PRESENTED TO THE LIBRARY
OP
PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
BY
JVTfs. Rlexandep PFoudfit.
^C
z^^;^
<
|
f^ h ^ |
;v |
t |
|
o - ^ up c o |
c |
|
|
c: 1 z |
! >• t |
|
|
^CUPQ |
Ui |
.'^ « |
|
o |
C^ |
^c „ |
|
u |
Ji «7' |
|
|
.5 |
9 c {. |
|
|
J |
> |
|
|
-G |
||
|
-. |
S |
A.
THE
Divine Authority
OF THE
Old and New Testament
ASSERTED:
With a particular Vindication of the Cha- racters of Moses, and the Prophets, our SaviourjE SITS Christ, and his Apostles, againft the unjuft Afperfions and falfe Rea- fonings of a B O O K, entitled,
T^he Moral Philosopher.
^
By y OHN LELAND, M. A.
Author ofanANSWERtoa Book entitled,
Chrifiianity as Old as the Creation. The Second Edition, Corre<5ted.
Elihu in Job XXXIII. 13, 14.
Jf'hy dofl thou ftrinje againfi God ? For he giveth jiot Account of any of his Matters. For God fpeaketh once, yea twice, yet Man perceiveth it not.
LONDON:
Printed for Richard Hett, at the BiMe and Crozvn in the Poultry. Mdccxxxix.
(iii)
THE
PREFACE,
A JUST Liberty of Thinking (which on the one Hand is not governed by old and popular Prejudices, nor on the other Hand led alide by the AffcBation of Novelty, and a defire of Thinking out of the common Way) which hath nothing but Truth in View, and the ferving the Caufe of real Goodnefs and Righteoufnefs, is certainly one of the noblefl Things in the World. To be a Free-Thinker in this, which is the moft pro- per Senfe of the Word, muft be owned to be an honourable and amiable Character. This the Enemies of our Holy Religion are fenfi- ble of, and therefore they have done them- felves the Honour to affume this Charadter as if it were their fole Privilege, and a Di- ftin(5tion that fets them above the reft of Mankind. But as no Man is a Free-Thinker, or a good Reafoner, merely for calling him- felf fo, the Juftnefs of their Preteniions to that Charafter muft be examined by other Things than their own confident Boailings. If thefe Gentlemen were really what they pretend to be, the fincere Lovers and Friends of Truth, and of a juft Liberty of Thinking, this would
A 2 appear
iv Tie P RE F ACE.
appear by their fair and ingenuous Way of treating the Argument they have undertaken. We (hould be able to trace in their Condud:, and in their Writings, the fair and beautiful Lines of Candour and Sincerity, an impartial Love of Truth, and an Opennefs of Mind to Convidion and Evidence, a Modefly of Sen- timent, and a calm and ferious Temper of Mind becoming the Importance of the En- quiry. But I fhall hardly be thought fevere, if I fay, that he that would look for any Thing of this Kind in the Writings of thofe that have lately appeared amongft us in the Caufe of Infidelity., would find himfelf very much difappointed. Bold and confident Af- fertions he will every where meet with, many Things that difcover high Conceit of their own Sagacity and Penetration, and a Contempt of others that do not think in their Way j a Wil- lingnefs to ufe any Arts of Mifreprefentation to ferve their Caufe ; and a flrong Defire to give an odious or a ludicrous Turn to every Thing where Revelation is concerned -, and all covered over with a pretended Regard (tho' it mufl be owned the Difguife is generally very thin) for that Religion they are ufing their repeated Endeavours to fiibvert and to de- ilroy.
But amongfl them all there is fcarce any who hath rendered himfelf more remarkable this Way than one that hath lately appear- ed under the Charader of T^he Moral Philo^ Jopher^ tho', if there be any Morality in Wri- ting, I never knew any that had a lefs juft
Pretention
Tie PREFACE. v
Pretenfion to this Characfter. I would be one of the laft to charge any Man with a Want of Honefty and Sincerity : but there are ma- ny Things in his Book that look like a wilful Perverfion and Mifreprefentation of Fads, as well as Arguments ^ and fometimes fo circum- ftanced, that it is fcarce poffible for the moft extenfive Charity to fuppofe that it was owing to mere Ignorance. Perhaps the Author him- felf would not be willing to accept of this A- pology. I cannot help looking upon it as an Honour to Chriflianity, that its Adverfaries find themfelves obliged to take fuch Methods as thefe, in order to carry on their Defigns a- gainft it. Does not this argue a fecret Con- fcioufnefs that they can never prevail by a fair Attack upon the Scriptures ? For furely he muft be either very wicked or very foolifh, that would have recourfe to fuch bafe Arts as thefe to ferve his Caufe, if he thought his End could be anfwered without it, and that fair and juft Reafoning, and an equal candid Ma- nagement would do as well.
This Author pretends to go farther in his Conceflions, than fome of his Brethren and Fellow-Labourers in the fame Caufe. He acknowledgeth the great Ufefulnefs of Reve- lation, in Aid of human Reafon in the prefent corrupt State of Mankind ^ and feems to find Fault with thofe who maintain. That under the frefent Pravity and Corruption of Mankind, the Religion 'of Nature is written with fufficient Strength and Clearnefs upon every Mans Heart j and who therefore are not fo thankful as they
A 3 ought
vi Tie PREFACE.
ought to be for the Light of the Gofpel^ p. 145. And tho' he openly and avowedly rejeds the Old Teftame?ity and plainly declares that he will have nothing to do with it in Religion-, yet if we were to judge of his Sentiments by feveral PafTages in his Book feparately confidered, one would be apt to think that he entertained very favourable Thoughts of Chrillianity. It were eafy to fill feveral Pages with direcft and for- mal PaiTages, where he fpeaks honourably of fefus Chrijly and the Religion he hath intro- duced, as having brought clearer Difcoveries of our Duty, and enforced it by ftronger Mo- tives, and provided more effectual Aids, than ever was done before. And he exprefsly de- clares himfelf to be a Chriflian upon the Foot of the New Tefament., p. 359. But if wc compare thefe with other PafTages in his Book, we (hall find Reafon to think that all his pretended Regard for Chriflianity, and the Re- ligion of JefuSy is only the better to carry on his Defign of fubverting it. At the fame time, that he affeds to fpeak with great Refpeit of yefus Chrif he infinuates feveral bafe Reflec- tions upon his Condud and Character ; and juflifies thofe that put him to Death as afting like good Patriots, who were under Necef- fity of doing what they did, out of a regard to the Welfare and Safety of their Country. Tho* he pretends to acknowledge the Ufefulnefs of divine Revelation, and particularly of the Revelation brought by Jefus Chrift in the prefent corrupt State of Mankind, he leaves us no way of knowing when a divine Reve- lation
ne PREFACE. vii
iation is really given ; and particularly endea- vours to deftroy the Proof on which the Autho- rity of Chrtji\ divine Million, and of the Chrif- tian Revelation is eftablifhed, drawn from Mi- racles, Prophecy, and the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft : yea, he abfolutely denies them to be any Proofs at all. Tho' he fome- times talks of the great Benefit of the Light of the Go/pel., yet he will not allow that anv one Thing was difcovered by that Revelation feut what was known as well before, except Sahation by Jefus Chriji as the "Jewifi MeJ/iah^ that is, as he explains it, the national Deliverer of the Jews., and the Reftorer of the King- dom to Ifrael in a temporal political Senfe. This very Thing which he all along explodes as falfe and abfurd, he reprefents as the only proper Article of the Chriftian Faith *, and as the whole of that Gofpel which was preached by all the Apoflles, except St. Faul^ who he pretends preached a different Gofpel from the reft. He profefTeth to be a Chriftian on the Foot of the New Tejiamenty and yet he repre- fents it as leaning ftrongly towards Judaifm, and as a Jumble of inconfiftent Religions., and not at all to be depended on for a juft Account either of Dodtrines or Fadts. And what plain- ly difcovereth his determined Malice againft the New Teftament, is, that he pretends the Cafion, as we now have it, was corre^ed, re- 'uifed., and publijhed by the Jews, who altered it according to their own Prejudices and falfe
* See/>. 349.
A 4 Opi.
viii The PREFACE.
Opinions ; even by thofe very Jews yA\o foon after, upon being difappointed in Jefus, fet up Barchocbab for their Mefliah, p. 440, 441. Finally, after all the Compliments he pays to Revelation in general, and to the Chriftian Revelation in particular, as of great life in the prefent corrupt and degenerate State of Man- kind, and notv^ithftanding his Acknowledg- ment that the Religion of Nature is not written with fufficient Strength and Clearnefs upon every Man's Heart, yet when he comes to de- fcribe the true Religion, or moral Philofophy, as he calls it in the latter End of his Book, and the Means by which it is to be obtained, he doth not fend Men to the Gofpel for In- flrudion, but fends every Man to the Light of Nature in his own Breaft, to the HeaveUy to the Earthy and ejpecially to the brute Crea- tures, to. learji ReaJbUy Virtue, and Religion. Where he feems to put a fpecial Note upon the brute Creatures as much properer Inftrudors than Books of hifiorical Religion, which is the Title he uliially thinks fit to bellow upon the
Holy Scriptures. See/*. 418 430.
This may give the Reader feme Notion of this Writer's Candour and Sincerity, and what we are to think of his pretended Regard for Chriflianity, which in Effe(5l amounts to this : That the Chriftianity revealed in the Writings of the New Teflament is Jewifi Chrijiianity^ that is, Chriftianity corrupted and adulterated with Judaijin, which, according to him, is the worll: Religion in the World. But the true and genuine Chriftianity is Chrijiian Deijm, to
be
The P R E FA C E. ix
be learned not from the Writings of the New Teftament, but from the Volume of Nature, from every Man's own Breaft, from the Hea- vens, the Earth, and efpecially the Brute Crea^ tures, the genuine uncorrupted Inftrudlors in our Author's Chriftianity. So that the Gentlemen that afTume to themfelves the Title of Deijis, feem refolved that for the future they only fhall be called the true Chrijiians too. Thofe that look upon the New Tejlaniejit to be di- vinely infpired, and receive it as the Rule of their Faith, and take their Religion from thence, muft be called Chrijiian yews, who only put a ftrange Mixture of inconliftent Re- ligions upon the World for Chriftianity : whereas thefe Chrijiian Deijis teach it in its Purity, and in order to propagate pure uncor- rupted Chriftianity they do their utmofl to difcard the Writings of the New Teftament, that is, the Writings that give us an Account of the Dodlrines taught by Chriil and his Apoftles. But fince thefe Gentlemen will not alJow us the honourable Title of Chrijiians, it is but fair that they fhould leave us that of Free-Thinkers, to which I really think the Advocates for the Gofpel Revelation have a much jufter Pretenlion than they. But they feem to be too fond of this Title to part with it. All the Religion this Writer feems willing to allow us is only an Hijiorical, Political, Cle- rical, Mechanical Faith and Religion, which are Terms of Art he often makes Ufe of to de- fcribe Revealed Religion ; whilfl he appropri- ates Real Religion, and rnoral Truth and Righ-
teoufnefs
X The P R E F ^ C E.
teotifnefs to himfelf, and thofe of his own Fadion.
Thus whatever the reft of the World think of thefe Gentlemen, they are refolved to think very well of themfelves. If others will but take their Words for it, they muft pafs for the only Free-Thinkers, the only Moral Philojb- phers^ and the only Men of Senfe : For he lets us know, that there is not a Man of Senfe in England that goes to Church for any other Reafon, but for Fear of the Imputation of Atheifm^ that the Clergy would otherwife lay upon him, p. 115. They are the Men, and Wifdom mufl die with them ; the only Men of Real Religion, and Friends of Moral Truth and Right eoufnefs, and finally, in their own Opinion, the only true Chrifiians. It will be caiily allowed, that their Pretenfions to all thefe Chara6lers are alike juft, and well-founded.
But belides all this, they feem to fet up for a kind of Infallibility too. This W^riter talks of his Moral Philofopher's having his Tinder- (landing irradiated with the Beams of immu- table eternal Reafon, which he calls an infal- lible Light from Heaven to teach and inform us how to ail. He reprefents him as receiving Intelligence and Informatioji frotn eternal Wif- dom^ and hearing the clear intelligible Voice of his Maker and Former, fpeaking to his filent undifiurbed attentive Reafon : whereas others that feek for Information in Religion from Books meet with nothing but Confifion and Dif- traBion, a Babel of Faith and Religion. He often talks as if he, and thofe of his Way, who
pretend
The P R E f A C E. xi
pretend wholly to govern themfelves by the Principles of moral Truth and Righteoufnefs^ had an infallible Criterion of divine Truths by which they were fecured from Error, and in which Men cannot be mifiaken. He reprefents the Principles of the Religion of Nature as what all Men mufl agree in^ whereas they are for ever divided in Points of mere Revelation, p. 94. But how comes it then that this Writer, in this very Book, thinks himfelf obliged to argue againft fome of his Brethren, who he tells us would be thought to be great Philofo- phers and very wife Men^ who yet deny Man's Free- Agency^ the Obligations of the Duty of Prayer^ and God's continual and immedi- ate Agency and Influence in the Government of the World? I fuppofe he will hardly pretend that thefe are uncertain, and of no Importance, becaufe Men, and thofe too that profefs to be impartial Inquirers, are di- vided about them. For he tells us, that thefe Things are of infinite Confequence to Mankind, And yet in feveral Parts of his Book he raifeth a mighty Stir about the Differences among Chrifiia?is, with relation to the Articles of their Faith, as if this were a Demonftration that thefe Doctrines are uncertain and obfcure, and of no ufe to Mankind. An Argument that may be turned with equal Force againft natu- ral Religion, and againft the common Princi- ples of Senfe and Reafon.
He exprelTeth his Apprehenfion, that this Performance of his would raife up all the Clergy of the Nation ; that the Silver -Smiths
would
xii The P R E FA C E.
would be all in on Upf^oar : the ytidaizing Clergy would be in Anyis : and many large ela- borate Volumes would be written^ and a thou- fdnd Sermom preached againji his Book. He alfo foretels, that they would clearly and tri- umphantly confute all that he had faid without fo much as aiifwering any one ObjeBion. See p. II, 357, 358. All that can be concluded from this is, that he looks upon himfelf to be a Writer of very great Importance. But I do not find there hath been fo general an Alarm, or that his Attack againft revealed Religion hath been judged fo very formidable as he feemeth to apprehend. Perhaps to have taken no Notice of him at all would have been a greater Mortification to this Writer, than the befl Anfwer that could be publifhed againfl him. And yet, on the other Hand, it is not unlikely that in the Opinion he feems to have of his own Sufficiency, he might be ready to flatter himfelf, that if the Friends of Reve- lation did not anfwer him, it was becaufe they could not do it. Indeed I fhould think it of very little Confequence to the World what he thought of this Matter ! but pofTibly the fuf- fering fuch an infolent Attack upon revealed Religion to pafs unregarded might be of Dif- advantage in an Age already too much inclined to Infidelity. This Writer's fmart and confi- dent Way of faying Things, and the high Pretences he every where makes to Reafon and Demon flration, may be apt to impofe upon fomq' that will not give themfelves the Trouble of a very clofe Examination. And
the
He PREFACE, xiii
the Objedions he hath raifed give Occa- fion to the clearing fome Difficulties, and to the fetting Ibme Things in a proper Light, that may be of Service to thofe, who, tho* they are not without their Doubts, are willing to be informed. I thought therefore it might be of Ufe to enter upon a diftindt Examination of this Philofopher : In which, I have not wil- lingly concealed the Strength of any Objedion he hath advanced, and perhaps have confi- dered feveral Things he offers more fully and particularly than fome will judge needful.
This Work is entirely confined to the Ob- jedtions he urgeth againft the Old and New Teflament, and therefore no Notice is taken of the Account he pretends to give of the Senti- ments and Pradice of the primitive Chriftians, tho' this might furnifh us with farther Proofs of the Injuftice and Difingenuity of this Wri- ter. Nor have I meddled with his Inved:ives againft the Clergy, the Priejls., the Theologaf- fers, the Syjiem- mongers^ the Faith -mongers^ &c. JThefe are Things fo much to be exped:- ed from Writers of this Kind, that they only pafs for Words of Courfe. He acknowledg- eth indeed that many Ecclefiajlicks of the fe- veral Deno?ninations are wife and reafonable Men : but I believe they will fcarce think themfelves obliged to him for his Compliment, fince he infinuates at the fame Time that they are in his own Way of thinking. But as for thofe that ftand up for pofitive, injiituted^ re- vealed and political Religion, or the\ Religion of the Hierarchy^ for all thefe are in his Lan- guage
xiv The P R E fj C E.
guage the fame Thing, he plainly lets us know that it is not his Defigft to dtfiinguijh between one Sort of Clergy and another, becaiife in this Cafe they are fcarce diflinguijhable. p. 94.
I have endeavoured in the following An- fwer to difpofe his Objecftions into fome Order, than which nothing can be more confufed and irregular as they lie in his Book. I firfl: con- iider what he ofFereth concerning the Proofs of divine Revelation in general j and then proceed to examine the GbjeSiions he hath ad- vanced againft the Old Tejiament, or the Law of Mofes and the Prophets, with regard to which he a6teth an open undifguifed Part, and no where concealeth his Malice. In the laft Place, the Authority of the New T^eftament, and the Do6trine and Character of our Saviour fefus Chriji and his Apoftles is aflerted and vindicated, and his pretended Account of the fewijh Chriftianity dete(fted. The Summary of the feveral Chapters which followeth this Preface will give the Reader a fuller View of the Defign and Method of this Work : in which feveral Things are conlidered more fully than would have been neceflary, if I had nothing in view but precifely to anfwer the Book before me. As I have once before en- gaged in a Work of this Nature, I fomctimes beg leave to refer to it, that I may not be guilty of needlefs Repetitions.
Our Author declares in his Preface, that he had no other Defign in view than to fer-ce the Caufe rf Virtue and true Religion, How
far
lie P R E F A C E. xv
Far the Methods he makes ufe of are confiftent with fuch a Defign the impartial Reader will determine. I can fincerely profefs, that the Reafon of my Undertaking this Work is he- caufe I am firmly perfuaded that the Caufe of Chriflianity is the Caufe of God, of religious Truth and Virtue : That to aflert the Autho- rity of the Scriptures is one of the beft Services that can be done to Mankind, and even to the Interefts of natural Religion, the main Princi- ples of which are there moft clearly explained, mod ftrongly eftablifhed, and moft powerfully enforced : That if the Chriftian Revelation were once difcarded, the ftrongeft Reftraints to Vice and Wickednefs would be removed, and the moft effedual Motives to the Practice of Virtue and the purefl Morals, together with thofe glorious and divine Hopes which are the chief Support and Joy of a good Man's Life, would be fubverted, or in a great Degree weakened : That to take the Scriptures out of the Hands of the People would be to give them up to all Manner of Wickednefs, Igno- rance, Superftition, and falfe Worfhip, and to leave them expofed to be pradifed upon by artful and defigning Men, againft all which a thorough Acquaintance with the Holy Scrip- tures, and a firm Adherence to them as the great Rule of Faith and Pradtice is the mofl cffe(5lual Prefervative.
I can fcarce form to myfelf an Idea of a Revelation whofe Dodrines and Precepts have a more manifefl Tendency to promote the Honour of God, and the Good of Mankind,
or
XIV He P R E Pa C E,
guage the fame Thing, he plainly lets us know that it is not his Defign to difiinguijh between one Sort of Clergy and another^ becaufe in this Cafe they are fcarce difiinguijhable, p. 94.
I have endeavoured in the foUov^^ing An- fwer to difpofe his Objeftions into fome Order, than which nothing can be more confufed and irregular as they lie in his Book. I firft con- fider what he offereth concerning the Proofs of divine "Revelation in general ; and then proceed to examine the (JbjeBions he hath ad- vanced againft the Old Tejiament, or the Law of Mofes and the Prophets, with regard to which he adteth an open undifguifed Part, and no where concealeth his Malice. In the iaft Place, the Authority of the New Teftame7ity and the Doctrine and Charad:er of our Saviour yefus Chriji and his Apoftles is aflerted and vindicated, and his pretended Account of the fewi/h Chriftianity detefted. The Summary of the feveral Chapters which followeth this Preface will give the Reader a fuller View of the Defign and Method of this Work : in which feveral Things are confidered more fully than would have been necellary, if I had nothing in view but precifely to anfwer the Book before me. As I have once before en- gaged in a Work of this Nature, I fometimes beg leave to refer to it, that I may not be guilty of needlefs Repetitions.
Our Author declares in his Preface, that he had no other Defign in view than to fer-ce the Caufe <f Virtue and true Religion. How
far
The P R E F A C E. xv
far the Methods he makes ufe of are confiftent with fuch a Defign the impartial Reader will determine. I can fincerely profefs, that the Reafon of my Undertaking this Work is be- caufe I am firmly perfuaded that the Caufe of Chriftianity is the Caufe of God, of religious Truth and Virtue : That to aflert the Autho- rity of the Scriptures is one of the beft Services that can be done to Mankind, and even to the Interefts of natural Religion, the main Princi- ples of which are there moil: clearly explained, mofl ftrongly eftablifhed, and mofi: powerfully enforced : That if the Chriftian Revelation were once difcarded, the ftrongeft Reftraints to Vice and Wickednefs would be removed, and the moft effediual Motives to the Pradice of Virtue and the pureft Morals, together with thofe glorious and divine Hopes which are the chief Support and Joy of a good Man's Life, would be fubverted, or in a great Degree weakened : That to take the Scriptures out of the Hands of the People would be to give them up to all Manner of Wickednefs, Igno- rance, Superftition, and falfe Worfhip, and to leave them expofed to be practifed upon by artful and defigning Men, againft all which a thorough Acquaintance with the Holy Scrip- tures, and a firm Adherence to them as thq great Rule of Faith and Pradtice is the moft effecflual Prefervative.
I can fcarce form to myfelf an Idea of a Revelation whofe Dodrines and Precepts have a more manifeft Tendency to promote the Honour of God, and the Good of Mankind,
or
xvi The P R E F A C E.
or that is more remote from the Views of worldly Ambition, Avarice, and Senfuality ; in a Word, that carries in it greater internal Cha- raders of Goodnefs and Purity, or is attended with more illuftrious external Atteftations of a divine Original. Nor are the Difficulties that attend it greater than may well be expected, fuppofing a Revelation really given to Man- kind. Several of thefe Difficulties are obviated in the following Book^ and if what is here offered may be of Service to the Interefts of real Religion and important Truth, I fhall not repent the Pains I have been at, under much bodily Weaknefs, to ferve fo glorious a Caufe.
THE
( xvii )
THE
CONTENTS.
CHAP. I.
T^HE Moral Philofopher'' s Concejfions concerning the Ufefulnefs of divine Revelation^ in the prefent cor- rupt State of Mankind. He leaves no JVc^ of knowing when fuch a Revelation is really given. His Pretence that moral Truth and Fitnefs as ap- pearing to our Under/landings, is the only Proof or Evidence of divine Truths or of any Do^rine as com- ing from God^ examined. That not only the Perfons to whom the Revelation is originally and immediately Tnade.^ but others alfo may have a fufficient Ajfurance of its being a Revelation from God., fo as to make it reafonable for them to receive it as of divine Authority. And particularly that Miracles may be fo circum- Jlanced as to furnifh a fufficient Proof of a Perfon*s divine Mijfwn, and of the divine Original and Au- thority of DoElrines and Laws attejied, and confirmed by thofe Mracles. The Author* s Exceptions againjl this conjidered. And what he offers to fhew that a divine Revelation cannot be conveyed to us by huinan Tejlimony^ fo as to be a Matter of divine Faith, examined. Page i^to^.^.
CHAP.
xviii The C O N IT E N T S.
CHAP. II.
An Entrance on the Authors Objections againjl the
Old T'ejtament. The jirange Reprefentation he makes
of the Law of Mofes. Some general Confiderations
concerning the Nature and Dejtgn of that Law. Its
moral Precepts pure and excellent. Its ritual In-
junEfions appointed for wife Reafons. The Nature of
its San£fions confidered. Reafons of God's erecting the
People of Ifrael i?ito a peculiar Polity. Nothing ah-
furd in this Conjiitution, It was defigned in a Sub-
ferviency to the general Good. The miraculous Fa5is
whereby that Law was confirmed^ not poetical Em-
hellifhments., but real Fa5is. The Author's Reafons
to prove that thofe FaCls could not be underjiood in a
literal hijlortcal Senfe^ JJoewn to be vain and infufficient.
Page 44, to 80.
CHAP. III.
The Author's Arguments againfi the Law of Mofes from the Authority of St. Paul confidered. Our Sa- viour Jefus Chrift, and the Apojile Paul, Jirongly affert and confirm the divine Original of the Law of Mofes. The diminijhing and degrading Manner in which that Apofile feems fometimes to fpeak of that Law^ accounted for. The Injlances the Author pro- duces tofhew that there was no End of the Law but what the Apofile exprefsly contraditls., examined. The Attempt he makes to prove that there was no fiich typical or myfiical Senfe of the Law as St. Paul fup~ pofes in his Arguings with the Jews. No Abfurdity^ but a Beauty and Harmony .^ in fuppojing that what is obfiiirely hinted at in the Law., is more clearly re- vealed in the Gofpel. Page 8q, to 116.
CHAP.
The CONTENTS. xlx
C H A r*. IV.
The Auth&r's Objemons agahiji the Law of Mofes from the internal Co-nftitution of that Law confidered. His Pretence that that Law extended only to the out- ward Pramce and Behaviour of Men in Society, and that the Obligation of it with refpe5i to civil and focial Virtue extended no farther than to the Mem- bers of that Society, and that they were put into a State of Wair with all the refi of the World. It is fljswn that that Law required an inward Purity of Heart and Affections. The great Tendernefs and Hu- manity that appears in its Precepts. It required a kind and benevolent ConduCl, not only towards thofe of their own Society, but towards Strangers. That Con- Jlitution not founded in the Principles of Pcrfecution.^ It tolerated all that worjhipped the one true God, tho* not conforming to their peculiar Rites and Ufages. The pmi/hing Idolatry with Death in the Common- wealth of Ifrael accounted far. No Obligation by that Law to extirpate Idolatry, and defiroy Idolaters in all other Countries by Fire and Sword. His Pretence that Mofes directed the Ifraelites to extend their Con- quers through all Nations, and that their Conflitution and Plan of Government was contrived for it, ex- amined. The contrary to this fhewn. The military Laws, Deut. xx. explained. Whether that Law abfolutely prohibited all Alliances with Idolaters. Page 1 1 6, to 146.
CHAP. V.
The Author's Pretence that the Law^ of Mofes encouraged human Sacrifices as the highcji A^s of Religion and Devotion, when offered not to Idols, but to the true God. Such Sacrifices plainly forbidden in the Law to be offered to God. His Account of Lev. xxvii. 28, 29. confidered. The ylrgument he draws from the Law of Redemption of the Firft- a 2 bom
XX The C O N T E N T S.
horn turned againjl him. l!he Cafe of Abraham'^ offering up his Son Ifaac confidered at large. Human Sacrifices not encouraged by this Injiance^ but the con- trary. iJje true State of the Cafe laid down. Abraham himfelf had full Affurance that this Com- mand came from God. Upon what Grounds his having had fuch a Command from God is credible and probable to us. It could not be owing to the Illujions of an evil Spirit : Nor to the Force of his own En- thufiafm. ^he Authcfs 'Pretence., that this Inflame dejiroys the Law of Nature^ and leaves all to mere arbitrary Will and Pleafure, examined. P. 146, to 176.
CHAP. VI.
The Moral Philofopher^s Account of the Original of Sacrifices and of the Priefthood., and of JolephV firft efiablifhing an independent Priefthcod in Egypt. "The Reprefentation he makes of the Mofaical Prieft- hood^ confidered. 'The Priefis had not the Government of the Nation vefied in them by that Conftitution, nor were they exempted from the Jurtfdi6lion of the Law., nor had an Interefi feparate from and incon- Jifient with the State. Concerning the Church-Reve- nues efiablijhedby the haw of Mofes. The particular lyianner of providing for the Maintenance of the Priefis and Levites accounted for. The Author* s Pre- tence, that it was an infufferable Burden and Im- poveri/hment to the People, and the Caufe of their frequent Revoltings to Idolatry, examined. Some Obfervations concerning the Sacrifices prefcribed under the Mofaical Oeconomy. The Author^s Obje^ions againft them confidered. No Sacrifices were to be offered in Cafes where civil Penalties were exprefsly appointed by Law, and why. The atoning Virtue of the Sacrifices fuppofcd to confifi in the Sprinkling of the Blood. This fi^ewn not to be a Priefily Cheats hut appointed for tvife Rcafons. Page 176, to 2CO. ^ CHAP.
The C O N T E N T S. xxi
CHAR VII.
His Pretence that the Law of Mofes made no Dif- tin^ion between Morals and Rituals, and never urged Things as in themfehes fit and reafijnable j and that the Stories of the Miracles recorded there were the Caufe of the Jews Obduracy and Impcnitency through- out all their Generations. His bitter Inveclives a- gainjl the Jews, and the flrange Reprefentation he makes of that People, with a View to cafl a Re^ proach upon their Law. It is fhewn that by the Ad- vantage of their Law, they far exceeded all other Nations in the Knowledge of Religion, and that they were famed for Wifdom even among the Heathens. 'The proper life that fhould be made of the Accounts given us of their Faults, and of the Punifhments in- fli^ed on them. P. 200, to 216.
CHAP. VIII.
A Tranjition to the Author'* s Obje^fions againfl other Parts of the Old Tejlament. Concerning the two different Turns or difi:in5f popular Appearances which he pretends the Spirit of Prophecy took in Ifrael. And firfi, concerning the Urim and Thummim. His Account of the Original and Dejign of that Oracle conjidered. The Attempt he makes to dejiroy the Cre- dit of it, becaufe of the Part it had in the War againjl the Benjamites for the Injury done to the Levite and his Concubine at Gibeah. That whole Tranf- aSfion particularly conjidered. His Account of the ceafing of that Oracle, and the Renfons he cffigns for it, examined. The Order of Prophets, by his own Confeffion a wije and excellent Irjlitution. The flrange inconjijient Reprefentation he gives of their Chara^er and Conduct. The Way he takes to ac- count for their foretelling future Events, fioewn to be
infufficient.
xxii The C O N T E N T S.
infufficient. 'Their Prediciions not merely general and ambiguous^ but clear ^ exprefs^ and circumjiantial. ^he difference between the falfe Prophets and the the true, conjidered. No Argument to be drawn from the former to the Difadvantage of the latter. P. 2 1 7, to 258.
CHAP. IX.
Some general Reflexions on the Attempt the Author makes to fhezv that the Prophets were the great Di- Jlurbers of their Country, and that they were of per- fecuting Principles, Enemies to Toleration and Liberty of Confcience : It is fheivn that they were the truefi Friends to their Country, and that if their Counfels had been hearkened to, its Ruin would have been prevented. His Inventive againfi the Prophet Samuel, whom he reprefents as the Founder of the Prophetick Order. His Pretence that he kept Saul twenty Tears out of the Exercife of the Royal Power, after he was chofen King. The Account he gives of SamuePj parrel againfi Saul/^r depofing him from the High- Priefihood, and of the fever al Plots laid by him for the T)eflruction of that Prince, cfpecially in the Affair of the Amalekites, conftdered. In what Senfe it is faid, that it repented God that he had made Saul King. That this was not a Pretence of Samuel to cafi his own Follies and want of Forefight upon the Almighty. David'j Character conftdered and vindi- cated : His Behaviour towards Saul fhewn to be noble and generous. Notwithflanding the Faults he was guilty of, in his general ConduSl he was an excel- lent Perfon. Concerning his Dancing before the Ark i the Author'^s bafe Reprefentation of it. Lord S — y*j Account of it, and of the Saltant naked Spi- rit of Prophecy, conftdered. JP. 259, /<? 300.
CHAP.
The CONTENTS, xxiii
C H A P. X.
^e Author's farther Inve^iive againji the Prophets conjidered. His Account of their pretended Confpi- racy again§i Solomon. The rending the Kingdom of the Ten Tribes from the. Houfe of David not owing to the Intrigues of the Prophets^ but to the jufl Judg- ment of God. The Prophets not the Authors of the federal civil Wars and Revolutions in the Kingdom of Ifrael. TJje favourable Account he gives of Ahab and Jezebel, and the other idolatrous Princes^ as Friends to Toleration and Liberty of Confcience. The Falfjoodof thisfJjewn. His Attempt to vindicate the Perfecutions raifed againji the true Prophets of the Jjord. Concerning Elijah'j Chara^er and Condu5f^ and particidarly concerning his caufmg BaalV Pro- phets to be put to Death at Mount Carmel. The Cafe of Elilha'j anointing Jehu to be King of Ifrael, with a Commiffion to dejlroy the Royal Houfe of Ah.2ihy conjidered : as alfo his Management with Hazael. The Charge this Writer brings againji the Prophets as fomenting the Wars between the two Kingdoms of Ifrael and Judah, and at length occajioning the Ruin of bothy fhewn to befalfe and incon/ijient, P. 300, te 3^9-
C H A P. XL
His Charge againji the Prophets that lived befire the AfTyrian Captivity^ that they declaimed only againji Idolatry y and not againji the other Vices and Immora- lities of the Peoj^e. The Faljhood of this fhewn. The excellent Scheme of Religion and Morals taught by the antient Prophets. His Pretence that the whole Nation of the Jcv/sfrom the Time of Mofes to Ezra
were
xxiv The CONTENTS.
were Sadducees or Deijlical Materialijls -, and that they received the fir^ Notions of a future State from the Perfian Magiy examined. His Account of the Change introduced into the Jewifh Religion at that 'Time fhewn to be groundlefs and abfurd. A future State implied in the Law., and all along believed among the People ., and clearly intimated in the Writings of the Prophets. This proved from feveral Parages. P- 3>ZO, to 346.
CHAP. XII.
A Tranjiiion to the Moral Philofophef s ObjeSfions againfi the Neiv Tefiament. Tho* he pretends a very high Refpe£l for our blejfed Saviour, yet he inji- nuates feveral Refle6iions upon his Condu5i and Cha- ra^er. Thofe Reflexions fhewn to be groundlefs and unjujl. Our Lord did not comply with the Prejudices of the People in any Thing contrary to Truth, or to the Honour of God. He was far from ajjuming to be a temporal Prince., yet he all along claimed to he the Meffiah promifed and foretold by the Pro- phets. The Author* s Pretence that he renounced that CharaEler at his Death., fhewn to be falfe. The Meffiah fpoken of by the Prophets., was not merely to be a national Deliverer of the Jews, nor were the Benefits of his Kingdom to be confined to that Na- tion only., but to be extended to the Gentiles. This fhewn from the Prophecies themfelves. The Attef- tation given to Chrifl^s divine Mffion^ by the Prophe- cies of the Old Tejlamentt confidered and vindicated. P. 346, to z^^.
CHAP. XIII.
The Author's Charge againfi the Apoflles, examin- ed. His Pretence that they themfelves were far
from
The C G N T E N T S. xxv
from chiming Infallibility^ confidered. It is floewn that they did profefs to be under the unerring Guid- ance and Infpiration of the Holy Ghoji, in publijh- ing the Gofpcl of Jefus ; and that they gave fuffici- ent Proofs to convince the World of their divine Mif- Jion. The Attejiations given to Chrijlianity^ and to the DoBrines taught by the Apofllcs^ by the extra- ordinary Gifts and Powers of the Holy Ghojl^ con- fidered and vindicated., againjl our Authofs Excep- tions. His Pretence that thofe Gifts of the Holy Ghofl might be ufed like natural Faculties., and Ta^ knts, according to the Pleafure of the Perfons who were endowed with them., either for the promoting Truth or Error ; and that the falfe Teachers, as well as the true, had thefe extraordinary Gifts and Powers, and made Ufe of them in Confirmation of their falfe 'Doctrines, examined at large. Page 360 to 390.
CHAP. XIV.
The Gofpel taught by all the Apojiles was the fame. The Aiithofs Account of the Jewifh Gofpel, preach- ed by them, falfe and groundlefs. The pretended 'Difference between St. Paul and the other Apof- tles, concerning the Obligation of the Law of Moles on the Jewifh Converts, examined. None of the Apofiles urged the Obfervation of that Law, as ne- ceffary to Juftification and Acceptance with God, under the Gofpel-, tho* they all judged it lawful to cbferve the Mofaick Rites for a Seafon. The Wif- dom and Confiftency of this their Conduct, and the entire Harmony between St. Paul and the other Apof- iles in this Matter, fhewn. The pretended Difference between them relating to the Law of Profelytifm to he urged on the Gentile Converts. The Decree of the Apoflolical Council at Jerufalem, confidered \ and the Reafons and Grounds of that Decree in- b quired
sxvi The C O N T E N T S.
quired inlo. No Proof that the Apofile Paul difap- proved or counter-acied that "Decree. The Conduit of. that Apofile at his Trials juflified. P. 391 to 425.
(^ H A P. XV.
The Authors Pretence that the Apocalypfe is fnoft properly the Chriflian Revelation^ and that it is there that zve are principally to look for the Doctrines of Chrifiianity ^ conftdered. There is nothing in that Book to countenance the Worfhip of Angels.^ Invoca- tion of Saints.^ or Prayers for the Dead. Salvation is not there confined to the Jews only. His Account of the fifth Monarchy which he pretends is foretold in that Book, fhewn to be falfe and abfurd. The Attempt he makes againjl the whole Canon of the New Teflamenty under Pretence that it was cor- rupted and interpolated by the Jews., and that Chriji's own Difiples reported Doctrines and Fa^s according to their own falfe Notions and Prejudices^ examined And difprov€d. P. 425 to 442.
CHAP. XVL
The Moral Phihfopher fets up for r edifying the Er' rors of Ch'ijiians with regard to fome of the par- ticular DoBrines of Chrifiiamty. His Objections againfl the Doctrine of Chriji*s Satisfatlion conft- dered. Tisere is ncthing in it contrary to Juftice. The Fullnefs of the SatisfaCiion not inconfifient with 'a free Pardon. It doth not rob God of the Glory &f his Mercy, a?ui gii^e the whole Praife to Chrifl. the Pretence that Chrifl' s Satisfatiion is needlefs hecaiife Repentance ahte is fufficient without it, examined: It doth not defiroy the Necejfny of per-
fonal
The CONTENTS. xxv"
fond Repentance and Obedience^ but ejtablifheth it. Chriji*s Prayer to the Father that the Cup might pafs from him not inconfijient with the Notion of his dying for the Sins of the World. 'The Author* s Afferticn that there was no fuch thing as vicarious Sacrifices under the Law of MofeSy and the Way he takes to account for Chrijl*s being called a Propitiation^ ex- amined. 'The Reprefentation he makes of the Gof pel Do^rine of Pardon upon Repentance. His Abfurdity and Inconftflancy in this fhewn. His Attempt againjl the pofitive Precepts of Chrijlian- ity conftdered. The Arguments he draws frmn the Differences among Chrijtians, to prove that none of the Do^rines of revealed Religion are of any Certainty or Ufe to Mankind., fhewn to be vain and inconclufive . His Encomium on Aforal Philofophy. The Conclufion. P. 443, &c.
THE
THE
Divine Authority
o F T H E
Old and New Testament
ASSERTED, Gfr.
CHAP. I.
'the Moral PhiloJopher*s Concejfions concerning the Ufefulnefs of divine Revelation^ in the prefent cor- rupt State of Mankind. He leaves no way of knowing when fuch a Revelation is really given. His Pretence that moral 'Truth and Fitnefs^ as ap- pearing to our Under/landings, is the only Proof or Evidence of divine Truths or of any Do^rine as coming from God, examined. That not only the Perfons to whom the Revelation is originally and imfnediately made, but others alfo may have a fufficient Affurancc oj its being a Revelation from God, fo as to make it reafonable for them to receive it as of divine Authority. And particularly that Miracles may be fo circumjlanced as to furnifh a fufficient Proof of a Perfon*s divine Miffion, and of the divine Original and Authority of Doctrines and Laws attejled, and confirmed by thofe Mira- cles. The Author* s Exceptions againji this confidered. And what he offers to fhew that a divine Revelation cannot be conveyed to us by hmnan Teflimony, fo as to be a Matter of divine Faith, examined,
TH E moral Philofopher, in feveral Parts of his Book, fpeaks of Revelation with Refpeft. He no where exprefly denies either the PofTibility
B or
t Concerning the Proofs
or Ufefulnefs of divine Revelation in general. On the contrary he feems plainly to aflert that it may be of great Ufe, in aid of human Reafon, in the pre- ■fent corrupt State of Mankind. What he offereth to thi"? Purpofe, page 143, 144, 145 is very ftrong and exprcfs. He there acknowledgeth that at the time of Chrift's coming into the World, Mankind in general were in a State of grofs Ignorance and JDarknefs^ with refpeft to the true Knowledge of God and of thejnfelves^ and of all thofe moral Relations and Obligations we fland in to the Siiprejne Beings and to one another. That they were x^ndur great Uncer- tainty concerning a Future State, and the Concern of divine Providence in the Government of the World, and at the fame time were filled with a -proud and vain Conceit of their ozvn natural Abilities and Self-fuffici- ency. That our Savioufs Do5lrines on thefe Heads, tho* they appeared to be the true and genuine Prin- ciples of Nature and Reafon^ ivhen he had fet them in a proper Light, yet were fuch as the People had never heard or thought of before, and never would have known without fuch an InftruEfor, and fuch Means and Opportunities of Knowledge : and that it doth not follow, that becaufe thefe are natural 'Truths and moral Obligations^ that therefore there could be no need of Revelation to difcover them : as the Books of Euclid and Newton'j Principia contain natural truths, and fuch as are necejfarily founded in the Reafon of Things, and yet none but a Fool or a Madjnan would fay that he could have informed him- fdf in thefe Matters as well without them. He fpeaks of our natural Weaknefs and Inability -, and reprefents thofe as conceited of themfelves, who talk of^ the Strength of human Reafon in Matters of Re- ligion in the prefent State of Mankind. He faith, that they, who would judge uprightly of the Strength of human Reafon in Matters of Morality and Reli- gion, under the prefent corrupt and degenerate State of Mankind y ought to take their Eflimatefrom thofe
Parti
of divine Revelation, 3
Parts of the World ivh'ich never had the Benefit of Revelation ; and tbis^ perhaps, might make them lejs conceited of themfelves, and more thankfiil to God for the Light of the GofpeL He afks, if theReligiofi of Nature^ under the prefent Pravity and Corruption of Mankind^ was written with fufficient Strength and Clearnefs upon every MarCs Hearty why might not a Chinefeor an Indian draw up as good a Syftem of natural Religion as a Chriflian, and why have we never met with any fuch ? and he adds, that let us take Confucius, Zoroader, Plato, Socrates, or the greateft Moralift that ever lived without the Light of Revelation^ and it will appear that their heft Syflems of Morality were intermixed and blended with much Superjlition, and fo many grofs Ahfurdities as quite eluded and defeated the ?nain Defign of them.
All this feems fairly to grant the need there is of a divine Revelation, and its great Ufefulnefs and Expediency, in the prefent corrupt State of Man- kind, to infti'uft them in Things of confiderable Importance, and to give them more clear and cer- tain Knowledge in Matters of Religion and Mora- lity, than they could have by the mere Strength of their own Realbn without it. One would be apt to think that fuch an Acknowledgment could only be made with a friendly Defign to eftablifh the Authority of divine Revelation, and to prepare Men's Minds for a more favourable Reception of it. But this docs net appear to be the Author's real and prevailing Intention. Whiift he feems to make fuch fair Conceflions, he finds another way to make that Revelation, the Ufefulnefs of which he would be thought to acknowledge, to be really of little or no Ufc or Authority at all. For he in efTecl leaves us no way of knowing or being affured when fuch a Revelation is really given. And it is the fame thing with refped to the Ufe it may be of to Mankind to
fay that no Revelation was ever given, of that
it is entirely needlefs, and to fay that if it be
B 2 given J
4 Concerning the Frooji
given, we can have no way of knowing with fuf- ficient Certainty that it is given» fb as to make ic realbnable for us to depend upon its Authority,
He maintains. That " whatever Certainty God *' may convey to a Man's Mind by Infpiration or " immediate Revelation, the Knowledge of fuch " Truth can go no f;irther upon divine Authority, ♦' or as a Matter of divine Faith, than to the l\r- " fon or Perfons thus infpired, or to whom the *« original Revelation is made \ and whoever afcer- '* wards receives it from them muft take it upon " their fole Credit and Authority, and not upon a *' divine Teftimony, or the Authority of God : \\\ " which Cafe he believes in them, and not in God, " unlefs God fhould in like manner reveal to him •' that he had made fuchaprior Revelation to them, *' and then the Pioof of their Revelation would be " needlefs to him, p. 82." tie exprefly afierts, that " the Certainty any Man may have concern- " ing any Truth by immediate Revelation from *' God is not naturally communicable. For he ** could not convince any other Man not thus in- ** fpired, tirat he had any fuch Revel ition from *' God. If God fpeaks to me immediately and di- *' redly, I believe him upon his own Authority " without any human Interpofition -, but if a Man " fpeaks to me as from God, I muil: take his own *' Word for it, unlefs he could proye to me the *' natural Reaibnablenefs or Fitnels ofthe thing : and *' then I fhould take it indeed as coming from " God, but not upon any human Authority at all. " In a word, there can be no fuch thing as divine " Faith upon iiuman Teftimony -, and this abfurd *' Suppofition has been 'the Ground of all the Su- " perftitionand falfe Religion in the World," /)<2^(? 83, 84. And the whole Truth of the Matter he thinks injhort is this, " There is one, and but one " certain and infallible Mark or Criterion of divine ** Truth, or of any Doctrine as corning from God,
" which
of divine Revelation. 5
*« which we are oblig'd to comply with as a Mat-* *' ter of Religion and Confcience : and that is the " moral Truth, Reafon or Fitnefs of the thing it- " felf, whenever it comes to be fairly propofed to ** and confidered by the Mind or Underllanding. *' The ways of conveying the Doflrines of Reli- " gion to the Mind of Man, and of propofing " them to a fair and equitable Confideration may " be various and different. They may be propofed " and conveyed to the Mind by Infpiration or im- *' mediate Revelation from God, by hiftorical tra- " ditional Evidence, or by the Exercife of Men*s *' natural Faculties, by which thofe Truths occur- " red to the Mind under the Evidence of their *' moral Reafon or Fitnefs: But in which foever of «* thefe ways the Do»5lrines and Truths of Religion ** are conveyed and propofed to the Mind, the *' Ground and Reafon of their Reception and Be- " lief, and their Evidence and Proof as coming *' from God is ftill the fame, i.e. the moral eter- " nal Reafon and Fitnefs of the things themfelves, " as appearing to the Underftanding upon a fair *' impartial Confideration and Judgment of Rea- *' fon," fee p. 85, 86 compared with p. 10.
Here we may obferve, ^that though in fome of
the Faffiges now cited, he feems to allow, that In- fpiration or immediate Revelation from God is a fufRcient Ground of Certainty, to the Perfon to whom the Revelation is immediately made -, yet in this laft Faffage, where he feems more diftinftly to explain his Intention, and to lay down the main
Principles of his Book He plainly puts human
Teftimony or Tradition, and 'Infpiration or imme- diate Revelation from God, intirely on the fame foot in point of Authority : That the one no more than the other is in itfelf a Reafon for my believing any thing that cometh to me in either of thefe ways. But I believe it both in the one cafe, and the other, inerely becaufe, upon an impartial Confideration,
B 3^ i£
p Concerning the Proefi
it appeareth to my own Reafon to be true in itfelf, abftrading intirely from the Authority of him from whom I had it, whether God or Man.
By this the Reader may be enabled to judge of the Author's pretended Regard for Revelation. For the account he gives of it comes plainly to this : That v/e muft not believe any Doftrines to be true, becaufe they are revealed from God, but we muft believe them to be revealed from God, becaufe we know theni by pur own Reafon to be true, by Ar- guments d^awn from the Nature of the Thing inde- pendent of the Authority of Revelation. And if we thus know them by our own Reafon to be true, we fliall believe them whether they be fuppofed to have been immediately revealed by God or nor. "Which is in efFeft to fay, that we are to receive no- thing upon the Credit of divine Revelation at all, and that the Do6lrines and Laws delivered as by Revelation from God, are entirely on the fame foot of Authority and Evidence with thofe taught by the Philofophers, and others, who do not pretend to any immediate Revelation. If thofe things were un- certain to our Reafon before the Revelation was pub- lifhed, they are fo ftill, nor- can the Teftimony or Authority of that Revelation give us any additional AfTurance concerning them. One while he fup- pofes, that in the prefejit State of Mankind, they need a Revelation from God to afcertain them of feveral Things of confiderable Ufeand Importance •, ^nd another while, fuch a Revelation cannot afcer- tain them of thofe things at all: Becaufe, in judg- ing of thofe things brcught by Revelation, they are to have no Regard to the Authority of that Reve- lation as a Reafon for believing them, but juft to Confider them as they lye before their own Reafon ; and if they cannot prove them to be true from the Reafon and Nature of the thing, independently of that Revelation, they are not to believe them to be re-vtalcd at all.
The
of divine Revelation. *j
The Foundation of all this depends upon this Prinoiple, which he frequently repeats in feveral Parts of his Book, — that moral Truth or Rightecuf- iiefs and Fitnefs is the only infallible Mark or Crite- rion of divine 'Truthy or of any Dodrine as coming from God. He reduces all the Proofs and Evi- dences of Religion to this alone, and reprefents it as a thing in which Men cannot he mijiaken, p. 92. This is the Defign of the fecond and fifth of thofe Principles, which he tells us were agreed upon among the Gentlemen of their Club as true and defenfible againfV all the Objedions that could be urged againft them, fee p. 8, 10.
It is not eafy to form a diftinft Idea of what this Writer means by moral Truth and Righteotifnefs^ or by a thing's appearing to the Underftanding to be morally true -, which he declares to be the only fure Evidence and infallible Criterion of divine Truth, or of any Dodlrine as coming from God. The moft natural Meaning of this ExprefTion, moral Truth, feems to be this, that a moral Truth is a Truth relating to Morality, or a Propofition which truly affirms fomething concerning fome moral Ob- ligation. Se he feems to underftand it, when be talks fo often of the Do5irines and Obligations of moral Truth and Right eoufnefs. But will he not al- low any Dodrine to belong to Religion that is not in this Senfe morally true ? This would difcard fe- veral important Principles even in natural Religion. For it is evident there are Principles in Religion of great Confequence, diftinsfl from the Propofitions immediately relating to the Duties or Precepts of it. The Propofitions and Principles relating to the Be- ing, the Attributes, and the Providence of God, the Immortality of the Soul, and a Future State, are not in this Senfe moral Truths, that is they do not diredly and immediately affirm any moral Duty or Obligation, and yet I believe he will fcarce deny, that thefe things are of confiderable Importance in
B 4 Religion,
8 Concerning the Proofs
Religion, and that we may have fufficient Evidence of their being true.
Or does he mean by the moral Truth and Righ- teoufnefs of Doftrines that they have a good moral Tendency ; a Tendency to promote the Practice of Morality and Righteoufnefs, and that this Tenden- cy is the only Evidence of their Truth ? But nei- ther can this be maintained. For tho' no Dodtrine is to be admitted into Religion that is manifeftly fubverfive of Morality and Righteoufnefs, yet the good Tendency nf a Principle or Doctrine is not of itfelf alone a fufficient Proof or Evidence of the Truth of that Principle or Do£lrine. For many things might be mentioned which would have a good Tendency fuppofing them to be true, but this alone would not prove them true. And the Man would be ridiculous, that, when required to prove or demonflrate the Truth of them, would only at- tempt to ftiew, that if they were true they would tend to promote the Practice of moral Goodnefs, and that therefore this is a full Proof and Evidence that they are a5iually true. He would not be thought a very proper Advocate for the Exiftence of a God and a Providence, that Ihould produce no other Argument to prove them than that they are of a good moral Tendency. The Truth of thefe Principles muft be proved from other Topicks, and by other Arguments, and then it will be a farther .Recommendation of them, and a great Advantage, to (hew the good Influence thefe Principles muft have upon Mankind, and the Practice of Righteoufnefs and Virtue. All the peculiar Do6trines of Chrifti- anity, where they are fincerely received and entertain- ed, have a good Effedt on Morality, and the Practice of real Holinefs, and tend to ftrengthen and improve good Affections and Difpofitions in the Mind i and many good Men have found it to be fo in their own Experience ; but this alone is not the proper Evi- dence of their Truth. This muft be proved by other
Argu-
of divine Revelation. g
Arguments, and then their good Tendency will be proper to Ihcw their Ufefulnefs and Importance.
But after all he fometimes talks as if by the moral Truth of Dodtrines and Principles he meant no more than the Reafonablenefs of thofe Doc- trines, or the Evidence of the Dodrines arifing from the reafon of the Thing. The moral Truth, Reafon^ and Fitnefs of Things^ and the moral Truth, Reafonablenefs y and Fitnefs of the Do5irines them- felves, are ufed by him as Terms of the fame Signification, y^^ p. 10, 86, 94. Whereby T^/ora/ Truth he feems to mean that which he calls the na- tural Reafonablenefs and Fitnefs of the Thing, and which he reprefents as a fufficient Proof of its com- ing from God, p. 84. And yet he there alfo dif-. tinguiftieth between the natural Reafons and moral Fitnejfes of Things, and allows each of thele, L e. the natural Reafonablenefs and Fitnefs of the Thing, and its being morally true and lit, to be a proper fufficient Evidence of its coming from God. Where he plainly fets up two Criterions of divine Truth, the natural and moral Truth and Fitnefs of the Thing itfelf ; and how this is confiftent with what he fo often affirms, that moral Truth and Fitnefs is the only Evidence and Criterion of divine Truth, he would do well to explain. Indeed it is hard to fix the Idea of the Word moral as ufed by this Author, and applied to Truth, It feems only to be put in becaufe it is a word of a good Sound, and to make an Appearance of faying fomething, whilft in reali- ty, as he ufeth it, it ferves only to perplex and con- found the Queftion concerning the proper Evidence or Proof of Dodtrines and Principles. But that we may get out of this Confufion, I fhall take it as if he had faid, that the Reafonablenefs of the Doftrine itfelf appearing to the Underftanding is the only Evidence of its being a divine Truth, or of its com- ing from God. And here again 'it may be alked, what he means by a divine Truths or a Truth aa com-
iffi
lo Concerning the Proofs
ing from God ? does he mean a Truth that came by immediate Revelation from God ? fo he ought to underftand it if he would fpcak to the Purpofe •, fince the Queftion, as he himfelf feems to put it, is concerning the proper Proofs and Evidences of a divine Revelation, or how we may know that a podrine is revealed from God. And according to this State of the Cafe, the Principle advanced by our Author is to be underftood thus, that a Do6trine's being reafonable in itfelf, and appearing to our Underftand ing to be true, by Arguments drawn from the Nature and Reafon of the Thing, is the only Proof of its coming by immediate Revelation from God. Whereas in reality this is no Proof of its being thus revealed at all. For a Thing may be 'very true and very reafonable in itfelf, and yet not have come by immediate Revelation from God. So that to fay, that this is the only Proof or Evidence of divine Revelation, is to fay, that there can be no Proof of any Dodtrine as coming by immediate Revelation from God at all. And this feems to be the Author's Intention. But is it not very odd to fee him aflume this all along without proving it, and argue from it as a Principle that cannot be con- tefted, when it is the very Point in queftion ?
Having thus endeavoured to deteft the Confufion and Obfcurity this Writer attempts to throw upon the Queftion, relating to the Way by which we may come to know that any thing is revealed by God, I ^all now proceed to treat this Matter more diftindtly.
It is a Principle here fuppofed (and which the Author pretendeth not to conteft) that a Revelation from God may be of great Ufe in the prefent corrupt and degenerate State of Mankind, to dired: Men in true Religion, and inftrud: them in Things which it is of confiderable Importance for them to know. And this is what I have proved at large elfewhere *.
* See Anfwer to ChriJHanitj as old «; the Creation, Vol. I, Chap. V, VI.
Ncv^,
— of divine Revelation, i x
Now fuppofing that God fhould in his great Good- nefs fee fit to give an extraordinary Revelation for the Ufe of Mankind, the moft likely way of pub- lifhing that Revelation for general Ufe feems to be this : That God fhould firft communicate the Knowledge of his Will by immediate Infpiration to fome Perfon or Perfons, and then appoint or commiffion them to inftruft Mankind, and to com- municate to others what they themfelves received. At the fame time furnifhing them with fufficient Proofs, or Credentials, to convince others that they were indeed fent of God, and that what they thus deliver to the World in his Name is not their own Invention, but that which they received by imme- diate Revelation from God himfelf. It was in this Method that the Chriftian Revelation was publifhed to the World, the Ufefulnefs of which, this Wri- ter would be thought to acknowledge.
There are two Queftions therefore to be diftin<3:- ly confidered. The one is, whether thofe to whom the original Revelation is immediately made, may have a fufficient Certainty that what they receive by immediate Infpiration is indeed a Revelation from God : The other is, whether other Perfons, befides thofe to whom the original Revelation was made, may have a fufficient Ground of reafonable Affurance, that what thofe Perfons publifhed to the World as by Revelation from God is indeed a Revelation from God, and is therefore to be re- ceived and fubmittcd to as fuch.
As to the firft Queftion ; That God can com- municate the Knowledge of things by immediate Revelation or Infpiration in fuch a manner that the Perfon or Perfons, to whom fuch a Revelation is immediately made, may be certain that it is indeed a Revelation from God, cannot rcafonably be de- nied. For it would be the moft unreafonable and the moft prefumptuous Thing in the World to fay. That when one Man hath a Power of conveying
his
12 Concerning the Proofs
his Thoughts to another, fo as to make him fenfi • ble that it is he and no other Perfon that fpeaks to him, God himfelf the Author of our Natures fhould have no way of communicating his Will to his own Creatures, fo as to make them know that it is he that revealeth himfelf to them. Nor is it any Objefl:ion againft this, that we cannot diftinftly ex- plain or account for the way in which he doth it. We have little notion of the way in which Spirits Communicate their Thoughts to one another, but ihuft we therefore conclude that they have no way at all of doing it, becaufe we cannot now compre- hend or explain the manner of it, and becaufe they have not the Organs of bodily Speech as we have ? No doubt they have far nobler and more perfedl ways of communicating their Ideas to one another, than one Man hath of conveying his Thoughts to another here on Earth. And we may be fure that God hath a far nearer accefs to the human Mind, and a far more intimate and effedlual way of ope- rating upon it, or exciting and imprefiing Ideas there, than any created Spirit can have -, or than one Man can have of communicating his Sentiments to another. Therefore, if it pleafeth him to com- municate Doflrines or Laws to any Perfon by im- mediate Revelation, he can do it in fuch a manner, and with fuch an overpowering Light and Evi- dence, as to produce an abfolute Certainty in the Mind of that Perfon, that thofe Do6trines and Laws are by Revelation from him. Accordingly, this Writer himfelf fcems to acknowledge Infpiration thus far, tho' it caniiot well be reconciled toother Paffages in his Book. As he makes immediate In- fpiration or Revelation from God to be one way of communicating the Knowledge of the Do£i:rines and Truths of Religion to the Mind, diftin6t from 'Tradition and human Tefiimony^ and from the com- mon Light of Reafon in the natural ordinary life of Men^s own Faculties, fo he fometimes feems plainly
to
of dhine Revelation. 13
to grant, that this may convey a Certainty to the Man himfclf, that is thus immediately infpired, the' he will not allow that the Knowledge of fuch Truth can go any farther upon divine Authority, or as a matter of divine Faith, than to the Perfon or Per- fons thus infpired, or to whom the original Reve- lation is made, pag. 82. And when he undertakes to ftate the Queftion concerning the way in which we may know whether any Law comes from God, he fuppofes that there are two ways in which there may be a rational Proof given of a Co7nmand or Lazvfrom God \ the one is, zvhere God himfelf fpeaks to the Perfon immediately and dire^ly, the other is, "where the fuoral Reafon or Fitnefs of the thing is pro- pofed or manifefted to the Perfon or Perfons concerned at the fame time with the Law or Command^ p. 90. And he exprefsly faith, p. 84. if God fpeaks to tne immediately and dire^ly, I believe him upon his own Authority. Where he both owns that God may fpeak or communicate a thing to the Mind imme- diately and dire£lly^ and that where he doth fo, what is thus revealed is to be believed by the Perfon to whom it is immediately communicated, upon his Auihority^ that is, becaufe he reveals it. He illuf- trates this by an Inftance, which he laith will come up exactly to the purpofe. He puts the cafe of a mathematical Propofition, being communicated to one Man by immediate Revelation, toaaother Man by its proper Evidence, or by its being plainly de- monftrated to him from the natural nece^ary Relation and Connexion of the Ideas themfelves. And he faith, that the one may be as certain of it as the other. He who hath it ijnmediately revealed to him from. Gody tho' we fhould fuppofe. he knew nothing, and could know nothing of it as a 'Truth necejfarily found- ed in Nature, yet would be as certain of it as he who received it upon the Evidence of mathematical Demonflration •, becaufe he would conned the certain Truth of the Propofition^^ with the neceffary Veracity I cf
14 Concerning the Proofs
of God: tho* he could not communicate that Cer-^ tainty which he himfelf had to others, fee pag. 82, 83. Here he feemeth plainly to affert that the Per- fon, to whom God is pleafed to make known a Truth by way of immediate Infpiration, may be cer- tainly affured that God doth thus reveal it to him i and that in this cafe, tho' he doth not by his own Reafon apprehend the neceffary Connexion of the Terms, or the natural Ficnefs of the Thing itfelf^ he receiveth it upon the Authority of God who re- veals it : And that this Authority or Revelation from God afFordeth a Certainty to the Mind equal to that arifing from a mathematical Dcmonftration. So that here he plainly fuppofeth in direft Contra- didlion to what he elfewhere afierts, that the moral Reafon and Fitnefs of the Thing, as appearing to the Mind, IS not ihcfole Evidence or Criterion o'i a Doc- trine as coming from God : but that immediate Re- velation may be a ju(f and certain GroundofaPcrfon's believing a thing to be true, and to come from God, diftinft from the apprehended Reafon and Fitnefs o^ the thing itfelf: and that upon the Authority of that Revelation the Perfon, to whom the Revelation is originally and immediately made, may receive it as true and as coming from God, tho' the Fitnefs of it in itfelf benot made evident to him by any Rea- fons drawn from the Nature of the Thing. And if a thing's being revealed from God be a fufficient Ground of Certainty to the Perfon himfelf to whom the original Revelation is immediately made, diftindl from the Proofs brought of its Truth from the Rea- fon of the Thing, then it muft be fo to others too in Proportion to the AfTurance they have, that it is a Revelation from God. So that if there be any way of afcertaining others, befides thofe to whom the Revelation is originally and immediately made, that any Doftrine or Law is by Revelation from God, they are obliged to believe and receive it on that account, as of divine Authority, tho* they cannot
provtf
_./«,:
cf divine 'Revelation. t^
prove it to be neceflarily true by Arguments drawn from the Reafon of the Thing independent of that Authority.
This leads me to the fecond Queftion that was propofed to be confidered \ with regard to which I lay down this Propofition : That there may be fuch Proofs and Evidences given that the Perions pro- fefling to have received Doftrines and Laws from God for the Ufe of Mankind, were indeed fent and infpired by him, and did receive them by Re- velation from him •, fuch Proofs and Evidences as make it reafonable for thofe to whom they are made known, to receive fuch Laws and Dodlrines as of divine Authority : In which cafe to refufe to believe thofe Do6trines, and to fubmit to thofe Laws, would be a very criminal Condu6t, and a manifeft Breach of the Duty that reafonable Crea- tures owe to the Supreme Being. This is the pro- per Queftion in debate. For tho* this Writer pre- tends not to deny that the Perfons, to whom the ori- ginal Revelation is immediately made, may be cer- tain that they themfelves received it by immediate Revelation from God himfelf, yet he denies that they have any way of proving to others, that it is a Revelation from God, except by proving the Rea- fonablenefs of the thing itfelf : which is to fay, that they have no way of proving to others that it came by divine Revelation at all. For as I have already obferved, the Reafonablenefs of a Doftrine or Law will never alone prove that the Man that teacheth that Dodrine, or bringeth that Law, had it by im- mediate Revelation from God. This muft be prov- ed, if it be proved at all, by other Evidences.
It will be eafily granted that Perfons being them- felves perfuaded that they have received any thing from God by immediate Revelation, is not of it- felf a fufficient Reafon to others to ingage them to receive it as fuch ; and that if we had only their own Words for it without any gther Proof, we I could
l6 Miracles proper Proofs
could not take this for a proper Evidence without laying ourlelves open to the Delulions of Enthu- liafts and Impoftors. The Queition then is, whe- ther aWtrading from the Credit and Teftimony of the Perfons themfelves to whom the original Re- velation is made, there may not be Proofs and Evi- dences given fufficient to convince others that they were indeed fent of God, and that what they pub- lifh as from God, and in his Name, is indeed a Revelation from him.
Now let us fuppofe that a Perfon profeffeth to have received Doctrines and Laws by Revelation from God, for the Inftrudion and Direction of Mankind, and that accordingly he urgeth Men to believe thofe Dodrines, and fubmit to thofe Laws as of divine Authority. And let us fuppofe that fuch Perfon appeareth as far as can be judged from his whole Condu6l, to be one of great Probity and Sincerity, animated with a hearty Zeal for the Glory of God, and the Good of Mankind ; and alfothat the Doftrines he teacheth, and the Laws he giveth as from God, have norh.ing in them contra- ry to true Piety and Virtue, but rather have a Ten- dency to promote it. This forms a ftrong Preju- dice in his Favour, but doth not alone prove that he received thole Do6lrines and Laws by Revela- tion from God himfelf. But if that Perfon is far- ther enabled as a Teftimony of his divine MilTion, to perform Works of lb wonderful a Nature, fo grand, fo glorious, as manifeftly and undeniably tranfcend all the Power and Skill of any Man, or all the Men upon Earth, and therefore evidently argue a fupernatural Interpofition. And if this is done not merely in a fingle Inftance or two, in which Cafe let the Fadt be ever fo extraordinary and above all the Power of Man, yet it might be fuf- pefted, that it was only fomeftrange thing that had happened without a particular View to the Eftablifh- ment of any Dodrines or Laws j I fay, let us fup- pofe
of a divine Rtvelafion, ty
pofe a marvdious Concurrence of many fuch amaz- ing and extraordinary A<5ts of Power and Domi- nion, of fuch a kind as naturally and alnioft unavoid- ably lead us to confider them as proceeding from the Sovereign Lord and Governour of the World, and of Mankind •, and that for a Courfe of Years together, all plainly wrought in Atteftation and Evidence of that Perfon's divine Miffion, and in Confirmation of that Scheme of Do6trines and Laws which he delivered to the World as from God, and without ever being controlled or over- ruled by any fuperiour Evidence. I think it is very reafonable in fuch a Cafe to regard him as fent of God, and to receive the Doiflrines and Laws he delivereth in the Name of God, and which come to ua thus attefted and confirmed, as the Dodtrines and Laws of God. For fuppofing thofe Miracles to be of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced as that either none but God can do them, or atleaft to be fuch that it can never be luppofed, that a wife and good Providence would fuffer them to be done in Atteftation of an Impofture*, the doing fuch
Miracles
* I will grant, that God is not obliged by his Providence* to hinder every thing that may in Faft feduce Men from the Truth. He is not obliged to hinder cunning Impoftors from employing their Arts of Subtilty to deceive, or to hinder evil Beings from attempting to feduce Mankind, or from fometimes doing things that may appear ftiange and miraculous. But this I fay, that there may be Miracles fuppofed of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced, and which carry in them fuch glorious Indications of a divine Power and Dominion, that it cannot reafonably be reconciled to the Notion of an infinitely wife and good Mind prefiding over the Affairs of Men, to fuppofe that they fhould be fuffered to be wrought in Atteftation of an Im- pofture, efpecially for a Succeffion of Years together, without ever being controlled by fuperior Miracles, or contrary Evi- dence. So that the Queftion here doth not properly proceed concerning all Miracles in general, whether all Kinds of Mira- cles are Proofs of Doftrines as coming from God : but whether Miracles may not be of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced,
C fos
1 9 Mi 'acles proper Proofs
Miracles in proof of fuch Dodrines and Laws, isi really a divine Teftimony to thofe Do6lrines and Laws as coming from God. And in every fuch, cafe we cannot be faid to receive the Doftrines and Laws thus attefted and confirmed upon the Word of Men, or upon the fole Credit and Authority of the Perfon profefTing to be extraordinarily fent and infpired, but we receive them upon the Tefti- mony and Authority of God himfelf. And fup- pofing God in his great Goodnefs to have really defigned to give an extraordinary Revelation of Dodlrines and Laws for the Ufe of Mankind, and to fend a Perfon or Perfons to publifh them in his Name, it is fcarce pofTible to conceive what ftrong- er Proofs could be given of the divine Miffion of that Perfon or Perfons, and the divine Authority of fuch Dodlrines and Laws, than fuch a Series and Succeflion of glorious uncontrolled Miracles, as we are now fuppofing.
But the Force of this will more fully appear when particularly applied to the Miracles that were done at the firft Eftablifhmentof the Jewifti and Chriftian Difpenfation.
Let us fuppofe that the Miracles were really wrought that are recorded to have been wrought by Mofes^ the Queftion is whether thofe Miracles and wonderful Works which he performed were a fuf- ficient Proof of his divine Miffion, and made it reafonable for them that faw thofe Miracles to re- ceive the Doctrines and Laws he publifhed as from God. And I think, a bare Reprefentation of them would go a great way to determine this Queftion. It is evident, that fuppofing the amazing and ftupen-
for Number, Grandeur, and Continuance, as to yield a fuffi- cient Atteftation to the divine Miffion of the Perfons by whom, and to the divine Original of the Doftrines, in Confirmation of which, they were wrought : and particularly, whether the Mira- cles wrought in Confirmation of the Mofaickznd Chriltian Dif- peniation were not fuch.
dous
of d divine Revelation t I ^
dous Works done by the Miniftry of Mofes in E^ypt, at the Red Sea, and in the JVildernefs, the Promulgation of the Law at Sinai, the feeding the People with Manna for forty Years together, i^c. and the fignal Judgments inflifted on thofe that op- pofed his Authority and Laws •, fuppofing thefe Things to have been really done as they are repre- fented, they were far above all the Power of Man, and feemed to argue fuch a Dominion over Nature as is proper to the fupreme univerfal Lord. And it is alfo evident that the Being, in whofe Name, and by whofe Power thefe Things were done, who gave thefe Laws, and brought the Ifraelites out of Egypt, all along affumed the Chara6ter and pecu- liar Prerogatives of the fupreme God, the indepen- dent Jehovah, and claimed their higheft Love, Re- verence, Adoration, and Obedience to himfelf alone, in Exclufion of all other Deities. To fuppofe that he who gave forth thofe Laws, and by whofe Power thefe great and aftonifhing Things were ef- fected, was an evil Being, would be the greateft of Abfurdities. Can it be thought that a wife and good God would thus fuffer an evil Being to aflume his Charadler, and fet up for the Creator and Lord of the Univerfe, and require to be acknowledged and adored as fuch, and to confirm this his Claim by fuch a Series of the moft glorious and ftupen- dous Works as muft almoft unavoidably lead all that beheld them to acknowledge a divine Hand, and not only to give forth Laws with the moft amazing Solemnity in the Name of the univerfal Lord, but to infiid the moft awful Judgments upon thofe that refufed to fubmit to thofe Laws, and acknowledge him as their Lord ; and thus bring them under a kind of Neceflity of being de- luded or fubmirting to the falfly ufurped Autho- rity ? Can we think that the fupreme Being would look on all the while with Inditferency, and fuffer an evil Being thus to perfonace him, and to abufe C 2 and
20 Miracles proper Proofs
and deceive his Creatures, and rake no care, by any fuperior Miracles or contrary Evidence, to over- rule and detefl the Impofture ? This appears to me to be abfokutly incondftent with all tlie Notions of a wife and good Providence prefiding over the World, and the Affliirs of Mankind. It is not to be accounted for upon any other Suppofition than that o\ an almighty evil Principle, ad:ing indepen- dently of the good God, and not at all under his Control.
But if this cannot be fuppofed without the greateft Abfurdity, then it muft be faid, that it was God himfelf immediately, or which comes to the fame thing, by the Agency of fubordinate good Beings fuperior to Man, ading under him as his Inftruments, and according to his Will, that wrought thofe won- derful Works in Atteftation of Mofes\ divine Mif- fion, and the Laws he gave in the Name of God. And then I think it cannot be denied, that thofe Laws thus attefted were to be received as con)ing from God, and to have refufed to fubmit to them in thefe Circumftances, and after all thefe glorious Atteftations would have been to rebel againlt God, and to refift the divine Authority : aiid coniequently would have been a very unjuftifiable and criminal Condu6t, highly difplcafing to the fupreme Being. And thofe who upon tlie Credit of fuch illuftrious Atteftations believed his divine Mifllon, and received the Revelation he brought, and the Laws he gave, as from God, could not in that Cafe be faid to be- lieve him merely upon hisov/n Word, or to receive thole Doftrines and Laws upon his fole Credit and Authority, but upon a divine Teftimony, and upon the Authority of God.
The Argumenc is ftill ftronger when applied to the Miracles wrought by Chnjl ^nd hxs Apojlles. Let us fappofe that the Fads as reprefented in the Gofpel are true, concerning Chrift's healing the moft obftinate and irxurable Difeafcs, of many
Years
of a divine Revelation, 2 1
Years Continuance, in an inftant -, refloring the Blind and Lame, calling out Devils, commanding the Winds and the Sea, feeding five thoufand at once with five Loaves and two Fifhes, and even raifing the Dead -, but efpecially his own Refur- redion from the Dead, Afcenfion into Heaven, and the confecuent Effufion of the Holy Ghoft in his extraordinary Gifts and Powers, whereby his Dil- ciples were enabled to perform the moft aftonifhing Miracles like to thofe which he himfelf had per- formed whilft on Earth : and all thefe Things done in a valt variety of Inftances, and for a long Courfe of Years together in his Name, and in Atteftation of his divine Miflion, and the Scheme of Laws and Doflrines he introduced : I fay, fup- pofing all thefe things to have been really done as they are recorded in the New Teftament, I think they form the ftrongeft Proof that can be fuppofed in Favour of the Dodrines and Laws fo attefted. They evidently tranfcended all human Power and Skill, and mult therefore have been wrought by the Affiftance and Power of a fuperior Being or Beings. And this could not be an evil Being: not only becaufe many of the Works themfelves are of fuch a Nature, that it can fcarce be fuppofed that an evil Being could have it in his Power or Inclination to perform them : but becaufe it can hardly be thought that the wife and righteous Governor of the World would fuffer an evil Being or Beings, to give fuch a Series of glorious At- teftations bearing the illuftrious Charaders of Divi- nity upon them, in Favour of Doctrines and Laws falfly pretended to be given by him, without ever controlling or overruling them by any fuperior Evidence : And laftly, becaufe it would be to the lafl degree abfurd, to imagine that an evil Being fhould ever exert his Power in fuch an extraordinary Manner to confirm a Revelation pretending to come from God, tlie principal Defign and manifeft Ten- C 3 dency
22 Miracles proper Proofs
dency of which was to recover Men from Idolatry, Vice and Wickednefs, to the Knowledge and Love of God, and the Pradlice of Piety, Righteoufnefs, and Virtue. Itfolloweth, therefore, that they muft have been wrought by the immediate Agency of God himfelf, or by fome good Being or Beings fuperior to Man, afling under him, and by his Direction and Influence. And this being the Cafe, either it muft be fliid that the Perfon in Atteftation of whole divine Miflion all thefe marvellous Things were done, was indeed, as he profefiTed himfelf to be, extraordinarily fentofGod, and that the Scheme of Religion, that is, of Doftrines and Laws, in Confirmation of which they were wrought, was in- deed true and of divine Authority : Or it muft be faid that God himfelf gave his own Power, or good Beings afting under his Dire6l:ion lent their Aflift- ance, and that in a Series of the moft aftoniftiing Inftances, and for a Succeflion of Years together, to give Teftimony to a Falfhood and Impofture, and to put a Cheat upon Mankind in the Name of God. A Suppofition which is fcarce confiftent with the Belief of a God and a Providence.
Thus I think it appeareth, that Miracles may be fuppofed of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced, as to afford a fufficient Atteftation to the divine MifTion of the Perfon in favour of whom, and to the Truth and divine Original of the Dodlrines and Laws, in Confirmation of which they were wrought. And that particularly, fuppofing the Things to have been really done, that are recorded to have been done at the firft Eftablifhment of the Jewifh and Chriftian Difpenfation, they yielded a full At- teftation to the divine MifTion of Mofes and our Lord Jefus Chrift, and to the Scheme or Syftem of Dodlrines and Laws publiflied by them in the Name of God. The Evidence was not put upon afingle Wonder or two, however extraordinary and glorious, bur there was a marvellous Series and
Sue-
of a divine Revelation, 2 j
Succeflion of wonderful Acls and fupernatural At- teftations to ftrengchen the Evidence, and put it beyond all reafonable Doubt. For all the Miracles done not only by Mcfes^ but the fucceeding Pro- phets, centred in proving his divine Million, and the Authority of the Laws he gave as from God ^ fince all the fubfequent Revelations by the Prophets in the Old Teftament ftill fuppofed the Authority of the Law of Mofes, and gave an additional At- teftation to it. And in like manner all the Mira- cles done by Chrift himfelf, and by his Apoftles and Difciples after him, had one main View to which they were all diredled, that is, to confirm the divine Miflion of our Lord Jefus Chrift, and the Truth and divine Authority of the Doctrines and Laws which he introduced ; So that each of thefe Schemes of Revelation was confirmed by a Series of the moft illuftrious Atteftations, And be- fides this, each of them gave Teftimony to the other. Mofes and the Prophets foretold the Com- ing and Glory of Chrift^ and the new Difpenfation he was to introduce, and prepared the World for it. And Jefus confirmed by his Teftimony the divine Miflion of Mofes and the Prophets. So that in this view, all the Atteftations given to both, really contributed to confirm the divine Original and Authority of each of them. And all together form an Evidence fo great and fo ftrong, the like of which cannot pofTibly be produced in favour of any other Syftem of Doctrines and Laws, and which it cannot reafonably be fuppofed could ever have been given, or that a wife and good Provi- dence would have fuffered it to be given to an Im- pofture.
I fhall now proceed to confider what this Writer objeds againft the Proof from Miracles. What he offers on this Head is of no great Weight, tho* ad- vanced with an uncommon air of Confidence. He urges that " there will be always two very ftrong C 4 « Ob.
24 Miracles proper Proofs
Objedlions againft fuch an Argument as thh when applied to Religion. Firft, that it would be a hard Matter to prove the thing as un- exceptionably true in fad, or that the firft Re- port and BeHef of ic did not arife from Ig- norance, Prefumption, Prejudice, i^c. And in the next Place, that no Confequence can be dr:Mvn from any fuch thing, fuppofing it ever fo true, ana clearly proved in Fad:," p. 345. As to the firft, I do not fee but Miracles fuppofing them to be Fadls obvious to the Senfes, done in open view, and even in the view of Enemies them- feives concerned and zealous to detect an Impofture, are as capable of being proved as any other Facls "whatfoevcr : And that both thofe that at firft were Eye-wi-^neffes to them might be as fure of them, as Men can be of any thing, which they themfelves hear and fee, and for which they have the Tefti- mony of their Senfes •, and thofe that have the Ac- counts tranfmitted to them, may have them tranf- mitted in fuch a Manner, and with fuch Evidence, that it would be an unreafonable Incredulity to doubt of mem. This muft be allowed, unlefs Men are refolved not to believe any Accounts of Fr.dls done in former Ages. And it might be eafily Ihewn, and hath been often proved, that the Mi- racles done at the firft Eftablifhment of the Mo- faical and Chrijlian Difpenfation were of this kind. As to what he adds, and which is the only prefent Queftion, that fuppofing the Fads ever fo true, no Confequence can be drawn from them in favour of any Religion, the Reafons he there offers are very weak. The firft is, that it is certain that the Being and moral Perfeoiions of God, and the natural Re- lations of Man to him as his reafonahle Creature^ and the Subject of his moral Government, cannot de- fend upon the Truth or Falfhood of any hijlorical Faols, or upon our forming a right or wrong "fudg- ment concerning them. This is very odly expreflTed.
No-
of a divine Revelation. 25
Nobody pretends that the Being of God, or the natural Relations between him and us, depend upon Miracles. But a Revelation from God, con- taining a clearer Difcovery of his glorious Perfec- tions, of his Nature and Will, and of the Obli- gations incumbent upon us towards him, t^c. may be attefted by Miracles in fuch a manner as to give the World convincing Proofs that it is indeed a true divine Revelation, and to be depended on as fuch. And then, upon the Credit of that Reve- lation, we may come to know feveral Things re- lating to thefe Subjecfls, which we could not have known at all, or not with Certainty without it. The fecond Reafon he there offers is, that he hath already -prov'd^ that the Charaui erijtick of moral Truth and Righteoufnefs is the only Jure Mark or Criterion of any Do5lrine or Practice as coming from God, and divinely authorized. I do not know in what part of this Book he hath proved this, except we take ftrong AfTertions for Proofs. But this Pre- tence hath been examined already: and is in Effedb no more than a confident affirming that there can be no external Proofs of divine Revelation, which is the very Point in Queftion.
But there are fome other Things he offers to in- validate the Proof from Miracles. He alferts, that " It is plain, that the Power of working Mi- " racles had no Connexion with the Truth of the " Doftrines taught by fuch Miracle-workers, be- " caufe falfe Prophets, and the moft wicked Se- " ducers, might and did work Miracles, which " they could not have done, had Miracles been " any Evidence or Proof of Truth and found «« Doclrine." p.%i. This he hath over again, p. 98. where he urges, that " Falfe Prophets, and *' the mofl wicked Seducers, and even the Devil " himfelf, may work Miracles ; and therefore, ?* Miracles alope confidered can prove nothing at
« all.
26 Miracles proper Proofs
*' all, and ought to have no Weight or Influence '* with any Body." *
But if there may be Miracles of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced, that no Seducer can ever equal them, and it cannot be fuppofed they could ever be done, or at leaft that God would fufFer them to be done in Atteftation of an Impofture, then the Evidence from fuch Miracles, fo circum- ftanced, ftill holds good, notwithftanding what this Writer here oifers to the contrary. And this hath been already fhewn with Regard to the Mira- cles wrought in Confirmation of the Jewifh and Chriftian Difpenfation. I will grant that Seducers may, by human Art and Skill, be fuppofed to do Things that appear very ftrange and unaccountable, and let the People a wondering ; and that they may do yet ftranger Things, luppofing the Agen- cy and Afliftance of evil Spirits; but ftill we may be fure, from theWifdom and Goodnefs of divine Providence, that the Miracles wrought by the Af- filtance of his Spirit, and in Confirmation of a Revelation which he gives to Mankind, fhall be of fuch a Nature, as fhall in their Number, their Grandeur, and Continuance, beyond all Comparifon tranfcend, whatever were or fhall be wrought in fa- vour of any I mpoflure. There have been t wo Syftems of Dodlrines and Laws really given by divine Re- velation, the Mofaical and the Chriflian ; and God took Care, in his great Wifdom and Goodnefs, that each of them fhould be attended with fuch an Abundance of extraordinary Atteitations, as no Impofture was ever attended with, and no Skill or Power of Deceivers could ever effeft.
Mcfes indeed makes a Suppofition of a falfe Prophet's working a 5ign or Wonder to feduce the People from the Worfliip of the true God, and warns them in that. Cafe not to regard him, nor
* See this Objeflion more fully confidered, Anfiuer to Chri- Biaaih as old as the Creation. Part II. from p. 72. to 92.
to
of a dhine Revelation. tj
to fuffer themfelves to be deceived by him. This is a ftrong Way of" putting the Cafe, to fhew that on no Account whatfoevcr they fhould fuffer them- felves to be drawn to Idolatry. But certainly he never did fuppofe that any falfe Prophet fhould be able to produce fuch a Series of miraculous Attefla- tions, in Confirmation of any falfe Doiflrine or idolatrous Worfliip, as could in any wife come in Competition with thofe which were wrought at the Eflablifhment and for Confirmation of the Laws, which he gave them in the Name of God. On the contrary, he all along fuppofes that as there was no God fave the Lord, fo neither were there any Works to be compared to his Works; and he ap- peals to thefe Works as the manifeft Proofs of his unequalled Sovereignty and Glory, and of the di- vine Original and Authority of that Law which they were defigned to confirm and to eflablifli.
Under the New Teftament our Saviour fpeaks of falfe Prophets, and falfe Chrifts, that fhould arife, and pew great Signs and IVonders. Matt. xxiv. 5, 6, 24. This plainly relates to the falfe Prophets and Seducers that arofe among the Jews, a little before the Deftrudtion of Jerufalem^ whom Jofephus reprefents as Magicians and Sorcerers, or Jugglers, \_^»,f(n 1^ yoYi-ikt;'] and who, he tells us, pretended to divine Infpiration, and promileci :he People to do wonderful Things for them. But it is certain, none of their pretended Wonders could in any Wife be compared to thofe wich our Savi- our himfelf (the true MefTiah) wrought. Nor could he intend by thefe Words to fignify, that they would do as great Things as he himfelf hai done, fince he fo often appeals to his wonderful Works, as the uncontefted P oofs of his divine MifTion. So he faith, John v. 36. The Works which my Fa- ther hath given me to finijh, the fame Works that I do, hear Witnefs of me, that the Father hathfent me. And John x. 37, 38. Jf I do not the Works of my
Fatkr
28 Miracles proper Proofs
Father helieve me not \ hut if I do, tM ye believe mt me, helieve the Works ^ that ye may know and be- lieve that the Father is in ?ne, and I in hitn. And again, John xv. 24. If I had not done among them the Works which 7ione other Man did, they had not had fin. And Johnx. 24, 25. Whc'^ the Jews iaid unto him, If thou he the Chriji tell us plaiiil'j? Jefus anfwered them, / told you, and ye believed not ', the Works that 1 do in my Father* s Name, they hear Witnefs of me. See alfo Johnxlw. \\, hence St. F eter reprefents Jefus o'i Nazareth as ap~ proved of God, [ivrahSafi/.ivov'] demonftrated, as the Word properly fignifies, by Miracles, and Won- ders, and Signs, which God did by him in the Midji cfthem. A6ls ii. 22. It could never therefore be our Saviour's Defign to fignify, that any of the falfe Pro- phets and Seducers among the Jews, fhould do Miracles that could in any Meafure be compared to his own. And it is certain in Fad', that they did not. They pretended to foretel Things 10 come, and the Event foon confuted them, and ihewed the Vanity of their Pretences. They pre- tended to do great Wonders, but they might pro- perly be called lying Wonders. For tho' they had the Art of feducing great Numbers of People, they and their Works foon perifhed, and jhe Falf- hood and Impofture of them foon appeared.
As to what the Author fuppofeth concerning the Apoftles oppofing Miracles to Miracles, in Con- firmation of their different Schemes of Chriftianity, this fhall be confidered afterwards, when I come to examine his Objedions againft the New Tefta- menr. At prefent I fhall only fay that it may be proved with the cleareft Evidence, that the Apof- tles of our Lord taught one and the fame uniform harmonious Scheme of Doctrines, the fame Gofpel- to which God bore Witnefs with Signs and Wonders, and divers Miracles, and Gifts of the Holy Ghojl : And that the falfe Teachers in that Age could never
produce
of a divine Revelation. 29
produce any Thing in Atteftation of their falfe Dodrines, that could in the leaft be compared to the illuftrious Evidences and Proofs brought by the ApolUes to confirm the Gofpel which they preached.
Another Thing he offers to fhew that Miracles can be no Proof, is this, that the Power of work- ing Miracles did not make the Workers of them either infallible^ or impeccable ; raife them above the Poffihility of being deceived themfelves in their in- ward Judgment, or of deceiving others in the out- ■ward Sentence and Declaration of that Judgment *. p. 80, 83, 93. But it appears that the Proof or Evidence from Miracles, as already ftated, hath not properly any Tiling to do with the Fallibility or Infillibility, the Peccability or Impeccability, of the Perfon in himfelf confidered, by whom thefe Miracles are wrought. For in that Cafe, the Cre- dit of his having received a Revelation from God, doth not merely depend upon his own Word, or Veracity, or Integrity -, upon which Suppofition it might be fa id, that the Word of fallible and pec- cable Men was not intirely to be depended on ; but it depends upon a real Proof, diftinft from his Word, and independent of it, viz, upon the Tefti-
* Our Author, when he here fpeaks of the P<ywer of ivork- ing Miracles, feems to have a particular Reference to the Gift of Miracles communicated by the Holy Ghoft, in the firft Age of Chriftianity j which he underftands as if it were a perma- nent Habit refiding in the Perfon, to be ufed at Pieafure, when- ever he thought fit, like a natural Faculty or Habit ; which therefore might be ufed by him, either for confirming Truth or Falfhood. But this is a very great Miflake: That Power of working Miracles was not a Power of doing them whenever the Perfons themfelves pleafed. They could then only work Mira- cles, when it feemed fit to the Divine Wifdom they Ihould do them for valuable Ends. And it cannot be fuppofed that God who gave them this Power on Purpofe to confirm the Truth, would enable them to exercife it to confirm a Fallhood. But conce-ning this fee below, Chap. XIII. where this is more largely confidered.
mony
3o Miracles proper Proofs
mony given by God himfelf, to his divine Miffiori and Inlpiration, and to the Laws he publifheth to the World in his Name. And we may be fure, that however fallible Men are in themfelves, yet if God fends them on Purpofe to deliver Dodtrines and Laws to Mankind, as by Revelation from him, and enables them, in Confirmation of them, to perform fuch a Series of illuftrious Miracles as wc are now fuppofing, he will alfo affift them in com- municating thofe Doftrines and Laws, fo as to pre- ferve them from Error in delivering them.
This will appear in a juft Light, if applied to the Cafes already mentioned. Mofes profeffed to be extraordinarily fent of God, and to have re- ceived Laws by Revelation from him, which Laws he delivered to the People in his Name. In Confirmation of this his MifTion, he performed a Number of the mod extraordinary Miracles, for a Succeftion of Years together, of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced, that they bore upon them the evident Characters of a divine Interpofition, and could never be fuppofed to have been done, or that God would fuffer them to be done, in Fa- vour of an Impofture. Now this being the Cafe, it is nothing to the Purpofe, whether we fuppofe Mofes to have been fallible and peccable in himfclf or not. Let us grant him to have been in himfelf fallible, or capable of being deceived and impofed upon : Yet v^e have a fufRcient Aflurance that he was not aftually deceived in this Cafe. If by an enthufiaftick Heat he had only imagined himfelf to be infpired, and to have received thofe Laws by immediate Revelation from God, this Conceit of his would never have enabled him to perform fuch a Series of the moft ftupendous Works above all the Art of Man, or Power of Enthufiafm. And his doing fuch Things manifeftly proved that his divine Miffion was not the Delufion of his own mifguided Imagination, but a glorious Reality :
And
of a divine Revelation. 3 1
And that he did not merely fancy himfelf fent and infpired of God, but that he really was fo.
Again, let us fuppofe that ht "wsiS peccable, that is, that he was capable of forming a Defign to de- ceive the People, and of putting his own Inven- tions upon them for divine Revelations ('tho* I think Mofes*s excellent Charadler will fcarce fuffer us to fuppofe that he was capable of carrying on a deliberate folemn Cheat and Impofture, in the Name of God himfelf-, but let us fuppofe him to have been capable of fuch Defign,) yet it is evident, that in this Cafe he did not impofe upon them, and that the Laws he gave them, as from God, and ia his Name, were indeed the Laws of God, and not merely his own Inventions •, becaufe God him- felf, in the Manner already mentioned, boreWitnefs to thofe Laws. And whatever Defigns Mofes might be capable of, yet God himfelf, or good Beings (uperior to Man adling under his Influence and Diredtion, by whofe Afliftance alone Works fo circumftanced could be fuppofed to be done, would never have joined with him in carrying on the Impofture, and giving Atteftation to a Lie. And this Way of reafoning may be urged with ftill greater Force, when applied to the Revelation brought by our Lord Jefus Chrift, and his Apo- ftles. Whereas therefore this Writer frequently argues, that we cannot take Miracles for a Proof or Evidence of Do^rines without expofing curfelves to all the Enthufmfm and hnpojlure in the IVorld^ it is manifeft, that we can run no Hazard of this by receiving Dodtrines and Laws as coming from God, that have been confirmed by fuch a Series of extraordinary miraculous Atteftations, as were thofe given to the Mofaical and Chriftian Revela- tions. Becaufe they were of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced, as no Impofture was ever attended with, and no Art of Deceivers, or Power of En- thufiafm can ever efFed. Such a Revelation once 2 given.
32 Miracles proper Proofs
given, and fo glorioufly attefted, where it is ftea> dily believed and adhered to, is one of the belt Prefervatives againft being led aftray by the Decep- tions of Enthufialts and Impoftors.
What our Author offers to fhew that Miracles can be no Proof di -pofitwe Precepts, tho' produ- ced with great Pomp, (for he pretends to itate the Queftion with greater Accuracy than hath been hi- therto done, and tells us, that the Queftion is not concerning God's Right of inftituting fuch Pre- cepts which he doth not deny, but concerning the Way of knowing when God gives fuch Com- mands, fee 'p. 87, i£c. I fay, the Force of all that he offers on this Headj depends entirely upon what he fo often afferts, but never proves, vi?:.. that moral Truth and Fitnefs is the only Proof and Evidence of any Dodlrine or Law, as coming from God : From whence he argues, that Pre- cepts concerning Matters of a ritual and pofitive Nature cannot be proved to come from God, as not being neceffirily founded in the Nature and Fitnefs of Things. He therefore compares fuch Commands, to Commands pretended to be fent from Parents or Matters to their Children or Ser- vants, but which do not come to them under their own Hand and Seal, and may for that Reafon be difregarded. But if we muft keep to the Author's Comparifon, why may not God's giving us Laws by Perfons, whom he hath fent and authorized for that Purpofe, and to whom he hath given fufficient Credentials, by confirming the Mefilige they bring by numerous uncontrolled Miracles ; why may not this be compared to a Parent or Mafter's fending Directions or Orders to his Children and Servants, by MefTengers under his own Hand and Seal, in which Cafe he allows that they are obliged to con- form to thofe Orders, tho' they do not know the particular Reafons of them ? Yea Miracles may be fuppofed to be of fuch a Nature, that the Proof I . arifing
of a divine Revelation > 33
arifing from them may be ftronger than what ari- feth merely from a Man's own Hand and Seal. For it is pofTible, that a Man's Hand and Seal may be fo exaflly counterfeited, that no Perfon upon comparing them, may be able to difcern the Difference between the genuine and the counterfeit, not even the Ferlbn himfelf whofe Hand is coun- terfeited, any farther than that by other Means he may know that he did not write it, and that he gave no fuch Orders. But Miracles may be fup- pofed of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced, and raifed fo far above ail Competition and Paral- lel, that no Deceivers can work the like, nor have been ever able, or can be fuppofed to be able fo to imitate them, but that upon carefully examin- ing and comparing them, we may eafily fee a vaft Difference. If therefore a Man's giving Orders under his own Hand and Seal be allowed to be a fufficient Notification of his Will and Pleafure, and maketh it reafonable for his Children and Ser- vants to obey thofe Orders, tho' it is not impofTible they may be counterfeited ; then the Command of God coming to us, confirmed with the Atteftation of Miracles, of fuch a Nature as no Impoflure was ever attended with, (and fuch I have fh^wn were the Miracles wrought at the Eftablifhmcnt of the Jewifh and Chriftian Difpenfation) is a fuf- ficient Ground for our yielding Obedience to fuch Commands. And our not apprehending the Things required to be in themfelves antecedently neceflary in their own Nature, cannot be a fufHci- ent Reafon for our rejedling them •, becaufe upon this Suppofition, they come to us upon the Autho- rity or Teftimony of God himfelf, who by the Author's own ConcefTion, hath a Right of com- manding us in Things of a pofitive Nature.
It ought to be obferved, that at the fame Time that this Writer doth all he can to fhew that Mira- cles can be no Proof at all of any Dodrine or Re-
D velation.
34 Miracles proper Proofs
velation, as coming from God, he would not be thought to infinuate, that Miracles are of no \Jk^ and can ferve to no Purpofe at all in Religion. He faith that A'liracleSt efpeciaily if wrought for the Good of Mankind, and ivith a viftble Regard for their Interefl and Hapvinefs, are perhaps the moji effe^ual Means of removing Prejudices, and procur- ing Attention to what is delivered, p. 98, 99. But I do not fee how this can be made to conlift upon his Scheme. If it be fuppofed that Miracles can in any Cafe be fo circumftanced, as to yield a fuf- ficient Atteftation to the divine Million of the Perfon who is enabled to work thefe Miracles, and to the Truth and Divinity of the Doclrines and Precepts that are confirmed by thefe Miracles ; then when I fee a Perfon performing fuch extraor- dinary Works, above all the Power of Man, this will naturally command and engage my Attention to what he delivers. But if it be fuppofed, that they can never be of fuch a Nature, and fo cir- cumftanced, as to give any Atteftation to the di- vine MifTion of any Perfon, or to the Truth and divine Original of any Do6lrine, I can fee no Reafon why I ftiould attend to a Dodtrine more fo* being accompanied with Miracles, than if it were not fo, or why I fhould concern myfelf about Miracles at all ; becaufe if ever lb true or good, they can give no Atteftation, and furnifh no Proof; or as this Writer exprefleth it. Can prove nothing at all, and ought to have no Weight or Influence with any Body.
All the Ufe he is pleafed to aftign for the Mi- racles wrought by Chrift and his Apoftles is, that They tended to convince the People, that they were no Enemies to God, and to their Country y and difpofed them coolly and foberly to eonfider the ISature and Tendency of the DoSir'tnes they had to propofe to them -, but that they were not defigned for a Proof of the Truth or Divinity of thofe Doctrines. See_p.98. But
does
of a divine Rtvelation, 3 5
does not our Saviour himfclf frequently and plainly appeal to the wonderful Works he wrought, as the proper Evidences of his divine MifTion, and as bearing Witnefs to him, and to his Doftrine? Does not he often exprefsly put the Proof upon this, and fuppofe it to be a Proof fo ftrong as would leave the Jews utterly inexcufable if they did not be- lieve him ? And the Effed thefe Miracles properly had upon thofe that attended to them is well ex- prefled by Nicodemus, We know that thou art d Teacher Jent from God ; for no Man can do thefe Miracles that thou doeji^ except God be with him. John iii. 2. Nor had the Pharifees any other Way of avoiding the Force of this, than by fay- ing, that he did his Miracles by the Affiftance of the Devil : A Blafphemy againft the Holy Ghoft, which our Saviour pronounces never to be for- given, as being the moft obftinate and malicious Oppofition to divine Truth, and a refilling the ut- moit Evidence,
This may be fufficierit to fhew what Affurance thofe, who themfelves were Witneffes to fuch a Series of miraculous Atteftarions, might have of that Doftrine or Law coming from God, which they beheld thus attefted and confirmed. But there is another Thing that deferves to be confider- ed, and that is, what reafonable Ground of Affurance they may alfo have of a Doctrine or Law coming from God, who did not themfelves /^^ thofe Mira- cles whereby it was attefted and confirmed, or did not live in the Age when thofe Miracles were wrought. Can it be reafonable for fuch to receive Dodrines and Laws as of divine Authority, upon the Evidence of Miracles which they themfelves ^ were not Eye-witnefles of? In Anfwer to this, I ' think it cannot be reafonably denied, that fuppo- fing Miracles may be fo circumftanced, as to be in themfelves a • fufEcient Proof to thofe that faw them, then they are alfo a fufficient Proof to o-
i) 2 thersj
.36 Miracles proper Proofs
thers, in Proportion to the AiTurance they have, that thofe Miracles were really done. So that the Queftion is reduced to this -, whether there may be fuch Evidence given of Miracles done in former Ages, as makes it reafonable for thofe that live in fucceeding Ages to believe, and be perfuaded, that thofe Miracles were wrought ? For if fo, then, fuppofmg Miracles to be a Proof, they are obliged to believe that the Dodlrines and Laws which were atrefted by thefe Miracles came originally by Re- velation from God, and are to be received as of divine Authority. Now this depends upon ano- ther Queftion, and that is, whether in any Cafe we can have fufficient Affurance of Facts which we ourfelves did not fee, or which were done in for- mer Ages ? It is not fufficient to prove Things uncertain, and not to be depended upon, to fay that we have them by human Tradition and Tefti- mony, that is, by the Teftimony of Men that are neither infallible nor impeccable *. For human Tradition and Teftimony may be fo circumftanced as to yield fufficient Aflurance, that thofe Fads ■were done in paft Ages, or fuch Lav/s cnafted : And therefore the Man that fhould doubt of them, and give no other Reafon for his doubting, or re- jefting them, but this,, that they came by human Tradition and Teftimony, would only render him- felf ridiculous.
This Author, to fhew the Infufficiency of Tra- dition, for conveying Dodtrines and Laws of Re- ligion, is pleafed to compare it to a Parent or Mafter's writing to another Perfon, and he to a thirds and the third to a fourth^ and fo on to the hundredth or thoiifandth liandy which Orders were at lafi come to his Family, about fomething of near Inter eji and Concern between him and them. In this
* Concerning this fee Anfwer to Chriftianity as old as the Creation. Vol. 2. p. 117, &c.
Cafe
of a divine "Revelation* 37
Cafe it is faid that Children and Servants would not be juftly blamed, if they fhould y^T^^'/z^r/ their Obedience^ till they heard from him in a more dire^i and unexceptionable Way. p. 88, 89. But this In- ftance doth not at all come up to the Point. The Cafe fhould be put thus, Suppofing Laws to have been enadted in former Ages, and thofe Laws committed to Writing, the Queftion is. Whether thofe Laws may not be tranfmitted to Pofterity with fuch Evidence, that we may have AfTurance, fufficient to convince any reafonable Perfon, that thofe Laws were really enabled, and that thefe are the very Laws ? And whether it would be e- fteemed a good Reafon, or accepted as a proper Excufe, for doubting of the Authority of thofe Laws, or refufing Obedience to them, that we our felves did not live in the Age when thofe Laws were made ; and that they are tranfmitted to us through the Hands of Perfons capable of an In- tention to deceive us, or of being themfelves de- ceived ? Again, fuppofing Fads to have been done in former Ages of confiderable Importance, and thofe Fadts recorded at the Time in which they were done, the Queftion is, Whether they may not be tranfmitted to us in authentick Re- cords^ with fuch Evidence, that it would be per- fectly unreafonable to doubt of them -, and whe- ther it would diminifh the Credit of them, that the Writings which contain an Account of thofe Fa6ls, have been fpread through many Hands, of- ten tranfcribed, difperfed among different Nations, and tranflated into various Languages ? One would think, by our Author's Manner of reprefenting it, that he intended to infinuate, that this would render the Accounts uncertain •, whereas there being many Copies of them is a much greater Security than if there were -but a few extant.
It cannot be denied, that Laws had originally from Revelation^ are as capable of being tranf-
D 3 mitted
gS Miracles proper Proofs
mitted to iPofterity as any other Laws •, and mira- culous Fa^is^ done in Atteftation ofthofe Laws^ may be of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced, as to be capable of being tranfmitted to fucceeding Ages, as well as any other Fa6ts. If therefore, it be allowed that any Laws, or Fafts, may be fo tranfmitted, that thofe who live in after Ages may have areafonable AfTurance, fufncient to convince them, that thefe are the very Laws which were enadted, and that thefe Facts were really done ; then it muft alfo be allowed, that the Laws which came originally by Revelation, and the Fads whereby thoie Laws were attefted and confirmed, may be tranfmitted to us in fuch a Manner, and with fuch a Degree of Evidence, that we cannot reafonably doubt of their being the very Laws which v/ere originally publilhed by Revelation from God, and that thofe miraculou*^ Fads were really wrought. If we refufe to receive thofe Laws or believe thofe Fadts, becaufe we ourfelves did not fee them, or live in the Age when the Laws were firft given, and the Fadls were done, though they come to us tranfmitted with fuch Evidence as we ourfelves would count fufRcient, in any other Cafe •, this is certainly a moft unreafonable Con- dud, and will hardly be juftified to the great Go- vernor of the World. To infift upon it, that thofe Laws fhould be again promulgated, in the Manner in which they were publifhed at firft, and that the extraordinary miraculous Fads wrought in Atteftation of therh, fliould be done over again in every Age, and in every Nation, for the Satisfac- tion of every finglc Perfon, (for one Man in one Age and one Country, hath as much Right to ex- ped and demand it as another) would be a moft abfurd Demand ; it would be unbecoming the di- vine Wii'dom to grant it : And indeed, fuch ex- traordinary Atteftations, by being continually re- peated, ^ou|d ceafe to be extraordinary, and be
regarded
of a divine Revelation. 39
regarded as no more than common Things, and fo would lofe their Force. It is enough that they are tranfmitted to us in fuch a Manner, and with fuch Evidence, that it would be periedly unreafonable to doubt whether thefe are the very Laws that were originally given as from God, and whether thefe Fads were really done. And it might eafily be proved, and hath been often (hewn, that the Scrip- ture Laws and Doftrines, and the Faits whereby they were attefted and confirmed, are tranfmitted to us with an Evidence thatfcarce any other Laws, or any other Fafts done in former Ages, were ever attended with *.
Our Author himfelf doth not deny, that *' A " Matter of Revelation is as capable of being " conveyed down to Pofterity as any other Mat- " ter of Fa6t, of what Nature or Kind foever, «« and that either this muft be allowed, or we mud " rejedt all hiftorical Evidence of every other " Kind. But then he faith, that he muft ftill in- " fift upon it, that no Reafon or Proof can be *' given of any Revelation as coming trom God, *' but the moral Fitnefs and Reafonablenefs of *' the Thing itfelf, in its own Nature, antecedent " to, and abftrafted from, any fuch Tradition or " human Teftimony •, and confequently, thatTra- " dition or human Teftimony is here brought in, " to no Manner of Purpofe, and without Effed." p. 85. This Writer often puts me in Mind of what he is pleafed to fay, concerning the common Run of our enthufiafiic Pulpiteers, whofe Manner he tells us, it is, always firjl to beg the main Point in ^ejiion, and then triumph upon it as a "Thing proved, p. 88. This is the Manner of our Au- thor, who repeats it on all Gccafions, that moral
* See to this Purpofe Anfvoer to Crijlianity as old as the Creation, Part II, Chap. IV. V. VI.
. D 4 Truth
40 Miracles proper Proofs
Truth and Fitnefs is the only Evidence or Proof of any Doftrine or Law, as coming from God ; and without offering any Argument to prove it, but only fuppofing it, makes ufe of this all along as a Demonftration, that Miracles can be no Proof or Evidence of the divine Original of any Doftrine or Law. And if you will but grant him, that the other is the only Proof, then he will eafily fhew that this is not a Proof. But fince it hath been fhewn, that Miracles may be of fuch a Nature, as to yield a fufficient Proof of the divine Original and Authority of Dodlrines and Laws attefted and confirmed by thofe Miracles •, then if human Tra- dition and Teftimony may give us a reafonable and fufficient Aflurance, that thofe Miracles were really wrought, it is evident that it is here brought in to very good Purpofe. And that human Tra- dition may be fo circumftanced, as to give fufficienf AfTurance that thefe Miracles were really wrought, is as true as that human Tradition can give us a fuf- ficient AfTurance of any paft Fafls : Nor can this be realbnably denied, except upon this Principle, that no paft Fa6ls can be tranfmitted to us with fufficient Evidence for a reafonable Man to depend ugon. A Thing which the Enemies of Revela- tion have not yet ventured to affert.
All the Ufe he is pleafed to allow to Tradition or human Teflimony in Matters of Religion, is this, <' That we may be probably affured from «' Tradition, and human Teftimony, what our «' Fore-fiithers believed about God and Religion, *« and what Reafons they affigned for it •, but ** whether they ought to have believed as they *'= did, or whether their Reafons will hold good " or not, is another Queftion, concerning which •' Tradition, or human Teftimony, can never in- " form us." p. 85. Let us therefore proceed upon his own State of the Cafe. I am not to be- lieve any Religion to be true and divine, merely
becaufe
of a divine Revelation, 4 1
becaufe my Anceftors believed it : But if I know what the Grounds were upon which they believed it, and am fatisfied that the Grounds were juft, then I am obliged to^believe it upon thofe Grounds as well as they were. And fuppofing the Grounds, upon which it was firft received and fubmitted to as of divine Authority, were, befides the Excellency and good Tendency of its Dodtrines and Laws, the illuftrious miraculous Atteftations whereby it was confirmed, Tradition may give me a fufficient Affu- rance to fatisfy any reafonable Mind, of the Truth of thofe extraordinary miraculous Fadts, or that thofe Fafts were really done. And this is all that Tradition or human Teftimony is properly brought for. For whether thofe Fafts were a fufficient Proof of the divine Authority of the Revelation attefted and confirmed by them, mufl be judged not by Tradition, but by our own Reafon, upon confidering the Nature and Circumftances of thofe Fa(5ts and Atteftations. And if our own Reafon convinceth us, that thofe Fa6ls, fuppofing them true, were pro- per and fufficient Atteftations to the, divine Original of that Revelation, and if alfo we have all the Proof that can be reafonably defired that the Fa6ls are true, then we are obliged to receive that Revela- tion as coming from God, and as of divine Autho- rity. And indeed the Proof of thofe Fads is fo ft:rong, they are tranfmitted to us with fuch convin- cing Evidence, that I am perfuaded few refift the Argument taken from the Fa6ts in Favour of Chrif- tianity, but who would have been among the Un- believing, had they lived in the very Age in which thofe Fads were done. For the true Reafon of their not believing is not, that there is not a fufficient Proof of thofe Fa<fts to convince dnd fatisfy a reafonable Mind, and fuch as is efteemed fufficient in any other Cafe ; but it is owing to certain Prejudices, and Difpofitions of Mind, which probably would have hindred their fubmitting to the Evidence brought for 3 the
42 Miracles proper Proofs
the Chriftian Revelation, had they themfelves been Eye-Witnefles to the Fafts. And we may 'well reckon our Author one of this Make and Difpofi- tion of Mind, fince he takes Care to let us know that he looks upon Miracles to be no Proofs at all, and therefore would not have been moved by them, tho' he had feen them done before his Eyes.
This Writer is pleafed pofitively to infift upon it, " That there can be.no fuch Thing as divine «' Faith, upon human Teftimony ; and that this «« abfurd Suppofition has been the Ground of all " the Superftition and falfe Religion in the World. •' And that the Knowledge of any Truth can go «^ no farther upon divine Authority, or as a Mat- «' ter of divine Faith, than to the Perfon or Per- *' fons immediately infpired, or to whom the ori- *' ginal Revelation was made." p. 82, 84.
But if, by divine Faith upon human Tejlijnony, be only meant, that an original divine Revelation may be tranfmitted or conveyed to us by human Tetlimony, together with the extraordinary mira- culous Fads whereby it was attefted and confirmed, and that in fuch a Manner as to make it reafonable for us to believe, that it is indeed a divine Revela- tion, this hath been already fhewn. And if I have fufficient Grounds of reafonable Affurance, concerning any Dodrines and Laws, that they came originally by divine Revelation, I am as tru- ly obliged to regard them as coming from God, and to believe and obey them on that Account, as if I had them myfelf, by immediate Infpiration. For the Obligation to believe and obey them, doth not depend upon the particular Way of my re- ceiving them, but upon my having fufficient Ground to convince me that they came from God. This Writer indeed feems refolved, that whatever Arguments can be brought to prove that any Thing is a divine Revelation, the receiving it as fuch, Ihall not be called divine Faith ^ except the
Per-
of a divine Revelation. 43.
Perfon that believeth it, hath received It immedi- ately from God himfelf. But whether he will allow it to be called divine Faith or not, the calling it by another Name, doth not at all alter the Nature ot the Thing, or difiblve the Obligation. If I have fufficient Reafon to be convinced that Miracles of fuch a Nature, and fo circumftanced, fuppofing them to have been really done, are ftrong Attefta- tions to the Truth, and divine Original of the Doc- trines and Laws which they are wrought to confirm ; and if I have fufficient Affurance, that thefe Fa6ts were really done •, then I am obliged to believe and receive thofe Doftrines, and obey thofe Laws, as of divine Authority. To do otherwife, would be to refufe to believe Dodtrines which I have juft Ground to conclude were revealed from God him- felf, and to refufe to obey Laws which I have juft Ground to believe God himfelf hath enjoined ; which would be a very criminal Conduft, highly difpleafing to God, and contrary to the Duty that reafonable Creatures owe to the Supreme Being.
Thus I have confidered what this Author offers with Regard to the Proofs or Evidences of divine Revelation in general •, in which, his Defign is plainly to fhew, that there can be no proper Proofs or Evidences of divine Revelation to any, but the Perfons immediately receiving it, and yet at the fame Time he affeds to own the great Ufefulnefs of Revelation, in the prefent corrupt and dege- nerate State of Mankind.
CHAP. II.
^n Entrance on the Author's Ohje^iions againft the Old Tejiament. The ftrange Reprefentation he makes of the Law of Mofes. Some general Con- fiderations concerning the Nature and Defign of that Law. Its moral Precepts pure and excellent. Its ritual Injunoiions appointed for wife Reafons, 3 "^^^^
'44 Divine Authority oj the Old Teftament.
^he Nature of its Sandfions conftdered. Reafons of God's ere5ftng the People of Ifrael into a pecu- liar Polity, Nothing abfurd in this Conjlitution. It was defigned in a Suhferviency to the general Good. The miraculous Fa5is wherehy that Law was confirmed not poetical Emhellifhments^ hut real Facfs. The Author's Reafons to prove that thofe Fa5ls could not he underflood in a literal hiflorical Senfejhewn to he vain and infufficient.
HAVING confidered what this Author hath advanced concerning divine Revelation in general, and the Proofs whereby it is eftablifhed i I now proceed to the particular Attempts he makes to deftroy the Authority of the Revelation contain- ed in the facred Writings of the Old and New Teftament. He feems willing indeed to obferve fome Meafures with regard to Chriftianity, but as to the Old Teftament he throws off all Difguife ; he every where openly rejedts, and makes the moft difadvantageous Reprefentation poffible both of the Law of Mofes and the prophetical Writings ; and expreQy declares he will have nothing to do with them in Religion, p. 394. If his Reprefentation be true, they are not only no true divine Revelation but a grand Impofture, contrary to Reafon and com- mon Senfe, and to the Liberties of Mankind.
