest light, I endeavour to
prove, that even such of then) (viz. the several sects of
Grecian Philosophers) who did not believe a future state
of Rewards and Punishments, did yet, for the sake of
Society, diligently teach and propagate it. That they
taught it, is confessed ; that they did not believe it, was
my business to prove : which I have done by shewing,
i. That they all thought it lawful to say one thing, and
think another. 2. That tliey constantly practised what
they thus thought to be lawful: and, 3. That they
practised ft on the very Doctrine in question. To explain
and verify the two first of these assertions, I had occa
sion to eiwjiiirr into the rise, progress, perfection, decline,
and genius of the ancient Greek Philosophy, under all
its several divisions. In which, (as its rise and progress
are shewn to have been from Egypt) still more materials
are lard in for inforcing the minor proposition of the
second Syllogism. I then proceed to a more particular
inquiry into the sentiments of each sect of Phile.t>phy,
on this- point ; and shew from the character asid genius
of each School, and from tlie Writings of each man, that
none of them did indeed believe the Doctrine via future
stute of Rewards and Punishments. At the same time
it appears, from almost every proof brought for this pur
pose, that they all thought the Doctrine to be of the
highest utility to the State. Here,, in examining the
philosophy of PYTHAGORAS, the subject led me, to con
sider his- so. celebrated AJetCMpxychQ&s ; in which r I take
occasion to speak of the erigin of the Pagan Fables, and
the nature of the Metamerpttuni* of Ovid, here s-hcwn to
be a Papular History of Providence, very regularly and
artfully deduced from the most early times to his OWD :
From the whole I draw this conclusion, " that Pytha
goras, who so sedulously propagated this species of a
future
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 117
future state of Rewards and Punishments (the Metemp
sychosis) that he was thought by some to be the author
of it, considered it only as ja_cominodious Fable to re
strain the unruly populace."
- 2. To support this fact, it is shown, in the next place,
that these Philosophers not only did not, but that they
could not possibly believe the Doctrine of a future state
of Rewards and Punishments, because the belief of it
contradicted two Metaphysical principles universally held
and believed by them, concerning the nature of GOD and
of the SOUL; which were, that the Deity could not hurt
any om\ and that the soul UYAV part of the substance, of
the Deity, and resolvable again into him. In explaining
and verifying their reception of this latter principle, I
take occasion to speak of its original; which, I prove,
was Grecian and not Egyptian ; as appears from the
genius and character of the two Philosophies; though
the spurious books going under the name of Hennes, but
indeed written by the later Platonists, would persuade us
to the contrary. The use of this inquiry likewise (i. e.
concerning the origin of this principle) will be seen when
we come to settle the character qf,M$se$, as aforesaid.
But, with regard to the belief of the Philosophers on both
points, besides the direct and principal use of it, for the
support of the major of the second Syllogism, it hath
(as I said before, it was contrived my argument? should
have) two further uses; the one, to serve as a principle
in the progress of my general Argument: the other, to
illustrate the truth of Revelation in general. For, 1st,
it will be a sufficient answer to that solution of the
Deists, (to be considered hereafter) that J/u.sr,v did not j
teach the Doctrine of a future state because he did not \
believe /Y, since it is shewn by the strongest evidence,
that the not believing a doctrine so useful to Society, was
esteemed no reason why the Legislator should not pro
pagate it. 2. It is a convincing proof ot the expediency
of the Gospel of Jesus, that the Sages of Greece, with
13 *;, whom
n 8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
whom all the wisdom of the Wise was supposed to be
deposited, had philosophised themselves out of one of the
most evident and useful truths with which mankind has
any concern ; and a full justification of the severity with
which the holy Apostles always speak of the Philoso
phers and the Philosophy of Greece, since it is hereby
seen to he directed only against these pernicious princi
ples ; and not, as Deists and Fanatics concur to repre
sent it, a condemnation of human learning in general.
3. But as now, it might be objected, " that by this re
presentation, we lose on the one hand what we gain on
the other; and that while we shew the expediency of the
Gospel, we run a risque of discrediting its reasonableness-,
for that nothing can bear harder upon this latter quality,
than that the best and wisest persons of Antiquity did not
believe that which the Gospel was sent to propagate,
namely, the Doctrine of a future state of Rewards and
Punishments/ As this, I say, might be objected, we have
given (besides explaining on what absurd principles their
unbelief rested) a further answer; and, to support this
answer, shewn, that the two extremes into which Divines
have usually run, in representing the state and condition of
revealed Religion, are attended with great and real mis
chiefs to it; while the only view of Antiquity which yields
solid advantage to the Christian Cause, is such a one as
is here represented for the true: Such a one as shews
natural Reason to be clear enough to percehc TRUTH,
and the necessary deductions from it when proposed, but
not generally strong enough to discover it. He, who of
all the Pagan World best knew its force, and was in that
very state in which only a true judgment could be passed,
has with the greatest ingenuity confessed this truth, " Nam
" ncque tarn est acris acies in naturis hominum et ingeniis,
" ut res tantas quisquam, nisi monstratus possit videre;
" neque tanta tamen in rebus obscuritas, ut eas peritus
" acri vir ingenio cernat, si modo aspexerit." In ex^
plaining this matter, it is occasionally shewn, that the
great
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 119
great and acknowledged superiority of the modern Systems
of Deistical Morality above the ancient, in point of ex
cellence, is entirely owing to the unacknowledged, and
perhaps unsuspected, aid of Revelation.
Thus the- Reader sees, in what manner we have endea
voured to prove the MAJOR PROPOSITIONS of the two
Syllogisms, that whatsoever Religion ami Society hare
no future State for their .support, must be supported by
an extraordinary Provide nee. And that, The ancient
Laicgivers universally believed, that a Religion icithout
a future, State could be supported only by an extraor
dinary Providence. For having shewn, that Religion and
7 o o
Society were unable, and believed to he unable, to sup
port themselves under an ordinary Providence, without
a future State ; If they were supported without that
Doctrine, it could be, and could be believed to be, only
by an extraordinary Providence.
But now as the proof is conducted through a long
detail of circumstances, shewing the absolute necessity of
Religion to civil Society; and the sense which all the
wise and learned amongst the ancients had of that neces
sity; lest this should be abused to countenance the idle
and impious Conceit that RI;LIGIOX WAS Tin: IXYKX-
TIOX OF POLITICIANS, I concluded the third Book
and the Volume together, with proving that the Conceit
is both IMPKKTIXF.XT and FA LSI-;.
i. Impertinent^ for that, were this account of the origin
of Religion true, it would not follow, that the thing itself
was visipjoarv ; but, on the contrary, most real, evidently
so even from that universal utility, on which this its pre
tended origin is supported. Indeed, against this utility^
paradoxical men, or men in a paradoxical humour, have
often reasoned; such as BAYLK ; PLI/TAHCII, and BACOX ;
Their arguments are here examined : And the Master
sophism, which runs through the reasoning of all three,
is detected and exposed.
14 2. False ;
120 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
2. False.] for that, in fact, Religion existed before the
civil Magistrate was in being. In proving this point, the
matter led me to speak of the origin of Idolatry ; to dis
tinguish the several species of it; to adjust the order in
which they arose out of one another ; and to detect the
ends of the later Platonists, in their attempts to turn the
whole into an ALLEGORY (in which the reasonings of a
late Writer in his Letters concerning Mythology are
considered). And because the rage of ALLEGORISING
had spread a total confusion over all this matter, The
origin, and progress of the folly, and the various views of
its sectators in supporting it, are here accounted for and
explained.
But my end and purpose in all this, was not barely to
remove an objection against the Truths delivered in this
place, but to prepare a reception for those which are to
follow: For if Religion were so useful to Society, and
yet not the invention of the Magistrate, we must seek for
its original in another quarter; either from NATURE or
REVELATION, or from BOTH.
Such is the subject-matter of the FIRST Volume of
The Divine Legation: which, as it was thought proper
to publish separately, I contrived should not only contain
a part of that general Argument, but should likewise be
a complete Treatise of itself, establishing one of the most
important Truths with which man lias any concern ;
namely, THE NECESSITY OF RELIGION" FOR THE
SUPPORT OF CIVIL GOVERNMENT. And if, in support
of this truth, I have entered into a long detail of some
capital articles of Antiquity, I presume I shall not need
an apology.
II.
We come now to the SECOND VOLUME of The Divine
Legation^ which is employed in proving the MINOR PRO
POSITION of the two Syllogisms; the first, that the
Jewish Religion and Society had no future state for their
support :
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 121
support: the other, that Moses, fin ancient -Lawgiver,
and learned in all the Wisdom of Egypt, purposely in
stituted such a Religion, in order to which the THIRD
GENERAL PROPOSITION was to be inforccd ; That the
Doctrine of a future state of Rewards and Pitnishmenlx
is not to be found in, nor did make part oj\ the Mosaic
Dispensation. But in proving the MINOR, a method some
thing different from that observed in proving the MAJOR
PROPOSITIONS was to be followed. These, in the first
Volume, were proved succe.sxtie/j/ and in order. But here
the MINOR PROPOSITIONS are inforced all the way
together. And this difference arises from the reason of
o
the thing; the facts, brought to prove the doctrine to be
omitted, do, at the same time, accidentally shew that the
Omission was designed : And the reasons, brought to
prove the uses in a designed omission, necessarily shew
that the Doctrine was omitted.
To proceed therefore with the subject of the SECOND
VOLUME.
IV. I just before observed, that the conclusion of the
first Volume, which detected the absurdity and falsity
of the Atheistic Principle, that Religion was an in
vention of Politicians, and a creature of the State,
opened the way to a fair inquiry whether its true original
was not as well from REVELATION as from NATURAL
REASON.
In the introduction therefore to this second Volume, I
took the advantage which that opening afforded me, of
shewing that the universal pretence to Revelation proves
tome Revelation must be true : That this true Revela
tion must have some characteristic marks to distinguish
it from the false : And that these marks are to be found
in the Institutions of MOSES.
But this was only by way of introduction-, and to
lead the Reader more easily into the main road of our
inquiry; by shewing that we pursued no desperate ad-
Venture, while we endeavoured to deduce the divinity
of
122 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
of Moses s Law from the circumstances of the Law
itself,
I proceeded then to the proof of the MINOR PRO
POSITIONS, that the Jewish Religion and Society had no
future State for their support: arid that Moses, an an
cient Lawgiver, and learned in all the wisdom of Egypt,
purposely instituted such a Religion. To evince these
truths with sufficient evidence, the nature of that In
stitution was to be first understood ; which again required
a general knowledge, at least, of the manners and genius
of the -Hebrew People, and of the character and abilities
of their Lawgiver. Now these having been entirely
fashioned on Egyptian models, it was further expedient
that we should know the state of Egyptian supersition
and learning in that early period.
i. In order to this, the following proposition is ad
vanced, that the Egyptian learning celebrated in Scrip
ture, and the Egyptian superstition there condemned,
were the very learning and superstition represented bif
the Greek Writers as the honour and opprobiuni of
that kingdom. Where I first state the question; and
then shew the equal extravagance of each of those two
parties amongst the learned, who have been accustomed
to advance or to depress the high antiquity of Egypt.
i. I corroborate the Proposition, first, by FACT, the
testimony of holy Scripture, and of the ancient Greek
Writers, set together and supporting one another; and
both supported by cii cir.iistanccs regarding the peculiar
situation of the land of Egypt. .And here the objections
of the author of the Sue red and Prophmie History of
the II - arid, connected, frightened by the common panic of
the high antiquity of Egypt, arc confuted and exposed.
Secondlv, by RKA.SOX, in an argument drawn from the
nature, origin, and various uses of their so famed HIERO
GLYPHICS. Where it is shewn,
i. That this .species of writing was employed by the
Egyptians as the vehicle of learning, even after the invcn-
1 1
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 123
tion of LETTERS : for which no good reason can be
assigned but this, that they were applied to the same i
purpose before. Now LETTERS were in use amongst
them before the time of Moses.
2. Again, it is shewn that the ONIROCRITJCS borrowed
their art of deciphering dreams from hieroglyphic Symbols:
but hieroglyphic Symbols were the mysterious vehicle of
the civil science and of the Theology of the Egyptians.
Now ONIUOCRITIC or the art of interpreting of dreams
was practised in the time of Joseph.
3. And again, It is shewn that ANIMAL-WORSHIP in
Egypt arose from the mysterious use of the same hiero
glyphic Symbols. Now A \ i MA L-woKsii IP was established
amongst them before the time of Moses.
From all this, it appears, that EGYPT was of that
high antiquity which Scripture and the best Greek Writers
concur to represent it. By which, we come to under
stand what were the specific manners and superstitions of
Egypt in the time of Moses; these being, as it now
appears, identically the same with what the Greek
Writers have delivered to us.
In the course of this proof from Reason, which opens
at large the nature, origin, and various kinds of EGYP
TIAN HIEROGLYPHICS, I interweave (as the explanation
of my subject necessarily required) a detailed history of
the various modes of ancient communication amongst men,
as well by real and literary characters, as by words and
action , and shew how SPEECH and WRITING ran parallel
in their progress ; and influenced, and were influenced by,
one another. On the same account, when I come to the
origin of BRUTE-WORSHIP, I give the history of the
various modes of ancient Idolatry, in the order in which
they rose, one out of another.
These things I have not only made to serve in sup-
port of the question I am here upon, but likewise in
support of one question preceding, and of one which is to
j dioic.
For
124 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
For in the history of the various modes of undent com-
liiunieuiion was laid, as the Rentier will find, the founda
tion of my discourses on the nature of undent Pro
phecies in the sixth Book.
And, in the history of the various modes of (indent
Idolatry, the Reader hath a necessary supplement to
\\lrat had been said before on the same subject, in the
latter end of the third book, against the Atheist s pre
tended origin of Religion.
So studious have I been to observe, what a great master
of Reason lays down as the rule and test of good order in
Composition, That every former part may give strength
to all that foilou- ; and every latter bring light unto all
before *.
But the high antiquity of Egypt, though proved from
Antiquity itself, seemed not to be enough secured, while
the authority of one great modern remained entire, and
his reasonings unanswered.
In the next place, therefore, I examine Sir ISAAC
XKW TON S Chronology of the Egyptian Empire-, a
Chronology erected on the supposed identity of Osiris
and Sesostris ; uhich is a fancy that not only contradicts
all sacred as well as profane antiquity, but, what is still
more, the very nature of tilings.
In the course of this confutation, the causes of that
endless eon fusion in the early Greek history and My-
tlwlogy, are inquired into and explained ; Which serves,
at the same time, to confirm and illustrate all that hath
been occasionally said in the latter end of the third book,
and, here again, in this fourth, concerning -the origin
and progress of Idolatry the genius of Pagan Religion
the (i entile modes of worship and their Theological
opinions.
Thus far concerning the high antiquity of Egypt.
AVhich, besides the immediate purpose of leading us into
the true idea of the Jcidsh Institution in general, ha,th.
tht sc further uses :
* Hooker,
Sect 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 12,5
We have seen, in the foregoing Volume, that EGYPT,
as it was most famed for the arts of legislation, so it most
ol all inculcated the doctrine of a future state of Rewards
and Punishments. Now, if Egypt were indeed of tlie
high antiquity here assigned unto it, that doctrine must
needs be of national belief, at the time the Hebrews lived
there in slavery. But then they having, as we find in
Scripture, thoroughly imbibed the religious notions of the
place, must needs be much prejudiced in favour of so
reasonable and flattering a Doctrine : Consequently their
Lawgiver, who likewise had been bred up in all the
learning of Egypt, would, if he had acted only by human
direction, have, in imitation of his Masters, taken ad
vantage of this favourable prejudice to make the doctrine
of a future state the grand SANCTION of his Religion
and Law.
Again, the proof of the high Antiquity of Egypt was
necessary to vindicate sacred Scripture; which all along
declares for that Antiquity ; and which the DEIST having
endeavoured to take advantage of, in opposing Moses s
pretence to inspiration, some imprudent BELIEVKKS were
grown not unwilling to explain away. Sir Isaac Newton s
CHRONOLOGY afforded them the aid they wanted : And
while it offered itself in support of the Bible-divinity, they
seemed little attentive to the liberties it had taken v\ itii
the Bible- history.
2. In order to bring on this Truth of the high antiquity
of Egypt nearer to my purpose, I proceeded to the
second Proposition, That the Jewish People were ex
tremely fond of Egyptian manners., and did frequently
jail into Egyptian superstitions : and that many of the
Laws green to them by the ministry oj Closes icerc
instituted partly in compliance to their prejudices, ayd
paj tly in opposition to those superstitions. In the proof
of the first part of this Proposition, I shew the high/;;x;-
bability that the Law was instituted ^ith reference to
Egyptian manners; and through the proof of the &e-
cO ill,
1 26 THE DIVIXE LEGATION [Book VI.
cond, is deduced a demonstration that it was actually so
trained.
For a further illustration of this Argument, I give an
historical account of the degeneracy of the Hebrew People,
and of their amazing propensity to imitate the manners
of Egypt, from the time that Moses was first sent upon
his Mission, to their entire settlement in the land of Judea :
Which fully shews (what will stand us in stead hereafter)
that a People so perverse and headstrong needed, in the
construction of their civil and religious Institutions, ail
possible curbs to disorder: Now of all such curbs, the
doctrine : of a future state was ever held the chief in
ancient policy; and as this doctrine was so peculiarly
Egyptian, they must needs have the most favourable
prejudice towards it.
But then, as it might perhaps be objected, that while
I am endeavouring to get this way into the interior of the
Jewish Constitution, I open a back door to the ravages
of Infidelity : it was thought necessary, in order to pre
vent the Deist s taking advantage of the great Truth con
tained in the preceding Proposition (which is the second),
to guard it by the following (which is the third), viz. That
Mws.s Egyptian Learning, and the Laics instituted in
compliance to the People s prejudices, are no reasonable
objection to the divinity of his HMMuA Where, in ex
plaining the first part, which shews what this learning
was, and how well it suited with Moses s Mission, I had
occasion to inquire into the origin and use of the SCHOOLS
OF THE PROPHETS : Which the Jleader will find of this
further use, viz. To give strength and support to what
is said in the sixth Book of the NATURE OE THE JEWISH
PROPHECIES ; and particularly to what is there observed
of GIIOTIUS S iatal error, in .his modc-of interpreting them.
And in explanation of the scctmd part, having proved
the Proposition, That to institute Laws in compliance to
popular prejudices, is no reasonable objection to their
divine original : having proved this, I say, from the
nature
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 127
nature of things; the Discourse proceeds to examine
all the Arguments which have been urged in support of
the contrary opinion, by HERMAN "\Vrrsrus, in his
learned Treatise intitled JEgyptiaca, that Book having
been publicly recommended by Dr. H aterland, for a
distinct and solid confutation of Spencers DC Legibus
Hebrceorum ritualibus.
And the answer to Witsius s last argument bringing
into question the intrinsic value of the ritual Law ; the
famous character of it given by the Prophet EZKKIEL,
of statutes that zcere not good, and judgments whereby
they should not live is explained in a large analysis of
the whole Prophecy, against an old foolish notion revived
by Dr. Shuckford, that these Statutes and Judgments,
here said to be given by God, were the Pagan Idolatries,
which, in defiance of God, they took without leave.
But I go yet further in support of the fourth Proposi
tion, and prove, that these very circumstances of Mose$s
Egyptian Learning, and the Laics instituted in com
pliance to the Peoples prejudices, arc a strong confir
mation of the divinity of his ^Mission.
1st, For, that one bred up in the arts of Egyptian
Legislation could never, on his own head, have thought
of reducing an unruly people to government, on maxims
of Religion and Policy, fundamentally opposite to all
the principles of Egyptian WISDOM, at that -time the
universal Model on which all the Legislators worked,
in reducing a barbarous People to Society. Yet Moses
went upon principles diametrically opposite to that
WISDOM, when he enjoined the PUBLIC worship of the
vne true God only, awl OMITTED the doctrine of a future
state of Reicards and Punishments, in tiie institution of
his Law and Religion.
2clly, For, that One who falsely pretended to receive
the whole frame of a national Constitution from God,
would never have risked his pretensions by a ritual
Law, which the people might see was politically insti
tuted,
128 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
tuted, partly in compliance to their prejudices, and partly
in opposition to Egyptian superstitions.
Here, all the imaginable motives are inquired into,
which MOSES, though a mere human Lawgiver, might
have had to act in the manner lie did ; and these motives
are shewn to be insufficient to induce a wise Legislator
thus to act. In conclusion, it is made apparent, that
a ritual, contrh-cd to oppose to the reigning superstitious ;
and, at the same time, to prefigure, by its typical nature,
all the essential parts of a future Dispensation, contains
a strong INTERNAL ARGUMENT THAT THE RITUAL
LAW WAS NOT A MKltE HUMAN INVENTION. Alld
with this the fourth Book concludes.
V. What hath been hitherto said, was to let the Reader
Into the genius of the Jewish Policy in general, in order
to his judging more exactly of the peculiar nature of its
Government ; that, from thence, he might be enabled to
determine, with full certainty, of the matters in question,
as they are contained in the two MINOR terms.
1. Th&Jtfth Book, therefore, comes still nearer to the
point, and shews, that the Government instituted by
Moses was a THEOCUACV, properly so called, where
God himself was the supreme civil Magistrate. It begins
with assigning and settling the true reason of the sepa
ration of the posterity of Abraham from the rest of
mankind;- because this separation has been greatly mis
understood - but principally because the true reason of
the separation leads us into the use and necessity of a
Theocrattc form of Government.
In evincing this necessity, the justice of the Laic for
punisltiiig Idol-wqr&hip ca pit ally , under a Theocracy, is
explained : And because the Deist hath been accustomed
to urge this .Law against the divine original of the whole
Institution, it is here justified at large, on the principles
of natural equity : Which serves, as well a past purpose,
viz. the adding strength and support to what hath been
said on the subject of TULI.UA nox. in the second Book;
as
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 129
as it does at present, viz. to confirm the reality of this
Theocracy, which a celebrated dissenting Minister has
preposterously gone out of his way to bring in question :
whose reasoning, therefore, is examined and exposed.
2. This THEOCRACY, thus proved to be necessary,
was likewise of the most easy introduction, as I have
shewn from the notions and opinions of those times,
concerning tutelary Deities. And here, speaking of the
method of Divine Providence, in applying the prejudices
and manners of men to the great ends of his Dispen
sations, I observe, that He is always accustomed to
impress on his institution, some characteristic note of
difference, to mark it for his own : which leading me to
give instances in some of these notes, I insist chiefly upon
this, " that the Mosaic Religion was built upon a former ;
namely, .the Patriarchal : whereas the various Reli-
" gions of the Pagan World were all unrelated to, and
independent of one another." As this was a circum
stance necessary to be well attended to, by all who would
fully comprehend the nature of the Mosaic Policy, I took
the advantage, which the celebrated Author of the
Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion had
afforded rne, to support this characteristic note, against his
idle attempt to prove, that the Pagans, likewise, were ac
customed to build one pretended Revelation on another.
3. I proceed, in the next place, to shew, that those
prejudices which made the introduction of a THEOCRACY
so easy, occasioned as easy a defection from it. In which,
I had occasion to explain the nature of the worship of
tutelary Gods ; and of that Idolatry wherewith the
Israelites were so obstinately besotted.
Both of which Discourses serve these further purposes :
the former, to support and explain what hath been said
in the second Book concerning the Pagan intercommunity
of worship : and the latter (besides a peculiar use to be
made of it in the third* Volume) to obviate a popular
* See p. 144 of this Volume.
VOL. VI. K objection
130 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
objection of Unbelievers : who, from this circumstance,
of the perpetual defection of the Israelites into idolatry,
would infer, that God s Dispensation to them could never
have been so convictive as their History represents it ;
the Objectors having taken it for granted, on the allow
ance of Believers, that this Idolatry consisted in re
nouncing the Law of Moses, and renouncing it as dis
satisfied with its truth. Both which suppositions are
here shewn to be false. This affords an occasion to
confute the false reasoning of Lord Bolingbroke ; who,
from this frequent lapse into Idolatrv, infers such a
defect and political inability in the Law, as shews its
pretence to a divine original to be an imposture.
4. The nature of the THEOCRACY, and the circum
stances attending its erection, being thus explained, we
come next to inquire concerning its duration. Here we
shew, that, in strict truth and propriety, it subsisted
throughout the whole period ot the Jewish economy,
even to the corning of Christ : In which discourse, the
contrary opinions, of an earlier abolition, are all con
sidered and confuted, and the above truth supported and
established. In the course of this reasoning, it is shewn,
that the famous Prophecy of Jacob, of the Sceptres not
departing from Judith till the coming of Shiloh, is a
promise or declaration of the existenceof the THEOCRACY
till the coming of Christ. And as the truth of this inter
pretation is of the highest importance to Revelation, all
the different senses given to this Prophecy are examined,
and shewn to be erroneous. And the last of them being
one borrowed by Dr. Sherlock, Bishop of London, and
received into his Book of the Use and Intent of Pro
phecy, is particularly discussed.
The use to be hereafter made of the duration of the
Theocracy to the coming of Christ, is to inforce, by this
circumstance, amongst many others, the cox VEX ION
between the two Religions : a truth, though too much
neglected,
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 131
neglected, yet incumbent on every rational Defender of
Revelation to support.
The argument then proceeds to a consideration of the
peculiar consequences attending the administration of a
Theocracy, which brings us yet nearer to our point*
Here it is shewn, that one necessary consequence was an
EXTRAORDINARY PROVIDENCE. And agreeably to
this deduction from the nature of things, we find, that
holy Scripture does, in fact, exhibit this very represen
tation of God s Government of Judea ; and that there
are many favourable circumstances in the character of
the Hebrew People, to induce us to believe the repre
sentation to be true. Here, many cloudy cavils of the
three Doctors, SYKES, STEBBING, and RUTHERFORD,
are occasionally removed and dispersed. But the at
tentive Reader will observe, that my Argument does not
require me to prove more in this place, than that holy
Scripture REPRESENTS an extraordinary Providence to
have been administered. The proof of its REAL Ad
ministration is established by the MEDIUM of my Thesis,
the omission of the Doctrine of a future state of Rewards
and Punishments. Which answers all objections as to
our inadequate conceptions of such an administration ;
as well as to certain passages of Scripture that seem to
clash with its general representation of it. Yet both
these sort of objections are, however, considered ev
obundanti.
As important as the fact is, to our present purpose of
an extraordinary Providence thus represented, it has still
a further use, when employed amongst those distinguish
ing marks of the truth of Moses s divine Mission in
general : for it shews us, the unnecessary trouble and
hazard to which he exposed himself, had that Mission
been feigned. Had he, like the rest of the ancient Law
givers, only pretended to inspiration, he had then no
occasion to propagate the belief of an extraordinary
Providence; a Dispensation so easy to be confuted.
K 3 But
132 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
But by deviating from their practice, and announcing to
his People, that their tutelary God was become their
KING, he laid himself under a necessity of teaching an
extraordinary Providence ; a dead weight upon an Im
posture, which nothing but downright folly could have
brought him to undergo.
To proceed. After having laid this strong and neces
sary Foundation, we come at length DIRECTLY to the
point in question. If the Jewish Government were a
THEOCRACY, administered, as it must be, by an extraor
dinary Providence, the next consequence is, that TEM
PORAL REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS, and not FUTURE,
were the SANCTION of their Law and Religion. Thus
far, therefore, have our considerations on the nature alone
of the Jewish Government conducted us : and it is
almost to our journey s end : for it fairly brings us up to
the proof of our two MINOR Propositions. So necessary,
as the Reader now sees, is the long discourse of the
nature of the Jewish Government.
But, to prevent all cavil, the Argument goes on, and
proves in the next place, that the Doctrine of a future
state of Rewards and Punishments, which could not, from,
the nature of things, be the SANCTION of the Jewish
economy, was not in fact contained in it at all : nay
further, that it was PURPOSELY OMITTED by the great
Lawgiver. This is proved from several passages in the
Book of Genesis and the Law.
And here, more fully to evince, that Moses, who, it is
seen, studiously omitted the mention of it, was well
apprised of its importance, I shew, that the PUNISH
MENT OF CHILDREN FOR THE SINS OF THEIR PARENTS
was brought into this Institution purposely to afford some
advantages to Government, which the Doctrine of a
future state, as it is found in all other Societies, amply
supplies. This, at the same time that it gives further
strength to the position of no future state in the Mosaic
Dispensation, gives the Author a fair occasion of vindi
cating
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 133
eating the justice and equity of the Law of punishing
Children for the sins of their Parents] and of proving
the perfect agreement between MOSES and the Prophets
EZEKTEL and JEREMIAH, concerning it; which hath
been, in all ages, the stumbling-block of Infidelity.
But we now advance a step further, and shew, that as
Moses did not teach, yea forbore to teach the doctrine of a
future state of Rewards and Punishments, so neither had
the ancient Jews, that is to say, the Body of the People,
any knowledge of it. The proof is striking, and scarce to
be resisted by any Party or Profession but that of the
SYSTEM-MAKER. The Bible contains a very circumstan
tial account of this People, from the time of Moses to the
great Captivity; not only the history of public occurrences,
but the lives of private persons of both sexes, and of all ages,
conditions, characters, and complexions ; in the adven
tures of virgins, matrons, kings, soldiers, scholars, parents,
merchants, husbandmen. They are given too in every
circumstance of life; captive, victorious, in sickness and
in health; in full security, and amidst impending dangers,
plunged in civil business, or retired and sequestered in
the service of Religion. Together with their story we
have their compositions likewise: in one place we hear
their triumphal ; in another, their penitential strains.
Here we have their exultations for blessings received;
there, their deprecations of evil apprehended : Here they
urge their moral precepts to their contemporaries ; and
there again, they treasure up their Prophecies and Pre
dictions for the use of Posterity ; and on each, denounce
the threatenings and promises of Heaven. Yet in none
of these different circumstances of life, in none of these
various casts of composition, do we ever find them acting
on the motives, or influenced by the prospect, of a FUTURE
STATE : or indeed, expressing the least hopes or fears, or
even common curiosity, concerning it : But every thing
they do or say respects the present life only; the good
K 3 and
i 3 4 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
and ill of which are the sole objects of their pursuits and
aversions.
The strength of this argument is still further supported
by a view of the general history of Mankind ; and par
ticularly of those nations most resembling the Jewish in
their genius and circumstances: in which we find the
Doctrine of a future state of Rewards and Punishments,
\vas always pushing on its influence. It was their con
stant viaticum through life; it stimulated them to war,
and spirited their songs of triumph; it made them insen
sible of pain, immovable in danger, and superior to the
approach of death.
This is not all : We observe, that even in the Jewish
Annals, when this Doctrine was become national, it made
as considerable a figure in their History, as in that of
any other nation.
It is still further urged, that this conclusion does not
rest merely on the negative silence of the Bible-history ;
it is supported on the positive declarations contained in
it; by which the sacred Writers plainly discover that
there was no popular expectation of a future state or
resurrection.
From the Old Testament \ve come to the New. By
the Writers of which it appears, that the Doctrine of a
future state of Rewards and Punishments DID NOT
HAKE PART of the Mosaic Dispensation.
Their evidence is divided into two parts; the first,
proving that TEMPORAL rewards and punishments were
the sanction of the Jewish Dispensation; The second
that it had no other. And thus, with the most direct
and unexceptionable proof of the two MINOR proposi
tions, the fifth Book concludes.
VI. But to remove, as far as possible, all the sup
ports of prejudice against this important Truth, the sixth
and last Book of this Volume is employed in examining
all those texts of the Old and New Testament, which
had
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 135
had been commonly urged to prove, that the Doctrine
of a future state of rewards and punishments DID MAKE
PART of the Mosaic Dispensation.
And amongst those of the Old Testament, the famous
passage of the xixth chapter of Job, concerning & Resur
rection (as it has been commonly understood) holding a
principal place, it was judged expedient, for the reasons
there given, to examine that matter to the bottom. This
necessarily brought on an enquiry into the NATURE and
GENIUS of that Book; WHEX WRITTEN, and to WHAT
PURPOSE. By the aid of which enquiry, a fair account
is given of the sense of that famous Text, consistent with
our general Proposition.
But the whole Discourse on the Book of Job hath this
further use : It provides a strong support and illustration
of what will be hereafter delivered concerning the GRA
DUAL DECAY of the extraordinary Providence from
the time of Saul, to the return from the great Captivity.
Yet this is riot all. The Discourse hath yet a further
use, with regard to Revelation in general. For the ex
plaining, How the principles of the Gospel-Doctrine
were opened by degrees, fully obviates the calumnies of
those two leaders in Infidelity, TIXDAL and COLLINS;
who pretend, that the Heads and Governors of the Jews
refined their old Doctrines concerning the Deity, and
invented new ones : just as the Priests improved in know
ledge, or the People advanced in curiosity ; or as Both
were better taught by the instructions they received from
their Masters in the country whither they were kd away
captive.
The discourse of Job being of this importance, we
% were led to support all the parts of it, from the attacks of
various Writers, who had attempted to confute it.
The rest of tiie Old Testament-texts are gone through
with greater dispatch, tyeing divided into two parts.
i. Such as are supposed to teach the separate existence,
or, as it is called, the immortality of the Soul. And,
K 4 2. Such
136 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
2. Such as are supposed to teach a future state of Re
wards and Pumsliments, together with a Resurrection
of the body. In the course of which examination, much
light, it is hoped, has been thrown both on the particular
texts and on the general question.
From the texts of the Old Testament, the Argument
proceeds to examine those of the New: Amongst which,
the famous eleventh Chapter of the Epistle it; (he He
brews is not forgotten ; the sense of which is cleared up,
to oppose to the inveterate mistakes of Systematical
Divines: And here, occasion is taken to explain the
nature of St. Paul s reasoning against the errors of the
c/ /
Jewish converts^ a matter of highest moment for a right
understanding of this Apostle s Letters to the several
Churches; and for the further illustration of the general
Argument.
As in all this, nothing is taught or insinuated which
O o
opposes the doctrine of our excellent Church, common
decency required that this conformity should be fully
shewn and largely insisted on.
Having therefore, all along, gone upon this Principle,
" That though a future State of rewards and punish-
" ments made no part of the MOSAIC Dispensation, yet
" that the LAW had a SPIRITUAL meaning; though not
" seen or understood till the fulness of time was come.
" Henoe the Ritual Law received the nature, and afforded
" the efficacy of PROPHECY : In the interim (as is shewn)
" the mystery of the Gospel was occasionally revealed,
" by God, to his chosen servants, the Fathers and
" Leaders of the Jewish Nation ; and the dctwnbigs of it
" gradually opened by the Prophets, to the People."
Having, I say, gone, all the way, upon this principle, I
shew, from the SEVENTH ARTICLE of Religion, that it
is the very Doctrine of our excellent Church.
And in exolaining that part of the ARTICLE which
says, That they are not to be he Ard which feign that the
old Fathers did look only for transitory Promises, I sup
port
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 137
port this doctrine by the case of ABRAHAM, who, our
blessed Master tells us, rejoiced to see his day, and saw it
and was glad.
Here, I attempt to prove, in illustration of this text,
that the Command to Abraham to offer Isaac was merely
an information given, at Abraham s earnest request, in a
representative action, instead of words, of the REDEMP
TION OF MANKIND by the great Sacrifice of Christ on
the Cross. Which interpretation, if it be the true one, is,
I think, the noblest proof that ever was given of the
HARMONY between the Old and New Testament
From this long Dissertation, besides the immediate
purpose of vindicating the Doctrine of our national
Church, in its seventh Article, we gain these two ad
vantages ; i . The first of which is, supporting a real and
essential connexion between the Mosaic and the Christian
Religions. 2. The other is, disposing the Deists to
think more favourably of Revelation, when they see, in
this interpretation of the COMMAND, all their objections
to this part of Abraham s story overthrown.
The matter being of this high importance, it w r as proper
to fix my interpretation on such principles as would leave
no room for reasonable doubt or objection : And this
was to be done by explaining the nature of those various
modes of information in use amongst the Ancients ; for
which explanation, a proper ground had been laid in the
discourse on the Hieroglyphics in the fourth Book. To
all this (for the reason here given) is subjoined a con
tinued refutation of all that Dr. Stebbing has been able
to urge against this idea of the Command.
Nor is this all. This Dissertation, which affords so
many new openings into the truths of Revelation in general,
and so many additional supports to the argument of the
Divine Legation in particular, hath another very impor
tant use. It is a necessary introduction to the long Dis
course which follows, concerning PROPHECY.
In
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
In this (which is the last of the present Volume) I
have attempted to clear up and vindicate the logical
truth and propriety of Types in action, and secondary
semes in speech : For on the truth and propriety of these
depends the divine original of the ancient JEWISH PRO
PHECIES concerning Christ A matter much needing a
support : For though the greater part of these Prophe
cies confessedly relate to Jesus only in a secondary sense,
yet had some men of name, and in the interests of Re
ligion, through ignorance of the true origin and nature
of such senses, rashly concurred with modern Judaism and
Infidelity, to give them all up as illogical and enthu
siastic, to the imminent hazard of the very foundation of
CHRISTIANITY.
In the progress of this inquiry, I had occasion to
examine, and was enabled, on the principles here laid
down, to confute Mr. Collins s famous Work of the
Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion, one of
the most able and plausible books ever written amongst
us, against our holy Faith; he having borrowed the
Argument, and stolen all the reasoning upon it, from the
most sagacious of the modern Rabbins ; who pretend
that none of the Prophecies can relate to Jesus in any
other sense than a secondary ; and that a secondary seme
is illogical and fanatical. Had I done no more, in this
long work, than explain and clear up, as I have done, this
much embarrassed and most important question of the
Jewish Prophecies which relate to Christ, and to the Chris
tian Dispensation, I should have thought my time and
labour \vell employed; so necessary to the very being of
our holy Faith, is the setting this matter on its true foun
dation. Thus much may be said in favour of this large
dissertation considered in itself alone : But, as part of the
Argument of the Divine Legation of Moses, it has these
more immediate uses :
i. To shew, that those who contend, that the Christian
Doctrine of a future State was revealed to the early Jews,
destroy
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 130
destroy all use and reason of a secondary sense of Pro
phecies ; for how shall it be certainly known, from the
Prophecies themselves, that they contain double senses,
but from this acknowledged truth, that the old Law was
preparatory to, and the rudiments of, the New? Or how
shall this relation between these two Laws be certainly
known, but from the evidence of this contested truth,
that the Doctrine of a future state of Rewards and
Punishments is not to be found in the Mosaic Dispensa
tion ? So close a dependence have all these capital
Principles on one another.
2. The other more immediate reason for this Disser
tation on Types and secondary Senses was this : As I had
shewn, that a future State of rewards and punishments
Avas not revealed under any part of the Jewish economy,
otherwise than by those modes of information; it was
necessary, in order to shew the real connexion between
Judaism and Christianity (the truth of the latter Religion
depending on that real connexion) to prove those modes
to be logical and rational. For, as on the one hand, had
the doctrine of life and immortality been revealed under
the Mosaic economy, Judaism had been more than
a rudiment of, and preparation to, Christianity ; so on the
other, had no covert intimations, at all, been given of the
doctrine, it had been less : that is, the dependency and
connexion between the two Religions had not been suiH-
ciently marked out and ascertained. With this Disser
tation therefore, so important in its use and application,
the sixth and last Book of the second * Volume concludes.
Thus the READER, at length, may see how regularly,
and intently, these two * Volumes have been carried on :
For, though the AUTHOR (whose passion is not so much
a fondness for his own conceived argument, as for the
honour and support of Religion itself) hath neglected no
fair occasion of inforcing every collateral circumstance,
which might serve to illustrate the truth of Revelation
* See p. 103. of this Vol.
in
140 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
in general-, yet he never loses sight of his end, but
as the precept for conducting the most regular works
direct,
Semper ad evcntum festinat.
This Volume too, like the first, I thought fit to publish
alone, not merely for the same reason, that it was a com
plete and entire work of itself, which explained the nature
and genius of the Jewish Constitution ; but for this ad
ditional one, that it fairly ended and completed the Ar
gument.
For the first Volume having proved the MAJOR, and
the second Volume, the MINOR Propositions of the
TWO SYLLOGISMS; my logic teaches me to think, that
the CONCLUSION follows of course, viz. THAT THE
JEWISH RELIGION AND SOCIETY WERE SUPPORTED
BY AN EXTRAORDINARY PROVIDENCE.
Or put it in another light, Having proved my three
principal Propositions,
I. " That the inculcating the Doctrine of a future
" State of rewards and punishments, is necessary to
" the well-being of civil Society ;
II. " That all mankind, especially the most wise and
" learned nations of Antiquity, have concurred in be-
" lieving, and teaching, that this Doctrine was of such use
" to civil Society ;
III. " That the Doctrine of a future State of rewards
" and punishments is not to be found in, nor did make
" part of, the Mosaic Dispensation;"
The conclusion is, that therefore THE LAW OF MOSES
IS OF DIVINE ORIGINAL.
A CONCLUSION which necessarily follows the premisses
contained in these three propositions. Notwithstanding
alt this, the evidence of their truth proving so various,
extending so wide, and having been drawn out to so great
a length ; What between inattention and prejudice, the
Argument, here brought to its final issue, hath been gene
rally understood to be left imperfect ; and the Conclusion
of
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 141
of it reserved for another Volume. Yet a very moderate
share of reflection might have led the candid Reader to
understand, that I had here effectually performed what
I had promised, namely, TO DEMONSTRATE THE
DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES. For if it be indeed
proved, That the Doctrine of a future state is necessary
to the well-being of civil Society, under the ordinary
government of Providence That all mankind have ever
so conceived of the matter That the Mosaic Institution
was without this support, arid that yet it did not want
it, What follows but that the Jewish affairs were ad
ministered by an extraordinary Providence, distributing
reward and punishment with an equal hand; and con
sequently that the MISSION OF MOSES WAS DIVINE?
However, tiie complaint against the AUTHOR, for not
having performed his Convention with the Public, became
pretty general. To which a great deal might be said,
and perhaps to little purpose. The following Tale will
put it in the fairest light. In a solemn Treaty lately
concluded between the Governor of one of our American
Provinces and the neighbouring Savages, it had, it seems,
been stipulated, that the Settlement should supply those
Warrior-Tribes with a certain number of good and ser
viceable Muskets. Which engagement was so ill per
formed, that at their next general meeting, the Chieft
of the Barbarians complained, that, though indeed the
Colony had sent them the number of Muskets agreed upon,
vet, on examination, they were all found to be without
Locks. This mischance (occasioned by the Muskets
and the Locks being put into two different cargoes) the
Governor promised should be redressed. It was re-
dressed accordingly ; and the Locks sought out, and sent,
He now flattered himself that all cause of umbrage was
effectually removed ; when, at their next meeting, he
was entertained with a fresh complaint, that the Colony
had fraudulently sent them Locks without Musktfs.
The truth "was, this brave People, of unirnpeached morals,
were
142 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
were only defective in their military Logic ; they had not
the dexterity, till they Mere first shewn the way, to put
the major of the Musket and the miner of the Musket-
lock together ; and from thence to draw the concluding
trigger.
But then it will be said, " If, as is here pretended,
the PREMISSES have been indeed proved, in these two
Volumes, with all the detail which their importance
required, and with all the evidence which a moral subject
can supply ; and the CONCLUSION, therefore, established
with all the conviction which the Laws of logic are able
to inforce ; Why was another Volume promised ? For
no other end, as would seem, than to mislead a well-
meaning Reader, in the vain pursuit of an Argument
already ended."
It was promised for a better purpose To remove all
conceivable objections against the CONCLUSION, and to
throw in every collateral light upon the PREMISSES. For
it is one thing to satisfy Truth ; and another, to silence
her pretended friends. He who defends Revelation has
many prejudices to encounter ; but he who defends it
by Reason only, has many more.
III.
The THIRD and last Volume, therefore, is destined to
SUPPORT what hath been already proved : not, as has
been absurdly suggested, to continue and conclude an
unfinished Argument,
It consists of three Books, like each of the preceding
Volumes.
i. The seventh Book therefore is employed in sup
porting the MAJOR and the MINOR Propositions of the
first Syllogism : in a continued History of the RELIGIOUS
OPINIONS of the Jews, from the time of the earlier
Prophets, who first gave some dark intimations of a dif
ferent Dispensation, to the time of the Maccabees, when
the Doctrine of a future state of rewards and punish
ments was become national.
3 l. The
Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 143
2. The eighth Book is employed in supporting the
MAJOR and MINOR Propositions of the second Syllo
gism, in which is considered the PERSONAL CHARACTER
of Moses and the GENIUS OF THE LAW, as far as it
concerns or has a relation to the character of the Law
giver. Under this latter head, is contained a full and
satisfactory Answer to those who may object, " That a
revealed Religion with a future state of rewards and
punishments is unworthy the Divine Author to whom it
is ascribed."
3. The ninth and last Book explains at large the nature
and genius of the CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION: For
having, towards the end of the eighth Book, examined
the PRETENDED REASONS (offered both by Believers
and Unbelievers to evade my conclusion) for omitting
the Doctrine of a future State of rewards and punishments
in the Mosaic Dispensation, I was naturally and ne
cessarily led to inquire into the TRUE. For now, it
might be finally objected, " That though, under an
extraordinary Providence, there might be no occasion for
the doctrine of a future State, in support of Religion, or
for the ends of Government; yet as that Doctrine is a
truth, and consequently, under every regimen of Provi
dence, useful, it seems hard to conceive, that the Religious
Leader of the Jews, because as a Lawgiver he could do
without it, that therefore, as a Divine, he would omit
it." The objection is of weight in itself, and receives
additional moment from what hath been observed in the
fifth Book, concerning the Jtedsdn of the Law of punishing
Children for the crimes of their Parents. I held it there
fore insufficient barely to reply, " Moses omitted it, that
" his Law might thereby stand, throughout all ages, an
" invincible Monument of the truth of his pretences :"
but proceeded to explain the GREAT AND PRINCIPAL
reason of the omission. And now, ventwn ad VERUM est.
The whole concludes with one general but distinct
view of the ^entire course of God s universal economy
from
144 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
from Adam to Christ. In which it is shewn, that if
Moses were, in truth, sent from God, he could not teach
a future State ; that Doctrine being out of his Commis
sion, and reserved for him who was at the head of ano
ther Dispensation, by which life and immortality wax to
be brought to light.
This Discourse, besides the immediate purpose of
supporting and illustrating the ARGUMENT here com
pleted, serves another end, which I had in view, as to
the general disposition of the whole work : which was to
explain and discriminate the distinct and various natures
of the PAGAN, the JEWISH and the CHRISTIAN Reli
gions : the Pagan having been considered in the first
Volume, and the Jewish in the second ; the Christian is
reserved for the third * and last. Let me conclude there
fore, in an address to my Reverend Brethren, with the
words of an Ancient Apologist f : Quid nobis invidemus,
si veritas Divinitatis, nostri temporis ^Etate maturuit?
Fruamur bono nostro, et recti sententiam temperemus :
cohibeatur SUPERSTITIO, IMPIETAS expietur, VERA
RELIGIO reservetur.
* As the first and second volumes of the Edition alluded to, con
tained Books I. to VI. the THIRD volume was intended to comprise
the VII th VIII th IX th ; but the VII th & VIII th Books were never
composed (See Life of the Author, vol. i. pp. 80 to 89, of this
Edition). The IX th Book forms the concluding part of this
volume. Ed.
t Minucius Felix.
END OF THE SIXTH BOOK.
APPENDIX
Appx.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 145
APPENDIX
CONCERNING
THE BOOK OF JOB,
AN excellent Writer having freely and candidly
examined the late Bishop of London s collection of
Sermons, and in page 165 of his Examination, asked this
question, Where was Idolatry ever punished by the Ma
gistrate, but under the Jewish Economy ? The Oxford
Professor, in the second Edition of his Prelections,
concerning the sacred Poetry of the Hebrews, thinks
fit to give the following answer " It was punished under
" the (Economy of the Patriarchs, in the families and
" under the DOMINION of Abraham, Melchisedec and
^ JOB. Idolatry spreading wider and wider, Abraham
" was called by God from Chaldea, for this end, to bo
" the father of a People, which, divided from all others^
" might continue to worship the true God ; to be set up
ft for an exemplar of true Religion, and to be ready to
." give testimony against the worship of vain Deities.
" Was not Abrahain, therefore (exercising the SOVE-
" REIGNTY in his own family) to punish Idolatry ?
" Were not Melchisedec and Job, and all the SOVE-
" REIGNS of Tribes of that time, who still retained the
" knowledge and worship of the true God, amidst a
ft general defection of all the surrounding People, to take
" care that their own did not backslide ? To curb offend-
<" ers, and to inflict punishment on the obstinate, the
* REBELLIOUS, and on all those who spread abroad
" the contagion of this vice." Ad quaestionein respon-r
VOL. VI. L detur :
146 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
detur : Sub oeconomia Patriarcharum ; in familiis, et sub
DOMJNATU Abraham!, Melchizedechi, Jobi, caetero-
rumque. Ingruente Idolol atria divinitus evocabatur ex
Chaldaea Abrahamus : eum in fincin, ut fieret pater
Gentis, quce ab aliis omnibus divisa, verum Deum
coleret, publicum proponeret exemplurn puras religionis,
contraque cultum vanorum numinum testimoniuin per-
hiberet. Nonne erat igitur Abrahami in sua familia
PRINCIPATUM exercentis proprium officiuin et munus in
Idololatriam anirnadvertere ? Nonne Melchizedechi, Jobi,
omniumquc tune temporis in suisTribubus PuiNCiPim,
qui veri Dei cognitioncin et cultum in communi fere
gentium circumvicinurum defectione adhuc retinebant,
cavere, ne sui deficercnt ; coercere delinquentes ; obsti
nates et KEBETLKS, et scclcrifi contagionem propagantes,
supplicio allicere? Supplement um ad primam Prcdec-
tionum Editionan : Addil. Editionis secunda*,, p. 312.
This is so pleasant an answer, and so little needing the
masterly hand of the Examiner, to correct, that a few
strictures, in a cursory Note, will be more than sufficient
to do the business.
1 . The Examiner, to prove, I suppose, that the book
of Job was a dramatic work, written long after the time
of the Patriarch, asks, Where was Idolatry ever punished
by the MAGISTRATE, but under the Jesc&k Economy?
The Professor answers, // was punished under the
JOBEAN ECONOMV. And he advances nothing without
proof. Does not Job himself say, that Idolatry was an
iniquity to be punished by the Judge? The Examiner
replies, that the Job who says this, is an airy Phantom,
raised for other purposes than to lay down the Law for
the Patriarchal times. The Professor maintains that
they are all Asses, with ears as long as Father Harduin^
Avho cannot see that this is the true and genuine old
Job. In good time. Sub Judice Us est : And while it
is so, I am afraid the learned Professor BEGS THE QUES-
TJ-OX ; when, to prove that Idolatry was punished by
Appx,] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 147
the Magistrate, out of the land of Judea, he affirms that
KING JOB punished it. If he say, he does not rest his
assertion on this passage of the Book of Job alone, but
on the sacred Records, from whence he concludes that
those CIVIL MAGISTRATES, Abraham and Melchisedec,
punished Idolatry ; I shall own he acts fairly, in putting
them all upon the same footing ; and on what ground that
stands, we shall now see.
2. The Examiner says, Where was Idolatry ever
punished by the Magistrate, but under the Jewish
Economy? A question equivalent to this, " Where
was Idolatry punished by the civil Magistrate on the
established Laws of the State, but in Judea ? To which,
the Professor replies, " It was punished by all the
Patriarchal Monarchs, by king Job, king Abraham, and
Jung Melchisedec."
Of a noble race was Shcnkin.
But here, not one, save the last, had so much as a nominal
title to civil Magistracy : And this last drops, as it were*
from the clouds, without lineage or parentage ; so that,
though ofdivhie, yet certainly not a Monarch of the true
stamp, by hereditary right. The Critic therefore fails
in his first point, which is, finding out civil Magistrates to
do his hierarchical drudgery.
3. But let us admit our Professors right of investiture,
to confer this high office, and then see how he proves,
that these his Lieges punished the crime of Idolatry by
civil punishment. ABRAHAM, and the Patriarchs his
descendants, come first under consideration. What!
(says he) was not Abraham, exercising the SOVEREIGNTY
in his own family, to punish Idolatry? Hoboes is, I bet
lieve, the only one (save our Professor) who holds that
" Abraham had a right to prescribe to his family what
" Religion they should be of, to tell them what was the
" word of God, and to punish those who countenance^
" any Doctrine which he had forbidden." Leviath,
jchap. 40. -But God speaking of Abraham, says, I know
a
148 THE DIVINE LEGATION [BookVL
that he will command his children and his houshold after
him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, $c.
Gen. xviii. 19. And Hobbes and our Professor, I sup-
pose, regard this declaration as a clear proof of the divine
doctrine of RESTRAINT in matters of Religion ; especially
when interpreted by their darling text oi force them to
enter in. On the contrary, those who have been bred up
in the Principles of Toleration, hold it to be a mere
testimony (a glorious one indeed) of Abraham s pious
and parental care to INSTRUCT his family in the Law of
God. And it is well it can go for no more, or I should feat
the learned Professor would have brought in Isaac as a
backslider to Idolatry ; and his Father s laying him on the
sacrificial Pile, as a kind of Auto de fe. Now, except
in these two places of Abraham s History, of such won
derful force to support intolerant principles, the Patriarch
appears in all others so averse to this inquisitorial spirit,
that where God comes down to destroy Sodom, the
Father of the Faithful intercedes, with the utmost im
portunity, for that idolatrous as well as incestuous City.
The truth is this : The usurped right of punishing for
opinions was first assumed and long ingrossed by Idolaters,
And, if tradition may be believed, Abraham himself nar
rowly escaped the Fire for preaching against its Divinity.
But this is not all. From his own conduct, and from the
conduct of his posterity, he seems to have made one part
of that fidelity /;/ keeping the way of the Lord (for which
he is so nobly distinguished by God himself) to consist
hi inculcating the divine doctrine of Toleration. When
JACOB and his family, without leave-taking, had departed
from Laban, Rachel stole away her father s Gads. The
old man followed and overtook them ; and complaining
of the theft, Jacob frankly answered, With whomsoever
thou jindest thy Cods, let him not live. Now, I woulcj
ask, was this condemnation on the offender denounced
for Idolatry, or for the Theft? The words of thq
Patriarch, which immediately follow, determine Ibis
2 Before
Appx.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 149
Before our brethren discern thou what is thine, with me,
and take it to thee. Well, Rachel, by a female stratagem,
contrived to keep her father s Gods ; for no better pur
pose, we may be sure, than that for which the good man
employed so much pains to recover them. The theft,
indeed, had it been discovered, would have been punished
by the Judge : But as for the Idolatry, which, from its na
ture, could not be long hid, the silence of Scripture shews
it to have been cor am non Jitdice. And so far was Rachel
from being doomed to the fire, that we do not find, even
her Gods underwent this punishment.
After the affair of the Shechemites, Jacob, by God s
command, goes to Bethel : and there, in pious emulation of
his grandfather s care to keep the way of the Lord, the text
tells us, he commanded his Jwushold and all that were with
Jam, to put away the strange Gods from amongst them.
They obeyed, all was well ; and not a word of punishing
by the Judge. Indeed, these Patriarchal Judges were
much better employed, and more suitably to their office,
in punishing civil crimes and immoralities, as appears
from the adventure of Judah and his daughter-in-law.,
Tamar.
MELCHISEDEC S story is a short one; he is just
brought into the scene to bless Abraham in his return
from conquest. This promises but ill. Had this King
and Priest of Salem been brought in cursing, it had
had a better appearance : for, I think, punishment for
opinions, which generally ends in a Fagot, always begins
with a curse. But we may be misled perhaps by a wrong
translation. The Hebrew word to bless, signifies likewise
to curse, and, under the management of an intolerant
Priest, good things easily run into their contraries. What
follows, is his taking Tythes from Abraham. Nor will
this serve our purpose, unless we interpret these Tythes
into Fines for nonconformity ; and then, by the blessing,
we can easily understand absolution. We have seen much
Atrangpr things done with the Hebrew Verity. If this be
L 3 not
150 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
not allowed, I do not see how we can elicite fire and
fagot from this adventure; for I think there is no insepa
rable connexion between Tythes and Persecution, feut in
the ideas of a Quaker. And so much for king Mel-
chisedec.
But the learned Professor, who has been hardily
brought up in the keen Atmosphere of WHOLESOME
SEVERITIES, and early taught to distinguish between de
facto and de jure, thought it needless to enquire into
Facts, when he was secure of the Right. And, there
fore, only slightly and superciliously asks, " What ! was
not Abraham, by his very princely office, to punish
1 Idolatry ? Were not Melchisedec and Job, and all the
" heads of Tribes, to do the same?" Why, no: and it is
well for Religion that they were not. It is for its honour
that such a set of persecuting Patriarchs is no where to
be found, but in a poetical Prelection.
4. For in the last place, let it be observed, that as these
Patriarchs did not de facto (which appears from their
history), so they could not dejure (which appears from the
laws of Nature and Nations) punish Idolatry by the
Judge. Because, as hath been shewn, Idolatry is not
amenable to civil Justice, but where it becomes Crimen
l&sce Majestatis. It could not become the crime of lese-
majesty under the Patriarchs, unless they had been GODS
as well as KINGS* Indeed, they were as much one as
the other. However, it is not pretended that their
government, though Regal, was Theocratical likewise.
The Patriarchs, therefore, could not punish Idolatry by
the Judge.
From the Examiner, the Professor (without the least
provocation given him) proceeds to the Author of The
Divine Legation ; who, he will shew, is as ignorant, ab
surd, and mad-brained, as Father Harduin himself.
The Author of The Divine Legation had said, that the
Writer of the book of Job observed decorum, in imitat
ing the manners of the early scene which he had pro
posed
Appx.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 151
posed to adorn. To this, the Professor objects, " I can
41 never bring myself to allow to a SEMI-BARBAROUS
" POET, writing after the Babylonian Captivity, such a
" piece of subtilty and refinement." A mighty piece of
refinement truly, for a Writer, who lays his scene in an
early age, to paint, the best he could, the manners of that
age. " Besides (says the Professor} which is the prin-
" cipal point, the style savours wonderfully of Antiquity,
" and its peculiar character is a certain primitive and
" noble simplicity. So that they who degrade this Book
" to the times posterior to the Babylonian Captivity,
" seem to judge almost as insanely of Hebrew literature
" as Father Harduin did of the Roman, who ascribed the
" golden Poems of Virgil, Horace, and the rest, to the
" iron ages of the Monks." Verum Poeta? semibarbaro
post Captivitatem scribenti tantam subtilitatem ut conce-
dam, impetrare a me non possum. Porro vero Stylus
Poematis, quod vel maximum est, praecipue vetustatem
sapit; est ejus peculiaris character ap^atV/xoj. Adeo ut
qui id infra Captivitatem Babylonicam deprimunt, nou
multo sanius in Hebraicis judicare videantur, quarn in
Latinis Harduinus; qui aurea Virgilii, Horatii, csete-
rorumque poemata ferreis Monachorum S&culis adscrip-
sit. Idem ib.
The learned Professor is a little unlucky in his com
parison. The age of Job, as fixed by him, and the a^e
of the Writer of his history, as fixed by me, run exactly
parallel, not with the times of Virgil and Frederic
Barbarossa, as he would insinuate, but with those of
Ennius and Virgil. Job, the hero of the Poem, lived in
an age when civil Society was but beginning to shew itself,
and what is more, in a Country where it never yet was
formed : And Ezra (whom I suppose to be the Author
of the Poem) w r as an eminent Citizen in the most perfect
civil goverment in the World, which he was sent home to
restore, laden vrith the literary treasures of the East ;
treasures that had been long accumulating under the warm
L 4 influence
152 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
influence of a large and powerful Empire. Frorin this
second transplantation of the Republic, Science got foot
ing in Judea ; and true Religion took deeper root in the
hearts of its Inhabitants. Henceforward, we hear no
more of their absurd Idolatries. A strict adherence to
the LAW now as much distinguished them from others, as
did the singularity of the LAW itself. And a studious
cultivation of the LANGUAGE, in which that Law was
written, as naturally followed, as it did amongst the
.Sarazens, who cultivated the Arabic, on the same prin
ciple. And to understand j#>w great this was in both,
we need only consider, that each had the same aversion
to a translation of their Law into a foreign language, It
is true, that in course of time, when the Jewish Policy
was abolished, and the Nation was become vagabond
upon Earth, while the Arabs, on the contrary, had erected
a great Empire, a manifest difference arose bet ween them,
as to the cultivation of the two Languages. Yet for all
this, the Professor calls Ezra, a SEMI-BARBARIAN;
.though we agree that he wrote by the inspiration of the
.Most High ; amidst the last blaze indeed* yet in the full
lustre of expiring Prophecy.
But the learned Professor has ah internal argument
from TASTE *, full as good as the other from Chronology.
" The book of Job savours of Antiquity, and those who
cannot relish it, have as depraved a taste as Father
Harduin, who could not distinguish Partridge from Horse
flesh."
The trutfi is, the Greek and Latin Languages having,
for many Ages, been the mother-tongues of two of the
greatest People upon earth (who had shared between
them the Empires of Eloquence and of Arms) became daily
more and more copious by the cultivation of Arts; and
less and less pure by the extension of Commerce. In
these two languages there yet remains a vast number of
* See what hath been said on this head in the preceding Volume,
book vu SK
writings
Appx.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 153
writings on all sorts of Subjects. So that modern Critics
(in the foremost rank of whom will always stand the in
comparable BENTLEY) had by long application to them*
through their various and progressive refinements and de^
pravations from age to age, acquired a certain sagacity*
in passing a tolerable judgment concerning the time of the
Writer, by his style and manjaer. Now Pedantry, which
is the ape of Criticism, would mimic the same talent of
discernment, in the narrowest and most barren of all
Languages ; little subject to change, both from the com
mon genius of the East, and from the peculiar situation
of a sequestered People. Of this Language, long since
become a dead one, the only remains are in one small
Volume ; the contents of which, had not Providence been
mercifully pleased to secure, while the Tongue was yet
liviiiij, by a translation into Greek, the HEBREW VERITY,
transmitted to us in the manner it was found in the most
ancient MSS. where no vowel-points are used, nor space
left to distinguish one word from another, and where a
great number of terms occur only once, would at this day
be a mere arbitrary CIPHER, which every Rabbinical or
Cabalistic juggler might make the key of his unrevealed
Mysteries. " Idem accidit etiain Mahometanis (says
Abraham Ekell.) ante inventa ab Ali Abnaditalebo puncta
vocalia: Tanta eniin legentiurn erat dissentio, ut nisi
Othomanni cocrcita fuisset authoritate, et determinata
lectio punctis, quae Ali excogitaverat, JAM DEALCORANO
ACT IT M ESSET." Arid if this had been the case of the
Arabic of the Alcoran, a copious and a living language,
what had become of the Hebrew of the liible ? a very
narrow and a dead one. Of which an ancient Jewish
Grammarian gives this character: " Lingua ista[ A rabica]
elegans est, et longe lateque scriptis dilatata, et qui earn
loquitur nulla dictione deficit : Lingua vero sancta pauca
st pra? ilia, cum illius nihil extet nisi quod in Libris Scrip
ture reperitur, nee suppedltct ornnes dictioms loquendl
Yet this is the language whose peculiarities
of
154 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,
of style and composition, correspondent to every age and
time, the Professor seems to think, may be as easily dis
tinguished as those of the Greek or Latin Classics. So
much for the Author of The Divine Legation : and in
deed too much, had not Mr.LocKE s defence been involved
in his : that excellent person having declared (speaking of
the words of Job, that Idolatry was an iniquity to be
punished by the Judge) "Tins PLACE ALONE, WERE
"THERE NO OTHER, is sufficient to confirm their opi-
" nion who conclude that book to be writ by a JEW."
From The Divine Legation, the learned Professor
turns again to the Examiner, who seems to sit heavy on
his stomach. This excellent Writer desired to know of
the learned, Where they could find a civil or religious
Constitution out of Judea, which declared that the
Children should suffer for the crime of their Parents.
To which the Professor replies in these very words In
praesens Horatiano illo versiculo contentus abito Exami-
natorum omnium CANDID ESSIMUS For the present, let
this MOST CANDID of all Examiners go about his busi
ness, and be thankful for this scrap of Horace,
" Delicta major urn immeritus lues,
" Romane."
This is true Poetical payment : He is called upon for his
reckoning, and he discharges it with an old Song. But
the Examiner is not a man to take rhime for reason.
He asked for an old system of Laws ; and the contemp
tuous Professor gives him an old Ballad : But a little
more civility at parting had not been amiss ; for he, who
did not spare the Bishop, would certainly demolish the
Professor, should he take it into his head to examine
the Prelections as he hath done the Sermons.
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 155
NOTES
APPERTAINING TO
THE FIFTH AND SIXTH SECTIONS
OF
BOOK VI.
P. 7- [A]
DR. SxEBBtNG, in what he calls Considerations on
the command to offer up Isaac, hath attempted to
discredit the account here given of the Command: And
previously assures his reader, that if any thing can hinder
the ill effects which my interpretation must hcrce upon
Religion^ it must be his exposing the absurdity of the
conceit. This is confidently said. But what then ? He
can prove it. So it is to be hoped. If not However,
let us give him a fair hearing. He criticises this obser
vation on the word DAY, in the following manner:
" Really, Sir, I see no manner of consequence in this
" reasoning. That Christ s day had reference to his
" office, as Redeemer, I grant. The day of Christ de-
" notes the time whert Christ should come, i. e. when
" He should come, who was to be such by office and
" employment. But why it must import also that when
Christ came he should be offered up a Sacrifice, I do
not in the least apprehend : Because I can very easily
" understand that Abraham might have been informed
that Christ was to come, without being informed that he
" was to lay down his life as a Sacrifice. If Abraham
saw that a time would come when one of his sons
" should take away the curse, he saw Christ s day."
{Consid. p. 139.] At first setting out (for I reckon for
nothing this blundering, before he knew where he was,
into
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
"into a Soclnian comment, the thing he most abhors) the
Reader sees he grants the point I contend for That
Christ s DAY (says he) has reference to his office as
Redeemer, I grant. Yet the very next words employed to
explain his meaning, contradict it ; The Day of Christ
denotes the TIME when Christ should come. All the sense
therefore, I can make of his concession, when joined to
his explanation of it, amounts to this Christ s day has
reference to his OFFICE : No, mt to his Office, but to
his TIME. He sets off well : but he improves as he goes
along But why it must import ALSO that when Christ
came he should be offered /? as a Sacrifice, I do not in the
least apprehend. Nor I, neither, I assure him. Had I
said, that the word Day, in the text, imported the time,
1 could as little apprehend as he does, how that which
imports time, imports ALSO the thing done in time. Let
him take this nonsense therefore to himself. I argued in
a plain manner thus, When the word Day is used to
express, in general, the period of any one s existence,
then it denotes time ; when, to express his peculiar office
and employment, then it denotes, not the time, but that
circumstance of life characteristic of such office and em
ployment; or the things done in time. DAY, in the text,
is used to express Christ s peculiar office and employment.
Therefore But what follows is still better. His want
of apprehension, it seems, is founded in this, that he can
easily understand, that Abraham might have b*ecn informed
that Christ was to come ; without being informed that
he was to lay down Ms life as a Sacrifice. Yes, and so
could I likewise ; or I had never been at the pains of
making the criticism on the word Dai) : \vhich takes its
force from this very truth, that Abraham might have been
informed of one without the other. And, therefore, to
.prove he was informed of that other, I produced the text
in question, which afforded the occasion of the criticism.
He goes on, If Abraham saw, that a time would come
when one of his seed should take cra ay the curse, he saw
Christ s
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 157
Christ s DAY. Without doubt he did. Because it is
agreed, that Day may signify either time, or circumstance
of action. But what is this to the purpose? The question
is not whether the word may not, when used indefinitely,
signify time; but whether it signifies time in this text, I
have shewn it does not. And what has been said to
prove it does ? Why that it may do so in another place,
In a word, all he here says, proceeds on a total inappre-
hension of the drift and purpose of the argument,
P. 8. [B] Daubuz on the Rfrbelationt, p. 251 ; printed
in the year 1720. To this reasoning, Dr. Stebbing re
plies as follows : " You are not more successful in your
" next point, Abraham rejoiced to see my Day, and he saw
* //, and was glad, h<* IAH T*> *pipou r*v Ipw ^ EIAE
" This (say you) evidently shews it [the revelation] to
" have been made by relation in words, but by representa*
* t ion in actions" How so? The reason follows. The verb
* t*fa is frequently used in the New Testament in it$
" proper sigwficati&n, to see sensibly. In the New Tes-
* tament, do you say? Yes, Sir, and in every Greek
" book you ever read in your life. What you SHOULD
" have said is, that it is so used here ; and I suppose you
** would have said so, if you had known how to have
w proved it." [Consid. pp. 139, 140.]
The reason follows (says he.) Where ? In my book
indeed, but not in his imperfect quotation from it; which
breaks off before he conies to my reason. One who
knew him not so well as I do, would suspect this was
done to serve a purpose. No such matter; twas pure
hap-hazard. He mistook the introduction of my argu^
ment for the argument itself. The argument itself, which
he omits in the quotation, (and which was all I wanted,
for the proof of my point,) was, That the verb si fa,
whether used literally or Jigurativdy, always denotes a,
full intuition. And this argument, I intrdouced in the
following manner, The verb H fa infrequently used iff the
New
THE DIVINE LEGATION [BookVL
New Testament in its proper signification, to see -sensibly*
Unluckily, as I say, he took this for the Argument itself,
and thus corrects me for it: " What you SHOULD have
" said, is, that it is so used here ; and I suppose you
" would have said so, if you had known how to have
" proved it:" See, here, the true origin both of dogma
tizing and divining ! His ignorance of what I did say,
leads him to tell me what I should have said, and to
divine what I would have said. But, what I have said,
I think I may stand to, That the verb iWw always de
notes a full intuition. This was all I wanted from the
text; and on this foundation, I proceeded in the sequel
of the discourse, to prove that Abraham saw sensibly.
Therefore, when my Examiner takes it (as he does) for
granted, that because, in this place, I had not proved
that the Word implied to see sensibly, I had not proved
it at all; he is a second time mistaken.
" But, he owns, that, if this was all, perhaps I sh ould
" tell him, that it was a very strange answer of the Jews,
" thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen
" Abraham? 1 [Consid. p. 140.] He is very right. He
might be sure I would. In answer therefore to this
difficulty, he goes on and says, " No -doubt, Sir, the
" Jews answer our Saviour, as if he had said, that
" A brah am and he were cotemporaries; in which, they
" answered very foolishly, as they did on many other
" occasions ; and the answer will as little agree with your
" interpretation as it does with mine. For does your
" interpretation suppose that Abraham saw Christ in
" person ? No ; you say it was by representation only."
[Consid. pp.- 1401.]
The Jews answered our Saviour as if he had said that
Abraham and he were cotemporaries. Do they so ?
Why then, tis plain, the expression was as strong in the.
Syrian language, used by Jesus, as in the Greek of his
Historian, which was all I aimed to prove by it. But
in this (says he) they amivered very foolishly. What
then ^
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED.
then? Did I quote them for their wisdom? A little
common sense is all I want of those with whom I have
to deal : and rarely as my fortune hath been to meet
with it, yet it is plain these Jews did not want it. For
the folly of their answer arises therefrom. They heard
Jesus use a word in their vulgar idiom, which signified to
see corporeally ; and common sense led them to conclude
that he used it in the vulgar meaning : in this they were
not mistaken. But, from thence, they inferred, that he
meant it in the sense of seeing personally ; and in this,
they were. And now let the Reader judge whether the
folly of their answer shews the folly of my Argument, OL;
of rny Examiner s. Nay further, he tells us, they an
swered as foolishly on many other occasions. They did
so ; and I will remind him of one. Jesus says to Nico
demus, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the
kingdom of God*, &c. Suppose now, from these words,
r should attempt to prove that Regeneration and divine
Grace were realities, and not mere metaphors : for that
Jesus, in declaring the necessity of them, used such
strong expressions that Nicodemus understood him to
mean the being physically born again, and entering the
second timeinto the womb : would it be sufficient, let rne ask
my Examiner, to reply in this manner : " No doubt. Sir,
" Nicodemus answered our Saviour as if he had said, that
a follower of the Gospel must enttr a second time into
" his mother s womb and be born: in which he answered
-" very foolishly ; and the answer will as little agree with
^ your interpretation as it does with mine. For does
" your interpretation suppose he should so enter ? No ;
" but that he should be born of water and of the
" Spirit."- Would this, I say, be deemed, even by our
Examiner himself, a sufficient answer? When he has re
solved me this, I shall, perhaps, have something farther
to say to him. In the mean time I go on. And, in re
turning him his l$st words restored to their subject, help
* St. John iii. 3.
him
160 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
him forward in the solution of what I expect from him.
The answer (says he) will as lit fie agree with your inter
pretation as it does with mine. For does your interpre
tation suppose that Abraham saw Christ in person ? No ;
you say, it was by representation only. Very well. Let
me ask then, in the first place, Whether he supposes that
what I said on this occasion was to prove that Abraham
saw Christ from the reverend authority of his Jewish
Adversaries : or to prove that the verb {<*> signified to
see literally, from their mistaken answer? He thought
me here, it seems, in the way of those writers, who are
quoting Authorities, when they should be giving Reasons.
Hence, he calls the answer the Jews here gave, a foolish
one : as if I had undertaken for its orthodoxy. But our
Examiner is still farther mistaken. The poirit I was
upon, in support of which I urged the answer of the
Jews, was not the seeing this, or that person : but the
seeing corporeally, and not mentally. Now, if the Jews
understood Jesus, as saying that Abraham saw corpo
really, I concluded, that the expression, used by Jesus,
had that import : and this was all I was concerned to
prove. Difference, therefore, between their answer as I
quoted it, and my interpretation, there was none. Their
answer implied that Abraham was said to see corporeally ;
and my interpretation supposes that the words employed
had that import. But to make a distinction where there
was no difference, seeing in person, and seeing by repre
sentation, are brought in, to a question where they have
nothing to do.
P. 1 3. [C] Ver. i o. et seq. By the account here given,
of GOD S Dispensations to Abraham, may be seen the
folly of that objection, brought with such insinuations of
importance, against the divine appoinment of Circumci
sion, from the time of its institution. Sir John Marsham
observes, that Abraham, when he went into Egypt, &KI&
not circumcised, nor for twenty- years after his return.
Abramus, quando 4Jgyptum ingressus est ? nondum
circumcisqs
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. id
circumcisus erat, ncque per annos amplius viginti post
reditum, p. 73. Franeq. ed. 4to. And farther, that Cir-
cumciiion was a most ancient rite amongst the Egyptians,
that they had it from the beginning, and that it was a
principle with them not to make use of the customs of
other people. A pud .Egyptios circumcidendi ritus vetus-
tissimus fuit, et *V *?%$! institatis. Illi nullorum
aliorum hominum institutis uti volunt, p. 74. The noble
Author of the CHARACTERISTICS, who never loses an
opportunity of expressing his good-will to a Prophet or a
Patriarch, takes up this pitiful suspicion after Marsham :
" Before the time that Israel was constrained to go
" down to Egypt, and me for maintenance, the Holy
" Patriarch Abraham himself had been necessitated to
" this compliance on the same account. Tis certain
" that if this Holy Patriarch, who first instituted the
" sacred rite of Circumcision within his own family or
" tribe, had no regard to any Policy or Religion of the
" Egyptians, yet he had formerly been a Guest and
" Inhabitant of Egypt (where historians mention this to
" have been a national rite) long ere he had received any
" divine notice or Revelation concerning this atfair."
Vol. iii. pp. 52, 53. These great men, we see, appeal to
Scripture, fpr the support of their insinuation ; which
Scripture had they but considered with common atten
tion, they might have found, that it gives us a chrono
logical account of COD S gradual Revelations to the
Holy Patriarch ; and therefore that, according to the
order COD was pleased to observe in his several Dispen
sations towards him, the Rite of Circumcision could not
have been enjoined before tljp time Abraham happened
to go into Egypt ; nor, indeed, at any other time than
that in which we find it to be given ; consequently that
his journey into Egypt had not the least concern or
Connexion with this affair : nay, had these learned Critics
but attended to their own observation, that the Rite of
Circumcision was instituted twenty years .after Abraham s
VOL. VI. M return
162 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
return from Egypt, they must have seen the weakness
of so partial a suspicion. For had this been after the
model of an Egyptian rite, Abraham, in all likelihood,
had been circumcised in Egypt, or at least very soon after
his return : for in Egypt, it was a personal, not a family
Rite. And we learn from profane history, that those
who went from other Countries to Egypt , with a design
to copy their manners, or to be initiated into their
Wisdom, were, as a previous ceremony, commonly cir
cumcised by the Egyptian Priests themselves.
P. 16. [D]. To this Dr. Stebbing answers, " You lay
" it down here as the common interpretation, that the
c command to Abraham to offer up his son was given
" as a trial only, WHICH is NOT TRUE." Why not?
because " the common opinion is, that God s intention
" in this command was not only to TRY Abraham, but
" also to PREFIGURE the sacrifice of Christ." [Consid.
p. 150.] Excellent! I speak of the Command s being
given : but to whom ? To all the Faithful, for whose sake
it was recorded ? or to Abraham only, for whose sake
it was revealed ? Does not the very subject confine my
meaning to this latter sense ? Now, to Abraham, I say,
(according to the common opinion) it was given as a
Trial only. To the faithful, if you will, as a prefi-
guration. If, to extricate himself from this blunder or
sophism, call it which you will, he will say it prefigured
to Abraham likewise ; he then gives up all he has been
contending for ; and establishes my interpretation, which
is, that Abraham knew this to be a representation of the
great sacrifice of Christ : I leave it undetermined whether
he mistakes or cavils; See now, if he be not obliged to
hie. Wliere I speak of the common opinion, I say, the
command is supposed to be GIVEN as a Trial only. Hfc
thinks fit to tell me, / say not true. But when he comes
to prove it, he changes the terms of the question thus,
" -For the common opinion is, that GOD S INTENTION-
IS " in
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 163
" in this command was/ &c. Now God s intention of
giving a command to Abraham, for Abraham s sake,
mi^ht be one thing ; and God s general intention of
giving that Command, as it concerned the whole of his
Dispensation, another. But to prove further that I said
not true, when I said that, according to the common
interpretation, the Command was given for a Trial only ;
he observes, that I myself had owned that the resemblance
to Christ s sacrifice was so strong, that Interpreters could
never overlook it. What then? If the Interpreters, who
lived after Christ, could not overlook it, does it follow
that Abraham, who lived before, could not overlook it
neither? But the impertinence of this has been shewn
already. Nor does the learned Consider er appear to be
unconscious of it. Therefore, instead of attempting to
inforce it to the purpose for which he quotes it, he turns,
all on a sudden, to shew that it makes nothing to the
purpose for which / employed it. But let us follow this
Protean Sophister through all his windings, c; The
resemblance (says he) no doubt, is very strong ; but
" how this corroborates your sense of the command, I do
fi not see. Your sense is, that it was an actual infor-
" mation given to Abraham, of the sacrifice of Christ,
" But to prefigure^ and to inform, are different things.
u Tins transaction might prefigure, and does prefigure the
" sacrifice of Christ ; whether Abraham knew any thing of
" the sacrifice of Christ or no. For it does not follow,
u that, because a thing is prefigured, therefore it must be
" seen and understood, at the time when it is- prefigured."
[Comid. pp. 150, 151.] Could it be believed that these
words should immediately follow an argument, whose force
(the little it tyas) is founded on the principle, That to
PREFIGURE and to INFORM are NOT different things f
P. 17. [E]. To this reasoning, Dr. Stebbing replies,
f Bqt how can you prove that, according to the common
" interpretation there was no reward subsequent to the
M 2 " trial?
64 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
" trial?" [Consid. p. 151.] How shall I be able to please
him ? Before, he was offended that I thought the
Author of the book of Genesis might ornit relating the
mode of a fact, when he had good reason so to do. Here,
where I suppose no fact, because there was none recorded
when no reasoa hindered, he is as captious on this side
likewise. " How will you prove it?" (says he). From
the silence of the Historian (say 1) when nothing hin
dered him from speaking. Weil, but he will shew it to
be fairly recorded in Scripture, that there were rewards
subsequent to the trial. This, indeed, is to the purpose :
" Abraham (says he) lived a great many years after that
" transaction happened, lie lived to dispose of his son
u Isaac in marriage, and to see his seed. He lived to
" be married himself to another Wife, and to have
" several children by her : He had not THEN received
" all God s mercies, nor were all God s dispensations
" towards him at an end ; and it is to be remembered
u that it is expressly said of Abraham, Gen. xxiv. i.
w (a long time after the transaction in question), that
" God had blessed him in all things" [Comid. p. 1.51, 2.}
The question here is of the extraordinary and peculiar
rewards bestowed by God on Abraham ; and he decides
upon it, by an enumeration of the ordinary and common.
And, to fill up the measure of these blessings, he makes
the burying of his first wife and the marrying of a second
to be one. Though unluckily, this second proves at last
to be a Concubine ; as appears plainly from the place
where she is -mentioned. But let me ask him seriously;
Could he, indeed, suppose me to mean (though lie
attended not to the xlrilt of the argument) that God
immediately withdrew all the common blessings of his
Providence from the Father of the Faithful, after the last
extraordinary reward bestowed upon him, when he lived
many years after ? I can hardly, I own, account for this
perversity, any otherwise than from a certain temper of
mind which I am not at present disposed to give a name
to;
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 165
to: but which, the habit of Answering has made so
common, that nobody either mistakes it, or is now indeed,
much scandalized at it. Though for my part, I should
esteem a total ignorance of letters a much happier lot
than such a learned depravity. " IJut this is not all,"
(says he) No, is it not? I am sorry for it! -"What
" surprises me most is, that you should argue so WEAKLY,
** as if the reward of good mew had respect to this life
4< only. 15e it, that Abraham had received all God s
" mercies ; and that all C rod s dispensations towards
46 him, in this world, were at an end ; was there not a
" life yet to come, with respect to which the whole
" period of our existence here is to be considered as a
" state of trial ; and where we are all of us to look for
" that reward of our virtues which we very often fail
** of in this?" [Co/wid. p. 1.52.] Well, if it was not all,
we .find, at least, it is all of a piece. For, as before, he
would sophistically obtrude upon us common for extra
ordinary KE .WARDS; so here (true to the mystery of
his trade) lie puts common for extraordinary TRIALS.
Our present existence (says he) is to be considered as <i
state of Trixl. The case, to which I applied my argu
ment, was this ; " God. determining to select a chosen
People from the loins of Abraham, would manifest to the
world that this Patriarch was worthy of the distinction
shewn unto him, by having his faith found superior to the
hardest trials/ Now, in speaking of these trials, I said,
that the command to offer Isaac was the last. No (says
the Examiner) that cannot be, for, with respect to a life
to come, the whole period of our existence here, is to be
considered as a state of TRIAL/ And so again (says he)
with regard to the REWARD ; which you pretend, in the
order of God s Dispensation, should follow the trial:
Wiry, we are to look for it in another world. Holy Scrip
ture records the history of one, to whom God only pro
mised (in the clear and obvious sense) temporal blessings.
