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'? «:
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11