To begin with the Account he gives of the Law of Mofes, he exprefly declares that in its original, proper and literal Senfe, which he fays was the only Senfe intended by the Law-giver, // had nei- ther any thing of Truth or Goodnefs in it, hut was a Minding inflaving Conjlitution, and an intolerahle Toke rf Darknefs and Bondage, Tyranny and Vajfa- lage. Wrath and Mifery, p. 29. . That it was a Law that introduced and confirmed a State of civil and religious Blindnefs and Bigotry, 6cc. p. 32. That it was a national Slavery, which the Jews had been unjujlly fuhje^ed to, and which they had a right to
throw
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 45
throw off whenever they had a proper Opportunityy and to affert and reaffume their natural and religious Rights and Liberties, p. 51. He calls it a wretched Scheme of Superjiition, Blindnefs, and Slavery, con- trary to all Reafon and common Senfe, let up under the fpecious popular Pretence of a divine Injlitution and Revelation from God, p. 71.* Thefe and others of the like Nature are the handfome Epithets he every where bellows upon the Law of Mofes. He is not content with declaring it to be a mere piece of human Policy, but makes it the worft Conllitution in the World. Nor did any of the Heathens, the greateft Enemies of the Jews, ever fpeak in fuch opprobrious Terms of Mofes and his Conftitutions as this pretended Chriftian Writer has done. If the Law of Mofes merits thefe Epithets, it certainly deferves the Abhorrence of all Mankind, and Mo- fes, inftead of being extraordinarily fent and infpir'd by God, was the molt pernicious Impoftor that ever was, and the greateft Enemy to his Nation, who inftead of regarding him as they always did with the utmoft Veneration, Ihould rather have ex- ecrated his Memory.
Before I enter on a particular Difcuffion of the Objeftions he advances againft the Law of Mofes, I fhall offer fome general Confiderations concerning the Nature and Defign of that Law, whereby the true original Intent, and the Excellency and Propriety of that Law may more evidently appear.
At the time when the Law was given. Idolatry had made a very great Progrefs. The primitive Re- ligion which was both derived by Tradition from the early Patriarchs, the Progenitors of the human Race, and was alfo very agreeable to right Reafon was very much corrupted, efpecially in the main Principle of it, the Worlhip and Acknowledgment of one only the living and true God. And tho* there were confiderable Remains of the antient true Reli- gion ftill prefcrved in fome particular Families, yet
Things
46 Divine Authority of the Old Teftamerit.
Things were growing worfe and worfe ; and it i's highly probable, that if God had not extraordinarily interpofed, true Religion and the juft Knowledge and Worfhip of the Deity, would have been loft among Men. It pleafed him therefore in this ftate of Things, to feled: a Nation to himfelf among whom the Knowledge and Worfliip of the true God fhould be preferved in a World overrun with Idolatry. And to that End he firft exerted his own almighty Power and Goodnefs in delivering that I^ation from a State of extreme Diftrefs, Sla- very and Opprefllon, and that in fo extraordinary a Manner, as exhibited a marvellous DifpJay of his own Majefby and Glory, and an entire Triumph over Idols in the very Seat of Idolatry, for fo Egypt then was ; and then caufed the moft pure and excellent Laws to be given them, which were pro- mulgated with the greateft Solemnity, and attefted by the moil amazing and unparallel'd Miracles. And in order the more effedually to anfwer the main Defign he had in view^ it pleafed him to enter into a peculiar Relation to that People, and to take them for his own by a folemn publick A61 or Covenant; whereby the People on the one hand brought themfelves under the moft exprefs and fo- lemn Engagements, to obey the Laws he gave them, and to be abfolutely devoted to his Service ; and he on his part engaged to be their God and King in a fpecial Relation, to give them the Land of Canaan for their Inheritance, and to pour forth many fignal Benefits upon them, and make them a happy People. I fee nothing in this unworthy of God, or that can be fhewn to be inconfiftent with his divine Perfe£bions. Nor can this Writer himfelf confiftently find fault with it, f nee fpeak- ing of the Covenant God made with Abraham, in which he promifed to be a God to him^ and to his Seed, and to jettle them in the 'Pojjejjwn of the Land of Canaan, and make them happy upon l\i& Con- dition'
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 47
dition of their continuing in the Religion and Wor- Jhip of the one true God, &c. he faith this was a wije and reafonable 'Tranfa5lion between God and Abraham -, and had the Conditions been performed by Abraham^ s Family and Pofierity, no doubt but the Grant on God's part had been made good, p. 258, 259.
If we enquire into the Nature of the Laws that were given them, the main Defign of them feems evidently to be this ; to preferve them from Idola- try, and Vice, and Wickednefs, and to engage them to the Worjhip of the only true God, and to the Pra6tice of Righteoufnefs. The great fun- damental Principle that lyes at the Foundation of the whole Body of Laws delivered by Mofes, and to which there is a conftant Reference in that whole Conftitution, and whereby it is erfiinendy diftin- guifhed from all other the moft celebrated ancient "J^aws and Conftitutions is this ; that there is but one only the living and true God, who is alone to be worfhipped and adored, loved, and obeyed. He is there reprefented as the eternal and felf-exif- tent Jehovah, Almighty and Alfufficient, to whom there is none like, or that can be compared, and who is not to be reprefented by any corporeal Form ; that he is the great Creator of the Univerfe, who made Heaven and Earth, and all Things that are therein by the Word of his Power, and who pre- ferveth and governeth all Things by his Provi- dence, diredling and ordering all Events -, that he is moft j lift and holy, moft faithful and true, a hater of Iniquity, who will feverely punifti obfti- nate prefumptuous Tranfgreffors, and yet is full of Compaffion and Gracious, Longfuffering, and abundant in Goodnefs and Truth, and ready to for- give penitent returning Sinners. In that Law they are every where moft ftri6liy commanded to wor- fhip and ferve the Lord God, and him only, to love him with all their Hearts and Souls, to fear
him.
48 Divine Authority of the Old Teftameftt
him, and dread his Difpleafure above all Things, to put their whole Truft and Confidence in him, to fubmit themfelves chearfully to his rightful Autho- rity, and to obey all his Commands.
And as the Law of Mofes direfts and inftruds Men ■ in the Duties they more immediately owe to God, fo alfo in thofe they owe to one another. It forbids. in the ftrongeft Manner all Malice, and "Wrath, and Bitternefs -, all Tnjuftice and Fraud, Violence and Opprefllon •, all Fornication and A- dultery, and Uncleannefs ; all Falftiood and Guile, and Deceit *, and even all covetous and inordinate Affedions and Defires : It not only requires exa6t Truth and Fidelity, a ftrift inviolable Honefty in our Dealings towards all Men, but it exprefly re- quires us to love our Neighbours as our felves, to be ready to affilt and do good to one another upon all Occafions, yea even to our Enemies themfelves, to fliew Mercy to the Poor, the Indigent, and de- ftitute Strangers and Servants*. Upon the whole, the moral Precepts of the Law of Mofes are pure and excellent ; they are fuch as if duly pradifed and obeyed could not f\il to make that Nation happy, if the pure Worlhip of God, and the Prac- tice of Righteoufnefs, Juftice, Fidelity, Tempe- rance, and of mutual Charity and Benevolence could make them fo, Mofes therefore might juftly repre- fent thefe Laws and Statutes as fufEcient, if careful- ly obeyed and attended to, to make them a wife and. underfianding People, above other Nations, Deut.iv. 5, 6. and again ver. 8. What Nation is there fo greats that hath Statutes and Judgments fo righteous^ as all this Law which I fet before you this Day ?
As to the ritual Precepts there enjoined, which are many and various ; tho' it cannot be expeded
* See Exod. xx. 12 — 18. xxii. 21, 24. xxi'ii. 1-78. Lev, \\. 2, 5. xix. 18, '36. xxv. 14 — 17. xiv. 29. xxii. i — 4. 22 — 29. xxiii. 17. xxiv. 20—22. xxv, 13, 16.
that
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 49
that we fliould be able to affign the particular Rea- fons of them at this Diftance, yet we have juft Reafon to conclude that they were all given for wife and good Purpofes, which rendered them very- fit and proper for that time, and for that People*.
Many
* I doubt not but if we had diftindl Views of the Reafons of the feveral ticual Injundlions prefcribed in the Law of MofeSp the Wifdom and Goodnefs of God in appointing them would eminently appear. Many happy Attempts have been made this way by learned Perfons, both Jev:s and Chrijiians, that have given great Light to many of the Mofaick Rites and Con- ftitutions. It is evident there is nothing in any of them that in- trencheth on the facred Rules of Virtue, Purity , and Decency , as did many of the Rites in Ufe among the Heathen Nations, e.g. the cruel Rites of Moloch, and the impure ones of Baal-Peor. And it may not be improper to obferve, that fome of the Mofaick Conftitutions, which feem atfirfl view mod ftrange and extraor- dinary, if clofcly coniidered, do furnifh a Proof of the divine Original of chat Conftitution and Polity. Of this kind I take the Law relating to the Sabbatical Tear to be. Every feventh Year was to be a Sabbath of Reji unto the Land, a Sabbath /or the Lord, in which they were neither to fow their Fields, nor prune their Vineyards: And it is exprefly promifed that God would command his BleJJtng upon them in the fixth Year, and it fhould hx'm% forth Fruit for three Tears, that is, for the fixth and the two I'ucceeding Years, the {eventh and eighth, Le'v. xxv. z, 4, 20, 22. No Conftitution like this can be found in the Laws of any other Nation. And it may be ftrongly argued, that Mofes would not l^ve propofed fuch a Law, if he had been left mere- ly to himfelf in his Legiflation, and had not received it from God, who was alone able to make good chat Promife upon which the Obfervation of it depended ; and by fo doing gave a (landing remarkable Evidence of his conftant fpecial Prefence and Provi- dence amongft them, and both confirmed the Authority of that Law, and anfwered the main Defign of if, which was to keep them clofe to the Acknowledgment, Obedience, and Adoration of him the only true God, in Preference to all Idols ; fince nothing of this Kind could be produced in favour of any of the Idol Dei- ties. And accordingly in the Sabbatical Year the whole Nation, not the Men only, but the Women and Children were obliged to appear at the Place which the Lord fhould choofe, and were to iJ»*«r the whole Law read to them, Deut. xxxi, 10 — 13. which was then moft likely to be attended to, and to make an Impref- fion, as they had then in the abundant Plenty of that Year, and
E the
50 Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
Many of them were defigned for the more efFeftual obtaining that which was the proper and principal End of that Law, which was to preferve the Jewi from Idolatry. For this End, many of the Rites prefcribed them were in dire6l Oppofition to thofe of the neighbouring idolatrous Nations -, and great care was taken by many peculiar Ufages to keep them a diftind and feparate People. There were many Rites alfo that added a great outward Pomp and Solemnity to their Worfhip, that they might be the lefs in Danger of being drawn afide by the Splendor and Decorations of the Heathenifh Ido- latry. Other Rites were inftituted in Comfnemora- tion of great and fignal Events, extraordinary Afts of Providence towards their Nation, the keep- ing up of a conftant Remembrance of which could not but be of great Ufe for preferving the Love and Worfhip of God amongft them, awakening their Gratitude, and engaging their dutiful Obedience, And laftly, many of the Rites then prefcribed had a farther View to the Meffiah^ his Offices and Be- nefits, of which they were defigned as Types and Preftgurations. I know this Writer will not allow this, but he muft not take it ill if we prefer tlie Authority of the Apoftle Paul to his •, what he offers againft it fhall be confidered afterwards. But tho* many and various Rites are enjoined^'and pre- fcribed in the Mofaical Law, yet ftill it is evident that the main Strefs is there laid on Things of a moral Nature, the great eflential Duties of Reli- gion. The abfolute NecefTity of real univerfal Righteoufnefs, Piety, and Charity, Juftice, Tem. perance, the Fear and Love of God is there fre-
the extraordinary Provifion made for them, a fenfiWe Proof of God's fovereign Dominion and Providence, and of the divjn* Original and Authority of that Law before their Eyes. Other Refleftions of this Kind might be made on feveral of the Mo- faick Conftitutions. But the particular Confideration of them would take up more Time than is confiftent with my pfefent Defign.
3 quently
Divine Authority of the Old Teftametit. ^i
quently and ftrongly inculcated, and moft pathe- tically inforced. Scarce any thing can be more maving and afFeding than the Exhortations to Piety and Virtue given by Mofes to the People of IfraeU elpecially in the kit part of his Life in the Book of 'Deuteronomy. Any one that ferioufly and impartially confiders them will find fuch a wonder- ful Force and Pathos, as well as a divine Solem- nity in them, as cannot but give a very advanta- geous Idea of that excellent Perfon, and of the Laws he gave them in the Name of God. All along in that Law, the Favour of God is promlfed to thofe that go on in the Praftice of Righteoufnefs ; that God will love them, and delight in them, and will moft certainly reward them, and make them happy. And on the other hand, the moft awful Tbreatnlngs are there denounced againft prefumptu- ous Tranlgreffors. God's Purity and Holinefs, his Deteftation againft Sin, and the Terrors of his Wrath and Vengeance, are there defcribed in the moft ftrong, and ardent, and fignificant Expref- fions, which have a manlfeft tendency where they are really believed, and ferioufly confidered, to fill Men with a deep Senfe of the Evil and Malignity of Sin, and to deter them from committing it.
It is true, that the Im mortality of the Soul and a Future State of Rewards and Punifhments, is rather fuppofed and implied in the Law of Mofts, than dire6lly afferted and revealed •, and one Rea- fon of this might be, that thefe Things were not controverted or denied in thofe early Ages. A con- fiderable part even of the Idolatry that then pre- vailed, proceeded upon the Notion of feparate in- corporeal Beings: and efpecially the Worfhip of departed Heroes, necefiarily fuppofed that their Souls furvived after Death. Cicero fpeaks of the Doc- trine of the Immortality of the Soul, as a Tradi- tion derived from the moft ancient times. And it might eafily be fhswn, that it fpread univerfally
E 2 through
52 Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
through all Nations, and ftill continued to be be- lieved among them, even when they had loft the true Knowledge and Worfhip of God. This ap- pears from the beft Accounts we have of the Senti- ments of the ancient Egyptians^ ChaldeanSy PiMni- cians^ Scylhians, &c. but afterwards thro' the falfe Refinements of Philofophy, and vain Deceit in the latter Ages, under the Pretence of Wifdom above the Vulgar, many began to difpute againft, and to deny the Immortality of the Soul, and a Future State. And therefore it became then abfolutely ne- celTary to make the moft clear and exprefs Reve- lation of it, and to fet it in the ftrongeil Light, as it is done by the Gofpel of Je/us : but as far as ap- pears, it was univerfally acknowledged when the Law of Mofes was given ; and I Ihall afterwards fliew that it is implied in that Law, and was all along believed by the Body of the Jew'ijh Nation in all Ages.
But it muft be confidered, that as the Law of Mofes was immediately diredled to the whole Peo-. pie of Ifrael confider'd as a Nation or Communi- ty, fo the Sandlions of that Law, or the Promifes and Threatnings whereby Obedience to it was en- forced, were fuited to the Nature and Circumftances of a Commmunity, and therefore were diredliy and immediately of a temporal Nature, relating to the Happinefs or Mifery, the good or evil Confe- quences, their Obedience or Difobedience would bring upon them in this prefent World. And there was a manifeft Propriety in it, that thefe Things fhould be much infifted on in that Law ; bccaufe fome of its Injunflions and Obfervances, tho' inftituted for wife Reafons, feemed laborious and burdenfome, as well as contrary to thofe of other Nations: God was pleafed therefore to alTure them that this fhould not turn to their Difadvantage even in this prefent State \ that he would abun- dantly compenfate their Obedience by various Blef-
Divine Authority oj the Old Teftament. 53
fings, which he v;ould pour forth upon them in this World i and that by a taithful Adherence to his Service they would promote their prefent Intereft, and by a Negled and Difobedience to his Laws would draw upon themfelves the greateft Evils and Calamities. Such Promifes and BlefTings were moft likely to make ftrong and vigorous Impreflions on the Minds of the People, and were wifely and con- defcendingly adapted to their Tempers and Cir- cjmftances, to allure and engage them to Obedi- ence, and to deter them from Idolatry and Wick- ednefs. But ftill thefe did not exclude the Rewards and Punifhments of a future State, which were all along fuppofed and implied, and the Knowledge and Belief of which was derived to them from the antient Patriarchs, and had obtained among them, and other Nations from the Beginning.
Upon this brief View of the Law of Mofes it appears, that the main Defign of it was moft ex- cellent, VIZ. to preferve thofe to whom it was given from the general Idolatry and IVtckednefs that had overfpread the World, and to maintain the Knowledge a.nd JVorJbip of the only true God, and the Pra^ice of true Religion and Righteoufnefs a- mong them. And all the fubfequent Adminiftrati- ons of God toward them were wifely fitted to pro- mote the fame valuable Defign. It was for this that he interpofed from time to time in an extraordinary Manner, by fignal Acls of Providence, in a way of Judgment or Mercy, fufficient to awaken the molt ftupid, to acknowledge and adore his Hand, and to convince them that their Bleffings and Punifli- ments came from him. The idolatrous Nations had with the true Worfhip of God almoft loft the right Notions of his Providence. They attributed their BlefTings and Calamities wholly to inferior De- ities, in whofe Hands they fuppofed the Ad minify- {ration and Government of human Affairs to be yefted : to whom therefore they addrefled themfelves,
E 3 and
54 Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
and paid all their Worfhip and Homage, whilft they almoft entirely neglected the fupreme Being, as not concerning himfelf with the Affairs of Men. JBut God's Treatment of the Jews-t and bis way of Adminiftration towards them was a conftant Proof of his Providence, and was peculiarly fitted to pre- vent their being led away by thofe pernicious No- tions, and to lead them to regard and confider the Hand of God in all things that befel them.
If it be urged as an abfqrd Thing in that Gonfti- tution, that God is there re prefented as entring into a peculiar Relation to one particular People, who were to be kept diftinft and feparate from all others *, let it be confidered that the particular Relation, that for wife Ends he entred into towards this People, was no way inconfiltent with his univerfal Domi- nion and Government, but fuppofed it. He was ilill as much as ever the Ruler of the World, and the God and Parent of all Mankind. Nor did the particular and fpecial Benefits conferred upon this People at all leffen his univerfal Goodnefs. And furely no Man vyho believeth that God pre- fides over all Events, and concerns himfelf in hu- man Affairs, and at the fame time doth obferve the mighty Difference that hath been, and is made between fome Perfons, and fpme Nations, and others, with refpeft to all Advantages for Improve- ment in Knowledge and Virtue, will pretend to iay, that it is inconfiftent with the Wifdom or Goodnefs of djvine Providence, to diftinguifli one Nation with peculiar Privileges and Advantages above others, fince it is ftil] trqe, that he doth and hath ajl along dpne much good to all in the Methods of his kind Providence, and giveth them many Ad- vantages, if they were careful to make a right Im- provement of them.
But befides it muft be confidered, that God's thu^ feledjng a peculiar People or Nation in fo extra- ordinary a Manner, and giving them fuch Laws,
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 55
was not merely defigned for the fake of that parti- cular People, but was defigneJ in a Subfcrviency to the general Good^ and had a tendency to promote it, by keeping up the Knowledge of true Religion in the World, which otherwife was in Danger of being extinguifhed. By virtue of this peculiar Conftitution, there was ftill a Remnant preferved, profefling and maintaining the Knowledge and Worfhip of the only true God, free from Idolatry. There was ftill true Religion maintained like a Light ihining in a dark Place, and how far this Light was diffufed, and how many kindled their Lamps at it, we cannot tell. The Ifraelites were placed in a convenient Situation between Egypty and AJfyria^ and Chaldea^ the moft remarkable Countries then on Earth. And the carrying them out of Egypt in fuch a wonderful Manner, and fettling them in Canaan^ with fuch a Series of mighty A6ts, and an out- ftretched Arm, and afterwards, the marvellous In- terpofitions of divine Providence towards them in a way of Judgment or Mercy, would probably reach a great way, and fpread the Fear of God unto diftant Nations. And in many Paffages of Scripture it is fignified that this was one Defign for which they were intended. The Fame of the mighty Afts done for Ifrael^ and the Laws given them, is reprefented as reaching to the Heathens, and fpreading the Glory and Majefty of God ; and the Nations are called upon to regard and to confi- der them *. It is very probable, particularly, that in the Days of David, when the Kingdom of Ifrael made a great Figure, and was of confiderable Ex- tent, and in the Reign of Solomon, who was fo ad- mired and fought unto from all Parts for his Wif- dom, and under whom the moft glorious Strufture
•See Exod. vii. 5. ix. 6. Lev. xxvi. 45. Numb. xiv. 13, 15. Deu/.iv.S. I Kings ¥111.41.^43. Ivii. 9. Ixvi. i — 5. Pfai, xcviii. I — 4. Jer^TOixm. 9.
E 4 was
56 Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
was built to the only true God that ever the World faw -, the Ifraelites, and their Laws, and Conftitu- tions, became more generally known, and this might have a very good Effedl in bringing many to the Knowledge, and Worfhip, and Obedience of the true God. It is evident from the Language of Hiram King of T^yre^ and of the Queen of Sheha, that they had a high Efteem and Veneration for the Lord Jehovah, the Go'd of Ifrael, 2 Chron. xi, 11, 12, I Kings X. 9. and the like may be fuppofed con- cerning many others.
After this, even their Captivities and Difperfions were made fubfervient by divine Providence to- wards fpreading the Knowledge of Religion in the Countries where they were fcattered, and where many of them became very eminent, and with a remark- able Steadinefs adhered to their Law, and to the Religion and Worfhip of the true God there pre- fcribed. The Decrees of Nebuchadnezzar, and Darius, and Cyrus, fhew the Efteem they had for the only Jiving and true God, the God of Ifraeh Dan. xi. 47. iii. 29. iv. 33 — 37. vi. 25 — 27. Ezra i. 2, 4. And it has been very probably fuppofed by many learned Men, that it was owing very much to the Light derived from the Jews, and the admirable Writings and Laws preserved among them, that there was more of the Knowledge of God, and of fome of the main Principles of Re- ligion preferved in the Eaft than in other Parts of the World. The nearer we come to the Times of the Gofpel, the plainer Proofs we have of the Knowledge and Worfhip of the true God and Re- ligion, being fpread and propagated by the Jews. As they were diffufed almoft all over the Roman Empire, as well as in Petfia, and the Ealtern Countries, fo they every where profelyted great > Numbers to the Worfhip of the only true God in Ppporuion to the fafhionable Idolatry which then fjniyerfilly prevailed. It does not appear that any
9f
Divine Authority ^ the Old Teftament ^j
of the moft refined PhilofopherSy thofe Men of ad- mired Knowledge and Genius, ever converted any of the People from their Idolatrous Superfti- tions -, on the contrary, they all meanly fubm it- ted and conformed to the Idolatry eftablifhed in their refpeftive Countries, and exhorted others to do fo too. Whereas the Jews were inftrumental to turn many from Idolatry, and to fpread the Know- ledge of the true God far and wide in many Parts of the Roman Empire, Babylonia, Perfta, &c. and this tended to prepare the "World for receiving that laft and moft perfe6t Difpenfation which our Lord Jefus Chrift was to introduce.
This naturally leads our Thoughts to another valuable End, which fhews the Propriety of eredt- ing the Jews into a particular Polity, and feparat- ing them from the reft of Mankind by peculiar Laws ; and that is, the Subferviency this had to the great Defign, the Wifdom of God had all along in View, viz, the fending his Son in the Fulnefs of Time, to fave and to redeem Mankind, and to bring the cleareft and moft perfe6t Revelation of his Will. There had been fome general Promifes and Expedlations of the Redeemer to come made and communicated to Mankind from the Beginning of the World. But this, like other Traditions de- rived from the earlieft Ages, was in Procefs of Time corrupted and loft •, fo that if this Promife and Hope had been left merely at large among the Nations in general, there would have been fcarce any Traces of it remaining. This the Divine Wifdom forefaw, and therefore it pleafed God for this, as well as other Purpofes, to fele^l a peculiar People, to be as it were the Depofitaries of that Hope and Promife, who accordingly were kept diftinft, as a Kind of fpecial Inclofure from the Reft of Mankind. He appointed that the Saviour who was to come, and who had been foretold from- the Beginning, fliould fpiing and arife out of that
Nation,
58 Divine Authority of tht Old Teftament.
Nation, and from a particular Tribe and Faniily a- mongft them. He ordered it fo, that many of their Laws and Rites had a Reference to this great Event. A Succeffion of Prophets was raifed among them, who defcribed that glorious Perfon that was to come, by his moft remarkable Characters ; foretold the Benefits of his Kingdom, and plainly pointed out the Time and Place of his Birth, and principal Circumflances of his Appearance. And according- ly among that People there was conftantly kept up a Belief and Expeftation of his Coming, and from them it fpread generally through the Nations. All this prepared the World for receiving him, and together with the illuftrious Atteftations given to him at his aftual Appearance, by the Miracles he performed, by his Refurreflion from the Dead, and the confequent Effufion of the Holy Ghoft, yielded all the Evidence that was proper, in a Cafe of fuch vaft Importance. Thus that peculiar Conftitution tended to keep the Proofs of his Miflion more di- ftindt, and give them a greater Force. Accordingly the firft Harveft of Converts to Chriftianity was among the Jews^ and the Jewifh Profelytes, who were prepared for it by the Knowledge of the only true God, and the Belief of the Mofaick and Pro- phetical Writings. And even the unbelieving fews^ who rejected the MefTiah — when he actu- ally came, were, and flill are, without intending it, remarkable WitnelTes for Chriftianity. The Proofs drawn from thofe Books, the divine In- fpiration of which they themfelves acknowledge, come with greater Force and Evidence, when tranfmitted and attefled by Enemies, than if they had been conveyed to us by them as Friends. And when after their long Infidelity, the Body of them fhall be converted to the Chriftian Faith, which I think is plain from what the Apoftle Faul faith in the eleventh Chapter of the Epiftle to the Romans^ this (hall give a farther Evidence in favour of
Chrif.
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 59
Chriftianity. And all this we may juftly fuppofe to have entered into the Scheme of God's molt wife Providence, who faw all Things from the Be- ginning, in fetting apart the Jews to be a peculiar People to himfclf, and giving them fuch a Confti- tution whereby they were to be kept feparate and diftindb from the Reft of Mankind.
Thefe feveral Obfervations may ferve to give us an Idea of the Nature and Defign of the Mofaick Conftitution, which appears to have been excellently fitted and defigned to preferve the Knowledge and Worfhip of the only true God, in oppofition to all Idolatry -, to guide thofe to whom it was gi- ven to true Religion, and the Pra6tice of Righte- oufnefs ; and to preferve the Faith and Hope of the Redeemer, to prepare the World for his Com- ing, and give fuller Atteftations to him when he actually came -, and, confequently, it appears that this Conftitution anfwered many wife Purpofes of divine Providence, and was made fubfervient to the general Good of Mankind.
And now I fhall proceed to confider the Objec- tions this Writer brings againft the Mofaick Law and Conftitution. He pretends to invalidate the Truth of the miraculous Atteftations whereby that Law was attefted ; he argues againft that Law and Conftitution, from the Authority of St. FauU and from the pretended Inconfiftency between it and the New Teftament -, and endeavours in feveral Inftances to fliew, that it was in itfelf an unrighte- ous Conftitution, tyrannical and abfurd, and un- worthy of God.
Let us fir|l confider what our Author offers a- gainft the Truth of the extraordinary miraculous Pauls, whereby this Law was attefted. And the Way he goes about to invalidate them, is not by denying that this Hiftory was written by MofeSy or proving that the Hiftory is falfe *, but he under- takes to fliew, that the Relations there given us of
thofe
6o Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
ihofe Fa<5ls were not defigned to be underftood as hiftorical Accounts of Fads that really happened, but purely were poetical Embellifliments, like the Fiftions of Horner^ and never intended by Mofes himfelf to be taken in a literal Senfe. He firft pretends to give an Account of the Original of Miracles, which he derives from the Juggles and Impoftures of the Egyptian Priefts, " Who having " kt themfelves diligently to the Study of occult *« Philofophy, or natural Magick, in which they *' made great Improvements, and which they " kept as deep Secrets to themfelves, made the *< People believe that they had an immediate In- *' tercourfe and Communication with the Gods. " From that Time Egypt became a Land of Mi- « racles and Prodigies, continually wrought by *' thefe holy Magicians-, which had fuch an Ef «* k6i upon the Ifraelites, in the Courfe of 210 *' Years, whilft they remained in Egypt, that no- «' thing could influence them but Miracles •, and «« they would never have regarded Mofes, if he «' could not have outdone the Egyptian Sorce- «» rers.'* p. 241, 242. And again he tells us, that «« as they had feen nothing for 200 Years toge- <« ther biif Miracles and Prodigies, wrought by ** thefe prieftly Magicians, they could conceive of " no other Way of receiving Information and In- " ftruflion from God." p, 247, 248. And then he goes on to obferve.
That " Mofes and the Prophets being under a «« Necefllty, from the Blindnefs and Obduracy of *' the People, always writ with a double Intention, *' or ambiguous Conftruftion. They had a po- •' /)^//^r political Senfe, which as the moft literal and *' obvious, was moft fuited to the grofs Apprehen- «' fions, Prejudices, and Superftirions of the Vui- " gar •, and at the fame Time another Meaning, " or Conftrudion, which was the true and rational ** one J but to be fuppofed and underftood only by
" the
Divine Authority of the Old Teflament. 6i
the wifer Sort. The Cafe was this, that the moft ancient Narrative Authors, whether facred or profane, did not write as mere Hiftorians, but as Orators, Poets, and Dramatifts, in which Way of Writing they kept up to ftrid hiftori- cal Truth, as to the fundamental leading Fads, or principal Events j but with Regard to the Manner and Circumftances of Aftion, the Ora- tor and Poet often took the Liberty to embet- lifh and recommend the Hiftory with fuch fen- fible Images and dramatick Reprefentations, as being moft agreeable to the popular Tafte, and vulgar Notions, might the more effe6tually move and direct the Affedlions and Paflions of the People, as the great Engines and Springs of Government." Thus he oblerves, that " Ho- mer^s Account of the Trojan War, and of the Conqueft of the Country by the Greeks^ is hifto- rically true, as to the principal Fads and Per- fons concerned on both Sides, but his Manner and Circumftances of Adtion, his miraculous Imagery, and poetick Ornaments, are all his own, like our Milton and Shake/pear.^* And he obferves, that " The Hiftory of" the Exodus and Conqueft of Canaan relates to Things done 600 Years_ before Hofner's Time, and is written much in the fame oratorial and dramatick Way; that thefe poetick Beauties, and dramatick Re- prefentations of Things can occafion no Diffi- culty to thofe who enter into the Spirit and De- fign of the Author, and who can diftinguifh the Orator or Poet from the Hiftorian : But vul- gar Heads muft make ftrange Work with fuch Performances, who, without entering into the Spring and Defign, fhould underftand every Thing according to the Letter ; and this was the Cafe of the Jewi/h Nation, with Regard to the Writings of Mofes and the Prophets, and St. /^^«/ has evidently and irrefutably proved it.'* 249, 250, 251. Let
6a Divine Authority of the Old Teflament
Let us fuppofe all that this Writer affirms to be true concerning the Egyptian Priefts, and their pre- tended Miracles and Prodigies. I think it clearly follows from this Reprefentation of Things, that if they pretended to work Miracles in Support of Idolatry, and made Ufe of thefe to propagate the Worfhip of Demons, this made it highly be- coming the Wifdom and Goodnefs of God, when Fie had it in View to eftablilh a Conftitution, of peculiar Polity, and give a Syftem of Laws, par- ticularly defigned in Oppofition to the fpreading I- dolatry, to eftablifh it by fuch extraordinary and amazing Afts of Power, as fliould fully exert his Divinity and Glory, and fupreme Dominion ; Works of fuch a Nature, that none of the pre- tended Wonders wrought by the Egyptian Priefts or Magicians could be fet in Competition with them. This ihews the Propriety of all thofe mira- culous Works done in Egypt, thofe Signs and Wonders y as they are often called, done in the Land of Ham. The doing thefe Things in Egypt, the Seat of Idolatry, from whence it was propa- gated to other Nations, was fuch a Triumph over all their Idols, and thofe great Patrons and Propa- gators of Idolatry, as ought to have had a mighty Influence upon them. The Plagues and Judg- ments inflifted upon them, fliould have awakened them, and all that heard of thefe Things, to fe- rious Refiedlions. And God's interpofing in thefe Circumftances by a Series of fuch wonderful Works, fo far fuperior to all that were wrought, or pretended to be wrought, in Favour of Idolatry, was of great Service for the eftablifhing true Reli- gion in the World.
If the Miracles wrought by Mofes had not been of a very extraordinary and unparallelled Nature, this Writer, and others of his Way, would have been ready to fay there was nothing in them fu- pernatural, nothing but what might have been
per-
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 63
performed by the Art of cunning Men, or by Skill in occult Philofopby, and natural Magick. And yet now that they are fo amazing and ftupendous, fo beyond all parallel, their very Greatnefs and ex- traordinary Nature is made an Objeftion againft them, and a Reafon for not believing them.
This Writer has let us plainly enough know that he does not believe the Miracles to have been really wrought, that are recorded in the Books of Mofes^ to have been wrought in Egypt ^ and in the JVildernefs ; and he has in his great Sagacity found out a very extraordinary Expedient for falving the Credit of Mofes^ and yet denying the Truth of the Fads which he relates. He has difcovered that Mojes's Hiftory is a Poenii and that all thefe Ac- counts of Fads, are only poetical Embellilhments or Fidiions, and that he always writ with a double or ambiguous Conjlru^lwi^ the one full of the Mar- vellous fuited to the grofs Apprehenftons of the Vul- gar ; the other, the true and rational one to be uip- derjiood only by the wifer Sort. But certainly, never •was there any tiling more remote from poetical Ornaments, or the AfFedation of ftudied Oratory, than the Mofaick Hiftory. It was not that Mofes, if he had defigned to write a Poem, was not ca- pable of doing it to great Advantage. The ad- mirable Specimens he has given of this Kind in the Song he compofed on occafion of the Ifraelites pafTmg the Red Sea, and in that v/hich he gave to them a little before his Deceafe, and in the Blef- fings he pronounced upon the Tribes, fhew the Sublimity of his Figures, noble and lofty Expref- fions, beautiful and fignificant Metaphors ; but in the Body of his^ Hiftory, where he gives an account of Laws and Fads, all thefe. things are carefully avoided. Every thing is related in the moft fim- ple unadorned Manner, as becomes plain Truth, and a naked Narration of Fads. The Orator and Poet no where appears, but the plain grave ^ Hijiorian
64 Divine Authority of the Old Teftament*
Hijiorian and Law-giver. The extraordinary mira- culous Fadts whereby the Law was attefted, are propofed to the People as Things that really hap- pened, yea as Things which they themfelves had leen, and to which they were Witneffes. He ap- peals to the Body of the People concerning the Truth of thefe Fads, and founds the Authority of his Laws upon them. And will this Writer, or any Man that has any regard to Reafon or Argu- ment, fay, there is any Parallel between this and the writing an heroick Poem like Hoffie/s ? or can any Man of common Senfe fuppofe that Homer intended to put all the Fictions he relates, upon the People for Things that literally and hiflorically happened ?
If Mofes himfelf writ thofe Books that give an account of the Laws and Fadls •, and we have as full a Proof of this as we can have, that any Book was written by any Author under whofe Name ic goes •, for we have the conftant Teftimony of the whole Ndtion to whom thofe Laws were given, and who regarded them with great Veneration, as the Rule of their Polity •, and all other Nations that had occafion to mention them, ftill afcribed thefe Laws and Writings to Mofes -, and which ought to have a great weight with Chriftians, they are all along afcribed to him in the New Teftament by our Saviour 2.n(\ \\\s Apofiles \ nor do I find that our Author himfelf denies, but rather fuppofes it : I fay, if Mofes himfelf writ thofe Accounts of the Laws and Fadts, they were written and publifhed at the very time in which thefe extraordinary and miraculous Fadls were faid to be done. And if fo, the Fa6ls related were of fuch a Nature, that it ■was impofTible the People fhould not know whe- ther they had really happened or not : and it was impoffible to have impofed them upon the People as true, or made them to have believed them true, if they had not known them to be fo. I will grant 3 ail
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 65
all that this Writer is pleafed to fuppofe concerning the Stupidity and BHndnefs of the Ifraelites. Lee us fuppofe them to have been the moft ignorant, brutifh, fuperftitious Generation of Men that ever lived upon the Earth ; yet if it be allowed that they had their Senfes at all, and that they could tell what was ad:ually done before their Eyes, which I think is but ai reafonable Suppofition, then they could know whether thefe Things were done in Egypt, at the Red Sea, and in the PFtldernefs, which Mofes told them were done in their own Sight. Could they poffibly have been perfuaded that they were brought out of Egypt by fuch a Se- ries of mighty ftupendous A6ls done in their own View : that they had pafTed thro' the Red Sea as on dry Land, whilft the Army of Egypt follow- ing them were overwhelmed with the "Waters, and that they themfelves had feen it: that when they were ready to perifh for thirft in the Wiidernefs, Mofes only ftruck the Rock in their Sight, and Waters gufhed out in abundance like a River, of which they drank plentifully, and their Cattle: that they were prefent when the Law was promul- gated with fuch amazing Solemnity amidft the moft awful Thunders and Lightnings, and that the Words were diftinflly pronounced in their own hearing : that they had been fed in the barren Wii- dernefs for forty Years together by Bread that fell from Heaven fix Days in the Week and intermit- ted the Seventh, and that they themfelves had ga- thered it, and lived upon it all along : I fay, could a whole Nation pofTibly have been made to believe that all thefe things had happened to themfelves, and in their own fight, if it had not been fo ? this were the wildeft, the moft extravagant Suppofition in the World ; nor is a Man that is capable of making fuch a Suppofition fit to be difputed with any longer j fince it is fcarce poffible to drive any Man to a greater Abfurdity. Nor is it lefs abfurd
F to
66 Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
to fuppofe that any Man in his Senfes, much lefs fo wife a Man as JS/lofes certainly was, would have taken fuch a way as this of dealing with the Peo- ple, and would have appealed to them concerning fuch Fadts, of the Falfliood of which the whole Nation could have convinced him, if they had not been true. This would have been to have taken the moft effeftual way in the World, to defeat his own Defign, by putting the Credit of his own di- vine Miffion, and the Authority of his Laws, upon Fadts of fo publick a Nature, which it v/as the eafieft thing in the World to contradift, and which the meanelt of the People, that had the ufe of their Senfes, mull on that Suppofition have known to be falfe. And the frequent Murmurings againft Mofes^ and the Oppofition made to his Authority and to his Laws, many of which were contrary to the Peoples deeply imbibed Prejudices and Cuftoms, fhews that it would not have been eafy to have managed them if they had not been fully convinced that all thofe Fafts to which Mofes ap- pealed were true. His Exhortations to the People in the Book of Deuteronomy not long before his Death, when he made a folemn Repetition of the Laws and Fafts ; I fay, the pathetical Exhorta- tions he gives them to Obedience arc founded on thofe Fa6ts, and have a conftant Reference to them ; and they are delivered with the greateft Gravity and Solemnity, and at the fame time with the greateft Plainnefs and Simplicity, and a moft fatherly Tendernefs and Compaflion towards the People. They have all the Marks of Serioufnefs and Truth that any thing can poftibly have. And as he commanded the People to acquaint themfelves with the Laws he had given them in the Name of God, and to teach them diligently to their Chil- dren -, fo alfo to inftrud them in the great Things which God had done for them, or the extraordi- nary miraculous Fadls wrought in Atteli-.'ion of
thofe
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. ()j
thofe Laws. Befides all which he inftituted facreci Rites which were to be obferved by all the People with great Solemnity at ilated times every Year, on purpofe to keep up the Remembrance of thefe extraordinary Fads, and to tranfmit them to fu- ture Generations. And accordingly, the Memory of thefe wonderful Fads was 11 ill preferved, and the Truth of them acknowledged by the whole Nation, and that in the Times of their greateft Degeneracy, and under all the Revolutions of their Government. In all their publick Monuments^ m all the Writings that were publifhed in different Ages among them, there is a conftant Reference not only to thefe Laws as given by Mofes to their Nation, but to the wonderful Fads that were done in atteftation of thefe Laws as of undoubted Credit.
As to what our Author talks of a double Senfe in the Writings of Mofes and the Prophets, the one defigned for the Vulgar, the other for the wifer Sort, it is to be oblerved, that he is only for ad- mitting this double Senfe in the hiftorical Narra- tion of Fads related in the Writings of Mofes \ but he denies that any of the Laws of Mofes or the Prophecies have any myfticai or typical fenfe at all, or any farther Reference than the mere Let- ter •, as I fhall have occafion to take Notice after- wards. Thus the Laws of Mojes and the prophe- tical Writings muft be taken in a literal or myfti- cai Senfe, juft as he thinks will beft anfwer the End he has in view, of expofing them. Prophecies de- livered in figurative ExprefTions, and the whole turn of which leads to a farther View, they are to be carried no farther than the bare Letter ; but Matters of Fad told in a plain fimple Manner muft be figurative and myfticai. He tells us indeed that this pretended figurative Senfe of the Fads was underjlood by the wifer fort. But it is certain that in this Refped there was no DiiF.rcnce between the
F 2 wiie
68 Divine Authority of the Old Teflament.
wife Men and the Vulgar among the 'Jewi •, alf without Exception believed the Account of thefe extraordinary miraculous Fa6ls recorded by Mofes \ even their wifeft Men, whofe admirable Writings far fuperior to thofe of the mod celebrated Philo- fophers, (hew them to have been Men of excel- lent Senfe and Knowledge, and juft Notions of Things.
But what is moft extraordinary, our Author is for bringing in the Apofte Faul as a Voucher to prove that the Fa6ts recorded in the Law o^ Mofes ^ were no more than poetical Embeliifhments. He fays that Apollle has evidently and irrefutably proved that the Jews were in the wrong in under- ftanding the Writings of Mofes according to the Letter, that \s^ in taking the Fads there recorded, (for of thefe the Author is there fpeaking) for things that really and literally happened, fee p. 251. But nothing can be more evident to any one that is ac- quainted with the Writings of Sr. Paul, than that whenever he has occafion to refer to any of the extraordinary miraculous Falls done in A.tteftation ot the Mofaical Difpenfation, he always fuppofes them to be things of undoubted Truth and Credit, and which really and adually happened : but with refped to fome of the Rites prefcribed in the Law of Mofes, he (hews they had a farther view to the Gofpel Times, as 'Types and Shadows of good Things to come, and were defigned as prepara- tory to the Difpenfation of the Mejjiah. Now this the Author ventures to contradift, and in Oppo- fition to the Apollle boldly aflerts, that the Law q[ Mofes had no fuch typical Viev/ or myftical Senfe at all ; but with regard to the hiflorical Fads v.'hich are plainly and clearly rekted, thefe things are only to be underfhood and taken in a myftical or allegorical Senfe. And this he would pafs up- on us for St. Paul's Opinion, as if this was that Spirittml and Typical Senfe of the Law which thac
Apoftle
Bivine Authority of the Old Teflament. 69
Apoftle pleads for. The mod extenfive Charity fcarce leaves room to fuppofe that this Author is fo blind as not to know that this is grofs and wilful Mifreprefentation.
But let us confider what he pretends to offer as a Proof that the miraculous Fafts recorded in the Writings of Mofes^ and by which that Law was attefted, are not to be understood in a literal Senfe ; that is, as he intends it, that they were not true in Fact, nor Accounts of Things that really hap- pened, but meerly poetical Embellifhments.
He fays, />. 251. " Should we take this Drama •*' in the obvious literal Senfe [that is if we take the hiftorical Accounts Mofes gives to be really true] " we muft fuppofe him to have been a more *• fabulous romantick Writer, than Homer, Mfop^ ^' Ovid, or any of the Heathen Poets and Mytho- «' logijis.'' This is very boldly and confidently laid after the Author's manner, but let us fee v/hat Proof he brings of fo ftrange an Aflertion.
He fiith, that " if the Hiftory of the Exodus^ *' as he calls it, or Deliverance out of £^jyp/, and *' Conqueft of Canaan be taken in the literal ob- *' vious Senfe, we muft fiippofe that God in thofe *' Days appeared, fpoke, and afted like a Man, *• or a finite circumfcribed Being, in a vifible fen- *' fible Manner-, that he converfed intimately and *' familiarly with Mofes^ as a Man talketh with *' his Friend •, that he went out of Egypi at the " Head of the Ifraelites Army, and walked with *' them through the Red Sea -, that he travelled up «« and down with them forty Years in the Wilder- *' nefs, always at the Beck or Call of Mofes, to " confult and talk with him upon every Occafion ; *« that God in a vifible fenfible Manner, as perfon- *' ally prefent, always gave Mofes the Word of " Command when they fhould march, and when <' they fhould not, and marked out every Foot of ^' Ground from time to time for the Encamp-
F 3 " ments
7© Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
*' ments of their refpetftive Tribes. In fhort, God " himfelf, as vifibly and perfonally prefent, afted *< as a General, and Mofes had norhing to do but *« to follow Orders, and obey die Word of Com- «' mand, and which a Fool might have done as *' well as a wife Man," p. 2^2.
And is this all the Proof he brings, that the hiftorical Facts recorded in the Writings of Mofes ^ are no more to be credited than E/op^'s Fables, or Ovid's Metamorphofes, becaufe there are fome me- taphorical Expreffions ufed, which as they are cir- cumftanced, and comparing one part of thefe Wri- tings with another, can fcarce miflead the meaneft Underftandings ? and I will undertake to fay that whatever Opinion he has of the Stupidity of the Jews, they were not fo fenfelefs as to underftand thofe Expreffions in that Senfe he puts upon them, tho' they all firmly believed the Fads.
He would have it believed that according to the literal obvious Senfe of the Mofaick Hiftory, God is reprefcnted to the People as ^finite circum- fcribcd Being, appearing to the Ifraelites all along in the Shape of a Man, walking as fuch with them thro* the Red Sea, going at the Head of their Army as their General, and travelling up and down with them through the Wildernefs, ^c. whereas there is not one Paflage in the whole Account, that reprefents God as appearing to the Ifraelites \n Human S\\2iT^Q; but the very contrary is diredl- Jy and ftrongly afierted, and that as the Founda- tion of the Laws that were given them. They are exprefly forbidden to worfhip God by any Image or corporeal Reprefentation whatfoever, or under the Likenefs of any Thing in Heaven and Earth, and that becaufe they faw no manner of Similitude, when the Lord fpake unto them, Deut. iv. 12, 15. Where would have been the Force of this, if it had been reprefented to them that God continually walked among them, and before them in human
Shape ?
Divine Authority of the Old Teft^ient. 71
Shape ? All that can be gathered from the obvious Senle of the Mofaick Account literally underftood is this J That as it pleafed God for wife Ends to feledt the People of Ifrael as a peculiar People to himfdf, fo in order to imprefs them with a more lively Senfeofhis immediate Prefence, and divine Majefty, he manifefted himfelf among them, by a vifible Cloud of Glory^ the illuftrious Symhol and Token of his fpecial Prefence •, which exhibited a wondrous Splendour without any human Shape or bodily Form. This Cloud of Glory conduced the People in their Journey ings through the VVil- dernefs. Thither Mofes had frequently recourfe for Diredion, and probably received Orders and In- ftruclions, by a Voice proceeding from amidft that Glory. All this was indeed a marvellous Inftance of Goodnefs and Condefcenfion in the fupreme Being, but it can never be proved to have any Thing in it abfurd or unworthy of God, and in- confiftent with his effential Attributes and Perfec- tions. I fuppofe this Author himfelf will hardly deny that though God is every where effentially prefenr, yet he can give more illuftrious Difplays and Exhibitions of his divine Prelencc and Majefty by a viQble external Glory and Splendor in fome Places, and on fome Occafions than others'; and that he can alfo, if he pleafes, either by his own immediate Power, or by the Miniftry of Angels, form an audible Voice, by which he may declare his Will to one or more among Mankind out- wardly to their Ears, as well as inwardly by imme- diate Impreffions on the Mind. It doth not fol- low from either of thefe Suppofitions, that God is a finite limited Being, or that his Effence is cir- cumfcribed, or confined to the particular Place, where it pleafeth him thus peculiarly to manlfeft: his fpecial Prefence. Nor does it appear that the meaneft of the Jews ever underftood it fo, who are every where taught in the Writings q^ Mofes
F 4 to
72 Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
to form the nobleft Conceptions of the divine Ma- jefty and Greatnefs, as the Maker and Lord, the Preierver and Governour of the World, and as filling the whole Univerfe with his Glory ; the God in Heaven ahove^ and in Earth beneath, as it is ex- prefled, Deut. iv. 29.
As to that Paffage he produces where God is faid to fpeak to Mofes Face to Face^ as a Man fpeaketb to his Friend ; 'tis plain it is to be under- Itood only of the clear open familiar Manner, in which God condefcended to reveal himfelf to Mofes above any of the other Prophets. The Apoftle Paul ufeth fuch a Phrafe as this to fignify the Clearnefs and Perfeftion of our Knowledge in Heaven -, that then we fliall not fee through a Glafs darkly y hutfhallfee Faee to Face. And does it follow that becaufe fuch a Phrafe as this appears in the Writings of Mofes^ a Phrafe which as it there ftands has no Difficulty in it, and is very eafy to be underftood •, that therefore his whole Hiftory is a Fix- iion^ and the Fa6ts there related, tho' told in a plain fimple Manner, are all Hyperbole and Romance?
Will this Writer pretend that it is beneath the Majefty of God, to concern himfelf in fo peculiar a manner for one particular People, and to grant them fuch vifible Tokens of his fpecial Prefence, and take them under his iminediate Condu6l and Government ? But if it be not unworthy of his general Providence for him to take care of, and concern himfelf for particular Perfons and their Affairs, I do not iee how it can be proved incon- fiftent with his Glory and Perfedion to manifefl: his Prefence in a fpecial manner, and to give re- markable Proofs of his tender Care towards a whole Nation, in order to keep them cloie to his Wor- Ihip and Service, and fecure a regard to the Laws he had been pleafed to give them. All that can be iliid in that Cafe is, that it was a mofh amazing CondefcenOon, and a wonderful Grace j;nd Good-
nefsj
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 73
nefs, and fo it is that he fhould concern himfelf with Mankind at all. And as this Author feems to think it unworthy of the divine Majefty to concern himfelf fo particularly in the Direffion and Go- vernment of that People^ fo there have been Per- fons that from pretended high Thoughts of God, have judged it unworthy of his Greatnefs to con- cern himfelf with Men^ or their Affairs at all, and thus have been for complimenting him out of his Providence. And others have denied his conti- nual Agency and Influence in the Government of the World, which they fuppofe to be a great Ma- chine firft made, and put in Motion by a divine Hand, and then left to itfelf, and to the Laws eftablifhed in the Beginning ; under pretence that it is unworthy of him continually to interpofe in a way of immediate Agency : whom this Writer zealouQy oppofes, and feems to account little better than Athe'ijls.
But he urges it farther as another Abfurdity in the literal Senfe of the Story, " That fuch was the •' Intereft of Mofes with God, that he could make *« him do whatfoever he pleafed. He often changed ♦' his Mind, when he had refolved to deftroy the *< People ; and prevailed with him to go farther, ♦* when he had determined to leave them, and go ** no farther: and this, h^ xht Egyptians fhould *« mock the God of Ifrael, and fay, that he was " not able to conduft them through the Wilder- " nefs, and give them PofTeffion of the Land " which he had promifed them, and for which *' he had engaged his Honour and Veracity for " above 400 Years before, to do it at this very *' time. This was the main topical Argument, ** which Mofes is faid to have ufed with God, and ** by which he gained his Ends, in every thing ♦ ' but the main Point, which was the Conqueft of *' the Country, which thefe Ifra'elites were never «^ able to do till David's Days, about 400 Years a " after
74 Divine Authority of the Old Teflament.
" after the Promife to Abraham was expired. It *' is true, they conquered and took Poffeflion of *' a fmall Part of the Country upon the Mountains ; " but they could not drive the Inhabitants out of '* the Plains, becaule they had Chariots of Iron^ " or becaufe God never enabled them as Infan- " try to ftand before the Canaanites Horfe." p, 252, 253.
As to Mofes's Intereft with God, as he calls it, fuppofing Mofes to have been what he really was, an excellent Perfon, a devout fearer and lover and adorer of the Deity ; I can fee no abfurdity in fuppofing that he had an intereft with God, if by that be meant no more than that God had a re- gard to his humble and earneft Supplications. But that he could not make God do whatfoever he ■pleafed, as this Writer ridiculoufly exprefleth it, is evident, becaufe we are there exprefly told that he could not procure that his own Life fhould be prolonged, fo as to enter adually into the promifed Land, though he earneftly defired it, fee Deut. iii. 23 — 26. In his Prayers for the People we may obfcrve a deep Humility and profound Reverence for the divine Majefty, a fervent Zeal for the Glory of God, and for the Intereft of true Reli- gion in the World, and a moft aftedlionate Con- cern and Love for the People, whofe Welfare he valued more than his own Life, or the particula-r Advancement of himfelf or his Pa:mily. Thefe Tvere noble and excellent Difpofitions, and' where is the Abfurdity of fuppofing that a wife and holy and merciful God had a regard to the Supplications he offered for the People, flowing from fuch excel- lent Difpofitions ? Certainly, the Refledlions the Author here makes are very little confiftent with the Zeal heelfewhere feems to exprefs for the Duty of Prayer, Cnce they are really no other than the Objedtions that others advance againft Prayer in general. When he talks of God*s changing his
Mindy
Divine Authority of the Old Teflament. 75
Mind, and altering his Refolution upon Mofei^s ad- drefiing him •, lajfk, Is it in no cafe proper to apply- to God by Prayer, for obtaining Bleffings for our- fclves or others, and for deprecating Evils, or averting threatned or deferved Judgments ? and may it not well be fuppofed that God hath a regard to Prayer as a neceliary Condition for obtaining thele Bleffings, or averting thofe Evils ? And when he hearkens to thofe Prayers, he cannot be juftly laid to change his Mind or alter his Purpofe, fince he does no other than what he had before de- termined to do. For he both forefaw thofe Prayers and determined to hear them, and not to confer thofe Bleffings, or avert thofe Judgments, if thofe Prayers had not been offered. There is nothing in all this but what every Man muft acknowledge, who (lands up for Prayer as a Duty.
To apply this to the prefent Cafe : God had de- termined to punifh and abandon the Ifi-aelites for thtir Idolatry and PVickednefs, if Mofes fhould not interpofe and intercede by humble and earneft Sup- plications ; but at the flime time he perfedly knew that Mofes would thus interpofe, and had deter- mined to grant his humble Requeft in their Behalf. And in this View all is perfedly confiftcnt. He knew that his Threatning to forfake and punifh them for their Sins, v/ould give occafion to that good and excellent Man to plead with him by earneft Prayer, and thereby fliew his Love to the People, and Zeal for the divine Glory, which Prayers he had determined to grant. And there was a manifcft Propriety in it, that God fliould not pardon and reftore the People but upon Mofes'^ Interceffion, as this tended to procure a greater AfFedion and Veneration for him in their Minds, and to engage them to pay a greater regard to the Laws he gave them in the name of God.
With regard to the topical Argument, as this Writer calls it, which Mofes made ufe of in plead- ing
76 Divine Authority of the Old Tellament.
ing with God for the Ifraelites •, if he had feirly reprelented it, there would have appeared nothing in it abfurd, or unfit for fuch a Man as Mofes to make ufe of, as the Cafe was circumftanced, and for God to have a regard unto. If Mofes prayed to God at all to avert deferved Judgments from the People, was it not proper for him to ufe Reafons or Arguments humbly to enforce his Peti- tions? One would think that this Author who v/ould be thought fuch an Advocate for Prayer, and who paffes fuch fevere Cenfures on thofe who ridicule and difcard it, fhould readily grant this. If it be allowable for us to offer up our Requefts to God, then certainly it muft be alfo allowed to be very proper for us to urge our Requefts with Hich Reafons or Arguments as may be fit for rea- fonable Beings to offer to that God who condefcends to admit our Supplications. Since this tends very much to the exercifing and ftrengthning thofe good Affeftions and pious Difpofitions, which it is one great Defign of the Duty of Prayer to exercife and improve. Now I cannot fee what properer Argu- nients Mofes could have made ufe of as the Cafe was circumftanced, than what he did. For what Arguments can be more fit to be offered to the fupreme Being, than thofe that are drawn from what is becoming his Government and Excellen- cies, his Wifdom, his Faithfulnefs and Truth, his Goodnefs and Mercy, aixi from a regard to the Honour of his Name, and the Interefi of true Re- ligion in the World ? And fuch as thefearethe Ar- guments Mofes makes ufe of, as appears from the jeveral Paffages that relate to this matter, fee Exod. xxxii. 9, 14. Numb. xiv. 13 — 16. DeuL ix. 25 — 29. Though no doubt his Prayers were more at large than is there recorded, and delivered with the greateft Humility and Earneftnefs, and it is only a very fhort Abftrad and Summary of them that is there given us.. And the particular Argu- ment
Divine Authority of the Old Teftament. 77
ment which this Author is pleafed to ridicule, was very proper, and of great force, if taken out of his ludicrous and fneering manner of reprefcnting it -, viz. drawn from the Reflexions the Egyptians and other idolatrous Nations would caft on the only true God, if he deftroyed that People whom he had fo miraculoufly delivered, and whom he feem- ed to have chofen peculiarly to himfelf; and the occafion they would thence take to harden themfelves in their Idolatry, and in their oppofition to God and his Worfliip ; and to charge him with unmer- cifulnefs, with breach of Promife, or want of Power. All this Mofes humbly reprefents in his Prayers to God •, and God perfedly knew all this before Mofes reprefented it, and had determined to ad: in a man- ner becoming hi'? own fupreme Wifdom and Glory. But it was his Will that Mofes fhould thus plead with him in order to his fliewing Favour to fo guilty People, and averting the Judgments he had threat- ned, and they had deferved. In like manner, whenever God hath regard to the humble and earn- eft Prayers of good Men, he well knows before- hand all that they can urge and reprefent before him, yet he will have thefe things reprefented by them-- felves, as a Condition of his doing it for them.
i^s to what this Writer adds, as if God did not after all perform his Promife to Abraham., and the IfraeliteSy fince they were not put in full Polfefllon of the promifed Land till the time of Da-vid^ 400 Years after the Time fixed for that Promife was expired ; I need not fay much to it, fince he him- felf in feveral PaiTages of his Book acknowledges and afierts that this Promife was conditional ; and that " had the Conditions been performed by Abra- " ham'i Family and Pofterityy no doubt but the «< grant on God^s part had been made good ^^ fee p, 259. 'Tis certain that Mofes declares to the If- raelites in the moft folemn Manner, calling Hea- ven and Earth to witnefs, that their obtaining the
Pofibf-
yS Divine Authority of the Old Teftament.
Poffeflion of the promifed Land, and continuing in it, depended on their Obedience to the divine Law, and keeping clofe to his true Worfhip and Service, and that otherwife they themfelves fliould perifh out of the Land, {ttDeut. iv. 25, 26, i^c. and many other Paflages to the lame purpofe. To which it may be added, that it is molt exprefly again and again declared and foretold that God would not drive out the Cajiaanites from before them all at once^ but hy little and little^ lee Exod. xxiii. 29, 30, 31, Deiit.mx. 22, 23, v/hich was molt literally and punftually fulfilled. It is fcarce worth while to take Notice of his little Sneers, though often repeated by the lale Writers on that fide, concerning God's not being able to drive out the Inhabitants of the Vallies, becaufe they had Chariots of Iron. The PafTage referred to is Judg. i. 19. And the Lord zvas iznth Judah, and he drave out the InhabitaMs of the Mountain^ but could jwt drive out the Inhabitants of the Valley^ becaufe they had Chariots of Iron. All that can be fairly ga- thered from this Pallige, is this ; that the Tribe of Judah attacked the Inliabitants of the Mountains, and God profpered and gave them Succefs •, but they fuftered themfelves to be affrighted and dif- heartned by the iron Chariots of the Canaaniles that dwelt in the Vallies, and therefore durft not venture to attack them. And this their Dijfidcnce and Diftruft, and not the Strength of ihQ Canaanitcs^ was the true Caufe of their not being able to fub- due them. When the Tribes of Ephrai?n and Manajfch expreffed the fame Apprehenfions, Jo- fl.ma reproves them for their Fears, and affures rhem that if they did not fuffer themfelves to be difcouraged, they flx)uld drive out the Canaanites, though they were Jlrong and had Iron Chariots^ Jolh. xvii. 16, 18. And certain it is that the Rca- \on v/hy the Men of Judah, could not drive out the CanaaniteSy was not, as this Writer is pleafed 2 ludi-
Divine Authority of the Old Teflament. 79
ludicroufly to reprefent it, hecaiije the Lord never enabled the Ifraelites as Infantry to ftand before the Canaanites Horfe. For JoJJjua attacked and de- flroyed a mighty Hoft of the Canaanites, though they had Horfes and Chariots very ma?iy, Jofh. xi. 4, 7, 8, 9. and afterwards we find, 5'i/^r^ and his numerous Army with 300 Chariots of Iron, was entirely defeated by a fmall Number of Ifraelites under Baraks Judg. iv. 3, 7, 15.
This is all that this Writer is pleafed to offer to fliew that Mofes's Hiftory when taken in the literal Senfe is more abfurd and romantick than Homer, or Efop^s Fables, or Ovid's Metamorphofes^ Buc though he has difcovered a very ftrong Inclination to prove this, nothing can be more miferable than the Attempts he has made this way. For any thing that he offers to the contrary, Mofes\ Hiftory ftill holds good ; and the miraculous extraordinary Fa6ls were really done as recorded -, and if they were, they yield an invincible Atteftation to the Truth and Divinity of the Laws thus attefted and confirmed, and manifcftly fhew them to have pro- ceeded from God. And it cannot without the higheft Abfurdity be fuppofed, that fuch glorious Exhibitions of the divine Power and Majefty fhould ever have been given in favour of an Im- pofture,
I fliall next proceed to confider what our Author offers againft the divine Original of the Law of Mofes from the A\ithority of St. Paid^ and the pretended Oppofuian and Inconfiftency between that Law and the New Teftament.
CHAP. III.
^he Author's Arguments againft the Law of Mofes from the Authority of St. Paul confider ed. Our Saviour Jefus Chrift, and the Apojlle Fa.u\,f}roj?g- ly ajfert and confirm the divine Original of the
Laxi^
8o Objections againfl
Law of Mofes. The diminijhing and degrading 7nanner in which that Apqfile feems fometimes to fpeak of that Law^ accounted for. 'The Injlances the Author produces to Jhew that there was no end of the Law hut what the Jpojlle exprefy con- tradicts^ examined. The Attempt he makes to prove that there was no fuch typical or myftical Senfe of the Law as St. Paul fuppofes in his Arguings with the Jews. No Abfurdity, hut a Beauty and Harmony in fuppojing that what is ohfcurely hinted at in the Law is more clearly re- vealed in the Gofpel.
THIS Author propofes the Queftion to be de- bated, " whether the pofitive and ceremo- «' nial Law of Mofes^ commonly called the Leviti- »« cal Law, or the Law concerning their Prieft- *' hood, was originally a divine Inltitution or Re- s' velation from God, to be afterwards nullified, *' abolifhed, and fet afide by another Revelation •, " or whether it was a meer Piece of carnal world- *' ly Policy." This latter part of the Queftion is what he undertakes to maintain, and which is more extraordinary he declares, that " if he can- *' not make it appear that St. PaiiU "when he ♦« comes to be rightly underftood, is plainly on his " fide, he will give up the Argument," p. 23.
He manages this in a great many. Words with fome Digrelfions from p. 24. to p. 80. But though he feems in putting the Queftion to confine it to that part of the Law of Mofcs that rekttes to the Priefihood., yet it is plain he intends it againft the divine Original of the whole Law ; and his Argu- ments, if they prove any thing, prove that it was ■wholly a political Lijliiution ; and that no part of it came by immediate Revelation from God. And it is evident either the whole Law v^as by imme- aiate Revelation from God, or no part of it was fo j fmce Mofes equally profefled to receive^ the
whole
the Lais) of Mofes, confidered. 8 1
Whole from God -, and the many extraordinary miraculous Atteftations that were given to it, if they confirmed that Law at all, extended equally to the Confirmation of the whole.
Before I enter on the particular Confideration of what this Writer offers on this Head, I fhall firft fhew that the Apoftle Paul did himfelf believe, and all along in the plained Manner fuppofe and affert, that the Law of Mofes was originally a di- vine Inftitution or Revelation from God. And no Words can be more ftrong and full to this Pur- pofe than that remarkable Pallage, 2 Ttm. iii. 15, t6. He is there writing to his beloved Timothy a. little before his own Death, whom this Author re- prefents as the only 'Teacher in that Age^ who hear- tily pined with the Apojile Paul as his faithful Helper and Fellowrlabourer, p. 72. And was of the fame Opinion with him in the Controverfy concerning the Law of Mofes, in Oppofition to the Chriftian Jews. The Apoftle might therefore ufe Freedom with him, and was under no Temptation to dif- guife his Sentiments to him, as our Author infinu- ates he was frequently obliged to do on other Oc- cafions. And he there commends Timothy, for that from a Child he had known the holy Scriptures ; and declares that they ivere ahle to make him wife unto Salvation.' Where by the Holy Scriptures he inconteftibly refers to the Writings of the Old Teftament, viz. thofe of Mofes and the Prophets^ which were the only Scriptures Timothy could have been acquainted with from his Childhood. And he adds, that all Scripture for the whole Scripture^ is given by Infpiration of God, and is profitable for Do5frine, for Reproof, for Corrcolion, for lnJlru5lion in Right eoufnefs. No Declaration can poflibly be plainer for the divine Authority and Infpiration of Mofes and the Prophets, whofe Writings he ma- nifeftly underftands by what he there calls the Scripture. And indeed nothing is more ufual with G this
82 Objections againfi
this Apojlle in all his Epiftles, than when he brings PafTages out of the Law of Mofes to call it the Scripture^ and cite it as of divine Authority, fee Rom. iv. 3. ix. 17, Gal. iii, 8. iv. 30. i Tim. v. 8. And having Occafion to mention a particular Com- mand of the Law of Mcfes, and which feemed to be of a civil Nature, he fuppoles that God gave that Command, i Cor. ix. 9. He mentions it as the fignal Advantage of the Jews above the Gen- tiles., that unto them were committed the Oracles of Cod^ Rom. iii. i, 2. And of thofe Oracles the Law of Mofes was certainly regarded as a principal Part, ABs vii. 38. And again, that to them., viz. the Jews pertained the Covenant, and the giving of the Law^ and the Service of God., Rom. ix. 4. Where he evidently refers to the Levitical Service and Worfhip. In the whole Epiftle to the He- Irews^ where it is his great Defign to fhew the fu- perior Excellency of the Evangelical Difpenfation above the Mofaical^ he all along evidently fuppofes the Law of Mofes., and the manner of Worfhip and divine Service there prefcribed, to have been originally from God, and of divine Appointment. He exprefly fliith, that Chrifi Jefus was faithful to him that appointed him., as alfo Mofes zvas faithful in all his Houfe., Heb. iii. 2, 5, Where it is un- deniably evident, that he fuppofes that God fent and appointed Mofes as truly as he did Jefus Chrifi, and that Mofes was faithful, and kept clofe to what God had appointed. With refpe6t particu- larly to the Levitical Prie^hocd, he fuppofes this to have been of divine Inftitution, and that Aaron was called of God to be High Priefi., and did not take this Honour unto hitnfelf Heb. v. 4. and Heh, viii. 5. he faith, 7/.?^ Priejls under the Law ferve to the Example and Shadow of heavenly Things^ as Mofes was admonifhed of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle ; for fee, (faith he) that thou make all Things according to the Pattern Jhewed to
thee
the Law of Mofes, confidered, ^^
thee in the Mount. Where he exprefly reprefents Mofes as receiving Orders from God by divine Revelation relating to the Sanctuary and Prieft- hood. And when he fets himfelf to prove, Heb. viii. that the firji Covenant, that is, the Mofaical Oeco- nomy was abolifhed, he ftill fuppofes at the fame time, that it had God for its Author, as well as the fecond more excellent and perfed: Difpenfation that was to fucceed it. And this alfo appears from the Quotation he produceth from the Prophet Je- remiah to prove it -, Behold the Days come^ faith the Lord, when 1 will make a new Covenant with the Houfe of Ifrael, and with the Hoiife .of Judah, not according to the Covenant which I made with their Fathers, when I took them by the Hand to had them put of the Land of Egypt, Heb. viii. 8, 9, 10. fee alfo //(?^. ix. 18 — 20. Where it is plainly implied and aflerted that God was the iVuthor of the firft Covenant, made with the Children of Ifrael by the Hand of Mofes.
From all this I think it is as evident as the plaineft Words can make it, that the Apoftle Paul Itiil reprefents the Mofaical Law, and particularly that part of it relatiijg to the Prie(ihood and Cere- monies to have been originally a divine Inftitution. And indeed in this Belief he only followed the Sentiments of his great Lord and Matter Jefiis Chrift, who in all his Difcourfes to the People and to his own Difciples, whenever he harh Occafioa to mention the Law of Mofes, always fpeaks of it in a manner that (hews he regarded it as originally of divine Appointment. He declares in the moft exprefs manner that he came not to deftroy the Lazi/ and the Prophets, but to fulfil them , that is, he came not to deny and fubvert their divine Authori- ty, but to fulfil the true and proper Defign and End of them *, to confirm and perfe6t the moral Precepts, to fulfil and give the Subftance of the Types and Ceremonies, which the Apoftle tells us
G 2 were
Sij. Objections agatnfi
were the Shadow of good 'Things to come, hut the Body is of Chriff, and to accomplifh the Predic- tions there contained. And he declares that till Heaven and Earth -pafs azvaw one "Jot or Tittle jhould not 'pafs away from the haw till all he fulfil- led. Matt. V. 17, 18. Luke xv\. 17. x^nd I do not know whether any Words could more ftrongly aflert its divine Original, and that no Part of it fhould fail of its juft Accomplifhment. Hefevere- ly reproves the Pharifees for teaching for Do5irines the Commandments of Men, and making void the Law of God hy their Traditions -, and by the Law of God he underftands the Commandments given hy Mofes, which he there calls the Commandments of God, and the fVord of God, in Oppofition to hu- man Inventions and Traditions, Markxn. 3, 9, 13. In the remarkable Parable of the rich Man and Lazarus, he refers them to the Law of Mofes and the Prophets, as exhibiting a fufficient Signification of the divine Will, and that if they did not hear^ that is, believe and obey them, neither would they he perfuaded though one rofe from the Dead, Luke xvi. 29 — 31. He tells the Sadducees, that they erred, not knozving the Scriptures, and the Power of God, and he explains vv^hat he means by the Scriptures, by referring to the Book of Mofes, Mark xii. 24 — 26. And laftly, after his Refurredion, when beginning at Mofes and the Prophets^ he expounded to his Difciples in all the Scriptures the things con- cerning himfelf^ Luke xxiv. 39. And again, when. he li\id to them, Thefe are the Words which I fpake iinto you, whilfi I was with you, that all Things jnuji he fulfilled, which were written in the Law 0/ Mofes, and in the Prophets, and in the Pfahns concerning me^ ver. 44, 45. Can any Thing be a plainer Proof, that he would have his Difciples regard the Writings of Mofes and the Prophets as of divine Original, and (jontaining a true Revelation from God ?
Having
the Law of Mofes, confidered, Z^ Having thus fhewn that the Apoflle Vaul^^ in Conformity to the Example of our bleffed Saviour himfclf, aflferted the divine Original of the Law of Mofes^ let us now confider the Account this Writer gives of the Opinion of that great Apoftle m this Matter, by whofe Judgment he pretends he is wil- ling to be determined.
He reprefents it as the Senfe of the Apoftle PauU that '* the ritual and ceremonial Law of *' Mofes was carnal^ worldly^ and deadly, and in *' its original, proper and literal Senfe had nei- " ther any thing of Truth or Good nefs in it, but " was a blinding inflaving Conftirucion, and fuch *' an intolerable Yoke of Darknefs and Bondage, *' Tyranny and Vaffalage, Wrath and Mifery, " that neither they nor their Fathers were able " to bear. And how St. Paul could declare " all this, with any Notion or Belief of the ritual *' ceremonial Law and Priefthood, as a divine ** Inftitution or Revelation from God, he would " be glad to know, p. 29, 30. and he afks, p. 32. " whether God can efiablifa Iniqiiiiy by a Law., " or whether a Law, which in St..P<^»/'s Opi- *' nion introduced and confirmed a State of civil *' and religious Blindnefs and Bigottry, Tyranny " and Slavery, could in the fame Judgment have " been originally a divine Inftitution and an im- " mediate Revelation from God ? and he obferves *' that it was not only the Abufes of the Law that «' he lays his Charge againft, but that it was the " Law itfelf in its own intrinfick Conftitution and *' natural Tendency, that in St. Paul's Language ** and Style was carnal, worldly, and deadly '* He thinks thefe to be plain Declarations that " fuch *' a Law could never be of divine Inftitution, and " confequcntly there needed no new Revelation to « fet it afide," p. 51,52. And whereas, « St. « Paul argues for fetting afide the Obligation of ^* the ceremonial Law, becaufe it was fulfilled,
G 3 '•f' abo-
S6 Objections againjl
•' abollfhed, and done away, by the Death of *' Chrift -, and becaufe the Law having been ori- <« ginally intended only as a Figure and Type of " the better Things to come, that is, of Chrift *' and the Gofpel Difpenfation, it was hereby to «« ceafe, and to be abolifiied for ever : " this Wri- ter takes upon him to affirm, that *' he did not *' argue thus from the Truth of Things, and on " the Foot of any Revelation from God in that *' cafe made to him, but argued ad Uominem only •' againft the y^'wj, as endeavouring upon pruden- " tial and political Principles to fet afide that ab- " furd, tyrannical, blinding, and inflaving Law *' of his Country, For that the ceremonial Law '* never had any Repeal or Abrogation by any new " Revelation he thinks is plain from the Fradtice '* of St. Paul himfelf, who when he could not *' carry this Point of letting afide and abrogating *' the ceremonial Law \ fubmitted to it as long as " he lived, as did all the Jewifh Profelytes in the " Apoftolical Times : he fubmitted to it, not as " binding the Confcience in Point of Religion and *' Acceptance with God, but in his political Capa- " city, as the Law of his Country, and as a Mat- " ter of human Liberty. Whereas had he thought " it an original, immediate, pofitive Inftitution *' from God, and afterwards null'd and abrogated *' by the fame Authority, he could not have fub- *' mitted to it, confiftent with his declared Judg- *' ment and Confcience,'* p. 52 — 54. Finally he de- " clares, that the Truth is, St. Paul was the great *' Freethinker of his Age, the bold and brave De- " fender of Reafon againfl Authority, in Oppofition " to thofe who had fet up a wretched Scheme of " Superflition, Blindnefs, and Slavery, contrary to " all Reafon and common Senfe, and this under *' the fpecious popular Pretence of a 'divine Infti- *' tution and Revelation from God," />• 71. Before I proceed to a diftindt Confideration of
what
the Law of Mofes, confidered. %y
what this Writer here offers, I would firfl obferve what a ftrange Reprefentation he makes of the A* poftle Paul^ at the fame Time that he aflfeds to commend and to admire him, and pretends to have as good an Opinion of that great Apojlle as any Man can have ^ p. 2i. It cannot be denied that in all his Epiftles he cites the Mofaical and Prophetical "Writings, as of divine Authority •, he delivered thofe Writings to all the Churches of the Gentiles among whom he preached, and whom he inftruc- ted in the Chriftian Religion, under the notion of Scripture^ or divinely infpired Writings ; and yet at the fame Time, according to this Author, he was perfuaded that the Law of Mofes was no Re- velation from God at all, but a pernicious Impof- ture put upon the World, in the Name of God \ a mere Piece of carnal Policy, and one of the moft abfurd, and tyrannical, and unreafonable Conftitutions that ever were impofed upon any Na- tion. Again, he declared that many of the Rites of the Law of Mofes, in their original Intention, were of a figurative and typical Nature, defigned to prefigure Chrift, and his Benefits, and to be the Shadow of good 'Things to come j whereas, according to this Writer he himfelf knew and believed that they had no fuch original Intention and Defign at all. • He infified upon it that he had received an im- mediate Revelation from God concerning the abro- gating the ceremonial Law, as our Author him- felf acknowledges, p, 79. and yet he prefents him as having proceeded wholly upon political and prudential Principles -, and that he himfelf well knew he had received no Revelation from God at all relating to that Matter, but only made the Jews believe fo, that he might the better carry his Point with them. I cannot fee how a Man that could prevaricate at fo ftrange a rate could deferve to be called a hold and brave Defender of Religion and Liberty 5 or how this is confiftent with the
G 4 Cha-
E8 Objections againft
Character he elfewhere gives of him, that be w^jj a Man oj the firi^lefi Honefty and Integrity^ p. 69.
1 know not what Scheme of Morals our Moral PhilofopherhdXh formed to himfelf for the regulating of his own Conduit ; but fuch a Conducl is no way fuitable to the Character of the Apoftle Paul^ or the Principles upon which he adled. He was far from allowing that Maxim, that it is lawful to do evil that good may come of it. He rejcdls the Imputation of it with the utmoft Abhorrence, and paffes a moft fevere Cenfure on thofe that govern themfelves by fuch Maxims, for he pronounces that their Damnation is jujl, Rom. iii. 8. Tho' he al- ways fhewed the greateft Condefcention and Ten- dernefs for weak Confciences, yet he never allowed himfelf in deliberate Fraud and Impofture, or to do Things contrary to Truth and good Confcience, under Pretence of complying with their Prejudices. He manifefted on all Occafions an unfhaken and unparallel'd Fortitude and Conftancy in the Caufe of God, and Truth, and Religion, even tho' he expofed himfelf by it to the greateft Sufferings. In a word, he could fay, that his rejoicing was this^ the Teftimony of his Confcience, that in Simplicity and godh Sincerity, not in flejhly TVifdom^ hut by the Grace of God, he had his Converfation in the Worlds
2 Cor. i. 12. It is certain therefore this excellent Apoftle was incapable of a Condudt fo little recon- cilable to Truth or common Honefty, as thar which this Writer afcribes to him. And therefore thofe Expreffions, in which he feems to fpeak in dif- ?idvantageous Terms of the Law of Mofes, could never be intended by him in that Senfe which our Author thinks fit to put upon them, and which is diredlly contrary to his declared Sentiments.
But let us confider this Matter more diftindly. It is plain that the Apoftle Paul had a great Con- troverfy relating to the Law of Mofes with fome Judaizing Teachers of that Age, to which he refers
the Law c/'Mofes, confidered 89
in almoft all his Epiftles. There were many that had then conceived a very high and extravagant Opinion of that Law, as fo abfolutely perfed: in itfelf that it was never to be changed or altered, nor ^ny of its Rites abrogated -, but was to be of {land- ing perpetual Obligation, and was to extend to all Nations \ that a ftri6l Obfervance of all the Com- mands and ritual Injunftions there prefcribed, was the only way of Juftification and obtaining the Fa- vour of God, and that without this the Gentiles them- felves could not be faved. This was the Doftrine of the Perfons mentioned ABs xv, 24. and of thofe againft whom the Apoftle argues in his Epiftle to the Galatians, who confirained the Chriftian Converts tQ he cinumcifed, and to ohferve the Law, that is, obliged them to it as abfolutely neceflary to Salva- tion, even though they had been Gentiles.
Now in Oppofition to thefePerfons St. Paul doth not alledge, as this Author would have it, that the Law of Mofes was not originally of divine Inftitu- tion : For this he all along fuppoles, yea, and di- redly and ftrongly aflerts it, as hath been fhewn : but that it was never defigned to be of perpetual Obligation ; that it was an imperfe^ Difpenfation, fuited to the imperfed: State of the Church ; and fell greatly Jhort of the clear Light, the Spiritual Glory, and perfedl Liberty of the Gofpel. That in the Intention of God, and in its original proper Defign, the Law was a temporary fubfervient Dif- penfation, defigned to make way for a more pure and fpiritual and perfect Difpenfation of which Chrift was the Author. That therefore thefe falfe Teachers greatly miftook and perverted the original Defign of that Law, and the End for which it was given j and that taken in their perverted Senfe, and as oppofed by them to the Grace of the Gof- pel, it would prove of bad Confequence to thofe that put their Truft in it, and expected Juftification from it. But he abhors the Charge as if he fuppofed
the
^0 Objections agalnft
the Law to be S'ln^ or to bring Death in its own Nature, {ttRom. vii. 7 — 13. which yet is the Re- prefentation this Writer thinks fit to make of the Apoftle's Senfe •, as if he held the Law to be in itklf deadly, and that the eftablifhing the Mofaick Conftitution was ejiahlijhing Iniquity by a Law. He exprefsly denies that in its original Conftitudon and Defign it was at all againft the Promifes of God, Gal. iii. 21. And upon the whole fhews that it was defigned for a time till the Seed Jhould come, to whom the Promife was made. Gal. iii. 19. and its Rites and Ordinances were impofed until the time of Reformation, Heb. ix. 10. that is, till the intro- ducing that more perfedl Difpenfation to which the other was intended tobefubfervient and preparatory. That the Jews were kept under it, Jhut up or fepa- rated from other Nations, under its ftrid: Difci- pline and Injunftions, till the Faith JJjould be re- vealed. Gal. iii. 23. And that now Chrift was come, he hath abolifhed the haw of Commandtnents, and hath taken down the Partition-wall between Jews 2.nd Gentiles, Eph. xi. 15. fo that now we are no longer under the Law, but under Grace, Rom. vi. 14. This is evidently the Apoftle Paul's Scheme, the Dodlrine he teacheth with regard to the Law of Mofes. In which, direftly contrary to what this Writer alledges, it is plainly fuppofed that the Law of Mofes was originally a divine Inftitution or Revelation from God, which was afterwards abo- lifhed and fet afide by another Revelation : Though it was n6t fo immediately and exprefsly abolifhed as to render it abfolutely unlawful for any Perfons at that time to obferve thofe legal Rites. The Apoflle Paul was for fhewing great Condefcention to thofe htVitv'moJews, who though they looked for Salva- tion through the Mercy of God in Jefas Chrift, yet from a confcientious Scruple were for obferving the Mofaical Rites themfclves, but did notimpofe them upon the Gentiles. And he thought it lawful on
fome
tJoe Law of Mofes, conjidered. 91
fome Occafions to obferve thofe Rites himfelf in Condefcention to their Infirmities. And his Pradtice and Sentiments in this matter were agreeable to thofe of the other Apoftles. Whilfl: in the mean time care was taken by the Doftrine they all taught, gra- dually to remove the Prejudices of the Jewi/hQWii- tians, and to give them a full View of the Liberty with which Chrift came to make them free. But I fhall have Occafion to confider this at large, and fet the Condud: of the Apoftle Paul and the other A- poftles in a proper Light, and ftiew the Harmony there was between them', when I come more parti- cularly to examine the Objeftions the Author raifes on this Head againft the New Teftament.
Let us now confider what he produces to prove, that St. Paul, contrary to his own exprefs Declara- tions, did not look upon the Law of Mofes to be of divine Original. And what he feems chiefly to infift upon is the difadvantageous Charader the Apoftle gives of that Law, reprefenting it as a Toke of Bon- dage, and its Ordinances as carnal, ^c. But it is not hard to account for the manner in which he fpeaks of the Law of Mofes, if we keep his Scheme and Defign in view.
It is certain that the Apoftle reprefents thofe that are under the Law as in a State of Bondage, and a Subjedion to its Rites he calls a Toke of Bondage. This our Author often repeats, as if it was in St. Paulas Opinion, an enfaving Confiitution contrary to the natural Rights and Liberties of Mankind, a State of civil and religious Tyranny and Slavery, an intolerable Toke which neither they nor their Fathers were able to hear. It is to be obferved that thefe laft Expreflions which the Author afcribes to the Apoftle Paul, p. 29. and which are at leaft as ftrong as any that he makes ufe of, were ufed not by him but by St. Peter, A6ts xv. 10. and yet this Writer himfelf will not pretend that Peter intended by thefe Expreflions to fignify, that the Law of
Mofes
^i Objections agaitifl
Mofes was not of divine Original ; fince all along he fuppofes him to be at the Head of the Judaizing Chriftians, who Hood up for the divine Authoricy and Obligation of that Law in Oppofition to St. Paul, All that he intends to fignify by this manner of Expreffion, is only that the ritual Injunftions and Ceremonies of the Law were difficult and hurden- fome in the Obfervance : And it is a way of fpeak- ing common almoft to all Languages for Perfops to be faid not to be able to hear a Thing which they cannot bear without great Labour and Difficulty. And yet thefe numerous Rites prefcribcd in the Lav/ however burdenfome they might be in the Obfer- vance, were inftituted for very wife Ends and va- luable Purpofes, and were very proper for the State of the Church and People to whom they were gi- ven. And this is what the Apoftle Paul plainly fignifies even in that very Paflage v/here he repre- fents the being under the Law as a State of Bondage., Gal. iv. 3, 9. He had obferved in the preceding Chapter, "oer, 24, 25. th^tthe Law was our Schoot- mafter to bring us unto Chrijl, hut after that faith is come we are no longer under a Scboobnafler. Where it is evident that he fpeaks not merely of the 7noral Law as the Author would have it, p. 26. but of the ceremonial Law. And in Purfuance of the fame Metaphor he futh, ch. iv. i, 2, 3. ISIow I fay that the Heir as long as he is Child., differeth nothing from a Servant., though he he Lord of all : But is under Tutors and Governors., until the Time appointed of the Father : evenfo we when we were Children were in Bondage under the Elements of the fVorld. Where it is plain what he means by Bondage., not that the Law is a Minding inflaving Conffitution, contrary to the natural Rights and Liberties of Mankind., but it is fuch a Bondage as an Heir is under whilft he is a, Child, the Bondage of being under Tutors, and Governors, and i'ubjedl to' a Difcipline, which though it may feem hard and fevere yet is ufeful and
, necef-
the Law of Mofes, confidered. 93^
necciTary : So the various Injundlions of the Law, though they migiit feem a troublefome Yoke, yet were very ufeful and well fuited to the State of the Church, at the time in which it was given. But as it would be wrbng to keep the Heir in fuch a Sub- jedion, and under the Difcipline of a Child, when he is out of his non-Age, and arrived to a State pf Maturity ; and it would argue a very ftrange and mean Temper of Mind for him to be willing to put himfelf under that P pedagogy 2L^z\n^ or to exer- cife himlelf in his childifh Rudiments, when he had obtained his manly Freedom So it would be a ftrange Condud when we are freed by the Gofpel from the Ftzdagogy of the Law, and brought under a more manly and perfect Difpenfation, to be wil- ling to return to it again. On this Account he might juftly expoftul ite as he does, ver. 9. How turn ye again to the weak and beggarly Elements^ whereunto ye defire again to he in Bondage ? and, Stand faji i^ the Liberty wherewith Chrifi hath made us free ^ and be not intangled again with the Toke of Bondage j ch. v. I.
And whereas in the Paffage now cited. Gal. iv. 3, the Apoftle calls the Mofaick Rites, the Elements of the Worlds and weak and beggarly Elements. It is evident that his Defign is not to fignify that thq Ceremonial Law was not originally a divine In- ftitution, but a mere Piece of carnal worldly Policy^ which is the Interpretation this Writer puts upon thofe ExprefHons : But as he compares their being under the Law to an Heir*s being under the Dif^ cipline of Tutors and Governors whilft he is a Child, fo carrying on the fame Metaphor he calls the Mofaick Rites the Elements or Rudiments of the World. As an Heir is under Tutors and Governors until the 'Time appointed of the Father ; even fo we^ when we were Children^ were in Bondage under the Elements of the IVorld, It is an Allufion to the way of inftrudling Children : He calls them the Elements
^ Objections againft
soi;^«d8, fo the Grammarians call the firft Principles or Letters, out of which the Syllables are com- pounded, that are afterwards formed into Words. So that he compares the being under the legal Rites, to Children's beginning firft to Jearn their Letters, or being entered into their firft Rudiments. And he calls them the Elements or Rudiments of the Worlds to fignify that with refpeft to the Matter of them they were taken from the things of this World, and were of an inferior earthly Nature compared with the more fublime and fpiritual Difpenfation of the Gofpel. Under the Law the People were inftru6led in a manner fuitable to their State of childifh Weak- nefs ; for they were as yet imperfe6t and rude in the Knowledge of Religion, nor fitted for the Sim- plicity of a pure and fpiritual Inftitution, in which there were but few external Rites. It pleafed God therefore to deal with them as Children, and to ex- ercife their Obedience by employing them in many inferior ritual Services in Condefcention to their In- firmity, till the proper Seafon came for their being raifed to a more pure and noble and fpiritual Wor- Ihip. Mahnonides gives pretty much the fame Ac- count, and yet I believe, no body will pretend to iay that he denied the Law oi Mofes to be of divine Original, or looked upon it to be a mere Piece of carnal worldly Policy. He fuppofes that as God did not bring the Ifraelttes directly, and all at once into Canaan, but after a long Circuit through the Wildernefs, fo he did not give the People the beft and moft exalted Scheme of Religion at firft, but fuch as they were capable of. He condefcended to their Weaknefs, and brought them on gradually as they could bear it, that they might arrive at laft to the thing he principally aimed at, right Apprehen- lions of him, and the effectual forfaking of Idola- try. This is the Subftance of a remarkable PaiTage in Maimonides, More Nevoch. P. III. cap. 32. And in the fame Chapter he alfo obferves, that as be- I caufe
the Law of Mofes, conjidered. 9^
caufe Animals when they are born are tender and not fit to be nOu^fbed with dry or ftrong Meat, therefore God hatH provided Milk for them, that by fuch a kind of moift Diet fuited to the Tenipera- ment of their Bodies they might be nourifhed, till by Degrees they obtain Strength and Firmnefs ; fo there is fomething like this, in the manner of Go- vernment of the great and good God with regard to feveral things in the Law. And he applies this Obfervation particularly to fome of the Rites there prefcribed, and to the pompous external way of Worfhip by Priefts, Temple, and Sacrifices, which he fuppofes to be inftituted in Condefcention to their Weaknefs, becaufe the People could not then bear a more fpiritual and exalted way of Worfhip.
It appears then that in the Judgment of the wifeft among the Jews themfelves, who are moft zealous for the divine Authority of the Law of Mofes, the Reprefentation the Apoftie Faul makes of the com- parative Imperfedlion of the Law of Mofes as a Dif- penfation fuited to the Weaknefs and to the imper- fect State of the Church and People at that time, was not inconfiftent with the Belief of its having been originally appointed by God himfelf. But efpecially the Confiftency of this appears if it be far- ther confidered, that the Apoftie reprefencs the legal Rites not only as inftituted in Condefcention to their Weaknefs, but at the fame time as defigned and contrived by divine Wifdom to be Shadozvs and Types of good things to come, and preparatory to a more excellent and perfect State of things that was to be introduced under the Mejfah.
When therefore he calls the legal Rites weak and heggarly Elements or Rudiments, he fpeaks in Oppo- fition to thofe who, extravagantly extolled thefe Rites as in themfelves fo perfedt and excellent, that they were never to be abolilhed, or to give way to a more perfed Difpenfation. And it is in the fame View that he declares concerning the Law, that it
was
96 Objections againft
was weak and unprofitable^ Heb. vii. — 18, 19. *There was a difannulling of the (^ommandment going before for the JVeaknefs and Unprofitahlenefs thereof. He doth not intend by this to intimate as if it was in its original Defign abfolutely unprofitable and good for nothing •, for we find that elfewhere, in Anfwer to that Queftion, Wloat Advantage then hath the Jew ? or what Profit is there of Circumcifton ? he anfwers, much every way I chiefly becaufe that unto them were committed the Oracles of God, Rom. iii. I, 2. and by the Oracles of God we are there in a fpecial Manner to underftand the Law of Mojes^ who, as St. Stephen fpeaks, 7^eceived the lively Oracles to give unto us, Aclsvii. 38. But what the Apoftle means by there calling the Law efpecially relating to the Priefthood weak and unprofitable, he himfeif explains in the Words immediately following: For he adds, that the Law made nothing perfe5ij and a little before he had fhewed that Perfe5iion was not hy the Levitical Priefthood, ver. -2. His Defign is to fignify that the Mofaical Oeconomy was nevef intended to be the A?/? and mo?iperfe^ Difpenfation, and therefore it was wrong to let it up as of abfo- lute Neceffity, and of univerfal and perpetual Ob- ligation -, but it was dcfigncd to prepare and make way for a more glorious and pcrfedl Difpenfation which was to fucceed it. '' In like manner when he calls the Ordinances un- der the Law carnal Ordinances^ ^i-Kxtufxciiloi <r«pxoV, Ordinances of the Flefh, or relating to the Flefh, Heb. ix. 10. his meaning is not as this Writer feems willing to underftand it, as if they were in themfelvesof an m/ corrupt Nature and Tendency, which is fometimes the Import of the Word carnal in Scripture, but merely as he himfeif explains it, ver. 13. that they Jan5fified to the purifying of the Flefh, and could not of themfelves, and by any vir- tue of their own, purge the Soul or Confcience from Sin, but were the Types and Shadows of greater
and
the Lans> tf Mofes, confidered. 97
and better Things •, and therefore in that very Paf- fage he fuppofes them to be impofedy till the time of Reformation, that is, till the bringing in of a more perfed Scheme of Religion, for which the other was defigned to be preparatory.
The lame Obfervation may be applied to that Paflage where he calls the Law eftablifhing the Le- vitical Priefthood the haw of a carnal Cowjnandment ^ he is far from intending to fignify by that Expreflion that it was a mere political Engine and human In- vention ; for he evidently fuppofes that Command- ment to be from God in the very Paffage where he calls it a carnal Commandment \ but he calls it fo becaufe it related to a Priefthood managed by frail mortal Men^ and was a Commandment of a tem- ■porary Nature. That this is his Meaning there is evident from the Oppofition he puts between the Law of a carnal Commandment and the Power of an endlefs Life, Heb. vii. 16. where he faith ; that Chrtfl was made a Priefi not after the Law of a car- nal Commandment, hut after the Power of an end- lejs Life. And again, ver. 28. the Law maketh Men High-Priefls which have Infirmity •, hut the Word of the Oath which was fince the Law, maketh the Son, who was confecrated for evermore.
Upon the whole, if we will allow the Apoftle Paul to explain himfelf, it manifeftly appears, that when he fpeaks of the Law of Mofes in feemingly difparaging Terms, it never was his Intention by any of thofe ExprefTions, to infinuate that the Law of Mofes was not of divine Original, for he every where fuppofes that it was ordained and appointed by God himfelf ; but in oppofition to thofe who fet it up for a complete and perfefl Difpenfation, he fhews the comparative Imperfection of it when fet in Competition with that more perfect Difpenfa- -tion which our Saviour introduced by the Gofpel. Thus he faith fpeaking of the Mofaical Oeconomy, that that which was glorious had no Glory in this H Pefpc^,
98 Objections againft
Refpe5l^ hy reafon of the Glory that excelleth, 2 Cor. iii. 10. where he reprefents it as having no Glory y not abfolutely, for he there exprefsly faith that it was glorious ', but it had no Glory when compared to the more perfed excelling Glory of the Gofpel Difpen- fation. In like manner the other Expreflions he makes ufe of with regard to the Law are not to be under- ftood in a ftridl and abfolute, but in a comparative Senfe.
But this Writer farther argues, that the Apoftle Paul could not look upon the Law of Mofes to be of divine Inftitution, becaufe he teaches things di- reftly contrary to that Law. He fays, the plain 'Truth of the Matter was, that St. Paul preached a new Do^rine contrary to Mofes and the Prophets^ p. 41. But it is certain that if the Apoftle Paul himfelf may be depended on for giving a right account of his own Sentiments, He believed all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets, Adls xxiv. 14. And he faid none other things than thofe which the Prophets and Mofes didfayfhould come, A61:s xxvi. 22. he preach*d a new Dodtrine indeed, and publifh'd a new Difpenfition, but not contrary unto, butperfedl- ly confident with Mofes and the Prophets, and to which they were defigned to be preparatory and fubfervient.
But let us fee how he proves the Charge. He goes on to fay, " that there is not one End, Ufe, " or Purpofe of the ritual Law as declared by " Mofes, but what is direftly contradifted and de- " nied by this Apoftle. This he proves, " firft *' becaufe Mofes delivered the whole Law to the *' Ifraelites, as a perpetual ftanding Ordinance or " everlafcing Covenant between God and them ** throughout all their Generations to the End of " the World ; St. Paul on the contrary declares " it to be only an occafional temporary thing, ne- *« ver intended for Perpetuity, but to laft only for «' a few Ages,"^. 241. But it does not appear
from
the Law of Mo/es, conjidered. 99
from Mofes that the Law was dcfigned for Perpe" tuity, fo as never to give way to another Difpenfa- tion, as if God himfelf would never change or abro- gate any ot thefe Laws : Nor does he any wher^ lay, as this Writer reprefents it, that the Law wa^ to continue to be obferved by them to the End of th^ World. That the Hebrew Phruk which we tran" flate for ever and everlafting does not always fignify a perpetual Duration, or a Duration to the End of the \Vorld, is fo well known, that it is unworthy of any Man that pretends to Learning to draw an Ar- gument merely from thofe ExprefTions. If Mofes had exprefsly called the whole Law an everlafting Covenant, which he no where does, no Argument could be drawn from it to fhew that it was intended to continue to the End of the World. To j^bra- bain's Seed the Land of Canaan is promifed for an everlaft'mg Pojfejfion, Gen. xxvii. 8. and yet Mofes exprefsly foretels that they (hould be expelled that Land and fcattered among all Nations. Nor does that other Phraie, throughout all their Generations^ prove that it was defigned to be of perpetual and unalterable Obligation ; tho' Mofes never ufes that Word throughout all their Generations, fpeaking of the Obfervation of the Law or any of its Ordinances, but only that it fliould be obferved throughout their Generations, or as it is often exprefied, in their Ge- nerations. And that this Phrafe is not neceffaiily to be underftood of a perpetual Duration, or a Du- ration to the End of the World, is evident from ma- ny Paflages. Thus the Pfalmift obferves, fpeaking of rich Worldings, their inward 'Thought is that their Houfes fhall continue for ever, and their dwel- ling Places to all Generations, Pfalm xlix. 1 1. Not as if they thought their Houfes would continue in ftridtnefs to the End of the World, which no Man in his Senfes could once fuppofe, but that they fhould continue for a long time to them and to their Pofterity after them. SeealfoL^v. xxv. 29, ^o. H2 It
lOo Object ions againft
It was not proper that it fhould be exprefsly de- clared in the Law itfelf that it was an occafional temporary Difpenfation only to continue for a time. This might have diminifhed their regard for the Law, and they might upon this Pretence have ' thrown off the Obfervance of it before the proper Seafon came. The plain Defign of thofe Phrafes, that they were to obferve the legal Ordinances for ever^ and throughout their Generations^ was to fig- nify to them that they were to obferve them always in their fuccelTive Generations, till God fhould fig- nify his Will to the contrary *, that it was to laft for ever, fo as never to be abrogated by any human Authority •, nor were the People themfelves to caft off the Obligation of it, merely by an a6t of their own upon any pretence whatfoever. But that they might expeft a new Law and new In- junflions from God, Mofes himfelf fignifies to them as plainly as was proper for him in that remarkable PalTage, Deut. xviii. 17, 18, 19. where he tells the People, that the Lord their God would raife up from the m'ldfl of them a Prophet like unto h'lm^ and that unto him fhould the-^ hearken \ and that God would put his Words into his Mouthy and he Jhould fpeak unto thein^ all that God Jfjould command him ; and that it Jfjould come to pafs^ that whofoever would 9wt hearken unto his Words, God would require it of him. It is exprefsly faid concerning the ordinary fubiequent Prophets, v;hich arofe in Ifrael^ that none of them was like unto "Mo^t?,^ Deut. xxxiv. 10. and God himfelf declares how much Mofes was fuperior to the other Prophets, Numb. xii. 6, 7, 8. but here Mofes tells the People, that God would raife up from among them a Prophet like unto him, that is, not an ordinary Prophet, but one of peculiar Eminence, that fhould like Mofes give them Laws in the Name of God himfelf, and to whom they were indifpenfably obliged to hearken, and to pay an intire Obedience. This was fufRcient to have direft^
ed
the Law of Mofes, confidered. i o I
cd them to look for another Law-giver, and might naturally lead their Thoughts to the promiled Mef- fiah^ of whom they had an Expectation derived to them from their Fathers. And afterwards as the Time drew nearer, the Abolition of the Law of Mofes was more plainly fignified. The Prophets intimated clearly enough that a new Difpenfation was to be introduced, and a new Covenant different from that which God made with their Fathers when he brought them out of the Land of Rgypt, Jer. xxxi. 31, 32. The ceafing of the Aarotiical Priefthood, and confequently of the Law of Mofes, is figniiied, when it is foretold with the greateft Solemnity, that God would raife up a glorious Perfon to be a Prieft for ever after the order of Melchifedeck, Pf ex, 4. Heb, vii. 12. and that God's Name fhould be great among the Gentiles, from the rifing of the Sun to the going down of the fame, and that in every Place Incenfe fhould be offered to his Name and a 'pure Offering, Mai. i. 2. which fuppofes the Law of Afo- y^i abrogated, which confined the offering up of In- cenfe to the Sanctuary and T^emple, And indeed the very Nature of the Law itfelf according to which a confiderable part of the Ordinances and Rites there prefcribed were to be entirely confined to the Land of Canaan, and not to be obferv'd any where out of that Land, fufficiently fhews that it was not origi- nally defigned to be of invariable Continuance, nor fitted in the Nature of the Thing for univerfal and perpetual Obligation.
Again, another Inftance produced by this Writer of the Apoftle Paul contradicting Mofes is this, That Mofes tvtxy where moftexpreQy eftablilhes Propitiations and Atonements for Sin by the Blood of Beafts, and declares upon the Adtion of the Prieit in fprinkling the facrificial Blood, the A- tonement (hould be made, and the Offence for- given ; and ordains daily and annual Sacrifices for the Sins of the whole People, and this without H ^< " the
102 Objections againfl
<* the leaft hint or intimation of any Type or farther <« Reference. But St. Faul on the contrary declares, <« it is impoffible for the Blood of Bulls or Goat? to *< take away Sins ; and condemns this literal Senfe <« of the Law as a Scheme of natural Blindnefs and « Bondage that cannot confift either with the civil *< or religious Rights or Liberties of Mankind."
That Mofes eftablifhes Propitiations and Atone- ments for Sin by the Blood of Beafts, will be readily acknowledged -, and if this Author could prove that the Apoftle Paul denies that fuch Sacri- fices had been ever appointed by God at all, this would contradift Mofes, who prefcribes them as of divine Appointment. But on the contrary, it is evident, that the Apoftle all along fuppofes that thefe Sacrifices had been appointed by God himfelf thro' the Miniftry of Mofes, He reprefents them indeed as now abolifhed, but this is only to fay, that the Mofaick Law is no longer obligatory, and that God hath not thought fit to require thofe Sacrifices under the New Teftament. As to what he adds, " that Mofes declares that the Atonement *' ihould be made and the Offence forgiven upon " the Adion of the Priefl: in fprinkling the facri- *' ficial Blood, without the leafl: hint or intimation *' of any Typs or farther Reference. Whereas the *' Apoftle declares it impoflible for the Blood of *' Bulls and Goats to take away Sin :'* The Apoftle himfdf plainly ftiews us how to reconcile thefe, by declaring that the Gifts and Sacrifices under the Law fan^ified to the purifying of the Flefh ; and this external Atonement is what Mofes intends as the immediate Confequence of the Prieft's fprink- ling the Blood. The Perfon thereupon was legally clean and free, but he never intended to fignify that merely upon the outward a6l done of the Prieft's fprinkling the facrificial Blood, the Man's Confcience was immediately purged from the Guilt ©f Sin, without Repentance and new Obedience.
For
the LawofMoCcSj confidered. 103
For the Neceffity of Repentance and Obedience in order to Forgivenefs and Acceptance with God is ftrongly reprefented in the Law, The Cafe then with refped: to thofe Sacrifices (lands thus : The outward Aft of offering the Sacrifice, and the Prieft*s fprinkling the Blood when done as the Law prefcribes, was an external Atonement or Expia- tion by which the Perfon was outwardly and le- gally cleanfed from the Guilt he had contraded. Befides which to the truly penitent and fincere this Rite was an outward Sign or Pledge of God*s Pardon and Acceptance. And if the Apoftle Paul may be allowed a better Interpreter of the Defign of thofe Sacrifices than this Writer, one great End for which they were inftituted was to prefigure that of Chrift, and by thofe typical Atonements to pre- pare them for that great Propitiation of infinite Virtue which he was to off'er for the Sins of the World. And if this was one primary Intention of that part of the Mofaick Law, it gives us a more comprehenfive View of the Wifdom of this Con- ftitution. It fhews thofe Sacrifices to have been originally appointed by God himfelf, and that the great End of them is now fulfilled, and confequent- ly that this part of the Law of Mofes inftead of be- ing contrary to the Gofpel, was defigned to be fub- fervient to it. As to the Exception he makes that Mofes himfelf gives no Intimation of any Type or farther Reference, it fhall be confidered afterwards when 1 come more particularly to examine what he offers concerning the i?iyflical Senfe of the Law.
The next Inftance he produceth to prove that the Law of Mofes is contradicted and denied by the A- poftle Paul is absolutely mifreprefented. For it no where appears that Mofes commanded all Idolatry to he exterminated by Fire and Sword, not only in Ca- naan but all the rejl of the World, as far as his Peo- flefhould have it in their Power, of which he was very confidetu. And as to the particular Law about the H 4 Punifh-
104 Objections againfi
Punifhment of Idolaters in the Jewijh Common- wealth, this, with the Author's pretence that it is in- confiftent with the Rights of private Judgment and Liberty of Confcience, fhall be confidered afterwards.
The laft Inftance he produceth to fhew the Con- tradidion and Inconfiftency between the Dodrine of the Apoftle Paul^ and the Law of Mofes, amounts to no more than this, " that the Levitical Order of " Pritfthood is now abolifhed, and that the Apof- " tie Paul declares it to be fo -," which will be eafily granted. But at the fame time, it is certain, that even when he argues that the Priefthood is now changed, he dill plainly (hews that he looked upon it to have been originally of divine Appointment. And tho' he no where exprefly declares in what particular Way the Chriftian JMiniftry is to be maintained, yet it is not true, as this Author alledges, that he leaves the Chrifiian Minijlry^ to fubfijl only upon Charity^ if by that be meant that it is a Mat- ter of mere Courtefy ; for 'tis certain he infills upon it as a Matter of Right, and declares that the Lord hath ordained that thofe that preach the Gofpeljhould live of the Go/pel.
The Author might at this rate of arguing have produced moft of the particular Conftitutions of the Law of Mofes which are no longer in Force under the Gofpel, and from thence have argued a Contradidlion and Inconfiftency between the Gof- pel and the Law. But all that follows from it is, That the legal Oeconomy is now abrogated with its peculiar Rites and Injundtions. But it does not Ibllow that therefore our Lord Jefus Chrijl and his ApoJUes believed that it was not originally of di- vine Inftitution : except it could be proved that God can never give any occafwnal Injundtions, which are to laft only for a time •, or that all his Laws muft be as himfelf immutable j or that that cannot be fit and proper at one time, or in one circumftance of Things, which is not fo in another :
The
theLawofM.Qk^,confidered. 105
The contrary to which this Writer himfelf acknow- ledges, p. 207. where having obferved " that all wife States and Governments have ever found it neceffary to abrogate and alter the old, or to enadl new Laws, acccording to n-jutable and va- riable Relations and Circumftances of Perfons in Society," he adds. That "this will equally hold good, when appHed to the Laws of God himfelf. For what God would require at one time under fuch particular Relations and Cir-- cumftances, he would not require at another time, under other Relations, and quite different or contrary Circumftances.'* From whence it is manifeft that his Argument to fhew an Inconfi- ftency between the Law o/"Mofes and the Chrijlian Religion as explained by St. Paul, becaufe many things that were required in the one are abrogated by the other, hath nothing in it. It doth not fol- low, that the Mofaick Oeconomy was not infti- tuted by God, becaufe many of its Rites and Con- ftitutions were abrogated and fuperfeded by a fuc- ceeding Difpenfation ; when the Circumftances of Things were much altered from what they were at the firft giving of the Law, and the Defign for which that peculiar Oeconomy had been erefted was anfwered and fulfilled.
I fhall conclude this Chapter with obferving that this Writer in order the better to Ihew an Incon- fiftency between the Law of Afo/^jand the Go/pel, abfolutely denies any myfiical or typical Senfe of the Law of Mofes, or that any of its Rites had in their original Intention any flirther Reference than the bare Letter.
He afks, " Whether there can be found any " Reafon or Foundation in all the Writings of " Mo/es, or his Commentators the Prophets, for * « that typical, figurative and allegorical Senfe of *' the legal Priefthood, Sacrifices, and Ceremonies " which St. Paid fuppofes and argues upon in his
«* Rea-
jo6 Objections againji
*' Reafonings againft the Jews^ in order to fet *' afide this Priefthood, and the Law of Ceremo- <« nies depending upon it, as fulfilled and accom- « plifhed inChrift?" And obferves in the Paf- fage I mentioned before, that *' Mofes eftabliihes <« Propitiations and Atonements for Sin by the «* Blood of Beafls, and ordains Sacrifices, without *' the leaft Hirst or Intimation of any Type or far- «» ther Reference," p, 41. And therefore he con- cludes that " St. Paulas rejecting and renouncing <» the ceremonial Law in its literal Senfe, when •' Mofes had delivered and inforced it in no other ** Senfe, was a plain Declaration that fuch a Law <* could never be of divine Inftitution,** />. 51. But it is not true that the Apoftle Paul condemned and renounced the ceremonial Law in its literal Senfe, if by that be meant that he fuppofed its Rites literally taken not to have been inftituted by God j for he all along fuppofes that even literally taken the legal Rites and Ordinances were of di- vine Appointment, and were impofed upon the Jews by a divine Authority to be obferved by them until the time of Reformation : That is, till the laft and moft perfeifl Difpenfation fliould be introduced under the Mejfiah. But he argues that befide the literal they had a myftical Senfe, and that in inftituting them, the divine Wifdom had a farther view, and defigned them as Types and Fi- gures of greater and better Things under that more perfect Difpenfation that was to fucceed.
And let us fee what this Author offers to prove that it was not fo. All his long Difcourfe about the typical myftical Senfe of the Law, amounts to no more than this. That *' there is not the leaft «' hint in the Writings of Mofes^ or his Commen- ** tators the Prophets of any fuch typical Senfe or '• Reference *, that fuch a myftical Senfe of the *' Law and Prophets was never known nor heard «« of among the Jews till after the Days oi Ezra,
«' when
the Law of Mofes, confidered. toy
« when the Jewijh Cabalifts put what Senfe they •« pleafed on thofe Writings -, and when they could *' not prove the new Dottrines they advanced (a- mongft which he reckons that of the Refurredlion, a general Judgment, and a State of future Rewards and Punifhments) " by the original literal Senfe of thofe " Writings, they introduced a myftical allegorical *» Senfe of their original Books, and pretended an *' oral Tradition to juftify their arbitrary Interpre-» " tations. That the Apoftle Paul and Chrifl him- '« {eK argued with the Jews in their own way, *< and upon their own Conceflions, and juflified " the Gofpel Scheme upon the Foot of Mofes and ** the Prophets^ not from the proper original Senfe " oi i\\t Prophets themfelves, but by myftical al- *' legorical Interpretations, for which there was " really no Foundation in the Writings them- *' felves of Mofes znt^ the Prophets. And he aiks *' why might not they take up the fame Principles *' againft fuch Men to introduce and eftablifli the *' true Religion, which they had made ufe of and *' applied to eftablifh and perpetuate a falfe one? ** This is the fum of what he faith from^. 43 to 51. But if we fhould grant that there is no hint of any fuch myftical typical Senfe or Reference in the Law of Mofes or the Prophets^ this would not prove that there was no fuch Senfe in the original Intention of the Holy Ghoft in giving thefe Laws. For fuppofmg fuch an original typical Intention, it might not be proper to declare this in the Law it- felf, or to let the People direftly and exprefly know that its Rites were typical, the Shadows and Figures of good Things to come under another and more perfed: Difpenfation. This might have diminifhed their regard to the Lav/, and have rendered them negligent in the Obfervation of its Injundions, even when it was proper for good Reafons that they Ihould be kept clofe to the Ob- fervation of them. Types might be originally in- tended.
lo8 Objections againft
tended, tho' not then explained and underftood when they were lirft inftituted. And there is no Abfurdity in fuppofing, that God whofe Wifdom penetrates through all Ages, had fome Ends in view in inftituting thofe Rites and Ceremonies, which he did not open all at once^ but which were to be underftood in the proper Sea/on •, and parti- cularly that he defigned them among other Ends, (for it is not pretended that it is the only End) for Types and Figures of good Things to come, with a view that when the time came for accomplifliing them, their apt Correfpondency might more fully appear. And indeed the typical Senfe and Refe- rence could not be well underftood till the Anti- type came, by comparing it with which, the exa(3: and beautiful Harmony between both, and the Wifdom ot God in appointing it fo, might be fully manifeft. And who fo proper in that Cafe to ex- plain the original Senfe intended by the Holy Ghoft, as thofe who were infpired by the fame divine Spirit? I fhall therefore beg leave to fup- pofe that our Lord Jefus Chrijl and his Apofiles^ particularly the Apoft'le Paul^ are more to be de- pended on for a juft Account of the original Senfe of Mofes and the Prophets, than this Writer who confidently averrs they had no fuch original typical Senfe and Reference, tho' Chr'iji and his Apojiles affure us they had.