It tells us that these temporal blessings were dispensed.
ai 3 Ono
166 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
One species of which were extraordinary Rewards after
extraordinary Trials. In the most extraordinary of all,
no Reward followed : This was mv difficulty. See
/ /
here, how he has cleared it up. Hardly indeed to his
own satisfaction : for he tries to save all by another fetch ;
the weakest men being ever most fruitful in expedients,
as the slowest animals have commonly the most feet.
" And what (says he) if after all this, the wisdom of
" God should have thought tit, that this very man, whom
" he had singled out to be an eminent example of piety
" to all generations ; should, at the very close of his life,
" give evidence of it, by an instance that exceeded all
" that had gone before ; that he might be a pattern of
" patient suffering even unto the end ? Would there not
" be SENSE in such a supposition?" [Gonxid. p. 153.]
In truth, I doubt not, as he hath put it : And I will tell
him, Why. Abraham w r as not a mere instrument to
stand for an example only ; but a moral Agent likewise ;
and to be dealt with as such. Now, though, as he stands
for an Example, we may admit of as many Trials of
patient suffering as this good-natured Divine thinks
fitting to impose ; yet, as a moral Agent, it is required
(if we can conclude any thing from the method of God s
dealing with his Servants, recorded in sacred history)
that each Trial be attended with some work done, or
some reward conferred. But these two parts in-Abra^-
ham s character, our Considerer perpetually confounds,
He supposes nothing to be done for Abraham s own
sake ; but every thing for the Example s sake. Yet, did
the good old cause of Answering require, he could as
easily suppose the contrary. And to shew I do him no
wrong, I will here give the Reader an instance of his
dexterity, in the counter-exercise of his arms. In p. 150.
of these Considerations (he says) " JT POES NOT FOLLOW,
" that, because a thing is prefigured, therefore it must
" be seen and understood AT THE TIME when it is
" prefigured." Yet in the body of the Pamphlet, at
pp.112,
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 167
pp. 112, 113, having another point to puzzle ; he says
(on my observing that a future State and Resurrection
were not national Doctrines till the time of the Maccabees)
" he knows I will say they had these doctrines from the
" Prophets yet the Prophets were dead two hundred
" years before." But if the Prophets were dead, their
Writings were extant - "And what then? Is it LIKELY
Q
" that the sons should have learnt from the dead Pro-
" phets what the Fathers could not learn from the
" living? Why could not the Jews learn this Doctrine
" from THE VERY FIRST, as well as their Posterity at
" the distance of ages afterwards?" In the first case \ve
find he expressly says, it docs not follow ; in the second,
he as plainly supposes, that it docs.
P. 19. [F]. And yet an ingenious man, one M.Bouiller,
in a late Latin Dissertation, accuses me of concealing,
that Chrysostorn, Erasmus, and others, were of my
opinion, viz. that Abraham in the Command to sacrifice
iiis Son was informed, of what he earnestly desired to
know, that the redemption of Mankind was to be obtained,
by the sacrifice of the Son of God. The Reader now
sees, whether the Author oi the Divine Legation was guilty
of a concealed theft, or his Accuser of an open blunder,
under which he covers his orthodoxal malignity. Yet he
thinks he atones for all, by calling The Divine Legation
egrcgium opus : ubi ingcniuni accrrinnun cum t\iimia cm-
ditionc ccrtat. Dissertationum Sacrum Sylloge, p. 194.
P. 20, [G]. To this, the great Professor replies, That
* there are but few gestures of the body more apt of
" themselves to signify the sentiment of the mind than
1 articulate sound: The force of which arises not from
" the nature of things ; but from the arbitrary will of
1 man : and common use and custom imposes this
1 signification on articulate sounds, not on motions and
1 gestures Pauci sunt motus corporis, qui ipsi per se
" aptiores esse videntur ad motus animi significandos,
M 4 " quarn
168 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
" quam sonus, qui ore et lingua in vocem formatur.
Vis ipsa non cst in natura rerum posita, sed arbitrio
" hominum constituta; eainqnc mos et usus communis
" non gcstibus corporis tribuit, sed verbis et voci."
R UTH Eiii-o IITII, Dctcrm.
The purpose of this fine observation, though so cloudily
expressed, is to shew that motion and gesture can have
no signification at all : Not from nature, since few
gestures of the body are more apt of themselves to
express the mind than articulate sound ; and yet articu
late sound is of arbitrary signification : Not from insti
tution, since it is not to gesture, but to articulate sound,
that men have agreed to affix a meaning. The conse
quence is, that gesture can have no meaning at all ; and
so there is an end of all Abraham s SIGNIFICATIVE
ACT rox. The Divine would make a great figure, were
it not for his Bible ; but the Bible is perpetually dis
orienting the Philosopher. His general Thesis is, " That
actions can never become significative but by the aid of
words." Now I desire to know what he thinks of all the
TYPICAL Rites of the Late, significative of the Sacrifice
of Christ? Were not these Actions? Had they no mean
ing which extended to the Gospel? or were there any
Words to accompany them, which explained that mean
ing? Yet has this man asserted, in what he calls a
Determination, that in the instances of expressive gesture,
recorded in Scripture, words were a lie ays used in con
junction with them. But to come a little closer to him.
As a Philosopher he should have given his Reasons for
those two assertions; or as an Historian he should have
verified his Facts. He hath attempted neither; and
I commend his prudence ; for both are against him :..
His Fact, that gestures have no meaning by nature^ is
false : and his Reasoning, that they have none by insti
tution ^ is mistaken. The Spartans might instruct him
that gestures alone have a natural meaning, That sage
People (as we are told by Herodotus) were so persuaded
of
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 169
of this truth, that they preferred converse by action, to
converse by speech ; as action had all the clearness of
speech, and was free from the abuses of it. This
Historian, in his Thalia, informs us, that when the.
Samians sent to Lacedemon for succours in distress, their
Orators made a long and laboured speech. AY hen it
was ended, the Spartans told them, tlnit the first part of
it they had for got ten, and could not comprehend the latter.
Whereupon the Samian Orators produced their empty
Bread-baskets, and said, they wanted bread. JThat
need of words, replied the Spartans, do not your empty
Bread-baskets sufficiently declare your meaning ? Thus
we see the Spartans thought not onlv that gestures were
apt (>/ t/;etmelir# (or by nature) to signify tne sentiment
of the wind, but even more apt than articulate sounds.
Their relations, the Jews, were in the same sentiments
and practice; and full as sparing of their words ;* and
{the two languages considered) for something a better
reason. The sacred Historian, speaking of public days
of humiliation, tells his story in this manner And they
gathered together to Mizpch, AXD DIU;W WATER AND
POURED IT OUT BKFOKE THE LOUD, (wdfcuted on that
day, i. Sam. chap. vii. ver. 6. The Historian does not
explain in words the meaning of this drawing of water, &c.
nor needed he. It sufficiently expressed, that a deluge
fif tears teas due for their offences. The Professor,
perhaps, will say that words accompanied the action,
at least preceded it. Put what will he say to the action
of Tarquin, when lie struck off the heads of the higher
poppies which overtopped their fellows ? Here we are
expressly told, that all was done in profound silence,
and yet the action was well understood. But further,
I will tell our Professor what he least suspected, that
Gestures, besides their natural^ have often an arbitrary
signification. " A certain Asiatic Prince, entertained at
Home by Augustus, was, amongst other Shows and
Festivities, amused with a famous Pantomime ; whose
actions
170 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
actions were so expressive, that the Barbarian begged
him of the Emperor for his Interpreter between him
and several neighbouring Nations, whose languages were
unknown to one another." Pantomimic gesture was
amongst the Romans one way of exhibiting a Dramatic
Story. But before such gestures could be formed into a
continued series of Information, we cannot but suppose
much previous pains and habit of invention to be exerted
by the Actors. Amongst which, one expedient must needs
he (in order to make the expression of the Actors convey
an entire connected sense) to intermix with the gestures
naturally significative, gestures made significative by
institution** that is, brought, by.qrbitiwy use, to have as-
determined a meaning as the others.
To illustrate this by that more lasting information, the
Hieroglyphics of the Egyptians, and the real Characters
of the Chinese; which, as we have shewn, run parallel
with the more fleeting conveyance of expressive gesture,
just as alphabetic writing does with speech. Now, though
the-earlier Hieroglyphics were composed almost altogether
of marks naturally significative, yet when the Egyptians
came to convey continued and more precise discourses by
this mode of writing, they found a necessity of inventing
arbitrary significations, to intermix and connect with the
other marks which had a natural. [See vol. iv. p. 1 25.]
Now, to shew that these arbitrary Hieroglyphic marks
were real Characters like the other, let us turn to the
Characters of the Chinese, which though (in their present
way of use) most of them be of arbitrary signification,
yet the Missionaries assure us that they are understood
by all the neighbouring nations of different languages.
This shews that the Augustan Pantomime, so coveted by
the Barbarian for his interpreter, might be very able to
disc! targe his function, though several of his gestures had
an arbitrary signification. And we easily conceive how
it might come to pass, since the gesture of arbitrary sig
nification oaly served to connect the active discourse, by
standing
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 171
standing between others of a natural signification, direct
ing to their sense.
Thus (to conclude with our Determiner) it appears
that GESTURES ALOXE are so far from having no meaning
at all, as he has ventured to affirm, that they have all the
meaning which human expression can possibly convey:
all which is properly their own, namely, natural informa
tion ; and even much of that which is more peculiar to
speech, namely, arbitrary.
To illustrate the whole by a domestic instance ; the
solemn gesture of a Professor in his Chair ; which $ome-<
times may naturally happen, to signify Folly; though, by
institution, it always signifies Wisdom ; and yet again, it
must be owned, in justice to our Professor s scheme, that
sometimes it means nothing at all.
P. 24. [H]. Would the reader now believe it possible,
fc heu these words lay before Dr. Stebbing, while he was
answering my Book, that he should venture to ask me,
or be capable of asking these insulting questions Was
there any good use that Abraham could make of this
knowledge which the rest of the People of God might not
have made of it as well as He ? Or if it was not unfit
for every body else, was it not unfit for Abraham too?
P. 25. [I]. But all I can say, or all an Apostle can
say, if I chance to say it after him, will not satisfy
Dr. Stebbing. He yet sticks to his point, " That if any
" information of. the death and sacrifice of Christ had
" been intended, it is NATURAL TO THINK that the ex-
" planation would have been Recorded with the trans-
< action, as it is in all other SUCH LIKE CASES." Now
if this orthodox Gentleman will shew me a such like case,
i. e. a case where a Revelation of the Gospel Dispensa
tion is made by an expressive action, and the explanation
is recorded along with it, I shall be ready to Qonfess,
he has made a pertinent objection. In the meantime, f
Jiave something more to say to him. He supposes, that this
commanded
17$ THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
commanded Sacrifice of Isaac was a TY PE of the Sacrifice
of Chiist. To this a Deist replies, in the Doctor s own
words, " If any type had been here intended, it is
** natural to think that the explanation would have been
" recorded with the transaction." Now when the Doctor
has satisfied the objection, which he has lent the Deists,
against a TYPE, I suppose it may serve to satisfy him
self, when he urges it against my idea of the Command,
as an IN FORM ATI ox BY ACTION. Again, our Answerer
himself affirms that the doctrine of Redemption was de
livered under Types in the Law ; and that the doctrine
thus delivered was designedly secreted and concealed from
the ancient Jews, Now is it natural to think (to use
his own words) that Moses would openly and plainly re
cord a Doctrine in one book which he had determined to
secrete in another, when both were for the use of the same
Peopie and the same Age }
P. 25. [K]. u You must give me leave to observe
* l (says Dr. Stebbing) that the transaction in question
" will have the same efficacy to shew the dependency
" between the two dispensation*, whether Abraham had
" thereby any information of the Sacrifice of Christ or
" not." [Consid. p. 150 .] This, indeed, is saying some
thing. And, could he prove what he says, it would be
depriving my interpretation of one of its principal ad
vantages. Let us see then how he goes about it, tc for
" this does not arise from Abraham s KNOWLEDGE, or
" any body s KNOWLEDGE, at the time when the trans-
** action happened, but from the similitude and corre-
" spotidency between the event and the transaction, by
4i which it was prefigured ; which is exactly the same
" upon either supposition." [Ibid, pp, 156, 7.] To this I
reply, 1. That I never supposed that the dependency
between the two Dispensations did arise from Abrahams
knowledge, or any body s knowledge, at that, or at any
other time; but from God s INTENTION that this com
manded
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 173
manded action should import or represent the Sacrifice
pf Christ : and then indeed comes in the question,
Whether that Intention be best discovered from God s
declaration of it to Abraham, or from a similitude and
correspondency between this commanded action and the
Sacrifice of Christ, Therefore, 2. I make bold to tell
him, that a similitude and correspondency between the
event and the transact/on which prefigured it, is XOT
ENOUGH to shew this dependency, to the satisfaction of
Unbelievers ; who say, that a likeness between two things
of the same nature, such as offering up two men to death,
in different ways, and transacted in two distant periods,
is not sufficient alone to shew that they had any relation
to one another. With the same reason, they will say, we
might pretend that Jephtha s daughter, or the king of
Moab s son whom the father sacrificed on the wall,
2 Kings iii. 27. were the types of Christ s sacrifice.
Give us, they exult, a proof from Scripture that God
declared or revealed his INTENTION of prefiguring the,
death of Jesus ; or some better authority *at least than a
modern Typifier, who deals only in similitudes and cor-
respondences, and has all the wiidness, without the wit, of
a Poet, and all the weakness, without the ingenuity, of
an Analogist! Now whether it be our Examiner, or the
Author of the D rdne Legation, who has given them this
satisfaction, or whether they have any reason to require it
of either of us, is left to the impartial Reader to consider.
P. 27. [L]. Let us sec now v>hat Dr. Stebbing has
to say to this reasoning. " By your leave, Sir/ says lie,
(which, by the way, he never asks, but to abuse me; nor
ever takes, but to misrepresent me) " if the Apostle had
" meant by this expression, to signify that Isaac stood as
" the Representative of Christ, and that his being taken
" from the mount alive, was the figure of Christ s Re-
" surrection; it SHOULD have been said, that Abraham
" received CHRIST from the dead in a figure." Should
it
174 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
it so? What? where the discourse was not concerning
o
Christy but Isaac? Had, indeed, the sacred Writer been
speaking of Abraham s knowledge of Christ, something
might have been said; but he is speaking of a very dif
ferent thing, hisjaith in Got/; and only intimates, by a
strong expression, what he understood that action to be,
which he gives, as an instance of the most illustrious act
of faith. I say, had this been the case, something might
have been said; something, I mean, just to keep him in
countenance; yet still, nothing to the purpose, as I shall
now shew. The transaction of the Sacrifice of Christ
related to GOD. The figure of that transaction, in the
command to offer Isaac, related (according to my inter
pretation) to ABRAHAM. Now, it was God who received
Christ; as it was Abraham who received the type or
figure of Christ, in Isaac. To tell us then, that (accord
ing to my interpretation) it SHOULD have been said, that
Abraham received CHRIST j% the dead in a figure, is,
in effect, telling us that he knows no more of logical ex
pression than of theological reasoning. It is true, could
he shew the expression improper, in the sense which I
give to the transaction, he would then speak a little to the
purpose; and this, to do him justice, is what he would
fain be at. " For, Christ it was, according to your in-
" terpretation (says he) that was received from the
" dead in a figure, by Isaac his Representative, who
" really came alive from the mount. If the reading had
" been, not lv zra/>aoA?, but ? MpaC&y, it would have
" suited your notion ; for it might properly have been
" said, that Isaac came alive from the mount as a figure,
" or that he might be a figure of the Resurrection of
" Christ." [Consid. p. 147.] Miserable chicane ! As, on
the one hand, I might say with propriety, that CHRIST
was received from the dead in a figure, i. e. BY a re
presentative : so on the other, I might say that ISAAC
was received from the dead in a figure, i. e. AS a repre
sentative: For Isaac sustaining the person of Christ, who
was
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 175
was raised from the dead, might in ajigure, i. e. as that
person, be said to be received : yet this our Examiner
denies, and tells us, the Apostle SHOULD have said that
Abraham received CHRIST, and not ISAAC. " But
" (adds he) if the reading had been not lv na/ja&Aij, but
" lit TiapxZoXw, it \vouid have suited your notion. And
the reason he gives is this: " For it might properly have
" been said tliat Isaac came alive from the mount AS a
" .figure, or THAT HE MIGHT BE a figure of the resur-
" rection of Christ." Strange ! He says, this would have
suited my notion; and the reason ,he gives, shews it suits
only hi$ men; which is, that the exactness of the resem
blance between the two actions, not the declaration of
the Giver of the Command, made it a figure. This is
the more extraordinary, as I myself have here shewn
that the old Latin translator had turned the words into
ix PAUABOLAM instead of IN PARABOLA, for this very
reason, because he understood the command in the sense
our Examiner contends for; viz. That Isaac, by the
resemblance of the actions, MIGHT BE, or might become
a figure.
However, he owns at last that " a reason will still be
" wanting, why, instead of speaking the fact as it really
" was, that Isaac came alive from the mount; the
" Apostle chose rather to say (what. was not really the
" case) that Abraham received him J rom the dead. *
[Consid. pp. 147, 8.] Well; and have not I given a
reason? No matter for that: Dr. Stebbing is turned
Examiner, and has engrossed the market. His reason
follows thus, " If Isaac did not die (as it is certain he
" did not) Abraham could not receive him from the dead.
" And yet the Apostle says, he received him from the
" dead. The clearing UP this difficulty will shew the true
" sense of the passage." [Consid. pp. 147, 148.] What,
will the clearing up a difficulty of his own making dis
cover the true sense of another man s writing ? This is
one pf his new improvements in Logic; in which, as in
Arithmetic,
i 7 6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
Arithmetic, he lias invented a rule of fake, to discover
an unknown truth. For there is none of this difficulty
V
in the sacred Text; it is not there (as in our Examiner)
said simply, that Abraham received Isaac from the dead,
but that lie received him from the dead IN A FIGURE,
or under the assumed personage of Christ. Nqvr if
Christ died, then he, who assumed his personage, in
order to represent his passion and resurrection, might
surely be said to he recerccd from the dead in a figure. A
wonderful difficulty truly ! and we shall see, as wonder
fully solved; by a conundrum! Itot with propriety
enough. For as a real difficulty requires sense and criti
cism to resolve it, an imaginary one may be well enough
managed by a quibble. Because the translators of St.
Mark s Gospel have rendered I* -srotot, srapaoA? by, with
*&hat comparison shall ice compare it, therefore, Iv s-ajja-
CA>I, in the text in question, signifies COMPARATIVELY
SPEAKING. But no words can shew him like his own
" The Apostle docs not say simply and absolutely, that
" Abraham received Isaac from the dead; but that he
" received him from the dead ly wapaSoyS, in a parable."
See here now ! Did not I tell you so ? There was no
difficulty all this while: The sentence only opened to the
right and left to let in a blustering objection, which is no
sooner evaporated than it closes again as before. // was
not simply said- No. " 1 tot that he received him lv
" 3raaoAj in a parable, i. e. in a comparison, or by com-
" parison. Thus the word is used, Mark iv. 30. Whert-
" unto shall we liken the, kingdom oj God, or with what
V COMPARISON [Iv -&oia, ir/iffli(>AjfJ shall we compare it.
u The meaning then may be, that Abraham s receiving
" Isaac alive (after his death was denounced) by the re-
" vocation of the command; was AS IF HE HAD re-
<{ ceived hirxi from the dead. Thus several Interpreters
" understand the place. Or it may be, as others will have
" it, that the Apostle here refers to the birth of Isaac;
" which was [li/ r^a^A?J COMPARATIVELY SPEAKING,
a receiving
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 177
" a receiving him from the dead ; his father being old,
" and his mother past the age of child-bearing, on which
" account the Apostle styles them both dead. Which in-
" terpretation, I the rather approve, because it suggests
" the proper grounds of Abraham s faith." [Consid.
pp. 148, 149-]
He says, lv f;afoXn signifies in or by comparison ; and
that the word is so used in St. Mark ; to prove which, he
quotes the English translation. Now I must take the
liberty to tell him, that the translators were mistaken ;
and he with them. ncaoA*, in St. Mark, is not used in
the sense of a similitude w ^comparison, but of sparable*
The ancients had two ways of illustrating the things they
inforced ; the one was by a parable, the other by a simple
comparison or simile : how the latter of these arose out
of the former I have shewn in the fourth Volume. Here,
both these modes of illustration are referred to; which
should have been translated thus, To what shall zee
COMPARE the kingdom of God, or with what PARABLE
shall ice illustrate or parabolize it. epowrvjufv tc-apa-
aAwui* which words express two different and well-
known modes of illustration.
But now suppose lv TVOIX eragaGoty had signified zcith
tch at comparison : How comes it to pass that lv sra/-
CCAJ? should signify by comparison, or as it were, or
COMPARATIVELY SPEAKING r In plain truth, his critical
analogy has ended in a pleasant blunder. How so?
you will ask. Nay, tis true there s no denying, but that
speaking by comparison is comparatively speaking ; and,
if men will put another sense upon it, who can help
that? they say, comparatively speaking signifies the
speaking loosely, inaccurately, and incorrectly. But was
it for our Doctor to put his reader in mind of such kind
of speakers? But the charge of a blunder, an innocent
jtfishap, I am ready to retract ; for I observe him to go
into it with much artful preparation; a circumstance
which by^ no means marks that genuine turn of mind,
VOL, VI. N which
17* THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
which is quick and sudden, and over head and ears, in an
instant: He begins with explaining, in a comparison,
by by comparison: where you just get the first glimpse,
as it were, of an enascent equivocation ; and his by com
parison is presently afterwards turned into tf.y it zcere, or
as if he had; and then, comparatively speaking brings up
the rear, and closes the criticism three deep.
P. 29. [M], Dr. Stebbing goes on as usual " In
u short, Sir, I do not understand this Doctrine (with
" which your whole Work much abounds) of revealing
" things clearly to Patriarchs, and Prophets, and Leaders,
cc as a special favour to themselves;, but to be kept as a
" secret from the rest of Mankind," -It is but too plain
he does not understand it : for which I can give no better
reason than that, it is the Scripture-doctrine, and not the
doctrine of Sums and Systems. " I have been used (says
" he) to consider persons under this character, as ap-
" pointed, not for themselves, but for others ; and therefore
" to conclude that WHATEVER was clearly revealed to
w
" them, concerning God s Dispensations, was so revealed
" in order to be communicated to others*." This is the
old sophism; " That, because Persons act and are em
ployed for others ; therefore, they do nothing, and have
nothing done for themselves." When God said, Shall I
hide from Abraham that thing, which I do ? was not
this said to, and for himself? But he has another to
match it, " That whatever was clearly revealed to the.
Prophets, was so revealed, in order to be communicated
to others." Here, then, a little Scripture-doctrine will
do him no harm. Did Moses communicate all he knew
to the Jews, concerning the Christian Dispensation; which
the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews tells us was
clearly revealed to him in the mount r Priests (says he)
that offer gifts according to the Law, rcho serve unto the
example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses avw
admonished of God when he was about to make the Taber-
* Consid. pp. 155, 156. nacle.
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 179
nacle *. Again, We find that Ezekiel, on his being called
out, upon his .mission, saw (what the author of Ecclesi*
asticus calls) the glorious vision ; and had (as appears
from the allegory of the roll of a book) a full interpre
tation thereof. Yet, notwithstanding all his illumination,
he was directed by God to speak so obscurely to the
People, that he found cause to complain, Ah> Lord, they
say of me. Doth he not speak parables \? And now let
him ask the Prophets in the same magisterial language he
is accustomed to examine me, Was there any good use
you could make of your knowledge, that the People of
God might not have made of it as well as you ? But
this very Dispensation is alluded to, and continued, under
the kingdom of Christ. And his Disciples ashed him
saying, What might this parable be ? And he said, Unto
you it is green to know the mysteries of the kingdom of
God: But to others, in parables , that seeing they might
not see, and hearing they might not understand^. Again,
St. John in his visions tells us, And when the seven
thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write.
And 1 heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, SEAL
UP those things which the seven thunders uttered, and
WRITE THEM NOT. Rev. x. 4. And now, Reader, I
shall try his gratitude! " If you can shew, (says he)
" that I am mistaken in this, pray do it, and I shall be
" obliged to you." p. 156. You see, I have taken him
at his word. And it was well I did ; for it was no sooner
out of his mouth, than, as if he had repented, not of his
candour, but his confidence, he immediately cries, Hold
and tells me, " I might have spared myself in asking
" another question, Why, if Revelations cannot be clearly
" recorded, are they recorded at all?" p. 1 56. But, great
Defender of the Faith ! of the ancient Jewish Church,
I mean, I asked that question, because the answer to it
shews how much you are mistaken ; as the intelligent
Reader, by this time, easily perceives. But why does he
* Keb. viii, 4, 5. f Ezek. xx. 49. J Luke viii. 9, ic
N 2 say
i8o THE DIVINE LEGATION [EookVI.
say I might have spared that question? Because " if a
" Revelation is not clearly given, it cannot be clearly
* recorded/ p. i. r >t>. Did I say it could ? Or \\ill lie
say, that there are no reasons why a Revelation-, that is
clearly given, should be obscurely recorded ? To what
purpose,, then, was the observation made? Made? why
to introduce another : for, with our eqvivocal Examiner,
the corruption of argument is the generation of cavil.
" And yet (says he) as you INTIMATE, there may be
" reasons why an OBS-CUBK REVELATIOX should be
* recorded, to wit, for the instruction of future ages,
" when, the obscurity being cleared up by the event,
" it shall appear, that it was foreseen and fore-ordained
" in the knowledge and appointment of God/ p. 1.56.
If thou wilt believe me, Reader, I never intimated any
thing so absurd.
What I intimated was not concerning an obscure
Rccdativn, but a Ri-v clarion obscurely recorded. These
are very different things, as appears from hence, that the
latter may be, a clear Rrcclalioi ; the word being relative
to him to whom the Revelation- was made. But this is
a peccadillo only. However he approves the reason of
recording- : for that, thereby, " it shall appear, that IT
was foreseen and fcre-ordaincd by God." IT, What?
The obscure Rtvclafion, according to grammatical con
struction : but, in his English, I suppose, IT stands for
the fact revealed. Well then ; from the recording of an
obscure revelation, he says it will appear, when the fore
told tact happens, that it was foreseen and -pre-ordained
by God. This too lie tells the Reader I intimated; but
sure, the Reader can never think me so silly ; For every
fact, whether prefigured and foretold, or not prefigured
and foretold, must needs have been foreseen and pre
ordained by God. Now, whether we arc to ascribe this
to exactness, or to inaccuracy, of expression, is hard to
say. For I find him a great master in that species of
composition which a celebrated French Writer,, in his
encomium.
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 181
t
encomium on the Revelation, calls, en clarie noire. How
ever, think what we will of his head, his heart lies too
open to be misjudged of.
P. 30. [X]. This infk el obj ctiou, ths Reader sees,
consists of two parts : the one, that Abraham must needs
doubt of the Author -of the Command: the other, that
lie would be misled, bv conceiving amiss of his Attri
butes, to believe human sacrifices wjre grateful to him.
Dr. Stebbing, who will leave nothing unanswered, will
needs answer this, [Coiisid. pp. 158, 160.] To the first
part he replies, partly by the assistance I myself had given
him, (where I took notice of what might be urged by
Believers, as of great weight and validity) and partly
from what he had picked up elsewhere. But here I shall
avoid imitating Ins example, who, hi .spite to the Author
of Arguments professedly brought in support of Religion,
strives, with all his might, to shew tiieir, invalidity ; an
employment, one would think, little becoming a Christian
Divine. If the common arguments against the objection,
here urged by him vuth great pomp; have any weak parts,
I shall leave them to Unbelievers to find out I have
the more reason likewise to trust them to their own
weight, both because they are none of his, and because
I have acknowledged their validity. For .which acknow
ledgement, all I get is this Whether yuu Jiad oicned
this or not (says he) I shott-fal have taken iiponinywlj the
pruof. Whereas, all that lie has taLtn rs the ptyperty
of other Writers ; made his own, indeed, by a weak and
an imperfect representation. But h is answer to the
second pait of the infidel objection must not .be passed
over so slightly, 4> As to the latter part of the objection
* (says he) thatjfawi this command, Abraham and A/y
"family must needs have thought hitman sacrifices a^
" cep table to God ; the revoking the command at last
" was a sufficient guard against any such construction.
* To this you make the Unbeliever answer ; No, became
N 3 " the
182 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
u the action having been commanded, ought to have been
" condemned , and a simple revocation was no condem-
" nation. But why was not the revocation of the Corn-
<c mand, in this case, a condemnation of the action ? If
" I should tempt you to go and kill your next neighbour,
" and afterwards come and desire you not to do it ;
* would not this after-declaration be as good an evidence
* of my dislike to the action, as the first was of my
" approbation of it? Yes, and a much better, as it
" may be presumed to have been the result of maturer
* deliberation. Now, though deliberation and after-
" thought are not incident to God ; yet as God in this
" case condescended (as you say, and very truly) to
66 act after the manner of men ; the same construction
(l should be put upon his actions, as are usually put
" upon the actions of men in like cases." [Consid.
pp. 160, 161.] Now, though, as was said above, I would
pay all decent regard becoming a friend of Revelation,
to the common arguments of others in its defence, yet
I must not betray my own. I confessed they had great
weight and validity ; yet, at the same time, I asserted,
they were attended with insuperable difficulties. And
while I so think, I must beg leave to inforce my reasons
for this opinion ; and, I hope, without offence ; as the
arguments, I am now about to examine, are purely this
Writer s own. And the Reader, by this time, has seen
too much of him to be apprehensive, that the lessening
his Authority will be attended with any great disservice
to Religion.
I had observed, that the reasonings of Unbelievers on
this case, as it is commonly explained, were not devoid
of all plausibility, when they proceeded thus, " That as
Abraham lived amongst Heathens, whose highest act
of divine worship was human sacrifices ; if God had com
manded that Act, and, on the point of performance, only
remitted it as a favour, (and so it is represented ;) with
out declaring the iniquity of the practice, when addressed
to
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 183
to Idols ; or his abhorrence of it, when directed to
himself; the Family must have been misled in their ideas
concerning the moral rectitude of that species of religious
worship : Therefore, God, in these circumstances, had
he commanded the action as a trial wily, would have
explicitly condemned that mode of worship, as immoral.
But he is not represented as condemning, but as remitting
it for a favour : Consequently, say the Unbelievers,
God did not command the action at all." To this our
Examiner replies, But why ? Was not the revocation
of the command, a condemnation of the action? If
/ should tempt you to go and kill your next neighbour,
and afterwards come and DESIRE you not to do it, would
not tills after-declaration be as gooil an evidence of my
dislike to the action, as thejirst was of my approbation of
it ? To this I reply ; That the cases are by no means
parallel, either in themselves, or in their circumstances:
Not in themselves; the murder of our next neighbour
was, amongst all the Gentiles of that time, esteemed a
high immorality ; Avhile, on the contrary, human sacrifice
was a very holy and acceptable part of divine Worship :
Not in their circumstances: the desire to forbear the
murder tempted to, is (in the case he puts) represented
as repentance ; whereas the stop put to the sacrifice of
Isaac (in the case Moses puts) is represented asjinwr.
But what follows, I could wish (for the honour of
modern Theology) that the method I have observed
would permit me to pass over in silence. Now though
deliberation and after-thought (says he) are not incident
to God, yet, as God, in this ease, condescended (as you,
say, and very truly) to act after the manner of men ;
the same construction should be put upon his actions, as is
usually put upon the actions of men in like cases. [Con-
sid. pp. 155, 156.] That is, though deliberation and
after-thought are not incident to God ; yet you are to
understand his actions, as if they were incident. A horrid
interpretation ! And yet his representation of the Com*
N 4 mand 1
1 84 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
mand, and his decent illustration of it, by a murderer in
intention, will not suffer us to understand it in any other
manner : For God, as if in haste, and before due delibe
ration, is represented as commanding an immoral action ;
yet again, as it were by an after-thought., ordering it to
be fo reborn, by reason of its immorality. And in what
is all this impious jargon founded? If you will believe
him, in the principle I lay down, That God condescends
to act after the manner of men. I have all along had
occasion to complain of his misrepresenting my Prin
ciples : but then they were Principles he disliked : arid
this, the modern management of controversy has sancti
fied. But here, though the Principle be approved,
he cannot for his life forbear to misrepresent it : So bad
a thing is an evil habit. Let me tell him, then, that by
the principle of Gcd s condescending to act after the
manner of men, is not meant, that he ever acts in com
pliance to those vices and superstitions, which arise* from
the depravity of human Will ; but in conformity only to
men s indifferent manners and customs; and to those
Usages which result only from the finite imperfections of
thei. nature. Thus though, as in the case before us, God
was pleased, in conformity to their mode of information,
to use their custom of revoking a Command ; yet he
never condescended to imitate (as our Examiner supposes)
the irresolution, the repentance, and horrors of conscience
of a, murderer in intention. Which (horrible to think!)
is the parallel this orthodox Divine brings to illustrate
the Command to Abraham. But he had read that God
is sometimes said to repent ; and he thought, I suppose,
it answered to that repentance which the stings of con
science sometimes produce in bad men. Whereas it is
gaid, in conformity to a good magistrate s or parent s
correction of vice ; first, to threaten punishment ; and
then, on the offender s amendment, to remit it.
But he goes on without any signs of remorse. " Nor
" will the Pagan fable of Dianas substituting a Hind
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 185
" in the place of Iphigenia at all help your Unbeliever.
" This did not, say they, OR YOU FOR THEM, make
" idolaters believe that she therefore abhorred human
" sacrifices. But do not they themselves, or have not
" you assigned a very proper and sufficient reason why
" it did not, viz. that they had been before persuaded
" of the contrary? Where human sacrifices make a part
<l of the settled standing Religion ; the refusal to accept
" a human sacrifice in one instance may, indeed, be
" rather looked upon as a particular indulgence, than as
" a declaration against the thing in gross. But where
" the thin*? was commanded but in one single instance,
" and the command revoked in that very instance, (which
" is our present case) such revocation, in all reasonable
" construction, is as effectual a condemnation of the tiling,
" as if God had told Abraham, in so many words, that
" he delighted not in human sacrifices." [Consid. p. 161.]
To come to our Examiner s half-buried sense, we arc
often obliged to remove, or, what is still a more disagree
able labour, to sift well, the rubbish of his words. Me
3ays, the revocation \^as an effectual condemnation. This
may either signify, That men, now free from the prejudices
of Pagan superstition, may see that human sacrifices
were condemned by the revocation of the Command :
or, That Abraham s family could see this. In the first
sense, I have nothing to do with his proposition ; and in
the second, I shall take the liberty to say it is not true.
I deny that the revocation was an effectual condemnation.
With how good reason let the Reader now judge.
Abraham, for the great ends of God s Providence,
was called out of an idolatrous city, infected, as all such
cities then were, with this horrid superstition. He was
himself an Idolater, as appears from the words of Joshua,
Your Fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood in old
time, even Tenth the fat her of Abraham, and the fat her
of Nachor : and TREY served other Gods. And I took
your father Abraham, $c. God, in the act of calling
* Josh. xxiv. 2, hi;n,
i 86 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
him, instructed him in the Unity of his Nature, and the
error of Polytheism ; as the great principle, for the sake
of which (and to preserve it in one Family amidst an
universal overflow of idolatry) he was called out. That
he must be prejudiced in favour of his Country super
stitions, is not to be doubted ; because it is of human
nature to be so : and yet we find no particular instruction
given him, concerning the superstition in question. The
noble Author of the Characteristics observes, that " it
" appears that he was under no extreme surprise on this
" trying Revelation ; nor did he think of expostulating
" in the least on this occasion ; when at another time
" he could be so importunate for the pardon of an in-
" hospitable, murderous, impious, and incestuous city:"
Insinuating, that this kind of sacrifice was a thing he had
been accustomed to. Now the noble Author observes
this, upon the Examiner s, that is, the common, interpre
tation. And I believe, on that footing, he, or a better
writer, would find it difficult to take out the malicious
sting of the observation. But I have shewn that it falls
together with the common Interpretation.
Well ; Abraham is now in the land of Canaan ; and
again surrounded with the same idolatrous and inhuman
Sacrificers. Here he receives the Command: And, on
the point of execution, has the performance remitted to
him as a FAVOUR ; a circumstance, in the revocation of
the Command, which I must beg the Examiner s leave
to remind him of, especially when I see him, at every
turn, much disposed to forget it, that is, to pass it over in
silence, without either owning or denying. And, indeed,
the little support his reasoning has on any occasion, is
only by keeping Truth out of sight But further, the
favour was unaccompanied with any instruction concern-
ing the moral nature of this kind of Sacrifice; a practice
never positively forbidden but by the Law of Moses.
Now, in this case, I would ask any candid Reader, the
least acquainted with human nature ; whether Abraham
and
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 187
and his Family, prejudiced as they were in favour of
Human Sacrifices (the one, by his education in his
country-Religion ; the other, by their communication
with their Pagan neighbours, and, as appears by Scrip
ture, but too apt of themselves, to fall into idolatry)
would not be easily tempted to think as favourably of
Human Sacrifices as those Pagans were, who understood
that Diana required Iphigenia, though she accepted
a Hind in her stead. And with such Readers, I finally
leave it.
P. 32. [O]. "Where are yeur Authorities for all
" this? (says Dr. S tabbing.) You produce none. Where-
" ever you had your Greek, I am very sure you had it
" not from the New Testament, where these words
" are used indiscriminately." [Consid. pp. 142, 143.]
Where are your Authorities f you produce none. This
is to insinuate, I had none to produce. He dares not,
indeed, say so ; and in this I commend his prudence.
However, thus far he is positive, that wherever I had my
Greek, I had it not from the New Testament. The
Gentleman is hard to please : Here he is offended that
I had it not ; and, before, that I had it from the New
Testament. Here 1 impose upon him ; there I trilled
with him. But, in all this diversity of acceptance, it is
still the same spirit : The spirit of Answering.
I had said, the two Greek words, in their exact u.se,
signify so and so. Which surely implied an acknowledge
ment, that this exactness was not always observed;
especially by the Writers of the New Testament ; who,
whatever some may have dreamed, did not pique them
selves upon what we call, classical elegance. Now, this
implication, our Examiner iahiy confirms, though, by
way of confutation. In the New Testament (says he)
these words are used indiscriminately. I had plainly
insinuated as much ; and he had better have let it rest
pn my acknowledgement ; for the instances he brings, to
prove
i88 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
prove the words used indiscriminately in the New Testa
ment, are full enough to persuade the Reader that they
are not so used. His first instance is, i Pet. iv. 13.
" Rejoice [%*4fc] inasmuch as ye are partakers of
" Chrisfs sufferings ; that when his glory shall be re-
" sealed Ix*?* ayahfauptni] ye may be glad u ilh
" exceeding joy. See you not here (says lie) the direct.
" reverse of what you say ; that ^/^w signifies the joy
" which arises upon prospect, and ay*XX*ftty*&i< that whicli
" arises from possession ?" [Consid. p. 143.] No indeed;
I see nothing like it. The followers of Christ are bid
<~j
fa rejoice, i x&($i. For what? For being partakers of
Chris? s &tffermgs. And was not this a blessing in pos
session? Ijiit it seems cur Doctor has but small concep
tion how suffering for a good conscience can be a blessing.
Yet at other tiir.es he must have thought highly of it,
\vhen, in excess of charity, he bespoke the Magistrate s
application of it on his Neighbours, under the name of
WHOLESOME SEVERITIES. He is just as wide of truth
when he tells us, that dyax^oiopcu signifies the joy which
arises on possession. They are bid to rejoice now in suf
ferings, that they might be glad with exceeding joy at
Christ s second coining. And is this the being glad for
a good in possession ? Is it not for a good in prospect ?
The reward they were then going to receive. For I
suppose the appearance of Christ s glory will precede
the reward of his followers. So that the Reader now
sees, he has himself fairly, proved for me, the truth of
.my observation, That in the exact use of the, zcord*,
cLyu.\^*Qpxi signifies that tumultuous pleasure which
ike certain expectation of an approaching blessing occa-
tions; and ^//> that calm and settled Joy that arises
from our knowledge, in the possession of it.
He goes on. " Rev. xix. 7. Let us be glad and re-
" joke [pci |>w/A* *} ayaAAiw/^0*] for the marriage of the
" Lamb is come. Where both words (says he) refer to
" blessings in possession. Again, Malt, v, 3 2, Rejoice
" awf
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 189
" and be exceeding glad[^^i\i ^ dya,\\i&&lt;r$i}for great is
" your reward in Heaven; where both refer to blessings in
kC prospect." [Consid. pp. 143, 144.] His old fortune
still pursues him. The first text from the Revelations,
Be glad and rejoice, FOR the marriage of the Lamb /.v
come; bids the followers of Christ now do that, which
they were bid to prepare for, in the words of St. Peter,
that when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad
with exceeding joy. If, therefore, where they are bid to
prepare for their rejoicing, the joy is for a good in pros
pect (as we have shewn it was) then, certainly, where
they are told that this time of rejoicing is come, the joy
in list still be for a good in prospect. And yet he says,
ihc words refer to blessings in possession. Again, the text
from St. Matthew Rejoice and be exceeding glad, roit
great is your reward in heaven, has tlte same relation
to the former part of St. Peter s words [Rejoice Inasmuch
//.y ye are jwrtakers of Christ" s sufferings] as the text in
Revelation has to the latter. Blessed are ye (says Jesus
in this gospel) ichen men shall revile you and persecute
you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely
for mil sake. Rtjoice, and be exceeding glad, FOR great
is your racard in heaven. Rejoice ! tor what? Is it not
for the persecutions they suffer for his sake ? A present
blessing sure; though not perhaps to our Author s taste.
The reason why they should rejoice, follows, for great
is your reward in heaven. And yet here, he says, the
words refer to blessings hi prospect. In truth, what led
lii:n into all this inverted reasoning, was a pleasant mis
take. The one text says Be glad and rejoice, FOR, on
The other, Rejoice and be exceeding glad, FOR, or* Now
he took the particle, in both places, to signify propter,
for the sake of\ wliereas it signifies quoniam, qnia, and
is in proof of something going before. So that he
read the text Rejoice, for the marriage of the Lamb is
come; As if it had been" Rejoice, for the marriage
01 iiie Laiab, WHICH is come: . And rejoice, for
great
igo THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
great is your reward in heaven; as if it had been,
" Rejoice for your ^reat reward in heaven."
But now let us consider these texts in another view, in
order to do justice to his delicacy of judgment. I had said
that, in the exact use of the two Greek words, they
signify so and so ; and applied that observation to a FACT ;
where a person was said to have rejoiced, &$c. In order
to disprove this criticism, he brings three passages, in which
those Greek words are used, where NO FACT is related ;
but where men are, in a rhetorical manner, called upon,
and bid to rejoice, <$c. In \vhich latter case, the use of
one word for another, is an elegant conversion. Those,
in possession of a blessing, are bid to rejoice with that
exceeding joy, which men generally have in the certain
expectation of one approaching; and those in expecta
tion, with that calm and settled joy, which attends full
possession. And who but our Examiner could not see,
that the use of words is one thing, in an historical
assertion; and quite another, in a rhetorical invocation?
Having thus ably acquitted himself in one criticism,
he falls upon another. " What shall we do with SVa? "
What indeed ! But no sooner said than done. " "lv&
" (says he) is often put for on or ?T, positive as you are,
" that it always refers to a future time." [Consid. p. 144.]
Now, so far from being positive of this, I am positive of
the contrary, that there is not one word of truth in all he
says. I observed indeed, that JW Wu, in the text, refers
only to a future time. And this I say still, though our
Translators have rendered it, equivocally, to see. Yet he
affirms, that I say, " IW [standing alone] always refers to
" a future time." That I am positive of it, nay very
positive, " positive as you are, 5 says he. And to shame
rne of this evil habit, he proceeds to shew, from several
texts, that 7v is often put for OT or on. " Thug John
" xvi. 2. The time cometh THAT [*W] whosoever killeth
" you will think he doth God service. Again: i Cor. iv. 3.
" With me it is a small thing THAT [!w] / should be
13 "judged
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 1 9 i
" judged of you. And nearer to the point yet, 3 John 4.
" I have no greater joy [1W a xsw] than THAT I hear, or,
" than TO hear that my children walk in the truth.
" And why not here, Sir ; Abraham rejoiced [7v* %]
" WHEN he saw, or THAT he saw, or (which is equiva-
" lent) TO SEE my Day." [Consid. p. 144.] For all this
kindness, the best acknowledgement I can make, is to
return him back his own criticism ; only the Greek words
put into Latin. The Vulgate has rendered Tn by
ut videret, which words I will suppose the Trans
lator to say (as without doubt he would) refer only to a
future time. On which, I will be very learned and
critical: u Positive as you are, Sir, that ut always referji
" to & future time, I will shew you that it is sometimes
" put for postquam, the past.
" Ut vidi, ut peril, ut me malus abstidit Error!
" and sometimes (which is yet nearer to the point) for
" quanto Ut quisque optimb Grace sciret, it a csse ne-
" quissimum. And why not here, Sir, Abraham rejoiced
" [lit rideret] WHEN HE saw, or THAT he saw, or which
" is equivalent, TO SEE my day?" And now he says,
there is but one difficulty that stands in his way. And what
is this, I pray you? Why, that according to his (Dr.
Stebbing s) interpretation, " the latter part of the sen-
" tence is a repetition of the former. AbraJmm rejoiced
" to see my day, and he saw it and was glad ; i. e.
" Abraham rejoiced to see, and then saw and rejoiced.
" Eut such kind of repetitions are frequent in the sacred
" Dialect; and, in my humble opinion, it has an ele-
" gance here. Abraham rejoiced to see, xai sufe, KK\
" ^api]. HE BOTH SAW AND WAS GLAD." \Cottsid.
pp.144, 145.] Before he talked of repetitions in the-
sacred Dialect, and pronounced upon their qualities, he
should have known how to distinguish between a. pleonasm
and a tautology ; the first of which, indeed, is often an
elegance-, the latter, always a blemish in expression : and
in the number of the latter, is this elegant repetition of
the
1 9 2 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
the Doctor s own making. Where a repetition of the
same thing is given in different words, it is called a pleo
nasm , when in the same words (as in the Doctor s trans
lation of the text in question) it is a tautology, which,
being without reason, has neither grace nor elegance.
Nay the very pretence it has to common sense arises
from our being able to understand the equivocal phrase,
to see, in my meaning, of, that he might sac. Confine it
to the Doctor s, of Abraham rejoiced when he had seen
my day ; ami hz saw it and was glad, and the absurdity
becomes apparent For the latter part of the sentence
beginning with the conjunction completive xal, it implies
fi further predication. Yet in his translation there is none;
though he makes an effort towards it, in dropping the
sense of xl in the sound of BOTH.
P. 32. [P]. Dr. Stebbing tells me, " there is not one
" word, in the history of the Old Testament, to justify
" this threefold distinction :" and that I myself CONFESS
as much. It is true, I confess that what is not in the
Old Testament is not to be found there. And had
he been as modest, he would have been content to find a
future state in the New Testament only. But where is
it, I would ask, that " I confess there is not one word,
" in the history of the Old Testament, to justify this
" three-fold distinction?" I was so far from any such
thought, that I gave a large epitome * of Abraham s
whole history, to shew that it justified this three-fold
distinction, in every part of it. His manner of proving
my confession will clearly detect the fraud and falsehood
of his charge. For, instead of doing it from iny own
words, he would argue me into it, from his own infe
rences. " You confess it (says he); FOR you say, that
" Moses s history begins with the second period, and
" that the first was wisely omitted by the historian. Let
us apply this reasoning to a parallel case. I will sup-
* From pp. 10 to 14, of this volume.
pose
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 193
pose him to tell me (ior, after this, he may tell me any
thing) " that I myself confess there is not one word in
" the Iliad of Homer, to justify me in saying that there
<c were three periods in the destruction of Troy; the first,
" the robbery of Helen ; the second, the combats before
tf the Walls ; and the third, the storming of the Town
" by the Greeks; FOR that I say, that Homer s poem
" begins at the second period ; wisely omitting the first
" and the last." Now will any one conclude, from this
reasoning, that I had made any such confession ?
P f 33. [Q]. This shews why GOD might say to Hosea,
Go take unto thec a wife of whoredoms, <S$c. ch. i. ver. 2,
Though all actions which have no moral import are
indifferent ; yet some of this kind (which would even be
indifferent, had they a moral import) may, on the very
account of their having no moral import, be the object
of pleasure or displeasure. Thus, in the adventure
between Elisha and Joash, we are told, that the Pro
phet said unto the King, " Take bow and arrows; and
" he took upto him bow and arrows. And he said to
" the king of Israel, Put thine hand upon the bow; and
" he put his hand upon it ; and Elisha put his hands
fe upon the king s hands. And he said, Open the window
" eastward; and he opened it. Then Elisha said, Shoot ;
" and he shot. And he said, The arrow of the Lord s
" deliverance from Syria: for them shalt smite the Syrians
" in Aphek, till thou have consumed them. And he said,
" Take the arrows ; and he took them. And he said
" unto the king of Israel, Smite upon the ground ; and
" he smote thrice, and stayed. And the man of God
" was wroth with him, and said, Thou shouidest have
" smitten five or six times, then hadstthou smitten Syria,
" till thou hadst consumed it : whereas now thou shalt
" smite Syria but thrice." 2 Kings xiii. 15 19. Here
Jt is not difficult to apprehend, that the Prophet, by God s
command, directed the King to perform a significative
VOL, VI, Q action,
1 9 4 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,
action, whose meaning GOD had beforehand explained to
his Messenger : and, amongst the particulars of it, had
told him this, that the Syrians should be smitten as often
as the King smote upon the ground, when the Prophet
should order him (only in general words) to smite it. Hence
the Prophet s anger, occasioned by his love to his country,
on the King s stopping when he had smote thrice.
P. 33. [R.] To this Dr. Stebbing answers, " I can
" easily understand, Sir, how the matter stood with
" Abraham; and that HE was in no danger of being
" misled, as to the nature of human Sacrifices, who knew
" the secret of the whole affair; and that it was nothing
" else but Scenery. But how this answer will serve for
" his Family, who are to be presumed to have known
" nothing of this scenical representation, is utterly past
" my comprehension ; because you have told us from
" the very first, that the information to be conveyed by
" it was intended for Abraham s SOLE VJSE; and I do
" not see how Abraham could open to his family the
" scenery of the transaction, without explaining the
" mystery. But is not your putting the Family of
"" Abraham, in possession of this consequence, a very
* plain declaration, that they knew the mystery of Christ s
" sacrifice ? Now therefore, Sir, take your choice, and
" give up one part of your hypothesis, or the other, as
" best pleases you; for to hold both is imposible. If you
" say that the family of Abraham were acquainted with
" the mystery of Christ s sacrifice ; it will overturn all
" you have said concerning their ignorance of a future
" state : It likewise overturns the single reason you have
" given why the explanation (usual in all such cases) to
" shew the import of the transaction was not added, viz.
" that it was a point not fit for common knowledge.
" But if you shall chuse to say, that the revelation of
" this mystery was for the SOLE information of Abraham,
" and that his family knew nothing of it, the objection
" will lie full against you, unanswered." [Consid. p. 166.]
I had
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 195
I had said, that the command was for Abraham s sole
use; and " therefore (says the Doctor) the Family of
" Abraham must be presumed to know nothing of this
" scenical representation :" Notwithstanding this, I pre
sume (he says) that they did know it. Here he takes me
in a flagrant contradiction. But did he indeed not appre
hend that where I spoke of its being given for Abraham s
sole use, I was opposing it (as the course of my argu
ment required) not to the s .ngle family which THEN
lived under his tents, but to the Jewish People, WHEN
the history of the transaction was recorded ? And now
having shewn his wrong conclusion from MY words, let
us consider next the wrong conclusion he draws from
HIS OWN. I do not see (says he) how Abraham could
open to his family the scenery of the transaction, without
explaining tlie mystery. What does he mean by, opening
the scenery of the transaction ? There are two senses of
this ambiguous expression ; it may signify, either, ex
plaining t/w moral of the scenery ; or simply, telling his
family that the transaction was a scenical representation.
He could not use the phrase in the iirst sense, because
he makes explaining the mystery a thing different from
opening the scenery. He must mean it then in the
latter. But could not Abraham tell his Family, that this
was a scenical representation, without explaining the
mystery ? I do not know what should hinder him, unless
it was the sudden loss of speech. If he had the free use
of his tongue, I think, he might, ii) the transports of his
joy, on his return home, tell his Wife, " That God had
ordered him to sacrifice his Son, and that lie had carried
this Son to mount Moriah, in obedience to the divine
Command, where a ram was accepted in his stead ; but
that the whole was a mere scenical representation, to
figure out a mysterious transaction which God had
.ordained to come to pass in the latter ages pf the world/
And I suppose when he had once toid his wife, the
would soon hear of it, Npw could they riot
O 2 ^derstand.
196 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
understand, what was meant by a scenical representation,
as well when he told them it was to prefigure a mystery,
as if he had told them it was to prefigure the crucifixion
of Jesus? Had I no other way of avoiding his dilemma
(for if I escape his Contradiction, he has set his Dilemma-
trap, which he says it is impossible I should escape) had
I nothing else, I say, it is very likely I should have in
sisted upon this explanation : But there are more safe
ways than one of taking him by his Horns. " Now
" therefore (says he) take your choice, and give up one
Ci part of your hypothesis or the other, as best pleases
" you; FOR TO HOLD BOTH is IMPOSSIBLE. If you
" say that the family of Abraham were acquainted with
" the Mystery, it will overturn all you said concerning
" their ignorance of a Future State But if you shall
" chuse to say that the revelation of the Mystery was for
" the sole information of Abraham, and that his Family
" knew nothing of it, then the construction in favour
" of human Sacrifices must have been the very same as
" if no such representation, as you speak of, had been
" intended." I desire to know where it is that I have
spoken AN Y THING of the ignorance of Abrahams Family
concerning a Future State. But I am afraid, something
is wrong here again : and that, by Abrahams Family, he
means the Israelites under Moses s policy : for, with
regard to them, I did indeed say that the gross body of
the People were ignorant of a Future State. But then
I supposed them equally ignorant of the true import
of the Command to Abraham. But if by Abraham s
Family he means, as every man does, who means honestly,
those few of his houshold, I suppose them indeed
acquainted with the true import of the Command; but
then, at the same time, not ignorant of a future State.
Thus it appears that what our Examiner had pronounced
IMPOSSIBLE, was all the while very possible. And in
spite of this terrible Dilemma, both parts of the hypo
thesis are at peace, I can hardly think him so immoral
as
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 197
as to have put a designed trick upon his Reader : I rather
suppose it to be some confused notion concerning the
Popish virtue of TRADITION (that trusty Guardian of
Truth) which led him into all this absurdity : and made
him conclude, that what Abraham s houshold once knew,
the Posterity of Abraham could never forget. Though the
WRITTEN WORD tells us, that when Moses was sent to
redeem this Posterity from bondage, they remembered so
little of God s Revelations to their Forefathers, that they
knew nothing even of his NATURE, and therefore did,
as men commonly do in the like case, enquire after his
NAME.
P- 37- [$] " To me (says the noble writer) it plainly
" appears, that in the early times of all Religions, when
" nations were yet barbarous and savage, there was ever
" an aptness or tendency towards the dark part of Super-
" stition, which, amongst many other horrors, produced
" that of human Sacrifice. Something of this nature
" might possibly be deduced even from Holy Writ."
To this a note refers in the following words Gen. xxii. J .
and Judg. xi. 30. These places relating to Abraham and
Jephthah are cited only with respect to the notion which
these primitive warriors may be said to have entertained
concerning this horrid enormity., so common amongst the
inhabitants of the Palestine and other neighbouring
nations. It appears that even the elder of these Hebrew
princes was under no extreme surprise on this trying re
velation. Nor did he think of expostulating, in the least >
on this occasion ; when at another time he could be so im
portunate for the pardon of an inhospitable, murderous,
impious and incestuous city, Gen. xviii. 23, c* Charact.
vol. iii. p. 1 24,
Dr. Stebbing will needs try his strength with the noble
Author of the Characteristics. For, whether I quote for
approbation or condemnation, it is all one ; this active
Watchman of Ihe Church militant will let nothing escape
O
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
him, that he finds in my service ; nor leave any thing
unpuriiied that has once passed through my hands. To
this passage of the noble Lord he replies, " The cases
" widely differ. God did not open precisely what he
" intended to do with these wicked cities ; only said,
" Judgement was passed. But what has this to do with
" Isaac, who did not stand as a sinner before God ; but
" as a Sacrifice, acknowledging God s sovereign domi-
" nion. For Abraham to intercede here would have
" inferred a reluctancy to do homage, which would have
" destroyed the perfection of his resignation." [Hist,
of Abr. pp. 41, 42.] So, Isaac s innocence, and his
not standing a sinner before God when he was doomed to
death, makes him a less proper object of Abraham s
intercession and compassion, than a devoted City, inhos
pitable, murderous, impious, and incestuous. This is our
Doctor s HUMANITY : and a modest petition of the
Father of the faithful, like that of the Saviour of the
world, If it be possible, let this cup pass from me, never-
theless not as I will but as thou wilt, would have destroyed
all the perfection of his resignation. And this is our
Doctor s DIVINITY ! Strange! that this Father of Ortho
doxy could not see, that what might be done by the
divine Antitype himself, without destroying his perfection
of resignation, might likewise be done, without that loss,
in behalf of the Type. After so fine a specimen of what
great things he is able to do against this formidable Enemy
of Revelation ; what pity is it, he was never set on work
by his Superiors, in a more avowed and open manner !
P. 43. [T]. This man, not long since, wrote against
the D. L. under the name of a Society of Free-thinkers :
by the same kind of figure, 1 suppose, that He in the
Gospel called himself Legion, who was only the for-
wardest Devil of the Crew.
P. 43. [U]. But I mistake. Unbelievers, I think,
are not yet quite so shameless. The objection, in form,
2 comes
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 199
comes from another quarter. It is Dr. Stebbing, who,
for the honour of the Church, makes it for them. He
will not allow that the words of Jesus are of any validity
to support my interpretation of the Command to Abraham,
because Unbelievers will not admit the inspiration of the
New Testament. But what then? they have not yet
disputed with me my interpretation of the Command.
Nobody hath done this but Dr. Stebbing. And I hope
the Authority of Jesus will stand good against him. He
was in haste to do their business for them : and, it must
be confessed, by an argument that does equal credit to
his logic and his piety.
Fair reasoners of all parties will see, tho Dr. Stebbing
will not, that the question is not particular, concerning
the inspiration of the Old and New Testament; but
general, of the connexion between them ; and those will
not be so unreasonable to expect I should prove this con
nexion, of which they ask a proof, any otherwise than by
applying each reciprocally to explain and to support the
other. If the two Testaments be shewn to do this;
while on the other hand, when singly considered, and
without each other s mutual assistance, they are in
explicable, the connexion between them is fairly made
out. The objection of Unbelievers stands thus. " You
pretend (say they) that these two Dispensations are two
constituent parts of God s great moral economy : If this
be true, they must needs have a strong connexion and
real relation to one another. Shew us this connexion
and relation : and amuse us no longer with proving the
divinity of this or that Dispensation separately, as if each
were independent on the other." I comply with their
demand : And now Dr. Stebbing tells me, I take this qr
that Revelation for granted which I should have proved.
Whereas in truth I take nothing for granted but what
Unbelievers are ready to prove against me, if I did not :
namely, that between two Dispensations, the one pre
tended to be preparatory to the other, there must needs
04 be
200 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
be a strong and near connexion and relation. And if, in
the course of evincing this connexion, I urge some circum
stances in the Jewish to support the Christian, and others
in the Christian to support the Jewish, this, I suppose,
is not taking for granted the truth either of one or the
other, but proving the divinity of both.
P. 49. [X]. Hence we see the vanity of Mr. Whiston s
distinction, who is for retaining Types (necessitated there
unto by the express declarations of Holy Writ) and for
rejecting double senses. " Mr. Whiston (says the author
" of the Grounds, 8$c.) justifies typical arguing from
" the ritual laws of Moses, and from passages oj History
" in the Old Testament. Indeed he pretends this last
" to be quite another thing from the odd (typical) appli*
" cation of prophecies. For (says he) the ancient cere*
" monial institutions were, as to their principal branches,
" at least in their own nature, Types and shadows of
" future good things But the case of the ancient pro-
61 phecies to be alleged from the old Scriptures for the
" confirmation of Christianity is quite of another nature,
61 andofamore nice andexact consideration" pp.227,228.
It appears, indeed, they are of a more nice and exact
consideration, even from Mr. Whiston s so much mis
taking them, as to suppose they are of a nature quite
different from Types. But instead of telling us honestly
that he knew not w r hat to make of them, he plays the
courtier, and dismisses them, for a more nice and exact
consideration.
P. 5 1 . [ Y]. The Bishop of London, in his Discourses
vn the Use and Intent of Prophecy, seemed to have but
a slender idea of this use when he wrote as follows
" There was no occasion (says he) to lay in so long
<c beforehand the evidence of prophecy, to convince men
" of things that were to happen in their own times : and
" it gives us a low idea of the administration of Provi-
c< dence in sending Prophets one after another in every
" age
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 20*
" age from Adam to Christ, to imagine that all this ap-
" paratus was for their sakes who lived IN OR AFTER
" the times of Christ." p. 37. But such is the way of
these Writers who have a favourite doctrine to inforce.
The truth of that doctrine (if it happen to be a truth) is
supported at the expence of all others. Thus his Lord
ship, setting himself to prove that Prophecy was given
principally to support the Faith and Religion of the
World, thought he could not sufficiently secure his point
without weakening and discrediting another of, at least,
equal importance, That it was given to afford testimony
to the mission of Jesus.
P. 55. [Z]. This account of Types and secondary
senses, which supposes they were intended to conceal the
doctrines delivered under them, is so very natural, and,
as would seem, reasonable, that Dr. Stebbing himself
subscribes to it. And hence occasion has been taken by
a most acute and able Writer to expose his prevarication,
in maintaining that the Jews had the revealed Doctrine
of a Future State : For the Doctor not only confesses
that the Doctrine was revealed under Types, but that
Doctrines, thus conveyed, were purposely secreted from
the knowledge of the ancient Jews. See the Argument
of the Divine Legation fairly stated, p. 1 25. And, the
free and candid Examination cf Bishop Sherlock s Ser
mons, &c. chap. ii. where the controversy on this point is
fairly determined, as far as truth and reason can deter
mine any thing.
P. 70. [A A]. Hear what a very judicious Critic
observes of the line in question. " The comment of
" SERVIUS on this line is remarkable. Hunc versum
" not ant Critici, quasi superfine et inutiliter additum,
" nee convenient em gravitati ejus, namque est magis
" neotericus. Mr. ADD i SON conceived of it in the
" same manner when he said, this was the only witty
" line in the JEneis] meaning such a line as Ovid would
" have
202 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
" have written. We see they esteemed it a wanton play
" of fancy, unbecoming the dignity of the Writer s work,
and the gravity of his character. They took it, in
" short, for a mere modern flourish, totally different from
" the pure unaffected manner of genuine antiquity. And
" thus far they unquestionably judged right. Their
" defect was in not seeing that the use of it, as here
" employed by the Poet, was an exception to the general
" rule. But to have seen this was not, perhaps, to be
" expected even from these Critics, However, from
" this want of penetration arose a difficulty in deter-
" mining whether to resA facia or fata nepotum. And
" as we now understand that Screws and his Critics
" were utter strangers to Virgil s noble idea, it is no
" wonder they could not resolve it. But the latter is the
" Poet s own word. He considered this shield of
" celestial make as a kind of Palladium, like the ANCILE
" which fell from Heaven, and used to be carried in
" procession on the shoulders of the SALII, Quid de
" scutis (says Lactantius)^^ reinstate putridis dicam ?
" QUCE cum port ant, DEOS IPSOS SE GESTARE HUMERIS
" suis arbitrantur. [Div. Inst. lib. i. c. 21.] Virgil, in
" a fine flight of imagination, alludes to this venerable
" ceremony, comparing, as it were, the shield of his hero
" to the sacred ANCILE; and, in conformity to the
" practice in that sacred procession, represents his hero
" in the priestly office of religion,
At fattens H u M E RO famamque et FATA Nepotum.
This idea then, of the sacred shield, the guard and
glory of Rome, and on which, in this advanced situation,
" depended the fame and fortune of his country, the
c Poet with extreme elegance and sublimity tranfers to
4 the shield which guarded their great Progenitor, while
c he was laying the first foundations of the Roman
" Empire." Mr. HURD Notes on the Epistle to
Augustus, pp. 68, 69. 3d ed.
p. 7 6.
<c
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 203
P. 76. [BB]. The Reader sees, however, by this,
that he at length takes ALLEGORIES and SECONDARY
SENSES not to be the same: In which, I must crave leave
to tell him, he is mistaken ; Religious allegories (the only
allegories in question) being no other than a species of
secondary senses. This may be news to our Critic,
though he has written and printed so much about ALLE
GORIES, that is, about secondary senses-, as Monsieur
Jordan was surprised to find he had talked prose all his
lifetime, without knowing it.
P. 77. [CC]. Dr. Stebbing, of this SOME (by one of
his arts of controversy) has made ALL. And charges
me * with giving this as the character of double prophecies
in general, that without Miracles in their conformation
they could hardly have the sense contended for well
ascertained. On the contrary, he assures his reader that
no Prophecy can have its sense supported by Miracles.
That part which relates to the Morality of the Doctor s
conduct in this matter, I shall leave to himself: with his
Logic I have something more to say. The Miracles,
which the Reader plainly sees I meant, were those
worked by Jesus; and the Prophecies, some of those
which Jesus quoted, as relating to himself. But the
Doctor tells us, "That Miracles are not to be taken for
" granted in our disputes with Unbelievers." In some
of our disputes with Unbelievers, they are not to be taken
for granted ; in some they are. When the dispute is,
whether the truth of Jesus Mission appear from Miracles,
it would be absurd to take Miracles for granted : but
when the dispute is, whether the truth of his Messiah-
character appear from Prophecies, there is no absurdity
in taking his Miracles for granted ; because an unbeliever
may deny his Messiah-character, which arises from
Prophecies, and yet acknowledge this Mission which is
proved by Miracles ; .but he cannot deny the truth of his
* See Hist, of Abr. pp. 6 1, 62, 63, &c.
mission^
204 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
mission, which is proved by Miracles, and yet acknow
ledge his Miracles. But more than this An Unbeliever
not only may allow us to suppose the truth of Miracles
when the question is about the proof of the Messiah-cha
racter from Prophecies ; but the Unbeliever, with whom
I had here to do, Mr. Collins, does actually allow us, in
our dispute with him, to suppose the truth of Miracles :
For thus he argues, " Jesus, you say, has proved his
Mission by Miracles. In good time. But he had another
Character to support, that of a promised Messiah, for
which he appeals to the Prophecies : Now, 1st, these
Prophecies relate not to him, but to another. And
2dly, Miracles never can make that relate to him which
relate to another.* In answer to this, I proposed to
shew, that the first proposition was absolutely false, and
that the second very much wanted to be qualified. In
the course of this dispute, I had occasion to urge the
evidence of Miracles ; and Mr. Collins, while denying
the Messiah-character, had permitted me to suppose
their truth. Unluckily, the Doctor, who saw nothing
of all this, takes what Logicians call the point assumed,
and the point to be proved, for one and the same thing.
That Jesus was a divine Messenger, and worked Mira
cles, is the point assumed by me ; and Mr. Collins, over
confident of his cause, permitted me to assume it. That
Jesus was the Messiah foretold, is the point to be proved]
and I did not expect that any other than a follower of
Mr. Collins would deny I had proved it. But I will be
fair even with so unfair an Adversary as Dr. Stebbing,
and urge his cause with an advantage with which I will
suppose he would have urged it himself had he known
how. It may be questioned whether it be strictly logical
to employ this topic (which Mr. Collins allows us to
assume) of Jesus s divine Mission, in order to prove his
Messiahship ? Now all that can be here objected is, that
we assume one Character, in order to prove another, in
the same divine Person. And what is there illogical
in
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 402
in this ? Who ever objected to the force of that reasoning
against Lord Bolingbroke, which from the Attributes of
God s power and wisdom which his Lordship allowed the
Author of the View of his Philosophy to assume, inferred
and proved God s justice and goodness, which his Lord
ship denied ?
But to satisfy, not the Doctor, but any more reasonable
man, I will suppose, it may be asked, " Of what use are
Prophecies thus circumstanced, that is to say, such as
require the evidence of Miracles to ascertain their sense?"
I reply, of very important use ; as they open and reveal
more clearly the mutual dependency and connexion of
the two Dispensations on one another, in many particulars
which would otherwise have escaped our notice : And,
by this means, strengthen several additional proofs of the
Messiahship of Jesus, on which the Gospel doctrine of
Redemption depends. But was there no more in it than
this, The rescuing some prophecies quoted in the New
Testament as relating to Jesus, out of the hands of
Unbelievers, who have taken an occasion, from their
generality or obscurity, to persuade the people that they
relate entirely to another matter ; this, I say, would be
n less than clearing the truth of the Messiahship from
inextricable difficulties. I will now take a final leave
of this Answerer by profession ; an Answerer of such
eminence, that he may indeed be called,
Knight of the Shire, who represents them all.
But as he displays at parting all the effrontery of his
miserable trade, I will just stop to new-burnish his com
plexion.
I had called my Argument a Demonstration, which
one would think no one who could distinguish Morals
from Physics could mistake, or would venture to mis
represent. Yet hear Dr. Stebbings last words, "That
" Moses was the Legislator of the Jews, and that the
" Jews were ignorant of a Future State ; these facts
[ must be known by history, which spoils you fora
" Demonstrator
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL
" Demonstrator at once : For historical evidence goes
" no further than probability ; and if this must concur
" to make up the evidence, it cannot be a Demonstration ;
" For Demonstration cannot stand upon probability.
cc The evidence may be good and sufficient, but Demon-
" stration it cannot be ; which is always founded upon
" self-evident truths, and is carried on by a chain or series
" of the most simple ideas hanging upon each other by
" a necessary connexion" [Letter to the Dean of Bristol,
pp. 9, 10.] And was it for this, that this wonderful man
hath written half a score Pamphlets against the Divine
Legation, that he could not find in it the same sort of
Demonstration which he hath been told may be seen in
Euclid ?
P. 87. [DD]. Nothing can be more simple than the
principle here inforced, or more agreeable to the rules of
just interpretation, than to suppose, that the Language
of the Law, in the terms ALTAR, SACRIFICE, &c. is
employed to convey these prophetic intimations of the
Gospel. The ancient fathers of the Church very impro^
yidentty continued the use of these terms, when speaking
of the Christian Rites : . For though they used them, and
professed to use them metaphorically, yet it gave counte
nance to strange extravagance of Scripture-interpretation
amongst the Romanists. The ingenious Author of the
Principes de lafoi Chretienne, Tom. i. p. 273. brings this
prophecy of Malachi for a proof of the divine institution
of the sacrifice of the Mass.
P. 96. [EE]. It is wonderful to consider how little
the Writers, on either side the question, have understood
4of the logical propriety and moral fitness of Types, and
secondary senses of Prophecy.
Dr. Middlcton and Dr. Sykes, who agreed with Mr.
Collins in laughing at these modes of information,, agreed
with him likewise, in laying down such principles, and
inculcating such ideas of the Mosaic Religion, as most
effectually
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 07
effectually tended to evince this logical propriety and
moral fitness.
On the other hand, Bishop Sherlock, Dr. Stcbbing,
and other advocates for Types and secondary senses
of Prophecy, lay down such principles, and inculcate
such ideas of the Mosaic Religion, as would totally
supersede the use of these modes of information, and
consequently destroy both their logical propriety and
moral jitness. See the Free and candid Examination of
Bishop Sherlock s Principles, &c. chap. ii.
P. 103. [FF]. M. BOUILLER, the ingenious Author
of the Court Examen de la These de Mr. L Abbe de
PR A DES, et Observations sur son Apologie, having
charged de Prades with taking his idea of the Mosaic
Economy from this Work, without owning it, goes on,
in his own way, to shew that the ARGUMENT of the
Divine Legation, as delivered in these Volumes, is
CONCLUSIVE.
" La Loi Mosa ique, consideree comtne fonde-
ment d un etablissement national et temporal, rfavoit
que des promesses et des menaces, ne proposoit que des
peines des recompenses temporelles : aulieu qu a con-
siderer les grandes VUGS de cet etablissement, par rapport
& I Eglise meme, la Loi etoit une espece de tableau
emblematique, qui sous i enveloppe des objets charnels
Jiguroit les spirituels , ewsoite que, en raisonnant selou
les principes d une juste analogic, la foi des Israelites
eclaires et pieux, trouvoit -dans les promesses de la I.oi,
qui portoietit uniquemeut mr les biens presens, mi nouv^ a.u
garand de la certitude des biens avenir. Alais comme
on doit bien se souvenir, que dans cette Nation, les
Fkleks ne faisoient QUE LE PETIT NO MB RE, I" argument
de WARBURTON, tire du silence de la Loi sur une
economic avcnir, en faveur de la divinite de *ceUe Loi
meme, conserve tmtte sa force, car il demeure Jtoujours
vrai qu iln a pas fallu oioins que la vertu des MIRACLES
e,t
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.
et 1 efficace d une impression surnaturelle, pour faire
ployer le gross de la Nation, c est-a-dire les Juifs charnels,
qui ne penetroient point ces vues Mysterieuses > sous le
joug pesant de la Dispensation Mosai que." [pp. 94, 95.]
And again, " Ce double Caractere de la Dispensation
Mosai que met sa divinite hors d atteinte a tous les traits
les plus envenimes du Deisme qui I attaque par deux
batteries opposees. Quoi? disent nos Libertins, une
Religion qui promet uniquement les biens de la Terre,
peut-elle tre digne de Dieu ! Et lorsque, pour leur
repondre, ayant recours au sens mystique, on dit que leg
promesses Legales qui, prises a la lettre, n offrent qu un
bonheur temporal, doivent s entendre spirituellement ;
ces Messieurs se retournent aussi-tot avec une merveil-
leuse adresse pour vous demander comment un Oracle,
qui trompe les hoinmes, et qui n a point d accomplisse-
ment dans le sens le plus clair, le plus propre, et le plus
litteral de ce qu il promet, peut etre regard e comme un
Oracle divin ? Question, qui dans Thypothese commune,
me paroit plus difficile a resoudre d une facon satisfaisante.
Mais Tune et 1 autre objection tombe, des qu on envisage
1 ancienne economic telle qu elle est ; c est-&-dire, tout a
la fois comme Alliance nationale et comme economic
religieuse. En qualite d Alliance nationale, ses pro-
messes sont toutes Charnelles, et s accomplissent a la
terre a 1 egard des Juifs. Mais en qualite d economic
religieuse, essentielkment li&e au plan de rEvangile, elle
est pour \esFideles, la figure etle gage des biens spirituels.
Doublement digne du Dieu de verite, et par t accomplissz-
ment litteral de ses promesses, et par leur usage ty pique,
la reunion de ces deux rapports y annonce Fouvrage de
son infinie sagesse." [Addition a Article iv. p. 1 04.]
Thus far this ingenious Writer. But now a difficulty
will occur. He owns the Author of the Divine Legation
hath made out his point, that the Law of Moses is from
God : He contends that the Author s system is the only
one that can support this Revelation against the ob
jections
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 209
jections of Deists and Libertines : Yet when he has done
this, he has thought fit to call this very system, a Para
dox ; though it goes upon his own principle, That the
Mosaic Dispensation had a double character ; that it was
a national Alliance, and was at the same time essentially
united to the Gospel plan ; that this double Character,
though not apprehended by the body of the Jewish People,
yet was well understood by those peculiarly favoured of
God, their Prophets, and Leaders. This censure, if it
be intended for one, I say, appears to me a little myste
rious. However, the learned Writer s words are these
" Quand Mr. de Prades a dit que Tceconomie Mosai que
n etoit fondee que sur les peines et les recompenses
temporelles, etqu il a sou ten u que cela me me tburnit une
bonne preuve de la divinite de cette (Economic, il n a
fait autre chose que suivre la trace du savant IVarburton,
qui avanca ce PARADOXE, il y a deja quelques annees,
dans son fameux Ouvrage de la Divine Legation de
Moise, et employa tour a tour pour le defendre, le rai-
sonnement et Ferudition. Notre Bachelier, aussi-bien
que M. Hooke, qu il cite pour son garand, auroient bien
du faire honneur a 1 illustre Docteur Anglois, d une
pensee que personne ne doutera qu ils n ayent puisee
chez lui." [p. 88.] No\v, I have so good opinion of this
learned Writer s candour as to believe that either he used
the word paradox in an indifferent sense, or that he was
misled in his Judgment of the Divine Legation by
Mr. de Prades and Mr. Hooke : Who although they
borrowed what they have delivered concerning the nature
of the Mosaic Economy from that book, which they did
not think fit to confess, yet it is as certain that what they
borrowed they either did not understand, or at least have
misrepresented. The learned Sorbonist has since pub
lished his Course of Theology, infilled lleUgionisnaturaUs
et revelattz Principia. In which, though he has con
sulted his ease and perhaps his reputation, in transcribing
the reasonings of the Divine Legation on various points
VOL. VI. P of
no THE 1)1 VINE LEGATION, &c. [Book
of Theology, and generally without reference to the
Book or the Author ; yet his affairs with his Body haver
taught him caution, and obliged him to declare against
the PROPOSITION., in. support of which, those reasonings
were employed by their original Author. For when he
comes to the question concerning the sanction of the
Jcu ixh Laze, he introduces it in the following manner *.
Q-usestionem inchoamus difficilem, in qua explicanda
adhibenda est sum-ma verborum proprietas, ne Pclagranis
ex uiia parte non satis feed us Mosaicum Evmigelicum
discriminantibus, aut contrariis RKCEN^IORUM QUORUM-
DAM erroribus favere videamur. And so, fortifies him
self with Suarez and St. Thomas. The consequence of
which is, that the two large Chapters in his second Volume
(the first, To prove that a future state was always a
popular doctrine amongst the Jews ; and the second.
That temporal rewards and punishments were really and
equally distributed amongst them under the Theocracy)
just serve to confute one another : Or more properly,
the second Chapter, by aid of the Arguments taken from
the Divine Legation, effectually overturns all that he has
advanced in the first. See 3\t Hooke s second volume
of his Course, intitlecl, Rdtgioms natundls et rcc elates
Principle/, from pp. 208 to 236.. For the rest, this jus*
tice is due to the learned and ingenious Writer, that these
Principles of natural and revealed Religion compose the
best reasoned Work in defence of Revelation which we-
have yet seen come from that quarter.
TBfi
NINTH BOOK
OF THE
DIVINE L E G A T I N
OF
MOSES:
TUIIXG AN ATTEMPT TO EX P LAI If
THE TRUE NATURE AND GENIUS
OF THE
CHRISTIAN RELIGION.
Printed, so far as it goes, by the AUTHOR;
and left unfinished :
HJIST PUBLISHED IX 1788.
P 2
CONTENTS:
INTRODUCTION to the Ninth Book.
Book IX, Chaps. I.II.III.IV.V.& VI. With NOTES,
%5~- THE Reader has been already referred to an Explanation of the omission
of Books VII. & VIII. And lest, in the preceding Title page to the IXth Book,
the words "left unfinished" might operate to the prejudice of this division of
the work, it may be proper to repeat here a few words from Bishop HVUD S
introductory Discourse : " This IXth Book is the noblest effort that has hitherto
" been made to give a RATIONALE OF CHIUSTIANITY . . . Very little is
" wanting to complete the Author s design ; only what he had proposed
" to say on the apocatyptic prophecies, and which may be supplied from th*
" Discourse on Antichrist." Sec Vol. I. f this Edit. pp. 86. 89. Ed,
t 213 j
INTRODUCTION*
TO THE
NINTH BOOK
OF
THE DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES,
TRUTH, the great Object of all honest as well as
rational Inquiries, had been long sought for in vain ;
when, the Search now become desperate, after the fruit
less toil of the best qualified Sages, and of the most im
proved times, She suddenly appeared in PERSON to put
these benighted Wanderers in their Way. I AM THE
TRUTH, says the Saviour of the World. This was his
Moral Nature; of more concern for us to know, than
his Physical ; and, on that account, explained more at
large in his eternal Gospel.
This last book, therefore, being an attempt to explain
the true NATURE AND GENIUS OF THE CHRISTIAN
RELIGION ; I shall,
1 . First of all, previously examine those sceptical Ob
jections, which in the long absence of Truth, the World
had begun to entertain of her very Being and existence ;
or at least of our capacity to discover, and get hold of
her. And these being removed,
2. I shall, in the second place, lay down, under what
laws, and with what disposition of mind, I have ventured
to use the aids of REASON to explain the TRUTHS OF
REVELATION.
3. And, lastly, I shall attempt to remove the Preju
dices which may arise against any new discoveries in
support of REVELATION, which the method here em-
* See Sermon, concerning The Nature and Condition of Truth ;
Serin. J. Vol. IX. of this Edit.
ployed
214 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
ployed to analyse that capital truth of all, THE FAITH,
may possibly enable us to make.
I.
That ancient Remedy against Error, #,f$rrkonian, or,
if you like it better, an Academic SCEPTICISM, only
added one more disorder to the human Mind ; but being
the last of its misbegotten issue, it became as is usual,
the favourite of its Parent.
Our Blessed MASTER, himself was the first to en
counter its attacks, and the insolence of that School has
kept the" Church in breath ever since.
When Jesus was carried before Pilate as a Criminal of
State, for calling himself King of the Jews, he tried to
shorten the intended process by pleading that his Kingdom
was not of- this JVvrld. But Pilate, alarmed at the
names of king and kingdom, asked, Art thou a King
then? The other replied, --For this cause came I into the
World) thai I should bear Witness unto the TRUTH,
Pilate saith unto him, WHAT is TRUTH? And ichcn he
had said this, he went oat again *. For when he found
that the Kingdom claimed by the supposed Criminal, was
a Kingdom merely Spiritual, or, in the Roman Governor s
conceit, a Kingdom only in idea, he considered the claim
as no proper subject of the civil tribunal. So far he
acted well, and suitably to his public Character. But
when he discovered his indifference to, or rather con-*
tempt of, TRUTH, when offered to be laid before him as
a private Man, -by -one who, he knew, had the repute of
exercising every superior Power proper to enforce it, he
appears, to me, in a light much less excusable.
The negligent air of his insulting question will hardly
admit of an Apology." You tell me (says he) of
" TRUTH, a word in the mouth of every Leader and
" Follower of a SECT ; who all agree (though in nothing
" else) to give that name to their own Opinions : While
" TRUTH, if, indeed, we allow of its existence, still
" wanders at large, and in disguise. Nor does the De-
" tcction seem worth the Pains of the Search, since
" those things which Nature intended for general use
" she made plain and obvious, and within the reach of
" all men/ 1
* John xviii. 38.