But after all, it is not true, that there is not the leafi Foundation in the Writings of Mofes or his Commentators the Prophets for that typical figurative Senfe of the legal Priefthood, Sacri- fices and Ceremonies, which St. Paul fuppofes and argues upon in order to fet afide his Prieft- hood, and the Law of Ceremonies depending upon it, as fulfilled and accompliflied in Chrift." There are feveral Hints concerning a Redeemer to come interfperfed in the Mofaical Writings, and ftill more in thofe of the Prophets. He had been
pro-
the Law of Mofcs, conjidered. 109
promifed and foretold from the beginning at fundry Times and in diyerfe Manners. This was the prin- cipal thing intended in the Promife made to Abra- ham concerning all Nations being hlejjed in his Seed^ and fo Abraham himfelf underftood it, who if we may believe our Saviour, faw his Day and was glad, Jacob fpoke of him, under the Name of Shiloh, And the Ifraelites had derived to them from the Patriarchs an Expectation of this glorious Perfon as one that fhould arife from among them. And this being the Cafe the moft wife and underftanding of them might be naturally led to think that there was a farther View and Reference to this great Event, in many of the Rites that were then prefcribed, and in that particular Conftitution and Polity that was then eredled, efpecially fince Mofes himfelf di- redled their Views this way, by telling them of another Prophet whom God would raife up from the 7nidft of them like unto him^ to whom they were to pay an entire Obedience, and to obferve whatfoever Laws or Commands he fhould bring them from God. The Sacrifices, the chief part of the legal Rites and Services, are fometimes fpoken of in the Old Teftament, with a feeming Contempt, as things in which God had no Pleafure. It is certain thefe Expreffions were not intended to fignify that God had not inftituted or required thofe Sacrifices at all : But it was natural to conclude from thofe Expref- fions, that they were not inftituted merely for their ownSakes, but had a farther View and Reference. Thus particularly in the 40th Pfalm, ver. 5, 6. the Perfon there fpoken of, after having plainly declared the InfufEciency of the legal Sacrifices, adds concerning himfelf, llQen faid 7, lo I come^ in the Volume of the Book it is written of ;«<?, I delight to do thy TVill^ O God. Where he reprefents himfelf and his coming, as written of in the Law. And this I think can fcarce be underftood to relate to any but the Meffiah -, of whom Bavid often fpeaks, and of
4 whom
116 Objections againft
whom the Apojile interprets it, Heh. x. 5 — 9. and if fo, here is an Inftance to prove, that at the time when this Pfalm was compofed, which was in the Days of Davidy many Ages before Ezra, the Law was underftood, as having a Reference to the Mef~ ftah. And in that Paflage there is alfo a plain Inti^ mation that the legal Sacrifices were to ceafe^ and to be abolilhed at the MeJfiahS coming. Bat efpe- cially the liiid Chapter of Ifaiah, which the moft ancient Jews interpreted of the Mejfiah, and which indeed cannot reafonably be underftood of any other, points to a farther Reference of the legal Sa- crifices, to ht fulfilled and accomplijhed in Chriji. The Prophet there fpeaks of him in Phrafes that properly related to Sacrifices. As he defcribes the grievous Sufferings he was to endure, fo he repre- fents them as having an expiatory Virtue, and making Atonement for our Sins. He reprefents him as hearing our Iniquities, and making his Soul an of- fering for Sin, and that God laid upon him the Jni- quities of us all. This ought to have led the Jews to look beyond the legal Sacrifices and Oblations, to that great Propitiation of infinite Virtue which was to be offered for our Sins in the fulnefs of Time, and of which thofe Sacrifices were only the imper- fe6l Figures and Shadows: And what the Prophet here faith is perfedlly agreeable to what St. Paul and the other Apoftles fo often reprefent concern- ing our Lord Jefiis ChriJl, as offering himfelf a Sacrifice for our Sins, and doing that in reality which the others only did in Type and Figure. Indeed the Prophets in all their Writings have num- berlefs References to the Mejfiah, and there is no explaining many Paffages in thofe Writings with- out fuch a Reference. They often fpeak of things that literally, and in the firft Senfe relate to their own Time, in Terms which evidently have a farther view. And that they underftood and explained the Prophecies before them as typical of the Meffiah, 4 and
the Law of Mofes, confidered, i n
and often prophefied by Types themfelves, and in- timated at the very Time of delivering thofe Pro- {)hecies tliat they were to be referred to him, is argely and fully (hewn in the Bijho-p of Lichfield'i learned Defence of Chrijlianky from the ancient Prophecies, Ch. 3. Se^. i, 2, 3, 4. Whereas therefore this Writer afierts over and over with great Confidence, that what he calls the figurative fpiri- tualiztng Senfe of the Law and the Prophets, was never heard of among the Jews before the Days of Ezra^ and that it had its firft rife among the Jewijh Cahbaliftical Doctors after that time : The contrary is rather true, that all along from the Beginning, the Law and the Prophets were underftood as con- taining a fpiritual and myftical Senfe, and as having a farther View and Reference. When Mofes urges the People to circumcife the Fore-fkin of their Hearts^ Deut. X. 16. and again, fpeaks oiQiQ^^ circum- cifing their Hearts that they might love him with all their Heart and Soul, Deut. xxx. 6. here is a plain Inftance of a fpiritual Senfe in the Law itfelf with regard to one of the principal Rites there enjoined, the folemn Rite of Initiation into that peculiar Polity. He here plainly direds them to carry their Thoughts beyond the outward Sign, and intimates to them that it had a farther View, even to fignify the Ne- ceffity of an inward Purity, and of mortifying their corrupt Affedions and Lufls. And indeed conG- dering the frequent ufe of Signs and Symbols among the Eaftern Nations, efpecially in the early Ages, which were ftill fuppofed to contain fome other Sig- nifications under them, and to have a farther View than the bare Letter ; and confidering the high Efteem they had of the great Wifdom of the Law and the Mofaick Inf^itutions, every thing in which even the moll minute Rites were regarded as prefcribed by God himfelf •, and confidering that an Expedta- tion of the Meffiah, and of a more new and glori- ous State of things under him, was Hill kept up
among
I IZ Ob j e c t I ON s again/}
among them -, it was natural for them to think that there was a farther View and Reference in that great Variety of legal Rites, and Sacrifices, and Ceremonies, beyond what appeared in the bar6 Letter. And it was becaufe it had been all along a known and acknowledged Principle in their Na- tion, that many things in the Law and the Prophets had a farther View, that the Jewijh DoSfors, after the time of £zm, when immediate Infpiration ceafed, and there v/ere no longer any extraordinary Pro- phets among them, took occafion to introduce their traditionary Explications. And it is probable fome of thefe Explications were agreeable to the true ori- ginal Senfe derived from the Prophets themfelves, as Dr. Prideaux fuppofes, to whom this Writer is pleafed to refer us. Though in procefs of Time they added many Inventions, and arbitrary Expli- cations of their own, which never were originally intended. They fuppofed all along a frequent Re- ference to the Mejfiah in the Mofaical and Prophe- tical Writings, and fo far they were right in gene- ral, and undoubtedly they were fo in the Senfe they give of many particular PafTages. Some confider- able Remains there are of thoie Explications in the moft ancient and approved 76'ZL'i//6 Writings •, tho' the modern Jews would fain give a different Turn to them to avoid the force of the Arguments the Chriftians bring againft them from thefe Interpre- tations that were admitted by their Anceftors. It alfo appears from fome Paifages in their approved Writings, that they expeded their own Law to be more fully opened to them at the Mejfialfs coming, and the Reafon of feveral of their own Rites ex- plained. See the abovementioned Defence of Chrif- tianity, p. 409, 410.
Upon the whole, tho' this Writer reprefents it, ^. 19. as a very ridiculous Thing to fuppofe that what was more obfcurely hinted in the Law and the Prophets is more clearly revealed in the Gofpel,
and
the Law of Mofes, confidered. 1 1 3
and fpeaks in a gibing manner o^ thofe Men of deep Penetration and Bifrernment that can fee this fort of Connexion and Harmony between the Go/pel and the Law, and to whom it appears juft and beduti/ulj p. 19. I can fee nothing in it but what is worthy of the Wifdoni of God, that he fliould at different Times and in different Circumitances of things," make gradual Difcoveries of his Will ; and that he fliOLild io order former Revehitions as to prepare the way for the latter, and the latter, fo as to illuf- trate and confirm the former j and that what is more darkly and imperfe^lly hinted at in the one, Ihould be more clearly and fully delivered in the other. • Confidered in this View and mutual Refe- rence, I muft own that both the Old Teftament and the New appear to me with a brighter Glory, and derive mutual Light and Strength to one another. And the gradual opening and unfolding of the di- vine Light in fo many various Viev^^s, has yielded great Satisfaction in the Contemplation of it to Men that truly defer ved the Cha rafter of Perfons of deep Difccrnment and Penetration, with which this Wri- ter fneeringly honours them. As God's fending his own Son into the World for the Redemption of Man- kind was the mofl: important Event that ever was ; fo to confider it as having been all along prefigured and foretold d.ifundry 'Times and in diver/e Manners^ fometimes more clearly and openly fignified by ex- prefs Predidions, fometimes more covertly by va- rious Types and Figures -, fo many things pointing this way through fo long a Succeffion of Ages, and all centring here ; gives a noble and compre- henfive view of this grand Defign, and fhews, one and the fame important Scheme ftill uniformly car- rying on, one wife prefiding Spirit and glorious di- vine Author, whofe views extend through all Ages. This is truly glorious and worthy of the fupreme Wifdom, and it is not an odd turn of Exprefllon, calling literal Chrijlianity m^^jllcal Judaifni, and
I literal
214 Objections againfl
literal Judaifm figurative Chrijlianity, and a jingle of th^ ]ike Phnles which the Author makes ufe of to ridicule it, that will (hew the Abfurdity cf fuch a Schpnie as this. And it is certain that what he ridicules is the very Scheme advanced by our Saviour himfelf and his Jpojlles, particularly the Apoftle Paul. He pretends indeed to apologize for them by alledging, that in this they only made ufe of the falfe way of arguing that had obtained amongft the Jews ; that is, he would have it thought, firft that they acknowledged and aflerted the divine Au- thority and Infpiration of Mofes and the Prophets., though at the fame time they believed them to be only falje pretenders to Infpiration •, and then that they fet up a Senfe of their Writings which they themfelves very well knew was not their Senfe, and endeavoured to put that falfe Senfe upon the Jews for the mind of the Holy Ghojl. A Condud: which is too inconfiftent with commoh Honefty and Inte- grity, and with the known Charafter of Chrijl and his Jpofiles to be admitted.
I fhall only farther obferve, to fhew the great Confiftency of this Writer ; that tho* in this part of his Book he fo confidently aflerts and endeavours in many Words to prove, that the Prophetical and Mofaical Writings were never underftood to have any myftical Senfe till after the Days of Ezra., when.it had its firft rife :in-\on^x\\tJewi/hCaha' lifts •, yet he el few here exprefsly declares that Mofes and \.\\Q Prophets dXwd. J % wrkwith a double Intention, and had a double Senfe •, the one literal and popu- lar, the other to be underftood only by the wifer Sort. And he blames the JewiJJj Nation for under- flanding the Writings of Mofes and the Prophets according to the Letter, without entering into the Spirit and Defign of them, as he faith, St. Paul hath evidently and irrefutably proved, p. 249, 251. It is true, he very abfurdly applies this to the hiftorical Narrations of Fadls which he would not have to be
under-
the Law of Moies, confidered. 115
underftood liceralJy : But it is certain the Apoftle PaiiU who he there pretends to believe hath evident- ly and irrefutably proved the myftical Senfe of the Law and the Prophets, and hath fhewn that the Jews did not enter into the true Spirit and Defignof them, underftood this not with regard to thcbijlo- rical Facts and Narrations, but to the legal Rites and Ordinances, and fhews they had a typical Re- ference and a farther View, So that if he will be concluded by the Judgment of that great Apoftle in this matter, as he pretends to be willing to be, there was fuch a Senfe originally intended in the legal Priefthood and Sacrifices. And what then muft we think of this Author, who contradidls and denies what by his own Confeffion St. Tfiul hath evidently and irrefutably -proved ?
As to the Proof he brings to ihew that the myf- tical and fpiritual Senfe of the Law and the Pro- phets was never heard of before Ezra^ becaufe before that Period " nojewijjj Writer, Prieft or Prophet, " had ever mentioned a Word of the Rifurre^ion^ " general Judgment, and State o^ future Rewards " and Punifhments, as the proper Sand: ions of Vir- *' tue and Religion in this Life, whereas all the " JewiJIj Writings afterwards are full of them, " p. 46." This is intirely mifreprefented •, as I fhall fhew when I come to confider what he offtrs to prove, that all the Jews wqvq Deifical Aiateria- lifls and Sadducees, and did not believe a future State, till after their Return from the Bahylonifb Captivity.
CHAP. iV.
'The Author'* s Ohje^ions againfl the Law ^/Mofes
' from the internal Conjlitution of that Law confidered.
His pretence that that Law extended only to the
outward Pra^iice and Behaviour oj Men in So-
ciety, and that the Obligation of it with refpe5l to
I 2 civil
ii6 Objections againfi
civil and foc'ial Virtue extended no farther than to the Members of that Society^ and that they ivere put into a State of War with all the refl of the JVorld. It is fhewn that that Law required an inward Purity of Heart and Affe^ions. The great "Tende/nefs and Humanity that appears in its Pre- cepts. It required a kind and benevolent Conduct mt only towards thofe of their own Society, but to- wards Strangers. That Conftitution not founded in the Principles of Perfecution. It tolerated all that worfhipped the one true God., tho* not conforming to their peculiar Rites and Ufages. The punifhing Idolatry with Death in the Commonwealth of ifrael accounted for. No Obligation by that Law to extirpate Idolatry, and defray Idolaters in all ether Courdries by Fire and Sword. His pretence that Mofes dircoied the Ifraelites to extend their Conquefls through all Nations, and that their Con- flitution and Plan of Government was contj'ived for it, examined. The contrary to this floewn. The military Laws, Deut. xx. explained. Whether that Law abfolutely prohibited all Alliances with Idolaters.
"Aving confidered the Author's Objedlions a- gainft the Law of Mofes drawn from the Authority of St. Paul, and from the pretended In- confiftency between it and the GofpeJ, I fliall now proceed to confider thofe Objedtions of his that are • taken from the internal Conftitution of that Law, which he every where fuppofes to be altogether un- worthy of God, and therefore impoffible to be gi- ven by him. If his Account be true it v/as one of the worft, the moft abfurd, and tyrannical Confti- tutions in the World ; a wretched Scheme of Super- flition, Blindnefs, and Slavery., Bigotry, and En- thufiafm, that had nothing of Truth or Gopdnefs in it, and was contrary to all Reafon and common Senfe, Thefe and other hard Epithets of th^ like kind he liberally beftovvsupon the Law of Mofes. t-et
us
the Law of Mofes, confide red, 117
us confider what he offers to fupport fuch fevere Invedtives.
And (irft, one of his Objections againft even the Moral Law given by Mofes to the People oi Ifraeiy is, that as the Law was conftituted •, " All its " Sanflions being merely temporal, relating only " to Men's outward Prafliceand Behaviour in So- " ciety, and none of its Rewards or Punifhments " relating to any future State ; it could only relate " to outward AcSlions, and thereby fecure civil Vir- " fue, and the civil Rites and Properties of the So- *' ciety, againft fuch Fraud or Violence, as might " fall under a human Cognizance •, but could not *' relate to the inward Principles and Motives of '^ Adion, whether good or bad -, and therefore " could not purify the Confcience, regulate the " Affe(5tions, or corred: and reftrain the vicious " Defires, Inclinations, and Difpofitions of the " Mind, and this is what St. Pa^l means, as often " as he declares the Weaknefs or Infufficiency of " this Law, to inforce or fecure a State of inward " Zeal, Virtue, or Righteoufnefs, with refpedl to *' God and Confcience, p. 27."
But it is capable of as dear a Proof as any thing whatfoever, (and our Author himfelf is fenfiblc of it, as is evident from what he makes Tbeo- fha7ies his Chriftian Jc\v obje6t againfb Philalethes his Moral Philofopher on this Head, ^.33,^^.) that the Law of Mofes did not relate to the out- ward A6lions alone, but to the inward Principles and Motives of Aflion : and that Mofes not only always /uppofed, as he grants, an inward right Motive, or the Principle and Difpojition of Love to God and our Neighbour, as neceffary to conflitute the true Morality and Religion of an A^ion with re- fpe5l to God and Confcience : but that he direftly and exprefiy, frequently, and in the ftrongeft man- ner, requires a right Difpofition of the Heart and Mind ; and that, this Law was defigned, contrary
I 3 to
'ti8 Objections againft
to what this Author aflerts, to regulate theAffeUlom^ and to corre^ and reftrain the vicious Deftres, In- clinations and Difpofitions oj the Mind. This is the evident Intention of the tenth Commandment, which forbids not only outward evil A6lions, but the inward irregular Affeftions and Motions of Cpncupifcence. This St. Paul takes Notice of when he declares, that he fliould not have been fenfible that fuch Dcfires were finful, or that they deferved Deaths if the Law had not forbidden them, Rom. vii. 7. and again, ver. 14. he faith, the Law is fpiritual^ by which he evidently means that it extends to the inward Difpofitions of -the Soul and. Spirit as well as to the outward Adions, and forbid? and .condemns all evil Thoughts and Inclinations. And the Suppofition of this vaft Extent and Spirituality of the Law lies at the Foun- dation of his Argument, that none can be juftified by It; becaufe none can be found that yield a per- fed: Obedience to its pure and excellent Precepts. This Writer therefore plainly mifreprefents St. P^w/'sSenfe, when after having faid, that the Law could only relate to outward Adions, and thereby fecure civil Virtue, but dfd not relate to the inward Principles or Motives of A6lion whether good or bad, and therefore could not regulate the Af- fedions, or reftrain the vicious Defires and Incli- nations of the Mind, he adds, that is what St. Paul means as often as he declares the Weaknefs or Infufjiciency of this Law^ to inforce or fecure a State of inward real Virtue or Right eoufnefs wii>h refpe5i to God and Confcience. p. 2 7. For the Apoftle by faying the Law (if taken of the moral Law) is weak^ doth not mean as this Writer infinuates, that its Precepts relate only to the outward Prac- tice, and not to the inward Difpofitions of the Heart and Soul •, for he exprefly affirms that it is fpiritual, and doth relate to the inward Defires and AfFedions: but he intends to Ihew that the Law
was
the Lawofyioks, confidered. 119
was in itfelf unable to jultify Men, or intitle them to Pardon and Acceptance with God, and give them a Right to eternal Life (which is what he means by Juftification) becaufe it could only juftify thofe that obeyed its Precepts, and no Man dotli perfe6liy obey it. So that it is weak, as he ex- prefTes it, through the Flejlo \ that is, it is unable to juftify Men becaufe of the prefent Weaknsfs and Corruption of Human Nature ; whereby it comes to pafs that in many Inftances they fall fhort of the pure and perfedt Obedience there required, and therefore their Acceptance and Juftitication muft be wholly owing to the free Grace and Mercy of God, which is mofi: clearly and glorioufly difpenfed and manifefted through Jefus Chriji in the Gofpel Difpenfation.
The Paflages this Writer himfelf in the Perfon of Tbeophanes refers to, clearly prove, that the Law of Mojes relates not merely to the outward Adions, or external Behaviour of Perfons in Society, but to the inward Difpofitions of the Heart, Deut. xii. 4, 5. Hear^ O Ilrael, the Lord thy God is one Lord i and thou /halt love the Lord thy God with all thine Heart, and with all thy Soul, and with all thy Might. This excellent and comp.rehenfive Com- mand, which takes in the Sum of real vital Reli- gion and Piety is often repeated in the Law, fee Bent. x. 12. xi. 13. The other Paffage he cites is from Lev. xix. 17, 18. Thou JJjalt not avenge or bear any Grudge againft the Children of thy Peo- ;ple, hut thou Jloalt love thy Neighbour as thy felf: I am the Lord. Where they are not only forbidden to avenge themfelves, but even to entl^ain a fe- cret Grudge againft their Neighbours, and are commanded to love them as themfelves. And this is inforced by this Confideration, I am the Lord, who fearch the Hearts, and know your in- ward Difpofition, and will reward and punifh you accordingly. And indeed, as God himfelf in that
I 4 • Polity,
120 Objections againji
Polity, and under that peculiar Form of Govern- ment, was regarded as in a fpecial and immediate manner their King and Judge, who perfedly knew their Hearts and moft fecret Difpofitions, fo they were taught by Mofes ftill to have a regard to God in their Obedience, and to cxpe6l Rewards and Punifhments from him, not merely according to their outward Actions, but the inward Difpo- fitions of their Minds. And as to their outward Adions, in this as well as other Conftitutions they fell under the Jurifdidlion of the Magiftrate, There ■were open Punifliments to be inflided for publick notorious Offences, and evil Pradices againft the good of the Society,
Many Inftances might be produced befides thofe now referred to, which plainly (hew, that the Law of Mofes reached not merely like the Laws of other Nations to Men's outward Actions and Behaviour in Society, but was defigned to govern and regulate their inward Affedlions. and Difpofi- tions of Soul. Thus Lev. :xix. 17. in the Words immediately preceding thofe laft cited, it is faid, Thou JJjalt ml hale ihy Brother in thine Heart : thou fball in any wife rebuke thy Neighbour \ and not fuffer Sin upon him. A mod remarkable Paffjge, the like of which Precept can fcarce be found in any other Law : It is there reckoned a hating our Brother in our Heart, if we have not fuch a re- gard for him as to put us upon tender afFedionate Admonitions, when we fee him ingaged in any wrong Pradticc. In the Precepts given the People concerning their diftributing to the Neceffities of their pooiM.nd indigent Neighbours, they are not only coi^ianded to give, but to give from a charitable Difpofition, not to be grieved when they give, Deut. xv. 10. They are commanded not only to obferve God's Statures and Judgments, but to keep thein with all their Heart, and with all their Soul, and that as they expedt that God would
blefs
the Law c/'Mofes, confiderecL I2i
blefs and favour them, fee Dent. xi. 13 — 18. xxvi. 16. The Repentance required of them is expref- fed by turning to the Lord their God idith all their Heart, and inith all their Soul, Deut. xxx. 10. iv. 29. and they are required to cirawicife the Fore^ jkin of their Heart, Deut. x. 1 6. which is explain- ed, Dent, xxx 6, by their loving God with all their Heart, and v:ith all their Soul, that they may live. Nothing can be plainer from all thefe Paf- fages, to which many more might eafily be added, than that the Law of ?^ofe5 infills "upon the Ne- ceffity of real inward Religion, and right Affec- tions and Difpofitions of Heart. And to fuch an Obedience as this it is that Life and Happinefs is there promifed. And we may therefore conclude, that under the Life there promifed, a Promife of Future Happinefs is couched and included, though not directly exprefled. The Author's Argument in this Cafe may be turned againft him, he argues that becaufe the Law had only the Sandions of temporal Profperity and Adverfity -, therefore it could only relate to outward Aftions, and not to the inward Principles and Motives of Ad:ion, -p, i-j. On the contrary, it may rcafonably be concluded, that becaufe the Law evidently reached unto, and v/as defigned to regulate the inward Principles and Difpofitions of the Heart, and indifpenfably re- quired inward vital Religion and Godlinefs, there- fore the Promifes, at leaft the general Ones, of the Lord^s being their God, &c. were underftood to extend flirther than merely to outward temporal Profperity and Adverfity -, and that under and to- gether with the Promife of temporal BlefTings, thofe of a fpiritual and eternal Nature were fignified, tho* not diredtly expreifed. And I fhall afterwards fliew that good Men under that Difpenfation all along had a view to the future Happinefs, as the Reward ^f true Religion and Righteoufnefs ; and took the promifes of temporal BleiTings not exclu-
fively
122 Objections agalnft
fively of, but as additional to, or as the Types and Pledges of the Spiritual and eternal Rewards of another World, which were all along believed among that People.
But this Writer farther objefls, That " as this " Law could only reach the outward Pradlice and " Behaviour of Men in Society, fo it was very " defedlive even in that, as providing no fufH- " cient Remedy againft. any fuch Immoralities, " ExceiTes, and Debaucheries, in which a Man *« might only, make a Fool or a Bead of himfelf, *' without diredlly hurting his Neighbour or injur- *' ingthe Society,"/?. 27. What he means by thefe ExceJJes and Debaucheries I do not well know. Adultery and Fornication are ftrongly and exprefly forbidden in the Law. And as to Drunkennefs ind Intemperance which he feems to have particularly in view, I think that Pafiage, Deut. xxix, 19, 20. fairly and ftrongly implies a Prohibition and Con- demnation of it. Where it is faid concerning the Man that bleffelh hmfelf in his Heart, faying^ I Jhall have Peace^ though I walk in the hn agination of mine Hearty to add drunkennefs to thirfl, that the Lord will not [pare him, hut the Anger of the Lord, and his Jealoufy fhallfmoke againfl that Man, and all the'Curfes that are written in this Book fhall lie upon him, &c. fb Deut. xxi. 20. When the Parents are ordered to bring a rebellious Son to be punifiied ; Drunkennefs and Gluttony are particu- larly mentioned, as the Crimes whereof he is ac- cufed before the Magiftrates •, they fhall fay unto the Elders of his C'liy,' this our Son is ftuhhorn and rebellious, be will not obey our Voice, he is a Glutton and a Drunkard : this is here reprefented as one of the worit Characters ; and then it is added, ver. 21. And all the Men of his City Jhall ftone him with Stones that he die. When the Priefts are moft ftriflly commanded to drink neither IVin^or firong Drink left they Jhould die, when they went into the 2 ^aber-
tbe Law of Moks, confidered. 123
Tabernacle, that they might pui Difference helween holy and unholy, between clean and unclean ; and that they might teach the Children of Ifrael all the Statutes which the Lord had commanded. Lev. x, 9, 10, II. Tho* the Prohibition taken in its ut- moft rigour as it extended to a total Abftinence from all Wine and ftrong Drink, only obliged them whilft they were actually miniftring in the Sandtuary -, yet the Reafon of the Command fuffi- ciently intimated the Neceffity of a conftant Sobriety and Temperance in their whole Converfation, that this was what Godexpefted and required of all, and that Drunkennefs was what he highly condemned and difapproved. The fame might be gathered from that particular Conftitution concerning the NazariteSy who being peculiarily devoted to God, were to feparate themfehes from JVine and Strong Drink during the time of their Vow, Numb. vii. 3. Which was defigned to let the People know how pleafing Sobriety and Temperance was to God, and that as they were all to be a peculiar People, holy unto the Lord, fo they fhould carefully avoid all Intemperance and Excefs.
But what this Writer feems to lay the principal Strefs upon is, " That the Obligation of the Lajv *' with refpe(5t to civil or fecial Virtus, extended *' no farther than to the Members of that Society ; " that is, to thofe who were of the natural Seed of *' Abraham, or fuch as by Profelytilm were in- *« corporated with them, and allowed to live among " them ; but tho' they were obliged to live in *' Peace and Amity with one another, or within " themfelves, yet they were put into a State of *' War with all the reft of the World. They were «' not only left at Liberty, but encouraged and " direded by Mofes himlelf, to extend their Con- «' quefts as far as they could, and to deftroy by " Fire and Sword, any or every Nation or Peo- *' pie that refifted them, and \vould not fubmit to
♦» be.
124 Ob JEC T I O N S ^^^/?2/?
*' become their Subjeifls and, Tributaries upon De- *' mand." And after mentioning their being com- manded to extirpate the Inhabitants of Canaan^ hevadds, that " with regard to their flirther Con- *' queft of other Nations, for which they were " defigned, and for which their Plan of Govern- *' ment was contrived, their Commifiion from *' Mofes was, to offer them Terms of Peace, in *' v/hich their Lives were to be fpared upon -Con- *' dition of becoming Subjeds and Tributaries to " them j and in cafe of refudil, they were to de- *' ftroy all the Males, and to take the Women " Captives, and feize upon all their Wealth, *' and proper Goods, and Cattle, as lav/ful Plun- " der, Deut. xx. lo — 18. And that thus it is " evident, that the People of Ifrael upon the very " Conftitution and fundamental Principles of Moy^j, " were not to maintain any Peace or Amity with «' any other Nation or People, but on Condition '« of fubmitting unto them, as their Subjeds, *' Slaves, and Triburaries, under fuch Terms as *' they fhould think fit to impofe," p. 28, 29. And again^. 42. he faith, that " ik/^T/^i: commands *' all Idolatry to be exterminated by Fire and ** Sword, not only in Canaan^ but in all the reft "' of the V/orld, fo far as his People ihould have " it in their Power." And p. 359. That " the *' Jewi/h State, or the Religion of Mofes was " founded in the Principles of Perfecution, in which " Idolatry was to be exterminated, and Idolaters " to be deftroyed by Fire and Sword ; and he " there obferves that the ^Profelytes of the Gate, " that were not obliged to be circumcifed, or to *' fubmit to the ceremonial Law, yet were obliged *' abfolutely to feparate themfelvcs from all Ido- " laters, or People of other Religions •, which le- *' piiration was to regard all family intercourfe of « eating and drinking together, and even Alli- '^'- ance in War, or any other Conjunflion of In-
" tereft.
the Law of Mofes, conftdered. 125
** tereft, tho' it fliould appear ever lb necefiary for " mutual Defence, and Self-Prefervation. He adds, *' that this ftricl and rigid Separation from all the ** reft of the World, and abjuring their Friend- " fiiip or Alliances as Idolaters, is fo clofely in- " terwoven with all the Laws of Mofes^ that it *' may be called the fundamental Conltitution of " that State or Body Politick. This JeimJJo Law- " giver thought that it would be impoffible to keep " Idolatry and filfe Religion out of the Society, " but by puniihing it with Death •, and that true " Religion might be promoted and fecured by " Force, p. 360, and again, -p. 373, That this " was the Nature and Genius of the Jewi/h Reli- *' gion, in which the Knowledge and Worlhip of " the only true God was to be promoted and '* fecured by Force and Perfecution, and by root-' *' ing out Idolatry, and deftroying Idolaters by Fire " and Sword.
I have put thefe feveral Paflliges together that we may collefl the Author's Sentiments on this Head, in one View, and in their full Force.
As to the firft Thing he obferves " That the *' Obligations of the Law with refpedt to civil or '* focial Virtue, ex'tended no farther than to the " Members of that Society, and that tho' they " were obliged to live in Amity with one anoJ|||;r, " yet they were put into a State of War with all " the reft of the World :" This is a very unfair Reprefentation. It muft beconfidered indeed, that the Law of Mofes, tho' of divine Inftitution and Authority, never was intended to be an iinherfal Law obligatory on all Mankind, but was pecu- liarly defigned for that one Nation, to whom it was immediately directed and publiflied -, and it was in the Nature of a fpecial Covenant between God and them. It muft be expeded therefore that diredlly, and in the firft place, it ftiould prefcribe how the Me??ihers of that Society fliould behave
among
126 Objections againfi
among themfelves ; and if it prefcribed a jufl, a friendly, and a. benevolent Condiicl in Society, this muft be owned to be highly laudable. And in this refpe6l the Laws of Mofe^ are admirable, and wonderfully fitted to engage thofe to whom it was given to all the Offices of Kindnefs, and brotherly Affection tov/ards one another. The Obligation it Jays upon them not to opprefs the Pocr, not to de- tain from the poor Debtor his Pledge, if it was any thing that was the necefiary Means of his Sub- fiftence, or maintaining his Family : The Com- mands given them to lay afide all Enmity and Re- venge, and not to bear a fecret Grudge againft their Neighbour, nor refufe Affijiance even unto their Enemies, but to be ready to do them kind Offices, Exod. xxii. 25 — 27. xxiii. 4, 5. D<?z//. xxiv. 10, 13. The Kindnefs and Equity with which they were obliged to treat their Servants, to which they are often urged by this Confideration, that they ibe7n- felves had been Servants, and Bondmen in the Land of Egypt, Exod. xxi. 26, 27. 'Deut. v. 15. xv. 12 — 15. xvi. II, 12. xxiii. 15, 16. xxiv. 14, 15. The many Precepts obliging them to pity and affiil: the Poor and Diftreffed, and to treat them not with haughty Contempt and Difdain, but with all Kindnefs and Tendernefs, and to give to them li- be||ly and without grudging. Lev. xxv. 35. Deut. XV. 7— II. The Injunftions laid upon them not to take Advantage of any Perfon*s bodily Weak- nefs and Infirmities for abufing them, not to lay a Stumbling Block before the Blind, nor to cmfe the Deaf, Lev. xix. 14. Dmt. xxvii. 18, Thele and other Precepts of "the like Nature fliew fuch an. Equity, fuch a Spirit of Tendernefs and Huma- nity in the Law of Mofes, as can fcarce be paral- lelled in any Laws that were given to any other Nation.
Nor was this to be confined merely to thofe of their own Nation or Society. They are very fre-.
quently
the Law of Mofes, confidered. i2y
quently commanded to fliew Kindnefs to Strangers, and not only not to vex and opprefs them, but to deal kindly and tenderly towards them. The Jews themfelves obferve that the Precepts prefer ibing a iuft and kind Condudl to Stransrers are inculcated one and twenty times in their Law. They are commanded to loije the Strangers as thetnfelves. Lev. xix. 34. And to love them not merely as they were incorporated into the fame Society with them- felves, as this Author reprelents ir, but to love and do good to them confidered as Strangers^ and un- der that Denomination. This is urged upon them in a pathetical Manner, both by Arguments drawn from the Example of the merciful God himfelf, ijuho lovetb the Stranger ; and becaufe they them- felves had been Strangers^ and knezv the Heart of Strangers^ Deut. x. 17, 18, 19. The Strangers are often joined with the Poor^ the JVidow^ and the Fatherlefs^ yea, and with the Levites, as Ferfons that fhould in a particular Manner be pkied and aflifted -, and whom it was a very great Wicked- nefs to vex or opprefs, Deut. xxiv. 19. Lev. xxv. ^§. Ntunh. xxvi. 11. The Gleanings of the Fields were to be left Tor them as well as the other Poor, Le'u. xix. 10. xxiii. 22. Deut. xxiv. 20, 21, 22. And agreeably to thefe Declarations of the Law, to deal hy Oppre£ion with the Stranger, and to op- prefs the Stranger wrongfully, is reprefented as a Crime and. Wickednefs of a very heinous Nature, and diofe that are guilty of it are reckoned amongffc the worft of Sinners, Ezck. xxii. 7, 29. Mai. iii. 5. I add as a Proof of the great Humanity of Mofes^s Laws, that one Defign for which the Sabbath was inftituted is there reprefented to be, that their Men Servants and Maid Servants, and the Stran'^er might reji and be refrejhed, Exod. xxiii. 12. Deut. v. 14, 15. Nor does it appear that their Kindnefs was to be confined to Strangers of any one Party or Religion. Ic is true, they were not to fuffer Stran- gers
128 Objections agamft
gers to dwell among them that openly profeiTed Idolatry, becaufe this was fas 1 (hall fhsvv) a Sub- verfion of their peculiar Conftitution. But in every other Cafe they were to allow Strangers of 'all Na- tions to live among them, and were obliged by their Law to treat them v/ith great Kindnefs and Humanity. So that this Conftitution was not on fo narrow a Foundation as the Author reprefents it. They were not to confine their Kindnefs to thofe of their own Nation or Religion, but to extend it to all that worflMpped the one true God, tho' they did not live by their Laws, nor obferve their Cuf- toms : and were far from exacting a rigid Unifor- mity of Sentiments or Practice.
This Writer indeed, to make the Molaical Coh- ftitution fcem narrower, thinks fit to repreient it thus, that their Kindnefs vjas to extend no farther than to the Memhers of their own Society^ that is, to thofe who were of the 7ialural Seed of Abraham, or fuch as by Profelyiifm were incorporated with them. But it is far from being true, that their Kindnefs was to be confined to thofe who were incorporated with them^ and made Ivlcmhers of that particular Society. This Writer himfelf elfewhere acknow- ledgeth, '« that under that Conftitution there was " room left lor all Nations to be frofelyted or na- *' turalized, widiout being circumcifed or fubmit- *' ting to the ceremonial Law," p. 359. Here indeed he fhevvs his Ignorance of the JewiJJj Con- ftitution, or elfe wilfully mifreprefents it, when 'he makes their being profelyted and their being natu- ralized to be the lame thing ; and in feveral other Parts of his Book he calls proj'elytifm^ naturalization y as if they were fynonymous Terms. But tho' the Profelytes of Juftice.^ who were circumcifed and obliged to obferve the ceremonial Law, might be properly faid to be naturalized, and incorporated with them, and to become Members of that So- ciety: The Profelytes of the Gate of whom he 2 there
the Law of Mofes, conftdered. 129
there fpeaks, could not be faid to be fo, nor were ever regarded by the Jews as incorporated with them, or Members of their Society. They ftill regarded them as Gentiles^ and were wont to call them the pom among the Gentiles. And yet all fuch Perfons of whatfoever Nation were allowed to liveamongft them, and the Law of Mofes obliged the Ifraelites to treat them with great Humanity and Benevolence, tho* they were not circumcifed, and did not fubmit to the ceremonial Law. Nor were they ever warranted by that Law to inforce the Obfervation of it by Fire and Sword, or to ufe any Methods of Violence in order to profelyte thofe of any other Nation to their Religion, or to perfecute them if they refufed to conform to their peculiar Rites. There is not any one Precept in the whole Law to this Purpofe. It is therefore a very wrong Account that he gives of the Jewi/h State or Religion of Mofes, when he reprefents it as founded in the Principles of Perfecution^ and as abfolutely inconfiftent with Toleration, Indulgence, and Liberty of Confcience, or the Rights of pri- vate Judgment.
It is true, that under that Conftitution, if any among the Ifraelites openly ferved other Gods, and endeavoured to feduce others to do fo, they were to be put to death -, and if a Town or City fell off to the open Practice of Idolatry ^ the Ringleaders were to be enquired after and punifhed with Death ; and if the Town perfifted in it after due Enquiry and Admonition it was to be deftroyed. But if we confider the peculiar Nature of that Conftitution, this may be eafily accounted for. One great Defigti for which that Polity was erefted, was to eftablilh the Worfhip of the one true God in Oppofition to Idolatry. This was not only the chief Principle of i\it\v Religion i but the principal Maxim of their State. For they were properly a Community or Body of People formed into a facred Polity under K God,
130 Objec tions againii
God, not only as the great Governor" of the World as he is to the reft of Mankind, but as in a fpecial Senfe their King and Governor, who had been pleafed to enter into a peculiar Relation to them to this Furpofe, whom they had by folemn Covenant acknowledged and recognized as fuch, and to whom they had promifed and vowed Obedience. This was the Fundamental of their Polity, the ori- ginal Contra^ upon which their State was founded. Their Poffeffion of the Land of Canaan, and all the Advantages and Privileges promifed them ab- folutely depended by Covenant upon their perfe- vering in the Worfhip of the true God. So that Idolatry or the worfhipping of other Gods befides the common Guilt, infeparable from it, as it is a very criminal Breach of the Law of Nature, was in that Conftitution an aft of Rebellion againft their rightful acknowledged Sovereign, and a diffolving the original fundamental Contra»5t that lay at the Foundation of their whole Conftitution, and by which it fubfifted. And in this View of Things, thofe that were guilty of Idolatry were to be re- garded as in the worft Senfe Trairors and Enemies to their Country, engaged in a Defign to fubvert their fundamental Conftitution, and that original Covenant on which their Prefervation as a Com- munity, and their Right to all their Privileges, and to their Country itfelf depended. And there- fore in fuch a Circumftance of Things, and in a State fo conftituted, it was far from being cruel or unjuft, or contrary to the Liberties of Mankind, or the Rights of Confcience, to punifti Idolaters with Death ; any more than it is in other Countries and States to punifti High Treafon with Death, or a Confpiracy to fubvert the State. And to have tolerated Idolatry in fuch a Conftitution, would have been as great an Abfurdity, as it would have been in any other State to tolerate the open avowed Enemies of the State, and thofe who manifeftly en- deavour to fubvert it. Nor
the Law of Moles, confidered. I3 1
Nor does it follow that therefore Idolaters are now to be punifhed with Death in Chriftian States and Commonwealths, becaufe that particular Law and Conftitution enjoining it is now no longer in Porce. 'Tis true this Writer urges, that " where- " as it has been commonly faid, that the Jewijh *' Religion and Government was a Theocracy^ and '* that no Confequence can be drawn from it, to " any other mere human Forms of Government ; ** this muft be a great Miftake. For it canfcarce- ** ly be doubred, that if God was to form any '* Scheme or Model of Government, it would be *' in all Refpe6ts the fitteft, wifeft, and bed that *' could be pitched upon, and worthy to be imi- ** tated under every other State and Conftitution. " To deny this would be to deny God's Righte« " oufnefs and fuperior Wifdom. And therefore ** he hopes the Patrons of the old Scheme of the " 7'^ic;?/6 Law and Religion, and they who would " now found ChriJUanity upon Judaifm^ v/ilj con- *< fidcr what they are about before they go much *« farther," p. 373.
It will be eafily owned that a Scheme and Mo- del of Government of God's own Appointment muft be the fitteft and wifeft, and moft worthy to be imitated in the like Circumftances and State of Things ; and confequendy it will be owned that in fuch a Polity fo circumftanced and conftitured, and of fuch a peculiar Nature as the Jewijh was, the Conftitutions of that Commonwealth which were of divine Appointment would be worthy to be imitated. But it does not follow that what God himfelf, who is certainly the beft Judge, thought fitteft and propereft in one Circumftance or State of Things, ought to be followed and imitated in every other State and Circumftance of Things ♦, or that the Laws and Conftitutions he gave as pecu- liarly adapted to fuch a Conftitution, Ihould be imitated by others, where that Conftitution with the
K z pecu-
132 Objections againfi
peculiar Reafons on which it was founded no lon- ger fubfifts. And this Author himfelf muft ac- knowledge this, fince he exprefaly faith, 'p. 207. That " what God would require at one time under «« fuch particular Relations and Circumftances, " he would not require at another time under " other Relations, and quite different or contrary " Circumftances."
But tho' Idolatry for the Reafons now men- tioned was punifhed with Death in the Land of Ijrael^ yet it is far from being true, tho' this Au- thor repeats it over and over with great Con- ^ fidence, that they were obliged by the Law to ex- tirpate Idolatry^ and deftroy Idolaters in all Nations with Fire and Sword. No fuch thing appears in the Law of Mofes. The Commands there given to deftroy Idolaters manifeftly relate to thofe among themfelves, and in their own Land that fhould worfhip other Gods •, as is evident from Dent, xiii'** Chapter. And when they are commanded to deftroy all the Monuments of Ido- latry, that alfo plainly relates to the Land of Ca- naan, as appears from all the PafTages where this is required, Exod. xxiii. 23, 24. xxxiv. 11, 13. Numb, xxxiii. 52. Deut. vii. 5 — 25. xii. i, 21. See alfo Judg. ii. 2. and there is not one Precept in the whole Law direding and encouraging theni to extirpate Idolatry, and to deftroy Idolaters in other Countries by Fire and Sword. Nor do we read of any War ever undertaken by any of the Kings of Jtidah or Ifrael beyond the Bounds of Palejiine^ merely to extirpate Idolatry and to de- ftroy Idolaters. David was the moft viftorious Prince they ever had, and was exceedingly zeal- ous againft Idolatry, and yet it doth not appear that any one of his Wars was undertaken merely for the Sake of exterminating Idolatry ; nor is it ever taken notice of that he dcftroyed the Monuments of Idolatry in thofe Countries which he fubdued,
4 hue
the Law of Mofes, conjidered, 133
but only that they became tributary to him, and brought him Gifts.
It is hard to conceive upon what Grounds this Writer could alTert as he does, chat Mofes was very confident that his People fijould have it in their Power to extend their conquering Arms, not only in Ca^ naan hut all the reji of the World. He often indeed exprefles his Confidence that they fhould conquer Canaan and deftroy the Nations there, whom God had devoted to Deftru6tion •, but he never once inti- mates any Confidence that he had concerning their obtaining an univerfal Empire. There is not the leaft Hint in all the Mofaick Writings that ever he believed or expefted any fuch thing, but a great deal to the contrary. He molt clearly and exprefsly foretels their many Calamities and Difperfions 5 that they fhould be fcattered through all Nations, not as Lords and Conquerors^ but as Captives, and under the Power of their Enemies, fee Levit. xxvi. and Deut. xxviii. and his admirable Song, Deu(. xxxii. This Author himfelf tells us, " That no- " thing has fince happened to the Jews, but what *' Mo/es himfelf had foretold. He knew from " what he had feen and experienced of them, that " after his Death they would forfake God, forfeit «< all the Favour and Protedtion of his Providence, *' and be finally deftroyed and difiblved as a Peo- " pie. And he left it upon Record againft them, " and caufed his lafl dying Words to be written " and prefcribed in the Book of the Law, p. 327, " 328." Though the Account he gives of what Mofes had experienced of them will by no means ac- count for the clear and admirable Predi6lions he ut- ters concerning the Fate of that People in fucceed- ing Ages, and the furprizing Revolutions that be- fel them ; yet it appears from the Author's own Confeffion, that Mofes did not believe and expedt that they wonld extend their Conquefts through all Nations, and fubdue them by Fire and Sword -, of K 3 which
134 Objections againjl
which yet this fame Writer tells us Mofes was very con^denL Nor is it true that he encouraged and di- reked th^m to extend their Conquefts, or that their ConjUtiition and Plan of Government was defigned and contrived for it. So far from this, that rather the whole Frame of their Government was fo contrived as to difcourage and hinder them from an ambition of enlarging their Empire. Mofes could not more efredually hinder it, than by binding them to the Obfervance of fuch Laws and Confticutions, as ren^ dered it in a great Meafure extremely difficult, if not impracticable, to make and maintain large Con- quefts abroad. The utmoft Extent of Dominion that is ever mentioned as what fhould any way, or at any time belong unto them, and which they ac- tually pofleffed in the Reign of David and Solomon^ was but of a fmall extent compared with the reft of the World, even as known in Mofes's time, viz. From the River of Egypt to Euphrates, Gen. xv. i8, but the Land that was particularly given them for a Poffeffion was very fmall, and Mofes defcribes it with great Exailnefs, and the Bounds of it, Numh. xxxiv. I — 13. Their being divided into feveral bribes, each of which were kept diftindt, and had their feveral L-ots particularly aftigned them in the Land of Canaan ; and their being forbidden ever to alienate there Inheritances there ; their having their Cities of Refuge affigned to them only within the Limits of that Land •, their being obliged to offer all their Sacrifices in that Land, and at the 'Taber- nacle or 'Temple there ; their Sabbatical Years and Jubilees^ and many other Conftitutions of a peculiar Nature, and which were confined in the original Appointment to the Land of Canaan •, all thefe Things fufficiently fliew that they were originally defigned quietly to enjoy their own Land, governed by their own Laws, without ambitioufly attempting to extend their Conquefts and difturb their Neigh- bpqrs, Nor can it be fuppofed that Mofes, who wa?
4 a very
the Lawo/Mofes, conjidered. 135
a very wife Man, much lefs that God himfelf would have ever given them fuch Lav/s and Conftitutions as thefe, if he had had it in view to encourage the People to go conquer all Nations, and extend their Empire and Religion throughout the World. Muft they attempt an univerlal or extenfive Dominion, all whole moft folemn ads of Religion and Worfhip were by the fundamental Law of their Polity to be confined to onQfmall Country ? and to one par- ticular Place there ? Muft they attempt to difturb and annoy their Neighbours merely from an ambi- tious Defirc of Empire, when all their Males were exprefsly and folemnly obliged by their Law to ap- pear three times a Year before God at the Sand:uary, and to leave their Towns and Houfes unguarded, except with Women and Children ? The fame Re- mark may be made upon that Conftitution whereby their Kings are forbidden to multiply Horfes to them- felves. Can it be fuppofed, that Mofes would have commanded this if he had defigned his People for extending their Conquefts through a great part of the World, which could fcarce be expected or at- tempted without Cavalry ? This is a plain Proof that he defigned to prevent or mortify a reftlefs Ambi- tion and Defire of Conqueft, by in a great meafure rendring them incapable of it in an ordinary way. Though if they were invaded he exhorts them not to fear the Horfes and Chariots of their Enemies, but to trufi in God-, to fhew, that they were de- figned chiefly for defending themfelves in the Land which God had given them, and not for arbitrarily offending and invading others from no other Motive or View but that of Conqueft. When Mofes pro- mifes national BlefTings and Profperity to them upon their Obedience, Levit. xxvi. Deut. xxviii. he doth not mention God's railing them to univerfal Em- pire, but that God would give them Plenty, and Peace, and Profperity, that they might dwell fafely and comfortably in their own Land 5 and
K 4 that
136 Objections againft
that they fhould be more happy and honourable than other Nations ^ and that he would give them Vidory over their Enemies that/joz^i/i rife upagainft them^ i. e. that fhould attempt to difturb and in- vade them : For that this is the meaning of that Phrafe in the facred Writings is evident from many Paflages. See particularly, DeuLxix. 11. 2 Kings xvi. 7. Pf. in. I. xvii. 7. xviii. 48. lix. i — 4. xcii. II.
Thefe Obfervations will help us to form a right Judgment of the military Laws in the xxth Chapter of Deuteronomy which the Author refers to. If we compare this with other Paffiiges of the Law, and with the whole of their Conftitution, we fhall be convinced that the Defign of that Chapter is not to dire<5t and encourage them to extend their Conquefts 'as far as they could, and to dejlroy any or every Na- tion that ivould ?iot fuhmit to become their Subjects and tributaries upon Deinand. As if they might invade whomfoever they would without Provocation, or any other Reafon than the Defue of making Con- quefls. This is never once mentioned in the whole Law as a fufficient Reafon for going to War. They are not encouraged or commanded to invade any except the devoted Nations, which was a peculiar Cafe, and in which they were only the Executioners of the juft Sentence denounced againft them by God himfelf for their execrable Wickednefs. * But there were feveral even of the neighbouring Nations whom they were exprefsly forbidden to meddle with i as the Edomites, the Amfnonites, the Moa-^ bites •, and were told that God had given thofe Na- tions the feveral Countries they pofTefTed for an In^ heritance, from which they were not to endeavour to difpoffefs them. The Ammonites and Moahites were amongft the Nations with whom they were
* Concerning the cafe of the devoted Nations, fee Anfwer Jo Chrijiianitj as old as ths Creation^ Vol. II./*. 429, i^c.
not
the Law of M.o{t^^ conftdered. 137
not to cultivate any particular Friendfhip or Amity, or to feck their Profperity, becaule of their injurious and wicked Treatment of them when they came out of Egypt ^ Deut. xxiii. 3, 4, 6. yet they were exprefsly prohibited to invade their Country, or to diltrefs them, Deut, xi. 5, 9, 15, this fufficiently fhewed that they were not cauldefly, and of their own mere Motion to invade other Nations, even though they were Idolaters^ from a mere Defire of Conqueft, and inlarging their Dominion : The Rules therefore given them for their Wars in the xxth Chapter o'i Deuteronomy^ do not relate to Wars undertaken only from a Motive of Ambition and Conqueft, but to Wars that were juft and neceflriry. And with refped to the Management of fuch Wars they are directed and encouraged in the firfl Place, not to be afraid of their Enemies in the Field, let them appear to be never io numerous and formida- ble, and better appointed for War than themfelves ; for that God would be zvith them. And then if they conquered their Enemies in battle, they are inftruc- ted how to deal with their Cities which they fhould come to befiege, ver. 10, isc. Let the Provocation given them be never fo great, and the Caufe of the War never fo juft, and though they had it in their Power to deftroy their Enemies, yet they were obliged when they came before any of their Cities firft to proclaim Peace unto them, that is, to offer to let them live quietly in the Enjoyment of their Country, and of their Goods and Pofieflions, on Condition of their becoming Subjeds and Tributa- ries to them. Thus we are told concerning the Moahites and Syrians, that they became David'i Ser- njants, and brought hi?n Gifts, 2 Sam. viii. 26. and with regard to Solomon, that he reigned over all the Kingdoms from the River, that is, Euphrates, unto the Land of the Philiftines, and to the Border of Egypt, (which was the utmoft Extent of Dominion that ever was promifed any way to belong to Abra-
ham's
138 O B /e c T I o N 8 againji
ham's Seed) they brought Prefects, andferved Solo- mon all the Days of his Life, i Kings iv. 21. and it is probable, that except the Tribute they paid they ftill continued to be governed by their own Laws and Cuftoms. Now it would be hard to Ihew the Injuftice of impofing a Tribute on a con- quered Enemy, whom they had beaten in the Field in a jLift War, and whofe Cities lurrendred to them as Conquerors. For it is plain that this is the Cafe here fappofed.
The next Direftion given them relates to a City that when fummoned by their vidlorious Arms re- futed to lurrender to them, and was taken by Af- fault. For this is the plain Meaning of it when it is laid, if it (the Ciry) will make no Peace with thee, tut will make War againji thee, then thou fl^lt befiege ii ', and when the Lord thy God hath delivered it into thine Hands, thou Jhalt [mile, &c. ver. 12, 13. Though they had refufed the firft Summons, yet if they furrendered before they were taken by Affault, and confented to the Conditions propofed to them, they were to be fpared j for though only ©ne Sum- mons or Offer of Peace is mentioned, yet no time is limited, but it is plainly intimated, that if they fliould make an Anfwer cf Peace, and open, or fur- render unto them, at any time before their City was taken by Force, their Lives were to be fpared. But- if they obftinately rejeded all Offers of Peace, and after being made to know what they were to exped: in cafe of being taken by Force, ftill refufed to fur- render, in that Cafe when Gcd delivered the City in-> to their Hands, that is, when they took it by Aflliult, (for this is the meaning of that Phrafe when applied to befieged Cities, fee Jofb. x. 30, 32.) they were allowed to kill all the Males, i. e. all that bore Arms: * As hath been ufual in the taking of
Towns
* In thofe Days all the Men were wont to fight and heat Arms in a time of War, efpecially in a City that was befieged
aud
the Law of Mofes, confidered. 139
Towns by Storm. And yet even then they were not in the Fury of an Aflault to kill Women and Chil- dren, fee ver. 14. Inftances of which there have been in many Nations, and even among the Rojnans themfelves, and that under Generals famed for their Humanity, as Sc'ipo, Germanicus, Titus, &c. See Grot, de Jure Belli i^ Pads, Lib. iii. Chap. 4. Se£i. 9. We find that in the Language of Scripture the Ruin of a City taken by Aflault is fometimes exprefled by dajhing their Children againfl the Stones \ becaufe it was but too ufual to do this on fuch Oc- cafions. If. xiii. 16, 18. Ezek. ix. 6. Hof. x. 14. xiii. 16. Nah.in. 10, iKingsvm. 12. but the 7/r^<f- lites are here abfolutely forbidden to imitate this Bar-
and affaulted. As we may fee in the Cafe of At, Jof viii. 14 — 16. and may be plainly gathered from many other Inftances, There were not properly regular Forces in Garrifon then as now, but all the Citizens were Soldiers. And on this Foundation it is that when a City was taken by AlTault, the Males and they only were fuiFered to be put to the Sword : That is, the Vigors by this Law had a Liberty given them to flay the Men, or in other Words thofe that fought againft them and refilled them. Tho* ftill this did not put it out of their Power to (hew Mercy to fuch of them as they fhould fee fit to fpare. Jofephui gives the Senfe of the Law of Mofes with regard to the Management of the War thus, that when they overcame in fight xparijo-arTEj rj? fJi'UX'^ they were to kill thofe that refilled r«? uiiTtTcilcc[A.B,u<;, the Worci properly relates to thofe that oppofed them in fight, or were in Arms againft them, and were to keep the reft alive for Tribute. And this feems to have been the real Intention of this Law, that they were to put thofe only to the Sword that refifted them, and this even in Towns taken by Storm or Aflault, when there is ufually a greater Liberty for Slaughter than in other Cafes, and againft an Enemy that had unjuftly made War upon them. And if we may credit the moft eminent 'Je'wijh Writers they thought themfelves obliged when they beileged or aftaulted a Town not to begirt it clofely on all Sides, but to leave one Side open, that luch of their Enemies as had a Mind might flee away and fave their Lives. And this Cuftom they will have to be de- rived from Mofes. So Maimonidss reprefents it. And that this was a very antient Tradition among them appears from the Tar- gum of Ben Uzzie/ in Numb. xxxi. 7. See Selden de Jure Nat. iff Gentium, Lib. vi. Chap. 1 5 . and Grot, de Jure Belli, &c. hib^ iii. Cap. 1 1. f. 14.
barity.
i4<^ Objections againji
barity. They were even in the Heat of an AfTault to fpare the Women and little Ones ; and the Word we there render little Ones, fignifies any Male or Female under twenty Years of Age. * The princi- pal Defign therefore of this Law feems to limit their Rage, and to fhew the utmoft to which they were ever to proceed in Cafes of this kind, when they took Towns by AfTault or by Storm . They were only to kill the Males, that is, thofe that bore Arms, but were not to wreck their Fury upon the young Ones, or the weaker Sex. And with refpe6t to the Males, or Men in Arms, if they had taken any of them Captives, and had fpared their Lives, this would not properly have been a Breach of this Law, which was not defigned abfolutely to bind them in all fuch Cafes to kill all the Males ; but tiot to kill any other but the Men, and fo the Jews underftood it •, who never looked upon it to be un- lawful for them in ordinary Cafes to take Men Cap- tives in War, and to fpare their Lives. And this is plainly fuppofed in the Anfwer which Eli/ha the Prophet, who very well underftood the Law, makes to the King of Ifrael, when he alked whe- ther he fhould fmite the Syrian Soldiers whom he had taken in Samaria ; 'thou jhalt not fmite them : wouldft thou fmite thofe whom thou haft ta~ ken Captive with thy Sword and with thy Bow ? 1 Kings vi. 22, -f
I would obferve by the way that with refpect to the Women that were taken Captives, the Ifraelites were not allowed by the Law to violate them. If any of them faw and liked a beautiful Captive, he
* See Schtndler in voce, ^tO.
-f- Of which Words Bert Gerfon gives this Senfe. If thou wouldft flay Perfons becaufe thou hadlt thy felf taken them Cap- tives in War, it would be a very unworthy Aftion, and it would be much more fo to flay thofe whom the blelTed God himfelf hath made thy Captives. And Jarchi explains it to the fame purpofc.
wa$
the Law of Mofes, corifidered, 141
was firft to take her to his Houfe, and allow her a Month to bewail her Father and Mother, which fhewed a great deal of Tendernefs and Humanity towards the Captive, and at the fame time gave Space for the Heat of his Paflion to abate •, and if his AfFedtion to her ftill continued, he was to marry her, and take her for his "Wife, or if he did not continue to love her, was to give her her Liberty, fee Deut. xxi. 10 — 15. This wife Conftitutioii was defigned to lay a Reftraint on their exorbitant Lufts, to which Soldiers are very prone to give a full Loofe, efpecially in a Town taken by AfTault.
And laftly, the Orders given in that xxth Chap- ter oi Deuteronomy^ ver. 19. not to dejlroy the Fruit ^rees in a Siege, becaufe they were Man's Life ; or ufeful for fuftaining Life ; and which the Hebrew Dodors juftly interpret, as extending to all things of the like Nature ; that is, not to commit needlefs cruel Waftes and Devaftations in the Enemy's Land, jfhew that Mofes was far from encouraging fuch a fierce and favage Spirit in the Management of their Wars as this Writer would have us believe.
I would only farther obferve, that whereas Mofes after giving thefe Direftions as to the Management of the War faith, Thusfhalt thou do unto all the Cities which are very far off from thee : This is not to be underftood, as this Writer would have it, as if it was defigned to encourage them to carry their con- quering Arms through all the World to the mod diftant Nations. What is meant by the Cities very far off from them Mofes himfelf explains in the fol- lowing Words ; for he immediately adds. Which are not of the Cities of thefe Nations. The latter Phrafe is evidently defigned to be explicatory of the former -, and to fhew whom they were to underftand by the Cities that were very far off from them, even all that did not properly belong to the devoted Na- tions of the Land of Canaan, And it is certain that in Scripture Language the Words far off do not al- ways
I42 Objections againfi
ways denote a great Diftance, but are fometimes ap- plied to Places that were not very remote. Thus we are told concerning the Waters oi Jordan when the Ifraelites pafied over, that they rofe upon ati heap 'Very far from the City Adam that is befide Za- retan, Jofi). iii, 16. tho' this was not many Miles off in the Plains of Jordan ; compare i Kings vii. 46, The Inhabitants of Laijh are faid to be far from the Zidonians, Judg. xviii. 7, 28. tho' they were but a Day's Journey from them, according to Jofephus. And any Stranger that is not of Ifrael is reprefented as of a far Country^ and as coming from a far Country^ Deut. xxix. 22. i Kings viii, 41. 2 Chron. vi. 32. So that the Meaning is plainly this, that they were to conform to the Direftions he had given them, in all their Wars with any other Nations but the Canaanites whom God had devoted to utter Deftrudlion.
Having confidered what the Author obje(5ts a- gainft the Law of Mofes from its Conftitutions of War, and fuppofed Intentions of univerfal Con- queft, I fhall not need to fay much to that part of his RefleflionSj where he urges it as a Proof of the Spirit of Inhumanity and Perfecution in that Law, that it obliged them abfolutely to feparate themfelves from all Idolaters, and to have no Alliances with them. He tells us, " that by the Law even the " Profelytes of the Gate who were not obliged to ** be circumcifed, yet were obliged abfolutely to *' feparate themfelves from all Idolaters, or People " of other Religions -, [fo he very candidly inter- prets it, as if to be Idolaters^ and to be People of other Religions were Terms of the fame Signifi- cation.] "And that this Separation was to regard " all Family Intercourfe, of Eating and Drinking *' together, Cohabitation, Intermarriages, Alliances «' in War, or any other Conjun6tion of Intereft, *' tho' it fhould appear ever fo neceffary for mu- *' tual Defence and Self-prefervation j and that this
«' ftria:
the Law of Mofes, confidered. 145
<« ftrid and rigid Separation from all the reft of •« the World, and abjuring their Friendfhip and *« Alliances as Idolaters, is fo clearly interwoven " with all the Laws of Mofes ^ that ic may be called ** the fundamental Conftitution of that State or Body *' politick, p. 360."
It will be eafily owned that the Jews were by their Conftitution and Peculiarities defigned to be kept a feparate People, and from confounding themfelves with other Nations ; and this was or- dered for very wife and valuable Ends, fome of which have been hinted at already. But the Pr<?/'^- I'jtes of the Gate were not bound by thofe peculiar diftindive Rites, that kept the Jews feparate from other Nations ; efpecialiy thofe that related to the Diftinftion of Meats, and to ceremonial Impurities. And whereas he tells us that the Profelytes of the Gala were obliged abfolutely to feparate from all Idola- ters, even with regard to Alliances in War, or any ether Conjun5iton of Jnterejl, tho* it fhould appear ever fo neceffary for mutual Defence and Self-Prejer- vation ; this is not true even of the Jews them- felves. They were not obliged by any Precept of that Law never to have any Alliances in War, or any other Conjun£lion of Intereft with the Heathen Na- tions, though it ftiould appear ever fo necefjary for mutual Defence and Self-Prefervation. The Precepts of the Law forbidding them to make any Covenant or League related to the Nations of Canaan, or the Inhabitants of the Land, as is evident fro:n all the Paffages where this is mentioned, fee Exod. xxiii. 32, ^^. Exod. xxxiv. 12, 15. Deut. vii. i, 2. to which may be added, Judg. ii. 2. The learned Grotius hath in a few Words fet this matter in a clear Light, de Jure Belli & Pads, Lib.u. Cap. 15. Sc^. 9. where he obferves that the Jews are no where in the Law forbidden to make Treaties of Commerce with the Pagans, or any other fuch Co- venants which tended to th? mutual Benefit of both
Parties.
J44 Objections againjl
Parties. He inftances in Solomon's League with Hiram King of Tyre^ for which he is fo far from being blamed, that it is mentioned as an inftance of the great Wifdom which the Lord had given him, 1 Kings y. 12. and before that there had been a great Friendfhip between Hiram and David, ver. i. as alfo between King David and Nahajh King of the Ammonites : And he was willing alfo to have kept up the fame friendly Intercourfe with his Son, though no Man was more zealous againft Idolatry than that Prince, fee 2 Sam. x. 2. So far is it from being true which this Writer here alledges that they were to abjure all Friend/hip and Alliances with Idolaters, and that they were not to maintain any Peace or Amity with any other Nation, or People, hut on Condition offuhmitting to them as their Suhje5ls, Slaves, and Tributaries, as he affirms, p. 29. and Grotius there obferves that the Maccabees, who were very ftridt in obferving the Law of Mofes, entered into a League with the Lacedemonians, and with the Romans, for mutual Afliftance and Defence, and that with the Confent of the Priefts and People, and even offered Sacrifices for their Profperity, I Mac. Ch. viii. and xii. As to Marriages with Idolaters the Cafe is different. This is a much nearer Union than what arifes from Treaties of Commerce, or Leagues made for mutual Defence. It depends more on a Perfon's own Choice and In" clination, whereas the other may be neceffary in certain Conjunctures and Circumftances for the pub- lick Safety. The Danger of being perverted to Idolatry is much greater in this Cafe than in the other, and of having the Children and Family bred up to Idolatry and falfe Worfhip, which every good Man would be defirous to prevent.
And accordingly, even the Chrijlian Injiitution, which is fo kind and benevolent, and every where breathes univerfal Charity and good Will towards Mankind ; yet forbids our entering into a conjugal
Relation
the Law of Mofes, confidered, 145
Relation with Idolaters and Unbelievers •, fee 2 Cor. vi. 14 — 16. So that this Part of the Mofaick Con- ftitution is far from proving, what our Author produces it for, that it was founded on the Princi- ples ot Perfecution, and on a Want of Benevolence to Mankind. It is not indeed to be wondered at that this Writer finds fault with this, who com- mends the Gnojlicks not only for marrying with Ido- laters, but for feafting with them in the Idol Tem- ples, and joining with them in all the outward A£ts of their idolatrous Worfhip, which he feems to think not only lawful but commendable, provided they (till kept from a mental Adoration of the Idol^ p. 388, 389. It will be eafily granted this never was allowed to the Jezvs, nor is it to thbfe whomi he is pleafed to call JewiJJj Chriflians, that is, to thofe that are Chriftians upon the Foot of the New Teftament, or the Religion taught by Chrift and his Apoftles, And however fuch a Conduct may be confiftent with this Man*s moral Philofophy^ yet how it can be made to confift with common Honefty I cannot fee.
CHAP. V.
The Author's Pretence that the Law o/' Mofes encou- raged human Sacrifices as the highejl A^s of Reli- gion and Devotion, when offered not to Idols, but td the true God. Such Saaifices plainly forbidden in the Laijo to be off^ered to God. His Account cf Lev. xxvii. 28, 29, confidered. 'The Argument he draws from the Law for the Redernption of the Firfi-born turned againjl him. The Cafe o/'Abra- hamV offering up his Son Ilaac confidered at large. Hu?nan Sacrifices not encouraged by this Inftance^ hut the contrary. The true State of the Cafe laid down. Abraham himfelf had full Affurance that this Command came from God. Upon what Grounds his having ha,d fucha Command from God
L is
146 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
is credible and frohahle to us. It could not he cw- ■ i7ig to the Illufwns of an evil Spirit : Nor to the Force of his own Enthufiafm. The Author's Pre- tence^ that this Instance dejlroys the Law of Nature, and leaves all to mere arbitrary JVill and Pleafure,
examined.
I
TH E Moral Philffopher has feveral other Ob- jediions againft the Law of Mofes fcattered through his Book. He would fain have it thought that that Law encourages and approves human Sa- crifices. The Author of Chriftianity as old as the Creation had laboured this Point before him, and what he otfers on this Head hath received a full Anfwer *. But thefe Gentlemen are never weary of repeating the fame Objedlions with as much Con- fidence as if not the leafl: Notice had been ever taken of them before. I'his Writer is pleafed to tell us, that, " among the Free-will Offerings offered by " the 7^'Z£;j under the Law, human Sacrifices were " looked upon as the mod efficacious and accept- " able to the Lord. And though they were not " exafted by Law" [Though if the Interpretation he pretends to give of Lev. xxviii. 28, 29. be jafi, they were exadted by Law] ^' Yet they were *■' encouraged and indulged as the richeft Do- " nations, and as the Teftimony of the moll per- " feft Religion, and higheft Degree of Love ro " God. Indeed fuch Burnt-Offerings of their Sons " and Daughters to Idols and falfe Gods were repre- **' fented as the greateft poffible Abomination : And " for the fame Reafon fuch Oblations were regarded <' as the higheft polTible Adts of Religion and De- " votion, when they were intended and given up " as Sacrifices of Atonement to the true God, *' p. 129, 130."
* See Anfwer to Chriftianity as old as the Creation, \''ol. II.
p, 468. ^ Seq.
But
by the Law of Mofes. 147
But certainly, fince there are fuch particular Di- tedtions given in the Law relating to Sacrifices, ap- pointing what things were to be offered to God, and in what Manner -, if human Sacrifices, or thd Offering of their Sons and Daughters, were there de- figned to be encouraged as the moft valuable Obla- tions, and A(5ts oj the moft perfe^i Religion, there would have been Dire£lions in the Law concerning them. And there not being the leaft Direflion there given relating to any fuch Sacrifices, when there are fuch minute and particular Dire6lions in every other kind of Oblations, is a manifeft Proof that they were never defigned to be encouraged and approved by that Law, and indeed is equivalent to an exprefs Prohibition of them under that Conftitu- tion. For they were ftri*5tly enjoined to keep clofe to the Law in their ficred Ceremonies, and not to add thereto or diminifh from it, and particularly were not fuffered to offer any other Sacrifices, or in any other Manner than was there exprefly appointed. But befides this, there is as plain a Prohibition of thofe human Sacrifices as can be defired in the Law itielf, D^i//. xii. 30, 31. In that Chapter God for- bids his People to worfhip him in the fame Manner and with the fame Rices, with which the Heathens worOiipped their Li ols. In the beginning of that Chapter, after having mentioned their worfhipping their Gods upon die high Mountains and Hills, and in the Groves, and with graven hnages, he adds, ver. 4. Thou Jhalt not do fo unto the Lord thy God ; that is, thou Ihalt not offer Sacrifices to him in the high Places and Groves as they worfliipped their Idols ; but as it follows, ver. 5. 6. Unto the Place ivhich the Lord thy God Jhall choofe, Jhall ye come, and thither /hall ye bring your Burnt-Offerings, &c. and then, ver. 30, 31. he forbids their imitating the Heathens in offering up human Sacrifices to him as they did unto their Gods. Take heed.to thy f elf that thou be not fnarcd by following them^ after that they he
L 2 deftroyed
t^S Human Sacrifices not encouraged
dejiroyed before thee^ and that thou enquire not after their Gods, fa'^ing'y how did thefe Nations ferve their Gods? evenfo will I do likewife. Thou Jhalt not do fo unto the Lord thy God : For every Abomination to the Lord which he hateth, have they done unto their Gods : For even their Sons and Daughters they have burnt in the Fire unto their Gods. It is very evident here that God plainly forbids his People not only to vi'orihip their Gods, bat to imitare them in the manner of their Worlhip. And particularly he mentions their iacrificing of their Sons and Daugh- ters to their Gods, as a Thing which was highly abominable in his Sight ; and that therefore the Ifraelites fhould not imitate this deteftable Pradlice in his Worfliip. They JJoould not do fo unto the Lord their God. And in the Words immediately follow- ing, in Oppofition to this, he charges them to o^^r^'^ to do whaifoever he covimanded them \ and forbids them to add thereto or diminiflo from it. Taking the whole Faffage together, 1 think it plainly appears from it, that by the Law of Mofcs God was fo far from encouraging the Ifraelites to offer up human Sacrifices to him, as the Heathens did to their Idols, or teaching them to regard it as the higheft pofiible Aft of Devotion when done to the true God, that he could not more ftrongly exprefs his abfolute De- teftation and Abhorrence of it.
There is no Neceflity therefore of examining the Author's Account of that Paifage, Lev. xxvii. 28, 29, which cannot admit the Interpretation he puts upon it. Indeed the Account he gives. of it, and of the Vows intended in that Chapter, is fo confufed and obfcure, that I muft confefs I do not underftand it, and it is of little Importance to feek out his Meaning. I fhall only obferve that whereas he fpeaks of two Sorts of Vows, general and fpecialy one Diitinftion betvy/een them he fuppofes to lye in this, that with* regard to the former there was a right of Redemption by the Law ; but in the latter
Cafe,
by the Law of Mofes. 149
Cafe, whatever Perfon or Thing had been thus ef- pecially vowed^ muji be dejiroyed by Fire^ and taken off from the ufe of Man as a Burnt-Offering unto th e Lord. And to this he appHes the 28th and 29th Verfes, which he renders thus : Neverthelefs nothing fepar ate from the common ufe, that a Man doth fepa- rate unto the Lord ^ of all that he hath, whether it b& Man or Beaft^ or Land of his Inheritance^ may be fold or redeemed ; for every thing fepar ate from the £ommon Ufe is holy unto the Lord : That is, accord- ing to this Author's Account of it, it 7?iuji be de- jiroyed by Fire, and taken off f-om the ufe of Man as a Burnt-Offering unto the Lord. So that if his Inter- pretation be admitted, the Field of a Man's Pof- fefllon when thus devoted to the Lord, was to be deftroyed by Fire, and taken off from the ufe of Manas a Burnt-Offering unto the Lord. And yet he that here makes the Nature of thefe fpecial Vows CO confift in this, that what was thus fpecially vowed to God was not to be redeemed, but of neceflity muft be deftroyed by Fire as a Burnt-Offering unto the Lord \ in a Page or two after declares, that tiie Thing devoted to God by this fpecial Vow became the abfolute Property of the Priefl, who jnight either facrifice it, or fell it as he thought ft \ and he thinks that if there were not as many Burnt-Offerings of the human Kind, as there might have been, it was be- caufe the Priefi had good Reafon for it., not to burn any Thing in common Cafes that would yield Money y p. 141. Thus our Moral Philofopher in his eager Zeal to expofe the Priefls Mercenarinefs, doth not reflect that he contradifts and expofcs himfelf as a captious and inconfiftent Writer.
I fhall not enter into a large Explication of that Paffage, Lev. xxvii. 28, 29. which he has fo mi- ferably mangled. It is done fully and accurately by the moft learned Mr. Selden, lib. 4. de Jure Nat. ^ Gent. cap. 6, 7, 9, 10, 11. I fliall only pbfervc briefly, that the former part of that Chap-
L 3 ter
j^o Human Sacrifices not encoura^d
ter relates to Things dedicated or conlecrated to God by a ftmple Vow, whetlier Men or Beads, or Houfes, or Lands, which might, after having been thus dedicated or confecrated, be redeemed with Money. The 28th Verfe relates to Things devoted to God by a Cherem^ (for that is the Word in the Original, different from what was ufed con- cerning the other Vows) that is, by a Vow of a peculiar Nature, accompanied with a Curfe, (for this is the proper Notation of the Word) and whatever a Man Jhould thus devote unto the Lord ef all that he had (that is, of Perfons or Things that were his own Property) whether oj Man or Beaji, or Field of his PoJJeJfion, was to be perpe- tually employed for the Ufes to which it was de- voted. The Man that gave or vowed it could never redeem it. If it was Land that was thus de- voted, it was abfolutely given to the Ufe of the Sanfluary •, if it was a Man, or a Slave, (for this is fpoken concerning fuch Men, as were their ab- folute Property, and included under that general Expreffion, all that a Man hath, that is, his pro- per Goods) he was to be perpetually employed in the Service of the Sanctuary, or for the Ufe of the Prieils : and never to be redeemed : fuch probably were the Nethinims, whom David and the Princes ^re faid to have appointed for the Service of the Levites, Ezra viii. 20 This by the unanimous Confent of all the JewiJJj Writers is all that is intended in the 28 th Verfc •, but the 29th Verfe which follows, doth not relate to Things which a Man fhould devote to facred Ufes out of what he had, that is, of his own PofiTeflion or Property, of which alone the 28th Verle is to be underftood ; but it relates to Perfons devoted to Def ruff ion by a folemn Cherem or Curfe -, as the Canaanites were by God's own Appointment, for their execra- \At Wickednefs. An Inftance of which we have \^ Jericho, Jofh. vii. 17, 18. where this Word
Qherem
by the Law o/'Mofes. 151
Cherem is feveral times made ufe of to fignify their being accurfed, or devoted to utter Deftruftion. And fuch of the Ifraelites as fell into open Idola- try, were alfo by the Appointment of the Law it- felf to be devoted to Deftrudtion. See Exod. xxii. 20. He that facrificeth unto any Godfave unto the Lord he Jhall be utterly destroyed \ or he fijoil be devoted. For the Word there ufed in the Original is precifely the fame that is ufed in the Palliige we are confidering, Lev. xxvii. 29. and is here ren- dred devoted. The Word Cherem is alfo ufed, Deut. xiii. 15. to fignify the Deflrudion of a City that revoked to Idolatry •, it was to be deflroyed as execrable and accurfed. And accordingly theSep- tuagint render the original Word which we tran- flate dejlroying it utterly., clvQ(,^iy,ot.-ri cLvx^ziiAjii-a-, ye Jhall curfe it with a Curfe. And none of thefe Perfons that were thus devoted to Deflrudion for juft Caufcs by a folemn Cherem or Curfe were to be redeemed : No Ranfom whatfoever was to be accepted for them, but they were fure to be put to Death. This is the Account the Jews themfelves give of this PafTage, Lev. xxvii. 29. and which renders it perfcdtly confiftent with other Paffages in the Law •, but certainly it cannot be underflood to relate to human Sacrifices, which, as 1 have fhewn, are no where required in the Law, yea are plainly forbidden there.
As to the Inftance o^Jephthah which he here pro- duces, whether he did indeed ficrifice his Daugh- ter unto the Lord, is a Queftion debated amongfl the mofl learned Criricks both Jews and Chrijlians ; and ftill like to be fo : tho' this Writer with his ufual Confidence very magifterially determines it, without bringing any new Light to the Queftion, except by calling the Opinion he does not Hke Pion- ftrous and ridiculous. But let us fuppofe that Jeph- thah did indeed facrifice his Daughter, it only fol- lows that he did wrong in it, thro' a miftaken
h 4 Zeal
ij;2 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
Zeal and Scrupulofity : fince, as I have Ihewn, the Law of Mofes no where allowed human Sacrifices. None of the Jews ancient or modern that ever mention this Adion of JephthaJfs approve his doing it : and if it had been approved and thought fit to be imitated, how comes it that this is the only In- ftance that can be produced, and that we have no Account of any of their mod zealous great Men or Heroes ever offering fuch human Oblations, as un- doubtedly they would have done, if fuch Obla- tions had been regarded as the moft exalted Ad:s pf Devotion, as this Author would have us be- lieve ?
The Argument he endeavours to bring from the Law for redeeming the Firji-horn may be turned againfl him, and proves the very contrary of what be produces it for. Since when God challenges every Firft-born Male of Man and Beaft to him- felf, in memorial of his flaying the Firft-born of the Egyptians^ and fparing the Jfraeliles, which was a wife Conftitution, apdy contrived to keep up a conftant Memorial of this moft extraordinary Event, and confequently of their Deliverance out of Egypt, the Remembrance of which it was of high Importance to preferve throughout all their Generations -, I fay, when he made this Conftitu- tion, he commanded the Firft-born among clean Beafts to be l^icrificed •, but with regard to the Firft-born of unclean Beafts, which were forbidden in the Law to be facrificed, and all the Firft-born among Men, they were exprefsly commanded to redeem them. A manifeft Proof, that as he would not have unclean Beafts to be facrificed, fo neither would he have any human Sacrifices to be offered to hirp. This is the plain original Law relating to that Matter, Exod. xiii. 15, 18. Yet this Wri- ter has the Confidence to tell us, that this Law concerning the Redemption of the Firft-born, which he calls a fevere Law^ whereby were enjoined fuch ■ ' ' terribk
by the Law of Mofes. 153
terrible things in Right eoufnefs^ laid them under an Obligation to facrifice their Firft-born Criildren unto God. He is pleafed indeed to allow that this Law was afterwards very much mitigated or rather repealed^ viz. upon God^s accepting all the Males of 'L.tYifor the Fir Jl -born Males of all other Tribes^ as a Ranfo7n and Redemption of their Lives and Sotils. And if we would know how far that fevere Law was mitigated or repealed, he informs us that it con- fifted in this, that God hereby re??iitted the legal Ob- ligation of human Sacrifices^ and left it to the free Choice and voluntary Oblation of his People^ whether their Burnt-Offerings of this Kind fhould be either Male or Female^ and whether it fhould be the Fir ft - lorn or not^ fee/). 137, 138. So that he fuppofcs, that before the Levites were taken inftead of the Firft-born, the Ifradites were under a legal Obli- gation to offer up all their Firft-born Male-chil- dren^ as Sacrifices or Burnt-offerings unto the Lord ; and afterwards they had the Favour done them to leave it to their Choice, not whether they fhould offer up any of their Children at all, but to offer either Males or Females., or any other of their Chil- dren, whether of the Firft-born or not.
Bat certainly an Author that is capable of writ- ing at this rate, can have little regard either to Truth or Decency, or to his own Reputation -, fincc it is impoffible he fhould not be fenfible that all this is his own Fidion, without the leaft Founda- tion in the Law itfelf to fupport it. The original Law which he refers to, Exod. xiii. is fo far from laying the Ifraelites under a legal Obligation to offer their Firft-born as Sacrifices to God, that to have done fo would have been the moft exprefs and ma- nifeft Breach of that Law, which at the fame time that it commands the Firftlings of clean Beafts to be facrificed, exprefsly commands again and again, not that the Firft-born of Men fiiould be facri- liced, but that they fhould be redeemed, fee Exod. ' xiii.
154 Human Sacrifices not encouraged
xiii. 13, 14. fee alfo Nmnh. xv\\\. 15, 16. And when God took the Levitss inftead of the Firft- born to himfelf, and declared that they fhould be his, as the Firft-born fhould have been his in whofe ftead they were taken ; this plainly fhews that as the Firftlings of clean Beafts were by virtue of their Confecration to the Lord to be ficrificed, becaufe Sacrifices of fuch Things were what the Lord ac- cepted j fothe Firft-born among Men by virtue of their being fandified to the Lord, muft have been not facrificed, but appropriated to his more imme- diate Ufe, and to the Service of the Sanduary ; be- caufe God did not accept of human Sacrifices. And accordingly it pleafed him to take the LevUes in their ftead to ferve him in his Sanftuary, whom he gave to Aaron and the Priefts to minifter unto them. This is the plain Meaning of that Tranfaftion of which we have an Account, Numb. iii. 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 41, 45. His poor playing upon the Word redeemed is too trifling and contemptible to be taken Notice of in oppofition to the evident Meaning of the Text.
The Inftance he produceth of Ahrahani's at- tempting to offer up his Son Ifaac^ is fo far from proving that God is reprefented in the Books of Mofes as approving human Sacrifices, that it rather proves the contrary : Since tho' God for the Trial of his Faith and Obedience faw fit to command him to offer up Ifaac^ yet he would not fuffer him to execute it. His forbidding him by a Voice from Heaven to lay his Hand upon his Son, fhewed that tho' he would have his Servants pay an entire Submifiion to his Authority and Will in all Things, and to be ready to renounce their deareft Interefts for his fake, yet to be worfhipped with human Sa- crifices was what he did not approve, and would not in any Cafe permit : and therefore would not fuffer it to take effed, not even in this fingle and extraordinary Inftance, tho' he could eafily have
raifecl
hy the Law of Mofes. 155
raifed Ifaac from the Dead, and have thus reftored him to his indulgent Father.
But this Cafe deferves to be more diftindlly con- fidered, efpecially as our Author here expreffeth himfelf with fuch a peculiar Air of Confidence and Triumph, as if it were a thing that could not pof- fibiy be defended. And many have taken Pleafurc in reprefenting it as abfolutely contrary to all Juf- tice and Realbn, and the Law of Nature, tho' the Scripture beftoweth high Encomiums upon it as a noble fnftance of Abraham''^ Faith and Obedience.
Our Aioral Philofopher would be thought to ftate the Queftion relating to the Cafe of Abraham with greater Exadtnefs than hath been hitherto done, and pretends that it hath been very much miftaken by thofe that have undertaken to defend it. He ac- knowledgeth, that wo doubt but every pofitive Law, of ivhat Nature or Kind foever, mitji be juft and rights fuppoftng it to be a Command from God, how unrea- fonable or unfit foever it might appear to our weaky imperfe£i and limited Underjlandings. But then he faith, the ^tejlion is, how God fhould covimand any fuch 'Things, or what Proof could be given of it if he did. A ^ejiion which our Syjlematical Divines and pofitive Law men never cared to meddle with, tho^ this is the only thing they ought to fpeak to, if they would fay any thing to the purpofe, p. 1 34.
It is not improper here to obferve, that from his own Conceflions it plainly follows, that a thing's appearing unreafonable or unfit to our Underftand- ings is not a fufficicnt Reafon for our rejeding it, if we have otherwife a fufficient Proof that this Command came from God. For in that Cafe we ought to charge the apparent Unfitnefs of it on the Weaknefs or Darknefs of our own Underftandings, and to believe that it would appear to us fit and reafonable, if we viewed it in the fame Light in which the divine Underftanding beholds it, and ^oyld take in the whole Compafs of Things, and
the
156 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
the Relation tht7 bear to the Order and Harmony of the WhoJe But then he fiiith the Queftion is, how God Jhould co?nmandJuch 'Things, or what Proof could 0? given of it if he did ? As to the Queftion, Ho^ God Jhould command fuch Thin7j^ i. e. Things that may appear unreafonahle or unfit to our weak, imperfe£f, and limited Under/landings ? the Anfwer is plain, He may command fuch Things when- ever it fo happens, that tho' thro' the Weaknefs of our Underftandings they appear unfit to us, yet in his own comprehenfive IVifdom he fees them to be fit and proper to be required of us in that Cir- cumftanceof Things ; and ;nay therefore fee Rea- ibns for laying thofe Commands upon us, which we do notatprefent fee, but fhall know afterwards. But he farther afks, if God gave fuch a Command, what Proof could be given of it ? And he parti- cularly afks, How came Abraham to know this ? I anfwer, that Abraham knew it by extraordinary Revelation^ which may be conveyed into the Mind "with fuch overpowering, irrefihible Light and Evi- dence that a Man can no more doubt of it, than of any thing that he hears or fees. Concerning which feeabove/). 12, 13, 14. where it is alfo fhewn that this Author himfelf acknowledgeth that fuch an immediate Revelation may give an AfTurance and Certainty to the Mind equal to that arifing from a Mathematical Demonftration. And particularly witii regard to this Cafe of Abraham^ I cannot but think tnc Reflecftion Maimonides makes a very juft and fenhble one : •' That we are taught by this " Hiftory that the Prophets were fully afilired of " the Truth of thofe Things which God fpake to « them, which they believed as fcrongly as things *' of Senfe : For if Abraham had in the leaft " doubted, whether this was the, Will of God or ,^^ no, he never would have confented to a Thing i«' which Nature abhorred." More Nevoch. p. 3. cap. 24.
4 It
by the Law of Moles. 1 57
It will farther confirm this if it be confidered, that this was not the firft time of God's communi- cating his Will to Abraham in a way of extraordi- nary Revelation. He had done it feveral times before, and that in fuch a manner as gave him full AfTurance that it was God that fpake to him *. In Obedience to the Will of God thus fignified he had left his own Country and Kindred, and came into a Land that he was an entire Stranger to. And when it was declared to him in the flime way of extraordinary Revelation, that he fhould have a Son by his Wife Sarah^ though he was an hundred Years old, and fhe was ninety, and had been bar- ren all her Days •, he firmly believed it, however incredible it might feem to be, becaufe he knew and was perfuaded that it was God himfelf that promifed it. And this Fromife of God, tho* con- trary to the Courfeof Nature, was exadly fulfilled. When therefore the Command came to him about facrificing his Son, it found him perfeftly well ac- quainted with the manner of God's appearing to him, and communicating his Will. And how- ever ftrange and unaccountable that Command might appear, yet he knew by undoubted Evi- dences that it was the fime God that fpake to him, and gave him this Command, that had fpoken to him on fo many Occafions before, and had entred into Covenant with him, and given him fo many Tokens of his Favour. And as his Soul was fteadily pofTefled with the moft adoring Thoughts of God's fupreme Authority and Dominion, and the moft unfliaken Perfuafion of his Power, Wif- dom, Righteoufnefs, and Goodnefs, fo he did not doubt but he had wife and glorious Ends in view in this particular extraordinary Method of Proce- dure, tho' he could not at prefent diftindly difcern
* See this well urged, Rei'elation efcarr.ifiid v:ilh Cando^srt Vol. II. DiiTeit. 8.
them i
158 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
them ', and therefore exercifed an implicit Depen- dance on the fupreme Wifdom and Goodnefs, and an entire Refignation to the divine Will. He knew what Promifes God had made to him with regard to Ifaac, and was firmly perfuaded that he would order Matters fo that they (hould all be fully ac- complifhed ; and that as he had received him from God in an extraordinary manner, and now was going to give him up to him in Obedience to his Command, fo he fhould receive him from hin) again to greater Advantage ; accounting that God was ahle to raife him from the Dead ; as the Apoftle expreffeth it, Heh. xi. 19. Confidered in this View there is nothing in Abraham''^ Condud: that is abfurd or contrary to Reafon, nothing but what is fuitable to his own amiable Charadtr, and which manifefted the moft excellent Difpofitions. And if God faw fit to take this extraordinary Me- thod to produce thofe glorious Difpoficions into a full and open Light to the View and Admiration of Angels and Men, by exercifing him with one of the greateft Trials that human Nature can un- dergo J (for what could be a greater Trial, than to command him to offer up his Son Ifaac^ who was the //<?/?" of the Pr(9w//t'j, which leemcd not only to be a lofing his moft beloved Son, but a fubverc- ing all his own Hopes and the Promifes made to him ?) I can fee nothing in this that can be prov- ed to be unworthy of the divine Wifdom and Goodnefs. The temporary Pangs and Uneafinefs this gave Abraham, wtre abundantly compenfated by the unutterable Tranfports of Joy that muft needs have overflowed his Soul, when he found his beloved Child at once rcftored to him as it were from the Dead, his Obedience fo highly approved by God himfelf, and the Promifes renewed to him in a more ample and glorious manner than before. This Triumph of his Faith in fuch an unparallel- led Trial, muft have produced a Satisfaction of
Mind
by the Law of Mofes. 159
Mind that lafted thro' his whole Life, and hath rendered him illuftrious to all Generations.
But our Author puts another Queftion, and that is, " What Proof could Abraham give that he *' had any fuch Command or Revelation from " God ? Will any of our prefent Clergy undertake *' to prove that fuch a Command from God to '* Abraham can be now credible or probable to us ? " It may be probable enough that either Abraham ** had fuch a Belief or Conceit, or that Mofes mif^ " took the Cafe. But that God in this or any *' other Cafe fliould dijjclve the Law of Nature, " and make it a Man's Duty, as a Thing morally " rea(onable and fit, to aft contrary to all the na- " tural Principles and PafTions of the human Confti- " tution, is abfolutely incredible, and cannot pofli- " bly be proved," p. 133.
I (hall firft fhew what reafonable Proof we have that Abrahajn had fuch a Command or Revelation from God -, and then anfwer the Author's Objec- tions againft it.
He grants that it is probable enough, that either Abraham had fuch a Belief or Conceit, or that Mofes miilook the Cafe. With regard to Mofes, not to in- fift at prefent on his extraordinary Infpiration, of which there is fufficient Proof, he appears to have been perfedlly well apprized of the principal Cir- cumftanccs of the Life of Abraham, their great and renowned Anceftor •, for whom they had the pro- foundeft Veneration, and the Covenant made with whom was the grand Foundation of their Hopes, He carefully records the principal Events that be- felhim, and efpecially this, which wasthemoft re- markable of them all. Mofes himfelf was far from encouraging human Oblations, which, as I have fhewn, are plainly forbidden in his Law. And it was a Thing in itfelf fo ftrange and improbable, that fuch a Man as Abraham, of great Power and Riches, renowned for his Wifdom and Probity as I well
l6o Human Sacrifices not encouragd
well as Piety towards God, who had only one Son by his beloved Wife Sarah, the Child of his Old Age on whom he had fixed all his Hopes, fliould attempt to flay him with his own Hands, and offer him up fof a Burnt- Offering, that no Reafon can be given why Mojes fliould have recorded it, if he had not been fully afllired of the Truth of the Fa6l. No doubt, Abraham himfelf gave an Account of the whole Tranfadlion, and how the Execution of it was prevented, and fo did Ifaac too, who was a competent Witnefs of it, being of fufficient Age when it happened, and who was himfelf to have been the ViSt'im. And we may juftly conclude, that there was no Particular of Abraha??i*s whole Life which was more univerfally known, and the Memory of which was more carefully preferved than this, fince it muft neceffarily have made a greater Noife than any of the reft, and was the moft extra- ordinary of them all.
But the chief Quefl:ion is ftill behind : Suppofing that Abraha?n had a Belief or Conceit (to ufe this Author's Exprefllons) that he had received fuch a Command from God, how can it he made credible or probable tons, that he really received it from God ? I anfwer, that either he received this Com- mand from God, or it was owing to the Illufions of an evil Spirit, or to the Pleat of his own cnthu- fiaftick Imagination. That it was not owing to the Illufions of an evil Spirit, is manifefl: among other Reafons from the Conclufion of it. Can it be fuppofed, that if an evil Spirit had carried him on fo far, he would have hindred him when he was on the Point of accomplifhing it .'' For it was evidently the fame Power that bid him do it, and afterwards hindred his executing his Purpofe. Be- fides, it cannot be fuppofed, that a wife and good God who had honoured Abraham with fuch extra- ordinary Manifeftations of his Favour, and Revela- Mons Oif his Will, would fuffer an evil Being fo to
per-
by the Law of Mofes. i6i
perfonate him, to give Commands to his faithful Servant in his Name, in a manner fo proper to the Deity, that Jbraham^ who had been ufed to the divine Communications, could not poiTibly diftin- guifli this Meflage of Satan from the immediate Command of God himfelf, and was thereby under a Neceffity of being deceived in a Matter of fuch vaft Importance. And indeed, if it was an evil Spirit that gave this Command, and then fo fo- lemnly renewed the Promife and Covenant made with Abraham^ it muft be fiid that it was an evil Spirit that had all along appeared to him with fuch a divine Majefty, and that took upon him the Cha- racter of God Almighty and All-fufficient, and made him fuch Promifes with regard to him and to his Seed. And if fo, then it was an evil Spirit that appeared to Mofis^ and wrought all the ftu- pendous Miracles that were done at the Eftablifh- ment of the Law ; and that infpired the Prophets under the Old Teftament, and afterwards fent Jefus Chrijl into the World, and railed him from the Dead, and confirmed the Gofpel with fuch a Series of il- luftrious Attellations. For he that did all this is the fame that all along charaflerized himfelf v/ith the Title of the God of Abraham -, and there is a conftant Reference to the Prom.ifes and Covenant made with Abraha??i, both in the Old Teftament and in the New.
But befides that it would be to the higheft de- gree abfurd to imagine, that an evil Spirit fliould carry on an uniform Dcfign to promote the Caufe of Piety, Righteoufnefs and Virtue among Men, and to deftroy his own Kingdom and Interefts -, be- fides this, I fay, to fuppofe an evil Being to have fuch an Influence, and to exert fuch amazing A6ls of Power and Majefty for fo long a Succeffion of Ages, v/ithout ever being controlled or over-ruled, is abfolutely inconfiftent with he Bdie*^ of a v/ife and good prefiding Providence. It confounds all M our
362 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
our Notions of the Deity, and introduces two ftr- preme independent Principles, or rather it leaves m good Principle at all, but makes the God that go- verns the World, and prefides over the Affairs of Men, to be an evil Being.
But if our Author will not venture to fay that it was an evil Spirit that appeared unto Abraham, and gave him this Command, it will be faid, that his believing he had a Command from God, was wholly owing to the Deception of his own Imagi- nation, and the Force of his Enthufiafm. But nei- ther can this be fupported if the Circumftances of the Cafe be confidered. Abraham believed that God had given him Ifaac in an extraordinary man- ner ; that by him he was to have the Pofterity that was to inherit the Land of Canaan ; by him he was to have that Seed in whom all the Families of the Earth were to be blejfed \ in a Word, he looked upon this Child as the Heir of all the Pro- mi fes, and of the Covenant. Thefe being his Sen- timents, and which were confirmed in him by re- peated Revelations from time to time, it could never have entred into his Mind, merely by the Force of his own Imagination, that God who had promifed all this, would require him to put Ifaac to death, in whom alone all thefe Promifes were to receive their Accomplifhment. However firong we fuppofe the Force of his Enthufiafm to be, it would never have carried him to imagine a thing contrary to all his Hopes and Expeftations, and to all the former Revelations which he believed he had received from God. It .would have produced Vifions more agreeable to his darling Hopes which he had fb long conceived, and which were fo deep- ly fixed in his Soul. But if we fhould fuppofe that he had conceived fo ftrange and wild a Fancy irr his Circumftances, as to caufe him to believe fo ftrongly, that God had given him fuch a Com- mand, how comes it that the fame heated Imagi- nation
by the Law of Mofes.' 'l6j
nation did not carry him to execute it ? Can it be imagined that the fame Pang of Enthufiafm that wrought in him fo ftrong and peremptory an Af- furance, that it was the Command of Heaven that he Ihould facrifice his Son, and that carried him to the very Point of executing it, fliould in the fame inftant make him believe that he heard a Voice from Heaven forbidding him ? This is abfolutely incon- ceivable. His flopping in fuch Circumftances, and when he was fo abiolucely poflefled with tiie Belief of a divine Command, could never be owing tq the Workings merely of his own Fancy ; and. Ihewed that neither the Beginning nor the Ending of it was owing to the mere Heat of his own Ima- gination.
Again, if all this from firft to haft was an Illuo fion of Abraham's own Imagination, and entirely owing to the Force of his Enthufiafm, then it muft be fuppofed that his other Viiions, and the Appear- ances of God to him, and the Promifes made to him were alfo nothing elfe but Workings of his own Fancy. And no doubt this Author would have it underftood fo. But we have good Evidence of the contrary. Could he by the mere Force of Enthufiafm foretel that his Pofterity fhould be in a State of Servitude and iVfilidion in a foreign Land, and at the End of 400 Years be brought out in a wonderful manner with great Subftance, and re° turn again to the Land of Canaan^ and have it given them for an Inheritance? fee Gen. xv. 13—16. Could this Enthufiafm enable him certainly to know- that his Wife Sarah who had been barren all her Days, and was then ninety Years old, fhould bear him a Child when he was an hundred ? Or if he had been fo wild as to have conceived an Exped:ation of a Thing fo abfolutely beyond the Courfe of Na- ture, could he by the mere Force of Enthufiafm have effected it ?
M 2 Add
i64 Human Sacrifices not encoiira^d
Add to this, that Abraham was a wife and excel- lent Perfon, one of the moft honoured and diftin- guifhed Charafters in all Antiquity, eminent for his Piety, Prudence, and Probity, and therefore greatly refpedled when alive, and his Memory af- terwards had in the higheft Efteem and Veneration throughout all the Eaft : whereas according to this Reprefentation he muft have been a perfect Mad- man, one of the wildeft and moft frantick Enthufi- afts that ever lived. His Faith fo much celebrated in Scripture was all Frenzy, and he believed not in God, but in the Illufions of his own heated Ima- gination. How is this confiftent with the Account given of him both in the Old Teftament and the New ? The Law^ the Prophets^ our Saviour Jefus C^rf/?, and his Apofiles all concur in giving Tefti- mony to Abraham as an illuftrious Prophet, who had immediate Communication v/ith the Deity, and to whom God was pleafed in an extraordinary Manner to reveal and make known his Will. The Reality of God's Appearances to Abraham^ of the Covenant made witii him, and the Promifes given him is every where fuppofed, and conftantly re- ferred to. It lyes at the Foundation of all fucceed- ing Kevelations. He is honoured both in the Old Teftament and in the New, v/ith the glorious Title of the Friend of God^ Ifa. xli. 8. Jam. ii. 23. Our Saviour, whenever he mentions him, does it in fuch a manner as ftiews the high Efteem he had for him ; and he pofitively declares, that Abraham faw his Day and was glad, which evidently relates to the Promife made to him, that in his Seed Jhould all the Nations of the Earth he blejfed ; which was par- ticularly renewed to him on the Occafion we have been now confidering. The Apoftle Paul, for whom this Writer profefles a great Refpeifl, frequently takes Notice of- the Promifes given by God to Abraham, and the Covenant made with him, as Things of undoubted Certainty ; he often makes '-^■A ' ^ men-
by the Law of Moies, i6jr
mention of him with the moft glorious Encomiams^ as the moft eminent Example of a noble and fteady Faith in God to all Generations, the Father of at the Faithful % and reprefents all true Chriftians as his Seed^ and blejfed together with him. And laftly, with refpeft to this particular Inftance of his of- fering to facrifice his Son, this, inftead of being re- prefented as a mad Fit of Enthufiafm only owing to the Frenzy of an over heated Imagination, is mentioned by two infpired Writers, St. Paul and St. James, as the moft illuftrious Proof of the Greatnefs of his Faith and Obedience. The Teftimony of the Apcftle Paul to this Purpofe is very remark- able,//^^. xi, 17, 18, 19. By Faith AhrsihTixn^ when be was tried ^ offered up Ifaac : a?id he that had re- ceived the Promifes offered up his only begotten Son : Of whom it was faid, "That in Kiac ^jall thy Seed he called : Accounting that God was able to raife him up even from the dead •, from whence alfo he received him in a Figure. To which may be added that of St. James, which is no lefs full and exprefs. Jam. ii. 21, 22, 2'^. Was not Abraham aur Father juftified by Works when he had offered Ifaac his Son upon the Altar ? Seeft thou how Faith wrought with his Works^ and by Works was Faith made perfect ? And the Scripture was fulfilled, which faith, Abraham be- lieved God, and it was imputed unto him for Rigb- teoufnefs, and he was called the Friend of God.
By this time this Writer may fee upon what Grounds it is credible and probable to us, thziAbra^ ham had not merely a Belief or Conceit of fuch a Thing, that is, that he was not merely a frantick Vifionary or Enthufiaft, but that he really had fuch a Command from God, which he imagines none of our prefent Clergy will undertake to prove.
But our Author has fairly let us know that what- ever Proof could be produced for it, he would have no regard to it, fince he roundly pronounces that it is impofiible to be proved. " That God in this M 3 " or
'l66 Human Sacrifices not encouraged
«« or any other Cafe fhould diflblve the Law of «« Nature, and make it a Man's Duty as a Thing «' morally reafonable and fit, to acl contrary to all <« the natural Principles and Paflions of the human " Conftitution, is abfolutely incredible, and can- «' not poflibly be proved. And upon fuch a Sup- ** pofition, I defy all the Clergy in England to *« prove that there is any fuch Thing as a Law of ^' Nature, or that any Thing can be juft or un- " juft, morally fit or unfit, antecedent to a pofitive •' Will. For upon this Principle I think it is " evident that nothing can be right or wrong, *' fit or unfit, in the Reafon of Things •, but that *' God may command the moft unfit or unrigh- " teous Things by mere arbitrary Will and Plea- " fure. A Suppofition which muft unhinge the *' whole Frame of Nature, and leave no human " Creature any Rule of Adion at all." And in his great Kindneis to the Clergy he fuppofes this to be the Reafon, viz. Becaufe it unhinges the whole Frame of Nature, and leaves Men no Rule of Ac- tion at all, this v is the Reafon that the Hierarchy *^ in all Ages and Countries have been infinitely *« fond of fuch a Notion, and have greedily fnatch'd «' at this Inftance, in order to fet afide the Law of *' Nature, and to fubftitute their own pofitive Laws *' in the room of it," />. 133, 134. By the way I would obferve, that the Apoftle Paid himfelf^ whom this Writer calls the great Freethinker of his Age^ the hold and hrave Defender of Reafon againfl Autho- rity^ p. 74. muft be involved in the fame Accufa- tion of defigning to fubvert the Law of Nature ; fince, as I havefhewn, he highly extols this Adion of Abraham as a glorious Proof of his Faith and Obedience to God. So that here we have a Speci- men of our Author's Regard for the Apoftles and for Chriftianity, of which wc fhall have many Inftances before we have done.
But
by the Law o/'Mofes. 167
But let us proceed to a more particular Confide- ration of what he offers. I will grant him, in as ftrong Terms as he pleafes, that there is a haw of Nature, that is, a Law that hath a real and juft Foundation in the very Nature of Things : and that there is right and wrong, fit and unfit in the very Nature and Reafon of Things ; that is, there is fomething in the Nature of Things that makes it fit and proper for reafonable Creatures to aft after fuch or fuch a manner, in fuch and fuch Circum- ftances and Relations. Nay farther, I will readily own that it is a part of the Law of Nature, or it is fit in the Nature of Things, that Parents (hould love their Children andcherifli them, and endeavour to preferve their Lives, and to do them good ; and that it is in the Nature of Things unfit that they fhould do them hurt, and deftroy them. But this is not to be underftood in fo extenfive a Senfe as if it admitted no Limitation, and as if in no Cafe whatfoever it could ever be lawful for Parents to put their Children to death. I fhall not infift on the Laws of feveral Nations, particularly the ancient Ro- man Laws, which gave Parents a Power ot Life and Death over their own Children -, but I believe it will fcarce be denied that Cafes may happen where it may become the Duty of a Parent, if he be at the fame time a Magiftrate, to infiifl upon his Children a capital Punifhment, if their Crimes require it. And Brutus was always admired by Kome when in its Liberty, for caufing his Sons to be fcourged and put to Death in his Sight, for endeavouring to be- tray their Country. In thefe Inftances indeed the Children are fuppofed to be criminal. But let us put the Cafe, that a Parent by giving up his own Son to Death, tho* the beft deferving in the World and chargeable with no Crime, could deliver his Coun- try from Slavery and Ruin, the very Law of Na- ture in fuch a Cafe would make it his Duty to con- trol his natural Affection to his own Offspring, and M 4 caufe
168 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
caufe it to give way to a fuperior Law, the Good of the Publick. And as the publick Good is a fuffi- cient Reafon for a Man's controlling his private Af- fed:ion, and acting contrary in fome particular In- ftances to what otherwife would be his Duty in pri- vate Relations, fo the Command ot God, when once it is fufficiently known, in what particular way foever we come to know it, is a good and valid Reafon for controlling private A ffedions and Inclinations.
This Writer himfelf feems willing to own, that in cale God fliould require fuch a thing it would be our Duty to obey, but then he denies that God can require any fuch thing. He thinks it abjoliitely in- credible that God Jhoiild in any cafe dijfolve the Law of JSlature^ and make it a Man''s Duty as a thing morally reafonahle and ft to a^ contrary to all the natural Principles and Paffons of the human Con- flitiition. But it is far from being true, that God can in no Cafe make it our Duty to ad contrary to the natural Principles and Pailions of the human Conftitution : or that his requiring this would be a diflblving the Law of Nature •, at that Rate where are all the noble Duties of Self-denial and Mortifi- cation, v/hich our Saviour fo much iniifts upon ? "When he urges it as our Duty to be ready to fcrfake Father, and Mother, and Hoitfes, and Lands, yea and our oivn Lives alfo for his Jake, and declares that he that loveth any of thefe more than him is not wor- thy of him •, is not this to oblige us in fuch parti- cular Inftances to counterad our natural Appetites and PafTions, and the deareft Inclinations and Inte- refts of the Flefh for the fake of Truth and a good Confcience .? And this is certainly an Inllance of the moil exalted Virtue that human Nature is capable of Atleaft, I believe, if the Cafe were put that a Man was to lofe his Life, his Liberty, his Wife and Children, and give them up to Death for the fake of his Country, this would be owned to be illuftrious Virtue. However, this I am furs of, that
a Man
hy the Law of Mofes. 169
a Man thi^t would have aflerred the contrary in Greece or Rome^ when Learning and Virtue flou- rifhed moft there, would have been defpifed and abhorred as the bafeft and moft abjedl of Men. And any Writer that would have maintained fuch a thing v/ould fcarce have been thought worthy to live, among them. And our Love to God ought certainly to be as ftrong in us as Love to our Coun- try^ yea, and fuperior too, fince we owe more to God than to any Man, or to all Men together. And if to control and over-rule our private natural AfFedions and Interefts in fuch Cafes be no Breach of the Law and Nature, but be rather a glorious Inftance of the moft eminent and confummate Piety and Virtue, and a fulfilling the nobleft and higheft Part of that Law, whereby ^ve are obliged to pre- fer the publick to our own private Good, and to love God above all, and yield the moft entire un- referved Subjeilion and Obedience to him -, then I cannot fee hov/ it can be thought unworthy of God, the fupreme Governor of the World, who has an abfolute Dominion over his Creatures, to lay Injunftions upon them in fome extraordinary In- ftances with this very View, to exercife and ma- nifeft this noble Difpofition, and give it an Op- portunity of exerting itfelf : ftill taking this along with us, which we may be fure will always be the Cafe, that however difficult and fhocking fuch a Trial may at prefent appear to be, yet a wife and good God will take care that it fliall be crowned in the Iffue with a proportionably higher Reward, and Ihall upon the whole turn to the Perfon's own greater Glory and Happinefs.
Of this Kind was the Command given to Aha- hara to facrifice his beloved Son. God did not command him abfolutely to hate his Son, which would have been a wrong Affedion of Mind, and fcarce poflible to be obeyed. On the contrary, the Command itfelf went upon the Suppofition of his
loving
170 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
loving him. 1'ake now thy Son^ thine only Son Ifaac, who)n thou loveji^ and offer him up^ Gen. xxii. 2. At the fame time that he Joved him fo tenderly he was to offer him up to God •, and it was becaufe he Joved him fo much that the Trial was fo great. It is evident, the proper Defign of this Command was for the Trial and Exercife of his Faith and Virtue •, for it appears from the Event that God did rot give this Command to Abraham with an Inten- tion that he fhould aflually execute it, but to give him an Opportunity of fhewing the excellent Tem- per and Difpofition of his Mind, the Strength of his Faith and Truft in God, and his entire unre- ierved Submiffion to his Authority and Will •, in a Word, to difcover that exalted Pitch of Piety and Virtue to which he had arrived •, by propofing to him one of the mod difficult and trying Inltances of Obedience that can pofTibly be conceived. And this the divine Wifdom thought fit to do, in order to exhibit a moft illuftrious Example to all fuc- ceeding Generations, of the mighty Power, and Force of divine Faith and Love, and how far we iliould carry our Submiffion to God, and our Re- fignation to his Authority and Will : That we muft be ready to exercife the moft difficult Ads of Self- denial, to which God fhall fee fit to call us, and to renounce for his Sake thofe things that are deareft to us here on Earth, and not fuffer any private Af- feftions or Interetts to come in Competition with the Duty and Subjeftion we owe to the fupreme univerfal Lord : And that we muft exercife an im- plicit Dependance on his fupreme Wifdom, and Faithfulnefs and Goodnefs, even where we do not at prefent fee the Reafons of Things, and where all Appearances feem to be contrary, and to put on a .dark and difcouraging Afpeft.
Thefe are noble Difpofitions, and fome of the
moft exalted Ad:s of Homage and Duty which a
reafonable Creature can poffibly yield to the Supreme
2 Lord
by the Lain) of Mofes. 171
Lord of the Univerfe, the greateft and the beft of Beings. And thefe are fome of the admirable Lef- fons which this Example teacheth us, and which we may fuppofe the divine Wifdom had in view, in giving fuch a Command as this to him who is honoured with the Charader of the Father of the Faithful. And the anfwering fuch valuable and ex- cellent Ends is fufficient to juftify the Wifdom and Fitnefs of this Command ; which taken in this View, appears plainly to have been defigned for promoting the univerfal Good, and for exhibiting a glorious and beautiful Exa?npie to the whole moral World.
But though for fuch wife and excellent Ends God thought fit to give fuch a Command, yet it muft ilili be remembred that he did not fufter Abraham adually to accomplifh it. He did not hinder it till the Moment of Execution, that Abrmhani's Obe- dience might more fully appear, which was as emi- nent as if he had adijally done it. But then he in- terpofed to prevent it by an extraordinary Voice from Heaven. From whence we fee the great Wifdom and Goodnefs of God •, that though he would have his Children ready to do the moft dif- ficult things when he requires them, yet he would rot fuffer any thing to be done, even in this mofl: fingular ^and extraordinary Inftance, that fhould countenance the inhuman Praftice of facrificing Children, and that fhould look like unnatural Cru- elty in his Worfliip.
And now upon the whole, the true Queflion and the only one in which we are concerned is this. Whe- ther God might not in an extraordinary Inftance take this Method of Procedure, for trying the Faith and Obedience of his Servant .'* I cannot fee any thing in this Suppofition as now ftated that is con- trary to the divine Wifdom and Goodnefs. Doth it follow that becaufe God faw fit in an extraordi- nary Inftance to give this Command to try Abra- ham,
172 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
ham^ though he did no: fulfer him to accomplifh it, that therefore there is no Law of Nature, no fuch Thing as right or wrongs jujl or unjuji, morally fit cr unfit ? It is evident there is no Confequence at all in this way of arguing. Indeed if God had pub- lifhed a general Law, declaring that it fhould be henceforth lawful for Parents to hate, hurt, and de- itroy their Offspring at Pleafure, and that they fliould be under no Obligations to love, cherilh, and provide for them ; this would be a difTolving that part of the Law of Nature. And it might juftly be concluded, that fuch a general Law as this could not poffiblyfproceed from God, or be confiit- enc with his Wilciom and Goodnefs. But it does not follow that becaufe God who is the Sovereign Lord of the Univerfe, and hath an abfolute Power over the Lives of his Creatures, may in an extraor- dinary Inft^nce, for wile Ends, command a Parent to take away the Life of his ov/n Child, that there- fore all Parents are allowed to hate and deftroy their own Offspring, and are freed from any Obligations to love and take care of them. The general Law is ftill as much in Force as before, that Parents are obliged to love and cherilh their Children, and to ufe their beft Endeavours to preferve their Lives in all Cafes, except a particular Cafe fhould happen, in which the public k Good or the exprefs Com- mand of God himfelf fhould require the contrary. And that general Law muft always neceflarily in the nature of Things be underflood with this Limi- tation ; and whenever this Limitation doth take place in any particular Inftance, it doth not at all vacate or diffolve the general Law.
Nor does it follow, as this Author fuggefts, that on this Suppofition God may command the moft unfit or unrighteous Things, by mere arbitrary Will and Pleafure -, if by unfit and unrighteous Things he means Things that are unfit and unrighteous for God to do. For the righteous God can never do a thing
that
by the haw of Mofes. 175
that is unrighteous : But then that may be fit and righteous for him to do or to require towards iiSy which it would not be fit and righteous for one Man to do or to require towards another. For it would be wrong to fuppofe that God is in all Cafes bound by our Laws. His Right and Dominion over us is of a peculiar and tranfcen- dent Nature, and not to be meafured by our fcanty Rules, buc by what is much fupcrior to them, that is, by what appears to his own infinite Mind to be, all things confidered, fit and right, and beft and pro- pereftin the whole. He, who has an abfoluce Right over our Lives and Properties, can whenever he pleafes, without Injuftice, deprive us of our worldly Subftance, or take fi^om one and give to another ; he can afflitfl us and exercife us with Troubles when- ever he fees fit for the Trial of our Patience, Sub- miflion and Refignation, yea, and can take away the Lives of the molt excellent and ufeful Perfons without Injuftice -, becaufe in this Cafe he only doeth what he hath a Right to do ; whereas in Men it would be unjuft to do fo, becaufe they have 110 Right to do it, and no fuch abfolute Dominion over one another. There are fome Things indeed which God cannot command or require of his reafonable Creatures, becaufe they have an infcparable and eternal Malignity, and can in no poflible Circum- ftances of Things ever be fit and right ; as, to com- mand a reafonable Creature to hate God, to blaf- phemc him, or renounce him, or to prefer other Things before him. There are other Things which, he cannot do, not becaufe he is tied down to the fame precife Rules that bind us, but becaufe his own fVifdo7nd.nd Goodnefs will not fuffer him to do them. Thus he cannot make an innocent Creature eternally miferable. But there is nothing to hiader but that he may make innocent Creatures undergo great Hardfliips and Afflidions, and Calamities for a time, for the Trial of their Virtue : Though in fuch 2 a Cafe
174 Human Sacrifices not encouragd
a Cafe we may juftly conclude from his Goodnefs, that he will abundantly compenfate their Sufferings by a glorious Reward. And if God Ihould in an extraordinary Inftance require a Parent to offer up his own Child, with an Intention that he fliould really execute it, which is not theprefent Cafe-, and fliould afterwards as a Reward of fo difficult and trying an Obedience, raife both Father and Son to a higher Happinefs and Felicity, which we may reafonably conclude in fuch a Cafe he would do ; I can fee nothing in fuch a Procedure that could be proved to be contrary not only to Juftice but to Goodnefs. Becaufe on fuch a Suppofition, as God would do nothing but what he hath a Right to do by virtue of his abiolute Dominion over the Lives of his Creatures, fo let the Hardfhip appear never fo great for the prefent, it is defigned to be recom- penfed by a glorious Reward for tranfcending the Greatnefs of the Trial •, and both Father and Son, inftead of having an irreparable Injury done them, would have their final and greateft Happinefs le- cured and promoted upon the whole.
Nor would it follow on this Suppofition, as the Author alledges, that God aUs hy mere arbitrary Will and Pleafure ; if by that he means unrea- fonable Will. For God hath always Realons for his own ading in every Inftance •, wife and juft Rea- fons obvious to his own infinite Underftanding, tho* thefe Reafons are not always known to us. And particularly in Abraham's Cafe, God did not a6l by mere arbitrary Will, but for wife Reafons, fomeof which have been already reprefented.
As to what he adds, that it would unhinge the whole Frame of Nature, and leave no huinan Crea- ture any Rule of A^ion at all, there is no juft Foun- dation for this Refledion. It makes no alteration in the general Laws of Nature, or in the Rules of Men's Condu6t towards one another, or in the Fit- nels or Unfitnefs of the Duties that refult from fuch or
fuch
by the Law of Mofes. 17 r
fuch Relations. . The Obligations of the paternal and filial Relation are no way altered by it, but are ftill as flrong as ever. All that can be concluded from it is, that though we are to love our Children or Parents, we are to love God more, and that we muft yield an abfolute unreferved Submiffion to the Supreme Being, and make all private AfFedtions and Intereft give way, whenever they happen to come in Competition with the Duty we owe to him. And this is no new Law, but is properly an emi- nent Branch of the Law of Nature, of immutable Obligation, and which is neceflarily founded in the Nature and Reafon of Things, and the Relations between God and us. It can never pofTibly ceafe to oblige us in any one particular Inftance -, whereas the Law of our particular Relations may in fome particular extraordinary Cafes or Circumftances ceafe to oblige, or give way to higher Obligations, then and there incumbent upon us.
Thus I have largely confidered the Cafe of Abra- ham^ becaufe this Writer is pleafed to lay fo mighty a Strefs upon it, and becaufe the Authority and Credit of the facred Writings is very nearly con^ cerned in it, in which Abraham^ Faith and Obe- dience in this Inftance is highly commended.
CHAP. yi.
li'he Moral Philofopher* s Account of the Original of Sa- crifices and of the Priefihood, and of Jofeph'j firll efiablijhing an independent Priefibood in Egypt. ^he Reprejentation he makes of the Mofaical Priefi- bood confidered. The Priefls bad not the Goverfi- ment oj the Nation vefted in them by that Conflitu- tion, nor were tbey exeinpted from the Jurifdi5tion of the Law, nor had an Interefl fepar ate from and inconfiftent with the State. Concerning the Church- Revenues efablifJjed by the Law of Mofes. The particular Marnier of providing for the Mainte- nance
iy6 Other Objections againjl
nance of the Priefis and LevHes accounted for. 'The Author's Pretence^ that it was an infufferahle Burden and hnpoiseriffDment to the People^ and the Caife of their frequent Revoltings to Idolatry, exa- mined. Some Obfervations concerning the Sacrifices prefcribed under the Mofaical Oeconomy. The Author^ s Objeolions againji them confdered. No Sacrifices were to he offered in Cafes where civil Penalties were exprefsly appointed by Law, and why. 'The atoning Virtue of the Sacrifices fuppofed to confijl in the fprinkling of the Blood. ThisfJoewn not to be a priejlly Cheat, but appointed for wife Reafons.
I Now return to our Author's Obje6lions againft the Law of Mofes. He frequently fliews how angry he is with the Conftitutions there made about the Priefthood. And this feems to be one principal Reafon of the ftrange Virulence he every where expreffes againft that Law.
It is fcarce worth while to take notice of the Ac- count he pretends to give of the Original of the priefthood and Sacrifices, which hath nothing but his own Authority to fupport it. He reprefents Sacrifi- ces as having been originally nothing but Feafts of goodFellowdiip, p.237. Though how this will agree to Holocaufts or whole Burnt-Offerings, which ieem to have been the moft anrient Oblitions, fee Gen. viii. 20. XV. 9, 10, i^c. Jobi. 5. xlii. 8. * in which
the
* In one of the PaiTages here referred to Job i. 5. it appears that yob from an Apprehenfion, that his Children had finned in their Feafiings together, rofe tip early in the Morning, and offered Burnt-offerings accorditig to the Number of them all. Where there is a plain Dillinftion made between Feaiiing and Sacrificing. For I fuppofe theSenfe of thePaifage will hardly be thought to be this. That Job rofe up early in the Morning, and feajlediox his Chil- dren to make an Atonement for the Sins they had been guilty of in their Feajls. It is true, that befidcs Burnt-OfFcrings in which the whole was confumed, there were Sacrifices appointed in the Law of Mofes, and probably had been in ufe before, in which as
part
the Law of Mofes, conjid'ered. i^'j
the whole was biirnt and confumed to the Honour of God, and no part of it left to the Offerer, is hard to fee. But our Author's Dcfign in this feems purely to be to bring in the Priefts for the Honour of being the chief Butlers^ Bakers^ Butchers^ and Cooks, in thefe Feafts, for fo he reprefents them. And I fuppofe he will allow the fame Honour to the Princes, Patriarchs, and great Men, whilft they continued to manage the Sacrifices in Perfon, as he owns they at firft did. His Account of the Egyp- tian Priefthood, and of 7^o/^/)i?'s ereding them into an Independency on the Crown, though he pretends to give it us for Hiftory, is purely of his own Ima- gination. He" would have it thought, that Jofeph having married the High Prielt's Daughter, by his Intereft obtained a Grant from the King to render their Lands unalienable ; becaufe it is faid their Land became not Pharaoh's, when the reft of the Land o^ Egypt became his, p. 239. But it is evi- dent from the Story he himfelf refers to, that this was owing to their not being under a Neceflity to fell their Lands to him as the other Egyptians did, to procure Corn for themfelves and their Families, as having their Portion of Meat alligned them from Pharaoh. And the fending them this Allowance is reprefented as the Aft not of Jofeph, but of Pharaoh himfelf •, who in this probably followed an antient Cuftom, fee Gen. xlvii. 22 — 26. As to Jofeph's marrying the High P-rieft**s Daughter, for fo our Author has it, (though Potipherah, whofe Daugh- ter he married, is not called the HighPriefi but the Prieft of On) : This inftead of proving that the Priefts owed all their Dignity to Jofeph, plainly
part of the Viftim was confumed upon the Altar, fo part of it was referved for the Offerer to feaft upon. But in this Cafe it was not the Feaft that was properly the Sacrifice. That which deno- minated it a Sacrifice was its being offered to God, and the Blood fprinkled upon or towards the Altar, and in this tlie EfTence of the Sacrifice, and its expiatory Virtue was fuppofed principally toconfiil, concerning which fee below, p. 198.
N Ihews
178 Other Objections againft
fhews that they were Perfons of great Eminence be- fore, fince when Pharaoh was doing Jofeph the greateft Honour, and made him next to himfelf in Power and Dignity, and Ruler over all the Land of Egypt ^ he gave him a Prieft's Daughter to Wife. For this Marriage was evidently of Pharaoh's, own procuring, Gen. xli. 45. And it appeareth from the moft antient Accounts we have of the Egyptians^ that their Priefts were Men of great Dignity and Authority, and probably took in all the prime No- bility, and Heads of the moft antient and honour- able Families. Concerning which fee Shuckford's facred and profane Hiftory, Vol. II. p. 120, &c.
I fhall proceed to confider the Account he gives of the Priefthood under the Mofaical Conftitution. He tells us, p. 26. That *' Mofes conftituted a " Priefthood, which was to govern the Nation as " Prime Minifters, Reprefentatives, and Vicege- " rents of God, and to drain all the Wealth and " Treafures of the Kingdom into the Church, as *' they muft neceflarily have done had his Law " been ftridlly executed, p. 42. and that the Tribe *' of Levi did not make a fixtieth part of the whole " Body, and yet it would be eafy to prove that the " Church Revenues under this Government amount- *' ed to full twenty Shillings in the Pound upon all *' the Lands of Ifrael." And then he puts a Quef- tion, which would be very proper if the Matter was as he reprefents if, * ' How came the People to be reconciled to this ?" To which he anfwers in fhort, that they were never reconciled to it at all. Their national eftablilhed Worfhip was fo prodigioufly expenfive, and their Clergy of Priefts, and Le- vices, fuch abfolute Mafters of their Property, that they took all Occafions to revolt, and were glad to ferve any other Gods that would accept them upon eafjer Terms, p. 128, 129. He af- firms, that the Levites, though Servants in the Temple, were Courtiers with the King's Livery,
'' and
the Law of Mofes, conjidered. iy()
<* and had greater Rights and Immunities than ** any Prince or firft Magiftrate of another Tribe. " Levi was a Tribe exempted from the Jurifdidion *« of the Law and protected againft it, as plainly <« appears from the Inftance of the drunken Levite " and his Concubine, p. 141. and he repeats it again in the next Page, that <•♦ this Inftance plainly " fhews, that there was no Law for Priefts and " Levites at that Time •, " he goes on to fay, p. 142. That " under the Lawof^oy^j the Priefts »' had an Intereft feparate from and inconfiftent " with the Intereft of the State or Society, and that " he looks upon this to be the true State of the " Cafe under theMofaical Oeconomy, and by the " eflential Conftitution of that Law."
That the Priefthood had the Government of the Nation in their Hands according to the Mofaick Inftitution, as this Author fuggefts, is far from be- ing true. Mofes had the chief Government in his own Hands during his Life time, while Aaron was High Prieft : And he did not veft the Government after his Deceafe in Eleazar the High Prieft, but appointed Joy^^^i^, who was not of the Tribe o^Levi^ to fucceed him in the Government of the People. Afterwards, when the Nation was governed by Judges for fome hundreds of Years, in whom the fupre me Power refidcd, they were taken indifferently out of every Tribe, as it pleafed God to appoint ; but not one of them was the High Prieft, nor of the prieftly Order, or of the Tribe of Levi^, till Eli and Samuel the laft of the Judges. They were afterwards governed by Kings till the Bahylonijb Captivity, who had it in their Power to depofe the High Prieft, as Solo?non did Ahiathar. In a Word, the judging and governing the People is never once mentioned in the Law, as properly belonging to the High Prieft's Office.
The inferior Judges that were appointed by Mofes to judge the People, Exod. xviii. 20, 21. Deut. i.
N 2 i3»
1 8o Other Objections againji
13, 15. and afterwards the feventy Elders^ whom God appointed to afllft Mofes in the greater and more difficult Caufes, which the inferior Judges were not able to decide, were chofen out of all the Tribes, and not that of Levi only, Numb. xi. 16, 17, 25. and it is agreed by all the Jews that the great Sanhedrim or Council, the Supreme Court of Judicature, of whofe Power they fay fuch great things, confifted not merely o^ Priejis and Leviies^ but of any other Perfons of other Tribes that were qualified by their Knowledge of the Law •, and Maimonides faith, " that even if there was not one " Prieft or Levite there, it was a lawful Judicatory, *' and that the High Prieft did not fit there merely " by virtue of his Place or Birth, except his Know- " ledge in the Law was fuch as fitted him for it.'* Concerning this, fee Selden de Synedr. Lib. ii. Cap. 18. §. I.
And whereas this \Vriter pretends, that even the Levites, though Servants in the 'Temple^ had greater Rights and Immunities than any Prince or firft Ma- gift rate of another Tribe ; and that Levi was a Tribe exempted from the Jurifdi5lion of the Law and pro- te5led againft it ; this is entirely falfe, there are no fuch Immunities;, or Exemptions from the Jurifdic- tion of the Law allowed to Priefts and Levites by the Mofaical Conftitution. The Judges are com- manded to judge all Perfons and Caufes without refpeft of Perfons, and to take Criminals even from the Altar, Exod. xxi. 14. If a Man come -pre jump- tuoufty upon his Neighbour to fay him with Guile^ thou fhalt take him from mine Altar., that he may die \ that is, as the moft eminent Jewifh Authors inter- pret it, though he were a Prieft and were then mi- niftring at the Altar, ready to facrifice, he was to be taken thence : And the Jerufalem Targum ex- prefsly faith, although it were the High Prieft that was then miniftring, they were to take him frotn the Altar and put him to death. And fo far is it
from
fbe Law of MofcSy conjidered. i5i
from being true, that the whole Hr'ibe of Levi was exempted from the Jurifdiftion of the Law, that it is agreed amongft the Jews^ that even the High Prieft himfelf as well as others was fubjeft to the Jurif- didtion even of the lefler Courts -, yea, to the leaft of them ail, the Tribunal of Three, in Caufes that came, before thofe Courts : And that whether he committed any thing againft the Affirmative or Ne- gative Precepts of the Law, he was accounted as one of the common People •, and that in every Caufe belonging to him. So the Gemara Babylon. Tit. Sanhedr. -^ See all this fully fhewn by the moft learned Author above cited de Synedr. Lib. ii. Cap. 8. §..!,. 3. and Cap. x. §. 6. The Proof this Writer pretends to bring from the Cafe of the Le* vice anc5 his Concubine is ridiculous. What the Levite had done contrary to Law, or wherein he was proteded againft the Jurifdidion of the L-aw is hard to know. But I fuppofe becaufe he was a Levite, our Author thinks that not only his Wife fhould be abufed and murdered with Impunity, but he ought to have been punifhed for complaining of it. Not thofe that did the Outrage were to be called to an Account for it, but the poor Levite that fut- fered it. This is the Immunity he feenjs willing to give the Levites, an Immunity from having common Juftice done them, and the Privilege of being injured and outraged with Impunity.
'Tis in the fame Strain of Mifreprefentation he concludes, that under the Law of Mofes the Priefts bad an Interejl feparate from andinconftjlent with the Interest of the State or Society •, and that he looks upon this to be the true State of the Cafe under the Mofaick 0 economy^ and by the effential Conftitution of that Law. Under that Oeconomy, as I have alrea- dy obferved, there were no proper ecdeftafiical Im- munities, if by thefe be meant the Priefts being ex- empted from the Jurifdidion of the Law, and from feeing fudged in the common Courts in all Caufes
N 3 . equally
j82 Other Objections againjl
equally with others. Nor were there any fuch things ftridly fpeaking as purely e c cleft ajlical Ju- dicatories under that Conftitution. Thofe of other Tribes joined with the Levites in the Judicatories, and even in the greateft of all, the Sanhedrim itfelf, to which the ultimate Appeal lay in all Caufes eccle- fiaftical as well as civil; as Selden fhews in the Place above quoted. So that the Priefts were not a Body feparate from and independent of the State, but incorporated with it ; except that the peculiar Duties of their Office, as the offering up of Sacri- fices, officiating at the Tabernacle or Temple, ^c. ■ were to be done by none but themfelves. Upon the whole, there was by the effential Conftituiion of that Law of Harmony between the civil and eccle- fmflical Powers, and accordingly under their bed Kings and Governors, when their Law was moft ftriftly obferved, and in the moft flouriffiingTimes of their State, we find them contributing mutual Affiftance and Support to one another.
As to their Church Revenues, if he could prove, as he fays he eafily could, that they had full twenty Shillings in the Pound upon all the Lands of Ifrael, he might juftly fay that they drained all the Trea- fures of the Kingdom into the Church. But fuch a wild Affertion as this deferves no Anfwer, and only fliews that this Writer throws out any thing at ran- dom, by which he may vent his Spleen againft the Priefts, without being at all folicitous whether it be agreeable to Truth or Decency.
He remarks, that the Tribe of Levi was hut a fixtieth part of the. People ; and it will be eafily granted that when they were firft numbred in the Wildernefs they were but few in Proportion to the reft of the People •, but as the Nation was divided into a certain Number of Tribes, and the Levites were one whole Tribe, it was but juft that in the general Divifion they fhould be cpnfidered and pro- vided for as fuch ; and that when the Method of
their
the Law of Moks, conjidered. 183
their Subfiftence and Maintenance was fettled for all iiicceeding Generations, Regard fhould be had not only to their prefent Number, which then happened to be far fmaller than that of any other Tribe, but to what it might prove afterwards : For the Num- bers of Perfons in the fame Tribe often differed mightly at different Times •, and particularly in the Tribe of Levi we find it fometimes bearing a much greater Proportion to the Number of the People, than it did at their being firft numbred in the Wil- dernefs.
But methinks this Writer, who feems to have fuch frightful Notions of a landed Clergy^ and who makes their having a large Share of unalienable Lands vefted in them, the chief Source of the great Afcendant they obtained both- over Kings and Peo- ple, fhould have more favourable Thoughts of the Priefthood eftablifhed by the Mofaick Conftitution, fince they were fo far from having a third part of the Lands of Canaan in their Poffeffion, as Diodorus tells us, * the Priefts had a third of the whole La7id of Egypt, that they had not properly fpeaking any Lands fettled upon them at all by the original Con- ftitution of that Law, except that there were Cities afligned them in the feveral Tribes to dwell in with Lands round them, which were not to extend to above a thoufand Cubits, for their Accommodation in their Dwellings. But the Tribe of Levi had no Inheritance in the Land affigned them, when the reft of the Tribes had theirs. This is often repeated in the Law, and that it fhould be a Statute forever throughout their Generations^ Numb, xviii. 20, 23, 24. Deut. X. 9. If therefore there had not been a liberal Provifion made for them otherwife, their Condition would have been much worfe than any of the other Tribes, which God did not think fit to fuffer, as they were more immediately to attend his
* Diod. Sicul. Lib. i.
N 4 Service
[148 Other Objec tions againfi
Service in the 'Tabernacle or Temple -, and were de- figned to teach and inftru6t the People. For that this whole Tribe was particularly defigned to in- ftrudl the People in the Law, is evident from many Paflages, particularly Lev.x. 2. DeuL xxxiii. 10. 2 Chron. xvii. 7, 8. xxx. 22, Neh. viii. 7, 9. Mai. ii. 4 — 7. And to engage them to be more di- ligent and careful in inftrufting the People in the right Knowledge of the Law, may be probably fuppofed to have been one Reafon of tlie particular manner of their Maintenance prefcribed under that Conftitution. For it is evident that the Subfiften-ce of the LevUes, but efpecially of the Priejls, very much depended on the People's clofe Obfervance of the Law oi Mofes^ without a pretty good Acquain- tance with which, tl'key could not be fo exad: in bringing the Oblations in the feveral Cafes and Oc- cafions there prefcribed. So that this made it to be the Intereft of the Priejls and Levites themfelves, that the People fhould not be ignorant of that Law. It alfo tended to make them more diligent in their own Offices, and in obferving the Laws and Con- Ititutions of the publlck Worfhip at the Tabernacle or Temple, from which their Subfiftence in a great Meafure arofe. And befides, in this Method of pro-r aiding for them the People had a better Opportu- nity given them of fhewing their Rcadinefs and good Will, than if they had had large independent Settlements in Land: And indeed Philo * tells us, concerning many of the Jews in his time, fpeaking of the Firft-Fruits, 6?c. belonging to the Priefts, that they prevented the demanding of ihem^ and paid them even before they were due, and as if they had rather been receiving a Benefit than giving any ; and that both Sexes brought them in withfuch a Readinefs nnd Alacrity, and jludious Zeal, as is beyond Ex- 'prejfion.
* Cited by ^tlden» Hiilory of Tithes. Re'view, Chap. ii.
It
the Law of Mofes, conjidered, 1S5
It comes in very properly to be obferved here, that feveral things which are looked upon as mightily contributing to promote the Power and Wealth of the Priefts, had no place at all .in the Mofaick Conftitution. This Writer obferves that, when once the Egyptian Priefts had obtained fuch an Afcendant in that Country, Egypt became the Pa- rent and Patrotiefs of new Gods , for every new God brought a new Revenue to the Priefts. And it is ob- ferved by a noble Writer, that in the early Days of this an dent prieflly Nation, it was thought expedient for the Increafe of Devotion, to enlarge their Syfiems of Deity, and to multiply their revealed Obje5ls of Wor- ' Jhip, and raife new Perfonages of Divinity in their Religion. And he fuppofes the vaft number of their Gods and of their Temples in Egypt to be the Contrivance of their Prieits for the Increafe of their own Power and Riches. And among the many Methods for advancing the Interefts of the Prieft- hood, he particularly reckons the having new Modes of Worfhip, new Heroes, Saints, Divinities, which ferve as new Occafions for facred Donatives *. Now it is undeniably evident that there was no Place for any of thefe things in the Law of Mofes : No new Modes of Worfjip, no new Divinities allowed, no Worfliip of Saints and Heroes, no Variety of Tem- ples. As there was but one God to be worlhipped, the only living and true God, fo there was but one Sanduary or Temple allowed at which all their Sa^ crifices were to be offered. So that many of thefe things, which are reprefented as mighty Sources of prieftly Wealth and Power, were not at all admitted under that Conftitution,
But yet as it pleafed God for wife Ends to choofe out a Nation to himfelf to be ereded into a peculiar Polity, whofe very Conftitution was founded in the Acknowledgment and Worlhip of the one true
« Charafterifticks, Fo^. Ill, f. 43, 44, 49, 50.
Godi
i68 OfherOBjEcr I on sagainji
God, at the fame time that the whole World about them was overfpread with Idolatry ; and as it pleafed him to appoint that there (hould be a great deal o^ pompous Ceremony in his Worfhip ; with- out which, as the Temper of the World was, it would probably have been neglefted and difregard- ed, and the People apt to revolt to the pompous and fplendid Idolatries of their neighbouring Coun- tries : fo he faw it fit that thofe that were to be em- ployed as Priefts and Minifters in his immediate Worlhip and Service, fhould be handfomely pro- vided for ; without which, in thofe Circumftances of things, they would have been in Danger of falling into Contempt, and have lain under a greater Temp- tation to ict about inventing new Modes of Wor- lhip, new Temples, Deities, and Altars. 'Tis certain that in all other Countries in thofe early Ages the Perfons officiating in the facred Rites and Ceremonies were of confiderable Rank and Figure -, and it did not feem fit that among that People, which above all others peculiarly made Profeffion of wor- fhipping the one true God, thofe, that were fet apart to the immediate Service and Worfhip of the God of Heaven and Earth, fhould be in a mean and indigent Condition.
But tho' the Provifion made for the Priefls and Levites by 'Tithes, Firjl-Fruits^ Oblations and other Dues fettled on them by that Law, was fufficient to give them a handfome Subfiftence-, fuppofing them regularly .paid * ; yet it has been greatly magnified by fome, tho' never fo unreafonably by any as by
* Yet it muft be owned", that this Method of Maintenance, the' chofen, as I have already hinted, for wife Ends, was much more precarious than if they had had rich independent Revenues irt Land fettled on them. And tho' many of the People, and the befl of them, rendered thofe Dues chearfully, yet no doubt they often fufFered thro' the Ill-will or Avarice of others : and to make amends for what they mufl: almoft unavoidably fufFer in this way, we may well fuppofe to be one Reafon why their ■411owance was made large, and to arife from various Things. _
this
the Law of Moks, con/idered, 187
this Author ; and to fwell the Account, they have thrown in the fecond 'Tithe, as if this alfo belonged peculiarly to the Levites •, and yet by the exprefs Diredlion of the Law it was to be fpent by the Owners in entertaining themfelves, and their Houf- holds, their Men-fervants and Maid-fervants, that they might all rejoice together in the Place which the Lord Ihould choofe. Therefore it is ufually called by the Jews the Owner* s 'Tithe ; and the Levites were admitted to partake of thefe Entertainments. And every third Year it was to be fpent at their own Places of Abode, and more peculiarly defigned for the Entertainment and Benefit of the Poor, the Stranger, the JVidow, and the Fatherlefs. And this is ufually called by the Jews the -poor Man^s Tithe. Thefe Things were defigned under that Conftitution for maintaining and enlarging mutual Benevolence, and brotherly Love and Charity. And notwithftanding the Complaints this Writer makes of the Impoverifhment and infufi^erable Bur- dens laid upon that People, yet in Fa6t it appears from the whole Hiftory of their Nation, that they were never fo happy and flourifhing at' home, and fo much refpedled abroad, as when they kept clofe to the Obfervance of their Law. Their chearful Obedience was fully Compenfated by Bleffings pour- ed forth upon them in great Abundance, as it had been exprefly promifed them in that Covenant. *Tis certain their greateft and beft Men always regarded the Law of Mo/es as their fpecial Privi- lege and Advantage, whereby they were glorioufly diftinguifhed above other Nations, which they would never have done if they had looked upon it to have been fuch a miferable, inflaving, impoverifliing Conftitution as this Author reprefents it. Nor do I find they made any grievous Complaints about the Maintenance provided for the Priefts and Le- vites. Solomon, who was a very wife Man and a great King, gives it as his Advice, Prov, iii. 9, 10. 3 Honour.
i88 Other Objections againjl
Honour the Lord with thy Suhjiance, and with the Firji- Fruits of thine Increafe [which were appointed by the Law to be given to the VntVi.^] fo Jhall thy Barns be filled with Plenty^ and thy Prejfes Jhall hurji with new Wine. From whence it appears, that he was far from being of Opinion that they would be impoverifhed and ruined, by what they liberally and chearfully expended in Obedience to the Law. And the Author of Ecclefiajlicus^ . of whofe Wifdoni this Writer feems to exprefs a good Opinion, ;p. 418. advifeth to honour the Priefl^ and give hi?n his Portion, as it is co?nmanded, the Firji-Fruits^ and the 1'refpafs-Offeringy &"c. Chap. vii. 31.
Our Author indeed takes upon him to pronounce that the Jews were never reconciled to this at all •, and he is pleafed to charge all their Idolatries to the Account of it. '• Their national eftabliftied Wor- *-s Ihip was fo prodigioufly expenfrve, and their «' Clergy or Priefts and Levites, fuch abfolute *' Matters of their Property [one would think by his Reprefentation, that they had all the l^ands of Ifrael in their PofTefTion] " that they took all «' Occafions to revolt, and were glad to ferve any *' other Gods that would accept them upon eafier ^' Terms." Thus he hath found out a good Ex- cufe for the frequent Idolatries of the Jews. At other times he charges this Conduft on the grofs Stupidity, and conjiitutional national Blindnefs of that wretched Egyptianized People: But here he 'is pleafed to pity the poor People, and lays, the Blame of all upon their Law, which laid fuch a Burden upon them, that it was impoflible for tliem to live under it. There is as much Foundation for this as for many others of this Author's Refledions. But how comes it that the Jews themfelves never pre- tended this as a Reafijn, or at leaft an Excufe for their Revolts.-* The Truth is, if this was the Rea- fon of their going over to the idolatrous Wor- ^ip of the neighbouring Nations, they would noj;
have
the Law of Mofes, conjidered. 189
have gained much by the Change. The Priefts in other Countries were of great Power and Influence, and it appears by the moft ancient Accounts, that the publick Worfliip and Ceremonies of Religion were vaftly expenfive, and their Sacrifices fuch as could not be maintained and performed but at a very great Charge*. And befides, we find the "Jeiiji in their moft degenerate Times were often wil- ling enough to offer Multitudes of Sacrifices to the Lord, and to other Gods too -, which one fhould think would rather have added to their Expences than diminiflied them. The Truth of the Matter is, it was not their being opprefled by the Priefts, and reduced to Poverty by the Expenfivenefs of their Publick Worfhip that drove them into Idolatry : but it was ufually in a time of Peace and Plenty, and when they began to grow rich that they forgot the Lord, fee Deut. xxxi. 20, 21. xxxii. 15. This brought on a Corruption and Diflblutenefs of Man- ners, which produced a Negledl of Religion, and a Conformity to the idolatrous Cuftoms of the neighbouring Nations. Nor need we go any far- ther to account for this, than the Corruption of the human Nature, and that ftrange Pronenefs that hath appeared in Mankind in all Ages fthe wifeft Na- tions not excepted) to Superftition and falfe Wor- fhip, and to imitate the ill Cuftoms of others, efpe- cially when they were fuch as tended to the Grati- fication of vicious Inclinations and Appetites. And of this Kind were many of the Rites performed to the heathen Deities. But with regard to the 'JewSy this is certain, that their revolting from the Re- ligion and Worfhip prefcribed in their Law, was ufually followed with great Calamities. And when they were reduced to Affliftion and Diftrefs, this brought them to ferious Reflexions upon their Guilt and Folly. They then fought unto the Lord,
* See Shuckford'i facred and profane Hiftory, Fol, 2. p. xog.
and
^go Other Object ions againfi
and were glad to return to the Obfervance of his Law, fenfible not only that it was their Duty, but that their Happinefs depended upon it.
Here it may not be improper to take Notice of the Objedlions raifed by this Writer againft the Law of Mojes^ on the Account of the Conititutions there made concerning expiatory Sacrifices, which he re- prelents as moft abfurd and unreafonable, and as a grofs Fallacy and Impofition upon the common Senfe and Underftanding of Men. But before I enter on a particular Confideration of his Objedions, it is proper to obferve, that Sacrifices were not firft originally appointed in the Law of Mofes ; they had been in ufe long before. The firft Adl of Re- ligion that v/e read of after the Fall, was the of- fering of Sacrifice. And it is probable, that it was originally of divine Appointment, and communi- cated to our firft Parents, together with the original Promile, both to keep alive upon the Minds of Men, a Senfe of the Evil of Sin, and God's juft Difpleafure againft it, and to be a vifible Pledge of his pardoning Mercy. It was an A61 of Religion that foon fpread univerfally among all Nations, and fcarce any other Account can be given of its hav- ing fo early and univerfally obtained, but that it was derived by a Tradition from the firft Parents and Progenitors of the human Race, who recom- mended it to their Pofterity as a Rite of Religion acceptable to God, and which he himfelf had ap- pointed. Afterwards, when Men fell off from the Worftiip of the only true God to Idols, they offer- ed Sacrifices to them as well as Prayers and other A6ts of divine Worfhip. This was the State of Things when the Law of Mojes was given. Sacri- fices were every where offered, tho' for the moft part to Idols. In that Law God prefcribed Sacri- fices to be offered to his divine Majefty, as they had been by good Men before, probably by his own Appointment, and ftridly prohibited the ofi?ering
them
the Law of Mofes, conjiderd. igt
them to any other. Many particular Regulations were made, and Orders given relating to thofe Sa- crifices. And in order to prevent their falling into the idolatrous Ufages of the neighbouring Nations, they were forbidden to offer any other Sacrifices, or with any other Rites than were there exprefsly pre- fer ibed : Some of which Rites probably had been derived from the ancient Patriarchs, others were then firft inftituted in Oppofttion to the Rites of the idolatrous Nations, and to preferve the Ifraelites from a Conformity to them. Thefe Rites and. Or- dinances relating to Sacrifices were wrought into the Mofaick Conftitution, and fo ordered by di- vine Wifdom as among other Ends and Ufes to be the Types and Shadows of good Things to come, under a more perfed Difpenfation, to which that was defigned to be fubfervient, and in which all thefe Sacrifices were to be entirely fuperfeded by an Ob- lation of a far fuperior Nature, and of infinitely greater Virtue.
But let us now confider the Attempt our Author makes to expofe the Ordinances of the Law of Mofes relating to expiatory Sacrifices. He obferves, that there could be no Commutation or Exchange of Punifhment under the Law as a Favour or Matter of Grace from any of thofe Sacrifices. The Penalty, whatever it was, fuppofing the Offence proved, muft be executed as the Law enjoined, and there could be no fuch Thing as any Pardon under that Conftitution. In all capital Cafes, the Offender upon legal Proof or Convidion muft die the Death, and no Sacrifice could exempt him. And in all Cafes where the Law had not provided Death, but fome pe- cuniary Mul6t or perfonal Labour and Servitude upon Non-payment, this Penalty was to bp ftridly executed, and none could plead any Pri- vilege or Exemption by Sacrifice. And he thinks he may venture to fay univerfally, that
« no
192 Other Objections againjl
<< no other Penalty, of what Nature or Kind foever, *' was ever taken off, or mitigated on the Account " of Sacrifice. He obferves tarther, that the Per- " fons entitled to this Atonement were fuppofed to «« be guilty of no Fault after they had fatisfied the «' Law in making their Offering, or paying thek *' Fine, which if they had not done, no Atone- *' ment could be accepted. And therefore he con- *' eludes, that the making the Atonement or Vir- *' tue of thefe Sacrifices to confift only and abfo- *' lutely in the Prieft's fprinkling the facrificial <' Blood, as was done under that amazing Con- «' ftitution, as he calls it, was nothing elle but a " prieftly Cheat, and grofs Impofition*, /. 126, 127, 128.
To clear this Matter I fhall offer fome Obferva- tions that may give fome Light into the Mofaical Conftitutions about Sacrifices, and may ferve to ob- viate our Author's Exceptions.
Firft, Under that Conftitution there were no Sa- crifices prefcribed at all for thofe Crimes againft which Death was denounced, or any particular Pe- nalties appointed by Law. And there is very good Reafon for this. If the offering Sacrifices had in fuch Cafes exempted Perfons that were legally con- vi(5led of thofe Crimes from the legai Obligation to Punifhment, it would have had a very bad Effedl on the Puhllck. And if Perfons could have efcaped Punifhments for the greateft Crimes merely on their offering Sacrifices, this Conftitution would have been much more inveighed againft, and with much more Reafon, as inconfiftent with the Prefervation of civil Order, and the Good of Society, and as a difpenfing with and vacating all the Laws of the Commonwealth. Where therefore it was judged
* As to the Ufe he makes of fome of thefe Affcrtions againft the Doftrine of Chrift's Satisfadion, the proper Place for confi- dering this will be, when we examine his Exceptions againft thatDo^rine.
I . neceflary
the haw of MoCes J conftdered. 193
necelTary for the Good of the Comgiunlcy, that the Penalties fhould be adually inflided on Perfons guilty of fuch Crimes, in thefe Cafes no Sacrifices were appointed. Becaufe as Sacrifices were fup- pofed to obtain Pardon, and to avert the Punifh* ment that was due for the Crime on the Account of which they were off'ered, it was not proper to appoint Sacrifices by Law for Crimes which it was thought neceflary for the publick Good to punifh.
Another Remark I would make with regard to thefe expiatory Sacrifices is, that in Cafes where Sacrifices were appointed to be offered, they were never fuppofed to be of any Avail, or to intitle a Perfon to Pardon without Repentance, which if they had been fuppofed to have done, this Conftitution would have had a very bad Influence on Religion. Hence in the Sacrifices that were to be offered for any Sin or Fault, the Perfon that had offended was obliged to lay his Hand upon the Head of the Vi5fiin, and to confefs his Sins, efpecially that particular Sin on the Account of which the Sacrifice was offered, and to declare his Repentance for it, as appears from Lev. v. 5. And in Cafes where Perfons had done any Damage to their Neighbour, they were not only to confefs it, but to make Reftitution of what they had wrongfully taken. And it is a o-e- neral Rule, that Sacrifices were never ordered, but in Cafes where the Offender was fuppofed to be pe- nitent. When a Perfon had finned through Igno- rance^ and came afterwards to be fenfible of it ; or if he had finned knowingly and wilfully, and after- wards was brought to a true Repentance, and of his own Accord acknowledged it, when it could not be proved againft him •, in fuch Cafes as thefe Sacrifi- ces were to be offered, as may be feen in the Laws about the Sin-Offering and the Trefpafs-Offerino-, Lev, Chap, iv, v, vi. But in Cafe of obftinate Im- penitency and prefumptuous Sinning with a high
O Hand,
194 Other Objections againji
Hand, no Sacrifices were admitted. From whence it appears, that the legal Sacrifices were not defign- ed to draw Men off from real fubftantial Piety and Righteoufnefs, or to ferve inftead of it, but rather fuppofed the abfolute Neceffity of Repentance in order to Forgivenefs, and that no Pardon could be expc6ted without it.
Another Thing that it is proper to obferve with regard to the expiatory Sacrifices under the Law, is, that the atoning Virtue of thofe Sacrifices was fuppofed principally to confift in the Blood of the Victim, which w:isjhed and fprinkled on or towards the Altar. And this is what our Author cries out againft as a prieftly Cheat and grofs Impofition i he would fain know what Atonements or Propitiation could fignify under a Law that admitted no Pardon ? If by faying that the Law admitted no Pardon, he means, that where the Law denounced any particular Penal- ty againft a particular Crime, the Law itfelf did not appoint that Penalty to be remitted, which it ap- pointed to be inflifted for that Crime, it is very true. And to fuppofe the contrary would be very abfurd. For no Law difpenfes with the Penalty which that Law exprefsly enjoins : And therefore it was, that in Cafes where the Mofaical Law exprefsly appoint- ed particular Penalties for particular Crimes, no Sa- crifice was admitted, becaule the Law did not intend the Penalties fhould be difpenfed with in thefe Cafes. But if by faying that Law admitted no Pardon, he intends that there was no fuch thing as Pardon or RemiiTion of Sins at all under that Conftitution, it is a great Miftake, for the very Appointment of expiatory Sacrifices fhews, there was Pardon under that Conftitution, and neceflarily fuppofes it. For in Cafes where Sacrifices were appointed to be offt;r- ed, it is exprefsly declared, that upon a Man's con- kiiing his Fault, and offering the Sacrifice, the Sin which he had committed jhoiild he forgiven him.
But ftill it is urged, that this was only a prieftly
Cheat,
the "Law o/'Alofes, cofifJered. 195
Cheat, frnce really nothing was forgiven, and he was freed from no Penalty on the Account of the Sacrifice. But how doth this Writer prove that he was freed from no Penalty on the Account of the Sacrifice ? 'Tis certain that in Cafes where Sacri- fices were appointed to be ofi^ered for any Crime, the Man that offended was not fubjeded by Law to any Penalty for that Crime, as he was with re- gard to Crimes for which Sacrifices were not ap- pointed to be offered. For which this Reafon is to be given, that the Sacrifice was fuppofed to avert the Penalty, and therefore Sacrifices were not fuf- fered to be offered in Cafes where it was neceffary for the Good of the Community, that the Penalty fliould be aflually inflidled. Thus, e. g. in Cafes of dealing or defrauding, if the Thief was taken and legally convidted, he was to refiore double^ if the Ox, or Afs, or Sheep which he had taken was found alive with him •, but if he had killed or fold it, he was to refiore Jour or Jive fold •, and if he could not do this he was to be fold, Exod. xxii. i, 2,3. And in fuch Cafes no Sacrifice was appointed at all: becaufe it was intended, and was judged ne- ceffary for the Good of the Publick, that the Penalty fliould be adually executed. But if a Man had taken any thing wrongfully from his Neighbour, and had even fworn falfly concerning it, and could not be legally convided, or the Crime proved upon him, if afterwards he fincerely repented of his Crime, and came of himfelf and acknowledged his Guilt, in that Cafe he was appointed to bring a Sa- crifice, and then the Penalty which was appointed in the other Cafe was not to be inflidled on him. He was obliged only to reftore the Principal, and add a ffth Part thereto, which was no more than was proper to make amends to the Owner for the Damage he might have fuftained in being for fome time without the Ufe of what had been taken from him, kc Lev, vi. 2. And this was not properly a O 2 Mul5$
igb Other Objections againji
Mulct or Penalty, but a juft Rejiitution, which was neceflary to fhew the Sincerity oi the Repentance he profeffed for his Crime. So that we fee that in Cafes where the Mul6l or Penalty was adtually in- fifted on by Law, Sacrifices were not appointed to be offered ; and where the Sacrifices were appointed to be ofi^ered, the Mul(5l or Penalty, which would have been otherwife due, was to be remitted. And by this we may fee how true it is which he ventures to pronounce univerfally^ that no other Penalty of what Nature or Kind Joever was ever taken off or mitigated on the account of Sacrifice.
But perhaps it will be faid, that in thefe Cafes the Sacrifices themfelves were the Penalty required by Law. He tells us, that in innu?nerahle Cafes of Ac- cident or Inadvertency^ which was made penal by the Law, the Sacrifice as a Deodand or Fine to the Church was the whole Penally. And where a Sacrifice was ordered with a pecuniary MidEt, one part of the Fine was due to the State, and the other to the Church. But Sacrifices were off^ered in many Cafes that were not owing meerly to Inadvertency, but where the Sin had been deliberate and wilful, tho* afterwards fincerely repented of, as is evident from the In- llances mentioned, hev. vi. 2, 3. And in thefe Cafes it is manifefl that the Sacrifice was not re- garded or prefcribed as a Punifhment, but as a Means to free the Offender from Punifhment -, and the Reafon why no Punifhment was enjoined where Sacrifices were ordered, was not becaufe the Sacri- fice itfelf was a Punifhment, but becaufe the Sacri- fice was fuppofed to free the Perfon in the Eye of the Law from the Guilt he had contracted, and thereby avert the Punifhment to which otherwife he mull have been obnoxious. As to his Infinua- tion that the Sacrifice was only a Fine to the Churchy one fhould think, if this had been the Cafe, they would have been allowed to commute the Sacrifice for Money, which yet was never admitted. And
whereas
the Law o/'Mofes, confidered. 197
whereas he adds, that where a Sacrifice was ordered, with a pecuniary Mul5l^ one part of the Fine was due to the State, and the other to the Church ; he would have done well to have told us what Sacri- fices were ordered with pecuniary Muldls. In Cafes where Mulds were ordered by Law, which was only where a real Damage had been done by any Man to his Neighbour, the Muloi or Fine, if he will call it fo, was to be paid to the injured Perfon himfelf, and not either to the State, or to the Church: nor was the Prieft to have any Share in It at all, except in Cafes where the Prieft himfelf happened to be the Perfon that had fuffered the Damage. Inftances of this we have with regard to the 'Thief that was obliged to reftore double to the Perfon whom he had injured, and if the Thing he had ftolen was fold or deftroyed, four or five fold; and if he could not do this, he was to be fold by him whom he had wronged. And in cafe of a Man's accufing a Virgin wrongfully, or in cafe of deflow- ering a Virgin unbetrothed, the Law appointed a Fine or Sum of Money to be paid to her Father, befides the Satisfadion that was to be made to the Damfel herfelf, Z)fz^/. xxii. 18, 19, 29. And in thefe Cafes, where there were penal Muldls appoint- ed by Law, there were no Sacrifices admitted: and on the other hand, in Cafes where Sacrifices were prefcribed, there was no Mul<5t appointed.
But he farther urges, to fhew that the making the Atonement to confift in the Prieft's fprinkling the facrificial Blood was a grofs Fallacy and hipofi' tion ; that the Perfom entitled to this Atonement, were fuppofed to be guilty of no fault after they had fatisfied the Law in making their Offering, or paying of their Fine, which if they had not done no Atonement could he accepted. And that this therefore was taking out a Pardon after the Debt had been paid, and the Law fatisfied, and owning an infinite Obligation to the Priejisjfor cheating them out of their Money, and their O 3 Subjlancf,
198 Other Objections againji
Subflance, p. 128. The Sting of this Sneer lies here: That before the Blood was fprinkled, the Offering was made, and the Law fatisfied, and the Perfon fuppofed to be guilty of no Fault, and there- fore it was an Impofition to pretend that the fprink- ling of the Blood made an Atonement for him. But this is mifreprefented : for the Law was not fatisfied, nor was the Offermg properly made, or compleated, till the Blood ^as, fprinkled. Till that was done the Perfon was ftill fuppofed to lie under his Guilt, and was not clear in the Eye of the Law. And as the Sacrifice could not be of any Avail without Confe[fion and Reftitution, which was fup- pofed to be a neceffary Qualification for Forgive- nefs, fo in Cafes where Sacrifices were prefcribed, tho' a Man had made Reftitution, he was not re- garded as free from his Guilt till the Sacrifice was offered, and the Atonement made by the Blood. Reftitution did indeed repair the Injury offered to his Neighbour, but ftill there was a Guilt cleaving to him on Account of the Tranfgreffion he had been guilty of againft God. Expiation therefore was to be maie for the Offence committed againft the Di- ruine Majefty. And in order to this, the Blood of the Sacrifice was required to be offered unto God. And the Reafon that is given why the Blood was fuppofed to make Atonement for the Soul, is this, that the Life of the Flefh is in the Blood, Lev. xvii. 2. So that the Atonement confifted in this, that the Life of the Vi^im was given for the Offender ; and the fprinkling of the Blood upon the Altar was an offering or rendring the Blood or Life of the Vidlim unto God. This was to put them in mind, that in ftriftnefs they had deferved Death at the Hand of God, if he fhould deal with them in a way of rigorous Juftice j fince every Tranfgreffion and Dif^ pbedjence expofed them to the Curfe that was de- nounced in the Law againft every one tha.t continued pgt in all things thai are written in the Book of the ■'-''' ' ' ■ . ' ■ LaiJij
the Law ^/'Mofes, con/idered. 199
haw to do them : But yet that he would gracioufly pardon them, and accept an Atonement for them ; and accordingly when this was offered, the Perfon that had offended was legally clean and free from the Guilt and Curfe he had contrafled, and not before.
As to the general Reafons of this Conftitution, it was a vifible Pledge of God's pardoning Mercy to penitent Sinners, and at the fame time it tended to preferve in their Minds a lively Senfe of his Jujiice and Purity, and of the Evil of Sin, and to make them fenfible, what it deferved if God Ihould enter into ftri6b Judgment with them : fince befides Re- pentance and Amendment the fheddingof the Blood of the Sacrifice for them was required in order to the Expiation of their Guilt. And Sacrifices were infifled oh even with regard to Sins of Ignorance and Inadvertency, that they might be afraid of all Sin when they found that the leaft Sin was not to be pafTed by without fome Marks of God's Difpleafure againfl it, and might be rendered cautious and vi- gilant over themfelves and their own Conduct, fince even Ignorance and Inadvertency or Rafhnefs, which is the Caufe of many Faults, fhould not to- . tally excufe for a Violation of the Law : but when once it came to be known, they were to confefs it before God, to humble themfelves on the Account of it, and to feek Expiation for it by the Blood of the Sacrifice. Laflly, fuppofing that God had from the Beginning formed the wife and gracious Defign to fend his own Son into the "World in the Fullnefs of Time to take upon him our Nature, and to fhed his Blood as a Propitiation for the Sins of the World ; and that this was the Way in which he had appointed to confer Salvation on guilty Man- kind ; that fo he might declare his Righteoufnefs in the RemifTion of Sins, and vindicate the Authority of his Government and Laws even in the very Methods of Reconciliation: taking in this View of
P 4 Things,
200 Other Objections againfi
Things, it was very proper to inftitute and appoint Sacrifices, the better to prepare the World for re- ceiving that Method of Redemption through the Blood and Sacrifice of his Son, and to typify and prefigure the true Atonement. And upon this State of the Cafe, the Propriety of this Conflitu- tion of Sacrifices, and the comprehenfive Views the Divine Wifdom had in it, do more fully ap- pear.
Thus it appears, that there were great and wife Ends in this Inftitution of Sacrifices, and at the fame time care was taken that they fhould be ma- naged fo as not at all to interfere with the Civil Laws, or to be any way detrimental to the Society, by derogating from the Juftice and Publick Order pecefTary for the Prefervation of the Commonr wealth,
CHAP. VII.
JJis Pretence that the Law of Mofes made no Di- jlin5fion between Morals and Rituals^ and never urged Things as in themfelves fit and reafonahle ; and that the Stories of the Miracles recorded there were the Caufe of the Jews Obduracy and hnpeni- tency throughout all their Generations. His bitter Invectives againfi the Jews, and the ftrange Re- frefentation he makes of that People, with a View to cajl a Reproach upon their Law. It is Jhewn that by the Advantage of their Law, they far exr ceeded all other Nations in the Knowledge of Reli- gion, and that they were famed for Wifdom even among the Heathens. The proper Ufe that fijoiild he made of the Accounts given us of their Faults^ find of the Punijhments infixed on them,
WE have not yet done with this Writer's Ob- jeftions againft the Law of Mofes. With a ¥iew to expofe that Law and the lews, he idh,
US,
the Law of Mofers, confidered. 201
us, p. 271. That *' Mofesg^vc them a Law, not " as a Law or Religion of Nature, but as the im- *' mediate Voice and pofitive Will of God, the *' Grounds or Reafons of which they were never to *' examine or inquire into, nor to look upon it " either as founded in the eternal immutable Fit- " nefs of Things, or the Refult of any human " Reafon or Prudence -, and having this Opinioa *' of their Law ira general, they made no Diftinc- *' tion between Morals and Rituals, between eter- •" nal and immutable, and temporary and mutable '* Obligations, or between the Laws of Nature, " and the perfeft Reverfe of them." And he had obferved before, that " they would believe no- " thing as neceflarily and eternally true in Nature " and Reafon, but depended for the Proof of eve- " ry thing upon Miracles, Prodigies, &'c. And " that they had really no fuch thing among them " as a Notion of what Is Right or Wrong in Mo- " rality," p. 256.
It will be eafily granted that Mofes reprefents the Law he gives as enjoined by the immediate j^u- thority and Will of God himfelf. And I fuppofe none will deny but that this muft give a mighty Force and Efficacy to Laws however fit or reafon- able in themfelves. And I believe every confidering Perfon will allow that in a divine Law it is not neceflary to enter into the particular Reafons of all the Commands that are given, or to deduce them by a Chain of Philofophical Reafonings from what this Writer calls the eternal FitJiefs of Things. But if he means to infmuate, as feems plainly to be his Intention, that in the Law of Mj/c-j things are never urged upon the People as in themfelves fit and reafonable, nor the Grounds and Reafons of the Law ever fet before them, nothing can be more falfe, as is evident to any one that is in the leaft acquaint- ed with that Law. They arc not urged to Obe- dience from a meer Regard to the Authority of God
whQ
202 Other Objections againfi
who gave them thofe Laws, but they are frequently urged to it from the Confideration of his great Good- fiefs -, and the Reafonablenefs and Fitnefs of the thing required of them is often fignified in the moft cx- preffive and comprehenfive Manner, with admirable Fullnefs as well as Brevity. It were eafy to pro- duce a confiderable Number of Inftances out of the Books of Mofes, in which the Reafons of the Law are clearly fet forth along with the Laws themfel ves, and that both with regard to moral and ritual Pre- cepts. It is true, that Mofes never talks of the eternal Reafon and immutable Fitnefs of Things •, nor does the Gofpel, tho' it fo evidently tends to give us good and excellent Notions of pure and refined Morality, ever exprefs itfelf after this Manner. And I apprehend this way of ExprefTion will fcarce be thought neceflary for enlightning the Under- ftandings of the People in the Knov/Iedge of Mo- rals ; efpecially in the crude and confufed Manner in which this Author and fome others ufe it. But it is evident that Mofes often teaches the People to regard his Laws as founded in Reafon, and Righ- teoufnefs, and Equity, and commendable for their Wifdom and Excellency. Thus Deut. iv. 6, 7, 8. What Nation is there fo great which hath Statutes and Judgments fo righteous^ as all this Law which I fet before you this Day? Keep, and do them, for this is your Wifdom and Underftanding. And he there fuppofes the Excellency of their Laws to be fo manifeft, that other Nations that fhould hear and obferve them would be ready to fay, furely this great Nation is a wife and underftanding People. He frequently tells them that the Statutes and Com- mandments which God required them to obey, were for their own Good, Deut.xxvi. 24. x. 13. And it is certain in Fad, that the greateft and wifeft Men among the Jews, and indeed the People in general, had a very high Opinion of the Wif- dom, th? Goodnefs, the Equity, and Reafonable- nefs
the Law of Mofes, confidered. 203
nefs of their Laws. So far is it from being true which this Author confidently alledges, that they did not regard the moral Law or Statutes and Judg- ments delivered by Mofes in the Na7ne of God, as true and right, in Nature and Reafon. The noble Account given of the Law, Pfal. xix. 7—12. to which might eafily be added many other Paflages celebrating the Righteoufnefs, the Purity, the Love- linefs of the Laws enjoined them, fufficiently fhew what were the Sentiments of all wife and good Men among the Jews on this Head.
And indeed, this Writer himfelfelfewhere thinks fit to own, that " the Lawgiver himfelf [Mofes} " direded the People to the right Motive and " Principle of Adion, /. e. to the inward Love " of God and their Neighbour, as the principal " Thing that would be regarded in the Sight " of God," p. 34. And, that " this was all " along underftood and infilled on during the legal " Oeconomy as neceffary to a State of true Reli- " gion and Virtue, as might be proved by innu- ^' merable Teftimonies out of the Law and the " Prophets. And that even in our Saviour's Time, " the Jews from the higheft to the lowed owned "the Obligation of it, and could not ftlfle their *' Conviftions of it, how much foever they had " loft or neglefted the Pradice. Their moft " learned Men, and Chrift*s greateft Enemies, al- " lowed,that to love God above all, and our Neigh- " bour as our felves, was the Sum and Subftance, " the End and Defign of the whole Law,"^. 34. And how this is confident with his aflerting that the Jews made no Diftindion between Morals and Rituals, and between the Laws of Nature, and the perfect Reverfe of them j and that they had no fuch Thing among them as a Notion of what is Right or Wrong in Morality, is hard to conceive.
It is with equal Juftice and Confiftency that he reprefents the eld Stm£S they had among them Qf their ■ ' ■ mira*
204 Other Objections agamjl
miraculous Deliverances andSucceJfes at the firft Injli- tution of their Covenant^ as h3.ving been the chief Occa- fion of their natural Blindnefs^ Obduracyy and Impe- nitency in all their fu'eceeding Generations^ and of their depending on continual Miracles^ which he calls the mojl dangerous Prefumption^ and the flrongeft Hold of Ignorance and Error, p. 263, 264, At other times he is pleafed to afcribe this to what he calls the in- curable Egyptian Temper of that People, which they at firft coRtraded in Egypt, and could never after- wards fhake off; but here he dire6lly charges their Impenitency and Obftinacy in all fucceeding Ge- nerations on the miraculous Things that were done for them to deliver them out of Egypt ; fo that as he there exprefieth it, they had no great Reafon to hoafi of their Deliverance. But how thofe old Stories^ as he calls them, fhould have an Influence to ren- der them ever afterwards obdurate and impenitent, is hard to conceive. The natural Tendency of them when firmly believed, was to fill them with adoring Thoughts of the divine Power and Majefty, and with a thankful Senfe of their Obligations to his Goodnefs, and to ingage them to a more diligent and careful Obedience to thofe Laws which came to ^ them confirmed with fuch illuftrious Atteftations. And it is for fuch Purpofes as thefe that they are frequently mentioned by good Men of old in their admirable Pfalms and Hymns of Praife. But there is nothing in them to encourage them to expedl any extraordinary Interpofitions in their Favour, whilft they continued an impenitent and difobedient Peo- ple. On the contrary, thofe old Stories of the Mi- racles wrought at the firft Eftablifhment of their Law were alfo accompanied with an Account of God's righteous Severity againft their Ancefiors, and the fignal Punilhments he inflidted upon them for their Obduracy and Impenitency. There was nothing in their whole Law that gave them Ground tg Jiope fpr Profperity and Happinefs, or any
Marks
the Law of Mofes, conjidered. 205
Marks of the divine Favour towards them, but in a Way of Righteoufnefs and Obedience. And on the other hand, it taught them to expeft to be dif- tinguiOied above other Nations, with the moft re- markable Judgments and Tokens of the divine Difpleafure, in cafe of their perfifting in an obftinate Courfe of Wickednefs and Difobedience. Nor was there any Thing in theirBehef of the extraordinary- Things that were done at their Deliverance out of Egypt^ that could reafonably induce them, in ordi- nary Cafes, to negUoi natural human Means^ which God has ordained and ejlablijhed in the Courfe of his Providence ; and to depend on all Occafions upon Miracles^ immediate Interpofition^ and uninftrumental divine Agency •, which is another Charge he ad- vances againft them. One would think by his Re- prefentation, that the whole Nation of the Jews m all Ages lived in a continual Expedlation of nothing elfe but Miracles, that they thought not of ufing any rational human Means at all, but expefted at all times to have plenty of Food though they never plowed or fowed, and to be viflorious over their Enemies without taking Arms or Fighting. But it does not appear from the Hiftory of their Na- tion in the Old Teftament, that this was all along their Temper and Expedlation. They are often blamed for 7?iaking Flefh their yfrw, and placing too much of their Dependance on the Aids of human Power, or the Methods of a worldly Policy, even to the Neglcdt and Difobedience of God's Com- mands and Law. In their Profperity, when they were in a State of Wealth and Power, they were too apt to be over confident and fecure ; and in their Adverfity when they did not fee probable hu- man Means for their Deliverance, they were apt to defpond, fuch is the Weaknefs of our Nature, and it was a difficult thing to get their Minds raifed to a (leady Confidence in the divine Power and Goodnefs for reftoring and delivering them. And
if
2o6 The A u T H o R ' J InveBives
if at any time they were brought by any gracious Promife or Aflurance that was given them in the Name of God, to hope that he would deliver them, they did not generally exped: it in a way of iinin- firumental divine Agency^ as this Writer phrafeth it % it did not make their Great Men and Heroes fit ftill and negleft rational human Means, but rather ani- mated and encouraged them to ufe the beft Means they could for their own Deliverance, in hope that God would blefs and give Succefs to their Endea- vours : as is evident to any one that is at all ac- quainted with the Hiftory of the Old Teftament.
We are now got into the Author's Inve5iives againft the Jews^ in which he feems to take an ill- natured Satisfadion. It appears from the Paffages already produced, that he makes a very difadvan- tageous Reprefentation of them, as having no No- tion of Right or Wrong in Morality, and making no Diftindion between the Laws of Nature, and the perfect Reverfe of them. He frequently talks ot *' their conftitutional natural Blindnefs which they " had contraded in Egypt among their Fellow- " Slaves •, that this Blindnefs, Bigotry, and En- *' thufiafm was the incurable Diftemper of this *' wretched People, and that they continued " throughout all their Generations under the fame " Egyptian Darknefs and mental VafTalage •, and " ftill retained the grofs Ignorance, ftrong Prejudi- '* ces, and conftitutional Charader of that prieftly " enflaved Nation." He reprefents them as having " loft all inward Sincerity and Integrity of Heart, *' and all true Notions of God, of his natural and " moral Attributes and Perfections, and of his " providential Government of the World. That " they could not diftinguifli between the effedive " and permiffive Will of God, but afcribed every " thing equally to God, as ordering, direding, " and appointing the greateft moral as well as na- " tural £vils. That their Superftition was fuch, ■" *' that
Ggninfi the Jews, cofi/idered. 207
" that neither the Law of Nature, nor the com- *' mon Methods of God's providential Government *' could at all affed them. That it is certain that " after their going out of Egypt^ notwithftanding *' their extraordinary Deliverance, they could " fcarce be paralleled by any other Nation upon *' Earth, for their grofs Ignorance, Superftition, " and moral Wickednefs, which ran through all " their fucceffive Generations, till their final Dif- *' folution and Deftruflion." He often talks of their national Blindnefs, Obduracy, and Impeniten- cy : And finally pronounces, that " the People " of Ifrael at firll, and their Remains afterwards " called Jews^ were a moft untoward, grody ig- *' norant, amazing, fuperftitious^ and defperately ** wicked Generation of Men," fee/». 248 — 256, £s?f. 263, — 271.
This is fome part of the Reproach which he pours forth upon that unhappy Nation, and which may give us a Specimen of the Spirit and Rheto- rick of this Writer. Whatever Cenfures have been at any time pafled upon the word -of the Jews in their moft degenerate Times, he applies without Diftin6tion to the whole Nation at all Times from firft to laft. The facred Writers often reprove the Jews for their Faults, and if other Nations were to be dealt with as freely and impartially, they would not appear fo fair as they now do in the Writings of partial and flattering Hiflorians. But tho' this Writer, and others, take Advantage of the Cenfures pafled upon the Jews in Scripture, I do not fee how they can confiftently blame that People for thofe Faults, for which they are there principally reproved. If this Author be in the right, their Unbelief ought to be commended as a noble In- ^'a.ncQ o^ Free-Thinking ; and their frequent Revolt- ings from their Law were glorious Efforts to fhake off an intolerable Yoke of Tyranny and VafTalage that was impofed upon them, and to refume their
natural
2oS The A u T H o R * i- InveBhes
natural Liberties. He is pleafed highly to com- mend their idolatrous Princes, as ading upon Prin- ciples of Toleration and Liberty of Confcience, and feems to approve their joining with the neighbour- ing Nations in their idolatrous Rites and Ufages. So that it is not the Jews as idolatrous, and imitat- ing the Heathens^ that he really dcfigns to find fault with, but the Jews as adhering to their Law, and to the Commands there given, and the Worfhip there eftablifhed ; tho' the better to cover it, he takes Advantage of the Reproofs given them in Scripture for thofe Things which he himfelf muft think to be no Crimes at all. It is their Law itfelf, and their beft and greatefl Men, thofe that moft religioufly adhered to that Law, that he principally intends to ftrike at by his flanderous Invectives, which he throws about without Diftin6lion.
He affedls frequently, as fome others have done before him, to fpeak of the Jews as if they had fomething naturally grofs and ftupid in them below the reft of the human Species ; and were by their natural Conftitution, or by a kind of fatal Neceffity doomed to perpetual Blindnefs, Superftition, and Slavery. He often talks of their natural and con- ftitutional Blindnefs, Stupidity, Obduracy, ^c. And is pleafed to reprefent them as having contra5led this conjlitutional natural Blindnefs in Egypt among their Fellow- Slaves^ p. 248. It was natural and con- jlitutional to them thro* all their Generations, and yet was contracted in Egypt. How this will agree I cannot tell, except it be fliid that in Egypt they contraded fome odd Kind of Nature and Confti- tution, which, likeaDiftcmper, ran in their Blood, and was conveyed from Father to Son through all their fuccefTive Generations. And then it muft be owned they were a wretched People indttd^ from firfi to lajly but at the fame time they were to be pitied more than blamed, and it was rather their Cala- mity than their Crioje. And this being, as he calls
2 it,
agahijl the Jews, confide red. 209
It, the incurable Difie?nper of this wretched People^ no wonder tliat he aflcs, IFhat could Mofes and the Prophets do with them? for as he wifely obferves, They could rM new-make them^ p. 271. And there- fore it was impoffible to govern and influence theiri hut in their own way. And he tells us, that God gave them up to thai Wickednefs and "Tyranny^ under fuch a Difpenfition of Blindnefs and Slavery, hecaufs there zvas no other way to he taken with them, p. 248. Where he fpeaks as if he thought God him felf could not help them, or do any thing elfe with them, but give them up to Wickednefs and Tyranny, Blindnefs and Slavery. Tho' at another time he feems to think, that the People might have been better, if they had been better inftrufted •, and after having obferved, that the Prophets and Priejls were eq^ually Egyptianized, he affefls to pity the People, who had no better Means of Information, p. 265.
But when this Writer and others have faid the worft againft th^Jews, that their Malice can fug- ged, andtho' hereprefents them as a 'NoiUon fear ce to be paralleWd by any other Nation upon Earth for their grofs Ignorance, and as having lofi all true Notions of God, and of his natural and moral Aitri* lutes and Perfe^ions, yet it is certain, that in theif Knowledge Q^ Qodi. and true Religion, they vaftly exceeded all other Nations, even thofe that were moft celebrated for their Wifdom and Learning ; and were the only People that worihipped the one Jiving and true God, when the reft of the World was over-run with Idolatry and falfe Worfhip. And there isReafon to think, that there were Numbers among them, even of the common People, that by their Acquaintance with their Law, which they were all commanded diligently to read and to con- fider, and in which they were to inftruft their Children, were brought to form 'lufter and nobler Notions of God, and of his Providence, of the Duty they owed hiixi, and the Worfliip thac was
P t<?
210 ^he A u T H o R * J InveBives
to be rendered to him, than even the Wife Men and Philofophers among the Pagans. And what rendered this more remarkable was, that they came out of Egypty which according to this Writer was the Miftrefs of Idolatry to other Nations. Egypt was a Country illuftrious among the Ancients for Riches, Arts, and Learning. From thence Greece principally derived her Knowledge, and thither her moft renowned Philofophers and Wife Men tra- velled for Improvement. And yet Sir John Mar- Jham, who is not partial to the Hebrews^ ji-'^ly ob- ferves. That it is beyond all doubt, that the He- hrews entertained moft juft and reverent Senti- ments of the one true God that governs the World, whereas the Opinions of the Egyptians in thatre- fpe6t were very wrong, Certe nulla eft controver- fia^ qiiin <cfei ^va<^-)^'j.^^ de unius regimihe, five deDeo anico, reverem fusrit et re^liffima HehrcBorum^ non item re5fa yEgyptiorum exiftimatio. Can. Chron. Sae- cul. 9. And furely this was no Sign of an extra- ordinary Blindnefs and Ignorance in the Hebrews above other Nations.
Their Laws, in fpite of this Author's Reprefen- tationof them, to all candid and impartial Judges, difcover an adrpirable Wifdom, Piety, Jufticeand Purity. Their Hiftorians fhew an unparallell'd hi- partiality, and feem only to have in view the re- lating plain Truth without Difguife, and obferving the happy Effefts of Righteoufnefs, Piety, and Virtue upon Kings and People, and the great Evils and Calamities that befel them, when they fell into Idolatry and Vice. Their Writers of Religion and iVf(?r^//7jy are admirable and unequall'd for the noblcft Conceptions of the fupremc Being, of his glorious Perfedlions and governing Providence ; for exhi- biting Precepts of pure Morals, and Maxims of the trueft Wifdom •, for the moft moving and pa- thetical Exhortations to Repentance, and to the Pradice of Piety and Righteoufnefs, and the moft
earneft
againji the Jews, conjidered. 2 1 1
carneft and impartial Reprehenfions of Vice and Sin. Their Heroes and Great Men, whofe Actions are not blazon'd out by the Pens of flattering Hi- ftorians, but related with a wonderful Brevity and Simplicity, were equal to the mod renowned He- roes and Great Men of any other Nation, for the Greatnefs of their Exploits, their Wifdom and Pru- dence, their Bravery and Magnanimity, their Love to their Country, and Zeal for its Liberties \ but beyond Comparifon fuperior to them all for their true Fiety and profound Veneration towards God, and Zeal for his pure Worfhip, in Oppofition to Idolatry and Superjlition. I cannot conceive there- fore with what Juftice or Decency thofe Gentlemen that fo much admire the ancient Greeks and Re- mans, and can fcarce ever fpeak of the People in general, or of their Great Men and Philofophers in particular without Rapture, fhouldonall Occafions exprefs fuch Contempt of the Jews^ as the moft ftupid, blind, defpicable Race of Men that ever lived upon the Earth: When their greateft Faulc for many Ages was their falling into the Vices and Idolatries of the neighbouring Nations, and imi- tating their corrupt Cuftoms and Manners. And yet we have Reafon to think, that even in the Times of their greateft Degeneracy, and their moft corrupt State under the Old 'Tejlament^ there were incomparably more truly religious Men, and de- vout Adorers of the Deity among them, than in any other Nation under Heaven. We find that even in the Days oi Ahah^ when Ifrael was in its moft degenerate State, and the publick Idolatry at its greateft Height among them, there were feveral Thoufands who, by theTeftimony of God himfelf, perfevcred in his true Worftiip and Obedience, free from Idolatry ; and no doubt there was a much greater Number at that time in Judah. And I be- lieve the moft extenfive Charity can fcarce fuppofe, that there was fuch a Number of true Worihippers P 2 of
2 1 2 The A u T H 0 R *i Itroe5iives
of God in Greece or Rome in their beft Times.' And theTruth is, we have no Account of any fuch -, and their beft and wifeth Men did all of them countenance and encourage the Publick Idolatry^ by their Maxims, and by their Pradice.
Notwithftanding that the great Difference of their Cuftoms, and of their Religion from the reft of Mankind, rendered the J^ws very unpopular, yet the Heathens themfelves could not help fome^ times profeffing their Efteem and Admiration for them, and for their Laws, in a Manner that fhewed they were far from looking upon them as fuch a ftupid, fenfelefs contemptible Generation of Men as this Writer reprefents them. The judicious Straho gives a handfomTeftimony concerning them in his fixteenth Book, where he makes the Caiife oi Mofesh forfaking£^j)'^/ to be his being diflatisfied with the falfe Notion and Worlliip of God that had ob- tained among the E^yptians^ and fuppofes him to have entertained nobler Notions of the Divinily than the Egyptians^ or Lyhians^ or Greeks. That there- fore he went out from Egypt ^ and along with him many that honoured the Deity, tsrohhoi Ttf^vl^ 7t? ^«oi'. That he perfiwded many good Men, and brought them into the Country where Jerufalcm is built ; and that there his SuccefTors continued for fome time praMifing Ji(Jiice or Righleoufnefs, and being truly religious or fincere WorflAppers of God :
J'ly^tQT^a.yivlci :^ ^oaiCiHs as *Xi)9<»j o/li;. So Jttftilt
out of Trogus Pompeius praifes the antient Jeirs for their Jufiice joined with Piety, jujlitia religione per- mixta, Juft. lib. 36. Porphyry, cited by EufebiuSy Prsp.Evang.lib.9. CIO. after having obferved that the Barbarians had juftcr Notions of Religion than the Greeks, produces an Oracle from Apollo, which reckons iht Hebrews among the Nations that found out and knew the Way to Happinefs ; and another in wnich it is pronounced that the Chaldeans and Hebrews alone obtained IVijdom, purely worftnpptng
God
cigamji the ]tv,^s, confidered. 213
God the [eternal] King. And in another Or^/f there produced the Hebrews, are called afi^wAwro/, illujirious or worthy to ha emulated. I do not mention thefe as if any Strefs was to be laid upon the Teftimony oi ApoMs Oracles, but only to fhew the Opinion, that had then obtained among the Heathens them- felves, oftheWifdom.apd Religion of the Hebrews: for if their Fame had not been far fpread on this Account, the Oracle would fcarce have defcribed them under that Charafter.
There is one part of our Author's Inveftlves againft: the Jews, which I cannot pafs by withouc a particular Notice. He charges them among other Things with not being able to diflinguijh between the effective and -permijfive Will of God \ and with afcribing every thing equally to God as ordering., di- re£iing, and approving the greatefl moral as well as natural Evils, though brought about by the Power and Malice ofTyrants and zuicked Men. I might obferve here that the Sadducees, whom he elfewhere r^prefents as the true Re??iains of the antient Jews, were fo far from being of this Sentiment, that 2.0.* covd'mg to Jofephus^s Account of them, they fcarce allowed Providence any thing to do about any hu- man A6lions, and nothing at all about evil ones. But undoubtedly this Writer defigns this as a Re- flexion upon the flicred Writings, which tho' they every where declare God's Detejlation againft Sin in the ftrongeft Terms, yet reprefent his mofb wife and juft Providence as dirotling and over-ruling all Events i and teach us to regard his fovereign Hand in all the Evils and Calamities that befal us, tho' immedia.tely inflicted by the Agency and Influence of wicked Men and Tyrants; of whofc Wicked- nefsand Injuftice he is not the Author or Caufe,but moft wifely over-rules it for carrying 0:1 the impor- tant Defigns of his Goverment. And m.uft not every one that hath juft Notions of Providence, or of God's preflding over human Afl^iirs, acknow-
P 3 lcdg<:
»i4 Ty^e Author'^ InveBives
ledge the fame thing ? Even this Author, who from a Defire of befpattering the Scriptures, would fain cavil at this Doftrine, yet frequently exprefleth himfelf in a manner that cannot be vindicated on any other Principles. Thus he tells us, p. 244. that the Egyptian Priefts, by an Incidency of Provi- dence, gained an Independency both of the Crown and People. And after having cenfured the Jews for afcribing thofe things to the Providence of God which were brought about by wicked Men, he him- felf in the very next Sentence afcribes what accord- ing to his Account of it was a very ill thing to an extraordinary Interpofition of divine Providence. For he tells us, p. ic^y. that the Ifraelites were de- livered from Egypt by an extraordinary Providence, and brought off with all their Plunder, after having been the Plagues of the Country for above two hun- dred Tears. And again,/?. 260. he reprefents God as having in the Courfe of his Providence given the Kingdom to David, tho' according to the Reprefen- tation he makes of that Matter, />. 299. he came to it by a Series of Faljhoods, Perjuries, Treafon and Rebellion.
Here it may not be improper to obferve theAb- furdity of this Writer, when undertaking to give an Account of thefalfe Principles and grofs Errors, which occafioned the JVickednefs and Obfiinacy of the Jews, and in which Principles and Errors he faith the Egyptian Priejis and Sorcerers had confirmed them, p. 255. et feq. he makes the fecond of thofe Principles and Errors to be this, That after having been delivered from Egypt by an extraordi- nary Providence, they from thence took it in their Heads that they were the peculiar Favourites of Hea- ven by an abfoluie irreverfible Decree ; that they Jhould from thenceforth fucceed in all their Enter- prizes, and make tbemfelves Maflers of the whole IVorld, &c. And the third Principle or Error he makes to be thdr grofs Miflake of the JSIature and • ■ Deftgn
againjl the Jews, confidered. 215
Defign o/'/y&^Abrahamick Covenant, which they took in an abfolute Senfe •, tho' it was only conditional. Every one fees how abfurd it is to fiippofe, that thefe were among the Principles in which Z^*? Egyp- tian Priefts and Sorcerers had confirmed the Jfraelites. And yet this is what he affirms concerning all thefe Principles and Errors in general.
Not to follow him farther in his fpiteful Reflec- tions upon the Jews, I fhall only obferve, that in his great Defire to expofe them, he feems willing to allow for a while the Miracles of Mofes to have been true and real Fads, tho' at other times he re- prefents them all as meer Fidtion and Romance. He obferves, that " within three Months after " their moji wonderful Deliverance from Egypt, ** they fell into the Egyptian Idolatry. And not- *' withftanding all the Miracles they had feen therCy " and their miraculous Paffage through the Red-Sea, •* they made a Calf, ^c. And after all the Mi- ** racks of Egypt, and the awful Manner of giving " the Lawy &c. they were jufl upon the Point of ** making themfelves a Captain to return thither,*' p. 268, 269. Thus he can own thefe Things to be real Fa<5ts, or make them all Fiftion and Flou- rilh jufl as it fuits his prefent Convenience. And whereas he tells us, that before they were brought out of Egypt they had been the mojl grievous and in- fupportable Plagues of an enfaved and ruined Coun- try^ i. e. of Egypt^ for above two hundred Tears^ p. 257. And again, p. 265. that Egypt was a Country^ which by divine Permiffion in the Coiirfe of his Providence, they, i. e. the Ifraelites, had en- faved and ruined : this plainly lets us fee how little Juftice we are to exped: from this Writer •, lince the very contrary is true, that the Ifraelites had for a Succeffion of Years in Egypt before their miracu- lous Deliverance, undergone a Series of Cruelty and Oppreflion fcarce to be parallelled in Hiftory. Hence they are often afterwards put in mind that P 4 they
2i6 The Author V IjweSiives
they had been Bond-men in the Land of Egypt. And it is called a Furnace of Iron^ and the Houfs cf Bondage. But our pretended Moral Philofopher, who would be thought fuch a Friend and Advocate for Liberty, can ftand up for Tyranny and OpprefTion, when it is upon the Jews that they are exercifed.
I fhall conclude my Remarks on this Writer's Inve<5lives againft the jezvs^ v/ith obferving that it were" greatly to be wifhed that thofe that are moft forward to reproach that unhappy People, would be careful not to imitate them in fome of the worft parts of their Condud and Charafler: Such as their finning againft great Advantages put into their Jiands for knowing and praftifing. their Duty ; the general Corruption of Manners they fell into in the ]aft Times of their State •, their rejeding the many Calls and Warnings that were given them from time to time ; and laftly, which compleated their Guilt, their obftinate Unbelief in rejeding the Sa- viour Jefus Chnjl, and the Revelation he brought to them, tho' attended with the moft convincing and illuftrious Atteftations. Thefe things at length brought a terrible Deftrudion upon them. And it becomes us not to be high-minded but fear^ as the Apoftle P^/ advifes on this Occafion. A Condu6t like theirs, when once it becomes general among any People, istiiefureft way to expofe them to God's heavy Difpleafure , and to the moft grievous Cala- mities. I cannot but think, the natural Tendency of the Attempts made by thisWriter, and others of his Spirit, is to bring us into this Condition ; but I hope God will in his infinite Mercy make their Endeavours as vain and ineffe(^ual, as they are wicked and unreafonable.
chap:
( 217 )
CHAP. VIII.
A Tranfition to the Author's OhjeBions a^ainft other Paris of the Old Teflament. Cancerniiig the two different ^urns or dijlirioi popular Appearances which he pretends the Spirit of Prophecy took in Ifrael. And firfi concerning the Urim and Tbum- mim. His Account of the Original and Defign of that Oracle confidered. The Attempt he makes t^ deftroy the Credit of it, hecaufe of the Part it had in the War againjl the Benjamites for the Injury done to the Levite and his Concubine at Gibeah. S'hat whole I'ranfaoiisn particularly conftdered. His Account of the ceafmg of that Oracle^ and the Reafons he affigns for it, examined. The Order cf Prophets^ by hi:> own Confeffwn a wife and ex- cellent Inflitution. Thefirange inconfiftent Repre^ fentation he gives of their CharaBer and Condu^, The Way he takes to account for their foretelling future Events., fhewn to be infufficient. Their Pre' dioiions not merely general and ambiguous^ hut clear ^i exprefs^ and circumftantial. The Difference "between the falfe Prophets and the true, confidered. No Argument to be drawn from the former to the "Difadvantage of the latter^
HAVING confidered tliis Writer's Objedions againft theLaw o^Mofes, our Way is clear to proceed to what he hath advanced in his Bool^ againft other Parts of the Old Teftament. He fets himfelf with all his' Might to ridicule and expofc the Spirit of Prophecy under that Difpeniation. He undertakes to prove, p. 265, 267, That the Prophets were not infallible, and that they Jtever be- lieved themfelves to be fo, but were under a Neceffity to talk as they did, that is, as he had exprefifed it juft before, ■/<? talk in the miraculous fupernatural 3 ff^^y^
2i8 .'f Vindication o/'
Way^ and make themfelves the infallible Oracles of God to the People: tho* they knew well enough that they were not immediately iufpircd by God, and that he had not fent them at all. And he thinks, or pretends to think, they were not blame- able for this. It was only the Effe6t of human Prudence. They might falftfy and deceive without Injury^ and fecure their own 'private Inter eft for the Puhlick Good. And he intimates, that a wife and good Man may do fo, and that //// a Man knows the Secret of doing thif, he knows nothing of human Nature^ or human Life, p. 266, 267. Thus I find it is a Maxim with out Moral Philofophers, Si po- pulus vult decipi, decipiatur : and that upon Occa- fion, he could himfelf a6l the Prophet, and pretend immediate Infpiration and Revelations from God, if he thought it would anfwer his End with the People. But the antient Prophets were of a very dif- ferent Spirit, and governed themfelves by quite dif- ferent Maxims and Principles.
But let us fee what Proof he brings to fhew that they were neither extraordinarily infpired by God, nor believed themfelves to be fo. And firft he be-- gins with obferving, that the Spirit of Prophecy in Ifrael, or the Spirit of infallibly declaring the Mind and Will of God, took two different Turns or diflin5l popular Appearances. From the Days of Mofes to Samuel, the Oracle of Urim and Thummim was eftablifhed as the laft Refort in Judgment, and then it fell into Difgrace, 2Lnd Samuel inftituted the Order <^f Prophets.
And firft he begs leave to give a brief Hiflory of the firft and grand Device, as he calls it, the Oracle of Urim and Thummim, p. 267, &c. — He infinuates, that the Original of it is to be afcribed to the People's having been much amufed and fur- prized with the infallible Declarations and Dictfons of Jupiter Hammon ; and then after running out for three or four Pages together into his Commoa
^ the Spirit <9/'Prophecy. 219
Place of Inve<5bives againft the Jews, he obferves, •p.iyi. That " it is abfolutely neceflary to the " Ends of Government, that in every Society " there fhould be fome dernier Refort, or ultimate " Appeal in Judgment. And this laft and ulti- " mate Appeal in Ifraely by the Eftabliiliment of '* Mofes, was to the Oracle of Urim and Thummim. " And this laft Decifion was made by the High " Prieji as by a living Oracle, who gave his An- ** fwer, viva voce,, while he fat with the C/ri/w and " 'Thummim in Judgment. And while he wore " this fitting in Judgment, it was prefumed that " he was both infallible and impeccable, or that his *' Voice and Decifion was the undoubted organi- " zed Voice of God. But the Voice of this Ora- *' cle was foon found to be the Voice of the Prieft.*' p. 278. And then he proceeds to what he calls a remarkable Proof that this Oracle was neither infaU lible, nor inpecc able,, p. 273.
As to his Infmuation about the Oracle of Jupi- ter Hammon, he ihews his Inclination to draw a Parallel between the Pagan Oracles and the Spirit of Prophecy under the Old Teftament Difpenfa- tion -, but he offers no Proof for it, and we fhall hardly think his own Word a fufficient Authority. And what he there obferves concerning the Doubt- fulnefs and A7nhiguity of the oracular Declarations^ which always gave them room enough for an Eva- fion ; and that the Oracle was never particular enough to be tied down to Time and Circumflances^ p. 268. is no way applicable to the many parti- cular exprefs and circumftantial Predi6tions under the Old Teftament. Particularly with Regard to the Oracle of Urim and Thummim -, it is a juft Ob- fervation of the learned Dr. Prideaux, that " the " Name of^Urim and Thuminim, that is. Light '* and Perfe5lion [tho* this Author fhews his Skill in the Original by rendring hTruth and Righteouf- nefs'\ " were given only to denote the Clearnefs
" and
220 A Vindication of
'* and Perfe6lIon, which thefe oracular Anfwers " always carried with them -, for thefe Anfwers '^ were not like the Heathen Oracles, enigmatical *' and amhiguous \ but always clear and manifejiy " not fuch as did ever fall fhort of Perfection, *' either of Fulnefs in the Anfwer, or Certainty " in the Truth of it." See Prid. Conned. Part I. Book: 3^. And it is certain that the Anfwers of this Oracle recorded in Scripture are clear, explicite, and dired to the Queftions propounded to it.
When our Author reprefents the Oracle o^Urim and I'hummm^ as appointed to be the loft Refort in Judgmefji^to which, by Mofes\ Eftablifliment, the ultimate Appeal in Ifrael was to be made ; and de- fcribes the High Priefl 2l% fitting with the Urim and ^hummim in Judgment^ and making the laft De- dfion ; as if in judicial Caufes the laft Refort or Appeal lay to this Oracle ; this is a grofs Mifre- prefentation, either thro' Ignorance or Defign. The Urim and Thummim was not eftablifhed for deciding Caufes in Judgment, which were decided in another Method ; but for afking Counfel of God, and that not in private Affairs, but in Affairs re- lating to the Puhlick, to the King, or fome chief Governor, or the whole People of Ifrael. Thus Mofes faith concerning Jojhua (and the Jews very juftly interpret it as extending to the fucceeding Governors^ that he fJjall fiand before Eleazar the Prieji, who Jhall ajk Counfel for him^ after the Judg- TJient of Urim before the Lord: at his Word fh all they go out, and at his Word fhall they come in, both he and. all the Children of Ifrael with him, even all the Congregation, Numb, xxvii. 21. Where by thzw going out and coming in, the Jews underftand particularly, the making War according to the Im- port of that Phrafe in the Scripture Language. And this was well fuited to the Nature of their Govern- ment as a Theocracy. As God had condefcended to enter into a fpecial Relation to them, as in a pe- culiar
the Spirit o/* P R o p h e c y ^ 2 2 1
cullar Senfe their King and Governor, fo he not only from time totimeraifedup extraordinary Per- fons to judge and govern them, the appointing of which he rcferved to himfelf out of what 'Trihe he* pleafed *, but by the Oracle of Vrim and 'Tbian- mim^ he directed how they were to proceed fn their moft important pubhck Affairs. This was an Ad: of great Goodnefs and Condefcenfion in God, and an ineftimable Privilege to the IfraeliteSy the Ad- vantage of which they would have enjoyed, if they had perfifted in their Obedience, and kept the Co- venant *. They would in that Cafe never have wanted his gracious Diredliorv as far as was necef- fary to their Security and Support. Thus it plea- fed God to indulge that Advantage to his chofeii, People in reality, to which the Heathens v^xvAj pretended by their Oracles. As to the particular Manner in which this Oracle was deliver'd, I fhaU iiot enter into a Difquifition, which hath fuificlent- ly employed the Learned : The Reader may fee a Ihort and judicious Account of it in Dr. Prideaux in the Place above-cited
But however that be, this Writei* pronounces, ,that it is certain, this Oracle was neither infallible mr impeccable : of which he tells us a remarkable -Proof happened under the High Priefihood of Phi- neas the Grand/on of Aaron. And then he goes on to tell the Story a^er his own Way concerning che Injury done to the Levite and his Concubine at Gibeah ; upon which, ihe whole Tribe of Benjamin, by the Decifion of the Oracle, was doomed to De* Jlru^ion : and that this was done without the leaSt
* It did not depend on the High Prieft to give Anfwers by the Urim and Thummim whenever he pleaied ; it depended wholly on the Will of God, who might, in Token of his jull Difpleafure againft tliem for their Sins, fee fit to withhold his Direftion by tilis Oracle, either from the chief Rulers or the People, though they applied to him for that Purpofe. An Inftance of which we have in Saifl, who could obtain no Anfwer from God by Urim, tho* % efirneiUy d«lired it, i Sm, xxviii. 6. Seealfo \ Sam. xiv. 37. ' ' * <I'rutb,
222 ^ ViND 1 CATION o/*
^rtitby natural Honour, or commonjujlice, is evident from the Story itfelf. And after having reprefented the Fa6t in fuch a Manner as he thought would beft anfwer his Defign, he obferves, that nothing was done in this whole Affair hut under the Counfel and Dire5lion of Phineas, the High Priejl, who was then the living Oracle of God in Ifrael. And that this makes it evident that the Oracle was neither in- fallihle nor impeccable : fo far from it, that he encou- raged and prompted the People to the mofi bloody and cruel Outrage, that had ever been known or heard of : and an Injury done to afingle Levite was thought fit to be revenged by cutting off a whole Tribe, Root and Branch, zvithout any Regard to natural Jujlice, or the leafl Bowels of Mercy and Compaffion. And that from this time the Oracle fell into Dijgrace, and tve hear no more of it for above three hundred Tears, fee p. 273 — 281. This Story ferves the Author for more Purpofes than one. As he produces it here to deftroy the Ci^edit of the Oracle of JJrim and T'humtnhn ; fo he had mentioned it before, p. 140, 141. as containing a plain Proof that Lm was a 'Tribe exempted from the JurifdiSion of the Law, and proteoled againft it : and that there was no Law for Priejl s and Levites at that time. Where alfo he reprefents that whole Tranfa^ion as a Scene ofWickednefs, Injuflice and Priejlcraft.
I fhall particularly examine the Author's Ac- count of this Matter, by wh'tth. it will appear how litde he is to be trufted in his Accounts of Things, who can allow himfelf fuch a Scope in Mifrepre- fentation in a Story fo well known. He difcovers from firft to lafl not a Difpofition to find out the Truth, or reprefent the Fad fairly as it was, but a mofl violent Inclination, firft, to make it look as black as poflible, and then to lay the- whole Blame of it upon the Oracle. And where he does not find the Story for his Purpofe, he endeavours to make it fo.
The
the Spirit o/* P R o p h E c Y. 223 The poor injured /.(S^zVf has incurred his Difplea- fure •, for what Reafon I know not, except becaufe he was a Levite. He calls him once and again the drunken Levite^ p. 141. and p. 280. tho* there is not one Word ot his Drunkennefs in the whole Story. He infinuates indeed, that the Levite got drunk at his Father-in-law's, particularly the Day he came away. His Father-in-law defired him to ftay and comfort his Heart: but it happens that the Text only tells us that they tarried till Noon, and did eat both of them, J^dg. xix. 18. If it had been faid, they drank both of them, it might have pafied with his Author for a ftrong Proof, tho' I believe it will be allowed chat People may drink together without being drunk. He obferves alfo that wc are told that the Levite and the old Ephramite that en- tertained him at his Houfe, cheered their Hearts^ and made merry together, as if he thought it im- pofifible for Perfons to cheer their Hearts, and to refrefh and entertain themfelves and their Friends without being drunk. But thefe Things are eafily diftinguilhable in themfelves, whatever they are to this Author. Another Proof of his Good-will to the Levite, is his calling his Concubine his Whore ; tho* every Body that is at all verfed in thefe Mat- ters, knows that a Concubine was a real Wife, but without a Dowry. And in the prefent Cafe, the Levite is feveral times exprefly called her Hiijband, and her Father is called his Father-in-law : And this the Author very well knew, for in relating the Story he calls them fo himfelf And yet he has it over and over again, a certain Levite with his eloped Concubine or Whore ; the Levite' s Concubine or rather Whore ; a drunken Levite and his Whore y p. 273, 276, 278, 280.
And to theLm/<f*s Wife or Concubine, he faith, p. 275. that it is plain from the Story itfelf, that be- fore her Elopement Jhe had been a common Whore. It appears indeed from the Story according to our
Tran-
224 ^ Vindication of
TranQation, Judg. xlx. 2. that fhe had proved un- faithful to his Bed, but nothing is faid to fix upon her the Chara6ter of a common Whore. This is Sup- plied by the Author's own Imagination. But the Word which our Tranflators render, Jhe -played the Whore againji him, is in the Septuagint rendered, iTn^iv'Qn ci'TT* auT^, Jhe went away from hhn, or for- fook him ; and fome Copies have it, u^y'i^) ivra, Jhe was angry at him. And Grotius obferves that xh^ Hebrew Word there made ufe of, which pro- perly fignifies to^/<:?jy the Whore, may alfo be ufed to fignify an Alienation of Mind or Affedlion. Jo- nathan cited by VataUus has it, cum fprevijfet eufu ; and to the fame purpofe Kimchi cited by Liid. De Dieu, defpexit eum -, Jhe difpifed. him. And fome judicious Commentators conclude from the Readi- nefs he fhewed to be reconciled, and his Jpeaking Joft comfortable Words to h^r, or as the Hebrew Phrafe is, Jpeaking to her Heart, ver. 3. that fhe was not guilty of Adultery. For then it is probable he would not have fo follicitoufly fought for a Recon- ciliation, nor would it have been lawful for him to do fo. And indeed, her going to her Father's Houfe (for it does not appear that fhe was turned out, but that fhe went away of her {c\^ ) and con- tinuing there four Months, looks more like a Fa- mily Quarrel upon fome other Account, than like the Ad: of a common Whore, who in all Probabi- lity would have fhunned her Fathers Houfe as well as her Hufband's j and could not well have expec- ted a Refuge or Entertainment there. Another Attempt our Author makes to difguife the Story is, that he would fain infmuate, that the Levite and his Concubine had raifed the Mob of Gibeah againft them by their ill and lewd Behaviour. " How this *' drunken Levite and his Whore behaved them- *' felves, with what Decency and Civility on their *' coming into the City, is not faid •, but this is *' plain, that they had raifed a Mob about them.
the Sph-tt o/' P R o p II E c Y. 225 " which had Hke to have done more Mifchief,'* ^. 280. And hehadfliid the fame thing before, f. 275. and again, p. 281. That " the Hiftorian knew " very well that this Affair would not bear a par- " ticLilar Relation, as to the Occafion and Cir- " cumfcances which made fuch an Uproar in Gi- " heah; tho' from what he hath faid, one may " eafily guefs at the true Grounds of this popular " Outrao-e." What the Author has particularly in view in thefe Infinuations I will not pretend to guefs, but one Thing is plain, that he has a fcrong Inclination to lay the Blame rather on the Levite that fuffered the Injury, than on thofe that inflicted it. Of any ill Behaviour of the Levite upon his coming into Giheah, there is not the lead Hint in the whole Stoiy. The good old Ephraimiie rf^turn- ino- from the Field at Even found the Levite and his Concubine in the Street alone, no Mob about them, and no body taking Notice of them, and therefore in Compaffion took theie Strangers to his own Houfe, being not willing that they fhould continue in the Street all Night, as knowing no doubt the Wickednefs of the Place. Our Author next is pleafed to obferve that a violent outraging Mob in the middle of the Night befet the Houfe, &c. He will have it to be done in the middle of the Night, with an intent, I fuppofe, to infmuate, that the Levite and his Hojl, who were then refrefhing themfelves, fat up drinking and caroufing till Mid- night : but of this there is not one Word in the Story. It may rather be concluded from it, that this happened not long after the Levite had got into the old Man's Houfe, which was in the Evening. When they had given Provender to their AJfes, and had wafhed their Feet, and were eating, and drink- ing, and chearing their Hearts, beheld the Men of the City, certain Sons of Belial, befit the Houfe round about, and beat at the Door, and fpake to the Majler of the Houfe, the old Man, faying, bring
Q. fort
226 A Vindication of
forth the Man that came into thine Houfe that we may know him, Judg. xix. 21, 22. The very fame Words that the Men of Sodom ufed to fig- nify their deteftable Defign to abufe the Angels whom they took to be Men, Gen. xix. 5. Here it is plain that they did not want to have the Le- 'uite brought out to them for any Rudenefs or un- civil Behaviour he had been guilty of, but to gra- tify their horrid and unnatural Lufts. And indeed, Giheah feems to have been then like Sodom^ both in Inhofpitablenefs and unnatural Impurities. It was with Difficulty the Levite himfelf efcaped, and probably upon his withftanding them it was that they threatned to kill him, as he informs the If- raelites^ Judg. xx. 5. But he was forced to give up his Concubine to their Lufts, whom by this Author's own Acknowledgment they forced and raviJJjed to Death. But inftead of fliewing a juft Deteftation of fo execrable a Crime, he exprefles himfelf on this Occafion, in a Manner that cannot but be lliocking to a chafte Ear, and which I fhall not repeat.
There was then no Judge or fupreme Magi- ftrate in Ifrael to whom the Levite might apply for Redrefs, and for the Punifhment of fo enor- mous an Outrage. And therefore he took an ex- traordinary Method to raife an Indignation in the People, and ingage them to do him Juftice. He divided the dead Body of his Concubine into twelve Parts, and fent them to the twelve I'ribes of Ifrael, and confequently to the Tribe of Benjamin among the reft -, which he concluded would make a deep- er Impreffion upon them> than the bare Relation of the Story would have done. The Refentment the People generally fhewed of fo horrid a Wicked- nefs, and their Behaviour on this Occafion, feems to me to furnifh a plain Proof that there was ftill among them a great deal of national Virtue. We are told, that all that faw it faid, there was no
fuel
the Spirit c/'Prophecy. 227
fuch Deed done ncr feen from the Bays that the Chil- dren of Ifrael caine up, out of the hand of Egypt unto this Day : confider of it^ take Advice^ andfpeak your Minds. Their being fo (Irangely fhocked at the Enormoufnefs of the Crime, and declaring that no fuch Thing had been heard of among them be- fore, fhewed that they had been hitherto generally Strangers to fuch horrid Ad:s of Wickednefs, Vio- lence, and Impurity j for which the Canaanites that had Jived in the Country before them had been particularly remarkable. It may be gathered from the Account that is given us, that they firft confi - dered it in x\\t\x: fever al Tribes, the chief M^n of each Tribe among themfelves, and then there was a ge- neral Aflembly of all the People at Mizpeh. How long it was after the Fad before this Affembly was held, we are not told, or how and by what Me- thods it was convened i but undoubtedly by a com- mon Concert among the feverai Tribes it was agreed that the whole Body of the People fhould meet on this Occafion. And then it was that a folemn Curfe was denounced, devoting thofe to Death by a general Confent that fhould not come. For tho' each Tribe had a Government in itfelf, yet all the Tribes made up one Body, and they were all fub- je6t to the Authority of the Whole, or general Af- fembly of the Nation. When they were all met to- gether, they were fir from acting with fuch Preci- pitation as this Writer reprefents it. They proceed- ed in the mod orderly Method. They firft inquir- ed into the Fa6t itfelf. 'Tell us, fay they, how zvas this JVickednefs. The Word in the Original '^"'^1 tell ye us, fhews that they direded their Speech to more than one. Probably, the Levite and his Ser- vant whom he had with him at Gibeah, and the old £/)i?r^/;«//^ that entertained him were prefent at the Affembly. And tho' the Levite only is men- tioned as relating the Fad, which no doubt he did at large in all its Circumftances, they were there to Q^ 2 confirm
,228 y^ Vl N D I C AT 1 ON of
confirm and atteft the Truth of it. This Writer indeed takes upon him to affirm, that the Levite's Account was taken without any farther Enquiry, What flirther Enquiry could be made ? The Tribe o^ Benjamin had notice given them of the Fad; in the fame way that all the other Tribes knew it, and were fumm.oned to come as well as the other Tribes, to the general Afiembly of the Nation. If the Story had been falfe, why did they not ap- pear to confront it, and to juftify themfelves, or excufe their Countrymen? For we are exprefsly told, that the Children <?/ Benjamin heard, that the Children of Ifrael were gone up to Mizpeh, chap. XX. 3. They knew it, and yet would not come; v/hich fhewed little Love to Juftice, or Difpofi- tion to Peace, and was a high Contempt of the national Authority, and a breaking off from that Body of which they were a Part. But the Affem- bly, tho' they had great Reafon to be offended at fuch a Condu6t, did not, as this Author reprefents it, immediately refolve upon the Dejlruofion of the whole Tribe. After they had a fall Information of the Fadl which they carefully enquired into, all the Refolution they took upon it was to punifh the In- habitants of Gibeah, i. e. the immediate Authors of this execrable Wickednefs, according to the Folly or Wickednefs they had wrought in Ifrael, ver. 9, 10, II. And then again, after this, we are told, that the 'Tribes <?/ Ifrael, (J. e. the whole AlTembly of the Nation which were then gathered and knit together as one Man, as it is there expreffed) fent liien through all the Tribe ^/ Benjamin, y^j/z/o-, what Wickednefs is this that is done among you ? now there- fore deliver us the Men, the Children 0/" Belial which are in Gibeah, that v:c may put them to Death, and put away Evil from Ifrael, ver. 12, 13. All that they defired was, that they would give up thofe Perfons to Juftice that had perpetrated this horrid Wickednefs. And could any MefTage be more
reafon-
the Spirit ^Prophecy. 229
reafonable, or more conformable to the Rules of Juftice and Equity than this ? With this Meflage they fent Men, and no doubt Perfons of Note, thro* all the Tribe 0/" Benjamin, to all their Cities, and to the cKitf Heads of Families amongfb them, as fome very juftly underftand it, who were to ex- poftulate with them, and ufe their utmoft Perfua- lions to engage them to comply with fo reafonable a Demand. But what Reception they met with appears from ver. 13. But the Children ^Benjamin would not hearken to the Voice of their Btethren the Children o/'Ifrael. This Writer indeed is pleafed to tell us, what the Benjamites faid to juftify or excufe themfelves, of which there is not one Word in the whole Story. They refufed to deliver up any of their Citizens, as nothing could he charged on any particular Perfons, ^. ijy. And again, p. 280. M^hen the zvhole Mob of a Town was up in the mid- dle of the Night (tho' as I have already (hewn it is probable they firft befet the Houfe, and begun the Outrage in the Evening) it mufl have been impofpible to have charged any Mifchief done upon particular Perfons, or that the Magifrates of Gibeah fjjculd give up the Rioters de?nanded by the other Tribes^ and by the High Prieft : Tho* of the High Prieft's demanding them there is not the leaft Account. But why then did not the Benjamites come as well as the reft of the Tribes to the general Aflembly of the Nation to reprefent this, who they knew were met together to inquire into it? Why did they not iliew a Difpofition to give them up if they could be found, and to ufe their bed Diligence to find them out and punifh them ? This no doubt, would have fatisfied their Brethren, who fufficiently fhew- ed how willing they were to accept Satisfaftion in a fair way, and how loth to break v/ith them. But the Truth is, there is reafon to think they knew , well enough who the guilty Perfons were. In fuch a Town as Gibeah^ that was not very large, it was
0.3 "o
230 A Vindication of
no hard Matter to difcover who were the principal Perfons concerned in this Outrage, and the old Ephraijnite who lived there, and was well acquaint- ed with the Town, and who went out to them> and fpoke with them, mud be fuppofed to have known feveral of them •, and therefore was well able to give Information about this. It was not therefore that they did not know who they were ; but tho' they knew them well enough, they refufed to deliver them up to Juftice ; and thereby became Acceffanes to their Crime, and involved themfelves in the Gmk and Punifhment of it. For the Refufal of fo juft a Demand, was a fufficient Ground for "War againfl them -, concerning which fee Grot, de Jure belli i^ pacts, lib. 2. cap. 21. S. i, 2, 3, 4. But this was not all ; it doth not appear that the Jfraelites ftill had any thing farther in view than to punifh the Inhabitants of Gibeah. We only find that they incamped againfl Gibeah to fight againft it, but not that they had determined to deftroy the reft of the Tribe of Benjamin. All that they did, when provoked by their evil Conduct, was to take a fo- lemn Oath, that none of them would give their Daughters to Benjamin to Wife., fee Chap. xxi. i, 7. "Which plainly fliews that they had then no Inten- tion of utterly deftroying that Tribe, but only to fhew their Abhorrence of their Wickednefs, by breaking off Correfpondence with them, and re- garding them as not of their Society, or belonging to their Body ; from which indeed they had cut themfelves off by their Conduct. But what brought Deftruftion upon the Benjamites was this, that they not only refufed to hearken to the Voice of their Bre- thren the Children of Ifrael, in giving up the Cri- minals when juftly demanded, but as it follows, they gathered themfelves together out of the Cities un- to Gibeah, to go out to battle againfl the Children of Ifrael, ver. 14. Thus in a bafe and fcandalous Caufe for the fake of fome wicked Criminals they
entred
fbe spirit of Fropwecy. 231
entred into a mod unjuft War againft the Body of their own Nation, which in the Event brought up- on them a fevere Vengeance. Hitherto we hear nothing of the Oracle^ being confulted. But now the War being refolved upon, the Ifraelites ajked Counfel of God, not whether they fhould go to War at all, for they feem to have thought the Juflice of the War fo clear, that they had not the leaft Doubt concerning it, but which of the Tribes Jloould go up firfi, or have the chief Command in the War, they being upon an Equality, and no Judge or General with a fupreme Authority over the whole. Nor did they enquire whether they were to have Succefs in it, for upon this it is likely they confidently prefumed, both becaufe of their Num- bers and Power, and becaufe of the Juftice of their Caufe. But when the Event did not anfwer th^ Expectations, they confulted the Oracle again, which the third time promifed them Succefs, which it had not done before. And this is all the Con- cern the Oracle had in this War. Nor is there the leaft Hint of their confulting it any more in the whole Story. As to the Slaughter that followed upon it, after the Ifraelites had been twice defeated, no doubt their Pafiions were raifed to the Height, partly by their Indignation againft the Wickednefs that had been committed, and againft the Benja^ mites for rejeding all the friendly Offers that had been made to them, and partly by the great Lofs and Slaughter they had fuftained in the two firft Engagements ; and then they gave too great a loofe to their Rage and Refentment, in utterly deftroy- ing all the Cities of Benjamin with the Men, Wo- men, ^c. The Author takes upon him to affirm, p. 273. That the whole Tribe o/" Benjamin was hy the Decifion of the Oracle doomed to Defiru5lion, But this is his own Fi^ion without any thing in the Story to fupport it. There feems to have been no Rcfolutiop of this Kind taken before. And the 0^4 Oath
232 ^ ViN DI C AT ION (9/'
Oath which they took with regard to Benjamin, and which I mentioned before, plainly imphes the contrary. It all appears to have been done at once in the Heat of Blood and Paffion, without con- fulting the Oracle, or giving themfelves time to cool and to confider Things. And accordingly, they were fenfible of it themfelves, and deeply concerned for it when the Rage was over. This Writer would fain infinuate, that they laid the Blame of what they had done upon the Oracle itfelf •, no- thing of which appears, but rather that they re- ^tnted of th.Qir DWH Ra/hnefs, Chap. xxi. 6. And we find the Elders of the Congregation, as they are called, ver. 16. who are the lame that are called. Chap. XX. 2. The Chief of all the People, even of all
«• Tribes o/"Ifrael, plainly charged it upon them- ves, when they fiiid to the Parents of the Vir- gins at Shiloh, whom the Berjamites were fuffered to take away, be favourable unto them for our Sakes ', becaufe we referved not to every Man his Wife in the War, ver. 20. that is, becaufe we rafh- ly carried the Slaughter fo far, as not to leave the Women of the Tribe to be Wives to the Men that fhould remain.
As to the Slaughter of the Inhabitants of Jabefh Gilead, this is exprefsly afcribed, not to the Advice of the Oracle, but to the Congregation, or the ' People themfelves, probably the Heads of them, who fent 12000 Men to deflroy it. Chap. xxi. 5, 8, 10. This Writer feems to think the Inhabi- tants of Jabefb were much to be commended for not having involved themfelves in the fame Di^ciil- ties with the reft of the Ifraelites, or been any ways concerned in this mofi unrighteous Effufion of Bloods But fince they had received the Summons that was lent thro' all Ifrael, and undoubtedly knew of the Oath or Curie that had been made in the general JffemUy of the Nation, devoting thofe to Death that fhould not come, their refufing to come to the
general
the Spirit cfV rophecy. 233
general Confalr, and to fubmit to the Appoint- ment, efpecially in a juft Caufe, was a very great Crime, and a Rebellion againft the Authority of the whole Community •, and they thereby were the Authors of their own Deftrudlion, which in that Cafe they had reafon to expeft But if the Pu- tt ifhment infli6led upon them was carried too far, as undoubtedly it was, v/hatever. there was wrong or cruel in this Proceeding, could not be charged upon the Oracle^ which was not confulted at all about it. Nor had the Oracle any thing to do in the Contrivance of fuffering the Benjamite young Men to take the Virgins at Shiloh. This is ex- preOy afcribed to the Elders of the Congregation, or Chief of the People, Chap. xxi. 16, 19, 20. who having a great Reverence for an Oath, thought of this Expedient to provide Wives for the Benja- miies, and yet not violate the Oath they had taken, though it was a rafh one. I fhall not undertake to vindicate their Cafuiftry in this, tho* a very great Man, Grotius, thinks their Condud in it was very juftifiable, and that thereby they (lived themfelves from the Guilt of Perjury. See Grot, de Jure belH et pads, lib. 2. cap. 13. §. 5.
Our Author obferves, " that the Hebrew Hif- " torian was fo confcious of the moral Iniquity " and Wickednefs of all this, that he concludes " the Story with thefe remarkable Words," in thofe Days there was no King in Ifrael, but every Man did that which was right in his ozvn Eyes. The Defign of thefe Words is to fignify, that there was then no chief Governor that had a fupreme Au- thority over the People. And therefore it is ufu- ally and juftly thought to have happened in the Interval between the Death of Jojhua, and the Elders that furvived him, and the Appointment of Judges, the firft of whom was Othniel. And therefore no wonder that there were great Crimes committed, and great Irregularities m the Manage- ment
234 yf ViN DI C A T I ON of
ment of their Affairs, and particularly of this Af- fair, fince there was no one that had fufficient Power to punifh Delinquents, or to govern the People and reftrain their Fury, or to guide and conduct them with a proper Authority. But then this Writer adds, that " he [the Hiftorian] feems " to have forgotten what he had juft before told ** us, that there was a High Prieft in Ifrael at that " time, as the living Oracle of God, ^c. and " that nothing had been done in this whole Affair, *' but under his Council and Diredion." But this is not to be charged on the Hijlorian^s Forgetfulnefs or Defign. Tho* there was an High Prieft^ yet he was not a King or Judge with fupreme Authority to govern the Nation, nor had he the Power of the Sword, to punifh Delinquents, or corredt Abufes. Nor doth it appear by any one thing in the whole Courfe of the Story, that the High Priejl then had, or exercifed any Authority or Sovereign Power over the People. This is exprelly attributed to the Chief of the People, or Heads of the Tribes, and Elders of the Cengregation. And all that the High Prieft had to do in it, was only to give them An- fwers when they confulted the Oracle of God, which it doth not appear they did after the laft Battle. And therefore none of the wrong Things they did after this are chargeable upon the Oracle. Nor is there any Evidence to fhew, that they confulted it with regard to any one part of their Condud, which was really culpable. So far is it from being true, that nothing had been done in this whole Af- fair, without the High Prieji*s Dire^ion and Ad- vice.
Thus have I particularly confidered this Affair, on which this Writer lays fo mighty a Strefs, and which is the only Thing he produces to deftroy the Credit of the Oracle of Uritn and Thununitn. As to what he adds, p. 281. that from that time the Oracle fell into Difgrace^ fmce we l^ear no more of
it
the Spirit ofPROPHECY, 235
// for above three hundred Tears, or till the Days of David : it doth not follow that it was not confult- ed, becaufe we have no particular Account of it in the fhort Hiftory that is given us of the Judges. And David's confulting it, which our Author owns he did three or four Times, while he was under his Difficulties and Dilirejfes (and he might have men- tioned Saul too, who confulted it, as appears from I Sam. xiv. 18, 19, 36, 37. xxviii. 6.) plainly Ihews, that the Reputation of it was not then funk ; and makes it very probable, that it had not lain negledted for above three hundred- Years. And whereas he tells us, that when David came to be fet- tled in the Kingdom, we hear no more of it, nor do we find it ever mentioned, confulted, or regarded after y we are exprefly told twice in one Chapter, that af- ter David was fully fettled in his Kingdom, he in- quired of the Lord when he was at War with the Philiflines, 2 Sam. v. 19, 23, 24. See another In- itance of it. 2 Sajn. xxi. i.
Our Author after having put the Difgrace of the Oracle upon the Bufmefs at Jahefo, afterwards tells us, that " it is plain from the Hiftory itfelf, " that the Credit of this Oracle funk and declined *' with the Reputation of the Priefts, who had " fallen into a State of the grofleft Ignorance and " Vice ; and by their fcandalous Behaviour in the " Day 5 of Eli and Samuel, were perfedlly fcorn- " ed and defpifed by the meanefl: of the People." The Hiftory indeed informs us of the fcandalous Behaviour of Elih Sons, but gives us no Account of the Corruption of the Priefls in general, or if it were fo, this did not aff^edb the Reputation of the Oracle of Urim and Thu?fimim, fmce it is certain from the Inftances already mentioned, that after the time he affigns for that general Corruption of the Priefthood, this Oracle was ftill held in great Efteem, and was confulted by David, both before he came to the Throne and afterwards. Nor is.
fhere
236 A Vindication of
there any Proof that the Triefts were, from the time he mentions, more funk in their Reputation than before : On the contrary, it might be fhewn from feveral Inftances, that both in the Reign of David, and under fome of the beftof the fucceeding Kings, that Order was as much efteemed as ever it had been. So that if the Oracle ceafed at that time, it could not be owing to the Caufe he affigns for it. Some, as the learned Dr. Spencer, who fuppofe it to have ceafed from the Time of Solomon, aflign very different Reafons for it*. But it feems to me more probable, that it continued till the Time of the Bahylonijh Captivity. It is true, we have no parti- cular Account of its being confulted under the Kings, any more than that it was confulted under the Judges, but very probably it was confulted un- der both : tho' in the time of the Kings, there be- ing a conftant Succeffion of infpired Prophets made Applications to it lefs frequent, and lefs neceffary. That Paffage, Ezra ii. 60,. and Neh. vii. 6;^. where the 'Tirjhatha or Governor, determined that the Priefts that had loft the Regifter of their Genea- logies, Jhould not eat of the mofi holy Things, till there flood up a Prieft with Urim and Tmmmim ; as it fhews, that at the Time of their Return from the Bahylonijh Captivity there was no Urim and 'Thummim, fo it feems plainly to intimate that be- fore that Captivity under the firfl Temple, there had been a Prieft with Urim and Thummim, and that they were in hopes it would be fo again. But we never hear of it afterwards, though it is certain the Priefthood was never in greater Power and Re- putation than under the fecond Temple -, which fhews that that Oracle did not rife or fall, with the Reputation of the Priefthood, nor had any Dependence upon it,
* See Spencer. Dijfert. de Urim ^ Thnm. cap. 7.