Sentiments
Zatrod.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 215
Sentiments like these bespoke the Ruler of an Asiatic
Province, who had heard so much of TRUTH in the
Schools of Philosophy ; and had heard of it to so little
purpose. Tins corrupt Governor, .therefore, finding a
Jewish Sage talk of bearing Jl ittiefifi to the Truth, (the
aiibcted office of the Grecian Sophists), was ready to
conclude that Jesus was one of their mimic .Followers.
For it was now become fashionable amongst the learned
Rabbins to inlist themselves into one or other of those
celebrated Schools. Thus the famous Philo was an out
rageous PLATO^IST : And Jesus -calling himself a
&NG, together with the known Purity and Severity of his
Morals, probably made Pilate consider him as one of the
STOICAL \dsc men, who alone was free, and happy, and
a King.
" Liber, honoratus, pulcher, REX denique Rcgum."
Xow, as on the one hand, the Character of the Greek
Philosophy, which was of an abstract nature, and seques
tered froiii civil business, made Pilate conclude, that these
Claims of Jesus had nothing in them dangerous or alarm
ing ; so, on the other hand, its endless disputes and
.quarrtls about TUUTH, and which of the Sects had her
in keeping, made ?,Ien of the World, and .especially those
in public Stations, whose practice declined the test of any
moral System whatsoever, willing to Iv? persuaded, and
ready to conclude, that this boasted TRUTH, which pre
tended to be the sole Directress of human conduct, was
indeed no better than a shifting and fantastic Vision.
This, I presume, was the light in which Pilate consi
dered the SAVTOTII OF TJIE WOULD, Had he sus
pected Jesus of being the Founder of a public and a
popular Religion, which aimed to be erected on the ruins
-of the established Worship, the jealousies of the Roman.
Court, since the loss of public liberty, had, doubtless,
made ibis servile Minister of Power very attentive, and
even officious, to suppress it in its birth.
Hut if the ill usage of TRUTH by the Philosophers
<could so disgust the Politician of old, as to indispose
him to an acquaintance of this importance, what must
we think will he her reception amongst modern States
men, whose views are neither more pure nor more gene
rous ; and whose penetration, perhaps, does not go much
p 4 beyond
si 6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
beyond the busy men of Antiquity; when they see her so
freely handled by those, amongst us, who call themselves
her Ministers, and profess to consecrate her to the Service
of Religion ? Amongst such, I mean of the active no less
than of the idle part of the fashionable World, Pilate s
scornful question is become proverbial, when they would
insinuate, that TRUTH, like Virtue , is nothing but a
name.
What is this TRUTH, say they, of which the world has
heard so much, and has received so little satisfaction? But
above all, what is that GOSPEL TRUTH, the pretended
Guide of life, which its Ministers are wont so much to
discredit in their very attempts to recommend ? For while
objections to Religion lie level to the capacities of the
Vulgar, the solution of them requires the utmost stretch
of parts and learning in tire Teacher to excogitate, and
equal application and attention in the Learner to com
prehend. From which (say they) we are naturally led
to conclude, that the Gospel ckctrines are no Truths, or
at least, Truths of no general concern ; since they are
neither uniformly held by those who are employed to
teach them, nor subject to the examination of such as are
enjoined to receive them.
Something like this, I apprehend, may be the way of
thinking and talking too, amongst those who have more
decently discarded all care and concern about the
Things of Religion.
And as our acquired passions and appetites have con
curred with the constitutional weakness of our nature to
form these conclusions against TRUTH, and especially
against that best part of it, RELIGIOUS TRUTH, Charity
seems to call upon us to detect and lay open the gene
ral causes which have given birth to Men s prejudices
against it.
I. And first with regard to TRUTH in general; of
the various hindrances to its discovery, and of Men s
backwardness to acquiesce in it, when luckily found.
The first and surest Means of acquiring the good we
seek, is our love and affection for the object. This
quickens our industry, and sharpens our attention. On
this account the LOVE OF TRUTH hath always been re
commended by the Masters of Wisdom as the best means
of
Ihtrod.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 217
of succeeding in the pursuit of it. Hardly any one sus
pects that he wants this Love : yet there are few whom
their confidence Hoes not deceive. We mistake the love-
of our Opinions for the lore of Truth ; because we sup
pose our own Opinions, true : Yet, for the most part,
we received them upon trust ; and consequently, they arc
much more likely to be false : So that our affections
being now misplaced, they are a greater hindrance in the
pursuit of TRUTH, than if we had no affections at all
concerning it.
How then shall we know when we have this love ? for
still it is necessary we should have it, if we would search
after TRUTH to any good purpose. It is difficult to de
scribe what every man must feel for himself; and yet it
is as dangerous to trust our own feelings, when the Object
is so easily mistaken. However, when we set out in
pursuit of TRUTH as of a Stranger ; and not in search of
Arguments to support our Acquaintance with precon
ceived Opinions : When we possess ourselves in a per
fect indifference for every tiling but known and well -at
tested TRUTH ; regardless of the place from Whence it
comes, or of that to which it seems to be going : Whe i
the Mind, I say, is in this State, no one, 1 think, can
fairly suspect the reality of its attachment.
1. But our APPETITES rarely suffer us to observe thi*
strict and rigid conduct. We seek the gratification of
our humour even in the Laws which should correct it.
lience so many various SYSTEMS OF MORALITY to suit
every man s bent of Mind and frame of Constitution.
The Indolent, the Active, the Sanguine, the Flegmatic,.
and the Saturnine, have all their correspondent Theories.
And from thenceforth, the concern of each is not the trial,
but the support of his Opinions ; which can be no other
wise provided for than by keeping the arguments in
favour of them always in view, and by contriving to have
those of a less benign aspect overlooked or forgotten.
2. PREJUDICES mislead the Enquirer no less than his
passions. He venerates the notions he received from his
forefathers : He rests in them on the authority of those
whose judgment he esteems; or, at least, wishes well to
them for the sake of the honours or profits he sees attached
to the profession of them. Nay, he can persuade him
self
Si 8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [BobkT3C
self to patronize what he hath once chosen, for reasons
with which TRUTH has no manner of concern. He likes
them because they are old ; because they are new ; for
being plain and simple ; for being wbtiwe and mysterious ;
for being followed by the Few ; for being followed by
the Many : in a word, on a thousand other accounts
Still more remote from the conclusions of common s< .
But then, bad as this is, since it is, at the same time,
Apparent, that the impediments in pursuit of Tut TF? are
not essential, but only accidental to the Inquiry, we may
well account for our mistakes in setting out ; for the slow
ness of our progress; and the rubs and oppositions we
meet in our passage, without having recourse to any
sceptical conclusions in favour of the incomprehensible
nature of TRUTH, or the inaccessible situation in which
the Author of all things hath been pleased to -place her.
For, is it any reason, that because some Truths are so
deep that our haste and impatience will not allow us
time to sound them ; others so disguised that our dissipa
tion will not enable us to unmask their pretences ; and
others again, so unfriendly to cur prejudices as to indis
pose us to examine them : That, because some errors
wear so plausible a face as to look like TRUTH ; others,
o commodious an appearance as to be readily received
for TRUTH ; and others again, so fashionable as to claim
all the privileges due to TRUTH ; is, I say, all, or any
thing of this, a reason for sober men to conclude, that
either there is no difference between Truth and Falsehood}
or that the difference}?, so insensible that it will not serve
us for a distinction ? Our Senses, in many cases ; our
Reason, in more ; and our very Hearts in almost all, will
tell us the contrary.
II. Secondly, with regard to RELIGIOUS TRUTH. <
i. Mistaken constancy, or more tenacious ZFAL, make
some men prejudiced in favour of /c xv alloiccd Opinions :
and the obliquer affections of avarice or ambition make
others declare for such as arc established* OPPOSITION
likewise will too much dispose Both, to support what they
may even suspect to be fuLse, and to secrete what they
know to be true. This draws them still further from
the road of TRUTH ; while all they seek is to be at dis
tance from one another s parties and Opinions.
2. Inveterate
I-ntrod.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 219
2. Inveterate errors, long since sanctified by Time
and Authority, concerning the nature and end of Scarp-
TUME, are another occasion of the disgraces to which
O
Itevclatio/i -is become subject.
GOD S WRITTEN Yv oiiD is so commonly and so justly
honoured with the name of THE TRUTH ; and holy \Vrit
in general so frequently recommended for its virtue in
leading us into all J rulii* that simple, well-meaning men
have been apt to regard it as a Treasury of Science ; and
to apply to it for all the principles of human knowledge.
How wretchedly, for instance, hath the Mosaic account
of the Creation been dishonoured, by the wild and fan
ciful expositions of men besotted by this or that Sect of
heathen PHILOSOPHY, or of Christian MYSTICISM]
Platonists, Materialists, Cartesians, Chimists, Cabalists,
and all the impure Fry of Physical, Philological, and
Spiritual Enthusiasts, have found each his own whimsies
realized in the first and second chapters of the Book of
Genesis.
Again, how impiously have the JEWISH LAW and the
GOSPEL OF JESUS been abused by Slaves and Syco
phants, to find, in one, the DIVIXE URMIT of KINGS ;
and, in the other, the SUPREME DOMIXIOX OF THE
CHURCH.
But amidst all this folly and mischief, arising from a
perversion ofthcBnvLE, to support human Systems of
Philosophy and Politics, had men only reflected, that
though the Bible tells us, it was written to make men
K isc itaddeth unto salvation *, they would have sought
for the Principles of natural smd. civil knowledge amongst
their proper Professors ; and have studied Scripture only
to investigate that WISDOM ichich is from above, and it
first PURE, then PEACEABLE f. A wisdom which, at
the same time that it rectifies the understanding, purifies
the heart; and so removes all ground of contention raised
by a perplexed head or a heated temper.
The first Propagators of our holy FAITH, under the
immediate Commission of their Master, were, in this, as
in all other parts of their conduct, truly admirable. What
they chiefly proposed to the People at large, was the
of a few clear and simple propositions, as neces-
* 2 Tim. iii. 15. f James iii. 17.
sari/
220 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
sary to Salvation : When they addressed themselves to
those chosen Particulars, who were fitly qualified and
rightly disposed, they as warmly recommend EXAMI
NATION : to Search the, Scriptures *, and to try all
things.
Yet the only use a late Writer f could find in so sage
and generous a conduct, was to abuse it, in a profane
piece of drollery, under the form of a serious question,
tVkether Christianity was founded in Argument or in
Faith ? which, however designed for Wit, was just as
wise as, JVhcthcr St. Paul s Clock was constructed on
MECHANISM or on MOTION? Since, if the Clock was
seen to have motion, we could not but conclude that the
motion arose from mechanism. So, if the vital principle
of Christianity be FAITH, it can be no other than such
a Faith as stands upon Reason, and is supported by
Argument. A wild Indian, perhaps, might fancy that
St. Paul s Clock was animated, and put in motion by q.
Spirit : And an Enthusiast, still wilder than the Savage,
may say that Faith is but the Seal of a supernatural im
pression. Yet surely, none but a Fool of the old stamp,
or a Fanatic of the mzc, would be willing to discard
REASON, in pursuit of his Juture happiness, when he has
already found IT so useful in procuring his present. For
both present and future Good are, alike, acquired by the
proper adaption of means to ends. An operation which,
all must confess, the Aid of REASON only can effectually
perform. Nor hath this faithful Guide of life ever afforded
cause of complaint or jealousy. When men, who profess
to be under HER guidance, tind themselves bewildered,
they should suspect, not HER, but themselves. And, on
a fair examination, I suppose, they will always find, that
they have been directing REASON when they should have
been directed by HER. But the wayward Affections
which occasion her discredit, go on in their illusions to
excite our distrust
IL
Thus much for SCEPTICISM, that bane of human
Science, which, while it boasts to be the NERVES OF THE
deprives it ol all it* force and vigour. I now
* John v. -p. f Dodwell.
i-ret run $pw*. ISpicliarmus.
proceed
Introd.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 231
proceed to consider the temper and disposition necessary
to be acquired by us, before we can safely and profitably
employ the AIDS OF REASON to explain the TRUTHS OF
REVELATION.
The greatest impediment to Men s advancement in the
knowledge of the nature and genius of the CHRISTIAN
RELIGION, hath ever been their adopting or espousing
some favourite HYPOTHESIS, whereon to erect the Gos
pel System. For every dispensation of true Religion*
consisting of means and end, the well-adapting these to
each other, produceth what we call a SYSTEM.
Now this may be built either on an HYPOTHESIS ,,
which is a supposed truth, or on a FACT, which is a real
one. And the Systems of Theology have, for the most
part, been unwarily framed on the former model ; which,
as we say, have much entangled and perplexed our
searches after Truth.
Into this mistake men easily fell by injudiciously apply-*-
ing, to the SYSTEM OF GRACE, the method which Philo
sophers invented, when they set upon explaining the
SYSTEM OF NATURE.
They did not consider that any plausible Hypothesis
in Physics hath its use, as it serves to shew from what
Laws the natural Phenomena may arise. Nor is it des
titute of more particular uses ; thus the Ptolemaic Hijpc-
thesis enables Astronomers to predict Eclipses as well as
the Copernican Theory.
But a mere Hypothesis, to explain the Dispensation of
Grace, is not only useless, but often, hurtful.
The reason is apparent. It is agreed by all sober and
intelligent Naturalists, that God is the Author of the
Material System : But it is the great question in debate
between Religionists and Unbelievers, Whether God be
indeed the Author of the System of Grace.
At worst, therefore, a false Hypothesis in Physics only
keeps hid, or leaves unexplained, the chief beauties of
the Material Creation : And the disgrace, to which this
method is subject, falls only upon the successless In
quirer; because every such false or fanciful Hypothesis
carries along with it, even in the very arguments for its
support, the Conviction of its falsehood. "But a ground
less Hypothesis, in religious matters, by affording (and it
can
22 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
can afford no other) an unfavourable representation of the
moral Attributes of God (his Cidodftcss and his Justice)
becomes a fatal discredit to the Doctrine of Redemption.
Yet, at the same time, it is but just to observe, that
such is the fate and condition of sublunary things, that
these sometimes exchange their proper qualities, and pro
duce effects not correspondent to their respective natures.
Thus in the case as thus considered, we have shewn
how haniness a mere hypothesis in Physics generally is,
and, on the contrary, how one in Religion is as generally
pernicious, Yet sometimes we shall find the Physical
Hypothesis to be hurtful, and the Religious useful.
The Pi denude System, by destroying all that simplicity
of motion to be expected in these Works of God, hath, along
with its civil and practical use, occasioned a speculative
mischief; and inclined men to Atheism ; as appears in
the case of Alphdnsui, who impiously boasted, that, had
he been consulted about the Solar System, he could have
advised how it might have been better constructed. I
call it an impiaw* boast, because it plainly insinuated, that
he (who had discovered the imperfections of the Ptoler
inaic Construction, and was ignorant of the true) ascribed
the whole to a blind cmd luiinte.Wgent Came. Again,
the Cartesian, with his Corpuscularian Hypothesis, at
tempts to explain all the Phenomena of Nature .by mat*
ter and motion; requiring only that God should at first
create a sufficient quantity of each, just enough to set him
on work, and then pretends to do the business without
his further aid ; that is, without the concourse of any
VITAL PRINCIPLE to help him forward, in an immaterial
.way ; this Hypothesis^ I say, which, on the one hand, so
much contributed to free Philosophy from the nonsense
and tyranny of the SCHOOLS, yet, on the other, produced
(while it was in vogue) many rank and irreligious
j\laie-rialisl$.
Eut once more turn the tables, and then, so shifting is
this state of things, we shall see, although we have shewn
that, in the heights and purer regions of -Theology, zmere
hypothecs is likely to disturb and perplex our views, yet
there is an inferior station in that service, where the Di
vine may employ this counterfeit of a true Theory to very
good purpose ; in discrediting such objections to Revda-
i j tion
Ihtrod.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 225
lion as have gained credit by our imperfect ideas of the
true System of the intellectual World. Here a probable
hypothesis is of use, as it may serve to convince objectorsy
that what we find recorded in Sacred Scripture of the
Origin and Progress of God s extraordinary Dispensation
to Man, may be very consistent with what human Reason
teacheth of the divine Essence and Attributes. And
the more we can frame of those probable Solutions, the
more support we give to Revelation, though it be only
by arguments ad ignorantiam.
Notwithstanding all this, it appears, upon the whole,
that a successful Search after Religious Truths can be.
then only expected when we erect cur System upon FACT *
acknowledged Facts, as they arc recorded in Sacred
O
Scripture.
For if the Dispensation, to which such Facts belong^
be indeed from God, all (he Parts of it will be seen to be
the correspondent Members of one entire WHOLE ;.
which orderly disposition of things, essential to a reli
gious SYSTEM, will assure us of the TRUE THEORY
of the Christian Faith)
But the abuse of Words ^ confounding those of HYPO
THESIS and SYSTEM witli one another (the word Si/stew*
being a common term, which may be applied equally to*
fen Hypothesis era true Theory) hath thrown a discredit
on the latter, with which the former only is chargeable.
Examples of this the attentive Reader may find among the
Dumberless Cavils to the Work of The Divine Legation.
Hitherto we have endeavoured to- shew in what way
HUM AX REASON should be employed on religious
matters.---But then, how far, when thus employed, fche
is to be indulged, is the next thing to be considered.
The three moral Attributes of the Godhead, discover
able by natural Light, on which men are accustomed to
Examine the pretensions oiMemtafioj^ are his JUSTICE,
liis GOODNESS, and his WISDOM. But the Reasoncr on
Religion will transgress his bounds, unless he confine
himself within the twojirst. The evidence of this asser
tion is convincing.
c To form a. right judgement of the divine Attributes of
JUSTICE and GOODNESS, the .only relations, to be taken
into
224 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
into consideration, are those of GOD and MA x. But to
judo e truly of the WISDOM of the Godhead, other relations
besides those of God and Man, namely, the whole
order of intellectual Beings, dispersed throughout the
universe, are to be added to the account : Of whom,
further than of their mere existence, we know nothing.
From hence it is seen, that we may safely determine,
whether any thing in REVELATION contradict God s
JUSTICE and GOODNESS. If it doth, such Revelation
is to he rejected. Not so, with regard to his WJSDOM,
therein manifested in any particular instance; although
our natural knowledge of the iking and Attributes of
God assures us ; that the GREAT ALL is conducted with
the most consummate H ixdom.
REVET ATION therefore is not to be rejected on account
of difficulties arising from our ignorance ofci/llhc relations
necessary to be taken in, when we would attempt to form
a complete judgment of the exertion of the Attribute of
Wisdom.
Vv hy this precise mode of .REDEMPTION by the death
ami sufferings of Christ was preferred to all other, in
the eternal purpose of the Godhead, exceeds the powers
of human reason to discover ; because his Attribute of
WISDOM, which is out of the reach of man to apply to
this inquiry, is here concerned. But when it hath been
proved by Fact, that a Religion was revealed in which
this mode of Redemption is employed, then Reason m-ay
lend her modest aid to shew (what a rational Religion
seems to expect should be shewn) that this precise mode
is conformable to all our ideas of divine goodness and
justice : Nay, that it best quadrates with, as it is seen to
be the properest means of, a RESTORATION TO A FREE
GIFT, WHEN BECOME FORFEITED.
" Tills difference, in the Application of Reason to reli
gious matters, MOSES hath not obscurely intimated to
his People ; where, in his last direction for their conduct^
he says, The SECRET THINGS belong unto the LORD our
GOD ; but those things which arc REVEALED belong to
us and to OUR CHILDREN, for ever.* ; and had I not
observed this sage direction, but vainly endeavoured to
explain Mysteries which the Gospel hath left unexplained,
9*
I should
Introd.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 225
I should justly have incurred the Censure of Jerom to his
Adversaries, IV hy (says this Father) do you pretend^
after so many ages are elapsed, to teach us what was
never taught before! Why, attempt to EXPLAIN what
neither PETER nor PAUL thought it necessary to be
known*?
1 . The Principles, here laid down, may be of use, First,
to direct future Enquirers in the RIGHT WAY; where, if,
on other accounts, they make but slow advances, they
are, at least, kept from wandering in the dark. For while
the bounds of Reason continue unsettled, and the use
and abuse of this noble instrument of Truth remain con
founded with one another, the very ablest Seeker will be
embarrassed and misled f . Hence it hath come to pass,
that this first and necessary step in support of our
holy Faith, AN INQUIRY INTO THE TRUE NATURE
AND GENIUS OF THE GOSPEL DISPENSATIONS, hath
been so generally overlooked : instead of which a thou
sand metaphysical subtilties on the terms and phrases
under which the doctrine of SAVING GRACE is conveyed,
have engaged men s principal attention ; while the thing
itself, a matter of the utmost importance, hath been suf
fered to lie in all the Obscurity in which old Polemics
had involved it. So true hath our perverse nature ever
been to itself. " Hoc habet irigenium humanum," (says
the great Philosopher) " ut cum ad SOLI DA non sufficiat,
" in SUPEIIVACANKIS se atterat J."
2. Another use of these Principles is to convince Un
believers, that REVEALED RELIGION affords, and is
productive of, all the evidence which the nature of the
thing requires; and consequently, all which right reason
can expect: And that the strongest of their objec
tions to it arise from the abusive exercise of our Faculties,
employed on objects which those Faculties can neither
apprehend nor reach.
III.
But now, all PARTIES, in support of their oblique in
terests, have concurred to decry this method of Inquiry
whereby, from the various genius, the comparative excel
lence, the mutual dependence, the reciprocal illustration
* -Ad Pammachium fy Ocean um de crroribus Origenis.
f Limborcb s Arnica collatio cum erudito Judxo. t Bacon,
VOL. VI. Q of
226 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
of the several parts of God s moral Dispensation to
Mankind, and the gradual progress of the Whole towards
perfection, .-great discoveries have been made in these
latter times, by men who dared to break the barrier,
which Bigotry and Superstition had been -so long form
ing, to obstruct our views both of NATURE and of
GRACE.
These PARTIES ask, How it happened that Disco
veries so sublime and useful, as is pretended, were now
to make ; when the light of the Spirit was sent so early,
and had illuminated the Church so long ? How it hap
pened, that these Truths were denied to the best times,
and, after lying hid for many ages, were reserved for the
reward of the very worst? And then in their real or pre
tended reverence for Establishments, concur in condemn
ing all EXPERIMENTS IN RELIGION.
To these, under their sad suspicions of the issue, in
forsaking the OLD POSTURE OF DEFENCE, it will be suffi
cient to reply,
i. That the promise and gift of the Holy Spirit may
be considered, either as they referred to the first Propa
gators of the Faith, or as they concerned the Teachers of
it, ever since.
As to the first Propagators, there is no doubt of their
being abundantly enlightened for the work of their
Ministry; whether it was in making Converts, in found
ing Churches, or in composing those occasional instruc
tions, by which the Faithful, in all ages, may improve
the current benefits of the same Spirit. As to the suc
ceeding Teachers of the word, the assistance they receive
from the HOLY; SPIRIT, is the second point we are more
particularly to consider.
Now the endowment of GRACE is, in this respect,
pretty much the same with the endowment of NATURE ;
of little advantage to the receiver without his co-opera
tion. God hath bestowed upon us hands and feet, to
procure good, and to avert evil ; but it is to the careful
and habitual application of these members to their proper
uses, that we owe all the benefits they are capable of
producing. So it is with the free gift of the Spirit. It
is bestowed upon us, to enlighten the understanding, and
to redress the disorders of the Will. But it does not
work
Introd.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 227
work like a Charm: for if either we neglect to employ
these given powers, or will divert them to improper sub
jects, the use and efficacy of Grace must certainly be
defeated.
This Ordinance in the economy of GRACE, may re
ceive credit from what is seen to have happened in the
economy of NATURE. The power, wisdom, and good
ness of the Almighty is so evident and convincing, from
every obvious configuration of matter surrounding us,
that these Attributes cannot escape the most inattentive,
or lie concealed from the most short-sighted. Hence a
GOD, the Maker, the Preserver, and Governor of the
World, is the^umversal voice 67 Nature.
Now CREATION and GOVERNMENT, from whence
the morality of human Actions is deduced, are the found
ation of NATURAL RELIGION : so that GOD cannot
be said to have been wanting in the discovery of him
self to the lowest of his rational Creatures : Yet, though
the general arid obvious marks of his power, wisdom,
and goodness, obtrude themselves upon all men, it is
nevertheless certain that a well-directed study of the Book
of Nature opens to us such Stupendous wonders of his
P oiver, such awful Scenes of his Wisdom, and such en
chanting prospects of his Goodness, as far exceed all con
ception of the unlearned and uninstructed Beholder.
Some faint taste of these delights the more inquisitive
enjoyed very early : But those who came after, by indulg
ing too much to abstract SPECULATION, and trusting too
little to EXPERIMENT, instead of discovering a real world,
the Archetype of its Maker, invented a variety of imagi
nary ones, all as dishonourable, as they were unrelated
to him. At length, two of our own countrymen of superior
genius chalked out a different road to the study of
Nature", in which vague conjecture was excluded ; and
facts, verified on experiments, were allowed to be the
only inlet to physical knowledge. Henceforth, NATUK*;
was set before us, unvciied; and her Sacred Mysteries
held out to the knowledge and admiration of all men.
This was the progress in the ways of NATURE: The
ways of GRACE ran the very same fortune.
The great Principles of revealed Religion are FAITH
and OBEDIENCE. These, -which are alone sufficient to
Q 2 make
228 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
fnoke men wise unto Salvation, are clearly and fully taught
in the Gospel. But we should greatly derogate from
God s moral Government, did we not allow it to abound
in the like sublime Wonders with the Natural. And to
the study of the first, there are more important Calls,
and much greater Advantages. The knowledge of God s
moral Government, as far as concerns his religious Dis
pensations, is the duty of every man: and, indeed, the
whole business of the Ministers of his revealed word.
So that partly, for the use and importance of the subject,
partly, for the necessity of making head against the Ene
mies of Revelation, but chiefly in obedience to the Com
mand, TO STUDY THE SCRIPTURES, it hath, from the
first ages of the Church to the present times, been one
of t^e principal occupations of the Learned. Yet what,
from unfavourable circumstances in the civil and literary
world; what, from the varying bias of occasional preju
dices; but, above all, from tiie sordid interests and blind
passions of men occupied in these Inquiries; the various
Schemes of Religion, pretended to be found in Scripture,
but indeed, the workmanship of Divines, had dishonoured
the Doctrine of REDEMPTION near as much as the hypo
thesis of Philosophers had dishonoured the History of the
CREATION. Till here again, as in the former case, the
same caution and sobriety which directed men to the true
method of treating things material, by a careful study
of the volume of NATURE, led them into the right way
of explaining things spiritual, by a careful study of the
volume of GRACE. So that if, in these times, the ad
vances in the knowledge of God s WILL should haply
prove as considerable as those in the discovery of his
WORKS, it will not be beside a reasonable expectation j
as similar causes are wont to produce similar effects.
I have placed these correspondent accounts of the pro
gress of the human faculties, in NATURE and in GRACE,
in this neighbourly position, that the Reader, by setting
them together, and comparing them with one another,
may see, whether there be any Objections to NEW DIS
COVERIES in Religion, which do not equally hold against
KEW DISCOVERIES in Nature , of which, for their new*
ntss alone, no one ever yet entertained the least doubt
er suspicion of their TRUTH.
IntrodJ OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 229
For let us compare the Almighty s display of his
nature in the great Y 7 olume of his WOR.KS^ with the de
claration of his Will in the lesser Volume of his WORD,
and we shall find the same marks of GOODNESS to be
alike conspicuous in hoth cases.
In his Works, a man need but open his Eyes to see in
every Object, the God which claims his adoration: In his
Word, the Man, who rum, may read, the Means and*
Method of his own Salvation. In neither case, is any
thing wanting to instruct the most simple in their depen
dence and their duty ; in which, consists their happiness.
For further information in the works and ways of Pro
vidence, God wisely reserved it for the reward of the
manly and virtuous improvement of the human faculties.
It is true in fact, as hath been already intimated, that
throughout a long series of Ages, neither of these Inqui
rers made any very considerable Advances in REAL
KNOWLEDGE. 15ut it is as true, that what hindered
Both, proceeded not so much from difficulties in the
things sought after, as from the wrong Methods em
ployed in the search. For, instead of addressing them
selves to discover the true Constitution of Things from
the Frame of God s works, as objected to their Senses ;
or the true End of Revelation from Sacred Scripture, as
it there lies open to their Contemplation, they framed
fanciful hypotheses, out of their own slender stock of
ideas ; and then, by distorting Nature, and wresting the
Bible awry, they forced both one and the other, to Father
their own blind and spurious Issue.
But when once DIVINES and PHILOSOPHERS were
become sensible of their wrong Courses ; and, in conse
quence of that conviction, had measured back their steps ;
and with more modesty and better sense had renounced
tiieir fancies, and erected Theories on the real consti
tution of things; it is wonderful to conceive what disco
veries were soon made in Natural and Religious Truths.
THESE TWO IMPORTANT STUDIES, therefore, being
alike circumstanced, and having run the same fortune,
demand, in all reasonable allowance, the same judgment
to be passed on their pretences.
But Men are not accustomed to be thus equitable.
One of the readiest, as well as most impudent exploits
Q 3 of
1230 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
of Prejudice, is to draw unlike conclusions from similar
Premisses.
It is confessed, that the book of Nature is so plain
and clear, that every Sentence reveals and proclaims its
Almighty Author : that if its more sublime or more
profound truths have lain concealed, or been kept out of
sight, for Ages, it was the fault of the Inquirers, who ad
hered so long to a perverse method of studying Nature :
for that, as soon as ever they began to seek a better, and
to prosecute it with care and sobriety, KNOWLEDGE
suddenly opened and enlarged its Empire; while the blaze
of light which accompanied its progress, was so far from
making Truth suspected for the newness of its- Splendour,
that it dissipated all those doubts which had been enter
tained of its obscure nature, and equivocal Claims and
Prerogatives.
But now, if we turn from the Physical to the Moral
state of things, we shall find, Men have drawn different in
ferences from similar cases. Because, in their search after
the higher Truths of Religion, they had been long unsuc
cessful, they not only toot umbrage at these now found,
and, like some jewels, found too by their own surround
ing light, but conceived fresh doubts even of the most
obvious principles which led to these late discoveries.
2. There is, yet, another sort of Believers (and this
brings me to the second part of the Objection) who,
from too great a reverence for things established, join
with such as have too little, in decrying all NOVELTIES
in religious Matters. These men, in abhorrence of the
Vanity of being wiser than their Fathers, have in express
terms denounced their displeasure against MAKING what
they call, EXPERIMENTS IN RELIGION.
This is strange language in a Country of Liberty; and
stranger still, in an Age of Reason. DIVINES, it is
true, have long disputed how experiments in Religion
should be made ! Some would depend on Scripture alone;
others were for taking in, Fathers and Councils ; a third
sort, for adding Tradition to the process ; and a fourth,
for applying raillery and ridicule to quicken the opera
tion. So that, ever since the fall of Monkery, all were,,
for making .some Experiment or other. For what is
making sober experiments, but (as hath been shewn)
supporting
Introd.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 231
supporting and illustrating REVELATION by new Argu
ments, furnished by new Discoveries made in the Order; j
Fitness, and Harmony of God s various Dispensations of
Religion amongst themselves, and with one another; just
as PHILOSOPHERS (from whom the Word is borrowed,
and we sec how unluckily) unfold Nature by new disco
veries, made from repeated trials on the obvious qualitie*
and hidden Contents of Material Substances.
No experiments in Religion is indeed the civil cant of
POLITICIANS ; for Bigotry and State -croft often meet;
as extremes easily run into one another by the very attempt
to keep them at a distance. This, as I say, is one of the
fundamental Articles of the Statesman s Creed. For
Religion being useful to Society ; and yet, in his Opinion,
only a well-invented Fiction, all experiments, that is, all
strict inquiries into its Nature, cannot but tend to weaken,
rather than support, this useful Ally of Civil Govern
ment. But for a man, who believes Religion to have
come, and in an extraordinary manner, from God, to be
alarmed with the danger of experiments, as if Truth
would not bear to be seen on all Sides, is the most ridi
culous of all panic terrors. Might we not reasonably
ask such a one, How it comes to pass, that Experiments,
which are of so sovereign use in the knowledge of Nature,
should be calculated to make such havoc In the study of
Religion ? Are not Nature and Religion both the Off
spring of God r Were not both given for human Contem
plation? Have not both (as proceeding from the dark
Recesses of his Throne) their depths and obscurities ?
And doth not the unfolding the Mysteries of his moral
Government tend equally, with the displaying the Secrets
of his natural, to the advancement of his glory, and the
happiness of Mankind ?
In a word, Had no experiments been made in Nature,
we had still slept in the shade, or beea kept entangled in
the barren and thorny paths of SCHOOL PHILOSOPHY;
and had no experiments been made in Religion, we had
still kept blundering on in the dark and rugged Wilds of
SCHOOL DIVINITY.
To conclude therefore, and in the words of our ^reat^ >K
Philosopher " Let no man, upon a weak commit of
" sobriety, or an ill-applied moderation, think or main-
U4 " tain
333 THE DIVINE LEGATION. [Pook IX.
" tain, that a man can search too far, or be too well
" studied in THE BOOK OF GOD S WORD, or in the
" book of GOD S WORKS; but rather let Men endeavour
" AN ENDLESS PROGRESS OH PROFICIENCE IN BOTH:
" only let them beware that the} 7 apply both to CHARITY,
" and not to swelling; to USE, and not to ostentation;
" and again, that they do not UNWISELY MINGLE OR
" CONFOUND THESE LEARNINGS TOGETHER*."
* BACON, Advancement of Learning, lib. i. Could we suppose the
divinity of Bacon s Genius to have been such as that he foresaw the
miserable havoc which a late Cabalistic Crew have made both of the.
WORKS and WORD of God by this impure and unnatural mixture, we
can hardly conceive words more expressive, or a warning more
awakening, than what is here contained in this caution against all
BUch blind Workers in dirt and darkness.
THE
DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES
DEMONSTRATED,
BOOK IX,
CHAP. I.
. : .J. l! I
I BEG AN this Work by an ARGUMENT (Ions; since
completed) to prove that A FUTURE STATE OF RE
WARDS AND PUNISHMENTS was not taught by Moses;
but -that, in its stead, an equal or extraordinary Pro-
cidence was the Sanction of the LAW. And I now con
clude it, with a corrohoration of that ARGUMENT, by
shewing, that life and immortality was brought to light
by the GOSPEL alone.
From whence results this further Truth, That were
MOSES and the PROPHETS the commissioned Servants of
God, THEY COULD NOT, by their office, TEACH A FUTURE
STATE ; since it was ordained, and reserved for, the
Ministry of JESUS.
Besides, What the LAW promised was to be obtained
by WORKS. What the GOSPEL brought to light, under
the name of Salvation, is to be procured by FAITH in a
crucified Saviour and Redeemer. From these Truths
will arise another proof of the Divinity, both of the LAW
and the GOSPEL.
But as all this can be shewn no otherwise, than by a
distinct and collective view of the whole of God s moral
Dispensation to Man, commencing with ADAM, and
completed in JESUS CHRIST, I have made the NATURE
AND GENIUS OF THE GOSPEL the subject of the Ninth
and last Book of the DIVINE LEGATION.
Of
234 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
Of the two immediately foregoing, namely, the Seventh
and the Eighth Books *, the first of them is employed in
supporting the MAJOR and the MINOR propositions of the
first Syllogism : by a continued history of the Religious
Opinions of the Jewish People, on this matter, from the
time of their earliest Prophets (who gave some dark
intimations of a different dispensation), to the time of the
Maccabees, when the Doctrine of a FUTURE STATE of
rewards and punishments was become National.
The other, namely the Eighth Book, is employed in
supporting the MAJOR and the MINOR propositions of the
second Syllogism ; in which is considered the PERSONAL
CHARACTER OF MOSES, and the GENIUS OF HIS LAW,
so far forth as it concerns, or has a relation to the Cha
racter of the LAWGIVER.
As the main Argument of all the foregoing Books, of
THE NATURE AND GENIUS OF THE LAW, has been
hitherto esteemed too Paradoxical ; the Argument of this
last, concerning THE NATURE AND GENIUS OF THE
GOSPEL, it is more than probable, may be condemned,
and by the same men, as being too Orthodoxical : For
I have, long since, observed, that a religious Notion is
apt to change its nature in the estimation of certain
Divines, when it changes its Advocate.
Were I concerned with none but UNBELIEVERS, in
this present Discourse, my only task, and a short one too,
would be to prove the reasonableness of these which
I hold to be the essential Doctrines of Christianity; for
Unbelievers confess they are to be found in the Gospel,
but deny them to be of divine Original, on account ot the
supposed absurdities which attend them ; in the same :
manner that they have allowed the Doctrine of a future
state, not to be found in the LAW ; and therefore denied
that Dispensation to be given by God, because such an
omission, they pretend, makes it unworthy ol him. This,
I say, h sd been a labour both short and easy, had I not
to do, likewise, uith a sort of BELIEVERS, who, as they
held that the- doctrine of a.ju-tune state made part ot the
MOSAIC RELIGION, because they think the honour of
the L^ w requires that it should be found there ; so, with
the same spirit, they deny that the Doctrine of Salvation
* bee p. 144 of this Volume.
in
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 235
in a Redeemer, by Faith alone, makes a part of the
CHRISTIAN RELIGION, because, they think, the honour
of the GOSPEL requires that it should not he found there.
Enough hath been urged, in the course of the main
Argument, against the Jirst of these perversities : the
second will detain us longer than such plain truths seem
to require : because the attempt to shew the reasonable
ness of these which we call the essential Doctrines of
Christianity, will be deemed immature, till we have
established very clear and circumstantial evidence of
their real existence in the SYSTEM : for laboured Dis
courses have been written to prove that FAITH ALONE
includes WORKS ; and that REDEMPTION, according to
the Scripture Doctrine of it, excludes a REDEEMER.
I am therefore, first of all, to prove the EXISTENCE
of these Doctrines; and then, the REASONABLENESS
of them. In doing which, I cannot but esteem it a
favourable circumstance, if not a happy omen, that the
very arguments employed to evince the existence of the
Doctrines, do, at the same time, serve equally to shew
the reasonableness of them.
A JOVE PRINCIFIUM was the formulary of ancient
Piety and Wisdom, which served to introduce what the
Sage had to deliver, of more than ordinary importance,
for the instruction of Mankind. But here, the very
nature of our present Argument will, of necessity, lead
us up to the FIRST CAUSE, the Author of all Being.
For, without beginning at the CREATION, our view
of these things would be narrow and obscure ; and
human judgment not sufficiently informed to enable it to
conclude, with any degree of certainty, concerning a
REVELATION, which is the completion of one great
Moral System, the principles of which were laid in the
disobedience of our first Parents.
In this Inquiry, as in all that have gone before, our
desire is, not to be carried up and down with the JVaves
of uncertain Arguments (to use the words of a great
Master of Reason), but rathqr positively to lead on the
Minds oj the simpler Sort, by plain and easy degrees, till
THE VERY NATURE OF THE THING ITSELF DO MAKE
MANIFEST WHAT IS TRUTH*
* Hooker s Eccl. Polity.
Moses,
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
Moses, in the account he gives of the CREATION, ex
pressly teiis us, that MAN, or the human species, was the
Work of the STXTH DAY. " So God created Man in
" his own Image; in the linage of God created he him ;
" MALE AND FEMAJ E CHEATED HE THEM. And God
" blessed TH EM, and God said unto THEM, be fruitful and
" multiply and replenish flic Earth, and have Dominion
" over every living thing that rnovcth upcn the Earth.
" And God sai i, behold I have given you every herb bear-
" ing seed which is upon the face of the Earth, and tvtry
" Trte, in which is the fruit of a Tree yielding seed, to you
" it shall bejor meat. And the evening and the morning
* were the SIXTH DAY*." Yet, because the formation
of WOMAN, from the side of MAN, was not circum-
st(intiulli) related till alter the account of God s placing
Man in PARADISE }", both Jews and Christians J have
generally concurred in one Opinion, that EVE was not
created i\\\ ADAM was put into possession of the Garden
of Eden ; for they took it for granted, that Moses
(though in a Moral or Religious history of the Creation
tmd Vail of Alan) had observed a Chronologic Order.
The very absurdity of this Opinion renders the mistake
so apparent, that the Reader should not have been
troubled with a formal confutation of it> did not the right
stating of the fact (so inconsiderable, as on first sight
it may bethought) serve to contirm a Truth, which hath
beon generally overlooked, though of the utmost impor
tance towards out* obtaining a just idea of Revealed Reli-
gioii , as will be seen in the course of this inquiry.
i . First, therefore, let it be observed, that Eve could
rrot be created in the Garden ; since we are expressly
told, that she was created along with Adam, some time
before, namely, on the sixth day. Male and female
created he them. A declaration so decisive, that the
Itabbins, who will needs have Eve completely formed in
** Gen. i. 27 31. t Gen. ii. 821 22.
I Le Clerc says 1 Ecriture nous apprend formellement qu Adam
donna les noms aux animaux, entre lesquels, il n en trouvoit aucun
pour Tassister ; aprcs quoi Ditu CREA la Fewme de 1 une des cotes de
I lioimmt!. Scntiwt-ns de yuelques Tliful. p. 4-23. Dr. Z. Pearce, i^
his Notes on Milton against Bentley, p. 233. And Hooker, in hit
Eccl. Pol. Book V. Sect. 73. Woman was eren in her Jirst Estat
nature not only ans* u* TIM*) Iwt inferior in exctllencie.
Paradises,
Chap.i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 237
Paradise, gathered from the Words Male and Female?
(used by the historian, where he speaks of the Creation
of the sixth Day) that Adam was an Androgune, a
double Animal, or Man-Woman, joined side to side*;
and that the operation of disjoining them was performed
in the Garden, where indeed Jesus tells us, not a .sepa
ration, but a closer union commenced.
2. When Moses gives us the Book of the generations
of Adam \, he repeats what he had delivered before, that
man was created male and female. Male and jewale
created he them^ AND CALLED THEIR NAME ADAM, ixr
TI1E DAY WHEN THEY WERE CREATED . Adam was
the common name for man and woman ; and that name
was given them when the Male was created ; conse^
quently the female was created with him.
3. On the other hand, the same kind of reasoning
which concludes, that the JVoman was not created till
after the sixth day, will conclude, that the man himself
was not created till after that day : for, if we suppose
the History of the Creation observes a strict chronologic
Order, he was not created till after the seventh day : the
sacred Writer, immediately alter recording the WORK of
the six days and the REST of the seventh, proceeds thus,
And the Lord formed man of the dust of the, Ground,
and breathed into Jus nostril* the breath of * life \ and man
became a living soul . Then follows the story of his
* This Jewish interpretation of the text appears to have been very
ancient: and to have come early to the knowledge of the Heathen-
World. Plato, in his Symposiutn, brings in one Aristophanes saying,
that the ancient nature of man was not as we find it at present, but
very different, lie was originally A>^cyt/>of, a ifian-vomtw. This
fancy affords occasion to a pretty Fable, perhaps of the Philosopher s
own invention, that these Artyyvm were a kind of double-animal,
joined back to back. But that Jupiter, when he set them agoing in
lh< World, slit every one of them, and then shuffling the separated part*
well together, committed them to their fortune : and the employ
ment of each of them being to find out its partner, the business of lite
was an incessant search of every one for its better half, in order to be
rejoined in a more commodious manner. This, says the Philosopher,,
is the true origin of Love. -\~ Gen. v. J Ver. L>.
Gen. ii. 7. Pkilo, misled by the common error, that a chrono*
logical order was observed in the history of the Creation, concluded
that the Adam, created in the Irna^e of God, Gen. i. 27. was a dif
ferent man from him who was formed of the dmt of the Ground f
ii. 7.
238 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
being put into paradise of his deep sleep of the Woman
formed from his side. If, to this argument, so similar in
all its parts, it be replied, that the direct assertion of
Man s creation on the sLvth day is alone sufficient to
prove that the alter mention of Information from the
dust of the Ground is but a repetition of, with an addition
to, the first account ; by which alone the TIME of Man s
creation is to be determined : if, I say, this be replied,
I shall take the benefit of the Answer, in favour of what
I have assigned for the time of Eves creation, where I
consider the account of her formation from the Rib,
just in the same light that the Objector sees Adam s for
mation from the dust of the Ground] that is to say, as
a repetition only (with other circumstances added) of
what the Historian had before told us, of Eve s creation
on the siith dm/, in these words MALE aha FEMALE
created he them *.
But further, on a supposition of a Chronological Order
in the relation, we shall be forced to conclude, not only
that Eve was created in Paradise, but that she w r as not
created till AFTEU the command was given not to cat of
the Tree of Knowledge (f good and evil] for the command
is found in the seventeenth verge of this Chapter, and her
formation from the Rib, not till we come to the twenty-
second verse : consequently, the prohibition did not bind
or affect Eve. Yet she tells the Serpent (and sure she
did not pay him in his own coin) that this prohibition
equally concerned both her and Adam. WE may eat of
the fruit of ihe trees of the Garden , but of the Tree
which is in the widst of the Garden, God hath said,
YE shall not tat of it *\. And accordingly, sentence is
pronounced by God upon her trangression, as well as
upon his^.
5. But lastly, to cut the matter short, the Historian
expressly tells us, that (j^A finished the work of creation
in six day. % and rested the seventh day from all his work
which he had made\. Eve, therefore, must needs have
been created with Adam on the SIXTH DAT.
Two points then, only remain to be considered, i . Why
Moses thought it expedient to give so very particular a
relation of Eve s formation from the Rib? 2. And why
* Gen. i. 27. t b. iii. 2, 3. : Ch. iii. 1316. Ch, ii. a.
he
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 239
he did not chuse to relate this circumstance in the place
where he mentions her Creation on the sixth day ?
i . The account of Eve s formation from the Rib was,
without doubt, given, to inform us, that the UNION of
the two Sexes, for the propagation of their kind, was
of a nature more noble and sublime than the consorting
of other Animals, who were all equally bid, like Man,
to increase and multiply. For as the Poet says,
" Not Man alone, but all that roam the Wood,
" Or wing the Sky, or roll along the flood,
" Each loves itself, but not itself alone,
" Each sex desires alike."
Thus far the common appetite impels ; and Man and
Beasts are equally subject to this second Law of Earthly
Beings. But, from henceforth, it becomes, in MAN,
a very superior Passion.
" The Young dismissed, to wander Earth or Air;
" There stops the Instinct, and there ends the Care *
" A longer care MAN S helpless kind demands:
" That longer care contracts more lasting bands :
* REFLKCTIOX, REASON still the ties improve;
" At once extend the interest and the love."
Now as REVELATION was given us (amongst other
purposes more peculiar, indeed, and important) to sup
port and strengthen the Operations of Reflection and the
Conclusions of Reason, what could better serve the
general design, while these were improving for the good
of the Offspring, than to instruct us in this closer relation
between the Parents, which arose from a personal Union,
prior to that of reciprocal fondness?
But the Historian still more expressly instructs us in
the end for which he recorded Rvcsj or /nation from the
Rib, where he makes Adam say, or rather says himself
Therefore shall a Alan Iccwe his Father and his Mother,
and shall cleave to his Ji r ife ; and they shall be one flesh :
alluding to what they originally were, before the separa
tion of the Rib.
But the allusions of Inspired Writers go further (of
which I have given many instances) than just to ornament
the discourse with the elegance of the conceit. Their
chief end is to support the particular Truth there incul
cated. Thus it is in the Text we are now considering ;
it
240 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
it contains an instruction partly declarative, and partly
perceptive. In (Btoeu^ttMKttfc, observant of the Command
to increase and multiply, the Offspring, when enabled to
provide for itself, is dismissed irom the Parent s Wing,
by an instinctive provision, which equally disposeth both
to a Separation. But the REFLECTION and REASON
bestowed upon Man, which engaged the Parent to a
longer care, in protecting, and providing for, its Off
spring, impiesseth on the Offspring, in its turn, a tender
sense of gratitude, and love towards the Parent, for the
benefits received in thrt defenceless state ; and naturally
disposeth it to be attentive to the welfare of the Parent,
when flattered by the glorious duty of returning an obli
gation. This might somewhat impede or run counter to
the first great Command and blessing, which, in the
infancy of the world, especially, required all possible en
couragement : Therefore, by the most divine address it is
here directed, that we should suffer this tie to give place
to one more important Therefore shall a man leave his
father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife.
2. With regard to the second point Why Moses did
not chuse to relate the Story of the Rib, where he mentions
Eve s Creation, on the sixth day This may be easily
understood. The Story of the Woman s formation from
the Rib is, as may be seen from the sequel of the story,
of so much concern in domestic life, that we cannot con
ceive a titter place for it than this, where we find it, in
the Entrance upon the fatal effects of our first Parent s
idle curiosity : from which Posterity might draw a Lesson
of great importance, viz. the mutual obligation incum
bent on each Sex, when united, to watch over the other s
conduct, equally with its own ; as nothing can affect the
welfare of the one, in which the other will not be equally
concerned ; each being destined to bear, together with
his own, the other s share, whether of good or evil. The
account, therefore, of Eve\v formation was, with much
art and decorum, omitted in the place where the Chro-
nologist would expect to find it; and postponed, till it
could be delivered with the advantage of being made an
introduction to the history of the FALL.
The best Historians have, in the same manner, created
beauties from a well-contrived neglect of the order of time.
12 The
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 241
The next thing to be considered, after the Mosaic
account of the CREATION of Man, is, what we are told
concerning his SPECIFIC NATURE.
*That he was of a nobler Kind than any other of the
Animals brought, at the same time, into Being, abund
antly appears from the LIKENESS in which he was made;
and from the PREEMINENCE which was given to him
over the rest. " And Ged said, let us make Man IN OUR
" IMAGE, after our likeness; and let him have DOMI-
" NT ON over the fish of the Sea, and over the fowl of the
u Air, and over the Cattle, and over all the Earth *."
Now, in what did this image or likeness consist ? Cer
tainly not in Man s having an IMMATERIAL PART, since
he had this, as the best Philosophy evinceth f, in com
mon with the whole animal Creation. And the Historian
makes the image, or likeness, to consist in something pe
culiar to Man. Now, the only two things, peculiar to
him, are his SHAPE and his REASON. None but an
Anthropomorphite will say, that it was his Shape, which
reflected this Image of his Creator. We must conclude
therefore, that it was the faculty of REASON which made
the resemblance.
But further, when God says, let us make Man in our
Image, it is immediately subjoined and let him have
dominion over the whole brute Creation. Now, nothing
but the faculty of Reason could invest man with this Domi
nion, DE FACTO, which was bestowed upon him, DE JURE.
Still further, we see Dominion was given him on ac
count of this preeminence of being made in the image of
God Let us make man in our Image, and let him have
Dominion But a preeminence, which qualified Man for
Dominion over other Animals, could be nothing but
REASON, which he had, and which they wanted ; whereas
an immaterial principle, with which both were endowed,
afforded no room for preeminence 9 especially such a pre
eminence as qualified Man for Dominion.
But now, the substance in which the faculty of Reason
resides, could not be a material substance, as this best
Philosophy, we say, hath shewn J. Man, therefore, must
* Gen. ii. 24. f See note [A] at the end of this Book,
t See Clarke and Baxter, as represented in the note [A] above
referred to.
VOL. VI, R needs
24^ THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
needs consist of an immaterial Substance, joined to a ma
terial ; or, in other words, he must be a compound of
SOUL and BODY. And this seems to be intimated, and
not obscurely neither, by the Words of the Text ; when
it comes, in the second Chapter, to give a more distinct
account of Man s Nature than hath been given in the
preceding Chapter, where He is placed, according to the
order of time, in the new framed System of Creation.
The Lord God formed MAN of the DUST OF THE
GROUND, and breathed into his nostrils THE BREATH OF
LIFE, and Man became A LIVING Sou L *.
By the words the breath of * life , and a living Soul
which discriminate LIFE in man from LIFE in brutes, we
are not to understand immateriality simply; since all
animals, as we say, have this in common ; but the CON
TINUANCE of life after the separation of the compound,
in virtue of Man s rationality, which making him respon
sible for his Actions, may, according to the different
parts in God s MOKAL economy, require that separate
existence.
But now, if it should be asked, Why this complete
exposition of Man s Nature was not given before, in the
first mention of his Creation, but reserved for the second,
two very important reasons may be assigned.
1 . Had the Historian given it in the first account of
Man s Creation, it would have had the appearance of
distinguishing Man, in his natural or physical capacity,
from other Animals ; whereas, in this capacity, there is>
in truth, no difference between them. Since the very
argument which evinceth the immateriality of the human
soul, evinceth the immateriality of the brutal. Yet, to
have left no mark of distinction between them when there
was one, had been a very faulty omission in the History
of Religion. Moses, therefore, with admirable address,
hath pointed out the difference, when he tells us, that
Man was created in the image of God f, i. e. endowed
with the faculty of REASON.
2. Secondly, the place, which points out this difference,
is made to serve for an introduction to the History of the
free gift of immortality. And a better cannot be con
ceived than that which teacheth us, that the Subject on
* Gen. ii. 7. f Gen. i. 37.
whom
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 243
whom this gift was bestowed, is, by the immateriality of
his physical Nature, capable of enjoying it ; and, by the
freedom of his reasonable Nature, accountable for the
abuse of it. So much is observed in honour of that
exquisite knowledge with which the sacred Writer was
endowed.
Having thus explained Mans PHYSICAL Nature, we
come to the consideration of his MORAL; which, hitherto,
we have but just hinted at, in shewing him to be respon
sible for his Actions. Now, as this responsibility is the
great Principle on which all Religion, or rather the Sanc
tion of Religion, is founded ; and as it is of the utmost use
in our enquiry concerning the true nature of the GOSPEL ;
to understand what Mode of Religion it was to which
Adam became subject, when he first rose from the forming
hand of his Creator, we must recollect what hath been
said concerning the TIME of his Creation, which, we shall
now see, will stand us in good stead to determine this
important question.
1 . For from thence it will appear, that the Man and
Woman, the Male and Female, were not immediately,
on their Creation, put into Paradise ; but had a State
and Condition upon Earth preceding that supernatural
Establishment.
That this first State of Man in the world at large was
not only prior to, but different from, his State in Para
dise, the Sacred Writer clearly intimates : God (says he)
on the creation of Man (male and female) blessed them y
and said unto them., Be fruitful and multiply, and RE-
PLENISH THE EARTH, and subdue it *.
But when, after they were put in possession of PARA
DISE, and the gift of immortality was there bestow r ed
upon them, they were not (immediately at least) to re-
plctiish the Earth at large ; but to replenish Paradise
only : from whence, as they increased, their Colonies,
perhaps, might be sent out to inhabit for a time, the
other parts of the Earth (not, then, a vale of misery and
death}, before they replenished the Regions of the Blessed.
2. Again, at the Creation of the first Pair God said*
Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed, which
i$ UL ? ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH; and, EVERY TREE
* Gen. i. 28.
R 2
244 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
in which is the seed of a Tree, yielding seed, "TO YOU IT
SHALL BE FOR MEAT *. But when God put them into
Paradise, he said, Of every Tree, in the Garden thou
may est freely eat\ but of the TREE of the Knowledge
of gotid and evil, THOU SHALT NOT EAT OF IT f.
Hence it appears that Adam and Eve had a MORAL
STATE, or \vere engaged to some Religion, before their
Paradisaical life commenced, and different from it ; for
in the first, there was no restraint of food ; in the second,
there was. Whether the Religion, to which they were
first subject, was that we call NATURAL, as being the
result and conclusion of that Reason with which, at our
Creation, we were endowed ; or whether it was that we
call REVEALED, or supernaturally taught by God, we
can only learn from Scripture. And Scripture teacheth,
even by its Silence, that it was NATURAL RELIGION to
which the first Pair were subject, from their Creation to
their entrance into Paradise.
For Scripture hath this advantage over human compo
sitions, that it teacheth as precisely by what it doth not
say, as by what it doth. In what concerns Religion,
there is nothing, either in its silence or in its enunciation,
that is ambiguous.
To give an instance, for the better illustration of the
matter before us. SPEECH might be acquired naturally,
as well as RELIGION. In this they agreed : In one
thing they differed Human Reason, which was able to
instruct in both, teacheth Religion, or our duty to our
Maker, and to each other, almost instantaneously : But
Speech, in the same School, is learnt only by slow degrees.
So that Man must have continued long in that brutal
State, to which the rest of the Animal Creation were,
from their very Nature, condemned. Yet it is hard to
suppose, that the all-gracious Author of our Being would
leave his Favorite Creature, Man, whom he had endowed
with superior gifts and prerogatives above the rest, to
struggle with this mute and distressful condition, from
which, unaided reason could only, by slow degrees, in a
length of time, set him free. But this uncertainty holy
Scripture removes ; by the information it hath given us,
that God himself, and not human Reason, was our first
* Gen. i. 2Q. f Gen, ii. 16, 17.
Schoolmaster
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 245
Schoolmaster in the rudiments of Speech. The text says,
And out of the ground the Lord God formed every
beast ofthcjidd, and every fowl of the air, and BROUGHT
THEM UNTO ADAM, TO SEE WHAT HE WOULD CALL
THEM; AND WHATSOEVER ADAM CALLED .EVERY
LIVING CREATURE, THAT WAS THE NAME THEREOF,
AND ADAM GAVE NAMES TO ALL CATTLE *-.
Here we have the most natural and familiar image of a
Teacher and a learner; where the abilities of the Scholar
are tried before they are assisted. From this text, we
likewise learn, that no more than the first rudiments of
Speech were thus, in an extraordinary manner, imparted
to Adam for his present and immediate use. He was
assisted in affixing names to sensible things, with which
he was to be perpetually conversant. And this was suf
ficient to put his reasonable nature in a train to advance
itself above the torpid silence of the brutal. Thus far
was man taught of God. But the further extent and
improvement of speech, particularly in its giving names
to more abstract ideas, was left to man alone ; which
names, as his necessities required, he would invent, and
treasure up for use.
This difference, in the two acquirements of Speech and
Religion, both of which natural Reason was able to teach,
but not with equal facility or speed, shews why God in
terfered in the one case, and why he did not interfere in
the other ; and consequently why the Historian s enun
ciation was necessary in the first instance ; and why his
SILENCE, in the second, was sufficient to give equal evi
dence to what was the truth.
This (which indeed concerns the subject in hand) ap
pears still clearer from the following considerations :
i. The PENTATEUCH is a professed history of God s
communication with, and extraordinary dispensations to,
Man, from the placing him in PARADISE to the giving
of the LAW. We have seen, that Man was subject to
a Religion, prior to that Will of God revealed to him
when he entered Paradise. Now, were the State, under
which he lived before the Paradisaical, the State of re
vealed Religion, the Nature of the Mosaic history re
quired that some account should have been given of it.
* Gn. ii. 19, 20,
R 3 But
246 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
But no account is given. We conclude, therefore, that
Man, on his Creation, came under the law of NATURAL
RELIGION-, or was, as the Apostle emphatically ex
presses it a Law unto himself *. On this supposition,
we can easily account for the Silence of the Historian,
His Theme was REVEALED RELIGION ; and to pre
serve the memory of such a Dispensation, it was neces
sary that the various modes of it should be recorded.
But the memory of Natural Religion was preserved by
an earlier Recorder, REASON : who wrote it, and con
tinues to write it, in the minds of all Men. Of this ori
ginal Record, Moses hath given sufficient intimation,
where, speaking of Man s nature, he tells, that it was
created in the LIKENESS OF GOD: meaning (as hath
been shewn) that Man was endowed with REASON. Now
such a LIKENESS implies his knowledge of, and confessed
subjection to, NATURAL LAW OR RELIGION.
2. But it is not only from the Silence of the Historian,
as to what preceded Man s migration into Paradise, but
likewise from what he expressly tells its followed on
Man s situation there, that we conclude, he was from his
creation to this time, under the guidance of the LAW OF
NATURE only: For the REVEALED LAW of God to
Man in Paradise, after bestowing upon him the free gift:
of immortality, consists but of one positive Command,
as the condition of this accumulated blessing : a condi
tion very different from any of those which Natural
Religion requires to entitle Man to God s favour : This
plainly implies, that Adam, by the Light of Reason,
knew already the rest of God s Will, with which, as
Moral Governor of the World, he had irradiated the
breasts of all Men. Otherwise, had this light been so
dim as to give no clear direction for his duty, we must
conclude, that the all-gracious Creator would have ex
pressly delivered to him a complete Code or Digest of
Natural Law, at the time when he enounced this re
vealed Command m Paradise. And that he did not give
any such, the Silence of the Historian, in a work whose
Nature would not dispense with such an omission, is a
certain proof.
To sum up all in a word Man s moral State, under
* Rom, ii. 14,
the
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 247
the revealed Will of God, began on his admission into
Paradise. From which truth it follows, that, from his
-Creation to that time, he was under the guidance of
NATURAL RELIGION.
And here let me just make an observation (which it
would be a fault to neglect, though it be but one of the
numerous instances of divine art in this inspired Writer)
concerning the different terms employed by him in de
fining Man as the subject of Natural Religion, from
those he uses in defining him as the subject of the Re
vealed. In the first case, Man is characterised by that
distinctive quality of his being made in the likeness of
God*, or being endowed with REASON ; the faculty
which denotes him the subject of Natural Religion ; that
Religion which teacheth the rewards and punishments of
Heaven INDEFINITELY. In the second case, he is dis
tinguished as a compound Being, made of the dust of the
earth and the breath of life f , which marks him out for
the adequate subject of that other Religion, denouncing
death -and immortality DEFINITELY.
To proceed. This natural State of Man, antecedent
to the Paradisaical, can never be too carefully kept in
mind, nor too precisely explained ; since it is the very
KEY, or CLEW (as we shall find in the progress of this
work) which is to open to us, and to lead us through, all
the recesses and intimacies of the last, and completed,
Dispensation of God to Man ; a Dispensation long be-*
come intricate and perplexed, by men s neglecting to dis
tinguish these two States or Conditions ; which, as we
say, if not constantly kept in mind, the GOSPEL can
neither be well understood nor reasonably supported.
So terribly mistaken have those good Men been, who
imagined, that the best way of serving the cause of Reve
lation was to deny the very being and existence of
Natural Religion.
But if some have allowed too little to this Religion,
.there are others, and those no declared enemies of Re
velation, who have ascribed a great deal too much to it.
Systems which, however different, are yet alike injurious
to the great Truth they profess to defend.
The one, by annihilating Natural Religion, cuts away
* Gen. i, 16. f Gen. ii. 7.
E 4 the
248 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
the ground and foundation of CHRISTIANITY ; the other,
by giving to Natural Religion certain Doctrines of
Perfection, to which it cloth not pretend, overturns the
Superstructure.
Having thus shewn that Man lived, at first, under the
guidance of Natural Religion-, let us now consider more
precisely, but with all possible brevity, What this Reli
gion is, and what it teacheth.
If my ideas, whether innate or acquired, do not mis
lead me, the whole of it may be comprised in this
" That Man, endowed with REASON and FREEDOM OF
WILL, is a Moral Agent, and accountable for his con
duct to his Maker ; who hath given him, for his rule of
Life,* a LAW, discoverable by the one Faculty, and ren
dered practicable by the other. That the faithful Ob
servers of this LAW God will reward, and the wilful
Transgressors of it he will punish ; but that, on repent-
ance and amendment, he will pardon, and be reconciled
to, Offenders."
This SANCTION of Natural Religion, evident as it is,
hath been brought into question, and disputed, not only
by those who reject our idea of such a moral System, but
by those who contend for it.
The first have said, that we know so little of God s
government of the universe, that it is hazardous to affirm,
that Man hath any claim at all to Revvard. The other,
that it is still more hazardous to affirm, that REPENTANCE
will certainly restore bad Men to the benefit of this Claim,
if, before their transgression, they had any such.
Yet the Truths (thus boldly brought in question) are
founded on this clear Principle, "That, taking in the
whole of a good Man s existence, God will bestow upon
him more of happiness than of misery," To deny this,
will tend to confound our distinct ideas of a good and
of an evil Governor of the World. Nor are these
truths, thus founded, at all shaken by our ignorance of
God s government of the universe. I apprehend, that
the supposed force of the objection arise th from Men s
not rightly distinguishing between God s PHYSICAL and
MORAL Government ; nor seeing how the consequences
of that distinction directs our judgment to decide of the
evidence in religious matters, and particularly of the
force
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 249
force of this objection. I will not here repeat my rea
soning on tiiis subject, which the reader may find already
delivered in pages 221, 222, and 223 of the Intro-
fusion, and will see repeated, occasionally, hereafter.
In behalf of these repetitions, had I added one more, on
the present occasion, I should have no need to apologize :
for as often as an old argument supports a Truth, newly
attacked, the use of that argument, on such an occasion,
cannot be called a repetition of it, but a different appli
cation of it to a new question. And every different ap
plication will give additional credit to the solidity of the
argument, when it is seen how many various purposes it
may be made to serve, and how many various Truths it
is fitted to illustrate. This is one of those FRUITFUL
ARGUMENTS, frequently to be met with in this Work,
which I have enforced again and again, in the support of
some new Truth ; and which, I make no doubt, a less
attentive Reader has as often condemned for a repetition
of the same thing.
From this Argument, so referred to, as it lies in the
Introduction, we may safely conclude, that a good man
hath a claim to reward: And this, I think, -Religionists,
consulting no more than their natural ideas, have generally
agreed in; and yet have generally concurred to deny that
other part of the proposition (though it stand upon the
same Principle) which teacheth, that God will re-establish
the repentant Sinner in his original claim to divine favour.
This may seem unaccountable ; but there is a secret
in it, which will deserve to be explained, for more rea
sons than one ; but at present, principally for the sake
of removing this difficulty.
The truth is, those Divines, who doubted of this re-
establishment, laboured under a groundless apprehension,
that to allow the Doctrine of reconciliation, on sincere
repentance alone, might tend to supersede the necessity of
the Christian Revelation ; which they erroneously sup
posed taught nothing concerning a future state but what
was discoverable, and had been actually discovered, by
the light of Nature : So that if natural Religion taught
ONE means of Reconciliation, and Revelation taught
ANOTHER, both could not be true. They, therefore,
/ejected that, as false, which natural Religion was said to
teach.
250 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
teach. And modern Unbelievers being under the like
delusion, viz. tluit Natural Religion and revealed taught
the same doctrine concerning a future state, reject, as
false, that means of reconciliation which Revelation,
pretends to have discovered.
But we have bestowed our pains to little purpose, if,
by this time, the attentive Reader doth not perceive, that
the Rewards, taught by natural Religion, are very diffe
rent in kind, as well as in degree, from those taught by
the Revealed: However, it lie hath not yet been suffi
ciently instructed in this important truth, the sequel of
our Discourse, to which we are now hastening, will, we
hope, give him entire satisfaction.
I had said, and on the Authority of St. Paul himself,
that natural Religion taught, that God Is a Rewarder of
them that diligently seek him*. Now, from his being a
Rewarder, which springs from his nature and attributes,
I have ventured to found Man s claim to reward.
But it may be asked, WHERE are those rewards to be
expected, and of WHAT quality do they consist?
To the lirst part of the question, 1 reply That, at
\\hat time soever God s Providence hath been dispensed
EQUALLY to the Sons of Adam, living under the direc
tion of natural Laic, they could expect their reward onlv
HERE. But, whenever they began to observe, that God s
Providence was grown ux EQUAL, and that rewards and
punishments were not regularly dispended here, they would
look to have the disorder rectified HEREAFTER. But of
this, more as we proceed.
To the second part of the question, Of WHAT quality
these rewards consist? I reply, We are taught to believe,
they shall be abundant, as suited to that better state of
existence to which they are reserved ; and as bestowed
by an all-bountiful Master, to whose more intimate pre
sence they shall be admitted : yet still bearing some
adequate proportion to Man s merit and desert.
If REASON, on the one hand, seems to revolt at the
thoughts of everlasting Punishment] (for, as (rod is a
Rewarder of the Good, we must conclude, the Apostle
would have us infer, that he is a Punisher of the Bad ;
since this exercise of his power over both Good and Bad,
* Heb. xi. 6,
stands
Chap.i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 251
stands on the same attributes of Goodness and Justice ;)
If REASON, I say, doth, on the one hand, seem to revolt
at everlasting Punishment, we must confess, that FANCY,
on the other (even when full plumed by Vanity), hath
scarce force enough to rise to the idea of infinite rewards.
How the heart of Man came to conceive this to be an
adequate retribution for his right conduct, during the
short trial of his Virtue here, would be hard to tell, did
we not know what Monsters PRIDE begot of old upon
Pagan Philosophy ; and how much greater still these
latter ages have disclosed, by the long incubation of
School-divinity upon Folly.
What hath been urged from natural reason, in support
of this extravagant presumption, is so very slender, that
it recoils as you inforce it. i. First, you say, " that
the SOUL, the subject of these eternal rewards, being
immaterial, and so therefore unaffected by the causes
which bring material things to an end, is, by its nature,
fitted for eternal rewards." This is an argument ad igno-
rantiam, and holds no farther Because an immaterial
Being is not subject to that mode of dissolution which
affects material substances, you conclude it to be eternal.
This is going too fast. There may be, and probably are,
many natural causes, (unknown, indeed, to us,) whereby
immaterial Beings come to an end. But if the nature of
things cannot, yet certainly God can, put a period to
such a Being, when it hath served the purpose of its
Creation. Doth ANNIHILATION impeach that Wisdom
and Goodness which was displayed when God brought it
OUT OF NOTHING?
Other immaterial Beings there are (as hath been
observed) who have the same natural security with man
for their existence, of whose eternity we never dream; I
mean the Souls of Brutes. But PRIDE, as the Poet ob
serves, calls God unjust :
" If MAN alone ingross not Heaven s high care;
< Alone made perfect here, IMMORTAL there."
Fanatics, indeed, both New and Old, have well provided
for the proper eternity of the human Soul, by making it
a part or portion of the substance of God himself*.
But so blasphemous a fancy, all sober Christians, from the
* &**. He [B] at the end of this Book,
most
252 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Cook IX.
most early times to the present, have looked upon with
However, let us (for argument s sake) allow the human
Soul to be un peri? liable by nature, and secured in its
.existence hy the unchangeable will of God: and see
what will follow from thence. An infinite Reward for
Virtue, during one moment of its existence, because
Reason discovers that, by the Law of Nature, some
lie ward is due ? By no means When God bath amply
repaid us for the performance of our duty, will he be at
a loss how to dispose of us for the long remainder of
ETERNITY? May he not find new and endless employ
ment for reasonable Creatures, to which, when properly
discharged, new rewards, and in endless succession, will
be assigned? Modest Reason seems to dictate this to the
Followers of the Law of Nature. The flattering expe-
dientof ETERNAL REWARDS, for Virtue here, was invented
in the simplicity of early speculation, after it had fairly
. brought men to conclude that the soul was immaterial.
^y
2. A second Argument, from the conviction it carries
with it, I would recommend to the care arid protection
of its Discoverers, the Pkttpnists and Poets \ namely,
Men s LONGINGS AFTER iMMOR/j A LIT v, even in the
state of Nature. These, say our Poetical Metaphysi
cians. and Metaphysical Poets, are a proof that we shall
obtain -what we long for ; since natural appetites were not
given in vain. The foundation, on which this argument
stands, is not, it must be confessed, quite void of all
plausibility. The general appetite for GOOD was indeed
given by Nature, to aid us in the easier and speedier
attainment of it. But in this consists the sophistry of
the reasoning Because the appetite for Good is essen
tial in the constitution of every sensitive Being, it is con-
. eluded, that we shall obtain the GREATEST GOOD which
the Imagination can form, for the object of its wishes.
And, to call this visionary Operator, Nature^ and not
Fancy, will scarce mend the matter, if the noble Philo
sopher* did not vilify his species, when he said, that
She did not know how to keep a mean or measure |- The
Phenomenon is easily explained. The PASSIONS were
given to excite our Activity in the pursuit of Good: and
* Bacon. t Mqdum tenere nescia est.
the
Chap, i.l OP MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 253
the violence of such of them, as drive most impetuously
to their end, will be apt to transgress the mean. But there-
is another part as essential to our frame, which is REA
SON"; and her office it is to keep the Passions within due
bounds; then most apt to fly out, when pursued by that
frightful Phantom, ANNIHILATION. And as the best
security against this terror is the pledge of immortality
we are too much in haste to inquire of Reason, Whether,
indeed, NATURAL RELIGION hath given us this security.
From all that hath been said, I would infer, that our
appetites, or LONGINGS after good, were given us, not to
lead the conclusions of Reason, but to be led by them,
kst these LONGINGS should become extravagant.
3. But the palmary argument is still behind. It is
partly Physical, and partly Moral. " The merit of ser
vice (say these Men) increases in proportion to the excel
lence of that Being to whom our service is directed and
becomes acceptable. An infinite Being, therefore, can
dispense no rewards but what are infinite. And thus the
Virtuous Man becomes intitled to immortality.
The misfortune is, that this reasoning holds equally on
the side of the UNMERCIFUL DOCTORS, as they are
called, who doom the Wicked to EVERLASTING PUNISH
MENT. Indeed, were this the only discredit under which
it labours, the mercile&s Doctors would hold themselves
little concerned. But the truth is, the Argument from
infinity proves just nothing. To make it of any force,
both the Parties should be infinite. This inferior emana
tion of God s Image, MA NT, should either be supremely
good or supremely bad, a kind of Deity or Devil. But
these Reasoners, in their attention to the Divinity, over
look the Humanity, which makes the decrease keep pace
with the accumulation, till the rule of Logic, that the
conclusion follows the weaker part, comes in, to end the
dispute.
This view of things, which presents to us the reward,
held out by the Law of Nature, clears up, at the same
time, the more disputed question, concerning the efficacy
of repentance alone, to reinstate us in God s FAVOUR;
and shews, that this doctrine of Natural Religion is
very consistent with what Revealed Religion teacheth,
concerning RECONCILIATION, on repentance : since the
rewards,
254 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
rewards, promised by each Religion, being totally diffe
rent, they may reasonably, when forfeited, have different
means appointed for their recovery. Hence it is, that,
by the Jirst, simple repentance, we say, is deemed suffi
cient; and by the latter, some ATONEMENT may be rea
sonably required, together with repentance.
On the whole of what has been said concerning
Natural Religion, we see, That REASON reclaims
against the pride of such of its votaries, who expect
eternal rewards, when that Religion only promiseth very
ample ones.
Come we now to the Condition of Man under RE
VEALED RELIGION. For God (as we must needs con
clude) having tried Adam in the STATE OF NATURE,
and approved of the good use he had made of his free
will under the direction of that light, advanced him to a
superior station in Paradise. How LONG, before this
remove, Man had continued subject to Natural Religion
alone, we can only guess. But of this we may be assured,
that it was some considerable time before the Garden
of Eden could naturally be made fit for his reception.
Since Moses, when he had concluded his History of the
Creation, and of God s rest on, and sanctification of, the
seveJith day*, proceeds to speak of the condition of this
new world, in the following terms: And God created
every living plant of thejield, before it was in the earth,
and every herb of the Jield before it grew ; for the
Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the Earth f.
Which seem plainly to intimate, that when the seeds of
vegetables had been created on the third day, they were
left to Nature, in its ordinary operations, to mature by
Sun and showers. So that when, in course of time, Para
dise was become capable of accommodating its inhabi
tants, they were transplanted thither. " And the Lord
" took the Man, and put him into the Garden of Eden
" And the Lord God commanded the Man, saying,
" Of every Tree of the Garden thou mayest freely eat;
" but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou
" shalt not eat : for in the day that thou eatest thereof
" thou shalt surely die J." In this manner, was the first
extraordinary revelation of God s Will, or what we call
* Gen.ii. 2,3. t Gi.ii, 4, 5. J Gen.ii. 15.
REVEALED
Chap.i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 255
REVEALED RELIGION, added to, or more properly built
upon, the Religion of Nature, which continued to be
the foundation of ail God s extraordinary Dispensations
throughout the whole course of his moral Government
of Man.
Well! Adam disobeyed the Command. He ate, and
became (as he was first created) MORTAL. And lest
(as the Historian says) he should put forth his hand, and
take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever *,
he is driven out of Paradise, and sent hack again to his
former State ; the subject of natural Religion. And in
this subjection lie continued till the giving of the LAW.
From tliis account \ve learn, that, had Adam not dis
obeyed the Command, he would have lived for ever,
exempt from the present condition of mortality ; since
tills return to it was the penalty of his transgression.
And lest we should make a wrong inference from what
we read, that immortal life was Man s natural claim from
the time of his creation ; and not a free gift bestowed
upon him on his entrance into Paradise; the Historian
tells us of the means employed to exclude him from the
THEE OF LIFE, which conferred immortality on the
Eater. The ideas which this language conveys are, in
deed, allegorical , but they inform us of this, and of
nothing but this, that immortal life was a thing extra
neous to our Nature ; and not put into our paste or
composition, when first fashioned by the forming hand
of the Creator f.
If it be asked, why Moses did not record this free gift
of immortality, lost by the first Adam, in as open and
clear terms as the second Adam proclaimed the recovery
of it ? the reason will be given, more at large, hereafter.
At present, I shall just observe, (though, perhaps, a
little prematurely) that the several MESSENGERS of God s,
several Revelations had each his proper office to dis
charge. It was the office of JESUS to bring life and
immortality to light, or to promulge the Doctrine of it
in open day. It was MOSES S office to record the loss, and
TO SUPPLY THE WANT OF IT , in that Dispensation
* Gen. iii. as.
f Gen. ii. 7. And the Lord formed man of the dust of the ground,
ike. compared with Gen. iii. 19.
t See the Subject of the DIVINE LEGATION.
which
256 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
which was committed to his Charge. Pie could go no
farther than just to hint at a recovery, in covert and ob-
scure expressions.
On these different and respective grounds then stood,
and must for ever stand, NATURAL and .REVEALED
Religion.
The first teacheth an abundant reward for virtue ; the
other promised a blessed immortality on the observance
of a positive command.
This distinction, carefully kept in mind, will reflect
great lights upon both Religions. As, by the neglect of it
the Mosaic Dispensation hath lain, for many ages, in
volved in obscurities ; and the Christian is become sub
ject to inexplicable difficulties. This will be seen as we
proceed.
At present let it suffice to observe, i. That this
account of the Paradisaical State supports our Capital
Assertion, that Natural Religion neither teacheth nor
promiseth eternal Rewards. While it is supposed to do
so, nothing can be conceived more discrediting of REVE
LATION ; for it will force us to conclude, that God arbi
trarily annexed Salvation, or eternal life, to one condition
by the Law of Grace, and to another condition by the
Law of Nature. This observation will have its weight
with those plain men, who allow, to the two connected
Laws, the common privilege of explaining one another.
2. It enables us to see clearly into another reason, why
the condition of immortality was the observance of a
positive command] and not the performance of moral
duty at large. For immortal life being a free-gift to
which no man had a claim by nature, it might be given
on whatever condition best pleased the Benefactor. And
the observance of a positive duty was very fitly pre
ferred to a moral] as it best marked out the nature of
the benefit, which was of grace and not of debt.
3. But there is still another reason, (arising from the
moral order of things,) why this free-gift, if it were fit
or necessary to be bestowed on condition, should rather
be annexed to a positive than a moral duty. No one, I
suppose, was ever so wild as to imagine, that had Adam
not eaten of the FORBIDDEN FRUIT, he would have
been intitled to immortality, unless he had likewise
observed
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 257
observed the dictates of the MORAL LAW, which natural
Religion enjoins : the habitual violation of which, unre-
pented of, every reflecting man sees, must have deprived
him of immortality, as inevitably as. the transgression of
the positive Command. The reason is evident. Man living
under the Law of Nature, when the free gift of immor
tality was bestowed on him, his previous qualification
to fit him for the acceptance of the free gift, must needs
be some reward ; or,., in other words, his having a claim
to that REWARD which natural Religion bestows. Now
nothing but the observance oi moral duties could intitle
him to some reward. The consequence is, that the ob
servance of moral duties was a condition annexed by na
ture, and appropriated to that reward which follows the
favour of God in general ; and so could not be made
the condition of a different thing ; viz. the free gift of
immortality , which was founded in a prior capacity of
reward ; and this capacity acquired by tiie performance
of moral duties.
These things give the curious observer such exalted
ideas of divine Wisdom, in the order and course of God s
Dispensations to Man. that (transported with the idea)
I have anticipated a Truth, which, though it be of present
use to confirm what hath been already said concerning
the separate states, and different genius of Natural and
Revealed Religion, yet belongs more properly to another
place ; where I shall employ it to remove a difficulty
which hath so long entangled, that it hath at length dis
credited the most rational as well as essential Principle
of Christianity..
In the mean time, we see, to how little purpose Di
vines have fatigued themselves, and others, to give a
.reason, Why a positive and not a moral duty was made
the condition of immortal life. In the course of which
enquiry, some have been so extravagant as to assert, that
the sequestered state of the first Pair made the observance
of a moral duty an improper condition to be annexed to
this free gift ; seeing, in that state, opportunities were
wanting to exercise them. But, if we divide moral duty,
as is commonly done, into the three separate Branches,
of Divine, Personal, and Social, \\e shall find that Adam
had an equal occasion to practise the two first, as if sent
VOL. VI. S into
*5* THE DIVINE LEGATION [book IX,
into a work! filled with Inhabitants ; and the most me-
yitorious part of the third, as soon as ever he was blessed
R-ith a Help meet for htm *.
The truth is, the- State of Natural Religion, under
which Adam lived till he was put into Paradise* unob
served by Divines ; ami the mistaken ideas entertained of
it, by them,, when they had observed it, and distinguished
it from the Reraited, betrayed them into these absurdities,
and gave- birth (as we shall see hereafter) to a thousand
errors, whidi have obscured and deformed the glories of
that last great and best Work in God s moral government.,
TUP! REDEMPTION OF MANKIND BY THE\S ACRI F1C
OF HIS
From the account here given, God s JUSTICE, with
regard to the effects of Adam s transgression ujxm his
Posted cy, is fully declared. Adam fell, and forfeited the
free g{ft of immortality hi the dm/ that thou cutest
thereof, tlmu. xhalt xurely .die t. lie returned to his former
state in which he was created, subject to mortality ; that
death which follows the separation of soul and body. It
k astonishing that any oth-er death should have been un
derstood by those words |, when the very; sentence fit
comkmnation itself confines us to the sense here give- .
..... //; the sic eat of thy face (says- God) sh-a-U thou eat
bread, ti/l r $\iQ\j HKTURN UNTO THK GROUND : for out
of it uv/sf thou taken: J or dust thou art, and UNTO DUST
fell ALT THOU RETURN >
In this State, Adam begat a Posterity, which na
turally became sharers in his original condition of Mor
tality |j. And, Were they injured in not being made
"partakers of a gift never bestowed upon them : Absurd!
y were If "ft and continued in possession- of all the
Rights inherent in. their original nature; and would hav^
*. Gen. ii. 18. f Gen. ii. 17.
See note |C] :it the end of this Book. Gen. iih 19.
: . jj * ; By. fhf Air. Locke) some men. und eratciiiit ettilkss for-
;* tii-jnts in, llelijire. But it seems a strange way of undarbtandiiig a
* Lu\v r (which rcqiures the plainest and directest words), that by
" d jal/i should be meant, eternal life in misery* Can" any one be sup-
" pui-:- i ti, by H Law, which says, for felony t/iou shalt surely- die not
** that, h.c sJionld lose his life, but be kept alive in perpetual and ex-
: ft qi.irit*- Ui: rnen-ts-? And would any one think hiinseif tairly dealt
.". with thtit was so used?" Ueusoaubleuess of Christianity, vol. ji.
Lad
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 259
had the benefit of the FREE GIFT, had not he, to whom it
was given, and from whom they were descended, forfeited
it before they came into Being*. What Physical con
tagion they contracted at their birth, either of body or of
mind, is of little use to enquire ; since, however Man
came by his Malady, his cure is one and the same.
So good reason had St. Paul not to think he impeached
the Justice of God, when ho said, that DEATH reigned
from Adam to Moses, even over those who had NOT
SINNED AFTER THE SIMILITUDE of Adam S trCWSgreS-
sion t, i. e. over those who died before they came to the
knowledge of good and evil. Now, as the death ^ here
mentioned, could be only Physical, though total ; the
death spoken of, in the same sentence, as denounced on
the rest of mankind, who had sinned after tJie similitude
of- Adams transgression, must, consequently, be Physical
likewise.
Thus both infants and adults falling under the very
letter of the sentence denounced on Adam, we see how
God s justice is made apparent.
Another important truth emerges from this account of
the FALL, viz. that this part of the Mosaic History is
NO ALLEGORY, as hath been commonly imagined. The
root of which conceit, as indeed of many other extrava
gancies that have deformed the rational simplicity of the
Christian Faith, hath been the confounding the distinct
and different sanctions of natural and revealed Religion
with one another. For Divines, as we said, having mis
taken these sanctions to be the same, namely IMMOR
TALITY, they were led to conclude, though against
the express words of the text, that Adam s transgression
was a breach of some precept of the MORAL LAW,
and, consequently, that the account which represented
it as the violation of a positive Command, was an
ALLEGORY : and being once got upon this fairy-ground,
every man had it in his power to pursue, as he liked,
the favourite Vision, which he himself had raised from
an Allegory left unexplained by the sacred Writer.
Numberless have been these monsters of the Irnagina-
* See what is said concerning the difference between .the forfeiture
of natural and adventitious Rights. Di v . Leg, B. v. 5.
f iicn\. v. 14. See ako note [l)J at the end of this Book,
s 2 tion.
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX;
tion. But a late Allegorist of the history of the Fall hath,
so discredited tlie trade, by his absurd and abominable
fancies, fit only to be told by himself*, that were it not
for the account which both believers and unbelievers find
in this commodious method of evading difficulties, we
might hope at length to get free of the dishonour of
having so long abused a rational mode of information.
We have shewn what the last bettering Writer hath
i.nvented, to render the abuse odious ] let us now see
what the last unbelieving Writer hath offered to render
the abuse ridiculous, lie assures us, that the Scripture
account of the FAJ.L /.? a MERE ALLEGORY, in the man
ner of the Eastern Fables, tignifying that man rcasformed
to a state of happiness and perfection, which lie enjoyed as
/ .v/A a* lie con tiuiu :d innocent, but lost and j orj cited it by
fd Oidng his tysfs aiidpassiotiSt in opposition to the will of
hi* Creator ; and became miserable as soon as he became a
wilful ami habit nal dnmr\.
Here we seethe learned Doctor throws aside his usual
reserve, and preaches up rank DEISM without disguise ;
while he makes the FALL from, and RESTORATION to,
life, as taught in the Old and New Testament, to be no
thing more than- an Emblem of the frail Condition of Man,,
to whom God had given the LAV/ OF NATURE for his.
only guide. On this principle lie attacks Dr. Water-
land s and Bishop Sherlock s explanations of the story of
the FALL. But the force of his reasoning (as hath been
the good fortune of most deistical Writers) springs not
from the truth of his own notions, but from the futility of
his Adversary s. " Pray tell us/ (says the learned
Doctor, with that vivacity which he never restrained,
when he had his Adversary at advantage,) " What is it
" we Christians are obliged to believe of it? [the story
" of the Fall. ] Must we believe it to be all an Allegory ?
" No. It is the allegorical interpretation that has drawn
" all this clamour from me, of weakening the authority
" of Moses and favouring infidelity. Must we believe
" it to be all literal? No. We are not allowed to do
* that, since there is certainly much mystery in it. What
11 then are we to do ? Why we are to consider it as
* See the Memoirs of the Life of Mr. \V. \Vhiston, vol. i. p. 339.
f Dr. Middk ton s Works, 410. vol. ii. p. 131. and voLiii.. p, 199.
" neither
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED.
" neither fact nor fable ; neither literal nor allegorical ;
" to interpret one sentence liter ally, the next allegon-
" calli] ; the third again literally ; and so on to the
" end of the chapter ; which, like the very Serpent
" it treats of, is all over spotted and speckled ; here with
" letter, there with mystery ; and sometimes, with a dash
" of both *."
This, on a supposition (the truth of which, both th6
Deist and the Believer took for granted) that the Mosaic
account of the FALL was an ALLECOFIV, hath its weight.
But -none at all, on the supposition, whose truth I have
endeavoured to evince, that the Mosaic account is a
HISTORY -OF FACT, and not, as the learned Doctor pre
tends, A MERE ALLEGG-RY; interlarded, indeed, as tha
undent Histories of greatest weight have always been,
with strong figurative expressions, as well allegorical as
metaphorical. In such a kind of composition, the best
rules of interpretation not only justify the rational Critic
in understanding some expressions literally, and others
alkgoricalhf, but necessarily require his observance of this
rule. To tfo what the learned Doctor requires of him
To stick throughout, either to the letter or tlicJ/gHre,
would betray much ignorance of the genius of ancient
literature. When Adam is said to have eaten of for
bidden fr-iti<t y and hrad to lurce committed ichvruiom,
Do these phrases (used by the same Historian in his
History of the Fall, and afterwards in the History of the
Jewish Dejection) make one more an ALLEGORY than
the other? Are not boiii narratives of facts f lgnra icely
adorned? the first, to denote Adams trau^- c^ wn of a
positive Command; and the -other, to signity th^^-jl ^lion
of the Israelites into Idolatry.
The cold raillery, therefore, of our learned Doctor,
while he considers the Mosaic Account of the FALL, as
neither fact nor fable, -neither literal nor ctttcgorictt!, but
to he sometimes interpreted one way, wmet lines anoihcr -
might, for his credit, have been sptuod; as imopuhg
us of -natking but his inattention to, or i yiorance of,
literary composition, as it was in its primeval state;
.early formed, and still continuing to exist, amo igst Peo-
pie undisciplined by arts and poiibued mnaners.
* Sec tke Doctor s Deduce of his Letter to Waterland.
.5 The
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
The truth is, our Critic in his censure, and those learned
Divines, in their defence, have equally confounded two
distinct Species of Writing with one another; that is to
say, an ALLEGORY with a real HISTORY ornamented
with metaphorical and allegoric colouring. The Di
vines, to serve their .occasions, did it, either wittingly or
inadvertently ; and the learned Doctor, to serve his,
either followed their example or imitated their practice.
These Divines had observed, that preceding Commen
tators on the Bible had, occasionally, in the narrative
parts, jumped from the literal to the allegoric seme, and
r> backward and forward to the end of the Chapter, be
cause they found, that where the language was full of
figurative terms, it was reasonable and necessary so to
do. Their error was, in supposing they might do the
same, in what they believed to be an ALLEGORY. On
the other hand, our Doctor saw the absurdity of this prac
tice in an Allegory ; but his error was, in supposing it to
be equally absurd to do the same in a. figurative narra
tion of fact.
And what occasioned the common mistake of both
parties was, their having (as we say) confounded these
two species of Co. n position with one another ; which
they would never nave done, had they but considered,
that the end of an ALLEGORY is to hide, and the pur
pose of allegorical., that is figurative expressions, only
to ornament.
But, as the History of the Fall is, in Dr. Middleton s
sense, a MERE ALLEGORY, and as his MORAL of the
Fable tends to reduce the whole Doctrine of the Gospel
to MERE DMSM ; I shall now endeavour to shew, from
the ver?/ gcwits of Antiquity, that his Moral is not of
the nature of th >se which the most early times loved to
disguise under f hat cover.
It is, in the learned Doctor s opinion, A MERE ALLE
GORY, hi tilt manner of the Ea-st em Fables, signifying, that
Man was formed to a state of happiness and perfection ;
which he enjoyed as long an he continued innocent, but lost
and forfeited it by following his lusts and passions , and
so became miserable.
The truth of his idea, of its being A MERE ALLEGORY^
hath been examined already. But this is .not the whole
12 Of
Gimp, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 263
.of bis idea : It is, if you will bclieye him, in the MAX-
XER OF THE EASTERN FABLES.
An observation that betrays his ignorance both of
Eastern Fables and Eastern Truth*. The Fables of the
Ancients, whether of the East or West, were invented, as
I have shewn elsewhere, for this end, and for no other,
iiamelj^jojjide from the People, tinder that cover, such
Truths as were above the People s capacity to compre
hend ; or were judged inexpedient, for the sake of public
-utility, thai they should know. This Veil, however, their
AVise Men were able to penetrate; and so could benefit
themselves of all the Truth conveyed under it ; and the
Public, of just so much as was judged expedient for
them to be, made acquainted with.
But what pretence is there to say, that either of these
-causes of concealment had any place in the MORAL,
which the Doctor is pleased to tell us is conveyccTuntIe.r
the fable of the Fall. The Moral contains a Truth of
the utmost clearness, and most general use ; whose pub
lication could be of no possible disservice to Society, <*r
-Jbe abused by one single individual in it.
On the other hand, if, instead of this MORAL, of A
simple lapse from Innocence to guilt, we believe that Jesus
and his Apostles have rightly interpreted the Mosaic
account of the FALL, where they inform us of the spe
cific nature of the loss which Aclarn sustained thereby ;
and ijpirom the .nature and course of God s Dispensa
tions, we see the fitness of its remaining a Mystery for
many ages, that J\lystery which (the Apostle telis us)
was hid from ages and generations, bat was at length
made manifest to the Saints * ; if this, I say, were the
ease, then, indeed, though the Doctor s Moral required
none of this Cover to his MI-IRE ALLEGORY : yet such a
Cover very well suited the History of Moses ; and justi
fied the interpretation of the Apostles.
Thus the POSITIVE COMMAND, whatever it specifi
cally was, is contained in the words of not eating of the
Fruit of the tree of good and evil the TEMPTER, THE
VIL BEING, is shadowed under the Serpent and the
CONDEMNATION TO DEATH, by Adam s return to his
first state of MORTALITY.
* Col. i. *s.
s 4 Having
264 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
Having thus cleared the revealed Doctrine of the
FALL from the absurdity of this deistical interpretation,
I now go on with my Subject.
Man, having forfeited the free gift of Immortality, is
driven out of Paradise*, and returned back to the state
and condition in which he was created, a Subject only
of NATURAL RELIGION. With tiiis difference, that,
before his entrance into Paradise, he was altogether ig
norant of the extent of his finite duration : on his expul
sion from thence, he might learn, from the terms of his
Sentence, that the execution of it, by DEATH, was at no
great distance. In the sweat of thij faceshalt thou cat
bread, till thou return unto the ground , for cut of it
wast thou taken : for dust thou art, and unto dust shall
thou return *.
But when we speak of the two Religions, natural and
revealed, we must distinguish (in our use of the term,
REVELATION) between a System oi revealed Religion,
and an occasional Communication of the divine Will to
Man, for his conduct on particular points, or for his
comfort in general, when the course of God s moral go
vernment required that he should, from time to time, have
intimations given to him, more or less obscurely, of the
hi .Men purpose of Providence in his favour; and this,
through various Dispensations, till, at the final comple
tion of them, life -md immortality should be again brought
to light and restored. These occasional Communications
began with that contained in the Sentence denounced on
the Serpent, or the EVIL ONE, that the seed cfthe Woman
should bruise Ks hcad\ and that he should bruise its heel^ :
And ended with that given by the mouth of Jacob, that
the scepti*c should not depart JromJudah , nor a Lawgiver
Jrom between his feet, until SIIILOH should come, to
whom the gathering of the People should be ^.
What followed these occasional Communications was
that SECOND SYSTEM of Repealed Religion, delivered to
the Posterity of Abraham, by Moses, preparatory to, the
THIRD arid last, under the Reign or rule of Shiloh, or
JESUS CHRIST, which took in and embraced the whole
Posterity of Adam.
* Gen, hi. 19. f Gen, iiu 15, J Gen. xlix, 10.
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 265
So that, of Revelations, in the sense of REVEALED SYS- ^. <^
TEMS of RELIGION, there were but THREE : the ftrsf,^
o-iven to Adam when placed in Paradise ; the second, to
the Posterity of Abraham, when going (under the ministry
of Moses) to possess the promised Land ; and the third,
promulged to all Mankind, by Jesus the Messiah.
Ignorance, of this matter, made the Rabbins invent a
fanciful System of Revealed lleligion, as given to the 80725
of Noah, under the name of the SET EM PRECEPTS. So
that it seemed proper just to hint at this distinction;
which, for want of attending to, hath been the occasion
of much error and mistake.
We have now seen MAN under the two first States of
God s Moral Government, the natural and the revealed ;
and how, by his misconduct in the second, he was returned
back again to the first ; in which he remained through
out the long interval from Adam to Moses ; when, by
this time, the NATURAL LAW was become so vitiated,
and obscured, that all memory of the LAWGIVER was lost
and forgotten. So that the knowledge of the one true
God, on which all natural as well as revealed Religion j
is founded, was, of necessity, to be REPUBLISIIED to
the world, by MOSES, when he entered on his Mission ;
who not only rekindled its extinguished flame, but, by the
Dispensation committed to his care, in which the first
Cause constantly and immediately directs all things, ob
viated the like misfortune for the future.
And as this Dispensation, called the LAW, being the
prelude and preparation to the GOSPEL, whose Author
was the promised MESSIAH, the Restorer of what was
lost in Adam, couhi.fop only made intelligible by the pre
vious knowledge of the cause and nature of that loss,
therefore hath Moses studiously recorded that previous
Knowledge.
And here it will be proper to observe, that had Jesus
teen only a MESSENGER sent from heaven, with no other
purpose than to propagate a System of revealed Morals,
or to republisk the Law of Nature, we can see no reason
why LIFE AND IMMORTALITY might not have been pro-
mulged by MOSES for the Sanction of the Law, as well as
by JESUS CHRIST, who hath made it the peculiar Sanction
of the Gospel ; and so both Doctrines, that of the true
God,
266 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
(* od, and of eternal life, have come from Heaven to
gether. The SOCINIANS, and they who deny a RLDEMP-
TION by the Atonement of a HEAL SACRIFICE on the
Cross, wc.ukl do \\ell to reconsider this matter. But
more of it in a fitter place,
To proceed. By the Penalty inflicted on Adam, lie
(\vith aii his Posterity) was again made mortal; that is,
became rxTixcT, at the natural dissolution of the union
between boul and Body.
But ft&t distribution of reward and punishment, which
Cod, under every mode of his Moral Government, makes,
with supreme justice, either here in this world, or here
after in another, was (when the sentence of DEATH was
denounced on Man s transgression) at first made here iu
this world, so long as he continued to be favoured with
the administration of an equal or extraordinary Provi
dence. Which, as we learn from the Mosaic History,
continued from the FALL down to the time uhen Poly
theism universally prevailed. For, when the World, by
reason of the Vices and Corruptions of its Inhabitants,
did not like to retain God in their know ledge, but changed
the glory of the incorruptible God, into an Image made
like ^ to corruptible ML/JI*, that first dispensation of Pro
vidence was withdrawn.
Yet, as soon as God had selected a chosen Race, and
had separated it from the rest of Mankind, to place his
name there, we see with astonishment, this equal Proyi-
il-, :Ce rev ne in Judca ; for Man was still under. the Cifr.se
or \oorn of death. And this existed, till repeated Idola
tries, the crime which first caused the equal Providence
to be withdrawn from the Nations at large, did at length
deprive the chosen People, likewise, of their share of this
blessing.
And, by such time as they had invariably returned
from their Apostasy to the pure worship of the God of
their Fathers, the Coun-e of God s floral government
required, that the nature and genius of the GOSPEL (the
Religion which completed ail the fo reccing, and which,
bv- die recovery of what <vas lost in Ad. mi, made an tqual
/- ; no longer necessary) was gradually revealed
. untu them, ibis, us we say, superseded the use, and
* K.om. i. 23 --28.
prevented
Chap, i.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 267
prevented the return, of that equal Providence ; which,
otherwise, on their adherence to the God of Israel, and
perseverance in his worship, they might naturally have
expected. Nay? Hie full conviction of their recent loss,
joined to the scattered lights in the later Prophets,
together with, otbcr less legitimate helps, enabled them
to gather and arrange then ideas in favour of a FUTURE
STATE; as hath been she n at large in the foregoing
Books.
These lights Divine Providence, in its course, did
indulge to then;, ila the Sun of flight evtisjiess arose, lest
the sudden splendour of his appearance should totally
dazzle this blinded and devoted people ; who, thus in
dulgently prepared and made fit to receive the Gospel,
were, by their rejection of it, re nek-red totally without
excuse.
These observations, the Reader sees, add further
evidence to the Truths advanced in the former Books,
concerning this EXTRAORDINARY PROVIDENCE.
The course of my Argument, in those Books, led me
.to deduce an equal administration of Providence in the
Jewish State, from the Nature of its THEOCRACY;. My
Subject here leads me to shew, from the general ORDER
of God s Moral Government, that this equal Providence
was administered in the world at large, while it retained
the memory of the true God ; and was again administered
in the Land of Judea, when, by the Mission of Moses,
the true God had there regained his rights.
All this, when carefully considered, will, amongst a
varcity of other reasoning, be one incontestible proof
of the truth of REVEALED RELIGION. Here, in the
MOSAIC, we find it so contrived, by divine Skill, that the
peculiar Nature of that Economy, under a THEOCRACY,
should coincide with, and concur to support, that very
.dispensation of Providence which naturally arose from
the punishment of the PALL. This also will add strength
and light to all my former reasoning, for the extension
of this extraordinary Providence to PARTICULARS. For
now it is seen, that this dispensation was not merely
political and attendant on a Theocracy, where civil con
siderations often overlook the care of individuals ; but it
was a general dispensation of Religion, from the FALL to
the
-68 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
the time when idolatry overran the World : and was again
administered when and where the knowledge and worship
ef the true God was restored.
" It is true (may an objector reply), that this different
administration of Providence, between the faithful fol
lowers of the true God, and the careless apostates from
i>is worship, did preserve the dignity due to God s Moral
Government; yet still this difference appears to he so
great, that it looks like an impeachment of the divine
Attributes, to confine this benefit to such only, who liked
to retain God in their knowledge, while the rest of Man
kind were left and abandoned to the evils consequent
on an irregular and unequal administration of Provi
dence. *
This objection would have weight, if those who were
included under the Sentence passed on Adam should be
irremissibly doomed to the short existence of this mortal
life. But a secret REPRIEVE (kept hid, indeed, from the
early world) passed along with the Sentence of Condem-
nation.. So that they who never received their due in
this- World, would still be kept in existence till they had
received it in the next : such being, in no other sense,
sufferers by the administration of an unequal Providence,
than in being ignorant of the reparation which attended
them. For we learn, from sacred Writ (what the prin
ciples of natural Reason do not impeach) that the DEATH
of Christ had a retrospect from the FALL of Adam ;
and that REDEMPTION was, from the first, amongst
the principal Ingredients in God s Moral Government
of Man.
Now, if the goodness of God thus provided for human
redemptiot?, that goodness, joined to his justice., would
make the redemption -\s (xt-nsive a> the forfeiture. But,
in case a retrospect did not take place, it would not bs
thus extensive. More words would only obscure a truth,
which the sacred text liuth rendered so plain and clear.
Ye were redeevu : (says St. Peter) icith the precious
Mood of Christ, FOREORDAINED from the foundation
ef the World, but W&& ..MXIFEST in these last times for
itau*\ St. John explains, from the words of Jesus him*-
etfj what is to be understood by his being foreordained^
* i Peteri. 20,
viz,
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 269
viz. That it was receiving the glory which accompanies
the entrance on an high office And nozv, O Father^
G LORI FT me, with the GLORY which I had zvith thee
before the World was. I have MANIFESTED^/ name
unto the men which thou gavest me cut of the World*\
St. Peter, in the words above, disthigiusheth -between
the advent of our Redeemer, and the efficacy of his death,
in teaching as, tliat, though his MANIFESTATION was
kite, yet the virtue of his FOREORDAIXED Redemption
operated from the most early times. For it would be
trifling to speak of & pre-ordination, which was not to -be
understood of a prc-operation ; since those to whom the
Apostle wrote well understood, from the Attributes of
the Godhead, that all things that were, had been pre
ordained^ in the simple sense of the word. The other
sense, of a pre-operation, St. John more forcibly ex
presses, by the Lamb SLAIN from the foundation of the
But if the course of God s various Dispensations
required, that this Act of grace, the REDEMPTION,
should be kt pt hid for Agex, and- never fully revealed
till the Advent of his SON, it could not be otherwise, thaa
that, in the intermediate Dispensations, Mankind must
be slill represented as suffering under the forfeiture of
Adam ; in Scripture language called, lying under the
curse : Nor had such of Adam s Posterity any cause
to complain that the REDEMPTION was kept hid fnoiri
them, since it was an Act of Grace, and not of Debt*
f which they would finally, and in due time, have the
benefit In the interim, as hath been shewn above, the
moral government of God, revealed to us in Scripture,
was administered to them in such a manner, a&, soonei
*r later, to proclaim its perfect equity.
C H A P. II.
IN this manner did the FREE GIFT OF IMMORTALITY,
become forfeit, by Alan s violating the CONDITION on
which it was bestowed, For a GUT is not the less c /}^
by having a condition annexed unto it : the quality of a
* John xvii. 5, 6.
\ Bev. siii. 3. See also note [E] at the end of this Book.
free
270 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
free gift not arising from its being without condition, but
from its being without a claim of right.
It is true, that a Condition, annexed to a claim of right,
is of a different nature from that which the Governor of
the world hath, seen lit to annex to a free gift : the first
ariseth out of the settled constitution of things ; the
second depends on arbitrary will and pleasure. Thus
MORAL VIRTUE was the condition of that favour and
protection which the Creature, Mc-n, claims from his
Maker; but the OBSERVANCE OF A POSITIVE COM
MAND was the condition ofthe t /ra? gift of immortality.
Again, the Law of Nature informs us, that the Con~
dit wn, which accompanies a claim, is, when unperformed,,
still capable of recovering its efficacy : the same Law
likewise directs us to the means, namely REPENTANCE.
Bat the violated Condition, annexed to & free gift, is not
thus recoverable.
The reason of this difference is apparent. -God s.
Creatures have a claim to his fa 1 our and protection,
whenever, and as often as, the breach of the Condition
is repaired bv sincere repentance ; because the relation
between the Creator and Creature makes the claim indis-
solvable. But IMMORTALITY being a// ee gift, which
gift fasti relation doth not naturally infer ; when the con
dition, oii which it was bestowed, is broken, the benefit
is irrecoverably taken back. The consequence of which
is, that if God, in his infinite goodness, shall be pleased
to restore again tite&free gift, he may do it by what
fneans he sees fit, as not being confined to that which his
own establishment hath prescribed, for the recovery of
Jsfta f&votir and protection simply.
The means, therefore, of regaining the free gift of
immortality, when God had graciously decreed tl:at
it should be regained, can be only known by HEVELA-
TION.
Another specific difference between the Conditions
annexed to a grace, and to a claim, is this, that as the
condition of the former is the observance of an arbitrary
Command, this Command may not be the same (though
still arbitrary, as annexed to afree gift) when that grace
is restored, with what it was in thejirst donation. It was
not the same; as we shall see when we come to speak* of
the
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 271
the concretion of life and immortality again brought tg
tivht. Where we shall, at the same time, be enabled to
see God s gracious purpose in the Change.
But here let us always keep in mind (which not to do
will occasion much confusion in handling the subject
of REDEMPTION), that the MEANS of recovering a benefit
lost, and the CONDITION annexed to that benefit, when
recovered, are two very distinct and different things.
Both of which, viz. of the MEANS and the CONDITION,
we shall speak to in their Order.
And first of the MKANS ; and to Whom intrusted.
The MEANS employed in this great Work, the RE*
DEMPTION OF MANKIND, human reason alone was nol
sufficient to discover.
It may, indeed, be collected from the Principles of
Natural Religion (as we have more than once observed,
and cannot do it too often) that God, on the sincere
repentance of Offenders, will receive them again into
favour, and render them capable of those rewards na
turally attendant on right behaviour. But the case
before us is very different. The benefit lost by Adam s
transgression was a free gift, a matter of grace. Our
restoration, therefore, to that benefit must needs be of
grace likewise ; consequently, the means resided in the
hidden counsels of the L estower, and so not to be tbund
in the promulgcd Digest of Natural Z#:r.
lie might have restored us, and certainly would, had
be seen it best, on the common terms on which Natural
Religion assureth us he will receive returning Sinners to
his favour : or he might, with equal justice, in perfecting
the great work of R&teniptioH* require AUHIE ; namely, a
MEDIATION, enforced by some kind of SATISFACTION.
But what his good pleasure was herein, it was impos.^blfe
tor human Reason to discover; whatever fitness that
Reason may perceive iu these MEANS, when revealed.
Indeed, had it been decent for falling Man, aided only
by the glimmering lightof that indefinite promise, that lie
should some Jime or other be restored to his lost in-
heritance"; had it been decent, I say, to indulge his con
jectures concerning the Counsels or the Most -High, ife
would have baen. apt to think that a MEDIATOR might
be employed amongst ihe m&anx used in this Rest C
72 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
since he is able to see the same fitness of such an inter
position in matters of grace, as of repentance done in
matters of right. MEDIATION implying a confession,
that the thing requested is merely of grace; to the
obtaining of which, Man doth no iurlher co-operate than
by his hopes and wishes.
How reasonable such a conclusion YV(,U!:J have been
we find by this, that the v< r\ AJI A\S, here supposed,
have been, as we have sai- , in Jacf, used, and accepted
by the God of our Salvation. lor there i;, cm God,
(says -St, Paul) and one MEDIATOR bauitn God and
Jinn, the Man Jesus Christ *. Jtsus (says tlie Author
of the Epistle to the Hebrews) is the MEDIATOR of
a better Covenant, which was established upon better
promises f~.
The modesty of R eason finds its account in Conclusions
thus confirmed ; and the Truth of Scripture receives
light and strength from Conclusions thus made.
We are now to consider of the Person of this Mediatory.
and then enquire into the manner in which he discharged
his J\lcdiat;cn.
The eternal Son of God, Jesus, the Messiah, was the
Person appointed to this Office J. The time of his
appearance was foretold by the Jewish Prophets : and
the nearer they lived to that time, the clearer and fuller
were their intimations concerning the Character and
Fortunes of him, who was sent to REDEEM Israel,
and to bring again to light that life and immortality
which was lost by the transgression of Adam.
The manner in which he was to discharge his MEDIA
TION, is our next enquiry : Whether he did it simply
by INTERCEDING for the remission of the Forfeiture; or
whether by SATISFYING, at the same time, for the Debt?
is the Question. Now, as it rested in God s good
pleasure, which of these he would accept, we must again
have recourse to Scripture for information : where we
find, that the intercession was by way of SATISFACTION"
for the Debt.
This Satisfaction is called in Scripture, REDEMPTION;
a term taken from civil transactions amongst Men, where
* i Tim. ii. 5. t Heb. viii. 6.
I See note [! ] at the end of this Book.
the
Chap. 2.] OF JV1OSES DEMONSTRATED. 273
the things or persons redeemed were paid for, with a price.
Hence St. Paul, speaking of our Redemption from the
forfeiture of Adam, expresseth it by this Periphrasis, Ye
are bought with a price *.
The price paid was the DEATH of the Son of God.
Christ died for the ungodly f, says he. And again,
Christ died for our Sins^he died for <2// to obtain
salvation, our Lord Jesus Christ died for us ||. On this
account, and in allusion to the like transactions amongst
Men,- the Redeemer is called the LORD -of those whom
he redeemed For to this end (says he) Christ both died
and rose and revived, that he might be the LORD both of
the dead and living * *.
- And now let us proceed to the nature of that DEATH
which had the efficacy of REDEMPTION.
1. First, it must be VOLUNTARY Hereby we perceive
the love of God, because he laid down his life for #yf"|~,
says St. John. / lay down my life for the Sheep, (saith
Jesus himself) no man taketh it from me, but I Lay it
down of myself. I have power to lay it down ; and I have
power to take it again. Th is COMMANDMENT have I
received of my Father J . Here he represents the laying
down his life as a power bestowed, in consequence of a
Command received. And this will lead us to consider
2. The second requisite of a voluntary death effica
cious of redemption ; which is, that it must be OFFERED
UP, in consequence of pre-ordained acceptance, called, in
the text, a COMMAND. And what is a religious offering
iip to God, but a SACRIFICE?
In this sense (the proper sense of the word,) the holy
Scriptures expressly call the death of Christ a SACRIFICE,
St. Paul speaking (as is his wont) in the Language of the
Law, says, Christ our Passover is SACRIFICED^/*
us,
* 1 Cor. vi. 20. f Rom. v. 6. J i Cor. xv. 3.
2 Cor. v. 14. |j i Thess. v. 9, 10. * * Rom. xiv. 9.
ft i John iii. 16. JJ John x. 15 18.
To this an objector may reply, If St. Paul speaks in the
Language of the Law, why is not the word Sacrifice part of that
language, as well as Passover ? And if so, says such a one, your
argument from this text, in proof of a real Sacrifice, is enervated. To
this I answer, the language of the law may extend to names without:
extending to things. It plainly does so, here. The word Passover
VOL. VI. T i t
274 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
us*. The Writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who-
rarely speaks any other Language, says Christ ncedetk
not daily, as those high Priests, to offer up SACRIFICE,.
first for his men sins, and then for- the People s ; for th\&
lie did oxcc when he OFFERED UP HIMSELF^. Again -
Christ hath appeared to put away sin,, by the SACRIFICE:
OF IIIMSELF;[;. And again He teas onte OFFERED to*
bear the sins of many .
But the virtue of expiatory Sacrifices consisted in*
procuring ATONEMENT, by some sort of SATISFACTION.
And thus the expiatory Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross:
operated for our REDEMPTION.
One could hardly have thought it possible, that any-
Man, who had read the Gospels, with their best Inter
preters, the Authors of the Epistles, should ever have-
entertained a doubt, WHETHER; THE DEATH OF CHRIST
WAS A REAL SACRIFICE?
But mistaken notions, concerning the origin anch
nature of this sacred Rite, have so obscured the Ratio-
waleoi it, that the SOCINIATCS, who boast to have inter
preted Scripture on the severest and justest Laws of
Logic and Criticism, have, in this instance, as well as
in many others, deviated more from these Laws than the
most licentious of the Ailegorhts, or the wildest of the
tipiritualiscrs. Here, in their care to avoid an imaginary
Absurdity, they have fallen into a real one, and of the-
grossest kind, while they consider the death of Christ as
nothing more than THE SEAL OF UTS MISSION. For,
were this all, so bloody an Impression might have been-
well spared ; &ince the proper Seal of his Mission, or the
evidence of his being SE^T, were MIRACLES performed
aucl PROPHECIES fulfilled: His DY/ING, if it were only
in support of what he taught, could be nothing more than.
the seal of his Integrity.
But ignorance of the ORIGIN AND NATURE OF
SACRIFICE hath misled these our Rationalists into the
gross and semi-pagan errors concerning the Rite itsself.
And
is language peculiar to the Law: the word SACRIFICE, though the
language of the Law, is not peculiar to it, but in use throughout the
whole religious World to denote a ltite t common,- at that time, to all
Men.
* i Cor. v. 7. f Heb. vii. 27. J Heb. ix. 26. Helx ix. 2.8^
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 275
And therefore it will be expedient to give (though it
may prove a work of some length and labour) an enlarged
History of this whole matter.
As SACRIFICE is almost coeval with the human Race,
its nature and supposed effects depend on the knowledge
of its Original , which is only to be found in the notions,
habits, and customs of the first mortals.
The PRINCIPLE advanced in the fourth Section of the
fourth Book of this work, together with the reasoning on
that Principle concerning the ANCIENT MODE OF CON
VERSE BY ACTION IN AID OF WORDS, will lead us (so
prolific is that Principle, in laying open the most secret
treasures of Antiquity) to the true rationale of this widely
extended, and as widely mistaken, Rite of Sacrifice. This
will shew, how the common sentiments of our Nature
would draw the first Men into this mode of worship,
whether the SACRIFICE was EUCHARISTICAL, PRO
PITIATORY, or EXPIATORY. Under one or other of
these Classes, I suppose, ail sorts of Sacrifice may be
reasonably comprised. Though the Egyptians, we arc
told, extended the number to six hundred sixty and six.
But their Sacrifices, like their Kings, were wantonly
multiplied at pleasure, in defiance of time and truth, to fit
the purpose of every fabling or designing Priest. Tor, the
Sentiments which nature and reason excite in every pious
breast towards the Author and Support of our Being, are
simply these. Gratitude for good bestowed ; Application
to him for good sought or wanted ; and Repentance, for,
and deprecation of, Crimes committed.
i. Gratitude gave birth to Eucharistical Sacrifice.
And this duty was, in the most early times, discharged
in EXPRESSIVE ACTION; the least epuivocal of which
was, the Offerer s bringing the first fruits of Pasturage
or Agriculture, to that sequestered place, where the
Deity used to be more solemnly invoked, at the stated
times of religious Worship ; and there, presenting them
in homage, with a demeanour which spoke to this pur
pose " I do hereby acknowledge thee, O my God!
" to be the Author and giver of all good : and do now,
" with humble gratitude, return my warmest thanks
" for these thy blessings, particularly bestowed upon
me."
T 2 Tilings,
576 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
Things, thus devoted, became, from thenceforth,
sacred. And to prevent their desecration, the readiest
way was to send them to the Table of the Priest, or to-
consume them in the fire of the Altar.
2. The P no P i T i A TORY S A c R i K i c E was precatory, to
implore success to their labours^ in order to procure and
improve to their use these common blessings of Provi
dence ; and deprecatory, to avert the evils due to the
past abuse of such blessings. And in this species of
Sacrifice, likewise, the oblation was so contrived as to
be an Action equally expressive of an invocation for the
continuance of God s favour; and for the remission of
the Offerer s transgressions,
3.. But it is the third Sort, the EXPIATORY SACRIFICE,.
which, by reason of the horrid abuses it early underwent,
hath obscured the whole face of things : yet the luciferouss
Principle, here applied, to illustrate this whole matter^
shews EXPIATORY SACRIFICED) be, in its nature, as
intelligible, and in practice as rational, as either of the
other two. Here, instead of presenting the first fruits
of agriculture and* pasturage, in conr, wine, oil and wool,,
as in the euchtiristical, or a portion of what was to be
sown or otherwise propagated, as in the propitiatory ;
some ebpsen Animal, precious to the repenting Criminal;
who- deprecates, or supposed to be obnoxious to the
Deity, who is to be appeased, was offered up and slain
at the Altar, in an Action, which, in all languages, when
translated into words, speaks to this purpose, " I con-
" less my transgressions at thy footstool^ O my God !
" and, with the deepest contrition, implore thy pardon ;
" confessing that I deserve death, for these my offences."
- The latter part of the Confession was more forcibly
expressed by the slcticn of striking the devoted animal,
and depriving it of life ; which, when put into words,<
concluded in this manner " And I own that I myself
i( deserve the death which I now inflict on this Animal."
But here it will be proper to observe, that as crimes
of a lighter complexion were atoned for, as well as depre-r
cated in the propitiatory Sacrifice; so those of a deeper
die could he only blotted out by the expiatory. This
frequently brought into both the slaughter, or at least,
the consecration of a devoted animal, by an action which
spoke
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 277
spoke alike in each; but louder in the expiatory, while,
in all the three, the action of Sacrifice still expressed a
reasonable language.
But this system of Sacrifice, so well supported by what
we know of plain and simple Nature, In its most early
movements, is further realized by what Historians tell us
was pronounced by the mouth of the Sacrificer himself;
who frequently explained his own action by the words
with which he accompanied it.
We learn from Antiquity, that when friendly or ad
verse States had entered into an alliance for mutual de
fence, or ended a war on mutual conditions, the League
was solemnized by the two parties with the additional
Sanction of a SACRIFICE, in its nature chiefly partaking
of that species we call Propitiatory ; to implore a blessing
on the transaction.
The Historian, Livy, hath recorded the Ceremonies in
use, in these Sorts of Sacrifice; where, speaking of a
Treaty concluded between the Roman and Alban People,
on certain conditions mutually agreed upon, he tells us,
that the Public person, on the part of Rome, whom we
may call the Khtg at anns, and who was the sacrificing
Priest, when about to strike the Victim, thus invocates
their common God, in an address to the Alban People,
and their chief Heralds " Lcgibus deinde recitatis, Audi,
" inquit, Jupiter-, audi Pater pat rate Populi Albani ;
" audi tu Populus Albanus; ut ilia palam prima pos-
" treina ex illis Tabulis C erave recitata sunt, sine dolo
" raalo, utique ea hie hoclie rectissimeinteilectasunt, illis
" Legibus Populus Romanus prior non deficiet. Si prior
" defexit publico Consilio dolo malo, TU ILLO 33 IE,
" JUPITER, POPULUM ROMAN UM sic FERITO, UT ECO
" HUXC PORCUM HIC HOD IE FERIAM TANTOQUE MA-
" GIS FERITO (f H anto imgis po tes pollesque: Idubidivit,
4i pore nm saxo si$c& percusslt**"
Another Treaty concluded between Hannibal and his
Army of multifarious Adventurers was, the same histo
rian tells us, sanctified in the like manner. Just before
the battle of Trebia, the General, encouraging his Fol
lowers, by all the usual excitements, to do their duty, con
cludes with a promise of the most magnificent spoils, as
* Liv. 1. i. c. 24.
T 3 the
278 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
the reward of their valour. And then offering one of
t iose propitiatory Sacrifices for himself and his army ;
the better to induce the various nations, of which it was
composed, to confide in his word, and rest assured of his
good faith, he held out a Lamb ready for the Altar, and
then proceeded in the following manner" Eaque ut
" rata scirent fore, Agnum laeva manu, dextra silicem
" retinens, si FALI.ERET, JOVEM C.ETEROSQUE PRE-
" CATUS DEOS 1TA SE MACTARENT QUEMADMODUM
" IFSF AGNUM MACTA.SSET. Sectuulum prccationem,
" Cap ut pecudis saxo disit*^
We see the reason, why in these religious Acts, when
made the Sanction of good faith, in public and civil con
ventions, the expressive action should be further ascer
tained by fiords; It was necessary, in an affair of public
and general importance, t0 give the utmost precision to
the Act, by removing from it all doubtful or equivocal
meaning.
Again, it is farther worth our notice, that, although
T<IE SPEAKING BY ACTION had (as we have shewn)
its original in the defects and imperfections of early lai>
guage ; yet, even v\hcn those impediments to fuller infor
mation \\ere in a ocd measure removed, still, partly from
habit and c us to in, but principally from some advantages
which this mode of converse had above the other, of
speech, it wa (as has been observed elsewhere) long kept
up amongst People of simpler manners, especially in the
more solemn transactions of lilb; of which those relating
to religion were the chief: by reason, that sigMJicativt
actions make a stronger and more durable impression than
words ; as the l ; ,ye is a more certain and steady convey
ance of intelligence than the Ear.
On the wbols, the Header now sees, that nothing could
be more natural, intelligible, or rational, than this mode
of religious Worship^ as here explained.
Ignorance of all this, and inattention to the state and
condition of ancient times, have divided Believers into
two parties on this subject.
One of them holds, that the origin of Sacrifices was by
command from heaven ; the other, that it sprung from
Super$titip&, together with many the like absurd practices.
* Liv. lib. xxi. c. 45,
The
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 279
The first call this religious Rite, Mysterious: and so give
to Heaven what, in their opinion, Reason disclaims. As
io the origin of Sacrifices, (says a learned Divine) it is
extremely hard to conceive them to be a human Institu
tion; BECAUSE we cannot give any tolerable a&cow^-of
Jhe REASONS of .them*. A move than tolerable, even a
plain and clear reasan, the Reader sees is now given.
J3ut men are always disposed to find in themselves a
standard for the measure of all things. However, admit
Sacrifice to be devoid of lleason ; must things, thus cir-
-cu instanced, needs come from Heaven ? As if nothing
.had ever entered into Religion that was of the growth of
Superstition! What will be the consequence of thus ac
counting for what we do not understand, but the dis
posing men to think, that every religious Rite, though
palpably absurd, yet, if .fancifully mysterious^ had that
.original?
Another -argument, which this more orthodox Party
urge for t their Opinion, that Sacrifice -must needs be
heavenly-derived, is, perhaps, something more plausible,
-but equally inconclusive : -It is the very early use of
Sacrifice, .which rises as high as the two Sous of Adam.
.And, indeed,,our account -of. this significative action shews,
that we can conceive no time, after the !/<#//, too early for
its introduction amongst men, under the guidance and
government of .natural Religion, as -these .two Brothers
certainly were: Besides, the defects of language, while
in its early rudiments, necessarily occasioned this mode
of intercourse between Man and his Maker. Yet, not
withstanding, Primaeval use can .never .prove Sticrijtcc
.to have arisen from any other source than the light of
natural reason. And if .that be sufficient (as we have
.-shewn it is), we must needs conclude -that it arose from
-thence, when Scripture is silent concerning any other
<source. Especially since we .find that this Scripture hath
.carefully recorded what God immediately, and not nature.,
taught to Adam and his Family. Now, concerning
Sacrifice, there is not a single word which implies any
.such instruction. On the contrary, the manner in which
the story is told leads us to conclude, that the Rite was
{first. dictated by natural reason. Abel was a keeper of
* Shuckford.
T 4
2 8o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
sheep, but Cain was a Tiller of the ground. And in
process of time it came to pass, that Cam brought of the
fruit of the ground, an offering unto the Lord. And
Abel he brought of the firstling of his flock*. And IN
PROCESS OF TIME (says the Historian) IT CAME TO
PASS. &c. words, which (in the sequel) not only acquaint,
us with the first Sacrifices, but in these, here quoted, ,
strongly intimate, that the Rite was of human original.
While, throughout the whole narrative, we find no men
tion of any prescribed mode of Patriarchal Sacrifice,
though Moses is most minute in what concerns the pre
scribed Sacrifices of the LAW. Doth not this shew, that
the first was a voluntary, uncommanded Worship, where
the mode was left to the discretion of the Worshipper;
and the latter a prescribed Rite, where every circumstance,
in the celebration, was to be scrupulously observed ?
Nor is this reasoning to be evaded by the confessed
brevity of the sacred Historian. For had the Original
of Sacrifice been prescribed, and directly commanded by
the Deity, Moses could never have omitted the express
mention of that circumstance. . The two capital Obser
vances in the Jewish Ritual were the SABBATH and
SACRIFICES. To impress the highest reverence and
veneration on the Sabbath, the Historian is careful to re
cord its divine original in these words Thus the Heavens
and the Earth were finished, and all the Host of them.
And on the seventh day, God ended his Work, which he
had made: and he IIESTED ON THE SEVENTH DAY
from all his work which he had made : and GOD BLESSED
THE SEVENTH DAY, AND SANCTIFIED IT I beCUUSC
that in it, he had rested from all his Work, which God
created and made f. Now, who can suppose, that, had
SACRIFICE been of divine Original, Moses would have
mgiccted to establish this truth, at the time that he re-
corded the other? Since it was of equal use, and of equal
importance, with the other. I should have said of much
greater: for the multifarious Sacrifices of the LAW had
not only a reference to the forfeiture of Adam, but like
wise prefigured our Redemption by Jesus Christ, as we
shall shew r hereafter.
The other mistaken extreme, arising from the same
* Gen. iv. 2. -j- Gen. ii. 2, 3.
cause,
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 281
cause, namely, ignorance of the nature of Sacrifice, is
amongst those Believers, who hold, that although Sacri
fice hecarne, at length, of divine- right, yet, in its Origin,
it was but- a capricious Ordinance of human invention;
concerning which, no rational or philosophic account can
be given ; yet, having spread wide, and struck its roots
deep into the fat and lumpish Soil of Superstition, it was
suffered, by God, to occupy a place in the Mosaic Insti
tution, in compliance with the prejudices of a perverse and
barbarous People, to whom many other extraneous Rites
(perhaps irrational, but certainly harmless) were indulged.
And now, to go on with our History of Sacrifice. This
important Rite, first dictated by natural reason, did not
long continue in its original integrity.
Of all the customs in use amongst Men, those re<-
specting Religion are most liable to abuse. For the pas
sions of HOPE and FEAR become then most inordinate
when the Mind is taken up and occupied in the offices of
divine Worship. At this season, the sobriety of common
sense is often forced to give way to the extravagance of
the imagination. And this more especially must have
been the case in those early Ages, when undisciplined
REASON was but just projecting how to curb the irregular
sallies of Enthusiasm.
Add to this, that SACRIFICE being a Scenical Rite,
it was principally fitted to strike the Fancy; which de
lighting in paradox and Mystery, would riot in this en
chanted ground, till it had lost sight of the simple mean
ing of a plain expressive action, first conceived for use,
and continued out of necessity.
Under this state of delusion, Eucharist ical and pro*
pitiatory Sacrifices were soon imagined to receive their
chief value from the costliness of the offering ; and
HECATOMBS were supposed more acceptable to Heaven,
than purity of mind, adorned with gratitude, and humble
reliance on the Deity.
Amidst these disorders, Philosophers and Moralists
might, from time to time, cry out, aud ask, as they did,
but without being heard,
" Dicite, Pontifices, in Sacro quid facit Aurum?
" Quin damus id Superis, de magna quod dare lance
" Non
c&s THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
" Non possit magni Messalas lippa propago :
" Compositum jus, fasque animi sanctosque recessus
< Mentis, et incoctum generoso pectus honesto ?
" Haec cedo, ut admoveamTemplis, etfarre litabo*."
The world went on its Train; and pomp of Sacrifice was
<every where preferred to the piety of the Offerer.
But in expiatory Sacrifices, matters went still worse.
-For, in these, the passion of FEAR being predominant,
strange enormities were soon superadded to the follies of
the Worshippers.
In these, the offering of the slain animal began, first
.-of all, to be vainly considered as a VICARIOUS ATONE-
.3IENT for the crimes of the Sacrificer.
Though, in the purity of the .first institution of Sacri
fice, striking the devoted animal was an action naturally
significative ; which (as we said,) when reduced to words,
contained no more than this humble and contrite recogni
tion / confess, O my God! tjiat I.deswve death for my
transgressions.
Modern Unbelievers, to get to their favourite point,
which was to arraign the Mosaic Ritual .for its vicarious
atonements, have been very large in exposing this abuse
in the offices of pagan or of natural Religion, corrupted.
** Right reason (say they) disclaims all such atonements^
,snd teaches, that to secure pardon for our offences against
-God, no more is required than humble confession before
the throne of Grace, joined to a sincere purpose of amend
ment; so that all the Mosaic, as well as Pagan Sacrifices,
which went on the idea of a vicarious atonement, .were
merely human inventions of fraud or superstition. 1
But this charge against the LAW is founded either in
-ignorance or in ill faith. For though it may be true, that ?
,by the Law of Nature, all vicarious atonement by Sacri
fice is superfluous and absurd ; yet, by the Law of
Moses, it was rendered just and rational.; for though this
Law was founded, as all God s revelations are, on natural
Religion, yet the Law, built thereupon, is conceived on
the Principle of a FREE GIFT, long since forfeited by the
breach of the Condition on which it was bestowed. This
Principle, together with the loss, intimates the recover!/.
* Pers. Satyr. II.
And
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, 283
And further, in the institution of the Rites of Sacrifice,
instructs us in the means employed for the recovery;
means peculiar, and properly adapted, to the nature of a
free gift.
We have already given, and shall further explain and
justify, those means (namely, the VICARIOUS ATONE
MENT, in the SACRIFICE ON THE CROSS, with its de
pendencies), on the grounds of Natural Reason and
Religion.
To free, therefore, the vicarious atonements, in the
Mosaic Sacrifices, from this Objection of our PHILOSO
PHERS, it will be sufficient to observe these two things :
1. First, that the Mosaic Sacrifices were TYPES (and
by both the Dispensations of the Law and Gospel de
clared to be so) of the great vicarious Sacrifice of the
Cross : So that the justification of their use depends on
their Prototype; whose conformity to right reason and
equity will be shewn.
2. But then, in the second place, as these Types had
a MORAL IMPORT*, that is, bore a temporal sense like
wise, having a relation to the peculiar benefits enjoyed
under a THEOCRACY, and so, of consequence, were not
Types merely and solely of things to come, and to be
transacted in another System, it will be necessary, in
order to their full justification against the objections of our
adversaries, to shew, that the peculiar benefits given by
the LAW were of the nature of a FREE GIFT, like that
of immortalliii, which was first bestowed on, and soon
after lost by Adam in Paradise., and recovered by Jesus
Christ in the Gospel. Between which two Dispensations
the LAW came in (as an intermediate Revelation), and
the benefits peculiar to the LAW (namely, extraordinary
temporal blessings) were so far of the nature of the FREE
GIFT of immortality (their prototype), as to make the
MEANS of reconciliation for the violated condition atten
dant on such a Gift, different from what is required for
the transgressions which natural Religion condemns.
Thus have we put a fair end to this formidable ob
jection, conceived in ignorance, and brought forth in
iniquity.
* See these terms explained in tli8 6th Book, p. 33, et seq. of this
volume.
But
234 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
But this is not all. The sacred Volume, which con
tains the Principles whereon vicarious atonements are
justified, under the Mosaic Law, at the same time in
structs us, that, by the LAW OF NATURE, a -vicarious
atonement by sacrifice is superstitious and absurd.
Moses, in pity of his People (whose idolatry, during
his short absence, had so incensed the God of Israel, as
to make it apprehended, by their Leader, that they would
be totally abandoned, if not instantly destroyed), trans
ported with the patriot passion, and misled by the Prin
ciples he had brought from Egypt, concerning VICARIOUS
DENOTEMENTS, thus addresses the Lord: Yet now, if
thou wilt, forgive their sins: and if not, blot me, I pray
thee, out of thy Book which thou hast written. To this
the God of Israel replies (but on the principles of his
own prior Law, the LAW OF NATURE; the Ritual
Law being already planned, indeed, but not given and re
ceived), cc WHOEVER HATH SINNED AGAINST ME,
HIM will I blot out of my book*." As much as to say,
<c The Law of Nature allows not of vicarious atone-
" ments\ but ordains, that the man who transgresseth
* c shall himself bear the punishment of his iniquity ; a
* punishment which no man deserves for the Faults of
" another, unless he be partaker of the guilt, by joining
" in the transgression."
But self-love, aided by superstition, made men seek for
pardon of their own Sins in the sufferings of others.
When God gave the Law of Nature, he did not permit
his Creatures to change the means he had ordained for
pardon and reconciliation. But when he ordained the
JWcsaic Law, by which many benefits of mere grace, as
well as others of Debt, were bestowed, he might, for
breaches in the condition annexed to those of mere grace,
well and equitably make the terms of pardon different
from those he had before established for breaches in the
condition annexed to those of Debt.
Thus we see how REVELATION triumphs ; while every
attack upon it produceth, in some new discovery of the
amazing Wisdom in the various parts of the Dispensa
tion, some further evidence of its Truth and Divinity.
We have shewn with what superior sagacity, as well as
* Exod. xxx. 32, 33.
indulgence,
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 285
indulgence, many harmless practices of Gentilism were
introduced into the Mosaic Ritual. But to manifest to*
the World what use divine Wisdom can make even of
the worst rubbish of Paganism, VICARIOUS SACRIFICES
condemned by the Law of Nature, as absurd and super
stitious, it changed, when brought into the Mosaic Ritual,
their very nature ; and, in that revealed System, made
them provisionary and reasonable.
And now, again, to proceed, A deep-rooted Super*
stition is always spreading wide and more wide. When
men, thus labouring under this evil, had (in order to give
themselves ease) gone so far as to indulge the fancy of a
vicarious Sacrifice, it was natural for them, to think of
enhancing so cheap an atonement by the cost and rarity
of the offering. And oppressed with their malady, they
never rested till they had got to that which they conceived
to be the most precious of all, A HUMAN SACRIFICE.
Nay, to accumulate the merit of the service by bringing
it still nearer home, the madness did not cease to rage till
it terminated in INFANTICIDE, or in offering up to their
grim idols (instead of themselves) the CHILDREN of
their bowels. We learn from Sanchoniathon, in that in
estimable fragment of Antiquity, translated by Philobib-
lius, that what is here collected from the natural course
of things, is realized by fact. It was customary In
ancient times (says the fragment) in great and public
calamities, before things became incurable, for Princes
and Magistrates to offer up in sacrifice to the avcng&g
Demons, the dearest of their Offsping*. Under the
fanatic fury of the high efficacy of this atonement, we
need not wonder that the strongest instincts of Nature
should be subdued, and even their very impressions effaced
in this horrid sacrifice, when we reflect that mere civil
custom, to avoid only a probable, nay, but a possible, in
convenience, was, in those early times, of force enough to
erase, even out of the best cultivated minds, the innate
love of Parents for their Children, and to introduce a
general practice of exposing them, at their birth, to almost
* Apud Euseb. Pra?p. Evang. l.iv. p. 158, "60? r lV TO?* rAaoK, I*
Toy rr/a,i;n~
)i> ETnd^avat
s.
inavitable
286 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
inevitable destruction. What power then must this magic
of custom acquire, when joined to dire Supers tition,
under the horror of approaching vengeance, to dispose
the terrified Supplicant to offer up his own kind to avert
it ; nay, to make all sure, his own offspring, not only with
indifference, but with alacrity.
This seems to have been the true original of HUMAN"
SACRIFICE*: An infernal practice, which soon over
spread the World, barbarous and civil. For that LOVE
and FEAR of God, implanted in our Nature to impiove
and perfect HUMANITY, do, when become degenerate
by fanatic and servile passions, make as speedy a progress
in dishonouring and debasing it.
From this HISTORY of the origin, use, and abuse of
SACRIFICE, thus delivered, on the principles of Nature
and Reason, and verified by Fact, I have deduced, and,
with the fullest evidence, established the following truths,
1. First, That the mode of Religious Worship by
SACRIFICE, is in itself, A REASONABLE SERVICE.
2. Secondly, That Sacrifice for sin was a fit atonement,
and reasonably required in the Dispensations both of
natural and revealed Religion, as a proper means of
reconciling sinful man to his offended Master.
3. Thirdly, That this species of it, which is most open
to objection, the VICARIOUS SACRIFICE, is founded in
Reason, when directed to the Mosaic and Christian
Systems ; how abusive and absurd soever, when practised
in the offices of Paganum.
Nothing but this history of Sacrifice could lay open
the way to these Truths: And nothing but these Truths
could Ictus into the true System of GOSPEL REDEMP
TION. For till it was shewn that a VICARIOUS ATONE
MENT, a thing of the essence of this System, is consonant
to our most rational ideas of the divine attributes; it
might be thought, by those who only saw the abuse, and
were ignorant of the genuine use of vicarious atonement \
that our proving the death of Christ to be a REAL
SACRIFICE, was only adding one embarrass more in
the road of Revelation, instead of removing (as was
my intention) a great many that ignorance hath laid
acioss it.
* See note [G] at the end of this Book.
But
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED.
But having now obviated the SOCINI AX objection to
this species of Sacrifice, we may proceed without further
impediment to establish this capital Principle of the
Christian Faith, THE SACRIFICE OF CHRIST ON THB
CliOSS FOR THE REDEMPTION OF MANKIND.
. i. Which will be done, first of all, by shewing that the
precious death upon the Cross was, for many ages, pre-
Jigiwed, and, in a scenical manner, foretold by the
SACRIFICES OF THE LAW; and more particularly and
circumstantially by those Sacrifices called PIACULAR and-
VICARIOUS.
2. And secondly, by shewing that this DEATH was
kept in perpetual memory under the Christian Dispensa
tion, by a SACRED RITE, instituted by the Divine Victim?
himself on his going to be offered ; this Rite being (to
peak properly) nothing but, nor other than, A FEAsr
UPON A SACRIFICE.
I. All Christian Churches, even the Soclman, agree
in this, that the Sacrifices of the Jewish Law served^
amongst other uses, for TYPES of the death of Christ,
particularly those Sacrifices called vicarious^ piacular,
and expiatory Of which, some prefigured one part of
that tremendous transaction, and some another. The
victim burnt without the Camp foretold his sufferings
without the City The blood sprinkled in the Sanctum
Sanctorum by the High Priest, on the day of expiation,
prefigured our entrance into heaven, whither Christ pre
pared the way for us by his blood The sacrifice of the
Paschal Lamb, which was both piacular and eucharistical^
proclaimed the innocence of our Redeemer, and the uni
versal benefit of his blood to Mankind.
To set this matter in the clearest light As to the
simple rite of SACRIFICE, this was not peculiar to Judaism*
It was in use, as we have shewn, from the beginning.
Nature dictated this Symbol to all her Children : It being
nothing else than a species of Worship, in action instead
of words ; so that sacrifice and religious worship were
correlative and coeval ideas. The particular thing which
Moses indulged to his people, for the hardness of their
hearts, was that multifarious Ritual, of which, indeed,.
Sacrifice makes a capital part.
.Amongst
288 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
Amongst the various causes of the Mosaic Ritual, the
principal were these :
1. First, A necessity of complying with those inve
terate prejudices (least liable to idolatrous abuse) which
a long abode in Egypt had induced : amongst the chief
was their attachment to SACRIFICE ; a species of divine
worship, which, at this time, made almost the whole of
Religion in the Egyptian world. These people (as hath
been observed before) reckoning up six hundred and
sixty-six sorts of sacrifice.
2. A second cause of the Mosaic Ritual was to debar
the people from their too ready entrance to Idolatry, by
keeping them continually occupied in the periormance of
their sacred Rites to the GOD OF ISRAEL; whose NAME,
\\hen lost in all other places, was, by their SEPARATION,
to be preserved in the land of Judea, till the j illness of
time should come.
3. A third was to PREFIGURE, by these Rites of Sa
crifice, the DEATH OF CHRIST UPON THE CROSS : For
the Mosaic Religion being the foundation of, and pre
paratory to, the Christian, it was fit and proper to con^ ;
nect these two parts of God s moral Dispensation, in.
.such a manner that their mutual relation might, in a-
proper time, become evident to all men. For in two.
Religions related to each other, as the MEANS and the.
>:ND, the FOUNDATION and the SUPERSTRUCTURE,
nothing can be more conformable to our ideas of Divine
Wisdom, than its contriving some ties which might esta
blish the knowledge, and perpetuate the memory of that
close relation, without iminatnrely explaining the parti--
ciilars of it. Now what can be conceived more effectual,
for this purpose than to make the RITES of the one Re
ligion TYPICAL, that is, declarative and expressive of
the general nature of the other.
These various uses of SACRIFICE in the Mosaic Ritual
cannot but raise our admiration of the divine Wisdom,
which hath so contrived, that the very Worship indulged,
to the Israelites, in compassion to their childish pre
judices, should not only prevent the abuses, the natural
effect of those prejudices which led to idolatry, but, at
the same time, should establish and proclaim, by means
of their TYPICAL representations, a strong and lasting
1 1 connexion
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED.
connexion between the two Religions. Representations
go apposite to this end and purpose, that all the sects arid
parties in Christianity, how widely seever they differ
amongst themselves in other matters, agree in this, that
the sacrifices of the Law, besides the other uses in the
Mosaic institution, are TYPICAL OF THE DEATH OF
CHRIST*. So far, we say, all the Christian Churches,
even the SOCINIAN, agree with us. In this, they differ;
they pretend, that though the Jewish Sacrifices prefigured
the death of Christ, as Typeset it, yet it does not follow
that his death was a real Sacrificfy like the Jewish. On
the contrary, we affirm, that this alone is sufficient to
shew, that if the Type was a real Sacrifice, the Antitype
must be so likewise. For (to enter a little more particu
larly into this mode of representation) a TYPE differs
from a SYMBOL in this, that the Type represents some
thing future ; the Symbol, something past or present. -
The commanded Sacrifice of Isaac was given tor a Type ;
the Sacrifices -of the Law were Types. The Images of
the Cherubims over the Propitiatory were Symbols ; the
bread and wine in the last Supper were Symbols.
So far they agree in their genus, that they are equally
REPRESENTATIONS; butin their species, they differ widely.
It is not required that the Symbol should partake of
the nature of the thing represented : the Cherubims
shadowed out the celerity of Angels, but not by any phy
sical celerity of their own ; the bread and wine shadowed
out the body and blood of Christ, but not by any change
in the Elements.
But Types being, on the contrary, representations of
things future, and so partaking of the nature of Prophecy,
were to convey information concerning the nature, of the
Antitypes, or of the things represented; which they could
not do, but b} the exhibition of their own nature.
Hence we collect, that the command to offer Isaac,
being the command to offer a real Sacrifice, the death
and sufferings ot Christ, thereby represented, was a real
Sacrifice. And the piacular and vicarious Sacrifices of
the LAW being real Sacrifices, the Death on tiu Cross
was a real Sacrifice likewise.
* See what hath been said of the logical and natural propriety of
Types and .secondary senses, Book vi. 6.
VOL. VI. U Were
igo THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book DC
Were this otherwise, the- Type, as a Type, would con*
tain more than was contained in the Ant ti i/ps. An ab
surdity, which makes the Shadow convey more than the
Substance; when, by its very nature, it should convey
less. On this Truth, the reasoning in the Epistle to the
Hebrews is founded <c Christ, (says the Apostolic
" Writer) was once offered to bear the sins of many.
" For the Law having the SHADOW of good things to
* come, and not the VERY IMAGE of the things, can
sc never with those- Sacrifices, which they offered, year by
" year, continually, make the comers thereunto perfect :
" for then would they not have ceased to be offered *."
The Jewish Sacrifices are here called SHADOWS, not
in an absolute, but in a comparative sense. The Typs
is inferior to the Antitype , just as, in visible things, a ?
natural shadow is to an artificial image. For the Typical
Sacrifices of the Law, having, besides their property of
Types, a -MORAL IMPORT, (and not like the Typical Sa
crifice commanded to be offered by Abraham, a mere
shadow without any moral import) are called Shadows v
not in opposition to realities (for having a moral import,.
they are realities) ; but called Shadows, only in compa
rison to the vast disparity between the virtues of the
Types and the Antitype, thus explained and enforced by
the same inspired Writer u For if the blood of bulls
and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer, sprinkling the
" unclean, sanctiiieth to thepUrx/ymgvf tttejksh, now
" MUCH MORE shall the blood of Christ, who offered
" himself without spot to God, purge your conscience
" from dead works to serve the living Godt :?
Again ; though, from hence, it appears that these Type*
with the Antitype are occupied in the elucidation of the
same great subject, yet it will not follow, that every several
Type is equally expressive of the Antitype. Some of
them shall present a more perfect image of the Antitype
than others ; yet they do not exclude the most imperfect
from a share in the honour of so august a representation.
For though the divine Author of the^ystem had ordained,
that the whole of the Jewish Ritual, concerning Sacrifices,
should typify or prefigure the great SACRIFICE or
* Heb. ix. 28. -x. i, 2. See Book vi. 6. of the Divine Legation.
tleb. ix, 13,
CHRIST :
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 291
CHRIST ; yet as those Sacrifices, at the same time, con
stituted an essential part of the Mosaic economy, which,
on several occasions, I have expressed more generally by
the terms of their bearing a MX)RAL i IMPORT, it could not
but he that some would carry fainter and others stronger,
*> U <J *
shadows or images of what as Types they represented ;
just as the various Jewish service, in its moral nature,
afforded more or less occasions of evidence. Thus, the
Type of the Paschal Lamb was a more perfect represen
tation, than the Type of the Victim burnt without the
Camp.
It might, and probably would have been otherwise,
had these Types borne no moral import, like the com
mand to offer Isaac, for then nothing could have hin
dered all the Types from being as complete representa
tions of the Antitype as that command to Abraham w r as;
and if nothing hindered, it is reasonable to suppose, it
would have been done.
We have observed, that these Types, in the Mosaic
Ritual, were a kind of Prophecy by action ; in which
Providence was pleased to manifest to the world, the
real connexion between the Jewish and the Christian
Revelations. But this was not all. The other sort of
Prophecy was not wanting, which, by way of eminence,
has commonly assumed the name, viz. The written Pre
dictions of the Jewish Prophets. Where, in a detailed
account of the PROMISED MESSIAH, the principal part
relates to his death and sufferings on the Cross, under the
idea of a SACRIFICE. And if, as hath been pretended,
these things relate to Jesus only in a secondary sense,
and to the Jewish Leaders in a primary, this would only
make the analogy between these two kinds of Prediction
more complete, and the connexion between the two
Religions more strong and durable. For the Jewish
Sacrifices, though as -types they rcier ultimately to Christ,
yet as a religious service not typical, they had, like Pro
phecy, a prior reference to the LAW. So admirable is
tliis coincidence between these two sorts of prediction.
As to the logical and moral illness of SECONDARY SENSES,
I have explained that matter at large in the former parts
of this work *.
* See Book vi. 6,
u 2 Hitherto
292 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.. .
Hitherto in support of the Doctrine of the GREAT
SACRIFICE ox TIIK CROSF. And this alone seems abun
dantly sufficient- to establish it.
But this is not the whole. It was not only FORKTOLD
by the Types and other Prophecies of the aid Laic,
but the Remembrance of it was PERPETUATED by a"
divine Institution in the -new: and an explanation of this-
Rite is -the last step we shall take to tix this fundamental*
Article of our holy Faith .
In those Ages of the World *, when Victims made a-
principal part of the Religion both of Jews and Gentiles,
the Sacrifice was commonly followed by a religious Feast
on the thing offered; called a Feast upon, or after, the
Sacrifice; the partakers of which were supposed to be
come partakers of the SEXEEITS of tlie Sacrifice. In
allusion to this custom, Jesus was pleased to institute a
Feast of the same kind. In" order of time, indeed, the
Feast naturally follozced the Sacrifice. But in this great"
Atonement, where the VICTIM, the OFFERER, and the*
PRIEST, were all one arid the same Person, the Feast
was, of necessity, to precede \\\Q Sacrifice.
The History of this institution is recorded, by the
Evangelists, in these words-: And as they were cat-
*" ing, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and gave it to his
ie disciples , and said, Take, eat: THIS is :.rv BODY. And
" he took the cup, and gave thairks, and -gave it to them,
<c saying, Brink ye all of it ; for THIS is MY BLOOD of
"the New Testament, which is shed for many, for the
"- remission of sins." Matt. xxvi. 26 28.
Now, to manifest that we are not- mistaken in the idea
here givefi of- this Rite, let us reflect on the precise time
ef its celebration.
"As Jesus, with his Disciples, (says the text) wag- con-
eluding ttie Paschal Supper, which was a Jewish Feast
after the Sacrifice, his own- approaching Sacrifice naturally
suggested to him the idea of this customary Feast. But
being himself both the VicthnwA the Offerer, the Insti
tution of this Rite must of necessity, as we observed,
precede the Sacrifice The Sacrifice on the Cross was the
Antitype of the Paschal Lamb , and the Feast on Christ s
* $etlie Discourse on tin-. Nuture arid End of the Lor.d s Supper,
. of tin? Edit,
Sacrifice
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 293
.Sacrifice was \hvAntitype of the Paschal feast. So that
the properest season we can conceive for the institution
Oi the last supper., was the instant of time between the
/celebration of the Type, and the offering of the Antitype,
This time likewise corresponded with Christ s usual prac-
.:K;e, who was wont to deliver his instructions by actions
and expressions, bearing allusion to what passed before
.his ey$s, or presented itself, in the natural course of things,
4x> his observation *. These considerations shew, that the
action, in the celebration of this Rite, -was so strongly
declarative of its nature, that had Jesus -only broken
.the -bread and given the cup in reiiwmb ranee of -himself,
without adding, this is mybodyandtftinw<wy>btoc<f) no
.ingenuous Hearer could -entertuin a doubt, whether thk>
was d esigned by him as a Feast upon the Sacrifice. Birt
*vhen to this we add .the remaining part of the explana
tory words, in the consecration of the Elements Tins
js si Y BODY TIMS is MY BLOOD wiiat is here con
tended for becomes almost self-evident.
In these feasts xtpon Sacrifice^ the very Zw/ytbat had
.been offered was eaten for the repast. .Now, as the tot
-supper was to be instituted, and the Rite first celebrated,
before the great Sacrifice was actually offered, (for the
reason just now given) it was on that account (not to
mention other reasons) necessary that some symbolic
dements .should b.e substituted in 4ke place of .the mv>
body and blood. These elements were BREAD AND WINE^:
on. this occasion naturally, r.propcrly, and -elegantly called,
Till: BO.DY AND BLOOD.
For if :the specific nature of the last supper was a
feast upon Sacrifice, we must needs conclude, that the
divine Institutor of ithe feast would give alLpossible evr*
dence of so important a Truth.
But if (as was in fact the case) this evidence must
-arise from, and out -of, the occasion, and through the
words of the Institution, then the figurative terms of BODY
and BLOOD became necessary, these only -being fully de
clarative of the nature of the like. And as this made
* See Sir Isaac Newton s Observations on the Prophecies,^. 148;
where he takes notice how Jesus, from the approach of li a next froiri
the lilies in bloom from the. Iccrccs of thcji<r-trces shot out from
the sheep kept in folds-near the temple for sacrifice was accustomed to
take occasion of inculcating his spiritual Doctrines and Precepts.
^ 3 the
294 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
the use of these terms to be necessary, so the necessity
of them produced their ease and elegance. This is ob
served, because it has been usual amongst Protestants,
even while they were opposing the portentous doctrine of
T R A N 8 u BST A N T i A T io N *, to acknowledge, cither through
ignorance of, or inattention to, the specific nature of the
Kite, that the figure of body ami blood was extremely
violent and forced.
It likewise removes another difficulty, which the ad
vocates for a r^ai presence throw in the way ot common
sense. They pretend that, if the words of the institution
were only FIGURATIVE, the Evangelist and St. Paul
might, and probably would, have changed ttiejigure , in
their narratives, live times repeated on diliercnt occasions;
for that no reason can be given of the unvaried use
of the. same words, but because they are to be under
stood LITERALLY ; and then as they were declarative
of one of the greatest Mysteries in Religion, there was a
necessity to record the very terms employed, whenever
the history of the Institution was related. To this, it is
sufficient to reply, that, indeed, were the words used
figuratively, and the figure only expressive of a death
commemorated, and no more, as the Socihiaiis suppose
it to be, it would be but reasonable to think, the terms
,\vould have been varied by one or other of the sacred
Writers ; because it is natural to believe, that Writers of
so different genius and acquirements in language would
not all have the same opinion concerning the use of these
precise terms, so as to esteem them preferable to any
other; as, in fact, on this idea of the Rite, they would not
be. But we can by no means allow their consequence,
that, therefore, they are to be understood LI TE u ALLY ;
since, if \ve admit the Institution to be of the nature of a
feast KJ o;-i Sacrifice, there will be the same necessity for
the unvaried use of the terms, although they b&Jigurative,
as there would have been although they were literal. For
these precise terms are as necessary to denote a feast ii<>(>n
& crifice (the Rite we contend for) as to denote the Sacri
fice itself; the enormous idea of the church of Rome.
All this reasoning on the nature of the Institution,
from the words of the Institutor, receives additional
* See note [Ii] at the eijclof this Cook.
strength
Chap, 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 295
strength even from what hath been supposed to invalidate
it, namely, the conclusion of them Do THIS IN RE
MEMBRANCE OF JME For although these words, when
delivered alone, might enjoin HO more than & remembrance
of a dead benefactor, (which is the sense the Socinians
put upon them) yet, when preceded by- THIS is MY*
EODY- THIS :i s MY BLOOD they are certainly an in
junction to keep in remembrance his death and passion
for our REDEMPTION. And could there be a least upon
.a Sacrifice in which that Sacrifice was not to be kept m
mind ?
It is true, that the Disciples of- Christ being com-
manded to do this /;/ remembrance of him, the Command
shews that the celebration of this Feast was continually
to be repeated, which was not the practice in the Pagan
and Jewishjeaste after the -sacrifice. But, in tin s parti-*
cular, the reason of the difference is apparent The
GREAT SACRIFICE- itself (of which the Jewish were
Types ) put an end to that mode of Religious Worship
amongst the Followers ..of Jesus.
Jewish and Pagaia oblations had, or were supposed to
have, a passing and .temporary Virtue. For the law
ixrcbig a shadow of good things to come, and not the very
image of the things, can never icith those sacrifices, iirfiick
they offered. year by year continually, make .the Corner*
thereunto perfect : FOE THEN WOULD THEY NOT HAVE
CEASED TO BE OFFERED*.
But the sacrifice on the CROSS is tbe very imnqc or
the thing itself; and therefore has more than a passing
and temporary effect, it continues operating till the con
summation of all tilings ; because it makes the comers
thereunto perfect: we being sanctified through the offer
ing of the body and blood of Christ, ONCE^FOK ALL -\ :
for where remission of sms is, there is NO MORE OFFER
ING FOR SIN ;[;. It seemed expedient, therefore, that
the operating virtue of this Sacrifice, offered once for all,
should be continually set before our minds, in repeated
-celebrations of the Feast upon it.
What hath been here reasoned, on the Institution of
the last supper, appeared so strong to a late eminent
Person, famous for his Socinian notions on this Subject,
* Hob. x. 1,2;* t Ver. 10. J Vcr. 18-.
u 4 that
296 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
that (as I have been told) he used to confess, that if the
death of Christ could be proved to be a real Sacrifice,
Jhe last Supper was undoubtedly of the nature of the
feast after the Sacrifice. This was said with his usual
address, to make his Reader overlook, and so to neglect,
one of the capital arguments for a real sacrifice ; for it
insinuates, that arguments for its reality are to be sought
for elsewhere, and not in. the institution of this Mite:
\\ hereas it is our design to shew, that this very Kite of
the last supper constitutes one of the capital arguments
for the reality of the Sacrifice itself. And, therefore, let
us now go on with it.
We have seen what may be naturally, and, indeed,
what must be necessarily, concluded from this part of the
Evangelic History of the Institution of the LAST SUPPER,
concerning Christ s design therein.
Let us see next what may be collected of St. Paul s
sense concerning the same ; who, although occasionally,
yet hath at large spoken of the nature of the LAST
SUPPER.
And here we shall find, that from this very sort of
Feast (which the words of the Institution of it plainly
alluded to) St. Paul expressly draws a comparison; and,
at the same time, to explain the efficacy of the Rite, in
forms us of the end and purpose of those Feasts upon
Sacrifice.
It is in that place of his first Epistle to the Corinthians,
where he reproves the proselytes to Christianity for the
idolatrous practice of sitting with the Gentiles, in their
feasts upon Sacrifice, and eating of the meats that had
been offered to Idols,
His words are these " I speak as to wise men; judge
" ye what I say. The Cup of Blessing which we bless,
" is it not the COMMUNION OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST?
" The bread which we break, is it not the COMMUNION
" OF THE BODY OF CHRIST? For we being many are
" one bread, and one body : for we are all partakers of
" that one bread. Behold Israel after the flesh : are
" not they which eat of the Sacrifices, Partakers of the
" Altar ? What say I, then ? That an idol is any thing,
" or that that which is offered to idols is any thing? But
" I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they
" sacrifice
Chap. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 297
(t sacrifice to Devils, and not to God : and I would not
" that you should have FELLOWSHIP with Devils. Ye
<( cannot drink the Cup of the Lord, and the Cup of the.
" Devils : ye cannot be Partakers of the Lord s Table,
" and of the Table of Devils *."
The Apostle here professeth to write to these Corin
thians, under their own assumed Character of wise men*
And, though, perhaps, he useth the term a little ironi
cally as wise in their own conceit, to reprove the di
visions, before objected to them, yet the logical inference,
drawn from an appeal to men of such a character, is not
at all weakened by- the sarcasm under which it is con
veyed. My meaning is, we may fairly conclude, that
St. Paul s reasoning is such as, in his opinion, wise men
would not disdain to weigh ; and so regularly conducted,
that wise men would acknowledge to be of force. In a
word, pursued with that science and exactness, which
leaves no room for the pretence of its having a loose,
popular, or inaccurate meaning.
Whence we may collect, in the first place, that the Cup
of blessing is not merely a general commemoration of a
dead Benefactor, but principally a commemoration of the
DEATH AND FASSio]\ r of that Benefactor. It is the
Communion of the blood of Christ ; an expression, as we
have shewn, of the utmost elegance to denote a feast
upon Sacrifice.
The inference which the Apostle draws from it, puts
his meaning out of question For we being many (says
he) are one bread, and one body : for ice are all partakers
of that one bread: i.e. Our being partakers of one
bread, in the communion, makes us, of MANY (which we
are by nature), to become (by grace; ONE BODY in
Christ. This inference is manifestly just, if the Rife be
of the nature of a Feast upon Sacrifice ; for then the Com
munion of the body and blood of Christ unites the Re
ceivers into one body, by an equal distribution of one
common benefit. But if it be merely the Commemoration
of a dead benefactor, it leaves the Receivers as it found
them ; not one body, incorporated by a common benefit,
hut many separate individuals, professing one common
Faith.
* \ Cor. x. 15 21.
The
2g8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
The Apostle having thus represented the LAST SUP
PER to be of the nature of a Feast upon Sacrifice, for
the truth of which he appeals to their own conceptions
.of it the cup of blessing, is it not the Commit; d-m? &c.
the bread ic hick &.-c break, is it not the Communion? c.
lie then endeavours to convince them of the impiety
of their behaviour, from the nature of those feasts, as it
v,as understood both by Jews and Gentiles; who alike
held, that they wno EAT OF THE SACRIFICKS \v
PARTAKERS OF THE ALTAR: i.e. had. the benefits of
the .Sacrifice. But what had these caters of the thir^x
sacrificed, in common with the Partakers of the bread
and wine in the LAST SUPPER, if this Supper was not a
feast of the same kind with the sacrificial Feasts? If the
three religious Feasts, Pagan, Jewish, and Christian, had
not one common nature * , how could the Apostle have
inferred that this intercommunity w r as absolutely incon
sistent? Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup
f)f Devils* For though there might be impiety in the
promiscuous use of Pagan and Christian Rites; yet the
inconsistency arises from their having one common na
ture, which, springing from contrary originals., destroys
one another s effects. The reasoning stands thus Those
who eat of the Sacrifice, are partakers of the Altar ;
that is, arc partakers of the benefits of the Sacrifice,
These benefits, whether real or imaginary, were confirmed
by a pact or convention between the Sacrifice!* and his
God. They who eat in the feast on that Sacrijicc are par
takers of the supposed benefits of the Sacrifice, and, conse
quently, are Parties to the federal Rites which confirmed
those benefits : so that the same Man could not, con
sistently with himself, be Partaker of both tables, the
Lord s table and that of Devils.
This argument, St. Paul urges to the Wise Man, whose
practice he is here exposing. And we see, it turns alto
gether on the Postulatu in agreed on, " that the Last
Supper is of the nature of a feast upon Sacrifice."
Now, if, instead of this idea, we substitute that other
of the Sociuians, That the Last Supper is a mere com
memoration of a dead Benefactor, all the force of this
reasoning disappears and vanishes. For, although a rea-
* See note [I] at th<" end of this Book.
sonable
Chap. 2,]. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. o 99
sonable man cannot execute two federal conventions,
winch destroy one another (the inconsistency here charged
upon the Corinthians), vet he might celebrate, without
absurdity, though not without impiety, a federal Rite in
one religion, an:! a bare remembrance of a deceased
Jjenefaetor in another.
Further, the same Apostle, in correcting another abuse
in the celebration of the Lord a Supper, takes occasion,
once again, to declare the N AT. m: of this holy Rite. -
IIi. ; Corinthians, as appears by the next Chapter*, had
been guilty of eating the bread and iclne in a very inde
cent manner, confdunaing ic iih the convivial (loin;;.-, in
their ordinary repasts; where charity arid sobriety had
been too jfren violated This fiuill y behaviour, by sncli
an indiscriminate celebration, the Apostle calls the being
guilty oj the body and hiood c/ CJifffi: m a, charge iiimio-
derately exaggerated, wore the Last Supper a mere com*
mtmo ration of a dead Benefactor. r l, he Corinthians did
riot make a fit distinction between their more ordinary
food, and their eating and drinking in memory of a de
ceased Frieml. This, witpout doubt, was a high inde
corum ; yet, to rank such delinquents with the JMurdcra s
of the Lord of life, is a severity in which we can see
neither justice in the sentence, nor propriety in the terms
of it. But let us only Suppose (\vhat we have indeed
proved), -that St. Paul regarded the Last Supper as a
jtast upon Sacrifice, that is, a Rite in, which the benefits
of Christ s death and passion were, in a certain manner,
conveyed, in a proper celebration, thus impiously abused;
and then the charge is fairly and justly made out. The
profanation of such a Rite was, indeed, aiding and assist-
Jng in the crime of his Murderers, as far forth as it ren
dered his death ineffectual to the Participants ; and there
fore properly compared to the prodigious enormity of that
impious act.
Such then, I presume, is the true nature of the LORD S
SUPPER. And were the adjusting an exact notion of it a
matter of mere speculation, I should have been much
.shorter; and have left the discussion of it (under the
simple idea of a religious custom of Christian Antiquity)
to the Ecclesiastical. Historian,
* i Cor. xi. 27,
But
.get) THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
But the Institution abounds with important conse
quences, in support of the Catholic Doctrine, which I
here pretend to illustrate and confirm. For, if the Last
Supper ;be a feast i/pon sacrifice^ .-the unavoidable conse
quence is, that the death of Christ was a real Sacri
fice. It being the highest absurdity to believe, that a
nitei was instituted on tne supposition of a real Sacrifice.,
und to keep such Sacrifice in perpetual memory, and yet
that no real Sacrifice, thus commemorated, ever had exist
ence ; but only the shadow of one, under a figure of Speech,
And now it is high time to call again upon the
SOCIXIAXS to examine and review this whole matter.