Our
the Spirit o/' P R o p h E c y. 237
Our Author, after making this Reprefentation of the Oracle of Urim and Thummim, proceeds to give an Account of the Inftitution of the Order of Prophets, which he makes to be the fecond dif- fer enl Turn, or dijlin5l popular Appearance, which the Spirit of Prophecy took in Ifrael. And he re- ^refents this as a new Inftitution fet up by Samuel. If he intends by this to infinuate that there were np Prophets before, it is a great Miftake, as appears from feveral Inftances mentioned in 'Scripture. See Gen. XX. 7. Numb, xi. 25, 26. Judg. vi. 8. i Sam. ii. 27 — 36. And Mofes, the moft eminent of all the Prophets, Numh. xii. 6, 7, 8. Deut. xxxiv. 10. was long before that time. But I will grant that from the time o{ Samuel there leems to have been a more conftant Succeffion of Prophets than there was before. At what time there were Colleges, as this Author calls them, of Prophets' firft eredled we are not informed in the facred Writings -, but have Reafon to think that there were fome fuch Things in the Days of Samuel, and under his fpecial In- fpedlion. Thus we read of a company of Prophets prophefying together, and Samuel flanding as ap- pointed over them, i. Sam. xix. 20. and of another Company of Prophets before this, 2. Sam. x. 5. It is very probable that there were Places where they lived together in Society, and devoted them- felves to religious Exercifes ; and that thefe were in the nature of Seminaries, where Perfons were trained up under the Diredion of one or more eminent Prophet or Prophets ftri(5tly fo- called, in- the Knowledge of the Law, and in juft and wor- thy Notions of Religion and of the fupreme Be- ing ; fuch as every where appear in the prophetical Writings ; and were employed in folemn Ads of Adoration to God, particularly in Prayer and Praife ; or compofing and finging facred Hymns to his Honour. This was fo ufual and conftant a Part of their Exercife, that praifing God is often I honoured
238 A Vindication of
honoured with the Name of Prdphefying^ even where no fpecial Infpiration is intended. Thus we read of the Levites being appointed by David to frophefy with the Harp^ with P/alteries, and Cym- bals, I Chron. xxv. 1—6. It is probable that the Perfons who were educated, and who lived together in thofe prophetical Colleges, were ufually calletUr Prophets, even tho' they were not immediately and extraordinarily infpired ; and becaufe Jezahd was for utterly exterminating thefe Schools of the Pro- phets, which helped to keep up and fpread the Knowledge of Religion, and the true Worfhip of God, * and endeavoured to deftroy all that were to be found in thofe facred Seminaries, fhe is re- prefented as deftroying the Prophets of the Lord, of whom Obadiah concealed a hundred. Thefe are probably the fame Perfons that are at other times called the Sons of the Prophets, and thereby diftin- guifhed from the Prophets eminently fo called, to whom they miniftred, and under whofe Difcipline and Inftrudlions they were educated. And though many of thefe never became Prophets in the moll ftrid and eminent Senfe, yet as they additfled them- felvesto Meditation and Prayer, and to devout fmg- ing Praifes to God, and to the Study of the Law under the Prophets Direftion, fo they were thereby well qualified to be ufeful to the People. And it may very juftly be fuppofed that out of Souls thus prepared and difpofed God often chofe Perfons whom it pleafed him to honour with his facred im- mediate Infpiration. Thus i Kings ch. xx^*", we read of one who is called ^ Prophet, ver. 38. and
* That the People were wont at ftated times to have recourfe to the Prophets for Inltrud'tion in Religion, efpecially on the Sab- baths and New Moons, may be probably gathered from what the Shiinamite\ Hufband laid to her, when fhe wanted to go to the Man of God ; •wherefore avilt thou go to him to Day ? it is veither New Moon, nor Habbath;, 2 Kings iv. 2 3.
one
the Spirit ©/"Prophecy. 2':;9
one of the Prophets, ver. 41. and in the 35* Verfe the fame Perfon is called a certain Man of the Sons of the Prophets, to fliew that he belonged to one of the prophetical Colleges, and had his Education there. But that it might not be thought that the prophe- tical Spirit was meerly the Effedt of their being educated in thofe" Seminaries, it pleafed God to call fome to the Office of Prophets, and to grant them his extraordinary Infpiration, who never were educated in thofe Schools at all. Such was the Vvo- ■^\itt Amos, Amos vii. 14, 15. and probably that eminent Prophet Elifha ; as may be gathered from
1 Kings Xix. 20, 21. and perhaps Z/i/r^Z? himfelf, and feveral others of the Prophets.
God's raifing up fuch Prophets among the Jews from time to time, is frequently mentioned as an extraordinary Inftance of his Goodnefs and Conde- fcenlion towards that Peoole. See 2 Kinvs xVii. 18,
2 Chron. xxxvi. 15, 16. Jer. vii. 25. xxv. 4, 5, 6, From which PafTages it appeareth that they were fent in the Name of God to infiru5i the People in true Religion, to warn them againft Idolatry and other Wickednefs, and to call them to Repentance, and give them the moft warm and lively Exhor- tations to the Praflice of univerfal Righteoufnefs ; and how well they performed this, we have a ma- nifeft Proof from their admirable Writings ftill extant. They were alfo frequently infpired 10 fore- tel future Events, And this was ordered for wife and valuable Ends. The Heathens boafted of their Oracles ; they had many Arts of Divination among them, and Perfons that pretended to the Know- ledge of future Events by Communication with their Gods, which did not a little contribute to keep up the Reputation of the fpreading Idolatry. All thefe Arts of Divination were exprefly forbidden to the 7<fZ£;; in their Law, Deut. xvin. 10, 11, 12. But it pleafed God in his great Goodnefs and Con- defcenfion to raife up Prophets among them, who
were
240 A Vindication of
were enabled to foretel future Events which it was impofTible for any human Segacity to forefee, and that in fuch a Manner as exhibited a glorious tri- umph over all the Heathen Idols and their Wor- fhippers in that which they vainly pretended to ; and thereby manifeflly contributed to the main De- fign of the Law, which was to preferve the People from Idolatry^ and from running after the Vanities of the Heathens. Some of the prophetical Pre- didions related to Things which were to hap- pen in their own time, whether of a private or of a more publick Nature : the exa6l Accomplifh- ment of which tended to engage the People to pay a greater Regard to their pure and excellent In- flru6lions and Exhortations. Others of their Pre- didlions related to Things that were to happen in future Ages at a confiderable Diftance of Time, and the fulfilling of thefe from time to time in their proper Seafon, gave a flill farther Proof that they were extraordinarily infpired of God. But efpe- cially many of their Predictions looked forward to the great Mejfiah or Saviour of Mankind, and to the Difpenfation he was to introduce. For the Pro- phets them felves were not fent to bring in any new Difpenfation, or to teach and publifh any new Dodrines or Laws ; but their Miflion was evident- ly appointed with a double View ; the one to- wards the Law of Mofes which had been already given, and the Authority of which the Prophets did farther confirm and eftablirti, and endeavoured to keep the People to the Obfervation of it whilfl it continued in force ; the other View was towards the future Difpenfation of the McJfiah^ whofe Com- ing, Kingdom, Covenant, Offices and Charader they pointed out and foretold at fundry Times and in divers Manners, with great Variety and a won- derful Harmony •, and thereby kept up the People's Expeftation towards it, which otherwife would have languiflied, and probably have been lofl, and
prepared
the Spirit of ]? R o ? u 'EC Y. 24!
prepared 'them for It. Thus the Spirit ofProphs* cy in the antient Prophets, was appointed and ordered for very valuable Ends. It was not only ufeful ro the Age and Nation in which they lived, but the Advantage arifing from it is of extenfivc Influence to other Nations, and to fucceeding Ge- nerations. Their pathetical Exhortations to the Pracflice of Righteoufnefs, their lively Warnings and Reproofs for Sin, and the jull and noble Ideas they give of God and Religion, are of fignal Ufe in all Ages, and the reviewing their Predidions, and comparing them with the Events, furniflieth a glorious Proof of the Extent of the divine Fore- knowledge, and the comprehenfive Views of the divine Providence: it tends to ftrengthen our Belief of a moft wife prefiding Mind governing the World, and the Affairs of Mankind ; as well as gives a glorious Atteftation to the divine Mifllon of our Lord Jefus Chrift, and to the evangelical Dlf- penfation, as I fliall have Occafion to Ihew more fully afterwards.
The Account our Author atfirfl g*ives of the In- ftitution of the Prophetick Order feems to be very much to their Honour,^. 282, &c. ForthoMie will not allow that they were extraordinarily in- fpired of God, yet if his own Account of their Inftitution be juft, it was one of the noblefl and beft defigned in the World, and is fcarce to be pa- rallell'd among the wifeft and moft celebrated In- llitutions of Antiquity, and redounds very much to the Honour of Satnuel, whom he makes the Au- thor of it. He tells, us, that when the Priefthood was fallen into great Dep-eneracy, Samiid's Defiga in inftituting the prophetical Order, was " to re- " ftore Learning and Virtue, and to reftrain the " Vices both ot Priefts and People. He repre- " fents the Prophets as devoted toLearning,Study, " and Retirement, as ftudyingHiftory, Rhetorick, *^ Poetry, and the Knowledge of Nature, but R ** above
242 ^Vindication of
" above all, moral Philofophy, or the Know- " ledge of God's Providence, and human Nature: *' That the moral Rules to be obferved in this " Society were very ft rid and fevere ; they were " to live in a low abftemious Way, retired from *' the World, without Ambition or Avarice, and ** to exemplify as well as preach the moft perfedt " Righteoufnefs and rigid Virtue-, and to rebuke " and corre6t Vice wherever they found it without " the leaft refped of Perfons." This bei ng fo,no wonder that he exprefsly calls it a mojl wife and ex- cellent Institution^ efpecially fmce he affirms, f, 284. that " the proper Bufmefs of the Prophets, " and the Defign of their Inftitution and Order *' was to preach moral Truth and Righteoufnefs, *' to keep the People to the moral Law, and " bring them to Repentance as the neceflary Means "of their Happinefs and Safety, and the only *' Condition of the divine Favour." And he re- peats it, p. 285. that " this was undoubtedly the " Nature and Defign of the prophetick Order and " Office. And he leems to pity their hard Lot in " being caft among fuch an ignorant fuperftitious " People, who often uled them very ill,"/'. 290. Hitherto one would think he entertained a very good Opinion of the Prophets, efpecially^fmce he thinks fit to honour them with that Title for which he profefTeth fo great a Veneration, that of PH- hfophers and Moralifis, p. 287. and reprefents them as oppofing the Priefts, and endeavouring to take the Peo fie from their ftiperjlilious Dependence on Sacri" fees and Ahfolutions, p. 304.
But who would think it, that after making this Reprefentation of the Prophets he bends his whole Force to prove, that they were the moft dangerous Incendiaries^ the greateft Plagues to their Coun- try, that ever any Nation was troubled with ; and the Caufe of all the Miferles and Calamities ' that befel it for above three hundred Tears, and
which
the Spirit of P R o p H E C Y." 243 which at length terminated in its Ruin. That they marked out every King and Roydl Family for De- firu^ion, that would not come into their Meafures, and raifed the moft formidable and Moody Rebellions Ggainjl them \ that they were continually ingaged in fomenting religious fVars, Maffacres^ OutrageSy cuid Perfecutions ; //// at length both Kings and Pro- phets were exterminated, and the whole Nation per- fectly injlaved, p. 299, 304, 320, &c. In a Word, fo great is his Zeal againft them, that for a while he feems to forget his Animofity againft the Priefts, and lays all the Calamities of Ifrael not upon the Prieflsy but upon thefe Prophets and moral Philofo- phers. There is no accounting for fo extraordinary a Rage againft them, but that fome of them hap- pen to be the Penmen of fevcral Parts of the Holy Scripture, and are reprefented both in the Old Teftament, and in the New, as divinely i?ifj)ired, and therefore he is determined to do all that in him lies to reprefent them as the worft of the human Race -, tho' at the Expence of all that can be called Candour, Truth, and Decency.
That I may obferve fome Order in my Remarks, tho' he obferves none in his Inveftives, I fliall firft confider what he offers againft the divine In- fpiration of the Prophets, and their having the Knowledge of Things future communicated to them in a fupernatural way •, and then ftiall proceed to Che Reflections he cafts upon their moral Charader, and the Attempts he makes to fhew that they were the Enemies and Difturbers of their Country : after which I fliall confider fome fcattered Infinuations againft them, which cannot fo well be reduced to either of the foregoing Heads.
Our Author, as I have already hinted, even when he feems to give the moft advantageous Ac- count of the Prophets, plainly denies them to have been divinely infpired. But that " by their.Re- " tirement and Study they had acquired fuch high R 2 *' Degrees
'244 '^Vindication o/
" Degrees of Knowledge, that the common Peo- *' pie looked upon them as wholly miraculous and *' fupernatural, and believed they had immediate ** and free Converfation with God, Angels, and *' departed Souls, and that they knew the Hearts ** of Men, and future Events, fff^:." p. 284. And he tells us that " the Prophets themfelves in time *' degenerated from the Stridtnefs and Purity of " their firft Inftitution, and particularly that they *' pretended too much to the Knowledge of Futu- •' rity 5 and by this Means fometimes -prophefied *' Lies in the Name of the Lord, as four hundred *' of them did at once in the Cafe of Ahah. That *' they vied with one another in their Prediftions, *' and carried their Pretenfions too high as a Means *' to get Money," p. 304, 305. And whereas they often foretold future Events, he endeavours to account for it feveral ways. He tells us that*' they *' had not in any Cafe the Knowledge of Things *'. future communicated to them in a fupernatural *' Way *, but that as they were Men of Study and ** Retirement, who nicely obferved the Conduft " of Providence, and the various Revolutions of *' Kingdoms and States in their very Beginnings " and firft Occafions, this might enable them upon *' rational Principles, to give a very near guefs at •* what would happen, efpccially as to the great *' Turns and Changes of Nations andGovernments." He inftances in the Predictions of the JJJyrian and Bahylonijh Captivity, which he thinks every Man that had Eyes in his Head might have forefeen as unavoidable. But being fenfible that all this will hardly account for particular, exprefs, circumftantial Prediftions of future Events, he thinks fit to add, that " the Prophets when they flruck at future " Events, were not very particular and circum- *' ftantial as to Time, Place, Perfons, ^c. They *' generally deliver their Prefages in dark and ob- " fcure Terms, and only relate for the moft part, q " tlieir
the Spirit o/Trophecy. 245
*« their Dreams and Vifions of the Night, the In- ** terpretation of which is extremely difficult, and " may be applied to a thoufand different Events *' from that time to this, and fo on to the End of " the World. And that by this Means the an- " tient Prophets in great meafure faved themfelves, " and were not anfwerable for Particulars in Fu- " turity, whilft they were footjiing the fuperfti- " tious People with an imaginary Knowledge of " what was to come,"^. 288, 289. And laftly, he tells us, that" there are likewife feveral In- " ftances to be given, in which the Prophets " brought about their own Prediftions by accom- " plifhing in a natural way, what they had re- " folved upon before. He inftances in the Me- ** thod taken by Samuel to fet afide Said and his *' Family, and in the Management of the Prophet " Elijha with Hazaeliht chief Captain of the King ** of Syria, " p. 305
I have laid thefe feveral Paflages together, that the Author's Sentiments may appear in their juft Light, and in their full Strength.
That the Prophets ftriftly and properly fo called were not only regarded by the Vulgar as- divinely infpired, but that they themfelves pretended to be fo, and that they delivered MelTages to the People as what they had received by immediate Revela- tfon from God, is inconteftable. And not only did they in the Name of God deliver folemn Warnings and Exhortations to the People to engage them to Repentance, and the Practice of true Religion and Righteoufnefs, but they frequently profefTed to fore- tel future Events, and that not merely by proba- ble ConjeBure, but in a way of cetain Predi5liony as having the Knowledge of them extraordinarily communicated to them by God himfelf. It will be eafily allowed that fome of the Prophecies have a confiderable Obfcurity in them, for which feveral Reafons might be affigned ; but it is alfo certain
R ^ iliav
246 !/^ VrNDICATION of
that many of their Predidions are clear and eX- prefs, -particular -and, circuniftantial^ as to 'Tim^-) Place, Perfons, and that with regard to Events which no human Sagacity could forefee, and which roi' e of the Ways mentioned by this Author can poiTibly account for.
Thus, €. g. what could be more plain or circum- ftantial than that Predidion of a Prophet to King Je- roboam^ that a Child fhould be born unto the Houfe of David, Jofiah by Name, who fhould deftroy the Altar at Bethel, and burn dead Men's Bones upon it to pollute it j and this foretold three hundred zxid fifty Years before it happened ? i Kings xiii. 2 — 6. Could any thing be more diftind or more wonderful than Ifaiahh foretelling theVidlories and Conquefts of Cy- rus by Name, and his letting go the C a! ives of Judali Tiot for Price or Reward, and this near two himdred > Years before it came to pafs, (ee Ifa. xlv, i — 5, 13. Our Author thinks it was eafy to fore- fee the Conqueft and Captivity of Ifrael by the Affyrians, who were then in the Fleight of their Power ; but was it pofTible for any human Saga- city to forefee that when Senacherih at the Head of a mighty Army was on the Point of befieging yeriifalem, and gave out fuch terrible Threatnings againft it, and there was no human Force to op- pofe him ; he fhould not befiege it at all, nor fo much as fhoot an Arrow againjl it, but obliged to return with Difgrace to his ozvn Land, and there be flain with the Sword? and yet this the Prophet Ifaiah clearly and exprefsly foretold, and it was accomplifhed in every Circumftance ; fee the xxxvii^ Chapter of Ifaiah, and 2 Kings xix. The fame Prophet, when Babylon was at Peace with Jiidea, and all the Danger of the J^-zc;; feemed to be from Affyria, which was then in its greateft Power ; and none from Babylon at all 5 foretolci to llexekiah the Deftruftion of Jerufalem by the King pf Babylon i and the carrying the Royal Family cap- tive
the Spirit 0/ P R o p h e c vJ 24.7
tive thither, above a hundred Years before that De" ftruftion happened, Ifa. xxxix. 6, 7. He alfo cxprefsly foretold the dreadful Deftruftion of Baby- Ion itfelf, and the utter Defolation that fhould come upon it, Ifa. xiv. 22,23. The Prophet Jeremiah foretels the fame Deftrudlion and Ruin of Babylon^ and that with many remarkable Circumftances re- lating to the taking of the City by the Medes and Perfiam, all which were literally accomplifhed. And this was foretold at a time when Babylon was the moft powerful Empire in the World, and in the Height of all its Profperity and Grandeur. This Writer thinks there is nothing in Jeremiah^ foretelling that Jerujalem fhould be taken and de- ftroyed by the Chaldeans at a time when they were fo powerful, and the Jews fo weak, tho' confider- ing the Alliance the Jews had with Egypt a very potent Kingdom, and whofe Intereft it was to op- pofe the Chaldeans, it might not be fo eafy to forefee it as he imagines •, but how came that Pro- phet to foretel that the Captivity of the Jews Ihould \2i^feventy Tears, and that at the End of that fixed time they fhould be rejlored to their own Country again ? Jer. xxv. 12. xxix. 10. Hofea and Amos both foretold the Deflrudlion of Ifrael by the Affyrians in the Days of Jeroboam the Se- cond, when that Kingdom was in the mofl flou- rilhing Circumftances it had ever been in, Uof. x. e^,6. Amos, vii. 10—17. The fame Prophet Amos alfo foretold the entire Deft ru6l ion of Bamafcus and Syria, with this Circumftance, that the People Ihould be carried captive to Kir ; as they actually were by Tiglath-Pilefer King of AJfyria, ^ near threefcore Years after the Predidion, according to Archbiftiop UJher*% Computation, compare Amos i. 4, 5, with I King xvi. 9. In the Days of King Ahaz when Ifrael was in Confederacy with Syria againft Judah, and threatned to deftroy it, the Prophet Ifaiab foretold that before the Child he R 4 then
248 ^Vindication of
^hen had by the Prophetefs fhould be able to fay my Father, or my Mother^ the Riches of Damaf- cus, and the Spoil of S3.m3.no, Jhould he taken away ly the King ©/"Aflyria, Ifa, viii. 3,4. And he had before that exprefsly foretold, that within three- fcore and five Years Ephraim fhould be fo dejlroy- ed as to be m more a People, Ifa. vii. 8. which was literally accompiifhed, fee Ufher's Annales vet. Teftam./)^^. 108. There are many other moft exprefs and circumftantial Predictions in the Pro- phecies of Ifaiah. After having given a moil lively Defcription of the Deflruftion of Moah and its diief Cities, he fixes the precife Time for it 5 the Lord hath fpoken, f<iying, -within three Tears as the Tears of an Hireling, and the Glory <?f Moab Jhall he contemned, Ifa. xvi. 14. So alfo Chap. xxi. 17. Thus hath the Lord /aid unto me, ivithin a Tear according to the Tears of an Hireling, and fhall all the Glory of Kcdi^v fail, &c. He exprefsly foretold not only that Hezekiah Ihould recover of his dangerous Sicknefs, but that God would add fifteen Tears to his Life, Ifa. xxxviii. 5, 6. The defolate State of Tyre is precifely determined tofe- *Denty Tears, Ifa. xxii. 15. The VxQi^\\tt Exekicl not only foretels in the flrongeft Terms the Defo- lation of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar, but exprefsly declares that at the End of forty Tears God would h'ing again the Captivity of Egypt ; and it fhould again becomiC a Kingdom i but he adds that it Ihould be a hafe one, and that it fhould no longer eicalt itfelf above the Nations •, v/hich was exadly accompiifhed, fee Ezek. chap. xxix.
It were eafy to produce more Inftances of this kind out of the prophetical Writings, to which might be added feveral other wonderful and exprefs Predicti- ons, of which we have an Account in the facred Hi- ftory. Thus, e.g, was it pofTible for any human Wil- dom to forefee that the huge Hofl of Moabites, Am^ moriikS) and Edmitcs, that threatued to fwallow up
Judabi
the Spirit o/*Prophecy. 349.
Judah, fliould on a fudden be deftroyed, widiout the Jews fighting in their own Defence -, and thac they needed only to Jland ft ill ^ and fee the Salva^ tiofi of God ? And yet this was exprefsly foretold by a Prophet in the Name of God to JehofJjaphat and the Men of Judah^ when they were overwhelmed with Terror ; and it was immediately and wonder- fully accomplilhed, iChron. xx. 14, ^c. By what human Means could the Prophet Elijha reveal to the King of Ifrael the King of Syria's mod fecret Proje<5ls and Counfels •, or afllire him, when Sa^ 7naria was reduced to the Extremity of Diftrefs by Famine and the Hofl of the Syrians^ and no hu- man Succour near, that in one Day's time there fliould be fuch a Plenty of all Things, as if Pro- vifionshad come pouring down upon them from Heaven ? Thefe and many other Predidions that might be mentioned are not delivered merely in general ambiguous Terms, as this Writer tells us was ufually done to fave the Prophet's Credit, but are clear, exprefs and determinate, applied to par- ticular Circumftances of Time, Place, and Per- fons, which it was impofiible for any Man on Earth by any merely human Sagacity to forefee ; many of them contrary to all Appearances, and to all the Rules of human Probability, and which it was ab- folutely out of the Power of the Prophets them- felves to bring about by any natural Means, by which he pretends they often took care to fufil their ov/n Predidlions. In a Word, they were Things which could only be known to him whofe Provi- dence governs all Events, and who hath the Times and Seafons, the Events of Nations and particular* Perfons in his own Hands.
But efpecially the Prophecies of Daniel are high- ly remarkable, which takes in the Fates offo many different Nations for fo long a Series of Years, the SuccefTion of four mighty Empires, and the principal Revolutions that were to befall them, in
the
^50 yf Vindication of
the very Order in which they were to happen.' Our Author indeed would fain have it believed that Daniel flourifhed in the Reign of Artaxerxes Mne- mon, i. e. 140 Years after the time in which he really lived*. But even on that Suppofition his
Prophecy
* If we inqnire what it is that oar Author offers to fupport fo extraordinary a ConjecStwe, which is entirely contrary to the whole Hiftory of the Book of Daniel, and to the exprefs Teftimony of the PrOphet Ezekiel, who lived in the time of the Sabylonijh Captivit)% and fpeaks of Daniel as at that time fa- mous for his Wifdom and Piety, Ez.ek.x\\. 14, xxviii. 3. It 3s no more than this ; He affirms, that it is evident, and the Text exprefsly tells us, that the Decree or Commandment for the building of the City, and Reftoration of the People, from which the feventy Weeks are to begin, came out at the very time when Daniel was offering up his Prayers and Supplica- tions for the Liberty of his Nation. And this Decree or Com- mandment for building the City, i^c. came forth in the feventh Year of Artaxerxes Ivlnemon, at which time therefore Dattiel muft have had his Vlfion, fee p. 337, 339. But not to urge that \i\\t Artaxernces in whofe Reign this Decree came forth, was not Artaxerxes Mneman, but Artaxerxes Loiigamus, who lived iixty Years before, as is proved among others by Dr. Prideaux ; J Ihall only obferve, that What this Writer faith is evident from the Text, doth not appear from the Text at all. The Com- Tnaniment mentioned, 'ver. 25. from which the feventy Weeks are to begin, is exprefsly faid to be the Commandment to rejiore and to build Jerufalem. But the Commandment mentioned in the 23d Verfe, that came forth at the Beginning of Daniel\ Supplication, is not faid to be the Commandment to reilore and to build Jerufalem, tho' otir Author tells us the Text, and the Aitgel exprefsly declare it to be fo ; but ismanifeftly to be under- fiood of the Commandment that was given by Goa to the Angel Gabriel to go and make known to Daniel thofe future Events contained in the Prophecy of the feventy Weeks. It is obferved, n)er. 20. that while Daniel was fpeaking in Prayer, Gabriel being caufed to fly fixiftly, touched him, and faid, O Daniel, I am noixj come forth to gi've thee Skill and Underfanding ; at the Beginning of thy Supplications the Commandment came forth, and 1 am come to Jhe-iJU thee : therefore underjland the Matter, and con- Rder the Vifion, that is, at the Beginning of thy Supplications the Commandment came from God to me, ordering me to fliew thee what is to come to pafs, and accordingly, I am come to make thee' underfland the Vifion. We have an Inftance of iuch a Commandment given to Gabriel before in a fiprmal Vi- fion,
the Spirit 0/ P R o p H E c Y. 251
Prophecy of the feventy Weeks^ according to our Author's own Computation, would be true : And all his wonderful Predid:ions concerning the over- turning the Per/tan Empire by Alexander the Great, and the Divifion of his Empire into four Kingdoms, and the Wars, Alliances, and princi- pal Tranfadlions between the Kings of Syria and Egypt-, which are related with fo amazing a Par- ticularity ♦, and concerning the profaning the Tem- ple, and the Miferjes brought upon the Jews by
Antiochus
lion, chap.ym. i6. where a Voice came to G^^rzV/, Make thit Man, i. e. Daniel, to underjland the Fijian. If the Author who pretends to urge the exprefs Declaration of the Text, will be go- verned by whu is there expref^ly declared ; this Prayer and Supplication ot Daniel was made in the frji Tear of Darius the Mede, chpp. ix. i, 2. that is, 141 Years before the feventh Year of Artaxerxes Mnemon, in which according to him the Decree for building and reftoring Jerufalem came forth. And this is farther coniirmed by the Occafion of Daniel's Prayer, which is there faid to be this, that he underftood that the feventy Years fpoken of by the Prophet Jeremiah for the Continuance of the Defolations o^Jerufalem were upon the Point of being ac- complifhed. But to this our Author hath a fhort Anfwcr, 'ui%» that the Book of Daniel, as ive now have it, has been in this Cafe greatly interpolated and corrupted, as he could demonjirate ivere this a proper Time and Place for it, p. 338. But upon his Suppofition as he puts it, the Book of Daniel muft not have " been merely Interpolated. All the hiftorical Part of it which %^holly relates to Things done in the Reigns of Nebucb-adneor Kar, Beljhazzar, and Darius the Mede, muft be one entire Forgery. This our Author, no doubt, could demonjirate, if this 'were a proper Time and Place for it. And 1 believe the Reader is convinced, that he would nave thought any Time and Place proper to have done it, if it had been in his Power. \ fhall not meddle with his Computation of the feventy Weeks % becaufe tho' he gives a very wrong Account of it, yet according to his own Computation, the Prophecy was literally accomplilh- ed, I Ihall only obferve, that in order to bring his Account the better to bear, he tells us that David fixes the Time when the M<'.ffiah was to be cut off, to \it fixty-t^wo Weeks after the com- ing forth of the Commandment, i^c. p. 337. whereas it is plain from the Text, that he reckons feven Weeks and fixty-two Weeks, that is, fixty-nine Weeks of Years after the <;oming fprth of the Comspandmei^t,
25^ -/^Vindication o/'
Antiochus Epiphanes ; as well as concerning the vaft Power of the Roman Empire, and the utter De- flruftion of the Jewijh State, the City, and the Sanduary, foon after the Mejfiahh Coming. Thefe Things fhew the Certainty of Prophecy : and are Inftances of an exa£t and certain Knowledge of fu- ture Events that can only be fuppofed to proceed from God himfelf, whofe Eye penetrateth thro* all Ages, who ruleth in thelQngdom of Men, and giveth it to whomfoever he will.
From thefe and many other Inftances that might be produced, it manifeftly appears how vainly this Writer would infinuate, that the Prophecies were nothing more than general conditional Declarations of God*s Favour to the Good, afid Denunciations of his Judgment againft the Wicked, fee^. 284, 285. And whereas he pretends that " to humour the People, they w^ere often obliged to deliver many Promifes and Declarations of Good to the Nation, in abfolute Terms, which were plainly intended as conditional ; and therefore as often as they pronounced any Judgment from God, or impending Calamities for the Sins of the Na- tion, they always promifed a future Deliverance ^c." It is evident from the whole of the pro- phetical Writings, that the pleafing or humouring the People was not what they had in view. They delivered the MefTage they received from God with a noble Boldnefs, whether it pleafed the Princes and People or not. They often foretold the moft difmal Calamities, not merely as Things which they were afraid might happen, but as what would moft certainly befal them. And when they fore- told a national Deliverance, or a better State of Things, it was not becaufe they thought this necef- fary to humour the People, but becaufe they knew by the Spirit of Prophecy that fuch a Deliverance would certainly be. Thus it was in the Cafe of the Return from the Bahylonijh Captivity, and of
Cyrui\
the Spirit ^Prophecy." 2^
Cyrus's letting the Captives go free, both which were moft clearly and exprefsly foretold, tho* they were Events which as thus circumftanced no Man could forefee. And with regard to other Nations as well as the Jews^ the Prophets fometimes after foretelling the Calamities that fhould befal them, exprefsly foretel their Refloration and Deliverance ^ and furely it cannot be pretended that this alfo was to humour the Jews. The only Reafon for it was, that they knew by the Spirit of Prophecy, that the Fa<5t would be fo. Thus Jeremiah foretels the Captivity and Refloration of Elam, Jer. xlix. 34 — 39. and of M?^^, chap, xlviii, 47. siS Ifaiab doth concerning Tyrus, Ifa.xxii. 1 — 7, 17 and Eze- izV/ concerning Egypt, Ezek. xxix. i — 13, 14.
With regard to the Prophecies relating to the Mejfiah, he pretends that the Mejfiah fpoken of by the Prophets was to be no more than a temporal Prince, and his Kingdom of a worldly Nature ; and that he was only to be a King of the Jews^ and a national Deliverer and Saviour of them only, and not of the Gentiles. And he farther intimates that this Promife of the Mejfiah was only condi- tional, and fufpended upon the Jeijus good Beha- viour, as the Promife of the uninterrupted Succef- fion of the Crown in David*s Family was condi« tional. The proper Place for confidering this will be when I come more particularly to examine th^ Objeftions he raifes againft the New Teftament ; when I propofe to fhew, that the Kingdom attri- buted to the Mejfiah by the Prophets is not merely like the Kingdoms of this World, of a fecular Na- ture, but ereded for Spiritual Ends and Purpofes, and that it is reprefented by the Prophets as an iiniverfal Benefit, not confined to the Jews, bun extending to all Nations. From whence it follows, that the Promife of tht MeJ/iah was not merely con- ditional, to depend upon the Repentance and Obe- di^ce of the Javs •, for why fhould a Benefit de-
figned
254 -/^Vindications/'
figned for Mankind in general, be fufpended iiporx the good Behaviour of the Jews only ? nor is this Condition ever once mentioned. On the contrary, it is foretold in the Prophecies that when he aftually came, the Jews would rejedt him, andufe him ill ; and that foon after his coming and being cut off, their City and Sanduary fhould be deftroyed, tho* it is intimated, that afterwards they Ihould feek to him in the latter Days, and be reftored to a happy State. This future Converfion of the Jews and a more glorious State of the univerfal Church than hath hitherto appeared, many of the Prophecies feem to point to : and I doubt not thefe Prophecies will in their due Seafon be accompliflied, tho' I am fenfi- ble that by this, I incur the Author's heavy Cenfure, who feverely inveighs againft thofe that underftand the Prophecies in this Senfe, as upholding the Jewi in their Vanity and Prefumption.
But to proceed to the farther Refledions he makes upon the Prophets, he obferves that by pre- tending too mtuh to the Knowledge of future Events, the Prophets fometimes told lies in the Name of the Lord, as four hundred of them did at once in the Cafe of Ahab. Thus in order to expofe the true Prophets of God he confounds them with t\\tfalfe ones, as if they were to be accountable for all the Falfhoods that were ever uttered by any that took upon them the Name of Prophet. It will be eafily granted, that there were at that time falfe Prophets as well as true ones. Some of thefe might per- haps have been educated in the prophetick Schools under the Difcipline of the true Prophets, and un- der that Pretence took upon them the Character of Prophets, tho' they never had any extraordinary Inlpiration, merely for ferving their own Ends of Ambition or Avarice. Or there might be Schooh of Prophets fet up under the Countenance of the Kings in oppofition to the true ones, whom they hated for their divine Zeal and Impartiality in re- proving
the Spirit o/Prophecy? "'255
proving their Faults and Vices. But thefe Prophete concerning whom, it is often declared, that God did not fend them, and that they prophefied afalfe Vi" fiofiy and the Deceit of their own Heart, were of a very different Character from the true Prophets of the Lord. They were too complaifant to contra- didl the Court Religion, or the prevailing falhion- able Vices and Humours of the Prince or People. They are reprefented as very wicked themfelves, and encouraging the People in their WickednefSj fee Jer. xxiii. 11, 14—17. xxviii. 7, Inftead of denouncing Judgments againft them for their Crimes, they prophefied of nothing but Peace and Profperity, and foothed and flattered them in their Vices, Jer, vi. 14. xiv. 13. Ezek. Xiii. 10, 16. And they were fo far from joining with the true Prophets, that they were their greatefl Enemies and Perfecutors *, and joined Interefts with the corrupt part of the Priefthood againft them, and had the People on their fide too, becaufe they pleafed and flattered them, Jer. v. 31. Thefe falfe Prophets were ready as Occafion ferved, and as they faw it would pleafe the King or People, to prophefy in the Name of the hord, or in the Name of Baal, Jer. ii. 8. xxiii. 13.
Of this kind were the four hundred Prophets that prophefied falfly to Jhab in the Name of the Lord. Hence Micaiah, the true Prophet of God, reprefents them as Ahah's Prophets, and not God's. They were fuch as he himfelf chofe and approved, becaufe they always took care to prophefy what they knew would be acceptable- to him. Wh? he hated Micaiah, becaufe he dealt impartially with him and told him the plain Truth. This Author indeed would have it thought that thefe four hundred Prophets bad him go up to Ramoth
* S&tjer. XX. 2, 6, xxvii. 9, 16. XXviii, "2, 10, n, »6. xxix. 21, 23, 32. \ Kings XTiii. 24,
Cikad
256 ./^Vindication o/'
Gilead, with a Defign that he fhould be killed by the Syrians in revenge for the Prophets of the Lord whom he had caufed to be flain before. Whereas the Truth is, they only faid fo becaufe they knew it would pleafe the King, which was all thefe Cou}-( Prophets had in view, who were always for prophefying fmooth and acceptable things. Be- fides they probably flattered themfelves that the King would prove vidlorious, which feemed far more likely than the contrary, as he had defeated the Syriam in the two laft Battles he had fought with them, and now had the Kiag of Judah to affift him. But Micaiah^ who was a true Prophet of the Lord, conduced himfelf after a quite diffe- rent Manner. He difcovers his own Character, and that of all the true Prophets of God in the Anfwer he made to the King's Meflengers who was for perfuading him to fpeak that which was good unto the King, as the other Prophets had done ; as the Lord liveth, what the Lord faith unto me, that will I fpeak, I King xxii. 13, 14. And accor- dingly he plainly told Ahah, that if he went up to Ramoth Gilead he fhould die. It was impoffible for him in a human way to forefee that a Syrian drawing his Bow at a venture fliould fmite the King of Ifrael between the Joints of the Harnefs, No Event could be feemingly more contingento And Ahahx.Q)ck. all the Precautions in his Power to prevent it by difguifing himfelf, and getting Jeho- fhaphat to put on his Robes. And yet Micaiah fpeaks of his Death with an abfolute AfTurance, and pawns his Liberty and Life upon it, ver. 27, 28. he was fure of it becaufe he wds fupernatiirally infpired with the Knowledge of it by God him- felf. No Confequence therefore can be drawn from the falfe Prophets to the true ones -, that becaufe there were fome that falily pretended to divine Infpiration, therefore there were none that were |-eally thus infpired. Since in the Inllance pro- duced
the Spirit c/' P R o p H E c v.^ 257
duced by this Writer, tho' there was a Number of Perfons that falQy pretended to the Name of Pro- phets, yet there was a tijue Prophet of the Lord, who had the Knowledge of a future Contingency revealed to him in an extraordinary Manner by God himfelf. The Charafters of the fdfe Pro- phets and the true were entirely different, and it was no hard Matter to diftinguifh them ; not only becaufe of the di&trtnt' Tendency of their Dodlrines and Predictions, which in the one was to flatter the Kings and People for their own Intereft, and to encourage them in their Vices •, in the other to reprove them impartially even at the Hazard of their own Lives for their Sins, and to turn them from their evil Ways to real Repentance, and the Prac- tice of Righteoufnefs. But efpecially becaufe the one were enabled clearly and certainly to foretel future Events which no human Knowledge could forefee, and which were exaftly accompliflied ; but the other either fpoke only in general ambi- guous Terms, or if they undertook to foretel Things future clearly and exprefsly, were confuted by the Event, as Ahalfs Prophets were. And whenever they pretended to come in Competition with the true Prophets of God, and to contradict their Pre- diftions, God gave his own Prophets a vifible Su- periority, fufficient to convince all that obferved of the great Difference between them. This appears in the Inftance now mentioned, and in the re- markable Conteft between Hananiab and Jeremiahy of which we have an Account in the 28'^ Chapter a^ Jeremiah J -where Jeremiah not only tells him, that the Lord had noi fent him j but exprefsly de- clares, thus faith the Lord, this T'ear thou Jfjalt die^ becaufe thou hafi taught Rebellion againfl the Lord. And accordingly he died that Year in the feventh Month, fee ver. 16, 17. So in the Cafe o( Jhab and Zedekiah, who prophefied Lies in the Name of the Lord, Jfrmiab foretold the dreadful Punifhment
S that
258 A farther Vindication
that (hould be infilled on them, and even the particular Death they fhould die •, that the King of Babylon Ihould caufe thfgn to he roafied in the Fire, Jer. xxix. 21 — 23.
Thus I have confidered the Attempts this Writer makes againft the Prophets with refpedb to their foretelling Things to come. There is no account- ing for their many clear, exprefs, and circumftan- tial Prediflions of future Events in any of thofe Ways which he mentions, or indeed in any other Way than by fuppofmg them to have the Know- ledge of thofe Things communicated to them in an extraordinary Way by God himfelf -, for it is the peculiar Prerogative of the fupreme Being, the moft wife Governor of the World, and of Man- kind, to know the Things which fhall be hereafter. And this is what he challenges to himfelf as that whereby he is eminently diltinguifhed above all other Beings, Ifa. xW. 22, 23. xlvi. 9, 10.
CHAP. IX.
So7ne general Reflexions on the Attempt the Author makes to Jheii) that the Prophets were the great Dijlurhers of their Country^ and that they were of 'perfeciiting Principles^ Enemies to toleration and Liberty of Confcience : It is Jhewn that they were the trueji Friends to their Country^ and that if their Counfels had been hearkened tOy its Ruin would have been prevented. His Inveoiive againfi the Prophet Samuel who?n he reprefents as the Founder of the prophetick Order. His Pretence that he kept Saul twenty Tears out of the Exsrcife of the Royal Power, after he was chofen King. The Account he gives of Samuel'j ^larrel againjl Saul for depofing him from the High Pricfthocd, and of the feveral Plots laid by him for the De- (iru^ion of that Prince^ efpecially in the Affair
of
of the ajitienf Prophets. 25*^
of the Amalekites, confidered. In what Senfe it is faid that it repented God that he had made Saul King. That this was not a Pretence of Sdi" muel to caft his own Follies and Want of Fore- fight upon the Almighty. David'j Chara5ier con- fidered and vindicated: His Behaviour tozvards Saul Jhewn to he noble and generous. Notwith- ftanding the Faults he was guilty of in his gene- ral ConduSl he was an excellent Perfon. Concern- ing his dancing before the Ark ; the Author's bafe
Reprefentation of it. Lord S y'i Account of
it^ and of the Saltant tiaked Spirit of Prophecy^ eonfidered.
LET us now proceed to what our Author offers againfl the 7}ioral Charadler of the Prophets, and particularly the Attempt he makes to fhew that they were the great Incendiaries and Difturbers of their Country for above three hundred Years, and at length proved its Ruin. This is the Sub- ftance of his long Invedlive for above thirty Pages together from />. 291, to p. 323. It is evident he intends all this merely againft thofe that are repre- fented in Scripture as the true Prophets of the Lord. For the falfe ones, who always took care for their own Intereft to be of the King's Religion, and never reproved them or the People for their Vices and Idolatries, do not come under his Accu- fition. And he fpeaks of Baal*s Prophets with great Complacency, as Men of benevolent Difpo- fitions, and Friends to Toleration, and Liberty of Confcience.
But before I enter on a diftindl Confideration of this Writer's Invedive, I cannot but make this one general Remark upon it; how inconfiftent he is with himfelf in the Account he gives of the Pro- phets and their Conduct. He reprefents them as Perfons that by their original Inftitution were to live in a low abjhmious way, retired from the IForld
S 2 id t bout
26o A farther Vindication
Kxjtthout A7nhtion or Avarice^ and wholly devoted io Contemplation and Study. That they were never to involve themfelves in fecular Affairs^ to pujh at For- tune, or to make any great Figure or fplendid Ap- pearance in the TForld. And again he talks of their abfolute Retirement and Recefs from the Bujinefs and Pleafures of the World. And yet the fame Author that gives this Account of them, reprefents them as continually engaged in all the Difturbances and Revolutions of the State, raifing numberlefs Rebel- lions and Commotions, able to turn out one Royal Family, and place another upon the Throne at Plea- fure. And what makes this ftill more extraordi- nary is, that by his own Account thefe Prophets muft have had very little Intereji. He reprefents the Kings as engaged in a perpetual Struggle and Conteft with them ; and that the Priefts generally hated them, for declaiming againji them, and endea- vouring to keep the People to the Moral Law, and take them offfro?n their fuperjiitious Dependance upon Sacrifices and Ahfolutions •, and that herein the Peo- ple were generally in the Intereji of the Priefis, p, 504. And to this it may be added, that the falfe Prophets who were countenanced by the Kings, and who joined Interclls with the Priefts, and flattered and pleafed the People, oppofed and hated the true Prophets of the Lord. Now this being the Cafe ; that a few Men bred up in Colleges and Places of Retirement, without Ambition or Ava- rice, retired from the Noife of the World, and devoted to Study and Cojitemplation, and who had the Kings, the Priefts, the pretended Prophets and Body of the People againft them, fhould yet have it in their Power to overturn Kingdoms, to raife perpetual Infurreflions and Commotions, and to transfer the Crown, when they pleafed, from one Royal Family to another, without Money, without Intereft, without Force, yea, all thefe engaged in an Oppofition to than, is a Suppofition fo wild
and
of the antknt Prophets, 261
and extravagant, that one would think fcarce any Man In his Senfes was capable of admitting it. But there is nothing that has a wider Swallow than Infidelity^ which tho' it makes the flighteft Diffi- culty on the fide of Revelation an infuperable Ob- jeftion, can admit the mod abfurd and unaccount- able Suppofitions in the World in Favour of a dar- ling Scheme.
The general Charge he advances againft the Prophets, and which he fuppofes to lie at the Foundation of all the Co?nmotions and InfiirreoiionSy the religious Wars and Majfacres of which he ac- cufes them, is their Zeal againft Idolatry^ whicli he reprefents as if they were utter Enemies to all toleration and religious Liberty. And on the other hand he commends the Kings that are branded in Scripture for their WIckednefs and Idolatry as only- maintaining Indulgence, Toleration, and Liberty of Conscience.
That by the Law of Mofes there was to be no Toleration of Idolatry in the Commonwealth of Ifrael, is very true, and has been already accounted for. They were not indeed brought under an Ob- ligation to endeavour to extirpate Idolatry in all other Countries by Fire and Sword, as this Writer reprefents it, but they were not to fuffer it In their own. Idolatry was the moft exprefs Breach of the original Contra5i or Covenant between God and them, by which they held the Land of Canaan, and all their Privileges, as a peculiar People, and was a Subverting the whole Conftitution. The Kings therefore whom this Author honours with the glorious Title of the Friends of Toleration and Liberty of Confclence (tho' 1 fhall flicw they were fir from proceeding upon this Principle, except by Toleration be meant a Liberty for Idolatry, but not for the true Worllilp of God) were really guilty of fubverting the fundamental Laws, and were the greateft Enemies to their Country, and S 3 took
262 A farther Vindication
took the readieft way to expofe it to the greatefl: jVliferies and Calamities, which had in that cafe been exprefsly threatned in the Original Covenant. _And thofe that at the hazard of all that was dear to them flood up for the antient Conftitution, ella- blifned by the exprefs Command and Autliority of God himfelf, and bore Teftimony againft that pre- vailing Idolatry and Wickednefs, which they knew tended to diffolve and ruin the State, and bring Captivity and Defolation upon Princes and Peo- ple, fliewed themfelves the trueft Patriots^ and dif- covercd a noble Zeal for the Welfare, the Glory, and Profperity of their Country. But when v/e farther confider them as extraordinarily fent and commiffioned by God himfelf for that Purpofe, this furely doth fully juflify them. When with a noble and impartial Zeal they reproved Kings, and the greatefl Men, for their Idolatry and other Vices, and foretold the dreadful Judgments and Calami- ties that would be inflided on them without Re- Formation and Repentance, in all this they only ex- ecuted the CommifTion which God intrufled them with, and delivered the Meflliges which he fent dicm upon. And if this Author will undertake to prove that it was unjufl in God to infli(5l thofe judgments on wicked and ungodly Kings, and on a finful and rebellious People, he will do fome- thing ; but if it was not wrong in God to infli(5t them, it was not wrong in the Prophets to denounce them, when he fent them to do it in his Name. And indeed his ralfmg up a Succejfion of Prophets to give them fuch folenm Warnings, and exhort them to Repentance, and enabling them clearly and exprefsly to foretel the Calamities that fhould befal them and their Kings, whereby when they came to pafs they might know that they were fent upon them in a way of J udgment for their Sins : This was a fignal Inftance of the divine Mercy towards a guilty People, and fhewed what proper Methods
he
of the antient Prophets. 263
he took to prevent that Dellru(5lion which they were bringing upon themfelves. And if the Body of the People and their Kings flill continued incorrigible under all the Methods made ufe of by divine Pro- vidence to reclaim them, both by the Judgments infli(5led on them, and the many fignal Mercies and Deliverances he vouchfafed them from time to time, and which were alfo exprefsly foretold by the Pro- phets he fent to warn t-hem 'in his Name, this only fhewed how juft it was at length to inflidl upon them that utter Ruin and Captivity, which had been fo long threatned, and which they had fo well deferv- ed. But to lay this their Ruin to the Charge of the Prophets, and to reprefent them as the Caufe of al] their Miferies is the moil unjuft Thing in the World, when the very contrary to this is manifcftly true, that if their faithful Counfels, their folemn Warnings, and earned Exhortations had been hearkened isnto, and complied with, the Deftrudion of that People had been prevented. And it was the rejecfling their wholfome and excellent Admonitions that brought Mifery and Ruin on that antient and famous Nation, as our Author calls them, p. 320. which is the on- ly Place in his Book where he feems to fpeak ho- nourably of the Jews, with a view to lay the greater Load upon the Prophets for caufing their Ruin.
But let us now proceed to the Inftances he brings to make good his general Charge.
He firft fills into a furious Invedive againfl: the Prophet Samuel, whom he reprefents as the Foun- der of the prophetical Order. By his own Account, his Defign in inflituting that Order was to rejtore Learning and Virtue, to keep the People to the moral Law, and to retrain the Vices loth of Priefts and People : He reprefents him as endeavouring to re- trieve as much IVifdom and Knozvlcdge as lie could fro?n its antient Ruins, and taking care that the Pro- phets fhould be inftrufted and educated in it : and tells us that the p'oper Bufinefs and Defign of their S 4 Injlitiition
264 A far tier V i n d i c a t i o n
Infiitution and Order 'u:as to preach up moral Truth and Right eoufnefs. One would think the Author of this mofl icife and excellent Conjlitution^ as he himfelf calls it, muft have been a wife and excellent Pcrfon. It is true, that after giving this account of the Infii- tution of the prophetick Order, he pretends, />. 292. to let us into a farther view of Sa?m{el*s Defign in that Inftitution. He tells us, that upon the Peo- ple's defiring a King, 'Samuel who faw the Revolu- tion that miijl foon happen in the State, injiituted this ncademick Order of Prophets, ivho hy their Weight and Influence with the People, inhere to moderate and refirain the Power of the Kings, and at the fame time keep the Princes and People too within the Boundaries cf the moral Law. Thus thofe Prophets who ac- cording to cur Author were no more than Moralifls and Philofophers, or Preachers of moral 'Truth and Right eoufnefs, and who by their Inftitution were wholly devoted to Contemplation and Study, and never to involve themfelves in fecidar Affairs ; Thefe Men were at the fame time inftituted and defigned to hold the Balance in the State, and to govern Kings and People as they pleafed. One would think by this Reprefentation that they were invefted with a Power like that of the Ephori, among the La- cedemonians. But then he Ihould have fuppofed them like thofe Ephori, the lirft Men in the State, at the Head of all Affairs, and not a mere Order of Academicks, Men devoted to Study and Philofo- phy, and that were never to concern themfelves in State Affairs at all. This may give the Reader a. Specimen of our Author's profound Skill in Poli^ ticks, and how well qualified he is for forming Plans for Republicks, and Schemes of Government. However one fhould think that it was an excellent Defign if it could be effe6led, and what all the States in the World fhould wifh for, to have an Order of Perfons among them, that might keep the Princes and People too within the Boundaries of the
moral
cf the antient Prophets,' 265
moral Law. Still Samucl*s Defign even upon this Reprefentation of it was very good. But the Au- thor who has hitherto obferved fome Meafures with regard to SamueU ibon throws off all Difguife, and reprefents him as ihgaged in reftlefs Attempts to deftroy his King, and ruin his Country j as carry- ing on a Series of wicked Frauds, Treafons, and Confpiracies for gratifying his own Ambition and Refentmenti and fanftifying all with the Pretence of Religion, and the holy Name of God. It is thus that this fpiteful Writer abufes and calumniates one of the brighteft Charatlers in Scripture, and one of the moft excellent Governors we read of in Hiftory. As a Prophet he was fo eminent, that we are told that even whilft he was yet young, the Lord wai ivilb him, and did not let one of his Words fall to the Ground; fo that all Ifrael/ro;;2 Dan even to Beerlhe- ba knew that Samuel was eftahlifJjed to he- a Prophet of the Lord, i Sam. iii. 19 — 21. As a Governour he not only delivered his Country from their moft dangerous Enemies and Oppreffors, but after he had governed them many Years to his Old Age, was able to appeal to the whole Nation, whether he had in any one fingle Inftance defrauded or opprefled any of them, or been guilty of the leaft Corruption or Wrong. And nothing could be more glorious than the Teftimony that was given by the united Suffrage of all the People, joined with a folemn Appeal to God himfelf, concerning the untainted Integrity, Juflice, and Clemency he had fliewn in the whole Courfe of his Adminillration, fee i Sa?)h %\\. I — 5. And accordingly not only was he uni- verfilly refpeded by the Whole Nation v/hen alive, and lamented when dead, i Sam. xxv. i . but his Memory was always had in great Veneration among them. Nor is he ever fpoken of by any Writer of that Nation, but with the higheft Efteem and Ad- miration for his Piety and Virtue. And yet our Author does his utmoft to traduce him as a Monfter
Pf
266 A farther Vindication
of Pride, Ambition, Falfhood and Revenge. He reprefents this excellent Man, who on all Occafions fhewed fuch a Love to his Country and a Zeal for its Welfare, as having little Companion for his Country, in its greateft Calamity, and beholding the Devafta- iion oj it by the Philiflines, not only with Indiffe- irency hut with Pleafitrc^ in hopes that the King whom he himfelf had recommended to the People (hould be deflroyed. And when he fpeaks of the Vidlories Saul obtained over the Enemies of his Country, and his fittling the Nation in Peace, he reprefents this as done to the great Mortification of this Prophet, and in fpite of all the Oppofition of Samuel and the Prophets, fee p. 295, 296, 298. Yea he defcends ib low In his Inveftives, as to infinuate that Samud caufed the Afles of Saul*s Father to be flolen, and fo was able to tell Saul what had be tided them, p. 305. It would be honouring fuch mean and fpiteful Re- flexions too much to give them a particular An- fwer, which have not the leaft Pretence from Hif- tory to fupport them, and only Ihew the deter- mined Hatred and Malice of this Writer againft the Man whom he fuppofes to have been the Father and Founder of the Prophets.
I (hall only take notice of thofe Reflexions which he pretends to fupport from the Account given us in the Hiflory it^lf. Thus he mofl abfurdly pre- tends, that after Saul was chofen King at Mizpah, Samuel prefently fent him Home again, where he lived a private Life for at leaft twenty Years, whilft Samuel really exercifed the regal Power. And that it was upon the occafion of the Ammo7iites be- fieging Jahejh Gilead, and the Succefs Saul obtain'- ed againft them, that he was inverted with tJj€ real State, Power, and Grandeur of a King, becaufe the People would have it fo -, and Samuel againft his own Inclination was under a Neceffity to comply with it. And " that this muft not have been lefs *' than twenty Years after Saul had been firft
" anointed.
of the ant lent P r o p h '^ - '• -^'7 . *' anointed, he fays is ^laip. i-caufe Saul \vh«n firfl: " anointed was bu»- -^ young Man, as the Text ** tells us, nnJ Jofephus faith he was then thirty, *' and therefore Jonathan then could be but a " Child, but now Jonathan was grown up an ex- *' pert Soldier, and the chief Captain under the *' King,"/). 294. But if this Writer will govern himfelf by the Chronology o^ Jofephus, the befieg- ing of Jabejh Gilead by the Ammonites w:as but a Month after Said's Inauguration at Mizpah, tho* our Author makes it to be no lefs than twenty Years. And that this was in fome antient Copies of the Books of Sa?nuel^ or at leaft was an antient Tradition among the Jews, may well be fuppofed, fince the Septuagint have it in their Tranflation of I Sam. xi. i. 'Then Nahafli the Ammonite catne up about a Month after, &cc. «? /^ fiya-y and that it could be but a ihort time, is evident becaufe it appears from what Samuel faith to the People of Ifrael^ I Sajn. xii. 12. that the War which Nahajk the Ammonite threatened them with, was the imme- diate OcGafion of their defiring a King to reign over them. And accordingly the firft Adion we read of after Saul's being chofen King, is that Nahajh the Ammonite came up and incamped againji Jabefh Gilead, the Inhabitants of which thereupon fent to Saul for Affiftance and Relief. The folemn Re- newal and Confirmation of the Kingdom to Saul at Gilgal, which' followed immediately upon the Vic- tory he obtained on that Occafion, appears plainly to have been done at Samuel's own Motion, tho* our Author thinks proper to reprefent it as if it was very much againfl his Inclination, and becaufe the People forced him to it, fee i Sam. xi. 14. If therefore this Writer's Obfervation was right, that at the time of renewing the Kingdom to Saul at Gilgal with the univerfil Confcnt of the People, which was immediately after the Affair at Jabep Gilead, Jonathan wns grown up and become an ex-
ptrt
2Lro ' A Jtir^i-,^ Vindication
pert Soldier, it would owiy follow that Saul at the Time of his being firft anointeo iripg by Samuel at Ramab was feveral Years above thirty, which is the Age that Jofephus affigns him according to our Author, tho* I have not found it fo in Jofephui himfelf. But he objedls, that the Text tells us that Saul was then but 2, young Man. But the Word in the Originual which our Tranllators there render a choice young Man, linn properly fignifies no more than a choice Man, and fo it is fometimes rendered by our Tranllators, as.in 2 Sam. vi. 2. where it is made to fignify the chofeii Men of Ifrael. The Words which are more peculiarly ufed in Scripture to fignify young Men, are not applied to Saul at all. Or if they were, he might have been forty Years old for all that -, as is plain from the Inftance of Rehobmm who is called a young Man "t^x And yet it is certain that he was then one and forty Years old. Compare 2 Cbron.K.u. 13. with Chap. xiii. 7. But we need not fuppofe Saul fo old. The firft Time that Jonathan is mentioned is i Safn. xiii. 2. where Saul is reprefented as giving him the Com- mand of a thoufand Men. And it appears from the firft Verfe of that Chapter that this was two Years at leaft, probably three ( if we take the one I^ear and the two Tears there mentioned as diftind; from one another) after his folemn Confirmation at Gilgal. So that if we fuppofe Saul to have been no more than thirty -four when he was firft anointed by Sa- muel at Ramab, which was fome Time before his Inauguration at Mizpah, as that was fome Time be- fore the Renewal and Confirmation of his Kingdom at Gilgal, he muft be at the Time when Jonathan is firft mentioned near thirty- eight •, and fuppofing Saul to have had Jonathan when he was eighteen^ which is far from being an abfurd Suppofition, then Jonathan at the Time referred to might be twenty Tears old, an Age fufficient for martial Exploits, The great Akxaader was but twenty when he came
to
cf the mittent P R o p h e t s« 269
to the Throne, and fliewed himfelf, to ufe our Author's Phrafe, an expert Soldier in many Wars in which he was immediately engaged: and he had diHinguifhed himfelf in an extraordinary Manner before this at the Battle of Cha;ro7iea^ when he was but a little above eighteen Years old: and when he was but fixteen he was left by his Father his Lieu- tenant in Macedonia^ and fignalized himfelf by glo- rious military Exploits at the Head of an Army, as Plutarch informs us. And if we fuppofe Jona- than to have been as forward as Alexander was, tlien we need not fuppofe Saul at his being firli anointed, to have been much above the Age affign- ed to him as this Author tells us by Jofephus^ and which he himfelf feems to approve, and fo his migh- ty chronological Computation with all he builds upon it, falls to the Ground.
This Writer next pretends to give us the true Reafon of the Quarrel between Samuel and SauL It was " becaufe after the Kingdom was confirmed to " him, he depofed Samuel from the High Priefi- " hood which he had ufurped, and put in Ahia who *' was the right Heir from Eli, which fo highly *' exafperated the Prophet, that from that time he *' proje<5led the Ruin of Saul and his Family, and " was refolved to convince the King, that no King " of Ifrael muft ever pretend to reign independent " of the prophetick Order. " Now all this which he gives us for Hiftory is purely a Fiaion of his own. He fays it is plain from the Hiftory that Sa- muel had taken upon him the High Priefihood: and yet there is not one Word of this in the whole Hi- ftory of Samuel. It is plain indeed from the Hifto- ry that Sa7nuel was a Prophet, and that he judged the People. But the Office of Judge was entirely diftinft from the High Priefthood, nor had there been any one of the Judges that was an High Prieft except Eli. The firft time that mention is made ofAhiai^ I Sa??u xiv. 3, where he is mentioned
3 TvS
270 A farther Vindication
as the High Priejl, and is plainly fuppofed to have been fo before j but of his being made High Prieft by Saul, or of Samuel's 6eing depofed from that Office there is not the leail Hint given. So that all this which lies at the Foundation of his Inveftive againft Samuel is his own Invention, and only Ihews how ready he is to forge Hiftory, when he cannot find it for his Purpofe.
The Account he gives, p. 296, 297. is writ in the fame Spirit. After mentioning a Battle and a co?nplete Vilfory gained by the Philijlines, of which the Hiftory faith nothing at all, he proceeds to tell us, that " Saul waited feven Days for Samuel, who " had promifed to come to him : and the itvtn. " Days being out, he ordered Sacrifices to implore " the divine Protection againft fo formidable an *' Enemy, ^c. and that as foon as Saul had done " this, Samuel who had lain by as unconcerned " before, came and charged the King with a great *' Aft of Wickednefs and Difobedience, as hav- " ing invaded the Priejlly OlHce, for which he *' declared in the Name of the Lord, that the King *' had forfeited his Crown and Kingdom." But it is no way probable that Saul ftayed till the feven Days were out, or quite expired, but rather that thro' Rafhnefs or Impatience, on the feventh Day he be- gun to offer Sacrifices. If he had ftaid but a little longer, Samuel would have come according to his Promife, who was then upon the way, and came when Saul had juft offered the Burnt -Offe^^ingSy before he had time to ofi'er the Peace-Offer- ings^ as he had intended to do. Nor doth it ap- pear from the Text that Samuel charged Saul with Wickednefs in invading the Prieftly Office, or that this was the Crime by which he had forfeited his Crown and Kingdom. For it is not improbable there were Prielts with him by whom he might offer Sacrifices. But the Fault he is charged with is this, that he had difob'^'vcd the exprcfs Command
of
of the afiflent Prophets.' 271
of God bimfelf, fee i Sam. xiii. 13. Safnuel faid to him, TI^Gu haji done foolijhly^ thou hajl not kept the Commandment of the Lord thy God which he com- Tnanded thee. And he repeats this Charge again in the next Verfe. There had been an exprefs Com- mand delivered to him by Samuel in the Name of God, enjoining him to go to Gilgal^ and not to offer Burnt-Offerings or Peace- Offerings till Samu- el came with Directions to him from God himfelf, to Ihew him what he was to do. This Command had been laid upon him when he was firft anointed King, fee i Sam. x. 8. and undoubtedly it had been renewed to him on this Occafion ; and he had beea told that now was the Time come for his obeying what had been enjoined him fo long before. And this (hewed that the Command was of Importance, and that there were fome particular Reafons for it, tho* we cannot pretend at this Diftance to fay di- ftini^ly what thofe Reafons were, as the Text doth not inform us of them. However fuppofing it to have been an exprefs Command from God deliver- ed to Saul by a true Prophet of the Lord fent and infpired by him, and that Saul himfelf knew and believed it to be fo, then his not fulfilling it was evidently a Fault, if Difobedience to God be fo. Now this was really the Cafe. All Ifrael knew that Samuel was a true Prophet of the Lord, and that God did not let any of his IVords fall to the Ground^ i Sam, iii. 19, 20. And Saul had parti- cular Reafon to know it, both from the feveral con- vincing Proofs he . himfelf had of Sat?iuel*s divine Infpiration when he anointed him to be King over Ifrael at Rainah, and from what had fince happen- ed when the Kingdom was confirmed to him at Gil- gal^ at which time God gave Teftimony to Samuel from Heaven in a mod extraordinary Manner be- fore Saul and the whole People of Ifrael, i Sam. xl'u 16—19. Saul had hitherto had the higheft Proofs of Samuel's own particular Ggod-will and Friend- ship
Q.y2 A farther Vindication
fixip to him (the Author's Infinuations to the con* trary are per fed] y vain and groundlefs) nor does it appear that he had the lead Doubt concerning S,a~ muel*s being a true Prophet, and that what he en- joined him in this Matter as from God was the Com- mand of God himfelf. Accordingly, when charg- ed with not keeping the Commandment which God bad commanded him, tho' he lays hold on all the Pretence he can to excufe himfelf, he doth not fo much as once infmuate that he did not know, or was not fure that God had commanded it. And this being the Cafe, he ought not on any Pretence whatfoever to have violated what he knew to be God's exprefs Command to him, and a Command given to him at the very Time when he was firft anointed King, and fmce repeated in the Name of God. And if the Circumftances were trying and difficult, which was all that he had to alledge for himfelf by way of Excufe, this was the Time for fhewing his Obedi- ence, and waiting patiently with a fteddy Truft and Dependance upon God according to his Appoint- ment, in which Cafe the Prophet aflures him his Kingdom would have been eftabliflied. Whereas now he lets him know, his Kingdom fhould not continue, but another fhould be appointed in his ftead, becaufe he had not kept that which the Lord commanded him. But the Sentence pronounced againfl him feems not to have been as yet ab- folute and peremptory. It was not till his Difobe- dience in the Affair o^ Amalek that he was abfp- lutely rejefled. Nor is it true, as this Writer tells us, that Safmiel now left him, with a Refolution never to fee his Face more, of which the Text faith nothing at all. On the contrary we are informed that Samuel went from Gilgal to Giheah, the Place of ^<^.7/'s ufual Refidence. And there we find Saul and Jonathan, and tlie reft of the People got toge- ther immediately after. Nor is there any Likelihood that Samuel would have gone to that Place if he
bad
of the a'ntient Prophets. 273
had intended utterly to abandon SauU and never to fee him more.
With regard to the Expedition againft Amalek^ our Author goes on in his wonted Strain of Mif- reprefentatibn and Calumny. He reprefents it as evident that the fending Saul againil tlie Anialckites, was a Plot laid by the Piopheifor the King^s De- Jlruilion: and that therefore he ordered, that tlie Soldiers fiiould have no Part of the Booty or Plun- der, with an Intention that the King fhould fall a Sacrifice to the inraged Soldiery ; and that being dif- appointed in this, he iJi^ent off mi Rage, and privately anointed David, p. 298, 299. Here our Author very wifely takes it for granted, that Sajnuel had no Command from God at all to bid Saul go and deftroy Amalek j but that he only feigned or pre- tended it. And if you will but grant him the ve^^ ry Thing in Quefbion, viz. that what Samuel and the other Prophets delivered in the Name of God, as by immediate Infpiration from him, was not from God at all, but purely a Fiction of their own, to colour over their own Defigns, and gratify their own Paffions, then this fagacious Author will prove, what will be eafily granted him on fuch a Suppofition, that he and they were falfe, wicked and defigning Men. But if Samuel had an exprefs Revelation from God, enjoining him to order Saul to go and extirpate the Amalekites, and if Saul Iiimfelf believed it to be fo, then the Cafe is quite altered. And thus it is reprefented in the Hilfory given us of this Matter. Indeed the Command, with regard to the Extirpation o^ Amalek, was no new Thing; it was as old as the Lav/. The Sen- tence had been pronounced againil them^ with the greateft Solemnity long ago. They had attacked tlue Ifraelites immediately after their coming out of Egypt, without the leaft Provocation, in the moft barbarous and cruel Manner, and in open Defi- ance of the Power and Majefly of God himfelf,
T which
274 A farther Vindication which had been fo illuftrloufly difplayed in bringing them out of Egypt-, with Signs and Wonders, and an out-ftretched Arm. For this, and no doubt for their other Iniquities, which like thofe of the Ca- naanites were very great, tho' not particularly men^ tioncd on this Occafion, Judgment was then pro- nounced againft them, Exod. xvii. 14. Deut. xxv. 17, 18. But God • had forborn the Execution of it for a long Time, about four hundred Years. And we may juRly fuppofe, that it was not till the Meafure of their Iniquities was full, and the great Wickednefsof the prefent Generation oi Amalekites, joined to that of their Anceftors *, had rendred them ripe for an exemplary Vengeance, that he faw fit that the Sentence that had been pronounced a- gainft them fo long before, fhould be actually ex- ecuted upon them. And it was his Will that it fhould be executed by that People whom they had at firft fo grievoufly injured, and whom they had often fince invaded. See Judg. iii. 13. vi. 3, 33. vii. 12. X. 12. And that it might appear, that this War was undertaken, not from a Defire of Spoil, but purely in Obedience to God's Command, and in Execution of his juft Sentence, they were not to take any of the Amalekites Goods to them- felves, and to their own Ufe, but utterly to deftroy all that belonged to them, as had been done in the Cafe of Jericho.
Said and the People do not appear to have had the leaft Doubt of its being a divine Com- mand 5 they knew the Sentence that had been pro- nounced againft Afnalek in the Law itfelf, and which therefore came to them confirmed by the fame glorious Atteftations which confirmed Mofes*s divine MifTion, and the divine Original of the
* Hence ti.ey are calkd, in the Command given to Saul, the Sinners the Amalekites, to iignify that they were Sinners above •thecomiiKn Rate, i Sa^n. xv, 17.
Laws
of the anticnt Prophets. 275
Laws he gave; befides which they had a frejh Command given them to this Purpofe, from God himfelf, by the Mouth of one whom they all be- lieved and knew to be a true Prophet of the Lord. And accordingly, SanU . when endeavouring after- wards to juftify or excufe himfelf, exprefsly calls it the Commandment of the Lord., i Sam. xv. 13. This
then is the true State of the Cafe, Saul believed
that God had exprefsly commanded him to extir* pate the Amalehtes^ in Execution of his juft Sen- tence againfl; that wicked People, and to deflroy afl that belonged to them, without fparing or re- ferving any Part of the Spoil. Accordingly he undertook to execute the Sentence, and yet in plain Oppofition to it, not only out of Pride and Ollen- tation, as it Ihould feem, fpared Agag^ the King of the AmalekiteSy who by what is faid of him, v. g5. appears to have been a mercilefs 'Tyrant, and probably deferved Death as much, or more, than any of the People, but referved all that was good among the Spoil ; and at the fame Time, that he might feem to obey the divine Command, took Care to defiroy utterly every Thi/^g that was vile and refufe, that is, that was not worth keeping, and could be of no Profit, v. 9, This was bale Hypo- cfify, and a prefumptuous evading an exprefs Com- mand of God, not from any Scruple he had ot its being a divine Command; for this he believed 5 nor from a Principle of Mercy and Compaffion, for this would have carried him to have fpared not fo much die Sheep and Oxen as the People, all of whom he dellroyed that he could meet with, ex- cept Agag, who was probably one of the word a- mong them ; but from a bafe avaritious Principle. And when his Difobedience was chaiged upon him, he firft flood upon it that he had exa^ly o- beyed the divine Command, the' he knew he had not done it; and afterwards pretended that he had referved thefe Spoils, that out of them he might T 2 offer
•ijf^ A farther Vindication
offer Sacrifices to God -, and laftly, when he was driven out of his other Excufes, meanly laid it up- on the Fear he ftood in of the People^ v. 15, 21, 24. When the Truth is he had Authority enough to have reftrained the People if he had plcafed. And this Prince, who pretended to be afraid to deflroy the Spoil belonging to the Amalekites for Fear of offending the People, tho* he had an ex- prefs Command of God for it, was not afraid ut- terly to deftroy Noh, the City of the Priefts, with all the Inhabitants, of every Sex and Age, and even the Oxen, Afles, and Sheep, merely to fat'if- fy his own cruel Jealouly and Revenge, tho' it was a Thing fo difpleafing to the People, that his own Guards and Servants refufed to execute it ; and he was obliged to get Doe^ the Edomite to do it. See Ch. xxii. 18, 19. This may let us into this Prince's Character, who feems to be a great Favourite of our Author-, probably in Oppofition to the Sacred Writings, becaufe he is there repre- fented as an ill Man. And Saul hirnfelf was fo confcious of his Guilt and bafe Condu6t in the Affair of the Amalekites^ that after finding that all his Excufes and fair Pretences were detected, he at length confeffes without Difguife, that he had fin- ned, and in Effe6t acknowledges, that he had de- ferved the Sentence then pronounced againfl: him by Samuel^ in the Name of God ; and only defires that Samuel would honour him before the Elders of the People^ and before Ifrael^ and would turn again with him to worfJoip the Lord his God, v. 30. which upon this his ingenuous Acknowledgment he con- fented to do. And this feems to (hew that all this had paffed between Samuel and Said privately, and that it is not true, as this Writer reprefents it, that Samuel denounced the Ruin of Saul and his Family before all the People.
It is on this Occafion that we are told, that it repnted God that he had 7nade Saul King over If-
raeL
of the ant lent Prophet?. 277
rael. But our Author tells us, that it was Samuel only that repented it^ whom he therefore charges with bringing God himfelf to Repentance^ and charg- ing his own Follies^ and Want of Forefight^ upon the Almighty. And the Proof he brings for it is, that it would he mofl ahfiird and fenfelefs to imagine, that God did not know, when Saul was made King, what would happen, hut it is plain that Samuel did not know, p. 295, 297. This Sneer is not fo much defigned againft Sajnuel, as againft the Scriptures in general, in which this Phrafe of God's repenting is fometimes ufed, tho* never with a Defign to in- fmuate, that God was ignorant of the Event before. But after all this Author's Blufter, I do not fee but that, upon his own Principles, God may be faid literally to repent. For if nothing can be certain- ly foreknown but what is neceffary, and depends upon neceffary Caufes, as he feems plainly to aflert, p. 332. which manifeftly implies a Denial of God's Prefcience of future Contingencies, then fuppofing that Said^s Adlions were free, and depended upon his own free Choice, God himfelf might not be able certainly to forefee how Saul would a61: after he was made King. Except this Author will fay, that Saul was under a Necefllty of doing as he did, and that his A(5tions were Neceffary, and depended on neceffary Caufes-, and how this is confiftent with that human Liberty and free Agency for which he profefles fo great a Zeal, I cannot fee. But this is not an Abfurdity chargeable on the fa^ cred Writings, which every where go upon the Suppofition of God's foreknowing future Events, yea even thofe that are moft contingent, and in which the Liberty of Man is as much exercifed and concerned, as in any Events or Adtions what- foever. When therefore God is reprefented as re- penting of a Thing in Scripture, it cannot be the Intention of this Phrafe, as there ufed, to infinuate that God was ignor^^of the Event before. But 1' 3 becaufe
^yS \A farther Vindication
becaufe when Men repent of a Thing they alter, their Courfe of affing, therefore God's changing his Method of Procedure or Courfe of afting, with regard to Nations, or particular Perfons, from fhewing them Favour to punifhing them, or the contrary, is in Accommodation to human Infirmi- ty reprefented under the Notion of repenting; tho' this very Change was what he perfeftly knew from the Beginning, but did not take Effe6l till the proper Time came for manifefting his Purpofe. So in the prefent Cafe, when God is reprefented as faying to Samuel, it repenteth me that I have fet up Saul to he King ; for he is turned back from follow- ing me, and hath not performed my Commandments, Ch. XV. II. the Meaning is no more than this, to fignify that God was determined to change his Condud: towards Saul, and as he had raifed him to be King, fo now he would re'peEl him from being King for his Difobedience : which Difobedience God had forefeen from the Beginning, as he fore- fees all the Iniquities Men will be guilty of; yet he does not change his Condud towards them till they are adually guilty of thofe Sins that deferve the Punifhment. But certainly it would be abfurd to fuppofe that Samuel intended by this Phrafe to infmuate, that God did not foreknow what was to happen, which would be utterly to deftroy all Pro- phecy, and confequently his own Reputation as a Prophet. Accordingly this Phrafe of God's re- penting that he had made Saul to be King is ex- plained by his reje^ing him from being King, compare Ch. xv. ii, 23, 26, 35. xvi. i. But to cut fhort this Writer's Pretences, that it was Sa- muel himfelf that repented, and put his own Re- pentance upon God, I would obferve, that whereas God is twice reprefented as repenting of having inade Saul Kmg, Ch. xv. 11, 35. In both thofe PafTages we are exprefsly told how grievous Saul*s Rejedtion was to Samuel, -^di^the great Trouble
and
of the a?2fie?7t Prophets. 279
and Sorrow it gave him. In the firft of thofe Paf- fages it is faid, that it grieved Samuel, and he cried unto the Lord all Night. And in the fecond, that Sci.nuel mourned for Saul. The Sentence he pro- nounced againft that Prince, was far from being the Eiiecft of any perfonal Enmity or Refentment he had againft him ; on the contrary he loved Saul, and would have done any Thing in his Power to have obtained a Reverfal of the Sentence againft him. He offered up his Prayers and Cries and Tears, but all in vain. And whereas this Writer reprefents it as if immediately, as foon as the Af- fair of the Amalekites was over, he went off m d. Rage for being difappointed of the Defign he had formed for Saul''s Ruin, and privately anointed Da- vid; the Hiftory plainly intimates, that he con- tinued to mourn for Saul a confiderable Time, and even carried his Grief fo far as to incur a Reproof from God on the Account of it. And it was not till he had an exprefs Command from God himfelf to do it, that he Pointed David, Ch. xvi. i. What our Author adds concerning Samuel's managing Matters fo as to bring David into Saul'j Family, where he married the King's Daughter, is, like ma- ny other Things, entirely his own Invention: fince in the Hiftory, the firft introducing David into Said\ Family, is exprefsly attributed to Saul's own Servants, who recommended David to him, as one well-fkllled in Miifick, and otherwife an ac^- complifhed Perfon, to divert his Melancholy, Ch. xvi. 17, 18, Nor is there the leaft Hint given that Sa??iuel had ever any Thing to do in David's following Advancement by Saul. Nor can this' reafonably be fuppofed, fince he never concerned himfelf with Saul, or his Family afterwards to the Day of his Death, Ch. xv. 35. It is well that Samuel died before Saul, or elfc our Author would certainly have found fome Way to have charged his Death upon that Prophet, and would have T 4 cont:rive4
28o A farther Vindication
contrived that Samuel fhould fend him into the Field of Battle to be killed by the Philiftines.
Our moral Philofopher next falls upon David; and there is no Perfon in his whole Book that he feems to have a more peculiar Spite and Malice a- gainft than that great and heroick Prince. I fup- pofe, becaufe he was an eminent Prophet as well as King, and the Penman of a very valuable Part of the facred Writings, which hath been always had in great Efteem.
He tells us, that " The Crown v/as cut off " from JfraeU and entailed upon Judah^ by a long " Train of Falflioods, Perjuries, Diffimulations, " Ingratitude, Treafon, and at laft open Rebel - *' lion; and that David atSted in Oppofition to all " his former Vows and Proteftations of Loyalty, ** p. 299. And after having mentioned feveral *' Sins and Vices, fuch as open profane Swearing, " execrable Curfes, and moft abominable Lies, *' Lufts, and Whoredoms, Breach of the moft " folemn Oaths and Alliances', Cruelty, and *' Blood-thirftinefs, contrary to all the Laws of *' Nature and Nations, he fiith, that all thefe Da- *' vid himfelf had been moil: remarkable for. And *' that yet he is reprcfented by the Prophets, as a " Man after God's own Heart, and as having *' walked uprightly with the Lord, faving only in *' the Cafe of Uriah the Hittite." And he af- firms, that *' The Jews, even in their moft dege- *' nerate Times, could not be charged with any *' Vice, or moral Wickednefs, which had not *' been approved and juftified in David, their " great Patron and Exemplar," p. 323, 324. And again, that " The Prophets juftify and ex- *' tol David's Charader, and fet up his Example *' as worthy to be imitated by all future Princes, " tho' he had been the moft bloody Perfecutor ** that ever had been known, and his whole Life " had been one continued Scene of Diffimulation,
" Falfhood,
of the antient Prophets. 281
Falfliood, Lull, and Cruelty. But his rooting out Idolatry^ and deftroying Idolaters by Fire and Sword wherever he came, made Atone- ment for all, and canonized him as the great Saint and Idol both of the Prophets and Priefts.'* f. 334. Another Reafon for which he makes to be, that " He at Icafl doubled the Revenues of the *' Priefts, to what they had been fettled by Mofes^ *' and obliged the People to bring their Sacrifices *' to Jerufalem; which was a Servitude the other *' Tribes could not bear, who only waited for a " fair Opportunity to break the Yoke oijudah."^ p. 300.
Such is the Fate of this great Prince. He com- plains in many of his Pfalms of hlfe and calum- nious Tongues, that persecuted him whilft he was alive, with unjuft and cruel Reproaches : And now at the Diftance of fo many Ages, the fime Spirit of envenomed Malice and Bitternefs appears againft: his Memory, ^n<\ /hoots Arrows againft him, even hitter Words. One would think by this Author's Reprefentation of him, that he was one of the worft Men that ever lived upon the Earth, and hardly to be equalled by a Nero^ or a Domitian.
He firft charges him with having obtained the Crown, By a long 'T'rain of Faljhoods^ Perjuries, Dijfwiulation^ Ingratitude^ 'Treafon^ and at lajl open Rebellion, p. 299. But the contrary of all this is fo true, that nothing can poflibly give us a higher Idea oi David'' s eminent and heroick Virtues than his Conduct towards Saul, under all the undeferved Perfecutions, the bafe and perfidious, the cruel and injurious Treatment he received from that Prince. He had done nothing to give Saul juft Offence', but had all along ferved him and his Country with the utmoft Zeal and Fidelity. Ail his Fault was, that the glorious and heroick A6tions he performed, procured him the Applaufe and Admiration of the People. This raifed Saul^s En-
yy
282 ^/^Zr/Z'^r VlNDI C AT ION
vy and Jcalonfy : And widiout any other Provo- cation, he refolved upon his Ruin, and took all the Ways he could think of to effed it. And at laft proceeded fo far that he attempted to kill him with his own Hand, even whilfl he was attending upon him in his Court, in Obedience to his Com- mands. And after feeming to be reconciled to him, when David had done him new and noble Services, he fent Meflengers to his Houfe to feize and flay him. See the 18th and 19th Chapters of the firft Book of Samuel. Thus was this great and good Man, that had done fuch eminent Services to his King and Country, forced to fly for his Life, baniflied not only from the Court, but which afi^efted him more, and of which he often makes the moft pathetical Complaints, the Proofs of the excellent Difpofltion of his Mind, from the Sanc- iuary of God, and the publick Solemnities of his Worfliip. And when he had got a Band of Men about him for his Defence, he never made the leafl: Attempt againft: Saul, nor did any Act of Vio- lence to his Countrymen, Jonathan, Saul's eldefl; Son, tho' Heir to the Crown, and likely to be mofl; prejudiced by David's, Succeflion, was fo fenfible of his Innocence, that he pleaded for him with his Father, Let not the King fin againji his Servant, a~ gainfi David, hecaufe he hath not Jinned againft thee, and hecaufe his PFork hath been to thee-ward very good. And all along he continued to have a moft exemplary Friendfliip for him. He loved him as his own Soul, from an Efteem and Admiration of his Virtues, and the Harmony between great and noble Minds. Twice David had it in his Power to have flain Saul, when he came with an Army to deftroy him. But when earneftly folicited to it by thofe about him, rejefted the Motion with Abhorrence. Saul himfelf was fo affeded with David's Generoflty and Fidelity, that he acknow- ledged with Tears that he had flnned, and that
David
of the antient Prophets. 283
David had rewarded him Good^ whereas he had re- warded Kim Evil. See the 24th and 26th Chap- ters of the firft Book of Samuel. There cannot be a more lUuftrious Proof than this is, of the noble and generous Difpofition of David's Mind, and the eminent Degree of heroick Virtue to which he had arrived. He knew that he himfelf had been anointed King of Ifrael, according to the fpecial Defignation and Appointment of God, by the Hand of his Prophet Samuel. A Man lefs emi- nent for Virtue and true Greatnefs of Mind than David was, would have been apt to think as thofe about him did, that this was an Opportunity which Providence had put into his Hands, for get- ting rid of a Man whom God had rejedied, and who moftunjuftly perfecuted him, and fought his Life, and for invefting him in the Kingdom, to which he had been by divine Appointment de- figned. Bat he was refolved to ufe no fmifter Means for obtaining the Crown. He would wait till Providence {hould bring it about in its own Way; but was determined to do nothing himfelf that was criminal to accomplifh it. Upon the Whole, David's Conduct all along towards Saul, was incomparably noble, loyal, and virtuous', and yet our pretended Moral Philofopher, who would be thought an Admirer x)f Virtue, makes the worfb Reprefentation of it imaginable ; whilft at the fame Time he does not find the leaft Fault with Saul^ whofe Treatment of David was the moft treache' rous, unjuji, and ci^uel in the World *.
When he came to the Throne he had a long and glorious Reign, and delivered his Country from all its Enemies and OpprefTors. Yet it doth not appear that .any of his Wars were undertaken,
* See a Vindication of Dan)i(/, againit fome other Charges brought againft him, Jnfuier tu Chrijiianity as old as the Crea- tion, Vol, W. p. 542, 543.
merely
284 A farther Vindi cation
merely for the Sake of Dominion and Conquey, With Regard to moil of them it is evident from the Account given us concerning them, that he was not the Aggrejfor^ and there is Reafon to think fo of all the reft. And although he had a great Averfion to Idolatry^ yet, that he rooted out Idola- try^ and defiroyed Idolaters by Fire and Sword^ in all the Nations round about hi?n, as this Writer affirms, there is not the leaft Hint given us in the whole Hiftory of his Reign •, nor, as far as appears, was any one of his Wars undertaken on that Account. Yea it is plain, he did maintain Peace with fome of his idolatrous Neighbours, and was willing to have done fo with others of them, if it had not been their own Faults *. Nor is there any Thing to fupport the malicious Charge this Writer brings a- gainft him, that he was the bloodiejl Perfecutor that ever was known.
He all along fhewed a true Zeal for God, and for his pure Worfhip, and a hearty Concern for the Intereft of Religion. He made very wife Re- gulations, with Regard to the various Offices and Employments of Priefts and Levites^ for rendring them more ufeful, and that they might perform the Work affigned them with greater Order. But that he doubled their Revenues as they had been fet- tled by Mofes ("as this Writer fuppofes) there is not one Word in the whole Account that is given us of his Reign. And indeed it would have been a hard Thing for him to have doubled their Re- venues, if they had full twenty Shillings in the Pound on all the Lands of Ifrael before. But it may not be amifs to obferve on this Occafion, that this Reign, in which, according to our Author, both the Prophets and Priefts met with great En- couragement, was one of the moft glorious that ever was in ■ Ifrael. Never were the People in a
* See concerning this above, /. 133 and/. 144.
more
of the anticnt Prophets. 285
more flourifhing Condition. Nor do we find that ever they were opprefled in the Reign of David, as afterwards they were under that of Solomon. The Juftice and Equity with which David governed is fignified when we are told that he executed Judg- ment and Jujiice unto all his People, 2 Sam. viii. 15. or as it is exprefled, Pfal. Ixxviii. 72. l\t fed them according to the Integrity of his Heart, and guided ihe?n by the Skilfulnefs of his Hands. This Writer reprefents it as a great Hardfhip and Servitude, lYiit he obliged all the People to bring their Sacrifices to Jerufalem, and to offer no where elfe. But we read of no fuch Conftitution made by David, the Tem- ple at Jerufalem not being as yet built. The Con- ftitution obliging them to Sacrifice at the Place which the Lord fhould choofe was as old as Mofes, and what good Men among the Ifraelites had al- ways praftifed. Nor was this as he infinuates the Toke of Servitude which the Ifraelites wanted to fhake off, and which was the Caufe of their revok- ing fi-om the Houfe of David ; but the heavy Yoke of ^axes and Impofitlons which Solomon laid on them, and of which we find no Complaint at all in the Reign of David, under whom the People were very happy and flourifhing.
The Adultery and Adurder David was guilty of in the Matter of Uriah was the greateP: Stain of his Life and Reign, and was indeed a moft heinous Crime and Wickednefs. And therefore there is a prrticular Brand fet upon it even where he is other- wife commended, i Kings xv. 5. it is (aid, that David did that which, was right in the Sight of the Lord, and turned not afide from any Thing that be co?n7nanded hi?n all the Days of his Life, five only in the Matter of Uriah the Hittite. The Defign of which Paflage is not to fignify that it was the only Fault he was ever guilty of, but that in no other Inftance did he prcfumptuoufly and zvickedly depart from God, to ufehisownExprefiions, P/i//.xviii.2i»
This
286 A fart/jer V IN Di c AT ION
This was a Crime of fo heinous a Nature, that it was in EfFeft a revolting from God and from his Law. And if he had not been recovered from it by a fincere and mod exemplary Repentance, he muft have been regarded as one utterly abandoned and forfaken of God and all Goodnefs. But fo far is it from being true, that there was no Kind of Vice and moral Wickednefs^ hut what the Prophets had approved and jujiified in David, that it was the Prophet Nathan that fird came and charged him with this Crime, with a noble Boldnefs and Free- dom, and denounced the Judgments of God againft him on the Account of it, and foretold the Evils that fhould happen in his own Family as a juft Pu- nifhment upon him for this his great Wickednefs. But then the exemplary Repentance David exprefTed muft always be remembered to his Honour. His great Sorrow and Contrition of Heart, and bitter Remorfe for his Sins, and his deep Humiliation before God (of which he hath left a lafting Monu- ment to all Ages in the 51/ Pfalm) and efpecially his unparallell'd Refignation to the divine Will and exemplary Submiffion to the afflicting Hand of God under the Calamities inflifted upon him for his Sin (of which we have wonderful Inftances, 2 Sa?n.xv. 2^5, 26. xvi. 10, II.) thefe Things fhew the great Difference between him, and many other Princes that have been guilty of the like Crimes.
It is generally fuppofed, and very probable Rea- fons might be brought to fupport that Suppofition, that it was in the Interval between David's great Sin in the Matter of Uriah, and his being awaken- ed to Repentance by the lively Reproofs o'i Nathan the Prophet, whilfl his Heart was yet hardened in his Sin, and ftupified with fenfual Pleafure, that he took Rabbah, and treated the Ammonites with that great Severity of which we have an Account, 2 Sam, xii. 29—31. It muft be owned that they had given him the utmoft Provocation. This War on their I Pare
of the mtient Prophets. 287
Part was bafe and unjuft in the higheft Degree. They had begun it with a notorious Infradlion of the Law of Nations, and had carried it on by hiring and flirring up all the neighbouring Nations againil him, which had brought him into great Dangers and Difficulties. When therefore their chief City was taken by afTault, this juftified a very fevere Vengeance. And it was probably only thofe that had been the principal Agents and Fomenters of the War in the feveral Cities that he treated with this Severity. For we afterwards read that ^hohi the Son of Nahafh of Rabbah of the Children of Am- mon, and who is probably fuppofed to have been the Brother of Haniin the Ammonitijh King that had fo villainoudy treated his Ambafladors, and begun the War againft him, came to aflift him in his great Diftrefs, when fleeing from his Son Ahfalom. From whence it maybe reafonably concluded, that he had treated him and probably others of the Ammonites v/ith great Kindnefs, whilfl: he fo feverely punilli- ed the moft guilty among them, and perhaps had made him King in his Brother Hanunh Stead.
That David fmned againft God in 77u??ibring the People is plain from Scripture, tho* in what the precife Nature of his Sin confifted, we cannot well determine at this Diftance. But his ingenuous and humble confelTing his Sin before the Lord, and efpe- cially the great Love and tender Concern he fhewed for his Country, in begging that the Punifliment might rather be inflicted upon himfelf and his Fa- mily than upon the People, flievved the excellent Difpofition of his Mind as became a good King, and a Father of his People.
Upon the whole with regard to the main Courfe of his Life, and the prevailing Difpofition of his Mind he appears to have been an excellent Perlon. What his habitual Temper and Charaflcr was we may learn from his admirable P/C?/;/;.*-, where we fee his whole Soul laid open, the Workings of his
Heart
288 A farther ViNDrcATiON
Heart without Difguife. From thence it appears how much his Mind was pofiefTed with juft and worthy Sentiments of the Supreme Bemg, and under the Influence of proper Aifeclions and Difpofitions towards him : how often he was employed in the af- fecting Contemplations of God's glorious Excellen- cies and Perfedions, and of his wonderful Works of Creation and Providence: what delight he took in his JVorJhip, in praifing, bleffing, adoring him, and in meditating on his Law, and on his mioft pure and excellent Precepts. No where can we obferve nobler Ardours of Love to God, a m.ore profound Reverence of the divine Majefty, a more intireSub- miffion to his Authority and Relignation to hisWill, and a more fleddy Confidence in him under the greatefl Difficulties and Adverfities, joined with the moll humbling Senfe of his own Guilt and Unwor- thinefs. We may there fee how much he was griev- ed for his Sins •, what juft Notions he had of Mo- rality and the Neceflity of an inward Purity of Soul ; what a Love of Truth and Goodnefs, and a Hatred of Falfliood and Injuftice; and how much it was the Defire and Endeavour of his Soul to make a continual Proficiency in Goodnefs, Piety, and Virtue. Thefe feem to have been the habitual go- v^erning Difpofitions of his Mind. And according- ly we find him frequently appealing with the great- eft Solemnity to the Heart-fearching God concern- ing the Integrity of his Heart, and the Purity of his Intentions. And it is with regard to thefe ex- cellent Parts of his Character that he is reprefented as a Man after God's own Hearty as well as his Fit- nefs to fervethe Purpofesof his Providence. Com- mon Candour will oblige us not to give the worfl turn to the Adions of fuch a Man-, but rather to judge the mo?i favourably concerning any Aftions of his that appear to us fufpicious, being ready to fuppofe that they would appear to us in a different View, if we were acquainted with all the Circum-
fiances
of the antient Vrovu'ETs. 289
fiances of the cafe. And where it is evident that he was guilty of great and real Faults^ the proper Ufe to be made of them is to reflect on the Weak- »(?/j of human Nature, and to put us upon a conftant IVatchfulnefs over our felves, and to make us fenfi.- ble what need we (land in of being continually up- on our Guard againft Temptations, that had like to have proved the utter Ruin of fo excellent a Man, and which coft him fuch bitter Sorrow and Repentance.
On this occafion I cannot pafs by a remarkable Paflage which our Author has in the Beginning of his Book, and which gives us a true Tafte of his Spirit. After having obferved that David was the great Mailer of Poetry and Politenefs in Ifrael^ he tells us, that he " made a Jeft of himfelf by dancing naked ** before the Lord among the Daughters of Ifrael^ *' and uncovering that which his Modefty ought " to have concealed. This was doubtlefs a merry ** A(5bion which he as merrily excufed to his Wife " by afcribing it to his Zeal for the Lord, and in " the fame Humour refolved never to lie with her *' more, becaufe fhe could not approve of his warm " Zeal for the Lord among the Women," 2 Sam. vi. 20—23. itfp. 22.
But our pretended moral Philofopher^ who affedls here to fhew his Wit, only ihews his own Abfur- dity, and the Immodefly and Levity of his Mind, as well as his virulent Malice againft a Perfon of great Merit. Davidy whom he calls the greai Ma- fier of Politenefs in Ifrael, had too much Senfe to be guilty of ading fuch a Part as this on a moft fo- lemn religious Occafion, and before all the Heads of the 'Tribes of Ifrael that were then convened, a Part which, according to his Reprefentation of it, would fcarce be born in a drunken Frolick, and in the leudeft Company. |
Our Author himfelf was fo fenfible of the In- juftice of this Reflexion, that tho* he puts it into
290 A farther Vindication
the Mouth of Philalethes his moral Philofopher, v/hom he would pafs upon us for a Lover of Truth and Virtue, yet he makes his other Dialogift Theo- phanes, whom he introduces to aft the Pare of the Chriftian Jew, tell him that this Cenfure is extreme- ly fevere if not unjujl^ and that the Place referred to might as well bear a more candid Interpretation. And yet fo loth is he to part with it, that he makes him at the fame time fay, that it fnay p.ojjibly b^ar that Conjlr Motion. But it is evident from the Chapter he refers to, 2 Sam. vi. that this PafTage cannot pojjibly hear the Conjiru^ion the jnoral Philofopher puts up- on it. Since in the 14"" Verfe of that Chapter, where we are told that David danced before the Lordy it is at the f.;me time exprefsly declared, that he was girded with a linen Ephod. And this is ftill more clearly and fully explained, i Chron. xv. 27. which relates to the fame Tranfadion. We are there in- formed that David was clothed with a Robe, of fine Linen^ and all the Levites that bare the Ark^ and the Singers, &c. David had alfo upon him an Ephod of Linen. Where it is evident that David had on him a linen Robe, and over that an Ephod which was a fhorter Garment girded over the other to keep it from flowing loofe. After this Manner the Le- vites were clothed on folemn Occafions, as appears from this PaOage, and from 2 Chron. v. 12, 13. David on this Occafiori put off his kingly Robes, and was clothed like one* of the Levites. This with his dancing before the Ark, tho' done purely from a religious Motive and Principle, was what dif- obliged Michal. She thought that David greatly demeaned himfelf, and adted much below the Ma- jeRy of a King in what he did j and in her Fret and Pride ufes the moll aggravating Expreffions flie could think of, the more to expofe the Action, and reprefent it as unfeemly and unworthy of him. Da- ,vid in anfwer to her was far from excufing himfelf in a merry way as this Writer has it 3 but very fe-
rioufly
of the antient Prophets. 291
rloudy and with a juft Indignation at the unworthy Reprefentation fhe had made of his Conduct, he put her in mind that God had chofcn him before her Father and all his Houfe, to appoint him to be Ruler over his People: that therefore he would play before the Loi-d, that is, would rejoice and tef- tify his Thankfulnefs to God -, and that if this were to be vile or to demean himfelf, he would do it j^^ more : For what fhe reproached him for he account- ed his Honour. And then the Text lets us know that Michal had no Child to the Day of her Death: Her irreligious Pride met with a juft Rebuke from God. She was from that Day forward (truck with Barrennefs, which in thofe Days efpecially was ac- counted a very fevere Judgment.
This is more than fufficient to fhew the Falfhood and Injuftice of our Author's Reprefentation of this Matter. But it may not be amifs to confider what a Writer of Quality has offered, from whofe fupe- rior Senfe and Politenefs, much better Things might be expe6led than from our pretended moral Philofo- pher. He has thought fit to make a Reprefentation of this Tranfadion, which tho' not fo bafe and fmutty as this Writer's Account of it, yet fets it in a very unfair and difhonourable Light.
After having reprefented David as a hearty Efpou- fer of the merry Devotion, he tells us, that " the " famous Entry or high Dance performed by him, '* after fo confpicuous a Manner, in the Procef- " fion of the facred Coffer, fliews that he was not " afhamed of expreffing any Extafy of Joy, or *' playfom Humour, which was pradifed by the ** meaneft of the Priefls or People on fuch an Oc- " cafion," fee Charaderift. Vol. 3^ p. 117. 'Tis plain what Ideas he intends to raife of this whole Affair in the Minds of the Reader. Merry Devo- tion^ high Dance, playfom Humour, praolijed by the meanejl of the People. And in his Notes at the Bottom of the Page he tells us, thac *' though this U 2 '* Dance
292 'A farther Vindication " Dance was not performed quite naked (m which he is jufter than our Author) " the Dancers, it " feems, were fo (lightly clothed, that in refpedt " of Modefty, they might as well have wore no- " thing: their Nakednefs appearing ftill by means " of their high Caperings, Leaps, and violent At- " titudes, which were proper to that Dance.** This mhle Writer gives us as particular a Defcription of it as if he himfelf had been prefent, and had ittn it performed, and was acquainted with the parti- cular Meafures proper to that Dance. And I think he would have done well to have informed us in what authentick Memoirs we may find an Account of it, or of the Clothing they wore on fuch Occa- fions; which he tells us was fo flight, that in refpe<5t. of Modefly they might as well have wore nothing. But certain it is th^t David was not fo flightly clothed. He had on, as I have already Ihewn, a linen Robe, which in thofe Countries was long, reaching to the Feet •, and over it had an Ephod of Linen girded about him, which were very decent Garments, worn by the Levites in their Miniftrations on the moft fo- lemn Occafions, efpecially when finging the Praifes of God, fee 2 Chron. v. 12, 13.
But let us a little particularly confider the Ac- count that is given us of this famous Entry, as he calls it, which we have defcribed to us in the xv^^ and XV i^" Chapters of the firft Book of Chronicles y that we may fee whether it defer ves to have fuch ri- diculous Ideas affixed to it. It appears that it was a very auguft AlTembly that was then convened. All the chief Men of the Nation were called and gathered together ; the Elders o/"Ifrael, and the Cap-' tains over thoufands. The Defign was to bring up the Ark of God to the Place which David had pre- pared for it in Jerufalem. And tho' they had too juft and worthy Notions of the Deity to fuppofe that his Prefence was confined there, yet they regarded it with the utmofl Reverence as a facred Symbol of 3 hi§
of the antient Prophet s^ 295
his more immediate Prefence. It is manifeft From the Account given us i Chron. xv. from the if^** to the 25^'' Verfe, that every thing was done in great Order. Some of the Levites bare the Ark as Mofes had commanded ; others of them were appointed to be Singers, being divided into feveral Clafles under their proper Mafters, and had their feveral Parts afligned them, fome upon one mufical Inftrument, fome upon another, to fing facred Songs or Hymns to the Praife of God. And that noble Form of Thankfgiving and Praife which we have, i Chron, xvi. from the 7''' Verfe to the ^y^'"" Verfe was given by David on this Occafion. The Levites fung it, and all the People faid Amen^ and praifed the Lord. In that admirable Hymn David excites the People to give Thanks unto the Lord, to glory and re- joice in his holy Name, and to remember and fpeak of his wonderful Works. He firft puts the People of Ifrael in mind of the particular Obligations they were under to blefs the Lord on the Account of the great Things he had done for them. And then with a noble Ardor and Enlargement of Soul calls upon all the Nations in the World to form as it were one univerfal delightful Confort in finging Praifes to God, and giving him the Glory that is due to his great and moft excellent Name, whofe unequalled Majefty and Perfedlions he extols as in- finitely fuperior to all the Idol-Deities. And laftly, he calls upon the whole Creation^ the Heavens, the Earth, the Sea, the Woods, the Fields, to break forth into a Tranfport of divine Joy and Praife. And the whole concludes with again calling upon the People of Ifrael to give Thanks unto the Lord for he is good, for his Mercy endureth for ever •, and to pray to him to fave and to deliver them •, and to blefs his holy Name for ever^ to which the whole Aflembly faid Amen.
This was the AfTembly, and this the Occafion
which is reprefented in fo ridiculous a Light as if it
U 3 were
294 \A farther V iiiD I c AT ion
were only a ludicrous gamefome Mob. Immedi- ately before the j^rk which was cartied in folemn ProcefTion, King David walked with the Levi tes 3.11 around him ranked in their feveral Orders, finging Praifes to God to folemn Airs of divine Mufick : whilft he himfelf danced wiih all his Might, i. e. with his bed Ability, or with all his Heart, (as that Phrafe is fometimes ufed) to fhew the Joy and Ex- ultation of his Soul. And tho' I will not pretend, like this honourable Writer, to tell particularly what Kind of Dance it was-, yet this I dare be fure of, both from the Solemnity of the Occafion,.and from David's own Character, that there was nothing in it light or immodeft. He certainly was a Man of excellent Senfe, as appears from his admirable Wri- tings, which fhew the exalted Notions he had of what was juft and pure, and lovely and praife- worthy ; he was a great and wife King, and too good a Po- litician to expofe himfelf by any light immodefl Behaviour on this Occafion in the Beginning of his Reign, when the whole Nation were affembled and WitnefTes of his Conduft; and efpecially before the Ark of God, whofe Prefence infpired a profound Reverence as well as Joy, and more fo at this time, confidering what had fo lately happened in the Cafe of Uzzah. His Soul was then filkd with Joy, but it was with a divine Joy and Exultation in the Goodnefs of God -, and the admirable Hymn he compofed on that Occafion fhews what noble and divine Sentiments then pofTefTed his Mind, how far from any thing fo mean, low, indecent, and trivial as they would put upon him.
Indeed, any one that confiders the peculiar Mo- defly and Decency prefcribed in the Law of Mofes to be obferved in the divine Worfhip •, and what care was taken to fhun whatfoever had the leafl Ap- pearance of any thing indecent or impure * j will fee
See Exod. XX. 26. xxviii. 42, 43. to which may beaddid, J)tut. xxiii. 12- 14,
2 how
of the a?2fie?it Prophets. 29^
how incredibly abfurd it is to fuppofe, that David who was fo well acquainted with the Law, would before the Ark of God dance naked, or fo (lightly clothed^ ik^t in refpeol of Modefty he might as well have wore nothing •, or that the Hicred Dances ufed on fach Occafions, fhould be of fuch a Nature as if they were contrived on purpofe to uncover their Nakednefs. We find that in the latter Times of the Jewijh State a Ro7nan Soldier's expofing him- fdlf naked before the People at one of their facred Fejiivah^ raifed fuch a violent Commotion among the Jews, that occafioned the Death of thoufands, and could hardly be appeafed. Such an Abhorrence had the whole Nation of any thing that had the Appearance of Indecency and Impurity in their Worfhip, even at a time when they were fuffici- ently loofe in their Morals, fee Jofephus^s Antiq, Lib. 20.
This noble Writer is pleafed to reprefent David as a hearty Encourager of the merry 'Devotion. And he had obferved a little before, that under that Con- ftitution not only Mufick^ hut even Flay and Dance were of holy Appointment, and divine Right*. All the Ridicule here arifes from the Idea now affixed to the Words Play and Dance in our Language. But it is unworthy of a Man of Learning to take Advantage from modern Cuftoms and Expreffions to exp^e a Cuftom among the Antients, that car- ried nothing of that Idea of Unfeemlinefs and Le- vity in divine Worlhip which it doth at prefent. It appears that on the moft folemn Occafions fome kind of Dance as well as Mufick was then made ufe of in their facred Exercifes: Let them praife his Name in the Dance j let them ftng Praifes unto
* If this Reprefentation which this noble Writer here gives of the Je-'-iJh Religion be juil, I do not fee with what Ccn- fiftenc/ he cuuld lay as he does, />. 1 16. Ihat they had certainly in Religion as in iveiy thing ejfe, the lea ft good Humour of any Pe-ple in the World, is very apparent.
U 4. , bim
296 A farther Vindication
him with the T'imhrel and Harp, Pfal. cxlix. 3. and again, P/al. cl. 4. Praife him with the Timhrel and Dance, praife him with (Iringed Inflruments and Or- gans. What the Meafure of their Dance, or what their Mufick was on fuch Occafions we cannot now pretend to explain. But if we may judge of the one or the other by the Majefty, the Dignity, the great and fublime Sentiments contained in their divine Songs, it had nothing in it light, effeminate, and vain, or that bordered on Wantonnefs and Impu- rity. All was noble, grand, manly and divine.
What the laft-mentioned Author farther adds, hath fuch a Tendency to expofe the Spirit of Pro- phecy, which is what we have been confidering and vindicating, that I hope it will not be thought an ufelefs Digreflion to confider it. He leaves the cu- rious Reader " to examine what Relation this reli- *' gious Extacy and naked Dance {viz. oi David •' at the bringing in of the Ark) had to the naked *' and proceffional Prophecy, i Sam. xix. 23, 24. *' where Prince, Prieft, and People prophefied in *' Conjunftion; the Prince himfelf being both of *' the itinerant and naked Party. It appears that •' even before he was yet advanced to the Throne, *' he had been feized with this prophefying Spirit, *' errant, procejjional, and faltant, attended as we *' find with a fort of martial Dance, performed in *' Troops or Companies with Pipe and Tabret ac- *' fiompanying the March, together with Pfaltry, *' Harp, Cornets, Timbrels and other Variety of *^ Mufick," fee i Sam, x. 5. xix. 23, 24. 2 Sam.
yi. 5-
It happens that in none of the PafTages here re- Terred to, there is the leafl mention of their dan- cing: tho' they are produced to prove the faltant Spirit of Prophecy. But his own fruitful Imagina- tion or Prejudices have enabled this ingenious Au- thor not only to difcover that they danced, but to tell us what Kind of Dance it was. He has found
that
of the a?2tienf P R o V n E r s. 297
that it was a fort of martial Dance^ performed in Troops^ Sec. ' I fee nothing to prove this except their having Inftruments of Mufick \yith them muft pafs for a Proof. And yet thefe were no other than were afterwards ufed in the Temple in the folemn A6ls of divine Worfhip and Praife. It is very pro- bable, that if Trumpets had been mentioned on this Occafion, this would have been looked upon as a Demonftration, and yet every Body knows that a Trumpet was often ufed among the Jezvs where no- thing of a martial Nature was intended. See PfaL Ixxxi. 3. cl. 3. All that appears from that PafTage, 1 Sam. X. 5. is that there was a Company of Pro- phets coming down from the High Place, where probably they had been offering Sacrifice; and that they were finging Praifes to God at the Sound of mufical Inftruments; and that Saul fuddenly tranfported as with a divine Rapture joined with them in the facred Exercife, and broke forth into Hymns of Praife. For this feems to be the Mean- ing of his Prophefying with them : which is not there to be underftood properly of foretelling Things to come, but as it fometimes is in Scripture of fing- ing facred Hymns and Songs with Exultation and Devotion. So we read i Chron. xxv. i — 6. of Perfons who according to the Order of the King were appointed to prophefy with Harps, with Pfal- teries and Cymbals to give thanks and to praife the Lord. Where to prophefy, and to give thanks, and to praife the Lord^ are reprefented as the fame Thing. The Prophefying mentioned i Sam. xix. 20, 23, 24. which is the other Paffage referred to, is probably to be underftood the fame Way. Saul had fent Meflengei^ to feize David upon hearing that he was at Naiow in Ramah with the Prophet Samuel : When they came there they faw the Com- pany of the Prophets prophefying, and SimutXJland- ing as appointed over them. They were probably all employed in celebrating the Praifes of God in
noble
298 A farther Vindication
noble elevated Hymns and A(5bs of Devotion. And the MelTengers Saul fent by a* fpeckl Influence of divine Providence catch'd the facred Tranfport. They were hereupon ravifhed as with adivijie Ex- tafy, and joined with the Prophets in folemn Acts of Adoration and Praife. And fo did the fecond and third Party of MefiTengers he fent after them. Then went Saul himfelf, probably full of Rage, and with a Refolution perhaps to deftroy not only David but Samuel too, and the whole Company of the Prophets that were with him. For his deftroy- ing the Town of 'Nob with the High Prieft and all the Priefts that lived there, upon a very flight Sufpicion of their favouring David \ and the At- tempt he made againft the Life of his own Son, lliewed what in the Rage of his Fury and Jealoufy he was capable of. But it pleafed God fo to order it, that he himfelf before he came to Naioth was feized by the Way as with a prophetical Tranfport. And he went on prophefying in the Senfe already ex- plained, till he came to the Place where Samuel was. Thus he was difarmed of his bloody Inten- tion, and his Rage and Fury turned into Praife and facred Extafy by a wonderful Influence of God's Spirit upon him. And we are told that when he came to Naioth^ he firipped off his Clothes alfo *, that is, he laid by his Royal Robes or military Ha-
"* The Jlripping off the Clothes, or laying rjide the Gam entf, is often to be underftood, not of throwing off all their Vellments, but only the upper Ga>7nent. Thus we are told, that our Sa- viour when he wa(hed his Difciples Feet /^rV ajide his Gar- 7nents, or put off his Clothes, not that he was ablblutely naked, for it is added, that he girded himfelf, Joh. xiii, 4. And the Word naked is fometimes ufed both in Scripture and other Au- thors, where abfolute Nakednefs ^not intended, but only a Perfon's being flightly clothed, or being wthout his upper Gar- ment, or his proper ufual Habit. So Michal reprefents Daviji as having uncovered himfelf, becaufe he had laid afide his Royal Robes, the' he was far from being abfolutely naked, as hath been fliewn.
biliments,
of the antient Prophets. 299
biliments, and prophefied before Samuel. He be- came himfelf, like one of the Prophets he came to deftroy, wholly taken up in praifing and adoring God. And after he had done thus prophefying, he lay down naked all that Day^ and all that Night; not that he was without any thing at all to cover him, but he lay down divefted of his Robes or up- per Garments, and thus continued in a Trance, or in a Kind of Extafy, all the Remainder of that Day and the Night following. A manifeft and re- markable Proof, how much the greateft Princes and all their Purpofes are in the Hand of God. He that was fo jealous of his Royalty, which put him upon doing fo many unjuft and unwarrantable Things, was now made as it were to Unking him- felf, and lay afide the Enfigns of his Dignity and Power; and was conftrained by a higher Hand to lie down without Power, without Royalty, unable to execute the Purpofe for which he came. In the mean time David had an Opportunity given him to get fir enough out of his Reach. And if Saul , as is very probable, came with any bloody Intentions again It Samuel and the other Prophets that were with him, and perhaps againft his own MefTengers, this wonderful Incident made fuch an ImprelTio^i upon him as caufed him for that time to lay afidc his cruel Refolutions. Confidered in this View this whole Affair, tho* wonderfuly and of an extraordi- nary Nature, had nothing in it that can be proved to be unworthy of the Wifdom of God. The Ri- dicule here lies not in the Thing itfelf confidered in all its Circumftances, but in the Expreffions this noble Author in his great Command of Words is pleafed to throw in upon this Occafion, concerning the prophefying Spirit, itinerant, errant, proceffional^ and faltant, and in the Infinuations he gives that the Prinqe, Prophets, and People all danced naked without any Thing to cover them. And it is as true that they all danced and prophefied naked on
this
300 Vl ND I C AT I ON ^/^^
this Occafion as that David did fo in his famous Entry.
CHAP. X.
^e Author* s farther InveBive againfi the Prophets confidered. His Account of their pretended Con- fpiracy againji Solomon. 'The rending the King- dom of the ten Tribes from the Houfe of David, "not owing to the Intrigues of the Prophets, hut to the juji Judgfnent of God. The Prophets, not the Authors of the fever at Civil Wars and Revolutions in the Kingdom o/*Ifrael. The favour alle Account he gives ^ Ahab and Jezabel, and the other ido- latrous Princes as Friends to Toleration and Liber- ty of Confcience. The Falfhood of this fhewn. His Attempt to vindicate the Perfecutions raifed againfi the true Prophets of the Lord. Concerning Eli- jah'j Character and Condu^, and particularly concerning his caufing Baal'j Prophets to be put to Death at Mount Carmel. The Cafe of Elifha'i anointing Jehu to be King of Ifrael, with a Com- miffion to defiroy the Royal Houfe of Ahab, con- fidered: as alfo his Management with Hazael. The Charge this Writer brings againfi the Pro- phets as fomenting the Wars between the two King- doms of Ifrael and Judah, and at length occafion- ing the Ruin of both, fhewn to be falfe and incon- fiftent.
OUR moral Philofopher, after having repre- fented the Prophets as quiet and fatisfied in the Reign of David, proceeds to inform us of a Confpiracy they formed againfi Solomon and his Family on the Account of his granting a general Indulgence and Toleration to all Religions. It is under this Idea that he thinks fit to reprefent his Defcftion to Idolatry in the latter Part of his Reign. He built High-Places to Moloch and Chentojh, and
other
Prophets, continued. 301
other Idol-Deities, not fo much out of Policy as this Writer would make us believe, as in Compli- ance with his Wives, fwayed by Effeminacy and a Love of Pleafure, which debafes and corrupts the bed Underftandings. This he did in exprefs Viola- tion not only of the fundamental Laws of his Coun- try, as hath been already fhewn, but of the parti- cular Covenant or Promife whereby David and his Pofterity held the Crown j which was upon Condi- tion of their continuing to walk in God's Com- mandments and Judgments, and adhering to his pure Worfhip as David himfelf had done. Our Author indeed affirms once and again that David took it to be an abfolute Promife to him and his Pofterity of an uninterrupted Succeffion to the Throne without any Condition at all, fee p. 26 1^ 286. But that David himfelf underftood it other- wife is evident from his own exprefs Account of it, I Kings ii. 3, 4. and i Chron. xxviii. 6, 7, 9. And th3.t Solomon had the fame Notion of it appears from what he faith in his Prayer at the Dedication of the Temple : Now therefore, O Lord God o/'Ifrael, keep with thy Servant David my Father that which thou hafi promifed him, faying, there /hall not fail thee a Man in my Sight to fit upon the 'Throne ^Ifrael: yet fo that thy Children take heed to their way, to walk in my haw as thou haft walked before me, 2 Chron. vi. 16. Add to this, that God himfelf appeared unto Solomon, and promifed him to ejlahlifip the Throne of his Kingdom, if he obferved his Statutes and Judgments, as David his Father had done: And on the other hand, threatned to deflroy both Kings and People if they forfook his Statutes and Judgments, and ferved other Gods, and worfhipped than; and that he would root them out of that Land, and dejlroy that Houfe which was called by his Name, and make them a By-word, and an Aflo- nifhment to all Nations, fee i Kings ix. 4 — 10. It is therefore juftly obferved as an Aggravation of
SohmQti'i
302 ViN D I C AT ION o/'/y^^
Solomon*s Guilt, that his Heart was turned from thd "Lord God of Ifrael which had appeared unto him twice, and had commanded him concerning this Thing, that he Jhould not go after other Gods: but that he kept not that which the Lord commanded, i Kings xi. 9, 10. This being the true State of the Cafe, if God had abfolutely deprived Solomon himfelf and all his Pofterity of the Kingdom, he could not juftly have complained of any Thing but his own Conduft, who had broken the Conditions on which he knew it was originally granted to David and his Family. But it pleafed God to deal more ten- derly with him. We are told that the Lord de- clared unto him, probably by fome Prophet who was fent to deliver that Meflage, that becaufe he had not kept his Covenant and his Statutes, the Kingdom fhould be rent from his Son, and given to bis Servant, yet not intirely, but fo that a Part of it fhould ftill be referved to his Family, and that he himfelf fhould enjoy the whole of it during his own Life-time*. See 1 Kings xi. 11 — 14. And accordingly the Prophet Ahijah was fent in the Name of God to promife to Jeroboam, Solofnonh Servant, the Kingdom of the ten Tribes; at the fame time letting him know that it was the Will of God, that Solo?non fhould pofTefs the Kingdom dur- ing his own Life-time, and that his Son alfo fliould have the Kingdom of Judah continued to him. And'this Promife to Jeroboam was alfo conditional ; that if he would hearken unto all that God comfnand-
* Our Autlior afcribes Solomons being preferved in the Pof- feffion ot" tlie Kingdom during liis Life-time to his being ftrength- ened by foreign Alliances, among whicii he particularly men- tions his Alliance with E^ypt ; wlien it appears on tiie contiary> that E^ypt inilead of giving Solomon Affiltance, rather gav4Pn- courag' ment to his Enemies, and was a Harbour for duafftfted Perfons, probably thro' Envy or Jealoufy of Solomon^ Great- nefs. Thither fled Jeroboam when Solo7Mn fought to flay him, and thither fled Hadad the Edomite, and both met wich great Countenance and Affiftance there.
edy
Prophets, continued. 303
ed^ and would 'walk in his Ways to keep his Statutes and Comjnandments as David had done, God would build him a fure Houfc^ as he did for David, and would jorjf Ifrael unto him ; fee i Kingsxi. 29—38. This Meffage which the Prophet Ahijah delivered by the divine Command to Jeroboam, when they two were alone in the Field, is what our Author hath improved into a Confpiracy of the Prophets, whom he reprefents as very profound Politicians, that had laid their Proje6ts deep for bringing about a new Revolution in the State, tho* how they were to' effed it, or how the Prophets came to have fuch anr intereft among the Tribes, as to be able to give ten Tribes to one, and referve two to another, he doth not inform us. However he alTures us, that Ahijah let Jeroboam into thofe Secrets and deep Deftgns of State -y. and laid before him what was intended and projeEl- ed by the Prophets againft^o^wo^ and his Family ; and that if he would be governed by them, and dejlroy all Idolaters , they would order Matters, fo that he fhould have the Crown. According to this Account Jeroboam muft have known that the whole was merely a Contrivance of thofe Politi- cians the Prophets, and that there was nothing of extraordinary Predidion or divine Infpiration in the Cafe. But it is certain, Jeroboam himfelf was of another Mind. He knew nothing of thofe prophe- tical Secrets and deep Defigns of State which our Author is the firft that has difcovered to theWorld: For when his Son Abijah was fick, he delired his Wife to difguife herfelf, and go to Shiloh to inquire about him, giving this Reafon for it •, Behold there is Ahijah the Prophet which told me that I Jhould he 'King over this People, go to him, and he /hall tell thee, what /hall become of the Child, 1 Kings xiv. 2, 3. Where it is evident that he looked upon Ahijah as a true Prophet of God, extraordinarily infpired to foretel future Events ; and he mentions his having foretold that he fhould bq^K^ing over If- rael
304 Vindication of the
rael as a Proof of it. And indeed his foretelling fo clearly and exprefsly this extraordinary Revolu- tion in the Days of Solomon^ when there was fo lit- tle Likelihood of effe6ting it, and his foretelling with fo much Particularity that Jeroboam Ihould reign over ten of the Tribes and no more •, and the cxa6t Accomplifhment of it, contrary to all Appea- rance, and which would have been prevented if i^*?- hohoam had but behaved with common Prudence, and had hearkened to the Advice which the wife Counfellors gave him •, this fhewed that the Prophet jihijah was indeed fent of God, and that that whole Affair, which it was impoffible for any human Sa- gacity to forefee, was ordered and over-ruled by his all-difpofmg Providence, for accomplifliing his own jufl: and righteous Judgments.
This ought to have engaged Jeroboam^ who was convinced that Ahijah was fent of God, to have conformed himfelf ftri(5bly to the Commands that were given him by that Prophet, in the Name of God, when he foretold his coming to the Throne of Ifrael. But tho* Jeroboam knew that the Kingdom was rent from Solomon^ as a Punifli- ment for his Idolatry, and that when it pleafed God to promife the Kingdom of Ifrael to himfelf, and to his Pofterity, it was on Condition of walk- ing in his Ways^ and keeping his Statutes and Com- mandments, yet in exprefs Contradidion to the di- vine L^w, he fet up the Calves at Dan and Bethel ; not as fhis Author reprefents it, from the friendly Regard he had to Toleration and Liberty of Con- fcience, but merely from a Motive of worldly car- nal Policy j for fear that if the People had con- tinued to go up to worfhip at Jerufalem, they Ihould revolt to the Family of David again, I i^/;?^j xii. 26 — 28. But this irreligious Policy of his, through the juft Judgment of God, only ferved to haften the Ruin of his Houfe, which it was defigned g) ellablifh, The fame Prophet A-
hijah
Prophets, continued. 30c
hijah^ that had foretold his Advancement to the Throne of Ifraely did alfo by divine Appointment declare that Jerohocm^?, whole Race and Family Ihould be cut off, and deilroyed : And at the lame Time he exprefsly foretold, that God would root up Ifrael out of the good Land which he gave to their Fathers, and feat ter them beyond the River, i Kings xiv. 4. A clear Evidence that he fpake by divine Infpiration, fince he fo clearly foretold an Event which did not happen till fome Ages after. Jero- hoam*s Son Nadab, and all his Family, was de- ftroyed (as Ahijah had foretold, tho' it can hardly be fuppofed that that Prophet, who was then blind and decrepid with Age, could be capable of form- ing Projects to effedt it) by Baafha ; and afterwards Baafha^s Son Elah, and all his Houfe, were de- ftroyed by Zimri; which Event was alfo exaflly foretold by the Prophet Jehu, whilft Baafha was in all his Profperity. And then Zimri, within feveii Days after his ufurping the Throne, was deilroyed by Omri, who after a Civil War for fome Years, between him and Tibni, was eftablifhed on the Throne. Our Author would fain lay all thefe Commotions and Revolutions to the Charge of the Prophets. He calls them Revolutio'ns in favour of Religion, and faith that all this Slaughter and Blood- fhed was for Religion. See />. 3 10, 311. Though there is not the leaft Proof that Religion was fo much as pretended by Baaflja, or Zimri, as the Caufe of their Confpiracies. Nor indeed can it be fuppofed that they would pretend the fetting up and worfhipping the Calves at Dan and Bethel to be the Caufe of their Confpiracies, which they found no Fault with, and pradlifed themfelves, both before and after their coming to the Crown. There is not the leaft Mention of the Prophets in all thefe Revolutions, any firther than that they had foretold them a confiderable Time before they happened, And if this muft be allowed to be a " X ' ~ Proof
306 Vindication of the
Proof of their having effefled them, then the Pro- phets may, with equal Reafon, be charged with being the Authors of all the wonderful Revolutions in the fucceffive Monarchies and Empires of the World, which they diftinftly foretold-, which would be to attribute to them a Kind of Divinity, and fovereign Dominion over the World and Man- kind. And at that Rate alfo our Saviour muft be charged with being the Caufe oiJudas*s Treafon, becaufe he clearly foretold it.
Our Author obferves, that when an Account is given of Zimri*s violent Death, within feven Days after his mounting the Throne, it is reprefented as a Punifhment upon him, not for the Murder and Treafon he was guilty of, in murdering Elah and all his Houfe, but only for his doing Evil in the Sight of the Lord, in walking in the Way of Jero- loam, and in his Sin, whereby he made Ifrael to fin. I Kings xvi. 19. But had not the facred Hiflo- rian mentioned his Murder and Treafon juft before, 1;. 16 — 18. as the Reafon why all the People rofe up againft him, and befieged him in Tirzah, where- by he was compelled to burn himfelf in his Palace ? Is not this fufficiently declaring, that his Murder and Treafon brought his Deftru6lion upon him ? And tho' his Treafon is not again particularly men- tioned in the 19th Verfe, among his evil Doings, that brought upon him the divine Judgments, but bis walking in the PFays of Jeroboam \ this is not defigned to fignify, that his imitating Jeroboam*?, I- dolatry was his only Crime ; for his 'Treafon that he wrought is again taken Notice of, in the Verfe immediately following. But according to the ftated Order obferved by the 'facred Hiftorian, it is ob- ferved of him, as well as of the other Kings of IfraeU that he was ingaged in the fame Courfe of political Idolatry with! his Predeceflbrs. And this was particularly proper to Ihew that it was not for any Averfion hc had to the Sins and Idolatry that 3 Baafha*i
Prophets, continued. 307
BaaJJjii^s Houfe was guilty of, that he rofe up againfl; them, but merely to gratify his own Am- bition and Cruelty and Lull of reigning. Thus it is obferved, v. 13. of that Chapter where an Ac- count is given of the Deftru6lion o^ Baajha's, Fa- mily, that it was becaufe of their Shis, by which they made Ifrael to fin, in 'provoking the Lord God of Ifrael to anger with their Vanities, or Idols. Where their Idolatry alone is mentioned as the Caufe of the Ruin that befel them in God's righ- teous Judgment. And yet that it was not the De- fign of the facred Writer to infinuate, that this was the only Wickednefs that expofed them to the di- vine Vengeance is evident, fince in the 7th Verfe of the fame Chapter Baafha^s deflroying the Houfe of Jeroboam, which however juft as from God, was unjuft in him, and wholly owing to his own Cruelty and Ambition, is charged upon him as a Crime, for which Judgment was denounced againft him and his Family.
This Writer proceeds next to the Reign of A- hob, of whom and his Queen Jezabel he fpeaks with great Complacency, for no other Reafon that I can fee, but becaufe they are fligmatized in the facred Writings for their Wickednefs and Idola- try, and becaufe they killed the Lord's Pfophets,' For it feems to be a conflant Rule with him, to do all he pofTibly can to vilify and blacken the belt and brighteft Chara6lers there fpoken of: And if any one be there reprefented as wicked and idola- trous, this is fufficient to recommend him to the Efteem of our pretended Moral Philofopher, who feems as folicitous to blanch over tlVe Crimes and Vices of the one, as to fully and calumniate the Virtues of the other.
Ahab and Jezabel not only built a Houfe or
Temple to Baal, and maintained 450 Prophets of
Baal, and 400 Prophets of the Groves, in exprefs
Breach and Defiance of the fundamental Laws and
X 2 Con-ftitutions
/
ooS Vindication of the
Conftitutions o^ Ifraeh, but they barbaroufly perfe- cuted the true Worfhippers of God, threw down his Altars^ and Jlew his Prophets with the Sword. See I Kings xviii. 4, 13. xix. 10. Yet this Writer who all along would be thought fuch an Enemy to Perfecution., and feems to make the Whole of Religion to confift in Liberty of Confcience, and will Icarce allow that God himfelf hath a Right to punifh Idolatry, is not afhamed to ftand up in Pefence of Ahab and Jezahel, for murdering the Lord's Prophets *, and even whilft he is giving an Account of this, has the Confidence to praife the idolatrous Kings of Ifrael, for maintaining Tolera- tion and Liberty of Confcience. f. 313, 314. All that I can make of this is, that in this Author's Opinion, it was Perfecution not to tolerate the pub- lick Worfhip of Baal, or to deftroy his Priefts and Altars, but it was no Perfecution to throw down God's Altars, and to put his Prophets to Death. He feems highly to approve the Scheme that A- hah laid to root out the Prophets, and to efiablijh fome other Religion more friendly and beneficent to Mankind, by which I fuppofe he means the Baalitijh Idolatry, p. 312. And after giving a very favour- able Account of that Idolatry, and of the Priefts of Baal, whom he reprefents as Friends to Liber- ty and Toleration, he affirms that " No Inftance " can be given throughout the whole Hiftory, *' where any of the Kings charged with Idolatry " ufed any Force or Violence, to oblige any Body *' to worlbip the Calves, Baal, Afoteroth, &c! and *' that they never hindred any of their People that *' had a Mind to go up to Jerufalem, to worlhip *' God in the legal Way, of which 'Tobit was " one *." And he denies that they are charged
with
* That many pious Perfons of the ten Tribes went up from Time to Time to wo fh p at Jemfalc/n, wc may well iiippore :
but
Prophets, continued, 309
with enforcing Idolatry by Law, P'3i3> .3 '4* ^^^ are we not exprefsly told concerning Jehoram King of Judah^ that he made High-Places in the Mountains of Judah, and caufed the Inhabitants of Jerufalem to commit Fornication, ( by which is evi- dently there meant Idolatry ) and cojnpelled Judab thereto. 2 Chron. xxi. 11. Can any Thing be a more direft Proof of what this Writer with fo much Confidence denies ? And this Jehoram pro- bably did, in Imitation of the Kings of Ifrael, and particularly of the Houfe of Ahab. For it is ob-- ferved a little before, that he walked in the Way of the Kings of Ifrael, like as did the Houfe of Ahab : for he had the Daughter of Ahab to Wife. Ver. 6. And the Statutes of Omri, who was Ahab^% Father, mentioned Micah vi. 16. cannot well be under- flood of any Thing elfe |than fome Laws for en- forcing Idolatry by the publick Authority. But need we go farther for a Proof of the perfecuting Rage of fome at leaft of the idolatrous Kings, than the Reign of Ahab, the very Time this Au- thor fixes upon for extolling their Lenity and In- dulgence ? The Perfecution was fo fevere, that all publick Worlhip of the true God was entirely pro- hibited. And as many of his Prophets as could be found, whofe Bufinefs it was to inftrud the People in the true Religion, were flain with the Sword. So that Elijah thought he was left alone ; and that there were no true Worfhippers of God left in If- rael but himfelf : tho' God informs him, that there were fome thoufands that had not fallen into the common Idolatry, but ftill worfhipped the true
but this was not with the Allowance of their Kings who fet up the Calves at Dati and Bethel on purpofe to prevent it. Thus particularly we find that great Numbers went from Ifrael to worlhip at Jerufalem in the Days of Afu, but Baa/ha King of Ifrael was fo far from allowing it, that he built Ramah to the Intent that none might go out or come in to Afa King of Ju- dah. Sec 2 Chron. xv. 9. xvi. i.
X3 God
310 V m D 1 c A T I o ii of the
God in private, tho* they were not fuffered to do k in a publlck "Way.
But our Moral Philofopber, in Order to juftify as far as in him lies, the Violence ufed by Jhab and Jezabel, tells us, that Experience had evinced, that it was impqffihle for the regal Power and pro- phetick Office to fnhfifl together, and therefore Ahab hoped to have put an End to this holy Order, and thereby have cut off the Occafion of more religious Wars, And that Jezabel feemed to have had fotne Appearance of natural Juftice in the Scheme (he laid for the Beftru^ion of the Lord's Prophets •, Jince it is certain, that they had greatly inflamed and ex- cited the People to Rebellion, and cut off one Royal Fa7nily after another for above two hundred Tears pajl on account of Religion. — And that fhe defigned to exterminate them as Enemies not only to their own Country, but to the com7non Peace and 'Tranquillity of the IVorld, p. 3 1 2 — 3 14.
But it doth not appear that Jezabel had any In- ducement to do what fhe did but her Zeal for Baal and his Worfliip •, or that either fhe or Ahab ever fo much as pretended to charge the Prophets with having been the Authors of Rebellions and Infur- reftions among the People. This is entirely the Pillion of this candid and righteous Author without any Thing but his own Malice againft the Pro- phets to fupport the Accufation. And this is the •way he hath found out to reconcile the Pradice of Perfecution with a pretended Zeal againft it. It is but charging Perfons with Treafon and Rebellion againft the State, and interpreting their faithful "Warnings againft the publick Vices and Idolatry, to be a Defign to ftir up Infurreftions among the People, and then it is right to deftroy them with- out being guilty of Perfecution at all. Thus he takes the Methods that the worft of Perfecutors have always done : firft, to blacken the Charafters of the good Men they had a Mind to deflroy, and
fix
Prophets, continued. 311
fix odious Brands upon them as Rebels and Incen- diaries, and then to ufe them cruelly, and maffacre them i which is a double Murder committed, upon their Perfons and Reputations. Thus the Apoftles, the Defign of whofe preaching was to turn Men from Darknefs unto Light, from Idolatry and Vice to the pure Worfhip of God, and the Pra6tice of Righteoulhefs, were reprefented as Perfons that turned the World upfide down •, and the Apoflle Paul in particular was charged as a pejlilent Fellow, and a Mover of Sedition.
Our Author feems to mention it with regret, that Ahab could not put an End to this Holy Order, as he hoped to have done, hecaufe the Prophets hadjiill tnore^ Intereji and Influence with the People than the Kings y p. 312. And that Jezahel, tho' fhe had cut off many of the Prophets, found it impojftble to root them out, whiljl they had fo much Intereji, and the People were refolved to protect them, p. 314. I'his is faid with a view to infmuate what Power they had to raife Infurreftions and Commotions among the People. But how abfurd is it to talk of the mighty Influence the Prophets had over the People at a time when the whole Nation had gene- rally fallen into Idolatry in Oppofition to their In- ftrudtions and Admonitions, and the few that had kept themfelves pure from it, were fcarce to be dif- cerned, and durft not publickly (hew themfelves ? If the Prophets had fo much Intereji with the Peo- ple, and they were refolved to protcol them, how came Jezahel to have it in her Power to deflroy as many of them as Ihe could find? For if any efcaped, it was only owing to their being concealed in fe- cret Places, like thofe whom Obadiah fed with Bread and Water in a Cave, or to their flying out of the Country. It appears from the Account we have o^ Elijah himfelf, the mod eminent Prophet of that time, that he lived for the mod part during that Reign in Obfcurity and Retirement, in conftant X 4 Hazard
312 Vindication o/ the
Hazard of his Life, perfecuted from Place to Place ; nor do we find him coming into Places of publick Refort, but when he was fent upon extraordinary MefTages from God, which he delivered and dif- charged with an undaunted Fortitude. The only Inflance that can be produced to fhew his Power and Influence over the People, is what this Writer mentions, his procuring Baal^s Prophets to be flain when they were affembled together to Mount Car- fuel. But this was only the EiTe6t of a fudden ftrong Impreffion that was then made upon the People, upon their feeing the fignal Miracle which was wrought before them all, and which gave them an illuftrious Proof upon a folemn Conteft, that he was a true Prophet of God, and that the l_,ord Jehovah whofe Prophet he was, was the only true God. Under the Influence of this prefent Convic- tion, they obeyed the Diredlions he gave them to deftroy thofe Prophets, who were then engaged in the very A(5t of Idolatry. This tho* an extraordi- nary A6lion was very jufl:, both as a Retaliation for the Deftruftion of the Lord's Prophets who had been caufelefly put to Death by Jezahel^ and pro- bably at the Inftigation of thefe falfe Prophets*, and becaufe thefe Perfons were all of them notorious Criminals, devoted to Death by the fundamental Lav/s of their Conftitution, which was of divine Original and Appointment*. To which was added at that time the fpecial Command and Authority of God himfelf, who upon Elijah' s> Prayer and folemn Appeal to him before all the People, gave an il- luftrious Attefl:ation from Heaven that Elijah was his Servant, and that what he then did was accord- ing to his Word, that is, by Commiflion from him, fee I Kif^gs xviii. ^^i ^c- -^hab himfelf, who feems
* Befides the general Law for punifhing thofe with Death that feductd the People to Idolatry, there was a particular Law which appointed that the Prophet that ihould /peak in the Name cfothtr Godi fhould be put to Death, Dent, xviii. 20.
to
Prophets, continued. 313
to have been prefent at this Conteft between Elijah and the Prophets of Baal was probably ftruck at that time with what he faw as much as the People, and therefore made no Oppofition to the flaying of Baal\ Prophets. And it plainly appears from the Account there given us, that he believed what Eli- jah then affured him of, that God would immedi- ately put an End to the grievous Drought that had fo long afHifted the whole Country, and fend a great Quantity of Rain, which accordingly upon Elijah'^ earneft Prayer to God was accomplifhed that very Day.
One would think that EUjah*s Intereft with the People was now at the Height, and that now if ever they fhould be refolved to proteoi him. And yet fo little was Jezahd apprehenfive of this pre- tended Influence of the Prophets to raife Infurrec- tions and Commotions, that as foon as flie heard of what Elijah had done, flie fent a peremptory Meflfage to him that jfhe would have his Life the very next Day : and he had no way of efcaping her Rage but by flying firft into J'udah^ and then into the Wildernefs, alone and deftitute of all human Succour and Protection.
Afterwards indeed we find him coming to Ahah again with a fpecial Meflfage from God, and denounc- ing the mofl: dreadful Vengeance againft him and his Family for the Murder of Nabolh. An execrable Wickednefs, contrived by Jezabel, and approved by Abab, and which may let us into the true Cha- ra(5ler of both. For what could be a more flagrant and deliberate Wickednefs, than firfl: to fuborn falfe Witnefles againfl: a good and innocent Man, and to get him condemned for Blafphe?ny againfl: God, and 1'rcafon againfl: the King (which Charge was as true as that which this Writer advances againfl: the Prophets) and then deftroy and murder him under that Pretence, and probably his Children with him, Jis may be gathered from 2 Kings ix. 26. and fo
feize
314 V I N D I C A T I O N O/' //^^
feize his Inheritance. It was on this Occafion that Ahab meeting Elijah fa id to him, Hajl thou found ine^ Omine E72emy? fee i Kings xya. 17 — 20. And he had once before called him the I'roubler of Umdy Chap, xviii. 17. Not that he intended to charge him with raifmg Infurreftions and Commotions againft the Government, but he hated him for his faithful Reproofs, and dreaded the Judgments he denounced with an impartial Zeal againft him for his Sins. The Anfwer that Elijah returned to him on both thofe Occafions is remarkable: He lets him know that it was he by his own Wicked- nefs that brought thofe Evils both upon himfelf and upon the People. Compare i Kings xviii. 18. and Chap. xxi. 20, &c. in which latter Paflage he plainly and exprefsly foretels the Ruin that fhould befal Jbah and his Family, and the principal Cir- cumftances of it with a wonderful Particularity, all which received an exaft Accomplilhment. The Effeft this had upon Ahab, in the outward Signs of Repentance and Humiliation it produced, tho' it did not effed a true Repentance and Amendment, but was a tranfient Remorfe that foon went off, fhewed the inward Conviction he had that Elijah was a true Prophet of the Lord extraordinarily fent and infpired by him, and the Reverence he had for his Piety, and inflexible Righteoufnefs and Integrity. And indeed from the Account that is given us in the Hiftory of Jhab, it feems very probable that at the latter End of his Reign, tho* he did not caft off the Worfhip of Baal which he continued in to the End of his Life, yet he was alfo willing to keep up fome outward Form of worfhipping the true God, and of fhewing a Regard to his Prophets, and did not fo openly perfecute them as he had done before, And accordingly, it is not improba- ble that he fuffered fome of the prophetical Schools to be again opened •, and was willing to have fome about him under the Chara^^er of the Lord's Pro- phets,
P Fs o r H E T s, continued. 315
phets, who yet fhould not prove troublefome to him by their Reproofs. And accordingly, as fomc true Prophets were fuffered in the latter End of Ahah\ Reign, as we may gather from the Inftances of fuch Prophets, i Kings xx. 13, 28, 35. So there were Numbers of pretended ones that aflumed that Charafter to pay their Court to the King, and who took care to pleafe and flatter him, and to prophefy as he would have them. Such were the four hundred that encouraged him to go up to Ra- moth Gilead^ and promifed him Vidory and Suc- cefs. Thefe were the Prophets he carefled, whilft he- hated Micaiah the true Prophet of the Lord, and counted him his Enemy merely becaufe he re- proved him for his Faults, and told him the plain Truth, and did not flatter him as the others did. Our Author indeed would have thofe four hundred pafs for true Prophets of God, that he may the bet- ter charge them with confpiring Ahali^s Defl:rud:ion. But this hath been already fufficiently expofed.
The next Infliance this Writer mentions is the Afi^air of Jehu's being anointed King of Ifrael, and deft:roying the whole Houfe of Ahah. And this is the only Infliance that can be produced of a Pro- phet's exprefsly anointing a Perfon to be King with a Commifllon to defl:roy the King that then reigned and his Family. The Hiftory reprefents this as done by the fpecial Command of God himfelf ; but he will have it to be only a Confpiracy of the Pro- phets againfl: the Houfe of Ahab^ merely to gratify their own Spite and Revenge without any divine Commifllon at all, tho' they feigned it the better to execute their Defigns. This makes a- vafl: Diff^e- rence in the Cafes. The true Qiieftion therefore is, firfl: whether God himfelf had a Right to transfer the Crown from the Houfe of Ahab^ and to order that whole Royal Family to be extirpated. And next, what Proof there is that the Prophet had fuch a Command or Commiflion from God.
The
3 1 6 V I N D I C A T I O N c/' /Zf-
The firft Queftion admits of an eafy Decifion. For not to urge that God by virtue of his fupreme and abfolute Dominion hath a fovereign Right to transfer Kingdoms from one Family to another, and to difpofe of Mens Lives, and can put an End to them when he pleafes without Injuftice, even fuppofing them innocent: not to urge this, it is in- conteftible, that he hath a Right to punifh his Crea- tures for their Sins^ in that "Way that feemeth moil fit to his infinite Wifdom and Righteoufnefs. And when particular Perfons or Families have been re- markably wicked, all that own a Providence muft acknowledge, that it is no unrighteous Thing "in God to inflift remarkable Judgments or Calamities upon them, as a Punifhment for their Crimes even to their utter Extirpation. Now the Cafe we are confidering is that of a very wicked Family, in which there had been a Succefiion of Kings that had been guilty of many and great Vices and Crimes, and particularly of an open revolting from the Worfhip of the true God to the Worfhip of Idols, and that in a Nation that was peculiarly fet apart and chofen above all other Nations to maintain the Worfhip of the Deity in a World over-run with Polytheifin and Idolatry^ and whofe Conftitution and Polity, which was of divine Appointment, was eftablifhed on the Principle of worfhipping the one only living and true God. Thefe Princes had not only broken thro' and endeavoured to fubvert thefe fundamental Laws of the State, and the ori- ginal Contra6t and Covenant on which that Com- munity was founded, and by which their Right to their Country and all their Privileges was fufpend- ed, but they had v/ith the utmofl Cruelty perfecut- ed and endeavoured to deftroy thofe that flood up for the antient Laws and Conflitutions, and had compelled the People to violate them: and thus had Ihewn thcmfelves the greateft Enemies to God, to the Laws, and to their Country, upon which
they
Prophets, continued. 3 1 7
they had brought many Calamities by their Wick- ednefs. Now upon this View, will any fay that it was unjiift in God to deprive fuch a Family of the Royal Power of which they had made fo ill an ufe, and even utterly to deftroy them ? If he had cut them off by Difeafes, by Peftilence, by Thun- der, or an immediate Stroke from Heaven, few would have pretended to difpute the Juftice of it. And if God hath a Right to cut them off, he may do it in that Way that feemeth to him moft fit, and therefore may do it by the Sword of others commifTioned by him to deftroy them, if this ap- pears to him to be moft proper to anfwer the Ends intended in the Punifliment, If he had cut them offby an extraordinary Difeafe or immediate Stroke, this might have been attributed to Chance, it would not have been fo evident on what Account this was inflidted. But his appointing one of another Family to be King, with an exprefs Commiflion to extirpate that wicked Race in a declared Execution of the Sen- tence that had been pronounced againft them long before for their Wickednefs, tended to fliew both the new King and the People the great Heinoufnefs of thofe Crimes, and what Ruin it would bring up- on them, if they fliould imitate that unhappy Fa- mily in that Idolatry and Wickednefs, which had expofed them to fuch an exemplary Vengeance. And if the fucceeding Kings and the People of If- rael had made a juft and wife Improvement of this Event, it might have prevented the Ruin of both, and all the Calamities that afterwards befel them in their final Defolation and Captivity. In which Cafe it would have been apparent, that this exem- plary Puniftiment on Ahah^ wicked Race was de- figned for the Benefit of the Whole: as the juft Puniftiment of wicked Malefadors is fitted and de- figned to promote the general Good of the Com- munity. And if it adually had not that Effect, it was their own Fault who did not make that ufe of
it
3l8 ViN DI C ATI ON 0/'//6^
it they might and ought to have done. And if upon fuch a view it appears that the Deflrudlion of AhaVs Family was entirely juft as from God, then on Suppofition that he fent and commanded his Prophet by his divine Authority to anoint Jehu King with a Commiflion to execute his righteous Vengeance on that wicked Family, there was no- thing wrong in the Prophet's Condud in delivering the Meflage God fent him upon : on the contrary, it would have been wrong, and an A61 of Rebel- lion and Difobedience againft God to have declin- ed it.
But the Queftion remains, what Proof is there that God did indeed fend the Prophet to anoint Jehu, and that all this was done by the divine Order and Appointment? And of this taking the whole Account as it lies before us in the facred Hiftory, there is clear and convincing Evidence, As God had been pieafed in his great Mercy to raife up eminent Prophets to Ifrael in the Time of this their great Degeneracy, in order to preferve the Knowledge of the true Religion among them, when they were in the utmoft Danger of utterly lofing and forfaking it -, fo he gave thofe Prophets the moft convincing illuftrious Attejiations of their di- vine MifTion, fufficient to have convinced Kings and People that they were indeed extraordinarily fent and infpired of God. More and greater Mi- racles were wrought by Elijah and Eli/ha in a few Years, than had been done for feveral hundred Years before, from the Days o^ Mojes to that time. Thus it pieafed God to order it in his great Wif- dom and Goodnefs, becaufe then there was greater Need of them. With regard to Elijah to give the greater Weight to hisprophetick Miffion,God hav- ing determined to punilh that guilty People with a moll grievous Dearth and Famine for their Wick- ed nefs and Idolatry, a Punifhment which had been threatned in that Cafe in the JLaw itfelf, Deut.
xxviii. 23.
Prophets, continued, 319
xxvlil. 23. fo ordered it that it fliould be brought on at EUjaJfs Word, and fhould be removed at his Prayer. Upon a folemn Appeal to Heaven he gave a mofl illuftrious Tejlimony to him as his faith- ful Prophet and Servant, in the Sight of the King and all the People at Mount Carmel. Two Com- panies of Men that were fent one after another to feize him, were at his Word confumed by Fire from Heaven. He raifed the Dead, and was him- felf at length taken -bodily in an extraordinary Man- ner into Heaven. Elijha that fucceeded him in the prophetical Office had his divine Miffion confirmed by no lefs extraordinary Atteflations. At his Word the unwholefome Waters and barren Soil had new ^alities given them. At his Word the Sy- rian Naaman was healed of his Leprofy : and his own Servant Gehazi ftruck with it in a Moment, as a Punilhment for his Bafenefs and Falfliood. He was enabled as well as Elijah, to raife the Dead^ which feems to be an Ad: of Dominion and Power peculiar to God himfelf, the Lord of Nature and Governor of the World. He gave the moft extra- ordinary Proofs of a divine Infpiration and fuper- natural Knowledge, in his difclofing to the King of Ifrael the Councils which the King of Syria took in his Bed-chamber. At a time when the Armies of three Kings were ready to perifli, he foretold both that immediately they fhould have Abundance of Water of which they flood in the utmoft Need, and that they fhould obtain ViBory over their Enemies, when there was no human Appearance of either. When Samaria was befieged by a vafl Hofl of Syrians, and reduced to the Extremity of Diflrefs by Famine, and no human Succour near, he ex- prefsly declared in the Name of God that the next Day there fhould be fuch a Flenty of all Things, that a Lord that flood by thought it fcarce pofTible to be effefled, even if God fhould open the Hea- vens, and pour down Provifions upon them from
thence.
320 Vindication of the
thence. And he alfo foretold that that Lord him- felf fliould fee it, but fhould not eat of it. And both thefe Things were literally fulfilled, which it ■was impoffible for any human Knowledge to fore- fee. With regard to the Deftruftion of Ahabh Fa- mily, Elijah had by divine Infpiration exprefsly denounced it to Ahdb himfelf many Years before it happened, and had foretold Ahab\ own Death with this particular Circumftance, that the Dogs JJmild lick his Blood where that of Naboth had been Jh.ed. It was alfo revealed to him that Jehu fhould be King over IJrael near twenty Tears before it hap- pened, and he was commanded to anoint him, that is, to caufe him to be anointed •, for he was not to do it immediately himfelf, fmce the Time appoint- ed for it in the divine Providence was not yet come ; but he was to appoint Elijha to do it, who was to fucceed him in the prophetical OiHce. Ac- cordingly, when the Seafon came which God faw fit for executing thejuft Sentence that had been de- nounced fo long before, the Prophet Elijha was put upon it by the fame extraordinary divine Im- pulfe and Authority by which he was enabled to work fuch aftonifhing Miracles above all human Power to perform, and to foretel Things above the reach of Man to forefee. And indeed, the Cir- cumftances of the Affair itfelf, and the Manner of bringing it about fliewed that there was an extra- ordinary Hand of God in it. Elijfja only fent a Perfon to call out Jehu on a fudden from the Com- pany where he was fitting, and anoint him King, and then the Man that did it fled. Upon this Jehu was immediately, and as .it were in a Moment ac- knowledged by all the Captains and the whole Army, tho' there does not appear to have been any previous Concert, nor any Steps taken to prepare Matters for fuch a Revolution. This is a moft furprifing Event, and which muft be afcrlbed to an extraordinary Influence of divine Providence.
Prophets, continued. 321
It was fcarce poffible to forefee in a human Way that this would have had fuch an Effc6l. It ra- ther might have been thought that it would have expofed theProphet himielf, and perhaps, toufe our Author's Expreffions, have endangered the whole Order. Bat the Prophet Elijha^ who was afllired that it was from God, was not at all folicitous about the IfTue of it, fince he very well knew what the Event would be, without taking any of the Mea- fures or Precautions that would have been neceflary, if the Affair had depended merely on the Manage- ment of human Policy. As to this Wi iter's Sneer that the King^ ^^teen and all the Houfe o/'Ahab were vioft religioujly murdered in the Name of the Lord ; if Jehu had executed the Sentence denouncedagainft the Houfe of Ahah^ merely in Obedience to the Command of God, and not from a Principle of private Ambition or Cruelty, it would have been no more a Crime, nor to be accounted Murder, than it is for a Perfon commilTioned by a juft King or Magiftrate, to put MalefaBors to death in exe- cution of the righteous Sentence pronounced againft them.
Our Author before this had reprefented the Pro- phet EliJJjo's Management with Hazael the chief Captain of the King of Syria, as a remarkable Proof that the Prophets brought about tlieir own Predidlions, by accomplilliing in a natural Way what they had refolve.d upon before, fee/). 306, 307. The Account he gives of this Matter is from the Beginning to the End one entire Mifreprefen- tation, as any one will find that will compare it with the Account given us in the place he himfelf refers to, 2 Kings v\u. 7, &c. He fuppofes the Prcfent which Benhadad the King o^ Syria ordered Hazael to give to the Prophet (the Magnificence of which v>^as fuch as became a King) to have been a Bribe from Hazael \\\m(t\i, tho' he does not tell us what the Bribe was given him for, or what Y could
322 Vindication o/'/^£'
could be Hazael*s vkvr in it. Was it in EUJha's Power to fet whomfoever he would on the Throne oi Syria too, as he would perfuade us it was in the Power of the Prophets by their Intereft and Influ- ence, to make whom they pleafed Kings of Ifrael ? He reprefentsit as li EUJha's telling Hazael that he Ihould be King of Syria, was to Jhew hitnfelf not ungrateful for what he had taken of the Captain. But if the Prefent had an Influence upon him, it fliould rather have bribed him to declare in Favour of the King, who had ordered that Prefent to be given him, than of the Captain who only delivered it to him from the King. The Prophet Ihewed the Ex- adlnefs of his Fore-knowledge and divine Infpira- tion by the Anfwer he gave to Hazael, whereby he let him know, that the King fhould not die of the Difeafe, and yet that he fliould certainly die fome other Way : as accordingly he did by the Hand of Hazael, who in all Probability had already concert- ed Meafures for fecuring the Crown to himfelf up- on Benhadad's Death, and had refolved to hafl;en his Death. And the Prophet here gives him to underft:and, that he was not ignorant of the Defign he had formed -, and then proceeds to tell him what execrable Cruelties he knew he would be guilty of againfl; the People of Ifrael, when he fliould be King o^ Syria. This Writer indeed thinks proper to reprefent it as if Hazael had at that time no De- fign againfl: his Maflier's Life or Crown at all, but was put upon it by the Prophet, who fent hi?n away after having given him fufficient Injlru5iions what he was to do, that is, that he was to murder his Ma- fl:er, and feize the Crown. And in order to account for the Prophet's putting Hazael upon this Murder and Treafon, he tells us, that it is plain that Eli- flia here put Hazael into a inofi effeEliial Way to obtain the Kingdom, in Hopes that having been in- debted to him for the Crown, he would favour his Country^ and put an End to the War againji Ifrael. ? And
Prophets, continued. 323
And accordingly he reprefents hin) as h^.vingtakeft his Vows and Protejtations, that if that Jhould hap- pen (i. e. if he fhould be King of Syria) be would favour lirael. Thus he is willing for once to allow the Prophet to have been a Patriot, and a Friend to his Country, that he may bring him in for hav- ing a Hand in the Death of the King of ^ym. But this is a Piece of Pliftory entirely of the Au- thor's own making. For there is not a Word of it in the Account given us of this Matter in the facred Records. Nor can any thing be more ab- furd than to fuppofe that the Prophet put Plazael into the 7no(i effectual Way to chain the Kingdotn^ in Hopes that he would favour his Country, and put an End to the War againfi Ifrael, when he very well knew that Hazael would prove a greater Plague to Ifrael than all the Kings that had been before him. How far the Prophet was from con- tributing to Ha%ael\ Advancement to the Throne, is evident from the great Sorrow and Concern the Prorpe6l of it gave him. He wept to think of the cruel Devaftations that Hazael would make in If- rael^ and the Calamities he would bring upon that People. 7 know, fays he, the Evil thou wilt do unto the Children of Ifrael, l^c. Our Author here gives us a Caft of his Art, which may let us fee what fair Dealing we are to exped: from him •, for whereas the Prophet faith, / know, he reprefents it as if he had only faid, I fear, and had fpoken of it as a Thing of which he was uncertain. But he plainly fpeaks of it as of a Thing which he was abfolutely aflured-of by Revelation from God him- felf : and this drew Tears from the Eyes of that good Man and worthy Patriot. All that canbe" concluded from the whole Story is on the one Hand, the Exadlnefs of the Prophet's Fore-Knowledge, and his having the certain Knowledge of future Events extraordinarily communicated to him from God himfclf i and on the other Hand, his great Hiima- y 3 niiy
224 V I N D I C A T I O N o/* ^^^
fiity and Love to his Country. And this Is a ma- nifeft Proof among many others that might be pro- duced that the Things predifted by the Prophets were not of their own procuring, and that they did not merely foretel Things with a view to take Mea- fures to accomphfli what they had refolved upon before •, tho* this Writer moil abfurdly produces this very Inftance as a Proof of it: but they fore- told them, becaufe they knew by divine Infpira- tion they would certainly come to pafs. Many of the Things they foretold were Things which were difagreeable to themfelves, and which they would gladly have prevented, if it had depended upon their own Choice, as no doubt Elijha would have done //rtz^f/'s Advancement to the Throne o( Syria. The fame Prophet Eli/ha gave a farther Proof of his divine Infpiration, in that when his Coun- try was reduced to theextremeft Mifery and Diftrefs, and feemed ruined beyond Redrefs thro' the Con- quells and Devaftation made by Hazael and his SucceiTors, exprefsly foretold when he was upon his Death-Bed the wonderful Change that would foon happen in Affairs by the glorious Vi6lories of Joafh King of Ifrael oVer the Syrians :■ and fore- told precifely the Number of Vi6lories he fhould obtain, viz. that he fhould vanquifli the Syrians thrice. And I fuppofe this Writer will fcarce pretend that in this Cafe too the Prophet took care to accomplifh his own Predictions in a natural Way, and enabled the Ifraelites to beat the Syrians thrice after his own Death. And here by the way I would obferve, how far that brave Prince Joajly was from looking upon the Prophets as the great Enemies and Difturbers of their Country, and the Authors of all theMifchiefs and Calamities that be- fel the State. He rather regarded them as the great- eft Defence and Protection of the Country by their excellent Counfels, and by their Prayers and Pre- valence with God, as appears frdm the Lamenta- I tioii
•'W
Prophets, continued. 225
tion he made over the dying Prophet Elijha, ths Father and Head of the Prophets at that thne. He wept over his Face, and laid, O my Father^ my Father^ the Chariot of Ifrael, and the Horfemen thereof 2 Kings xiii, 14 — 19. The very Words that £/z/?><^himfeifhad ufed concerning the Prophet Elijah when he was taken up into Heaven.
The Reign of Jerohoam that followed was a fuc- cefsful and glorious one. Our Author takes No- tice of this, and after having obferved that this King was as great an Encourager of Idolatry as any that bad been before him (which is not true, for he only followed the Sin of Jeroboam the Son of Nebat, which confifted in worfhipping the true God after a wrong Manner, whereas the Houfe of y^hab had introduced the Worfhip of Baal, and the Heathen Deitie'S, which was anexprefs and open Revolting irom the God of Ifrael) he adds, that this makes it evident^ that the Toleration (he fhould have faid the EJiabliJbment, for this was really the Cafe) of Idolatry bad not been the real Caufe of the Ruin and Devaf- tation of this Country for above two hundred Tears back : as i^ Jeroboam' s Idolatry was the Caufe of his Succefs. But all that can be gathered from Jero- boani's Profperity and Succefs, which had been plainly foretold by the Prophet Jonah, 2 Kings xiv. 25. is, that as the Ifraelites had been afflicted for their Sins thro' the juft Judgment of God, fo now it plealed him in hisgreat Mercy to give them a Refpite from their Calamities, and to try what In- fluence his Goodnefs and Indulgence would have upon them ; to which it is exprefsly afcribed, ver. 16, 27. But they made a wrong ufe of their Pro- fperity :and it appears from the lively Admonitions of the Prophets, who lived at that Time, that all Manner of Vice and Wickednefs abounded among them. And this their abufingthe divine Goodnefs, and being neither reclaimed by his Mercies nor Judgments to Rep ntance, at laft ended in their
y ^ uttev
326 V I N D I C A T I O N o/' //^^
Utter Ruin. As to what this Author remarks, that Jeroboam had reftored the Obferuation of all the Sa- crifices and Fefiivnls of Egypt -, there is nothing of this in the Account given us of his Reign. It is probable indeed that he continued the ivc7/?j which the firft Jeroboam had appointed. But thefe feeni only to have been in Imitation of thofe inftituted in the Law of Mofes with a fm.all Variation. See I Kin^i xii. 32, o^o^. Accordingly it appears from the Prophet Hofea^ who prophefied in the Days of Jeroboam the Second, that in Ifrael at that time they had their New Moons and Sabbath^ andfoletnn Feajls. He fpeaks of their IVine-Offerings and Sa- crifices to the Lord Jehovah ; and of the Feafi of the Lord, znd folemn Day, as celebrated among them, Hof. ii. 4, 5, II. And j^mos, who prophefied at the fame time, talks of their Tithes and Free-tvill Offerings, their feafi Days, and folemn AJJemblies, Amos iv. 4, 5. I fhall not examine the Way our Author takes to account for Jeroboam's Viftories over the Syrians: nor his Chronology that within five or fix Years after this King's Death, the Afi- fyrians deftroyed Damafcus, whereas it might be plainly fhewn that it was above /or/jy Tears after Jiis Death that this happened. The Confufion and ci- vil Wars that followed the Death di Jeroboam, he would gladly attribute to the Intrigues of the Pro- phets, tho' there is not one Word or Circumftance in the Hiftory that can afford the leaft Pretence for fuch a Sufpicion.
After having laid the the Ruin and Captivity of Ifrael to the Charge of the Prophets, tho* if the Jfraelitcs had complied with their Advice and Ex- hortations their Ruin had been prevented ; he next takes Notice of the bloody War between Ifrael and Judah, which he tells us lafted 260 Years, that is, during the whole time that the Kingdom oi If- rael fubfifted. And this alfo he reprefents as he jiad done all the reft, as a War carried on upon
the
Prophets, continued. 327
the Account of Religion^ and endeavours to intereft the Prophets in it, whom he reprefents as doing all they could to reftore the Kingdom to the Houfe of David, p. 320,321. But all that he here of- fereth is one continued Mifreprefentation. The "War between Ifrael and Judah was fo far from being perpetual and uninterrupted as he would have us believe, that we have no Account of any War between them from the Days of Baajha and Afa to the Time of Amaziah and Joajh, which was the Space of above an hundred Tears. Nor was there any W^ar again between them from that Time till the Reign ofAhaz, which was ahovt four fcore Years more. And whereas he reprefents the Kings of Judah, or the Houfe of David, as all along Ag- grcffors in the War, and as taking a mercilefs and outrageous Method with Ifrael after the Revolt, the very contrary is true. For tho' Rehohoam firft levied a great Army with a Defign to reduce Ifrael to his Obedience, he defifted from it upon the R^- prefentation made to him by the Prophet Shemaiah, 2 Chron. xi. 4. And it is therefore probable that the War which was afterwards carried on between Jeroboam and him, and his Son Ahijah after him, was owing to Jeroboani's own Ambition, who thought, as being much more powerful, to have wrefted Judah out of the Hands of the Houfe of David. Baajha was the Aggreflbr in the War be- tween him and Afa, out of the Jealoufy he con- ceived againft him, becaufe many of the Ifraelites went up to Jerufalem to worlhip. The fame may be obferved concerning the War carried on be- tween Ifrael and Judah in the Days of Ahaz. Pe- kah King of Ifrael was the Aggreflbr, and joined Forces with the King of Syria. Vaft Numbers of the People of Judah were then taken Captive, and ufed in the moft mercilefs Manner, till upon the lively Reprefentations made to the chief Men of Ifrael by the Prophet Oded, they difmilTed them,
y 4 and
328 Vindication of t Joe
and treated them with great Humanity. See 2 Chr. xxviii. 9 — 15. From whence it appears how falfly he reprefents the Prophets as all along fo- menting the War between Ifrael and Judah. For as the Prophets declared againft Rekohoarii's war- ring againft Ifrael^ fo afterwards they equally de- clared againft the Cruelty the Ifraelites ufed againft their Brethren in Judah : And thus fliewed them- felves true Friends to both. And v/hereas he re- prefents the Kings of Judah at the Inftigation of the Prophets as entring into an Alliance firjl with the Syrians or Aramites, and then "cvith /^<? Aflyrians in order to bring hack the revolted Tribes^ and force them to a Compliance^ or elje to root them out of the Land -^ it happens, that in both thofe Cafes the Kings cf Judah made thofc Alliances, not to ob- tain Dominion over Ifrael, but to defend themfelves when invaded by Ifrael; as appears from the Ac- count given of Afa's Alliance with the Syrians, 1 Kings XV. ly — ig. And of Ahaz's Alliance with the Jffyrians, 1 Kings xvi. 5 — 9. And if thofe Alliances as he tells us ended in the Ruin both of Ifrael and Judah, the Prophets are not chargeable with this, fince they did not approve thofe Alli- ances. An(;l here by the Way we may obferve the great Confiftency of their Writer, who^. 303. brings Jt as a Charge againft the Prophets, that they weaken- ed and deftroyed their Country by caufing the Kings that hearkened to their Counfels to break all their Alliances with the neighbouring Nations, as not thinking it lawful to maintain any Peace or Friend- fhip with Idolaters: and yet />. 321, 322. repre- fents it as owing to the Counfels of the Prophets that the Kings of Judah ^nitrtd into Alliances with the Syrians and Ajjyrians \ and that thefe Foli- ticks of the Prophets occafioned the Deftruftion of Ifrael ^.n<\ Judah-, when the Truth is, neither of thefe is fiiirly reprefented. For on the one Hand, the Prophets never advifed or approved the Alli-
anc6^
Prop h e t s, continued, 329
ances he fpeaks of with the Syrians and Ajjyrians \ and on the other Hand, they never abfolutely con- demned all Alliances with foreign Nations *, nor urged them to break their Alliances with them un- der Pretence that they were Idolaters. See in what ftrong Terms the Prophet Ezekiel reprefents the great Guilt of King Zedekiah in breaking the Oath and Covenant he had made with the King of Babylon^ and the Judgments he denounces againil him for it, Ezek, xvii. 12. See alfo 2 Chron. xxxvi. 13.
Thus have I gone thro' the Author's long Invec- tive, the Defign of which is to reprefent the Pro- phets as the great Difturbers of their Country, and the principal Authors of all its Miferies, and of its final Ruin •, and which for a Mixture of talfe Hi- ftory, and malicious Calumny, can hardly be pa- railel'd.
CHAP. XI.
His Charge againft the Prophets that lived before the AlTyrian Captivity^ that they declaimed only a- gainjl Idolatry, and ?iot againft the other Vices and Immoralities of the People. 'The Falfhood of this fhezvn. The excellent Scheme of Religion and Mo'(als taught by the antient Prophets. His Pre- tence that the whole Nation of the Jews fro7n the Time of Mofes to Ezra were Sadducees or Dei/ii- cal Alaterialijls -, and that they received the firft Jfiotions of a future State from the Perfian Magi, examined. His Account of the Change introduced into the Jewilh Religion at that Time Jhewn to he groundlefs and abfurd. A future State implied in
* See concerning this what hath been o^jferved above p. 144.
iU
330 A Vindication of the Prophets
the Law, and all along believed among the People^ and clearly intimated in the PFrilings of the Pro- phets. T'his proved from fever al Paffages.
TH E remaining Charges our pretended moral Philofopher brings againft the Prophets, will admit of an eafy Difcuffion. Tho* he reprefents it as theDefign of the prophetical Inftitution to preach up moral Right eoufnefs, and keep the People to the moral -Law, yet he faith, that " from David's'Rt- *' belHon, as he calls it, to the Afjyrian Captivity, •* for the Space of above 350 Years, it is wonder- *' ful to obferve how little thefe antient Prophets " declaimed againft the Vices and Immoralities of *' the People." And after having mentioned feve- ral heinous Crimes and Vices, he obferves, that ** thefe are fcarce taken Notice of, and in the mean ■ " while, nothing in a Manner is declared againft " but Idolatry, and the NecefTity of Fire and " Sword [urged] as the moft proper and only ef- " fedlual Means of rooting it out." He is pleafed indeed to add, that ** after the Afjyrian Captivity " the few Prophets that were left talked in another *' Strain ; and urged the NecefTity of not only ab- '* ftaining from Idolatry, but of a true national *' Repentance, and a ftri6t Regard to the moral *' Law, and no Reliance upon Sacrifices and prieft- *' ly Abfolutions. See ^. 323, 324.
One would wonder with what Front this Writer could pretend to advance fuch an AfTertion as this : Since it is impolTible to look into the prophetical Writings, and not be convinced, that the fame Spirit every where appears in all the Prophets that lived before and after the Affyrian Captivity, the fime Zeal againft Vice and Wickednefs, the fame Concern for the Honour of God, and the Intereft of true Religion and moral Goodnefs. Hofea, Amos, and Micah Inconteftably lived and prophe- fied before the Deftrudion of Samaria, and the car- rying
before the Captivity. 331
rying away 7/;-^^/ captive by the Affyrians% and they air exprefsly foretold thatDeftmftion and Cap- tivity, and that as a Punifhrnent not only for their Idolatry^ but for their other Immoralities and Wick- ednefs. They particularly mention Swearing, Ly- ing, Injuftice, Cruelty, Bribery, Covetoufnefs, Op- prelTion of the Poor, Luxury, Drunkennefs, Whore- dom, Adultery, ^c. for which they reprove them with noble Zeal and impartial Freedom, without refpeft of Perfons, or flattering the great Men more than the meaneft of the People. And it is obfer- vable that they inveigh more frequently againft their other Vices and Crimes than againfl their Idolatry itfelf, particularly the Prophets y^wwand Micah do fo. And they urge them in the moft pathetical Manner to the Pradice of univerfal Righteoufnefs, Juftice, Mercy, if!c. and let them know that with-, out this their Sacrifices would be of no avail, and exprefsly declare the Preference of moral Duties to mere ritual Obfervances "*. Nor do they onceinfifl upon that which he reprefents as the only Thing they urged, viz. the Neceffity of Fire and Sword as the only proper and effedlual Means of rooting out Idolatry. That eminent Prophet Ifaiah pro- phefied many Years before the Ajjyrian Captivity, tho' he alfo continued to prophefy after it, and the fiime Spirit every where appears in all his Prophe- cies. Every where doth he ftrongly reprove Sins and Vices of all Kinds, and exhorteth to real Re- pentance, and univerfal Righteoufnefs and trueHo- linefs in the mofb noble, and folemn, and pathetical Manner. This fufficiently fhews with how little Re- gard to Truth or Decency this Writer ventures to charge the Prophets that lived before the Ajjyrian Captivity, as declaring againft nothing but Idolatry,
* See for all this, ^-./iiv. i — 3, n. vi. 6,8. vii. i, 4, 5. X. 12. xii. 6. Amosix. 6 — 8. iii. 10. iv. i, 10 — 12. v. 14, 15, zi — 24. vi. 3—6. viii. 4—8. Micah ii. i,*2. iii. 2—4, 9 — 12. vi. 6 — ^8, 10 — 13, vii. 2 — 6.
Ilhall
3':>2 Vindication of the Prophets
I fhall not mention the Prophets that lived after that Time, particularly Jeremiah and Ezekiel^ be- cdufe the Author himfelf owns, that they urged the Neceffity of a true national Repentance, and a drift Regard to the moral Law. And indeed it is impof- fible there fhould be ftronger Declarations to this Purpofe, than are to be frequently met with in thofe prophetical Writings. And yet afterwards in the very fame Page where he feems to acquit the latter Prophets of the Charge he had advanced againft the former, he really involves all the Prophets in general in the fmie Accufition. For he hath the Confidence to tell us, that the principal Caufe of the great Corruption of Manners among the Jews after their Return from -the Babylonijh Captivity was owing to this, that they had never been told hefore of any thing hut Idolatry^ as the Caufe of all their Miferies and Calamities hitherto -, and that all manner of Vices and moral Wickednefs had been ap- proved andjuflified in David their great Pattern and Exemplar, p. 328. An Affertion as talfe as any Thing in his whole Book, and I think I need fay no worfe of it.
It is in the fame Spirit of Calumny that he re- prefents the Prophets as requiring only an external Obedience to the moral Law, without regarding the Principle from which it proceeded^ or whether it wa'Si free or forced^ p. 334. To this I need only op- pofe what he himfelf acknowledgeth, that it may he proved from innitmerable Tefiiinonies out of the Law and the Prophets^ that an inward fpiritual Principle of Obedience as neceffary to a State of true Religion and Virtue^ was all along under/load and in- fejled on during the legal O economy^ p. 34. And whereas in the PafTageabove-gited hegoeson to teli us, that Mortification and Self-denial^ and a Faith which can fupport Men under Adverfity and above the JVorldy an inward Purity of the Heart and Af- feflions, and the Practice, of univerfal Benevolence
and
before the Captivity. 333
dnd Charity^ moral Truths Righteottfnefs and Peace with all Men, from the Profpe^ of Immortality and a future State of fpiritual Happinefs to he enjoyed with God and the Angels \ this is a Religion which thofe holy Men the Naioth Prophets never tinderftood or taught : 'Tis certain that no where is the Neceflity of an inward Purity of the Heart and AfFedions, or oi" moral Truth and Rlghteoufnefs more ftrongly inculcated than in thofe admirable Writings ; no where can be found nobler Expreffions of a lively Faith and Truft in God even under the greateft Afflidions and Adverfities, and of holy Love to him, and Zeal for his Glory. A merciful, a kind and charitable Difpofition of Mind towards our Neighbour, is there alfo frequently urged as abfo- lutely necefHiry to the Charader of a good Man, and as an effcntial Part of true Religion *. And when all People and Nations are fo often called upon to blefs and praife the Lord, and to rejoice in him ; when fo earned a Defire is frequently ex- preffed, that God's Way might be known upon Earth, and his Salvation unto all Nations -, when the Happinefs of the MeJJiah's Kingdom is fo often defcribed by its being a State of univerfal Benevo- lence and Peace, and mutual Good-will among Mankind, and Gentiles as v/ell as Jews are repre- fented as fharing in the glorious Benefits of it ; I cannot but think this difcovers in the Prophets, a Spirit of extenfive Benevolence, having in View the univerfil FLippinefs and Good of all Man- kind, and not merely confined to that of their own Nation.
What he mentions concerning the Profped of Immortality, and a future State of Happinefs, as a Thing which the Prophets never underflood 01^
* Seethe whole 58th Chapter of /Aua/j', Pa xxxvii. zr, 26. cxii. 4. Uj/.w. 6. il//f. vi, 8. Dnn.iv. 27. Z<ich. vii. f),
taught,
433 ^ Vindication of the Prophets taught, deferves a more particular Confideration, as it is a Charge he frequently brings againft the whole Old TeftamentDifpenfation. He exprefsly declares, that before the Time of £/^r^j, which was after the Return from the Bahylonijh Captivity, no Jewijh Writer, Prieft, or Prophet, had ever mentioned a Word of 2i general RefiirreEiion and 'Judgment of good and lad Men, and a confequent future State of Rewards and Puni/hments, p. 46. And that *' From the Days o^ Mofes till the Time '* of Ezra, which was a Period of about eleven " hundred Years, the whole Nation of the Jews ** had been deiftical Materialifts or Sadducees, and '' had been never known to fufFer any Thing for " Religion, becaufe they had no future Expeda^- " tion that could make them Amends for it. And " that it might beeafily proved that the Sadducees " in Days of Chrift and the Apoftles, were " not a new or modern Se6l lately fprung up among " them, but the true Remains of the antientjift^j.'* And he had obferved a little before, that " It was in " the Time of the Perfian Empire that a great *' Change of Religion was introduced among the " Jews, by which they quitted their Idolatry, and *' embraced the Doftrines of the Immortality of " the Soul, and the Refurreftion of the Body, a " final Judgment, and a future State of Rewards " and Punifliments for good and bad Men. And ' that after the Jews had received thefe Do6trines *■' from the Perfian Magicians, they never relapfed " into Idolatry more, but fuffered Martyrdom for " their Religion with the fmie Conftancy, Zeal, ** and Firmnefs that the Chriftians have done " fince." p. 440, 441.
This pretended Account of the great Change of Religion among the Jews after the Time o^Ezra, and which was owing to their Converfation with the Perfian Magi, only fhews that fome Perfons are willing to take up with any Scheme, how ab-
furd
before the Captivity. <^ ^^
furd fcever, that feems to favour the Prejudices they have conceived againft the Holy Scriptures. It is true indeed that the Body of the Jewijh Na- tion fhewed a more general Averfion to Idolatry in theTimes after their Return from the BahylomJhCap" tivity, in which they had fuffered fo much for this and their other Crimes than ever they had done be- fore. But can any Thing be more abfurd than to fup- pofe that they learned this Averfion to Idolatry from the idolatrous Chaldeans, or from the Perfian Magi, the Adorers of the Sun and of Fire ? And where- as he takes upon him to affirm, that from the Days oi Mofes till the Time of Ezra, noneof the J^'-re^j had ever been known to fuffer any Thing for their Religion -, not to mention feveral of the Prophets, who in Defence of the true Religion and Law of God, expofed themfehres to the bittereft Perfecu- tions, and even to Death itfelf ; the Inftances of Shadrach, MeJIoech, and Abednego, and of Daniel, are illuftrious Examples of Conftancy in Religion in Oppofition to all the Terrors of this World, at the fame Time that the Wifemen of 5^^j/o;z com- plied with the idolatrous Injundions, As to this Infinuations concerning the Jews learning Religion from the Perfian Magi, if a Change of Religion muft be admitted among the Jews it might with much greater Probability be fuppofed that they had learned it from the Babylonians than from the Per- fians ; fince during their long Captivity in Babylon, the Body of the People had almoft forgotten their antient Language, and had accuftomed themfeives to that of the Chaldceans. But it is certain that they did not adopt their Religion, which was Ido- latry, on the Account of which, as well as for In- juftice. Cruelty, and Tyranny, Judgment is de- nounced againft Babylon by the Prophets. When the Jews returned from Babylon, in the firft Year of Cyrus, under the Condu6t of Zerubbabel and Jojhua, which was before they could be fuppofed
to
336 Vindication of the Prophets
to have much Commerce with the Perfians, who had but juft conquered the Bahyknijh Empire, they immediately upon their Return fet up their old Re- ligion, according to the Law of Mofes. And af- terwards Ezra and Nehemiah^ who came by the Allowance of the Perfian Emperors, did not re- form the Jewi/h Religion and Polity, by bringing it to the Model of other Countries, but by bringing all Things as near as pofTible to the original Con- ftitution as appointed in that Law, and they vigo- roufly oppofed and cenfured every Diviation from it. And as to thofe of the Jews that did not re- turn to y^/fid-^, but continued ftilldifperfcd through- out the feveral Provinces of the Perfian Empire, it appears, that far from adopting the Perfian Re- ligion as their own, they ftriftly adhered to their own particular Laws and *Cuftoms -, and from hence it was that Hainan took Occafion to expofe them to the publick Hatred, and procured a De- cree for their Extirpation. EJlh. iii. 8.
Any one that confiders the mofl remarkable and diftinguifhing Principles of the Perfian Magi, will foon obferve a vail Difference between them and the Jews. The main Principle of the Magian Religion was the Acknowledgment of two Princi- ples, the onzgood and the other m/, both of which they acknowledged to be Gods, and to both they paid their Adcrations. Which was entirely contra.- ry to the very fundamiCntal Principle of the Jew- ijfh Religion. According to Dr. Hyde''s own Ac- count of the antient Perfians^ which this Writer re- fers to, they fell very early into Sahiifm^ or wor-. Ihipping the Hoft of Heaven •, and tho' he fuppofes Abraham to have reformed this, he owns that after a Time they relapfed into it again. Tho* they did not intirely lofe the Knowledge of the true God^ yet they paid their Adorations to the heavenly Lu- minaries. And how exprefsly this is prohibited irr the Law of Mt'fes^ and in the prophetical Writings
none
before the Captivity. 33^
none that ever read the Scriptures needs to be in- formed. And when Magtfm was introduced a- mong the Perfians^ flill they worfhipped the ^un and the Fire. And fomething hke this we read of among the Je^s before the Babylo7iJjh Captivity. Some of their idolatrous Kings had Priejis that burnt Incenfe to the Sun •, and we read of Horfes which they had given or dedicated to the Sun, which that great reforming King Jo/iah deflroyed ; 2 Kings xxiii. 5, 11. And the Prophet Ezekiel among other Abominations, reprefented to him in the prophedcal Vifion as pra(5lifed at Jerufalem^ even by the Elders of the People^ a little before the utter Deftrudion of the City and Temple by the Chaldeans, faw fome with their Backs towards the Temple of the Lord, and their Faces toward tlye Eqft, worjhipping the Sun toward the Eajl ; Ezek. viii. 16, But this as well as ail other kinds of ido- latrous Worfhip, after their Return from the Cap- tivity, was held in Abomination by the Jews ; tho' one fhould think, if they had learned their Religion from the Ferfian Magi^ they lliould ra- ther have been confirmed in it. Add to this, that another Thing remarkable among the Ferfians was that they facrificed on Hills and High-Places in the open Air, and had no Temples *, whereas the Jews were not allowed to offer Sacrifices on High- Places, or any where but at the Temple at Jent- falem •, and fhewed a remarkable Zeal for rebuild- ing that Temple, after their return from the Cap- tivity, notwithftanding all the Oppofition they met with in that Undertaking.
* I khow Dr. Vrideanx, in his Account of ZoroaJIer, fup- pofes that he caufed Temples to be built, whereas tlie Perjtans had none before ; but in this he feems to be miftaken, fince there are exprefs Authorities to fhew that long after the Time of Zoroajier the Perjians were without Temples, as Mr. Moyle has I think clearly proved.
Z There
33^ I'h^ a?icienf Jews not Deijlical
There is no likelihood therefore, that the Jews ihoLild have learned their Religion from the Per- Jmn Magj^ to fome of whofe main Principles of Religion they had the utmoft Averfion. Indeed if the Account Dr. Prideaux gives of Zoroafiery and the Reformation wrought by him in the Reli- gion of the Magians, may be depended on, it feems evident that the very Reverfe of our Author's Sup- pofition is true ; and that inftead of the Jews learn- ing their Religion from the Perftan Mngi^ or Zo- roajier^ he derived from the Jews the Reforma- tions or Alterations he wrought in the antient Re- ligion of the Magians. See Prid. Connecl. Part I. Book IV, And if it be true that the Perfian Magi ~4oad received and taught the Do5irines of the Unity of God^ a Refurre^ion from the Dead, and a future State of Rewards and Punifhments, for many hundred Tears before Zoroafter (whom our Author fuppofes to have been Contemporary with Efdras) who did not in thefe Cafes pretend to introduce any new Re- ligion, but to rejlore the true old Abrahamick Re- ligion, which had been in fome Refpe5is corrupted. All which he thinks Dr. Hyde, in his Book De Re- ligione veterum Perfarum, makes very clear. See p. 348, 349. If this be fo, it may very juftly be flippofed that this Abrahamick Religion was much better preferved amongft the Jews, the dire6l De- fcendants from Abraham, whom they looked upon as the great Founder of their Nation, and for whofe Memory they always had the profoundeft Veneration.
This Writer indeed takes upon him to affirm, that the Jews were entire Strangers to the Doftrines of a Refurre5lion, the Immortality of the Soul, and a future Judgment, till after the Time of Ezra ; that the whole Nation had been till then deijlical Materialifts, or Sadducees -y and that the Sadducees in our Saviour's Time were not a modern Se6t, but the true Remians of the antient Jews, who
ftuck
Materialifis, or Sadducees* 339
iluck to the Principles of their great Lawgiver Mofes. Whereas the very contrary to this is true, that the Saddiicees were a modern Se6t never known among the Jezvs, till long after the Days of Ezra % till then the Immortality of the Soul, the Exiftence of Spirits, and a future State of Retributions, were univerfelly believed in that Nation, They were indeed little better than a Sedl of Jewifh Epku- reansy and always few in Number, and of ill Re- putation with the Body of that Nation •, and there- fore they were wont to diflemble their Principles, whenever they had a Mind to make an Interell with the People.
I had already Occafion to obferve, that it doth not appear that the Immortality of the Soul and a fu- ture State was denied or controverted when the Law of Mofes was given, which may be fuppofed to be one Reafon why it is not there fo exprefsly afiferted. But it is all along fuppofed and imphed in that Law. The noble Account Mofes gives of Man*s original Formation, that he was made in the Image of God himfelfy and after his Likenefs^ which tends to give us high Notions of his original Dignity ; his reprefenting the Body of Man as formed out of the Dujl of the Ground^ but giving a different Ac- count of the Souly whofe noble, vital, adtive Na- ture he fignifies by calling it the Breath of Life, which he reprefents as immediately infpired by God himfelf into the Body duly organized : The fre- quent Mention he makes of the Apparition of Angelsy (which is fcarce reconcileable to the Doc- trine of the Sadducees^ who did not acknowledge either Angels or Spirits ^ A6ts xxiii. 8.) and of the Intercourfe between Men and the Inhabitants of the heavenly World ; his Account of Enoch^s having walked with God, and that he was not^ for God took him \ which mull be underftood of his tak- ing him to another State, as a Reward of his diftinguifhed Piety j and is by the Apoftle juftly Z 2 interpreted
340 ^he ancient Jews not Deifiical
interpreted of God's tranjlating him, that he flooiild not fee Death \ Heb. xi. 5. Another Inftance of which there afterwards was in Elijah: His reprefenting the moft eminent Patriarchs and Favourites of God, as confefling themfelves to be Strangers and Sojourners here on Earth, and calHng this their prefent Life the fezv and evil Days of their 'Pilgrimage ; from whence it is natural to infer, that they did not ex- pert their Recompence here, but looked for a better Country^ that ts^ an heavenb -' The Account he gives of the Covenant God made with Abraham, where- by he engaged to be a God unto him, his Shield, and his exceeding great Reward; which muft have a farther View than this prefent State, fince Abra- ham^ who for the moft Part lived a wandering un- fettled Life as a Sojourner in the Land of Canaan, met with no Reward here that could juftly anfwer the Lnport of fo glorious a Covenant and Pro- mife : His reprefenting God as defcribing himfelf under the Charafter of the God of Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob, and thus challenging a fpecial Relation to them as their God and Portion, fome Ages after thofe Patriarchs were dead, which plainly fhews that they were not utterly loft and extinguifhed in the Grave ; fince he is not the God of the Dead, but of the hiving \ from whence our Saviour draws an Argument againft the Sadducees, to prove the Re- furredlion and a future State : The Account Mofes gives of the Hopes and Expedations of dying Ja- cob, wh^n juft before his Death, in the midft of his prophetical Benedi6tions to his Sons, he breaks forth into that Exclamation exprellive of his Hope and his Delire, / have waited for thy Salvation, O Lord: His reprckntmg Balaam exprefling his Defire that he might die the Death of the Righteous, and that his laji End might be like his : All thefe are plain Intimations of the Belief of a future State ; that Mofes himfelf believed it, and that it was the Faith of the antient Patriarchs. The Exiftence of
good
Materialifts, or Sadducees. 341
good and evil Spirits feparate from Man, is evi- dently implied in feveral PafTages in the Books of Mofes ', and that this was a Notion that then ob- tained generally among the People, may be con- cluded from the Prohibitions there made not to confult with thofe that, had familiar Spirits^ or with Necromancers^ i. e. thpfe that pretended to conlult the Dead, and to raife their Ghofts to enquire by; like the Woman at Endor, of whom we have an Account, I Sam. xxviii. ^3, 7. And by the way, I would obferve, that when Saul fo earneftly defired to have the Soul of Samuel raifed that he might en- quire of him, this plainly fhewed the Perfuafion he had of the Exiflence of the Souls of Men in a fe- parate State after Death, and which was no doubt the common Belief in that Time. The very No- tion which all along obtained among the Jews of Prophets and infpired Perfons, who had inter- courfe with God and Angels, and were enabled to foretel future Events, plainly fhews the Belief they had of an invifible World of Spirits. Hence the Epicureans, vfho denied the Immortality of the Soul, and a future State, laughed at all thefe Things. And doth not this Writer himfelf tell us, that the temrfion People among the Jews believed the Pro- phets bad an immediate and free Converfation with God, Angels, and departed Souls, from whom they were fiippofed to receive all their fuperior Knowledge and Intelligence; p. 284. And how this is con- fident with his aflerting the whole Nation to have been all this Time deifiical Materialijls, or Sadducees^ who believed there were no Angels or departed Souls, is hard to conceive.
Not to infift on that noble Paflage in Job, where he fpeaks fo clearly of the Refurreclion of the Bo- dy •, for that it relates to the Refurredion of the Body, and cannot without great Conftraint upon the Words, be applied to any Thing elfe, might I think be clearly fliewn ; and if Job, who was of Z z the
342 ^he ancient Jews 72ot Deijlical
the Pofterity of Abraham, and lived in Arabia^ had fuch Notions of the Refiirreclion and a future State, we may well fuppofe that the Ifraelites were not Strangers to it ; I fay, not to infill upon this, there are many Paflages in the Pfalms, and other prophetical Writings, which plainly fhew this. T)avid fpeaking of ungodly Men, reprefents them as the Men of this World, who have their Fortiori in this Dfe, in Oppofition to whom he declares his own Hope that he Ihould behold the Face of God in Righteoufnefs ; which is the very Expreffion made ufe of in the New Tefiament, to fignify the fpiri- tual Happineis of the Saints in a future State ; and that when he fhould awake ( which may be juftly underftood of rifing again from the Dead, fince Death is fo ufually reprefented under the No- tion of a Sleep) he fhould be fatisfied with his Like- nefs'i Pf. xvii. 14, 15. Tliofe Words of his, Thou wilt not leave my Soul in Hell, neither wilt thou fif- fer thine Holy One to fee Corruption, fhew David's own Belief of a Refurredion and a future State, tho' they ultimately relate to the Meffiah, in whom alone this was properly and literally accomplilhed. And when it is added, that in God's Prefence is Fulnefs of Joy, and at his Right Hand there are Flea- fur es for evermore -, Pf xvi. 10, II. this is an eX-r cellent and comprehenfive Defcription of the Hap- pineis referved for good Men in the heavenly State. And when the Pfahniit David reprefents God as having eflablifhed his 'Throne in the Heavens, and gives that noble Account of the blefied Angels there, that they excel in Strength, and do his Com^ piandments, hearkening to the Voice of his Word, and in a divine Rapture calls upon them to blefs the Lord; Pf ciii. 19 — 21. this fhews the Notion pood Men then had of thofe holy and happy Spi- rits, which is abfolutcly inconfiftent with their be- ing Materialifts, or Sadducees, and what they |hought pf the Perfe(5tioa of liappinefs and Pu- rity
Materialifts, or Sadducees. 343
rity in the heavenly World : And is no obfcure In- timation, that they had the fame Hopes, for Sub- ftance, of the heavenly Jerufalcm^ and an mnumera- hle Company of Aywels there, which the Saints ex- prefs under the New Teflament. See Heh. xii. 22. In the xlix'** Ffa. ver. 14, 15. it is plainly figni- fied, that how rich or profperous foever the Wic- ked might be here on Earth, yet they mufi. he laid in the Grave^ and the Upright fhould have Domi- nion ovej: them ; but that God would redeem his faithful Servants /r^;;? the Power of the Grave, and would receive them to himfelf. The Prophet Afaph when perplexed with the Thoughts of the worldly Profperity of the Wicked, declared that he was fatished by entering into the Sanoinary of God, and confidering the Dejiru^iion that fhould come upon them : And for his own Part he expref- feth his Defire and Hope in this excellent Man- ner, Thou fcalt guide me ivilh thy Counfel, and af- terward receive me to Glory. Whom have I in Hea- ven but thee, and there is none upon Earth that 1 defire hefides thee. My fleflo and my Heart faileth •, hut God is the Strength of my Heart and my Portion for ever. See the Ixxiii^ Pfalm. When the Prophet Habbakkuk makes that noble Declaration, Although the Fig-'Tree Jloall not bloffom, neither fjall Fruit be in the Vine •, the Labour of the Olive fhall fail, and the Fields fhall yield no Meat -, the Flock foall be cut off from the Fold, and there fJoall be no Herd in the Stall : Tet 1 will rejoice in the Lord, 1 will joy in the God of my Salvation ; as it fhews with what Truth this Writer affirms, that none oHht Prophets ever underftood or taught a Faith which can fupport Men under Adverfity, and above the World \ fo it Ihews that they did not look upon the Reward they cxpeded as confilling merely in temporal Profpe- rity, or a worldly Affluence -, that their Hopes were of a higher and nobler Nature, not merely con- fined witlnn the narrow Limits of this prefent Life, Z 4 which
344 ^^^ ancient Jews not Deijlical which could not poflibly furnifh fuch glorious Con- ceptions, or lay a Foundation for fuch eminent Ads of Faith and fpiritual Joy, under the greateft outward Difficulties and Diftreffes.
It is exprefsiy declared, that the Wicked is dri- ven away in his Wickediiefs, but the Righteous hath Hope in his Death; Prov. xiv. 32. And that at Death the Diijl^ that is, the Body, JImU return to Earth as it ijoas^ hut the Spirit JJmU return unto God that gave it •, Ecclef. xii. 7. Sinners are called upon to conflder amidft their vicious Pleafures and Ex- ceffes, that/<?r allthefe 'Things God will bring them into Judgment ; Ecclef. xi. 9. And it is exprefsiy affert- ed, that God will bring every Work into Judgment ^ with every fecret Things whether it be good^ or whe- ther it be evils Ecclef xii. 14. And yet this Wri- ter hath the Confidence to affirm, that no Jewijh Writer^ before the Days of Ezra^ ever mentioned e, Word of 'a future Judgment. The Prophet Ifaiah after having obferved, that the Righteous perijloeth^ and no Man layeth it to Heart j and merciful Men ere taken away^ none ccnjidering that the Righteous is taken away from the Evil to come^ immediately adds, He^ i. e. the righteous Man, whom he fup-; pofes to have perifhcd or died, and to be taken a- away from this World, and the Evil of it, fhall enter into Peace. Which can only be underftood of a State of Reft and Happjncfs., which is the ufual Meaning of the V\'ord Peace in the facred Wri- tings. And he there defcribes that future Happi- neis in metaphorical Expreflions, by faying, they, i. e. the righteous and merciful Men, whom he reprefents as having departed out of this Life, j^^// rejl in their Beds., each one walking in his Upright- nefs ; Ifa. Ivii. i, 2. Thofe Words of the fame .Prophet are juftly looked upon as containing at lead a manifeft Allufion to the Refurreftion of the Dead -, Thy dead Men fhall live., ■ together with my dead Body Jhall they arife : Awake and fing, ye that
dzvelj
Materiallfts, or Sadducees. 345
dwell in Duji : for thj Dew is as the Dew of Herbs ^ and the Earth jhall cafi out her Dead •, I fa. xxvi. 19. To which may be added thofe Words of Uo^ fea, I will ranfom them from the power of the Grave : I will redeem them from Death. 0 Deaths I will be thy Plagues ; O Grave., I will be thy De^ firu^ion., Hof. xiii. 14. But it is ftill more clearly expreffed ia the Book of Daniel., Mayvy that fleep in the Duji of the Earth (hall awake., fome to ever- lafiing Life., and fome to Shame and everlajling Con- tempt., Dan, xii. 2. When in ftating the Jufticc and Equity of the divine Proceedings, in the xviiith Chapter of Ezekiel., God is reprefented as declaring with the greateft Solemnity, as a Matter of im^ mutable and eternal Certainty, concerning every Man whatfoever that fliould perfift in a Courfe of Sin and Difobedience, that he ^oxAdi ftirely die ; and concerning every good and righteous Man, that he fhould furely live., he fliould not die j it is evident this cannot be underftood merely of temporal Life and Death, or of worldly Profperity and Adver- fity, fmce it is undeniable that both thefe in many Inftances equally befal the Righteous and the Wic- ked ; as the Wifeman obferves, Eclef ix. i, 2. and muft therefore be underftood to extend to a State of Happineis or Mifery, after this Life is at ^n end.
This may fuffice to Ihew the Falfhood and In- juftice of that Charge which this Writer brings a- gainft Mofes and the Prophets, and the whole Jew- tfh Nation, till the Days of Ezra., that they were deiftical Materialijls, or Sadducees, And now I have gone through the feveral Objeflions fcattered in different Parts of his Book againft the Old Tes- tament j and perhaps I Ihall be thought to have examined them more particularly than they deferve : I now proceed to what he offers with a View to de- (trpy the Authority oi" the New Teftament.
CHAP.
346 Objections againji
CHAP. XII.
A Tranfttion to the Moral Philofophef s Ohje5lions againji the Neiv Tejlament. 'Thd' he pretends a very high Refpe5f for our blejjed Saviour^ yet he infinmtes feveral Refie5iions upon his Condutl and CharaMer. 'Tbofe Refle5fions jhewn to he ground- less and unjuft. Our Lord did not comply with the Prejudices of the People in atry 'Thing contrary to Truth, or to the Honour of God, He was far from affuming to be a temporal Prince, yet he all alo7ig claimed to be the Mejfiah promifed and fore- told by the Prophets. The Author*s Pretence that he renounced that Chara^cr at his Death, Jhewn to be falfe. The Mejfiah fpoken of by the Prophets, was not merely to be a national Deliverer of the Jews, nor were the Benefits of his Kingdom to be confined to that Nation only, but to be extended to the Gentiles. This fijewn from the Prophecies thern- felves. The Attefiation given to Chrift^s divine Mif- Jion, by the Prophecies of The Old Tefiament^ con- Jidered and vindicated.
IN many of the Objedions that have been hi- therto conlidered, we have had plain Proofs of the Mahce and Difingenuity of this Writer •, but in what remains with regard to the New Tefiament there is ftill greater Reafon to complain of his Condudl. As to the Old Tefiament, he a6ts the Part of an open Enemy, tho' an Enemy that hath little Regard to any Thing that can be called fair or honourable, and who feems to govern Himfelf by that Maxim, Dolus an virtus quis in hofie requirat ? But when he Ipeaks of the Gofpel-Revelation, he frequently puts on the Appearance of a Friend. He affefts to fpeak honourably of Jefus Chrifi, and of the Religion he taught. He exprefsly declares Himfelf to be a
Chrifiiau
the New Teftament, confidered. 347
Chrijlian on the Foot of the New Tejlament, p. ^5^. and talks in pretty ftrong Terms of the fignal Ad- vantages of the Gofpel-Revelation, and feems to blame thofe that do not fet a due Value upon it. In the Beginning of this Book I have quoted a long and remarkable Paffage to this purpofe, to which I refer the Reader •, and feveral other PafTages might be produced that are no lels ftrong and exprefs. See particularly, p. 358, 359, 392, 394, 41 1. But all this is only the better to carry on his Defign againft Chrijiianity, by feeming to fpeak favourably of it whilft he really ufes his utmoft efforts to fubvert it. This will be evident to any one that confiders the bafe Refledlions he infmuates upon our blefled Lord himl^lf : his more open Attempts againft the Cha- ra6ler of the Apojiks, and againft the Proofs they brought of their divine Miffion ; efpecially thole taken from the extraordinary Gifts and Powers of the Holy Ghoft in the Apoftolical Age : the Ac- count he gives of the falfe and abfurd Jewijh Gol^ pel, which he pretends they all preached except the Apoftle Paul, and of the great Differences a- mong them about Points of the higheft Confequence and Importance : the Endeavours he ufes to deftroy the Credit of the whole Canon of the New Tefta- ment, and to fhew that it is not to be depended on for a right Account either of Dc5lrines or Fa^is : befides the Pains he takes to mifreprefent and expofe fome particular Do6lrines of Chriftianity. I fhall take fome Notice of what he offers with regard to each of thefe. And fhall begin with conlidering his Infinuations againft the Charafler of our l>kjfed Saviour himfelf, notwithftanding he frequently af- fe6ls to fpeak of Him with great feeming Vene- ration.
He commends him, p. 168. among other Things for this, that he did not, like other Lawgivers, in any Jnjlance give up the Caufe of Virtue and the common Qood of Mankind^ to comply ivith the prevailing Pre- judices
34^ Objections agalnfi
judices of the People. And yet he would have us believe, that in compliance with the Prejudices of the People *, htjujlified the Gofpel-Scheme on the Foot cf Mofes and the Prophets. -, that he not only affert- ed the Authority of thofe Writings, tho' they only falfly pretended to divine Inlpiration, but impofed a Senfe upon them which he ' knew was not their Senfe, and put that falfe Senfe upon the Jews for the real original Intention of the Holy Ghoft j and particularly that he pretended to be the Perfon that had been foretold and fpoken of by the Prophets, under the Charadler of the Mejfiah •, whereas accord- ing to this Writer he himfelf could not but be fen- fible that the Prophets had never fpoken of him at all 5 but of fome temporal Prince that fhould Ibme time or other rife up in Judea, and deliver the Jews from their Enemies.
But this is not all. He reprefents him as fuffer- ing himfelf to be carried about for a 'Twelvemonth together hy the Jewilh Moh all over the Country .^ and to ht declared their Meffmh (i. e. their temporal Prince in Oppofition to Cefar^ which is the only Senfe he puts upon that Expreflion) and that they had led him in Triumph to Jerufalem, andproclaim-
* But certainly he that on all Occafions declared with fo no- ble a Zeal and Freedom againft the Traditions of the Elders, for which the Je^s had the highell Veneration, and detefted the Hypocrijy of the Scribes and Pharifees, whom the People ad- mired and reverenced as holy Perfons, would have declared with equal Zeal againft the Law of Mofes itfelf, if he had looked upon it to be as this Author reprefents it, a nvretched Scheme of Stt- ferjlition, Blindnefs^ and Slavery, contrary to all Reafon and com' itton Senfe, impofed upon them under the fpecious Pretence of a di'vine Infiitution, And he would not have deferved the Name of a true Reformer in Religion, if he had not endeavoured to undeceive the People, and to deteft and expofe fo pernicious an Impofture. And his not doing fo, but all along reprefenting that Law as di'vine, and never once in the whole Courfe of his Miniftry, dropping an Infinuation to the contrary, is a manifell Proof that he himfelf looked upon li to be of divine Original ^nd Authority.
ed
the New Teftament, confidered. 349
ed him Ktng hi this Senfe but three D^ys before he was apprehended, widiout his oppofing it. That therefore the JewiJIj Chief-Priefts and Rulers were under a Necejfity of doing what they did, in order to fave their Country from Ruin. That tho* they could not prove that he had made any Pretenjions to the Crcwn againjl Celar, yet they prefmned he mujt have given the People feme Encouragement that Way^ or elfe foflrong and general an Expectation could never have been raifed and kept up. And our Author himfelf obferves, that had he renounced any fuch Preterjions fooncr^ as he did at lajl^ the People would all have forfook him, as they did as foon as they found he voas not for their turn, and that he had as they thought, betrayed them. Thus it is evident that he juftifies our Lord's Murderers, and reprefents them as only having a6led as became good Patriots to prevent the Rum of their Nation * : and infmuates
that
* Whatever Gloffes the Chief-PrteJ^s, the Scribes and Phari- fees might think proper to put upon it in their Council, and however they might colour over their Defigns with a Pretence of T'eal for the publick Good, Johnzd. 47, 48, i^c yet it is evi- dent from the wliole Evangelick Kiftory, that the real Motive was their Malice and Envy ; becaufe with an impartial Zeal he had rebuked their Crimes and Vices, and detefted their Hypo- crify, and oppofed their Authority and Traditions. Hence we read fo often of their being Jilled 'with Rage againfc him, and taking Counfel to flay him. Their Malice was fo apparent, that Pilate himfelf could not but obferve it. If he had believed that Jefus had fet himfelf up for a Prince of the Jeijos in Oppo- fition to Ce/ar, it concerned him more than it did them to pre- vent it. But he knew that the Chief-Priejls had delivered him for En'vy, Mark XV. 10. and therefore endeavoured to get him freed from Puniftiment. And whereas this Writer to excufe the Chief-Priefts, ^c. lays his Death upon the Multitude, who he pretends were enraged at him for at laft difclaiming his being their MeJJiah ; on the contrary, it is evident, that it was the Chief-Priefts and Elders that mcjed Oindperfuaded the People to do what they did, Matt.xxw'n. 20. Mark xv. 11. And their Honefty appears in this, that they accufed him to Pilate as per. *verting the Nation, und forbidding to give Tributt to Celar, Luk.
xxiii.
350 Objections agalnjl
that he brought his own Death upon himfelf, by" having encouraged the Jewijh Mob to take him for their Mejjiah or temporal King, and to proclaim him to be fo but three Days before ; and that he never renounced thefe Pretenfions till he was before the Roman Governor. And if fo, I know not upon what Foundation he there reprefents him as a glorious Martyr and Confejfor for the Truth. Thus his determined Malice againft our blefied Lord plainly difcovers itfelf from under the Difguife he endeavours to throw over it. See^. 350 — 353.
But it may be eafily proved that thefe Infinua* tions are as falfe as they are malicious. Nothing is more evident than that on the one Hand our Lord all along difclaimed all Pretences to the being a. temporal Prince in oppofition to Cefar •-, tho' this Writer infinuates, that he never renounced thefe Pretenfions till he came upon his Trial before Pi- late: and that on the other Hand, he all along claimed to be the Mejfiah foretold and fpoken of by the Prophets, tho' he affirms that he renounced that Character upon his Trial, and died upon that Renunciation.
As to the firft, not only did he withdraw when the Populace would have taken Him hy Force to have made him a King^ John vi. 5. but to avoid all Appearance of fetting up for a temporal Sove- reignty, when one defired him to fpeak to his Bro- ther to divide the Inheritance with him, he anfwer- ed, Man^ ivho made me a Judge or a 'Divider over you ? Luk. xil. 14, There was nothing he more feverely rebuked among his Difciples than ambitious Contentions who fhould be greateft ; and he de- clared, that he himfelf came not to be minijlred unto^ but to minifter^ and to give his life a Ranfom for
xxiii. 2. tho' they knew that Accufation was falfe, and that when the Queftion was propofed to him, he had required them to render unto Cefar the 'Things vjhich are CefarV.
many
the New Teftament, conjidered, 351
many. He declared both to his own Difciples and to the Multitude, that if any Man would come after him, that is, would be his Difciple, he muji deny himfelfy and take up his Crofs, and follow him. In- ftead of raifing them to Expedations of great world- ly Advantages, as he exprefsly foretold his own grievous Sufferings and Death, fo he declared that his Difciples fliould be hated and pcrfecuted of all Men for his Name^s fake, and that in this World th^ floould have 'Tribulation. And the Rewards he promifed to thofe that fhould believe and obey him, were not the Riches and Honours of this prefent World, but the fpiritual and eternal Rewards of a future State.
But tho' he {o plainly difclaimed all Pretenfions to worldly Dominion and Sovereignty here on Earth, yet it is certain that he claimed to be the Mejfiah that had been promifed and foretold from the Beginning. From whence it is evident, that he did not look upon the Meffiah foretold by the Pro- phets to be, as our Author reprefents him, meerly a temporal Prince. John the Baptift, when he was fent to, plainly and openly declared that he was not the Meffiah or the Chrift. But did our Lord Jefus ever during the whole Courfe of his perfonal Miniftry, make liich a Declaration concerning him- felf } far from it. Whenever any gave him the Title of the Chrifi^ the Son of David., or any of the other pecuhar Chara6lers which were made ufe of to fignify the Meffiah., he never once rejefted it, or rebuked thofe who thus addreffed him : on the contrary, when Peter in the Name of the Difciples made that noble Confeflion, Thou art the Chrifi, the Son of the living God ; Jefus anfwered Him, Blefjed art thou., Simon Barjona : for Flefh and Blood hath not revealed it unto thee., but my Father which is in Hea^ ven. Matt. xvi. 17. So he approves Martha^?> il- luftrious ConfefTion, / believe that thou art the Chrifi the Son of Cod, which fhould come into the PForld,
John
3 52 Objections againfi
John xi. 27. And when the. High-Prieft upon his Trial before the Jewijh Council adjured him by the living God, to tell them, whether He was the Chrift the Son of the Blejfed ? He anfwered diredtly, / am. And then adds. And ye Jhall fee the Son of Man fitting on the Right Hand of Power^ and coming in the Clouds of Heaven. Where he evidently applies to himfelf what the Prophet Z)^ra^/.faith of the Mef fiah under the Charafter of the Son of Man., and which by this Writer's own Acknowledgment all the Jews., and Jewifh Chriftians underftood of the Meffiah. See il^^r^ xiv. 61, 62. Dan.Yix. 13, 14. And this was the pretended Blafphemy for which they condemned him. And when he was before Pilate., tho' he told him that his Kin dom was not of this World •, yet even then fo cautious was he of faying any Thing that fhould look like a difclaim- ing the Character of the Meffiah., that when Pilate afked him whether he was a King., he anfwered that he was ; that is, that he was that Perfon that had been promiled and foretold by the Prophets under that Charader. See John xviii. 37. Matt, xxvii. II. Luke xxiii. 3. Accordingly Pilate when he brought him out to the Jews laid, behold your King. And this was the Crime of which the Chief-PrieftSj and by their Iniligation the Multitude accufed him to the Governor, tho' our Author pretends that the Reafon of their Rage againft him, was his dif- claiming before Pilate that he was their King or Meffiah. So far therefore is it from being true, that our Saviour renounced his being the Mef fiah in the -prophetical Senfe., and died upon that Re- nunciation., as this Writer with an unparallell'd Con- fidence in Falfhood over and over aiferts ; that the very contrary is true, that he declared himfelf to be the Meffiah upon his Trial, and died upon that Declaration. His aflerting it was the Caufe of his Condemnation by the Jewifh Council, and was the Crime urged by them againft him before Pilate,
This
the New Teftament, conJidereL 353
This was in an efpecial manner the glorious Truth for which he died a Martyr^ and which he lealed with his Blood. And after his Refurre6lion he opened the Underftandings of his Difciples that they might know the Scriptures, and explained to them the Paflages in the prophetical Writings re- lating to himfelf as the true Chriji^ that had been there promifed and foretold. And this the Apof- tles, and the Apoftle Paul as much as any of them, preached under the Influence of his Divine Spirit. Now what Idea does this Writer give us of all this ? That this pretended McfTiahfhip of Jefus was all a Fidion. The Prophets had never fpoken of him at all, nor of any Mejfiah^ but a temporal Prince and national Deliverer of the Jews^ and of them only. And what is this but to declare that our Lord Jefus Chrift was a Deceiver^ and that the whole Gofpel is one grand Impojiurc^ and the Article fo much infilled upon there, and which our Author makes to be the only proper Article or Dodrine of Religion peculiar to the Gofpel Difpenfation, fee p. 349. is an ablblute Fallhood, and grofs Impo- iition.
I fhall not enter upon a diftind Confideration of the Prophecies relating to the MeJ/iab, in order to Ihew how amply they are fulfilled in our Lord Je- fus Chrift -, this would carry me too far, and is a Subje6t which hath often been largely and juftly handled. I Ihall only briefly obferve, that where- as there are two Things which this Writer repre- fents as neceflarily entring into the Charader of the Mejfmh, as foretold by the Prophets : the one is, that he was to be no more than a temporal Prince, and his Kingdom and Dominion was to be of a worldly Nature : the other is, that he was only to be a King of the Jews^ and to be a national De- liverer or Saviour of them only, and not of the Gentiles: the contrary to both thefe may be ma- nifeftly proved from the Prophecies themfelves
A a that
354 Objections againft
that relate to this Matter. It will be eafily granted that the Kingdom of the Mejjiah^ and the Advan- tages and Bleffings of it are fometimes reprefented. by Figures and Emblems drawn from the Glory and Magnificence of earthly Kingdoms. Nor is this to be wondered at by any one that confiders the Nature of the prophetical Stile, which delighted in bold and pompous Figures and Allufions, and often reprefented Things of a fpiritual Nature under Images drawn from the Things of this World : but at the fame time there are many Things faid by them which plainly Ihew that the Kingdom afcribed to him, is not like the Kingdoms of this World in its Nature and Defign, but erefted for far nobler Purpofes. That the great and principal Defign of it was to eflablifh Truth and Righte- oufnels, and fpread the Knowledge of God and Religion, and mutual Benevolence and Charity a- mongft Mankind. This is the manifefl: Import of thofe remarkable Prophecies concerning the MelTiah and his Kingdom, which we have, Ifa. xi. i — lO. and Ifa. xlii. i — 7. That this is the Name where- by he fhould be called, the Lord our Righteoufnefs^ Jer. xxiii. 5, 6, And in the ninth Chapter of Daniel^ where Mefftah the Prince is fo exprefsly pro- mifed, the End of his coming is fignified to be to Jinijh the 'Tranfgrcjfions^ to make an End of Sin^ to make Reconciliation for Iniquity^ and to bring in everlafiing Right eoitfnefs^ Dan. ix. 25, 24, ^c. The fame Perfon that is fometimes reprefented as a glo- rious King, is alfo reprefented as a Priefi for ever ; not after the Order of Aaron, as it muft have been if the Law of Adofes had continued in Force under his Reign, but after the Order of Melchifedec, Pf ex. 4. He is alfo defcribed as a great Prophet to whom the People were commanded to hearken, Deut. xviii. 15--! 8. And this Charadler of the Meffiab was fo well known, that even the Sama- ritan Woman could fay, / know that Mejfiah Com- eth^
the New Teftament, confidered, 355
€th^ which is tailed Chriji : when he is come he will tell us all Things^ John iv. 25. In that remarkable Prophecy relating to the Mejfmh^ and which was underftood of him by the antient Jews, from Ifa. lii. 13, to the End of the. fifty third Chapter, as it is foretold concerning him, that he fhould be exalted and be very high, k> his deep Humiliation, and moft grievous Sufferings, are (trongly defcribed in a Variety of emphatical ExprefTions, and the Rea- fons and Ends of thofe Sufferings are plainly fig- nified ; that it W3.s for our 'Tranfgrejfwns that he was to fuffer •, that he was to make his Soul an Offeringu J^or Sin, and to bear the Sins of many, that by his ' Stripes we might be healed ; und that by his Knowledge he fhould juflify many, and fhould make Interceffion for the TranJgreJJors. In the illuftrious Prophecy concerning the Meffiah, Mai. iii. i. he is defcribed under the Gharadter of the Meffenger of the Cove- nant, and what Kind of Covenant that was we are informed, Jer. xxxi. 31 — 35. from which it appears that it was to be a New Covenant diftind from that made with the Ifraelites when they were brought out of Egypt, and that the promifed Bleflings of it were to be of a fpiritual Nature ', fuch as that God would write his Law in their Heart, and teach them to know him, and forgive their Iniquity.
And as thefe Things plainly fhew that the King- dom of the Meffiah fpoken of by the Prophets was not merely of a fecular Nature, like the Kingdoms of this World, and that the principal Benefits of it, and in which the Glory of it is defcribed as princi- pally confiding, are fpiritual and divine ; fo it is alfo evident, that thefe Benefits and this Salvation are reprefented there as not confined to the Jews only, but extended to all Mankind. Thus in rhc Promife made to Abraham, and which is (o often referred to in the New Teftament, it is laid, that in his Seed fhould all the Families of the Earth be " Jed, When Jacob prophcfies of the Meffiah A a 2 under
356 Object roNS agalnfi
under the Name of Shibh, it is declared that unto him ihould ihe gathering of the People be. Gen. xHx. 10. It is foretold that in the Time of that Branch that fliould gi-o^tv out of the Root of Jeffe, the Earth fhould be full of the Knowledge of the Lord^ as the Waters cover the Sea ; and that to him fhould the Gentiles feek, or as the Seventy render it, in him Jhall the Gentiles trufl, Ifa. xi. i, 9, lo. That God would put his Spirit upon him, and he fhould bring forth Judgment unto the Gentile^;, and the Ifles Jhould wait for his Law ; and that God would give rfiim fdy a Covenant of .the People, for a Ught of the Gentiles, Ifa. xlii. i, 4, 6. And again, that God .^ would ^/w him for a Light to the Gentiles, that he might be the Salvation of God, unto the Ends of the Earth, Ifa. xlix. 6. He is defcribed under the Cha- racter of the t)efire of all Nations, Hag. ii. 6--9. to fliew that he was promifed and defigned to be a Blefling to all Nations. The general Converfion of the Gentiles to the Knowledge of God and true Religion, is frequently fignified by the Prophets in ftrong and noble, tho* figurative Expreflions; fee Mai. i. II. Ifa. ii. 2, 3. Some of thofe Expref- fions do indeed carry a manifeft Allufion to the Manner of Worfhip that was in ufe under the legal Dif^enfation ; fee Ifa. Ixvi. 23, Zech. xiv. 16, 17, 18. but the general Defign of thofe Expreflions is no more than to fignify that the Gentiles fhould be brought into the true Church of God, and fhould become his People, and worfhip him in a pure and acceptable Manner, according to his Appoint- ment -, but not that the Mofaick Law and the Rites there prefcribed fhould be obferved by the Gentiles: the contrary to which plainly appears from fome of thofe PafTages. Thus, Mai. i. ii# the Converfion of the Gentiles is reprefented by their offering Incenfe unto the Lord, and a pure Offering in every Place : but that this cannot be underflood literally of their offering Incenfe .and Oblations ac- cording
the New Teftament, confiderd. 357
cording to the Law is evident, becaufe that Law did not allow Incenfe to be offered in any Place but at the Temple or Tabernacle. So it is foretold, Ifa. xix, 9 — 2 1 . that the Egyptians JhouJd know the Lord ; and that they fhould offer Sacrifice and Oblation ; and that an Altar fhould be eretted unto the Lordy in the Midji of the Land of Egypt, and a Fillar at the Border thereof to the Lard. Where it 'is maiti- feft that thefe ExprefTions- are not to be taken lite- rally, as fignifying the Manner in which they fliould worfhipGod; for both thefe, the eredling Pillars to God any where at all, and the erecting Altars in any Place but in the Land of Canaan^ at the Place whioh the Lord fhould chufe there, are for- bidden in that Law. In that Prophecy it is alfb farther declared, that E^pt and Affria^ by which are fignified the chief of the Heathen Nations, fhould as well as Ifrael be God's Feople and Inhe- ritance. Whereby it is plainly fignified that the Diftinflion of Nations fhould then be taken away •, there fhould be no Difference between Jeijos and Gentiles ; and the peculiar Rites of the ^ofaick Conftitution Ihould be abolifhed, fee Ifa. xix. 24, 25. With a View to this State of Things, all Na- tions are often called upon to praile the Lord for his Mercy and Truth, and to ferve him with Glad- nefs -, it is fignifted that there was a Time com.ing when his Way fhould be known upon Earthy and his faving Health unto all Nations -, when all the Earth fhould ivorjhip him, and fhould fing unto his Name, and a glorious Reign of God is fpoken of that Ihould be the jufl Caufe- of univerfal Joy and Re- joicing to all People*.
In a Word, nothing can be more evident than it is from the Prophecies, that the Kingdom of the Meffiah is reprefented as an univerfal Benefit, the happy Effefts of which were not to be confined to
* See /•/';/. Ixvi. 1—4. Ixvii. i — 4, xcvii, xcyiii. c. cxvii,
A a 3 the
358 Objections againjt
the Jews^ but were to extend unto all Nations. And tho* many of the Jews thro' their Selfiftinefs and narrow Prejudices would fain have appropri- ated the Benefits of the Mejfiab to their own na- tion ; yet there were fome among them that ftill pre- ferved jufter Notions of Things, in Conformity to the plain Declarations of the antient Prophecies con- cernin^.him. Thus aged Simeon, who was one of thofe that expe5ied the Cmfolation of Ifrael, that is, waited for the coming of the Meffiah, when he took Jefus into his Arms, and blefled God for hav- ing caufed him to live and fee the promifed Mef- Jiah, calls him tht Salvation of God, which he had prepared before the Face of all People-^ .a Light to lighten the Gentiles, and the Glory of his People Ifrael, Luke ii. 30, 31, 32. And even the Samaritans, who had the fame Hopes and Expe6lations of th^ Mtffiah with the Jews, looked for him under the Notion of the Saviour of the World : We know, fiy they, that this is indeed the Chrifi, tJj^ Saviour of the World, John iv. 42.
From the feveral Paflages that have been referred to, and others that might be mentioned, it appears that the Kihgdom of the Meffiah, and that glorious State of Things fo much fpoken of in the Pro- phets, is not to be underftood merely of a worldly Dominion or Empire, under the Government of a mere temporal Prince, that was to be a proper King of the Jews, and of them only -, but of a Kingdom of Righteoufnels and Peace, of Truth and Holinefs •, the proper Defign of which was to Ipread the Knowledge and Pradice of true. Reli- gion among Men : that, this Meffiah to whom this Kingdom belonged was to be the great Prophet and Teacher of his Church, the great High Prieft, but not after the Order of Aaron, the Meflenger of a new and moll gracious Covenant different from that which God made v/ith the Ifraelites when he brought them gut of Egypt : that he was to ap- pear
the New Teftament, conftderd. 359
pear in a mean and humble Form, and to endure the greateft Sufferings, and by thofe Sufferings to make Reconciliation tor Iniquity : that he was to be cut off out of the Land of the Living, and in Confequence of this was to be highly exalted : that his Dominion was. to be extenfive over all Nations, and to continue to the End of the World : that the Bleffings of his Reign were not to be confined to the Jc'-jos only, but were to extend unto all Na- tions ; he was to be a Light to lighten the Gentiles^ and the Salvation of God unto the Ends of the Earth ; fo that the whole World fhould have Rea- fon to rejoice in his coming, and in the Difpenfa- tion he introduced, as an univerfal Bleffing.
When therefore the King, or Mefiiah, of whom fuch glorious Things are fpoken, is reprefented as
fitting on the Throne of David his Father i it is evi- dent this cannot be underllood in the Senle this Author puts upon that Phrafe, as if he were to be only a temporal Prince, and a national Deliverer and Saviour of the Jews only ; which by no means anfwers the Idea the Prophets give us of the Mef-
ftah. All that is intended iij thefe Expreffions, is that as he was to proceed out of the Family and Race of Bavid^ fo he was to be King as David was, but in a far more fublime and glorious Senfe. David's being chofen and fet apart by God's own ipecial Defignation and Appointment to be King over Ifrael, who were then God's peculiar People and Inheritance^ whom he fed according to the Integ- rity of his Hearty and guided by the Skilfulnefs of his Hands, Pfal. Ixxviii. 70, 71, 72. was a Type of that more glorious Kingdom and Sovereignty which the Meffiah was to exercife over the univer- fal Church, Li that remarkable Prophecy relating, to the Meffmh, Ifa. ix. 6, 7. after it is laid, unto us a Child is horn, unto us a Son is given \ and the Government fhall be upon his Shoulder, and his Name (Jjall be called Wonderful, Counfellor, 1'he A a 4 mighty
360 Objections againjl
mighty God, The everlajling Father, or as the Se- venty render it, the Father' of the World to come, oj: the future Age, The Prince of Peace : It is ad- ded, of the Increafe of his Government and Peace there fhall he no End-, upon the Throne of David, and upon his Kingdom, to order it, and to (fiahlifld it with judgment and "with Jufiice, from henceforth even for ever : the Zeal of the Lord of Hofis will per- form this. From which Paffage it is evident, that as the Perfon there fpoken of is defcribed by Characters that fhew him to be vaftly fuperior to David, fo the Kingdom afcribed to him, tho' figu- ratively fignified by the Expreflions of his fitting upon Davids Throne, and upon his Kingdom, muft needs be underftood to be of a far higher and nobler Nature •, even that Kingdom fo often re- prefented by the Prophets, as a Kingdom of Righ' teoufnefs and Truth, Charity and Benevolence. That Kingdom of the Son of Man fpoken of by Daniel, which is reprefented as of a different Kind from all former Dominions and Empires •, which are defcribed under the Emblem of furious wild Beafts, deftruflive Powers \ whereas this is repre- fented as an univcrfal Blefiing to Mankind.
If it be faid, that granting all this to be true,^ yet ftill thefe Prophecies cannot be applied to our Lord Jefus Chrifl, fmce the Event hath not anfwer- ed thefe glorious Prediftions of univerfal Peace, Righteoufnels, ^c. that are reprefented as attending the Meffiah\ Kingdom. I anfwer. That if it be confidered that our Lord Jefus Chrifl hath brought in a new and mofl perfeft Dilpenfation, the mani- feft Tendency of which is to eftablilh Righteouf- nefs, Truth, Peace, and univerlal Charity and Good-will amongft Mankind, without Diftinftion between Jews and Gentiles : That in Confequence of his grevous Sufferings, which were expreisly foretold, God hath highly exalted him, and he iias declared to he the Son of God with Power: That
notwith-
the New Teftament, confidered, 361
notwithftanding all the Oppofition it met with, the Gofpel of his Kingdom attended with the Holy Ghofl feiit down from Heaven, and with the moil glorious Manifeftations of a divine Power, made a furprizing Progrefs, and in a few Years was pub- lifhed throughout the vaft Roman Empire ; the Kingdom of Satan and pagan Idolatry fell down before it ; and vail Numbers were every where turned from Darknels to Light, from worfhippLng Idols to ferve the living and true God, and from Vice and Wickednefs, and the moil immoral Con- dud, to a Life of Holinels, Purity and Virtue. Any one that confiders this, and at the fame time confiders the pompous Figures of the prophetick Style, will not be furprized that fuch a glorious Perfon, and fuch a Difpenfation and State of Things Ihould be foretold and fet forth by lofty Figures, and in the mofl ftrong and elevated Expreflions. And if Chriftians afterwards fell off from the Pu- rity and Glory of the Gofpel into a great and ge- neral Apoftacy \ tho' ftili in Times of the greateft Degeneracy there v/eremany thoufands among them that faithfully adhered to the true Worfhip, Love, and Obedience of the only true God thro* Jefus Chrift, and to the Pradlice of real Piety and Righ- teoufnefs ; and if there has rifen up an exorbitant Anti-chriftian Power and Spiritual Tyranny, which hath been of long Continuance •, this alfo hath been plainly foretold, and that a very glorious State of Things fhall follow, and fhall continue for a long time. And under that glorious State of the Church, the prophetical Predidlions relating to the Meffiah^^ Kingdom, its univerfal Extent, Peace, Purity, Happinels, Ihall receive their fulleft Accomplifh- ment. And the remarkable Completion of the other Parts of the Prophecies leave us no reafonable Room to doubt that whatever remains to be fulfilled Ihall in the due Seafon be accomplilhed alfo.
And
362 Objections againft
And whereas the Meffiah's Kingdom feems fome- times to be defcribed with a particular Regard to the Jews ; and it is foretold that he fhould reign over them as their Prince and Shepherd, and that in his Days Ifrael and Judah Jhould dwell fafely^ and in a happy State : There are two Things that will entirely take off the advantage our Author pretends to take from thefe Expreffions. The one is, that the Terms Ifrael a.nd Judah, and the Houfe of Jacob, are not always to be underftood in the Prophets precifely of the Seed of Jacob literally fo called, or of the Jewifh People and Nation -, but are fometime defigned to fignify the Church in ge- neral, as it fhould be vaftly enlarged under the Gofpel Difpenfation, when Jew and Gentile fhould be all one in Chrift Jefus. It might be eafily ihewn that there is nothing in this but what is per- fectly agreeable to the prophedcal Style and Man- ner of ExprefTion. And in Conformity to this Way of Speaking, the Church under the New Teftament is defcribed under the Charafter of the Jerufalem which is above. Gal. iv. 26. Heb. xii. 23. True Chriftians are called Jews, Rev. iii. 9. The Ifrael of God, Gal. vi. 6. The true Circum- cifion, Phil. iii. 3. And all fincere Believers are called Abraham* s Seed, and the Children of Abra- ham. The other Thing to be obferved is, that if fbme of thofe Prophecies, . that fpeak of the Ad- vantages Ifrael and Judah were to enjoy under the Meffiah, be underftood literally of the People of the Jews, they relate to a future Rejloration of the y^wj that is yet to be accompUfhed. As the prefent wonderful Difperfion of the Jews, their being fcattered through all Nations of the E^rth, and their finding no Reft among them, but being every where hated and defpifed, fcorned and re- proached, and their ftill continuing in this their un- exampled Difperfion to be a difiin^ People, is fore- told and defcribed by many remarkable Characters,
an4
the New Teftament, conjidered. 363
and whick could never be applied to any other Na- tion *, fo their Recovery and Return is alio foretold. And this their Deliverance is fometimes expreisly applied to the latter Days, and is connedled with the Times of the Mejfmh. Not as if it were to happen immediately upon the MeJJiah's coming : On the contrary it is plainly fignified, that the Jews would deipife and rejeft him when he came, Ifa.Yiii. I, 2, 3. that he w|)uld be a Stone of Stum- Ming and a Rock of Offence to them, at which rciinj fhould fall and be broken, Ifa. viii. 14, 15. It is intimated that Ifrael fhould not be gathered at his coming, and yet he fhould be glorified, Ifa. xlix. 5. that the Day of his coming would be great and terrible to many among them, Mai. lii. i, 2. iv, I, 5. And moft plainly and exprefsly it is fore- told by Daniel, that the coming of the Meffah would be attended with the Deftru6lion of their City and Sanduary, and the Subverfion of their whole Conftitution, Dan.ix. 26, 27. And finally, that after they had continued many Days, or for a long Time, without a King, and without a Prince, end without a Sacrifice, and without an Image, and without an Ephod, and without Teraphim ; a moft exa6b Defcription of their prefent State, when they are without any fettled Form of Government, without the Exercife of the legal Priejlhood or Oblations, and at the fame time free from that Idolatry to which they were antiently fo prone •, they fhould after- ward return and feek the Lord their God, and David their King, that is, the true Meffiah, who is fometimes reprefented under that Chara<5ler, and fhould fear the Lord and his Goodnefs in the latter Days, Hof iii. 4, 5. And that God would pour forth upon them a Spirit of Grace and Supplication, and that they fhould look upon him whom they had
^ See Dent, xxviii. 63, 64. Amoslx. 8, 9, ij. Deut, xxx. 1—4. Jer. XXX. 1!. xxiii, 3. Ifa. xi. 11 — 16.
pierced^
3 64 Objections^ againfi
pierced, and mourn, (Zach. xii. 10 14.' xiii. i.
And their State under the Mejfiah is defcribed in figurative Expreflions, as. a State of Peace and Ho-
]inefs, Ezek. xxxiv. 23 31. xxxvi. 21-— 28.
This Return and Converfion of the Jews, and the happy EfFeds of it, St. Paul clearly fpeaks of in the eleventh Chapter of the Epiflle to the Romans. And fince the former Part of the Prophecies relating to the Jews'is fo remarl^bly accomplifhed, we may regard it as a Pledge and AfTurance, that the other Part of the Prophecies relating to their future Con- verfion and Return, lliall alfo receive its proper CJ!)omj)letion. And indeed their being ftill preferved a diftind People in fuch remarkable Circumftances, feems to fhew that they are referved for fome fignal Purpofes of divine Providence.
And now, upon this brief View of the Prophe- cies relating to the Meffiah, which were delivered not all at once, but by different Perfons, and in diverfe Manners, at a vaft Dillance of Time from one another, and which are remarkably accom- phfhed in our Lord Jefus Chrifl, in whom the fe- veral Chara(5lers given of the Mejfiah, tho' fbme of them at firlt View feemed not very confiflent with others, do wonderfully concur; I think it mufl be acknowledged that fuch a Series of Pro- phecy carried on for a long SuccefTion of Ages, yet all confpiring with an admirable Harmony, the like of which cannot be produced in any other Cafe, yields a glorious and peculiar Kind of At- teftation to our Lord Jefus Chriji, and to the Dif- penfation he hath introduced. And when joined with his wonderful Miracles, and the extraordinary Effu/lon of the Holy Ghoft, and the excellent Ten^ dency of that Doftrine and Religion which he taught and publifhed to the World, lays a folid Foundation for our Faith in him, and Obedience to the Dodrines and Laws which he hath given us. Our Author indeed will not allow that the Pro- phecies
/^^ New Teftament, conjtdered. 36^
phecies fiirnifh any Proof at all. Reargues, that if the Life or Religion of the Pope or Mahomet had been prophejied of and foretold^ as feme think they' were, this would have been no Proof of the Truth of Do£lrines or Righteoufnefs of Perfons, and there- fore could have heen no rational Foundation for true' Religions p. 332, 333, And it will be eafily own- ed, that if our Lord Jefus Chriji had been prophe- fied of no otherwife than as a tyrannous, wicked Power, no Man in his Senfes would have produced this as a Proof that his Miflion was divine -, when . it would rather have proved, that this was that ve- ry wicked opprefTive Power that had been foretold and defcribed, in order to warn people ag!iinft it, and to keep them from being too much difcouraged on the Account of it, as well as to ftrengthen their Hope that it Ihould be at length deflroyed. But when there had been a Perfon foretold from the Beginning of the World as a Blefling to Mankind, and the fending of whom is reprefented as the moft extraordinary Effeft of divine Love ; when „ he had been defcribed by the moft glorious divine Charadlers, and many particular Circumftances re- lating to his Perfon, A6lions, Offices, and the precife Time of his coming plainly pointed out, this being the Cafe, when he actually came in whom all thefe Gharafters met, and to whom all thefe Predictions pointed, and in whom alone th^ received their Accomplilhment, this certainly tend- ed highly to recommend him to the Efteem of Mankind, and to prepare and engage them to re- ceive that Difpenfation of Righteoufnefs, Truthf and Charity, which he came to introduce and efta- blifh. It tended to remove the Prejudices arifing from the Meannels of his outward Appearance, from his Sufferings, ^c. fince it was manifeft from the Prophecies, that even thefe Things were ex- prefsly foretold concerning him, and made a Part of the divine Scheme. And it Ihewed the great
Guilt
366 Objections againfi
Guilt of rejeding him, and thereby counter-afling the great and noble Defign and Scheme of divine Providence, which had been carried on from the Beginning.