The Writers of the New Testament unanimously and
invariably call the Death of Christ on the Cross, A SA
CRIFICE. To this, the SOCIXIANS reply, " We confess,
indeed, that those Writers do thus uniformly qualify the
Death of Christ, But their Phraseology abounds with
YIGURATI VE TERMS ; and.tlie word SACRIFICE .is plainly
and eminently of this number. .... When the Death of
Christ, so -highly beneficial to mankind, was the subject of
their discourse, they could not enforce the value of those
Benefits so intelligibly and strongly amongst Men, who
had -been taught to conceive that the highest benefits were
conveyed by the tremendous Rite of SACRIFICE. But
that this was all which those Writers meant, when they
called Christ s death a SACRIFICE, appears from hence,
that SACRIFICE, whatever original it had, soon became,
in practice, a superstitious and an irrational Kite; and
gloried in an efficacy which right reason disavows,
namely, a VICARIOUS ATONEMENT ; brought, indeed, by
Moses, together with other Pagan Rites, into the Law, .ora
account of the hardness of heart amongst those with
Avhom their Leader had to deal." This, and a great deal
more to the same purpose, hath had its effect, to the dis
credit of the doctrine of R^DEMPTIOX,, on those Men,
and on others, as ignorant of the true origin and nature
of SACRIFICE as themselves.
To remove these objections to a Doctrine so essential
to our faith, is the reason why I have been so large in
proving,
i. First, From the origin and nature of SACRIFICED
that it is A REASOXABLE SERVICE.
2. Second! v,
Chap. 2.] - OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 301
2. Secondly, That a VICARIOUS ATONEMENT., how
much soever disclaimed by natural Religion, is, in th
Jewish Sacrijicct ^nd in the Sacrifice of Christ, a proper
atonement ; and- may be justified on the surest principles
of reason.
3". Thirdly, That the Sacrifices of the Law were
TYPICAL of the great Sacrifice of Christ.
4. Fourthly, That were it the purpose of the sacred
Writers, in their history of Christ s death and passion, ta
represent it as a REAL SACRIFICED it. is not possible to,
conceive they, could convey that meaning in more expres
sive terms than in those which they have employed.
> And lastly, That Christ s death and passion was, by
himself, ordained to be perpetually commemorated ; by a
Rite which declares that, death could be no other than a
real Sacrifice.
When the SOGINIANS, I say, have well considered all.
tliis, they may be asked, with propriety, and modesty,
whether it can be believed by any reasonable man, that
all this apparatus was provided for, and bestowed upon,,
a MERE FIGURE OF SPEECH? Or whether they deserve
the title they give themselves, of being the only rational
interpreters of Scripture, who can suppose such- a perver
sion of Order, in the divine economy, as that it should
dignify a MERE FIGURE OF SPEECH with preceding.
TYPES, and a following. FESTIVE INSTITUTION; things,
most improper for this Service ; and only fitted to mislead
us in our notions and conceptions concerning this capital
doctrine of our holy Religion ?
We have now (it is presumed) settled the true SPE
CIFIC NATURE of the death of Christ; and having be
fore spoken largely of its END, we proceed to consider
the effects of it.
They are comprised by the sacred Writers in the words*.
REDEMPTION and JUSTIFICATION.
Redemption respects the price paid by JESUS for our
restoration to eternal life ; and Justification, the accept
ance of that price by GOD TUB FATHER.
From these two- terms School Divines coined a third,
namely, SATISFACTION ; which carries iu< it the ideas
a debt^wW and accepted,.
302 THE DIVINE LEGATION
The disputes amongst Divines concerning the sense
and propriety of the terms, Redemption and Atonement,
Justification, Satisfaction, c. have been endless, and the
confusion attending them inexplicable ; chiefly occasioned
by all parties mistaking their ground, and arguing on the
principles of XATUIIAL LAW, when they should have
had recourse to the REVEALED, as now explained.
But here a difficulty occurs. LIFE AND IMMOR
TALITY is, throughout the New Testament, considered
;.is a FREE GIFT ; called so in express words by St. Paul;
" But not as the offence, (says he) so also is the FREE
GIFT*/ Yet, we know, a large price was paid for it.
And this, likewise, the same Apostle agrees to, " \Ve
were BOUGHT (says he) with a price f." And St. Peter,
speaking of certain heretics, says, they denied tlie Lord
that BOUGHT them\. And St. Paul again calls, what he
had just before entitled A FREE GIFT, A PURCHASED
POSSESSION .
To clear up this matter, and to reconcile the Apostle
to himself, who certainly was neither defective in natural
-sense, nor in artificial logic, let us once again remind the
reader, that Life mid Immortality, bestowed on Adam
in Paradise, was a FREE GIFT, as appears from the
history of his Creation. As a free gift, it was taken
"back by the Donor, when Adam fell ; to which resump
tion, our original natural rights are not subject; since
natural Religion teacheth, that sincere repentance alone
will reinstate us in the possession of those rights, which
our crimes had suspended. So that when this free gift,
forfeited by tiiv first Adam, was recovered by the second,
its nature -continuing; .the same, it must still remain & free
gift ; a gift to which .man, by and at his creation, had
no claim ; a gift which Natural Religion did not bestow.
But, if misled by measuring this revealed mystery of
human redemption, by the scant idea of human trans
actions, where a free gift and a purchased benefit are
commonly opposed to one another, yet even here we may
be able to set ourselves right; since, with regard toman,
the character of a free gift remains to immortality
restored. For v the price paid for forfeited man, was not
* Rom. v. 15. t i Cor. vi. ^o. vii. 23.
% 2 Pet. ii. i. Fph. i. 14.
paid
Chap. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 303 .
paid by him, but by a Redeemer of Divine extraction,
who* was pleased, by participating of man s nature, to
stand in his stead. Hence the sacred Writers seeing,
in this case, the perfect agreement between a FREE GIFT
and d PURCHASED POSSESSION, sometimes call it by the
one, and sometimes by the other name.
C H A P. III.
SO much for the MEANS of recovering what was
lost by Adams transgression.
In the entrance on this subject, I cautioned the Reader
to keep in mind the distinction between the MEANS of
recovering a lost benefit, and the CONDITION annexed
to the enjoyment of that benefit, when recovered, as two
different tilings, to be separately considered, and in their
order.
With regard to the MEANS, (already explained at
large) it hath been shewn, that they were of an arbitrary
nature, at God s good pleasure to appoint ; unrestrained
by any thing he had established in the general system ot
his moral government of man.
These MEANS, had not cur holy Religion revealed
them, could not, otherwise, have been known.
They were the DEATH AND SACRIFICE of his ever
blessed Son, MeeKtititfg for us.
And now, Man being restored to his forfeited Inherit
ance, the secure possession of it stiil depended, as it did IB
the original grant, on the performance of a CONDITION.
We have already shewn, Why that Jlrst Condition
was the observance of a POSITIVE COMMAND. Which
reasoning, if it have any force, proves, that the new con
dition, annexed to the recovered blessing, must be the
observance of a POSITIVE COMMAND likewise.
IMMORTALITY (as hath been shewn) was a FUSE
GIFT, as well when recovered, as when originally given :.
which might be bestowed, or recovered when forfeited,
on what Condition the Divine Donor should be pleased
to annex to it.
Nay, if we consider the nature of the whole economy,
we shall find it could not well be given, or restored whez*
lost,
304 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX*
lost, on any other condition than the observance of a
positive Command, since the performance of MORAL DUTY
was the condition already appropriated, by Natural
Religion, to the procurement of GOD S FAVOUR.
r It is true, had IMMORTALITY not been a free gift,
but what Man had a right to, on his Creation, while
under the government of Natural Religion, the con
dition annexed to immortality might have been the per
form aace of Moral Duty.
And indeed, those who so far mistake immortality as
to esteem it a RIGHT, inherent in our nature, contend
strongly for the conditions being of a moral kind , and
that the command not to eat of the Tree of good and
evil, enjoined to Man in Paradise, is so to be understood,
though delivered under the cover of an Allegory.
But besides the reason given to evince this mistake,
another arises from the sacred Writer s not explaining
this pretended Allegory : for where an Allegory contains
a precept respecting the whole of moral duty, it can never
be too plainly nor fully delivered. There would be none
of this necessity if both the first and second condition of
immortal Life were of a positive nature, though delivered
in allegoric terms which spoke for themselves ; for then
the chief use of an interpretation had been little more
than the gratification of our curiosity.
Allow, therefore, the reasoning here offered to explain
the nature of the condition annexed to the free gift (when
iirst given, and when, after forfeiture, restored) to be
solid and convincing, and it opens to us the abundant
goodness of our Maker; who, that the possession of this
recovered blessing might be no longer precarious, (as it
was when first bestowed, on the condition, to Do or to
forbear Doing) was graciously pleased to change one
positive Command for another ; and, instead of some
thing to be Done, hath now required of us something TO
BE BELIEVED. From henceforth the free gift of im
mortality is become more permanent and certain : a
GRACE, which the very nature of the new Dispensation
would lead us to hope for and expect ; whereby IMMOR
TAL LIFE under the Gospel, like the FAVOUR OF THE
J)EITY under natural Religion, is now, when forfeited,
to be regained by REPENTANCE. .
7 So
Chap. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 305
So much reason, order, and beauty is seen in the
various parts of God s moral Government of Man, when
compared and explained by one another.
The new CONDITION, as we say, is FAITH IN THE
REDEEMER; or our owning and receiving him as the
promised Messiah, by whom alone we are to receive that
salvation, procured for us by the Sacrifice of himself on
the Cross. i;a
And now, we begin to have some reasonable Notion
of that great and fundamental principle of Christianity,
that FAITH ALONE JUSTIFIETH, or, in other words, is
the sok condition of recovering the possession of what we
lost by ADAM.
This great Truth, though made the foundation of the
Gospel of Jesus, yet (its reason lying hid, or not care
fully sought for, and the little of it that was seen being
horribly abused) Believers, as well as Unbelievers, have,
too generally, concurred in condemning, as absurd in
speculation, and fanatical and hurtful in practice. But
the Divine who hath carefully studied the nature of
God s moral or religious Dispensations, throughout all
their parts, will be easily disposed to rest the whole of
the Christian cause on the reasonableness, the propriety,
and even the necessity of this capital Principle.
We have now shewn, 1st, That LIFE AND IMMOR
TALITY is, in its nature, a FREE GIFT; and that holy
Scripture always represents it under this idea : 2dly,
That the benefit, which Natural Religion informs us we
have to expect from our great Master is, simply, a
reward for well-doing : A reward, indeed, which will be
abundant ; for though we be unprofitable servants, yet is
he a most bountiful Master. But ABUNDANT and
ETERNAL belong to different Systems.
Man, from his Creation, to his entrance into Paradise,
was, as hath been shewn, subject to the Lazv of Natural
Religion only. From thenceforth, to his expulsion from
Paradise, Revealed Religion superinduced to the Natural,
was- to be his Guide: whereby, to GOD S FAVOUR (the
sanction of Natural Religion) was added IMMOR
TALITY (the sanction of the Revealed;) not on con
dition of his observance of moral duties ; for that was
the condition of God s favour under Natural Religion ;
VOL. VI. X but
306 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book I>L
but 011 condition of his obedience to a positive com
mand.
But who are they, who, on the rccovc?\y of the free
gift of immortality, are qualified to claim it ? Certainly
none but those who arc already entitled to some reward
.by the Religion of Mature ; which Religion accompanies
the Revealed throughout all its various Dispensations :
and on which, they are all founded.
But to make this great principle of JUSTIFICATION
BY FAITH ALONE still more clear, let us suppose that),
at the publication of the Gospel, all to whom the glad
tidings of immortality were offered, on the condition of
faith in Jesus, had been moral or virtuous men ; and, on
that account, entitled (as natural Religion teacheth) to
the favour of God, and an abundant reward; is it not
self-evident, that FAITH ALONE, exclusive of the con^
dition of <*ood works, would, in that case, have beea
the very thing which justified^ or entitled to life ever
lasting ?
But are good work*, therefore, of no use in the Chris
tian system ? So far from that impiety, good works are
seen, "by this explanation, to be of the greatest avail ; as
they render Men the only capable Subjects of this
JUSTIFICATION which FAITH ALONE procures.
This is the true use and value of WORKS with regard
to FAITH ; and greater canriot be conceived. Hence k
appears, that JUSTIFY INC; FAITH is so far from excluding
GOOD WOUKS, that it necessarily requires them. But
how? Not as sharing in that. JUSTIFICATION ; but as
procuring for us a title to God sjarour in general, they
become the tfucilijication of that inestimable Reward,
revealed by the Gospel, to be obtained by FAITH
ALONE.
, To illustrate this matter by a familiar instance : Sup
pose a British Monarch should bestow, in Jree gifa
a certain portion of his own Domaincs* upon such of his
subjects who should perform a certain service, to which
they were not obliged by the stated Laws of that society
under which they lived ; it is evident, that the perform
ance of this Lust engtigcwent ONLY would be the thing
which entitled them tothe,/ree gift: although that which
* T* which immortality may be well compared,
gave
Chap. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 507
gave them a claim to protection, as Subjects, in the enjoy
ment of THEIR OWN PROPERTY*, acquired by observing
the terms of the contract between Subjects and Sovereign,
Miis the necessary qualification to their claim of the free
gift ; since it would be absurd to suppose that this gift
was intended for Rebels and Traitors, or for any but
good and faithful servants of the King and Community.
This, I presume, is the true, as it certainly is the only
consistent explanation,, which hath been hitherto given of
JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALOXZ. Well, therefore,
might St. Paul reprove the ignorance or licence of certain
of his converts at Rome, in his question (which, under
his authority, we have asked before) Do we then make
void the LAW through FAITH? God forbid! Yea, ice
ESTABLISH THE L,AW |\
" But how (it may be asked) is the Law of Works
ESTABLISHED by the Christian Doctrine of Faith ?
For by the Law of Works, the Apostle could mean no
other than the Law of Nature ; he having again and
again told us, the Law of J\ loses, as distinguished from
the Law of Nature, was abolished by the Law of Christ.
I answer, This Law of Works was indeed ESTABLISHED,
and hi the most substantial manner, by the doctrine of
Faith, as these // orks are the very foundation tf justify
ing Faith ; the qualification of all who are entitled to the
Fruits of that Faith, viz, LIFE AND IMMORTALITY.
But further, to prevent all mistakes on this important
subject, (if the wisest provisions of Heaven could have
prevented the effects of human perversity, without violat
ing freedom of will) God was pleased to send JOHN
THE BAPTIST, as the Forerunner of his blessed Son,
to proclaim and KEPUBUSII this great principle of
Natural Religion, PARDON ox REPENTANCE Repent
ye, for the kingdom, of heaven is at luntd ^. A necessary
CALL to procure Subjects to this new Kingdom, just
ready to be erected, where LIFE AND IMMORTALITY
was to be obtained by Faith ; but such a Faith as is
ounded on those Wvrks which Natural Religion requires
o be performed ; or, when neglected, the omission or
transgression to be atoned for by REPENTANCE.
* To -which the reward offered by natural religion may be well
pompui<?d. t Rom. in. 31 . j Alatt.ii. 2.
x a This
3P8 . THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
This shews the extreme folly of what hath been
asserted by certain of our unwary Friends, and echoed
back to us by the Enemies of our holy faith, that the
GOSPEL ITSELF is only A REPUBLICATION OF THE
RELIGION OF NATURE ; whereas, it now appears, that
the whole of THIS REPUULICATIOX amounts to no
more than a republication of one great principle of
Natural Religion, viz. Pardon on Repentance ; and this,
as the foundation of (and in order to introduce and render
effectual) our FAITH IN CHRIST, the great principle of
the Revealed.
To proceed. It is with regard to Johns Character
of a Preacher of Moral Righteousness, on the principle*
of Natural Religion, that Jesus says of him,: Amongst
them that are born of women hath not risen a greater
than John (he Baptist : notwithstanding^ he that is least
in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he * : this least
in the kingdom of heaven is greater (he says) than John,
i.e. greater in office. JOHN only proclaimed and re-
published that great Principle of Natural Religion,
the doing WORKS meet for Repentance^. Whereas
the Disciples of Jesus were the Promulgators of the
efficacy of Revealed Religion SAVING FAITH Greater
in their spiritual gifts and graces. They worked Miracles.
John worked no Miracle. The reason is obvious :
MIRACLES are the necessary CREDENTIALS of men sent
by God to promulge a new Rtvelation. The preaching
up of Natural Religion (which was John s office) needed
none of these Credentials: its truth having been engraved
in the breasts of every one, when God created Man in
his own Image.
But this is not all. The better to.sscure tiii^ natural
Foundation of SAVING FAITH, Jems himself, in his
entrance on his Ministry, thought fit to repeat and con*
-firm the Mission of John; and in the very words of his
Forerunner REPENT, ^0; the kingdom of heaven is at
hand%. On this account, I suppose, it was that Herod,
hearing that a new Prophet was just arisen, who began
liiajMimstry like John, with preaching repent cwce^ becausp
the kingdom of heaven was at hand, mistook him for
John risen from the dead ; and being alarmed at the
* Ma.tt.xL IK f Acts xx vi. 20. { Matt. iv. 17.
name-
Chap. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 309
name of Kingdom, joined to the report of Miracles, now
first performed by him, concluded, he was returned to
life, with the accession of new powers : Herod, I say, in
his fright, cries out, John the Baptist, whom I beheaded,
4s risen from the dead, and THEREFORE mighty works
do shew forth themselves in him *. A natural sentiment
-on this occasion. For cruelty, in its suspicions, cora-
.monly adds terror- to superstition.
Yea,- further, when Jems first sent out his Disciples
to give notice of his Gospel, they, too, were directed to
enforce this previous and necessary Truth : And they
went and preached that men should repent \.
And they whom he left behind him at his ascension
were likewise directed to perform the same office. They
began their work with the doctrine of REPENTANCE,
only changing the Baptism of John into that of .Jesus.
St. Peter, in his Iirst discourse to all the dwellers at
Jerusalem, who enquired of him into the way oj sal
vation, speaks in this manner : Repent, and be baptized,
every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ^.
St. Paul tells Agrippa, that lie began his Mission with
exhorting both Jews and Gentiles, that they should
repent, and turn to Gad, and do WORKS meet for repent-
ance\. And as he began with repentance, so he ends
with it, where, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, heexpresseth
himself in . this manner, " Therefore leaving the PRIN-
" CIPLES of. the Doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto
" PERFECTION ; not laying again the FOUNDATION of
" repentance from dead works, andoftkith towards God."
These are the great principles of Natural Religion,
which Christ made the FOUNDATION or his Gospel.
Iniquity is called dead icork.sm by Faith towards God
is meant simple belief in him ; and alludes to the same
Apostle s definition of Natural Religion where he says,
he that comet h to God must BELIEVE that he is, and that
he is a reicarder of them that diligently neelt him. The
sense of which is this, " Sink not back ^gain to, nor
" rest in that Principle of Natural Religicn, after you
" have made it (as your Master requires you should) the
"foundation of his Gospel/
* Matt. xiv. 2. t Actsii. 38.
J Acts xx vi. Acts xx vi.
x 3 But
3to THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
But as there are not only first principles in Natural
Religion, but likewise in the Revealed, the Apostle goes
on with an account of these likewise The doctrines of
Baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of the resur
rection of the dead, and of eternal judgement. Now these
first principles of the GOSPEL we are likewise forbid to
rest in, no less than in thosey/rs/ principles of NATURAL
RELIGION , which the Apostle began with it follows
(as we are directed) that we should GO ON UNTO PER
FECTION. But if it he asked, What was this doctrine
of perfection? I answer, it was that great MYSTERY,
iirst revealed by the Gospel, which explains our loss by
the disobedience of Adam, and the punishment attending
it, together with the recovery of that loss by Christ Jesus,
*vho was graciously pleased to become our MEDIATOR;
and more than that, by virtue of his death and sufferings
on the cross, our REDEEMER likewise, together \\ith all
the circumstances attending this wonderful transaction of
human redemption.
This Doctrine of Perfection, the Apostle promises to
explain to them, if God affords him leisure and a fitting
opportunity if Gcd (says he) per nut *. This, for some
wise ends of his Providence, God did not permit. Nor
have we any reason to complain, as he endowed his
inspired servants, in general, both with leisure and abili
ties to enrich the world with the noblest treasures of
divine knowledge, ordained to enlighten and accompany
his Church till the consummation of all things.
Thus, on tiie whole, it appears, even by the principle
here explained, of S A EVA TIG x in- FAITH ALONE, that
NATURAE RELIGION is THE GROUND AND FOUNDA
TION OF ALL THE REVEALED.
Here let us stop a moment, to deplore the condition
of human h indne ss, always running into opposite ex
tremes. \Vhik. one sort of Believers (as we have observed)
can sec no more in the Gospel than a Republication of
the Religion (f Nature; and another are so far from
owning, that Natural Religion is the foundation of
the Revealed, that they are ready to deny that Natural
Religion.
* Tub. vi. i, a, 3,
These,
Chap. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 3 1 1
These, indeed, are portentous opinions; yet less so
fchan that of our RATIONALISTS, who deny what Scrip
ture has, in so many words, so often repeated, SALVA
TION, or JUSTIFICATION ;BY FAITH ALONE.
But they had mistaken the Gospel -doctrine of salvation
nnd justification for no more than God s Jicrcour indefi
nitely, as taught by Natural Religion -, whereas the words
signify ETERNAL LIFE, brought to light and defined by
the Gospel. What occasioned their confounding two things
so different, was an unsuspected error, full as gross, namely,
\k\akN(ti>ural Religion, in teaching a reward for well-doing,
taught an eternal Reward. An error into which these
men could scarce have fallen, had they distinguished the
Religion of Nature, to which Adam became -subject on
his creation, from that Religion which was revealed unto
him when he entered Paradise.
This hath been rectified at large towards the beginning
of this Discourse; and to what important purposes, the
Reader may now understand.
Indeed, had Natural Religion promised life and
immortality far zceU-4ouig, then would God s two Dis
pensations have contradicted one another ; as giving
immortality to WORKS by Natural Religion, and imnwr-
ialtiy to FA mi hy the Rcr-cakd.
But there are no contradictions in the Economy of
God s moral Government. All such arc the spawn of
human fy. stews, the mis-shapen issue of artificial Theo
logy. And if one thing, in sacred Scripture, seems to
look thus asquint upon another, we may he assured it
arises from the vitiated Organs of the Observer.
To instance, in the famous case (so apposite to our
present purpose) of the Apostles, PALL and JAMES;
whom ignorant Interpreters have set at variance.
St. PAUL says*, THEREFORE WE CONCLUDE, that
a man is JUSTIFIED BY FAITH WITHOUT THE DEEDS
OF THE LAW.
But St. James seems to speak another language f
You SEE THEN, ho~c that by WORKS a man is JUSTI*
FIED, AND NOT BY FAITH ONLY.
The assertion of each Apostle is (we see) a CONCLU
SION from some preceding PREMISES. These are, first
* llora. 11^28, t Mis General Epistle, chap. ii. 24.
^ 4 of
312 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
of all, to be considered, ere we can determine concerning
the sense of either conclusion, where the same capital
word is employed, by both Writers, in common.
St. Paul having explained (for that is his subject) the
nature of the GOSP :L COVENANT, whereby w r e are
restored to the Inheritance which we lost by Adams trans
gression, namely, lye and immortality, ends his argu
ment in this manner Therefore we conclude that a man
is JUSTIFIED BY FAITH [i.e. entitled to this recovered
benefit by virtue of Faith] WITHOUT THE DEEDS OF THE
LAW, [which are Works. } We have shewn how true this
position is ; WORKS being what justifies or entitles us to
the favour of God, as taught by Natural Religion ; the
foundation, indeed, of the Gospel- Covenant; which pro-
miseth life and immortality to FAITH ALONE.
But St. James, where he seems to talk so differently
from Paul, \vas enforcing a very different thing, namely,
the obligation of MORAL DUTY, as taught by Natural
Religion, though not exclusive of the Revealed; for he
exemplifies it by the precepts of the DECALOGUE ; which,
though a moral part of the LAW, is supported equally on
the two Religions, Natural and Revealed. He, therefore,
concludes his argument in this manner Thu^wesee^how
that by WORKS A MAN is JUSTIFIED, and not by Faith
only.
llence it appears, that the two Apostles use the
word JUST 1 1 ICA i ION, in these places, in very different
senses. St. Paul means by it, a title to eternal life, on
the terms of Revealed Religion ; and St. James, a title
to God s favour indefinitely, on the terms of Natural
Religion:
Neither can they be fairly charged with obscurity
in- using an undefined term in different significations,
since, had their Readers but attended to the different
subjects eacli apostle ^as then treating, and both in an
equally clear and obvious manner, the objectors would
have seen, there was not the least need of a formal
definition to ascertain the meaning of either.
On the uhok-, it appears, that the two Apostles are
.perfectly consistent in their reasoning on this question.
Whose words, when aptly put together, produce this com
plete aud capital Truth, " WO&KS entitle us to a reward
indefinitely ;
Chap. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 313
indefinitely; FAITH to the reward si eternal life: But as
he who deserves no reward at all, can never deserve the
reward si eternal life, therefore the first step to the greater
blessing must needs be a title to the lesser."
St. PAUL S purpose was to vindicate the use and honour
of the Gospel immjudaising Christians, by shewing, that
the MORAL WORKS of the Jewish Law (the same with
those of Natural Law} did not entitle the observers to
eternal life; this being the specific reward which the
Gospel bestows, and bestows it on FAITH alone.
St. JAMES S purpose was to vindicate the use and
honour of Natural Religion, from the corrupt comments
of those pretended Christians, who flattered themselves
in their vices with the hopes of obtaining eternal life by
FAITH, without being previously qualified for the FAVOUR
of God, by the performance of those good works which
Natural Religion enjoins : and so vitiating the integrity,
and destroying the very nature of FAITH itself. A dread
ful Venom, which appeared early, and, like a leprosy,
soon overspread the face of the Church ; at present known
by the detested name of Ax TIN OM IAN ISM.
But to leave nothing unanswered on so important a
question, I will suppose an Objector may persist in his
reply. Be it granted that the two Apostles are" thus
made consistent with one another ; a stronger objection
still remains to the doctrine of Salvation by FAITH
ALONE, and that is the Declaration of Christ himselij
who gives this Salvation or Justification to WORKS ^
where, in his account of his second coming to judge the
world, he thus pronounces on the final doom of the
Nations assembled round his Throne, To the RIGH
TEOUS, he says, Come ye blessed of my Father, INHERIT
THE KINGDOM PREPARED FOR YOU FROM THE FOUN
DATION OF THE WORLD. For I was an hung red, and ye
gave me meat , I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink ; /
was a stranger, and ye took me in-, I was naked, and ye
clothed me ; / was sick, and ye visited me ; / was in
prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the RIGHTEOUS
answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred
and fed thee ? or thirsty, and gave thee drink ? When
saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? naked and
clothed ihee ? or when mw we thee sick, or in prison, and
came
514 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
came unto thce? Ami the KING si Kill nnsiccr and say
unto them, Verily^ I say unto you, forasmuch as yc have
done it unto one of the least of these my Brethren, yc
hare, done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them
on the left hand, Depart from me, ye caned, into ever
lasting jirc, prepared jor the Devil and his angels.
For I was an hungred, and ye gare we no meat; 1 teas
thirsty, and ye gave me no drink ; / was a .stranger,
end ye took me not in; naked, and ye clothed me not:
sick and in prison and ye visited me not. Then shall
they also ansicer him, saying. Loan, when saw we thce
an hundred, or athirst, or a stranger or naked, or
sick or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then
shall he answer them, saying, Ferity I say unto you
inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these,
yc did it not unto me*.
To explain this, which seems to bear so hard against
us, we must first of all observe the r qreat care and caution
in the divine Founder of our Faith, and of liis Apostles,
to whom he committed the trust of proclaiming it to the
"World; the care, 1 say, that this capital Doctrine of his
Religion, JUSTIFICATION" BY FAITH ALOXF., should
not be mistaken or abused, in making FAITH supersede
those WORKS which Natural Religion requires as neces
sary to procure th&Javour of (rod. WORKS, which we
have shewn to be the only true foundation of that FA IT if
WHICH ALOXE JUSTIFIES. And the work! hath had full
experience of the horrid ABUSES occasioned by Men s
placing FAITH on any other foundation.
So that were there no more in this ticenical Represen
tation of the last Judgment than the purpose to make
WORKS bear so considerable a part in it, the Represen
tation had been still highly expedient. But there was a
great deal more.
Hold, says an Objector; Let us first ask how this
Scene can at all stand \\ith your System, which teachcth,
" that WORKS only entitle to the reward indefinitely^ and
tliat it is FA ITII which entitles to the reward of eternal life :
for these RIGHTEOUS, in the text, are rewarded with that
which is onlv due to the FAITHFUI, namely, eternal
itf*"
* Matt. xxv. 34 f 5.
I was
Chap. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 315
I was about to explain another important use of this
Representation, which you will now find is a full answer
to your Objection.
Jesus, in the very mode of obviating the above-men
tioned abuses (for they were those abuses which it was
his purpose here to obviate), hath, with the most divine
energy and address, instructed us in another important
Truth, namely, THAT THE VIRTUE AND MERITS OF HIS
DEATH HAD A RETROSPECT QUITE BACKWARD EVEN
TO THE TIME OF THE FALL. The Right cons, or the
performers of good Works, are here told, that they shall
INHERIT the Kingdom of Christ, PREPARED FOR THEM
from the foundation of the World. Who were these, here
called, Righteous? Certainly such who had never heard
of Christ, or been made acquainted with the terms of the
Gospel ; such who had obeyed the dictates of Natural
Religion ; and not having the LAW of revealed Religion,
were (as the Apostle says) a Law unto tliemelves*. Thiv
will appear evident to those who consider the nature and
purpose of this Representation of the last Judgment ;
when all Nations, or the whole Race of Mankind, as
well those who lived before, as those who came after
the Advent of the Son of God, are to appear at his
Judgment-Seat.
The tremendous Session, here represented, proceeds
in order. They who lived before the coming of Christ,
are the first who are set to the Bar, whether for reward,
or for condemnation. They who lived after were to come
next. But, with the first, the Scene closes.
For Jesus had already explained the terms of Salvation
to all the followers of the Gospel. Concerning the con
dition of these there could be no doubt. It might become
a question amongst them, how those who had never
heard of Christ were to be treated ; and whether they
were to be made partakers of-the benefits of his Death
and Passion; and likewise, upon what terms. To re
solve those points, was the design of this moral Picture.
These Righteous are justified or saved. But how ?
surely not by FAITH. For, the Apostle tells us, that
FAITH cometh by /tea ring; and hearing by the word of
Cod]\ That is, " The doctrine ot justifying Fauh
* Horn. ii. 14. f Rom.x. 17.
cannot
3i6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
cannot be learnt from Natural Religion ; but is to be
taught by the Messengers of the Revealed, speaking by
the Spirit of God." The just ijicatiwi of these Righteous,
therefore, must needs be by WORKS; the natural foun
dation on which all revealed FAITH is built.
But to shew still more evidently, and sensibly, that the
Righteous, in the Text, were those who had never heard
of Christ, till they came to Judgment, ue must observe,
that as soon as they had been told what kind of WORKS
they were which procured their Salvation, namely, ad
ministering to this their Lord when he was a stranger,
ruiked, sick, and in prison, they are made to reply Lord,
when saw we thee a stranger, naked, sick, and in prison?
A Question, which they, who, in this life, had heard of
Christ, could never ask ; since their Lord had often told
his Followers, that the men who did any of these good
Works to the least of their distressed Brethren, did them
unto him : that is, gained the same benefit by them, as
if done to himself.
In a word, this important REPRESENTATION instructs
us in these two points of Doctrine: First, That the
KINGDOM, whose blessings were produced by the death
and passion of Christ, w^as secured to us even from the
foundation of the world: and Secondly, That it was,
actual Righteousness, as well as imputame, which made
those who had never heard explicitly of CHRIST, to
become partakers of his merits.
CHAP. IV.
HAVING now, at length, gone through this GENERAL
;VIEW OF THE NATURE AND GENIUS OF -THE CHRIS
TIAN RELIGION; first, by an explanation of the MEANS
by which we are enabled to recover the benefits lost by
Adam s transgression ; and, secondly, by an explanation
of the CONDITION annexed to the enjoyment of those
benefits, when recovered : We proceed to ^vhat remains
of our general view. This Religion, as it was the LAST
REVELATION of Ciod s Will to Man, so it was the com
pletion of all that preceded; and, therefore, when truly
^explained, must needs add the UTMOST FORCE AND
LIGHT to every thing that, in the foregoing Volumes of
the
Chap. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 317
the DIVINE LEGATION, hath been advanced, concerning
the NATURE OF THE JEWISH DISPENSATION.
We have already observed how graciously the Divine-
Goodness displayed itself, in the RESTORATION of our
lost Inheritance, by changing the condition annexed to
eternal life, from something to be DONE, to something
to be BELIEVED. And this was FAITH IN OUR RE
DEEMER. For by such a change, this important bless-*
ing became less subject to a new loss or danger.
But this was not all. The same bountiful Lord of life
did. for its further security, impart to every true Believer,
the strength and light of his HOLY SPIRIT to support
FAITH in working out our Salvation*.
Natural Reason, indeed, contemplating the attributes
of the Deity, discovered to us, that when human abilities
alone are too weak to support us in the performance and
discharge of moral duty, God will lend his helping-hand
to aid our sincere endeavours.
But to manifest to us with what more abundant mea
sure this aid is dispensed, under the GOSPEL, our blessed
Redeemer hath minutely explained all that relates to
the PERSON and to the operations of the- Divine Dis
penser, called the HOLY SPIRIT; whom the FATHER and
the SON have, for the further security of this recovered
blessing, been pleased to associate with themselves in
the administration of this economy. Which divine Person
bears his share, with the other two, in the actual RE
DEMPTION OF MANKIND.
Thus far as to his NATU-RE. By which it 1 appears,
that this species of divine assistance, which our holy
Religion calls GRACE, is to be understood as one
of the peculiar blessings bestowed upon the FAIT" UL ;
and to be reckoned in that number. The wojds of
St. John makes this truth still more apparent. Thi s
(saith he) Jesus spake of the SPIRIT, which they that
believe on him. should receive. For THE HOLY GHOST
WAS NOT YET GIVEN, BECAUSE THAT JESUS WAS
NOT YET GLORIFIED!-.
The OFFICE and OPERATION of this holy Spirt, is.
to support our Faith and tq perfect our Obedience, by
* See the Doctrine of Grace, vol. viii, of this Edit.
| Jolm viii. 39.
enl ghtniing
3i8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
enlightening the understanding and by purifying the
This, the blessed Jesus declares, where he professedly
treats of the office of the holy Spirit. / will pray the
Father (says he) and he shall give you another COM
FORTER, that he may abide with you for ever; even the
SPIRIT OF TRUTH. He dwelleth in you; and shall be
in you which is the HOLY GHOST whom the Father
ah all send in my name: lie sJiall TEACH YOU ALL
THINGS*.
These are the two parts of his office : As the TEA c HER,
to impress upon the understanding all those practical
and speculative truths, which constitute the sum and sub
stance of our holy Religion; and as the COMFORTER, by
purifying and supporting the will, to enable us to per
severe in the profession of those truths that constitute the
body of moral righteousness ; the foundation (as we have
shewn) of that JUSTIFYING FAITH, to which the Gospel
hath annexed salvation or eternal life.
And the economy of the Gospel seemed to require,
that when this Dispenser of divine assistance, the HOLY
SPIRIT, was to be clearly revealed, and personally dis
tinguished, as soon as Jesus was GLORIFIED^, his first
descent, amongst the Faithful, should be attended with
signs and wonders, to bear witness to the SAXCTIFIER
O
in the same way that they had borne witness to the RE
DEEMER. These signs were, in both cases, of the same
nature, and performed for the same ends : First, for
CREDENTIALS of their mission ; and, secondly, TXDICA-
TIONS of their office. " When the day of Penticost was
" fully corne, they [the Apostles] were all, with one
" accord, in one place ; and suddenly there came a
" sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and
" it filled all the house where they were sitting. And
" there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of
" fire, and it sat upon each of them : and they were all
" filled with the HOLY GHOST;- and began to speak
" with other tongues, as the SPIRIT gave them utter*
fc ancej."
This miracle manifested itself in the gift of tongues,
tfc> the astonished multitude, barbarous and civil, then
* Johjxiv, 26. -f John vii. 39. J Acts ii. i. et-seq.
casually
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED.
casually assembled from every quarter of the habitable
Globe, who heard the APOSTLES, (all natives or inha
bitants of Galilee.) speaking to each of these Strangers,
in his own mother-tongue. And this being for the ser
vice and conviction of others, was, in its nature, TEMPO
RARY *. Other effusions of the holy Spirit were PERMA
NENT ; and these, instead of being conveyed In a sound
Jrom heaven asof x HUSHING MIGHTY VVIXD, were onl v
conveyed and felt in the STILL, SMALL VOICE. For
these were principally for the use and benefit of the fa
voured Receiver; who, although he himself was fully
assured by them of the divine presence, yet could he give
no sufficient evidence of that Presence to others.
Thus it appears, that this species of divine assistance,
which our holy Religion calls GRACE, is to be con
sidered as one of the peculiar blessings bestowed upon
the Fttithful. For, as htith been observed, the FATHER
and the Sox have been graciously pleased to associate,
in the administration of this new economy, a third divine
ferson, called in Scripture the HOLY GHOST.
CHAP. V.
THIS MIRACULOUS appearance of the HOLY SPIRIT,
on his fmt Descent, naturally and happily leads us for
ward in this iour general view ; by bringing us to the
consideration of the extraordinary manner in which it
bath pleased Providence to promulge and propagate the
Christian Faith.
Now, as it is apparent to common sense, that an im
mediate Revelation from Heaven can be firmly esta
blished no otherwise than by the intervention of MI
RACLES; and, as we have found, by the sad experience
of human corruption, that THIS SUPREME EVIDENCE of
our holy Religion hath been fatally discredited by the
contagion of lying wonders, deforming almost every
age of the Church, it will be of the utmost importance
to discover and fix the bounds of this extraordinary
Inter position f .
* See Note [K] at the.endof this Book.
t See Discourse OH the Resurrection, vol. x. of this; Fdit.
But
320 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
But a MIRACLE, even when best supported by human
testimony, needeth to be still further qualified, ere it can
deserve credit of a rational Believer : namely, that it be
so connected with the system to which it claims relation,
as that it be seen to make a part of it, or to be necessary
to its completion.
It is otherwise, in Facts, acknowledged to be within
the verge of nature and human agency. Here all that is
wanted to recommend them to our belief, is the testi
mony of knowing and honest Witnesses.
While in pretended Facts beyond the verge of nature
and human agency, such as those we call MIRACULOUS,
much more is required when offered to our belief. The
controul and arrest of the established Laws of Nature, by
tiie God and Author of Nature, either mediately or inx-
mediately, is a thing which COMMON EXPERIENCE hath
rendered so extremely improbable, that it will at least
balance the very best human testimony, standing unsup
ported and alone. And why ? Because ordinary Facts
carry their CAUSES openly and manifestly along with them :
Or if not so, yet none are required, as we are convinced
their causes must be INTRIN SEC ALLY there. But in
Facts pretended to be miraculous, the immediate efficient
cause is extrinsical ; and therefore leaves room for doubt
and uncertainty : or rather, when, in tins case, men per
ceive no cause, they are apt to conclude there is none ; or,
in other words, that the report is false aiid groundless.
So that when the whole evidence of the Fact, deemed
miraculous, is solely comprised in human testimony, and
is, in its nature, contrary to UNIFORM EXPERIENCE, th c
Philosopher will, at least, suspend his belief.
But though in all MIRACLES, that is, in Facts deemed
miraculous, the EFFICIENT CAUSE continues unknown ;
yet, in those which our holy Religion seems to recommend
to our belief, the FINAL CAUSE always stands apparent.
And if that cause be so important as to make the Sfiracfe
necessary to the ends of the DISPENSATION, this is all
that can be reasonably required to entitle it to our be
lief; when proposed to us with the same fulness of human
testimony, which is sufficient to establish a common fact :
since, in this case, we have the MORA [/ATTRIBUTES OF
11 THE
Ctop/5.3 OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 321
TfiE DEITY to secure us from ^n error, so fafal- to pur
weliare *.
And the con&iing our belief of MirftGfcp wtt^ifj tljiese
bounds, wipes away (as- 1 Conceive) all tfes fi^i^erafel^
sophistry of our modern prcteriders p Pfeilo^ophy, both
at home and abroad, against Mi BACHES, oia f^teeee oi
their being contrary to^GLNe^AL tx^ER E^g, ia $#
ordinary course of things- At least, the T&UJ-; Pnii/pr
SOPHEII so thought, when he made that strict enquiry
into Truth, towards the conclusion of his immortal
Work" Though COMMON EXPERIENCE [says he) A.:;p
"THE ORDINARY COURSE OF THINGS mive justly a
" mighty influence on the minds of men to make them
" give or refuse credit to any thing proposed to their be-
" iief ; yet there is ONE CASE wherein the STRANGENESS
" of the facts LESSENS NOT THE ASSENT .to a lair testi-
" ixiony given of it. Kpr where SUPEEXATCUAL events
" are SUITA.BJLE TO THE ENDS AIMED AT BY HIM who
" liath power to change tj:ie cpjurgq of nature, then, under
u such circuaistaiices, they may be FITTER to procure
" belief, t>y how much the more tliey are !3YONP OR
" CONTRARY TO ORDINARY OJB^SEJl.VATION. Tills IS
" the proper case of MaiiAC.tjEs, vvhiclj, \\.^il attested, do
" not only find credit tiiemselves, but give it al&oto other
" truths which need sycb c.c,njinnaticn$"
No\v the MIRACLES, which Qhribtianiiy objects to pur
belief, and which, therefore, demand credit of every rea*
sonable man, are, and I apprehend .u^ist be 3 quaiified
in one or other of thes^ three ways :
I. They must eitlier, in the first place, be such as
Christ and his inspired Servants and F-Gilovvers are re-
* Here, by the wny, let me observe, that wh.t i$ now saki gives
that CiUTFriiiox, which Dr. Middlelon and his Opponents, in a late
controversy cowcer-tiing MHIACLES, demanded oi one another ; and
which yet, both Parties, for some reasons or other, declined to give ;
.namely, some certain mark to enable men to distinguish (for all the
purposes of Religion) between true and certain Miracles, and those
which were false or doubtful.
f Locke s Essay concerning Human Understanding, vol. ii. Chap,
O/ the Degrees of Assent, 13. p. 286. This great man, we rind,
understood it to be apparent to common sense, that the belief of an
immediate Revelation from Heaven could be firmly established no
otherwise than by the aid of &iiradis. $ut ses thjis truth proved
more at large as we go along.
VOL. VI. Y corded
322 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
corded to have performed for the CREDENTIALS of their
mission.
II. Or, secondly, such as make a necessary part in, or
towards the completion of, the Gospel System.
III. Or, thirdly and lastly, such as have been performed
directly to manifest and VERIFY THE DIVINE PREDIC
TIONS, when impious men have set themselves on at
tempting to defeat 7 them.
Wfien a Miracle is wrought (as in the first case) for
the CREDENTIAL of a Messenger coming with the
revealed Will of God, to Man, we may safely confide in
it. Because such a Miracle is so far from being beneath
the dignity of the occasion, that it is even necessary to
answer the important purpose of it. Under this Idea,
it hath, I believe, been generally conceived in every age
of our holy Religion, till the present. Indeed, it seems
to have been the constant expectation of Believers, that
these supernatural attestations should accompany every
NEW MESSAGE from Heaven; -insomuch that all the
pretended Revelations in the Pagan World, as well as the
real in the- Jewish and the Christian, Were constructed on
this principle of credit.
But now, in these times, some there are even amongst
the Ministers of the Gospel, who tell us, they think, or
at least are hardy enough to teach, that the REASONABLE
NESS of the Doctrine is the best, and indeed the only true
evidence of its divine Original.
If in this" they should not be mistaken, I may, however,
boast, that I, myself, have, in this Work, greatly strength
ened this boasted plenitude of evidence.
But, in reverence to Truth, I hold myself obliged to
own, that, in my opinion, the REASONABLENESS of a
Doctrine pretended to come immediately from God, is,
of itself alone, no PROOF, but a PRESUMPTION only of
such its divine Original : because, though the excellence
of a Doctrine (even allowing it to surpass all other moral
teaching whatsoever) may shew it to be \vortby of God,
yet, from that sole excellence, we cannot certainly con
clude that it came immediately from him ; since we know
not to what heights of moral knowledge the human under
standing, unassisted by inspiration, may arrive. Not
even
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 323
even our full experience, that all the Wisdom of Greece
and Rome comes extremely short of the Wisdom of the
GOSPEL, can support us in concluding, with certainty,
that this Gospel was sent immediately from God. We
can but very doubtfully guess, what excellence may be
produced by a well-formed and well-cultivated Mind,
further blessed with a vigorous temperament, and a happy
organization of the Body. The amazement into which
Sir Isaac Newton s Discoveries in Nature, threw the
learned World, as soon as men became able to compre
hend their Truth and Utility, sufficiently shews, what
little conception it had, that the human faculties could
ever rise so high or spread so wide.
On the whole, therefore, we conclude, that, strictly
speaking, there is no ground of conviction solid and strong
enough to bear the weight of so great an interest, but
that which rises on MIRACLES, worked by the first Mes
sengers of a new Religion, in support and confirmation
of their MISSION.
That is, MIRACLES, and MIRACLES ONLY, demon
strate that the Doctrine, which is seen to be worthy of
God, did, indeed, COME IMMEDIATELY from him.
To. be plain s there is a glaring absurdity in the novel
fancy here exposed ; of which we can find no instance iij
the affairs of civil life And civil and religious Policies
O
aye conducted on the same principles of Reason, while
administered in their integrity. For what public Person
ever imagined, or expected to have it believed," that the
true and proper CREDENTIAL of a Minister of State wa^
the fairness of his Character, or the equity of his demands?
Nothing but the BROAD-SEAL of his Master, he knows,
will satisfy those to whom lie is sent, that he has a right
to the Personage which he assumes. Doth not common
sense tell us, that a Messenger from God must come
recommended to Mankind in the same manner ? Neither
his personal accomplishments, nor the excellence of his
Doctrine, nor, in a word, anything short of the BROAD-
SEAL of Heaven, exemplified in MIRACLES, will be suf
ficient to establish his assumed Character.
But the Doctors of this new School seem to have fallen
into the absurdity here exposed, by another as ridiculous ;
namely, that THE GOSPEL ITSELF is NO MORE, NO k
y 2 OTHEB ;
3 24 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Eook IX,
OTHER, THAN A KEPUBLICATION OF THE RELIGION
OF NATURE : (an extravagance, amongst the first of
those, which, I presume, this Work of the Divine Lega
tion hath totally discredted.)
Now (say these men) if the light of Reason hath in-
s tru cted us in w h at x A T u n A L li E L i G i o N T teacl le th, it
seems. most consonant to common sense, that the KI: PUB
LICATION of this Reiigiou should be established in the.
same -manner that it was first PU-BLI SUED to the world,
NOT so, (I reply) even on their false principle of a mere*
REPUBLIC ATI ON. For 5-iiiGe it was found, by experience,
that the first publication of, God s will, by natural light
alone, hath .-proved insufficient to perpetuate the knowledge
of it ; we shall think it most adequate to Reason, that
the .REPUBLIC ATION should.be better guarded; to se
cure it from the like -mischance.
.But the truth is, this idea of .ChrliUanity s being merely.
Mich tf.,RPUBLicATiON aroscfrom the grossest ignorance
of. the GOSPEL; which reveals more, infinitely more im
portant Truths than NATURAL LIGHT did or could dis
cover. .It reveals the whole scheme of human Redemption^
which, till this Revelation took place, was a MYSTERY,
kept hid amongst the Arcana of the Godhead.
However, the same Men have another objection to
the belief of these miraculous Credentials. And the
abjection arises, it seems, -from our SOPHISTICAL rea
soning in support of them: for thus (they say) we
argue -
" So little being known of the powers of created
spirits,, superior to ourselves, (some of which we are
taught, to believe are - beneficent to man, and some averse)
ail that we can conclude of MIRACLES, considered only
in themselves,, is, that they are the work of agents, able,
in .some instances, to control Nature, and divert her
from her established course. But whether this control
be performed immediately by the God of Nature, or by
Agents acting under his direction, (which amounts to
the same thing) or, on the. contrary, by malignant agents,
at enmity with Man, and, for a time, permitted to indulge
their perverse and hurtful purposes, cannot be known but
by the nature^ af that Doctrine, in support of which, the
pretended MLUACLKS are performed. The conclusion.
,7 frora
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 325
from this is, that THE MIRACLES ARE, to BE VERIFIED
BY THE DOCTRINE.
But then, (say they again) since we know so little of
the extent of the human understanding, we cannot deter
mine of the true Original of the Doctrine; proposed to
our bel ief, til 1 it be s u pported by J\ 1 1 R A c L E s ; - n o w tl i :?.
conclusion from this is, that the DOCTRINE is TO BE
VERIFIED BY MlRACLES.
Such is the vicious Circle (say our adversaries) round
which we run, when we first? ROVE THE MIRACLES BT
THE DornuxF, AND THEN PROVE THE Doc T;
THE MIRACLES.
This is, without doubt, a Paralogism. Cut we deny
that a-ny such faulty reasoning i c > here ernployeH. The
term DOCTRINE^ in the first proposition, is used 1":
nify a -Dextrine agreeable to thviruth of :
demonstrated to be so by-natural ii^it. In -the* second
proposition, the term, DoCTiuxr, is used to signify &
Doctrine immediately, anil in an extraordinary manner,
revealed by God. -So that these "different significations,
in the declared use of the word DOCTRINE,- in the two
propositions, sets the whole reasoning free frcrn that
vicious Circle within which our Philosophic Conjurers
would confine it. In this, there is no fruitless return -of
an unprogressive argument; but a regular procession of
two distinct and different Truths, till the whole reasoning
becomes complete. In truth, -they -afford mutual assist*-
ance to one another; "yet not -by taking back/ rtxter the
turn has been served, what they had given;- but by eci>
ti nuing to hold what each had imparted to the support of
the other.
On the. whole, v/e conclude, that if any 1 Messengers
ever wanted the CREDENTIALS OF Mm ACT .ES, they were
the first- MESSENGERS OF GOD in the reveateft^Iys tery
of the GOSPEL.
Indeed, divine Providence hr.th so strictly appropriated
MiiiAc L Ks for these CREDENTIALS, that JoH^ r THE
BAPTIST, the Precursor of those Messengers; destined
only to announce the approaching GOSPEL, worked NO
MirtACLEs : yet, had Miracles been of no oth er use than,
what this new-fangled Doctrine assigns to them, nanielyv
tatnake the hearers attentive to the excellence of the
y 3 moral*
326 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
words of the new Religion T none had more need of them
than JOHN and his Penitents. St. CHRYSOSTOM seems
to have understood the GOSPEL better than these modern
Divines, when he supposed that even JESUS himself
worked no Miracle till after his haptism, i. e. till the
time of his addressing himself to his Mission, when CRE*
DENTIALS to his Character -were naturally required;
which Credentials had he not given, the unbelieving Jews,
as he himself acknowledges, had been free from blame.
IF I HAD NOT DONE AMONGST THEM (says he) THE
WORKS WHICH NONE OTHER MAN DID, THEY HAD
NOT HAD SIN *.
II.
We come next to that second Species of Miracles,
mentioned above, whose subject makes so essential a
part in the Economy of the GOSPEL, that, without it, the
whole would be vain and fruitless. The first and prin
cipal of the species is the MIRACLE of Christ s RESUR
RECTION from the Dead If Christ be not RAISED,
(saith St. Paul) your faith is vain ; you are yet in your
sins f. And St Peter uses the same argument to shew
the NECESSITY of his Master s resurrection God says
he) raised him up, having loosed the pains of death ; (BE*
CAUSE IT .WAS NOT POSSIBLE THAT HE SHOULD BE
I1OLDEN OF IT .
Now from whence does the impossibility arise, if not
from the force of St. Paul s argument concerning the
nature of Christ s Resurrection ?
So important a circumstance, therefore, required that
the highest evidence should be given of its truth.
CHRISTIANITY reveals the restoration of lapsed and
forfeited Man to life and immortality from the power
and dominion of the Grave.
But the course of human nature continuing the same
after this restoration which it held before^ and the GRAVE
still boasting its power, though foolishly, indeed, and in
vain, since Death had lost its Sting ; there seemed to be
need of some extraordinary evidence of the reality of
tliis change in the order of things, which being procured
at the price of Christ s death on the Cross, and then vi
sibly paid, the nature of the compact required that the
f JoijQ XV. 24, 1 I Cor, xv. 17, t Acts ii, 24. 1 Cor, xv. 55.
benefit
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 327
benefit obtained should be as visibly put into our posses
sion ; and both one and the other openly exemplified
in the same Person, the Author of our Salvation. For,
if he himself was not seen to enjoy the fruits of that
Redemption, which was of his own procuring, what
hopes could be entertained for the rest of mankind?
Would it not have been too plausibly concluded, that
this expedient of Redemption had proved ineffectual by
CHRIST S not rising ? So necessarily connected (in the
Apostle s opinion) was the MIRACLE of our Saviour s
visible resurrection with the very essence of the Christian
Faith. And this Resurrection being the jirst fruits of
them that slept, was the very thing which both assured
and sanctified all the benefits that were to follow. For
the Jewish jirst fruits (to which the expression alludes)
were of the nature, and a security to the plenty, of the
approaching Harvest.
Thus, we see, the MIRACLE of the Resurrection
made a necessary part of the integrity of the Gospel.
But it had other uses and expediencies besides ;
which, (in concluding this head,) I shall, in as few
words as possible, endeavour to point out. The heathen
World had, in general, some notion of another life. But
a resurrection of this material body, after death, to
accompany the soul in its future existence, never once
entered into their imaginations; though some modern
Writers have been misled to think otherwise, partly by
what they had learnt of the fables of the vulgar, full of
shadows of a bodily shape, Inhabitants of the Tombs,
or Attendants on the Soul, in the sequestered abode of
Spirits ; and partly of the more solemn dreams of the
Philosophers, particularly the famous STOICAL RENOVA
TION, which, however, is so far from bearing any re
semblance, or yielding any credit to the CHRISTIAN
resurrection, though mistaken for it, that it is absolutely
inconsistent with it.
The Sages of Antiquity had discovered many qualities
in the human Soul, which disposed them to think that it
might survive the Body. But every property they knew
of A fatter led them to conclude, that, at the separation
and dissolution of the union between these two constituent
parts of Man, the Body would be resolved into the
y 4 Elements
3-o8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
Elements from whence it arose. And that sect of Phi
losophy vvhieh most favoured, and best cultivated the
Doctrine of the Soul s immortality, considered the Body
only as its prison, into which it was thrust, by way of
penance, for its pre-cxistent crimes ; and from which,
when it had undergone its destined purgation, it was to
be totally set free. Nay, so little did the RESL^RUECTIQM
OF THE BODY enter into their more studied conceptions,.
Ihat when St. Paul, at Athens, (the capital Seat of
Science,) preached JESUS AND THE RESURRECTION *,
his Auditors mistook the second term to he like the first,
a revelation of some new Dcky, a certain Goddess, called
AN A STASIS f..
With all these prejudices, so unfavourable to the
INSURRECTION OF THE BODT, nothing less than the
assurance of the best attested MIRACLE, in confirmation
of it, could have reconciled the Gentile World to the
Mief of so incredible a Doctrine.
This we say with the greater confidence, since St. Paul
himself oft this occasion, appears to argue on the same
idea.
* Acts xtii. 31.
f In this sense St. CIIRTSC^TOM rtnderstood the thoughts of the 1
Athenians to be concerning St. Paul s mention of the Anasfasis.-
J)f. Hi^TLt Y thinks otherwise, liut which of these two Doctors
was likely to be best acquainted with the genius and state of Paganism,
when St. Paul preached at Athens-, must be left- 1<> the judgment of the
Header. This, at least, is certain, that the reason the modern Doctor
gives, vv iiy the Athenians could not mistake AXASTASIS /or a God<hss r
ftfettifli they too trr// understood the notion of a resurrection, is a very
weak one, since they had no notion of a resurrection at all; miles*
they mistook (which is very unlikely) the STOICAL IIEA* OVATION for
that which the Apostle preached. Dr. Bentley, indeed, seems to hare
fallen into tht^t error, or he could scarce have said the Athenians well
Understood the notion of a Resurrection. However, let the Athenians
Understand this Stoical renovation as they would, they were certainly
liable to a folly us gross-, and at that time much more general, which
was, the turrinii moral entity into an object of worship : most of
which abstract notions, superstition had thus metamorphosed.
Amongst the JMVS, indeed, the RESURRECTION was become u
national Doctrine some time br fore the advent of the MESSIAH ;
not collected (we may be sure) from natural reason, nor taught theai-
hy their Scriptures, yet collected from the contemplation of their
Prophets misinterpreted ; where the restoration of the Mosaic Rcpublk
was predicted, in terms which were mistaken by the latter Jews, to
signify the revival or resurrection of the Bodies of their deceased
.Ancestors ; of which many instances might be given y besides Ezekiel i
Vision oftfa dry tones r
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 329
idea. For when he had rectified this error of the Athe
nians, concerning Jesus and the resurrection, and had
informed them that, by this resurrection, he meant the
revival of the dead bodies of men, and restoration of them
to life, he adds whereof God hath given ASSURANCE
unto all men, in that he raised Jesus from the dead. For
after his resurrection, he was seen (says the same
Apostle, on another occasion) of jive hundred brethren
at once ; of whom the greater part remain unto this
present. \ Cor. xv. 6.
2. Under this second division of Miracles, whose
subject makes an essential part in the Economy of the
.Christian dispensation, let me recommend to your con*
sideration and belief the power of Jesus and his Disciples
to CAST OUT DEVILS OR EVIL SPIRITS from the bodies
of Men suffering by those inhospitable Guests*. HO
And under this division I the rather chuse to place this
species of Miracles, since, by occasion of a very general
and infamous pretence of such a power, especially in
these later times, the fact itself has been rendered doubtr
ful ; and even excluded from the number of those mental
and bodily disorders, recorded by the Evangelists, to
have been relieved in the most extraordinary manner by
Jesus and his Disciples And they brought unto him all
sick people (says St. Matthew) that were taken with
divers diseases and torments, and those -which were POS
SESSED WITH DEVILS, AXD LUNATICS; and he healed
th.cm r \. Insomuch that at length we have been told,
that what is here called the being possessed with Devils-,
was, indeed, no other than an atrabilaire Lunacy, or one
of those occult distempers for which Physicians cuuld not
find a remedy, or, what was still harder, were at a loss
for a name ; and therefore, in complaisance to the imbe
cility of their Patients, they agreed to suppose it super-
natural, or (saving your presence) the work of the DeviL
But this strange Malady being delivered to us as a
REAL POSSESSION by the Evangelist last quoted, who,
at the same time, distinguishes it from natural disorders,
and particularly from LUNACY, with which these modern
Doctors are willing to confound it, we chuse to adhere to
the opinion of the sacred Writer.
* Sernaoii On the Fall ofS(ftaji 7 .\ol, x, f Matt. iv. 24,
In
330 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
In support of which, and to form a right judgment of
the matter in question, it may be proper to consider what
adverse part the DEVIL bore in disturbing the Economy
of Grace.
Now, in the History of the FALL, recorded by Moses,
to which the Writers of the New Testament perpetually
allude, SATAN, or the Tempter, Calumniator, the old
Serpent, or the evil One, (for by these names he is cha
racterized in Scripture,) is represented as having instigated
ihe first man, Adam, to disobedience; for which, by the
second Adam, Jesus Christ, (who restored us to our lost
inheritance) is denounced his punishment in these figurative
terms, the Seed of the Woman should bruise the Serpent s
head* : explained in the New Testament, to be the final
conquest and destruction of this enemy of mankind by
our Redeemer. So that we may reasonably expect to
find the punishment of the Tempter recorded in the
History of our REDEMPTION, as his crime was recorded
in the History of the FALL. And, indeed, this circum
stance, so necessary to the story of the whole transaction,
\ve meet with in the Gospel, on several occasions.
When the Disciples, whom Jesus had sent out to
renounce their Mission, came back to their Master
exulting in the power of their Ministry, he receives them
as Conquerors, returning in triumph from their spiritual
warfare / beheld SATAN (says he) as lightning fall
from heaven^. A strong and lively picture of the sudden
precipitation of that Prince of the Air from the place
where he had so long held his usurpation, hanging like
a pestilential meteor over the sons of men.
The rise, therefore, of Christ s Kingdom, and the fall
of Satan s, being thus carried on together, it would be
strange indeed, if, in the Gospel, we should find no
MARKS of the rage of Satan s expiring tyranny amidst
all the salutary blessings of the rising Empire of Christ.
But we find them in abundance. We find this enemy
of our salvation, mad with despair, invoking all the
powers of darkness to blast that peace and good mil
towards men, proclaimed by Angels on the birth-night
of the Son of God. For when he understood, by his
baffled attempts on his Lord and Master, that the SOULS
* Gen. iii. 15. t Luke x. 18.
of
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 331
of Men had escaped his usurped Dominion, he turned
his cruelty on their BODIES, in the most humiliating
circumstances of pain and oppression that could dis
honour or disgrace humanity : permitted, no doubt, to
take a wider range at this decisive instant than at any
other, either before or since, in order to illuminate the
glories of his Conqueror.
Had the first Adam stood in the rectitude of his
Creation, he had, on observing the Command given to
him in Paradise, gained IMMORTALITY, and been placed
above and beyond the reach of NATURAL and MORAL
evil. His relapse back to MORTALITY brought both into
the world. The office of the second Adam was to restore
us to our Paradisaical State. But as the immortality^
purchased for us by the Son of God, was unlike to that
which became forfeit by the transgression of thejirsf man
in this particular, that it was not to commence imme
diately, but was reserved for the reward of a future state,
it followed that both physical and moral evil were to
endure for a season. Yet, to manifest that they were,
in good time, to receive their final doom from the RE
DEEMER, it seems essential to his character that he should,
in the course of his Ministry, give a convincing specimen
of his power over both.
One part, therefore, of his Godlike labours was, we
find, employed in curing all kinds of natural diseases.
But had he stopped here amidst his conquests over
physical evil, the full evidence of his Dominion over both
f^orlds, which, by his office, he was to restore to their
primeval integrity, had remained defective.
Jesus, therefore, was to display his Sovereignty over
moral evil likewise ; and this could not be seen in the
manner it was manifested over natural evil, but by a
sensible Victory over SATAN ; through whose machi
nations moral evil was brought into the World, and by
whose temptations it was sustained and increased.
Hence it was that, amongst his amazing works of sanity
and salvation, the CASTING OUT OF DEVILS is so much
insisted on by the Writers of his life and death ; he him
self having informed them, that it was essential to the
erection of his spiritual Kingdom//^ / (says he) cast
332 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
or,--- Devils by the Spirit of God, THEN the Kingdom
r// Gwi >> come, u-nto you*.
oin the very genius of the GOSPEL, from the
and constitution of the System of GRACE, it
rirs that this Was a real ejection of the evil Spirit.
But, besides this, Jesus and his Disciples, in their
manner of working, and in the mode of recording what
they worked, did every thing that might best display
a real victory over SATAN.
Let the Jews- of that time, let the Diseased themselves,
be as much in an error as you arc pleased to conceive
them, in the matter of Diabolical Possession, yet no
Believer will presume to think that JESUS was deceived
in his own case; or was disposed to deceive others,
when he informed his Historians of his being led by the
Spirit into the fflldcmc-ss, and of his being tempted there
forty days of the DEVIL*]". Whether any, or what part
of this transaction passed in Vision, is not material to
determine, since the reality of the agency is the same on
either supposition ; as its truth depended riot on the
mode of sensation, but on the infallible assurance of that
agency. For Jesus, in his amazing humiliation, when
he assumed our nature, was yet, without doubt, superior
to those infirmities of it which arise from the delusions
of sense ; as such delusions would have been incom
patible with the exercise of his divine Ministry. If,
therefore, there was any mistake in tin s matter, it must
be (I speak it with the most reverential horror) the de
signed contrivance of our blessed Master himself, who
assures us, that he was not only the way, but .THE TRUTH J
likewise.
So far then is clear, that the ei il Spirit was neither
absent nor inactive when the Gospel was first opened to
mankind.
In THIS TEMPTATION, he was permitted to try
whether he could traverse the great work of human
Redemption- In his possession cf niais bodies, he seems
to have been, in part, forced upon the attempt, that the
casting of him out, by the power of Jesus, might evince
Mankind that our restoration to LIVE was fully accom
plished.
* Mutt, xii. 28. i Luke iv. i, -2. J John xiv. 6.
Thus,
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 333
Thus, in the case of the man possessed in the country
of the Gadarenes The Devils, oppressed by the mighty,
hand of God, and ready to be cast out and sent into a,
place of torment, gonfess the superiority of their con
queror, and proclaiiw him to be the promised MESSIAH,
at a time when he concealed this part of his Character,
and was not certainly known by it even amongst his
Disciples.
If it be asked, why the Devils proclaimed it? The
answer is easy: It was to impede, or to cut off, the
pourse of his appointed Ministry, On this account
Jesus checks, or enjoins silence to them. Indeed, had,
all the attestation given by our Saviour to real possessions
been ro atrpn^er tiian that which he gave in answer to.
those who said, He cast out Devils by Beelzebub, namely,
that then, Beelzebub s kingdom being artided within
itself, must be brought to destruction *, the argument
might be thought to labour a Sittie ; for if the power and
operation of 8ata$"or Beelzebub was a groundless fancy,
as our Philosophers pretend, Jesus may not unreason
ably be thought to argue ad hominem ; which a Messenger.
from God might do without impeachment of his Cha
racter, though the concession on which he reasons were
not strictly conformable to the reality of things. But when
such o Messenger commands the Devils, whom he pre-.
tends to have cast out, not to discover his office or.
character, this is going a length, if there was. no Devil
in thu case, which a Messenger from the God of Truth,
could never, surely, be authorized to engage in.
If we turn from Satan s temptation of Jesus to his cruel,
treatment of the Jews, we shall still find the same strong,
marks of real agency.
JBe it granted, that both the Jews and Gentiles of .that
time were grown, very fanciful and superstitious concern
ing diabolic possessions, and, consequently, that they often,
mistook natural to? supernatural maladies ; what follows,
but that which \ve find provided against those talsq
conclusions which weak or licentious men drew from
thence ?
The utmost care and attention has been given by the
sacred Writers to mark out those cases of real possession,
* Matt. xii. 24, & seq.
which
334 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
which Jesus relieved, by some circumstance not equivocal,
or what could not accompany an imaginary or natural
disorder.
Thus, in the adventure recorded by three of the
Evangelists* when Jesus had eased the Demoniac,
and his tormentors had obtained leave to go into a herd
of swine; what other reason can be given, or, indeed,
what better can be conceived, of their extraordinary
request on the one hand, or permission on the other, than
that this circumstance was to afford a certain MARK to
distinguish a REAL from an imaginary Possession ?
It is true, that the wild extravagance of human fancy
may be able to form chimeras that shall affright the
Raiser of them to distraction. Yet Brutes (we all know)
have none of this dangerous faculty. Therefore, when
we find great numbers of them stimulated, at once, to an
instantaneous madness, we must needs conclude, that it
was caused by some supernatural Agent, operating on
their organs.
So admirably has our indulgent Master been pleased
to guard this important Truth against the most plausible
evasions of self-conceited men.
The strong impulse of a vitiated fancy, pushed forward
by superstition, might be supposed able, without other
agency, to produce these very extraordinary appear*
ances.
To cut off, therefore, all escape from a forced con
cession of the mighty hand of God, compelling his most
averse Creatures to acknowledge his Sovereignty, here
are two cases obtruded on the most incredulous : The
one is, SATAN S temptation of the Messiah ; the other
is, his Possession of brute Animals : In neither of which
cases hath \hvpowers of imagination any place. In the
Jirst, the divine Patient was above their delusions ; in
the other, the Brutal was as much below them.
If we turn from the FACTS which the Evangelists have
recorded, to the EXPRESSIONS which they have employed,
we shall have further reason to rest satisfied with the
ancient interpretation.
The text says, They brought unto him all sick people
that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and
* Matt. viii. Mark v. Luke viii.
THOSE
Chap. 5-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 335
THOSE WHICH WERE POSSESSED WITH DEVILS, and
LUNATICS; and he healed them.
Here we find, that the disorder of those who are said
to be POSSESSED WITH DEVILS, is precisely distin
guished, not only from natural diseases and torments in
general, but likewise from LUNACY in particular; that
very disorder which the Antidernoniast is so willing to
confound with supernatural agitations. Is it possible,
therefore, to believe, that a Writer of any meaning, at
the very time he is distinguishing Lunacy from diabolical
Possessions, should confound these two disorders with
one another ? Yet, this is what these licentious Critics
make him do, in compliance (they tell us) with an acr
customed mode of speech. On the contrary, is it not
certain, that the sacred Writer was the more intent to re-*
present them as two very different disorders, for this
very reason, their having many symptoms in common ?
a circumstance which hath made these men solicitous
to confound what the Evangelist was careful to dis
tinguish.
In a word, they who, alter all these precautions taken
by St. Matthew, and the rest, can believe that Devils and
Jjetnoniacs were used only as terms of accommodation,
may well believe (as some of them profess to do) that
the terms Sacrifice, Redemption, and Satisfaction, come
of no better a House than one of the common figures of
speech*.
III.
We ROW come to the third and last Class of MIRA
CLES, which, we say, demand the assent of every reason
able man, when proposed to him with full evidence of the
Fact.
Of this kind are the Miracles in which the Deity im
mediately interposes, to vindicate the Credit of his own
Predictions, when impious men have publicly combined
to defeat and dishonour them.
The most eminent of this Class was the miraculous in
terposition of Heaven, which defeated JULIAN S attempt
to rebuild THE JEWISH TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM.
When God found it expedient or necessary, in order
to preserve the Memory and keep up the Knowledge of
* See not* [L] at the end of this Book*
himself
336 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
himself amidst a corrupt world, running headlong into
Polytheism and Idolatry, he chose a single Family, which,
when spread out into a Nation or People, was to become
the public repository of his holy Name, till the fulness of
time should come, when, as he promised by himself, all
the earth should bejilled with the glory of the Lord*.
This family was of the seed of Abraham; which, in
compliance with the religious notions of those times, lie
was pleased to adopt for his peculiar People, under the
idea of their tutelar Deity, or the God of Abraham^
Isaac j and Jacob ; and, the more, effectually to secure
the great end of their separation, assumed, likewise, the
title and office of their KING or CIVIL GOVERNOR ;
having, first of all, communicated himself to them, as the*
Makei* and Governor of the Universe..
Hence, the RELIGION he gave unto this People came
under the idea of a LAW; and the LAW, amongst them,:
was, in the strictest sense, RELIGION, as having all the
sanctions of a divine command.
From this short account of the JEWISH CONSTITU
TION it appears, that RELIGION, which, elsewhere, had
properly and justly particulars cnly for -its subjects, hat(;
liere the nation or community. And what, elsewhere,
(as far as concerns the divine origin of Religion) is only-
a private matter, was here a public. For the Deity
being both their tutelary Gcd and Civil Governor, the
proper object of his care was in either capacity, the
collective Body.
Hence it follows, that the principal Rites of the
Hebrew Religion and Law were to be performed in
some determined Place. For the ideas of a tutelary God
and civil Governor implied a local Residence ; and a
national act, arising from the relations springing oqt of
these qualities, required a fixed and certain habitation for
its celebration; and both together seemed to marjk out
the Capital of the Country for that use.
Such a practice, which the nature and reason of things
so evidently point out, the Institutes of the Jewish Law
expressly direct and enjoin.
During the early and unsettled times of the Republic,
the Sacrifices prescribed by its Ritual were directed to be
*: Numbers?-; I v. -21.
. offered
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 337
offered up at the door of an ambulatory Tabernacle ; but
when the People had perfected the Establishment or-
dained for them, and a magnific TEMPLE was erected
for religious Worship, then their SACRIFICES were to be
offered in that place at Jerusalem only.
Now, SACRIFICES constituting the essentials of their
Worship, their Religion could not be said to exist longet*
than that celebration continued. But Sacrifices were to
be performed in no place out of the Walls of their TEM
PLE. So that when this holy place was finally destroyed,
according to the prophetical predictions, the INSTITUTION
itself became abolished. Nor was any thing more con
sonant to the genius of this Religion, than the assigning
such a celebration of its principal Rites. The Temple
would exist while they remained a People, and continued
Sovereign. And when their Sovereignty was lost, tha
Temple-worship became precarious, and subject to the
arbitrary pleasure of their Masters. They destroyed this
Temple; but it was not till it had lost its use. For the
Rites, directed to be there celebrated, were relative to
them only as afree-policied People.
So that this was, in reality, a total EXTINCTION of the
Jewish Worship. How wonderful are the ways of God !
This came to pass at that very period when a new Reve
lation from Heaven concurred with the blind transactions
of civil policy, to supersede the LAW by the introduction
of the GOSPEL : the last great work which completed the
Scheme of HUMAN REDEMPTION.
To confound this admirable order of Providence was
what induced the EMPEROR JULIAN to attempt the
REBUILDING the JEWISH TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM.
The vanity of the attempt could be only equalled by its
impiety; for it was designed TO GIVE THE LIE TO GOD,
who, by the mouth of his Prophets, had foretold that it
should never be rebuilt. Here then was the most im
portant occasion for a miraculous interposition, as it was
to defeat this mad attempt. And thus in fact it was de
feated, to the admiration of all mankind.
But as a large and full account of the whole affair hath
been already given to the Public, in a Work entitled
JULIAN, or a Discourse concerning th$ Earthquake and
VOL. VL Z
338 THE DIVINE LEGATION [EooklX.
flcrti Eniptini -xhich ckfcatcd that Ewpcror.s Attempt
to rebuild the Tcn^lc at Jerusalem* ; thither I refer the
learned Ucacler, ^ho \vill there meet with all the various
evidence of the Fact, abundantly sufficient to support and
establish it; together with a full confutation, of all the
cavils opposed to its certainty and necessity.
To conclude this subject with a recapitulation of what
I undertook to prove, namely,, that the MIRACLES in the
Christian Dispensation, which exact credit of reasonable
men., iuay be all comprised under one or uthcr of these
Division, viz.
I. Under that srr:cii:s OF MIRACLES which serves .
for CREDENTIALS to the MISSION of Jesus Christ and
his first Disciples and followers.
II. Or under that wliich makes an essential part in
the integrity or completion of the Gospel-System.
III. Or, lastly, under that in which the Deity imme
diately interposes, to vindicate the credit of his own
predictions, when impious Men have entered into a
combination to defeat and dishonour them.
Not that it is my purpose positively to- brand, as
FALSF., every pretended Miracle recorded in ecclesiastical
and civil History, which vaults this favourable capacity of
being reduced to one or other of the Specie* explained
above. All that I contend for is, that those Miracles,
still remaining unsupported by the nature of that Evi
dence which I have shewn ought to force conviction from
every reasonable Mind, should be at present excluded
from the privilege of that conviction.
Indeed the greater part may be safely given up, for
idle and knavish tales of monkish invention. Of the rest,
which yet stand undiscredited by any considerable marks
of Imposture we may safely suspend our belief, till time
hath afforded further lights to direct our judgment.
" v " Nor will the confining our Assent to Miracles, thus
brought vit iin the limits of an apparent SUFFICIENT
CAUSE, be less beneficial to Religion in general, than it
is subversive .of the vain Philosophy in vogue, whicfi
attempts to discredit all extraordinary interpositions of
Providence whatsoever, as we- shall now shew.
* See Vol. via. of this Edit
i. The
Chap. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 339
i. The bringing MIRACLES within these bounds will
afford a mark ot distinction, never to bo effaced, between
those of the GOSPEL, and those which PA.GANISM and its
Advocates object to us. For T may venture to affirm,
tiiat, amongst those pretended Miracles in the Pagan
World, there cannot be found one that carries along with
it any thing that bears the least resemblance to a SUFFI
CIENT CAUSE. And there is strong reason to believe,
that the Dcitv, without such an occason, would never
interfere amongst the Gentiles ; because such an inter
position would, besides the vanity of it, have a natural
und direct tendency to rivet men in their idolatry.
But the principal use of confining MIUAGLF.S within
these bounds will be the giving an immediate check to
FRAUU and SUPERSTITION, when in their full career, to
abuse and enslave a foolish World. For that strange
infirmity of the human mind, viz. a jbndness for the
MARVELLOUS (begot by a misconception of nature, and
nursed by the pride of self-importance), always marie
the deluded multitude thankless and averse to those whg
would luring them to their senses.
Cut sic extort a voluptas,
And if Men be so fond of the Marvellous for the mere
pleasure .of the ADMIRATION which it creates, what must
be their zeal to propagate those strange tilings, in which
Religion is supposed to be concerned ? Every disorderly
passion now conspires to blot and deform the fair face of
Nature, with Prodigies and Portents.
Such f rightful Visions, even the earliest A s:es of Chris-
V J * V J
tianity raised u p. The Prodigies of A x T i c a RJ ST (says
the Apostle) have been crjler tlie working of Satan, with
Po w E RS and S i G x s and V L v r x G Wo x D E RS *.
This, it is true, should make THEOLOGIAXS cautious ;
but it shoujd not make our PHILOSOPHERS presumptuous
or vain. For even these Intimadps of Nature know 119
more of Her than what lies just before them, in common
with those whom they most affect to despise: And all
they kno\v, if not a MIRACLE, is yet a MYSTERY.
Let these her Closet-acquaintance steal, as they are
able, to her inmost recesses, they can bring nothing from
* 2 Thess. ii. 9.
z 2 thence
340 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX*
th nee concerning God s natural and moral Government,
as. the Poet finely expresses it,
BUT UN DECIPHERED CHARACTERS,
which only teach us the need we have of a better De
cipherer, than that REASON on which these men so*
proudly rely.
CHAP. VI.
BUT now,, besides these extraordinary Gifts, pro
perly called MIRACLES, with which the first Preachers
of the Gospel were intrusted, for its more speedy pro
pagation, they were endowed with another, and more
complicated kind of supernatural Power, namely, PRO
PHECY, in which a MIRACULOUS power was eminently
inciiuled.
With PROPHECY, or with that simpler species ci
divine Virtue, MIRACLES, was the Church of Christ at
that time supplied; as one or the other was best suited
to the various uses of Religion.
In explaining this matter, which the importance of the
subject requires us to do more at large, it win be neces
sary just to repeat what has been observed before; that-
in the first propagation* of a new Religion from Heaven,.
the Will of God must be attested by MIRACLES; since
nothing less than this instant Evidence is sufficient to
assure us of its divine original.
But when this hath been fully and largely afforded, the
po:cer of Miracles (where Miracles do not make a con
stant and essential part in the nature of the Dispensation,
as they did in the Jewish} is with good, reason withdrawn
from the Servants and Ministers of Religion : And the
CKURCII is from thenceforth left, at least for some time,
to support itself on the TRADITIONAL EXEMPLIFICA
TION of this evidence; something less forcible than the
ORIGINAL RECORD, of which the first and better ages
Of Christianity had been in possession..
But by the time this MIRACULOUS power began to fail,
another Was preparing to supply its place, of still greater
efficacy ; I mean, that of PROPHECY.
For the sovereign Master, who no less manifests his
constant PRESENCE to the moral than to the physical
government
Chap. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED.
government of the World, has been graciously pleased to
give to the later ages of the Church more than an equi
valent for what tie had bestowed upon the earlier^ in be
ginning to shower down on his chosen servants of the
NEW COVENANT the riches of PROPHECY as the power
of working MIRACLES abated. So early, 1 say, was
this preparation made for that stronger and more last
ing support; a support not yet, indeed, improved into
Incidence ; nor was the Evidence wanted, while Afiractes^
in a sort, remained. Besides, it could not, in the nature
of things, become Evidence, till some time after its first
enunciation : for till the more considerable events of a:
PROPHECY, which contained the future and later fortunes
of the Gospel, had arisen, and been brought, by degrees,
into EXISTENCE, the Prophecy could atfbrd no convic
tion of its truth.
Yet, in this wonderful disposition of things, we see
the divine Hand by which they were conducted.
To proceed. PROPHECIES were now more clearly
and simply, now more obscurely and enigmatically
enounced, just as the nature of the subject or the cir~.
cumstances of the time required Yet still we have ven
tured to call PROPHECY a stronger and more lasting
Evidence than MIRACLES. .And this will deserve our
attention. The evidence from MIRACLES seems, by its
nature, to lessen somewhat by time ; while that irom PRO-
PHECY gathers strength by it. and grows more and more
convictive, till the gradual and full completion of all its
parts makes the splendour of it irresistible.
Hence the wisdom of the divine Disposer is still further,
seen, in making PROPHECY, not only the strongest, but
the LAST and CONCLUDING Evidence of a Religion,.
w hich, as it was the completion of the whole scheme of
HEVELATION, so having (as it would seem) the largest
portion of its course yet to run, that species of Evidence
which does not lose, but gain strength, by time, was best
fitted to accompany it to its utmost period.
But to go on with our more general reflections on the
whole.
This DOUBLE EVIDENCE, in support of Revealed
Religion, hath always been the same throughout every
z 3 mode
34* THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
mode of God s moral Dispensations. The records of
sacred History confirm this Truth.
Under the Jewish economy, although MIRACLES, by
reason of the peculiar form of the Republic, were neces
sarily attendant on its administration, throughout a course
of many ages (that is, during all tiie time in which the
affairs of this people were conducted by an extraordinary
Providence), yet God s inspired Servants were, together
with the power of working MIRACLES, endowed with the
gift of PKOIMIECY. For, although the extraordinary
Providence, and consequently MIRACLES, which made a
part of it, continued much longer than would have been
Necessary, had MIRACLES, amongst the Jews been of no
other use than they were in the Christian Church, viz. to
evidence the divinity of the Revelation; yet as that Pro-
vidence, and consequently this miraculous attendant on
it, were to cease long before the abolition of the THEO
CRACY; the other evidence of PROPUECY, in the absence
of MIRACLES, was graciously bestowed on the Jewish
Church likewise.
Hence the inspired Ministers of it, DANIEL in par
ticular, foretold more circumstantially and minutely than
the rest, the various fortunes of that Church and Repub
lic, from its decay, in their own times, to the entire clisso^-
lution of it by the introduction or* a better SYSTEM.
In the like manner St. Jonx, under the NEW COVE
NANT, did, by the same divine Spirit, predict the fortunes
of the Christian Church, from the flourishing condition
of it, in his own time, through all the disasters of the
corrupt ages that followed, to the happy consummation
of all tilings. .
In both cases, for the reasons above given, PROPHECY
could not be urged as instant evidence, at the tirr^eitvvas
delivered, but was kept entire and reserved for the use of
those ages when MIRACLES having long ceased in the
Christian Church, and were declining in the Jeicish^
seemed to need this other and further support.
From all these, and from many other considerations to
fc-3 further urged, it will appear, that, of this double Evi
dence to the truth of Revelation, viz. MIRACLES and
PROPHECY, the latter, as we have said, is of superior
c and Citicacv.
We
Chap. 6,] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 343
We have already shewn its superiority in gaining by
Time what the other loses. This advantage is further
seen by its beinu less subject to the mistakes and fallacious
impressions r Qi sense than Miracles are.
But as this is a matter of much importance, it may be
prqper to explain and verily the assertion,
Both MIRACLES and PROPHECIES are indeed appeals
.to the Senses, but with this difference, that MIRACLES,
.however illustrious, such as those worked by the first
^propagators of aur holy Religion, are subject to tluc cavils
of Infidelity.
Of this, Dr. Middleton hath afforded a wonderful ex
ample; where .he insinuates,, and would seem to persuade
us, that the Vuice J rom Heave u recognizing the Son of
Gcd, was no other than a superstitious fancy of the later
, Jews called the BATJI KOL.; a fantastic kind of Divina
tion of their own invention. As groundless and scanda
lous as this cavil is, yet it must be owned, that the frame
.of the animal economy, in which a heated imagination is
.able to work strange appearances in the body, has given
some countenance to infidelity, in its sceptical conclusions
.against Miracles. And though we have sajd enough to
free tko.sc of the Gospel, and some others, confined within
the reasonable bounds before laid do\\n, from every im
putation of this sort, yot Miracles bcj.ug, by their very
nature, open and liable to abusive interpretations, and
Prophecjf wdl secured from then;), for this, and Jur the
more weighty reasons given above, we conclude (as ihe
crown of all) with the unerring declaration of the holy
Apostle PETER; who, in his second general Epistle to
.the Churches, alluding to this fa f;jbld cridejwc for the
truth of Revelation, namely MIRACLES and PROPHECY^
.after he had ended what he thought fit to ?ay of the
Jirxt t proceeds to the other in these woa*iL> WE HAVE
ALSO A 31 ORE Si RE WORD OF PilOiyiECY %c;*> BE-
3AIOTEPON TOV nPO^HTJKON hfywa zcord, that nwij be
.more Jinnly relied on, andichoxe e.vtdejiceis more durable.
The word, jS^iJT^, including both these senses. And
we have shewn that the nature of PROPHECY contains
these two qualities;.
And they being most .eminently comprised in the
CAPITAL PROTHLCY here described and characterized ;
24 a more
344 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
a more particular explanation of it may be naturally
expected in this GENERAL VIEW of the Christian
Religion.
" We have not followed a^//;^: ; / dev/tca Cables
" (says the Apostle, ver, i (I) when we made known unto
" you the POWER AND COMING of our Lord Jesus.
" Clirist, but were eye-witnesses of his Majesty."
17. " For he received from God the Father honour
" and glory, when there was a VOICE to him from the
" exceeding glory This is my beloved Son, in whom I
" am well pleased."
1 8. " And this voice which came from Heaven we
" heard, when we were with him in the mount."
1Q. " WE HAVE ALSO A MORE SURE WORD OF
" PROPHECY ; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed,
" as unto a light shining in a dark place, until tht day
" drfwn, and the day-star arise in your hearts"
* There are few places, in the Scriptures of the New
Testament, plainer than this before us ; and yet there are
none where interpreters have wandered further from the
ApostL s meaning f.
This hath been principally owing to a mistake of the
subject. These Interpreters supposed that St. PETER
was here speaking of the PERSONAL CHARACTER OF
JESUS; and thence concluded, that THE MORE SURE
fvoRD OF PROPHECY, whereby he strengthens his argu
ment, respected the Prophecies of the OLD TESTAMENT,
which establish that PEIISONAL CHARACTER.
But the Apostle is treating of a different thing; namely,
Of THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL IX GENERAL.
Which shews, that the more sure word of Prophecy
regards a Prophecy of the NEW TESTAMENT.
One mistake produced, of course, another. For, on
supposition, that the personal Character of Jesus was
the thing meant, it would follow, that by the power and
coming oj our Lord, we are to understand his FIRST
COMING ; and then, indeed, the word of Prophecy must
needs signify a Prophecy ALREADY FULFILLED. But
* From this place to the end, abridged and altered from Discourse
Gn the Rise of Antichrist.
f See the altercations between Bibhop Sherlock and Dr. Middleton,
and their respective Advocates,
5 nothing
Chap. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 345
nothing is more certain than that the Character here
given of that Prophecy, to which the Church is admo
nished to take heed, or pay its attention, confines us to
one, but now, just beginning to attest its divine original
it is a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawn,
and the day-star arise in mtr heart*; that is, till a long
series of events (yet in the womb of time) shall arise, to
give testimony, by degrees, till the whole evidence con
cludes in one unclouded blaze of conviction. So that the
power and coining of our Lord must needs mean his
SECOND COMIXG.
Yet amongst the Interpreters just before censured,
there are some more eminently absurd * than the rest.
One of these is even desirous to have it believed, that
by this more sure word of Prophecy is to be understood
the Prophecy of ISAIAH, chap. xlii. ver. i. although the
Apostle has characterized this to be a light sinning in a
dark place, c. /. e. not as convictive evidence at present,
yet being a LIGHT, though shining \n a dark place, it de
served our attention, till greater lights should arise, which
would afford full conviction.
Now, could this be the Character of a Prophecy of
the Old Testament-, especially one of ISAIAH S, most of
whose Predictions referred to, and had their completion
in, JESUS, their great object ? The dawn and day-star,
here spoken of by the Apostle, as of a very distant light,
was, in the time of that Prophet, already risen in the
hearts of his countrymen, or it would never rise.
Let us, therefore, look out for some more reasonable
Paraphrase of the sacred Text.
" That you may be assured (says the Apostle) we
" have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we
" described to you the power of our Lord at his SECOND
" COMING, you should recollect what we have frequently
" told you, of his FIRST; having been eye-witnesses of
" the Majesty and Miracles attending it, when there
" came a voice to him from the exceeding glory 9 c.
" Now, the MIRACLES, which accompanied, and con-
" firmed his mission, on his FIRST COMING, are surely
* k sufficient to gain credit to what we have, as often, told
" you, of his SECOND. And, of this capital Truth, God
* See Mr. M.
" hath
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Cook IX.
41 hath been graciously pleased to add still stronger
6 evidence; by giving us A MORE SURE WORD OP
* PilOPil ECY."
But the general subject of the EPISTLE will further
support the truth of this Paraphrase.
It is a farewell address to the CHURCHES, on his
having received intimation, from the holy Spirit, of his
approaching Martyrdom.
The Apostle begins with repeating to them [from
ver. 3d to the i.5thj that elegant summary of Christian
Religion*, as was his wont, on all occasions, to inculcate.
But, at this juncture, CONSOLATION being what the
afflicted Church most needed, he takes his topic from the
Il>; WARDS, now supposed to be approaching, at the
second cowing of our Lord in the consummation of all
things. PERSECUTION had soothed the Sufferers into
this flattering error, which was now become general, and
not likely to be soon redressed, while they continued
unable (as they yet were) to distinguish the two parts of
which this PK EDICT ION, concerning the second coming
of our Lord, was composed. Each part had its distinct
completion, commencing at different periods. The first ,
when our Lord came to judgment, on the JEWISH
PEOPLE, in putting a complete period to their ECONOMY,
by the destruction of their TEMPLE ; The other, when
lie was to pass judgment on the whole race of mankind,
and make a, final end of the MUNDANE SYSTEMS
Or rather, to speak with more exactness, this prediction
of -the SECOND COMING was delivered in two Prophecies
joined together ; and, in intimation of the Jewish mode,
j nixed and interwoven with one another; generally as
littb understood, at the time pf the delivery, as all those
of a like import were,, which hacj either a sppondary scnw,
or included a double subject. But for a larger account of
these, and particularly of the sort now in question, I beg
leave to refer the Header to the sixth Section of the sixth
Book of this \Vork.
Such was the Erroi\ which (as we say) gave birth to
the consolatory Epistle here explained, But as all
ERRORS, together with the accidental good, which, by
the directing hand of Providence, they are inade to
* S^e the Discourse on this text, Vol. x. of this Edit.
produce,
Chap. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 347
produce,, are easily attended \\ith much evil; so it was
here.
At first, the Error produced sobriety, vigilance, and
perseverance in the FAITH. But alter wards, it had a
contrary effect. There shall come in the last days (:-ay<i
this Apostle) scoffers, walking after their own /w,v/-.v, and.
SfUjUig, WHERE IS THE PKOMJSK OF liiS COMING? For
since the Fathers fell asleep^ all things continue as they
were from the beginning of the creation*.
After the censure of this Impiety, the Apostle proceeds
to upbraid their ignorance of the natural constitution of
the Earth ; which is physically ordained to bring on its
own destruction, by FI-IE, in some future period, as here
tofore, by the destruction of WATER : and that the delay
of this dreadful Catastrophe, which affords these scoffs
of Impiety, is not owing to the Lord s slackness in the
performance of his promise ; but to his long-suffering \
that all might come to repentance \. lie then describes
this final dissolution of all things, by fire$. Out of
which (he tells them) shall arise (according to the pro
mise of PROPHECY) a new heaven ami a new earth t
wherein shall dwell righteousness^* And with this the
F A U EWE L L E P i S T L E CO11 cl U d CS
Such being the subject of it, who can doubt but that
a true account of the reasoning in the latter part of the
jirst chapter is here given ? and, consequently, that the
Apostle s purpose is not to speak of indefinite Prophecies
already fulfilled IN, OR UNDER, the OLD TESTAMENT,
but of some precise Prophecy to be Ji //tiled under the
NEW; in order as the several parts of it (extending
through a course of many Ages) should come into
existence.
To THIS the Church of Christ is bid TO TAKE HEED,
as to a more sure word of prephecy. Jkit had the
description ended here, it would have been much too
yague to enjoin our attention in so earnest and particular
a maniier. The Apostle, therefore, goes on to give it
this characteristic Mark that it was A LIGHT SHIXIXG
IN A DARK PLACE. A Prophecy, of which the princi
pal parts were, at that time, surrounded and partly
involved in obscurity and darkness ; but yet, emitting so
* Ch. ill. 3. & seq. f Ver. 9. J Ver. 10,11, 1-2. Ver. 13.
many
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
rnany scattered Rays, as to make a careful observer
inclined to think some great scene was just beginning to
open, \vhich would amply reward our attention to this
light tihhihig hi a dark place, by the change of its con
dition, first into a daicn ; and then, into still clearer day-
The Apostle having thus prepared our way to this
SURER WORD, or superior excellence of PROPHECY, pro
ceeds to acquaint us with the very IDENTICAL PROPHECY
lie had in his eye ; which will now appear to be no other
than the predictions of St. Paul and St. John concerning
ANTICHRIST, or the future fortunes of the Church,
unrler the usurpation of the MAN OF SIN ; a prediction
de -r< l i^y called, by way of eminence, THE WORD OF
PIIOPHKCY. For this Man of Sin began to icork before
the writing of this farewell Epistle. So St Paul assures
US - THE MYSTERY OF INIQUITY (sayS he) DOTH
ALREADY wo UK*. St. Peter, therefore, towards the
conclusion of his Epistle, recurring again, as his subject
required, to God s long-suffering, in the delay of his set < nd
coming to judge the world, adds, even as our bclored
PAUL also, according to the WISDOM given unto him,
hath written unto you : as also in all his Epistles,
SPEAKING IN THEM OF THESE THINGS ; IN WHICH ARE
SOME THINGS HARD TO BE UNDERSTOOD, which they
that are unlearned and unstable zvrest, as they do also
the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction f. Now
what are these OBSCURE PARTS in St. Paul s Epistles,
here characterized, but the Prophecies in St. John s,
Book of the REVELATIONS concerning ANTICHRIST J,
abridged by St. Paul in his Epistles, and referred to by
St. Peter
* 2 Thess. ii. 7. f Chap. iii. 15, 16.
J See Sir Ibaac Nev/toirs Observations upon the Apocalypse o(
St. John, chap. i.
See tf i: remainder of this argument in Discourse On the
if Antichrist, Vol. x. pp. 165, &c. of this Edit.
END OF THE NINTH BOOK.
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 34?
N O T E S
ONf
BOOK IX.
P. 241. [A].
ON this point it will be sufficient to refer the reader
to those two excellent Writers, Dr. Samuel Clarke
and Mr.W. Baxter, for a full Demonstration of the
immateriality of that Substance, in. which the taculties of
sense and reflection reside. [See Clarke s Tracts against
Dodwell and Collins, and Baxter on -the Nature of the
Soul.] These Writers have gone much further than
Locke and others on the same Subject ; who contented
themselves with shewing the possibility, nay, great pro-
liability, that the thinking substance in us is immateriaL
[See Locke s Second Reply to the Bishop of Worcester^
p, (>oo. of his Works.] But Clarke and Baxter have
clearly proved, from the discovered qualities of a thinking
Being, that the Soul cannot possibly be material, what
ever undiscovered qualities it may be possessed of. And
this conclusion was made (in my opinion) neither rashly
nor at random. For, to unsettle our assurance in the
truth of their Opinion, their Adversaries must shew that
such undiscovered qualities are contrary to the qualities
discovered ; yet contrary qualities can never subsist
together in the same substance, without one destroying
the other. Hence, we understand the futility of Mr.
Locke s super induct ion of the faculty of thinking to. a
system of Matter. , conceived, by that excellent Writer,
in the modest fear of circumscribing Omnipotence ; but
Omnipotence is not circumscribed by denying its power
of making qualities, destructive of one another, to reside
in the same substance (for a power which produces
nothing is no exercise of power) ; but by denying his
power to change, together with consistent qualities, the
nature of the. substance in which those qualities reside,
Tliis power (supposing Mr. Locke contended for
350 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
more) will be readily granted; but his argument will
gain nothing by it. On the contrary, by changing via fert
ility into immat&iality, it ends th^ dispute with the
Bishop; but to Mr. Locke s disadvantage, by proving,
that the Soul, or thinking Substance in us, is immaterial,
P. 2.51. [B.] The impious notion of the human Soul s
being part or portion of the Divine Substance, made the
Thdstical Philosophers give no credit to the Doctrine
of a future state of rewards and punishments, [."tee the
Divine Legation, book iii. 4.] To avoid this impiety,
certain Christian Enthusiasts taught that eternity was the
condition of the Soul by nature as well as by gmcc,
And so, before they were aware, fell into the very error
of the Philosophers, which they were so anxious to avoid.
For eternity being confessed by all to be one of the
attributes of the Deity, it followed, that the human soul
was indeed part or portion of the Divine Substance.
This execrable frenzy, of which Religion could never
get entirely free, (known by the name of SPJXQZISM)
hath of late appeared under its ugliest form in the
Writings of Mr, W. Law, collected from the exploded
ravings of Jacob Behmcn. [See a book, intitled, An.
Appeal to all who doubt or disbelieve the Truths of the
Gospel.] But when learned men wake out of one
delirium, it is not to recover their senses, but to fall back
again into another ; and that, generally, is its opposite,
So it was here. The Philosophic Converts to the Christian
Faith, in the first ages of the Church, were no sooner
convinced of the folly of fancying that the human Soul
was a part cf the Gcdhead, than, in their haste to be at
distance from that monstrous opinion, they ran suddenly
into a contrary folly, and maintained, that the Soul had
not one spark of the Divinity in her whphe composition ;
but was MATERIAL as well as mortal: now degrading
man to a brute, whom before they had exalted to a
God. Nor hath this extravagance been destitute of (for
what extravagance hath ever wanted) the patronage of
niotlern Divines. We have seen it lately employed in
support of afresh whimsy, viz. THE SLTKP or THE SOUL.
One thing however seems to be defective in the Scheme;
which is, the not rectifying the old error of a UESUUUKC?
Xotes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 3,71
Tiox. For, I apprehend, that when a MATERIAL Soul
is once gone to Sleep, nothing but a KE-CUEATIOX can
awake it.
P. 2;"; 8. [C.] Other death had been understood, viz.
Eternal life in misery. But, to sec what ill use hath
been made of this portentous comment, we need only
attend to Collins in his discourse of free-thinking. " We
<l learn in the Old Testament, (says he) that Adam by
" eating the forbidden fruit subjected himself and all his
" Posterity to death. But the New Testament TEA CUES
" us TO UNDERSTAND, by death, eternal life in misery ;
" and from thence, we know that GOD HAD BUT ONE
" WAY to put mankind in a capacity of enjoying immortal
" happiness. 7 p. 153. Having given, in this buffoon
manner, so absurd and monstrous a picture of REDEMP
TION*, (to the composition of which the School Divines
had greatly contributed) he, and his free-thinking col-
leagues, hoped that their Doctrine of Christianity* s being
onJij a republication of the Religion of Nature would go
down the easier. And they well enough understood how
to manage that unscripturat error to their advantage ; as
may be seen by Tindafs book, intitled, Christianity as
old as the Creation; which combats the Christian Reve
lation, under cover of the absurd concessions of certain
latitudinarian Divines of a later date. These conces
sions, Tindal miscalls the PRINCIPLES OF CHRISTI
ANITY. Hence this formidable book became one con
tinued thread of contemptible sophistry from beginning;
to end. Yet I remember the time when the false terror
of it alarmed the whole body of the ClergVj for the
danger of the Church, who were but just recovered from
the Sachevcrel- crisis.
P. 259. [D.] The HEMOXSTRAXTS, fearing that this
interpretation of the text might give countenance to the
School doctrine of ORIGINAL six, deny that Infants are
here meant, by those u ho had not sinned, &e. But the
fear is vain. It was death, and not damnation, which
reigned from Adam to Moses. The expression Kal lv\
rifV py dpagTvc-afl&s, &c. implies it was a part only of
the human species which v&$ free from simting after the
similitude
35-2 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
similitude of Adcmis transgression ; or the being without
mi And what part could this be but the infantine?
P. 269. [E.] It is true, that notwithstanding the con
formity of this language in the Revelations to that of
Peter and to the Gospel of John, some Critics, and
particularly Grotius, would have the text in the Apoca
lypse, which says, all that die ell upon the Earth shall
worship him whose names are not written in the Boole
vf Life, of the Lamb slain from the foundation oj the
world to be thus understood The Book of Life written
from the foundation of the World and not as here
translated Christ slain from thcjoundationofthe World*
However, both the one and the other sense infers the
same truth ; for if the Book of Life [of the Lamb slain]
was writ ten from the foundation of the war Id, it is plain,
that the Lamb slain, or the sacrifice of his death, ICY/A*
preordained from the foundation of the World.
P. 272. |T.] The reason why Jesus, at the first publi
cation of the Gospel, refers so little to the FALL, which
concerned all mankind, and so much to his MESSI AHSIIIP,
uhich directly concerned only the Jews, is apparent ; his
Mission was first directed to the house of Israel. He
left his Apostles to carry on their Ministry of the Gospel,
to the Gentiles. Hence St. Paul, who was more emi
nently the Apostle of the Gentiles, is so explicit in his
account of the RESTORATION FROM THE FALL. This
furnished a handle to Lord Bolingbroke, to affirm, with
equal ignorance and malice, that Paul preac/iedaxw
GOSPEL, different from that of Jesus.
P. 286. [G,] A learned and serious Writer*, in a
late book, intitled, Observations and Enquiries relating
to the various parts of ancient History!, hath a chapter
concerning HUMAN SACRIFICES; which he thus intro*
duccs One would think it scarce possible that so unna
tural a custom as thai of HUM AN SACRIFICES should
farce existed, in the world But it is certain, that it did
r.ot only t\i ist, hut almost universally prevail, p, 267.
Our account of the origin of this unnatural custom will
* Mr. Bryant. f Printed in quarto, 1767.
much
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 353
much abate the wonder. However, the learned Writer
solves the difficulty with much ease ; by deriving it from
the Command to Abraham, And here, before I enter
on the matter, permit me to repeat, what I have before
observed, that it indicates an odd turn of mind (however
general it may be), which disposes the Learned to seek
for the origin of the superstitious rites of antiquity, rather
in the casual adventures of particular men, than in the
uniform workings of our common nature*.
But the learned Writer fancies his solution is much
strengthened by the general notion of Antiquity, that the
AN0P,ano0r2IA was a Mystical Sacrifice. Let us
examine his reasoning on this head. Mr. Bryant having
given us, from the fragment of Sanchoniatho, what relates
to I L or KllONUS s sacrifice of his only Son (by which,
indeed, it appears, that human Sacrifice was not a con^
ceit of yesterday; the Author of that fragment plainly
deriving his story from this part of the Abrahamic
History), goes on in these words, " They [human sacrifices]
" were instituted probably in consequence of a prophetic
" Tradition, which I imagine had been preserved in the
" family of Esau; and transmitted, through his pos-
" terity, to the people of Canaan." p. 291.
To this, let me, first of all, observe, that the supposition
of a/;; *oph elic tradition rests entirely on the truth of my
peculiar idea of the nature of the command to Abrahan^
viz. That it was a mere scenical representation, given
at the patriarch s earnest request. For on this idea only
could the command be considered as a prophecy. But
this is doing too much honour to my hypothesis, still
held, I suppose, by the more orthodox, to be a paradox;
and, what is still worse, it greatly weakens the learned
Writer s reasoning ; for a scenical representation, which
must naturally end as this die!, in a prohibition of the
commanded sacrifice, could hardly induce any one, who
went upyii the grounds, or in consequence of a prophetic
Tradition, to think that human Sacrifices were acceptable
to the Deity. But the truth is, this prophetic Tradition.
}n the family of Abraham, is merely gratis dictum. We
find not the least footsteps of it in the more circumstantial
History of the other branch of Abraham s Family, the
* See the Divine Legation,
VOJL. VL A A Patriarchal ;
354 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
Patriarchal ; which was most concerned to preserve it,
had there heen any such. Besides, how this commanded
Sacrifice, which was forbidden to be perpetrated, should
encourage human sacrifices, before men had steeled
themselves, by long use, in the practice of so unnatural
a crime, is hard to conceive. It is true, that this argu
ment will lose somctt hat of its force, when we suppose
the command was given to a family which were no strangers
to human Sacrifices. This is observed purely in reverence
to truth; but, be this as it will, it subverts the fancy of
the Abrahamic original. For the fact seems to be, that,
at the time this Command was given to the Patriarch,
the Gentile world was deeply plunged into this diabolic
Barathrum : which, though the descendants of Esau
possibly had not escaped, yet the line of Isaac cer
tainly had.
The Mosaic account of the State of Religion in the
Abrahamic times, shews that it was extremely depraved.
For though the iniquity of the Amorltes icas not yet J nil* ^
yet that of their neighbours, in Sodorn and Gomorrah,
we know, was. These considerations reasonably induced
Philo the Jcic, in his Discourse concerning Abraham,
to suppose that human Sacrifices were in use before the
time of Abraham. And Marsham, one of the best
modern Critics concerning ancient times, declares, with
out hesitation, in favour of this humiliating circumstance ;
and our admirable Spencer thinks, there is so little reason
to ascribe the original of Infanticide to the command to
Abraham i that, unless the iJistory of that command be
told very lamely and imperfectly, it atibrds very strong
arguments against that inhuman practice. But it is not
generally the way of Scripture to reprobate a bad practice
before it has been conceived or committed f. Hence we
may fairly collect, that human Sacrifice* were in use
before the command to Abraham* But \\hat need we
* Gen. xv. 16.
f Probe novi quamplurimos alui onania de ritus liujus nefarii fonte
^entire, quasi ex Abraham! hiium suuni ofierentis, bistoria corrupta
et depravata protiuxissent. Huic autem sen ten tire fidera udhibere
nescio, cum historia ilia nisi plane mutilata, inagna prabeat contn*
inorem ilium inbumanum argumenta; et verisimile sit miiHas Gentes
liberossuos immolare solitas, de Abraham! exemplo, ne vel ikndo quic-
quara audivisse. De Leg, Hebraeo, rkualibus, L. 11. C. i^. Sect. 3.
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 355
more to prove the fact in question, than this, That, if the
account, here given, of the origin and progress of Sacrifice
be the true, (as it hath the fairest claim of being so re
ceived, since the first use, and all the gradual abuses,
of it, till it sunk into the horrid Rite in question, may be
understood, and understood only on this simple Principle,
the uniform workings of our common nature) human
Sacrifices must needs have preceded that a3ra.
What follows, in the learned Writer, as a strong con
firmation of his system, is this, that CHILD-SACRIFICE
was a type or representation of SOMETHING TO COME.
Now, if by Child-sacrifice he means the command to
Abraham, this we allow and even contend for. But, if
he means that the specific rite of Child-sacrifice was
understood by Sacrificers, either Jewish or Gentile, to be
a type or representation of .SOMETHING TO COME, I think
he speaks without the least proof. What he adds, one
knows hot what to make of Child -sacrifice (says he)
is the only instance of ami Sacrifice in the Gentile world
which is said to be MYSTICAL. For, if by mystical he
means, a type of something to come, this has been
answered already. But if by -mystical we are to under
stand, what was so called by the Gentiles in their
Sacrificial Rites, almost all of them were mystical; that
is, had a meaning subjoined, not obvious, nor intended to
i>e obvious to the uninitiated, or the Profane. All their
secret Rites, in which Sacrifice bore a principal part,
abounded so much in hidden meanings of this sort, that
these Rites were called MYSTERIES by way of eminence.
But if, alter all, this TEKNC0TIIA w Child- sacrifice
/had the plain meaning which I have given to it, and not
the mystical of the learned Writer, what becomes of his
whole hypothesis ? That it had no other meaning, than
the plain one, I appeal to the Authority of an inspired
Writer. MICAK, without doubt, understood the true
Origin, and consequently, the right import of Child-
sacrifice; and he delivers my sense of it, in these
words /Till the Lord be phased with thousands of
Rams, or with ten thousands of Hirers of Oil ? SHALL
I GIVE MY FIRST- BO UN FOR MY TRANSGRESS! OX,
THE FRUIT OF *IY BODY FOR THE SlN OF 3i y SOUL* ?
* Oh. vi. ver. 7,
A A 2 Here,
356 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
Here, we see, conformably to what I have delivered con
cerning Child-sacrijice, that the idea the Gentiles had of
it, (for, to the Gentile, not to the Jewish sacrifices, the
Prophet here alludes, as will be shewn hereafter) was
simply, and solely, this-, the very highest atonement that
man could make for his transgressions, as it was the
offering up what was most dear to the offender. The
Prophet, therefore, puts it in the number of expiatory
Sacrifices. But had that, which the learned Writer con
tends for, been the true and ancient notion of the Tcj/o(W*,
one can hardly think that, at a time when the Prophets
were gradually opening the nature of the NEW DISPEN
SATION, 3 Iiath would have let slip so fair an occasion
of considering it under that Christian idea.
We may now see, tor what reason Child-sacrifice
came to be reckoned a MYSTERIOUS WORSHIP; it was
done, to withdraw the observation of the People from so
horrid a rite, when considered only in its simple use ;
for nature is rarely so far debauched, as to behold, with
indifference, the violation of its most instinctive appetites.
So that the enormity was to be covered by some far
fetched invention of superior excellence of virtue, which
preferred the rights of the Divinity to all human obliga
tions. Thus, when the Worshippers were apt to revolt
at Sacrifices extremely cruel or libidinous, the Priests
secured their own credit, and the honour of their Got!,
by the intervention of a spiritual meaning. And hitman
Sacrifices became mysterious for the same reason that
the impudent procession of the Phallus, in the corrupted
Rites of Bacchus and Osiris, was taught to convey the
high matters of REGENERATION, and a new life.
I have been the longer on this question, because, if
human Sacrifices should be thought to have had their
original from the Command to Abraham, it might seem
to give some colour (which was far from the intention
of this very learned and worthy man) to tjie calumny of
the Deists, who assert, that HUMAN SACRIFICES MADE
A PART OF THE MOSAIC RlTUAL. For if the TCXf00y<n*
prefigured the Sacrifice on the Cross, or, as the learned
Writer expresseth it, was a type or representation of
something to come, it softens a little this infidel Paradox.
The Poet VOLTAIRE hath repeated the calumny over
and
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 357
and over, as if the Bible was still shut up, not only from
the people in general, but (what perhaps would have been
attended with less injury to Religion) from THESE
POETS in partieular.
And now, this more serious question (in the midst of
one less important, viz. the origin and progress of sacri
fice in general) will deserve a severe examination.
VOLTAIRE, in a thing he calls, " An Essay on. general
" History," accuses the LAW, in these Words" The
" Jewish Law seems to permit these [human] Sacrifices.
" It is said in Leviticus, that none devoted which shall
" be devoted of men shall be redeemed, but shall surely
" be put to death*" The Jewish Books bear evidence,
that when the Israelites overran the little country of
Canaan, they massacred in most of the villages, men,
women, and children, because they had been DEVO
TED. On this Law it was that " Jephtha sacrificed his
" daughter|."
1. This whole calumny I shall clear away first of all,
by the most express prohibitions of the LAW, together
with the declarations of the PROPHETS; both of which
execrate every species of human Sacrifice.
2. And then examine and explain all tiiose passages of
Scripture, which seem to have given a handle to this im
pious charge.
3. Concluding, in the third place, with a confutation
of that censure of inhumanity towards the inhabitants of
Canaan urged by Voltaire, to support his main accusation
of HUMAN SACRIFICES, and urged as if it were itself in
the number of such Sacrifices.
I.
In my entrance on the first head, let me previously ob
serve, that the earliest direction for SAXCTIFICATJON,
that is, (in the language of Moses) for SACRIFICE, is of
* Ch. xxvii. ver. 29.
t LLI Li;i ties Jtiifs semblait permettre ces Sacrifices. Il-estcUt
dans Levitique ; si une amc vii tmte a etc promise a DIEU on nc poura
la racheter t il fa at qiidlc meure. Les Livres des Juifs reportent que
quand ils envoluirent le petit pais des Cananeens, ils niassucrerent
dans plusieurs villages, les hi-mmes,.les i emmes, .les eniansr p&fce
qu ils avoient vie devours. (Test siir cette Loi. qui fare lit lodes- les
serments de Jephthc qui sacrilia sa fille, &c. Oeuvies de M. de Vol
taire, Tom. xiii. p. 227. 8 Ed, 1756, 8vo.
A A 3 the
358 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
the first-born, expressed in these words*, SANCTIFY
unto me ail thejirst-born, whatsoever openeth the womb
amongst the Children of Israel, both of man and beast ;
it is MINE. This is declared to be for a memorial of
God s smiting K^ypt in favour of his chosen people.
All the first-born of the Children of Israel are MINE,
both man and beast : on the day that I smote the jirst-
born in the land of Egypt, 1 SANCTIFIED them for
But from this Sanctification or SACRIFICE, Man and
unclean animals were exceptcd, arid redeemed. The re
demption of the first-born of man is thus settled and ex
plained " I have taken (says the text) the LEVITES for
" all the FIRST-BORN of the Children of Israel: and I
" have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and his Sons,
" to do the service of the children of Israel, in the taber-
" nacle of the Congregation J." The redemption of the
first-born of unclean animals, witli a repetition of the re
demption of Men, is thus expressed : Even/ jirstling
of an ass shalt thou redeem with a Lamb and alt the
first-born of wan, cmongst thy Children shalt thou re
deem^. The redemption-money, for both, is given to
Aaron and his Successors ||; to whom the whole tribe of
Levi was assigned for a vicarious (and in Heu of a more
general) sane t if i cat ion of the first-born of man.
This redemption was not on account of personal favour
to a chosen people, but in abhorrence of HUMAN SACRI
FICES, as appears plainly both froiA the LAW and the
PROPHETS.
Moses, on his delivery of the LAW, thus solemnly
forbids all curious inquiry concerning the Pagan rites of
Worship, in the Nations round about them ; Inquire not
after their GODS, saying, how did these nations SERVE
their Gods? EVEN so WILL I DO LIKEWISE. The
reason of the prohibition follows, they practised the
horrid enormity of Child-sacrifice For every abomina
tion to the Lord, WHICH HE I-IATETH, have they done
unto their Gods^ FOR EVEN THEIR SONS AND THEIR
DAUGHTERS HAVE THEY BURNT IN THE FIRE TO
* Exod. xiii. 2. t Numb.viii. 17. and Exod. xiii. 14, 15.
J Numb. viii. 18, 19, arid to the same purpose, Ch.iii. 19, 13 45.
Exod. xiii. 13. || Numb, xviii. 15, 16.
THEIR
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED: 359
THEIR GODS*. The dangerous curiosity here re
strained, was not on account of the number and nature
of the Gods of Canaan. For the striking absurdity of
their Theogony or original, and the impiety of their
Mythology or history, would have served to attach the
Israelites more firmly to the LAW. The prohibition only
respected an inquiry into the Canaanitish modes of wor
ship, or, as it is better expressed in the text, HOW these
nations served their Gods. And though this inquiry might
at first, arise from nothing else than a wanton curiosity,
yet the Legislator intimates that it would end in apostasy
from .the LORD OF HOSTS even so will we do likewise \
that is, we will use those Pagan rites in the service of the
God of Israel ; for they were little in danger, so early,
to use Canaanitish rites in the service of the Gods of
Canaan. Besides, the caution here is not against IDO
LATRY but INFANTICIDE. Nor could they be much
disposed to forsake the God of Israel for the Gods of
Canaan, at the very time they were so successfully march
ing, under the auspices of Moses, to exterminate that
devoted people. He therefore could scarce conceive that,
at this time, they needed such a caution. For, the reason
he gives for restraining this hurtful inquiry is, lest they
should worship their own God with Pagan rites; espe
cially this most abominable of all, INFANTICIDE. And
there was the more nee.d of this caution, since the first
born cf man and beast, in Israel, were to be sanctified
to the Isord , and though the fiivt-born of man was re
deemed, while the first-born of the clean beasts were
sacrificed, yet the love of corrupt and idolatrous Kites
might give some propensity to a iatal mistake, and to slip-
ill Sacrifice instead of &w edification.
Afterwards when the Israelites became polluted with
the infernal stains of Infanticide^ the PROPHETS never
ceased to proclaim aloud God s abhorrence of this im
piety. For, in order to impress upon the paganized or
-apostate Israelites a due sense of their frequent defec
tions, it was found necessary for these his messengers
thoroughly to probe the consciences of such hardened
wretches, which had been seared with the^ m- ofMolecli.
* Dent. xii. 30.
A A 4 Sacred
360 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
Sacred History informs us how severely Ahaz was
punished for his multiplied Idolatries ; bat principally
for his " burning his Children in the fire, after the abomi-
" nations of the Heathen [the Canaanites] whom the 1
" Lord had cast out before the Children of Israel*."
They sacrificed (says the Psalmist) their sons and their
daughter* unto Dc dis the Idols of Canaan and the
Land was polluted with blood insomuch that he ab
horred his own inheritance^. " They have built the
if high places of Baal (says Jeremiah) to burn their Sons
" with fire, for burnt-offerings to IkalJ." And again
they caused their Sons and their Daughters to pass
through thejire, to Molech^. Ezekiel, likewise, accus-
eth them of having caused their Som to pass through
the fire to DETOUR thcm\\. But further, it would seem,
by the following words of Jeremiah, that these impious
sacrifices were offered, by the unnatural Jews, to the God
of Israel himself " The Children of Judah have done
" evil in my sight, saith the Lord ; they have set their
" abominations in the house which is called by my name,
* to pollute it, and they have built the high |>iaces of
" Tophet, which is in the valley of the Son ot" Hinnom,
" to burn their Sons and their Daughters in the fire,
" which I commanded them not, neither came it into my
" head**." The concluding words seem to intimate that
these Apostates pretended to have received such a com
mand ; or with what propriety was it so formally denied ?
Possibly they might pervert the famous passage in Levi-
tieus f f ; of which more hereafter. However, the whole
of the text informs us clearly, that Child-sacrifice some
times polluted the altars of the Temple. Ezekiel seems
to confirm the same thing: " Moreover, this they have
" done unto me; they have defiled my Sanctuary, in the
" same day, and have profaned my Sabbaths. For when
" they had slum their Children unto their Idols, then
" they came, the same day, into my Sanctuary to~ pro-
" fane it, and lo! thus have they done in the midst of
" mine house Q" i. e. " When they had slain Children
* 2 Cbron.xxviii. 3. f Psalm cvi. 37, 38. 40. J Ch. xix. ver. 5.
Ch. xxxii. 35. || Ch. xxiii. 37. ** Ch. vii. 30, 31.
If Ch. xxvii. 28, 29. I| Ch. xxiii. 38, 39.
" tO
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 361
" to their idols, they, on the same day, offered the like
" horrid sacrifice to me." -And we know, it was their
usual practice, amidst their defections, to join idol-worship
to the worship of the God of Israel.
The sacred Historian is still more express to this pur*
pose; when he thus speaks of the wicked king Manasseh
lie built altars in the house of the Lord and he built
altars for alt the Host of Heaven, in the two Courts of
the house of the Lord, and HE MADE ins SONS TO
PASS THROUGH THE FIRE; and observed times, and
used enchantments, c.*
On the whole, the gross IMMORALITY of this horrid
Rite, was that to which the abhorrence of God was
principally, and often solely, directed. This truth would
appear certain (did Scripture afford no other evidence)
from the warning given by Moses to his People, on their
going to take possession of the Promised Land.
Bat a decisive passage in Isaiah cuts off the subter
fuge of our Philosophers, who are ready to suppose that
the declared abhorrence of human Sacrifices, so often re
peated in Scripture, is confined to such as were directed
to an IDOLATROUS OBJECT; for the Prophet, in the
very place referred to, speaking in the name of God, de
clares the utmost detestation of human Sacrifices when
offered to himself: For, speaking to those immoral
Israelites, who imagined they could atone for their vices
by ritual observances, he tells them, that even legal
sacrifices, when offered to him with corrupt dispositions,
were as displeasing to him, as those abominable human
Sacrifices would be, which the Law of Nature condemns.
He that killetk aii ox, is as if he had slain a MAN ; he
that sacrijiceth a lamb, as if he cut off A DOG S NECKf.
Here, we see the ritual worship, commanded by God, is
opposed to the Sacrifice of Man, abominated by the
Law of Nature; and to the Sacrifice of a Dog, the thing
most abhorred by the Law of Moses ; in whose ritual
tiiis animal was held so totally unclean, that the hire
of a whore and the price of a Dog, are put together
as equally unfit to be brought into the house of the
* 2 Kings xxi. 4, 5, 6. f Chap. Ixvi. 3. t Deut. xxiii. 18.
II. We
302 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX v
II.
We now come to those two capital Passages, on which
the Enemies of Religion found their impious Charge.
The one, they consider as an indispensable COMMAND ;
the other as an EXAMPLE, adapted to inforce the execu
tion of it.
The pretended Command is in Leviticus,, and con*
tained in these words : NONE DEVOTED, WHICH SHALL
BE DEVOTED OF MEN, SHALL P,E REDEEMED, BUT
SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH*.
Here is a Lazr, which our Philosophers, in their great
sagacity, conceived did enjoin something. But being
strangers to the subject, and ignorant of the phraseology,
with heads likewise full of mischief, they discovered
HUMAN SACRIFICES in a place where Moses was speak
ing of quite another thing.
"The Chapter, in which this Laic is found, contains
directions for the making, and for the performance of
Vows; a mode of obligation which had a natural place
in a government THEOCRATICAL; where civil matters
of obedience were intimately connected w ith religious.
Now, that capital Command given to the Chosen
People, TO EXTERMINATE THE CANAANITES, a COII1-
mand so necessary to be observed, for the preservation
both of their civil and religious Systems, needed, above
all things, frequent repetitions of the sacred tie of Vows
for its more exact performance; some of the softer as
well as stronger passions of our Nature pushed forward
by the delusions of self-interest, being always at hand to
defeat or retard the divine sentence denounced against an
INCORRIGIBLE People (of which more hereafter). The
repetition of Vows, therefore, for the speedier accomplish
ment of this great and laborious event (just like the re
petition of oaths of allegiance in common states for the
belter security of the establishment) was enjoined, or at
least encouraged, by the Leaders of the Jewish people.
Sometimes the Vow was made by the People, in a
Body ; like that we find in the Book of Numbers " And
|C Israel vowed a Vcw unto the Lord, an J said, If thou
* Levit. xxvii. 2
" wilt,
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 363
" wilt, indeed, deliver this people [the Canaanites] into
" my hand, then / will utterly destroy their Cities. Ancf
" the Lord hearkened unto the Volet of Israel; and de-
" livered up the Canaanites : and they utterly destroyed
" them and their Cities*." Sometimes again, the vow
was made by Particulars; by such whose power or
situation best qualified them for the execution of this
primary COMMAND : and to these, and for this sole
purpose, was this strangely mistaken Text directed.
" NONE DEVOTED, WHICH SHALL BE DEVOTED
" OF MEN," (or, as it is explained in the immediately
preceding verse, no devoted thing, which a man shall
devote unto the Lord) " shall be redeemed, but shall
" be surely put to death f." These Vows were called
the SANCTIFYING or DEVOTING men or things. In
which, indeed, the Language of Religion is employed;
and very naturally, for the reason given above. But to
prevent the abusive interpretation of such Vcnvs, in the
manner of our PHILOSOPHERS, by suffering more of
Religion than the mere language to enter into the idea of
them, the People are forbidden to extend their vows to
what God himself had sanctified) such as \he first-fruits.
Only the firstling of the beasts, which (says Moses)
should be the Lord s first ling, no man shall sanctify it J.
But if man was, for this reason, not to sanctify the first-
fruits of beasts, much more was he restrained from sancti
fying the first-fruits of Man ; since the first- fruits of
Man were not to be put to death (like those whom human
Vows had devoted), but to be redeemed.
In & word, the men here devoted by men, and not to be
redeemed, were NO SACRIFICES AT ALL, as the first-
fruits of the Children of Israel WERE, arid, therefore, to
be redeemed; but enemies taken in battle, to whom no
quarter had been given; and whose lives, by the Law of
Arms, were at the disposal of the Conqueror. M. Vol
taire s ignorance of the Law of Moses, which occasions
him to mistake a MILITARY EXECUTION for a RELI
GIOUS SACRIFICE, might have been well excused, had he
forborne to abuse what he did not understand. But to
know his Virgil no better is a disgrace indeed.
* Numb. xxi. 2* 3. t Levit. xxvii. 29. J Ver. 26.
" Quis
364 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
" Quis ILLAUDATI ncscit Busiridis aras ?
says the great Poet, in plain detestation of human Sacri
fices. Yet in the funeral Rites of Pallas, directed by the
Hero of the Poem, (the Model of Religious Piety and
civil wisdom) the captives taken in war are slain at the
lighted Pile, without the least mark of the Poet s cen
sure or disapprobation.
" Vinxerat, et post terga manus quos mitteret umbris
" Inferias, caeso sparsuros sanguine flammam."
For their lives were forfeited by the Law of Arms, and
only taken with a little more ceremony than is, at present,
in use : the military execution being often performed at
Tombs and Altars : for in the Pagan World Superstition
had occasioned a confused mixture of things, sacred and
profane. But in the Jewish Republic, where the Church
and State were incorporated, this commixture made no
other confusion than what arises from the mistakes of
Men, ignorant of the nature of that Sacred Economy.
Their God was their King; and their government in
consequence was Theocratical. So that every act of
State was in a certain sense, though not in the common
one, an act of Religion. Obedience to the LAW was
inforced by a Vow; and slaughter in and after Battle, a
PEVOTEMENT to the Lord of Hosts; in support of the
civil command to exterminate the Canaanites.
But besides the singular Form of the Jewish Republic,
which brought in the use of this language, the very genius
of the People, modelled, indeed, on a theocratic adminis
tration, disposed them to improve that mode of speech;
so that matters merely civil and domestic are conveyed
to us in the style of Religion.
Thus highly coloured, both in the Camp, and in the
Temple of the Lord of Hosts, was the language of the
Jewish People. Which gave a pretence to the detestable
Spinosa, to insinuate, that the whole of the Mosaic Reli
gion consisted only in a SACRED PHRASEOLOGY. Though
what he insinuates proves only, yet proves fully, that the
DEVOTEMENT in question was a civil, not a sacrificial
Rite. " Judoei (says he) nunquam causarurri mediarum
" sive particularium faciunt mentionem, riec eas curant,
" sed Religionis ac pietatis, sive ut vulgo dici solet, devo-
2 " tionis
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 365
" tionis causa, ad Deum semper recurrunt. Si enim,
" ex. gr. pecuniam mercatura lucrati sunt, earn a Deo
" oblatam aiunt ; si aliquid, ut fit, cupiunt, dicunt,
" Deum eorum cor disposuisse; si aliquid etiam cogitant,
" Deum id iis dixisse aiunt," &c.*
Having now examined the pretended PRECEPT or
Command ; and shewn that it has no relation to HUMAN
SACRIFICE, but to quite another thing; we proceed to the
EXAMPLE, the case of JEPHTHAH : for, on the Law
of human Sacrifices (says the Poet Voltaire) it was, that
Jephthah) who sacrificed his Daughter, founded his oath
of Denotement. As this EXAMPLEhath given more alarm
to the Friends of Religion than it deserves, and drawn
them into forced and unnatural constructions of his rash
and foolish \ r ow, it may be proper to consider the Man
and his Manners, fairly and at large.
jEpKTHAiif, a Bastard son of Gilead, by an Harlot,
being cast out from a share of his Paternal Inheritance,
by the legitimate Issue, took refuge in a strange land.
What effects this expulsion must have on his religious
Sentiments, we may learn from the case of DAVID; who
thus expostulates with Saul, on his exile " If (says he)
" they be your Counsellors, who have advised you to
" this unjust usage of me, cursed be they before the
tc Lord; for they have driven we put this day from
" abiding in the Inheritance of the Lord., saying, GO,
" SERVE OTHER GODS J." Now, if David, so learned
and zealous in the LAW, was exposed at least to this in
evitable temptation, by his exile in a foreign land, what
must we think of Jephthah in similar circumstances ? who
had nothing of David s knowledge of the Law, and con
sequently none of his zeal for its support. In this foreign
Land, Jephthah associated himself to a dissolute Band of
Outlaws, who lived upon rapine and violence : not (it is
confessed) the most discreditable profession, in those early
* Tract. Theol. C. I. This \vtis said by Rpinosa in order to decry
the MIRACLES recorded m Script are. But with the usual luck of every
attempt of the same kind. For were this. very exaggerated account
a true one, a stronger proof, of the reality and frequency of Aliraclm,
could hardly be conceived in the nature of things. Since no People
but such who had lived under a real THEOCRACY, could have con
tracted a turn of mind- productive of so singular a Phraseology.
f Judges xi. J i Sam, xxvi. 19,
ages
366 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
ages of barbarous manners. Amongst these men, he soon
got to be the leader, and a distinguished Chief in all their
lawless expeditions. So that his fame for military at-
chievernents filled all the Regions round about.
At this time, the Israelites in punishment for one of
their defections from their God and King, Mere labouring
under the oppression of the idolatrous Borderers. And
the Amor lies making an excursion into Gileacl; the
Israelites of this place, as most immediately concerned,
sought to provide for themselves, as well as for their
brethren (now become repentant), some Leader of
superior power and distinguished capacity. And the Re
putation of their Kinsman, Jephthdh> made them first
apply to him.
But Jephthah, with the frank roughness of a soldier of
fortune, naturally upbraided them, on this occasion, with
their former neglect and injustice, in permitting his father s
house so cruelly to cast him out, to want and misery;
and now, as meanly, without redressing his injuries, to
fly to him in their distress.
They reply, they were now come to make him that
amends, by their choice of him for Head over all the In*
habitants of Gilead.
Jephthah accepts this satisfaction : and an Act is made
of their proceedings according to the religious customs of
those times.
All this while, the Republic, the THEOCRACY itself,
seems to have been little thought of, by this future Judge
of Israel. Indeed the honour of so sacred a station had
small charms for our licentious Outlaw.
However, in consequence of the reconciliation, and in
pursuance of the Choice which the Gilcaditcs had made
of him, for their Head and Leader, he enters on his office.
And now, perhaps, for the first time, be observed, towards
his enemies, all the punctilios of the Law of Arms.
He sent to know of the Children of AiniHon, why they
committed hostilities against his countrymen. They an
swered, that the Israelites had unjustly dispossessed them
of their Lands; and that they were now assembled in arms
to recover the inheritance of their Fathers. To this, the
Bastard of Gilcad, like an able Advocate, as well as a
determined Chieftain^ replied, That when Israel, under
the
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 367
the conduct of Moses, had left Egypt, to take possession
of the Land, promised to their Forefathers, and now
given to them by their GOD, they had craved leave of the
intermediate People, and particularly of the Children of
Ammon, for a free passage through their Country, accord
ing to the Law of Nations, which being denied unto
them, they forced their way ; and w hen hostilely opposed,
and their enemies overcome in battle, they took posses
sion, as, by the Laws of War, they might do, of the
Lands of the Conquered. So far was well; and suitable
to the dignity of a Judge of Israel.
But, by what follows, it appears that our famous Ad
venturer was, as yet, more than half a Pagan ; for thus
he proceeds So noic the Lord God of Israel hath dis-
jmsessed the Amorltes from be/ore ftis People Israel j
and sh on Idesi t hou possess it ? YV i L T x OT T H o u POSSESS
THAT WHICH ClIEMOSH, THY CiOD, GIVET11 THEE TO
POSSESS ? 80 wkotnaoever the LORD, OUR GOD, shall
drive out from before, us, them uill we possess *. This
was said, on the Gentile principle of local tutelary Deities,
in all the Crossness of that notion ; not yet refined and
rationalized by our Adventurer, on the ideas of the Law.
But when he resumes the civil argument, he again reasons
better: and very solidly pleads the general law of PRE
SCRIPTION, in defence of his People While Israel
(says he} du-elt in Heshbon and her Totem, and in Aroer
and her Towm, and in all the Cities thai be along,
by the Coasts of Arnon, THREE HUNDRED YEARS-;
Why therefore did ye -not recover them WITHIN THAT
TIME |? But the force of this Argument making no im
pression, the negotiation ended in an appeal to arms.
Jephth .ih leads out his Troops against Aminon. And, in
the Forefront, without doubt, were those faithful Bands,
which he had collected and disciplined in the Land of Tob.
The first step he takes to invite Success, was the
making an absurd Pagan Vow, that, if he returned with
Victory, he would sacrifice, for a burnt-offering to God,
whatsoever came iirst out of the doors of his house;]: to
welcome his return. He came back a Conqueror; and
his Daughter, impatient to celebrate his Triumph, being
the first who met him, was, for ins Oath s sake, (though
* Judges xi. 23, -24. f . .f-Ver. 26. % Ver. 31.
with
368 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
with extreme regret, because, besides her, he had neither
son nor daughter*,) sacrificed for her pains, according to
the then established custom of Idolatry ; which, on such
occasions, required a Sacrifice of what was most dear or
precious to the offerer. For, I hardly believe that Jephthah
was, at this time, so learned in the LAW, as even the Poet
Voltaire ; or that he had proceeded, like him, so far in the
sacred text, as to misunderstand or misinterpret this famous
twenty -seventh Chapter of Leviticus, in support of so
impious an action. The unhappy father appears, at this
time, to understand so little of the LAW, as not to be able
to distinguish what it had in common with Paganism,
(namely, the custom of .offering eucharistical Sacrifices on
every great and fortunate event) from what it had in direct
opposition to it (viz. that dire impiety of human Sacrijice).
The account here given appears to be the natural expla
nation of a plain Story. But Commentators, full of the
ideas of Papal, rather than of the Mosaic times ; and
paying a blind reverence to the character of a Judge of
Israel, make the Daughter, to save her father s honour,
return vow for vow ; and so consecrate herself to t a Virgin
State. Solutions like these expose Sacred Scripture to the
scorn and derision of unbelievers.
But against our account of JEPHTHAH S Vow, which
makes the whole to be conceived and perpetrated on Pagan
principles and practices, our adversaries,
1. Bid us observe, that the action is not condemned.
A censure, they think, it could not have escaped, had the
Sacred Historian deemed it an impiety.
2. That the text tells us further, that Jephthah went
out in the Spirit of the Lord f, and therefore they con
clude, that he returned in the same Spirit.
3. Lastly, that Jephthah is ex toiled by the Author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews^ and numbered in the class
of sacred Heroes.
To these objections, in their order.
First, They who lay so much stress on the Action s
having passed uncensured, consider neither the nature of
the Composition, nor the genius of the Historian. The
narrative itself is a brief Compendium, or rather extract
from the Records of State, entered as t;- ings passed, and
* Ver. 34. t Ver. 29, I Ch, xi. ver. 32.
then
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 369
then laid up in the Archives of their Scribes. In this
species of Composition it is not the wont to dwell either
on the causes, the qualities, or the consequences of Actions,
but simply to tell the naked Facts.
Nor had the Writers of those times improved History
into an art. They transcribed or abridged, merely for the
sake of the people s information in facts, of what they
found recorded in their venerable Archives. This was the
case in the Story of the lying Prophet, in the affair of the
Altar of Bethel*. His crime is neither condemned, nor
js his punishment recorded. Had the History been a
Romance, forged at pleasure, both these particulars had
assuredly been dwelt upon at large.
Besides, as the nature and quality of actions arc best
seen by the Laics and Customs of the people concerned ;
and the action in question was well understood, both by
the Writer, and his Readers, to be condemned by the
Mosaic Ritual, it less needed a Censure. The faithful
Followers of the LAW, for whose service this adventure
was recorded, wanted no historian of prophetic Authority
to tell them, (after they had seen huwan Mien/ices exe
crated iu almost every page of their History) that Jcph-
t hah s sacrifice of his Daughter was either an impious
imitation of Pagan practices, or an ignorant presumption
in the half- paganized Votary, that he was here complying
with the famous precept of the Law in Leviticus f, when
indeed (as we have shewn at large) it related to quite
another thing.
o
Mot further, it is not peculiar to this story, to furnish
an objection (such as it is) from the sacred Writer s not
interposing with his own judgment, concerning the moral
quality of the action related. Scripture abounds with
instances of this sort ; a silence occasioned by one or
other of the causes here explained.
2. But Jcphthah (which is the second objection) Went
out in the spirit of the Lord, and therefore (they con
clude) he must needs return in the same spirit.
Now though, on a less important occasion, I should
be tempted to acquiesce in the Criticism, though not in
tjie spirit, of Spinosa, that this expression was to be put
to the account of the sacred phraseology of the Jews;
* i Kings xiii. f Ch. xxvii. ver. 29.
VOL. VI. B B and
370 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
and to mean no niore than the strength, the courage, and
the address of a consummate leader; yet the language
being here applied to a Judge of Israel, and in the actual
exercise of his office, I can readily allow that it signifies
some supernatural assistance.
But what then ? when the work committed to him, and
for which he was thus qualified, was well over, we have
i\o reason to suppose that the same spirit constantly rested
on him, but very much to conclude the contrary. One
of his most illustrious successors, SAMSON, had still a
larger share of this divine Spirit imparted to him; yet no
body imagines that it rested with him ; when, contrary to
the LAW, he chose a wife from among the Philistines, or
revealed the secret intrusted with him to Delilah; de
linquencies much less criminal than the Sacrifice of a?
Daughter.
3.- But then, " the Author of the Epistle to the.
Hebrews extols him ; and lifts him into the number of the
raost distinguished of the Jewish Heroes." But for what
is he thus extolled ? For his rash vow ? No surely.
David is extolled in the same place, and in the same man
ner. Is it for the murder of Uriah, and adultery with his
Wife ? Surely neither of the Heroes are extolled for these *
exploits ; but for their FAITH in God, and their zeal
for the advancement of the THEOCRACY. So says the
Writer himself; where, recapitulating the works and
achievements of FAITH, he goes on, in these words
And wliat shall I more say, For the time would fail me to-
t til of Gideon and Barak, and of Samson and of JEPH-
THAif, cf David also and Samuel, &c* This FAITH was
so active and eminent in DAVID, that, notwithstanding his
tup gross, immoralities, he is called by God himself, A
M^N;. .AFTER HIS owx HEART. For, as this illustrious
Title neither covered, nor atoned, for his crimes, so neither
did his crimes hinder its being bestowed upon him, when
the question only concerned his zeal for the LAW and the
THEOCRACY ; as I have shewn to these Philosophers, oiv
Another occasion.
To conclude with JEPHTHAH. We know, though only
in general, that he lived long enough in the exercise of his
.Ministry, and, consequently, under the occasional guid-,
*.Ileb. xi. 32.
ance
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 371
ance of God s holy Spirit, to wipe out all the Pagan im
pressions of his ill education. DAVID, with a much better
in his early youth, kept on improving in the knowledge
of the LAW. He wa"s* at first somewhat scandalized at
foe prosperity of the wicked : but when he came into the
sanctuary, i. e. when he had gained a more exact and per
fect knowledge of the Dispensation, then, as he tells us,
he understood the end of % hose men. In these respects,
indeed, we are left more to our, conjectures concerning
JEPHTHAH. His History tells us, he judged Israel for
six years *. We are further informed (and this is all) that
he defeated the Ephraimites f ; who had picked a ground
less quarrel with him ; which ended as it is fit all such
quarrels should end.
But, though we have now done with the personal Cha
racter of Jephthah, and his rash Vow ; we have something
more to say of the general Character of a Judge of Israel^
as it holds in common with that of many other of God s
chosen servants : whose faults and imperfections the malice
of Unbelievers have carefully drawn out, and objected to
us, as matter of scandal ; tending to impeach the veracity
of Sacred History, and the Evidence that God thus inter
posed in support of his revealed Will.
To clear up this matter, it may be sufficient to observe,
that when God sees fit, in an extraordinary way, to give
a new revelation of his WILL to man, v/e may conclude,
from the very nature of things, that he will not disgrace his
own DISPENSATIOX, by the use of unworthy Instruments.
Both the dignity and interests of Revelation require,
that the first Bearers of these glad tidings to mankind
should be fully possessed of that power of Virtue which
true religion only can bestow.
The dignity of Revelation requires that so bright an
emanation from the very source of light and purity should
not be conveyed to us through a polluted medium. The
interests of it, likewise, reclaim against such an unworthy
Service.
A sanctity of manners, which is so necessary to support
the mission, is the natural and inseparable attendant ou
the Office. For, in the promulgation of a new Religion,
those marks of truth arising from the purity and
* Judges xii. 7. f Ch, xii. ver. i.
B B 2 reasonableness
37-2 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
reasonableness of the Doctrine, which shew it to be;
TORTIIY of the Author to whom it is ascribed, there is
need, in order to prove that it ACTUALLY CAME FROM
HIM, of certain MIRACULOUS pawers, declarative of the
nature of the Dispensation ; and attendant on the saucti-
iication of the heart of the Messenger.
But the character of God s Instruments, and the conduct
of Providence in the use of them, may be very different
from those who are only raised up, anil employed for the
support of an established Dispensation ; as in the Jewish
economy ; or for the reformation of it, as in the Chris
tian : though in the Jewish, administered by an extraor
dinary Providence, these Instruments may have had
(\itraordinarij powers intrusted to them, whkh those of the
Christian had not. Here [/ . c. for the support or refor
mation of things received and established] the same
conclusion, tor the necessity of sanctity of manners, will
not hold. It being sufficient, for this purpose, that God,
i:i the settled course of his Providence, is incessantly
producing GOOD OUT OF EVIL. And the irregular In
strument is frequently made to serve, without his know
ledge, and even against his will, the great ends of piety
and truth.
Of the evidence of this, the History of the Church
affords us many examples.
When God had gradually prepared, and, at length,,
fitted his Chosen People for the reception of the LAM , his
carlv Instruments were selected from the most virtuous
amongst men, NOAH, ABRAHAM, and MOSES :
And, again, when he first prepared the World for the
promulgation of the GOSPEL (which was the completion
uT the LA\V) he committed the care of it to men of the
most unblemished and exemplary characters ; such as
John the Baptist, and the blessed Apostles.
But, in the ExtMhlivhwent, in the Support, and in the
lie format ion of Religion (the second and inferior Opera
tion of Divine Love to Man) God did not disdain ta
employ lets perfect Instruments, in either Dispensation.
He served himself of DAVID for the LAW, and of
COXSTANTINE for the GOSPEL. And under the former
of these Dispensations, both before and after the periocj
here rcftrre J to y when he had decreed, cither to execute
V 7 engeanca
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATE!! 373
vengeance on the Oppressors of -sm offending People, or to
clear the Holy Land of Idolaters, he frequently availed
himself of the Agency of wicked Kings and licentious
Jlulers. The same gracious Providence was displayed in
the preservation of Religion under the latter Dispensation.
For, when the time was come that the Christian Church
was to be cleansed and purified from the long pollutions
of an Antichristian Usurpation, -God was pleased to make
use of Instruments, who had. neither motives nor manners
that could do honour to the Rejbnnation they were ap
pointed to bring to pass.
UNBELIEVERS did not sufficiently consider this, when
they made it an objection to revealed Religion ; nor
PAPISTS, when they made the same objection to the Pro
testant Reformation* To the First we have already said
enough on this head ; and, to the other, shall only add at
present, that we are far from being ashamed of receiving
spiritual benefit from men, who supply these circumstances
of reproach against themselves ; while we find reason to
adore that Hand which turned the avarice (if such was the
case) of a furious Friar, and the luxury of a debauched
Monarch, from their natural Mischiefs, to become pro
ductive of the greatest blessings ; the Restoration of
LETTERS and RELIGION.
But it is now time to go on with M . Voltaire, whose
Philosophy ) being grafted on his Poetry, produces Fruit
worthy of the Stock it comes from, viz. Fable and Fiction.
So- that the next instance he produces of the encourage
ment which the LAW gives to human Mien/ices, is Saul s
abortive vote. The wonder is, that he did not go on with
the cases of Achan the five Kings of the Amorites
Sisera Agag Adonijah the five sons of Saul, hung up
inOibeah -and in short, all the civil and military execu
tions recorded in the Old Testament. But in his rage to
run down Religion, he has out-shot himself, and forgot his
subject. To bring him to himself, I will, in charity, direct
him to a text, which, if he knows how to pervert with pro
per dexterity, may appear more to his purpose than any of
this senseless prate. It is in the Prophet HJiccth: who
addressing himself to his corrupt and idolatrous Country
men, amongst his other ex probrations, ridicules, and, at the
time, instructs them, in this manner, " Wherewith
tt B 3 " shall
374 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
" shall I come before the Lord ? and bow myself before
li the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt-
<c offerings, with Calves of a year old ? Will the Lord
<c be pleased with thousands of Rams, or ten thousands
" of rivers of Oil? SHALL I GIVE MY FIRST-BORN
" FOR MY TRANSGRESSION ; THE FRUIT OF MY BODY
c FOR THE six -OF MY SOUL? He hath shewed thee,
" O man ! what is good. And what doth the Lord re-
" quire of thee, but to do justly, to love mercy, and to
" walk humbly with thy God * ? "
Reasoners, like our poet, may fancy, that the Prophet
is here reckoning up the most efficacious of the LEGAL
SACRIFICES; and consequently, that INFANTICIDE and
HOMICIDE are amongst the first of that number, since all
are said to be offered up to the Lord the high GocL
To confute this groundless fancy, let me previously
repeat these two observations, First, that the Law of
Moses is so far from requiring or directing human sacri-
Jlces, that it ever treats them with the utmost abhorrence;
and therefore was very unlikely to speak of them as legal
Sacrifices : secondly, it hath been shewn that the Idola
trous Jews of these times, were accustomed to bring
into the TEMPLE-SERVICE the most detested Rites of
Paganism.
This being premised, let us consider the season in which
these Prophecies, sent to Micah, were delivered ; to
whom they were addressed and to what end, directed.
They were sent, the prophet tells us, in thedayspfJotham,
Ahaz, and Hczckiah, Kings of Judah f.
We lind by the History of these Kings, that, in their
reign, the House of Judah was sunk into all kinds of vice
and iniquity. But still the leading crime, through the bad
example of these monarchs, was IDOLATRY ; which con
sisted, sometimes in worshipping the God of Israel in the
Pagan place* of .worship, called THE HIGH PLACES; at
other times in worshipping Idols in the very place of God s
worship, THE TEMPLE. Jotham, indeed, is said to have
done that icliich was right in the sight oj tht Lord. How-
beit that the HIGH PLACES were not removed; the
People sacrificed and burnt incense still in the high
places J. But his son, Aliaz, we are told, " did not that
* Ch.vi. ver. 6, 7, 8, f Ch. i. ver. i. J 2 Kings xv, 34, 35.
" which
3Cotes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 37.5
" which was right in the sight of the Lord his God, like
" David, his Father. But he walked in the way of. the
" Kings of Israel. Yea, and made Ms Sous to pas* through
" the FIRE, according to the abominations of the Heathen,
" whom the Lord -cast out from before the Children of
* Israel*." Hezekiah supplied what was wanting in the
Grandfather, and reformed what was amiss, during the
wicked reign of his Father.
Amongst a people so corrupt, while any sense of Reli
gion still remained, Rites and Ceremonies would always
take the lead of moral duties. The Prophet seems to have
availed himself of the good reign of Hezekiah : and to
aid the reformation, which that Monarch had begun, at
tacks labouring Superstition in its head -quarters, amidst
the fires of Moloch-
But to strike at the root of the evil, which was substi
tuting ritual modes of Worship, in the place of moral
duties, he informs them how unacceptable the external
pomp and pageantry of Religion was to the God of Israel,
when not accompanied with purity of heart, and integrity
of manners. This is the general sense of the Text quoted
above: which, without doubt, should be thus paraphrased
Wherewith shall I come before the Lord (says the
Prophet, personating an idolatrous and immoral Jew),
shall I bring a pn fusion of Calves, and Rams, and Oil,
AS THE LAW DIRECTS; Or if these be inmfjfccient, or
unacceptable to the Deity, shall 1 scelc, as is now the
practice, for a more powerful atonement, AMONGST THE
FOREIGN RITES OF OUR PAGAN NEIGHBOURS, wIlO boast
of something still more precious and worthy the Altars of
their Gods MY FIRST-BORN TO BE OFFERED UP INT
SACRIFICE? Vain man, (subjoins the Prophet) do riot God
and Nature proclaim, that without VIRTUE. Rites and
Ceremonies are of no -avail, whether they be such as the
LAW prescribes, or such as IDOLATERS (to whose practices,
thou art so enslaved) impiously fancy to be still more
horribly efficacious.
And how, human Sacrifices came to be so esteemed,
we have shewn, in the course of this dissertation, con
cerning the rise and progress of Sacrifice.
2 Kings xvi. 3.
B 4 III. From
3/6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
III.
From the Sacrifice of particular men, charged by
M, Voltaire, on the Jewish LAW, he rises in his impiety
to accuse it of tlic SACRIFICE OF A WHOLE NATION.
These are his words " It is said in Leviticus that none
" devoted which shall be devoted of men shall he re-
" deemed, but shall mrely be put to death. The Jewish
" books boar evidence, that when the Israelites overran
<( the little country of Canaan, they massacred, in most
t of the villages, men, women, and children because
tk they had been DEVOTED."
In tiiese words are included two charges against the
LAW. i. That this devoting of the Canaanites was a
religious Sacrifice. 2. Or, at least, a commanded exter
mination of a whole people, by the ministry of the
Israelites. So that if one of them should fail, the other
yet may hold.
I have already acquitted it of the first, by an expla
nation of the famous mistaken text in the xxviith chapter
of Leviticus. We come now to the second, the censure
of extreme cruelty and inhumanity in executing the com
mand. And this will bring us to the concluding head, on
this subject.
THE MORAL GOVERNOR, OF THE UXIVEUSE ad
ministers his Sovereignty in two different ways: while
moral Governors amongst men can, in their several de
partments, administer theirs only in one.
God, the Author of Nature, and Frumcr of its Con
stitution, hath so ordered and combined moral Entities,
that VIRTUE generally, or for the mo^t part, produceth
HAPPINESS ; while MISERY is as generally attendant
upon VICE. On this disposition of things, the rewards
and punishments of FREE AGENTS are tirst of all ad
justed. But this makes it neither superfluous nor inex
pedient for the God of the Universe to punish and reward
in another manner, likewise. Not superfluous ] since this
constitution of Nature does not always, by reason of
certain traversies \\\ free agency, produce its designed
effects. Not inexpedient ; since, in that other manner,
the power of the divine Administration is more sensibly
manifested ; as in the first way his Wisdom may be
better
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 377
better collected : While, both together serve more fully
to convince us, that the FIRST CAUSE is a free Agent;
and that the constitution of Nature is his ordinance ;
aurl not the effect of chance or destiny.
On these accounts, a reasonable analogy would lead
us to conclude, from what passeth in the government of
the NATURAL v;oLiLi), that, in the early ages of man kin ;i,
when an EQUAL PROVIDENCE prevailed (as it did while
men retained the knowledge of their Governor and
Creator; of which more in its proper place) God would
frequently interpose, in an extraordinary manner, to
prevent or redress those irregularities which would, from
time to time, arise, and did actually arise in God s moral
government, while sotc/y administered by that relative
order of things, which his wisdom had so beautifully con
nected, and so firmly established, as to be disordered by
nothing but the traversiss of free agency in his Creatures,
That he did thus, in fact, interpose, holy Scriptures
bear full evidence. The first account we have of it, after
the DELUGE (in which, this part of God s moral admi
nistration was so signally displayed) is in the fate of
Sodom and Gomorrah: And afterwards, in the EXTER
MINATION OF TiiE CANAANITES : both these nations
having, by the same unnatural crimes, jilted up the mea
sure of their iniquities.
In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, the enormity of
their vices, and the total depravity of their manners,
impose silence on the most profligate opposers of Reli
gion, however clamorous they may be in the Patronage
of the Canaanitcs. Their Plea, in iavour of these, arises
from the Choice God is said to have made of the
INSTRUMENTS of his Vengeance. Fire and Brimstone
they easily submit to : but Fire and Sicord revolts their
humanity.
They can never (they tell us) be brought to believe
that the common Father of All would employ some
of his reasonable Creatures to execute his vengeance
upon others of the same species, even though these others
had been justly sentenced to perdition for their beastly
and inhuman Vices.
They pretend to say, " that God could not, con
sistently with his nature and attributes, put fellow-
creatures
378 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
creatures on such an employment/ They have offered
no reasons for this bold assertion: and I can find none.
In the mean time, we must needs be much edified with
the modesty of these men ; who deny that liberty to God,
-which they are not backward to allow to their earthly
Sovereigns : Amongst whom, the right of employing om
part of their Subjects to execute their Sentence on
another, is every where practised, without censure or
control.
But they say further, " that although God might, vet
lie certainly would not have recourse to human agency in
this matter, on account of the mischiefs which such
agency was likely to produce.
First, as it is extremely liable to abuse. Every Pre
tender to a divine command, whether feigned by an
Impostor, or fancied by an Enthusiast, would, when
supported by this example, never suffer their Neighbours
to live in peace. And Saracen armies and Popish
Crusades would be always at hand to carry on desolation
in the name of God."
Secondly, " this instrumentality must have an ill
(effect on the MANNERS of the Israelites, by making their
Jiearts callous, and insensible to the calamities of their
Fellow-Creatures." These are the objections of our
PHILOSOPHERS. But before they give us time to reply,
they kindly take the trouble off our hands, and will needs
answer for us, themselves. This is one of their usual
tricks, to stop or cover tlie disgrace of a foolish Sophism,
l)y a shew ot candour. But, indeed, their aim is to draw
the Advocate of religion from solid ground, which is
fairly and steadily to confute infidelity, ON ITS OWN
pRixfipLF.s. Of this slight of hand, the Poet Voltaire
has here given us an example mo.st worthy of him. -
This [the extermination of the Canaanites] had been
cm enormous crime, had not God himself, THE SOVEREIGN
ARBITER OF LIFE AND DEATH, $f U hose COmlllCt tt
are not to ask a reason, so ordained-, in the impenetrable*
depths of kis justice. Indeed! But we will be bold to
bring hin back to the state of the question. " God the
3i o UAL GOVERNOR of the World could not or would not
($$y ufj believers) make use of human Instruments . for
the" destruction of the Canaanites." This is the objection.
But
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 379
But to keep us from answering, they take the business
into their own hands God (says this prince of Philo
sophers) the CREATOR, the sovereign arbiter of life and
death, of whose conduct we are not to ask, what dost than?
hath foreclosed all reasoning, in the impenetrable depths
of his Justice"
Thus they raise their objection against a command
of God, as MORAL GOVERNOR of the Universe, (and
such lie is always represented in Scripture) and then,
to stop our mouths with a Flam, answer the objectiou
themselves, by putting a PHYSICAL CREATOR in his
place.
Now, of the actions of a MORAL GOVERNOR, we may,
with clue modesty and humility, ask the reason; Shall
not THE JUDGE OF ALL THE EARTH do right ? was
asked * in a similar case, by the Father of the Faith fuL
But, to the PHYSICAL CREATOR of the Universe, who
will venture to say, what doest thou f? Illustrious Phi
losopher! permit us therefore to answer for ourselves.
We say, that the moral Governor of the World can never
be debarred from carrying on his Administration in such
a way as may best suit the ends of divine Wisdom,
because human folly may encourage itself to raise, on
that ground, an impious and abusive imitation. And,
neither under natural, nor under revealed Religion, hath
God thought fit to exempt or secure his Laws from such
abuses.
God, under natural Religian, in the ordinary course
of his Providence, hath, by annexing evil to Vice, made
that Constitution of tilings the Instrument of punish
ment ; but how hath this Dispensation been dishonoured,
and even to the disturbance of Society itself, when these
punishments, interpreted by ignorant or uncharitable
men, have been turned into EXTRAORDINARY JUDG
MENTS ? Again, Peter and John said, what every honest
Deist is ready to say, We must obey God rather than
Man\. Yet how perpetually has this truth been abused
by Rebels and Fanatics.
Under Revealed Religion, MIRACLES, (the necessary
Credential of those intrusted with its promulgation) by
which Power, both the physical and intellectual Systems
* Gen.xviii. 25. f Job ix. 12. J Acts v. 29.
were
3-So THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
%v ere control led, have yet occasioned innumerable abuses,
defiling every age of the Churcli with fantastic Prodigies,
and lying Wonders.
But why do I speak of these sanctions of Revelation,
(the Credentials of God s Messengers) when the very
Communication of hie Will to Man, REVELATION itself
hath filled all ages and nations with Impostors, pretending
to a divine Commission?
liiit our Philosophers go on; and say, "That this
ofnce of destruction imposed upon the Israelites, must
have produced an- ill effect on their Jlforal Character,
.by giving them wrong notions of the divine Nature ;
and by vitiating their own ; as it had a tendency to
destroy or to weaken the Social passions and afiections."
Nay, further, they pretend to see the marks of these
evils in the Character of the chosen People : whom,
therefore, instead of pitying, (and if the evils arose from
the cause they assign, were most deserving of pity) they
have most mercilessly abused and misrepresented. But
to answer to the FIKST FART of this infidel objection,
which pretends that the Jews were brought, by this
employ ine-nt,. to entertain wrong ideas of the Divine
A tf/wj-r, I reply, The most adorable attribute of God,,
the moral Governor of the world, is his LONG-SUFFIC
ING, by which he bears with the crimes and follies of
men, in order to brin;^ them to repentance: Now this
attribute he hath made manliest to all : but more fully
to his chosen People^ even in the very case of these
devoted Canaanihs. For when their crimes were arrived
at the height of human depravity, Me still withheld his
Ly.nd, and by divers awakening Judgments, gave them
tinse find invitation lor repentance. But on their neglect
r.:id contempt of his repeated warnings, He, at length,
was forced, as it were, to pour out his full vengeance
upon then i.
The Author of the Apocryphal Book, of the Wisdom
cf Solcnton, thus graphically paints their case, in an
Address to the Almighty : " Thou hast mercy upon
" all thou winked ;: 7 Ihe Sins of Men, because they
* c should amend Tho sparest all ; for they are thine,
ki thou Lover of Souls 1 Therefore thou chastenest
" them, bv little and little, that offend ; and earnest
" them
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 381
" them by putting them in remembrance wherein they
< have offended ; that leaving their wickedness, they
* may believe in thee, O Lord ! Far IT WAS THY WILL.
" TO DESTROY BY THE HANDS OF OUR FATHERS, THOSE
" OLD INHABITANTS OF THY HOLY LAND ; whoiil
" thou Imtest for doing most odious works of Sorceries,
<c and WICKED SACRIFICES merciless murderers of
" children, and devourers of mans jlesh, ami the feasts
" of blood Nevertheless even those thou sparedst as
" Men*, and didst send Wasps, forerunners of thine
" host, to destroy them by little and little executing thy
" judgments upon them by little and little, THOU GAYEST
" THEM PLACE OF REPENTANCE; not being ignorant
*< that they were a naughty Generation and their
<e cogitations would never be changed f."
The Canonical Books of Scripture authenticate what
this Sage Writer of after-times, here delivers, concerning
God s dealing with these devoted Nations.
Moses, on the egression of the Israelites from Egypt,
speaks thus to them, in the Person of the Almighty
" I will send Hornets before thee, which shall drive
s< out the Hivitc, the Canaanite, and the Hittite from
" before thee. I will not drive them out from before
" thee in one year, lest the land become desolate ; but
" by little and little will I drive them out from before
" thce:{;." And again in his last exhortation to his
People, " Behold the Lord, thy God, will send the
" Hornet amongst them, until they that are left, and
" hide themselves from thee, be destroyed ." And
Joshua, on the like occasion, tells the People that what
Moses had promised, in the name of the God of Israel,
God had fulfilled / sent the HORNET before you,
which drove them out from before you, even the two
Kings of the Amorites || .
Here, the Reader may observe, that the Apocryphal
Writer gives one reason for the temporary plagues,
which forerun the total destruction of the Canaanites;
and the Authentic Text gives another; nor will the
t * i. e. for the sake of their rational nature, though by their un
natural vices they had forfeited all the prerogatives olhumanitv.
f Ch.xi. 33 & seq. Ch. xii. 2. & seq. | Exod. xxiii. -28.
l)eut> vii. 20. . H Josh, xxiv, 12.
learned
g&s THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX;
learned Reader be at a loss to account for this differ
ence.
The Israelites, under their Leader, Moses, did not
want to he told, that those temporary Plagues were sent
in mercy. They had, on the first opening of his Com
mission, been instructed by him, in the attributes of the
true God, his long suffering and bearing with the con
tradiction of Sinners] and his merciful acceptance even
of a late-delayed Repentance. They had experienced
the unwearied exertion of this attribute, even in their
Own case, when their repeated perversities, which would
have tired out every thing but injinite Goodness, were as.
often pardoned as they were committed. So that they
were not ignorant, though their degenerate Posterity, in
the time of this Apocryptical Writer, might want to be
informed of the gracious purpose, in those warnings to a
devoted People.
And as there was another nse in these probationary
plagues, viz. the wasting the Inhabitants of Canaan, this
was the design which Moses and Joshua principally insist
on, -as it was the greatest encouragement to a dastardly
People. MGSCS, in the name of his Master, promiseth
to scud HORNETS before them, which SHOULD DRIVE
OUT the Jiivite, e. And Joshua reminds his People
how the promise had been performed Gvd sent the.
HORNET before you, winch drove them out from before
you, &c.
This assurance was no more than needed. The cow
ardice contracted in a long state of Slavery; (a state
fairly recorded, and deeply lamented by their Leader)
required the assistance of all NATURE in their support.
" O nimium dilecte Deo cui militat /Ether,
" Et conjurati veniunt ad Classica venti."
But though these warning Judgments, these chastise-
wcnts of mercy, were lost on those to whom they Were
sent, yet they were not cast away ; for, in aggravating
the Crimes of the Canaanites, they served, at the same
time, to promote their speedier extermination. So ad
mirably is the moral government of Cod administered,
that its acts, directed to various purposes, are never
issued in vain. But what is said in holy Writ, of the
previous punishments on the Canaanites, in mercy, is
given
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED.
given only as a specimen of them, and not for a complete 1
list, as in the record of the trying plagues of Egypt,
So that we are not to conclude, that the destructive
Animals, sent amongst those miscreants, were only wasps
and hornets ; or that, amongst the awakening punish
ments, DISEASE was not one. When God was pleased,
in after-times, to punish their Descendants, the Philis
tines, for their profanation of the ARK ; (which, for
the sins of his people, he suffered to fall into their hands)
the sacred writers tell us, that they, who so profaned
it, were smitten with emerods in their secret parts*.
This is the only punishment there mentioned. Yet, by the
account of the atonement, or trespass- offering, it appears
that there was another. The Philistines sent back with
the Ark, which they restored, the images of Jive emerods \
and FIVE MICE IN GOLD "I". Who can doubt, but that,
in this addition to the atonement, another punishment
was intimated, viz. the devastation of their Lands by mice?
But the sacred Writer does not leave us to mere con
jecture. In speaking of these mice, he thus qualifies
them, Mice that MAR THE LAND. But this is net
all. The text here acquaints us, though occasionally,
with two punishments, inflicted on the Canaanites , which
the history of their expulsion does not particularly men
tion. We understand how fit Instruments of general
devastation MICE must needs be: and we may guess
how well suited the other punishment was for their
unnatural Crimes ; nor would cither one, or the other, .
cease to remind diem of the vices or punishments of
their Ancestors, the Canaanites, so that, avoiding the
manners of their ancestors, they might (if possible) escape
their total destruction.
I shall conclude this point with an observation which
naturally leads to the next, that is to say, to the SECOND
PART of this infidel objection, viz. " the EFFECT which
the destruction of the Canaanites must be supposed
to have on the minds of the MORAL INSTRUMENTS
of their punishment." A matter most deserving our
attention.
It cannot be doubted but that the Almighty displayed
bis mercy and long -suffering on Sodom and Gomorrah,
* i Sam. Y. 6, f Chap. vi. 4, 5.
>:-,., in
3S4 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
in some way analogous to what lie practised in the Land
of Canaan, (and how gracious he was in the extent of
that mercy, we learn from- Abraham s intercession for
those Cities*) though the particulars of it be not re
corded by the sacred historian : Whose silence in the
one case, and not in the other, may be clearly under
stood. Those execrable Cities were destroyed immedi
ately by Goers own hand, in letting loose the Elements
(the treasurers of his wrath) upon them. In the deletion
of the Canaanites, he was pleased to employ HUMAN
INSTRUMENTS. These were to be used according to
their nature; not as Entuitcs merely Physical, but as
moral agents likewise : Ikings not only endowed with Sense,
but Sentiment. Now i t seemed but fit that such ct^oits
should be instructed in the reason and occasion of their
Commission ; especially as it was a matter of high im
portance; no less than to preserve them from judging
perversely of the divine attributes. Accordingly Moses-
obviated this mischief by a detail of the abominable
manners of this devoted People : together with a memorial
of the ineffectual issue of their many chastisement * hi
wercy to bring them to repentance, and to save them
from utter deletion.
As the mischief was thus effectually obviated, the
Israelites were, at the same time, secured from that
other, (which is the second point objected to tlidr
( Commission) its tendency to vitiate the most amiable
passion of our nature, by destroying or weakening the
benign and social feelings for the miseries of our fellow
creatures. For what could God s gracious dealing with
these incorrigible Miscreants teach all, who (like the
Israelites) were intimately informed of their crimes, and
long delayed punishment, but, in imitation of God s
long forbearance, to shew mercy and compassion to their
offending Brethren in distress. Nor, in fact, do we find
that the Jew* were more steeled to, or insensible of, the
calamities of humanity (bating those of this devoted
People) than other men, in. the early Ages of society,
were wont to be. And if they were not much more
humanized, by being better taught, as well as fed, than
the rest of mankind, it must be ascribed, not to this
* Gen. xviii,
Commission,
Notes.] t)F MOSES DEMONSTRATE!). 3*5
Commission, but to a certain native perversity, which (as
strange as it may at first sk^-t appear) might be one,
amongst the very many reasons of God s choice of them,
for his PECULIAR, as it made them the properest subjects
to work upon, i or a fuller manifestation, of his infinite
mercy towards the Sons of Men. Where it might be
seen, in the deviations from right of two People thus
connected and related, that the one was destroyed, after
all means had been employed, without effect, to bring
them to REPENTANCE; and the ottier pardoned and
highly favoured, when the same merciful forbearance had
produced its fruit of a timely REPENTANCE, and return
to GOD, after every transgression ; and, at length, a
determined perseverance in this their capital duty (ad
herence to the true Gotl) for many ages, even to the
present time.
But it may still be asked, though no mischief was
derived towards the Instruments of this extraordinary
Commission, yet what good could such a commission pro
duce? I answer, much, and constant; for besides a
political benefit to an abject unwarlikc people, in teaching
them the use of arms ; who were to make their destined
way to Empire, as well by their own power, a$ by the
extraordinary aid of the Almighty; in order to avoid a
lavish waste of miracles : besides this, (I say) there
were moral advantages, great and lasting, derived to this
Instrumentality. Horror and- aversion in the Israelites
to those unnatural Crimes which had occasioned .the
deletion of the Canaanitcs ; whose punishment must
be intimately impressed on the minds of the chosen People,
by their being appointed the executioners of God s
vengeance. To confirm this, we may observe, that both
J\Ioses and Joshua, by incessantly reminding them of the
horrid depravity of that devoted People, had their eyes
always intent upon this good effect.
P. 294. [II.] The eloquent Bossuet saith rightly, that
Protestants have but lamely supported the FIGURE, of
THIS is MY BODY, &c. by those I am the vine I am
the door.- -And the reason he gives has its weight -
Jems (says he) in the institution of the -Lord s. Suppcj\
VOL, VI. C c
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
neither propounding a parable, nor explaining an
allegory* But when the learned Writer would have
us infer from this, that there could be no other occasion
for the use of a FIGURE, he imposes his usual artifice
upon us ; which was always to keep out of sight what
would have detected his slight of hand. He knew there
were other occasions, of employing figurative expres
sions, such as juing and declaring the NATURE oif A
KITE. Ancl this was the occasion here. But then, says
he, the words are detached and separated from all other
discourse there is no leading preparation f. So say
the Socinians likewise ; in order to infer a contrary con*
elusion. But we have Already shewn, that they are both
mistaken.
There was a leading preparation ; and that, a plain
one, namely, the celebration of the paschal Supper,
And we have shewn, it was the custom of our Lord to
be led by what passed before him, to regulate his language
on ideas thus prepared. Nor was the comecration of
the Elements in the SUPPER OF OUR LORD SEPARATE
from all other discourse. It was preceded bv, and con
nected with, a most affecting discourse on the death and
sufferings of our Redeemer. Therefore the words of
the Consecration do not, as M. Bossuet pretends, carry
their whole meaning within themselves ; but refer to
things preceding and exterior. So that the Bishop s
triumphant conclusion loses much of its lustre, when he
says, what 1 pretend to evince is, the embarntsinto which
these words THIS is JMY BODY, throws all the Protestant
party there was no reason J or using these S IIIOXG
TERMS /or the. Institution of the Eucharist rather than
for Baptism. r j t his place 1 foretell shall be the eternal
and inevitable confusion of the defenders of the FIGURA-
TJV.E SENSED. There was no more reason, on the Pro-
* quand les uns opposoient, ccci est mon corps, les autrcs repon-t
cloient, Je suis Ic rig fit Je suib la poite lc pier re etmt Christ
\\ est vrui qiie ces examples u etpient pas sen-ihlabks. Ce ifetuit ni
n proposant une pavabole, ni en expliquant une allegoric.
f Ces paroles [ceci est moh Corps, &c.] detachees de tout autre
fliscours, portent tout leur sens en elles-mcines.
J Get endroit sera 1 eteinelle et inevitable confusion des Defenseurs
^u SENS FIGURE, Hist. des. Var. Tom. i. p. 477. 8vo.
jestant
Ivotes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 387
test ant principles, (says he) Jbr chux/xg these STT.OXG
TERMS here, than in the rite of Baptism* Surely, there
was a very good one. For if it was the purpose of
divine Wisdom to explain the nature of the Rite, only hy
the words of the CawecrotwiL) which it is agreed it wa.%
as well by him who holds it to be a real Sacrifice, as by
us who hold it is only a .feast upon Sa&ifice, there was a
necessity for the use of these terms. This was not the
case in instituting the Rite of Baptism, whose nature is
i\cprsdy defined. Besides, here the matter, administered,
was WATKtt, an cleioemt always at hand, and therefore
fitly called by its proper name. -But the -FLESH and
BLOOD of the Sacrifice, of which the Lord s supper was
a festive commemoration, not being then -at hand, as
Christ was not yet offered on the Cross, the Elements
of Bread ami IVbie, substituted in their place, were, hy
<an elegant and necessary conversion, called tiie body and
-bloody as these elements only \vcre declarative of the
nature of the Rite, viz. a feast upou Sacrifice. To
support this reasoning still further. Another sacred
Rite, that of the imposition of lund^ in procuring the
descent of the HO^Y SIM HIT, is -called tire BAPTISM BY
1*1 RE ; in which, both the terms arz figurative, as, in the
Baptism by \Vato\ both are literal. And why this
difference? I ecause the Agent or Instrument of this
Baptism by Fire being spiritual, there was need of figu
rative terms, taken irom material tilings, to aid the
igrossness of our conceptions, concerning the irwmner of
-ttjc operation. So tiiit all the mystery ia this affair,
(I moan, so far forth as concerns the terms oj the
institution) is no more than this; \\lic-\\ t!:e things com-
jnanicated are .of a sj.)ii-iti.?(il i-at -sr^, i\s the gilts of the
holy Spirit ; or of a material natiu*e not v -:ct hi cwe, as the
ilesii of a Sacrifice, not yet oiiercd up, aud {hereto re need-
jug another body to be substitetcd in its place, there, tlu3
employing figurative .term* bccoaves necessary. But when
the thing communicated is a material Substance, at hand,
; and actually capable of being employed, as Ifaier in
JtiaptiMii, it would rather confound, than aid our
, to use improper y that \s, figurative terms,
C C 2 f. 298.
388 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
P. 298. [I.] They had one cominun nature so far as
they really conveyed, or were foolishly imagined to coil-
vey, beneiirs to the participants. But St. Paul joining
to the Christian and the Jewish, the Gentile sacrificial
Feasts, he thought it logically necessary to make a dis
tinction between the real and the imaginary benefits;
which he does in this manner What say I then? that
an IDOL is any thing; or that which is offered to Idols is
any thing? No, (says he) both are nothing, i.e. are
equally incapable of conveying benefits. That this must
be his meaning, appears from his predicating the, same
thing both of the Idol and the offering. Now as the
offering had a PHYSICAL existence, what hindered but
that, in his opinion, the Idol might have a METAPHY
SICAL? Though in an efficacious and MORAL sense,
Both were nothing. This interpretation shews that the
Apostle was perfectly consistent, when just before he calls
these Idols NOTHING, and yet, presently after, says they
were DEVILS, whom, we know, in his opinion, were
SOMETHING. The calling these Idols, Devils, served to
explain his meaning when he said Idols were nothing, to
be this, that no benefit was to be expected from them. And
to intimate yet further, that so far from receiving benefit
from Idols ^ their Worshippers, by this intercourse with
them, were subject to great harm and mischief. In order
to insinuate this latter assertion, the Apostle changes his
first idea of an Idol, which he used in common with the
Gentiles, to this second, which he, and all the Christians,
of that time, had of them. The Idols, to whom the
Gentiles intentionally. sacrificed, were their national Gods,
the celestial Bcdiex, their dead Ancestor* ; their Kjugs
and Benefactors , all of them, long ago, engrafted into
the public worship. From such, the Apostle owns, they
could receive neither good nor harm; these being only
IDOLS OF THE BRAIN. -J3ut SATAX Ol* the PKViL,
as the Original Author and still the fomenter of Idolatry,
makes him properly and peculiarly the IDOL OF THE
ALTAR. From such an Idol, they, to whom the Apostle
writes, must readily confess, much harm would arise from
communicating with him, in a Sacrificial ov sacramental
feast.
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 389
Of this capital Enemy of Mankind the Gentiles them
selves had, sosnehow or other, received an obscure tradi
tion; plentifully, indeed, contaminated with fable ; which
they still further polluted with new-invented Superstitions.
Yet these still preserving a few traces of resemblance to
the Mosaic History, and occasioning some conformity
between the languages of error and revelation, have drawn
unwary men into some dangerous conclusions, as if the
Founders of our holy Religion had taken advantage of
Pagan follies to form a system of DKMOXOLOGY, agree
able to the preconceived fancies of their CONVERTS.
But of this, more" in its place. The present occasion
rather leads us to admire the Art by which the Sacred
Writer has conducted his argument.
P. 319. [K.] It should seem most probable that the
miraculous powers were, in general, occasional and tem
porary. But a learned Writer, who has declared him
self of this opinion, hath unwarily put the gif t of * tongues
into the number
" The Gift of Tongues upon the day of Pentecost
" (says he) was not lasting, but instantaneous and
" transitory ; not bestowed upon them for the con-
<c stant work of the Ministry, but as an occasional si<^n
" only, that a person endowed uith it was a chosen
" minister of the Gospel: which sign, as soon as it had
" served that particular purpose, seems to have ceased,
" and totally to have vanished*."
Would reason, or the truth of tilings, suffer us to be
thus compliant, we might concede to Unbelievers all \\ hich
they fancy the Learned Writer hath procured for them,
" that the power of tongues was temporary, and like the
" power of healing, possessed occasionally," without
being alarmed at any consequence they will be able to
deduce from it. For let it be granted, that the. gift of
tongues returned as often as they had occasion for its
use, and it is no great matter where, it resided in the
interim.
* Dr. Middleton s Essay on the Gift of Tongues, Vol II. of hia
AVorks, p. 79.
c c 3 But
3co- THE DIVINE LKGATIOK [Booi
But neither reason, nor the truth of tilings, will suffer
ns U> be thus complaisant. The power of healing the
diseased (to \vliich Dr. M. compares the gi/i of tongues)
is, during the whole course of its operation^ one con
tinued arrest or diversion of the general la-ws of matter
and motion ; it was therefore very fitting that this power
should be imparted occasionally. But the // of tongues;
when once it was conferred, became, from thenceforth, a
natural power; just as the free and perfect use of the
members of the Body, after they had been restored, by
miracle, to the exercise of their natural functions. Indeed,
the loss of this gift of tongues, alter the temporary use of
it, would imply other miracles, as oft as there was occa
sion to restore what was lo^t by actual deprivation..
Unless we can suppose that the Apostles, in the exercise
of this gilt, were merely ii rational organs, Automate,
through- which certain soands were conveyed. In
word, it was as much in the corpse of nature for art
Apostle, when the holy Spirit- on the Day of Pentecost
had enabled him to speak a strange language, ever after
wards to- have the use eftHftfr language; as- it was for the/
Cripple, whom Jesus had restored to the use of his
limbs on the sabbath day, ever afterwards to walk, to-
run, and perform all the functions of a man perfectly
sound and entire.
In one thing, indeed, the power of healing- the diseased,
$nicl of speaking with strange tongues, agreed 1 . As the
Disciples could not heal at all times, and when they
would ; so- neither could they speak when- they we^ld, in
an unknown tongue, when it was first essayed 1 . Yet
when the holv Spirit had once enabled them to speak and
understand a Language till then unknown to them,
I conceive they must retain the use -of it with the same
facility as- if they had acquired it in the ordinary way of
instruction.
But the confusion in this matter, and the embarras
which follows it, in the Doctor s stating the -Question,,
arise from not distinguishing between the active pwctr
.and the ftosmc gift- In healing the diseased, the Apostles
a be considered as .the f$ r urlws of a Miracle \ in
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 39*
speaking a strange tongue, as Subjects of a miracle per
formed**
P. 33.5. [L.] The serious Reader will be ready to
ask, what learned discoveries they are which have encou
raged these men to innovate from the common opinion
concerning the Gospel Demoniacs? Have they found
in the Scripture history of the Depioniacs any thing
either hurtful to morals, or false in Physics f Nothing
of either. And yet whatever is found there, they are
not the tinders.
An excellent Divine of the last age had, in his exten
sive researches into antiquity, collected, that both Jews
and Gentiles, at and before the time of Christ^ were in
fected with one common Superstition, that Demons and
\hzSmilsofwickedftien deceased frequently seized upon
the bodies of the livhig, and tormented them in various
ways. Hence he too hastily, yet with his usual modesty,
insinuated, that the Possessions recorded in the Gospel,
and called demoniacal* might be of that imaginary sort;
and no Gth^r in reality than OCCULT DISEASES; which
being intractable by the art of medicine, were supposed
to be supernatural (as if a good Physician was a match
for any thing but the Devil). To the unhappy wretches"^
so afflicted, he supposed that Jesus might apply his salu
tary hands : and that to this malady, so relieved, the Peo
ple gave the fashionable name by which, at that time, it
was commonly distinguished.
Without doubt this trulv learned Divine went the more
readily into this bold opinion, as he had observed it to
have been God s gracious method, in the course of his
DISPENSATIONS, to take advantage of men s habitual
prejudice*, towards the support of his Revelation, by
keeping his servants attached to his Ordinances.
I kit, here, the excellent person should have distin
guished (as his Followers \ were not likely to do it for
* lie who would see a more complete account of this whole affair
mill its dependencies, is recommended to the FIRST BOOK of the
Doctrine of Grace, or the Office ami Operation of the LLdj Spirit y
3d Edition, Loud. 1763. [See vol. viii. of this Edit.]
f Dr. Sykes Dr. Larduer, c. &c.
c c 4 him)
THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
him) between RITE^ and DOCTRINES. As they were
Rrnis only, of which God was pleased to avail himself,
for the benefit of his People, in order to combat, or ta*
elude, tlieir fondness fur Pagan usages. -In matters of
DocTiiiXK, the like caiipli.ince was not, nor could be,
safely indulged to them, without violating the truth of
things ; and therefore Sacred Scripture affords us no ex
ample of such a condescension. In things pertaining only
to Rites we have, indeed, many instances. Tims the use
of linen-garmenfs, lighted lamps, I as I rations, and a muU
titudc of other usages, in themselves indifferent* were
brought out of Jake Religions into the true: and this,
with high propriety and wisdom, while their new destina
tion sanctified their use ; and their use served to the
easier introduction of the new establishment. Hut to
assert and support a groundless, superstitious opinion
(if such it were) of Diabolical possessions, would be the
infecting and contamitr.itiiig the Christian Faith.
However, if the admirable Author of this hurtful
Novelty did himself miss of so jiibt and obvious a dis
tinction, we have less reason to wonder that those of his
Followers, who only aimed at something, by a taint re-
ilcction from the other s learning, should not hit (as we-
ha^ve said) upon what their Master had overlooked.
A kite eminent Physician, who hath borrowed this
notion professedly from this great man, acted a more,
modest and becoming part. He might pretend, by virtue
of his Profession, and still inore by his superior skill in
it, to a profounder insight into Nature: At the same
time, Theology being in another department, he was the.
more excusable, if he did not see all that this Divine
Science opposed to the Opinion; an Opinion, which
might be said to descend to him, by inheritance from his
great namesake and relation: whose conciseness, strength,
and modesty of reasoning, he hath so well copied, that to-
confute objections so borrowed, will be to overthrow, the
>* hole System of the Ant ukmoniac Party *
In
* " Ut redeam autcm ad Drcmoniacos ; non raea est, profecto, sed
aliorum ante me pi elate & dectrinu preaityritium virorum sententia.
quuori hie propouo. lit proximo quideai i2uculo,inLt;f iiostrates etiam
1.1
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 393
In his Medica Sacra, he hath a chapter dedcemcmacis 1 ;
in which he hath treated tk: Evangelic History with all
that decency and reverence which becomes a true Scholar
and a serious -Pro-lessor of the Christian Faith.
The tirst observation I shall make, in the entrance OH
his argument, is general; and will serve to confute all
who have written on the .Question. It is this Our An^
tidemoniasts reason upon the case, not as they find it
recorded by the J&wangelistS) but as they see it described
only in a treatise of Medicine, by Aretaeus,- Fernelius, or
any other of the faculty, where it stands unconnected
with all moral as well as religious inquiries. But it hatU
been shewn at large, that these demoniacal possessions
have a close relation to the Doctrine of REDEMPTION ;
and were therefore reasonably to be expected at the first
promulgation of the GOSPEL. Ihis sets the matter on
quite another footing : and that plausible reasoning, which
attends the learned person s representation, entirely dis*
appears, when we put the case as it was in fact.
i. This proper precaution, against so defective and
foreign a representation of the case, being premised,
I now proceed to the reasoning employed by our learned
Physician to discredit the common Opinion of a real.
possession.
His first argument stands on the extent of the Super
stition, which gave birth to so many imaginary posses
sions.
" * It had not only infected the Mosaic Religion in par-
" ticular, but had overrun paganism in general." u As
" to the Jews, who were wont to ascribe whatever there
"was of prodigious in nature, to the MINISTRY OF
" ANGELS, they were easily brought to believe, that
(t those dire diseases, vUiich infected the Mind and
" Body
JOREPIIUS MF.ADUS, Theolcgns, rerum sacrarum cognitione, nulli
Ssecimdus, luculenta dissbrtatione cam propujjrmbit. Cwn ex
igitur ac ilte, jamllla sim oriundus," c. Praef. in. Med. Sa,cr. p.ix.
Authore UJCUAIIDO Ai
* At non Judim tan turn, sed et aliis etiam gentibus in usu fu t inr-
sanos pro demoniacis habere, p. 76. A Chald:cis quidem ad PIii;ni-
ces, postea ad Egyptios propagata, ad Gn^cos deinde, hinc ad Ji./ni i-
os aliasq^e demum geutes teniporis pro^r essu Uemoniara is a He-
ligio pervenit. p. 74.
3 g4 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX,
" Body equally and at once, and whose causes were
" unknown, could be no other than the work of the
DEVIL*/
Let us allow all this Let us allow that the Jews, at the
time of Christ, were very superstitious in this matter. But
then the learned Doctor, in his turn, will allow, that the
Teachers of the Gospel, in the fulness of their inspiration,
must needs be secure from an error, which so dreadfully
affected the Religion they were intrusted to propagate, as
Demonianism did, if it wore an error. And if so, they
knowingly and designedly gave it countenance and sup
port. But how that will agree with their character and
office, we shall see, as we go along.
Our Learned Doctor tells us further, " that the Jews
not only gave credit to the works of the Devil, but
believed in the ministry of A NO ELS likewise."- -This seems
to be one of those slips of the pen, to which Truth some
times betrays those who write most cautiously against her ;
especially when they act the part of Believers; which,
however, I will not suspect was the case here. For the
Old Testament, which the learned Doctor reverences
equally with the Neic, bears ample testimony to the real
ministry of Angels ; and with such circumstances attending
it, as will not permit a Believing Caviller to evade it, by
having recourse to vision, Jigure, or accommodation. For
jf the Angel who waylaid Balaam may be reduced to a
dusky dream, those whom Abraham entertained in Broad
daylight were more substantial. When, therefore, the
learned Person puts the ministry and malice of good and
bad angels on the same footing, he must confess that, if
the reality of the former be proved, the reality of the
latter will follow.
As to the abounding Superstition, in this matter, both
amongst Jew^and Gentiles, I do not see how that, in the
least, alters the case. The Jews, of this time, by a more
enlarged and unrestrained Commerce with their Pagan
* Juda i an tern, siquid faceret Natura, ad ANGET.OIIUM supremi
J)ci Mi/lint ronirn operani referri soliti, facile in animuin sibi inducere.
poterunt, ut chras quasdam crederent regriliulines qua? mcntem simul
ct corpus Ift-derent, ,-t quiirum rnusite coguo&cere ziequirt Ut, ab angelo-
rum nialonim y^y.aif exuiia. p. 74.
neighbours^
Notes.! 01* MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 395
iieighbours, had defiled the purity of their holy Religion
by many opinions borrowed from the Gentile Philoso-*
Alters. Thus they took, we may well suppose, the Doctrine
of I Demons from PLATO, and the pre-existcnce (if not a
future state) from PYTHAGORAS. Notwithstanding, it
is certain, that both Demoniacal "possessions and future
r war ds and punishments are equally supported by the.
acts and doctrine of Jesus and his Disciples.
This- too, let me observe The Doctrines of the FALL
and of the REDEMPTION (the two principles on which
our holy religion rises) are interwoven into the substance,
of the Christian Faith. If therefore we can suppose
Detnonkirtism to be only a threadbare fable, new-dressed >
and oftered, by way of accommodation, to amuse the
followers of the Gospd, I cannot see what hinders our
supposing, with SVNESIUS, ajuture state itself to be no-
more.
Both Opinions had the advantage of old prejudice?
in their favour. Yet if only one of them were true,
(namely, that of & Jut lire state), and the other of Demo-
mant&m, taught but by way of accommodation, we see, ifc
could hold its ground no otherwise than from the difficulty
of erasing it from the popular belief: yet so uncomfort
able a doctrine, one should think, might be removed with
very little trouble.
Nay, Jeus was even invited to help forward, as it were,,
its discredit, had it been only a delusion. A Father*"
mistook his Son s disorder to be LUNACY, when, accord
ing to the Historian, it was a DIABOLIC POSSESSION".
And as such, Jesus treats it. He rebukes the DEVIL,
v//0 departed out of the Child, and he was cured from
that very /war. And to prevent all mistake in this
matter, when the Father had told Jesus that his Disciples
could not cure the Child, our Lord, .after upbraiding his
followers for their leant of fait h> tells them, however,,
that tliis miracle tot dispossession^ the most difficult of all,
Enquired a move extraordinary preparation for the work,
than any other, by acts of piety and humiliation. For
which assertion an obvious reason may be assigned, this
victory over Satan being a certain mark, that the Redemp*
xvii, 15.
ggG THE DIVINE LEGATION
tion was completed and accomplished, this evidence of
it was fitly reserved to be bestowed on the mo;-? peri- ct
of the followers of Christ. Yet had the Satanic part
been only a popular fancy, Jesu- ;, i ue~
cried it with advantage, while he had the Father of the
sufferer on his side; who considered his Son s disease as
a Lunacy only.
It may be said, perhaps, [hat the Doctrines of a -future
state, and that of Demoniacal p(jsse&--,wns y which I put
upon the same footing of Credibility (because the Gospel
Lath so put them), differ in this, ,that.a t /)t /we: state may
be proved by natural rtt$^ y &hichtDeniwuacalp6$s&$$iotit
cannot. But what doth this objection infer more thsm
this ? that a Juture .stale makes part of NATURAL
HELJGION; and Demoniacal possessions ^ a part of ttiQ
KEVEALED.
2. The ingenuous Discourser brings another objection
to these pes#es$ wM Having collected together all the
SYMPTOMS of this disorder, from Matthew, Mark, and
Luke, he concludes thus " All these are tbeSyffiptom}
" of a natural disorder. r \ Ijey are more surprising,
" indeed, than thoeeof other disorders, yet nothing super-
* e natural*." Hislearned Fellow Collegiate, Dr., 7. Frtind,
treating the- same subject, alter he hath given us, from
JEtius and Oribasius, a description of the ma dness
called Lyeanthropif, of which, one of the most strik
ing SYMPTOMS was a fondness to wander wndngst* ttt
Sepulchres of the dead, adds the Demoniac in the
Script urex, who was POSSESSED WITH A LTKE SORT
OF MADNESS, is represented as hfrciitg his dw cUing
amongst the Tomb,r\:
The opinion of these two learned Naturalists is founded,
\ve see, in this circumstance " that the Symptoim of a
* c demoniacal possession are the same with "those of some
" natural disorders."
* Insanprum sunt ba^c omnia ; utnsm vero a Daemoniis, an vi
rnorhi provenerint, disceplatnr neqt -CM^ninj alius qiiisqtiain inter om-
nes, qui huii .anijm genus infestant, morbub tarn naturae vim excedcre
\idetur. p. 66.
f Hist, of Physic, Part I. pp. 1621.
But
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 397
mti>Gt no Vj it evil spirits were permitted to disturb
the vitul functions of the human frame, whether in
the solids, th-3 ir.iids, or in both together; can we have
any conception how this co^H be effected -without
TI-T or occasioning, in 3Up&UfitUflal disorder*) the very
same SYMPTOMS which accompany n-itural maladies?
These Symptoms, in both cases, must arise from the dis
turbance of the material Frame, and can arise no other
wise; an I tho/e disturbances, whether produced by a
spiritual Agent, or by material causes, must produce the
sa-ne sensible effects. Madness, for instance, whether
occasioned by the malignity of an intelligent Agent ab
extra, or by discordant honours ab infra, will be .still
madness, -A^ accompanied with the same Symptoms. That
appearance, therefore, which must accompany a Demo
niacal possession, IF RKAL, can never by any rules of logic
be converted into a reasonable argument for the falsehood
of such a possession.
It is worth observation, that one of the Evangelists
being a Physician, our learned Critic, by a very becoming
partiality, prefers him to the rest. t: LUKE (Le tells us)
being superior to them for the purity and accuracy of
his expression, when there is occasion to speak of distem
pers, or of the cure of them ; and is more particular in
reciting alt the miracles of our Saviour in relation to
healing, than the other Evangelists are*.
All this is true ; and yet ^ t. Luke speaks the very same
language with the rest concerning demoniacal possessions.
Now if the Gospel Demoniacs were men only labouring
under -natural disorders, a Physician, by his deeper insight
into Nature, with the assistance of inspiration to boot,
was very likely to have discovered the mistake ; and for
the glory of his art as likely to have recorded ic : espe
cially as the detection of it was the overturning a hurtful
Superstition. And we know how ready these benevolent
Gentlemen have ever been to detect VULGAR ERRORS.
"Not to insist, at present, that St. Luke was guided, in so
good a work, by a stronger passion than honour for his
frojemon, as a Physician, that is, a love j or truth, as au
Evangelist
* Ib. pp. 223 225,
This,
395 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IX.
This, as we say, must have been the case in duzlrtti*
possessions, wliere the Body only was thus supernaturaHy
affected. Yet in those, where the mind alone, or equally
xvith ttie body, suffered by these disorders, I confess, we
might expect some extraordinary marks or symptoms of
supernatural Agency, when it was for the purpose of the
EVIL SPIRIT to display his Power. Here the immaterial
principle wiihin us affords larger room, and more con
veniences to be acted upon, by an exterior agent: although
the irregular etlbrts of the mind itself are so wouderful as
to be frequently mistaken for a foreign agency.
Yet this notwithstanding, there are, in these mental
disorders, powers exhibited, that can never be mistaken,
by a careful observer, for its men.
Some of which, are, in fact, recorded to have been
exerted; in order, as it were, to confute the.se learned
men, who seem to think we ought to reject all diabolic
possessions but such as are ascertained by Symptoms
supernatural.
An instance of such we have in* the Dam-sd possessed
tt ith the Spirit of DIVINATIOX, who brought her Master
much gain by SOOTH SAYING. This Woman, Paul dis-r
possessed, and so spoiled her Master s trade; who there
upon raised a fierce persecution against the Apostle.
The symptoms of Divbwtion and SoQths&yuig, that is,
telling of things absent, and foretelling things future, were,
certainly supernatural ; and, for such, must be acknow
ledged by the Objectors; who I hope will not yet forget
the Personages, they have assumed, of Believers : against
\vhom only this reasoning on the Demoniacs is directed
and addressed.
Having now seen what these learned Wiiters have to
oppose to my System of the Gospel- Demoniacs:
i crave leave, in the next place, to bespeak their atten
tion to what I have to urge against theirs. Enough hath
been said to shew that this is no trifling or unimportant
O
Question.
The untoward consequences being these, which un
avoidably follow the Concession, that Jesus and his Dis-
* ActS XVi. l6, & 28C[.
ciplet
Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 399
ciples did only accommodate themselves to the fanciful and
superstitious opinions of the times, in placing natural dis
tempers in the visionary Class of Supernatural.
i . Unbelievers may conclude (and by too many they
will be supposed not to conclude amiss) that much ad
vantage is hereby gained over the Evidences of our
Faith. While it is believed, from the testimony of the
Evangelists, that Jesus cast out DeviU, and healed suck
as were possessed with them, that plausible subterfuge
against his miraculous cures, which pretends that th*
relief afforded * c
* See Sermon On the Fall of Satan, (vol. x. of this Edit.)
this Note.
*3* The Reader will phase to observe, that to the fol*
lowing INDEX, is subjoined an Alphabetical LIST of
AVTHORS, fyc. quoted in The DIVINE LEGATION ; which
quotations are not referred to in the Index.
I 40i ]
INDEX
TO THE
DIVINE LEGATION,
A.
A BIM E LJ^CH, account of him vol. iv. p. 8$
Abraham, a brief historical view of the call of God to him and
his family - - iii. 342
. by some authors taken for Zoroaster - - iv. 366
- supposed by M. Fourmont to be Cronon - iv. 438
- the true meaning of the blessing pronounced on him,
pointed out - v. 394
exposition of the history of the command to sacrifice his
son Isaac - vi. 3 24
explanation of " Our Father Abraham wished to see my
day" - - vi. 6
- summary of his history - - vi. 10
the import of God s revelation to him explained - vi. 14
in what sense said by Christ to have seen his day, vi. 23.31
reply to objections against the historical truth of his re
lation - - vi. 30
three distinct periods of his history pointed out - vi. 32
an advocate for toleration - vi. 148
summary of his history - - vi. 185
Abraxas, (Egyptian Amulet) described - iv. 176
Academics and Pyrrhonians, their principles compared, iii. 47
Academies, Greek, their founders and various sects - ibid.
on what principles erected - iii. 54
Academy O/d and Peripatetics, their conformity - iii. 140
Academy, Old and Nezv, thejr conformity - ii. 97
Actions, signal instance of divine .instruction converted by
them in the case of Abraham r r - vi. 3
typical and significative distinguished - - vi.45
their eloquence illustrated by an anecdote from the Spartaix
history - ,- vi, 168
and by another from the Roman history - vi. 169
VOL. VI, J) D
402 I N D E X T O
Adoption, account of the practice of, in ancient and moderti
times - - ii. QI
Adoration, Prideaux s account of the ancient form of, iv. igq
MmUianus, character of - - ii. 174
JEtieas* exposition of the story of his descent into hell, ii. 7^
- enquiry into the nature of the poem of the JEneid, ibid.
the image of a perfect lawgiver conveyed in him, ii. 85
persoijiiiiy alludes to Augustus - - ii. qS
description of his shield - ii. 160
JEsculapiuSf observation on the ancient story and character
of - - ii. 172
Africans, deductions from their knowledge of a future state
notwithstanding their barbarism - ii. 209
Alc&us, why confounded with Hercules - - iv. 229
Alexander the Great, the probable motive of his commu
nicating to his mother the secrets of the myste
ries - - ii. 26
the stones of the exploits of Bacchus and Hercules in
the Indies designed to aggrandize him - iv. 228
Allegories, often imputed when never intended - - ii. 206
< for what purpose introduced in the ancient Pagan
ism - - iii. 289
adopted by Christians in the interpretation of Scrip
ture - - iii. 293
controversial reflections on their nature with reference to
Job, and the Ode of Horace, " O Navis referunt" v. 447
religious, distinguished - vi. 48
- argument deduced from the general passion for, vi. 101
Alliance of Church and State, mutual inducements to enter
irfto - - - ii. 272
fundamental arl - - - - ii. 282
Alphabets, origin or, accounted for - - iv. 131. 153
political - ----- iv. 1 53
sacred - - - - - - - - iv. 157
reason for discrediting the notion of their invention by
the Israelites- - iv. 162
invention of, prior to the time of Moses - - ibid.
Hebrew, formed by Moses from an improvement on the
Egyptian - - iv. 163
America, remarks on the religion of the Natives of, i. 304
( is of, a good nursery for philosophers and free
thinkers - ii. 331
remarks on the language of - - iv. 413
Amos, a clear description of a particular providence quoted
from the book of - v. 137
Anatomy, practised and studied by the ancient Egyp
tians - - - iv. 103
Ancients, enquiry into their opinions concerning the immor
tality .of the soul - * - iii. 148
Animal
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 403
Animal food, Sir Isaac Newton s opinion of the introduction
of it into Egypt refuted - - iv. 267
Animal worship, origin .of, accounted for - - - iii. 280
true origin of, amongst the Egyptians - iv. 183 210
images of animals first worshipped - - - iv. 186
afterwards the animals themselves ,-.. - - iv. 188
- various opinions of the ancients of its origin - iv. 103
Amchariiis, St. anecdote of - - - 11.378
Antoninus, Emperor, motives on which he was desirous of
initiation in the Eicusinian mysteries - ii. 10
observations on his reflections on the Christians, ii. 315
his reflections on dv?atii\ - HH , - - iii. 104
his notion of the human soul - ;-...-- - iii. 167
Apis, the symbol of the Egyptian God Osiris ~ - iv. 18(3
Apollo, explanation of those oracles of his v> hicli were quoted
by Eusebius from Porphyry - - .*; - ii. 36
ji polio Pythian, bis oracles paralleled with the prophecies of
scripture, by Middleton - - vi. 54
Dr. ]\] iddieton s opinion exposed - ibid.
Apologue or Fable, its use in oratory - iv. 137
its analogy to hieroglyphic writing - - ibid.
its improvement and contraction in simile and meta
phor - iv. 138
its change to parable . - - - iv. 167
Apotheosis, Civil, the origin of - i. 307
when bestowed on deceased heroes among the Egyp
tians - - iv.^2o8
Apuldus, general intention of his metamorphosis - ii. 163
his personal character - - .ii. 171
enquiry into his prejudices against Christianity - ii. 1 74
< his motives for defending Paganism and mysteries, ii. 179
foundation of his allegory of the Golden Ass - ii. 181
story of - - 11.182
moral of his story - - ii. 10,6
the corrupt state of the mysteries in his time - ii. 201
Arbitrary will, Zeno the patron of - - 1.240
Areopagus, practice of that court - - i. 149
< remarks on the nature of that jurisdiction - - ii. 277
conjectures on the first founding -of that court - ii. 320
Argument internal, defined - - /- v. 156
Aristophanes, review of the dispute between him and So
crates - > - j. 156
Aristotle, character of him and his philosophy - - iii. 100
his opinion of the hum an soul - *,.. - 111.163
his distinction between mind and intellect - .\. :-. -. ibid.
Ark, the fatal effects of amongst the Philistines - v. 64
Arthur, King, and William the Conqueror, the similar outlines
of their characters - ; - x , ,- iv. 222
D D 2 Article
404 INDEX TO
Article VII. of the Church of England, an exposition of, vi. 2
directed against the Manichean error - ibid.
Arts, the invento/s of, where placed in Elysium, by Vir
gil - ii. 148
Ass carries mysteries, origin of that proverb - ii. 101
momy Jewish, observations on -r - v. 361
Atheism, examination of Bayle s arguments for - i. 232
an examination of Plutarch s account of the origin of, iii. 228
Plutarch s parallel between it and superstition - iii. 230
Lord Bacon s parallel between it and superstition, iii. 253
Atheists, whether capable of distinguishing the moral dif
ference of good and evil - i. 232
whether deserving punishment from the hand of
God - - - - - i. 255
the effect of his principles on his conduct compared with
the fatalist - - i. 269
their moral conduct accounted for - - i. 270
summary of their dispute with the divines - - i. 295
their opinion of the human soul - iii. 148
Athenians, the most religious people of Greece, ii. 6 13
copy of their test oath - - - ii. 292
law relating to the introduction of foreign worship, ii. 319
- their behaviour in prosperity aRd adversity - - v. 340
Atomic theory, a Greek invention - - iii. 1/7. 214
Atossa, her invention of letters fabulous - - iv. 410
Attributes Divine, examination of Lord Bolingbroke s no
tions of - ii. 212
Augury of Safety, Dion Cassius s account of - - iii. 380.
Aurelius, Emperor, his opinion of the firmness of the Chris
tians - - iv. 3&
Austin, St. his ingenious definition of language and let
ters - iv. 133
Author, the proper objects of his writings - i. 171
on the knowledge of old ones from the phrases they make
use of - - - v. 310
from the scenery introduced - - v. 311
B.
Bacchanalian Rites, origin of the impieties committed in
them - ii. 62
representation of their Vigils - - ii. 164
Plutarch s account of their Vigils - - ii. 165
the Romans in their edicts x against them careful not to
violate the rights of toleration - ii. 32-3
Bacchus, oath of the priestesses of - - - ii. 293
his exploits in the Indies invented to aggrandize the glorjr
of Alexander - * - iv. 228
Bacchus*
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 405
Bacchus, his identy confounded with Osiris - - iv. 233
reusous for proving him to be Noah - - iv. 433
Bacon, Lord Chancellor, examination of his parallel between
atheism and superstition - iii. 253
Balaam, his prophecy, Numb. xxiv. 17, expounded - iv. 172
- observation on the story of his ass - - iv. 396
iiis wish to die the death of the righteous explained, v. 398
Banishment, how far a punishment for offences committed
against society - i. 211
Baptism, tbe importance of, established - v. 291
Baucis and Philemon, whence that fable derived - iii. 66
Bayle, his character as a writer *^ : - - i. 230
examination of his arguments to prove Atheism not de
structive to society j- - - i. 232
bis reflections on toleration - v. 23
Bembine Table, a description of it, contained in Ezekiel s
visions - ;:*;, - iv. 296
Bermet, secretary, bow brought into disgrace - - 1.157
Bentlcy, the real existence of Zaleucus, and the authenticity
of his remains defended against him - i. 324
Bible, how differently represented by Freethinkers, i. 178
summary view of - - - v. 175
&ee Scriptures.
Bolingbroke, Lord, vindication of divines from his charge of
confederating with Atheists - - - i. 290
examination of some of the principles of his first philoso
phy - ii. 212
Montesquieu s letter respecting him - - iii. 355
his observation on the insufficiency of the Mosaic law to
restrain the people, answered - v. 65
consequences of a law upon his principles - - v. 67
examination of his notion concerning the omission of the
doctrine of a future state in the M osaic Dispensation, v. 202
Bond, humorous anecdote of a forged one - iii. 191
Brute-worship, its symbolical nature explained - iv. 185
opinions of the ancients of the origin of it in Egypt, iv. 103
Bryant, his opinion of the origin of human sacrifices ex
ploded - - vi. 352
Buffoenry, observation on the tendency of it, illustrated
in the instances of Socrates and Lord Chancellor
Hyde - - i. 156, 157
Butler , ill effects resulting from his satire against fana
ticism ----- .* - -1.156"
C.
Cadmus, whence he obtained his alphabet - iv 163
Cesar, Julius, his disavowal of the belief of a future state, in
thc.senate - iii. 41
D D 3 Ccesar,
4o5 I N D E X T O
Cccsar, Julius, his account of the religion of ancieri
Gaul - -.--.. i v . 429.
of ancient Germany - - - - - iv. 432
Caff, Gohkn, what divinity represented by it - - iv. 20,0
Calves of Dan and Kethd, why the Jews were so invincibly
attached to them - - - iv. 203
why two of them erected by Jeroboam - iv. 297
Canaanites, why ordered to be exterminated - - iv. 284
Canadtam, remarks on their religion - i. 304
Cardan, his argument to prove the doctrine of the immor
tality of the soul destructive to society - i. 228
Casaubon, his account of the translation of the Pagan mys
teries into the Christian religion - - ii. 75
Caio, mentioned in the MnQis, enquiry whether the Censor
or of Utica - - ii. 163.
his reply to Caesar s- disavowal of the belief of a future
state, in the senate - - iii. 42
Cavalry, the situations, proper and improper for the use
of - - iv. 263
Caylus, Count, his opinions relating to the Egyptian cha
racters ------ . iv. 386
CelsttSf his character compared with that of Origen, ii. 4.
his remark on Plato s doctrine of a future state - iii. 07
Cerberus, in the JEneis,. explained - - ii. 123
Ceres, Eleusinian, her temple described - - ii. 157
her story - - - ii. 159
Vervantes, ill consequence resulting from his satire against
Knight Errantry - - i. 155
Chaos, a description of, from Berosirs - - ii. 116
Char/evoix, F. his sentiments rsepecting the civilization of the
North American Indians - - - - ii. 389
Charon, exposition of the character of, in the JEneis, ii. 122
Cheops king of Egypt, how he raised money for the erection
of his pyramids explained - - - - iv. 434
Children, the punishment of, for the crimes of their parents,
on what principle only to be vindicated - - iv. 20
Chinese language, an improvement of the ancient Egyptian
hieroglyphics - - iv. 123
Improvement of, to its present state - - iv. 124
its opposite progress from that of the Egyptian hierogly-
phical writing; to what owing - iv. 127
to what the different accounts we have received of it is
owing - - - - - - - iv. 128
account of, by M. Freret ----- ibid.
^ by P. Parennin - - iv. 129
by M. Gaubil - - - - - - ibid.
by P. Magaillans - - - - - iv. 130
- wliy not further improved - - - - iv. 133
hierogly phical marks not for words but things - iv. 144
r*~L*
Lhitme
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 407
Chinese langit&ge, Du Hulde s observations on - - iv. 174
the reverence of % the natives for their ancient cha
racters - - - iv. 179
the ancient characters of, greatly venerated by the na
tives - iv. 303
Chinese printing, Voltaire s account of - - iv. 389
Christ, remarks on the use he made of his twofold credentials,
scripture and miracles - - - - - vi. 9
made no use of traditions - *-- - ibid.
important argument drawn from his conversation with
two disciples in their journey to Euamaus alter his
resurrection - - vi. 39
-^- an exposition of his prophecy of his first and second
coming - - - - - - - vi. 6e
the use to be made of miracles and prophecies in proof of
his being the Messiah - vi. 205
the light in which he was held by Pilate - - vi. 215
redemption by, had a retrospect from the fall - vi. 268
an act of grace, not of debt - - vi. 269
- the means employed in that great work enquired
into * - vi. 271
his sacrifice on the cross considered - vi. 287
the Socinians opinion of the death of Christ exa
mined - - - - - - . -.-rvi. 300
his account of the last judgment examined - .-. vi. 313
the miracle of his resurrection considered - - vi. 326
his miracles of casting out devils or evil spirits, con
sidered - - - - ; - vi. 329
his miracles of healing natural diseases considered, vi. 331
his temptation considered" - -; vi. 332
Christian religion, how esteemed by the ancient Pagans, ii. 175
how the evils of persecution arose in it - ii. 310
- first received with complacency by the Pagans - ii. 312
first incurred hatred by claiming to be the only true re
ligion - V > .r. .- - ii. 313
occasion of its being persecuted - - ii. 314
character of by Tacitus t , s - >- ii. 315
persecuted both by good and bad princes - - ii. 379
the views and consequences of bringing in Pagan anti
quity to assist in defending it - - - - iii. 210
their nocturnal assemblies vindicated from the misrepre-
. sentations of Dr. Taylor,, chancellor of Lincoln, iv. 36
first occasion of the nocturnal assemblies of Christians, iv. 40
Pliny s doubts of the manner of proceeding against
Christians - iv. 45
* an enquiry into the methods taken by Providence to
propagate it - - iv. 314
the ignorance of the propagators, the means of advancing
it - s: - r - - iv. 315
D D 4 Christian
4o3 INDEX TOf
Christian religion, its doctrine shadowed under the rites of
the Mosaic law - - - v. 205
its evidences why not at all disclosed by Providence, vi. 40
and Judaism inseparable - - vi. 41
the ultimate end of Judaism - vi. 50
its nature and genius explained - - vi. 213
Chronology, Egyptian, a mistake of Sir Isaac Newton illus
trated by a case stated in similar circumstances, iv. 222
Church, its inducements for accepting an alliance with the
state - - - ii. 278
what it receives from the state - - ii. 283
what it communicates to the state - . - ii. 285
Cicero, his opinion of the end of the law - i. 342
his exposition of the Pagan theology - - ii. 29
his testimony in favour of the Eleusinian mysteries, ii. 57
his reply to Caesar s disavowment of a belief of a future
state, in the senate - - iii. 42
his opinion of academies - - jii. 49
his remark on the Phaedo of Plato - iii. 90-
the difficulties in coming to the knowledge of his real
sentiments of a future state of rewards and punish
ments - - - iii. 106
the various characters he sustained in his life and writ
ings - - iii. in
where his true sentiments are to be expected - iii. 114
his idea of the human soul - iii. 115
his opinion of the obligation of an oath, under the belief
of the immutability or the divine nature - - iii. 128
his account of the first advancer of the notion of
TO EV - - iii. 179
accused by Lactantius of duplicity - iii. 360
remarks on Middleton s Life of - - iii. 376
his account of the origin of brute worship contro
verted - - - iv. 194
Circumcision, a patriarchal institution - iv. 303
why appointed - - iv. 330
when first enjoined - - vi. 13
Citizen, how man cuglrt to be educated to make a good
one - - ii. 333
Claim of right andfreegift, the difference - vi. 269
Clemens Atexandrinus, his account of a remarkable symbolical
message sent to Darius - - iv. 136
his account of the Egyptian characters and writing corn-
pared with that of Porphyry - iv. 141
Chrc le, his notions of the Pythagorean metempsychosis
proved erroneous - - - iii. 81
- his opinion of the theocratic government of the Jews
confuted - - - v. 85
Clergy, abused by the Freethinkers - - i. 160
Clergy*
THE DIVINE LEGATION.
Clergy, the abuse of, an insult upon civil society - . 165
the abuse of, an evidence of a weak cause -
vindicated against Lord Bolingbroke -
their hard luck amongst modern Freethinkers
20
Collins, his ill treatment of his friend Locke - - . 162
inconsistencies in his writings -
the validity of his assertions, that new religions are always
grafted on old ones, &c. examined into - ~ y. 38
characterised as a writer ----- vi. 46
an examination of his discourse on the Grounds and
Reasons of the Christian Religion - - ibid.
his observations on the allegorical writings of the an
cients - - vi. 94
these observations shewn to refute his objections against
Christianity - - - vi. 96
Comets, their theory known by the ancient Egyptians, iii. 175
Commentators on scripture, points recommended to their at
tention - - v. 413
Condamine, his remarks on the Indians of America - ii. 331
Controversy, the arts of Freethinkers in - - i. 146
the mischief arising from carrying it on under assumed
characters - ~ - - i. 172
when this practice may be justifiable - - - i. 173
Cretans, celebrate their mysteries openly - - ii. 52
boast of Jupiter and other gods being born amongst
them - ..-,- ibid.
? the custom of adopting youth among - - - ii. 91
Critias of Athens, some account of, and a translatiou of his
Iambics - iii. 219
Crocodile^ why worshipped by the Egyptians - - iv. 186
Cromwell, his character contrasted with those of his associates,
Fleetwood, Lambert, and Vane - iii. 263
Cudworth, his testimony as to the ancient opinion of the soul s
immortality - ... iii. 153
corrected as to his observation on Plutarch - < Tii. 169
* the history of his Intellectual System - - - iv. 31
Cupid and Psyche, exposition of the fable of - - ii. 20*
Custom, remarkable instance from antiquity, of its power to
erase the strongest impressions of nature - - i. 25$
Customs, a" similarity of, observable among distant nations,
no argument of an actual communication betweea
them - - iv. 385
* traductive, an enquiry into " - iv. 363
D.
Dacier, his notion of the Pythagorean metempsychosit
erroneous - - iii. Si
Darius f Cyrus s dream respecting him ~ - - iv. 182
Dark
410 INDEX TO
Dark sayings, what that expression imports in scripture, iv. 168
David, why appointed to succeed Saul - - iv. 311
his title cf man after God s own heart explained - ibid,
-the chronology of facts relating to his introduction to
Saul rectified . _ - \\. 447
Dead men, origin of the worship of, traced - iii. 2<5q
Death, citations from the Stoics, shewing their notion s
concerning it _ jij. 303
Debtors, ancient and modern treatment of, compared, ii. 121
funeral rights denied to the ancient; whilst the modern
are buried alive - - _ - ii. 121
Dedication, of the second edition of Books I. IT. II F. of the
Divine Legation, to the Earl of Hardwicke - i. 137
to the Freethinkers - i. 141
of Books IV. V. VI. to Lord Mansfield - - iv i
of Books IV. V. VI. to the Jews - iv. 13
Dedications, absurdity of addressing them unsuitably, i. 141
Deification, when bestowed on any hero of the Egyp-
tians - - iv. 204
Deities, Pagan, whence derived - iii. 284
form of the ancient statues of, accounted for - iii. 285
their spurious offspring accounted for - - iv. 251
local and tutelary, their worship always maintained even by
sojourners and conquerors - v. 49
Democritus and Epicurus, their doctrine of matter com
pared - - - iii. 383
Demoniacs, the miracles of casting out devils or evil spirits
considered - - vi. 329
various opinions concerning them examined - vi. 301
Demons, whence the doctrine of the Pythagoreans and JPia-
tonists so full of - - iii. 142
Apuleius s account of - iii. 143
Des Cartes, not the inventor of the atomic philoso
phy - - - iii. 177. 214
Devoted, the command that. none devoted shall be redeemed,
examined - - - - - - - vi. 362
Dlagoras, consequence of his revealing the Orpheic and
Eleusinian mysteries - ii. 50
Dido, remarks on her character in the ^Eneis - - ii. 87
Dionysius Halicarnassus, his distinction between established
and tolerated religions among the ancients - ii. 324
Drama, its obligation to conform to nature in the delineation
of characters - - iii. 395
Dramatic writing, remarks on, with reference to the book of
Job - v. 303 308
Dreams, Artemidorus s division of, into speculative and alle
gorical - - - - - iv. 180
superstitions interpretation of - + ibid,
~- grounds of this species of divination - - - iv. 181
4 Earthquakes,
THE DIVINE LEGATION.
E.
Earthquakes, said by Pythagoras to be occasioned by a synod
ot.ghosm - - " - - - - 111,38
predicted by the taste of well water - ibid
on the predicting of - in. 36*2
Egypt, the mysteries first instituted there - - ii. 70
by whom carried abroad - - - - - ii. 73
a religions war in, and the occasion cf it - - ii. 304
original of animal worship in - ii, 306
the piace whence the Grecian legislators^ naturalists, and
philosophers, derived their knowledge - hi, 32
an enquiry into the state of the learning and superstitioa
of, in the time of Moses - - iv. 79
why entitled to priority among civilized nations - iv. 86>
scripture account of - - iv. 87
the antiquity and power of, as delivered in the Grecian
writers, confirmed by scripture - - iv. 89
civil arts of - iv. 95
a critical enquiry into the military usages of, at the tnne
of the Trojan war - - - - - iy. 258
abounding in horses before the conquest of Libya, iv. 259
- why the Israelites were prohibited, carrying horses
from - - - - - - iv. 261
the laws of Moses why accommodated to the prejudices of
the Jews, in favour of - - - , . - , iv. 2oc$
the ancient school of legislation - - iv, 354
fundamental maxims in the religious policy of - iv. 355
hereditary despotism preferred there - ibid.
- the government not rendered despotic by Joseph, iv. 373
Egyptian characters^irditT and Count Caylus, their opinions
concerning ------ iv. 147. 386
Egyptian heroes, the reason why the later obtained the names
oi their earlier gods, explained - iv. 223
Egyptian hieroglyphics^ how they came to be, and to conceal
their learning - v.V- - - iv. 140
curiological and tropical - ".._- -,,.. - iv. 145
symbolic - - iv. 148
their change of their style effected by this latter application
of them ,: - ;, - ibid*
Egyptian husbandry, anecdote of - i. iSa
Egyptian idolatry, described in EzekieFs visions - iv. 20,4
Egyptian learning, that mentioned in scripture, and that men
tioned in a corresponding manner by the Greek writers,
the same - iv. $4
no distinct division of the sciences in - - iv. 104
how preserved from the knowledge of the people by me
priests - - - - - - - - iv. joc>
summary of .. - - v ~ ~ * - iv. 178
4t iNbfiX TO
Egyptian physicians, confined to distinct branches of the
medical art - - i v . 0,5
their preventive method of practice - - i\. or>
their number accounted for - - 97
confined to distinct branches of the medical art, ivvibi-
proved to compose an order of the priesthood - iv. 104
Egyptian priest hood, account of, from Diodorus Siculus, iv. 90
confirmed by Moses - - iv. gi
their rites - - - iv. 94
Egyptian writing, the four kinds of - iv. 141
Egyptians, a people most celebrated for the cultivation of
religion - - - i. 302
- celebrated for religion in the most early times ; their priests
also their judges and magistrates - - iii. 29
- examination into the degree of their scientific know
ledge - - iii. 175
in what their wisdom more especially consisted - iii. 177
among the first who taught the immortality of the
soul - - iii. 184
why subject to incurable diseases * - iv. qg
their funeral rites - - iv. 113
their sacred dialect - - iv. 165
-origin of animal worship among - - - iv. 183
worshippers of plants - - iv. 184
of chimerical beings - - - - iv. 185
- local animal deities, among - - ibid.
their charge against the Grecians of stealing their gods;
with their mutual recriminations - - iv. 250
JZleusinian mysteries, the general purpose of their institu
tion - - - ii. 7
requisites for initiation into them ii. Q
initiation into, deemed as necessary among the Pagans, as
baptism among Christians - - - - ii. 13
why kept secret - - ii. 14
the greater and the less - - ii. 16
enquiry into the doctrines taught in the greater - ii. 17
negatively - ii. 18
positively - ii. 20
why aspired to, by considerable personages - - ii. 24
a detection of Polytheism - - ibid.
why the unity of deity concealed in them - - ii. 25
the history narrated in them, what - - ii. 44
the hymn sung at - ii. 45
how they became corrupted - ii. 591
why abused by the Fathers - - - ii. 66*
under the inspection of the civil magistrate - ii. 67
transferred intp the Christian religion - - ii. 69
of the Egyptians and Grecians., the same - - ii 70
where invented - - - - - - - ii. 72
Eleusinian
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 415
Eleusinian mysteries, by whom - - - * ii. 74
- offices in the celebration of - ibid.
taught a future state of rewards and punishments, ii. 7?
--- initiation into, represented by poets allegorically, by de
scent into Hell -r - ii. 96
r initiation into, compared with death - ; -*. ^ - ii. 152
.- alluded to by Solomon in Ecclus. ch. iv. 17, 18 - ii. 153
the celebration of, a drama of the history of Ceres, ii. 158
-* the riles of, contained in the Golden .Ass of Apu-
leius - r . f ii. 191
T magic rites in the corrupt state of - ii. 201
Elias, the sense in which he was predicted to come before
the day of the Messiah ascertained - vi. 78
JZIihiit why distinguished from the other friends of Job, v. 362
his character - * v. 366
Elijah) the difference of the account of his translation and
Enoch s accounted for - >. - . - v. 162
JZlisha, exposition of the adventure between him and
Joash - - vi. 193
Eloquence, denned by Milton - iv. i
Elysium, the description of in Virgil, preferred to that in
Homer - ii. 146
the several stations allotted to the happy by Virgil, ii. 347
Embalming, the Egyptian method of - - iv. 101. 113
this operation performed by the physicians, and the
reason -r r - iv. 103
the antiquity of the general practice of, proved - iv. 114
Enigmas, required in the nature of God s dispensation to the
Jews - r - - iv. 168
Enoch) the difference between the account of his translation
and that of Elijah accounted for - v. 163
Enthusiasm and fraud, the union of accounted for - iii. 261
Epic poetry, Homer, Virgil, and Milton, the triumvirate
of - ii. 95
Epictetus, his notion of death - iii. 103
Epicurus, his doctrine of matter compared with that of De-
mocrittis r r iii. 380
Epistolic writing, account of the origin of - iv. 153
Error, ridicule the proper means of detecting - i. 186
Essential differences, Aristotle the patron of i. 240
Establishments in religion, advantages of iv. 7
Eucharistical sacrifice, origin and nature of, explained, vi. 275
Euhemerus, how subjected to the imputation of Atheism, ii. 51
examination of his conduct in disclosing the secrets of the
mysteries - - iii. 287
Evander, observation on Virgil s account of his court, ii. 89
Eve, the creation of enquired into - - vi. 236
fivremoud, St. examination of his remarks on the characters
in the /Ejaeis - - :,i: - ii. 85
Exodus,
414 INDEX TO
$xo$zs, ill. 14, and vi. 3, expounded - - iv. 286
J&xpiatoiy sacrijice, origin and nature of it explained, vi. 276
Jtizekie/, and Jeremiah, the actions recorded to be performed
by .them to illustrate their prophecies accounted For, iv. 1 33
his famous visions, chap. 8, relating to the Jewish idolatry
expounded - - iv. 204
- God s reproaches to the Jews for their perverseness and
disobedience, delivered by him - iv. 331
the celebrated prophecy in his soth chapter ex
plained - - iv. 336
his representation of the Jewish idolatry - v. 56. 60
quotations from, in confirmation of a particular provi
dence - v. 137
a passage in, predictire of the new dispensation - ?. 165
his vision of the dry bones explained - v. 381
Ezra, his writings pointed out - v. 370
supposed to be the writer of the book of Job - ibid,
also the books of Chronicles and Esther - - ibid.
by tradition among the Jews, the same person as Ma-
iachi -------- ibid.
enquiry who hevwas - - vi. 151
supposed io be the writer of the book of Job - ibid*
F,
Fables, ancient, an enquiry into the origin of - iii. 64
Faith, summary view of the disputes between it and mora
lity -. - iii. 387
defined from St. Paul - - - v. 428
the condition of the new covenant considered - vi. 305
St. Paul and St. James s accounts reconciled - vi. 311
Fall, enquired into - vi. 255
t<tUely condemned, their being assigned to purgatory ac
counted for - ii. 130
Fanaticism, ill effect resulting from Butler s satire against
fanaticism - - - i. 156
fatalists, the influence of the principles on the conduct of,
compared with that of the Atheists - i. 2439
Fathers, Christian, enquiry into their sentiments of the hu
man soul - .-_-- iii. 157
Fiction, from what motive employed by the ancient law
givers - ----- iv. 456
Figurative expressions, origin of - - - iv. 170. 173
First philosophy, vccording to Lord Bolingbroke - ii. 212
according to San.cbo Panca - - - - ii. 215
Fleetwpod, Gen. his character - - iii. 263
Fool, its import in the Old Testament language - v. 340
i o ji it ures, remarks on the laws of, in cases of high
treason ------- v - l $9
Forgery,
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 415
Forgery, marks of, in ancient writings - i. 329
opposed to forgery by the primitive apologists for Chris
tianity - - iii. ^91
Foster, his notions of the Jewish theocracy examined, v. 30
Fourmont, M. his mistake of the identity of Abraham with
Cronos corrected - - iv. 438
Fraud, opposed to fraud by the primitive apologists - iii. 190
and enthusiasm, the union of accounted ibr - iii. 261
Free gift and claim of right, the difference between - vi. 269
Freetfyirikers, proper estimation of that character - i. 142
- their complaints of the want of liberty ill-founded, i. 144
- their principal abuses of liberty pointed out - i. 147
in classic times would have been styled enemies to their
country -* * i. 359
- their abuse of the clergy - - - i. 160
: this abuse the evidence of a weak cause - - i. 167
their professions and their practice compared - i. 168
the multifarious characters they assume - ; *.- i. 172
- both dogmatists and sceptics - . - i. 176
Funeral rites, the great attention paid to them by the an
cients - ii. i IQ
of the Egyptians, described from Herodotus - iv. 113
Future state of rewards and punishments, the doctrine of, ne
cessary to the well-being of civil society - i. 200 220
the importance of the doctrine of, to the well-being of
society, believed by all the wisest part of hiaiikind, i. 297
how taught in the mysteries - ii. 7
the ancient legislators unanimous in the propagating the
belief of - ii. 323
the sages as unanimous in propagating the belief of - ibid.
the sages as unanimous in thinking the doctrine of, ne
cessary to the well-being of society -, - iii. i
Lord Shaftesbury s opinion of - iii. 9
- sentiments of theistical philosophers on - - iii. 12
sentiments of antiquity on the use of to society - iii. 13
Caesar s disbelief of, with Cato and Cicero s answers to
him - - iii. 41
of all the "ancient Greek philosophers only believed b-y
Socrates - iii, 47
* from what causes disbelieved by the ancient Greek phi
losophers - iii. 125
considered as a moral designation, as necessarily implying
punishments as rewards *" - 11^135
its being disbelieved by the wisest of the ancients, no dis
credit to the Christian doctrine of - >-, - iii. 208
* not of the number of those doctrines taught by natural
religion " - - iii. 210
the benefits of that doctrine to the Gen-tile world, iii. 326
* supplied to the Jews by an ex traordinary providence - ibid.
Future
INDEX TO
lutuqe state, no part of the Mosaic dispensation - v. j 58
purposely omitted in the Mosaic dispensation - v. 161
the want of how supplied - v. 164
strongly inculcated by the Suevi and Arabs - v. 177
positive declarations against the expectation of, instanced
from the- Jewish writers - - v. 178
~ corroborated by the New Testament writers - v. 186
^examination of Lord Bolingbroke s notion on the omission
of that doctrine in the Mosaic dispensation - v. 202
< the doctrine of deducible by natural reasons - v. 225
a review of the prejudices which have induced to the
belief that it was taught in the Mosaic dispensation, v. 289
that taught by natural religion to be distinguished from
that taught by the Christian Revelation - v. 291
r its mention by Moses and by the following writers to be
distinguished - v, 296
a review of those passages in scripture urged to prove that
it was taught in the Mosaic dispensation v. 384
a list of texts urged by the rabbins in proof of its being
taught under the Mosaic law - v. 414
< an examination of the arguments founded on the nth
chapter of the Hebrews, to shew that it was taught by
Moses v. 428
that it was -not taught in the Mosaic law, confirmed by
the authorities of Grotius, Eprscopius, Arnaud, and Bp.
Bull - v. 441
* Dr. Rutherforth s opinion, of Moses not being studious to
conceal this doctrine, examined - v. 480
not contained in the Mosaic dispensation - - vi. io
this omission a proof of its divine origin - ibid.
brought to li-ght by the Gospel alone - vi. 233
the origin and progress of that opinion enquired
into - - - vi. 250
* a free gift not a claim of right ~ - - vi. 269
G,
Gathered to the people, that phrase explained - v. 387
Gaul, ancient, enquiry into the deities of iv. 237
Geometry, on the origin of - - iv. 270
"frermany, ancient, Caesar s account of the gods of - iv. 452
G/i/cho, account of the mysteries of - ii. 159
God, note on the various opinions of the human nature
of - i. 349
examination of Lord Bolingbroke s notions of the divine
attributes - - - - - ii. 21 1
the disbelief of a future state of rewards and punishments
founded by the Greek philosophers on his immuta
bility - - - - r f r. ^ - iii. 127
God,
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 417
God, whether endowed with human passions- - iii. 732
the distinction made hy philosophers between the good
and thcjust - iii. 133
- a censure of those who estimate his decrees by the stand
ard of their own ideas - - iii. 329
- the only means of preserving the doctrine of his unity, v. 3
God of Israel, why he gave himself a name to the
Jews - - - iv. 28 ^
the relation in which he stood to the Jewish people, v. 25
why represented with human affections - v. 20
not less benign to man under the Law, than under tho
Gospel - - - - ibid.
- how considered by the neighbouring nations - v. 3.6
his character as the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of
Jacob, explained, and the mistakes concerning this text
pointed out - - - - - -v. 416
Gods of the Pagans, bad consequences of the vicious exam
ples of- - ji. 21
who they were, explained ii. 23
three systems concerning - ii. 25
the fear of amongst the Romans - - iii. 3
the necessity of a fear of to society - - iii. 10
how so many immoralities came to be recorded of
them ------ ^ ( ~ jv, 2o5
account of the origin of local tutelary ones in Greece,
from Plato - - iv. 235
Golden /I S3 of Apuleim, the moral of - .- - -^ ii. 108
the foundation of that allegory - .,-. ii. 281
story^of - - " - , :. ,/.. - ii. 282
Golden Bough, in the Mnels, meaning of - i?. 106
Golden Calf, account of it omitted b} Josephus - v. 250
Good, natural, requires human industry to prep-are and ap
ply it - - - ii. 266
Gospel, the moral precepts of, the same with those of natural
religion - . -< ,-/. - -, i. 286
no justification by works under -.- - ( - + v. 436
its nature and genius considered . ; * i* - vi. 234
Grace, enquiry into the system of - V; . - vi. 221
Greece, when dead men first, began to be deified there, i. 308
the learning of, derived from Egypt .-.!- iii. 32
much given to speculative legislation -.r - iii, QA
J& * O "
remarks on the species of philosophy cultivated
tnere . . ~ " - iii- 35
the religion of traced down to its original - ;. iv. 233
what it borrowed from Egypt - iv, 236
the three distinguished periods in the religion of - iv. 248
.charged by the Egyptians with stealing their gods, iv. 250
ignorant of the use of cavalry at the time of the Trojan
war - - - . iv. 250
VOL. VI, E & Grecian,
4iS INDEX TO
Grecian fiislory, their accounts no otherwise to be credited
than as corroborated by scripture - - iv. 85
an enquiry into the validity of their testimony concerning
the antiquity of the Egyptian monarchy ibid.
the confused chronology of the early part of, re
marked - - iv. 2iQ
Gveek-philotopky, a twofold doctrine taught in, external and
internal - - hi. 20
account of from Macrobius - iii. 23
progress of - iii. 32
Green-land women, their language a refinement an that of the
men - - iv. 408
Grey, Dr. his notions concerning the book of Job contro
verted - v. 321
examination of his objections to the author of the D. L.
account of the book of Job - v. 457
Grotius, his fatal misinterpretations of the Jewish prophecies
shewn - vi. 92
H.
Hades, its different senses in the Old and New Testaments
pointed out ... v . 280
JIagar, why she named the angel who appeared to her
Elroi - - iv. 285
Ilalde da, his remarks on the style of the Chinese lan
guage - iv. 174
Happiness, the pursuit of, not the obligation to morality, i. 2407
Hare, Bp. his tract on the Difficulties and Discouragements
which attend the Study of the Scriptures misunder
stood - i. 144
character of him - iv. 33
his censure ofjosephus - - v. 129
Hebrew, the uncertainty of that language - - vi. 153
Hebrew Alphabet, whence derived - iv. 163
when the points were added to it - iv. 164
Hebrews, the argument of St. Paul s Epistle to, stated, v. 428
Hecate of the Greeks, account of - ii. 118
Heliopolis, the most famous college of the ancient Egyptian
priests - - iv. 91
- the worship established there - - iv. 93
Hell, its different meanings in the Old and in the New Tes
taments. - - - v. 405
Hercules, story of his interview with Jupiter - - iv, 19*
the ancient Egyptian, account why there were so many of
.that name - - iv, 224
Heresies, TermlHatis account of the origin of - iii. 199
Hermes Trismegistus, history of the books forged in the
of * - iii. i8S
Hero*
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 419
Hero-worship , the origin of traced * - iii. 277
complicated in its rites ----- iii. 278
- source of the low elate of - - - iv. 248
Herod, the cause of his supposing Jesus to be John the
Baptist risen from the dead, explained - - vi. 308
Herodotus, his opinion of the origin of geometry, iv. 276
Heroes, lives of, compared - - iv. 221
Heroes of antiquity, their characters compounded of enthusiasm
and craft - - iii. 259
Hetaritf, (assemblies of the primitive Christians), the nature
of, explained ; when and by whom suppressed, iv. 65
Ilezekiah, the name he gave to the brazen serpent accounted
for - iv. 437
detail of God s dealing with him - - v. 315
Hieroglyphics^ the first essay towards the art of writing, iv. 116
found in use amongst the Mexicans by the Spa
niards - <,,--- iv. 117
found in Siberia - - iv. 119
this picturesque method cf expression abridged by the
Egyptians - - " - - iv. 1 20
brief view of their types and allusions ibid.
mythologic account of the origin of - __- > - iv. 122
improved in the Chinese language - - iv. 123
source of the different genius of, from the Chinese cha
racters - iv. 127
stood for things, and not for sounds - - iv. 130. 186*
- used by all nations - - , r *, iv. 131
how they caine to be applied by the Egyptians to conceal
their learning - . iv. 140
their Influence on language - - iv. 174
the origin of brute-worship - ? ^< iv. 183. 186
on the origin and progress of - - vi. 170
Hierophant, of the mysteries, his office - :- iv. 1Q2
Hippocrates, his opinion of the Cnidian sentences - iv. 107
deductions from, as to the ancient practice of phy
sic - iv. 108
author of the diaetetic part of medicine - /- iv. in
Holy Spirit, enquiry into the nature, office, and operations
of _" vi. 3^7
Homer, excelled by Virgil in the description of Ely
sium - - - - ii. 146
his representations of the ancient Greek physicians ascer
tained and accounted for - - iv. 10^
whence he collected his materials - - iv. 434
Hooker, h s sentiments of the practical use of religion iii. 31 1
; his censure of those who estimate the dispensations of
Providence by the test of their own conceptions, iii. 329
Horace, the double sense in his famous ode, fe O navis referent?
&c. pointed out - * - - vi. 71
E E 2 Horeb f
420 INDEX TO
Iloreb, consequences of the contract therebetween God and
the Jewish peopie * - - - - - v. 2(5
Horses, not in use at the Trojan war - iv. 2^q
Egypt abounded with, before the conquest of Libya, iv. 260
Israelites forbid to fetch horses from Egypt - iv. 261
motives for the prohibition - ibid,
* Solomon s violation of the law punished - - iv. 262
- Judea not a proper country for the use or breeding
of - iv. 263
Hosea, his representation of the Jewish idolatry - v. 50
If act, his conjectures of the corruption of sacred history into
Pagan fables - iii. 65
Human sacrifices, the origin of, enquired into - - vi. 285
- Bryant s opinion of the origin of, exploded - vi. 352
Voltaire s opinion confuted - - vi. 350
: the command that " none devoted sJiaH be redeemed"
examined - - vi. 362
Hyde, Lord Chancellor, how brought into disgrace, i. 157
Hym?i, that sung by the Hie roph ants at the celebration of the
Eleusiniao mysteries, pointed out - - ii. 45
I.
Jallonski, notes on a passage in, contending that the Egyp
tian gods were not dead men deified - ii. 335
Jacob, his expressions to Pharaoh, Gen. xlvii. ver. 9, ex
plained - - v. 397
bis ejaculation to his sons, Gen. xlix. 18, explained, v. 398
bis wrestling with an angel, what intended by - vi. 26
shewn to be of a tolerating disposition - - vi. 148
Jamb fichus, note on a passage of - - - - i. 351
his opinion of the ancient mysteries - ii. 208
his account of the origin of brute-worship contro
verted - - iv. 197
James, his and St. Paul s account of justification on faith
reconciled - - - vi. 311
lapis, his character in Virgil not designed for Antonius
Musa - - - - ii. 167
Idolaters, the first intolerants - vi. 149
Idolatry, account of the rise of the three species of, from
Sanchoniatho - ii. 37
the progress of traced ----- iii. 270
enquiry where idolatry was punished, except under the
Jewish economy * - vi. 145
Idolatry of the Assyrians, transplanted into the Holy Land in
the room of the captive Jews, how punished - v. 51
view of the early spread of, by Calmet - v. 246
Idolatry Jewish, under what figures represented in the pro
phecies - - iv. 439
Idolatry
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 421
Idolatry Jewish, the extent of that crime, and how legally
punishable under the Jewish theocracy - v. 27
never proceeding from matters of conscience - v. 28
the sources of pointed out - v. 48
in what it consisted - - v. 52. 61
Jehovah, explanation of that name - - iv. 286
Jephthah, the story of his vmv considered - - vi. 365
Jeremiah and Ezekiel, the signs added by them to illustrate
their prophecies, accounted for - - iv. 133
his representation of the Jewish idolatry - - v. 55
a passage in, predictive of the new dispensation - v. 165
passages quoted froiD, predictive of the new dispensa
tion - - vi. 88
Jerusalem, the destruction of, as prophesied by Christ figu
ratively,, in a literal sense importing the destruction of
the world - - vi. 60
Jeics, how differently represented by Freethinkers - i. 177
- their religion, dogmatic theology - - ii. 30(3
why they became hated by their neighbours >, ii. 311
character of, by Tacitus - .- 11.315
how long they continued ignorant of a future slate, iii. 329
their religion syllogistically proved to be supported by an
extraordinary providence - - ..- jii. 332
a summary view of their religious history - <- iii. 342
- observations on their ritual or ceremonial law iii. 344
on the change of dispensation, prophesied by Jeremiah and.
other prophets - , -. ,. - ibid.
dedication of Books IV. V. VI. to them - - iv. 13
an examination into the motives which withhold them
from receiving Christianity - - - .,* iv, 16
arguments adapted to invalidate them ibid.
the subject of their naturalization argued - -. iv. 23
the repeal of the Naturalization Bill justified - iv. 25
~ the folly of deriving all arts, laws, and religion from them,
or denying them the production of any - - iv. 82
fond of Egyptian manners and superstitions - iv. 283
their obstinate attachment to the Egyptian customs and
superstitions historically traced - - - iv. 288
their expulsion from Egypt by Pharaoh denied - iv. 2qi
* - reproached in a signal manner for their ^erverseness and
disobedience, Ezekiel chap. xx. - - iv. 331
explanation of this celebrated chapter ~ - iv. 334
their propensity to idolatry accounted for - ~ iv. 354
under what figures their idolatry was represented, iv. 439
why their policy was seldom understood - - v. i
~ in what light their separation from the rest of mankind,
to be" considered - * v, 3
summary view of deliverance from Egypt in order to be
separated - ~ - " - v> 19
E E 3
422 INDEX TO
Jews, their theocracy established - v. 21
thc ir idolatry, not a rejection of the God of I rael, v. 53
how iong their theocratic form of government sub-
Sisted - v. 83
. their iirst kings the viceroys of God - ibid.
when their theocratic government was abolished - v. q6
^ at the coining of the Messiah - - v. 97
their ignorance of a future state under the Mosaic dispen-
: sation illustrated by the New Testament writers, v 186
whether subject to punishment in a future state under
the Mosaic dispensation - - v. 226
how long they continued ignorant of a future state, v. 281
whence their obstinate adherence to their abolished rites
proceeds - - v. 203
: their history supposed to be contained in the history of
Job - - v. 322
a surnmn.ry viesv of their history - v. 325
the bad consequence of their propensity toward marrying
idolatrous women - v. 341
reflections on the moral dispensations of God toward
them >r - v. 357
totally ignorant of a future state under the Mosaic dis-
pensation - - vi. 120. 132
Ignatius Loiofa, remarks on his character - - iii. 264.
Increase and multiply, that command considered - vi. 239
Infanticide, remarks on the custom of, among the an
cients, &c. - - ii. 128
on the practice of - -- - ii. 366
the origin and practice of, examined - vi. 285
the origin and progress of, considered - vi. 358
Infants, and men false h/ condemned, why consigned by Virgil
to purgatory - ii. 127
Infernal regions, a comment of Virgil s topography of, ii. 125
Injidelitiff propensity of the present age to - i. 142
an indiscriminate aversion to all the principles advanced
by - iv. 80
prejudicial to the defence of true religion ibid.
the proper method of disputing with - - ibid.
Instinct in mankind, how different from that quality in
brutes - i. 256
Invocation of the dead, enquiry concerning - - v. 482
Job, Book of, a critical enquiry into - v. 298
a dramatic composition - - v. 290
when written v. 306. 322. 324
observations on the imagery of - v. 311
a continual allusion to the Mosaic law throughout, v. 319
supposed to contain the history of the Jews - v. 322
the language of, compared to that of the American
Indians - ibid.
THE DIVINE LEGATION.
Job, Book of f the purpose of its composition pointed
out - - " v. 328
examination of the characters in the piece, v. 330. 346. 362
allegory of the story explained - v\ 330
reflection* on the character of Satan - v. 353
- enquiry concerning the author v. .^70
supposed to have been written by Ezra - - ibid.
enquiry whether " I know thai: my Redeemer liveth" Sec.
refers to a resurrection, or temporal deliverance only, v. 371
examination of Grey s objections to the author of the
I). L. account of the - - v. 457
enquiry into the antiquity of - >- v. 476
appendix concerning the - - vi. ^45
Job, bis real existence asserted - v. 305
his exemplary patience not founded on his written
story - v. 330
reflections on the character of his wife - > v. 339
reflections on the character of his friends - v. 346. 362
his persecution renewed by modern critics - v. 445
enquiry whether he put away his wife - -- v. 475
his opinion of Providence enquired into - - v. 477
Joel, the double senses in his prophecy pointed out, vi. 56. 61
John the Baptist, his mission and character explained, vi. 307
Joseph, prime minister of Egypt, married to ai daughter of
the priest of On - - - iv, 02
vindicated from the charge of rendering the government
of Egypt despotic - iv. 115
> inference drawn from his entertainment of his brethren,
concerning the use of animal food in Egypt - iv. 268
procures the property of all the land for Pharaoh, iv. 269
did not make the government of Egypt despotic, iv. 373
an eminent instance of the strength of natural affec
tion - - v. 302
Josephus, his character of the Jewish religion, with a refe
rence to the Pagan mysteries ii. 34
defended from the charge of disbelieving the miracles he
o o
relates - - - - - - -v. 124
the circumstances under which he wrote his history, v. 125
his deviations from scripture accounted for - v. 127
Joshua, clear state of the debate between him and the Jewish
people on the article of worship -r v. 54
Jothams parables, an instance of instruction by apologue
or fable - - iv. 137
observations on the story of - iv. 39(3
Xrony, ill consequences of the indiscriminate use of it, i. 169
Isaiah, his denunciations against the Israelites for bringing
horses from Egypt in violation of the Mosaic prohibi
tion - - iv. 263
his representation of the Jewish idolatry - v. 55. 58
4
424 INDEX TO
Isaiah, double senses, in his prophecies, explained - vi. 79
- his figurative prediction of the gospel dispensation, vi. 87
Isiac Table. See Bembine Table.
Isis, who - - ii. 180
and Osiris, under what similitudes worshipped - iv. 0,6
why adopted by the Athenians as the patroness of their
mysteries - iv. 243
the several attributes and characters ascribed to her, iv. 244
and Osiris, the patrons of the primitive arts - iv. 257
and Osiris, their mysteries described in Ezekiel s vi
sions - - iv. 295
the cause of her bei ng worshipped under the figure of a
galley - - iv. 375
Israelites, why subject to few natural diseases - iv. 100
forbid by their la\v to fetch horses from Egypt - iv. 26.1
this law violated by Solomon, and punished - iv. 262
treated by God as moral agents - iv. 318
Henry s account of the stale of the arts among, in the
time of Moses - - -? iv. 413
Judaism, its characteristic distinction from all other reli
gions - iv. 74
Judea t not a proper country for the use of cavalry in, iv. 263
Voltaire s account of, examined v. 13
Judgment, Christ s account of it examined - ~ vi. 313
Judgment of Hercules, an allegoric piece to excite the youth
of Greece to virtue - - v. 471
\ Julian, JLmperor, his observations on the double doctrines
of the Greek philosophers - - in. 98
the miracle of his being defeated in his attempt to re
build the Temple considered - * vi. 335
Jupiter, only one deity though known by many local tutelar
appellations - ? - - - ii. 369
a local deity - - iv. 76
the stories of his adulteries founded in truth - iv. 206
Jupiter Amman , moral of the Egyptian fable concerning, ii.3
Justice, the pure stream of in England - - iv. 10
Justijicali.cn by faith, explained - ^ vi. 305
St. Paul s arid St. James s accounts reconciled r vi. 311
K.
Kings of the Jexs, the viceroys of God r - v. 83
Klrcher, characterised as a writer - - - iv. 211
- his opinion concerning the Egyptian characters,
iv. 147. 386. 416
L.
JLactantitts, an examination of the argument of his treatise
De La Dei ? ? ? - * r iii. 131
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 425
Lamb, Paschal, a type of the future sacrifice of Christ, vi./J5-4S
Lambert, his character - - iii. 263
Language, a deduction of the origin of iv. 133
upheld at first by a mixture of words and signs - ibid.
its improvement by apologue or fable - - iv. 137
- its advance to elegance by the metaphor - - iv. 339
the revolutions of traced - iv. 166
Diodorus Siculus s account of the origin of - iv. 390
first taught by God - - iv. 391
Law, the two great sanctions of - - i. 210
Lawgiver, heroic, displayed in the character of /Eneas, ii. 85
- from what motive induced to have recourse to fiction, iv.456
Lawgivers, summary view of their conduct in the propa
gation of religion - - - - - - vi. 112
Law, Mosaic, the objections brought against the sufficiency
of it, in obtaining its end, equally valid against the law
of nature _"- v. 65
its provision against idolatry - * v. 70
. ause of its inefficacy - v. 71
its divine institution manifest in the dispensations of Pro
vidence toward the Jewish people - v. 78
- the primary intention of - v. 79
the temporal sanctions of not transferred into the Gos
pel - . v. 148
illustrations from the prophets of the temporal nature of
its sanctions - - v. 158
the Christian doctrine shadowed under the rites of, v. 295
* in what sense typical or spiritual - v. 388
not supposed by St. Paul to offer a future state to its
followers - v. 437
Lazes penal, to enforce opinions only equitable under a
theocracy - - - - v. 23
Lazarus, passages in the parable of explained, with reference
to arguments founded on them of a future state being
taught by Moses - v. 420
Legislation ancient, a divine interposition the very spirit
of - ii. 81
Legislators, and their pretended missions, an enumeration
of - 1.314
an enquiry into their motives - i-3 1 /
placed by Virgil in Elysium - ii 147
-~ however different from each other in other points, unani
mous in propagating the belief of a future state of re
wards and punishments - * - ii. 328
-!- compared with modern missionaries - ii. 333
always enthusiasts - * iii. 258
". never found a people without religion - - -iii. 309
Letters, whether entitled to patronage of the great - i. 191
* the history of * * - * iv. 116
Letter?^
I N D E X T O
Letters, the antiquity of among the Egyptians, inferred from
their mythoJogic derivation of them - - iv. 162
> the invention of, by Atossa, fabulous - - iv. 410
Lex Sacra, what ii. 360
Liberty, civil., too great an attention to the security of, sub
versive of religion iv. 2
Life, the promises of, under the Mosaic law, how to be un
derstood - v. 400. 408
XiV//, his character of Seipio Africanus - - iii. 397
Locke, Mr. his memory injured by his friend Collins - i. 162
his last word to Collins - - - i. 163
his observations on the Jewish theocracy - v. 25
JLorcTs Supper, the anti-type of the paschal lamb - ri. 292
the institution of, examined from St. Paul s sense of it, vi.2QO*
- Bossuet s objections to the p rote Hants opinion of the
figure of This is my body, by those of / am the vine, I am
the door, examined - vi. 385
Lot, his story supposed to be allegorised by Ovid in Baucis
and Philemon - - iii. 66
Love, Plato s account of the origin of - - vi. 237
Litcian, his opinion of death - iii. 105
- his account of the origin of brute-worship contro
verted - - - iv. 195
Lucius, story of his transformation, from the Golden Ass
of Apuleius T- ii. 182
Jjttxury, observations on the vague meaning of that word, i. 284
true definition of - - - - i. 287
Lycanthropy, a Grecian disorder, account of - - iii. 69
Lycurgus, his chief aim in the laws of Sparta - iv. 358-
Lyte, "anecdote relating to his conjectural notes touching the
origin of the University of Oxon, &c. - - iii. 386
M,
Macrobius, his account of the doctrines of Greek philoso
phers - - - * iii. 23
Magistrates, civil) their inducement to an alliance with the
Church t - ii. 272
; two conclusions drawn by believers and unbelievers, from
his large share in the establishment of ancient national
religions - iii, 221
Mahomet, the absurdity of his imitating Moses in the dis^
ti notion of meats, pointed out - iv. 321
h:j imitation of Moses in the union of civil and religious
policy - -s v. 26
the plan en which his religion was framed - v. 46. 81
to what his successes were chiefly pwing - ? v. 157
Mahometan writers, a character of v. 4*
how determined to actiou - i- 268
Man,
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 427
Man, in society described - - i. 277
an enquiry into the moral constitution of, as an individual,
and in society - - ii. 222
Man a tid woman, examination of the Mosaic account of, vi. 236
examination of the Command to increase and mul
tiply - - vi. 239
Mosaic account of their specific nature examined, vi. 241
their admission into Paradise - - vi. 243
thejr first religion acquired naturally - - vi. 244
their early acquisition of speech - - ihid.
- religion revealed to them in Paradise * - vi. 246
their condition under natural religion enquired into, vi. 248
their condition under reveaied religion enquired into, vi. 254
Matiaswh, detail of God s dealings with him - - v. 317
Mandeville, examination of his principle of private /ices
being public benefits - i. 281
his argument reduced to an absurdity - i. 287
Manicheans, Art. VII. of the Church of England directed
against them - vi. 3
Mansfield, Lord, Dedication of Books IV. V. VT, to him, iv. i
Mead, Dr. his opinion of Demoniacs examined - vi. 392
Medicine, the pans of, and when each obtained in use, iv. no
^ indication of the great antiquity of - - ibid.
Melk hizedec, observations on the story of - vi. 149
Metempsychosis, why taught in the mysteries - - ii. 151
the doctrine of, how employed by the ancients, iii. 67
and metamorphosis, difference between - - iii. 68
Pythagorean notion of - - - - - iii. 78
came originally from Egypt, and believed by all man
kind - - iii. 80
Plato s notion of ------ iii. 92
the dor-trine of, not the origin of brute-worship, iv. 194
Mexicans, remarks on the religion of i. 304
. their use of hieroglyphic writing illustrated by their man
ner of painting their prayers - - iv. 117
account of a Mexican history in the hieroglyphic
style - - - iv. 118
Mhhokek, the proper signification of that word pointed
out - -. v. 98
Middleton,, remarks on his Life of Cicero - - iii. 376
: his arguments of the derivation of Popish from Pagan
rites examined - - - - - iv. 46*0
his opinion of the gift of tongues exposed - - vi. 389
Milesian J ables, what - - - - ii. 181
Milton, remarks on the species of poetry in his Paradise
Lost - - ii. 95
Mind and intellect, the Aristotelian distinction - 111.163
Minerva, exposition of a famous hieroglyphical inscription
on her temple at Sa is - - iv. 147
Miracles,
4$ I N D E X T O
Miracles, evidences of an extraordinary providence over the
Jewish nation v. 123. 134
a necessary confirmation of the secondary senses of the
Jewish prophecies - - - - vi. 76
the DSC to be made of them in disputes - - vi. 20*
the testimony required for the belief of, vi. 320. 338
.what to be accounted miracles - - vi. 321
the only proof of a doctrine proceeding from God, vi. 323
of the resurrection of Christ t con?idered - - vi. 326
of casting out devils or evil spirits, considered - vi. 329
of healing natural diseases, considered - - vi. 331
< designed to defeat the designs of impious men, consi
dered - - vi. 335
M rlh, an enemy to chastity - ii. 185
JtftSJttjjwrn es, Catholic and Protestant, reasons of the ill success
of their missions ii. 328
compared with ancient lawgivers - ii. 333
Missions, pretended by ancient legislators, list of - i. 314
Molech, the meaning of giving seed to him - - v. 404
$I&nte$quieu, extract of a letter from, to the author, iii. 355
Moen, ils various symbols and attributes as represented in
the Pagan mythology, from the Golden Ass of Apu-
leius - - ii. 188
Moral sense, the foundation of - i. 233
Plato the patron of - - - - i. 240
Morality and faith, summary view of the disputes concern
ing - - - iii. 387
Moses, a list of Pagan gods and heroes supposed by Huet to
have arisen from the corruption of h ; s history, iii. 65
his account of the Egyptian priesthood, a confirmation of
those of the ancient Greek historians - - iv. 91
corroborates their account of the religious rites of
Egypt iv. 94
-of the funeral rites of Egypt - - iv. 114
of the division of the lands of Egypt - iv. 115
the former of the Hebrew alphabet, by an improvement of
the Egyptian characters - - iv. 163
the difference between contradicting the astronomy and
the history wrote by him - iv. 215
characters in the Pagan mythology supposed by some to
be intended for him - - - iv. 225
-one intention of his law, to prohibit all intercourse be
tween the Hebrews and the Egyptians - - iv. 261
r- his motives explained - - ibid.
the reason oi his unwillingness tp undertake his mis~
sion - -. - iv. 287
his laws accommodated to the prejudices of the Jews, in
favour of the Egyptian customs - r iv. 299
this no objection to the divinity of his mission - iv. 306
TH DIVINE LEGATION.
Moses, his knowledge in the Egyptian learning, and the laws
by him instituted, a confirmation of the divinity of his
mission - - 7 iv. 354
- answers to deistical objections against the divinity of his
mission - - - - iv. 356
vindicated from the supposition of having had recourse to
fiction in certain cases - - - iv. 456
his injunctions to the Jews against the local idolatry of the
Cutheans - v. 50
his injunctions to the Jews against the local idolatry of
Canaan - - v. 58
the omission of a fulure state in his law, intended, v. 161
two periods observable in his history - ibid.
the sense of his expressions relating the creation of man
ascertained - - v. 384
the veil over his face explained - - vi. 25
Mosaic Dispensation, not a complete religion - iii. 327
logically proved to be supported by an extraordinary pro
vidence ... - . iii. 332
on what principles the proof of it conducted - iii. 334
its limitation to a particular people no impeachment of the
impartiality of God towards mankind in general, iii. 340
summary estimate of - iii. 342
its divinity logically proved - vi. 107. 127
Mosaic ritual, the cause of the admission of sacrifices into it
considered - - vi. 285
Mosaic sacnfices, had types and also a moral import, vi. 283
Moses, Divine Legation of Demonstrated, the medium em
ployed to establish his Divine* Legation - i. IQJ
propositions on which this demonstration depends, i. 200
- summary view of the opposition* this performance met
with - - iv. 28
recapitulation of the argument proving his Divine Le
gation - - vi. 103
the length of it accounted for - - vi. 109
argument designed for the subject of Books VII. VIII. IX.
of the Divine Legation - - vi. 142. 233
Musa Antonius, not depicted by Virgil under the character
of lapis - ii. 167
Muskets, humorous story of a parcel of, with a logical
inference - - vi. 141
Mysteries, of the Pagan religion, for what purpose insti
tuted - - ii. i
what the original ones ii. 3
the Eleusinian - ii. 5
arguments in favour of - - * - - ii. 14
- who the first institurors of - ii. 72
the abuse of them in the Christian religion - ii. 352
- explanation of that term * - - - ii. 355
Mysteries,
430 I N D E X T O
Mysteries, Pagan, marks of their Egyptian original - iv. 93
. gummary view of * - - vi. 112
Mythology, ancient, ex plan at ion of - . - - iii. 272
the testimony not to be trusted, in ascertaining times and
facts - - - iv. 246
sources of the confusion in - iv. 247
MythraSy priests of, explanation of their names - ii. 26, 27
probationary trials previous to initiation into the mys
teries of - ii. 114
N*
"Nature, state of, and civil society, difference between, i. 209
enquiry into the systems of * vi. 227
Nebuchadnezzar, enquiry into his disorder - - iii. 69
Nero, Emperor, how deterred from attempting to intrude
upon the Eleusinian mysteries - ii. 9
Newton, Sir Isaac, his account of the origin of idolatry, i. 308
his system of idolatry controverted - iii. 270
his character as a natural philosopher - iv. 215
misled by Greek mythologists - ibid.
the argument of his Egyptian chronology - iv. 216
his reasons for the identity of Osiris and Sesostris, iv. 217
his mistake in this illustrated by a case stated in similar
terms - - ---iv. 221
the source of his mistake - - - - iv. 227
his hypothesis supported principally by two mythologic
fables - - * - iv. 249
mistakes the times -of the Pagan deities, compared with
the asra of the Trojan war - - iv. 251
his system of chronology contradictory to scripture, iv.256
his chronology refuted by deduction ibid.
his account of Vulcan, compared with thatof Homer,iv.259
his assertion of the conquest of Libya furnishing Egypt
with horses, invalidated - - iv. 259
his opinion of the time when the Egyptians introduced
animal food, refuted - - iv. 267
his period of the division of the lands of Egypt, dis
proved - - iv. 268
his account of the first introduction of letters into Egypt,
rejected - - - - - - - iv. 270
his observations relating to the populousness of Egypt,
examined - - - - - iv. 271
makes Sesostris to be Hercules - iv. 273
quotes j^Esculapius as the first who huilt with square
stones - - iv. 274
summary view of the dispute concerning the identity of
Osiris with Sesostris - iv. 275
Nile, the happy effects of its annual overflowings - iv. 87
4 Nisus,
THE DIVINE LEGATION, 431
Nisus, and Euryalus, remarks on the episode of, in the
/Eneis - ii. 9!
Noah, his character found to answer that of the Indian
Bacchus - iv. 433,
Nocturnal assemblies, of the primitive Christians, first oc
casion of - iv. 40
their antiquity among Pagans - - * - iv. 6 j
Nordeu, Capt. his mistaken conclusion, from a view of the
Pyramids, concerning the antiquity of the Egyptian
hieroglyphics, corrected ... iv. 404
O.
Oaths, of the citizens of Athens - ii, 292
of the priestesses of Bacchus - - ^ -* ii. 293
solemnly regarded by the Romans *< - - iii. 4
Cicero s opinion of the obligation to fulfil, under the
belief of the immutability of the deity - - iii. 128
Obelisks, of the aacient Egyptians, the public records of the
times - - iv. 145
Obligation, duties of perfect and imperfect, how distin
guished - . i. 208
Ombites and Tentyrites, occasion of the intolerant proceed
ings of - ii. 306
Omens, their admission into ancient history, accounted
for - - i. 312
two kinds of - , - ii. 82
On, some account of the priests of iv. 93
Ofiirocritic art, explained - - iv. i$o
whence the art of deciphering borrowed - - iv. 183
Oracles, the original motive, of consulting them - iv. 237
Origea and Celsus, comparative characters of - ii. 4
his account of the stoical renovation - - iii. 105
his misunderstandings of the promises of the Jewish law
pointed out - - v. 478
Osiris aad Sesostris, their identity controverted against Sir
Isaac Newton - - - iv. 218
who - - iv. 226
and Sesostris distinguished - - iv, 225. 230
account of, and his cortege, from JDiodorus Siculus, iv. 227
his symbols - - - iv. 233
proof of his antiquity equal to Moses - - ibid.
his superior antiquity to Sesostris ascertained - ibid.
- his various characters at different places, as expressed in
an epigram of Ausonius - iv. 244, 245
represented in the Golden Calf of the Egyptians, iv. 290
Orpheus, said to have been struck dead by lightning - ii. 66
where placed in Elysium by Virgil - ii. 147
Ovid, remarks on his Metamorphosis * ? - - iii. 61
Ovid s
43* INDEX TO
Ovid s Metamorphosis, a popular history of Providence, iii. 71
key to his poem - - iii. 75
-r Metamorphosis founded on the Metempsychosis, iii. 77
his account of Typhon s war with the gods - iv. iqo
Oxyrynchit and Cynopolita?, Plutarch s account of the re
ligious contest between * ii. 307
Paganism, chiefly founded in the deification of dead men, i. 306
ancient, the religion of the civil magistrate - i. 309
favourer of mysteries - - ii. 77
the genius of, considered as opposed to the true reli
gion - * - ii. 302
intercommunity of worship general in * ii. 303
Pan, how painted by the Egyptians - iv. 191
Pantomime, historical anecdote of the great expression of
one - - vi. 35
story of a famous one at Rome - vi. 169
Parable, the origin and nature of - - iv. 167
Parmenides, the philosopher, his public and private doc
trines - - iii. 21
Passover, Jewish, its typical meaning pointed out - vi. 55
Patriarchs, Jewish, shewn to be no punishers for opi
nions - - vi. 148
Patriots, where placed in Elysium by Virgil - - ii. 148
Paul, St. why brought before the court of Areopagus at
Athens * - ii. 319
why supposed not to be brought before that court ui a
criminal view - ii. 381
the sense of his words in Heb. xi.6, ascertained, iii. 322
for what purpose called to the Apostieship - iv. 316
citations from, in proof that the doctrine of a future state
was not known under the Mosaic dispensation, v. 186
that its sanctions were all temporal - v. 193
his sentiments of persecution before and after con
version - - - - v. 249
his definition of faith - v. 429
a seeming contradiction in, between Acts xiii. 32, and
lleb. xi. 39, reconciled - v. 433
an important passage in his Epistle to the Romans,
chap. viii. ver. 3, 4, expounded - v. 436
his account of the institution of the Lord s Supper,
examined - - vi. 296
his account of justification by faith reconciled to that of
James - vi. 311
Pelasgians, account of their adoption of the names of the
Egyptian gods, and application of them to their own
deities, from Herodotus - iv. 238
Pelasgiant,
THE DIVINE LEGATION 433
Pelasgians, communicate the names of the Egyptian gods to
the Greeks - - iv. 240
Perfection, the doctrine of, enquiry concerning it - vi. 310
Peripatetics, their notions of Providence - hi. 140
Peripatetics and Old Academy, their conformity - iii. 367
Persecution, for religiuus opinions, the true origin of,
traced - iv. 35. vi. 149
enquiry into the nativity of - iv. 51
frequently an engine of state - - - iv. 56
discountenanced by the Gospel dispensation - v. 249
Persians, why they had no statues of their gods - i. 308
their superstition described in Ezekiel s visions - iv. 298
Peruvians, remarks on the religion of i. 304
Peter, his vision of the clean and unclean beasts ex
plained > iv. 320
his double sense, pointed out - . - vi. 70
Pharmacy, general division of ,.-. iv. ill
Pharaoh, king of Egypt, the scripture account of - iv. 87
promotes Joseph - iv. 92
an illustration of the onirocriiic art, drawn from Joseph s
interpretation of his two dreams ;-/ - iv. 183
his chariots and cavalry in the pursuit of the Israel
ites - ,;, i -- r - iv. 260
Phertcydes Cyrus, the first advancer of the notion of the
TO EV - - - - iii. 179
Pheniciau superstition, described in EzekicFs visions, iv. 297
Philosophy, the study of, not ihe only business for which man
is sent into the world - - ii. 333
Philosophers, Greek, legislative, always professed belief in a
future state; mere philosophers the contrary - iii. 38
the causes which induced them to disbelieve a future state
of rewards and punishments - <*. iii. 125
ibeir conceptions of the soul - ",- iii. 148
Physic, critical enquiry into the state of, in ancient Egypt, iv. 95
Pirithous, account of the fable of his design to steal Pro
serpine from hell - - ii. 139
Planet-worship, the earliest species of idolatry - . -. iii. 273
the first religion of Greece ,,- < . iv. 234
Plants, worshipped by the Egyptians - - iv. 184
Plato, the proem to his laws - i. 344
his definition of sacrilege ,- -> - i. 345
the first of his laws - . ., i. 347
his public writing shewn to differ from his private sen
timents - - .; - iii. 21
a character of his politics and philosophy * . - iii. 85
Cicero s remarks on his Phsedo - iii. 90
in what sense an advocate for the immortality of the
soul - ..,- - . . - iii. Q2
~ his sentiments concerning the soul - iii. 161
Vot.VL FF Platonists,
434 i N D E X T O
Platonists, their notions of Providence - iii. 141
Pleasure, allegorical view of the dangers attending an indul
gence in - - ii. 183
Pliny, the reason of his persecuting the Christians, iv. 36"
his doubts respecting the manner of proceeding against
Christians - - iv. 45
the reason of his persecuting the Christians ihid.
Plutarch, his opinion of two principles - i. 338
his derivation of superstition - ii. 260
- his notion of death - - iii. 121
observations on his recital of the opinion of the philo
sophers, concerning the soul - iii. 169-
an examination of his comparison between superstition
and atheism - iii. 22$
his famous exclamation to his countrymen - iii. 239.
- accuses the Jews ol worshipping swine - iv. 422
Pococke, his account of the Egyptian hieroglyphics, iv. 376*
objections to his account - - iv. 377
Poisons, the virtue of - - i. 187
Policy, human, Critias of Athens, his history of - iii. 219
Political romances, the common errors they have all fell
into - i. 215
Polybius, his testimony iii favour of the piety of the Ro
mans - - iii. 3
his opinion as to the means bv which states are brought
to ruin iii. 5
remarks on his character - iii. 6
Polytheism, in what it consisted, explained - - ii. 188
Pomponatius, some account of - i. 221
- his opinion of a future state defended against Bayle, i. 223
Pope Alex, his observations on Lord Bolingbroke - ii. 263
Poppy, why the juice of used in the ceremonial of the shows
in the Eleusinian mysteries - - ii. 124
Porphyry and Clemens Alexandrinus, their accounts of the
Egyptian characters and writing - - iv. 141
-~~ his account of the origin of brute-worship, contro
verted - iv. 197
Posterity, why the punishments of the Mosaic law extended
to them - - . v. 164
the case argued - v. 167*
Posthumius, extract from his speech on the introduction of
foreign worship to Rome - - ii. 293
* bis intention only to prevent the exercise of unlicensed
religion - - ii. 322-
Prc-existence of the soul, enquiry into the sentiments of the
ancients concerning - - iii. 152
Press, liberty of, the propensity of the present age to infide
lity, not to be ascribed to - - i. 143
the complaints of its being restricted disingenuous, i. 144
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 435
PrideauXj his account of the deification of heroes, contro
verted - - iv. 204
Priests, pious and virtuous, where placed in Elysium by
Virgil - - ii. 148
Principles, good and evil, the belief of, how guarded against
by the writer of the book of Job - - v. 358
Priscilian, the first sufferer for opinion - - - iv. 55
Prodigies, &c. their admission into ancient history accounted
for - - i. 312
Prophecies, scripture, defended from the insinuations of
Dr. Middleton $M? - vi. 53
their primary and secondary senses distinguished- vi. 78
misunderstood by the Jews, and why so ordained - vi. 89
the use to be made of them in disputes - vi. 203
Prophecy, what a necessary confirmation of their reference
to the Messiah - - vi. 77
an evidence of a doctrine proceeding from God - vi. 340
considerations on - ibid.
Prophets, reason of the institution of a school for - iv. 308
Prophets, Jercish, an enquiry into the nature of the divine
commission to - - iii. 344
rational account of their illustrating their prophecies by
signs - - - iv. 133
Propitiatory sacrifice, origin and nature of it, explained, vi. 276
Providence, the doctrine of, the great sanction of ancient
laws - - - - i. 323
the spirit of legislation depends on the doctrine of a, ii. 81
- the inequalities of, how rectified by the ancients - iii. 67
what kind of, believed by the ancient Theistic philoso
phers - - iii. 140
administration of, at various times, considered - iv. 336
extraordinary, a necessary consequence of the Jewish.
theocracy - v. 117
illustrated from Solomon s prayer at the dedication of
the Temple - - v. 135
* from Ezekiel - - - v. 137
from Amos - - - v. 138
evidences of its ceasing - v. 142
~~ the ease with which the pretension to it might have
been carried on - . ibid*
-< the mention of the inequalities of, by the sacred writers,
accounted for - - - - v. 145
- remarks on the different reception of its adverse dispen
sations, in ancient and modern times - v. 474
~~ Job s opinion of the equality and inequality of - v. 477
revival of an equal, to the chosen race - vi. 266
considerations on God s using human instruments in the
dispensations of - vi. 371
f * a Provide nc^
436 INDEX TO
Providence, considerations on God s using temporary plagues
in the dispensations of - - vi. 381
Psammitichus, his scheme to establish an intercourse between
Egypt and the Grecian states - - iv. 161
Psyche, the ancient story of, explained - - ii. 200
Punishments, how applied in civil society - i. 213
of the crimes of parents on their children, on what prin
ciple only to be vindicated - - iv. 20
Purgatory, remarks on Virgil s account of - ii. 125
the inhabitants of - - ii. 126-
Pyramids of Egypt, probable reasons why they exhibit no
hieroglyphic inscriptions - - iv. 404
the Egyptian architecture formed on the idea of - iv. 40^
not temples, but sepulchres - iv. 406
alluded to in the book of Job - - v. 312-
Pyrrhonians, and Academics, their principles compared, iii. 38
their origin - iii. 51
Pythagoras, his knowledge in physics established in late
experience concerning earthquakes - - iii. 38. 362
an enquiry into the principles of his philosophy - iii. 57
his legislative fame - - - - - iii. 60
taught several doctrines which he did not believe - iii. 78
Pythagoreans, their notions of Providence - iii. 141
their tenets concerning tlie human soul - iii, 161
Q.
Quakers, their motives for rejecting the institution of bap
tism examined into - - - v. 2oX
Quaternion, philosophic, their opinion of the soul - iii. 159.
R.
Rachel, the story of her stealing her father s gods, exa
mined - - vi. 148
Rainbow, first creation and reason of iv. 443
Reason, the only test of truth - - - - i. 159
- the use of, in the discovery of truth - i. 184. vi. 22Q
- why discredited in religious controversy - - iii. 133
Redemption by Christ, had a retrospect from the Fall, vi. 268
an act of grace, not of debt - - vi. 269
the means employed in that great work enquired into, vi.27i
Reguhis, Cicero s enquiry into his obligation to return to.
Carthage - - - - iii. 128
Religion, the protection of, necessary in all governments, 1.192
. reply to Bayle s opinion, that a man devoid of religion
may be sensible of honour - - - - i. 263
* always the peculiar care of the magistrate - i. 300
* the necessity of uniting it to the state - * ii. 264
Religion,
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 437
Religion, brief view of the state of, in the ancient world, 11.296
< supposed by the Sages to be calculated only for the ser
vice of the state - - iii. 18
the double doctrine of the ancients considered - iii. 23
its truth manifested by its use to society - - iii. 216
if admitted to have" been invented by statesmen, not
therefore false - - iii. 222
an enquiry into the first origin of - iii. 269
no people ever found without one - iii. 309
Hooker s sentiments on the political use of - - iii. 311
too great an attention to civil liberty subversive of - iv. 2
a comparison of the many that have existed in the world,
the clew to the true one - - iv. 73
the absurdity of any human legislature enforcing it by
penal laws - v. 29
Christian and Mosaic, necessarily dependent on some
preceding religion - v. 44
the care of legislators in the propagation - - - vi. 115
acquired naturally by Adam and Eve - - vi. 244
first revealed in Paradise *.. ...> . - vi. 246
reasonableness of a doctrine no prooj\ but a presumption
of its divine original - - vi. 322
miracles the only proof of a doctrine being from God, vi.323
prophecy an additional evidence - vi. 340
Religion established, the voice of nature - - ii. 265
the nature of - ^ - - ii. 266
necessary to society - - ibid.
danger from its deviating from the truth - - ii. 274
necessity of its alliance -with the state - ii. 275
advantages io the magistrate from such an alliance - ibid.
what it receives from the stale - - ii. 283
what it communicates to the state - ii. 285
with a test law, the universal voice of nature - ii. 292
speech of Posthmnius on the introduction of foreign
worship at Rome - - .,..._ jj. 203
causes which facilitated it - - ii. 296
good purposes of - ii. 297
distinction between established and tolerated, according to
Dionysius Halicarnassus - ii. 324
advantages of establishments - iv. 7
Religio?i Jewish, of names, an Egyptian superstition, iv. 285
not adopted by any of the neighbouring nations, and
why - ( - v. 62
Religion natural, true definition of - - - - iii. 349
the Mosaic, a rcpnblication of - - iii. "350
teaches God to be the rewarder of them .that diligently
seek him - vi. 250
of what those rewards consist - - ibid.
the distinction between natural and revealed - vi. 264
F F 3 Religions
43$ INDEX TO
Religions Pagan, not interfering with each other, v. 42
Religion revealed, its internal and external evidence i. 193
- the necessary qualifications for treating of them, i. 10,5
only able to enforce the sanction of reward - i. 216
condition of man under it, enquired into - - vi. 254
the three systems of - vi. 265
Religion, toleration of, motives for toleration - - ii. 299
danger of enforcing conformity ibid.
the sense in which it was understood by the Pagan
world --------ii. 301
Religious truth, enquiry into what it is - - vi. 218
Religious war, one in ancient Egypt, and the occasion of
it - ii. 306
Repentance, the nature and efficacy of, considered, vi. 307
Resurrection, allegorized by the Greek philosophers, iii. 197
Revelation, particular objections against, answered - iii. 339
- some one embraced by all mankind - - iv. 69
natural inferences from this general propensity, iv. 76
the use and necessity of it iv. 73
Revelations Pagan, one circumstance common to all, iv. 75
attributed by the primitive fathers to the devil - ibid.
Reward, the Sanction of, explained - i. 210
to be enforced only by religion - - i. 216
Rhea, observations on the fable of - iv. 201
Rhetoric, use of disallowed at the court of Areopagus, i. 149
Riddles, propounded by the Hebrew Sages, as mutual trials
of sagacity - - iv. 168
Ridicule, the favourite figure of speech among Free
thinkers - i. 148
* Shaftesbury s justification of, examined
not the test of truth -
how far it may be safely made use of
the defence of, by Dr. Akenside, examined
not the test of truth
the proper detector of error
150
158
159
181
183
186
Rites, legal and patriarchal, not to be confounded, iv. 302
Ritual law, of the Jews, made in reference to the Egyptian
superstition * - * iv. 299
this no objection to the divinity of it - - iv. 317
characterized in Ezekiel * iv. 334
explained * ibid,
Romans, to what their ruin was owing * i. 288
their law respecting tolerated religions - - ii. 321
excellence of their constitution * iii. 3
their fear of the gods - ibid.
their regard for an oath - iii. 4
their use of sacrifice at concluding treaties of peace, vi. 277
Rome, Christian, whether its superstitions borrowed from the
Pagan city, examined - - iv. 363
2 Rose,
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 439
Rose, what the emhlem of among the ancients - ii. 194
origin of the proverb, " under the rose" - ibid.
Runic alphabet) when and why changed for the Roman, iv. 163
Rutherforth, Dr. his notion of the effect the withdrawing the
sanctions of the Jewish Jaw had on the obligatory force
of that law, examined - - y. 120
his notions of the temporal sanctions of the Jewish law
being continued under the Gospel, examined - v. 148
- his notions of inerhcacy of action without speech ex
amined ( - - vi. 167
S.
Sabbath, a positive institution - - iv* 303
the Jews breach of by circumcision considered^ iv. 441
its origin - - iv. 443
Sacred band of Thebans, Plutarch s remarks on the death
of r ii. 95
Sacrifice, origin and nature, of, explained - vi. 274
made use of by the Romans at the ratification of
peace - - - vi. 277
Mosaic examined - . * vi. 283
the origin and progress of human - - ,,* vi. 285
r of Christ -on the cross, considered - - vi. 287
the admission of it into the Mosaic ritual considered, vi. 288
feast upon the Sacrifice., a type of the Lord s Supper, vi. 292
Sacrifices) human, the command to Abraham to offer up hig
son Isaac vindicated from the objection of giving a
divine sanction to - - vi. 30, 36
their origin enquired into - - - vi. 285 ,
- Bryant s opinion of their origin, exploded - - vi. 352
Voltaire s opinion confuted - V vi. 357
the command that "none devoted shall be redeemed," exa
mined - vi. 36*2
Sages, ancient, unanimous in thinking the doctrine of a
future state of rewards and punishments necessary to the
well being of society - - iii. i
- did not believe in a future state ~ iii. 15
held it lawful for the public good, to say one thing
when they thought another - iii. 16
Sallu-st, his opinion of the divine nature - iii. 145
Samuel, his conduct in establishing the regal form of govern
ment in Judea - - v. 87
Sanclwniatho, arguments proving that "this is the history nar
rated in the Eleusinian mysteries - : ii. 44
extract from his history - - ii. 45
Sanhedrim, why instituted - - iv. 308
when established - - iv. 313
the motives of Jesus Christ s evasive reply to their inter
rogations y;- - - - - IV. 313
F F 4
440 INDEX TO
Satan j reflections on his character as represented by Job, v. 353
Saul, the phrase of his being among the prophets, ex
plained - - iv. 310
characterized - ibid.
Savages, American, why averse to the arts of civil so
ciety - . ii. 331
Scarron, his artifice in ridiculing the sentiment of Sulpi-
cius - j. 154
Scenical representations, in what respect without moral im
port - vi. 34
Scepticism, characterized - - vi. 214
Sceptre of Judah, the common notions of that phrase, exa
mined v. 99
true sense of, pointed out - v. 113
Scriptures sacred, a summary view of their contents, v. 175
general rule for the interpretation of- v. 382
* three points recommended to the attention of commenta
tors - v. 413
much abused in the search after truth - - vi. 219
Self-love, the operation of in mankind, traced - i. 260
Sempiternus, the true import of that word ascertained, iii. 180
Seneca, his consolaiion against the fear of death - iii. 104
accused by St. Austin of duplicity - - iii. 361
Serpent, in the fall of man, the true meaning of ascer
tained - - v. 161
how the sentence passed on it, is to be understood, v. 386
Serpent, crooked, in Job and Jsaiah, the meai ing of ex
plained - v. 359
Sesostris, account of, from Dioclorus Siculus - - iv. 89
and Osiris, arguments against the identity of, in oppo
sition to Sir Isaac Newton - iv. 218
and Osiris distinguished - - iv. 226 233
who - - iv. 226
divides Egypt by transverse canals - - iv. 227
- his motives for - - iv. 270
Shaft esbury, Lord, remarks on his character i. 163
his unfair treatment of Mr. Locke - - ibid.
Sherlock, Bishop, his notion of the tribal sceptre of Judah,
examined - v. 102
Shuckford, Dr. his remarks on the ancient ritual law, exa
mined - - iv. 335. 439
Sibyl, how that character in the JEneis to be under
stood - - ii. 104
Signs, memorable instance of divine instruction communicated
by, in the case of Abraham - - vi. 3
Silenus, whence Ovid derived his idea of iii. 72
Sleeping scheme, the principles of, examined - - v. 198
Society, civil, the first invention of, and the motives to, i. 205
no preservative against moral disorders - - i. 207
Society,
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 441
Society) civil, unable to enforce the sanction of reward, i. 210
which is only to be supplied by religion i. 216
mutual stipulations between magistrate and people on
entering into - - - i. 21 1
the purpose of its institution - - - - ii. 267
the extent of its care - ii. 268
invented for intractable spirits - - - iii. 2
Society, religious, the end of its institution - - ii. 269
sovereign and independent on the civil - ibid.
not possessed of any civil coactive power - - ii. 270
the object of its care - ii. 271
Socinittns, examination of their opinion concerning the death
of Christ - - vi. 300
Socrates,, revkvv of the dispute between him and Aristo-
" ""phanes. - i. 156
why he declined initiation into the mysteries - ii. 50
remarks on the latter part of his conduct - - iii. 17
the first who called off philosophy from the contemplation
of nature to morals - - iii. 45
the only Greek philosopher who really believed a future
state of rewards and punishments - - iii. 47
the method of his philosophy - - iii. 52
note on the effect of the poison iii. 357.
Socratic method of disputing, what so called - - iii. 52
Solomon, alludes to the mysteries in the book of Ecclesiasticus,
chap. iv. ver. 17,18 - ii. 153
his violations of the Mosaic law remarked - * iv. 262
his prayer at the dedication of the Temple illustrative of
the particular providence over the Jewish nation, v. 135
in his prayer at the dedication of the Temple, requests
only a continuance of temporal rewards and punish
ments - v. 159
how perverted to idolatry - v. 343
Solomon s Sting, a representation of Christ s union and mar
riage with the church - v. 470
Sophists, Greek, some account of - - iii. 53
Soul, the several senses in which the ancients conceived the
permanency of it - iii. 14
its future existence in a state of rewards -and punishments
taught, but disbelieved by the philosophers, iii. 15
Cicero s idea of - iii. 114
an enquiry into our conceptions of - - iii. 348
three species of, admitted by the ancients - - iii. 150
opinions of various philosophers - iii. 168
the opinions of the philosophers on the immortality
^ of - iii. 383
the sentiments of the Jews concerning, under the
law - - - v. 196
examination of the notion of the sleep of - - v. 198
Soul,
442 INDEX TO
Soul, the mention of its future existence by Moses, and by
following writers, to be distinguished - v. 2x36
immaterial, common to the whole animal creation, v. 384
living, in what sense to be understood as used in the his
tory of the creation of man - v. 385
enquiry into the nature of - vi. 251
different opinions on the - - vi. 349
Speech, the origin and history of - * - iv. 133^
the early acquisition of, by Adam and Eve - vi. 244
Spencer -, an examination of the argument of his treatise,
De Theocratia Judaica - v. 93
examination of Sykes s defence of his argument, v. 252
Spinozists, their opinion of the human soul - - iii. 149
Spiritual courts, the end and use of - ii. 277
Slate, its inducements to seek an alliance with the
Church - ii. 272
what it communicates to the Church - - ii. 283
what it receives from the Church - - ii. 285
its conduct where it includes more than one religion, ii. 287
Statues, the first rise of worshipping, in human form, iv. 236
Stebbing, Dr. an examination of his objection to the argu
ment of the Divine Legation of Moses - - iii. 318
his arguments of Moses s Divine Legation,, equally apppli-
cable to Mahomet - v. 155
* his exposition of Levit. xviii. 5, examined - v. 40*
an examination of his Considerations on the command to
Abraham to offer up Isaac - - vi. 24. 155. 162, 163.
171, 172, 173. 178. 181. 187. 192. 104. 197, 198.
Stilling fleet, his opinion of the Egyptian hieroglyph ics,iv. 147
Stoics, their practice contrary to their principles - i. 267
their notions of death - iii. 103
their opinions of the soul - - iii. ] 66
Stoical renovation, what - - iii. 105
Strabo, his opinion concerning the institution of the mys
teries - - ii. 32
his opinion as to the necessary religious doctrines by
which to govern and restrain the multitude - iii. 10
his account of the Mosaic doctrine of the Deity, iii. 171
Stratonicean, whether the principles of, capable of dis
tinguishing the moral difference between virtue and
vice - *- * i. 241
Suicide, why consigned by Virgil to purgatory .- ii. 12(3
condemned in the Eleusinian mysteries, and by Vir
gil ... = ii. 166
authors who have written against it - - - ii. 365
Sulpicius, his reflections on the sight of Grecian ruins, i. 153
Sun, the various names under which it was worshipped, iii. 284
Superstition, in ancient history accounted for - - i. 312
whence derived, and the cure of it ^ - ii. 260
Superstition,
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 443
Superstition, whether preferable to atheism - - iii. 226
examination of Plutarch s parallel between - iii. 229
of Lord Bacon s parallel between it and Atheism, iii. 253
Swift) his observations on Toland and Asgill - - ii. 263
Sykes, his answer to a censure passed on Spencer s opinion
of the Jewish Theocracy considered, v. 252. 259. 2(v$. 267
his notion concerning the double senses of the Scripture
prophecies, examined - vi. 66
Symbols, and allegories of ancient Paganism, for what pur
pose introduced - - iii. 289
their revolution from being employed for contrary pur
poses to their primitive designation, pointed out, iv. 166
and type, their difference explained - vi. 289
Synesius, Bishop of Ptolemais, some account of - iii. iq6
allegorises the resurrection - . - iii. 197
System and hypothesis, the human mind naturally hvcfmed
to - ;f r \ *r - iv. Sa
T.
Tacitus, his character of the Jews and Christians - ii. 315
his opinion of the Jewish Religion ^ < < iv. 37
his account of the ancient Theban monuments, iv. 146
Tages, the Etruscan god, how found - iv. 213
Talismans, greatly venerated by the Mahometans, iv. 176
what they were - - iv. 415
Tartarus, observations on Virgil s account of - - ii. 125
who consigned to - . - -.. ii. 137
Taylor, Dr. examination, of his account of the origin of
persecution - - iv. 35
Tettmachus, why he refused the horses of Menelaus, iv. 264
TertuUian, his account of the origin of heresies - iii. 109
Test Law, whence it took its birth - - ii. 288
- copy of the test oath of Athens - - ii. 202
Thebans, account of the sacred band - - ~ ii. 03
Theistical opinion, concerning the human soul - iii. 149
Theseus, exposition of his descent into hell - ii. 09. 139
Theocratic government of the Jews, the reasons and conve-
niencies of - - - v. 3. 29
every subject a priest under - - v. 21
particular enquiry into the circumstances of, v. 22. 74
why willingly received by them - v. 35
how long subsisting - / * 1 ; - v. 83
when abolished * I v. 96
necessarily including an extraordinary providence, v. 117
. illustrated from Solomon s prayer at the dedication of the
Temple >* - - - - v. 136
from Ezekiel * W - v. 137
from Amos - ibid.
Theocratic
444 INDEX TO
Theocratic government of the Jem, Dr. Sykes s answer to the
censure passed on Spencer, considered - - v. 252
Theology, natural, the obligations flowing from, as given by
Lord Bolingbroke - - - ii. 252
Theology, Pagan, three systems of - - ii. 25
Theopompus, the common source from which both Ovid and
Virgil borrowed,, and wherein they erred in deviation
from him - - iii. 73
Timteus, his exposition of the ancient Metempsychosis, iii. 78
To E v, not an Egyptian notion - iii. 174
derived from Pherecydes Syrus - - - Hi. 179
Toland, character of his Pantheisticon - - iii. 26$
Toleration, juster notions of it entertained by the ancients
than by the moderns - - ii. 298
two principal causes inducing a large and full allowance
of by the ancient lawgivers - - ii. 290
the Romans careful not to infringe it, in their edict
against the Bacchanalian rites - ii. 323
universal, among all the ancient nations, and why - iv. 59
Toyman, at Bath, pertinent story of - vi. 105
Traditions, mistaken presumption to strengthen the autho
rity of, by the church of Rome - v. 183
never made use of by Christ in support of his character, vi-9
Treason, high, observations on the laws of forfeitures in
cases of - - v. 169
Trismegistus, history of the Books forged in the name of, iii. 187
Truth, whether possible to be made ridiculous - i. 152
reason the best test of - i. 159
reason and ridicule considered in the trial of - i. 184
reasons for veiling it in mysteries - - ii. 15
~~ and utility, their coincidence, and the mutual proof they
afford of each other - - - -iii. 217
enquiry into what it is - vi. 214
Turnns, remarks on the character of, in the ^Eneis - ii. 86
Types, the meaning of ascertained - - vi. 45
derivation of - . . _ vi. 48
argument deduced from the general passion for - vi. 101
retained by Mr. Whiston s opinion, whilst he rejects
double senses - - vi. 201
Type and symbol, their difference explained - - vi. 289
Typhon, the fable of, explained - iv. 189. 225
Tyrants, ancient, great encouragers of religion, and from
what motives - i. 318
U. V.
Vane, Sir Harry, his character - - iii. 26*3
Vedam, the antiquity of it - iv. 366
Vine-tree^ Ezekiel s prophecy of it, explained - v. 5
Vigils,
THE DIVINE LEGATION. 445
Vigils, supposed to have originated from the Eleusinian
mysteries - - ii. 6&
suppressed on the same account - - ibid.
Virgil, an exposition of his allegory of the descent of .ZEneas
to the shades - ii. 78
an enquiry into the nature of the JEneid - - ibid.
remarks on his destroying the myrtle which dropped
blood - - ii. Si
^ remarks on his making ships become deities of the sea, ii. 84
remarks on the character of Turnus - ^ - ii, 86"
remarks on the character of Dido - - ii. 87
remarks on Voltaire s criticism on this story - ii. 8$
- remarks on his account of the court of Evander - ii. 89
- remarks on the Episode of Nisus and Euryaius - ii. 91
recommends adoption ... - ii. 92
explanation of the Golden Bough - - ii. 10$
^ his account of the mysteries of Mythras - - ii. 214
exposition of his character of Charon - ii. 122
> explanation of the dog Cerberus - ii. 123
comment on his topography of the infernal regions, ii. 125
remarks on the episodes of Dido and Deiphobus - ii. 135
- his description of Elysium compared with that of
Homer - ii. 146
- infected with Spinozism - - ii. 159
remarks on his description of the shield of /Eneas - ii. 160
Virtue, three different excitements to - i. 233
natural and moral obligations to, distinguished i. 244
an enquiry into the nature of, u^jder a dispensation of
rewards and punishments ;- * - v. 238
Unity of the Deity taught in the Eleusinian mysteries, {1.149. 151
Universality, the want of no objection against the truth of
the Mosaic dispensation - iii. 340
Voltaire, remarks on his criticism on the Dido of Virgil, ii. 88
examination of his method of accounting for the perse
cuting spirit among Christians - ii. 374
- examifiation of his objections to the argument of the
Divine Legation of Moses - - iii. 315
- his account of the Chinese method of printing - iv. 380
his account of the Mosaic dispensation, examined - v. 6
- his misrepresentation of Judea, refuted ii -o v. 13
some mistakes in his treatise on toleration, noted - v. 276
his opinion of the origin of human sacrifices, confuted, vi-357
his accusation of the Jews sacrificing a whole nation,
examined - . <! /4 * - vi. 376
Voice of the sign, origin of - - iv. 133
Vossius, his account of the origin of idolatry, refuted, iv.ipS
Votes, the origin and obligation of, considered - - vi. 362
the command that " rtone devoted shall be redeemed,
examined V a -^ , - 71.363
446 INDEX TO
Vozos, Jephthah s rash vow considered - - vi. 367
Utility, indicative of truth - - iii. 217
Vulcan, Sir Isaac Newton s account of - - iv. 258
compared with that of Homer - - ibid,
W.
Wants of mankind, real and fantastic, enquiry into, and the
effects of - - i. 277
War, the different situations of countries for the use of in
fantry and cavalry - - iv. 263
Warburton, answer to the objections of the chancellor of
Gottingen - - iii. 202
motives for writing " The Alliance between Church and
State," - - iv. 6
Will, the foundation of morality - - i. 248
William the Conqueror and King Arthur, the similarity of
the outlines of their characters - iv. 222
William qfNe&bourgi his character of Pope Gregory VIII. vi. 1 08
Witsius, his arguments for the Egyptian ritual being borrowed
from the Jews, examined - - iv. 301
critique on his ^Egyptiaca - - iv. 323
Wives, strange or idolatrous, bad consequences of the fond
ness the Jews had for them, shewn - - v. 341
Wollaston, his mistake in establishing the principles of mora
lity, explained - - i. 253
Words, mischief attending the improper use of them - i. 254
Works, no justification by, under the Gospel - - v. 437
Writing, history of thwart of - iv. 116
Writings, ancient, marks of forgery in - - i. 329
Y.
Youth, adopted, the strength of ancient states - - ii. 92
Z.
Zaleucus, his real existence, and the authenticity of his re
mains, defended against Bentley - - i. 324
extract from his preface - - i- 339
notes on a passage in i. 353
Zeno y his philosophic character - iii. 101
Zoroastes, the various opinions of the learned who he was, iv.366
of Hyde and Prideaux, discredited - - v. 41
Zosimus, his relation how the Eleusinian mysteries came to be
excepted in Valentian s edict against nocturnal assem
blies - - ii>57
THE DIVINE L K (5 A T I O N.
44*
AUTHORS, ETC. QUOTED IN
The Divine Legation;
WHICH QUOTATIONS
ARE NOT REFERRED TO IN THE PRECEDING
I N D E X.
A BEN EZRA, vol. iv. p. 111.
159 vol. v. p. 162
Abennephi - - - - iv. 21 1
Abraham Ekell - - - vi. 153
Abul-Feda - - - n. 361.366
Acosta - iv. 14. 117. 123. 126
Atldison, i. 150 ii. 81. 135. 173.
vi. 201
Adrian the Sophist - - iii. 71
,lian, iii/ 30. 38. 86 . 181
iv. 186 . 228
,schylus, i. 500. 349 ii. 320.
iv. 372
^sop - v. 44-9
*tius vi. 396
Africanus - - - ii. 356 . 359
Agelius ------ iii. 5]
Ahijah ------ vi. 33
Akenside - - - - i. 181
Albinus - ii. 170 iii. 89, 90
Albo, Rabbi Joseph - - vi. 84
Alcoran ----- iv. 266
Alembert, d - i. 280 ii. 348
Ambrose ----- ii. 281
Ammianus Marcellinus, i. 336 -
ii. 69 iii. 176 iv. 145. 296
Amos, iv. 172. 291. 341 v. 147.
318 vi. 81
Anaxagoras, ii. 233. 252 iii. 25
Andocide* ----- i. 321
AndocJes - - - - ii. -5
Antoninus Marcus, Emperor,
ii. 315. 381 iii. 104. ISO.
16 7
Antonius Liberalis - - iv. 190
Apion - - - v. 252. 257, 258
Apollodorus, i. 315 ii. 159
iv. 372
Apollonius, ii. 118. 124 iv. 92
Apollonius Rhodius - - ii. 98
Apollonius Tyaneus - - ii. 65
ApuJeius, i. 14.0 ii. 13.. 48, 4p.
70, 71. 78. 102. 108. 146 . 157.
16 3. 16*9. 171, 172. 349. 36>.
iii. 107. 143. 186. 284 iv. 10t>.
127. 145. 152. 16*6. 244.375.
409 vi. 114
Araleus - - - - iv. 196
Arbuthnot - - - - i. 159
Ariosto ii. 207
Aristides, ii. 6. 12. 59- 142. 144,
147. 149. 158. 160
Aristophanes, i. 188. 239. 300
ii. 8. 12. 16, 17- 46. 72. 74.
100. 143. 193. 321 iii. 285
iv. 11
Aristotle, i. 205, 206. 240. 318,
324 ii. 22, 80. 2l6. 268. 2/6\
iii. 22. 34. 40. 96. 100. 140.
142. 163. 176 iv. 171. 228
v. 135. 160
Arnauld ----- v. 443
Arnobius.
AUTHORS CITED IN
Arnobius, i. 195 ii. 4. 175
iii. 157- l6l. 294. 360
Arrian - ii. 11 iii. 167 iv, 228
Artemidorus - ii. 189 i v ISO
Astruc - - - - iv. 287. 412
Athenaeus ----- iii. 310
Athenagoras - ii. 48. 50..337
Atterbury, Bishop - ii. 167
Atticus ------ i. 273
Augustin, St. i. 311 ii, 11. 16.
22. 26. 185. 354. 387 iii. 19-
58. 124. 16 1. 200. 302. 36l
iv. 50. 156. 206. 4-26 vi. 2
Aulus Gellius - - - iv. 254
Aurelius Marcus, ii. 170 iv. 37
Ausonius - - iii. 374 iv. 245
B.
Bacon, Lord Chancellor, i. 203
iii. 63. 246. 248. 233 iv. 68.
455 vi. 119. 225. 231. 252
Bacon, Roger - - - - v. 481
Banier, i. 349 ii. 107 iii. 66.
77 iv. 427
Barfceyrac ----- ii. 364
Barnes iii. 395
Baronius - - - - ii. 75. 352
Barrow, Dr. - - - - ii. 249
Barthius - - - - - ii. 170
Basilius ----- ii. 354
Bale, Julius - - - - iv. 28
Baxter, iv. 418 v. 200. 385
vi. 241. 349
Bayle, i. 220. 241. 26l. 278. 299-
310. 326 ii. 122. 129. 322
iii. 173. 226. 392 vi. 111.
119-
Beausobre - - iii. 190 iv. 415
Behmen ----- vi. 350
Bellarmine - - - - ii. 60
Bembine Table, iv. 150. 153. 199.
374. 424
Bentley, i. 324. 332. 351, 352,
353 ii. 369 iii. 21. 370
iv. 411 vi. 328
Berkley ----- v. 184
Bernier - - - - ii. 309. 373
Berosus - - - - - ii. 116
Black well - - - - - iii. 207
Blanchini ----- i. 148
Bleterie - - - - - iv. 431
Blount - - - * iii. 210 . 218
Bochart - iv. 158. 421. 427. 432
Boeotiiis - - - - ii. 43. 123
Boeus ------ iii. 71
Bolingbroke, i. 166. 290 ii. 211
iii. 318. 355 iv. 8- 306. 3o7
v. 19- 30. 65. 73. 75. 174. 271.
426 vi. 130. 205. 352
Bossu ------ ii. 80
Bosuet ----- vi. 385
Bouiller - - - - vi. 167. 207
Boulain Villiers, Comte de, i. 305
Bryant - - - - - - vi. 352
Buckingham, Duke of - i. 147
Bull, Bishop - - v. 442. 445
Bullet ------ iv. 414
Burlamaqui - - - i. 252. 254
Burm;t, iii. 31. 178 iv. 275. 444
Butler - i. 156 ii. 2l6 iv. 275
C.
Caecilius - ii. 69
Ca3sar - - - iii. 41 iv. 429
Calisthenes ----- iii. 71
Callimachus - ii. 54 iv. 254
Calmet, v. 172. 246. 330. 368,
369. 446
Capitolinus - - - ii. 169, 170
Cardan - i. 220. 275 iii. 255
Careri - - - - - - iv. 117
Caitesius iii. 177
Casaubon, ii. 75. 352 iii. 167-
192. 356 iv. 227
Casbiodorus - - - - iv. 176
Cassius i. 273
Castellio v. 409
Cato - - - - iii. 42. 363
Catrou iii. 75
Caylus - - - - - - iv. 386
Celsus, ii. 68. 115. 125. 350. 312.
iii. 97. 102. 106. 135. 178. 197.
373 iv. 48, 49. 100. 104. 106.
v. 49. 257. 478
Cervantes - - ii. 215 iii. 39S
Chaeremon - - - - - iv. 370
Charlevoix, ii. 36l. 389 iii. 67.
iv. 119
Chill ingworth - - - - v. 324
Choisi, Abbe de - - - ii. 373
Chrysippus - - - ii. 31 iii. 96
Clirysostom, ii. 354. 381 vi. 18.
o2. 326. 328
Chubb v. 266
Cicero,
THE DIVINE LEGATION.
449
Cicero, i. 149. 171. 210. 267.
275. 301. 307. 325. 328. 3.30 .
34-2 ii. ,- 7, 8. 29, 30. 33. 39,
40. 52. 53. 57. 6*1. 65. 79/89.
92. 96". 103. 126 . 151. 159. 16*2.
299, 300. 320, 321. 335. 338,
339, 34-0. 348. 353. 359. 365.
371. 386 iii. 19. 45. 4-7. 50.
51. 56Y60. 84. 86". 90. 100, 101.
107* 136*. 140. 151. 153. 159.
.179. 195. 215. 268. 310.36*3.
36*7. 370. 373, 374, 375, 3/6.
398 iv. 49. 59- 6*1. 66". 110.
131. 155. 171. 194. 411. 422.
426 v. 171. 178. 273 vi.104
Clarius ------ v . 377
Clarke, i. 1.5.9. 253 ii. 215. 239,
240, 241. 248 iii. 386" v. 200.
228. 287- 385. 395 vi. 24-1.
, 349
Cliiuclian - - - i. 218 ii. 109
Clemens Alexandrinus, i. 326
ii. 15. 20. 31, 32. 45. 48. 6"4.
66". 78. P9. 108, 347 iii. 37.
107. 174. 179. 285 iv. 104.
120. 136". 141. 150. 157, 158.
226". 304/319. 390. 397. 400.
4-10. 418. 426*
Clerc, le, ii. 49. 351. 355. 376
iii. 81 iv. 1C). 133. 395). ^7
v. 85. 92. 10*3. 197. 409. 417
vi. 23(5
Cocceius - - - iv. 02 v. 341
Codrus ------ i. 14,3
Codurcus - - - v. 313, 314
Collins, i. 159. 172. 175 iv. 16".
395. _44-6 v. 38. 16 2. 200
vi. 11. 43. 77. 135. 138.200.
204. 206*. 351
Compte, M. le - - iv. 124. 409
Conduniine - ii. 331 iv. 413
Condillac - - - iv. 41 1. 41.5
Cornelius Nepos - - - ii. 34.5
Cutta ------ ii. 341
Coward - - - iii. 216 iv. 4
<- ruig i. 194
Crinitus, P. - ii. 364 iv. 413
Critias - - hi. 019. 074. 392
, Croze, M. la - - - - iii. 194
Cjewphon - - - iii. lij i
Cudworth, iii. 152. 16*3. 16*8, 16*9.
178. 192. 214. 299 iv. 197.
36"7 vi. 113
Cumberland - iv. 24-7. 368. 375
Cuper ...... i. 19
Cyprian - - - ii. 28 iv. 426*
Cyrillus - - - - ii. 172. 30*
D.
Dacier, Mr. ii. 156. 364 iii. SU
130
Daniel, iv, 169. 172 vi. 19. 342
Dassovius - - - - - iv. 19
Daubuz, iv. 214. 418, 419 vi. 8*
157
David, King, iv. 169 v. 50. 145.
179- 182. 262. 407
Davies ..... iii. 110
Demetrius Phalareus, ii. 15
iv. 168. 386*
Democritus - iii. 386 iv. 159
Demosthenes - - - - ii. 293
Diagoras ----- i. 273
Diodorus Siculus, i. 315. 317*
324, 325, 326 ii. 3. 41. 52,
53. 70,71.73, 74.96. U9. 128.
134. 306". 317. 339- 355 iii. 29.
258. 276". 283 iv. 88. 90. 92.
98. 113. 146. 148. 150. 154.
157. 171. 189- 191. 1.94. 223,
224. 229. 233. 245, 246. 250.
257. 283. 304. 3/2. 407. 414.
421. 425, 437
Diogenrs Laertius, i. 337 ii. 47.
6 g iii. 30. 56. 60. 80. 88. 156.
160. 182. 191. 291. 36*8- iv.
1 59. 249, 250
Dion Cassius - ii. 326 iii. 38O
Dion Chrysostom - ii. 46, 47.
109
Dioiiysius the African - - ii. 5
Dionysius Halicarnassus, ii. 21.
54." 91. 161. 310. 324. 349. 353,
354 iii. 271 iv. 253
Dionysius, Thracicus - ii. 108
Dodwell, iv. 4-i-O* v. 47 vi. 220
Donatus ----- iii. ISO
Dorotheas - - - - iii. 71
Drusius * - - - v. 197. 377
Dryden - - - i. 144 v. 449
Dudley - - ... iii. 36*2
Edda Snorro - - - - iv. 207
Egcde - ii, 388 iv. 4Q8. 414
G & Xkell
A U T II O n S, &c. CITED IK
Kkcll - - - - - - vi. 153
KHhu ..... v. 315,316
Klipliaz - - - - v. 310. 314-
Enfant, I ..... ii. 377
Epicharmus - iii. 84 vi. 220
Epictetus, ii. 9. 11 iii. 39. 103.
166
Epicurus, i. 273 iii. 75. 84. 179
3ipiphanes ----- ii, 3
Epipbanius ----- iv. 369
Fpiscopius - - - v* 4 16\ 441
Kraiinuft, iii. 305 iv. 12 vi. 18
Euclid ------ iii. 175
Euhernerus, 30. 5l iii, 268.
U87.. 292 iv, 20?. 4*26
Eunapius - - ^ ii. 27 iii. 28
Knpolemus - iv. 371
Euripides, i. 30O ii. 5. 12. 15.
21. 59. 100. 105. 120. 154
iii, 392 v. 454 vi. 4
llusebius, i. 351 ii. 34. 36. 51.
306*. 316 . 342. 356, 357. 37 1.
376 iii. 23. 87. 89. 136. 162.
185. 190. 275. 283, 284. 290.
360 iv. 38. 69. 72. 74. 122.
149. 158 t 159. 204. 210. 228.
3f6. 422. 426 vi. 39* 113.
285
qtJtathUis - - - iv, 376. 390
E Yemenis - - - - - i. 273
Evreinoiid, St. - - - ii. 85
Ezekiel, iv.. SO. 134. 139- 167-
289. 2.Q2. 305. 331. 425. 443
v. 4, 5. 12. 60. 63. 119- 135.
137. 145. 165. 10 9. 172. 263.
272. 275. 353 vi. 45. 90,91-
127- 133. 17!;. 360
Ezra, \. 131. 324, 325. So2. 342,
543. 348, 349, 350, 351. 454.
4y2 vi. 151
F.
Fabricius, ii. 6 5. SIS. 377 iii.
89- U3
Fauistus ------ v. 149
Felton ...... v. 379
Vunton -- *--- iv. 255
Terrnicus -----< ii. 14
Ticinus, Marcilius - - iii. 214
Fleuri - - - ii. 170 iv. 412
FonteneHe - - iii. 29. 16. 259
Foster - - - - - - v. tf JO
Fourmont, iv. 15<). 184. 211.
385. 427. 432. 438
Frfiind - - .... vi. 396
Freret - iv. 128. 430 v.
G.
Gagnier ------ ii. 366
(iaile - - i. 180 iv. 367. 402
Galen, ii. 33 iii. 22. 39 iv. 109
Garcillasso - - - - iv. 4?9
Gassendi ----- iii. 150*
Gatakrr iii. J67
GaubiJ iv. 129
Gaodeutius - - - - ii. 354
Geddes ------ iii. 37 *?
Gelling, Atilus- - - - ii. 140
Geoft ry of Alonmoath - iv. 414
Gordon - - - - - - iv. 374
Grevius ----- iii. 309
Gregorius Ka/ien, ii. 11 iii. 6 2
iv. 391
Gregorius Magnus - - ii. 35i
Grey, v. 321. 451. 454. 45?;. 476*
Gronovius ----- iii. 24
Grotrus, ii. 272 iv. 170. 327
v. 170. 305. 320. 36*9. 395i
416. 441. 469 vi. 79. S5. 126.
352
G niter ------ ii. 386*
Gurgnes - * - - - i v . 3S
B,
Habakku-k, iv. 173 v. 400. 430
Uaggai - v. 96. 333. ^67. 37 /
liaidt, M. du - iv. 123. 174. 179
Hales ------ v. 480
Hammond- - iv. 368 v. 409
Hardouin - - - >i. 150. 155
Hare, Bishop, i. 145 iv. 169
v. 129- 409,410
Herateus ----- i. S5O
Heliodorus - - - iv. 159
Hellanicus ----- iv. 410*
Hennepin - - - - - ii. 383
Heiaclittis - - i. 320 iv. 13t>
Herbelot - - T. 293, 294. 389
Herbert, Lord - - - - i. 219
Hereclictes Ponticu* - - iii. 29-1
Hermapion - - - - - iv. 148
Hermes Tneincgifitas, ii. 338
iii, 187. 191 IT. 148
Heraiia*
THE D I VI N E LEGATION.
451
IZcrmias ----- iii. 162
Hermippus - - - - - i, 315
Herodotus, i. ISO. 307. 336, 350.
ii. 42. 70. lip. 30-1 iii. 29. 60.
180. 271. 276*. 233 iv, SO. 9).
94, 95, 96- 101, 102. 109. 114.
136. 157. lO l. 164. 182. 136.
189. 191. 227. 231. 237, 238.
24-6. 249, 250. 253. 267. 270.
285. 290. 371. 392. 407. 431.
vi. 168, 169
Hesiod, i. 266 iv, 203. 239.369.
395. 408
Hesychius - - i. 180 iv. 92
Jlezekiali - - - - - v. 180
Hicesius - - - - - ii. 179
Hierocles - - - - - ill. 184
Ilieronynms - - - - ii. 313
liigden - - - - - - v. 123
liimerius - - - - - ii. 152
Hippocrates, iii. 39 iv. 97. 104.
107. Ill, 112
Jlippolitus ii. 139
Ilippon ------ i. 273
Hispala ------ ii. 64
Hoadley ----- j v . 7
Hobbes, i. l6 />. 204.246.319
iv. 31 v. 123. 215 -vi. 109.
147, 14S
Holstenius ----- iv. 397
Homer, i. 276. 317 ii. 78, 79,
80. 120. 146. 154. 359 iii. 60.
180. 292 iv. 97. JOO. 203.
235). 252, 253, 254. 36 p. 390.
396. 410. 434 v. 283, 284
Hooke ------ vi. 209
Hooker, i. 202. 205. 248 iii.
311. 329 v. 154 vi. 124.
235
Horace, ii. 112. 156 v. 468
vi. 71. 154
Ilorapollo, ii. 14. 132 iii. 186.
277 iv. 120. 144. 149. 151.
166. 172 422
Iloseu, iv. 312 -v. 55). 89. 166.
341 vi. 8. 15J3
lioubigant, iv. 453 v. 318. 456.
vi. 21
Jlouteville - - - - - v. 101
Hudibras - - .- - - v. 201
Huet - - iii. 65 iv. 427 . 43-2
iluntington - - - - iv. 152
Hurd -
Hutchinson
Hyde - -
Hyginus
- - - - vi. 201
- - - - iv. 3.92
- iv. 366 v. 41
- ii. 140 iv. 274
I. J.
Jablonski - - ii. 335 iv, 421
Jackson - - ii. 209 iv. 407
Jamblichus, i. 333, 334. 337. 351.
ii. 62. 144. 208. 354 iii. 38.
57, 58, 59- 90. 175. 189, 190.
193 iv. 107. 120. 197.418
James - - - - - - vi. 311
Jameson - - - iv. 370. 372
Jarchi v. 162
Jeremiah, iii. 345 iv. 95. 133.
137. 294. 299- 458 v. 50. 55.
63. 147, 15Q. 165. 171. ISO.
272. 324. 343. 410 vi. 19. 79-
88, S9. 133. 360
Jerom, ii. 68 iii. 60. 131, 134.
161. 261 iv. 410. 425 v. 318.
329 vi. 2:3. 225
Job v. 178, 179
John, vi. 19. 65. 179. 273. 317.
342. 352
Johnson ----- iii. 308
4onson, Ben. - - - - v. 471
Joiiville i. 331
Jortin * - - . . . iv. 135
Josephus, ii. 7. 318. 358 iii. 86.
iv. 168. 253. 370 v. 65. 78.
133. 248. 252. 257
Joshua - - - iv. 292 v. 54
Jotliam iv. 167
Irenes, iii. 158 iv. 159-369
v. 279
Isaiah, iv. 370. .375. 419 v. 55.
58. 6l, 62. 136, 137. 146, 147.
159. 312. 3 16. S59. 380 vi. 51.
79. 82. 345. 36l
Isocrates, ii. 54. 59. 277 iii. 3.9
Jude - - v. 1J)9
jjulian, ii. 303. 3l6. 320. 382 j
iii. 9, 99 iv. 38 vi. 6l ~ W>
Julius i ennicus - ii. 30 iv. 4?6
Justin - ii. 345 iv. 254. 37<>
Justin Martyr, ii. 78. l/ 2 iii. 158.
v. 36
Justinian ----- iii. 381
o G 2 Kaitnt 5.
AUTHpRS, &c. CITED IN
K.
Kaimes, Lord - - - - i. 181
Kircher, iv. 124. 147. 150. 176.
1.97. 199- 296. 373, 374. 386.
398. 408 vi. 100
Kimchi - - - - - iv. 334
Kuster- ----- iv. 397
I..
JLactantius, i. 167. 195 iii. 101.
131. 13 i. 137- 139. 147. 360
iv. 285 v. 305 vi. 202
Lafitau - - - - - iv. 413
Larnpridius - - - - ii. 378
Lardner vi. 3.91
Lavaur - - - - iii. 66
Law - - - - iv. 6 S vi. 3.50
Leland ----- v . 408
Leonard - - - - - iv. 370
Libanius - - - - - ii. 0. 75
Liberalis - - - - iii. 71- 7 6
Liciniug ^Iftcianus - - iv. 411
Limborch, iv. 14. 17 v. 258.
275 vi. 225
Linus - - - - - Hi. 1.91
Livy, ii. 63. 91. 140. l65. 293.
300. 321, 322.3.50. 360. 387-
iii. J9. 259. 397 vi. 277
ocke,*i. 162. 174. 182, 205. 260
jft ii. 76. 268-rr-iv. 212 v. 455
vi. 154. 258. 321. -540
J.ucan - - ii. 34. 369- iv. 177
Luke - vi. 330. 32
Lucian, i. 303 ii. 13. 31. 51. f. s.
75. 112. 136. 15.9. 182. >? I
iii. 48. 105 iv. 189. 195. 52.5,
421 v. 2
Lucretius - i. 263 iii. 12. 85.
119
Lucullus, - ii. 0.) in. o.). :>/ 5
Lysias ------ ii. 7-
M.
Mabillon - - - - ii r 379
Machiavel - i. 319- -ii. 276
Macrobius, ii. 40. 91-97. 16*9
iii. 23. 284 iv. 180. 450
llagaillans - - - - iv. 130
Mahomet - - - - ii. 36 l
1
Maimonides, iv. If. 19/82. 134.
301. 328. 352. 460 v. 140.
301. 305. 328.451. 471
Malachi, v. 96. 147. 330, 334.
336. 34?. 344. 349. 364. 367.
377 vi. 78
Malebraneh - - - - iii. 370
Manasseh Ben Israel, v. 378. 3;97.
414
Mandeville, i. 239. 281 vi. Ill
Manetho, ii. 558, 359 iv. 104
159. 165.358, 359.453.
Mann - - - r - -iv. 218
Manulius - - - - - iii. 110
Marsilius Ficinus - - iv. 415
Marinus - , - - - iij. 20
Mark ------ vi. 175
Marsham, ii, 42, 121. 343.356,
357. 359 iv. 82. 89. 164. 176.
228. 301. 319. 401. 454 v. 251
vi. 37. 1 60. 354
Martinius ----- iv. 126
Matthew, v. J0. 403 vi. 189-
32.9.331, 332
Maxinms Tyrius - i. 321 iv. 50
Mead - - r iv. 4-46- - vi. 392
Mclampus - - - - iy. ]05
i Mclanthius - - - ii. 178, 179
| Menago - - - - - iv. 412
Mt naiider- - - - - ii. 179
Merriiriiis Trisinenisles, ii, 113
Mf-Lrodorus - - - - }ii. 29!
Mfiirs-ius - - - - ii. 49. 7-S
Micah, iv. 173--vi. 355. 37 J,
. 574.
M idnk ton, i. 100 iii. 366.376--
iv. ! 5. 456. 46(> v. .106 vi. 53.
2 (). 260. 262. 321. 343, 341.
: Milion, ii. 95. 16*8. 3(>9, 370. 372,
iv. 243
Minufius, Felix, ii. 337. 37 1 ? 372.
iii. 289 iv. 55 vi. 144
Moliere ----- v . C66
Montaine - - - i. 26; }
Montesquieu, i. 194 ii. 308
iii. 555.
Moor ------ iii. 166
Morgan - - iv. 1.5. 366 vi. 43
Mosheim, ii. 067 iii. 36 4, 365
v. 482
T II E
V I N E L E G A T I O V.
45*
Movie -
3 lu ret -
Musaius
- ii. 379 iii 363
.--_-. iv. 431
- - i. 3oo ii. 149
N.
Xeedham - - - iv. 3$?. 385.
Nehemiah, T. 13!, 324. 334, 335.
342,343.346", 347. 3/0.
Nemesius iii. t65
Nevochirn .... iv. 134
Newton, Sir Isaac, i. 308 ii. 2 If).
359 iii. 173. 1?6\ 270 iv. 80.
203.215. 227. 230. 242. 245.
247- 254. 367. 428. 440 -
v. 160 vi. 65, 113. 124,293.
323. 348
Nicander ----- iii. 71
Nicanor ------ i. 273
Nicepliorus, Greg. - - ii. 15
Nonnus - - ii. 54. 114. vi. 32
Norden ----- ir. 404
Numenius ----- iii. 89
Ocellus Lucanuts - i. 332. 352
Oldmixon ----- i. 327
Orijirn, ii. 4. 6l , 62. 68. 1 15. 3 1 2.
350lit. 31. 31. 51. 97- 102.
105. 107. 135. 150. 179. . ">. r >, S
iv. 4.9- v. 45). 172. 257 vi. .95)
Oribusius - - - vi. 396
Orohin - iii. 324 iv. 17. 20, 21
Orpheus - i. 333 ---ii. 45, 46". 66
Otter, Tom - - - - iv. 1.96
Oiitrain - v. 1<)5
Ovid, ii. S3. <)0. 108. 146 . 173.
366 iii. (T I . (it). 7 1 . 7;> - iv. 1 uo.
206 . 253 vi. 116
p.
Pacviviamis - - iii. 151
Paltphatcs - - ii!. 64. 76
Parennm - - - - iv. 129
Parlhenius iii. 71
Pascal - - - vi. 40, 4i
Pasquier i. . J;}1
Patorculus - it. 360 -iii. 72 -
v. 454
v. 5. 11. U-i.9- 15 J, 179 ^00.
246. 258. 2r?4, 265. 28/. 591.
370. 378. 3 86 . 3S8. 400, 401
vi. 14, 15. 39. 64, 65. 250. 259.
572, 273. 296.309, 310, 3.11.
312. 326. 348. 352. 388.
Pausanias, ii. 6. 43. 47. 123, 138.
174. 189.
Pearce ------ VK
Pericles 1 ----- ii.
Persius ----- vi. S?8l
Petavius - - - - - v. 10 1
Peter, v. 15O. 2-a. 406 vi. 6 4.
70. 188. 268, 269. 302. 3?6. 343,
344. 348
Peters - - - - - * v. 283
Petit, de la Croix - - - i. 316"
Petit, S. - ii, 50. 386 iii. 392
Pha^drus - - - - - vi. 100
Phalaris ----- i. 3.52
Pherecydes Syrius - - iv. 136
Philo, "iii. 1*17 iv. 376. 423
V. 133vi. 237. 354
Pliilo-Biblius, ii. 346 iv. 158-^
vi. 37. 285
Philo-.JudaDus - - - - v. 38.$
Philostratus - ii. 10. 65. 178
Phoronis ----- iij. 28(>
Pliotius - - - ii. 182iii. 16 5
Pindar - - ii. 105. 142 v. 177
Plato, i. 210. 258. 300. 3l6. 342.
34-7. 354 ii. 8. 22. 24, 25. 51.
54. 79- 96. 104. 119. 125. 127,
TJS, 12.9. 131. 136. 147. 150.,
H)6. 212. 3ft 4 iii. 2. 19. 51. 24.
36. 40. 46. 52. o. 115. 118.
135. 141. 154. 160. 178. 214.
275. 291. 382 iv. 10. 131. 154.
17?. 235. 251.398 v. 35. 133.
vi. 237
Plelho - - - - ii. 115. 115
Pliny, i. 273 sit. 182.319 iii. 1 1.
121. 396 iv. 36. 45. 103. 106,
107. 111. 148.407. 411
Plotinus - - - - - iii.. 38*5
Plnche, Able de la - ii. 340
iii. :)06. 307. 39S- iv. 196. 211.
427
] Plutarch, i. 148. 240. 298. 300.
.;23. 325. 338. 354 ii. 9. 27.
28. 3-). 61. 70. 7"6. 8^>. ();3. <)7.
1(>5. 260. 307- 320. 33$. 345.
355 iii. 29, 30. 57. 40. $3, SI,
[ 6. 101. 107. 12"1. 137. 14*.
434
AUTHORS, &c. CITED IN
160. 169. 176. 183. 226. 294.
310. 371. 383. 385. 392 iv.
120. 122. 136. 145. 149- 186.
103. 207, 208. 225. 237. 296.
371. 418. 426. 434 v. 177
vi. 119
Pococke - iv. 280. 376 v. 419
Polo ii. 366
Polybius, i, 325, 326, 327 iii. 3.
6. 8. 41
Pompey ----- i. 275
Pomponatius - i. 220. 275. 342
Pomponius Mela - - - iv. 188
Pope, i. 309 ii. 230 iv. 205.
252, 253, 254, 255. 435, 436.
Porphyry, i. 321. 331. 352 ii. 9.
19. 26. 5^. 71. 105. 107. 151.
178. 208. 346 iii. 28. 34. 60.
171- 193. 385 iv. 141. 151.
185. 197.397.418
Posidoaius - - i. 275 iii. 178
Port-Royal - - - v. 443, 444
Prades, Abbe de - - - vi. 207
Pratextatus - - - - ii. 58
Pridcaux, iv. 199. 203. 20S. 366,
367. 417. 421 v. 41. 370
vi. 113
Proclus, ii. 119. 128 iii. 292
iv. 146. 148. 418
Psellus - - - - - - ii. 144
Ptolemy ----- iv. 104
Purchas - - - - iv. 118. 150
Puffendorf ----- ii. 364
Pythagoras, ii. 189 iii. 86, 87.
141 iv. 97. 141
Q.
Quintilian, i. 318 ii. 114 iii. 62.
109. 112 iv. 47. 139. 399.414,
415. 420 vi. 72
R.
Rabelais - - - iii. 307 iv. 9
Ramsay ------ iii. 179
Reinesius ----- iv. 412
Renaudot - - - - - iv. 164
Rimius ------ vi. 4
Rogers ------ iv. 15
Romaine ----- iv. 28
Rousseau - - - iii. 218. 389
Rowe .--..- ii. 372
Rubruquis, Father - - ii. 373
Ru*us ii. 154
Rufinus ------ iv. 176"
Rutherforth, v. 120. 148. 164.
404. 479, 480 vi. 35. 131
S.
Sachevcrell - ... i v . 3
Salomo ------ iv. 19
Sallust - iii. 42. 107. 140, 145
Sanchoniatho, ii. 36. 44. 346
iii. 190. 273. 279. 281. 283.301.
iv. 122. 149. 158. 182. 205.
368. 375, 376. 423 vi. 285 .
Sauvage i. 33 1
Saxo-Grammaticus - - iv. 430
Scaivpla - - - ii. 25 iii. IP
Scaliger - - - ii. 79 v. 133
Scarron - i. 154, 155 ii. 141
Schultcns, v. 321. 330. 341. 344.
457. 467
Scott vi. 8. 26
Scribonius Largus - - iii. 357
Selden - i. 250 ii. 363 vi. 68
Seneca, i. 171. 208, 209. 301
ii. 139- 354 iii. 39. 91. 104.
145. 166. 272
Serranus ----- iii. 214
Servetus --.- v. 13
Scrvius, ii. 103. 121. 130. 154.
163. 363 iii. 70, 71, 72. 94.
-iv. 224. 374 v. 578
vi. 201
Settle ------ iv. 383
Severus ----- ii. 170
Seward ... - - ii. 21
Sextus Empiricus, i. 263. 302
iii. 50. 84. 159. 288. 368. 3/1.
392 iv. 110.
Silhouette ----- ii. 342
Simon, Father, ii. 546 iv. 391
v. 86. 132. 184
Shaftesbury, Lord, i. 150. 169,
170. 176. 182, 183, 184. 190.
236 ii. 217. 302. 304. 379
iii. 9 239. 246 iv. 312.
v. 236 vi. 37. l6l. 186. 197
Shakespeare - - iv, 174. 408
Shaw iv. 406 417
Sherlock, iii. 389 iv. 7. 395.
436 v. 102. 234. 384. 420
vi. 130. 200, 201. 207. 260. 344
Shcringham,
THE DIVINE LEGATION.
Sberingham - i. 3l6 iv. lo4
tymcktbrd, iv. 96. 159. 335. 367-
398. 402, 403. 433. 439
v. 048 vi. 127.279
Smallbroeke - - - - iv. 28
Smith - - iv. 135. 313 vi. 84
Sociuus ------ vi. 47
Socrates, i. 188 iii. 45, 46. 86.
1.95 iv. 71
Solomon - - - ii. 153 v. 135
Sopater - * ii. 23. 77. 97. 143
Sophocles, i. 300 ii. 6. 12. 105.
120 v. 49
Sotado ii. 179
Spencer, iii. 285 iv. 81. 301.
323. 326. 334. 343. 347. 36*1,
362. 439. 452. 454 v.93. 251,
252. 315 vi. 127. 354
Spines;!, i. 1S8. 273. 330 iv. 309.
447 v. 124. 144. 166. 272.
275 vi. 364. S6 9
Stanley, i. 349 iii. 83. 101. 163.
362 iv. 401
Stubbing, iv. 18. 29. 458 v. 154.
180. 250. 272. 281. 285, 286.
399. 406. 479 vi. 24. 26. 40.
131. 137. 155. 157. 162, 163.
171. 201. 203. 207
Stephen - - - - iv. 80. 306
fctillingfleet, iv. 147. 159. 247.
367 vi. 1 13
Stobaeus, i. 324.332.341 ii. 137.
152 iii. 85. l63. 166
Strabo, i. 320. 325 ii. 2. 5. 32.
43. 72. 157. 162. 181. 319- 382.
iii. 10.29- 41. 97. 171. 356
ir. 92. 97. 146. 200. 228. 371.
374. 407
Stahlenberg - - - - iv. 119
Suarez vi. 210
Suetonius, ii. 10.57. 98. 112. 298.
360. 369, 370
Suidas, i. 326 ii. 50 iii. 182
iv. 419
Swift - - i. 152. 214 ii. 263
Sibylline Oracles - * - ii. 3
Sykes, iii. 123, 124. 359, 360
v. 118. 214.252.259.263, 264,
S65. 267. 479 vi. 66. 75. 131.
506. 391
Symniachus - - - - ii. 308
Syncellus - ii. 11 6. 356 iv. 104
fcynesius,ii.l5 iiiJ23.107 vi.395
Syriaau* * - - - - ii.
T.
Tachard it. 373
Tacitus, ii. 74. 129. 298. 312.315.
317- 327 Hi. 26*2 iv. 37. 132.
146. 148. 203. 212. 224. 296.
374. 407. 425. 429
Tanaquil Faber - - - vi. 72
Tanchum, Rabbi - - - v. 414
Tasso ------ ii. 207
Tatian - iii. 158. 181 iv. 410
Tavernier ----- ii. 26$
Taylor iv. 3<>
Taylor of Norwich - - v. 199
Teles iii. 85
Temple, Sir W. - - - i. 315
Tenisoii - - - - - - iv. 31
Terence, i. 258 ii. 13. 21.367
iii. 180
Tertullian, ii. 11. 17. 47. 62. 105,
114. 124. 370. 376 iii. 158.
197, 198, 199. 292 iv.45. 49
Themistius, ii. 118. 144 iii. 20.
359
Theodoret, ii. 3. 62. 70 ii. 251*
355 iv. 159
Thecderus - - - . - i. 273
Theophilus ----- ii. 34.7
Theophrastus, i. 315. 325 iii. 22,
iii. 252
Thomas ------ iv. 210
Thoth iii. 190
Thrasyllus - - - - - iv. 159
Thucydides - - ii. 345 v. 34O
Tibullus ----- ii. 70
Timaus - i. 325. 327 ii. 71
iii. 2. 41. 78. 82, 83
Tindal, i. 16*1. 202. 231 ii. 26?,
263 iii. 37. 211 iv. 71. 392,
393, 394. 444 v. 167. 171.
272 vi. 11. 41. 135. 351
\Toland, i. 202. 231 iii. 28. 37.
{ 172. 216. 268, 269. 271. 295
v. 124. 199
Touruemine - - - - v. 100.
Trajan - - - - - iv. 46. 65
Trismegist - - - - iv. 285
Trogus Pompeius - - iv. 370
Turnebus - i. 343 iv. 40O
Turner - ... - - iv. 31
TeUes - - - - ii. 139. 143
Valla
A u T ii o n s, & c . CITE D.
v.
Valla - - i. 3-19
Vauini - - i. 273 -v. 2() G
Varro, ii. l(>. 24. 52. 330 iii. 19.
58. 110. 124. 2(>5 iv. 5221-
Villeins - - - - ii. 34-1. 371
Telly, Abbe ----- ii. 36 2
Venn iv. 29
Victorias - - - - ii. 57- 348
Virgil, i. 341 ii. 67. 78. 349. 362,
363, 364 -iii. 70. 72. 186 .
383 iv. 374 vi. 70,71. 75. 80.
114. 201. 3 6.3, 304
Vitruvius - - ii. loS iv. 390
Viz/iinius - - - - - i. 331
Voltaire, i. 280 ii. 45. 88. 374
iv. 366 v. 276 vi. 3j.7. 363.
365. 368.373. 376
Vossius, iii, 296 iv. 197 v. 4ltf
W,
Walkrr ---- iv. 136
W niter - - - - - ii. 389
\Yaterland, iv, 29. 323 vi. 127.
M6ti
Uebster - - - - iv. 29, 30
\Vhcatl-ey ----- iv. 446
\Vhistou, iv. 453 v. 130. 13 2.
259. 279. 407 vi. 55. 84, S5.
200. 260
Whitby - v. 133
Wilkins ----- iv. 373
\Villiam of Newbourg - vi. 108
\Viiikciniaii -" - ii. 62 iv. 423
\Vitsius, iv. 302. 319. 323. 352.
452 vi. 127
Wollastoa - - i. 253 ii. 273
Wood, Anthony - - - iii. 386
\\Vjlston ---.-- i. 149
World ----"- iv. 3S l >
Wycherky - - * - i. 15O
Xeuoplion, iii. 39. 46. 52.
Z.
Xabara - - - - * - iv. 19
Zatynthus ----- iii. 28
/aleuchus - - - - - v. 3.35
Zecbarial), iv. 138 v. 96. 141.
160. 333. 33S. 351. 3\ >3. 367-
377
Xciy> - - i. 240 iii. 39- 101
Zeqxis ------ v. 2
Zuphaniah, iii. 347 v. 147. 327
vi. 87
Zinzendorf, Count - vi. 4, 5
Zopliar - - - - - v. 31O
Zoroaster - - - ii. 117- 145
Zusirnus- - - - . ii. 6i. 5r
END OF TOE DIVlNE LEGATION
I:ND OF THE SIXTH VOLUME*
r/oudou : Printed br Luke Hansard and Soii. 1 ^
near LiucoluVlnu field*,-
&
^} ^
H
Q
8
1 1
LlEi-iflf
University of Toronto
library
DO NOT
REMOVE
THE
CARD
FROM
THIS
POCKET
Acme Library Card Pocket
Under Pat. "Ref. Index File"
Made by LIBRARY BUREAU
- ,
* . A
,
/>?*
3ML -