I add, that thefe Prophecies, and their Accom- pli(hment, befides that they exhibit an illuftrious Proof of a moft wife prefiding Providence that governs the whole Series of Events, and fhew the Extent of the divine !^nowledge, and thus are ve- ry ferviceable even to natural Religion, do alfo fhew the wonderful Harmony between the Old Teftament and the New j that there is one and the fame Spirit in both •, the fame uniform Defign and Scheme -ftill carrying on ; and that Prophecy came not in old Time by the Will of Man -, but holy Men of God fpake as they were moved by the Holy Ghoji, . 2 Pet. i. 21. Our Author indeed makes little of all this. If the Reader will take his Word for it, thefe Things are Mmutenejfes, and even minutiae mi- nutiarum^ as he exprefTes it. He puts -the Cafe that the Prophets had foretold the Birth, Life, Miracles, Crucifixion, and Refurre^on of Chriji, particularly and minutely, in all the Circumfiances of 'Time, Place, Perfon, &c. and then he afks. What could this have proved, but only that thefe Men had the certain Knowledge _ of Futurity in thofe Matters? And confequently, that thefe Events were necejfary, as^ depending upon necejjary Caufes, which might be certainly foreknown and predicted ? p. 332. I fhall not ftay to expofe the Abfurdity of this Paffage, which plainly implies a Denial of God's Prefcience of future Contingencies, and feems to fuppofe a fatal Neceflity in human Adlions and Events. For if the Adtions here referred to, and all the feveral Events foretold by the Prophets, were neceffary, and depending on neceffary Caufes, we may equally fup- pofe that all other Events, and the Aftions of all Men, at all Times, are neceffary, and owing to neceflary Caufes, fmce they "have not greater Marks
of
the New Teftament, confidered, 367
of Freedom than thefe had -, which would be an odd Suppofition in one that on all Occafions dil^ covers Tuch a mighty Zeal againfl Fatalifm^ and fets up as a warm Advocate for Man's Free-agency. But not to infift upon this, I fhall only obierve, that if the Prophets foretelling thefe Things doth prove, as the Author owns, that they had the cer- tain Knowledge of Futurity in thefe Matters, it proves they forefaw Things which it was impofllble for any human Sagacity to forefee, and which could only be known to him whofe Providence prefides over all Events, and whofe Views extend throughout all Ages. And confequently, it proves, that thofe Prophets were extraordinarily infpired with the Knowledge of thole Things by God him- felf -, and we may be fure, that he would not have thus infpired them but for Ibme valuable End. And in the prefent Cafe, their being infpired to foretel the coming of our Lord Jefus Chrifi, was with a View to keep up the ExpeUation of this glorious Redeemer that was to come, and the bet- ter to prepare the World for receiving him when he actually came ; and that by confidering the Pre- didlions that went before concerning him, it might appear that he was the extraordinary Perfon, the fend- ing of whom was the Thing which the divine Provi- dence had all along in View. This gives a great So- lemnity to his divine Miffion, and is of fignal Ufe, in Conjundlion with the other illuftrious Atteftations given from Heaven. And there having been fuch a SuccelTion of Prophets raifed up among the Jews^ who iliewed by their wonderful Predidlions, that they had extraordinary Communications from God, and who all harmonioufly concurred, both in con- firming the Law of Mofes that had been already given, and carrying the Views of the People to another and more glorious Difpenfation that was to fucceed it, connected the Old Teftament and the New, and confirmed the divine Original of both.
CHAP.
§68 A Vindication
CHAP. XIII.
^je Aiithofs Charge agaiuji the ApoftleSy examifted. His Pretence that they them/elves were far from claiming Infallibility^ confidered. It is Jhewn that .they did profefs to be under the unerring Guidatice and Infpiration of the Holy Ghofl, in publiflnng the Gofpel of Jefus ; and that they gave fufficient Proofs to convince the World of their divine Mif- fion. The Attefiations given to Chriflianity^ and to the Do5lrines taught by the Apofiles^ hy the ex- traordinary Gifts afid Powers of the Holy Ghojl, confidered and vindicated, againfi our Authofs Exceptions. His Pretence that thofe Gifts of the Holy Ghofl might be ufed like natural Faculties and Talents, according to the Pleafure of the Per- fons who were endowed with them, either for the promoting Truth or Error •, and that the falfe Teachers, as well as the true, had thefe extraordi- 7iary Gifts and Powers, and made ufe of them in confirmation of their falfe Do5lrines, examined at large.
HAVIN G examined our Author's Infinuations againft the Lord Jefus Chrijl, let us now pro- ceed to confider what he offers with a View to lub- vert the Authority of the Apofiles, and to fhew that they are not at all to be depended on, in the Account they give of the Religion of Jefus, of which they were the firft authorifed Teachers and Publilhers to the World. He affirms that they themfelves never fo much as pretended to the infallible Gui- dance of the Holy Spirit •, or if they had pretend- ed to it, their great Differences among themfelves about the mofl concerning Points of Reveladon would have been an evident Demonflration to the contrary : That they preached quite different and
• even
of the Apostle s. 369
even contrary Golpels : They reported the Doc- trine of Chrift according to their own Jewijh Pre- judices, and made a wrong Reprefentation of fe- veral Fads, afcribing to him Things which he ne- ver did, and Prophecies which he never uttered, and Dodlrines which he never taught : That be- fides this, the New Teftament was farther corrupted and interpolated afterwards by the Chriftian Jews^ To that ^as it now (lands, it is a ftrange Mixture of Religions, of Cbrijlianuy and Judaifm, tho' they are the moft oppofite Things in the World.
I Ihall firft begin with the Attempt he makes againft the Infallibility and divine Infpiration of the Apollles. He alleges that " There was no Pre- *' tence in thofe apoftolical Times to any Spirit or *' Holy Ghoft, that made Men either infallible or «' impeccable -, that fet Men above the Poflibility *' of erring, or being deceived themfelves as to «' the inward Judgment, or of deceiving others in *• the outward Sentence and Declaration of that *' Judgment. This was the wild and impudent <* Claim of the Church of Rome in after Ages, " which the Apojlles themfelves, who really had *' the Holy Ghoft, and the Power of working *' Miracles, never pretended to. And tho* this has *« been liberally granted them, and fuppofed of *' them, by our Chriftian Zealots and Syftem-Mon- *' gers, yet it is what they never claimed." P. 80, 81.
As to what he calls their being impeccable ; if he means by this an abfolute Impoflibility of ever finning at all, or doing a wrong Thing in any fin- gle Inftance, in the whole Courfe of their Lives, neither the Apojiles themfelves, nor any for them, ever did pretend to this. Nor is it all neceflary to fuppofe fuch an Impeccability as this in order to their being depended upon. It is fufficient if they were Perfons of fuch Honefty and Integrity as to be incapable of contriving and carrying on a deli-
B b berate
^yo A Vindication
berate folemn Impojlure in the Name of God, and of putting known Falfhoods upon the World un- der the Pretence of a divine Revelation. This is all the Impeccability, if the Author is refolved to ufe this Word, that we are concerned to ftand up for with regard to the Apojiks, and furely this is no more than may well be fuppofed concerning many Perfons that are not abfolutely raifed above all the PalTions and Frailties of human Nature, in its prefent imperfed: State. And this the Apoftles certainly claimed. They affirmed that they did not follow cunningly devifed Fables ; that what they beard and faw^ and what their Hands had handled of the Word of Ufe, that they declared. That they knew that their Record was true, and called God to wit- nefs to it. They declared with a noble Confidence, arifmg from an inward Confcioufnefs of their own Integrity, that their Rejoicing was this, the Tejli- mony of their Qonfcience, that in Simplicity and godly Sincerity, ^ot in fleJJjly Wifdom, hut hy the Grace of God, they had their Converfation in the IVorld. That they did not corrupt the Word of God nor handle it deceitfully, or walk in Craftinefs, but had renounced the hidden 'Things of Difhonejly ; and as of Sincerity, as of God, and in the Sight of God fpoke ihey in Chriji, And could appeal to thofe that be- held their Converfation, and to God alfo, how ho- lily and unhlameahly they behaved themfelves. And this Author himfelf feems to grant, that it \%pro- hable that Men fo qualified and a^ing, as the Apof- tles are fuppofed to have done, could have no Dejign to deceive us, p. 93.
As to Infallibility, it is true that in the Senfe in which this Author feems to underftand it, as figni- fying that abfolute Infallibility which he tells us is the fole Prerogative of God himfelf, or of an om- nifcient Being, fee p. 9. and/». 83. viz. an utter Impoflibility of ever erring, or being miftaken at any Time, or in aiw Thing whatfoever, it is cer- i tain
of the Apostles. ^yi
tain the Apojlles never pretended to it ; For they never pretended to be Gods, or to be omnifcienr. Nor havfe any of thofe whom this Writer contemp- tuoufly calls $yjl em- Mongers^ ever alcribed it to them. But if by Infallibility is meant no more than their being under an z^«frm^ Guidance of the Holy Spirij, fo as to be kept from Error or Mif^ take in teaching and delivering the Doftrines and Laws of Chrifl, it is certain they did pretend to this. They declared Aat Chrift had exprefsly promifed his Spirit to teach them all 'Things con- cerning him, and to bring all 'Things to their Re- membrance whatfoever he had faid unto them^ John xiv. 26. And had afllired them that when the Spi- rit of Truth came, whom he would fend unto them from the Father, he would guide them into all Truth. For he fhould receive of his, and fJdouldfhew it unto them, Johnxvi. 12, 13, 14, It is evident there- fore that if this Promife of our Saviour was ac- compHflied, and it is certain that they themfelves believed and profeflcd that this Promife was fulfil- led to them, they were guided by the Spirit cff Truth in the whole of the Gofpel-Dodlrine ; and accordingly they claimed a Regard to the Word they preached j as the Word of God and not of Mcn^ iand urged the Difciples to be mindful of the Com- mandments of them the Apojiles of our Lord and Saviour, 2 Pet. iii. 2. i ThefT. ii. 13. The A- portle Paul, who was not one of thofe that attend- ed Chrift during the Gourfe of his perfonal Mini- ftry, but was afterwards taken into the Number of the Apoflles, by the immediate Call of Chrift him- felf, doth alfo in the ftrongeft Manner lay Claim to this divine Guidance and Infpiration. Heufual- ly begins his Epiftles with declaring that he was an Apoflle of Jefus Chrijl, in order to challenge a Regard to the Inftrudions he gave^ and the Doc- trines he taught. He affirms, that the Things which he preached unto others God had rczerJed
Bb 2 uniQ
372 ^Vindication ,
unto him hy his Spirit^ that Spirit which fearcheth all 'Things, yea the deep Things of God, i Cor. ii. 4, 6, lo, 12. that he had or k.n^'N the Mind of Chrijl, ver. i6, that the Things which he writ were the Commandments of the Lord, i Cor. xiv. 37. He talks of Chriji*s fpeaking in him, 2 Cor. xiii. 3. He could not more ftrongly affert his own divine Infpiration, and the Certainty and divine Authority of the Doftrinq^ he had preached, than by declaring, tho* an Angel from Heaven fhould preach any other Gofpel than that which he had preached, let him be accurfed. Gal. i. 8, 9. And again, Ver. 11, 12. / certify you. Brethren, that the Gofpel which was preached of me is not after JUan. For I neither received it of Man, neither was I taught it, but by the Revelation of Jefus Chrifi. And he plainly fuppofes and aflerts the divine Infpiration of the other -Apoftles too, and their entire Harmony in the Do6lrines they preach- ed in the Name of Chrift, when he reprefents Chri- ftians as built upon the Foundation of the Apoftles and Prophets, Jefus Chrift himfelf being the chief Corner-Stone, Eph. ii. 20. And declares, that the Myftery of God was revealed unto his holy Apoftles and Prophets hy the Spirit, Eph. iii. 5.
It is plain then that the Apoftles did profels to be infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit in the Doc- trines they taught, and the Laws they delivered in the Name of Chrift. If it be afked, which this Writer feems to fay is the proper Queftion in this Cafe, whether they were not miftaken themfelves, or what Proof they gave to the contrary ? See p. 93, 94. I anfwer •, That they were not miftaken in imagining themfelves infpired by the Holy Ghoft, is manifeft from the extraordinary Gifts and Pow- ers of the Holy Ghoft conferred upon them, and difcovering themfelves by the moft wonderful Ef- fefts •, whereby it plainly appeared, that the Pro- mife Chrift had made to them of fending his Spirit
to
of the Apostles. 373
to guide them into all Truths and to endue them with "Power from on high^ that they might be his Wit- neffes unto the uttermojl Part of the Earth, Ads i. 8. was fully accomplifhed. The evident Defign of all thefe wonderful Gifts and Powers, which fhewed they were under an extraordinary Influence, and had an extraordinary AfTiflance, and of all the Miracles they wrought, was to confirm the Word they preached, and to engage Mankind to receive what they taught as the authorized Minifters and Witnefles of Jefus Chrift, commilTioned and fent by him to teach all Nations in his Name, and for that Purpofe furnifhed with thofe extraordinary Gifts and Powers, both to enable and quahfy them for the right Difcharge of their Work, and to be the Proofs and Credentials of their MifTion. Ac- cordingly the Apoftles all along appealed to thefe extraordinary Gifts and miraculous Powers, as the great confirming Evidence of the divine Authority of the Do6trines they taught, and the Laws they delivered in the Name of Chrift. This is what the Apoftle Peter infilled upon in his firft Difcourfe to the Jews on the Day of Pentecoji, A6ls ii. 32, 33, 36. And what he and the other Apoftles appealed to before the Jcwifh Council, ASls v. 32. The Apoftle Paul often refers to thofe extraordinary Gifts and miraculous Powers of the Holy Ghoft, as a glorious Confirmation of the Gofpel which he preached *. His preaching and that of the other Apoftles was not with enticing JVords of Man's JVifdom : The 'Demonjlration they gave of the Truth of what they delivered was the Demonjlration of the Spirit and of Power •, a Demonftration of a pe- culiar Kind, but ftrong, and powerful, and convin- cing, I Cor. ii. 4, 5. They preached the Gofpel with the Holy Ghoji fent down from Heaven, i Pet. i. 12. God bearing them Witnefs with Signs and
* Rom. i. II. XV. 18, 19 I Cor. i, 6, 7, i ThelT. i. 5- Gal. iii. 2, 5.
B b 3 IVomicTs
374 Attejlation to Chrijlianity by the
}Vonders, and divers Miracles, and Gifts of the Hohj^ Qhofi according to his Will, Heb. ii. 2, 3, 4.
But tho' fuch a mighty Strefs is laid upon this in the New Teflament, as the great confirming Evi-r dence of the Chriftian, Religion, this Writer would have it all pafs for nothing. It yields no more Evidence to it, than if there had been no fuch exr traofdinary Powers given at all. This is very ftrange. Let us confider the Reafons he gives for it. It is becaufe " the extraordinary Powers and *' Gifts in the apoflolick Age were never confined ' • or annexed to any moral Charader, but the falfe ^' Prophets and Teachers had them as well as the. *' true ; and becaufe thofe extraordinary Gifts and '* Powers did not make Men eitl^er infallible or ■* impeccable, as they did not deftroy natural Li-: *' berty or Free-agency,, but they who were endued *' with them might make either a good or bad ^■' Ufe of them, as much as of any natural Facul- *' ties or Talents. See Pref. p. 9. And again he *' obferves, that they who in the apoftolical Times '' had thofe extraordinary Gifts and Powers, were ^' left at Liberty to exercife them upon the com- " mon Principles of Reafon and human Prudence. " And from hence we find that fome made a right f Ufe of them for Edification ; and others em- <' ployed them only to ferve the Purpofesof Emu- " lation and Strife, which introduced great Confu- *' fions and Diforders among them. And this is f« an evident Proof that the Perfons veiled with <« fuch extraordinary Gifts and Powers were nei- ** ther infallible nor impeccable-, that is, they were *' not hereby made incapable either of deceiving f ' others, or of being deceived themfelves. And " then he repeats what he had obferved before, i\ that falfe Prophets, and the moil: wicked Sedu- «' cers might and did work Miracles, which they " could not have doRC, had Miracles been t^ any Evidence or Proof of Truth and found Doc- " trine,*'.^. So, 81. A?^
extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft. 375
As the main Foundation of all he here offers, lies in fuppofing it as a Thing not to be contelied, that all thofe extraordinary Gifts or Powers, when once given, were as much in Mens own Power as any of their natural Faculties or Talents, and might be equally made ufe of to promote and propagate Truth and Falfliood, I fliall diftin(ftly examine this Suppofition with regard ta the principal of thofe extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft, that were poured forth in the apoflolical Age.
The only extraordinary Gift concerning which there is any juft Pretence of making that Suppo- fition is that of Tongues. Thofe that had this Gift probably had as much Command of that Lan- guage or Languages which they had once com- municated to them by the immediate Operation of the Holy Ghoft, as any Man hath of any Language that he hath learned or acquired in the common Way. It feems to have been in the Nature of a permanent Habit to be ufed according to their Dif- cretion, and accordingly fome in the Church of Corinth ufed it unfeafonably, and are reproved for it by the Apoftle Paul., who gives Dire6lions for a proper and feafonable Ufe of it to Edification. But then it muft beconfidered, that it was only the firft conferring of the Gift of 1 ongues on any Per- fon or Perfons that was properly miraculous \ the confequent Ufe of it was not fo, and was not im- mediately and properly deiigned fo much to con- firm die Truth of the Do6lrine they delivered, as to enable them to communicate that Doftrine to others, which was confirmed by other Miracles, The Gift of Tongues conferred upon the Apoftles on the Day of Pentecoji was fignally miraculous. That plain, fimple unlearned Perfons Ihould be ena-r bled at once without any previous Inftrutflion to fpeak with divers Kinds of Tongues, which they had never known before, and which Tongues they continued to ufe always afterwards ; This was evi- 15 b 4 dently
37^ \Attefiation to Chrijlianity by the
dently fupernatural. No Force or Power of a Man's own enthufmjlick Imagination could ever pro- duce fuch an Effeft. For who will pretend to fay, that a Man can fpeak any Language that he pleafes, by only ftrongly imagining that he can fpeak it, tho* he never heard it before ? And as the Force of a Man's own Imagination could never effedl this, fo neither could the Power or Skill of any other Man, or of all the Men upon Earth, enable him in a Moment, without Preparation, or previous Inftrudion, to underftand and fpeak feveral Lan- guages, to which he was before an entire Stranger. Such an immediate and wonderful Operation upon the human Mind, in imprefling fo many thoufand new Ideas at once upon it, is evidently fupernatural, and feems peculiar to the Author of our Beings, whofe Infpiration hath given us Underftanding. This therefore was a moil illuftrious confirming Evi- dence of the Truth of Chrift's divine Miflion, in whofe Name it was conferred ; and was a Proof of the Accomplilhment of the Promife he had made to his Apoftles that he would fend his Spirit upon them ; and of the Truth of the divine Commiflion he gave them, to go teach all Nations, for which Work they were hereby fignally qualified. But their ujing any of thofe Languages afterwards in the Nations to which they were fent, could not be alone a Proof or Miracle to thofe Nations, becaufe they did not know but they might have learned thofe Languages in the ordinary Way. But the proper Ufe of thofe Langua[ges was to enable them to preach the Doflrine of Jefus to thofe Nadons to whom they were fent, and by the other Miracles they wrought they confirmed the Word with Signs following. In like Manner, when any particular Perfon orPerfons, on their being baptized into the Faith of Jefi^s Cbrifi, and laying on of t!ie Apof- tle's Hands, which was the ordinary way by which the Gifts of the Holy Ghoft were communicated,
received
extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft. 377
received the Gift of Tongues, it was at that time a moft illuftrious Miracle, and both to themfelves who received this Gift, and to others who obferved it, and knew they could not fpeak thofe Languages before, it was a glorious Ccnfirmation of the Doc- trine of Jeftis taught by the Apoftles, into which they were baptized. And if we fhould fuppofe a Perfon that had thus received the Gift of Tongues afterwards to apojiatife from the Dcxftrine of the Apoftles in which he had been inftrudled, and to become a falfe Teacher, his making an ill ule of that Gift, fuppofing it to continue with him *, would not render it the lefs certain, that in its original Donation, it was a glorious Attsftation to the Truth of Chriflianity, and of the apoftolical Dodrine in Confirmation of which it was given. And inftead of being an Argument in favour of fuch Seducers as fhould abufe the Gift contrary to the Dodrinc they had received, it might be improved againft them, to fhew that the Dodlrine from which they had fwerved was true. It might be urged againft them, that they themfelves had received that Gift they boafted of only in the Name of Jefus Chrijiy and upon their believing and embracing the Doc- trine of the Apoftles ; and that ftill none could re- ceive thofe Gifts in any other way : and they might be challenged to communicate that Gift to others by the laying on of their Hands in Confirmation of their new Scheme of Dodlrine, as it had been com- municated to them in Confirmation of the Apoftolick Doftrine which they had received along with thatGift, and in which therefore they ought to have continued. I have been the more particular in confidering the Gift of Tongues, becaule if the Suppofition the
* I am willing to make this ConcefTion, tho' the Inftances of the Abufe of the Gift of Tongues mentioned by the Apoftle Paul, I Cor. xiv. do not at all relate to the abufmg it for pro- pagating falfe Doftrine, but to an ufing it unfeafonally, and with Oftentation, and not in fo orderly and edifying a manner as they ought to have done,
Author
^yS Atfejlatlon to Chrijlianity by the
Author makes concerning the extraordinary Gifts in the apoftolick Age, that Men might rnake a good or bad Ufe of them as much as of any of their natural Faculties and Talents, if this Suppofi- tion holds good concerning any of thofe Gifts, it muft be the Gift of Tongues ; and yet even in this Inftance it will by no means anfwer the End he propofes by it, which is to fhew that this Gift could yield no Atteftation at all to the Truth of Chrif- iianity.
The Word of Wifdom, and the Word of Know- ledge^ are mentioned by the Apoftle Paul, among the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft, i Cor. xii. And as it is probable that the Perfons that had thofe Gifts, had their Minds extraordinarily enlightned in the Knowledge of fpiritual and divine Things, and the great important Doctrines and Myfteries of the Golpel ; {o it may well be fup- pofed that. that Knowledge once communicated to the Mind by the Illumination of the Spirit, conti- nued there in the Nature of a permanent Light and Habit •, and thofe that had this Knowledge might communicate it to others by Speaking or Writing, as other Knowledge is communicated. But it can- not be pretended that this Gift was one of thofe that were capable of being abufed to propagate Error and Falfhood. It is a Contradiction to fup- pofe that any Perfon fhould by the Exercife of this Gift of divine Wifdom and Knowledge, that is, by the very adlual Exercife of the Knowledge of Truth, and by declaring and imparting to others the Knowledge he himfelf had of the Truth, pro- mote and propagate falfe Dodlrine and Error.
The fame Obfervation holds with regard to the Gift of Prophefying^ taken in the Senfe in which the Apojlle feems to underftand it, i Cor. xiv, for an extraordinary Gift of teaching and exhorting in the publick AfTembhes for Edification and Inftrudrion in Dodrine ;^nd Praftice. It is probable there was an
abiding
■Ok
extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft. 37^
flbidhig Habit or Ability this way communicated to thofe Peribns that had this Gift, by Virtue of which, jhey were quahfied and enabled to teach and ex- hort the People. Befides which it may be concluded from the Account the Apoftles give us, that thele Perfons were often under an immediate Afflatus of the Holy Ghoft in the a6tual Exercife of that Gift in the publick Affemblies ; tho' it did not hurry them on by an irreliflible Impulfe, but left Room for a prudential Management. They had it in their Power to exercife it in fuch a Way and Manner as might be mofl for Edification, and moft agreeable to Decency and Order. But if they exercifed this Gift at all, if they either taught and exhorted by virtue of the habitual Knowledge and Wifdom, which was at firft communicated to them by the JJoly Ghoft, and according to the Ability then given them ; or according to the immediate Affla- tus and afhial Infpiration communicated to them occafionally afterwards •, this Gift in either Cafe, if really ufed at all, was only capable of ferving the Caufe of Truth. If a Man, "pretending to the Gift of Prophefying, taught Errors and falfe Doftrines, it could not be by the real Exercife of the Gift of Prophefying which he received from the Holy Ghoft, but by falfly pretending to it when he ^ad it not. In which Cafe it could not be faid, that it was owing to his making an ill Ufe of the Gift which he really had, as Perfons may make an ill Ufe of their natural Faculties and Talents which they have, which is the Author's Suppofition ; but only that he pretended to that extraordinary Gift when he really had it not. And agc^inft fuch falfe Pretenders alfo the divine Wifdom and Good- nefs had provided a Remedy by another Gift of an extraordinary Nature, which was communicated in that firft Age of Chriftianity, viz. that of difcern- \ng of Spirits, whereby Perfons were enabled to difqern between falfe Teachers and the true, and
between
380 Attejlation to Chriftianity by the
between falfly pretended Infpirations, and true In- fpirations of the Holy Ghofi. And any Man that had this Gift conferred upon him, if he really ex- ercifed it at all, muft exercife it in DeteSling Falf- hood, and falfe Teachers, becaufe this was efTen- tially included in the very Nature of it.
Another Gift or Power which attended the firft Preachers of Chriftianity, and which was more peculiarly intended for a Confirmation of the Doc- trines they delivered, was the Power of working JSSracles j that is, doing wonderful Works far tranlcending all human Power, of which we have feveral remarkable Inftances recorded in the A^s of the Apoftles. But this was not properly a perma- nent conftant Habit to be exercifed like natural Faculties and Talents, as this Writer fuppofes, merely according to the Pleafure or Choice of the Perfon by whom thofe Miracles were wrought. They could only do thofe Miracles when and upon what Occafions it feemed fit to the Holy Ghoft that they fhould do them : in which Cafe they felt an extraordinary Impulfe, which is ufually called the Faith of MiracUi^ which was a Kind of Direc- tion to them when to work thofe Miracles, and whereby they knew and were perfuaded that God would enable them to do them. Thus, e. g. it was not in the Power of thofe that had the Gift of heal- ings nor even of the Apojiles themfelves, who had thofe Gifts in a far greater Meafure and Degree than any others, to heal the Sick as often as, and whenfoever they pleafed. For then they would fcarcehave fuffered any of their own intimate Friends to have died. But it was when God faw it fit that this Gift fhould be exercifed ; which was ufually ordered then when it ferved beft to the Propaga- tion and Co'/ijirmation of the Gofpel. So Paul left Trophimus at A4iletum fick, whom no doubt he would gladly have healed and reftoijed at once, if it had been left merely to his own Choice, to have
exercifed
extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft. 381
excrcifed his Gift of healing as he pleafed. And he fpeaks of Epaphroditm^s Sicknefs in fuch a man- ner as fhews that it did not depend upon him to recover him when he would, Phil. ii. 27. And yet we find at another time, the fame Apoftle, when he was at Ephefus preaching the Word of the Lord Jefiis to thofe that dwelt in Afia, both Jews and Greeks^ and when the Jews contradifted and oppofed his Doftrine, wrought the moft aftonifh- ing Miracles in Confirmation of it. We are told, that at that Time, and for fuch valuable Ends, God ordered it fo, that St. Paul fully exercifed his mi- raculous Powers. The facred Hiftorian obferves, that God wrought fpecial Miracles by the Hands of Paul. The Manner of Expreflion is remarkable, and fhews that the Miracles were God's own Work, only done by St. Paul as the Inftrumfent, fo that from his Body were brought unto the Sick, Handker- chiefs or Aprons, and the Difeafes departed from them,, and the evil Spirits went out of them, Adts xix. 1 1 , 12. Sometimes the Apoflles raifed the Dead: as Peter raifed' Tabitha or Dorcas, and Paul raifed Eutychus. But it cannot be fuppofed that they could exercife that Power as often as they them- felves pleafed, and that it depended merely on their own Will and Choice •, but it was exercifed upon extraordinary Occafions, when it feemed fit to the divine Wifdom that it fhould be fo, who in that cafe directed them to it by a fpecial Impulfe upon their Minds.
Thus alfo with regard to the Gift of Prophecy, if it be taken in the flridell Senfe, {ov foretelling Things to come, which was one Thing promifed by our Saviour to his Apoftles, John xvi. 13. and of which we have an Inftance in Agahus, who is called a Prophet, A£is xi. 28. xxi. 10. this was not like natural Faculties, or acquired Abilities to be exer- cifed at their own Plcafure. It did not depend merely upon their own Will and Choice, when
they
^^Z Atfejiation to Chrifiianity by the
fhey were to foretel Things to come, or what fu^ ture Things they were to foretel. This depended wholly on the fVill of the Holy Gholl by whom they were infpired. And they could then only ex- ercife this Gift, when it feemed fit to God for wife Purpofes that they fhould exercife it. The fame may be faid of the extraordinary Power they had in fome Inftances of difcerning the Secrets of the Heart, and the Workings of Mens Spirits, and what palTed inwardly in their Minds, fee yl£fs V; 3, 4. xiv. 9. I Cor. xiv. 25.
' With regard to thefe and other extraordinary Gifts and Powers of the Holy Gholl, it is evident, that they were not, as this Writer fuppofes, left merely* to Mens own Diredion and Management, to be employed to whatever Purpofes they thought fit, whether good or bad, like their natural Facul- ties and Talents ; but they were empowered to ex- ercife thofe Gifts, whenever it feemed fit to God they fhould exercife them for fome valuable Ends, for doing Good, or for the Confirmation of the Qofpel *. If therefore we fhould fuppofe that
fome
* Concerning thefe extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghofl poured forth in the firft Age of Chrifiianity, I would obferve, I . That they were very 'various, both in their Kind and De- gree, and were diftributed, not according to the Will of Man, but with great Variety in fuch Proportions, and to fuch Per- fons, as to the Holy Ghoit feemed meet, who as the Apoftle tells us, dijiributed to every Man fe'verally according to his Willy I Cor, xii. 1 1. And it feems to appear from the Account he gives us, that the fame Perfon was not ufually Partaker of fe've- ral of thefe extraordinary Gifts together, but fome of thefe Gifts were given to one, and fome to another, fee i Cor. xii. 8, 9, 10. Rom. xii. 6, 7, 8. except whei-e Perfons were defigned for very eminent Service in the Church ; efpecially the Apojiles, who had all thefe Gifts in Conjunftion. 2. The general De- fign for which they were all given was not for Oftentation, but for Edification and Ufe. The Ma?iifeJiation of the Spirit isgi'vett to every Man to profit ivithal, that is, to render him ufeful to others, i Cor. xii. 7. Hence the Gift of Tongues was ufually joined with that of Prophefying, tliat the one might render the
other
extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft. 383
fome who had once received feme of the extraor- dinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft, Ihould afterwards apoJ}atife from the true Do6trine of the Golpel which they had received, and fhould prove bad Men and wicked Seducers, it would not follow, that be- caufe they had thofe Gifts once, and when they preached the Truth, exercifed them in Confirmation of it, therefore it was in their Power to exercife thofe Gifts and miraculous Powers afterwards in Confirmation of Error and Falfliood. For fince the Exercife of thofe Powers, particularly that of working Miracles, depended not merely on them- felves, and on their own Pleafure, but on the pecu- liar Impulfe and Operation of the Spirit ; then on Suppofition that they intended to work a Miracle for the Confirmation of any Doftrine oppofite to CJmJlianity, we may be fure that the Spirit would not give them his Afliftance to confirm a Falfliood. Nor can this Writer prove what he confidently af- ferts, and takes for granted, that any falfe Teachers in that Age did by Virtue of any extraordinary
other more ufeful, Jiis'ii. ii. x. 46. xix. 6. 3. All thefe Operations are afcribed to God. There are dinjerjities of Opera- tions, but it is the fame God that ivorketh all in all, l Cor. xii. 6. 4. As the communicating thofe Gifts at firft, fo the continu- ing of them to thofe Perfons that liad received them, depended on the wife and good Pleafure of God. So that it doth not follow that when Men once had thofe extraordinary Powers, they were always to have them, let them ufe them to what Purpofes they would. It was Hill in the Power of him that gave them to con- tinue or increafe them, or to withdraw them from thofe that fhould endeavour to abufe them to the Subverfion of the Gofpel they were defigned to promote. And feveral Paffages of Scrip- ture plainly intimate that the Spirit in his extraordinary Gifts as well as in his more ordinary gracious Operations, might be quenched, and provoked to withdraw : and on the other Hand, that Perfons by making a right Ufe of thofe Gifts they had, and applying to God by Prayer with Faith and Humility, might ob- tain farther Degrees of them, and excel in them more and more. See i Cor. xii, 31. xiv, i. i 'TheJJT. v. 19. i Tim. iv. 14. 2 Tim. i. 6.
Gifts
3^4 Attejlation to Chrijlianity by the
Gifts or Powers of the Holy Ghoft communicated to them, work Miracles to corxfirm the falfe Doc- trines they preached. Our Saviour indeed makes a Suppofition, Matt. vii. 21, 22, 23. of Perlbns prophejying^ and doing many wonderful works in his Name, who yet fliould be rejefted by him at the, laft Day as evil Doers. But this is a very different Cafe from that which the Author puts. For our Saviour doth not there fpeak of falfe Teachers work- ing Miracles in Confirmation of a Falfhood, but of Perfons that preached the true Do6trine of Chrift, and wrought Miracles in Confirmation of it, and were ready to plead this as a Kind of Merit, as if it was fufRcient to entitle them to Heaven, tho' they did not apply themfelves to the Practice of real Godlinefs and Virtue. This is the Cafe our Saviour fuppofes, and it furniflies us with this important Leflbn, that no external Privileges or Attainments, how fplendid foever, and no Knowledge of the Dodrine of the Gofpel, tho* accompanied with the moft extraordmary Gifts, will recommend a Man to the Favour of God, or entitle him to that fu- ture BlefTednels, without real Holinefs of Heart and Life. And it is a Suppofition that may be made, that Perfons might have their Minds extraordinari- ly enlightened in the Knowledge of Chriftianity, and be inwardly convinced of the Truth of the Doc- trine of Jefus, and preach that Truth to others, and yet thro' the Prevalency of fome corrupt Ap- petite, it might not have its proper fandlifying In- fluence upon their own Hearts and Lives. In which Cafe, their being enabled to work Miracles in Confirmation of the Doflrine they taught, might be a Proof to others of the T»ruth of that Doctrine, tho* it was not a Security to themfelves concerning their own Salvation, which depended entirely upon their own perfonal Obedience and Holinefs.
With regard to the falfe Apoflles and judaifmg Teachers, who oppofed St. Paul^ and taught the ab-
folute
extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft. 3 8 j
fblute Neceflity of Circumcifion, and the Obferva- tion of the Mofaical Rites in order to Mens being juftified and faved ; it cannot be proved that any of them wrought Miracles in Confirmation of that Dodtrine. The contrary feems plain from that Queftion the Apoftle propofeth to the Galatians. Recehed ye the Spirit hy the Works of the Law^ or by the hearing of Faith ? He that miniftreth the Spi- rit to you^ and worketh Miracles among you^ doth he it by the Works of the Law, or by the Hearing of Faith? Gal. iii. 2, 5. Would he have faid this^.. if Miracles have been wrought, and the Gifts of the Spirit communicated in Confirmation of the Doc- trine he was oppofing ? He appeals to themfelves as in a Matter of Fa<5t that could not be contefted j that Miracles were only wrought, and the extraor- dinary Gifts of the Spirit communicated in Attefta- ftation of that true Dodlrine of the Gofpel which he had preached, and not of that other Gofpel, as he calleth it, which the falfe Teachers would have impofed upon them. And accordingly in all the Accounts that are given in the NewTeftament, and particularly in the Writings of the Apoftle Paul^ concerning the falfe Teachers and Seducers in the apoftolical Age, it is never fo much as Once inti- mated, that they exercifed the extraordinary Gifts and Powers of the Holy Ghoft, particularly that of working Miracles, in confirmation of their Scheme of Error and falfe Doftrine. He reprefents them as Perfons of great Cunning, who ly good Words, and fair Speeches deceived the Hearts of the Simple, Rom. xvi. 8. as great Pretenders to Excellency of Speech and Wifdom^ and making an Oftentation of Learning and Philofophy, in Oppofition to whom he declareth concerning himfelf, that his Preaching was not with enticing Words of Mdr^s Wifdom, but in Demonjlration of the Spirit and bf Power, that is^ it was accompanied with the Power of the Holy Ghoft,, which theirs was not^ i Cor.
C c xi, I .
386 Atteftation to Chrijlianity by the
xi. 1,4, 5. Tee alfo i Cor. iv. 19, 20. He reprc- fents his Oppofers as commending themfehes, but himfelf as one whom the Lord commended : that is, by his Gifts and Graces vouchfafed to him, and the Power attending on his Miniftry. They glorified after the FleJJj^ they boafted that they were He- brews^ and called themfelves Apcjlks^ &c. 2 Cor, xi, 18, 22, 23. Phil.m. 4, 5, 6 : But as to him- felf he declares, that tndy the Signs of an Apojlle were wrought hy him in all Patience^ in Signs ^ and Wonders, and mighty Tweeds, 2 Cor. xii. 12. So elfewhere he reprefents thofe falfe Teachers as en- deavouring to beguile Men with enticing Words, and to fpoil them thro* Philofopbf and vain Deceit, thro^ the 'Traditions of Men -, and making a fhew of Wif- dom, in Will-Worfhip, and Humility, Col. ii. 4, 8, 18, 23, And in his Epiftles to Timothy and Titus, where he particularly defcribes them, they are reprefented as giving heed to Jewifh Fables, and given to vain Babblings and Oppofitions of Science falfly fo called. But there is not one Word in all that he faith concerning them of their working Mi- racles, or abufing tKe extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft to confirm their falfe Do6lrines. The fame Obfervation may be made on the Account the Apoftle Peter gives of the falfe Teachers men- tioned in his fecond Epiftle, whom he reprefents as thro' Coveteoufnefs with feigned Words, making Mer- chandize of Men, and Jpeaking great fwelling Words of Vanity -, and alluring Men thro' the Ijifts of the Flefh, and thro* much Wantonnefs, and by promifmg them Liberty. And Jude gives pretty much the fame Defcription of them : and among other Charadlers ■reprefents them as fenfual, harjing not the Spirit, ver. 19. i. e. they were deflitute of the Holy Spirit of God both in his Graces, and in his extraordinary Gifts. This Author therefore has no Reafon for aflferting with fo much [^confidence as he does, that the falfe Prophets and Teachers had the extraor- dinary
extraordinary Gifts of (be Holy Ghofl. 3 87
dinary Gifts and Powers of the Holy Ghofl in the Apof- tolick Age as well as the true^ Pref. p. 9. which he there lays down as a Principle capable of being maintained againft all Oppofers.
I think the Obfervations that have been made, deftroy the Force of all that he advances to fhew that no ArguVnent can be brought to eftablifh the Truth and divine Authority of the Gofpel Revela- tion from the extraordinary Gifts and miraculous Powers of the Holy Ghoft in the Apoftolick Age. Thofe Gifts and Powers were evidently fupernatu- ral, above all the Art or Power of any Man, or of all the Men upon Earth, and Ihewed a very extraordinary Interpofition. And as it was only in the Name of a crucified and rifen Jefus^ and upon their profeflTing their Faith in him, and becoming his Difciples, that any received thofe Gifts and Powers, fo the imparting thofe Gifts of the Holy Ghoft as thus circumftanced, was an illuftrious Con- firmation of the chriftian Faith and Dodrine pub- lilhed to the World by the Apoftles of our Lord. For it muft be confidered that it was by the laying en of the Hands of the Apoftles, that the Holy Ghoft was ordinarily communicated. See ^^^ viii. 14 — 18. xix. 6. Rom. i. 11. and where it was given immediately from heaven without the laying on of the Apoftle's Hands, as in the Cafe of Come- liusy and thofe that were with him, A^s x. 44. yet ftill it was in Confirmation of the Do<5trinc taught by the Apoftles, As they were properly Ipeaking immediately commiffioned by Chrift him- felf to be the authorized Publifliers of his Doc- trines and Laws to the World, fo they were emi- nently diftinguiftied above all other Teachers in that Age, and had an Authority which no other Teach- ers had ; and that not only becaufe they had thofe extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit of which others alio were made Partakers, in a far greater Abun- dance, and in a more excellent Meafure and De-
Cc 2 gree.
388 Attejlation to Chrifiianity by the
gree. See 1 Cor.xiv. 18. 2 Cor. xii. 12 : But they were mvefted with fome extraordinary Powers of a peculiar Kind which no other Perfons had, and which were eipecially defigned to confirm their di- vine MifTion and Authority, and to engage Men to pay an entire Submiflion and Regard to what they dehvered in the Name of Chr)Jl. Such was the Power already mentioned of commtmicating the Holy Ghoft in his extraordinary Gifts by the laying on of their Hands. What could have a greater Tendency to convince the World that God had fent them, and that the Dodrine which they pub- lifhed in the Name of Chrijl was true and of di- vine Original, than this, that after having inftru6l- ed Perfons in the Chriftian Faith, they could by laying on of their Hands upon them in his Name, communicate fome or other of thofe extraordinary Gifts and Powers in fuch Meafures and Degrees as feemed fit to the Holy Ghofl:, who diftributed them according to his Will, in Teftimony of the Truth and Divinity of the Do6lrine they had taught them. And a moft illuftrious Teftimony it was, and which none of the falfe Apofl:les or Teachers of that Age ever did or ever could give in Confirmation of their Doftrines. We may alfo reckon among the extraordinary Powers pecuhar to the Apoftles, and which gave them a great Superiority above falfe Teachers, the Power of infliSfing bodily Pu- mjhments in fome extraordinary Cafes, fuch was the ftriking Elymas the Sorcerer with Blindnefs, A5ts xiii. 8 — 12. And fome fuch thing is probably in- tended by that delivering unto Satan for the Deflruc- tion of the Fle/h^ that the Spirit might be faved in the Day of the Lord,Jefus \ which the Apoille Ipeaks of as a Power committed unto him by the Lard Jefus^ I Cor, v. 4, 5. fee alio i 'Tim. i. 19, 20. which feems to relate, as the Ancients explain it, to fome Pain., or Difeafe, or grievous Corredion in- filled on the Flelh or Body, by the Sharpnefs of
which
extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft. 389
which the guilty Perfon might be awakened to a Senle of his Sin, and brought to a true Repentance for it. And perhaps fomething of this Kind is what the Apoftle means, when he threatens thofe amongft the Corinthians that had not repented of the great Sins they had committed, but ftill per- fifted in them, and in an Oppofition to his Autho- rity, that if he came again he would not fpare •, and Ipeaks of his ujing Sharpnefs according to the Power which the Lord had given him for Edification and not for DeJlru5fion, and of his having in a Readi^ nefs to revenge all Difobedience, fee 2 Cor. x. 6. xii. 20, 21. xiii. 2, 3, 10. Tho* he there intimates that he was loth to ufe this Power without necefli- ty, and that he could not do any Thing, he could not ufe this Power he fpoke of, againjt the T'ruth, hut for the T^ruth^ ver. 7, 8. This Power like that of Miracles was not to be exercifed by the Apoftles whenever they themfelves pleafed, and merely to gratify their own private Paflions j but was exercifed by the extraordinary Impulfe and DiretfHon of the Holy Ghoft, whenever it feemed fit to God that it fhould be exercifed to his Qlory, and for promoting the Interefts of important Truth, and real Religion and Godlinefs.
This alfo feems to have been the proper Defign of that remarkable Judgment that was inflifted up- on Ananias and Sapphira, who both fell down dead by an immediate Stroke from Heaven at the Re- buke of the Apoftle Peter, for lying to the Holy Ghojl. This was wifely ordered in the Beginning of the Gofpel Qiipenfation, to procure a greater Regard to the Apoftles who were mean in their outward Appearance. Their being thus enabled to know the Secrets of the Heart, and the fignal Pu- nilhment that was inflifled on thofe that had form- ed a Defign to impofe upon them, was a remark- able Proof that they were indeed guided by the Spirit that fearcheth all T^hings, and tended to give
C c 3 a greater
39© Atteflation toChriJlianity, &c.
a greater Weight to the Teftimony they gave, and the Do6trine they taught in the Name of thrift. Thus it appears that as it was of great Importance to eftabhfh the Credit and Authority of the Apof- tles^ who were the principal appointed JVitneJfes of Chrift, and the authorized Pubhlhers of his Doc- trine to the "World, fo it pleafed God in his great Wifdom and Goodnefs to take care of this many ways. And to fuppofe that he would do all this, and interpofe in fo extraordinary a Manner, and by fuch wonderful Gifts and Powers to confirm their Authority, and to bear witnefs to the Doftrine and Religion they taught, and yet not guide and aflift them in delivering that Doftrine and Reli- gion, fo as to preferve them from Error in teach- ing and publifhing it to the World, is abfurd and too inconjiflent a, Condufl to be attributed to the wife and good God. Accordingly the Chriftians in general paid a pecuHar Regard both in that firft Age, and ever fince, to the Apoftles of our Lord ; their continuing in the Chriftian Faith is expreffed by their continuing in the Apoftles Do^rine^ Ads ii. 42 . And Believers are reprefented as huilt upon the Foundation of the Apoftles and Prophets, Eph. ii. 20. And God hath fo ordered it, that the Laws and Doctrines they delivered and publilhed in the Name of Chrift, and which were confirmed by fuch glo- rious Atteftations, were committed by themfelves to Writing for the lafting Ufe and Inftrudtion of the Church in fucceeding Generations, under the Gui- dance and Infpiration of the lame divine Spirit of Truth, that aiTifted them in publifhing the Gofpel, and enabled them to work fuch illuftrious Miracles in Confirmation of it.
CHAR
( 391 )
CHAP. XIV.
^e Gofpel taught hy all the Apojiles was the fame. The Author*s Account of the Jewifh Gofpel, preached by them, falfe and groundkfs. The pretended Dif- ference between St. Paul and the other Apojiles, concerning the Obligation of the Law of Mofes on the Jewifh Converts, examined. None of the Apoflles urged the Obferuation of that Law, as neceffary to Jujlification and Acceptance with God, under the Gofpel ; thd* they all judged it lawful to obferve the Mofaick Rites for a Seafon. The Wtf dom and Conjijiency of this their Condu^, and the entire Harmony between St. Paul and the other Apofiles in this Matter, fhewn. The pretended Difference between them relating to the Law of Profelytifm to be urged on the Gentile Con- 'verts. The Decree of the Apojlolical Council at Jerufalem, confidered ; and the Reafons and Grounds of that Decree inquired into. No Proof that the Apojlle Paul difapproved or counter-aSfed that Decree. The Condu^ of that Apojlle at his Trial, juflified.
AN Y one that impartially confiders the New Teftament, will find one and the fame uniform Scheme of Religion going thro* the whole. It appears from the Writings of the Apoflles, and the Account that is given us of their Preaching, that they all pubhfhed the fame Dodlrines concerning the Attributes, Perfections and Providence of God, and the pure and fpiritual Worfhip that is to be rendered to him, concerning the Methods of our Redemption and Reconciliation by Jefus Chrifl, concerning the Defign and End of his coming into the World, and of his grievous Sufferings and Death, which they all reprefent as a Propitiation
C c 4 for
392 ^e Apostles
for our Sins, concerning his Refurreftion from the Dead, his Afcenfion and Exaltation at the Right Hand of God, his perpetual Mediation and Inter- cefTion, and his fecond Coming to raife the Dead, and to judge the World, and concerning the eter- nal Retributions that Ihall then be difpenfed unto all Men according to their Behaviour in the Body. They all publifhed the fame pure and excellent Laws and Precepts, the fame refined Morals, far exceeding, by the Author's own ConfelTion, what any others have advanced, and the fame noble and powerful Motives for ingaging Men to the Obfer- vation of thefe Precepts. They all taught the fame gracious Terms of Acceptance, and made the fame merciful Offers in the Name of God of Pardon, and Grace, and eternal Life upon Condition of Faith and Repentance, and new Obedience •, and denounced the fame awful Threatnings of eternal Mifery and Ruin againft thofe that fhould perfill in obflinate Impenitency and Difobedience. Thefe Things they all agreed in, the Apoftle Peter as well as the Apoftle Paul •, the Gofpel they all preached which they profeffed to have received from the Lord Jefus, and by the Infpiration of his Spirit, and which they confirmed with Signs following, was en- tirely the fame, and perfeflly harmonious and con- fiflent in all its Parts. But this our moral Philofo- pher will not allow. He endeavours to fhew tha^ they differed ampng themf elves about the moji concern- ing Points of Revelation. And he thinks this is an evident Demonfiration thai they, were not infallible^ infomuch that had they pretended to any fuch 'Thing, they muji openly, and in the Face of the whole IVorld have contradihed themf elves in Fa^, p. 80, 81. And indeed in one Point there would be a very great ^nd effential Difference between them if he could prove it, viz. that whereas the Apoftle Paul preached Jefus Chrifl as the Saviour of the World, {)Oth Jews and Gmtiles ; the other ApofUes believed " " ■ ' • • in
farther vindicated. 39^
in him, and preached him only as a temporal Mef- fiah and the Saviour of the Jm}s only.
After having obferved, that the Jewifh 'Populace or Mobility had generally a Notion of Jefus Chrift as their Meffiah, national Deliverer^ or Refiorer of the Kingdom^ he exprelsly aflerts, that his own Difciples had all along adhered to him upon this vain hope, and even after his Refure£iion, they never preached Jefus as the Meffiah or Chrift in another Senfe, that is, in any other Senfe than that of the Jewifh Populace, as one that was to ereft a temporal Kingdom, and was to be the national Deliverer of the Jews. He adds, that no Chriflian Jew ever believed in Jefus as the common Saviour of the World without jfiftinc- tion between Jew and Gentile. 'This is St. Paul'.? Gojpel which he had received, as he declared, by imme- diate Revelation from Chrifl himfelf ; and had never advifed or confulted with any of the Jewifh Apcfiles about it, as well knowing that they would never come
into it, fee p. 350 354. fee alfo^. 361. And
after having afferted, that the Jews that adhered to Jefus as the Meffiah after his Refurreftion, all ex- pe^ed that he would foon come again, with a fuffi- cient Power from Heaven to dejiroy the Roman Em^ pire, to rejlore the Nation, and fet up his Kingdom at Jerufalem ; he adds, that this was properly the Jew- ifh Gofpel which Chriffs own Difciples firmly adhered to and preached. And therefore he declares, that he takes this to have been the plain Truth of the Mat- ter, that Chrijlianity was nothing elfe but a political Fa^ion among the Jews ; fome of them receiving Je- fus as the Meffiah or Rejlorer of the Kingdom, and others rejecting him under that CharaBer, fee p. 32S. and p. 354. And again, p. 329. he tells us, that the Chriftian Jews received nothing new on their be- coming Chrijliam, but the fmgle Article, that Jefus was the Meffiah in the literal Senfe of the Prophets, i. e. in their own national Senfe. This was properly the whole of that Gofpel, which according to him,
Chrifl's
394 ^^^ Apostles
Chrjfl's own Difciples that had been all along with him in his perfonal Miniftry taught and publifhed to the World.
If we were not a little ufed to this Writer*s way of faying Things, we might be furprized at his afferting with fo much Confidence a Thing which every one that can read the New Teftament may eafily know to be falfe ; and it is fcarce poffi- ble to fuppofe that he himfelf is fo ignorant as not to be fenfible that it is fo. Not to inlarge upon Refleflions which fuch a Conduct as this would juftify, I fhall produce a few out of many PafTages that will clearly fhew the Fallhood of what he hath advanced. When St. Peter, whom our Author reprefents as at the Head of the Chrijlian Jews m oppofition to St. Paul, preached up Jefus as the Mejfiah, the Lord and Chrift, immediately after our Lord's Afcenfion, and urged the Jews to believe in him ; the Idea he gives of Chrift as the Meffiah is this, that God had raifed up his Son Jefus to blefs them in turning them away from their Iniquities ; and had exalted him to he a Prince and a Saviour y not a temporal Prince or national Deliverer, but to give Repentance unto Ifrael and RemiJJion of Sins, fee ^^jii. 38. iii. 19, 26. v. 35. When he was fent to preach the Gofpel to Cornelim, the Account he gives him of what God had commanded the Apoftles to preach is this, he commanded us to preach unto the People, and to teftify that it is he [the Lord Jefus] which war ordained of God to be the Judge of ^iick and Doad. 'To him give all the Prophets witnefs, that thro* his Name, whofoever be- Ueveth in him fhall receive Remiffion of Sins, A<5ls X. 42, 43. Where it is evident that he reprefents the Benefits that were to be obtained thro* the Mef ftah as of a fpiritual Nature •, and declares, that this was the Idea the Prophets gave of the Mefftah, that he was to be the Author of a fpiritual Salvation . And in \:htfirji Chapter of his f^ji Epiftle he fets forth
in
farther vindicated. 39^
in the moft noble and admirable ExprefTions the Greatnefs of that Salvation that was to be obtained thro' Jefus Chrijl, as confifting not in a temporal national Deliverance of the Jews, of which he gives not the leaft hint ; but in an eternal heavenly Hap- pineis, the Profpefts of which filled the Minds of true Chriftians with a fpiritual and divine Joy under the greateft prefent Affliftions and Sufferings : and he reprefents this Salvation of their Souls as the End of their Faith ; and that this was the Salvation of which the Prophets had Ipoken when they tejiifed beforehand the Sufferings of Chrijl, and the Glories that fhould follow, fee i Pet. i. 2. ii. 25. v. 10. The fame great Apoftle before the whole Council oi the Apoftles, and Elders, and Brethren at Jerufalem^ declareth exprefsly, fpeaking of the Gentiles, God which knoweth the Hearts, bore them Witnefs, giving them the Holy Gh^Ji, even as he did unto us : and put no Difference between us and them, purifying their Hearts by Faith, Acfls xv. 8, 9, And he adds, ver. 2 1 . We believe that thro* the Grace of the Lord Jefus Chrifl we Jhall befavedevenasthey. No Words can be more decifive to fhew, that Jefus Cbriji was regarded as the Author of a fpiritual Salvation and that in this Salvation all true Believers were to be equal Shares without Diftinclion between Jews and Gentiles ; which is the very Gofpel the Apoftle Paul publifhed, and as exprels and full as any thing that was faid by that great Apoftle of the Gentiles. St. James, who was another of the chief Apoftles of the Circumcifion, perfe6bly agrees with St. Peter in this, and fhews by a Paflage from one of the Prophets, that it was foretold concerning the Meffiah, that the Gentiles fhould feek after the
Lord, and be called by his Name, ver. 14 17.
The Apoftle John, whom our Author reprefents as one of the chief Teachers of what he calls the Jewifh Gofpel, after having declared, that he that believeth not God, hath made him a Liar, becaufe he
heliiveth
39^ ^he Apostle s
believeth not the Record that God hath given of his Son ; proceeds to fhew what that Record is : not that God would fend him to deliver the Jews only, and reflore the Kingdom to them ; but he repre- fents this -as the Subftance of the Gofpel Record, that God hath given unto us eternal Life, and this Life is in his Son, i John v. 9, 10. In the fame Epiftle he declares, that we have an Advocate with the Father, Jefus Chriji the Righteous: and he is the Propitiation for our Sins, and not for ours only, that is, the Sins of us believing Jews, but for the Sins of the whole World, ch. ii. I, 2. Can any thing poflibly be more ex- prefs and full to Ihew that Chrift is the Saviour of all Men, Jews and Gentiles, without Diftinftion ? The fame Apoftle reprefents the Chriji, and the Saviour of the World, as Terms of the fame Signification, John iv. 42. and informs us, that Chrift himfelf declared, that Godfo loved the World, not the Jews only •, but the World of Jews and Gentiles, that he gave his only- begotten Son, that whofoever believeth in him Jhould not perifh but have everlajiing Life. Where the Salvation of which Chriji is the Author is repre- fented as a fpiritual and eternal Salvation and Hap- pinels to be conferred on all thofe without Diftinc- tion that fhould fincerely believe and obey him, Johnm. 16. And again, he acquaints us that Chriji declared •, Other Sheep I have which are not of this Fold ; them alfo I muff bring, and they Jhall hear my Voice, ajtd there Jhall be one Fold and one Shepherd, Chap. x. 1 6. Can any thing more clearly Ihew that our Lprd Jefus Chrift would bring Jews and Gentiles into one Fold, and that they fhould both make up one Church under him as their com- mon Shepherd and Saviour ? And could he that reprefents this as our Lord's own Senfe, look upon him as a Saviour of the Jews only ? See alfo, Chap, xk 51, 52. which is no lefs exprefs to this Purpofe. And Chap. i. 29. St. Matthew, who was another of the Jewi/h Apo.ftles, reprefents Chrift ^s exprefsly
declaring
farther vindicated 397
declaring that the Jews^ the Children of the Kingdom^ fhould be caft out, and that many jhould come from the Eajl, and from the Weft, and fit down with Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob in the Kingdom of Gody Matt. viii. 11, 12. And he appHes to Chrift the Prophecies relating to the Mejfiah, that he fhould fhew Judgment to the Gentiles : and that in his Name Jhould the Gentiles trujl, ch. xii. 17, 18, 22. The fame Apoftle and Evangelifl, inftead of reprefenting Chriji as promifing to come and reftore the King- dom to the Jewifh Nation, and deliver them from their Enemies, inform us, that he declared to the Jews, that the Kingdom of God fhould be taken from, them, and given to a Nation bringing forth the Fruits thereof, ch. xxi. 43. And that he foretold the utter Deflrudion of their City and Temple, and the dreadful Calamities that fhould befal them, chap. xxi, 41. xxii. 6, 7. and xxiv. And he reprefents him as commifTioning his Apoftles to go teach all Nations -, or as the Evangelifl Mark has it, to preach the Gofpel to every Creature.
It appears from this brief Account, that the Gof- pel which the Apoflle Faul preached concerning Chrifl's being the Author of a fpiritual eternal Sal- vation, and the Saviour of all Men, Jews and Gen- tiles, that really believed and obeyed him, was taught clearly and fully by the other Apoftles. Nor is there any one Word in any of their Writings, concerning that which he pretends was the whole of the Gofpel they preached, that is, concerning Chrift's reftoring the Kingdom to the Jews in their national Senfe. And when they write to the believ- ing Jews, they never once comfort them with the hope of a national Reftoration and Deliverance, which yet is the only Thing he pretends they had in view. But there are many PalTages in their Writings that point to the End of the Jewifh Po- lity as approaching. What our Author pretends to offer from the Book of the Revelation fhall be con- fidered afterward. This
398 'The Apostles
This may luffice to fhew the ablblute Falfhood of the new Golpel, the Author would put upon the World for the Golpel taught by our Saviour's own Apoftles, and which he calls the Jewijh Gofpel in oppofition to tlie Gofpel preached by St. Paul. A great deal of his bitter and malicious Invedlives in the latter part of his Book is built upon this Sup- pofition : by which he undoubtedly intends to ex- pofe the New Teftament Writers, but really ex- pofes himfelf, as a Writer that has the Confidence to afTert any Thing, how falfe foever, which he thinks may ferve the Caufe he has undertaken.
Let us now proceed to Ibme other Things he offers to fhew the Contradidlion and Inconfiflen- cies between St. Paul and the other Apoftles. He faith, that " the great concerning Debate of that " Time was reduced to thefe two Queftions : " Firfl, Whether the Jewijh Converts were ftill " obliged in Point of Religi'on, to obey the whole " Law.? And, fecondly. Whether tht Gentle Con- " verts, as a Matter of Religion and Confcience, " were bound to comply with the Mofaick Law " of Profelytifm, as the necefTary Condition upon *' which the Chriftian Jews were to hold Com- " munion with them } In both thefe Points, the " Apoftles, Elders, and Brethren at Jerufalem in " confequence of their Decree, flood to the Afhr- *' mative, while Paul as flifBy maintained the Ne- " gative againfl them, declaring that he received " this, not from Man, or by any intermediate " Conveyance, but by immediate Revelation. But " the reft of the Apoftles it feems never had any " fuch Revelation, nor could Paul ever convince " them. Nor could this Point of Difference be " determined by Miracles. For Peter wrought as " many and great Miracles as St. Paul, and per- " haps St. Paul having all the reft againft him, " might have been very much diftanced as to any ** Proof from Miracles.'* And then he pretends
that
farther vindicated. 399
that the Controverfy rofe fo high at laft, that it came to an abfolute Separation between St. Paul and the other Apoftles. He labours this Point in many Words, and very conflifedly, from p. 54. to p. %i. and returns to it again, p. ^61^ i^c.
With regard to the firft Point pretended to be in Difference between St. Paul and the other Apoftles, viz. " Whether the Jewijh Converts were ftill " obliged in Point of Religion and Confcience to " obey the whole Law : he reprefents this as the *' ftanding Controverfy between St. Paul and the " Apoftles and Teachers of the Circumcifion, who '< obeyed the Law as a Law of Righteoufnefs, or <' as a neceflary Part of Religion, and Means of «« Juftification with God ; which Paul never would « fubmit to, tho' he could comply with the Law « in his political Capacity as the Law of his Coun- *« try." That " when he preached in Afta and *' Greece, he ventured to advance a new Dodrine *« of his own. Wherever he came into the Jewijh " Synagogues, he endeavoured to convince the " Jews that the ceremonial Law of Mofes could " be no farther binding upon any fuch Jews, as " fhould embrace Chriftianity, being out of the " Confines of Judea •, for that the ceremonial ** Law having been really typical and figurative " of the great Chriftian Sacrifice, was done away by " the Sacrifice and Death of Chrift the only true ** Propitiation for Sin •, and confequently could be « no longer obliging to the Jews any more than to " the Gentiles, who were now both together to " form a new fpiritual Society, not under the Ju- " rifdidtion of Mofes, but of Chrift alone. That " herein St. P^«/had not one Apoftle, Prophet or *' Teacher of that Age who heartily joined with him " except Timothy ; and tho* Peter, Barnabas, &c. *' joined with him in preaching the Gofpel for a " time, yet they all fell off from him afterward " upon this very Quarrel, becaufe they could not
" aG:ree
400 TZ*^ Apostles
•' agree to abfolve the Jewijh Converts from their *' Obedience to the Law as the Law of God, or *' as a Matter of Religion and Confcience,'* fee
p. 54, 71; 72.
All this in which the Author pretends to keep clofe to the Accounts that are given us in the ^s of the Apoftles, and in St. Paul's Epijiles, is ftrange- ly mifreprefented. He feigned a Controverfy be- tween the Apoftle Paul and the other Apoftles which never fubfifted at all. There was indeed a very great Controverfy not between St. Paulsmd the other Apoftles (for there was an entire Harmony between them in the Golpel they preached) but between that great Apoftle and certain Jewijh Teachers or falfe Apoftles, who were for urging the Obfervation of the ceremonial Law upon the Gentile Converts, as abfolutely neceflary to Juftification and Acceptance with God. Againft thefe St. Paul every where difcovereth a great Zeal. And in this he had all the other Apoftles of our Lord evidently on his fide. When they were all met together in the Jerufalem Council, they pafled a very fevere Cenfure upon them as troubling the Churches, and fuhverting Men's Souls, A6ls xv. 24, and at the fame time call Paul and Barnabas their beloved Brethren, and give them this high Encomium, that they were Men that had hazarded their Lives for the Name of our Lord Jefus Chrift, ver. 25, 26.
The great Dodrine which that Apoftle infifteth upon in oppofition to thofe falfe Teachers, viz. That wc are juftified freely by divine Grace thro' the Redemption that is in Jefus Chrift ; and that it is by Faith in him that we obtain Remiflion of Sins and eternal Life : this Dodrine the other Apoftles taught as well as he, as is evident from the Pafiag^s that have been above cited. Particularly the Apof- tle Peter declareth this exprefsly in the Council at Jerufalem in the Name of them all, ABs xv. 11. And when the Apoftle Paul reproved Peter at
Antiockf
farther vindicated, 40 X
Antioch^ he reprefents the Doftrine of their being juftified not by the Works of the Law, but by Faith in Jefus Chriji, as an uncontefted Truth in which he, and Peter, and all true Believers were agreed^ Gal. ii. 15, 16, ^c. And whereas this Writer re- prefents Sz. Paul as preaching in the Synagogues of the Jews that Jefus Chrift was the only true Pro- pitiation for Sin, with a view to Ihew that there- fore the ceremonial Law, having been only typical and figurative of the great Chriftian Sacrifice, was done away by the Sacrifice and Death of Chrift ; it is certain that the other Apoftles preached this Dodrine of Chrift*s being the only true Propitiation for Sin as fully and exprefsly as the Apoftle Patd. The Paflages to this Purpofe are well known *. Nor do they ever once diredl the Views of their Chriftian Converts to the legal Sacrifices as Expia- tions for Sin. And it ought to be obferved, that tho' Peter, and James and John, whom this Author reprefents as the Heads of the Chriftian Jews, wrote Epiftles to them abounding with Exhortations and Counfels of various Kinds, in which they every where animate them to a fteady Adherence to the Doftrines and Laws of the Gofpel, yet they never lb much as once exhort them to adhere to the Obfervation of the Law of Mofes, and of the Rites there enjoined. Is it potTible to account for this on this Writer's Suppofition, that they looked upon the Jewijh Converts as obliged to obey the Law of Mofes, as the necefiary Means of Juftifica- tion and Acceptance with God ; and that they had a ftanding Controverly on this Head with the Apof- tle Paul, who taught the contrary i* And if this had been the Cafe, can it be fuppofed that St, Peter in his fecond and laft Epiftle, written a little before his Death, would have called St. Paul his beloved Brother^ or have recommended all his Epijlles to the Chriftian Converts as written with great IVifdom,^
* See I Pet. i. 19, 20. ii. 21, 24. iii. 18. i John i. 7. ii- 2. iv. 10. John i. 29.
D d and
402 ^he Apostles
and have reckoned them among the Scriptures^ that is, among the Writings that were divinely infpired ? See 2 Pet. iii. 15, 16. After the Apoftle Paul h3.d, according to our Author, been preaching through- out ^a and Greece, that the Law of Mofes was no longer obligatory on the Jews, we find him go- ing up and faluting the Church at Jerufalem : and not the leaft Hint of any Diflatisfadion, but a per- fedt Harmony between them, ji£fs xviii. 21, 22. And afterwards at his laft going up to Jerufalem the Brethren there received him, and them that were with him gladly. St. James, and all the Elders that were with him treated him with great Kindnels, and called him Brother. And their advifing him what Courfe to take to remove the Prejudices fome •of the Jewijh Converts had entertained againft him, Jfhews their great Tenderneis towards him, and how far they were from looking upon him as an Enemy : and at the fame time it feemeth plainly to fhew that what they advifed him to do was not from any Opinion they had of the abfolute Obligation of the Law of Mofes in Point of Religion and Confcience^ but for avoiding Offence : in which their Condufl was perfectly agreeable to his own, y^^s xxi. 17 — 25. The fame Refieftion may be made upon •St. Peter's Condu6t at Antioch. For it appeareth from what St. Paul faid to him, that before cer- tain Perfons came from Jerufalem he did eat freely with the Gentiles, and being a Jew lived after the Manner of the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews : tho* he afterwards declined this, for fear of offending fome of the Jews that came from Jerufalem : which fhews that the Principle he went upon in obferving the Law, as well as the Apoftle Paul, was the Fear of giving Offence, and not any Opinion he had of its abfolute Obligation in Point of Con- fcience. Gal. ii. 12, 14. And St. Paul exprefsly tells us, that when he communicated the Gofpel which he preached among the Gentiles to the Apoftles at Jerufalem, they faw that the Gofpel of the Uncircurrh
cijim
farther 'vhidicafed. 403
cijion was committed unto him^ as the Go/pel of the Circumcijion was unto Peter : for that he that wrought effe^ually in Peter to the Apojllejhip of the Circumci- /lon^ the fame was mighty in him (Paul) towards the Gentiles, And that accordingly, Feter^ James,, and John gave to hifn and Barnabas the Right-Hand of Fellow/hip^ that they jfhould go unto the Heathen, and themfelves unto the Circumcijion^ Gal. ii. 2 — 9. Where nothing is more plain than that the other Apoftles approved the Do6lrine which St. Paul had preached, and owned his divine Miflion : and that it was the fame Goipel that was taught by Paul and Barnabas^ and by the other ApoJlles,, only called the Gofpel of the Uncircumcifion as preached, among the Gentiles,, and the Gofpel of the Circum- cijion as preached to the Jews. Taking all together, it doth not appear that there was the leaft Difference between St. Faul and the other Apoftles with regard to the Obligation of the Mofaick Law. Neither he nor they looked upon it as abfolutely obligatory in Point of Conlcience, and as neceflary to our Juftification and Acceptance under the Gof- pel, tho' both he and they looked upon it to be ftill lawful to obferve the Mofaick Rites in Compliance with weak Confciences. So that there was a perfeo; Harmony between them in Doflrine and Pradice. This Author, in order to make it appear that there was an Oppofition between St. Paul and th^ other Apofiks,, gives a very wrong Reprefentation of his Conduft j as if in all the Synagogues where he preached in Afia Minor and Greece y he abfolved the JewiJh Converts from all Obligation to the Mo- faick Law ; and made the abfolute Abrogation of that Law to Jews as well as Gentiles^ the conflant 6ubje<5l of his Preaching. Whereas if we examine the Account that is given us of St. Paul's preach- ing in the Synagogues of Ajia Minor and Greece,, nothing of this appears. We read that he preached ■to the Jews in their Synagogues that Jefus was tl>e
D d 2 Chrifi
404 'The Apostles
Chrijl the Son of God, that he died for our Sins ac- cording to the Scripture, that he rofe again from the Dead, that thro' Faith in him Remiflion of Sins was to be obtained. He preached Repentance to- wards God, and Faith in our Lord J ejus Chriji*. And if the Jews to whom he preached were brought to acknowledge that Jefus was the ChriJl, and to look to him for Salvation in a hearty Compliance with the felf-denying Terms of the Gofpel-Cove- nant, it doth not appear by any one Inftance in the whole New Teftament, that he was at all trouble- fome to them about the Obfervation of the Mofaick Rites ; he left them (till to follg^w their old Cuftoms, till by a farther Light, and a more thorough Know- ledge and Acquaintance with the Gofpel, theyfhould fee that they were free.
Here it is proper to obferve that the judaizing Chriftians in that Age who profeffed to believe in Chrifr, and yet continued to obferve the Law of Mofes were of two different Kinds. There were fome of them that looked upon that Lr.w to be of fuch indifpnifihle Nsceflity that no Mr*n could be faVed but by the Obfervation of that Law, and therefore they urged it even upon the Gentile Con- verts. They laid fuch a Strels on Circumcifion, and the other ritual Precepts of that Law, that they jvould not acknowledge any for their Brethren, or look upon them as Members of the Church, except they fubmitted to thofe Rites. Againft thefe the Apoftle Faul all along zealoully contends. And thefe all the other Apojlles oppofed and condemned no lefs than he : and many of them afterwa1-ds openly apoftatized from Chriftianity, as may be gathered from feveral Paffages in the New Tefta- ment. But there were other Chriftian Jews that were for obferving the Law of Mofes from a con-
* See for an Account of the Subjeft of St. PauFs preaching, j^{ls ix. 20 — 23. xiii. 23 — 45, 50. xvii, 2, 3, 5. xvi".. 5, 6. XX. 21. 1 Cor. i. 23. ii. 2. XY. 3, 4:
icientious
farther 'vindicated. 4° 5
fcientious Scruple that it was not yet repealed, who yet were of a different Charafter from the former. They knew God had prefcribed thofe Rites, and were not fatished that they were as yet abrogated, and therefore tho' they regarded the beheving Gen- tiles as their Brethren in Chrift, and were not for impofing the Obfervation of the Law upon them ; yet they thought that they themfelves as Jews^ were obliged by virtue of the divine Precept to obferve thofe peculiar Rites that God had prefcribed to their Nadon. But then at the fame time they ex- pefted to be juftified and faved only thro' the free Grace of God offered in the Redeemer \ here they laid the Strels of their Hopes, looking for the Mercy of our Lord Jefus Chrijl unto eternal Ufe. Oar Author feems not able or not willing to conceive this. He thinks that if they obferved the Mofaick Rites at all as obhgatory by virtue of the Divine Command, they muft obferve them as necejjary Parts of Religion, and the neceffary Means of Ju'- tiiication, and mull exped; to be accepted and juf^ tified on the Account of them. For where pofi- iive Things are joined in the fame Divine Law with moral, the pofitive are as neceffary as the moral to our Acceptance with God, and are put on an equal Foot in Point of Confcicnce as the neceffary Terms of Acceptance, becaufe equally required. This is the Subflance of his arguing, p. 52, ^2- But it doth not follow, that becaufe pofitive and moral Precepts are both required in the fame Lav/, there- fore they are equally Parts of Religion, and of equal Neceffity in Point of Acceptance with God. For tho' every good Man that looks upon any pofitive Precept as required by God ought to obey it, whilft he thinks it required : yet he does not lay the prin- cipal Strefs of his Hopes of the Divine Favour and Acceptance on fuch Obfervances, but on Things of a higher Nature. And therefore it is ,,very fup- pofable that the Jewijh Chriftians might' fliU look Pd 3 upon
4o6 The Apostles
upon themfelves to be obliged to obferve the Mo- faick Rites by virtue of the Divine Command which they did not fee to be yet repealed ; and yet expeft the Pardon of their Sins, and Acceptance with God, and eternal Life, only thro* the Free-Grace and Mercy of God in Jefus Chrift as the great appoints ed Mediator and Saviour of Mankind, who is the Propitiation for the Sins of the World. And thefe were always treated with great Regard and Ten^ dernels by St, Paul and the other Apojiles. He fpeaks of the Saints at Jerufalem with an affeftionate Tendernefs, and ftirs up the Gentiles to contribute li- berally for their Supply. He forbids the Jewi/h and Gentile Converts to condemn or dejpife one another on Account of their obferving or not obferving the legal Rites and Ceremonies ; fee Rom. xiv. and de- clares that in Chriji Jefus neither Circumcificn availeth any 'Thing., nor Uncircumcifion.^ but Faith which worketh by Love.^ Gal. v, 6, i Cor. vii. 19 ; That the King- dom of God is not Meat and Drink., but Righteouf- nefs and Peace ^ and Joy in the Holy Qhofi., Rom. xiv. 17. He was for receiving thofe that are weak in Faith, and v/ho flill thought themfelves obliged to obferve the legal Rites j and was for having them all walk by the fame Rule as far as they were agreed, and for their bearing with one another till God fhould farther enlighten them, Phil. iii. 15, 16, And it is probable that many of thefe came in time to fee their Liberty, and that by treating them with Gentlcnels and Forbearance, they by degrees over- came their Prejudices and Scruples, till at length they entirely joined with the Gentile Converts. Such was the wife and moderate Conduft of the; Apoftle Paul and the other Apofiles in this Matter. And accordingly it is evident that tho' this great Apoftle was fully fatisfied and perfuaded by Reve- lation from Chrift himfelf, that the Law of Mofes was no longer obligatory in Point of Confcience fincp the Death of Chriif , yet he looked upon thofe
legal
farther 'vindicated. ^oy
legal Rites as Things which he himfelf might ftill lawfully obferve for a while in order to promote the main Interefb of Chrillianity. He declares con- cerning himfelf, that to the Jews he became as a Jew that he might gain the Jews^ i Cor. ix. 20. And it appears how careful he was not to offend them, in that he circtimcifed T'imotJjy becaufe of the Jews which were in thofe Parts, becaufe they knew all that his Father was a Greek, Ads xvi. 3. And is it likely that he who was fo cautious of offending them, lliould, as this Author reprefents it, make it the conftant Subje6t of his Preaching in all their Sy- nagogues, that the Law of Mofes was entirely abro- gated, and that the Jews themfelves were abfolved from all Obligations to obferve it ? We find him afterwards fhaving his Head in Cenchrea, for he had a Vow, Ads xviii. 18. and keeping the Feafi at Je- rufalem, ver. 21. It was therefore a falfe Accula- tion that was brought againft him, tho* this Wri- ter faith that it was a Matter of Fa6l that could not be denied, that he had taught all the Jews which were among the Gentiles to forfake Mofes, faying, that they ought not to circumcife their Children, neither to walk according to their Cuftoms, A6ts xxi. 21. They accufed Paul as if he had every where taught that it was abfolutely unlawful for the Jews to cir- cumcife their Children, or obferve any of the legal Rites. This was the Charge : and this Charge was not true. He had never urged it as abfolutely un- lawful for the Jews to obferve the Mofaical Lav/, or their ancient Cuftoms. And tho' he had de- clared ftrongly againft urging Circumcifion upon the Gentiles, yet inftead of forbidding the Jews to circumcife their Children, he himfelf had circum- cifed Timothy becaufe his Mother was a Jewefs, tho* his Father was a Greek. And taking the Accufa- tion in this View, the Advice they give is very rea^ fonable : that he fhould go and purify himfelf, that all may know that thofe Things whereof they were in^. Dd 4 formed
'408 I'he Apostles
formed concerning thee are nothingy hut that thou thy felf walkejl orderly^ and keepejl the Law, ver. 24. They urged him to do no more than what he him- fe]f had done on former Occafions. For he had Jhaved his Head at Cenchrea, and had a Fow upon him. And both his own former Pradtice, and what he now did at Jerufalem, was a full Vindi- s. cation of him againft the Charge advanced againft | him, that he had abfolutely forbidden the Jews to obferve the Law, and had declared it utterly un- lawful for them to obferve the Mofaick Rites and Cuftoms.
To account for this Condu6l of the Apoftle Paul and the other Apoftles, two Things are to be con- fidered. The one is, that they knew it was the "Will of God that the Law of Mofes with its pe- culiar Rites Ihould be no longer ftriftly obligatory in Point of Conference on the Difciples of Jefus : and that Chrift by his Coming, and by his Death, had really fuperfeded that Law, and fet them free from the Obligation of its Ceremonies and Ordi- nances. The other is, that they alfo knew by the Spirit of God that it was his Will that the Obfer- vation of that Law and its peculiar Rites fhould be indulged and tolerated for a while : and that the Abrogation of it fhould not be urged upon the Jews all at once, but by degrees. And the Wif- dom and Reafonablenefs of this Method is very ma- nifeft to any one that duly confiders the Circum- ilances of the Cafe, and of that Time. The whole Jewifh Nation had the higheft Veneration for the Law of Mofes. Nor could it be v/ondered at, if they did not eafily part with a Law, which they were aflured was of Divine Original, and had been confirmed by fuch illuftrious Atteftations from Hea- ven, as well as had been the Law of their Nation for fo long a SucceiTion of Ages. God could in- deed have commanded them all at once immedi- ately after Chrifi's Refurredion to hj afide all the
Ivjofaicl^
farther 'vindicated. 409
Mofaick Ceremonies, to which they had been fo long accuflomed, and could have abfolutely for- bidden the Oblervation of it •, in which Cafe no Chriftian could with a fafe Confcience, or confift- ently with the Chriftian Profeffion, have obferved any of the Ceremonies of that Law. But this would have been too great a Shock, and joined to their other Prejudices arifing from Chrijih Sufferings and Crucifixion, and the Meannefs of his external Ap- pearance here on Earth, would have proved fuch an Obftacle to their embracing Chri/iianiiy, as they could fcarce have overcome. It feemed therefore but reafonable to indulge them a little as the Cafe was circumftanced, and to remove their Prejudices by degrees •, which were of fuch a kind as might well raife Scruples in Men of lincere and honeft Minds. And accordingly it pleafed God in his great Wifdom and Goodnefs fo to order it. that that Abrogation and Repeal of the Law of Mofes was gradually hinted and fignilied to them, and they were prepared for it by degrees. The Apof- ties firfl preached to the Jews, and to them only Salvation thro' Jefus Chrift and him crucified, a- greeably to our Saviour's own Diredions who had commanded them to begin at Jeriifalem. After- wards they preached the Gofpel to the Samaritans^ whom the Jews defpifed as much as they did the Gentiles, Adts viii. and to them was the Holy Ghoft given upon their believing in Chrift by the Impo- fition of the Apoflles Hands. This prepared them for what next happened -, and that was that Peter by exprefs Revelation was ordered to preach to the devout Gentiles or Profelytes of the Gate, that is, to thofe among the Gentiles that worfhipped the true God, tho' they did not obferve the Rites of the ce- remonial Law ; as in the famous Inflance of Cor- nelius. Peter was at the fame time taught by a Vifion from Heaven, that the legal Diftinftion be- tween dean and unclean Meats was now no longer
obligatory »
410 7/&^ Apostles
obligatory ; and that the difference of Jews and Gentiles was now to be taken away. And it pleafed God to pour forth the Holy Ghojl in his extra- ordinary Gifts and Operations upon Cornelius, and thofe that were with him, and that in an immediate Manner without the laying on of Peier^s Hands, as he had done upon the Apojlles themfelves at the Beginning. This tended to remove a ftrong Pre- judice the Jews had entertained, and to convince them that the Gentiles were now to be taken into the fame church with themfelves, and were to form one facred Society under Jefus Chrift. Afterward, •when the Goljpel had been preached for fome time to the devout Gentiles or Profelytes of the Gate, it was at laft preached to the idolatrous Gentiles : and the Apoftle Paul was in a more efpecial Manner fet apart to that Work. And in the mean time the Dodrines which he and the other Apoftles una- nimoufly preached concerning Remiffion of Sins, and Juftification thro' Faith in Chrift, concerning his being the only true Propitiadon for our Sins, and his being the Saviour of all Men without Dif- tinflion, whether Jews or Ge?itiles, that fhould fin- cerely believe and obey him, tended to prepare the Jews for the entire Abrogation of the Mofaical Oeconomy, which followed from the Principles they laid down *. And laftly, this Apoftle writ
a whole
* The Accounts that were then publifhed by the Apoftles and apoftolical Men of the Life and Difcourfes of our bleffed Saviour, (hewed that he himfelf had declared that nothing that entreth into th$ Mouth defileth a Man, which was a plain Inti- mation that t^iie Mofaical Injunctions concerning the Diftindion of Meats, and by which the Difference between Je^s and Gentiles was very much kept up, were now to be no longer obligatory. And finally the Apoftle John whom this Author reprefents as one of the principal Jenjuijh Apoftles, and at the Head of the Chriftian Je^^s, publifhed it to the World that pur Lord Jefus had declared, that the Hour 'was coming tvhen tieither in this Mountainy viz. at Mount Gerizim, nor yet at
' Jerufakm.
farther 'uindicated, 411
a whole Epiftle diredled particularly to the Hebrews^ the proper Defign of which is to piove that the legal Difpenfation is abolifhed by Jefus Chrift, And foon after this the JewifJj Temple and Polity were intirely deftroyed, as jefus had foretold, whereby the Exercife of the legal Priellhood, and the Ob- fervation of the Mofaick Rites, pardcularly thofe relating to Sacrifices, was rendered imprafticable. Thus it appears in how juft and wife a Progreffion the Golpel of Jefus was publifhed, and fucceffive Degrees of Light communicated, and the glorious Scheme and Defign of God gradually unfolded, till the Chriftian Je'-jos were prepared for receiving it in its full Glory and entire Harmony. And whilft this Defign was. carrying on, it was agree- able to the Will of God, and the Defigns the Di- vine Wifdom had in View, that the Apojiks fhould obferve the Mofaick Rites, left the throwing them ofi:' at once, fhould have created too great a Prejudice againft them and their Do(5lrine in the Minds of the Jews^ until the Time came, which the Apoftles knew by fpecial Revelation, and by ChrijR:'s own exprefs Predictions was near at H^nd, when that Polity was to be deftroyed.
Let us now confider the fecond main Point in Difference, as this Author ftates it between St. Paul and the other Apofiles^ which he pretends relates to the Law of Profelytifm -, viz. " Whether the G(?;>- ^' tile Converts as a Matter of Religion and Con- ^' fcience were bound to comply with the Mofaick ^* Law of Profelytifm, as the neceflary Condition " upon which the Jews were to maintain Commu- " nion with them, fee p. yg.''^ And here alfo he fuppofes " a great and very material Difference
"J erufalem Jhould Men moorjhif the Father, but the true Wor- Jhippers fhould ivorj/jtp him in Spirit and in Truth, John iv. 2 1, 23. whereby it appeared that the Diftindion of Places, and the typical ritual Service ellabliihed in the Law of Mo/es was to be abolifhed under the Gofpel.
. " bCr
4 1 1 7he Apostles
" between St. Paul and the other ApqftleSy parti- «« cularly St. Peter.*' He aflerts, that " the Je- *' rufakm Council enjoined this Law of Profely- *' tifm upon the Gentile Converts as neceflary, or " as a Matter of ReHgion and Confcience, with- *' out which the Chriftian Jews could not be jufti- *' fied in communicating with them, or receiving <' them as Brethren. That this foon occafioned *« frelh Troubles and Difturbances in the Church. " For St. Paul could never fubmit to the Impo- *' fition of this Law of Profelytifm upon his Gen- *' tile Converts, at lead not in the Senfe of the " Council •, as neceflary, as a Matter of Religion, " or as the Law of God upon the Authority of " Mofes -, tho' yet he allowed them to comply with " it occafionally, as a Matter of Liberty, and for " the fake of Peace, to prevent an open Rupture *' with the Chriftian y^wj", p. 72, jj. He repre- " fents St. Paul as not fatisfied with the Decree of " the Jerufalctn Council \ that he looked upon it *' as a joining two contrary and inconfiftent Re- *' ligions, and that he laboured under the Difad- " vantage of being oppofed in all his Miniftry by " the whole Jewijh Nation, and of having a De- ** cree of Council, ftanding out againft him, pafied *' at Jerufalem by a large Affembly of apoftohcal " Chriftian Jews^ p. 71." and he refumes this Subject again, p. 361. and p. 376, ^c.
Here the Author pofitively aflerts feveral Things for which there is no Foundation in the facred Hif- tory j tho* he pretends to great Accuracy, and to deliver nothing but what is perfeftly agreeable to the Memoirs of that great Apojlle in the Adis, and in his own genuine Epijlles. t
With regard to the Jerufalem Council he pofi- tively afl^erts over and over, that they prefcribed the Things mentioned in their Decree, viz. the ab- ftaining from Things off^ered to Idols, from Things ftrangled, from Bipod, and from Fornification, as
riecefliary.
farther imidicated. 413
necefiary, becaufe ii was the Law of Trofelytifm en- joined by Mofes , and aflerts, that it was certainly the Senfe of that Council that the Law of Profelytifm was the Law of God given hy Mofes, and not yet abrogated and repealed, and therefore mufl be bind- ing in Point of Religion and Confcience, p. 77, 78. But it is plain that the Jerufakm Council could not urge their Decree precileiy as the Law of Profely- tifm enjoined by Mofes, becaufe Mofes did not give any Law of Profelytifm precifely anfwering to that Decree. For with regard to thofe Profe- lytes that were to be incorporated with the JewSy and entered into their national Inclofure, as our Au- thor exprefleth it, and who were ufually called the Profelytes of Righteoufnefs , they were according to the Mofaick Conftitution to be ' circumcifed, and to obferve the whole Law of Mofes, and its peculiar Rites : and hence the ftricteft among the judaizing Chriftians, fuch as thofe mentioned, A^sxv. i, 5. were for having this Law of Profelytifm obferved withr-egard to thofe of the Gentiles that were to be taken in the Church. They would have them circumcifed in order to their acknowledging them as Brethren, and as belonging to the fame Body. But in the Council that was convened to judge of this Matter St. Peter declared, with whom the other Apofiles agreed, that as God had put no dif- ference between the Gentiles and Jews, but had given them the Holy Ghoft without their being circumcifed, fo they ought without being circum- cifed or obliged to obferve the Law, to be regarded by the Chriftian Jews as their Brethren, and as making up one Body or facred Society with them in Jefus Chrifi. So that it is fo far from being true as this Writer aflerts, p. 361. that they woidd not allow the Gentiles the Privileges of ChriSi^s Kingdom, except they were profelyted or naturalized, and thereby entered i?ito their national Inclofure and Separation from the re§f of the World : and that therefore Peter
who
414 ^^^ Apostles
who had the Keys^ /hut the Gates of the Kingdom cgainSf the whole Gentile World that would not fub- mit to the Law of Profelytifm or Jewiflj Naturali- zation : and that this Point was carried in the firSi Council at Jerufalem, by all the Jewifh Apofiles, El- ders, ofid Brethren, againfi all St. Paul'j Remon- ftrances and earneff Endeavours to the contrary. I iay, this is fo far from being true, that the very contrary to this is manifeftly true ; that St. Peter and the whole Council carried it, that the Gentiles ihould not be obliged to fubmit to the Law of Profelytifm or Jewifh Naturalization, which necefla- rily included their being circumcifed and obliged to obferve the Law.
With regard to the Profelytes of the Gate, as they are ufually called, that is, thofe among the Gentiles that worfhipped the true God but were not circum- cifed, tho' they were allowed to live among them, they were never regarded as naturalized, or entered into their national Inclofure : Nor doth it appear that the Law of Mofes required that they fliould abftain from Things ftrangled and frora Blood: on the contrary, that Law allowed them to eat that which died of itfelf, and which therefore had the Blood in it, Deut. xiv. 2 1 . which was not allowed either to the natural Jews, or to the Profelytes of Righteoufnefs. It is plain therefore that if the Jeru- falem Council required thefe Things of the Gentile Converts, it was not becaufe this was the very Law of Profelytifm enjoined by Mofes. For the Things required in the apoftolical Decree were not the Things precifely required and infilled upon in that Law, either with regard to the Profelytes of Righte- mfnefs, or the Profelytes of the Gate. Of the for- mer more was required than is urged in that Decree, of the latter notfo much. They did not therefore in that Prohibition go merely upon the Authority and Law of Mofes. They only declare that it feemed fit to the Holy Gho§f, and to them,
to
farther vindicated. 415
to lay upon the Brethren no greater Burden than the Things urged in that Decree. So that it was they under the Guidance of the Holy Ghofi^ and by his Authority, that laid thefe Injunftions upon the Gentile Converts, and they did not put them upon them, as what they were bound to by the Law of Mofes, which they were under no Obligation to obferve.
If it be inquired, upon what Reafons they pro- ceeded in this Matter, and why it feemed fit to the Holy Ghoft, and to them, to lay thefe Injundlions upon the Gentile Converts : the Circumftances and true State of the Cafe mufl: be confidered. Tho' the Jews were wont to regard the Profelytes of the Gate, who worfhipped the true God without being circumcifed, as tho. pious among the Gentiles, yet they •ftill looked upon them as Gentiles, tho* not Idola- ters ; and were Ho far from regarding them as Bre- thren, or belonging to the fame Body or Church with themfelves (as they did the Profelytes of Righ- teoufnefs who were circumcifed, and obferved the whole Law) that they would not converle familiar- ly or eat with them *, fee ji^sx. 28. xi. 3. But now by the Chrijiian Inftitution the Jews were to •regard all thofe among the Gentilesi$hat believed in Chrift and embraced his Gofpel, as Members of the fame Church, and forming one Body with them- felves under Chrift the Head, without their being circumcifed, or obliged to obferve the Law of Mofes at all. This was a new Do6trine to the Jews, and was in EfFefl a deflroying the pectdium of the Jews, and eftablilhing a new Conftitution, or ered- ing a new Church confifting of Jews and Gentiles^ into which it was not neceflary to be initiated by Circumcifion. But tho' the Gentiles were thus to be
* In this the latter Conftitutions of the Jeivs had carried it to a greater Stridnefs than the original Law of Mofes. See Sflden de Jure Nat. i^ Gent, lib. ii. <•«/■ 5.
admitted
41 6 The Apostles.
admitted to the full Enjoyment of all Church Pri- vileges under the Gofpel without being obliged to the Mofaick Law, yet it feemed fit to lay fome Injunctions upon them, without which, as the Cafe then flood, fuch a near and intimate Communion between Jews and Gentiles^ as all belonging to one Church and facred Society, would have been im- praflicable. To this End they were to abftain from every thing that had the Appearance of coun- tenancing the Heathen Idolatry •, and Dr. Spencer hath taken great Pains to fhew, that the feveral Things prohibited in this Decree were regarded as Signs of Idolatry or Ethnicifm, and were ufed a- mong the Heathen in their Idol-lVorJhip *. Of this Kind was not only the eating Things offered unto Idols y but the eating Blood and Things ftrang- ledy both which were Things to which the Jews had the higheft Averfion and Abhorrence -, and the allowing the Gentile Converts to eat thofe Things as the Cafe was then circumftanced, would have abfolutely prevented the Jews eating with their Gentile Brethren, or having that intimate Society and Communion with them which was proper to lay the Foundation of a true Harmony as became Members of^the fame Church. And as all manner of Impurity was extremely common among the Gentiles^ and even an Attendant of their Idol-Wor- Jhipy it was thought proper to mention this parti- cularly, that as a holy People to the Lord they fhould abftain from all Impurity and Uncleanneis, and unlawful Mixtures. For that the Word •7ro?i'««, Fornication, is often ufed as a general Word for all Impurity, is well known.
Thefe are the Things exprefsly mentioned in the apoftolical Decree. They are all there called necef- fary Things. But it is not declared or explained in what Senfe they were fo. If they were neceflary
* See Spencer, de Legib. Hebr. Lib. ii. Dijfcrt. in Afts xv. 20.
at
farther vindicated. 417
at all upon any Account^ whether at that Time or perpetually., it is fufficient , to anfwer the Import of the Word. .And tho' they are all comprized in one Word necejfary, it.dodi.not follow that they are all equally and abfolutely necefTary. The abftaining from Forni.caiiofi appeareth both from the Reafon of the Thing, and from many expreis Pafiages of the New Teftament, to be of moral and perpetual Obligation. But if other Things men- tioned ^in- that Decree were only forbidden, becaufe ihey were looked upon at that Time as outward Sig7i5 of Communion with the Heathen /Joi^/m in their Superftition and falfe Worlhip, and becaufe they would have proved, Matter of ^Te3.t Scandal ■and OfferhGe .to the Jeziis, and would have abfo- lutely cut off brotherly Ggrrefpondence between .them and t^e Gentiles^ as Brethren and of the fame Eodywith themfelves, this was a valuable End, . and fuffici'ent to juftify that Prohibition, and fhew the Seafonablqneis and NeceiTity of it at that Time, Ai.d .on this Suppofition, when. -the Situation of . Things was akered; the Reafon of the Injundiqn,. and the Neceflity arjfing from it;might ceafe. -.^'i n'r
But in whatever Way we underlland that Pjecree, there is not the lead Proof that ever the Apoftle ■Paul Gounter-afted it -, or that ever there was the leaft Difference between him and the other Apof- ties on that Head. As to Fornicaiion, which is forbidden in that Decree, it i^S:evident that it is. fre- quently and exprefsly forbidden in St. Paul's Epif- ties, and that Prohibition is, enforced with. Argu- ments that ihew it to. be , of perpetual Ob%ation. With regard to Meats offered to IdoU^ St. Paul doth not allow the Gentile Converts to eat Things offered to Idols in the Idol-Temple, becaufe that was plainly to countenance Idolatry ; and he repre- fents it as being Partaker of the 'Table of Devils, and as having Fcllovjfhip with 'Devils. And as to Meats in private Houles, if they were told that
■ E e they
41 8 T/^^ Apostles
they had been offered unto Idols, they were not to eat of them for Fear of giving Scandal. So that in this Senfe he thought it necej/ary to abftain from thefe Things. As to Blood and Things Jlrangkd, the Apoflle no wheTe mentions them in any of his Epijlles^ and therefore it cannot be proved that he ever taught the Gentiles to eat them, nor confe- quently can it be proved, that in this he contra- di<5led that Decree. If his general Declarations, that nothing is unclean of itfelf that every Creature of God is good, and to be received with Thankfgiv- ingy and that they were to eat whatfoever was fold in the Shambles ajking no ^eflion for Confcience JakCy be judged an Allowance to eat Blood, t^c, then our Saviour's Declaration which St. Matthew and Aiark take Notice of, that nothing that entereth into the Mouth, and paffeth into the Draught, de- fleth a Man, may be equally thought an Allow- ance to eat Things flranglcd and Bloodi And it may be argued, that the Apoftles, who knew of this Declaration of our Lord, and particularly the Apof- tie Peter who had been taught by a Vifion from Heaven not to call any Thing common or unclean^ did not by Things necefjayy in that Decree intend to fignify that all thefe Things were perpetually ne- ceflary in the Nature of the Tiling, but necefTary ;it that Time, and in that Circumftance of Things. And any one that knows any Thing of the Apoftle TauV% Doctrine, cannot but be lenfible that he thought it neceflary in Cafe of giving Offence to weak Confciences, to abftain from Things which, otherwife, and in themfelves confidered, he judged lawful. So that upon the whole it doth not appear but that he entirely approved of that Decree, and of the Principles upon which it proceeded. This Wri- ter himfelf obferveth, " that it was refolved in the •' Jerufalem Council to lay no farther Burden up- ^' on the Gentile Converts than a few Things which *' were thought neceflary by the HolyGhoft, and
" tliec...
farther indicated, 419
" them, to avoid the Appearance of Idolatry, and " that the Gentile Profelytes might not feem to ** countenance the Temple- Worfhip of the Hea- '* thens," /». 59. And if this was the Neceflity intended, it was perfeflly agreeable to the Senti- ments of the Apoftle Faul. This Writer indeed pretends that ^t. Paul's not fubmitting to that Decree raifed frejh Dijlurbattces and Iroubles in the Church. But there is not the leaft Hint of this Kind either in the A5ls or the Epijiles, nor was there ever any Accufation brought againft him on this Account. On the contrary we are exprefsly told that Paul and Silas in their Progrefs to vifit the Churches, as they pafled thro' the Cities, deli- vered . them the Decrees to keep that were ordained of the Apojlles and Elders which were at Jerufalenty Ads xvi. 4. And at his laft coming to Jerujalem^ when he returned from his great Progrefs in preach- ing to the idolatrous Gentiles ^ tho* St. James and the Elders that were with him mention the apoftolical Decree, they do not fay one Word of St. Paul^% having afted againft it, but glorified God for what he had done amongft the Gentiles^ Adls xxi.
19 25. And whereas he talks of a very material
Difference between St. Peter and St. Paul about the Law of Profelytifm \ there is not the leaft Ac- count of any Difference they ever had on this Head. For the Difference referred to Gal. ii. doth not pro- perly relate to that Matter, nor indeed to any Dif- ference of Sentiment between thofe two great A- poftles. On the contrary, St. Paul blames Peter for having afted in a Manner not very agreeable to that Doftrine in which they were both agreed, and not very confiftent with the Defign of the apofto- lical Decree, which manifeftly was to ingage Jews and Gentiles to cultivate a brotherly Communion with one another. '
Thus after all the Stir this Author makes about the mighty Differences between St. Paul and the
E e 2 iDther
420 27;^ Apostles
other Apojiles, it appear there was an Harmony between them in their Doftrines : and that there- fore there is no need of confidering the pretended Difficulty of* deciding the Controverfies between them by Miracles. The Miracles they wrought all concurred to give an illuftrious Atteftatlon to the fame Goipel which was uniformly preached by them all. And whereas he tells us that 'Timothy was the only Teacher in that Age that heartily joined with St. Pauly and that St. Peter, John, Mark, and Barnabas, and all the other Apoflles and apoftoli- cal Teachers thought themfelves obliged at kft to feparatefrom St. Paul, becaufe they could not agree to abfolve the J ewijij Converts from their Obliga- tion to the Mofaical Law, ^nd kft him to preach his :Own Gofpel his own fVay : this is afferted without any Foundation in the infpired Writings to fupport it. What was the Q-mitdi John Mark's leaving Paul, of which we have ah Account, J^sxni. 13. ;we are not told. But there is not the leaft Hint that it was for any fuch Reafon as this Writer pretends. And if Barnabas was, as he infinuates, as much offended as Msri^, and for the fame Reafon, why did he not then leave him too ? inftead of which we find him after this joining with Paul in preach- ing the Gofpel throughout the lefTer J/ia, and fuf- fering Perfeciitions on the Account of it as well as he. And he was ready to have gone with him another Progrefs, and would have taken Mark with him too, which Paul would not fuffer, be- caufe he had left them abruptly in their former Progrefs. And this and not any Difference between them in Doftrine was the Caufe of the Contention that then arofe between Paul and Barnabas. But it is plain from St. Paul's own Epiftles, that this Mark, whom our Author fuppofes to have entirely feparated from him upon the "Difference between them in Dodlrines, was, after that Separation men- tioned J^s xiii. 13. fignally helpful to him ; and
efpecially
* farther '^Indicated, 421
efpecially in the latter Part of St. FauV^ Life, when his Oppofition to the Law muft have been much better known than it could have been O/t the Time that Mark firft left him, which was in the Begin- ning of his firft Progrefs. In fome of his laft Epiftles he calls him one of his Fellow-Labourers y and Fellow-Workers unto the Kingdom of God •, and iaith that he had been a Comfort to him^ and was profitable to him for the JMUniflry^ Philem. 24. Col. iv. 10, II. 2 i!im. iv. 11. And the fame Mark is alfo mentioned by St. Feter with great Regard, I Fet. v. 13. where he calls him his Son. Silas or Silvanus was alfo a Perlbn of eminent Note among the Jewifh Chriftians at Jerufalem^ as appears from yl^s XV. 22, 32. and he went along with St. Paul'm his fecond Progrefs, who joins him and Ti- mothy with himfelf in the Infcriptions of his two Epiitles to the Thejfalonians ; and affures the Corin- thians that the Golpel preached by all three was entirely the fame, and that they perfedlly harmo- nifed in it, 2 Cor. i. 19. This is that Silvanus whom St. Peter calls a faithful Brother, and whom he fent to confirm the Churches, i Pet. v. 12. And this is another Proof of the Harmony there was between thofe two great Apoftles St. Peter and St. Paul. The fame Perfons were alTiftant to them both, fometimes to one, fometimes to the other, in preaching the fame Gofpel. To which may be added the great Commendation I men- tioned before, which St. Peter gives of St. Paul, and of his Writings a little before his own Death, 2 Pet. iii. 15, 16. It is evident therefore that when St. P<^z^/ fometimes calls the Gofpel he preached his Gof- pel, it could not.be his Intention to infinuate that it i»as a Gofpel different from what the other Apof- tles preached and taught. For he reprefents Chril^ tians as built upon the Foundation of the Apoflles and Prophets, Eph. ii. 20. and fpeaking of the MJlery of calling the Gentiles to he Fellow-Heirs ^ and of the
Ee 3 fame
422 ^he Apostles '
fame Body with the Jews^ which he reprefents as made known to himi by Ipecial immediate Revela- tion, he exprefsly declares that this Myftery 'w^'& then alfo revealed unto the Holy Apojlles and Prophets hy the Spirit y Eph. iii. 2, 3, 5.
There needs nothing more to be faid concerning the pretended Difference between St. Paul and the other Apojiks.
But I cannot pals it by without Ibme Notice that notwithftanding the Veneration he profeffes for that great Apoftle, the Reprefentation he makes of his Condud at his Trial is fuch as under Pretence of vindicating him, infmuates feveral Refleftions upon his Charader. He obferves, that the Apojile does not own that which was the chief Matter of Com- plainf againjl him, and the Ground of all his Profe- cutions by the Jews, namely, that in all their Syna- gogues in Greece and Afta Minor he had maintained that the Law was abrogated hy Chrijl^s Death and Refurre^ion, and that in Chrijl there was no Dif- ference between Jew and Gentile, p. 67, 68. To which it is fufHcient to anfwer, that it was not the Apoflle's Bufinefs to accufe himfelf He puts his Adverfaries upon the Proof, and it is evident they were not able to prove the Charge they brought againft him. Nor was it true in Faft, as I have fiiewn, that he had preached in all the Synagogues that the Jews -were abfolved from the Obligation of tht Mofaick Law.
The AJiatick Jews * were not capable of mak- ing' good their Accufation againft him ; and
thought
* The Ajian J e-wSf mcMiorvtdiJl£is XXI. z-j, were not, as this Writer pretends, Chriftian Jeivs that believed in y*/aj ; but they were unbelieving Jenvs who were enraged at Paul fof preaching up ^e/us as the Meffiah, and for preaching the Gof- pel tojthe Gentiles, which they interpreted as an Endeavour to d^W the People from Mofes. A^d on the fame Account they alfo perfecuted the other Appftles and Chrifti^ns, as is plain il*
farther 'vindicated, 423
>fiought therefore to have run him down by general Clamours, concerning his raifing Tumults, and profaning the Temple. The Defence Paul makes for himfelf is juft and noble, and hath a becoming Freedom and Boldnefs in it as well as Caution, He denies the Charge of Sedidon and Tumult, of pro- faning the Temple, or of having offended againft the Law, but at the fame time never in the lead difguifed his being a Chrijlian : he freely owns that afier the IVay which they called Herefy Jo worjhifped he the God of his Fathers^ and at the fame time de- clares what was literally true, that he believed all Things which were written in the Law and the PrO' phets. He with a noble Zeal bore an illuftrious Teflimony to our Lord that he was the Chrijl^ and that he had rifen from the dead, and had fent him to preach to the Gentiles ; which was the principal Thing that provoked -the Jews in the firft Apo- logy he made for himfelf before them, Acts xxii. 21, 22. And whereas this Writer infmuatcs that till his laft Defence before Agrippa and Fejlus^ Paul had not owned the Refurre^ion of Jefus of Nazareth j which was the main Point which had raifed the Ma- lice of the Jews againft him, but only ajferted the Re- furre5iion of the dead, in general \ which they believed
as well as he^ p. 6y. this is far from being a true
•
the- Cafe of Stephen, and the Apoftles James and PeUr. It was the unbelievijig Jews that were the Authors of all the Tumults and Perfecutions that were raifed againft St. Paul, and not as this Writer afferts, the Je-ws that profeffed to believe in Chrift. Nor can any Thing be more falfe than that which he concludes his whole Account of this Matter with, p. 80, 81. That it it evident from all the Memoirs of this great Apojile's Life in the Hijioty of the ASs, and his o'vjn genuine Epifles, that all his Suf- -Jerings and Perfecutions all along arofe from his fruggling againjl the Superfition of the Chrijlian Jews, and their pretended religi- ous Obligations to the Law of Mofes, 'which they thought them- felves ftill as much obliged hy as before. Whereas not one of the Perfecutions there mentioned were raifed againft him by the Chriftian Jews, but by thofe Jews that denied that Jefus was the Chrif.
E e 4 Re-
424^ The Apostles
Reprefentation : for it appears from the Account Fejtus himfelf gives Agrippa^ that before the Apo- logy Paul made in the Prefence of : that Prince he had affirmed not merely the Refurreftion in gene- ral," but the Refurreclion of Jefus^ and that this was thd great Qaeilioribetween him and the Jews. Fe/itis ttWs A^rippa th3.t'thG J ezvs had certain ^ef- tions againfi Paul of their own Superftition, and of ■ oyie Jefi's ivhich "doas dead, whom Paul affirmed to be dive, A6b XXV. 19. And the Connedtion there was between the Refurreftion of Jefus and the ge- neral Reftirreftion, both in the Truth of the Thing, and in St. A?«/'s own Scheme, was fuch, that the Apoftle might juftlyreprefent himfelf as called in Queftion about the Refurreftion of the Dead, when he was called in Queftion about the Refurredion of Jefus, the beft Proof and Pledge of it. And in Fa6l that was the great Reafon why the Sadducees, the profefTed Enemies of the Refurreftion, were fo zealous againft the Chriftian Scheme. Tho' we do not hear much of their Oppofition to Chrift before, y€t no fooner did the Apoftles begin to preach Chriji^s Refurredion, but they appeared to be the moft zealous Adverfaries of the Golpel. For they faw, that if Chrift's Refurreclion from the Dead was believed to be true, it would be a fenfible Proof of the Refurredlion and a future State. Thus we are told, JSts'iv. I, 2. That the Sadducees came M^bn the Apoftles, being grieved that they taught the People, and preached thro* Jefus the RefurreSiton from the Dead. And again, Ch. v. 17. That the Se5i of the Sadducees being filled with Indignation laid Hands on the Apoflles, and put them in Prifon. It was not therefore without Reafon that the Apoftle Paul declared, that he was called in ^eftion con- cerning the Hope and Refurre5tion of the Dead ; fince this was really one chief Thing, tho' not the only pne^ that ftirred up the Malice and Spite of his Enemies, efp.eci.dly of the Sadducees, feveraL-#f
whom
farther *i^indicafed. 425
whom he faw in the Council, and who were hi3 chiefeft and mofl implacable Adverfaries, A^s xxiii. i!^, 7, 8.
C HAP. XV.
The Aabor's Bretence thai the Apocafypfe is moft prd>* firly the Chrifiian- Revelation, and that it is there
. that 'U)€ are principally to look for the Doctrines of Chrijiiamty, confidered. There- is ' nothing in tlmt Book to countenance, the Worfhif. of Angels^ Invoca- tion of Saints^ or Prayers for the Dead. Salvation is not there confined to the Jews only. His Account of the fifth Monarchy which he pretends is foretold in that Booky fhewn to be falfe and ahfurd. The
. Attempt he makes agai?ifi the whole Canon of the New Teftament, under Pretence that it was cor- rupted and interpolated by the Jews^ ■ and that Chrift^s own Difciples reported Doctrines and Fa5ls according to their own falfe Notions and Prejudices^ examined and dijproved.
NOTHING can be more evident than that our Author makes ufe of the Term, Chrifiian Jew^ with a Defign to expofe our Saviour and his Apofiles^ and the whole New Tefiament. And the more efFeftually to anfwer that Defign he is pleafed to afcribe feveral Sentiments to ^e Chrifiian Jews^ and as making up Part of what he calls the Jewifh Gofjpel, which he thinks he can prove to be abfurd and falfe, and fome of which really are io. And for a Proof that thefe were their Dod:rines, he refers us not to the Gofpels or to the Epifiles written by the Apoftles of our Lord, but to the Apocalypfe which he reprefents as a Syftem of Jewifh Chrifiianity^ in hopes, I fuppofe, to take Advantage from the obfcure and figurative Style of that Book. He thinks Sir Jfaac Newton has proved it to be a genuine
IVork
426 Worjhip of Angels not
Work of St. John, and that it was written in Nero*s fltme, two or three Tears before the DejlruSlion of Jerufalenti p. 364. And he tells us, that this Book is moft prt^erly the Chrijlian Revelation, or the Re- velation of Jefus Chriji, which is the very Title of that Book : whereas no other Book of the New Tefia- tnent affumes or claims any fuch Character ^ p. 369. But it is evident from the exprefs Declaration of the Book itfelf, that it was not lb properly and im- mediately defigned to be a Revelation of Do^rines, as to be a Revelation of future Events. It is called the Revelation of Jefus Chrifi to fhew unto his Ser- vants the Things which mujl fhortly come to pafs^ ch. i. I : And again, it is called this Prophecy^ ch. xxii. 19. It is therefore a poor trifling Obfervation, that no other Book of the New Teftament has the Word Revelation of Jefus Chrift in the Title of it. If he could prove that no other Book of the New Teftament was given by Infpiration of God (as the Apoftle Paul tells us all Scripture is) or was defigned to inftruft us in the Dodtrine of Jefus Chrift, this would be Ibmething to his Purpofe. And he Jhews his good Will this Way, by obferving, that the Epiftles and Gofpels contain nothing but hijiorical Ac- counts of Fa^is, or pra^ical Rules and Exhorta- tions, &c. But nothing can be more manifeft to any one that ever read thofe Writings, than that they abound with Inftrudions in Point of Bo^rine, And from thefe Writings we fhould have a full Ac- count of the Doftrines of Chriftianity, tho' no fuch Book as the Apocalypfe had been ever written at all. I am fatisfied that it is a truly infpired Book, and of confiderable Ufe : But the Authority of the Chriftian Revelation, and the Difcovery of its Doc- trines, doth not at all peculiarly depend upon that Book ; tho' all that is there faid occafionally con- cerning any of the Chriftian Doftrines, is agreeable to what is delivered in the other Books of the New Teftament.
But
countenanced in the Apocalypfe, 427
But let us examine the Account he pretends to give of the Dodrines of that Book. Firft he tells tis, that the Chrijlian Jews foon fell into grofs Idokr try^ and fet up a great Number of Mediators^ and Interceffofs* with God in/lead of one. And this he pretends to prove from the Apocalypfe^ p. 364, 365. And again p. 372. that the mediatorial JVorfhip of Saints and Angels^ and Praters for the Dead, are all plainly founded in this Book. To fhew that the Angels are there reprefented as Mediators between God and us, iie obferves, that the twenty four El- ders^ or principal Angels^ which flood before the Throne , are reprefented as halving golden Cenfers in their Hands full 0/ Incenfe, which is the Prayers of the Saints. But what if the four and twenty Elders be only the Reprefentatives of the Ghriftian Church, and the Harps and Vials full of Odours, be only defigned to be a Reprefentation, in the figurative Style of Prophecy, of the Worlhip paid to God in the Church, which is Sir Ifaac Newton*s Interpreta- tion, then the Author's Inference from it falls to the Ground. And that the Elders there mentioned are not to be underftood, as he would have it, of the principal Angels., is manifeft, both becaufe the An- gels are plainly diftinguilhed from the Elders, Rev. v. II. and vii. 11. and becaufe thofe Elders are reprefented, in their Song to the Lamb, as blefling him for having redeemed them unto God by bis Blood out of every Kindred, and Tongue, and People, and Nation, Ch, v. 9, 10.
There is another Paflage in that Book, tho* not mentioned by this Writer, that feems at firft view much more to his Purpofe than that which he pro- duces, viz. that concerning the Angel which flood at the Altar, having a golden Cenfer, to whom was given piucb Incenfe, that he Jhould offer it with the Prayers of all Saints ; and that the Smoke of the In- cenfe, which came with the Prayers of the SaintSy afcendtd up before God out of the Angel's Hand,
Jlev,
428 Worjhsp df Ang^k not
Rev. viii;'|,/4i. ; jBut the Word Angel admits of fo many Senies in that Book, .that no Argument can be drawn from it. The Bilhops or Miniilers of the Churches are called the Angels of the Churches. An Angel is reprefented as having xht , everlajling Gofpel ta preach, wnio them that dwell on the Earthy to every Nation^ and Kindred, and tongue, and Peo- ple, Ch. xiv. 6, 7. Where by the Angel h meant all thofe Perfons that were employed to preach the Gofpel, and to call Men to the true Worfhip of God. And as Heaven ^ and the Temple, and Altar there, often fignify, in this Prophecy, the vifible Chriftian Church on Earth, and the Wor- fhip there performed ; fo the Angd Jianding at the Altar, having a golden Cenfer, and offering up the Prayers of the Saints upon the golden Altar, with much Incenfe, may be defigned to fignify no more than this, that the Minifters of the Chriftian Church offered up to God their own Prayers and thofe of the People in folemn A6ls of publick Worfhip, and that thofe Prayers found a gracious Acceptance with God. Thus when the Pfalmift faith, Pfal. cxli. 2. hu nt) Prayer he fet forth be- fore thee as Incenfe, it fignifies no more than if he had faid, Let my Prayers be favourably accepted. There is nothing in this Interpretation, but what is agreeable to the Style of this Book. But if we fhould fuppofe that the Angel here is fpoken of in Allufion to the High Prieft under the Law on the Day of Expiation, then it is the Lord Jeftis Chrijl that is here reprefented by the Angel, as being the only High Priejl of the Chriftian Church in the con- ftant Language of the Nev/ Teftament. And his being here called an Angel is no Objeftion againft this, fince he is reprefented under a Variety of Ima- ges in this Book. And fince this Author grants Sa. John to have been the Author of the Apocalypfe, it is but reafonable that the figurative Language ot this Book ihould be underftood in a conformity to
the
countenanced in the Apocalypfe. 429
the declired Sentiments of this great Apoftle. Now we find him elfewhere plainly fignifying, that our Lord Jefus Chriji is the only Advocate with the Father, as well as the only Propitiation for our Sins^ I Joh. xi. I, 2. And in his Gofpel he reprefents our Saviour as eticouraging his Dilciples to ajk the Father in his Name, as the only Mediator through whom their Prayers would -be accepted, John xiv. 6, ig. Xvi. 23, 26V To which it may be added, that this very Book of the Revelation contains as exprefs a Declaration againjl the Worfhip of An- gels, as 'any is to be fouiid in the whole Scripture. See i^(ft;. jcix. 10, xik^ii. 9. where the Angel twide forbids John to worfhip him. Giir Author endea;- vours to evade thi?, by faying, x^^Ltthe Worjhip of Angels iVas theH mty mediatorial, . and not - immediate nnd dire^ -, and therefore the Angel refufed St. John*j immediate dire^ Adoration'," when kewcls' going to pay it him. But cct'ta'iVily St. John 'TiGvtt intended to Worfhip the An^^l as the fupreme God,^ or as the La^'y it was only an inferior Worfhip he intended to render him. In the' Tranfports of his Gratitude and Refpeft he thre^vhimfelf at hisTeet, .and wa's for paying him an z»f^f ^irreligious Homage ; and yet even this the Angel would not allow, but ex- preisly forbad it, as St. Peter had done in a like Cafe to Cornelius, to fhew how far we Jhould be from doing any thing that looks like rendering 4 religious Worfhip to inferior Beings ; adding a Reaibn for it, becaufehe was his Fellow-Servant, a Servant of God and of Jefus Chrifi as well as he.
What our Author offers to prove, that this Book teacheth the Invocation of Saints at their 'Tombs, and Prayers for the Dead, hath not fb much as the. Sha- dow of an Argument. He obferves, that St. John faw the Souls of them that had been flain for the Word of Go^, crying ou'tj How long, 0 Lord, holy and true, dofi thou not judge and a^'enge our Blood on them that .dwell an the Earth? Chap. vi. 9, 10.
From
43 o Sahation not confined to the
From whence he argues, that // the departed Saints and Martyrs are ftill in fuch a State of earnejl Defire and Expectation of a compleat "Deliverance^ we ought furely to pray for them as they do for us, and even pray to them, or requeji their Prayers and Intercejfions with God for us, whenever we apprehend them pre- fent, Pag. ^66. Let us grant that the Saints above or Church triumphant, do pray to God in behalf of the Church militant on Earth, for putting a Stop to perfecuting Rage and Violence, and for pro- moting the Interefts of his Kingdom of Piety, Righteoufnels, and Charity among Men ; there is nothing in this but what may well be fuppofed, nor did any underftanding Protejiant ever deny it. But fays he, then we ought to pray for them as they do for us : And if by praying for them be meant no more than our praying that the Time may be haftened when their and our Felicity and Glory^ fhall be completed at the Refurredion, when the whole general Affembly and Church of the Firft- born fhall be fully accomplifhed and glorified: fuch a Communion as this between that part of the Church and Family of God which is yet militant on Earth, and that part of it which is triumphant above, they concerned for us, and earneftly defi* ring our Happinefs and Welfare, and we rejoicing in their prefent Glory, and defiring the Completion of it, may juftly be admitted, and is full of Confo- lation. But then he adds, that we ought alfoto pray to them, or requeji their Prefers and Intercejfions with God for us, whenever we apprehend them pre- fent. Our Author wifely adds this. For this Ihews the Impropriety of applying our felves to any par- ticular Saints departed, bccaufe we cannot know that they are prefent with us ; and to pray to them as if they were every where prefent, would be an afcribing to them the peculiar Perfections of God : Or, if they were prefent, it would be improper for us to bow down before them with all the Marks of
religious
Jews, in the Apocatypfe, 43 1
religious Homage and Reverence, as is done in the Church of Rome : for this we find John was not fuffered to do to the Angel when really prefent.
But he tells us, p. 367. That the great and dan- gerous part of the Scheme with regard to thefe pri- mitive ChHftian Jews was, that they confined Salva^ tion to themfelves j that it is evident the Author of tiiis Book confines Salvation to the Jews only. For iWhen the Saints came to be marked and entered int9 the Book of Life^ there are none marked and entered, but Jews only^ twelve Thoufand out of every Iribe ; wid no Gentile was to be faved^ &c. p. 372. But no Argument can be drawn from the calling thofe that were fealed by the Names of the Tribes of Ifrael ; fince, agreeably to the prophetick Style, by Ifrael is fignified the Chriftian Church, as in this very Book by Babylon is fignified Rome ; becaufe as Babylon was the great perfecuting Power under the .Old Teftament, fo Rome ihould be the great Per- fecuter of the Church under the New. So the falfe Seducers to Idolatry are called by the Name of Jezabel, Chap. xi. 8. and Rome is called Sodom \ and Egypt^ the great City where our Lordfhip was cru- cified. Chap. xi. 20. And in the fame Figure the Church is called Jerufalem and the Holy City ; as it is alfo by St. Paul, Gal. iv. 26. Heb. xii. 22. And that it could not be the Intention of St. John, in the Exprefllons produced by this Writer, to confine Salvation to the Jews only, is evident, not only becaufe there are as plain Declarations, as any in the whole New Teftament, to be found in his Writings, concerning Chrifi's being the Saviour of the World, or of all Mankind ; for which fee the PaflTages I had Occafion to cite before, J oh. iii. 16^ X. 16. xi. 52. I John ii. 2 : But becaufe no Ex- prefllons can be ftronger than thofe that are ufed in this very Book, to fignify that fome of all Nations Ihould be faved •, I fhall only produce one Palllige \Q this Purpofe, which is very clear and exprcfs.
It
45 ^ Account of the fifth Monarchy
It is in Chapi vii. of, where ipeaking of the Hap- l^iAefs 'of the Saints, he reprefents them as a great Muliiiiide^ , tjohicb no Mm could . mimher^ of all Na- tions and Kindreds^ and Pesple ' and Toiigues •, and then goes on to defcribe their bleffed State, It is obfervable that this is immediately faid after the Account that is given of the 144000 that were feal- "fed 'out of al'l the 'Tribes of tj^ael. ' Now if we Ihould ivkY^(3i{t ■&i^jr eat Multitude of Saints mentioned V^. 9. to be different from the 144000 T^^Z?^ ones, then even allowing the Author's own Suppofitioa, that thofe were to be underllood literally of jewijb Converts^ ' it would prove, that a great Number of ail Nations Mould '^ faved ■ befides them. But if this great Mul'tifUde of 'Saints of all Nations, G?f. 4lienti©ned ■Ye'T; ' ^, be fuppofed to be the very fame Perfons that ^re reprelented before, as having been fealed out 'of all xh^l^ribes of Ifrael^ then this ihews, that by t\vt 'Tribes of Ifrael we are there -ib tinderftand thb-- 'Chrijiian Church, df all Nations, myftically cailled Ifrael^ in . the prophetical Style. Our Airehor indeed pretends, that, by all Nations ■and Kindreds, -^Cy-Yft Mtov^y to underftand the Jews gathered out of all Nations. And at that rate, what?eyer Expreffions had been ufed to fignify that the Goi|jel Salvation ihould .extend to all Na- tio'ns, he might ftill have pretended that it was to be underftood only of the Jews. But whereas this Phrafe of -People and Kindreds^, and Tongues and Nations, is frequently ufed in this Book, it never once fignifies the Jews of all Nations, as will ap- pear to any o^e that will confult- the Paflages where this Phrafe is ufed. 'Ch. xi'.«p.i- xii. 8.^ xiii. 3, 7. xiv. 6, 7, 8, :Xi4i. 15. ■'■ -'
The Account our Atithor pretends to give of the fifth Monarchy foretold in the Book of the Reve- lation, that was immediately to fucceed the Deftru^ion of the fourth^ or Roman Monarchy, which was to happen in that very Age, is entirely mifreprefented.
There
/;/ the Apocalypfe^ " conjidered, 43 3
There is nothing in this Book that looks Jike creeling a Monarchy or Empire of the Jews above all other Nations, in whicli they were to glut their Re- venge upon the Gentile World, which is the Idea he gives of that fifth Monarchy, as he calls it. Thofe that are defcribed as Saints in this Book, and that fhall be Partakers of the Happinefs and King- dom there defcribed, are reprefented to be thofe of all Nations that keep the Commandments of God, and the Faith of Jefus, Rev. xiv. 12. and that fuffered for the Word of God, and the 'J'efiimony of JeftiSy Ch. XX. 4. With regard to the New Jerufalem there defcribed, the Nations [t^ \^vy\, a Word commonly ufed to fignity the Gentiles] of them that are faved, are reprefented as vjalking in it, Ch. xxi. 24, And the Leaves of the Tree of Life are faid to htfor the healing of the Nations, Ch. xxii. 3. And no Jew would ever have made ufe of fuch Expref- fions to fignify that the Jews only Ihould Ihare in the Benefits of that glorious and happy State.
Our Author would have all that is faid in the Apocalypfe concerning the New Jerufalem, to be Bnderftood literally of a real City that was to come down from Heaven, and to he built without Hands ^ -12000 Furlongs, or 1500 Miles fquare, &c. and that all the Gentiles fhould be forced to bring all their Riches into it, as Contributions and Marks of Homage to the Jewilh Meffiah, who was to reign there a thoufand Tears. And he might as juftly take every thing that is faid in the whole Book in a ftri6l literal Senfe. But by fuch an Attempt, in- ftead of expofing the Book of the Revelation, which is undoubtedly his Defign, he would effecStually ex- pofe his own Abfurdity. It is manifeft to every one that confiders the figurative Style that is every, where preferved throughout this Book, that thisj Defcription of the New Jerufalem is only defigned to be a figurative Reprefentation of a very glorious and happy State, of which good Men lliould be
F f Partakers,
434 Account tf the fifth Monarchy
Partakers, and the Felicity and Glory of which is defcribed by Images drawn from thofe Things that are ufually accounted the moft fplendid and magni- ficent here on Earth -, and yet at the fame time it \t intimated, that the Happinefs and Glory of it fhall be heavenly and fpiritual, chiefly confifling in God's gracious Prefence, and in the Purity and Holinefs of the blefled Inhabitants, and the Manifeftations of the Divine Love and Favour towards them. See Kev. xxi. 3, 4, i^c.
Arid whereas this Writer, in order to fhew that the Prophecy of this Book is falfe, would have it, that all the Events there foretold are reprefented as Things that were immediately to be accomplifhed in that very Age, becaufe it is /aid to he a Revelation of Things which were Jhortly to come to pafs •, it is evident from the Book itfelf, that the Intention of this could not be to fignify that all the Events there prophefied of were Ihortly to- come to pafs : for among other things there prophefied of is the final Judgment, when all the Dead, fmall and great, Jhall jland before God, and be judged according to their fVorks, Rev. xxii. 12. And this is reprefented therS as not to happen till the thoufand Yeai"s of Chrift*s Reign on Earth were paft. So that it is plain, that when it is faid to be a Revelation of Things Jhortly to come to pafs, it can only be intended to fignify, that the Things there prophefied of were to begin immediately to be accomplifhed. Thefe Expreffi- ons fhew where the Fulfilment of that Prophecy fhould begin, not where it fhould end. And ac- cordingly it contains a Series of Events to begin from that Time, and to end with the general Judgment.
It would carry me too far, to enter into the Apo- calyptick Computations. Any one who would fee them Well handled, may, amongft others, confult a good Book lately publifhed by Mr. Lovuman *. But whereas this Writer, in order to fhew that the.
• Taraphrafe and liofes Oil the Revelation, 410,
1260
in the Apocalypfcy conjldered. 435
1260 Days there mentioned are to be underftcod of lb many natural Days, pretends, that there is no Foundation in Scripture^ for taking a Day for a Tear^ in the Interpretation of thofe Prophecies •, and that the Jews had no fuch Computation as putting a Day for a Teary tho* they bad annual Weeks. And therefore when JVeeks are mentioned, as in the famous Prophecy of Daniel, it may fignify Weeks of Years, as well as Weeks of Days : I would only obferve, that if Week, which in the proper literal Signification fig- nifies {kven. Days, may be underftood to fignify feven Years-, I fee noReafonin the World, why a . Day may not be put for a Year. For if it be faid, a Day in itfelf fignifies a natural Day, and nothing ehe j fo a Week in itfelf fignifies feven Days, and nothing elfe, and is always fo underftood in Scripture^ whea put alone without the Addition of Years, except in the Style of Prophecy. And if in that Style, by the Author*s own Acknowledgment, a Week, which properly fignifies feven Days, may be put for feven Years, tho* it is not in the Prophecy itfelf exprefsly declared to be a Week of Years ; then in the fame Style a Day may be put for a Year. And that it muft be underftood fo in the Prophefy of the Apo- calypfe is, I think, manifeft by internal Arguments drawn from the Prophecy itfelf. For any one that carefiiUy confiders what is reprefented as hap- pening in that twelve hundred and ftxty Days, or forty and two Months, will eafily be convinced, that three Years and a half is too fmall a Period for fo many and great Events, which take up near one half of the whole Prophecy *. Nor do I fee, upon this Suppofition, where is the Neceflity of fpeaking fo often of the Favour and Patience of the Saints, ^f the perfecuted State of the Church were to be of fuch a fhort Duration.
It is not to be wondred at, that there is a confi- derable Obfcurity with regard to many Circum-
• See Lo-vjptan on the Revelation, p. 1 06.
F f 2 ftances
4j6 Account of the fifth Monarchy
fiances of the Prophecies in that Book, and parti- ciiJarly as to the precife Time of the Bates of the Events. Several Reafons might be offered to Ihew that it was not proper that they fhould be more dif- tinftly marked out: but yet there is fuch a plain Defcription of an idolatroiis and perfecuting Power that was to arife in the Church ; the Seat where that Power was to be fixed is fo plajnly pointed out, viz. Rome, and that it was to be iinder a dif- ferent Form oi Government in the Ronton Empire from that which fubfifted in St. John's time, and • after the Rife of ten Kingdoms into which that Empire was to be divided, which did not happen till many hundred Years after this Prophecy : the Arts of Seduction and Deceit that fhouid be made ule of, the general Ipreading of the Apoftacy, and the grievous Sufferings to which the faithful few fhould be expofed, are fo difiin6tly and flrongly defcribed : and we have feen all this fo wonder- fully accomplifhed by a Power the moft flrange that ever was in the World, and in which all thefe Charadiers are to be found, that it is no fmall Con-' firmation of the divine Authority of this Prophe- cy. And it is alfo foretold that after the Bejiruc- tion of this Power, there fliall be a glorious State of' the Church, a State of univerfal Purity and Peace, to continue a thoufand Years : our Author may call this a ffih Monarchy if he pleafes, but let him prove that there is any thing in this unbecoming the Wifdom and Goodnefs of God . The Profpeds of it cannot but be very refrefhing to every good Man that hath any Zeal for the Glory of God, or for the Good of Mankind, and for the Interefls of true Jleligion and Righteoufnefs in the World.
But the Author o^ efts that this fifth Monarchy was to be founded in Blood and Bejlru^ion as the four Monarchies before had been fuccefjively founded^ p. 7,6^. or as he expreffeth it, p. 372. that not ^»^ Gentile was to be faved: they were all to he given up
to
in the ApQcalypfe, confidered. 437
to the S'-jLwrd, Plague^ and Famine •, or fuch Jttdg- ments by •which God had determined to dejlroy the fourth to make way for the fifth Aftf;z^r<:^y, ''ui;hich looks very unlike converting the whole World by Ar- gument and Reafon^ and hy the Motives and Induce- ments of Beneficence and Love^ under a Kingdom or State of Government, that mujl depend upon inward Conviction and free Choice. His Infinuations that the Jews only were to be Partakers of the Benefits of this Kingdom have been already fufficiently ex- pofed : but it will be eafily allowed, that it is plainly fignified in this Book, that God after hav- ing long born with them, would inflict fevere Judgments on his obftinate Enemies who had per- fecuted his faithful Servants with {q much Cruelty, and Rage, and had feduced the Nations by their wicked Arts, and propagated Iniquity, Vice, and Idolatry. This Writer here feems to think it is a Breach of Liberty of Confcience for God himfelf to inflidl Plague, Famine, ^c. upon the wicked Oppofers , of his Authority and Laws : And for ought I know, he may think it a Breach of Liber- ty, and inconfiflent with God's governing his Crea- tures by Love, to punifh the wicked at all either in this World or in the next. But tho* not to punifh the Wicked might feem to be a Lenity and In- dulgence to them, yet which is far worfe, it would be a Cruelty to good Men. It would be a fubvert- ing the Order and Welfare of the moral World, and a fuffering Vice and Wickednefs to ravage with- out Controul, which would be abfolutely inconfiftent with a wife and good Government. I would fain know of this benevolent Author, who is afraid of God's punifhing the obftinately Wicked .? becaufe this would be very unlike converting the World by Inducements of Beneficence and Love, under a King- dom that muji depend upon inward Convi£iionr and free Choice-, I would know of him v/hat Room there would be for Mens afting in Religion upon in-
F f 3 ward
43 8 ^he Istw Teftajnent
ward Convi^ion and free Choice, if God fliould air ways fufFer perfecuting Powers to prevail, and fet no Bounds to their Rage. How the punifhing and deflroying fuch Powers, or which is the fame Thing, putting a flop to Tyranny and Perfecution, is the Way to hinder free Choice, he would do well to explain. On the contrary, it is evident that the removing fuch idolatrous perfecuting Powers is ne- celTary in the Nature of Things, to nnajce way for fuch a happy State of Government where Truth, and Love and Benevolence muft reign.
Thus I have confidered our Author's Gbjeftions againft the Apocalypfe, one of the facred Books of the New Teftament. But he is not content with •this. He endeavours as far as in him lies to de- llroy the Authority of the whole Canon of the New Teftament. He reprefents it as fo full qf Cor- ruptions and Interpolations that it is not *f at all to *' be depended upon : that the Chriftian Jewsh^i^ " the revifmg and publifhing that Canon in their ** own Hands, and altered it as they pleafed in " that very Age ; and that as they left it, and as V* It now ftands, it is a Syftem of Chriftian Ju- " daifm, a Jumble of two inconliftent Religions ; " yea that Chrift's own Difciples reported every *' Thing that Jefus did or faid according to their *' own Prejudices, and are therefore not to be de- " pended on for a juft Account either of Doftrines *' or Fadls." See ^.440, 441. '
I fhall not repeat what I have elfewhere offered to fhew that never were there njore unexception- able Witnefies than the j^qfties, and that the New Teftament Writings have all the Marks of genuine Purity and Integrity that any Writings can have, and that it was not in the Power of any Pcrfbns if they had been willing to have introduced a general Corruption into thofe Writings * either with regard
|P"* See Anfwer to Chriftianity as old as the Creation, ^o/. II. Ghap.ii. ancjv.'
not corrupted by the Jews. 439
to the Dodrines or Fads. I Ihall only obferve at prefent, that the Suppofition this Writer makes of their being corrupted by the Jews, thofe very Jews who he tells us would have crucified a thoufand Mejftahs, rather than take in the Gentiles as Partakers in the Kingdom with the primitive ek^ People of God', and who at laft being difappointed in Jefus fet up anotheif Mejftah one Barchochab, p. 374, 440. is the wildeft the moft extravagant Sup- pofition in the World. For not to urge, that it was not in their Power to have corrupted the ori- ginal facred Writings of the New Teftament, which were immediately difperfed far and wide among the Gentile Churches, we have a manifeft Proof in Fa6t that they did not interpolate and corrupt them in Favour of their own Jewijh Notions and Prejudices, becaufe none of thofe which this Writer reprefents as their Notions and Doctrines, and as making up what he calls the Jewijh Gofpel, fuch as the Doc- trines concerning Chriji's being only a temporal Mejfuzh, and national Deliverer of the Jews, con- cerning the Obfervation of the Law of Mofes as abfolutely necelTary to Juftification and Acceptance with God, concerning the worfhipping of Angels, and letting up many Mediators and Interceflbrs in- Head of one, concerning the confining Salvation to the Jews only, and raifing them to a Height of Power and Dominion over all Nations, that they might be thoroughly revenged on the Gentile World -, I fay, none of thofe Doftrines are to be found in the New Teftament Writings. And to imagine that the Chriftian Jews, as he calls them, Ihould interpolate and corrupt the New Teftament Wri- tings in order to accommodate them to their own Notions and Prejudices, and yet ftiould leave the entire Scheme of Religion there laid down quite con- trary to thofe Notions and Prejudices, and neither ^Iter thofe Paffages that are moft inconfiftent with thofe Notions, nor infert any Pafliiges in Favour of
F f 4 them,
440 1'b^ New Teftament
them, is the moft abfurd and unaccountable Suppo^ fition that ever was made.
But our Author is pleafed to inftance in fome Things which he looks upon to be Proofs of fuch Interpolations and Corruptions. Such he would have thofe Paffiiges to be that relate to the Dhinity of our Saviour -, but he would do well to tell us what Inducements the Chriftian Je'ivs could have to foift in fuch Interpolations. The Ebionites^ Cerinthians, and others who called themfelves Chriftians, and yet urged the Neceffity of the Obfervation of the Law of Mofenj would never . have inferted thofe PalTages, but rather the contrary, fince they did not acknowledge our Lord's Divinity. And be- fides, it is evident, that no Part of the New Tef- tament affords ftronger Paffiiges to this Purpofe than are to be found in the Writings of St. Paul. But certainly if we fhould fuppofe that the Chriftian Jews had it in their Power to have corrupted his Epiftles (which is a moft abfurd Suppofition) it would have appeared by their altering or corrupt- ing fome of the Paffages that feem to be ftrongeft againft the Obligation of the Law of Mofes^ and that relate to the Gentiles being taken in as Fellow- Heirs and Members of the fame Body : But the whole Frame of his Epiftles bears the plain Gha- racrers of genuine Purity and Integrity. Another Inftance he brings is, that in favour of their old na- tonal Prejudices, Ghrift's own Difciples made hirn a falfe Propbety they made him prophefy of the End of the Worlds and of his fecond coming to "Judgment^ as a ^hing very fhortly- to happen during that prefent Generation^ p. 440. And he obferves farther, that ih^ expetled Chrijl^s fecond coming in that very Age or Gmeration^ with all the Powers of Heaven to re- jlore the Kingdom to the Houfe of David, in an ever- lajling Succeffion of Power and Dominion over all Nations to the End of the World, p. 441. But no where do any cf the Apoftles affign ihtprecife Time
qf
not corrupted by the Jews. 441
of Chrift's coming to the general Judgment -, on the contrary, they plainly let us know that the exafl Time of it was not revealed to them. The coming they fpeak of, as foretold by our Lord to happen in that very Age, is his com- ing not to reftorc the Kingdom to the Hoiife of Da- vid in the Jeivijh Senfe, and to raife .the Jews to a Height of Pouter aitd Dominion ever all Nations^ as this Writer is pleafed to reprefent it ; but to de- fir oy Jerufalem^ and to put an utter End to that State and Polity, and inflid the moft dreadful Pu- nifhment and Defolation upon them that ever was injfiid:ed in any Age, or upon any Nation. And this is fo far from making Chrifi a falfe Prophet, that it furnilheth a glorious Froof among many others that might be produced of his divine MifTion. And it is remarkable, that tho' they afllire us that our Lord fo clearly foretold the utter Deftruftion of the City and Temple of Jerufalem, yet when they give us an Account of this, they never add the leaft hint of his foretelling that the Kingdom fhould be reftored to the Jews^ and that they fhould be fully revenged on the Gentiles, which one fhould think they would have done if they had interpolated thefe Predidlions in favour of their own national Prejudices.
Our Author farther pretends that Chrifi^s Dilci- ples afcribed feveral Miracles to him, in which there could have been only an Exertion of Power without Wifdom or Goodnefs, but as he does not condelcend to mention them, I need not take any particular Notice of this Infinuation. I fliall only obferve, that the Miracles they relate are Things which they themfelves heard and law, yea which were done in open View of Multitudes, and even of their moil watchful and malicious Enemies. And the Accounts were publilhed in the very Age in which thofe Fadls were fiid to be done, and when it would liave been the eafieft Thing in the World to have
deteded
442 l!he New Teftamc»t, tic,
dctedled and contradifled them if they had not been true. And indeed, never were there, all Things confidered, more credible WitnelTes. They ap- peared by their whole Conduft to be Men of great Probity and Simplicity. The Do6lrine they preach- ed, and which was confirmed by thofe Miracles, was contrary to all their moft rooted and favoured Prejudices, and former Notions of Things. They themfelves received that Diodrine on the Credit of the Fad:s they relate, and to which they were Witnefies. And they perfevered in their Accounts of thofe Fads, and in their Profeflion of that Dodrine, with an unparallel*d Conftancy, and even with a wonderful Satisfadlion and Joy of Mind, under the moft grievous Sufferings, and at length fealed their Teftimony with their Blood. Nor is it conceivable to any that imparti- ally confiders thefe Things, and the 'pure and fdf- dertjing Scheme of Religion they taught, upon what other Principles they could proceed in all this, than what they themfelves profeffed, a Regard to the Glory of God, and to the Good of Mankind, and an earneft Defire of promoting true Religion, Piety, and Virtue in the World, together with the Hopes of a glorious Reward and Happinefs in a future State. And the being aded by thefe Prin- ciples is abfolutely inconfiftent with their being Im- poftors and Deceivers \ who put a deliberate folemn Cheat upon Mankind in the Name of God, and witnefled to Fadls which they themfelves knew to be falfe. And our Author himfelf after putting a Cafe which pretty exadly anfwers to that of the Apojiksy feems to acknowledge, that it is very pro- lahlc that Men qualified and ailing as it is here fup- pofed could have no Ikfign to deceive us. See p. 90—93.
C H A P.
( 443 )
CHAP. XVI.
S'he Moral Philofopher fits up for re^ifying the Er- rors of CJmfiians with regard to fome of the par- ticular VoSirines of Chrijiianity. fiis Obje^ions againfl the Do^rine of Chriffs Satisfaction confi" dered. 'There is nothing in it contrary to Jufiice, The Fullnefs of the Satisfaction not incon/ijlent with a free Pardon, It doth not rob God of the Glory of his Mercy ^ and give the whole Praife to Chriji. The Pretence that Chri/l's Satisfaction is needlefs iecaufe Repentance alone is fufficient without ii, examined. It doth not deflroy the Necejfity of per- fonal Repentance and Obedience^ but ejiablijheth it. Chriji'* s Prayer to the Father that the Cup might pafs from him not inconjijlent with the Notion of his dying for the Sins of the JVorld. The Aahor^s Affertion that there was no fuch thing as vicarious Sacrifices under the Law of Mofis, and the Way he takes to account for Chrifi^s being called a Propitiation^ ex- amined. The Reprefintation he makes of the Gofi pel DoCfrine of Pardon upon- Repentance. His Abfurdity and Inconfifiancy in this Jhewn. His Attempt agaiiifi the pofitive Precepts of Chrifiian- ity confidered. The Arguments he draws from the Differences among Chrifiians, to prove that none of the Doctrines of revealed Religion are of any Certainty or Ufe to Alankind, Jhewn to be vain and inconclnfrve . His Encomium pn Moral Philofophy. The Conclufion.
IH A V E now gone thro' the feveral Objec- tions of our pretended Moral Philofopher as far as they affed the Authority of the Holy Scrip- tures in general, whether of the Old Teftament or of the New. It doth not properly come within my Defign to enter upon the Confideration of the
particular
444 Objections againji
particular Doftrines of Chriftianity, efpecially thofe that are controverted among Chriftians, I might therefore entirely pafs by thofe Parts of our Au- thor's Book, where he pretends to fet up for recti- fying the Errors and Miftakes that have obtained among Chriftians with regard to fome of the Doc- trines of the Gofpel. He is certainly a very unfit Perfon to bring Chriftians to the true original Chriftianity, and to the Purity of Dodlrine as laid down in the New Teftament, who does all he can to fubvert and deftroy the Authority of thofe facred Writings. There is no one Doftrine againft which he exerts himfelf with fo much I^'orce and Vigour, as that of Chrift's Satisfaftion. He is pleafed on this Occafion to give us a Specimen of his Sermo- nizing Faculty, as a Sample how the Cler^ ought to preach, and what Doctrines they are to inJlruEi us in as from Chrijl and the Apqftles. And the Difcourfe he entfertaineth us with on this Subjeft lafts, with DigrefTions, for about a hundred Pages together. If its Confufion and Tedioufnefs were its principal Faults, I fhould not have endeavoured to difturb the good Opinion he feems to have of his own Performance; but the peculiar Air of In- folence and Scorn with which he treateth a Doc- trine that hath been generally thought by Chrijlians to be plainly founded in the New Teftament, and the bitter Reproach he poureth forth upon it, de- ferveth fome Animadverfion. He not only repre- fenteth it as a moft abfurd ajtd irrational T)o5frine, but as the Strong-hold of Sin and Satan in the Chrif tian World, p. 146. and thinks he has faid enough to fiibvsrt and deftroy this Hypothefts under all the Appear dnc(s and Conjiruoiions of it among our feve- ral Schematifls and Faith-mongers, p. 444. I fhall therefore take fo much Notice of what he hath advanced on this Head as may fuffice to fhew that there is no Occafion for all this Boafting and Confi- dence, and that this Doctrine may ilill ftand its
Ground
Cbri/Ts SatisfaBion confiderd, 445
Ground notwithftanding the Attacks of this formi- dable Writer.
The true Notion of Chriil's Satisfa^ion, or Chrift*s dying for our Sins, in general, is this, " That it is " a Provifion made by the Wifdom of God to " difpenfe his Grace and Favour towards guiky *' Creatures in fuch a Way as doth, at the liime " time, fecure the Majefby of his Government and " the Authority of his Law, and fliew forth his Juf- " tice and Purity." And I beheve there is fcarce any Man but will own that if fuch a Way can be found out, it is better, and more becoming the wife and righteous Governor of the World, than it would be to pardon and reftore Sinners abfolutely to Favour in a Way of meer Prerogative, without any fuch Provifion for maintaining the kights of his Government, and vindicating the Honour and Authority of ;his Laws. The Gofpel Revelation ex- hibiteth very extraordinary Difplays of the Divine Grace and Mercy towards Sinners of the human Race. It not only containeth a full and free Offer of the Pardon of all our Sins, how great and hei- nous foever, upon our Repentance and Amend- ment, but it promifeth a compleat Felicity of Body and Soul to continue to all Eternity, as the Reward of our imperfeft Obedience in this State of Trial ; a Reward tranfcending what we could have pre- tended to have merited, if we had never finned at all. But at the fame time we are there informed that all thefe ineftimable Bleffings, Pardon, and Peace, and eternal Life, are only conferred upon us thro* Jefus Chriji, as the great appointed Mediator, who according to the Father's Will took upon him our Nature, and gave himfelf up to the moft grie- vous Sufferings, and to Death itfelf, to make Atonement for our Sins, and to obtain eternal Re- demption for us. And nothing can furnifh a more awful and affedting Proof of God's righteous Ab- horrence of Sin, and the fleady Regard he hath to
the
44^ OsjEfcTioNS dgainji
the Majcfty of his Government, and the Authority of his Laws, than that when his infinite Grace and Mercy incHned and determined him to pardon, and rfeftore his offending Creatures, and raife them to the highcft Felicity upon their Repentance, and fincere tho*imperfe6t: Obedience, he would not do it upon any leis Confideration than this, that his own Son fhoiild give himfelf up for us an Offering and a Sacrifice for cur Sins ; and that he would not allow fuch guilty Creatures as we are an immediate Accefs to him in our own Names, but only thro* the Mediation and IntercefTion of that great Redeemer, who fuffered and died for us, the Jujl for the Unjufi, that he might bring us unto God *. This gives thehigheft poffible Weight to the New Covenant. And when the Blelfings of it are difpenfed in this Method, it hath a rriariifeft Tendency to prevent our abufing thofe glorious Difplays of his Goodnefs and Mercy that are made to us in the Golpel. For fmce God would not pardon and reftore even penitent Sinners to his F^our without fo extraordinary an Expe- dient for vindicating the Authority of his Govern* ment and Laws, this fhewis that if we rejeft the Grace of the Covenant, and the Terms upoit which the Benefits of it are now offered to us, we have no farther Favour or Mercy to hope for : There re- maineth no more Sacrifice for Sin (for we cannot ex- pe6l another Sacrifice equal to that which we have
* Our Author, in his Account of the Rebellion of the fallen Angels, of which he gives us as particular a Relation as if he had been an Eye-witnefs, is pleafed to acquaint us ; That hereupon it tvas enabled as an eternal immutable Lanu of God and Nature , that no Petition /hould ever be heard or accepted far the future but <what /hould come immediately from the Petitioner himfelf p. 232, 233. that is, as he plainly intends it, that no Prayer ihould ever be offered up to God in the Name of any Interceffor or Media- tor whatfoever. But he doth not inform us where we are to find this Lav/ ; and we liave no Reafon to think him fo well sicquainted with the Laws of Heaven, as to take his bate Word for it that fuch a Law was enaded.
rejeded)
Chrift's Satisfadlon, confidered. 447
rejefted) hut a certain fearful looking for of Judg- ment, &c. So that God hath taken care to ma- nifeft his re ff oral Juftice and Hatred againft Sin, even in the very Methods of our Reconciliation. And we are' taught in the Gojfjpel ftill to have the Blood and Sacrifice of Chrilt in View, whilft we are receiving the gteateft Mercies and Benefits from God, that we may not forget his Juftice and Purity whilft we experience his rich Grace and Mercy.
The Objeiiions of our Moral Philofopher againft the Dodtrine of Chrift's Satisfaftion are of various Kinds. I Ihali take Notice of the principal of them, and thofe upon which he feemetii to lay the greateft Strels.
" That God fliould punifh the Innocent for •« the Guilty (faith he) and fparc the Guilty for this *« very Reafon, becaufe an innocent Perfon has *' fuffered what they ought to have fuffered, is a " ftrange Do<flrine : but ftranger ftill that fuch a *' Subverfion of all moral Government, and in- " verting the Courfe of all redoral Juftice, ftiould " be neccflary to fatisfy that very Juftice,** p. 148. He has this over again, p. 222. where he calls it by way of Ridicule, a moft amffzing and fhipendous Projec- tion^ beyond the Comprehenfion of Men and Angels.
Bat doth not this Writer himfelf allow that Chrijl was perfedlly pure and innocent in himfelf; and yet that by the Will of the Father he was fubjefled to the moft grievous Sufferings, and was treated as if he had been a Sinner, and thereby as it were put himfelf In the Place of Sinners ? p. 225. and that all this was for our Benefit ? From whence it fol- loweth, that it was not unfuitable to the Divine Juftice, to inflifl grievous Sufferings on a Perfon per- fe<5lly pure and innocent, for the Sake and Benefit of guilty finful Creatures, and with a View to pro- mote their Welfare and Happineis. And if this be allowed, I cannot fee what Foundation there is for the mighty Clamours that arc raifed againft the
Dodlrine
44^ A Vindication
Doflrine of Chrijl^s, Satisfaflion on this Head, un- der Pretence that it fuppofet;h an innocent Perfon to fufFer for the Guilty. If it be fliid, that tho' Chrift fuffered for our Good, he did not fuffer in the flead of Sinners, or as a Punifjoment fpr their Sins -, I cannot fee why it fhould be thought unjuft in God to lay Sufferings upon Chrijl confidered as an innocent Perlbn who had voluntarily undertaken to fufFer inftead of the Guilty, that they might be pardoned and faved, when it is not thought unjufl to lay the fame Sufferings upon him, tho' perfedlly innocent without any fuch Confideration. Our Author owns that Chrtfi tho' innocent, fuffered, but he will not allow that his Sufferings were penal -, as if the calling xh^m. Ajjii^iions rather than Punifli- ments altered the Nature of them, or made them to be lefs grievous and painful to the Suffering Per- fon. It is true, that the charging an innocent Per- lbn with Crimes which he was not guilty of, and. then compelling him againll his own Conlent to fuffer for the Crimes of others, would both be cruel and unjufl in the Perfon inffifting that Punifhment ; and would render the Sufferings of the Perfon thus punifhed much more grievous than if he had fuf- fered the fame Evils without any fuch Confideration, but merely as Calamities that had befallen him. But if we fliould fuppofe an innocent Perfon to fuf- fer for the Faults of others, the Punifliment of which he had from a noble Principle of Love and Kindnefs to the guilty Perfons taken upon himfelf, that the Offenders might be fpared and freed from Punifhment, this certainly would not render the Evils and Sufferings he endured on that Account, more grievous or affliftive to him, than if he had fuffered the fame Evils merely as Calamities, or as a Trial and Exercife of his Patience and Submif- fion without any fuch view at all. Yea his Suffer- ings may be juflly fuppofed to be lefs grievous and afflictive to him on that Supppfition, than otherwife
, they
Chrifl's Satisfadlon, c'onjidered. 44.9
\\\ty would be^ becaufe of the happy Effe5is they would produce for the Benefit of others, as well as becaufe on this Suppofition they were what the Per- fon himfelf had freely undertaken for valuable Ends.
But ftill it will be urged, that the Suffering of fuch an innocent Perfon for the Guilty could not be properly a Satisfadbion to Jujiice. To which I an- Iwer, That if Juftice were merely an Appetite of Revenge againft the particular Perfon that had of- fended, then it could not be fatisfied but by his perfonal Punifhment, and in no Cafe could the Pu- nifhment of another be accepted for him. But the juftice of God is only a wife and fteady Will of vindicating and preferving the Honour and Autho- rity of his Laws an^ Government, an unalterable Refblution to aft as becl^mes the wife and righteous Governor of the World, for the maintaining of Order and the univerfal Good, by keeping up by all proper Methods an Awe of his Authority, an Abhorrence of Sin, and a Fear of offending him in the Minds of his Creatures. And if the difpen- fing Pardon and Salvation to guilty Creatures, thro* Chrift's fuffering and dying for our Sins, anfwers thefe great and valuable Ends, it fatisfies his Juftice in the propereft Senfe in which that Phrafe can be ufed with regard to the Deity.
The Reafon of inflifting Punilhments in general is not merely to exercife Revenge upon the guilty Perfon, or to take Pleafure in his Pain or Miferyi. but to vindicate the Authority of the Laws, to deter Perfons from tranfgreffmg them^ and to preferve Order and good Government in the World : and as thefe Ends cannot ordinarily be anfwered but by the perfonal Punilhment of the Offender himfelf, therefore this is ordinarily neceffary. But if a Cafy may happen in which thefe Ends may be anfwered by another Perfon's interpofing to fuffer inftead of. the Guilty, no Reafon in the Nature of Things ctui
G g be
450 Objections againjl
be produced to prove that in fuch a Cafe fuch a Sub- ftitution might not be accepted, or that it would be unjuft in that Cale to lay upon fuch a Perlbn, tho' in himfclf innocent, the Punifhment or Sufferings which he voluntarily took upon him to endure for the iiike of the Guilty. And this would be beyond all reafonable Exception, if it could be fo ordered as to tend upon the whole to the Glory and Ad^ vantage even of the fiiffering Perfon himfelf, by re- componfing fo noble and generous an Acl of Kind- nds and Benevolence •, and if at the fame time the Aiithsnty of the Government be in this way effec- tually manifefted and difplay'd, and the Majefly of the Laws vindicated, and the main Ends of Pu- nifhment obtained. Now all thefe Conditions ma- nifeftly concur in the Cafe <rf our Lord Jefus ChriiVs fuffering for Sinners.* For in this Method as the greateft Mercy is fhewn to the Sinners them- felves who obtain the Pardon of their Sins, and are raifed to the higheft Glory and Felicity upon their Repentance and fincere tho' imperfedc Obe- dience •, fo there is an awful Difplay made of the Majejly of God's Government and the Authority of his Laws, in that he would not pardon and re- llore Sinners to Favour without the Intervention of a Mediatcr of fuch eminent Dignity, who was him- felf to undergo the mofl grievous Sufferings in the Stead and upon the Account of the Offenders, in order to their Redemption. And at the fame time no irreparable Injury is done to the fuffering Per- fon himfelf, who both freely confented and under- took thus to fuffer for Sinners, and is now as the Reward of his Sufferings crowned with Glory and Honour, exalted in that very Nature in which he kiffered to the higheft Degree of Glory and Fe- licity.
But our Author flirther objeds on the other Hand, that if we fuppofe Juftice to be fatisfied, Uiere is no room for ihe Exercife of pardoning
Mercy,
Chrift's Satlsfadioni conftdered. 451
Mercy, and that the Notion of SatisFaftion is ab- iblutely inconfiftent with a free Pardon. For if the ^atisfa£iion be full and complete^ it cannot reafonably he refttfedi and miift entitle the J3ebtor or Offender to an Acquitment in Law, which Acquitment in that Cafe is an A^ of Jujlice, and not to be conftdered as a Pardon or an AB of Grace, But where the Satis^ fa^lim is not thus full and complete, it is no Satis- faElion, and good for nothing. To this Purpofe is his reafoning from p. 148. to/». 153. where he alfo endeavoureth to fliew that the fuppofing God hiiii- felf to have found out and contrived this Satisfac- tion doth not at all alter the Cafe, or render it an A<51 of Grace and Mercy. The whole of what is there offered proceedeth upon this Suppofition •, that there is an exaft Parallel between the Sarisfadion, Chrift made to his heavenly Father for the Sins of Mankind, and a pecuniary Surety*s paying the Mo- ney to the Creditor on the Behalf of the Debtor. In which Cafe it will be eafily acknowledged that the Acquitment of the Debtor by the Creditor is an Ad of Juftice 5 and that the Creditor doth 'not pro- perly remit any thing at all, or exercife any A(5t of Mercy or Generofity to ''the Dv^btor, but all the Obligation is to the Surety. And if the Credit'oY fhould himfelf contrive to find out fome Perfon that would pay him the Money inftead of the Debtor who was inlblvent, this would not hz lb much a Proof of his Kindnels and Compaffion to the Deb^ tor, as of his own cunning Contrivance to get his Money. But if this Writer were as well verfed in this Controverfy as he pretendeth to be, he could hot but know that the ableft Defenders of the Doc- trine of Chrifl*s Satisfaftion have maintained that it is in feveral Refpe6ts very different from the Sa- tisfaflion rriade by a pecuniary Surety to the Cre- ditorj by paying him his Money. And the Ab- furdity gf arguing from the one of thefe to the othei? hath been often ihewn. The Satisfa<^ion made by
G g 2 Chr^
452 Objections againft
Chrijl by fuffering for our Sins, is properly an Expe- dient fixed upon by the wife and righteous Gover- . ncfr of the World for difpenfing his Mercy to pe- nitent Sinners of the human Race, in fuch a Way as may at the fame time vindicate the Authority of his Laws, and preferve the Rights and Dignity of his Government. And on this Suppofition we may be fare, that if he fixeth upon any Expedient, it will be liich as i^ fitted to anfwer the End propofed by it, and in this Senfe will be a fufficient Satisfadtion. But the Sufficiency of the Satisfadion taken in this View, that is, its being fitted to anfwer the End propofed by it, which is, to preferve the Reve- rence due to God's Authority and Laws, and to manifeft his glorious Greatnefs, Juftice, and Pu- rity, at the fame time that he exercifeth the higheft; Mercy to the Sinner •, is indeed a Proof of his great reftoral JVifdom, but doth not at all diminifli the Freedom of his Mercy. The Pardon is as free to the Offenders, and is as much the Ef- f&6k of his Grace and Goodnefs, as if it had been given abfolutely without any fuch Provifion or Ex- pedient at all. And this particular Way of doing It, by giving his own Son to fuff'er in our Stead, is a more glorious Proof of his rich Grace and Good- nefs (and therefore flill fpoken of in Scripture as the mofl wonderful Inflance of his Love to Man- kind that can pofTibly be conceived) than if he had pardoned Sinners by a meer Aft of his abfolute Prerogative without any fuch Satisfadion at all. It is ftill true, that eternal Life is thtfree Gifioi God to undeferving Sinners, with this enhancing Circumflance, that in order to open a Way for conferring it upon us in a Manner fuited to the Glory of his Government and moral Excellencies, and the Order and general Good of the moral World, he gave his Son to fuffer and die for our Sins, and confers this Life upon us through his Blood and Mediation.
It
Chrift's Satisfadion, confidered. 453
It is therefore far from being true, which our Author urgeth againft this Dodrine, that in this Method all our 'Thanks and Praifes mufl he due pri- marily and chiefly to the Perfon who has made this Satisfaction for us ; and that fivf cannot receive arty thing at all as a free Gift, or A^ of Grace from God, p. 152, Or, as he expreffeth it, p. 151. // robs God of the Glory of his pardoning Mercy, and gives all the Honour of it to Chriji the Surety. For Chrift did not die for us, to difpofe God to be mer- • " ciful to us, as he is pleafed to reprefent the Sentiments of thofe that are Advocates for Chrill*s Satisfadlion ; but it was becaufe he was difpofed and determined to fhew Mercy towards us, and that in fuch a Way as fhould beft comport with the Dignity of his Government, and his illuftrious moral Excellencies, that he ^tux. his Son to fufter and die for our Re- demption. So that this is fo far from fhewing, as he would have it, that God has no fuch ejfential Attribute as Mercy, or any Difpofition to Pardon or Forgivenefs in his own Nature, p, 150. that the whole Defign had its Rife in his rich Grace and Mercy, and the mofl free and boundlefs Benevo- lence of his own Nature, and is only a Contrivance of Wifdom how x.6 exercife his Mercy towards Sin- ners, in a Way moft becoming his own glorious Perfedions, and the Character he bears as the great Governor of the World. In this Scheme therefore tho* we are under very great Obligations to the Son, all is ultimately referred to the Glory of the Father ; and by his Grace we are faved. All Blefllngs come to us from the Father, as the Fountain and prime glorious Author of them, thro' the Son, as the great Medium of Communication. They come as really from the Father, and are as truly his Gifts, as if there were no Regard had in the conferring them to the Mediator at all. The giving them to us thro* Jefus Chrijl, and with a Regard to his Suffer^ ings and Mediation on our Behalf, relates only to
G g 3 the
454 Objections
the fitteft Manner of Conveyance^ or that Way of dijlributing thofe Gifts, which feems moll fit to the Supreme Wifdom.
Another Objection upon which he feems to lay a. great Strefs is this. That Chrifl'-s Satisfadlion is perfedly needlefs, becaufb Repentance and new Obedience will do as well without it. That God will pardon Sm upon Repentance and Reformation^ and will never reject or caji off a penitent returning Sinner is the eternal immutable Voice of God in Na- ture and Re^ifony as well as Scripture •, and therefore the Cafe mufl be the fame, whether Chrifi had fuf- fered and died, or not. So that there is no Room for the common Jewifh Hypothefis of Satisfa5iion, nor .can' this alter the Cafe, whether it be fuppofed, or not. Pag; 148, 150.
But this which he here lays down as a Truth of immutable and eternal Certainty, that Gcd is obliged in all ^afes and at all Times to pardon and reftore his offending Creatures as often as they fincerely repent, and' to accept this alone as a fufficient Re-^ paration, if underftood abfolutely., and without any Limitation, is a moft abfurd principle, and would intirely vacate the Authority of the Divine Govern- ment and Laws. I Ihail not repeat what I have elfe where offered concerning this Matter *. But I iDelieve every Man that attentively confiders it, will find himfelf obliged to acknowledge that the Prin-r ciple which the Author here pretends to eftablifh muft neceffarily be underftood with Limitations : ^nd he himfelf afterwards limits it within very nar- row Bounds, as I fhall have Occafion to fhew. How far Repentance fhall be accepted and reward- ed, and how far God will extend his Mercy even tovjctrds penitent Sinners, dependeth wholly on his governing Wifdom and Jujlice., and on what he
* See Anpwer to Chrifiianity as old at the Creatioti, Vol. I.-
Chap. 6. ■- ^ ■ • '' •■•
feeth
Chrift's Satisfadion, conftdcrctl 455
feeth to be neccflliry for the Prefervation of the liicred Rights of his Government, and the <iOod Order of the Whole. When therefore this Author fo confidently afferteth, that the Cafe mud have been the fame with regard to God's accepting and rewarding penitent returning Sinners, whether Chrift had died or not ; he boldly pronounceth in the dark concerning a Thing v/hich it is impolTible for him to be fure of. Since he cannot pretend certainly to know what the Divine Government requireth, and what is necefFary for anfwering the great Ends of it, and for fecuring and vindicating his facred Authority. Befides, when he reprefent- eth it as a cej-tain Truth founded in Nature and Reafon, that God will reward thofe that repent and obey him -, I would defire to know whether he thinks God is obliged, in the Nature and Reafon of Things, to reward an imperfeft Obedience mix-' ed with many Defefts, and falHng flicrt in m.any Inftances of what the Divine Law requireth (and fuch is all our Obedience in tliis prefent State) with eternal Life, that is, with as glorious a Reward as we could polTibly have hoped for if our Obedience had been abfolutely finlefs and v/ithout Defect, yea and far tranfcending what in that Cafe we could have pretended to have deferved from God ? Upon what Principle will he pretend to found this '^. Sure- ly it muft be acknowledged, that it dependeth wholly on God's own moft fre*'^ and unmerited •Grace and Goodnels, and on his fupreme Wifdom,_. how far he will reward the imperfect Obedience of fuch finful Creatures, and what kind of Reward he will confer, and in what Way and Method he will difpenfe it, as the fittefl: and moft fuitable to his go- verning Wifdom and Righteoufnefs. And conie- quently no Man can v/ithout the higheft Arrogancy take upon him to fay, that the Death of Chrift dorh not at all alter the Cafe, and that God might as cojififtently with the great Ends of his Government
G g 4 hav'C
45^ Objections againft
have conferred Pardon and eternal Life upon Sin- ners without it as with it. On the contrary we may affirm upon fure Grounds, that God would not have fent his own Son to undergo fuch grievous Sufferings for our Sakes, if our Pardon and Salva- tion might as well have been obtained without it.
With regard to what he faith concerning the Im- pofTibility of communicating perfojial Merit and De- merit from one Perfon to another (which is another Argument he makes ufe of againft Chrift's Satif- faduon) and that therefore it mtiji be an eternal Contradi5iion^ in the Nature and Reafon of Things, to fuppofe or fay that Chrifi was ever punifhed for our Si'ds^ or that we are rewarded for his Righteoufnefs, p. 155, 224. It will be eafily admitted, that the individual perfonal Crimes or good A6lions of one Man cannot become the individual perfonal Crimes or good Aftions of another, fo that that other ihould be accounted to be the very individual Per- fon that performed that Aftion, or committed that Crime. But, notwithftanding this. Cafes may hap^ pen, in which one Man may juftly fufFer for the Crimes committed by another, if he voluntarily un- dertakes to fuffer inftead of the other, and the governing Power in the Community feeth fit to ac- cept of that Subftitution *, And on thexAher hand, if one Man fhould do a glorious A6lion with a view that the Benefit of it fhould redound to others, and if we fhould fuppofe the governing Powei: to pro-, mife and agree, that in cafe of his undertaking and performing fuch a difficult Service, it fhall have fuch or fuch Effefts for the Advantage of others j then there is nothing abfurd in fuppofing, that in Confequence of this, others may reap the Benefit of It, according to the Terms and Conditions agreed pn. Nor is there any thing in all this that can be proved to be contrary to the Law of Nature oj-
* That for this we have the Confent of Nations, fee Grotius de Satis/. Chrijii, Cap. 4.
' Rcafbn,
Chrift's Satisfadlion, cenfider'd. 457
Reafon. Now to apply this. It is not pretended, that Chrift's perfonal Obedience and Sufferings re- ally became our perfonal Obedience and Sufferings : or that God doth efteem us perfonally to have en- dured thofe individual Sufferings, and to have per- formed that individual Obedience which Chrift him- felf fuffered and performed : for that were to efteem us to be one and the fame individual Perfon with Chrift himfelf, or efteem them to be other than they really are. But lince what Chrift did and fuf- fered was fuffered and done according to the Father's wife and gracious JVill and Appointment for our Sakes and upon our Account, to obtain. Pardon and eternal Life for all thofe that fhould comply with the Terms fixed in the New Covenant ; it is highly congruous, that the Benefit of Chriji^s Obe- dience and Sufferings fiiould be applied to thofe for whofe Benefit it was defigned ; and that in confer- ring Pardon and eternal Life upon us, God ftiould have a Regard to what his Son by his own Ap- pointment did and fuffered on our Behalf, as a Reafon to his infinite Wifdom and Righteoufnefs for conferring that Pardon and Salvation upon us, in that Way, and upon thofe Terms which he hath appointed. When therefore this Writer declares, that he is fatisfied there is a Day comings in which no Plea from the Merits or Righteoufnefs of Chrifi will be of any Avail -, and that he is as fure of this, as he is that God ever made known himfelf to Mankind^ either by the Chrijlian Revelation, or am other Way, p. 170. if he means, that this fhall not be allowed as a Flea for thofe that obftinately perfifted in Im~ penitency, and a Courfe of prefumptuous Difobedi- ence to his Authority and Laws, or as excufing Men from perfonal Obedience, it is very true : But if he means, that no Regard ihall be had to what Chrifi did and fuffered on our Behalf, as a Reafon why the Sins of the truly Penitent fhall be forgiven them, and not urged againft them to their Con- demnation
45^ Objections againji
demnation at the great Day -, and why the Obedi- ence of the truly Upright and Sincere, tho' imper- fe6t and mixed with many Failures and Defeds, fhall be crowned with fo glorious and tranlcendent a Reward, this is not true. Nor can he bring any good Argument to Ihew the Abfurdity of fuch a Scheme, or that there is any thing in it contrary to Jufticc or Wifdom.
The Strength of what he hath thought fit to urge againft this dependeth wholly uj3on the wrong Re- prefentation he is pleafed to make of this Matter. He reprefents the Advocates for Chri{l*s Satisfadion, as pleading the Merit of his Death in Exemption from the Obedience which God requires of us, p. 178. and as fuppofing, that God will reward or punifh Men in the Day of Judgment, not according to their own perfonal A6lions, but for the Anions of others, without any Regard to the natural Individuality or moral Chara3fers of the Perfons thus rewarded or pu- nifhed, p. 155, 198. And on this Foundation he objefteth againft the Do6lrine of Cbriji's Satisfac- tion, as inconfiftent with the great Principle of God's judging all Men at the laft Day according to their Works ; which Principle he makes to be the certain and infallible Criterion between true and falfe Religion. But the Neceflity of perfonal Repentance and new Obedience is as ftrongly fupported upon the Scheme of thofe that afiert drift's Satisfaftion, as it can poffibly be upon any other. Becaufe the Benefit of Chrift's Sadsfaftion doth only extend to thofe who comply with the Terms fixed in the New Covenant : And it is evident from the whole Gofpel^ that perfonal Repentance and new Obedience is there indifpenfably required of all that would be Partakers of that great Salvation which God offer- eth to us throu2;h his Son. It is as true on this Scheme, as it is on the Author's own, i\i'M perjo- nal Righteoufnefs , or a perfonal Compliance with the Terms of Acceptance, is alfolutely and indifpenfably
neccffmy.
Chrifl's Satisfadion, confidered. 459
necejfary. And it will be eafily acknowledged, that no Redundancy ef Merit, or arrf perfinal imputed Righteoufnefs of another, can be ever taken in Account as an Equivalent for this, as he expreffeth it, p. 169 ; if by this be meant, that it will not be taken infiead of our own perfonal Obedience, fo as to render that unneceffary. Yea, it may be juftly affirmed, that there is lels Hope of Pardon and Indulgence for thofe who do not now comply with the Terms of Pivine Mercy, by repenting and forfaking their evil Ways, upon the Scheme of thofe who maintain the Gofpel Doftrine of Chrij^^ Satisfadlion, than there is or can be upon the Scheme which this Writer feems here to advance. For fince God is fo juft and holy, and hath fuch an inviolable Regarc^ to the Authority of his Government and Laws, that he would not pardon our Sins, and give us eternal Life, even upon our Repentance, and fmcere tho^ imperfeft Obedience, without at the fame time making fuch an efFeftual Provijion for fecuring the Authority of his Government by the Sufferings of his own Son in our Nature and Stead ; then it is evi- dent, that thofe cannot hope to efcape, who by their Impenitency and Difobedience reje^ this Remedy which he hath in his infinite Wifdom and Goodnels provided for them •, and that they, who now refufe to comply with the Terms on which alone Pardon and Salvation is offered thro* his Son, can have no Ground to expeft any farther Offer of Mercy in any future Time or State of Things. Than which no- tliing can pofTibly be a flronger Argument to Ihew tht abfolute NecefTity of a prefent Compliance with the Gofpel Terms, that is, to engage us to prefent Repentance and new Obedience. Whereas if Re- pentance and Reformation alone be fuppofed at all Times a fufficient Satisfacflion without any other Provifion for fecuring the Majefty of the Divine Go- vernment, and the Authority of his Laws j then tho* Perfons Ihould rejed the Terms on which Mercy
is
460 Objections againfl
is now offered during this State of Trial, yet they might hope, that if at any Time during the Courfe of their Exiftence, even after this Life is at an End, they Ihould repent and be reformed, God would pardon and fave them. And that the Way would always be open for their being received to Favour, as often as ever they fhould repent and be reformed, not only in this Life, but to all Eternity. And whether this, if it were really believed, would not be a great Encouragement to Sinners to defer their Repentance and Reformation, and to indulge them- felves in a prefent Gratification of their corrupt Ap- petites, may be left to the Confideration of any im- partial thinking Perfon. That which the Author declares concerning the Doftrine which he hath ad- vanced, may with much greater Propriety be ap- plied to the ^^rn^/^r^-Doftrine of Chrifl's Satif^ faftion, that it is the Do^rine that mujl fupport the Authority of God, and keep up the Awe and Influence of his governing Jujiice and moral Perfe£iions in the JVorld, p. 199. At the fame time that the moft glorious Favours and Benefits are conferred upon " finful Creatures, on Condition of their returning to God by Repentance, and a fincere tho* imperfed: Obedience, Care is taken to guard and temper this marvellous Grace, fb as not to give them any Temptation, either to think lightly of the Evil of thofe Sins which are fo fully pardoned, or to enter- tain too high Thoughts of the Jlderit of their Obe- dience, which is fo glorioufly rewarded.
Another Attempt this Writer makes againfl the Satisfaflion of Chrifl is this, that the Redundancy of Chrijl^s Merit could not l^e placed to cur Account, becaufe all that was done and fuffered by him was necefjary to himfelf, and on his own Account. As he ; was under a haw to God, and a5ied with the Profpe^ ' of a glorious eternal Reward, he could not have fail- ed in any Part of his Obedience without lofing that Reward^ and forfeiting the Divine Favgur- He
finifljcd
Chrift's Satisfadion, conftdereL 461
finijhed the Work that "joas given him to do^ but then he did no more than he was bound to do^ and nothing lefs could have been accepted from him. And tho* his Obedience was free, it was a necejjary Obligation laid upon him by the Will and Law of God ; from which he would gladly have been excufed if his heavenly Fa- ther had thought fit. His praying fo earnejily not to be put upon fuch a 'Trial, fhtws that he had no fuch Notion of the Necejfty of his Death as a Propitiation and Atonement for the Sins of the World. He would not have fpent a whole Night in fuch paffionate Prayers to God in order to prevent a Thing which he cer- tainly knew muji happen, and which had been pre- vioufly agreed on between the Father and him, fee
P- 154, 155-
It will be eafily owned that Chrift having once
freely undertaken the Work of our Redemption,
was under an Obligation to finiih it. But then it
mufl be confidered that his affuming our Nature,
and being brought under this Obligation to fuffer
and die for us, was not merely by an A6t of God's
abfolute Authority, but by his own free Confent, and
voluntary Sufoeption. And his undertaking this
is Hill reprefented as the moft aftonifhing Proof of
his wonderful Love to Mankind, a Love beyond
all Comprehenfion, and beyond all Parallel. And
tho' it pleafed God highly to reward him in his
human Nature for his Humiliation and Sufferings,
the Profpedl of which helped to fupport him under
thofe Sufferings, yet nothing can be more evident
than it is from the whole New Teftament, that the
proper Defign of his coming inter the World was
not to procure Glory to himfelf •, for this he had
with the Father before the World was •, but to feek
and to fave that which was loft. What he did and
fuffered was truly and properly on our Account, to
open a Way for our being pardoned and raifed to
the higheft Felicity according to the glorious De-
fjgns of infinite Wifdom and Goodnefs. The Law
he
462 Objections againfi
he was under as Mediator by his own Confent, and the Father's Appointment, obliged him to make his Soul an Offering for Sins, to fuffer and die for our Offences, and thereby to make Reconciliation for Iniquity, and to give his Life a Ranfom for maity. And it is very odd to argue, that becaufe he was under this Law, therefore what he did and fuffered could not be accepted on our Account^ when by the effential 'Tefwr of this Law what he did and iufFered was done upon our Account* and was to be accepted on our Behalf.
And whereas this Writer argues, that Chrift would not have prayed to the Father that the bitter Cup might pafs from him, if he had had any Notion of his Death as a Propitiation for the Sins of the Worlds or if he had certainly known that his T)eath was a Thing that mujt happen, and which had been pre- uioujhy agreed on between the Father and him : it is manifeft that this Prayer could not be intended as he reprefents it. Since it plainly appeareth from many exprefs Paffages in the Gofpel, that our Lord very well knew that he mull certainly fuffer and die ; and that this was the Work which the Father had given him to do, and which he himfelf had freely undertaken. As he declareth in general, that he came into the World to do the Will of his hea- venly Father that fent him \ fo alfb that one great End for which he was fent was that he might give his life a Ranfom for many. Matt. xx. 28. and might give his Flefh for the Life of the World, John vi. 51. He exprelsly faith, as the Father knoweth me, even fo know 1 the Father : i. e. the Father knoweth my Intentions and Dlfpofitions, and I am perfe6tly acquainted with the Father's moft wife and gracious Counfels and Defigns : and I lay down my Life for the Sheep. Therefore dolh trty Father love me becaufe I lay down my Life.— —No Man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of my felfs 1 have Power to lay it down, and I have Power to take it
agaiHi
Chrlfl's Satisfadion, conjidered. 463
v.gain. This Commandment have I received of my FiUhei\ John X. 15, 17, 18. A mofl remarkable Palliige, from which it appeareth, that the laying down his Life for the Salvation of Mankind was a Thing in which the Father's Appointment, and his own moil free and voluntary Confent perfectly con- curred. It was not a mere Conftraint laid upon him by God's abfolute Authority •, his Life was not taken from him whether he would or not ; but he laid it down of himfelf^ it was his own A6t and Choice, and therefore the Father loved him. Here therefore we have the Subftance of what Divines commonly call the Covenant of Redemption, and which our Author hath thought fit to ridicule, p. 222, 223. For our Saviour here plainly reprefent- eth his laying down his Life for the Sheep, as a Thing agreed upon between the Father and him ; and that the Defign of all was for our Sakes, to procure the Salvation of Sinners. Accordingly, he frequently and exprefsly told his Difciples, what Manner of Death he was to die, what kind of Suf- ferings he was to endure, and the principal Circum- ftances of thofe Sufferings ; and this he foretold as a Thing which he knew would moil certainly come to pafs *. And when Peter upon hearing him declare that he was to fufFer and die, took up- on him to fay, far be it from thee. Lord, this floall not he unto thee \ he gave him the fevereil Rebuke that ever he gave to any of his Difciples, get thee, behind me, Satan, thou art an Offence unto me, for thou favoureji not the Things which be of God, but thofe that be of Men, Matt. xvi. 21 — 23. From whence, it appears what a llrong Senfe he had of the Certainty of his Sufferings and Death, and the Importance and Neceility of- thofe Sufferings for anfwering very valuable Ends and Purpofes. To which it may be added, that that very Night in
* See Matt. xvi. 21. xx. 17, i8, 19. Markh. 31. x. 33, 34. Luk. xviii. 31, 32, 33.
which
464 Objections againfi
which he was betrayed, he inftituted an Ordinance to be obferved in his Church for a perpetual Me- morial of his Body broken and Blood fhed for the Remiffion of Sins ; where he reprefented it as a Thing which was no lefs certain, than if it had been adnally accompliflied. It is evident there- fore that the Defign of thofe Prayers which he of- fered up to the Father immediately after this, could not be with any View or Expedlation that his Suf- ferings and Death fhould be prevented, fince he perfeftly knew that he muft fuffer and die ', that it was the Father*^ Will that he Ihould do fo ; and that this was one important Patt of the Work which was given him to do, and which he himfelf had freely undertaken. But either the Defign of his Prayer was that he might be delivered from thofe tremendous Sorrows and Agonies of Soul which he then laboured under, and which were beyond all Expreflion grievous, as appears from the Accounts the Evangelifts give us of them \ and this was not a decHning the Work that was given him to do for our Salvation, fince the Extremity of thofe Sor- rows might be allayed or difpenfed with, tho* his dying for our Sins could not ; Or, if the hitter Cup mentioned by our Saviour in his Prayer related to the whole of his Suffering and Dyings then the De- fign of his Prayer taken together is evidently this ; to fignify that his Sufferings and Sorrows were fo inexpreffibly grievous and dreadful, that if it were pojfible he could have wilhed to be delivered front them ; but that as he knew it was the Father''?, Will for very wife and valuable Ends, he fubmitted and refigned himfelf to undergo them, however grievous and Ihocking they might be. In themfelves confi- dered. To the fame Purpofe is the Pra/er he had uttered not long before on the Profped of his Suf- ferings, Johnxn. 27, 28. Now is vv^ Soul troubled y and what Jhall I fay ? Father^ fave me from this Hour : but for this Caufe came I unto this Hour :
Father^
Chrlft's Satisfa6tion, conjidered. 465
Father, glorify thy JSlamc, i. e. I forelee my Suffer- ings will be fo great and grievous, that the Pro- ipe<5t of them fills my Soul with Trouble and Amazement, fo that I could wilh if pojfibk to be delivered from that Hour of Suffering and Sorrow which I fee approaching : but as 1 know that for this End I came into the World, and that this is thy Will, and what thou hafl appointed for wife and gracious Ends ; it is my Defire and Will that thou Ihouldft glorify thy Name, and fulfil the De* figns of thy Wifdom and Goodnels, tho' by my moll grievous Sufferings.
Whereas therefore this Writer tells us, that Chrifl would gladly have been excufed from this Trial, ;/ his heavenly Father had thought fit -, it is very true, that he would have been willing to have been freed from thofe Sufferings, if it had been confiftent with the great Defigns of the Divine Wifdom and Good- nels •, for he did not chufe Sufferings in themfelves and for their own Sakes : but taking in the whole, that it was the Father*^ Will, and that fuch great and valuable Ends were to be anfwered by it, he was willing and did undertake it. So that it is not true, that he declined a few Hours bodily Sufferings, as he reprefents it. For he did not decline his Suf- ferings upon the whole, and taking in all Confi-^ derations : he only poured forth his Sorrows before his heavenly Father, and at the fame time that he expreffed his natural Averfion and Horror of thofe Sufferings abfolutely and in themfelves confidered, he declared his Refolution to undergo them as the Cafe was circumftanced. And this Prayer of his is highly ufeful for our Sakes, to give us a more live- ly Stwit of the exceeding Greatnefs of his Suffer- ings and Sorrows ; and of the great Importance and Neceffity of them, that they were fuch as could not be difpenfcd with j and to fet us a Pattern of the moft entire Refignation to God in the moft dif- ficult and trying Circumftances. And 1 think this H h is
466 Ob JECTIONS ^^^/«/?
is evident from the whole Account that is given us of our Saviour's laft Agonies and Sorrows, that there was more in them than the mere Dread and Apprehenfion of temporal Death, and the Suffer- ings he endured from the Hands of Men. It was fiot the mere Prolpedl of a few Hours bodily Pain in a Way that fo many thoufands had fuffered before biniy as this Writer expreffeth it, that filled his Soul with fuch Agonies and Conflift. Since many of the Martyrs, vaftly inferior to him in a true Firm- nefs and Conftancy of Mind have been enabled to bear temporal Death, and the fevereft bodily Suf- fering, not only with Patience but with Joy and Exultation of Mind. It is evident there was fome- thing in his Sufferings and Sorrows that lay much deeper^ and which far tranfcended the greatefl Suf- ferings of the perfecuted Saints and Martyrs -, fome- thlng that we are not able diflinftly to defcribe and to explain, but which fhould fill us with awful Thoughts of the Majefty, Greatnefs, and Purity of God, and of his Abhorrence againfl Sin, when we confider that all thefe his Sufferings, fo grievous and inexprefTible, were for our Sins.
There is one Obje6lion more which our Author frequently infills upon with a peculiar Air of Triumph, as a perfed Demonflration that there can be no Foundation for the Doftrine of Chrift's Satisfaction in Scripture : and that is, that there was no fuch "Thing as vicarious Sacrifices under the Law of Mofes, and therefore there could be no Reference to any fuch Sacrifices in the New Tefta- ment when fpeaking of the Death of Chrifl ; and this he proves, becaufe under that Law no other Penalty of what Nature or Kind foever was ever taken off or mitigated on the Account of Sacrifice, But this hath been fhewn to be a great Miftake : fee above chap. vi. to which I refer the Reader ^ where he will find all that the Author offers with a View to prove that there could be no expiatory
Sacrifice
Chrlfl's Satisfaftion, conjidered. 467
Sacrifice under the Law of Mofes^ confidered. I fhall only here farther obferve, that whereas he wonders at Grotius and the Syftematical Divines, For fuppofing that ever the Life of a Beajl under the Law was taken and accepted of injiead of the Life of the Offender ; and declares, that if they can give him any fuch Inflame he will he hound under a Penalty never to fpcak a Word more, p. 126, 127. If he underftands by it, that they muft give him an Inftance, where a Perfon that had been guilty of a Crime againfl: which the Law had exprefsly denounced the civil Penalty of Death, was by Law to be freed from that Penalty upon offering a Sa- crifice ; this is what none of thofe Syftematical Di- vines over whom he fo unmercifully triumphs were ever fo abfurd as to fuppofe : For they all know that in fuch Cafes there was no Sacrifices appoint- ed or admitted by Law at all. But then this is {o far from proving as this Writer intends it, that there were no vicarious Sacrifices under the Law, that it rather proves the contrary. For the Reafon why no Sacrifices were appointed in thofe Cafes was, becaufe Sacrifices were underftood to free a Man from the Penalty he had incurred by his Crime : And therefore when it was defigned that the Offen- der in Perfon muft die, and when it was judged necefTary for the Good of the Community that it Ihould be fo, no Sacrifices were appointed, becaufe he muft fhed his own Blood, and therefore no Blood of the Beaft was to be fheii to make Atonement for him. If Sacrifices had been admitted in fuch Cafes, and yet the Punifhment had been inflided on the Criminal, it might have been argued that thofe Sa- crifices were of no Avail to avert the threatned Pe- nalty. But it is a general Rule, that in all Cafes where it was judged necefTary that the Ofi'ender himfelf fhould fuffer in his own Perfon, whether it were the Punifhment of Death, or any other Pe- nalty, there was no Sacrifice to be offered, or H h 2 Blood
468 Objections againfi
Blood of Atonement to be flied for him at all •' and on the other Hand, in all Cafes where the Blood or Life of the Beafb was to be offered for the Man to make Atonement for him, the Law never appointed Deaths or any other Penally whatfoever to be adlually infli6ted on him •, which Ihews that Sacrifices were fuppofed to avert the Penalty from the. Perfon on whofe Account they were offered.
In Cafes where Sacrifices were prefcribed to be offered for Sin, the Man that came to offer the Sacrifice was to lay his Hand upon the Head of the Vidim, and to confefs his Sin, and Trsfpafs which he had committed^ Lev. v. 5. and if he had wrong- ed his Neighbour was to make Reftitution j and then the Animal was to be flain, and his Blood fhed and fprinkled upon the Altar, and thereby offered to the divine Majefty : And hereupon the Offender was in the Eye of the Law freed from the Guilt he had contraded. The Curfe he had incurred in ftrid Juftice was fuppofed to be averted by the Blood of the Sacrifice fhed for Atonement. For it is declared, that it is the Blood that maketh Atonement for the Soul: and the Reafon is given, be- caufe the Life of the FlefJs is in the Bloody Lev. xvii. II. From whence it is plain, that the Atonement lay in this, that the Blood or Life of the Animal was given or offered for the Offender, to free him from the Guilt he had contrafted, and the Curfe and Punifhment he had incurred by his Sin. And accordingly this Writer himfelf tells us, that the Jews had a very high Opinion of their legal Sacrifices and Atonements by Blood: and that it was an efia-. bfifloed Principle with the whole Jewifh Nation;, that without fJoedding of Blood there coidd be no Remiffion : and that they thought that God himfelf could be no otherwife fatisfied and atoned, but with Blood. And therefore he would have it that St. Paul was obliged to talk of the Blood and Death of Chrill as an expiatory Sacrifice in Compliance with their Preju- dices i
Chrlft's Satisfadion, conjidered. 469
dices i but that the Metaphor, as he iifes it, ought not to he Jirained to the rigid, literal, and mcft ah- furd Senfe of the ]tW\{[\ Law, p. 163—165. Where he manifeftly fuppofeth, that the Jews did acknow- ledge a vicarious Sacrifice in that Senfe in which it is to be underftood in this Queftion, and that this was agreeable to the literal Senfe of their own Law. And hence he frequently calleth the Aflerters of Chrift's Satisfaflion Judaizers, and the Dodrine it iejf the Jewi/h Doctrine of Propitiation and Atone- ment. And yet this fame very confiftent Writer hath the Confidence to aflert over and over again, that there zvas no fuch Thing as a vicarious Sacrifice under the Law *, and that therefore the Apoftle Paul could not refer to any fuch Pracfice, or fuppofe the Death of Chrijl analogous to a "Thing that never ex- ijled, not fo much as in Suppofttim. And therefore the Chriflian Priefis who have introduced this Notion of a vicarious penal Sacrifice, have run into groffer Abfurdities and more dangerous Errors concerning it, than ever the Jewifh or Pagan Priefts had done, p. 210. But that the Notion of vicarious Sacrifices was not firfl: introduced by the Chriflian Priefts, but had obtained long before both among Jews and Pagans, may be proved with the cleareft Evi- dence *. And it is alfo undeniably evident that Chrift's Sufl^erings and Death all along in the New Teftament are reprefented under the Notion of an expiatory Sacrifice •, and that the Sacrifices that were offered under the Law are there reprefented as the . Types and Figures of that moft perfeft Oblation which Chrift hath off'ered, and of the true Atone- ment for the Sins of Mankind made by his Suffer- ing and Dying for us.
The Way our Author taketh to account for Chrift's Sufferings and Death being called a Pro- pitiation and Sacrifice is pretty extraordinary. He
* For this fee among others Dr. Outram de Sacrif. lib. !• cap. xxii. fee alfo cap. xx. p. 228, 229.
H h 3 makes
470 Objections againji
makes a Propitiation or Sacrifice in general to be fomething offered to God by a voluntary Aft of Obedience to his Will, upon which God becomes propitious to the Perfon who yields and performs that Obedience. And therefore Chrifl's Propitia- tion according to him was nothing but the Obedi^ ence he yielded and offered to God, upon whigh God became propitious to him, and highly re- warded him, as he will alfo be propitious to us upon our Obedience. And he faith, that Chrijl by his Deaths and Jhedding his own Bloody made a publick Declaration or antheniick Notification from God of the propitiatory reconciling Virtue or Acceptahlenefs of fiich perfonal Obedience^ p. 225. But at this rate Chrift could not be faid to offer a Propitiation for us at all, but. only for himfclf^ and every Man as well as he might be faid to offer a Propitiation for himfelf by his own Obedience, And how this will agree with the Scripture Expreffions, and the Ac- count there given us, may be left to any Man of common Underftanding that can read the New Tef- tament. Befides, I do not fee how upon this Scheme he can be faid to be a Propitiation for Sins at all, much lefs for the Sins of the zvhole World : fmce he had no Sias of his pwn to atone for, and according to this Writer made no Atonement for ours. Nor can I fee with what Senfe it can be faid, that Chrifi hy his Death, and fhedding his own Blood, made an authentick Notification from God of the propitiatory Virtue and Acceptabknefs of his Obedience \ fince it was not his Suffering and Dying that properly noti-r fied to the World the Acceptablenefs of his Obedi^ ence, and that God was well pleafed with him and his Obedience, but his Refurre^lion and confequent Glorification. And therefore it was this, and not his Sufferings and Death, that according to our Au- thor's Account of it, Ihould have been called a Pro- pitiation, which he makes to be only declarative of the Virtue and Acceptablenefs of his Obedience.
But
Chrlft's Satlsfadlon, confidercd. 471:
But I Ihall not fpend any more Time in confider- ing the Account he pretends to give of this Matter, which hath nothing to fupport it, but his own Imagination. But this I am confident of, that if there had been nothing more in our Saviour's Suf- ferings and Death than this Writer would have to be underftood and intended by it, the New Tefta- ment Writers would never have fpoken of it, and reprefented it in the Manner they have done, and in Phrafes which according to the Ufage of them that then obtained thro' all the World both among Jews and Gentiles^ muft almoft unavoidably lead them to quite different Notions, and to look upon it as making a true Expiation for the Sins of the World.
This Book is already fwelled io much beyond my original Intention, that I mufl be very brief . in my Reflexions on the Account he pretends to give of fome other Doftrines of Chriftianity. Thus under Pretence of redifying the Miftakes that have prevailed among Chrijlian Divines for 1400 Tears paji to the unfpeakable Detriment of the Chrijlian Worlds and of Mankind in general, with regard to the Chrijlian Doctrine of Pardon upon Repentance^ he makes a very extraordinary Attempt to prove, that not one wilful Sin under the Gofpel Hiall be pardoned, even'tho* a Man doth fincerely repent of it and forfake it. And that the general Offer of Pardon upon Repentance made in the Gofpel, ex- tended only to the Sins committed by Je'ws or Heathens before their embracing the Faith of Chrift, but did not extend to any one wilful prefumptuous Sin coramitted under the Gofpel Dtfpenfation itfelfy after Men had engaged themfehes in the Chrijlian Covenant, fee from />. 170, x.o p. 177. This is to make the Grace of the GolJDel much narrower than it was under the Old Teftament Difpenfation. For in the Law of Mofes there was Pardon not only for Sins of Ignorance, but even for wilful delibe- Hh 4 rate
472 The Chrijiian DoSfrine of Pardon
rate Sins which were afterwards fincerely repented of, and which the Offender himfelf had voluntarily confefled -, fuch are the Inftances mentioned. Lev. vi. 2, 3, And it is evident that the Prophets every where abound with Promifes of Pardon and Mer- cy even to the greateft Sinners upon their Repen- tance and Reformation. And can it be fuppofed that the Gofpel Difpenfation which makes the moft glorious Difcoveries of the Divine Grace and Good- nefs was defigned to confine the Mercy of God to- wards penitent returning Sinners in narrower Li- mits than it had been before, as it muft have been if the Reprefentation our Author gives of it be true ? He pretends to prove this by three Texts -, two of which, viz. vi. 4—6. and Heb. x. 26, 27. are evidently to be underftood not of any one fingle wilful Sin which a Man might happen to commit, and of which he afterwards fincerely repented, but of a total Apojlacy from the Chriftian Faith and Praftice, as will appear to any one that impartially confiders thofe Paffages -, and the Reader that would fee this clearly proved may confult Dr. Whitby. With refpecl to one of thefe Paffages, viz. Heb. vi. 4—6. the Author is guilty of a fignal Falfi- fication of the Text, For he rcprefents it as if it had been fiiid, that it is impoffible to renew the Perfons there mentioned by Repentance •, and puts thefe Words in large Charafters to diftinguifh them ; the Senfe of which he makes to be this, " That it *' is impoffible to reftore them to Pardon, tho' they ** fhould repent.'^ Whereas the Original has it as it is juftly rendered in our Tranflation, that it is impoffible to renew them unto- Repentance., v'xt.. be- caufe they had finned againft the befl and moft ef- fetftual Means that could be made ufe of to convince and to convert them. And the Simile by which the Apoftle illuftrates it neceffarily requires this Senfe, for he compares their Cafe to that of barren Ground^
which,
upon Repent ance^ "oindicated. 473
which, tho' it hath had Rain coming upon it, and hath been often drefled and cultivated, bringeth forth nothing but Briars and Thorns^ and is there- fore rejected and nigh unto Curfing. Where his Meaning cannot be, that if that Land after long continuing barren fhould at length bring forth Fruit and Grain, it muft notwithftanding this be rejeft- ed : but that there was no hope of its ever becom- ing fruitful after all the Cultivauon that had been laid upon it had proved ineffe6lual, and therefore it was rejedled and accurfed. The laft. Paflage he produceth is from John v. 16, 17, 18. concerning the Sin unto Death, which he pretends cannot be underftood of a total Apojiacy from the Faith of Chriji, or of the Sin againft the Holy Ghojl, becaufe it is faid to be the Sin of a Brother or Fellow-Pro- fejfor of Chrift, which an Apojlate could not be. But without entring into a particular Explication of that Paflage which would lead me too far, I fhall only obferve that the Author's Obfervadon upon it will not hold good. The Sin unto Death, is not there exprefsly faid to be the Sin of a Brother, as this Writer affirms : Or if the Apoftle had exprefled it thus, if a Br other Jin a Sin unto Death, &c, it would not have followed that this Sin unto Death could not be underftood of an Apojiacy from the Gof* pel. For it would be fufficient to juftify fuch a Manner of Expreffion, if the Perfon guilty of that Sin was one that had before profefled himfelf a Brother or a Chriftian. Nor can I fee any Abfurdity in fuch a Phrafe as this •, if a Chriftian fhould totally apoftatize from the Faith and Prac- tile of the Gofpel, he cannot expe6l the divine Par- don and Mercy. And of fome fuch Perfons the Apoftle John feems to fpeak in feveral Paflages of this Epiftle. But whatever be the precife Meaning of this Paflage, into which I fliall not now parti- cularly enquire, it cannot admit of the Interpreta- tion he gives of it. He is pleafed to talk of the
unnatural
474 ^^ Chrijlian DoSlrine of Pardon
unnatural forced and conjlrained ConJlru5lions that Divines put upon thefe Words, but I know of no Conflrudion fo abfurd and unnatural as his own. • Which is, that^ this Sin unto Death muft fignify any wilful prefumptuous Sin under the Gofpel in Vio- lation of a Man^s Covenant Engagements to the Chrif- tian Faith and Pra3Uce : That every fuch Sin is the Sin unto Death which is not to be prayed for, and which according to this Author cannot be for- given even upon Repentance and Reformation. Whereas it is evident from the whole Gofpel, that that cannot be called a Sin unto Death, which is fmcerely repented of. Repentance and Remiffion of Sins, are there always joined together, as having an infeparable ConnetStion : and in this very Epiflle St. John faith, that the Blood of Jefus Chrifl cleanf eth us from all Sins, that is, from all Sin truly re- pented of, I John i. 7. for fo he explains himfelf, Ver. 9. If we confefs our Sins (where Confeflion is put for the whole of true Repentance, of which it is a part) he is faithful and jujl to forgive us our Sins^ and to cleanfe us from all Unrighteoufnefs.
The Reafons this Writer pretends to give to Jhew the Abfurdity of fuppofing that wilful pre- fumptuous Sins are pardonable upon Repentance, proceed entirely upon a wrong Reprefentation of the Dodtrine of Repentance. If Repentance were fup- pofed to be no more than a Man's expreffing his Sorrow for his Sins at the fame Time that he per- fifts in the Pradice of thole wilful prefumptuous Sins which he pretends to confefs and bewail, or a crying to God for Mercy in his laft Hours, and feel- ing fome Bitternefs and Remorfe from an Appre- henfion of the Wrath and Mifery which is ready to come upon him for his Crimes •, if this alone were judged to be fufficient to wipe off the guilty Score, I will allow that this would be a great Encourage- ment to Sin. But this is not that Repentance to which Pardon is promifed in the Gofpel. Nor need
we
upon Repentance, 'vindicated. 475
we this Author to fet us right in this Matter, who talks as if he came to enlighten the World with fome new Difcoveries on this Subjeft, when die moft judicious Divines have all along aflerted the utter Infufficiency of fuch a Repentance, and fhewn the extreme Folly and Danger of relying upon it. The Repentance to which Pardon and Life is pro- mifed in the New Covenant, includes fuch a real efFed:ual Change whereby a Perfon becomes a new Man and a new Creature, that the vicious Habits muft be mortified, and the Soul muft be turned from the Love of Vice and Sin to a real prevailing Abhorrence of it, and to a Love of God and uni- verfal Goodnefs. And tho' a Man may have been guilty of heinous wilful Sins in Violation of his Chriftian Covenant and Vow, and may have long perfifted in them, yet if afterwards he is brought to a true Repentance for them, and not only with deep. Sorrow and Humiliation applies to God thro' Jefus Chrift for pardoning Mercy, but becomes thorough- ly changed and reformed, and is delivered from the Power of his evil Habits, and brought to a ho- ly Life and Prad:ice-, it is very plain from the whole Gofpel that fuch a Man is entitled according to the New Covenant to Pardon and Forgivenefs : his Sins fhall not be charged upon him to his Con- demnation, but he Ihall thro* the rich Grace and Mercy of God in Jefus Chriji be made Partaker of that great Salvation, which is promifed in the Gofpel. And it is evidently of great Advantage to the Intereft of true Religion in the World, that there fliould be Encouragement given to Sinners during the Continuance of this State of Trial to rt-. pent and forfake their evil Ways, and to apply themfelves in good earneft to the Practice of Righ- teoufnefs. But if a Man after having been once guilty of any wilful prefumptuous Sin, e. g. of any one deliberate Ad of Injuftice, Fraud, Vio- lence, Uncleannelsj t^c. which are committed in
Violation
47^ The Chriftian DoBrine of Pardon
Violation of the Gofpel Covenant, and againft which if perfifted in, Damnation is there denounced, could never hope to be forgiven and reflored to the divine Favour, tho' he fhould never fo fincerely repent, and become entirely reformed, and fhew the moft excellent Difpofitions : This Dodlrine, under pre- tence of ftanding up for the Neceffity of a holy Life, would really be a Prejudice to the Caufe of Virtue ; fince it would endrely defeat the Force of all Exhortations to Repentance, and would ab- folutely difcourage all Endeavours after Reformation and Amendment, and tend to harden Men in Sin and Impenitency.
Here by the Way we may obferve the great Confiftency of this Writer, who elfewhere repre- lents it^ as the eternal immutable Voice of Reafon and Nature as well as Scripture^ that God will pardon Sin upon Repentance and Reformation^ and never reje5i and cafi off a penitent returning Sinner, and that to deny this would be to deny the Mercy and Goodnefs of God, and to leave no rational Ground of Hope or S'rufl in him from any Revelation whatfo- ever, p. 150, 212. and yet here reprefents the Doc- trine of Pardon upon Repentance, as a Doftrine that gives the greateft Encouragement to Sin and Wickednefs •, and denies that any wilful Sins com- mitted againft Covenant Engagements can ever be remitted ; and afierts that no Grace or Favour of the Gofpel, or Benefit by Chrifl, can ever be pleaded for anyfuch Sins, even tho* they fhould be fincere- ly repented of, />. 171, 172, &c. It is true, he pretends that it doth not follow from this, that Re- pe?uance for fuch wilful prefumptuous Sins would be cf no Avail, becaufe Repentance mujl always have this good Effe^, to lejfen the Number of Men's Sins, and increafe the Value of their good Anions, in the Day of Account. But how can this Repentance for wil- ful Sins lefien the Number of Men's Sins in the Day of Account, if wilful Sins are not pardonable
upon
upon Repentance, vindicated. 477
upon Repentance as he exprefsly affirms ? If fuch a Repentance cannot procure the Pardon of the Sins themfelves that are thus fincerely repented of, how can it procure the Pardon of other Sins ? Ac- cording to the Interpretation this Writer pretends to give of the Text produced by him, there could remain no Hope of Mercy for fuch Perfons tho' they Ihoiild repent, but a certain fearful looking for of Judgment and fiery Indignation. And then of what Avail their Repentance for fuch Sins would be, or how it could increafe the Weight and Value of their good Anions, is hard to fee.
But I cannot help remarking on this Occafion, that this Author who here pretends fuch a mighty Concern for the Intereft of pra5iical Religion^ and. who feems fo afraid of giving the leaft Encourage- ment to Sin and Wickednefs, that he denounces no- thing but Death and Judgment even againft all that have been guilty of any one wilful Sin committed under the Gofpel, tho' they lliould afterwards be never fo thoroughly reformed ; this righteous Au- thor who is here fo zealous for ftridl rigid Juftice at the Day of Judgment, elfewhere thinks fit to make a Mock of Hell and Damnation^ and the Perpetuity of the Torments of the Wicked, and re- prefents it as the Invention of the Clergy, to keep up the Awe of their own Authority, fee p. 400, 401. He makes the eternal Fire into which the Wicked fhall then be fent, and which is a ftrong ExprefTion defigned to convey to us a more lively Idea of the Greatnefs of the Punifhment and Mifery prepared for them, to be nothing elfe but a con- fuming their Bodies in the Flames at the Day of Judgment : and xhtfecond Death and everlajiing De- ftru^ion that fhall befal them, to be only an utter aboliihing of their Being, Body and Soul. So that their Worm which dieth pot^ is a Worm that fhall foon die ; and their Fire which floall not he quenched, is a Fire that fhall foon be quenched,
and
47^ I'he pofitive Precepts of
and that for ever. And all the Expreflions vrfc^ in Scripture in various Forms to fignify the Perpt^ tuity of the Punifhment prepared for the Wicked, iignify no more than that the Punifhment which fhall be denounced againft them in the Day of Judgment, fhall in that Day be ended at once in the utter Extindlion of their Being. And if this were to be all the Punifliment the moft obftinate and har- dened Sinners were to expedl, that they muft firft be condemned, and then immediately be confumed and annihilated at the great Day, and fo an utter immediate End be put to all their Torments and Miferies, I do not fee any great Matter of Terror there would be in this to affright Men from their evil Courfes •, and am certain that if this were ge- nerally believed, it would take off the greateft Re- ftraints on Men's impetuous Lufts and Vices, and would let loofe the Reigns to all manner of Wick- ednefs. Violence and Impurity. To which it may be added, that upon this Scheme there is no room for fuppofmg different Torments to the Wicked in Proportion to the different Aggravations of their Crimes, fince all are alike to be confumed and annihilated. I cannot but obferve on this Occa- fion that Celfus himfelf carries it much farther than this Writer, For he faith that the Chriftians are right in this, that they believe that thofe that have lived well fhall be happy, but the Unjujl or Un^ righteous JJoall be fubjeh to eternal Evils, o aJ'hot Tir&ij.'Trttv euaiviaii KctKoli (rwi^ovjott. And he reprelents this as a Doftrine in which all Mankind are agreed, and from which no Body ought to depart. See Origen. contra Celf. lib. viii.^. 409.
I (hall take fome Notice before I conclude, of the Attempt our Author makes againfl the pojitive Precepts of Chriflianity. He fometimes pretends to prove that what are ufually called the Chriftian Sacraments, Baptifm and the hordes-Supper^ are not Chriflian Inftitutions at all, npr defigned for {land- ing
Chrifllanify, *uindicated. 470
ing Ordinances. And the Argument he makes ufe of to this Purpofe is, that the external elementary Parts of thefe Sacraments were in ufe before as national Rites, Ufages, or Cufloms ainong the Jews^ and that from thence it naturally follows, that they cannot, properly fpeaking, he Chrijlian Injii- tutions. See p. 104, &c. 202, 203. But that which makes any thing to be properly a Chriilian Inftitution, is its being inftituted or appointed by Chrifl himfelf to be obferved in his Church ; if therefore Baptifm and the Lord* s-Supper were thus inftituted and appointed by Chrift himfelf, they are properly fpeaking Chrijlian Injlitutions. And it doth not alter the Cafe, whether we fuppofe them with regard to the outward elementary Part of them to have been ufed among the Jews before or not. Thus, e. g. let us grant that Baptifm was a Rite of long ftanding among the Jews in the Initiation of Profelytes before the Time of our Saviour, tho' this Author is in the wrong to affirm that no learned Chriftian ever denied it, for I could name him fe- veral learned Chriftians that have denied this. But I am willing to grant that it was ufed before the Time of John the Baptift, and of our Saviour, in admitting Profelytes of Righteoufnefs, who were ob- liged to obferve the whole Law (for as to the Pro- felytes of the Gate, they never were admitted by Bapdfm *, tho' this Writer pofitively affirms they were, p. 105.) But then it muft be confidered that Baptifm in this Cafe was never ufed alone, but as joined with Circumcifion and the offering a Sacri- fice. If therefore Chrift had ufed Baptifm, merely becaufe it was a Jewifh national Rite or Ufage as this Writer pretends, why did he not ufe Circumci- Jion for the fame Reafon in admitting Profelytes, fmce this was accounted to be no lefs eflential, yea and of greater Importance, and no Man could be
* See Selden d« Jure Nat, ^ Cent. lib. i. cap. 3.
480 The pofitive Precepts of
a Member of that Church and Polity without be- ihg circumcifed ? It was not therefore merely be- caufe it had been ufed before among the Jews^ but becaufe on other Accounts it feemed fit to the di- vine Wifdom, that this fhould be the {landing Or- dinance of Initiation under the New Teftament, as Circumcifion had been under the Old. And ac- cordingly Baptifm was applied by our Saviour to other and farther Purpofes than it had been among the Jews. And I fuppofe our Author will fcarce pretend that they were baptized before in the Name of the Father^ Son, and Holy Ghojl, or that they were baptized into the Death of Chrijl.
With regard to the Lord^'s-Supper, he pretends that the Jews had a Rite or Ufage like this at all their common Meals •, which may be fo far true, that probably they had ufually Bread and Wine at their Meals, and gave Thanks over it. But will he fay, that they ever received Bread and Wine in that Manner, and for thofe Purpofes, for which our Saviour appointed it to be taken at his laft Sup- per, that is, as a Memorial of his Body broken and Blood fhed for the Sins of the World ? This plainly fhews that it was a new Inftitution, and which was inforced upon Chrift's Difciples by his own exprels Authority. And it would be no Argument againft this at all, tho' we fliould fuppofe that with regard to the Manner of celebrating it, he chofe to make ufe of fome Rites or Ufages that bore a near Re- femblance to thofe that had obtained among the Jews before, in celebrating the Pafchal Supper. And whereas he tells us, that this Ufage was pretty early brought rnto the Churches, in their very large and populous AJfemhlies, firji at Corinth, and after- wards at other Places, but this was done without any apofiolical Advice or Authority, p. 107. No- thing is plainer, than that they received this Ordi- nance at the fame Time that they received the Knowledge of Chrijlianity from the Apoftle Paul
From
Chrijiianity ^ vindicated 481
From whofe exprels Words it is manifeft that he delivered it to the Corinthians as a thing that he had received by immediate Revelation from Chriji himfelf, and as a Matter of Importance to be ob- ferved in the Chriftian Church till the coming of our Lord, and which required great Care and Re* verence, and Solemnity in order to a right Celebra- tion of it*.
The Arguments he produceth againft pofidve Precepts in general are little more than a confident aflerting the very Thing that is in Debate : As when he faith it is plain, and he may venture to take it as a Pojlulatum, that all Means of God's Appoint- ment mujl have a natural Relation to, and Connec- tion with the End, &c. or elle we muft fuppofe that God is an arbitrary Being, p. 201, 413. For a Thing which is in itfelf antecedently indifferent, may by divine Appointment be appropriated to a facred Signification and Ufe, which it would not have had without that Defignation and Appoint- ment ', and then when it hath by God*s Ir^ution fuch a Signification annexed to it, may be highly ufeful to promote the main Ends of Religion. Any one that is acquainted with human Nature cannot but know that the appointing outward Signs and Reprefentations may in fome Cafes imprefs a Senfe of a Thing more ftrongly and aff^e6lingly upon the Mind. Special commemorative Signs and Sea- ions fet apart for that Purpofe, have often been judged, by the wifeft Nations, to be of great Ufe
* It would carry me too hx to enter on a particular Confide- ration of the Inftances the Author brings of the Devotions of Chriftians, from the original Inftitution of this Ordinance, p. 107, 108. fome of them are trifling Things, or wrong repre- fented. Or if they were all true and important, it would only follow, that Chriftians ihould endeavour to keep clofe to the Purity and Simplicity of the primitive Inftitution, tho' this Writer is not a very proper Perfon to engage them to do fo, but it would not follow, that that Ordinance' was not of divine Appointment, and an original proper Inftitution of Chriftianity.
I i for
48 2 The pojltive Precepts of
for keeping up the Remembrance of important Events. And what Arguments can be brought to prove either that God himfelf cannot in Confiftency with his Wifdom and Goodnefs appoint fome Things of this Kind to be obferved, or that if he did they would be of no Ufe or Advantage in Re- ligion at all ?
To apply this. The Death of Chrifl is repre- fented in the facred Writings as an Event of great Importance, the Belief and Confideration of which is of the higheft Ufe in Religion : and even this Writer himfclf fuppofes the Death of Chrift to be improvable to many valuable and excellent Pur- pofes, fome of which he is pleafed to mention, p. 166, 168, 177, l^c. And if fo, then certainly it muft be of great Ufe in praftical Religion fre- quently to commemorate the Death of Chrill. And the more folemn that Remembrance is, the more likely it is to anfwer the End, and make proper Impreflions upon the Mind. And confequently an Ordinance, the exprefs Defign of which is to oblige us to fuch a frequent and folemn Remem- brance of it, and to make it prefent to our Minds by fenfible Signs and Reprefentations, muft be highly ufeful for attaining and promoting the great End of all Religion.
Our Author makes the Application and Atten- tion of the Mind, and a Man's taking himfelf off from fuch Avocations to other Bufmefs and Pleafure that would hinder his main Purjiiit, to be the necefiaiy Means of obtaining the divine Wifdom or true Religion, ^.421. And if fo, then it muft be of great Ufe to have folemn Seafons of Recolledion, in which Men look upon themfelves as under an Pbligatign by divine Appointment to apply them- felves m.ore particularly to religious Confiderations, which otherwife in the Hurry of worldly Bufinefs or Picafures they would be apt to negled. For
Chriftianify^ 'vindicated. 483
this Realbn I have always thought the Appoint- ment of weekly Sabbaths to be a wile Conftitution : and in this View the Sacrament of the Lord's- Supper may be alio Ihewn to be of great Ufe ; fince when rightly attended upon according to the original Defign, it hath a Tendency to fix the At- tention of our Minds on fuch Confiderations as mull needs have a mighty Influence to llrengthen and improve our Love to God, and Charity to- wards Mankind, and to infpire us with a deep Senle of the Evil and Malignity of Sin. To which . it may be added, that it engageth us to frequent Self -Examination ., 1 Cor. xi. 28. which hath a Ten- dency to promote that Self- Acquaintance, which by the Author's Acknowledgment is necelFary to di- vine Wifdom and true Religion, And befides all this, it muft needs be of great Ufe as it ingageth us frequently to recognize the Obligations of the New Covenant, that was ratified by the Blood of Chrill, and to renew our folemn Engagements to the Pradice of true Religion and Righteoufnefe. When Pliny in his celebrated Letter to Trajan re- prefents the primitive Chrillians as folemnly bind- ing themfelves in their religious Allemblies, not to commit Immoralities, fuch as Thefts, Robberies, Adulteries, Fallhood, and betraying their Trufl; ne furta, ne latrocinia, ,^ie adulteria committerent, ne fidem fallerent, ne depofttum appellati ' ahnegarent \ was this a Prejudice to their Charafter! Or can it be thought that their Religion was the worfe for having an Ordinance in which they folemnly bound themfelves by an Obligation, accompanied with fa- cred external Rites or Signs, to the Pra6lice of all Righteoufnefs and Virtue, and to avoid Vice and Wickednefs.
And now it will be eafy to form a Judgment concerning the Jullnefs of what our Author ad- vances when fpeaking of the Diilinction between I i 2 the
4^4 '^he pofithe Precepts
the Religion of the End^ and the Religion of th9 Means, he faith, that the Means in this Cafe muft be as nsceffary as the End, for otherwife they would pe no Means at all, in contra-diftin^ion to any thing elfe: And that unnecejfary M^^ns are fit only for an unmceffary Religion, and they that will have the one (?ught to he content with the other, p. 420. When Jie talks of unneceffary Means, the Word unnecefjary may admit of two Significations. If by unneceffary Means he intends Things that are ahfolutely ufelels and infignificant, it will be eafily acknowledged that fuch Things are good for nothing, and of no Advantage in Religion ; but fuch are not the Chris- tian Inftitutions, which rightly confide^ed and ob- ferved according to the original Appointment are of great and manifold Ufe. But if by calling them unneceffary, he means that they are not as ne- ceffary as the End itfelf, and that it is poffible the End may be obtained without them, then in this Senfe Means may not be abfolutely neceffary, and yet may be of confiderable Ufe. And if they can be fhewn to be v^ry ufeful in the original Defign and Appointment, and that they were prefcribec^ t)y the Author of our Religion, that in the Ufe of them the great Ends of Religion might be pro- moted ; to difcard or negled: them under Pretence of their not being abfolutely neceffary would be a very wrong Gondu(5t, and would fhew both Folly and pifpbedience. Qur Author is pleafed often to talk of mechanical Mea7ts of Grace, mechanical, Agency of the Spirit, and the Conveyance of Grace, ^x opere operato, and he reprefents thofe that think themfelves obliged to attend upon thofe inftituted Means as expedling that they would operate phy- Jically upon them like Medicines upon the Blood and 'Humours : but without haying recourfe to any fuch abfurd Suppofidons, it may be juftly faid, that if divine Jfpjlances be neceffary to. our making a
Proficiency
hf CJ^riJliamty^ vindicated. 4^5
I'toficiency in the Knowledge and Praftice of true Religion, as this Writer himfelf feemeth feme- times to grant; then, on Suppofitiori that God hath inftituted Ordinances to ingage us to a folemil llecollecflion and Remembrance of fuch Things as are of great Importance in Religion, and to be of ufe in ftrengthening, exciting, and enlarg- ing good Aifedlion^ and Difpofitions in our Souls, thofe that from a Regard to his Inftitutions, and in Obedience to his Authority are careful in theif Attendance upon them, and endeavour to obferve them in a proper Manner according to the ori- ginal Appointment and Defign, may more juftly expe^ the divine AfTiftances and Influences in the Ufe of thofe Means, than they that allow themfelves in the habitual Negleft, much more in the Con- tempt of them.
There i^ one Objection more which t fliall here take fome Notice of, becaufe the Author makes a great Flourifh With it, to fhew that there is nO Cer- tainty in revealed Religion, and that is drawn from the Differences there are among ChriJlianSy with relation to the Articles of their Faith; He fets out with great Pomp in the Beginning of his Book with giving us a Catalogue of Doftrines of revealed Religion in which Chriftians differ, and thofe the' mojl learned^ impartial, and diligent In- quirers, From whence he argues that the Scrip- tures are uncertain and obfcure, and that there can be no important or fundamental Doftrines in i-evealed Religion, and no determinate Senfe in which they are to be taken : that there are as many different Schemes of revealed Religion as there ate Men ; and that it is not one Religion, hut d vajl Number of Religions : And he thinks it is firange that God fhould reveal a Religion as of a7iy Neceffity or Ufe to Mankind, which may he taken in as many different Senfes as there arc differerent Capa-^
I i 3 cities^
486 Differences among Chrijlians
cities, Apprehenjions, and Ways of thinking among Men. See p. 15 — 19, .^^y ^6. and he returns to it again at the latter End of his Book, p. 443, 444. •
But if there were any Thing in this Way of arguing, it might be eqiuUy turned againft natu- ral Religion , and even againft the common Prin- ciples of Senfe and Reafon, to fhew that there is nothing to be depended upon either in Rehgion or in any Thing elfe. For tho' this Writer takes upon him to affirm that the Religion of Nature has been always the fame, and mufl for ever be alike apprehended by the Underfiandings of all Mankind, as foon as it comes to be fairly propofed and confi- dered, p. 94, yet nothing is more certain than that as large a Catalogue might be eafily produced of Differences in Dodrines relating to natural Re- ligion, as what he hath been pleafed to give us with regard to the Dodlrines of Revelation ; and that among Perfons that pretend to impardal En- quiry, and fome of whom have appeared to be Perfons of Sobriety, Benevolence, and all the facial Virtues, as he exprefTeth it. And yet it doth not follow either that there are no important and fun- damental Do6lrines in natural Religion, or that there is no determinate Senle in which thofe Doc- trines are to be taken. Our Author himfelf fur- nifheth us with fome Inftances of this Kind. He argueth at fome Length againft fome Perfons who, he tells us, look upon themfehes to be great Philofo- phers and very wife Men -, and whom he himfelf acknowledgeth to be Men of Farts, and Subtilty in Speculation, who yet deny Man's Free-agency, and introduce an univerfal Fatalifm and Neceffity in all A6lions. He alfo afferteth the Obligation of the Duty of Prayer, which he feemeth to regard as an important Duty of natural Religion againft fome in this Age who deny it. And he tells us, that
many
no Argument againft Revelation. 487
mmy great and celebrated Philofcphers^ Perfons that are above the grofs Ignorance of the common Herd^ have maintained, that the World is governed by- certain inherent Powers and Properties communi- cated to it in the Beginning, without the continual Prefence, Influence, and Operation of the firft Caufe upon it. This he reprefents as a Philofo- phical Scheme of Natural Atheifm^ the Parent of Moral Atheifm, and argues ftrenuoufly againft it : See from p. 179, to p. i^y. Thefe then by his own Acknowledgment are Inftances of Diferences relating to Matters of great Importance in Natu- ral Religion, and yet he will not allow that Men's differing about them is any Proof of -their being uncertain and obfcure or of no Ufe ; for he ex- prefsly declares them to be Matters of infinite Con- fiquence to Mankind.
It is as true in Points of Natural Religion as in Revealed, that where Men do profels to agree in the Do(5lrines, they often differ in the Manner of explaining them, and in fome or other of the Ideas they form concerning them *. From whence it would foPow according to our Author's Manner of arguing^, that there are as many different Schemes of^ Natural Religion as there are Men ; that there is no determinate Senfe in which its Doc- trines and Principles are to be taken ; and that
* There are perhaps hardly any two thinking Men that exatH:- ly agree in all the Ideas they form concerning the Divine Na- ture, Attributes, and Providence. But it would be foolifli to pretend that they do not agree in believing and acknowledg- ing the Being, Attributes, and Providence ot God, bccaufe they do not agree in all the Ideas they form concerning them. And yet thus it is that this Writer argues in order to magnifv the Differences about the Dodrines of Revelation. But it' doth not follow with regard to revealed any more than it doth with regard to natural Religion, that no two thinking Men agree in any of its Dodrines or Principles, becr.ufe they may happen to form different Ideat concerning fome thing or other rehatlng to thofe Dodrines.
there
488 The Conclufion,
there is no Natural Religion at all, becaufe God would not give a Religion as of any Ufe to Mankind that is capable of being taken in fo many different Senfes. Tho* how this could be prevented except God Ihould miraculoufly convey the fame Ideas to all Men, and at once remove all their Prejudices and Prepoffeflions, and heal all their Vices and wrong Affedions of Mind, is hard to conceive. A noted Sceptick, Sextus Empiriciis^ makes ufe of this very Argument of the Author to Ihew that there is no Certainty to be depended upon with refpedl to the Being of a God, a Providence^ and the Moral Differences of Good and Evil. See the third Book of his Hypotypofes.
But the Truth is, the Argument whether with regard to Natural or Revealed Religion is weak and fallacious. It doth not follow that any Thing is uncertain and obfcure, or of no Confequence, merely becaufe Perfons pretending to Learning and impartial Inquiry differ about it. If a Doc- trine comes to me confirmed with good Evidence and fufficient Proof, I am not to think worfe of it either with regard to its Truth or Importance, be- caufe another Man that profefTeth to be an honeft impartial Inquirer denies or doubts of it. For the Caufes of Men's different Apprehenfions lie very deep ; and it is hard to know who is an irrtpartial unprejudiced Inquirer. This is a Thing that we cannot properly judge of. There are often fome unobferved Prejudices, fome fecret wrong Turns and Affedions of Minds, which hinder thofe from a right Difcernment of Truth in particular In- ftances, that are otherwife fober, honeft, and di- ligent. We muft form our own Judgments con- cerning any Dodtrine according to the Evidence that arifeth to us upon the beft Enquiry we are able to make : and if it appeareth to be well- founded in Reafon or Revelation this ought to be
fufficient
^e Conclnjien, 489
fufficient to fatisfy our own Minds, and to influ- ence and regulate our own Practice. And we may alfo according to the Senfe we have of its Importance ufe all proper Endeavours in a fair way to convince and fatisfy others too, and to op- pofe the contrary Errors. At the fame Time we ought to exercife great Charity towards thofe that have the Appearance of ferious Enquirers, and who feem to have a real Love of Truth and Good- neis, however greatly we may think them to be •miftaken. But there are fome Perfons concerning whom it may be faid without any Breach of Cha- rity, that their Behaviour is fuch as plainly difco- vereth the bad Temper of their Minds, and that they are not in a proper Difpofition for feeking out Truth. And I believe it would be difficult to find an Author that hath taken lefs Care to preferve the Appearances of a candid, a ferious and unpre- judiced Inquiry^ than this Gentleman that is pleafed to afTume the Charadler of the Moral Philofapher.
Towards the End of his Book he breaks forth into a large Encomium on Moral Philofophy or di- vine Wifdom, and the proper Means of attaining to it. His general Defign in this is obvious, which is to dired Men to feek the Knowledge of true Religion by contemplating the Heavens, the Earthy Them/elves, and Brute Creatures, in Oppofition to their learning it from the Holy Scriptures. No Man will deny that it is very ufeful, and a Duty %o confider the Difcoveries that are made to us of the divine Glory and Perfections in the Frame of Nature, in the Works of Creation and Providence^ and in the Conftitution of our own Bodies and Afinds. And a much greater Progrels hath been made in all thefe Ways of obtaining Knowledge by thofe that have had the Advantage of divine Revelation, than was ever made by any that had no other Way of Inftrudtion than what this Writer
propofeth.
49 o ^be Conclujion,
propofeth. Revelation doth not at all hinder but promote fuch Inquiries : it doth not difcourage, but aflifl and improve the Exercife of cool impartid Reafon ; and at the fame time, that it exciteth and engageth us to make ufe of all the Lights of Na- ture and Reafon, it openeth and enlargeth our Views by giving us a more clear and certain Dif- covery of feveral Things which it is of Importance to lis to know, and which yet either we could not have known at all, or not with fuch fatisfying Clearnels and Certainty as we can can do by that Af-' fiftance. Our Author talks in magnificent Terms of a Man*s converfmg with God^ and deriving Com- munications of Light and Knowledge from the eternal Father and Fountain of it, and hearing the clear intelligible Voice of his Maker and Former fpeaking to his ftlent, undifturbed attentive Reafon. But tho' a Man that earneflly impl«res the Afliftance of the Father of Lights, and with a humble and teachable Mind gladly makes ufe of the Advantage of Rea^ fonjLnd Revelation which God hath put into his Hands, and is ready to praftife as far as he knows, may upon good Grounds hope for God*s gracious Guidance and AfTiftance as far as is neceflary to lead him to true Happinefs ; yet if, befides the common Light of Nature and Reafon, God has been pleafed to favour us with farther Difcoveries of great Impor- tance by a more extraordinary i^Wfi^/Z^w, thofe, that under Pretence of hearkening to their own Reafon, obftinately rejeft this Revelation, tho' confirmed with all the Evidence that can reafonably be defired in fuch a Cafe, and fhut their Eyes againft the hea- venly Light, cannot jnftly expeft God's gracious Communications i but rather have Reafon to be afraid that he will give them lip to the Hardneis of their own Hearts, and will call them to a fevere Account for their obftinate Unbelief and Difobe- dience hereafter. 'Tis certain that the Gopel pro-
nounceth
^'he Conchifwn. 491
nounceth a very fevere Sentence agalnft thofe to whom it is made known, and who yet reje£f the Evidence •, and warrenteth us to conclude, that their Infidelity is owing to very criminal Caufes, and bad Difpofitions of Mind •, and that their Danger is very great, and their Condemnation fhall be ag- gravated. It highly concerneth this Author to con- fider this, who pretends to own the great Ufefulneis of Revelation in Aid of human Reafin in the pre- fent corrupt State of human Nature, and yet ufeth his utmoft Endeavour to expofe it to the Derifion and Contempt of Mankind. I heartily wifh him a better Temper of Mind, and that he would fe- rioufly refledl, if it be not yet too late, on his great Guilt and Danger. I am ferry there is fo much Reafon to fear that he is incorrigibly har- dened in his Infidelity. For he hath plainly enough let us know that if he had lived in the Time of our Saviour and his Apojiles^ and had been an Eye- witnefs to all the glorious Miracles that were then wrought, and all the extraordinary Powers and Gifts of the Holy Ghoft^ that gave fuch an illus- trious Atteflation to- the Gofpel Revelation, this would have had no Influence upon him, fince he will not allow thefe to have been any Proofs at all. On others I truft they will dill have their de- figned Effecl.
I have fairly examined whatfoever .he hath offered that hath any Appearance of Reafon, and many Things that are little better than downright Mifreprefeniaiion and Abufe. I am Satisfied that if Reafon and Argument be calmly attended to with that Serioufnefs and Impartiality that becometh the Weight and Importance of the Subjeft, our holy Religion hath nothing to fear from the Attacks of its moft fubtile and malicious Adverfaries. God grant that thofe that profefs to believe it may be
careful
492 ^he Conclufion.
careful to adorn their Profeflion by all the Fruits of Piety, Charity, Purity, and the heavenly Mind and Life, which it is the manifefl Defign and Tendency of its excellent Dodlrines and Precepts tp promote.
FIN I S.
,i7-asi»»"-"""-
y*M I'^r^'Hl'? «: